.

'

PJtt:: p-.,l CA tv l A~cHA-E()LoGr 3f :2..r(-2g( (933

EXCAVATIONS AT ELEUSIS, 1932

PllELDnXAllY REPORT

PLATE XXXIV

IL'LF a centllry has alreado· passed since t he Greek Archaeological Society began the work of uncoyering the remains preserved within the Eleusinia,n sanctuary.' The director of that excayat ion and first scientific explorer of Eleusis, thc late D. Philios. in the course of two seasons (1883-1884) cleared the area occupied by t he Teles­terion, uncovered its remains and made clear the va,rying fortunes of this sacred building.' After the monumental ,,·ork of the late Ferdinand Noack,' in which the results of Philios' eXea,·ations were also given in detail , the Telesterion was con ­sidered explored, at least as far (is the spade was concerned~ although the ruins uncovered preseuted llJany probleins. The sanctuary bnilt of polygonal masoury and dated b)· :'\oack in t1w seven th century was considered by him a.nd many others as the earliest Telesterion built in honor of Demeter.

In the reports of Philios. ho,w,·er, mention ,,·as made of walls, graves, and earl.,· pottery disco'·ered belo,,· the Aoor le,·eI of the historic sanctllaries. Some of these walls we,·e placed in Dr. Dorpfold·s early plans of Elell sis and were later incorporated in the plans of :'\oack.' Furthermore in the campaigns of 1930 and 1931, in front 01 lhe Stoa of Philo SO lli e prehistoric graves were discovered, and foundations wh ich seemed to belong to prehistoric houses.' It was natural to ask precisely wbat were the remains found b.'· Philios a nd ,,·hat was the relation of tbe prehistoric finds to the historic buildings.

To determine this. to prn·ent an.'· speculation ",hich might be based on the nature ol lhe reported prehistoric ruins. and to bring to light all possible ex isting remains beiOlY the floors of the hi storic Telesteria, we decided to remove the earth covering Over almost three fourths of the sanctuary nntil the rock was exposed e,·crywhere. This was especiall .,· importan t since the theory of the existence of a cult at Eleusis in ~Iycenaea n times based chiefly upon tbe date of the sanctuary bui lt in polygonal masonry of the archaic period, could no longer be held after Koack's carefLlI study and successful dating of that construction .' The work of removing the eartb ,,·as completed in 193~,' the natural rock is now exposed in practically the entire area of

I The event was commemorated b," the publicat ion of the first yoillme of Eleusiniaka, dedic;).ted to th: memory of the first scientific: explorers of Eleusis, D emetrios Philios (1882.- 189£) .and Andreas Sbas (1894--1907). ' Pra!;tiko., 1883. pp. 50 If.; 1884, pp. 64 If., PI. 6.

~ Ekuau;, die bG'ugcschichtlicile Elllu:icidllllg dc~ lleiligtumcs, Derlin-Leipzig, 19~7. ~ Praklih~a, 1884 PI. ..l. O. and walls shaded in blue. .Krock, op. cit. , pI. lB. 'G. E. Myionas. A.J ..-1.. XXX\-.I, 193-2. pp. 110 If., a.nd "Prehistorie Eleusis," in Ele1.lsiniaka I ,

PP. ]5, 49 If. .

J ~ A. W. Persson. Archie jur ReligiollslcisscTlsclwft, XXI. 191212, pp. 292 If.; Marlin P. Nilsson, The ;In(Km~}Iycetlaean Religioll and Its SUTl~iml in Creel,; Religion, pp. 402 If.; See also Ch. Picard, in

. e.uehl$lorique, CLXn, ]931, pp. ] If. 'f . 1 ThLS important work became possible by the generous financia.l assistance given to Dr. K ourou­

It DlOtes by an unnamed American donor through the American School of Classical Stud ies. To him as

~ nl

~I!FE~RCI!AEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE' . • AMERICA

..k..

i!72 GEOItGE E, MYW\""S ,-\\" I) K. KOCn Ol'N JOTES

the T elesterion. and the foundations and remains of the differen t periods like a gigantic skeJ('toJl li t> bare for scientific inq·stigation.

The filling removed ha.d a maximum thickness of 7,50 m, immediately in front of the foulld,ttions of the inlier ca.st side of thc P ericlean cella, and a minimum thick_ ness of 0.40 m. " meter to the east of th e third row 01 columns of the Roman Teles­terion which stalld upon the levelled rock of the hil!.' It was chiefly made up of earth brought from other parts of the hill and used for the const ructiou of the artifi­cial terrace on which th e va rio us Telesteria "'erl' built , :\ good portion of it, how­ever, was composed of the debris accumulated from the destruction of older build­

." .. ings. Th e filling was mostl!' disturbed first by Philios <Lnd his workers when they ' were t esting th e area of the Telest('I"ion. and second by builders of the historic .. sanc tuaries, who lOIn-red the foundation s of their wall s and columns pl"flctically 10 ' th e rock. FortlllHltd!, th e ancil'nt huildns sholl'ed a, great respect for the older 'i

constructions which th~,' round in th eir '1"<"', and destro ,'cd or di sturbed as little or the older "clics as possibl," Between th e Ron;'lIl co lum,;s \'5 a nd "15 an interest­ing exa,mpl" of a l\/iddle H elladic huria l \\"a5 discoyered, ' The skull and the bones of th e chest or one or the skeletons "'~n' not found [wcaust'. in a ll probability, they Were remov('[1 to l11ake room fo r the firs t COlll'st' of the founda t ions or column V5_ ", ' The honcs of the leg> " 'cn' fou nd in tl1<·i,. original Hcwd position , and the filling ~ around and over tlwl1l as well as 0 \"(:''1" the rest of th t' g ra ve was undisturbed. It is e\'ident that there was destroyed on l," wl",t WaS absolukly n,'cessa ry for the laying . of th e foundation s, This is ont' of the mall." instanct'S. probably th e most striking, " ':. in which we noticed a scrupu lous eA'ort to p""SI'n',' the older rcmains, whether they '" Wel'e graves or wa.ll s. ,. '.-

The respect shown to t h" oldcr constl'llc! ions I", t h l' cI a5sica I and 1l olllan builders, ' '~1 niH] th e f,1.(; [ tha t Philios did not ~xca,""tl' cOI11I'I<,I<-\.I- the ent ire ar('a, ",ill account '.>

for t l J(~ p reservalion and tht.' docuwentatio n of the remain s uncovered during our ' it "

campaign. F oundations of ,,-alls sU r\.- in·d: and on either s ide of them horders of . undi sturbed earth \I"<'re unco" cred , small IJU t im portant. inasmuc h as they yielded . enough evidellce for dating the reliC's. Our chronological conclusions were verified ' . furth er by th e results obtained by excavating the undisturbed carth that lay beneath ." Ih,> fonndations of the Peisis trnlean co lum n 15 (n:; in the plan, P!. XXXIV). The ,' temporar,v relll ov~d oC this base wa s decided upon . and it proyed most essential for the acc urate dating of all the ren",ins un('overed bclow the P eisistrn teau leveL'. H owever, no moy" bl" finds of great size co uld he found in the small undisturbed'

well as to Prorcssor Edward CHPPS or Print'e tan rni\·(' r~;t.\' :'lnt! to t.he o ffi cials of the School we to ('xprcss om gratitud e for th eir m o.<:t timeh' as:;; ist 'lIlC'('. ,Yc nrc also grateful to the Anoe,ic'" Cr)UJI,;I' of Learned So(: ictics (or the ir grallt to our 'field director, Dr. George E. l\lrJo1HLS of the University Illino is , whi ch c n:Lhled him to he in Greece during the mo:;t im portant period of the work. Ou~ col~ leagues, l\'[r. Jolm Travlos and ~1r. .John Thrersiadcs. rendered invaluable sen'icc and are noW actiVelY engaged in the furthe r stud.,- o f the rema.in s. Thanks are also dll e to our foreman , AIr. Slratis Ke· hHghias, to ollr n~,sc~mender, ,Mr. Basil Yannikos, and t o our photographe r, 1\lr. D, Tsimas.

1 Cr. Noack. op, cit., pLs. 1 and 3. . _ ~ In ou r present study we foUow 1\oacJ.;'s system of numbering the columns of the different Tel~1.erla;

Cf. 1'1. XXX I \T, ­l It was rcmo "eo only when drawings, photographs and notes of its exact position were taken.

base ami hase h4 in our plan wiU be replaced arter the refilling o f the area.

273 Exc\Vxrro"s AT ELErSIS, 1 9~Q

fillillg, which forms but a particle of th e to tal earth removed. Our mo vable finds, with the exception of those discovered in the archaic py re, cons ist mainly of sherds, ,rhich give us nothing more tha n the dates of the cons truc tions <l f O lInd and within which the" '''ere found,

Th e remo"al of the filling now makes poss ible the final s tudy of the found atio ns of the different cellae as well as those of the columns of the ,'arions periods. The foundations of the Pcisistratean and also those of the P erielean cella nre built down 10 the roek e,·erywhere. The!' a re const.ructed of large blocks of Eleusi nian s tone pI need in isoclomic courses. The upper anu the lower faces of these stones are ca re­filII," le"olled so as to afford a good, even bed to the layers above and below them. Theil' outer faces are simply blocked out ;tlld have a n irregular appearance. The fOlilioa tions of all the col ulll ns, with t he (';i:c(.·pt ion of the P e isis lratean , ar(:, huilt .! ')\\'Il to th e rock, The l'ei sis trat.ean ('OI UIIlIl S rest for the mos t part on hast's composed of fo lll' blocks of pOl'OS s t.o ne inid in t\\"O alternating courses 0 1) a layer "i'lwrd-pressed earth (Fig. J). Th,' poros blocks arc e,·identl.,· reused s illce th e." lin n' allath~'roses on the- ir ~h ort<:r (:':\­posed sides, Their Jlulllb er and their

F IG. 1.-j<'ov:\"n"'TIO:\" I)F PEI :-; IST H nE \:\":-;iz(' ,ymlld indicate that th ey W('f<.' taken

COI.I; .\I'\" I ;) from a large constructio n, and as sUl: h a !JUilding" does Jlot seeIll to han:, ex isted in EI<.'llsis at that period , it. is pro ba.hle t hat till'." were brought from elsewht'l'e, possibly from .\thens,

The Cimonian columus h ill'e a ca rdull:- constructed foundation of large slabs of ];J,'usinian black stone, Cj uarr ied for fhe purpose, and pla.ced in horizo ntal irregular COllr~<.'s (Fig. 2) . In all cases th e fOllndations go down to the na.tura l rock which \\'" s slll oothed to a fl'ord an ,"'l'n bed for the first course. The sides o f the sin bs are irr(·gu la r- and un worked , a nti i ll ma ny of t hem traces of the woodell \\'edges used for th" ir quarrying are "isible. The architects of the P ericlea.n building lI sed po ros xlune. well "'QI'ked a nd ca refulh' la id in hori zontal la nTs in the foundations of t he colulIlns. The na lural rock wa~ IIOt onl \' s lll oothed. I~LLt it. ""I S carefu lly cut until a [('gu lar bed '''as fonll ed ill which the low~sl blocks w(,l'e lait! , T he R o n'ta n column s arc based on found a tio ns mad" o f lu a te ri a ls available frolll older buildings; collimn drums, paras blocks witll nna thyroses, a nd Ja rge Elellsini a ll s la bs a re la id in irreg­ular horizontal cou rses a nd in " ,-err slo venl!" fa shion (Fig, 3).

Hemains of impo'rtant co nstructions belonging both to the histo ric a nd to the pre'historic eras were revea led between these foundations of the histo ric Telesteria. They can mOre easily be stud ied in two sections. R emains found within the a rea ~nclosed by the P eisis tra tean T elesterion will form Section 1, a nd those uncovered In the area of t he remain in g pa rt of the last sanctuary will form Section II'.

'TI ny )O le a,re.u \\'as excn '·a t e~ in the sau!e or~er. First the fillillg .from Section I was .removed in shal.lo" ., lh('llca l ln~·crs u"eragmg 0.30 lll . III thickness, and then Section II was explored. III the same fashIOn.

GEORGE E. MYl.OK..I.S ..1.,'\ 0 1'. 1:0CHOC:-.:IOn :S

In Section I we uncovered in its entire presen'ed lellgth the construction known from Philios' and Noack's work as the Round Buildillg {Fig. 4, K).' Its date can now be definitely assigned to the close of the Geometric Period. The round Or elliptical building K is partly based UpOll the wall E E', running nearly east and lVest and preserved to a length of 19 meters ' (Fig . .J.). It II "erages 0.85 Ill. in thickness

"

and it fOl1ns the south section of a peribolos, the north side of which was discovered at a distance of 16 meters (PI. XXXIV, Z). Thus the a rea enclosed, towards the end of the use of the periboJos, had a breadth of 1 (i met,' rs. It s full length cannot b.

J"G. Y.-FOUXD.U JOX OF Cnlo:,\'1.-\X CQJ,mL·...- , FIG. 3.-FoUX lM.T IOX OF Junr.... N COLUMS,

n cr \1 6

determined since both the east and the west sides of the peri halos are not preserved. The east side is probabl;' co"ered h." the foundation s of the Peisistratean prostoon, \\'hil e the west "'liS destro,wel ",hen II great part of the hill "'a , Cllt awa,v to form the wes t end of the classical Telesteri ", The endosed area had a gate",a," on its north side, as can be proved by the pu'.'ed road th"t has slIn'ived at that point (Fig, 6), " 'e cannot exclude the poss ibilit," of the former existence of otiwr gateways probably of a mOre monumental charac ter in the eastel'll side which is not preserved.

\Vithin this enclosed area and at a short distance from the south wall of the peri, bolos the re!nains of a large construction of the" megaron type" were di scovered, lying immediately below the east side of the Archaic Telesterion , They are oriented.

Noack. 0]). cit., p. 10. Here references are given to known round or elliptical buildings. The plan ;' '''as drawn by our colleague. Arlr. J. 'fravlos, and was copied rOt the present publication by Mr. Pilul E,'ans of the Un iversity of Illinois.

~ Part of this wall was noticed by Philios. ct Praldilm, pI. .3, sect. O. and Noack, op. cit ., pis. 14, 16: . '

I

275 EXCW,\TIO"S AT ELEUSIS, 1 93~

""proximately from east to west with the entrance in the east (Pt xsxrv, structure Il), The north and south long wall5 of thi5 construction (PI. XXXIV, 11, LI.') , which for convenience we call :,\legaron B, I end in well constructed alltae to the east (Fig. 4L1.). They average O.GO Ill, in thickness and nre preserved alm05 t to their entire length. Their average height is 0.50 Ill. i\' o trace of the rear wa ll was found, but Oil good evidence, such as the floor le" el ilnd the formation of the rock, its position call be fixed with some probability. Consequently the entire length of the bnilding "iln be eslima.ted to be abollt 9.50 111.: its " 'idth is abollt 5.90 meters. A cross wall

""1(;. -J.-RE) LU XS DELO\\' TilE .-\ n CJI .H C TEI..£:o::rEtHO X (,-\'1'). II. PE L'5JSTR.HEAt' CELL., F OUND.nlON.

E. PERI BOLOS. ;;). . A. :\"T.-I. OF l\i£G.\RO~ n. K. H.OUN D llUlLlH XG. S. S EWER

divides the building into an inner challIber and a n open porch or prodomos. Po r­lions of the floor of both the inner chamber and of the prodomos Were found. They arc made of well beaten earth and lime mixed with pebbles . Owing Lo the slope of ~he hill, the floor of the chamber is about 0.30 111. above tbat of the prodomos and It was reached from the latter bv at least one step. The cross wall acted also as

., reUJining wall for 'the artificial filling of the floor of the inner chamber. The level of the prodomos is about 1.25 m. abo"e that of the court before it. The chamber

. was entirely excavated before and no evidence of its inner arrangements, of the columns which most proba bly supported its roof, or of its hearth could be found in

". OUt work. Over the prodomos are IRid the foundations of the Roman column V5

>f' ,j ~~e elongated form , the open porch in front. and the termination of the side wall s in regular aRtae '\._ .~ I Y the name. "Megaron."

2i0 GEO HGE E. )IYLO\",-\S ,-\:\1) K KOCROC:\IOTES

"'J1lof the Cill lUlliil n YG ancina t ul'al l)' a grl'at portion of this division of the build i". 'vas des troyed. Enough Was preserved, however) to pro"e its interes ting and prob: ab l)' unique plan, The central pa rt of the prodomos projects almost 9. metel's be)'ond the euds of t he ant al', thus forming a large pia tiorm , r , s)'mmetri_ call .,> placed sO .\5 to leave t \\'O pnssages 0 11 e ithe r side an:Tagi ng 1.40 lU . in width , In the nOl,th passage a s tair wa), e,is t(,u forming the ,l.scent from the lower leveled court to the prodoll1os, A few steps of thi s stainva,' as ",ell as the threshold of the

[lrotiomos wcre found in situ (Fig, 4), A second stai rway probably filled the space left between the platfonu a nd the north anta; no tmce of this stairway, however, was discovered in situ . but some of its flat steps SC'('1ll to han' heen nsed in the build­ing of a bter wall. On e-ithel" side of the rt'.ma in s of the mega ron and arou nd th ose of the peri bolos were found a good n];IIl ," sherds (Fig, 5),

J)J'ov illg t1wt tlws(" constructions W('l'(' built towaru till' end of Late Hl'lladic II and the beginning of the La te Helladic III [leriod and that the" continued to be in use II nli l the end of the Mycenaean a.gt· . That they were contelUpO~

ra.r." is pro'<ed by the discoyery of it s<.'wer concealed carefully under the steps of the ,{egaron B r Fig, 4, S), {o r wh05t" ,Yaters an opening was constru cted on the peri bolos wall at the ti me of its Luilding, \\,ith the

F,G. 5 .-S 11 En o!-> FHO'\I ';\ I F;G,\UO~ U ,~:-;-n I'EHI UOI.O"'; E [llatform stretching in front of the

prodomos, ~legaro n B pres.(Jnted a. unique and a \Tcry in terest illg ground plan (Fig. 6). \\,ithin the enclosure ,mel to the northeast of :\{egn ron B "'ere unco"ered consider­

able foundatio ns Lclonging to" more complex s tructure, to Building II (Pi. X:\:X1V, Fig, 7), This building is oriented appro"jlllately from so uth to north, It s west side rests pmtly u[lon the front of Meg-aroH n; t he south side, [lrobably its front, is based upon the north leg of platform r, and its north , 0 1' rear side, rests u[lon an earli er wa ll , [lrobaLI)' upon an earlier section of th e [lerioolos waiL Bnilding H in the last phase of its e"istence was com[losed of a main room, room H, cOlU[lletely preserved ~nd IneaslIl'ing 7 meters in I(>ngth and' 4,40 In, in breadth, and of two side chambers, rOOl11 s H 2 and H3, placed on either side of rOO ll! H (PL XXXIV), The exact dimensions of the lateral rooms are not known since they are only partly pre­served, The main roo III H had an en t rance at t he center of its south side, measur­ing about 1.60 Ill, in breadth and o[lening to p latform r , and a second entrance placed

----

EXC,\ \',\'f]O:\S xr EU:CS1S. 1')3~

"t lhe \rest corner of its north side. me<lsuring il bou t 1.45 m. ill breadtb . Tbis last en­trance seems to ha" e corresponded to the gate,Yay of the peribolos which is found at a dis t~nce of 1.25 m. from the north '1'1.11 of Bui ld ing H . A ven' small portion of the Aoor of room H was found unt ouched ; room H 2 had been completely excavated before; it greftt part of rQOJU 113 was pre­

s('n 'ed under the fi oor of th e Pei­ ----­sistratean prostoon and it \\'as partly oxc~viJ.ted by meM1S of tun­nels dug under the cla ssical re­lIlains . In this way it was possihle 10 find here a.nd ill room H :l a gr;at Il1nn.,· sherds belonging to tho c1os­illg .,·oars of the Late H~lIadic III period. Thest> sherds and the fact that t he ,,'a il s of Build ing Hare h"ill upon pMts of "Iega ron n ,l and its p latform. prove that the str"cture H is later than the mega­ ,X \\ ron. Probably Building H . ,,·hieh ---.-I \ dOt'S not possess au illdi\'idwd I I _-------:----­

I L_--- _ ----­L __ ---­:Irt:hitectonic forJn~ is a lat er ad­dili"n to :Jfegaron B. iJut at 0,== >===,5,====='£,0/,\ . ]lJ'l':it:' llt their relations C<1lll1ot he ddinit el,' estab li shed . At th,· ,ont h"'est corn er of room Hl alld ahont 0.0.5 m. above it s floor 'wre disco"ned t\\"o chara cteristic handles of Ceo­llldric \\"are. one in the form of a hird l a dow ') and th e other in the for111 of <l ~riffin . These small finds possi"':' ind icate that nuilding H was in use e,'on a t the

I)eginning of the Geollletric period . The filling discovercd b~lo \\' the

Late Hell <ld ic III level, <1 S fixed h,' the foundations describNI abo,'e, has an [I n~rage thickness of 0.30 Jll .

and was characterized b~' gray and )'ello\\' "fillyan, plain and g-roo\'od. b.,' matt-painted and polychrome \\"are. Foundations of walls be­

" longing to Middle H ellatlic build­ings are numerous but fragmeu­tar~" a ud do not give us the ground

•cr. PI. XXXIV. AA' where Ihe M in;·.n"it FJG. - ,- C1.-''l.OnTli EAST ORNER Of' STR UCTURE H foundation walls an~ left plain.

278 GEORGE E. MYLONAS AND K. KOUROUNlOTE5

plan of even a single house. Burials between walls and evidently below the floors of houses are very common.' i\lfost interesting is the burial discovered between the foundations of the Roman columns V5 and VI5 and immediately in front of the en trance of iVlegaron B (Grave No.8) . Four skeletons were fOllnd placed near each other as seen in Fig. S. Three of them are laid almost north and south with the head turned west, while the four th is laid almost due south and north. The bones of the lower part of the body below the waist of the last skeleton were found in situ. The bodies were laid in the position of one sleeping on his side with feet bent and on the rock, the small crags of which were fill ed and leveled with flat stones and pebbles. No foundations of a built grave Or slabs covering it were found and evi- .

., ,

/' F IG. S.-;\IIDDLE HELL.WIC D URr.~ L I N SBCTIOX I .~

jdently the bodies were simply buried in a trench dug in the earth and filled in aIter .J the burial. The filling O\'er and around the bodies was found undistu rbed and was • cha.racterized b~' gray-black grooved Minyan sherds, by matt·painted and poly- " chrome ware, The burial therefore belongs to lbe Middle Hellad ic II period, pos· 1 sibl)' to its closing yea rs. as is indicated by the polychrome pottery.

In front of the Stoa of Philo a built grave was discovered in the campaign of 1931 quite rich in ",<p[u~a,a, pro \' ing that offerings were buried with the dead towards lbe close of the :\liddle Helladic period .' Grave :\'0. 8 of the present campaign ,. seems to indicate that burial of many persons in the same grave was not impossible . ~ in the same period. Thus the Middle R elladic graves of Eleusis furnish important .,' links in lbe .chain of the evolution of the Late R ell adic I shaft graves from the.. . Middle R elladic cist tombs.'

I For this characleristic :Middle HeUadic burial custom d. C. 'V. Blegen and A. J. D. 'Vace, "Middle HeUadic Tombs," ill Symbolae OS/OCMes, Fasc. IX, 1930, pp. 28 IT.

'G. ]\f)'lonas, A.JA . XXXVI, 1932, PI'. lIO If. Prehistoric Ekusis. 1'1'.50 IT. 'Cr. G. Kaeo, A/h. Mi ll . XL, 1915, p. 195 and Blegen-Wace, 01'. cit., pp. 81 If.

EXCAVATIONS AT ELEUSIS, 1 93~ Q79

In Section II, the prehistoric finds were not as plentiful as in the preceding Sec­tion. The Middle Helladic period is represented by Minyan and matt-painted sh('rds, by graves and foundations of houses. The Late Helladic remains include a long wall evidently surrounding a rectangular court within which very scanty traces of a building were unearthed. ' Both the building and the court wall belong to the middle and the closing years of the Late Helladic III period.

The historic remains of Section II are more important. A short distance to the southeast of the Peisistratean Telesterion , retaining wa ll ~ of Philios' e,cavat ions waS uncovered again to its complete length. I t was possible to ascertain that it [<'.Sts upon a Late Hellad ic III filling, that it is contemporary with the rou nd or ('lliptical building K uncovered in S,.ction I, and that it was probably bnilt at the close of the Geometric period. N umerOllS su b-ge6metric ~hl'T(ls discoyered around its lower courses indicate its date. The wall hilS an average thickness of 1.'25 m. aud presents a worked face on both

. si<i('s, although its inner fn ee is Ilot

'" cardully finished as its outer (Fig. 9). The la\'ing of rough I,' pol.vgonal stones in irregula r hori­zontal courses hera lds the pol)'gonal method of wall construction. It is II", identical method em pio)'ed in Ih(' (' r('c tion of the round or eilip tica l building K. To the soullnyest , the " 'all ends iu " well built ant a , ,l nd diagonally opposite this " re fou ll d three sha llow steps al­rmd~· known from Philios' "'ork (Fig. 9 and P I. XXXI", ;\ ' ). T heir proper func­tion, ho\ye\·er. had remained unexpla ined, a lthough they "'ere included in l'ioack 's plans. The well built anta at the end of the retaining wa ll lea yes no doubt that a t this point we han an entrance and th a.t the three steps form ed part 01 a stainya)'. possibly made up of seven steps. which ga ,'e access to the terrace of th e sanctuar)'. The steps are made of small Eleusin i"n flat stones well polished fro m use. The lowest first step has a breadth of 4.80 m. and averages onl)' 0.13 111. in height.

Beb\"een the Periclean column D2 and tJle reta.ini ng wa.1l ); , Pbilios discovered a sacrificial p,"re rich in "oti Ye offerings. Clay figurines were most commo n among thcm .' Around the area of tha t pyre we found a great nllmber of similar fig urines . They are of the standing amorp hous type, a re somewh"t similar to the well kuo\yn Boeotian figurines, .and h ave their hands extended to the side with" slight upwa rd tilt. They remind one strongly of the figurines usual in the La te Bella-dic III period.' Some seem to wear a crown or a garland, and practica lly all are covered

I Part of it was unea rthed by Philios. Cf. Praktika, 1884, Plo .1, section. IT . r.'. 1 A few were described and discussed by Noack. op. cit., pp. 12 fr. and figs. 3-5, but there are many

htmdreds unclassified and not properly studied in the slorerooms at Eleusis. The work of the study and classification of the figurines fou nd by Pbilios is also in progress.

J Cf. Tsonnta.<: in Eph.. Arch. 1888, pp. 168 ff, and Martin N ilsson, op. cit" pp. 26 1 fr. "·inler . Die TY1"Jen der figiirliclum Tcrrakotlen, r, p. 24.

~80 GEOHGE E. MYLO~AS ,\ l\D K. KO rH OC:-:IOTES

with [t white ""("Ish on which are paint~d elaborate linear designs in a deep r~d color (Fig, 10),

In S('{;tion II lies a pOltion 01 th~ southern side of the pol ygonal re­tain in g \nlli which supported the terrHce on ,,-hieh the archaic Teles_ krion "",,s built. It was parth· exca"atcd hy l'h ili os a nd it i's nwrked in :\ o~lck's pla.ns,l We h:t,,<.' tlllC'oYere-d its existing remains' to th~il' entire length (Fig. 11, PI. xxxn-, 0, 0'). For greater re­sistHnce the upper courses 01 this "'nll an' stepped and buil t of rather long a ll d nHrroW blocks of ElellSin­iclll stOll<', pL.lcl,.·d in regular hori~ zO litHI IH."rr3, hil t "' ith joints not <I I \rays y(;' rti cal. The lower courses,

II 0 \\"(:'n-r. nre t'xc(,Hc nt examples of tht' a rchai c pol.'-gona.l masonry with ClilT ing joillt :,. kn own from the re­lIlains or tht' <lrC'haic Telesterion 2

(Fig. l ~). The wall is !"id upon a \Ycll construc- ted foundation aver­'lgi ll ,!{ OIW !nett-I' in d(·pth . The

uppermost two co ul',-ses of thi s foundati on ,Ire huilt of lotl ~ ;llld ftat Elcl1sinian St011 <:'S

pla('(-d in horizo ll h d la,n>rs and proj e~·ting beyond th l' Oll kr face of the wa ll, As is wei! kno\\'ll. a singl e ('O\l I'S(' of Elellsin iull stant's similarl.' · placed forms the founda­tion all which tll(-> archaic T(> I('s h~ l'iJn rpsts. Th t' lo"'(')' part of' thl.:' fou ndation is

huilt of smal ler ston('s laid i!T('g-1I1arl~' ill horizont<d n'(·(·dill:,! cou r5('s . :\t the point ma.rkt'd o n ]" in :\oack's plans (O UI' 1'I. XXXI\', 0 ') " 'as e" identl ~' a ,,·id.:- (~ llt"'l n ('('" cO ITt'spolHling t ~ )

th" stt'Plwd entrnn('~ of the Sl.iJ ­

gpolllt,tl'ic period a \ld to the later south (' ntrance of t!w historic sancl ­uarit's. Cllfortunntel.,· that part d the wa ll is not so \YeJl preser\'(·d, Ill, t enough remains to pron.. thaI th e al'chaic teJ'r(lce \,'as (:'Iltpred at thi s

point by mean s of a ramp.

Praldii;:a. I SS'{', pI. .\ , ., ' ..\ "; .L\oa('k, op. eil .. pI. 14, DI - ll4.

t cr. Nouk. np. ('it .. (lg. O.

,. )

'.

I

E'.:C\'-_\1'10X5 AT EUXSIS. JD3'! eS I

Oil the face of the wall and for some length are to be sfen hla.ck p"tches ca used by .... 1l10k('. That they were caused by the fires of sacrificl'S was proved by the remains or;1 p,Yn" discon:'red bet\Yt.'ell tht' Perid("lln column D1 and the ret-lining \\"al1, UIl­

j()u('hed by previous ('X(,';lYcltOJ'S and build<.-'r:3. The ashE's UllCO\"(:" l't'd. forming but a ..atl'111 sec tion of tll(' P.'"IT. sprea d O\' CI' a roughl." ci rcular (lrt'H of <:2.80 lH . in diameter ;111<1 ;'l\'(>rngt'd 0.80 m. ill thickness. '1'11("," wen~ divi ch'd in distinct la~·l.'rs, an>raging O.:W Ill. in del}th~ b.,' llllworked stones throwil irn:'gllJarl~' 0\' ('1' them . \[ost COIU ­

111011 (lIllong' the ,'oti"e ofi'(:'rings dis('o\'("l'ed 111 the I>YI'(-' \\"('l't' \'aSl~5 and tel'l':-tcotta

1ig!!l'ines. The \,:ISl'S includ e ex­;!Inple,s of Cori llthian, Orit'lltaJizLng, f .­I'l'oto-_"tti c, "nd Black-Fig Lll't'd :--"<~-:

std", of potler,'-' The fir>t COlllC'

from the· lower, thl" last from the "!'Per levels of the deposit._ 'Of the Bl<, ck-Figured ware. lll.ost "inteL'est­illl!: exam ples Hre two FillgS or Y<l5('­

.... t;lllds. and the t"~il ::ind Sl(>IHier st:o nd of a e'#'aT1P<O' (F;l( 1 :l) _ Bot II I,dong to th e last :-ears:,:"i: tl", B1ack­Figu red technique [Illd probahl,'­\f(.'r(:' uHlde by artists who "-01'},;:",<1 in Jled-figureel ,,-are. The flat hase of the stand isdccora ted b,'- nchariot race, \\-hile its upper part. di"id,'d into zones. possibl,'- repn.>sl'nts<.l ])1'0­('e" ion of Gods and (;oddes'l's, led 1,_'- Hermes hold ing his staff and \yt.>aring his wlngt>d s<.llld als and })(:'­tasos (Fig_ H)_ On th e mack-Fig­ured rings or vas('-stands we ha'"e the representation of a rOlll'-holse eh""iot dri'-en by two female figures aud led b:- H ermes.'

The tenacotta fi gurines repn.'senl standing and sea.ted t,'-pes and bt.~long to the archaic period (Fig_ 15). Some of t.he sl<ll1ding' figures rt'call the Korni of the _-\cro­polis, lI'hile the sea ted examples present similariti,.s to the Dranchidai figures,' The fonner hold their veils with the ext ended Idt hand, while the right hand, prob­abl~- holding an offering, is placed belo"- the right breas t. The seated figures rest their hands upon their kn ees_ The standing figures seem ligh t and give an impres­sion of motion, ~I' hile the seated seem condemned by their own weight and solidity

I The painting on the rings presents many similar ities to the ,,,,ork of Skythes, especially to the pinax or the Acropolls. Cf. Eph. A'fch. 188.5, pJ. 3, and probabl~' those on the stand \'t'ere painted by :\ikos­thenes or one oJ his contelllporaries"

1 Winter, op. cit., pp, 4::2 , -1; 43 , 2, 5; 44 , 4; -J.S. 1. 2, j; D_ .M:. Robinson, The Terra-Cottas of Olynth11.8 Found in 1928, pI. 5.

282 GEORGE E. MYLON'AS AND K. KOUROUKIOTES

to retain their positions forever. Both seated and standing figures are covered with color, in most cases red and blue of a dark shade, laid upon a white wash.

FlG. IS.- DL.... CK -FIGCRED 5r .... :-;-D

Fnmr THE ARCH.He rl"RE

A .,. j

.• Fa;. 1~,-13!,."'CK·F1GUnED ST.\:'\U.

H EHMES. DET.... IL OF' FIG. 13

The vases, termcottas. and lamps discovered in the pyre prove that sacrifices were held at that area frolll the time when Corinthian vases were in use to the period when Black-Figured ware predominated and was rather ad,'anced in style, that is

during the sixth aod possibly dur­ing the latter part of the seventh centuries. These dates, we believe, form a lermilllls a.llle quem for the date of the archaic Telesterion and its terrace . It now seems very probable that these structures were built towards the end of the sev­en th century. Their building ne­cessi tated the filling in of the sub-geometric sacrificial area and created n ne'" site for sacrifices immediately in front of the polyg­onal retaining wall.

At the southeast corner of the Telesteri on a great part of the Pei­sistrateall fortifications was uncoV­ered, completing the circuit of the Peisistratean peri bolos around the sanctuary (PI. XXXIV, 2:). Dr.

", '.. : •. ~

}""'IG . 15.-TERR,ACOTTA FlGURIXES FRQ)1 TRE .-\RCIU.IC

PYRE

EXCAVATIONS AT ELEC~IS, 19:>2 Q83

KOllrouniotes' excavations from 1926 to 1930 proved that the polygonal foun­dation on which the pseudo-isodomic wall '''as built after the Persian destruction (Section C6-C8 of .:\oack's plan), is it continuation of the Peisistratean peribolos and not a pre-Peisistratean lyall, as was accepted by Noack' In the campaign of 1031 the exact length of the post-Persian wall Iyas determined and the continuation of the Peisistratean wall bc,'ond it was hrought to light in front of the Stoa of Philo, It then became evident that the peribolos characterized by Noack as pre-Peisistra­teall ";as later and that it was built to cnciose not the Archaic but the Peisistratean Telesterion, To this peribolos was corriXtl;, attributed a section of a polygonal wllll marked by the ktters C, C2 in the plans of Xoaek (Plate 15) as well as the eorner C5 preserved bdo\\' the south side of the Telesterion, Noack, always be­lieving that he had to do with 11 pre-Peisistrat0an work, hypothetically completed the part of the wall belol\' the classical floor level. TIHtt jJart of the pcribolos bas no\\'" been brought to light and it can be seen that it is Peisistratean (PL XXXIV, L, p), It is built in the well known Peisistrate"n fashion in two the foundation is built of pol),gonal masonry, the superstructure is of mud The great bend introduced into Koack's plan to end the wall in the corner C5 does not exist in militO', and C5 forms the COrner of R great to\\'cr which guarded th.. south entrance of the sanctuary, the Seelor of 1\'0lwk (PL XXXI\', the south or outer ilnd the north or inner faces of wall present a carefuIJy worked suriaee and this prohab!y indicates that the area left between the Peisistratean wall and the polyg­onal terrace formed a ':OI'/\tW oMv,'.!

The filling covering part of the courL between the south side of the Teles­terion and the stoa to the west of the fourth centur~' gate \\'as rel1lo,,'ed during this

excavations, and the scanty remains of the south section of the Periclean periholos were again brought to light Now it is dear that a existed at this south side as marked b~' ?\oack and that a large square tower guarded its entry, Very Ie,," blocks of the tower are preser\'ed, but its extent (',an be mad!' out from the beds elit in the living rock to ' the lon'er courseS, The entrance lies on a lower Jevel than the contemporary terrace and it seems that the ascent was effected by a stairway or rather a rmup, few remains of which have survived, Beyond the

to the wcst the Periclean peri bolos on the Peisistratean wall and did not ester:d to the west, as marked in the pI",,> of :\oaek,'

Outside sanctuary the work included extensi'"e soundings on the top of the """;U,,lIWlI\ hill and on the plateau lies to the "'est of the so-called tholos tomb' and between the Eleusinian ,-\'cropolis and the hill crowned by the of the mediaeval tower, It has often been stated that no :\[rcenaean remains existed on the top of the Elensinian Acropolis. and indeed all efforts to find such had failed, A careful investig?-tion oi the area, ho,,'cver, disclosed an undisturbed prehistoric filling, on the northeastern end 01 the hill and to the \wst of the small chapel of

1 P.raktil"a. 188~, pI. .::.., TI, T ~ 1\-oack, OJ>. ca., pis. 14. C5-C8 aud 16, C5~CR . ~ T'he restoration giycn by Noack, op. cit.; p. 44, Hl. the correct impression as far as the road 15 CODcerned. A great tower, ho,,ye\'er, has to head in the fortification '(",!ttl and on lhe terrace the Archaic Tdc$terion must be b.y the Peisistratean. :i Noaek, op. cit., pI. W.

"That. tJjlS :Structure IS not a tomb "vas proved by the of a similar subterranean reservoir on the hIll of SL Klkolas. Cf. K. Kourouniotes, Eleusln£al.:a r, pp. 237 if.

GEORGE E. 1I1YLON.-\S .\:\J.) K. KOUROC'IIOTES

P anaghi'L A sllla ll portion of it was tested and it seems that the filling has '"I aVeI·age depth of 1..50 nL aud belongs to the :\liddle Helladic and to the Lilte Hellad ic ilI periods. )Iost important relIIains of the LH III period thus far UI\­

covered are foundations of a large building carefu lly laid out and ,"·eraging O.!IO III. in thickness . They apparently belong to a large construction, possibly to the palace of the \"IIlers of prehistoric Eleusis_ At a short distance frolll the hOltse foundation remains of a thick wall ,,-ere IInco\·erecl probably belonging to the <: a.l7ru TEixos" lll (' lltioneu ill the IIOIllel'ic Hymn. The t"xnct and final determina. tion of the na.tnre of these remains, howen'\", will ha,·e to be postponed until the area is completely excanlted in a future cnmpaigll.

The preliminat·,- ,,·ork ca rried on in the west pintea" brollght to light the remains of a retaining ,va ll ca refull)- built of large polygonal stones in the style of the fourth "' century peJ"ibolos \Yall huilt around the K.nixopo, q,p'.p and the greater Pro­pylaea. It seems t1wt it is built around a large terracf.\ but its exact dimensions and the determination of the building standing on th\' terrac~ were left for auother campaign_ Alollg the frbllt of this retaining wall a· broa.d road, abollt 2 111. in width was uuco'-ered, bearillg c1<'ar muks of the traffic t hat went along it. To the south of it the slope is conre" ,,·;th Hellenistic and later houses.

It is rather too ea rly ill th e study of the remains l1l1CO,'ered in th e Telesterioll a.re.1 to draw <111,- final or supposedly final conclusions, yet we feel that with all due re­serve \yc cnn point to certain results indica tt"d by the work. "

It is proyed, we think. that the wall \". known as the earliest terrace wall, is contemporaro' with the sub-geonwtric round Or elliptical building K and that it supported the terrace on ,yhich that building was standing. The entrance to this enclosure is now determined to be on the sOLLthwest side of th~ termce and towards the sea. The diagonal position of the steps, thc direction of the north, of the east and of the south portions of the ,,-aU (marked as wall e in Philios' plans), would indica te tha t this tenace had a polygonal sha.pe nry appropriate to enclose a round or an elliptical building. The remains of the sn.crificial pyre discovered by Phil ios and b~' us outside of the terra c~ wall, and the di scover,· of a similar pyre in almost the sallie relative position beyond the Archaic terrace wall, seem to pro'-e decidedly t hat the round or elliptical structure K was a sanctllary. l.lnfortullately no other I-clllains of this structure have been presen'ed in the excavated area alld it is im­poss ible to detenlline whether it was of a round or of an ellipticn.l shape_ ' The. sllb-geometric sherds discoyered will date these stmctures to the closing qua.rtcr of the ninth centulT ll.C.

The problems c~nnected with the :\l!'cenaean remains are more complicated. As we have stated at the beginning, lIothing was found in these structures to prove . that the,)" were sallctuaries of some sort. There are, however, many reasons which lea.d us to believe that at least Megaron B was built as a sanctuary. The loc,ation;' of such a large building on the slope of the hill surrounded by a peribolos wall was badly suited for a palace which one might expect to find built upon the hill. And as the remn.ins of what seems to be a palace have been found on the hill, the possibility of a second palace Oll the slope becomes \'ery dubious. The value of the pelri b<)JO!i' ~

J Cf. Koack>s rema.rks about contemporary round and eJJip~icai bui ldings, op. cit., p. ]0.

28.)

;..5 a defensive work is a lso '-ero-sllla ll. sinCt' it could harcli.,- be defended if attacked from the higher lewis of the hill. Its use \\,,1..5 li mited rather t o affording privae." t o the structure. The shape of i\Iegaron B ,,,ith its projecting platform is, as fil l' as '''" know, unique in l\Iycena.ean struc: tures, b ut it agrees with the speciflcat ions gin'll by Demeter fol' the construction 01 her temp le:

a.XX' a:Yf !J.Ot JlT}OV H !J.t-yaJl Kai. {3WfJ.OJl v,,' ahii (Hymn to Dem" v, 270)

It is not im probable tha t an "Ita I' "-as pbcerl at t he end of the pla tforlll . At Elellsis and dUl;ng the his toric pe riod lcng-e s tructures J)ron'n to be sac red were buil t over the same spot a nd at t he side of the hill ",hieh beea,,,e of its gr,,;1( "lope was l,adlo' suited for large COtl !:i trllc tio Il5. Th e sel ect io n of the s ite \\·as cl' rta in 'y d ictated hy considerations of s<t nctit,\'. hro ught about by long ohsen ....cl llce of an fL ncient cul t. Continu it~, of cu lt places. ns pointed Ollt reC(~l1t J y b.\' Professor ~-il sson. is not un­common in G l'eece. } " '}WIl aliI' in.:.;t proto-hi storic building I( \\'as constru cted. to­\Ya.rds the end of the ninth centur,\'. th e spot wus already sncrl~d from prev iolls worship, otherwise n bet ter site \\"ollid ha\'e Iwe ll chosen. ~\nd \\,h en w{> cOlls id .... r that the sub-geometric struc ture <1 S \\"e ll as the later buildings were hui lt oYe !' g roun d occupied by a bu il di llg llsed to tlw end of the prehistoric age, with a uniqll (' gro nnd plan which remin ds liS of the (,Ollllll alH i of Dt'Bleter. we In;l ,\' conclude ,,· ith so me reason that this pre his toric h uild ing was ll sed fo r the \\'orship whic h sanc ti fied th e si te and made it a. desi}" l l)le loca t ion fo r th e historic struc tures. These cons idera ­tions lead us to belie-n.' that ::\Iegnroll n \\";.15 or ig ill a ll ~· huilt as a plnce of worsh ip: if not at the com mand of Demeter herself, at le,l st under the constraint of it religioll s fed i!16 wh ich led to the ohsc n'c111c('" of rit c-s connected \\"i th her \\"ol'ship.

Building H is later in da t e than :\iegaron B. ,-\.t present it is hard to detcrmi lll' wht'lher it was in use "im ul ta neollsh- ,,-ith the older st l'uct m e, 01' ,,-hether it re placed the i\legal'on a fter it lI'a s destro.,-ed or abandoned. Their relations pr"sent diffi ­culties ,,-hich can on l!' be soh-ed after an ""hall,ti,'e stu d.,' of the remains, ancl t his ",ill be resen-ed for the final publ ica tion_ ' If ,,·e aSSlll lle that s tructure H was used for worship, and we feel certa in thnt it was, th en \\'e ha\'e an a.lmost unhrokeD reco rd of Eleusinian sa Jlctu uies frolll the fift eenth ce ll tur~' before Chris t, to the fif th cen tury of ou r era, II'hen sa nctity of the site "-as ended by thc im'asioll of the Goths alld the orders of the Byzantine E mperors. Our on ly laclilH. in this record is du e to the unkno,,,n history of the geometric period, But this could a lso be amended if we accept the hypothesis that the La te Helladic bllildings "'ere completely or partially used at that period. T his hypothesis is strengthened by the discovery of two characteristic geometric handles almost on the floor of Roolll HI. 'Ye must admit that the evidence is scant\', but the Ilndisturbed area left for us to test and excavate "'as also scanty , 'Ye shou ld note tha t belo,,- the remai ns of Bui lding H and of i\l egal'on B no actual fi lli ng or remains of the Lat e H ellad ic I and II periods exist , but that the M iddle H ellad ic relics immediately follow t hose of the last Helladic

, ' N ilsson, op. cit., pp. 391 If. A. Keramapoulios, Praklika of i/,. Aco'(u!1ny of Atlul1I." 2, 1927, pp. m~ . .

2 We hope to publish the fina l results iu the near future, with the col laboration of our colleagues, ~fessrs . J, Travlos and J. Threpsiades in the second volume of the Eleusiniaka.

286 GEOllGE E. )lYLO:\".-\.S AND K. KOUROUNIOTES

period. This was also noticed in Section II in which the Late Helladic III founda_ tions are based upon ",Iiddle Helladic filling when they do not re$t upon the rock.

Finally "'e may remark that nei ther in the architectural remains nor in the smaller relics, with one exception, did we find elements which could be attributed to Cretan or Egyptian influence. The slightly raised pavement discovered in front of one of the "halls" of the Palace at :'Ilallia could possibly be cited as a. Cretan parallel.' But it could scarcely be compared, at least at present, with the platform stretching in front of Megaron B. One large sherd belonging to an amphora of the palace style was found in the artificial filling used for the levelling of the floor of room H, and this was the on ly object disconred showing Cretan influence. Even this probably amounts to very little when we recall the numerous jars of the palace style produced on the mainland of Greece itself.

The important results obtained ill this year's ciLlupa ign can hard ly be overesti­mated.' Especially has Ou r knowledge of the are~" of the Telcsterion been greatly increased. The fortunes of that area can now be studied in a nual wav from the beginning to the end 01 E leusinian history. The worship ou the site alld possibly its provenauce may no\\" be treated aile,\" with profit.

K. KOUROt.'XlOTES

ELEUSlS, GREECE

GEORGE E. MYLONAS

C'l\l\TRSITY OF IL(.I S'O IS

'B.C.!!, XLVIII, 192-1. rp. 494 tI. 2 This brief summary of the work we belieye is pertinent. since the problems connected wi th Eleusis

are of general interest, and since our final report may be delayed for some time. The preseIVatioD 01 the historical remains necessitates refilling of the area excavated til the Ilcar future and we feel that it is ou r duty to let those interested .k:n0\": of the existence o f the remams in case they might like to see the relics thelUseh-es lJefore they arc fi naUy buried .

I~" ESTERION '"•

"tier/SIS ,

I II 1II N J"4 V4TIONS OF 1.931-32 " ~

" IICl 15] I~ "- v~ ;~ ~\ ~) •• 02:", 0 DN '\ ~,:;-.~

w ,~ 1z[O iDl iQ] D1 J

E s ,; .

.~~-===;:::~ ...-­L__-:-:-.. ", _ '.", .

I:·: . ". ". -. ..',

. . ", :_"..... . .:.'. -: :..... :.: :7(,"' :",1;., .:. ::..:' ~ " -': : . '.. .: .

~~"====~~~~~9+-0'~~.~'. ":",:,~:,,~:,,,.:.;.:-,-~~;>~-~-':.~ ~ '-----t~=::.~~....~lj..<-.:-- ..­

o 5 /0 20 30

IYFTERS

PL.... TE XXXIY.-TELE:5TERIO:-\ .-'1.1' ELEusrs. PUI..)". Exc.-\v.-\TlO:S:S OF 1931-32

1lI .lJl /"tI N YA!V

LATE IIE'-!AO/C UlaQ., OJ =- IAT< tiE"AOI( lIIb,(

II!!liIIIIIl .s (lfJ- (j cOMe Tilleo = I-II VIUVE5

• AR.CHAIC TELcSTEl?lON~

e A.eCHAIC ReTAINING ;VAl.L"

C.cc:] P~/SISTJ€.ATeIAN Tet.ESTEIUON

~ PEISISTRATE'lAN PEI!IBOL05

-... '" ..J CIl'iOtVIAN fJA5cSU[)J h:TlNIAN OASESDl KJI 0

f2,* u 2..?2V2J OAStS OF L AST TEL£'ST~R.IOND !3. ":71,10:.:.;.1

, -'. ,', n ...... J , j ....j

fE x...'XXIY.-T'ELESTEnroN .4.T ELEUSls. PLA::-- . Exc.-\ Y.nroxs OF 1931-32