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

PREHISTORIC REMAINS AND THEIR DISTRIBUTION. 75
of whose names faintly reach us down the long aisles of time,
we must view with suspicion the claims of any race whose
traditions affirm that they entered the Aegean
at a comparatively
late era in other
; words, we must search for the
people who, according to tradition, are autochthonous in the
basin of the eastern Mediterranean, who had the genius to
develope on the northern side of the Sea a culture which may
be regarded as independent of those of Egypt and Mesopotamia.
The evidence so far clearly indicates that the grand step in
development was taken neither on the coast of Asia Minor, nor
in the islands, but on the mainland of Greece. This culture
exercised a far-reaching iuHuence in central, northern and
western Europe. For if on the one hand the people of the
Mycenean period received in Italy and Greece the amber of
the Baltic, so they in turn sent up southern wares into the
distant and mysterious regions beyond the sources of the Istros
and the dense pines of the Hercynian forest, regions into which
it was said by them of old time Heracles had onci' journeyed
in his (piest
for the Hind of the Golden Horns.
When did this culture reach its zenith { It will ])c best at
we only use criteria derived from the monuments,
this ]joint
if
and avoid as far as possible all arguments fiom literary tradition.
Archaeologists have relied chiefly on the evidence of cei'tain
articles of Egyptian origin found along with Mycenean remains,
and which bear the (-artouches of eei'tain Pharaohs. fJut
Phai'aoh may prove a broken reel, on wliich the ehronoh)gist
must not lean too heavily for fear it piei\e
his hand. \Vi' nnist
therefore be vei'v careful in using evideiire troni this soiiive,
unless it can l)e sup|)orted by iudepeiMlent testimony.
At .Mvcenae two fragments of Egy])tian porcelain ha\c been
found, each of which beai-s the caii.ouche of Ainenophis 111.,
who I'eigned in Egvpt ahoui I4K) 1400 i;.c. One piece was
(liscovei'ed in a tomb in the lowei' city, the other in a Mvcenean
house (111 the acro]ioli>.
A scarab Ix'aring the nann- ol 'i'hi, t he
wife of .\nieiiophi> III., was found in another house mi the
acropolis of M\-cenae; in diie of the Mycenean graves
at lal\sii,s
a scarab of Aiiieno|)liis
III. hini>elf was discoxcr.d, I'rof.
W'aldstcin has fMund scaral)s of 'rimt linio III. at the lleraeiim.
76 PREHISTORIC REMAINS AND THEIR DISTRIBUTION.
But a scarab may be centuries older than the tomb or house
in which it is found. Scarabs inscribed with certain kings'
names were made and worn as much as a thousand years after
the death of the kings whose names they bear\ Thus though
the scarabs dug up at the Greek city of Naucratis are not older
than the seventh century B.C., yet many of them bear the
prenomens of Thothmes III., Seti I., and Rameses II. This is
further proved by the occurrence of scarabs inscribed with the
names of two kings. Thiis there are scarabs which bear the
names of both Thothmes III. and Seti I., another has those
of Thothmes I., Thothmes II., and Seti I., another those
of Thothmes III. and Rameses IX., and another those of
Thothmes III. and Psammetichus.
No doubt the names of famous kings were placed on
scarabs whose primary use was amiiletic. Such scarabs were
valued as potent talismans just as in India gold mohurs of
Akbar (especially those with the date 1000) are highly esteemed
as amulets, and for that reason are being continually manufactured
by the goldsmiths. It is therefore just as absurd to
date a Greek grave by a single scarab of Amenophis
III. or
Thothmes III., as it would be to assert that the contents of a
Hindu giave were contemporary with Akbar, merely from the
fticr that a gold mohur of that monai'ch was found within it.
Such scarabs cannot even give us a superior limit, for though it
is certain that a scarab (or vase) with names of Amenophis III.
cannot be older than the reign of that king", yet we must not
say that a grave which contains such a scarab cannot be older
than the scarab, lor the grave may have been used foi- later
interments, and the scarab niay have behjngcd to one of the
latter. It is clear then that but little stress nuist be laid on
isolated scarabs.
On the othor hand there is another class of Egyptian
evidence! which is of distinct value. I'rof IV'trie at (Jurol)
(]). ();")) found five
Mycenean false-necked amphorae decorated
with iron-glaze.
; cf. .J. L. Myrcs' review (if MiTorr's
work, Chix. Rn-inc, ISIM;, jij). 417^4.'')H.