Evans, Arthur J.: The Palace of Minos: a comparative account of the successive stages of the early Cretan civilization as illustred by the discoveries at Knossos (Band 1): The Neolithic and Early and Middle Minoan Ages (London, 1921)

M. M. I: FOUNDATION OF KNOSSIAN PALACE 129

from elements of doubt. The evidence seemed to point to the existence of
an original structure dating* from the close of the First Middle Minoan
Period, and to a subsequent remodelling- of the facade in the course of
M. M. III.1

These analyses were perforce confined to the part of the West wall Results of
above the base slabs of the orthostats. But the section North of this, where w.S\Vall
the upright gypsum blocks were wanting, offered an opportunity of testing the &c-
contents of the actual wall foundations beneath the base slabs. The un-
disturbed material found beneath these, at a point behind the Twelfth
Magazine, o-ave a different result from the foregoing-. There were abso-
lutely no fragments belonging to M. M. III. The latest sherds here
brought to light belonged to an early stage of the First Middle Minoan
Period.'2 Corroborative of this, moreover, was another interesting test. It
will be seen from the view outside the West Porch, given in Fig. 96,3
that, about three metres West of the existing South section of the
facade, a line of large slabs runs parallel with it, curving round towards
the East side of the Porch. But these slabs, which (after a slight set-
back, such as is usual in the Palace walls) follow the more Northern line
of the facade, may with great probability be taken to represent its original
continuation southwards, and to be the base slabs, embedded in a tough Earlier
clay stratum, of a Western facade-line along this section. Immediately wCWall°
under the second of these slabs from the North end were found, besides a
mass of Neolithic and Early Minoan sherds, a score illustrating the earlier
M. M. I phase, but nothing later.4 All this points to the conclusion that the

1 The fragments found that could be defi- led me in the original Report (op. a't., p. 21)

nitely classified were practically divided into to draw the too sweeping conclusion that ' the

two groups, M. M. I and M. M. Ill, the former construction of the West wall belongs to the

much preponderating. In Test Pit 1, made in close of the Middle Minoan Age'. In view

the filling between the orthostats, from their of the further wall analyses referred to below,

existing top to the base block on which they this conclusion must be greatly modified,

rested (55 centimetres), the fragments as 1 The following is the analysis of 3 ^classified

analysed by Dr. Mackenzie were M. M. I, 315 : fragments from the interstices of the foundation

M. M. II, none; M. M. Ill, 81 ; unclassed, wall of rough stones beneath the base slabs at

171 ; L. M. I, obviously intrusive, 1. In Test this point: Neolithic, 52; Sub-Neolithic or

Pit 3, where the depth of the rubble deposit E. M. 1, 42; Early Minoan in general, 127;

was greater (1-05 m.), my own analysis was : M. M. I, 98.

M. M. I, 50 ; Late M. M. I, 5 ; M. M. Ill, 25 ; 3 See too the Sketch Plan, Fig. 152, below,

unclassed, 28 ; L. M. I, 1. Five fragments 4 Of the sherds examined, 20 were M. M. I.

here brought to light, at first set down as ' late The others (in the first half-metre) were : E. M.

M. M. I', seem to be best described as in general, 146; and Neolithic, 460.
M. M. I b. The presence of M. M. Ill sherds

I K