Central Court

8/3/2019 Central Court

1/16

1

Jan Driessen, Dpartement dArchologie, Universit Catholique de Louvain, Place B. Pascal 1,

1348-Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgique, [email protected]

Monuments of Minos

The Central Court of the Palace at Knossos1

Abstract: It is argued that, from EM II onwards, enclosed courts were constructed to

manipulate the performance of certain rituals and that these courts formed the origin of what

is now known as the Minoan palace.

Introduction

Minoan palaces at least in their Protopalatial and Neopalatial phases reflect, as

many other public works do, the investment of social resources, and they are usually

interpreted as the embodiments of political, social, religious and economic power, with their

architecture especially devised to reflect the performance of this power (cf. Moore 1996, 101).

It is assumed that these palaces incorporate a symbolism that served as a signpost for a

particular social order, a symbolism especially carried by monumentality. Scale, location,

decoration, materials and visual impact enhance this monumentality. By making particular use

of these features, Minoan palaces blend in marvelously within their surroundings, both the

natural landscape and the artificially created environment (Driessen 1999), or, as Devitt

(1982, 21) argues at Knossos, the landscape became an integral part of the architecture.

Whether or not the palaces monumentality may have helped to improve social cohesion

within Minoan society (Abrams 1989, 62), its intergenerational use made it an ideal

formalized information vehicle with great potential for communication and remembrance,

especially during specific ceremonies (cf. Day and Wilson in press).

1 I thank B. Cavanagh , P. Day and D. Wilson for making some of their unpublished papers available, F. Gaignerot for some of the ideasexpressed in this paper and the members of the project Topography of Power at the UCL (P. Fontaine, K. Vansteenhuyse, T. Cunningham,E. Druart and S. Soetens) for their collaboration.


2/16

2

For most of us, the Central Court, not only that of the palace at Knossos, but also those

of other sites, forms the distinguishing and indispensable ingredient of what makes a Minoan

building a palace and it has been described as reflecting a function that was fundamental to

Minoan society as a whole (Davis 1987, 161). What this function precisely was, remains a

topic of debate, but for a series of scholars it acted as the main arena for the (in)famous bull

games (e.g. Graham 1957, Pelon 1992). That the Court could have served for a variety of

other ritual actions is very likely and Evans already defended such a position. Indeed, soon

after the first excavation campaigns, he himself used the Court for dinner parties for his

distinguished international visitors (Frrejean 1999) (Figs 1 and 2), and, on another occasion,

it served for a tug of war between his workmen or a typical Cretan glendi (Brown 1986, figs

9a, 9b and 10a). It is even rumoured that Isodora Duncan danced here when honouring the site

with her visit (MacGillivray 2000, 233) and both Shaw (1973) and Goodison (in press; this

volume) have stressed its importance for astronomical observations. Bull games, feasting,

ritualised warfare, dance and others could indeed have formed part of the ritual, integrative

actions taking place in this environment (German 1999). Graham (1957; 1962), Shaw (1973),

Preziosi (1983) and others have also emphasised the repetition of the proportions and

orientations followed by the Central Courts and it seems fair to assume that this

standardisation corresponds with a set of prescribed rules that one or more of the rites taking

place on the Court dictated. The nature of these rites is now very difficult to establish and is

not of my immediate concern. I suspect that they were perhaps largely ecstatic, maybe drug-

induced and most likely involved larger groups, so dancing and feasting are the most likely

candidates. Gesell, for example, has calculated that the Central Courts of the three main

palaces could have held about 1698 milling people or about 5435 people standing in a crowd

(Gesell 1987, 126, n. 12). My interest in the Central Court, however, has more to do with it

being the core around which the rest of the building complex has grown. Or, as Devitt (1982,

407, 409) stressed: Its [the central court] use as the pivotal space around which the Cretan


3/16

3

architect designed palaces, making this central courtyard the focus of his circulation and

intercommunication system, was never extended to ordinary domestic architecture. This

emphasis on the central courtyard shows that the Minoans thought of space as an entity equal

in importance to the defined architectural mass with which it was interacting. Indeed, in

contrast with Near Eastern and Mycenaean palaces, to name only those, the central court of a

Minoan palace is not a simple step en route in a linear, hierarchically built-up circulation

pattern, culminating most often in the throne room, as shown, for example, by Cavanagh (in

press) for the Mycenaean palaces, but indeed, the final destination of this circulation pattern.

This may imply less hierarchical conditions prevailing at its origin and, perhaps, indeed a

public or community function for the complex. As such the Central Court was not only the

essential feature of the complexes generally described as palaces but it seems fair to say that

we will need to understand what its function really was before we can understand the

operational principles of Minoan society as a whole. In other words, I want to argue that the

ritual performances that took place within the Central Court were the first unifying and

integrative actions that bound society together and made Minoans out of them. It implies, in

essence, that I believe that all buildings or rooms around these courts were simply

dependencies or ancillary rooms serving a variety of needs, such as administration, storage,

production, residence and cult, but that these functions remained secondary to its main and

primary purpose up to the end of Late Minoan IB.

Few would disagree with the observation that the Central Court should foremost be

seen as a constructed landscape, as an artificially created space for the enactment of ritual

action, allowing certain ways of human interaction. Its layout and location leave no doubt that

it was created to manipulate the visual perception and the communicative potential of

particular rituals (Moore 1996). The rituals could henceforth both be spatially and temporally

controlled by anchoring them at a particular place; they were also obstructed from view

through the construction of screen walls and, by giving them a specific environment, they


4/16

4

were also given permanence and intensification2. It is clear that this process implies an

institutionalisation of one or more rituals and that this must have had tremendous social and

political repercussions. It reflects the development of a hierarchy in society through selection

and exclusion, something also implied by the urban choreography discussed below. The origin

of the Minoan Palaces then is the origin of the Central Court. Its original concept may well be

the Cretan landscape as a whole. Natural phenomena such as mountain peaks, caves, sources

and unaltered features of the landscape form an important aspect of Minoan cult (Bradley

2000). We must add the open plain surrounded by mountains, I feel, which is at the same time

one of the most common but also most compelling features of this island. I suspect the Central

Court to reproduce this kind of landscape and hence to be a cosmic reminder of the island

itself. Branigan (1993, 137-139) and Peatfield (1987) have linked the origin of peak sanctuary

cult to that of funerary practices combining ancestor and fertility cults, assuming it were these

cults that were afterwards instutionalised and manipulated when the palaces were constructed

in the Middle Minoan IB period. I would like to show, however, that our present evidence

allows us not only to retrace the history of the Central Courts to the Early Minoan period, but

also that this is the period when Crete reached a level of complexity that equals that of the

Helladic Mainland at the time of the Corridor Houses (Shaw 1987). My argument is based on

three types of evidence: regional survey, stratigraphy and urban choreography.

Regional Survey

Thanks to a large number of recent surveys, we can now without hesitation state that

settlement numbers and sizes suggest that EM II was really the moment when Minoan society

took off (Driessen in press): during the Prepalatial period, some regions indeed witness the

growth of larger settlements: Malia itself already had an extent of about 2.58 ha and recently

another large site was identified a few kilometers east, near the Arkovouno (S. Mller in

2 This becomes more obvious during the Neopalatial period when the Central Courts receive temporary installations that are usuallyinterpreted as cultic e.g. the baetyl and altar at Malia, the altar at Zakros etc.


5/16

5

Blackman 1997, 109). Knossos is said to cover 4.84 ha (Whitelaw 1983, 339), Phaistos about

1.5 ha (Watrous et alii 1993: 224) and Watrous team has identified the largest EM I-II

settlement in the Isthmus of Hierapetra at Halepa at the east end of the Pacheia Ammos bay,

covering 2 ha (Tomlinson 1996, 45). Blackman and Branigan (1977, 69) also discovered a

3.25 ha site in the Ayiofarango, possibly the largest Early Minoan settlement yet known. In

some areas, we seem to have a two- or three-tiered hierarchy, which people tend to equate

with chiefdoms, rank societies in which chiefly families played a considerable role. I think it

is very likely that at least Knossos and Malia, but most likely other places too, may already

have developed further at this point but this needs more archaeological corroboration

(MacGillivray and Driessen 1990, 399; Schoep 1999). The monumental building, identified

beneath Block X, the site of the later sanctuary of Zeus Diktaion, at Palaikastro, also dates to

the Early Minoan period. Its location immediately to the north of what may have been the

public court of the settlement is telling in this regard and deserves further archaeological

examination.

Stratigraphy or the Date of the Central Courts of the Minoan Palaces

It needs no mention that central courts existed in a variety of Cretan buildings from

early in the Middle Minoan or Protopalatial period onwards, when the different palaces as

well as some other buildings such as the agora at Malia and the building at Haghia Photia

near Sitia included spacious courts or plazas. Most authors indeed seem to imply that the

Protopalatial complexes only became palaces at this particular stage in Cretan civilisation

because they henceforth included central courts. But can we trace their history further back in

time? A site that has often been invoked in the discussion on the origin of the Minoan palaces

is Vasiliki, in the Isthmus of Hierapetra. I accept Zosobjection that the buildings originally

cleared by R.B. Seager have little or no relevance to the discussion on the origin of the

Minoan palaces (Zos 1982). I do not follow him, however, in downgrading the importance of


6/16

6

the west court of this settlement. Situated on the highest point of the hill, measuring about 20

by 20 m and paved with flat boulders carried up the hill from the river in the valley, the court

does represent a considerable communal effort and Warren (1987, 49) has rightly stressed

how the concept of the court is already important at Vasiliki and perhaps also at Myrtos

Fournou Korifi. The fact that the court at Vasiliki is situated to the west of the constructions

does not really inconvenience this observation if we can agree on the court being the

organisational principle of the settlement. Zos (Aerial Atlas, 279) has dated this court to EM

IIB, a date which, as we will see below, agrees with observations made elsewhere.

Because of continuing occupation, the palace sites lend themselves less easy to

generalisation but some interesting patterns are obvious.

The evidence at Malia is the most reliable thanks to a series of recent soundings by O.

Pelon (1980, 1989, 1993). He not only found ample traces of important EM IIB constructions

beneath the Hypostyle Hall to the north of the Central Court and beneath some of the

Magazines in the West Wing, with some finds such as a fine golden bead and a sealing hinting

at the possible functions of the building or buildings, but he also sounded the Central Court,

producing a stratigraphical sequence from EM IIA onwards (Hue and Pelon 1992; Pelon 1989,

1993). At Malia, it seems clear that major changes took place at the end of EM IIA. From EM

IIB onwards, the different constructions on the palace site follow the same orientation,

roughly north-south, which is entirely different from the earlier northeast-southwest direction

followed up till EM IIA. Moreover, from EM IIB onwards, the area of the Central Court

seems to have been void of constructions. Incidentally, P. Demargne, who cleared the West

Court at Malia, seems also to have thought it already existed in the Early Minoan period (cf.

Chapouthier, Demargne and Dessenne 1982, 39; Pelon 1987, 200).

Turning to Phaistos, there seems little agreement as to the precise date for the

establishment of the Central Court. Most Italian archaeologists (cf. V. La Rosa inAerial Atlas,

240), followed by Warren (1987, 48, n. 2), attribute it to the Third Phase, i.e. to the MM IIB


7/16

7

period, but E. Fiandra (1983, 34) already assigns it to the Second Phase, MM IIA. From the

beginning, the court was nicely paved and provided with colonnades on either long side. It

seems clear that the area of the Central Court was certainly still used for habitation at the end

of the Final Neolithic period to which circular and rectangular houses have been assigned

(Vagnetti 1973; Vagnetti and Belli 1978, 148). What happened between the Final Neolithic

period and the Middle Minoan II phase is not clear but a survey of findspots of Early Minoan

pottery and architecture by Branigan (1993, 116, fig. 6.9) does not seem to have yielded

evidence for habitation in the area of the Central Court. This may then suggest that the court

was already left open during the Early Bronze Age. Some authors, including Warren (1987),

have drawn attention to the odd situation at Phaistos where the palace seems to have been an

isolated construction, in contrast to Malia and Knossos where it seems to have been

constructed within an existing urban environment. The recent survey suggests a size of 1.5 ha

for Prepalatial Phaistos, however (Watrous et alii 1993, 224).

The Central Court of the Palace of Minos at Knossos is a formidable open square of

almost 54 by 28 m. Evans assumed that in order to obtain a level space for this Court and the

adjoining West Section of the Palace the builders had levelled away the original top of the

Tell, removing thus almost the whole of its Early Minoan strata when they constructed the

MM IB palace (PM II:1, 5). ). He also seems to have thought that this Protopalatial central

court was already paved since he found the remains of a so-called mosaico paving beneath the

later limestone, paving in the area of the Tripartite Shrine (PMII:2, 798). There are, I believe,

some arguments in favour of an Early Bronze Age date, probably EM IIB, for the original

putting in place of the Central Court. It cannot be much earlier, at least not at the place it is

situated now, because a settlement still occupied the top of the tell3

up to the end of the

Neolithic period. Indeed, Sir Arthur found a fragment of a small building, probably of Late or

Final Neolithic date, overlying the earlier Neolithic house (PM II:1, 8; Vagnetti and Belli


8/16

8

1978, 132). This house fragment is to all intent the latest building in the Central Court before

it was levelled and turned into an open area. Question is, when was the area levelled? John

Evans insisted upon the fact that the existing structures were buried with a fill that did not

include anything later than Neolithic pottery, with some pieces perhaps of Final Neolithic date

(Evans 1994, 16, 18). He also observed levelling operations in the area of the palace which

clearly took place in Early Minoan times (Evans 1994, 16). I may add that no later, i.e. post-

Neolithic, intrusions such as pits or wells were observed in the area of the Central Court.

Since the area of the West Court was probably also made into an open area during EM IIB, as

Wilson (1994, 36) has discussed, I think it is very likely that this was also when the Central

Court was laid out. The quality of the Early Minoan II-III architecture, with an identical

orientation in the northwest area as that followed by the later structures, and the discovery of

EM clay seal impressions, all suggest that the Knossos complex may have included a central

court from EM IIB onwards. It may also be useful to remember that, by EM III, Knossos also

possessed at least some paved roads, as shown by Warrens tests (1994, 202, 205;

Momigliano 1999).

Apart from these three examples, the courts of the other settlements are all probably

later. The palatial courts Petras (Tsipopoulou 1999, 849) and Monastiraki (Kanta 1999, plate

LXXXI) may date back to the Protopalatial period but the cement-paved, 40 by 15 m large

public court at Gournia may already have been laid out at the very end of the Prepalatial

period, in MM I, serving, according to Damiani-Indelicato (1984, 53) as the original hub for

the urban street system. Here, and at Petras and Monastiraki, the courts are situated on the

highest spot of the hill with, immediately behind, a rocky outcrop. It is possible that such

natural features formed an integral part of the ritual activities taking place on these courts, as

recently argued by Kanta and Tzigounaki (in press) and Davaras (1999). The small court

within the palace at Gournia is probably Neopalatial (Soles 1991), the same date as the huge

3 Evans already realised that the Neolithic settlers would have established their village in some kind of a depression between the surrounding


9/16

9

court at Kommos (Shaw and Shaw 1993, 186) and the fine paved court of the palace of

Galatas, as argued by Rethemiotakis (1999, 721), who suggests that it was only then added to

an existing mansion. Zakros palace is problematic since Lefteris Platon has recently argued

that palace and central court date only to a very advanced stage of the LM I period (Platon

1999; this volume). As argued elsewhere (Driessen 1995, 74-5), there are indeed several

indications to assume that parts of the east wing were added during LM IB, especially the

enclosure walls and gates. I feel that not enough evidence has yet been presented to assume

that this date applies to the entire palace, however. The architectural phases observed

throughout the building and the evidence for at least one earlier central court, discussed by N.

Platon (1971; cf. Driessen and Macdonald 1997, 237-238), still seem to imply a more

developed historical development than LM IB only.

In any case, the impressive continuity between the Early Minoan and the later

buildings at Knossos and Malia implies, I think, that certain rituals involved in the original

layout of the court and surroundings were still being followed at specific moments when the

respective buildings needed remodelling and repair in their later life.

Urban Choreography

We may also consider the importance of the Central Courts from an urbanistic point of

view. Seen against the background of the respective street system and settlement plan of the

various sites, it may be stressed how the Central Courts not only form part but actually

constitute the culminating destination of an overall Minoan urban choreography. With this I

mean that the palace - or rather the court - formed part of a well established, conceptualized

urbanistic and ritual landscape and the destination of a process in which progressive,

hierarchical selection was at work.

hills; John Evans soundings (1994: 6, fig. 3) established the level of the aceramic Neolithic knoll at about + 94 m asl, 7 m beneath the levelof the present Central Court.


10/16

10

It is well known that important Minoan streets from at least the beginning of the

Middle Minoan period comprised a cobblestone level crossed by a slightly higher, paved

surface, a so-called raised walk, sometimes also called paved corridor or processional

way (Sakellarakis and Sakellarakis 1997, 122, 127). It is very likely that such an elaborated

street system actually started at the edge of town as shown by our only preserved example, the

MM I system east of the palace at Malia, where the arrangement was initiated in the form of a

small paved area (Driessen 1995, 72, fig. 7). From here, the raised walk crosses the east court,

directly leading to one of the entrances of the palace. Usually the raised walk arrived at the

palatial complexes from different directions, crossing the protopalatial West Courts almost

like a red carpet, indicating or rather forcing the visitors towards the entrance of the palaces

and within. The Malia complex is the only palace with large courts both to the east and the

west. Evidence collected by Hutchinson (Warren 1994: 196) and original excavation data

presented by V. Fotou (this volume) seem to suggest, moreover, that the West Court at

Knossos during Protopalatial and Neopalatial times may have been much more extensive than

the patch nowadays visible, stretching out, at different levels and crossed by several raised

walks, up to perhaps more than 130 m to the west of the west faade of the palace (cf. Warren

1994: 197-98, figs 4-5). If this is correct, it provided ample space of large gatherings, criss-

crossed by pathways used for processions, as with the superb example at Archanes, where

three phases of paving, crossed by as many as five raised walks were identified in a small area

south of the palatial building (Sakellarakis and Sakellarakis 1997, 120-127). About 20 years

ago, Silvia Damiani Indelicato (1982a, 1982b, 1985, 1986) tried to argue that the primary

organisational principle in the palace sites were the West Courts, the original hub for the street

system, later appropriated by the palaces. Although she may have been right in a few

instances, such as Gournia and perhaps Zakros, I do not follow her where Knossos, Malia and

Phaistos are concerned. Indeed, if we accept that these sites already included a court-centred

building from the mature EM II period onwards, their Protopalatial raised walk system


11/16

11

becomes more intelligible, reflecting a fossilisation of an earlier situation but also a system

which needs a terminal point to be complete. Central Courts never have such raised walks, it

is a characteristic of the outside courts, areas to be crossed, or, if you want, liminal zones that

linked the outside with the inside, a controlled interface between city and palace, as suggested

by the Sacred Groove Fresco (Marinatos 1987). Following the raised walks through the west

courts and entering the complex implies a transition from one world, open to the view of the

public, to another, hermetically closed off. The narrowness of the pathway to follow, with a

funnel effect at the entrance, implies a line-up of individuals and a selection process, whereas

the wide-open space of the courts themselves suggests much larger crowds. Usually, the raised

walk system is seen in isolation, as in the plans published by Marinatos (1987) and Preziosi

and Hitchcock (1999, 64). They should, however, be seen in close connection with the internal

circulation pattern of the palaces themselves, leading eventually to the Central Court. It seems

fair to say then that, in all palaces, what went on in the Central Courts was carefully screened

off and plenty of care was given to regulate the access to the respective buildings and the

courts therein. This is perhaps clearest at Kommos (Shaw and Shaw 1993, 187). This

orchestrated and repeated circulation pattern seems then to suggest a specific set of ritual

prescriptions, with rites culminating in the Central Court (MacGillivray, Driessen and Sackett

2000, 88). The West and Central Courts have in common their attention to visual perception

and monumental background, but whereas the West Courts were necessary to enhance the

monumental aspect of the West facades and the buildings, the message carried by the Central

Court is a monumentality formed by sheer open space, enclosed on all sides4.

The Nature of the Central Court

In conclusion, I want to offer a hypothesis for the origin of the Central Court and thus

for the Minoan palaces. I would like to suggest that the Central Court served as a cosmic

4 See also the contribution of K. Palyvou to this volume.


12/16

12

reminder of the island itself: the court within its building re-enacts or reproduces the Cretan

landscape of plains with the mountains as backdrop where the original ritual action took place.

The court at Vasiliki is an example of such a court but it is likely that special zones, close to

domestic and funerary buildings, served for community gatherings and the performance of

certain rituals. Gradually, during Early Minoan IIB, the action was not only anchored in space

and in time but also screened off from the public through the construction of walls and

buildings and this at specific places. These places all have a long occupational history and

formed nodes of fertile, coastal agricultural regions. At Knossos, probably, but at Malia

certainly, the establishment of the court presents itself as an innovation, an abrupt and

significant change from earlier situations. The institutionalisation of ritual should correspond

with social changes and it is perhaps no coincidence that the mature EM II period also

presents important modifications on other levels. This is when the house tombs at Mochlos

start to show increased hierarchical differences, illustrated by gold diadems and special

architectural features (Soles 1992, 255-58). It may then perhaps be relevant that paved,

sometimes enclosed areas were also added to some of the older Messara tholoi precisely in

this period (Murphy 1998, 36). This is also when several of the Peak Sanctuaries are

inaugurated and when, at Knossos, communal drinking and feasting ceremonies see the

introduction of the individual drinking cup (Day and Wilson in press). Day and Wilson (in

press) have argued for the existence from EM I onwards of such ceremonies in which food

and especially drink were ritually consumed, but whereas during the first phase large

communal vessels were used, the later participants would now each have their own drinking

cup. Although such ceremonies obviously played a major role, I do not think it was the only or

primary function of the Central Courts, but Day and Wilson are undoubtedly correct in

stressing the communal aspects of these ceremonies. The manipulation of the rituals through

constructed space implies that a particular social group henceforth spatially and temporally

controlled these, allowing participation only by selection, as shown by the access system. In


13/16

13

any case, this process of institutionalisation of ritual forms the origin of what we know as the

Minoan palaces but I suggest that the surrounding structures largely served secondary

functions and as screens. If the above mentioned observations are correct, we should perhaps

progressively aim to avoid the term palaces for a less biased term such as court centred civic

buildings (Shaw and Shaw 1993: 186) or ceremonial court centres.


14/16

14

Fig. 1: Dinner party in the Central Court at Knossos (after Frrejean 1999, Yakoumis

Foundation).

Fig. 2: Dinner party in the Central Court at Knossos (after Frrejean 1999, Yakoumis

Foundation).

References

Aerial Atlas = J.W. Myers, E.E. Myers & G. Cadogan, The Aerial Atlas of Ancient Crete, Berkeley, 1992.PM= A.J. Evans, The Palace of Minos, London, 1921-1935.

Abrams, E., 1989. Architecture and energy: an evolutionary perspective in M.B. Schiffer (ed.),ArchaeologicalMethod and Theory, I: 47-87. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

Blackman, D. 1997. Archaeology in Greece 1996-1997 Archaeological Reports for 1996-1997: 1-125.Blackman, D. and K. Branigan, 1977. An Archaeological Survey of the Lower Catchment of the Ayiofarango

ValleyAnnual of the British School at Athens 72: 13-84.Bradley, R., 2000.An Archaeology of Natural Places. London & New York: Routledge.

Branigan, K., 1993. Dancing with Death. Life and Death in Southern Crete c. 3000-2000 B.C., Amsterdam:Adolf M. Hakkert Publisher.

Brown, A., 1986.Arthur Evans and the Palace of Minos. Oxford: Ashmolean Museum Publications.

Cavanagh, W. (in press). Lost in Space: Courts and Squares in Mycenaean Towns in K. Branigan (ed.),Sheffield Colloquium on Aegean Urbanism, held in January 2000 (in press).

Chapouthier, F., P. Demargne and A. Dessenne, 1962. Fouilles excutes Mallia: quatrime rapport:exploration du palais, bordure mridionale et recherches complmentaires (1929-1935 et 1946-1960)(Etudes crtoises, 12). Paris: Ecole franaise dAthnes.

Damiani Indelicato, S., 1982a. Piazza pubblica e palazzo nella Creta minoica. Rome: Jouvence.Damiani Indelicato, S., 1982b. La piazza publica e il palazzo nella Creta minoica, Annali di Classe di lettere e

filosofia (Pisa) 12 : 445-67.

Damiani Indelicato, S., 1984. Gournia, cite minoenne in Centre Gustave Glotz (ed.), Aux Origines delHellnisme. La Crte et la Grce. Hommage H. van Effenterre : 47-54. Paris: Publications de laSorbonne.

Damiani Indelicato, S., 1985. Place Publique et palais dans la Crte minoenne Proceedings of the 5thCretological Congress (1981) : 93-100. Herakleion.

Damiani Indelicato, S., 1986. Minoan Town Planning. A New ApproachBulletin of the Institute of ClassicalStudies 33: 138-39.

Davaras, C., 1999. Comments on the Plateia (Area BR), in P.P. Betancourt and C. Davaras (eds), Pseira IV.Minoan Buildings in Areas B, C, D, and F: 167-70. (University Museum Monographs 105). Philadelphia:The University Museum.

Davis, E., 1987. The Knossos Miniature Frescoes and the Function of the Central Courts, in R. Hgg and N.Marinatos (eds), The Function of the Minoan Palaces: 157-61. Stockholm: Skrifter utgivna av SvenskaInstitutet i Athen.

Day, P.M. & Wilson, D.E. (in press). Landscapes of Memory, Craft and Power in Prepalatial and ProtopalatialKnossos in Y. Hamilakis (ed.), Labyrinth Revisited: Rethinking Minoan Archaeology (in press). Oxford:Oxbow Books.

Devitt, M. K., 1982. Knossos Revisited. An Architectural Analysis of the Palace at Knossos. Unpublished Phdissertation, Saint Louis University.

Driessen, J., 1995. Some Observations on the Modification of the Access Systems of Minoan Palaces Aegean

Archaeology 2 [1997]: 67-85.

Driessen, J., 1999. The Archaeology of a Dream. The Reconstruction of Minoan Public Architecture Journalof Mediterranean Archaeology 12: 121-27.


15/16

15

Driessen, J., (in press). History and Hierarchy. Preliminary Observations on the Settlement Pattern of MinoanCrete in K. Branigan (ed.), Sheffield Colloquium on Aegean Urbanism, held in January 2000 (in press).

Driessen, J. and C.F. Macdonald, 1998. The Troubled Island. Minoan Crete before and after the SantoriniEruption (Aegaeum 17). Lige: Universit de Lige.

Evans, J.D., 1994. The Early Millennia: Continuity and Change in a Farming Settlement in D. Evely, H.

Hughes-Brock and N. Momigliano (eds), Knossos. A Labyrinth of History: 1-20. Oxford: Oxbow Books.Fiandra, E., 1983. Cultura e scambi commerciali nella civilt minoicaLe Scienze 176: 30-43.

Frrejean, A., 1999. Sur les sites de Crte avec Sir Arthur EvansHistoria Dcouvertes 6 : 48-61.

German, S.C., 1999. Performance and the Art of the Aegean Bronze Age, PhD Univ. of Columbia.

Gesell, G., 1987. The Minoan Palace and Public Cult in R. Hgg and N. Marinatos (eds), The Function of theMinoan Palaces, 123-27. Stockholm: Skrifter utgivna av Svenska Institutet i Athen.

Goodison, L., (in press). From Tholos to Throne Room. Perceptions of the Sun in Minoan Ritual in R.Laffineur and R. Hgg, POTNIA. Deities and Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 22). Lige:Universit de Lige.

Graham, J.W., 1957. The Central Court as the Minoan Bull-RingAmerican Journal of Archaeology 61: 255-

62.Graham, J.W., 1962. The Palaces of Crete. Princeton: University Press.

Kanta, A., 1999. Monastiraki and Phaistos, Elements of Protopalatial History in P.P. Betancourt, V.Karageorghis, R. Laffineur and W.-D. Niemeier (eds),Meletemata. Studies in Aegean Archaeology presentedto Malcolm H. Wiener(Aegaeum 20): 387-93. Lige: Universit de Lige.

Kanta, A. and A. Tzigounaki (in press). The Character of the Minoan Goddess. New Evidence from the Area ofAmari in R. Laffineur and R. Hgg, POTNIA. Deities and Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 22).Lige: Universit de Lige.

MacGillivray, J.A., 2000. Minotaur. Sir Arthur Evans and the Archaeology of Minoan Myth. London: JonathanCape.

MacGillivray, J.A. and J. Driessen, 1990. Minoan Settlement at Palaikastro in P. Darcque and R. Treuil (eds),

LHabitat gen prhistorique : 395-412. Paris : Ecole franaise dAthnes.MacGillivray, J.A., J. Driessen and L.H. Sackett (eds), 2000. The Palaikastro Kouros. A Minoan

Chryselephantine Statuette and Its Aegean Bronze Age Context. London: British School at Athens.

Marinatos, N., 1987. Public Festivals in the West Courts of the Palaces in R. Hgg and N. Marinatos (eds), TheFunction of the Minoan Palaces: 135-42. Stockholm: Skrifter utgivna av Svenska Institutet i Athen.

Momigliano, N., 1999. Osservazioni sulla nascita dei palazzi minoici e sul periodo prepalaziale a Cnosso in V.La Rosa, D. Palermo & L. Vagnetti (eds), EIONTONAZOMENOI . Simposio italiano di studi egeidedicato a L. Bernab Brea e G. Pugliese Carratelli, Roma, 18-20 Febbraio 1998: 69-74. Rome: Scuolaarcheologica italiana di Atene.

Moore, J.D., 1996. Architecture & Power in the Ancient Andes. The Archaeology of Public Buildings.Cambridge: University Press.

Murphy, J.M., 1998. Ideologies, Rites and Rituals: A View of Prepalatial Minoan Tholoi in K. Branigan (ed.),Cemetery and Society in the Aegean Bronze Age (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology): 27-40.Sheffield: University Press.

Peatfield, A., 1987. Palace and Peak: The Political and Religious Relationship between Palaces and PeakSanctuaries in R. Hgg and N. Marinatos (eds), The Function of the Minoan Palaces: 89-93. Stockholm:Skrifter utgivna av Svenska Institutet i Athen.

Pelon, O., 1980.Le Palais de Malia. V(Etudes crtoises, 25). Paris : Ecole franaise dAthnes.

Pelon, O., 1982. Le palais de Malia et les jeux de taureaux, in L. Hadermann-Misguich and G. Raepsaet (eds),Rayonnement grec. Hommages Charles Delvoye : 45-57. Brussels : Editions de lUniversit de Bruxelles.

Pelon, O., 1987. Particularits et dveloppement des palais minoens in E. Lvy (ed.), Le systme palatial enOrient, en Grce et Rome. Actes du colloque de Strasbourg : 187-201. Leiden : E.J. Brill.

Pelon, O., 1989. Travaux de lEcole franaise en Grce en 1988Bulletin de Correspondance hellnique 113 :771-86.


16/16

16

Pelon, O., 1993. La salle piliers du palais de Malia et ses antcdents : recherches complmentaires Bulletinde Correspondance hellnique 117 : 523-46.

Pelon, O. and M. Hue, 1992. La salle piliers du palais de Malia et ses antcdents complmentaires Bulletinde Correspondance hellnique 116 : 1-36.

Platon, N., 1971. Zakros. The Discovery of a Lost Palace of Ancient Crete. Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert

Publisher.Platon, L., 1999. New Evidence for the Occupation at Zakros before the LM I Palace in P.P. Betancourt, V.

Karageorghis, R. Laffineur and W.-D. Niemeier (eds), Meletemata. Studies in Aegean Archaeologypresented to Malcolm H. Wiener(Aegaeum 20): 671-81. Lige: Universit de Lige.

Preziosi, D. and L.A. Hitchcock, 1999.Aegean Art and Architecture (Oxford History of Art). Oxford: UniversityPress.

Preziosi, D., 1983.Minoan Architectural Design. Formation and Signification. Berlin: Mouton.

Rethemiotakis, G., 1999. The Hearths of the Minoan Palace at Galatas in P.P. Betancourt, V. Karageorghis, R.Laffineur and W.-D. Niemeier (eds), Meletemata. Studies in Aegean Archaeology presented to Malcolm H.Wiener(Aegaeum 20): 721-27. Lige: Universit de Lige.

Sakellarakis, Y., and E. Sakellarakis 1997. Archanes. Minoan Crete in a New Light. Athens: AmmosPublications.

Schoep, I.M., 1999. The Origins of Writing and Administration on Crete Oxford Journal of Archaeology 18(3):265-76.Shaw, J.W., 1973. The Orientation of the Minoan Palaces in Antichit cretesi. Studi in onore di Doro Levi: 47-

59. Catania.

Shaw, J.W., 1987. The Early Helladic II Corridor House: Development and Form American Journal ofArchaeology 91: 59-79.

Shaw, J.W., and M.C. Shaw, 1993. Excavations at Kommos (Crete) during 1986-1992Hesperia 62: 129-190.Soles, J.S., 1991. The Gournia PalaceAmerican Journal of Archaeology 95 : 17-78.Soles, J.S., 1992. The Prepalatial Cemeteries at Mochlos and Gournia and the House Tombs of Bronze Age

Crete (Hesperia Supplement 24). Princeton: University Press.Tomlinson, R.A., 1996. Archaeology in Greece 1995-1996Archaeological Reports for 1995-1996: 1-47.Tsipopoulou, M., 1999. Before, During, After: The Architectural Phases of the Palatial Building at Petras,

Siteia in P.P. Betancourt, V. Karageorghis, R. Laffineur and W.-D. Niemeier (eds), Meletemata. Studiesin Aegean Archaeology presented to Malcolm H. Wiener (Aegaeum 20): 847-55. Lige: Universit deLige.

Vagnetti, L., 1973. Linsediamento neolitico di Fests Annuario della Scuola Archeologica di Atene 50-51(1972-1973): 7-138.

Vagnetti, L. and P. Belli, 1978. Character and Problems of the Final Neolithic in Crete Studi Micenei ed Egeo-Anatolici 19: 125-63.

Warren, P.M., 1987. The Genesis of the Minoan Palace in R. Hgg and N. Marinatos (eds), The Function of theMinoan Palaces: 47-55. Stockholm: Skrifter utgivna av Svenska Institutet i Athen.

Warren, P.M., 1994. The Minoan Roads of Knossos, in D. Evely, H. Hughes-Brock and N. Momigliano (eds),Knossos. A Labyrinth of History: 189-210. Oxford: Oxbow Books.

Watrous, L.V., D. Khatzi-Vallianou, K. Pope, J. Shay, C.T. Shay, J.D. Bennet, D. Tsoungarakis, E. Angelomati-Tsoungaraki,C. Vallianos and H. Blitzer, 1993. A Survey of the Western Mesara Plain in Crete. Preliminary Report of the 1984, 1986

and 1987 Field SeasonsHesperia 29: 90-108.

Whitelaw, T.M., 1983. The Settlement at Fournou Korifi Myrtos and Aspects of Early Minoan SocialOrganisation in O. Krzyszkowska and L. Nixon (eds), Minoan Society. Proceedings of the CambridgeColloquium 1981: 323-45. Bristol: Classical Press.

Wilson, D., 1994. Before the Palaces: An Overview of the Early Bronze Age (EM I-EM III) in D. Evely, H.Hughes-Brock and N. Momigliano (eds), Knossos. A Labyrinth of History: 23-44. Oxford: Oxbow Books.

Zois, A., 1982. Gibt es Vorlafer der minoischen Palste auf Kreta? in D. Papenfuss, H. Prckner and V.M.Strocka (eds), Palast und Htte. Beitrge zum Bauen und Wohnen im Altertum: 207-15. Mainz am Rhein:von Zabern.

Central Court

Documents

Transcript of Central Court