Page:History of Art in Primitive Greece - Mycenian Art Vol 2.djvu/123

94 Primitive Grkeck : Mycenian Art. we have compared to the metopes and triglyphs of the Dorian frieze, and placed in that situation in our restoration of the palace (Pis. XL, XII., and Fig. 227).^ Are we, then, to conclude that the form in question was borrowed by the Tirynthian decorator from Phoenician models ? This of course is not im- possible ; but we must own to having met nowhere among the Phoenicians, either in their architectural remains or on their wares, a design which is so liberally employed by the Mycenian ornamentist. One is tempted, therefore, to think that the Greek artificer, whilst deriving his inspiration from a foreign type, put his indi- vidual mark on it ; and if the assumption be allowed, it would explain the far-off yet undoubted resemblance observable between this facade and that of the Tirynthian palace. There is first a foundation of well-jointed stones ; above this follows a con- struction the visible parts of which are seemingly carpentry work. In both edifices there are three doorways enframed by massive timbers. The height of the middle entrance of our gold plate far exceeds that of the side openings. This was doubtless done to provide a lantern with windows at the sides for lighting the inner edifice. The salient beam ends of the flat roof, which served to keep in place the earth covering, are well brought out at the corners. The entrances about this frontispiece are the only points which are somewhat problematical. Are the doors intended to be open, and the columns seen in the centre of the openings meant to indicate rows of pillars extending right through the inner hall ? Should the curvilinear shape that surrounds the foot of the shafts be identified with one of those great basins placed in front of porches, like the vase at Amathont for example ? Or is it a mere decorative form applied to the door surface? It is hard to say. But these are after all minor points, and however interpreted, will not greatly modify the main characteristics of the building. The triple division of this facade recalls that of the Tirynthian and Mycenian palaces, the ground- plans of which may be read on the ground. Could we be sure that this amulet was wrought at Mycenae, by an artist who did his best to reproduce the outward appearance of some edifice of his native place, it would enable us to assert that Mycenian Greece had temples whose arrangement was practically identical 1 This detail was first noticed by Schuchardt (Schliemann^ s Ausgrabvngen),