In fig. 5 is figured advisedly a monument of snake worship, which it must be distinctly noted comes, not from the precinct of Zeus Meilichios at the Peiraeus, but from Eteonos in Boeotia. When we come to the discussion of hero-worship, it will be seen that all over Greece the dead hero was worshipped in snake form and addressed by euphemistic titles akin to that of Meilichios. The relief from Boeotia is a good instance of such worship and is chosen because of the striking parallelism of its art type with that of the Peiraeus relief in fig. 3. The maker of this class of votive reliefs seems to have kept in stock designs of groups of pious worshippers which he could modify as required and to which the necessary god or snake and the appropriate victim could easily be appended. Midway in conception between the Olympian Zeus with his sceptre and the snake demon stands another relief[39] (fig. 6), also from the Peiraeus sanctuary. Meilichios is human, a snake no longer, but he is an earth god, he bears the cornucopia, his victim is the pig. He is that Meilichios to whom Xenophon offered the holocaust of pigs, praying for wealth; he is also the Zeus-Hades of Euripides. We might have been tempted to call him simply Hades or Ploutos but for the inscription [Κριτο]βόλη Διὶ Μειλιχίῳ, ‘Kritoboule to Zeus Meilichios,’ which makes the dedication certain. By the light then of these reliefs the duality, the inner discrepancy of Zeus Meilichios admits of a simple and straightforward solution. It is the monument of a superposition of cults. But the difficulty of the name of the festival, _Diasia_, remains. There is no reason to suppose that the name was given late; and, if primitive, how can we sever it from Διός? [Illustration: FIG. 6.] It is interesting to note that the ancients themselves were not quite at ease in deriving Diasia from Διός. Naturally they were not troubled by difficulties as to long and short vowels, but they had their misgivings as to the connotation of the word, and they try round uneasily for etymologies of quite other significance. The Scholiast on Lucian’s _Timon_[40] says the word is probably derived from διασαίνειν ‘to fawn on,’ ‘to propitiate.’ Suidas[41] says it comes from διαφυγεῖν αὐτοὺς εὐχαῖς τὰς ἄσας, because in the Diasia ‘men escaped from curses by prayers.’ If etymologically absurd, certainly, as will be seen, a happy guess. Such derivations are of course only worth citing to show that even in ancient minds as regards the derivation of Diasia from Διός misgiving lurked.