PLATE V.

THE TREASURY CLOSE TO THE LIONS' GATE. Excavated by Mrs. SCHLIEMANN. Frontispiece.

MYCENÆ
A NARRATIVE OF RESEARCHES AND DISCOVERIES
AT MYCENÆ AND TIRYNS.

BY DR. HENRY SCHLIEMANN

CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
AUTHOR OF 'TROY AND ITS REMAINS,' 'ITHAQUE, LE PÉLOPONNÈSE ET TROIE,'
AND 'LA CHINE ET LE JAPON.'

THE PREFACE

BY THE RIGHT HON. W. E. GLADSTONE, M.P.

MAPS, PLANS, AND MORE THAN 700 OTHER ILLUSTRATIONS.
A NEW EDITION, WITH IMPORTANT ADDITIONS AND NEW PLATES.

NEW YORK:
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS,
1880.

PRESS OF J. J. LITTLE & CO.,
Nos, 10 TO 20 ASTOR PLACE, NEW YORK.

Dedicated

HIS MAJESTY DOM PEDRO II.,

EMPEROR OF BRAZIL,
WITH THE PROFOUND RESPECT OF
THE AUTHOR.

᾽Επὶ δ᾽ ἐγδούπησαν ᾽Ἀθηναίη τε καὶ ῞Ἥρη

Τιμῶσαι βασιλῆα πολυχρύσοιο Μυκήνης.

HOM. Il. XI. 45, 46.

Πρὸς ἡμῶν

κάππεσεv, κάτθανε, ἡμεῖς καὶ καταθάψομεν

οὐχ ὑπὸ κλαυθμῶν τῶν ἐξ οἴκων.

ÆSCH. Agam. 1552-1554.

῏Ω τοῦ στρατηγήσαντος ἐν Τροίᾳ ποτὲ

Ἀγαμέμνονος παῖ, νῦν ἐκεῖν᾽ ἔξεστί σοι

παρόντι λεύσσειν, ὧν πρόθυμος ἦσθ᾽ ἀεί.

Τὸ γὰρ παλαιὸν ῎Αργος ὁὺπόθεις τόδε,

τῆς οἰστροπλῆγος ἄλσος Ἰνάχου κόρης·

αὕτη δ᾽, Ὀρέστα, τοῦ λυκοκτόνου θεοῦ

᾽Αγορὰ Λύκειος· οὑξ ἀριστερᾶς δ᾽ ὅδε

Ἥρας ὁ κλεινὸς ναός· οἷ δ᾽ ἱκάνομεν,

ϕάσκειν Μυκήνας τὰς πολυχρύσους ὁρᾶν·

πολύϕθορόν τε δῶμα Πελοπιδῶν τόδε,

SOPHOCLES, Electra, 1-10.

PREFACE.

It has been with much reluctance that, at the persevering request of Dr. Schliemann, I have undertaken to write a Preface to his Mycenean volume. I have managed perhaps, though with long intermissions of the pleasant labour, to maintain a tolerable acquaintance with the text of Homer; and the due establishment of the points of contact between that text and the remains from Mycenæ is without question one of the essential aims, to which comment on this work requires to be addressed. But I have a horror of all specialism which travels beyond its proper province; and in this matter I am at best no more than a specialist, probably, too, not one of very high pretensions. I have not that practised skill, that comprehensive outlook over the whole field of Hellenic, and other than Hellenic archæology, which has conferred upon Mr. Newton his well-earned fame. The just conclusion from these premises appears to be, that I ought to have declined a charge quod ferre recusent humeri.[1] But there was, in ancient poetry, a Destiny stronger than the will of gods. To me, on this occasion, Dr. Schliemann is the vicegerent and organ of that Destiny. In view of the splendid services which he has conferred upon classical science, a power, that thrusts argument out of court, brings me to perceive, that I cannot but accede to his desire. I have however given the reader fair warning where and why he should be on his guard: and I shall make all the use I can of the landmarks laid down in the report which Mr. Newton, after an ocular inspection of these remains, published in the Times of April 20, 1877; and of the valuable papers of Mr. Gardner in the Academy (April 21 and 28). I believe that the interest, excited by Dr. Schliemann's discoveries, has been by no means confined to classical scholars. I shall therefore endeavour to be as little technical as possible, and to write, so far as may be, for a circle wider than that of the persons among us who are acquainted with the Greek tongue.

When the disclosures at Tiryns and Mycenæ were announced in England, my own first impression was that of a strangely bewildered admiration, combined with a preponderance of sceptical against believing tendencies, in regard to the capital and dominating subject of the Tombs in the Agora. I am bound to say, that reflection and a fuller knowledge have nearly turned the scales the other way. There are indeed, not only gaps to be supplied, but difficulties to be confronted, and to be explained; or to be left over for future explanation. Yet the balance, I will not say of evidence, but of rational presumption, seems as though it might ultimately lean towards the belief that this eminent explorer has exposed to the light of day, after 3000 years, the memorials and remains of Agamemnon and his companions in the Return from Troy. But let us endeavour to feel our way by degrees up to this question, gradually and with care, as a good general makes his approaches to a formidable fortress.

I find, upon perusing the volume of Dr. Schliemann, that the items of evidence, which connect his discoveries generally with the Homeric Poems, are more numerous, than I had surmised from the brief outline, with which he favoured us upon his visit to England in the spring.

1. He presents to us the rude figures of cows; and upon a signet ring (No. 531) and elsewhere, cow-heads not to be mistaken. He then points to the traditional worship, from the first, of Hera in Argolis; and he asks us to connect these facts with the use of Boöpis (cow-eyed) as a staple epithet of this goddess in the Poems; and he might add, with her special guardianship of Agamemnon in his interests and his personal safety (Il. I. 194-222).

This appears to me a reasonable demand. We know that upon some of the Egyptian monuments the goddess Isis, mated with Osiris, is represented in human figure with the cow's head. This was a mode of exhibiting deity congenial to the spirit of an Egyptian immigration,[2] such as might, compatibly with the text of Homer, have taken place some generations before the Troïca. But it was also a mode against which the whole spirit of Hellenism, according to the authentic type of that spirit supplied in the Poems, utterly revolted. We find there a Hera, who wore, so to speak, the mantle of Isis, besides carrying the spoils of one or more personages enrolled in the Golden Book of the old Pelasgian dynasties. Nothing could be more natural than a decapitation of the Egyptian Isis, not penally but for her honour. She might consequently appear with the human head; but, not to break sharply with the traditions of the people, the cow-head, and even the cow figure, might nevertheless be retained as symbols of religion. And the great Poet, who invariably keeps these symbols so to speak at arms' length, in order that he may prevent their disparaging the creed of which he was the great doctor, might nevertheless select from the bovine features that one which was suited to his purpose, and give to his Hera, who was never a very intellectual deity, the large tranquil eye of the cow. The use of the epithet for Hera in Homer is not, indeed, exclusive, and I admit that he may have inherited that use. But, though not exclusive, it is very special, and this speciality is enough to give a sensible support to the doctrine of our famous explorer.

2. The buildings improperly called Cyclopean, and still more improperly endowed with the alternative name of Pelasgian, have long been known, more or less, to exist in Argolis; but Dr. Schliemann has thrown some light on what I may perhaps be allowed to call their diversity of style. He admits three forms found in this kind of building. I have objected to the current names, the first because it does not inform; the second because it misleads, for these buildings have no true connection with the Pelasgian tribes. What they indicate is the handiwork of the great constructing race or races, made up of several elements, who migrated into Greece, and elsewhere on the Mediterranean, from the south and east, and who exhibit an usual, though perhaps not an invariable connection with the Poseidon-worship, a worship, with which the Cyclopean name is, through the Odyssey, perceptibly associated, and which is one of the main keys, as I have long been persuaded, wherewith in time to unlock, for Hellenic and Homeric regions, the secrets of antiquity. The walls of Troy were built by Poseidon; that is, by a race who practised the worship of the god. How far those walls conform to any of the minuter points of the descriptions of 'Cyclopean' architecture by Dr. Schliemann, (pp. 42, 123), I cannot say. But if he is right, as seems probable, in placing Troy at Hissarlik, it is important to notice that this work of Poseidon had a solidity, which bore it unharmed through the rage of fire, and kept it well together amidst all the changes which have buried it in a hill of rubbish and promiscuous remains. And of course the modes, used by the very same race in the business of building, could not but vary much with the circumstances of each case, and especially with the material at hand. I am tempted, at least until a better name can be found, to call this manner of building Poseidonian; at any rate, whatever it be called, to note it as a point of correspondence between the Poems and the discoveries, admitting at the same time that the matter is not sufficiently developed to warrant me in laying upon it any considerable stress.

3. The beehive-like building, which is rather loosely called the Treasury of Atreus, presents to us over the doorway (p. [43]) two enormous slabs, one of them supposed to weigh from 130 to 135 tons. I only refer to them for the sake of reminding the reader that, as I think, we must be prepared, in this and other matters, freely to recognise the hand of the foreigner at work; who brought with him into Greece attainments, not to be despised, of material civilisation. More pointedly I wish to observe that in the interior of the Treasury, from the fourth course upwards, there are visible (p. [44]) in each stone two bored holes, and in many of them the remains of 'bronze' nails still existing. Similar holes, it appears, are found (p. [45]) in the Treasury of Minyas at Orchomenos. The purpose of these nails, says our author, could only be to attach to the wall what in one place he calls the bronze, and in another the brazen plates, with which the whole interior was once decorated. On the secondary question, what was the exact material employed, let me here observe that of brass those ages knew nothing, and that bronze, particularly in that stage of material development, was wholly unsuited for sheeting. But, as to the structural point, we have here a remarkable point of contact with the Homeric text. For in the palace of Alkinoös, king of the Phaiakes, a splendour as of sun or moon dazzled the eye, for the walls were of chalkos (Od. VII. 86, cited p. 44), which I hope I may now boldly translate copper: a metal unlike bronze (a) in being readily malleable, (b) in being throughout the Poems most usually lustrous, a character I do not suppose we should assign to bronze. On the other hand, the comparative softness of copper was not well suited for the nails, so bronze might very well be employed. Nor does this conjunction of the two metals, pure and mixed, in the same work, carry us away from the text of Homer: for his wall-sheets of copper in Scheriè were crowned with a cornice of his dark kuanos, which I take to be bronze. This copper sheeting is a feature of the supreme Olympian Palace (Il. I. 426, Od. VIII. 321), built by Hephaistos of the skilful mind. I think I could show that it also adorned the palaces of Menelaos and Odysseus, and could point out, moreover, why all this is in accordance with the distinctly foreign and eastern character of the embellishment: but an exhibition of the evidence would lead me into too great length; and I note only for the present purpose the remarkable correspondence of the archæology with the Poems.

4. Passing from architectural to moveable objects, I observe that Dr. Schliemann found both knives and keys of iron in Mycenæ, but that from their form he assigns them to a later and strictly historic period. Old Mycenæ, therefore, in accordance with Hissarlik, has afforded us, up to the present time, no remains of this metal. In the Poems it is freely mentioned, but as a rare and valuable substance, used where great hardness was required, and for objects comparatively small and portable; except, indeed, in the case of the Gates of Tartaros (Il. VIII 15), where the Poet could dispose of as much material as he pleased. The aggregate quantity, then, was small; and the instruments were likely to be carried away on the abandonment or destruction of a city. Its absence may therefore be accounted for, in part by its value, but also, and more especially, because it so readily corrodes.[3] Therefore, although we cannot here establish a positive correspondence, neither have we any occasion to admit a discrepancy.

5. Neither need we, I think, suppose any variance between the chariot, as our author found it on the second tombstone of the Acropolis (p. 84), and the Homeric picture. True, he finds a wheel of four spokes, and the Olympian car of Hera had eight (Il. V. 723); but this diversity of structure is probably introduced, like the diversity of material, by way of divine distinction, and to show the superior elaboration and strength of the vehicle.[4]

6. We have at Mycenæ the Agora, or place of Assembly, in full agreement with the Poems on the two points, first of its circular form (pp. [338], [339]), and secondly of the smoothed horizontal slabs, bounding the circle, on which the Elders sate. I do not dilate upon these, as they are fully noticed in the text: but I shall return to the subject, in connection with the situation chosen for the tombs, and the inferences which are to be drawn from this important circumstance.

I will now hazard, before proceeding further with my list, one or two general remarks on the works of art and ornament, referring again to the reports of Mr. Newton and Mr. Gardner, as the most trustworthy comment on the text of our author concerning them.

First, I have to offer some reflections on the general character of the discoveries, and on its relation to the state of Art exhibited in the Poems. It seems reasonable to believe, especially after what has been shown by Mr. Gardner respecting the four tombstones, that they constituted the contemporary seal of a great deposit. It results, I think, from the evidence before us that it is impossible to reduce to one school or style or stage of art the whole of the objects exhumed. But on this I would observe first that, although they were simultaneously deposited in honour of the dead, they might have been the productions of more than one generation: secondly, that not only are we not required, but, in so far as we draw light from the Homeric Poems, we are hardly permitted, to refer them collectively to a domestic origin.

I gather from Mr. Gardner's report that the Art exhibited on the Pottery is more uniformly backward, than that exhibited by the works of metal. But this pottery, which was, whether wheel made or hand-made, of an early stage in the manufacture, was far more likely to be domestic; while the works in the precious metals might be imported. Or they might be the productions of foreign artists, attracted to the Court of Agamemnon; in the same manner as we find that Daidalos, whose name, however mythical, represents a foreign influence, executed in Crete, for Ariadne, the representation of a dance in metal.

The discovery, or the inspection, of the works must without doubt in the first instance suggest a reference of them to a local school of goldsmiths. But, considering the numerous points of contact between the discoveries and the Homeric Poems, it is important to know whether, and how far, they really favour such a supposition. This is not the place for an examination in detail of all the works of Art mentioned by Homer. I believe there is no one of them, of which the purely Greek origin can be established by proof from the text, while the manufacture abroad and importation are frequently mentioned. At the same time, there are some considerations which tend to show that, if there were local workmen in Greece capable of producing objects such as those now exhumed, it is at Mycenæ that we should expect to find them. First, on account of the wealth of the city, and of its position as the capital of the country. Secondly, on account of the wealth of Agamemnon personally, and his acquisitiveness if not his avarice, which made him eager to spoil those whom his spear had slain, and which is the subject of varied allusions in the Iliad. It must be remembered that in those days works of art were not merely ornamental, but were a favourite form, as their name (keimelia) shows, of stored wealth: and of these, even in Troas, Agamemnon possessed many (Il. IX. 330). Thirdly, an indication, perhaps, more significant, may be drawn from the remarkable passage in the Eleventh Book (15-46), which describes the arming of Agamemnon for the field. The first portion of the armour, that attracts observation, is an elaborately wrought breast-plate, which had come from Cyprus, a seat of Phœnician settlement. We next come to the sword, which I shall presently describe. This is followed by the shield, adorned with many bosses of metal, but also carrying a representation of the Gorgon with the heads or figures of Fear and Panic. This shield must be considered as a work of art; and the same may be said of its band or strap, which carried the figure of a three-headed snake. There is nothing said to connect these works with foreign manufacture. The family of Agamemnon was of a foreign origin comparatively recent; but it may remain an open question, whether these arms are presumptively referable, or not, to a domestic manufacture.

The deposits appear, again, to differ extremely in point of merit. I set aside the objects directly symbolical, because, where religion, or idolatry, is in question, excellence in workmanship becomes secondary, or even ceases to be desired. Among the other objects, I gather that none exhibit a very high order of technical qualities. But, if we may rely upon photographic representation, they surely exhibit lively and forcible movement, as well as many of the elements of nobleness, beauty, and fertility of invention; particularly in ornamentation, as distinguished from the representation of life, either animal or vegetable. Some of this diversity may be due to difference of date; some, perhaps much, to the superiority of the immigrant hand, or of imported works. That there were foreigners resident in Greece at the time of the Troïca, we have every reason to infer from one conspicuous case, that of Echepolos, a son of Anchises, who was allowed to present the mare Aithè to Agamemnon, as the price of his exemption (Il. XXIII. 296) from service against Troy. If there be anywhere in the Poems an account of a work of art produced in Greece or by a Greek, it is the bedstead of Odysseus,[5] wrought by himself (Od. XXIII. 190-201); and to him, after a good deal of consideration, I am inclined to ascribe a close connection with the immigrant or Phœnician stock; though this representation might also be due to his unequalled versatility and universality of accomplishment. There was indeed a Chrusochoös or gold-plater at the Court of Nestor (Od. III. 425); but the very same man goes by the name of Chalkeus or coppersmith (Ibid. III. 432). And it would even seem that working in metals cannot have been a principal or prominent employment in an Achaian community, for no such person is named in the remarkable passage of the Odyssey (XVII. 384) which supplies a sort of list, and where the wood-worker, or carpenter, appears.

The list of these objects, and of their ornaments, is on the whole richer and more diversified than the Poems, with the exception of the famous Shield of Achilles, would have led us to expect. Possibly a knowledge of the Mycenean treasures may have prompted or aided a vigorous imagination, in that wonderful anticipation of excellences which had not been realized in practice. The most remarkable feature, I think, of all Homer's delineations of art is the force and reality with which he confers animation on things inanimate. And perhaps the eye may be struck, in examining Schliemann's illustrations, with the vigour of life and motion which asserts itself in many of the Mycenean works, where the delineation is technically most imperfect. But we cannot compare the text with these remains alone; we are bound also to avail ourselves of such light as can be had from Hissarlik, whatever its effect upon our prepossessions or our arguments. Now I, for one, am struck with the wealth of Mycenæ, and the comparative poverty of what is probably Troy. I do not mean merely as to the small number of valuable remains, for this may be due to chance; though, indeed, fortune, for once renouncing her caprice, seems in both cases to have obeyed the dictates of archæological justice, and to have treated Dr. and Mrs. Schliemann as her favourite children. But I mean that there is far less of luxe in the ornamentation of the works at Hissarlik; I might, perhaps, say no representation at all of life, except in the rudest and most barbarous form. There seem to be very good forms in the gold and silver objects of Hissarlik, but always associated with plain work; no animal or even vegetable representation calling for notice from the present point of view, none of the repoussé work, nothing resembling the (apparently) beautiful cylinder (p. [287]), or the elaborate rings photographed in this volume. How are we to account for this? And does an argument hence arise, that the Hissarlik remains belong to a period different from, and anterior to, that which produced the works at Mycenæ? That the adverse case may be made as strong as possible, let it be borne in mind that while Homer indicates Orchomenos, and above all Egyptian Thebes, as the wealthiest cities of his little world, he seems designedly to assign the very same stage of opulence to Troy, which he gives to Mycenæ; for he describes by one and the same epithet, poluchrusos, which means gold-abounding, these two cities and these two alone. Troy has it in Il. XVIII. 289. For Mycenæ it was almost a formula; see Il. VII. 180, XI. 46; Od. III. 305.

We have now before us, as is not improbable, the choicest samples of what the two cities had to boast of; and the question is, can we account for the difference in opulence, and stage of art, between them? I conceive that we can, at least in a considerable degree; but it is only by that acknowledgment, which some are still indisposed to make, of the broad vein of historic reality, that runs through the delineations of the Iliad and Odyssey.

Three passages of the Iliad, in particular, convey to us that the city of Troy was suffering great impoverishment by the War. Indeed, if there be a grain of fact in the tale, it could not be otherwise. For the means of resisting the truly national attack of the Achaians, she was dependent neither on a good cause, nor on a soldiery commensurate with theirs. She had to seek strength from without; first from the grudging support of Dardania, secondly from the neighbouring tribes both of Europe and of Asia. It might even be inferred from the text that nine-tenths of the fighting power (Il. II. 123-33) were other than strictly domestic. But this support from without could only be got by paying for it. Accordingly Hector, in the Seventeenth Book speaks with the authority (220-32) of a general addressing allies, who are duly compensated for their services. So also we know that the great Eurupulos and his Keteians,[6] or Hittites (Od. XI. 520), fall in numbers on the plains of Troy, "serving for gifts." "I wear out the Trojans," says Hector, "with presents and with victualling for you." Again in the Twenty-fourth Book, Achilles, compassionately addressing Priam, says, "We hear that you once were prosperous, and exceeded in wealth, as well as in the number of your sons, all the neighbouring countries" (543-6). The inference is obvious; that at the time, though the city had not been captured, it was becoming comparatively poor. But the most express testimony is that of Il. XVIII. 288-92, when Hector stimulates his countrymen to sally out, by reminding them that they are already well-nigh ruined. Once, he says, all men were wont to celebrate the wealth of Troy; "but now the fine valuables have utterly disappeared from our mansions."

νῦν δὲ δὴ ἐξαπόλωλε δόομων κειμήλια καλά

And, under the wrath of Zeus, multitudes of their possessions had been sent in exchange to Phrygia and Mæonia; in exchange, that is, as I presume, for necessaries. But the great Mycenean deposit, if Schliemann be right in his view, was made before the time of any sack or depopulation of the city. Upon such an issue of life and death, as that offered to the Trojans, the best objects would naturally be parted with, as the most effective for their purpose (see Il. XXIV. 234-7); and accordingly, if we are comparing Troy and Mycenæ at all, we are comparing Troy in its exhaustion with Mycenæ in its prosperity.

We have among the remains in the precious metals from Hissarlik, I believe, no representation of an animal, either chased or in the round. But the Poems give us several examples of such works in the possession of Greeks; though commonly under presumptions of foreign production, as it would not be difficult to show.

It is true, indeed, that Troy, in immediate contact with the large fertile districts of Asia Minor, had means of material growth by land-trade, which Greece, split by her mountain chains into comparatively narrow tracts of cultivable soil, did not possess. But it seems likely that even in those days the maritime commerce, stimulated by Phœnician ships and settlements, may have compensated, or more than compensated, for this disadvantage. Of the trade in metals and in corn, carried on by their race, we have distinct information in the Poems (Od. I. 183-4, XIV. 333-5). They had, in all likelihood, already been followed by the Greeks. The voyage of the ship Argo seems to have been of a mixed character. The ships of the armament against Troy could hardly have been supplied by a people, who had not made a substantial beginning in maritime trade. The navigation of the coasts, without reference to purposes of war, is evidently a familiar idea in the Odyssey. But, in the Iliad, the construction of the ships of Paris is noted as the remarkable work of a remarkable man (Il. V. 59-64); nor do we, except in this one ill-omened case, ever hear of Trojan navigation.

Once more. We are given to understand [7] that signs of the art of writing have been discovered at Hissarlik; whereas the new volume supplies us with nothing of the kind for Mycenæ. But nothing, I apprehend, can be affirmed of its existence either in Greece or Troas during the Homeric age, except as the secret of a few; in Greece it was manifestly exotic, and perhaps it may have been the same in Troas. As long as the evidence remains in this state, we cannot infer from it with confidence any important proposition as to comparative advancement.

I now resume the list of points of contact between the Mycenean discoveries and the Poems, by noticing such of them as are found in movables.

1. As the first of these I take the free use of copper for large utensils (pp. [274]-[277]). We have also the analysis supplied by Dr. Percy of a sword and a vase-handle of bronze (pp. [372]-[5]). In my judgment, we have no sign whatever from the Poems of the fusion of metals together as a domestic practice; while we have abundant proof of the importation and foreign production of works of art and implements in bronze. This vase, then, may probably have been foreign. The same is likely with respect to the sword. We know that swords were exported and imported between different countries. Thrace was a seat of manufacture both for fine works of art (Il. XXIV. 234) and for weapons (Il. XXIII. 808): and we find a sword, "beautiful and long," from Thrace, in the possession of the Trojan Prince Helenos (Il. XIII. 577). Moreover, copper was an abundant metal, tin a rare one. Bronze weapons, therefore, must have been expensive. And the swords of bronze found in the tombs, in conjunction with all other costly objects, are just where we should have expected them. Even so at Hissarlik, two battle-axes found in the Treasure, and presumably belonging therefore to distinguished persons, were of bronze.[8] But axes made of pure copper may be seen in the Museum of the Irish Academy; and the great layer of copper-scoriæ at Hissarlik, without any tin, seems effectually to show that copper was the staple metal of the heroic period, and that our archæologists will have to insert a copper age in their lists, between their age of stone and their age of bronze. If weapons of copper were to be discovered in the tombs at Mycenæ, no circumstance could more enhance the proofs afforded by the Poems of the general use of copper; because the weapons in the tombs are weapons of the persons most likely to be able to command the use of bronze. I hope that the analysis, already begun, will be applied to a much larger number of objects. In the meantime, as to large utensils, I find the discoveries already in close correspondence with the Poems.

2. The most remarkable, perhaps, in themselves, of all the objects discovered at Hissarlik, were the two elaborate head-dresses of gold, which for the first time enabled us to construe, with reasonable confidence, the entire passage in the Iliad (XXII. 468-72), which describes the head-dress cast away by Andromachè in the agony of her grief. The print will not have been forgotten, which exhibits the plektè anadesmè.[9] It was a series of gold plaits, hanging down, over the forehead and the ears, from the broad band (ampūx) which ran round the head, and which constituted as it were the base of the ornament. With these objects, and with the Poems, Schliemann associates, incontestably as it would appear, the ornament No. [357] (p. [248]); a band or frontlet adorned "with rosettes and crosses. It has two perforations in the rim, a little way from either end, from one of which is still hanging the fragment of a very fine chain." The only variation in the fashion of the thing seems to be, that the plaits have not been continued over the forehead.

3. Hissarlik did nothing for us towards explaining the kredemnon; an article of head-dress worn by many or some women of the heroic age, who could not add to it the splendid decorations then reserved for princesses. But the definitions of this commodity are supplied for us by the Poems, piecemeal indeed, yet with adequate clearness. In the first place, it crowned the head like the battlements of a walled city; for the destruction of the walls of Troy is described as the ruin of its sacred kredemna (Il. XVI. 100).

It was not, however, a metallic or solid object; for the deified Ino, to save Odysseus from the fury of the storm, throws to him her own kredemnon and bids him bind it round his chest (Od. V. 346). It used to be made of delicate and glossy material (Od. I. 334), and was worthy even to be a marriage gift from Aphroditè to the bride of Hector (Il. XXII. 470). But finally, it had a long wing, tail, or lappet (I am not skilled or confident in this vocabulary), descending from behind, perhaps more than one. This is shown indirectly, but I think conclusively, by the information given us in Od. VI. 100, that the handmaidens of Nausicaä, when about to play at ball, first put away their kredemna, evidently lest the free movement of their arms should be embarrassed by the long lappets. Again, it is evident that Penelopè, when she used her kredemna to cover her face, brought the lappets round and employed them as a veil; on any other ground the use of the plural can hardly be explained (Od. I. 334). And now this part of the prehistoric lady's toilette is as complete as I can make it from the Poems.

I turn, then, to Dr. Schliemann's volume, and call attention to the signet ring at p. [354], which, though apparently not of a high order in art, combines so many objects of interest. On the extreme left of the picture stands a child, or small woman, who is picking fruit from a tree. Behind her head appear to descend long tresses of hair. What if these should prove on further examination to be lappets from a head-dress which the head seems to carry? Passing to the right of the tree, first comes a tall seated woman in a turban, which carries in front, says our author, a diadem and behind a "tress of hair" from the point into which the turban runs. I cannot but suppose this "tress" to be a lappet of the kredemnon. She offers poppies to another tall woman, again dressed in a turban running out into a point (p. [356]), "from which a long ornament hangs down on the back," a third time, in all likelihood, the lappet of the kredemnon. Below her outstretched right arm we have another small figure, probably of a child, again in a turban, and with "a long tress of hair, or some ornament, hanging down its back:" yet once more, I conjecture, the lappet indicated by Homer. There is also a fifth: we have still the figure to the right of the picture (p. [357]); and she, too, wears a turban terminating in a point "from which a long band-like ornament hangs down on her back." Now let us go aloft; and we find a small figure, towards the right of the picture. This figure (p. [357]) is described by Schliemann as female, from his observing breasts upon it: and again, "from the back project the long bands." Thus, in all the six cases, we appear to have the same remarkable form described for the main article of female head dress, which is also given us by Homer.

It may, however, be said that the female figures on this ring are foreign, rather than Hellenic, in their character and habiliments. But it happens that the evidence of the Poems more copiously establishes the use of the kredemnon among foreigners, than in Greece. We hear indeed of the kredemna of Penelopè; and Hera, when about to inveigle Zeus, assumes the kredemnon (Il. XIV. 184). But it is worn, as we have seen, by Andromachè in Troy; by Ino, a deity of Phœnician extraction; and by the maidens attendant on Nausicaä in Scheriè.

4. In the upper region, or what we might call the sky of the picture, are presented to us, apparently in very rough outline, the sun and a thinly horned moon.[10] Below them is an uneven band, forming rudely an arc of a circle. This, I am led to suppose, is an indication of mother-earth, with its uneven surface of land and its rippling sea, in the proper place, beneath the sun and moon. If this be so, it greatly confirms the conjecture of Mr. Newton respecting the six objects on the rim of the picture to the right. He asks whether these can be the teirea (Il. XVIII. 485), the stars of heaven, which are described by Homer as placed upon the Shield of Achilles, together with the sun, moon, sky, earth, and sea. Schliemann assigns to this sestetto heads and eyes: Mr. Newton says they are thought to be heads of lions. That they should be things animate is not, I imagine, in conflict with the conjecture that they may be stars. The spirit of Hellenism transmuted the older Nature-worship by impersonations, of which we have an Homeric example in the astral Orion (Il. XVIII. 486, Od. XI. 572). Should these conjectures be confirmed, the matter will be of peculiar interest: for we shall then have before us, in actual collocation, the very objects, which people the first compartment of the god-wrought Shield of Achilles: the earth (of land and sea), sun, moon, and all the stars of heaven. The ouranos or heaven itself, which the Poet also includes, is here in all likelihood represented by the curvature of the picture.

5. The goblet (No. 346 of the volume) has on each of its two handles, we are told, the carved figure of a dove in gold. Schliemann observes on the correspondence with the goblet of Nestor (Il. XI. 632-635). We are not indeed told that this was of gold; probably a different material is to be supposed from the mention of gold as the material of these parts or appendages. But it had four handles, and on each handle were two doves. We are also told that he did not get it in Troy, which may remind us of the argument already presented, but brought it from home. It was probably a foreign work; for the Phœnician associations of Nestor are attested by his descent from Poseidon (Od. XI. 254). This is fairly to be noted for an instance of equable development in art, as between the discoveries and the Poems.

6. We frequently hear in the Poems of the golden studs or buttons which were used as ornamental adjuncts. In many passages we have the silver-studded sword, xiphos or phasganon arguroëlon (Il. II. 45, III. 334 et al.). This, I say, is common. We have also studs, or bosses, of gold upon the staff or sceptre of Achilles (Il. I. 246), upon the cup of Nestor XI. 632-635: and upon a sword, only once it is true, but then that sword is the sword of Agamemnon, king of gold-abounding Mycenæ (Il. XI. 29). On this sword, says the Poet, there were gilt, or golden, bosses; and the expression he uses about them (pamphainon) is worthy of note. It is not easy to represent by any one English word. It means not merely shining brightly, but shining all over; that is to say, apparently, all over the sheath to which they were attached, so as to make it seem a shining mass. Is not this precisely what must have been the effect of the line of bosses found lying by the sword in p. 303, which lie closely together, are broader than the blade, and probably covered the whole available space along the sheath of wood, now mouldered away? And is it not now startling, to descend into the tombs with Dr. Schliemann, and to find there lying silently in rows these gold studs or bosses, when the wooden sheaths they were attached to have for the most part mouldered away, but by the very sides of the very swords which they adorned like binding on a book, and of the slight remains of warriors by whom, there need be little doubt, those swords were wielded?

"Expende Annibalem; quot libras in duce summo Invenies?"[11]

They also appear on the sword-handle knobs. The helos of Homer is commonly rendered a nail or stud, which has a head of small size; but the word probably includes the larger buttons or bosses, which lie in lines along some of the swords. (See on this point pp. [281], 2; [303], 5, 6.)

I will not attempt to pursue further an enumeration which, growing more and more minute, would be wearisome. If porcelain and glass have been found, I should at once assign them to foreign importation. The art of casting and tooling in the precious metals, of which the examples would appear, both from our author and from Mr. Newton, to be few, are probably to be referred to a like source. The hammer and the pincers are the only instruments for metallic manipulation, of which Homer appears to be aware (Il. XVIII. 477, Od. III. 434-5). As regards the pottery mentioned by our author, if some of the goblets were of light green (p. [285]), we have a colour developed in their manufacture of which Homer had certainly no distinct conception, though it may still be true that, as in nature, so in human art, objects bearing that colour may have met his eye. Of the scales in the third sepulchre there seems no reason to doubt that we may find the interpretation, by referring them to the Egyptian scheme of doctrine with regard to a future life (pp. [197], 8). In the Books of the Dead, we have an elaborate representation of the judgment-hall, to which the departed soul is summoned. Here the scales form a very prominent object;[12] and it seems very possible that the Poet, who was Greek and not Egyptian in his ideas of the future state, may have borrowed and transposed, from this quarter, the image of the balances displayed on high, which he employs with such fine effect in some critical passages of the Iliad. As regards the emblem of the double-headed or full-formed axe, I venture to dispense with the cautious reserve of Schliemann. As the usual form of a weapon familiar to the age, it seems to require no special explanation (p. [252]). But where we find it conjoined with the ox-head (p. [218]), or on the great signet ring in conjunction with a figure evidently representing Deity, I cannot hesitate to regard it as a sacrificial symbol. We have only to remember the passage in the third Odyssey, where the apparatus of sacrifice is detailed, and Thrasumedes, who was to strike the blow, brought the axe (III. 442):—

πέλεκυν δὲ μενεπτόλεμος Θρασυμήδης

ὀξὺν ἔχων ἐν χερσὶι παρίστατο, βοῦν ἐπικέψων.

The boar's teeth (p. [273]) supply a minor, perhaps, but a clear and significant point of correspondence to be added to our list (Il. X. 263-264). Another is to be noticed in the manner of attaching, by wire, lids and covers. On these subjects, I refer to the text of the volume.

By the foregoing detail I have sought to show that there is no preliminary bar to our entertaining the capital question whether the tombs now unearthed, and the remains exposed to view, under masks for the faces, and plates of gold covering one or more of the trunks, are the tombs and remains of the great Agamemnon and his compeers, who have enjoyed, through the agency of Homer, such a protracted longevity of renown. For the general character of the Mycenean treasures, I take my stand provisionally on the declaration of Mr. Newton (supported by Mr. Gardner), that, in his judgment, they belong to the prehistoric or heroic age, the age antecedent to his Greco-Phœnician period; and in important outlines of detail I have endeavoured to show that they have many points of contact with the Homeric Poems, and with the discoveries at Hissarlik. But this Preface makes no pretension whatever to exhibit a complete catalogue of the objects, or to supply for each of them its interpretation. We encounter, indeed, a certain number of puzzling phenomena, such as the appearance of something like visors, for which I could desire some other explanation, but which Schliemann cites as auxiliaries to the masks of the tombs, and even thinks to prove that such articles were used by the living, as well as for the dead (p. [359]).

Undoubtedly, in my view, these masks constitute a great difficulty, when we come to handle the question who were the occupants of the now opened sepulchres? It may be, that as Mr. Newton says, we must in the main rest content with the "reasonable presumption" that the four tombs contained Royal personages, and must leave in abeyance the further question, whether they are the tombs indicated to Pausanias by the local tradition; at any rate, until the ruins of Mycenæ shall have been further explored, according to the intention which the government of Greece is said to have conceived.

At the same time this is a case where the question before us, if hazardous to prosecute, is not easy to let alone.

It is obviously difficult to find any simple, clear, consistent interpretation of the extraordinary inhumation disclosed to us by these researches. Such an interpretation may be found hereafter: it does not seem to be forthcoming at the present moment. But the way towards it can only be opened up by a painstaking exhibition of the facts, and by instituting a cautious comparison between them and any indications, drawn from other times or places, which may appear to throw light upon them. For my own part, having approached the question with no predisposition to believe, I need not scruple to say I am brought or driven by the evidence to certain conclusions; and also led on to certain conjectures suggested by those conclusions. The first conclusion is that we cannot refer the five entombments in the Agora at Mycenæ to any period within the historic age. The second is that they are entombments of great, and almost certainly in part of royal, personages. The third, that they bear indisputable marks of having been effected, not normally throughout, but in connection with circumstances, which impressed upon them an irregular and unusual character. The conjecture is, that these may very well be the tombs of Agamemnon and his company. It is supported in part by a number of presumptions, but in great part also by the difficulty, not to say the impossibility, of offering any other suggestion which could be deemed so much as colourable.

The principal facts which we have to notice appear to be as follows:—

1. The situation chosen for the interments.

2. The numbers of persons simultaneously interred.

3. The dimensions and character of the graves.

4. The partial application of fire to the remains.

5. The use of masks, and likewise of metallic plates, to adorn or shelter them, or both.

6. The copious deposit both of characteristic and of valuable objects in conjunction with the bodies.

1. Upon the situation chosen for the interments, Dr. Schliemann opines that they were not originally within the Agora, but that it was subsequently constructed around the tombs (p. 340). His reasons are that the supporting wall, on which rest, in double line, the upright slabs, formerly, and in six cases still, covered by horizontal slabs as seats for the elders, is careless in execution, and inferior to the circuit wall of the Acropolis. But, if it was built as a mere stay, was there any reason for spending labour to raise it to the point of strength necessary for a work of military defence? Further, he finds between the lines of slabs, where they are uncovered, broken pottery of the prehistoric period more recent than that of the tombs. But such pottery would never have been placed there at the time of the construction; with other rubbish, it would only have weakened and not strengthened the fabric of the inclosure. Nor can we readily see how it could have come there, until the work was dilapidated by the disappearance of the upper slabs. If so, it would of course be later in date than the slabs were.

It appears to me that the argument of improbability tells powerfully against the supposition that the Agora was constructed round the tombs, having previously been elsewhere. The space within the Acropolis appears to be very limited: close round the inclosures are 'Cyclopean' houses and cisterns. When works of this kind are once constructed, their removal would be a work of great difficulty: and this is a case, where the earliest builders were followed by men who aimed not at greater, but at less, solidity. Besides which, the Agora was connected with the religion of the place, and was, as will be shown, in the immediate neighbourhood of the palace. In addition to these material attractions, every kind of moral association would grow up around it.

It can be clearly shown that the ancient Agora was bound down to its site by manifold ties, other than those of mere solidity in its construction. It stands in Mycenæ, says our author (p. [341]), on the most imposing and most beautiful spot of the city, from whence the whole was overlooked. It was on these high places that the men of the prehistoric ages erected the simple structures, in many cases perhaps uncovered, that, with the altars, served for the worship of the gods. In Scheriè, it was built round the temple, so to call it, of Poseidon (Od. VI. 266). In the Greek camp before Troy the Agora was in the centre of the line of ships (Il. XI. 5-9, 806-8). There justice was administered, and there "had been constructed the altars of the gods." Further, it is clear, from a number of passages in Homer, that the place of Assembly was always close to the royal palace. In the case of Troy we are told expressly that it was held by the doors of Priam (Il. II. 788, VII. 345, 6). In Scheriè, the palace of Alkinoös was close to the grove of Athenè (Od. VI. 291-3); and we can hardly doubt that this grove was in the immediate vicinity of the Posideïon, which was itself within the Agora. In Ithaca (Od. XXIV. 415 seqq.), the people gathered before the Palace of Odysseus, and then went in a mass into the Agora. While it was thus materially associated with those points of the city which most possessed the character of fixtures, it is not too much to say, considering the politics of early Greece, that it must, in the natural course, have become a centre around which would cling the fondest moral and historical associations of the people. Into the minor question whether the encircling slabs are the remains of an original portion of the work or not, I do not think it needful for me to enter.

But, while I believe that the Agora is where it was, the honour paid to the dead by the presence of their tombs within it is not affected by either alternative; but only the time of paying it. If this be the old Agora, they were honoured by being laid in it; if it is of later date, they were honoured by its being removed in order to be built around them; if at least this was done knowingly, and how could it be otherwise, when we observe that the five tombs occupy more than a moiety of the whole available space? We know, from the evidence of the historic period, that to be buried in the Agora was a note of public honour; we cannot reasonably doubt, with the five graves before us, that it was such likewise in the historic age.

It was a note of public honour, then, if these bodies were originally buried in the Agora. If we adopt the less probable supposition that the Agora was afterwards constructed around them by reason of their being there, the honour may seem even greater still.

2. Next, the number of persons simultaneously interred, when taken in conjunction with the other features of the transaction, offers a new problem for consideration. An argument in p. [337], to show that the burials were simultaneous, seems quite conclusive. They embraced (ibid.) sixteen or seventeen persons. Among the bodies one appears to be marked out by probable evidence as that of the leading personage. Lying in the tomb marked as No. 1, it has two companions. Now Agamemnon had two marshals or heralds (Il. I. 320), whose office partook of a sacred character. There might, therefore, be nothing strange in their being laid, if so it were, by their lord. The most marked of the bodies lay to the north of the two others, all three having the feet to the westward. It was distinguished by better preservation, which may, at least not improbably, have been due to some preservative process at the time of interment. It carried, besides a golden mask (p. [296]), a large golden breastplate (15⅗ by 9½ in.), and other leaves of gold at various points; also a golden belt across the loins, 4 ft. long and 1¾ in. broad. By the side of the figure lay two swords, stated by Dr. Schliemann to be of bronze (p. [302]), the ornamentation of one of them particularly in striking accordance with the description in the Iliad of the sword of Agamemnon (Il. XI. 29-31). Within a foot of the body, to the right, lay eleven other swords (p. [304]), but this is not a distinctive mark, as the body on the south side has fifteen, ten lying at the feet, and a great heap of swords were found at the west end, between this and the middle body.

The entire number of bodies in the five tombs (p. [337]), which is stated at sixteen or seventeen, seems to have included three women and two or three children. The local tradition recorded by Pausanias (inf. p. 59) takes notice of a company of men with Agamemnon, and of Cassandra, with two children whom she was reported to have borne. This is only significant as testifying to the ancient belief that children were buried in the tombs: for Cassandra could only be taken captive at the time when the city of Troy was sacked, and the assassination immediately followed the arrival in Greece. But it is likely enough that these children may have been the offspring of another concubine, who may have taken the place Briseïs was meant to fill. This is of course mere speculation; but the meaning is that there is nothing in these indications to impair the force of any presumptions, which the discoveries may in other respects legitimately raise.

3. Like the site in the Agora, so the character of the tombstones, which is in strict correspondence with the style of many of the ornaments,[13] and the depth of the tombs, appear with one voice to signify honour to the dead. As I understand the Plans, they show a maximum depth of 25 feet (see, e.g., p. 155) below the surface, hollowed for the most part out of the solid rock. But then we are met with the staggering fact that the bodies of full-grown, and apparently (p. [295]) tall, men have been forced into a space of only five feet six inches in length, so as to require that sort of compression which amounts almost to mutilation.

We seem thus to stand in the face of circumstances that contradict one another. The place, the depth, the coverings of the tombs, appear to lead us in one direction; the forcing and squeezing of the bodies in another. But further, and stranger still, there seems to have been no necessity for placing the bodies under this unbecoming, nay revolting, pressure. The original dimensions of the tomb (p. [294]) were 21 ft. 6 in. by 11 ft. 6 in. These are reduced all round, first by an inner wall two feet thick, and secondly by a slanting projection one foot thick (at the bottom) to 5 ft. 6 in. and 15 ft. 6 in. Why, then, were the bodies not laid along, instead of across, it? Was not the act needless as well as barbarous? And to what motive is a piece of needless barbarism, apparently so unequivocal, to be referred? I hardly dare to mention, much less, so scanty is the evidence, to dwell upon the fact that their bodies lie towards the west, and that the Egyptian receptacle for the dead lay in that quarter.[14] The conflict of appearances, at which we have now arrived, appears to point to a double motive in the original entombment; or to an incomplete and incoherent proceeding, which some attempt was subsequently made to correct; or to both. But let us pay a brief attention to the remaining particulars of the disclosures.

4. We have next to observe (a) that fire was applied to these remains; (b) that the application of it was only partial; (c) that the metallic deposits are said to show marks [15] of the action of it (pp. [158], [165], [188], [198], [201], [208], [215], [218], [260], [266], [321], [330]): so do the pebbles (p. [294]). We see, therefore, that the deposition of the precious objects took place either at the same moment with the fire, or, and more probably I suppose, before it had entirely burned out.

The partial nature of the burning requires a more detailed consideration. In the Homeric burials, burning is universal. It must be regarded, according to the Poems, as the established Achaian custom of the day, wherever inhumation was normally conducted. And for burial there was a distinct reason, namely, that without it the Shade of the departed was not allowed to join the company of the other Shades, so that the unburied Elpenor is the first to meet Odysseus (Od. XI. 51) on his entrance into the Underworld; and the shade of Patroclos entreats Achilles to bury him as rapidly as may be, that he may pass the gates of Aïdes (Il. XXIII. 71). I think the proof of the universal use of fire in regular burials at this period is conclusive.

Not only do we find it in the great burials of the Seventh Book (429-32), and in the funerals of Patroclos (XXIII. 177) and Hector (XXIV. 785-800), but we have it in the case of Elpenor (Od. XII. 11-13), whom at first his companions had left uninterred, and for whom therefore we must suppose they only did what was needful under established custom. Perhaps a yet clearer proof is to be found in a simile. Achilles, we are told, wept while the funeral pile he had erected was burning, all night long, the bones of Patroclos, "as a father weeps when he burns the bones of his youthful son" (XXIII. 222-5). This testifies to a general practice.

In the case of notable persons, the combustion was not complete. For not the ashes only, but the bones, were carefully gathered. In the case of Patroclos, they are wrapped in fat, and put in an open cup or bowl (phialè) for temporary custody (XXIII. 239-44) until the funeral of Achilles, when with those of Achilles himself, similarly wrapped, and soaked in wine, they are deposited in a golden urn (Od. XXIV. 73-7). In the case of Hector, the bones are in like manner gathered and lodged in a golden box, which is then placed in a trench and built over with a mass of stones (Il. XXIV. 793-8). Incomplete combustion, then, is common to the Homeric and the Mycenean instances. But in the case of the first tomb at Mycenæ, not only was there no collection of the bones for deposit in an urn, but they had not been touched; except in the instance of the middle body, where they had simply been disturbed, and the valuables perhaps removed, as hardly anything of the kind was found with it. In the case of the body on the north side, the flesh of the face remained unconsumed.

But though the use of fire was universal in honourable burial, burial itself was not allowed to all. Enemies, as a rule, were not buried. Hence the opening passage of the Iliad tells us that many heroes became a prey to dogs and birds (Il. I. 4). Such says Priam, before the conflict with Hector, he would make Achilles if he could (XXII. 42); and he anticipates a like distressing fate (66 seqq.) for himself. In the Odyssey, the bodies of the Suitors are left to be removed by their friends (XXII. 448; XXIV. 417). Achilles, indeed, buried Eëtion, king of Asiatic Thebes, with his arms, in the regular manner. "He did not simply spoil him, for he had a scruple in his mind" (Il. VI. 417); and no wonder; for Eëtion, king of the Kilikes, was not an enemy: that people does not appear among the allies of Troy in the Catalogue. Thus there was a variance of use; and there may have been cases of irregular intermediate treatment between the two extremes of honourable burial and casting out to the dogs.

5. With regard to the use of masks of gold for the dead, I hope that the Mycenean discoveries will lead to a full collection of the evidence upon this rare and curious practice. For the present, I limit myself to the following observations:

(1.) If not less than seven of these golden masks have been discovered at Mycenæ by Dr. Schliemann, then the use of them, on the occasion of these entombments, was not limited to royal persons, of whom it is impossible to make out so large a number.

(2.) I am not aware of any proof at present before us that the use of such masks for the dead of any rank or class was a custom prevalent, or even known, in Greece. There is much information, from Homer downwards, supplied to us by the literature of that country concerning burials; and yet, in a course of more than 1200 years, there is not a single allusion to the custom of using masks for the dead. It seems to be agreed that the passage in the works of Lucian, who is reckoned to have flourished in the second half of the second century, does not refer to the use of such masks. This might lead us to the conjecture that, where the practice has appeared, it was a remainder of foreign usage, a survival from immigration.

(3.) Masks have been found in tombs, not in Greece, but in the Crimea, Campania, and Mesopotamia. Our latest information on the subject is, I believe, the account mentioned in Dr. Schliemann's last report from Athens (pp xlvii, xlviii), of a gold mask found on the Phœnician coast over against Aradus, which is of the size suited for an infant only. It is to be remembered that heroic Greece is full of the marks of what I may term Phœnicianism, most of which passed into the usages of the country, and contributed to form the base of Hellenic life. Nor does it seem improbable, that this use of the metallic mask may have been a Phœnician adaptation from the Egyptian custom of printing the likeness of the dead on the mummy case. And, again, we are to bear in mind that Mycenæ had been the seat of repeated foreign immigrations.

(4.) We have not to deal in this case only with masks, but with the case of a breastplate in gold, which, however, could not have been intended for use in war; together with other leaves or plates of gold, found on, or apparently intended for, other portions of the person.

6. Lastly, with regard to the deposit of objects which, besides being characteristic, have unchangeable value, the only point on which I have here to remark is, their extraordinary amount. It is such, I conceive, as to give to these objects, and particularly to those of the First Tomb, an exceptional place among the sepulchral deposits of antiquity. I understand that their weight is about one hundred pounds troy, or nearly that of five thousand British sovereigns. It is difficult to suppose that this deposit could have been usual, even with the remains of a King; and it is at this point that I, for one, am compelled to break finally and altogether with the supposition, that this great entombment, in the condition in which Dr. Schliemann found it, was simply an entombment of Agamemnon and his company effected by Ægisthus and Clytemnestra, their murderers.

So far, with little argument, I have endeavoured fairly to set out the facts. Let me now endeavour to draw to a point the several threads of the subject, in order to deal with the main question, namely, whether these half-wasted, half-burned remains are the ashes of Agamemnon and his company? And truly this is a case, where it may be said to the inquirer, in figure as well as in fact,

"et incedis per ignes

Suppositos cineri doloso."[16]

Let us place clearly before our eyes the account given by the Shade of Agamemnon, in the Eleventh Odyssey (405-434), of the manner of his death. No darker picture could be drawn. It combined every circumstance of cruelty with every circumstance of fraud. At the hospitable board, amid the flowing wine-cups, he was slain like an ox at the stall, and his comrades like so many hogs for a rich man's banquet; with deaths more piteous than he had ever known in single combat, or in the rush of armies. Most piteous of all was the death of Cassandra, whom the cruel Clytemnestra despatched with her own hand while clinging to Agamemnon; nor did she vouchsafe to her husband the last office of mercy and compassion, by closing his mouth and eyes in death. Singularly enough, Dr. Schliemann assures me that the right eye, which alone could be seen with tolerable clearness, was not entirely shut (see the engraving at p. [297]); while the teeth of the upper jawbone (see the same engraving) did not quite join those of the lower. This condition, he thinks, may be due to the superincumbent weight. But if the weight had opened the jaw, would not the opening, in all likelihood, have been much wider?

Now, as we are told that Ægisthus reigned until Orestes reached his manhood, we must assume that the massacre was in all respects triumphant. Yet there could hardly fail to be a party among the people favourable to the returning King, who had covered his country with unequalled glory. There might thus be found in the circumstances a certain dualism, a ground for compromise, such as may go far to account for the discrepancies of intention, which we seem to find in the entombments. There was this division of sentiment among the people, in the only case where we know the return of the prince from Troy to have been accompanied with a crisis or conflict, I mean the case of Ithaca.

The assassins proceeded in such a way, that the only consistent accomplishment of their design would have been found in casting forth the bodies of the slain like the bodies of enemies. But this may have been forbidden by policy. In the Julius Cæsar of Shakespeare, Brutus says (III. 1.)—

"We are contented Cæsar shall

Have all due rites and lawful ceremonies.

It shall advantage more than do us wrong."

Ægisthus was not Brutus. Even fury was apparent in the incidents of the slaughter. Yet there might be a desire to keep up appearances afterwards, and to allow some semblance of an honourable burial. There is one special circumstance that favours the idea of a double process, namely, that we readily find the agents for both parts of it; the murderers for the first, with necessity and policy controlling hatred; Orestes on his return for the second, with the double motive of piety and revenge.

We are now on the road not of history, but of reasonable conjecture. I try to account for a burial, which according to all reasonable presumption is of the heroic age, and of royal and famous personages, but which presents conflicting features of honour and of shame. That there is no conflicting hypothesis, is not a good reason for precipitate assent to the hypothesis which we may term Agamemnonian. Conjecture, to be admissible, ought to be consistent with itself, to meet the main demands of the known facts, and to present no trait at actual variance with any of them. In this view I present the hypothesis of a double procedure, and a double agency: and I submit, that there is nothing irrational in the following chain of suppositions for the First Tomb, while the others are probably included in the argument. That the usurping assassins, from the same policy, granted the honour of burial in the Agora; hewed the sepulchre deep and large in the rock; and built the encircling wall within it. That honour stopped with the preparation of the tomb, and the rest, less visible to the public eye, was left to spite or haste. That the bodies were consequently placed in the seemingly strange and indecent fashion, which the tomb has disclosed. That, as they were protected by the rock, and by the depth from the surface, their decomposition was slow. That Orestes, on his return, could not but be aware of the circumstances, and, in the fulfilment of his divinely ordered mission, determined upon reparation to the dead. That he opened the tombs and arranged the means of cremation. That, owing to the depth, it was imperfect from want of ventilation; we may remember that in the case of Patroclos the winds were specially summoned to expedite the process (Il. XXIII. 192-218). In calling it imperfect, I mean that it stopped short of the point at which the bones could be gathered; and they remained in situ. That the masks, breastplate, and other leaves of gold were used, perhaps, in part with reference to custom; in part, especially as regards all beside the masks, to replace in the wasted bodies the seemliness and majesty of nature, and to shelter its dilapidation. That the profuse deposits of arms and valuables were due to filial piety. That the same sentiment carried the work through even to the careful sculpturing of the four tombstones (others have been found (p. [100]), but without sculpture); and sought, by their means, to indicate for renown and reverence, and to secure from greedy violation, the resting-place of the dead.

A complex solution, perhaps; but one applicable to very complex facts, and one of which the ground at least is laid in those facts; one also, which I offer as a contribution to a most interesting scrutiny, but with no claim or pretension to uphold it against any other, that may seem better entitled to fill the vacant place.

W. E. G.
HAWARDEN, November, 1877.

DR. SCHLIEMANN'S ACCOUNT OF A TOMB AT SPATA, IN ATTICA.

Athens, 1st Oct., 1877.

For some months past it has repeatedly been asserted in the Press by travellers that there exists a very great similarity between the Mycenean antiquities and those recently discovered in a tomb at Spata. Having now visited the latter, in company with my esteemed friend Professor E. Castorches, of the University of Athens, and his daughter Helen, and having carefully examined the objects found in it, I think it in the interest of science to offer the following remarks on the subject. The village of Spata, which is exclusively inhabited by Albanians, lies about nine miles to the east of Athens, on the further side of Mount Hymettus, on the road to Marathon. Close to that village is a small mount, whose circular summit has evidently been artificially levelled; it is covered to a depth of about three feet with débris, in which we see now and then fragments of archaic vases with painted parallel horizontal bands. The villagers assert that until very recently the summit was surrounded by the ruins of fortress walls, which have now altogether disappeared, the stones having been used for the building of the new village. The name of the settlement which existed here in antiquity is altogether uncertain. Colonel Leake [17] recognises in the present name, Spata, a corruption of the ancient demos of Sphettus (Σϕῆττος or Σϕηττός), which is mentioned by Aristophanes,[18] Strabo,[19] Pausanias,[20] Stephanus Byzantinus,[21] and others.

In the south-west side of the mount, which slopes at an angle of 52 degrees, there occurred last winter in one place a sudden breaking down of the ground, and in the hollow thus formed there was discovered a sepulchre cut out in the sandstone rock. The Archæological Society had the place explored, and it was found that an inclined road, cut in the rock, 74 feet long, led into the tomb. The road is 8¼ feet broad up to the entrance, which is 10 feet long and 3⅓ feet broad. The sepulchre consists of three quadrangular chambers, which are united by two passages 6½ feet long and 3⅓ feet broad; and the ceilings of these chambers are cut out in the rock in the form of roofs with two slanting sides. The primitive architect had evidently intended to give to each of these three chambers exactly the shape of a house, because the slanting sides of the roof-like ceiling do not converge directly from the vertical walls, but hang over by 8 inches like the eaves of a house. The height of the first chamber is 16½ feet, its breadth 15, and its length 20 feet; the two other chambers are 12½ feet high, 12 feet long, and 11½ feet broad. Of the existence of wooden doors there are no traces, except in the passage from the first to the second chamber. Seen from the extremity of the "dromos" this tomb reminds us of the Egyptian sepulchres.[22]

In each of the three chambers was found a human skeleton, with a quantity of ashes and charcoal, which seems to prove that each body had been burnt on the pyre in the very spot where it lay, but so superficially that the bones were preserved. In this respect, as well regarding the burning of the bodies in the tombs, we find a resemblance to the mode of burial of the bodies in the five royal sepulchres at Mycenæ. But here the bones crumbled away on being exposed to the air. This tomb had evidently been already rifled in ancient times, for but a few objects were found with the bodies; nearly all of them lay dispersed in the débris, in and before the entrance. They consisted of bone or ivory, glass, bronze, stone, and terra-cotta. Only a few flowers of very thin gold-leaf having been found, whose aggregate weight cannot exceed the eighth part of a pound, it appears that the tomb-robbers only aimed at the golden ornaments, and that they threw away all the rest.

The few terra-cotta vessels found here are all wheel-made; among the number there is one which perfectly resembles the vase represented under No. 25, p. [64]; it is ornamented with red and black circular bands, and is in the shape of a globe with a flat foot; it terminates above in a very pretty narrow neck, without an opening, the top of which is joined on each side by a beautifully shaped handle to the upper part of the body. The real mouth of the vase is in the shape of a funnel, and near to the closed neck. There was also found the upper part of a similar vase. I remind the reader that forty-three vases of exactly the same form were found in a sepulchre at Ialysus in Rhodes, and are now in the British Museum; that they sometimes, though but seldom, occur in Attica, and that some specimens of them have also been found in the Egyptian tombs and in Cyprus.

Another vase found in the tomb of Spata is ornamented with black spirals.

I also mention among the findings at Spata the large quantity of small ornaments which Professor Landerer's analysis has proved to consist of glass alloyed with much protoxide of lead, the latter having the property of breaking the rays of light; these ornaments present a silvery mirror-like glimmer. Landerer observes that it is soda-glass (in German, Natrum-Glas), and that it has the property of dividing into small leaves or splinters. It is very remarkable that all these ornaments of glass have evidently been cast in moulds, and that many of them resemble more or less the types which we see in the Mycenean moulds represented under No. 162 and No. 163, p. [107] and p. [109]. On the reverse side of most of these objects are one, two, or three small holes, or tubular rings, for fastening them on other objects, probably on clothes. A most frequent object here is that which we recognise in the type on the lower side of the mould, No. 162, p. [107]. There also occur small cones of a much weather-beaten glass, which have the very greatest similarity to the type which we see in that side of the mould, No. 163, which is represented on page [109] in the upper row to the right of the spectator; it also resembles very much the small cone, No. 164, p. [109], of which a large number were found at Mycenæ; the only difference is that the cones of Spata have an impressed spiral line, whereas the cones of Mycenæ show impressed concentric circles. However, it deserves attention that the mould, No. 163, represents the type of such a cone with a spiral line. But then, again, there is the greatest difference in the substance, for whilst at Spata all these small ornaments are of glass, the Mycenean cones and other objects, such as Nos. 164, 165, 166 and 167, are of a hard-baked clay, which has been varnished with a lead glaze; no trace of glass having been found at Mycenæ except some small glass beads, the small object, No. 177, and the almost microscopical tubes of cobalt glass described at pages [157] and [158]. As, on the other hand, there have been found a large quantity of small ornaments of hard-baked clay varnished with a lead-glaze, we cannot reasonably doubt that the manufacture of glass at Mycenæ was only in its first beginning, that until the capture of the city (468 B.C.) it made no progress there, and that all the types contained in the Mycenean moulds served merely for the casting of similar ornaments of baked clay varnished with a lead-glaze.

But there also occur in the tomb at Spata objects of blue cobalt glass, some of which are identical in shape with the object of stone represented under No. 172, p. [111].

All these objects of glass lead us to the conclusion that the sepulchre of Spata belongs to a much later time than the royal tombs of Mycenæ. But we find a much stronger proof of this in the carved works discovered in the Spata sepulchre, which are generally thought to consist of ivory, but which by the investigation of Professor Landerer are proved to consist of common bone. All these carved works appear to belong to a late period of Assyrian art; perhaps the most remarkable object among them is a beardless man's head covered with a very high Assyrian mitre, the lower part of which is ornamented all round with a diadem, whilst the upper part is divided by three double bands into four compartments. As usual in the Assyrian hair-dress, the hair hangs down on the neck in three tresses, lying the one on the other. I also mention a comb 5·8 in. long, 3·4 in. broad, the upper part of which is divided by narrow borders into two horizontal compartments; the upper one containing in the midst a flower and on either side a female sphinx; the lower one containing three female sphinxes. There are also two bone plates with female sphinxes. All these sphinxes have very large and broad wings and exhibit a most excellent Assyrian style of art. In comparison with them the golden sphinxes of the Mycenean tombs, of which I have represented one under No. 277, on p. [183], show a most ancient and very primitive style of art.

Among the carved works found in the tomb at Spata particular attention is due to a plate of bone, on which is represented a lion devouring an ox; the whole body of the former is represented as hovering in the air, and his long outstretched hind-legs vividly remind us of the representation of the lions on the Mycenean goblets and plates of gold. On the other hand the lion's head and the ox which he devours most decidedly show an Assyrian style of art.

I repeat here that no trace of Assyrian art was found at Mycenæ.

Another of the carved works from Spata which deserves attention is a disk of bone of 4·6 in. in diameter, with a border formed by two double lines, the whole interior space being in the form of a net, divided by treble wave-like lines into small triangles.

Professor Landerer asserts that these large plates and disks of bone prove beyond any doubt that the art of softening bone in water, and pressing it, and thus preparing very large pieces of bone, was known in Attica at a remote antiquity.

I still call attention, among the objects found at Spata, to the small disks of stone, which have on one side in the centre a small tube, and may have been used as ornaments on the house doors. They are mostly similar to objects which I found at Mycenæ;[23] but they were also found in the sepulchre at Ialysus, and may be seen in the British Museum.

Of bronze arrow-heads several specimens were found in the sepulchre at Spata, but no trace of them occurred in the Mycenean tombs. On the other hand there were found in one of the latter the thirty-five arrow-heads of obsidian represented under No. 435, p. [272], and arrow-heads of the same stone also occurred in the débris above the tombs; it was only in the upper layers of débris at Mycenæ that I found some arrow-heads of bronze.[24]

Among the objects found at Spata I further mention the fragment of a vase of black granite, with two holes for suspension; fragments of similar vases occurred also at Mycenæ.

Close to this tomb was discovered another, consisting of but one small chamber, approached by a dromos which has but half the length of that which leads to the large tomb. In the small tomb was found the skeleton of a man which had evidently likewise been burned on a pyre on the very spot where it lay; there was also found the skeleton of a stag, but nothing more.

Colonel Leake is in all probability right in proclaiming the identity of Spata with the ancient demos of Sphettus (Σϕῆττος or Σϕηττός), and as, according to Plutarch,[25] the fifty Pallantides, sons of Pallas, the brother of Ægeus, marched from Sphettus against Athens; and as Colonel Leake, guided by an inscription published by Finlay, identifies the site of the demos of Pallenæ, which the Pallantides inhabited, with a spur of mount Hymettus, which bars the road to Probalinthus and Marathon, and is thus in the immediate neighbourhood of Sphettus—for all these reasons it has been supposed that the tombs of Spata might possibly belong to the Pallantides killed by Theseus. But this opinion is contradicted by the objects discovered, which make it impossible for us to attribute the large tomb to an earlier period than the eighth century, B.C., whilst the royalty at Athens belongs to a very remote antiquity, and must be contemporaneous with royalty at Mycenæ.

The use of masks in antiquity being a question very important for Archaeology, I cannot conclude without mentioning that my esteemed friend Professor A. Rhousopoulos, of the University of Athens, reminds me of a very small golden mask found last spring in a sepulchre on the coast of ancient Phoenicia, just opposite to the island of Aradus. It had been bought there by a trader in antiquities, who brought it first to Athens, and showed it to me at Boulogne-sur-Mer, on his way to London, where he intended to sell it. It is of thin gold plate, and so small that it could apparently only fit on the face of a new-born child. It represents a human face with shut eyes, in very rude repoussé work.

THE FALL OF MYCENÆ AS DESCRIBED BY DIODORUS SICULUS.

I give, at my worthy friend Professor F. A. Paley's suggestion, a literal translation of the account which Diodorus Siculus (xi. 65) gives us of Mycenæ's tragic end:

"In the seventy-eighth Olympiad (B.C. 468) a war was set on foot between the Argives and the people of Mycenæ, on the following grounds. The Myceneans, proud of the high renown which their own country had formerly enjoyed, refused to obey the Argives as the other cities in that territory had done, but took up an independent position and paid no regard to the Argives. They had disputes with them also about the worship of the goddess Hera, and put in a claim to have the sole conduct and management of the Nemean games. And still further they were at variance with them because, when the Argives had passed a resolution not to aid the Spartans at Thermopylae, unless they should be allowed a share in the command, the Myceneans alone of all the inhabitants of Argolis joined the ranks of the Lacedæmonians. The Argives had besides a general suspicion that some day their rivals might become too powerful and dispute with them the sovereignty, from the former greatness of their city. Such being the motives for hostility, they had long been watching an opportunity to raze Mycenæ to the ground; and they thought the fitting time had now arrived, as they saw the Lacedæmonians had been defeated and were unable to bring any aid to the Myceneans. Accordingly they collected a strong force from Argos and the other states in alliance, and led them to the attack. The Myceneans were beaten, driven into the walls of their city, and besieged. For some time they defended themselves with spirit against the besieging hosts; but at length, partly because they had been worsted in the war, partly because the Lacedæmonians were unable to aid them, from having wars of their own on hand, as well as through the disastrous effects of the earthquakes, and having no one now to help them, through mere deficiency of aid from without they were taken by assault. The Myceneans were thus made slaves by the Argives, a tithe of their property was consecrated to the service of religion, and their city was razed to the ground. Thus a state that had been great and wealthy in times of old, had numbered many illustrious men and performed many glorious actions, met with its final overthrow, and it has remained desolate up to our times" (i.e., to the time of Augustus).

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

[Preface], by the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone	Page	[v]
[Dr. Schliemann's Account of a Tomb at Spata], in Attica	"	[xli]
[The Fall of Mycenæ], as described by Diodorus Siculus	"	[xlviii]
[Table of French and English Measures]	"	[lviii]
[List of Illustrations]	"	[lix]

[CHAPTER I.]

EXCAVATIONS AT TIRYNS.

Situation of the City—Description by Pausanias—Cyclopean Walls: meaning of the epithet—The Quarry—The rock of Tiryns and its bordering Wall—Galleries, Gate, and Tower—Walls and Terraces of the Acropolis—Mythical traditions and History of Tiryns—Its destruction by the Argives—Its connection with the myth of Hercules—Morasses in the Plain of Argos—The Walls of Tiryns the most ancient monument in Greece—Pottery a test of antiquity—Beginning of the Excavations—Cyclopean house-walls and conduits—Objects discovered—Terra-cotta cows, and female idols with cow's-horns—Both represent the goddess HERA BOÖPIS—A bird-headed idol—A bronze figure, the only piece of metal at Tiryns, except lead—No stone implements found—Pottery—Hellenic remains outside the citadel, which was the primitive city—Proofs of different periods of habitation—The later city of Tiryns—The archaic pottery of Tiryns like that of Mycenæ—Its forms and decoration denote higher civilisation than the rude walls would lead us to expect—Older pottery on the virgin soil, but no cows or idols—Probable date of the second nation at Tiryns, about 1000 to 800 B.C.; of the Cyclopean walls, about 1800 to 1600 B.C.—No resemblance to any of the pottery in the strata of Hissarlik, except the goblets—A human skeleton found—Whorls—Estimate of soil to be moved at Tiryns—Greater importance of MYCENÆ Page [1]

NOTE A.—"HERA BOÖPIS" [19]

[CHAPTER II.]

TOPOGRAPHY OF MYCENÆ.

GATE OF THE LIONS AND TREASURY OF ATREUS.

The road from Argos to Mycenæ—The Plain of Argos: its rivers and hills, horses and vegetation—Myth regarding its arid nature—Swamps in the southern part; and fable of the Lernæan hydra—Early social develop-ment here—Legend of Phoroneus—The Pelasgian Argos—The Achæan states of Argos and Mycenæ—Situation of Mycenæ—The Citadel and its Cyclopean walls—The term defined—"Gate of the Lions"—The postern gate—Cisterns—Poetical confusion of Argos and Mycenæ.

The Lower City: its house-walls, bridge, treasuries, and pottery—Its partially enclosing wall—The undefended suburb, and its large buildings—Its extent—The only two wells in Mycenæ—Three Treasuries in the suburb—Treasuries in the Lower City—Description of the "Treasury of Atreus"—Dodwell's Argument for regarding the building as a Treasury—Uniqueness of these structures—Excavation of the Treasury by Veli Pasha [23]

[CHAPTER III.]

HISTORY OF MYCENÆ AND THE FAMILY OF PELOPS.

THE SEPULCHRES OF AGAMEMNON AND HIS COMPANIONS.

Traditional foundation of Mycenæ by Perseus—His dynasty succeeded by the Pelopids—The legend of their crimes unknown to Homer and Hesiod—The Homeric story of Agamemnon's murder by Ægisthus and Clytemnestra, avenged by Orestes—Cycle of crimes devised by the later bards—Dominion of Agamemnon—End of the Dynasty at Mycenæ with Ægisthus—Orestes and his sons—The Dorian invasion—Part taken by Mycenæ in the Persian wars—The Argives besiege and take Mycenæ—The walls of the citadel preserved from religious reverence—Homeric epithets of Mycenæ—Its "abundance of gold" confirmed by Thucydides—The Treasuries of the Pelopids mentioned by Pausanias—Treasury at the Heræum, near Mycenæ—Probable existence of another Treasury at Mycenæ.

The Royal Sepulchres described by Pausanias—General misinterpretation of the passage—Experimental shafts sunk there in February, 1874—Excavations begun, August 7, 1876—Porter's lodge at the Lions' Gate—The later habitation of the city after 468 B.C.—No coins of Mycenæ known—Remains below this first stratum—Painted archaic vases, like those at Tiryns—The vases almost all made on the Potter's wheel—Female idols and cows of terra-cotta—Other idols and animals—Iron knives and curious keys of a later period—Bronze knives and arrow-heads—Stone implements and other objects—A little gold and much lead found—Fragments of a lyre and flute—Plates of ornamented terra-cotta for lining walls—Cyclopean house-walls—A remarkable water-conduit—Twelve tomb-like reservoirs—Two tombstones with bas-reliefs, probably of the same epoch as that over the Lions' Gate [52]

[CHAPTER IV.]

EXCAVATIONS IN THE CITADEL OF MYCENÆ—continued.

Wages and worth of labour at Mycenæ—The double circle of slabs—Two more sculptured stêlæ—Unsculptured stêlæ—Ashes and bones, probably of sacrifices—Fragments of other sculptured tombstones—The style of these stêlæ unique—Their probable age about 1500 B.C.—A Cyclopean house filled with ashes, bones, &c.—Objects found there and in the twelve reservoirs—Great significance of the tombstones found in the Acropolis—They mark the Royal Tombs, mentioned by Pausanias from tradition only—Excavation of the Treasury close to the Lions' Gate: about as large as that of Atreus—Antiquity of the covering-up proved by the ancient vases, idols, &c. in the débris above—Hera-idols, and others, found in the dromos, and in the Acropolis—Their vast abundance—Cow-heads on handles of vases, as at Troy—Moulds for earrings and other ornaments of gold and silver, and curious clay cones—Other ornaments of glazed clay, potstone, &c.—Numerous objects of bronze—Curious wheels—Necklace beads of various stones, with intaglios of animals, and similar objects of other shapes—Two-handled goblets; the δέπας ἀμϕικύπελλον of Homer—Depth of the débris—Breach in the great Cyclopean wall, repaired by an ancient wall of small stones—The quarry of Mycenæ [86]

[CHAPTER V.]

EXCAVATIONS IN AND NEAR THE ACROPOLIS—continued.

THE LIONS' GATE AND THE AGORA.

The Treasury excavated by Mrs. Schliemann—Older and less sumptuous than that of Atreus—The entrance, its ornaments—Archaic pottery found in the passage—Necklace beads—Fragment of a marble frieze—Threshold of the Lions' Gate—The great double row of parallel slabs, probably not of a remote antiquity—The Acropolis only partly accessible to chariots—The gateway double, like the Scæan Gate at Troy—Corridors of Cyclopean house-walls—Hera-idols and arrow-heads of bronze and iron—Door-keeper's lodge—Retaining walls—Tower of the Acropolis resting on a massive wall—The double circle of slabs formed the enclosure of the royal tombs and the Agora—Arguments in proof of this view—Objects of interest found there—A vast Cyclopean house with cisterns and water conduit, probably the ancient Royal Palace—The spring Perseia—No windows in the house—Objects of art and luxury found there—An onyx seal-ring—Vase-paintings of mail-clad warriors—Hand-made pottery in the Acropolis [118]

NOTE [138]

[CHAPTER VI.]

The SECOND GREAT TREASURY; ACROPOLIS; AND CYCLOPEAN REMAINS IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD OF MYCENÆ.

Further excavations of Mrs. Schliemann's Treasury—The dromos, doorway, and threshold—Objects found there—Hera-idols—Cyclopean water-conduits and cisterns in the Acropolis—Bronze rings—Pottery with marks like letters—Earrings like those found at Troy—Hand-made painted pottery—New forms of Hera-idols—Terra-cotta tripods and cradles, probably votive offerings—A comb, stilettos of opal, beads and buttons—A bronze sword—Iron tongs of late date—State of the débris left at the Lions' Gate—The excavations visited by the Emperor of Brazil—Ascent of Mount Eubœa—The Cyclopean enclosure on its summit; was probably a very ancient sanctuary—Other Cyclopean remains near Mycenæ—State of the excavations [139]

NOTE [149]

[CHAPTER VII.]

THE FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD TOMBS IN THE ACROPOLIS.

Discovery of the Tomb indicated by the three sculptured stêlæ—Curious gold-covered buttons, objects of ivory, baked clay, gold, glass, bronze, &c.—Pottery, both wheel and hand-made—Second Tomb below the unsculptured stêlæ—Discovery of three human bodies, which had been partially burnt where they lay—Fifteen diadems of thin gold plate found on the bodies—Also crosses of golden laurel-leaves—Other curious objects, proving a knowledge of the art of glass-working and colouring—Knives of obsidian—A silver vase with a bronze mouth plated with gold, and other objects—Terra-cotta vases—The horned Hera-idols found in the tomb, a proof of that symbolic worship in the earliest times at Mycenæ—Its duration to the last age of the city—Primitive painted wheel-made vases of terra-cotta—Further discovery of sepulchral slabs—Various objects found with them—The Third Tomb—Several skeletons of men, not burnt, and objects found with them—A curious double-bladed bronze dagger—Narrow escape from a falling rock—Internal walls of the tomb—Three skeletons of women in it, evidently burnt where they lay—Laden with jewels of gold—Layers of round plates of gold with ornamentation of repoussé work under and over the bodies—Description of their many types—The other jewels described—Other chased and embossed beads—Golden griffins—Legend of the griffins of Indian origin—Heart-shaped and lion-draped gold ornaments—Curious brooches formed of palm-trees, stags, and lions—Women with pigeons—Golden cuttle-fish, butterflies, swans, hippocampi, eagles, sphinxes, trees, and birds—The splendid gold crown on the head of one of the bodies—Signs upon it—The second gold crown—Five more diadems of gold—Crosses of double leaves of gold—Golden stars—A gold brooch, and other ornaments—Necklaces and bracelets—Two pairs of golden scales—Golden plates—A child's mask of gold—Other ornaments—Balls, &c. of rock crystal, silver, and bronze, probably the handles of sceptres—Lentoid gems of agate, sardonyx, &c., with intaglios—A lentoid gem of amethyst engraved with a cow suckling her calf, as on the old coins of Corcyra—Gold wheels—A gold comb with bone teeth, &c.—Amber beads—Other ornaments—Pieces of gold-leaf strewn below and about the bodies—A gold goblet—A curious gold box, and gold vases with lids fastened on by wires—A silver vase and golden sceptre-handle—Boxes of copper-plate filled with wood, perhaps pillows for the dead bodies—Other objects found in the third sepulchre—Hand-made and very ancient wheel-made pottery [150]

[CHAPTER VIII.]

THE FOURTH TOMB IN THE ACROPOLIS OF MYCENÆ.

Further search within the Agora, without the guide of tombstones—Discovery of an altar of Cyclopean masonry, over the centre of the great Fourth Tomb, containing the bodies of five men, burnt where they lay, laden with jewels, and covered with a layer of white clay—Objects found—Copper caldrons, one containing 100 gold-plated buttons with intaglio work—Homeric mention of caldrons—A silver cow's head with gold horns and a gold sun on its forehead: it represents Hera—Cow-heads with axes—Swords and lances of bronze—Gold-plated wooden sword-sheaths and hilts with gold pins—Three masks of gold covering the faces of the bodies—A fourth mask, representing a lion's head—Two seal-rings and a bracelet, with ornaments—The state of art corresponds with that described in Homer—Golden breastplates on two of the bodies—Golden crown by the head of another—Golden ornament of the greaves—Borax used then, as now, for soldering gold—More than one δέπας ἀμϕικύκελλον, and other vessels of gold and silver—The large gold goblet, with doves on the two handles, like Nestor's cup in the Iliad—Two-handled terra-cotta vases, hand-made, like those at Troy—Ornaments of alabaster—Gold shoulder-belts (τελαμῶνες)—Other objects found in the tomb, of rock crystal, amber, alabaster—Golden diadems, some seemingly for children; also a child's belt and frontlet, or "belle Hélène," and other ornaments of gold—Double edged battle-axes—Their use by the Greeks as a symbol, especially at Tenedos—A funeral fork of copper—Vase-lids of bone—Vessel of silver and lead in shape of an animal—Buttons of wood, plated with gold, splendidly ornamented—Their patterns and workmanship—Hundreds of gold flowers, plain buttons, and other ornaments of gold—Larger gold buttons, splendidly ornamented—Leaves of gold strewn under, over, and around the bodies—Wooden comb with gold handle—Gold models of temples—Many golden cuttle-fish—Gold knobs for sword hilts, highly ornamented—Arrow-heads of obsidian—Boars' teeth—Large copper vessels—Custom of placing such vessels in tombs—A copper tripod—Uses of tripods in Homer—Bronze swords, lances, and knives—Some swords with parts of their wooden sheaths, alabaster handle-knobs, golden studs, &c.—Remnants of linen sheaths—Oyster-shells and unopened oysters—Broken pottery, indicative of a still existing funeral custom—The bones of the deceased—Alabaster vases—Hand-made and very ancient wheel-made pottery—Fragments of a characteristic form of goblet, both of terra-cotta and of gold—Another type of goblets—Two whetstones—A handle of unique work, gold encrusted with rock crystal, "θαῦμα ἰδέσθαι." [211]

NOTE ON THE ROYAL PALACE [288]

[CHAPTER IX.]

THE FIFTH SEPULCHRE, AND THE FIRST AGAIN.

At length again a guard and watchfire on the Acropolis of Mycenæ—Exploration of the Fifth Tomb—Its sepulchral stêlæ—The tomb described; containing only one body—Golden diadem and other objects found in the tomb—Hand-made vases of terra-cotta; one with female breasts, like the prehistoric vases at Santorin and Troy—Wheel-made pottery—Excavation of the First Tomb completed—Its position and construction. Three bodies in it: the middle one has been disturbed and rifled of its ornaments—Large size of the bodies—Golden mask and state of the first—Wonderful preservation of the third—Its ponderous gold mask, face, and teeth—Description of the body—its remarkable compression—Golden breast-plate, and leaves of gold on the forehead, eyes, and breast—Excitement caused by the discovery—Measures taken to preserve and remove the body—Its shoulder belt and bronze sword with crystal ornament, and disks of gold for the sheath: all special funeral ornaments, and not for ordinary use—Description of the golden breast-covers of this and the first body—Highly-decorated bronze swords and other objects found with the third body—Ornamented golden leaves, a wooden comb, and bronze swords, with the second body—A large heap of broken bronze swords, with knives and lances—Other weapons, chiefly in fragments—Amber and gold beads, and various objects of gold and silver—An alabaster vase—Wonderful plates of gold—The two massive golden masks of the first tomb—The skilled work argues a long-trained school of artists—Several large goblets of gold and silver—Objects in this sepulchre—A silver vase, with copper and gold plating—A drinking-cup of alabaster—Plates of gold, in form of double eagles, &c.—Fragments of silver vases; one with a gold mouthpiece and handle—A splendidly ornamented plate of gold, covering a cylinder of charred wood—Hundreds of gold-button-plates, large and small, with various ornamentation—The new types shown—Gold plates, ribbons, and ornaments for greaves—Tubes and buttons of bone; their probable use—An ivory plate, and a curious object of glazed Egyptian porcelain—Hand-made and wheel-made pottery—Seven large copper vessels, caldrons and cans—A quadrangular wooden box, with most interesting reliefs Page [289]

[CHAPTER X.]

CONNECTION OF THE FIVE TOMBS WITH THE ROYAL HOUSE OF PELOPS; AND DATE OF THE AGORA.

Discussion of the identity of the five tombs with those mentioned by Pausanias as the tombs of Agamemnon and his companions—Opinions of scholars about the Trojan War—The ancients unanimous for its reality—The author's faith in the traditions led to his discovery of Troy and of the five Royal Tombs at Mycenæ—The civilisation of Mycenæ higher than that of Troy—The pottery of both very primitive—Alphabetic writing known at Troy, but not at Mycenæ—The different civilisations may have been contemporaneous—The appearances in the tombs prove the simultaneous death of those interred, certainly in each tomb, and probably in all the five—Traditional veneration for the sepulchres—Monuments repeatedly placed over them—No tombs between the two circular rows of slanting slabs which formed the enclosure of the Agora and its benches—Agora probably erected when the tombstones were renewed, and the altar built over the fourth tomb, under the influence of the enthusiasm created by the Rhapsodists—These monuments buried in the course of time, but the memory of the site was fresh by tradition long after the destruction of the new city of Mycenæ—Testimony of Pausanias—The enormous treasures prove the sepulchres to be royal, but royalty at Mycenæ ended with the Dorian invasion—This must have been much earlier than the received date, 1104 B.C.—An objection answered—Honours paid to the remains of murdered princes even by their murderers—Custom of burying the dead with their treasures—The sepulchral treasure of Palestrina—The sepulchre of Nitocris at Babylon—Case of Pyrrhus and the royal sepulchres at Ægeæ—The sepulchre at Corneto [333]

[CHAPTER XI.]

TREASURE OF THE TOMB SOUTH OF THE AGORA.

Discovery and description of another tomb in the Acropolis outside the Agora—Its Cyclopean masonry like that of the five sepulchres—The golden trinkets of this tomb—Double-handled goblets—A plain gold cup (φιάλη)—Spirals and rings of gold and silver wire, like those of the Egyptian tombs—A golden seal-ring covered with intaglio-work—Its full description—The face-covers of the female figures prove the use of masks during life—A figure meant for a Palladium—Six other rude figures resembling the Trojan idols: their likeness to the "Corinthian helmet" of Athena—The work of this ring calls to mind Homer's description of the shield of Achilles—A smaller golden signet-ring, with four Palladia and three Hera-idols—A beautiful lion of massive gold—Gold necklace beads—Bones of animals found in this tomb—The human remains probably removed when the water conduit was built, but the small jewel-recess escaped being rifled—Three curious lentoid gems of necklaces, one found on the site of Phœnicé, the others near the ancient Heræum—The first represents Phœnician figures—Description of the other two—The Cyclopean foundations of the ancient Heræum, probably as old as the walls of Tiryns and Mycenæ—It was destroyed by fire in 423 B.C., and its site deserted—Professors Sayce and Mahaffy on the Date of the Capture of Mycenæ—Views of M. Emile Burnouf [350]

Telegrams to and from the King of Greece—Conclusion [380]

ANALYSIS OF MYCENEAN METALS [387]

APPENDIX A. Tombs in the Agora [383]

APPENDIX B. Explanation of the objects in fig. 213 [383]

APPENDIX C. Possible connection between ornaments found at Mycenæ and the Badges worn by those initiated into the Egyptian mysteries [384]

APPENDIX D. Account of ornamentation on a bronze sword [385]

INDEX [397]

NOTE TO PAGE [145].

With reference to the visit paid to the excavation at Mycenæ by the Emperor of Brazil, I feel bound to mention the renewed mark of his Majesty's interest in the discoveries, when he did me the signal honour of visiting my lodgings in London on June 22, 1877. His Majesty spent two hours in examining with great attention my large Album of Mycenean photographs, and repeatedly congratulated me on the results of my excavations.
H. S.

COMPARATIVE TABLE OF FRENCH AND ENGLISH MEASURES, EXACT AND APPROXIMATE.

Metric.	Inches.	Ft.	Inch.	Approximate.
Millimètre	0·0393708	"	·03937	·04 or 1⁄25 of inch.
Centimètre	0·393708	"	·39371	4" ⅖ "
Décimètre	3·93708	"	3·9371	4 inches.
Mètre	39·3708	3	3·3708	3⅓ feet.
2	78·7416	6	6·7416	6⅔ "
3	118·1124	9	10·1124	10 "
4	157·4832	13	1·4832	13 "
5	196·8540	16	4·8540	16⅓ "
6	236·2248	19	8·2248	19⅔ "
7	275·5956	22	11·5956	23 "
8	314·9664	26	2·9664	26¼ "
9	354·3372	29	6·3372	29½ "
10	393·7089	32	9·7080	33 "
11	433·0788	36	1·0788	36 (12 yds.)
12	472·4496	39	4·4496	39⅓ feet.
13	511·8204	42	7·8204	42⅔ "
14	551·1912	45	11·1912	46 "
15	590·5620	49	2·5620	49¼ "
16	620·9328	52	5·9328	52½ "
17	669·3036	55	9·3036	55¾ "
18	708·6744	59	0·6744	59 "
19	748·0452	62	4·0452	62⅓ "
20	787·416	65	7·4160	65⅔ "
30	1181·124	98	5·124	98½ "
40	1574·832	131	2·832	131¼ "
50	1968·54	164	0·54	164 "
100	3937·08	328	1·08	328 (109 yds.)

N. B.—The following is a convenient approximate rule:—"To turn Metres into Yards, add 1-11th to the number of Metres."

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

		PAGE
PLATE I. THE ACROPOLIS OF TIRYNS	To face	[1]
PLATE II. THE WEST SIDE OF THE ACROPOLIS OF MYCENÆ"		[23]
PLATE III. THE GATE OF THE LIONS	"	[32]
PLATE IV. THE TREASURY OF ATREUS	"	[43]
PLATE V. THE TREASURY NEAR THE LIONS' GATE, EXCAVATED BY MRS. SCHLIEMANN	Frontispiece
PLATE VI. ICHNOGRAPHY OF THE ROYAL TOMBS WITHIN THE CIRCLE OF THE AGORA	To face	[124]
PLATE VII. Panoramic View of Dr. Schliemann's Excavations in the Acropolis of Mycenæ	To face	[148]

CHAPTER I.—TIRYNS.
VIGNETTE.—No. 1. Map of Argolis		[1]
No. 2. Terra-cotta Cow,	Tiryns	[10]
Nos. 3-7. Terra-cotta Cows,	"	[11]
Nos. 8-11. Terra-cotta Idols,	"	[12]
No. 12. Bronze Figure,	"	[14]
Nos. 13, 14. Terra-cotta Vessels,	"	[17]
No. 15. Stone Whorl, found at Mycenæ		[18]
CHAPTER II.—MYCENÆ.
VIGNETTE.—No. 16. Ruins of the Cyclopean Bridge at Mycenæ		[23]
No. 17. Walls of the First Period		[29]
No. 18. Walls of the Second Period		[30]
No. 19. Walls of the Third Period		[30]
No. 20. Entrance to the ogive-like Gallery in the Walls of the Citadel of Mycenæ		[32]
No. 21. Gate of the Lions		[32]
No. 22. Plan of the Gate of the Lions		[34]
No. 22a. Right and Left Door-posts of the Gate of Lions		[35]
No. 23. Elevation and Plan of the Postern Gate		[35]
No. 23a. Terra-cotta Vase		[51]
CHAPTER III.—MYCENÆ.
VIGNETTE.—No. 24. First of the Tombstones found above the Sepulchres in the Acropolis		[52]
No. 25. Terra-cotta Vase		[64]
No. 26. Terra-cotta Jug		[65]
No. 27. Vase of Yellow Ware, with black and yellow lines		[66]
No. 28. Vase of Black and Yellow Ware		[67]
No. 29. Terra-cotta vase. The bands yellow and reddish, the lines black		[67]
PLATE VIII.—Nos. 30-34. Fragments of Painted Vases.	End of Volume
PLATE IX.—Nos. 35-39. ""	"
PLATE X.—Nos. 40-47. ""	"
PLATE XI.—Nos. 48-54. ""	"
PLATE XII.—Nos. 55-61. ""	"
PLATE XIII.—Nos. 62-67. ""	"
PLATE XIV.—Nos. 68-72. ""	"
PLATE XV.—Nos. 73-78. ""	"
No. 80. Painted Vase		[68]
No. 81. Human Head on the Mouth of a Jug		[69]
No. 82. Human Head on a Potsherd		[69]
No. 83. Goblet of Terra-cotta		[70]
Nos. 84-89. Fragments of Painted Pottery		[71]
PLATE XVI.—Nos. 90-93. Terra-cotta Idols	End of Volume
PLATE XVII.—Nos. 94-98.	"
PLATE XVIII.—Nos. 99-102.	"
PLATE XIX.—Nos. 103-110.	"
No. 111. Terra-cotta Idol		[72]
Nos. 112, 113. Terra-cotta Figures		[73]
Nos. 114-119. Terra-cotta Figures of Animals		[74]
No. 120. Objects in Bronze, Lead, and Iron		[74]
Nos. 121-125. Bronze Knives		[75]
No. 126. Arrow-heads, Hatchets, and other objects of stone		[76]
No. 127. Fragment of a Lyre of Bone		[78]
Nos. 128, 129. Lower and Upper Ends of a Flute		[78]
No. 130a. Another part of the same Flute		[79]
Nos. 130-136. Combs and Needles of Terra-cotta		[79]
Nos. 137-139. Terra-cotta Ornaments		[79]
No. 140. Second Tombstone, found above the Sepulchres in the Acropolis		[81]
No. 140a. Pattern of straight and spiral frets		[83]
CHAPTER IV.—MYCENÆ.
VIGNETTE.—No. 141. Third Tombstone, found above the Sepulchres in the Acropolis		[86]
No. 142. Fourth Tombstone, found above the Sepulchres in the Acropolis		[91]
No. 143. Piece of a Tombstone		[92]
No. 144. "		[93]
No. 145. "		[94]
Nos. 146-148. Three Pieces of Tombstones		[95]
Nos. 149-150. Fragments of Tombstones		[96]
No. 151. Piece of a quadrangular Column of Red Porphyry		[97]
Nos. 152-154. Fragments of Friezes		[98]
No. 155. Jasper Weight, with a hole for suspension		[100]
No. 156. Fragment of a perforated Terra-cotta Vase		[101]
No. 157. Piece of a Painted Vase, from the "dromos" of the Treasury near the Lions' Gate		[103]
No. 158. Fragment of the same Pottery from the "dromos"		[103]
No. 159. Idol of Terra-cotta, with a Cow's Head, on the handle of a Vase		[104]
No. 160. Idol of Terra-cotta with a Cow's Head		[105]
No. 161. Cow-headed Idols of Hera		[106]
No. 162. Two faces of a Granite Mould for casting various ornaments		[107]
No. 163. Four faces of a six-sided Mould of Basalt		[109]
Nos. 164-166. Ornaments of Glazed Clay		[109]
Nos. 167-169. " "		[110]
Nos. 170-172. " "		[111]
No. 173. Double-edged Hatchet of Bronze		[111]
Nos. 174-181. Lentoid Gems		[112]
Nos. 182-189. Lentoid Gems, Cylinder, and Beads		[113]
No. 190. A Disk of Terra-cotta, with the appearance of an Inscription		[115]
No. 190a. Pattern of the Slabs forming the Double Parallel Circle enclosing the Agora		[117]
CHAPTER V.—MYCENÆ.
VIGNETTE.—No. 191. The Village of Charvati, with the ancient Quarry of Mycenæ		[118]
PLATE XX.—Nos. 192-197. { Fragments of Painted Pottery from { the Approach to the Treasury PLATE XXI.—Nos. 198-204. { near the Lions' Gate	End Of Volume
Nos. 205-209. Beads of Glass and Fluor-spar		[121]
No. 210. Threshold of the Gate of Lions		[121]
No. 210 a. Slanting Bench of the Agora		[125]
No. 211. A Fish of Wood		[129]
No. 212. A curious Idol		[129]
No. 213. Fragments of a Painted Vase representing armed Warriors		[133]
No. 213 a, b. A very frequent type of Mycenean Painted Pottery		[138]
CHAPTER VI.—MYCENÆ.
VIGNETTE.—No. 214. Other Fragments of the Vase (No. 213)		[139]
Nos. 215, 216. Fragments of Friezes of blue and white marble, found in the Treasury near the Lions' Gate		[140]
Nos. 217-220. Bronze Rings (two with intaglio engravings), and a twisted Gold Wire		[142]
No. 221. Bronze Sword		[144]
CHAPTER VII.—SEPULCHRES I. II. III.[26]
VIGNETTE.—No. 222. Fragment of a Wooden Box		[150]
No. 223. Plan of Tombstones in the First Tomb		[151]
Nos. 224-229. Objects of ivory, bone, or metallic composition. Sepulchre I.		[153]
No. 230. Foot of a black hand-made Goblet. Sepulchre I.		[154]
No. 231. Cross of Golden Laurel Leaves. Sepulchre II.		[157]
Nos. 232, 233. Fragments of a very ancient wheel-made Vase. Sepulchre II.		[160]
No. 234. Plan of Tombstones above the Third Tomb		[161]
No. 235. Piece of Ornamented Ivory		[162]
Nos. 236, 237. Hand-made Vases of Terra-cotta		[163]
No. 238. Large Bronze Dagger, with two blades soldered together in the middle		[164]
No. 239. Plate of Gold		[166]
No. 240. " " A Cuttle-fish		[166]
No. 241. " " A Flower		[167]
No. 242. " "		[167]
No. 243. " " A Butterfly		[168]
No. 244. " "		[168]
No. 245. " "		[169]
No. 246. " "		[169]
No. 247. Leaf in Gold Plate		[170]
No. 248. Leaf Pattern in Gold Plate		[170]
No. 249. " "		[171]
No. 250. " "		[171]
No. 251. Star in Gold Plate		[172]
No. 252. Plate of Gold		[172]
Nos. 253-255. Perforated Ornaments of Gold, with Engravings in Intaglio		[174]
Nos. 256-260. Golden Ornaments		[176]
No. 261. Golden Ornament. A Griffin		[177]
Nos. 262, 263. Golden Ornaments. Heart and Lion		[178]
Nos. 264, 265. Golden Ornaments		[179]
No. 266. Golden Ornament		[180]
Nos. 267, 268. Golden Ornaments. Women with Doves		[180]
No. 269. Golden Ornament		[181]
Nos. 270, 271. Two Golden Cuttle Fish		[181]
No. 272. Flying Griffin of Gold		[182]
No. 273. Golden Ornament		[182]
Nos. 274-280. Golden Ornaments		[183]
No. 281. Splendid Crown of Gold, found on the head of one of the three persons interred in the Third Sepulchre		[185]
No. 282. Golden Diadem, found on the head of another body in the Third Sepulchre		[186]
Nos. 283, 284. Diadems of Gold		[188]
No. 285. Cross in Gold Plate		[189]
Nos. 286-288. Ornaments of Gold		[190]
Nos. 289,290. Golden Crosses		[191]
No. 291. Cross of Gold		[192]
No. 292. Golden Brooch		[193]
No. 293. Golden Ornament from the Third Sepulchre		[194]
No. 294. Golden Cross		[194]
Nos. 295-300. Golden Hair-holders, Bracelets, and Ornaments of Necklaces		[196]
Nos. 301, 302. Golden Balances		[197]
Nos. 303-306. Golden Ornaments		[199]
Nos. 307, 308. Objects of Rock Crystal		[200]
Nos. 309, 310. Sceptres of Silver plated with Gold, with Handles of Rock Crystal		[201]
Nos. 311-315. Beads of Agate and Lentoid Gems of Sardonyx and Amethyst		[202]
No. 316. Golden Wheel		[203]
Nos. 317, 318. Goblet and Box of Gold		[205]
No. 319. Golden Vase, with lid attached by a golden wire		[206]
Nos. 320-322. Three Golden Vessels		[207]
No. 323. Box of Copper Plate, filled with wood		[208]
No. 324. Vessel of Terra-Cotta		[209]
No. 325. Object of Alabaster		[209]
CHAPTER VIII.—SEPULCHRE IV.
VIGNETTE.—No. 326. Golden Mask in the form of a Lion's Head		[211]
No. 327. Cow's Head of Silver, with Horns of Gold		[216]
No. 328. Another View of the Cow's Head		[217]
Nos. 329, 330. Two Golden Cow-Heads, with double axes		[218]
No. 331. Mask of Gold, found on the face of a body		[220]
No. 332. Gold Mask		[221]
No. 333 a, b. Two Gold Signet Rings		[223]
Nos. 334, 335. Intaglios on the Signet Rings		[223]
No. 336. Bracelet of Gold		[227]
No. 337. Splendid Crown of Gold found close to the head of one of the bodies in the Fourth Sepulchre		[229]
No. 338. Human Thigh-bone, with a Gold Ornament of the greaves still attached to it		[230]
No. 339. Golden Goblet with two handles		[231]
No. 340. Golden Goblet with one handle		[232]
No. 341. Golden Wine-Flagon		[232]
No. 342. Golden Cup		[233]
No. 343. Plain Massive Cup of Gold		[233]
No. 344. Large Massive Gold Goblet with two handles		[234]
No. 345. Gold Cup with one handle		[236]
No. 346. Golden Goblet with two doves on the handles		[237]
No. 347. Large Gold Cup		[239]
No. 348. Large Silver Goblet, richly plated with gold		[240]
No. 349. Hand-made Vase of Terra-cotta		[240]
Nos. 350, 351. Objects of Egyptian Porcelain, of unknown use		[241]
No. 352. Alabaster Model of a sort of Scarf tied in a noose		[242]
No. 353. Silver Flagon		[243]
No. 354. Gold Model of a Shoulder Belt		[244]
No. 355. Amber Necklace-beads		[245]
No. 356. Large three-handled Vase of Alabaster, recomposed from the Fragments		[246]
Nos. 357, 358. Belt and "Belle Hélène" of Gold		[248]
Nos. 359-365. Various Ornaments of Gold		[250]
No. 366. Highly-decorated Golden Cylinder, probably the handle of a sword or sceptre		[251]
Nos. 367-370. Golden Ornaments		[253]
Nos. 371, 372. Objects of Copper		[255]
Nos. 373-375. Two Bone Lids of Jars and a piece of an Alabaster Vase		[256]
No. 376. Stag, of an alloy of silver and lead		[257]
Nos. 377-386. Buttons of Wood, covered with plates of gold, highly ornamented		[258], [259]
Nos. 387-401. Plates of Gold		[263]
Nos. 402-413. Gold Buttons		[264]
Nos. 414-422a. " "		[265]
No. 423. Model of a Temple in Gold		[267]
No. 424. A Cuttle-fish in Gold		[268]
Nos. 425, 426. Two halves of a whorl-shaped object of thick Gold Plate		[268]
Nos. 427-434. Gold Covers of the Knobs of Sword-handles		[269]-[271]
No. 435. Arrow-heads of Obsidian		[272]
No. 436. Large Copper Vessel		[274]
No. 437. Two large Copper Vessels stuck together		[275]
No. 438. Large Copper Vessel with three handles		[275]
No. 439. Large two-handled Vessel of Copper		[276]
No. 440 Copper Tripod		[278]
No. 441. Lance-head of Bronze		[279]
Nos. 442, 442a. Small One-edged Bronze Swords		[279]
Nos. 443, 444. Fragment of a Two-edged Bronze Sword, and another weapon, probably a Dagger		[280]
No. 445 a, b, c. Two-edged Bronze Swords, and an Alabaster Sword Knob		[281]
No. 446. Two-edged Bronze Sword		[282]
Nos. 447-449. Two-edged Bronze Swords, and an Alabaster Sword Knob		[283]
No. 450. Human Jawbone		[285]
Nos. 451, 452. Golden Tube, and Golden Dragon with scales of rock crystal, both being probably pieces of a sceptre-handle		[287]
CHAPTER IX.—SEPULCHRE I.[27]
VIGNETTE.—No. 474. Massive Golden Mask of the body at the south end of the First Sepulchre		[289]
No. 453. Richly ornamented Cup of Gold. Sepulchre V.		[292]
No. 454. The upper part of a body found in the First Tomb. From an Oil Painting made directly after its discovery		[297]
No. 455. Golden Shoulder-belt, with a fragment of the two-edged Sword		[299]
No. 456. Small Jar of Rock Crystal		[300]
No. 457. Funnel-shaped object, of Rock Crystal		[300]
No. 458. Ornamented Breast-cover of Massive Gold		[301]
No. 459. Small Bone, with the fragment of a splendidly ornamented Gold Ribbon		[302]
No. 460. Two Bronze Swords with golden handles; Golden Buttons belonging to the destroyed Wooden Sheaths; two gold plates, &c.; found lying beside a body in Sepulchre I.		[303]
No. 461. Gold Sword-tassel		[304]
No. 462. Golden Covers of Sword-handles, with intaglio ornamentation		[305]
Nos. 463-466. Bronze Battle-axe and Swords		[306]
No. 467. Sword-handle, plated with gold, richly ornamented		[307]
Nos. 468, 469. Curious object of Gold, and Silver Tongs		[308]
No. 470. Gold Plate, with Intaglio of a Lion chasing a Stag		[309]
No. 471. Gold Plate, with Intaglio of a Lion catching a Stag		[309]
No. 472. Gold Plate, with a spiral ornamentation in Intaglio		[311]
No. 473. See Vignette to Chapter X.		[333]
No. 474. See Vignette to Chapter IX.		[289]
No. 475. Large Gold Cup		[313]
No. 476. Large Gold Cup		[314]
No. 477. Golden Goblet		[315]
No. 478. Top and lower part of a large Silver Vase, from the First Sepulchre		[316]
No. 479. Large Goblet of Alabaster		[317]
No. 480. Double Eagles in Gold Plate		[318]
No. 481. Gold Plate, with a pattern in repoussé work		[319]
No. 482. Golden Mouthpiece of a Vase		[320]
No. 483. Golden Vase-handle		[320]
No. 484. Cylinder of Gold Plate		[321]
Nos. 485-506. Ornamented Gold Buttons		[322]-[324]
Nos. 507-512. " "		[326]
Nos. 513-518. Ornamented Gold Ribbons		[326]
No. 519. Golden Ornament of the Greaves		[328]
Nos. 520-524. Bone Tubes and Buttons		[328]
No. 525. Piece of Ivory; perhaps the Handle of a Dagger		[329]
No. 526. Object of Egyptian Porcelain		[330]
No. 527. Wheel-made Vase of Terra-cotta		[331]
CHAPTER X.—THE ROYAL TOMBS.
VIGNETTE.—No. 473. Massive Golden Mask of the body at the north end of the First Sepulchre		[333]
CHAPTER XI.—TOMB SOUTH OF THE AGORA.[28]
VIGNETTE.—No. 528. Golden Goblet, with Dog's Head Handles		[350]
No. 529. Gold Rings, Gold Wire (round and quadrangular) in spirals, and one Silver Ring		[353]
No. 530. Gold Signet-ring		[354]
No. 531. Second Gold Signet-ring		[360]
No. 532. Golden Lion		[361]
Nos. 533-538. Gold Beads of a Necklace		[361]
Nos. 539-541. Three Lentoid Gems of Serpentine and Agate with intaglio-work, found on the site of Phœnicé and of the Heræum		[362]
APPENDIX.
ANALYSIS OF METALS. FROM SEPULCHRE IV.
No. 542. Piece of Argentiferous Gold Foil		[368]
No. 543. Piece of Sheet Gold		[369]
Nos. 544, 545. Fragments of a Silver Vase		[370]
No. 546. Piece of a Bronze Sword		[372]
Nos. 547-549. Plan, side elevation, and end elevation, of a Bronze Handle of a Vase		[375]
Illustration to Appendix C—Egyptian Badge		[384]
Illustration to Appendix D—Two-edged Bronze Sword, after cleaning		[386]

[COLOURED PLATES OF TERRA-COTTA FIGURES.]
(To follow Index.)
PLATE A. Figs. a, b. Terra-cotta Cows and Idols from Tiryns.
" " c, d. Terra-cotta Idols from Tiryns.
PLATE B. Figs. e, f, g. Terra-cotta Idols from Mycenæ.
" " h. A piece of Terra-cotta, with characters resembling letters.
PLATE C. Fig. i. The Head of an Idol from Mycenæ.
" " k. A Cow from Mycenæ.
" " l, m. Idols from Mycenæ. Actual size.
PLATE D. Figs. n, o, p. Fragments of Terra-cotta Cow-headed Idols from Mycenæ.
[PLANS.]
(At End of Volume.)
PLAN A. The Acropolis of Tiryns.
PLAN B. The Circular Agora, with the Five Royal Sepulchres, in the Acropolis of Mycenæ.
PLAN B B. Vertical Sections of the Hill of the Acropolis of Mycenæ and the Depths of the Five Tombs.
PLAN C. Plan of the Acropolis of Mycenæ, with Dr. Schliemann's excavations.
PLAN D. Plan of the whole City of Mycenæ.
PLAN E. Façade, Plan, and Section of the Treasury near the Lions' Gate.
PLAN F. Plan and Section of the Fourth Sepulchre, with the Funeral Altar above it.
PLAN G. Plan and Section of the Tomb South of the Agora, in the Acropolis of Mycenæ.

PLATE I.

THE ACROPOLIS OF TIRYNS. To face page 1.

No. 1. Map of Argolis.

[[See larger version]]

CHAPTER I.

EXCAVATIONS AT TIRYNS.

Situation of the City—Description by Pausanias—Cyclopean Walls: meaning of the epithet—The Quarry—The rock of Tiryns and its bordering Wall—Galleries, Gate, and Tower—Walls and Terraces of the Acropolis—Mythical traditions and History of Tiryns—Its destruction by the Argives—Its connection with the myth of Hercules—Morasses in the Plain of Argos—The Walls of Tiryns the most ancient monument in Greece—Pottery a test of antiquity—Beginning of the Excavations—Cyclopean house-walls and conduits—Objects discovered—Terra-cotta cows, and female idols with cow's-horns—Both represent the goddess HERA BOÖPIS—A bird-headed idol—A bronze figure, the only piece of metal at Tiryns, except lead—No stone implements found—Pottery—Hellenic remains outside the citadel, which was the primitive city—Proofs of different periods of habitation—The later city of Tiryns—The archaic pottery of Tiryns like that of Mycenæ—Its forms and decoration denote higher civilisation than the rude walls would lead us to expect—Older pottery on the virgin soil, but no cows or idols—Probable date of the second nation at Tiryns, about 1000 to 800 B.C.; of the Cyclopean walls, about 1800 to 1600 B.C.—No resemblance to any of the pottery in the strata of Hissarlik, except the goblets—A human skeleton found—Whorls—Estimate of soil to be moved at Tiryns—Greater importance of MYCENÆ.

Tiryns, August 6, 1876.

In the south-east corner of the Plain of Argos, on the lowest and flattest of a group of rocky hills, which rise like islands out of the marshy lowlands, only eight stadia or one mile from the Gulf of Argos, was situated the ancient citadel of Tiryns, now called Palæocastron.[29] It was celebrated as the birthplace of Hercules and was famous for its gigantic Cyclopean walls, of which Pausanias says, "The circuit wall, which is the only remaining ruin (of Tiryns) was built by the Cyclopes. It is composed of unwrought stones, each of which is so large that a team of mules cannot even shake the smallest one: small stones have been interposed in order to consolidate the large blocks."[30]

THE CYCLOPEAN WALLS.

The usual size of the stones is 7 feet long and 3 feet thick, but I measured several which were 10 feet long and 4 feet thick. Judging by the masses of fallen stones, I think it probable that the walls, when entire, were not less than 60 feet high. Had the circuit wall consisted of wrought stones it would doubtless have disappeared ages ago, because its stones would have been used for the buildings in the neighbouring cities of Nauplia and Argos. But the wall was preserved on account of the enormous size of the blocks, for the later builders found it much more easy and convenient to cut the material they needed at the foot of the rocks than to destroy the wall and break up the blocks.

I may here mention that the name "Cyclopean walls" is founded on an error, being derived from the mythic legend that the Cyclopes were distinguished architects. According to Strabo (VIII. 6), the Cyclopes, seven in number, came from Lycia and erected in the Argolid walls and other buildings, which were known under the denomination "Cyclopean walls." According to Apollodorus (II. 2, 1) and Pausanias (II. 16, 4) they built the walls of Tiryns and Mycenæ. Probably in consequence of this the whole of Argolis is called "Cyclopean land."[31] There is of course no historical foundation for calling walls of huge blocks "Cyclopean," after the mythical giant race of the Cyclopes. But as the word has come into general use, I cannot avoid employing it.

It must be distinctly understood that not every wall built of stones, without any binding material, may be called "Cyclopean;" and that under that denomination are only comprised, firstly, the walls of large unwrought blocks, the interstices of which are filled in with smaller stones; secondly, the walls composed of large polygonal stones well fitted together; and, thirdly, the very ancient walls (such as we see in the Lions' Gate at Mycenæ) where immense quadrangular blocks, rudely wrought, are roughly put together in horizontal layers, but the joints not being quite straight, there remain small interstices between the stones. House or fortress walls of well-cut quadrangular slabs, which are closely joined without mortar, can never be called "Cyclopean;" and thus, even the large subterranean Treasuries at Mycenæ and Orchomenus can in no way claim this denomination, though they may belong to the remotest antiquity.[32]

The quarry from which these walls were built can easily be distinguished at the foot of a rock one mile distant, which is crowned by a chapel of the prophet Elias. But this quarry does not form a pit, such as we see at Syracuse, Baalbec, or Corinth. At Tiryns, as at Mycenæ, the Cyclopean builders have contented themselves with cutting away the blocks from the rocky surface.

THE CITADEL OF TIRYNS.

The flat rock of Tiryns, which is 900 feet long, from 200 to 250 feet broad, and from 30 to 50 feet high, extends in a straight line from north to south, and its margin is lined by the aforesaid Cyclopean circuit wall, which is from 25 to 50 feet thick, and in a pretty good state of preservation; but it is not always massive, being traversed by interior passages or galleries with ogival vaults, of which four can easily be discerned. One of these galleries, which is 90 feet long and 7 feet 10 inches broad and high and free from débris, has in its external wall six gate-like recesses or window openings, which reach down to the bottom. Their pointed arches are formed like the angle in the passage, merely by overlapping the ends of the courses of the masonry.[33]

These niches were most probably intended for archers, whilst the galleries themselves must have served for covered communications leading to armouries, guard-chambers, or towers. Of the other three galleries, two are in the south-eastern corner and run parallel to each other; the third, which traverses the western wall, seems to have served as a sally-port, and was probably concealed in some way or other.[34]

On the eastern side is the only gate, which is 15 feet broad. It is approached by a ramp 20 feet wide, which is supported by a wall of Cyclopean masonry.[35] The right flank of the gate is defended by a tower 43 feet high and 33 feet broad, which may have procured for the Tirynthians the credit of having been the first to build towers.[36] In this place the walls are better preserved than anywhere else, and they rise considerably above the flat summit of the mount within the Acropolis or citadel.

This citadel consists of an upper enclosure on the south, and a lower one on the north side; both are of about equal size, and are divided by an abrupt slope, 14 feet high, which was fortified by a Cyclopean wall of minor proportions. In this wall I perceive some stones shaped by art, and some even rectangular, which leads me to think that it belongs to a later time than the Cyclopean circuit walls. In the upper enclosure are a number of terraces supported by Cyclopean walls.

Through all antiquity the Greeks themselves looked upon the walls of Tiryns as a work of the demons. Pausanias [37] regards them as a structure more stupendous than the Pyramids of Egypt; and Homer manifests his admiration of them by the epithet "τειχιόεσσα," which he applies to Tiryns.[38]

HISTORY OF TIRYNS.

According to ancient tradition, Tiryns was founded (about 1400 B.C.) by Prœtus, who was its first king, and whose son Megapenthes ceded the town to Perseus, the builder of Mycenæ. Perseus gave it to Electryon, whose daughter Alcmena, the mother of Hercules, married Amphitryon, who was expelled by Sthenelus, the king of Mycenæ and Argos. Hercules conquered Tiryns and inhabited it for a long time, in consequence of which he is often called the Tirynthian.[39] On the return of the Heraclidæ (80 years after the Trojan war) Mycenæ itself, as well as Tiryns, Hysiæ, Mideia, and other cities, were forced to increase the power of Argos, and were reduced to the condition of dependent towns. Tiryns remained nevertheless in the hands of its Achæan population, and, together with Mycenæ, took part in the battle of Platææ with 400 men.[40] In consequence of this event the name of Tiryns was engraved, among those of the other Greek cities which had fought there, on the bronze column with the golden tripod-stand, which the Spartans dedicated as the tithe of the booty to the Pythian Apollo at Delphi. The glory which Tiryns thus acquired excited the envy of the Argives, who had taken no part in the Persian war, and who also began to consider that city as a very dangerous neighbour; particularly when it had fallen into the hands of their insurgent slaves (Γυμνήσιοι), who maintained themselves for a long time behind its Cyclopean walls and dominated the country.[41] The insurgents were finally subdued, but soon afterwards (Ol. 78, 1; 468 B.C.) the Argives destroyed the city, demolished part of its Cyclopean walls, and forced the Tirynthians to emigrate to Argos.[42] But according to Strabo [43] they fled to Epidaurus. Pausanias [44] mentions that between Tiryns and the gulf are the "θάλαμοι" of the insane daughters of Prœtus, of which no vestige is to be seen now; they cannot have been underground buildings on account of the morass. Theophrastus [45] speaks of the laughing propensities of the Tirynthians, which rendered them incapable of serious work.[46]

The myth of the birth of Hercules at Tiryns and the twelve labours he performed for Eurystheus, the king of the neighbouring Mycenæ, may, I think, be easily explained by his double nature as hero and as sun-god.[47] As the most powerful of all heroes, it is but natural that he should be fabled to have been born within the most powerful walls in the world, which were considered as the work of supernatural giants. As sun-god he must have had numerous sanctuaries in the plain of Argos and a celebrated cultus at Tiryns, because the marshy lowlands by which it is surrounded, and which even at present are nearly unproductive from want of drainage, were in remote antiquity nothing but deep swamps and morasses, which extending far up the plain engendered pestilential fevers, and could only be made to disappear gradually by incessant human labour and by the beneficent influence of the sun.

For the existence of the immense morasses in the plain of Argos we have no less an authority than Aristotle, who says,[48] "At the time of the Trojan war, the land of Argos being swampy, it could only feed a scanty population, whilst the land of Mycenæ was good and was therefore highly prized. But now the contrary is the case, for the latter has become too dry and lies untilled, whilst the land of Argos, which was a morass and therefore lay untilled, has now become good arable land." Thus it will appear but natural that Hercules, as sun-god, should be fabled to have performed for Eurystheus, the king of Mycenæ, who possessed the whole plain of Argos, the twelve labours which have been long known to mean nothing else than the twelve signs of the zodiac, through which the sun appears to pass in the annual revolution of our globe.

The topography of the plain south of Tiryns appears not to have changed since the time of Aristotle, for the northern shore of the gulf consists of deep swamps, which even now extend for nearly a mile inland.

BEGINNING OF WORK AT TIRYNS.

I perfectly agree with the common opinion that the Cyclopean walls of Tiryns are the most ancient monument in Greece; but, having the conviction that no city or fortress wall can be more ancient than the most ancient pottery of the site it surrounds, I was very anxious to investigate the chronology of the Tirynthian walls by systematic excavations. I therefore proceeded to Tiryns on the 31st ultimo, in company with Mrs. Schliemann and my esteemed friends, Castorches, Phendikles and Pappadakes, Professors of Archæology in the University of Athens.

There I engaged fifty-one workmen, and dug a long broad and deep trench in the highest part of the citadel, and sank besides this thirteen shafts 6 feet in diameter.[49] I further sank three shafts in the lower part of the fortress, and four more at a distance of 100 feet outside the walls. In the higher citadel I struck the natural rock at a depth of from 11½ to 16½ feet; in the lower citadel, at from 5 to 8 feet; and outside the citadel I reached the virgin soil at from 3 to 4 feet.

In seven or eight of the shafts sunk in the upper citadel I brought to light Cyclopean house-walls built on the natural rock, and in three shafts I found Cyclopean water-conduits of a primitive sort, being composed of unwrought stones, laid without any binding material. Though these water-conduits rest on the rock, yet I cannot conceive how water can ever have run along them without getting lost through the interstices between the stones.

Neither in the long trench nor in the deep twelve or thirteen shafts did I find any stones at all. I conclude from this that the majority of the houses consisted of unburnt bricks, which still form the building material of most of the villages in the Argolid. The houses can hardly have been of wood, for, if so, I should have found large quantities of ashes. All my excavations in Tiryns remain of course open, and visitors are invited to inspect them.

COWS OF TERRA-COTTA.

Among the objects discovered I must first mention the small terra-cotta cows, of which I collected eleven,[50] for they seem to solve a great problem, and are, at all events, of capital importance to science. Nearly all of them are covered with painted ornaments of red colour; one only has a black ornamentation.

No. 2. Terra-Cotta Cow, from Tiryns. (1½ M.) Actual size.

IDOLS OF HERA.

At the same time I found nine female idols, seven of which are painted with red and two with black or dark yellow ornaments.[51] They have a very compressed face, no mouth, and a "polos" on the head; of the idol No. 8 the head is missing, and the idol, No. 10, has a broader face and an uncovered head. The breasts of all these idols are in high relief, and below them on each side protrudes a long horn, in such a way that both horns together must either be intended to represent the moon's crescent or the two horns of the cow, or both the one and the other at the same time. I found cows and idols perfectly similar, three years ago, in the thirty-four shafts I sank in the Acropolis of Mycenæ, which city was close to the great Heræum and was celebrated for its cultus of Hera, whose cow-character and identity with the Pelasgic moon and cow-goddess Io, with the Bœotian goddess Demeter Mycalessia, and with the Egyptian moon-goddess Isis,[52] I have already sufficiently proved.[53] My opinion is also shared by the high authority of the Right Honourable W. E. Gladstone, who says in his celebrated work, 'Homeric Synchronism,' p. 249: "The goddess Isis, mated with Osiris, is represented with the cow's head on some of the Egyptian monuments.[54] She is identified by Herodotus with Demeter: but Demeter and Herè are very near, and Herè seems in Homer to be the Hellenic form which had in a great degree extruded Demeter from many of her traditions, and relegated her into the insignificance which belongs to her in the poems. The epithet Boöpis seems therefore possibly to indicate a mode of representing Herè which had been derived from Egypt, and which Hellenism refined.

Nos. 3-7. Terra-Cotta Cows, from Tiryns. Actual size.

Nos. 8-11. Terra-Cotta Idols from Tiryns. Actual size.

EXCAVATIONS AT TIRYNS.

"It must, however, be borne in mind that the Egyptian representation was not with the eyes, but with the full countenance and head, of the ox or cow; and further, that the Homeric epithet is not confined to Herè, but is applied to Klumené, one of the attendants of Helen,[55] and to Philomedousa, wife of Areithoos.[56] It is likewise given to Halié, one of the Nereid Nymphs.[57] The inference, probable though not demonstrative, would seem to be that in Homer's time the epithet had come to bear its later and generalised sense, and that the recollection of the cow had worn away."

I therefore do not hesitate to declare that both the cows and the horned female figures found at Mycenæ and Tiryns must needs be idols of Hera, who was the tutelar deity of both cities.

All the above idols, in the form of a cow and of a horned female, were found at a depth of from 3 to 11½ feet below the surface, and none at a greater depth.

Several terra-cotta idols of a different form were found; one of them at a depth of 8 feet.[58] This also seems to be a female idol; its two hands are joined on the breast, as if in the attitude of prayer; the head, which is uncovered, exactly resembles a bird's head, and at the first glance one is involuntarily struck by the resemblance of this idol to those on one of the many painted figures of the Attic vases with geometrical patterns which are preserved in the small collection of antiquities in the Ministry of Public Instruction at Athens,[59] and which have been until now considered to be the most ancient pottery in Greece. But I hope to prove in the subsequent pages that this is a great mistake, and that they must belong to a later period.

Of the idol No. 11 there remain only the neck and the head, which very much resembles an owl's head.

No. 12. Bronze figure,
from Tiryns. (3 M.)
Actual size.

Except lead, the only piece of metal found was a beautiful archaic male figure of bronze, wearing a Phrygian cap, and seemingly in the attitude of throwing a lance (see No. 12). But copper or bronze at least, if not iron, must have been extensively used at Tiryns, for I did not find there a single implement of stone.

The surface of the citadel is scantily strewn with potsherds of the Middle Ages, and probably of the time of the Frank dominion, for that period seems to be indicated by the chalk floors of a villa and its dependencies. These potsherds, as well as entire vases of the same fabric, are sometimes found as far down as 3 feet, but immediately below them follow archaic potsherds, which are usually met with at as little as a few inches under the surface; and thus it is evident that the site of the citadel of Tiryns was never inhabited from the time of the capture of the city by the Argives (468 B.C.) to about 1200 A.D.

POTTERY AND COINS FOUND AT TIRYNS.

But in the four shafts which I sank outside the citadel I found nothing but remains of Hellenic household vessels, which, judging by the potsherds, I am inclined to attribute to the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th centuries B.C. I am confirmed in this conjecture by quite a treasure of small Tirynthian copper coins, discovered some years ago at the foot of the citadel, and evidently of the Macedonian time. These medals, which are of splendid workmanship, show on one side the head of Apollo with a diadem, on the other a palm-tree with the legend ΤΙΡΥΝΣ. Thus there can be no doubt that the most ancient city of Tiryns was confined to the small space within the walls of the citadel, and that a new city, with the same name, was built outside of it some time after the capture by the Argives, and probably in the beginning of the 4th century B.C. This city seems to have extended especially to the east and still more to the north side of the citadel, where a number of its house-walls may be seen on the road to Mycenæ. From the absence of pottery of a later period I conclude that the new town was already abandoned before the Roman rule in Greece. It seems to have been quite insignificant, for it is not mentioned by any ancient author.

The Tirynthian archaic pottery is of precisely the same fabric, and has the same painted ornamentation, as the pottery of Mycenæ. There are the same tripods, with from one to five perforations in each foot; the same large vases, with perforated handles and holes in the rim of the bottom for suspension by a string; the same fantastically-shaped small vases, jugs, pots, dishes, and cups—all made on the potter's wheel, and usually presenting, on a light red dead ground, the most varied painted ornamentation of a lively red colour, which seems to be quite indestructible; for the thousands of potsherds with which the site of Mycenæ is covered have lost nothing of their freshness of colour, though they have been exposed for more than 2300 years to the sun and rain.

I dug up at Tiryns a large quantity of fragments of terra-cotta goblets, which, like those found at Mycenæ, are of white clay, and without any painted ornaments;[60] but they are not found beyond a depth of 8 feet below the surface. At a depth of from 8 to 10 feet I found only goblets of a greenish or dark red colour. All of them have the form of the large modern Bordeaux wine-glasses.

PROBABLE DATE OF THE POTTERY.

All this splendid pottery denotes a high civilisation, such as the men who built the Cyclopean city walls can hardly have reached. Hence, all this beautiful pottery was either imported, or (and this appears more likely) it has been manufactured by the nation which succeeded the Cyclopean wall-builders, and to these latter must belong all the hand-made monochromatic pottery which I found in Tiryns on and near the virgin soil. The colour of this pottery is that of the clay itself, which on the vast majority of the smaller vases has been wrought by hand-polishing to a lustrous surface; nearly all the black vases have been hand-polished both on the inside and outside, and are very pretty. All the larger jars are bulky, as well as many of the other large vases; and many of them have on each side a very short handle placed horizontally, with a broad hole, which may have been used for suspension by a string. In this stratum I found neither cows nor female idols. Of this hand-made pottery I have been fortunate enough to take out, besides hundreds of fragments, two entire vases, of which I give the drawings annexed (Nos. 13 and 14).[61]

No. 13. Terra-Cotta Vessel, from Tiryns. (3 M.) About half-size.

No. 14. Terra-Cotta Vessel, from Tiryns. (3½ M.) Size 2:3 about.

With regard to the chronology of the Tirynthian pottery, if the date of about 1400-1200 B.C., generally attributed to the most ancient Attic vases, were correct, we might perhaps assign a like date to the establishment in Tiryns of the second nation; for to the same period must be ascribed the bird-headed idol described above,[62] and a quantity of fragments of very ancient painted vases with similar patterns. But for several reasons, which will hereafter be explained, I am unable to attribute these vases to a remoter age than from 1000 to 800 B.C., and I cannot therefore admit the settlement of the second nation at Tiryns to have taken place at an earlier epoch. It will probably for ever remain mere guesswork to what date belongs the stratum of hand-made pottery on and near the virgin soil; but if we suppose that the most ancient examples of this pottery are older, by 800 years, than the most ancient painted vases of the second nation, and that, consequently, the building of the Cyclopean walls of Tiryns was from 1800 to 1600 B.C., I think we shall be very near the right date. I have vainly endeavoured to recognise an affinity between the primitive Tirynthian pottery and that of any one of the four prehistoric cities of Troy. After mature consideration, I find that there is no resemblance whatever, except in the goblets whose form is also found in the oldest prehistoric city on Mount Hissarlik.

Not the least interesting object I discovered at Tiryns was the skeleton of a man at a depth of 16½ feet. The bones are partly petrified, but I attribute this merely to the nature of the soil in which the skeleton has been imbedded. Some of the bones had swollen considerably owing to the damp, and this may also be the case with the lower jawbone, which is enormously thick. Unfortunately I have been able to save only part of the skull.

I have still to mention that in all the prehistoric strata I found very small knives of obsidian; but, as before stated, no weapon or implement of stone. Many small conical whorls of blue or green stone [63] were found in the strata of the nation second in succession, but only two very rude ones of baked clay.

Taking the average depth of the virgin soil in the upper and lower citadels, as ascertained by my shafts, to be 11·66 feet, I find by accurate calculation, that the quantity of débris to be removed at Tiryns does not fall short of 36,000 cubic metres. From this, however, are to be deducted the cubic contents of the Cyclopean house-walls, of the curious water-conduits and of a couple of cisterns (only one of which, however, I have been able to find), on the south side. I hope to accomplish this work some day, but first of all I must finish the much more important excavation in the Acropolis of Mycenæ, and of the Treasury close to the Lions' Gate, which I intend to commence forthwith. I know that, after Troy, I could not possibly render a greater service to science than by excavating at Mycenæ; because if, as is probable, the Cyclopean walls of its Acropolis belong to the same remote antiquity as the walls of Tiryns, the architecture of its Treasuries is at all events more modern, and there can be no doubt whatever that such was in general use in the time of Homer, who describes it by the phrase θάλαμοι ξεστοῖο λίθοιο ("chambers of polished stone").

My esteemed friends, Professors Castorches, Phendikles, and Pappadakes return to-day to Athens.

NOTE A.—"HERA BOÖPIS."

NOTE ON HERA BOÖPIS.

I extract the following from my Paper on Troy, read on the 24th of June 1875, before the Society of Antiquaries in London.

It has been said by a great scholar,[64] that, whatever else the Homeric epithet γλαυκῶπις may mean, it cannot mean owl-headed, unless we suppose that Ἡρη Βοῶπις was represented as a cow-headed monster. I found in my excavations at Troy three splendid cow-heads with long horns of terra-cotta,[65] and I believe them to be derived from Hera idols, but I cannot prove it. But it is not difficult to prove that this goddess had originally a cow's face, from which her Homeric epithet βοῶπις was derived. When in the battle between the gods and the giants, the former took the shape of animals, Hera took the form of a white cow, "nivea Saturnia vacca."[66] We find a cow's head on the coins of the island of Samos, which had the most ancient temple of Hera, and was celebrated for its worship of this goddess.[67] We further find the cow's head on the coins of Messene, a Samian colony in Sicily.[68] The relation of Hera to the cow is further proved by the name Εὔβοια, which was at once her epithet,[69] the name of one of her nurses,[70] the name of the island in which she was brought up,[71] and the name of the mountain at the foot of which her most celebrated temple (the Heræon) was situated.[72] But in the name Εὔβοια is contained the word βοῦς. Hera had in Corinth the epithet βουναία,[73] in which the word βοῦς is likewise contained. White cows were sacrificed to Hera.[74] The priestess rode in a car drawn by white bulls to the temple of the Argive Hera.[75] Iö, the daughter of Inachus, the first king of Argos, was changed by Hera into a cow.[76] Iö was priestess of Hera,[77] and she is represented as the cow-goddess Hera.[78] Iö's cow-form is further confirmed by Æschylus.[79] The Egyptian goddess Isis was born in Argos, and was identified with the cow-shaped Iö.[80] Isis was represented in Egypt as a female with cow-horns, like Iö in Greece.[81]

The cow-shaped Iö was guarded in Hera's sacred grove at Mycenæ by the hundred-eyed Argus, who was killed by Hermes, by order of Zeus; and Hera next persecuted Iö by a gad fly, which forced her to wander from place to place.[82] Thus Prometheus says: "How should I not hear the daughter of Inachus, who is chased around by the gad fly?" But the wandering of Iö is nothing else than the symbol of the moon, which restlessly moves in its orbit. This is also shown by the very name of Iö (᾽Ιώ), which is derived from the root I (in εἶμι, I go). Even in classical antiquity Iö was still frequently represented as a cow; as at Amyclæ.[83] Iö continued to be the old name of the moon in the religious mysteries at Argos.[84] Apis, king of the Argive realm, was the son of Phoroneus, and thus the grandson of Inachus, and the nephew of Iö. From Apis, the Peloponnesus and also Argos were called Apia; after his death he was worshipped under the name Serapis.[85] According to another tradition, Apis ceded his dominion in Greece to his brother, and became king of Egypt,[86] where, as Serapis, he was worshipped in the shape of a bull. Æschylus makes the wanderings of Iö end in Egypt, where Jove restores her to her shape, and she bears Epaphus, another name for the bull-god Apis. The cow-horns of the Pelasgian moon-goddess Iö, who became later the Argive Hera and is perfectly identical with her, as well as the cow-horns of Isis, were derived from the symbolic horns of the crescent representing the moon.[87] No doubt Iö, the later Hera, had at an earlier age, besides her cow-horns, a cow's face. Hera, under her old moon-name Iö, had a celebrated temple on the site of Byzantium, which city was said to have been founded by her daughter Keroëssa—i.e., "the horned."[88] The crescent, which was in all antiquity and throughout the Middle Ages the symbol of Byzantium, and which is now the symbol of the Turkish empire, is a direct inheritance from Byzantium's mythical foundress, Keroëssa, the daughter of the moon-goddess Iö (Hera); for it is certain that the Turks did not bring it with them from Asia, but found it already an emblem of Byzantium. Hera, Iö, and Isis, must at all events be identical also with Demeter Mycalessia, who derived her epithet "the lowing," from her cow-shape, and had her temple at Mycalessus in Bœotia. She had as door-keeper Hercules, whose office it was to shut her sanctuary in the evening, and to open it again in the morning.[89] Thus his service is identical with that of Argus, who in the morning unfastens the cow-shaped Iö, and fastens her again in the evening to the olive tree,[90] which was in the sacred grove of Mycenæ, close to the ῾Ἡραῖον.[91] The Argive Hera had, as the symbol of fertility, a pomegranate, which, as well as the flowers with which her crown was ornamented, gave her a telluric character.[92]

In the same way that in Bœotia the epithet Mycalessia, "the lowing," a derivation from μυκᾶσθαι, was given to Demeter, on account of her cow-form, so in the plain of Argos the name of Μυκῆναι, a derivative from the same verb, was given to the city most celebrated for the cultus of Hera, and this can only be explained by her cow-form. I may here mention that Μυκάλη was the name of the mount and promontory directly opposite to and in the immediate neighbourhood of the island of Samos, which was celebrated for the worship of Hera.

In consideration of this long series of proofs, certainly no one will for a moment doubt that Hera's Homeric epithet βοῶπις shows her to have been at one time represented with a cow's face, in the same way as Athena's Homeric epithet γλαυκῶπις shows this goddess to have once been represented with an owl's face. But in the history of these two epithets there are evidently three stages, in which they had different significations. In the first stage the ideal conception and the naming of the goddesses took place, and in that naming, as my esteemed friend Professor Max Müller rightly observed to me, the epithets were figurative or ideal, that is, natural. Hera (Iö), as deity of the moon, would receive her epithet βοῶπις from the symbolic horns of the crescent moon and its dark spots, which resemble a face with large eyes; whilst Athena, as goddess of the dawn, doubtless received the epithet γλαυκῶπις to indicate the light of the opening day.

In the second stage of these epithets the deities were represented by idols, in which the former figurative intention was forgotten, and the epithets were materialised into a cow-face for Hera, and into an owl-face for Athena; and I make bold to assert that it is not possible to describe such cow-faced or owl-faced female figures by any other epithets than by βοῶπις and γλαυκῶπις. The word πρόσωπον for 'face,' which is so often used in Homer, and is probably thousands of years older than the poet, is never found in compounds, whilst words with the suffix ειδης refer to expression or likeness in general. Thus, if Hera had had the epithet of βοοειδής, and Athena that of γλαυκοειδής, we should have understood nothing else but that the former had the shape and form of a cow, and the latter that of an owl.

To this second stage belong all the prehistoric ruins at Hissarlik, Tiryns, and Mycenæ.

The third stage in the history of the two epithets is when, after Hera and Athena had lost their cow and owl faces, and received the faces of women, and after the cow and the owl had become the attributes of these deities, and had, as such, been placed at their side, βοῶπις and γλαυκῶπις continued to be used as epithets consecrated by the use of ages, and probably with the meaning "large-eyed," and "owl-eyed." To this third stage belong the Homeric rhapsodies.

PLATE II.

THE WEST SIDE OF THE ACROPOLIS OF MYCENÆ.

In the background is the principal summit of Mount Eubœa, 2500 feet high, crowned with an open Chapel of the Prophet Elias. To face page 23.

[[See larger version]]

No. 16. Ruins of the Cyclopean Bridge at Mycenæ.[93]

CHAPTER II.

TOPOGRAPHY OF MYCENÆ.

GATE OF THE LIONS AND TREASURY OF ATREUS.

The road from Argos to Mycenæ—The Plain of Argos: its rivers and hills, horses and vegetation—Myth regarding its arid nature—Swamps in the southern part; and fable of the Lernæan hydra—Early social development here—Legend of Phoroneus—The Pelasgian Argos—The Achæan states of Argos and Mycenæ—Situation of Mycenæ—The Citadel and its Cyclopean walls—The term defined—"Gate of the Lions"—The postern gate—Cisterns—Poetical confusion of Argos and Mycenæ.

The Lower City: its house-walls, bridge, treasuries, and pottery—Its partially enclosing wall—The undefended suburb, and its large buildings—Its extent—The only two wells in Mycenæ—Three Treasuries in the suburb—Treasuries in the Lower City—Description of the "Treasury of Atreus"—Dodwell's Argument for regarding the building as a Treasury—Uniqueness of these structures—Excavation of the Treasury by Veli Pasha.

Mycenæ, August 19, 1876.

I arrived here on the 7th inst. by the same road which Pausanias [94] describes. The distance from Argos is only 50 stadia, or 5·8 English miles. Pausanias saw, on that side of Argos which looked toward Mycenæ, the temple of Lucina (Εἰλείθυια), and next an altar of the Sun, which appears to have been on the bank of the Inachus. After having passed this river he saw, to his right, the temple of the Mysian Demeter, and further on to his left the mausoleum of Thyestes, the brother of Atreus and uncle of Agamemnon. This monument was crowned with a ram of stone, in commemoration of the adultery of Thyestes with his brother's wife. Still further on he saw, to his right, the temple (ἡρῷον) of Perseus, the founder of Mycenæ. But of all these monuments not a vestige now remains.

The first river I passed, in coming from Argos, was the ancient Χαράδρος, now called Rema, an affluent of the Inachus, on the banks of which, as Thucydides [95] informs us, the Argives were in the habit of holding a military court on the return of their armies from abroad, before allowing them to enter the city. Soon afterwards I passed the very wide bed of the famous river Inachus, now called Bonitza, which traverses the plain of Argos in its entire length. The beds of both these rivers are dry except when heavy rain falls in the mountains; and this appears to have been the case also in the time of Pausanias, who says [96] that he found the sources of the Inachus on Mount Artemisium, but that the quantity of water was very insignificant and it only ran for a short distance. This seems to prove beyond any doubt that the Arcadian mountains were then already as bare of trees as they are now.

MYCENÆA NARRATIVE OF RESEARCHES AND DISCOVERIESAT MYCENÆ AND TIRYNS.

PREFACE.

DR. SCHLIEMANN'S ACCOUNT OF A TOMB AT SPATA, IN ATTICA.

THE FALL OF MYCENÆ AS DESCRIBED BY DIODORUS SICULUS.

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

COMPARATIVE TABLE OF FRENCH AND ENGLISH MEASURES, EXACT AND APPROXIMATE.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

CHAPTER I.

CHAPTER II.

MYCENÆ
A NARRATIVE OF RESEARCHES AND DISCOVERIES
AT MYCENÆ AND TIRYNS.