θάλπεσι μεσημβρινοῖς ἡλιομανὴς βοᾷ. (Aves, 1092–8.)
ἦμος δὲ χλοερῷ κυανόπτερος, ἠχέτα τέττιξ,
ὄζῳ ἐφεζόενος, θέρας ἀνθρώποισιν ἀείδειν
ἄρχεται, ᾧ τε πόσις καὶ βρῶσις θῆλυς ἐέρση,
καί τε πανημέριός τε καὶ ἐῷος χέει αὐδὴν
ἴδει ἐν αἰνοτάτῳ, ὁπότε χρόα Σείριος ἄζει.
There has been strange diversity of opinion about the nature of this stone. Dodwell and Leake call it basalt. Moreover, Dodwell thought it greenish. Some one else thinks it yellowish. The French expedition and Curtius call it limestone. Dr. Schliemann says it is the same breccia as the rest of the gate. It is in the face of these opinions that I persist in the statement that it is bluish, and limestone.
It is owing to this note that it was again critically examined by Mr. Tuckett, who published his result in the Architect of 19th January, 1879, and who had fragments of the stone analyzed, which justified my observation. He also notes that several observers erred as to the shape of the central pillar, which does not diminish in bulk downward.