Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1898-03-17
THE ARTS AT
Discoveries Destructive of Schiie-
mann's Hypothesis.

1A~ NAAAAaN
article, on the remains Of Mycenae. look
to conclusions which have a very great
Importance in relation to the discoveries
connected with the name and researches
Of Schliemann, and which, unless they
can be controverted, dissipate definitely
the hypothesis of the high antiquity Of
either the tombs I'm which the treasures
now at Athens were found. or the palace
at Tiryus. If 1t be true that knowl-
edge of the art of stone-cutting. properly
speaking, was possessed by the people
who restored the facade of the great
tomb at Mycenae and built the second
tomb, known as that Of Nine. Schliemann,
besides adding to the Lion gate the re-
lief Of the l~iOns-which conclusions are
to me indisputably shown by the techni-
cal evidence-it follows that wherever we
find stone-cutting, !. e.. with chisels, we
are in the presence Of work posterior
to that which is recognized by the great
est authorities as of the seventh, or at
furthest, the eighth, century B.. c., at
which former date the stone-saw and
most probably the tube-drill were. ac-
cOrding TO tradition, introduced; a date
which strengthens the opinion Of those
authorities as to the epoch of the relief
Of the Lion gate.
To resume, for convenience of COMPARE
sion, the facts which are, / believe, indis-
putable: The work done with "the stone
hammer and plumb-line' Of Hesiod, which
comprises all the earliest style of the re-
mains at Mycenae, and was done by split
ting. hammering, and ~trituration, is
earlier than the seventh or eight century,
by an Understandable period. The stone
saw and stone-drill appear at that epoch
| aud apu phiga1-yUnrk ia later. and from
all the researches 1 have been able to
make. there is in the Hellenic world no
proper stone-cutting-i. e., chisel work,
earlier than the sixth, or at furthest, the
| seventh century. 1 believe the Sormer to
! be the limit, with possible exception Of
work in the soft volcanic stone, Of which,
i'm the Italian sphere, all the earliest cut
stone work consists, as this material can
easily be worked with the bronze tools
which have come down to US from ancient
times. I assert that no hard stone, such
as the !imestones usually employed in
Greek building, can be indicated as in
use earlier than the sixth century, and l
accept the opinion of the authorities
which put the late of the Lion relief at
the earliest in the eighth century.
Now. in the constructions which en-
viron the tomb that once contained the
Mycenaean treasure, at present in the
museum at Athens, there are stones
| coming from various stages of the decay
of Mycenae, both Of the earliest epoch
and Of the two later, showing the use OF
the tube-drill and the chisel respectively.
This alone indicates that the tomb ana
surrounding structure are later than the
sixth century. But there Is still stronger
evidence Of this comparative modernity
in the treasure itself. In the Epheneris
| Of 1894 part - there is an article on this
subject by Mr.. Nicolaides, which shows
in lis Illustrations a fragment of a silver
vessel (part Of the treasure) with a be-
sieged city-a portion of the walls with
their defenders and archers and singers
fighting outside the defences. This, Mr..
Nicolaides maintains 10 be a representa-
ton of the siege OF Troy, and, as the most
celebrated siege of antiquity, II may De
assumed to be so. But what, IN any case
IS decisive OF the epoch in which II was
made. an absolute proof that II IS suisse
auent TO that siege, Is the fact that the
wallis of the city there represented are in
regular, parallel courses, rusticaIed'
which features cannot be found in any
Hellenic walls earlier than the sixth CEN
tury Tor. as / believe, the ffth. The
nasitiou of the relief i'm the tomb pre-
cINdes the idea of it's being Of accidental
and later inclusion, and the ineVltaDle
inference is. that the tomb Is that OF
= sepulture later than the sixth century
b. c.
This conclusion would in fact alone ac-
count for the curious and otherwise mex
nIicable melange Of objects OF various
epochs. and evidently of different stages
of art. 1t is that at which l had arrived
from the first examination of the tomb
and It's contents and the condition OF the
uttered bodies at the moment Of dis
coverv made it inconceivable that a date
CORRESPONDING with Schliemann's theory
ebouId he a%ssignable to II. The form or
the grave. so entirely different from
everything known Elsewhere or the In
terments in Hellenic usage Of any epoch
made this problem an insoluble one from
the beginning, and so 1t still remains OF
any other hypothesis than that II was
ethnologically and chronologically an
intrusion INTO the Hellenic locality. Inc
probability of its being a reinterment has
been admitted by some of the most siren
nous advocates Of its assignment to an
extreme antiquity, n is an hypothesis
INDISPENSABLE for the explanation of the
manner of inhumation, the secrecy OF II,
and the circular and Stonehenge-like
monument which crowned II. The dis
covery by Tsountas OF the great virgin
beehive tomb near Sparta, with objects
belonging TO the earlier period OF those
found at Mycenae, gave an tntelllslole
clue to the mystery; and that OF the I'M
mense collection of tombs, many riied In
ancient times, in the immediate vicinity
of Mycenae adds to the evidence in FAVOR
OF my original hypothesis-viz., that the
Schliemann tomb was a late interment,
In which the treasures OF a chief OF a
band Of temple or tomb-robbers had been
deposited with the bodies of the family
Of which he was head.
As the researches Of Tsountas proved
among other things, that the city had
been reoccupied after the period of its
supposed destruction and abandonment
by the Argives, and had been inhabited
down into the Roman conquest, the pos
sibility OF such an occupation as would
permit the refinement Is. / suppose, UNI
deniable, and the hypothesis solves every
problem connected with the treasure.
Have we any Indications OF such a state
OF affairs as would render this hypothesis,
a priori, probable? This / propose 10
show TO be the case. Among the frag-
ments of Diodorus Siculus C'The Virtues
and the Vices" ed. A.. f. Mot, Diodore
di Sicile. vol. W., p. 1907 il this:
Pyrrhus, after having given up TO pill
lage the city OF Aegae. residence OF the
kings of Macedonia, left In ii a Gaulish
garrison. The men who composed II,
having learned hat formerly there was'
according to ancient usage. the custom
OF burying In the royal tombs large sums
OF money ureasureO with the dead buried
there, violated these tombs. divided the
treasure which they found there. ana
scattered the bones. This violation OK
sculpture drew down the public male