Page:EB1911 - Volume 20.djvu/1037

 1906), which assumes a dislocation of the text, has lieen answered by Dörpfeld (''Wochenschrift für kl. Philologie'' (1907), p. 940 seq.)

The account of the law courts of Athens and of the altars at Olympia may have been derived from monographs on those subjects. In both cases the author departs from his usual method of following the order of place, and deals with a group of monuments belonging to the same class. But in the extant literature of antiquity (as J. G. Frazer has shown) no passage has been found agreeing in form or substance so closely with the description in Pausanias as to make it probable that he copied it. The theory that Pausanias borrowed largely from Polemon of Ilium, who flourished about 200–177, and wrote on the Acropolis and the eponymous heroes of Athens, on the treasuries of Delphi, and on other antiquarian topics, was incidentally suggested by Preller in his edition of the fragments (1838), and was revived by Professor von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff in 1877 (Hermes, xii. 346). It was subsequently maintained by A. Kalkmann (1886) that Pausanias slavishly copied from Polemon the best part of his descriptions of Athens, Delphi and Olympia, and described those places, not as they were in his own age, but as they had been in that of Polemon, some 300 years before. It is alleged that, in the notices of the monuments on the Acropolis of Athens, and of the sculptors and the athlete-statues of Olympia, the lower limit of Pausanias is practically 150 ; it is inferred that the authority followed by him ended with this date, and it is more than suggested that his sole authority was Polemon. But the comparative neglect of works later than 150 might also be explained by the fact that the independence of Greece came to an end in 146. And, further, it so happens that Pausanias refers to very few sculptors for the 140 years (296–156 ) before the age of his supposed authority, while some of the sculptors represented at Olympia have since been placed after that date, and not a few of the Athenian monuments described by Pausanias belong to the period between that date and the accession of Hadrian, or, approximately, the period between about 166 and  117 (Gurlitt, Über Pausanias, pp. 117 seq., 194 seq., 257-267). More than one hundred extracts from, or reference to, the works of Polemon have come down to us, and it has been shown by Mr Frazer that “the existing fragments hardly justify us in supposing that Pausanias was acquainted with the writings of his learned predecessor; certainly they lend no countenance to the view that he borrowed descriptions of places and monuments from them.” Again, it has been urged that his brief description of the Peiraeus is not true of his own time, as it had been burnt by Sulla (86 ), and was still lying desolate in the age of Augustus, but his account of the buildings and monuments has been confirmed by an inscription conjecturally ascribed to the time of Pausanias (Frazer ii. 14 seq.). It has also been stated that the description of Arcadia must have been borrowed from far earlier writers, because Strabo (p. 38S) says that most of the famous cities of that land had either ceased to exist or had left hardly a trace behind them; but the evidence of coins has proved that at least seven of the eleven cities described by Pausanias were still in existence long after the death of Strabo. It has further been assumed that his account of the temple of Apollo at Delphi is “irreconcilable with the remains of the building” and with the inscriptions recently discovered by the French archaeologists. We are told that Pausanias describes the temple of the 6th century as if it still existed in his own time. On the contrary, he states that the first sculptures for the gables were executed by a pupil of Calamis, the pupil of a sculptor still at work in 427, and the shields that he saw suspended on the architrave were captured from the Gauls in 279. Again, his description of New Corinth, built in 44 , more than a century after the time of Polemon, is most minute and systematic, and it is confirmed by coins of the imperial age. In at least one important point Pausanias compares favourably with Strabo. While Strabo erroneously declares that not a vestige of Mycenae remains, Pausanias gives a brief but accurate description of the Lion-gate and the existing circuit-wall of the Acropolis, with a notice of the tombs “within the wall” (ii. 16, 5-7), a notice which led to their discovery by Schliemann. In all parts of Greece the accuracy of his descriptions has been proved by the remains of the buildings which he describes; and a few unimporl, ant mistakes (in v. 10, 6 and 9; viii. 37, 3, and 45, 5), and some slight carelessness in copying inscriptions, do not lend any colour to an imputation of bad faith. It has been stated with perfect justice by Frazer (p. xcv. seq.) that “without him the ruins of Greece would for the most part be a labyrinth without a clue, a riddle without an answer.” “His book furnishes the clue to the labyrinth, the answer to many riddles. It will be studied so long as ancient Greece shall continue to engage the attention and awaken the interest of mankind.”

PAUSIAS, a Greek painter of the 4th century, of the school of Sicyon. He introduced the custom of painting ceilings of houses. His great merit appears to have lain in the better rendering of foreshortening. The words in which Pliny (xxxv. 127) describes a bull painted by him should be quoted: “Wishing to display the length of the bull’s body, he painted it from the front, not in profile, and yet fully indicated its measure. Again, while others fill in with white the highlights, and paint in black what is less salient, he painted the whole bull of dark colour, and gave substance to the shadow out of the shadow itself, with great skill making his figures stand out from a flat background, and indicating their shape when foreshortened.” This passage well marks the state of painting at the time.

PAVANE, Pavan or Pavin, the name of a slow stately dance of the 16th and 17th centuries. The word has been variously derived: (1) from Lat. pavo, peacock; the dancers, as they wheel and turn, spread out their long cloaks, which they retained in this dance, like the tail of the bird; (2) from Padovana, i.e. of Padua, in Italy; the dance, however, is usually taken to have come from Spain. As an instrumental composition, common in the i6th and 17th centuries, the “pavane” was usually followed by the quick and lively “galliard,” as the “gigue” followed the “saraband” in the later suite (see ).

PAVEMENT (Lat. pavimentum, a floor beaten or rammed hard, from pavire, to beat), a term originally applied to the covering of a road or pathway with some durable material, and so used of the paved footway at the side of a street—the “sidewalk” as opposed to the roadway proper. The term is also extended to the interior floor of churches and public buildings. It is probable that the earliest pavements consisted only of rammed clay, as in the “beehive” tombs of Mycenae, or of cement or stucco decorated with lines in coloured marbles, such as those mentioned in the Book of Esther (vi. i) in the palace at Susa. W. M. Flinders Petrie discovered at Tell el’ Amama in the palace of Akhenaton the remains of a stucco pavement, decorated with foliage, flowers, birds, &c., and a complete naturalistic treatment. The threshold of the doors of the Assyrian palaces were of stone carved with patterns in imitation of those in a