94 Preface 



presumably trustworthy authority has been followed. When no 

 such authority was available, I have preferred not to run the risk 

 of making confusion worse confounded. There is the more reason 

 for this reticence, as the question whether a given object came from 

 Herculaneum, Pompeii, or Stabiae is of very little consequence. 



On the other hand, it is of the utmost importance to distinguish 

 from the homogeneous objects found in these buried cities other 

 objects of earlier date and style found in graves of southern Italy. 

 Of such objects the Museum of Naples possesses a considerable num- 

 ber, jumbled up in the exhibition rooms with the mass of things from 

 Herculaneum and Pompeii. Some of these earlier products are rep- 

 resented in the present collection, and these, so far as recognized, 

 have been grouped together under the category of "Pre-Roman 

 Objects." The task of distinction has not always been easy. In 

 one instance (No. 7) I have ventured to reject the explicit statement 

 of the official inventory of the Naples Museum, which I have con- 

 sulted on this point as on several others. I can only hope that in 

 this attempt at classification no serious mistakes have been made. 



For purposes of identification it has seemed desirable to give for 

 each piece the inventory number attached to it in the Naples Museum. 

 In determining these, it has been necessary to rely on the indications, 

 not always self-consistent, afforded by De Angelis in his catalogue 

 and on the copper tags attached to his products, with such confirma- 

 tion and correction as could be obtained from books and photographs. 

 Whenever any reason has been discovered for doubting a number, 

 an interrogation mark has been used. Doubtless some errors have 

 •crept in, but they ought not to be numerous. 



The attempt has not been made to give a complete list of the 

 places of publication of individual objects, but rather to refer to 

 the most important, as well as to the most accessible. Overbeck's 

 Pompeii is cited by its fourth edition (1884), and Mau's Pompeii, 

 translated by Kelsey, by its revised edition (1902). 



Professor M. H. Morgan, of Harvard University, has given me 

 the benefit of his advice on two or three matters, and Mr. H. F. 

 De Cou has corrected and extended my notes at numerous points. 

 To both of these gentlemen I herewith express my thanks. 



