The Geographical Journal (Journal of the Royal Geographical Society): Volume XII, No. 2 [‎286r] (74/154)

MR. FRAZER’S PAUSANIAS.
161
at the Heraeum of Argos, and that of the Greek Archaiological Society
at Eleusis, and at the Hieron of Epidaurus, receive their due share of
attention. Mycenai, too, is well described, and the important questions
connected with it—the date and origin of the Mycenaean civilization, the
relation which it bore to that which is described in the Homeric poems,
and the race to which the Mycenaean people belonged—are discussed with
excellent judgment. Mr. Frazer’s opinion is that the Mycenaean art was
of native development on the shores of the ^gean, though certain
elements in it came from Egypt and Syria; that the forms of that civi
lization which are found in Crete represent an earlier, the Argolic forms
a later, stage in its development; and that the Homeric period was
somewhat posterior to that which is represented at Mycenae.
. As re g ar ds the geographical features of Greece, perhaps the most
important notices which are met with in this work are those which
treat of the underground passages, which form the only outlets of the
water that collects in many of the inland valleys of that country. The
most remarkable instance of this phenomenon is found in the basin of
the Copaic lake, and this is especially interesting at the present time,
because that piece of water has quite recently been drained by the con
struction of artificial passages to carry off its waters, and the area
which it previously covered is now a cultivable plain. Mr. Frazer has
given us an account, mainly derived from his own observation, both of
the modern system of drainage by which this change has been effected,
and of similar attempts which were made in antiquity, for of these latter
conspicuous traces remain. The corresponding features which are found
m the lakes of Pheneus and Stymphalus in Arcadia, and the periodical
disappearances ot those pieces of water arising from the opening of the
subterranean passages which drain them, are also interestingly described.
An equal tribute of praise must be given to the discussions of the argu
ments relating to certain localities which are disputed at the present
day. Conspicuous among these is the question of the position of the
fountain of Enneacrunus at Athens. Pausanias’ description of this has
long been a standing puzzle, for he evidently conceived of it as lying in
the valley between the hills of the Pnyx and the Areopagus; and Dr.
Dorpfeld, who has recently excavated this neighbourhood, has with
great, though somewhat over-subtle, ingenuity maintained the correct
ness of this view. Mr. Frazer, however, is so strongly impressed with
the waterless character of this site, and with the almost unanimous
testimony of ancient writers in favour of the traditional position of that
fountain in the neighbourhood of the bed of the Ilissus, that he decides
unhesitatingly against his author and his modern champion. In respect
of another disputed point in Athenian topography—the position of the
river Eridanus—Mr. Frazer is at one with Dr. Dorpfeld. This stream
has usually been identified with the one which rises at the monastery
of Kiesariani, on the side of Mount Hymettus, and joins the Ilissus on
No. II.— August, 1898.] M