In the beautiful landscape among the Cretan coastline, the last remnants of a magnificent palace protrude from the hills.  The ruins mark the remains of the Palace of Phaestos, the final evidence for this ancient civilization.  But at a second glance, there is more to these fallen structures, information that reveals much about the social stratification of the peoples who once inhabited the immense and powerful ancient palace-town.  Based on the art and artifacts found during archaeological excavations, there was a rather rapid development of culture on Phaestos during the protopalatial and palatial period.  Within this culture, there was a system of social hierarchy that was depended upon a ruling class exploiting the labor of common workers in order to provide them with wealth and security.

         The ancient Minoan palace of Phaestos was situated in on a hill overlooking the southern Coast of Crete, with the majesty of Mount Ida towering in the background.  Excavations have revealed that as far back as the Neolithic, peoples were inhabiting the fertile land around the Yeropotamos River.  The palace itself was built around 2000 BCE, the protopalatial period, although the town, which lies to the south of the citadel, developed later.  According to the archaeological evidence, the Old Palace was destroyed around 1700 BCE, but was quickly rebuilt and dwelt in again during the Middle Minoan, or palatial, period.  Under the New Palace Age, it flourished into a powerful center, and along with Knossos, it served as an administrative and religious center of Minoan culture (Cottrell 71). According to the style of pottery that has been recovered from the site, sea faring and fishing were lucrative for the bustling kingdom, while religion and culture flourished with the wealth that must have been entering the city.  There will be more on this later in the paper.

         However, its final destruction came in 1450 BC, when Phaestos, along with Knossos, and all other Minoan palaces, perished in an immense destruction.  There is no conclusive reason for such a mass destruction of so many cultures, but evidence implies that there was possibly an earthquake, fire, or both (Pendlebury 228-229).  Spyridon Marinatos, a Greek archaeologist who concentrated on Ancient Thera (modern Santorini), hypothesized that the same volcano that apparently annihilated part of Thera possibly could have led to the eradication of the Minoan cultures on Crete, too, but, again, the evidence is inconclusive (Willetts 44).  Actually, modern scholarship has generally agreed to a new date for the eruption of the volcano in Thera (c1628). Nevertheless, the town of Phaestos was rebuilt after the disaster, but the palace was abandoned.  People inhabited the town through the Geometric and Archaic ages, all the way until the Classical age of Greece.

         Under the direction of Halbherr, an Italian archaeologist who was roughly contemporary with Sir Arthur Evans and his work at Knossos, archaeological excavations began in 1900 after Crete was liberated from Turkish control (Cottrell 40).  Halbherr himself became somewhat of a legend by personifying the adventurous archaeologist who romantically rode an Arabian black mare throughout the countryside (Higgins 26-27).  The site was found first by Cantley, who discovered a tomb less that a mile from the palace site.  A more modern archaeologist, Doro Levi, also an Italian, has continued his excavations at Phaestos, but with quite a different aim as his predecessor.  Of all the excavations of Minoan palaces in Crete, Levi has worked most systematically in his stratigraphic digging (Platon 80).  His primary concern is to establish a chronology of the Minoan civilization through the study of the artifact in their vertical contexts (Platon 29-30).  He is most concerned with the problem of artifacts that were assumed to have been from different time periods found side by side.

         In the course of the excavations, many archaeological discoveries have set Phaestos apart from other Minoan sites. First, unlike Evans, Halbherr did not reconstruct the building once he uncovered the majority of the palace (which was in actually only the remains of the second palace).  Rather, he preferred to simply preserve the white walls that were emerging from the ground so that they did not erode from exposure.  Thus, the walls, as seen today at the ruins of Phaestos, are the walls that were discovered so many years ago; they more accurately portray what the original structure from the Minoan period would have looked like than the one at Knossos does.  However, the entire palace could not be exposed because part of the hill on which the palace is situated had eroded away, taking the structure and artifacts with it to be lost forever.

        Outside of the actual structure, archaeologist have uncovered few important artifacts, except for a large amount of elaborately designed Kamares-ware pottery, clay tablets with a pre-Hellenic form of writing, known as Linear A, and the Phastos Disk.  Both of these types of artifacts, in addition to the palace itself, are very indicative of the culture, as they denote social stratification, ideas of aesthetic beauty, and a blossoming economy; therefore, they will be discussed in detail within the analysis.

         The Palace at Phaestos is a colossal piece of evidence for social stratification, the advance of architecture, and indication of the blossoming economy. Modern archaeologist by no means know for what this massive structure actually was used, but by sheer size, the walls must have been enclosing either an immense palace, or serve as the protective walls of a town.  If it was a palace, it implies that a monarch, who would presumably have control over the economic growth and assets of the culture, would reside within the enormous structure. On the other hand, if it was an enclosed town, this town must have had a ruling class who, again, would preside over the political and economic aspects of Phaestos.  Whatever the case, the evidence of a social hierarchy are present by the existence of such an immense structure.  In fact, the possibility that it was, in fact, a palace are actually quite slim, for there has been no evidence to show that any one person had the majority of the wealth; in addition, there is evidence of a town of Phaestos a short distance outside of the walls.  There is possibly no end to this debate.  However, for argument's sake, this paper will refer to the structure by its conventional, if not wrong, name of palace, for it is the humble opinion of this author that there was an aristocracy that possibly lived within the walls of the "palace," while the inhabitants of the town used the space as a market for sale and bartering, as well as social and religious interaction.

         The complexities of the structure, including the spaces designed possibly for artisans and/or vendors to set up, imply a highly stratified culture, complete with different classes for rulers, merchants, artisans, actual farmers/fishers (the manual workers), and servants.  Willetts, a scholar of Minoan civilizations, asserts that in the center of the palace compound, there lies a courtyard (74).  To the southern and most of the eastern portion of the palace has disappeared because of the erosion of the hill on which it is situated (74).  What has come to be known as the royal residence lies to the northeastern side of the courtyard, complete with a dining room, receiving area, and a living area.  The servants would also live and work in that part of the structure; one would assume that a ruling class with such great power would require a large amount of servants.  On the opposite side of the courtyard, there are magazine spaces that allowed for vendors and artisans to bring their goods to the center of the structure for sale or bartering.  Also in the courtyard, there were grandstands used possibly for entertainment or religious spectacle (Cottrell 80-81).

         The entrance to the palace was from the west, up an impressive staircase, known as the Magnificent Staircase, which led up to a structure that is known as the Monumental Propylaia.  Such a name is probably anachronistic, since the appearance of propylaiai at the entrance of religious centers is a feature seen in Classical Greek architecture.  The author would like to add that although the function of many of the rooms within the palace itself is unclear (it is questionably assumed that the west court was used for religious purposes), it is dangerous to assume that the culture had no religious beliefs or sense of the sacred.  Other contemporary cultures show evidence for the worship of gods, ones associated with nature, in particularly, and there is no reason to assume that the inhabitants of Phaestos would be any different.  All of these attributes to the palace indicate that there was stability, both economic and political, in order that the people, first, build such a large structure, in addition to accenting it with such sophisticated architecture.

         In addition to the place itself, evaluating the Kamares-ware pottery provides quite a bit of information about the social development of the people of Phaestos. For example, the Kamares-ware Eggshell Cup implies a very sophisticated method of firing pottery. In order to fire pottery this delicate (as it is very thin pottery), it requires a substantial amount of knowledge about firing temperatures, for if they were left in too long on too high a temperature, it would crack; such knowledge was either developed by the inhabitants or acquired by another culture.  If it was developed in Phaestos, then the economy must have been stable enough that the certain people were able to spend their time experimenting with firing methods.  If it was learned by outside peoples, then the locals of Phaestos must have had access to these people by trade. Whatever the case, there must have been a boom in economic trading and/or agrarian endeavors so that certain craftsman were specializing in fine pottery, not just functional pottery.  The cup's decoration is also quite telling.  Around the body of the cup, there is a pattern of white and orange curvilinear lines that intersect quite elaborately.  Within the spaces that these lines produce, there is representation of abstract plants.  The question of why there appears to be a plant motif is quite interesting.  The location of Phaestos is among the hilly coast of southern Crete, a very beautiful and pastoral location.  It is possible that the culture held the natural surroundings sacred, especially since it served as a means for a food source.  The explanation can be much more simple, just that they were partly an agrarian society, but it is not uncommon for such cultures to hold nature sacred.  As will be discussed below, the same theme arises with marine motifs, also.

        Likewise, the attention to detail on the Kamares-ware implies a thriving artisan trade, which must have been dependent on: one, the economic security of the culture and, two, the market for fine pottery.  The Beak Spout Jug, Kamares Crater, and the Three Handled Pithos are decorated quite extensively, with fine strokes and difficult patterns. The Beak Spout Jug is intriguing, with its familiar spiral pattern, as is seen on so many Kamares-ware pieces.  In addition, on the beak shaped spout, the artist put an eye so that it looked like a representation of a bird.  The Kamares Crater, too, is distinct, with its vine-like decoration on the shaft and clay flowers placed on the body and shaft.  But it is the Three Handle Pithos that is very telling.  The marine motif-the spiral "waves" on the rim and body-can indicate a connection with the sea, possibly a sacred bond.

         We can extrapolate from the need for a market that a class system was being developed as connected to the economic development of the culture becomes more sophisticated. In addition, the need for different types of pottery is very telling about the nature of the culture at the time. For example, the Kamares-ware Fruit-stand is innately decorative, although it is questionable whether it as actually a fruit-stand or not.  However, it does have a flat top that extends down to a narrow shaft that supports the top.  Whether used for fruit or not, it appears to have functioned as a display for something.  The elaborate spiral and feather-like shapes, as well as the tooth fringed around the rim, are very extensive and possibly was to demonstrate wealth and extravagance.

        As for the trades that would be providing the economic success, we can use the motifs portrayed on the pottery to determine what themes were important to the inhabitants of Phaestos.  That they were trading, possibly on the sea, and fishing would account for the marine motif (in addition to the sense of the sacred), particularly on the Three Handled Pithos. The close relationship with the landscape by farming would account for the floral motif, as on the Kamares Crater. These conclusions, drawn from the artifacts found on the Greek Art and Archaeology web page, are all show the economic success, hence, stability, of Ancient Phaestos.

         The Phaestos Disk, found by Halbherr, is possibly the most interesting and enigmatic artifact found at within the palace.  Those familiar with Minoan cultures know that there was a form of writing that has now been deciphered, Linear B, and have probably heard of its predecessor, Linear A. However, the Phaestos disk, which bears the molds of hieroglyphics-like pictorial communication, is not directly connected to these forms of writing.  John Chadwick, one of the men who assisted Michael Ventris in deciphering Linear B, asserts that the two writings are distinct among themselves, and fails to believe that they are even of the same family, as they have been assumed to have been in the past (56).  The Phaestos Disk itself, nevertheless, bears the representations of actual material things on both the obverse and reverse.  Some of the more intriguing images are of humans include a man walking, a woman, and a man's head.  In addition, there are representations of wheat stalks, a flower, a leaf, a sickle-like piece of equipment, a hammer-like instrument, and fish.  Chadwick argues that some of these images are not seen anywhere else in any Minoan culture (58).  The implications of the disk are hard to extrapolate.  If it was made at Phaestos, it shows a sophisticated technique of writing tablets, since the images were applied while the clay was wet with clay or wooden molds.  And, if it was made elsewhere, the people of Phaestos must have acquired it through trade of some sort.  Since there is no decipherment of the tablet, it is hard to come to any real conclusion.

         The very nature of the palace of Phaestos denotes a very civilized culture.  By analyzing the palace and artifacts discovered within, archaeologists can determine the characteristics of the culture.  Social stratification, economic stability, and technological development are all apparent in the elaborate palace and decorative pottery and writing that were present in palatial Phaestos.  It is by studying all these pieces of evidence in context of each other that we can determine that these aspects of civilization evolved.  The fact that this civilization developed within two hundred and fifty years is a testimony to the rapid progress of the culture.  By studying these aspects of those who lived in Phaestos, archaeologists and art historians can determine the nature of every day life over 3500 years ago.

Back to Cover