(}.E head of negro in profile, on face an intaglio of a harp ; (4) steatite scaraboid: head of Achelous, full face, with intaglio of citharist (Plate I., No. 13) ; (5) scaraboid in burnt car- nelian: head of Achelous, full face, with intaglio of Ajax carrying body of Patroclus; and four porcelain scaraboids from Camirus, eacl1 with a negro’s head in relief on the back. In gem engraving the principal 1nodern implement is a wheel or minute copper disc, driven in the manner of alathe, aml moistened with olive oil mixed with emery or diamond dust. There is no proof of its use among the ancients, but M. Soldi, a practical authority on the subject, believes (I.’5=r1(c Arc/2., 1874-, xxviii. p. -17) that it was known before the time of Pliny, whose expression fervor tercbrcumn, as applied to the cutting of very hard stones, would fittingly chtxracterize the rapid movement of the wheel. At the same time these words, apparently the only ancient state- ment on the question, may equally refer to the motion of the drill, an instrument of constant use in antiquity, which in this case was employed to drive an iron tool fitted with a diamond point or splinter. In intaglios, when the larger spaces had been sunk with the drill, the design was worked out in detail by a tool with a diamond point, and finally polished, but not, it would appear, to the extent to which polishing is carried in modern work, for this reason, no doubt, that their finer tools left less of rouglmess to be smoothed away. Still a gem highly polished in the interior of the design need not be taken to be modern on that account, since it is known that many genuine ancient gems have been repolished in modern times, and since it is not kn )Wll whether ancient engravers may 11ot sometimes have resorted to excess of this process ; while on the other hand an intaglio dim in the surface of its design is not necessarily antique, since modern engravers have observed this peculi- arity, and have imitated it with a success which, were there no other suspicions, might escape detection. Except in the hardest stones, much of the ancient gem engraving seems to lune been done by a simple copper tool duly moistened and supplied with emery (o-;u'pu; or o'p.1ipL§, naxium). The Ethiopians in the time of Xerxes employed a flint instru- ment, if that is what Herodotus means (vii. 69) when he says that their arrows were tipped “ not with iron but with a sharp stone, with which they also engrave their seals.” With such a tool steatite could be easily engraved, and it should be remembered that among very early gems this material is of frequent occurrence, while in the later art of Greece and Rome it can scarcely be said to exist ; and the inference is that, when processes had been invented to cut harder stones, the softer substances were discarded. Still it would not be correct to found more than a general argu- ment as to the comparative ages of gems on the different degrees of resistance in the stones themselves, even when dealing with the works of one nationality, much less so in a l'cVlcV of ancient gems as a wl1ole, for this reason, among uth:r=, th it the decline of art is in technical matters often very like its infancy. It would be easy to show from pub- lished criticisms how certain classes of rude intaglios have been regarded now as the very earliest efforts of the art, now as debased ; and at times it is difficult to choose between these judgments. In the present state of knowledge it may seem idle to inquire where the infancy of the art was passed. One thinks in Egypt, which otherwise is known for its intimate skill in working hard stones. Another says Ass-yria, which doubtless had a civilization as remote as that of Egypt, but has left no similar evidence of the masterv of obdurate substances. The architectural and the artistiuc remains of the two nations present this broad distinction, that they are of much harder material in the one case than in the other, whence it would be reasonable to expect that -.+1.mz.+ Hm :..m...t:,... I:L1«l -_,:xL-_1 L ,1, BI S 137 from Egypt, though of course if the idea of engraving gems originated with soft stones and simple implements such as flints, that origin may well have been in Assyria. Possibly the marked difference in the shape of the gems peculiar to these two nations bespeaks little contact between them in this matter. The favourite shapes in Assyria were the cylinder pierced Iengtl1ways, and sometimes fitted with a swivel so as to be used as a seal, and the cone also pierced but not requiring a swivel, since the design was cut on its base. When inscribed, a cylinder generally states three things,—the name of the owner, his father’s name, and the name of his protecting deity. But there are exceptions, as for example, a cylinder in the Bihliotheque at Paris in- scribed, “Alchaloum, servant of J ehastukur,” which from the Semitic form of name “ Alchaloun1 ” has been thought to have belonged to a Jewish captive in Babylon. A cylinder supposed to be the seal of Sennacherib, in the British Museum, is not inscribed. Another, purporting to be the seal of Igli, son of Uruck, the oldest king of Assyria, is re- jected by M. Oppert as not having any such antiquity. An agate seal from Khorsabad reads, “ N ipishi, of King Tiglath Pileser, king of Assyria, son of Haou Liklikhus, king of Assyria.” But, as has already been said, many of the cylinders could not have been employed as seals without difficulty, and it appears to result froin the most recent study of the designs on them that frequently their n1ain function was to act as talismans in the system of magic generated among the Chaldzeans. In what seems to be the oldest examples the design is sunk by a pointed tool pushed backward and forward in long straight lines. In the next stage round cavities are sunk here and there in the design by means of a drill, when greater depth is required, while the shallow parts are worked out with the pointed instru- ment. By practice in utilizing both methods the Assyrians reached whatever skill they could beast in this branch of art. The materials are haematite, jasper, calcedony, sard, basalt, agate, lapis lazuli, rock crystal, alabaster, por- cclain, quartz, glazed clay. Mr King classes them under four periods, beginning as early as 2234 B.C. In Egypt the favourite forn1 of gem was a scarab (beetle), having a flat surface underneath, on which was engraved a hieroglyphic design. The common materials are green jasper and porcelain. From the soft nature of the porcelain, and from the strict adherence to the scarab shape, it may be inferred that they were used 1m1ch less as seals than as a sort of badges or ornaments, and this is confirmed by the finding of large numbers of them in foreign countries, as at Camirus in Rhodes and in Etruria, where the hieroglyphics could not have been understood. No doubt it may be true that these specimens had been manufactured by Phoenicians for export to these countries merely as articles of ornament, but had the originals been strictly held by the Egyptians to ' be seals, it would have been the height of dishonestyin the Phoenicians to reproduce them in this way. In Egypt, however, the art of gem engraving was not confined alto- gether to scarabs, as may be seen among other interesting exceptions in the oblong intaglio of green jasper in the Louvre (Gazette Arc/zéol., 1878, p. 41) with a design on both sides, representing on the obverse, as known from the cartouche, Thothmes II. (1800 B.C.) slaying a lion, and on the reverse the same king drawing his bow against his enemies fron1 a war chariot. In the Louvre also is an Egyptian gem, said to belong to the 12th dynasty, 3000 B.C. But uninteresting in themselves as are the scarabs of Egypt, they have this accidental importance in the history of gem engraving that they furnished the Phoenicians w1t_h a model which they first improved as regards the mtagho by a freer spirit of design, gathered partly from Egypt and partly from Assyria (see the Phoenni‘cian scarabs from I‘harras
__ ._......,.I. L1-..1n :r‘rV-(I’1£)l"