Peak Sanctuaries. Peatfield defines a peak sanctuary as "a site on or near the summit of a mountain, situated to maximize human interaction (visually and physically accessible from areas of human habitation and exploitation), and identified as a shrine by the presence of specific groups of animal and human clay figurines, including anatomical models, all interpreted as votive offerings" (Peatfield 1992, 60). When peak sanctuaries first appeared is still in debate. The earliest one appears to have been on Mt. Jouktas, associated with Crete's first "city" at Knossos. The material remains here date back to the Early Minoan II period, although the extent to which the space was viewed as sacred remains debatable (Nowicki 2001, 35). Otherwise, most peak sanctuaries date from Early Minoan III to Middle Minoan I, with their high point (no pun intended) occurring in the Middle Minoan period (Nowicki 2001, 35).
From 2000 to 1650 b. c.e., there were as many as twenty-five peak sanctuaries on Crete, mostly concentrated in the east. Although high, they were accessible by foot within a few hours' walk from the nearest town, and both physical and visual links between the sanctuary and nearby residential areas seem to have been crucial in the placement of the sanctuaries (Peatfield 1992, 60). During this period, peak shrines were built up architecturally. Walls surrounded the temenos, or sacred space, and horns of consecration were common embellishments. The presence of column bases at the sites may indicate that there were roofed structures, although this would seem to contradict the point of having a sanctuary so close to the sky, and the columns may have instead been freestanding baetalic images. Several rooms are attested to at some elaborate shrines, such as the one at Mt. Jouktas, as well as built, permanent altars. Such architectural structures are not only attested to in the archaeological remains, but also in the iconography: A depiction of a peak sanctuary on a rhyton (funnel-like object) from Zakros shows a multifaceted structure with what appears to be several rooms.
Not all peak sanctuaries were so built up, though. The Atsipadhes shrine, in use through the Middle Minoan II period, was completely natural. The shrine had two terraces; the upper terrace may have functioned as some manner of adyton, or holy-of-holies. A circular area surrounded by river pebbles was, apparently, the center of the cult focus; something standing here would easily be seen from both terraces. A shallow impression may have accommodated an offering vessel, baetyl, or idol. The lower terrace was replete with clay votives, including a number of human figurines. It is probable that rituals took place here, in full view of the "deity" located on the upper terrace (Peatfield 2001, 54-55).
The votives from these sanctuaries are pretty consistent throughout Crete. Clay figurines are the most common, including both male and female humans in a variety of poses, as well as animals and individual body parts. Pebbles, and even shells, also appear in many peak sanctuaries. Less common votives, found only sporadically, are pottery, offering tables, and bronze implements, including a few labrydes.
In the Second Palace period (1650-1450 b. c.e.), the use of peak sanctuaries was deliberately limited to those few associated with the palaces. It seems that in the Middle Minoan III-Late Minoan I periods, only about six to eight sanctuaries were still in use, and by the Late Minoan II, Mt. Jouktas was the only peak sanctuary left. Early in this period, new rituals appeared at Jouktas, Kophinas, Traostalos, Vrysinas, and Petsophas. Here were found burnt and carbonized materials, occasionally even bones, showing a new use of burnt offerings.
What rites took place on the peaks of Crete, and to what deities were they dedicated? The usual assumption about the latter is that a weather god, like Zeus, was worshipped in peak sanctuaries, thus the close association with the sky. However, one of the few depictions we have of a deity on a mountaintop is the so-called Mistress of the Mountain seal from Late Minoan II Knossos. It is certainly likely that, as with the cave sanctuaries (see below), the peaks were dedicated to different deities or, following Peatfield (2001), none at all. Instead, Peatfield argues that the peaks may have been used purely for ritual action, where Minoans could gather, dance, etc., without reference to any specific deity (Peatfield 2001, passim). Other ritual performances must have included dedications of stones, shells, figurines, both human and animal, and animal sacrifice (ibid.).
Cave Sanctuaries. Caves were important to the Cretans since Neolithic times. At first, caves served as dwellings; later, they were used for laying out the dead—like a modern-day mausoleum. By the Middle Minoan period, they served religious functions. There were three categories of cave sanctuary: the grotto, which is mainly a large niche; the simple cave, which is deep but with little more than one "room"; and the complex cave, possibly bordering on the completely labyrinthine (which certainly was appropriate for the Minoans). Thirty-six such sanctuaries are attested to from Minoan Crete (Rutkowski 1986, 9). The majority contain elaborate stalagmites and stalactites, as well as water sources. These features were probably responsible for the sacred mystique of these caves, and it is likely the stalagmites and stalactites were seen as baetyls (ibid.).
Different deities were worshipped in the different cave shrines, as can be determined by the variety of votive goods dedicated. In a few very rare instances, the deity's identity has been determined by a combination of votives, Linear B evidence, and later historical references. One such example is the cave sanctuary of Eileithyia at Amnissos. Within the cave, about 10 feet from the entrance, is a smooth, rounded stone formation with a "belly-button" indentation. Farther along is a stalagmite resembling a female body (the head was chopped off in antiquity). The female imagery, especially the "pregnant belly," suggests a birth goddess. This identification is enhanced by references in the Linear B tablets to dedications to Eileithyia at Amnissos. Finally, Eileithyia's cave is mentioned in the Odyssey. Together, the imagery, Linear B evidence, and later literature argue that this cave was sacred to the birth goddess (Rutkowski 1986, 51).
Beyond evidence for sacrifice and drinking, we do not know what the Mi-noans did in the cave sanctuaries. Their dark, mystic setting, combined with later stories of shaman-like rituals taking place in them, has led Loeta Tyree, the leading expert on Minoan cave sanctuaries, to suggest that they were used in some manner of vision-quest ritual, whereby the worshipper placed her-self/himself into an altered state of consciousness to encounter a deity (Tyree 2001, 43-44).
Sacred Enclosures. The term sacred enclosure was originally coined by the early Aegeanist M. P. Nilsson to describe what appeared to be walled, ritual structures portrayed in Minoan glyptic art. He defined a sacred enclosure as "rustic sanctuaries consisting of an enclosure with a gate-way, or free-standing portal with a sacred tree, and sometimes a baetyl, or a sacred column" (Nilsson 1950, 270-271) as per the iconography. At the time Nilsson was writing, no such sacred enclosure had ever been found on the ground.
This changed in the 1970s when A. Lebessi and P. Muhly excavated the sanctuary of Kato Symi Viannou in central Crete. This sanctuary is one of the longest-lived in ancient Greece, used continuously from the Middle Minoan period through the third century c. e. By the historical period, it was associated with Aphrodite and Hermes, although the original Minoan deities worshipped there are more difficult to determine.
By the early sixteenth century b. c.e. (Phase B of the sanctuary), the sanctuary consisted of three main structures: an area of 530 square meters surrounded by a massive enclosing/supporting wall, a paved road some 2 meters wide flanked by low curbs and separated from the wall by a drain, and a rectangular platform constructed of limestone blocks that had an initial height of more than 1.5 meters (Lebessi and Muhly 1990, 319-321). There is no evidence of a roof having been over any of these structures. The road seems to have led initially from a nearby spring, around the enclosure wall, into the enclosure on the eastern side. The platform was located within the walls, and the road must have included a ramp to allow worshippers access to the platform.
The pottery from the sanctuary is mainly gustatory in nature: chalices and goblets for drinking, libation vessels, conical cups, and dishware. The areas between the platform and walls were filled with a thick, black stratum consisting of carbonized wood mixed with animal bones. It was originally thought that the bones were the remains of sacrificial victims. However, as nothing at the site appears to have been an altar, and as the bones themselves were not burned, the hypothesis of sacrifice has been replaced with one of sacred meals celebrated at Kato Symi, with, perhaps, the head of the main course being reserved for the deity or deities. It seems that some manner of ritual picnic took place at Kato Symi (Lebessi and Muhly 1990, 327).
To date, Kato Symi is the only archaeologically recognized sacred enclosure. What is ironic is that this enclosure does not conform to the original "sacred enclosures" identified in the glyptic art. There is no clear evidence for a baetyl at Kato Symi (although there were some boulders at the site, usually avoided in construction), nor a sacred column or tree (although the latter would hardly be expected to have survived). Lebessi and Muhly have therefore revised the original definition of a sacred enclosure. Recognizing that sacred enclosures might have fulfilled a number of different ritual functions over time and across populations, they gave a more general definition: "an unroofed area serving specific cult purposes and consequently having a specific architectural plan" (Lebessi and Muhly 1990, 332). Thus, sacred enclosures accommodating tree cults would contain trees; likewise, columns would be present at sites used for column cults. Kato Symi was, rather, a feasting cult, with structures serving this purpose.
Town and House Shrines. Although the Minoans were nature-oriented in their art and sacred spaces, they did live in cities and towns (see chapter 4), and it can hardly be considered unusual that they had sacred rooms in houses and town centers as well as on mountain peaks. Such town or house shrines have been discovered at Gournia (Fournou Koriphi Myrto, possibly), Haghia Triadha, Koumasa, Malia, Pseira, Palaikastro, Haghia Iirini on Keos, Rousses Chondrou, and Khannia-Mitropolis.
What marks out a town shrine from all the buildings surrounding it in the city? There are five criteria archaeologists use to distinguish a shrine from the surrounding secular structures: (1) access from a high-traffic area, preferably a city square; (2) access through a stepped entrance (perhaps symbolic?); (3) wide entrances (for ease of entrance and egress of large bodies of worshippers); (4) axial alignment (doors on the short end of rectangular structures); and (5) architectural embellishment (think St. Peter's Cathedral) (Driessen 2000a, 90).
One town shrine is the structure near which the Palaikastro Kouros was discovered. This building (Building 5), dating to the Late Minoan I period, is located just south of Street 3-4 and the town plateia (city square). Thus, it fulfilled the first requirement above. The main, and only, entrance on the ground level led into a narrow, paved vestibule (Room 1); this led into the larger, square Room 2, which was probably the focus of whatever rituals were held in the shrine. In the floor of Room 2 was a depression containing votive items, which the archaeologists refer to as a "sacrificial pit" (Driessen 2000b, 38). Although bits and pieces of the Palaikastro Kouros were found all over the area, it was probably originally set in this room. Finally, opposite the vestibule was Room 13, a large storage room (with items still in it) and a staircase allowing access to/from the upper floors. Many of the walls were of a fine style of masonry called ashlar. The line of Rooms 1, 2, and 13 conforms to the axial alignment pattern of town shrines, and the ashlar masonry definitely counts as architectural embellishment—thus fulfilling criteria 4 and 5 above.
World History
