The Palace. Eyuk. 177 find this animal in juxtaposition with the goddess, Ishtar, Anait, Cybele ; for we suspect that in the ordering of this double series of pictures, the artist wished to represent the adoration of a divine couple, akin to that at Boghaz-Keui. It is even possible that, with small variants in attitude and outward semblance, they were the same deities. It should be borne in mind that in Asia divine types never acquired the fixity of forms which they assumed in Greece. Deities, in the plastic art and poetry of the Hellenes, were transformed into living creatures, each with a distinct physiognomy and special expression, like beings kneaded and fashioned by nature. Oriental art lacked this peculiar quality of the Grecian mind, and to the end its concepts floated indistinct in mid-air. Hence it happens that at a few hours from Eyuk, a warrior resting upon his club represented the male principle, whilst here the animal pre-eminently typical of virile force was selected to fill the same part. Whatever the truth may be, the principal portion in the building, which we hold to be a royal mansion, was reserved for the beardless priest or eunuch, as at Boghaz-Keui (Figs. 314 and 321). The king, however, so conspicuous a figure in Assyria, and easily singled out by his tiara and the formidable bow he wields, from amidst officiating priests,^ is not found in the temple of either place, where we might expect to see him moving side by side with the high priest ; but what is more extraordinary still, there is naught to remind us of a royal personage in the palace. To explain the absence throughout Pterium of the personage who is wont to wield supreme authority, we must suppose one of two things — either that the priest took precedence of the sovereign, or that the twofold dignity was vested in the same individual. This is mere presumption — albeit it seems to receive some weight from the words of Strabo ; to the effect that the high priest of the god Men, and the priestess of the goddess Ma, be it in Pontus, the two Comanas, Cappadocia, Cabira, Zela or Zileh, were temporal princes as well. Like mediaeval abbots and bishops, they were mostly recruited from the royal stock, and yielded to the king alone.^ They ruled with absolute power over the temple or cathedral town, as well as the adjacent country. The peasantry cultivated their lands, and numbers of the citizens, male and female, were told off for the various services of the temple. Customs such
- Hist of Art^ torn. ii. Fig. 330.
• Strabo, XII. ii. 3 ; iii. 31, 33, 36, 37. VOL. II.
