DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.3044#0228
GROUPS 213
tion using quality of workmanship and seal material as main criteria, Evans originally dated the
onset of this complex to a time between Egyptian dynasties VI and XI (c. 2300-2000). While
one does find parallels with Egyptian seal motifs25, stylistically they are usually of a very general
nature. The occurrence of over one hundred examples of the seals of this complex in the MM II
Malia Workshop is the main support for the dating of this complex (CMS 112 86-198). Further
stratigraphic evidence comes in the form of two seals and an impression. The seals stem respec-
26
lively from a MM I-II and a "MM" context near Palaikastro. The impression comes from a MM
II context in Monastiraki (CMS V 290). A dating for the seals of the Malia Workshop Complex
at this stage of the research is somewhat hypothetical. However, since we have eliminated the Mes-
ara contexts as a criterion for dating, there is little reason to date these seals prior to the begin-
ning of the Old Palatial Period. Aside from the stratified evidence, two arguments can be offered
for a MM IB-II dating. First, given the large number of seals, on purely statistical grounds it is
difficult to imagine that all 550 date to a single ceramic period (i.e. MM II, in which many of
these seals are relatively securely dated). In addition, these seals are only moderately homogene-
ous in style, technique and iconography perhaps owing to an extended period of production. Sec-
ond, the equation of the onset of the Malia Workshop Complex and with it the Hieroglyphic A
script at the beginning of the Old Palatial Period forms an attractive theory. Thus, these seals
would be the main successors to the ivory seals and the Hieroglyphic A script would succeed the
28
Archanes script. At present, there is no evidence that the Malia Workshop Complex continues
in use into MM III.
There is no means of determining a chronology within this style-complex. Evans's theory
that elongated Prisms are late and short ones are early does not work as both short and long
Prisms came to light in the MM II Malia Workshop. However, a few of the seals of this complex
show signs more related to those of the Hieroglyphic B than A script, which may date relatively
late.30
8B: The Malia Workshop Subgroup MM IB-II
CM 115, 159, 178; CMS 112 79, 150, 168, 230; VII 36; IX 32; XII 92-94; CS 126, 127, 149
near: CM 123, 156; CMS* IV 161
total: 19
The Malia Workshop Subgroup is an offshoot of the Malia Workshop Complex and both
motifs and seal shapes are shared with the better known and larger complex. In contrast to the
Malia Complex, the seals of this group are in hard stone. The dominant shape, the Three-sided
Prism, constitutes half of the examples. Other shapes include Foliate Backs and Foreparts of Ani-
mals. Various low grade, perhaps local, semiprecious stones occur, but none dominates.
Certain motifs consistently reoccur on the seals of the Malia Workshop Subgroup including
round or lentoid jars with hoop-handles (Motif 53:5-7), bucrania (3:3), humans (1:32, 33) and
waterbirds (11:5), the same as in the Malia Workshop Complex.
The dominant material, hard stone, necessitates the use of rotary tools for the engraving of
the motifs and thus, the style of the motifs differs from that of the Malia Workshop Complex. The
figures tend to be more geometricized and are formed by rings, borings and simple cuts. More-
tion using quality of workmanship and seal material as main criteria, Evans originally dated the
onset of this complex to a time between Egyptian dynasties VI and XI (c. 2300-2000). While
one does find parallels with Egyptian seal motifs25, stylistically they are usually of a very general
nature. The occurrence of over one hundred examples of the seals of this complex in the MM II
Malia Workshop is the main support for the dating of this complex (CMS 112 86-198). Further
stratigraphic evidence comes in the form of two seals and an impression. The seals stem respec-
26
lively from a MM I-II and a "MM" context near Palaikastro. The impression comes from a MM
II context in Monastiraki (CMS V 290). A dating for the seals of the Malia Workshop Complex
at this stage of the research is somewhat hypothetical. However, since we have eliminated the Mes-
ara contexts as a criterion for dating, there is little reason to date these seals prior to the begin-
ning of the Old Palatial Period. Aside from the stratified evidence, two arguments can be offered
for a MM IB-II dating. First, given the large number of seals, on purely statistical grounds it is
difficult to imagine that all 550 date to a single ceramic period (i.e. MM II, in which many of
these seals are relatively securely dated). In addition, these seals are only moderately homogene-
ous in style, technique and iconography perhaps owing to an extended period of production. Sec-
ond, the equation of the onset of the Malia Workshop Complex and with it the Hieroglyphic A
script at the beginning of the Old Palatial Period forms an attractive theory. Thus, these seals
would be the main successors to the ivory seals and the Hieroglyphic A script would succeed the
28
Archanes script. At present, there is no evidence that the Malia Workshop Complex continues
in use into MM III.
There is no means of determining a chronology within this style-complex. Evans's theory
that elongated Prisms are late and short ones are early does not work as both short and long
Prisms came to light in the MM II Malia Workshop. However, a few of the seals of this complex
show signs more related to those of the Hieroglyphic B than A script, which may date relatively
late.30
8B: The Malia Workshop Subgroup MM IB-II
CM 115, 159, 178; CMS 112 79, 150, 168, 230; VII 36; IX 32; XII 92-94; CS 126, 127, 149
near: CM 123, 156; CMS* IV 161
total: 19
The Malia Workshop Subgroup is an offshoot of the Malia Workshop Complex and both
motifs and seal shapes are shared with the better known and larger complex. In contrast to the
Malia Complex, the seals of this group are in hard stone. The dominant shape, the Three-sided
Prism, constitutes half of the examples. Other shapes include Foliate Backs and Foreparts of Ani-
mals. Various low grade, perhaps local, semiprecious stones occur, but none dominates.
Certain motifs consistently reoccur on the seals of the Malia Workshop Subgroup including
round or lentoid jars with hoop-handles (Motif 53:5-7), bucrania (3:3), humans (1:32, 33) and
waterbirds (11:5), the same as in the Malia Workshop Complex.
The dominant material, hard stone, necessitates the use of rotary tools for the engraving of
the motifs and thus, the style of the motifs differs from that of the Malia Workshop Complex. The
figures tend to be more geometricized and are formed by rings, borings and simple cuts. More-