DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.1021#0269
CHAPTER IX
SOME PHASES OF MYCENAEAN ART
The remains of the Mycenaean world, already passed in
review, abundantly attest an advanced stage of culture.
Indeed, such is the maturity of Mycenaean art, in some
of its phases, that there are still those who refuse to accept
its monuments as the work of Greek hands in pre-Homeric
time.1 And, in fact, we cannot wonder at this skepticism,
in view of the sudden and startling revelation of a wealth
and power and refinement of which history had given us
hardly a hint. That Hellas had always been wedded to
penury, the Hellenes themselves believed,3 and now Myce-
nae confronts us with a dazzling demonstration of her
opulence. With poverty goes feebleness; yet we are awe-
struck in the presence of the mighty walls of Tiryns, of the
lion-guarded gateway of Mycenae, of the solemn domes
hidden away in the hillsides. We regard with amazement
that enormous lintel-block lying with its 120 tons' weight
over the doorway of the Treasury of Atreus. How was the
1 Thus but recently Dr. Helbig lias been arguing again (before the J
of Inscriptions in Paris) that " the so-called Mycenaean Art is nothing else than
Phoenician art of the second millennium B. C." (See Academy, July 20, 1895,
and Class. Review, October, 1896.) At the other extreme we have the earlier
contention of a Russian archaeologist (Stephani) that it is nothing but Gothic
art of the third century of our own era ! According to this savant the trea-
sures of Mycenae were buried there by the Heruli with some of their fallen
leaders about 267 A. d., and consist partly of the work of Gothic hands, partly
of the plunder of Greek cities. (See Jour, of Hellenic Studies, i. 94^106.)
2 Herodotus, vii. 102. See p. 2.
SOME PHASES OF MYCENAEAN ART
The remains of the Mycenaean world, already passed in
review, abundantly attest an advanced stage of culture.
Indeed, such is the maturity of Mycenaean art, in some
of its phases, that there are still those who refuse to accept
its monuments as the work of Greek hands in pre-Homeric
time.1 And, in fact, we cannot wonder at this skepticism,
in view of the sudden and startling revelation of a wealth
and power and refinement of which history had given us
hardly a hint. That Hellas had always been wedded to
penury, the Hellenes themselves believed,3 and now Myce-
nae confronts us with a dazzling demonstration of her
opulence. With poverty goes feebleness; yet we are awe-
struck in the presence of the mighty walls of Tiryns, of the
lion-guarded gateway of Mycenae, of the solemn domes
hidden away in the hillsides. We regard with amazement
that enormous lintel-block lying with its 120 tons' weight
over the doorway of the Treasury of Atreus. How was the
1 Thus but recently Dr. Helbig lias been arguing again (before the J
of Inscriptions in Paris) that " the so-called Mycenaean Art is nothing else than
Phoenician art of the second millennium B. C." (See Academy, July 20, 1895,
and Class. Review, October, 1896.) At the other extreme we have the earlier
contention of a Russian archaeologist (Stephani) that it is nothing but Gothic
art of the third century of our own era ! According to this savant the trea-
sures of Mycenae were buried there by the Heruli with some of their fallen
leaders about 267 A. d., and consist partly of the work of Gothic hands, partly
of the plunder of Greek cities. (See Jour, of Hellenic Studies, i. 94^106.)
2 Herodotus, vii. 102. See p. 2.