FUNEREAL ARCHITECTURE. that the site was much frequented. 1 All the same, it does not help us to explain how a people in possession of a system of writing should have laboriously cut out of the solid rock a commemorative monument, which was to perpetuate the memory of a god or royal per- sonage, without taking the trouble to record his name. Here more than ever are explorations needed around, above, and at the base of the rock, one of whose faces bears as elegant and well adjusted a decoration as was ever executed by the Phrygian chisel. Had this been a tomb, the absence of a Phrygian text should cause no surprise ; since, with one notable exception, instances abound with chambered graves, troughs or stone beds, that leave no doubt as to their sepulchral character, which yet are innocent of any literary document. The number of monuments respecting which it is impossible to pronounce a decided opinion is reducible to three or four. Real tombs, on the other hand, may be counted by hun- dreds ; but as they are pretty much alike, a sequent de- scription would in- volve wearisome iteration, and would FIG. 62. Plan of tomb at Bakshish. After Wilson. -- FIG. 63. Totub showing mouth of well. After Ramsay. only result in loss of time. We pro- pose, therefore, to single out such ex- emplars as will serve as types for the many. The grave of a certain number of these is entered, as at Delikli Tach, by a 1 TtxiER, Description, torn. i. p. 157, Plate LVIII. ; Stewart, Plates IX., X. ; EARTH, Rtise ron Trapezunt, p. 92. We have corrected Teller's drawing with the aid of sketches handed to us by Professor Ramsay ; hence it has been possible to represent more exactly the rosettes and the central acroterion.
