A Late Minoan III Propylon at Haghia Triada (with N. Cucuzza)

A LATE MINOAN III PROPYLON AT HAGHIA TRIADA

1. IntroductionA new survey of the whole area around the «Great Stoa» or Stoà dell’Agorà of Haghia

Triada 1 has allowed us to examine more closely the southern access to the large open area,the so-called Piazzale dell’Agorà, whose eastern part is made up of this huge Stoà. Thesouthern access to this Piazzale leads along the western wall of the Bastione, and then withan almost right-angled turn eastwards around its northwestern corner. Some Meters afterthat corner there is a threshold made of greyish calcite stone: an architectural feature whichhad previously indicated the possible existence of a propylon or at least the desire to markthe point of access to the Piazzale 2. A detailed examination of the surrounding wall struc-tures in question has made it possible to determine that this threshold was actually part ofan entranceway or a real propylon at that important point of access to this quarter, erectedin LM III.

NICOLA CUCUZZA - NILS HELLNER

2. DescriptionThe typical ground-floor plan of a propylon consists of two parallel walls which are

connected with a central step in the manner that it forms a «H». On the plan of Stefanifrom 1914 (see fig. 1) one could observe at the southern entrance of the «piazzale» anextending wall, which seems to be attached to the massive and still high-standing pre-served northern wall of the Bastione ( fig. 2). The careful observation reveals two facts: atfirst there is no technical connection between the wall of the Bastione and this 4.28 m longand 0.69 m thick wall 3. Secondly each end of it is made in the common technique of a cor-ner bond with big ashlars, which have the width of the wall in every second row; where-

1 The survey was carried out in 2006 by N. Hellnerwith the help of Daniele Pellizzoni and GiuliaGelletti, post-graduate students in Architecture at theUniversity of Trieste. First of all, N. Hellner has tothank the INSTAP for the generous grant to under-take a survey of the whole area of the Piazzale. Wealso wish to express our deep gratitude to VincenzoLa Rosa and his team, especially to Filippo Carinci,Pietro Militello, Orazio Palio and Santo Privitera forhelpful discussions based on their years of experiencein Haghia Triada and Phaistos. Finally, it is impor-tant to mention that the whole survey was made pos-sible by the generous help of the Trieste representa-

tive of LEICA Geosystems S.p.A. Italia, Mario Mocari-ni, who agreed to lend us a LEICA 405TCR withcomplete additional equipment in flight cases.

The dimensions in this article are always given inmeters; meters are divided from centimeters by a fullstop «.».

2 CUCUZZA 2003, pp. 222, 262 and 266.3As N. Cucuzza observed, at the western end of

this wall the lowest ashlar is thicker than the wall: itprotrudes by about 20 cm. The ashlar in question is0.88 ✕ 0.66 m with a height of 0.44 m and is builtwith its shorter side along the wall.

Creta Antica 10/II, 2009

as the remaining space on the long side is filled respectively with smaller stones and someashlars only. These two facts have led to the conclusion that this wall was constructedintentionally to this length and was not a simple secondary structure to sustain the even-tually unstable north-western wall of the Bastione. The wall is still preserved at the heightof 1.59 m at its east end ( figs 4, 5, 7), which corresponds to 1.25 m above the centralthreshold; at its western end the preserved height is 1.10 m. It must be the southern wallof the Propylon.

On the opposite side of this southern Propylon wall the missing counterpart, the north-ern wall, could be identified as incorporated in a later wall, which constitutes the south-ern limits of rooms W/1 and W/2. On the Stefani plan of 1914 ( fig. 2) this northern Propylonwall is well distinguished as a central part of the wall ( fig. 3) and nowadays it is still clear-ly visible as a separate part. The two additional walls on each of its sides towards east andwest differ: the height of the used ashlars changes and the more recent ones have their sur-face smoothed by a chisel ( figs. 8, 9). The ashlars of the western addition show detailswhich make technically no sense and thus indicate their secondary use: the lowest ashlarhas a cut of almost 45 degrees and the highest preserved ashlar of this wall has on its low-er eastern side a little step ( fig. 8). In the eastern addition one of these reused ashlars has amason’s mark.

This northern Propylon wall has a length of 4.20 m and is 0.70 m thick. Its easternend is still preserved with a height of 1.68 m and its western end at 0.93 m. The connec-tion between this northern wall is certain, as it is built in the same way as its oppositecounterpart, namely with smaller stones between the eastern and western ends, whichcould be defined as antae. These antae are build with well elaborated ashlars of which thewestern end has three rows preserved ( fig. 8); in the eastern end five rows sit on a sub-structure of smaller stones. This substructure may very well be a restoration dating backto the year 1959 4, as a reddish cement mortar and unusual stones, comprising a very whitecalcite and a greyish stone show ( fig. 9).

The central threshold has the height of 25 cm (34.12 m over sea level) and is con-structed with four huge slabs. The two slabs at the walls are almost square 5, the two in themiddle are long and rectangular ( figs. 3, 6). The two regular ones at the walls are proba-bly bases for the vertical timbers of a door frame and they are better preserved than the twolonger ones in the middle part, as these were most subject to wear by foot traffic. The totallength of the threshold is 3.04 m and its width 0.57 m. The step, that means the westernend of the four slabs, is located from the western antae with the distance of 1.50 m at thenorthern wall and 1.45 m at the southern one, whereas the same western limit of the stepis located from the eastern end of the antae with the distance of 2.67 m at the northernwall and 2.70 m at the southern one.

As the two Propylon-walls run almost perfectly parallel to each other and they havealmost the same length, the threshold between them is located more towards the West andis not perfectly squared to the two accompanying walls.

On the north-western, rear side of the northern Propylon wall it can be observed thatit is constructed against a terrace wall, which runs northwards almost in the middle of the

NICOLA CUCUZZA - NILS HELLNER502

4 In 1959, red mortar was used in restorationscarried out in Megaron ABCD at Haghia Triada.

5 The northern slab has the dimensions of 0.57 ✕

0.51 m (at West) and 0.49 m (at East); the southernslab 0.57 ✕ 0.47 m.


northern Propylon wall. The northern Propylon wall is built at an angle of almost 90 degreesto this terrace wall. The lowest row of this terrace wall is built with huge ashlars and inthe meeting point of the two walls the terrace wall continues under the Propylon wall.Between the next north-western ashlar of the Propylon wall and the continuing, though ear-lier ashlar of the lowest row of the terrace wall, the remaining gap is filled with smallerstones, as if this remaining gap could not be filled with a bigger ashlar hewn in the exactdimensions to fill the gap. In the upper layers of the two walls the things change: the ter-race wall is erected with a step back towards northeast from about 15 cm. At this level ahuge ashlar of the Propylon wall is positioned upon the lowest row of the terrace wall andcontinues through; the stones of the terrace wall are built against it. This shows that thePropylon was erected at a time when at least the lowest row of the terrace wall existed. Thefollowing three ashlar rows in the terrace wall have no further connection with the Propylonwall, which could indicate that they were cut exactly to fit the Propylon wall (see fig. 10).

Under the step of the Propylon passes a channel, which leads the water from the south-western part of the Piazzale down to the corner of the ex Casa del lebete.

To the east of the Propylon, attached to the wall of the Bastione, there is a stone benchwith length of 1.29, width of 0.52 m, and height of 0.50 m. The upper block which wasused as a seat, is a reused threshold (l 1.29, w 0.50 ✕ h 0.20 m), with the notch for the doorhinges (diam. 5 cm) preserved. A second bench is located to the west of the northern wall(l 2.55, w 0.51/0.52, h 0.40 m).

As we only have the ground-floor plan of the Propylon, the roof could be hypotheti-cally reconstructed as follows: up to six wooden architraves about the height of 0.40 mwould traverse the two lateral walls; these probably bore at an angle of 90 degrees a coverfrom lighter beams side by side. Another flat cover consisting of reed and clay, and reach-ing further 0.40 m. in height was probably placed over this wooden construction. A lowattic has to be imagined to prevent the clay from being washed down in the case of heavyrain, so the the total height of the roof construction should have been 0.80 m. ( fig. 11).

N.H.

3. Excavation dataThe area of the Propylon was excavated in 1905, and again in 1910. The Bastione was

fully brought to light in 1905 6. For some time, the building formed the northern bound-ary of the excavations. It was really only in 1910 that the excavations were continuednorthwards; this meant that while the southern wall of the Propylon was brought to lightin 1905, the rest of this structure was not excavated until five years later. This circum-stance may explain why we have little information about the excavation of this area.However, the network of paths in which the Propylon is located was carefully examined byEnrico Stefani in 1910-1912. He provided a precise description of it and in May 1912 alsocarried out a small-scale excavation to better understand the channel that runs from the

A LATE MINOAN III PROPTLON AT HAGHIA TRIADA 503

6 Cf. F. HALBHERR, Lavori eseguiti dalla MissioneArcheologica Italiana in Creta (15/12/1903 -15/4/1905), in RendLinc 14, 1905, pp. 365-405. Onthe early excavations at Haghia Triada, V. LA ROSA,

«il colle sul quale sorge la chiesa ad Ovest è tutto semina-to di cocci…». Haghia Triada: vicende e temi di unoscavo di lungo corso, in Creta Antica 4, 2003, pp. 11-68.


southern part of the Piazzale dell’Agorà under the Propylon (exactly in the middle) and thenturns to the north-west. With the aid of this description and Stefani’s drawings (figs. 12,13), we can deduce that the road surface was made up of a layer of tarrazza (consisting ofmortar and very small pebbles) superimposed over a second layer of astraki, 0.06 m thick,which in turn was on top of a bed of pebbles (Appendix, text A; fig. 14). Moreover, Stefani’snotebooks mention the existence of a wall later than LM III, built to the north-west of thePropylon. In his examination of the area, Stefani rightly inferred an LM III dating for thethreshold of the Propylon, but he assumed that the southern wall of the structure was justa «sperone» (buttress) for the Bastione wall (Appendix, text B). During LM III this build-ing was in part refurbished and re-used, as is shown by the monumental staircase accessi-ble from the Piazzale dell’Agorà.

The close relationship between channel, Piazzale and Propylon clearly shows that thethree structures were built according to an overall plan, at least with regard to the south-ern part of the Piazzale dell’Agorà. The tarrazza floor paving described by Stefani in thePropylon area might be very similar to that still extant in the Piazzale, opposite the south-ernmost room (Room 1) of the Stoà dell’Agorà. The threshold of the Propylon has the samealignment as the north-south wall that delimited the Piazzale on its western side. Thiswall, with its stepped foundations, appears to be earlier than the northern wall of thePropylon ( fig. 3).

N.C.

4. The propylon in Minoan and Mycenaean architectureProper propyla, that is, architectural structures that are often free-standing and have

an axial and symmetrical layout (generally on an «H» plan), are not found in Minoan pala-tial architecture 7. One possible exception is the South Propylaeum in the Palace at Knossos,which probably went through two different architectural phases, the more recent one dat-ing to LM IA8. This structure, with an axial layout and two columns between antae on eachside, was not free-standing but rather the monumentalization of the entrance to a sectionof the Palace. It was inside the Palace, and illumination was probably through a cleresto-ry. What is more, the most monumental entrances in Minoan Crete architecture thus farknown (above all, the palaces) are characterized by a lack of symmetry: the best known isvery probably the monumental «propylaeum» of the second Palace at Phaistos, which hasa small extremely off-centre doorway opening in staircase 39 9. The same can be said of theWest Porch, the entrance to the Palace at Knossos from the West Court: the passageway tothe Corridor of the Procession is located in the south-eastern corner of the structure 10. Also


7 M.-C. HELLMANN, L’architecture grecque 2. Architec-ture religieuse et funéraire, Paris 2006, p. 181. Cf. W.B.DINSMOOR Jr, The Propylaia to the Athenian Akropolis,I. The predecessors, Glückstadt 1980.

8PM II, pp. 686-718; C.F. MACDONALD, The Neo-palatial Palaces of Knossos, in J. DRIESSEN - I. SCHOEP -R. LAFFINEUR eds, Monuments of Minos. Rethinking theMinoan Palaces (Louvain-la-Neuve, 14-15 December2001), Aegaeum 23, 2002, pp. 35-54, 37-39. S.

HILLER, The South Propylaeum of the Palace ofKnossos, in Pepragména toú D' Dieqnoúv Krhtologikoú

Sunedríou, A’, Aqäna 1980, pp. 216-232 for a criticalevaluation of Evans’s restoration; cf. HITCHCOCK

2000, pp. 75-77.9 Festòs II, pp. 305-326; see also HITCHCOCK 2000,

pp. 69-71.10PM II, pp. 660-685.


very similar is the so-called Chiosco E at Haghia Triada, in use during LM IIIA ( fig. 15).Among the various architectural structures to be found in Minoan Crete, this is perhapsthe closest to a true propylon: even though it lacks symmetry, it is free-standing, as it onlyleans against the southern wall of Megaron ABCD. Moreover, Chiosco E was a passagewaybetween two open spaces, the Piazzale superiore to the east and a small open courtyard (witha raised walkway) to the west 11. Again at Haghia Triada, it has been suggested that theruins of a Neopalatial room buttressed to the south-western corner of the Bastione were thefoundations of an LM I propylon with a monumental façade on Piazzale 10 12. If this were thecase, it would be a long but not very wide room with a narrow, off-centre passageway tothe north. Very different are the entrances through rooms with rows of pillars and/orcolumns, such as the northern entrance to the Palace at Knossos (the North Pillar Hall),which can be compared to the entrances to the Villa at Sklavokambos and House 103 atPhaistos 13.

There is definitely more evidence for the presence of propyla in Mycenaean architec-ture 14. Particularly monumental are the propyla in the citadel at Tiryns and Mycenae, aswell as those found in the Palaces at Pylos and Dimini. All these structures are character-ized by clear axial symmetry and an «H» plan 15. While they are different in size, their over-all length is almost equal to the width. The façades of these propyla are very wide and great-ly exceed the 4 m of the Propylon at Haghia Triada: the lintel was supported by one or twowooden columns on a stone base. The Mycenaean propyla at Tiryns and Mycenae were locat-ed along the network of paths inside the citadels, between open spaces. They emphasizeand monumentalize a passageway marked by the presence of a stone threshold.

The two propyla in the citadel at Tiryns both had two façades with two columnsbetween antae ( fig. 16) 16: the Great Propylon, with an overall width of 13.60 m (and anequal length) is located in the south-western corner of the storeroom courtyard; its easternfaçade fronted the colonnade (with alternating columns and pillars) along the eastern sideof the same courtyard. A 2.20 wide doorway led to an inner and smaller courtyard, wherethe Small Propylon was set. This second structure ( fig. 17), with the same plan (twocolumns between antae in both façades) but smaller in size (the restored length and width


11 B.J. HAYDEN, Crete in transition: LM IIIA - LMIIIB Architecture. A preliminary study, in SMEA26, 1987, pp. 213-216.

12 V. LA ROSA, Considerazioni sull’area ad W delc.d. Bastione di Haghia Triada, in ASAtene 84, 2006,pp. 845-849, figs. 51-52; P. MILITELLO, Un nuovo«propylon» ad Haghia Triada e gli spazi recintatinella Creta neopalaziale, in Creta Antica 9, 2008, pp.11-25.

13 Cf. PM I, pp. 385-404, PM III, pp. 160-167,HITCHCOCK 2000, pp. 83-85 and MACDONALD, Theneopalatial palaces… cit. at footnote 8, pp. 42-44(Knossos); E. ADAMS, «Time and Chance»: unravel-ing temporality in North-Central Neopalatial Crete,in AJA 111, 2007, pp. 401-403 and S. PRIVITERA,Case e rituali a Creta nel periodo neopalaziale (Tripodes9), Atene 2008, pp. 43-46 (Sklavokambos); Festòs II,

pp. 394-399 (Festòs); the palatial building at Protoria-Damantri perhaps also had a similar entrance.

14 On the basis of the similarities between the SouthPropylaeum of the palace at Knossos and the propylon atTroy II, Evans thought that this type of building,Anatolian in origin, had reached Mycenaean Greecethrough Minoan Crete: PM II, pp. 694-695.

15 Quite different is the case of room 41 in thePalace at Pylos, an entrance to the Main Building witha column between antae and an offset door, similar inplan to Chiosco E at Haghia Triada: Pylos I, pp. 178-181.

16 K. MÜLLER, Tiryns III. Die Architektur der Burgund des Palastes, Augsburg 1930, pp. 127-134. Morerecently, M. KÜPPER, Mykenische Architektur. Material,Bearbeitungstechnik, Konstruktion und Erscheinungsbild,München 1996, pp. 111-113.


are 10.50 m, the doorway 2.50 m) gave access to the Megaron court. At Mycenae the propy-lon, reconstructed with a width of 7.00 m (and an equal length) marked the entrance to thePalace; the rectangular area in front of it had a cobblestone floor, while the two façades hadonly one column between antae ( fig. 18) 17. A colonnade also marked the entrance to theMain Building of the Palace at Pylos (rooms 1-2: width 8.70 m and overall length 9.50m) 18: from the outer colonnade it was perhaps possible to gain direct access to room 7 (thepalace archive). At any rate, the absence of the western wall (lost in antiquity) makes thissuggestion speculative. The inner structure is well preserved, with a threshold betweentwo almost square slabs retaining the door jambs. It has been suggested that, in the outercolonnade, the trace left by a square base (approx. 1 ✕ 0.90 m) just to the left of the door-way is the remains of a sentry post for controlling entrance to both the main building androom 7 19. A similar layout is also to be found in the propylon to the palatial building atDimini (approx. 9 ✕ 11 m), where there is a column (or pillar) base in the middle, betweentwo antae in both façades and an inner support for the roof 20. The structure enabled peopleto pass through to the area of Megaron A from the road brought to light during the exca-vations 21.

The parallels between the LM III Propylon at Haghia Triada and these structures arevery evident: the Haghia Triada Propylon is a smaller and less monumental version, almostcertainly lacking columns. The «H» plan, with an overall width almost identical to itslength (approx. 4 ✕ 4 m), links this Cretan structure to the Mycenaean ones. They alsoshare a layout in which the paths were almost at right angles to each other. The closest sim-ilarities to the Haghia Triada structure can be found in the two propyla at Tiryns. It shouldbe pointed out that the Great Propylon of this settlement was in fact located in a large courtwith a long colonnade on one side ( fig. 16) 22: the parallel is even closer if we assume the


17 For the excavation data, A.J.B. WACE, Excava-tions at Mycenae, in BSA 25, 1921-23, pp. 210-213;A.J.B. WACE, Mycenae 1939-55. I. Preliminary reporton the excavations of 1955, in BSA 51, 1956, p. 106;for a planimetric restoration, G. MYLONAS, Mycenae andthe Mycenaean Age, Princeton N.J. 1966, p. 66. Cf. alsoA.J.B. WACE, Mycenae. An Archaeological History andGuide, New York 1964, p. 70 and S. IAKOVIDIS, LateHelladic Citadels on Mainland Greece, Leiden 1983, p.58. H. LAUTER, Nouveaux aspects du palais deMycènes au HR IIIB, in E. LÉVY ed., Le système palatialen Orient, en Grèce et à Rome (Strasbourg 19-22 juin1985), Leiden 1987, pp. 219-225 for the existence ofan another propylon in the palace at Mycenae.

18Pylos I, pp. 54-63.19 P. DARCQUE, L’habitat mycénien. Formes et fonctions

de l’espace bâti en Grèce continentale à la fine du IIe mil-lénaire avant J.-C. (BEFAR 319), 2005, pp. 178-179for a different view.

20 V. ADRIMI SISMANI -L. GODART, Les inscriptionsen Linéaire B de Dimini/Iolkos et leur contextearchéologique, in ASAtene 83, 2005, p. 52; V. ADRIMI

SISMANI, The Palace of Iolkos and its end, in S. DEGER-

JALKOTZY-I. LEMOS eds., Ancient Greece. From the Myce-naean Palaces to the Age of Homer, Edinburgh 2006, p.468; V. ADRIMI SISMANI, Mycenaean Northern Borderrevisited: new evidence from Thessaly, in M.L. GALATY-W.A. PARKINSON eds., Rethinking Mycenaean Palaces II.Revisited and expanded second edition, Los Angeles 2007,p. 164. In the absence of a specific description of thisstructure, the size of the propylon has been deducedfrom the published plans of the site.

21 B. MONTECCHI, Santuari micenei e produzioneartigianale: i casi di Pilo, Micene, Tirinto e Dimini,in ASAtene 84/1, 2006, pp. 176-179 has some doubtsabout the interpretation of the complex as a palace,seeing it rather as a religious complex with someartisans’ workshops. From an architectural point ofview, given the size, use of columns and centralhearths in each building, there can be no doubtabout the palatial character of the compound.

22 On the Mycenaean courts, W. CAVANAGH,Empty space? Courts and squares in MycenaeanTowns, in K. BRANIGAN ed., Urbanism in the AegeanBronze Age (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 4),Sheffield 2001, pp. 119-134.


existence of a row of identical rooms on the so-called Eastern Casemates. In this case the lay-out at Tiryns would be identical to that at Haghia Triada, where the eight rooms and thestaircase of the Stoà dell’Agorà opened on to the colonnade on the eastern side of thePiazzale. The LH IIIA2 dating of the Great Propylon at Tiryns, built over an older gate tothe citadel, ties in with the LM IIIA2 dating suggested for the planning of the southernpart of the Piazzale dell’Agorà and the Propylon at Haghia Triada.

N.C.

5. The LM III Propylon in the Haghia Triada settlement and in CreteIt is hard to overestimate the significance of a Mycenaean style Propylon in LM III

Haghia Triada. Thus far no similar structure has been discovered outside the main Mycenaeansettlement in mainland Greece (particularly in Argolid). In other words, the LM III Propy-lon testifies to a close link between Haghia Triada and the main Mycenaean palatial sitesin the 14 th century BC (especially Tiryns, assuming that the closest parallel is with the GreatPropylon of this citadel).

The positioning of the Propylon at the entrance to the Piazzale dell’Agorà focuses par-ticular attention on this area of the settlement. The construction of the Piazzale dell’Agoràduring LM IIIA2 dramatically modified the topography of the area23. The earlier architec-tural remains were then demolished and a cut was made in the flank of the hill to the eastin order to build the back wall of the Stoà dell’Agorà. The southern part of the Piazzale waslaid out at the same time as room A in the Casa dai Vani Aggiunti Progressivamente (hence-forth Casa VAP) was built: its foundations are set back at exactly the same level as thePiazzale’s paving, while the floor of room A is 1 m lower than this level (four steps stillextant in the south-western corner of room A enabled people to reach the floor from thelevel of the Piazzale) 24. It is very probable that this room, with direct access from thePiazzale, was built in order to modify the main entrance to Casa VAP, until then posi-tioned on the lower western terrace, through room I and, subsequently, P. It is certain that,in the last phase of use of the Piazzale dell’Agorà, only two buildings opened on to it, apartfrom the storerooms of the Stoà: room A in Casa VAP and Edificio Nord-Ovest/P on thenorthern side. The LM III Propylon must have had the function of highlighting the impor-tance of one of these two buildings (or both of them). What should also be borne in mindis the monumentality of Edificio Nord-Ovest/P reflected in its huge size and its impressivethreshold at the entrance from the Piazzale dell’Agorà 25. It is also important to point outthat very recently S. Privitera has convincingly assigned the LM III fresco fragments withiconographic themes very similar to those depicted in the Painted Sarcophagus (GrandeProcessione, Donna ed altare) to the wall decoration of room A in Casa VAP 26. The close link


23 Cf. CUCUZZA 2003, pp. 216-221. D. PUGLISI,L’organizzazione a terrazze nel «Villaggio» TM I diHaghia Triada, in Creta Antica 8, 2007, pp. 169-200for the area in LM I.

24 S. PRIVITERA, Looking for a home in a houselesstown: exploring domestic architecture in Final-Palatial Haghia Triada, in Stega, forthcoming; cf.CUCUZZA 2003, p. 218. See also S. PRIVITERA, I due

pithoi globulari di Haghia Triada e la cronologia del-la ‘Casa dei Vani aggiunti progressivamente’, in CretaAntica 2, 2001, pp. 141-147.

25 N. CUCUZZA, The North Sector Buildings of HaghiaTriada, in J. DRIESSEN-A. FARNOUX eds., La Crète Mycéni-enne (Ecole Française d’Athénes, 26-28 mars 1991),BCH suppl. 30, 1997, pp. 73-84.

26 S. PRIVITERA, Gli affreschi TM III del ‘Villaggio’


between the construction of the southern part of the Piazzale, the Propylon, room A of CasaVAP and, very probably, the refurbishing of the Bastione, might suggest a direct function-al relationship between the Propylon and room A: this idea could explain the modificationof the main entrance to Casa VAP, since the building of the LM III Propylon considerablynarrowed the passageway towards room P. However, it is evident that the end point of theroute along which the Propylon was built was definitely the Edificio Nord-Ovest/P, whosemonumental façade closed off the northern side of the Piazzale in a manner very similar tothe façades of the Mycenaean megara at Mycenae and Tiryns. The overall size of EdificioNord-Ovest/P, square in plan with a side of 20 m and a stone threshold of over 7 m at theentrance from the Piazzale, is comparable to the palatial megara of the two main Mycenaeansettlements in Argolis.

Moreover, the presence of the Propylon shows that access to the Piazzale dell’Agorà wascontrolled in some way. Its position on the northern wall of the Bastione forced people (bothduring LM IIIA and in the present) to turn at right angles along the walls of this huge build-ing, strategically positioned to oversee the route. The specific function of the Bastione is stillnot clear: at any rate only its westernmost part (rooms 1-12) was in use during both theNeopalatial and the LM III period. D. Puglisi has recently demonstrated how the eastern-most part of the building (rooms 13-15) was added during LM III 27 (very probably linked tothe nearby Stoà dell’Agorà). It must also be remembered that the Neopalatial walls of theBastione (of course, in its western part) were refurbished during LM III; moreover, a monu-mental staircase was built to allow access to the upper level of the Bastione directly from thePiazzale. It is very probable that during LM III the westernmost part of the building was justa mound, a platform from which it was possible to see what was happening in the Piazzaledell’Agorà as well as in Piazzale 10, immediately south of the Bastione 28. The refurbishing ofthe outer walls of the western part of this building appears to have been inspired by the samedesire to monumentalize, but also to control, the entrance to the Piazzale dell’Agorà (asalready mentioned in relation to the Propylon). For this reason it is perhaps better to suggestthat the monumental staircase could also have been planned at the same time.

Controlled access to the Piazzale can also account for the two benches positioned atboth ends of the Propylon, one against the northern wall of the Bastione and the otheragainst the wall built in the north-eastern corner. The emphasis placed on the entrance tothis area of the settlement could also have been reflected in the re-use of two ashlar blockswith mason’s marks (in both cases a branch) in the northern wall of the Propylon ( fig. 19)as well as in the wall built in its north-eastern corner 29. Their position is not accidental: itcan be compared to the two slabs with mason’s marks (a double axe) used in the LM IIIpaving in the upper Piazzale at Haghia Triada, just east of Chiosco E, near the south-easterncorner of Megaron ABCD. There is also very probably a connection with the entrance to thislatter building 30. In the Propylon as well as in Megaron ABCD the placing of blocks and


di Haghia Triada: nuove osservazioni sul contesto esulla cronologia, in Creta Antica 9, 2008, pp. 111-136; for a different view, P. MILITELLO, MinoischeTradition und mykenische Innovation: Wandbilderund Kultaktivitäten in Agia Triada in SM IIIA, inÖJh 75, 2006, pp. 185-203.

27 D. PUGLISI, Il Bastione Tardo Minoico I ad

Haghia Triada: nuove osservazioni su cronologia efunzione, in ASAtene 81, 2003, pp. 573-593.

28 CUCUZZA 2003, pp. 219-220.29 N. CUCUZZA, Mason’s marks at Haghia Triada,

in Sileno 18, 1992, p. 56 (n. 15-16).30 CUCUZZA, Mason’s marks… cit. at note 29, pp.

56-59 (no. 13-14); for the entrance to the Megaron


slabs with mason’s marks in LM III suggests that the aim was to make the mason’s marksas visible as possible, independently of their original function 31.

The existence of a propylon at the entrance to the Piazzale dell’Agorà at Haghia Triadaundoubtedly shows the great importance of this part of the settlement, clearly distin-guished from the southernmost area. The latter was directly accessible and characterizedby a close link with the religious sphere, as the presence of an LM III shrine (Sacello H)clearly demonstrates 32. The similarities with the Great Propylon at Tiryns very probably tes-tify to a closer link between LM III and contemporary mainland architecture, as has beenalready deduced from some features of the palace at Pylos 33. It is also possible that thearchitectural type of the «H» propylon, well documented in Mycenaean palatial architec-ture, is of Cretan origin. In this case the LM III Propylon at Haghia Triada could be one ofthe first of these architectural features (and perhaps, for this reason, less monumental) 34.However, in view of the fact that the propyla seem to characterize only the known mainMycenaean palatial sites, the existence of this same type of structure at LM III HaghiaTriada inevitably raises questions about the role of this site in LM IIIA-B Crete 35. Is the


ABCD, CUCUZZA, The north sector… cit. at note 25,p. 74, footnote 9.

31 The marks with double axes engraved on theslabs of the Piazzale superiore are very probably amongthe later mason’s marks thus far known in Crete. Theuse of ashlar blocks with mason’s marks in LM IIIAHaghia Triada, with the probable aim of emphasisingthe passageway, can be perhaps compared with the useof conglomerate in buildings at Mycenae: J.C.WRIGHT, The Formation of the Mycenaean Palace, inS. DEGER-JALKOTZY-I. LEMOS eds., Ancient Greece. Fromthe Mycenaean Palaces to the Age of Homer, Edinburgh2006, p. 17. On Minoan mason’s marks, recentlyD.J.I. BEGG, An Archaeology of palatial mason’s markson Crete, in A.P. CHAPIN ed., Charis. Essays in honor ofSara A. Immerwahr, Hesperia suppl. 33, 2004, pp. 1-25.

32 Cf. G. ALBERS, Rethinking Mycenaean Sanctua-ries, in R. LAFFINEUR -R. HÄGG eds., Potnia. Deitiesand Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age (Göteborg, 12-15 April 2000), Aegaeum 22, 2001, pp. 131-141.

33 Cf. J. WESTERBURG, Ein Rekonstruktionvorschlagzum Nordostbau des ‘Nestor-Palastes’ in Pylos. Dieerste Stoa auf dem griechischen Festland?, in AA2001, pp. 1-12; M.C. NELSON, Pylos, block masonryand monumental architecture in the Late Bronze AgePeloponnese, in J. BRETSCHNEIDER-J. DRIESSEN-K. VAN

LERBERGHE eds., Power and Architecture. MonumentalPublic Architecture in the Bronze Age Near East andAegean, Leuven 2007, pp. 143-159. The existence of acentral court (of Minoan type) at Pylos was suggestedby K. KILIAN, L’architecture des résidences myceni-ennes. Origine et extension d’un structure du pouvoirpolitique pendant l’Age du Bronze Récent, in LÉVY

ed., cit. at note 17, pp. 213-217. See also J. RUTTER,Southern Triangles Revisited: Laconia, Messenia, andCrete in the 14th-12th centuries B.C., in A.L. D’AGATA-J. MOODY eds., Ariadne’s Threads. Connections betweenCrete and the Greek Mainland in the Post Palatial Period(Late Minoan IIIA2 to Sub-Minoan) (Athens 5-6 April2003) (Tripodes 3), Athens 2005, pp. 19-53.

34 In LM III Crete we find the use of stoai (in thesense of free-standing buildings) and frescoed floorswith painted scenes before they appeared in main-land Greece: cf. B.J. HAYDEN, The derivation andarchitectural context of Cretan Bronze Age stoas, inArchNews 11, pp. 1-7; Kommos V, pp. 93-96. See alsoWESTERBURG, Ein Rekonstruktionvorschlag… cit. atnote 33, pp. 5-8. For the Sacello H painted floor inHaghia Triada and those in Mycenaean palatialmegara: Haghia Triada I, pp. 331-332.

35 Cf. V. LA ROSA, Haghia Triada à l’époque my-cénienne: l’utopie d’une ville capitale, in DRIESSEN -FARNOUX eds. cit. at note 25, pp. 249-266. On LMIIIA-B Crete, recently J. DRIESSEN-C. LANGHOR, Rally-ing ‘round a «Minoan» Past. The legitimation of pow-er at Knossos during the Late Bronze Age, in M.L.GALATY-W.A. PARKINSON eds., Rethinking MycenaeanPalaces II, Los Angeles 2007, pp. 178-189; on Knossos:E. HATZAKI, From Final Palatial to Postpalatial Knossos:a view from the Late Minoan II to Late Minoan IIIBtown, in G. CADOGAN -E. HATZAKI -A. VASILAKIS eds.,Knossos: Palace, City, State (Iraklion 15-18 November2000) (BSA Studies 12), London 2004, pp. 121-126;EAD., Postpalatial Knossos: town and cemeteries fromLM IIIA2 to LM IIIC, in D’AGATA-MOODY eds. cit. atnote 33, pp. 65-95.


existence of a propylon consistent with control by a different polity (the Knossian palace) oris it an indication of political and administrative autonomy? If the positions put forwardhere are correct, the similarities between Haghia Triada and the Mycenaean palatial siteswould be even closer, thus supplying a further contribution to our knowledge of Crete inthe final palatial period.

N.C.



Appendix. The passages in Enrico Stefani’s notebooks referring to the LM III Propylon

A. Notebook Stefani Isola di Creta. H. Triada, Gortina (1912) - 16 maggio 1912, pp. 7-9

Tra l’angolo N.O. del Bastione ed il muretto tardo A, in parte demolito, si è fatto unsaggio per studiare il piano stradale. Da tale saggio è risultato che detto piano era cosìcostituito: 1° Uno strato di ciottoli formanti la massicciata; 2° sopra il detto strato erasovrapposto un letto di astraki, spesso cm 6 formante lo strato impermeabile; 3° finalmentesullo strato di astraki una malta di terra chiara compatta impastata con delle piccole ghiaiedi fiume, la maggior parte delle quali di colore bluastro. Il piano stradale era inclinato ver-so Nord, come risulta dall’unita sezione. Nel mezzo quasi della strada, a breve intervallol’una dall’altra, delle lastre di gesso formanti una specie di listone.

Tale piano stradale girava dinanzi al lato occidentale del Bastione e sovrapponevasinella parte da esso occupata alle costruzioni venute in luce con gli scavi di quest’anno.Passava anche al di sotto del muretto tardo A e lo oltrepassava verso la sua estremità est dim 1,00 circa.

Al di sotto di questo piano stradale, oltre la fascia settentrionale del muretto A, è unafogna che prosegue discendendo in direzione S.E./N.O. scavalcando parecchi ambienti piùantichi che all’epoca della costruzione della fogna stessa erano interrati.

B. Notebook Stefani Isola di Creta. H. Triada, Gortina (1912) - 17 maggio 1912

Si è proceduto alla ricerca della fogna di cui ieri si è accennato. Essa, completamenteintatta, prosegue in direzione ovest-est lungo la strada a Nord del Bastione, e piegando poicon arco di cerchio continua in direzione S.N. tra la scala del II periodo del Bastione e l’e-dificio coevo. Ad un certo punto la fogna è sbarrata trasversalmente da una grande pietra equivi, certo, aveva origine. Originariamente in quel punto la lastra di copertura dovevaessere munita di fori, ma disgraziatamente proprio in prossimità della sua origine le lastresi trovarono mancanti.

Ora il fatto che tale fogna era stata costruita sulle rovine di edifici più antichi riferi-bili all’epoca del I Palazzo verrebbe a dimostrare che essa è di un periodo posteriore. E qua-le sarebbe questo periodo? Assai probabilmente quello del II Palazzo. Esaminiamo con curail percorso della fogna e specialmente quel tratto prossimo al «Bastione». Il tratto indica-to dallo schizzo di pianta colla lettera b corre parallelo all’edificio della II epoca per la cuicostruzione si adoperarono blocchi della I epoca, alcuni dei quali col segno della spiga. Iltratto a, che s’innesta con quello b mediante una curva, corre anche presso a poco paralle-lamente al lato orientale dell’edificio della II epoca. Ciò significa che la fogna fu eseguitao contemporaneamente alla costruzione dell’edificio o immediatamente dopo.

In appoggio a tale ipotesi si può anche accennare che nella II epoca, allorchè le muraperimetrali del Bastione si dovettero ingrossare per sostenere il terrapieno si costruì anchea scopo di rinforzo quella specie di sperone d addossato sulla sua fronte nord. Ora il listo-ne e, che attraversa la strada quasi a 1/2 e che muove dall’edificio della II epoca raggiungelo sperone menzionato e qui si arresta. Dunque anche questo listone deve riportarsi alla IIepoca. (Il detto listone passa al disopra delle lastre che coprono la fogna e doveva conver-gere di qualche centimetro dal piano stradale. Alcune delle lastre di gesso sono sovrappo-ste alle lastre di copertura della fogna stessa. Dunque tutto questo è contemporaneo allafogna). Si vede che il piano stradale della I epoca doveva essere allo stesso livello di quello



della II, dal momento che esso muove dal punto ove il muro del Bastione forma risega enon è improbabile che esso fosse a fondo naturale.

C. Carte Stefani 69, p. 19

Il canale che va in direzione S.E./N.O. e che ha principio presso l’angolo N.O. delBastione sembra contemporaneo agli edifici limitanti a Nord la strada che gira attorno alBastione, ed a quelli fronteggianti l’Agorà del II Palazzo. Quindi anche il d.tto canaleapparterrebbe a quel periodo. In d pavimento a tarrazza formata con ghiaiolina scura edastraki. Tutti gli ambienti coperti del canale suddetto sarebbero perciò anteriori al IIPalazzo. Gli ambienti, invece, sbarranti il canale, e che furono demoliti (in giallo nellapianta) sarebbero posteriori al canale stesso.





FIGURA 2

FIGURA 1

FIGURA 3



FIGURA 4 FIGURA 5

FIGURA 6 FIGURA 7



FIGURA 8

FIGURA 9 FIGURA 10



FIGURA 11

FIGURA 12 FIGURA 13


FIGURA 14

FIGURA 15

FIGURA 19FIGURA 18

FIGURA 17

FIGURA 16

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES

CUCUZZA 2003 = N. CUCUZZA, Il volo del grifo: osservazioni sulla Haghia Triada ‘micenea’, inCreta Antica 4, 2003, pp. 199-272.

HITCHCOCK 2000 = L. HITCHCOCK, Minoan Architecture. A contextual analysis (SIMA-PB 155),Jonsered 2000.

ABSTRACT

A LATE MINOAN III PROPYLON AT HAGHIA TRIADA

A survey of the area around the Stoà dell’Agorà at Haghia Triada has identified an H-shaped Propylon. Built in LM IIIA against the northern wall of the Bastione, the structure waslocated at the entrance of the large Piazzale dell’Agorà. The Propylon has no good comparisonin Minoan architecture; instead it has many similarities with the propylaia known in theMycenaean palatial sites of Mainland Greece. The presence of a propylon (the only one knownup to now in Crete) confirms the importance of Haghia Triada in LM IIIA-B. Moreover, itenlarges our knowledge of the LM IIIA-B architecture and its relationship with the contem-porary architecture of Mainland Greece.


518 NICOLA CUCUZZA - NILS HELLNER

A Late Minoan III Propylon at Haghia Triada (with N. Cucuzza)

Documents

Transcript of A Late Minoan III Propylon at Haghia Triada (with N. Cucuzza)