DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.9804#0108
<S2
EGYPTIAN CHRONOLOGY
period. Dr. Mackenzie's arguments really amount to
this, that a man of Late Minoan II. not only built on the
same architectural principles, but lived in the same
kind of rooms, as his ancestor of Middle Minoan II.
Is it probable that this means two thousand
years ? Are even one thousand as probable as six
hundred ? It may be granted that, in a lifeless
age, architecture and house construction might main-
tain the same form for an indefinite period; but in
an age which ex hypothesi is alive and moving in
all the other arts, and makes their many changes the
basis of its claim for length of span, does not this marking
time in the ' master art' weaken the force of such a claim ?
Even if we lay stress on the religious aspect of the Cretan
palaces, we can find no analogy that is against us in
the history of Western Europe, from the first Doric
temples of Corinth or Selinus to the imitation Gothic
or Byzantine churches of to-day. Even in religious
art permanence of type for very long periods means,
either deadness, or an archaism that presupposes inter-
vening changes. When we consider that the religious
elements in the palaces were after all subsidiary, and that
in the main they were houses to live in, our case becomes
stronger still.
Even a thousand years is a huge interval of time ;
and leaving out of sight the special argument we base on
the permanence of the Minoan Palace, we have a right to
ask whether the changes in the other arts, in pottery,
frescoes, swords, and writing really demand so long a
period. The change from pictographic script to linear
is the only point that gives us cause to doubt : and even
here the ink-written linear inscriptions of Middle Minoan
III.1 show that the gap was bridged before that period
was reached. In regard to the other arts the high level
reached by Crete takes it out of the range of primitive
or barbarous analogies, and makes it fair to apply to it
1 See pp. 64-5.
EGYPTIAN CHRONOLOGY
period. Dr. Mackenzie's arguments really amount to
this, that a man of Late Minoan II. not only built on the
same architectural principles, but lived in the same
kind of rooms, as his ancestor of Middle Minoan II.
Is it probable that this means two thousand
years ? Are even one thousand as probable as six
hundred ? It may be granted that, in a lifeless
age, architecture and house construction might main-
tain the same form for an indefinite period; but in
an age which ex hypothesi is alive and moving in
all the other arts, and makes their many changes the
basis of its claim for length of span, does not this marking
time in the ' master art' weaken the force of such a claim ?
Even if we lay stress on the religious aspect of the Cretan
palaces, we can find no analogy that is against us in
the history of Western Europe, from the first Doric
temples of Corinth or Selinus to the imitation Gothic
or Byzantine churches of to-day. Even in religious
art permanence of type for very long periods means,
either deadness, or an archaism that presupposes inter-
vening changes. When we consider that the religious
elements in the palaces were after all subsidiary, and that
in the main they were houses to live in, our case becomes
stronger still.
Even a thousand years is a huge interval of time ;
and leaving out of sight the special argument we base on
the permanence of the Minoan Palace, we have a right to
ask whether the changes in the other arts, in pottery,
frescoes, swords, and writing really demand so long a
period. The change from pictographic script to linear
is the only point that gives us cause to doubt : and even
here the ink-written linear inscriptions of Middle Minoan
III.1 show that the gap was bridged before that period
was reached. In regard to the other arts the high level
reached by Crete takes it out of the range of primitive
or barbarous analogies, and makes it fair to apply to it
1 See pp. 64-5.