History of the American School 1882-1942 - Chapter II

A History of the American School of Classical Studies, 1882-1942

Chapter II: The Chairmanship of Thomas Day Seymour of Yale University, 1887–1901

White’s resignation was accepted in May, 1887, and at that same meeting Thomas Day Seymour, Hillhouse Professor of Greek at Yale, was elected to succeed him.

Seymour’s father was Professor of Latin and Greek at Western Reserve University, and on his retirement in 1870 his son, who was graduated that year, was elected Professor of Greek and given two years’ leave of absence for study. These years were spent at Leipzig, Berlin and Athens. He held the Greek chair at Western Reserve till 1880, when he was called to Yale. Perhaps the man’s caliber can best be measured by the fact that he devoted his two years of study to preparation for his teaching and refused to spend the time seeking the doctor’s degree. In the youth of the generation now drawing to its close he was one of the “Big Four”—Gildersleeve, Goodwin, Seymour, White.

Seymour was elected to the Managing Committee at the November meeting in 1884 to succeed Packard. He first attended a meeting of the Committee in November, 1886. From that time till his retirement from the chairmanship in 1901 he was absent, as has been mentioned, only once (November, 1894).

The first problem of his administration was to secure the acceptance of the directorate of the School by Waldstein, to whom the position had already been offered.

At the November meeting in 1887 the regulations of the School had been amended to provide for a director for a term of five years and an annual director. Both were to be elected by the Managing Committee, the latter from the faculties of the cooperating colleges. The annual director was to reside in Athens and to have charge of the School in the absence of the director. But “the sole responsibility for the administration of the School should rest with the Permanent Director.” To avoid a possible ambiguity the title “Annual Director” was later (1892) changed to “Professor of the Greek Language and Literature” and still later (1914) to “Annual Professor.”

When the Managing Committee met in May, 1888, it was clear that the endowment of one hundred thousand dollars postulated by Waldstein could not be completed by fall. The expense of paying him a salary of three thousand dollars and of financing an annual director was beyond the means of the Committee. The annual directorate, with a stipend of five hundred dollars, was accordingly offered to Professor William G. Hale, of Cornell, who expected to be in Greece the following winter. Since Hale was unable to accept, Frank Bigelow Tarbell, who had been Assistant Professor of Greek at Yale, was appointed for 1888–1889, and further negotiations with Waldstein were left to the Executive Committee.

Meanwhile it was becoming increasingly clear that a permanent director was needed. Augustus C. Merriam, Professor of Greek Archaeology and Epigraphy at Columbia, was Director for the year 1887–1888. Writing to Norton from Paris in June, 1888, Mr. Martin Brimmer, one of the original Trustees of the School, comments on the situation at the School in Athens as he had found it that spring. After describing Professor Merriam as “intelligent” (a term which Jebb says is complimentary when applied to an elephant) and saying that he himself was providing outside blinds for the building (“a great credit to Ware”), he concludes, “It seems even more plain on the spot than elsewhere that a permanent Director must be had. It seems also most desirable that the Annual Professor should not be dispensed with.”

Waldstein came to America in the summer of 1888, and a protracted conference was held with him in Boston. In view of the fact that the desired endowment for the School had not been raised, Waldstein quite naturally declined to resign his post at Cambridge, which offered him a permanency, to assume at the School in Athens a position which might be regarded as quite precarious. After a thorough canvass of the situation it was finally agreed that Waldstein should be elected Director of the School for a year with a salary of one thousand dollars. He was to retain his position at Cambridge and visit Athens for a month at the end of the year (1888) and if possible again for another month in the spring of 1889. At the close of the school year the situation was to be reconsidered de novo with no prejudices to either party. Waldstein further offered to assist any student of the School who might be in Cambridge while he was in residence. That the amount, one thousand dollars, was inadequate was recognized by Waldstein and doubtless by the School authorities also.

Much correspondence passed between the Executive Committee and Waldstein during the winter of 1888–1889. He proposed a number of conditions on which he was willing to accept the appointment as director: residence in Greece from January 1 to April 1, twelve open lectures, direction of research and excavations. The Committee was to obligate itself to secure a “Director’s Endowment Fund” of one hundred thousand dollars and to devote the interest of this to the director’s salary. If such a capital sum was not raised sponsors were to be corralled who would guarantee a salary of at least three thousand dollars per annum, payable quarterly for three years, the appointment of the director being for “good behavior.” In a note to Ware, Waldstein complains that “matters that are the most important, namely present work suggested by the people on the spot [himself] is not seen to.” In spite of this, in March, 1889, Waldstein brought himself to accept the proposal of the Executive Committee: appointment for three years, salary of twenty-five hundred dollars per year, residence in Greece January 1 to April 1.

During the first year (1888–1889) of Waldstein’s directorate all seems to have gone smoothly, perhaps because of the diplomatic character of Tarbell, who was Annual Director, perhaps because Waldstein was in Athens such a limited time. In the second year friction began to develop.

The Annual Director was S. Stanhope Orris, Ewing Professor of the Greek Language and Literature in Princeton University. When the School building was planned, adequate provision was made for only one family because it was expected that there would be but one director. Now there was a director who was in Greece only three months during the year and in Athens only about half that time. Could the annual director with his family live at a hotel during his six months’ stay and manage the School from there while the director’s quarters in the School building stood vacant for all that time except six weeks? Orris’ answer was, “I trow not.” And in this he seemed to have the sympathy of the Committee. But in the general conduct of the School his directorate was far from winning the Committee’s approval.

Goodwin, who was in Athens that spring, had been suffering from an ulcerated sore throat and, “owing to the south wind,” as his physician said, was unable to speak aloud. He was, however, amply able to write. In a letter to Norton he described the work of Orris in terms the most complimentary of which was “thoroughly incompetent.” The exorbitant chaos of that year is best told in Goodwin’s own words:

I do not see how any first class man can ever be expected to take the annual directorship under the present arrangement, especially after this unfortunate experience [i.e., Orris]. I am more and more convinced that it is absolutely necessary to have our regular director in Athens (or at least in nominal “residence”) the whole of the School year; and when that can be done we need another permanent officer in the position of secretary who shall really assist the director in definite lines, but with no independent policy. Nothing can be worse, it seems to me, than to have a man there with full powers more than half of the time, who must suddenly give way in the middle of the year to a new man with different ideas and different policy. The change back again to the former regime is still worse, and it practically breaks up the school. It seems to be taken for granted that when Waldstein returned to England, before the middle of April, the work of the year was over; and our school was scattered just as our English neighbors were beginning most important work at Megalopolis. Our students were not a little ruffled that they had to stop work at Plataea just when the good season was beginning, and when $500 voted for this work remained untouched, apparently because there was nobody to superintend the excavations. Waldstein is a man of such impetuous mind, that he needs a long time to get settled in any new business; and this way the bustle attending his arrival in Athens, his departure to Plataea, his return to Athens, his departure for Troy, his return, and his final return to England made half of his time useless to the students.

At the meeting of the Managing Committee in November, 1890, Orris gave the report of his year’s work, in which he “emphasized the utility of the School in its vivifying influence upon classical study at home,” a subject on which it was hoped he was speaking from personal experience.

The Committee was further apprised of the unfortunate situation of affairs by Jabez Brooks, Professor of Greek in the University of Minnesota, who spent the spring of 1890 in Athens. On his return he wrote an article for Ariel, a publication of his university issued from 1877 to 1900. This came to the attention of the Managing Committee, and an excerpt appears in the Records. The complete quotation referring to the School is as follows:

The Archaeological Schools are four in number, French, German, English and American. The French is exclusive; the other three fraternize cordially. All are well equipped for general or special study and research in archaeological subjects, in addition to which the American School furnishes special advantages in the study of history and the classics. At present the supervision of the American school is cumbrous. A permanent director is appointed for three months and an annual one for the whole term from October to May. The utility of this arrangement is not apparent. If it is a necessity it is a misfortune. A conflict of authority, or a somewhat humiliating subordination of the annual to the permanent director is inevitable. A good endowment, with a salaried director, an American and not a foreigner, one who is in practical sympathy with American colleges, ideas and methods is a desideratum. The English school has the most students. The German school is the strongest in its directorship and the most successful in its achievements.

When the Managing Committee met the following May the whole question of the management was discussed fully. Norton had been made chairman of a committee on reorganization, and he reported that the committee regretted that it could see no possibility of there being more than twenty-five hundred dollars available for the management of the School, that it would, therefore, be impossible to add a secretary who should be permanently in Athens to assist the director; nor would it be possible to increase the amount (twenty-five hundred dollars) paid to the present director. It was likewise clear to the committee that it was “a manifest and undisputed fact that the success and usefulness of such an institution as the American School demands the continuous residence on the spot of a permanent representative of the Managing Committee.” It was accordingly voted that when Waldstein’s term of office expired in October, 1892, “the continuous presence on Greek soil of the permanent Director will be required during the whole school year or from October 1 to June 1 following in every year.” Provision was made for a special meeting of the Managing Committee to consider Waldstein’s reaction to this decision.

It was expected that Waldstein would visit America that summer. He did not do so, and when the fall meeting of the Committee took place (November 20, 1891) it was decided to proceed with the reorganization of the School as determined at the May meeting. There were eighteen present at this meeting—the largest attendance at a Managing Committee meeting up to that time. Norton was not there, but the Committee adopted his suggestion of calling the new executive head of the School the secretary. Seven names were considered, but on the second ballot Tarbell, who had been Annual Director with Waldstein in 1888–1889, was elected unanimously. His residence was to begin in October, 1892, and his salary was to be twenty-five hundred dollars. Against stiff opposition Seymour and Ware secured the election of Waldstein as Professor of Art in the School for 1892–1893 with a salary of one thousand dollars and a minimum residence of eight weeks in Athens.

It might have been expected that these actions would establish the direction of the School on firmer foundations for some time, but at the May meeting in 1892 Tarbell announced that he would be able to accept the secretaryship for only a single year because he had received a call to a professorship in the newly established University of Chicago.

This was undoubtedly a great disappointment to Tarbell’s friends on the Committee. There were, however, those who were still convinced of the great virtue of Waldstein’s services, and they were able to secure a vote by which “all the excavations of the American School at Athens for the year 1892–1893” were “put under the charge of Dr. Charles Waldstein.” The Executive Committee was charged with the responsibility of nominating another “permanent” chief executive of the School.

There had been a sharp difference of opinion in the Committee on the title to be given the chief executive officer in Athens. Those who favored the title “secretary” had succeeded in imposing it on Tarbell and had been able to prevent a reversion to “director” at the May meeting. But in November, 1892, the Committee, after listening to a letter from the Honorable J. Lowden Snowden, formerly United States Minister to Greece, in which he criticized the title of “secretary” as lacking in dignity, approved the title “director,” a designation which has ever since been used.

To the directorate, which this time was really to have some permanency, they unanimously elected Rufus B. Richardson. He held the office for ten years (1893–1903).

Richardson had been Annual Director for 1890–1891, following the unhappy Orris. He “had shown rather unusual powers of administration and of guiding the work of students during his term of office.” In the spring of 1891 he had worked with Waldstein in the excavation of the theater of Eretria and he took up this task again in 1894, the first spring of his directorate.

An important change in his relations to Waldstein was also made by the Managing Committee at their meeting in May, 1893. During Tarbell’s term as chief executive the excavations of the School had been under the direction of Waldstein. The Committee now voted that the director should have charge of all School excavations, thereby conferring on him, at last, full responsibility for the School’s activities. But Waldstein’s friends on the Committee succeeded at the November meeting in 1893 in passing a vote again limiting the director’s authority by giving entire charge of the Argive Heraeum excavation to Waldstein, as well as responsibility for the publication of these excavations. While this was perhaps unfortunate, since it weakened a central executive authority that was in sad need of being strengthened, the impasse which it threatened had already been avoided by the tactful action of the director in requesting Waldstein “to continue in charge of the excavation at the Heraeum.”

Waldstein had been elected Professor of Ancient Art for 1892–1893. There had been some fear that he might be offended by the offer of a subordinate position. These fears proved ill-grounded. Waldstein did accept and was reelected for 1893–1894 with the same salary, one thousand dollars, and a period of residence reduced from eight to six weeks. He was subsequently re-elected for annual terms till in the fall of 1896 the Managing Committee voted to allow the professorship of ancient art to lapse and to extend to Waldstein the Managing Committee’s “sense of the value of his services to the School.” He had been Director of the School for four years, 1888–1892, and Professor of Ancient Art for five years, 1892–1897.

Waldstein had undoubtedly done much for the School. His interest in the School had been spontaneous and genuine, though he frequently annoyed the students by his egotism and his brusqueness. He was an experienced excavator and enjoyed the work at the Argive Heraeum, the most important excavation undertaken by the School up to that time. When the Executive Committee directed him to close these excavations at the end of the season in 1895, leaving the work in “such condition that any work in future may be taken up at a satisfactory point,” his interest in the School largely evaporated, or was transferred, rather, to the completion of the publication of these excavations in a dignified form.

Waldstein was possessed of a passion for activity. His desire to be continually doing something did not make him the most helpful guide for his students. Goodwin, writing to White on April 14, 1890, at the close of Waldstein’s second year, finds this eminently true:

Our best students do not think that the School has gained much from W[aldstein] this year except in outside glory. W[aldstein] is our best possible representative socially and brilliantly, but he is never quiet long enough to be of real solid substantial help to the students at the School. The result of all the moves and counter moves this year has been that even now before the middle of April the School is practically broken up and the building in charge of a servant.

Waldstein’s correspondence with Norton (in the Houghton Library at Harvard) reveals a restless, self-centered individual. He is in trouble with the Institute for publishing material from the Heraeum without giving credit to the Institute for support. He manifested a petty jealousy of Merriam, due to the fact, probably, that Merriam was also an archaeologist, and this “made it almost impossible” for him to deal with Merriam, who was Chairman of the Committee on Publications. He apparently did have a real affection for Richard Norton, who was his most trusted assistant in the excavations at the Heraeum. But even the expression of this pleasant relation between director and student becomes wearisome in the too long telling of it.

Charles Eliot Norton himself composed the carefully worded note of appreciation which was extended to Waldstein at the close of his term as director. One paragraph sums up the matter, expressing in the language of diplomacy what Goodwin had said in idiomatic English:

[The Committee] are aware that the School owes much to him for unofficial as well as official services, and that for these they offer him their warm acknowledgement and thanks, while they recognize that to him is largely due the favourable regard in which the School is now held by the Government of Greece and the learned community at Athens.

One of the pleasant results of Waldstein’s directorate should not be forgotten: the appointment, in November, 1891, at Waldstein’s request, of Kabbadias, Ephor General of Antiquities in the Greek Government, as Honorary Professor of Hellenic Antiquities in the School.

The story of Phoebus Apollo and Zante Currants belongs really to the history of the Archaeological Institute of America. But since the Oracle vexed the School for nearly a decade, the base author of the plot may be indicated here and the villain exposed.

Professor Martin L. D’Ooge, of the University of Michigan, who was the fifth director of the School (1886–1887), wrote to Norton from Athens, October 23, 1886, as follows:

You probably recall a few words of conversation we had at the table of Professor Goodwin last May with reference to undertaking excavations at Delphi. I understood you to say at that time, that if I could get permission from the Greek government to carry on excavations in that most promising of all sites in Greece, you thought you could command almost any amount of money for this great undertaking. I have had several talks with the Ephor of Antiquities, Kabbadias, on the subject and at his suggestion called this morning with Hon. Walker Fearn, our U. S. Minister, on the Minister of Foreign Affairs to present the case. The situation is as follows:

Several years ago the French government began negotiations on behalf of the French School for the privilege of making excavations at Delphi, at which time the Greek government was disposed to expropriate the terrain on which the village, Castri, is located. The opposition to such expropriation was, however, so strong that the matter was dropped. Since then the French have been allowed to make a few excavations where the land was unoccupied. Meantime the village has grown and the difficulties of buying out the proprietors of the soil have increased. At present the terrain occupied by the temple, the theatre, etc., cannot probably be bought for less than $50,000. The Greek government would be willing to buy it for us (or others) and give us the right of excavation and then buy it back from us after we had done with it, thus reducing the first outlay. The expenditure requisite for the excavations Kabbadias calculates at $10,000. Of course, that’s an approximate estimate. I should say, however, that if we had $50,000 in hand we should be warranted in going ahead, hoping that any deficit would be easily made up. Now the French government has not the money, and it is somewhat questionable if it will be ready to vote this sum for some time to come, if ever. The Greek government, however, feels in duty bound, on account of the earlier negotiations left in suspense, to notify the French government of any proposal made by any other party. In case we could tell the Greek government that we can furnish the needed funds for this enterprise and the Frenchmen are not ready to go ahead, the chance would be ours. The Greek authorities are very friendly to us, and having discharged their obligation towards the French would gladly favor us. Suppose the expenditure to be $75,000 in toto—a large sum truly—we may remind ourselves that the Germans spent 800,000 marks at Olympia. May I quote a sentence from Newton’s Essay on the Discoveries at Olympia? “Is it too much to hope,” he says, “that some other nation may come forward to emulate the enlightened spirit which has undertaken this arduous and costly enterprise, not for the advantage of the German nation alone, but for the common benefit of all to whom classical archaeology is matter of interest?” Who can estimate the impetus the study of archaeology would receive in our country from the undertaking at Delphi?

Delphi was considered (as it proved to be) the most interesting and promising site in Greece for an extensive excavation. Both Schliemann and Doerpfeld recommended it, though Madame Schliemann was doubtful. Michaelis wrote from Strasbourg commending the project but stated that the discovery of valuable sculpture was unlikely!

In April, 1889, W. G. Hale wrote to Norton from Athens, giving a hopeful picture of the situation. This letter is summarized in the Secretary’s records as follows:

The French School has made no systematic excavations at Delphi,—the last in 1881.

French School estimate of expropriation at 40,000 dr[achmae]. Not by engineers. Official estimates 500,000 to 430,000 drachmae. Process of expropriation same as for a R. R.

Tricoupi stated unequivocally that we could have the concession if we came with the money. He said the French “were not patient persistent excavators.”

“The advantage to the country would be greater if another nation [than Greece] should undertake the task. Greece needed to be more widely known. The work of the Germans at Olympia had benefitted the country more than if the same excavations had been accomplished by Greeks.”

“The Greek Archaeological Society would prefer to have the Americans undertake the work.”

The Greek estimates of the cost of Delphi were made before anything was said to the Greek government with regard to the excavation of the site by Americans.

Mr. Fearn, like Tricoupi, is sure that France will not accept the treaty through any later assembly.

Dorpfeld and Schliemann believe that Delphi will prove a rich field. Mrs. Schliemann doubts. French minister told Fearn that he had no idea that the French would undertake the work. That is the general opinion in Athens. . . . .

Concession of Delphi to French made 7 or 8 years ago before Tricoupi came into power. He refused to go on with it. Convention modified 5 years ago and connected with the commercial treaty. This has been rejected twice (1884, ‘87) by French senate.

Stillman says Foucart and French minister are much irritated by the action of the Americans.

Excavations at least as expensive as Olympia.

Before Norton received this letter from Hale he had begun to sense opposition from the French but had none the less gone ahead. He wrote to George Herbert Palmer in January, 1889:

The Delphi matter is in a very interesting position. Mr. Fearn, our Minister at Athens, writes that Trikoupes, who is not only Prime Minister, but the Administration, so far as one man can be, promises us the concession provided we can guarantee such sum as may be needed for the expropriation of the villagers of Castri, the little town built up on the site of the old city,—at the outside $80,000, but presumably much less will actually be requisite, for there will be no necessity for removing the whole village. But French amour propre is touched, and both diplomatic and private pressure are being brought to bear to prevent the Greeks from withholding the concession from France. Any considerable delay on our part in affording the required guarantee is likely to spoil our chance.

The meeting at Bishop Potter’s seemed to me, and to others better able to judge, very successful in arousing interest in the matter. There were more than a hundred of the best persons to promote such an object as we have in view, present at it. Marquand, Cornelius Vanderbilt, S. Sloane, Jesse Seligman, Smith of “the Century,” James Loeb, and half a dozen more agreed on the spot to act as a Committee for obtaining the money needed. Marquand is Chairman, and subscribes $10,000. A meeting of the Committee has been called by him at his house tomorrow. Their action will determine our success or our failure, so far as action here can determine it. We cannot be sure until we have actually received the formal, official concession from the Greek Government If the result of the meeting tomorrow should be encouraging, a meeting will be called in Boston to forward the scheme.

Michaelis, hearing of the proposed Institute excavation of Delphi, wrote from Strasbourg in October, 1889, commending it heartily and damning the French with equal enthusiasm:

I was highly interested in the notice you sent me about the scheme of undertaking the excavations at Delphi, and I hope you will be fortunate enough to collect the necessary means. It is not likely you should discover sculptures of considerable importance, as the soil forms only a thin layer above the rock. The greater will be the harvest of inscriptions and of architectural remains. And here allow me to point out the absolute necessity of providing the staff of the excavators with an able architect, well acquainted with the results of and with the method of inquiry used in the recent excavations. It is one of the greatest losses for the history of Greek architecture that the French excavations throughout, and especially those at Delos, have been carried out without the aid of a trained architect, and there was a real danger, if the French had succeeded to make the excavations at Delphi, that the same system would have been followed. The French are interested exclusively in sculptures and especially in inscriptions, but they do care little about the general features of the spot they are exploring, and about the history of the buildings etc. which cannot be ascertained without a patient research and an exact statement of the whole matter of fact, even in its slightest details which often are able to throw light over important points. As far as I can see—and I hope that it is no narrow national partiality which makes me think so—our excavations at Olympia and at Pergamon owe their best results to this system, and it is a pleasure to see how the Greeks, availing themselves of the advices particularly of Dr. Doerpfeld, are following the same line. I feel sure that your architect, or architects, would find Doerpfeld always ready to help them, in their pursuits, and I fancy his counsels would do a real service to your excellent undertaking. Believe me, my dear Sir,
Yours very sincerely,
A. Michaelis.

Meanwhile the Institute conducted its campaign for funds with enthusiasm and success. In May, 1890, Norton could report to the Managing Committee of the School that the Institute had appropriated five thousand dollars for the project for that year, that thirty-one thousand dollars had been subscribed and that ten thousand was expected from Chicago. Waldstein was to spend that summer in America and solicit further gifts. Finally, at the meeting November 21, 1890, Seth Low announced that he had cabled Waldstein on the eighth that the Institute was prepared to pay four hundred thousand francs for the concession to excavate Delphi, that he had taken up the matter with the Department of State and that the United States Minister to Greece was being instructed to do all he could to further the success of the Institute plan. In view of this news, which seemed conclusive, the Managing Committee authorized the appointment of a sub-committee to “cooperate with the council of the Archaeological Institute in the conduct of explorations at Delphi in case the council invites the appointment of such a committee.”

But the worm was already busy at the root of the gourd. Michaelis had written to Norton from Strasbourg on November 6, 1890—two days before Low’s cable to Waldstein:

I read in the newspapers that the French have consented to reduce the duty of imported currants, and that the government asks a supply of 400,000 francs for the Delphi excavations. It would be a pity if this scheme should come to effect, because Delphi would be completely destroyed, owing to the careless and unscientific manner in which the French use to execute this kind of undertakings. All those who have seen Delos after the French excavations are affrighted at the devastation, so as to make the ruins completely unrecognizable. I whish [sic] heartily that your hopes might be fulfilled, and you might come in time to save Delphi from destruction. It would be a great loss to archaeology and topography.

The report was all too true. One of the conditions on which the Greek raisins known as Zante Currants were to be admitted to France with a reduced duty was that the privilege of excavating at Delphi be given to the French Archaeological School.

In spite of the criticism of the competence of French excavators levelled at them both by the Greek Premier and by the German archaeologist, and earlier by J. R. Sitlington Sterrett, it is doubtful if the American School at that time could have furnished the Institute with the personnel necessary for so large and complicated a task as the recovery of the temple and treasures at Delphi presented. Neither the French nor the American School had appreciated or learned to profit by the new technique in excavation developed by the Germans at Olympia. Ten years later either school could have done a competent job, and it is perhaps as well for the American School that it did not have to live down the incompetence of Homolle.

During Seymour’s chairmanship Norton and Ware were asked to submit a design for the seal of the School. The inscription, ΠAPΘENOΥ ΦIΛAΣ ΦIΛOI, is from a chorus in the Eumenides (line 999), “Ye beloved of the beloved maiden.”

Perhaps the authors of the seal would deprecate the use of the full quotation, for the next line reads σωφρoνoῦντες ἐν χρóνῳ, “Learning at last the way of Wisdom.” The date MDCCCLXXXI marks the appointment of the committee on organization. The School opened in 1882. This design was adopted as the official seal of the School at the November meeting in 1891.

At the May meeting in 1896 provision was made that the cooperating institutions might fund their annual payments of $250 by depositing $5,555 (later reduced to five thousand dollars) with the Treasurer of the Trustees, a payment of part of this amount might reduce the annual contributions pro rata. Brown University was the first institution to take advantage of this proposition. In 1902 Professor Poland deposited the final payment on this endowment with the understanding that “It shall be known forever as ‘The Albert Harkness Fund for the benefit of Brown University,”’ thus commemorating the distinguished scholar who had been one of the committee to organize the School and had been so influential in promoting its success. This fund was later very substantially increased. It now (1944) amounts to $9,664.09, the largest of any of the funded college endowments.

The question of publications was a cause of much perplexity. When the School was founded it had been hoped that each year the research of the director and students would produce a volume of papers. This ideal was realized only in the initial year, as has already been noted (p. 37). As the importance of the work of the School increased, the question of immediate, or at least early, publication of the results of research and excavation became more and more pressing. It was also realized that the American Journal of Archaeology, founded in 1885 and published quarterly by the Archaeological Institute, offered unusual facilities for presenting the work of the School to an interested clientele. A Second Series of the Journal was begun in 1897.

At the May meeting in 1888 the question of publication was fully discussed, and on Norton’s motion it was voted to send quarterly reports to the Journal together with such papers as the director of the School felt deserved publication. The Bulletins of the School were to be discontinued. Articles by members of the School printed in the Journal were to be stereotyped for later printing in the School Papers. The relations between the editorial staff of the Journal and the Publications Committee, however, needed clarification, for at the November meeting the Managing Committee felt compelled to define still further its position:

It was the intention of the Committee, that the publications of the School in the Journal of Archaeology should comprise Archaeological News, and such reports of a preliminary or comparatively slight nature as have heretofore been issued in the form of the Bulletins which on account of the facilities offered by the Archaeological Journal were ordered discontinued at the meeting of last May; but it was not the intention of the committee that such publication in the Journal should compete with or supersede the regular volumes of Papers, which constitute the proper permanent memorial of the work of the School.

There was some feeling in the matter and some talk of the School’s issuing a journal of its own from Athens. This would doubtless have been a serious mistake at that period of the School’s history. The danger to both institutions was recognized by A. L. Frothingham, Editor of the Journal, in a very frank letter written to Chairman Seymour, January 28,1889:

In thinking over the question of the best way to publish the discoveries of the School at the earliest possible date two ways have occurred to me, which I beg to propose to you and through you to the School Committee.

I. All discoveries of the School could be described in a general way and with as much detail as desired, in a Bulletin Sheet which the editors of the Journal of Archaeology would issue at their expense at whatever time and as often as wished by the School authorities. It could be issued to all the members of the Institute ten days after the Ms. is received from the Committee or the Director, and would be of the nature of News, not of articles.

II. In order to quickly place before the public the fuller results of the School discoveries and work as embodied in special papers, (I) the Journal will give to such papers the precedence over others in the make-up of its numbers; and (2) the papers so contributed by the school can be printed separately and distributed to the members of the Institute one or two months before the number of the Journal containing them could be issued. In this way it would be possible to publish the papers two or three weeks after the Ms. was received. The latter plan would involve a change in the manner of publishing the volumes of School papers which may commend itself to you and to the Committee. That is, these papers would form separate successive numbers of the volume which would thus be issued, not all at once, but in parts. It would perhaps be a good way to keep up interest in the School by issues of greater frequency and in smaller packages, and would be an economy even in the matter of postage as we could avail of the 2nd. class rates of postage per pound. For these articles the school would be charged only the cost of paper and press-work, and they could afterwards be stereotyped for future editions. We will be liberal in the matter of plates. To resume then, the Journal offers to issue the work of the School which the committee selects for it, in a prompter way even than could be done by a Journal printed at Athens, at hardly any expense to the School, and with the certainty of a pretty wide circulation. It will do it (I) by short preliminary reports in Bulletins; (2) by a series of papers which it will issue in advance of the Journal; or (3) by a combination of the two. You will see that we are willing to do anything in order to retain our alliance with the School and prevent the position and future of the Journal from being so damaged as it would be by the issue of another Journal in Athens, which, as it would have to be distributed entirely over here, would not possess any advantage in point of time and would be a great burden of expense.

The Committee on Publications, of which Professor Merriam was Chairman, recommended the acceptance of this offer, and it was confirmed by the Managing Committee at the meeting in November, 1889. At that time ninety-two pages of Volume V of the Papers had been stereotyped. This volume finally appeared in 1892.

The arrangement, so ideal on paper, proved in practice to be wholly satisfactory to neither party. At the May meeting of the Managing Committee in 1892 the subject was again discussed, and a special committee composed of Seymour, Merriam and Ware were asked to give it consideration.

The following November much time was spent in a discussion of the semi-perennial subject. It was stated with regret that the hopes expressed by Frothingham were far from fulfillment. No money had been saved, the hopes of prompt publication had been blasted, the prestige of independent publication had been sacrificed. At the same time it was realized that the Journal was a valuable asset to the cause of archaeology and that to withdraw the School’s support would be a serious injury. The Committee, therefore, gave Merriam and Ludlow power to deal with the situation but recorded the Managing Committee’s opinion that the present arrangement should be continued. They did, however, exact one condition: two thousand reprints of School Papers with continuous pagination should be printed and sent to all members of the Institute. It resolved:

That in the opinion of the Managing Committee of the School at Athens it would promote the interests of the School and of archaeology in general for the Committee of the Archaeological Institute to arrange for the sending of the Journal of Archaeology to all members of the Institute.

When Merriam and Ludlow, armed with these explosive resolutions, interviewed the editor of the Journal, the effect was at least apparently all that could be desired. The Journal was to be sent to all members of the Institute, and Papers of the School were to be published at the earliest possible date, avoiding the necessity of preprints. The committee re-affirmed its intention of making Bulletin V {The History of the First Twenty Years, by Seymour) the last Bulletin of the School and of publishing the “results obtained under the auspices of the School. . . . through the official channels of the School and the Institute.”

For the present all was quiet on the Publications front, and Professor Bernadotte Perrin, of Yale, succeeded Merriam as Chairman of the Committee, November, 1893. In November, 1894, the committee was given authority to select for publication in Volume VI of the Papers some of the articles which had appeared in the Journal. They were not obligated to republish all of them. The decision was more important than the member of the Managing Committee who approved it realized. For this volume of the Papers of the School was to be the last. Till Hesperia was founded under the auspices of Professor Capps, the results of the work of the School were to be scattered through the Journal of Archaeology, Art and Archaeology and other journals. They were not to be collected in a dignified series of volumes as the founder of the School had hoped.

But the question of publications would not down. A year later (November, 1895) the Managing Committee directed the Committee on Publications to confer with the Committee on Publications of the School in Rome regarding the best method of publishing School papers. And by 1898 the tension had grown to the point where the Managing Committee were moved to vote that the Secretary of the Institute be requested to furnish to the members of the Managing Committee five copies of any part of the Journal containing papers of the School and “that these parts be furnished on demand of the members of the Managing Committee, which demand shall be countersigned by the Chairman of the Committee ; that each member of the Managing Committee shall receive as many copies of the reports of the School as he may call for.”

During the earlier days of the School many subjects came to the Managing Committee for discussion which were later left to the discretion of the director. The enthusiasm with which the entire Committee pursued the harassed Crow till he disgorged a thesis to justify the results of his year’s work at the School was worthy of the Eumenides. Rules for the use of the library were made and revised with semi-annual regularity. The loss of five books from the library is noted with anger and regret. The entire Committee passes on the qualifications of applicants to be admitted to the School. The “waste of crockery” and the closing of the School or its transfer to a more salubrious climate in fear of the cholera epidemic of 1893 are subjects of discussion on succeeding pages of the record. A supervising architect for the School building is appointed with a salary (suggested by the architect himself) of one hundred francs (twenty dollars) a year.

Two years later (November, 1893) this was magnanimously increased to two hundred francs. Professor Sloane is authorized to endeavor to secure a Kodak camera for the use of the School.

The Committee was concerned, too, over the details of the students’ lives. The director was warned that arrangements for a bathroom at the School, if made, must be paid for out of the regular appropriation. “It was the sentiment of the committee that our students should be aided to the extent of having floor, walls, roof and insurance free but should pay the cost of other conveniences.” As late as 1889 the Managing Committee is still attending to the details of housekeeping in Athens. They are solemnly informed that “Basile would sweep the rooms and make the beds but once a month, a woman must be employed to scrub the floors and a man to assist in washing windows.” [It seems probable that a misplaced comma has cast unwarranted aspersions on the sanitary reputation of the School.] The following year for the first time luncheon for the Committee on the day of its regular meeting was paid for from the funds of the School. In May, 1895, the Committee formally approved the inauguration in 1896 in Athens “of international contests in outdoor sports, to be known as The Olympic Games.” One of the features of these games—as first announced—was to be a croquet match. (Later bulletins said cricket.)

One item of the regular School program which later became a source of justifiable pride was the “Open Meeting.” The earliest mention of this is in the report of D’Ooge, who was Annual Director in 1886–1887, the last year of White’s chairmanship. And it seems quite clear that these meetings, at which the director and the students presented the results of their researches, were rather an outgrowth of the evening sessions presided over by Goodwin, at which visitors were welcome, than an imitation of the fortnightly functions of the German Institute.

Three such public meetings were held during D’Ooge’s term. Waldstein did try to imitate the German practice of bi-weekly meetings, but the program failed because of inanition,

and only five were held. The next year Waldstein went to the other extreme and mentions but one formal meeting, and in the tenth year of the School’s existence (1890–1891) there were five, a number that for some time custom seems to have hallowed.

At the May meeting in 1896 the Executive Committee was authorized to omit the fall meeting or to hold it in New Haven. A meeting was held in October, instead of November as usual, that the Committee might have the pleasure of conferring with Doerpfeld, who was in New Haven at that time. This was the thirtieth regular meeting of the Managing Committee and the last one to be held in the fall. Beginning with 1893 annual meetings have been held in May. At the meeting of the Managing Committee held May 11, 1900, Seymour asked to be relieved of the chairmanship. He felt acutely the need of increasing the School’s endowment, but the “work needed to bring about such an increase he did not feel himself prepared to undertake.” The Committee declined to accept his resignation but did appoint a committee, of which White was chairman, to nominate a successor at the next meeting.

At that meeting, May 10, 1901, Seymour’s resignation was accepted, and James Rignall Wheeler, of Columbia University, was unanimously elected as his successor. Seymour was asked to allow his sketch of the history of the School to be printed. It appeared as Bulletin V, The First Twenty Years of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens.

The work of the School at Athens went forward methodically year by year during Seymour’s chairmanship.

At the November meeting in 1885 Augustus C. Merriam, Professor of Greek Archaeology and Topography in Columbia University, had been elected Director of the School for 1887–1888—the first professor of archaeology to be sent out to the School and the last independent annual director. There were seven students. One, S. B. P. Trowbridge, of Trinity and Columbia, was a member of the School for a second year. On his arrival in Athens on October 2 Merriam found the quarters which the School had occupied for the first five years abandoned. It had been expected that the School would open in the new building. This, as has been said, was still incomplete, so the Director’s first task was to rent temporary quarters. These were found in a large building, Σπíτι M&ecgr;λα. Here the School made its headquarters till the following April. Then the students moved in, but the Director, finding the plaster still damp and not wishing to expose his “family to the risk of this influence,” abode in a hired lodging throughout the year.

Merriam’s advice to his students was sound: “See as much of Greece as you possibly can, and while there spend no time on anything that can be done equally well elsewhere.” He laid out a systematic course of instruction. After a preliminary inspection of the museums and monuments of Athens the School settled down to their regular meetings and work. The first meeting was devoted to epigraphy, the second to reports on independent work by the students, the third to literature. It is interesting to note that of the eighteen reports printed, all but two were of an archaeological character. The two exceptions were studies in Modern Greek. The Greek literature studied was all selected because of its relation to the sites examined in Attica or elsewhere.

These meetings were adjourned in March in favor of School trips. The usual sites in Athens were visited, and rather more than usual was seen of the Peloponnesus and northern Greece.

Two excavations were conducted that year. That at Sicyon has already been described. The other was more interesting and more productive of results.

The site of the ancient deme of Icaria, the birthplace of Thespis, had long been disputed. It has been conjecturally placed at almost every locality in Attica. Following a hint given him by Milchhoefer, Merriam was able to locate Icaria definitely. In a dithyrambic passage of his report Merriam describes his journey from Athens to Kephissia and on to Dionyso with appropriate reference to all the surrounding scenery, to Theocritus, Thespis, Susarion and the
Vedic Soma. At Dionyso, on the northern slope of Pentelicus, there was a ruined church built with the fragments of an ancient choragic monument. The semicircular monument had been used for the apse of the church. Here Dr. Milchhoefer had found an inscription which led him to think that this was Icaria.

Excavation was begun here on January 30, 1888, and continued till March 19. A little work was also done the next fall and during a few days in January, 1889. Carl D. Buck, Soldiers’ Memorial Fellow of Yale, was in charge. The ruined church was further dismantled, and almost at once an inscription was found proving beyond doubt that this was Icaria.

The sculptures found were notable. They included a colossal head of Dionysus, of archaic workmanship, a colossal archaic torso of a satyr, a relief representing a goat sacrifice, a bronze intaglio of a figure holding a thyrsus, several funeral stelae, some of them of the best period, one bearing a striking resemblance to the stele of Aristion, and other interesting reliefs. Besides these sculptural remains seventeen inscriptions were found and a considerable number of interesting architectural fragments. So much of the choragic monument was found that it could be accurately redrawn and might have been rebuilt. The foundations of several structures were uncovered, the Pythion was located, and a relief representing Apollo on the omphalos was found, together with the inscribed threshold of the naos. (Plate II)

Though diligent search was made, the theater of Icaria, wherein it may be supposed Thespis’ dramas were acted, was not discovered. As a matter of fact the excavators had actually cleared it but failed to recognize it because of its primitive shape. The investigation at Icaria proved to be one of the School’s most fortunate enterprises. This good fortune was continued in the account given of it by Buck in the Papers of the School, where the excavation and the finds are discussed with scholarly accuracy and restraint. The cost of the excavations of Icaria was $452.04. Among the early excavations of the School the cost of this alone is known accurately.
Thoricus and Sicyon together cost the School $1,057.14, but the exact division of expense cannot be determined, and considerable financial aid was given by the Institute.

The year 1888–1889 marked the beginning of the directorate of Charles Waldstein, the first permanent director. That year Frank B. Tarbell was Annual Director. There were eight students; Carl Buck and Reverend Daniel Quinn were enrolled for a second time.

Tarbell organized the work for the year on the usual lines: the three weekly meetings were devoted to the architectural remains of ancient Athens, to sculptures and to reading Greek authors. Two of the students were from Wellesley, Miss Emily Norcross and Miss Elizabeth E. Slater. In deference to them most of the meetings were held in the afternoon.

On December 18 Dr. Waldstein, the new Director, arrived, and things began to happen with alarming rapidity. The next day he delivered his first lecture. He planned alternate lectures in the School and in the museums but soon gave up the former, devoting all his time to lecturing in the presence of the objects of art. The students were expected to attend Doerpfeld’s topographical lectures. A course in Greek Ceramics under E. A. Gardner, the Director of the British School, was organized. Meetings every two weeks for the presentation of papers on original research were decreed. When Waldstein averred that “the students may be said to have had an unusually full course of instruction offered them,” there was no one to gainsay his declaration. It might in mercy be said here that Tarbell omitted some of his exercises during Waldstein’s stay in Greece and that “it proved impossible to hold them [the bi-weekly deluges of original research] regularly once a fortnight as he proposed.” The total number was five. At the first of these Waldstein demonstrated beyond the shadow of a doubt the truth of his brilliant conjecture that the female head recently discovered in a mediaeval wall on the Acropolis was the head of Iris missing from the central panel of the east frieze of the Parthenon.

But if the schedule of class work was strenuous the program of excavation was nothing less than frantic.

It has already been noted that Buck was set to work on a second campaign at Icaria. Henry S. Washington was assigned to Stamata, a village between Marathon and Kephissia. Here he located the deme Plotheia. For this excavation Washington himself provided the funds. Boeotia was next invaded at three points, Anthedon, Thisbe and Plataea. At Anthedon, on the Euripus about a mile and a half north of Loukisi, John C. Rolfe uncovered the foundations of a large building, located the small temple of Dionysus and recovered a number of interesting bronze implements. In addition about sixty inscriptions were found. These as well as the other results of this excavation are published in the Papers.

From Anthedon, Rolfe transferred his investigations to Thisbe, on the other side of Boeotia near the Gulf of Corinth. Here he was engaged in taking down the walls and removing the pavement of ruined Byzantine churches (there were said to be twenty-three at Thisbe). He had recovered a few inscriptions when Waldstein arrived on his second visit to the School that year.

Waldstein decided to concentrate all forces on Plataea. Accordingly, Thisbe was abandoned, Waldstein, Tarbell and Rolfe moved over the hills to Plataea. They arrived in the evening and at six the next morning (April 2, 1889) opened the campaign, with sixty-three workmen. There were nine Byzantine churches among the extensive walls of ancient Plataea, and since these often contain ancient inscriptions, architectural fragments and pieces of sculpture, Waldstein began his attack with these, dividing his forces into three divisions. Plataea had seen no such energetic action since the Peloponnesian War. By noon two of the churches had been forced to return negative answers to the interrogations of Waldstein and Tarbell; two others were attacked. On the second day at noon rain stopped the work, but when it cleared all forces were concentrated on a small church for a half-hour’s blitz before sunset. The next day Tarbell cleared a seventh church and departed for Athens. On April 5 Rolfe extended his lines and investigated the foundations of some of the city walls, while Waldstein renewed work on Tarbell’s abandoned site, a three-apse Byzantine structure which had aroused his interest.

Here, accordingly, the next day all forces were consolidated with the result that an inscription of fifty-four lines was found. It was a fragment of the preamble to Diocletian’s edict De Pretiis Rerum Venalium in Latin. On April 7 a grand review of the site was held, and Waldstein with Rolfe departed for Delphi. Before he left Athens, April 20, Waldstein secured permission from the Greek Government to continue the Plataea excavation the following year and to conduct excavations in Arcadia. He also secured what he confidently thought was an option on the site of Delphi, good till the following December.

During the second year of Waldstein’s directorate (1889–1890) there were only two students, but in February, Washington joined the School. Before his arrival in Athens, Professor S. Stanhope Orris, the Annual Director, conducted the ordinary routine of classes but does not seem to have taken the students to any of the sites outside Athens.

Excavation was renewed at Plataea under the immediate charge of Washington, but inclement weather intervened, and little was accomplished. The walls were surveyed—two and a half miles of them—another fragment of Diocletian’s edict was discovered, an aqueduct was partially cleared, and the number of Byzantine churches examined was raised to twelve or more.

Rufus B. Richardson was the Annual Director during Waldstein’s third year (1890–1891). There were four students. Washington again joined the School for part of the year. Mrs. Richardson accompanied her husband, and the School again knew the gracious hospitality that had lent charm to the social life of the first few years. The King and Queen and the Crown Prince and Princess attended the first open meeting.

Richardson departed somewhat from the usual program of the annual director. No set meetings were held, but the morning of each day during the early fall was devoted to visiting the ancient sites in Athens and studying them. Later a very considerable number of places in Greece were seen. Herodotus and Pausanias were constantly studied. Waldstein continued the excavations at Plataea. Washington was in complete charge of this investigation and personally supplied the funds for it. The foundations of a large building of poros stone were uncovered, which Washington believed to be the temple of Hera. No inscriptions were found to confirm his identification. This concluded the excavations at Plataea. (Plate II)

More important excavations were begun at Eretria. These were conducted in part under Waldstein’s personal direction, but during his absences Richardson had charge. Three sites were explored—the Acropolis, the theater and graves, where Waldstein was “desirous of studying the methods of ancient interment and of finding some white lekythoi.” In this he was successful and discovered also what he thought to be the grave of Aristotle.

In the Nineteenth Century for May, 1891, he published the facts about this tomb. It was in a family burial enclosure surrounded by a marble wall. There were several graves of different periods, the more important in the corners. One of these contained a partially preserved skeleton, seven golden diadems, a metal pen, styluses and a statuette thought to represent a philosopher. Nearby was found an inscription of the fourth or third century (B)IOTH (A)PIΣTOTEΛOΥ, clearly marking this plot as the property of the family of an Aristotle. When he wrote his report for the year’s work he believed that the facts “tend rather to confirm” this attribution, a belief that time has not justified.

The excavation of the theater proved to be of great interest. The skenˆ was pierced by a well preserved arch, and an underground passage was found leading from the center of the orchestra to a building at the rear of the “stage.” This passage, approached as it was at either end by steps, suggested at once that it might have been used by actors for sudden and unexpected appearances like that of the Ghost of Darius in the Persians. (Plate III)

A similar passage had been found but not cleared in the excavation of the theater at Sicyon by McMurtry (p. 45). So great was the interest aroused in this subject that Mortimer L. Earle was sent over in the summer of 1891 on a special grant from the Institute to investigate the theater at Sicyon. He was compelled by sickness to leave his work incomplete, though it was accurately done. It was left for Carleton L. Brownson and Clarence H. Young to finish it the next fall under the supervision of Waldstein. They clearly proved that this large passage at Sicyon, which extended from the center of the orchestra under and beyond the stage buildings, was part of the drainage system of the theater. However, the presence of steps leading to it just back of the proscenium, and the fact that only the part between this point and the center of the orchestra was paved and the side walls faced with stone, indicated that it probably also served for the unseen passage of actors from the dressing rooms to the orchestra.

Professor William C. Poland, of Brown, was the Annual Director for 1891–1892, the last to hold that title. This was also the last year of Waldstein’s directorate. There were five students. Among them were Herbert F. de Cou, Jones Fellow of the University of Michigan, Carleton L. Brownson, Soldiers’ Memorial Fellow of Yale, who had been in the School the previous year, and Clarence H. Young, of Columbia, who has been an active member of the Managing Committee since his election in 1908.

Professor Poland found that the School building and the grounds needed much attention and saw to it that the needed repairs were effected and that at least a beginning was made in improving the grounds by excluding the predatory goats from the olive grove behind the house. He reverted to the practice of holding three regular meetings a week. Part of the time was spent in examining some of the Greek plays for evidence on the “stage question.” He participated in excursions about Attica but did not accompany the students in their longer trips to Delphi and Boeotia.

In examining the frieze of the monument of Lysicrates, De Cou made the surprising discovery that in all previous discussions of this monument writers had used the drawings of Stuart and Revett, 1762–1830, in which the slabs of the frieze had been wrongly arranged. De Cou, working from the original monument, was able to reach some valuable conclusions as to the norms of symmetry used in the composition.

The excavation at Sicyon, part of this year’s program, has already been described. Washington, again with the School for the spring excavations, dug at his own expense under Waldstein’s supervision at Phlius. Thirty-one years later the account of this excavation appeared in the Journal, an offspring born out of due time. The excavation lasted only a week. Almost all the digging was on the acropolis. The foundations of a building of unusual shape were uncovered. This Washington identified with some certainty as the sanctuary of Ganymeda or Hebe, mentioned by Pausanias. A second building, probably the sanctuary of Demeter, was also found.

An excavation which Young had expected to conduct at Koukounari in Attica had to be abandoned because of his early return to America. Work at Eretria was continued in January under the immediate charge of Poland, though Waldstein planned the campaign. The eastern half of the orchestra was cleared, and its correct diameter was established. Its circumference did not touch the stylobate of the proscenium as indicated on the plan already published. There was a space of 1.27 meters between. Waldstein also excavated at Sparta. He had been in doubt whether to add Messene or Elis to this strenuous program but apparently concluded that Sicyon, Phlius, Koukounari, Sparta, Amyclae, Eretria, and the Argive Heraeum would suffice for one season’s work. The campaign at Amyclae proved to be nothing but a reconnaissance in force—not even a skirmish—because Tsountas, the Greek archaeologist, had already exhausted the possibilities. At Sparta the work, continued during the next year (1893), proved that the so-called Tomb of Leonidas was really a temple in antis. Most of the work consisted in excavating and studying a circular building which was identified as the structure mentioned as near the Scias by Pausanias.

At Waldstein’s suggestion J. M. Paton excavated for six days in April on a hillock near Koutsopodi. Here Waldstein had noted ruins that suggested to him significant burials. The investigation conducted by Paton was, however, disappointing. No early burials were found, little pottery and the fragmentary remains of, the walls seemed to indicate that they had been part of some arrangement for the distribution of water.

But the real work of the year, the most ambitious undertaking yet embarked on by the School, was the excavations on the site of the Heraeum at Argos. These were, throughout, the responsibility of Waldstein. They were continued through the first three years of his term as Professor of Art (till 1895), and he was the editor of the two elaborate volumes discussing this excavation and the objects found there. They were published by the School, 1902–1905.

For the year 1892–1893 Waldstein was Professor of Art—no longer Director. That position was filled by Frank B. Tarbell, whose title was Secretary of the School. James R. Wheeler was Professor of the Greek Language and Literature. There were six students, among them Miss Mary H. Buckingham, of the Harvard Society for the Collegiate Instruction of Women (Radcliffe College), Richard Norton, son of the School’s founder, and James M. Paton, who later was elected to the Managing Committee and served till his death in 1944.

Waldstein did not reach Athens till the last of March and devoted practically all his time during his stay in Greece to the excavation of the Heraeum (the second campaign) and to the work at Sparta already described. No digging was done at Eretria.

The work of the year was somewhat hampered by the fact that Tarbell, who had been elected with the hope—as has been seen—that he would be a permanent official, accepted a call to the University of Chicago and therefore made no plans for the School beyond the one-year term of his residence. The situation was further complicated by the fact that White, who had expected to spend the year at the School as Professor of the Greek Language and Literature, had been forced to change his plans in the summer, and J. R. Wheeler, who had consented to accept the emergency appointment, was not able to reach Athens till December 17. He gave a short course of lectures on the history of the antiquities of Athens during the Byzantine period and the Turkish occupation.

Tarbell lectured on epigraphy and organized some of the School trips, which were not extensive. Much was done for the students by Doerpfeld, who welcomed them to his lectures on the topography of Athens, and by Ernest Gardner, the Director of the British School, who was lecturing on Greek sculpture in the museums.

The year 1893–1894 was most important in the history of the School. That year for the first time the School had a permanent director who was in residence for the entire school year—Rufus B. Richardson, of Dartmouth. He had been Annual Director in 1890–1891. He now returned to be the School’s chief executive for ten years. The Annual Professor of the Greek Language and Literature was John Williams White. There were twelve students, the largest number in the history of the School, an enrollment not exceeded till 1898–1899. Among the students was Edward Capps, of Illinois College, Yale University and at that time Associate Professor of Greek in the University of Chicago. Here met in the relation of teacher and student the two men who more than all others have made the American School of Classical Studies at Athens a great institution.

A pleasing tribute to the School was paid by the Imperial German Institute of Archaeology and the Greek Archaeological Society. Both societies made White and Richardson honorary members.

White conducted a course in Athenian topography, delivering a series of masterly lectures on the Acropolis, and Richardson lectured each week on the sculpture in the museums till Waldstein, who arrived in December, took over this course. Richardson also gave a course in epigraphy. As usual, the students took advantage of Doerpfeld’s local lectures, and several of them joined his trips through the Peloponnesus and the Islands. There was no School trip.

Waldstein, with the assistance of Richard Norton, who was spending his second year in Greece, and of Washington, who for the sixth consecutive season was offering his help, had a most successful campaign at the Heraeum.

Richardson resumed the excavation of Eretria, which had been interrupted the year before. Besides further clearance about the theater he uncovered the foundations of a temple, probably of Dionysus, several water conduits, bases and drums of columns belonging to dedicatory memorials, and what proved to be part of a gymnasium, an interesting complex of tanks and basins which he remarks “looks like a lot of wash-tubs.” Trenches were also dug on the acropolis with indifferent results. An investigation of certain mounds that suggested burials revealed nothing significant, and the location of the Temple of Artemis Amarysia, earnestly sought also by Waldstein, entirely eluded Richardson. The Temple of Apollo Daphnephoros was not discovered till 1900. So important was White’s report of his year at the School that it was not published with the other annual reports but was made a special Bulletin (IV).

White began by speaking of the history of the School, its founding by the Institute. He noted that it now had an endowment of over fifty thousand dollars and a plant in Athens valued at thirty-five thousand dollars. He said that its excavations had been numerous and notable. He commended the appointment of a permanent resident director and the continuance of the annual professorship. He stated his belief that what had apparently been a handicap—the lack of an endowment—had really been a blessing because it had caused the School to be the creation of the cooperating colleges, and thus it was more truly a national school than either the French Ecole d’Athènes or the German Archaeologisches Institut.

He then went on to say that from the beginning the regulations for the management of the School had been but little changed. Now serious revision was necessary. He contrasted the thoroughly trained students of the French and German schools with the American students, who had frequently little or no training in archaeology. He proposed the founding of two fellowships, one by the School and the other by the Institute, to be awarded on the basis of examinations which would insure the selection of students with some considerable knowledge of Greek and of archaeology. He next proposed that regular courses should be offered at the School, and a schedule of these courses published. He suggested courses in Greek archaeology, sculpture, vases, epigraphy and topography. He expressed his doubts of the wisdom of using the time spent in Greece in reading classical authors. He described the regulation requiring each student to write a thesis as a Procrustean contrivance that had fallen into a deserved abeyance. And finally he condemned in no doubtful terms indiscriminate excavation and the idea that every student must conduct one: “. . . . the ordinary student is not the best person to take charge of day laborers, nor is this the most profitable use of his time. . . . . If he thereby misses the chance to cross the Peloponnesus or to sail among the Islands, he loses much more than he gains.” An excavation is costly; “it is not a picnic, but a serious scientific enterprise, whose main purpose must be to enlarge the bounds of knowledge, not to train tyros in the practical art of digging.”

So strong was White’s influence that his clearly sensible advice was immediately taken. The next year (1895) two fellowships were founded, the School Committee on Fellowships was appointed, and White was its first chairman. One of the fellowships was provided by the Archaeological Institute of America, the other by the School. The amount of each was six hundred dollars. The first Fellow of the School in Archaeology was Frank Cole Babbitt, A. B., Harvard College, later Professor of Greek in Trinity College. The first Fellow of the Archaeological Institute was Herbert Fletcher de Cou, A.B., University of Michigan. He was later Secretary of the School (1900–1901). His murder by Arabs at Cyrene in 1911 was a tragedy for Roman as well as Greek archaeological research. These first two Fellows were appointed on the basis of credentials submitted. They went into residence in Athens in 1895. In the spring of 1896 the first fellowship examinations were held. The successful candidates were Carroll N. Brown, of Harvard, and De Cou. Since 1896 these two fellowships have been continuously awarded, except during war, usually on the basis of examinations.

The subjects set in the first examination are of interest: Modern Greek, one hour; Greek Epigraphy, two hours; Introduction to Greek Archaeology, two hours; Greek Architecture, Sculpture, Vases, three hours; Pausanias and the Monuments and Topography of Athens, two hours. At the examination one year later (1897) an examination in an Introduction to Greek Art and the minor subjects in Greek Archaeology was substituted for Greek Archaeology, and the time allotted to this and to architecture, sculpture and vases was increased from five to six hours.

Besides these two fellowships, immediately established as a result of White’s Report, two others were shortly forthcoming. At the annual meeting of the Managing Committee in May, 1898, the establishment of the Agnes Hoppin Memorial Fellowship was announced. This fellowship, with the stipend of a thousand dollars annually, was to be awarded without examination to a young woman for study at the School in Athens. The fellowship was given by Mrs. Cortlandt Hoppin, Miss Sarah Hoppin and Professor Joseph C. Hoppin, of Bryn Mawr, in memory of their daughter and sister, Miss Agnes Hoppin. Miss May Louise Nichols, A.B., Smith College, was the first appointment (1898–1899). This fellowship was continued for six years.

James Loeb, as a student at Harvard, had come under the inspiring influence of White and had become a devoted admirer of Norton. In 1901 he wrote Norton as follows:

You may recall that when I had the pleasure of visiting you in Cambridge, I spoke of my intention of founding a Fellowship in the American School of Archaeology at Athens. I have a great desire to name this Fellowship the “Charles Eliot Norton Fellowship,” as it is so largely due to your efforts and to your deep interest in archaeology that the School was founded and brought to its present state of efficiency. Of course, I should not do this without first getting your permission, and I need hardly assure you that it would be a source of peculiar satisfaction to me to record in this way my appreciation of the great friendship which you have shown me through so many years. I feel some delicacy in addressing you on this subject, but I trust that my idea will meet with your approval, and a line from you to this effect will be much appreciated. At the same time, I hope that you will treat this matter with perfect frankness and not hesitate to tell me in case you have any objection to my plan.

The result of this significant tribute to the influence of Norton was the establishment of a fellowship at Harvard which has been held by many brilliant Harvard and Radcliffe students. The first to earn it was Oliver S. Tonks, A.B., Harvard, 1898, now Professor of Art, Emeritus, Vassar College.

There were also two other fellowship foundations from which the School sometimes benefited during Seymour’s chairmanship—the Elisha Jones Fellowship of the University of Michigan and the Soldiers’ Memorial Fellowship at Yale. The holder of the Elisha Jones Fellowship, established in 1889, was entitled to pursue graduate study abroad. Herbert F. de Cou was the first holder of this fellowship to become a student of the School (1891–1892). The melancholy history of the fund is recorded by an officer of the University of Michigan:

Mrs. Catherine E. Jones’ offer to establish the fellowship is recorded April 17, 1889. Substantially she agreed to furnish a principal fund of $10,000, on which she was to pay $500 a year, her estate being pledged for the entire amount. Apparently she made payments of $500 a year for some time, and these were immediately used as the stipend of the fellowships from year to year. On June 20, 1905, I find record that Mrs. Jones offered to deed to the University a lot in Ann Arbor in lieu of the fellowship which she had established and the offer was accepted. There is no indication that the land was to be used for other than the general purposes of the University or that it was to finance the fellowship. At any rate the fellowship seems to have lapsed either then or a few years before. It is not now in existence.

In 1895 the Soldiers’ Memorial Fellowship was founded at Yale by Theodosia D. Wheeler. The holder of this fellowship was to be a Yale graduate of not more than five years’ standing, engaged in nonprofessional studies. The fellowship was frequently held by members of the School. Walter R. Bridgman (1883–1884) was the first appointee to this fellowship to enroll at the School.

Thus at the close of Seymour’s chairmanship in 1901 there were, in addition to the Jones and Soldiers’ fellowships and other traveling fellowships which might be occupied at Athens, four fellowships specifically designated for students of the School. The Institute has continued to maintain its fellowship at the School with a stipend now more than doubled, the Charles Eliot Norton Fellowship is still awarded annually at Harvard for study at the School, and instead of one fellowship awarded by the School there are now four, bearing the names of the first four chairmen of the Managing Committee: the John Williams White Fellowship in Greek Archaeology, the Thomas Day Seymour Fellowship in Greek History and Literature, the James Rignall Wheeler Fellowship and the Edward Capps Fellowship.

The influence of White’s Report on the character of the courses offered at the School was almost as notable as it had proved to be in regard to the establishment of fellowships. For while no list of courses to be given at the School was ever published, the systematic instruction in epigraphy, sculpture, vases and topography offered during the next few years can be traced directly to this source. It was many years before a Professor of the Greek Language and Literature ventured to offer a course in the reading of a Greek author.

White’s advice that excavation was not necessarily a part of the ordinary student’s work bore fruit at once. In the next year, 1894–1895, the excavations at the Heraeum and at Eretria were both brought to a close. Attention was focused on Corinth. No other excavations were attempted till 1901 except the work done by Miss Boyd, a seasoned excavator, at her own expense in Crete. Gone were the days when the School could spread devastation over the face of the land by attacking theaters and ruined Byzantine churches in seven different sites in one season.

There were six students this year, Theodore W. Heermance, Soldiers’ Memorial Fellow of Yale, among them. Thomas D. Goodell, of Yale, was the Annual Professor. He offered a course in inscriptions dealing with Greek law. Since the excavations at the Heraeum were to close with this season, Waldstein gave no instruction at the School. Edward L. Tilton had been appointed Architect of the School to assist in the work at the Heraeum, and his advice was found very helpful to the students.

Professor Augustus C. Merriam, of Columbia, the first American to devote most of his time to classical archaeology, Annual Director of the School in 1887–1888, was spending his sabbatical year in Athens. The Institute had given two hundred dollars with which he was to excavate under the auspices of the School at Koukounari, near Icaria. He died in Athens in January, 1895, and Richardson was requested to take charge of the investigation. This he did in a four-day campaign in February. It will be remembered that the successful excavations at Icaria had been directed by Merriam as a result of a hint given by Milchhoefer. Another suggestion from the same source aroused Merriam’s interest in a church and cloister at Koukounari.

On looking the site over Richardson decided that there was too little time and too little prospect of finds to warrant wrecking the entire structure. He therefore decided to “tear down only the south and west walls of both buildings.” The results were decidedly disappointing. Trenches were also dug outside the church and cloister. These and the piles of stones adjacent yielded some interesting reliefs and an important sacrificial calendar. This was published by Richardson in the Papers.

Another interesting incident of the year was the discovery of a sarcophagus and several stelae on the grounds of Mr. K. Merlin on Kephissia Boulevard near the street that now bears his name. These objects he very kindly turned over to the School for investigation. They are discussed by Goodell and Heermance in the Papers.

The work at Eretria was brought to a close. The theater and the buildings connected with it were entirely cleared. The work lacked much if judged by modern standards, because excavation technique has been so greatly improved. Still, it represented a competent and complete excavation.’ The School had reason to be well pleased with it. It had cost about two thousand dollars.

This year also saw the last digging at the Heraeum. As at Eretria, the work had been conducted during four years. But the Heraeum had been a much more costly and elaborate dig. The expense was about thirteen thousand dollars. The Institute had contributed about half.

Waldstein had had complete charge of this excavation, first as Director of the School (1891–1892) and later (1892–1895) as Professor of Art. This position he continued to hold till 1897. During the two years that he was in the School after the close of the excavation he gave nearly all his time to work on arranging and studying the finds.

In this excavation he had some able assistance. De Cou took part in the first campaign, H. S. Washington in the first three campaigns, Richard Norton in the second and third, and Professor Joseph C. Hoppin in the third and fourth. Heermance and the architect, Tilton, also assisted in this last campaign. After the excavation closed De Cou returned to the School (1895) and devoted almost his entire time for the next six years to studying the bronze objects found during the Heraeum excavation. Hoppin gave much time to the study of the vases, and George H. Chase, of Harvard, worked on the figurines systematically during his two years in the School (1896–1898).

The importance and size of the sanctuary of Hera at Argos were scarcely realized when these excavations were begun. They proved to be of very great interest. The old temple destroyed by fire in 423 B.C. (“according to Homer,” as the impeccable New York Evening Post reported April 12, 1892) was located, and its plan determined. The later temple by Eupolemos was also found, and so many of the architectural fragments that Tilton was able to make a “restoration” of it on paper. Two colonnades belonging to the earlier building period and one of later date were uncovered, and plans of all these were drawn. Several other buildings were also found, the nature of which was not entirely clear. So many bronze objects were found that from them a history of the development of the art of working in bronze can be written. The vases discovered here and in the adjacent tombs were both numerous and important. A fine head of Hera in marble was one of the early finds. Other marbles recovered threw important light on the Argive school of sculpture.

The publication of this important excavation was considerably delayed; Waldstein insisted, rightly, on having editorial control but was not always reasonable, and the fact that he was separated by the Atlantic Ocean from the Committee on Publications did not make it easier for the two parties to understand or to compose their mutual difficulties.

One preliminary report was issued as Bulletin III of the School (1892). Year-by-year reports were made by Waldstein as Director and Professor of Art. The final publication appeared 1902–1905. It filled two elaborate quarto volumes of over six hundred pages. There were about three hundred illustrations in the text and nearly 150 plates, some of them in color. There were ten heliogravures. Waldstein as Director and Professor of Art. The final publication appeared 1902–1905. It filled two elaborate quarto volumes of over six hundred pages. There were about three hundred illustrations in the text and nearly 150 plates, some of them in color. There were ten heliogravures. Waldstein’s name appeared alone as editor. He wrote the introduction and the chapter on sculpture and collaborated in the chapters on topography and the terra cottas. The chapter on inscriptions was written by Richardson, that on vases by Hoppin, terra-cotta figurines by Chase, bronzes by De Cou, engraved stones, gold ornaments, coins and minor objects by Norton. The Egyptian objects, of which there was a considerable number, were described by Albert M. Lythgoe, an Egyptian archaeologist of standing. Washington had written on the geology of the Argolid. It was a monumental undertaking, and in spite of the delays, judged by the best archaeological practice, the tempo of which is somewhat geological, the report had been issued with promptness. It was an achievement in which the School took pride. The Publications Committee were John Williams White, Edward Robinson, Harold N. Fowler, representing the Institute; Thomas Day Seymour, John H. Wright, James R. Wheeler, for the School.

It is difficult to evaluate Waldstein’s services. A good administrator he was not, a charming personality who made friends for the School he certainly was. Of his scholarship and his work as an excavator, the recent Director of the German Institute in Athens, George Karo, writes:

As an archaeologist, Waldstein never achieved distinction, though he undoubtedly was well grounded and possessed artistic taste. He had the misfortune of not recognizing the epochal changes brought about in our field, both around 1880 and during the closing years of the century. For the seventies, the Austrian expedition to Samothrace and the German excavations at Olympia set a new standard of field research. Waldstein failed to apply it at the Heraeum, but, he could have pled the excuse that his excavations were certainly not inferior, in fact rather superior in method and accuracy, to what the French did at Delos, long before and during the Heraeum dig, or what they did—and omitted to do!—at Delphi in the nineties and during the first years of the new century One can hardly reproach Waldstein with his inadequate attention to small finds. Even at Olympia potsherds were thrown away wholesale, and Alexander Murray told me himself that when he excavated for the British Museum at Enkomi on Cyprus, they did not even keep fairly well-preserved Cypriote vases. Mrs. Murray said their great number had been most annoying! Of course the Mykenische Vasen of Furtwängler and Loeschcke might have taught a lesson. But hardly anybody learned it during the nineties; and the new epoch in field archaeology, inaugurated by the British School at Phylakopi, promptly adopted by the Americans and triumphantly applied by both schools, under Bosanquet, Dawkens, and Bert Hill, during the first decade of the twentieth century, was very insufficiently understood by many archaeologists. . . . Waldstein had an inkling of its importance, though he was too superficial to fathom it . . . . Hoppin and De Cou did all they could to present the minor finds of the Heraeum as well, and as completely as possible. These chapters of the book are really useful.

There were eleven students in 1895–1896—two of them, Babbitt and De Cou, as has been said, the first fellows of the School, Andrews of Cornell, Heermance of Yale, Hoppin of Harvard. It was Heermance’s second year and Hoppin’s third. Benjamin Ide Wheeler of Cornell was the Professor of the Greek Language and Literature.

In the early fall Richardson conducted School trips to Boeotia and the Peloponnesus and later lectured in the museums. Waldstein gave a few lectures, but his time was mostly spent in arranging the finds from the Heraeum and beginning the arduous task of preparing them for publication. Wheeler’s lectures were on epigraphy, partly at the School and partly in the labyrinth of the Epigraphical Museum.

On the eastern architrave of the Parthenon appears a series of empty holes into which were inserted nails that held the letters of an inscription in which Nero had honored himself by attaching his name to the temple. Many attempts to recover this had failed, but this year Eugene P. Andrews, a student from Cornell, solved the puzzle. At considerable risk he was lowered from the floor of the pediment and took squeezes of the holes. After much study he was able to show that the bronze letters were held each by three nails, usually placed in the same way for the same letter but differing in position for different letters. He finally recovered the whole forty-six words of the inscription with the exception of two that were proper names. The exploit was one of the most brilliant in the early history of the School. An interesting account of the adventure was published by the hero in the Century Magazine for June, 1897.

But the great event of the year was the beginning of the excavation of Corinth, an enormous task at which the School is still laboring. The results of the first campaign, which was largely exploratory (twenty-one trenches were dug), were encouraging; the theater, the agora and a stoa were located. The discovery of the Lechaeum road helped to indicate the situation of the agora. The amount of money at Richardson’s disposal was not large—fifteen hundred dollars given by the Institute and about six hundred dollars contributed by friends. John Hay made his first contribution, five hundred dollars, to the School this year.

The excavation of Corinth was from the beginning financed largely by contributions solicited from somewhat reluctant donors. The Institute appropriated money generously, but it was always necessary to supplement this amount, and to secure the supplemental funds was by no means easy. Benjamin Ide Wheeler wrote a strong letter from Athens on the subject, which was published in the New York Tribune, February 2, 1896, eliciting a commendatory editorial in the same issue. Wheeler pointed out what is often overlooked, that no excavation of a large Greek city had hitherto been undertaken. Olympia, Delphi and Delos were shrines, nor was any other such site as Corinth available, for the other prominent Greek city sites are covered by modern buildings. He appealed to the American public to do for the American School what the French and German governments had done for theirs.

The year 1896–1897 was a year of deep humiliation for Greece. The disastrous defeat of the Greek armies by the Turks filled Athens with refugees and disrupted the life of the country. An incident in this catastrophe was the cessation of most of the work of the archaeological schools. Richardson was forced to abandon excavation at Corinth after about a week for lack of workmen. Doerpfeld gave up his archaeological trips. Miss Harriet Boyd (Mrs. Charles H. Hawes) dropped her work at the School and went as a nurse to Thessaly, an act of sacrifice that endeared her greatly to the Greek people.

There were nine students this year. Among them were Hoppin, enrolled for the fourth year as a student; De Cou, spending the third of his six years at the School; Carroll N. Brown and George H. Chase of Harvard. De Cou and Brown were Fellows of the School, the first appointed on the basis of competitive examination. Because of serious illness in his family Richardson conducted few trips this year. That duty fell to the Professor of Greek, J. R. Sitlington Sterrett. Richardson lectured as usual in the museums and at the archaeological sites in Athens. Sterrett took epigraphy for his subject. On this he lectured from December to March, when Dr. Wilhelm, of the Austrian School, admitted Sterrett’s pupils to his lectures. Waldstein, who retired from the service of the School at the close of this year, dedicated his time to the Heraeum finds.

The School is very greatly indebted to both Doerpfeld and Wilhelm for their generous help. Doerpfeld’s lectures on the topography of Athens were for many years open freely to the American students. No one who has not heard Doerpfeld explain an intricate problem can understand how lucid he was, how clearly and logically he could present his facts, or how persuasive was his wistful eloquence.

His tours of the Peloponnesus and the Islands were also open to the students of the School—they were always welcome. It is no wonder that Wheeler preferred to go with Doerpfeld to the Peloponnesus instead of witnessing the excavations at Corinth. And it was these tours that White had in mind when he said that it was more profitable for a student to cross the Peloponnesus or sail among the Islands than to take part in an excavation.

Dr. Wilhelm’s work in the Epigraphical Museum was only less important. He had inhabited that wilderness till he knew most of its bypaths and traps. He could lead the students to the desired stone without a guide or without spending hours in a search for it. He was an authority in his subject, and the American students profited immensely by his generously given help.

This year saw the establishment of the John White Field Fund by the gift of one thousand dollars, a legacy from Mrs. Field, the principal to accumulate till it should be sufficient to maintain a scholarship. In 1944 the fund amounted to $6,992.85.

This year also saw the sixth and last volume of School Papers published, a volume of 446 pages, fifty-five illustrations and twenty-five plates. These six volumes of Papers present a dignified and impressive record of the School’s achievements. It is to be regretted that the subsequent articles recording the work of the students have not been systematically reprinted after they appeared in the American Journal of Archaeology and published periodically. A single collection of these papers, listed in Appendix V, has been made for the Managing Committee at an expense of about one hundred dollars. They fill several bound volumes and testify to the sound archaeological activities of the School.

The staff of the School from 1897–1898 was strengthened by the appointment of Professor Alfred Emerson, of Cornell, as Professor of Archaeology, and Joseph C. Hoppin, who had worked on the ceramic finds at the Heraeum for four years, as Lecturer on Greek Vases. Unfortunately, the illness of his sister in England prevented him from giving more than a few of his lectures. Emerson lectured on the Parthenon and the earlier temple of Athena. He was deterred from giving a second course in epigraphy by the numerous other lectures to which the students were at least exposed. Richardson was lecturing weekly in the museums, Wolters, of the German School, and Richards, of the British School, were giving lectures on Athenian sculpture, Doerpfeld on Athenian topography, Wilhelm on inscriptions, and Reichel, of the Austrian School, on Mycenaean art. Emerson conducted what had now come to be the two regular School trips—to the Peloponnesus and to the north, Boeotia and Delphi. He himself was interested in mediaeval culture, a refreshing novelty in a school that had joyfully scattered to the winds the remains of so many Byzantine churches. He lectured to the students on the mosaics of Daphni and visited Hosios Lukas to study the mosaics there.

There were eleven students this year, a group better prepared than any of their predecessors; four were doctors of philosophy, four had been in residence at Athens for a year or more, and all but three had had graduate work. There was only one woman, Miss May Louise Nichols, of Smith, but she had won one of the two coveted School fellowships. Carroll N. Brown performed the aerial feat of the year. He was lowered over the south wall of the Acropolis and took squeezes of hitherto unread inscriptions.

John Hay again showed his interest in the School by giving a second five hundred dollars for the Corinth excavation. This work, interrupted by the war in 1897,  was renewed in March, 1898, and continued for nearly three months. The fountain of Peirene was located and partially uncovered, and the Greek agora was again located. How little the School then realized the importance or the difficulty of the site is shown by the comment of the Chairman of the Managing Committee that “continuance of the work for at least another campaign is necessary.”

The following year (1898–1899) Richardson conducted the School trips to the Peloponnesus, including Sparta—with an ascent of Taygetus; Boeotia, with a climb of Cithaeron and an expedition to Icaria, returning via the summit of Pentelicus. The previous year he had taken ten of the School to the top of Parnes and had climbed the remote Kiona, “the highest mountain in Greece” (Olympus, 9,790 feet, was still in Turkey), and had surmounted Geraneia. This yearning for the stratosphere, while it undoubtedly did give his students an excellent idea of the Greek landscape and an insight into Hellenic geography, was a symptom of the touristic triviality that somewhat impaired his later work. The superficial character of some of these trips is indicated by a remark of J. R. Sitlington Sterrett’s on the School trip which he conducted in 1896. “A day was devoted to Mycenae, our aim being to make ourselves thoroughly familiar with everything pertaining to the ancient site.” Richardson also continued his museum lectures. Emerson, who was appointed for a second year as Professor of Archaeology, lectured on epigraphy, with special reference to building records. He also met a small group of students who read modern Greek ballads, another innovation. His broad catholic interests had given the School two new possibilities of usefulness, Byzantine antiquities and modern Greek literature. Miss Professor Angie C. Chapin (as the Reports style her), of Wellesley, was the Annual Professor. Her title was Lecturer on Greek Literature. It was the first time a woman had been appointed to the position. In spite of her title she lectured on the topography of the Battle of Salamis, on epitaphs, and supplemented Richardson’s museum course by lectures on grave reliefs.

A third campaign at Corinth in the spring resulted in the almost complete clearing of Peirene and its certain identification by inscriptional evidence, the discovery of the fountain Glauce and the location of the agora for the third time. The location of Glauce established the identity of the Temple of Apollo, “a squat, surly temple with no nonsense about it,” as Gildersleeve says. This time the ruins of the propylaea were unearthed. There were fifteen students in attendance, the largest group in the School’s history. Six had had at least one year in the School previously. Among them were four women.

The question of the attendance of women at the School had never caused difficulty but had sometimes occasioned embarrassment. It has been noted that an early applicant from a “female institution” had been assured that her sex would not be a bar to her admittance. Miss Annie S. Peck had been a student in 1885–1886. In his first report as director, Richardson had said, “Women cannot well travel in the interior of Greece, nor share in the active work of excavation.” Even ten years later a somewhat dazed J. R. Sitlington Sterrett could write, “The women members of the School took part in all these tours and ascended Helicon with the rest of us; their pluck and courage deserve high praise.” Richardson had taken only the men to Sparta. But now he was to see the women students come into their own.

As soon as the fellowships were thrown open to competition women began to take the examinations—and win them. For 1897–1898 Miss Nichols, of Smith, was appointed, for 1898–1899 Miss Boyd, also of Smith. She had already proved her ability to “travel in the interior” by her service as a nurse in the Turkish War. In 1898 the Hoppin Memorial Fellowship, with a stipend of a thousand dollars annually, was established through the good will of Joseph C. Hoppin. He had been a student of the School for four years and had been a Lecturer on Greek Vases from 1897 to 1899. He and his friends now established this fellowship to be held by a woman because “the activity of the School for women students was limited to a certain degree.” Miss Nichols was the first to be appointed (1898–1899), and the next year Miss Boyd. Thus in the year 1898–1899 Richardson found himself director of a school where one of his two colleagues on the faculty was a woman, of his fifteen students four were women, and two of the School’s three fellowships were occupied by women. But worse was in store.

For the next year, 1899–1900, there were fifteen students, and eight of them were women. Among them were Miss Boyd, this year holding the Hoppin Memorial Fellowship, Miss Edith F. Claflin, later Lecturer in Greek and Latin at Barnard, Miss Florence A. Gragg, who became Professor of Classical Languages at Smith, Miss Lida S. King, who was Dean of the Women’s College (Pembroke) at Brown University, and Miss Ida Thallon (Mrs. B. H. Hill), who taught at Vassar till her marriage.

Miss Boyd not only wrote during the year an excellent paper on the coinage of Eleusis but further disproved Richardson’s dictum that a woman could not endure the hardship of active excavation by conducting at her own expense an excavation in Crete. The last word in the matter of female fragility was, however, with Seymour, who states that Miss Boyd was accompanied on her expedition by an Epirot attendant and his mother, who served as Miss Boyd’s chaperon.

This excavation at Kavousi, near the eastern end of Crete, produced an exceedingly valuable collection of vases, fibulae, swords and bronze objects. One large beehive tomb was re-discovered, and eight smaller ones hitherto unknown were found.

James Tucker, Fellow of the School, was drowned while bathing in the Nile at Luxor. This was the third time in the history of the School that a student had died. The others were Joseph McK. Lewis in 1887, and George M. Richardson in 1896.

The Professor of Greek for the year was Herbert Weir Smyth, of Bryn Mawr. He lectured on epigraphy, especially the inscriptions of Epidaurus. Richardson gave his weekly lectures in the museums and conducted the School trips. The bicycle had for several years been a regular means of School locomotion. This year, after the regular work in the Argolid, Richardson and Smyth, accompanied by two students, cycled through Arcadia and Laconia (Mistra was included). At the close of the northern trip Richardson, Smyth and two students climbed Mount Delph in Euboea, and in January the same quartet that had cycled through Arcadia and Laconia took a very extensive ride to the north, including Thermopylae, the Meteora Monasteries, the Vale of Tempe, Pherae and Volo.

The excavations at Corinth were continued, thanks to a considerable number of interested donors. Mr. Sears and Mrs. Phoebe A. Hearst continued their generous support. There was found a very considerable number of statues, among them two of colossal size used as architectural members in one of the buildings. The most interesting discovery was a triglyph frieze along a low platform from which a flight of steps led down to a fountain of which Richardson said, “the only instance, I believe, of an ancient Greek fountain absolutely preserved.” West of this, below and east of the Temple of Apollo, was cleared the first of a series of vaulted rooms. An incidental discovery that aroused much interest, especially in religious circles, was the lintel of the Jewish synagogue. To have found another place where Paul may have spoken gave a dramatic tinge to this bit of marble. It was becoming clear that the excavation of Corinth would present many problems that would need the attention of a professional architect.

For the last year of Seymour’s chairmanship the number of students was the largest in the history of the School—sixteen. Among them were Samuel E. Bassett, later Chairman of the Committee on Fellowships (1917–1936), Bert H. Hill, who was to be the School’s director for twenty years, and Charles H. Weller, a Fellow of the School.

The Professor of Greek was Edward D. Perry, of Columbia, for eighteen years Secretary of the Managing Committee (1920–1938) and on two occasions Acting Chairman. Like several of his predecessors he offered a course in epigraphy. He also took charge of the School for six weeks while the director was in Egypt. The staff of the School also included this year a secretary, Herbert F. de Cou. He delivered some lectures on bronzes, but most of his time was spent in working over the bronzes from the Heraeum. An innovation of the year was permission granted to a limited number of the members of the School to attend lectures on Greek vases in the National Museum, given by Professor Pottier, of the French School.

The director’s lectures followed the pattern of earlier years, and the usual trips were taken. Boeotia was traversed by “bicycle and carriage.” An unusual trip of the year was by bicycle to Acarnania and Aetolia. Five members of the School went with the director.

The ruins of Oeniadae proved so interesting that in December Professor Manley, of the University of Missouri, Dr. Forman, of Cornell, with Dr. Powell and Mr. Sears, returned to the site to excavate. Their investigations were confined to the theater and some of the ship houses. The following spring a Greek bath was uncovered by Powell and Sears. Dr. Forman and Mr. Sears bore the expense of the excavation. The results were published in the American Journal of Archaeology. (Plate VI)

Another subsidiary excavation with surprising results was undertaken at the grotto of Pan, Apollo and the Nymphs at Vari in southern Attica. This cave was well preserved and frequently visited. It had apparently never occurred to anyone to dig here till Weller suggested it. The removal of a few inches of soil cost less than fifty dollars. There were recovered seven delightful reliefs of Pan, Hermes and the Nymphs, many terra-cotta figurines, more than 150 coins, Roman and Christian, and several valuable inscriptions. The lamps and vase fragments were measured by the bushel. The publication of the finds is in the Journal. (Plate VII)

Weller also lent distinction to the School this year by his work on the Acropolis. He drew a new plan of the Old Propylaea, during his investigation removed some soil hitherto untouched and recovered new data for this building.

At Corinth further examination of the platform with the triglyph frieze proved that it was not a post-Mummius construction. More vaulted buildings were found west of the fountain, the open-air basin at Peirene was discovered and cleared. Attempts to find the Aphrodite temple on Acro-Corinth, the Odeum and the Tomb of Medea’s Children were not successful.

Seymour’s chairmanship had seen fourteen years of steady growth at the School. The attendance was good, the preparation if not the quality of the students was decidedly improved. This had been partly, at least, due to White’s plea for fellowships. There were now four open for study at Athens. A flexible routine of work at the School had been established. The “open meetings” and the School trips under adequate supervision had been made regular features of the year’s program. Wildcat excavation had been largely stopped—again by White—and the School had settled down to the serious work of recovering ancient Corinth. The annual professorship of Greek had been perhaps too closely confined to archaeological matters. Cooperation among the schools, especially the American, British and German, had been established. The lectures of Doerpfeld and Wilhelm had become an integral part of the School’s curriculum. A permanent resident director had been secured at last to give continuity to the School’s work. Several volumes of Papers and even more the elaborate publication of the Argive Heraeum had lent luster to the name of the School. An adequate endowment was still lacking, and the dispersion of the published work of the students through the volumes of the Journal was regrettable, but when Seymour surrendered the chairmanship to Wheeler he must have experienced a feeling of deep satisfaction at the work he had done; he could well have “looked upon it and called it good.”