The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 03 : $b Greece to the Peloponnesian War
History
The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 03 : $b Greece to the Peloponnesian War
World history
We have seen that Mycenæan art was no exotic, transplanted full grown
into Greece, but rather a native growth--influenced though it was by
the earlier civilisations of the Cyclades and the East. This indigenous
art, distinct and homogeneous in character, no matter whence came its
germs and rudiments, must have been wrought out by a strong and gifted
race. That it was of Hellenic stock we have assumed to be self-evident.
But, as this premise is still in controversy, we have to inquire whether
(aside from art) there are other considerations which make against the
Hellenic origin of the Mycenæan peoples, and compel us to regard them as
immigrants from the islands or the Orient.
In the first place, recalling the results of our discussion of domestic
and sepulchral architecture, we observe that neither in the Ægean nor in
Syria do we find the gable-roof which prevails at Mycenæ. Nor would the
people of these warm and dry climates have occasion to winter their herds
in their own huts--an ancestral custom to which we have traced the origin
of the avenues to the beehive tombs.
Again, we have seen reason to refer the shaft-graves to a race or tribe
other than that whose original dwelling we have recognised in the
sunken hut. To this pit-burying stock we have assigned the upper-story
habitations at Mycenæ. If we are right, now, in explaining this type of
dwelling as a reminiscence of the pile-hut, it would follow that this
stock, too, was of northern origin. The lake-dwelling habit, we know,
prevailed throughout Northern Europe, an instance occurring, as we have
seen, even in the Illyrian peninsula; while we have no reason to look
for its origin to the Orient or the Ægean. It is indeed true that the
island-folk were no strangers to the pile-dwelling, but this rather goes
to show that they were colonists from the mainland.
But, apart from the evidence of the upper-story abodes, are there other
indications of an element among the Mycenæan people which had once
actually dwelt in lakes or marshes?
Monuments like the stone models from Melos and Amorgos have not indeed
been found in the Peloponnesus, or on the mainland, but in default
of such indirect testimony we have the immediate witness of actual
settlements. Of the four most famous cities of the age, Mycenæ, Tiryns,
Orchomenos, and Amyclæ, it is a singular fact that but one has a
mountain-site, while the other three were once surrounded by marshes. The
rock on which Tiryns is built, though it rises to a maximum elevation of
some sixty feet above the plain, yet sinks so low on the north that the
lower citadel is only a few feet above the level of the sea. Now this
plain, as Aristotle asserts, and as the nature of the ground still bears
witness, was originally an extensive morass. The founders, therefore,
must have chosen this rock for their settlement, not because it was a
stronghold in itself, but because it was protected by the swamp out of
which it rose.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account