'mmmi Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2017 with funding from Getty Research Institute https://archive.org/details/tirynsprehistori00schl_1 FRONTISPIECE. VIEW FROM THE EXCAVATED PALACE ON THE ACROPOLIS OF T1RYNS, ’ . # . with 168 - > O ODC I r .C-S H*-*1 I T I RYN S THE PREHISTORIC PALACE OF THE KINGS OF TIRYNS THE RESULTS OF THE LATEST EXCAVATIONS BY DR. HENRY SCHLIEMANN wrw D CL OXON AND HON. FELLOW OF QUEEN’S COLLEGE, OXFORD; F.S.A ; HON' CORRESP. MEMBER AND GOLD MEDALLIST OF THE ROY. INSTITUT OF BRIT. ARCHITECTS; AUTHOR OF “TROY AND ITS REMAINS.” “ MYCENAE,” “ ILIOS,” ' TROIA.” AND “ ORCHOMENOS. THE PREFACE BY PROFESSOR F. ADLER, AND CONTRIBUTIONS BY DR. WM. DORPFELD WITH 188 WOODCUTS, 24 PLATES IN CHROMOLITHOGRAPHY, ONE MAP. AND FOUR PLANS NEW YORK CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS 1885 The right 0/ Translation is rescn’cd Copyright, 1885, BY CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS. Press of J.J. Little & Co., Nos. 10 to 20 Astor Place, New York. TO JAMES FERGUSSON, Esq., C.I.E., D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.S., F.R.IBA, M.R.A.S., HON. MEM. R.S.L. &c., THE HISTORIAN OF ARCHITECTURE, EMINENT ALIKE FOR HIS KNOWLEDGE OF THE ART, AND FOR THE ORIGINAL GENIUS WHICH HE HAS APPLIED TO THE SOLUTION OF SOME OF ITS MOST INTERESTING PROBLEMS; Cljis Work is gibicalcb, IN GRATEFUL ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF HIS INTEREST IN MY LABOURS AND THE HELP DERIVED FROM HIS SCHOLARSHIP AND PROFOUND ARCHAEOLOGICAL LEARNING SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE DISCOVERIES AT TROY. HENRY SCHLIEMANN. PREFACE. When the Author invited me to write a Preface to his work on Tiryns, I declared my readiness to do so without hesitation; for he thus afforded me a welcome opportunity of adding my personal thanks — for the substantial advan- tages that had accrued to my own studies in the history ol architecture — to the universal tribute offered so justly from every side to the indefatigable explorer of the oldest civilisation of Greece and Asia Minor. I hope to express this feeling most practically by an attempt to gather the results — as regards the technical and artistic aspect of architecture — which follow from Dr. Schliemann’s excavations in Troy, Mycenae, Orcho- menos, and Tiryns, and, as far as this is possible to-day, to shape them into a picture ol the oldest art of building in Greece and in Asia Minor. No doubt, there are still great gaps, owing to various causes, and it is certain that our present materials will sooner or later be substantially supplemented. Yet I would justify this essay as a necessary preliminary, which only an architect can supply, to further inquiries as to the develop- ment of art in one of the most attractive, though one of the most obscure, regions of classical antiquity. If I have reached beyond Dr. Schliemann’s personal work, by utilising the architectural harvest of the latest discoveries in Attica and Argolis, I plead my desire to make my sketch as complete as possible. Three kinds of architecture have been materially illus- vi THE CITADELS PERGAMOS AND TIRYNS trated by the successful work of the spade: (i) Fortresses, (2) Palaces, (3) Tombs. The important branch of Temples is still missing from the list. True, MM. Schliemann and Dbrpfeld had taken two large ruins, lying parallel on the Pergamos (of Priam), to be temples, and supported this view even in Troja (pp. 76-86, seq .), which appeared in 1884. But they forthwith aban- doned this view, when analogous but better-preserved architectural remains at Tiryns proved to be parts of a great palace, plainly discernible as such in its main features. As here, so in Troy, these rooms, superior to the rest in proportion, plan, and strength of walls, were certainly the chief halls of the kingly residence. Hence the fact is to be noted, that no trace has hitherto been found, in any of the three citadels, of buildings for the purpose ol worship, dating from the ancient period. The very slight archi- tectural fragments, of Doric style, found at Mycenae and Tiryns, which may be the remnants of stone temples, are certainly far more recent than the ancient royal palaces, and hence offer no material for the solution of this important problem. As regards Fortresses, the foitifications of Troy, Mycenae, and Tiryns can alone be considered, since the Acropolis of Orchomenos has not yet been subjected to an accurate investigation. All three are built on an almost identical plan, and show a similarity of situation. For the site, there was always chosen a rocky eminence of more or less height. Tiryns (26 m. over the sea) is the lowest ; then comes Troy (40 m.), while Mycenae lies ten times as high as Tiryns: its summit rises to 277 m. The former are strongholds in the plain. The latter is a proud mountain- fastness. The scanty room enclosed by the surrounding walls proves that, in the first foundation, only the security of the chieftain was the object aimed at not the protection of a town-like settlement, or the erection of a great depot WATCH SEA AND LAND. vii for war. Even as in the Middle Ages, huts and houses may somewhat later have sprung up round the citadel. When the increase of population, and the growing wealth, necessitated an enlargement of the existing bulwarks, this extended fortification, even when rationally and skilfully laid out, did not always increase the defensive power of the fortress ; nay, it often impaired it. In the case of Mycenae, such a combination of town and fortress is certain from the name, from literary evi- dences, and from architectural remains. The same may be assumed at an early period in the case of Troy, even if we do not regard the evidence of Homer as decisive, because the wells lying to the S.W. were indispensable for a pro- longed defence of the fortress, and must therefore soon have been embraced in the fortifications. The town there- fore lay certainly S. of the Pergamos. From later times we have also evidence of a town-like settlement beside Tiryns ; but its origin is as obscure as the course of its surrounding walls. Probably the town lay not to the west near the sea, but to the east in the plain, protected from pirates by the citadel. This situation seems to be indicated also by a find of coins. Two citadels, Pergamos and Tiryns, were meant to watch both sea and land. The former commanded the most extensive view, and lay, moreover, on a great high- road of the world’s traffic. Mycenae, on the contrary, is a stronghold thrown forward as an outpost into the moun- tains, to dominate important passes ; hence its natural strength is greatest. Then follows Tiryns ; and last of all, Troy. This last only had, at least on its E., W., and S. sides, a dry moat, which was not needed by the others, built, as they were, on steep rocks. The other indispensable conditions for defence are . fulfilled by all alike : with economy of circuit, a minimum of gates and posterns ; then, walls of sufficient height and strength, with easily blocked approaches ; and finally, a ALL HAVE ONLY TWO GATES, viii suitable utilising of the inner enclosed ground with a view to dominating the lower parts, i.e. a terrace formation of higher and lower citadel. At all times, strongholds have been narrowly girdled, for a small circuit of wall is more quickly built ; it diminishes the cost of construction and maintenance, and permanently facilitates the defence. But sometimes the first narrow girdle of defence did not long suffice for the fast growing requirements of the place. Then, on one or more sides, extensions were undertaken. The still existing remains prove this fact in the case oi Troy, to the E. and S., as well as at Mycenae along the S. side. Tiryns, on the other hand, has always preserved the line of its old bounds, and seems certainly a building of uniform plan, though the citadel is not the first, but the second structure on the same site. The second condition — a minimum of gates and pos- terns— is obvious in rationally planned fortifications, seeing that every gate, however small, constitutes a weak point, and that every useless postern diminishes the primary intention of safety by enhancing the danger of treason. Hence Tiryns, in addition to two very small apertures in the walls for the purposes of patrolling and getting infor- mation, always possessed only one main gate and one postern. The same is the case at Mycenae; besides the Lions’ Gate, there is here only, at the N.E,, a postern which, in addition to military purposes, served for getting water from a neighbouring well (Perseia?). So also tor the citadel of Troy, two gates sufficed from the beginning — - namely, the central gate at the S., and the one leading to the wells, S.W. This number has never been exceeded; for when the extension of the fort made it necessary to plan a new (third) gate S.E., the old central gate was per- manently walled up, and the traffic between town and citadel again confined to two gates. Besides these fundamental points of agreement in ancient fort-building, there are also points of variance, which must AND THE FLANKING SYSTEM. IX not be overlooked. They concern the arrangement of the walls in ground-plan and in section ( trad and profile). If we turn first to the ground-plan, we find already in the Pergamos that the ancient walls were flanked by salient, massive, tower-like bastions recurring at pretty regular intervals, from which the intervening wall-sections could be watched and laterally swept by the missiles thrown from the beleaguered stronghold. This is specially shown in the old central gate — a colossal, massive structure with a narrow, tunnel-like gate- way, which in the first instance was intended to defend the causeway crossing the moat, but which also served to flank the S. side, and therefore assuredly stood out like a great tower over the walls. From the fact that, in the later extension of the fortress, the flanking position of this tower was almost wholly abandoned, we may be certain that its construction must belong to the time of the second citadel, the method of fortification in the earliest settlement being unknown. At all events, this structure represents, in its conception, a combination of gate-tower and of salient outwork, which is architecturally of great value. The flanking system, the application of which, in the heroic age, was even recently still so strangely denied, is absent neither from Mycenae nor from Tiryns ; but, on account of the varying conditions of the ground, it has in neither of these citadels been so thoroughly carried out as at Troy. In the former two cases it was confined to a few very important points. At Troy, it was most fully developed. To the circuit wall belongs the entrance way into the fort. The final ascent for pedestrians and horsemen was provided for by inclines, which were either simply formed of earth, or paved, and had a moderate incline (20-25°) °f varying breadth (5-8 m.). At Tiryns and Mycenae (I speak here of the first foundation of the citadel, before the southern extension was undertaken and X TROJAN WALLS OF SUN-DRIED BRICKS. the Lions’ Gate built) these ramps lay (and still lie) close along the walls, in such a manner that the assailant was forced to expose his unshielded right side to the defenders. In Troy, on the contrary, where a dry moat had to be crossed, the dam-like ramps lead direct to the gates, and are consequently at right angles with the line of the wall. Both the ground-plans and the sections of the circuit walls show marked differences. The variety of the building materials and of the site accounts for that. The walls of the Pergamos show the simplest structure, because lime quarry-stones of middling size have been used for the substructures, while sun-dried bricks were used lor the upper part. The limestones are laid horizontally in layers without any sort of cement ; but the wall is escarped from without (the angle of Inclination is at first 45 0 , then 6q°) while the inner side rises vertically. The scarp, or batter, fulfils a twofold object ; it makes the undermining of the wall more difficult, and also diminishes the absolute heights for the upper structure. This latter, built of sun- dried bricks with clay mortar, had an average thickness of 3 l_ 4 m., and 'within, a similar height. Its strength was increased by means of inserted beams of wood, which recur at fixed levels and are placed longitudinally in the wall as well as across it— a structure often repeated in stone building. There must have been a rampart way along the top of the wall with a protecting parapet. We can also infer from the existing remains an average elevation of 9-10 m.; and thus the wall was externally secure from escalade. The weakest front was the south side; it was therefore provided with a dry moat, the width of which can be inferred from the flank measurements of the gateway, and may be fixed at 16-17 m. Its depth cannot have been less than 3 m. Quite different are the fortifications of Tiryns and Mycenae. The escarped substruction of free-stone was omitted, being replaced by the rising rock which could CYCLOPEAN WALLS BONDED WITH CLAY. XI easily, where necessary, be made inaccessible by subsequent chiselling. Then, as good free-stone was to be found quite close by, the use of sun-dried bricks could be con- siderably limited, or entirely dispensed with. The greater part of the walls of Tiryns consists of lime- stone blocks of large, even colossal size, the interstices being filled up with smaller stones. Throughout, a hori- zontal jointing is attempted, as far as possible, with the stones already split in the quarry to obtain an under- surface, and rudely worked with heavy hammers on the other surfaces. There is no trace of ashlar masonry, or real polygonal bonding; but it is obvious, from mathe- matical considerations, that at the numerous salient and in- verted angles the rude, longish, polyedra must have been wrought into clumsy parallelopipeda to construct these angles. Hence, upon careful examination, there is clearly to be seen in many* places an approach to a horizontal jointing, though rising and falling in crooked lines. I conjecture that in the construction of all so-called Cyclopean walls a strong mortar of loam, or potter’s clay, was used as bedding material, which facilitated the laying, joining, and further piling up of the stones, but dried up afterwards, and, by being gradually washed away, finally disappeared. Hence there resulted, in many places, both vertical and horizontal joints sufficiently large to make the scaling of the wall possible to experienced climbers, especially if the wall itself was slightly escarped. As close fitting with oblong or polygonal blocks was not yet usual, this danger was obviated by choosing, for the lowest and middle courses, blocks so large that they could not be surmounted either by upward or oblique climbing. This view is supported, first, by the circumstance that some stones in the interstices lie there loosely now, because they are no longer held together by pressure, and chiefly by the fact, that the largest blocks are only found in the lower and middle courses on the outside. Hence I am disposed to xii EARLIEST AND LATER SETTLEMENT AT TIRYNS. attribute the use of the colossal quarry-stones at Tiryns at least as much to this practical reason as to the ambition of the founder of the stronghold. He has indeed, in this latter respect, raised for himself a monument of the first rank. I have myself measured in many instances on the upper citadel, blocks of 2 *90-3* 20 m. in length, by 1 • 10- 1-50 in height. Their depth was not measurable, but may be taken at 1-20-1-50 m. We thus obtain a weight of from 12-13,000 kgs. for a rudely-prepared block, the transport of which, to its exact place on a high and narrow site, was only possible with the aid of many technical devices — inclined planes and scaffolding — and a host of workmen. Even middle-sized stones, easily measurable in their chief dimensions, weigh 3700-4000 kgs. These figures are im- portant, as proving that the citadel we see before us, and whose gigantic blocks even in antiquity excited astonish- ment and admiration, cannot have bffen built in a hurry, in the sight of the enemy, or as the first stronghold of an invasion based on maritime supremacy. If, indeed, the country was here suddenly invaded from the seaside, the first fortress must have consisted of wood and sun-dried bricks ; for the colossal walls tell every one able to read the language of stones, that their erection can only have been effected in a long period of peace, by a ruler with unusual resources of power, and who had trained workmen under his permanent control. In support of the idea, that we have in Tiryns not the first, but the second structure on that site, many additional reasons may be adduced. In the first place, under the foundations of the palace on the upper citadel, occur undoubted traces of older buildings; among them, the substructure of a huge gate-tower, over which the outer Propylaeum was afterwards erected. But if the inner part of the citadel was made a good stronghold, the outer must have been so a fortiori. This confirms my second observation, that in the wall of the nether citadel there are, THE WALLS OF MYCENyE. Xlll in many places, vertical joints coming down, sometimes, to the rock, which show clearly that this part was not built at one and the same time, but in several divisions. Probably the older and cheaper defence of wood and sun-dried bricks was retained here till it could be replaced gradually bv a more solid stone structure. The section of the wall is not uniform, but is generally massive in the nether citadel. Here the depth varies from 7 to 9 m. ; the outer height, no longer measurable, may have also been 9 m. The broad rampart way along the top of the wall was contracted closely by massive towers in several places, perhaps even blocked, so that it might be defended in sections. There are deep niches in the wall, covered by rude corbelling out of the blocks, not so much to save material as to gain room. In the upper citadel the thickness of the wall increases to 13, 15, even 1 7 m., but no longer represents a massive block of wall — e.g. in the S.E. corner and along the S. front — but a systematically con- nected cluster of rooms (stairs, galleries, magazines, cisterns, and casemates), which are all built of large blocks, and are all covered on a system of corbelling, so as to be fireproof. The whole, though partially fallen in, is an astonishing specimen of fortification and construction dating back to hoary antiquity. A huge double tower, with cellars, which perhaps contained prisons, flanked the south part of the W. wall. A second, still greater, in the E. wall, com- manded the main entrance. Smaller solid towers were probably here distributed along the wall, as well as in the lower citadel. The walls of Mycenas do not possess the general uni- formity which marks those at Tiryns ; one recognises there various kinds of work, done at periods the succession of which cannot now be determined The construction of the nucleus is, no doubt, almost everywhere the same : it consists of roughly-shaped limestone blocks piled up one upon the other, and bonded by small stones and clay. XIV OLDEST OUTER WALLS OF MYCENAE But there also appear, outside, large stretches of perfectly horizontal ashlar-masonry ; in some spots even the best close-fitting polygonal bonding. It is known from the history of Greek architecture that this last kind of budding belongs everywhere to a comparatively late period, and has no connection with the so-called Cyclopean constructions. At Mycenm this best, but most costly, kind of wall seems to have been applied only where damaged places (breaches, slips) had to be subsequently repaired permanently, or completely renewed. Considerably older than this patchwork with polygonal blocks is the ashlar masonry, which first occurs here, and which consists of layers of oblong rectangles, with studied variation in the vertical joints. That this does not belong to the earliest building of the fort, is at once clear from the fact, that the northern wall of the approach to the Lions’ Gate consists of two parts separated vertically : first, of a thick core of limestone piled up in Cyclopean fashion ; and then, of a relatively thin coating of oblong blocks of breccia, in the lower strata of which no bond-stones are to be found. The southern wall of the same approach shows the same oblong ashlar masonry of breccia, not laid on, howecer, as a mere coating without binding-stones, but joined thoroughly with the core-structure. From both observa- tions it follows with absolute certainty that the oblong ashlar masonry must be more recent than the old Cyclo- pean limestone building, and is only connected with the extension of the fortress towards the south, and with the erection of the Lions Gate. The oldest outer wall of Mycenae is all of the same stamp m , it is built in Cyclopean fashion, like that of Tiry ns, but throughout with smaller blocks of stone. It closely surrounded a triangular hill, which is in places very r steep, and which could only be terraced with the help of numerous supporting walls, and thereby 7 ' made fit to beai an upper fortress in the middle, and two lower ones ; the ITS LIONS’ GATE. XV latter lying to the east and west respectively. The old ascent with its incline was probably at the S. side, above the well-known pit-graves discovered by Dr. Schliemann ; and the last part of the ascent went from E. to W., so that the unshielded side of the assailant was here again exposed. From the first there were two gates here. Besides the chief gate — in the middle of the old south front — the position of which cannot be determined without further excavations, there was the above-mentioned water-gate on the N.E., which, like the central gate at Troy, had a tower as a superstructure. The circuit-wall is, generally speaking, much thinner than that of Tiryns ; its average thickness is 5 rn. However, in the N. and S.E. there are portions increasing to the thickness of 14 m. The occurrence, in one place in the N. wall, of remains of a gallery leads to the conjecture that, later on, a careful examination of the masses of ruins which have tumbled down, will bring to light similar arrangements of stairs, galleries, store-rooms, and casemates, to those at Tiryns. At a later period the fortress was enlarged southward ; evidently to gam more room for the increased requirements of kingly power. Then, not only was a new gate — the well-known Lions’ Gate — added ; but the whole N.W. corner, in order to give it a grander appearance, was dressed with the above-mentioned thin coat of oblong square blocks of breccia. Better than this strengthening, which was only for show, was the erection of the strong oblong tower of the same material, jutting out at the S. side like a mole, and destined to defend the approach to the new gate, and make the western finish to the new extension wall on the S. It was a very necessary advanced work for the security of the weak gate. Then, also, the old ascent to the fort, which came from the S.W. and swept round, loop-like, towards the W , was given up ; and, as a further consequence, the Castle ramp was carried up from another direction. It now went straight up from the XVI MONUMENTAL SHAPE OF THE GATES. Lions’ Gate, hence in a favourable position for the assailant ; but the builder could afford to make this apparent error, because the ramp lay now no longer outside, but inside the circuit-wall, and was therefore amply protected. The gates show differences not less significant than those of the walls. The oldest kind of construction is exhibited in the S. central gate of the Pergamos of Troy, that primitive and massive solid structure of sun-dried bricks, cut through by the narrow gateway. Its roof was constructed, as in the gallery of a mine, by side posts with close timbering above, and it had an upper storey with a platform and breast-work. This rude and simple structure shows that the very old Oriental method of vaulting with sun-dried bricks was unknown at Troy, and that they strove to solve the problem before them in a not very monumental fashion. The covering of the S.W. gate leading to the wells was probably similar ; but trustworthy indications are wanting in the excavated remains. When the central gate was abandoned in consequence of the enlargement of the fort, the S.W. gate was rebuilt on another plan, suggested by the S.E. gate — viz. in the form of a sluice-chamber with two portals, and with short vestibules bounded by side-walls. This form of gate is also characteristic of Troy, and deserves all the more atten- tion, as we here have the fundamental idea of the later propugnaculum. Tiryns and Mycenae do not, it is true, possess this form of gate ; but in the Propylaea of the palace of Tiryns a similar architectural principle has been applied, and indeed in a more advanced form. If in the gates of Troy we still find wood largely used, the gates of the other two fortresses show, on the contrary, a perfectly monumental shape. The cases neces- sary for the doors consist here of great and hard stones (breccia), and the lintel is relieved of the superincum- bent weight by obliquely corbelled layers of stone, which close above in triangular form. Thin slabs — one or two, THE PORTAL POSTERN AT TIRYNS. . xvii according to the depth-— fill this triangular opening, in order to prevent climbing over the closed gate. Such a structure with two slabs is still preserved in the little N.E. gate at Mj xente, while the Lions’ Gate probably always possessed but the one with the famous relief. The proximity in situation, as well as the historical connection expressed in the legends, explain the many points of similarity in the two fortresses, not only in structure but in detail — to wit : the identical measurements in the clear, and other tech- nical aids to fortification, such as the construction of the threshold, the arrangement of the bolting-bar for the gate wings, See. This is also true of the little side gates, posterns with their modest triangular structures of corbelled layers, to which, as there were no framing stones, a closing apparatus could only be applied in a very incomplete manner. The most interesting postern is found in the western semi- circular structure of the wall of Tiryns. It is connected by a flight of sixty-five steps, first, with the middle fortress, but also by a second flight of steps and by a narrow zigzag passage with the interior of the palace, as well as with the upper circuit-wall. Accordingly, messengers might come and go — particularly in the direction of the sea — by this secret way, without using the main entrance ; and during a siege the semicircular structure could at the same time be used to collect troops for a sortie. Moreover, the remains of a chamber, found at a considerable height above it, show that at this important point a look-out was established. N ext to the outer shell of walls and gates comes naturally the examination of the core, which was the dwelling-place of the ruler. Unfortunately, there is far less material extant for this second kind of architecture than foi the first. The citadel Pergamos gave but few results, because the separation of the strata of building was here very difficult, because in the earlier years of the excavations much had been inadvertently destroyed. Nevertheless, some comparisons are possible. It is even more to be b xv iii the royal palace at tiryns. deplored that the extensive ruins on the acropolis of My cense continue to be a book with seven seals, which every scholar must long to have soon opened by systematic researches. For even now a surface of ^0—60 m., which fairly corresponds, as the site for a palace, to that at Tiryns, can be recognised on the highest top. From the graduated formation of the ground we may conclude that the acropolis of Mycenae, with its palace, must have made outwardly a far more imposing impression than the princely dwelling at Tiryns, which was half hidden behind its gigantic walls. Under these circumstances, the results which we owe to the closer examination of the fortress at Tiryns, are of all the greater value. This is, so far, the only source from which we can draw a direct and clear idea of the architecture of an ancient Greek royal palace. What first strikes us in examining the ground-plan, is the orientation, towards the S., of the rooms most used. This arrangement seems due to two causes. First, the palace was to be made habitable at all seasons ; for the warmth of the sun was required in winter, the summer heat being kept off by the national method of building with thick walls of sun-dried bricks and roofs of wood, covered with clay. Secondly, it was desirable to keep an eye always on the neighbouring Nauplia and the broad entrance of the gulf. An architect’s eye is next attracted by the very skilful distribution of all the portions of the building on the space afforded by nature and much limited by art. If, as was obvious, the principal room of the palace — the Men's Hall— was to occupy the highest place, and, on account of the outlook on Nauplia, had to be moved as near as possible to the S. side, then these two require- ments could only be satisfied by making the eastern approach start from the N., ascend in a great sweep, and end at a suitable distance from that main room. This was done, and indeed so as to make the first greater section of the way everywhere still capable of defence. It is only with MEN’S AND WOMEN’S HALLS. XIX the great Propylaeum that the huge rampart whose only- aim and object, at first, was security, makes way for a style of building intended for the purposes of comfortable human occupation. The form and grouping of its rooms had to satisfy the various demands which a princely house- hold has made for itself at all times, both in a real and an ideal sense. Proud seclusion towards without ; suitable accommodation for guards and domestics about roomy courts ; dignified approaches up to the reception room ; finally, convenient connection of the dwelling-rooms proper, both one with another and with the outer rooms — and all this well lighted, and yet shady and cool : these are the requirements of a palace in the South. If with this basis to go upon we add the aids given us by Homer in his characteristic descriptions of princely life, we are able, in spite of sundry gaps, to explain correctly the wonderfully well-preserved ground-plan in its main features. There can be no doubt about the central part of the plan. The large Men’s Hall, distinguished by a stately ante-room, and the very much smaller Women’s Hall, each lying contiguous to an inner court surrounded with colonnades, are conspicuous at once ; next, the remarkable bath-room, close to the larger Megaton. Considering the custom of the Heroic Age of giving strangers a bath soon after their arrival, the position of the guest-chambers, as well as of the servants’ rooms, must be sought near the bath-room — that is, at the W. side of the principal court, where now, by the fall of the circuit-wall, there is a great gap. In the same way, we may set down the small inner court, lying close beside the Women's Court (XXX on Plan II.), as a yard devoted to the domestic economy, and the adjoining rooms to the S. as housewifery rooms ; for it is worthy of remark that this court is not con- creted, and, doubtless, on account of the continual inter- course with the outside, was in direct communication with the first great Propylaeum. Finally we have here, and b 2 XX THE ALTAR OF ZEUS HERKEIOS. here only, two separate conduits within the domestic rooms, which carry off water southward, and point to a large use of water. The rooms in the N.E. corner, closely connected with the women s apartment, were at once, and I think rightly, designated as the bed-chamber of the married pair, and the armoury and treasure rooms of the ruler. Moreover, this handsomely and practically arranged building was not wanting in an ideal centre-point, where the ruler, surrounded by his people, thankfully offered sacrifices to the gods or sought their will ; and this was the altar of Zeus Herkeios, built under the open sky, in the shape of a circular sacrificial pit. Like a guardian of the threshold, it stands in the main court, close to the inner vestibule ; forming, at the same time, the end of the main axis of the Men’s Hall. It was an admirably chosen spot for setting up a structure the importance of which needed no enhancement from art, which was to remind one of peace, to afford protection, and to hallow the going in and the coming out. But although the plan of the inner palace is intelligible in its main features, it is less easy to tell with certainty the destination of the buildings about the great fore-court. In position and form, it is true, the two pillared vestibules are at once distinguishable. Their object, too, is plain; they were to separate, practically, the inner and the outer parts, and combine them artistically. In addition, we may also regard the rooms between the two gates as very well suited for guards and servants. But everything else to the W. and S. remains doubtful ; the fall of the western wall, and the erection of the Byzantine Church to the S., have destroyed all useful indications. Yet this loss must not be over-estimated. To the W., not much more than a portico can have stood, as the course of the upper circuit-wall leaves but little room ; and to the S., the almost immediate vicinity of the gigantic fortification, with its stairs, galleries, and magazines, suggests, that with the exception of some THE ORIENTAL INFLUENCES. XXI buildings for outer husbandry uses, the majority of rooms once here situated must also have served for defensive purposes. N. of the palace extends a somewhat lower terrace, with an average breadth of 30 m. — the so-called middle citadel — the excavation of which has scarcely led to any satisfactory results. Neither its connection with the lower citadel, nor its immediate connection with the approach to the Castle, has been established. Yet we may conjecture that here, too, a part of the garrison was posted, because the important way to the W. postern and sally-gate passed through here, and the not less important back-stairs to the palace began here. So momentous a point of the citadel must have been under permanent military guard. Hence it results that the house of the prince was shut in, and carefully guarded on all sides, by gates, walled ap- proaches, watch-posts, and barracks. This main feature in the plan seems to point to Oriental influences. What kind of buildings the lower citadel once enclosed, is as unknown as their order, form, and size, the spade having only felt its way here, instead of excavating ; so that, excepting some graves, nothing important has been as yet discovered. Perhaps the first town settlement stood here. The ground-plan of the palace shows, in my opinion, a distinct uniformity of design, in spite of some later addi- tions and alterations, and gives us a very favourable idea of the talent and experience of its architect. The principal rooms are arranged in clear order about courts admitting full light and air ; they are suitably disposed and easily accessible. They have no want of good and often twofold connection. Particular facility is afforded for the separate home work of serving-men and maids ; and the urgent need of secret exit and intercourse with the outside is not forgotten. We obtain valuable hints also as regards the technical capabilities of the builder. The walls, constructed of sun- XXII ALL PILLARS AND PILASTERS OF WOOD. dried bricks with tie-beams, rest on foundations of free-stone bonded with clay. The thresholds consist partly of wood, mostly of stone ; they show us the dimension, arrangement, and method of fixing of the thick wooden doors. Astonish- ment is created by the monolith floor of the bath-room, weighing 2,0,000 kg. What mechanical efforts must its transport and placing at this elevation have cost! Its site, when once chosen, must have been decisive for the arrangement of all the chief rooms, and so we may infer that essential changes of the first plan never took place. Else- where, too, the laying of the floors in most of the rooms and chief courts is carefully considered, and, in connection there- with, the important question of draining systematically treated— a sure proof of an advanced state of culture. The structure shows much variety in the formation of its rooms : large and small courts ; pillared and unpillared vestibules ; even a three-aisled state-room, with ante-room. Like the roofs, all the supports, pillars, pilasters, and door- posts were of wood. That the visible wooden surfaces were even coated with sheet-metal is not impossible, but scarcely probable, or else some remains of the metal sheets would have been found in the ruins. As to the form of the pillars, nothing certain could be discovered. But the still measurable traces of their standing-places, of various dimensions — together with the heights, which we are taught by experience can be deduced from the thickness of the walls — lead us to the sure inference, that the pillars were of slender proportions : namely, 1 : 7 or 1 : 8 ; sometimes even 1 : 10. If, for example, we assume for the side-walls of the Men’s Hall, which are 1 ■ 32 m. thick, five times this height — which is rather too little than too much — we obtain a height of 6 • 60 m. up to the lower surface of the two thick girders which carried the roof, and so with the now measurable lower diameter of the pillars (o' 66 m.), a proportion of 1 : 9 • 9 1 . A similar result — viz. 1 : 9 — is obtained by a com- parison of the corresponding measurements of the great LIGHTING OF THE ROOMS. XX111 Prothvron. These are also the minimum proportions com- monly employed in wooden structures for supports. The rotting, dry or wet, of the shafts was obviated by a moderate elevation of the base on fiat stone supports. We do not know, however, how the mischief of settlement and splitting of the wooden pillars, caused by their drying, was technically counterbalanced ; yet, this point, so im- portant practically for any southern climate, has been well considered in the construction of the pilasters. Both in Troy, and in Tiryns it was preferred to make the antes, throughout, of a number of thin posts rather than of one beam. As to the construction of the wooden roofs, as well as the form, division, and connection of the roof beams, we are left to conjecture in the absence of certain indications. From the fact that the widest span does not exceed 5 • 64 m., we may indeed infer roofs of great weight ; but we cannot determine whether they were made in the primaeval, simple fashion of a close row of unhewn round beams, such as the Lycian rock-tombs represent, and the Lions’ Gate relief and the faqade of one of the beehive-tombs at Mycenae suggest ; or of hewn beams set at fixed intervals, with a cover of boards and a coating of clay. Probably both methods were used side by side, the first for the subordinate chambers, the latter for the chief rooms. In no case can we assume an artistic formation of overhanging roofs with architectural members of terra-cotta. The lighting of separate rooms was certainly, according to southern habits, through the door ; the majority, how- ever, probably obtained their light by elevated lateral aper- tures. I suppose that the triple-naved Men’s Hall was also lighted only by an uninterrupted row of side windows treated after the manner of a frieze, between the beam-ends close under the roof. Lighting on the clerestory principle, immediately over the hearth, is too objectionable practically, especially for winter weather, to make it, in my opinion, XXIV DESIGNS FROM EGYPTIAN SOURCES. likely. The construction of a wooden central nave on slender and widely-separated pillars is in itself complicated enough, and as regards the weight produced by the widely- projecting roof, not without danger in the case of violent storms. Then, the important discovery of the so-called kyanos- frieze of alabaster is to be taken into account. As this architectural member, so remarkable for its original beauty and decorative splendour, must certainly have been intended to be clearly seen, it required a specially good lateral light- ing, and it is therefore very possible that it was situated over the place where it w f as found, on the side wall ot the vestibule, close under the roof. With this I connect the further conjecture, that the axes of the upper windows of the great Megaron between the beds of the beams, and also the beams themselves in their main measurements, may have agreed with the corresponding architectural members of the kyanos-frieze, so that these latter may afford us an important basis for the graphic reconstruction of the Megaron roof. The extraordinary simplicity of the system which results therefrom, both for roofing and lighting, recommends this hypothesis. Lastly, the palace also possessed the important artistic and sympathetic element of coloured decoration — of a decoration which was not confined to the introduction of organic or geometrical ornaments, but even embraced figure-painting. We may expect the complete reproduc- tion and full discussion of this epoch-making find of most archaic wall-painting to form a lasting basis of an important chapter in classical art history. Of great value is, at any rate, the easily recognisable fact that certain decorative designs here painted on the wall, and repeated in chiselled relief on the stone-roof at Orchomenos, undoubtedly come from Egyptian sources. On the citadel of Troy also stood a palace of similar plan and construction to that at Tiryns ; this is now a THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE TOMBS. XXV fact established beyond the possibility of cavil, after the renewed reproduction and discussion of some large struc- tures, formerly regarded as temples. In the walls, unfor- tunately much destroyed, certain chief rooms, and parti- cularly characteristic architectural parts, can be forthwith recognised and determined, as soon as the plan of Tiryns is brought into comparison. I refer to a stately Men’s Hall lying S.E. (larger than that at Tiryns), with a hearth and a vestibule ; close to it, a smaller hall with vestibule and special back-room — perhaps the women’s apartment ; and in front of both, separated by a court, a Prothyron of modest dimensions, no doubt, but closely allied in form and structure to the Propylasa of Tiryns. As regards the construction of walls and antes, there is also so unmistak- able an analogy, that missing architectural members, such as pillars, the vestiges of whose standing-places are gone, can be supplemented with great probability. This point too — the surprising agreement of Tiryns and Troy, both in the artistic and the technical aspects of their style of building — is one of the most important facts for the history of art, which we owe to Dr. Schliemann’s latest researches. A third kind of architecture , that of tombs, has also received much elucidation. Though the number of such monuments has been but little increased, valuable analogies to older and well-known buildings of this kind have turned up, and new forms of graves were discovered. It was still more important that a methodically conducted inquiry repeatedlv came upon still untouched graves, and succeeded in preserving all their contents, with an accurate account of all the facts of the find. Hence we have before us materials as extensive as they are significant ; their thorough scientific treating has only just commenced. I confine myself to the accentuation of some principal points of view as regards their architectural side. How comfortably and securely the ruler dwelt in his XXVI ROCK-TOMBS AND PIT-GRAVES. castle through his life, the architectural remains of Tiryns and Troy have proved to us. How he was laid to rest at his death, and how gracefully, nay monumentally, his last abode was adorned, we learn from the sepulchres of Mycenae and Orchomenos, especially from the beehive- tombs of both places. We are sorry to miss the analo- gous cases which might have been furnished by Tiryns and Troy. The former, apart from some simple earth- graves in the lower citadel, has yielded us no material ; and of Troy almost the same may be said. For, the im- mense barrows which surround Troy at various distances, were unexpectedly found by the excavations to be ceno- taphs. Some of them have indeed a core of stone, circular and parting walls to secure the earth, but no chambers or receptacles for bodies. As, with two exceptions — that of the tumulus of Besika Tepeh in the Plain of Troy, and the so-called tomb of Protesilaus in the Chersonesus, which was excavated, but not architecturally examined — all these barrows seem to be of more recent date than the epoch of the walls, gates, and palaces of the Pergamos, they are beyond the range of our present subject. Of subordinate value, architecturally, are the rock- tombs of Nauplia and Spata. Their ground-plans, con- sisting of an approach and one or more chambers, are very simple ; the proportions are small, and the technical arrangement is confined to what is absolutely necessary. The only ascertained fact of importance is, that these tombs, though temporarily closed, were still used for a long time. Plence the architectural features admit of no inference as to their date; only the objects found, which are partly very peculiar, point to an epoch not far removed from that of the buildings of Tiryns and Mycenae. A distinct contrast to these grotto-tombs is afforded by the six so-called pit-graves , in the southern extension of the fortress of Mycenae, which, in the year 1876, yielded THE GRAVE-TERRACE AT MYCENAL XXV] l the fortunate discoverer a splendid museum of precious objects of art. In my opinion the dead were here as else- where buried ; not, however, in quadrangular rock-chambers, but in flat rock-cut graves, which were covered with earth, and marked with unadorned tombstones. It was only after a little necropolis (seventeen persons in six graves) had gradually arisen,* that it was changed into a sepulchral terrace of moderate height at the foot of the precipitous cliff, by means of a semicircular supporting wall, and with sculptured tomb -steles. The forming of a level tomb-terrace in a place where it would have been quite easy to hollow out the adjoining rock-walls into sepulchral chambers, is a fact of great importance. It proves, I think, that the founder who ordered the building, seeing that he followed a wholly different custom from that of the men who were buried then or a little later at Spata and Nauplia, must have been of different race from them. We may further see in the choice of the place, as well as in the artistic, though very simple, arrangement of the structure with its marking stones, the deliberate object of maintaining the memory of individual members of the family here buried. This object has been attained. Even at the critical time when the citadel had to be extended to the S., this terrace, in spite of pressing architectural needs, was spared with pious care. Nothing proves this plainer than the suddenly and abruptly changed course of the southern circuit-wall, at the S.W. corner, which was made in order to bring the way necessary for communication in its full width along the terrace surrounded by the circular wall. Nay, even more was done. Finally — either immediately after the building of the Lions’ Gate, or even later — the grave-terrace was again raised, surrounded with a boundary of broad stone slabs set upright ; and by means of a gate * See my contrary view, at the end of this Preface.— Henry SCHLIEMANN. xxvili THE BEEHIVE-TOMBS AT MYCENAE ; through this boundary towards the N., a direct and solemn entrance was attained from the Lions’ Gate. Considering all this, and moreover the manifold and extremely rich contents of the pit-graves, there can be no doubt that the remarkable necropolis re-discovered by Dr. Schliemann contains the resting-place of the founder of the Castle and his kin. It was for ever held sacrosanct. Originally lying outside, at the old approach to the fortress, and afterwards included in the circuit of the walls, this family sepulchre was at last made into a sacred enclo- sure with an entrance gate, in order to celebrate solemn rites there. It was therefore no agora , but a temenos , like the Pelopion or Hippodameion at Olympia, but circular in form, and with far more real contents than those hallowed places. As the legend only recognises one founder of Mycenae — Perseus, — we are entitled to designate these pit-graves as those of the Persidae. It is only with the help of this theory, slowly and care- fully elaborated from repeated and careful examination of the place, as regards the original situation and arrangement of the pit-graves, that we can explain two facts, otherwise very puzzling : first, that, against all rules and principles of fortification, a considerable part of the lower citadel was sacrificed to a cemetery which acted as a most incon- venient bar ; and secondly, that the graves lie not only under an artificial accumulation of earth 7-8 m. deep, but are moreover cut into the adjoining rock. Whilst, therefore, the chief value of the pit-graves — apart from their precious and, in some degree, unique contents — lies for us in the gain for the topography and relative chrono- logy of Mycenae, the beehive-tombs found there afford the most valuable materials for the history of architecture. Beehive-tombs, in the strict sense, have hitherto only been found on Greek soil. Asia Minor as yet gives us none ; and similar buildings in Italy are but late deriva- tions from old Greek models. THEIR TECHNICAL EXECUTION. XXIX Beehive-tombs consist of conically erected round chambers of ashlar stones, which in building were already covered externally with small stones bedded in clav-mortar, and when finished, so completely piled over with earth that they appear, outside, like simple barrow-graves. They are, therefore, artificial subterranean chambers, with a central chamber containing only two boundary surfaces ; namely, the natural floor, and the artificial wall. As the horizontal layers of stone, on a system of corbelling, form the roof, nb separation is visible between wall and roof. Both together form a unity. This simple structural formation points to very ancient models, such as round tents, half-subterranean earth huts, &c. ; but it appears here in its monumental and artistic execution, at least in three cases, as a climax which certainly was attained only after many earlier attempts. The technical execution was not easy, as the sepulchral chamber was to be kept dry, and also to be for a long time accessible in dignified manner, in order to allow of other bodies being entombed after the first interment. A door aperture was therefore required, as well as an approach, the former of which was walled up or closed when a beginning was made with the filling up of the approach. The hut- ment, in the construction, was afforded by the thrust of the earth piled on it from without in connection with the adjoining rock, in which, in spite of the troublesome labour of quarrying it out, the whole building was some- times embedded up to a certain height. Twice — at Orchomenos and at Mycenas — the neighbouring rock-wall was even first smoothed down vertically, and then hollowed out, in order to obtain a separate rock-chamber in addition to the beehive-chamber built beside it in the open. The approach ( dromos ), laid out in the form of a trench, but flanked by strong supporting walls, shows, by the expen- siveness of these constructive accessories, what stress was laid upon easy access to the tomb for a long space of XXX THE BEEHIVE-TOMB OF MENIDI. time. The doors, which for reasons of practical use are remarkably high and correspondingly broad in dimen- sions, required huge lintels; and these again, to save their being broken, wanted relief from the weight of the wall above. The lintels, therefore, which also acted as tie- beams, were relieved by a triangular aperture, produced by corbelled layers of stone, and in the best examples, at all events, closed within by thin rows of stones ; without, by slabs. This relieving device never served for lighting ; most beehive-graves were permanently covered up, and therefore dark. Only a small minority was kept per- manently open, and received what light was necessary for the beehive-chamber through the door. As to orientation, there was no fixed rule : doors and approaches face in all directions. No doubt, the ground and its roads often determined the site. Equally varied is the quality of the building: it rises from the simplest structure of necessity to that of monumental splendour, but is never without a certain solidity, demanded by the very nature of the construction. The proportions also widely differ : the diameter below in the smallest tomb averages 7*20 m. ; in the greatest, 14-62 m. The altitudes seem to have been equal to the span in the clear, or at least approached this proportion. Down to the present time we know of eleven beehive- graves in Greece. Six lie before the citadel of Mycenae ; single ones near the Heraeon of Argos, at Pharis in Laconia, at Menidi in Attica, at Orchomenos in Boeotia, and at Volo in Thessaly. As to the subterranean circular chamber on the citadel of Pharsalos, it was certainly a cistern. Four only have been accurately examined, besides the largest at Mycenae : those of the Heraeon, of Menidi, and of Orcho- menos. The second largest Tholos at Mycenae awaits, in spite of the important indications it has afforded, a yet more complete excavation. The tomb of Menidi maintains a certain pre-eminence, because it was found untouched with THE TOMBS WITH FACADE. XXXI its rich contents, and when excavated was recognised for certain as the common tomb of six persons. Materially as well preserved, but superior in technical and artistic respects, is the largest beehive-tomb of Mycenae, still erro- neouslv designated as the Treasure-house of Atreus. All the other examples, after the washing away of their cone of earth, have lost their upper part by pulling down, and are filled up with debris as high as the lintel of their portals. According to my investigations, this whole species of graves falls into two classes : ( i ) tombs where the approach was blocked up with earth, as soon as interments were over ; (2) tombs where the Dromos remained always open. This distinction is based on the existence of peg-holes in the stone lintels and thresholds of the portals. Peg- holes imply the existence of doors turning upon their hinges ; and so the intention of a permanent access to the beehive-chamber is proved. But if the stately portal was to remain for ever visible, then its framing and crowning, and also the slabs closing the relieving space, as well as the upper parts, must be artistically adorned ; in other words, such tombs were furnished with a facade. This was the form and arrangement of the two largest beehive-graves at Mycenae, of that of Orchomenos, probably also of that of Pharis. On the other hand, the excavations at Menidi and the Heraeon have shown, that the portals of all tombs lacking this distinctive feature in their lintels and thresholds, were blocked up with quarry- stones and clay mortar, in order that the approach might be filled up. Besides the two last-named, this also applies to the four smaller tombs at Mycenae, which lie W. and N.W. of the town-hill; none of them had a faqade. It is well known that these peculiar buildings were long explained in various ways, sometimes as treasure-houses, sometimes as Chthonian shrines, and, according to vulgar analogies, even as well-chambers. They can never have XXXii PAUSANIAS’ VISIT TO MYCENAE. served the first or third of these uses, for never has a well oi watercourse been found in them, whilst their number and scattered position about Mycenae excludes all possi- bility of their being treasuries. No prince ever kept his trea- sures outside the circuit-wall of his fortress, and therefore the so-called Treasury of Orchomenos, distant ii km. from the Acropolis, cannot, in the ordinary sense of the word, have been the treasury of Minyas, though in Pausamas’ days this title was already fixed upon it by tradition. The origin of the name can be guessed, when we compare the splendid architectural results of the excavation of Orcho- menos with the notice of Pausanias (ix. 38, 2). Beside the beehive-chamber, Dr. Schliemann found a richly-decorated side-chamber cut into the rock, which could be separately closed. This circumstance, as well as the splendid decora- tions of the side chamber, lead us to regard it as the tomb of the founder of the city (either Minyas or Orchomenos), the more so as Pausanias mentions the tombs of Minyas and Hesiod immediately after the Treasury, the structure of which he characterizes very well. Hence we may regard the beehive-chamber as the Heroon of the founder, which, for the purpose of worship, had always to remain accessible, and which, from its original or later furnishing with costly heirlooms or votive gifts, gave rise to the erroneous legend of a treasury. The same explanation probably applies to the Treasury of Hyrieus, to which clung, in the time of Pausanias, the old Egyptian builder’s legend of its having been plundered by the architects Trophonius and Agamedes. It is only in this century that the false description has been further extended to the largest beehive -tomb at Mycenae, which has been called the Treasury of Atreus. Pausanias is innocent of this ; his account even contradicts it. The traveller comes to the citadel-walls, passes through the Lions’ Gate, and sees under the ruins of the citadel, besides the artificial well called Perseia, the subterranean treasuries of Atreus and his sons (II., 16, 6). It is then DISTRIBUTION OF THE ATRIDxE GRAVES. XXXlll only that his way leads him to the graves of the Atridae, six of which he mentions by name ; adding the express remark, that the last tomb— that of Klytaemnestra and JEgisthus — lay some distance from the city wall, as both were thought unworthy of being buried where Agamemnon and those murdered with him were reposing. From this I draw two conclusions. First, that Pausanias considered his description of the citadel completed when he came to examine the graves of the Atridae. Secondly, that five of these graves lay within the city walls, — namely, those of Atreus, Agamemnon, Eurymedon, the children of Kas- sandra, and Elektra. Now, there are still extant, on the slope of the hill adjoining the fortress to the S.W., six tholoi (vaulted structures), one of which — the north-western one — lies lowest and furthest outside,*' while the two grandest were built close to the citadel on the declivity, and adorned with splendid faqades. From this, the obvious conclusion seems to me perfectly justified, that in these six peculiar structures we not only still possess, in their main parts, the tombs of the Atridae period, which Pausanias saw and described as such, but that we may also designate the two beehive-tombs on the E. slope as the graves of Atreus and Agamemnon, owing to their select position beside the old approach to the fortress, as well as on account of their size and costly building. In accordance with the sequence mentioned by Pausanias, the northern tomb would thus have to be fixed as that of Atreus, the southern as that ot x\gamemnon. Again, of the remaining three, one surpasses the two others in technical execution, in size, in material, and in select position. This is the Tholos, situated only room, from the Lions’ Gate on the N.'VV . slope of the saddle between the town and fortress hills, and which, even * The city wall certainly included the upper well of Charvati, and therefore probably ran along the west side, following the hill curve pretty closely at a height of 166 m. (above the sea) as far as the northern ravine. Cf. Steffen, Karten veil Mykenai , Plate 2. C xxxiv COMPARATIVE MEASUREMENTS OF TOMBS. on account of its favoured site, may be set down as being, in all likelihood, that of Electra. This assumption again corresponds accurately to the enumeration of Pausanias. For the tourist coming out of the citadel, it was the most natural course, by using the old approach to the Castle, to pass first round the eastern, and then round the western slope of the town hill, and so to end with the tomb of Electra near the Lions’ Gate. The tomb of zEgisthus and Klytaemnestra, lying far away outside the city wall, thus naturally fell into the last place of the peregrination. Hence we obtain the following series : at the east slope (i) Atreus, (2) Agamemnon; at the west slope, (3) Eury- medon ; near it, to the west, (4) the children of Kassandra ; (5) Electra; and 540 m. to the west of that grave, (6) Klytaemnestra and iEgisthus. Now, is it mere accident that of the four tombs on the W. slope, No. 4 is by far the poorest in workmanship, and the smallest in size? As a proof of this statement, I adduce the only point which, owing to the blocking up of the tombs, we can at present bring forward, beyond the examination of the material and technique. I mean the comparison of the upper width of the portals in ten beehive-tombs. The width in the clear, in them, is as follows : Orchomenos . . 2-47111. Tomb at the Heneon 1-65111. Tomb of Atreus . . 2-4601. Tomb of Eurymedon i-6om. Tomb of Agamemnon . 2-42111. Tomb at Menidi (pro- Tomb of Electra . 2-3301. bably) . . . 1-5301.* Tomb at Pharis . . 1-8301. Tomb of the children: Tomb of Klytaemnestra 1-71 ni. only . . . 1-3001. We see, from this, the close relation of the measurements of the tombs of Atieus, Agamemnon, and Electra, and what a great contrast, as regards measurement, is offered by the children’s tomb. Its isolated position, also, is surely not without significance. Now, although the questions here raised can only be An exact statement is wanting. THE BEEHIVE-TOMB OF MENIDI. XXXV finally settled after the excavation of all the tholoi at Mycenae, yet so much is already certain, that treasuries are out of the' question, since Tiryns has yielded its evidence— that is, since the remarkable structures in its circuit walls (galleries, magazines, cisterns, &c.), described in this book, have been brought to light. W hat Pausanias saw in the ruins of Mycenae, and admired as the subterranean trea- suries of Atreus and his sons, were not the beehive-graves, but iu x ta-posited vaulted chambers within the quaintly massive structure of the walk, similar to those at Tiryns. And here I may further support my view by bringing the fact to mind, that the so-called treasure of Priam, as well as the larger finds of precious metal at Troy, were dis- covered in like places, namely, close to, or in, the fortress wall: a striking evidence that people used such fireproof and concealed places either permanently, or temporarily — in times of danger— as treasuries. Hence the record ol Pausanias concerning Mycenae rests on a true basis; but his brevity, and the misleading analogy of the Treasury of Minyas, have led to frequent misunderstanding of him. The substantial distinction between treasuries and beehive- tombs rendered it necessary for me to discuss again this much-commented passage. The beehive-tomb of Menidi has the oldest archi- tectural character, either because it is really the earliest ot those known to us up till now, or because, from want ot means, it was made in a cheap and rude way of rubble lime- stone. Besides the small dimensions — diameter, 8*35 m. ; width of the approach, 3 m. ; lower width of portal, 1-55 m. the first theory would be supported by the absence ot all chiselling, and by the fact that the tomb is embedded, not in a rocky slope, but in an earth hill ; also, that there is no pavement, and that the requisite external impermea- bilisation has been much neglected. Most significant, moreover, are the different ways in which the relieving of the lintels has been managed: outside by means of several XXXVI SUPERIORITY OF THE HERTON TOMB. slabs laid one over the other, and separated by empty spaces ; inside by a trapezoid gap, closed with stones. Those outside slabs look like a reminiscence of wooden tie- beams, from an older manner of building, working with different materials. In all these respects the beehive-tomb at the Herason is superior, although the dromos (approach) is of the same width, and the diameter not much greater. In particular, that tomb produces a better effect by the solid stone work in the dromos walls and the portal. Whilst the supporting walls of the approach are, from the very starting-point, at first made of small, hard, poros-stones with mortar, we come, further in, upon carefully cut, oblong, and cubic blocks, with broadly marked mortar-jointings — just as in northern granite buildings. The walls themselves slightly project, from above, towards the interior. The portal, narrowing a little towards the top, is built of clean-cut square blocks, with a double fascia in front, and three lintel stones of breccia, lying one behind the other ; the hinder- most of which attains the considerable weight of 7800 kg. In the entry there is rude rubble masonry, owing to the walling-up of the tomb, which was no doubt intended from the first, and carried out later. But in the circular chamber the work again improves, although the pointing is not so carefully done as that of the dromos. At the same time a thorough outer impermeabilisation is obtained by means of broken stones in clay-mortar, and the floor paved with pebbles. The whole structure, in spite of its modest treatment, has a certain air of distinction, as compared with the coarse, rustic production at Menidi. A still higher stage is represented by the Atreus-tomb at Mycenae, the excavation of which has not been com- pleted. This is all the more regrettable, as probably the decorative members of the faqade are here more fully pre- served, than in the neighbouring tomb of Agamemnon, which was early rifled. Being of almost the same size, and THE ATREUS-TOMB AT MYCENAE. XXXV11 similarly furnished with a permanent approach, it yet differs from it by the absence of a side-chamber, and by the use of smaller stones in the tholos. It is, nevertheless, a costly and important monumental structure, in which, for example, are preserved the cleanly cut covering stones on the supporting wall — a proof, if such were still needed, that the approach was never meant to be blocked up, and in itself a valuable help in determining the plane angle of in- flection of the earth hill. The facade is built, in exemplary style, of polished breccia blocks, and simply but artistically arranged. The wall strips, slightly projecting at both sides, joined above by a slab, and crowned by a bipartite epistyle, form the frame all round. There are embedded in it, above, the triangular relieving space; below, the doubly framed door, which gradually narrows a little. The triangular hollow space was closed outside by thick slabs of red marble, and is still now completely walled up within by rows of flat square slabs, so that, in presence of this fact, all notion of an original lighting by means of windows must be abandoned. The relieving triangle rests on a lintel of leek-green marble ; while, instead of the head- moulding of the door, there appears a projecting slab oi blue-grey marble, on which, frieze-like, there is cut, in flat relief, the front side of a beam-roof made of round poles. Right and left, this roof is bordered by widely overhanging abacus-slabs of breccia, which bore some plastic ornament (a very rude lion-head of grey trachyte, which I saw in the Museum at Charvati in 1878, might come from here), and is supported beneath by embedded columns. Parts of them have been found, consisting of dark-grey alabaster, and fluted like Doric work. Unfortunately, the capitals have not yet been recovered, and the bases, which are certainly there, are not yet laid bare. The embedded pillars, as the impressions in the walls show, tapered slightly downward, and were of very slender proportions, reminding us of wooden buildings. The lintel of the door is formed xxxvm THE TOMB OF AGAMEMNON. of three stones ; in the centre one are the pivot holes for the door-wings, which opened inwards. The inmost block projects far into the wall on both sides, and joins a stone- course of the same height, running right through, and made of thirteen blocks, which, being provided with several skew-notches, form a real tie-beam. The remaining square blocks are very much lower, and, speaking exactly, cut like slabs. Including that larger stone layer, twenty-five courses are visible ; the upper rows have disappeared, and the lower are not yet uncovered. In the upper courses the depth of the blocks is i’30 m. ; and behind them comes, as protection from rain-water, a coat of clay mortar mixed with fragments of stone. In the interior there are no nail- holes for a metal-coating. In the front, there are plain traces of the enormous pressure to which the head beams have been exposed, on account of the relieving hollow space. The corbelled stone-courses of the relieving trian- gular space have broken the front upper lintel at both ends, and this break has extended down through almost all the courses of the inner fascia. The tomb of Agamemnon represents the highest stage of the tholoi at Mycenae, not only in plan, but also in structure and design of faqade ; for, despite much similarity to, or even agreement with, the Atreus-tomb, the workman- ship here is very much more solid, and the adornment by far more splendid. Here, the constructive power and rich experience of the architect appear quite a match for the resources of the prince. One point only surprises us : it is the curious plainness of the roomy rock chamber (6*50 m. square), with a hardly indicated plinth, half-smoothed walls, and similarly treated roof. Was this intended as a contrast, or was the builder hindered by sudden death from finishing the tomb ? Two low oblong plinths, like basement stones in profile, are the last enigmatical remains of the former decoration. The effect of the conical chamber is imposing, in MECHANICAL POWER OF THE ARCHITECT. XXXIX spite of the absence of all architectural divisions. The room makes the impression of a natural vault, simply by its proportions, its disposition, and its texture. Perfect work- manship corresponds to materials of rare excellence ; and at the same time the enormous inner stone of the lintel affords documentary proof of the mechanical power at the architect’s command in those days. A clean-cut block, weighing 122,000 kg., or more than six times as much as the largest block in the citadel of Tiryns, tells the practised eye a great deal, and suggests many questions besides. Where was it quarried ; how dressed on all sides ; by what means was it brought to this height, and at last safely laid on its supports ? A most extraordinary spending of time and strength is contained in this mass, which has been Iving firmly in its place for three thousand years. The thirty-four courses within, including the key-stone, are of various heights, also divided very differently in square blocks ; yet they are perfectly joined, and care has been taken to have neat upright joints everywhere. The chief effect depended on the perfect smoothness of the wall ; but, as special orna- ment, there were two frieze-strips of bronze-sheets (probably gilt), set on the fifth and ninth courses. A complete coating of metal, such as has often been supposed, was not applied. Only the little double door leading from the thoios to the rock tomb, had a similar covering ; and thicker bronze plates seem to have covered the greater threshold, and to have made a special frame for the principal door. Clear traces of the same manner of decoration with metal ornament, are also preserved on the outer side of the lintel. We have, unfortunately, not sufficient material for a graphic reconstitution of the stately portal. The front surface, built of polished breccia blocks, was once coated, in its upper part, with slabs of red, green, and white marble ; but the greater portion of this splendid incrustation is gone. According to technical indications, it was only added after the completion of the building, and clamped on, so that it xl DOWNWARD TAPERING PILLARS. could easily be removed. The greed of subsequent genera- tions did so, and partly dragged it off to neighbouring churches. Precious fragments are now in London, Athens, Munich, and Berlin. It remains, therefore, doubtful for the present, whether the same important faqade system, with pilaster-strips, was here architecturally carried out — that is, in full plastic existence — as on the tomb of Atreus, or only indicated by painting on the stone. Double, delicately- grooved fascias surround the lofty portal ; while here, too, the outer frame was formed by two slender, embedded pillars of dark-grey alabaster, the shafts of which, richly orna- mented with sharp zigzags and spirals, w'ere dowelled into very low, rebated, oblong base stones. That they tapered downwards — a point which has been much disputed — is certain. Equally so we can demonstrate, from the identity of the clamping holes, that the architectural member known to us since the beginning of this century, which consists of a leaf-covered cavetto, and an echinus richly adorned with rhomboid and spiral friezes, together with an abacus, was not the base, but the capital of these embedded pillars. On its polished back side it bears a pattern-like division of clearly-cut, parallel, vertical and horizontal lines, which reminds us of the like practice of Egyptian sculptors. It is obvious — and this is a point of special importance — that the embedded pillars of both tomb faqades are closely related to the pillar of the heraldic relief on the Lions’ Gate. In both of them we find the shafts dowelled in below, and thickening upwards ; and a form of capital, which is the basis of a distinct variety of the old Doric capital. From a comparison with the Atreus-tomb, with its indicated roof of round poles, we can recognise in the little cylinders (not plates — as appears clearly from looking at them sideways) over the capital of the Lions’ Gate pillar, nothing but a reduced reproduction of that important, shade-giving, architectural member of the princely dwelling. In any case, the close agreement demonstrates that the celebrated Lions’ THE ORCHOMENOS TOMB. xli relief, and consequently the gate and adjoining S. wall, belong to the same epoch as the beehive-graves, and that, therefore, the Atridae were the extenders and adorners of the citadel, whilst the first foundation was due to the Persidee. The last of the tombs which I have to discuss, is that of Orchomenos.* It is only a little smaller than that of Agamemnon, and resembles it in possessing a side chamber for burial purposes, but is distinguished from it both in material and the peculiar construction of the special grave chamber. The structure is composed of moderately-sized blocks of dark-grey marble brought from Lebadeia, and executed in such a manner that not only the dvomos and tholos walls, but also the walls and roof of the moderately large grave chamber are made of it. The founder s evident and manifestly exhibited intention was, that his tomb, by its chisel work, should receive a stamp as thoroughly uniform as it was to be highly artistic. For this object, a wide shaft had to be sunk from above for the proposed Thalamos in the rocky slope, down to its floor, so as to build up in clay mortar, from within, the surrounding walls which would be able to serve as supports for the marble roof slabs, whilst at the same time they could be them- selves coated with ornamental marbles. The roof, consist- ing of four slabs, was treated as a uniform whole ; namely, in delicate relief, like a spread-out carpet, with centre pattern and very broad outer bands. The main ornament was of spiral maeanders, with fan-flowers in the corners, while the borders of the centre-piece, as well as of the whole carpet, were formed of rich rosettes. Special precautions were required to prevent any collapse of this splendid ceiling by pressure of the earth from above. How this important supplementary construction was managed, is not yet known. But it is a fact, that it served its purpose * Insufficiency of materials prevents my entering upon a discussion of those of Pharis and Laminospito, near Volo. xlli BRONZE PLATES OF ORCHOMENOS TOMB. for more than three thousand years ; the regrettable partial collapse having only taken place a few years ago. The considerable expense of time and trouble demanded by this structure, which for the present must be regarded as a unique one, is doubtless closely connected, in the first place, with the choice of the valuable material, the fine quality of which acted as an inducement for chiselling work. More- over, there cannot be any doubt that the founder thought no sacrifice too great to leave a monument for posterity, which was to perpetuate his name, and to afford a lasting and speaking evidence of his wealth and artistic taste. It is, therefore, very probable that later generations at Orchomenos, justly proud of this monument, granted the honour of a tomb in the old royal Thalamos to Hesiod, the great bard of Bceotia ; for Pausanias speaks of the graves of Minyas and Hesiod immediately after his description of the Thesauros, and several finds in the beehive-chamber seem to be apt to support this supposition. There have been found distinct traces of the splendid adornment of the beehive- chamber with bronze plates. We gather from them that this kind of decoration was used more extensively — and at the same time with a greater variety of pattern — than in the tholos of Agamemnon. That such a splendid structure had a rich faqade like the portal fronts of the Atridae tombs, may be assumed as certain ; but the account of the excavations, so far as it is before us, leaves this important point unexplained. Inside, only the fragments of a small pillar, said to be like the relief pillar on the Lions’ Gate, and also several thin marble slabs with spiral ornaments were found ; both perhaps remains of an incrustation of the faqade. If it follows with certainty from these observations that the architects of that early time had command of great re- sources in the matter of structures, architectural members, and ornaments capable of further development, we are still more struck when finding that some of the motives, members, and decorations, adopted and worked by them REPRODUCTIONS OF THE LIONS’ GATE RELIEF. xllil on a large scale, were also used in the manufacture of obiects of luxury and ornaments on a much smaller, even a minute, scale. Such is the design of the Lions’ Gate relief, which reappears repeatedly, with altered position of the lions, on an ivory dagger-handle found at Menidi. So with a design consisting of a kerbed post and two half- rosettes leaning against it, which is the fundamental orna- ment of the so-called kyanos frieze at Tiryns, and which existed in similar size in the palace of Mycenae, as is shown by two fragments from Mycenae. So with a cast plate of glass, which was probably used for the decoration of drapery ILlike enamel in modern dress— which turns up at Menidi. So, also, the peculiar architectural members under the pillar of the Lions’ Gate, which remind us of stone seats, have served as a model in making hne gold ornaments and graceful glass plates, as is shown by specimens from Spata and Menidi. Finally, the downward-tapering embedded pillars of the Atridae tombs, and of the Lions Gate, w^ere frequently used as types for furniture and glass ornaments. There are three ivory specimens, in light and in vigorous proportions, from Spata ; another of glass, in the form of a slender pilaster, from Menidi. A further model, in which the embedded pillar appears as the separating member between rows of long-legged sphinxes, is afforded by a curious ivory plate from Menidi. Few as these finds, and the results deducible therefrom, are, they yet deserve careful notice. Never, in the history of the art of building, has a new phase in architectonic development occurred in consequence of new utensils or ornaments having been brought by trade into a country . But inversely, when the greater architectonic evolution was very far advanced, or had completed us couise, the wmrker of small objects of art-industry or house-implements appropriated to himself the “ language of forms which had been gradually elaborated in works carried out on a grand scale; adapting it, in a minor degree, and in somewhat changed manner, to his own ends. How ; e\er, as we know xiiv AMALGAMATION OF TWO BUILDING SYSTEMS. from experience that a long period of time is required before such a process of gradual adaptation is realised, we may conclude, that the architecture the striking remains of which have come down to us partly in the original, partly in imitations of artistic handicraft, must have gone through a long course of evolution, and that it cannot have been confined to a narrow area. There are but very few places in Greece and Asia Minor, which, on account of their architectural ruins and the discoveries made there, could be touched upon here, rather in a cursory than in an exhaustive way ; and yet they have furnished a rich harvest for the knowledge of the oldest architecture in those lands. With astonishment we see the different epochs opening out, more and more, before our eyes. A real primitive architecture is nowhere to be found ; even in Troy the first steps of development are long passed. Within certain limits, the materials are already under full control, and worked variously, according to the available means and the ends required. A moderate, but yet very fruitful, store of detail forms is already gathered, so as to cover the gradually elaborated shapes of rooms with significant adornments full of meaning. In some peculiarly favoured places, the domain of the higher monu- mental architecture has already been entered upon with decisive success. In the face of such extended and yet closely connected achievements, which form a consistent whole, the attempt to search for the roots from which arose this early bloom of the art of building, is doubly attractive. Among the architectural monuments here discussed, the highest stage is represented by the beehive graves ; and among them, by those with faqades. In my opinion they are a remarkable, though a too early, attempt to amalgamate two opposed systems of building, viz. that of wooden roofs and that of beehive-roofs. The faqade in relief is, in design, nothing but the schematically reduced type of the pillared, shady vestibule of the Men’s Hall — a type most PHRYGIAN ORIGIN OF ARCHITECTURE IN GREECE, xlv clearly recognisable in the Atreus-tomb, and indicated in closer form — only, sketch-like — by the Lions’ Gate relief. This Prothyron, which certainly was held to be the main part and feature of the Prince’s palace — many allusions in Greek tragedy point to it — was meant to be combined with the beehive-chamber, in order to mark it outwardly as a royal tomb. This was the sum and substance of the archi- tectural program at Mycenae and Orchomenos. But still more important is the information we obtain from an analysis of the second system. I think, indeed, I can see in the tholos and its drcmos the last monumental form of a most ancient national mode of architecture that ol 1 hrygia. Vitruvius reports from Greek sources that the Phrygians dwelling in valleys were wont to construct their habitations artificially underground, in that, over an excavated hill of earth, they set up posts in conical form, which they bound together at the top. They covered these posts with reeds and brushwood, and then put upon the whole the gieatest heap of earth it would bear. The entrance was made by cutting in passages from below ; and these dwellings, he said, were very warm in winter and very cool in summer. The main features of this construction are repeated by Xenophon and Diodorus with regard to the Armenians, who were akin, in race, to the Phrygians ; and even to-day we find similar constructions in the same districts. Now, the beehive-tomb is composed of a deeply cut-in approach and a central chamber, afterwards made subter- ranean by heaping earth upon it. So striking an agreement is surely the result, not of accident, but of tradition. As men’s pretensions advanced, the wooden posts were first omitted from the primitively simple, conical hut covered with earth ; for they were always perishable and liable to fire : they were replaced by thick walls of sun-dned bricks, with wooden tie-beams. Still later, the bricks were re- placed by stone walls : first in rude layers of slabs, as at Menidi; then in polished blocks, as at Orchomenos and xlvi ORIENTAL INFLUENCE IN THE FAQADE SYSTEM. Mycenae — so that every reminiscence disappeared of the old earth-and-wood structure which had been the starting- point. The peculiar form of the primitive dwelling only was maintained as the proper tomb type for distinguished families and illustrious princes. We do not know when and where the important transi- tion took place from wood to brick building. But as it was certainly in a land of bricks, we may at once think of the broad valley of the Hermos, possessing inexhaustible layers of clay, whose natural central point, the magnificent residence, Sardis, still consisted, in the opening of the fifth century b.c., of clay-houses covered with reeds, which could be as easily destroyed as they dould be rapidly rebuilt. Now, it is from the Hermos valley, from Sipylos, that the rich princely scion, Pelops, came to Greece — as the ancient tale says. His race attained the highest power and celebrity, then and afterwards: the proverbial riches of the Atridag are visible even to-day in the Castle and royal graves of Mycenae. All this, I opine, supports my view, that we have to look upon the beehive- tombs as architectural creations whose fundamental prin- ciple has arisen from the national style of building among the Phrygians, and that the transference of this style to Greek soil is connected with the immigration of distin- guished Phrygian families. The frequently referred-to relief of the Lions’ Gate points to an origin in the same primeval home — now more than ever, since Prof. Ramsay was for- tunate enough to find in great rock-faqades in Phrygia the older and severer prototypes of well-known later derivations from this kind of composition. Whilst the kernel structure of the royal tombs has pre- served, despite all veiling changes, the still easily discernible building methods of an early Greek race, the influence of the Orient appears distinctly in the architectural system of the splendid faqades. It is in particular the pilaster-strips — both in the upper and in the lower part of the Atreus- tomb — as well as their upper connection and crest-work, THE CYCLOPEAN BUILDERS FROM LYCIA. xlvii which point to such Eastern influence. How important a part is played by the system of vertical wall bands in Oriental architecture, is amply known from Assyrian, Per- sian, and Old-Syrian monuments. All the more surprising is the fact, that its transplanting to Mycenae led to no further developments in Greece. It is still an open ques- tion, so far as I know, what was the original home of this faqade system. The embedded pillars — including that of the Lions’ relief — prove by their slender proportions, and their dowel- ling into the threshold, their origin from the building with wood. The same is true of the ceiling made of round wooden beams, twice indicated in relief. We may conclude therefrom, with some certainty, that such ceilings were used in every palace of that day — not only as being prac- tical, but as having the sanction of ages. In this connec- tion, the local legends of Argos deserve special attention, which record explicitly the close relations between Proitos, the founder of Tiryns, and early civilised Lycia. As an exile, this princely scion from Argos is said to have gained the hand of the Lycian king’s daughter. Returning with an army of his father-in-law, he maintained himself in the land; and by means of the expert Cyclopes whom he summoned from Lycia, he built the invincibly strong Castle of Tiryns. His nephew Perseus is said then to have employed the same skilled workmen to build Mycenae. In both places, men afterwards knew of, and showed, Cyclo- pean altars, hearths, vestibules, and walls. Now, Lycia is that part of Asia Minor, in the innumerable tombs of which are perpetuated ceilings of round beams, lying close together, and protruding far out in front. Nay, the same, most archaic, feature is still to be seen now in the structure of their huts. To Lycia, also— apart from this kind of ceiling— the undeniable popular legend ascribes the build- ing of walls with immense blocks of stone, which gradually displaced from fortification architecture the old brick build- xlviii DOUBTFUL ORIGIN OF THE EMBEDDED PILLARS. ing, and led to new developments. But if two countries with kindred populations in Asia Minor transferred to Greece their ancient national styles of building as well as newly acquired methods — of course, not all at once, or in passing, but during a considerable period — there is no difficulty in understanding, how from such rich sources, and with the continual stimulus from splendour-loving courts, there arose a brilliant epoch of architecture which reached its perfection at Mycenae, owing to the political power and greatness of the Atridae, but which is also to be presumed as having been in existence at other royal cities — such as Spata, Orchomenos, Hyriae, Larissa in Thessaly, &c. If the origin of round timber ceilings is thus established, we still lack the proof of the origin of the embedded pillars. It is a fact that in no rock-tomb of Lycia have such pillars yet been found as are seen at Mycenae, Spata, and Menidi. Pillars are entirely wanting in the earliest rock-tombs. Only uprights at the corners and on the walls, with some cross-bars, form the constructive design of the tomb, which either stands free, or is constructed in relief. The embedded columns must, therefore, come from another home than Lycia, or be the independent creation of that early epoch. 1 consider the latter view all the more probable, as the most diligent search among our large stock of monumental materials has led, as yet, to the discovery of no analogy what- ever in other styles of architectonic art, and the connection with the decorative manner of the stelce above the Persidae tombs, and with a great many objects discovered in them, is unmistakable. Their tapering downward remains a mystery, and its explanation is the more difficult, as free pillars of that period have not yet been found, and the embedded pillars may possibly depend on the then accepted laws of relief style. On mechanical grounds there is no objection to a moderate tapering downward of wooden EGYPTIAN INFLUENCES IN DECORATION. xlix supports ; and, practically speaking, some additional room was even gained thereby for thoroughfare especially if very broad epistyles were considered necessary for the laying of the roof beams, and hence large diameters were required above. But perhaps neither of these suggestions hits the real solution. Perhaps it was a mere temporary vagary of taste, like that which created, within the stiff: hieratic art-rules of Egypt, nay, even during a good artistic epoch, in the temple of Kiarnak, those curious downward tapering stone pillars, with their flower capitals reveised in the same way.* There are other points of resemblance to Egypt. The beautifully chiselled ceiling in the grave-chamber at Orcho- menos, treated like a carpet, and adorned with spiral maeanders, besides fan-shaped flowers and stripes of rosettes for borders, is clearly derived from Egyptian prototypes— however, as it appears, not directly, but indirectly. The Palace of Tiryns possessed the same kind of wall-decoration in many places, though applied as a frieze, and worked out in simpler manner in detail— as in rosettes. Hence this palace, or some other similar one, may easily have served as a model for the ceiling at Orchomenos. Not less important is the decorative border of the kyanos-frieze with blue smalt at Tiryns, because this technique , of which traces have been found at Mycenae, was familiar in Egypt from the oldest times, and treated with such careful preference, that the materials required for it became precious articles of trade. As the Phoenicians managed their import, it is possible that this whole decorative stvle came through that nation to Greece. But still, Egypt wall always have to be looked upon as the starting- point— and not Babylon, where the Egyptian invention of ornamenting with smalt was early adopted because the kyanos-frieze at Tiryns is connected with stone woik and * Cf. Lepsius, Denzmaler, I., PI. 31. d 1 CRETAN INFLUENCES. chiselling, not with the special formations of brick archi- tecture. How are such important relations to be explained: We may, first of all, think of the early settlements of Phoenicians at the mouths of the Nile ; then, of the con- tinued wars which Libyan tribes, allied with northern coast and island people, carried on against Egypt since the 14th century before our era. That long-continued peaceful intercourse, as well as these sudden warlike encounters which once brought the invaders even as far as Memphis, surely held out much inducement for becoming acquainted with Egyptian architecture — both in buildings of sun- dried bricks and in buildings of quarried stone. But when, as we know in the case of talented races, the slumbering instincts for culture are once awakened, then valuable booty, such as the daggers and swords, the cups and bowls from the Mycenaean pit-graves — whose Egyptian origin is beyond doubt, owing to their peculiar and highly-developed technique — would permanently foster and spread this artistic tendency. There can, moreover, have been no lack of intermediate localities and people, to bring about such a slow and long continuing transference, lasting for generations — now, according to the favour or disfavour ot circumstances, in an increasing, now in a lessening degree. And this sup- position brings us back to Tiryns and its above-mentioned connection with Lycia, if we remember that, according to all tradition, the oldest culture of that land came from Crete — that is to say, from an island lying at the gates of Egypt and Libya, and therefore destined, before all other islands, to spread throughout the archipelago the elements of civilisation of the highly developed kingdom of the Pharaohs, which Crete had acquired either in war or peace. Hence this island, though an accurate examination and classing of its oldest monuments has not yet taken place, comes within the sphere of our present reflections. Here, COMPARISON WITH ARCHITECTURE IN TROY. ll in Crete, it was, that by a wise combination of tribes as lit for culture as they were competent at sea, the earliest national power of Greek antiquity was founded. To Crete is attached the rare title of fame of “the 100-citied, as a speaking proof of the early culture and the flourish- ing wealth of an island state ruled by strong hands. With the venerable name of Minos is connected indis- solubly the name of Daedalos, the oldest hero of Greek architecture ; and from here, commonwealths were founded, and cults established. A structure belonging to that latter category is, it seems to me, still extant. The remarkable grotto in Delos, at the foot of Kynthos, which I am inclined to regard as a shrine of Eileithyia, is probably a branch foundation from Crete in the heyday of its power ; for the structural system of the very peculiar roof, com- posed in masterly manner of ten great counterfort stones, certainly came from Egypt, whose gigantic buildings, with their enormous superincumbent weight, compelled men at an early time to solve that kind of constructive problem. This roof, which was able to carry a small mountain, proves what men had seen and learned in Egypt. It affords another useful support for the theory, started by others, of a very early influence from Egypt— a theory derived from gems, as well as from the discovery of beautiful metal-work, of an ornamented ostrich egg, &c., found in the Perseid graves. Compared with the architecture of Mycenae, Orcho- menos, and Tiryns, that of Troy is distinctly inferior. Still, with all its gaps, it is for this reason very instructive, because the existing remains — looked at as a whole gire us an older phase of architectural development than the ret known monuments on Greek soil. 1 his is true^ of the walls and gates, as well as of the palace of the ruier. At the same time, however, our judgment must at present rest rather on the technical than the artistic aspects of Trojan architecture. For, as regards the latter, it is much to be d i Ill OLDEST CITADELS OF TROY AND TIRYNS ALIKE. regretted that neither royal graves, nor architectonic details were found in Troy. On the other hand, at the side of the characteristic system of fortifications (with its dry moat, its escarped wall substructions, its flanking towers, &c.), the antique building method of forming all the walls — in citadel and house — of sun-dried bricks with wooden tie-beams, is of very peculiar importance. First, because all these features prevail in Egypt, both in the Delta and in Upper Egypt; secondly, because the walls of the palace at Tiryns still were of a like or a similar structure. This method, then, was widely used, and long maintained from practical as well as economical grounds. Its application at Tiryns, too, is the more easily explained when we remember the fact above mentioned, that the present citadel at Tiryns certainly followed upon an older and simpler one, which can hardly have been very different from that found at Troy. There was indeed no kind of building so serviceable, as this, for the first provisional securing of any newly occupied point on the coast, as soon as the two materials, clay and wood, could be found in the neighbourhood. Hence we may justify the conjecture, that the numerous, absolutely necessary forts established on the Greek coasts and islands tor the protection of Phoenician depots, must have been of an architectural kind not requiring expensive and tedious stone masonry, but that the prompt and cheap building system of sun-dried bricks, with wooden beams, was chosen. From such a foundation, a citadel of a higher class, than that of Troy, might easily be developed. It will hardly be denied that all these briefly discussed structures must be older than the Trojan war; the most fully developed of them, contemporaneous with it, or very little younger. To go further than this general chronology, the closer determination of which is still in dispute, seems premature in the present state of our researches into the monumental records. The paths, on which we must pro- ceed, are marked out clearly enough. We want continued LIMITED PHOENICIAN INFLUENCE. liii new discovery of materials, and their methodical and critical sifting. Besides the pressing need of excavating the citadel of Mycenae, the oldest architectural monuments of Lycia and Crete, especially, must be surveyed, and brought together for comparison, in order to facilitate the solution of the all-important question, how far the Phoenicians were instructors of the Greeks in monumental architecture. I do not deny this influence, but can only admit it to a limited extent for the oldest period, whose architecture had here to be discussed, because hitherto no buildings can be shown an v where on the Syro-Phoenician coast or the islands, which can compete with the peculiarly severe organism of the beehive-tombs, and the masterly arrangement of the palace at Tiryns. How very far, indeed, does the latter surpass all known ground-plans of Assyrian Royal Palaces in simplicity and clearness ! I see in these early creations of architecture, on the soil of Hellas, the conscious expres- sion of the old Greek mind, and evidences, as genuine as they are indelible, of the primitive national connection of the tribes on both shores of the iEgean Sea. F. ADLER Berlin, 31st July , 1885 . Postscript. It is only since reaching this place, after concluding this Preface, that I see, from Dr. Dorpfelds supplemental accounts, that my conjecture recorded last May, and printed above on p. xi, regarding the use of clay for the bonding of Cyclopean walls, is confirmed by closer investigation. Had this fact been known to me earlier, I should of course have used a different expression. F. ADLER. Pontresina, 16 th August , 1885 . NOTE. My honoured friend, the learned author of the Preface, having expressed the opinion (p. xxvii) that the little necropolis in the Citadel of Mycenae had gradually arisen, I feel it my duty to state that this is an error. I have made the excavations of the royal tombs of Mycenae in the presence, and with the continual superintendence, of two distin- guished archaeologists, the Ephoros (the late General Ephoros of Antiquities), Panagiotis Stamatakis, who had been associated with me by the Greek Government to superintend the works, and of Professor Phendiklis, of the University of Athens. The excavations have shown beyond any doubt, that the bodies could not possibly have been buried gradually, but that all of them must necessarily have beeti buried simul- taneously. I have proved this in my work Mycenae by a most minute account of the internal arrangement of the graves. All my statements are fully corroborated by the Ephoros Stamatakis in his diary, which is to be published by the Greek Archaeological Society. Happily, Professor Phendiklis is still living to confirm them on his part. PIenry Schliemann. CONTENTS. PAGE PREFACE.— By Professor F. Adler ... CHAPTER L— The Excavations 1 II. — Topography and History of Tiryns ... n III. — The Objects of Terra-cotta, Stone, & c., FOUND IN EXCAVATING THE LAYERS OF Debris of the Oldest Settlement in Tiryns ■■■ ••• ••• 55 IV. The Objects found in the D£bris of the Second Settlement of Tiryns 84 1. Vase Paintings with Geometrical Pat- terns ... ••• ••• ••• 9 ° 2. Vases Painted with glossy White Colour 103 3. Vase Paintings, with representations of Birds or Stags . . ... io 7 4. Vase Paintings, representing Marine Animals ••• ••• io 9 5. Vase Paintings, with Spiral Ornamenta- tion ... • ••• 110 6. Pottery of Various Kinds ... IJ 5 7. Pottery with Architectural Designs ... 127 8. Vases with Various Ornamentation ... 131 9. Various Objects of Terra-cotta ... 140 10. Idols of Baked Clay ... ••• ••• I 5 ° 11. Objects of Metal ... ••• 12. Objects of Stone ••• 1 7 13. Objects of Ivory, Wood, and Glass ... 176 n V. — The Buildings of Tiryns. By Dr. Wilhelm Dorpfeld ... ••• ••• I 77 A. — The Citadel and its Wall ... ••• 1 7 7 Ivi CONTENTS. PAGE CHAPTER V. — B. — The Palace in the Upper Citadel ... 189 1. The Gate of the Upper Citadel ... 192 2. The Great Propylseum of the Upper Citadel ... ... ... ... 194 3. The Great Front Court ... ... 199 4. The Gate into the Men’s Court ... 20T 5. The Court of the Men’s Apartments... 203 6. The Men’s Apartment ... ... 208 7. The Bath-room and other Apartments West of the Megaron ... ... 229 8. The Court of the Women’s Apartments 236 9. The Women’s Hall and its Vestibule 239 10. The Thalamoi in the North-east corner of the Palace... ... ... ... 242 rr. The Outer Court XXX, with its Ad- joining Rooms ... ... ... 244 12. The Roof and the Upper Storey ... 248 C. — The Architectural Remains of an older Settlement ... ... ... ... 250 D. — Building Material and Construction ... 253 1. The Walls ... ... ... ... 253 2. The Parastades (Pilasters) ... ... 263 3. The Pillars ... ... ... ... 269 4. The Roof and Roofing ... ... 272 5. The Floor ... ... ... ... 275 6. The Doors ... ... ... ... 276 E. — Isolated Fragments of Architecture ... 284 1. The Kyanos Frieze ... ... ... 284 2. Sculptured Spiral Band ... ... 292 3. Doric Capital ... ... ... ... 293 4. Archaic Antefix ... ... ... 295 F. — The Wall-paintings ... ... ... 296 G. — Later Remains on the Citadel ... ... 307 n VI. — The Excavations of the Year 1885. By Dr. Wilhelm Dorpfeld ... ... ... 309 A.— The Citadel Wall ... .. ... 312 1. The Out- Wall of the Palace ... ... 314 2. The Out- Wall of the Fore-court F ... 316 3. The Enclosure-Wall of the Central Citadel (Z) ... ... ... ... 326 4. The Side Ascent to the Upper Citadel 327 5. The Main Ascent to the Castle ... 332 CONTENTS. CHAPTER VI.— B. — Technical Remarks C. — Supplements to Chapter V. 1. The Altar in the Courtyard of the Men’s Apartments ... 2. The Gate of the Men’s Court 3. The Megaron of the Men 4. A Drain 5. The Roof-tiles of Terra-cotta 6. Additional Wall-paintings £). Separate Finds in 1885. By Dr. Ernst Fabncius g The Find of Terra-cotta Objects made at the South-East Corner of the Castle APPENDIX.— Mycenaean Amber imported from the Baltic. By Otto Helm Ivii PAGE 335 337 337 34 ° 340 341 34 1 34i 344 357 368 373 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. NO. PAGE 1. Hand-made Terra- cotta Vase with double pierced excres- cences at the sides ... ... ••• 5 ^ 2. Vase of Green Basalt, with double vertically bored excres- cences at the sides ... ... • • • ■ • • • ■ 59 3. Hand-made one-handled Jug ... ••• ••• 65 4. Jug with projections on the sides, and handle ... ... 66 5. Vessel in the form of two Shells laid together, with white lines of decoration ... ••• ••• ■ 67 6. Basin of Terra-cotta ... ... ••• 67 7. Terra-cotta Vessel with projections right and left 68 8. Fragment of brim of a large Jar ... ... ... 68 9. Fragment of a large Jar ... ... ••• ••• 69 10. Deep Plate of Terra-cotta .. 7 ° 11. Fragment of an Idol of Terra-cotta .. . ... ... • •• 77 12. Object of black Stone ... • •• • •• ••• • • 77 13. Polishing Stone of black Marble, speckled red and white ... 79 14. Polishing Stone of fine reddish Marble 79 15. Polishing or Grindstone of fine black Granite, with white grains ... • • • • • ■ ■ • • • • • • • • • • • 79 16. Embroidering Needle of Bone ... ••• ••• ••• 82 17. Pierced Bead of blue-painted Glass 82 18. Fragment of Vase with Female Figures and Geometrical Patterns ... ••• 95 19. Fragment of a Vase with Cranes and Shells ... 96 20. Fragment of a Vase, with a Man, a Horse, and a Fish ... 99 21. Fragment of Vase with concentric Circles and Crosses ... 101 22. Ram’s Head in Clay ... ••• ••• IQ 6 23. Fragment of a Vase with a Swan ... ••• r °7 24. 25. Vase-Fragments, with representation of the purple shell (Murex) very common in Mycenae, and often found in Tiryns ... ••• ••• ••• I0 9 26. Vessel for baking Cakes ... ••• ••• ••• - IJ 6 27. Goblet ... ••• ••• ••• ir 7 lx LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. NO. PAGE 28. Large Vase ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 118 29. Jug with spout ... ... ... ... ... ... 119 30. Jug with sieve-like spout ... ... ... ... ... 120 3 1 - J u g 120 32. Mug ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 121 33. Fragment of a Vessel ... ... ... ... ... 122 34. Neck of Vase ... ... ... ... ... ... 122 35. Upper part of a Pitcher ... ... ... ... ... 122 36-47. Fragments of Vases ... ... ... ... 124-133 48, 49. Vases ... * 133 50, 51. Vessels 134 52, 53. Vessels with Rosettes ... ... ... ... ... 135 54. Vase-Fragment with Rosette ... ... ... ... 136 55 - J u g 137 56. Vessel ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 138 57. Vessel with tube-shaped spout ... ... ... ... 138 58. Torch-holder... ... ... ... ... ... ... 141 59-61. Vase-Lid with perforated handle ... ... ... 142 62. Dish with Balls shaped like dumplings ... ... ... 143 63. Stand with a Dog ... ... ... ... ... ... 143 64. Stopper of Terra-cotta ... ... ... ... ... 144 65. Object of Clay ... ... ... ... ... ... 144 66. Object of Clay ... ... ... ... ... ... 144 67. Ear of Clay... ... ... ... ... ... ... 144 68. Object of Clay in form of a Foot ... ... ... ... 145 69. Object of Clay with nine penetrations ... ... ... 146 70. Object of Clay ... ... ... ... ... ... 146 71. Cylinder with two perforations ... ... ... ... 147 72. Disc of Clay ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 147 73. Wheel-shaped Clay Ring ... ... ... ... ... 148 74. Wheel-shaped Clay Disc ... ... ... ... ... 148 75. Handle of Clay in form of an animal ... ... ... 149 76. Bread-making figure ... ... ... ... ... 149 77-84. Idols 150-15S 85. Idol with Child on the arm .. . ... ... ... ... 155 86. Upper part of an Idol ... ... ... ... ... 156 87-89. Sitting Idols ... ... ... ... ... 157, 158 90. Lower part of a sitting Idol ... ... ... ... ... 159 91. Sitting Idol ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 159 92. Upper part of an Idol ... ... ... ... ... 159 93. Head of an Idol with Phrygian Cap 159 94,95. Upper parts of Idols ... ... ... ... ... 160 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. Ixi NO. 96. Idol ... 97. Helmeted Warrior of Bronze 98. Bronze Chisel 99. Tool of unknown use 100. Double-edged Battle-axe of Bronze .. . xoi. 102. Little Bronze Saucer 103. Basin of hard Limestone 104-107. Two-edged Knives of Obsidian 108-rn. Arrow-heads of Obsidian 112. Gallery in the Eastern Wall .. . 1 1 3. The Men’s Apartment, with antechamber and vestibule ... T14. Western Antae of the Vestibule of the Megaron 1 15. The Central part of the Pergamos of Troy 1 16 Pattern of the Floor in the Megaron 1 1 7. Plan of the Bath-room ••• • 118. Pipe of Terra-cotta ... 1x9. Door of the Women's Apartment 120. Bronze Sheath for the Pivot of a door 121. Side-door in the Vestibule of Womens Hall 122. Doric Capital. (Front view, section and plan) 123. Archaic Antefix of Terra-cotta. (Front- and side-view) ... 124. The sculptured Ceiling of Orchomenos 125. The Upper Citadel of Tiryns, with the excavations of 1885 126. Transverse Section of the Southern Wall 127. Longitudinal Section of the Southern Wall 128. Ground Plan of the Eastern Wall of Tiryns 129. Ground Plan of the V all of Byrsa ... 130. Transverse Section of the Semicircular projecting Structure at the Western Wall 1 31. Perspective View from the crown of the Semicircular pro- jecting Structure on the Staircase of the lateral ascent... 132. View into the Gallery of the Eastern Wall 133. Stone with a Bore-hole 134. Stone with a Bore-hole 135. Portion of the Western Citadel Wall 136. Portion of the Western Citadel Wall . 137. Ground Plan of the Altar (sacrificial pit) 138. Section of the Sacrificial Pit ” 139. Fragment of Painted Wall-Plaster ... 140. Fragment of Painted Wall-Plastei 14 1. Fragment of Painted Wall- Plaster ... PAGE 162 166 167 167 168 170 172 174 174 184 209 21 1 225 226 230 234 27a 281 282 293 295 299 3°9 3*9 320 324 3 J 4 328 3 2 9 334 33 6 336 33 6 338 339 339 342 342 343 Ixii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. NO. 142. Fragment of Painted Wall-Plaster ... 143. Vase-Fragment with brown parallel lines ... 144. Rosettes of different form ... 145 a and b. Two fragments of an Ornament 146 a and b. Two fragments of an Ornament 147. Legs of a Bird 148. Fragments of two Birds 149. Body of a Bird 150. Fragments of various Animals 15 1 Fragment of a Horse 152. Fragment of a Chariot 153. Vase-Fragment with a Horse-head and Warrior ... 154. Vase-Fragment with Horse-feet 155. Vase-Fragment with a Warrior and a Chariot 156. Idol for suspension ... H7. Terra-cotta Group. Two persons sitting on a couch 158. Weight of Terra-cotta with a Number 159. Archaic Idol ... 160. Archaic Idol. (Side view) ... 161. Sitting Idol of Terra-cotta ... 162. Terra-cotta Figure. Woman with a Pig ... 163. Terra-cotta Figure. Woman with a Pig ... 164 Upper part of a Woman with a Pig 165. Female figure of Terra-cotta 166. Torso of an Archaic Terra-cotta Figure 167 Head with Polos of Terra-cotta 168. Female Head with Diadem .. . 169. Little Bowl ... 170. Cup with two handles 171. Tripod Kettle 172. Little Pan 173. Small Dish ... 174. Basket with openings in the body of Terra-cotta ... 175. Vessel with three openings in the Dody 176. Vessel with two handles 177. Little Vase with two hanoles 178. Flat Plate in form of a Flower PAGE 343 346 349 35° 35i 35i 351 35 2 35 2 35 2 353 353 353 354 35 6 356 35 6 359 360 360 361 361 363 36.3 363 3 6 4 3 6 4 365 365 365 365 366 366 366 366 367 3 6 7 LIST OF PLANS AND PLATES. View of the Southern portion of the Plain of Argos, with the Ruins of the Palace of Tiryns in the foreground.. .Frontispiece. To face Map of Argolis * ase 1 Plate I. The Citadel of Tiryns. After the excavations by Dr. Schliemann, 1884. Designed and drawn by Dr. W. Dorpfeld l 7 % Plate II. The Upper Citadel of Tiryns. Surveyed in May, 1884, by Dr. W. Dorpfeld “ 180 Plate III. Acropolis of Tiryns I ^4 Plate IV. Frieze inlaid with Glass-paste. Sculptured Or- nament. Frieze from Mycense. Glass-paste from Menidi 2I ^ Plate V. Wall Painting in the Palace of Tiryns “ 232 Plate VI. a , Gold Ornament from Mycenae ; b , Ivory Or- nament from Menidi ; c, d, e, Wall Paintings in the Palace of Tiryns. “ 256 Plate VII. Wall Painting in the Palace of Tiryns “ 272 Plate VIII. Wall Paintings in the Palace of Tiryns “ 288 Plate IX. Wall Paintings in the Palace of Tiryns “ 296 Plate X. Wall Paintings in the Palace of Tiryns “ 304 Plate XI. Wall Paintings in the Palace of Tiryns “ 3 12 Plate XII. Wall Painting in the Palace of Tiryns ; fac- simile of natural size • 33 ^ Plate XIII. Wall Painting in the Palace of Tiryns ; rep- resenting a Man dancing on a Bull ‘ 35 2 Plate XIV. Fragment of a large Vase, with two Warriors, Atend a Horse, and a Dog of volume. Plate XV. Fragments of two large Vases, on which are represented a Man in a War-chariot, and por- tions of two other Men Plate XVI. Fragments of Vases. a represents a Horse and other decorations ; ^ and r, a Procession of Women with Branches Ixiv LIST OF PLANS AND PLATES. Plate XYII. Fragments of large Vessels, a, a series of Women who are bearing Branches ; b , two War- riors ; c, two Warriors running and a Woman standing Plate XVIII. Fragment of a large Vase with Geometrical Patterns, a Man, two Horses, two Fishes, etc... Plate XIX. Three Fragments of Vases, a, a Horse; b, a series of Cranes and horizontal strokes; c, rep- resenting a vertically bored breast-like ex- crescence Plate XX. Fragments of Vases, a and b represent Geo- metrical Patterns ; c , the upper part of a Stag ; d, a Bird and part of another Plate XXI. a, Fragment of a Vase with representation of a Horse ; b. Fragment with part of a Horse’s Head; c, d, and e, Gold Ornament ; /, a Goblet ; g, a Whorl of violet-colored stone with decora- tion Plate XXII. Fragments of Vases with various Ornamen- tation Plate XXIII. a and b, Vase Fragments, the first repre- sents a Man, the second two Birds ; c, an Arm- chair ; d, a bottle of Terra-cotta Plate XXIV. a and b, Idols of Flera in form of Cows ; c, a Vase ; d and e, Fragment of a Bathing Tub of Terra-cotta Plate XXV. Terra-cotta Idols of various form Plate XXVI. Fragments of Vases with various Ornamen- tation Plate XXVII. Pottery with various Ornamentation f ) R I JV T I © T I R Y N S. CHAPTER I. The Excavations. In the beginning of August 1876, I had worked at Tiryns for a week with 5 1 men, had sunk on the high plateau of the citadel 13 pits and several long trenches down to the rock, and had also examined by 7 pits the lower plateau of the citadel and its immediate neighbourhood.* In a trench dug at the west side of the higher plateau I had rediscovered the rectangular plinth, together with the 3 pillar-bases, which had been found by Fr. Thiersch and Al. R. Rangabe, who had dug here for one day in September 1831.! In seven or eight of the pits on the higher plateau I had found walls built of large stones without mortar, which I considered to be the Cyclopean housewalls of the prehistoric inhabitants of Tiryns. But afterwards I began to doubt this, and my doubts were strengthened by the results of my excavations at Mycenae and Troy. I was therefore very desirous for years back to explore Tiryns thoroughly, but was prevented by other pressing work; for after I had finished in 1876 my very * Cf. my work Mycentz (London, John Murray, 1878), p. 9. f An account of this is found in Fr. Thiersch’s letters to his wife, published in his Life (Leipzig, 1866), by W. J. Thiersch, II. 68. See also Al. R. Rangabe’s communication in the Memoires des Savants Etrangers , presentes h l’Acade'mie de France, I. Se'rie, Tome V. 1857, p. 420. B 2 EARLIER EXCAVATIONS. [Chap. I. successful excavations at Mycenae, I was engaged all through 1877 with the German* * * § ' and English editions of my work Mycence , and with the French f up to the summer of 1878. Then I thought it of most importance to explore Ithaca, and to prosecute the work of exploring Troy and the so-called heroic tombs of the Troad, which kept me busy till June 1879. The concurrent editing in German J and English § of my book Ilios occupied another year and a half. Then came the exploration of the great Minyan treasure-house at Orchomenos, which took several months. I then made a journey through the whole of the Troad, and my writings on these subjects, Orchomenos, \\ and a Journey in the Troad, % together with other affairs, kept me busy till the end of 1881. The excavations at Troy (renewed March 1st, 188a) lasted five months, and my publications on this in German** * * §§ and English ff called Troja, together with the French edition of Ilios occupied me till the end of 1883. In February 1884. I excavated the so-called tomb of the 192, Athenians at Marathon, §§ and it was not till March 1884 that I was able to realise my long-deferred hope of explor- ing Tiryns. The necessary permission was readily granted me by M. Boulpiotes, the learned Minister of Education, who was constant in helping me to overcome the many * Mykena (Leipzig, F. A. Brockhaus, 1878). t Mycenes (Paris, Hachette & Co., 1879). + Ilios (Leipzig, F. A. Brockhaus, 1881). § Ilios (London, John Murray, 1880). || Exploration of the Boeotian Orchomenos in the Journal of Hellenic Studies, London, 1881, Vol. II., and in German Orchomenos (Leipzig, F. A. Brockhaus, 1881). Reise in der Troas (Leipzig, F. A. Brockhaus, 1881 ** Troja (Leipzig, F. A. Brockhaus, 1884). ft Troja (London, John Murray, 1884). ++ Ilios (Paris, Firmin-Didot & Co., 1885). §§ Zeitschrift fur Ethnologic , Organ der Berliner Gesellschaft fiir A nth ropologie, Ethnologic und Urgeschichte , 1884, II. Heft, p. 85-88, Chap. I.] PREPARATIONS FOR THE WORK. 3 obstacles arising during the operations. It is with great pleasure that I here repeat my thanks to this worthy man for the inestimable services he has rendered to science, for without his ready help, it would have been impossible to carry out effectually the exploration of Tiryns. in order to ensure that none of the information likely to be obtained from architectural fragments should be lost, I ao-ain obtained the assistance of the eminent architect of O the German Archaeological Institute at Athens, Dr. Wilhelm Dorpfeid, who had conducted for four years the architec- tural department of the German excavations at Olympia, and who had helped me for five months at Troy in 1882. I also re-engaged, as overseer (at 180 frs. per month), G. Basilopoulos from Maguliana in Gortynia, who had served me in the same capacity under the name of Ilos at Troy, and now entered on the new campaign under this title; I also engaged Niketas Simigdalas of Thera, for 150 frs. per month. My third overseer was my excellent servant CEdipus Pyromalles. who had also been with me in Troy, and had now much leisure. The necessary apparatus I brought from Athens, viz. 40 English wheelbarrows with iron wheels ; 20 large iron crowbars ; one large and two small windlasses ; 5° large iron shovels ; 5° pickaxes ; 25 large hoes, known ail through the East by the name of tschapa , and used in vineyards ; these were again of the greatest use in filling the baskets with debris. The baskets necessary, known ever, in Greece by the Turkish name senbil , I bought in Nauplia. For the storage of these tools, for the stabling of my horse, and for the lodging of my overseers, I hired rooms (at 50 frs. per month) in the buildings of the model farm started by Capo d’Istria, close to the south wall of Tiryns. It has now decayed into a tumbledown farmhouse. Dr. Dorpfeid and I found this house too dirty ; and as there was near Tiryns only one suitable residence, for which they asked 2000 frs. for three months, we preferred to live in b a OUR DAILY HABITS AT TIRYNS. [Chap. I. 4 the Hotel des Etrangers, in Nauplia, where we got for 6 frs. per day a couple of clean rooms, as well as a room for (Edipus, and where the worthy host, Georgios Moschas, did all he could to make us comfortable. My habit was to rise at 3.45 a.m., swallow 4 grains of quinine as a preservative against fever, and then take a sea bath; a boatman, for 1 fr. daily, awaited me punctually at 4 o’clock, and took me from the quay to the open sea, where I swam for 5 or 10 minutes. I was obliged to climb into the boat again by the oar, but long practice had made this somewhat difficult operation easy and safe. After bathing, I drank in the coffee-house Agamemnon , which was always open at that hour, a cup of black coffee without sugar, still to be had for the old sum of 10 Lepta (a penny) though everything had risen enormously in price. A good cob (at 6 frs. daily) stood ready, and took me easily in twenty-five minutes to Tiryns, where I always arrived before sunrise, and at once sent back the horse for Dr. Ddrpfeld. Our breakfast was taken regularly at 8 a.m., during the first rest of the workmen, on the floor of the old palace at Tiryns. It consisted of Chicago corned beef, of which a plentiful supply was sent me by my honoured friends Messrs. J. H. Schroder & Co., from London, bread, fresh sheep-cheese, oranges, and white resined wine ( 'rezinato ), which, on account of its bitter, agrees with quinine, and is more wholesome during heat and hard work than the stronger red wines. During the workmen’s second rest, beginning at 12 and lasting at first an hour, in greater heat one hour and three-quarters, we also rested, and two stones of the threshing-floor at the south end of the Acro- polis, where we afterwards found the Byzantine Church, served us for pillows. One never rests so well as when thoroughly tired with hard work, and I can assure the reader, that we never enjoyed more refreshing sleep than during this midday hour in the Acropolis of Tiryns, in spite of the hard bed, and the scorching sun, against which Chap. I.] RESINED WINE. 5 we had no other protection than our Indian hats laid fiat upon our faces. Our third and last meal was at our return home in the evening, in the restaurant of the hotel. As my London friends had also supplied me with Liebig’s Extract of Meat, we had always excellent soup ; this, with fish or mutton, fried in olive- oil, cheese, oranges, and resined wine, com- pleted our menu. Fish and many kinds of vegetables, as potatoes, broad beans, French beans, peas and artichokes, are excellent here, but are so ill-cooked with quantities of olive- oil, that to our taste they are almost useless. Although wine mixed with resin is not mentioned by any ancient Greek author except Dioscorides, and even Athenaios makes no allusion to it, yet we may assume with high probability that it was in common use in the ancient Greek world, for the fir-cone was sacred to Dionysos, and the thyrsos, a light staff wound with ivy and vine branches, which was carried in processions by the priests of Bacchus, was ornamented at the upper end with a fir-cone. Pliny also, among the various fruits useful for making wine, enumerates the fir-cone, and says that it is dipped and pressed in the must.* The passage in Dioscorides, which is very characteristic and instructive, runs thus : “ Concerning resined wine. Resined wine is prepared by various peoples, but it is most abundant in Galatia, for there, on account of the cold, the grapes do not ripen, and therefore the wine turns sour if it be not tempered with pine resin. The resin is taken off along with the bark, and half a Kotyle (a piece of two ounces) is mixed in an Amphora. Some filter the wine after fermentation, and thus separate the resin ; others leave it in. When the wine is long kept it becomes sweet. But * Plinius, JV. H. XIV. 19, 3-4 : “ Vinuin fit, et e siliqua Syriaca, et e piris, malorumque omnibus generibus. Sed e Punicis, quod rhoiten vocant : et e comis, mespilis, sorbis, moris siccis, nucleis pineis. Hi musto madidi exprimuntur : superiora per se mitia.” 6 WORKMEN’S PAY AND DUTIES. [Chap. I. a ll wines so prepared produce headache and dizziness, yet promote digestion, are diuretic, and to be recommended for coughs and colds ; also to those suffering from gastric complaints, dysentery or dropsy, &c., and for internal ulcers. Also the dark rezinato constipates more than the white.” * I commenced the excavation on the 17th of March, with sixty workmen, who were shortly increased to seventy, and this" remained the average number of my labourers during the two and a half months’ campaign at Tiryns in 1884. The daily wages of my workmen were at first 3 francs ; this, however, increased as the season advanced, and before Easter rose to 32 francs. I also employed women, finding them quite as handy at filling baskets as men ; their wages^at first were ih francs, and later were increased to 2 francs. At sunrise all the workers came with the tools and wheelbarrows from the depot to the citadel, where as soon as I had called over the roll, work began, and lasted till sundown, when all tools and wheelbarrows were again returned to the depot. In spite of these precautions, many tools and a wheelbarrow were stolen from me. For work with the pickaxe I chose the strongest men, as it is the heaviest ; the others suited for the wheelbarrows, for filling the rubbish into the baskets, and for clearing * Pedanii Dioscoridis Anazarbei De Materia Medica, Y. 43 : (ITepi prjTLVtTOV olvov.') 'O 8e prjTiVLTV.g KCU KCLTo. t a tOvf] ctkc va^erar ir\eova£ec 8e iv TakaTia, 8ia to u.7coEvvc(t6(U tov olvov dvrCTravTOV pevovarjg rrjg o-Tav\r}s, Sea to i/Ax etv ’ € ‘ M 7ra f ia7rKaK V vf.VK.Lvri ■ KOTrrerat 8e c rw tw \oiy r) prjTLvrj, kcll r(T) KCfxxply piyvvTaL rjpiKOTvXiov . kcu ol pev a-n-rjOovtTL pcTa to aTro^icraL, ympiiovTCg TYJV pr]TLV7]v, ol 8e etocri . -rr a\aiw6 cvt eg §€ yiyvovTai p8eig . TTOVTCg 8e Kecf>a\a\yeis ol tolovtol kcu cjKOTwpaTLKOi, ttctttlko'i pevToi kcu ovprjTLKOi, KCU KO.Tappol'Copivotg ko. t fSrjcrcrovatv appd'CjM’Tcs kou kolXlcikols, SvcrtvTepLKOv;, vSpWTTLKOLg KCU pOLKCUS yWCLl £1 ' TOIS 81 Iv fiddeL el\KU>p€VOLS tyK^VCTpa ■ (TTVTTTL- KWTepos pivTOL tov XtvKov t