Elite Minoan Architecture: Its Development at Knossos, Phaistos, and Malia (Prehistory Monographs) 9781931534772, 1931534772

Citation preview

Elite Minoan Architecture Its Development at Knossos, Phaistos, and Malia

Frontispiece. Knossos palace, Residential Quarters, looking west in the Hall of the Double Axes. Evans 1921–1935, III, plan G.

PREHISTORY MONOGRAPHS 49

Elite Minoan Architecture Its Development at Knossos, Phaistos, and Malia

by Joseph W. Shaw

Published by INSTAP Academic Press Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 2015

Design and Production INSTAP Academic Press, Philadelphia, PA

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data   Shaw, Joseph W. Elite Minoan architecture : its development at Knossos, Phaistos, and Malia / by Joseph W. Shaw. pages cm. -- (Prehistory monographs ; 49) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-931534-77-2 1. Architecture, Minoan. 2. Palaces—Greece—Crete. 3. Architecture—Composition, proportion, etc. I. Title.  NA267.S53 2014 722’.61--dc23  2014022230

Copyright © 2015 INSTAP Academic Press Philadelphia, Pennsylvania All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America

Dedicated to the pioneers in Minoan archaeology

Table of Contents

List of Tables in the Text............................................................................................. ix List of Figures in the Text.. . ......................................................................................... xi Introduction and Acknowledgments.............................................................................. xxi List of Abbreviations...............................................................................................xxv Chapter 1. Introduction to the Elite Style.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.1. Elite Forms: Raised Walkways, the West Courts, and “Theatral” Areas............................. 14 1.2. Central Courts... ............................................................................................ 17 1.3. Domestic or Residential Quarters... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 1.4. Grouped Storage Magazines... ............................................................................ 31 1.5. Upper-Floor Reception Rooms............................................................................ 34 1.6. Ascending and Parallel Stairways........................................................................ 38 Chapter 1 Endnotes............................................................................................... 41 Chapter 2. Protopalatial Beginnings and Early Traditions.. . .................................................... 45 2.1. Knossos...................................................................................................... 45 2.2. Phaistos...................................................................................................... 49

viii

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE 

2.3. Malia......................................................................................................... 51 2.4. Observations.................................................................................................58 Chapter 2 Endnotes............................................................................................... 61 Chapter 3. Destruction at Knossos and the Rise of a New Architectural Order............................... 63 3.1. The East Wing at Knossos: Palatial Construction Explored........................................... 63 3.2. Fallen Upper Floor Features at Minoan Sites............................................................ 76 3.3. Architectural Preservation at Knossos................................................................... 77 3.4. Aspects of Elite Style at Knossos and Phaistos.. . ....................................................... 81 3.5. Evans’s Excavation Architects at Knossos............................................................... 88 Chapter 3 Endnotes.............................................................................................. 92 Chapter 4. A Typology of Elite Architectural Forms: Genesis and Development (MM I–III).............. 97 4.1. Extensive Wooden Frameworks......................................................................... 97 4.2. Wall-Ends, Doorways, and Pier-and-Door Partitions, Phase 1 (EM II–MM II)... ................. 101 4.3. Wall-Ends, Doorways, and Pier-and-Door Partitions, Phase 2 (MM III)... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 4.4. Columnar Structures...................................................................................... 110 4.5. Multiple Windows, or Polyparathyra.................................................................... 117 4.6. Lustral Basins... .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 4.7. Wall Building....................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 4.8. Freestanding Supports.............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 4.9. Attached or Embedded Piers as Wall Supports....................................................... 133 4.10. Gypsum Dadoes, Floors, and Pavements... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 4.11. “Triglyph” Benches................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Chapter 4 Endnotes.. . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 Chapter 5. Ancestry, Development, and Spread of the Minoan Elite Architectural Style................... 149 5.1. Residence in the Palaces?.. ............................................................................... 149 5.2. Ancestry and Development of the Minoan Hall.. . .....................................................152 5.3. The Spread of Elite Styles................................................................................163 5.4. Comparative Development of Significant Elite Forms... ..............................................169 Chapter 5 Endnotes.............................................................................................. 173 References............................................................................................................ 179 Index....... ........................................................................................................... 193

List of Tables in the Text

Table 1.1.

Simplified chronological chart. In the text, Minoan palaces (MM IB–II) and their renewals (MM III–LM I) are referred to as Protopalatial (or first palaces) and Neopalatial (or second palaces), respectively. For detailed information about relative phases and absolute dating, see Warren and Hankey 1989. (Views of Minoan chronology vary, following changing perception.)........................... 3

Table 1.2.

MM II–III relative palatial relationships.. . ......................................................... 4

Table 1.3.

The appearance of Minoan elite architectural forms (MM IB–LM IA) at specific sites.......10

Table 2.1.

Storage areas of Protopalatial architectural complexes at Malia... .............................. 61

Table 3.1.

Selected piers and pillars in the central East Wing, Knossos. Thirteen examples are mostly paired, corresponding bases found on the ground-floor and first-floor levels of the Residential Quarters. AM = Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive. Listed in roughly north–south, west–east order. See also Fig. 3.3.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

List of Figures in the Text

Frontispiece. Knossos palace, Residential Quarters, looking west in the Hall of the Double Axes...........ii Figure 1.1. The southern Aegean Sea and its islands.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Figure 1.2. The island of Crete, with sites mentioned in the text.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Figure 1.3. Plan of the Neopalatial Knossos palace. Light walls can indicate supports, traces of walls, early structures, or non-palace walls.............................................. 5 Figure 1.4. Phaistos, Neopalatial palace plan.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Figure 1.5. Malia, Neopalatial palace plan. White walls are either earlier or later.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Figure 1.6. Galatas, Neopalatial palace plan. White walls indicate a possible colonnade................... 8 Figure 1.7. Kato Zakros, Neopalatial plan........................................................................ 8 Figure 1.8. Petras, palace plan. White walls indicate colonnades.............................................. 9 Figure 1.9. Kommos, plan of partially restored Neopalatial Building T....................................... 9 Figure 1.10. Malia, plan of central civic area..................................................................... 16 Figure 1.11. Malia palace, walkway leading west through northwest court toward the Crypte Hypostyle (background)... ..................................................... 16 Figure 1.12. Malia, pattern of walkways.......................................................................... 16

xii

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE 

Figure 1.13. Knossos palace, fresco depicting festive occasion in a court with a walkway (the Sacred Grove and Dance Fresco).............................................................. 16 Figure 1.14. Knossos, plan of walkways.. . ....................................................................... 16 Figure 1.15.

Walkways leading into the palaces at Knossos and Phaistos: (a) plan showing walkway leading to the West Porch at Knossos and continuing on toward the Central Court via the Corridor of the Procession, seen at top right; (b) Protopalatial western entrance to Phaistos palace.. . .......................................... 18

Figure 1.16. Phaistos, Protopalatial plan, with MM II Protopalatial areas at center, left, and MM IIIA area at upper right.................................................................... 18 Figure 1.17. Phaistos, plan of earlier, western portion (left) below later palace (right). The Theatral Area is at center, left.................................................................. 19 Figure 1.18. Phaistos, Protopalatial Theatral Area, looking north along walkway.. . ........................ 20 Figure 1.19. Phaistos, Neopalatial entrance (left) and a portion of the Theatral Area (right) steps, looking northeast..................................................................................... 20 Figure 1.20. Phaistos, Neopalatial Theatral Area restored, looking southeast... ............................. 20 Figure 1.21. Malia palace, Theatral Area, steps on western side of the Central Court...................... 20 Figure 1.22. Malia palace, sounding in the southeastern part of the Central Court. Of the labeled pavement areas, 1 and 2 are Neopalatial, 3 and 4 are Protopalatial............................. 22 Figure 1.23. Knossos palace, extract from the Grandstand Fresco from Knossos... .........................23 Figure 1.24. Phaistos palace, restored elevation looking northwest in the Central Court.. . .................23 Figure 1.25. Malia palace, storage areas in the East Wing: (a) plan (after Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, plan 9); (b) photo of a storeroom with pottery in situ, looking west (Chapouthier and Charbonneaux 1928, pl. xxiii)... ............................................... 24 Figure 1.26. The orientations of the Minoan palaces............................................................25 Figure 1.27. Malia palace, Residential Quarters in the North Wing...........................................26 Figure 1.28. Malia palace, restored northern portico of the Residential Quarters............................26 Figure 1.29. Knossos palace, features of the Residential Quarters in the East Wing: (a) plan; (b) restored seat with canopy in the Hall of the Double Axes, Room 90b on plan; (c) latrine in the Queen’s Megaron area, Room 98 on plan...................................... 28 Figure 1.30. Phaistos palace, Residential Quarters in North Wing... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Figure 1.31. Hagia Triada, restored plan of northwestern residential portion of western building... . . . . . . 29 Figure 1.32. Hagia Triada, eastern building... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Figure 1.33. Kato Zakros palace, restored plan of the Residential Quarters in the East Wing.. . ........... 31 Figure 1.34. Knossos palace, partial plan and section of the eighth magazine in the West Wing.. . . . . . . . . 33 Figure 1.35. Archanes, plan of the cult building at Anemospilia. Gray blocks represent ashlar piers.. . ... 33 Figure 1.36. Archanes, cult building at Anemospilia, elevation of storage room entrances, looking north......................................................................................... 33 Figure 1.37. Malia, plan of Quartier Mu......................................................................... 34

LIST OF FIGURES IN THE TEXT

xiii

Figure 1.38. Malia, Quartier Mu, plan of Building A, first phase.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Figure 1.39. Malia, Quartier Mu, Building A, view looking northeast to lustral basin (right foreground), light-well (center background), and Minoan hall (right background).. . . . . . . . . .35 Figure 1.40. Malia, Quartier Mu, stored vessels as found in Building A, Room I 7, looking north... . . . . . 35 Figure 1.41. Malia palace, plan of Room IX and stairs leading to Banquet Hall.. . ..........................35 Figure 1.42. Knossos palace, Stepped Porch with stairs leading from the Central Court to the first floor (Piano Nobile), West Wing... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Figure 1.43. Knossos palace, first floor of the West Wing... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Figure 1.44. Palace of Knossos, northwestern corner of the first floor in the West Wing.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Figure 1.45. Knossos palace, Stepped Porch (see also Fig. 1.42). Stair block showing ledges with outline of risers and treads once set next to it............................................... 39 Figure 1.46. Knossos palace, restored view of a portion of the facade of the West Wing on the Central Court, showing the Tripartite Shrine (left) and the Stepped Porch (right) leading to first-floor reception rooms... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Figure 1.47. Kommos, restored stairway in Building T indicating ashlar landing blocks (newels) functioning as pillar bases, found collapsed below... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Figure 1.48. Malia, Hypostyle Hall (IX 2), southern triad of low-block pillar bases, looking east, with mortising near block corners.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Figure 1.49. Malia, Stairway IXa leading to Banquet Hall (above IX) from north of Central Court.. . . . . 41 Figure 2.1. Knossos Protopalatial phase according to Evans.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Figure 2.2. Knossos palace, Protopalatial plan (dark walls)... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Figure 2.3. Knossos palace, piers of the Protopalatial magazines (right), looking west... ................. 47 Figure 2.4.

Knossos palace, light-well in Room 100, south of the Queen’s Megaron, looking west. The corniced wall (arrow) and those behind (south) and west of it are among the earliest in the palace. They retain the scarp of the cutting made in MM II for the insertion of the predecessor(s) of the Residential Quarters............................. 48

Figure 2.5. Knossos palace, Protopalatial Northwest Terrace, looking northeast.......................... 48 Figure 2.6. Knossos palace, plan of the early “Keep,” north is at top....................................... 48 Figure 2.7. Knossos, the Monolithic Pillar Basement, looking northwest.................................. 48 Figure 2.8. Phaistos, southwestern entrance to southern section of the first palace.. . ..................... 48 Figure 2.9. Phaistos, view south along the face of the northern section of the Protopalatial western facade... .............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49 Figure 2.10. Phaistos, first palace, top of northern facade line on the west, looking south. Note mortises......................................................................................... 50 Figure 2.11. Phaistos, northern end of orthostat wall of the first palace, looking northeast. Note the two ashlar courses... ......................................................................50 Figure 2.12. Malia, plan of early building east of Chrysolakkos.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

xiv

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE 

Figure 2.13. Malia, plan of burial enclosure at Chrysolakkos.................................................. 51 Figure 2.14. Malia, plan of the “Agora” area. The Portique Coudé is interpreted here as facing east, toward the main Agora court.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Figure 2.15. Malia, plan of the Crypte Hypostyle.............................................................. 53 Figure 2.16. Malia, view eastward into the Crypte Hypostyle. Note exterior light-well space on far left... . 53 Figure 2.17. Malia palace, with hatched Protopalatial areas and black Prepalatial areas... .................54 Figure 2.18. Malia, northwestern area of Protopalatial palace, showing storerooms (a–c), corridor (d–d'), and court (p). Pelon 1990, fig. 9. Light colored walls are Neopalatial... .....54 Figure 2.19.

Malia: (a) restored Protopalatial storage area Beta below northwestern part of second palace; (b) MM IB/II area of Protopalatial storeroom Beta (center) below Residential Quarters in the North Wing of the palace; (c) impressions of beam ends in plaster floor of eastern room in Fig. 2.19:b, just east of a later palace wall........... 55

Figure 2.20. Malia, two possible foundation deposits: (a) Patrikies teapot found in a slab enclosure in northwestern area; (b) Vasiliki-style ware teapot and a cup, part of a possible foundation deposit found in cleft “a” in Figure 2.24.. . ........................................... 56 Figure 2.21. Vasiliki plan................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 Figure 2.22. EM II Vasiliki, northern elevation of southwestern entrance into Red House; cf. Figure 2.21, Room 16.. . .......................................................................... 56 Figure 2.23. Myrtos Phournou Koriphi plan..................................................................... 56 Figure 2.24. Malia, plan of Protopalatial Area I 1 included within the later West Wing of the second palace.. . ....................................................................................... 57 Figure 2.25. Malia, view looking east at Area I 1... ............................................................. 57 Figure 2.26. Malia, plan with features found north of the Central Court, including the outlines of the Neopalatial Hypostyle Hall IX, Protopalatial pillar bases (dark, partly preserved), and an independent EM II building (hatched) predating both................................... 59 Figure 2.27. Phaistos, long Protopalatial benched room CVII near present tourist path to palace. Axonometric view looking northeast.............................................................. 60 Figure 3.1. Knossos palace, ground-floor plan of the Residential Quarters, East Wing. Evans 1921–1935, III, plan E.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65 Figure 3.2. Knossos palace, first-floor plan of the Residential Quarters, East Wing.......................66 Figure 3.3. Knossos palace, plan of the Residential Quarters.. . ............................................. 66 Figure 3.4. Knossos palace, portion of east–west section of the Residential Quarters in East Wing..... 67 Figure 3.5. Knossos palace, restored western elevation of the Grand Staircase in the East Wing........ 67 Figure 3.6. Knossos palace, view looking southwest at the restored ground level balustrade of the Grand Staircase...............................................................................68 Figure 3.7. Knossos palace, watercolor showing restored elements of the Grand Staircase, looking northeast at second landing (right) and third landing (left) at first-floor level.. . .....68

LIST OF FIGURES IN THE TEXT

xv

Figure 3.8. Knossos palace, Residential Quarters, perspective, looking west in the Hall of the Double Axes......................................................................... 69 Figure 3.9. Detail of Fig. 3.8 showing wooden rafters supporting floor in the Hall of the Double Axes, Knossos palace...................................................... 70 Figure 3.10. Knossos palace, isometric view of timber construction in the Grand Staircase, made in 1905 by C.C.T. Doll......................................................................... 70 Figure 3.11. Knossos palace, southern wall of the Hall of the Double Axes: (a) view after preliminary restoration, showing ashlar blocks (center, right) in reuse; (b) detail of reused ashlar blocks shown in (a), but before preliminary restoration.. . .........70 Figure 3.12. Knossos palace, East–West Corridor looking west. Note large, possibly reused ashlar blocks, chases for horizontal timber beams, and partly destroyed dado........................ 71 Figure 3.13. Knossos palace, north–south section of Hall of the Double Axes, looking west, showing restored floor structure.................................................................... 71 Figure 3.14.

Knossos palace, Hall of the Double Axes, north–south sketch elevation looking west, showing positioning of gypsum pier-and-door partition bases and floor slabs on first floor, carbonized east–west rafters and, below, burned remains of wooden pier-and-door partitions on ground floor. The three lines of writing, from the top to the bottom, read: “A is higher than B” (top); “Floor level in Megaron further west” (middle); “Elevations of furthest east stone” (bottom)........................................... 72

Figure 3.15. Main staircase, West House, Akrotiri, Thera. Restored isometric drawing, looking southwest, showing method of construction. Note positioning of beams and blocks at northern end of central spine wall... ..................................................... 73 Figure 3.16.

Knossos palace, four corresponding pairs of mortised pier block bases from a lower floor and the floor above it in the Residential Quarters: (a) Grand Staircase area, bases set into northern wall of corridors; (b) Hall of the Double Axes, western light-well far upper left, windowsills (upper left) with piers (lower left) at both levels; (c) service stairway south of the Hall of the Colonnades, with landing blocks (newels) at both levels; (d) mortised ashlar bases set at southern and northern ends of “spine” wall of Grand Staircase.. . ............................................................................74

Figure 3.17. Knossos palace, restored eastern portico in Residential Quarters in East Wing, looking northwest.....................................................................................76 Figure 3.18. Knossos palace, West Magazines, looking southwest, showing Evans and Mackenzie observing (right) the eastern end-piers of ground-floor storage magazines. The lower courses of the first-floor ashlar piers are shown collapsed upon the ground-floor piers.......77 Figure 3.19.

Knossos palace, Residential Quarters, Hall of the Double Axes. Portion of photograph from 1901 looking northeast at excavation of gypsum pier-and-door partition bases (above) in situ from first floor. They rest some distance above charred remains of the wooden pier-and-door partitions and their corresponding bases on the ground floor.. . .......78

Figure 3.20. Knossos palace, charred wooden beam from the East Wing being packaged for transportation to museum in Herakleion............................................................78 Figure 3.21. Photo taken after a fire in North America showing a partially carbonized wooden beam and, collapsed upon it, two bent steel girders twisted by the intense heat.. . ............ 80

xvi

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE   

Figure 3.22. Kommos, elevation of northern wall of Building T, looking south.. . ........................... 82 Figure 3.23. Phaistos, top of northern facade wall of Central Court, looking southeast, showing mortises (and bedding?) for attachment of horizontal timber, marking transition between lower ashlar and probable upper rubble construction.. . ................................ 83 Figure 3.24. Phaistos, top course of northwestern facade wall of Central Court, looking north.. . ......... 83 Figure 3.25. Phaistos, first palace, ceiling beam sockets in western wall of Room IL....................... 85 Figure 3.26. Tylissos, House A, empty chases left by wooden props in eastern wall of Room 3........... 86 Figure 3.27. Knossos, plan and elevation of the Temple Tomb.................................................. 87 Figure 3.28. Phaistos, Residential Area, Room 50a, looking east.............................................. 87 Figure 3.29. Seated left to right: Arthur Evans, Theodore Fyfe, and Duncan Mackenzie... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Figure 3.30. Christian Doll (center, background) with Arthur Evans (left) on the ground-floor landing of the Grand Staircase................................................................................ 89 Figure 3.31. Piet de Jong in Athens................................................................................ 91 Figure 4.1.

EM II–LM I wall-ends and entrances: (a) entrance to EM II Hagia Triada house; (b) room entrance, MM II Quartier Mu, Building A; (c) MM IIB Phaistos palace, elevation of wall-end of Corridor XII; (d) MM IIIA Phaistos, entrance into lustral basin XLIV 38; (e) MM IIIB polythyron, Hall of the Double Axes.................... 98

Figure 4.2. Myrtos Phournou Koriphi, EM II threshold and interior door pivot, looking south............. 99 Figure 4.3. Archanes, Phourni, Tholos Tomb Complex B, original MM I wall (background) with chases for wooden uprights................................................................... 99 Figure 4.4. Crypte Hypostyle, window and door combination between Rooms 4 and 5, from the northeast................................................................................... 99 Figure 4.5. Malia, MM II Quartier Mu, plan for the three doorways between Rooms I 11 and I 10 in Building A (see Fig. 1.38)... ................................................................ 100 Figure 4.6. Malia, Quartier Mu, Building A, conjectural restoration of first floor above light-well (I 1), looking northeast.............................................................................. 100 Figure 4.7.

Malia, Quartier Mu, Building A, stairway leading upstairs from light-well I 1. Elevation (above, looking east) and plan (below, north to the left) show construction elements, including timber supporting framework. Note how the lowest tread was plastered with clay and the next two steps were of wooden planks....................... 100

Figure 4.8. Akrotiri, Thera, pier-and-door partition.. . ........................................................ 103 Figure 4.9. Xeste 3, Akrotiri, Thera, wooden pier-and-door partitions as well as rafters similar to those used at major Minoan sites on Crete... ......................................... 103 Figure 4.10. Malia palace, Residential Quarters, restored pier no. 7 from polythyron in Room III 7a.. . ....................................................................................... 103 Figure 4.11. Knossos palace, detail of Queen’s Megaron area with lower pier-and-door bases of Lair building indicated with asterisks (center, left)........................................... 105

LIST OF FIGURES IN THE TEXT

xvii

Figure 4.12. Knossos palace, pier-and-door bases. Above: three pier-and-door bases reused as covers for MM II drains below the Residential Quarters. Below: pier-and-door bases from (left) the northern entrance to the Queen’s Megaron and (right) the eastern polythyron in the Hall of the Double Axes.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Figure 4.13. Knossos palace, various door arrangements, including indications of door closure implied by scorings on thresholds.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Figure 4.14. Knossos palace, jamb arrangement in eighth magazine, West Wing, with pier jambs, later replaced by elongated jamb bases added to narrow the doorway......................... 108 Figure 4.15. Knossos palace, plan of Northwest Lustral Basin area.......................................... 109 Figure 4.16. Knossos palace, watercolor depiction of Northwest Lustral Basin, looking northeast... . . . . 109 Figure 4.17. Akrotiri, Thera, variety of stone partition bases used in LM I architecture.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 Figure 4.18. Phaistos, Casa XLVII, looking southwest... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 Figure 4.19. Malia, Quartier Mu, Building B ceiling sections (top, middle) and rafter distribution (bottom)... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 Figure 4.20. Malia, Quartier Mu, view of light-well in Building A, from southeast.......................... 112 Figure 4.21. Malia, Quartier Mu, column bases at right center in Fig. 4.20. Note dowel holes... . . . . . . . . . 112 Figure 4.22. Phaistos, northeast area, plan of Room 103....................................................... 113 Figure 4.23. Kato Zakros palace, preliminary sketch of wooden construction in Room XXVIII near the light-well in the West Wing, looking northwest. A pillar (left foreground) has been omitted..................................................................................... 114 Figure 4.24. Top of a stone lamp stand in the form of a column capital from House Z at Kato Zakros.. . ..................................................................................... 115 Figure 4.25. Kato Zakros, Room XXXVIII, state plan and section of stylobate (left) and restored views.................................................................................. 116 Figure 4.26. Malia, Quartier Mu, showing a window (a) and vents (b) from Building B... ................ 118 Figure 4.27. Malia palace, restoration of window (top) bordering the southern side of the Central Court, with plan of part of its sill (below)........................................... 118 Figure 4.28. Hagia Triada, Area 2, restored window plan, elevation, and sections (cf. Fig. 1.32). Note dowels in mortises, lower right.. . ............................................................ 118 Figure 4.29. Knossos palace, unusual polyparathyro arrangement in Queen’s Megaron................... 119 Figure 4.30. Malia. Entrance into lustral basin in Building A, Quartier Mu... .............................. 120 Figure 4.31. Phaistos, MM III lustral basin found below Room 70, along with paved area to its east. North is at top... ...................................................................................... 121 Figure 4.32. Phaistos, partly restored window next to the entrance to the lustral basin seen in Fig. 4.31................................................................... 121 Figure 4.33. Phaistos, plan showing MM III lustral basin below Room 38 in relation to earlier and later features in that area............................................................................ 122

xviii

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE   

Figure 4.34. Chrysolakkos, Malia, northern krepidoma composed partly of reused orthostat blocks set on their sides, looking east...................................................................... 123 Figure 4.35. Chrysolakkos, Malia, east facade of MM ossuary with orthostat blocks in situ, looking northwest.................................................................................... 124 Figure 4.36. Malia, exterior corner block at an eastern entrance of the Agora... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 Figure 4.37. Phaistos, plan and section of early Protopalatial facade and southwestern entranceway.. . .. 124 Figure 4.38. Knossos palace, west facade near southwestern entrance.. . .................................... 125 Figure 4.39. T-shaped pier jambs at Knossos between Magazines 6 and 7 (left) and Phaistos between Magazines 35 and 36 (right).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 Figure 4.40. Malia, Crypte Hypostyle, beam sockets in southern ashlar wall.. . ............................ 126 Figure 4.41. Archanes palatial building, plan of northeastern area with entrance... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 Figure 4.42. Archanes, plan and elevation of southeastern entry in Fig. 4.41................................ 127 Figure 4.43. Hagia Triada, coursed ashlar wall of Room 22 of eastern building (cf. Fig. 1.32)... ......... 127 Figure 4.44. Phaistos, Neopalatial storeroom with coursed ashlar jambs in Area 26....................... 128 Figure 4.45. Knossos palace, column foundations at southwestern entrance................................ 129 Figure 4.46. Knossos, Unexplored Mansion, pillars in Room H, from southwest........................... 131 Figure 4.47. Tylissos, House C, view of mortised top block of pillar in Room 2............................132 Figure 4.48. Knossos palace, East Wing, newel (landing) block by fifth landing of the Grand Staircase (cf. Fig. 3.5): (a) western face; (b) southern face with cuttings for steps; (c) view showing eastern and northern sides.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 Figure 4.49. Malia, East Wing, sketch of ashlar block reused as wall-end between XI 2 and XI 3.. . ..... 135 Figure 4.50. Hagia Triada, Room 4 of western building (in Fig. 1.31), with bench below the partly restored dado and vertical beam sockets.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 Figure 4.51. Phaistos, second palace, jamb of door between Rooms 79 and 80... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 Figure 4.52. Hagia Triada, east–west section through light-well (Room 1, on left) and Room 2 showing windows, dado slabs (right), and bench arrangement typical of the Neopalatial Mesara............................................................................. 137 Figure 4.53. Phaistos, second palace, pattern of gypsum slabs in Room 25... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Figure 4.54. Phaistos, second palace, pattern of gypsum slabs near Peristyle 94 in Room 93... . . . . . . . . . . 139 Figure 4.55. Phaistos palace, gypsum bench in northwestern corner of Room 23, alongside Central Court: (a) photo showing vertical and horizontal lines engraved on the slabs; (b) plan of arrangement of gypsum slabs of bench in (a), showing method of joining.. . ................... 140 Figure 4.56. Gypsum bench near light-well in Myrtos Pyrgos country mansion, looking north.. . . . . . . . . 140 Figure 5.1. Malia, plan of House Δa...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Figure 5.2. Quartier Mu, Building A, with two (of three) phases. North is at top... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152

LIST OF FIGURES IN THE TEXT

Figure 5.3.

xix

The Minoan hall from earlier to later stages, MM I/II–III: (a) Malia, underground rooms within the Crypte Hypostyle (MM I); (b) Quartier Mu, Building A (MM II [phase 1]); (c) Knossos palace, East Wing, Hall of the Double Axes Area (MM IIIB), the canonic Minoan hall... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154

Figure 5.4. Knossos palace, Throne Room, restored, looking west... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 Figure 5.5. Hagia Triada: (a) EM II houses; (b) pillars with conjectural restorations for the Eastern and Western Houses.................................................................. 158 Figure 5.6. Partially restored plan of MM IA settlement within the enclosure wall at Hagia Photia Kouphota........................................................................... 159 Figure 5.7. Partially restored plan of MM IA settlement at Trypiti Adami Korphali, indicating the main “residences.” ................................................................. 161 Figure 5.8. EM III–MM IA Protopalatial houses south of the Southern Wing of the LM Malia palace.................................................................................................162 Figure 5.9. Myrtos Pyrgos gypsum stairway looking southeast............................................. 164 Figure 5.10. Knossos, the Unexplored Mansion (left) and the Little Palace (right).........................165 Figure 5.11. Chania, Kastelli house with Minoan hall......................................................... 167 Figure 5.12. Tylissos, plan of House A..........................................................................167 Figure 5.13. Nirou Khani, plan of Neopalatial establishment...................................................168 Figure 5.14. Knossos, isometric reconstruction of Royal Villa. North is to the right.......................169 Figure 5.15. Palaikastro, House B.. . ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

Introduction and Acknowledgments

When I wrote Minoan Architecture: Materials and Techniques (hereafter MA:MAT) in the late 1960s,1 I had only five, fortunately rich, years of fieldwork in Crete, chiefly at the Kato Zakros excavations under the direction of Nicholas Platon. Although I had visited many sites and met many of the excavators, that first edition of MA:MAT was more a simple description of the basic ways and means of construction used by Minoan architects than an attempt to reveal the chronological relationships, differences, or similarities in construction within and between sites. Years of teaching at the University of Toronto and, in particular, the process of excavating and publishing the site of Kommos from 1976 to 2011 exposed me to many aspects of the challenge of trying to interrelate sites and their surrounding areas during the Minoan floruit. These experiences aided the long process of revising MA:MAT after 2006, and it was published as a monograph (rather than a very long article) in 2009.2 The book was brought up to date, often with the help of others, and a new chapter was added that deals with a few aspects of development, the work force for building, and the appearance of the Minoan architectural style abroad. In its new form I hoped it was an improvement. That second edition also set the scene for this book, the aims of which differ substantially from its predecessor. Specifically, my goal here is to trace the development of elite Minoan architectural forms that arose during the late Protopalatial and early Neopalatial periods—Middle Minoan (MM) II and MM III—which come before and after, respectively, a destructive event. The event most likely was an earthquake, or a series of earthquakes, that occurred toward the end of MM II. Any attempt to study architectural developments chronologically automatically encounters problems because our dating is usually only an estimate based on incomplete evidence. With architecture, transitional

xxii

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE 

periods such as Early Minoan (EM) III–MM I, when the Minoan palaces were in the process of formation, or MM III, when Neopalatial architectural forms were being introduced, are of particular importance. Another, and perhaps inevitable, risk is that a sequence established on a single site may be upended due to reinterpretation by succeeding excavators, as happened recently in the cases of the Kato Zakros, Malia, and Phaistos palaces, which were assigned later dates.3 Especially helpful to my reassessment have been recent studies of old sites and discoveries at new sites. In the process of writing about them, it became clear to me that the best way to study the development of Minoan elite architectural forms was to concentrate on the older, larger sites of Knossos, Malia, and Phaistos in Central Crete, where those very forms seem to have originated. At the same time, I have attempted to refer when appropriate to other sites near Knossos (Archanes and Galatas), those not far from Malia (Vasiliki, Myrtos Phournou Koriphi, and Myrtos Pyrgos), or those near Phaistos in the Mesara (Hagia Triada and Kommos), as well as those in East Crete (Kato Zakros, Palaikastro, and Petras).4 In the present work I suggest more details about the circumstances that led to the creation of the new forms. Why, for instance, were mortised column bases or stone pillars not used more often, or what led to the development of more efficient roofing and ceiling structures? Why were some pier and pillar forms preferred above others? From another point of view, why did probable earlier forms (e.g., the pier-and-door partition with wooden base) coexist with the more developed jamb bases of stone on the site of Malia? In the process of my research I have been helped by the scholarship of many colleagues, including the work of John McEnroe in his book The Architecture of Minoan Crete: Constructing Identity in the Aegean Bronze Age.5 Its chronological scope is broader than what I cover in this book, and it explores many aspects of Minoan society and architecture not investigated herein. The present monograph, as well as my earlier work concerning materials and techniques (MA:MAT), might be considered companion volumes that inform McEnroe’s broader treatment. Naturally, I am indebted to a number of other researchers. Regarding Knossos, an epicenter of development and change, Colin Macdonald and Peter Warren helped me navigate through parts of that labyrinthine site they know so well, while Vasso Fotou furnished copies of drawings by Theodore Fyfe and Christian Doll, now in the Ashmolean Museum, which helped me to learn more about the work of Arthur Evans’s chief architects at Knossos. For Malia, a source of much Minoan architectural history, especially of MM I– II date, architect Martin Schmid (French School of Athens) answered my sometimes tedious inquiries. The late Olivier Pelon, whose reinvestigations and detailed publications revealed so much about the first and second palaces at Malia, helped as well. In the cases of Phaistos and Hagia Triada, the late Vincenzo La Rosa aided me through the maze of development and conflicting opinion, especially with respect to chronology. Luca Girella helped as well. Toronto artist Giuliana Bianco made many of the new drawings for the book, and I am thankful for her talent. For assistance with the investigation into the nature of wood and its burning characteristics in Chapter 3, I am indebted to many colleagues. First, I thank Regis Miller and Robert H. White, both of the Forest Products Research Laboratory in Madison, Wisconsin, who provided me with Figure 3.21 and references to numerous publications. Furthermore, I am also indebted to André Denton, a firefighter of the Toronto Fire Department, who brought me into contact with Clifford G. Miller, Fire Investigator in the Office of the Fire Marshall, Midhurst, Ontario. Kathy Hall, conservator in the Coulson Conservation Laboratory at the Institute for Aegean Prehistory Study Center for East Crete (INSTAP-SCEC) in Pacheia Ammos, helped in preliminary investigations, as did George Poulos, an engineer

INTRODUCTION AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTSLIST OF FIGURES IN THE TEXT

who explored some of the issues involved. Amy Miller of the University of Toronto contributed as well. For her thoughts about the interaction of burning wood and gypsum used in architecture, I am also indebted to Stephania Chlouveraki of the Coulson Conservation Laboratory, who is studying whether the gypsum actually cooled areas where it was used to sheath the walls. Any errors and oversights that remain are mine alone. For continuing to furnish facilities aiding my research, I am indebted to the University of Toronto. Funding, often connected with my investigation of the architecture of the site of Kommos, has often been provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, the Institute for Aegean Prehistory, the University of Toronto, and Lorne Wickerson. We are also indebted to the INSTAP Academic Press, especially Philip P. Betancourt, Susan Ferrence, and Jennifer Sacher. I owe a special debt of gratitude to my wife and colleague, Maria Coutroubaki Shaw, whose comments have improved my presentations. Finally, I owe much to Crete itself for its rich Minoan architectural heritage. Joseph W. Shaw Pitsidia, Crete August 2013

Introduction and Acknowledgments Endnotes 1. Shaw 1971. 2. Shaw 2009b. 3. According to the discoverer of the palace of Kato Zakros, it dated to early LM I (Platon 1971b, 238, 325), but the palace was recently redated to LM IB (Platon 2002, 151– 155; 2010, 516). The date of the Malia palace was lowered from MM IIIB to LM IA (Pelon 2006; Van de Moortel and Darcque 2006).

Pernier and Banti (1947, 7) thought that the second Phaistos palace should date to MM III, but its present excavator has suggested a date of LM IB (La Rosa 2002). 4. Architectural developments in western Crete, at Chania for instance, may remain little known until a palace is discovered (cf. Andreadaki-Vlasaki 2002). 5. McEnroe 2010.

xxiii

List of Abbreviations

AM Ashmolean Museum, Knossos Archive

LC

Late Cycladic

LM

Late Minoan

cm centimeters(s)

LN

Late Neolithic

DB

Duncan Mackenzie daybook

m meter(s)

EM

Early Minoan

esp. especially

MA:MAT

Minoan Architecture: Materials and Techniques (Shaw 1971)

FN

MM

Middle Minoan

pers. comm.

personal communication

Final Neolithic

INSTAP-SCEC Institute for Aegean Prehistory Study Center for East Crete km kilometer(s)

1

Introduction to the Elite Style

In this book I attempt to define in some detail the Minoan Elite Style of architectural forms that developed in Crete beginning around 1900 b.c. and ending some 500 years later. The style is a highlight of second millennium b.c. Aegean architectures— Minoan, Mycenaean, and Cycladic—which have recently attracted a good deal of attention. Mycenaean sites, especially those such as Mycenae and Tiryns in the Argolid (Fig 1.1), are well known for the elaborate “Cyclopean” fortifications encircling the dwellings and the formal, axial megaron halls of the ruling elite.1 The bestpreserved Cycladic island architecture is at Akrotiri on the island of Thera, whose affluence may well have been due to the town’s control of shipping lanes between Crete, the Aegean islands, and the Greek mainland. Akrotiri was overcome by a catastrophic volcanic explosion in Late Cycladic (LC) IA and was buried by pumice after being abandoned by its fleeing populace. Only recently were a number of its many buildings completely excavated, some still standing two stories high. Many of these were built with techniques similar to

those used on Crete.2 The clear Minoan influence and the remarkable state of preservation at Akrotiri will serve here as a key to our understanding of some subtleties of Minoan architectural technique. The somewhat earlier Minoan centers on Crete (Fig. 1.2) tend to dwarf both Cycladic and Mycenaean settlements in size and elaboration and sometimes in the refinements of architectural technique. Concerning the predecessors of the Minoans who built those centers, recent research has shown that the people who first settled the island likely came in groups from North Africa, crossing over the sea to Crete as early as Lower Paleolithic times, at least 130,000 years ago. Their tools have been recovered in the coastal Plakias area some distance west of the Mesara Plain in the south central part of the island.3 Much later, some of their descendants may well have been among those who founded a settlement at Knossos (Fig. 1.3) in North-Central Crete at the beginning of the Neolithic period,4 around 7000 b.c. Later, there are alternative scenarios in which new groups of colonists from mainland areas—for example,

2

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Anatolia—settled Knossos, introducing various plant cultigens and fauna to the island.5 Knossos became the largest Neolithic site on the island. Accumulations from its gradual growth over the millennia created a mound or tell that was partly removed when its first Bronze Age palace was established around 2200 b.c.6 An overview of Minoan chronological periods is presented in Table 1.1. Exploration of Crete by European explorers began as early as 1755 and continued sporadically until the end of the 19th century.7 After 1898, when Crete was granted autonomy by Turkey, the tempo of exploration in Neolithic, prehistoric Minoan, Classical Greek, Roman, Byzantine, and later contexts increased and has continued until this day. Among the Minoan remains discovered were large buildings with open courts in their centers, large rooms apparently intended for gatherings, and other rooms for storage. They were singled out as “palaces.” The relative chronology of their construction in Middle Minoan (MM) II and MM III is detailed in Table 1.2. The term “palace,” as applied to the monumental building at Knossos and similar ones at other Minoan sites, was first used by early explorers of Crete, for example, the Englishman Arthur Evans, Italians Federico Halbherr and Luigi Pernier (who used the term “palazzo”), Cretan Joseph Hazzidakis (“anaktoron”), and others. Its use continues to

this day. The buildings’ precise functions, however, remain ambiguous, as we lack a clear definition of the social and power relationships with which they were associated. In the absence of adequate written documentation, other more suitable terms have been suggested, especially recently. In search of a better designation, for instance, I once suggested “court-centered building” as a neutral replacement for “palace.”8 But a title defining the more exact nature of the building, whether relating to the elite that used and/or occupied it or its role within the community, would certainly be preferable. I have also heard use of the term “central building,”9 but this implies that the building is at the center of the settlement. The attribution of a central location is difficult to prove archaeologically in some cases and incorrect in others, as, for instance, with the second great “palace” at Phaistos (Fig. 1.4) in the Mesara Plain, south of Knossos, where the palace is bordered on the east and south by precipitous slopes. John McEnroe recently retained the word “palace” so as “not to imply a range of functions but to refer to a group of buildings that share a set of formal elements,” 10 such as residences, magazines for storage, central courts, pier-and-door partitions, light-wells, and ashlar masonry (see also below). These formal elements, summarized in Table 1.3, are explored in detail in this book. They are sometimes referred to as “palatial,” but since they

a

Figure 1.1. The southern Aegean Sea and its islands.

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

3

Sea of Crete Chania

Katsambas

Herakleion Amnissos Knossos Archanes

Tylissos Hagia Triada

Galatas

Gortyn Phaistos Trypiti

Kommos Matala

Malia

Myrtos Pyrgos

Petras Pseira

Mochlos Gournia Vasiliki Ierapetra

Palaikastro Zakros

Myrtos Phournou Koriphi

Libyan Sea

Figure 1.2. The island of Crete, with sites mentioned in the text.

Calendar Dates

Relative Chronology

3500–1900 b.c.

LN to EM I–III periods through MM IA

1900–1700 b.c.

MM IB–II (A, B), or Protopalatial period

1700–1425 b.c.

MM III (A, B)–LM I, or Neopalatial period

1425–1200 b.c.

LM II–III (A, B, C), or Postpalatial period

Table 1.1. Simplified chronological chart. In the text, Minoan palaces (MM IB–II) and their renewals (MM III–LM I) are referred to as Protopalatial (or first palaces) and Neopalatial (or second palaces), respectively. For detailed information about relative phases and absolute dating, see Warren and Hankey 1989. (Views of Minoan chronology vary, following changing perception.)

can occur in both palaces and buildings that are not palaces, such as some of the fine Minoan houses, it is better to characterize such features as “elite.” I will, however, follow the longstanding naming tradition and, in the interest of intelligibility, still refer to the monumental buildings as palaces. The third great palace is that of Malia (Fig. 1.5), built on a broad, flat plain not far from the sea, somewhat less than halfway between Knossos and

the eastern end of Crete. The Malia palace, along with those at Knossos and Phaistos, is one of the earliest and must be considered when we begin to investigate the architectural remains of the first palaces and their possible predecessors in Chapter 2. As can be seen in Table 1.2, the palaces had two major periods. The first, or Protopalatial, period (ca. 1900–1700 b.c.) came to an end with a destruction, probably one or more earthquakes, that severely damaged many if not most of the large buildings on the island. Afterward, at varying intervals, the second, or Neopalatial, period (ca. 1700–1425 b.c.) began, with Knossos being one of the first sites to have been at least partially rebuilt. The three early palaces, which eventually became the largest ones,11 were followed by others elsewhere on Crete, some even arising during the Protopalatial period (for details, see Table 1.2).12 During the Neopalatial period other palaces were established, for instance that at Galatas (Fig. 1.6),13 not far from Knossos, and another at Kato Zakros in eastern Crete (Fig. 1.7), south of the Petras palace (Fig. 1.8).14 There were others, also, still unpublished, such as the one at Pretoria, in the eastern Mesara,15 and one probably at Sissi, not far from Malia.16

4

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Date1

North-Central and Eastern Crete

Mesara Plain and Amari Valley to West

Knossos pre-East Hall; the Protopalatial magazines in the West Wing2

First Phaistos palace: Pernier, Levi Phases Ib and II3

Malia palace and Quartier Mu in use4

Kommos Building AA (MM IIB)5

First Petras palace (MM IIA)6

Monastiraki in use in Amari Valley7

At end of phase a possible series of earthquakes8

At end of phase a possible series of earthquakes9

Knossos terraces built to form base for East Hall10

At Phaistos an attempt to reconstruct the palace: Buildings 101–102, Northwest Lustral Basin XLIV 38, the Ramp House (Rooms LXXXVI– XCIII, XCVI), Room CIV;11 strata below Rooms 18 and 50;12 Rooms LXXV–LXXVI; House on the SW Slopes13

Anemospilia Shrine built at Archanes14

Chalara North and South15

Galatas palace east wing, additions to northeast area16

Levi Phase III

MM II

MM IIIA

At end of phase a possible earthquake18 At end of phase probable earthquakes at Anemospilia and Kommos17

Storeroom 25 on Kommos Hillside.19 Kommos Building T built20

MM IIIB

Knossos Residential Quarters built21

No MM IIIB/LM IA strata in area of Phaistos palace22

Petras new palace built23

Villa begun at Hagia Triada24

Galatas palace north wing completed, but most parts abandoned not long afterward25

Kiln built within South Stoa of Building T at Kommos26

Table 1.2. MM II–III relative palatial relationships. 1The relative sequence in this chronological table adopts that being used at Knossos (Warren and Hankey 1989, 60–65) and that recently suggested by Girella (2007, 2010) for Phaistos, Hagia Triada, and Kommos. The equivalents for Kommos specifically are MM IIIA (in this table) = Kommos MM III, followed by MM IIIB (this table) = LM IA Early. For the Kommos MM II–LM IA sequence see Van de Moortel 2001; 2006; 2007; Rutter 2006; Girella 2007, 239, fig. 4; 2010, 41–45, table 3. See also Betancourt 2013, 146. Correspondence with J. Rutter (pers. comm., 18 May 2008) and P. Betancourt (pers. comm., 24 February 2008) has clarified rough possible equivalents. 2 Macdonald 2005, 72; C. Macdonald, pers. comm., 11 April 2008. Also, the East Hall was built on successive terraces, including the Loomweight Basement (C. Macdonald, pers. comm., 29 December 2007). The Protopalatial magazines in the West Wing apparently preceded them (see Fig. 2.3, below; Evans 1921–1935, II, 663, fig. 424). Also possibly the West Magazines, including the doorjambs, and some form of the predecessor to the Throne Room Complex (C. Macdonald, pers. comm., 13 August 2014). 3La Rosa 1995, 888; 2007, 24, 29; Todaro 2009, 140–141 (MM IB). 4Poursat and Schmid 1992. 5Van de Moortel 2006, 317. 6Tsipopoulou 1999a, 848–851. 7Kanta 1992, 196. 8Poursat and Schmid 1992, 8; La Rosa 1995, 888; Tsipopoulou 1999a (earthquake not mentioned as cause of destruction); Pelon 2005, 188; C. Macdonald, pers. comm., 11 April 2008; Stürmer 2013. Possibly there were destructions at Knossos and Phaistos. For other affected sites with similar pottery groups, see also MacGillivray 2007, 143, table 4.3. 9Kanta 1992, 196; Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, table 5.1; Van de Moortel 2006, 362; La Rosa 2007, 24–25. 10 Possibly the Residential Quarters (C. Macdonald, pers. comm., 11 April 2008). 11La Rosa 1995, 889; 2002, 74; 2007, 29; pers. comm., 2 May 2008; Carinci and La Rosa 2013. 12Girella 2007; 2010, 56–57. 13Girella 2010, 88–92. 14Anemospilia: Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, 271–272 (MM IIB–IIIA). Kommos: Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1996, 189, 346. 15Girella 2010, 109– 114, 119–126, table 4. 16Rethemiotakis 2002, 56–57. 17Anemospilia: Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, 272; Knossos: C. Macdonald, pers. comm., 11 April 2008; Malia: Pelon 1987, 188; 2005, 190, “à la fin du MM II.” 18Kanta 1992, 196; La Rosa 1995, 889; Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1996, 150, 153, 392. 19Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1996, 150, 152, 392. 20J. Rutter (pers. comm., 7 February 2008) thinks that Building T was constructed at the end of Knossian MM IIIA. See Rutter 2006; Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, table 5.1. 21Macdonald 2002, 36, 47–49. He believes (as Evans 1921–1935, IV, 873) that the new Knossos palace began in MM IIIB, some time after an earthquake at the end of MM II. For other views (MacGillivray, Warren) about the main MM building operation at Knossos see Betancourt 2013, 146. 22V. La Rosa, pers. comm., 2 May 2008. 23Tsipopoulou (1999, 851) notes MM III–LM IA without specifying further. Concerning Kato Zakros, south of Petras, Platon (2002, 153–155) believes that there was a “central public building” there (below the present LM IB palace) by LM IA, but the MM III presence is presently too fragmentary to provide a clear view of the site at that time. The same might be said about the Gournia palace, which Soles dates to LM I (1991, 21–26). 24La Rosa 1995, 889. The new Phaistos palace that we see today was apparently not built until the beginning of LM IB (La Rosa 2007, 29). A pure MM IIIB stratum has been recognized in the dump in Trench M4 at Hagia Triada (V. La Rosa, pers. comm., 3 May 2008). See Girella 2010, 142–143. For the development of Hagia Triada, see below, Ch. 5.3.2, n. 116. 25Rethemiotakis 2002, 57. 26Shaw et al. 2001.

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

5

Figure 1.3. Plan of the Neopalatial Knossos palace. Light walls can indicate supports, traces of walls, early structures, or nonpalace walls. Modified from Poursat 2008, fig. 200, with the colonnade along the eastern side of the Central Court restored after Shaw and Lowe 2002.

Large palatial structures such as Building T at Kommos (Fig. 1.9), most likely designed with special functions in mind, also appeared as early as MM II.17 Other palace-type buildings no doubt remain to be found because the palace style seems to have become an accepted form for a community as it attempted to define itself within an emerging urban landscape. During the process of this development, some uniformity was bound to emerge as expanding communities and their ambitious leaders promoted shared interests. In the words of Gerald Cadogan, In themselves these buildings, whatever their ultimate intellectual, social and ritual origins,

and whatever their exact functions in the intraregional exercise of power . . . provide the best evidence for competitive inter-regional behaviour. They cannot all be independent inventions. Someone, or some group, had the bright idea in one of the regions; the others hastened to emulate. In Old Palace “political” geography, Knossos, Malia, Petras and Phaistos fit well into the different ceramic regions, while the Pediada subset may be seen as foreshadowing the later creation of the Galatas palace.18

The development of the form can be compared to the circumstances leading to the foundation of the later Greek agoras, with their stoas, temples, and other buildings that came much later to typify

6

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 1.4. Phaistos, Neopalatial palace plan. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 8.2.

communities during the Classical Greek period. Thanks to ancient written sources such as those of Plato, as well as a wealth of inscriptions discovered through excavation, we are well aware of certain known Archaic and Classical habits of social interchange, governance, and ritual, although we can probably associate the Minoan central court with seasonal gatherings.

At the end of the Minoan Neopalatial period, ca. 1425 b.c.,19 another event occurred that was to herald the beginning of mainland Mycenaean influence and the gradual dissolution of Minoan practices, including construction in the Elite Style.20 As Ilse Schoep has recently demonstrated,21 Neopalatial rebuilding on the older palace sites has often come to characterize the “palatial” or Elite

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

7

North Court

Residential Quarters

seats

Figure 1.5. Malia, Neopalatial palace plan. White walls are either earlier or later. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 8.3.

Style and to be associated incorrectly with earlier periods. Coursed ashlar masonry, for instance, is rare during the Protopalatial period at either Malia or Phaistos, but it might be taken as ubiquitous on the basis of what one can see on the sites now. Additionally, the “Minoan hall” (Ch. 5.2), a relatively common feature in Neopalatial palace architecture, has not yet been identified in Protopalatial

palace contexts. At Malia, however, as we will see later, two examples occur in what might be referred to as nonpalatial domestic/civic contexts, in contrast to what we have come to expect from later Minoan contexts.22 With this caution in mind, therefore, I shall attempt in this chapter to introduce general aspects of Elite Style forms, in particular some of those

8

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 1.6. Galatas, Neopalatial palace plan. White walls indicate a possible colonnade. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 8.5.

Lustral Basin

L

Residential Quarters

Figure 1.7. Kato Zakros, Neopalatial plan. Mod­ ified from Platon 1971b, 102.

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

9

most obvious to visitors to the sites today, and in the process I will set the stage for some of the more detailed discussions that follow. In Chapters 2 and 4, I will attempt to identify the earliest appearance of these and other forms and their possible stages of development. In Chapter 3, I will concentrate on aspects of the mature stages of development, best seen at Knossos, especially the ways in which building was carried out and the elements were joined. Finally, in Chapter 5, I will examine the ancestry of some of the more intriguing Elite forms and consider how they may have been used. Also discussed there is the spread of the Elite Style outside the palaces during the Neopalatial period. Figure 1.8. Petras, palace plan. White walls indicate colonnades. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 8.15.

Figure 1.9. Kommos, plan of partially restored Neopalatial Building T. Drawing J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco.

10

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

A. General Features (Ch. 1)1

MM IB

MM II

1. West court with walkway(s)

Malia2

Knossos3 Phaistos4

2. Central court, oriented north–south5

Knossos6 Malia7

Petras8 Kommos9

3. Domestic or residential areas

Knossos13 Malia, Mu14

4. Grouped storage magazines, two types

Knossos17 Malia18

5. Upper floor reception rooms

Knossos23

6. Ascending and parallel stairways leading to first floor

Malia, Mu27

MM IIIA

MM IIIB

LM IA

Knossos15

Malia16

Galatas10 Kommos11 Phaistos12

Knossos19 Anemospilia20 Kommos21

Kommos28

Petras22

Knossos24 Phaistos25

Malia26

Knossos29

Malia30

Table 1.3. The appearance of Minoan elite architectural forms (MM IB–LM IA) at specific sites. 1Palaces may have these features, but individual palaces do not necessarily have all of them. References below are usually either to the original excavators or to scholars closely connected with the site. Some of the references are to examples in buildings, e.g., Quartier Mu at Malia, which are not “palaces.” The order of the listings follows generally those given in Chs. 1 and 4. Listings for the LM IA category, the time of the spread of the palatial techniques to many sites, are limited here. 2Driessen 2009, 47–48; see also McEnroe 2010, 42. 3Evans 1921–1935, II, 609–612; Driessen 2009, 48–50, fig. 4.5. The Royal Road West, west of the Knossos palace, was laid out as early as EM III, but without the raised walk that characterized its later Protopalatial phase (Warren 1994, 202). 4Pernier 1935, 177–194; Driessen 2009, 48, fig, 4.4. 5For palace orientation, see Shaw 1973b, 2011. 6The Knossos court was laid out as early as EM IIB (Driessen 2004, 78) or, as recently proposed by Tomkins (2012, 65), even earlier (FN IV–EM I). 7The Malia court was established as early as EM III (Pelon 1989, 1993). 8See Tsipopoulou 2007. 9Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, 1. 10Rethemiotakis 2002, 56–57 (the mansion that preceded the MM IIIB/LM IA palace). 11Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, 17. 12The date of the Central Court at Phaistos may be determined by the orientation of the colonnade along its western side. Levi (1976–1981, I, 262–267) dated the colonnade and paved Central Court to the late Protopalatial period. Carinci and La Rosa have redated them to MM IIIA (Carinci and La Rosa 2009, 249–250, 299). However, since the court at Malia has been proven to be so early and there is a strong argument that the palaces originated around a communal celebratory space (which became the Central Court), the dates of the Knossos and Phaistos courts are also most likely to be surprisingly early. Carinci and La Rosa have pointed out, for instance, the earlier levels below the paved Central Court at Phaistos (2007, 18–20, fig. 2). 13Based mainly on the presence of early (MM) doorjambs in situ in the Lair (Hood and Taylour 1981, Room 99; Evans 1921–1935, III, plan E, below the southern and eastern walls of the Treasury; see Fig. 4.11, below) and the excavation of the huge cutting there in MM II, which surely is the preliminary stage of a major undertaking. 14Building A; Poursat and Schmid 1992. It is assumed that the polythyron group in Building A performed a residential function. See also the Crypte Hypostyle at Malia (Schmid 2003, 2006). 15The Residential Quarters, for which, see Macdonald 2002, 36, 47–49. He believes (as Evans 1921–1935, IV, 873) that the “new” Knossos palace began in MM IIIB, some time after the earthquake(s) at the end of MM II. See also Betancourt 2013, 146. 16Both Pelon (2006, 149–150) and, independently, Van de Moortel and Darcque (2006, 179), believe that most of the new Malia palace was built in LM IA. See also Schmid 1983 for the construction of the Residential Quarters there. 17Evans 1921–1935, II, 663–664, fig. 424; see Fig. 2.3, below (Protopalatial). 18Pelon 1989, 785 (general); cf. Schoep 2004, fig. 5, for position. Also, for Building A1 in Mu, see Poursat and Knappett 2005, 250, fig. 40. 19Evans 1921–1935, I, 448–462 (see Fig. 3.18, below); Macdonald 2005, 72. 20Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, 271–272 (MM IIB– IIIA phase). 21Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, 40–56, pl. 1.7. 22Tsipopoulou 1999a (on the northeast); Fig. 1.8. 23Evans and others, including Graham (1987, fig. 86), believed that the Knossian West Magazines’ walls were laid out so as to support the walls, columns, and pillars of large assembly rooms on the first (or upper) floor. Although the restoration in Evans 1921–1935, II (plan C by W.G. Newton and T. Fyfe) reflects the situation during the Neopalatial period, a similar one may well have existed earlier (see also Pendlebury 1963, 31 [see Fig. 1.43, below]). Both plans include mention of specific doorjambs, column bases, piers, and the like found either in position on the first floor or fallen into the collapse of the ground floor. 24See n. 23. 25Graham 1987, 119–124 (versus Pernier and Banti 1951, 330); but see also Pernier and Banti 1947, 52. 26Graham 1987, 116–119, fig. 83 (Malia). For the LM IA date, see most recently Pelon 2006; Van de Moortel and Darcque 2006. 27Main interior staircase I 1/I 9, ca. 1.85 m wide, leading up to the first floor of Building A in Quartier Mu (see Fig. 4.6, below). Wide boards graced at least the second and third steps. Pairs of long beams, set to the slope of the staircase, supported the steps (Schmid 1996, fig. 45; see Fig. 4.7, below). 28Shaw 1999; 2009b, fig. 204a; Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006. 29Dating of Residential Quarters, East Wing: Evans 1921–1935, I, 347. The most outstanding example is the Grand Staircase in the East Wing, for which, see Evans (1921–1935, I, 325–359), numerous references in this work, and see Figs. 3.5, 3.6, 3.10, below. 30Located on the western side of the Malia Central Court (Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 138–140). Also in the Malia palace: Areas XXII 3 and XXII 1, about 2 m wide, and possibly XXII 2 and XXI 2, also IXa and IXb, of the same width, leading up to large rooms, one perhaps a banquet hall, in the north wing (Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 123–125, 184–185, plans 6, 7; van Effenterre 1980, 305–309; Graham 1987, 45, 186, pl. 87–89). For the LM IA date, see most recently Pelon 2006; Van de Moortel and Darcque 2006.

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

B. Complex Forms (see Ch. 4)

MM IIIA

11

MM IB

MM II

MM IIIB

Archanes32

Malia33

Knossos34

Beam spans

Malia35

Knossos36

Beam thickness

Malia Phaistos38

Knossos39

LM IA

7. Extensive wooden frameworks31 Vertical supports in interior walls

37

8. Wall-ends and doorways strengthened by vertical timbers, Phase 1 Wooden bases

Malia40

Stone bases

Phaistos41

Knossos42 Phaistos43

9. Freestanding pier-and-door partitions Simple wooden bases, Phase 2

Malia, Mu44

Stone bases

Knossos46

Malia45 Phaistos47 Palaikastro48

Knossos49

Table 1.3, cont. The appearance of Minoan elite architectural forms (MM IB–LM IA) at specific sites. 31For wall-ends framed by vertical beams, see category no. 8, below, and for columnar structures, see no. 10. For exterior orthostat walls with their presumed superposed timber framework filled with rubble, see listing no. 13. 32In Tholos B (Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, 177, fig. 127). 33In Magazines 1–4 of the Crypte Hypostyle at Malia vertical wooden supports, of wall-width and based on flat limestone blocks, were set at intervals within the walls between the rooms (Amouretti 1970, 27, plan 1). The excavator dated the Crypte to MM I (Amouretti 1970, 74), but reconsideration suggests a MM II date is more probable ( Shaw 2011). A similar methodology, probably representing a pre–MM IIIB phase, is reported from the North Magazines (Rooms XXVII 1–5) of the Malia palace (Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 92, plan 2; see also van Effenterre 1980, fig. 181, with the timbers restored). 34Set at intervals throughout the Residential Quarters and the West Wing Magazines. 35Malia, Quartier Mu: the largest free room span of about 3.50–4.00 m; Chrysolakkos, the interaxial of the eastern portico of ca. 4.65 m; also the interaxial ca. 3.00 m in the early portico along the western side of the Central Court (Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 137, plan 21). The range of the interaxial spaces between supports in some nine Minoan porticoes (in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, 94–95) is ca. 1.94–4.65 m, with Chrysolakkos not only the more daring but also among the earliest. An average interaxial dimension in the group cited is ca. 2.96 m. 36For instance, in the well-preserved western (5.20 m) and eastern (4.80 m) rooms of the Hall of the Double Axes in the East Wing. 37 Malia, Quartier Mu, ca. 0.20 m diameter in the subterranean rooms of Building B (Schmid 1996, fig. 44; see Fig. 4.19, below). Column bases in Room I 1a, the light-well of Building A (see Fig. 4.21, below) have a diameter of 0.41 m, implying an actual column with a base diameter of about 0.27–30 m (see Shaw 2009b, 104–105, for column diameters). Outlines of two posts, one next to another, about 0.35 m2, were preserved in the plaster in a Protopalatial room below the North Wing of the Malia palace (Pelon 1983, fig. 13). 38The oval column base at the propylon of the first palace (Pernier 1935, 289, fig. 169; see Fig. 1.15:b, below) is 1.21 m (max.) in diameter. Perhaps the column set on it was composite, made up of numerous wooden sections plastered together and then painted over. 39The massive size of some of the beams in the East Wing at Knossos, some 0.30 m or more in section, can be seen in Fig. 3.10, below. See also see the descriptions of the Grand Staircase in Ch. 3. 40Quartier Mu, Building A; see Schmid 1983, fig. 17; 1983, fig. 17. 41Shown in Pernier 1935, north–south section in pl. III showing wall-end between Room XI and Corridor XII (see Fig. 4.1:c, below). 42There are stone jamb bases for pier-and-door partitions still in situ below the walls of the storeroom or so-called Lair or Treasury in the Queen’s Megaron area of the Residential Quarters of the East Wing at Knossos. These represent a lower, earlier level probably as early as MM II. See Evans 1921–1935, III, figs. 249 (Fig. 4.11, below), 265, and foldout E. I thank C. Macdonald for first pointing them out to me. We do not know if they have projecting reveals like those used at the later (higher) floor level. Contemporary with them, but possibly earlier, and certainly predating the Residential Quarter, is a series of stone pier-and-door partition bases, two of the I-type and one C-type, reused as cover slabs in the drain running below the Residential Quarters, for which see Macdonald and Driessen 1988 and Ch. 4.2.3. 43La Rosa 2002, 77–78; lustral basin below Room 70; Fiandra 1995, fig. 5, with fully formed partition bases; Pernier and Banti 1951, fig. 195– 196; and Casa XLVII in southwest below the Greek temple first shown in Pernier 1935, fig. 72 (see Fig. 4.18, below), and “very probably MM III in date, but surely reused in LM I” (V. La Rosa, pers. comm., 11 March 2008; see also La Rosa 1995, fig. 1). 44Building A, Poursat and Schmid 1992; also probably in the Malia Crypte Hypostyle (Schmid 2003; 2006, fig. 12). 45 Pelon (2006, 149) believes that most of the new Malia palace was built in LM IA. See also Schmid 1983 for the construction. 46See above, n. 42. 47See above, n. 41. 48Knappett and Cunningham 2012, 6, 12–13, fig. 2.6, pl. 5b. The series of four pier-and-door openings is at the entrance into a squarish room (3) facing a large court. Of the unusual serpentinite bases, that beginning the series on the west preserves a C-projection for enclosing the door pivot. The base is 0.25 m wide and 0.42 m long. The base type is so far unique at Palaikastro. The authors suggest (2012, 6) “a close and perhaps complicated relationship with . . . Knossos, which starts to exercise considerable power as of MM IIIA.” See also Driessen 1999. 49 Residential Quarters, East Wing, Evans 1921–1935, I, 327–329; Macdonald 2002, 36, 47–49.

12

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

B. Complex Forms, cont.

MM IB

MM II

MM IIIA

MM IIIB

LM IA

Light-wells

Malia, Crypte50

Malia, Mu51

Knossos52

Larger porticoes

Malia

Malia

Phaistos55

Malia56

Colonnades57

Malia58

Knossos61

Malia62

10. Columnar structures

53

54

Malia59

Alternating column and pillar series

Phaistos60 Phaistos

11. Polyparathyra (numerous adjacent windows)66 12. Lustral basin With adjoining parapet

Malia64 Palaikastro65

63

Knossos67

Malia68

Malia, Mu69 Phaistos70

Knossos71

Table 1.3, cont. The appearance of Minoan elite architectural forms (MM IB–LM IA) at specific sites. 50Two in the Crypte Hypostyle. The first, unique at this time, was at ground level just north of subterranean Room 1, which was illuminated by a window in the room’s north wall. The second had at least three columns set east–west in the center of an assemblylike room at ground level in the center of the southern part of the building. For the first, see Amouretti 1970, 14, 74. For the second, clarified during a cleaning operation, see Schmid 2006, fig. 12; 2012; Fig. 2.15, below. 51Building A, Room I 1, I A; Poursat and Schmid 1992. 52In the Residential Quarters of the East Wing (Macdonald 2002, 47), for which, see Fig. 3.5, below. 53The “bent,” or angled, portico or stoa arrangement, probably with six columns, along the northern side of the Crypte Hypostyle in the so-called Agora area, for which see van Effenterre and van Effenterre 1969, 43–47, pls. I, XL; also Schmid 2012; Fig. 2.14, below. 54West side of Central Court of the Malia palace, at different levels, also lower and north of the later Residential Quarter (Pelon 1999). Schmid (2006, fig. 10) would restore the former as part of a colonnade continuing around the periphery of the Central Court, with a Greek-style propylon in the center on the west, but further evidence is needed. 55Room 103, northeastern border of palace, Carinci and La Rosa 2009, 271, fig. 141; Fig. 4.22, below. Alternating pillars and columns, probably originally with the mortised pillars in the four corners and the four columns in between them. “Peristyle” type. 56Five columns between mortised low-block pillars along northern facade of Residential Quarters (III 7a). Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, plan 17; Fig. 1.27, below. 57Somewhat arbitrarily, to differentiate a colonnade from a portico, a colonnade is defined here as six or more columns set in a line. 58Ten columns or posts set along the eastern side of Chrysolakkos Ossuary. See Soles 1992, 168; also Demargne 1945, esp. pls. XXXVIII 1, 2 and LV 1–3; Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, 94–95, table 1.4. 59Rectangular court 6.60 east–west by 11.20 north–south, at the lower, Protopalatial level just north of the Neopalatial Residential Quarters, area p (Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 241–242, pl. 163 1–3, plan 26). It probably was of peristyle type, with columns around its four sides, probably five east–west and seven north–south. 60At least 13 bases along the west side of the Central Court of the Phaistos palace (Levi 1976–1981, I, 262–267). Redated to MM IIIA by Carinci and La Rosa (2009, 249–250, fig. 118). 61The bent porticoes along the eastern sides of the Hall of the Double Axes and the Queen’s Megaron (Figs. 3.1, 3.3, below) at Knossos. 62Some 10 column bases of white marble set along the northern side of the Malia Central Court. See also column bases, below. 63In light-well of Room 103 north of the Phaistos palace; see Fig. 4.22, below. See La Rosa 2002, 89, for date. 64Along the eastern side of the Central Court at Malia, some six columns alternating with seven (unmortised) pillars (Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, plans 8–10). The technique of combining columns and single, mortised low-block pillars appears in a peristyle light-well at Phaistos in Room 103 (see Fig. 4.22, below) as early as MM IIIA. The same technique is used at the ends of columnar porticoes at Knossos (Hall of the Double Axes, eastern portico). The square pillars were often placed, like anchors, at the beginning and ends of a series, whether in a line or at the corner of a bent portico. 65Block B (Bosanquet et al. 1902–1903, 287, pl. VI); see Fig. 5.15, below. 66 Defined here as more than two adjacent windows. 67Queen’s Megaron, Evans 1921–1935, III, figs. 244, 245; see Figs. 3.1, 3.3, 4.29, below. 68On the south facade of the Central Court, for which, see Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 154–156, pl. 138 (2, 3); see Fig. 4.27, below. Pelon doubts the cuttings on top of the long ashlar course were to accommodate window frames. He argues that a series of windows here is not matched by the character of the rooms behind it, which is plausible. Also, however, he believes that the wooden framework set on the wall was simply intended to strengthen it. But the pattern of cuttings matches that on sills proven to be for windows (e.g., Shaw 2009b, 121–123; see Fig. 4.28, below). Moreover, ashlar walls thought to support a timber framing filled with masonry, as Pelon envisions, for instance the orthostat facades at Phaistos and Knossos (see Figs. 4.37, 4.38, below), do not feature beam cuttings made at right angles to the face of the wall, such as we see here at Malia. Cf. the similar arrangement of cuttings on the sill of a polyparathyro in Area A at Akrotiri, in Palyvou 1999, fig. 210:d. 69Building A; Poursat and Schmid 1992. Undeveloped form possibly preceded in the Crypte Hypostyle by the simple, square basement-level Room 4 (see Shaw 2011). 70Below the northwest part of the second palace of Phaistos, Room XLIV 38. See Pernier 1935, 327; Fiandra 1995; La Rosa 2002, 74. 71Northwest Lustral Basin in the Knossos palace. See Evans 1921–1935, I, 406–411; Macdonald 2002, 44; 2005, 133–134. Evans prefers a MM IIIA date for the lustral basin and also suggests that its basic plan goes back to the First Palace period (see Figs. 4.15, 4.16, below).

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

C. Simple Built Forms (see Ch. 4)

MM IB

MM II

MM IIIA

Malia72 Phaistos73

Malia, Mu74

13

MM IIIB

LM IA

13. Wall building Orthostats

Knossos75

Single course Double course

Kommos76

Coursed ashlar construction

Knossos Malia, Mu78 Phaistos79

Knossos80

77

Coursed ashlar jambs at wall ends

Anemospilia81

Knossos82

14. Freestanding supports Wooden columns set on round stone bases

Malia, Mu83 Phaistos84

Stylobates

Phaistos86

Beams on end Monolithic pillars

Knossos85 Phaistos87 Knossos88

Knossos89

Malia90 Knossos

91

Mochlos92

Multiple-block ashlar pillars

Knossos93

Low-block (single block) pillars

Knossos Phaistos96

Malia94

95

Table 1.3, cont. The appearance of Minoan elite architectural forms (MM IB–LM IA) at specific sites. 72Chrysolakkos facade: Shaw 1973a; Soles 1992, 168. 73First palace of Phaistos, West Wing, two early phases: Pernier 1935; Fiandra 1961–1962; Levi 1964, 1976–1981; Levi and Carinci 1988; La Rosa 2007. 74Possibly in Quartier Mu, Building A, a socle of large, close-fitting, end-toend ashlar blocks, plastered and overlain by plastered mudbrick at south and west facades (Poursat and Schmid 1992; see Fig. 1.39 [below], foreground). 75Western orthostat facade of the Knossos palace. Dating discussed in Shaw 2009b, 62. 76Northern facade of Building T: Shaw 1983; Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, 20–22, table 5 . 77The gypsum walls of the Protopalatial magazines of the West Wing (Evans 1921–1935, II, 663, fig. 424; see Fig. 2.3, below); C. Macdonald, pers. comm., 11 April 2008. Especially the ashlar wall southwest of the Queen’s Megaron (Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 153; III, fig. 248; see Fig. 2.4, below) and reused ashlar in the south wall of the Hall of the Double Axes (Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 251; see Fig. 3.11:a, b, below). 78Behind the plaster facing on the north wall of the lustral basin, Building A, Room I 4 and, according to M. Schmid (pers. comm.), the interior wall once hidden behind the plaster facings of the Crypte Hypostyle (also Amouretti 1970). 79Northern end, latest orthostat section at Phaistos, two blocks only (Shaw 2009b, fig. 89; see Fig. 2.11, below). The eastern wall of Room 45, as well as other once “early” walls of the palace (Levi 1964, 1976–1981; Di Vita, La Rosa, and Rizzo, eds., 1984, fig. 91; Levi and Carinci 1988) have now been down-dated by La Rosa to the Neopalatial period (La Rosa 2002, 2007). 80E.g., the light-well in the Hall of the Double Axes, West Wing of the Palace. Evans 1921–1935, I, 347; date suggested in Macdonald 2002, 36, 47–49. 81 Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, 271–272 (MM IIB–IIIA phase): the wall-end piers border both sides of a central corridor separating two lines of opposite storerooms. 82The coursed gypsum wall/jamb ends of the West Magazines (Evans 1921–1935, I, 461–462, fig. 331; C. Macdonald, pers. comm., 11 April 2008); see Figs. 4.14, 4.40, below. 83Building A, Poursat and Schmid 1992; also in the Crypte Hypostyle (Amouretti 1970); see Figs. 2.15, 4.21, below. 84At the main western entrance to the first palace at Phaistos (see Fig. 1.15:b, below). 85Alongside the light-well in the Hall of the Double Axes, East Wing of the Knossos Palace. Evans 1921–1935, I, 347; also Macdonald 2002, 36, 47–49. 86At the main western entrance to the first palace at Phaistos (see Fig. 1.15:b, below). 87In entranceway with a single column leading from the west into House XLVII, below the Greek temple south of the Minoan palace (Pernier 1935, 169–173 and the main plan in the Phaistos plate volume); V. La Rosa, pers. comm. 88A stylobate slab, reused as a cover slab for an early drain below the Residential Quarters, is reported in Macdonald and Driessen 1988, 244, Block 40(?), pl. 32:e. It predates the MM IIIB Residential Quarters, so its date should range from MM II through MM IIIA. 89Residential Quarters, Knossos. 90Two thick (0.35 m2) beams set within the MM II palace, north wing (Fig. 2.19:c; Pelon 1983, fig. 13). 91Monolithic pillars occur, however, mainly at Knossos, in the MM IA Monolithic Pillar Basement (Evans 1921–1935, I, 145–146, fig. 106: two pillars), in the MM III North Pillar Crypt (Evans 1921–1935, I, 400, figs. 289, 290: two [of six] preserved, of gypsum), and the single gypsum pillar in the sepulchral chamber of the LM III Temple Tomb (Evans 1921–1935, IV, 974–975, figs. 934, 935). Also, see the pillars from the house northwest of the Southwest Houses (Hogarth 1899–1900, pl. vi:3). 92Soles and Davaras 1996, 189, pl. 52, in Building B.2. 93For the dating of the Pillar Crypts in the West Wing, see Macdonald 2002, 40, after Panagiotaki 1999, 253. See also Evans (1921–1935, II, fig. 216) for the multiple-block pillars in the basement of the South House, also believed by Macdonald to have been established in MM IIIB. 94 West Wing, Room VII 4. Not preserved to the top of the topmost block; no mortises visible. 95East Wing, Domestic Quarters, Knossos. See Evans 1921–1935, III, general plan E in pocket. Most if not all of the pillars restored there with numerous stacked blocks, often indicated by incisions in the modern cement, were originally constructed with vertical timbers keyed to a single low ashlar block, as shown by the mortise holes in the block’s upper surface. For this predictable construction tradition, see Shaw 2009b, also Table 3.1 here, as well as Tsakanika-Theochari 2006, vol. II. 96La Rosa (1995, fig. 1; Carinci and La Rosa 2009, fig. 141) indicates that Casa 103, just north of the Phaistos palace, may be MM IIIB, which would include four lowblock pillars there, each with four mortises in each of its four corners, as inspected by this author in 2009. For the plan, see also Pernier and Banti 1951, fig. 258 (see Fig. 4.22, below), also Fiandra 1995, fig. 2, where the area is circled.

14

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

C. Simple Built Forms, cont.

MM IB

15. Pillar halls

Malia

MM II

MM IIIA

97

MM IIIB

LM IA

Knossos

Malia99

98

16. Inset piers Mortised corner piers

Phaistos100

Malia101 Phaistos102

Knossos103

Inset wall-pier bases with mortises

Knossos104

Wall-end piers with mortised landing blocks 17. Gypsum dadoes on lower walls

Phaistos105 Phaistos107

18. Triglyph benches

Knossos106 Knossos108

Hagia Triada109

Myrtos Pyrgos110

Hagia Triada111

Table 1.3, cont. The appearance of Minoan elite architectural forms (MM IB–LM IA) at specific sites. Room IX, just north of the Central Court of the later palace, investigated by Hue and Pelon (1992, 27), with stone bases on which probably stood tall wooden posts, replaced in the Neopalatial period by single, low-block pillars. 98The Entrance Hall, with some 12 (probably) low-block gypsum pillars, dated to MM IIIB by Macdonald (2005, 125). Above both it and its counterpart at Malia in Room IX, Graham thought, were banquet halls with columns set above the downstairs pillars (Graham 1961; 1987, 125– 128). 99Room IX, with some six (probably) low-block pillars (Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 184–190, plan 7; see also Shaw 2009b, 117 n. 740). 100Shaw 2009b, fig. 87. Phaistos, corner of entrance leading into earliest, southwestern section of first palace; but not an exact parallel. 101Malia, corner of southern entrance leading from the Agora (see Fig. 4.36, below). 102 Reused Protopalatial corner pier built into lower fill of new palace (Shaw 2009b, fig. 81). 103Shaw 2009b, fig. 196:b. Stray block. For a block in situ in the Residential Quarters, see Evans 1921–1935, III, general plan G in pocket (see Fig. 3.8, below), left foreground. 104Throughout the Residential Quarters area of the East Wing of the Knossos palace. Evans 1921–1935, III, general plan E (see Fig. 3.1, below) in pocket there. 105Fiandra 1995, fig. 5 (just left of center in the lustral basin found below Room 70). For details of the same, see Pernier 1935, fig. 195, similar to Fig. 4.31, below. 106For some in the Residential Quarters, see Fig. 3.16:d, below. 107Levi and Carinci 1988, figs. 25, 83, 91. 108Macdonald 2002, 47. 109For the dates of the development of Hagia Triada, see below, Ch. 5.3.2. 110Cadogan 1977–1978, 77, fig. 23 (LM I). 111See n. 109, above. 97

1.1. Elite Forms: Raised Walkways, the West Courts, and “Theatral” Areas A visitor to the Minoan palaces, especially that of Knossos, may well walk away with the impression that these sometimes huge edifices existed in relative isolation, aside from numerous residences of the affluent that tended to cluster around them. This may also be one’s first impression at Malia, where the large palace is at the entrance to the site. But a second visit reveals the surprising reality that, at least in its Protopalatial phase (Fig. 1.10), the urban center was composed of numerous large establishments, including Quartier Mu (locus of production, ceremonial activity, and perhaps residence) and the Crypte Hypostyle (mainly religious/ceremonial with a large court for events), both with their own storage facilities for food products, including those within the east wing of the visible palace. All of those establishments were linked together at the time by a series of raised walkways (e.g., that in Fig. 1.11) of squared white

or gray limestone slabs, 0.70 to 1.40 m wide,23 laid on a bed of densely packed small stones.24 On the one hand, these walkways, found at other large sites but especially at Protopalatial Malia, where excavation has probably uncovered more area, may well have made walking simpler during inclement weather or in the evening. But on the other hand, their formal and consistent layout over time has suggested to many that they are more significant. Jan Driessen, who has recently studied the walkways within their urban landscapes, concludes that they developed “in connection with rituals that went on within the court centers and where ceremonial routes connected the countryside to the city core.” They “started at the town’s edge and guided nonresident visitors to their destination,” providing “direct access to either a building or an important square.”25 I certainly agree with Driessen, and I would add that most walkways were apparently established early in the Protopalatial period, not long after the foundation of the first palaces. To judge from what one can see at early Malia, the walkways joined

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

major ritual centers, and this may also have been the pattern at Knossos. The separation of the ritual areas from one another, as seen at Malia, may imply that they were intended for use by different groups, perhaps associated with particular families or residential areas near or at Malia. There is evidence, however, at Malia and elsewhere, that the earlier walkways were still used during the Neopalatial period but had lost some of their importance.26 Also, during the Neopalatial period at Malia, ceremonial activities may have been concentrated in and around a single building (the palace) rather than in a number of earlier structures (the palace, the Crypte Hypostyle, and Quartier Mu). The implication of this change is that political or social control may have been more divided during the Protopalatial period and was later replaced by fewer or less fragmented groups making use of a single large building complex.27 The walkways leading from one place to another are often set diagonally, forming triangular shapes. The patterns thus formed in the extensive west courts at the three larger palaces (e.g., Malia, Fig. 1.12), Driessen thinks, enhance the performance and theatricality of the movement during performances on festive occasions,28 as shown in a Knossian fresco (Fig. 1.13), where the walkways appear as if they are separating participants and spectators. Nevertheless, a diagonal path may originally have functioned more as a simple means to shorten the distance between entrances to ritual centers. For instance, a well-constructed walkway (Fig. 1.11) led diagonally northwestward from the Malia palace to the entrance to the Crypte Hypostyle. In between the two was a “crossroads” where another walkway led diagonally southwestward. South of there, outside the palace storage magazine area, there is another crossroads, this one with a triangular shape. The eastern side of the triangle once led to the southeast toward the MM entrance to the Central Court, but it was built over or replaced during Neopalatial times by what appear to be silos for grain (Fig. 1.5). The southern branch of the walkway triangle led to the same entrance (or exit). This part of the walkway and the western side of the triangle also led southwest toward the Magasins Dessenne (Fig. 1.10, as suggested in Fig. 1.12) 29 and farther on. Thus, the triangular walkways at Malia, Knossos (Fig. 1.14), and Phaistos served as a kind of

15

pedestrian “traffic circle” guiding visitors by the most direct path to, around, and into palaces and other urban centers, especially during the MM I– II periods. Clairy Palyvou has also pointed out that some walkways did not stop at the entrances but instead continued, unraised, into the building. For instance, at the Southwestern Entrance at Knossos (Fig. 1.15:a) the walkway “continues into and along the Corridor of the Procession and stops only when it reaches the Central Court,”30 which may have been the case at Protopalatial Phaistos as well (Fig. 1.15:b). Peter Warren has studied the Knossos Protopalatial walkways, pointing out their considerable extent some distance from the palace, as well as their crossroads where known (Fig. 1.14).31 Usually the palaces had courts along their western perimeters, often surfaced with irregular, naturally worn limestone slabs. Some west courts, especially those of the earlier palaces,32 were huge, the two largest being estimated as 2,550 m2 (Malia) and 2,112 m2 (Knossos).33 They were considerably larger than the central courts inside the buildings and were suitable for events that a reasonable percentage of the population might attend. Hägg has suggested that the rulers might appear to the attendees in the windows high in the west facade at Knossos,34 and Nanno Marinatos has described the possible associated festivals.35 The palatial facades bordering these courts on the east were characterized by projections and recesses. These provided the buildings with structural integrity, and at the same time they hint at the size and proportions of the upper halls on the first floor. Recesses within the facades are thought to indicate the positions of windows higher up at first-floor (first-story) level.36 Into the west courts at Knossos and Phaistos were sunk large circular pits, or kouloures, referring to something round and hollow (Fig. 1.3, for Knossos). They were first interpreted by Evans as being for garbage;37 later they were thought by some to be silos for grain, and more recently they have been interpreted as features for the disposal of runoff rain water.38 During both palatial periods, at the northeastern corner of the same courts, there were stepped “theatral areas”39 intended for groups of observers, perhaps watching processions that came along the raised pathways leading to the respective palaces. At Protopalatial Malia the facilities for viewing were probably farther off to the

16

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 1.12. Malia, pattern of walkways. Driessen 2009, fig. 4.2.

Figure 1.10. Malia, plan of central civic area. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 4.5.

Figure 1.11. Malia palace, walkway leading west through northwest court toward the Crypte Hypostyle (background). Photo J.W. Shaw.

Figure 1.13. Knossos palace, fresco depicting festive occasion in a court with a walkway (the Sacred Grove and Dance Fresco). Driessen 2009, fig. 4.6.

Figure 1.14. Knossos, plan of walkways. Warren 1994, fig. 1. Courtesy British School of Archaeology at Athens.

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

northwest, alongside the large court north of the Crypte Hypostyle (Fig. 1.10). The Theatral Area (Figs. 1.16, upper left, 1.17– 1.20) at Phaistos is particularly notable. During the Protopalatial period it consisted of nine broad steps upon which people could stand or sit, facing south onto a large paved court. The court was crossed diagonally by a raised walkway, which also climbed up the steps of the Theatral Area, surely an indication that the walkway, which proceeded southeastward to the palace entrance, was intended both as a processional way and to serve as a tangible indication of the unity of the palace with other nearby structures. This linking is quite similar to the situation at Knossos (Fig. 1.14) but is most evident in the schematic plans of the Protopalatial town of Malia (Figs. 1.10, 1.12), where each large built-up area was linked to another by means of walkways. During the Neopalatial period, part of the Phaistos Theatral Area, as well as the lower part of the Protopalatial West Facade, was replaced by a larger, unpaved court; the diagonal walkway in Fig. 1.18 was largely covered over. Directly to the east, however, a new Theatral Area (Fig. 1.17) was constructed, some 9 m wide north–south, with 12 broad steps leading up to a deep landing behind which was a propylon-like series of three spaces (no. 69 in Fig. 1.4). The easternmost was a lightwell. Walter Graham has proposed that the two western rooms supported an upper floor and balcony from which the Phaistos ruler might address those assembled below (Fig. 1.20). This magnificent arrangement, with its spacious architecture of huge coursed ashlar blocks, is unmatched elsewhere on Crete. The chief function of the area, judging from its layout, seems to have been to accommodate groups assembled on the steps and in the court. A side door (no. 71 in Fig. 1.4) on the north, however, connected with a broad stairway leading to upper floors with rooms intended for assembly,40 and a relatively narrow back door, in the eastern wall of the light-well, led to palace interiors as well as to the Central Court. The main entrance to the palace continued to be to the south, in Area 5, near where it had been when the first palace was in use (Fig. 1.15:b). At Neopalatial Malia the Theatral Area, rather like a series of narrow terraces, was actually within the palace along the western side of the Central

17

Court (Figs. 1.5 [at “seats”]; 1.21). It had nine broad steps of white limestone, about 3.30 m wide, beginning from a raised pavement next to the court; four of the steps have been restored. Two channels subdivided the steps, east–west, into three equal rows, possibly for drainage, although Olivier Pelon thinks that since the stairs were probably covered, the channels may have been intended for the insertion of painted plaster decoration.41 The area could be closed by two folding doors set near the edge of the court, as shown by the stone and bronze pivots found in situ.42 The steps themselves probably continued up to the west with wooden construction,43 perhaps even up to a point where there was access to the first-floor level.

1.2. Central Courts 1.2.1. Access If the west courts represent “free” areas where the populace assembled to participate in events of a public nature, the central courts within the palaces represented a step beyond such free access, one involving control and often, probably, an individual’s particular responsibility within the palace. Protopalatial Phaistos and Neopalatial Knossos, for instance, had controlled entrances along their western facades (Figs 1.3, 1.15:a, b). Entering, one passed to either side of a central column into a corridor leading to the Central Court, but presumably only after having gained permission from a gatekeeper keeping watch from a space nearby. Raised walks (thus part of the intention for the overall area plan) led in each case to the general entrances. Of such entrances, all probably monitored, but not fortified and thus apparently not “defended,” Neopalatial Knossos had at least three (one on the north, two on the southwest (Figs. 1.3, 1.15:a); Malia (Fig. 1.5) probably had at least four (on the north, northeast, southwest, and southeast, respectively) during both palatial periods. Phaistos (Figs. 1.4, 1.15:b, 1.17) featured a main entrance, from the west, almost on the same east–west line, during both palatial periods. If, as presently assumed, few people with a function in the working of the palace

18

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

a

b

Figure 1.15. Walkways leading into the palaces at Knossos and Phaistos: (a) plan showing walkway leading to the West Porch at Knossos and continuing on toward the Central Court via the Corridor of the Procession, seen at top right (Evans 1921– 1935, II, fig. 427); (b) Protopalatial western entrance to Phaistos palace (after Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 159). Courtesy British School of Archaeology at Athens.

Theatral Area XXXIV 69

Figure 1.16. Phaistos, Protopalatial plan, with MM II Protopalatial areas at center, left, and MM IIIA area at upper right. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 5.2.

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

19

Figure 1.17. Phaistos, plan of earlier, western portion (left) below later palace (right). The Theatral Area is at center, left. Pernier 1935, pl. v. Courtesy Italian School of Archaeology at Athens.

20

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 1.19. Phaistos, Neopalatial entrance (left) and a portion of the Theatral Area (right) steps, looking northeast. Photo J.W. Shaw.

Figure 1.18. Phaistos, Protopalatial Theatral Area, looking north along walkway. Photo J.W. Shaw.

Figure 1.20. Phaistos, Neopalatial Theatral Area restored, looking southeast. Graham 1970, ill. 2. Courtesy the American Journal of Archaeology.

Figure 1.21. Malia palace, Theatral Area, steps on western side of the Central Court. Photo J.W. Shaw.

actually lived in it, then the remainder would enter the building at the most convenient point, perhaps daily. At Neopalatial Phaistos, for instance, groups bound for an event in the Central Court could enter via the single main entrance, but those going to an

upper floor gathering could enter by means of the private stairway just north of the Propylon (Room 69) in Spaces 71–73 (Fig. 1.4).44 At Malia, again, groups might gain direct access to the court via the southern entrance, whereas individuals involved in

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

the varieties of work activities in the North Court (the North Portico) in the North Wing (Fig. 1.5) could enter via a special entrance room.

1.2.2.1. Origins and Uses If we consider the origins of the central courts we have just visited briefly,45 it seems likely that they were associated with earlier customs carried out in open spaces reserved for group gatherings, perhaps occurring seasonally. These would have been the stage, as public or main courts, before the same areas were defined architecturally by perimeter walls representing service structures, added alongside the court. As Driessen put it, “[t]he origin of the Minoan ‘Palaces’ . . . is the origin of the Central Court.”46 Of course some of the later palaces, for instance those of Galatas or Kato Zakros, may well reflect the overall tradition but not necessarily the overall court history. At Knossos, unfortunately, the Late Neolithic and Early Minoan (EM) levels were removed as early as EM III–MM I, when the palace was being built,47 but enough remained for Peter Tomkins to identify activity centered around large hearths involving the use of ceramic vessels and the consumption of meat.48 Moreover, at Phaistos, the area below the Protopalatial Central Court surface is thought by Simona Todaro to have been used “as a major ceremonial hub for the site since the Neolithic Period.”49 She and Serena di Tonto50 believe that in the Final Neolithic (FN) period “several structures seem to have been organized around two communal open areas, where people gathered . . . in ceremonies that involved the preparation and consumption of drink served with a specialized set of drinking and pouring vessels decorated with red ocher encrustation,”51 and they should not be confused with the narrow east–west courts between isolated groups of apartmentlike houses discovered at two MM IA sites in eastern and South-Central Crete.52 These areas may well have been comparable in use to the paved outdoor spaces associated with Early Helladic “corridor” buildings on the Greek mainland, probably used for similar rituals.53 Schoep has recently suggested that in Minoan communities, as in other Near Eastern Bronze Age polities, there was a physical separation of buildings devoted to secular and religious functions. The Minoan palaces may have been confined to religious functions, while other buildings (e.g., the Little Palace at Knossos, House E at

21

Malia, House A at Kato Zakros, and Hagia Triada near Phaistos) may have housed secular authority.54

1.2.2.2. Dimensions The central courts are uniformly rectangular and oriented from north to south. Usually each is surrounded by a continuous grouping of rooms, misnamed “wings”55 (but still a useful word). The central courts vary in size, with the largest examples found at Knossos (28 x 52 m, or 1,456 m2), Malia (27 x 48 m, or 1,296 m2), and Phaistos (22.3 x 46.5 m, or 1,036.95 m2), while smaller ones were constructed at Kato Zakros (12.15 x 30.3 m, or 368.15 m2) and Petras (miniscule, 6 x 13 m, or 78 m2; Fig. 1.8).56 Their size, and the overall size of the palace building, can probably be used as a rough indication of the size of the community in a specific area.57 Donald Preziosi compared, with some success, an early estimate of the proportions of court width to length, an average of 1:2,58 to the actual size of the main eastern room groupings in the west wings of the palaces of Knossos and Malia,59 a suggestion recently dealt with sympathetically by Palyvou.60 The suggestion, however, is less successful when applied to other palaces. The present author has used a revised central court proportion of 1:2.2 to propose that the now destroyed eastern court perimeter at Knossos was once lined by an extensive pillared portico (restored in Fig. 1.3),61 otherwise not seen in the Knossos court.

1.2.2.3. Court Surfaces and Wings Court floor surfaces were well maintained. Perhaps the most dramatic example of court renewal is at Malia (Fig. 1.22), where in a shallow sounding Pelon exposed at least four levels of pavement, beginning with a red EM II/EM III level (no. 4) that was overlain by at least three layers of white soil, each about 0.25 m thick, the last of Late Minoan (LM) IA date.62 In its final form, the large Malia court had only a few enigmatic patches of carefully laid pavement; in the center of the court was a small squared pit with burned mudbrick, a possible altar.63 At Kato Zakros, the upper court, with a small rectangular “altar” near its northwestern corner (Fig. 1.7), was composed of hard clay. It rested on an earlier floor with a thick plaster coating that ran below the west facade of the upper court.64

22

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 1.22. Malia palace, sounding in the southeastern part of the Central Court. Of the labeled pavement areas, 1 and 2 are Neopalatial, 3 and 4 are Protopalatial. Pelon 1986, fig. 11. Photo © École française d’Athènes.

Both the Phaistos and Knossos courts were probably completely paved with squared slabs; otherwise the court floors were almost featureless. No doubt celebrations were carried out upon the courts, events such as we see in the famous Grandstand Fresco (Fig. 1.23) from Knossos, where unseen protagonists perform before assembled crowds and elite spectators, seated and standing, above and around whom rise the pillars and porches of structures alongside the Central Court. Perhaps the spectators watched gymnasts or bull leaping events like those celebrated in wall painting and the minor arts. On a daily basis the courts must have been alive with palace activities such as governance and ritual, with people criss-crossing the courts as they went from one wing to another. At Knossos, Malia, and, in particular, Kato Zakros, the central block of ground-floor rooms on the west side of the central court was largely devoted to ritual,65 as in the Throne Room and the Central Sanctuary at Knossos, the Pillar Crypts at both Knossos and Malia, the Ceremonial Area (Quartier d’Apparat [areas III and IV]) at Malia, and the Central Shrine at Kato Zakros.66 The extensive north wings often had spacious pillared banquet halls on their first floors, which were reached by

stairs.67 That at Phaistos, just east of the main entrance from the north, looked down upon the Central Court, where the entrance was flanked by half-columns (Fig. 1.24) most likely imitating the masts flanking pylons on either side of monumental Egyptian New Kingdom entranceways.68 The eastern sides of the courts might have, as at Malia, a simple line of storerooms (Fig. 1.25:a, b), but they also featured entrances into a minor residential area, perhaps for passing guests, such as that found at Phaistos (Fig. 1.4, right). The largest group of residential apartments was at Knossos, where there were two similar levels below the level of the Central Court (Fig. 1.3, east of the court) and perhaps two more above that point. Shallow pillared porticoes lined the eastern and western sides of the Phaistos court, offering both shade from the heat and shelter from inclement weather, as well as entrance into the rooms beyond. Porticoes featuring alternating piers and columns are seen along the eastern side of the Malia court (Fig. 1.5), as well as that at Kato Zakros (Fig. 1.7) and possibly the one at Galatas (Fig. 1.6). Simpler long colonnades occur in the courts only at Neopalatial Petras (Fig. 1.8) and along the western side of the Malia court (Fig. 1.5). These architectural features, along with the broad-stepped stairs at Knossos and Malia, must have expedited affairs of governance, as well as offering opportunities for people to exchange views when at leisure.

1.2.2.4. Alignment All major palace structures were carefully laid out with parallel walls running either east to west or north to south. The large central court, invariably rectangular and with its long sides oriented north–south, was a major, if not the only, determining element. The reason for this is that the courts, apparently at least as old as the palaces themselves, served for gatherings of the very populace that erected them.69 In terms of alignment, as estimated in the early 1970s, the long axes of the Kato Zakros, Knossos, Malia, and Phaistos courts fall within 2° to 37° east of true north (Fig. 1.26).70 Among the more recently excavated palatial buildings, at one of them, Galatas, the axis appears to fall not far from true north, while those of both Kommos and Petras are unusual for they fall 7° to 10°, respectively, west

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

23

Figure 1.23. Knossos palace, extract from the Grandstand Fresco from Knossos. Evans 1921–1935, III, pl. xvi opposite p. 47.

Figure 1.24. Phaistos palace, restored elevation looking northwest in the Central Court. Graham 1979, ill. 10. Courtesy the American Journal of Archaeology.

of true north.71 The range of Minoan palace alignments has thus been increased lately by about 12°, to 47°, a phenomenon whose significance should be explored through further research. At least three possible explanations for the axial preference may be offered. One is that being a long north–south rectangle, with the width considerably shorter than the length, the central courts

were shaped so as to allow for maximum illumination within the eastern, western, and northern facades on the central court—the southern facade would, of course, receive little or no direct sunshine. A second suggestion is that the long axes of the central courts were set so as to point directly at local landmarks, but, aside from the possibility that the one at Phaistos points north to the twin peaks

24

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

a

b

Figure 1.25. Malia palace, storage areas in the East Wing: (a) plan (after Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, plan 9); (b) photo of a storeroom with pottery in situ, looking west (Chapouthier and Charbonneaux 1928, pl. xxiii). © École française d’Athènes.

of Mt. Ida and the sacred Kamares Cave, this argument is not convincing.72 The fact that at a number of palaces, rooms clearly dedicated to religious and/or ceremonial use were set along the western side of the court brings up a third possibility, that is, that sunlight was needed in those rooms and, as long as the height of the eastern facade did not obstruct the process, ceremonies could have taken place at sunrise during equinoxes or solstices.73 An alternate scenario is that nocturnal observations, involving the stars or the moon, played a role.74 Recently, Dennis Doxtater, using up-to-date methodology, has attempted to show that the orientations of the palaces were set in relationship to significant sacred caves and mountain peaks throughout Crete.75 An inherent problem, however, is whether the building and landscape patterns we can derive now were intentionally integrated then, for we have little evidence to indicate Minoan

expertise in long-range observation and complex geographical measurement. Another attempt at explaining Minoan building positioning has been made by William Downey, who posits that Minoan observers of the heavens understood the hypothetical positioning of a polestar such as our Polaris, which lies near true north today.76 He also states that the Minoans may have used magnetic compasses that could be used to determine the extent to which an observation made on land corresponded to a variation from true north (declination). In turn, he proposed a new methodology of sequencing buildings on archaeological sites. One of the problems in Downey’s theory is that there is no evidence for the use then of the magnetic compass, which is now thought to have been first used practically for navigation in the ninth century a.d.77 If the compass was known as early as the Minoan period, then it seems odd

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

25

that it would not have continued in use into later Greek times, or at least be known from Egypt and thus appear in written sources or through actual discovery. Concerning both of the proposed hypotheses mentioned here, it is likely that modern methodologies are introducing possibilities that could not have been carried out with the technology available then on Crete.

1.3. Domestic or Residential Quarters Among the more fascinating areas found in the palaces are the Neopalatial residential zones shown in Figs. 1.27–1.31.78 Usually they were located along either the eastern or northern edge of the palace. There the morning sun would illuminate the rooms, and the midday heat and afternoon sunshine would be minimal, especially if cooled by a breeze rising up from lower slopes. Large windows, often attested by their mortised ashlar sills,79 were common, and actual windows can be seen at Akrotiri on Thera.80 When possible, as, for example, at Knossos, Phaistos, and Galatas, it seems they were set so as to provide vistas of the Cretan countryside, in keeping with the wellknown Minoan appreciation for natural forms. According to Quentin Letesson: With the exception of Kato Zakros, all [residential areas] in palaces are fairly remote from all the entrances of the palaces. In terms of graphs or dendrograms they are set at the very top of the sequence of rooms and spaces that form the palaces [so as to] remain somewhat private, secluded, and not totally embedded in the daily routines of palatial life (at least the public side of it).81

These residential units82 range from perhaps four or five at Galatas to a dozen or more rooms or spaces covering ca. 700 m2 on the ground-floor level at Knossos. Most of them, moreover, had stairs leading up to the first floor, where there were presumably more spaces for living and reception. Knossos had as many as four floors, with the first floor repeating to a large extent the plan of the ground story below.

Figure 1.26. The orientations of the Minoan palaces. Shaw 1973b, 49, fig. 1. Courtesy Italian School of Archaeology.

1.3.1. Malia The core of the residential area had three special spaces. If we take the one at Malia (Fig. 1.27) as a typical example, we find, placed centrally from north to south, first, the slab-floored Room III 7a, which could be completely closed off from the inside by means of multiple double doors (indicated on the plan) along the three open sides, depending on weather and the inhabitants’ desire for privacy (see also pier-and-door partitions in Ch. 4.2). Next is III 7b, a slab-paved portico a few meters wide with a light-well with two columns. The closable room (or “polythyron,” a many-doored room), the covered space between it and the light-well, and the light-well itself have been called by many the “Minoan hall,” a somewhat vague term, but one that nevertheless implies the presence of the three ingredient spaces. Almost invariably accompanying the “hall” is the so-called lustral basin (III 4), a sunken area with a number of steps leading down, a place possibly devoted to rites perhaps involving lustration, as described elsewhere (Ch. 4.6).

26

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

b

Figure 1.27. Malia palace, Residential Quarters in the North Wing. Plan J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco, after Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, fig. 7, and Schmid 1983, fig. 20.

Figure 1.28. Malia palace, restored northern portico of the Residential Quarters. Tiré and van Effenterre 1983, fig. 14. Drawing © École française d’Athènes.

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

Adding to the pleasurable surroundings for the inhabitants was a portico (IV 1, elevation in Fig. 1.28) “bent” around the polythyron. It was columnar on the north and pillared on the east. One could look out from there over gardens and the Malia countryside, and sometimes one could no doubt hear the rhythms of the sea, not far to the north. Other rooms (III 5–6, III 8), probably closable from the inside, offered further privacy, and the two parallel spaces in III b, most likely entered via III a or III c, accommodated stairs providing access to other apartments, perhaps with a similar plan, on the first story.

1.3.2. Knossos By comparison with Malia, the spaces for living on the ground floor at Knossos appear more complex. There, upon descending the Grand Staircase (Space 88, Fig. 1.29:a) and passing through the Hall of the Colonnades (89), one entered the first covered room (90b), a fore hall open to light-well 90a (west) and with a polythyron (90c) to the east. The last was sheltered on the east by a bent portico of six columns (91), with a square pillar at the central hinge point—overall a core arrangement very much like that seen at Malia. Evans dubbed 90a– 90c “The Hall of the Double Axes” after the mason’s marks inscribed on the ashlar blocks of the light-well (90a) there.83 While Malia had a few ancillary spaces beyond the core unit, Knossos had an entire suite appended (99–102, Fig. 1.29:a) that Evans called the “Queen’s Megaron”—he located the king in the “Hall of the Double Axes,” where he found the remains of what he thought to be a throne (Fig. 1.29:b) set against the north wall of Space 90b. For the queen’s comfort was a “mini” Minoan hall with a fore hall, the usual closed polythyron (as III 7a at Malia, Fig. 1.27) but featuring unique benched sills with pillars on the east and south. On the west was the other missing element of the palatial Residential Quarters, the Lustral Room (102), here not really a basin since its floor seems to have been even with that of the room outside, without the usual steps leading down. The Queen’s Megaron had wall paintings of women dancers and, near the eastern light-well, gamboling dolphins. Also, at the end of Corridor

27

100 leading west was an elaborate toilet facility (98, Fig. 1.29:c), probably using water supplied by jugs and also by rain water during the rainy season, brought down from roof level via vertical shafts.84 The facility emptied into a complex system of covered drainage channels running below floor level throughout this part of the East Wing. The toilet room was lit by a light-well (96) on its north. Most intriguing in the complex was the series of long corridors (87 and those at story levels above) furnishing unimpeded access between east and west, but especially the series of inner staircases, 95, a service stairway just south of the Hall of the Colonnades, and 104, between the Hall of the Double Axes and the Queen’s Megaron, which made it possible for inhabitants to circulate between the different levels. The pattern of door closure in the rooms shows how considerations of privacy were consciously built into the structure. (For discussion of how a door would fit into the reveals provided for it in the doorjamb, at the same time indicating from which side it could be opened or closed [locked], see Ch. 4.3.1). For instance, the “king” could close off his entire area except for entrance passage 103, but he could still close off the southern entrance there into the Queen’s Megaron, just as the “queen” could close off (on the south) the king’s entrance (on the north) into 103.85 Also, those in the apartment above, on the first floor, could, at will, close off stairway 104 leading up to their rooms. Thus access was provided so as to guarantee individual and group privacy both between discrete room areas and separate floors.

1.3.3. Phaistos If we now glance at the Residential Quarters at Phaistos (Fig. 1.30), we see that it has the same core arrangement (79–77–78) but with a shortened portico (85) and an abbreviated equivalent of the Queen’s Megaron (81–82) or, as Graham has dubbed it, the “Women’s Hall,”86 with its own lustral basin (83). There was also an annex, without a polythyron but with two sheltered porticoes (50a, 50c) on either side of a lightwell (50b), an arrangement so far reported elsewhere in Crete only in Room 4 at nearby Hagia Triada (Fig. 1.31)—perhaps this was an original

28

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

a

b

c

Figure 1.29. Knossos palace, features of the Residential Quarters in the East Wing: (a) plan (J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco, after Hood and Taylour 1981, foldout); (b) restored seat with canopy in the Hall of the Double Axes, Room 90b on plan (Evans 1921–1935, III, fig. 223); (c) latrine in the Queen’s Megaron area, Room 98 on plan (Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 172).

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

29

Figure 1.30. Phaistos palace, Residential Quarters in North Wing. J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco, modified from Pernier 1935, plan in plate volume.

Figure 1.31. Hagia Triada, restored plan of northwestern residential portion of western building. J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco, after Halbherr, Stefani, and Banti 1980.

30

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Mesariote contribution to architectural form.87 A stairway (51) led up from ground level there to the first story.

1.3.4. Hagia Triada Although the northwestern building (House A) at Hagia Triada is not usually considered a palace in the formal sense,88 much of its architecture is certainly elite (Fig. 1.31). There is, for instance, an unusual L-shaped arrangement (Fig. 1.31) with a central polythyron (3), eminently closable from the inside, with a portico (11) adjoining it on the north. To the east is a fore hall (12), light-well (49), and, farther on, two interior rooms (4) of which the southern one has a benched interior. The eastern building (House B) at the site, possibly designed by the same architect, had the same basic L-shaped plan for its residential area (Fig. 1.32). The L-shaped polythyron began at the apex with the central polythyron (1a), and with two rooms, 73 and 21 (with a private light-well, 22). Directly to the east of 1a was the normal fore hall (1b) with a light-well (1c). Throughout both of these Hagia Triada buildings, the interiors were distinguished by both their elegance (especially the gypsum dadoes and benches) and the limestone ashlar exterior facings, known for the extreme care with which they were made.

1.3.5. Kato Zakros The plan of the Kato Zakros living quarters (Figs. 1.7, 1.33) has the more normal core arrangement (XXXVII), plus a reduced “Queen’s Area” (XXXVI) with a possible light-well on the east.89 Some distance to the north was a lustral basin (Fig. 1.7). There were narrow porticoes on the west, bordering the Central Court. Adjoining the Minoan hall on the east was a large open court with what should probably be interpreted as a circular swimming pool (LXXII). A unique feature of the Zakros palace is that in the West Wing there is a small Minoan hall arrangement (Fig. 1.7) in the southwestern corner of what Nicholas Platon, the discoverer of the palace, termed the “Hall of the Ceremonies”90 (Room XXVIII). There is a small polythyron open to the east and north, with a fore hall separating it from the usual light-well, and bordered on the west by a lustral basin (Room XXIV). The floor spaces were decorated with groups of panels outlined by thin, narrow plaster strips, painted red. As they were subject to damage if stepped on, it is possible that they formed a pattern for the placement of colorful woven rugs upon the spaces between them.91 The East Wing of the palace, which was the more spacious residence, might also have been the preferred one, but the unusual combination of the polythyron halls, seen in opposite wings of the palace, appears to have been an intentional

73

20

21

1a

22

1b

1c

2

Figure 1.32. Hagia Triada, eastern building. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 9.23.

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

31

Figure 1.33. Kato Zakros palace, restored plan of the Residential Quarters in the East Wing. J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco, after Platon 1974, fig. 100.

redundancy, not evident in other Minoan palatial establishments, that requires explanation.

1.4. Grouped Storage Magazines Almost upon entering the West Wing of the Knossos palace, visitors encounter to their left the massive magazine block (Fig. 1.3) of some 22 parallel east–west corridor-like spaces, their walls still standing about 2 m high, in which there were some mended pithoi even taller than that. Built in MM III,92 the magazines were renovated with the addition of floor cists (Fig. 1.34), as deep as 1 m and extending, end-to-end, the length of a

magazine.93 The cists were made of fitted gypsum and limestone slabs, sometimes sealed with lead, looted in antiquity but with sufficient fragments of inlays in various materials, as well as remains of crystal and gold foil, to suggest that the cist contents may have been fabulous, certainly more so than the contents of the pithoi that were arranged on slabs along the two side walls on either side of the floor cists. Graham has graphically estimated the relative capacity of the storerooms. He states: [t]he commonest type of magazine, in the palaces as in the houses, is that used for the storing of pithoi. At Vathypetro these seem to have alternated with smaller jars set on wooden shelves. The West Magazines at Knossos, which vary from about 10.5 to 18.5 m. in length . . . and from 1.5 to

32

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

2.5 m. in width . . . , could have held from thirty to forty jars apiece, ranged in single or double rows along the walls . . . Estimating some 155 gallons (ca. 586 liters) as the capacity of an average jar, and the maximum number of jars at about 420, the total maximum capacity of the magazines might amount to over 65,000 American gallons (over 246,000 liters). The contents were probably entirely olive oil, according to Evans, a commodity which was used by the ancients in tremendous amounts since it served as a food, as a soap substitute, and as fuel for their lamps. Pithoi were also used to store other substances, however, such as grain, beans, peas, and lentils.94

One wonders how the stored goods were to be used. Christakis expresses the current opinion that: the institutions residing within palaces may have operated as large, autonomous groups, storing goods . . . for the maintenance of a restricted number of non-food producers and to provide the means to finance state enterprises. Relief redistribution to the masses . . . cannot be dismissed, especially in periods of serious social unrest caused by subsistence stress. At the same time, however, I would argue that the picture of consensus and reciprocity, which the concept of relief distribution indirectly implies, actually contrasts with the power-brokering and dependence relationships within a stratified and hierarchical power system. The ideal of consensus seems illusory, and the politics of self-interest were well and truly alive in ancient states.95

At Knossos, the West Magazines could only be approached by means of a north–south corridor over 3 m wide, separating the magazine block from cult rooms to the east. A somewhat similar arrangement was used in the MM II–III Anemospilia cult building (Figs. 1.35, 1.36),96 where of the six substantial rooms used for storage of various types, two groups of three were set on either side of a broad corridor. The same symmetrical plan was used later for the storage in the western wing of the Phaistos palace (Figs. 1.4, 1.17 [lower right]),97 where five rooms lined either side of the access corridor (26), an arrangement that, because of the easy access and choice of units available, typifies storage areas of the Greek and Roman period as well.98 A third storeroom type, recognizable in plan and hardly seen elsewhere, characterizes MM II Malia. There, low, thickly plastered platforms were set around at least three sides of a room, with channels

leading toward “collection vases” buried up to their rims in the floor, and usually set at platform ends or corners (Figs. 1.37–1.40). They were apparently intended to catch liquids spilled during transfers made between containers. A good example can be seen in Building A in Quartier Mu (Fig. 1.38, upper left). Many small vessels in Rooms I 5–I 8, not simply pithoi as might be expected in a later, Neopalatial context, were placed on a platform, where they were found partially crushed by the room’s collapse (Fig. 1.40).99 A somewhat similar MM II example was found below the Residential Quarters of the second palace, where two long plastered platforms were set east–west against the eastern wall of a room, with other platforms continuing around most of the room’s periphery (see Fig. 2.19:b, below).100 A final look at this exclusively Protopalatial storeroom type should include the example found along the eastern side of the Central Court at Malia (Fig. 1.25), retained and perhaps partially restored when the second palace was being laid out in LM I. There were six identical magazines, 6.25 m long by about 2.10 m wide, within which were found large jars or pithoi containing wheat and lentils; some smaller jars may have contained liquids, probably oil.101 Scorings on each platform marked out spaces for 14 smaller and 14 larger jars. In the southeast corner was a great jar protected by a row of slabs. Beside it was a stone block where the excavators suggest an overseer sat and kept tally as the porters carried in their oil-filled amphorae to pour into the pithoi. These patterns at Protopalatial Malia suggest that each large establishment (e.g., Quartier Mu, Buildings A and B; the Crypte Hypostyle, and the palace) had its own storerooms destined to serve those engaging in the various activities associated with it. One wonders why the Malia platformtype of storeroom was discontinued, as for instance in the West Wing (Fig. 1.5), where the longer, platform-less type already described for Knossos was built, most likely during the Neopalatial period. Perhaps the size of the vessels mattered, with the smaller vessels being placed separately in cupboards while the larger pithoi, which perhaps could easily stand on their own, were set in rows between the long, parallel east–west walls, systems that conveniently served to support spacious first-floor rooms, described below.

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

33

Figure 1.34. Knossos palace, partial plan and section of the eighth magazine in the West Wing. Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 325.

Figure 1.35. Archanes, plan of the cult building at Anemospilia. Dark gray blocks represent ashlar piers. J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco, based partly on Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, draw­ings 67–71.

Figure 1.36. Archanes, cult building at Anemospilia, elevation of storage room entrances, looking north. Sakellarakis and SapounaSakellaraki 1997, drawing 72.

34

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 1.37. Malia, plan of Quartier Mu. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 6.15.

Figure 1.38. Malia, Quartier Mu, plan of Building A, first phase. J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco, modified from Poursat and Schmid 1992, fig. 30.

1.5. Upper-Floor Reception Rooms The Minoans made full use of upper floors for living in their houses and also, in their public buildings, for social and cultural occasions, whether, for

instance, in Protopalatial Quartier Mu (Fig. 1.38, Room I 1) or the Neopalatial Little Palace at Knossos (Ch. 5.3.1). Aside from the upper floor banquet halls (e.g., in Fig. 1.41 at Malia), now unseen but imaginable at the northern end of the central

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

Figure 1.39. Malia, Quartier Mu, Building A, view looking northeast to lustral basin (right foreground), light-well (center background), and Minoan hall (right background). Poursat and Schmid 1992, fig. 28. Photo © École française d’Athènes.

35

Figure 1.40. Malia, Quartier Mu, stored vessels as found in Building A, Room I 7, looking north. Poursat and Schmid 1992, fig. 29. Photo © École française d’Athènes.

Figure 1.41. Malia palace, plan of Room IX and stairs leading to Banquet Hall. After Graham 1979, ill. 8.

courts, there is general agreement that at least at Knossos, Malia, and Phaistos there were other large first-floor reception rooms, especially in their west wings. The best evidence for their size and positioning is found at Knossos, in the form of upper

floor features such as piers, column bases, and pierand-door partition bases, as well as portions of broad steps (Fig. 1.42), which led participants up from the Central Court or elsewhere. To his credit, Evans, who had an instinct for architecture, as well

36

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 1.42. Knossos palace, Stepped Porch with stairs leading from the Central Court to the first floor (Piano Nobile), West Wing. Evans 1921–1935, II, fig. 536.

as for hiring excavation architects who could fulfill his expectations, commissioned a restored plan of the first floor of the West Wing (Fig. 1.43). Architects W.G. Newton and Theodore Fyfe added notes to it indicating what remains were “found in position,” “replaced from below,” and “probable,” giving at least tenuous theoretical life to the both spacious and complex framework provided by the Minoans for their social, cultural, and, no doubt, political deliberations.102 We cannot deal here with the details of the entire proposal, but summarizing the arrangement of the four halls on the first floor is useful. First, in terms of general organization, the rooms there were separated into east and west zones by an upper version of the north–south Lower Long Corridor that defines the eastern limits of the rows of magazines there (Fig. 1.3, 1.43). Above, on the eastern part of the upper floor level, there was the Central Tricolumnar Hall, reached from the Central Court via

the Stepped Porch (Fig. 1.42), already mentioned above. West of the line of the Upper Corridor there were the two main halls, arranged from north to south (the Sanctuary Hall and the Great Hall). The very plethora of such reception rooms, covering some 550 m2 by one estimate,103 certainly invites explanation concerning the nature and variety of functions that they may have served. Graham undertook a thorough examination of Evans’s proposals concerning upper floor layout in the West Wing.104 He suggested, for instance, that the thickened walls in the central, western storeroom block in the West Wing (visible in Fig. 1.3) indicated where columns were placed on the upper floor (as in the Southwest Hall, Fig. 1.44) and that the window indents along the western facade there could be used to define the upper rooms. His most important emendation was to eliminate Evans’s proposed Northwest Corner Entrance leading only up to the two first-floor halls (Fig. 1.43). Instead,

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

Figure 1.43. Knossos palace, first floor of the West Wing. Evans 1921–1935, II, foldout C.

37

38

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 1.44. Palace of Knossos, northwestern corner of the first floor in the West Wing. After restoration by Graham 1974, 36.

using as a basis a new state plan of that area made by this author, he substituted a north–south access ramp leading up to the ground-floor storerooms, adding to the first floor above an enlargement of Evans’s Sanctuary Hall to create the largest of the halls (50 on Fig. 1.44), a new Northwest Hall, measuring some 270 m2.

1.6. Ascending and Parallel Stairways Stairways leading to the upper floors varied. A particularly elegant type, which might be termed

“ascending,” did not turn but, rather, ran straight up to the upper floor. The most obvious example is what Evans termed the “Stepped Porch” and “Central Staircase” at Knossos (Fig. 1.42), which began about two-thirds up the western side of the Central Court and ran up some 12 limestone steps to a corridor leading into one of the main assembly rooms on the first floor (the Tricolumnar Sanctuary Hall).105 Among the features found fallen and replaced in their inferred original positions were two columns set separately on the center line of the steps, which were about 5 m wide. Those steps ended at a formal, closable entrance, with two doorways leading into the upper corridor. Of particular interest was a gypsum block, found

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

somewhat sunken from its original level, with a stepped ledge together with the blackened traces of four steps above, against which the steps had been placed, with risers slightly tilted inward toward the slope up (Fig. 1.45).106 The first steps were probably set upon packed soil, a common method for supporting the beginning of a stairway.107 The stairway just discussed and one in a similar position at Malia (Fig. 1.5) were both apparently the chief means of access for those gathered in the central court and planning to attend events taking place in the large, first-floor rooms along the eastern side of the west wing (Fig. 1.46).108 One wonders, therefore, when looking at the plan of the Phaistos palace (Fig. 1.4), why similar access was not provided there. Graham, however, has suggested an ingenious solution109 that I adopt here, namely that the main rooms for gathering were above Rooms 25, 26, 27–38, and 70. Rather than being approached by means of the Central Court, as at Malia and Knossos, groups attending events in the upper rooms

Figure 1.45. Knossos palace, Stepped Porch (see also Fig. 1.42). Stair block showing ledges with outline of risers and treads once set next to it. Evans 1921–1935, II, fig. 534.

39

entered by climbing the steps of the Theatral Area, then turned left (north) into 71, then again left and up the broad steps, 2.65 m wide,110 above Rooms 72 and 73 until they reached, by turning south, the floor above the Propylon columns, where they then crossed over into the Upper Hall. The stairway they had just ascended was of the U-type that doubled back on itself and was common throughout Neopalatial Crete. One of our illustrations here (Fig. 1.47), a detail of Building T at Kommos, shows the type in section as it climbs up, with ashlar blocks combined with wooden pillars at each end of a central spine wall giving it the necessary strength. Landings at turns of the stairs were often provided with windows. Palyvou succinctly describes the type used at Thera, an architecture so strongly influenced by Minoan architectural fashion that she might as well have been describing Cretan architecture of the time: The remarkable construction of these staircases, leading two and three stories up, depends largely

Figure 1.46. Knossos palace, restored view of a portion of the facade of the West Wing on the Central Court, showing the Tripartite Shrine (left) and the Stepped Porch (right) leading to first-floor reception rooms. Evans 1921– 1935, II, fig. 532.

40

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

of the middle wall. Horizontal beams tie the posts together on both sides of the middle wall. Pairs of beams also tie the ends of the middle wall with the corresponding side walls. A strong transverse horizontal beam is at the point where the two flights meet. It joins with the timber frame at the end of the middle wall, and its two ends are fixed in the walls encasing the staircase . . . The stone walls, slender though they may be, help to give rigidity to the system.111

Figure 1.47. Kommos, restored stairway in Building T indicating ashlar landing blocks (newels) functioning as pillar bases, found collapsed below. Drawing J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco.

on wood . . . The loads of the superimposed flights of steps, as well as those of the middle landings, are transferred to the ground through a robust timber frame encased in the walls. Timber is the prime element in this system, which explains the slender stone walls of the staircase. This frame consists of two pairs of posts fastened on dressed stones with dowels and mortises at the two ends

The best-known example of such a stairway, of course, is the Grand Staircase, bordering the east side of the Central Court at Knossos, described elsewhere (Ch. 3.1.1). Its chief distinguishing features were its height (as much as four stories), its complex wooden supporting frameworks, and the gypsum with which it was carefully encased. Its columns opened up the space to light the landings and stairs at the southern end of its spine wall and were set along the eastern side where they were socketed into rising gypsum parapets set next to a colonnaded light-well. Other staircases of the U-shaped type measuring 2–3 m in width were those leading up to large rectangular pillared or columnar rooms, often just north of the central courts, which have been reasonably associated with banquet or reception halls. Graham was most assiduous in both identifying and studying them in both palaces and other contexts.112 The one in Space IX at Malia, for instance, adjacent to a pillared hall on the ground-floor level (Fig. 1.48), began with six stone steps leading north (Fig. 1.49).113 From there on, wooden steps supported by a timber frame continued up to the landing, then after the turn to the south, proceeded up to the first-floor level, where the participants turned right, alongside an upstairs portico. From there they could enter the Banquet Hall (Fig. 1.41), which featured two rows of three columns positioned above the pillars on the ground floor.114 Similar arrangements, also bordering the Central Court on the north, have been suggested for the palaces of Phaistos and Kato Zakros.115 For Knossos, Graham supported his interpretation of dining functions by citing the presence of grain mills, evidence for food storage, spit supports, and quantities of pottery.116 At Kato Zakros, there was clear evidence for pottery storage and cooking facilities on the ground floor.117 Having introduced the subject of this book by describing six of the more obvious elite palatial

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

41

Figure 1.48. Malia, Hypostyle Hall (IX 2), southern triad of low-block pillar bases, looking east, with mortising near block corners. Photo J.W. Shaw.

Figure 1.49. Malia, Stairway IXa leading to Banquet Hall (above IX) from north of Central Court. Photo J.W. Shaw.

architectural forms and their purposes, I now turn in Chapter 2 to their predecessors, found either beneath or alongside them. A detailed examination of other elite architectural forms is reserved for Chapter 4.

12. Petras (Fig. 1.2), e.g., in MM II; Tsipopoulou 1999. 13. In MM III, for which, see Rethemiotakis 2002, 56–57. 14. Platon 1971b; Platon 2002, 2010. 15. As described to me by others (V. La Rosa and A. Van de Moortel, to whom I am indebted), excavation by the Greek Archaeological Service, and under the direction of E. Andonakakis, has exposed parts of a large Minoan building at Pretoria. Its plan certainly conforms to that of a “palace,” with rooms set around a central court measuring about 20 by 30 m. It features storage rooms and a colonnade. There is some ashlar masonry, including at least one pier-and-door partition base, as well as a squared block with dowel mortises, the latter most likely deriving from a pillar. The modern name of the site is “Pretoria,” or “Praetoria” (Spanakis 1979, Mesara map opposite p. 24), probably related to Praetorium, the name for a Roman center of governing, such as the huge one found at Gortyn not far from Phaistos (Di Vita, La Rosa, and Rizzo, eds., 1984, 53–56), both some distance west of Pretoria in the huge Mesara Plain. The location of the Minoan palatial site at Pretoria and the (presumed) Roman governmental site may well have been determined by local topography, for the area is about midway, north–south, between the rising plateau to the north and the hills of the Asterousia range to the south. Perhaps more important, it is slightly east of the point where the watershed of the Mesara begins to drain, via the Anapodaris River, eastward rather than via the Geropotamos River, which drains to the west. Such considerations may well have played a major

Chapter 1 Endnotes 1. Blegen and Rawson 1966; Mylonas 1966; Küp­ per 1996; Nelson 2001; Darcque 2005; Wright 2006. 2. Doumas 1983; Palyvou 2005. 3. Strasser et al. 2010. 4. Evans et al. 1964, 1971; Tomkins 2007, 2008, 2012; also Efstratiou et al. 2004. For the architecture, see McEnroe 2010, 9–18. 5. E.g., Evans 1994. 6. Warren and Hankey 1989, 169, table 3.1. For aspects of setting in the palaces, see Shaw 2011. 7. Pendlebury’s The Archaeology of Crete (1963) continues to be an entertaining and informative source for the history of the island. See also the two comprehensive volumes by Spanakis (1979) on Central and eastern Crete (vol. I) and western Crete (vol. II). 8. Shaw and Shaw 1993, 186; Shaw 2003, 244. 9. E.g., Schoep 2010, 222, 230. 10. McEnroe 2010, 54. 11. The area of Knossos at its acme during the Neopalatial period is estimated at 13,200 m 2, that of Malia at 10,000 m 2, and that of Phaistos at 8,300 m 2 (Shaw 2003, 245).

42

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

role in Minoan as well as later, in Roman calculations of administrative areas to govern, serve, or otherwise exercise responsibility. 16. At Sissi the outline of what may be a central court has just been reported (J. Driessen, pers. comm.). 17. Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006. 18. Cadogan 2011a, 129. 19. Warren and Hankey 1989, 169, table 3. 20. There are a few exceptions to this, among them the post–LM II architecture at Hagia Triada with, for instance, large Building ABCD, a small stoa, and a shrine, all of which reflect Minoan precedent but also introduce innovative plans and building techniques. There is also a huge stoa-like building (the Mercato) that in plan is less like the stoas associated with palaces (as along the eastern side of the Central Court at Malia, Fig. 1.5) than it is with later, classical stoas, for which it is the forerunner in form if not in actual ancestry. For those buildings, see most recently Cucuzza 1997, 2001; also Hayden 1982. For building techniques, see Shaw 2009b, 74–75, 103 n. 648. 21. Schoep 2004, 2006. 22. See section 1.3. 23. McEnroe 2010, 60. 24. Palyvou 2004a, 214. 25. Driessen 2009, 47, 51. See also, generally, Indelicato 1982. 26. At Phaistos, e.g., the extensive Proto­ palatial walkways in the West Court were covered over and not replaced during the Neopalatial period. 27. Good candidates for examples of such a phenomenon are found at Galatas, Kato Zakros, and Petras (Figs. 1.6–1.8). 28. Driessen 2009, 50. 29. Driessen 2009, 48, fig. 4.2. 30. Palyvou 2004a, 214. 31. Warren 1994. 32. Some later palaces did not have west courts, as at Petras (MM II–LM I), Galatas (MM III–LM I), and Kato Zakros (LM I). 33. Vansteenhuyse 2002, 247. 34. Hägg 1987, 132. 35. Marinatos 1987. 36. Graham 1987, 162–164. International terminology is preferred here over the usage of first and second floor levels in the U.S. 37. Evans 1921–1935, I, 208; II, 610. 38. McEnroe 2010, 60. The kouloures seem to have been abandoned during the MM period. They may be paralleled at Myrtos Pyrgos (Cadogan 1977–1978, 74, figs. 3[D], 10, 21), where they are referred to as cisterns. See also Strasser 1997.

39. Evans 1921–1935, II, 578–588; Pernier 1935, 177– 190; Pernier and Banti 1951, 23–39; Graham 1987, 27; McEnroe 2010, 58–60, 108–109. 40. Graham 1987, 119–124. 41. Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 139. 42. Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 138. 43. See also Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 140. 44. Since the West Facade here appears to be Neopalatial in date (Shaw 2009b, 62 n. 361), the entrance appended to it is likely to be contemporaneous, but it may well reflect an earlier plan. 45. McEnroe (2010, 95) rules out the Little Palace at Knossos as a “palace” because it lacks a central court. This makes one wonder, with our present assumptions about palace rule, whether there could be two palaces at any one site, a possible future discovery that would certainly invite speculation. 46. Driessen 2007, 78. 47. Evans 1921–1935, II, 5. 48. Tomkins 2012, 42–43. 49. Todaro 2009, 142. 50. Todaro and di Tonto 2008, 187. 51. See also Todaro 2012, 202. 52. At Hagia Photia and Tripiti. At the former, located near modern Siteia, some 30 rooms that can be subdivided into apartments face onto a narrow rectangular east–west central (roofed?) corridor. See Tsipopoulou 1999b; McEnroe 2010, 34. See also Ch. 5.2.3, p. 159. 53. Shaw 2007, 146. See also Driessen 2007, 90–92. 54. Schoep 2010, 233–234, 236; 2012. 55. In some cases one of the wings (or more) is minimal, as at Malia on the east or Galatas on the west and south. A “wing” can even be omitted, seemingly, as on both the east and south at Petras and, perhaps, on the south at Phaistos. On the south at Kommos (Fig. 1.9) was a stoa open to whatever light was reflected from the north; that at Malia (Fig. 1.5) was a series of rooms lit by sunlight reflected through a row of windows lining the southern facade of the court (Shaw 1971, 182). The missing or minimal wings may possibly be explained as the result of incremental additions planned but simply never carried out (for planning, see Shaw 2011; see also Palyvou 2002 and McEnroe 2010). 56. See the useful chart of Minoan court sizes, with references, in Vansteenhuyse 2002, 247–248. Graham, who wrote before palaces like Galatas or Petras (or Kommos) were discovered, maintained strongly that other courts’ dimensions corresponded with his Minoan foot unit of 30.36 m (Graham 1987, 222–229, 254–255 [addendum 5]).

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELITE STYLE

57. Shaw 2003. 58. Shaw and Lowe 2002, 522 n. 19. 59. Preziosi 1983. 60. Palyvou 2002, 170–171. 61. Shaw and Lowe 2002, 522. 62. Pelon 1986, 17, fig. 11. 63. Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 128–133. 64. Platon 1971a, 242–243, pls. 231b–232b. 65. See Evans 1921–1935, II, 796–826. 66. Platon 1971b, 101–160. 67. Graham 1987, 125, pls. 87–90. 68. Alexiou 1969; Graham 1970. 69. For the court in particular, see Graham 1987, 27; Palyvou 2002; Driessen 2007. 70. Shaw 1973b. Since that time it has come to my attention that the orientations of the Proto- and Neopalatial palace buildings at Phaistos probably differ slightly, as measured not with a theodolite but by straight-edge on Plan B in the plate volume of Levi and Carinci 1988. The former, older palace building, the western facade of which provided the base line for the 1973 presentation, is oriented about 1.45° west of the newer one, as measured from the line of the MM III colonnade along the western side of the court, compared with that of the western side of the new palace court walls. A similar difference can be seen between the northern, overlapping parts of the two west wings. Given the work involved to reorient an entire architectural complex, the change must be intentional, but the purpose remains obscure. For more discussion of palace layout, see also Shaw 2011. 71. For that of Kommos, 9°40'15", see Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, 99 n. 44, where 90° should be changed to 9°. That of Galatas is estimated from the plan in Fig. 1.6; that of Petras is 2° to the west of magnetic north (M. Tsipopoulou, pers. comm.). That at Archanes is somewhat east of north (Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, 79 [plan]). That at Gournia appears to be considerably west of magnetic north (Soles 2002, pl. xxxiv, after Hawes et al. 1908). At Makrygialos the court axis appears to be close to magnetic north (Davaras 1997, 119, plan 2). But court rectangles at both Gournia and Makrygialos are uneven, and in each case the southwestern quadrant appears in plan as if tilted away from the rest of the court. A worthy future project would be to determine the various palatial orientations not given in my 1973 article, either through direct observation with a theodolite or, if practicable, through calibrated GIS. 72. For the collected evidence, see Shaw 1973b, 55–56. Also see Preziosi 1983, 507–509. 73. Detailed proposals to that effect, esp. concerning the Throne Room complex at Knossos, have been made

43

by Goodison (2001, 2004). See also Soles 1991, 43–46; Marinatos 1993, 43–46; Driessen 2005, 84. 74. For more detail, see Shaw 1973b, 58–59. The Anemospilia “cult” building (see below) is oriented slightly east of true north, like the three larger palaces, which may not be by chance. The crucial aspect of the cult building’s orientation, I think, is that its entrance (and its long central hallway) faced east. See also Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, 272. 75. Doxtater 2009. 76. Downey 2011. 77. The New Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th ed., vol. 16, p. 158, 1979, Chicago. 78. See esp. Graham 1959. 79. Shaw 2009b. 80. Palyvou 2005. 81. Q. Letesson, pers. comm., 1 March 2012. See also Letesson 2009, 2013. Concerning Kato Zakros, the northeastern entrance into the palace led into a separate large court bordering the main residential area. That court area was probably semiprivate, with only a narrow corridor leading to the Central Court. 82. Aspects of the architectural structure of these areas are dealt with here in Ch. 2 (esp. Knossos), also throughout the discussion of various elite forms in Ch. 3, and in sections of Ch. 5 devoted to examinations of what we can discern and suggest about the origin and development of the form. 83. While in plan the two are similar, the use of stone, rather than wooden, pier-and-door partition bases at Knossos places the latter developmentally ahead of Malia. Stone bases were introduced at Malia in MM IIIB or not long after (Shaw 1999, 766 n. 38). For differing techniques used in rendering plans of an area, cf. Fig. 1.29:a with Fig. 3.2, below. 84. Shaw 2009b, 86–90, 135–139. 85. While the suggested arrangement is real, the identification of king’s and queen’s areas, originally proposed by Evans and followed by Graham, is intriguing but still unproven, as it is likely to remain. For a recent discussion of gendering Minoan architecture, see Driessen 2013, with bibliography. 86. Graham 1987, 87. 87. The arrangement at Hagia Triada, however, features two stylobates, with their details suggesting two periods of building. 88. Recent opinion (Watrous 1992; McEnroe 2010, figs. 9.22, 9.23) has separated the western part of the main elegant Neopalatial architectural complex into two buildings, northwestern House A (Fig. 1.31) and House B (Fig. 1.32).

44

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

89. The light-well, however, does not have the usual drain. 90. Platon 1971b, 155–160. 91. Shaw 2009b, 151–152; Shaw and Betancourt 2009. 92. Macdonald 2005, 72. 93. Evans 1921–1935, I, 448–456; Graham 1987, 132–133. For Neopalatial storerooms in general, see Begg 1975. 94. Graham 1987, 130–131. 95. Christakis 2008, 123. 96. Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997; Driessen 2001, 365–366, pl. CI:d. 97. Pernier and Banti 1951, 66–103. 98. Shaw and Shaw 1999, fig. 8. 99. As, e.g., in Room I 7 (Poursat and Knappett 2005, 250, fig. 40, pl. 62:b, d, e). 100. Pelon 1983, 690–693; McEnroe 2010, 53. 101. Chapouthier and Demargne 1942, 1–5; Graham 1987, 131. 102. See also Graham 1979, 61. 103. Graham 1960b, 332 (chart). 104. Graham 1960b; 1979; 1987, 114–119, 249–250. 105. For the stairway, see Evans 1921–1935, II, 810– 820, also foldout plan C in the same volume. Elsewhere Evans (1921–1935, II, 760 n. 4) estimates that an average stairway at the Knossos palace had risers of ca. 0.16 m and treads of ca. 0.39 m. 106. The block was apparently set on the left side of a stairway leading up from the first-floor corridor (Evans 1921–1935, II, fig. 536, center, right; Fig. 1.42). Another, similar block (Evans 1921–1935, II, fig. 534b) was found nearby. Such phenomena also occur on at least one block

lining the side of the Grand Staircase (Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 237, center right wall-end block). It is not clear to me, however, whether the “blackened traces” reported by Evans resulted from burning, use, or a mason’s technique. 107. Another supporting method, using wooden beams, can be seen in Malia’s MM II Building A in Quartier Mu (Ch. 1.3.1; Fig. 4.7) and in Knossos’s Grand Staircase (Ch. 3.1.1). 108. For an interesting and somewhat analogous Protopalatial stairway, also originating in a court (although a much smaller one), see that leading upward from Space I 1 in Building A in Quartier Mu at Malia (Fig. l.38, Room I 1), and see Ch. 2.3. 109. Graham 1956; 1987, 119–122. See also his section on staircases (1987, 180–185). 110. Pernier and Banti 1951, 336. I inspected the spine wall of the staircase in 2010 and found that it began on the east in a typically Neopalatial landing, or newel, base block, mortised for setting a wooden pillar upon it. 111. Palyvou 2005, 133. 112. Graham 1961; 1987, 125–128. 113. Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 184–191; van Effenterre 1980, fig. 416. 114. To the north, another set of stairways in Spaces XXII 1 and 3 provided access to the Banquet Hall for those arriving from the north (Graham 1987, figs. 87, 88). See also Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 123– 128, concerning this complicated area. 115. Graham 1961; 1979, 67 n. 75. 116. Graham 1987, 126. 117. Platon 1971b, 203–209.

2

Protopalatial Beginnings and Early Traditions

One question that has been asked recently about Minoan palaces pertains to their antecedents. More specifically, what earlier structural remains have been uncovered, especially from within, below, and around the Knossos, Phaistos, and Malia palaces? A second, related question concerns the general extent and nature of relevant Prepalatial (EM) remains at the same sites. Below we discuss briefly what we can now ascertain about the possible Prepalatial beginnings of the palaces, as well as their first Protopalatial phases. We begin our survey of the physical evidence for the development and use of antecedent buildings at Knossos.

2.1. Knossos While the Knossos palace is the best preserved of the three, its good preservation has also either prevented or at least hindered excavation down into earlier levels. What lies, for instance, below

the Queen’s Megaron, where remains of the newly dubbed “Lair Building” have been found? The excavation of this architectural unit (a near impossibility considering the well-preserved remains above it) might reveal a most interesting structure, probably an early “residential” Minoan hall group, perhaps of Protopalatial (MM II) date. Its exposure would elucidate both the development of this form at Knossos and its chronological and stylistic relationship to the two Protopalatial examples (see Ch. 2.2.3) discovered at Malia. In addition to the limited possibilities for excavation of the earlier levels, extensive renovation over a long period of time has sometimes made it difficult to separate the older from the newer elements of construction, especially in the West Wing at Knossos. To what period should a particular wall be assigned on the basis of pottery or other association(s)? As Colin Macdonald, who is deeply involved in the courageous attempt to untangle the labyrinthine nature of the site, has written, “How can an Old Palace dating to MM IB and IIA be discussed when few

46

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

remains can be assigned to these phases with any certainty?”1 Partly as a result of their sometimes conflicting views, scholars have proposed differing versions of Protopalatial plans for Knossos. The first was published by Evans in his Palace of Minos I,2 where he demonstrated graphically his theory that the ground floor of the first palace was subdivided into independent areas, separated by corridors, that were reserved for particular palatial functions such as storage or ritual (Fig. 2.1). Later Knossian investigators, such as Alexander MacGillivray, Todd Whitelaw, and Macdonald himself, often helped by others, have reinvestigated Evans’s proposals, especially the relative dating provided

by restudy of pottery from selected areas.3 Macdonald has also relied, cautiously, on the differing enigmatic signs carved on wall blocks (“mason’s marks”) to date walls.4 There is also disagreement about the extent of the Protopalatial palace, which no doubt will continue. For instance, Ilse Schoep has proposed that the first Knossos palace consisted essentially of a poorly defined building bordered by an open court to its east, the latter not becoming definable as a “central court” until Neopalatial times.5 There is sufficient agreement among others, however, that most of the darkened areas in Figure 2.2, based on MacGillivray’s model,6 are mainly Protopalatial. This consensus offers some assurance that

Figure 2.1. Knossos Protopalatial phase according to Evans (1921–1935, I, fig. 152).

PROTOPALATIAL BEGINNINGS AND EARLY TRADITIONS

47

Figure 2.2. Knossos palace, Protopalatial plan (dark walls). Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 5.7, based on MacGillivray 1994, fig. 2.

we can separate Protopalatial from Neopalatial areas, a specific focus in this book, so that we can search for clues to stylistic development in architecture between one period and the next. Aside from obvious later renovations, for instance, the “Protopalatial Magazines” (Fig. 2.3) are shown as Protopalatial, as is the outline of the Central Court. Also, in the East Wing some of the ashlar walls (Fig. 2.4) are of the same early date.7 The early remains below the Residential Quarters, moreover, are either late MM II (Late Protopalatial) in date or very early MM III (early Neopalatial). Very important for our purposes is the early Neopalatial (MM III) date assigned to the major primary phase of the Residential Quarters itself, for while renovation there was to continue into the LM III period, the basic structure remained essentially unchanged, as suggested especially by the uniformity in the structural techniques used.8 The second question posed at the beginning of this chapter concerned evidence for the very beginnings of the palatial structure, whether as part

Figure 2.3. Knossos palace, piers of the Protopalatial magazines (right), looking west. Evans 1921–1935, II, fig. 424.

48

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 2.5. Knossos palace, Protopalatial Northwest Terrace, looking northeast. Photo J.W. Shaw.

Figure 2.4. Knossos palace, light-well in Room 100, south of the Queen’s Megaron, looking west. The corniced wall (arrow) and those behind (south) and west of it are among the earliest in the palace. They retain the scarp of the cutting made in MM II for the insertion of the predecessor(s) of the Residential Quarters. Photo J.W. Shaw.

Figure 2.7. Knossos, the Monolithic Pillar Basement, looking northwest. Photo J.W. Shaw.

Figure 2.6. Knossos palace, plan of the early “Keep,” north is at top. Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 101.

Figure 2.8. Phaistos, southwestern entrance to southern section of the first palace. Photo J.W. Shaw.

PROTOPALATIAL BEGINNINGS AND EARLY TRADITIONS

of the palace itself or in a forerunner. Regarding the former, most scholars point out the broad EM III terrace wall (Fig. 2.5) in the northwestern corner of the palace, the dating of which was affirmed in 1972 when Sinclair Hood excavated a number of trenches behind the facade wall.9 There is also the “Keep” in the North Wing (Figs. 2.1, 2.2, 2.6), with deep foundations that may have supported a tower-like building, which is probably of Late Prepalatial date.10 This structure may have guarded or marked the northern approach to the flattened top of the hill, just as the South Front House may have done from the south.11 Also, we should consider the MM I Monolithic Pillar Basement (Fig. 2.7), perhaps a house, which borders the palace on the southeast.12 Although not part of the palace, as Whitelaw says, it serves as another indication of an economic resurgence that characterized not only Knossos but also Phaistos and Malia during the EM III/MM IA period.13 Macdonald has pointed out the similarity of its chinked masonry to that of the Northwest Terrace.14

2.2. Phaistos At Phaistos, a significant part of the first palace has been preserved, indeed most of its “West Wing” (Figs. 1.16, 1.17). It was built in as many as four major stages during MM II.15 Unlike Knossos, where the architectural periods can present a frustrating amalgam,16 the Neopalatial stage at Phaistos was simply set upon the Protopalatial one and, as if for the convenience of modern archaeologists, the former was also set some meters east of the latter’s facade. The earlier stage of the MM palace, excavated mainly by Doro Levi,17 was as high as three stories, so high that in order for the building to stand, and without the timber support techniques to be developed later, the lower walls were truly massive, made up of packed rubble and clay. The lower rooms, at least, which were rather like compartments, appear to have been devoted chiefly to the storage of foodstuffs in pithoi set upon the floors. On the palace’s southwestern perimeter was an entrance (Figs. 1.16, lowest left, 2.8) leading east, up the precipitous slope, perhaps to the level of where the Neopalatial central court was to be formalized at a later point.

49

From that southwestern entrance the building’s west facade extended north, up the hill slope, to the main entrance into the palace, introduced by a portico with a single large column, approached by a raised walkway leading down through the Theatral Area from the northwest (Figs. 1.15:b, 1.17, 1.18). The west facade there was built of carefully cut poros limestone blocks set upon a projecting socle (Figs. 2.9–2.11). It supported an upper facade wall, no doubt pierced by occasional windows, made of a timber framework filled with rubble, all stabilized upon the ashlar (orthostat) course. The framework was attached by means of dowels set into mortises cut into the tops of the blocks not far back from the front edge of the wall (see 4.37, below, for the wall type). The north–south line of the same early facade continued farther up the slope, north of the entrance with its portico, where the second great section of the first palace was built (Fig. 1.17, left), that uncovered by Luigi Pernier.18 The facade technique was similar, but its execution suggests greater expertise with stone working on the part of the masons. The preserved northern end of the facade wall (Fig. 2.11), where the bedrock of the hill slopes up, is particularly important, for it has two courses, the second one most likely added, and neatly so, in order to elevate the vulnerable upper wall, mainly made of rubble and clay, above runoff rainwater. According to the present excavators of the site, this may be a unique point in the first palace where ashlar masonry was actually coursed,19

Figure 2.9. Phaistos, view south along the face of the northern section of the Protopalatial western facade. Photo J.W. Shaw.

50

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 2.10. Phaistos, first palace, top of northern facade line on the west, looking south. Note mortises. Photo J.W. Shaw.

Figure 2.11. Phaistos, northern end of orthostat wall of the first palace, looking northeast. Note the two ashlar courses. Photo J.W. Shaw.

a situation similar to that at Protopalatial Malia where the technique was known but rarely used.20 This later, northern part of the first palace appears much neater in plan (Fig. 1.17) than its southern counterpart (Fig. 1.16, lower left) with thinner walls (perhaps suggesting that it had a lower superstructure than that to the south). But its interior, a warren of activity areas, was made up of small compartments, in stark contrast to the ample storage spaces of the later Neopalatial building just to their east, which reflect the use of a massive timber superstructure developed during the Neopalatial era.21 We are extremely fortunate that the later, “new” palace was positioned to the east of the earlier one, providing a further glimpse into the past. One must also note, however, that at least half of the “west wing” of the early palace was covered up by later Neopalatial construction (Fig. 1.16). The

excavators made soundings at a few points, as below the light-well (69, east) of the Neopalatial propylon, where a Protopalatial storeroom (XXXIV) appeared, with its three adjoining compartmentlike spaces that are small, and similar to the southernmost storerooms mentioned above, due to the lack of sufficient vertical timber support during the period they were built. Immediately southwest of these storerooms another room, a fancy lustral basin equipped with a gypsum parapet, was found below Neopalatial Room 70. It, however, was transitional between the first and second palaces and is discussed elsewhere.22 One does wonder what other features may still be buried, unknown, below the second palace. For instance, there would seem to be sufficient room left unexplored to the west, south, and perhaps east of the lustral basin just mentioned, for a Minoan hall,23 as hall and lustral basin are usually found

PROTOPALATIAL BEGINNINGS AND EARLY TRADITIONS

51

together.24 Also, we can address here the question of predecessors of the first palace at Phaistos, for there is distinct EM III activity in the area.25 It seems to me that the area being discussed below and south of the second palace Propylon, and near where the most convenient entrances were to be for the two later Phaistian palace buildings, would be a logical site for any Prepalatial predecessor. Although it may never be searched for and explored, for obvious reasons, we can also wonder why the southwestern part of the first palace, described above, was the first to be constructed on the lower, southern slope, rather than farther to the north, an area that certainly was, to judge from the later entrances, the more convenient spot. Perhaps such a predecessor to the earliest Phaistian palace that we know still lies just west of the court that had already served as a gathering point for groups for generations.26

2.3. Malia

Figure 2.12. Malia, plan of early building east of Chrysolakkos. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 4.15.

Figure 2.13. Malia, plan of burial enclosure at Chrysolakkos. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 4.14.

During the Protopalatial Period (MM I–II) and somewhat before, there was considerable architectural activity at Malia, especially in areas such as Chrysolakkos (Figs. 2.12, 2.13), the Crypte Hypostyle (Figs. 2.14–2.16), and Quartier Mu (Figs. 1.38–1.40), all referred to here in this chapter. These three areas serve as exemplars for the architecture of the MM I–IIB periods. Along with other “civic” centers, they were either deserted or hardly used after MM II, and their relatively wellpreserved remains thus help us understand more about local architectural styles during that earlier period. Also, when seen on a plan of the Malia site during the Protopalatial period (Fig. 1.10) they represent an amazing array of organized civic functions, more than we see at any other Cretan site.

52

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

After the MM II destruction event, the MM II Crypte Hypostyle remained largely unused but the Malia palace was rebuilt, first in an apparently half-hearted way during MM III and later in LM IA when the Protopalatial remains were often almost completely covered over by new construction.27 The northwestern corner of the first palace (Figs. 2.17, 2.18), with storage areas, workrooms, and at least one court, however, was not built over—it may have become an open garden area that could be enjoyed by those looking out from the Minoan hall of the Residential Quarters. Other remains of the first palace were identified by the early French excavators and, since 1965, by means of a series of soundings made under the direction of Pelon throughout the palace area. The Protopalatial features discovered were either incorporated into the visible Neopalatial building or were simply buried below it. Of the latter, in the northwestern area (Fig. 2.18), excavator Fernand Chapouthier found on an early floor two elaborate swords, one with an acrobat in repoussé upon its pommel.28 Further excavation by Pelon in the same area revealed a western entrance into the Protopalatial building through a portico with two columns (Fig. 2.18), leading to a large, heavily plastered storeroom (Fig. 2.19:a–c) with at least two long, raised flat platforms of the type upon which large

and small pots are known to have been set (as in Fig. 1.40).29 Alongside each platform were vases set into the floor, presumably to catch liquids such as wine and oil spilled during transfers. Some distance away was found a large EM III white-anddark teapot, set into a slab enclosure (Fig. 2.20:a) and interpreted by Pelon as a foundation deposit.30 Also of Protopalatial construction were two more storage areas, both incorporated and reused in the second palace. The first are the northern rooms (Fig. 2.17, top right, Rooms XXVII 1–6) in the North Court, on one’s left upon entering the second palace through its northeastern entrance.31 The second is a series of seven long parallel storerooms (Rooms XI 1–7; Figs. 1.25:a, b, 2.17) that line the eastern side of the Central Court. They are of the “platform” type with catch-basins, similar to those found below the North Wing, mentioned above.32 This storeroom type appears to be largely confined to Protopalatial Malia, where it is known in both Quartier Mu (Fig. 1.40) and the Crypte Hypostyle (Fig. 2.15), as well as in the Dessenne storage area southeast of the Palace.33 It was largely discontinued after MM II, being replaced by a variety of storerooms, especially the long, narrow ones where pithoi were sometimes set on rows of slabs.34 The contents of the Malia storerooms provided sustenance. The thick clay plastering on their wall

Figure 2.14. Malia, plan of the “Agora” area. The Portique Coudé is interpreted here as facing east, toward the main Agora court. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 6.5.

PROTOPALATIAL BEGINNINGS AND EARLY TRADITIONS

53

* Puits de lumière

N

Figure 2.15. Malia, plan of the Crypte Hypostyle. After Schmid 2006, fig. 12.

Figure 2.16. Malia, view eastward into the Crypte Hypostyle. Note exterior light-well space on far left. Photo J.W. Shaw.

surfaces is quite typical of this period, the earlier tradition of the same technique being ubiquitous in the EM II remains at nearby Vasiliki (Figs. 2.21, 2.22) and at contemporary Myrtos Phournou Koriphi (Fig. 2.23). In the Mesara a similar technique was used by the builders of the southwestern MM II wing of the Phaistos palace, although there the lower walls were proportionately thicker (Fig. 1.16, lower left) since they were designed to support the weight of three stories, including ceilings and a roof. Another example at Malia of incorporation of the Protopalatial within the Neopalatial is to be seen in Area I 1 in the West Wing (Figs. 2.24,

2.25). There, in a space about 12 m east–west and 6 m north–south, is a series of some eight almostparallel east–west walls, often set close together. The walls were usually made of hardened clay, but mudbrick was used as well. A few walls, perhaps formed of clay that never hardened, are represented only by the krepidoma, or socle of small stones (b in Fig. 2.24). Almost the entire space of I 1 is occupied by walls, except for a rectangular gap (d in Fig. 2.24) in the center, an opening (“ouverture”) within the mass (center, right), and a narrow gap between two walls (Fig. 2.24, at a) within which the first excavators recovered a deposit of EM vases, including a large teapot (Fig. 2.20:b) of EM II

54

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

XXVII

N

Figure 2.17. Malia palace, with hatched Protopalatial areas and black Prepalatial areas. After McEnroe 2010, fig. 5.9.

Figure 2.18. Malia, northwestern area of Protopalatial palace, showing storerooms (a–c), corridor (d–d’), and court (p). Pelon 1990, fig. 9. Light colored walls are Neopalatial. © École française d’Athènes.

Vasiliki ware,35 which provides some assurance that at least some of the walls are of Prepalatial date. That view is reinforced by the discovery in the lower part of Wall 2 (north) of a series of chases left by horizontal timbers set within a reddish clay, a technique common at EM II Vasiliki and otherwise unknown in the Malia palace.36 The complex has been extensively described by Pelon.37 One approach to understanding this curious Malia phenomenon, perhaps unique, is to attempt to place the walls in sequence, as in Figure 2.24.38 There the walls are numbered in what I believe to be in the order of their construction. The key to understanding the wall arrangement is the mudbrick wall (1), which is in the form of a rectangle with its western end either never built or, more likely, destroyed by time. Next to or near the interior of this were gradually added other walls (2) and, later, still more (3, 4). The final walls (5) may have been added during the Neopalatial period because they conform to the outlines of the storerooms of that date in

the surrounding area.39 In this scenario the original rectangular space outlined by the mudbrick wall, about 4 m north–south by 11 m east–west (interior), was gradually almost filled with parallel walls. Perhaps the interior walls (2–4) were added as an upper wooden structure deteriorated. Presumably the walls continued up to the floor of the first story, or even beyond, at least during the Neopalatial period, when the original room had gone out of use, with only a simple mass of construction, with a gap in its center, remaining. But why didn’t the people using the structure simply fill in the room with packed earth rather than with walls? The answer probably is that they still wanted to enter the space to gain access to what was stored there (heirlooms, arms, ritual equipment?), items perhaps kept in the covered, cave-like space (c) between walls 2 and 3 on the east. The original excavators might have agreed with this, for they suggested the possibility of wooden stairs, leading up from the central gap, set against wall 4 (at e).40

PROTOPALATIAL BEGINNINGS AND EARLY TRADITIONS

55

a

b

c Figure 2.19. Malia: (a) restored Protopalatial storage area Beta below northwestern part of second palace (Pelon 1983, fig. 18; © École française d’Athènes); (b) MM IB/II area of Protopalatial storeroom Beta (center) below Residential Quarters in the North Wing of the palace (modified from Pelon 1983, fig. 9); (c) impressions of beam ends in plaster floor of eastern room in Fig. 2.19:b, just east of a later palace wall (Pelon 1993, fig. 13; © École française d’Athènes).

56

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

a

b

Figure 2.21. Vasiliki plan. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 3.5.

Figure 2.20. Malia, two possible foundation deposits: (a) Patrikies teapot found in a slab enclosure in northwestern area; (b) Vasiliki-style ware teapot and a cup, part of a possible foundation deposit found in cleft “a” in Figure 2.24. Chapouthier and Charbonneaux 1928, pl. xxv:4, and Pelon 1986, figs. 6, 7; © École française d’Athènes.

Figure 2.22. EM II Vasiliki, northern elevation of southwestern entrance into Red House; cf. Figure 2.21, Room 16. Drawing J.W. Shaw.

Figure 2.23. Myrtos Phournou Koriphi plan. After McEnroe 2010, fig. 3.2, based on foldout plan opposite p. 11 in Warren 1972.

PROTOPALATIAL BEGINNINGS AND EARLY TRADITIONS

57

Figure 2.24. Malia, plan of Protopalatial Area I 1 included within the later West Wing of the second palace. Drawing J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco, with general outline based on Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, fig. 18 and plan 16.

Figure 2.25. Malia, view looking east at Area I 1. Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, pl. 159:2. © École française d’Athènes.

This brings one to imagine one room above another in a single building without stairs, certainly an odd form for a structure. But then we might think of towers with their upper levels reachable by means of either stairs or ladders. Could this enigmatic Minoan structure at Malia actually be the base for such a tower? If so, then it could be compared to the so-called early (EM III– MM I) Keep at Knossos (Fig. 2.6), a much more

substantial building, roughly 15 m2, completely isolated in construction according to Evans,41 who considered it a possible base for a tower.42 Both structures could have provided a point of observation, most likely defensive, for the inhabitants to view the surrounding countryside, including the northern approaches by sea at Malia. What appears at first to be just a room within the palace, then, may actually have been a small,

58

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

freestanding building in the Prepalatial period. This possibility is also suggested by the fact that its original outline on the north, south, and east is complete, not being joined to another wall. The Protopalatial building was later enclosed carefully from the outside, like a chrysalis, by walls numbered 5 in Figure 2.24. The building was strengthened at an early stage by the walls numbered 2. Wall 3 was then added, for some unknown reason with a gap left between it (for the masons to create a face?) and Wall 2 to its south. At the same time the hidden eastern space (c) may have been added.43 If the building served as a tower to protect the Malia community, and if it served well, one can understand that it was treated with deference, rather than simply being torn down. Assuming that suggestion is realistic, then the building’s orientation, although slightly tilted down to the southeast, may have played a role in setting the palace alignment.44 Its orientation may well have been affected by this now almost invisible rectangular structure within the West Wing. Another of the most interesting early areas within the Malia palace, studied in detail by Pelon and others, lies below the floor of the so-called “Hypostyle Hall” (IX 1, 2).45 The Neopalatial hall itself (Fig. 1.48), just north of the Central Court, featured six squared ashlar bases, arranged in two rows, supporting wooden pillars (of the low-block type, for which, see Ch. 4.8.4) reaching up to its ceiling. On the first floor, reached by a broad stairway on the south (Fig. 1.49) was a room, perhaps with columns arranged in a similar manner, which has been identified by Graham as a banquet hall (Fig. 1.41).46 Below, under the Neopalatial groundfloor level, evidence was found to show that earlier rows of Protopalatial wooden pillars (Fig. 2.26), with a similar alignment, had been set there until they were replaced during the Neopalatial period.47 Of particular interest for us here is that below IX, a substantial Prepalatial Building (X) of EM IIB date, running east–west (Fig. 2.26), was found and partially cleared.48 Originally it was at least 15 m long, with more than five rooms and, on the east, what appear to have been closed spaces within an area of rubble masonry. Building X is aligned a few degrees closer to the northeast than the later palaces. Pelon does not believe that it is a domicile, partly because a golden bead and a clay seal were found in association with it.49 Its southern exterior wall is some 10 m from the line of the later Central Court.

The Court itself was sectioned in a shallow sounding on the southeast, where it was found to consist of five layers (Fig. 1.22), the first of red soil and the remainder of white soil, altogether over 0.25 m thick, set above EM IIA architectural remains.50 A MM IA sherd, found just above the lowest, reddish layer, was probably first deposited there after EM IIB or EM III,51 so the earliest court at Malia at this point certainly may have been created during the later Prepalatial period, perhaps placed upon an open area used traditionally for gatherings, possibly coinciding with the structures just discussed in Areas I 1 and below IX 1–2.52

2.4. Observations If we pause here to revisit the beginning of this chapter, we can agree that there were “first palaces” at the three major Minoan sites, although the evidence for them is clearest at Phaistos (Fig. 1.17) and most difficult to discern among the amalgam of walls at Knossos. Malia would no doubt offer more information should soundings continue within the later palace area. Concerning Prepalatial structures preceding the building of the palaces, little can be said about Phaistos, while the Northwest Terrace (Fig. 2.5) and the Keep (Fig. 2.6) are the most suggestive structures at Knossos. At Malia the Mud Brick Building (Figs. 2.24, 2.25 [I 1]), Building X (Fig. 2.26) north of the Central Court, and sections of the Central Court (Fig. 1.22) are realistic candidates for discussion, perhaps conforming to Tomkins’s vision of EM II–MM IB Knossos as “one of a complex of buildings around a Court rather than a single Court building.”53 Still, Whitelaw, in a recent and thorough review of the same spectrum of material, expressed disappointment in the “unprepossessing character of most of the [relevant] architectural remains from the Prepalatial Period.”54 But then, having been charmed by the view of the later palace at Phaistos or amazed by the engineering feat of the Grand Staircase at Knossos, perhaps one may hope for too much to be revealed from the dawn of a long lasting tradition of palace construction. The organization and scale of the Protopalatial town at Malia, as seen in Figures 1.10 and 1.12,

PROTOPALATIAL BEGINNINGS AND EARLY TRADITIONS

59

Figure 2.26. Malia, plan with features found north of the Central Court, including the outlines of the Neopalatial Hypostyle Hall IX, Protopalatial pillar bases (dark, partly preserved), and an independent EM II building (hatched) predating both. Pelon 1993, fig. 3. © École française d’Athènes.

seems quite incredible, with Quartier Mu and its attendant buildings, the Crypte Hypostyle, the palace just discussed, as well as the Magasins Dessenne (the formal rooms of which still remain to be excavated). Contemplating the Malia plan, Sturt Manning reflects that “rather than being already the ruling seats of a dynasty, the palace buildings and spaces appear rather as sanctioned corporate venues created to formalize increasingly large communal ceremonies and events.”55 In his recent book on the architecture of Crete, McEnroe addressed similar questions about the beginning of the palatial era: Today scholars are gradually deconstructing the assumption that there was a single, monolithic event. No two sites shared precisely the same history, and the underlying social processes are likely to have been intricate and multilinear . . . The extraordinary EM III–MM IA buildings at Malia not only embody that complexity, but also encourage one to question the assumption that the first Minoan Palace had to have been built at Knossos. Malia is at least as likely a candidate.56

To me, the generous amount of space between the Malia buildings in Figure 1.10 suggests prior thought and planning. At the same time the way in which the establishments were joined together by formal walkways seems extraordinary. Unfortunately, the nature of their origin—the creative stimuli that brought them together in this manner—remains ambiguous, that is, whether they were brought about through group cooperation,

cooperative effort among an elite, or even executive order by a single ruler. It is also interesting that, although McEnroe is certainly right that the palatial sites differed, similar walkways most likely linked the palaces of Knossos and Phaistos with other local centers.57 Yet the evidence is not as well preserved nor as obvious at those sites as at Malia. At Knossos, for instance, the substantial remains of the web of walkways west and north of the palace are clear in Figure 1.14. What is less clear is whether those walkways linked nodes such as the predecessors of the South House or the Little Palace during the Protopalatial period. Perhaps those nodes remain to be found. At Phaistos the walkways are, as presently known, limited to the Protopalatial West Court (Fig. 1.17) and just north of it. Those of the West Court area were largely covered over and not renewed when the Neopalatial court was raised above it (Fig. 1.4). The walkways’ further extensions at Phaistos now remain unknown, but if, as at Malia, they linked up with nodes beyond, then a major building, CVI/CVII in Figure 2.27, located alongside the present tourist path northwest of the palace, should be considered as a possible node.58 It contains the remains of a long, rectangular room bordered on at least two sides by benches, the longer one extending at least 8.75 m (shown in Fig. 2.27). The room was paved with large gypsum slabs. Together, bench and room seem intended for a substantial group of participants, and they have been

60

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

interpreted by the excavator as part of a civic building.59 The room prompts one to recall Protopalatial benched interior rooms that appear rather commonly at early Malia: Quartier Mu, Room I 2 (Fig 1.38), the building near Chrysolakkos (Fig. 2.12), and the Crypte Hypostyle, northern Rooms 1 and 5 (Fig. 2.15); they appear to have been uncommon in Crete after MM II.60 The custom of walkways continued into the Neo­ palatial period, but it was not as carefully maintained at that time. Moreover, while other Protopalatial buildings at Malia went out of use, the palace area there was nevertheless rebuilt, a possible pattern to be investigated at Knossos and Phaistos. Moreover, from what one can tell, the palace form, in which the building was constructed with a central court (“court-centered”), was apparently to become the preferred, if not the lone, form for a civic structure in a growing Minoan community. This is suggested by the palaces without obvious local predecessors built from scratch after MM II, such as those at Galatas (Fig. 1.6) and Kato Zakros (Fig. 1.7),61 without clear evidence so far of linked satellite centers. From the evidence at hand, the palace form seems to have evolved at a few centers, and then it may have become, in a somewhat different guise, the governing paradigm.

8.7

One key to why the Malia “palace” rather than, for example, the Crypte Hypostyle or Quartier Mu, was rebuilt during the Neopalatial period might be inferred from the approximate size of the Protopalatial storerooms with platforms discovered within them, as shown in Table 2.1. I assume, for the moment, that the storerooms in these Protopalatial buildings were intended to be used for the benefit of those already in or visiting the buildings on occasions that brought groups to the Malia civic center. The arrangement of the storerooms and the varied sizes of pottery vessels found within them (cf. Fig. 1.40 showing an array of the typically smaller vessels within one of the Mu storerooms) 62 does not suggest a bulk storage of materials that accumulated as they might have if they had been brought in as taxes or tribute. If viewed on that basis, storeroom size for both of the main buildings in Quartier Mu is only 72 m2, as compared with 152 m2 for the Crypte Hypostyle. The palace, however, had at least 224 m2 and probably more, for it still remains largely unexcavated. The comparison suggests that the palace was the traditional center for celebration and ritual, and it may have been chosen for rebuilding, perhaps after a period of abandonment, in order to continue its traditional functions, even to absorb those of nearby largely abandoned centers.

5m

Figure 2.27. Phaistos, long Protopalatial benched room CVII near present tourist path to palace. Axonometric view looking northeast. After Levi 1976– 1981, I, plan G.

PROTOPALATIAL BEGINNINGS AND EARLY TRADITIONS

61

Architectural Complex

Storage Area (m2)

Crypte Hypostyle 1–5 (Figs. 2.16, 2.17)

152 total

East Wing storerooms: X 1-1–X 1-7 (Fig. 1.25:a, b)

162

Room Beta in northwestern area (Fig. 2.19)

62

Building A I 5–6, I 7–8

36

Building B V 2–4

36

Protopalatial palace

224 total

Quartier Mu (Figs. 1.37, 1.38)

72 total

Table 2.1. Storage areas of Protopalatial architectural complexes at Malia.

Chapter 2 Endnotes 1. Macdonald 2012, 83. 2. Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 152. 3. See esp. MacGillivray 1994; Macdonald 2005, 41–56; 2012; Macdonald and Knappett 2007. See also related studies by Schoep (2007) and Driessen (2007). 4. For a brief discussion of the marks, see Shaw 2009b, 76–79. 5. Schoep (2007, 224, fig. 5) compares her minimalist version with that of Evans (see Fig. 2.1 here). Perhaps, however, she is referring in her illustration to the MM I rather than the MM II period, by which time more building had taken place (compare with Fig. 2.2). 6. MacGillivray 1994, fig. 2. 7. The neatly cut blocks in the walls in Fig. 2.4, for instance, can be compared with some of those reused from an earlier building (the “Lair Building”) in the southern wall of the Hall of the Double Axes. 8. See also Ch. 3.1. 9. Evans 1921–1935, I, 149, fig. 109. Excavation of the Northwest Terrace by Hood in 1973 dated the wall to EM III (Catling 1973–1974, 34), which would make it one of the earliest Minoan examples of the use of shaped blocks, but not yet fine coursed ashlar. MacGillivray seems unsure, however, and cites MM IA and IB as possibilities suggested by others (1994, 49–51). The wall retains an early building platform that can be compared with one at Kommos, of MM II date, upon which Proto­ palatial Building AA was set (Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, 1–17, 846–847; also Shaw and Shaw 2010). 10. Evans 1921–1935, I, 136–139, figs. 100, 101. Branigan 1992; Hood and Cadogan 2011; Whitelaw 2012, 127. For another possible tower-like building at Malia, see also Ch. 2.3. 11. Momigliano and Wilson 1996. 12. Evans 1921–1935, I, 146, fig. 106; Macdonald 2012, 85. See also Ch. 4.8.2, here on the mono­lithic pillars.

13. Whitelaw 2012. 14. Macdonald 2012, 86. 15. La Rosa 1995, 886–888; 2007, 24, 29. 16. See also Macdonald 2010, 533. 17. Levi 1976–1981, I; Levi and Carinci 1988. 18. Pernier 1935; see also Pernier and Banti 1951. 19. V. La Rosa, pers. comm. Pernier believed that some coursed ashlar walls, e.g., that retaining the western scarp in Room 47 (Fig. 1.4), were Protopalatial. 20. See Ch. 5.2.1. 21. See Ch. 3.4.2. 22. See Ch. 4.6. 23. Of the areas investigated, there are the Proto­ palatial Storerooms XXXIV directly north of the lustral basin, and also Room 25 to the southeast, examined by Pernier and Levi. According to P. Militello, to whom I am indebted for the information, the rest of the storeroom block (rooms 26–37) remains to be investigated below Neopalatial levels. 24. There are, however, some exceptions, for the Northwest Lustral Basin at Knossos (Ch. 4.6) was apparently alone. In Neopalatial Phaistos there are two simple lustral basins in the West Wing, perhaps intended for the gatekeepers’ families (nos. 19 and 21, for which, see Fig. 1.4), but without the usual formal Minoan hall. 25. Benzi 2001; Carinci and La Rosa 2002. See also Todaro 2009. 26. For thoughts on the origin and use of the Central Court, see Ch. 1.2.2.1. 27. For the former: Pelon 2006; Van de Moortel and Darcque 2006; Driessen 2010, 564–565. 28. Chapouthier 1938; Pelon 1982, 1983 (concerning chronology of the swords). 29. Pelon 1983, 2005. 30. Pelon 1986. Recently, excavators who have found entire vessels in unusual positions, as at Malia, have interpreted them as having been left as an offering intended to consecrate a construction. More study of

62

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

variety, positioning, and context is still needed, however, to differentiate between the former and others found in contexts interpreted to represent normal household use, as in a LM III context at Kommos; Shaw 1996, 357 (concerning enclosures), pl. 3.151 (with a tripod cooking pot); Wright and McEnroe 1996, 230. See Boulotis 1982 concerning foundation deposits in general; see also the discussion of Area I 1 at Malia, pp. 53–57). 31. Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 91–94. 32. Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 198–203; Pelon 1989. 33. Unpublished but referred to and illustrated, e.g., in van Effenterre 1980 (197–201, fig. 273) and McEnroe 2010 (53, 63). See also Driessen 2010 (562) and Treuil 1999. 34. Begg 1975. 35. Chapouthier and Charbonneaux 1928, 7, 48–50, pl. 25:3, 4 (thought to be a foundation deposit; Driessen 2007, 84). 36. Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 230, 232, pl. 160 (2); see also Shaw 2009b, 56. Further explication of the area is planned for a second volume on the palace (Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 229 n. 6). 37. Pelon 1966, 1007–1011; Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 229–232, pls. 159–161. 38. Fig. 2.24 is based on the plan published in Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier (1980, fig. 18, plan 16), but with the earliest wall, of mudbrick, being shown as a complete unit, along with the addition of the possible wall sequence. The drawing of the mudbrick wall is based on personal observation and sketches. The return of the mudbrick wall (no. 1) on the east is not shown in the publication. 39. Pelon, however, points out a fine Vasiliki-like (EM II) layer of plaster that characterizes both the interior of the inner compartment (labeled c in Fig. 2.24) and the northern wall of I 1, which suggests that all the walls in I 1 may be early. The same northern wall was built in at least three layers (Shaw 2009b, fig. 69, for a section), a technique I have noticed only in I 1 at the Malia site. 40. Chapouthier and Charbonneaux 1928, 7. 41. Evans 1921–1935, I, 136–139, fig. 101. 42. Evans 1921–1935, I, 138; see also section 2.1 in this chapter. Another possible tower, but a very poorly

preserved one, has been suggested by Y. Spence. It may have been set not far south of the palace (Spence 1990). 43. In plan this space is shown with a normal eastern, north–south wall face (confirmed in Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, pl. 161 [2]), which implies that supporting the original wall, adjoining it on the east, was also the builders’ intention. 44. The orientation of the EM II “Mud Brick Room” may have been set originally by celestial observation, which could explain the somewhat similar orientations, east of true north, of the three earliest palaces: Phaistos: 2°35'38"; Knossos 11°37'18"; and Malia 17°1'48" (Fig. 1.26; Shaw 1973b, 49). 45. Pelon 1991, 726–735; 1993; Hue and Pelon 1992. 46. Graham 1961, 169; 1987, 126; also Ch. 1.5, p. 34. 47. See also Ch. 4.8.4, p. 133. 48. Pelon 1993, 524–536. 49. Pelon 1993, 534. 50. Pelon 1986, 16, fig. 11. 51. Driessen 2007, 85. 52. See also Ch. 1.2.2.1, concerning the development of the palatial courts. 53. Tomkins 2012, 74. 54. Whitelaw 2012, 115. 55. Manning 2008, 111. 56. McEnroe 2010, 43. 57. See Ch. 1.1; see also Warren 1994; Driessen 2009. 58. Levi 1976–1981, I, 602–629, esp. 614–620. 59. Levi 1976–1981, I, 620: “un edificio publico.” 60. For typical Neopalatial benches, see Ch. 4.11. For a Neopalatial benched room, however, see Room 4 at Hagia Triada in Fig. 4.50. 61. Other buildings, such as the palatial buildings of Gournia, Archanes, and Kommos (Fig. 1.9), although somewhat differently arranged, and lacking certain forms found within the generic “palace,” nevertheless correspond to a general palace architectural formula often featuring court, wings, Minoan hall, for example. 62. Specifically, the vessels within I 7 include two amphorae, two pithoid jars, 11 jars, one piriform holemouthed jar, one plateau (type 3) deep cooking tray, one askoid jug, one beaked jug, one jug with cylindrical neck, and five rimmed jar covers (Poursat and Knappett 2005, 250, 287–290, fig. 40, pl. 62:b).

3

Destruction at Knossos and the Rise of a New Architectural Order

In Chapter 1 the later and now most visible Minoan palaces were introduced, along with some examples of their shared characteristics. Chapter 2 included summary evidence for their predecessors, found lying below or alongside them or incorporated within later rebuilding. Next, we turn to the bestpreserved and most complex Minoan architectural remains discovered on Crete, the central East Wing of the Knossos palace. A chief focus of the discussion will be the methodology of using built-in or incorporated pier construction, probably developed at Knossos. This practice, which has hardly been discussed before, is the key to understanding complex Neopalatial construction.

3.1. The East Wing at Knossos: Palatial Construction Explored It is generally agreed that toward the end of MM II a series of strong earthquakes may have

destroyed the first (or old) Minoan palaces. The devastation at Phaistos, however, appears not to have been as severe as elsewhere.1 As shown in Table 1.2, a variety of building initiatives followed there not long afterward. Some effort was made to rebuild the Malia palace, but most of the major building there was to take place in LM IA.2 In terms of scale, complexity, and innovation, however, the architects at Knossos appear to have played the leading role in the rebuilding effort. Knossos remains the most extensive and bestpreserved Minoan palace. Claims that it has been over-restored have been exaggerated, especially when one considers that parts of the upper floors were actually discovered almost in their original positions and were restored to those positions. This is particularly true in the central part of the East Wing, where much of two and parts of a third story were preserved intact within the stratification that had accumulated. If the remains had not been conserved with enormous care, effort, and expense, they would now simply be a pile of rubble.

64

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Concerning that part of the palace, McEnroe believes, at least partially on the basis of ceramic evidence found below the area’s latest floors, that “most of the Residential Quarters had been rebuilt in LM II–IIIA.”3 However, although the ceramic material should certainly be taken into consideration, it cannot always be taken at face value, given that the renewal of floors, as is also the case with painted wall decoration, is a recurrent process leading to the loss of evidence of earlier use. Maintaining an absolute floor level can be important for a number of reasons, for instance, so as not to cover features like thresholds. If I am correct, the basic frameworks in the Residential Quarters should date to MM III, as both Evans and Macdonald have proposed.4 One fact supporting this view is the consistent use of mortising there on pier and pillar bases, as seen in Figures 3.1, 3.2, and, below, in Figure 3.16:a, b. Moreover, there is not extensive evidence of materials reused for patching. An earlier date is also suggested by the discovery of architectural innovations such as reused pier-and-door partition bases and a stylobate slab in MM II–IIIA levels below the Residential Quarters,5 where one could interpret them as early and, perhaps, experimental forms later imitated on the same site. Finally, it would be difficult to argue that the advanced pier and pillar construction used in the Residential Quarters, considered below in Chapter 4, was patterned after innovations already made in outlying Neopalatial sites such as Tylissos, or that the LM I Myrtos Pyrgos stairway, usually thought to emulate the Grand Staircase at Knossos,6 actually provided the model for what was installed later, in LM II–IIIA, at Knossos. Furthermore, there are definite contrasts between architectural techniques used in the (MM III) Residential Quarters at Knossos and the LM III architectural “style” at Hagia Triada. One can cite, for instance, the use at Hagia Triada of a horizontal wooden beam above the first low ashlar base course. This occurs in Buildings H (the Shrine) and P (the “megaron”).7 There is also the occasional use of rectangular (rather than square) mortises,8 pier-and-door partitions done in low relief,9 and pillars combining layers of horizontal slabs in the Stoa (“Mercato”).10 None of these techniques is visible in the East Wing at Knossos. Nor were gypsum dado slabs used at LM III Hagia Triada, whereas they were ubiquitous at Neopalatial

Knossos and, for that matter, at Neopalatial Hagia Triada itself. That same East Wing at Knossos (Figs. 3.1– 3.4), already partly discussed here in Chapter 1, was rebuilt in MM III, during a time when some features of Elite Style had either already been introduced or were still in the process of development. As discussed further in Chapter 4, the “edges” of our knowledge concerning the beginnings of those forms are only now in the process of being defined as field work continues in old and newly discovered MM II–III contexts.

3.1.1. The Grand Staircase In order to reach the Residential Quarters from the Central Court, one entered what Evans aptly titled the “Grand Staircase” (Figs. 3.5–3.7). It occupied the northwestern part of the great cutting made into the Knossos Neolithic tell in MM II. As seen in Christian Doll’s architectural elevation (Fig. 3.5), somewhat more than four flights of stairs, about 10 m high, were preserved. It fell to Evans, Doll, Duncan Mackenzie, and Evans’s best workmen to undertake the truly Herculean challenge of understanding what they had discovered, first of all, and then finding ways to support and straighten walls and steps that had sagged or become otherwise displaced where wooden columns, piers, and horizontal beams had disintegrated.11 One entered the stairway, each flight about 2 m wide, via steps coming down from the Central Court to the fourth landing of the stairs, which continued up to at least two more landings. There were at least one or two more floors above what we see in Figure 3.5. Those may well have been of lighter construction, with mudbrick walls and wooden framework, rather than the heavy beams, as thick as 0.50–0.70 m, sometimes set side-to-side, that were used below. On its west the stairway was set against thick retaining walls bordering the Central Court, with a wall that measured 2 m in thickness on the north. The eastern flights were open, with projecting corniced balustrades set on coursed ashlar supported by heavy wooden architraves stepping down. The architraves in turn were supported by columns, the bases of which were stabilized by round, framed sockets cut into the cornice slabs.12

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

Figure 3.1. Knossos palace, ground-floor plan of the Residential Quarters, East Wing. Evans 1921–1935, III, plan E.

65

66

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 3.2. Knossos palace, firstfloor plan of the Residential Quarters, East Wing. Evans 1921–1935, III, plan F.

Figure 3.3. Knossos palace, plan of the Residential Quarters. Hood and Taylour 1981, fold-out plan.

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

67

Figure 3.4. Knossos palace, portion of east–west section of the Residential Quarters in East Wing. After Hood and Taylour 1981.

Figure 3.5. Knossos palace, restored western elevation of the Grand Staircase in the East Wing. Evans 1921–1935, III, plan D. © British School of Archaeology at Athens.

68

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Doll thought the carbonized remains of the columns indicated evenly rounded rather than the down-tapering shafts actually restored in concrete by Evans.13 Fyfe’s beautiful watercolor (Fig. 3.7) of the second and part of the first flight of the staircase, already referred to above, clearly shows the construction of its spine or newel wall, supported by a massive wooden and ashlar pier at its northern end and by a combination of column-with-ashlarblock pier arrangement at its southern turn. Tied into the eastern framework of the staircase was a light-well with colonnaded porticoes on the north, east, and south. From them, at each floor level, corridors led eastward into apartments of the Residential Quarters and southward to a subsidiary service stairway, leading in turn to other apartments, the lower one of which Evans dubbed the “Queen’s Megaron” (Spaces 101, 102). The resulting generous use of space and materials in the area of the Grand Staircase, combined with the daring support of such superincumbent masses of ashlar masonry, amazes the visitor even today, and

one can easily imagine the even more dramatic impression that this ceremonial staircase made on any ancient visitor allowed to enter. The suggestive symbolism of the columns, which were often included in Minoan depictions of buildings, especially in wall paintings, combined with the wall decoration of figure-of-eight shields, must have added to the wonder of the experience.14

3.1.2. Wooden Structural Features at Knossos Perhaps the most novel aspect of the Residential Quarters construction is its use of wood. The wooden members were massive both in size and length, with many measuring over 0.30 m in section, in some cases at least twice that size when two or more pieces were used together.15 Their very size was calculated by the builders less for show than by necessity, for this portion of the palace was set into a huge cutting excavated in MM II, adjoining the

Figure 3.7. Knossos palace, watercolor showing restored elements of the Grand Staircase, looking northeast at second landing (right) and third landing (left) at first-floor level. Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 237. Figure 3.6. Knossos palace, view looking southwest at the restored ground level balustrade of the Grand Staircase. Photo J.W. Shaw.

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

eastern side of the Central Court. Within this generous space were set two stories of rooms, courts, and corridors that in turn supported at least one and perhaps two more stories above, an immense weight requiring special means for support both vertically and laterally, including allowance for the continuing threat of earthquake activity. The larger and thus architecturally more adventurous spaces (88 and 89 in Figs. 3.3, 3.4)16 were built on the north. To support both them and the floors above a massive framework of intersecting, squared and rounded beams (Figs. 3.8–3.10) was constructed. Most likely parts of the framework

Figure 3.8. Knossos palace, Residential Quarters, perspective, looking west in the Hall of the Double Axes. Evans 1921–1935, III, plan G.

69

were first set in place and then the gaps between beams were filled with masonry, sometimes with blocks reused from earlier structures (Fig. 3.11:a, b), perhaps from those destroyed by an earlier MM II earthquake.17 Vertical beams were keyed into horizontal ones at intervals of a meter or so, with their lower ends resting on solid blocks about 0.30 m above floor level. A similar method was used in the series of east–west corridors bordering the northern side of the complex (Fig. 3.12). The overall vertical layout can be seen from the north in Figure 3.11:a, as partly restored.

70

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

a

b Figure 3.9. Detail of Fig. 3.8 showing wooden rafters supporting floor in the Hall of the Double Axes, Knossos palace.

Figure 3.10. Knossos palace, isometric view of timber construction in the Grand Staircase, made in 1905 by C.C.T. Doll. Kienzle 1998, pl. 101.

Figure 3.11. Knossos palace, southern wall of the Hall of the Double Axes: (a) view after preliminary restoration, showing ashlar blocks (center, right) in reuse (Evans 1921–1935, III, fig. 221); (b) detail of reused ashlar blocks shown in (a), but before preliminary restoration (Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 251).

The horizontal timbers in this linked system were set at two levels (Fig. 3.13). The bottom of the first, lower row, set at about 1.80 m above floor level, was also at lintel level for all the entrances into the rooms, as well as the lower parts of the transoms for the pier-and-door partitions in Spaces 90b–90c, or, more formally, the Hall of the Double Axes, named after the double axes carved on some of the ashlar masonry in the western light-well there (center background, Fig. 3.8). Those transoms, like the doors below them, could probably be opened or shut depending on the season and the residents’ requirements.18 The second level of horizontal timbers of the support system was set higher, its base at about 3.20 m above floor level. It was also extended

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

to serve as the architrave above the columns in the porticoes, but its chief function there was to hold up the shorter east–west ceiling beams, which were round, unsquared timbers about 0.30 m in diameter, as can be seen in architect Fyfe’s drawing (Fig. 3.14). Upon these was set the actual flooring, composed of layers of clay and soil about 0.30 m thick, probably watered and tamped down.19 Upon this, in turn, were set cut gypsum flooring slabs, about 0.05–0.07 m thick, as well as gypsum partition bases, some actually found by Evans in situ in their relevant positions as seen in plan, although somewhat lower because of subsidence. With at least some of the second floor intact, the Residential Quarters at Knossos provides us with much information about how the plan of a first floor may relate to a ground floor. On the one hand, enough remained of the plan of the Hall of the Double Axes to show that the walls and pierand-door partition bases had the same general arrangement. On the other hand, even though the Queen’s Megaron area (Spaces 99–102) was similar, we know that rooms to the west of there, Space 98, for example, differed. There intact pier-anddoor partition bases were found, indicating a corridor that did not occur on the ground floor (cf. Figs. 3.1 and 3.2, by Doll, which are among the two most precious documents recording evidence for Minoan architectural technique).

71

Figure 3.12. Knossos palace, East–West Corridor looking west. Note large, possibly reused ashlar blocks, chases for horizontal timber beams, and partly destroyed dado. Photo J.W. Shaw.

, A South

A North restored column

plaster

restored parapet

plaster

dowels gypsum floor slabs

ashlar pier base earth floor

dowels

Figure 3.13. Knossos palace, north–south section of Hall of the Double Axes, looking west, showing restored floor structure. Drawing J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco, after sketch drawing by T. Fyfe, shown in Fig. 3.14 below.

lintel

partly plastered restored column

dowels

ashlar pier base

0

drain

1

2

painted frieze gypsum dado gypsum floor slabs

stylobate

ashlar blocks

3

4m

4.10 - 4.15

plaster

plaster

gypsum dado

72

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 3.14. Knossos palace, Hall of the Double Axes, north–south sketch elevation looking west, showing positioning of gypsum pier-and-door partition bases and floor slabs on first floor, carbonized east–west rafters and, below, burned remains of wooden pier-and-door partitions on ground floor. The three lines of writing, from the top to the bottom, read: “A is higher than B” (top); “Floor level in Megaron further west” (middle); “Elevations of furthest east stone” (bottom). Drawing T. Fyfe, Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford, Knossos Archive, sketchbook B 1901, 67.

Doll was also well aware of the novel and calculated use by the Minoans of pier and pillar structures, imbedded within walls at strategic points, beginning on one floor (usually the ground floor) and continuing up to, and often beyond, the next. These were a major part of the Minoan Neopalatial support system and so useful that they were later adopted by the Mycenaeans in their elite architecture.20 These piers have similar forms (see Ch. 4) and occur at differing but still predictable places. They can be identified easily in Figures 3.1 and 3.2 of the Residential Quarters by the dark crosshatched areas. Dowel holes shown in the two plans can often be identified as well. Most of these pillars begin with a squared ashlar base of gypsum into

the top of which had been cut dowel holes, usually two for each exposed block side (see also Ch. 4). A rectangular wooden base framework was usually keyed to the top of that block, and to that numerous vertical wooden members were fastened, often with three to each exposed block side, set around a clay/rubble core. Exposed sides were often plastered and painted. A similar pattern of vertical beams set on a shaped stone base, separated by plastered clay, can be seen in most Elite Style doorjambs (Fig. 3.1, center right). How did such piers, when set on the ground floor, terminate as they approached the floor level of the first story? It seems reasonable (although it still remains to be proven, since nothing remains of the wood structure) that a horizontal timber frame, just like that immediately above the lower base block (Fig. 3.13, lower left), completed the pier. The frame bound together, with mortises, the pier’s vertical timbers. If support was needed at the same point for a first floor, then a similar structure, also beginning with a mortised ashlar base, was set on the line of the first, ground-story pier. As shown by the evidence, especially that at Knossos, the first-floor base was not mortised to the upper end of the ground-floor pier.21 It remains unknown whether the top pier structure rested directly upon the pier extending up from the lower floor. It is possible that the two relevant ends, of wood and stone, respectively, were separated by earthen floor material, perhaps to give the piers adequate structural flexibility to offset earthquake shock. In this respect, the inhabitants of Akrotiri on Thera, who were most likely subjected often to seismic disturbances, adopted many imported Minoan techniques into their construction; what we see at well-preserved Akrotiri may well show us what was done on Crete. For instance, in their stairway construction, they set ashlar pier support blocks into clay and rubble walls, even when there was a similar pier structure immediately below, continuing up from ground level (Fig. 3.15, the main staircase in the West House).22

3.1.2.1. Pier Structures A few examples of pairs of such piers, a group studied here together for the first time,23 have been selected for Figure 3.16:a, b; others can be examined in Table 3.1. They occur, predictably, at points

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

73

such as wall ends, corners, and where porticoes, always risky constructions, end at their respective walls. This technique might be christened “the extended pier technique.” In Figure 3.16:a, for instance, a gypsum base (at arrow) is set into the wall at the point that the architrave beams of the colonnade cross over to rest upon it.24 In the elevation diagram, the artist indicates the large chase, or gap, above that base where the vertical wooden beams of the remainder of the pier had simply vanished. The construction on the first floor was similar, associated with another architrave beam on the level above the Hall of the Colonnades (Space 89). The construction illustrated in Figure 3.16:b occurs north of the western light-well of the Hall of the Double Axes (Space 90a). As described by Evans, the wall pier was set adjacent to a window that collapsed when its heavy framing and the adjacent wooden pier disintegrated.25

3.1.2.2. Stairway Structures Figure 3.16:c illustrates a common stairway type, the “Service Staircase” south of the Hall of the Colonnades (Space 95), of which Doll carefully drew two of the gypsum landing blocks. As shown in his penciled sketches, they were cut with a narrow shelf intended to accommodate the first slab of the steps leading up. To be noted is the method of mortising: at the entrance on the ground floor the base has three mortises (as a corner block) and, on the first floor above, two mortises, an arrangement that is the more typical positioning at the end of a stairway spine wall.26 Figure 3.16:d in the same illustration depicts a special Elite Style stairway arrangement. At the core of the structure is a single dividing spine wall. At the northern end of that wall was set an ashlar pier base, the type sometimes helpfully labeled by Doll as a “landing block,” which can occur at each turn of the stairway. In this example from the Grand Staircase, to be discussed further below, however, the usual wooden pier construction surmounting a stone pier base was replaced by a column set into a shallow socket carved into a gypsum parapet slab. The slab rested on the usual wooden casing keyed to the single ashlar pier block below. Another addition, unique to Knossos and probably invented there, were large blocks cut with a wide vertical socket (Fig. 3.16:d, isometric

Figure 3.15. Main staircase, West House, Akrotiri, Thera. Restored isometric drawing, looking southwest, showing method of construction. Note positioning of beams and blocks at northern end of central spine wall. Palyvou 2005, fig. 191.

on the upper right) that retained a long mast-like wooden beam to ensure structural continuity.27 In the Residential Quarters, the only pillar that is freestanding is in the Eastern Portico (Space 91) shown in Figure 3.8, left. Since its base block was mortised, with one mortise in each corner, the tenons set in them must have held a wooden framework supporting vertical timbers, like all the piers in the same area. The completed restoration in Figure 3.17 suggesting coursed ashlar continuing up to the first-floor level is, therefore, incorrect, since mortises invariably denote a transition from stone to wooden construction.28 The same is true of the corner pier (between Spaces 90 and 91) of the pierand-door partition that, as also shown in Figure 3.8, in the shadowy background behind the pillar just discussed, had a series of dowel holes next to its two more exposed sides. It, too, was restored as completely ashlar, whereas it was, in fact, once surmounted by the usual wooden construction.

74

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

a

b

c

axonometric

d

Figure 3.16. Knossos palace, four corresponding pairs of mortised pier block bases from a lower floor and the floor above it in the Residential Quarters: (a) Grand Staircase area, bases set into northern wall of corridors; (b) Hall of the Double Axes, western light-well far upper left, windowsills (upper left) with piers (lower left) at both levels; (c) service stairway south of the Hall of the Colonnades, with landing blocks (newels) at both levels; (d) mortised ashlar bases set at southern and northern ends of “spine” wall of Grand Staircase. Drawings G. Bianco, after Evans 1921–1935, III, plans E and F, also after pencil drawings of blocks in folders in the Ashmolean Museum, Evans Collection (a, left, Folder 8; b, Folder 13; c, Folders 23, 24a, and 24b). View in d is taken from Evans 1921– 1935, I, fig. 237 (our Fig. 3.7); Block 4 is from Doll’s Folder 4; Block 4B is after Evans 1921–1935, III, fig. 336 (our Fig. 4.48). Details of piers are shown more clearly in the original Macmillan publication than in the reprinted edition. Matching Doll’s detailed drawings of bases with his own plans can be difficult, as it was for us with blocks 3 and 4B. Block 4B in the lowest row of drawings may actually be from the landing above Block 4.

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

75

Area Number and Name in Hood and Taylour (1981)

Description and Comments

Source(s)

1

No. 85, Lobby of the Wooden Posts

Pier bases: lower, ground-floor base within parapet support; first-floor pier base a worn gypsum block set on slab floor above remains of ceiling beams; mortises not noted by excavators

Fyfe Sketch Book 1901, 58, AM; Mackenzie notebook for 3 March 1902; Evans 1921–1935, I, 360, fig. 261; III, figs. 183, 185, plans E, F (Doll)1

2

Nos. 88, 89, Lower East–West Corridor at Grand Staircase

Pier bases in north wall of corridor; Doll elevation shows vertical chase in ground floor for timber/rubble/plaster pier construction; three mortises along south side of each pier base(?); Fig. 3.16:a

Doll Folder 8, 1908, AM2; Evans 1921–1935, III, plan E (Doll)

3

No. 87, Middle East–West Corridor north side

Pier base (five mortises along three exposed sides, thus 13 total considering overlaps) and a wall corner (six mortises along three exposed edges) on first floor

Doll Folder 9, plan, 1908, AM; Evans 1921–1935, III, plan E (Doll)

4

No. 88, Grand Staircase at north end of spine wall

Single pier base, landing block, first floor only; mortise at each of its four corners; Figs. 3.16:d; large base with a vertical cutting in its southern face positioned above (Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 237, by Fyfe; for a similar base, set higher up, see also Evans 1921–1935, III, fig. 336)

Doll Folder 4, Block B, 1908, AM; Evans 1921–1935, III, plan F (Doll)

5

No. 90/87, North end of portico adjacent to light-well of Hall of Double Axes

Ground-floor block: pier block and adjacent windowsill combining horizontal and vertical timbers; pier base with a mortise on three of its four corners, one mortise at center; first floor: smaller block with at least one mortise at each corner, restored incorrectly at Knossos as stacked ashlar; detailed measurements of sill in Doll Folder 13; see also Fig. 3.16:b

Doll Folder 13, undated, AM; Evans 1921–1935, I, figs. 253a, b; III, plans E, F (Doll); G (Fyfe perspective); Tsakanika-Theochari 2006, II, 90; Shaw 2009b, fig. 206, for sill3

6

No. 90, South end of portico of no. 5 (above)

Ground-floor block with one mortise in each of four corners; first-floor block not recorded; Fig. 3.1 (faint)

Evans 1900–1901, 116, fig. 36 (drawing by T. Fyfe); Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 250 for block and chase above; III, plan E (Doll); Brown 1983, fig. 57, at left center below modern wall

7

No. 90, Southeast corner of the Hall of the Double Axes, where two lines of pier-and-doorpartition bases meet

Ground-floor block not shown in Evans 1921–1935, III, plan E (Doll), but visible in photograph (see Brown) and Evans 1900–1901, 116, with T. Fyfe’s drawing. First-floor block known only from a perspective (Evans 1921–1935, III, plan G, center left [Fig. 3.8]), probably by Fyfe, showing a mortise in each corner

Evans 1921–1935, III, plan G; Brown 1983, fig. 57, left foreground

8

No. 90, South-southeast corner of the Hall of the Double Axes

Freestanding pillar base on ground floor incorporated into corner of pier-and-door-partition base series; three mortises each along east and south sides; interior northwest corner removed by builders; upper first floor block missing, probably lost; Fig. 3.8

Doll Folder 11, undated, AM; Evans 1921–1935, III, plans E, F (Doll), G (Fyfe)

9

No. 91, Southeast corner, portico of the Hall of Double Axes

Freestanding pillar base at corner of east portico; single mortise at each of four corners; upper first floor block (probably similar) missing; pillar misrestored as stacked ashlar; Fig. 3.8

Doll Folder 11, undated, AM; Evans 1921–1935, III, plans E, F (Doll), G (Fyfe); III, fig. 219 (see Fig. 3.17); Tsakanika-Theochari 2006, vol. II, 92

10

No. 90, Hall of the Double Axes

Pier-and-door-partition bases, Hall of the Double Axes, north–south row; first-floor bases found “suspended” above similarly set bases in situ on the ground floor; four of the five first floor bases recovered; Figs. 3.2, 3.14, 3.19.

Fyfe Sketch Book B 1901, 67 (plan, elevation); Doll Folder 11, undated, AM; Evans 1921–1935, III, plans E, F (Doll), G (Fyfe); Brown 1983, pls. 57–59a

11

No. 95, Service stairway south of Hall of Colonnades

Ground-floor landing block: two mortises along eastern and northern sides of Block B in Doll Folder 24, AM; first-floor gypsum landing block: two mortises along east edge; Doll Folders 24A and 23, in plan and section, associated with a small column base; Fig. 3.16:c

Doll Folders 23, 24, 1910, AM; Evans 1921–1935, III, plans E, F (Doll)

12

No. 103/104, Stairway south of Hall of The Double Axes

Ground-floor landing block: two mortises along west and north edges; ground-floor second landing block: one mortise in each of three exposed corners; first-floor landing block: two mortises along northern edge of block

Evans 1921–1935, III, plans E, F (Doll)

13

Nos. 96–99, Eastern Queen’s Megaron area

Numerous pier-and-door-partition bases on first floor found subsided; some resting above the lines of solid walls of the ground floor in western part of the Queen’s Megaron area

Doll Folder 17, undated, AM; Fyfe Sketch Book 1902, 47, 49, AM; Evans 1921–1935, III, plans E, F (Doll)

Table 3.1. Selected piers and pillars in the central East Wing, Knossos. Thirteen examples are mostly paired, corresponding bases found on the ground-floor and first-floor levels of the Residential Quarters. AM = Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive. Listed in roughly north–south, west–east order. See also Fig. 3.3. 1Apparently the later versions of Evans 1921–1935, I, figs. 239, 240. The author is indebted to the Ashmolean Museum for permission to see drawings by C. Doll and T. Fyfe in its Evans Archive. I am especially indebted to V. Fotou, who had arranged the drawings in the Evans Archive, for sending me pertinent copies. 2The base shown in Doll’s Folder 5 (AM) may have been set below the northeastern corner coping block of the light-well in the Hall of the Colonnades, southeast of here, perhaps on the first floor level. 3The wall-end pillar base above this, on the third story, may be that in Doll Folder 10 (AM), with two mortises, from the “south side of the Upper East-West Corridor,” also associated with a C-shaped jamb base.

76

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 3.17. Knossos palace, restored eastern portico in Residential Quarters in East Wing, looking northwest. Evans 1921–1935, III, fig. 219.

3.2. Fallen Upper Floor Features at Minoan Sites As we have seen at Knossos, especially in its East Wing, where the layout of the ground floor is often mirrored by that of the first, the stone bases used for piers (including those of pier-and-door partitions), as well as pillars on the first floor, were often found near their original positions because of the unusual conditions of preservation at the site. Of course, one cannot expect the same to apply to other sites, which were also burned but with differing floor plans for their stories.29 Still, one might suspect, given the relatively consistent use of pier-and-door partition bases at Knossos, to find bases fallen near ground-floor levels in other buildings featuring the Elite Style. At Petras in eastern Crete (Fig. 1.8), for instance, Metaxia Tsipopoulou has reported a LM IB destruction deposit in the southwestern part of the Central Court, representing the collapse of the first story. Within it were plaster, burned wood, and “many architectural fragments fallen from the upper floor. Those included doorjambs, some of them double, suggesting the presence of pier-and-door partitions in the upper floor to the west of the court.”30 In the palatial building at the Tourkogeitonia building in Archanes, however, the excavators

recorded fallen floor slabs of different stone types, a single column base, and, in only one place, a few rough, possible doorjamb bases of gypsum.31 Somewhat similarly, at the Kato Zakros palace (Fig. 1.7), where the author was present during the clearing of the east and west wings, both of which featured numerous stone pier-and-door partition bases on the ground floor; no fallen bases were encountered. Their absence might be taken as an indication that wood rather than stone was used for such upper floor features, although stone pillaging by locals must be considered as well.32 Comparing these observations with architectural finds from sites in the Mesara, at Kommos relevant pier bases (for a stairway) have been recovered, fallen, near the ground floor (Fig. 1.47, shown numbered). According to the present excavators of both Phaistos and Hagia Triada, however, there is no recollection of such fallen bases having been reported by Pernier and Banti, even though there are numerous places where they might be expected. Explanations for the difference between Knossos and other sites may be sought in the more modest upper story arrangements elsewhere, the culling of blocks for building by local farmers, and such. Given the similarity between three major Mesara sites and both Archanes and Kato Zakros, however, the more reasonable conclusion is simply that the residents at many major sites did not furnish their upper floors as richly as the Knossians, or, perhaps, the upper floors of certain palace buildings were not intended to be used as much. In the Knossos houses, in particular the Royal Villa, sufficient remains were found of the upper floor to restore much of its plan.33 Of some interest, also, is that many upper floor levels at Akrotiri on Thera, which was much influenced by the Neopalatial style that developed in Crete, preserved pier-and-door partitions as well as slab pavements and column bases almost in situ, a situation somewhat similar to that in the East Wing at Knossos. In summary, the evidence for stone architectural elements fallen from upper floors is uneven. It is strongest for the Knossos palace and its immediate surroundings. Wooden bases may well have been used as substitutes. The similarity of the situations at Knossos and Akrotiri probably shows the direct influence of the former upon the latter.

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

3.3. Architectural Preservation at Knossos Part of the fascination of the Knossos palace lies in its architecture. Understanding its construction, however, requires more than the mere description of the architectural remains—for example, the associated stratigraphic contexts must be considered, too, particularly those revealed in the collapsed stories of the East Wing. Additional related evidence is to be found in the study of the remains of the palace of Phaistos. Concerning Knossos in particular, one also has to acknowledge the gifts provided for us by the excavation architects during Evans’s time, not only their drawings, but also their initiation and implementation of conservation and restoration of the architecture as best as was then possible.

3.3.1. What Evans Found At Knossos, Evans discovered a huge building, some 8,000 m2 in area, of which the architectural remains were in a variety of states of preservation. The more typical condition was probably that of the West Wing, where the walls were preserved to heights of as much as 2 meters, most likely thanks to the collapse of the thick dirt floor and walls of its first story, as well as the roof above it. Over time, these together must have made the wing appear as a low mound, or “Kephala,” as it was known when the excavation began. The result was the superior preservation of the walls and some of the features of the first floor. Some column and jamb bases, as well as the steps of stairways, had subsided, but they were otherwise found in their original positions, helping Evans’s architects, especially Newton and Fyfe, to make their restored plan of the upper floor of the West Wing (Fig. 1.43) or Evans’s “Piano Nobile,” named after large Renaissance houses with elaborate upper floors. A particularly informative case of preservation can be seen in the West Magazines at Knossos, where two ashlar wall-ends of piers once separating magazines on the upper floor (Fig. 3.18) were found resting upon ground-floor ashlar wall-ends built immediately

77

below.34 Burning and decay had combined to destroy any wooden beams under them, so the wall blocks had subsided. Such superposition in any Minoan context is unusual. The situation on the other side of the Central Court, especially in the Residential Quarters, was dramatically different. There a huge cut had been made in the side of the hill, and into it three or perhaps even four stories of structures were set, with the entrance to the third floor level, leading up as well as down, at the level of the Central Court. The northwestern quadrant of the Residential Quarters was occupied by the levels of the Grand Staircase. At the ground-floor level the remainder was composed of apartment-like dwellings, with the more spacious one to the northeast and a more subdivided one to the south. From what the excavators could discern, the plans of the first two floors, and perhaps one or two above those, were quite similar (cf. Figs. 3.1, 3.2). When Evans excavated the area, described dramatically in his Palace of Minos at Knossos,35 he found it burned and, to some extent, collapsed. Some of the timbers used had, as was common, simply vanished, leaving empty spaces, although sometimes ash remained, as was the case with many of the piers (e.g., Fig. 3.16:a). Some of them, for instance the lower part of the jambs shown in

Figure 3.18. Knossos palace, West Magazines, looking southwest, showing Evans and Mackenzie observing (right) the eastern end-piers of ground-floor storage magazines. The lower courses of the first-floor ashlar piers are shown collapsed upon the ground-floor piers. Brown 1983, pl. 33:a. Courtesy Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford

78

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 3.19 or the wall timbers in Figure 3.11:b, were only partially carbonized and not burned through to the point that they were oxidized and became ash. Most instructive are the upper levels of what came to be known as the “Hall of the Double Axes,” where the jamb bases of a north– south pier-and-door partition group were found in line, resting on soil at least 3 m directly above a

Figure 3.19. Knossos palace, Residential Quarters, Hall of the Double Axes. Portion of photograph from 1901 looking northeast at excavation of gypsum pier-anddoor partition bases (above) in situ from first floor. They rest some distance above charred remains of the wooden pier-and-door partitions and their corresponding bases on the ground floor. Brown 1983, pl. 58:a. Courtesy Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford.

Figure 3.20. Knossos palace, charred wooden beam from the East Wing being packaged for transportation to museum in Herakleion. Kienzle 1998, fig. 212, with thanks to P. Shields of the University of York.

similar line of well-preserved bases in situ in the Minoan floor below (Figs. 3.13, 3.14, 3.19).36 Some large beams found in the East Wing were actually saved, boxed up, and sent off to the archaeological museum in Herakleion.37 Among them, according to Spyridon Marinatos, was “a great portion of a carbonized column of the Palace of Knossos.”38 That may well be the one shown here in Figure 3.20. The description by Evans of the situation revealed in the light-well of the Hall of the Double Axes, from which the member mentioned may have come, is apposite: The limit of the inner area of the Megaron of the Double-Axes was marked . . . by a gypsum stylobate, beyond which the whole floor level was paved with fine gypsum slabs. On this stylobate, which terminates on either side in two massive cubical blocks, were two column bases 65 centimeters in diameter, and above them a very interesting feature was brought out by careful excavation, namely the remains of the two columns themselves in a carbonized condition. Both of these stood with their lower extremities pointing towards their respective column bases, the upper part of the drums sloping away slightly in a south-westerly direction. They were made of cypress wood, and in the case of the more northerly of the two, which was the better preserved, it was possible to make out a length of 2.60 meters, very nearly the full height of the shaft which would have been somewhat over 3 meters. A distinct taper downwards, according to the Mycenaean canon, was moreover perceptible, the diameter of the shaft near the lower extremity in its burnt condition being about 45 centimeters.39

From the example cited, the carbonized column remains from the Grand Staircase, and other less obvious instances, it was clear to the excavators that many wooden supporting members—the epistyle of a column, a balustrade in a stairway, or jamb bases in a polythyron—were often not burned to the point that they collapsed beneath their burdens. Also, Evans and others understood that the architectural features had remained in place until soil and other material filled in around them, taking over the supporting role. Of course there was some subsidence, due in part to the lack of compaction in the filling, but most likely because of the disappearance, over time, of the raw timber fabric, leaving only the wood that had become so deeply carbonized that it did not oxidize completely.40

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

3.3.2. Destruction Contexts in the Residential Quarters at Knossos When excavating in the East Wing, Evans and his professional staff were preoccupied with the challenges of uncovering the remains, consolidating them, and even repositioning an entire wall of the Grand Staircase that had shifted out of place. Later Evans would reflect more on how the architectural elements came to be found in the condition we have described. Thus, at least as early as 1921, he proposed his view concerning the carbonization that preserved the timbers long enough to allow for infilling to complete the process of stabilization. He states: It would seem that the débris due to the falling in of masses of sun-dried bricks from the upper stories had infiltrated (partly owing to the subsequent solution of the clay) into the covered part of the building below, and thus led to the formation of a compact filling which had held up the floors and terraces above. The wooden columns themselves seem to have for the most part survived awhile in an unburnt condition. Later on, however, when owing to the result of chemical action they had become carbonized; their function of supporting the incumbent structures above had been taken up by this natural concretion of the fallen materials. Only in the case of their wooden architraves and the transverse beams that traversed the walls the carbonizing process left a certain void, usually involving a subsidence of the overlying structures to that extent.41

He maintained this general view, especially concerning the “chemical processes” that brought about the carbonization.42 The first reevaluation of Evans’s view that I am aware of was offered in 1963 by John Boardman, who proposed that climatic conditions at Knossos were such that unburned wood would have disappeared with time, and that “stout columns or beams of seasoned wood could well be badly scorched yet not burnt wholly through . . . So columns and timbered walls might still stand, though furniture and flooring were burnt, or at least still be usable.”43 Since then, the case against “chemical carbonization” has become much stronger, culminating in the fact that incomplete carbonization is, under certain circumstances, actually to be expected in buildings constructed of massive timbers, such as the Knossos palace.44 The decades that this process of

79

understanding took, extending back even into Evans’s time, points out that the feedback from other areas of research into the more arcane professions, such as archaeology, can occasionally be as slow as the very carbonization process Evans envisioned. Researching the subject of carbonization can lead in many directions, but I found that studies of the nature of burned wood and of fire by those who deal with these subjects were the two most profitable lines of inquiry. Both groups of experts whom I consulted agreed that as sections of beams burned, the thickness of the layer of carbonization, as it formed, tended to inhibit further combustion. Robert White and Mark Dietenberger observe that: wood exposed to very high temperatures will decompose to provide an insulating layer of char that retards further degradation of the wood. The load-carrying capacity of a structural wood member depends upon its cross-sectional dimensions. Thus the amount of charring of the cross section is the major factor in the fire endurance of structural wood members. . . . As a beam or column chars, the corners become rounded . . . The temperature profile within the remaining wood crosssection can be used with other data to estimate the remaining load-carrying capacity of the uncharred wood during a fire and the residual capacity after a fire.45

The inhibition of further combustion depends, of course, on the presence of burning, combustible materials nearby. In other words, if whatever there was to burn in an area has been burned, then wood, though deeply charred, may remain unburned and structurally still serviceable. I recall fires in ordinary fireplaces, which, although easily started, died out because the logs were not placed in close enough proximity to one another and not moved next to each as they burned. An example is shown in Figure 3.21, in which a thick wooden beam (top), reduced by fire to perhaps half of its original diameter (note protruding nails), was still strong enough to hold up two heavy steel I-beams that, having lost their shape in the fire, hung down from the beam as if made of rubber. The fire was probably extinguished after it had largely died down on its own.46 With the new scenario, somewhat changed from Evans’s time, we may hazard a guess concerning the situation during the fire in the area of the Hall of the Double Axes. We must manage without extensive stratigraphic sections and descriptions,

80

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 3.21. Photo taken after a fire in North America showing a partially carbonized wooden beam and, collapsed upon it, two bent steel girders twisted by the intense heat. Courtesy R.H. White and R.B. Miller, Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, WI.

which would have helped us deal with the matter, and search for any available evidence. To begin, it is clear that the entire area was burned, while the cause, whether human (by accident or by intention) or natural (earthquake, lightning), remains undetermined. We can still estimate the amount of burning, as deduced from the evidence of the main structural supports. Examining that from west to east, we find that numerous carbonized beams were more or less in situ in the Grand Staircase and adjacent Hall of the Colonnades areas (as restored in Doll’s drawing in Fig. 3.10). Mackenzie, Evans’s archaeological field supervisor, recorded the complex situation: In the section underneath wall 9 at 2.50 from the floor . . . appears such a beam end in section a metre higher i.e. 3.50 from the floor being a second beam section. In the section at the NE corner is a beam end in section, then a second and a third at equal intervals each succeeding beam section being at a lower level than the last. These must be beam ends from the upper floor. When these collapsed the beams next the E wall being the support of these[,] collapsed with those[,] but those furthest away toward wall 9 collapsed most.47

The supports for the staircase must have still been sufficiently intact immediately after the fire for them to have been observed by Evans. Next door to the east, in the light-well of the Hall of the Double Axes (Fig. 3.8, top center), we have already noted, in Evans’s words, the discovery of two carbonized but otherwise fairly wellpreserved columns, somewhat displaced from

their original positions and tilted to the south. Farther east, in the main hall, the westernmost line of pier-and-door partitions stood until infilling between the ground floor and first floor was fairly complete, with the result that the pier-anddoorjamb bases on the first floor were found resting above the ancient ground-floor level, as seen in Figure 3.14. The bases were later removed and placed in their original positions. From the photograph taken from the west (Fig. 3.19) and Fyfe’s elevation from the east (Fig. 3.14), it is clear that the lower few meters of at least five of the wooden piers once holding up those bases had been carbonized, but not so much so that they could not continue to support their load.48 As excavation proceeded southeast of the north– south row of partitions just mentioned, within the columned portico, Mackenzie reported that: carbonized wood has been frequent throughout the area but especially in the neighborhood of the column-bases. Above column base 4 the burnt remains of the wood are so plentiful that we have here no doubt [that they are] the remnants of the original column that surmounted the base . . . [Nearby] is a heap of lime probably the remains of a block or blocks of gypsum burned to lime. This would in that case be the explanation of the lumps of lime found elsewhere on the site.49

To judge from the evidence, therefore, the amount of burning in the area, taking place from east to west as deduced from the main structural supports, was significant but not sufficient to bring about their collapse. This conclusion is consistent with the discussion above concerning the process and results of carbonization within similar structures. As shown in an earlier quote here, Evans believed, and quite correctly so, that the gradual or precipitous collapse of masses of mudbrick from wall construction, along with soil and other materials from floors, played a role over the years in filling in gaps within the still-standing structures. This would have been especially true when the gaps could only be filled by material infiltrating from the side, as must have been the case with the Grand Staircase. In the past the collapse was seen as happening after the fires occurred, but there is possible evidence for a collapse that occurred during the fire itself. This is provided by the Fyfe drawing in which two round rafters (A and B in Fig. 3.14) are shown considerably below

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

their normal floor level, as if they had subsided more than the materials they usually supported.50 As seen in section in the drawing, and considering that they are very close horizontally to the north– south beam they once rested on, they also appear to have fallen. But one wonders upon what, for as recorded by Fyfe, they are 2 m above the floor level. A short explanation is that the floor of the first story, once held up by rafters A and B and, of course, by others, collapsed during the fire—one can see layering, with burning, in Fyfe’s sketch. If the fire began, moreover, in an upper story, the possible first-story collapse may have been only a later one among a series of consecutive collapses beginning with that of the roof.51 If this proposal is acceptable, then we have a possible collapse in the area of the Hall of the Double Axes that might have taken place along all the main ceiling spans. With their accumulations, these collapses could have filled in both parts of Rooms 90, a through b (Fig. 1.29:a), up to the point where we see carbonization ending in Figure 3.14. They could even have played a role in stifling the fire, already hindered (or arrested) by the very carbonization process described. If my impression is correct, the situation within the two light-wells concerned, that in the Hall of the Double Axes and next door in the Hall of the Colonnades, both open to the sky, may have differed. In Mackenzie’s words describing the situation near the lowest part of the Grand Staircase: The removal of this deposit, it could be seen at once from our operations of 1901, was to be a work of great difficulty. Nowhere at Knossos had we had to deal with [a] deposit that, owing to its hard concrete-like character, had so stubbornly resisted all but the most determined attacks of the pickaxe. The conflagration which had destroyed the Palace had been particularly busy here[;] no doubt the open balustraded stair with its light-well had acted as an effective funnel to the flames. The débris had been turned by the action of the fire to the consistency of terra-cotta brick and the burning of so much limestone masonry into lime tended still further to harden the mass acted upon later by damp from above impregnated with the easily soluble elements of the gypsum materials in the construction.52

Mackenzie’s description of the unusual character of the deposit raises the point that the open light-well would have received a variety of

81

materials falling from above, with less floor collapse but also with rainwater, which could have affected those materials. It may also be surmised that the ceiling collapse(s) just suggested did not occur similarly elsewhere during the fire since those interior areas were not characterized by massive consolidations as described above.53 Mackenzie and Evans often mention soluble gypsum, used throughout the architecture of the Residential Quarters, as playing a role in the consolidation of the partially burned palace, especially in filling and sealing gaps not open to infilling from above. This is certainly true. As recently suggested,54 gypsum may also have played an even more substantial role, namely one of moderating the fire, at least on the ground-floor level where most of the interior walls of the Residential Quarters were lined to a height of 2 m with dadoes. Since Evans’s time, gypsum’s general propensity to store water has been exploited extensively to serve as a reliable fire retardant, for which see also Chapter 4.10.3.

3.4. Aspects of Elite Style at Knossos and Phaistos 3.4.1. Ashlar Construction at Knossos and Phaistos As we have seen in Knossos’s East Wing, in MM III, squared ashlar masonry was used mainly for pier bases, and it also acted like a sheath to protect otherwise vulnerable walls in areas exposed to the weather, mainly in light wells and porticoes. Even earlier, however, coursed ashlar in the Knossos area had made its debut in an unusual way, especially among important closed, interior storage areas characterized by their rectangular, symmetrical plans, as introduced in Chapter 1. A well-dated example is the MM II–MM IIIA55 shrine at Anemospilia (Fig. 1.35), near the summit of Mt. Juktas not far from Knossos, which featured six spaces of “storeroom” type, arranged in two groups of three rooms facing upon a common, wide corridor-like space. Of special interest for us here is that although the entire building is otherwise constructed of rubble masonry, using

82

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

rough blocks of local sideropetra (ironstone), each side of the six doorways at Anemospilia was made up of neatly coursed ashlar rising up some seven blocks in height (Fig. 1.36),56 with a reveal in each jamb to accommodate the pivots and inner edges of the wooden door leafs. One wonders why wooden door frames, instead of ashlar, were not used at Anemospilia. One possibility is that the ashlar door piers may have been used to support a similar set of rooms on an upper floor there, but the only apparent access to an upper level at Anemospilia was by exiting the building from the western end of its central corridor (Fig. 1.35, left). From there one turned south, making one’s way up to roof level upon a western extension, and perhaps a late one, of the building’s exterior wall, surely built only for occasional visits, perhaps in order to renew the roof material. Therefore, while the ashlar piers strengthened the doorways, they may also have ennobled them because of the importance of the building that, we know from the excavation itself, was devoted to the honor of the deity or deities through ritual use.57 Similar ashlar construction can be found in the West Wing of the Knossos palace in the extensive series of magazines that back onto the West Facade (Fig. 1.3). There each storeroom wall-end, also facing a long, broad corridor, was carried out with three courses of large ashlar blocks, with reveals, in the form of solid pier jambs (Fig. 3.18). The three courses, as indicated by the mortises in their top blocks, supported at least one large north–south horizontal beam that, in turn, held up the ceiling

structure underlying similar magazines near the large inner halls dedicated to group gatherings on the building’s first floor, or Piano Nobile. Like the Anemospilia building, the other Knossian storeroom walls are made up of rubble, along with vertical wooden reinforcements set at intervals into the sides of the walls. The western facade wall here, aside from an orthostat course, 1.15 m high, was also made up of rubble, perhaps with mudbrick above, all set within a wooden framework.58 While, therefore, one can certainly say that the line of ashlar wall-ends in the West Magazines supported superincumbent walls and supports on the Piano Nobile, the lack of similar ashlar construction in the remainder of the ground-floor walls suggests that the otherwise anomalous ashlar pier jambs may have had a special purpose or significance for the builders, namely, one of ennoblement. Actually, since the Knossos ashlar pier jambs could be older than those at neighboring Anemospilia, quite possibly they set the precedent. In turn, at Knossos, the early ashlar jambs of gypsum in the Protopalatial Magazines (Fig. 2.3), also in the West Wing, probably provided the precedent for the West Magazines themselves.59 South of Knossos in the Mesara, in the MM IIIA Building T at Kommos (Figs. 1.9, 3.22) the northwestern corner rooms and orthostat facade display ambitious, even perhaps unmatched use of coursed ashlar blocks for the time, marking a dramatic change from its monumental MM IIB predecessor, Building AA, in which ashlar may not have been used at all.60 In perhaps the same tradition,

Figure 3.22. Kommos, elevation of northern wall of Building T, looking south. Drawing G. Bianco.

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

83

the Phaistos palace, possibly built later in LM IB,61 demonstrates a leap from the earlier Phaistian tradition of using ashlar only sparingly, as in its Protopalatial MM IA–MM IIB orthostat facade (Figs. 2.9, 2.10), to using it in a more massive way than is seen at any other Minoan palace in Crete. Specifically, the rubble-within-wood-framework type of exterior wall traditionally placed above the orthostats was raised at Phaistos about 2 m, and it was replaced by courses of huge, carefully cut ashlar blocks extending up almost the entire height of the ground floor, preserved in places to a height of about 3 m, just below ceiling beam level. This construction occurred throughout much of the area bordering the Central Court on the north (Spaces 41, 43, 59, 60) and in the ample storeroom area (Spaces 26–37) to the southwest, representing a tour de force not seen elsewhere in Crete. Even the pillar in Space 26 was completed in ashlar, unusual in a room so large. This same storeroom area at Phaistos, with its row of ashlar-faced room entrances facing a broad corridor, is reminiscent of Anemospilia and the Knossos West Magazine areas, discussed above. Anemospilia is actually the closer parallel because of the common corridor. Also, at Phaistos mortises cut into the tops of all the highest blocks (Fig. 3.23), including the central pillar there, at ceiling level, show that wooden floor construction began just above. The same applies to the two magnificent ashlar courses, together 2.05 m high, which form most of the north facade of the Central Court (Fig. 1.24, visible in the restoration,

and, partly, in Fig. 3.24). Thus, at Phaistos, we witness a huge “base course” faced at numerous places, even on some interiors, with ashlar, and, like a solid podium, supporting a second story of a lighter, differing construction, as we will see below. The care lavished on the blocks of rooms just mentioned at Phaistos was focused on three areas. The first is the northern facade of the Central Court and, just behind it, the stairway (Spaces 42, 43 in Fig. 1.4) leading up to the larger rooms above, where Graham hypothesized a large columnar dining room above Spaces 58–61, 91, and 92,62 an arrangement used at other palaces and probably at certain Neopalatial villas as well.63 The second is the Grand Propylon (Spaces 66–69A) that, along with the Central Court, appears to have been the most public-oriented space in the palace. It was probably intended to serve as a gathering place where subjects could be addressed by their leaders and also as a theatral area for public performances (Fig. 1.20).64 It may have replaced a similar area, also stepped, with a large open court and paved walkways in front of it, west of the Protopalatial court’s facade and largely covered over when the new Phaistos palace was constructed (Figs. 1.4; 1.17, left). The area of the new Propylon, a generous 13.70 m north–south and about twice as long east– west, was provided, beginning on the west, with a long and unique series of 11 broad steps leading up to a platform (Space 67) with a huge oval column, placed centrally, surely the largest and probably the highest (perhaps 4.5 m) in Minoan Crete. Behind it

Figure 3.23. Phaistos, top of northern facade wall of Central Court, looking southeast, showing mortises (and bedding?) for attachment of horizontal timber, marking transition between lower ashlar and probable upper rubble construction. See also Fig. 3.24. Photo J.W. Shaw.

Figure 3.24. Phaistos, top course of northwestern facade wall of Central Court, looking north. See also Fig. 3.23. Photo J.W. Shaw.

84

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

were two closable doorways separated by a single large pier (Space 68), before a space with three columns set into a stylobate, leading into a light-well court (Space 69A), the largest light-well in Minoan Crete. A large clay form, a lump with impressions, found displaced next to the pier base, suggests that the pier itself, like so many others already described here, was made up of a series of squared timbers set together and separated from each other by clay.65 It is likely that the clay form was once either at the bottom or the top of the pier. It is unlikely that this huge stairway often served as an approach to the Central Court, for the relatively narrow exit to the east, connecting to a smaller stairway, was too restricted. Most likely, entrance from the West Court to the Central Court was usually via a broad east–west passageway (Space 7), farther south. Graham has reasonably proposed, however, that the Propylon served as the chief access, via Stairway 71 just to its north, to the upper story of two stories of public-oriented rooms above the Magazine Block adjoining the Propylon on its south.66 A major problem in studying the development of the palace at Knossos, and to a lesser extent that at Malia, is that architectural renovation and change often occurred on the same level, and thus one does not often have the benefit of superimposition of the later upon the earlier in order to separate out the two. Fortunately, in the same western area of the Phaistos palace that we have been considering, not only are the two major chronological horizons separated, for the Propylon complex was set at least a meter above the West Wing of the earlier palace, but the West Facade of the later palace was set back, eastward, at a distance of 6–20 m, from the facade of the first palace, exposing much of the West Wing of the earlier building. The northern part of this area is shown in Figure 1.17, displaying the older rooms (in Roman numerals) and the western fringe of the new rooms (in Arabic numerals).

3.4.2. Old and New Palace Architecture at Phaistos: The New Approach Perhaps more than any other illustration I could show, Figure 1.17 illustrates some basic differences between concept and execution of old and new

palace architecture. To begin with, the earlier facade, the double-hatched wall aligned north–south on the left, is faced on the west with an orthostat course (Figs. 2.9–2.11). This is the only part of the building where ashlar is known to have been used. In contrast, as pointed out already, the later facade (dark, around storerooms 27 and 33 in Fig. 1.17, also north of the Propylon stairs), consisted of coursed ashlar rising to ceiling level. In the same plan (Fig. 1.17), we are also looking at a warren of small rooms (XIII–XIX) of varying shapes that are, usually, quite narrow, the width being the dimension chosen for spanning ceiling beams. Similar short spans can be seen in the irregular rooms at EM II Myrtos Phournou Koriphi in the Ierapetra area of Crete (Fig. 2.23).67 This brings to mind botanist Oliver Rackham’s comment concerning the size of the ceiling beams there: “The largest minimum span of a room in which charcoal was found is 2.5 m, and some were only 1.2 m across. This indicates that suitable timber was lacking rather than skill in carpentry.”68 As compared with the later Phaistos palace plan (Fig. 1.4), the earlier (Fig. 1.16) is certainly more varied but, at the same time, less predictable and, above all, small.69 Moreover, the many, sometimes very thick walls of the earlier structure (e.g., VIII, IX, XVI, the facade wall south of XXI, and the walls around XXII–XXVIII)70 actually take up space that would be gained if the rooms were larger. What is exemplified at Phaistos is the realization that rooms could be enlarged by means of regularizing space and, especially, by the installation of much larger wooden ceiling structures than those made simply of poles. In Figure 3.25, one can see two rows of successive periods of ceiling rafters in the MM IA walls of the lower section of the first Phaistos palace. Instead of unconnected poles laid from wall to wall, covered by reeds and soil, the Neopalatial authorities arranged to use large cut beams, probably of cypress and/or fir.71 Those could be laid east–west, for instance, atop the ashlar storeroom end piers, to which they were affixed with mortises, with other beams spanning the corridor in between, while smaller beams and poles, like the traditional ones, might be used for the ceiling of the storerooms themselves. This system of an interlinked timber frame provided support needed for the upper stories at the same time

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

85

that it distributed more evenly the weight being passed down to the ground level. The walls, therefore, could be made thinner. This new technique reduced the wall thickness seen in early structures in the southwestern section of the first Phaistos palace (Fig. 2.8) from some two meters to half (or less) of that, in later construction. A result was a dramatic increase in the actual space available for use as compared with the structural mass. Phaistos architect Enrica Fiandra has calculated the difference in space use in a section of the first palace as compared with another, but otherwise similar, section of the second palace: We chose two homogeneous samples in terms of [use], namely, for Palace I the block comprising Rooms LVIII a, b, c, d and LIX, LX, LXI, LXIII, LXV, and for Palace II, Rooms 27–31 and 70.72 For the Palace I block, the total surface was 226.80 m2 of which 59.50 m2 was used for rooms and 167.30 m2 for external and internal walls. In other words, the rooms covered a useful area equal to 26.24% of the total, while the walls covered 73.7%. In Palace II, the surface examined measured 209.10 m 2 of which 115.97 m 2 [was used for] rooms and 93.13 m 2 for the walls, making 55.46% for the rooms and 44.54% for the walls. It is easy to see from this that Palace II, which implemented the construction criteria of MM III, made it possible to exploit the occupied surface area to the full, and even though it gave the visual impression of occupying a smaller ground area than Palace I, the internal areas were, in reality, more spacious. From the functional and economic points of view, there were evident advantages with this: shorter distances to travel, larger internal capacity, and improved distribution of the areas to be used for checking the incoming and outgoing goods.73

In the second palace, the new use of wood, a basic ingredient in Neopalatial style, differed somewhat from that used in the Residential Quarters at Knossos, described above. For instance, the huge horizontal beams used about two-thirds up the wall in the Hall of the Double Axes (Fig. 3.11:a) were not used at Phaistos, perhaps because the lower, ground floor of the Knossos Residential Quarters supported the weight of at least two floors above. Also, the wooden framework in the Hall of the Double Axes was tied structurally to those of the Grand Staircase and the Hall of the Colonnades,

Figure 3.25. Phaistos, first palace, ceiling beam sockets in western wall of Room IL. Photo J.W. Shaw.

probably the most daring engineering feat undertaken by Minoan architects. Also, while the Residential Quarters at Phaistos (Fig. 1.30) made good use of the pier system already discussed in the Knossian Residential Quarters, only rarely did its architects include vertical posts set at intervals within walls, such as in the side walls of the East–West Corridor (Fig. 3.12) or at intervals in the walls of the Western Magazine block at Knossos.74 This technique, known in Crete from as early as MM IA,75 was primarily intended to carry down the weight of upper structures to near ground-floor wall level from the timber framing resting on them at an upper floor level above. The technique was known at nearby Hagia Triada, appearing, for example, in Room 4 (Fig. 1.31), where the supports were set decoratively, rather than being hidden behind wall covering, so that they could be seen between the high gypsum dado slabs set along the

86

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

back of a bench. A typical example of similar supports set on each side of a freestanding wall is one from Tylissos (Fig. 3.26), where the chases for the wooden struts they rested on appear as well.76

3.4.3. A Special Preference for Wood in Elite Minoan Structures As already pointed out, throughout the East Wing at Knossos the Minoans demonstrate their preference for using single block, or low-block, piers and pillars. Piers of solid, stacked ashlar blocks were used, as in the center of the West Wing, often in closed, damp rooms where wooden supports would rot. Perhaps, however, one might infer that since stone was usually not used to complete construction, it was either scarce, expensive, or both. Two examples can, I think, help to clarify matters. One is from Knossos and the other is from Phaistos. Both concern porticoes. That from Knossos is in the “Pavilion” of the LM I–III “Temple Tomb” (Fig. 3.27), which is a portico facing west onto a court leading to the entrance to the tomb chamber itself. Along the front of the portico are two columns set into a stylobate. The architrave above the columns was supported at each end by wall-end piers made up of ashlar blocks stacked one above the other, supporting the roof beams above.77 Such construction might at first glance appear normal, with the wall piers echoing (but with smaller blocks) the construction of the three heavy pillars, rising to ceiling height, used in the tomb

Figure 3.26. Tylissos, House A, empty chases left by wooden props in eastern wall of Room 3. Photo J.W. Shaw.

interior. Nevertheless, those pillars’ construction may have been determined by their location in potentially damp, in this case sealed areas, following a presently little known but probable Minoan architectural custom. The two wall piers in the portico, however, stand next to an open court, sheltered by the overhang of the roof, so they should have been, on the basis of what we have already seen in the portico of the Hall of the Double Axes, completed with wooden supports above an ashlar base block, rather than with one stone block upon another. The answer to the question of why wooden pier construction was not used may be found at Phaistos, in a double portico arrangement labeled “Room 50” (Figs. 1.30, 3.28), a portion of the Residential Quarters of that palace. There, if one approaches from the north, one enters a corridor (76) leading to a stairway (51) accessing the first floor above, which probably had a balcony looking down onto a light-well in the center (Room 50b), equipped with a drain. The same corridor provided access to the ground-floor rooms: a private western room (50a), the light-well with its drain (50b), and an eastern portico (50c) beyond, which provided storage space and was entered through a doorway on the south. More to the point here is to contrast the construction methods used for the wall piers at the respective northern and southern ends of the two columned porticoes, for at Phaistos that on the west uses the low- or single block variety topped by wooden piers rising to ceiling level, while that on the east uses stacked ashlar blocks just like those we have just examined from the Temple Tomb at Knossos.78 The similarity between the two western porticoes, with their stacked ashlar construction, has been shown. At Phaistos, however, the western portico was supported by timber piers, in the same way that the porticoes were constructed in the Residential Quarters at Knossos, whether in its western light-well or eastern portico area. Why, then, the contrast in technique? It is doubtful that it occurred by chance. Rather, the clear choice of stacked ashlar for the two western porticoes indicates a definite preference. My own guess is that since both porticoes were extensions of the larger buildings they were appended to, and to that extent were architecturally independent and less complex structurally, the builders chose a simpler, less challenging construction method for

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

Figure 3.27. Knossos, plan and elevation of the Temple Tomb. Evans 1921–1935, IV, pocket plan.

Figure 3.28. Phaistos, Residential Area, Room 50a, looking east. Photo M.C. Shaw.

87

88

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

them, stacked ashlar rather than the wood-andstone low-block construction method, which was more time consuming and complex. If so, then wood, in their view, with its superior flexibility in responding to earthquake stress, appears to have emerged as their choice of the better supporting material, whether in the western piers in Room 50b at Phaistos or the Hall of the Double Axes at Knossos.

3.5. Evans’s Excavation Architects at Knossos When Evans began excavating on the Kephala hill in 1900, after arduous but successful negotiations to purchase it, he hired Duncan Mackenzie (Fig. 3.29, right), a ceramics expert with four years of excavation experience at Bronze Age Phylakopi on Melos, to help him with everyday matters, including the handling of the workmen. Mackenzie’s previous work offset Evans’s inexperience in excavation matters. It is clear from Mackenzie’s daily notebooks that one of his chief challenges was to maintain an ongoing understanding of the architecture, sometimes preserved above ground-floor level, so as to determine how to precede within a particular context.79 It is equally clear that although Evans was untrained from the architectural point of view, his natural intelligence prompted him to excavate architectural contexts as such, and he presented the resulting perceptions, along with requisite illustration, throughout his publication of the Knossos site.

Figure 3.29. Seated left to right: Arthur Evans, Theodore Fyfe, and Duncan Mackenzie. Boardman 1963, pl. 1. © British School of Archaeology at Athens.

3.5.1 Theodore Fyfe (1875–1945) Evans was to be ably helped by Theodore Fyfe (1875–1945; Fig. 3.29, center), then 25 years old, who had recently been appointed Architect of the British School at Athens, following his architectural studentship at the School80 and his prior attendance at the Glasgow School of Art. Fyfe was to continue working at Knossos for another four years, and he would return at intervals after that to help. He made clear his talents during his time there. As an artist, for instance, he probably made what is certainly the only definitive restored perspective view of the Hall of the Double Axes area (Fig. 3.8). He also made delicate watercolors, such as that focusing on the midpoint of the Grand Staircase (Fig. 3.7), indicating actual remains “suspended” over voids created by timber that had vanished. Another watercolor depicts the Northwest Lustral Basin, with the actual states of parapets, column bases, and gypsum revetment clearly indicated, something difficult to present even in a photograph. He also studied the relative arrangements of the jambs and thresholds in various doorways, especially those in the Residential Quarters of the palace.81 Another important contribution was the restored plan he later helped make, along with Newton,82 of the first floor (or Piano Nobile) of the West Wing of the Palace of Knossos, which Evans included as plan C in the rear pocket of volume II of his Palace of Minos at Knossos. There (Fig. 1.43) they indicated the column and partition bases, as well as upper wall construction finds, that were used for determining aspects of the plan. Unfortunately, as was typical at the time, few stratigraphic sections were made during the early Knossos excavations. One exception, recently discovered in the Ashmolean Evans Archive and drawn by Fyfe in 1901, helps explain the nature of the burning and destruction of the area of the Hall of the Double Axes in the East Wing of the palace (Fig. 3.14).83 Unlike the architects that succeeded him, Fyfe also had an academic inclination, as shown by his occasional publications. For instance, he wrote a still valuable essay on painted plaster decoration at Knossos, reported on conservation there, and made a less important contribution on the Knossian wall paintings.84 He wrote Evans that he had even proposed to David Hogarth, then director of the British School of Archaeology in Athens,

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

that “the time might be ripe for some ordered account of the Minoan architecture.”85 Unfortunately that idea never came to fruition. During his later career, which included his directorship of the Cambridge University School of Architecture, he was to write two longer studies about the ancient world, the first on the Roman navy and the second a textbook on Hellenistic architecture, which long remained the only monograph on the subject.86 Fyfe was hired by Evans as a recorder, but his role in conservation and consolidation developed when, especially in the East Wing, architectural remains from the first-floor level were found, some “floating” on soil, meters above the ancient ground-floor level.87 Those remains, as well as certain walls, piers, and pillars originally strengthened by now disintegrated wooden construction, needed to be replaced, in his and Evans’s views, by wooden beams similar to the ancient construction.88 Unfortunately, since the new constructions were not covered by a roof, with the passage of time they weathered, weakened, and had to be replaced with iron girders, more durable than wood, under the guidance of Doll.89 Fyfe died at the age of 70 in a bizarre incident that took place not far from the house in which he and his family were staying. Apparently an accomplished skater, he walked out one morning onto Longstowe Hall Lake to test the ice for skating. He broke through the ice and drowned, his body not being recovered until the next day.90

89

Doll’s other chief concern was the conservation and restoration of the palace, especially the area of the Grand Staircase in the East Wing. That required further excavation under Mackenzie’s direction in 1905, and Doll had to make the necessary architectural studies at Knossos in order to facilitate the ordering of the relevant materials from England.92 In 1927 Evans described, in retrospect, the overall process, including the preliminary work under Fyfe: Knossos . . . has passed through three “periods” of conservation—marked respectively by the use of wooden supports, of iron girders, and of ferroconcrete [for the last, see below]. In the first stage of the excavations in the West Quarter of the Palace, where the depth of the excavated area was less and the amount of upper story remains more limited, wooden props and beams, with at most iron bars to reinforce them over horizontal openings, were made to serve. But the quite unprecedented conditions met with in the “Domestic Quarter” soon demonstrated the inadequacy of such supports. The violent alternations of the Cretan climate and vicissitudes of damp and heat were found to rot woodwork in an incredibly short space of time, and some serious collapses of

3.5.2. Christian C.T. Doll (1880–1955) Fyfe was succeeded at Knossos in 1905 by Christian C.T. Doll (1880–1955; Fig. 3.30), who was also appointed Architect of the British School of Archaeology. Like Fyfe, Doll was to work with Evans for five years, and he returned when the opportunity arose. Doll had major responsibilities, including that of designing and building a labyrinthine mansion, dubbed by Evans the “Villa Ariadne” after the mythical daughter of King Minos.91 The structure was later turned over to the Greek government, and it has been used most recently for occasional residence as well as archaeological meetings. During World War II it served as a headquarters for the German army.

Figure 3.30. Christian Doll (center, background) with Arthur Evans (left) on the ground-floor landing of the Grand Staircase. Brown 1983, fig. 54:b. Courtesy Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford

90

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

supports and masonry were the result. Mr. Christian Doll, the architect, who came out to assist me in the conservation and reconstitution of the upper structures of the “Domestic Quarter,” found it necessary to take the bull by the horns and to have a large recourse to iron girders to fulfil the supporting structure of the great beams. At the same time the originally wooden columns were replaced, as had already been done in the “Room of the Throne” on the West side, by stone cores with a covering of plaster.93

After the “Atlantean” task of raising and supporting the sunken elements of the upper stories was over, Evans praised Doll’s accomplishments, especially how his “meticulously accurate measurements have stood all tests.”94 Indeed, if one reflects upon his various works at the site, perhaps their most salient characteristic is the accuracy that he aimed to achieve. For instance, his drawings of various individual building blocks from the Residential Quarters (Fig. 3.16:a, b),95 oftentimes from piers, pillars, windows, or stairways, are often given to the millimeter and are drawn out on a large scale. His elevation sections of the Grand Staircase (e.g., Fig. 3.5), many still unpublished, indicate in great detail the state of the remains. Among his greatest achievements is the pair of drawings (Figs. 3.1, 3.2) depicting at a large scale the ground and first-floor plans of the Residential Quarters, published as plans E and F and placed in a rear pocket of volume III of the Palace of Minos at Knossos. There one can see even the sockets for dowelling on the tops of the blocks, which in turn enables one to determine the nature of the ancient construction, whether of wood or stone, resting upon them,96 something not available in the more recent, “modern” survey of the architecture (Fig. 3.3). Doll was even attentive to proportional relationships between Knossian structures. In a letter that he wrote to Evans on February 25, 1911, for instance, he noted: The height of the incised column on the Central Pier of the Tomb is 1.825 which equals also the heights of the Double Axe Pillars in the Palace, the Pillars in the Royal Villa, and the bottom of the first timber line in the Hall of the Colonnades. This seems to show that 1.825 was a fixed dimension for certain purposes.97

This observation compares very well with Graham’s suggested “Minoan foot” of 30.36 m,98 with Doll’s 1.825 m measurement equal to six of Graham’s Minoan feet (1.8216 m), with only a 0.0034 m discrepancy. Of some interest, both as an indication of Doll’s independence of mind and the shape of Minoan columns, is that in his restored elevation of the Grand Staircase (Fig. 3.5) he (heretically) showed the columns as cylindrical rather than tapering. Evans, however, believed that he saw tapering in the carbonized remains of the columns found largely preserved, for instance, in the light-well of the Hall of the Double Axes.99 Ann Brown points out that Doll “suffered much . . . from [Evans’s] peremptory letters and orders.” But she also notes100 that in 1951, Doll, then mayor of Holborn in England,101 wrote on the occasion of the Evans Centenary Exhibition held at the Ashmolean Museum: I am the last survivor of the original team that worked with Sir Arthur at Knossos and I still have lively recollections of those times. There certainly never was a more delightful man to work or live with. His energy and his sense of humour were a constant source of admiration to me. I count it a great privilege to have known him so intimately.

3.5.3. Piet de Jong (1887–1967) The third, final chapter of Evans’s consolidation and reconstruction, or “reconstitution,” efforts took place during the two Knossos terms of Piet de Jong (1922–1930 as architect, 1947–1952 as Knossos Curator).102 De Jong (1887–1967; Fig. 3.31) was the only one of the three architects who actually lived in Greece, beginning in 1921 when he started his career as excavation architect with Alan Wace at Mycenae. During the next year he was hired by Evans to work at Knossos, for during the World War I interval (1913–1921), when Evans did not return to Knossos, the site had suffered considerably from weathering. Evans was determined to protect it as much as possible. Peter Kienzle writes: In 1925 Piet de Jong started the reconstruction work which was to change the appearance of the Palace completely. In this year, he began to

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

employ reinforced concrete as the main building material for the reconstruction work on site. He had gained considerable experience with this [relatively new] building technique by reconstructing the Caravanserai in the previous year. While walls were still executed traditionally in rubble masonry, the ceilings and stairs were produced in reinforced concrete. Piet de Jong also started to employ cast moulds to reproduce in concrete large quantities of columns.103

Continuing for some years, this was a huge operation; Evans recorded that “about 100 carpenters and masons and their assistants were employed for nearly six months in 1928.”104 In the process of the work de Jong also remodeled some of the earlier work carried out by Doll and Fyfe.105 Aside from his architectural reconstitution at Knossos, de Jong had many other talents. As an artist, for instance, he often painted watercolors of restored areas, such as the Queen’s Megaron at Knossos106 and the Mycenaean Throne Room at Nestor’s Pylos in Messenia,107 which have a

91

brilliance of color and detail that is hardly matched. He also produced fine black-and-white views of the Temple Tomb at Knossos (Fig. 3.27).108 After leaving Knossos in 1930, in the years before and after World War II he worked as an itinerant excavation architect and artist at many sites (Pylos, the Athenian Agora, Isthmia, and Kea), where he produced drawings with an inimitable flair of line and clarity of labeling and overall presentation.109 His watercolors of objects are particularly noteworthy. He even did a series of caricatures of many archaeologists.110 In 1947, some years after Evans’s death, he was appointed Knossos Curator of the British School of Archaeology, a position he held until 1952, when the Knossos site was handed over officially to the Greek state. As a sign of his gratitude, and perhaps as a gesture recollecting experiences and friendships gained, he left a bequest to the British School that made possible the extension of the Stratigraphic Museum at Knossos. There both old and new Knossos finds are stored and studied by scholars for publication.111

3.5.4. The Legacy

Figure 3.31. Piet de Jong in Athens. Kienzle 1998, 268.

Thanks especially to Fyfe’s and Doll’s early work in recording, along with de Jong’s roofing and protection of the architectural remains (all paid for through Evans’s considerate generosity and care), we are fortunately in a position to study some of the ways in which Minoan architects put together a palatial structure of more than a single story. But even today problems of conservation challenge the Greek government, the steward of the Knossos site, for deterioration brought on by time and to some extent by massive tourism continue to damage it. The government has responded impressively to the challenge, however, taking steps both to preserve the Knossos site in its reconstituted state and to make adequate arrangements for visiting by the public. Kienzle’s final comment about Evans’s restoration work thus remains apt even for those recent conservation efforts, namely that “the reconstructions must be seen as a manifestation of effort rather than a final product.”112

92

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Chapter 3 Endnotes 1. Carinci and La Rosa 2009, 298–300. 2. Pelon 2006; Van de Moortel and Darcque 2006. 3. McEnroe 2010, 123. 4. Evans 1921–1935, IV, 873; Macdonald 2002, 36, 47–49. 5. Macdonald and Driessen 1988. 6. Cadogan 1977–1978, 1992. 7. For which, see Shaw 2009b, 74–75, figs. 125a, 125b. 8. As in Cucuzza 1997, 78, fig. 6; see also Shaw 2009b, 74 n. 441. 9. Shaw 2009b, fig. 188. 10. M.C. Shaw 1999, 774, figs. clxxii:a–clxxxiii:f. 11. For the dramatic description of the excavation process, see Evans 1921–1935, I, 325–327. For Evans’s main architects at Knossos, Christian Doll, Theodore Fyfe, and Piet de Jong, see section 3.5 in this chapter. 12. Dinsmoor (1973, 12) notes that each run has 12 steps, with 27 steps in each story, 81 in all. The gypsum steps have a rise of 0.14 m and a wide tread of 0.46 m and were built 0.18 m into the wall at both ends. 13. Evans 1921–1935, I, 342 n. 1. 14. For the feature of the column on a pillar base, bordering a stair, see also Ch. 4. 15. For a list of some of the diameters of beams used at Minoan and Cycladic sites, as measured from the chases left in the walls, see Tsakanika-Theochari 2006, I, 76–78, following Paterson 2002. For the use of timber in Aegean architecture of the Late Bronze Age, see also Palyvou 2004b. 16. For the sake of simplicity, throughout this section rooms/spaces at Knossos are referenced with the numbers assigned to them in Hood and Taylour 1981 (Fig. 3.3 here), although the nicknames given to most spaces, as shown in Fig. 3.1, and to which many have become accustomed, will be referred to as well. 17. For those earlier structures, see Ch. 4. 18. This theory has recently been supported at the Akrotiri excavations on the island of Thera, where a similar pier-and-door partition opening had served as a window for the adjacent room (Palyvou 2005, 144, “a unique instance”). Of some interest is that it was apparently Piet de Jong who in 1928 first introduced the idea that the area above the lintels of the pier-and-door partitions in the Hall of the Double Axes (and elsewhere, by association) was not filled with rubble wall mass carrying up to the ceiling, as thought earlier. Rather, there was a series of transom or window openings above them, an idea suggested to de Jong by faience pieces from the Town Mosaic (Kienzle 1998, 302). The Akrotiri discoveries just mentioned above confirm de Jong’s restoration that, for many, had previously been

assumed to have been based on actual architectural evidence. 19. For floors and flooring, see Shaw 2009b, 147–152. It is clear that here in Fig. 3.8 Fyfe depicted the floor of the room above the Hall of the Double Axes as considerably thinner than it actually was. One of Evans’s succeeding architects, probably Christian Doll or perhaps Piet de Jong, established the floor-to-floor height in this area at about 4.20 m, as measured from a section. Also to be noted is that the appearance of the areas immediately below floor level in Fig. 3.4 is deceptive. There the east–west joists (left-to-right) that actually held up the floor structure do not appear above the upper horizontal beams, where they were in antiquity. The unintended visual deception is due to the fact that the floor restored by Evans was a reinforced concrete slab and quite thin compared to the Minoan equivalent. The top of that slab was set at the excavators’ estimate of the ancient floor level. It has led, however, to the “gap” visible in the section (Fig. 3.4), originally filled by floor material, being shown in some restorations as an actual gap below the floor level. 20. Shaw 2009b, 175–178. 21. No ashlar bases with mortises on top and bottom have been reported. 22. See our Fig. 5.15 (as in Palyvou 2005, fig. 191), or, at a larger scale, our Fig. 3.15 (in Palyvou 1999, fig. 134). However, “the Xeste 3 at Akrotiri, the stone wall of the staircase actually rests on the wooden form below. This shows the astonishingly high standards of the building technology . . . as well as the design capabilities in conceiving such an intricate system” (Palyvou 2005, 57, fig. 62). 23. See also Tsakanika-Theochari 2006, I, 151, 234; II, 88, 103, 104 (my own page numbering of otherwise unnumbered pages). 24. The small plan excerpts are taken from Doll’s drawings. 25. Shown dramatically in Evans 1921–1935, I, figs. 253a (after the collapse), 253b (after restoration). 26. Indeed, when found in excavations, either in situ or lying loose, such blocks suggest to one that they were used in a stairway (cf. the stairway at Kommos shown in Fig. 1.47, e.g., where the upper two landing blocks, found loose and in reuse, were restored visually to their original positions). 27. Shaw 2009b, 119. Two such bases, probably in reuse, can be seen in the East Wing. Two depictions (Figs. 3.7, 3.8) show how similar blocks found in the collapse of the Grand Staircase were used. As in the perspective shown in Fig. 3.16:d, they continued to be used as the staircase rose higher. 28. For which, see Shaw 2009b, 115, and Ch. 4. For coursed ashlar pillars, see also Ch. 4.7.

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

29. However, fallen construction features, such as roofing, as well as tile drains once projecting out from the sides of the roofs, have been recovered (Hallager 1990; Shaw 2004; 2009b, 154). Ongoing excavation at Papadiokambos by T. Brogan of the INSTAP-SCEC has focused on recovering whatever is possible of upper story features (Brogan, Sofianou, and Morrison 2011). Driessen (2005) has recently examined Neopalatial upper floors, especially those at Palaikastro. 30. Tsipopoulou 2007, 55. At the Myrtos Pyrgos site in the Ierapetra area (Fig. 1.2), Cadogan and Driessen (pers. comm., 20 November 2013) report gypsum pierand-door partition bases found fallen from the first floor of the burned mansion. One base was T-shaped, of the type often used for an arrangement of three or more doors. Three bases were C-shaped. The presence of such bases can be interpreted as another Knossian influence at the site. 31. See Sakallerakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, 83, 85, 87, 90, 105, 143, 144 (floor slabs), and drawings 8 and 15 (fallen pavements); p. 87 for the column base and p. 90 and fig. 71 for the possible pier-and-door partition bases; there are some fine I- and C-shaped jamb bases on the ground floor there. 32. At Tylissos, a later (LM III?) building with pierand-door partitions was superposed above the remains of House C (Hayden 1984, 44). 33. Evans 1921–1935, II, 409. 34. Newton and Fyfe note in their plan “limestone ends in position” at that point (Evans 1921–1935, II, foldout plan C). See also Ch. 4.7.3. 35. Esp. Evans 1921–1935, I, 325–359. 36. Evans 1900–1901, 115, 117. See also Shaw 2012. 37. For analyses and identification of wood types, see Shaw 2009b, 92–93. 38. Marinatos 1974, 95. This may actually be what Evans identified as a beam from the northeast corner of the Hall of the Colonnades (Evans 1921–1935, I, 343 n. 4); it was apparently erroneously published by Durm as a column fragment (Shaw 2009b, 93 n. 571). 39. Evans 1900–1901, 114. Mackenzie’s description (1901–1907 [1901, 62]) of the same context is more limited. 40. In the instance of the north–south jamb bases in Figs. 3.13, 3.14, and 3.19, the subsidence from the original floor level can be estimated at 0.60–1.25 m (Shaw 2012). 41. Evans 1921–1935, I, 327–328. 42. E.g., in Evans 1921–1935, III, 319; IV, 1. 43. Palmer 1963, 83 n. 2. 44. After reading Boardman’s 1963 publication, I compared the various views, citing him and considering the advice of B.F. Kukachka of the Forest Products

93

Laboratory in Madison, Wisconsin (Shaw 1971, 136– 137); I later brought matters partially up to date with the advice of botanist O. Rackham (Shaw 2009b, 93). But before then, in 1998, in an unpublished Ph.D. thesis in architecture at University of York in England, P. Kienzle (1998, 150) had outlined the actual carbonization process as understood in the professions dealing with heavy timbers. His dissertation is presently available online. 45. White and Dietenberger 1999, 17-10–17-12. 46. An educated guess on the part of R. White of the Forest Products Research Laboratory, who helped provide the illustration. 47. Mackenzie 1901–1907 (notebook from 1 June 1901, 58), after the transcription made by J.W. Graham, in the University of Toronto Robarts Research Library. 48. See Shaw 2012. 49. Mackenzie 1901–1907 (notebook of February 21, 1902, 5), from the transcription by J.W. Graham. Farther east in the Hall of the Double Axes, erosion probably destroyed any carbonized remains connected with the next north–south row of partitions or the columnar portico east of it. 50. For more description of the same phenomenon, see Shaw 2012. 51. Kienzle 1998, 155–156. See also Graham 1987, 85, for a somewhat similar view of the collapse. 52. Mackenzie 1901–1907 (notebook of April 6, 1905, 42), from the Graham transcription. For the lightwell of the Hall of the Double Axes, see Fig. 3.8 (center background). Evans suggests that the accumulation of calcined brick-red soil and lime there (the latter, he thought, was for planned renovations) on the floor of the light-well had preserved the shafts of the two columns shafts discovered. Mackenzie was more inclined to attribute the lime to blocks baked by the fire. The lime in the light-well of the Hall of the Double Axes, however, if from blocks baked by the fire, may have been precipitated from above because the lower wall of the light-well is not in a burned condition. Perhaps the fire in an upper story, next to the light-well, which, after all, continued up, was more intense than that down below where the fire appears to have died out. The date of this “final destruction” of the Residential Quarters remains hypothetical. A recent evaluation by Macdonald (2005, 204–207) suggests that the LM IIIA period (1375–1325 b.c.) is the most likely. 53. Similar very hard concretions have been found at other Minoan sites. Only one, at Phaistos, may not be natural in origin (Shaw 2009b, 155–156). 54. Chlouveraki (2006, 120; 2012, 5). 55. Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, 271–273.

94

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

56. Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, fig. 67 (plan), drawing 72 (restored elevation). 57. A similar argument can be made for a MM III/ LM IA series of storerooms at the Petras palace in eastern Crete (Fig. 1.8), where, again, all of the construction except for the pier jambs was of irregular rubble (see Tsipopoulou 1999b, pls. CLXXXVII:a, CLXXXIX:b). 58. Shaw 2009b, 62–63. Instead, Evans restored coursed ashlar. T. Fyfe, Evans’s own architect, did not restore ashlar in a sketch he made featuring the West Facade at Knossos (Fyfe 1902, 115, fig. 25). 59. Evans 1921–1935, II, 663, fig. 424. 60. Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, 6. For the ashlar style in Building T at Kommos, see also Shaw 2013. 61. La Rosa 2002. 62. Graham 1987, 126, figs. 89, 90. 63. Graham 1961, 1975. 64. Graham 1987, 121–123, fig. 48. 65. Shaw 2009b, fig. 190. 66. Graham 1987, 121–122, fig. 84. 67. Warren 1972, foldout plan opposite p. 11. 68. Warren 1972, 301–304, by O. Rackham. 69. Despite their simplicity, however, there were subtleties that might otherwise be missed. McEnroe, for instance, points out that all of the major walls of the ground floor run east–west, at right angles to the slope, also that thinner walls and openings such as doors and windows were oriented north–south, where less support was needed (McEnroe 2010, 46). 70. The walls become even thicker the farther south one goes in this western wing of the first Phaistos palace, while the rooms remain as constricted in their dimensions (see Levi 1964, fig. 2; 1976–1981, I; Levi and Carinci 1988; Tzakanika-Theochari 2006, II, 27– 52). 71. For more detail, see Shaw 2009b, 91–92. 72. The first group was chosen from the earliest storeroom group in the southernmost part of the first palace. The second group consists of rooms in the Neopalatial storerooms south of the Propylon. 73. Fiandra 1995, 338. 74. A somewhat similar method was used to block a Phaistian doorway in Corridor 41 (Pernier and Banti 1951, fig. 136, center). 75. Found in the side walls of Tholos B at Archanes; see Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, 176– 177, fig. 127, and Ch. 4, Fig. 4.2, below. 76. They were often hidden behind plaster, which also preserved them. The technique continued to be used into the LM III period, for instance in the walls of Building P at Kommos (Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, pls. 1.78b, 1.94). 77. For the construction of the northern pier, see the isometric view of the tomb in the pocket of Evans

1921–1935, IV. For the southern pier, see Evans 1921– 1935, IV, figs. 930 (right), 951 (right); see also Fig. 3.27. 78. For views of the original state during excavation, see also Pernier and Banti 1951, fig. 187 (elevation of the south wall of Room 50), also, for the north wall, see fig. 165 with the single block base of the western portico and fig. 166 with the stacked blocks of the eastern portico. See also Tzakanika-Theochari 2006, II, 139. It is interesting to consider, as far as space use is concerned, that Phaistian Space 50 was probably conceived to provide its inhabitants with shade on the east during the morning (in the eastern portico) and on the west during the afternoon. The portico at Knossos also provided shade for visitors on the west or, perhaps, even for the deceased for whom the elaborate tomb was constructed. 79. Mackenzie was to write a series of four articles featuring Minoan palatial architecture and other matters (Mackenzie 1904–1905, 1905–1906, 1906–1907, 1907– 1908). Therein he deals mainly with its place in the Aegean rather than its more specific nature, function, and typology, which is our concern here. Few refer now to his studies because much more accurate contextual information has been assimilated since those early days of Cretan exploration. Momigliano (1999, 74) comments that many of Mackenzie’s theories are now totally “obsolete.” 80. Gill 2008, 49. Following the similar necessity of retaining an excavation architect, a custom apparently introduced in Crete by Evans, F. Halbherr, excavating in the Mesara, would soon call upon architect E. Stefani (1869–1955) to help him with his work at Phaistos and Hagia Triada. Unlike Evans’s architects, who were free­ lancing but also appointed as architects of an independent British School at Athens, Stefani was a public servant working with the Italian government. He appears in many of the early excavation photographs; some of his drawings appear in this book. Vincenzo La Rosa, to whom I am much indebted, outlined Stefani’s history of work, which I present here. Stefani originally worked as a draftsman at the Soprintendenza dell’Etruria meridionale in Rome (Villa Giulia Museum) and was then promoted, due to his special merits, first to Ispettore and afterward to Soprintendente. In Italy he excavated in the area around Rome (an Etruscan sanctuary at Portonaccio, in Veii [1917–1921]; a basilica and temple at Ardea [1926–1934], Capena). He was a member of the Italian Mission in Crete, working as a draftsman for four campaigns from spring 1902 to 1905 and then a further five from 1910 to 1914. He returned to Crete another three times between 1921 and 1925, again in the summer of 1927, in May 1929, in June 1931, and in October–November 1932. At the end of the 1940s he worked on the general colored plan of Hagia Triada. Halbherr decided to involve him in the publication of

DESTRUCTION AT KNOSSOS AND THE RISE OF A NEW ARCHITECTURAL ORDER

the excavation campaigns at Hagia Triada and entrusted him with the description of the architectural structures (as is clear from Stefani’s notebooks). All of his papers are currently kept in the Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana in Rome. 81. Quoted in Ch. 4.3.1, pp. 106–108. 82. Newton, who died at Tell el Amarna in 1924 when he was directing the excavations of the Egypt Exploration Fund (Evans 1921–1935, II, 158 n. 3), was also responsible for a number of restored drawings of the Knossos palace (e.g., Evans 1921–1935, II, figs. 75 [the Knossos bridgehead, also done with Fyfe] and 532 [a restored elevation of the west facade of the Knossos palace on the Central Court, of which an excerpt is seen in Fig. 1.46]). 83. Shaw 2012. 84. Fyfe 1902, 1925, 1926, respectively. 85. Soar 2009, 72. 86. Fyfe 1935, 1936; the latter was only recently supplanted by F.E. Winter’s recent (2006) book on the subject. 87. See Ch. 3.3.1; Shaw 2012. 88. See Kienzle 1998, 218, 386–388. 89. For a discussion of the problems, see Kienzle 1998, 222–225. 90. After Soar 2009, 244–245. 91. For more about the architecture of the villa, see Kienzle 1998, 239–242. For the Villa’s history during Evans’s days and later, see Powell 1973. 92. Kienzle 1998, 225. 93. Evans 1927, 262. For the use of iron girders at Knossos, see Kienzle 1998, 235–236. 94. Evans 1921–1935, III, xii; Evans 1921–1935, I, vii. 95. These are in the Knossos Archive of the Ashmolean Museum. 96. For details, see Table 3.1.

95

97. The “timber line” in the Hall of the Colonnades is presumably the horizontal line of the bottom of the timber in the north wall of that Hall. See also his comments at the end of Evans’s presentation to the Antiquaries Society (Evans 1927, 267), e.g., that a Knossos staircase could be reconstructed on mathematical lines, the dimensions being multiples of one another and the tread three times the risers. 98. Graham 1960a. I am indebted to Vasso Photou for making available a copy of Doll’s letter, now in the Ashmolean Museum. For more on the Minoan units of measurement, see Shaw 2009b, 53 n. 308. 99. For a discussion of Minoan column shape, see Shaw 2009b, 104–106. 100. Brown 1983, 31. 101. Kienzle 1998, 497, for Doll’s curriculum vitae. After his work with Evans, Doll pursued a political career. 102. For the respective curriculum vitae of the Knossos architects discussed here, see Kienzle 1998, 493–501. For more information about them, as well as many other craftsmen and artists who worked in Crete with the British School of Archaeology, see also Hood and Hood 2000. 103. Kienzle 1998, 288. 104. Evans 1921–1935, III, 289–290. 105. Kienzle 1998, 269. 106. Kienzle 1998, 112, after Michailidou 1995, 80. 107. Blegen and Rawson 1966, frontispiece. 108. Evans 1921–1935, IV, in pocket at end of volume. 109. De Jong’s work with the Athenian Agora was recently highlighted in a special exhibition at the Benaki Museum in Athens (Papadopoulos 2007). 110. Hood (1998, esp. 225–270) records many of these and other aspects of de Jong’s life. 111. Kienzle 1998, 500. 112. Kienzle 1998, 376.

4

A Typology of Elite Architectural Forms: Genesis and Development (MM I–III)

In Chapter 1 I introduced the theme of Minoan palaces and investigated some of their most memorable characteristics: their west courts and raised walkways, central courts, residential quarters, storage magazine groups, reception rooms on upper floors, and broad stairways. Those might be termed “general features,” as indicated in Table 1.3. But other forms contribute to the spectrum of what we call “Elite Style,” and those are discussed in this chapter.1 The first group, discussed in sections 4.1–4.6, includes six forms that are combinations of constructed units, such as complex timber constructions or, for instance, a lustral basin with its typical squared plan including parapet with column(s), steps, and (sometimes) “viewing” window or platform. I then examine certain simpler forms, beginning with ashlar wall construction and ending with the use of gypsum dadoes and “triglyph” benches. Throughout the discussion there is an emphasis on function, along with estimates of when the form first appeared and, often, how it developed. My aim is to establish some perspective on when and where

these developments took place, as summarized and discussed further in Chapter 5.

4.1. Extensive Wooden Frameworks As general features such as those mentioned above were developing for the larger building projects, timber began to be used for more than simply creating a span between walls to support a roof. At EM II Vasiliki, the inclusion of horizontal timbers within walls encouraged wall cohesion (Fig. 2.22), with vertical timbers playing little role. Elsewhere they were used on the inner side of doors that pivoted on stones with natural or man-made depressions (Figs. 4.1:a, 4.2), or occasionally they were used to support roof or ceiling construction (Fig. 4.3). Not long afterward, however, timbers began to be employed for framing wall-ends, which were often the weakest part of a wall of plastered rubble (Fig. 4.1:b, c). Framed window openings were

98

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

painted (Fig. 3.4, left center [partly restored]). All of the above elements are described below and referenced in Table 1.3. From the available evidence it appears that the technology of wooden construction generally developed earlier than quarrying, cutting, and setting stone, although orthostat courses such as those at MM I–II Chrysolakkos or the first Phaistos palace (Fig. 2.11) remain exceptions. In interior spaces, the builders of MM I–II rooms at the early Phaistos palace made minimal use of vertical timbers (Figs. 1.16, lower left; 1.17), which resulted in constriction of space and overbuilding.2 The MM I–II regional architecture in the Malia area, in contrast, shows greater sophistication in overall room arrangement—for example, the neat grouping of storerooms—as well as the creation

also introduced (Fig. 4.1:d). As early as MM IB, wooden frameworks were keyed to socles of cut stone, or orthostat, courses (Figs. 2.10 [top of orthostat wall], 2.11). Columnar structures were also introduced within light-wells (Figs. 1.38 [I 1], 2.15) and porticoes (Fig. 2.13), and from at least as early as MM II they continued to be major features in Minoan architecture. Piers and doorjambs composed of groups of vertical beams (Fig. 4.1:d, e) were also developed. In order to preserve their lower ends, they were first set onto wooden and, later, onto ashlar bases (see below). Wooden pierends were mortised onto stone blocks, a method that could well be a carryover from wooden construction methods. Both jambs and piers were typically composed of beams set between clay and rubble packing that was plastered and sometimes

–

–

–

a

c

b

d

e

Figure 4.1. EM II–LM I wall-ends and entrances: (a) entrance to EM II Hagia Triada house (after Laviosa 1972–1973, figs. 1, 3); (b) room entrance, MM II Quartier Mu, Building A (after Schmid 1996, fig. 40); (c) MM IIB Phaistos palace, elevation of wall-end of Corridor XII (after Pernier 1935, pl. III); (d) MM IIIA Phaistos, entrance into lustral basin XLIV 38 (after Pernier 1935, fig. 195); (e) MM IIIB polythyron, Hall of the Double Axes (after Evans 1921–1935, III, plan E). Drawings G. Bianco.

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

of interconnected spaces by providing both general and more intimate access with passageways within or around room groups. As a result of the new use for wood, for instance, wooden uprights between shared storeroom walls in Malia’s Crypte Hypostyle helped reduce wall width and at the same time provided support for the floor above (Fig. 2.15, lower right, 1–4).3 A somewhat similar technique was used earlier in the MM IB Tholos B at Archanes, but apparently on one side of the wall only (Fig. 4.3).4 Later, at early Neopalatial Knossos this practice became common in the Residential Area and on either side of walls, especially in the West Magazines there. In Quartier Mu, not far away from the Crypte Hypostyle at Malia, the use of wood is quite conspicuous, for most of the doorways are framed (Figs. 4.1:b, 4.4), as are piers separating rooms (Fig. 4.5). The culmination of this development in the use of interlinked wooden supports can be seen in early polythyra and columnar light-wells at

99

Malia (Figs. 1.38, 2.15). The broad staircase leading up from the light-well in Building A in Quartier Mu (Figs. 4.6, 4.7) added to the room complex the dimension of upstairs rooms illuminated by the light-well along their eastern side, along with access to other rooms beyond.5 Here in Quartier Mu (Fig. 1.38) we can see the provision of space for the gathering of groups beginning on the west with a shrine (I 12) next to a lustral basin set below a large room (I 4, I 3), then the portico with its light-well (I 1, I A) and the polythyron (I 13e), designed to impress and at the same time to carry out social and religious functions, perhaps similar to occasions being carried out in the nearby MM I–II palace.6 Figure 4.6 suggests how the same groups may have proceeded up a broad stairway to the first floor, unless it was reserved for the inhabitants’ residence. The most impressive extensive wooden framework in Minoan Crete, however, was to be built not long after, at Knossos, in the form of the Residential Quarters (Figs. 3.1–3.4). A construction

Figure 4.2. Myrtos Phournou Koriphi, EM II threshold and interior door pivot, looking south. After Warren 1972, pl. 19:a. © British School of Archaeology at Athens.

Figure 4.3. Archanes, Phourni, Tholos Tomb Complex B, original MM I wall (background) with chases for wooden uprights. Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, fig. 211.

Figure 4.4. Crypte Hypostyle, window and door combination between Rooms 4 and 5, from the northeast. Drawing G. Bianco, after Amouretti 1970, pl. 2.

100

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

–

–

–

Figure 4.5. Malia, MM II Quartier Mu, plan for the three doorways between Rooms I 11 and I 10 in Building A (see Fig. 1.38). Drawing G. Bianco, after Schmid 1983, figs. 18, 19.

Figure 4.6. Malia, Quartier Mu, Building A, conjectural restoration of first floor above light-well (I 1), looking northeast. Drawing J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco, after foldout plan in Poursat and Schmid 1992.

Figure 4.7. Malia, Quartier Mu, Building A, stairway leading upstairs from light-well I 1. Elevation (above, looking east) and plan (below, north to the left) show construction elements, including timber supporting framework. Note how the lowest tread was plastered with clay and the next two steps were of wooden planks. Cf. with Fig. 4.6. Schmid 1996, fig. 45. © École française d’Athènes.

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

drawing by Doll (Fig. 3.10) illustrates the great complexity of the Grand Staircase and the Hall of the Colonnades. The situation there resembles that just discussed in Building A of Quartier Mu (Fig. 4.6), in which a major staircase with an adjacent light-well provided access to main rooms for assembly and/or residence.7 In the case of Knossos, of course, we know that ground and first floors were quite similar in plan, but then the relationship in Mu (Fig. 1.38) between the stairs (I 11/I 9), the portico (I 1/I A), and the polythyron (I 13) suggests that the plan of the ground floor may, for both structural and practical reasons, have resembled that of the first floor (Fig. 4.6).8 In both instances the master builders in charge met the requirements posed by the occasion.9

4.2. Wall-Ends, Doorways, and Pier-and-Door Partitions, Phase 1 (EM II–MM II) In early Crete, doorways might be defined as the gaps left for passage between walls, often where walls ended or began. Sometimes there were thresholds. At EM II Myrtos Phournou Koriphi (Fig. 2.23), for instance, many such wall gaps had no indication of closure. A few, however, such as the main entrance to the building from the south, 1.05 m wide, had an impressive slab threshold and, directly to the right of it as one entered (Fig. 4.2), a round pivot stone, with a circular hollow 0.085 m in diameter, into which the probable wooden or reed door was set, with the upper part of the door’s pivot shaft projecting up into a beam or an oblong stone projecting from the upper wall.10 The door swung in, to the right, as one entered Corridor 64 there, suggesting convenience for the righthanded who were entering as well as security for those living within, who could close, even bar, the opening against intruders. A similar opening arrangement led into the neighboring room.11 Its door also swung in to the right as one entered, a custom that may have been island-wide at the time, for the EM III Casa Est at far off Hagia Triada (Fig. 4.1:a) had exactly the same arrangement.12 Important to note is that the doors mentioned opened inward, a custom that was to extend down

101

through time, even to many dwellings now where, as in my own household, doors open in to most of the inner rooms, living room, kitchen, bathroom, and bedrooms, where, again, security and convenience were in the mind of the original architect, as they are all lockable from the inside.13 At Myrtos Phournou Koriphi (Fig. 2.23) there was little trace of wood or reeds, aside from the pragmatic evidence of the doors themselves (the pivot stones), at such passages.14 At contemporary Vasiliki, much better preserved due to the very thick layers of plaster used (Fig. 2.22), many chases in the walls show where horizontal beams helped bind walls together,15 but still there is little evidence for a door frame: walls simply ended neatly, especially if they were plastered. If there were doors, they were probably near to but inside the doorway, against which they closed, as at Phournou Koriphi and Hagia Triada. A few hundred years later, in Quartier Mu at Malia, doors, now ubiquitous, opened almost without exception into the interior.16 A major addition to the structural integrity of the walls in Building A there had apparently already been introduced, namely, vertical wooden supports set into each of the four wall corners involved (Fig. 4.1:b). Those supports were keyed to each other below and also presumably above, at lintel level, and set upon a horizontal wooden member still within the jamb, at floor level. A similar jamb with an extra support in the center can be seen in the window-door combination within the Crypte Hypostyle, also at Malia (Fig. 4.4). Thus three sides of an actual door frame, the two sides plus the inevitable lintel above, the last usually not preserved, began to form, a change predicated upon a growing sophistication in architectural requirements and certainly tied to an improving infrastructure for acquiring and processing the necessary wood products. Thus what one might term the “reinforced jamb” was introduced. A jamb similar to what we have seen at Malia was set into a wall-end between Spaces XI and XII of the first Phaistos palace (Fig. 4.1:c).17 The structure of the latter wall-end, with one support near the corner of each jamb and another in its center, was later to become typical in Neopalatial jambs, although even then there was variety.18 The lower, horizontal base for the same jamb appears to have been made of stone, probably marking the time toward the end of MM II when stone jamb bases were introduced, as discussed below.

102

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

As we have seen, many of the doors concerned retained the convenience of having the door pivot next to the room’s entrance (e.g., Figs. 4.1:b, 4.4)19 so that the door could close against the opposite doorjamb, where it could be fastened from inside by, for instance, a simple cord arrangement. A significantly different variation in the positioning of the door pivot and thus the door itself, however, was found in the Atelier du Potier, also in Quartier Mu, where the pivot as well as the closed door rested within part of a recessed jamb,20 an accommodation also common in today’s jambs, so that the door is arrested firmly and restrained from swinging out. Doors pivoting on their wooden thresholds are also found in nearby Building A (Fig. 4.5).

4.2.1. Polythyron Form at Early Malia Evidence for a great innovation, one uniquely Minoan, was discovered in Quartier Mu, namely a Middle Minoan predecessor to the Neopalatial polythyron (many-doored) base arrangement that can often be found in residential areas and elsewhere in the Minoan palaces, as well as in certain elite houses. (Polythyra have already been introduced in Ch. 1 in terms of their arrangement and use; their development is discussed in Ch. 5.) One example can be seen between Rooms I 10 East and I 11 in House A in Quartier Mu (Fig. 4.5). As seen there, the excavators found, thanks to the plaster that had been smoothed around them, the outlines of two pier bases set at intervals between the two walls of a room, leaving three spaces for passage. A similar arrangement, possibly as early as MM I, has also been suggested by Martin Schmid for two of the subterranean rooms in the Crypte Hypostyle at Malia (Fig. 2.15).21 The western ends of these bases and wall-ends in Quartier Mu (see Fig. 4.5) were linked by a single line of boards serving as thresholds. Each wall-end was provided with a jamb with two vertical timbers anchored on a horizontal board set in the floor. Each polythyron pier had, as restored by Schmid, a vertical timber at each of its four corners.22 The doors for the three spaces were double leaved, two per space, with all six pivoting on the threshold sills, each leaf neatly folding against either a pillar or against the jamb of a pier. The double doors in each of the two

southern intervals were of about equal size. Those in the northern, third interval, were unequal, implying that the western one of the two (0.42 m wide) could be left open to afford easier passage while the smaller leaf, 0.35 m wide, remained in the closed position. Seen for the first time here, in a MM II context, is the use of piers set at intervals subdividing a room, also the use of double door leaves for the relevant door openings. It is not known whether open spaces were left above the door lintels, as seen in developed Neopalatial examples. Evidence for the open spaces above at least the later lintels is best attested at Akrotiri on Thera (Fig. 4.8), where their occasional use as shelves was proven. This general Minoan timbering system was ubiquitous at LM IA Akrotiri, where a good example, as reconstructed by Palyvou, may be seen in Xeste 3 (Fig. 4.9). Such transoms above the lintels could well have existed in the case of the later LM IA pier-and-door partition arrangement discovered in the northern part of the Malia palace, already discussed in Chapter 1 in connection with the residential area (Ch. 1.3.1). Restored elevations from Area III 7a and a plan of the base of one of the piers along the northern side are shown in Figure 4.10. At first glance it appears quite like the earlier piers just discussed from Quartier Mu, being made of wood but with clay filling. One major difference, however, is that the four corner timbers project out slightly to the side, giving the pier an I-shape in cross section, which allowed the door leaves to fold within rather than against the side of the pier. As we will see, the I-shape is a typical outline for the later, mature pillar form. That form, however, was set upon a base of stone rather than wood and was most likely earlier than the wooden facsimile at Malia, so there is a good chance that the polythyron arrangement at Malia actually postdates more developed bases at other sites, for example, some of those at Knossos.23 The architectural innovation that characterizes the Malia site during the Protopalatial period is hardly matched there during Neopalatial times. If one studies the Knossos palace site from a similar point of view, however, the MM III changes and additions are so ubiquitous that they perhaps suggest a greater scale of innovation than what was actually underway, because we know so little about MM I–II architecture on the site. An example of this is the MM IIIB Residential Quarters with its Grand

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

Figure 4.9. Xeste 3, Akrotiri, Thera, wooden pier-and-door partitions as well as rafters similar to those used at major Minoan sites on Crete. Palyvou 2005, fig. 70.

Figure 4.8. Akrotiri, Thera, pier-and-door partition. Palyvou 2005, fig. 213.

–

Figure 4.10. Malia palace, Residential Quarters, restored pier no. 7 from polythyron in Room III 7a. After Schmid 1983, fig. 12.

–

103

–

104

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Staircase, which literally fills the “Great Cutting” made in MM II, leaving us scarce evidence for MM II and MM IIIA architecture in that area.

4.2.2. Evidence for Early Polythyron Development at Knossos The jamb bases in the Residential Quarters at Knossos (e.g., in Fig. 3.1) are both well developed and varied, all of them made of stone and none of wood such as those we have seen at Malia. But what of their predecessors? Should we look for them at Phaistos in the MM IIIA contexts (to be discussed here shortly)? Actually, as already mentioned in Chapter 3, there is some evidence for MM II/IIIA architecture in the Residential Quarters at Knossos. There are jamb bases, for instance, below the so-called “Lair” in the Queen’s Megaron area, set at the lower, kalderim pavement level (Fig. 4.11).24 The Lair, jocosely referred to as such during the excavation, was a secluded but centrally located space, perhaps a storeroom.25 The jamb bases just mentioned probably represent parts of the plan of a (or the) predecessor of the present Residential Quarters. Also, not far away, in the southern wall of the Hall of the Double Axes (Fig. 3.11:a, b), high-quality reused ashlar blocks can be seen. That at least the lower blocks (below the first horizontal timbers) are reused is suggested by the contrast between their rough coursing and their otherwise carefully cut edges and smoothed faces. Also, coursed ashlar was not usually used on an interior wall, such as this, which was to be covered over by either plaster or a dado, or both. The blocks in question, in their original use, might have come from a wall exposed to the exterior, such as that of a light-well, as was the custom in later Minoan construction. That they come from another, obviously earlier building is also suggested by their low heights (about 0.30 m) as compared with the much larger blocks, of different proportions, about 0.50– 0.60 m high, used uniformly in the light-wells in the area of the Residential Quarters.26 Of special interest in this regard are three pierand-door partition bases (Fig. 4.12, top) that were reused as cover slabs for the underground drains, built in MM II, below the Residential Quarters. The drains themselves were explored and described by

Macdonald and Driessen.27 The three gypsum bases were among the many other slabs used to cover the drain channels. The actual lengths of the three slabs can only be approximated now since they were inspected from below, and then in cramped circumstances, from within channels averaging only about 0.65–0.95 m in height and 0.45–0.55 m in width. The amount of the slabs’ overlap on the outside of the channel (not visible to the viewer from below), however, can be estimated as perhaps 0.05–0.15 m. On that basis the measurements of the two I-shaped bases are about 0.30 m wide by 0.60 m long. Those of the C-shaped base are about 0.20 m wide by 0.60 m long. If we compare the I-shaped bases’ measurements with comparable bases in the Hall of the Double Axes (Fig. 4.12, lower right), however, the latter, about 0.60 m wide and 1.20 m long, are considerably longer. The C-shaped base (Fig. 4.12, upper left) probably belongs to a single rather than a multiple type of doorway. Again, there are also significant size differences—for instance, with one from the Queen’s Megaron (Fig. 4.12, lower left) measuring ca. 0.40 m wide by 1.10 m long. The significance of the comparisons is that while the slabs from the drains are rather consistent among themselves in measurement, they appear to be significantly smaller in overall dimensions than those in the Residential Quarters. The case of the two larger drain slabs is especially important since the only I-shaped bases in the Residential Quarters are in the polythyra of the Hall of the Double Axes (Fig. 3.1). One conclusion would seem to be that since the two groups of bases are internally consistent, the drain slabs must belong to another, earlier building predating the one that we see now. A likely candidate for that building is the one represented by the Lair slabs (Fig. 4.11) mentioned above, of which unfortunately we have only the approximate dimensions as scaled off the published plan (0.35 m wide by 0.60 m long).28

4.2.3. The Lair Building at Knossos Whatever the Lair and drain jamb base groups, as well as the reused ashlars, may reflect of earlier area history, no doubt can remain that there was an earlier structure, known here as the “Lair Building,” below the later Residential Quarters. It

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

105

Figure 4.11. Knossos palace, detail of Queen’s Megaron area with lower pier-and-door bases of Lair building indicated with asterisks (center, left). Evans 1921–1935, III, fig. 249.

Figure 4.12. Knossos palace, pier-and-door bases. Above: three pier-and-door bases reused as covers for MM II drains below the Residential Quarters. Below: pier-anddoor bases from (left) the northern entrance to the Queen’s Megaron and (right) the eastern polythyron in the Hall of the Double Axes. Drawings J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco.

had a significant polythyron arrangement and dated to MM II (the date of the Great Cutting) or MM IIIA, and it was probably the immediate predecessor of the MM IIIB Residential Quarters. Possibly it had a similar arrangement and overall purpose. Of course we do not yet have evidence from Knossos for a wooden predecessor, already seen here in bases at Malia in both MM II and MM III contexts, but it might well appear some day.

establishments underwent a basic change in which their wooden structure was elevated upon a single ashlar block.29 Doorjambs went through a similar evolution, perhaps even ahead of piers, and I believe the two changes can be traced to the same cause, namely, the need to lift the wooden structures above the damp floor level in order to prevent their bases from rotting out. The pier bases, however, required mortising wooden jamb supports to the stone base, whereas the wooden jamb base construction usually remained unmortised, perhaps because the doorframe was more self-supporting than the pier.30

4.3. Wall-Ends, Doorways, and Pier-and-Door Partitions, Phase 2 (MM III)

4.3.1. Doorways at Knossos

It now appears that at the beginning of the MM III period, piers built in some of the more elite Minoan

As we have seen, two of the chief base types in their developed form (Fig. 4.12) had already been

106

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

used in a predecessor of the Residential Quarters at Knossos (Fig. 3.1). Those reappeared later in the Hall of the Double Axes, as well as in a selection of door types that follows below. I-shaped bases with projecting “antennae,” one at each corner of the base, designed to enclose the door leaves so that, when closed, the pier appeared of uniform dimensions, are featured in this discussion, along with the C-shaped base, which was often used. Usually, the I-type occurred in the most elegant polythyra. Such bases appear in some Knossian dependencies such as the Royal Villa, the South House, and the House of the Chancel Screen, but not, curiously, at the Little Palace, where the Tand C-shaped bases predominate. Outside Knossos, I-type bases were used at Nirou Khani, in the Residential Quarters of the palaces at Malia and Phaistos, and in the West Wing of the Kato Zakros palace, but not, surprisingly, at Hagia Triada. In this doorway type, the opposite facing leaves pivoted within the interior corners closest to the outside of the room so that someone inside could close the door easily. As in the Hall of the Double Axes (Fig. 3.1), the corresponding C-shaped jamb was often used along with the I-type to end the polythyron at a wall or corner or, along with one matching it in shape, on either side of a doorway. Sometimes a simpler C-shaped base could substitute, but this type was often reserved for doorways with a single door. In 1903, only a few years after Evans began excavation at Knossos, Fyfe provided him with a brief study of the opening of doors, which is worth quoting in part here to indicate both the superior character of the investigation and the nature of their forms and use. It was illustrated in the Palace of Minos by a group of five examples (Fig. 4.13), most from the East Wing of the palace.31 Evans’s introductory text reads:32 The heavy rains of this season first brought clearly out the scorings on the thresholds caused by the opening and the shutting of the doors. This was first noticed in the Hall of the Double Axes and adjoining Hall of the Colonnades, but afterwards clear traces were observed in various parts of the Palace and its dependencies. In the Royal Villa . . . it . . . was specially perceptible. This phenomenon coupled with the appearance of the hinge [pivot] sockets and many bolt-holes makes it possible to understand a great deal more about

the interior arrangements of the building. The doors, as Dr. Mackenzie has justly noted, were controlled on the side towards which they opened, and the private rooms and passages are in this way found to command the more public quarters.

Fyfe’s detailed description of four examples of doors (nos. 1–4 in Figure 4.13) that had left friction marks on the floor slabs of their doorways then followed. Concerning double, or “two leaf” doors, Fyfe wrote:33 All the examples given . . . confirm the supposition that double doors were the rule where the jambs have double “reveals.” Each leaf folded back into the recess of the gypsum jamb (which formed a base for a similar recess in the woodwork above), after the manner of a modern folding door, or a shutter in its shutter-boxing. Double doors are found in doorways communicating between the various rooms and corridors of a system, in house or palace.

He offered these remarks about single, or “one leaf” doors:34 Single doors were evidently the rule where the doorjambs have only one reveal (see Nos. 3 and 4). They occur more particularly where the end of a system is reached, as is apparently the case in No. 4, where the private quarter of the Women’s Apartments and Royal Stores is shut off from the “Hall of Colonnades”—a partly open colonnaded court looking on to the main staircase and corridor giving access to the East Slope Halls.

He then examined the doors illustrated here in Figure 4.13 sequentially:35 To take these doors in detail, in their order of illustration:—No. 1, from the Pillar Room of the Royal Villa . . . shows a rather puzzling double door, in which the leaves do not appear to have met. It is impossible to account for this except by the supposition that one leaf of the door was generally kept closed, and fastened by a bolt running into the rectangular socket in the floor slab: the other, and larger leaf (which shows evidence of having been used more), being allowed to swing free. It is, however, possible that the right hand leaf was larger than is represented by the present limitmark: and that this was a double door, of two equal leaves, meeting or slightly overlapping, in the ordinary manner. The threshold line, crossing from jamb to jamb, is more clearly marked in the case of the left-hand leaf than in the right.

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

In No. 2 (North door of Hall of the Double Axes) it is fairly clear that the two leaves of a double door overlapped, but the left-hand leaf must have scraped the centre of the floor-slab more than the right-hand leaf. A bolt-socket in the floor also exists in this doorway, which from its position seems to show that the bolt probably fastened the end of the right leaf, after the left leaf had been closed. The lines of the threshold crossing from one reveal to the other are really slight sinkings. The front one is probably a little in advance of the actual front of the door when closed, and the other one may represent the common line of both leaves, when closed. No. 3, from the East door of the “Hall of Colonnades,” is an example of a large single door opening into the corridor which led to the (perhaps) more private “Hall of the Double Axes.” The floormarks indicate the direction of the door-swing, and the outer limit of the swing is very clearly defined, showing a clearance of about 1 1/2 inches [4 cms] with the “cheek” of the jamb. There is no definite hole cut in the floor slab for the hingeing apparatus. No. 4, also from the “Hall of Colonnades” (South door) has already been quoted. It shows more clearly than any other example the mechanism of a single door. The front face of the door, when closed, is clearly represented by a line—the meeting of the back, and slightly higher front of the threshold. The position of this line is significant, as it shows that some of the doors, at least in the Palace, did not fit hard up to the reveals of their doorjambs; and that wooden door frames may have been used. These door-frames, if they existed, were not necessarily ‘housed’ into the floor slabs, as in this case only one rectangular opening is cut in the floor, and it is at the hingeing end; obviously, therefore, chiefly for the hingeing apparatus. In the case of a double door (see Nos. 1, 2, [and 5]), the two rectangular openings in the floor are obviously for the hingeing apparatus of each leaf; so that the existence of wooden doorframes on which doors were hung is not proved except by the scant evidence already given in discussing No. 4. The whole question of door-fixings, however, is obscure, as there is evidence to show that the Palace builders were familiar with metal pivothinges, sunk into holes in the floor, ground out by the drill; and the large holes shown in the illustrated examples (see especially right side of No. 2) almost suggest door-frames. No. 5. (East Doors of Hall of Double Axes . . .) call for no particular remark, except that [it] has

107

Figure 4.13. Knossos palace, various door arrangements, including indications of door closure implied by scorings on thresholds. Evans 1921–1935, III, fig. 213, by T. Fyfe.

on the right-hand side a clearly defined black line which shows the place of the woodwork jamb above the gypsum base. . .

Concerning the double door that Fyfe labeled No. 1, it might be noted parenthetically that a similar double door was found in the Malia polythyron in Quarter Mu, above (Fig. 4.5, center).36 Fyfe’s important contribution, like my own attempt to discern the development and use of both bases and doorways, may give the impression of standardization, but when considering the entire Knossos palace architecturally, we find variety. For instance, regarding the C-shaped bases with a single reveal, there is also a thinner, elongated version found in at least two areas of the palace. A pair of MM III date, illustrated in Figure 4.14,37 shows the narrowing of the original MM III coursed ashlar doorway (“wall-jambs”) leading into the Eighth Magazine of the West Wing. The second group, of three bases, with two C-shaped bases and a single T-shaped base in between them,

108

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

was at the MM III entrance way leading into the so-called Initiatory Area, with its lustral basin, in the North Wing of the palace (Figs. 4.15, 4.16).38 Those bases are, theoretically, contemporary with the ones in the West Wing that we have examined here, but they differ somewhat in shape. To explain this, one can suggest that those responsible for building, probably separate groups undertaking individual projects, simply varied the base form while proceeding with their work, and also, no doubt, reused bases when they were available. A dramatic parallel for this situation is evident in Figure 4.17, which illustrates the variety of roughly contemporary (LC IA) jamb bases of the same general types (I, T, C, other) found in houses at Akrotiri, Thera.39 A single wall-end in the first Phaistos palace (Fig. 4.1:c) suggests that by MM II some wall-ends there were strengthened by vertical timbers set on stone bases. Not long after, probably in MM IIIA, however, doorway groups of this type were introduced, for instance in a series of at least three single doorways with C-shaped bases set around at least two sides of a larger room or court (Fig. 4.18) in Casa XLVII. Within the Phaistos palace itself, a canonic three-doorway group of C- and T-shaped bases led into the lustral basin there (Fig. 4.1:d). Another, with attenuated bases like those in Fig. 4.14 from Knossos, led into Room XLV 22.40 The Ishaped base does not appear in these early contexts at Phaistos. As already suggested, the new style of stone bases, providing secure footings, a convenient place for pivots to rotate, and elevating wooden construction above the damp “rot and wear” zone, seems to have been introduced not long after the destruction horizon of MM II.41 To conclude this section focusing on the construction of wall-ends, I will summarize what we can learn from door pivots in the doors set there, for the changes in their positioning probably reflect the character of the door framing. At the beginning of the chapter, for instance, we noted that at EM II Myrtos Phournou Koriphi, the pivot was set in a partially hollowed out stone, placed behind and to one side of the threshold (Fig. 4.2), an arrangement also seen at contemporary Hagia Triada (Fig. 4.1:a). This custom continued in MM I–II, as is evident in Malia’s Crypte Hypostyle (Fig. 4.4), but a clear difference can be seen nearby, probably partly as a result of improving carpentry techniques, in the early Minoan hall structure in contemporary

Quartier Mu. There (Fig. 4.5, top) squared wooden members were set horizontally at the bases of the door piers. Additionally, the position of the pivot in the northernmost of the door openings and the scratch marks of the bottom of the door on the plastered floor (Fig. 4.5, left, on both plans) show that the door opened into rather than out from the door opening, as in the other cases cited above. This is a fashion leading up to the later pier-and-door partition type. In the same illustration one can also see that the horizontal beam in the pier acted as the lowest part of the door framing and was set next to the pivot on which the door swung. Not long afterward, as we have just seen, the wooden beams closest to floor level began to rot; then the builders apparently began to replace the horizontal, lower part of the wooden framing with single stone blocks. Not long after, judging from MM IIIA remains elsewhere at Phaistos, a projection was added to the rectangular stone block (Figs. 4.1:d and 4.18, right center), and the door’s pivot was set neatly within the protected interior corner, as seen more clearly in later bases from Knossos shown in Figure 4.13. This likely explains the circumstances that brought about the use of the C- and the T-shaped jamb bases. A step in the same development was, also, the addition of a second projection on the other end of the

Figure 4.14. Knossos palace, jamb arrangement in eighth magazine, West Wing, with pier jambs, later replaced by elongated jamb bases added to narrow the doorway. Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 331.

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

109

Figure 4.15. Knossos palace, plan of Northwest Lustral Basin area. Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 291.

Figure 4.16. Knossos palace, watercolor depiction of Northwest Lustral Basin, looking northeast. Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 292.

stone bases, enabling the door to swing into the reveal of the pier without projecting at all (as in Fig. 4.1:e). When used in a multiple doorway, in a pier-and-door partition of the mature type, the other side of the stone bases we have been describing was cut with two similar projections, one on each end, the resulting base being rather like a capital “Ι” in outline.

In the Phaistos area this developed type may have been introduced later in LM I.42 But at Knossos, where both types were found reused in a late MM II or early MM III context (Fig. 4.12), the two types appear to be contemporary. This observation could strengthen the argument that Knossos introduced the type, which was used later in the Mesara when the Phaistos palace was constructed. Thus,

110

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 4.17. Akrotiri, Thera, variety of stone partition bases used in LM I architecture. Palyvou 2005, fig. 214.

Figure 4.18. Phaistos, Casa XLVII, looking southwest. Pernier 1935, fig. 72.

the changes in the positioning of the pivots seem to have been crucial to the development of the Minoan pier-and-door partition, a form represented by the bases described here and seen on so many Neopalatial sites in Crete.

windows, a technique that soon spread to strengthening and framing interior doorways, in addition to stairways, as we see later in a developed form in Malia’s MM II Quartier Mu (Figs. 4.6, 4.7). In Figure 4.19 we see how a combination of timbers set into wall-ends and spanning room widths there gave structural integrity to an upper floor. There occurred also a remarkable transformation in structures even before MM I, namely that by then the buildings were “perfect” to the extent that they fulfilled the builders’ goal of being almost impervious to the heat of the summer, the rain of the fall, and the moderately cold days of winter. Then a near reversal of this process began, with developments that created more harmony with the outdoors, as buildings were opened up to allow judicious access to light and air, to courtcentered activity, and sometimes, for the privileged few, a view of the surrounding countryside or the sea. Impressive entrances with a single column, with or without stylobate, were introduced as early as MM II, as attested by the large oval

4.4. Columnar Structures Vertical wooden supports were seldom used in Early Minoan walls,43 although a few solidly built stone pillars have been reported in EM III/MM IA rooms in South-Central Crete.44 Those may be the predecessors to wooden columns used similarly in later contexts.45 But timbers were built horizontally into some EM walls. They also supported ceilings and roofs. Ample widths of some EM rooms, for instance at Vasiliki (Fig. 2.21), suggest that some of the beams spanned over 4 m. The gradual addition of vertical timbers may have begun with the introduction of frameworks for exterior doors and

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

111

Figure 4.19. Malia, Quartier Mu, Building B ceiling sections (top, middle) and rafter distribution (bottom). Schmid 1996, figs. 43, 44. © École française d’Athènes.

base, 1.24 m. in diameter, in the area leading into the first West Wing of the palace at Phaistos (Fig. 1.15:b),46 or the smaller and somewhat later entrance, with a stylobate, leading into Casa XLVI from the west.47 For building interiors, the new

need was satisfied by light-wells with columns and/or windows that furnished light and air, which concurrently promoted the introduction of hydraulic works to drain them, with arrangements to handle the rain runoff from slightly sloping roofs. A

112

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

similar result could be achieved by adding columnar porticoes to a building’s exterior, which could be improved even further by creating larger interior courts with porticoes in order to provide private or public space, depending on the circumstance.

4.4.1. Light-Wells The light-well developed in Crete as early as MM I and was used consistently, with innovations, throughout Minoan architectural history. Concerning its earliest background, however, little is known, for the first known use, at Malia, is from a period in which the form was already partially developed. The first stages of light-well use may have occurred during the EM period, but light-wells have not yet been reported from well-preserved settlements such as EM II Myrtos Phournou Koriphi48 or from Vasiliki.49 More likely, it was introduced either at the end of the EM period or at a time in MM I that predated the examples we know from Malia. The light-well no doubt functioned rather like a window set in a building’s exterior wall, illuminating interior rooms. As larger buildings were constructed, the need arose for light in interior spaces located at some distance from the outside walls, a requirement that could only be satisfied by opening up the roof to allow light to enter. Perhaps the lightwell was at first a small room, open to the sky, with a window or two, but as a form it would not become really functional until a drainage system was developed to empty the runoff water outside the building.

Figure 4.20. Malia, Quartier Mu, view of light-well in Building A, from southeast. Photo M.C. Shaw.

At Malia, light-wells50 opened up interior spaces to outdoor light. Two, featuring a number of elements, are known from the Crypte Hypostyle (Fig. 2.15, north of Chambre 1 and south of Chambre 3), dating perhaps as early as MM IB.51 The first, a kind of exterior light-well (also Fig. 2.16, left of center), presently unique, was essentially an ashlarlined, open plaster conduit at ground level, about 1 m wide. It collected accumulated rain water from a sloping roof and carried it westward, outside the building area. Adjoining the channel on the south, the northern, ashlar wall of Room 1 of the subterranean Crypte was no doubt fitted with a window that lit the interior.52 The light-well was adapted to the ground level on the north and the subterranean floor level to the south. The second light-well in the Crypt building (Fig. 2.15, center left, “puits de lumière”) was discovered largely during a cleaning operation that followed the major publication.53 It was set approximately at the center of the southern rooms, which were at ground level. The room is large, over 6 x 10 m, ample enough to be used for gatherings connected with rituals carried out in subterranean Rooms 1–5 along the northern border (see Ch. 5).54 The light-well was supported along its north side by three columns, those at each end spanning south to the stairway wall that led directly up to either another story, possibly with a similar plan, or to the roof. A drain led from the light-well to the area under the stairs and from there to the street drain. A similar light-well, also formed by a line of columns set parallel to a bearing wall, was used,

Figure 4.21. Malia, Quartier Mu, column bases at right center in Fig. 4.20. Note dowel holes. Photo J.W. Shaw.

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

perhaps later in MM II, in Building A of Quartier Mu (I 1 in Fig. 1.38, see also Fig. 4.20). There two beautifully fashioned bases (Fig. 4.21) of gray sideropetra supported two columns whose architrave no doubt began at the northern east–west wall and ended at the pillar-like eastern wall of the stairs leading up to the first floor, where a parapet probably bordered the rectangular area open to the sky (Fig. 4.6). Downstairs the covered area was paved with very large and evenly laid, irregular slabs of hard gray limestone.55 The rectangular floor area open to the sky was plastered. A substantial drain carried accumulated rain water south, outside the building. The light-well itself is about 5.6 m2. It is positioned strategically in a line of rooms (Figs. 1.38, 1.39) created at the same time, beginning with Room I 3 with the lustral basin (I 4), then the lightwell itself (I 1), and, to the east, at least three spaces of which the first two (I 13 west and I 13 east) had pier-and-door partitions forming their eastern walls.56 This very significant group is discussed further in Chapter 5, along with the joining of its early light-well form (I 1) with what has come to be called the “Minoan hall” (I 13w and I 13e), with its two columns in antis and its two pier-and-door partitioned walls creating a polythyron. A different approach to light-well construction can be seen in Room 103 at Phaistos, along the northern periphery of the palace (Fig. 4.22). There the light-well is of the peristyle type supported on four sides,57 in this case, by low-block pillars alternating with columns (see Ch. 4.4.4, for the type). This is an early example of such a combination, the mortised pillars being among the earliest examples of that technique, which was to become common in the Neopalatial period. The tradition of light-well construction at Malia, discussed above, continued despite earthquake destruction in MM II, as, for example, in the LM I palace where, predictably, a polythyron was accompanied by its private light-well in the Residential Quarters (Fig. 1.27, Room III 7b) in the North Wing. It was somewhat like that in Quartier Mu save that Mu’s “fore hall,” with its two columns, now had a small light-well aligned alongside. The combination of appended light-well and fore hall had by then merged into a single, simpler form, one that was to become a constant, but with some variation, during the ensuing Neopalatial period, before disappearing after LM II. Of some interest,

113

Figure 4.22. Phaistos, northeast area, plan of Room 103. Pernier 1935, fig. 209.

and again similar to the Quartier Mu grouping, is that a special arrangement was made in the Malia light-well shown in Figure 1.27 (Room III 7c); the builders added a two-meter-wide pavement, perhaps roofed, east of the columns—possibly to allow people to pass directly south into Room III 8 without getting wet during a downpour.58 Characteristically, although there are numerous porticoes in the palace, this is the only light-well identified there, probably because a light-well had special engineering requirements—for example, creating an open, therefore vulnerable, roof structure, as well as providing and maintaining an adequate drainage system. Porticoes, usually additions on the periphery of a building, or alongside a large court, were probably easier to install and maintain. At contemporary Knossos, the light-well of the Hall of Double Axes (Fig. 3.1) is similarly placed, also with two columns, and has a drain connected with a general drainage system in its southeastern corner. Aside from the superior, carefully crafted ashlar wall blocks, many with incised mason’s marks (thus the name of the room), a few innovations can be identified. One is the stylobate introduced here on the line of the columns, the purpose of which was no doubt to keep rain water from

114

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

coming into the room.59 A second is that it features the first example of a typical Neopalatial light-well window, placed in the coursed ashlar north wall (Figs. 3.4, 3.8 center, right), where it illuminated the corridor to the north. The same corridor provided access to the Hall of the Colonnades next door. That surely had by far the most ambitious light-well ever built in Crete, supporting, along with the Residential Quarters bordering it on the east, at least three stories. In ground-floor plan (Figs. 3.1–3.4) the rectangular shaft open to the sky is about 3.50 m north– south by 5.50 m east–west. On the south it abuts the northern wall of the Service Staircase; a window in the common wall there lit an upper landing. On the eastern and northern sides is a colonnade flanked by broad corridors. The west side coincides with the first run of the Grand Staircase, with the three smaller columns on the balustrade there set in line with the larger columns to their east. The primary purpose of the light-well was to illuminate the Grand Staircase, but it also enhanced the monumentality of the entire conception. At the same time carefully planned corridors leading chiefly to the east and south provided the inhabitants with privacy and, no doubt, service, made even more efficient by the number of ancillary stairways interconnecting the various floor levels. At about the same time or not long after, when Hagia Triada was established in the Mesara, an unusual light-well type was introduced between

Rooms 12 and 4 (Fig. 1.31), one in which two adjoining spaces could receive air and light by means of two stylobates, each with two columns, placed not far from each other, the space between (49) being left open to the sky and equipped with a drain.60 That in the West Wing of the Zakros palace (Fig. 4.23) had a large double window on the west and four columns around the other three sides; a drain carried rainwater off to the Central Court. Another regional development not yet noted here, at Palaikastro in eastern Crete, was a square light-well with a column in each corner,61 the use of which is discussed in Chapter 5.

4.4.2. Larger Porticoes Again, Malia appears to have been among the initiators, if not the initiator, of somewhat larger porticoes, less extended than the longer colonnades (for which, see Ch. 4.4.3). One (Fig. 2.14), of bent, or coudé, form (with two open wings facing an open court), was set just north of the MM I Crypte Hypostyle, mentioned above.62 It may have faced west, with its back wall forming part of the western edge of the large “Agora” court, so-named after much later customs believed to have been carried down from the Minoan period.63 The portico served those using the spacious interiors to the north and also probably the Crypte Hypostyle,

Figure 4.23. Kato Zakros palace, preliminary sketch of wooden construction in Room XXVIII near the light-well in the West Wing, looking northwest. A pillar (left foreground) has been omitted. Drawing J.W. Shaw.

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

whether on its basement, ground-floor, or first-floor levels. Although the excavator, who wrote the actual report, was unsure of the Crypte’s function,64 it was interpreted by some scholars as a type of prytaneion where elders met, next to the Agora court. Since then the court has been interpreted as the site of bull games,65 and, more recently, Schmid has proposed that the court and the buildings on its south and west were centers for acrobatic activities,66 well known from Minoan depictions. What is sure here, from the functional point of view, is that the bent portico being considered was designed for the use of groups whose activities were carried out within the buildings as well as in the court, the latter with two main entrances that could be closed off. At places along its sides (Fig. 2.14) steps led up onto a very wide surrounding wall, rather like bleachers, upon which crowds could gather to watch events. Of all the Minoan central courts, that at Malia shows that during both the Protopalatial and Neopalatial periods its builders were concerned with providing sheltered, protected areas around its periphery for groups viewing and/or participating in events taking place in the courts. The events, of course, could vary, but the one that has received the most attention, especially because of the characteristics of Malia’s eastern colonnade, has been bull leaping.67 As to the western side of the court (Fig. 2.17), investigations have shown that an earlier Protopalatial portico, open to the east, was subsequently enclosed within a long room that extended the eastward limit of the space.68 At least three column bases remain of that early portico.69 With the rebuilding of the Malia palace in LM IA,70 porticoes continued to play a major role on the site. In the North Court, for instance (Fig. 1.5), the bent portico type was bent again, so that the portico had three columnar sides, with four columns along the central, north–south extension, and two columns lining the two facing extensions on the north and south. The result was the creation of a large, well-lit paved work area outside storage and work rooms, all quite near the northeastern entrance to the palace and, surely by design, also leading directly south into the Central Court. It was very neatly designed and executed. In its Neopalatial form, also, the Minoan hall, which formed the core of the residential areas in the palaces, was set so as to extend to the northern edge of the palace precinct, where it was

115

terminated with an attractive portico from which the inhabitants could view the countryside (Fig. 1.28). This occurred at Knossos (Fig. 3.17), Malia, and Phaistos (Fig. 1.30). At the first two sites the porticoes were made of a combination of low-block pillars at the ends or corner points of a bent colonnade arrangement. As many as five (at Malia) to six (at Knossos) columns were used.

4.4.3. Colonnades A colonnade is simply a line of columns, but here I apply the term to facades with six or more columns, in order to avoid confusion with porticoes. Of Minoan colonnades, perhaps the earliest example is that along the eastern side of the Chrysolakkos ossuary at Malia (Fig. 2.13). There some 10 rectangular stone bases are the only source of information about the supports resting on them. There is no guarantee that those supports were round— indeed the shape of the bases suggests we are dealing with squared posts such as those that left their shapes defined in the plaster of an MM room below the Malia palace (Fig. 2.19:c).71 Also, to expect special treatment of their tops at this time, whether by means of stepped enlargements on piers or using capitals in the case of rounded or tapering columns, is perhaps to be overoptimistic. We should consider that, aside from a capital-shaped lamp base found at Kato Zakros in 1962 (Fig. 4.24)72 and Mycenaean models, our understanding of Minoan capitals is largely based on Neopalatial pictorial representations in frescoes,73 a source used extensively by

Figure 4.24. Top of a stone lamp stand in the form of a column capital from House Z at Kato Zakros. Platon 1963, pl. 142:b.

116

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Evans in his restorations, both on paper and in physical reconstructions. A novel approach to colonnade construction in Crete was discovered by the French excavators in the Protopalatial level just north of the Minoan hall of the new palace.74 Enough was preserved of the stuccoed court (Fig. 2.18, left of p), 6.60 m east–west by 11.20 north–south, to indicate that it was rectangular and may have been surrounded by columns, some five east–west and seven north– south.75 While the unusual peristyle character of the court, as well as its modest size, in comparison to the Central Court of the palace, remains clear, its ancient surroundings are not, but Pelon suggests the possibility of a garden, which is reflected in Graham’s restoration of that same area during Neopalatial times as a “Palace Garden.”76 During MM II or not long after, a colonnade with at least 13 columns was constructed along the western side of the Central Court at Phaistos (Fig. 1.16).77 Unfortunately, only the sub-bases remain, for the bases are no longer there, probably having been reused elsewhere, and may not even have been visible during the final period of the palace. Unlike the construction at Malia, this Phaistos colonnade appears to have been a somewhat hurried addition rather than part of a carefully considered plan. The colonnade (Fig. 1.5) along the north side of the Central Court at Malia was set there sometime after the MM II destruction, perhaps when the new palace was constructed in LM IA.78 The 10 bases are unique among Minoan bases, for they are made of a fine white marble. The stone

was probably chosen especially for the project and perhaps brought from afar. The care shown in the workmanship of the bases is uneven, but more careful techniques were used in the colonnade along the eastern side of the same court (Fig. 1.25:a, far left side).

4.4.4. Alternating Column and Pillar Series As we have seen in the light-well in Room 103 north of the Phaistos palace (Fig. 4.22) and in the large porticoes bordering the Residential Quarters of the palaces of Malia and Knossos, at least by the beginning of the Neopalatial period the Minoans began to use a combination of squared pillars and round columns, with the former usually serving as “anchors” at the respective beginnings, corners, and ends of the porticoes, while the more elegant but also less stable columns were set in between. A somewhat similar situation is found in the carefully built colonnade along the eastern side of the Malia Central Court (Figs. 1.5, 1.25:a), where over some 31.35 m there is a series of some seven pillars alternating with six columns, with single pillars beginning and ending the series.79 The single pillars, averaging 0.75–0.78 m square and 0.68–0.81 m in height, were set at intervals upon a continuous stylobate of slabs. The columns were set upon round bases, ranging from 0.55 m to 0.65 m in diameter,80 embedded within and below the stylobate, which had been cut out to accommodate

Figure 4.25. Kato Zakros, Room XXXVIII, state plan and section of stylobate (left) and restored views. Drawing J.W. Shaw.

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

them (cf. Fig. 4.25). At some point wooden posts were affixed in sockets in the stylobate to block off passage through the colonnade, a development that Graham used to strengthen his general argument that spectators behind the various barriers around the periphery of the Court were protected from harm during the bull games.81 The form of this unusual colonnade at Malia, the longest alternating series of pillars and columns known, raises a question concerning the chronology of building techniques.82 Specifically, none of the seven pillars is mortised on the top, a sure sign in some contexts that the visible pillars had other blocks placed upon them and continued up to architrave level. Yet this extensive pillar series is so neatly preserved at one level, without other blocks reported to have been found fallen to the side, that it is possible that such mortising had not yet been introduced, although we see it elsewhere in the Malia palace, now thought to have been rebuilt in LM IA.83 This case may attest to the transition from one stage of a building technique to the next.

4.5. Multiple Windows, or Polyparathyra 4.5.1. Window Openings Aside from doorways, which are readily traceable in plan, not enough is known about other wall openings, especially those for windows in Crete during the EM and MM II periods. A small opening preserved by chance, however, can be seen in a wall in EM II Vasiliki (Fig. 2.22). Also, good examples of Protopalatial window openings are known from MM II Quartier Mu at Malia, where one in Building B, about 0.50 m wide, was set into the plastered rubble wall within a square wooden casing (Fig. 4.26:a).84 Two other openings there (Fig. 4.26:b), located near ground level and about 0.70 m wide, apparently served more as vents, or soupireux, than actual windows.85 Surprisingly, the best-preserved MM II window, perhaps similar to windows in the upper floor(s) of the buildings in the Malia settlement, is an internal one in the Crypte Hypostyle, a double window next to a door,

117

between two rooms (Fig. 4.4). The form of the actual structure illustrated was determined by the impressions left in the clay that was once smoothed around it; its excellent preservation was due to the fact that the room in which it was built was actually below ancient ground level, with retaining walls made in an early ashlar technique, especially strong to prevent possible leakage and subsequent collapse (Fig. 2.16). Two overall changes occurred after MM II that must not only have increased the number of windows in Minoan buildings but also, coincidentally, made them easier for us to identify. The first was the more extensive use of timber framing that probably developed along with improvements in wooden door and ceiling structure, so that strong, large window frames could be inset into the rubble of exterior walls. The second grew out of the use of ashlar blocks as anchors for wooden frameworks keyed to them by means of dowels, as in the case of piers and pillars, also described in this chapter. Thus the lower part of the window frames came to be attached to an ashlar sill, and it is often those mortised sills, set less than 1 m above the ancient ground level, that help one identify a windowsill.86 The actual positioning of the window frame is also indicated by cut beddings as well as by the mortises (Figs. 4.27, 4.28). The site where one can best study Minoan Neopalatial windows is, curiously, not in Crete, but at Akrotiri on Thera, where the LC/LM IA architecture, so influenced by the then current Cretan style, can be seen preserved up to three stories high. Windows are everywhere, especially on the exterior walls where one might expect them, for as we know, light and the freer circulation of air had priority in elite Minoan establishments. Architect Palyvou, who has studied the buildings with great care, defined four categories of windows there,87 three of which are to be found on both ground and upper floors. Of the latter group, one type, usually on the ground floor, is small, about 0.50 m square, often functioning as a vent and latticed for security. The second is vertical and was often placed near doors. Examples of the third type are large, ranging from 1.4 m2 to 4.35 m2 in size, horizontal in orientation, and sometimes divided into two or three vertical sections. Usually the windows have ashlar sills. Often, and perhaps unlike their counterparts on Crete, an entire wooden window frame was completely

118

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

V3

–

V6 V4

a b Figure 4.26. Malia, Quartier Mu, showing a window (a) and vents (b) from Building B. Drawing J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco, after Schmid 1996, figs. 41, 42.

Figure 4.27. Malia palace, restoration of window (top) bordering the southern side of the Central Court, with plan of part of its sill (below). Tiré and van Effenterre 1983, fig. 5. © École française d’Athènes.

Figure 4.28. Hagia Triada, Area 2, restored window plan, elevation, and sections (cf. Fig. 1.32). Note dowels in mortises, lower right. Drawing J.W. Shaw and M.C. Shaw.

surrounded by a course of ashlar blocks, with the blocks above and below being laid horizontally and those on either side placed end-to-end.

4.5.2. Polyparathyra While the mortised ashlar windowsill is probably a post–MM II “marker,” Palyvou’s fourth category, “Pier-and-Window Partitions,” or polyparathyra

(multiple windows), are uniquely Neopalatial.88 They are also related in numerous ways to the pierand-door partition system that was used to divide interior spaces, as discussed above. The best example, of MM IIIB date, is an unusual one in Crete. It is found on the ground floor of the Residential Quarters at Knossos, in the “Queen’s Megaron” (Figs. 3.3 [Space 101 east], 4.29). There, two long sills lined the southern and eastern sides of what appears to have been the main living space within the

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

room. Each series of windows (four to the south, three to the east) faced a light-well. Between each pair of vertical piers that separated the windows there was a gypsum sill slab with a curving painted plaster rim projecting on either side, providing seating for the room’s inhabitants.89 They would look out into a walled outdoors area, probably planted, and certainly private. Presumably rooms with similar plans continued in the stories above (note the projecting balconies in Fig. 3.2), so that each group of inhabitants had relative privacy and could enjoy the magnificent view eastward over the Kairatos Valley, with Mount Ailias outlining the horizon. Privacy was crucial, something particularly apparent also at Akrotiri, where at least nine polyparathyra were set, often in groups of four equal openings, into the external walls of houses at the second floor level.90 Some were set into adjoining walls of a room at a building’s corner. As an indication that the windows were intended to be for private viewing (while maintaining, no doubt, the privacy of the viewers themselves), all of the polyparathyra at Akrotiri were set above ground floor (street) level. None displays the finesse of the curving plaster seats found in the example from Knossos (Fig. 4.29), but those in Room 5 of the West House at Akrotiri featured a miniature frieze, now famous, set above it and, below sill level, another painted frieze imitating gypsum slabs held in place by vertical wooden panels. Probably similar arrangements could have been found on Crete, for although Knossos so far has the best example of the polyparathyro used where people were living, it is reasonable to suggest that, like Neopalatial Akrotiri, Minoan villas or country houses at sites such as Amnissos, Tylissos, Sklavokambos, or Myrtos Pyrgos had such windows, unfortunately not preserved, in their exterior walls above the ground story, affording privacy, light, and magnificent views of the countryside or, perhaps even better, the sea. Of some interest from the point of view of Neopalatial multiple windows is the extra long sill, with slight projections and recesses, which stretches almost the entire length of the southern end of the Neopalatial Central Court at Malia (Fig. 4.27). The mortises cut into it, and especially the beddings for horizontal beams there, demonstrate that a series of framed spaces (windows) was erected upon it, a unique phenomenon in a Minoan central

119

Figure 4.29. Knossos palace, unusual polyparathyro arrangement in Queen’s Megaron; see also Fig. 3.1, left. Evans 1921–1935, III, fig. 245, probably by P. de Jong.

court. The original excavators proposed that windows were set there.91 Pelon has suggested, however, that the sill supported a parapet strengthened by timber framing.92 South of (behind) the sill is a long east–west corridor (XIV 1, XIV 2, XIV 10, about 1.20 m wide) that Pelon interprets as a covered walk, or promenoir.93 Graham suggested that the openings were “embrasures from which spectators might watch in safety performances in the Central Court,”94 and van Effenterre has a similar interpretation,95 with which I agree, for connecting the corridor with the activities in the Central Court is required by the architectural plan. We also can see, in a more general way, that the new Malia palace did not simply adapt the form of the recently introduced polyparathyro but expanded it for an unusual situation, at the same time providing a privacy of space (and year-round shade) inherent in the usual use of the form on the upper floors of dwellings.

4.6. Lustral Basins Like the pier-and-door partitions, the so-called lustral basin (e.g., that in Figs. 4.15, 4.16) is unique to Minoan culture and has an interesting history

120

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

of development. In its advanced Neopalatial form, it was a relatively small, covered room featuring a number of elements, for instance dogleg stairs alongside a decorative stepped parapet, with at least one column or pillar, and with a single turn leading down to its floor. The lower room, or “basin,” was often bordered at the top by a corridor or a window, from which observers could view what was happening within the basin. Often ample space, covered or uncovered, was provided outside the basin, presumably for groups to assemble. The earliest structure surely identified as a lustral basin was set within an unusually large room (I 3), 6 m x 6 m, in Quartier Mu at Malia (Figs. 1.38, 1.39, 4.30).96 The basin itself (I 4; 3.90 m x 2.75 m) takes up the southern half of that room, with its floor level 1.80 m below that of I 3. It was not entered directly through I 4, although its far eastern end could be viewed from within I 3, from behind a parapet of slabs. Rather, one entered through an eastern doorway and descended seven rough, thickly plastered steps, with a narrow platform faced by vertical slabs next to the righthand wall. At least its western part was covered over with an extension of the floor of I 4; its walls were of bluish plaster. Its excavators, noting bedrock irregularities left plastered but otherwise undisturbed, were reminded of Minoan cave cult. A small table was found in its southwestern corner. A clay offering table next to a plastered table just outside its entrance (I 10) suggested that “ceremonies liées au culte” took place within the room, the oldest in the building.97 A descendant of this type of room is the Northwest Lustral Basin at Knossos (Figs. 4.15, 4.16), seen in a watercolor made by Theodore Fyfe not long after it was cleared.98 The Knossian basin is square rather than roughly rectangular like that from Mu. Its steps are regularly aligned and, as is normal later, they turn at the first landing. There is the normal parapet, in this case with four wooden columns, each set at a point where the parapet steps down. Evans remarks that their bases are of “Early Palace” type99 in which the columns were not socketed into their pedestals but rested on circular projections in one piece with the base. It is notable that the bases were set upon a wooden framework keyed to a single-block pier base and that the entire basin was sheathed by gypsum slabs, all architectural elements characterizing the new, post–MM II style.

From the point of view of relative development, the basin at Quartier Mu is primitive architecturally compared to that at Knossos, so much so that one instinctively imagines a series of stages over time separating the two. Yet the first stage is securely dated to MM II, while the second stage, at Knossos, is dated by Evans to MM IIIA, the immediately succeeding period.100 A few explanations of the sharp contrast may be considered. One is that the Malia basin was actually a very old one, of MM I date or even earlier, when Quartier Mu was destroyed in MM II. This would allow for changes to its form elsewhere, even at Malia, including the regularizing of its shape, the addition of a formal parapet, and the introduction of supports. In any case, the lustral basin is definitely a Protopalatial period phenomenon, but we need more examples to understand the stages it went through. From the point of view of the form’s development at Knossos, we know, for instance, that there were MM II/MM IIIA predecessors to the Residential Quarters,101 so still unknown but predictable developmental stages could certainly fit within that period, either there or elsewhere on the Knossos palace site. It would be interesting to learn more about it, especially with regard to the introduction of columns on parapets. Just within the Knossos palace, for example, the Grand Staircase exploits the same columnar form as a decorative and, perhaps more importantly, likely a symbolic element.

Figure 4.30. Malia. Entrance into lustral basin in Building A, Quartier Mu. Poursat and Schmid 1992, fig. 28. © École française d’Athènes.

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

Similar considerations apply to the MM IIIA102 lustral basin at Phaistos (Figs. 4.31–4.33). Its two mortised parapet piers, which may well have supported wooden columns, are canonic. Like the Northwest Lustral Basin at Knossos, its basin was square and had a “viewing area” (a window), as well as an unusually large “waiting room” to the north.103 The similarity, aside from details, suggests that the time gap between the two structures was not a long one. Elucidating the structural history of the Minoan lustral basin, however, does not resolve the matter

121

of the use of the room itself, a mystery that will probably remain. Evans believed that such spaces played a role in initiations and also that they had “lustral functions,”104 the latter an idea echoed by Bogdan Rutkowski, who thought that they were for “ritual ablution.”105 Martin Nilsson remained doubtful about the theories proposed but admitted that he had no other to put in place.106 Graham, who dealt with the matter in detail, believed that they functioned both as bathrooms and as basins for lustration.107 Nanno Marinatos, following her

Figure 4.31. Phaistos, MM III lustral basin found below Room 70, along with paved area to its east. North is at top. Drawing J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco, after Pernier 1935, fig. 195.

Figure 4.32. Phaistos, partly restored window next to the entrance to the lustral basin seen in Fig. 4.31. Photo J.W. Shaw.

122

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 4.33. Phaistos, plan showing MM III lustral basin below Room 38 in relation to earlier and later features in that area. Room 25 is shown as it was after excavation and when most of the pavement was removed. Levels are indicated by +. Hatching indicates lower, earlier walls. Drawing J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco.

father’s earlier suggestion, sees the rooms as adyta, areas of seclusion and shrines where offerings could be made.108 Geraldine Gesell, although cautious, is attracted by the bath explanation.109 Katerina Kopaka believes that the lustral basins are to be connected with women’s menstruation period.110 Considering the usual 1–2 m descent onto a drainless floor in a lustral basin, set between solid walls, I imagine, metaphorically, one entering the Earth to commune with the spirits that inhabit it.111 The columns on a basin’s parapets, structurally unnecessary within such small rooms, add to the experience. Columns can be symbolic as well, suggesting power or authority, and they may have played similar roles in Aegean iconography. The lustral basin might be thought of, therefore, as a Minoan architectural metaphor expressing such beliefs in a pragmatic way, similar to the symbolism suggested by the spire of a Gothic church or the heavenly cosmic dome of Hagia Sophia.

4.7. Wall Building 4.7.1. Orthostats Distinctive among elite architectural elements in Minoan Crete is quarried stone that, when squared, is referred to as “ashlar.” Ashlar masonry implies not only expertise in quarrying and shaping, but also the ambition to create something durable and usually appealing to the eye, as if dignifying part of a building was a conscious aim of those who commissioned the work. In Crete, such a tendency in elite architecture is first seen generally in MM III, in the rebuilding that followed the overall destruction horizon at the end of MM II. Earlier, during the Protopalatial period (MM I– II), examples of ashlar are, at best, sporadic, and most likely began with what are referred to as

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

“orthostat” courses of thick blocks set end-to-end upon an even socle, or krepidoma. The socle, often of rubble but sometimes of large, evenly set slabs, probably developed from earlier experimentation, as at EM II Vasiliki (Fig. 2.22), where the house was set upon a sloping ground level. First the workers built a stepped rubble wall and then set their final, plastered wall upon that base. Floor level, at the entrance to the house, was created by dumping soil into the room’s interior. A similar method was used at Malia’s elegant MM I–II Chrysolakkos ossuary, a huge rectangular enclosure north of the palace, the exterior wall of which was set upon a roughly level socle made up of large, uneven limestone blocks, including a number of finely cut slabs in reuse from some still undiscovered, probably nearby, building (Fig. 4.34).112 Above socle level, in the better preserved eastern wall (Fig. 4.35), large squared blocks, about 0.80 m high, were set end-to-end. Into their tops, not far from their outer edges, were drilled round holes, a few centimeters deep, into which were fitted pegs destined to anchor a line of wooden beams in order to stabilize the wall but, mainly, to provide a base for a vertical wooden framework containing rubble masonry, probably plastered on the outside.113 A similar method was used at a southern entrance into the “Agora” (in Fig. 2.15, marked *) in the case of a triangular corner block (Fig. 4.36) with cut beddings for horizontal timbers, along with round, drilled mortise holes, ca. 0.04 m in diameter, for attaching them. Only alongside the actual Agora court, however, was the orthostat technique used again, in the form of a number of thin slabs, 0.90 m. high, facing the wall there.114 Beyond Malia, whose builders were apparently unique in Crete for using hard metamorphic limestone for significant building projects, the orthostat technique was also used in the Mesara (see Table 1.3). At Phaistos over 60 m of wall, built in two incremental sections, south to north, during MM IB and MM II, lined the west facade of the first palace (Figs. 2.8–2.11).115 Again, mortise holes can be seen on the top of the wall, not far behind the top of the line of blocks, which were about 0.55 m high; the wall itself was 1.76 m wide.116 Here, however, the sockets are rectangular, which is to be expected when one is dealing with the easily chiseled softer poros limestone (only drills could penetrate the harder limestone or sideropetra used in the

123

early days at Malia). Near the early, southwestern entrance into the early western wing at Phaistos (Fig. 4.37), one can see the projecting socle in front of and below the rectangular blocks, the mortise sockets, and, in the section, the horizontal wooden beam to be restored there.117 After MM II, orthostats seem to have been completely replaced at Phaistos by coursed ashlar. At nearby Kommos, however, in MM IIIA, a rectangular, palace-size building, Building T, measuring at least 55 m east–west and 38 m north–south, was built near the shore, probably in order to play an emblematic and/or practical role in the commerce arriving at that harbor. A broad, high ashlar wall (Fig. 3.22), its base 1.76 m high and 2.00 m wide, was constructed to line at least its northern and eastern flanks. The outside faces consisted of two courses of huge orthostat blocks interspersed with single blocks the entire height of the ashlar wall. Many of them are among the largest known from

Figure 4.34. Chrysolakkos, Malia, northern krepidoma composed partly of reused orthostat blocks set on their sides, looking east. Photo J.W. Shaw.

124

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 4.35. Chrysolakkos, Malia, east facade of MM ossuary with orthostat blocks in situ, looking northwest. Photo J.W. Shaw.

Figure 4.36. Malia, exterior corner block at an eastern entrance of the Agora. Drawing J.W. Shaw.

Figure 4.37. Phaistos, plan and section of early Protopalatial facade and southwestern entranceway. Drawing J.W. Shaw.

Minoan Crete.118 The wall, so far unique in Crete in terms of height and length, is a development of earlier orthostat style. It was probably built in such a monumental manner in order to impress visitors arriving at the harbor from abroad. From the point of view of construction, it also probably differed from the other major examples that we have seen by not being carried up to its full height with rubble masonry encased within a wooden framework: mortises were not found carved into the top of the upper course. Most likely the medium-sized ashlar blocks found cascaded within the building originally carried the facade wall up to roof level. The best-known orthostat facade in Crete (Fig. 4.38) is at Knossos, where it borders the West Court. It may have been built in MM III.119 Built of

now badly weathered gypsum blocks, 1.15 m high, it is unique for being lined with blocks on both of its faces instead of only one. Also, the two lines of blocks were stabilized by swallowtail-shaped wooden clamps set into cuttings in the backs of the blocks. A single eroded dowel hole suggests that the normal wood-with-rubble framework was set upon it.

4.7.2. Coursed Ashlar Construction Coursed ashlar construction, with one row of squared blocks above another and vertical joints judiciously spaced to assure wall cohesiveness (e.g., in Fig. 4.39) was never common during the

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

125

Figure 4.38. Knossos palace, west facade near southwestern entrance. Drawing J.W. Shaw.

Figure 4.39. T-shaped pier jambs at Knossos between Magazines 6 and 7 (left) and Phaistos between Magazines 35 and 36 (right). Drawing J.W. Shaw.

Protopalatial period (MM IA–II; see Table 1.3). At Malia, for instance, the technique may have been used only within unusual, below-ground-level rooms of two buildings, the Hypostyle Crypte (Fig. 2.16) and the lustral basin in Building A in Quartier Mu (Figs. 1.38, 1.39, 4.30). The walls in the former, often five courses high, are somewhat rough but nevertheless consistently made, with rather broad joints filled with clay mortar. In both instances the excavators reported sockets in the uppermost course for supporting the ceiling timbers (e.g., Fig. 4.40).120 Aside from an occasional

upper exterior face, or a wider wall added above,121 these walls are apparently built with a single face, as retaining walls, to resist the pressures of the surrounding soil and any accumulation of rainwater. Ashlar construction was chosen for its relative strength, certainly not because of its appearance, for the walls were hidden below thick layers of plaster.122 The only other instance of possible early coursed ashlar at Malia may be the blocks of a single course lining the facades of Building A in Quartier Mu (Fig. 1.39, foreground). Architect Martin Schmid believes they functioned as plinths

126

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

supporting a mudbrick or rubble/clay superstructure.123 According to him the wall was once covered with thick plaster.124 At Phaistos, one can disregard Pernier’s dating of certain walls to the first palace and accept Vincenzo La Rosa’s suggestion that they were constructed in LM I.125 The only example of coursing at Protopalatial Phaistos, therefore, and one so nicely carried out that it suggests that coursing was well known, is where the MM II orthostat wall neatly steps up a course at its northern end because of the rising level of bedrock (Fig. 2.11). The mason only added that block, and in a professional way, in order to protect the plastered rubble wall above it. On the other hand, at neighboring Kommos, the exterior wall of Room 5 of MM IIIA Building T (Fig. 3.22, right) is consistently built of large coursed ashlars of poros limestone, not unlike what was to become the standard at Phaistos when the second palace was built. From what one can tell, there may have been considerably more stone working at Knossos during the MM II period than at either Phaistos or Malia. In the West Wing of the palace at Knossos, for instance, there are the coursed piers of the Protopalatial Magazines (Fig. 2.3). In the East Wing of the palace, also, the building history of the predecessor(s) of the Residential Quarters can be estimated from the neatly squared blocks visible

in the southern wall of the Hall of the Double Axes (Fig. 3.11:b). The same neatly squared, carefully laid style characterized the masonry identified both by Evans and Macdonald as belonging to the earliest MM II construction in the area,126 such as the wall retaining the scarp southwest of the Queen’s Megaron (Fig. 2.4).127 The ensuing Neopalatial period, following destructions at the end of MM II, witnessed the acme of coursed ashlar style.128 At Malia in LM I, such construction can best be seen in the pillars in the Hypostyle Hall (IX) in the North Wing (Fig. 1.48) and in a few stretches of the western facade wall. Unfortunately Malia’s quarries usually did not furnish the same high-quality stone available elsewhere. Also the flat palace area, without scarps against which buildings could be nestled so as to be sheltered from erosion and depredation, usually did not result in the height of wall preservation seen at Knossos, Phaistos, and Hagia Triada. At Phaistos, while the evidence of Casa XLVII (Fig. 4.18), Room 103 north of the palace (Fig. 4.22), and the lustral basin in XLIV 38 (Fig. 4.31) shows that some masons were busy, there is little evidence for coursing until the second palace was built at a later point. Then the first story of much of the western wing was elevated, as it were, upon a huge socle of coursed ashlar, of which the facades on the Central Court (Fig. 3.24) or open Corridor 51 are examples.

Figure 4.40. Malia, Crypte Hypostyle, beam sockets in southern ashlar wall. Amouretti 1970, pl. 1, by P. Bobillot. © École française d’Athènes.

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

At Knossos, however, there is massive evidence from MM III, as seen in exposed ashlar walls such as that in the light-well of the MM IIIB Hall of the Double Axes (Fig. 3.8, background). Of interest there is that the line of the wooden support running at lintel level throughout the rooms to the east was continued between the third and fourth ashlar courses. Round tie-beams within that wall bound the beam to another similarly placed on the other side of the same wall, the eastern wall of the Hall of the Colonnades.129 A more massive approach to masonry, but just as neatly carried out, can be seen at the northeastern entrance to the palatial building at Archanes (Figs. 4.41, 4.42), not far from Knossos

127

and, like the Galatas palace, certainly within Knossos’s sphere of influence. Finally, we should mention ashlar construction at Hagia Triada in the Mesara, which probably dates to early LM I (see Table 1.2).130 In particular, the small eastern rooms there, probably residences, are characterized by some of the finest stonework in Neopalatial Crete. In Room 22 (Fig. 4.43), for instance, the even courses and fine jointing may equal or surpass that at Knossos. However, the excavators of the Hagia Triada site have actually suggested that Knossos may well have played a role in its establishment.131

Figure 4.41. Archanes palatial building, plan of northeastern area with entrance. After Sakellarakis and SapounaSakellaraki 1997, drawing 6.

Figure 4.42. Archanes, plan and elevation of southeastern entry in Fig. 4.41. Drawing J.W. Shaw. Figure 4.43. Hagia Triada, coursed ashlar wall of Room 22 of eastern building (cf. Fig. 1.32). Photo J.W. Shaw.

128

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

4.7.3. Coursed Ashlar Jambs at Wall-Ends The photograph in Figure 3.18 depicts Evans and Mackenzie looking across the Long Corridor to the entrances of the southernmost of the West Magazines.132 There, on three ashlar wall-ends, each with two courses, is what appears to be stacked masonry. What we are seeing, actually, is a rare and extremely informative circumstance with the remains of three intact, two-course-high ashlar wall-ends in situ (below) with a gap above partially filled with rubble, representing the chase left by wooden beams that have simply vanished. The accumulation above that, shown most clearly by the horizontal joint visible in the nearest of the three, probably between Magazines 1 and 2, are the remains of two ashlar blocks of the same wall-end type but from the original first-floor level, or Piano Nobile. Fortunately the excavators recognized what they had found and preserved it.133 This type of wall-end, already introduced in Chapter 3, is one of the earliest examples of coursed ashlar. It begins at Knossos as early as MM IB/IIA, in the form of jamb-less piers of gypsum preserved two courses high (Fig. 2.3), located just north of the mostly restored staircase leading up to the Piano Nobile.134 Late in MM II, or during the next phase, MM III,135 that of the coursed wall-ends leading into the West Magazines (Figs. 1.3, 3.18, 4.39), the wallends were made with large limestone blocks cut with reveals on each side so as to allow the hinged double doors to fold back into them (Figs. 4.14:left, 4.40). This inclusion of jambs with reveals in MM

Figure 4.44. Phaistos, Neopalatial storeroom with coursed ashlar jambs in Area 26. Photo J.W. Shaw.

III suggests that the I-shaped bases equipped with reveals found below the Residential Quarters (Fig. 4.12) are this early, or even earlier, in a sequence that must still be established. The top of each jamb of the West Magazines was mortised for keying in a wooden beam, perhaps a lintel but more likely a single short beam upon which the actual lintel would rest. Later in the Neopalatial period, as shown in Figure 4.14, separate elongated jambs were used to narrow some of the same doorways. A somewhat similar arrangement was adopted for the Anemospilia building at Archanes, of MM II/III date (Figs. 1.35, 1.36), but there coursed ashlar jambs with reveals were set on either side of a rubble core, a simple substitute for the heavy coursed ashlar jamb blocks we have just inspected at Knossos (Fig. 4.39). Similar alternatives were adopted, also for storage magazines, at the MM III/ LM IA Petras palace in eastern Crete136 (Fig. 1.8, upper right) as well as in the LM I storeroom group in the second palace at Phaistos (Figs. 4.39, 4.44).

4.8. Freestanding Supports Freestanding supports, which were often wood (columns and occasionally raw wooden beams) or, rarely, solid stone pillars, were introduced at least by MM I–II (see Table 1.3). During MM III, probably after the MM II earthquakes and in part as a response to them, single ashlar blocks mortised to vertical wooden beams set within a plastered soil matrix were adopted for most new elite structures. That structural form developed after wall ends reinforced by vertical timbers were introduced subsequent to EM II (compare EM II Vasiliki with MM II Malia in Figs. 2.22 and 4.5). Later a stone base was inserted in order to raise the beam ends above the damp floors where they would otherwise rot. The technique of building pillars of rough stone blocks also began early (Fig. 4.3) and continued thereafter. It appears to have been largely confined to partly closed ground floor, often basement, spaces. It was also used as a technique for deep foundations on slopes, sometimes used to support columns (Fig. 4.45). Occasionally, squared ashlar blocks were neatly stacked one on top of another to form pillars, invariably set in semiclosed

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

129

ground-floor spaces and sometimes supporting columns on the first floor above. From what one can see on the sites, such pillars are relatively uncommon and were used only when the otherwise ubiquitous single, low block form of pillar construction was thought inadequate to prevent rot.

4.8.1.1. Wooden Columns Set on Round Stone Bases Early in the Protopalatial period Minoan builders, gaining confidence in their ceiling structures and the accompanying support, began using wooden pillars to increase the size of interior spaces, whether within the core of a building or alongside it in a stoa. The earliest, best examples are from Malia. For instance, at MM I Chrysolakkos, a building (Fig. 2.12) with corridors lined with benches for seating large groups involved in funerary activities was succeeded, probably replaced, by another, a large rectangular ossuary (Fig. 2.13) set at a higher level. Alongside the latter’s eastern flank was built a large stoa, of ca. 200 m2, elevated on some 10 wooden posts set upon squared ironstone bases, perhaps intended to shelter groups of mourners from inclement weather.137 South of Chrysolakkos, in MM II Quartier Mu, a single round stone slab base in Room I 3 of Building A (Fig. 1.38) introduces to us the use of a wooden post placed fairly centrally within a large room, a technique that was developed further during Neopalatial times.138 In the same building we see an early polythyron (many-door) arrangement (Room I 13 east and west in Fig. 1.38) adjacent to a light-well on the west. Of particular relevance here are the forms of two posts (bases), recognized from their imprints in the plastered floor, bordering the primary hall on its west (I 13w in Fig. 1.38) during its first phase. The portico itself, paved with handsome, large slabs, was bordered on its east by two round stone bases (Figs. 4.20, 4.21) that suggest, because they are so finely cut, that we might now begin substituting here the word “column” for post, as long as we consider the columns as perhaps being without capitals or downward tapering shafts, at least at that point in time and this point in scholarship.139 The two column bases are also drilled in their approximate centers with round holes, no doubt to receive dowels that extended up into the bottom of

Figure 4.45. Knossos palace, column foundations at southwestern entrance. Photo J.W. Shaw.

the column shafts and stabilized them. This represents a Protopalatial Minoan building custom probably abandoned by MM III,140 possibly because it did not allow for the flexibility needed in the overall supporting structure. Such bases can provide a possible dating check, or mark, for excavators, indicating early site use and/or history (see Ch. 5). Perhaps seismic events proved that the dowelling technique was risky. Instead, since at least during later periods the lower end of the column shafts were significantly smaller than the column bases themselves141 and the area where the shaft rested was often left rough, one may conclude that allowing for at least some structural shifting was considered to be a reasonable safeguard. Column bases, which continued to be used at old and new sites alike, varied in the stone used (e.g., conglomerate, veined metamorphic limestones, ophiolites, schists, gypsum, marble). Usually they were round when seen from the top, but they could be oval, too. They might be disk-shaped or truncated cones, or of a bulbous type with all but the flat supporting disk hidden below floor level.142 There is usually a variety on any large site. Evans thought that the higher, often polychrome, cylindrical type was usually Protopalatial at Knossos.143 Aside from the mortised type mentioned above, there do not seem to be other types that can be used for comparative dating between sites. There can, however, be some consistency in a particular area of a site, which suggests a similar source for a particular project, a simple instance being the white marble bases of the colonnade along the northern border of the Central Court at Malia.

130

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

4.8.1.2. Stylobates As can be seen in Figure 4.20, the floor of the light-well in Building A of Quartier Mu is almost even with the top of the slabs that surrounded it. Thus during a heavy rain, even though a drain carried much of the water east and south, outside the building, some water probably flowed into the covered part of the room. This situation probably led to the creation of what some refer to as “stylobates,” a term used in classical Greek architecture for the solid stone platforms built for the columns to rest upon. In Minoan architecture the finer stylobates were made of cut slabs, not thick blocks, often of limestone and, in Central Crete, sometimes of gypsum, with the ends cut in semicircular arcs that embraced half of the column base (Fig. 4.25). Stability was provided exclusively by the base and any foundation provided for it. Such stylobates, sometimes stepped, were set along the edges of some central courts (Fig. 1.33, in the northeastern corner). At the Malia palace, the stylobate alongside the eastern side of the Central Court featured alternating pillars and columns (Fig. 1.25:a). Some columnar entrances featured stylobates (Fig. 4.42), as did light-wells (Figs. 4.23, 4.25). All kept water from entering and soiling interiors. Obviously they were introduced after columns were already in use. One of the earliest examples of a stylobate that may have set the style, at least in southern Crete, was in the main MM II western entrance to the Phaistos palace, where it was positioned north– south on either side of a large oval column base (Fig. 1.15:b).144 Some further overflow into the covered porch area was apparently expected, as indicated by an open vase buried up to its rim not far east of the stylobate, a drainage arrangement that seems to have characterized the Mesara area; elsewhere in Crete built channels predominated.145 At Knossos, perhaps the earliest example of a stylobate is in the form of a single slab of MM IIIA or earlier date reused as a cover slab for a MM II drain below the Residential Quarters, as reported by Macdonald and Driessen.146 Another early example, but definitely Neopalatial, is at the entrance with the single central column and stylobate leading into Casa XLVII at Phaistos.147 A possibly contemporary one is at the two-columned entrance portico into the palatial building at Archanes (Fig. 4.42), and a probably later example framed the

light-well in Room XXXVIII at the Kato Zakros palace (Fig. 4.23), which also had a stepped example along the northeastern corner of its Central Court. They are less frequent in the Malia area. It is perhaps significant, for instance, that the columns in the light-well of the Neopalatial Residential Area (III 7b in Fig. 1.27) at Malia are not accompanied by a stylobate, also that the bases of the polythyron there were of wood rather than stone. Surely these are to be interpreted as “archaic” traits. The latest stylobate known is probably that used in the LM III roofed “Chiosco” adjoining Building ABCD on the south at Hagia Triada.

4.8.2. Monolithic Pillars Monolithic Minoan pillars are few in Crete, but their history and rarity adds depth to our understanding of Minoan architectural style. The three instances of their use are all at Knossos, in the Monolithic Pillar Basement (Fig. 2.7), the North Pillar Crypt, and the Temple Tomb.148 The first, MM IA in date, featured two huge rectangular pillars standing on a solid stone base in a sizable basement space south of four storage-like rectangular rooms.149 A detailed plan of the Knossos palace shows clearly how the MM II predecessor(s) of the Residential Quarters there was set upon its northern wall.150 The second example, the North Pillar Crypt, another basement area, featured four square pillars (two of gypsum are preserved), one being 1.96 m high, with beveled edges, set upon large slabs. This building appears to be independent, like that containing the Monolithic Pillar Basement, and it was set some 25 m due north of the contemporary MM III Pillar Hall at the palace’s North Entrance.151 The third example is the MM III/LM I Temple Tomb, southwest of the palace, which featured two pillars of five blocks each set in a first, perhaps visitable room in the structure.152 Further in was the actual sepulchral chamber, which had a single solid gypsum pillar, about 1.80 m high, with two mortises in its top indicating how the wooden ceiling beams would be attached.153 Some patterns in the use of these monolithic pillars invite discussion. One point is that all of those mentioned were set in semiclosed, presumably

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

windowless (esp. the tomb) ground-floor or basement rooms. The pillars’ advantage in such circumstances, aside from their considerable strength to support upper floors, was that, except for the ceiling frame resting on them, they were not combined with wood that would rot in the dampness of closed spaces. I should add as well that their relative dates (MM IA, MM III, MM III/LM I) indicate that their use spanned a long period of time, from close to the foundation of the first palace at Knossos in EM III/MM I almost to a destruction of the second in LM II/III. And yet all examples known from the Knossos site are in buildings structurally independent of the palace, where megalithic pillars were not used. Rather, the only all-stone pillars in the palace were made up of separate squared blocks, one stacked upon the other. Why this curious circumstance? The answer to the question is probably that while builders associated with independent projects could use the monolithic method of support, a conscious decision was made by palace overseers that monolithic pillars were not to be used in their domain. Although such pillars could be set up relatively easily and would support sufficient weight, they were most likely considered to be without the flexibility required to withstand the horizontal shifting caused by earthquakes. Such a “building code” might have been enforced by an overseer who, as a palace functionary, could also afford to install the more expensive multiple-block type (see below) with its built-in flexibility. Its smaller, separate blocks were not joined to one another but, rather, each could shift slightly when a horizontal shock wave came. If such had not been the case the few multiple-block pillars in the West Wing at Knossos, for instance, and elsewhere in Crete, might well have been monolithic.154

131

the pillar. A thin layer of clay mortar separated each block from the other, allowing blocks to shift slightly in order to provide the flexibility necessary to offset earthquake stress. Distinguishing these pillars, when incomplete, from the more common, single, low-block type (for which see below) is important, especially at Knossos where restorers often assumed from the one pillar block before them that other blocks, once stacked upon it, were missing.155 The crucial difference is that the low-block variety has a single ashlar block at its base, the remainder being a rectangular pillar made up of vertical timbers with clay and plaster in the interstices (Fig. 3.28 left, center). The timbers were usually set within a lower wooden frame keyed onto the top of the block by means of tenons set into mortises cut into the block, usually in each corner (Fig. 3.8, lower left). This was not done in the case of the multiple-block type. Instead, the top block in the stack, set just below ceiling level, was mortised to receive a wooden casing serving as the transition between pillar and ceiling.156 In the field, one can usually distinguish the two pillar types if one can inspect the top of the first block. If it is mortised then that block was the only one in the pillar; if unmortised the block is only one of the three to five used. Numerous examples can be provided, but a good example is in the Pillar Hall of the Unexplored Mansion at Knossos. There, among the four pillars once set neatly within a rectangular room (Fig. 4.46),157 the northwestern is missing and the northeastern is preserved only two blocks high

4.8.3. Multiple-Block Ashlar Pillars Some stone pillars were made up of three to five carefully squared ashlar blocks set neatly one above the other (Figs. 4.46, 4.47). They were usually positioned on a large squared foundation block, sometimes two courses deep, projecting a centimeter or so above floor level and projecting about the same amount on all four sides of

Figure 4.46. Knossos, Unexplored Mansion, pillars in Room H, from southwest. Note dowel holes only in top pillar blocks. Popham et al. 1984, pl. 29:d. © British School of Archaeology at Athens.

132

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

(it is not mortised on the top of its second block), whereas the tops of the southern two pillars, complete with three blocks each, and at exactly the same level, at +12.59, are mortised in the usual manner, just like the pillar illustrated here from Tylissos (Fig. 4.47). Another characteristic of this pillar type is that it was usually positioned, like the monolithic pillars already discussed here, in semiclosed interior, basement-like spaces where wooden construction was to be avoided, especially near the floor where it would be affected by dampness.158 Actually, the multiple-block type is relatively uncommon outside the general area of Knossos, with only three at Malia159 and one at Phaistos in the storeroom area, in Corridor 26 (Fig. 4.33); there are none at Kommos or Kato Zakros. At Knossos itself there are as many as 20 spread out in the various houses and dependencies, all in semiclosed interior spaces.

Figure 4.47. Tylissos, House C, view of mortised top block of pillar in Room 2. Photo J.W. Shaw.

The earliest examples recognized at this point all appear to be MM IIIB in date, including the two incised with many signs of the double axe (“Mason’s Marks”) in the West Wing of the Knossos palace,160 three in the basement of the South House at Knossos,161 and the three in the West Wing of the Malia palace.162 None have been reported from Protopalatial levels. Earlier developments leading to their form, however, are probably to be linked with the support by pillars of uncut, irregular stones stacked in interior spaces, such as that in the MM I Tholos B at Archanes (Fig. 4.3; the pillar is somewhat later).163

4.8.4. Single Low-Block Pillars As already noted, many Minoan pillars consisted of a single ashlar block, about half a meter high, topped by wooden construction keyed to the top of the block by means of square wooden dowels set into mortises. Usually a vertical timber was placed in each corner, with another set in the center of each side, making eight in total. Sometimes the wood was left visible, sometimes all was plastered over and, occasionally, painted red, a favorite Minoan color. When one attempts to trace the form’s origin, the best place to begin, as is often the case, is at Malia, in this instance just north of the Central Court where Pelon and colleagues excavated during 1990–1992 within the Hypostyle Hall, Room IX 2. There two rows of three low-block pillars (Figs. 1.5, 1.48), and all but one with the usual dowel holes are thought to have supported a large hall above (Figs. 1.41, 1.48). Excavation of MM IIB levels below the Neopalatial floor level revealed enough to show that earlier rows of pillars had been there until they were replaced by the low-block type, probably in LM IA when most of the new palace was constructed.164 The evidence for the earlier pillars was a series of large slab bases (Fig. 2.26, in black).165 The repetition of pillar bases at both levels is a convincing pattern. Pelon suggests the early wooden pillars were tall and perhaps squared, like the two, once next to each other, that left empty chases in the plaster of a MM II floor in Area III of the palace, where they were set centrally within a large room (Fig. 2.19:c) and

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

rested on a large slab set below floor level.166 The developmental sequence here in Area IX 2, then, seems clear, with thick wooden beams set upon base slabs by MM IIB and replaced on a higher, later floor level when the palace was renewed after MM II. The change involved the development of large, squared ashlar sandstone bases and the use of wooden frames anchoring groups of wooden beams, already described. The pre-destruction, MM II technique was thus replaced by a new technique, a pattern we have seen before. This development had some precedent in Crete, for the keying in of wood to ashlar bases was known as early as MM IB at Phaistos in the case of the orthostat facade there (see Fig. 2.10, for the mortises). The technique was being used in late MM II or early MM III at the palace at Knossos, as shown by the presence of a slab with two mortises in reuse as a cover slab over the MM II drain running below the MM IIIB Residential Quarters.167 At Malia itself, perhaps uniquely, the very hard ironstone occasionally used could only be drilled, rather than chiseled, for mortising, and it had been in use, perhaps since MM I, at Chrysolakkos, on some facade blocks now seen in reuse there (Fig. 4.34).168 More to the point, in the MM II Agora area, one of the triangular corner blocks at its the southern entrance (Fig. 4.36) had cuttings for insetting horizontal wooden beams along the face of the wall and mortises to hold it in place. It is possible, if not probable, that it was surmounted by vertical timbers in the manner that we see preserved in the Residential Quarters at Knossos. From the point of view of material and dating the corner block is sure—only at MM I–II Malia did the builders usually employ such hard stone in architecture.169 But for shape and use, the block compares well with certain gypsum corner blocks at MM IIIB Knossos, for instance, with the block in the southeastern corner of the pier-and-doorpartitioned room in the Hall of the Double Axes (Fig. 3.8, lower left). Pillars of this type were often used in groups to create large ground-floor and first-story spaces such as at Malia palace Room IX 2, already discussed, Phaistos Room 103, north of the palace (Fig. 4.22),170 and probably the Pillar Hall at the north entrance into the palace at Knossos. Also, they were used at Phaistos palace on either side of

133

a column at the entrance from the Central Court into the spacious Room 25.171 They appear in colonnades, sometimes with pillars alternating with columns, such as that found at the LM III Hagia Triada “Mercato.”172 They were also adapted for the parapets of some lustral basins both to complete the balustrade and to support columns, sometimes set at intervals (e.g., in Fig. 4.31).173 They were set at corners and ends of columned porticoes, for instance, in the eastern portico of the Hall of the Double Axes (Fig. 3.8, lower left),174 in Portico ll in the northwestern part of the Hagia Triada establishment (Fig. 1.31), and in the northern portico in the Residential Area at Malia (north of Area III 7a in Fig. 1.27).175 They were also ingeniously incorporated into walls in different ways, some of which are described below. The structure of this pillar type, which apparently first appeared in MM III, permeated the Elite Style of Minoan architecture, giving it much of its strength, cohesion, and flexibility, whether on the ground floor or on an upper story.

4.9. Attached or Embedded Piers as Wall Supports While columns and pillars opened up space and allowed light and air to penetrate Minoan public buildings and domiciles, piers of various kinds—usually a version of the low-block type just described—provided much of the loadbearing muscle. They strengthened wall-ends and corners, as well as places such as porticoes where loads were concentrated. The resulting combination of structural strength and graceful form, with a healthy interchange between exterior and interior space, provided a rich environment for living. As we have already seen, as early as MM II at Malia and Phaistos mortised piers strengthened important wall corners. Scrutiny of the Residential Quarters at Knossos, especially, reveals a somewhat similar custom, but one that was carried out in the interior of the building, for instance, in the Hall of the Double Axes where, as shown in the restoration, probably by Fyfe (Fig. 3.8, center left, at the wall corner), a pier base was set where walls met on the first floor. That base was mirrored by

134

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

another on the ground floor below.176 A similar pier structure was used where the two groups of pier-and-door partitions meet in the mid-left foreground of the same illustration, save that the base there was cut into a triangular shape with three mortises along each of the two remaining and exposed sides.177 Such “corner cutting” (literally) was a custom that would continue into Mycenaean elite architecture on the Greek mainland.178 A good example of another mortised corner pier can be seen in Figure 3.16:c, where the pier in the southwest corner of the Service Staircase south of the Hall of the Colonnades continues up to be matched by another on the first floor (in Fig. 3.3, Space 95).

4.9.1. Inset Wall-Piers with Mortises Some wall-piers were set into the length of walls, especially into the transition point between a portico opening onto a light-well, as in the case of the western light-well of the Hall of the Double Axes (see Table 3.1, nos. 5, 6; Fig. 3.16:b).179 The same arrangement, but with a parapet, no doubt, was carried up to roof level. As in Figure 3.16:a, the wall-piers carried much of the weight of the superincumbent structure down to ground level, as well as the extra load brought about by the use of columns with openings on either side, rather than a normal wall with only an occasional opening

a

b c

allowing for passage. A similar plan can be seen on the western side of the light-well/portico plan in Room 50 at Phaistos (Fig. 1.30).180

4.9.2. Wall-End Piers and Mortised Landing Blocks One distinguishing MM III addition to Minoan architectural vocabulary was a particularly well-knit design for stairways with longer runs and gentler risers. Like the stairway in Building T at Kommos (Fig. 1.47), at each end of the central spine wall between runs single or low-block pillars (newels) were set like a series of masts. The first was next to the first step, the next at the first landing, with the next (assuming that the stairway continued up either to another story or the roof) at the landing at the level of the first story. The type is particularly common and well preserved at Akrotiri on Thera, where Palyvou has studied them carefully.181 On Crete there are many instances, as exemplified by those in the East Wing at Knossos, where excavators termed them “landing blocks,” an appropriate nickname. In the Grand Staircase, already discussed in Chapter 3 (Fig. 3.5), the first two northern pier bases had the usual form plus wooden superstructure, but at the second floor level the base became taller, with a long vertical cut in its side (see Figs. 3.16:d, 4.48) to accommodate a wooden

Figure 4.48. Knossos palace, East Wing, newel (landing) block by fifth landing of the Grand Staircase (cf. Fig. 3.5): (a) western face; (b) southern face with cuttings for steps; (c) view showing eastern and northern sides. A cutting for passage of a round beam is visible on the northern side (a). Note dowel holes on top of block. After Evans 1921–1935, III, fig. 336.

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

support that could link it with the second and third piers, a pattern that continued up farther and is probably unique in Crete. On the southern end of the spine wall of the same staircase were mortised pillar bases surmounted by columns positioned in sockets in gypsum balustrades. Fyfe’s watercolor of a lower part of the staircase (Fig. 3.7) illustrates the variety. Elsewhere in the Residential Quarters, the canonic Service Stairs south of the Hall of Colonnades had well-preserved landing blocks (Table 3.1, nos. 5, 6; Fig. 3.16:c). Normally, pillars alongside courts are of the single, low-block variety A series of wall-end piers in the eastern storerooms at Malia (Area XI, Fig. 1.25:a) invite reflection, for there seven parallel Protopalatial storerooms ended on the east in six wall-end ashlar piers, of which three are preserved (in XI2/3, 2/4, and 2/5). Of those, the second two bases have plain, flat tops, whereas the first one (Fig. 1.25:a, at M) is mortised just back of its two exposed corners (Fig. 4.49). Also, the southern side of the block has a projecting ridge with single mortises on each of the two surfaces next to the ridge.182 While it was once thought that this third block may have accommodated vertical posts, similar in shape, for a doorway,183 the block is more likely a Neopalatial addition, replacing an original block, for mortises were hardly ever cut into vertical faces in Minoan architecture.184 Probably the ridged side was originally set horizontally, perhaps for a sill, with two wooden beams mortised onto it, one on either side of the central ridge. Then, when being reused, the block was set on end, in the form of a typical Neopalatial pier, which continued up, probably in plastered wood and rubble construction, to ceiling level. The first two blocks, pier bases in the original building dated to the Protopalatial period, are without mortises, while the later, reused block has the usual mortised pier top. A conclusion one can possibly draw, therefore, is that such sandstone or poros limestone piers may have been unmortised during MM II, and that the custom of mortising them, at least at Malia, began thereafter. This may not have occurred by coincidence, for the MM II earthquake(s) had caused considerable damage, partially because some structures had few safeguards, such as securing timbering to ashlar in order to forestall the lateral shifting caused by earth movements.

135

Figure 4.49. Malia, East Wing, sketch of ashlar block reused as wall-end between XI 2 and XI 3. Chapouthier and Demargne 1942, fig. 1. © École française d’Athènes.

4.10. Gypsum Dadoes, Floors, and Pavements Gypsum is calcium sulfate, deposited in past millennia upon the drying up of salt lakes and inland seas.185 Stephania Chlouveraki and Stephano Lugli, who have studied natural Neogene outcrops of gypsum in Crete and the use of gypsum in Minoan buildings, describe two basic types, first a selenite macrocrystalline type, consisting of large, semitransparent crystals, used chiefly for wall dadoes and bench slabs. The second type, a fine-grained laminated (“balantino”) gypsum, appears light green/gray or brown to pinkish-red.186 The fires that destroyed many Neopalatial Minoan buildings actually transformed the gypsum used in them into a dehydrated form of microcrystalline gypsum.

136

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

In Central Crete, extensive deposits of gypsum occur mainly in the Knossos and Phaistos areas. As is also reflected by the architectural remains, these deposits become progressively fewer as one moves eastward until they practically disappear near the eastern coast.187 Exceptions are Neopalatial Nirou Khani, not far from Amnissos, north of Knossos, and contemporary LM I Myrtos Pyrgos, not far from Ierapetra in eastern Crete.188 The latter, especially, reflects Knossian influence in its architecture, but both sites participate in the new style of using gypsum, especially for decorative effect.

4.10.1. Uses of Dadoes at Knossos Gypsum, locally plentiful, was used for building at Knossos during both the Protopalatial and Neopalatial periods, especially during the latter. Dadoes of gypsum, 0.02–0.05 m thick, were certainly introduced by MM IIIB, for they were used consistently at least at the ground-floor level of the Residential Quarters (Figs. 3.1, 3.4),189 where they masked the lower parts of the walls to at least 2 m above floor level. They often extended just up to the first horizontal beam socket that received the lower part of the wooden framework stabilizing the rubble wall structure (Fig. 3.11:a). Above that point the wall was plastered; the plaster over the beam was often painted with a spiraliform frieze going around the room’s interior (Fig. 3.8, lower right).190 Elsewhere, as in Hagia Triada’s Room 4, however, spaces were left between dado slabs (Fig. 4.50) to allow the attractive vertical timber supports in the wall to remain visible. Among the earlier examples of dadoes are those at Knossos around the sides of the Northwest Lustral Basin (Fig. 4.16), usually dated to MM IIIA.191 Gypsum was used during LM II for modest houses and for other purposes at Knossos.192

4.10.2. Uses of Gypsum at Phaistos and Hagia Triada Gypsum was used sparingly at Phaistos during the Protopalatial period, for instance as thin slabs attached to the lower part of walls in the earliest, MM IB rooms (Levi’s Phase I) in the southwestern

part of the palace.193 Concerning later Protopalatial use, Pernier noted a few areas where gypsum slabs were used as socles on the lower parts of walls, below the plastering,194 also rooms and areas where dentated gypsum jamb bases (e.g., in Fig. 4.51), “characteristically Late Minoan” (Neopalatial) were used.195 Recently many of those rooms have been redated by Filippo Carinci and La Rosa to MM IIIA, after the first palace, in their terms, in connection with post-earthquake rebuilding at the site.196 There dadoes are not readily apparent, but in Room XLIV 38 (Fig. 4.31), the parapet leading down to the lustral basin was faced with at least one gypsum slab.197 Later, with the building of the Villa at Hagia Triada and the rebuilding of the Phaistos palace, gypsum became a major building material, especially for interiors, including pierand-doorjamb bases, dadoes, benches, and flooring, as seen in a east–west section-elevation (Fig. 4.52) made through the Eastern Building at Hagia Triada (cf. Fig. 1.32). According to the latest evidence, the thick dado, which was usually of gypsum,198 was probably introduced at Knossos not long after the earthquake at the end of MM II. Since it is argued elsewhere here that many of the changes that we see introduced into the architecture at the time can be interpreted as antiseismic in nature, one wonders how a dado may have performed in this context. It may, for instance, have strengthened the bottom of the wall somewhat, but perhaps thick applications of plaster would have had the same effect. Alternatively, one might explain the dado as simply a very attractive addition to the novel architectural approaches being taken, having a purely decorative effect.

4.10.3. Gypsum Dadoes as Possible Fire Retardants Concerning the possible use of gypsum dadoes to retard the spread of fire, nowadays gypsum (drywall) sheets are routinely used in building, especially in houses where “gypsum board is the obvious choice due to its low cost and excellent fire-resistance properties.”199 Almost all new dwellings with wooden frameworks today have their interior spaces first blocked out with vertical

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

wooden uprights that are then covered on both sides by drywall boards, about 0.01 m thick, that not only speed up the completion of a house’s interior but also serve as major points of defense against the spread of fire. The gypsum dado slabs in Minoan buildings can possibly be viewed, therefore, as serving rather like firebreaks, which are cleared swaths in open grassland or forested areas intended to block the fire and let it burn itself out rather than spreading. Minoan dadoes at Knossos, however, are usually thought of only as protecting the walls and enhancing their attractiveness, as surely they did, but one wonders why they did not simply plaster those walls, for plaster was simple, strong, and durable, and it could be painted with solid colors or reserved for designs. One might also suggest that dadoes were installed to prevent wall wear, which then, as now, probably occurred less than a meter above floor level. This raises the question of why most of the dado slabs in the East Wing, set so that their tops were just below the first horizontal timber beam at lintel level, were about 1.80 m above the floor level (as in Figs. 3.4, 3.11:a).200 We should also consider why dadoes were, apparently, usually if not exclusively restricted to the ground floor. In the first floor above the Hall of the Double Axes, for instance, they seem to have been replaced by plaster. Surely when we think of the fire that partially destroyed the Residential Quarters, we must consider the dadoes used at the lower level as having, along with collapsing materials and the effects of wood carbonization, effectively moderated the fire, perhaps even putting it out. One wonders whether the Minoans actually realized this potential,201 especially after the probable earthquake(s) and the fires caused by it not long before, at the end of MM II.202 If so, adding extra weight to upstairs superstructures, something we have seen here as being avoided during the Neopalatial period, may explain why heavy gypsum dado slabs were probably not used there. While surveying Neopalatial Minoan storerooms in his dissertation, Ian Begg expressed puzzlement concerning gypsum dadoes, noting, “It is difficult to explain why many of the magazines and the Long Gallery at Knossos were provided with gypsum dadoes.” He also commented, “Regional availability of gypsum does not by itself account for the lavish use of it in storerooms.” He wondered about the dadoes’

137

Figure 4.50. Hagia Triada, Room 4 of western building (in Fig. 1.31), with bench below the partly restored dado and vertical beam sockets. Photo J.W. Shaw.

Figure 4.51. Phaistos, second palace, jamb of door between Rooms 79 and 80. Pernier and Banti 1951, fig. 276. Courtesy Italian School of Archaeology at Athens.

Figure 4.52. Hagia Triada, east–west section through lightwell (Room 1, on left) and Room 2 showing windows, dado slabs (right), and bench arrangement typical of the Neopalatial Mesara. Halbherr, Stefani, and Banti 1980, fig. 100. Courtesy Italian School of Archaeology at Athens.

138

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

purpose. Was it to keep rooms cool for the storage of wine, to reflect more light, to prevent the entry of undesirable pests, or even to impress visitors?203 One might suggest, alternatively, that it was to guard against ignition of an accidental spill of oil from a storage pithos.204 As mentioned above, Begg mused that the gypsum in the storerooms might have played a role in cooling. More recently Chlouveraki began an ongoing formal investigation of any specific thermal role that gypsum could have played in Minoan buildings. She argues, for instance, that “the thermal conductivity of materials is a property that can easily be understood by people (i.e., a metallic surface develops high temperatures while wood does not). The low thermal conductivity of gypsum means that if you walked on it during the summer you would notice that its surface would be cooler than that of limestone.” She further theorizes that “all the rooms that were dressed with gypsum would offer a cooler environment,” thus accounting for its use in storage areas.205 Her suggestion, if shown through controlled experiment to be true, may well indicate that the Minoans introduced a form of “air-conditioning” hardly suspected in the past. Perhaps the Minoan master builders understood the properties of gypsum as both cooling and serving as a fire retardant when added to interiors, including those of residences, where summer heat could be reduced and at the same time fires could be prevented, slowed, or even stopped. Nevertheless, a chief role that gypsum was to play in Minoan life remained the decoration of interiors, which then became, as Chlouveraki says, “rather shiny and sparkling as the primary gypsum crystals reflected the sunlight, or later in the evenings, the light of the candles.”206

4.10.4. Pavements To judge from the well-preserved interior floors on the ground and first-story levels of the Residential Quarters at Knossos, the gypsum slabs used were first squared and then set in line with the walls of the rooms. Before then, according to a sounding Evans made in the floor of the Queen’s Megaron,207

there were two other floors, the lowest MM II kalderim pavement, made of hard slabs laid over a large area of the Great Cutting, on top of which a “mosaiko” pavement of polished ironstone slabs was placed, then covered, still later, by the gypsum floor slabbing of the MM IIIB Queen’s Megaron. Thus, at least in the East Wing at Knossos, expanses of gypsum paving appear to be of MM IIIB date, part of the post-earthquake initiative. That said, while the Knossian palace paving is impressive, little is particularly notable, at least from the point of view of setting slabs into special geometric arrangements, sometimes by stone type and color. Despite Knossos’s near monopoly on figurative wall painting, therefore, with few exceptions its floors do not exhibit the variety and artistic sense found elsewhere, for instance at the northern entrance to the Malia palace, where varieties of stones and their arrangements exhibit discrimination in shape and color.208 Actually, the most varied and inventive “built” floor patterns of slabs are to be found in the second palace at Phaistos. In Room 77, for instance, slabs are arranged in a cruciform, a design repeated on either side of paired columns within Room 25 (Fig. 4.53) at the same site.209 As is often the case, the gap between slabs, about 0.10 m wide, was filled with plaster and painted red. The most inventive design, with square slabs set at diagonals, almost rhombus-like, was in Room 93 of the Phaistos palace, within the room north of Peristyle 74 (Fig. 4.54). Unfortunately, only a few rows of it were preserved.210 How does this fit into our view of post-earthquake architectural forms in Central Crete? On the one hand, we learn that the use of gypsum slabs for flooring began at Knossos by MM IIIB or slightly earlier. On the other hand, elaborate gypsum slab floor designs first appear at Phaistos, a site where floor designs, but in plaster, began much earlier, for they have been found in numerous rooms of the first palace.211 If the second palace dates, as its excavators thought, to MM III (see Table 1.2), then we can point out a MM III revival of the idea, but in a different medium, at Phaistos. If, instead, we follow its present excavator, La Rosa, who suggests LM IB as the date for the later palace, then one can propose that an older, Mesara-based method of decoration was revived and improved on, to

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

Figure 4.53. Phaistos, second palace, pattern of gypsum slabs in Room 25. Hirsch 1977, fig. 10.

emerge as the more adventurous of its kind in Neopalatial Crete. It was a style that developed along with the new architectural methodology, but almost purely for its aesthetic appeal.

4.11. “Triglyph” Benches Benches are a common feature in Minoan architecture. During the Protopalatial period, as might be expected, they were built in places where people might sit to work or wait, as in the MM I building just east of Chrysolakkos (Fig. 2.12), at the southern entrance into Building A in Quartier Mu (Fig. 1.38), or in work and storage rooms in the first palace at Phaistos.212 The usual method for building them was to form a convenient mass with rubble and then cover that with thick applications of plaster, to be renewed when it was deemed necessary. At some point, however, probably during MM III, a novel method of covering the top and veneering the bench face with stone slabs (Fig. 4.55:a) was introduced: thin slabs were slotted into opposite sides of small rectangular pillars (Fig. 4.55:b). The bench

139

Figure 4.54. Phaistos, second palace, pattern of gypsum slabs near Peristyle 94 in Room 93. Pernier 1935, pl. vi. Courtesy Italian School of Archaeology at Athens.

system could continue along the side of a wall or, as in Figure 4.55:a, far left, it could even turn an interior corner. Sometimes, as at Phaistos, slab and pillar faces were incised with triads of grooves, with the grooved slabs alternating horizontally and vertically (Fig. 4.55:a) but with the central pillar left plain. The bench from the country house at Myrtos Pyrgos (Fig. 4.56), located far south of Malia near the shore, was decorated differently, with three vertical lines in the center of each of the three pillars.213 Those grooves and the method of joining the slabs reminded some archaeologists of the friezes on Classical Greek Doric buildings, with their alternating metopes and grooved triglyphs, and thus such benches received their present nickname.214 The benches are most common in the Mesara, especially at Phaistos and Hagia Triada,215 where they were used in corridors, vestibules, and meeting rooms, areas where people could wait or gather and discuss. The specific bench form may have been introduced at Hagia Triada and later imitated at Phaistos.216 The bench type was rare outside of the Mesara, seldom appearing at Knossos except in the Throne Room, both within its anteroom and on either side of the throne.217

140

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

a

b Figure 4.55. Phaistos palace, gypsum bench in northwestern corner of Room 23, alongside Central Court: (a) photo showing vertical and horizontal lines engraved on the slabs (Pernier and Banti 1951, fig. 88); (b) plan of arrangement of gypsum slabs of bench in (a), showing method of joining (Pernier and Banti 1951, fig. 89). Courtesy Italian School of Archaeology at Athens.

Chapter 4 Endnotes 1. In Table 1.3 one can find the beginning of the examination of Elite forms discussed in Ch. 1.1–1.6 and those documented here (Ch. 4.1–4.11). 2. Shaw 2009b, 97. In MM IB the southwestern section of the palace had extremely thick walls (Fig. 2.8). In the later, northwestern section the rooms (Fig. 1.17, center left) were also constricted. 3. Shown in Amouretti 1970, state plan (plan I), between storerooms 1–4. 4. Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, 127, 168, 170, 177, fig. 40. 5. Fig. 4.6 was made by G. Bianco on the basis of the published plans of the ground story and an estimated floor-to-floor height of 2.80 m, which is somewhat greater than that of the subterranean storerooms of Building B to the north (1.86 m) and the Crypte Hypostyle (about 2.15 m); Amouretti 1970, 19–20, fig. 2, pl. 1. Maximum free spans within Quartier Mu can be estimated at 3.50– 4.00 m. Concerning the stairway illustrated here, there is an erratum in the caption in Shaw 2009b, fig. 262, which should read: “Note that the lowest tread was of plastered clay and that the next two were planks.” 6. Early exploration below the later, Neopalatial Malia palace by the original excavators, and more recently by Pelon (Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980; Pelon 1983, 1993, 1999; Hue and Pelon 1992) have exposed significant

Figure 4.56. Gypsum bench near light-well in Myrtos Pyrgos country mansion, looking north. Photo courtesy G. Cadogan.

earlier structures such as storerooms, a pillared hall, and a possible peristyle court (see also Ch. 2.3). “Public” or ritual rooms such as a polythyron and the lustral basin just mentioned in Quartier Mu, remain to be discovered there. The very quality of the architecture in Quartier Mu and the Crypte Hypostyle has led Schoep (2004) to suggest that the architecture of the palaces may have been influenced by that of the other elite establishments that originally set the style. 7. Free timber spans could be somewhat longer at Knossos than in Quartier Mu, from 4.80 to 5.20 m in the Hall of the Double Axes, for instance. 8. The Residential Quarters at Knossos, however, is discussed in Ch. 1 (from the point of view of arrangement and function), Ch. 3 (construction, especially the use of a massive wooden framework), and Ch. 5 (developmental history of the form). Suffice it to say that a combination of Minoan ingenuity, a building site carved deep into a hillside, and a brilliant, affluent archaeologist backed by a succession of talented and devoted architects made possible the preservation and recording of over two stories of complex architectural remains. 9. For the builders of these impressive structures and what little we know about them, see Shaw 2009b, 166–169. 10. Warren 1972, 57, 258, pl. 19A (Fig. 4.2 here). 11. Warren 1972, 68, figs. 24, 25.

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

12. Laviosa 1972–1973, 503, fig. 3; the pivot hole was 0.08 m in diameter and 0.04 m deep. 13. Aside from the closets, opening out, and the door under the stairs, opening onto precipitous steps leading down into the basement. 14. Warren 1972, 303. 15. See also Shaw 2009b, 96. 16. Schmid 1996, 78. 17. Tzakanika-Theochari (2006, II, esp. 52) was the first to point out the jamb, which apparently is not mentioned by the excavators. Credit belongs, of course, to architect E. Stefani, whose quick eye and careful draftsmanship produced the original drawing (Pernier 1935, pl. III). It is also quite possible that we see here a later patch rather than an original wall-end. 18. See, e.g., the related pillar form in Pernier and Banti 1951, fig. 273, with vertical timbers in each corner. 19. Schmid 1996, fig. 40. 20. Poursat 1996, 28, fig. 13. For a similar arrangement proposed for LC IA Akrotiri on Thera, see Palyvou 2005, fig. 205. 21. Schmid 2006, fig. 12. 22. For which, see Schmid 1983, 712. 23. For a discussion, see Schmid (1983, 712) and also Shaw 1999, raising the question of when stone bases were introduced at Malia, as they are found in a number of houses in the settlement. 24. Evans thought that the jambs were contemporary with the earliest, kalderim pavement of rough slabs, thus named by him after the style of paving used in Turkish roads (Evans 1921–1935, I, 335; III, 359). See also Evans 1921–1935, I, 203–204; III, 397, 399, figs. 236, 249, foldout plan E. Perhaps the early jamb bases were more extensive than actually reported in the texts by Evans, for one can see in the published Lair plan (Fig. 4.11) the three bases below its southern wall, also two bases below the eastern wall, and possible bases (later, on a higher level?) below the northern wall, suggesting that the MM IIIB plan of the Lair and bathroom arrangement on the higher level may have been similar to that on the lower level. This is also suggested by the layout of the MM II drainage system furnished for the Residential Quarters construction in the same area (see also Macdonald and Driessen 1988, 249). 25. Evans 1921–1935, I, 335, 337. 26. Evans 1921–1935, I, figs. 243, 250. 27. Macdonald and Driessen 1988. I am especially obliged to C. Macdonald for furnishing additional information about the results. Two slabs are of the developed I-shape, used as pier bases with a single half-size door leaf on either side, as in Fig. 3.3, Room 90c. For the first two see Macdonald and Driessen 1988, 241, fig. 6, Block 70, and fig. 4, pl. 31:d, Block 3. The third is a C-shaped jamb base that would accommodate

141

a single wooden jamb set next to a pillar or a wall. For that base, see Macdonald and Driessen 1988, 244, fig. 5, pl. 33:c, Block 62. 28. Contemporary with that Building and its associated drainage system also is the west wall of the Queen’s Megaron (Fig 2.4, right), where a massive block forms the south side of the drain (C. Macdonald, pers. comm., 13 August 2014). The jamb bases below the southern walls of the Lair (Evans 1921–1935, I, 335, 337; III, 397–401) can be seen in fig. 249 of Evans 1921–1935, III, excerpted in Fig. 4.11 here. However, they are spaced about 1.35 m apart, which suggests that any double doors folding out between them would fall short of meeting by at least 0.20 m. Perhaps the ends of the bases were clipped off when the later walls were built over them? If they had been, the bases would come closer to those of the Hall of the Double Axes, with a center-to-center measurement of 1.90 m. Or, perhaps, intermediate bases were removed or the spaces between bases were not intended to be closed. Also, in the two I-shaped bases from the drains illustrated in Fig. 4.12, top, the space that the door leaves would have folded into suggests that the total door opening might have been as narrow as 0.50 m. That the actual opening may have been larger is suggested by the single door base (Fig. 4.12, upper left) with a space about 0.46 m long for the door leaf. Even in Malia’s Mu polythyron (Fig. 4.5), piers are separated from each other by about 0.80 m. Pairs of door leaves there, however, were sometimes intentionally unequal, as in Fig. 4.5, center, left. 29. A possible early example of such bases was recently reported at Khamalevri near Rethymnon, where four rectangular slabs, somewhat irregularly arranged and without more closely defining architectural context, suggested an “experimental application of the palatial polythyron innovation” (Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1997b, 38). Similar slabs have been reported from the sanctuary on Mt. Juktas near Knossos, where they are dated to MM III (A. Karetsou, pers. comm., 2011). See Table 1.3, Form 9, and relevant notes there. 30. A few of the jamb bases at Hagia Triada show evidence for mortising. 31. Evans 1902–1903, 14–15. Figure 4.13, somewhat changed from fig. 6 in Evans 1902–1903, was reprinted by him in Evans 1921–1935, III, fig. 213. 32. Evans 1902–1903, 14. 33. Evans 1902–1903, 14. 34. Evans 1902–1903, 14. 35. Evans 1902–1903, 14, 16. 36. For what we can learn about the locking of doors in Minoan Crete, see Graham 1987, 175–179. 37. Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 331. The label “doorjambs” in the center of my illustration has been edited down from “earlier doorjambs” to conform to

142

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Evans’s text on pages 461–462. Note that the magazines both to right and left have also been narrowed by setting in variations of the same base type. 38. Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 291. 39. From Palyvou 2005, fig. 214. 40. Pernier 1935, 122, fig. 51. 41. Such bases were most popular at the beginning of the Neopalatial period, when many if not most elite Neopalatial buildings were constructed. For occasional later use at Knossos, west of Evans’s Southwest House, see Driessen 1999, 228. At Tylissos, a later (LM III?) building with pier-and-door partition was superposed above the remains of House C (Hayden 1984, esp. 44). MM II C-shaped stone bases have been reported from Monastiraki (A. Kanta, pers. comm.); their fine cutting and the fact that the type has not been found as early elsewhere, in particular at nearby Phaistos, however, suggest that they may actually be later. Future publication may clarify the matter. 42. The earlier examples of elite-style bases of C and T shape are at Hagia Triada (the “Villa,” Figs. 1.31, 1.32) and at Kommos in Building T, Room 5 (Fig. 1.47), which both date to MM III or slightly later. Both feature only T- and C-shaped pier-and-door partition bases. The more complicated I-shaped bases occur only at the Phaistos palace, which is thought to date to a later period (Table 1.2; V. La Rosa, pers. comm., 31 October 2012; see also La Rosa 1995, 889). In two instances at Phaistos where stone bases were used in MM III structures, in Casa XLVII (Fig. 4.18) and the lustral basin below Room 70 (Fig. 4.1:D), only T-shaped bases were used. This seems to confirm that the I-shaped bases were actually introduced later in the Mesara, most likely from Knossos, where they are probably earlier. 43. Shaw 2009b, 96. 44. See also below, Ch. 4.8.4. 45. See Ch. 5.2.3; Michailidou 1987. 46. Pernier 1935, 289, fig. 168; Shaw 2009b, fig. 144:A, B. 47. Pernier 1935, 170, fig. 72, plan II. The column diameter is 0.35 m. A similar arrangement was adopted for the southwestern entrance into the palace at Knossos (Fig. 1.15:a; Evans 1921–1935, II, fig. 427). 48. Warren 1972; Fig. 2.23. 49. Fig. 2.21; Zois 1976. 50. For light-wells, see also Graham 1987; Palyvou 2004a, 212–213. 51. Amouretti 1970, 74; see also Allegrette and Schmid 1997, 791. 52. Amouretti 1970, 16, pl. XIII:1, 4. Architectural sections E–F and G–H surely mistakenly show the drain as having been built over. See also Schmid 2006, pl. 12. 53. Allegrette and Schmid 1997; see also Schmid 2006, fig. 12.

54. See Shaw 2011. 55. A fine color photograph of the room can be seen on the ample dust jacket of Bradfer-Burdet, Detourney, and Laffineur, eds., 2005. 56. At a later point rooms I 11 and I 12 were added on the west (Poursat and Schmid 1992, 32). 57. The design eventually led to the construction of the large peristyle in Room 74, with its square four-byfour column arrangement, in the later Phaistos palace (Fig. 1.4; Pernier 1935, pl. VI; Pernier and Banti 1951, 346–359). 58. Similar accommodations were made in some houses as well, where the light-well had a column added so as to provide for easy, covered passage to the area just beyond it, as in the South East House at Knossos (Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 306). 59. See also the section on stylobates (Ch. 4.8.1.2) and early evidence for them from the Knossos site. 60. Halbherr, Stefani, and Banti 1980, 76–79, figs. 29, 48. The authors suggest sequential building may have brought about the result. At Phaistos, in Room 50 (Fig. 3.28) an analogous arrangement appears to this author to be a one-time event, possibly inspired by the rooms just discussed at Hagia Triada. 61. E.g., in Room 6 of House B, within a large paved court. That it may have had a clerestory or “lantern” arrangement at roof level is put into doubt by a drain indicated by the curved line of “stone flagging” in Room 2, which, after it passed below the floor of Room 3 (a lustral basin, a room type that, apparently, was never furnished with a drain), most likely headed to the light-well in Room 6. See Bosanquet 1901–1902, pl. xx. 62. The seven column bases involved, four north– south and three east–west, have disappeared with time, but their foundations remain and confirm part of the plan. Of the building’s footprint, and the position of the north– south eastern wall, Schmid’s (in Fig. 2.14) interpretation is probably to be preferred to the van Effenterres’ (van Effenterre and van Effenterre 1969, plan 1). 63. Van Effenterre and van Effenterre 1969, xi; van Effenterre 1980, 191–194; Tiré and van Effenterre 1983, 55–56. 64. Amouretti 1970, 83–86. 65. Platon 1972; Graham 1974. 66. Schmid 2012. 67. Graham 1987, 77. 68. Pelon 1999, 475–481, figs. 1, 2. 69. The line of the portico has been extended north by architect Schmid to include a column in Area V 3, which is in line with the east–west line of the colonnade along the northern side of the Central Court (Schmid 2006, fig. 9). This arrangement is possible, especially given the clear peristyle character of the roughly contemporary MM II court in Area r to the north (see below, Ch. 4.4.3).

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

Also, a circular cavity still farther east from the north– south line (above), probably a setting for a column base, suggests another line of columns, perhaps part of a later Classical-type propylon facing onto the court (Schmid 2006, fig. 10), but further evidence is required for confirmation. 70. Pelon 2006; Van de Moortel and Darcque 2006. 71. Two thick (0.35 m 2) beams; see Pelon 1983, fig. 13. 72. Platon 1963, 165, pl. 142:b. 73. See also Shaw 2009b, 104–106, for column and capital form. 74. Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 240–241, pl. 163:1, 2, plan 26. 75. Two bases, plus a foundation, are preserved on the west, with at least three foundations for bases on the east, including the northeastern corner, with one base defining the line of the southern border. 76. Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 242; Graham 1987, pl. 58. 77. Levi 1976–1981, I; II, 262–267, figs. 408, 409. Redated to MM IIIA by Carinci and La Rosa (2009, 298, fig. 118). 78. Pelon 2006, 150. For the colonnade, see Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 148–149, plan 7. 79. See esp. Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 150–154, plans 8–10. 80. Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 152. The distances between most centers, as reported by Pelon, range from 2.49 m to 2.52 m, with the eighth and ninth being 2.56 m and 2.54 m, respectively. 81. Graham 1974. 82. Of some interest is that while there is no known close parallel to this colonnade elsewhere in Neopalatial Crete, the LM III colonnade alongside the so-called Agora at Hagia Triada is remarkably similar in layout, with 10 pillars (the two end-pillars are piers incorporated into side walls) and 9 columns, but without stylobate. Mortises are used on the tops of the first (low-block) pillars. The Neopalatial jamb construction of vertical timbers has been replaced by a complex series of superposed limestone blocks. See Halbherr, Stefani, and Banti 1980, plan in pocket; La Rosa 1980; Shaw 1987, 103, 105; Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, 29 n. 111, pl. 1.56 (a parallel at nearby Kommos). For an example of an “alternating” colonnade alongside a court in eastern Crete, adjacent to a typical “Palaikastro Hall” with its four columns around a light-well, see that at Palaikastro in Block B (Bosanquet et al. 1902–1903, 287, pl. VI). See also Ch. 4.4.4. 83. Pelon 2005, 190. The usual Neopalatial mortising technique was used, however, in the supposedly contemporary northern portico of the Residential Quarters (Figs. 1.27, 1.28).

143

84. Poursat 1996, 76, fig. 41. 85. Poursat 1996, 80, fig. 42. 86. For examples, see Shaw 2009b, 121–124. 87. See Palyvou 1990; 1999, 375–411; 2005, 145– 152 (more available, and also well illustrated). 88. Palyvou (2005, 151 n. 30) refers to Malia’s House Δγ, probably Room 2, as having a polyparathyro dating to the Protopalatial period. The report (Demargne and de Santerre 1953, pls. LXVI, LXVII, view pl. XXV:4) seems to indicate a windowsill, about 1.50 m long, but without detail. According to the excavators (1953, 54), the house was built in MM I but occupied through MM III–LM I. I suggest that the later sherds reported and, chiefly, the developed Neopalatial form of the polythyron in Rooms 10 and 11 of the same house, as compared with that of MM II Building A in Quartier Mu (Fig. 1.38), help to redate the windowsill to the Neopalatial period, which was set in during a renovation of the earlier structure. 89. Were the windows closed with shutters? At Akrotiri, Palyvou, who is in the best position to decide because of the well-preserved remains there, notes, “[n]o trace of shutters remains, and the intricate wooden framing technique makes them quite improbable, at least for the multiple windows. With so many large openings, there must have been some way of regulating the weather conditions. Curtains made of mat or parchment are a possibility, but they leave no distinct traces” (2005, 150). 90. Palyvou 2005, 149–152. 91. Chapouthier and Joly 1936, pl. III. 92. Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 156, 210. 93. There may, however, have been a cross wall between XIV 2 and XIV 10 (Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, plan 11). 94. Graham 1957, 259. He associates it with a fresco fragment from Knossos depicting a woman standing behind a fence-like wooden enclosure (1957, fig. 6). 95. Van Effenterre 1980, 302–305, figs. 411–414. 96. Poursat and Schmid 1992, 38. 97. Poursat and Schmid 1992, 37, “la plus originale.” 98. For the basin, see esp. Evans 1921–1935, I, 405– 411. 99. Evans 1921–1935, I, 410. 100. Actually, Evans thought that the basic unit went back to the Protopalatial period (Evans 1921–1935, I, 406). Macdonald (2005, 134) suspects that it may be MM IIIB or later. 101. See Ch. 4.2.2, where early bases are discussed. 102. See La Rosa 2002, 77–78, for the date. 103. One variation in the form, as pointed out by McEnroe (2010, 100) is that some five basins, all in the general Knossos area, lack the stepped descent (the Queen’s Megaron [Fig. 3.1]), the Royal Villa, the Southeast House, and the Nirou Khani building; see

144

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Ch. 5 here). McEnroe remarks that they are either renovated lustral basins or were originally built that way and represent a newer form. Graham (1987, 265) suggests that filling in a lustral basin “reflects a change in the style of bathing.” 104. Evans 1921–1935, I, 405. 105. Rutkowski 1986, 131 (useful catalogs of lustral basins on 132–133, 152–153). 106. Nilsson 1971, 93. 107. Graham 1987, 99–108, 255–268. 108. Marinatos 1993, 80–81. 109. Gesell 1985, 22. 110. Kopaka 2009. 111. As did Evans (Evans 1921–1935, III, 12), “these sunken purificatory basins connected themselves with the Goddess in her chthonic character . . .” 112. For the excavation report, see Demargne 1945. For the date, see Soles 1992, 170–171. See also Poursat 1993; Driessen 2010. For the exterior wall, see Shaw 1973a; 2009b, 61, 111–114. 113. Similar early Classical-period orthostat walls, as in the case of the Temple of Hera at Olympia, were carried up in mudbrick construction (Dinsmoor 1973, 55). 114. Shaw 1973a. 115. A recent article (La Rosa 2007) moves the alignment of the initial MM IB facade westward in MM II. 116. The blocks in the northern section were 1 m high, the wall itself 1.80 m wide. 117. A vertical beam above it could be restored as well. 118. For Building T and its wall, see Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, 17–60; also Shaw 1983. Unlike most other Minoan orthostat walls, rather than being rather evenly squared on front and ends with an uneven interior face, its blocks are actually slabs set on edge. 119. For the controversy concerning the wall’s date, see Shaw 2009b, 62 n. 261. 120. Amouretti 1970, 19, fig. 2, pl. I; Poursat and Schmid 1992, 38. 121. Amouretti 1970, 8. 122. According to the architect of the French School at Athens, M. Schmid. See also Amouretti 1970, 7. 123. Cf. also Poursat and Schmid 1992, 32, where the suggestion is made that it was coursed. 124. M. Schmid, pers. comm. 125. In particular, V. La Rosa (pers. comm.) notes, for instance, that “Pernier [1935, 335] considered the [west wall of Room 47] as Middle Minoan. Room 47 [Pernier and Banti 1951, fig. 149], originally part of Room 48, had a pavement of slabs, and it is my opinion it is probable that that floor touched a sort of first, protruding edge of the foundation. In my opinion this could be the original

MM wall Pernier is referring to, while the upper rows belong to the second palace.” 126. C. Macdonald, pers. comm., 26 October 2009. 127. For the former, see Evans 1921–1935, I, 204, fig. 153. 128. For a selection from the Neopalatial period, some mentioned here, see also Shaw 2009b, figs. 97–122c. 129. Kienzle has correctly pointed out (1998, 128– 129) that I have suggested (Shaw 1971, 148 = Shaw 2009b, 100) that wood was hardly ever used within exterior ashlar walls, but there are a number of instances where it was used at Knossos and elsewhere. One must also add to the list the wooden framing that I assume to have been used on the tops of orthostat and other walls. “Not often” would have been a more appropriate phrase. 130. For the dates of the development of Hagia Triada, see Ch. 5.3.2. 131. Cucuzza 1992, 62; La Rosa 1995, 890. 132. This photo was perhaps made easily available for the first time in Brown’s very useful book about Knossos (1983, fig. 33a). 133. This is confirmed by plan C (Evans 1921–1935, II) by W.G. Newton and T. Fyfe, “Restored Plan of Entrance System and Piano Nobile of West Palace Section,” Fig. 1.43 (revised) here. The plan indicates “limestone ends in position” at two wall-ends of at least three storerooms restored at those points on the upper floors. Unfortunately in Hood and Taylour 1981 (section 8), three blocks rather than two have been restored. Of course the upper floor remains have subsided, but if we restore the wooden beams (probably two, total ca. 0.60 m in thickness) above the wall-ends (which are 1.50 m high), with a simple first beam the width of the wall-end and a series of long beams stretching the entire length of the gallery for the upper one, plus the thick floor material (0.30 m), we arrive at approximate first-floor level, a minimum of about +2.50 m above ground-floor level. 134. Evans 1921–1935, II, 663–664, fig. 424. Colin Macdonald (pers. comm.) has suggested the possible date. A similar arrangement, but with only a single ashlar course remaining, was used at the ends of walls in the Protopalatial storeroom on the eastern side of the Malia Central Court. 135. See Macdonald 2005, 72, and C. Macdonald, pers. comm., 13 August 2014, for the dates. 136. See Tsipopoulou 1999b, pls. CLXXXVII:a, CLXXXIX:b. 137. Demargne 1945, esp. pls. XXXVIII:2, LV:1–4; Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, 94–95, table 1.4. For more recent work on the earlier building, see Pomadère, Gomrée, and Schmid 2009. 138. Michailidou 1987; Palyvou 2005. Similarly, in Protopalatial rooms discovered below the North Wing of the second palace to the west of here (Fig. 2.19:c),

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

two large squared beams were set on a slab in the center of a spacious storeroom (Pelon 1983, figs. 9, 13). For the earlier EM roles of the central supporting structures, see also Ch. 5.2.3, below. 139. Evans based his restorations of Minoan columns largely on their depictions in pictorial art. For some of the evidence concerning their shape, see Shaw 2009b, 104–106. For the taper-less columns (but with capitals) on the MM III house model from Archanes, see Shaw 2009b, 153–155, fig. 264, and, esp. Lembesi 1976. 140. Some of these mortised bases, however, were reused in later buildings. For this class of base, see Shaw 2009b, 84, app. C. Perhaps of significance is that the column bases in the MM I Crypte Hypostyle at Malia are not mortised, which might indicate that the custom of doing so was a relatively short-lived one. 141. Shaw 2009b, 104, for details. 142. For the variety, see Shaw 2009b, 79–86, figs. 131–155. 143. Evans 1921–1935, I, 211–213. 144. The stylobate is not shown clearly in the Pernier Phaistos publication (e.g., see Fig. 1.17) and is only mentioned tangentially by Pernier (1935, 289) but fortunately was illustrated by Evans when comparing the entrances at Phaistos and Knossos palaces (Evans 1921– 1935, I, figs. 158–160). Its shape has been confirmed by V. La Rosa (pers. comm.). 145. See also Shaw 2009b, 86–90 (stone channels), 139 (terracotta catch-basins). 146. Macdonald and Driessen 1988, 244, fig. 5, Block 40(?), pl. 32:e. 147. Pernier 1935, plan I. 148. The Knossos Royal Villa’s crypt (Evans 1921– 1935, II, fig. 235) consists of two gypsum blocks, placing it somewhere between the monolithic and the multiple-block types. For the latter see the text that follows. Single monolithic pillars have been found in each of the two adjoining basement rooms in Building B2 (Rooms 1.2, 1.3) at Mochlos near the Isthmus of Ierapetra area (Soles and Davaras 1996, 189, pl. 52:a, b) 149. See esp. Evans 1921–1935, I, 145–146, fig. 106. 150. E.g., Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 152 (foldout), lower right. 151. For the Crypt, see Evans 1921–1935, I, 400–401, figs. 289–290. 152. “Visitable” implies a room that would not be (like the sepulcher itself) closed off and continually damp, therefore helping to explain the choice of a multiple-block rather than monolithic pillar type, explained in the text below. The first room was also significantly larger than the sepulcher. 153. For the tomb, see Evans 1921–1935, IV, 964–978, figs. 929–938, and the illustrations in the pocket in the back of the volume. See also Ch. 3.4.3; Fig. 3.27.

145

154. Concerning other Minoan Cretan sites with elite architectural forms, the very lack of monolithic pillars and the presence of other pillar types there does suggest that similar considerations applied. 155. Confirmable examples in the Residential Quarters are mentioned in Ch. 3 here. Also, we should note the large group of pillar bases in the Northeast Entrance “Hall of the Eleven Pillars,” of which many were restored as the multiple-block type. Instead, from what one can discover, in some of the early publications they appear to be of the single, low-block type (e.g., see Evans 1921–1935, I, fig. 287). One cannot now, however, inspect the tops of the crucial first block for evidence of mortises, which would be a sure way of testing the matter. A similar group of four pillars at Phaistos, also along the north edge of the palace, is in Room 103 (Fig. 4.22). In the summer of 2009 they were inspected by the author, and all were found to have been mortised on the top of their single block construction, with four mortises originally in each. 156. At least at Knossos, such pillars positioned on the ground floor often supported columns on the first floor. 157. Popham et al. 1984, pls. 2, 29:d, and foldout general plan. 158. A possible exception may be two pillars, each with two blocks preserved, set next to a court in House A at Tylissos (Hazzidakis 1934, pl. III:2; Shaw 2009b, pl. 201). The very wide joints visible between each pair of pillar blocks, however, that the top blocks may have been placed there sometime after their original construction. Only by removing the upper bocks could one confirm the case either way. 159. In the West Wing, two in the Salle à Piliers (VII4; Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, pl. 16:1, 2), and one in Room VII 11 (Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, pls. 140:1–4, 141:1–2, 142:3, 143:1). 160. Macdonald 2005, 104–106, for a discussion of the dating. 161. Evans 1921–1935, II, fig. 216. 162. See also Table 1.3. A diminutive pillar of small ashlars, 1.22 m high, was found by van Effenterre in a building in the northeastern part of the “Agora” complex, in the Maison de la Cave au Pilier, named after it (van Effenterre and van Effenterre 1969, 120, pl. L:2). If it is of MM II date (the building was also reused after that date), it may mimic the larger variety. 163. For which, see Sakellarakis and Sapouna-­ ­Sakellaraki 1997, 177, and fig. 127. A roughly contem­ porary masonry pillar, rectangular and con­ siderably larger than that in the Archanes tholos, was set in the center of a large tomb at Myrtos Pyrgos (Cadogan 1977–1978, 73, fig. 5; 2011b, 42), and others can be seen on a plan of EM Trypiti (Dickinson 1994, fig. 4.3), all

146

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

apparently having the purpose of supporting a wooden ceiling below the roof. At EM II Myrtos Phournou Koriphi, a masonry pillar with an unusual -shape set in the center of Room 80 is interpreted as having been intended to support the roof of one of the larger rooms in the settlement (Warren 1972, 72–73; Cadogan 2011b, 45). That pillar is similar in shape and no doubt in function to those used in the equally large rooms in the contemporary settlement at Hagia Triada in the Mesara (Laviosa 1972–1973). See also Ch. 5.2.3. 164. Hue and Pelon 1992; Pelon 1993. For their date, see Pelon 2006, 150. 165. Pelon 1993, fig. 3 (plan), figs. 6, 13, 14 (some of the bases). 166. Pelon 1983, 690–691, fig. 13. 167. Macdonald and Driessen 1988, 241, fig. 2 (slab 31). The slab was then thought to be a reused threshold block; it had two square dowel holes. Since threshold blocks only rarely had dowel holes in them and only a portion of the slab could be discerned within the narrow drainage channel, its actual shape and purpose remain unknown. Knowledge of the dowelling technique at Knossos at that time remains, nevertheless, sure. 168. Shaw 1973a; 2009b, 112–113. 169. A similar corner block, perhaps contemporary with the Malia block, but of soft limestone and with squared dowels, can be seen in the fill within the southeastern scarp in the first Phaistos palace (Shaw 2009b, pl. 81). 170. Inspected by the author during the summer of 2009: all of the pillars there were of the mortised low-block type. See also Pernier 1935, fig. 209. 171. Tzakanika-Theochari 2006, vol. II. 172. The eastern side of the Malia Central Court, with eight pillars alternating with six columns, presents a possible exception. The well-preserved pillars are without dowel mortises, so they may have been multiple-block pillars, yet Pelon (Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 151) does not report tumbled blocks near any of them. Normally pillars alongside courts are of the single, low-block variety 173. See also the section on lustral basins, Ch. 4.6. 174. No. 9 in Table 3.1. 175. Cf. Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, plan 17, for the mortises on the northwestern pillar of the portico and on the northeastern corner pier of the pierand-door partition (van Effenterre 1980, fig. 498), as in Fig. 1.28. The portico has been restored, however, with multiple-block pillars (van Effenterre 1980, fig. 497; also noted by Tzakanika-Theochari 2006, vol. II). 176. For the lower base, not seen here, see Table 3.1, no. 7. 177. See also the triangular corner block of the turn of the stairs in Space 51 in the Residential Quarters at

Phaistos (Pernier and Banti 1951, fig. 169), and also the somewhat different one at the turn of the stairway leading down into Space 2 at Hagia Triada (Halbherr, Stefani, and Banti 1980, plan in pocket). 178. Shaw 2009b, 176 n. 1141. 179. Another good example is inset into the eastern wall of the staircase between the Hall of the Double Axes and the Queen’s Megaron, on the line of the southern colonnade of the eastern portico of the former. See also Tzakanika-Theochari 2006, vol. II. It also was restored as a multiple-block pillar. 180. See also Ch. 3.4.3, for a discussion of the piers used there. 181. Palyvou 1999, 243–288; 2005, 133–136. 182. For the area, see Pelon, Anderson, and Olivier 1980, 198–204 [esp. 200, for the specific block], pls. 150:2, 151, plan 9. 183. Chapouthier and Demargne 1942, 3–4, fig. 1. 184. Shaw 2009b, 115. 185. For a thorough review of gypsum’s properties in a Cretan Minoan context, including its types and their uses in building, as well as its weathering characteristics, see Chlouveraki 2002, 2006; Chlouveraki and Lugli 2007. 186. Chlouveraki and Lugli 2007, 657. 187. For more on sources, see Shaw 2009b, 21–23. 188. For Nirou Khani, see esp. Xanthoudides 1922, 10; for Myrtos Pyrgos, see Cadogan 1977–1978, 1992, 2011b. 189. Above, on the first floor, Doll’s elevation of the Upper East–West Corridor at its eastern end (Folder 9, Ashmolean Museum), indicates gypsum dadoes at that level. Fyfe’s perspective drawing of the Hall of the Double Axes (Fig. 3.8, above, right, just to the left of the C-shaped jamb base on the first floor) shows, however, a large fresco fragment rather than a gypsum dado still in situ on the room’s north wall (see also Brown 1983, fig. 59a [and caption]). 190. Evans 1921–1935, III, 44, 381. 191. Evans 1921–1935, I, 411; Macdonald 2005, 134– 135. 192. Warren 1983 (the “Gypsum House”); McEnroe 2010, 126. 193. Levi 1976–1981, vol. I, 38–41 (Corridor L), 71, figs. 83, 91 (Room LIII). 194. Pernier 1935, 443. For the slabs Pernier lists three cases, Rooms XLIV, the lustral basin (Fig. 4.31) just west of it, and Storeroom XVI. 195. For the bases, see Rooms XLII (=103), XLIV, XLV, XLVII, and the earlier wall construction of Room 51. Pernier believed that the MM IIIA rooms concerned were still Protopalatial, belonging to the period before the destruction. 196. Carinci and La Rosa 2009. All of the rooms are included in their estimation. To this author, Storeroom

A TYPOLOGY OF ELITE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS: GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT (MM I–III)

XVI (Fig. 4.1:c) is particularly interesting, for its position is certainly early, among the MM II storerooms later buried below the extended western court of the second palace. Its dating may be secure, unless it can be argued that the room can be shown to have been repaired by those reentering the first palace after the destructive quake in order to reuse some of the interior rooms. 197. Pernier 1935, 330; it could well have been added later, however. V. La Rosa (pers. comm., 27 November 2009) has pointed out that dadoes were not used during MM IIIA/B at Phaistos. 198. Evans has reported that fine-grained limestone slabs, found in fragments, may also have been used as dadoes (Evans 1921–1935, II, 598, 698–699, figs. 372, 438). The former, as noted, are grooved, whereas gypsum dadoes are generally plain. The examples noted, from the North-West Corner Entrance and the Early Propylaeum, respectively, may well belong to the class of slabs, along with some sculpted friezes, found in the West Wing at Knossos, where they were associated with entrances (Evans 1921–1935, II, 591). 199. White and Sumathipala 2006, 72. See also Chlouveraki 2012, 4. 200. For the height, see Evans 1921–1935, III, 44, 381. 201. It is interesting, from this point of view, to note that in the LM/LC IA architecture of the houses at Akrotiri on the island of Thera, the dado was not adopted to line interior room walls, whereas typical Neopalatial Minoan forms such as ashlar masonry employing mortising, pier-and-door partitions, polyparathyra, and U-shaped staircases are to be seen everywhere at Akrotiri. Even though Thera was without gypsum deposits, one might think that local volcanic stone might have been adopted for dado use. The dado form was certainly known on the island, however, for we find slabs of local stone being used to line the walls of the lustral basin in Xeste 3, and there is a painted dado course of alternating “gypsum” slabs below the polyparathyro on the first floor of the West House (Palyvou 2005, 57, 116, 166). Clearly, therefore, gypsum was the preferred material but was not adopted, although it was actually imported from Crete on a very small scale for decorative pavements within some of the houses (Einfalt 1978; Gale et al. 1988; Chlouveraki 2002; 2006, 156).

147

202. For the association of earthquakes and fires, see Nur 2008, 138. For the development and use of stone dadoes, see Ch. 4.10.3. 203. Begg 1975, 59–60. 204. Similar arrangements can be seen in other Neopalatial storerooms, for instance at Phaistos (Room 33 in Pernier and Banti 1951, 90, fig. 45), and in Rooms 8 and 17 at Hagia Triada (Halbherr, Stefani, and Banti 1980, 130, 136, figs. 88, 89). 205. S. Chlouveraki, pers. comm., 6 October 2012. 206. Chlouveraki and Lugli 2007, 663. 207. Evans 1921–1935, III, 356–358, figs. 235, 236. 208. Dimou, Schmitt, and Pelon 2000, fig. 2. For color and variety in the Minoan selection of stone, see also Shaw 2009b, 26–28. 209. For these floors and a general study of Aegean floor patterns, see Hirsch 1977. 210. Pernier and Banti 1951, 355, fig. 223. 211. Hirsch 1977, 13–16; imitation slabs (C43), incised design (C44). The design of incurved lozenges is also referred to in Shaw 1979, 237. See Levi 1976–1978, I.2, pl. 85:a. Simple geometric floor designs of plaster strips, 0.05–0.07 m wide, usually painted red, also appear in Neopalatial Crete, all most probably dating to LM I. They may derive from, and were thought of as partial replacements for, the designs of slab pavements. They are discussed in Hirsch 1977, 44; Shaw 2009b, 150–151; Shaw and Betancourt 2009. 212. Pernier and Banti 1951, 470 n. 316. 213. Cadogan 1977–1978, 79, fig. 23. 214. Holland (1917, 124–125), however, ruled out the possibility that there could have been a connection between the Minoan bench construction and that of the upper wall construction of early Greek temples. The question was reintroduced by Bowen (1950), who argued that the form was transferred from altars to the Doric entablature around 600 b.c. Graham was convinced that Bowen’s view was correct (Graham 1987, 197 n. 11). 215. Pernier and Banti 1951, 470. 216. See Table 1.2 for site dates and Table 1.3 for typology of form. 217. Evans 1921–1935, IV, 904, fig. 879. The method described also joined the gypsum slabs lining the interior of the sepulcher of the Temple Tomb at Knossos (Shaw 2009b, 124, fig. 222).

5

Ancestry, Development, and Spread of the Minoan Elite Architectural Style

Now that the architectural features of the Elite Style have been introduced, it is time to focus on a number of more general issues pertaining to their functions and social significance. One problem is the definition of the uses of the principal interior spaces that are part of the “Minoan hall” system, a task that is made difficult—if not, eventually, impossible—by the lack of contemporary historical information about the culture itself. Another issue related exclusively to the Neopalatial period concerns the spread of elite architectural forms that derived in large part from the older, larger communities of Malia, Phaistos, and, most likely playing a leading role, Knossos. This prosperous era lasted some 300 years, ending around 1400 b.c., perhaps as a result of invasion from the Mycenaean mainland. In a surprisingly short time within that period, the Elite Style came to characterize not simply the palaces but also select residences of the affluent, such as the “country house” at Myrtos Pyrgos (Fig. 4.56).

5.1. Residence in the Palaces? As early as 1902 Evans designated palatial areas we have described earlier as residential—“for domestic and family life,”1 and with some alacrity he went on to claim that the two adjacent room groups in the central East Wing at Knossos contained the residences of the King (the Hall of the Double Axes, Rooms 90–91 in Fig. 1.29:a) and the Queen (the more complex one to the south, Fig. 1.29:a, Rooms 98–101). Were that true, then which members of the royalty lived on the first floor, above, with its similar room arrangement? There the view to the east was more panoramic, and access to much of the remainder of the palace, at the level of the Central Court, a floor level above, was more convenient. That question might be considered academic, but it is also worthwhile, at least to appease concerns of the skeptic, to wonder whether the rooms concerned might have had some other purpose(s),

150

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

despite the fact that many experts have followed Evans’s original suggestions, not only for Knossos but for other palaces and even for houses with similar room plans and arrangements.2 Identifying room use can be simple or impossible. Some spaces can readily be designated “access providers,” such as the relatively narrow passageways or corridors leading from one larger space to another, as well as stairways that perform similar functions but lead from one level to another. The Residential Quarters at Knossos has many of these, including what Evans described as “service stairways” (Fig. 1.29:a, Spaces 95, 104) that he interpreted as providing access for servants or semiprivate access for residents between apartments at different levels. Also, as we saw in Chapter 1, some spaces can be defined as storage areas on the basis of their room plans or the presence of containers, usually pottery, found in situ (although one must guard against the possibility of different forms of reuse). But there are few if any storerooms in the Knossos Residential Quarters, save perhaps the “Treasury” in Room 99, set above the earlier “Lair” building.3 The lack of storage space prompts one to suppose that any large quantities of food or drink to be consumed on the premises were brought in from outside the immediate area. The lack of cooking areas strengthens this idea. Some spaces in the area under question can be singled out as having had a special function. For instance, Room 98 (in Fig. 1.29:c) had what Evans reasonably, I believe, interpreted as a latrine, which had a wooden seat but was built mainly of stone slabs and equipped with a drain connected to the main underground conduit found to lead outside of the building.4 Another special room had a lustral basin (Fig. 1.29:a, Room 102), with its balustrade (see also Ch. 4.6), which Driessen suggests was “specifically used for women and their initiation rituals.”5 A clay tub was restored by Evans within the room to suggest that bathing took place there,6 but the tub concerned was not only found outside the room but was being used there during the Postpalatial, LM III period, so it is not helpful for our purposes. Portable or permanently fixed furnishings such as tables, benches, beds, chairs, wall or window hangings, and braziers can also be clues to area use.7 Unfortunately they were usually of wood so few survive. But the partial outline of a wooden

“throne” (Evans’s term) in Figure 1.29:b was found encased in plaster next to the northern wall of Room 90a. Apparently it was covered by a canopy supported on two sides by fluted wooden columns. The outline of the back of the chair is based on the well-known gypsum throne found in the socalled Throne Room of the Palace’s West Wing.8 Since it is single and canopied, the chair may have been reserved for a particular person. The use of a canopy in a roofed area where direct sun, wind, or rain could not reach seems odd, but it might be explained if we imagine that it reflected the dignity of the person seated there. Also, considering seating in the rooms, a series of low window benches (Fig. 4.29) on the eastern and southern sides of the main room (101) in the Queen’s Megaron hint at times of relaxation in a shaded portico with a pleasant view of the natural world outside.9 The benches were low (just over 0.30 m high, as compared to the 0.47 m height of the restored seat just mentioned above), which prompted Evans to suggest that they may have been designed for women10 —Evans himself, however, was also quite short. It is to be regretted that so few small finds revealing possible uses of so-called residential rooms have been reported from the other Minoan palaces, but circumstances of preservation were unfavorable. At Kato Zakros, for instance (Fig. 1.7), where the author was present during excavation, plowing had all but removed the floor levels of the “residential” parts of the East Wing. At Phaistos, Pernier and Banti reported little save for the presence of a few cups.11 At Knossos, Evans must have been challenged when arranging for his best-known restorations of the Hall of the Double Axes and the Queen’s Megaron,12 where, aside from the sometimes genuine wall decoration and the architecture itself, few objects found in the rooms could actually be used in the illustrations. From the former hall one can only point out large fragments of a rhyton of breccia found toward its southern side.13 From the latter, found on the stylobate in its eastern portico,14 was a pyramidal stone stand that once probably supported a ritual double axe. But then, to be realistic, one cannot expect much from an area where reuse through LM III left little from a residency during the earlier, Neopalatial period. The presence of painted room decoration may also have been significant, especially at Knossos, where it was a fashion during the Neopalatial

ANCESTRY, DEVELOPMENT, AND SPREAD OF THE MINOAN ELITE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE

period. Of the depictions from the Residential Quarters, Evans found a portion of a bull’s leg painted on a large plaster fragment still in situ on a wall at first-floor level (Fig. 3.8, right, on the north wall just west of the north–south pier-and-door partition crossing the center of the room). The bull was likely part of a more extensive depiction in the covered area next to a second polythyron immediately above the Hall of the Double Axes. Its subject is quite consistent with depictions in other areas of the same palace wing, featuring bulls and bull leaping,15 a sport well known from Knossian art. The games themselves, which probably took place on the Kairatos Plain east of the palace, would have been visible from the porticoes and slopes just to the east, where the residents could gather to see the spectacle.16 In the loggia of the Grand Staircase in the northwestern corner of the Residential Quarters was found a large frieze of dappled figure-of-eight shields against a frieze of running spirals.17 Evans thought that the warlike parade represented “a new and stirring episode in Minoan history,” namely to mark the “advent of a new [Minoan] dynasty.”18 Sara Immerwahr, however, has suggested that they may instead reflect the proposed Postpalatial Mycenaean occupation of the Knossos palace, for “many today would now recognize [the motifs] as Mycenaean or under strong Mycenaean influence.”19 Some distance southeast of the Grand Staircase, Evans found in the eastern light-well of the Queen’s Megaron, in “a heap of detached stucco fragments,” the famous depictions of a dancing girl with her long locks of black hair suspended in the air.20 Also in the same light-well, perhaps fallen from the portico above, but along with pieces found within the portico as well, was discovered a marine landscape with dolphins surfacing in the sea, later restored by Evans within the Megaron itself.21 Overall, the light tones conveyed by the dancing girl and the marine scene, or the implication of window benches in Room 101, seem to contrast with the more severe nature of the Hall of the Double Axes with its simple spacious rooms, and thus one is tempted by Evans’s suggestions concerning the “queen” in the southern Megaron. According to McEnroe, however, it was simply a bedroom.22 The overall arrangement of the northern (King’s) and the southern (Queen’s) apartments should also be considered, for they are obviously designed to

151

be complementary to one another. The connection was articulated by means of corridors, some of which were lockable from either side, as well as by means of stairways leading to upper and lower floor levels. The two areas differ substantially, the northern one with a more spacious polythyron arrangement that could be adjusted, when opened, to accommodate groups or, at another time, simply to allow the light and air to enter. The arrangement thus could service either social reception or simply family functions. Graham imagines that functions there included both sexes, although he, like Evans, tended to separate men from women into separate halls.23 When such polythyra were closed, the resulting arrangement could provide privacy and, during cold winter days, warmth as well. The southern area, however, was clearly designed to be more private and confined, although it had pleasant, well-lit areas to the east and south. The answer to the question of whether residential areas are represented within the palaces is cautiously affirmative up to this point, but there remains still another criterion to consider that is also encouraging. Namely, a strong argument for residential use of certain areas can be made if we examine the polythyron and lustral basin arrangements in Neopalatial houses either within a palatial town or in rural areas. As one can see, for instance, in the plan of House Δa at Malia (Fig. 5.1), the polythyron and lustral basin areas so dominate the house plan that living space

-

Figure 5.1. Malia, plan of House Da. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 9.16.

152

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

could hardly have existed in the building unless those ground-floor spaces were used. Rooms on the upper floor in the Malia house may well have had plans similar to those below, as was actually the case in the Residential Quarters at Knossos. There may not have been lustral basins on an upper floor, however, for none has been found above ground-floor level on Crete nor, so far, at Akrotiri on Thera, where many upper floors are well preserved.24 This strengthens the argument that the lustral basin, which is usually entered by steps leading one down to a lower floor, may have been related to chthonic worship. The result of this short survey,25 in any case, is that although residential spaces at the palaces seem fairly sure, much still remains to be learned, hopefully, through future discovery.

5.2. Ancestry and Development of the Minoan Hall The general nature of the Neopalatial residential quarters, with Minoan hall, light-well, porticoes, and usual accompanying lustral basin has just been described. The structure and history of its

unique pier-and-door partition arrangement, with its double-folding doors has also been discussed, but it still remains to examine here a few aspects of its general form and development. The hall’s earliest known appearance is at Malia, in what appear to be somewhat differing contexts.26 In the first, Quartier Mu, Building A, is a series of seemingly public rooms that its excavator, Jean-Claude Poursat, believes were for “cérémonies” and “aparat,”27 or ceremonies and pomp (Figs. 1.38, 1.39). The rooms were placed in line within the center of the building, which, in its first stage,28 had a row of four magazines and a few other rooms along its northern edge and a scatter of smaller rooms to the southeast. In the center, from east-to-west were the roofed, underground lustral basin (I 4)29 approached by stairs leading down (Fig. 4.30) within a larger room (I 3), a large portico with a light-well (I 1, I 1a in Figs. 1.38, 4.20) from which one could ascend a broad Ushaped stairway (Fig. 4.6) leading to the first floor, and then the Minoan hall itself (I 13, Fig. 5.2). The hall included the canonic, closable space with pierand door partitions (polythyron) on the east. Its fore hall on the west originally had two columns facing onto the light-well. Later, the columns were at least partially replaced by a wall about 0.80 m

Figure 5.2. Quartier Mu, Building A, with two (of three) phases. North is at top. Poursat and Schmid 1992, fig. 30. © École française d’Athènes.

ANCESTRY, DEVELOPMENT, AND SPREAD OF THE MINOAN ELITE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE

high, perhaps surmounted by a series of windows before which, according to Schmid, rainwater falling within the light-well may have flooded the room.30 The broad, bench-lined southern entrance to the building (I 11) also suggests that the building was constructed to accommodate groups. The second example of a Protopalatial Minoan hall, also at Malia, was identified during a post-excavation cleaning process within the socalled Crypte Hypostyle (Figs. 2.15, 2.16). There, in underground Rooms 2 and 3, its presence was indicated by stone slab bases set for a wooden pier-and-door structure to rest on.31 I have argued elsewhere that the adjoining Room 4, immediately to the east, may well have functioned as a lustral basin. That possibility is based on the room’s underground nature (all canonic lustral basins are subterranean and subterranean rooms are rare) and the presence of a large, unusual underground window (Fig. 4.4), which could have allowed for observation of the ritual in Room 4 by viewers in Room 5, a common arrangement for lustral basins, whether in MM II Building A to the southwest (Fig. 1.38) or in many later, Neopalatial lustral basins discovered (e.g., the one at Phaistos shown in Fig. 4.31). Both examples from Malia occur within buildings of about the same final size (840 m2),32 which also included facilities for storage, visible in Figures 1.38, upper left and 2.15, right. Both had ample room for groups to assemble (Rooms I 1 and I 3 in Building A: Rooms 1 and 5, and esp. the portico area with the light-well to the south in the Crypte). Also, both halls were positioned as if they played major roles in the building’s activities, especially with regard to the flow of people using it. This is in contrast with the situation found in the later, Neopalatial palaces where the residential areas with their Minoan halls are not only isolated but are placed along the margins, usually on the north or northwest, of the buildings themselves (Fig. 5.3).33

5.2.1. MM I–II Palaces and Elite Centers at Malia As part of her general survey of Middle Minoan elite architecture, Schoep has compared architectural innovation as seen in the first palaces (her

153

“court buildings”) and other elite centers, especially at Malia, where the Protopalatial landscape reveals more than simply houses and a palace, with the normal situation in later palatial landscapes.34 Her conclusion is that certain “palatial” forms (her term, whereas my preferred term is “elite”) such as ashlar masonry, orthostats, column bases, light-wells, Minoan halls, lustral basins, impressive staircases, and upper stories actually first developed in connection with nonpalatial buildings such as Building A in Quartier Mu at Malia (Figs. 1.37–1.40), just discussed. She attributed their development to keen rivalry among the ambitious elite classes, a rivalry that may well have existed between developing communities during both Proto- and Neopalatial periods. One of her better examples of this process is that of ashlar masonry, such as the roughly coursed walls of the Crypte Hypostyle (Fig. 2.16), and the squared blocks set in a row alongside the early western facade of Building A (Fig. 1.39, foreground).35 She points out quite correctly that nothing similar is to be found in the early Malia palace and emphasizes that the masonry mentioned may attest to “conspicuous consumption.”36 According to Schmid, however, the coursed blocks in the Hypostyle Crypte were covered with thick mud plaster, an early, common practice in the Malia area.37 I also suspect that coursed ashlar was used there because retaining walls of similar solid construction below ground level were required to prevent wall collapse during seasonal downpours. A similar ashlar technique used for the northern wall of the subterranean lustral basin in Building A of Quartier Mu, some distance away, may confirm this. Concerning the ashlar blocks alongside the entrance to Building A, architect Schmid has pointed out that they formed a socle of a single row of ashlars, uncoursed since blocks were not found fallen to either side of the wall. Upon them was probably placed a mudbrick wall, all of which was covered over, as in the case of the Crypte Hypostyle, with the usual thick layer of mud plaster. Thus, if considered as evidence for conspicuous consumption, the early Malia ashlar work is certainly overmodest. Indeed, any ashlar work at Malia was a rare phenomenon during the Protopalatial period. Nevertheless, Schoep’s strongest point remains: so far, neither a Minoan hall nor a lustral basin has

154

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

-

a

-

b

c

-

c

Figure 5.3. The Minoan hall from earlier to later stages, MM I/II–III: (a) Malia, underground rooms within the Crypte Hypostyle (MM I); (b) Quartier Mu, Building A (MM II [phase 1]); (c) Knossos palace, East Wing, Hall of the Double Axes Area (MM IIIB), the canonic Minoan hall. All drawings J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco, after Schmid 2006 (a), Poursat and Schmid 1992 (b), and Hood and Taylour 1981 (c).

ANCESTRY, DEVELOPMENT, AND SPREAD OF THE MINOAN ELITE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE

been securely identified within any of the MM II “court buildings.” By itself this suggests, also assuming that the Protopalatial halls were residential, that the first palaces did not have resident palatial authorities, as opposed to the Neopalatial palaces where residences can be expected. In her words, Early court buildings, rather than serving as a residence for an elite authority that dominated and directed Minoan society . . . possibly housed an important social institution that may have been instrumental in promoting a particular social order and maintaining social cohesion . . . perhaps from their origins in EM IIB and EM III . . . By constructing their own ceremonial arenas [e.g., the Minoan hall in Quartier Mu] elites may have been attempting to appropriate some of the ceremonies associated with the court buildings.38

A lustral basin at Phaistos (Figs. 4.31), below Room 70 and west of Room XLIV 38, thought by Pernier to have been Protopalatial39 and more recently by Carinci and La Rosa to date to MM IIIA,40 prompts one to pause, however, before accepting a theory that could still be correct. Why, for instance, should the lustral basin appear at all in a MM IIIA context, dating to just after the MM II destruction at the site? Does it represent an attempt to restore a ritual long associated with the site? Is there a still undiscovered Minoan hall nearby?41 Or, following Schoep’s logic, does the lustral basin we are discussing represent an early Neopalatial effort “by single elite groups that were successful in merging their own ideology with a long-standing tradition of beliefs and practices centered upon the court buildings”?42 In such a case, introduction of the basin may have been a prelude to the construction of an actual residential area at Phaistos.43 With regard to the Minoan hall, once again, the earliest and only sure Protopalatial examples are from Malia. Neither belongs to a palace, although some might refer to them, perhaps hopefully, as “palatial” because of their scale and organization. Whether the first palaces actually had such halls remains a moot question, but both Driessen and McEnroe believe that they did.44 On the basis of the two halls known, we can certainly speculate that others will be found. It is also safe to assume that the activities carried out in them were characteristic of the region, if not of most of Crete and that, because of their similarity, they probably had predecessors, possibly from as early as the EM period.

155

It is probable that while “Prepalatial” Minoan halls, including “high style” houses, often with P-shaped ceiling supports built near their centers, have recently been defined by Carol Hershenson,45 any stylistic predecessors to the Minoan halls discussed here still remain to be identified. The central role played by those in Mu and the Crypte, so obvious in our Figures 1.38 and 2.15, might suggest that the hall was a recent innovation framing a space for ritual activity. Alternatively, the Minoan hall could represent an earlier, simpler space, perhaps like the rough lustral area seen in Mu’s Building A I 4, which continued in use but in a more polished form. Separate elements such as the polythyron, the lustral basin, and perhaps the light-well, were brought together to consolidate similar rituals and social activity among the congregations at some point before MM I/II. Some have suggested that the custom of halls may have arisen outside of Crete,46 perhaps in Egypt or the Near East. In Syria the closest parallel is the reception hall in the palace of Yarim-Lim at Alalakh. Schoep has suggested that Graham’s original argument that the Minoan hall cannot be compared to the Yarim-Lim hall no longer applies, given the discovery (after Graham had written) of the much earlier hall in Quartier Mu, which she thinks shows close similarities in plan, including a pier-and-door partition to the Yarim-Lim hall.47 I do not think, however, that the identification of the pier-and-door partition is warranted there.48 At present, the evidence for external prototypes is not convincing, and autochthonous development of the Minoan hall remains more likely.

5.2.2. The Middle Minoan II–III “Leap” Whatever the nature of the social (regime?) changes between MM II and MM III, the Neopalatial MM III residential areas differed from their predecessors. First, they probably became larger,49 involving at least two stories of numerous rooms linked by stairs. Also, extra rooms were added later to the MM II core, best represented by the Queen’s Megaron at Knossos (Figs. 1.3, 1.29:a; Rooms 96– 102, an entire apartment), and seen to lesser extents at Phaistos (Fig. 1.30; Rooms 80–84, 50 a–c, 74[?]) and Malia (Fig. 1.27; Rooms III 5–6, 8, IV 6).

156

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

A fundamental change in the three linked units of lustral basin/light-well/polythyron seen at MM I–II Malia is also evident. The ample interior spaces in Mu and the Crypte, apparently intended for the gathering of groups, were reduced during the Neopalatial period. If we consider Mu’s Building A (Fig. 1.38), for instance, one can note that I 3, just north of and above the lustral basin, and lightwell/portico I 1/1A were proportionately reduced in size in later examples. We should also consider the early broad, benched entrance way (I 11, ca. 4.50 m wide) leading toward those main rooms from outside the building to the south.50 In the case of the Crypte Hypostyle, benched entrance Rooms 1 and 5 were eliminated, as well as the large lightwell to the south of the series, linked to Rooms 1–5 by means of two stairways. One can also see that while overall residential space increased in Neopalatial times, the spaces themselves became significantly less approachable for most people; they were reached indirectly by means of corridors and were intensely private. They also afforded views of the countryside through shaded colonnades, surely an elitist pleasure. At the same time, while the two early examples of linked units from Malia clearly assume a central role in their respective buildings’ plans, their Neopalatial descendents are placed on the northern or northeastern periphery, in their (probably new?) role as valuable subsidiaries but

by no means the center of either activity or attention as we see them in the two Protopalatial examples. Also noticeable is that, unlike the situation at MM II Malia, where the halls were set alongside rows of storerooms, probably to provide for entertainment of participating groups, the Neopalatial residential quarters are not located near major storeroom areas close to the upper reception halls on the Piano Nobile. Another change also took place during the MM II–III “leap.” Both examples of the MM II lustral basins from Malia were closely connected with their Minoan halls. In all of the Neopalatial residential quarters (e.g., Figs. 1.27, 1.29:a, 1.30, 1.33), however, the lustral basins are set, in effect, to one side.51 Clearly the focus is no longer directly upon them, although their continuing importance is proclaimed by their very size and arrangement.52 One suspects that their role was now more likely associated with an individual (a woman, perhaps a priestess?). If it is correct to assume that Protopalatial period lustral basins occurred only along with residential quarters, during the Neopalatial period there are a few instances where lustral basins are set alone, apart from any residence. Two occur at Knossos, the first in the Throne Room at the northwestern corner of the Central Court (Fig. 5.4), where we are confident that ritual was carried out in connection with the stone throne Evans found in situ,

Figure 5.4. Knossos palace, Throne Room, restored, looking west. Evans 1921–1935, IV, part II, frontispiece.

ANCESTRY, DEVELOPMENT, AND SPREAD OF THE MINOAN ELITE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE

set along with its benches against a background of couchant griffins in a fantastic landscape.53 The second instance is the Northwest Lustral Basin (Fig. 4.15), where Evans thought groups came to participate in initiatory ritual (hence its designation as the Initiatory Area).54 The space around the basin is so generous that one can only be reminded of the lustral basin within its larger room I 3 in Quartier Mu (Figs. 1.38, 1.39). Of some interest is that it was abandoned, possibly by the end of MM IIIB. Perhaps its continued use was at odds with new ritual practice.

5.2.3. Early Minoan Precedents for the Elite Style? Given some of the traditions of elaborate architecture that characterized the MM IB–II Protopalatial Period, and the fact that architectural developments in some cultures can be traced back in time, it is more than tempting to look to the EM I–MM IA period for the beginnings of the elite architectural style on Crete. One finds at Palaikastro, for instance, a large but still undefined series of EM II walls buried deep below later houses,55 but as Whitelaw has pointed out, they are too far apart to represent roofed structures.56 For EM II settlements, those at Hagia Triada in the Mesara and Myrtos Phournou Koriphi and Vasiliki farther east in the Ierapetra area may be taken as representative. At the first were uncovered two singlestoried houses (Fig. 5.5:a), each with a large room with a maximum single ceiling span of about 3 m. Toward the center of each room (a and b in Fig. 5.5:a) were curious wall bases with C- and L-shaped plans, which were thought by Clelia Laviosa to have helped to support the ceiling.57 At Phournou Koriphi, a number of sizeable masonry bases, although with a P-shaped plan this time, were found in the centers of at least three of the larger rooms (e.g., Room 80 in Fig. 2.23) and were similarly interpreted by Warren.58 While I agree with Laviosa and Warren concerning the main function of the unusual walls, I have argued elsewhere that the special enclosing shapes of the walls (with C-, L-, and P-shaped plans) are otherwise unnecessary for a simple pillar59—certainly another function is implied. My

157

explanation is that ladders, similar to those thought by Warren to have been used to access roofs and, from the roofs, certain ground floor rooms,60 were set within the enclosed shapes, as suggested in our Figure 5.5:b at Hagia Triada. The ladders, projecting up through hatch-like openings in the roofs, provided the inhabitants with easy access to the roofs, any use areas on them, and to ground-floor rooms open only to the roofs and accessed by the ladders, as envisioned by Warren. Of special interest in this regard is the Vasiliki site, where Richard Seager excavated what he called the “Red House” (Fig. 2.21), named after the thick painted plaster he found covering the lower walls.61 In what has been called the “Northeast Annex” (Room Groups 39, but esp. 40–42), there is room 41, which, together with the walls surrounding it, sits at the center of the adjacent rooms. Room 41, I suggest, most likely played a role similar to the walls with enclosing shapes at Hagia Triada and Phournou Koriphi. Namely, it was provided with a ladder (or, perhaps, a wooden stairway) leading up not simply to a roof but, in this case, to a second story supported at that part of the building by the long, P-shaped wall group shown enclosing Room 41 in Figure 2.21. Can the central supporting structures just discussed be considered part of the later Elite Style? No, for not only do they appear too early in time (EM II) but they probably went out of use during the same period, perhaps in connection with the development of wooden stairways that ushered in a period when second floors became easily accessible; a later example of such a stairway can be seen in MM II Quartier Mu at Malia (Fig. 4.6). On the other hand, the custom of creating larger ground-floor spaces by means of pillar-like supports was to develop from the precedents such as those we have seen at Hagia Triada and Myrtos. For instance, we see the same general support in the use of pillars in a large MM IA building at Knossos (Fig. 2.7), or in the three Protopalatial rooms (Figs. 2.19:a–c) discovered below the North Wing of the palace at Malia, or, from Neopalatial times, on the ground floor of the Unexplored Mansion at Knossos (Fig. 4.46). The principle of providing calculated central support was simply passed down through the generations. During the ensuing period, EM III, Crete was “marked by the abandonment and destruction of

158

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

north

Western House d

3

bench?

c

pithos

pithos

Eastern House

c e

a

1

a

?

b

main entrance

exterior court bench

pivot

main entrance

bench bench

bench

2

ro ad

0

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00 m

restored

nort h

a

0

0.50

1.00

2.00 m

state plan

restored

nort h

Eastern House

A

0

A’

0.50

1.00

Western House

2.00 m

Section A–A’

state plan

restored

b Figure 5.5. Hagia Triada: (a) EM II houses (modified from DiVita, La Rosa, and Rizzo, eds.,1984, fig. 200, and after Laviosa 1972– 1973); (b) pillars with conjectural restorations for the Eastern and Western Houses. Drawings J.W. Shaw and G. Bianco.

ANCESTRY, DEVELOPMENT, AND SPREAD OF THE MINOAN ELITE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE

many sites . . . [when] evidence for occupation on large sites is extremely limited . . . the countryside was largely deserted.”62 During the subsequent period, MM IA, the most interesting candidates for innovations in architectural form are two small MM IA communities in eastern and South-Central Crete—Hagia Photia near Petras, and Trypiti, which is situated some distance southeast of Phaistos. At Hagia Photia, Tsipopoulou discovered a rectangular building (Fig. 5.6),63 about 18 x 27.5 m and presumably housing a small community, set within an enclosure wall 1.30–1.50 m thick that certainly provided privacy even if it was not primarily defensive.64 The rectangular building contained an east–west corridor about 3 m wide, with entrances at the east and west, along with possible porters’ lodges and/or access to the roof at J and K in Figure 5.6. Some, recalling the later central courts of the Minoan palaces, have identified the corridor as a central court, but it is not like those in the palaces65 to the extent that the palatial courts were extensive and were apparently designed to accommodate large groups. Nor, unlike the palaces, does the

159

Hagia Photia building have a ritual character. Also, the palace courts are invariably oriented north– south. Moreover, the “court” at Hagia Photia could well have been roofed, for its 3 m width is equal to the spans of some of the rooms, showing that sufficiently long timbers would have been available for the purpose. In line with that suggestion is that the larger interior rooms, as seen in Figure 5.6, were set along the periphery of the building, where light may have been provided via windows set in the exterior wall. The central corridor, moreover, was not supplied with drain slabs to empty the rainwater that surely would have accumulated in the corridor if it were it open to the sky, unless drainage was simply not considered. If drainage was a consideration, it seems odd that the ends of the east– west corridor were partly blocked respectively by J and K, spaces that probably were roofed. The most interesting aspect of the complex, however, is that the corridor appears to have provided entrance to eight separate room groups (A–H in Fig. 5.6), with the northern group more neatly arranged than the southern. The room groups communicated

n o rt h

enclosure wall

3 2

1 1

entrance

J 2

B

ca. 3.00m

A

3

1

?

2

1

?

central

C

2

1

3

E

Figure 5.6. Partially restored plan of MM IA settlement within the enclosure wall at Hagia Photia Kouphota. Drawing by G. Bianco; modified from Tsipopoulou 1988, pl. xxviii, by J.W. Shaw to suggest the arrangement of “apartments.”

restored

F

?

2 3

G

D

2

I

K bin?

3

3

corridor

1 1

2

?

3

entrance

1

4

2 3

H

0

5.00

10.00 m

160

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

with the corridor but not with each other. The number of separate accommodations, presumably for nuclear families, is similar to the five or six estimated for Myrtos Phournou Koriphi,66 or the six or seven separate residences at Trypiti,67 for which, see below. Unfortunately, concerning room use, little aside from a few cups, closed vessels, and numerous stone tools, including obsidian blades, were found within the rooms themselves. Evidence for the preparation of food was found in at least two rooms.68 Because of the extraordinarily neat organization of most of the rooms within a single complex at Hagia Photia, it is possible that the building had some other purpose, but more information would be necessary to argue that families were not accommodated within it. A similar argument might be made at first glance for the house groups at Trypiti (Fig. 5.7), excavated by Antonis Vasilakis.69 But there, evidence for residence in the form of stone tools, bones, pottery, benches, hearths, inwall closets, and other separate storage areas seem to indicate that people actually lived there.70 The Trypiti arrangement is most interesting. Unlike Hagia Photia, where adjacent domiciles shared party walls, as in a modern condominium, the diminutive Trypiti houses were built separately, each with its own walls, on a defensible height some distance from the sea. In Figure 5.7 the chief domiciles have been emphasized. All faced upon a narrow east–west street, about a meter wide, possibly with windows (restored) in both their front and back rooms. The street could also easily have been roofed, as suggested in the case of the east– west corridor at Hagia Photia. Three of the Trypiti house plans (A–C) were similar. Their first rooms often had one or more hearths and a cupboard or two, with floor subdivisions created by slabs set vertically into the floor. All of the front rooms had a low rectangular base, like that of a pillar, described as “used for working and, in almost all cases, for some wooden posts to support the roof.”71 From the way that the pillar in C is set (Fig. 5.7), superposed upon a hearth, it postdates the original construction and brings up the possibility that all the bases may have been added later in order to retain collapsing ceilings. The front room at Trypiti in turn led to narrow rooms (1) that, according to the excavator, served as storage areas and were not as high as other rooms. Instead they were apparently provided

with wooden covers at a height of ca. 1.00–1.50 m, which may have served as beds. Moreover, gaps exist in the lower portions of the walls separating the main rooms from the narrow one . . . and were closed with slabs. Thus people could easily . . . remove small quantities of produce . . . from the narrow storage spaces . . .72

The rooms thus were intended for storage, but his descriptions require adequate illustration that has not yet been published. Perhaps at an upper level the rooms housed wooden stairways leading to the roofs. Each house also had a backroom (2). House D (Fig. 5.7) appears “doubled,” with a common entranceway leading to tiny, split main rooms, the usual back rooms (2), and storage rooms (1, 1a) to the side—all a very organized, neat but compressed arrangement that eventually, according to the excavator, was abandoned for larger separate buildings in the countryside.73 Both the Hagia Photia and the Trypiti buildings, with their organized, rectilinear designs facing onto a street or corridor, contrast with the somewhat confusing arrangement at Myrtos Phournou Koriphi. Also, their scale is small, and they technically are considerably less advanced than many later Protopalatial structures.74 We should probably consider them, therefore, as separate regional phenomena rather than a step up in a process leading toward more inventive solutions. Toward the end of MM IA, chiefly in the main settled areas at Knossos and Malia in Central Crete, as emphasized by L. Vance Watrous, “the first true Aegean urbanization takes place on Crete. The major population centers are reorganized: street systems, open squares, fortifications, and the first palaces are constructed.”75 At Knossos, the Northwest Terrace (Fig. 2.5), built as early as EM III, is a first indication of the scale of construction possible during the period, as is the MM IA Monolithic Pillar Basement (Fig. 2.7).76 Both were built of carefully coursed rubble blocks and slabs. The pillars in the latter indicate the impressive scale on which stone could be quarried in the Knossos area, even at that early date. Excavation at Malia revealed a portion of a roughly built settlement of EM III–MM IA date with at least seven hearths (Fig. 5.8), perhaps suggesting the number of family groups using the rooms. The irregular way in which the room group was laid out on a gradually sloping area, as

ANCESTRY, DEVELOPMENT, AND SPREAD OF THE MINOAN ELITE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE

161

23

w

n o rt h

w

24

2

2

34

?

?

P

P

A

1 ca. 1.65 m

26

D

?

P

P c

1

?

2

1a

w

w

P

10

43

cistern 45

18

8 7

41

2

2

w

9

entrance

w

C

12

21

1

w w

1

c

B

w

14

20

46

bench

40

44 17

47

5

Figure 5.7. Partially restored plan of MM IA settlement at Trypiti Adami Korphali, indicating the main “residences.” Modified from Vasilakis 2010, fig. 34.1, by J.W. Shaw; drawing by G. Bianco.

6

w P c

phase 1 phase 2 outlying buildings restored window restored pillar / bench cupboard slabs on edge hearth

37

19 3

1 38

entrance 4

if by random, reminds one of EM II Myrtos (Fig. 2.23), although the latter took the form of the naturally sloping shelving bedrock it was set upon. Further, at Malia a more pretentious building, perhaps of EM IIB date, shown in hatching in Figure 2.26, was discovered by Pelon below the remains of a Protopalatial pillared hall (IX 1–IX 2) that itself was partially replaced by another during the Neopalatial period.77 Little is known, however, about the function of this once substantial early structure.

2

0

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00 m

5.2.4. Architectural Sequencing at Early Malia The new forms appearing for the first time at MM I–II Malia bring up numerous considerations. One concerns whether relative ceramic chronology in the three discrete Protopalatial areas there can allow us to compare the architecture in order to ascertain a possible developmental sequence. But perhaps changes in the architecture itself can suggest the passage of time. Study of the types of supports used, for instance, can be suggestive. For

162

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 5.8. EM III–MM IA Protopalatial houses south of the Southern Wing of the LM Malia palace. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 4.6.

example, in room γ in Figure 2.19:b, located just east of the Protopalatial storeroom below the northern part of the West Wing, Pelon found a stone base slab obviously intended to furnish a footing for a wooden ceiling support (Fig. 2.19:c). Normally, one would expect a wooden column with its separate stone base to have been set there. Instead, he found only the imprints in the thick MM plaster of two stout beams, each 35 cm2. Their size represents a significant step up in scale from the props used on the low benches/pillar bases at Trypiti (Fig. 5.7) and could also very well indicate a logical inbetween stage between a small post and a solid wooden pillar or column. It seems reasonable, as well, to suggest that the same technique was used in anteroom α in Figure 2.19:b, and that opens the way for speculation that this Protopalatial structure was built earlier in time than Building A in Quartier Mu, where rounded bases and the round wooden columns set upon them in the light-well seen in Figures 4.20 and 4.21 are obviously more stylistically advanced. A careful look at Figure 4.21 also reveals that the two bases there flanking the light-well are not uniform, as might be expected in a building otherwise constructed so carefully. Rather, they differ in the technique used to make them circular, for the closest one there is not stepped. That leads me

to wonder if the bases are reused from some earlier, perhaps nearby structure. It is also significant that both bases are mortised to receive a wooden tenon projecting out of the bottom of the column being set on it. Actually, such mortising may have disappeared from Minoan architecture after MM II, to be replaced by unmortised bases,78 which, again, suggests a passage of time.79 Complicating (or perhaps simplifying) the picture further, if we inspect the nearby Crypte Hypostyle (Fig. 2.15), a building that, because of the nature of its series of below ground level ritual rooms, probably makes it earlier architecturally than Quartier Mu;80 the two column bases there (for one, see Fig. 2.16, left foreground) in the subterranean rooms (1 and 5) are plain and unmortised. In addition to the suggestion that, architecturally, the Crypte may be earlier than Quartier Mu is the probability that the former had a ramp in the long space lining the south wall of the portico/ light-well (Fig. 2.15, left center), which Schmid believes contained a stairway leading to the second floor.81 The well-delineated space is 10 m long, which is much too long for a normal flight of stairs. If the risers were 0.23 m. high,82 then the 2 m height of the second floor would be reached in only nine steps. If the eight treads were ca. 0.30–0.40 m wide, like those elsewhere in the Crypte,83 then the

ANCESTRY, DEVELOPMENT, AND SPREAD OF THE MINOAN ELITE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE

stairs would be only about 3 m long, leaving at least 6 m of the stairway space provided without steps. Surely, then, here was an earthen ramp rising slowly westward, with possible landings at both ends. Since ladders and ramps, rather than stairways, may have been used at EM II Myrtos and Vasiliki (see Fig. 2.21, Space 16, for the latter),84 and a stairway rather than ramps was used exclusively in MM II Quartier Mu (e.g., in Fig. 1.38), a ramp in the Crypte does suggest that it may be earlier than the buildings in Quartier Mu. Partly on the basis of the column and base shapes, therefore, one can suggest that the simpler forms, the beams set vertically in the rooms below the present Palace (Fig. 2.19:b [at b]), suggest an early date for that structure. Next in line timewise could well be the Crypte Hypostyle with its unmortised bases, the next logical form introduced after the slab base type began to be used less frequently.85 Following that would be the unknown building or buildings, perhaps the immediate predecessor(s) to Mu’s Building A or an early phase of Building A from which at least one of the column bases in Figure 4.21 came. Finally, Building A as we see it now appeared in MM IIA, to be destroyed in MM IIB.86 Thus, one can easily imagine at least four separate and identifiable architectural events forming part of the history of this area of Malia during MM IA–II. One can also still hope for possible future refinements of the local ceramic chronology. It is clear that architecturally, much still remains to be explored and discovered, for instance evidence for the early history of the polythyra that we see in both the Crypte Hypostyle and Building A of Quartier Mu. In summary, we can inquire again into the introduction of Elite architectural forms. Concerning their origin earlier than MM IB, especially at Malia, I believe we should remain skeptical. Nevertheless, one can still trace, as we have done here, the central supporting pillar form back to EM II at Hagia Triada (Fig. 5.5), Myrtos (Fig. 2.23), and Vasiliki (Fig. 2.21). Or, one can point out the heavily plastered lower walls at EM II Vasiliki and Phournou Koriphi that may have set the fashion visible at Protopalatial Phaistos, Malia, or Knossos. One can also note a common rectangularity in building probably carried out at sites such as EM II Vasiliki or the three Protopalatial centers at Malia through, yes, care, but also by the availability of longer

163

timber and developing expertise in carpentry and wall-building.87 The impetus for the development of the Elite Style is no doubt connected with the combined effect of population growth, sustained group organization, and the burgeoning economy during MM I–II in Central Crete,88 a period estimated to have lasted some 400 years.89

5.3. The Spread of Elite Styles By MM IIIB, within a relatively short time since the destructive event, probably a series of earthquakes at the end of MM II, most, if not all, of the elements of the Neopalatial90 Elite Style that we have been describing here had been formed. Evans wrote about it as “a brilliant recovery . . . a fully conventionalized architectonic style.”91 Those elements, however, were an amalgam. Some of them were inherited but then improved, after experimentation and use, such as the Minoan hall and the lustral basin. Others, such as coursed ashlar masonry, had rarely been used on any scale outside Knossos. Ashlar soon became admired, however, for its appearance and durability. With time, it became less exotic and more economically possible as new quarries were exploited and expertise in shaping and setting stone masonry developed.92 Some forms, such as porticoes with their columns and newly invented stylobates, became common at Knossos, where columnar style grew to be as popular as it once had been at Malia to its east. But while Malia originally played a dominant role in setting architectural precedent, there is little evidence to indicate a continuation of that achievement—even a revived palace was not built there until LM IA.93 Similarly, at Phaistos, the gracious new palace was not built until LM IB,94 although a number of significant intermediary MM III structures (lustral basin XLIV 38, below Room 70 [Fig. 4.31], Court 103 [Fig. 4.22], and Casa XLIV [Fig. 4.18, already discussed]) introduced the new style to the site, if not contributing to its actual creation.95 The first stage of the stylistic drama took place in LM I, especially LM IA, when the Elite Style was to spread throughout Crete in a “proliferation” examined in a seminal article by Driessen96

164

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

and discussed most recently by McEnroe, who refers to its spread as “Palatialization.”97 During transitional late MM IIIB/early LM IA, when neither of its potential rivals seems to have been energetic, it appears that Knossos emerged thriving, if not dominant. The growth and development of its palace, as epitomized by the building of the Residential Quarters during MM III, is clear, and there is plentiful substantiating evidence at least locally for a Knossian architectural floruit, especially around the palace, in the form of large and smaller elite houses, to be discussed below. Driessen has also specified the epicenter, “which started from Central Crete, from Knossos sometime in the MM IIIB period, although, in Middle Minoan times, Knossos may rather have been at the receiving end of the line. The causes of this proliferation were, as Evans has already suggested, the peaceful conditions on the island from MM IIIB onwards.”98 The style was to spread abroad as well, especially to nearby Akrotiri on Thera in the Cycladic islands, and eastward to the Dodecanese. The system of ashlar piers within walls and at wall-ends was to provide later Mycenaean elite architecture with much of its structural strength and resiliency.99 One should not get the impression, however, that the style, although widespread throughout Crete, influenced most of the new buildings being constructed or renovated. As McEnroe puts it, “While Palatializing houses had a broad geographical distribution, they were few in number. There are five palaces and about two dozen Palatializing houses, less than 10 percent of the total number of excavated houses. The vast majority of houses had no Palatializing features.”100 After all, building involved effort and expense, and the owner was often

Figure 5.9. Myrtos Pyrgos gypsum stairway looking southeast. Photo courtesy G. Cadogan.

paying mainly for appearance, as when he constructed a coursed ashlar wall within a light-well such as that in House A at Tylissos (see below). Moreover, for an elite member of a community living some distance away from the population centers, for instance, at Myrtos Pyrgos (Fig. 5.9) along the southern shore, with its gypsum staircase that is among the more elegant examples of the Elite style, or at Pitsidia (Plakes) about halfway between Hagia Triada and Kommos in the Mesara,101 there must usually have been a personal connection of some kind (social, political, religious) to make the project appear justifiable to the owner. One result of the process was that, rather than fitting in with local tradition, some of the buildings contrasted markedly with local architecture. As McEnroe suggests concerning the town of Kato Zakros, for instance, “houses, along with smaller houses and supplementary structures, formed the basic matrix of the town before the new, Knossian Palace was inserted in their midst.”102 As enumerated by Driessen103 some of the features of the Elite Style were structural, such as ashlar masonry, the slightly projecting walls that ashlar walls rested upon (euthynterias, leveling courses, or socles), cut column or jamb bases, elaborate drainage systems, and raised walks, some of which are discussed in Chapter 4 and shown in Table 1.3. Also distinctive was the presence of mason’s marks, groups of signs incised individually upon blocks, the significance of which remains largely unknown.104 Types of wall covering such as painted plaster, sometimes with frescoes, and gypsum dadoes, as well as types of floor covering (e.g., plaster, terracotta tiles, and geometrical floor designs done with narrow plaster strips105) and paving (slabs of differing types of stone such as gypsum, schist, metamorphic stones) were additional important elements of Elite Style. So, too, was the construction of particular types of rooms, such as those with a central column, lustral basins (often discussed here), and closed basement rooms with pillars (Evans’s “pillar crypts”). The typology of Neopalatial buildings and their constituent elements have been discussed extensively by McEnroe,106 who places them in categories ranging from the simpler to the more complex. Many of the same elements have also been discussed by the present author, particularly from the point of view of materials and techniques.107

ANCESTRY, DEVELOPMENT, AND SPREAD OF THE MINOAN ELITE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE

We have followed the development of the Minoan hall from MM II Malia, where the earliest examples have been reported, and we can see the central role that it played within the buildings there. We will now look at its use in three of the larger Neopalatial structures at two sites beyond the immediate confines of the palaces themselves, and then we will examine how the hall was used within a number of houses.

165

-

5.3.1. The Little Palace at Knossos The largest of the three Neopalatial buildings that we will consider is the one that Evans appropriately dubbed the “Little Palace” (Fig. 5.10), located some distance northwest of the palace itself.108 Its construction postdates that of the palatial Residential Quarters.109 Measuring some 900 m2, not including the first floor, its western half contains two long parallel staircases, a crypt with two pillars rather than the usual single one, and numerous rooms that could well have served for storage. Along the building’s entire eastern flank, some 12 m wide, was a long colonnaded portico behind which are two complete Minoan halls, a unique situation. The first hall, bordered by a lustral basin on the west and the portico on the east, faces south onto a spacious peristyle court, which replaced the usual light-well. The second hall, much smaller than that to the north, is oriented west to east. Again, its central room is a true polythyron, with three sides (east, west, and north) open to spaces beyond. Its light-well (the peristyle court just mentioned) was on the north; it did not have its own lustral basin. With its halls and courts on the east, the Little Palace appears to have been designed to serve groups of varying sizes, the larger on the north and the smaller on the south. The northern one was equipped as well to accommodate ritual associated with the lustral basin and the typical gathering space just north of it. Just west of the Little Palace is a large building reached by a bridge, the so-called Unexplored Mansion (Fig. 4.46). Its excavators suggest that it postdates the Little Palace and was never completed, perhaps having been built to incorporate a cult room, storage areas, and living quarters and accommodating overflow from the Little Palace.110

Figure 5.10. Knossos, the Unexplored Mansion (left) and the Little Palace (right). Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 9.2.

The plan of its ground floor, which was presumably similar to that of the first floor,111 however, contrasts so strongly with the eastern halls of the Little Palace that perhaps we should be considering the Mansion as housing the equivalent of a retinue rather than the leaders themselves. The physical relationship between the two buildings is not unlike that in the earlier MM II House A in Quartier Mu (Fig. 1.38) or the Crypte Hypostyle (Fig. 2.15), where the halls have related storerooms. The comparison can perhaps be taken even further: just as Protopalatial Malia has more than one large structure with a Minoan hall intended for groups, so Knossos had an analogous situation (the Palace and the Little Palace) during the Neopalatial period. The same balance may have existed at Protopalatial Knossos, about which we know less than we do about Malia in the same period.

5.3.2. Hagia Triada McEnroe has recently commented that the Little Palace would qualify as a palace, architecturally, if it had a central court.112 Yet the large site of Hagia Triada, not far from the Phaistos palace, has a large southern court with the main building arranged around two of its sides. The building was

166

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

thought of, however, not as a palace but as a villa by its original excavators,113 and, more recently, as a center of power before the second palace was constructed at Phaistos.114 It has also, and I think reasonably, been interpreted not as a single house, but as two adjacent ones,115 with House B on the east and A on the west (Figs. 1.31, 1.32). Although parts of B have been destroyed by later building operations, most of its ground-floor residential area is, fortunately, preserved (Fig. 1.32).116 The southern part is occupied by two typically Neopalatial parallel flights of a stairway, leading into what one might refer to as a Minoan hall complex. There the first room (the rectangular polythyron, 1a) extends east, with a fore hall (1b) opening onto a light-well, with an unusually fine window installation just to the south (Figs. 1.32, east of 2; 4.28). The same polythyron room, however, adjoins another (21) on the north with its own fore hall and light-well (22) on the east, south of four adjoining private rooms that interconnect (73–20). We have here an unusual arrangement carried out exquisitely with decorative rectangular gypsum paving, triglyph-type interior gypsum benches, and gypsum dadoes (as in Fig. 4.52). In the open eastern light areas the coursed ashlar technique is among the finest in Minoan Crete (Fig. 4.43). Together, the parallel adjoining hall units linked to a separate polythyron are unusual, quite possibly reflecting special accommodation made for a family or families. Perhaps the northern room group is a sophisticated substitute for the otherwise quite separate Queen’s Megaron at Knossos (Fig. 3.1, south) that was built before Building B, although both were probably constructed during MM III or somewhat later.117 The pattern of door closure in Building B’s room group provides an indication of privacy, if one notes that the tops of the T-shaped partition bases point toward an “exterior.” Thus anyone in the southwestern “core” hall (1) could close off the rooms to the east. But someone in Rooms 21/22/20/73 could close off the entire group from the core room adjoining it on the south. An interesting contrast can be seen in the Residential Quarters at Knossos (Fig. 1.29:a) where, as one can see in Corridor 103, either the Hall of the Double Axes could be closed off from the Queen’s Megaron or, perhaps suggesting equality, vice-versa.

House A at Hagia Triada was considerably larger, including an industrial extension to the south (not shown in Fig. 1.31). Again, the arrangement of its rooms for living was based on the Neopalatial hall. As in Building B, there were also multiple halls. In A the core polythyron room (3) opened east into a fore hall, bordering a narrow light-well. Adding a further dimension to the living amenities was the benched Room 4, beyond.118 Core Room 3 also extends north into the equivalent of a narrow fore hall and then into a large light-well (11) that was probably surrounded by a wall at the northwestern corner of the building. Subsidiary Polythyron 13 was connected with Shrine 14, with its famous wall painting of a woman, perhaps a priestess, within a natural landscape.119 As in the case of Building B, parallel stairways along the southern periphery led to first-story rooms. Of all sites, Hagia Triada exhibits the greatest experimentation with the hall form without abandoning its original tripartite arrangement. The architects’ solutions display variety and enthusiasm in the use of many Neopalatial elements, but curiously these did not include the usual lustral basin. As time went on in Crete, experimentation was to continue, but the hall was never again to be used with the freedom that we see at palatial Hagia Triada.

5.3.3. Elite Residences If we review the use of the hall in elite residences it is possible see how one was used in a northern room in a group of houses at Kastelli in Chania in western Crete (Figs. 1.2, 5.11).120 Chania, or ku-doni-ja in the Linear B archives, seems to be a long way west of the epicenter of Minoan architecture, but continuing excavation has revealed expanses of fine ashlar masonry in Neopalatial houses there, as well as a painted lustral basin alongside another possible Minoan hall,121 sure signs that more examples of Elite Style remain to be found there. A palace could well be the next discovery, as we might anticipate, too, at Palaikastro in far eastern Crete (Fig. 1.2), where Neopalatial ashlar buildings also exhibit the spread of the style, even though the form of the hall differs (see below).

ANCESTRY, DEVELOPMENT, AND SPREAD OF THE MINOAN ELITE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE

The “light-well” associated with some of the halls we are considering, as at Hagia Triada and Chania (Figs. 1.31, 1.32, 5.11), are along the outer periphery of their buildings. Thus they are not the canonic light-well type like that seen on the west in the Hall of the Double Axes at Knossos (Fig. 3.1) or in Tylissos House A (Fig. 5.12), both of which are set in the interior of the building and continue up to roof level, where they were open to the sky. The exterior wall of the example at Chania probably rose to somewhere above eye level, for the sake of privacy, as exemplified in a MM III terracotta model of a house from Archanes.122 Such light-wells might be referred to, really, as walled exterior courts. As Palyvou noted, many Minoan halls “are a continuation of an exterior open air space (a street or garden) and there is ample lighting from elsewhere.”123 The type is particularly evident in House Δa at Malia (Fig. 5.1),124 where it appears in the usual tripartite arrangement, not far from a lustral basin to its south. The hall and lustral basin take up much of the “social” space on the ground floor of the house, with the remainder, on the south, being dedicated to storage and industrial activities. Half of the ground floor of the house, in other words, is given over to the hall form, an indication of the importance accorded to it by individual patrons and builders at Malia. The spaces of the hall added elegance and conveyed the aura of social, if not political, distinction.125 The symbolic significance of the hall form for elite Minoan society during the Neopalatial years becomes even more obvious when one inspects the opulent establishment excavated by Stephanos Xanthoudides at Nirou Khani, located east of Amnissos (Fig. 5.13).126 There the hall arrangement, with a somewhat simplified polythyron, has actually become the main entrance to the building. It is accompanied by a lustral basin to its south. The usual light-well component is actually a large court outside the entrance. It is difficult not to associate the nature of this entrance with the plethora of religious material, including huge bronze ceremonial double axes, found in the building, and the identification made by the excavator and Evans of the building as that of a high priest.127 Like House Δa at Malia, the building is divided into two sections, the one for storage and industry, the other for living, but, in the case of Nirou Khani, the latter was

167

-

Figure 5.11. Chania, Kastelli house with Minoan hall. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 9.12.

/

-

Figure 5.12. Tylissos, plan of House A. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 9.19.

168

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Figure 5.13. Nirou Khani, plan of Neopalatial establishment. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 9.18.

also certainly the locus of ceremony, carried out in its large eastern court outside the main entrance, in association with a possible tripartite shrine.128 A somewhat similar arrangement, again with religious overtones, can be seen in the elegant Royal Villa excavated and restored by Evans at Knossos (Fig. 5.14).129 Although the main entrance to the house was by means of an upper floor opening onto the slope against which the house was built, there was also a lower entrance leading into the hall proper. South of the hall was a lustral basin; a pillar crypt lay to the north. The light-well and the front of the hall are normal, but at its western end there was a balustrade with columns on either side of a passage. One walked westward and up steps through the passage to reach, behind the balustrade, a niche in the wall where there may have been a seat of honor, presumably for a priest who lived in the house. Evans likened the situation to the layout of an early Christian basilica with a raised tribunal with its screens (cancelli), recess (exedra), and, in the center, the seat of honor.130 Above the last was a narrow light-well running the width of the room. A similar arrangement at the far end of the hall was found in another Knossian house, the House of the Chancel Screen, with a balustrade, steps, and behind it, a stone dais probably for a seat of honor.131 Together, the addition of balustrade and dais introduce a new element to the rather simple hall, fore hall, and light-well sequence we have been

following here. The arrangement suggests that an authority seated in the niche and separated physically from the audience would give judgment of some kind. Given its presence in a house, however, it seems odd that there is no architectural parallel in the palaces. Evans suggested that it may have been a summer home of the “Knossian priestkings,”132 his phrase for a king with both temporal and spiritual powers. Perhaps the phenomenon represents an independent development of some kind, one about which we may learn more in the future. For instance, Stefan Hiller recently suggested, but in a measured way, that the balustrade/column arrangement found at Knossos might have been based on an Egyptian model.133 Finally, for an example of independent initiative, we might consider the plan of Neopalatial House B at Palaikastro, shown in Figure 5.15. The house is partially destroyed, but one can discern an outside court bordered by a pillar-and-column colonnade (1), then a vestibule leading into a hall (2) next to a lustral basin (3). The hall itself, unusually, is without polythyron and instead features four columns, one set at each corner of a small sunken square court, reminiscent of an impluvium (a lightwell with a shallow basin to catch rainwater from the roof) in Roman architecture. Apparently this was the normal hall form at Palaikastro; it was discovered there in a number of places.134 It contrasts with what we find at other sites in Crete, whether to the west or even to the south at the palace of Kato Zakros, where the hall arrangements are certainly inventive in terms of placement (Fig. 1.7) but otherwise seem normal. The “Palaikastro Hall” type seems to represent a genuine departure from the usual Neopalatial style.135 Should a palace with sufficient architecture preserved ever be discovered on this large site, we might be able to place the architectural form in clearer perspective.

5.4. Comparative Development of Significant Elite Forms Accompanying the hall, even partly defining it throughout its history, was the “pier-and-door” partition, an early form of which we see in Malia Building A in MM II Quartier Mu (Fig. 1.38). Its

ANCESTRY, DEVELOPMENT, AND SPREAD OF THE MINOAN ELITE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE

fore

169

hall

well light-

Figure 5.14. Knossos, isometric reconstruction of Royal Villa. North is to the right. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 9.8.

Figure 5.15. Palaikastro, House B. Modified from McEnroe 2010, fig. 9.24.

later form featured stone bases, discussed here at some length (Ch. 4.3), which at Phaistos may first appear at the entrance into the lustral basin below Room 70 (Fig. 4.31). Its context dates, according to a recent evaluation, to MM IIIA, not long after the likely earthquake event of MM II that caused widespread damage in much of Crete (Table 1.2). Another early example is from Knossos (Fig. 4.12, top), so early that the reused pier-and-door partition bases below the Residential Quarters appear to belong to a “Lair” Building, probably the first structure set into the huge cutting made alongside the Central Court in MM II. Probably contemporary with the Lair Building are the ashlar blocks visible in reuse in the Hall of the Double Axes (Fig. 3.11:a, b). They were likely part of an ashlar facade, perhaps used to face a light-well. The presence of a pre–Residential Quarter ashlar construction, even if in reuse, reinforces the belief of the present Knossos excavators that the stone masonry technique was advanced in the palace during the Protopalatial period, as demonstrated by piers in the West Wing (Fig. 2.3) and early walls consisting of large, carefully cut and coursed blocks in the East Wing (Fig. 2.4).136 If we compare Knossian expertise with that seen at Phaistos, our best, perhaps unique Protopalatial example at Phaistos is the orthostat facade bordering the palace on the west (Fig. 2.9). From the point of view of technique this construction certainly vies with work at Knossos, especially at

the north where a second course was added to the Phaistos wall where it runs up against the bedrock slope (Fig. 2.11). This probable lone example may, nevertheless, serve to indicate that the Phaistians generally did not use coursed ashlar masonry in the Protopalatial period, in stark contrast to its lavish employment in the Neopalatial era. At Malia the residents appear to have used coursed ashlar masonry only occasionally during the Protopalatial Period, when they built retaining walls covered by thick plaster as seen in the Crypte Hypostyle (Fig. 2.16). Coursed ashlar technique, in other words, was known but hardly used, with heavily plastered rubble construction being the accepted regional technique. If we examine the use of columnar architecture in Protopalatial Crete, the custom at Malia was to include columns, often bordering courts (Figs. 2.18 [near p], 4.20).137 At Phaistos, contrastingly, while the single large column at the main western entrance (Fig. 1.15:b) demonstrates acquaintance with the technique, there is little else to show that it was used more than occasionally. Again, at Knossos clear indications of its use are also only occasional, as in the case of the stylobate fragment found in reuse below the Residential Quarters138 or a column base found in situ in the East Wing.139 The contrast between Protopalatial Knossos and Malia may be exaggerated by circumstance, however, as the excavated civic area at Protopalatial Malia is huge and was not completely built over later, while that

170

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

at Knossos is largely confined to the palace itself, with predominantly Neopalatial remains preserved. Still, one can note concerning the use of columns at Knossos that there is no indication of columns lining the Central Court even during the Neopalatial period,140 while the second palace at Malia featured colonnades or column-and-pier combinations along three sides of its Central Court. Along with the increased interest in ashlar construction that characterized the Neopalatial period, rubble walls became thinner as vertical wooden supports assumed more of the strategic load being transferred down toward ground-floor level. At the same time freestanding supports seem to have become more common, including both columns and pillars. The latter played a crucial role in the “lightening up” of construction.141 Some of the pillars were composed of two to four limestone or sandstone blocks stacked upon each other reaching almost to ceiling level. This type, however, was most common in closed interiors where significant construction in wood would simply rot due to dampness. Actually, as suggested in Chapter 3, in some circumstances wood was, perhaps surprisingly, preferred to stone. Such was the case with most pillars, whether they stood in an interior area or alongside an exposed portico. The crucial point in pillar construction was that only a single ashlar block of normal size was set as a base. Above that wooden and clay construction carried up to ceiling level (as in Fig. 3.16:a), creating a flexible pillar that could withstand earthquake stress, also one that would not rot at its base. The wooden members of the pillars were as much as 2 m or more long, while the “bundle” was usually secured at the top and bottom by a caplike case of smaller horizontal beams. Those at the bottom were secured by wooden mortises to the base block. Providing stability of this type was not new to Minoan architectural tradition, for it had been used already in the Protopalatial period for orthostat construction to affix a wooden framework filled with rubble, later plastered, upon the orthostat course (Fig. 4.37).142 The older technique would continue to be used, but for other purposes such as for windowsills (Fig. 4.28) or for fastening rubble masonry to the tops of high ashlar walls (Figs. 3.23, 3.24). This new but related technique seems definitely to have been introduced after MM II. It could well

have developed in response to earthquakes that occurred at the end of MM II, which prompted builders to realize that new technology was called for to counter the threat. Of some interest from this point of view is that in the colonnade along the eastern side of the Malia Central Court, pillars were probably not extended up to architrave level by means of mortising. This suggests that the technique just described had not yet been adopted at Malia, as it was used later in the construction of, for instance, the Pillar Hall immediately north of the Central Court (Fig. 1.48). It also suggests, indirectly, that we are looking there at a construction method in the process of development.143 Among the three obvious candidates for architectural originators—Knossos, Malia, and Phaistos144 —Malia, with its multiple examples of columnar architecture and complex timber construction, presently appears to be the front-runner in the Protopalatial period. Obvious progress at Knossos in the technique of coursed ashlar construction, however, indicates its contemporary ascendance. The advanced techniques involving wood and stone visible at Phaistos, especially in the MM IIIA lustral basin in Room 70 (Fig. 4.31), must still be explained, however. One possibility might be that the room was built under the influence of Knossos which, according to a number of scholars, played an increasingly important, if not dominant, role in Cretan affairs after MM II.145 From the point of view of architectural chronology, it may be significant that the I-shaped pier-and-door partition base appears for the first time at the Phaistos palace in the Mesara in LM IB, while at Knossos it was known some time before (see Ch. 4.2.2; Table 1.3, no. 9). This observation tends to support Carinci and La Rosa’s lower dating for the Phaistos palace, along with the suspicion that Knossos played a role in its later rebuilding.

5.4.1. Kommos Middle Minoan IIIA Building T at Kommos (Figs. 1.9, 1.47) seems to have received priority in major regional building enterprises after the MM II earthquakes, perhaps connected with Knossian ambition.146 Its very scale and the high quality of

ANCESTRY, DEVELOPMENT, AND SPREAD OF THE MINOAN ELITE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE

the stonework appear to make it the largest and most important single “civic” construction in the Mesara until the Phaistos palace was rebuilt in LM IB. Perhaps for the first time in the Neopalatial Mesara, coursed ashlar masonry appears on a large scale; there is also a double pier-and-door partition arrangement in Room 5. Building T’s double orthostat facade, moreover, introduced a new style, still unique on excavated sites, as well as a developed form of the U-shaped stairway with ashlar blocks set as bases for wooden pillars, a technique that would reappear in the Mesara when Hagia Triada was built147 and, later, when the second palace at Phaistos was constructed.148

5.4.2. Phaistos The first palace at Phaistos was once thought by its excavators to have been destroyed at the end of MM II and rebuilt in MM III, at about the same time as that at Knossos.149 In this scenario, the introduction of various elements of Elite Style might be contemporary at both sites. That would suggest close connections between the two in terms of overall control and among those responsible for building, the latter perhaps taking place in the presence of a single master builder. Recently, however, after evaluating a series of stratigraphic sections in the palace and evidence from ceramics and other means of dating, La Rosa lowered the date of the rebuilding at Phaistos to LM IB, at least a century later than the date suggested by Pernier and Banti.150 La Rosa and Carinci have suggested that in the interim a number of small, sometimes unconnected building projects were carried out within and along the periphery of the Old Palace structure, including the construction of a four-pillared room on the northeast (103, Fig. 4.22) and a well-appointed house (XLVII, Fig. 4.18) on the southwest, below the later Greek temple.151 Room 103, to the northeast, contains four pillars of the single, low-block type that typically occur only in Neopalatial contexts and are probably of MM IIIB date here.152 All were mortised on their tops for wooden pillar attachments. Casa XLVII (Fig. 4.18), thought to be of MM IIIA origin, contains an entranceway crossed by a stylobate with a central column, and there are C-shaped

171

doorjambs elsewhere in the house,153 both standard Neopalatial features. Similar techniques can be seen in the lustral basin (Fig. 4.31) found below Neopalatial Room 70, west of Room XLIV 38, discussed above. Furthermore, the excavators at Phaistos now believe, partly on the basis of its alignment, that the colonnaded portico along the western side of the Central Court was constructed in MM IIIA.154 This would seem to indicate a perhaps otherwise unexpected optimism and capability after the MM II earthquake when, they say, “the palace was somehow rebuilt in the same area as the previous one . . . Hence we can safely say that a MM IIIA palace existed at Phaistos.”155 An important consideration, therefore, is that Neopalatial architectural forms appear for the first time at Phaistos not long after its MM II destruction. But more important is that some of the forms (e.g., the pier-and-door partition, the lustral basin) are, as far as we know, new to the Phaistos area and yet on the site do not appear to be part of an expanded enterprise. How are we to explain this? Most likely, since the forms used do not appear to be experimental but, rather, are of a developed type, their inspiration should be sought outside the palace area. Only nearby Hagia Triada affords a local possibility, but that site apparently developed after MM IIIB,156 so it should probably be ruled out. Moreover, no lustral basin was found during that site’s excavation. The Phaistos excavators suggest that these Neopalatial features, as well as aspects of pottery decoration and innovative experiments in wall painting, may have been the result of an ancient local tradition. Alternatively, they could attest to an increasing Knossian presence in the Mesara area, consolidated in the building of the Royal Villa at Hagia Triada and perhaps accounting for the abandonment of the Phaistos palace in a ruined state for a long time.

5.4.3. Knossos The Residential Quarters in the East Wing at Knossos serves as probably the earliest, and certainly the most complete, exemplar of the Neopalatial interior form in Crete. The architectural forms and the complex interrelationships observed there,

172

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

both within and between stories, are so sophisticated that initially one is tempted to assume that an interval of careful conception and planning was needed to develop the new architectural style, even if they were originally formed by the axe stroke of a genius. Yet if we look south to Phaistos for inspiration, we find more scattered but sometimes equally sophisticated Neopalatial forms. If we consider Malia, an area that appears to have made some earlier significant architectural contributions, the processes of innovation and/or emulation at this site seem to have slowed down significantly. A complication also arises when we consider the overall chronological relationships between Knossos and Phaistos (see Table 1.2). The relative date of the Knossos Residential Quarters, which Evans and Macdonald would both place in MM IIIB, is later than the MM IIIA date for the Neopalatial style of architecture at Kommos and Phaistos already described above.157 How could Mesariote architecture have been influenced, therefore, by a Knossian style that postdated it? One possibility is that the MM IIIA dates for the Mesara are too early. The relatively recent studies that have led to this dating, however, along with the relative independence of the ceramic analysts concerned, make that doubtful. Perhaps some adjustment should be made in the sequence so as to allow for the primacy of a Knossian role in the development and spread of Neopalatial form, for neither Malia nor Phaistos appear at this time to have possible local progenitors.

5.4.4. Looking Abroad Aegean centers are located relatively close to the Fertile Crescent, where the cultures of Egypt and Syria developed sophisticated architectural forms visible to travelers and merchants even before the Minoan floruit. Thus it is reasonable to assume that some of those forms might have been emulated, if not copied, by the Minoans. Egyptian and Egyptianizing artifacts, as well as others of foreign origin, such as those found in Quartier Mu at Malia158 and various finds at Knossos,159 tend to support that possibility.160 Demonstrating these architectural connections in a meaningful way, however, can be difficult, although scholars such as Stylianos Alexiou, Graham, Schoep, Watrous, and Hiller

have made a number of proposals, some more persuasive than others.161 The best conclusion, I believe, is that most of the specific elite forms that we have been dealing with here, such as the central court, lustral basin, “Minoan” columns, parallel stairways, and mortised pier and pillar construction, should be considered to have developed in Crete rather than having been imported in a developed form, almost entire, from elsewhere. Instead, as Malcolm Wiener has recently suggested, the “idea of monumentality” that spread to the Aegean from the east, rather than the complex forms themselves, might be viewed as the real creative force.162 The result of the general innovations is what Assaf Yasur-Landau and his colleagues have recently termed, especially in reference to Bronze Age orthostat construction, a “Mediterranean architectural language” with a variety of “international architectural refinements.”163 Related to the broader concern with interconnections is the attempt to trace the influence of Minoan architectural style, in turn, upon nearby Aegean cultures, for example, contemporary Akrotiri on Thera,164 Trianda on Rhodes,165 or, to a lesser extent, the Mycenaean culture of the mainland.166 Naturally, such an exercise becomes increasingly problematic as the distance from the source increases. For instance, is the so-called lustral basin, probably of the 12th century b.c., at Hala Sultan Tekke in Cyprus really a reflection of Minoan custom traveling east?167 Or, looking even farther away in terms of distance and time, we might consider the remarkable similarities between 16th-century Minoan and 12th-century Ugaritic building practices.168 Are they traceable to earlier interchange between the two cultures, or are the features in Syria the result of autochthonous development? We must also consider the individuals who brought about the architectural innovations on Crete, certainly people with a strong instinct for design and organization. At the earliest stage, for instance, some began, perhaps gradually, the practice of surrounding a communal gathering space with accommodating structures, as we may see at the Malia “palace.” Later, especially qualified master builders would combine their expertise to build a multistoried structure such as we see at Knossos, where part of the building would remain, as it were, “suspended in air” until Evans and his talented

ANCESTRY, DEVELOPMENT, AND SPREAD OF THE MINOAN ELITE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE

group came to reveal its secrets. Graham dubbed that master builder another Imhotep, the mythical designer of the amazingly innovative Step Pyramid complex of Zoser at Sakkara in Egypt.169 We may come closer to the understanding we seek here, however, if we recall the Syrian myth of Kothar-Wa-khasis. As William Stevenson Smith writes, . . . an important source of artistic inspiration is to be found in the Ugaritic poems where messengers of the gods are sent [flying] over the sea by way of Byblos (Gabal) to fetch the god of handicrafts, Kothar-Wa-khasis, from his throne in Kaphtor (Crete). He is brought to build a palace for Baal; but elsewhere he is concerned with fine metalworking, melting down precious metals to cast a dais of silver covered with gold and fashioning a throne, a couch, and a footstool. The compelling impression made by the volatile Minoan genius is evident throughout the eastern Mediterranean world.170

Surely this could be a faint recollection of Knossos, in particular of its East Wing with its Grand Staircase, Hall of Colonnades, and Residential Quarters. Knossos must have inspired emulation on Crete itself and at Mycenae on the Greek mainland, just as it has inspired awe among archaeologists, scholars, and the general public ever since it was discovered.171 Still, until more evidence emerges to clarify the myth or to strengthen arguments for strong influence of Syrian or Egyptian architecture upon their Minoan counterpart, it is probably best to consider Minoan architectural developments to be indigenous, although reflecting a consciousness of circumstances outside of Crete, heard of as if like a song from afar.

Chapter 5 Endnotes 1. Evans 1902–1903, 45. For a valuable review of the question of residence, see also Letesson 2013, 307–310. 2. E.g., Matz 1962, 87; Hood 1971, 70; Platon 1971b; Warren 1975, 93; Driessen 1982; 2013; Graham 1987; McEnroe 2010. 3. For the Lair Building, see Ch. 4.2.3; Evans 1921– 1935, III, 399–401. 4. Evans 1921–1935, I, 228–230, fig. 172; III, 387.

173

5. Driessen 2013, 152. 6. Evans 1921–1935, III, 384, figs. 255, 256. 7. See also Graham 1987, 210–219, figs. 139–143. 8. Evans 1921–1935, IV, 915–920, figs. 889–895. 9. Evans 1921–1935, III, 367–369, figs. 244, 245, pl. 26. 10. Evans 1921–1935, III, 296 n. 1. 11. Pernier and Banti 1951, figs. 171, 172. 12. Evans 1921–1935, III, pls. 24, 26. 13. Evans 1921–1935, III, 346, fig. 230. 14. Evans 1921–1935, III, 369, shown in pls. 24, 26. 15. Evans 1921–1935, III, 203–232. 16. Evans 1921–1935, III, 233; M.C. Shaw 2012. Warren has suggested that they took place near the “grandstands” he discovered in the area of the Royal Road, east of the palace (Warren 1973, 575; 1973–1974, 903). 17. Evans 1921–1935, III, 299–308, pl. 23. 18. Evans 1921–1935, III, 308. 19. Immerwahr 1990, 139. 20. Evans 1921–1935, III, 369–371, pl. 25 (below). 21. Evans 1921–1935, III, 377–381, pl. 26. 22. McEnroe 2010, 77. 23. Graham 1987, 84–113. 24. But only one lustral basin has been identified so far at Akrotiri. 25. Our survey focused on the Residential Quarters at Knossos because the type is best represented there. The only special features not found in the Knossos example may be the circular step-down bath, or pool, in the East Wing at Kato Zakros (Fig. 1.7, right; Platon 1971b, 185–191) and the painted shrine at Hagia Triada (Fig. 1.31, Room 14; Halbherr, Stefani, and Banti 1980, 90–95). Both general areas would conform to the interpretation of being residential in nature. 26. While “Prepalatial Minoan halls” have recently been identified by Hershenson (2011), including “High Style” houses, I believe that any stylistic predecessors to the Minoans halls being discussed here still remain to be identified. 27. Poursat and Schmid 1992, 9, 31–32. See also Shaw 2011. For the development of the Minoan hall form, see also Letesson 2013, 310–312. 28. Later a “shrine” (I 12) was added to its western facade (Fig. 1.38, left), and a large sprawling addition extended Building A to the south (Fig. 1.37), perhaps indicating a change in the overall nature of the building’s function. 29. For the lustral basin, see also Ch. 4.6, and the text below. 30. M. Schmid, pers. comm. The flooding may have been caused by an error in design, i.e., not raising the floor sufficiently above that of the adjoining light-well.

174

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Alternatively, the original drainage channel may have been blocked when a large extension of the building was built over it on the south. 31. Amouretti 1970; Alegrette and Schmid 1997; Schmid 2006; Shaw 2011. 32. Here I refer chiefly to the first stage (above) of Mu’s Building A. 33. Palyvou (1987) and others (e.g., Preziosi 1983; Letesson 2009, 2013) have correctly pointed out the complex patterns discernible for entering and circulating within the Minoan halls in the residential areas of the palaces. Those are within the defined borders of their respective insulae (Evans’s term, in Evans 1921–1935, I, 204). At Protopalatial Malia, the halls served as one, if not the only, organizational focus for the entire building, similar to their role in later Neopalatial houses (see below, Ch. 5.3.3). 34. Schoep 2004, 2006, 2010. 35. Schoep 2004, 256; Poursat 2012, 177. 36. Schoep 2004, 262. 37. M. Schmid, pers. comm. 38. Schoep 2006, 58. 39. Pernier 1935, 329. 40. La Rosa 2002; Carinci and La Rosa 2009, 242– 244, 298; for the date, see Fiandra 1995, 337, fig. 5. 41. Directly east of this lustral basin is Room XLIV, paved with slabs, which is also dated by Pernier to the Protopalatial period (Pernier 1935, 327). It is possible that XLIV is analogous to rooms just outside lustral basins in residential areas in the palaces, where observers may well have gathered to witness events being carried out within them, for instance Room 101 in the Queen’s Megaron at Knossos Fig. 3.3), Room 81 at Phaistos (Fig. 1.30), or Room LIX at Kato Zakros (Fig. 1.7, to the northwest). If so, it is possible at Phaistos that the two rooms concerned once belonged to an entire residential suite. 42. Schoep 2006, 58. 43. The same lustral basin at Phaistos (Fig. 4.31) challenges one to explain its well-developed form, if it is really of MM IIIA date as claimed. Compared with the MM II example from Malia, with its irregular steps and rough overall shape (Figs 1.38, 1.39, 4.30), that from Phaistos, apparently built not long afterward, is surprisingly advanced in design. Its parapet had gypsum ashlar pillars at each end. Between the two pillars was a thick projecting gypsum slab, above a slab of gypsum veneering along the wall’s eastern face. The top of each pillar employed a careful mortising technique matching that of the finest Neopalatial structures elsewhere in Crete. During my visit to the otherwise locked lustral basin in 2010, I noted the details shown in Pernier’s 1935 publication of the basin (Pernier 1935, fig. 195). The two mortises in the northern parapet block, however,

were actually cut into its center, east–west, not along its southern side, as they appear in the published drawing. That same rectangular block, 0.67 m east–west by 0.50 m north–south, is missing its northeastern corner, but it is otherwise intact. The wooden frame resting on it, therefore, was probably rectangular and continued up to the ceiling framework above, like the side of a doorjamb. The square base at the southern end of the same lustral basin parapet wall, with four mortises, may well have supported a wooden framework supporting a column, as known from elsewhere (Fig. 4.16). The Phaistos basin is also accompanied by a large, formal “observation window” in good Neopalatial tradition (Fig. 4.32), but it is also reminiscent of the equally impressive window in the MM I–II Crypte Hypostyle at Malia, where it separates benched Room 5 from Room 4, the latter probably an early form of lustral basin (Shaw 2011). It is also difficult to consider the Phaistos basin as having been renovated, unless it was completely replaced at the time. Girella’s recent reevaluation of the pottery found in association with the basin dates it to MM IIIA, Mature (Girella 2010, Deposit 2, 52, 56, pl. 6), strengthening the dating suggested by La Rosa (above). 44. Driessen 1982, 55; McEnroe 2010, 64. The possibility remains, e.g., as suspected by Mirié (1979, 76, pl. 35 [1]), that the lustral basin in the Throne Room there is as early as MM II. Was it accompanied by a Minoan hall? 45. Hershenson 2011. 46. Driessen 1982, 55 (Egypt); Schoep 2007 (the Near East?), 233–234; Shaw 2009a, 63 (in favor of Cretan origin). 47. Graham 1964; Schoep 2007, 233–234. 48. I do not see any clear similarity between the door arrangement in the Yarim-Lim palace (Graham 1964, pl. 2, between Rooms 5 and 5A) and that of the Mu polythyron. At the former, original double doors closed to the south against a large stone threshold in order to seal off one room from another. On that threshold were found clear marks left from four burned vertical timbers set in line (the putative “polythyron” doors?), delineating three passages between them. But were there doors between the posts? Or, possibly, since the four timbers appear redundant in view of the earlier doors to their north, which closed off the same passageway, perhaps they were set in line to support a fractured lintel that had not been sufficiently supported from the beginning. 49. The approximate size of the two MM II resi­den­ tial areas from Malia are, respectively, 230 m 2 (Quartier Mu, Building A) and 135 m 2 (Crypte Hypostyle, including the south portico). Other Neopalatial residen­ tial areas were as follows: Kato Zakros (440 m 2),

ANCESTRY, DEVELOPMENT, AND SPREAD OF THE MINOAN ELITE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE

Knossos (550 m 2), Malia (360 m 2), and Phaistos (450 m2). 50. Here I am considering only the first phase, as planned (in Fig. 1.38), before the area to the south was covered by a massive extension (Fig. 1.37). 51. That in the east wing at Kato Zakros, somewhat later, is even some distance to the north of the Minoan hall. 52. Another role of lustral basins in connection with residence can perhaps be identified at Phaistos, where in Rooms 19 and 21 of the Western Wing, individual lustral basins were provided for what appear to be two adjoining apartments (Rooms 17, 18, 19 and 16, 20, 21; Fig 1.4). They were entered from the main east–west passageway, 7, leading from the West Court to the Central Court. Those using the apartments accessed them through corridor rooms 12/13/24/15, of which 15 appears rather like an entrance room or foyer common to both apartments. These apartments, by no means as fancy as Rooms 63–65 alongside the eastern side of the Central Court, perhaps intended for special guests, may have been reserved for palace guardians with special status and privileges who controlled the eastern and western entrances to the Central Court through Corridor 7. A similar arrangement, also featuring a lone lustral basin and a two-room apartment (Room 2), was discovered at the entrance to Building B at Tylissos, where it was identified as the warden’s lodge (Hazzidakis 1934, 28). 53. Evans 1921–1935, IV, 901–946. 54. Evans 1921–1935, I, 405–422; Fig. 4.15. 55. Dawkins, Hawes, and Bosanquet 1904–1905, plan X; McEnroe 2010, 25, fig. 3.8. 56. Whitelaw 2012, 117. 57. Laviosa 1972–1973, 507. 58. Warren 1972, 55–56, 72–73. 59. Shaw, forthcoming. 60. Warren 1972, 39, 45, 258. 61. Seager 1904–1905; see also Zois 1976. 62. Watrous 2001, 179–180. 63. Tsipopoulou 1988, 1992, 1999b. 64. The author visited and sketched the site in 1986. Some of the stones of the enclosure wall have collapsed outside the wall and could appear on a plan rather like towers, so they have been omitted from the drawing. 65. E.g., McEnroe 2010, 34, fig. 4.3; see also Tsipopoulou 1999b, 182, where she states that it is “clearly the predecessor to the central court of the later palaces.” 66. McEnroe 2010, 19. 67. McEnroe 2010, 23–24. 68. Tsipopoulou 1988, 46. 69. Vasilakis 1989, 2010. 70. Vasilakis 2010, 354–355.

175

71. Vasilakis 2010, 357. 72. Vasilakis 2010, 357. 73. Vasilakis 2010, 356. He thinks that there is not enough evidence for a second story (A. Vasilakis, pers. comm., 27 February 2014), but special access to the roof still remains possible. 74. The “oval house” at Chamaizi has also been considered by some as belonging to the Hagia Photia group; see, e.g., McEnroe 2010, 34, fig. 44. 75. Watrous 2001, 214. 76. Evans 1921–1935, I, 145–146. 77. Pelon 1993. 78. MA:MAT, 84, 181–182. 79. It is also possible that, since at least one of the bases is in reuse, neither one nor both of the bases held a tenon as we see them positioned in the light-well, for the period during which such bases were in use may have been limited. 80. Shaw 2011. 81. Amouretti 1970, state plan; Schmid 2006, fig. 12; Shaw 2011, fig. 20. 82. An average height in the Crypt, as calculated from the excellent state plan in Amouretti 1970. 83. Width calculated from Amouretti 1970, state plan. 84. See also Shaw, forthcoming. 85. Since Quartier Mu was destroyed at the end of MM II, and the Crypte basically belongs to the MM I– II horizon, we do not consider the alternative that the Crypte is later than Mu, although there is some ceramic evidence for reuse of the area after MM II. 86. J. Driessen, pers. comm., 5 February 2013. 87. For the use and development of plastering in Crete, see MA:MAT, 141–156. 88. Watrous 2001, 198–199. 89. Warren and Hankey 1989, 169. 90. During the Protopalatial period (MM I–II), while certain establishments such as Apodoulou, Chamaizi, Hagia Photia, and Monastraki (McEnroe 2010) shared the general affluence of the period, the impact of any architectural forms developed at the major centers focused on here was minimal. That was to change at the beginning of the Neopalatial period. 91. Evans 1921–1935, II, 287. 92. For a summary of information about the workers involved, see Shaw 2009b, 166–169. McEnroe (2010, 22, 96, 107, 149) has estimated the amount of time required during the process of the excavating and quarrying for a house, building the walls, and laying roofs, as well as transporting materials to the building site. As examples, he chose houses from the EM II, Neopalatial, and Postpalatial periods. The hours for a small EM house at Myrtos, e.g., totaled some 1,160, and with a working day of six hours, four people might have built the house

176

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

in some 48 days. For the much larger South House at Knossos, his estimate is some 22,485 hours, which may have required some 31 full-time laborers over a four-month building season. Concerning the leveling and laying out of Neopalatial buildings in particular, see also Fotou 1990; Devolder 2013. To estimate construction time for a larger building such as a palace, of course, one would also want to work in the possibility of building it in stages over a period of years. For a valuable estimate of the human labor required for the tholoi and cist graves at Mycenae, see Fitzsimons 2014. 93. Pelon 2006; Van de Moortel and Darcque 2006, 179. 94. La Rosa 2002, 89. 95. See also Table 1.2. 96. Driessen 1989–1990. 97. McEnroe 2010, 93–103. 98. Driessen 1989–1990, 22 99. For the spread of the new style abroad, see Shaw 2009b, 169–178. For at least the moment, I assume that the pier-and-door partition developed in Crete, based on the evidence for an early form of it in Quartier Mu at Malia (Fig. 5.2). The same consideration would also apply to the stone bases for such partitions, which appear to have replaced wooden prototypes in late MM II/ early MM III at Knossos. Nevertheless, the very recent discovery of stone bases (we can assume that wooden partitions were set upon them) at Trianda on Rhodes, in what have been described as a Protopalatial context (T. Marketou, pers. comm.), gives one pause to consider an extra-Cretan origin for the form. For earlier discoveries on Rhodes and Kos, see Marketou 2010, 775–793; see also Shaw 2009b, 171. 100. McEnroe 2010, 98–99. 101. At still unpublished Plakes all jamb bases were of gypsum; the site features a small court with fine ashlar masonry on either side of a pillar embedded in the wall. See Vallianou 1987, 1988; Chatzi-Vallianou 1989, 1990. 102. McEnroe 2010, 104. 103. Driessen 1989–1990, 8–12. 104. Shaw 2009b, 76–79. 105. Shaw and Betancourt 2009. 106. McEnroe 1982. 107. Shaw 2009b. 108. Evans 1921–1935, II, 513–527. 109. The building of the Little Palace was dated most recently by Hatzaki (2005, 198) to MM IIIB/LM IA. 110. Popham et al. 1984, 261. See also Hitchcock and Preziosi 1997. 111. Popham et al. 1984, 262. 112. McEnroe 2010, 95. 113. La Rosa 1992, 70 114. La Rosa 1995, 890.

115. Watrous 1992; but see La Rosa’s objection (1992, 70). 116. Halbherr, Stefani, and Banti 1980, 151–163, fig. 95. 117. At one time the Hagia Triada complex was dated to late MM IIIB (La Rosa 1992, 70). Now La Rosa believes that it was built during LM I (V. La Rosa, pers. comm., 31 October 2012). Specifically, “the construction of the north-west quarter of Villa at Hagia Triada (Quartiere Signorile di Nord-Ovest) is later than MM III, because a LM IA pottery deposit was found under the slab floor of Room 14. The construction of the first phase of the eastern quarter (Quartiere Signorile orientale) is later than MM IIIB.” 118. Light-well 49, between 4 and 12, was created by setting in two parallel stylobates, each with two columns. The area open to the sky was the narrow strip between them, with a drainage collector set below the eastern stylobate (Halbherr, Stefani, and Banti 1980, 64 [plan], 76–78, fig. 48). It is clear on the site, because of the differences between column and slab arrangement, that they were not set in together; the larger western one was probably the earlier. Perhaps Room 4 was an afterthought, created to add living space on the other side of an earlier light-well. A similar construction can be found in Room 50 in the Phaistos palace (Figs. 1.30, 3.28). Since the palace is probably later than the Hagia Triada buildings being discussed, there remains a possibility that Building A at Hagia Triada set the precedent at the time of its renovation. 119. Militello 1998, 99–115, pls. 2–6. 120. For the Chania hall, see esp. Hallager 1990. 121. Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1988; 1997a; 2010, 521, “a grand hall.” 122. Lembessi 1976; see also Lloyd 1999. 123. Palyvou 2004a, 212. 124. For Δa, see Demargne and Gallet de Santerre 1953; see also Driessen 1982, 48–50, with discussion of the possible remodeling of the house. 125. For a similar arrangement, see that of House Za at Malia (Demargne and Gallet de Santerre 1953, pl. LXV). 126. Xanthoudides 1922. 127. Graham 1987, 59. 128. Shaw 1978, 446 n. 32. 129. Evans 1921–1935, II, 396–413. 130. Evans 1921–1935, II, 406. 131. Evans 1921–1935, II, 391–395. 132. Evans 1921–1935, II, 413. 133. Hiller 2000, 581. 134. For the “Palaikastro Hall,” see Driessen 1989– 1990, 14; Letesson 2009, 341. 135. Another unusual example of innovative archi­ tecture at Palaikastro is a partly destroyed arrangement

ANCESTRY, DEVELOPMENT, AND SPREAD OF THE MINOAN ELITE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE

in Area 6 of the South-East Building. It had a possible peristyle around a rectangular court. On the southern side was a line of at least three rooms, opening onto the court. One of those rooms had four pier-and-door partitions with stone bases, at least one of them C-shaped. The group might be interpreted as incorporating details belonging originally to the Minoan hall, but here in a different and simpler arrangement; see Driessen 1999; Knappett and Cunningham 2012. 136. As dated by C. Macdonald (pers. comm.). 137. See also Ch. 4.4. 138. Macdonald and Driessen 1988, 244, pl. 32:e. 139. Evans 1921–1935, I, 386 n. 3, fig. 280, suppl. pl. viii. Also Shaw 2009b, 85. 140. I have suggested, however, the possibility that there may have been a portico, now lost to a combination of decay, erosion, and pillage (Shaw and Lowe 2002). Another consideration is that colonnades may have functioned as partial protection for spectators at bull game performances, as argued persuasively by Graham in the case of Malia (1957; 1987, 77–80). Evans believed that the bull games at Knossos took place east of the palace, in the alluvial plain there (Evans 1921–1935, III, 233). 141. See also Ch. 4.4, 4.8.2–4.8.4. 142. Most likely dowelling was common in ceiling and other upper wall construction as well. 143. Of some interest in this respect is that similar mortising does not apparently occur either in MM II Quartier Mu or the Crypte Hypostyle at Malia. Early examples of the new mortising technique are two square mortise holes (the usual shape) in a possible threshold slab found reused as a cover slab for a drain in a MM II context below the Residential Quarters at Knossos (Macdonald and Driessen 1988, 241, fig. 2, Block 31). 144. While architectural innovation outside the three populated centers should not be overlooked as a possibility, the elite nature of the innovations we are concerned with and their greater relative cost suggest that such display would normally develop in an urban center. There is also little indication in early periods that elites were establishing mansions outside the settlements where new techniques might be developed. That development occurred in the later Neopalatial period when palatial style spread into rural areas (see also below). 145. Wiener 1984, 1, 18 (“the Versailles Effect”); 1990, 129, 151, 154; 2007; Cherry 1986, 43–44; Driessen 1989–1990, 22; Cucuzza 1992, 62; La Rosa 1995, 890; 2010a, 499; 2010b, 590; Driessen and Macdonald 1997, 74; Warren 1999, 902; Knappett and Schoep 2000, 370. 146. For the possible circumstances leading to the building of T and its predecessor, AA, at a relatively

177

small harbor site on the Libyan Sea, see Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1996, 1–12; 2006, 845–850, 854–856. 147. See the eastern portion of the complex, between Areas 2 and 75 (Halbherr et al. 1980, fig. 95 and the general plan in the pocket); also Stairway 47 south of 12 to the west (fig. 29 plan and general plan in the pocket). 148. I.e., in Rooms 42 and 43, just north of the Central Court and also at the eastern end of stairway 71–73 west of there. The stairway may be lacking the pillars usually present at each end of the central spine wall, however. 149. Pernier and Banti 1947, 7. 150. La Rosa 2002. 151. Carinci and La Rosa 2009. 152. Carinci and La Rosa 2009, 271, 299, fig. 141. 153. Carinci and La Rosa 2009, 273–274, 300, figs. 145, 146. 154. Carinci and La Rosa 2009, 248–250, 299; it was originally thought by Levi to belong to the Protopalatial period (1976–1981, I, 262–281). The MM IIIA date coincides with the construction of Building T at Kommos with its colonnaded North and South Stoas (Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, 17, 27, 56, pl. 1.7). At least the South Stoa there had a predecessor, in MM IIB Building AA, which in our present knowledge marks the introduction of the colonnade to the Mesara (Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, 2, 7, table 1.4, pl. 1.5). As far as we know, at that point only Malia (Pelon 1999) and perhaps Knossos (Shaw and Lowe 2002) had equivalent structures. 155. Carinci and La Rosa 2009, 299. All of this was, they think, destroyed by another earthquake at the end of MM IIIB (2009, 299), which in turn led to the abandonment of the palace for some time. 156. For the development of Hagia Triada, see above, Ch. 5.3.2. 157. Evans, however, originally dated the renovation of the drainage system and the installation of the Residential Quarters as we see it to “Early MM III” (i.e., to MM IIIA; Evans 1921–1935, I, 227–228). 158. Poursat and Schmid 1992, figs. 14–16. 159. Evans 1921–1935, I, 417–422 (the famous alabastron lid of the Hyksos King Khyan). 160. For foreign artifacts in Crete, see also Cline 1998, 2007 (but mainly Mycenaean). For the extensive range of foreign pottery at the Kommos site in southern Crete, see Rutter 2006; Tomlinson, Rutter, and Hoffman 2010; Ben-Schlomo, Nodarou, and Rutter 2011; Day et al. 2011. 161. Alexiou 1963, 1969; Graham 1970; see also Graham 1964; Watrous 1987; Hiller 2000; Schoep 2007. For a review of some of the opinions, see Shaw 2009a, 62–64. 162. M. Wiener, pers. comm., 31 July 2012.

178

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

163. Yasur-Landau et al. 2012, 23–24. 164. Palyvou 2005. 165. Marketou 1988; Shaw 2009b, 171. 166. Shaw 2009b, 172–178. 167. Hult 1983, 45, 74, 80, 89 (“the Cypriot well-room, met with at Enkomi, but here in a Minoan dress”); see also Åström, Holt, and Olofsson 1977. 168. Palyvou 2007. See also Fiandra 1997 for archi­ tectural similarities and differences between Minoan

Crete and Ugarit. Consult esp. Callot 1983 and 1994 for relevant Ugarit reports. 169. Graham 1987, 230. 170. Smith 1965, 46. See also Ginsberg 1969, 132– 134, 138. 171. E.g., the influence of the Grand Staircase at Knossos (Fig. 3.5) upon the staircase at the site of Myrtos Pyrgos in southeastern Crete (Fig. 5.9; Cadogan 1977–1978).

References

Abbreviations follow the conventions suggested in the American Journal of Archaeology. Alexiou, S. 1963. “Μινωϊκοί ἱστοὶ σημαιῶν,” CretChron 17, pp. 339–351. . 1969. “Ἱστοί Μινωϊκών ἱερών και αἰγυπτιακοί πυλώνες,” AAA 2, pp. 84–88. Allegrette, A., and M. Schmid. 1997. “Malia: Crypte hypostyle (bâtiment KB),” BCH 121, pp. 790–792. Amouretti, M.-C. 1970. Fouilles exécutées à Mallia: Le centre politique. II: La crypte hypostyle (1957–1962) (ÉtCrét 18), Paris. Andreadaki-Vlasaki, M. 1988. “Ὑπόγειο ἄδυτο ή δεξα­ μενή καθαρμών’ στα Χανιά,” AAA 21, pp. 56–76. . 1997a. The County of Khania through Its Monuments: From the Prehistoric Period to Roman Times, Athens. . 1997b. “Craftsmanship at MM Khamalevri in Rethymnon,” in Texnh: Craftsmen, Craftswomen, and Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 6th International Aegean Conference, Philadelphia, Temple University, 18–21 April, 1996 (Aegaeum 16), R. Laffineur and P.P. Betancourt, eds., 1997, Liège, pp. 37–43.

. 2002. “Are We Approaching the Minoan Palace of Khania?” in Driessen, Schoep, and Laffineur, eds., 2002, pp. 157–166. . 2010. “Khania (Kydonia),” in Cline, ed., 2010, pp. 518–528. Åström, P., G. Holt, and M.S. Olofsson. 1977. Hala Sultan Tekke 3: Excavations 1972 (SIMA 45 [3]), Göteborg. Begg, I. 1975. Minoan Storerooms in the Late Bronze Age, Ph.D. diss., University of Toronto. Ben-Schlomo, D., E. Nodarou, and J.B. Rutter. 2011. “Transport Stirrup Jars from the Southern Levant: New Light on Commodity Exchange in the Eastern Aegean,” AJA 115, pp. 329–353. Benzi, M. 2001. “Il periodo prepalaziale a Festòs: Una ricognizione preliminare,” in I cento anni della scavo di Festòs, Roma 13–14 dicembre 2000 (Atti dei Convegni Lincei 173), Rome, pp. 121–155. Betancourt, P.P. 2013. “Transitional MM III–LM IA Pottery at Kommos Revisited,” in Macdonald and Knappett, eds., 2013, pp. 145–148.

180

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Betancourt, P.P., V. Karageorghis, R. Laffineur, and W.-D. Niemeier, eds. 1999. Meletemata. Studies in Aegean Archaeology Presented to Malcolm H. Wiener as He Enters His 65th Year (Aegaeum 20), Liège. Betancourt, P.P., M.C. Nelson, and H. Williams, eds. 2007. Krinoi kai Limenes. Studies in Honor of Joseph and Maria Shaw (Prehistory Monographs 22), Philadelphia. Blegen, C.W., and M. Rawson. 1966. The Palace of Nestor at Pylos in Western Messenia I: The Buildings and Their Contents, Princeton. Boardman, J. 1963. On the Knossos Tablets: The Date of the Knossos Tablets, Oxford. Bosanquet, R.C. 1901–1902. “Excavations at Palaikastro. I,” BSA 8, pp. 286–316. Bosanquet, R.C., R.M. Dawkins, M.N. Tod, W.L.H. Duckworth, and J.L. Myres. 1902–1903. “Excavations at Palaikastro. II,” BSA 9, pp. 274–387. Boulotis, C. 1982. “Ein Gründungsdepositum im minoischen Palast von Kato Zakros: Minoischmykenische Bauopfer,” ArchKorrBl 12, pp. 153–166. Bowen, L. 1950. “Some Observations on the Origins of Triglyphs,” BSA 45, pp. 113–125. Bradfur-Burdet, I., B. Detournay, and R. Laffineur, eds. 2005. Κ ρης Τεχνιτης: L’artisan crétois. Recueil d’articles en l’honneur de Jean-Claude Poursat, publié à l’occasion des 40 ans de la découverte du Quartier Mu (Aegaeum 26), Liège. Branigan, K. 1992. “The Early Keep, Knossos: A Reappraisal,” BSA 87, pp. 153–163. . 1993. Dancing with Death: Life and Death in Southern Crete, c. 3000–2000 b.c., Amsterdam. Brogan, T.M, C. Sofianou, and J.E. Morrison. 2011. “In Search of the Upper Story of LM I House A.1 at Papadiokampos: An Integrated Architectural and Ceramic Perspective,” in Our Cups Are Full: Pottery and Society in the Aegean Bronze Age. Papers Presented to Jeremy B. Rutter on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday, W. Gauß, M. Lindblom, R.A.K. Smith, and J.C. Wright, eds., Oxford, pp. 31–39. Brown, A.C. 1983. Arthur Evans and the Palace of Minos, Oxford. Cadogan, G. 1977–1978. “Pyrgos, Crete, 1970–77,” AR 24, pp. 70–84. . 1992. “Myrtos-Pyrgos,” in Myers, Myers, and Cadogan, eds., 1992, pp. 202–209. . 2011a. “Behind the Facade: What Social and Political Realities Are behind the Cultural Regionalities of Middle Minoan Crete?” in Πεπραγμένα του

Γ' Διεθνοῦς Κρητολογικοῦ Συνεδρίου A', Chania, pp. 127–130. . 2011b. “Myrtos: From Phournou Koryphi to Pyrgos,” in ΣΤΕΓΑ: The Archaeology of Houses and Households in Ancient Crete (Hesperia Suppl. 44), K.T. Glowacki and N. Vogeikoff-Brogan, eds., Princeton, pp. 39–49. Cadogan, G., E. Hatzaki, and A. Vasilakis, eds. 2004. Knossos: Palace, City, State (BSA Studies 12), London. Callot, O. 1983. Une maison à Ougarit: Études d’archi­ tecture domestique (Ras Shamra-Ougarit 1), Paris. . 1994. La tranchée “Ville Sud”: Études d’archi­ tecture domestique (Ras Shamra-Ougarit 10), Paris. Carinci, F., and V. La Rosa. 2002. “Festòs: Per un riesame della cronologia delle rampe minoiche,” ASAtene 80, pp. 870–879. . 2007. “Revisioni festie,” CretAnt 8, pp. 11–113. . 2009. “Revisioni festie II,” CretAnt 10, pp. 147–300. . 2013. “A New Middle Minoan IIIA Ceremonial Building and the So-Called ‘New Era’ at Phaistos,” in Macdonald and Knappett, eds., 2013, pp. 107–122. Catling, H.W. 1973–1974. “Archaeology in Greece, 1973–74,” AR 20, pp. 3–41. Chaniotis, A., ed. 1999. From Minoan Farmers to Roman Traders: Sidelights on the Economy of Ancient Crete (Heidelberger althistorische Beiträge und epigraphische Studien 29), Stuttgart. Chapouthier, F. 1938. Deux épées d’apparat découvertes en 1936 au palais de Mallia au cours des fouilles éxécutées au nom de l’École française d’Athènes (Ét­ Crét 5), Paris. Chapouthier, F., and J. Charbonneaux. 1928. Fouilles exécutées à Mallia: Premier rapport (1922–1924) (Ét­ Crét 1), Paris. Chapouthier, F., and P. Demargne. 1942. Fouilles exécutées à Mallia: Troisième rapport (1929–1935) (ÉtCrét 6), Paris. Chapouthier, F., and R. Joly. 1936. Fouilles exécutées à Mallia: Deuxième rapport. Exploration du palais (1925–1926) (ÉtCrét 4), Paris. Chatzi-Vallianou, D. 1989. “Πλακές,” ArchDelt 44 (B', 2 Chronika) [1995], pp. 429–447. . 1990. “Πλακές,” ArchDelt 45 (B', 2 Chronika) [1995], pp. 417–420.

REFERENCES

Cherry, J.F. 1986. “Polities and Palaces: Some Problems in Minoan State Formation,” in Peer Polity Interaction and Socio-Political Change, C. Renfrew and J. Cherry, eds., Cambridge, pp. 19–45. Chlouveraki, S. 2002. “Exploitation of Gypsum in Minoan Crete,” in Interdisciplinary Studies on Ancient Stone. ASMOSIA VI: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference of the Association for the Study of Marble and Other Stones in Antiquity, Venice, June 15–18, 2000, L. Lazzarini, ed., Padua, pp. 25–44. . 2006. Gypsum in Minoan Architecture: Exploitation, Utilisation, and Weathering of a Prestige Stone, Ph.D. diss., University of London. . 2012. “Gypsum in Minoan Architecture: Varieties, Sources, and Uses.” Paper read at the FitchWiener Labs Seminar Series at the American School of Classical Studies, Athens, 25 April, 2012. Chlouveraki, S., and S. Lugli. 2007. “Gypsum: A Jewel in Minoan Architecture. Identification and Characterization of the Varieties,” in ASMOSIA VII: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of the Association for the Study of Marble and Other Stones in Antiquity, Thassos, 15–20 September 2003 (BCH Suppl. 51), Y. Maniatis, ed., Athens, pp. 657–668. Christakis, K.S. 2008. The Politics of Storage: Storage and Sociopolitical Complexity in Neopalatial Crete (Prehistory Monographs 25), Philadelphia. Cline, E. 1998. Sailing the Wine-Dark Sea: International Trade and the Late Bronze Age Aegean (BARIS 591), Oxford. . 2007. “Rethinking Mycenaean International Trade with Egypt and the Near East,” in Rethinking Mycenaean Palaces II (UCLAMon 60), M.L. Galaty and W.A. Parkinson, eds., Los Angeles, pp. 190–200. Cline, E., ed. 2010. The Oxford Handbook of the Aegean Bronze Age, Oxford. Cucuzza, N. 1992. “Mason’s Marks at Haghia Triada,” Sileno 18, pp. 53–65. . 1997. “The North Sector Buildings of Haghia Triada,” in La Crète mycénienne. Actes de la table ronde internationale organisée par l’École française d’Athènes, 26–28 mars 1991 (BCH Suppl. 30), J. Driessen and A. Farnoux, eds., Paris, pp. 73–84. . 2001. “Religion and Architecture: Early LM IIIA2 Buildings in the Southern Area of Haghia Triada,” in Laffineur and Hägg, eds., 2001, pp. 169–174. Darcque, P. 2005. L’habitat mycénien: Formes et fonctions de l’espace bâti en Grèce continentale à la fin du IIe millénaire avant J.-C. (BÉFAR 319), Athens.

181

Darcque, P., and R. Treuil, eds. 1990. L’habitat égéen préhistorique. Actes de la Table Ronde internationale organsée par le Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, l’Université de Paris I et l’École française d’Athènes, Athènes, 23–25 juin 1987 (BCH Suppl. 19), Paris. Davaras, C. 1997. “The ‘Cult-Villa’ at Makrygialos,” in The Function of the “Minoan Villa.” Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 6–8 June, 1992 (ActaAth 4º, 46), R. Hägg, ed., Stockholm, pp. 117–135. Dawkins, R.M., C.H. Hawes, and R.C. Bosanquet. 1904–1905. “Excavations at Palaikastro. IV,” BSA 11, pp. 258–308. Day, P., P.S. Quinn, J.B. Rutter, and V. Kilikoglou. 2011. “A World of Goods: Transport Jars and Commodity Exchange at the Late Bronze Harbor of Kommos, Crete,” Hesperia 80, pp. 511–558, and online apps. 1 and 2, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2972/ hesperia.80.4.0511. Demargne, P. 1945. Fouilles exécutées à Mallia: Exploration des nécropoles (1921–1933) (ÉtCrét 7 [1]), Paris. Demargne, P., and H. Gallet de Santerre. 1953. Fouilles exécutées à Mallia: Exploration des maisons et quartiers d’habitation (1921–1948) (ÉtCrét 9), Paris. Devolder, M. 2013. Construire en Crète minoenne: Une approache énergétique de l’architecture néopalatiale (Aegaeum 35), Leuven. Dickinson, O. 1994. The Aegean Bronze Age, Cambridge. Dimou, E., A. Schmitt, and O. Pelon. 2000. “Recherches sur les matériaux lithiques utilisés dans la construction du palais de Malia: Étude géologique,” BCH 124, pp. 435–457. Dinsmoor, W.B. 1973. The Architecture of Ancient Greece: An Account of Its Historic Development, New York. Di Vita, A., V. La Rosa, and A. Rizzo, eds. 1984. Creta antica: Cento anni di archeologia italiana (1884– 1984), Rome. Doumas, C. 1983. Thera: Pompeii of the Ancient Aegean. Excavations at Akrotiri, 1967–1979, London. Downey, W.S. 2011. “Orientations of Minoan Buildings on Crete May Indicate the First Recorded Use of the Magnetic Compass,” Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry 11, pp. 9–20. Doxtater, D. 2009. “Rethinking the Sacred Landscape: Minoan Palaces in a Georitual Framework of Natural Features on Crete,” Landscape Journal 28, pp. 1–21.

182

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Driessen, J.M. 1982. “The Minoan Hall in Domestic Architecture on Crete: To Be in Vogue in Late Minoan IA?” ActaArchLov 21, pp. 27–92.

Driessen, J.M., and C.F. Macdonald. 1997. The Troubled Island: Minoan Crete before and after the Santorini Eruption (Aegaeum 17), Liège.

. 1989–1990. “The Proliferation of Minoan Palatial Architectural Style: (I) Crete,” ActaArchLov 28– 29, pp. 3–23.

Efstratiou, N., A. Karetsou, E. Banou, and D. Margomenou. 2004. “The Neolithic Settlement of Knossos: New Light on an Old Picture,” in Cadogan, Hatzaki, and Vasilakis, eds., 2004, pp. 39–49.

. 1999. “The Dismantling of a Minoan Hall at Palaikastro (Knossians Go Home?),” in Betancourt et al., eds., 1999, pp. 227–236. . 2001. “Crisis Cults on Minoan Crete,” in Laffineur and Hägg, eds., 2001, pp. 361–369. . 2004. “The Central Court of the Palace at Knossos,” in Cadogan, Hatzaki, and Vasilakis, eds., 2004, pp. 75–82. . 2005. “On the Use of the Upper Floors in Minoan Neopalatial Architecture,” in Krhs Texniths: L’artisan crétois. Recueil d’articles en l’honneur de Jean-Claude Poursat, publié à l’occasion des 40 ans de la découverte du Quartier Mu (Aegaeum 26), I. Bradfer-Burdet, B. Detournay, and R. Laffineur, eds., Liège, pp. 83–88. . 2007. “IIB or Not IIB: On the Beginnings of Minoan Monument Building,” in Power and Architecture: Monumental Public Architecture in the Bronze Age Near East and Aegean. Proceedings of the International Conference “Power and Architecture” Organized by the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, the Université Catholique de Louvain, and the Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, on the 21st and 22nd of November 2002 (Orientalia Lovaniensia analecta 156), J. Bretschneider, J. Driessen, and K. van Lerberghe, eds., Leuven, pp. 73–92. . 2009. “Daidalos’ Designs and Ariadne’s Threads: Minoan Towns as Places of Interaction,” in Inside the City in the Greek World. Studies of Urbanism from the Bronze Age to the Hellenistic Period (University of Cambridge Museum of Classical Archaeology Monographs 1), S. Owen and L. Preston, eds., Oxford, pp. 41–54. . 2010. “Malia,” in Cline, ed., 2010, pp. 556–570. . 2013. “Cherchez la femme: Identifying Minoan Gender Relations in the Built Environment,” in Minoan Realities: Approaches to Images, Architecture, and Society in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegis 5), D. Papayiotopoulos and U. Günkel-Mascheck, eds., Louvain-la-Neuve, pp. 141–163. Driessen, J.M., I. Schoep, and R. Laffineur, eds. 2002. Monuments of Minos: Rethinking the Minoan Palaces. Proceedings of the International Workshop “Crete of the Hundred Palaces?” Held at the Université Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, 14–15 December 2001 (Aegaeum 23), Liège.

Einfalt, H.-C. 1978. “Stone Materials in Ancient Akrotiri—A Short Compilation,” in Thera and the Aegean World I. Papers Presented at the Second International Scientific Congress, Santorini, Greece, August 1978, C. Doumas, ed., London, pp. 523–527. Evans, A.J. 1900–1901. “The Palace at Knossos,” BSA 7, pp. 1–120. . 1902–1903. “The Palace of Knossos: Provisional Report for the Year 1903,” BSA 9, pp. 1–153. . 1921–1935. The Palace of Minos at Knossos I–IV, London. . 1927. “Work of Reconstitution in the Palace of Knossos,” AntJ 7, pp. 258–267. Evans, J.D., J.R. Cann, A.C. Renfrew, I.W. Cornwall, and A.C. Western. 1964. “Excavations in the Neolithic Settlement at Knossos, 1957–60. Part I,” BSA 59, pp. 132–240. . 1971. “Neolithic Knossos: The Growth of a Settlement,” PPS 37, pp. 95–117. . 1994. “The Early Millennia: Continuity and Change in a Farming Settlement,” in Evely, HughesBrock, and Momigliano, eds., 1994, pp. 1–20. Evely, D., H. Hughes-Brock, and N. Momigliano, eds. 1994. Knossos: A Labyrinth of History. Papers Presented in Honor of Sinclair Hood, London. Fiandra, E. 1961–1962. “I periodi struttivi del Primo Palazzo di Festòs,” CretChron 15–16, pp. 112–126. . 1995. “Phaistos between MM II and LM I,” in Πεπραγμένα του Η' Διεθνοῦς Κρητολογικοῦ Συνεδρίου A' (1), Rethymnon, pp. 329–339. . 1997. “Similarities and Differences in the Architectural Structures of the Palaces in Crete and Ugarit,” SMEA 39, pp. 49–73. Fitzsimons, R.D. 2014. “An Energetic(s) Approach to Late Helladic Tomb Construction: Funerary Architecture and State Formation at Bronze Age Mycenae,” in Meditations on the Diversity of the Built Environment in the Aegean Basin and beyond. Proceedings of a Colloquium in Memory of Frederick E. Winter, Athens, 22–23 June 2012 (Publications of the Canadian Institute in Greece 8), D. Rupp and J.E. Tomlinson, eds., Athens, pp. 83–120.

REFERENCES

Fotou, V. 1990. “L’implantation des bâtiments en Crète à l’époque néopalatiale: Aménagement du terrain et mode d’occupation du sol,” in Darcque and Treuil, eds., 1990, pp. 45–73. . 2013. Architecture néopalatiale en Crète: Les bâtiments en dehors des palais et leurs fonctions, Ph.D. diss., Université Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne. Fyfe, T. 1902. “Painted Plaster Decoration at Knossos with Special Reference to the Architectural Schemes,” Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects 10, pp. 107–131. . 1925. “The Mural Paintings of Knossos,” in Papers of the Society of Mural Decoration and Painters in Tempera II: 1907–1924, J.D. Batten, ed., Brighton, pp. 9–16. . 1926. “The Palace at Knossos: An Example of Conservation,” Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects 33, pp. 479–480. . 1935. The Roman Imperial Navy 31 b.c.– a.d. 324, Chicago. . 1936. Hellenistic Architecture: An Introductory Study, Cambridge. Gale, N.H., H.C. Einfalt, H.W. Hubberten, and R.E. Jones. 1988. “The Sources of Mycenaean Gypsum,” JAS 15, pp. 57–72. Gesell, G.C. 1985. Town, Palace, and House Cult in Minoan Crete (SIMA 67), Göteborg. Gill, D.W.J. 2008. Students at the British School at Athens (1886–1914), Swansea. Ginsberg, H.L. 1969. “Ugaritic Myths, Epics, and Legends,” in Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed., J. Pritchard, ed., Princeton, pp. 129–158. Girella, L. 2007. “Towards a Definition of the MM III Ceramic Sequence in South-Central Crete: Returning to the Traditional MM IIIA and MM IIIB Division?” in Middle Helladic Pottery and Synchronisms. Proceedings of the International Workshop Held at Salzburg, October 31st–November 2nd, 2004 (Contributions to the Chronology of the Eastern Mediterranean 14), F. Felten, W. Gauß, and R. Smetana, eds., Vienna, pp. 233–255. . 2010. Depositi ceramici del medio minoico III da Festòs e Haghia Triada (Studi di archeologia cretese 8), Padua. . 2013. “Evidence for a MM III Occupation at Ayia Triada,” in Macdonald and Knappett, eds., 2013, pp. 123–135.

183

Goodison, L. 2001. “From Tholos Tomb to Throne Room: Perceptions of the Sun in Minoan Ritual,” in Laffineur and Hägg, eds., 2001, pp. 77–88. . 2004. “From Tholos Tomb to Throne Room: Some Considerations of Dawn Light and Directionality in Minoan Buildings,” in Cadogan, Hatzaki, and Vasilakis, eds., 2004, pp. 339–350. Graham, J.W. 1956. “The Phaistos ‘Piano Nobile,’” AJA 60, pp. 151–157. . 1957. “The Central Court as the Minoan BullRing,” AJA 61, pp. 255–262. . 1959. “The Residential Quarter of the Minoan Palace,” AJA 63, pp. 47–52. . 1960a. “The Minoan Unit of Measurement and Minoan Palace Planning,” AJA 64, pp. 335–341. . 1960b. “Windows, Recesses, and the Piano Nobile in the Minoan Palaces,” AJA 64, pp. 329–333. . 1961. “The Minoan Banquet Hall: A Study of the Blocks North of the Central Court at Phaistos and Mallia,” AJA 65, pp. 165–172. . 1964. “The Relations of the Minoan Palaces to the Near Eastern Palaces of the Second Millennium,” in Mycenaean Studies. Proceedings of the Third International Colloquium for Mycenaean Studies Held at “Wingspread,” 4–8 September 1961, E.L. Bennett Jr., ed., Madison, pp. 195–215. . 1970. “Egyptian Features at Phaistos,” AJA 74, pp. 231–239. . 1974. Minoan Crete, Athens. . 1975. “The Banquet Hall of the Little Palace,” AJA 79, pp. 141–144. . 1979. “Further Notes on Minoan Palace Architecture: 1. West Magazines and Upper Halls at Knossos and Mallia. 2. Access to, and Use of, Minoan Palace Roofs,” AJA 83, pp. 49–69. . 1987. The Palaces of Crete, rev. ed., Princeton. Hägg, R. 1987. “On the Reconstruction of the West Façade of the Palace at Knossos,” in Hägg and Marinatos, eds., 1987, pp. 129–134. Hägg, R., and N. Marinatos, eds. 1987. The Function of the Minoan Palaces. Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 10–16 June, 1984 (ActaAth 4º, 35), Stockholm. Haggis, D. 1999. “Staple Finance, Peak Sanctuaries, and Economic Complexity in Late Prepalatial Crete,” in From Minoan Farmers to Roman Traders:

184

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Sidelights on the Economy of Ancient Crete (Heidelberger althistoriche Beiträge und epigraphische Studien 29), A. Chaniotis, ed., Stuttgart, pp. 53–85.

Hood, S., and G. Cadogan. 2011. Knossos Excavations, 1957–1961: Early Minoan (BSA Suppl. 46), London.

Halbherr, F., E. Stefani, and L. Banti. 1980. Hagia Triada nel periodo Tardo Palaziale (ASAtene 55), Rome.

Hood, S., and W. Taylour. 1981. The Bronze Age Palace at Knossos: Plan and Sections (BSA Suppl. 13), London.

Hallager, E. 1990. “Upper Floors in LM I Houses,” in Darcque and Treuil, eds., 1990, pp. 281–292.

Hue, M., and O. Pelon. 1992. “La salle à piliers du palais de Malia et ses antécédents,” BCH 116, pp. 1–36.

Hatzaki, E. 2005. Knossos: The Little Palace (BSA Suppl. 38), London.

Hult, G. 1983. Bronze Age Ashlar Masonry in the Eastern Mediterranean: Cyprus, Ugarit, and Neighbouring Regions (SIMA 66), Göteborg.

Hawes, H.B., B.E. Williams, R.B. Seager, and E.H. Hall. 1908. Gournia, Vasiliki, and Other Prehistoric Sites on the Isthmus of Hierapetra, Crete: Excavations of the Wells-Houston-Cramp Expedition, 1901, 1903, 1904, Philadelphia.

Immerwahr, S. 1990. Aegean Painting in the Bronze Age, University Park. Indelicato, S.D. 1982. Piazza pubblica e palazzo nella Creta minoica, Rome.

Hayden, B. 1982. “The Derivation and Architectural Context of Cretan Bronze Age Stoas,” Archaeological News 11, pp. 1–7.

Kanta, A. 1992. “Monastiraki,” in Myers, Myers, and Cadogan, eds., 1992, pp. 194–197.

. 1984. “Late Bronze Age Tylissos: House Plans and Cult Center,” Expedition 26, pp. 37–46.

Kienzle, P. 1998. Conservation and Reconstruction at the Palace of Minos at Knossos, Ph.D. diss., University of York.

Hazzidakis, J. 1934. Les Villas minoennes de Tylissos (ÉtCrét 3), Paris. Hershenson, C. 2011. “Social Hierarchy in the Architecture of Prepalatial Minoan Settlements,” in Πε­­­πραγμένα του Ι' Διεθνοῦς Κρητολογικοῦ Συνεδρίου A' (2), Chania, pp. 67–84. Hiller, S. 2000. “Egyptian Features at Knossos,” in Πεπραγμένα Η'  Διεθνοῦς  Κρητολογικοῦ Συνεδρίου A' (1), Heraklion, pp. 577–591. Hirsch, E.S. 1977. Painted Decoration on the Floors of Bronze Age Structures on Crete and the Greek Mainland (SIMA 53), Göteborg. Hitchcock, L.A., and D. Preziosi. 1997. “The Knossos Unexplored Mansion and the ‘Villa-Annex Complex,’” in The Function of the “Minoan Villa.” Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 6–8 June, 1992 (ActaAth 4º, 46), R. Hägg, ed., Stockholm, pp. 51–62. Hogarth, D.G. 1899–1900. “Knossos: Summary Report of the Excavations in 1900. II: Early Towns and Cemeteries,” BSA 6, pp. 70–85. Holland, L.B. 1917. “The Origin of the Doric Entablature,” AJA 21, pp. 117–158. Hood, R. 1998. Faces of Archaeology in Greece: Caricatures by Piet de Jong, Oxford. Hood, R., and S. Hood. 2000. “Artists and Craftsmen,” in Cretan Quests: British Explorers, Excavators, and Historians, D. Huxley, ed., Athens, pp. 208–219. Hood, S. 1971. The Minoans: The Story of Bronze Age Crete, New York.

Knappett, C., and T.F. Cunningham. 2012. Palaikastro Block M: The Proto- and Neopalatial Town (BSA Suppl. 47), London. Knappett, C., and I. Schoep. 2000. “Continuity and Change in Minoan Palatial Power,” Antiquity 74, pp. 365–371. Kopaka, K. 2009. “Mothers in Aegean Stratigraphies? The Dawn of Ever-Continuing Engendered Life Cycles,” in Fylo: Engendering Prehistoric “Stratigraphies” in the Aegean and the Mediterranean. Proceedings of an International Conference, University of Crete, Rethymno 2–5 June 2005 (Aegaeum 30), K. Kopaka, ed., Liège, pp. 183–196. Küpper, M. 1996. Mykenische Architektur: Material, Bearbeitungstechnik, Konstruktion, und Erscheinungsbild (Internationale Archäologie 25), Es­pel­kamp. Laffineur, R., and R. Hägg, eds. 2001. Potnia: Deities and Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 8th International Aegean Conference, Göteborg, Göteborg University, 12–15 April 2000 (Aegaeum 22), Liège. La Rosa, V. 1980. “La ripresa dei lavori ad Haghia Triada: Relazione preliminare sui saggi del 1977,” ASAtene 55, pp. 297–342. . 1992. “Ayia Triada,” in Myers, Myers, and Cadogan, eds., 1992, pp. 70–77. . 1995. “A Hypothesis on Earthquakes and Political Power in Minoan Crete,” Annali di geofisica 38, pp. 881–891.

REFERENCES

185

. 2002. “Pour une révision préliminaire du second palais de Phaistos,” in Driessen, Schoep, and Laffineur, eds., 2002, pp. 71–97.

MacGillivray, J.A. 1994. “The Early History of the Palace at Knossos (MM I–II),” in Evely, Hughes-Brock, and Momigliano, eds., 1994, pp. 45–56.

. 2007. “New Data on the Western Facade of the Phaistian Palace,” in Betancourt, Nelson, and Williams, eds., 2007, pp. 23–30.

. 2007. “Protopalatial (MM IB–MM IIA): Early Chamber beneath the West Court, Royal Pottery Stores, the Trial KV, and the West and South Polychrome Deposits Groups,” in Knossos Pottery Handbook: Neolithic and Bronze Age (Minoan) (BSA Studies 14), N. Momigliano, ed., London, pp. 105–150.

. 2010a. “Ayia Triada,” in Cline, ed., 2010, pp. 495–508. . 2010b. “Phaistos,” in Cline, ed., 2010, pp. 582–595. Laviosa, C. 1972–1973. “L’abitato prepalaziale di Haghia Triada,” ASAtene 50–51 [1975], pp. 503–513. Lembesi, A. 1976. “Ὁ οἰκίσκος τῶν Ἀρχανῶν,” ArchEph 1976 [1977], pp. 12–43. Letesson, Q. 2009. Du phénotype au génotype: Analyse de la syntaxe spatial en architecture minoenne (MMIIIB–MRIB), Louvain.

Mackenzie, D. 1901–1907. Knossos Notebooks. Knossos Archive, Ashmolean Museum. . 1904–1905. “Cretan Palaces and Aegean Civilization,” BSA 11, pp. 181–223. . 1905–1906. “Cretan Palaces and Aegean Civilization. II,” BSA 12, pp. 216–258. . 1906–1907. “Cretan Palaces and Aegean Civilization. III,” BSA 13, pp. 423–446.

. 2013. “Minoan Halls: A Syntactical Genealogy,” AJA 117, pp. 303–351.

. 1907–1908. “Cretan Palaces and Aegean Civilization. IV,” BSA 14, pp. 343–422.

Levi, D. 1964. The Recent Excavations at Phaistos (SIMA 11), Lund.

Manning, S. 2008. “Protopalatial Crete: Formation of the Palaces,” in The Cambridge Companion to the Aegean Bronze Age, C.W. Shelmerdine, ed., Cambridge, pp. 105–120.

. 1976–1981. Festòs e la civiltà minoica I (Incunabula graeca 60), 2 vols., Rome. . 1988. Festòs e la civiltà minoica II: L’arte festia in etá protopalaziale (Incunabula graeca 77), Rome. Lloyd, J.F. 1999. “The Three Dimensional Form of the Light Area of the Minoan Hall System and the Southeast Corner of the South House at Knossos,” OpAth 24, pp. 51–77. Macdonald, C.F. 2002. “The Neopalatial Palaces of Knossos,” in Driessen, Schoep, and Laffineur, eds., 2002, pp. 35–54. . 2005. Knossos, London. . 2010. “Knossos,” in Cline, ed., 2010, pp. 529– 542. . 2012. “Palatial Knossos: The Early Years,” in Schoep, Tomkins, and Driessen, eds., 2012, pp. 81–113. Macdonald, C.F., and J.M. Driessen. 1988. “The Drainage System of the Domestic Quarter in the Palace at Knossos,” BSA 83, pp. 235–258. Macdonald, C.F., and C. Knappett. 2007. Knossos: Protopalatial Deposits in Early Magazine A and the South-West Houses (BSA Suppl. 41), London. Macdonald, C., and C. Knappett, eds. 2013. Intermezzo: Intermediacy and Regeneration in Middle Minoan III Palatial Crete (BSA Studies 21), London.

Marinatos, N. 1987. “Public Festivals in the West Courts of the Palaces,” in Hägg and Marinatos, eds., 1987, pp. 135–142. . 1993. Minoan Religion: Ritual, Image, and Symbol, Columbia, SC. Marinatos, S. 1974. “A Note about Minoan Wooden Columns,” AAA 7, pp. 95–96. Marketou, T. 1988. “New Evidence on the Topography and Site History of Prehistoric Ialysos,” in Archaeology in the Dodecanese, S. Dietz and I. Papachristodoulou, eds., Copenhagen, pp. 27–33. . 2010. “Rhodes,” in Cline, ed., 2010, pp. 775–793. Matz, F. 1962. Crete and Early Greece: The Prelude to Greek Art (Art of the World 10), London. McEnroe, J. 1982. “A Typology of Minoan Neopalatial Houses,” AJA 86, pp. 3–19. . 2010. Architecture of Minoan Crete: Constructing Identity in the Aegean Bronze Age, Austin. Michailidou, A. 1987. “Τό δωμάτιο με τον κίονα στο Μινωϊκό σπίτι,” in Αμητός: Τιμητικός τόμος γιά τον καθηγητή Μανόλη Ανδρόνικο, Thessaloniki, pp. 509–525.

186

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

. 1995. Knossos: A Complete Guide to the Palace of Minos, Athens. Militello, P. 1998. Haghia Triada I: Gli affreschi (Monografie della Scuola Archeologica di Atene e delle Missioni Italiane in Oriente 9), Padua. Mirié, S. 1979. Das Thronraumareal des Palastes von Knossos: Versuch einer Neuinterpretation seiner Entstehung und seiner Funktion (Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 26), Bonn. Momigliano, N. 1999. Duncan Mackenzie: A Cautious, Canny Highlander and the Palace of Minos at Knossos (BICS Suppl. 72), London. Momigliano, N., and D.E. Wilson. 1996. “Knossos 1993: Excavations outside the South Front of the Palace,” BSA 91, pp. 1–57. Mylonas, G.E. 1966. Mycenae and the Mycenaean Age, Princeton. Myers, J.W., E. Myers, and G. Cadogan, eds. 1992. The Aerial Atlas of Ancient Crete, Berkeley. Nelson, M.C. 2001. The Architecture of Epano Englianos, Greece, Ph.D. diss., University of Toronto. Nilsson, M. 1971. The Minoan-Mycenaean Religion and Its Survival in Greek Religion, New York. Nur, A. 2008. Apocalypse: Earthquakes, Archaeology, and the Wrath of God, Princeton.

. 2007. “The Cosmopolitan Harbor Town of Ugarit and the ‘Aegean’ Aspects of Its Domestic Architecture,” in Betancourt, Nelson, and Williams, eds., 2007, pp. 31–47. Panagiotaki, M. 1999. The Central Palace Sanctuary at Knossos (BSA Suppl. 31), London. Papadopoulos, J.K. 2007. The Art of Antiquity: Piet de Jong and the Athenian Agora, Athens. Paterson, I.B. 2002. Structures and Stratigraphy of the So-Called “Reoccupation Period” at the Palace at Knossos, Crete, and the Contexts of the Linear B Archives, Ph.D. diss., University of Edinburgh. Pelon, O. 1966. “Mallia,” BCH 90, pp. 1007–1013. . 1982. “Palais et palais à Malia, Crète,” RALouvain 15, pp. 57–81. . 1983. “L’épée à l’acrobate et la chronologie maliote (II),” BCH 107, pp. 679–703. . 1986. “Un dépôt de fondation au palais de Malia,” BCH 110, pp. 3–19. . 1987. “Particularités et développement des palais minoens,” in Le système palatial en Orient, en Grèce, et à Rome. Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg, 19–22 Juin 1985, Université des sciences humaines de Strasbourg (Travaux du Centre de recherche sur le Proche-Orient et la Grèce antiques 9), E. Lévy, ed., Strasbourg, pp. 187–201.

Palmer, L.R. 1963. On the Knossos Tablets: The FindPlaces of the Knossos Tablets, Oxford.

. 1989. “Malia: Le palais,” BCH 113, pp. 771–786.

Palyvou, C. 1987. “Circulatory Patterns in Minoan Architecture,” in Hägg and Marinatos, eds., 1987, pp. 195–203.

. 1990. “La naissance des palais dans le ProcheOrient et dans l’Égée: Contribution à l’étude du développement d’un système architectural,” in Darcque and Treuil, eds., 1990, pp. 265–279.

. 1990. “Observations sur 85 fenêtres du Cycladique Récent à Théra,” in Darcque and Treuil, eds., 1990, pp. 123–139. . 1999. Ακρωτήρι Θήρας: Η οικοδομική τέχνη (Βιβλιοθήκη τῆς ἐν Ἀθήναις Ἀρχαιολογικῆς Ἑταιρείας 183), Athens. . 2002. “Central Courts: The Supremacy of the Void,” in Driessen, Schoep, and Laffineur, eds., 2002, pp. 167–177. . 2004a. “Outdoor Space in Minoan Architecture: ‘Community and Privacy,’” in Cadogan, Hatzaki, and Vasilakis, eds., 2004, pp. 207–217. . 2004b. “Timber in Aegean Late Bronze Age Architecture,” in Interaction between Science, Technology, and Architecture in Timber Construction, C. Bertolini Cestari, ed., Paris, pp. 573–585. . 2005. Akrotiri Thera: An Architecture of Affluence 3,500 Years Old (Prehistory Monographs 15), Philadelphia.

. 1991. “Malia: Le palais,” BCH 115, pp. 726–736. . 1993. “La salle à piliers du palais de Malia et ses antécédents: Recherches complémentaires,” BCH 117, pp. 523–546. . 1999. “Malia: Le palais,” BCH 123, pp. 468–481. . 2005. “Les deux destructions du palais de Malia,” in Krhs Texniths: L’artisan crétois. Recueil d’articles en l’honneur de Jean-Claude Poursat, publié à l’occasion des 40 ans de la découverte du Quartier Mu (Aegaeum 26), I. Bradfer-Burdet, B. Detournay, and R. Laffineur, eds., Liège, pp. 185–197. . 2006. “Stratigraphie et chronologie au palais de Malia,” in Πεπραγμενα Θ' Διεθνοῦς Κρητολογικοῦ Συνεδρίου A' (1), Herakleion, pp. 141–152. Pelon, O., E. Anderson, and J.-P. Olivier. 1980. Le Palais de Malia V (ÉtCrét 25), Paris.

REFERENCES

Pendlebury, J.D. 1963. The Archaeology of Crete, New York. Pernier, L. 1935. Il palazzo minoico di Festòs I, Rome. Pernier, L., and L. Banti. 1947. Guida degli scavi italiani in Creta, Rome. . 1951. Il palazzo minoico di Festòs II, Rome.

187

Preziosi, D. 1983. Minoan Architectural Design: Formation and Signification (Approaches to Semiotics 63), Berlin. Rethemiotakis, G. 2002. “Evidence for Social and Economic Changes at Galatas and Pediada in the NewPalace Period,” in Driessen, Schoep, and Laffineur, eds., 2002, pp. 55–69.

Platon, L. 2002. “The Political and Cultural Influence of the Zakros Palace on Nearby Sites and in a Wider Context,” in Driessen, Schoep, and Laffineur, eds., 2002, pp. 145–155.

Rutkowski, B. 1986. The Cult Places of the Aegean, New Haven.

. 2010. “Kato Zakros,” in Cline, ed., 2010, pp. 509–517.

Sakellarakis, J.A., and E. Sapouna-Sakellaraki. 1997. Archanes: Minoan Crete in a New Light, 2 vols., Athens.

Platon, N. 1963. “Ἀνασκαφαὶ Ζάκρου,” Prakt 118 [1966], pp. 160–188. . 1971a. “Ἀνασκαφὴ Ζάκρου,” Prakt 126 [1973], pp. 231–275. . 1971b. Zakros: The Discovery of a Lost Palace of Ancient Crete, New York. . 1972. “Περί τό πρόβλημα τῶν χώρων τών Μινοϊκῶν ταυρομαχιῶν,” in Κ ερνοσ . Τιμητικὴ προσφορὰ στὸν καθηγητὴ Γεώργιο Μπακαλάκη, Thessaloniki. . 1974. Ζακρος: Τὸ vέον μινωϊκόν ανάκτορον (Aρχαίοι τόποι και Mουσεία της Eλλάδος 5), Athens. Pomadère, M., T. Gomrée, and M. Schmid. 2009. “Malia, Chrysolakkos: Le palais,” BCH 133, pp. 647–669.

Rutter, J.B. 2006. “Neopalatial and Later Minoan Pottery,” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, pp. 377–630.

Schmid, M. 1983. “Les portes multiples au ‘megaron’ du palais de Malia,” BCH 107, pp. 705–716. . 1996. “L’architecture: Éléments de restitution,” in Poursat 1996, pp. 75–95. . 2003. “Malia: Traveaux de restauration et d’aménagement,” BCH 127, pp. 470–479. . 2006. “Le palais de Malia et la crypte hypostyle: Nouvelles données architecturales,” in Πεπραγμένα Θ' Διεθνοῦς Κρητολογικοῦ Συνεδρίου A' (1), Heraklion, pp. 53–60. . 2012. “The Hypostyle Crypte (Quartier Kappa) and the Large Court, Malia: An Athletic Center?” in Philistor. Studies in Honor of Costis Davaras (Prehistory Monographs 36), E. Mantzourani and P.P. Betancourt, eds., Philadelphia, pp. 177–185.

Popham, M.R., J.H. Betts, M. Cameron, H.W. Catling, E.A. Catling, D. Evely, R.A. Higgins, and D. Smyth. 1984. The Minoan Unexplored Mansion at Knossos (BSA Suppl. 17), 2 vols., London.

Schoep, I. 2004. “Assessing the Role of Architecture in Conspicuous Consumption in the Middle Minoan I– II Periods,” OJA 23, pp. 243–269.

Poursat, J.-C. 1993. “Notes de céramique maliote à propos de la céramique de Chrysolakkos,” BCH 117, pp. 603–607.

. 2006. “Looking beyond the First Palaces: Elites and the Agency of Power in EM III–MM II Crete,” AJA 110, pp. 37–64.

. 1996. Fouilles exécutées à Mallia: Le quartier Mu. III: Artisans minoens. (ÉtCrét 32), Paris.

. 2007. “Architecture and Power: The Origins of Minoan ‘Palatial Architecture,’” in Power and Architecture: Monumental Public Architecture in the Bronze Age Near East and Aegean. Proceedings of the International Conference “Power and Architecture” Organized by the Katholeike Universiteit Leuven, the Université Catholique de Louvain, and the Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster on the 21st and 22nd of November 2002 (Orientalia Lovaniensia analecta 156), J. Bretschneider, J. Driessen, and K. van Lerberghe, eds., Leuven, pp. 213–236.

. 2008. L’art égéen I: Grèce, Cyclades, Crète jusqu’au milieu du IIe millénaire av. J.-C., Paris. . 2012. “The Emergence of Elite Groups at Protopalatial Malia: A Biography of Quartier Mu,” in Schoep, Tomkins, and Driessen, eds., 2012, pp. 177–183. Poursat, J.-C., and C. Knappett. 2005. La poterie du Minoen Moyen II: Production et utilisation (ÉtCrét 33), Athens. Poursat, J.-C., and M. Schmid. 1992. Guide de Malia au temps des premiers palais: Le quartier Mu, Paris. Powell, D. 1973. The Villa Ariadne, London.

. 2010. “The Minoan ‘Palace-Temple’ Reconsidered: A Critical Assessment of the Spatial Concentration of Political, Religious, and Economic Power in Bronze Age Crete,” JMA 2010, pp. 219–243.

188

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

. 2012. “Bridging the Divide between the ‘Prepalatial’ and the ‘Protopalatial’ Periods?” in Schoep, Tomkins, and Driessen, eds., 2012, pp. 403–428.

. 2011. “Tracing the Ancestry of the Minoan Hall System,” BSA 106, pp. 141–165.

Seager, R.B. 1904–1905. “Excavation at Vasiliki, 1904,” in Transactions of the Department of Archaeology, Free Museum of Science and Art 1, pp. 207–221.

. 2012. “After Destruction by Fire in the Hall of the Double Axes, Knossos Palace, Crete, with an Unpublished Drawing by Theodore Fyfe, Knossos Architect,” in Κρήτη Μινωιδός: Tradizione e identià minoica tra produzione artigianale, pratiche cerimoniali e memoria del passato. Studi offerti a Vincenzo La Rosa per il suo 70o compleanno (Studi di archaeologia cretese 10), F. Carinci, N. Cucuzza, P. Militello, and O. Palio, eds., Padua, pp. 383–394.

. 1906–1907. “Report of Excavations at Vasiliki, Crete, in 1906,” in Transactions of the Department of Archaeology, Free Museum of Science and Art 2, pp. 111–132.

. 2013. “Architectural Signposts: Datable Ashlar Style at Middle Minoan III Kommos in SouthCentral Crete,” in Macdonald and Knappett, eds., 2013, pp. 137–143.

Schoep, I., P. Tomkins, and J. Driessen, eds. 2012. Back to the Beginning: Reassessing Social and Political Complexity on Crete during the Early and Middle Bronze Age, Oxford.

Shaw, J.W. 1971. Minoan Architecture: Materials and Techniques (ASAtene 49), Rome. . 1973a. “The Facades at Chrysolakkos,” in Πεπραγμένα του Γ' Διεθνοῦς  Κρητολογικοῦ Συνεδρίου A', Chania, pp. 319–331. . 1973b. “The Orientation of the Minoan Palaces,” in Antichità Cretesi. Studi in onore di Doro Levi I (CronCatania 12), Catania, pp. 47–59. . 1978. “Evidence for the Minoan Tripartite Shrine,” AJA 82, pp. 429–448. . 1983. “The Development of Minoan Orthostates,” AJA 87, pp. 213–216. . 1987. “A ‘Palatial’ Stoa at Kommos,” in Hägg and Marinatos, eds., 1987, pp. 101–109. . 1999. “A Tale of Three Bases: New Criteria for Dating Minoan Architectural Features,” in Betancourt et al., eds., 1999, pp. 761–767. . 2003. “Palatial Proportions: A Study of the Relative Proportions between Minoan Palaces and Their Settlements,” in Metron: Measuring the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 9th International Aegean Conference, New Haven, Yale University, 18–23 April 2002 (Aegaeum 24), K. Foster and R. Laffineur, eds., 2003, pp. 239–245. . 2004. “Roof Drains and Parapets in the Southern Aegean,” BSA 99, pp. 173–188. . 2007. “Sequencing the EH II ‘Corridor Houses,’” BSA 102, pp. 137–151. . 2009a. “The Character, Genesis, and Influence of Minoan Palatial Architecture,” in Proceedings of the Symposium “Bronze Age Architectural Traditions in the Eastern Mediterranean: Diffusion and Diversity,” May 07–08, 2008, Munich, Germany, Weilheim, pp. 61–89. . 2009b. Minoan Architecture: Materials and Techniques (Studi di archeologia cretese 7), Padua.

. Forthcoming. “Central Ceiling and Roof Supports in Early Minoan (EM II–MM II) Architecture.” Shaw, J.W., and A. Lowe. 2002. “The Lost Portico at Knossos: The Central Court Revisited,” AJA 106, pp. 513–523. Shaw, J.W., and M.C. Shaw. 1993. “Excavations at Kommos (Crete) 1991–1992,” Hesperia 62, pp. 129–190. . 1999. “A Proposal for Bronze Age Aegean Ship-Sheds in Crete,” in Tropis V: 5th International Symposium on Ship Construction in Antiquity, H. Tzalas, ed., Athens, pp. 369–392. . 2010. “Kommos,” in Cline, ed., 2010, pp. 543–555. Shaw, J.W., and M.C. Shaw, eds. 1996. Kommos I: The Kommos Region and the Houses of the Minoan Town. Part 2: The Minoan Hilltop and Hillside Houses, Princeton. . 2006. Kommos V: The Monumental Minoan Buildings at Kommos, Princeton. Shaw, J.W., A. Van de Moortel, P. Day, and V. Kilikoglou. 2001. A LM IA Ceramic Kiln in South-Central Crete: Function and Pottery Production (Hesperia Suppl. 30), Princeton. Shaw, M.C. 1979. Review of E.S. Hirsch, Painted Decoration on the Floors of Bronze Age Structures on Crete and the Greek Mainland (SIMA 53), Göteborg, 1977, in AJA 83, p. 237. . 1996. “Town Arrangement and Domestic Architecture,” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1996, pp. 345–377. . 1999. “A Bronze Age Enigma: The ‘UShaped’ Motifs in Minoan and Mycenaean Architectural Representations,” in Betancourt et al., eds., 1999, pp. 769–779. . 2012. “New Light on the Labyrinth Fresco from the Palace at Knossos,” BSA 107, pp. 143–159.

REFERENCES

Shaw, M.C., and P.P. Betancourt. 2009. “Plaster from Block AF,” in Pseira X: The Excavation of Block AF (Prehistory Monographs 28), P.P. Betancourt and C. Davaras, eds., Philadelphia, pp. 113–119. Smith, W.S. 1965. Interconnections in the Ancient Near East: A Study of the Relationships between the Arts of Egypt, the Aegean, and Western Asia, New Haven. Soar, P. 2009. Theodore Fyfe: Architect 1875–1945, Great Britain. Soles, J.S. 1991. “The Gournia Palace,” AJA 95, pp. 17–78. . 1992. The Prepalatial Cemeteries at Mochlos and Gournia and the House Tombs of Bronze Age Crete (Hesperia Suppl. 24), Princeton. . 2002. “A Central Court at Gournia,” in Driessen, Schoep, and Laffineur, eds., 2002, pp. 123–131. Soles, J.S., and C. Davaras. 1996. “Excavations at Mochlos, 1992–1993,” Hesperia 65, pp. 175–230. Spanakis, S. 1979. Κρήτη: Τουριστικός, ἱστορικός, καί ἀρχαιολογικός οδηγός, 2 vols., Herakleion. Spence, Y. 1990. “Was There a Guarded Southern Entrance Way to the First Palace at Mallia?” BSA 85, pp. 369–374. Strasser, T.F. 1997. “Storage and States on Prehistoric Crete: The Function of the Koulouras in the First Minoan Palaces,” JMA 10, pp. 73–100. Strasser, T.F., E. Panagopoulou, C. Runnels, P. Murray, N. Thompson, P. Karkanas, F. McCoy, and K. Wegmann. 2010. “Stone Age Seafaring in the Mediterranean: Evidence from the Plakias Region for the Lower Palaeolithic and Mesolithic Habitation of Crete,” Hesperia 79, pp. 145–190. Tiré, C., and H. van Effenterre. 1983. Guide des fouilles françaises en Crète, Paris. Todaro, S. 2009. “The Latest Prepalatial Period and the Foundation of the First Palace at Phaistos: A Stratigraphic and Chronological Re-Assessment,” CretAnt 10 (1), pp. 105–145. . 2012. “Craft Production and Social Practices at Prepalatial Phaistos: The Background to the First ‘Palace,’” in Schoep, Tomkins, and Driessen, eds., 2012, pp. 195–235. Todaro, S., and S. di Tonto. 2008. “The Neolithic Settlement of Phaistos Revisited: Evidence for Ceremonial Activity on the Eve of the Bronze Age,” in Escaping the Labyrinth: The Cretan Neolithic in Context (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 8), V. Isaakidou and P. Tomkins, eds., Oxford, pp. 177–189.

189

Tomkins, P.D. 2007. “Neolithic Strata IX–VIII, VII– VIB, VIA–V, IV, IIIB, IIIA, IIB, IIA, and IC Groups,” in Knossos Pottery Handbook: Neolithic and Bronze Age (Minoan) (BSA Studies 14), N. Momigliano, ed., London, pp. 9–48. . 2008. “Time, Space, and the Reinvention of the Cretan Neolithic,” in Escaping the Labyrinth: The Cretan Neolithic in Context (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 8), V. Isaakidou and P. Tomkins, eds., Oxford, pp. 21–48. . 2012. “Behind the Horizon: Reconsidering the Genesis and Function of the ‘First Palace’ at Knossos (Final Neolithic IV–Middle Minoan IB),” in Schoep, Tomkins, and Driessen, eds., 2012, pp. 32–80. Tomlinson, J.K., J.B. Rutter, and S.M.A. Hoffman. 2010. “Mycenaean and Cypriot Late Bronze Age Ceramic Imports to Kommos: An Investigation by Neutron Activation Analysis,” Hesperia 79, pp. 191–231. Treuil, R. 1999. “Les ‘maisons dessenne’ à Malia,” in Betancourt et al., eds., 1999, pp. 841–845. Tsakanika-Theochari, E. 2006. Ο δομικός ρόλος του ξύλου στην τοιχοποιία των ανακτορικού τύπου κτιρίων της Μινωϊκής Κρήτης, Ph.D. diss., 2 vols., University of Athens. Tsipopoulou, M. 1988. “Αγία Φωτιά Σητείας: Το νέο εύρημα,” in Problems in Greek Prehistory. Papers Presented at the Centenary Conference of the British School of Archaeology at Athens, Manchester, April 1986, E.B. French and K.A. Wardle, eds., Bristol, pp. 31–48. . 1992. “Ayia Photia,” in Myers, Myers, and Cadogan, eds., 1992, pp. 66–69. . 1999a. “Before, during, after: The Architectural Phases of the Palatial Building at Petras, Siteia,” in Betancourt et al., eds., 1999, pp. 848–854. . 1999b. “From Local Centre to Palace: The Role of Fortification in the Economic Transformation of the Siteia Bay Area, East Crete,” in Polemos: Le Contexte Guerrier en Égée à l’Âge du Bronze. Actes de la 7e Recontre égéenne internationale, Université de Liège, 14–17 avril 1998 (Aegaeum 19), R. Laffineur, ed., Liège, pp. 179–189. . 2007. “The Central Court of the Palace of Petras,” in Betancourt, Nelson, and Williams, eds., 2007, pp. 49–59. Vallianou, D. 1987. “Πλακές,” ArchDelt 42 (B', 2 Chronika) [1992], pp. 532–550. . 1988. “Πλακές,” ArchDelt 43 (B', 2 Chronika) [1993], pp. 525–542.

190

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Van de Moortel, A. 2001. “The Area around the Kiln, and the Pottery from the Kiln and the Kiln Dump,” in Shaw et al. 2001, pp. 25–110. . 2006. “Middle Minoan IA and Protopalatial Pottery,” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 2006, pp. 264–377. . 2007. “Middle Minoan Pottery Chronology and Regional Diversity in Central Crete,” in Middle Helladic Pottery and Synchronisms. Proceedings of the International Workshop Held at Salzburg, October 31st–November 2nd, 2004 (Contributions to the Chronology of the Eastern Mediterranean 14), F. Felten, W. Gauß, and R. Smetana, eds., Vienna, pp. 201–214. Van de Moortel, A., and P. Darcque. 2006. “Late Minoan I Architectural Phases and Ceramic Chronology at Malia,” in Πεπραγμένα του Γ' Διεθνοῦς  Κρητολογικοῦ Συνεδρίου A', Chania, pp. 177–188. van Effenterre, H. 1980. Le palais de Mallia et la cité minoenne: Étude de synthèse (Incunabula graeca 76), 2 vols., Rome. van Effenterre, H., and M. van Effenterre 1969. Fouilles exécutées a Mallia: Le centre politique. I: L’agora (1960–1966) (ÉtCrét 17), Paris. Vansteenhuyse, K. 2002. “Minoan Courts and Ritual Competition,” in Driessen, Schoep, and Laffineur, eds., 2002, pp. 235–248. Vasilakis, A. 1989. “Ο Προτομινωικός οικισμός Τρυπητής,” Αρχαιολογία 30, pp. 52–56. . 2010. “Myrtos Fournou Korifi and Trypiti Adami Korfali: Similarities and Differences in Two Prepalatial Settlements in Southern Crete,” in Cretan Offerings. Studies in Honor of Peter Warren (BSA Studies 18), O. Krzyszkowska, ed., London, pp. 353–358. Warren, P. 1972. Myrtos: An Early Bronze Age Settlement in Crete (BSA Suppl. 7), Oxford. . 1973. “Knossos: Excavation in the Area of the Royal Road,” ArchDelt 28 (B', 2 Chronika) [1977], pp. 574–576. . 1973–1974. “Knossos 1973: Royal Road Excavation and Study Season,” ArchDelt 29 (B', 2), pp. 903–904. . 1975. The Aegean Civilizations, London. . 1983. “Knossos: Stratigraphical Museum Excavations, 1978–82. Part II,” AR 1982–1983, pp. 63–87. . 1994. “The Minoan Roads of Knossos,” in Evely, Hughes-Brock, and Momigliano, eds., 1994, pp. 189–210.

. 1999. “LM IA: Knossos, Thera, Gournia,” in Betancourt et al., eds., 1999, pp. 893–903. Warren, P., and V. Hankey. 1989. Aegean Bronze Age Chronology, Bristol. Watrous, L.V. 1987. “The Role of the Near East in the Rise of the Cretan Palaces,” in Hägg and Marinatos, eds., 1987, pp. 65–70. . 1992. “Ayia Triada: A New Perspective on the Minoan Villa,” AJA 88, pp. 123–134. . 2001. “Review of Aegean Prehistory III: Crete from Earliest Prehistory through the Protopalatial Period,” in Aegean Prehistory: A Review (AJA Suppl. 1), T. Cullen, ed., Boston, pp. 695–753. White, R.H., and M.A. Dietenberger. 1999. “Fire Safety,” in Wood Handbook: Wood as an Engineering Material, Madison, sections 17-1–17-16. White, R.H., and K. Sumathipala. 2006. “Fire Containment in Wood Construction Doesn’t Just Happen,” in Wood Protection 2006 (Forest Products Society Proceedings 7229), H.M. Barnes, ed., Madison, pp. 67–75. Whitelaw, T. 2012. “The Urbanisation of Prehistoric Crete: Settlement Perspectives on Minoan State Formation,” in Schoep, Tomkins, and Driessen, eds., 2012, pp. 114–176. Wiener, M. 1984. “Crete and the Cyclades in LM I: The Tale of the Conical Cups,” in The Minoan Thalassocracy: Myth and Reality. Proceedings of the Third International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 31 May–5 June, 1982 (ActaAth 4º, 32), R. Hägg and N. Marinatos, eds., Stockholm, pp. 17–23. . 1990. “The Isles of Crete? The Minoan Thalassocracy Revisited,” in Thera and the Aegean World III. Proceedings of the Third International Congress, Santorini, Greece, 3–9 September 1989. Vol. 1: Archaeology, D.A. Hardy, C.G. Doumas, J.A. Sakellarakis, and P.M. Warren, eds., London, pp. 128–155. . 2007. “Neopalatial Knossos: Role and Rule,” in Betancourt, Nelson, and Williams, eds., 2007, pp. 231–242. Winter, F.E. 2006. Studies in Hellenistic Architecture, Toronto. Wright, J.C. 2006. “The Formation of the Mycenaean Palace,” in Ancient Greece: From the Mycenaean Palaces to the Age of Homer (Edinburgh Levantis Studies 3), S. Deger-Jalkotzy and I.S. Lemos, eds., Edinburgh, pp. 7–52.

REFERENCES

Wright, J.C., and J. McEnroe. 1996. “The Central Hillside at Kommos,” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1996, pp. 139–242. Xanthoudides, S.A. 1922. “Μινωικὸν μέγαρον Νίρου,” ArchEph 61, pp. 1–25. Yasur-Landau, A., E. Cline, N. Goshen, N. Marom, and I. Samet. 2012. “An MB II Orthostat Building at Tel Kabri, Israel,” BASOR 367, pp. 1–29.

191

Zois, A. 1976. Βασιλική I: Νέα ἀρχαιολογική ἔρευνα είς τό Κεφάλι Βασιλική, Ἱεραπέτρας (Βιβλιοθήκη τῆς ἐν Ἀθήναις Ἀρχαιολογικῆς Ἑταιρείας 83), Athens.

Index

Akrotiri, 1 polyparathyra, 119 transoms, 102 upper floors, 76 West House staircase, 72 windows, 117–118 Xeste 3, 102 Alalakh, 155 Anemospilia, 81–82 storage magazines, 32 Archanes, 76 ashlar jambs, 128 ashlar masonry, 127 stylobate, 130 Tholos B, 99 ashlar jambs, 128 ashlar masonry, 81–84, 122, 124–127, 153, 169

Cadogan, G. on palace development, 5 central courts, 17, 20–21 activities in, 22 alignment, 22–25 dimensions, 21 origins and uses, 21 surfaces, 21–22 Chania, 166–167 Christakis, K.S. on use of stored goods, 32 colonnades, 115–116 column bases, 129 columns, 110–112, 169 wooden, 129 columns and pillars, 116–117 construction time estimates, 175–176 n. 92

Begg, I. on gypsum dadoes, 137–138 benches, 139–140, 150 Boardman, J. on carbonization of wood, 79

dadoes, 136 as fire retardants, 136–137 dancing girl frieze, 151 de Jong, P., 90–91

194

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Doll, C.C.T., 89–90 on Arthur Evans, 90 on fixed dimensions, 80 doorjambs, reinforced, 101 door pivots, 101, 102, 108–110 doorways, 101–102 base types, 105–106, 107–108 Downey, W., 24 Doxtater, D., 24 Driessen, J. on central courts, 21 on walkways, 14

Evans, A. on carbonization of timbers, 79 on doorways, 106 on the need for iron girders, 89–90 on wooden columns, 78

Fiandra, E. on space use in Phaistos, 85 figure-of-eight shields frieze, 151 floors, gypsum, 138–139 Fyfe, T., 88–89 on door closures, 106–107 on double doors, 106 on single doors, 106

Galatas, 60 Graham, W., 17 on storeroom capacity, 31–32 on upper floor layout of West Wing, Knossos, 36, 38 gypsum, 135–139 cooling properties of, 138

Hägg, R., 15 Hagia Photia, 159–160 Hagia Triada, 64 ashlar masonry, 127 benches, 139 Elite Style in, 165–166 EM II structures, 157 gypsum use at, 136 light-well, 114

Minoan hall, 166 residential quarters, 30 stylobate, 130 wooden supports, 85–86

Immerwahr, S., 151

Kato Zakros, 60, 76, 164 central court, 21–22 light-well, 114 residential quarters, 30–31 stylobate, 130 Kienzle, P. on de Jong’s reconstruction work, 90–91 Knossos as center of Elite Style, 163–164 ashlar masonry, 82, 126, 127 Central Staircase, 38–39 coursed wall-ends, 128 Grand Staircase, 40, 64, 68, 73, 101 landing blocks, 134–135 light-well, 114 gypsum used at, 136 Hall of the Double Axes, 27, 70, 79–80 light-well, 113–114 influence of, 171–172 Little Palace, 165 lustral basins, 156–157 MM IA structures, 160 monolithic pillars, 130–131 Northwest Lustral Basin, 120, 157 orthostat facade, 124 Pavilion of the Temple Tomb, 86, 88 polyparathyra, 118–119 polythyron, 104 Protopalatial palace extent, 46–47, 49 Queen’s Megaron, 27 residential quarters, 27, 64, 77 destruction contexts, 79–81 room use, 149–151 Royal Villa, 168 site conservation, 91 stylobates, 130 The Lair, 104–105 Unexplored Mansion, 165 upper-floor reception rooms, 35–36 West Magazines, 32, 77 wooden structural features, 68–72 wooden structural framework, 85

INDEX

Kommos, 76 ashlar masonry, 126 Building T, 82 orthostats, 123–124 stairway, 39 Elite Style in, 170–171 Kothar Wa-khasis, 173 kouloures, 15 krepidoma, 123

ladders, 157 landing blocks, 134 latrine, 150 Letesson, Q. on residential areas, 25 light-wells, 112–114, 167 lustral basins, 25, 119–122, 153, 174 n. 43, 175 n. 52 MM III use of, 156–157 use of, 121–122, 150, 152, 155, 156–157

Macdonald, C., 45–46 Mackenzie, D., 88 on burned remains, 80 on collapsed beams, 80 on excavating the Grand Staircase, 81 Malia ashlar masonry, 125–126 benches, 139 bent portico, 114–115 Chrysolakkos ossuary, 129 orthostats, 123 colonnade, 116 Crypte Hypostyle, 14, 99, 153 dating of ramp, 162 light-wells, 112 window opening, 117 EM III–MM IA settlement of, 160–161 extra long sill, 119 light-wells, 112–113 low-block pillars, 132–133 Minoan hall, 167 MM I–II architectural sequence, 161–163 Prepalatial Building X, 58 Protopalatial palace, 51–58 Protopalatial storerooms, 52–53 Protopalatial walls, 54, 58 Quartier Mu, 14 Building A, 99, 152–153 light-well, 113

Malia, Quartier Mu, cont. lustral basin, 120 polythyron, 99, 102 window openings, 117 residential quarters, 25, 27 room use, 151–152 storerooms, 32, 60 stylobates, 130 Theatral Area, 17 walkways at, 15 wall-end piers, 135 Marinatos, N., 15 marine scene frieze, 151 McEnroe, J. on Malia’s architecture, 59 Minoan halls, 25, 152–153, 166, 167–168 ritual activities and, 155 Minoans, predecessors of, 1–2 Myrtos Phornou Koriphi, 53, 84, 101, 157, 163 Myrtos Pyrgos, 64, 136, 139, 149, 164

Neopalatial Elite Style foreign influence on, 172 proliferation of, 163–165 Nirou Khani, 136 Minoan hall, 167–168

orthostats, 122–124, 169

painted room decorations, 150–151 palaces definition of, 2–3 relative chronology, 3, 5 Palaikastro, 157, 168, 176 n. 135 Palyvou, C., 15 on staircases of Thera, 39–40 Pelon, O., 17 Petras, 76, 128 Phaistos ashlar masonry, 83–84, 126 benches, 139 ceiling structures, 84–85 Central Court facade, 83m colonnade, 116 Elite Style in, 171 Grand Propylon, 83, 84 gypsum used at, 136

195

196

ELITE MINOAN ARCHITECTURE

Phaistos, cont. light-well, 113 lustral basins, 121, 155, 174 n. 43, 175 n. 52 orthostat facade, 169 Protopalatial palace, 49–51 residential quarters, 27, 30 Room 50, 86, 88 staircase to upper floor, 39 storage magazines, 32 stylobates, 130 Theatral Area, 17 pier-and-door partition bases, 71, 76, 104, 169 pier and pillar structures, 72 pier-ends, wooden, 98 pier structures, 72–73 piers, 133–134 pillars, 170 monolithic, 130–131 of multiple ashlar blocks, 131–132 of rough stone blocks, 128–129 single low-block types, 132–133 Pitsidia, 164 Platon, N., 30 polyparathyra, 118–119 polythyron, 25, 99, 102, 104, 151 porticoes, 27, 114–115 Preziosi, D., 21 privacy, 27, 119, 151

residential quarters, 25, 27, 30, 64, 77, 79–81 changes in MM III, 155–156

Schoep, I., 6, 21 on court buildings, 155 on the development of palatial forms, 153, 155

Smith, W.S. on Kothar Wa-khasis, 173 stairways, 38–41, 73, 150 Stefani, E., 94–95­­­­­ n. 80 storage magazines, 31–32 stylobates, 130

theatral areas, 15, 17 Todaro, S., 21 Tomkins, P., 21 transoms, 70, 92 n. 18, 102 Trypiti, 160 Tylissos, 86, 164, 167

upper-floor reception rooms, 34–36, 38

Vasilakis, A. on Trypiti storage areas, 160 Vasiliki, 53, 97, 101, 110, 117, 123, 157, 163

walkways, 14–15, 59–60 wall-ends, 97 wall-piers, 134 Warren, P., 15 west courts dimensions, 15 White, R. and M. Dietenberger on carbonization of wood, 79 wood uses in construction, 97–101 wooden throne, 150