No. \.--Temple of Jupiter Serapis. 275 



need hardly say, if I have at all succeeded in explaining the 

 phenomena of the spot, could not for a moment be entertain- 

 ed by any person of common sense, who has even looked at 

 the pillars. 



The fifth and only other theory which, as far as I know, 

 has been suggested, is very ingenious, and more far-fetched 

 than any of those above-mentioned, to which it is also subse- 

 quent in date. It has been supported by Gothe, Pini, De 

 Jorio,* and Daubeny, and seems to have been originally pro- 

 posed by the first of these authors. They suppose, that when 

 the temple was covered by volcanic tufa a hollow was left, 

 as might naturally enough be supposed, in the court of the 

 temple ; that afterwards by some means sea water was intro- 

 duced, and formed a salt lake surrounding the three standing 

 pillars, in which the Mytili bred and pierced the stones. The 

 lake being then dried up, the shells were left in the holes, and 

 the building restored to its former condition as a ruin. 



The hypothesis of which the above are the leading facts, 

 strikes me, I confess, as one of the most assumptive that could 

 be formed, and, with due respect for the names which have 

 supported it, I cannot help looking upon the temporary popu- 

 larity it has received, as the result of the singular obscurity 

 of the subject, and the ingenuity manifested in finding a new 

 explanation which might evade many difficulties of the old 

 ones, and, as it were, surprise the reader into belief, hardly 

 giving him time to consider the peculiar and weighty objec- 

 tions which take the place of former ones. Indeed, the 

 supporters of this lacustrine hypothesis have seldom condescen- 

 ded upon the particulars of the operations they so boldly assert 

 to have taken place ; and it is in the paper of Pini, formerly 

 quoted, that we find the subject pursued to its details, which 

 we suspect rather invalidate the argument than support it. 



It is of little consequence at what period the temple was 



* I have already mentioned, that I am not in possession of De Jorio's 

 book expressly on the subject ; but I infer his opinions from the citations 

 in Dr JDaubeny's work, and a short expression of his opinion of a lake in 

 the " Guida de Pozzuoli" though in the same work he brings forward 

 testimonies which we might have thought would have suggested a more 

 simple theory. 



