[534] Nos. 66-67. The presence of sculptures at the spot was noted by Perrot and Chipiez. [535] Cf. pp. 101 ff. and Pl. LXXV. (i). [536] No. 68. [537] No. 69. [538] The broad end is not altogether enclosed, but leads to rocky broken ground. [539] Nos. 70-81. [540] Nos. 32-43 L. [541] Pl. LXIX. (ii). [542] Cf. The weapon carried by the men on the Phaestus cup. [543] No. 72. [544] Nos. 73, 74. [545] No. 2 R. [546] Nos. 22 R., 9 L. [547] No. 22 R. [548] See particularly Perrot and Chipiez, _Art in ... Asia Minor_, ii. pp. 149-153; Ramsay, _Luke the Physician_, chap. vi.; and _Journal Royal Asiatic Society_, vol. xv., New Series (1885), pp. 113-120; Hamilton, _Researches_, etc. (i.) p. 394; and for an illuminative anthropological point of view, Frazer, _Adonis, Attis, and Osiris_ (_Golden Bough_, iv. 2nd ed.), bk. I. chap. vi., § 4, pp. 105-110. [549] These, it seems to us, have been too much neglected in attempts which have been made to elucidate the meaning of the sculptures. [550] Frazer, _Adonis, Attis, and Osiris_ (_The Golden Bough_, iv., 2nd ed.), p. 107, reminds us that the deities associated with animals are probably derived from a more primitive conception when the god was indistinguishable from the beast. Doubtless the lioness (or panther) and the eagle were cult objects, if not totems, before they were humanised. In fact, in the sphinx and human-headed eagle, there is seen the intermediate anthropomorphic stage. The human forms were already developed in Babylonia, whence they may have been derived, being superimposed on the pristine native beliefs and fetishes. (On the relations with Babylonia and kindred cults, see pp. 323, 355 ff.) We may assume that the evolution of the mountain-god was similar, though inanimate. The ‘high place’ on Kizil Dagh, with image of the god carved on the rock, (p. 181) is an illustration. Probably also the altar on Kuru Bel (p. 147), may be most naturally explained as dedicated to the spirit of the mountain or of the pass. [551] We do not deal with these symbols in detail, as the reading of some of the signs is doubtful, and being isolated groups, they present special pitfalls to attempts at translation. It is interesting to note, however, that such priests and priestesses commonly received a special sacred name as a mark of their office. [552] Cf. Ramsay, in _Recueil de Travaux_, xv. (1890), p. 78, on the priest-classes of Asia Minor. [553] _E.g._ excluding Nos. 29-31 from the whole series, 19-43. [554] Or servants of the temple. Cf. Strabo on the rites at Comana, bk. XII. chap, xi., § 3. [555] No. 22 R. [556] No. 9. [557] The treaty of Rameses II. with Hattusil. [558] This analogy was first pointed out by the late De Cara, _Gli Hethei Pelasgi_ (Rome, 1894), i. p. 192. [559] Cf. below, p. 257 and Pl. LXXII. [560] Winckler, _Report cit._, pp. 57-58; above, p. 159. [561] Cf. Pls. LXXXI. (i) (Sakje-Geuzi), and LXIV. (Malatia).