spoken in Crete before the later Doric was non-Hellenic, but
Indo-European. This inference rests on three inscriptions
in Greek characters but non-Greek language found in E.
Crete. The language has some apparent affinities with
Phrygian. The inscriptions are post-Aegean by many centuries,
but they occur in the part of the island known to Homer
as that inhabited by the Eteo-Cretans, or aborigines.
Their language may prove to be that of the Linear tablets.
C. History of Aegean Civilization.---History of an
inferential and summary sort only can be derived from
monuments in the absence of written records. The latter do,
indeed, exist in the Case of the Cretan civilization and in
great numbers; but they are undeciphered and likely to remain
so, except in the improbable event of the discovery of a long
bi-lingual text, partly couched in some familiar script and
language. Even in that event, the information which would be
derived from the Cnossian tablets would probably make but a
small addition to history, since in very large part they are
evidently mere inventories of tribute and stores. The engraved
gems probably record divine or human names. (See CRETE.)
(1) Chronology.--The earliest chronological datum that we
possess is inferred from a close similarity between certain
Cretao hand-made and polished vases of Minoan Period I. 1 and
others discovered by Petrie at Abydos in Egypt and referred
by him to the Ist Dynasty. He goes so far as to pronounce
the latter to be Cretan importations, their fabric and forms
being unlike anything Nilotic. If that be so, the period
at which stone implements were beginning to be superseded by
bronze in Crete must be dated before 4000 B.C. But it will
be remembered that below all Evans's ``Minoan'' strata hes
the immensely thick Neolithic deposit. To date the beginning
of this earliest record of human production is impossible at
present. The Neolithic stratum varies very much in depth,
ranging from nearly 20 ft. to 3 ft., but is deepest on the
highest part of the hillock. Its variations may be due
equally to natural denudation of a stratum once of uniform
depth, or to the artificial heaping up of a mound by later
builders. Even were certainty as to these alternatives
attained, we could only guess at the average rate of
accumulation, which experience shows to proceeb very differently
on different sites and under different social and climatic
conditions. In later periods at Cnossus accumulation seems
to have proceeded at a rate of, roughly, 3 ft. per thousand
years. Reckoning by that standard we might push the
earliest Neolithic remains back behind 10,000 B.C.;
but the calculation would be worthy of little credence.
Passing by certain fragments of stone vessels, found at Cnossus,
and coincident with forms characteristic of the IVth Pharaonic
Dynasty, we reach another fairly certain date in the synchronism
of remains belonging to the XIIth Dynasty (c. 2500 B.C.
according to Petrie, but later according to the Berlin School)
with products of Minoan Period II. 2. Characteristic Cretan
pottery of this period was found by Petrie in the Fayum in
conjunction with XIIth Dynasty remains, and various Cretan
products of the period show striking coincidences with XIIth
Dynasty styles, especially in their adoption of spiraliform
ornament. The spiral, however, it must be confessed, occurs
so often in natural objects (e.g. horns, climbing plants,
shavings of wood or metal) that too much stress must not
be laid on the mutual parentage of spiraliform ornament in
different civilizations. A diorite statuette, referable by
its style and inscription to Dynasty XIII., was discovered
in deposit of Period II. 3 in the Central Court, and a
cartouche of the ``Shepherd King,'' Khyan, was also found at
Cnossus. He is usually dated about 1900 B.C. This brings
us to the next and most certain synchronism, that of Minoan
Periods III. 1, 2, with Dynasty XVIII. (c. 1600-1400 B.C.).
This coincidence has been observed not only at Cnossus, but
previously, in connexion with discoveries of scarabs and other
Egyptian objects made at Mycenae, Ialysus, Vaphio, &c. In Egypt
itself. Refti tributaries, bearing Vases of Aegean form,
and themselves similar in fashion of dress and arrangement of
hair to figures on Cretan frescoes and gems of Period III.,
are depicted under this and the succeeding Dynasties (e.g.
Rekhmara tomb at Thebes). Actual vases of late Minoan style
have been found with remains of Dynasty XVIII., especially in
the town of Amenophis IV. Akhenaton at Tell el-Amarna; while
in the Aegean area itself we have abundant evidence of a great
wave of Egyptian influence beginning with this same Dynasty.
To this wave were owed in all probability the Nilotic scenes
depicted on the Mycenae daggers, on frescoes of Hagia Triada and
Cnossus, on pottery of Zakro, on the shell-relief of Phaestus,
&c.; and also many forrus and fabrics, e.g. certain Cretan
coffins, and the faience industry of Cnossus. These serve to
date, beyond all reasonable question, Periods III. 1-2 in
Crete, the shaft-graves in the Mycenae circle, the Vaphio tomb,
&c., to the 16th and 15th centuries B.C., and Period III.
3 with the lower town at Mycenae, the majority of the sixth
stratum at Hissarlik, the Ialysus burials, the upper stratum
at Phylakope, &c., to the century immediately succeeding.
The terminus ad quem is less certain---iron does not begin to
be used for weapons in the Aegean till after Period III. 3, and
then not exclusively. If we fix its introduction to about 1000
B C. and make it coincident with the incursion of northern
tribes, remembered by the classical Greeks as the Dorian Invasion,
we must allow that this incursion did not altogether stamp
out Aegean civilization, at least in the southern part of its
area. But it finally destroyed the Cnossian palace and initiated
the ``Geometric'' Age, with which, for convenience at any
rate, we may close the history of Aegean civilization proper.
(2) Annals.--From these and other data the outlines of
primitive history in the Aegean may be sketched thus. A
people, agreeing in its prevailing skull-forms with the
Mediterranean race of N. Africa, was settled in the Aegean
area from a remote Neolithic antiquity, but, except in
Crete, where insular security was combined with great natural
fertility, remained in a savage and unproductive condition
until far into the 4th millennium B.C. In Crete, however,
it had long been developing a certain civilization, and at a
period more or less contemporary with Dynasties XI. and XII.
(2500 B.C.?) the scattered communities of the centre of the
island coalesced into a strong monarchical state, whose capital
was at Cnossus. There the king, probably also high priest
of the prevailing nature-cult, built a great stone palace,
and received the tribute of feudatories, of whom, probably,
the prince of Phaestus, who commanded the Messara plain, was
chief. The Cnossian monarch had maritime relations with Egypt,
and presently sent his wares all over the S. Aegean (e.g.
to Melos in the earlier Second City Period of Phylakope) and
to Cyprus, receiving in return such commodities as Melian
obsidian knives. A system of pictographic writing came into
use early in this Palace period, but only a few documents,
made of durable material, have survived. Pictorial art of a
purely indigenous character, whether on ceramic material or
phster, made great strides, and from ceramic forms we may
legitimately infer also a high skill in metallurgy. The
absence of fortifications both at Cnossus and Phaestus suggest
that at this time Crete was internally peaceful and externally
secure. Small settlements, in very close relation with the
capital, were founded in the east of the island to command
fertile districts and assist maritime commerce. Gournia and
Palaikastro fulfilled both these ends: Zakro must have had mainly
a commercial purpose, as the starting-point for the African
coast. The acme of this dominion was reached about the end
of the 3rd millennium B.C., and thereafter there ensued a
certain, though not very serious, decline. Meanwhile, at
other favourable spots in the Aegean, but chiefly, it appears,
on sites in easy relation to maritime commerce, e.g. Tiryns
and Hissarlik, other communities of the early race began to
arrive at civilization, but were naturally influenced by the
more advanced culture of Crete, in proportion to their nearness
of vicinity. Early Hissarlik shows less Cretan influence
and more external (i.e. Asiatic) than early Melos. The
inner Greek mainland remained still in a backward state.
Five hundred years later--about 1600 B.C.----we observe
that certain striking changes have taken place. The Aegean
remains have become astonishingly uniform over the whole
area; the local ceramic developments have almost ceased and
been replaced by ware of one general type both of fabric
and decoration. The Cretans have stayed their previous
decadence, and are once more possessors of a progressive
civilization. They have developed a more convenient and
expressive written character by stages of which one is best
represented by the tablets of Hagia Triada. The art of all
the area gives evidence of one spirit and common models; in
religious representations it shows the same anthropomorphic
personification and the same ritual furniture. Objects produced
in one locality are found in others. The area of Aegean
intercourse has widened and become more busy. Commerce with
Egypt, for example, has increased in a marked degree, and
Aegean objects or imitations of them are found to have begun
to penetrate into Syria, inland Asia Minor, and the central
and western Mediterranean lands, e.g. Sicily, Sardinia and
Spain. There can be little doubt that a strong power was
now fixed in one Aegean centre, and that all the area had
come under its political, social and artistic influence.
How was this brought about, and what was the imperial centre?
Some change seems to have come from the north; and there are
those who go so far as to say that the centre henceforward
was the Argolid, and especially ``golden'' Mycenae, whose
lords imposed a new type of palace and a modification of
Aegean art on all other Aegean lands. Others again cite the
old established power and productivity of Crete; the immense
advantage it derived from insularity, natural fertility and
geographical relation to the wider area of east Mediterranean
civilizations; and the absence of evidence elsewhere for the
gradual growth of a culture powerful enough to dominate the
Aegean, They point to the fact that, even in the new period,
the palm for wealth and variety of civilized production still
remained with Crete. There alone we have proof that the art
of writing was commonly practised, and there tribute-tallies
suggest an imperial organization; there the arts of painting
and sculpture in stone were most highly developed; there the
royal residences, which had never been violently destroyed,
though remodelled, continued unfortified; whereas on the
Greek mainland they required strong protective works. The
golden treasure of the Mycenae graves, these critics urge, is
not more splendid than would have been found at Cnossus had
royal burials been spared by plunderers, or been happened upon
intact by modern explorers. It is not impossible to combine
these views, and place the seat of power still in Crete,
but ascribe the renascence there to an influx of new blood
from the north, large enough to instil fresh vigour, but too
small to change the civilization in its essential character.
