Page:History of Art in Primitive Greece - Mycenian Art Vol 1.djvu/274

Troy. 251 pure illusion ; that the notches in Dorpfeld's plan were acci- dentally made by the explorer himself, and had been inadvertently allowed to remain. After Dorpfeld, M. Tsoundas discovered another palace at Mycenae, exhibiting all the essential charac- teristics of the Trojan and Tirynthian palace. The difficulty of challenging witnesses whose number waxed stronger every day was lost on Boetticher, who retorted that whatever opinion might be held as to Mycenae and Tiryns, proved nothing in regard to Troy, since the plan of the Trojan megaron had no existence in fact. The great hole, he affirmed, was of Dorpfeld's own making, brought about by the destruction of the partition- walls, which originally had divided the building into a number of small chambers, to which a funerary destination might well be attributed ; and had imparted thereby a totally different aspect to the structure. That its primitive state, the true and only one that could be taken into consideration, was to be sought in Burnoufs plan of 1878. To this Schliemann and Dorpfeld answered, that the plan in question applied to a different stratum than the one he challenged, having been made before the ex- cavations which had brought to light the buildings of the burnt city ; they gave vent at the same time to their indignation at having their sincerity and the results of their work perpetually questioned by one who had not even taken the trouble to test them on the spot. As regards Schliemann, he had to a certain extent laid himself open to these attacks ; there were grounds to suspect, if not his good faith, at least the sound- ness of many of his statements. In his eagerness to acquaint the world with his discoveries, he all too soon had rushed into print. Accordingly his information, necessarily incomplete, conflicting at times and therefore subject to correction, was un- mercifully dealt with by his critics.^ These strictures, however, could not be laid at Dorpfeld's door, and he may be forgiven if he was somewhat rough in repelling the unjust attack made upon his veracity. That he faithfully notes down the faintest ^ In no unfriendly spirit— for he accepts Dorpfeld's conclusions — M. J. Durm, a rising young architect, in an article dealing with the debate carried on by Schliemann and Boetticher, which he published on his return from the Troad, has shown how far Schliemann exposed himself to be attacked through hasty work and consequent oversights {Zuni Kampfum Troja^ in the Centralblatt der Bauvcrwaltung^ 1890).