Architecture of Minoan Crete: Constructing Identity in the Aegean Bronze Age

Preface

There are many ways to study architecture. One can study materials and techniques, as J. Shaw has so thoroughly done (Minoan Architecture). One can study changes in style, as most traditional architectural histories do. One can study function—how the buildings were used-–as did most of the papers in two symposia organized by the Swedish Institute (Hägg and Marinatos 1987; Hägg 1997). Or one can focus on the relation between the house (an architectural unit) and the household (a social unit), as the recent STEGA conference did. In this book I shall consider all these issues in passing, but my primary concern is with the meaning of buildings. Architecture does more than provide shelter. It is, perhaps first and foremost, a medium for conveying meanings. The thesis of this book is that architecture is one of the chief media through which humans shape their identities and present themselves to others. Through architecture we construct our identities as members of families, of communities, of particular social classes, and of regional, national, and international groups. (I discuss the concept of identity in more detail in Chapter 1.) Only a small portion of this book is based on my own fieldwork. The recent flood of important, insightful scholarship has almost entirely reshaped the field. My role is to serve as a journalist, selecting, reporting, and synthesizing some of the most interesting stories in order to provide scholars who are not necessarily specialists in the Aegean Bronze Age with access to these ongoing conversations. The past twenty years have been extraordinary in Minoan archaeology: G. Rethemiotakis discovered a new Palace at Galatas; the Shaws excavated monumental harbor facilities at Kommos ; M. Tsipopoulou excavated fascinating buildings at Aghia Photia, Petras, Halasmenos, and elsewhere. In addition to these new projects, many excavations initiated at the beginning of the twentieth century have either continued or been revived, and much of Crete has been systematically surveyed. The Institute for Aegean Prehistory built a new research center in Pachyammos. Dozens of international conferences have provided opportunities for innovative scholarship. At a time when much of the rest of the academic world and particularly academic presses are financially threatened, new scholarly journals and monograph series have been launched in Belgium, Italy, Great Britain, Poland, Greece, and the United States. One of the byproducts of the surge of scholarship has been increasing specialization. Excavators concentrate on specific sites, and surveyors focus on selected regions. Many scholars restrict themselves to particular periods (for example, Early Minoan, Middle Minoan, or Late Minoan III) or media (pottery, tombs, frescoes, or faience, for example). As a result, we have any number of excellent excavation reports and symposia papers, but no general synthesis. The primary goal of this book, therefore, is to provide the first overall history of Minoan houses, Palaces, tombs, and towns from the Neolithic period through LM IIIC. Placing things in the larger picture changes their appearance and their significance. p r e f ac e McEnroe_4524_BK.indd vii McEnroe_4524_BK.indd vii 3/2/10 3:44:26 PM 3/2/10 3:44:26 PM A r c h i t e c t u r e o f M i n o a n C r e t e viii buildings” as opposed to “palaces,” for example—have not had much success (Schoep 2002b, 18, for example). The problems arise when we interpret these terms as implying a set of functions. In this book I am concerned with problems of function only in passing. I shall use the traditional terms only to describe specific Minoan architectural forms, capitalizing them (“Lustral Basin” rather than “lustral basin,” “Palace” rather than “palace,” etc.) to signal their arbitrary, conventional nature. Thus in this book a Lustral Basin is a small, square, sunken room entered by descending a small stairway; whether or not it had anything to do with lustration is for others to debate . The conventional terms are defined in a glossary at the end of the book. A Note on Conventional Terms Over the course of its hundred-year history, Minoan archaeology has developed a unique terminology that has caused considerable confusion and disagreement. Some of the most commonly used terms—mostly coined by A. Evans—used to describe certain types of rooms (“lustral basins,” “pillar crypts,” “Throne Room,” etc.) and buildings (“peak sanctuaries,” “theatral areas,” “villas,” and, most problematically, “palaces”) carry with them unwarranted implications. Resulting arguments over the function(s) of a “lustral basin” or a “villa” or a...