Chios, now Scio, in ancient days known by the name Pityusa, referring doubtless to its abundant pine-forests, was nearly as close to the mainland of Asia Minor as Lesbos, and, in size, rather more than twice that of the Isle of Wight. It was in character peculiarly rugged, its epithet in Homer [of whom it claimed to be the birthplace], of παιπαλοέσσα (the “craggy”), being literally true. In ancient and in modern times it has been famed for the beauty of its women; in the former, also, for the excellence of its wines. In an oval place, not far from its chief town, stood the temple of Cybele, whose worship the Chiotes especially affected; and, that all things might fit properly, the careless Pococke seeing there her headless statue, which he describes as that of Homer, with equal judgment converted the lions between which she is sitting into Muses! Its present chief town is said, in situation, to resemble Genoa in miniature. Traditionally, its oldest people were the Pelasgi; but Ion, a native writer, with better reason, traces them to Crete. Chios was little injured by the first Persian conquest, as the Persians, then like Timúr, eighteen hundred years later, had no fleet; but it was thoroughly sacked and plundered, subsequently, for the crime of having sent one hundred ships to fight off Miletus in aid of the Ionians (Herod. vi. 8, 32).
During the Peloponnesian war, Chios at first supported the Athenians, but was afterwards ravaged by them, though they failed to take its capital. So, in the Mithradatic war, though at first supporting the king of Pontus, Chios fell under his displeasure, in that it had allowed Roman “negotiatores” to frequent and settle in its ports, and had to pay 2,000 talents, and to suffer still rougher treatment at the hands of his general, Zenobius. In modern times, Scio has suffered more perhaps than any other Greek island. Early in the fourteenth century, the Turks secured possession of it by a general massacre; in 1346, it was taken from them by the Genoese, who held it for nearly two centuries and a half, till it was recaptured by the Turks. In 1822, having been foolishly over-persuaded—though then a comparatively flourishing island—to join in the revolt of the Greeks against the Turks, a powerful Ottoman fleet attacked it, who, landing, massacred right and left, enslaved its women and children, and made, as is their wont, a well-cultivated district a desert, destroying, too, by fire and sword a town with thirty thousand inhabitants. No doubt fifty-four years is a very long time in the eyes of mere politicians; but historians might have been expected to remember “Scio,” and to have anticipated similar results at “Batak,” or wherever else these barbarians are able to repeat the habits and practices of their fore-fathers.
Rhodus, an island about ten miles from the south-west end of Lycia, next claims our attention, as one of the most important of the Greek settlements of antiquity, and as retaining still something of its ancient splendour. In remote ages as the adopted abode of the Telchines, a celebrated brotherhood of artists, probably of Phœnician origin, Rhodes soon became famous for its cultivation of the arts, so imported, leading, as these did, naturally, to a civilization much in advance of the people around them. Its early history abounds with many legendary tales, which we regret we cannot insert here (but see Pindar Ol. vii.; Hom. Il. ii. 653). The Rhodians, no doubt from their early connections with the Phœnicians, were among the greatest navigators of antiquity, and this, too, earlier than B.C. 776, when the Olympian games are said to have been instituted: hence the foundation by them of very remote colonies in Sicily, Italy, and Spain; in the latter country, especially Rosas, which, remarkably enough, retains its ancient name, but slightly modified. The Rhodian code of naval laws became too, as is well known, not only the law of the Mediterranean, but the basis of the law of much more modern times. The people of this island did not, perhaps, for prudential reasons, join in the Ionian revolt or in the Persian war.
In the Peloponnesian war, too, they did not take an active part, though serving (according to Thucydides), with reluctance, on the side of Athens, against the people of Syracuse and Gela. In those days they were chiefly valued as light troops, especially, as darters and slingers. In the cause of Darius Codomannus against Alexander, the Rhodians supported Memnon, the ablest admiral of the day, whose death, perhaps more than that of any other individual person, hastened the downfall of the Persian monarchy; and somewhat subsequently, their resistance to Demetrius Poliorcetes, in the memorable siege they underwent, secured them the highest credit, and the admiration of their conqueror. Indeed, they were in such esteem among their neighbours, that (so Polybius states) when their city had been almost destroyed by an earthquake, the rulers of Sicily, Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt vied with each other in the liberality of the supplies and presents they sent to repair this calamity. To the Romans their services were of the highest value, indeed, it was mainly due to them, that the naval operations of Livius, the Roman admiral, were successful in the wars against Philip and Antiochus (Liv. xxxi. 14; xxxvii. 9, &c.).
But, perhaps, the most interesting matter in connection with the island of Rhodes is the history of the researches recently conducted there by Messrs. Biliotti and Salzmann on the site of Camirus, one of the three chief original cities of that island, the combining of which together, about B.C. 408, resulted in the creation of the capital city, Rhodes. It was natural, therefore, to expect that any antiquities discovered at these places would be earlier than this date. The ground all round is now covered by a pine forest, in the clearing of which the old necropolis was discovered by a bullock falling into a tomb. In 1853, Mr. Newton obtained many terra-cotta vases of a very archaic type, and other fictile vases from the peasants’ houses of the adjacent village of Kalaverda. Some of the pinakes or platters, with geometrical patterns painted in brown on a pale ground, resembled the oldest objects of this class from the tombs of Athens and Melos; the sites, too, of Mycenæ and Tiryns are also strewn with similar fragments.[[112]] Other amphoræ and oinochoæ, with black figures on a red ground, or red figures on a black, were also met with.[[113]]
[112]. As has been well shown in Dr. Schliemann’s recent researches.
[113]. Travels in the Levant, i. p. 235.
Shortly after this, a firman was obtained from Constantinople, empowering Messrs. Biliotti and Salzmann to make a thorough investigation into this ancient site, the result of which has been the opening of at least 275 tombs. From these tombs many precious works of art in gold, bronze, and glass, with figures in terra-cotta, and calcareous stones, together with vases and alabaster jars, have been procured, some of them probably as old as B.C. 650. The whole may be grouped under the heads: (1) Asiatico-Phœnician, or Archaic Greek; (2) Greek of the best and latest periods; (3) Egyptian, or imitations of Egyptian. The first is the most important, as comprehending most of the gold and silver ornaments, with a few terra-cottas. It has been supposed that the makers of these objects were Phœnicians of Tyre and Sidon; but, as many of the specimens betray a marked Assyrian character and influence, they are more probably copies, at second hand, of works originally Assyrian.
On examining these curious works of art, it will be observed that most of those in gold have been used either as necklaces or for attachment to other substances, probably leather, consisting, as they do, for the most part, of thin pieces or plaques of metal, averaging from one to two and a half inches in length, with subjects on them worked up, as a rule, from behind, after the fashion now called repoussée work. Thus we meet with standing female figures, draped to the feet (which are close together), as on the sculptures from Branchidæ, with long and elaborately-dressed hair falling on their shoulders and naked breasts, the arms being raised in a stiff and formal manner, and the hands partially closed. Another figure has large wings, almost like a nimbus, hands crossed, and elbows square; and against the body of this figure, a rudely-executed animal. A third holds in each hand a small lion by the tail, just as on some of the sculptures from Khorsabad. On a fourth the lions are not held, but are springing up against the figure.
On another plaque we have nearly the same type, with this distinction, that the lions stand out in very high relief, and, curiously enough, are in style almost identical with those on a fibula obtained from Cervetri by the late Mr. Blayds. Many instances may be seen of the narsingh, or man-lion type—a compound figure, with the head, body, and legs of a man, but attached to or behind this body, and, as it were, growing out of it, the body of an animal with hoofs. This monstrous form occurs, also, on a vase from Athens and on Assyrian cylinders. There are, also, specimens of winged, man-headed lions, their wings being thrown back so as to cover the whole figure, just as on the Assyrian sculptures. In some cases, we find bronze plated with gold, the latter having often been forced asunder by the rust and consequent expansion of the bronze.