It is worthy of remark that, unlike so many other early Greek works, these sculptures exhibit no trace of an Asiatic or Assyrian origin. The only style they recall is that of Egypt, while the only Assyrian monument they resemble is the semi-Egyptian seated figure brought by Mr. Layard from Kalah Sherghat. Mr. Newton has justly pointed out that the resemblance to Egyptian work “is seen not only in the great breadth of the shoulders, but also in the modelling of the limbs, in which the forms of the bones and muscles are indicated with far greater refinement and judgment than at first sight seems to be the case ... the subdued treatment of the anatomy contributes to the general breadth and repose for which these figures are so remarkable, and suggests the idea that they were executed by artists who had studied in Egypt.” We know that the Greeks were intimately connected with Psammetichus I., Amasis, and Neco; while the tombs at Cameirus, in Rhodes, have yielded works almost certainly imitated from Egyptian prototypes by early Greek artists. We have, too, the statement of Diodorus, that Theodorus of Samos and his brother Telecles of Ephesus, the sons of Rhoecus, derived the canon of their sculptures from Egypt. The general character, however, of the ornamentation, the mæander-pattern, and the lotos and borders on the garments of the seated figures, agreeing, as these do, with the same patterns on early Greek vases, tend to show that their actual artists were Greeks. Thus, too, the archaic statue of Athene in the Acropolis at Athens is essentially Greek, and not Egyptian. Pliny has further noticed that two Cretan sculptors, Dipænos and Scyllis, were the first artists (about B.C. 580) of note, as workers in marble: it is, therefore, quite conceivable that they may have been the actual artists of these monuments. We shall now say a few words of THYATEIRA, MAGNESIA AD SIPYLUM, PHILADELPHIA, and TRALLES with some rather fuller remarks on the celebrated city, SARDES, the capital of Lydia.