DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.808#0077
'THE RING OF NESTOR,' ETC. 75
as such they must be of later date, forgetful of the principle which stands at
the root of all sound archaeological deduction—that imitative works reflect
current, not past fashions. ' It is a distinct attempt,' he surprisingly adds,
'. on the part of the Mycenaeans to outdo their Cretan teachers. We may
therefore attribute these vases to the beginning of L.H. III.' In other words,
he refers them to the Third Mycenaean stage, at the lowest computation over
two hundred years later. It is unfortunate indeed that Mr. Wace should
illustrate his ' L.H. III.' by the (certainly intrusive) sherd found by him beneath
the threshold of the ' Atreus' tomb (B.S.A., xxv. p. 357, Fig. 76 6). This
itself belongs to a late and almost ' Sub-Minoan ' group, definitely separated,
as Professor R. M. Dawkins has shown, by stratigraphic evidence at Phyla-
kopi, from the earlier L.M. III. class (B.S.A., xvii. p. 19, and PI. XIV. 39-
44: compare too, 0. Rubensohn, Ath. Mitt., xlii. 1917, p. 71, who found
similar types following on to those of the advanced Ialysos class at Paros).
This style, which may be described as an advanced phase of L.M. III. b,
can hardly have come into vogue much before 1200 B.C., and, as Dr. Mackenzie
points out, heralds the earliest ' Philistine.' In another connexion, indeed,
Mr. Wace admits this (op. ait., p. 47, n. 1). I regret to observe, however, that
Mr. Blegen (see Korakou, pp. 59-62), begins his L.M. III. series (' L.H. III.')
with this class.
Mr. Wace endeavours to support his conclusion that the tympanum or
relieving triangle above the lintel of these tombs represents a structural
advance due to a gradual architectural evolution on the soil of Greece. But
the evidence that this type co-existed with the others from the first at Mycenae
is overwhelming—indeed, as we have seen, this feature marks what, judging
from M.M. III. relies that they contained, may be placed among the earliest
examples there of this class of monument, the ' Treasury of Atreus,' namely,
and the ' Tomb of Clytemnestra.' It appears that at Mycenae the typologically
inferior structure was for various reasons occasionally preferred. But it is
dangerous in these cases to draw a chronological conclusion. It is clear that
the fully developed type, thoroughly ' Minoized ' in all its decorative details,
was implanted into Hellas in the earliest days of the Conquest.
as such they must be of later date, forgetful of the principle which stands at
the root of all sound archaeological deduction—that imitative works reflect
current, not past fashions. ' It is a distinct attempt,' he surprisingly adds,
'. on the part of the Mycenaeans to outdo their Cretan teachers. We may
therefore attribute these vases to the beginning of L.H. III.' In other words,
he refers them to the Third Mycenaean stage, at the lowest computation over
two hundred years later. It is unfortunate indeed that Mr. Wace should
illustrate his ' L.H. III.' by the (certainly intrusive) sherd found by him beneath
the threshold of the ' Atreus' tomb (B.S.A., xxv. p. 357, Fig. 76 6). This
itself belongs to a late and almost ' Sub-Minoan ' group, definitely separated,
as Professor R. M. Dawkins has shown, by stratigraphic evidence at Phyla-
kopi, from the earlier L.M. III. class (B.S.A., xvii. p. 19, and PI. XIV. 39-
44: compare too, 0. Rubensohn, Ath. Mitt., xlii. 1917, p. 71, who found
similar types following on to those of the advanced Ialysos class at Paros).
This style, which may be described as an advanced phase of L.M. III. b,
can hardly have come into vogue much before 1200 B.C., and, as Dr. Mackenzie
points out, heralds the earliest ' Philistine.' In another connexion, indeed,
Mr. Wace admits this (op. ait., p. 47, n. 1). I regret to observe, however, that
Mr. Blegen (see Korakou, pp. 59-62), begins his L.M. III. series (' L.H. III.')
with this class.
Mr. Wace endeavours to support his conclusion that the tympanum or
relieving triangle above the lintel of these tombs represents a structural
advance due to a gradual architectural evolution on the soil of Greece. But
the evidence that this type co-existed with the others from the first at Mycenae
is overwhelming—indeed, as we have seen, this feature marks what, judging
from M.M. III. relies that they contained, may be placed among the earliest
examples there of this class of monument, the ' Treasury of Atreus,' namely,
and the ' Tomb of Clytemnestra.' It appears that at Mycenae the typologically
inferior structure was for various reasons occasionally preferred. But it is
dangerous in these cases to draw a chronological conclusion. It is clear that
the fully developed type, thoroughly ' Minoized ' in all its decorative details,
was implanted into Hellas in the earliest days of the Conquest.