These reports of two eye-witnesses are important not so much for what they contain as for what they do not contain. Neither M. Dumont d’Urville nor Viscount Marcellus mentions the name of the artist of the statue. An inscription is copied by both in which Bacchus, Hermes and Heracles are mentioned, but no reference is made to the name of Agesander or Alexander of Antioch as having been seen on a fragment of the pedestal--an artist who makes his appearance in a mysterious way and whose acquaintance we shall make in the next chapter. Moreover, since other pieces of debris were found either in the cave or in a neighboring field, there is no reason whatever that any one of them, let alone the left hand holding an apple, should have been attached to our statue. We shall have occasion to refer to these points again. DEBAY’S DRAWING. The famous French painter David happened to be in exile at the time of the discovery of the Venus of Milo, and, taking an especial interest in this wonderful piece of ancient art, he induced one of his disciples, a certain Debay, to have his son Auguste Debay, a young art student, make a drawing of the statue as soon as it was put up in the Louvre. This drawing was afterwards published by M. de Clarac in his “Notice” and we here republish it on account of the importance it has gained as a document in the history of the statue. Debay’s drawing shows a plinth bearing an inscription and also exhibiting a square hole in the ground near the left foot of the statue. The angle of vision is indicated by the line “_xx_” which shows the height from which the statue was viewed by M. Debay. The point _a_ corresponds to the place of the eye projected horizontally at a distance in front which cannot have been more than one and one-half times the height of the statue. Geometrically this place is determined by the intersection of two lines [Illustration: DEBAY’S DRAWING OF VENUS.] from _a_ and _b_ constructed in a horizontal plane at right angles to the vertical axis of the statue. The inscription on the pedestal of M. Debay’s drawing reads: ...--ΑΝΔΡΟΣ ΗΝΙΔΟΥ ... ΙΟΧΕΥΣΑΠΟΜΑΙΑΝΔΡΟΥ ΕΠΟΙΗΣΕΝ “ ... andros son of Menides of [Ant]iochia on the Maiandros.” Since of the last missing letter before the Α the lowest stroke of a Greek Ξ or of an Σ is discernible in the drawing, the name must have read “Alexandros” or “Agesandros.” This man cannot have lived before the third century B. C. because his native city Antioch on the Maeander was founded by Antiochus I, the second of the Diadochs (280-261 B. C.) According to Professor Kirchhoff’s view the character of the letters belongs to the first century and may in his opinion be dated back at most to the middle of the second century B. C. We have no information whatever why the plinth was joined to the statue. All we know about it is that it appears on the Debay drawing and is lost now, but it continues to be a mystery to archeologists.