1 See, e.g., Evans 1921, 160–61; 1928, 1:277. For an oriental-type of goddess, see Evans 1921, 51–2.
2 The spirit of the age also played an important role at the end of the 19th century: Evans probably employed universal assumptions of his time. It is difficult to decide whether Frazer influenced him either directly or indirectly. On this problem cf. Peatfield 2000, 140–41: He reconstructs a “spirit of the age” rather than a direct influence, but he possibly missed a note in Evans 1921, 3 n. 3: Here Evans cites Frazer’s “Adonis, Attis, Osiris”, which is a part of his “Golden Bough” that appeared separately and in an extended version in 1906 and deals especially with the cult of mortal youthful gods and their oriental-type mother goddesses, see e.g. Frazer 1906, 283.
3 See Evans 1921, 447 for reference to birds, snakes and double axes. Also Evans 1901, 100.
4 Evans 1901, 105–6. See also Harlan 2011 for more details about the origin of Evans’ religious concept.
5 Cf. Evans 1921, 221–23, with a depiction on p. 220, fig. 166 F.
6 For details, see Evans (1921, esp. 501–3 with fig. 360), where he describes her as a “Votary” or “Double” of the Snake Goddess.
7 See Faure 1964, 160–61.
8 Cf. Evans 1921, 159–60 with fig. 115 and Evans 1901, 170–71 for an interpretation of the scene; see also Kenna 1960, 125, no. 250.
9 According to Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki (1997, 2:660) this signet ring stylistically belongs to the MM IIIB/LM IA period, although its context is Mycenaean, i.e. LM IIIA:1 (1997, 1:168). For a description of the scene and a depiction of the signet ring cf. also Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, 2:654–59 with fig. 722.
10 See Evans 1921, 442–43 with fig. 319; Evans 1928, 2:601, fig. 373 a.
11 For a depiction, see Nilsson 1950, 205, fig. 99.
12 Depicted in Evans 1928, 2:619, fig. 388.
13 This plaque – despite its unusual motif – probably belongs to the Neopalatial period, see Boardman 1961, 46, no. 217; 47 with fig. 21. Cf. also Evans 1921, 632.
14 Karo 1930–1933, 1:18. They derive from the III and IV shaft grave, see Karo 1930–1933, 1:48 with no. 26; 1:74–5 with nos. 242–44.
15 Cf. Schliemann 1878, 307–8, with a depiction on 306, no. 423. For an overview of the history of research concerning the gold plaques and their supposed significance, see Rutkowski 1986, 82 n. 35.
16 For a detailed drawing and a reconstruction of the depiction on the rhyton, see Nörling 1995, pl. 11, figs. 1–2.
17 See Evans 1901, 101–2 with 103, fig. 2; subsequently Nilsson 1950, 120; also Rutkowski 1986, 106; 117, no. 21.
18 For illustrations of the objects, see Davaras 1980, pl. 15 (Petsophas), Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, 2:505, fig. 494 (Archanes).
19 Excavations in 1997 established a date for the sarcophagus in the LM III A:2 period, see Burke 2005, 403 with n. 2, for illustrations, see 404, figs. 1–2. For a description of the sarcophagus in general, see Long 1974, cf. also her chronological discussion on the LM III A-date of the sarcophagus on pp. 21–3.
20 Cf. Burke 2005, 404, fig. 2 for a depiction.
21 See the illustration in Burke 2005, 404, fig. 1.
22 Burke 2005, 418.
23 For an example, see the review on Privitera’s book in Müller and Stürmer 2013, esp. 448–49.
24 Briault 2007, esp. 249–56.
25 Haysom 2010, 50–2.
26 Cf. Renfrew 1985, 18–20. He based these features on observations adopted from research results of various other disciplines, e.g. from Religious Studies, Social Anthropology/Ethnology and Sociology, see Renfrew 1985, esp. 11–7.
27 For this method already applied to a range of Neopalatial rooms and buildings, among these also possible “cult rooms”, compare e.g. Letesson (2009, esp. 16–8), where he comments on the method of visibility analysis and its limitations.
28 See Löw 2001, 158–60, 271. In her study Löw, introduces the term “social goods” which she applies to all material goods, i.e. objects, including their symbolic value, see Löw 2001, 153–54. The graphic representation is drawn by Sergej Stoetzer on the basis of Löw’s theory.
29 Löw 2001, 158.
30 See Löw 2001, esp. 169–70, 210; cf. also Löw et al. 2007, 63–6. On the structuring aspect of space and the close relationship between architecture and action in general, see also Maran 2006.
31 Compare Löw 2001, 169–70; for this aspect, see also especially Rapoport 1982, esp. 88–101.
32 See Löw 2001, 205, 209, 229; also Löw et al. 2007, 65.
33 For a discussion of specific problems inherent in the detection of perception compare Löw 2001, 202–3, 208–10.
34 Bell 1992.
35 See Bell 2007, esp. 282–85, where she argues for the use of the word “ritualization” and avoidance of a definition of the term “ritual”.
36 See the precise summary in Verhoeven 2002, 21, 23 and also in Kyriakidis 2007, 10.
37 Cf. Kyriakidis 2007, 20. For a critical illumination of symbolism employed in religious ritual and the limits of its archaeological recognition, see also Wright 1995, 342–44.
38 Myres (1902–1903, 356) notes that during the time of excavation the wall at angle C was preserved up to a height of approximately 2.50 m. In Rutkowski’s times wall C–D was preserved up to a height of 1.95 m, compare Rutkowski 1991, 17. See Myres 1902–1903, 360–61 for a rough phasing of the structures on the hill; cf. also Rutkowski 1991, 17 for the date of the wall and constructional details.
39 See Rutkowski 1991, 19: He cannot exclude the possibility that the steps may also have been an addition of the second phase of the sanctuary.
40 Surface measure according to plan in Rutkowski 1991, 18, fig. 1 (cf. my fig. 2). For the idea of the “temenos” in general, see e.g. Rutkowski 1986, 75–6 and in reference to Petsophas Rutkowski 1972, 159. Possibly the presence of this temenos wall could have also turned the place on the hill into a kind of sacred enclosure: According to Lebessi and Muhly (1990, 332–33) the term “sacred enclosure” can only be used if the wall encompasses a specific ritual area and not the whole area of a sanctuary including areas used for various purposes. However, this may also apply to the initial phase on Petsophas. Therefore the term sacred enclosure could potentially be used to describe the situation on Protopalatial Petsophas as well.
41 Cf. the figurines, votive limbs, miniature vessels and clay balls illustrated in Rutkowski 1991; see also Myres 1902–1903, pls. 8–13.
42 See the depiction in Rutkowski 1991, 18, fig. 2.
43 Rutkowski (1991, 19) assumes a stone altar and a fire altar similar to the situation at Juktas, where a stone altar and also the layer of a fire altar have been found, see Karetsou 1981, 138, 146. Furthermore, no bones have been recorded from the ash layer at Petsophas, whereas at Juktas also bones were found; cf. Cromarty 2008, 34–5, 37–8.
44 Cf. the rough room size given in Rutkowski (1986, 80), apparently only meant to apply to room no. 1: 7.20 m x 3.70 m. For constructional and chronological details, see Rutkowski 1991, 20: In this phase also the walls D–F and D–E were built. Room no. 5 seems to have been an open-air area.
45 See Rutkowski 1991, 20.
46 According to Myres (1902–1903, 360) this lamp came from room no. 1, dating to the same phase as the building.
47 Myres 1902–1903, 359.
48 The small height of the bench is not singular, see e.g. the benches of room VIII of the palace at Phaistos in Gesell (1985, 120) and the bench of room XVIII 1 of the palace at Malia (Gesell 1985, 106), and thus might not contradict such a use.
49 These came mainly from the area to the east and south of the building, cf. Davaras 1972, 102, with illustrations. They date to the MM III–LM I period, see Rutkowski 1991, 16. Cf. also Davaras 1972, 102–3, and Warren 1969, 62–7: The material (serpentine) was mainly used from MM III onwards. At least eight different specimens could be distinguished belonging to the area of Petsophas, see Warren 1969, 65–7, and Davaras 1972; 1981. In addition, more figurines were found in the rock crevices of the area, cf. Rutkowski 1991, 17, and Davaras 1981, 1, but these obviously only date to the first phase of occupation on the hill, MM I and MM II; see Rutkowski 1991, 16 with n. 27; 29, 119–20. Moreover, fragments of vessels were found inside the cultic area: Kyriakidis (2005, 136, table 10) mentions clay cooking pots, but does not provide any reference. Rutkowski (1991, 113 n. 10) refers to an “immense number of fragmentary vases” on the surface of the area, but the precise character of these vases and their date remains obscure. Furthermore Kyriakidis (2005, 132, table 8) mentions “plates, fine, clay”, but by checking Rutkowski (1991, 115) and Myres (1902–1903, 378–80), these “plates” presumably turn out to be very small discs but not plates with a reasonable function “for feasting” as suggested by Kyriakidis. The performance of activities related to cult other than the use of libation tables on Neopalatial Petsophas must therefore remain vague.
50 They originate from the south-western area of the building and presumably date to MM III–LM I as well: See Davaras 1980, 89, 90–1 with n. 15, who dates them – due to their findspot and their supposed original placement inside the building – to the time of the building’s existence and preferably to the end of this period.
51 Compare Davaras 1980, 91 with n. 15; 92. As these plaster double horns at Petsophas were quite small, they might have also been a kind of votive offering themselves.
52 See the depiction in Rutkowski 1991, 19, on the top of the page (fig. 3).
53 Cf. the depiction on the Grandstand Fresco, e.g. in Nörling 1995, pl. 8.3. Myres (1902–1903, 360) observed a relative continuity of the two successive phases at Petsophas: The building itself must have been almost directly erected above the former cult area, for no layer of vegetation was found between the two strata. This could indeed hint at a continuity of function as well. Nevertheless, Myres interprets the building as a secular one, while many other researchers assigned a cultic function to it: See Rutkowski 1991, 16, 20; equally Nilsson 1950, 70. It is perhaps safer to assign a function as a kind of backdrop for cultic actions to the building at Petsophas, subsequently, also an outer appearance of its façade similar to the iconographic evidence is at least possible. I thank Professor Peter Warren for this comment (pers. comm. 2011); for a similar view on the function of the tripartite façades, cf. Majewski 1960, esp. 59–60.
54 They are situated beneath quarters III and IV, with room α lying in the area beneath room III 2, room β lying mainly beneath room III 1 and a part of III 2 and III 7a, and room γ lying principally beneath rooms III 7a and IV 1, see Pelon 1992, 72, plan 6. As already mentioned, the complex of rooms dates to the MM II period, cf. Pelon 1982, 182 with n. 47; 1983, 701.
55 Pelon 1983, 683. The room measures approx. 38 m² for its preserved parts according to the plan in Pelon 1983, 685, fig. 9 (cf. my fig. 3); see also Pelon 1980, 54 with further references; 1982, 176, 178.
56 It comprises an area of approx. 65 m², cf. Pelon 1983, 693.
57 See Pelon 1982, 178: Probably the two walls would have reached up to the ceiling. However, according to Pelon (1983, 693) they could have been the remains of walls rather than pillars.
58 The room measures approx. 52 m², in its middle a double wooden post was inserted to support the ceiling, see Pelon (1983, 693) and Pelon 1992, 36. For the window-like niche, cf. Pelon 1983, 686.
59 Chapouthier 1946, 88–9; Pelon 1982, 168. For a photo of the juglets, see Pelon 1982, 169, fig. 7. A religious significance of the Chamaizi juglets connected with a supposed pillar cult was already presumed by Pelon (1982, 185). See also the reference to libations in Pelon 1983, 695.
60 Chapouthier 1938, esp. 15–6; Pelon 1982, 166. For a photo showing a reconstruction of the deposition of the swords as originally found and for a drawing of the gold decoration on the pommel, see Pelon 1992, 35, fig. 13 and 37, fig. 16.
61 As implied by Pelon 1983, 696.
62 Pelon 1983, 691, fig. 15; 692.
63 For the remains of stone vases, see Pelon 1982, 166, 172; Chapouthier 1938, 13; for the fragment of the ivory relief compare Chapouthier and Gallet de Santerre 1947–1948, 406; Pelon 1982, 172–73 with fig. 13–14; 180. This fragment could actually have also belonged to the ivory pommel of the second bronze sword found in the room. However, it is not clear from the drawings whether the fragment’s parts that look like legs are broken or intact and worked out; for the fragment of a lamp, see Pelon 1983, 686.
64 The remains of white, reddish brown and perhaps also ochre-yellow plaster were found, indicating a decoration of the floor and the walls, cf. Pelon 1983, 693. The same decoration was also applied to room γ.
65 Pelon 1983, 683. The low platforms were plastered, see Pelon 1982, 178.
66 Pelon 1983, 695: He compares the tripartite structure to the depictions on the gold sheets from Mycenae, the Grandstand Fresco and the three-roomed building at Anemospilia, where a stone basin at the entrance of the central room was perhaps also used for the performance of libations, see Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, 1:279. For the measurements of the three oblong parts, see Pelon 1983, 687.
67 See supra n. 66.
68 Compare equally Pelon 1983, 687.
69 Pelon 1982, 178–79.
70 Pelon 1983, 687, 689. The small cavities have a depth of approx. 4–7 cm, see Pelon (1983, 687) for the measurements and a photo of the cavities on 682, fig. 7. In addition, contrary to Pelon’s opinion, it should be noted that the liquids – according to the slightly greater depth of the channel in the direction of the wall, also noted by Pelon (1983, 687 n. 24) – even if they were first collected in the larger cavity, would then have directly run towards the wall. Despite this fact, Pelon (1983, 687 with n. 24; 689) adheres to the assumption that the liquids must have run through the channel into the larger cavity.
71 For the libation tables compare Warren 1969, 62–8, especially those dating to the Protopalatial period. Two of the “fruit stands” found in the annexing room ε mentioned below in more detail might have also fitted into at least one of the circular cavities, see no. 2 and no. 3 in Pelon and Stürmer 1989, 103 with fig. 3–6.
72 For a proposed reconstruction of room β, see also Pelon 1983, 694, fig. 18.
73 It comprises two column bases in its western part and was probably also furnished with platforms and channels along the wall, remains of which have been found, see Chapouthier 1938, pls. 1, 2.2, 3.1 and 4.1, as well as Pelon 1983, 680, 682 with n. 5; 683; Pelon 1982, 176 with n. 27; 178. Perhaps even a collecting vessel belonged to this room, see Pelon 1982, 176 n. 27; 1980, 54 with pl. 6.1. This could indicate that libations might even have been performed inside this vestibule, perhaps on special occasions, but this must remain uncertain.
74 See supra n. 58 and n. 64.
75 These effects of the sunlight will be treated in more detail in a forthcoming paper especially on this Protopalatial complex of rooms in the palace at Malia, which is due to be published in a commemorative volume in honour of Veit Stürmer.
76 For more details on the surrounding rooms, see Pelon 1984, 881, 884 with fig. 1; Pelon 1980, 235–242 as well as the latest results in Stürmer 2013, 28 and 31 with fig. 7, 12; 33 with n. 21. The reasons for the state of excavation are given by Pelon 1983, 687 n. 23 and Stürmer 2013, 21–2, 26, 28, 33, who mentions also the palace’s major building phases relevant for the investigation of these rooms. For the fruit stands, dating to MM II, and their possible representative significance compare Pelon and Stürmer 1989, 103–6 with fig. 3–11; 109–10; for a rather cultic function, see Stürmer 1992, 160; equally Schiering 1998, 78. For a possible placement of some of the vases in room β, see also supra n. 71.
77 Equally Pelon 1992, 36.
78 Compare also Pelon 1983, 695, who equally hints at the use of the platforms, collecting vessels and juglets during the course of libations. Cf. Pelon 1982, 185 with n. 55, who brings up similar findings and refers to a supposed pillar cult, as it was first coined by Evans (1901, esp. 105–6, 111), and later adopted and revised by Nilsson 1950, esp. 243–48. For a more moderate view, see also Rutkowski 1986, 37–45. The installations in room β superficially resemble those known from the eastern magazines of the Old Palace, which were used to store liquids: In contrast to room β these magazines comprised platforms with transverse channels to collect the liquid surplus of vessels standing on them. These transverse channels again ran into a long channel which itself in turn ran lengthwise of the platforms and then ended in a collecting vessel inserted into the floor, as is the case in room β, cf. Pelon 1980, 198–203; 1992, 44–6. All in all, room β is arranged differently to the eastern magazines: There are no transverse channels, equally no magazine compartments with connecting passages can be found, which are common to all magazines and are also found in the western magazines of the same palace. Moreover the eastern magazines were not furnished with plastered walls. Only the width of the platforms and also their height are approx. the same, measuring about 0.7 m (width) and 0.1 m (height); see Pelon 1980, 201, for the eastern magazines; Pelon 1982, 174 with fig. 16; 179; 1983, 687, 689, for room β. This at least implies that the superposition of vessels in room β would have generally been possible. For a comparison of both complexes, see also Pelon 1982, 178, 184; 1983, 695, and also the very first reference to them in Chapouthier 1938, 13.
79 Cf. Pelon 1983, 694, fig. 18 with comment.
* I would like to dedicate this paper to the memory of my late doctoral advisor, Dr Veit Stürmer, who encouraged me to conduct a thesis on Minoan “cult rooms” and to whom I owe a lot. This paper is a preliminary version of parts of this doctoral thesis, with a special focus on the history of research concerning the development of Minoan cultic symbolism, an aspect deriving from my work on “cult rooms”. For the correction of my English I would like to thank Anna Hodgkinson.