DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.7476#0017
THE SHAFT GRAVES AND BEE-HIVE TOMBS OF
MYCENAE AND THEIR INTER-RELATION.
Prevalent Views of Earlier and Later Dynasty.
It has become a generally accepted axiom that the two different kinds
of sepulture of which we have evidence in the early remains of Mycenae
supply die records of an earlier and a later dynasty. To the earlier of these
were ascribed the pit-graves unearthed by Schliemann within the later
Acropolis wall, much of the contents of which was from the first recognized
to be of great antiquity. By Dr. Adler and others the construction of these
was referred to the Danai. The great bee-hive chambers, which by analogy
must also have served a sepulchral purpose, though found void of their con-
tents, were, archaeologically speaking, ' to let', and excellent tenants were
found for them in the Achaeans.
This view of an earlier and later dynasty marked by distinctive modes
of burial, has, indeed, been once more brought forward by the late Director
of the British School at Athens, who ably conducted on its behalf the most
recent excavations at Mycenae. As Mr. Wace states the case, part of the
old native cemetery (distinguished by cist graves with ' rustic' contents) was
made use of by a new dynasty, which came in ' not long before the beginning
of the Sixteenth Century b.c.', and to which he gives the name of the
' Shaft Grave Dynasty'.1 This cemetery, he considers, went out of use for
royal interments in the Mainland Period (' Late Helladic I'), contemporary
with the First Late Minoan of Crete, possibly ' because a new dynasty now sat
on the throne of Mycenae'. From about the end of L. H. I begins the series
of Tholos Tombs, ' which from their impressive and noble architecture we can
only regard as the tombs of kings. . . . The different method of burial
inclines us to the belief that a change of dynasty took place at Mycenae,
and we may call this, the second dynasty, the " Tholos Tomb Dynasty".'
In one case, then, we find magnificent mausolea without contents, in the
other case mere stone-lined pits huddled together, but containing the richest
group of burial deposits that has ever been brought to light. Both groups
of tombs may be fittingly described as 'royal', but it was plainly impossible to
suppose that two separate contemporary dynasties had existed at Mycenae -
1 B.S.A., xxv, p. 391. (if-) that it would be absurd to imagine two
2 Mr. Wace, himself, rightly observes (loc. dynasties ruling simultaneously at Mycenae.
B
MYCENAE AND THEIR INTER-RELATION.
Prevalent Views of Earlier and Later Dynasty.
It has become a generally accepted axiom that the two different kinds
of sepulture of which we have evidence in the early remains of Mycenae
supply die records of an earlier and a later dynasty. To the earlier of these
were ascribed the pit-graves unearthed by Schliemann within the later
Acropolis wall, much of the contents of which was from the first recognized
to be of great antiquity. By Dr. Adler and others the construction of these
was referred to the Danai. The great bee-hive chambers, which by analogy
must also have served a sepulchral purpose, though found void of their con-
tents, were, archaeologically speaking, ' to let', and excellent tenants were
found for them in the Achaeans.
This view of an earlier and later dynasty marked by distinctive modes
of burial, has, indeed, been once more brought forward by the late Director
of the British School at Athens, who ably conducted on its behalf the most
recent excavations at Mycenae. As Mr. Wace states the case, part of the
old native cemetery (distinguished by cist graves with ' rustic' contents) was
made use of by a new dynasty, which came in ' not long before the beginning
of the Sixteenth Century b.c.', and to which he gives the name of the
' Shaft Grave Dynasty'.1 This cemetery, he considers, went out of use for
royal interments in the Mainland Period (' Late Helladic I'), contemporary
with the First Late Minoan of Crete, possibly ' because a new dynasty now sat
on the throne of Mycenae'. From about the end of L. H. I begins the series
of Tholos Tombs, ' which from their impressive and noble architecture we can
only regard as the tombs of kings. . . . The different method of burial
inclines us to the belief that a change of dynasty took place at Mycenae,
and we may call this, the second dynasty, the " Tholos Tomb Dynasty".'
In one case, then, we find magnificent mausolea without contents, in the
other case mere stone-lined pits huddled together, but containing the richest
group of burial deposits that has ever been brought to light. Both groups
of tombs may be fittingly described as 'royal', but it was plainly impossible to
suppose that two separate contemporary dynasties had existed at Mycenae -
1 B.S.A., xxv, p. 391. (if-) that it would be absurd to imagine two
2 Mr. Wace, himself, rightly observes (loc. dynasties ruling simultaneously at Mycenae.
B