DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.807#0036
THE MINOAN AGE
now Lyktos, later the great Dorian centre. This early account of Achaean
domination in the island (which does not exclude the participation of other
Hellenic elements such as the Dorian) seems to give us a real glimpse of the
historic conditions in Crete at the beginning of the Iron Age. But when we
go back from Idomeneus, through Deukalion of hoary tradition, to the
generation beyond him we find ourselves in a very different atmosphere.
The sister of Deukalion is Ariadne, his mother Pasiphae, and his father,
Minos, is the direct emanation of the divinity. In other words we find
ourselves again caught up in the celestial cycle of the old Cretan religion.1
If there be any value attaching to the early dates supplied by the Parian
Parian Chronicle, or that of Eusebius, the first historical appearance of a king ici^°n~
bearing the name of Minos is projected within the last brilliant age of
the pre-Hellenic civilization of Crete. The year given by the Parian
1 Sir William Ridgeway, in his paper entitled
Minos the Destroyer rather than the Creator of
the so-called ' Minoan ' culture of Cnossus (Proc.
Brit. Acad., 1909-10, p. 98 seqq.), sets forth
some original views on these matters. Holding
by the tradition of two kings of the name of
Minos, he regards ' Minos II ' as Achaean on
the strength of the genealogy given in the
Iliad. ' Idomeneus was an Achaean, but, if
he was such, his father Deucalion and his
grandfather Minos must have been Achaeans '
(p. 94). This was certainly the inference
desired by the logographer. 'Minos II'
having been dealt with in this somewhat
summary fashion, 'Minos I' has his turn.
That his brother Rhadamanthys is twice spoken
of in the Iliads £av86s (iv, 564; vii. 523)
might not by itself be sufficiently convincing,
since such a descriptive touch would be a
natural move in the process of 'adoption'.
It was necessary therefore to resort to what
can only be described as les grands vwyens.
The fabled relationship with Phoenix seems to
be the chief basis for the statement (p. 125)
that ' Minos I passed into Crete from Palestine
at the close of the fifteenth century 1:. c' He
was one of 'the tall fair-haired Achaean in-
vaders ' who, we are asked to believe, had made
their way to Syria from the North across the
Dardanelles, like the later Gauls, and through
Asia Minor (p. 126). Swooping down from
Canaan to Crete, this 'Achaean' leader with
the un-Hellenic name deals a fatal blow to
' Minoan' civilization.
Not only here are chronological conditions
ignored but the historic course of events is
actually reversed. In the fifteenth century
b.c., the sea-paths round the East Mediter-
ranean angle were already, perhaps via Cyprus,
bringing Cretan wares to the ports of Canaan,
and painted sherds of the later ' Palace
style' of Knossos begin to appear in the
deposits of its Tells. (P. g. at Gezer, Maca-
lister, vol. ii, p. 155, Fig. 318—part of an
alabastron with 8-shaped shields and stars ;
L. M. I b — from the ' Second Semitic'
stratum.) In the superimposed Canaanite
stratum imported Aegean pottery of the Tell-
el-Amarna class abounds. But the stage of
armed occupation to which the formation of
Philistia was due was not reached till a still
later date, and the Philistine pottery of native
fabric showing a matt-paint ' Metope' style
(Mackenzie. Ain Shems, P.E.F. Annual, 1912-
1913, p. 32) is found in the superimposed
stratum. It is possible that Achaean or Dorian
swarms took part in the ' Philistine ' movement,
following in the wake of earlier Cretan pioneers.
But a current of invasion, from Palestine to
Crete, ' at the close of the fifteenth century
b. c.', is excluded by the elementary facts of
East Mediterranean history.
now Lyktos, later the great Dorian centre. This early account of Achaean
domination in the island (which does not exclude the participation of other
Hellenic elements such as the Dorian) seems to give us a real glimpse of the
historic conditions in Crete at the beginning of the Iron Age. But when we
go back from Idomeneus, through Deukalion of hoary tradition, to the
generation beyond him we find ourselves in a very different atmosphere.
The sister of Deukalion is Ariadne, his mother Pasiphae, and his father,
Minos, is the direct emanation of the divinity. In other words we find
ourselves again caught up in the celestial cycle of the old Cretan religion.1
If there be any value attaching to the early dates supplied by the Parian
Parian Chronicle, or that of Eusebius, the first historical appearance of a king ici^°n~
bearing the name of Minos is projected within the last brilliant age of
the pre-Hellenic civilization of Crete. The year given by the Parian
1 Sir William Ridgeway, in his paper entitled
Minos the Destroyer rather than the Creator of
the so-called ' Minoan ' culture of Cnossus (Proc.
Brit. Acad., 1909-10, p. 98 seqq.), sets forth
some original views on these matters. Holding
by the tradition of two kings of the name of
Minos, he regards ' Minos II ' as Achaean on
the strength of the genealogy given in the
Iliad. ' Idomeneus was an Achaean, but, if
he was such, his father Deucalion and his
grandfather Minos must have been Achaeans '
(p. 94). This was certainly the inference
desired by the logographer. 'Minos II'
having been dealt with in this somewhat
summary fashion, 'Minos I' has his turn.
That his brother Rhadamanthys is twice spoken
of in the Iliads £av86s (iv, 564; vii. 523)
might not by itself be sufficiently convincing,
since such a descriptive touch would be a
natural move in the process of 'adoption'.
It was necessary therefore to resort to what
can only be described as les grands vwyens.
The fabled relationship with Phoenix seems to
be the chief basis for the statement (p. 125)
that ' Minos I passed into Crete from Palestine
at the close of the fifteenth century 1:. c' He
was one of 'the tall fair-haired Achaean in-
vaders ' who, we are asked to believe, had made
their way to Syria from the North across the
Dardanelles, like the later Gauls, and through
Asia Minor (p. 126). Swooping down from
Canaan to Crete, this 'Achaean' leader with
the un-Hellenic name deals a fatal blow to
' Minoan' civilization.
Not only here are chronological conditions
ignored but the historic course of events is
actually reversed. In the fifteenth century
b.c., the sea-paths round the East Mediter-
ranean angle were already, perhaps via Cyprus,
bringing Cretan wares to the ports of Canaan,
and painted sherds of the later ' Palace
style' of Knossos begin to appear in the
deposits of its Tells. (P. g. at Gezer, Maca-
lister, vol. ii, p. 155, Fig. 318—part of an
alabastron with 8-shaped shields and stars ;
L. M. I b — from the ' Second Semitic'
stratum.) In the superimposed Canaanite
stratum imported Aegean pottery of the Tell-
el-Amarna class abounds. But the stage of
armed occupation to which the formation of
Philistia was due was not reached till a still
later date, and the Philistine pottery of native
fabric showing a matt-paint ' Metope' style
(Mackenzie. Ain Shems, P.E.F. Annual, 1912-
1913, p. 32) is found in the superimposed
stratum. It is possible that Achaean or Dorian
swarms took part in the ' Philistine ' movement,
following in the wake of earlier Cretan pioneers.
But a current of invasion, from Palestine to
Crete, ' at the close of the fifteenth century
b. c.', is excluded by the elementary facts of
East Mediterranean history.