Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, Transmitted to Congress, With the Annual Message of the President, December 3, 1877

No. 162.
Mr. Read to Mr. Evarts.

Corfu, Greece, July 11, 1877. (Received July 27.)

No. 302.]

Sir: Referring to a previous dispatch relating to the reported discovery of the arms of the Venus of Milo, I have the honor to state that I have since entered upon an extended examination of the subject, with the aid of important authorities which were not then at my disposal. The result may be briefly reduced to the following conclusions:

I. Several statues and several arms belonging to other ancient statues have been recently found at the-Island of Milo or Melos; one of the latter, it is claimed, belongs to the Venus of Milo.

II. The latter arm was found on the site of what the discoverer believes to be the temple of the Venus of Milo.

III. If the site proves to be that of the above named temple, it may lead to the discovery of the niche wherein the Venus of Milo formerly stood, and solve the long-disputed question as to whether the Venus was originally associated with one or more other figures.

I have the honor to inclose a statement made to me by Mr. Nostrakis, on whose land the recent discoveries have been made. It will be noted with interest that this statement emanates from the family of one of the inhabitants of the island who were engaged in the discovery of the Venus of Milo in 1820.

It may be worth while at this stage to trace the origin of the report of the recent finding of the arms. In passing I desire to remark upon the extreme difficulty of obtaining exact details in an agitated moment like the present from a remote locality in the archipelago.

As early as the first week in May what appeared to be reliable information was brought to me to the effect that the arms of the Venus of Milo had been discovered within ten yards of the spot where the famous statue had been found fifty-seven years before. In order to obtain copies of these relics for presentation to the Department, in case they proved valuable, I addressed myself, as reported in my previous dispatch, to the Greek Government. After some time I received a reply to the effect that there was no knowledge upon the subject in the possession of the Hellenic Government; but I was assured that inquiries would be instituted. In the mean time there appeared in all the Greek papers a statement setting forth that the arms of the Venus of Milo had been discovered, in the island by members of the French Archaeological School at Athens. This proved to be false, and it was then ascertained that the relics in question had been found by Mr. Nostrakis. Thereupon I obtained from the latter the information contained in the inclosure marked 1. I have the honor also to append—marked 2—a copy of a discourse delivered on the 13th of June last by M. Ravaisson, the well-known keeper of the antiquities in the Louvre, before the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres of the Institute of France. This valuable document I owe to M. Dumont, the distinguished director of the French Archæological School at Athens.

The “imaginary narrative,” to which M. Ravaisson refers, was contained in a series of letters addressed to the Paris journal Le Temps, in 1873–74, by M. Jean Aicard. These letters were eventually published in a volume. In this book M. Aicard attempted to prove that both of the arms of the Venus of Milo were attached to the body when the statue was found, and that they were detached and broken in a struggle between the crew of a French vessel of war which was sent to receive the statue, and the crew of a Turkish vessel which had already gained possession of the wonderful relic.

It will be seen by inclosure 2, that M. Ravaisson denies that any such combat took place, and contends that there were no arms attached to the body when it was found. In support of this position, M. Ravaisson produced before the academy photographs of the drawings made from the statue at Milo at the moment of the finding of this splendid work of art. These designs were executed by M. Voutier, an officer on board the French vessel the Estafette, whose death was recently reported as having taken place at Hyères, in France. These sketches show the statue separated into two portions or blocks, and without arms, as the statue exists to-day in the Louvre. Consequently, M. Ravaisson does not believe that the arm holding an apple now in the Louvre, and which was found with the statue, ever belonged to the Venus of Milo. He goes further, and says: “Non seulement done on n’a point retrouvé un des deux bras de la Vénus de Milo, mais il n’est pas probable qu’on les retrouve jamais ni l’un ni l’autre.” Such is the deliberate opinion of a most learned expert. He denies that the arms have been found, and he does not deem it probable that they will be found. This, however, presents a point for further investigation, which can only be undertaken and decided by a learned and competent commission, such, as I am told by the famous and erudite secretary of the Archaeological Society at Athens, M. Coumanoudis, the Greek Government intends to send to the island, of Milo for the purpose of examining critically all the discoveries there made. Should it prove that the arm in question does not belong to the Venus of Milo, the examination may nevertheless result in the acquisition of further interesting details, especially touching the remains, which the discoverer believes are those of the temple of the Venus of Milo. An exact account of the value to be attributed to the other marble figures recently found will also fix public attention. In any event, the results of this ‘investigation will be looked to with eagerness, and it is to be hoped that nothing will occur to interfere with the sending of the government commission. I have, indeed, written again to-day to urge this. Since my endeavor to obtain a copy of the arm, the representative of another government has made a similar attempt. I shall succeed in getting a plaster cast, and, if the original proves to be of value, I shall hasten to present my copy to the Department.

I have been applied to by many of my countrymen for information’ upon this subject. I have not hesitated to impart whatever knowledge I possess, for the matter is one of general archaeological interest, and does not in the slightest degree trench upon the domain of political discussion.

I shall hope to continue my report in future dispatches.

I have, &c.,

JOHN MEREDITH READ.

[Inclosure 1 in No. 302.]

Statement of Mr. Nostrakis.

In course of the excavations which we are carrying on in the island of Milo, we have found the following relics;

1. A statue of Neptune, perhaps of Roman origin, with an inscription.

2. A female statue with a little Cupid, of a good period of Greek art. The statue is without a head, hut the Cupid is intact.

3. A bust, well-fashioned, and of a good period of Greek art.

4. A horse with a man on, its back, both life-size and of Greek workmanship. The horse is without ears.

5. A statue of a woman with extended arms; natural size; Greek art.

6. Two or three heads, very well preserved, and of very tine transparent marble. It is supposed that the bodies belonging to the heads will also be brought to light.

7. Many arms, of Greek art.

8. The left arm of the Venus of Milo, and the hand, which is, however, cut off. The latter was found first, and the arm next. The arm terminates at the shoulder exactly at the spot where the left arm of the Venus of Milo is wanting. The hand was originally attached to the arm with an iron. The workmanship is exquisite, and I, Basil Nostrakis, am certain that it originally belonged to the Venus of Milo. The hand holds a mirror of marble, and is admirably executed. The spot where the arm was found is called Clima, near the western shore of the island.

During the researches a spring was discovered, which flows with such vigor as to retard the excavations. It seems to have its origin in an ancient aqueduct. The water is of the purest and best quality, and so abundant that nine workmen are employed in draining, and only two in excavating.

Fourteen years ago, the uncle of Theodore Nostrakis, John Sararoaskos (a man who had much practice in antiquarian excavations, because he used to accompany English travelers to Candia and other parts for the sake of antiquarian researches), found in his garden, near the spot where the excavations are now being made, a large slab of marble. Having removed this slab, he found beneath it a flight of marble stairs. He did not then enter upon further explorations, but covered the place again, intending later to prosecute his inquiries. At the time of his death, ten years ago, he called his nephew, my father, Mr. Theodore Nostrakis, to him, and told him to excavate at the place where the slab was, near a mulberry tree. My father did not exactly get hold of the place where this slab was situated, and excavated below the real place; and, although he spent a great deal of money, he did not succeed in finding anything. But lately, six weeks ago, my father (who had received the place or garden as a dowry), while digging for cultivating purposes, found, by chance, indications of ancient statues, and discovered the statue of Neptune. A portion of the head was unfortunately knocked off by the pick-ax.

The directions of the deceased were now recalled, and excavations were begun above the mulberry tree, and not below it, as before. The slab and the staircase, however, have not yet been found. We are about to transfer to that place the proper instruments for draining, and then shall proceed to excavate upon a larger scale.

It is supposed that the place where these discoveries were made is the spot whereon the temple of the Venus of Milo anciently stood, because of the different pieces of columns found there, and moreover the original statue was found in a place which it appears was not its proper location.

discovery of the venus of milo.

Anthony Bottonis owned land about five or ten minutes distant from the place where the present excavations are carried on. Eustrate Saramaskos, nicknamed Anticoyannia, was engaged by him one day to gather some stones for some arrangements In his field. There, by chance, he found the statue. Not knowing its value, he sold it to the French consul, M. Brest, for 200 piastres, about 170 francs. The same Eustrate Saramaskos discovered the place where excavations are now being made, and which is supposed to be the site of the temple of Venus.

The statue was found in a kind of a cave or trench, covered with a heap of stones, and that accounts for its being injured in different places, especially the nose. The cave is to be seen at the present time.

My aunt used to say that there were found at the same time two arms, which had traces of an iron screw in each to attach them to some statue.

The theater is half-way between the present excavations and the spot where the Venus of Milo was found in 1820.

Excavations have not yet been carried out to a sufficient extent to trace the different parts of the supposed temple of Venus, and therefore nothing can be said as to the place on which the statue might have stood.

In the theater a series of stairs of marble is to be seen, but no seats or statues.

The man still lives, named Anthony Bottonis, who was with the uncle of Mr. Theodore Nostrakis, who discovered the statue of the Venus. He was the man who took out the statue; of course he was assisted by others. Neither of them had any idea or its value.

My father, Mr. Theodore Nostrakis, has made excavations in different parts of the island in the vicinity of Clima; but, at the present time, there are none being prosecuted except those above referred to.

Some nine months ago, the French school sent to Melos some of its scholars to excavate; but they did not find anything. They excavated at Tripete, a quarter of an hour’s distance from the place where the statue was found. They also excavated in some other places, at two, three, and four hours’ distance. They only excavated for a month, and without any success.

[Enclosure 2 in No. 302.—Translation.]

Remarks of Mr. Ravaisson, made before the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres on Friday, June 8, 1877. Extracted from the Journal Officiel of the Bepublique Française.

Wednesday, June 13, 1877.

Mr. Ravaisson. Several newspapers have recently announced that the members of the school at Athens have just discovered in the island of Milo a marble arm holding a looking-glass, and that this fragment belongs to the celebrated statue preserved ac the Louvre. This assertion, which up to this time has not been justified, seems to have its origin in an “imaginary narrative” recently published. According to this narrative the Venus of Milo, after its discovery, was mutilated in a combat which took place between the French seamen and the inhabitants, and there was a probability of finding its arms in the vicinity of the struggle.

It appeared from the authentic discourses of Dumont d’Urville, of Marcellus, from letters exchanged between our agents in the east, which were communicated to the Academy by M. de Vogue, that the combat was only a fable, and that the Venus of Milo when excavated was in the same state as it arrived at the Louvre. I give a new proof to-day. Here is a photograph of the drawings made from the statue at Milo, at the moment of its discovery by Mr. Voutier, then an officer on board of the Estafette. These sketches, which were transmitted to me by their author, represent the statue separated into two portions, without arms, as it now is. This is undeniable evidence of this fact, already so well established and vainly contested, that the Venus of Milo no longer had its arms when it was deposited in the vault, undoubtedly more than twelve centuries ago, and whence it was not to be taken out until 1820. Not only has one of the two arms of the Venus of Milo not been recovered, but it is not probable that either will ever be recovered. The recovered arm is said to have held a looking-glass. The researches and arguments which I have submitted to the Academy have proved, I think, that the statue was grouped with a Mars in such a way that it could not have held in its hand either a looking-glass or any other object. There are some objections raised against this demonstration, viz, that the Greeks did not group Mars with Venus, as the Romans did. But, not to speak of various monuments, undeniably of Greek origin, where Mars and Venus form a group, among others the great archaic base of the candelabrum preserved at the Louvre, these two deities are united, and also Eros, upon a painted vase at the Louvre, in a scene representing an episode of a combat between the Olympus and the Titans. This vase, which has been recently added to our collections, is from the is land of Milo.