THE EARLY AGE OF GREECE VOL.I by W.Ridgeway 1901

Slavs, Venetians. Xei-mans. and (loths, the mass of the present
})ortal at Tir\ns is identical in ])lan with the similar ])ropylaea
WHO WERE THE MAKERS ? 277
278 WHO WERE THE MAKERS?
behalf of Venetians, or Normans, ancient Egyptians, or Libyans ;
population of Greece (especially in the islands) are the descendants
for it will be equally impossible to show any historical evidence
of the Greeks of the Byzantine and Roman periods, who,
that any one of these peoples ever occupied Thessaly, Attica,
though much mixed with foreign blood in seaports and large
Peloponnesus, the Troad, Crete, Melos, Central Italy, and
cities, were certainly descended from the Greeks of the age of
Sicily. In addition to these two arguments, which apply to
Pericles. But we have seen that in Attica and elsewhere
all
these avowed or potential claimants, there- is another which the
is
archaeological evidence shows that there was an unbroken
deadly to the claims of the post-Christian competitors. The
continuity of population from the Stone Age, a resylt perfectly
evidence of the monuments has made it absolutely certain that
in accord with the statements of the historians that the
the people of the Mycenean age used bronze for their Athenians were autochthonous.
cutting
implements and weapons, as no trace of iron weapons has been
But what is true of Attica is probably true of many other
found in any
site on the mainland of Greece. Now, as the
parts of Greece, for even in districts such as Laconia, Argolis,
Romans and Greeks of the classical time invariably used iron
and Thessaly, there is strong evidence to show that the bulk of
for their weapons of offence, and as we know that the Teutonic
tribes who overran the Empire were abundantly equipped with
the population consisted of the old race reduced to serfdom.
The unbroken continuity in the development of the arts exhibited
in so many other Mycenean sites, but especially prominent
iron, it is absurd to suppose that the Mycenean culture is the
outcome of any ])eople who occupied the Aegean area at in Mek)S and at Hissarlik, is a clear indication that the mass of
any
time since the
the
Christian era.
population in all these cases remained unchanged. Thus
All these claimants have been
we can trace the
dis(pialiti('(l
froui failing
to
gradual transition from archaic hand-made
fulfil two out of the three conditions which we laid down at the
pottery with linear ornament to wheel-made fabrics with similar
outset, viz., evidence (1) of wide geographical distribution, and
decoration, from the latter to painted ware exhibiting the same
(2) of being indigenous in the Aegean basin.
principle in its adornment, until we come to the splendid
On the othei' hand, the evidence for the extension and duration
of the Pelasgiau (occupation of the eastern ^lediterranean
products of the potters of the classical time. There is no
sudden
is
appearance of a totally- distinct kind of pottery differing
conq)lete. Fui'thermore, the Pelasgians fnlhl our third condition,
essentially in form and decoration from that already on the
that the successful cliimant should have enq)loyed a spot. This latt(!r
sciipt
phase is known well in England, where the
similar to the Cypi'iote syllaljai'},
and non-Phoenician iettei's in
Anglo-Saxon pottery appeal's per saltum. on top of the Romanothe
Lycian and ( 'arian alphabets. Hut Homer
British
])roves that
fabrics, which in their turn had suddenly burst into the
I'roetns, who wrote at ;i
'I'iiyns
letter intelligible to the domain of the old Celtic forms. Nor is
king
only in the ceramic
of Lyeia, reigned in Argolis geiiei'ations
befoi'e either Aehean
arts that this continuity between the prehistoric and elassit-ul
or Doi'ian evei' set foot in Peloponnesus; and a large body of
periods can be (observed.
traditional e\idcnce has shown that Proetus was The architecture of classical times shows indications that
a i\'lasgian.
it
What became of this j)eo|)|i'
in histoi'ical times, and who
was the lineal descendant of that of the Mycenean age.
wei'e thev? Prom t he ai'cliai 'i i|i igicaj and historical data
Several such characteristics have
hct'oi-e
long been pointed
(ait. Thus
the cella
lis it is not difticnlt to answer
and the
the tirst jtoitico leading into it, that is, the ('ssential
iiiiestioii.
The same
elements in the (ireek
race has |iracticallv nccujiied the .\egean area
temjjle.are dei'ived from the same soui'ce
as the hall and
from the neolithic time down to the present daw li w II
portico seen in the palaces of the Mycenean
admitted that in sjiite
of the admixture of 'j'urks, .Mhaiiians,
]jeiio(l
Mycenae, Tiryns, and Hissarlik. Again, the grand