Two aspects of Mycenaean centers remain poorly known. The first is the reason for the delay between the rise of elite burials at the MH-LH transition, and the first definite construction phases of the palace complexes, securely dated from the fourteenth century (early LH3A). The second is, to what extent were the major fortified acropoleis surrounded by towns, and were these large or small? For the first question, there are several sites where elite residences are evidenced or claimed from LH2, such as the Menelaion near Sparta (Rutter 2005), and an LH1—2 mansion (?) at Pylos (Nelson 2007). Warren’s theory that the delayed appearance of full palaces is a consequence of the Mycenaean takeover of Minoan civilization around 1500 BC remains a powerful explanation for this uneven development of the Southern Mainland over time.
For query two, Mycenaean Lower Towns are becoming better known. LH3B Tiryns possesses a surrounding settlement of 25 ha. Extensive survey of the Lower Town outside the Mycenae citadel suggests an extent of 30 ha (although dispersed cemeteries might reduce the settled area). Intensive survey around the Pylos palace indicates a surrounding town also of at least 15—30 ha. On a comparative scale, these central-places appear to be modest, but consistent with the scale of their inferred territorial states. They compare well to the size of city-state foci in the Early and Middle Bronze Age Levant, and to the lesser palatial centers of Minoan Crete (Bintliff 2002).
Nonetheless, the internal planning and range of house types in Lower Towns remain largely unknown. Clusters of tombs in the Mycenae Lower Town might represent dispersed house-zones rather than a monolithic block of residences. Darcque has recently argued (2005) that the excavated houses closest to the Citadel are all extensions of the palace-complex, rather than representing the houses, workshops or stores of independent merchants and craftsmen.
Our understanding of the internal plans of the Citadels has advanced through studying access routes
Figure 7.4 The palace at Pylos in LH3B: the Great Megaron reconstructed.
Watercolor by Piet de Jong, digitally edited by Craig Mauzy. Courtesy of Department of Classics, University of Cincinnati.
And functional differentiation (Cavanagh 2001, Muhlenbruch 2003, Thaler 2006; cf. Figure 7.2). Mycenaean palaces focus on a modest-sized “Great Court” which faces onto a special large building, the Great Megaron (Figure 7.4). From the main entrance to the Citadel, the way to this heart leads through a series of gates or doors and passageways, and is complex and indirect. On the route from the entrance of the Citadel to the core of the palatial complex would be placed the archive rooms, storehouses for oil, wine, and grain, and perhaps residential areas for members of the elite. At Pylos this last role has been argued for the Southwest Building, which has its own court (left of the Great Megaron on the plan in Figure 7.2), but other scholars suggest this open area was for social feasting.
How influential in this design was Minoan palatial architecture? Only the first Pylos palace is a court-centered plan, succeeded by this more characteristic Mainland layout, although the later Minoan palaces also made access to the center of the complex tortuous. Taking the normal late Mycenaean palace as described above for our comparison, the Minoan Central Court is far grander than the Great Court, and considered as a “theatrical zone” where major events were staged, initially for the general populace but later more for the elite. Views and alignments to distant landmarks, some of ritual significance, are also a feature on Crete. Yet although Mycenaean Great Courts are smaller in scale, and lack distant views, it is probable that major events also occurred within them, whilst the upper floors around and above them might have functioned as spectator areas. The visual focus on the Megaron, the seat of power, is a striking contrast to Minoan architecture. Mycenaean art represents processions, and there is speculation that at Mycenae and Tiryns the elite may have used the Citadel entrance route directed to the Great Court for formal movements, perhaps leading into sacrifices in the
Great Megaron porch and within the inner hall of the Megaron itself, for which there is some evidence. Other details of Mycenaean palatial architecture nonetheless show clear Minoan influences, such as light wells (unroofed internal rooms to introduce sunlight) andpolythyra (folding doors).
At the same time, possible parallels in Near Eastern states can be cited, for example the palace of the city-state of Ugarit, where we find a similar access route, archive location and a court associated with a great hall. However one clear contrast between the Levant and Minoan-Mycenaean palatial-citadel plans is the low profile and limited scale of formal shrines in the latter (notably the excavated tiny Mycenae ritual complex). This has been taken to suggest that both of the Aegean civilizations may have tied ritual to secular power, so that “public spaces” could have been also places for religious ceremonies.
Apart from the focal Great Megaron, agreed to be the audience hall of the state ruler (throne emplacements are reconstructed at Pylos and Tiryns), several palace plans have additional megaron-style complexes, seen as possible residences or reception halls for other members of the elite.
World History
