Archaeology Magazine - March 1958 - 66

problems presented are a refreshing
change from the American and English data appearing in recent works on
methodology.On the other hand, the
general character of the topics discussed is reassuringly familiar; it is
apparent that sound basic techniques
of observation and inference have no
geographical limitations. I read with
sympathetic interest the denunciations
of wastage of archaeologicalresources
through casual or malicious depredations, slovenly curatorial practices and
unreasonably delayed or inadequate
publication. De Laet ranks continental
archaeological evidence as distinctly
less reliable than that from Great
Britain and Scandinavia.
The methods of reconnaissance,excavation, dating and interpretation advocated do not require any special
summary. Perhaps the most noticeable
contrast with American practice is the
absence of any consideration of quantitative seriation or related ideas. However, this absence is certainly not the
result of any hostility toward technical
innovations or resistance to systematic
procedures. De Laet has no patience
with the precious point of view which
deplores the "encroachment of technique upon thought," arguing rather
that genuine technical advances provide new data to think about. There
are some terminological differencesto
guard against: thus "community" and
"clan" are used in an intentionally
vague sense. A few ideas should be
presented more lucidly: for example,
it is not at all clear to me how paly-

nological dating is of any direct help
in reconstructing the internal structure of a Bronze Age tumulus, nor do
I understand from the discussion in
what manner distribution studies yield
relative chronology. Finally, De Laet
points out with some force that the
assumption of similar "mental powers" for the "primitive mind" at all
times and places is unprovable, but
he fails to note that the converse is
equally incapable of proof and has the
additional disadvantage of producing
hypotheses about cultural differences
which have no logical implications.
Albert C. Spaulding
Universityof Michigan

period, enclosedtwenty-four graves, of
which fourteen are shaft graves like
those of Schliemann's Circle A. The
others are mainly small cists, but
Grave P, the latest in date (Late
Helladic II A), is a built chamberwithout parallel on the Greek mainland
but comparable to the built graves of
the Mycenaean settlements at Ras
Shamra and Minet-el-Beidain Syria.
This unique grave was emptied in antiquity, but the shaft graves were nearly
all intact. They were, on the whole,
less richly furnished than those of
Circle A, but the finds included several
fine weapons and a number of gold,
silver and bronze vessels; gold ornaments were found in several graves,
and in one was a beautiful vase and
The Capital City of ornaments of rock
ANCIENT
MYCENAE,
crystal. The potE. MyLONAS.
Agamemnon,
by GEORGE
is of great variety and interest.
tery
ix, 201 pages, 87 figures. Princeton Whether or not these were
royal
University Press, Princeton 1957 (The graves, they were certainly the graves
Lectures
for
at
the
1955
Page-Barbour
of some leading families of Mycenae.
University of Virginia) $7.50
The book includes a general descripBoth in 1952 and in 1955 Archae- tion of Mycenae and its history, comology had the good fortune to carry bined with fresh and thought-provokaccounts of the Grave Circle discov- ing comment. It places considerable,
ered in 1951 outside the citadel at My- perhaps excessive, reliance on Greek
cenae. In his new book Professor My- legend, seeking- always ingeniouslylonas provides both a fuller report on to connect the monuments of Mycenae
the excavation of this Circle (in which with the great figures of her heroic
he took an active part) and a most past. Professor Mylonas identifies two
interesting discussion of modifications main eras of construction, the former
suggested by recent excavation and re- (connected with Perseus) in the midsearch to the accepted dating and in- dle of the fourteenth century b.c. when
terpretation of other major monu- the acropolis fortifications and the
ments of Mycenae.
palace were first completed, the latter
Grave Circle B, which dates from (connected with Atreus) a century
the second half of the Middle Helladic later when the palace was altered, the
Lion Gate and the curving western
wall were added to the fortifications,
the ring of slabs was constructed
We have issued:
around Grave Circle A, and the two
Special List C Classical Antiquities
tholos tombs- the Treasury of
great
40 works of art, mostly illustrated, and 48 books on
Atreus and the Tomb of Clytemnestra
- were built. This chronologicalscheme
archaeology.
will not be universally accepted. Less
We are preparing:
controversial and particularly convincAuction Sale XVIII, Spring 1958
ing is the suggestionthat the so-called
Throne Room in the palace was in
Works of Ancient Art from the collections of the
fact a guest chamber; additional suplate Dr. Jacob Hirsch, of Lord Elgin and others.
for this came in 1955 when a
port
Three more Special Lists of Classical Antiquities.
place for a throne was discovered in
the porch of the great megaron.
Catalogues and lists are sent free of charge.
Especial interest attaches to the
Inquiries are welcome.
chapters on the tombs and burial customs of Mycenae.Excavation of Circle
ET MÉDAILLES S.A.
MONNAIES
B by modern methods has cleared up
(Dept. of Classical Art: Dr. Herbert Cahn)
much that was obscure about Circle A
*
Basel (Switzerland)
and has cast fresh light on Mycenaean
Malzgasse 25
beliefs and funeral practices. Most im-

Archaeology Magazine - March 1958

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Archaeology Magazine - March 1958