The Cambridge Ancient History - Revised Edition - Volume II - Chapters IV(b) and XII - The Maturity of Minoan Civilization - The Chronology of the Early Palace Period

Sep 29, 2026

Uploaded by Liam

Revised Edition of Cambridge Ancient History Volume II presents Chapter IV(b) within “The Maturity of Minoan Civilization,” focusing on the early Palace Period in Crete, roughly c. 2000–1700 B.C. The discussion explains the rise of Minoan palaces, evaluates chronological placement without direct written sources, and outlines how excavations at Knossos used Early/Middle/Late Minoan divisions and subdivisions to model stratigraphy and relative timing. Absolute chronology is constrained through links with Egyptian and Near Eastern evidence and dated pottery associations, including MM IIa/b, scarabs, and Khyan’s cartouche.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryLiterature

FormatPDF

Pages56

Reading Time1 h 26 min

AccessFree to download

CHAPTER IV(b)

THE MATURITY OF MINOANCIVILIZATION

I. THE CHRONOLOGY OF THE EARLY PALACE PERIOD (c. 2000-1700 B.C.)

THE EARLY PALACE PERIOD

THE CAMBRIDGEANCIENT HISTORY # REVISED EDITION OFVOLUMES I &II CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS 6s.net;$I.25 C14↓-2 4 C # MINOANCIVILIZATION MATURITY AND ZENITH BY F.MATZ Professor Emeritus of ArchaeologyUniversity of Marburg VOLUME II,CHAPTERS IV(b)AND XII CAMBRIDGEInc:1AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS PU BLISHED BYTHE SYNDICS OF THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS Bentley House,200 Euston Road,London,N.W.IAmerican Branch:32 East 57th Street,New York 22,N.Y.West African Office:P.O.Box 33,Ibadan,Nigeria CAM BRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS I962 First pri9Rrind 9 Prinied in Great Britain at the Unioersizy Prinzing House,Cambridg(Brooke Crutchley,University Printer) ## CHAPTER IV(b) THE MATURITY OF MINOANCIVILIZATION I.THE CHRONOLOGY OF THE EARLYPALACE PERIOD(c.2000-1700 B.c.) THE first palaces in Crete were built soon after the turn of themillennium.Could there be a more obvious mark than this for thebeginning of an epoch?With them Minoan civilization rose fromits prehistoric beginnings and attained the rank of an advancedcivilization.But did it really even now enter the realm of history?Names,personalities and direct written sources are lacking.Onthe other hand the historical setting of this civilization cannot bedisputed.It finds expression in its involvement in contemporaryand subsequent events of Mediterranean history.Monumentsconsequently play a greater part than actions and people in pro-viding a picture of this period,and the archaeological interpreta-tion of these monuments is of cardinal importance.The Greekslater associated this period with the figure of Minos in theirmythology.Any attempt to separate the historical and themythical features of Minos is hopeless,but his name has rightlybeen given to this civilization which we can discern in the strangelight of early history. The palaces stood for about 6oo years.After their destructionin about I40O B.C.they were not rebuilt.The Palace Period can besplit into an earlier and a later stage in terms of stratification andarchitectural developments.The present chapter is concernedonly with the earlier stage of the Palace Period.Hitherto,how-ever,there has been no real consensus doctorum to fix the pointswhere the line of demarcation is to be drawn,or to establish therelative and absolute chronology of the stages.During the exca-vation of Cnossus Evans and Mackenzie worked out a system ofthree periods which was based on the stratigraphy of the site andwas intended to establish the relative chronology in the first place.Each of the three periods—Early Minoan(=EM),MiddleMinoan(=MM)and Late Minoan(=LM)—was divided intothree subdivisions,designated by numbers which could,if neces-sary,be differentiated further by labelling sub-periods a,b and c. On the whole,the three periods correspond with the Early,Middleand Late Bronze Age periods.This correspondence has beenessentially confirmed in the case of the first of the three periods.Between EM II and MM I there is a genuine break,whereasEM II overlaps already with the following period.The EarlyPalace Period¹and the Middle Bronze Age both begin withMM I.It was soon pointed out,however,that the division be-tween MM III and LM I was unimportant compared with thatbetween MM II and MM III,when fundamental changes tookplace not only in architecture but also in the style of pottery andother objects.The naturalism which is characteristic of Minoanart began with MM III.Moreover,it was clear from the verybeginning that the end of the Palace Period fell in the middle ofthe last of the three divisions,that is to say in the very short periodLM IIIa.On the whole it was therefore agreed to let the EarlyPalace Period extend from MM I to MM II and the Late PalacePeriod from MM III to LM IIIa.The question whether theLate Palace Period should be divided into an initial and a finalstage(MM III/LM I and LM II/IIIa)belongs properly,to thenext chapter.This system,however,has been called in questionrecently in view of the excavations at

FAQs

What period in Crete does the chapter cover, and why is it considered a milestone?

It covers the early Palace Period of Minoan civilization, roughly c. 2000–1700 B.C., marked by the construction of the first palaces soon after the turn of the millennium. The palaces signal an epochal transition from earlier prehistoric beginnings.

How is relative chronology established when direct written sources are lacking?

The chapter notes that names, personal histories, and direct written sources are missing, so archaeological interpretation of monuments is crucial. It uses stratigraphy-based divisions derived from the Knossos excavations, organized into Early, Middle, and Late Minoan periods with numbered subdivisions.

What evidence is used to fix the absolute chronology?

Absolute dates are anchored through relations with Egypt and the Near East. Examples include dated MM IIa/b pottery associations at Egyptian sites, context at Lebena with a Twelfth Dynasty ivory scarab, and Egyptian and Near Eastern finds such as Khyan’s cartouche and a dated Babylonian cylinder seal.

Sep 29, 2026

Uploaded by Liam