Page:History of Art in Primitive Greece - Mycenian Art Vol 1.djvu/398

 Mycen/K. 37 1 the last thirty years, the time has come to approach a minor question, but one not destitute of interest ; namely, how are we to understand the passage of Pausanias relating to these antiquities,^ the sole writer in Hadrian's time who, though he does not give a full account of them, has yet indications sufficiently distinct to enable us to recognize the particular monuments he describes ; at times, however, the student does not know what to make of the evidence he has before him ? With Schliemann he would like to believe that the shaft-graves on the acropolis are those mentioned by Pausanias ; but he is arrested on the threshold by grave objections. Let us weigh every word of the passage which has given rise to so much discussion, but which has not, as it seems to me, been subjected to a sufficiently close scrutiny, and see if the question can be settled that way. Enough allow- ance has not been made for elements of a widely different nature which the author may have fused together into his narrative. Let us turn to Pausanias : ** Some remains of the circular wall and the gate which has lions over it are still extant. These were erected, they say, by the Cyclopes who made the wall at Tiryns for Praeteus." ^ All this is as clear as noon-day : ''the gate over which stand lions" is our Lions Gate, and the ^sg/SoXo^, or circuit in which it opens, is the citadel wall. Next we have : the subterranean buildings of Atreus and his children, in which they stored their treasures."^ That Pausanias, when writing this, was looking in spirit at the citadel from the outside, is proved by his mention of the Perseia, for no spring exists within the circuit ; and one is inclined to think that he never entered it, but was satisfied with a superficial glance at the Lions Gate. Had he passed it, he could scarcely have failed to notice the temple built over the old palace, as well as the substructures ^ We follow Bclger's closely-reasoned criticism of the passage in question, which the reader will find in the second part of Beiinz^c zur Kenntniss^ cr*^., and also in his articles on Schuchardt's book. - Ac/ircrai Ik ofiufi in koI aWn tuv inpiGvKov kui fj nvXrj* Xeorrcc U ifffeerrffKaffiy ftir-^. KvKXwirwy he ical ravra ipya ihui Xtyovaty, ot Upo/ry to rtfxoc iTroiriaay to iy Tipvydi, ^ MvKiit'iijy Se ky toIq epeinloiQ Kpriyrj ti iari KnXovfiiyrj Uepauaf Kai 'Arpcwc Kal Tuiy waihuty vvoyma otKodofiri^aTa, h'Oa oi Orjaavpoi a^toi rwy 'Xpri^taTuy Jjaay, It will be observed that Pausanias calls the Perseia icp^vi; and not nrjyri. For him, vqyli is a natural spring, whereas Kpriyri is a fountain provided with a reservoir, channels, etc.
 * Among the ruins of Mycenae is the fountain called Perseia and