DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.1021#0063
26 THE MYCENAEAN AGE
of the approaches to the two fortress gates (illustrated in
the view of the Lions' Gate, Plate I.), and of a tower in
the south-eastern wall. Strictly speaking, however, only the
outer faces of these sections are thus built, the core-structure
consisting, as in the first system, of unhewn stones bonded
with clay. Thus ashlar masonry is employed solely as a
facing, partly to dignify the great portal and its accessories,
partly, no doubt, because it offered no foothold to an
escalading foe, as would the Cyclopean with its great gaps;
while the core of the wall, as well as the inner face, was
built in the simpler and less expensive fashion. It follows
that the Cyclopean, though certainly the earlier by origin,
continued in use along with the regular masonry, and the
employment of the one or the other, taken by itself, does
not enable us always to determine with certainty the rela-
tive age of a building. Moreover, the rectangular masonry
in the architecture of the acropolis of Mycenae is still far
from perfect, for there are spaces between the joints filled
up by smaller stones, the courses are not always quite hori-
zontal, and the vertical joints are sometimes found in the
same line.1
A third order is the so-called polygonal, which .employs
stones carefully hewn into polygons with unequal sides,
and so closely joined that there are no gaps and
consequently no bonding with small stones or
mortar. That this masonry is much later than either of
the others is apparent on its face and admits of positive
proof. It is found in three places, — at the north-east
corner of the.circuit wall; again to the north-west of the
Lions' Gate ; and, finally, below the middle of the western
wall (H in the Plan). This last section is still standing to
its full height of some 56 feet, and is usually called a
1 See Sell lie maim's Tiryns, Adler's introduction, xiv.
of the approaches to the two fortress gates (illustrated in
the view of the Lions' Gate, Plate I.), and of a tower in
the south-eastern wall. Strictly speaking, however, only the
outer faces of these sections are thus built, the core-structure
consisting, as in the first system, of unhewn stones bonded
with clay. Thus ashlar masonry is employed solely as a
facing, partly to dignify the great portal and its accessories,
partly, no doubt, because it offered no foothold to an
escalading foe, as would the Cyclopean with its great gaps;
while the core of the wall, as well as the inner face, was
built in the simpler and less expensive fashion. It follows
that the Cyclopean, though certainly the earlier by origin,
continued in use along with the regular masonry, and the
employment of the one or the other, taken by itself, does
not enable us always to determine with certainty the rela-
tive age of a building. Moreover, the rectangular masonry
in the architecture of the acropolis of Mycenae is still far
from perfect, for there are spaces between the joints filled
up by smaller stones, the courses are not always quite hori-
zontal, and the vertical joints are sometimes found in the
same line.1
A third order is the so-called polygonal, which .employs
stones carefully hewn into polygons with unequal sides,
and so closely joined that there are no gaps and
consequently no bonding with small stones or
mortar. That this masonry is much later than either of
the others is apparent on its face and admits of positive
proof. It is found in three places, — at the north-east
corner of the.circuit wall; again to the north-west of the
Lions' Gate ; and, finally, below the middle of the western
wall (H in the Plan). This last section is still standing to
its full height of some 56 feet, and is usually called a
1 See Sell lie maim's Tiryns, Adler's introduction, xiv.