Vol1 PDF

Peter Kienzle
Conservation and Reconstruction at the Palace of Minos at Knossos

The North Entrance Passage - Watercolour by D. Zaverdinos
ll-ý-
Conservation and Reconstruction
at the Palace of Minos
at Knossos
Volume I
Peter Kienzle
Dipl.-Ing. (KA), MA. (York)
Submitted for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy in Architecture
University of York
October 1998
Dedicatedto my parents.
Without their supportand encouragement
this work would havebeenimpossible.
r
UNIVERSITY
OFYORK
AFRIY
LIBR]
t+
Abstract
Conservation and Reconstruction at the Palaceof Minos at Knossos
The aimof this thesisis to evaluatethe conservationand reconstructionwork executed
at the Palaceof Minos at Knossosbetween1900and 1930.In this period the owner and
excavator, Arthur Evans successivelyemployed three architects, Theodore Fyfe,
Christian Doll and Piet de Jong respectively,to conserveand reconstructparts of the
excavatedBronze Age palaceat Knossos,Crete. The study aims to understandthe

executedwork asanoutcomeof both building techniquesand materials,and the ethical
and aestheticvaluesof its time. Thus, the researchquestionwas set:
at the Palaceof Minos at Knossosbe evaluatedin

How can thereconstructions
both theirfunctional and their aestheticaspectsas an appropriate responseto
the demandsof the original designbrief?
This researchhas been basedon both literature study and fieldwork. Both current
literature and material contemporaryto the reconstruction work such as diaries,
photographsand lettersoriginating from Arthur Evansandhis teamhavebeenstudied.
Theoryandpracticeof archaeologyandconservationat the early twentieth century will

be exploredto highlightthebackgroundagainstwhich the work at Knossosmust be set.
Furthermore,it examinesthe life of Arthur Evansandhis links to thesedisciplines.The
original building materialsand techniques,the destructionof the palaceand finally its

excavationprocessare discussedto explorethe technicalproblemswhich the architects
Abstract 5
Peter Kienzle
were facing on site. The study examinesthe building work executedby the three
architects which shows how they respondedto these problems and how their
conservation attitude affected their work. It explores how failures of earlier
were examinedby later architectsin orderto improve the quality of the
reconstructions
work.
The study aims to present a clear understanding 'why' and 'how' the conservation and
reconstruction work at Knossos was executed in this particular way. It shows that the
reconstructions were the result of a long process with various influencing factors and,
finally, analysesthe problems the physical reconstructions will face in the future.
The study offers information about the site of Knossos and its particular problems in
order to reach a qualifiedjudgement of the reconstruction work. However, it also.offers

a clearer understanding of the complex relations between building materials and
techniques,decayprocesses,excavation procedures, repair materials and techniques and
conservation attitudes on site. The thesis argues to understand the physical
reconstructionson site as a result of a processwhich was influenced by the above named

factors.
Abstract
Contents
Volume I
Abstract 5
........................................................
Contents 7
........................................................
List of Tables 12
...................................................
List of Figures 13
..................................................
List of Plates 19
...................................................
Abbreviations 30
...................................................
Acknowledgments 31
..............................................
Preface 33
.......................................................
Introduction 37
...................................................
Arthur Evans and his time 65

................................
1.0 Introduction 67
............................................
1.1 The life of Sir Arthur Evans 68
................................
1.1.1 The early Years, School and Studies 69
..........................
1.1.2 The Balkans .71
............................................
1.1.3 Ashmolean Museum 72
......................................
1.1.4 Travels in Crete 74
..........................................
1.1.5 The Excavation at Knossos 76
..................................
1.1.6 Conclusion 78
.............................................
1.2 Contemporary Archaeological Thought 79
........................
1.2.0 Introduction 79
............................................
1.2.1 Overview of the Development of Archaeology 79
..................
1.2.2 Contemporary Archaeology 84
................................
1.3 Contemporary Conservation Thought 93
.........................
............................................
1.3.1 Overview of the Development of Conservation 93
..................
1.3.2 Discourse: St. Alban's Cathedral 96
.............................
1.3.3 Conservation at Archaeological Sites 99
..........................
1.3.4 Discourse: The Restoration of the Acropolis at Athens 102
...........
1.3.5 Protective Shelters 108
............ ..........................
1.3.6 Arthur Evans' Links to Conservation 109
........................
1.4 Conclusion 110
............................................
Contents
Peter Kienzle
2 The Palace of Minos at Knossos III

...........................
2.0 Introduction 113
...........................................
2.1 The Original Building Structure 117
............................
............................................
2.1.1 Stonework 119
............................................
2.1.2 Timber 124
...............................................
2.1.3 Mud Ceilings and Mud Brick 135
..............................
2.1.4 Decoration 138
............................................
2.1.5 Conclusion 142
............................................
2.2 The Destruction Process 143
..................................
...........................................
2.2.1 Earthquake 144
............................................
2.2.2 Fire 148
..................................................
2.2.3 Santorini Theory 151
........................................
2.2.4 Robbing of Stones 152
......................................
2.2.5 Other Factors 155
..........................................
............................................
2.3 The Excavation Process 158
..................................
...........................................
2.3.1 The Workers at the Excavation 159
.............................
2.3.2 Supervision of the Workers 161
................................
2.3.3 Architects and Support Staff 162
...............................
2.3.4 The excavation Process ................................... 164
............................................
2.4 Conclusion 166
............................................
3 The Works by Theodore Fyfe 1900 to 1904 169

..................
...........................................
3.1 Before Knossos 171
........................................
3.2 Flat Roof of the Throne Room in 1901 173
.......................
3.3 Work in the Domestic Quarter 180
.............................
3.3.1 The Grand Staircase 182
.....................................
3.3.2 The Upper and Lower East-West Corridor 188
....................
3.3.3 The Hall of the Double Axes 189
...............................
3.3.4 The Queen's Megaron 194
...................................
3.3.5 Other Parts of the Domestic Quarter 198
.........................
3.3.6 The Lobby of the Wooden Posts 202
............................
3.3.7 The Retaining Wall in 1902 203
................................
3.4 Reconstruction of the Theatral Area in 1903 205
...................
3.5 The Construction of the Observation Towers in 1900 and 1903 208
....
3.6 The Pitched Roof of the Throne Room in 1904 210
.................
3.7 Other Pitched Roofs 212
....................................
3.8 Theodore Fyfe after 1904 214
.................................
3.9 Conclusion 216
............................................
8 Contents
ConservationandReconstructionat the Palaceof Minos at Knossos
4 The Works by Christian Doll 1905 to 1910 219

4.0 Introduction
..................
........................................... 221
........ ******-***--, **** ... --,
4.2 The Reconstruction Work in 1905 222
......... .................
4.2.1 The Theoretical Reconstruction of the Grand Staircase 223
...........
4.2.2 The Physical Reconstruction of the Grand Staircase 231
.............
4.2.3 The Throne Room Area 236
..................................
4.3 The Villa Ariadne 239
.......................................
4.4 The Work in 1908 242
.......................................
4.4.1 The Queen's Megaron 243
....................................
4.4.2 The Room of the Plaster Couch 249
.............................
4.4.3 The East-West Corridor 251
..................................
4.5 The Reconstructions of 1910 255
... * ...
4.5.1 The Fourth Flight of the Grand Staircase 255
......................
4.5.2 The Corridors in the Domestic Quarter and the Service Stairs 258
......
4.6 After Knossos 264
..........................................
4.7 Conclusions 265
...........................................
5 The Works by Piet de Jong 1922 to 1930 267

....................
...........................................
.........................................
5.2 The reconstruction Work in 1922 an 1923 272
.....................
5.2.1 The Magazines South of the Throne Room 273
....................
5.2.2 The Stepped Portico 281
.....................................
5.3 Discourse: Reinforced Concrete 285
............................
5.4 The Work between 1924 and 1927 287
..........................
5.4.1 The Reconstruction of the West Wing in 1925 288
..................
5.4.2 The Reconstruction of the Pillared Portico 291
....................
5.4.3 Work at the South Front 292
..................................
5.5 The Reconstruction Work of 1928 295
......... ................
5.5.1 The Loggia and Overhaul of Earlier Work at the Grand Staircase 296
...
5.5.2 The Hall of the Double Axes 300
...............................
5.5.3 Other Work in 1928 303
...... ...............................
..........................
5.6.1 The North Lustral Basin 306
..................................
5.6.2 The North Entrance Passage 309
...............................
5.6.3 Roofing over the Magazines of the West Wing 311
.................
..........................
5.7.1 North Entrance Passage 314
..................................
5.7.2 The Throne Room Area 317
..................................
5.8 After Knossos 320
..........................................
5.9 Conclusions 323
...........................................
Contents 9
PeterKienzle
6 Evaluation of the Technical Aspects of the Reconstructions 325

....
...........................................
6.1 Stone 328
.ý..............................................
6.1.1 The Use of Stone in the Reconstruction Process 328
................
6.1.2 Adequacy of Stone as Material for Reconstruction 332
..............
6.1.3 Performance, Harm and Benefits 336
............................
6.2 Timber 341
...............................................
6.2.1 The Use of Timber in the Reconstruction Process 341
...............
6.2.2 Adequacy of Timber as Material for Reconstruction 345
.............
............................
6.3 Bricks 350
............. ..................................
6.3.1 The Use of Bricks in the Reconstruction Process 351
...............
6.3.2 Adequacy of Bricks as Material for Reconstruction 354
..............
............................
6.4 Iron Beams 357
6.4.1 The Use of Iron in the Reconstruction Process 357
.................
6.4.2 Adequacy of Iron as Material for Reconstruction 359
...............
............................
6.5 Concrete 362
..............................................
6.5.1 The Use of Concrete in the Reconstruction Process 362
.............
6.5.2 Adequacy of Concrete as Material for Reconstruction 367
............
............................
6.6 Conclusions 375
...........................................
7 Theoretical and Philosophical

Aspects of the Reconstruction Work 377
.......................
...........................................
7.1 The Conservation Philosophies of Evans, Fyfe, Doll and de Jong 380
...
7.1.1 The Conservation Philosophy of Arthur Evans 381
.................
7.1.1 The Conservation Philosophy of Theodore Fyfe 385
................
7.1.1 The Conservation Philosophy of Christian Doll 388
.................
7.1.1 The Conservation Philosophy of Piet de Jong 390
..................
7.2 The Aim, Function and Purpose of the Reconstruction Work 394
......
7.3 The Truthfulness of the Reconstructions 400
......................
7.4 The Site as Source for Reconstructions 406
.......................
7.4.1 Archaeological Evidence 407
..................................
7.4.2 The Frescoes 413
..........................................
7.4.3 The Town Mosaic 415
.......................................
7.4.4 The House Models 417
......................................
7.5 Influences from Outside 419
..................................
7.5.1 Financial Aspects of the Reconstructions 419
......................
7.5.2 Other Archaeologists and Experts 422
...........................
7.6 Significance of the Reconstructions 426
..........................
7.6.1 A Villa in Athens 427
.......................................
7.6.2 Excavations at Akrotiri (Santorini) 428
..........................
7.6.3 The Reconstructions at Knossos and the Charter of Athens 431
........
7.7 Conclusions 433
...........................................
10 Contents
Conclusions 437
..................................................
Author's Declaration 456
...........................................
Glossary 457
.....................................................
Bibliography 461
.................................................
Appendices 487
...................................................
Appendix I Curricula vitae 489
.....................................
Appendix 2 Chronology of excavation and reconstruction work ......... 503
Appendix 3 History of Knossos by Gerald Cadogan .................. 507
Appendix 4 Charter of Athens 517
...................................
Appendix 5 Mortar Analysis ...
....................................
Appendix 6 Permit by the Ephoria U to take samples ................
...
Volume 2
Volume 2 529
.....................................................
Note 530
........................................................
Plates 531
........................................................
Drawings 649
.....................................................
Contents II
List of Tables
Table I Chronological chart of Minoan periods. Based on Cadogan 35

. .......
Table 2 Figures for workforce at the excavation at Knossos in 1903.
Compiled on information frornDuncan Mackenzie's diary 160
........
Table 3 Mortar samples from the Palace of Minos 337
....................
12 List of Tables
List of Figures
Fig. I Map of the eastern Mediterranean. Source: the author ............. 38

Fig. 2 Map of Crete with important Minoan sites. Source: the author ....... 39
Fig. 3 The greater area of Knossos showing important remains outside
the palace. Source: Papadopoulos, 1997, p. 96 .................. 40
Fig. 4 Sketch plan of the Palace of Minos. Source: Martin, 1986, p. II..... 41
Fig. 5 The House of John Evans at Nash Mills. Drawing by F. G. Kitton, 1892.
Source: Evans, 1943, facing p. 113 70
............................
Fig. 6 Schematic sketch of the different strata of the tell at Hissarlik (Troy)
Source: Fitton, 1995, p. 63 86
..................................
Fig. 7 Pottery of successiveperiods in Petrie's predynastic sequence.
Source: Trigger, 1989, p. 201 90
...............................
Fig. 8 The Parthenon with the small new mosque in the cella.
Drawing by M. Korres. Source: Korres, 1994c, p. 50 ............ 103
Fig. 9 The Acropolis of Athens in Classical times. Reconstruction
by M. Korres. Source, Korres, 1994b, p. 43 105
....................
Fig. 10 Plan and section of the West Wall showing the wedge
shaped blocks and the mortices for the wooden clamps.
Drawing by J. Shaw. Source Shaw, 1973, p. 89 122
.................
Fig. II Reconstructed elevation of West Wall and Corridor of Procession.
Drawing by Theodore Fyfe, 1902. Source: Fyfe, 1902, p. 115 123
.......
Fig. 12 Two sections of the Grand Staircase. Unpublished drawings by
Christian Doll. Source: Ashmolean Museum, Evans' Archive.
G/S I (I 2a) and GS/HC 3 (12b) 126
............................
Fig. 13 Restored elevation of the Columnar Shrine in the Central Court.
Probably Theodore Fyfe. Source: PM II, p. 807 127
.................
Fig. 14 East wall Court of the Distaffs. Recorded by the author 129
. ..........
Fig. 15 Horizontal reinforcements structures. The dovetail joint is
based on structural considerations not on archaeological
evidence. Drawing by the author............................. 13C
Fig. 16 Plan and elevation of a doorjamb. Drawing by Theodore Fyfe
Source: Fyfe, 1902, p. 112 131
.................................
Fig. 17 The decay process of the a rubble wall with two horizontal timber
members at the same height. Drawing by the Author ............. 133
List of Figures 13
PeterKienzIe
Fig. 18 Window betweenthe Hall of the Double Axes andthe

Lower East-West Corridor. Recording of the cavity left
by the decayed timber beams. Drawing by Christian Doll, undated
(probably 1908). Source: Ashmolean Museum, Evans' Archive ..... 134
Fig. 19 Schematic drawing of ceiling construction for a vernacular
Cretan house. Drawing by the author 137
.........................
Fig. 20 Plaster decoration in Magazine XII. Drawing by Theodore Fyfe.
Source: PM IV, p. 649 140
....................................
Fig. 21 The Charging Bull Relief from the North Entrance Passage.
The reconstruction is based on the depiction of a charging
bull on a gypsum slab found at Mycenae. Source: PM IV, p. 11. 141
Fig. 22 Earthquake-prone areas of the world.
Source: Coburn et al. 1995, p. 6 144
............................
Fig. 23 Propagation of P and S-waves through the earth.
Source: UN, DHA, 1995, p. 54 145
.............................
Fig. 24 Area affected by the ashfall from the Thera eruption.
Source: Castleden, 1990, p. 146 151
............................
Fig. 25 Elevation of West Bastion of North Entrance Passagewith
find levels of fragments of the fallen Bull Relief Fresco.
Drawing by Piet de Jong. Source: PM III, facing p. 171 154
..........
Fig. 26 Illustration for stratigraphic layers in the North-West are of the
Palace. Drawing by Theodore Fyfe. Source: Evans: 1903, p. 26. 164
Fig. 27 Ground plan of Throne Room areal. Source: PM IV, p 921 ....... 174
Fig. 28 Sketch plan of the rooms to the north and west of the Throne Room.
Fyfe, Notebook 1901, p. 3 1. Source: Ashmolean Museum 175
.........
Fig. 29 Sketch of the reconstructed column in the Throne Room.
Fyfe, Notebook 1901, p. 77. Source Ashmolean Museum 176
.........
Fig. 30 The Fresco remains in the Throne Room. Source: PM IV, p. 912. 177
...
Fig. 31 Ground plan of the Domestic Quarter. Drawing by Theodore Fyfe.
Source: Evans, 1902a, p. 56 181
................................
Fig. 32 Restored Sections of the Hall of Colonnades. Theodore Fyfe, 1901.
Source: Evans, 190 1, p. 106 183
................................
Fig. 33 Schematic section through the East-West Corridor.
Source: The author 186
......................................
Fig. 34 Sketch for the construction of a doorframe. Fyfe,
Notebook 1902, p. 2. Source: Ashmolean Museum 186
..............
Fig. 35 Sketch elevation and ground plan of the doorjambs of the
Hall of the Double Axes. Fyfe, Notebook 1901, p. 67.
Source: Ashmolean Museum 189
. ............................. .
Fig. 36 Sketch plan and elevation for the first timber support frame of the
Hall of the Double Axes. Theodore Fyfe, Notebook 1901, p. 8 1.
Source: Ashmolean Museum 190
. ............................. .
Fig. 37 Restored Section of the Grand Staircase, Hall of Colonnades
and the Hall of the Double Axes. Theodore Fyfe, 1901.
Source: Evans, 1901, p. III................................ 193
14 List of Figures
Conservadon and Reconstruction at the Palace of Minos at Knossos
Fig. 38 Restoredsectionof the raisedstylobatewith the doublebenches.

Drawing by TheodoreFyfe. Source:Evans, 1902,p. 50 195
...........
Fig. 39 Plan andElevation of the Bathroomwith the spiral frieze.
Drawing by TheodoreFyfe. Source:Evans, 1902,p. 53 196
...........
Fig. 40 Sketchproposalfor a roof abovethe Bathroom.Fyfe,
Notebook 1902,p. 44. Source:AshmoleanMuseum 197
.............
Fig. 41 Groundplan of the brick pillar andelevationof the eastwall
of the Room of the PlasterCouch.Sketchplan by TheodoreFyfe.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum 199
...............................
Fig. 42 Elevation of the southwall of the Treasury.Source:author 200
........
Fig. 43 Court of the Distaffs with restoredtimber framesfor windows.
Drawing by Fyfe. Source:Evans, 1902a,p. 64 200
..................
Fig. 44 Sketchplan of the TheatralArea. Fyfe, Notebook 1903,p. 10.
...............................
Fig. 45 Plan and sectionof the TheatralArea indicatingrestoration
work. Drawing by TheodoreFyfe.
Source:Evans, 1903,p. 103 206
................................
Fig. 46 Sketchdrawing of the viewing platform on top of the
observationtower. Fyfe, Notebook 1903,p. 147.
...............................
Fig. 47 View of the Kitchen showingplastertable andthe stone
seat.Drawing by TheodoreFyfe. Source:Evans, 1901,p. 33 ....... 211
Fig. 48 Plan and Sectionof the Shrineof the Double Axes.
Drawing by Fyfe. Source:Evans, 1902,p. 97 213
..................
Fig. 49 GrandStaircaseelevationlooking westby Fyfe, 1901.Source:
Evans, 1901,p. 106.GrandStaircaseelevationlooking west
by Doll, 1905.Source:AshmoleanMuseum,GS/HC 3 224
...........
Fig. 50 Sectionof GrandStaircase.Unpublisheddrawing
by ChristianDoll. Probably 1905.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum;Drawing G/S I 227
..................
Fig. 51 Reconstructedelevationof GrandStaircase.
Drawing by ChristianDoll. Source:PM I, p. 341 228
...............
Fig. 52 Sectionof the GrandStaircase.Unpublisheddrawing
by ChristianDoll. Probably 1905.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum;drawing GS/HC 3 229
................
Fig. 53 First Floor groundplan, GrandStaircaseand Hall of
Colonnades.ChristianDoll, probably 1905.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum;Drawing GS/HC 3 233
.................
Fig. 54 Elevationof westwall of the ServiceSectionshowing
battenremains.Red line indicatesoutline of former pitched
roof. Source:the author ......................... 237
Fig. 55 Elevationof north wall of the Kitchen of the ServiceSection. : *****"I, *
Source:the author 238
.......................................
Fig. 56 Groundplan of the Queen'sMegaronand adjoining areas.
.......................................
List of Figures 15
Peter Kiergle
Fig. 57 Sectionof the Queen'sMegaronand the Bath Room.

Source: the author 247
.......................................
Fig. 58 Measureddrawing of the SouthWindow of the
Court of Distaffs. Drawing by Doll, June 1908.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,Doll's Folder ..................... 250
Fig. 59 Schematic the
section of the northern portico of
Hall of Colonnades and the East-West Corridor
...... ***..... --***--*******--
Fig. 60 Section of the East-West Corridor looking south.
.......................................
Fig. 61 Limestone blocks above the window to the Hall of Double Axes.
Drawing by Christian Doll, 1908. Source: Ashmolean Museum 254
......
Fig. 62 First floor plan of the Domestic Quarter. Drawing by Doll.
Source:PM 1,p. 329 260

Fig. 63 First floor
. ....................................
Domestic Quarter.
ground plan of western section of
.......................................
Fig. 64. Side elevation. Design for a Guild Hall by Piet de Jong.
R. I. B. A. Soane Medallion.
Source:TheBuilder, 2 February1912,p. 123 271
..................
Fig. 65. Restoredview of a sectionof the West Wing by F.G. Newton
.................................
Fig. 66 Plan of the West Wing in 1900by TheodoreFyfe.
Source:Evans, 1901,p. 23 ................................ 275
Fig. 67 Restoredplan of the SteppedPortico. Probably Piet de Jong.
Source:PM 11,p. 816 .................................... 275
Fig. 69 SchematicsectionunderSteppedPortico.ProbablyFyfe.
Source:PM I, p. 454 ..................................... 276
Fig.69 Sectionof the SteppedPortico andthe Magazinenorth of the
magazine of the Jewel Fresco looking south. Source: the author .... 281
Fig. 70 Plan for reconstructionof the SteppedPortico. Piet de Jong [?]
Source:AshmoleanMuseum. .............................. 282
Fig. 71 Shutteringfor edgesof reinforcedconcreteceilings.
.......................................
Fig. 72 Sketchof the SteppedPortico southwest of the palace.
Drawing by F.G. Newton,completedby TheodoreFyfe.
................................
Fig. 73 Plan of the SouthPropylaeumindicatingexcavatedremains,con-
jectural reconstructionsandwherefrescoremainswere found.
ProbablyPiet de Jong.Source:PM 11,fig. 434 294
.................
Fig. 74 Sketchproposalfor decorationin the Loggia by Evans.
Source:EvansNotebook 1929,AshmoleanMuseum 299
.............
Fig. 75 View of the North Lustral Basin by Piet de Jong.
Source:PM III, p. II.................................... 307
Fig. 76 North Lustral Basin, southfacade.
.......................................
16 ListofFigures
Fig. 77 Initiatory area and Lustral Basin according to Evans'

later interpretation. Source: PM III, p. 8 309
......................
Fig. '78 Plan of the northern entrance system of the palace. Plan
probably by Piet de Jong. Source: PM I, p. 397 310
.................
Fig. 79 Restoration drawing showing North Entrance Passage.
Piet de Jong. Source: PM IV, p. 9........................... 315
Fig. 80 Sketch plan and section of the proposed reconstruction of
the western portico of the North Entrance Passage.
Notebook Piet de Jong. Source: British School at Athens 316
.........
Fig. 81 Treasury of Atreus at Mycenae. Plan by Piet de Jong for
Alan Wace. Source: Wace, 1964, figure 6 321
......................
Fig. 82 Plan and section of central area, Palace of Nestor, Pylos.
Piet de Jong. Source: Blegen and Rawson, 1973, figure 48 ....... 322
Fig. 83 Rubble masonry by Fyfe and by Doll
.......................................
Fig. 84 Queen's Megaron, south wall of the light well with ashlar
masonry and plastered rubble masonry above.
.......................................
Fig. 85 Well constructed masonry with rubble of various sizes, weak
masonry with small stones missing and masonry with weak
internal bond. Source: the author 334
............................
Fig. 86 Ground plan of the Throne Room and Anteroom.
.......................................
Fig. 87 Bricks used by Piet de Jong at the Magazines below the
Stepped Portico. Source: the author 353
.........................
Fig. 88 West elevation of the North Lustral Basin.
.......................................
Fig. 89 Expansion of flat concrete roof above the
North Lustral Basin. Source: the author 371
.......................
Fig. 90 Lintel construction with iron I-beams.
.......................................
Fig. 91 Sketch of the existing remains of the West Porch by Fyfe (?)
Source: PM II, fig. 428 378
....................................
Fig. 92 Restored view of the West Porch by F.G. Newton.
Source: PM II, fig. 429 378
...................................
Fig. 93 Plan of the Acropolis of Mycenae.
Source: WeiB, 1994, p. 310 392
. ...............................
Fig. 94 The Dolphin Fresco. Original remains shaded.
Source: Palmer, 1969, p. 86 398
................................
Fig. 95 Pronaos of the Parthenon, Athens. Drawing by M. Korres.
Source: Korres, 1994c, p. 132 402
............................. .
Fig. 96 Stepped Portico. Position of second flight as reconstructed
and according to a higher or lower position of the found
gypsum block. Source: the author ........................... 409
List of Figures 17
PeterKienzle
Fig. 97 Plan of the reconstructedupperfloor.

Evans' reconstruction.Source:Gouvoussis,1994,
Castleden'sreconstruction.Source:Castleden,1990,p. 163 ....... 411
Fig. 98 Faiencetabletsof the Town Mosaic.Drawing by TheodoreFyfe.
Source:PM L fig. 226 ................................... 416
.
Fig. 99 HouseModels from the LoomweightBasement,Knossos.
Drawing by Schoep.Source:Schoep,1994,p. 191 .............. 418
Fig. 100 Sectionthrougha door frame.Drawing by Doll.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum ............................... 421
Fig. 101 Architecturalfrescofragment.Drawing by Gilli6ron..
Source:PM 111,p. 84 424
....................................
Fig. 102 Reconstructionof miniaturefrescoincorporatingthe
new fragment.Source:Evans,1911,facing p. 290 ............... 425
.
Fig. 103 Plan of the excavationsat Akrotiri, Thera.
Source:Doumas, 1978,p. 779 430
.............................
18 List of Figures
List of Plates
Plates in Volume 1
Plate A The North Entrance Passage.Watercolour by D. Zaverdinos

Source: Knossos Gift shop
................................. .2
Plate B Arthur Evans. Photograph by Col. Raymond ffennel.
Source: Brown, 1994, p. 73 66
................................
Plate C Reconstructed Queen's Megaron. Watercolour by Piet de Jong.
Source: Michailidou, 1995, p. 80 112
............................
Plate D Theodore Fyfe. Source: Leilah Clarke 170
........................
Plate E Christian Doll. Source: Ashmolean Museum 220
...................
Plate F Piet de Jong. Source: Rachel Hood 268
..........................
Plate G Aerial Photograph of the site.
Source: Ashmolean Museum, E.Top. -I 326
......................
Plate H Reconstructed North Entrance Passage.Watercolour by
Piet de Jong. Source: Michailidou, 1995, p. 91 438
.................
Plates in Volume 2
Plate I General view of the excavations of the palace, 1901

Source: Ashmolean Museum, E.Top. 182 531
.....................
Plate 2 General view of the excavations of the palace, 1902
.....................
.....................
Plate 4 General view of the excavations of the palace, 1908 (?)
Source: Ashmolean Museum, ET 2119 532
.......................
Plate 5 General view of the excavations of the palace, 1922 (?)
Source: Ashmolean Museum, ET 2081 533
.......................
Source: author 533
.........................................
Plate 7 Plan of the excavations in 1900. Theodore Fyfe.
Source: Ashmolean Museum, drawing WW I 534
..................
Plate 8 Plan of the excavations in 1903. Theodore Fyfe
Source: Ashmolean Museum, drawing GP 4 534
...................
Plate 9 West Front of the palace in 1930 with Kolouras
in foreground. Source: Ashmolean Museum, E.Top 116 535
..........
List of Plates 19
Peter Kienzle
Plate 10 West Entrance with replaced gypsum slabs.

Source: Ashmolean Museum, E.Top. 96 ...................... 535
Plate II West Front of the Palace between 1905 and 1921.
-'- A chmnlenn Mimmim
- ----- ---- 1P-Tnn-92
-- - -r ---------------------
536
----------------------
Plate 12 West Front of the Palace,1996.
Source:author ......................................... 536
Plate 13 West Front with detail of original gypsumorthostatsand
superimposedreconstruction,1996.Source:author ............. 537
Plate 14 West Front of the palacewith view to the reconstructed
parts of the West Wing, 1996. Source: author ................. 537
Plate 15 ReconstructedSouth-NorthCorridor, 1996.
Source:author ......................................... 538
Plate 16 ReconstructedSouthPropylaeum,1996.
Source:author 538
.........................................
Plate 17 MagazineVII, probably 1900.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 123b ................... 539
Plate 18 MagazinesXI andXII, probably 1900.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 76 539
......................
Plate 19 Walls of MagazinesIV andV with rubbleinfill in
vertical slots. Source:author .............................. 540
Plate20 Walls of MagazinesV andVI with plasterremainsand
rubble infill in vertical slots.Source:author ................... 540
Plate21 MagazineVII westwall with tracesof fire destruction.
Source:author ......................................... 541
Plate22 Long Corridor looking south.Probably 1928.
Source:photo-bookJ.D.S. Pendlebury,BSA Athens ............ 541
Plate23 MagazineII looking west.Probably1930.
Plate24 Long Corridor looking south, 1997.
Source:author 542
.........................................
Plate25 View from the reconstructedupperpart of the SteppedPortico.
Probably 1923.Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 152g ....... 543
Plate26 View of the south-eastern part of the WestWing in 1900(?)
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,ET 2096 ....................... 543
Plate27 Concreteceiling over the Magazineslooking south, 1997.
Source:author 544
.........................................
Plate28 Concretedrain canalat the West Wing.
Source:author 544
..... .... -***--*******--*-**
Plate29 ReconstructedPillared Portico.Probably 1928.
Source:photo-bookJ.D.S. Pendlebury,BSA Athens............ 545
.
Plate 30 Pillared Portico in 1997.
Source:author 545
........................................ .
Plate31 Area of the SteppedPortico. After 1904.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,H41b........................ 546
.
Plate32 The reconstructionof the SteppedPortico in 1922.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 119d ................... 546
20 List of Plates
ConservationandReconstructionat thePalaceof Minos at Knossos
Plate33 Reconstructionof the SteppedPortico in 1922.

Source:AshmoleanMuseum,ET 2118 547
.......................
Plate34 West Wing looking north in 1925.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 154f 547
.....................
Plate35 SteppedPortico looking west in 1923.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top 681 548
.....................
Plate36 SteppedPortico looking west in 1998.
Source:author 548
.........................................
Plate37 Column at the SteppedPortico.
Source:author 549
.........................................
Plate38 The Middle Minoan III Magazineunderthe SteppedPortico.
Source:author 549
.........................................
Plate39 Magazinenorth of the Magazineof the JewelFresco.
Source:author 550
.........................................
Plate40 Lintel of the door betweenthe two magazinesunderthe
SteppedPortico. Source:author 550
............................
Plate41 BlockedWindow in the Magazineof the JewelFresco.
Source:author 551
.........................................
Plate42 Southface of the first floor wall at the SteppedPortico.
Source:author 551
.........................................
Plate43 Throne in the Throne Room in 1900.
Source:collection TheodoreFyfe 552
...........................
Plate44 The Lustral Basin in the ThroneRoom in 1900.
.....................
Plate45 The Throne in the ThroneRoom with plasterremainsin 1900.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 665a 553
....................
Plate46 Constructionof the flat roof abovethe Throne Room in 1901.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 655a 553
....................
Plate47 Reconstructionof the threecolumnsin the ThroneRoom in 1901.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 654c 554
....................
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 654d 554
....................
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 654b 555
....................
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 126w 555
...................
Plate51 Plasterfloor andbenchin the Kitchen of the ServiceWing in 1901.
.....................
Plate52 PartlYreconstructedfrescoin the Throne Room in 1901.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 656b 556
....................
Plate53 West Wing in 1901looking south.
......................
Plate54 Flat Roof abovethe ThroneRoom in 1903.
.....................
Plate55 ReconstructedThrone Room in 1901.
.....................
List of Plates 21
PeterYGenzle
Plate 56 Door between Inner Sanctuary and the Service Wing.

Source: author 558
.........................................
Plate 57 East gable of pitched Roof above the Throne Room.
Probably 1904. Source: Ashmolean Museum, H 39a 559
.............
Plate58 West gable of pitched roof above the Throne Room.
Probably 1904. Source: Ashmolean Museum, ET 2119 559
..........
Plate 59 Construction of the concrete roof above the Throne Room
in 1930. Source: photo-book J.D. S. Pendlebury, BSA Athens 560
.....
Plate 60 Construction of the concrete roof above the Throne Room
in 1930. Source: photo-book J.D. S. Pendlebury, BSA Athens 560
.....
Plate 61 Reconstructed Loggia above the Throne Room in 1930.
Source: photo-book J.D. S. Pendlebury, BSA Athens 561
............
Plate 62 Reconstructed Loggia above the Throne Room in 1997.
Source: author 561
.........................................
Plate 63 Shuttering for concrete beam above slot in the Throne Room
area from 1930. Source: author ............................ 562
Plate 64 North-west corner of the Inner Sanctuary.
Source author 562
..........................................
Plate 65 The Throne Room area today.
Source: author 563
.........................................
Plate 66 The West Wing today.
Source: author 563
.........................................
Plate 67 Round corner of the Throne Room area today.
Source: author 564
.........................................
Plate 68 Water puddle indicating the incline of the flat ceiling.
Source: author 564
.........................................
Plate 69 North wall of the Throne Room in 1997.
Source: author 565
.........................................
Plate 70 Restoration proposal for the Throne Room by Emile Gilli6ron.
Source: Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive 565
..................
Plate 71 North Lustral Basin in 1901 with replace parapet slabs.
Source: Ashmolean Museum, E. Top. 53b 566
.....................
Plate 72 North Lustral Basin in 1901 with replace parapet slabs.
Source: Collection Theodore Fyfe 566
..........................
Plate 73 North Lustral Basin in 1928.
Source: photo-book J.D. S. Pendlebury, BSA Athens 567
............
Plate 74 Ink and Watercolour record of the east wall of the North
Lustral Basin. Source: PM I, p. 409 567
.........................
Plate 75 North-east angle of the reconstructed North Lustral Basin in 1930.
Source: Ashmolean Museum, E. Top. 36b 568
.....................
Plate 76 Interior of the reconstructed North Lustral Basin in 1930.
Source: Ashmolean Museum, E. Top. 42 568
......................
Plate 77 Plan of the Theatral Area by Theodore Fyfe. 1903.
Source: Ashmolean Museum, TA I 569
.........................
Plate 78 The Theatral Area after restoration in 1903.
Source: Ashmolean Museum, E. Top. 68 569
..................... .
22 List of Plates
Plate79 North EntrancePassagein 1901after excavation.

Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top.-14 ...................... 570
Plate 80 North EntrancePassagein 1901after excavation.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 31 ...................... 570
Plate 81 North EntrancePassageafter first restorationin 1929.
Plate 82 North EntrancePassageafter final restorationin 1930.
Plate83 North EntrancePassagein 1997.
Source:author ......................................... 572
Plate84 Reconstructedand original wall of the North EntrancePassage.
Source:author 572
.........................................
Plate 85 End of reconstructedwall at the North EntrancePassage.
Source:author 573
...............
Plate 86 Concretebeamin vertical wall slot in north-westquarter
of the palace.Source:author .............................. 573
Plate 87 Magazinesof the Giant Pithoi. Probably 1904.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 346 ..................... 574
Plate 88 Magazinesof the Giant Pithoi. After 1904.
Plate 89 Plan of the GrandStaircase.TheodoreFyfe, 1901.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,GS/HC 5 ...................... 575
Plate90 Light-well of the GrandStaircasein 1901.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,ET 2022 ....................... 575
Plate91 Support-framesin the tunnel underthe third flight of the
GrandStaircase,1901.Source:AshmoleanMuseum,ET 2119 ..... 576
Plate92 Support-framesin the northernportico of the Hall of
the Colonnades.Source:AshmoleanMuseurn,ET 2017 .......... 576
Plate93 Excavationwork at the upper East-WestCorridor in 1901.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 282a .................... 577
Plate94 The secondsupportwork of the northernportico of the Hall of
the Colonnades.Source:AshmoleanMuseurn,E.Top. 282 ........ 577
Plate95 GrandStaircaseand northernportico of the Hall of the
Colonnadesin 1901.Source:AshmoleanMuseum,ET 2032 ....... 578
Plate96 GrandStaircaseand partsof the DomesticQuarterin 1902.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,no number ..................... 578
Plate97 GrandStaircasearealooking west in 1902.
Plate98 GrandStaircase,Hall of the Colonnadesand East-WestCorridor.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.T. 2009 ......... * ............
579
Plate99 Elevationand Sectionof the GrandStaircaseby Christian Doll,
1905.Source:AshmoleanMuseum,G/S 2* ................... 580
Plate 100 Elevationof the GrandStaircasewith sectiondetailsdrawn in
orangeink. Source:AshmoleanMuseum,G/S 7................ 580
Plate 101 isometricdrawing of the timber structureof the Grand
Staircase.Source:AshmoleanMuseum,G/S 4 581
.................
List of Plates 23
PeterYjenzle
Plate 102 Elevation of the original remains in the Grand Staircase area by
Doll, July 1908. Source: Ashmolean Museum, Doll's Folder 8 ..... 582
Plate 103 Reconstruction proposal for the Grand Staircase by Doll, 1905.
Section. Source: Ashmolean Museum, G/S 2 583
..................
Detail of section. Source: Ashmolean Museum, G/S 2 583
...........
Detail of elevation. Source: Ashmolean Museum, G/S I 584
..........
Elevation looking south. Source: Ashmolean Museum, GS/HC I 584
...
Detail of elevation. Source: Ashmolean Museum, GS/HC I 585
.......
Detail of elevation. Source: Ashmolean Museum, GS/HC I 585
.......
Elevation looking east. Source: Ashmolean Museum, GS/HC 3 586
....
Detail of elevation. Source: Ashmolean Museum, GS/HC 2 586
.......
Plate III Reconstruction work at the Grand Staircase in 1905.
Source: Ashmolean Museum, E.Top. 299a 587
....................
Plate 112 Hall of Colonnades and Grand Staircase after the reconstruction
work of 1905. Source: Ashmolean Museum, E.Top. 308a ........ 587
Plate 113 Third flight of the Grand Staircase after restoration in 1905.
Source: Ashmolean Museum, E.T. 2008 588
......................
Plate 114 Hall of Colonnades and Grand Staircase after restoration in 1905.
.....................
Plate 115 Grand Staircase after restoration in 1905.
....................
Plate 116 Grand Staircase restoration with disintegrating timber cladding.
.....................
Plate 117 Replacing the corner block of fourth landing in 1905.
....................
Plate 118 Corridor of Bays and Grand Staircase looking south.
.....................
Plate 119 Grand Staircase after the 1910 restoration work.
....................
Source: Ashmolean Museum, E.Top. 300c 591
....................
......................
Plate 122 Loggia with shield fresco completed in 1929.
Source: Ashmolean Museum, no number 592
.....................
Plate 123 Comer block of fourth landing in 1997.
Source: author 593
.........................................
Plate 124 Capital and abacusof the column of the third landing
of the Grand Staircase in 1997. Source: author ................ .
593
24 List of Plates
Plate 125 Northernportico of the Hall of Colonnades,groundfloor.

Source:author 594
.........................................
Plate 126 Northernportico of the Hall of Colonnades,first floor.
Source:author ......................................... 594
Plate 127 Lower East-WestCorridor looking eastin 1902.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.T. 2018 595
Plate 128 Lower East-WestCorridor looking eastin 1997.
Source:author ......................................... 595
Plate 129 Lobby of the WoodenPostsafter excavationin 1901.
Source:CollectionTheodoreFyfe ........................... 596
Plate 130 Lobby of the WoodenPostswith supportframe in 1901.
Plate 131 Lobby of the WoodenPostsafter restorationin 1902.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top 340a .................... 597
Plate 132 Lobby of the Woodenpostsafter restorationby Piet de Jong
in 1930.Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.T. 2083 ............... 597
Plate 133 Excavationwork in the Hall of Double Axes in 1901.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 242a .................... 598
Plate 134 Excavationwork in the Hall of Double Axes in 1901.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 242d .................... 598
Plate 135 Hall of Double Axes in 1901with remainsof upperstorey
stackedon the side. Source: Collection Theodore Fyfe 599
...........
Plate 136 Hall of Double Axes with first timber supportframesin 1901.
Plate 137 Light-well of the Hall of the Double Axes in 1901.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.T. 2051 ...................... 600
Plate 138 Light-well of the Hall of the Double Axes in 1901.
Source:CollectionTheodoreFyfe ........................... 600
Plate 139 Window betweenthe Hall of the Double Axes and the East-
. 601
West Corridor in 1902.Source:AshmoleanMuseum,253a ...... .
Plate 140 Window betweenthe Hall of the Double Axes and the East-
West Corridor in 1908.Source:AshmoleanMuseum,253b ....... 601
Plate 141 The secondtimber supportframe in the Hall of the Double
Axes in 1902.Source:AshmoleanMuseurn,E.Top. 298 .......... 602
Plate 142 The secondtimber supportframe in the HalI of the Double
Axes in 1902.Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 298 .......... 602
Plate 143 Reconstructionproposalfor the Hall of the Double Axes
by ChristianDoll. Source:AshmoleanMuseum,HDA I .......... 603
Plate 144 Decayedfloor slabsin the Hall of the Double Axes in 1928(?).
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,H 91 .......................... 604
Plate 145 Door andpillar wall of the Hall of the Double Axes in 1928.
Plate 146 Hall of the Double Axes after restorationin 1928.
Plate 147 Hall of the Double Axes looking west in 1997.
Source:author 605
.........................................
List of Plates F - 25
IVE SITY
OF YORK
PeterKienzlc
Plate 148 Hall of Double Axes, southwall with cavities.

Plate 149 Hall of the Double Axes, restoredsouthwall in 1928.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top 261 ..................... 606
Plate 150 Reconstructedportico of the Hall of the Double Axes in 1928.
Plate 151 ReconstructedupperHall of the Double Axes in 1928.
Plate 152 Decayedfloor in the southernportico of the Hall of the
Double Axes. Source:author .............................. 608
Plate 153 Decayedfloor in the easternportico of the Hall of the
Double Axes. Source:author .............................. 608
Plate 154 Hall of the Double Axes, reconstructedwestwall of the
light-well in 1997.Source:author 609
...........................
Plate 155 Original Gypsumjamb block with superimposed reconstructed
concrete pillar in the Hall of the Double Axes. Source: author ..... 609
Plate 156 Hall of the DoubleAxes. Crack in wall which waspartly
incorporatedin concretepillar. Source:author 610
.................
Plate 157 Remainsof clay featurein the Hall of the DoubleAxes.
Source:author ......................................... 610
Plate 158 DomesticQuarterin 1903.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top 231a.................... 611
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top 2314 .................... 611
Plate 160 Reconstructionwork in the DomesticQuarterin 1910.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,H 41a ......................... 612
Plate 161 The DomesticQuarterafter the reconstructionsof 1928.
Plate 162 DomesticQuarterlooking north from the Room with the Stone
Bench in 1902.Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 298d 613
........
Plate 163 Hall of the Double Axes andQueen'sMegaronin 1902.
......................
Plate 164 Hall of the Double Axes andQueen'sMegaronin 1902.
Plate 165 Queen'sMegaronin 1902.
.....................
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 159d 615
....................
Plate 167 DomesticQuarterlooking north from the Room with the Stone
Bench in 1903.Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.Top. 287 ......... 615
Plate 168 StoneBenchbeforeFyfe's restorationin 1902.
Source:CollectionTheodoreFyfe 616
.......................... .
Plate 169 StoneBenchafter Fyfe's restorationin 1902.
.......................... .
Plate 170 Window of the Court of the Distaffs after Fyfe's restoration
in 1902.Source:AshmoleanMuseum,E.T. 2075 .............. 617
.
26 List of Plates
Plate 171 Window of the Court of the Distaffs after Doll's restoration
in 1910. Source: Ashmolean Museum, E.T. 2073 617
................
Plate 172 Warped gypsum dado in the Room with the
Plaster Couch. Source: author 618
.............................
Plate 173 Warped gypsum dado in the Dogs Leg Corridor.
......................
Plate 174 Fir post of Fyfe's 1902 reconstruction in the Treasury.
Source: author 619
.........................................
Plate 175 Brick pillar of Fyfe's 1902 reconstruction in the
Room with the Plaster Couch. Source: author 619
. .................
Plate 176 Cast concrete doorjamb of Doll's restoration of the
Domestic Quarter in 1910. Source: author 620
....................
Plate 177 Ceiling of the Corridor of the Painted Pithoi,
affected by penetrating rainwater. Source: author ............... 620
Plate 178 Queen's Megaron looking west in 1902.
Source: Ashmolean Museum, E.Top. 189c 621
....................
Plate 179 Queen's Megaron looking west in 1903.
....................
Plate 180 Queen's Megaron in 1903.
.....................
Plate 181 Reconstruction proposal for the Queen's Megraon by Doll in 1908.
Source: Ashmolean Museum, QM I 622
.........................
Plate 182 Carved capital for the restoration of the Queen's Megaron in 1908.
...........................
Plate 183 Construction of a new doorjamb in the Queen's Megaron in 1908.
...........................
Plate 184 Original plaster remains decorated with a spiral frieze. Photograph
probably 1902. Source: Ashmolean Museurn, E. T. 2064 624
..........
Plate 185 The Bathroom of Queen's Megaron in 1997.
Source: author 624
.........................................
Plate 186 Test pit in the Queen's Megaron in 1913.
......................
Plate 187 The light-well of the Queen's Megaron in 1908.
....................
Plate 188 Queen's Megaron with first decoration scheme of 1908.
.....................
Plate 189 Queen's Megaron with second decoration scheme of 1930
....................
Plate 190 South wall of the light-well of the Queen's Megaron showing the
incline of the pitched roof. Source: author 627
.....................
Plate 191 Interior decoration of the Queen's Megaron in 1997.
Source: author 627
.........................................
Plate 192 Detail of the lintel construction of the Queen's Megaron.
Source: author 628
.........................................
Plate 193 Neglected but still good cladding from Dol I's 1908
reconstruction of the Queen's Megaron. Source: author .......... 628
List of Plates 27
PeterKienzle
Plate 194 Detail of doorjamb constructionin the Queen's Megaron

0
Source: author 629
.........................................
Plate 195 Detail of door constructionin the Queen'sMegaron.
Source:author 629
.........................................
Plate 196 Door in the southwall of the Queen'sMegaron.
Source:author 630
.........................................
Plate 197 Eastwall of the light-well of the Queen'sMegaron.
Source:author ......................................... 630
Plate 198 Decayedgypsumblock with cementrepairs.
Source:author 631
.........................................
Plate 199 Decayedgypsumblock with cementrepair.
Source:author ......................................... 631
Plate200 Decayedgypsumblocks with cementjoints.
Source:author 632
.........................................
Plate201 Remainsof a gypsumcolumnbasecompletedwith concrete.
Source:author 632
.........................................
Plate202 Weatheredgypsumdoorjamb.
Source:author 633
.........................................
Plate203 Decayedgypsumwith impurity indicatingdecayrate.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,H 98 633
..........................
Plate204 Door lintel with rusting iron-l-beamsexplodingthe concrete
envelope.Source:author ................................. 634
Plate205 Window lintel with rusting iron-l-beamsexplodingthe concrete
envelope.Source:author ................................. 634
Plate206 Lintel in the Lobby of the WoodenPostswith exposed
reinforcementrods.Source:author .......................... 635
Plate207 Lintel of window betweenthe Court of Distaffs and
the Room with the PlasterCouchwith exposed
reinforcementbars.Source:author. ......................... 635
Plate208 Decayedgypsumpavementwith cementpointing in the upper
East-WestCorridor. Source:author 636
.........................
Plate209 Ceiling of the Corridor of the PaintedPithoi with water
damage.Source:author 636
..................................
Plate2 10 ReconstructedEastBastion.
......................
Plate211 Excavationwork in progressat the Little Palace.
Source:AshmoleanMuseum,H 35b 637
.........................
Plate212 Excavatedtimber remainspreparedfor transportto the Museum
in Herakleion.Source:CollectionTheodoreFyfe 638
...............
Plate213 Constructiontimber from Austria arrivesin CandiaHarbour.
..........................
Plate214 Reconstructiondrawing for the shrinein the CentralCourt.
Printedin Evans,1911,facing p. 294. Original with pencil
corrections.Source:AshmoleanMuseum:no number............ 639
28 List of Plates
Plate 215 Fresco fragments representing Minoan temple.

Source: Evans, 1901b 640
....................................
Plate 216 Restored panel of the Miniature Fresco.
Source: PM III, plate xvi, facing p. 47 641
........................
Plate 217 Protection houses above Roman excavation in Bignor, Sussex.
Source: Schmidt, 1988, p. 88 642
...............................
Plate 218 Excavation house in Pergamon on the excavated ruins of a
town house. Source: Radt, 1988, p. 325 ...................... 642
Plate 219 Reconstructed doorjamb at the acropolis of Mycenae
Source: author 643
.........................................
Plate 220 Reconstructed concrete floor and column base at the
acropolis of Mycenae. Source: author 643
.......................
Plate 221 Protection roof above the Palace of Nestor at Pylos.
Source: Schmidt, 1988, p. 72 644
...............................
Plate 222 Construction of the Villa Ariadne in 1906.
Source: Ashmolean Museum, E.Top. 504 ..................... 644
Plate 223 Dining room in the Villa Ariadne in 1997.
Source: Author 645
...... **********'****''**'****''*********
Plate 224 Main entrance of the Villa Ariadne in 1994.
Source: author 645
.........................................
Plate 225 Villa in 'Minoan' style in Athens in 1997.
Source: author 646
.........................................
Plate 226 Floor in 'Minoan , style of the terrace of the Villa in Athens
in 1997. Source: author 646
..................................
Plate 227 Excavations at Akrotiri (Thera) in 1997.
Source: author 647
.... *********'******'*''*******''*'* ... **
Plate 228 Excavations at Akrotiri (Thera) in 1997.
Source: author 647
.........................................
Plate 229 St. Albans Cathedral before restoration.
Source: The Architect's Journal, 23. November 1977, p. 1021 ..... 648
Plate 230 St. Albans Cathedral after restoration.
Source: The Architect's Journal, 23. November 1977, p. 1021 ..... 648
List of Plates 29
Abbreviations
DM DuncanMackenzieDiary (followed by dateof entry)

EM I Early Minoan I (early Early Minoan period)
EM II Early Minoan 11(middleEarly Minoan period)
EM III Early Minoan III (late Early Minoan period)
ENB EvansNotebook(followed by page)
LM I Late Minoan I (early Late Minoan period)
LM Il Late Minoan 11(middle Late Minoan period)
LM III Late Minoan III (late Late Minoan period)
MM I Middle Minoan I (earlyMiddle Minoan period)
MM 11 Middle Minoan II (middle Middle Minoan period)
MM III Middle Minoan III (late Middle Minoan period)
PM I EVANS, Arthur (1921). "The Palaceof Minos. Volume 1". MacMillan &
Co., London, United Kingdom.
PM II EVANS, Arthur (1928). "The Palace of Minos. Volume 2". (Two
volumes).MacMillan & Co., London,United Kingdom.

PM III EVANS, Arthur (1930)."The Palaceof Minos. Volume 3". MacMillan &
PM IV EVANS, Arthur (1935)."The Palaceof Minos. Volume 4". MacMillan &
30 Abbreviations
Acknowledgments
It would not have been possible to complete this work without the help and support of
many. First I must acknowledgethe financialand moral support of rny parents.I owe
them most gratitude.
I thank my supervisors Jane Grenville and Peter Burman for accompanying me on my
three year journey exploring the Palace of Minos and its conservation problems. They
offered valuableadvice and always found some time to discuss my work. I am also most
thankful to Dr Hartwig Schmidt, Rheinisch-WestfdlisclieTechnischeHochschule Aachen,
for among other things, his idea to study the reconstruction and conservation work at
Knossos.In a generousand - as far as academiais concerned- uncommon move, he gave
this topic away, so I could do the research here in York. Furthermore, I am grateful to
the University of York and especially to Mr Philip Sirnison for granting a University
Bursary. Without this financial help I would not have been able to complete my studies.
I thank Dr AlexandraKaretsou,Ephor of the Kr-Ephoria in Herakleionand Dr Eleni

Banou for their support and the permissionto work on site. I also owe thanksto the
guardson site, who madeit possibleto investigateall partsof the palaceeventhe ones
normally inaccessible;amongthe guardsa specialthanksto Nikos, who introducedme
to Greekcoffee.
I am grateful to Helen Fields and Helen Clark frorn the British School at Athens and to
Dr Colin Macdonald, Curator at Knossos. I would like to thank Dr David Wilson, who
introduced me to Minoan archaeologythroughout numerous breakfasts, at the Taverna's
rocking kitchen table, Dr Sinclair and Rachel Hood, Dr Peter Warren, Dr Don Evely, Dr
Acknowledgments 31
Peter Kienzle
Vasso Fotou, Dr Nico Momigliano, Conn Murphy, AndreasLapourtas, Evi Petropoulou,

Stefie Chlouveraki and Steven Soetens.
Furthermore, I would like to thank Michael Vickers and Julie Clementsfrom The
AshmoleanMuseum Oxfordfor their non-bureaucratichelp, ElizabethUnderwoodfrom
the Architectural Association,Mrs Greenhill from the Society for the Protection of
AncientBuildingsandElizabethWaywellfrom theBritish School'sLondon Office. I also
would like to thank JuneYorke, daughter-in-law,and Lilah Clarke, granddaughterof
TheodoreFyfe.
The King's Manor in York was a wonderful placeto study and I would like to thank
Keith Parker,JanPowellandPatHaywoodfrom theKing's Manor library. Without their
ability to find books andespeciallyobscure I
old magazines would not havegot so far.
I would like to thank Pam Hodgson and Gavin Ward and my fellow studentsAlp
Ozerdern,JenniferMacdonald,Keith Emerick,PriyaleenSingh,Li-ChuanPan,An Suy,
PeterGoldsboroughand Enrico Fodde.
Eric Johnson,Leigh SymmondsandRatishNandacorrectedmy English andalI mistakes

ZD
whicharestill in thisthesisareonly my own fault.I amgratefulto StefieChlouverakiand
VassifisZervosfor translatingGreektexts for me and I apologisefor not having learned
moreGreekin thethreeyearsof rnystudy.Furthermore,I am grateful to Reni and Keith
Parkerfor translatingPernier'spaperfrom Frenchto English.
32 Acknowledgments
c
Preface
It will be importantfor the readerto makehimself familiar with the history of the site in
order to understandthe termsand the referencesin the text. The thesisis not aimedto
enter the ongoing and sometimescontroversial discussionon the correct way of
interpreting the palace.The remainsare too few to allow an undisputedinterpretation
Minoanhistory andarchaeologyaremuch more qualified
andmanyscholarsresearching
to discussthis problem than I will ever be. However, the reconstructionscannot be
discussedwithout any referenceto the original Minoan palace.Therefore, I printed
Gerald Cadogan'sdiscussionof Knossianhistory in Appendix V Familiarity with the
Minoan past would be of help in better understandingthis thesis.I choseCadogan's
writing becauseit is short but nonethelessdetailed. It is a rather conservative

interpretation of Knossian history which, however, does not imply that other
interpretationsare automaticallywrong.
In 1905Arthur Evanspresentedat the Archaeologicalcongressin Athenshis systemfor

2
dating the Minoan past. He suggesteddividing the Minoan period in three sections:
Early Minoan (EM), Middle Minoan (MM) and Late Minoan (LM). Each of these
sections was subdividedinto three phaseslabelledwith Romannumbersso that, for

example,LM I wastheearlypart of Late MinoanwhileLM III wasthe last phaseof Late
Minoan. Through comparativestudy with Minoan artefacts in Egypt and Egyptian
'Myers, Myers and Cadogan, 1992, p. 124 ff.
ýCongr6s Internationald'Archdologie,Athens, 1905.(SeeTheThnes,12 April 1905,p. 4). Evans's

paper, explaining the classificationsystemfor the Minoan periods was printed in truncatedway in the
proceedings of theconference.Subsequently,in 1906 Evanshadhis paperprintedagainon his own expenses
wit the title: "Essai de Classificationdestpoques de la Civilisation Minoenne".
Preface 33
Peter Kienzle
artefacts in Knossos, he was able to suggest absolute dates for each of these phases.
Modern research has improved and adjusted these dates, and some more sub-groups,
labelled with letters, were introduced. However, the general dating principles remain
unchanged. The table printed on page thirty-five is based on Cadogan's article in the
Aerial Atlas of Ancient Crete which gives recent and widely accepted dates." Like the
interpretation of the function of the palace these dates are not undisputed and they are
not on my part an archaeological statement!
Arthur Evans used to label rooms in the palace with names rather than employing a
numericalsystem. Some of the names have changed and some of them were used twice
at different parts of the Palace. Hood and Taylor tried to establish a numbering system
for the rooms in 1978 but failed to gain acceptancein the scholarly world. Thus, I used
the conventionalterminology even if this was sometimes complicated and cumbersome.

The namesof rooms are indicatedby capital letters for example the Room with the Stone
Bench or the Hall of the Double Axes. It will be necessaryfor the reader to make oneself
familiar with the namesof the rooms. A sketch plan with the names is reproduced at the
end of volume two to allow readers to identify the rooms in the palace.
in this thesisaregiven in the metric system.Arthur Evansemployed

All measurements
andarchitecturalremainsin his notebooksand

themetricsystemto recordarchaeological
diaries evenbeforehe beganwork at Knossos.' At Knossos,the site was recordedby
TheodoreFyfewho alsousedthemetricsystem.Only later,an irnperialscalewasadded
to the metric one on drawingsintendedfor publication.In the text of his publications
Evansalsousedthe metric systemdo give distancesor dimensions.I executed171Y own
recordsin the metric systemand alsousedit in the text.
'Myers, Myers and Cadogan, 1992, p. 33.
*Ibe datesgiven in the table and in the thesis use the conventional system of BC and AD. which shall
not be understood as an attempt influence anyone's historic perception or religious
C
feelings.
'See for example Brown, 1993, p. 68.
34 Preface
Conservation and Reconstruction at the Palace Minos Knossos
of at
300OBC - Early
rariy MinoanI
minoan i (EMI)
krmi) -
2900 BC
2800 BC
2700 BC
2600 BC
Early Minoan
Early H (EME)
Minoan II (EMII)
2500 BC
Prepalatial.
Prepalatial.
2400 BC
2300 BC
2200 BC
2100 BC - Early Minoan

Early HI (EMIII)
Minoan III (EMIII)
2000 BC
MinoanIA (MMIA)
MiddleMinoan
Middle (MMIA)
1900 BC
Minoan113
MiddleMinoan
Middle (MMIB)
113
(MMIB)
1800 BC Protopalatial
Minoan11
MiddleMinoan
Middle H (MMID
(MMID (Old Palace)
1700 BC
Middle MinoanIH
MiddleMinoan (M.MIII)
III (MMIII)
1600 BC
LateMinoanIA (LMIA)
LateMinoan (LMIA) Neopalatial
Neopalatial
1500 BC
Late MinoanM
LateMinoan EB(LME)
(LMEB) (New Palace)
(New Palace)
1400 BC Minoan U (LMID
L ate Minoan (LMID -- ------
-
DIA (LMIHA)
Minoan IIIA
Late Minoan
Late (LMIIIA)
1300 BC
Late Minoan
Late IlIB (LMIIIB)
Minoan HEB (LMIIIB)
1200 BC
Postpalatial
Postpalatial
LateMinoan
Late HIC (LMIIIQ
MinoanIIIIC(LMIIIQ
1100 BC
1000 BC Sub-Minoan(SM)
Sub-Minoan(SM)
Table I Chronologicalchartof Minoanperiods.Basedon Cadogan.
Preface 35
Peter Kienzle
The thesis is presented in three volumes, the first of which contains the main text with
line drawings, the bibliography and the appendices. The second volume contains the
plates and the third volume containsthe drawings. In the text, I regularly refer to various
4
plates. Frequently it will be necessaryto compare two plates in order to recognise the
amount of work executed and it is helpful to have the two plates printed next to each
other. Within a group of plates of one area it was attempted to print them in
chronological order. However, only few of the original photographs were dated and thus
their order is sometimes arbitrary.
36 Preface
Introduction
Figure I Map of the eastern Mediterranean showing
locationsmentionedin the thesis.
38 Introduction
Introduction
On 23 March 1900Arthur Evansand his assistantDuncanMackenziewith thirty-two

menbeganthe excavations at Knossos,Crete.By I April a hundredmen were employed
andby the endof the two
season acresof the palacesite were '
exposed. Initially Evans
was looking for evidenceof what was laterto be known as Linear A and Linear B script.
He believedthe siteat KephalaHill couldbeexcavatedwithin a few years2but ultimately
he wasinvolved at Knossosuntil his deathin 1941.The undertakinghe startedin 1900
proved to be much larger than he had originally expected.
Figure 2 Map ot Crete showing Minoan archaeological

C, sites anu importanEmouern cities (in italics).
The Palaceof Knossoswas excavatedfrom 1900to 1930and was reconstructedat the
sametime.Thus, thirty yearsof excavationhistory are synonymouswith thirty yearsof

reconstitution work. In many areasthe remains of upper storeys were found in their
original position and frescoes and gypsumpaving proved to be too valuableto be left
The
exposed. resultof this, it
as presents itself today, is an inextricably interwovenfabric
'Brown, 1994,37.
'See for example:Evans,1943,p. 344.
Introduction 39
PeterMenzle
of old and new, of NIinoanwalls, original stonesresetin a new contextandcompletely

new constructions.
4 I6U1 .ia atu&ut, s tI, J3aJa aII, VT &hI IIIqJJS
Today,thePalaceof Minos at Knossosis one of the most importantarchaeologicalsites

in Greece,and, indeed,in the entire world. More than one million visitors seethe ruins
of thepalaceeveryyear.Due to theirpreconception- their knowledgeof the site andthe
40 Introduction
site'shistorywhen they arrive - they will discovervariousthings or gain impressionsof

architectureand decorationin BronzeAge Knossos.Despiteindividual preconceptions
eachtourist's experiencewill be dominatedby the reconstructionswhich commandthe
site.
00
Tn
so
Figure4 Sketchplan of the Palaceof Minos at Knossos.
The imageof the Minoanarchitecturein generalandexplicitly of the Palaceof Minos at

Knossos is determined by the reconstructionsor, as Evans liked to call them,
reconstitutions.Virtually all holiday cataloguesof Crete feature at leastone imageof
Knossosbut they featurereconstructedparts rather than Minoan material.In a similar
way nearly every postcard sold in the stalls at the palaceentrancefeaturesconcrete
reconstructionsor restored frescoesas the main motif while the excavatedMinoan
structuresare marginalised.The fresco of the lily prince, reconstructedby Gilli6ron in
Introduction 41
Peter Kienzle
1925 for Arthur Evans became the symbol for Herakleion's shipping company Minoan
Lines. The architectural style of the reconstructions and the recreated interior design
becamethe common way of representing'lost cultures' in popular medias, as for example
in the film Erik the Viking or the comic book AsterLx and Obelix all at sea. Today the
reconstructionsof the Palaceare better known than the actual palace remains themselves.
Today, ah-nosta century later, the reconstructions have aged and acquired a patina. The
original excavatedstructuresand modern reconstructions have become indistinguishable

and difficult to understand. Even architects or archaeologists who are familiar with
excavationsites and ancient building methods are confused whether certain parts of the
palace are original or reconstructed. How much more puzzled by this site must an
untrained visitor be?
Criticism of the Reconstructions
Much has been written about the palace and almost all of this writing includes short
paragraphs on the reconstruction '

work on site. Archaeologists, conservationists,
architects, and even travel guides label the reconstructions 'controversial', 'much
debated', or 'questionable'. However, none of them ever enters into an extensive
discussionof the reconstructionsbeyondtheseendlesslyrepeated basic statements.Many
of these assessmentsof the reconstructions are rooted in personal feelings or in an

condemnation of reconstruction work per se based on the imperative demand of the
Charter of Venice. A detailed investigation is neededon which a sound criticism could
be based.
In 1930 the Austrian archaeologist Camillo Praschniker dubbed Knossos "a movie city"
which brings the main argument to a point. ' The reconstructions were seen as a stage
set preparedby Evans to convince archaeologists and visitors of his interpretation of the
'SeeLiteraturereview laterin this chapter.

'As quotedin Horwitz, 1981,p. 201.
42 Introduction
Minoan past.' The reconstructions, so the argument goes, obstruct the real value of the
site, and are - at least to a certain and not yet detenninedextent - hypothetical.
Consequently,they arepotentially misleadingto the inexperiencedvisitor.
at thepalaceliterallyform a concretestatementof the interpretation

The reconstructions
of the site. When, in his publications, Arthur Evans describes his findings in his own
colourful and enthusiastic way, past periods seem to come alive:
"If he[thelordof thehouse]wishedto speak,let ussay,to Ariadnehehardlyhadto raisehisvoice

tocallhertothebalcony Conversation
opposite. couldbeheldoil bothsides,and,if thereweremusic
theirlord,andwhoevermayhavestoodonthenarrowplatformbeside
or songin theladies'chamber
the niche, might have the full enjoymentof it. Ile life of a household rises before us, as it was carried
on some sixteen centuries before our era."'
The vivid imagination Arthur Evans employed to describe this scene, appears strange in
the scholarly world of today where objectivity and accuracy are considered the most
important characteristics of research. It is probably this flarnboyant style of writing that
places Arthur Evans under the suspicion by the scholarly establishment. Can a man who
is using such vivid imagination in describing excavated ruins be trusted to be accurate in
his reconstitutions? Or, rather, do we have to believe that it was the sarne fantasy which
was not only employed in writing but also in recreating Knossos? It is of interest to learn
what was known and what could be known about the Minoan past at the time of the
reconstruction. To what extent are these reconstructions based on Evans's imagination,
and to what extent are they based on research? If they are based on research, is the result
of these investigations reliable?
It hasoftenbeenquestionedwhetherthe amountof reconstitutionwork at Knossoswas

needed, or whether it was necessaryto execute it at all. This criticism is based on the
imperative demand of the Charter of Athens and, much more, the Charter of Venice
'For the discussion of this see: Castleden, 1990a, p. 32

6PMll, p410.
Introduction 43
PeterKienzle
work at archaeological 7
siteS. The Charter of
which a priori rules out reconstruction
Athens was agreedupon in 1931, one year after the reconstruction work was completed
at the Palace and the Charter of Venice dates from 1964. Clearly, then, they could not
have been guiding principles for the work. However, the meetings of architects and
archaeologists in both Athens and Venice which have resulted in these charters did not
happenwithout a prehistory. They are landmarksin a long history of ongoing discussions
on conservation philosophy. Thus, it will be necessary to set the reconstructions at

Knossosagainst the conservation thoughts of their time but not against the demands of
4-:
1
thecharters.In fact,the Charterof Athenswasinfluencedby the work at Knossosrather
thanviceversa.8Anothermainareaof criticismfocuseson the useof reinforcedconcrete
which is commonlyseenasinappropriateandharmful; yet thereis, to date,no detailed
studyof the aestheticandstructuralperformanceof the materialat Knossos.
Also, it has
beendecriedthat the reconstructionsused,andwere directly placedon, historic fabric.
is wantingwhich analysesthe damagecausedby theseactions.
Again, an assessment
Besides the negative criticism, the reconstructions were also positively assessed.They
help the tourists to understand Minoan architecture and the palaces of Mallia and
Phaestos,which have not been reconstructed are understood much better after Knossos
hasbeenvisited.' Furthermore, it is frequently pointed out that the reconstructions were
necessary to keep the excavated elements in position and to protect the historic fabric
from the weather.Evans frequently argued that the necessity of the reconstruction work
was imposed on him becauseof the very specific circumstances at Knossos. At various
places the remains of the second storey survived remarkably well and in certain places
even the remains of the third storey were traceable. Another problem particular to
Minoan sites,but especially particular to the excavation site of Knossos, is the frequent
use of the material 'gypsum'. Gypsum is a fine, but very soft stone which is easily soluble
in water. If this material is not protected from weather it will dissolve within a short time.
Both the unusuallygood preservation of parts of the upper storey and the particularities
'Venice Charter,Article 15.

'SeeChapter7
'O'Conell, 1990,p 82. SeealsoKaretsou,1997,p. 18.
44 Introduction
actionsnot commonat other sites.Thus, Arthur Evans

of gypsumrequiredconservation
claimsthat he wasforcedto undertakeeffortsto preservethe site and his reconstructions
respondto this need.In fact, J.D.S. Pendlebury,the notedMediterraneanarchaeologist
offered support: "without the restorationsthe palacewould be a meaninglessheapof
"
ruins". This statementhas been widely quoted in the relevant "
literature. The needfor
conservationandprotectionis generallyacceptedandthe reconstructions

valuedby many
scholarsfor this reason.
The Dilemma
It hasbeenshownabovethatthe negativecriticism of the ruins wasbasedon the general

"
philosophicalandtheoreticalaspectsof conservationand presentation. In contrast,the
positive support of the work was rooted in its practical value for preservation and in its
educational value for 13

ViSitorS. Thus, two different systems of evaluation reached a
different verdict on the quality of the reconstitutions.
The general dilemma of theory and criticism of architecturehas been outlined by

14In order to createa generaltheory the particularsof a specific problem must
Banharn.
be left out. But no individual building canbe criticised without understandingits brief,
the reasonswhy the building wascreatedin the first place.Unlike fine art, or "portable
art" asBanhamlikes to call it, but like industrialdesign,criticism of architecturehasto
accept the fact of utility. Understandingthe "why" of architectureis the first step to
understand its "how". " For criticismit is evenmore importantto understandthe original
brief asbuildingsbecomelessformal." Domesticarchitecturein any one country hasa
"'Pendlebury, 1954, p. 10.

"See for example: Lapourtas, 1997, p. 79, Horwitz, 1981, p. 222;
12For example Durm. 1910, Schmidt, 1985, p. 30 f., Farnoux, 1996, p. I 10 ff.
"For example 1959, p. 4 ff., Graham, 1987, p. 26, Papadopoulos, 1997, p. 93 ff.
"Banham, 1965.
15Banham, 1965, p. 92.
"'Ibid., p. 96.
Introduction 45
PeterKienzle
formalandacceptedbrief but the reconstructions at Knossosarea ratherexceptionaltask

for anarchitect.Thus, the original brief needsto be establishedbeforetherecan be any
criticism of the work.
The dilemma is that the criticism of the reconstitutions at Knossos, both positive and
negative, has seen them as the result of a single, deliberate design process. They are
condemned or praised for a single aspect, for example presentation or protection.

Generallyspeaking,architectural theory and criticism infers that the architect starts with
a blank sheet of paper, implying that he has the freedom to design structure according
to his intentions.It disregards the reality that the physical result of the design process is
only a distorted imageof the original theory applied, with financial, human and technical
constraintsbeing the distorting factors. It will be to
necessary apply the dualistic, platonic
system of a world of ideas and the imperfect world experienced by the observer. The
world in which we live and which we experienceconsistsonly of the shadows cast by the
original ideaswhich are accommodatedin a overlaying world of the perfect and complete
ideals.According to Plato, anything in this world is only an imperfect reproduction of the
original idea. So far, criticism of the reconstitutions failed to identify the relationship
between the original ideas, the influencing factors and the physical result.
In the literature the reconstructions at Knossos are ascribed solely to Evans, yet it is
evident that he could not do the entire work on the site himself. He employed local
workers to do all the manual labour but he also employed archaeologists, artists and
architectsto help him organize and manage the excavation at Knossos. It was left to the
archaeologistDuncan Mackenzie to keep a proper excavation diary and to work on the
pottery. The two Swiss artists, E. Gilli6ron p6re and fils, who had a workshop in Athens,
worked frequently for Arthur Evans.They executedreconstruction drawings of frescoes,
pottery and small finds, but they also reproduced and restored these artefacts. Finally
Evans successivelyemployedthree architectswho recorded the excavated structures and
produced reconstruction drawings of the site. Theodore Fyfe worked for Evans from
1900 to 1904 and Christian Doll from 1905to 1910. Piet de Jong was employed partially
by Arthur Evans and partially by the British School at Athens between 1921 and 1930.
46 Introduction
From the earlyyears,thesearchitectsexecutedconservationand reconstructionwork at

Knossos. It was the conservationattitude, knowledgeand skills of Evans and these
employeeswhich influencedthe work on site. The work at Knossos was further

determinedby the particular conservationproblemsof the excavatedstructuresand
materialsandalsothe techniques,skills andmaterialsavailablefor the reconstructions.

Finally, Arthur Evans was a wealthy person but even he was subject to financial
restrictions.
It is the commonpracticein architecturalhistory to namethe architectof the building,

but it is ratherlesscommonto-talk aboutthe client - the employerof the architectswho
thework andpayedfor it. For example,ChristopherWren is well
actuallycommissioned
known as the architect of St. Paul's Cathedral,but the personwho employedhim to
createthis masterpieceis unknownto most.This is different in Knossos.Arthur Evans
employedthreearchitectsat theexcavationsiteto plan and executereconstructionwork,
but the work is commonly associatedwith his name whereasthe namesof these
architects are unknown to most. Why is this so? Was the entire conservationand
reconstructioneffort at based
Knossos exclusivelyon Arthur Evans's ideas?And hashe
determinedthe work in sucha way that the architectswere mere 'vehicles' to execute
his plans?" Evanswas not trainedas an architectand consequentlyhad to rely on the
architectural knowledge of Theodore Fyfe, Christian Doll and Piet de Jong for the
executionof the It
reconstructions. will be interestingto see,to what extent the design
of the reconstructionswas influencedby the artistic feeling and technicalknowledgeof

the architectsinvolved.
"As suggestedby Lapourtas, 1997, p. 75.
Introduction 47
PeterKienzle
Aim and Objectives
The aimof this dissertationis to work towardsa new understandingof how the existing
reconstitutions can be The
assessed. research is driven by the following question:
How can the reconstructions at the Palace of Minos at Knossos be evaluated in

both theirfunctional and their aestheticaspectsas an appropriate response to the
demandsof the original designbrief?
It aims to understandthe executedwork asthe result of designprocesseswhich were
subjectto many influencingfactors.The researchaimsto establishthe original design

brief in order to evaluatehow closethe resultscameto the intendedaim of the brief.
Thus,the researchquestiondirectsthe investigationtowardsestablishingan architectural
historyof the siteandidentifyingthehow andwhy of thereconstitutions.Through a new,
comprehensiveevaluation of the conservation and reconstitution work, a new

of
understanding the site of Knossoswill be developed.
To achievethis aim the following objectiveswere set:
0 Establishinga precise record of the reconstitutionsincluding their materials,

construction techniques and building dates.
0 Identifying the original design brief for the reconstitutions and investigating the
solutions proposed by the architects.
0 Identifying the conservationattitude of Evans and the architects in order to
establishtheir influenceon the designs.

0 Establishing the relationship between the client, Arthur Evans, and his architects.
0 Researching conservation philosophy at the time of the execution of the work
againstwhich the reconstitutionscanbe set.

0 Establishingto what extent, from the perspectiveof the late twentieth century, the
work on site has satisfied the expectations of excavators and architects?
48 Introduction
Methodology
It has been previously discussedthat in order to assessthe reconstitution work at

Knossos,an architecturalhistory of the work has to be written. Three main sources have
been used to establish this architectural history of the reconstitutions at Knossos:
0A detailed recording of large parts of the physical reconstitutions
0 Contemporaryphotographswhich show the reconstitutionwork
Contemporary documents (diaries, notebooks, etc.) by Evans or the architects
which give information why and how the work was executed.
The main source for this thesis are the stone by stone recordings of the reconstructed
parts of the palace. Theodore Fyfe, the first architect employed at Knossos, executed
numerousplans of the site which were published in regular reports in the Annuals of the
British School at Athens, the originals of which are still kept in the Evans Archive at the
Ashmolean Museum in Oxford. " They form the basic plans published in all subsequent
reports and paperson the palaceby Evans and by later scholars. Christian Doll added to
Fyfe's plan which was published as the definitive plan in the second volume of 'The
Palace of Minos' in 1928. He also produced reconstruction proposals for the upper
storey of the Domestic Quarter and other inked plans and sketches for publication in
Evans's book. However, the majority of DoU's plans are unpublished. They include large
ink and watercolour proposalsfor the reconstitution work of the Grand Staircase and the
Queen's Megaron. Piet de Jong produced numerous plans of specific details for
publication in the later volumes of 'The Palace of Minos'. He also drew the plans and
sections of the newly excavated tombs and houses but did not produce a new general
plan of the palace site.
"For a historyof the plansproducedso far on Knossossee:HoodandTaylor, 1981,p. 5 f.
Introduction 49
PeterKienzle
In 1981 Sinclair Hood and William Taylor published a plan and sections of the Palace at
Knossos." The planswere recorded in 1/100 scaleand published in 1/200 scale.They are
still the authoritative plans for work on the palace by current scholars. However, these
plans feature the outlines of the reconstitutions in dotted lines but omit to give any
detailed infon-nation.This helps to distinguish the original Minoan archaeology from the
reconstructions but was not helpful for this thesis. A more recent photogrammetric
survey has been commissionedby the Greek antiquity authorities which was executed in
1/20 scale.The photogrammetric results were plotted on paper but unfortunately never
were developed beyond this first stage. An archaeological analysis and interpretation is
lacking and thus their information value is limited. They were not published and access
to them proved to be rather difficult.
The first andmostvaluablesourceof informationon anyobjectis the object itself. I spent
nine weeksin summer1996andsevenweeksin summer1997at the palaceto execute

in 1150scalestoneby stonerecordingsof largepartsof the reconstructions.The careful
recordingof eachindividualstonerequiredan intense,long andcloseobservationof the

structures on site. The result of this processis not only the actualdrawing itself but a
deep understandingof the site. Many details which would have been overlooked
otherwisewerediscoveredby executingthesedrawings.For example,the different styles

of rubble masonry used by Fyfe and Doll were only observedby drawing them.
Furthermore,givingequalattentionto variousareasof the reconstructionsfor recording
the
reduces
purposes risk of selectingprejudicial informationsupportinga preconceived
theory.
The secondmost important source were the historic black and white photographs of the
excavation and reconstitution work taken on site in the years 1900 to 1930. Most of
these photographs were commissioned by Arthur Evans and taken by Marayiannis, a
photographerfrom Candia (Herakleion), Crete. They were the property of Arthur Evans
and after his death were bequeathed to the Ashmolean Museum where I was able to
"'Hood and Taylor, 1981, Supplementary Volume No. 13. British School at Athens.
50 Introduction
ConservationandReconstruction
at the Palaceof Minos at Knossos
studythem.Otherphotographsweretakenby TheodoreFyfe andarepart of the family's

inheritance,currently kept by Fyfe's granddaughter.I also had the opportunity to use
thesephotographsfor my research.
Finally,I usedphotographs
4:1 takenby JohnPendlebury
in 1929when he becameCuratorat Knossosafter Mackenzie'sdeath.They are stored
in the Archive of the British Schoolat Athens.
Most of thesephotographshavenot beenpreviouslypublishedbut somewere usedin

Arthur Evans' book The Palace of Minos. While a numberof thesepublishedwere
touchedup with paint, the originalsareoften still accessiblein the archive.They give a
clearanduntemperedimageof the work executed.However,few of thesephotographs
were dated and they only can be used correctly in cornbinationwith diaries and text
sources.
The third major sourceof information were the diariesand notebooksof the people
involved in the work on site. Duncan Mackenziekept the day to day diary of the
excavationsand,therefore,is regardedasthe most reliablesourceof information on the

excavation process. However, it seemsthat he was not at all interested in the
conservationandreconstructionwork on site andcommentson this part of the work at
Knossosare few. Arthur Evanskept notebooksratherthan diaries.They do not follow
a chronologicalorderandtheyarea mixture of sketches,reportsand aphorisms,sudden
Excavationrecordsare inextricablyinterwovenwith plansfor the
ideasandcalculations.
future. Unlike Mackenzie's diaries they allow a wide area of interpretation and
speculationwhich makesthem a more interestingbut lessreliable source.
Thereare also sketchbooksand notebooksby TheodoreFyfe and ChristianDoll which
wereproducedon site and,probably,handedto Evansat the end of a season'swork as

part of the contract.They give informationon the executedwork frorn the architect's
perspective.All the abovenameddiaries,notebooksand sketchbooksare kept in the
AshmoleanMuseumwherethey havebeenconsulted.Two notebooksof Piet de Jong
are kept in the archiveof the British Schoolat Athensand havebeenstudiedthere.
Introduction 51
PcterKicnzle
Arthur Evans usedto publish a report on the progress of the excavations every year. He
wrote short reports for the generalpublic which were printed in 7he Thnes. Longer
4n more
scholarly articles were published in the Annuals of the British School at Athens from
1900 to 1905 and from 1907 to 1913 in the Journal of Hellenic Studies. After World
War I reports were printed more irregularly in the Antiquaries Journal, Journal of
Hellenic Studies and the Annuals of the British School at Athens." These reports were
written shortly after the work was completed on site which makes them a more reliable
source. The Palace of Minos, Arthur Evans's massive six volume book on the
excavations at Knossos was written between 1921 and 1935 at his house at Youlbury,
Oxford. The Palace of Minos is more likely to be biasedby lapseof memory or the desire
to argue for a certain interpretation due to the spatial and chronolooical distance to the
work at Knossos. Besides Evans, only Theodore Fyfe left a number of articles on the
reconstruction work. No articles on related matters by Doll or de Jong could be found.
While biographicalmaterialon Arthur Evanswas publishedin severalbooks it proved
more difficult to find information on the The

architects. archivesof R.I. B. A., A. A.,
S.P.A.B. aswell asCamdenPublicLibrary,theWestYorkshireSocietyof Architectsand
similar allowed
organisations me to piecetogetherthe life of the architectsbefore and
aftertheir work at Knossos.This wascomparatively
simplefor TheodoreFyfe, who later
becamelecturerandDirectorof the Schoolof Architectureat Cambridgeand,thus, was
a 'publicfigure'. It wasmoredifficult for ChristianDoll and,especially,for Piet de Jong.
Contemporary and more recent writing on the palace at Knossos was also used, but this
represents secondary comments from authors who were not involved in the work but
rather presenttheir own interpretations.The relevant publications will be discussed later
in the literature review.
20SeeHood andTaylor, 1981, p. 11.
52 Introduction
Conservation
andReconstruction
at thePalace
of Minosat Knossos
Scope of Study
The study will be limited to the buildings of the palaceat Knossosand exclude all
outlyinghousessuchasthe SouthHouse,the Little Palace,the Royal Villa, the Temple

Tomb,etc.Furthermore,the studywill be limitedto thereconstitutionsexecutedbetween
1900and 1930whichwastheperiodduringwhich Arthur Evanswas responsiblefor the
site.More work wasexecutedafter World War II by Piet de JongandNikolaos Platon,

for the site.This includestwo areaswith a new
thenEphorin Herakleionandresponsible
concreteceiling (Magazineof the Medallion Pithoi and Room of the StoneVats) and
new lightweightprotectionroofsmadeof thin metalpolesandcorrugatedplastic sheets.
It also includesrepointingof large areasof the ruins andearlier reconstructionswith a
red coloured mortar. The progressof this work was regularly describedin Kretika
Chronika will not be discussedin the thesis.The aim of the thesisis to establish'why'
and 'how' the reconstitutionswere constructed.Furthermore, it does not aim to

investigate how they are perceivedin the scholarlyworld" or by modem tourists."
While the aim of the thesisis to dissectthe reconstructionsin an archaeologicallight it
doesnot presenta new archaeologicalinterpretationof the Minoan remains.
Literature Review
Much has been written about the Palaceof Knossosbut most of these books are
concernedwith Minoanprehistoryratherthanwith thereconstructions

themselves.These
books commonly discussthe reconstructionsin a few sentenceswhich are normally
restrictedto labelling them 'controversial'or 'much disputed'.In this literaturereview

I will concentrateon booksandarticleswhich dealexclusivelywith the reconstructions
or, at least,featuresubstantialpartsof them.The booksdiscussedfall into four groups:
"Andreas Lapourtas aims to establish the perception of the reconstitutions in the scholarly world in
his PhD at the University of Oxford.
2'Evi Petropoulou discussesthis in an MPhil study at the University of York.
Introduction 53
PeterKienzle
biographieson Evans, scholarly works on the site and its interpretation, scholarly works
few travel "
on reconstruction theory or practice, and a guides.
The biographiesofArthur Evans are the first placesto look for detailed information. The
most authoritative biography was written by his half-sister Joan Evans. Works of
reconstruction are mentioned a few times in their chronological order in the last fifty
pagesof her four hundred page book Time and Chance. 771e
stc)137
ofArthur Evans and
hisforbearers. 24She explains the need to protect the excavated remains and, thus, the
necessityof the work. She presents a lengthy quotation from Hogarth's letter to Evans,
explaining that British citizens would be reluctant to donate money for the excavations
when seeing the expensive reconstructions on site. Nonetheless, she defends her half
brother and approves of the reconstructions for the above stated reasons.
In her book The Find of a Lifetime, Sylvia Horwitz dedicates an entire chapter to the
reconstructions titled A New Era in Reconstruction but out of the thirteen pages only
"
two actually speak about this work. The title itself is borrowed from Evans' chapter
heading: New Era of Reconstitutiondue to the Use of Ferro- Concrete." It is interesting
that Horwitz replaces the word 'reconstitutions', preferred by Evans, with the more
popular 'reconstructions'. A detailed investigation of the reconstruction work was not

presentedhere and Horwitz did not reach any conclusion on it. However, she explained
that "his intuition and imagination

ZP added visual dimension to what his spadefound, until
ruin and reconstruction together produced a latter-day awakening

Cýof life in the court of
King Minos". 27 D. B. Harden's small Memoir on Sir Arthur Evans discusses the
reconstruction with just one sentenceand, also, reachesno conclusion. He wrote:
"Ibere are, of course,hundredsof travel guideson Crete and not all of them could be reviewed. I have
selected a few which claim to focus on cultural tourism.
"'Evans, 1943, p. 338 ff.
"Horwitz, 1981, p. 197 209. The pages on reconstitutions are 198 199.
- -
26PM III, p. 288.
2'Horwitz, 1981, p. 260.
54 Introduction
"[Evans] also continuedhis work, begunmany yearsbefore,of restoring the Palaceruins and
embellishingthem with reconstructions

of their architecture
andcoloured 1'
decoratione'.
In 1993 and 1994 Ann Brown publishedtwo small but richly illustrated volumeson
Arthur Evansbasedon materialfrom theEvansArchive in the AshmoleanMuseum.The
first volume,Before Knossos Arthur Evans's travels in the Balkans and Crete dealt
..
with the periodbeforeKnossos,whilethe second,Arthur Evansand the Palace of Minos
is the first publicationwhich exclusivelydiscussedthe excavationand reconstruction
work at thepalaceper se.It drawsuponthe rich photographicarchiveandthe diaries of
DuncanMackenzieandthe notebooksof Evans.However,thebook is ratherdescriptive.
It presentsthe datesandthe typesof work executedon site but refrainsfrom an analysis
andevaluation.Sincereferencesaremissing,its valuefor scholarlyuseis limited.
One of the first to criticise Sir Arthur Evans publicly for his reconstruction work was the
German architect and professor Joseph Durm. He visited Knossos in 1906 and in 1910
published in his book Die Baukunst der Griechen a lengthy discussion of the Minoan
architecture as well as a criticism of Evans himself:
"What is presented to the visitor is much and little, and less would have been more, if one had not
done so much concession to modem 'conservation'. Automatically, one asks for whom these
reconstructions were made. Only too soon one will see what one has had and what one has lost
forever. Too much has happened,to enable some tourists in imagination of the original. ""
JosefDunn was certainly one of the earliestand most fierce critics of Evans. He criticised
the amount of reconstruction work in 1906 when the Throne Room and the Grand
Staircase were the only major works executed. He was outraged by the 'inverted'
columns which looked, according to Durm, Re gigantic table-legs.Durm was an eminent

scholar in his time and his became
assessment a frequently quoted source in the scholarly
literature. Interestingly, when Durm. visited Knossos in 1906 only Christian Doll was
present while building the Villa Ariadne. Evans was at home in England.
"Harden, 1983, p. 15.

"Durm, 19 10, p51. Translation by the Author.
Introduction 55
Peter Kienzle
Pendlebury, in his Handbook to the Palace of Minos. Knossos briefly explains the
reconstructions as a necessary reaction to the conservation "

needs. His term of 'a
meaninglessheap of ruins' into which the ruins would turn without the reconstructions
became a common phrase. In his Archaeology of Crete he completely ignores the
existence of any reconstructions at Knossos."
GeorgKaro visited the excavationsat Knossosfor the first time in 1900andfrequently

after that date.His book Greifen ain 77iron.Erinnerungenan Knossosis a lively and
personalaccountof thesevisits. He claimsthat his frequentvisits to the site allow him
to judgethat the reconstructions
werebasedon archaeologicalevidence.He admitsthat
the victimof thetemptationto do too much,but claims that very
Evanswasoccasionally
few of the reconstructions Karo explainsboth tile necessityto prevent
wereunnecessary.
the collapseof excavatedstructuresand the needto provide infori-nationfor visitors.
Karo sketchesthe reconstructionsasa well consideredand appropriateresponseto the
32
requirementson site.
Sinclair Hood does not mention the reconstructions at Knossos in his book The Home
of the Heroes" but dedicates a section to them in his later publication The Bronze Age
Palace at Knossos.34The main part of this publication is the large plan and the sections
of the Palace which are accompanied by a small booklet with an extensive bibliography
and information on the excavations. Hood explains that Evans was confronted with
conservation problems in some areas of the palace but concludes that Evans' aim in
making the reconstructions was to give some impression how some parts of the palace
might have looked in its "
original state.
'Vendlebury, 1954, p. 10.

"Pendlebury, 1963.
"Karo, 1959, p 24 ff.
33
Hood, 1967.
'Hood and Taylor, 1981.
31Ibid., p. 4L
56 Introduction
Conservation and Rcconstruction at the Palace of Minos at Knossos
Hallager condemnsthe reconstructionsin his MycenaeanPalace at Knossos not so much

for being reconstructions but mainly because they had been, in his opinion, poorly
documented. He explains that the extensive reconstruction work and the lack of its
documentation make it impossible to use the palace as a source for current research.36
Mellersh refrains, in his The Destruction of Knossos, from making clear statementson
the quality of the reconstructions but he also states that interpretation is always a
dangerousbusiness." He calls the reconstructions of the upper storey of the West Wing
'tentative"' but, when describing the palaces of Mallia and Phaistos, suggests that the
lack of reconstructions may preclude an easy understanding. Small comments like these
are made throughout the book but do not result in a clear evaluation of the work.
Gerald Cadoganpresentsa very positive assessmentof the reconstructions in his Palaces
of "
Crete. He not only points out that the work was structurally necessary but also that
it was accurateand honest.He writes:
'Many of die details which make Knossosso fascinatinghave been preserved and developed by Evans
in his work of restoration or, as he called it, 'reconstitution'. These restorations have often been
criticised, as people have thought them ugly - but they are of enormous help in understanding
Knossos,which would otherwise be an incomprehensible mess: and by understanding Knossos, you
can understandbetterthe other palaceswhich have not been restored. For Evans his 'reconstitutions'
were essential to complete the work as he had to shore up what had already been uncovered before
proceedingdown. 'Ibe rotted timbers in the timber and rubble wal Is had dissolved the walls into heaps
of stonesand madeexcavationunsafeand the stratigraphy complicated. Evans has normally preserved

the evidencefor his reconstitutions:I hope readerswill find, as I have found, that the closer you look,
the more you marvel at how accurate and honest he was. Equally, his landscaping of the ruins show
style and imagination,asyou will seeif you walk on the hills around Knossos. What might seem from
inside the palace the random placing of the restored parts appears from afar a pleasing and
harmonious whole.""
3'Hallager, 1977, p. 11.

31Mellersh, 1970, p. 58.
3'lbid., p. 54.
3'Cadogan, 1980.
'Ibid., p51.
Introduction 57
Peter Kienzle
Castledenasksin his The KnossosLabyrinth whether the aim of the reconstructions was
"persuadingwith concrete?". "' He agreesthat in the early parts of the excavations Evans
was faced with conservation problems. According to Castleden, later serious problems
by Evans thought were originally present or, at least
were created adding elementswhich
conformablewith the function of the rooms. While he agrees that some reconstructions
he criticises others. However, the majority of his adverse cornment is
were correct,
directed towards the reconstruction of frescoes rather than the buildings. Castleden's
book aimsto presenta new interpretationof Knossosas a sanctuary rather than a palace.
He suggeststhat the reconstructionswere made to support Evans's interpretation rather
than to reconstitute what really had been found. Besides, perhaps, the broad flight of
stairs north of the South Propylon, he mostly agrees with Evans's physical
reconstitutions.However, he allocatesdifferent namesand functions for each room which

better suit his interpretation of the structure as a sanctuary.
In his Knossos. Unearthing a Legend, Farnoux claims that Evans was inspired by a
to preservethe ruins. 2He describes the conservation necessities and
strong commitment
the work executed but also analyses the sources employed by Evans for his
reconstructions. He argues that Evans acted with the most honest reasons and with
careful deliberation but concludes that Evans nonethelesswas influenced by the tastes
and methods of his time. 43
Two recentpaperswhichtalkedexclusivelyaboutthe reconstructionsat Knossosshould

be mentionedhere.In 1994Louise Hitchcock presenteda paperat the Associationof
titled VirtualDiscourse:Arthur Evansand the Reconstructions
EuropeanArchaeologists
of the Minoan Palace at Knossos. She argued that the reconstructionsincorporate
structuresfrom severalphasesof the Minoan palaceand suggestedthat the Minoan

culture was much more an invention by Evans than factual reality. In an attempt to
"'Castleden,1990a,p. 32 ff.
"'Famoux,1996,p. 85.While this smallandrichly illustratedbook obviouslyaimsat touristsrather
than scholars,Farnouxis a scholarand excavatorat Mallia. 'Ibus it was discussedunderthe headingof
scholarlydiscussionsof the reconstitutionsratherthanthe guidebook section.
43
Ibid., p. 89.
58 introduction
at the Palaecof Minos at Knossos
analyse the scholarly world's opinion of the reconstructions she posted a questionnaire
on the Internet but gained hardly more than half a dozen replies which she groups into
1. "Nostalgia!', 2. "Apologi;Y' and 3. 'The problems that the reconstructions pose for the
understandingof the site". She raised many questions on different issues and claimed to
prove on the strength of individual replies, certain details of the reconstructions wrong.
A clear distinction was drawn between necessary conservation work and the
reconstructions, but she failed to define where this line can be found. She called the
reconstructions a narrative by Evans, fictional and ahistoric. The "authentic" Knossos,
according to Hitchcock, can only be found in the notebooks and diaries by Evans and
Mackenzie but they are only accessible to scholars. She posed the general question
whether a "genuine" past can be reconstructed, but, again, failed to discuss it. She
Zý
concluded her paper with the acknowledgement that the reconstructions have today
the
acquired statusof a document of the pastthemselves and that no solution might be
found as to what to do with them. In all, the paperwas very theoreticaland the data
provided was too little asto be conclusive.
Lapourtas published his paper on Arthur Evans and his Representation of the Minoan
Civilisation at Knossos in the Journal Museum Archaeologist. " He also draws a clear
distinction between the earlier, and in his opinion necessaryconservation work by Fyfe
and Doll and the later reconstructions by de Jong, which were not justified. He suggests
that Evans's directorship at the Ashmolean Museum triggered the desire to mount a
permanent display of Minoan Culture at Knossos. It is acknowledged that Evans set
examplesof systematicapproach to excavation and conservation of archaeological sites

and on the employment of various specialists (archaeologists, architects, artists) for the
individual tasks on site. However, Lapourtas also assertsthat Evans was an autocratic
despot and that the reconstitutions were his very own idea of a permanent exhibition of
the Minoan past. He suggests that the architects "served merely as vehicles to execute
his plansPý'Furthermore, Lapourtas investigates the reception of the reconstructions at
Knossos in the scholarly world and how Evans adapted to this criticism.
"Lapourtas, 1997, p 71 82.

-
"'Ibid., p. 75.
Introduction 59
PetcrKienzle
In 1988 and 1993 Hartwig Schmidt publishedtwo volumesin cooperationwith the

Architectural Departmentof the GermanArchaeologicalInstitute. The first volume
discussesprotection shelters while the second volume examinesreconstruction at
archaeologicalsites. He explainsthat Evans gradually moved from a predominantly

protectiveaimof thereconstructionsto a more representativemotivation. He notesthat
the reconstructedparts are too few to provide effectiveprotection for the site. Many
areaswere still left exposedto the weather.They were later coveredby the Nikolaos
Platonandthe Greekauthoritieswith lightweight shelters.Schmidtexplainsthat on the
otherhand,the reconstructionof only somepartsof the ruins createda distortedimage
of theoriginalpalace.He suggests
that modemvisitors experiencethe palacenot as one
large structurebut as numeroussmallbuildings."' Schmidtconcludesthat Evansfailed
to achievehis conservationobjectivesand that the dominanceof the reconstructions
deprivedthe site of its archaeologicalandhistoricalvalues.47
In May 1995 the Getty Conservation Institute hosted a meeting of conservation
specialists in the Mediterranean the proceedings of which were published two years
later."' John Papadopoulos' paper, Knossos, discussesthe excavation site of the Palace
of Minos not only in its historical and scientificperspectivebut also in its aesthetic, social
"
and economic aspects. He explores various issues such as the prominence of one
historic phase in the reconstructions, the introduction of new materials and that, today,
the reconstructions acquired their own historical identity. Papadopoulos proves that
some details of the reconstructions were not accurate but fails to provide a general
judgement on the reconstructions. He explores the wider area of heritage site
managementwith its various issues of tourism and conservation. Thus, he provides the
background againstwhich this thesismust be set, but the paper is too short to discuss any
of the problems in detail.
"'Schmidt, 1993, p. 107.

"'Compare also Schmidt, 1985, p. 30.
"'de la Torre, 1997.
"Tapadopoulos, 1997, p. 93 ff.
60 Introduction
While thepreviousquotesweretakenfrom scholarlyliterature,anotherperspectivemight

be takenby the numerousvisitors who seeKnossoseveryyear.While masstourism did
wereexecuted,today the tourists form the

not existat thetime whenthe reconstructions
majority of the audiencefor this work. It seemsthat most of the visitors appreciatethe
help to understandingtile site, which is reflectedin the
asa considerable
reconstructions
travel literature on Crete.The following quotation was takenfrom O'Conell's Groc's
Candid Guide to Crete and Mainland Ports which is clearly in favour of the
reconstructions:
'Evansput intotrainanimaginativereconstruction.This wasbasedon frescoesfoundon the site and
of PietdeJong,which resultedin the mostcoherentrestoration.It is a pity that

theartisticrecreations
hisdistinctiveapproachcausedso muchacademiccontroversy.Therecanbe no doubtthat the other
island palace remains,that have all been 'faithfully' excavated,are much more enjoyableonce
Knossoshasbeenvisited."'"
O'Conell is one of the few writers who acknowledged that, besides Evans, other people
had an influence on the design of the reconstructions. He furthermore highlighted how
important the reconstructions are for untrained visitors in order to understand Minoan
architecture.
Gallas takes a different view in his travel guide to Crete:" Based on the assessmehtof
Schiering, he suggeststhat the reconstructionsmust be seen as a docurnent of their time.
Contemporary to the reconstruction of the Saalburg in Germany and two generations
after Schinkel's proposal for a Royal Palace on the Acropolis, Evans's reconstructions
seemedto be a typical product of the early twentieth century. He proposes that no one,
including Evans, would dare to execute this work today.
This literaturereviewshowsclearly the divide, identified earlier in this chapter,between

the needof protection and a reaction to this necessity on the one hand, and on the other
hand the phHosophicaland theoretical discussion on the legitimation for this work. None
"O'Conell, 1990, p 82.

"GalIas, 1985, P. 184 ff.
Introduction 61
Peter Kienzle
of the authors discussed went into a detailed analysis of why the individual
.
reconstructionswere built. The result on site was seen as sufficient to infer what
motivationsEvanshad to do this work.
Structure of the Thesis
Along with the introduction, the thesis has seven chapters and a conclusion. A basic
historyof the sitecanbe foundin Appendix 3, to provide readerswith basicinformation
on Minoan history. Volume two of the thesiscontainsthe photographsandplans.
In ChapterOne backgroundinformation will be provided.It consistsof threeparts,the

first of which comprisesof a short biographyof Arthur Evanswhich will help us to
his relationshipto archaeology
understand The secondsectionprovides
andconservation.
infon-nationon archaeologicaltheory and philosophyof the late nineteenthand early
twentiethcentury,whilethethird sectionwill exploretheconservationtheory of the same
period.This illuminatesthe backgroundagainstwhich the work at Knossosmust be set.
Chapter Two will analyse the archaeological remains of the Minoan palace. Here, the
historic building materials and techniques will be discussed in order to understand the
conservation problems the architects were facing when the site was excavated.
Furthermore, the chapter will discuss the way the palace was destroyed, which also had
an influence on its state of preservation when it was discovered.
The third chapterdescribesthe conservationand reconstructionworks executedwork

by Theodore Fyfe from the years 1900 to 1904. It will describethe materialsand
methodsused by him and, thus, identify his conservationattitude. Furthermore,the

original designbrief for his work will be established.
The reconstructionof the Grand Staircase,the Queen'sMegaronand other works by

Christian Doll will be discussed in Chapter Four. He worked at Knossos from 1905 to
62 Introduction
1910.It will be examinedhow Doll's different backgroundresultedin a changeof the
work on site and how the designbrief was improvedin the light of earlier mistakes.
In Chapter Five the work of Piet de Jong who worked at Knossosfrom 1922 to 1931 will
be examined. It will offer a consideration of how Evans' forced absencefrom Knossos
during World War I influenced the design brief for the later reconstruction work.
Furthermore, it will be established how financial considerations, the availability of new
materialsand techniquesand technicalproblemsresulted in an accelerated reconstruction

programme. Also discussed is the manner Piet de Jong's aesthetic feelings shaped the
form of the later reconstructions.
In Chapter Six the technical aspects of the reconstructions will be evaluated. It will
include an investigation of how the different materials employed on site by the three
architectsperformed, why they failed and how they benefited the site. Each material will
be individually assessedand future conservation problerns will be highlighted.
The evaluation of the theoretical and philosophical aspects of the reconstructions will be
discussed in Chapter Seven. First, the conservation philosophy of Evans, Fyfe and Doll
will be summarised. Secondly, the sources which have been employed for the execution
of the work will be investigated and it will be discussed how reliable this information has
ZD
been.Furthermore,the influenceof the reconstructionson the formation of the Charter
of Athenswill be examined.
In the Conclusionsthe resultsof the sevenchapterswill be summarisedand an evaluation

of the reconstructionwork at Knossoswill be presented. for
Recommendations further
at
research Knossos
andin the field of at
conservation archaeological
siteswill be made.
Furthermore,actionsto be takenon site will be recornmended.
Introduction 63
Peter Kienzle
64 Introduction
Chapter 1
Arthur Evans and his Time

Sir Arthur J Evans
In the works of reconstitution, which here so izecessarilv lollowed that of the

spade, the object of qfJording an intelligible picture to the visitor had been
constantlY kept in view.
(Evansin Pendlebury,
1954,1).
7)
66 Chapter I
Chapter I
Arthur Evans and his Time
1.0 Introduction
at Knossos.As we will seelater on,

Much hasbeenwritten aboutEvans'reconstructions
Arthur Evanswas the initiator of the programbut he was by no meansthe only factor
which influencedthe work on site. Otherpeoplehadtheir sharein the designof them.

Nonetheless,in order to understandEvans'sinfluenceon the reconstructionwork, it is
importantto describehisbackground.Therefore,thefirst sectionof this chapterwill deal
with Arthur Evans'schildhood and his travels.Furthermore,it will discusshis work
experienceincludingbeing correspondentfor TheManchesterGuardian in the Balkans
andbeingKeeperof the AshmoleanMuseum,beforehe startedexcavatingat Knossos.
The reconstructionwork at Knossosmust be seenin its historic context.Archaeology

is a ratheryoungdisciplineand,for quitesometime,was regardedasa luxury of wealthy
men. The developmentof archaeologyfrom the mere hunt for treasureto a qualified
sciencewasnot yet completewhenthe work at Knossoswas executed.In order to reach
an assessmentof the work on site, the second part of this chapter illustrates
contemporaryarchaeologicalthought.
Likewise the scienceof conservationwas in its infancy.The Charterof Athens (1931)

and,later,the Charterof Venice(1964)setinternationalstandardsof conservationwhich
subsequentlydevelopedinto our modernunderstandingof good conservationpractice.
However,both charterswereconcludedafterthe work at Knossoswascompleted.While
it might be interestingto seeto what extent the conservationwork at Knossos,now
Arthur Evansandhis Time 67

PeterKienzle
almost a century old, complies with modem standards,these standardscannot serve as

a means to assessthe work. Therefore, the third part of this chapter illuminates the
developmentof conservationtheory and illustratesother contemporaryconservation
work at the time Evansexcavatedat Knossos.
1.1 The life of Sir Arthur Evans
The main sourcefor the studyof Arthur Evans' life is his half-sisterJoanEvans' Time
and Chance.The Story of Arthur Evans and his Forbearers.This book is the main
source of informationfor all later biographies,suchasDB Harden'sshort Sir Arthur
Evans,A Memoir, Sylvia Horwitz's The Chanceof a Lifetime and Ann Brown's two
volumesBeforeKnossos Arthur Evans'stravels in the BalkansandArthur Evansand
...
thePalaceof Minos.The lasttwo volumesareillustratedwith numerousblack andwhite
photographsfrom Evans'collectionat the AshmoleanMuseum.Thesephotographsand
partsof Evans'comprehensivecorrespondence at the AshmoleanMuseumcontributeto
further understandingof Evans' life and his attitudetoward archaeology,conservation
andreconstruction. SinceArthur Evanswasonly oneof the influenceswhich determined
the final result at Knossos, this discussionof Arthur Evans' background will be
essential.It will be left to other scholarsto write a detailed,
superficialyet, nonetheless,
up-to-date biography of Evans his
and philosophy. '
1.1.1 The early years, school and studies
Since 1840, John Evans, Arthur's father, had worked at the Nash Mills, the paper mill
of his uncle John Dickinson.2 He fell in love with the daughter of his employer, his cousin
'In fact, AndreasLapourtasis currently undertaking researchon these issuesbut his work has not yet
been published. First results were published in the Museum Archaeologist. See Lapourtas, 1997.
2Evans, 1943, P. 57.
68 Chapter I
at thePalaceof Minos at Knossos
Harriet Ann Dickinson whom he marriedon 12 September1850.3Arthur John Evans,

JohnandHarriet'sfirst child was born on 8 July 1851! His motherdied I January1858
after a short illness andArthur's father remarriedonly 18monthsafter the deathof his
first wife,
At this time, John Evans was a renownedscholar,interestedin numismaticsand the

archaeologyof flint tools. He gavepapersat severallearnedsocietiesand was elected
fellow to the RoyalSocietyin 1862.' He becamevicepresidentof both the Royal Society
and the Society of Antiquariesin 1870 Sir John Lubbock, who was a neighbourof
Charles Darwin at Down House, becamea close friend. As we will see later in this
chapter, Darwin and his On the Origins of Specieshad an important influenceon the
developmentof archaeologicalthought.Lubbock andEdwardB Tylor linked Darwin's
biologicalevolutiontheorywith theevolutionof culturein prehistory.7While Evanstook
a greatinterestin thesetheories,businessactivitiespreventedhim from taking a greater

part in the discussions!Furthermore,JohnEvans'sfriend Lubbock was engagedin the
thought. He suggesteda new Billfor the Protection of
advanceof modemconservation
Ancient Monuments' and was one of the founding membersof the Society for the
Protectionof Ancient Buildings on 22 March 1877.1"
Arthur Evansgrewup at NashMills, Hertfordshire,in a housefilled with the arrowheads
andflint tools from hisfather'sexcavations.

Lubbock,the geologistJohnPrestwich" and
otherscholarsregularlycamefor dinner and,naturally,talkedaboutthe latestadvances

in archaeological research and conservation. After the untimely death of his mother,
'Evans, 1943,p. 78.

'Ibid., p. 82.
'Ibid., p. 107.
'Ibid., p. 156.
'Trigger, 1989,p. 114ff. SeealsoMacEnroe,1995,p., 4.
'Evans, 1943,p. 108.
"He wasworking on the bill since1871and it wasfist discussedin Parliamentin 1874but became
law only in 1882.SeeJokilehto,1986,p. 328.
"Jokilehto, 1986,p. 322.
"For PrestwichseeTrigger, 1989,p. 93 and Daniel, 1975,p 54 ff.
C,

PeterKienzle
Arthur Evans grew more attachedto his father and so he grew up in an environment
whichappreciated thepast.In summer1860,at the ageof nine, he helped
andresearched
his father excavateRomanpottery at Dunwich, Suffolk.'
Figure Di ne nouse or jonn mans at iNasnmins. vrawing q v. U. Kitton, 1ZS92.
In autumn1860,Arthur Evanswentto preparatoryschoolnearChipperfield,and in 1865

he went to Harrow School.In 1866hejoined his father on a ten day trip to northern
Francein order to find flint tools in gravelpits," and in January1867he listenedto his
fatherreada paperat the Societyof Antiquaries." Arthur left Harrow in 1870and went
on to study at BrasenoseCollege,Oxford. While at Oxford, he begantravelling widely

in Europe.In 1871he andhisbrotherLewisvisitedFrancejust after the Franco-Prussian
war hadended.In 1872he travelledto the Balkanswith his brotherNorman and a year
"Evans, 1943,P. 114.

"Ibid., p. 131.
"Ibid., p. 124L
70 ChapterI
laterhe visitedLapland." In 1875he spenta term in Gbttingenand travelledagain to the

16
Balkans.
Arthur publishedaccountsof his travels and paperson archaeologicaland historical

subjectswhich were receivedwell in the scholarly world, but he was still known as 'Little
Evans - Son of Evans the Great'. " For a long time Arthur Evans was unable to surpass
the reputation of his father.
1.1.2 The Balkans
While travelling in the Balkans Arthur Evans realisedhow the Ottoman occupation of the
area prevented freedom for the Slav population. The Ottoman Empire which occupied
large parts of the Balkans, was on the brink of collapse and the German, Austrian and
RussianEmperors were all trying to expand their areasof influence. In this situation the
various indigenouspopulations of the Balkans fought for their independence.Unlike his

father, Arthur did not have a pragmatic attitude to politics. He strongly supported the
causeof a pan-Slavonicfreedom movement.The publication of his travels in the Balkans

in 1876 gained him the reputation of an expert in the political and social circumstances
of the Balkans.
On the completionof his studiesArthur Evansappliedfor a collegefellowship, but he

After havingworkedfor a Balkansrelief organisationhe was offered
wasnot considered.
a post which he acceptedas the Balkanscorrespondentfor TheManchesterGuardian.
He moved to Ragusa(Dubrovnik) in 1877and immediatelybeganwriting on political
issuesbut still hadtimeto conductsomearchaeologicalresearch.He travelled widely in
the areaand many of his journeys on foot to remotespotswere quite dangerous."
"Evans, 1943, p. 164 ff.

"Ibid., p. 176 ff.
"Ibid., p. 163.
"Ibid., p. 182 ff.
Arthur Evans and his Time 71

PcterKicnzlc
On 18 June 1877, while in Ragusa, Arthur Evans met Augustus Edward Freeman who
was accompaniedby his two daughtersMargaret and Helen. Freeman was a well known
historian and writer on conservation issues who had published a book on 77zePrinciples
of Church Restoration in 1846." Arthur fell in love with Margaret and married her on
19 September 1878 at Sommerleaze near WellS.2' They moved to a new house called
Casa San Lazzaro, in Ragusa, and while Margaret ran the household and provided for
guests, Arthur continued to travel and write and to conduct archaeological research.
Furthermore, he was still involved in political agitation. He strongly opposed the Austrian
Empire's involvement in Balkan politics after the end of the Ottoman occupation, and
supportedindependencefor the local population. In 1880 a friend of Arthur's, Felix von

Luschan, sent him a coded message that his political activities were being closely
4:1
watchedby the Austrian authoritiesand that arrestmight be 21
imminent.
In autumn 1881the insurrectionbroke out in Crivosciaand, naturally,Arthur Evans

travelledthereto report the issue.He was accusedby the Austrian authoritiesof being
the agitatorwho hadcausedthe uprising. In March 1882he was issuedwith a notice of
expulsion,but wasnevertheless
arrestedon 7 March whenhe embarkedon a ship in the
harbour.Evanswasimprisonedat Ragusafor six weeksandfinally releasedon 23 April
1882andexpelled from Austrianterritory.22
1.1.3 Ashmolean Museum
After returning from the Balkans, Margaret and Arthur Evans settled in Oxford, where
Arthur tried to find work for himself. In 1884 Evans was appointedKeeper of the
Ashmolean Museum in Oxford, then still in its old and overcrowded rooms in Broad
"Jokilehto, 1986, p. 297 U

"Evans, 1943, P. 195 ff.
"Ibid., P. 216 ff.
22Ibid.,P. 239 ff.
72 ChapterI
Street." At this time the AshmoleanMuseumwas more a cabinetof curiositiesthan a

'
rriuseum. Evansenlargedthe collectionsby travelling andacquiringobjects;but he also
camein contactwith thewealthycollectorCharlesDrury EdwardFortnum,who intended
to lendandafterhisdeathbequeathhis collection to the AshmoleanMuseum.Together
Evans and Fortnum startedto fight for a new building to accommodatethe enlarged
collections.
Arthur Evans wanted to integratethe University Galleriesin the new Ashmolean Museum
to form a large art and 6rchaeology museum. This new museum concept reflected the
contemporary debate on the development of art history and archaeology at this time. "
Evans suggested that the new museum should be headed by the director of the
AshmoleanMuseum. By contrast, the university preferred to link the Ashmolean to the
existing University Galleries,with the Keeper of the Galleries responsible for both parts.
Besidesthis conflict with the University, Evans also had fierce battles with the governing
body of the AshmoleanMuseum itself. While he was an adherent of the newly developed
understandingof archaeology,many members of the governing body had a conservative

"
approach. It seemsthat Evans was disappointedby thesepolitical difficulties and almost
resigned from being Keeper at the Ashmolean Museurn. However, Fortnum convinced
him to continue and, finally, in 1891 a hard-fought battle secured the university's support
for Evans' scheme of a new Ashmolean Museum for Art and Archaeology. "' -The
experience of these battles and, occasionally, the experience of powerlessness in the

process of decision-making probably haunted Evans and influenced him.
"Brown, 1993,29 ff.

"'Evans, 1943, P. 265.
"See comment of Charles Bell in Evans, 1943, p. 328 and compare page 381 ff.
'Evans, 1943, p. 269 ff. and also Evans, 1943, p. 299. Arthur Evans expressedhis view of the new
AshmoleanMuseum in his inaugurallecture 'The Ashmolean Museum as a Home of Archaeology in Oxford'
on 2 November 1884.'Ibese different attitudesare also highlighted in two speechesin 1911. Percy Gardener,
who retired from the presidency of the Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies supported research in
the beautiful, classical art. Immediately afterwards, succeeding Gardener as President, spoke Arthur Evans
who supported the research in the origins of culture and its evolution. Fitton, 1995, p. 38.
27Evans,1943, p. 299.
AxthurEvansand his Time 73

PeterYjenzle
In 1894 the new AshmoleanMuseum was completed in Beaumont Street.2' Arthur Evans
involved in setting up a new council merging the governing bodies of the former
was I-
AshmoleanMuseum and the University Galleries. Furthen-nore,representing the council
Ashmolean Museum he closely controlled the building work on site and he
of the
had 29
close contact with the architectS.
probably
The difficult situation with the governing body persisted and gradually grew worse. The
regulation for the keeper's his

residencyrequired presencein Oxford for at least 150 days
in eachyear.' Evanshad travelled d lot in the years between 1882 and 1900 but with the
beginning of the excavations at Knossos in 1900 he was abroad for long stretches of
time. After the new Ashmolean Museum had been completed and the collections were
arranged Evans was no longer interested in it. His interest shifted to the excavations in
Crete and, subsequently, he resigned from the keepership in 1908.31
1.1.4 Travels in Crete
After Evans returnedto Britain in 1882he travelled in Greece,the easternBalkans,

CrimeaandCaucasus.He conductedseveralsmall excavationsin Oxford and Kent and
wrote numerousarticles and paperson Mediterranean

and Celtic "
archaeology. While
travelling in Greecehe found gemstoneswhich were engravedwith symbolswhich he
strongly believedwere an early hieroglyphic "
systemof writing. Local antiquedealers
told Evansthat the stonescamefrom Crete, and it was at this momentthat Evans's
stronginterestin the islandawoke.At this time Cretewas still occupiedby the Ottoman
forces.Arthur Evansvisited Crete for the first time in 1894and was shownthe site of
"Surprisingly, both the Journal of the Royal Institute of Architects and the Builder have not reported
on the new museum.
"Evans, 1943, P. 305.
lqbid., p. 305.
31Ibid., 1943, p. 356.
3'Harden, 1983, p. 17.
3'Evans, 1943, P. 309.
74 ChapterI
Knossoson 19 March. Two dayslater he returnedto the site with Minos Kalokairinos
who had excavatedparts of the Anteroom in 1878-79.-4Kalokairinos' work had been

halted by the outbreakof a violentuprisingof the GreekChristianpopulationagainstthe
Turkishoccupation.On thesameday,Evansspoketo the two men who togetherowned
the site,oneof whomowneda quarterof the siteandwaswilling to sell; the other owner
refused. "
Arthur Evans was by no means the first person, who had expressed an interest in the
excavation of Knossos. The existence of prehistoric remains at the hilltop of Kephala, as
the site was called in this period, had long been known. The American archaeologist W
J Stillmann had visited the site in 1881 and published an account of tile excavations of
Kalokairinos. " In 1883 Heinrich Schliemann tried to obtain an excavation permit and
repeated his attempts after he visited the site personally in 1886. After Schliemann's
death in 1890, the French School of Archaeology tried to obtain the site but could not
in 31
achieve any progress negotiations.
After Evans acquired a quarter of the site in 1894, further negotiations stalled and it took
him six years until he finally completed his purchase. He travelled widely in Crete in 1894
and returned in 1895 and 1896 for further explorations of the island. He visited many
sites which promised to be of archaeological interest. While he recorded and described
many of them, he actually did not excavate any which was probably due to the restrictive
Ottoman regulations.38 In 1897 the political tensions between the Christian and the
Muslim populations on Crete worsened. Greek government troops invaded the island,
subsequently encouraging the Christian Cretans to massacretheir Moslem neighbours.

Order was restored by the 'Great Powers' - France, Britain, Russia and Italy.
"'For more informationon Minos Kalokairinossee:Aposkitou, 1979,pp 81 - 94.

"Evans, 1943,P. 312 f.
3'Hood/Taylor,1981.p. 1.
37See Brown 1986. One of the main obstacleswas that the local Greek intellectualswho were
organisedin the Syllogos,a societyfor the Promotionof Educationopposedexcavations.They fearedthat
mostof the interesting
0
finds would be shippedby the Ottomanofficials to museumsin Istanbul.
3'Brown, 1993,p. 37 ff.

Peter Kienzle
Superficially peace had been restored, but tensions continued to grow and more violent
in 1898. In 1897 Evans decided to travel in North Africa but he
encounters occurred
returned to Crete in 1898 and 1899." Finally, in 1899, the last Turkish soldiers left the
island and Prince George of Greece was nominated High Commissioner for the Great
Powers. He landed on the islandon 21 December and subsequentlyestablished complete
peace.40The necessary conditions for the start of the excavation had been provided.
1.1.5 The Excavations at Knossos
Arthur Evansbeganhis excavationsat Knossoson 23 March 1900.He, his assistant

DuncanMackenzieand the architectTheodoreFyfe, excavatedlargepartsof the West
Wing in the first campaign.Kalokairinos'searly excavationsindicatedthe existenceof
a structureat Kephalawhich was datedto the Mycenaeanperiod, but provided no clear

indicationof its size.Even after the first campaignin 1900Evansstill believedthat the
Palaceconsistedonly of whatis todayknownasthe WestWing flanked by a West Court
andan EastCourt." Graduallyit en-verged
that the Palacewas far bigger than recognised
and that the work on site would take much longer than estimated.
The remainingpart of the West Wing and the northern part of the Palace and some parts
of the Domestic Quarter were excavated in 1901. In the following year the remaining
part of the Domestic Quarter and the East Bastion followed. In 1903 the south east area
of the palace was excavated and this completed the main excavation work. In the
following years supplementary research was conducted such as excavation work under
the pavementwhich was discovered in earlier campaigns. From 1900 to 1904 Theodore
Fyfe was the architect on site who was responsible for the measured drawings and the
reconstruction and conservation work.
"Brown, 1993, P. 75 ff.

"Evans, 1943, P. 326.
"Compare Plan 1900 by Ilieodore Fyfe, Plate 7.
76 ChapterI
In 1905 the architectChristianDoll beganto work for Evansand his first task was to
restorethe GrandStaircase.
Thoughthe mainexcavationwork was completedwithin the
first five campaignsbetween 1900 and 1904, Evans realised that supplementary
excavations,finds processingand the conservationwork would take manymore years

andso, in 1906,theVilla Ariadnewasbuild on siteas a comfortableheadquartersfor the
Christian
excavations. Doll executedfurther reconstructionwork for Evansin 1908and
1910.
The immediatepublicationof preliminaryreports of the excavationwork in scholarly

journals and The Timesmadethe work at Knossosknown to the world. Arthur Evans
becamefamousand honorarydoctorateswere conferredupon him and in 1911he was
knighted.' Work on sitewasresumedin 1922after the interruptionof World War I and
its aftermath.Evanscompletedthe first volume of his book, The Palace of Minos, in
1921and returnedfor supplementaryresearchfor the following volurnes.Piet de Jong
joined Evansas architectin 1922and worked for him until 1931. Tile site as it stands
today is largely the work of this period. Evansfinally publishedthe last volume of his
monumentalbook ThePalaceof Minos in 1935andin the sameyear he visited Knossos
for the lasttime. He died at Oxford on II July 1941,a few daysafter his 90th birthday.
It has been suggestedthat Arthur Evans was Victorian in his attitude and that much of
his work on site must be seenin this context! ' Another scholar has proposed that he was
influenced by Edwardian thought. " Arthur Evans grew up in a wealthy family in the
Victorian period. This certainly influencedhim. Behavioural patterns such as frequent tea
parties for visitors in the palaceand the gardenof the Villa Ariadne-5 as well as the names
Evans gave to the individual rooms and the way he describedthe palace seem to reinforce
"'Evans, 1943, p. 366.

4'For example: Farnoux, 1996, p. 95 ff.
""MacEnroe, 1995. John Evans and his friends such as Lubbock and Prestwich were certainly
Victorians. Arthur Evans was born in the Victorian period but his work at Knossos was executed mostly in
the Edwardian period. It is difficult to distinguish these two periods based on behavioural patterns of the
people who lived in them.MacEnroe suggeststhat the peopleof the Edwardian period were much more sober
than the Victorians and were generally less optimistic about technical advances.
"'Horwitz, 1981, p. 204, seealsoEvans,1943,p. 377 f.
Axthur Evans and his Time 77

PeterKienzIe
this perception. However, it will be important in the course of this study to analyse to
what extent the physical reconstructions were influenced by this attitude.
Conclusions
Arthur Evans'sfatherwas at theforefrontof developmentsin archaeologicaltheory and

philosophy
conservation in his '
time. Arthur grew up in an environmentwhich provided
financial security and had no needto securean incomefrom his work. He engagedin
manyactivitiessuchastravelling,
writing and and
research was Keeperof the Ashmolean
Museum.When he startedto excavatethe Palaceof Minos at Knossoshe was already
48 yearsold. His wealthybackgroundallowedhim to purchasethe site and as sole owner
to excavateand reconstructas he pleased.This must certainly havebeena welcome
freedomafterthedifficultieshe experienced
with thegoverningcouncil of the Ashmolean
Museum. Arthur Evans had not himself conducted a large excavation in the
Mediterraneanand he was not formally trained as an archaeologist.Nonetheless,his
fan-dlybackgroundandhisexcavations
in Britainandthe Balkansequippedhim well with
necessaryskills andknowledgeto excavateat Knossos.
Arthur Evans' backgroundcertainlyinfluencedhis work on site. Much of the work at

Knossos might be explainedfrom his personalbackgroundbut other things might be
typical for the time period. Thus, it will be necessaryto analysethe stateof the art of
archaeologyat the late nineteenthcentury and to compareEvans' work with that of
contemporaryarchaeologists.This will be donein the next section.
"John Evans's role in the developmentof archaeological method and theory is highlighted in Daniel,
C,
1975.
78 ChapterI
1-2 Contemporary Archaeological Thought
Introduction
Archaeology is a comparativelyyoung discipline. Glyn Daniel suggested that archaeology

is a creation of the Victorians and places the birth and development of archaeological
theory and method in the sixty years between 1840 and 1900.47From 1900 to the
beginningof World War H archaeologicalmethods were refined but no significantly new
archaeological thought was created. This suggeststhat when Arthur Evans excavated
at Knossos, the main early development in archaeological theory and methodology had
been completed. After World War II the prevailing rnaterial-cultural approach to
archaeology was questioned and new methodologies and approaches to the past were
developed." However, they are not relevant for the thesis and will not be discussed here.
Unfortunately, it is not possible to give here a detailed account of tile development of
archaeologicalmethod and theory; but it is important to sketch tile progress archaeology
made from its beginnings to the time of Arthur Evans's excavations at Knossos. It will
be shown that Arthur's father, John Evans, was one of the leading thinkers in this process
of development which probably influenced Arthur Evans considerably.
1.2.1. Overview of the Development of Archaeology
It is difficult to define a convincingstartingpoint for the birth of archaeology.Mankind

hasprobablyalwaysbeeninterestedin the questionof its origins, and mythological and
theological explanatorymodelssufficeduntil the beginningof the Renaissancein the
"'Daniel, 1975, p. 10.1 understandthe term Victorian as an indication for a spccil*ic time period rather
than a location. Similar developments happened at the same time in countries which were not governed by
Queen Victoria such as France, Germany and the Scandinavian countries.
"See Daniel, 1975 and Trigger, 1989.

PeterKienzle
fifteenth centuryý9 Then scholars began to research the classical Greek and Roman
civilisations which had survived in both literary and archaeological evidence. The study
of the material remainsof the ancient structures resulted in the creation of the distinctive
style of Renaissance architecture. This interest in the past also included material
archaeologicalevidenceand wealthy people begancollections of archaeological artefacts.

These art collections lacked a methodological interpretation and a chronological
evaluation being collected purely for their "'

aesthetic qualities. Furthermore, the
beginningof scientific researchat this time and the creation of universities prepared the
ground for a methodological approach to the past which was no longer directed solely
by religious narratives.
The secondhalf of the eighteenthcentury and the early nineteenthcentury saw an

enormousincreasein the quantity of materialfor the study of the past.Many scholars
travelledin the Mediterraneanand numerousbookswerepublishedon the antiquitiesof
andEuropeansites.Thesepublicationsdescribedantiquitiessuchas
both Mediterranean
buildings,ruinsandartefactsbut werenot ableto datethemunlesswritten evidencewas
provided. However, written evidencewas only availablefor the historic period, the
classicalRomanand Greekperiod,but was not availablefor prehistoric times.Thus, a
of Celtic,Gen-nanic
qualifiedassessn-vent or Gaulishperiodsin Europeor the pre-Roman
andpre-Greekperiods in the Mediterranean "
was not possible.
In 1764 the German scholar Johann Winckelmann published his book Geschichte der
Kunst desAlterthwns. The book presentedfor the first time a periodisation of Greek and
Roman sculptures.In the tradition of art history, it still relied on written sources for the
chronology of the sculpturesbut it demonstratedthat a stylistic development took place.

By imphcation,the sequenceof styles in a specific art form could provide chronological
information. " After Napoleon's invasion of Egypt in 1798/99 tile systematic research
"'Daniel, 1975, p. 14 ff and see also Fitton, 1995, p. 14 ff.

soDaniel, 1975, p. 17.
"Ibid., p. 20 ff and Trigger p. 35 ff.
52Trigger, 1989, p. 38-and compare with Daniels, 1975, p. 17.
80 ChapterI
of theEgyptianpastbeganin the early nineteenthcentury.Onceagain,no chronological

information could be obtaineduntil Champolliondecipheredthe hieroglyphsin 1822."
One of the problemsfor a further developmentof prehistoricarchaeologywas the role

of the ChristianChurch.The historic model presentedby the Churchproposeda linear
development from thecreationto the final salvation.It was commonly acceptedthat the
creationof the world wasnot earlier than 5000 B C.54 With the Egyptian paststretching
back until ca. 4000 B.C. not much time was left for prehistory.Thus, much of the
prehistoric artefacts such as flint implementsand stone axes which decorated the
curiosity closetsof Europe were regardedas ancientbut A

contemporary. distinction
betweenindividual periodsin prehistorywas not made."
However, theologiansand philosophersbeganto questionbiblical narrative.In 1959

CharlesDarwin publishedhis theory of evolution in his book On the Origin of Species
" Darwinwas not the first or only scholarto suggestthis
by MeansofNatural Selection.
theory;he wasprecededby otherscholarssuchasthe FrenchmanJeanBaptisteLamarck
and the geologistCharlesLyell who publishedhis Principles of Geologyin 1830-33.
However, he becamethe most popular." His writings influencedarchaeologyin two
ways: first, many of the ideas of evolution theory have their origin in the study of
geology. The understandingof how geologicalfeaturessuch as rocks and sediments
developedand how fossilisationtook placesuggesteda chronologydifferent from the
Church's official story. With the creationdate of the world pushedfurther back, there
was enough time to allow for a differentiateddevelopmentof prehistoric societies.

Second,the developmentfrom simpler speciesto more sophisticatedones could be
to
applied archaeological "
finds.
53Trigger, 1989, p. 39 and Ceram, n. d., p. 130 ff.

'Daniel, 1975, p. 27. Daniel suggeststhat Bishop Ushers date of 4004 B. C. was accepted by many.
"Daniel, 1975, P. 3 1.
"Compare Fitton, 1995, p. 34 f.
"Daniel, 1975, p. 28 and Trigger, 1989, p. 94.
"Compare Emerick, 1997. Even before Darwin published his book in 1859 the Danish scholar
Thomsen suggested an evolution of culture and the English architect Rickman proposed the evolution of
cultural styles.

PeterKienzle
On I May 1859 John Evans and his friend Prestwich visited a common friend, Boucher
de Perthes, who researched flint tools in the area of Abb6ville, France. " John Prestwich,
by Evans, read a paper at the Royal Society on 26 May on the results of de

supported
Perthe's researclOo They suggested that the stone age had to be divided into two phases.
Man in the earlier period (later called Palaeolithic) used crude artefacts which were found
at drifts and caves and man in the later period (later called Neolithic) used more
sophisticated artefacts which could be found at barrows and settlements. Herewith, a
chronological distinction of archaeological remains was provided which was based
exclusively on the remains themselves. From that point on, the pace of development
increased. The central figure in this development seemed to be John Lubbock (later Lord
Avebury) who was a neighbour of Darwin and a supporter of his theories but also a
friend of John Evans. 61Charles Lyell, to whose work Darwin referred when he wrote On
the Origins of Species,62was another friend of Lubbock and also a member of the Royal
Society and actually attended the talk by Prestwich mentioned above.63However, the
person who is most famous for the integration of the evolution theory into archaeology
was General Augustus Fox-Lane Pitt Rivers. 6'
6-1
Pitt Rivers, who was the father-in-lawof JohnLubbock, camefrom a wealthy back
ground andwas educated

at the RoyalMilitary College at Sandhurst.He was responsible
andimprovement
for the development of rifles for the British Army andsubsequentlyhe
developeda theory of how weaponsevolvedfrom a simpletype to an advancedtype
by Darwin.A moreeffectiveweaponis superiorandwill
followingthetheoriessuggested
be producedin futurewhiletheproductionof lesseffectiveweaponswill be discontinued.
Pitt Riversneverreceiveda formal educationrelatedto art, history or archaeologyand
"Evans, 1943, p. 101 and Daniel, 1975, p. 58.

"Daniel, 1975, p. 60 and Evans, 1943 p. 103.
"Evans, 1943, P. 108.
"'Daniel, 1975, P. 64.
"'Evans, 1943, P. 103.
'For detailedinformation on Pitt Rivers see:Thompson, 1977, and Bowden, 1991. The information
in this section is taken from thesebooks, if not stated otherwise.
"'Trigger, 1989,p. 197.
82 ChapterI
hisinterestsin thesesubjectswere of a merely private nature.He collecteda wide range
of ethnographicand prehistoricartefactsbut, unlike other collectors,did not arrange

them geographicallybut rather typologically." In 1875he gave a paperat the Royal
17
United ServiceInstitution entitled The Evolution of Culture. He suggested
41ý that more
primitive and generalisedfornis were older, while the more specialised and sophisticated
forms were a later development." Pitt Rivers, who excavated in England and Ireland,
0
insisted on a careful and accurate excavation method and stressed the importance of
stratigraphy.He understoodthat the find context was at lelLstas important as the artefact.
Furthermore, he insistedthat all artefactsand not just the art objects have to be studied."'
Certainly, this was an important step towards the development of modern archaeology.
Archaeologywastransformedfrom a treasurehuntto a scientificdiscipline.The ultimate

aim wasno longertheobjectitselfbut thecontextandinformation this object gaveabout
the past. This developmentcannot be attributed to just one person but Pitt-Rivers'
contributionis certainly a very significant one.It wasdescribedby M. W. Thompson:
For Fox (Pitt-Rivers) the 1875 seasonat Cissbury was like the conversion of St. Paul. Excavation,
insteadof being primarily a search for objects to arrange in series, had become a field of endeavour
in its own right. Significant information could be obtained from it both about a monument and about
its relationship to others. This after all is the crucial point about digging. You can dig to look for
objects, the usual motive for early barrow digging, or you can dig to disencumber foundations to
reveal a plan of a building. In both these cases the soil is a nuisance to be disposed as quick as
possible,but what Fox was doing was to interpret the history of the site from the way the deposition
of soils and stonehastakenplace. ..... Clearly, in this type of work, although the digger neededto find
objects in his deposits to make inferences about the history of the nionument, this was secondary to
understanding the processesof formation of the deposits."

0
"Daniel, 1975,p. 170.

"Thompson, 1977,p. 35.
"Daniels, 1975,p. 171.Pitt-Rivcrs agreedthat periodsof degencrationmay happenin which the
quality of materialartefactsdecline.However,this neednot detractfrom the fact that there is a general
development.
6"Daniel, 1981. p. 138.SeealsoTrigger, 1989,p. 199.Trit-cr insiststhat Pitt-Riverswas not an
isolatedfigureandotherscholarssimilarly acceptednew scientificmethodsof excavation.Readerswho are
moreinterestedin this subjectaresuggestedto readTrigger's book.
"Ibompson, 1977, p. 54.

PeterKienzle
By the end of the nineteenth century the two most important principles of archaeology
had been established: first, the application of the evolution theory of archaeology and,
the
second, principles of stratigraphy. The foremost reason for digging is not to extract
beautiful artefacts but to understand the past. However, it is important to note another
aspect of early archaeology: the system of patronage. The background of the persons
involved in archaeology is almost exclusively wealthy and archaeology is not regarded
as a way to earnmoney. The excavators paid for their excavation work themselves and,
thus, the system of patronage was established in archaeology."
1.2.2. Contemporary Archaeology
JohnEvans'deepinterestin the intellectualdevelopmentof archaeologyhasbeennoted.

Thus,onemayanticipatethatArthur Evans,who sharedthis interestwith his father, was
well informed on current archaeologicaltheoriesand methods.A few excavatorsand
areexaminedin the next section,someof whom slightly precededEvans
their rrie-thods
and someof whom areEvans'scontemporariesbut all of whom wererelatedin one or
the other way to Evansand his work at Knossos.This allows the comparisonof the
at Knossoswith contemporaryexcavationmethodsusedby other scholars.
excavations
Heinrich Schliemannis certainly one of the most controversial excavators in the history
of archaeology. Born 6 January 1922 to a poor priest and his wife in Neubuckow,
Mecklenburg, Germany, he became a merchant of considerable wealth. In 1858 having
amasseda considerable fortune he retired from business and dedicated his wealth and
time to his childhood dream to excavate Troy. Until then, Greek history had begun with
the first Olympiad in 776 B. C. and everything earlier was regarded as mythical including
the Homeric tales of Iliad and Odyssey.7' Schliemann excavated Hissarlik, the site of
Troy, in several campaigns in 1871-73,1879,1882-83 and 1889_90.7'Between these
"Compare: Emerick, 1997,p. 52 L

'Fitton, 1995,p. 14 ff. andCottrell, 1953,p. 24 ff.
7'Daniel,1981,p. 125.
84 Chapter I
Conservation
andReconstruction
at thePalace
of Minosat Knossos
campaigns Schliemann excavated at MYcenae in 1876 and Tyrins in "

1884-85. Shortly
after work on site wascompleted,he publishedhis results.
Schliemann travelled the Troad' and, with the help of the geographical descriptions in
Homer's Iliad, identified Hissarlik as the site of ancient Troy. For the first time a site
which had not survived visibly on the surface or in the memory of locals had been
identified with the help of literary sources. Schliemann's main achievernent was to push
the frontiers of archaeology further into the past and to prove that the mythological
narratives of Homer had, at the least, some real background."
However,hisexcavationmethodsaremorecontroversial.Sornescholarshavesuggested
"
that wasa completestrangerto archaeologicalexcavationmethods. His interestin
he
the jewellery and gold treasuresof Troy and Mycenae,and especiallythe way he
presented his finds to the public, suggesteda mere treasure hunt rather than an
archaeological
excavation.Schliemann employedup to 160workersat his excavations,78
which seemsto reinforcethis theory. When Schliemanndug at Mycenaein 1876 the

Greek Society of Archaeologywould only allow a limited numberof workmen. The
reasonfor thisdemandwasnot that the Societybelievedtoo many workerswould result

in bad archaeologicalwork; rather it allowed the Greek Ephor79Staniatakisto control
to
all work on site and prevent the theft "
of artefacts. The deploymentof a hundred
workmen,supervisedby only oneor two archaeologists,
was not uncornmonat this time
"
and acceptedas good practice.
"'Gorys, 1989,p. 56.

"Northern part of Asia Minor, southof the Dardanelles.
76SeeFitton, 1995,p. 57 ff.
'Daniel, 1975,p. 167.
7'Gorys,1989,p. 56 andFitton, 1995,p. 64.
7'In Greece,Ephoris the title of the personofficially responsiblefor the antiquitiesof a region.
'*Cottrell, 1953,p. 63. Schliemannhadpreviouslytakenthe treasureof Priam from Turkey without
permissionof the authoritiesandthe GreekArchaeologicalSocietyfeareda similar eventin Mycenae.
"Comparefor examplePetrie, 1904.

PeterKienzle
Otherscholarshavepointedout thatSchliemann's excavationsfollowed certainscientific

methods,
archaeological albeitcrude in our modern understanding but consistentwith the
0
of
standards his time.The 'greattrench!,a forty metre wide section,was cut through the
entire tell which exposedall the various levels of With

settlements. the applicationof
he identified seven different successive '
settlements. A gold
stratigraphicalmethods
treasurefoundin the level of Troy II was labelledthe 'Treasureof Priam' and,thus, the
FigUre6 Schematicsketchof the differentstrataof the tell at Hissarlik (Troy)

CP
city
second was identified as the Homeric Troy. In 1882the GermanarchitectWilhelm
D6rpfeld becamehis assistantand suggestedthat the tell at Hissarlik consistedof nine
consecutivestratawith Troy VI beingthe HomericTroy." In the I 880sa reliable system
of comparativedatingof archaeologicalstratawasstill missing.Tile different settlement

stratahadbeenidentifiedandtheexcavatedpottery was of a type which had no parallels
in the classicalworld. Thus, it was impossibilityto link any of tile successivestrata at
Hissarlikto absolutedates." Obviously,the principlesof stratigraphywere observedbut
their practical applicationfeaturedstill someimperfectionand the lack of comparative
datahasnot allowed for unchallengedinterpretation.
"Trigger, 1989,p. 197andcompare:Aýkin, 1988,p. 6 ff.

"Daniel, 1981,p. 126.In the 1930sthe AmericanarchaeologistBleg n suggested
Troy Vlla to be
Vc C,
the HomericTroy.
"Cottrell, 1953,P. 93.
86 Chapter I
at thePalaceof Minos at Knossos
Schliemannhad the stratafrom which an artefactcamecarefullynoted and he had the

"
artefactsrecordedand photographed. He understoodthat the stratigraphyof the site
providedthe chronologicalinformationrelatedto the artefact.However,his excavations
still focussedon the artefactratherthan on the site asa sourceof information and,thus,
Schliemann'sexcavationmethodswere often consideredruthless." It is supposedthat
much of the scientificexcavationmethodswhich were employedlater in Schliemann's
excavationswere due to Dbrpfeld rather than to "
Schliemann.
Arthur Evans was comparedfrequently with Heinrich Schliemannand it has been
suggestedthat they were like-minded.There were indeedstriking similarities.Both

andEvanswerewealthy.They had the necessaryfunds to buy the sitesthey
Schliemann
excavatedand could conduct excavationson a large scale.FurthermoreEvans, like

Schliemann,
hada centralideahepursuedwhenexcavatingthe sites.Schliemannwanted
to prove the Iliad and the Odysseyright and he succeededby excavatingTroy and
Mycenae.Evanswantedto find thewriting systemof the BronzeAge Greeksociety and
discoveredthe Palaceof Minos.Both EvansandSchliemannweredriven by a greatidea
and frequently criticised for this. Finally, many scholarshave suggestedthat Evans'
excavationmethodswere,like Schliemann's,unscientificandwrong."
Evans had visited many of Schliemann's excavations and met him personally in Athens
in 1882 where he appreciated the bead seals and signet rings shown to him. 89As noted
above, Schliemannhad intendedto excavateKnossosbut was not successful in obtaining

an excavationpermit from the Turkish authorities or acquiring the site.' However, this
meeting furthered Evans' interest in Greek prehistory and the island of Crete.
"'Daniel, 1975, p. 169 and Fitton, 1995, p. 65.

"For example Fitton, 1995, p. 61 ff and Daniel, 1975, p. 167 f.
"Cottrell, 1953, p. 87, Fitton, 1995, p. 99.
"For Example: Hitchcock, 1994.
"Evans, 1943 P. 263.
"Fitton, 1995, p. 102 and Brown, 1994, p. 13.

PeterKienzle
Wilhelm.D6rpfeld was a contemporaryof Evans.Bom 26 December 1853 in Wuppertal-

Barmen, Germany, he studied architecture and became an assistant to Ernst Curtius at
the excavations at Olympia in 1877. He was responsible for the financial affairs which
included payments to up to 350 workers. "' His approach to antiquity was from an
architectural history perspective.92 In 1882 he became Schliemann's assistant and
contributed to the excavation at Troy the scientific methodology which he had acquired
at Olympia. In 1887 he becamethe first director of the German Archaeological Institute
in Athens, a position which he held until 1911. After Schliemann's death in 1890 he
continued the excavationsat Troy until 1894; and between 1900 and 1911 he excavated
at Pergamon together with Alexander Conze. In 1902 he built the excavation house of
Pergamon on top of the remains of the excavated 'House I' reusing the layout of the
ancient structure.93
D6rpfeld's main achievementwas certainlythe integrationof systematicarchitectural

historyinto archaeological
thought.However,unlike EvansandSchliemann,he was not
ableto financeexcavationshimself but hadto earnhis living by working on excavation
sites.Both Curtius and Schliemann employed him for his excavationskills and for his
in architecturalhistory. Germanscholarswere
trainingasan architectwith specialisation
particularly fortunate in this period becausethe Gen-nanArchaeological Institute
employedscholarsin countrieslike Greeceand gavegrantstowardsexcavationprojects.
Someof theexcavationswhichDbrpfeldconductedhimselfwerefinancedby the German
Institute, while others,asat Leukas,were financedby donations.' But
Archaeological
all werevery accurateandto the highestcontemporarystandards.D6rpfeld's reputation
within the scholarlyworld of archaeologydependedon the quality of his researchrather
than the numberof finds he could produce.
"Radt, 1988,P. 346.

"Gorys, 1989,P. 35 L
"I know the housefrom my own experience, having stayed there in 1990 for three months. The main
building is placed in the peristyle while other rooms of the ancient building have been reconstructed to serve
as bedrooms for the excavators. Compare: Radt, 1988, p. 124 ff. See plate 218.
'Gorys, 1989, p. 25 andDaniel, 1975,p. 166.The Institute was founded 1829 in Rome by artists and
diplomats but soon moved to Berlin and, from 1859 was financed by the Prussian government. In 1874 the
GermanEmpire took over and offices were establishedin Athens (1874), Cairo (1897) and Istanbul (1899).
88 ChapterI
Evansmet D6rpfeld for the first time in February1892in Athensandsubsequentlythe

two men becamefriends.It is said that EvanscalledDbrpfeld "Schliemann'sgreatest
discovery"." Without doubt, Evans held D6rpfeld in high esteernand valued his
"
opinion. D6rpfeld visited the site of Knossosfor the first time with Schliemannin
1886' andreturnedfrequentlyto the sitealoneandwith travel groupsafter Evansbegan
excavations in "
1900. Wilhelm D6rpfeld spent almost all of his professionallife
excavatingsitesin GreeceandTurkeyandhe hadthe expertisewhich Evanswas lacking

whenhe beganat Knossos.It can be assumedthat Dbrpfeld's approvalof the methods
of excavation, reconstructionand interpretation of the finds at Knossoswere very
importantfor Evans.
The English archaeologist William Matthew Flinders Petrie was born 3 June 1853 in
London and, thus, is another contemporary of Evans and Dbrpfeld. He began his work
as archaeologicalsurveyor in Britain while researching Stonehenge,but he is best known

for his work in Egypt." In 1883 the Egyptian Exploration Fund was founded in London
and Flinders Petrie becameits field director. He excavatedat many sites such as Sakkara,
Tell el-Amarna, Gurob and Kahun.
Archaeological interest in Egypt started with Napoleon's conquest of the country in

1798." After Champollion's decipherment of the hieroglyphs in 1822 it was possible to
0
read the Egyptian inscriptions and, consequently,to establisha sequenceof the Pharaonic
dynasties. This allowed for a dating of Egyptian sites by the means of their
inscriptions. 'O' Petrie developed the system of modern stratigraphy, which allowed the
95Cottrell, 1975, p. 87.

"Interestingly, when Evans proposed the term Minoan for the newly discovered prehistoric culture
on Crete at the archacological cong ess in Athens 1905 he ignored D6rpfeld who thought the name of a
C- _-r Zý
legendaryVing may be inappropriate to describe a culture extending two and a half millennia. Daniel, 1975,
p. 192.
"'Fitton, 1995, p. 123 and Evans, 1943, p. 313.
"CompareEvans, 1943, p. 301. Thesetravel groupswere knownas 'Inscireise'. Maria Lathbury. later
to become John Evans's third wife, was a member of such a travel party in 1892.
"Gorys, 1989, p. 49 f.
"Daniel, 1975, p. 21
....Trigger, 1989, p. 200.

PeterYicnzlc
dating pottery and other small

finds in successivesequences,
so to speak in a relative
17 1jýü=, 91
of pottery 102
types.
chronolog,
qw'ý--7 Ily
The combination of the two
sequencesprovided an ab-
solute chronology for finds
which were not accompanied

by inscriptions.Furthermore,it
allowednewlyfoundpottery to
be datedto one phaseor a few
subsequent phases of the

ýu09 (Do ei chronology. In 1891 Petrie
Mycenae where he
5ý, 2 OVQ'l' visited

compared Aegean pottery
found at Gurob and Kahun
Figure 7 Potteryof successivepcriodsin Pctrie'spredynastic sites with the local material
sequence.
and he datedEgyptianobjects
whichwerefound at "'
Mycenae. Trade in pre-historictirnesbroughtEgyptian artefacts
to the neighbouringcountriesand, in exchange,goodsfrom thesecountriesto Egypt.
Thus, links betweenthe Egyptianchronology,which could be datedin absoluteterms,
andthe Greek
prehistoric chronologycouldbe established.Graduallythe relative system
of chronology could be transformedinto an absolutesystemwhich provided quite
accuratedatesfor variouspottery types.This systemis still in usetoday.
The importanceof Petrie's work for Minoan archaeologyis that it provided the fixed
points of the "

chronology. In fact, Evansfrequentlyrefersto Petrie in the Palace of
""Seefigure 7.
'"'Daniel, 1981,p. 118,Petrie, 1890,p. 273 ff. andWaterhouse,1986,p. 10L
"First mentionedEvans,1900,p. 27.
90 ChapterI
Minos. " However, Petrie also advanced archaeological excavation methods." In 1904
he published a small book, Methods and Ainis in Arcluieology, in which he stated:
"Archaeolog is the latestborn of the sciences.It hasbut scarcelystruggledinto freedom,out of the

Cly CP
swaddlingclothesof dilettantespeculations.It is still attractedby pretty thingsratherthan by real
knowledge.It hasto find shelterwith theFineArts or with History,andnot a singlehomehasyet been
providedfor its real growth.""'
However, the aims of archaeologywere still focussed on the information which could be
publishedand on artefacts.He wrote:
"Ibe two objectsof excavation raphicalinforniationand(2) to obtain

are(1) to obtainplansandtopoC-,
portableantiquities."
He understoodthat theprocessof excavationis destructive,and that this processcannot

be repeated.If theearthandall theartefactsit containedare onceremoved,their original
context can never again be established.Therefore, he dernandedthat all information
connectedwith an artefacthad to be recordedcarefully.He dedicateda chapterin his
book to archaeological
ethicsin which he talks aboutthis processof destructionand the
responsibilityof theexcavatorto thepublic. Furthermore,fie demandedthat sitesshould
not berestoredbut that theyshouldbeconservedfor future generations.The posit.-on of
groupsof finds in chambersor gravesshouldbe recordedandpublished,and generally
all finds "
should publishedwithin oneyear. Thesedemandsseemvery modem.
be
Like Mrpfeld, Petrie relied on the income from his employers, the Egyptian Exploration
Fundandlaterthe EgyptianResearch accountandhisprofessorshipat University College

London."' He wasnot ableto purchasesiteslike SchliernannandEvans.His education,
"For Example PM 1, p. 193 ff and 286 ff, PM 11,p. 22 ff and 192 ff.
"Daniel, 1975, p. 288 f.
"Petrie, 1904, p vii.
'"'Ibid., p. 33.
"'Ibid., p. 169 f.
"OGorys, 1989, P. 49 f.

PeterKienzle
his scientific approachand his aims were closer to Dbrpfeld than to Schliemann or Evans.
Evans and Petrie certainly met, yet no correspondence between these two keen letter-
writers has survived, if it ever existed. It is difficult to say to what extent Petrie's ethical
in influenced Evans's actions at Knossos."'
considerations archaeology
This short summary of three excavators who were contemporaries of Evans and who
influenced his work shows the development of archaeology at this time. The system of
patronagehad dorninatedarchaeologicalresearchuntil the end of the nineteenth century.

Archaeology was not a way to earn money but rather was the interest of wealthy people
such as Pitt-Rivers, John Evans and Schliemann. Obviously the quality of their
scholarship varied, but common standards began to form with the encouragement of
scholarly societies such as the Royal Society, the Society of Antiquaries or the German
Archaeological Institute. ' 12 In Germany, where government funding created a
comparatively good environmentfor scholars, patronage was of a lesser concern than in
Britain. Here, funds were setup for specific purposes such as the Palestine Exploration
Fund, Egyptian Exploration Fund, Cretan Exploration Fund and the School of
Archaeology at Athens. ' 13These groups relied on donations from the public and the
availability of funds depended "'

on economic circumstances.
Archaeology was changing from an adventure for rich people to a profession for
scholars. People like Evans and Schliemann had money and could afford large-scale
excavations.But at the turn of the century a new breed of archaeologist had arrived who
r)
"
worked more carefully and slowly. These new archaeologists had no money, but they
did have the skills and the knowledge to conduct archaeological excavations in a modem
C)
IIIDrJS Phillips, University of Cambridge in an e-mail communication 5 March 1998. Dr Phillips

suggestedthat specific archaeologicalmethodsat Knossosfollowed closely Petrie's example or were directly
influenced by him.
"'For the roles of the societies in this development see: Emerick 1997.
"'Compare MacEnroe, 1995, p. 6. MacEnroe argues that the creation of the individual institutes and
funds for different geographical research areas reflected the dominance of tile diffusion theory in the
Mediterranean while the evolution theory was dominant in northern Europe.
114See Waterhouse, 1986, who describes the up and downs of the financial situation of the British
School at Athens.
I "Compare Horwitz, 1981, p. 214 f.
92 ChapterI
senseand to interpret their results. At Knossos, Mackenzie represented the latter group.
Evans, who was certainly not ignorant in archaeologicalmatters, understood the
to
necessity employ an expertlike Mackenzie, and later for
Pendlebury, his work.
1.3 Contemporary Conservation Thought
1.3.0 Introduction
Like archaeology, is a ratheryoungdisciplineandmany of the scholarswho

conservation
promoted the development
of archaeologywere also involved in the development
of
modern conservationphilosophy.Archaeologyprovided the materialsourcesfor the
is to preservethesesources.The main issue
studyof thepastandthe aimof conservation
in the developmentof a modern understandingof conservationis the principle of
will sketchthe developmentof conservationuntil
authenticity.The followingparagraphs
1900,with a particularfocus on the conservationof archaeologicalsites.Naturally, this
overview will be very short and interestedreadersare askedto consult the relevant
detailedliterature.' 16
1.3.1. Overview of the Development of Conservation
The idea of conservation stretches back to the Renaissancewhen artists and architects
became interested in the architecture and the ruins of ancient Rome and Greece. It
became obvious that in order to study the past it had to be preserved. Subsequently,
architects, artists or art historians were appointed by patrons to look after monuments
as was the case with Raphael who was appointed by Pope Leo X in 1516. Successive
"'I haveconsulted the unpublished PhD thesis of Jukka Jokilchto which provides a good account of
the developmentof conservationtheory. The books of Ruskin, 1849, Brown, 1905, and Powys, 1929, which
were written in the period when Evans worked at Knossos are recommended. Surprisingly, no recent
publication tackles the historic development of conservation but Chamberlin, 1979, and Thompson, 1981,
give good overviews. Schmidt, 1993, is a good account on the conservation of archaeological monuments.
Arthur Evans and his Time * 93

PeterYjenzle
popes followed this example and many rulers issued decreesfor the protection and
of historic sites
structures, andmonuments. ' 17However, it was not until the
conservation
nineteenthcentury that there begana theoreticaldiscussionon which valueshistoric
structures possessand how they should be best conserved.
At this time the dominant influence on architectural style in central Europe was
historicism and, as far as ecclesiastical buildings were concerned, Gothic revival in
particular."' In to
order construct new churches in the Gothic style, medieval buildings
were carefully studied and a comprehensiveknowledge of the evolution of Gothic style,

its ornamentsand its construction technology, was acquired. This new knowledge was
not exclusively used for the construction of new buildings; it was also employed to
restore existing structures.It was believedthat the new understandingof the past allowed
for the removal of later additions and inherited shortcomings of the existing building and
the revelation of the purified originally intended design.' "
A conflict between two different values which were inherent in historic structures was
discovered quickly. For many architects of the restoration movement the historic
buildings were intended to be seen in their perfect form. The meticulous study of the
remains, which included archaeological excavations and buildings archaeology in the

modem sense,revealed the original plan of the building. They had no doubts that their
research provided a comprehensive and complete understanding of the past. This, they
believed, enabled them to reconstruct the buildings and also imposed the obligation to
reestablish the original beauty of the structure. '20 Opposed to this view were the
considerations of the conservation movement. To them the most important inherited
value of such a structure was its value as an historical document. The original fabric
117Petzet and Mader, 1993, p. 13

I"Interestingly, architectsand architecturalhistorians from England, France and the German countries
declaredthe Gothic style to be the best style for church architecture and the most appropriate national style
for their respective countries. Exceptionally, Heinrich Habsch in Karlsruhe, Germany, proposed
'Rundbogenstil' (neo-Romanesque)to be more appropriate.
119Compare Emerick, 1997, p. 55 L See also Schmidt, 1993, p. 17 ff.
""See Schmidt. 1993, p. 17 ff, Petzet and Mader 1993, p. 16 f, Emerick, 1997, p. 52 ff.
94 ChaptcrI
witnessedthe age of the building and every repair, every alteration and even an imperfect
original design had to be regardedaspart of the history of this structure. The restoration
of a structure destroys its value as a historic document and leaves it as it was perceived
by the restoration architect. In order to be of any value for the study of the past, the
structures have to be authentic. Many of the historic structures were in need of repair
but, in contrast to the restoration movement, the architectsof the conservation movement
proposed to conserve and repair the structures - but not to restore them to their
supposed former glory.
by John RuskinandWilliam
The conservationmovementin Englandwas spearheaded
Morris. They claimed that constantcare and repair of ancient buildings will render
restorationwork unnecessary.This finally resultedin the foundationof the Society for

the Protectionof AncientBuildings(S.P.A.B.) on 22 March 1877,of which JohnEvans's
12'Theaims of the Society were
friend,JohnLubbock,wasoneof thefoundingmembers.
laid down in a manifestowritten by William Morris which arguedfor respectfor old
buildings, minimal interventionand regular maintenance.Thus, the basicprinciplesof
modemconservationwere developed.However,the conflict betweenthe conservation

movementand the restorationmovementcontinuedfor severalmore decades.
The legislative situation in Britain changed with the introduction of the Ancient
MonumentsActon 18 August 1882.122
The act applied to standing stones and prehistoric
monumentsbut medievalmonumentssuch as the ruins of monasteries were not included.

The implementation of the law was preceded by a long and controversial debate,
concerning to what extent the government should be allowed to interfere with private
property rights for the sake of the preservation of cultural heritage. Since all these
monuments were in private ownership, the state should have only limited powers of
interference. 123In 1913 a new law was introduced which covered medieval structures
"'Jokilehto, 1986,p. 322. Seealso Evans, 1943,p. 156 who mentioned that Lubbock brought forward
a bill for the protection of ancient monuments in 1876.
122This was the bill for which John Lubbock was fighting so long. Compare page 69.
"'See Jokilehto, 1986, p. 328.

PeterKienzle
the Then,
suchas ruinsof monasteriesaswell asprehistoricmonuments. it was decided
that the stateshouldassumeguardianshipof a monument,which meansthe statetook

on the responsibilityfor the maintenanceand management
of the structuresand could
undertakenecessaryrepair without having to requestpermissionof the owner.
The developmentof conservation thought did not occur in England independently from
the continent. France, Italy, Austria and the German countries experienced similar
restoration movementsto Britain and also reacted by founding conservation movements.

In Austria the art historian Alois Riegl defined the intrinsic values of historic structures
in 1903, and in 1905 Georg Dehio formulated the principles of conservation in
Gen-nany.12'The contemporarycontinentalefforts were closely watched and analysed by
British conservators,and cross-fertilisationbetween the different countries took place. 115
At the end of the nineteenthcentury the importanceof the restoration movement
graduallydeclinedwhiletheconservation
movementgainedinfluence.Historic structures
or places were no longer seenexclusivelyas picturesquesites but also as historic
documentsof the past. Authenticity had beenrecognisedas an important value of an
126The
historicdocument. mainprinciplesof conservationwereestablishedand laid down
in documentssuchasthe manifestoof theS.P.A.B. but it took sonletime until they were
codified in the law and universallyapplicableto all historic structuresof import. The
changefrom restorationto conservationwas a slow processand for a long time both
existedsimultaneously.
1.3.2 Discourse: St. Alban's Cathedral
This short discourseillustrates,through the example of St Alban's Abbey, Hertfordshire,
the different British approaches to conservation towards the end of the nineteenth
"'Petzet/Mader,1993,p. 17 f.
"'See Brown, 1905,specificallyp. 8 ff.
"'See Stevenson,1881.
96 ChapterI
century.This is a particularlyinterestingcasestudybecauseit reflectsthe typical conflict

between the restoration and the conservationmovementat this time; but it is also
significantbecauseit involved JohnandArthur Evans.According to the legend,Alban,

a Romanof noble descent,was killed while he protecteda Christianpriest during the
prosecutionundertheEmperorDiolectian in the early fourth century.A monasterywas
founded at the site of RomanVerulamium,the placeof his martyrdom,in the eighth
century by King Offa of Mercia and was comprehensivelyrenewedafter the Norman
conquestin 1066.The mainbuilding materialwas,typically for this area,brick andflint;
much of the materialw8 taken from the ruins of the Rornantown. 127
As early as 1856 it had beenestablished that the Abbey of St. Alban's needed repair and
collections produced E4,000. Sir George Gilbert Scott was appointed architect and
directed the restoration works until 1877.121 In 1871 the tower of the church was
pronounced unstable and immediate action became necessary, but only an additional
E3,000 was collected. 121In 1877 the diocese of St Albans was created and the church
becamea cathedral.It was suggestedthat the state of the building was unsuitable for its
new function and that it should be improved. Sir Edmund Beckett (later Lord
Grimthorpe) offered to financethis work but did not limit his role to that of a benefactor.
He took an active part in the decisions of how to restore the cathedral.
At St Alban'sCathedral,two issueswereof specificconcern;oneof which later became

knownasthe 'battle of the roofs, the other was the west front. St Alban's possesseda
low-pitchedtimber roof with a high percentageof original timbers.Insteadof repairing
tn
the roof in its originalform, Beckettinsistedthat the roof had to be replacedwith a high
pitched one. Sincehe was financing the restorationhe wasable to convincethe bishop
that the fifteenth century roof shouldbe replacedwith a new high pitched roof. 130
The
second problem arose when Beckett suggestedthat the west front of the cathedral
"'SchNfke, 1983, p. 248 L

121Schafke,1983, p. 267.
12913vans,
1943, p. 151 L
""Compare plate 229 and 230.

PeterKienzle
neededto be He
replaced. that
requested a facultybe to
granted him personallyto restore
the west front he 13'
as chose. The main objection to this proposalwas that Edmund
Beckett was no architect.132The west facade featured a large window in the
Perpendicular
stylewhich Beckettclaimedto be "one of the ugliest in Britain", andthat
it never had "any businessto be there at all"Y3 He declaredthat most of the other
in
windows the church had been executed in the Decoratedstyle and,consequently,he
replaced the west window with a completelynew one in 1879 accordingto his own
design in this style.Beckett defendedhimselfby sayingthat he only removedparts of
genuine Gothicfabricwhich were iinfit to last but he alsoclaimed, for example,that the
west front had "'ceased
to exist as architectureand became brick wall long ago" 134
To
.
him it seemedno sacrilegeto removeparts which were stylistically not part of the
original pure design.
St Alban's is one of the extremeexamplesof the negativeinfluenceof patronagein

England at this time. In the early 1870sJohn Evans was electedto various county
committees in Hertfordshire and, therefore, was almost inevitably involved in the
proposedrestorationplans for the Abbey. He strongly opposedBeckett's plans for the
restorationbut could not convincethe bishop.FannyPhelps,his secondwife, reported

theeventsat St Alban's to Arthur Evans in
who was the Balkans at this time.13
-' Arthur
sided with his father's position and in 1885 wrote to his father-in-law, E. A. Freeman
stating how disgustedhe was by Beckett's ýVork.He describedhow he observed workers
picking Roman tiles from the walls and replacing them with modern bricks. "' Clearly,
Arthur Evans and his father were both supporters of the conservation movement and
were opposed to the restoration movement, as were their friends such as EA Freeman
and John Lubbock.
"'Evans, 1943,P. 152.

13'Jokilehto,1986,p. 321 f.
"'Stevenson,1881,p. 187.
"Stevenson,1881,p. 187.Accordingto Sch!ifkc, 1983,p. 267 he evenmodelledfor the carvingof
a statueof an angelfor theWestFacade.
"'Evans, 1943,P. 152f.
"'Ibid., p. 153.
98 ChapterI
1.3.3 Conservation at Archaeological Sites
The developmentof conservationat archaeologicalsitesis not congruentwith that of

building conservation."' Schmidtarguesthat frequentlythe theoreticalconceptionof
conservationat archaeologicalsites was more advancedthan for buildings.118Unlike

living buildings,excavatedruins were no longer in useand did not needto comply with
139The
user'srequiren-y--nts. approachto conservingthesestructureswas not encumbered
by utilitarian considerationsand, furthermore,the ruined sites in the landscapewere
appreciatedbecauseof their picturesquevalues.This idea of a picturesqueruin in a

landscapehada longtradition,andartificial ruins werebuilt in eighteenthand nineteenth
"
century parks. To conserveruins in the landscapewascommonly acceptedpractice.
Under the Ancient MonumentsProtection Act GeneralPitt-Rivers becamethe first

Inspectorof Ancient Monumentsin 1882.Pitt-Rivers,alreadycited asa pioneerin the
practice of excavation,also laid the foundationsfor the integration of conservation

measures into the 14'
excavationof archaeologicalsites. The conservationwork at his
excavationsat CranborneChasebetween1887and 1898becamethe cornmonstandard.
After Pitt-Rivers'deathin 1900,thepositionof the Inspectorlay vacantfor ten yearsand
was finally filled by Charles (later Sir Charles) Peers in 1910.142The conservation
of thesetwo mendominatedthe approachto conservationat archaeological

philosophies
sites in Britain at the time Evans excavated Knossos.
Peers' approachwas to freezethe monumentsin time. He regardedruins as dead features

in the landscape which have nothing added to their history. He chose to present one
137
For a detaileddiscussionof thistopicseetheforthcoming dissertation
of KeithEmerickat the
Departmentof Archaeology, Universityof York.I amgratefulto Mr. Emerickfor manyconversations in
whichheexplained thedevelopment of conservation
andarchaeology at thistimein Britain.
"'Schmidt,1993,p. 11.
131Seealso:Peersin Replyto a paperby Forsythin: Forsyth,1914.
"See for example Schmidt,1993,p. 47ff for Germany andThompson, 1981.p. 13for Britain.
14'Thompson, 1981,p. 2 1.
142
Ibid.
ArthurEvansandhisTime 99
Peter Kienzle
significantperiodof the monument'shistory while This

others.
suppressing principle of
telling only one storylineadded to the legibility of the structure'splan. Even unskilled
to
visitorswereable understand the historic structure. These standards, set by Peersand
the Officeof PublicWorks, werewidelyexported to the countriesof the British Empire
and frequently were more effective in those countries because private property rights
were lessdevelopedthan in Britain itself. 143
However, a distinction must be drawn between the picturesque roofless ruins, which
always were a feature of the Brifish and other European landscapes,and sites in the
Mediterranean which were completely new excavations. At Olympia or Pergamon,
remains of ancient buildings were still visible on the surface and the location of the
ancient city was never disputed but, at Troy and Knossos, no standing feature indicated
the existence of ancient structures. Most of the excavations at these new sites exposed
multiple strata of historic settlements which had constantly re-used earlier building
material and foundations. Generally speaking, few extensive structures exhibiting
picturesque qualities similar to the English ruined monasteries and castles were
"
preserved. Consequently, many of the early conservation ideas for excavations in the
Mediterraneanfocussedon the artefactsrather than on the site itself. Petrie suggested an
excavation method which would allow for the discovery of artefacts but which would
rebury the site immediately after exposure:
"But far the more economicaland rapid work is that of turning over whenever practicable. If a site has
not beenoften rebuilt upon, the way is to start by a long clearanceat one Cdc-e;and then a line of men
steadilycut from one side of the trench and throw back on the other, so that the trench moves across
the whole site, and every pound of earth is turned over."'45
Obviously,Petrie'sconcernwasof anexclusivelyscientificnature.He conducteddetailed
work in orderto discoverthe entire plan of the settlementand the artefactsin the earth.
"'See Emerick, 1997,p.

"We will seelater on in this thesis that the site of Knossos was distinctively different in this aspect.
145
Petrie, 1904, p 43.
100 Chapter I
He was not concernedhow the site looked after completion of the work. The display of
the artistically important features was reserved for the museum environment. He
suggestedremovingcarvedblocks and other architecturalfeaturesfrom the site to the

museum and reburying the site. 146
Nonetheless,Petrie had in many aspectsa good understanding of conservation issues. He
stressedthat not only artefacts which were regarded as beautiful pieces of art had to be
preserved but that the intrinsic information value of all finds is important in order to
understandthe past. He criticised the way in which the information from archaeological
sites was presented in contemporary museums:
"Yet anotherall-importantmatterfor thesystematic

archaeology
of the futuremustbe herementioned,
Cý
especially as it greatly affects the future schemesof field-work. The first requirement for systematic
work of study is material sufficient to work on. And to provide this there must be both discovery and
conservation. DuringZPthe last century there has been a gradual
Cý growth of archaeological perception;
and in place for only caring for beautiful and striking obJects there has arisensome interest in
C,
whatevercanthrow light on the pastcivilisations.But unhappilythe ideasor conservationhavenot
Zý
keptpacewith the work of discovery.The presentsystemor museumsis the mostseriousbar to the
The building which is the meremodernshell,of no interest,and often no
progressof archaeology.
beauty,is themasterof thecollectionwhich is restrainedandcrippledby suchconditionsthat its use
is impairedand its growth is stopped.The past is vanishiqubeforeour modernchangesyearly and
daily.Thereis everlessand lessto preserve.And everythingpossiblemustbe garneredbeforeit has
Thepresenthasits mostseriousduty to history in savingthe pastfor the benefitof
entirelyvanished.
the future.""'
At the turn of the century most of the Mediterraneancountries,including Egypt where

Petrieworked,hadmonuments
protectionacts,and the period when antiquitiescould be
taken for the benefitof museumsin the excavator'shomecountry such as in Berlin or
"' However,newlyexcavatedsiteswere not necessarilyregardedas
Londonhadpassed.
""Petrie, 1904, p. 105. It must be noted that Petrie worked predominantly in Egypt where
archaeological finds were displayed in the Cairo Museum and where tile artefacts could not be taken abroad.
147Ibid., p. 130.
"'Brown, 1905,p. 222, seep. 238 ff for Egypt.

Peter Yienzle
monuments,and frequently after sites were exposedthey were left without any protection
while the movable finds had been transported to museums. Two reasons may help to
explain this attitude. First, mass tourism had not yet been developed and many of the
excavation sites were located in areas which were not easily accessible. A need to
develop the site for visitors was not seen by the excavators. Second, at many of the
Mediterraneanexcavation sites the remains of the structures which were exposed in the
excavationprocesswere quite durable.Timber beamsand other degradable materials had
rotted long before and the stone remainswere in no danger of immediate collapse. Some
consolidation work was executed, but comprehensive conservation of the excavated

""
structures was not regarded as necessary.
The Acropolis at Athenswasoneof the monumentswhich experiencedcomprehensive

century,slightly beforeArthur Evans'
treatmentat theendof the nineteenth
conservation
work at Knossos.This conservationwork was discussedat the First International
Congressof Archaeologyin Athensin 1905which was attendedby Evansand,thus, it
must be suspectedthat Evans was well infon-nedabout the work executedat the
Acropolisandhasseenit." Therefore,the work at the Acropolis will be discussedasan
exampleof slightlyearliercomprehensive work in an areacloseto Knossos.
conservation
1.3.4 Discourse: The Restoration of the Acropolis at Athens
Unlike Knossosthe buildings at the Acropolis were not excavated but have been exposed
ever sincethey were first constructed. The Parthenon, the main temple on the Acropolis
hill, underwent a number of alterations. It was destroyed by fire, most likely in late
Roman times, and converted into a Christian Church by the end of the fourth or
beginningof the fifth century. "' The Christian church covered only the area of the naos
"'See Schmidt, 1993, p. 59 ff. He discussesconservation work at archaeoloCFical

sites in Italy and
Greece before 1900 which were in the tradition of picturesque ruins.
"'Jokilehto, 1986, p. 420.
111Korres, 1994d, p. 140 - 141.
102 Chapter I
and left the pieron open to the sky. An apse was addedat the pronaos (eastside of the
cella) and a square tower was added at the opisthodonzos (westernportico) while the
to
opistnaos was converted a narthex. A pitched roof with dormer windows was
added". Two yearsafter the of
conquest Greece by the Frankishtroops of the Fourth
Crusadein 1204theParthenonwasconvertedby PapalBull into the Catholic Churchof
Our Lady.
In 1456the Turks besiegedAthens,andthe lastDuke of Athensdepartedtwo yearslater.

theParthenonwasconvertedinto a mosquein 1460.The church tower was
Subsequently
reduced in height and a new minaret added"'. Besidesthe roof, the basic structures
surviveduntil the second Venetian war. Venetiantroops attackedAthens and
-Turkish
the Turkishtroopsretiredto the Acropolis.After a bombardmentof four daysa grenade
struck the Parthenonon the eveningof 26 September1687.The grenadeignited the
17
. ..........
pill
Figure 8 The Parthenonwith the small new mosquein the cella. Drawing by M. Koffes.
Korres, 1994d, p. 146 - 147.

Ibid., p. 150.

PeterlGenzie
stored gun-powder in the building and the entire central part of the Parthenon exploded.
A new, smallermosquewas built later at a unknown date in the ruins facing Mecca and,
therefore, did not follow the east-west orientation of the ancient temple. In 1802 Lord
Elgin removed the marble frieze of the pedimentsand, in this context, took off some two
metresin height. Twenty years later more damage was done by Turkish troops besieged
at the Acropolis in the Greek Liberation War which lasted from 1821-1829.'-4
In the early nineteenth century Greece saw three intellectual movements which found
their focus in the Parthenon. In central Europe neo-Classicism in architecture started in

1793 with the Brandenburger Tor by Larighans in Berlin. William Inwood built St
PancrasChurch in London (1818 - 1822) replicating elements of the Erechtheion.155Leo
von Klenze (1784-1864) was architect to the Bavarian King Ludwig 1 (1786-1868), 'an
art lover and devotee of things Greek' 156,
and later to Maximilian 11 (1811-1864).
Maximilian's brother Otto (1815-1867) becameKing of Greece in 1832. Leo von Klenze
became a leading architect in the Classicism movement in Bavaria and also executed
work for Otto in Athens. On the banks of the Danube near Regensburg he built the
Wallhalla (1830-1842), a memorial for great Germans of the past (Leibniz, Schiller,
Gluck, Mozart [sic], etc.). While the name 'Walhalla' was derived from the Nordic
legends"'. the form of the building is an almost exact copy of the Parthenon. Parallel to
and interwoven with it, was a growing interest in the antique and archaeology as already
outlined above. The third intellectual movement, focussing on the Parthenon, was the
struggle of Greek nationhoodculminating in the war of independence(1830-1842). After
centuriesunder Ottoman rule and the suppressionof all things Greek, the Greek people
intellectually had to define their nationhood. The obvious focal point of such a new
nationality found its expression in the Parthenon, representing in a matchless perfection

the great classical past of Greece.
154
Korres, 1994d,p. 156.
"'Middleton andWatkins, 1987,p.95.
"'Kondaratos, 1994,p. 44.
'"Accordingto NorseMythology,Walhallais theplacewherethe stainheroescelebratetheir feasts.
See:Middleton andWatkins, 1987,p. 102.
104 ChapterI
"till
Figure 9 The Acropolis of Athensin Classicaltimes.Reconstructionby M. Korres.
These three intellectual strings - the growing interest in classical architecture, the 'new'
C)
discipline of archaeology and the re-established Greek state found their focus in the
C)
increasinginterest in the Acropolis and, especially,in the Parthenon." Severalminor
repair and restorationworks were undertakenbetween 1834and 18721-59 but after the
Earthquakein 1894andthe subsequent
report by JosefDurm in 1895"" major work was
In
undertaken. 1898Nikolaos Balanos,
who graduatedasan engineer from the tcole des
Ponts et Chaussies at Paris, started his restoration work at the Acropolis which
for
continued more than forty years.16'Balanos coined tile term Anasýylosis,which later
was adoptedat the Athens Meeting in 1931, to describehis work. Antique fragments
"'See also: Bouras,1994,p. 324.

"'See Tournikiotis, 1994,Appendix 1.
'60Durm,1895.Durmsuggested someof the reconstructionslater on executedby Balanos.Durm was
besidesthe architectFrancisCrammerPenrose(sometimedirector of the British Schoolat Athens) and
Lucien Magnememberof the committeechargedwith the supervisionof the restorationat the Acropolis.
"'Schmidt, 1993,p. 8 1.

Peter Kienzle
were collected and put back to their original locations and missing,parts were replaced
with new marble pieces. New elements were to be used only where necessary for
structural reasonsand it was agreedthat they must be clearly labelled. Balanos executed
the first phase of his reconstruction work at the western part of the Parthenon (1898-
1902) according to this concept but already at the restoration work of the Erechtheion
(1902-1909), he continued far beyond the limits outlined above."' Balanos continued
working at various parts of the Acropolis until 1939.""
Balanosusedtheexistingfragment§from the siteto reconstructcolumnsand architraves.

Wherepartsweremissing,newlycarvedmarblepieceswerefitted in the gaps.Naturally,
this collection of original and replacedmarblefragmentswas not fit to carry load and,
consequently, Balanos inserted iron-beamsin the structure and fixed the marble
fragmentsto them.Modern criticism of Balanos'swork focuseson two issues:first the
recreation of a picturesque the

ruin and, second, use of iron "
girders. Much of the
ancientbuildingmaterialof theAcropolis'sstructureswere dislocatedfrom their original
contextbut survivednearby.Balanosemployedthis materialto recreatethe ternplesof
the Acropolis in more or lesstheir presentform.`3 For example,only the easternand
westernendof theParthenonsurvivedin situ up to Balanos'stime. He reconstructedthe
northernandsoutherncolonnades andrecreatedthecompletepteron. Balanos'saesthetic
perception of a classicalruin determinedhis approachto the reconstructionon.site.166
However,SchmidtarguesthatBalanos'sinterventions,set againstthe measuresof their
because
time,wereacceptable theydid not go beyondthe limits setby the availability of
ancient material. Furthermore, there were few new parts and all were easily
"
recognisable.
"'Schmidt, 1993,p. 82 83.

-
"'Mallouchou-Tufano, 1994,p. 81.
"'See for exampleMallouchou-Tufano,1994,p. 78 ff andSchmidt,1993,p. 77 ff.
16'Mallouchou-Tufano,1994,p. 82. The modemCCAM interventionshaveexecuteda considerable
amountof work but havegenerallyspeakingrefrainedfrom changingthe generalappearance
of the site.
"Ibid., p. 82.
'61Schmidt,
1993,p. 87.
106 ChapterI
The technical execution of the work, assessedfrom a modern point of view was
disastrousfor the structure. Iron clampswere used to join stone blocks together and iron
girders recreated the structural function of the architraves. This construction proved to
be the Achilles-heel of the reconstruction work at the Acropolis. "' The iron was
originally shelteredfrom the direct influences of the weather by cement capping, but due
to the gradual aging process and to temperature-related expansion and contraction, the
cement capping on top of the architraves cracked in succeeding years. Water penetrated
the structure and, consequently,the iron girders rusted and expanded, causing the marble
fragments which they Were intended to support, to split away from the structure.
Furthermore, Balanoshad the existing broken surfaceof ancient marble pieces reworked,
chipping off large amounts of ancient material, so that the new pieces of Pentelithic
marble could be fitted. 169
There was little criticism while Balanos was executing the work at the Acropolis but it
increased towards the end. One of the main criticisms was that Balanos used cement
insteadof marble for the reconstructionof the north colonnades between 1922 - 1930.170
The earthquakedamageof 1894 necessitatedstructural repairs to the ruins but this could
be done without reconstruction of large parts of the site. Excavations at the Acropolis
hill exposed original parts of the structures which were on site but not in their original
context. These elements facilitated the comprehensive reconstruction work by Balanos
and, replacedat their former position, they will last better than on the ground. However,
the main reason for the reconstruction work was aesthetics and not conservation.
"'Bouras, 1994, p. 324.

"'Schmidt, 1993, p. 87.
"'Schmidt, 1993,p. 86. However,the Athensconferencein 1931discussedthe useof cementand
concludedthat its judicious useis appropriate.Seepage43 1 ff.

Peter Kienzle
1.3.5 Protective Shelters
findsarevery fragileandneedprotection.Someof thesefinds were

Manyarchaeological
where they were exhibited,but someof them,notablymosaics,were
takento museums
too big to be easily transported. Furthermore, by the end of the nineteenth century it was
recognisedthat sites and their artefacts form a contextual unit which, if possible, should
17' in Gerniany, England
not be disturbed. At severalplaces Switzerland and ZD shelters were
erected to protect sensitive features at their original location. 172
Roofs and protection buildingsover archaeologicalsitesare not as new as commonly

believed. In Hiffingen, Germany,in 1821, a largeprotectionbuilding was constructed
the
above ruinsof the bathsof a Romanfort. "' In 1831a housewas erected in classical
style above remains of Roman mosaics in Zofingen, Switzerland; and in Orbe,
Switzerland,two smallhouseswerebuilt to cover mosaicsin 1841. In 1838four houses
werebuilt to coverroomswith mosaicsin Otrang, 174
Germany. The ruins of the Roman
bathsof Badenweiler,Germany,wereexcavatedin 1784andwerecoveredimmediately
with a woodenroof resemblingthe local Black-Forest 171
style.
The German and Swiss examplesare all similar in that they were constructed as
individual housessurroundedby lawns and trees. They were not part of a wider
excavatedlandscapeand little or nothing of the ancientremainswas seenoutsidethe

protectiveshelters.Furthen-nore,
all thesebuildingsweredesignedas structureswith their
Classicaldetailingwith colonnadedporchesandpilasterswere
own architecturalme-rits.
usedat Zofingenand Orbe,while HUfingenand Otrangusethe vernacularstyle of the
region.Noneof theseshelterswasintendedto recreatethe architectureof the excavated
structureunderneath.
"'Schmidt, 1985,p. 2 1.
"'For more information on the topic of protection shelters see Schmidt, 1988.
'"Schmidt, 1988,107.
""'Schmidt, 1988,109 ff.
"'Filtzinger et al., 1986, p. 235.
108 Chaptcr I
Conservation and Reconstruction at the Palace of Minos at Knossos-
Evans travelled in Europe in 1871 with his brother Lewis and studied in G6ttingen in
1875. "" There is no conclusive evidence that Evans knew any of the continental
examplesmentionedabove, but he most probably knew a similar construction from 1820

covering the mosaics of a Roman farmstead in Bignor, Sussex. The houses at Bignor
were constructed in a vernacular style with thatched roofs and do not replicate the
"'
original architecture. In contrast to the continental examples, the walls of these
buildings have beenerecteddirectly on the excavatedwal Is but, similar to the continental
examples,theseprotective shelters were also located in a designed landscape and not in

a field of excavated ruins.
Examples of how to protect excavatedbuildings with protection sheltersor houses
existedat the time Evans to

started excavateat Knossos.
While he may have not known
the continentalexampleshe probablyknew the exampleof Bignor. Theseshelterswere

probablya sourceof inspirationon how to protect the excavatedstructuresat Knossos.
At Bignor as at Knossosthe walls of the protection buildings rested on the original
excavatedwalls but the houses

at Bignor were in
constructed a vernacularstyle and were
set in a green landscapewhile the reconstructionsat Knossosrecreatedthe original
architectureand were set in an excavatedruined area.
1.3.6 Arthur Evans' Links to Conservation
The third part of this chaptershowedthat Arthur Evanshad links to peoplewho were
involved in the developmentof modernconservationideas.Arthur and his father were
involved in the 'battle of the roofs' at St Alban's where they took sides for the
conservationmovementandopposedthe restorationmovement.It hasbeenmentioned

above that John Lubbock, a friend of Arthur's father, was one of the foundersof the
S.P.A.B. in 1877andArthur's father-in-law,AugustusEdwardFreemanwas a historian
17'Harden,1983. p. 16 f. and Brown 1993, p. 13 ff.

'"See plate 217.

PcterKienzle
and writer on conservation issues. Besides these close contacts with his wider family he
also corresponded with many people involved in conservation such as Sir Charles
Peers."' It can be assumed safely that Arthur Evans, when the excavations at Knossos
started in 1900, was fully aware of the ongoing discussions on conservation principles
and ethics at this time in England.
1.4 Conclusions
The three parts of this chapterillustratehow Arthur Evansinheritedfrom his father an

interest in all things ancientand how, via his father, he cameinto contact with many
peoplewho wereleadingthediscussions
in antiquarianism,
archaeologyandconservation
at this time in Britain. Furthen-nore,his marriageto Margaret brought him in close
contactwith the historianE. A. Freemanwho was anotherimportantpersonin the area
of archaeologyandconservationat this time.
Both archaeology and conservation were rather young disciplines at the time when
Arthur Evans began digging at Knossos. All important principles of archaeology, such
as stratigraphy and comparative chronology through pottery-types, were developed by

1900. The general principles of conservation, such as understanding the historic
structuresas documents and preserving their authenticity as a historic source, had been
established by then. When he embarked on the excavation of the palace at Knossos
Arthur Evans could draw upon the most modern philosophical and theoretical
understanding of archaeology and conservation. It cannot be argued that conservation

and reconstruction work at Knossoswas executedin a particular way becauseEvans was
ignorant about the theoreticalconceptsof these disciplines. He either knowingly ignored
certain aspects or he must have had particular reasons to execute work which did not
comply with the common standard.
"Oxford Archive, XVIII / viii / La-3. I am indebted to Keith Emerick who informed me about this
letter.
110 Chaptcr I
Chapter 2
P7711-
I he Palace at Knossos,
its Construction, Destruction and Excavation
Reconstruction of the Queen's Megaron. Watercolour by Piet de Jong
Ruins which retain in position their huge blocks oj'granite or porphYry,

poros or Pentelic inarble solidý-vpinned together or with travertine and
baked brick held together by roman cement, such ruins call waitjbr our
attention without excessivedamage.
(Pernier,1933,p. 267ýtranslation
by KeithParker)
112 Chapter 2
Chapter 2
The Palace at Knossos,

its Construction, Destruction and Excavation
2.0 Introduction
It is beyond the scopeof this thesisto explore the entirety of Minoan history. Other
works have beenwritten on this topic and I will largely rely on them, suchas Sinclair
Hood's TheAegeanbefore the Greeks.' I am awarethat the discussionabout Minoan
historyis ongoingandthat in recentyearsmany of the dates,which hadbeengenerally
accepted,have beenquestioned?SinceArthur Evanspublishedhis Palace of Minos

between 1921 and 1936 numeroussmall books and articles have been written on
Knossos.Someof themwereinitiatedby Evanshimself,' but most of them were written
after his death.Someof thesebooks,suchas Castleden's,TheKnossosLabyrinth and
Wunderlich's, The Secretof Crete, offer completelynew interpretationsof the entire
but
palace mostof the recentpublicationsdiscuss 4
only specificareasor aspects. These
publicationseithershowthat Evans'interpretationwas wrong or right in a specific detail
aspect,but generallyacceptthe mainframeworkasestablished by him. Re-interpretations
of certainpartsof the palacehavebeenproposedandother scholarshaverespondedto
'In additionto Hood's book, I have usedthe first three chaptersof GeraldCadogan'sPlacesof
MinoanCrete,Dickinson'sTheAegeanBronzeAge, Thediscover),of the GreekBronzeAge by Fitton and
Pendlebury's TheArchaeology of Crete.Manymorebookswerewritten on Minoanarchaeologyoffering less
conservative interpretationssuch as Wunderlich's The Secretof Crete and Castlcden'sThe Knossos
Labyrinth. Seealsothe literaturereview in the Introduction.
'For example:PeterIanKuniholm'sdendrochronology projectfor theAegeanshakesthe conventional
dating of the Minoan phases.See:Nature,381,27 June 1996,p 780 - 783.
'For example: Pendlebury, 1954.
Tor example: Driessen, 1990; Evely, 1993, Mirid, 1979, Raison, 1988 and 1993.
71bePalace at Knossos, its Construction, Destruction and Excavation 113

Peter YGenzle
them. ' However, no recent comprehensive work has been written discussing the
architecture of the Palaceof Minos as a whole and an history

architectural of Minoan
structures is also missing.
Sincemy thesisairristo understandthe decisionmaking process at the time of excavation
and reconstruction it will rely to a large extent on the writings of Arthur Evans and
contemporary writers. It was this contemporary knowledge, available to Arthur Evans
and his architects that influenced the decisions on site. Certainly our knowledge of the
Minoan Bronze Age has improved sinceand this new knowledge will allow us, in the last
chapterof this thesis,to assessthe successof the reconstruction and conservation work.
However, it is pointlessto analysethe reconstruction and conservation work solely from
a modem point of view. The conservation and reconstruction work at Knossos must be
seen in the light of the knowledge and skills available to the excavators at Knossos.
It is of major importanceto understandthat much of the presentcriticism of the
reconstructionwork is basedon a simplefact: we have little informationon how the

Palaceof Minos exactly looked in the past.The researchdone by Arthur Evanswas
undoubtedly very careful, but the question remainswhether this knowledge of the
Minoanpastwassufficientto reconstructruins in a permanent,literally 'concrete',way.
However,this questionis basedon the assumptionthat the solepurposeof the work at
Knossos was to recreate the Minoan past; it does not assessthe quality of the
reconstructionsin relation to their designbrief andit doesnot considerthe relationship

betweenconservationandreconstructionon site.
Conservationwork aims to preservehistoric structures and we have seen in the previous
chapter that various values are attached to these structures. The general goal of
conservation work is to slow down the process of decay which destroys the structures
and, thus, the values attached to them. The deterioration factors may be split into two
'See for example: Jan Driessen, 1990: "An Early Destruction in the Mycenaean Palace at Knossos:
A New Interpretation of the Excavation Field-Notes of the South-East Area of the West Wing. " and the
review of this book by Peter Warren in the Classical Review, Vol XLII, No. 1,1992.
114 Chaptcr 2
groups: the problems generated by man and decay generated by the environment.
Manmade deterioration factors might be:
" useand wear

" alteration
" manmadedisaster
" tourism
" smogandotherenvironmentalpollution
Environmentalfactorsinclude:
" wind
" water (rain, raisingdamp)
" temperature(expansionand contraction)
" plant growth
" naturaldisaster
" animaldisturbance
All structures, buildings and archaeological sites, are exposed to these factors to some
extent but archaeological sites experience additional threats. Buildings are designed to
withstand the deteriorating factors, for example,the roof protects the structure from rain
and this roof is designed to be exposed to the environment. Building traditions were
traded from one generationto the next and improvementshelped to optimise them. If the
design rules were followed, buildings withstand climate and weather and they require
little maintenance to upkeep the structure. However, ruins and excavation sites are no
longer complete buildings. The roof that once protected the structure from rain has
vanished and features such as wall tops are exposed to the rain though they were not
designed to be this way. Frescoes or mosaics which were designed as interior features
also do not withstand the forces of the environment. The conservator attempts to
maintain maximum authenticity by intervening as little as possible. At complete buildings
regular maintenanceensures the survival of the structure but at archaeological sites an
The Palace at Knossos, its Construction, Destruction and Excavation 115

Peter Y-ienzle
intervention is necessarythat brings the excavated structure into a state which can resist
the deterioration factors named above.This intervention can be roofing of the entire area
or restoring parts of the structure. Naturally, this intervention will be more
comprehensive than the regular maintenance of complete buildings.
Both complete buildings and excavated structures feature conservation problems which
origin in the original building material and construction technique. For example, a rubble
masonrywall whether it is part of an excavated structure or part of a standing building,
has typical conservationproblems such as the dissection of the wall faces from the core.
However, excavatedstructures have undergone a series of statesthat additionally affect
their state of preservation. These structures fell into disrepair or were destroyed, they
were buried and finally excavated.These processesof decay, burial and excavation and
the original building designdetermine the conservation problems at archaeological sites.
They require specific attention in this researchand, therefore, the following chapter will
discuss three areas:
0 The original building structure
0 The destruction and burial process
0 The excavation process
It is obvious that whether a building was made of stone or timber, whether it was
destroyedby fire or earthquake and wether it was excavated in a hasty rescue operation
in
or a careful scholarly dig makes a great difference. These three issues deten-ninethe
state of preservationof a structure. In order to assesswhether the work at Knossos was

an adequate response to the conservation problems on site we have to analyse these
issues.
116 Chapter2
2.1 The Original Building Structure
2.1.0 Introduction
The construction of the building is chronologically the first element that determines the
later conservationwork at archaeological sites and, therefore, it will be the first issue to
be examined.Generally speaking, building work uses specific methods or skills to form
walls, ceilings and roofs with the materialsavailablein order to create a space for specific
purposes.Commonly, the building methods and skills are passed on frorn one generation
to the next and developed gradually from basic ideas to complex craftsmanship of
specialisedtrades.They developed by utilizing the materials available and responding to

the building requirements. The choice for materials and construction methods for the
building work was determined by a number of factors, such as:
" availability of materials
" the ability to produce, exploit or work the materials
" durability of the structure
" design brief
Obviously every culture developedbuilding skills, which were adaptedbest to the

material that was availablein its area.' For exampletimber was the commonbuilding
materialin the woodedcountriesof Scandinaviaandwoodworkingis a highly developed
trade. It has only beenin the last few decadesthat transport - at least in Europe and
North America - hasbecomeaffordableand regionalavailability is no longer a major
determining factor.7 The next factor to considerafter availability was the capacityto
work them. The builder neededto be able to exploit the building materialsat their
for
sources, examplequarryingstone. Improved toolmaking skills and new materials for
'See also Dickinson, 1994,p. 23 who stressesthe importance to consider the influence of environment
and natural resources on the structures.
7Inthepastspecificvaluedbuildingmaterialsweretransportedover a long distancefor exceptionally
important buildings such as the pyramidsat Gizeh or the Gothic cathedrals.But most of the standard
structuresrelied on sourcescloseto the building site.

Peter Fjenzle
the tools (copper, bronze, iron, etc.) extended the range of possible exploitable and
workable building materials.
The aim of good buflding designis to create a structure that responds well to daily wear,
and also to expected disasters. The Minoans lived in an area which, as least as
weather
far as our records go, is regularly struck by a major earthquake! Excavations proved that
have happened in the Minoan past and we can assumethe Minoans knew
earthquakes
about their 9
existence. Although it cannot be predicted when exactly the next earthquake
will occur, its occurrence ain certain area, sooner or later, is predictable. The Minoans
to this threat in their building work. " As we will see, the Minoan builders
reacted
developed construction methods which limited the damage of earthquake.
Finally, the construction of a building is determined by design ideas and the intended use
of the structure. Cultural, social and, sometimes, religious aspectsinfluenced the design
of the space and the choice of material for specific buildings. In fact, archaeology tries
to reverse this design process by analysing the finished product in order to understand
better the social and cultural environment in which it was produced. However, since this
thesisconcentrates on the preservation of the fabric rather than its interpretation, these
issueswill not be discussedfurther.
The following section describes the building materials and the construction techniques
which were employed at the Palace of Minos. Don EvelY and Joseph Shaw have done
excellent research on the original materials and techniques and, to a large extent, this
thesis will rely on their publications but will also present rny own observations."
Branigan suggestedthat it would be difficult to assessthe original constructions because
not only were new reconstructions executed on site but even the original walls were
'ComparePM 11,312ff.
IPM Il P. 286 ff, Pcndicbury 1963, p. 3 and Driesscn, 1987, p. 171 IT.
'"Evans also suggestedthat the Minoansreactedto the earthquakethreatin their philosophical-
religioussystem.Accordingto him, the SnakeGoddessrepresentundergroundpowersand is linked to the
seismicforcesof the earthquakes.
He alsosuggestedthat the ChthonicGoddessas Lady of the Underworld
wasworshippedin the sunkenLustralBasins.PM IV, p. 186ff.
"See Evely, 1993 and Shaw, 1973.
118 Chapter 2
taken down and rebuilt. 12However, a careful investigation of the structures allows to
distinguish between the original materials and techniques employed by the Minoan
builders and modem conservation work.
Stonework
Stone is regarded as one of the most important building materials of the past. This to a
certain extent is due to the simple fact that stone is the most durable building material and
remains at excavation sites when other materials have vanished. We tend to give
disproportionate importance to the stonework as it visibly remains. Perishable materials
might have played an important role in the original structures but since we have only
scanty archaeological evidence of these materials most reconstruction work is highly
speculative.
The stone work in Knossosfalls in three categories.First, there are the ashlar walls which
feature a dressedstone surface as at the North Entrance Passageor in the light wells of
the Domestic Quarter. Second, there are rubble walls which were constructed with
randomly collected undressed stones and were frequently used in combination with a
timber framework which will be discussedbelow. These walls were commonly plastered
or covered with gypsum dado slabs. Finally, stone was employed because of its fine
surface as paving material, as dado fixed to the wall or as decorative column bases."
The Palaceof Knossoswasconstructedin the Bronze Age. The introduction of bronze

insteadof copper in MM I had a great influence on the architecture of Crete. 14The new
andharderbronzemadeit possibleto work stonein a betterway than had beenpossible

with the previouscoppertools, but bronze,comparedto iron, is still relatively soft and
"Branigan, 1970,p. 211.

"CompareEvely, 1993,p. 208 ff andShaw,1973,p. 75 ff.
"Pendlebury.1963,283
The Palaceat Knossos,its Construction,DestructionandExcavation 119

Peter Kienzle
working hard stone with it is "

still cumbersome. Consequently, Minoan builders
preferred relatively soft stone which was available locally. " At Knossos the Minoan
builders predominantly employed Gypsum which was available at the GypsadesHill to
the south of the 17

palace and limestone available at a quarry at Hagia Aaron, two miles
to its "
north. Shaw has discussed the limestone and proved that the Minoan builders
distinguishedbetweena very soft limestone(ko4skouras),which was used as rubble infill,
a soft limestone (por6s or por6lithos) which was generally employed for less exposed
building work and a relatively hard grey-blueish limestone called ironstone (sidher6petra
or asbest6lithos) for its to

qualities make good lime. " The latter was used for exposed
featuressuch as thresholds.This distinctive use of the different types of limestone clearly
shows the level of sophistication in the Minoan building tradition. 20
Of course,this doesnot imply,thatBronzeAge people were unableto work hard stone.

The Pyramidsof the IV. Dynastyin Egypt" werebuilt with hard stonessuchasgranite
and "
basalt. The Minoansusedhard stonesfor severalpurposesbut predominantly in
threecircumstances.The mostprominenttypeof hard stonewas schist,a greenish- blue
typeof slatewhich lastedwell. It was employedfor paving in largepartsof the Palace,
specifically in areas which were not covered with a roof but also sometimesfor
corridors." Schist could be split easilyalongthe naturalbeddingplanes,and thus thin
large slabscould be prepared.Randomlycollectedhard stoneswere includedin rubble
masonry walls where it was not necessaryto work them at all or, only to dressthem
"Shaw,1973,p. 12.SeealsoKorres,1994a,p. 21 f who explainsthe effectmetallurgicaltechniques

for the productionof toolshadon theexecutionof the Acropolis.
"Evely,1993,p. 207.He provesthatsomebuildingmaterial,includingstone,wastransportedby ship
0
overconsiderabledistances.However,thevastmajorityof thebuilding material
C, wasobtained locally.
17Shaw,1973,p. 43 andPM III, p. 192f.
"Shaw, 1973,P. 38 ff andPM 1,p. 532.
"Shaw, 1973,pp. 12.
2"rheodoreFyfe noted the different qualities of limestone and
gypsum used for different purposesin
the palace and the outlying buildings as early as 1900. See Evans, 1900, p. 53 ff See also Pernier's
contribution to the Athens conference: Pernier, 1933, p. 267.
211owe gratitude to Dr. Rolf Snethlage, Munich, who, in a personal talk, illustrated the use of hard
stone types in Bronze Age Egypt.
2'Lloyd and Moller, 1987, p 94.
"Shaw, 1973,p 24.
120 Chapter2
roughly to achieve the desired size. Finally, the Minoans employed hard stones in a
limited way for decorative purposes as in the base of a column24or friezeS.25Besides
thesearchitectural uses, hard stones were employed for rhytons, vessels and seals.This
proves that the Minoans were ultimately able to work hard stones but obviously this
work was limited to small decorative objects.
Ashlar masonry was employed predominantly at two places: the walls of the light wells
and orthostats at the exterior wallS.26What appears to be good ashlar masonry in the
palace is in reality a very problematic construction. The stone blocks were dressed only
at the front in order to achieve a smooth rectangular surface but were not dressed at the
rear. Thus, the irregular wedge shapedblocks form no firm grip with other ashlar blocks
and had to be supportedwith a rubble and clay infill. This technique provided a pleasant
appearancewhich had some functional advantages:it was comparatively easy to produce,
it was relatively waterproof and it was more resistant against wear than a plastered
27
surface. However, the technique had considerable structural weaknesses.The wedge
shape of the blocks not only failed to provide a proper base for other blocks to rest on
but also tended to push the stone out of its bond in the wall. Therefore, it was necessary
to prevent them from tumbling over by tieing the inner and the outer face together. The
Minoan builders employed timber braces which were dovetailed at either end and fitted
into socketscarved into the block's surfaces 2' A similar construction (opus revinctum)
.
was employed in the fourth century BC for the fortifications at Mtsketa (25 km west of
Tbilisi, Georgia). According to Sekhniashvili, this construction technique was employed
because it was believed to be earthquake resistant.29
24Shaw, 1973,pp 27.

25Sakellarakis,1994,p. 44.
26Shaw,1973,p. 101.
27
Ibid., p. 92 L
29pM1,P. 128andShaw,1973,p. 88 and p. 157f. Seefigure 10.
2'Sekhniashvili,1988,396.

PeterKienzle
rigure iu nan ana section ot ine west waii snowing tne weap snapea viocKs ana tile morticcs lor ine
C,
wooden clamps. Drawing by J. Shaw.
A course of fine gypsum orthostats faces the West Court, which was formerly held
together with the dove tailed wooden wedgesdescribed above. Shaw could identify only
one, significantly eroded dowel hole on top of these orthostats.-'('This led Arthur Evans
to anticipate a superstructure of more perishable material instead of ashlar blocks. He
suggesteda timber framework with clay and rubble masonryinfill similar to the ones
from within the palace31Accordingto this idea,Fyfesuggesteda reconstructedelevation
.
of the wall in 1902 the
which showed abovementioned timber 32
frarnework. Later, Piet
de Jongreconstructedpartsof the West Wall in cementrenderedmasonryreplicating a
"Shaw, 1973,p 88.

-"Evans,1900,P. 10.
3'Fyfe,1902,p. 114L Seefigure II
122 Chapter 2
horizontal timber beamand ashlarmasonryabove." This was frequentlyseenby later
scholarsasan indicationthat the reconstructions

as a whole are unreliableand wrong."
Figure II Reconstruction of the elevation of West Wall and Corridor ot Frocession. Drawing by
Theodore Fyfe, 1902.
However, most of the walls in the Palace of Minos at Knossos were built as rubble
masonry walls. Stones, collected from the surrounding areas, needed only a minimal
dressing in order to be used in the wall constructions. Sometimes dressed stones from
earlier structures were re-used in the new walls. The stones were bonded together with
earth, mud or clay mortars and commonly plastered or covered with a gypsum dado. 35
The coating improved the visual appearance of the walls but was also necessary to
prevent rain penetratingthe wall and washing out the soft "
i-nortar. The internal strength
of these walls is limited to

and allow for higher loads the thickness of the walls had to be
17
considerable. The Minoan builders frequently employed a techniquewhere rubble
masonrywalls were reinforcedwith timber beamswhich allowed thern to build thinner
walls and limited the impact of earthquakes." Rubblewalls were employed for internal
for in 39
walls and,probably, the exterior walls the upperstoreyS.
"'CompareEvans'sexplanationsin PM 11,p. 349.

3'Comparepage416.
"Shaw, 1973,p. 77 ff.
"'CompareEvely, 1993,p. 208.
"For structuralbehaviourof stonemasonrysee:Binda andAnzani, 1997,p 113ff.
"This constructionmethodwill be discussedin the sectionon timber.
"It is not clear if therewere rubble walls without timber reinforcementbearnsof any considerable
heightin the palace.Sincethe reinforcementbeganonly at a certainheightabovethe floor level andmany
wallsarepreserved onlyto a lowerheightit cannotbe decidedif they formcrly featuredreinforcementbeams.
The Palaceat Knossos,its Construction.DestructionandExcavation 123

Peter Yjenzle
Modem conservationfacestwo problemsrootedin the Minoan constructiontechnique

for stonewalls. Firstly, the comparativelysoft bronzetools led the Minoans to prefer
comparativelysoft types of stonesuchasgypsumand limestone at Knossosand Phaistos
andsandstone at Mallia and "

Zakro. Of thesestones,
gypsum is especiallyvulnerableto
deteriorationby water.Limestoneand sandstonealso deterioratefast comparedto the
of
marblestructures the classical
period! ' The difficulty
second is causedby the specific
constructiontechniquesemployingtimber in the stonewalls. Ashlar masonrywas tied

together with timber braces and the rubble walls were reinforced with a timber
framework, all of which hasvanished.The problemsgeneratedby this methodwill be
discussedin the next sectionon timber.
2.1.2 Timber
Hardly any material used in the Palace of Minos was as controversial and disputed as
timber. Evans repeatedly reports the survival of charcoaled timber remains which
indicated the use of timber for severalpurposesin the palacesuch as columns, ceiling and
reinforcement beams 42However, unlike extremely dry climates, timber in Knossos is

.
hardly ever preserved in its original dimensions and most of the fragments found in the
Palacewere carbonised,rotted and were outside their original context." They had fallen
into courtyards and rooms and it was not possible to establish their original position.
Many of theselarger timber elementswere mentioned in Mackenzie's diaries and Evans'
Notebooks and some of them were recordedby Theodore Fyfe. In fact, one of them was
"Evely, 1993,P. 207.

"Generally speaking,igneousrocks suchas basaltand graniteare formedfrorn magniaeither by
eruptionor gradualcooling.Theyarecrystallineand hardto work, but they last lon.g. Sedimentaryrockssuch
as limestone,gypsumandsandstoneare formedfrom erosionproduceunderhigh I'lleir strength
pressure.
C
dependson the binding agent.They are easyto work but lessdurable.Marble is a limestonewhich was
reheated by the magma core of the earthand formed larger crystalswithin its structure.See Ashurst and
Dimes, 1989,p. 19 ff.
"For example: Evans, 1900, p. 38, PM I, p. 343 L
41Shaw, 1973, p 136.
124 Chapter2
photographed by Fyfe." However, few remains have survived today and, thus, it is
difficult to assestheir quality and function. "
Evanshad the excavatedtimber remainsanalysed,all of which werecypresswhich led

him to state that cypresswas the predominant type of timber used for construction work
at Knossos."' In 1934 Fritz Netolitzky analysed several pieces of timber from various
Minoan excavation sites for Spyridon Marinatos, then curator at the Museum at
Herakleion. He identified one sample taken from architectural timber members from
Knossos as spruce and three samples from architectural members from Knossos,
Amnissos and Phaistos as fir. None of the samples were cypress or cedar (Cedrus
libani). " However, cedar was used along with fir for the handles of axes and oak was
used for an altar .4' The uniform appearance of coniferous trees and the state of
preservationof the individual charcoaledremainsmade it impossible to distinguish within
a speciesand Netolitzky did not identified a single piece of cypress used for architectural
49
purposes. Thus, it must be concluded that a variety of timber species were employed
as construction timber at Knossos of which cypress was, perhaps, the predominant
species.
Frequently, enough matter survived to prove the existenceof a timber mcmber at certain
positions such as at the column sockets in the Throne Room. -" This allowed Evans and
Fyfe to establishthe general structure of the building and to determine the layout of the
timber framework but the exact dimensionsof the memberswere frequentlylost. Only
occasionallyafterrotting hadtimbermembersleft an impressionin the surroundingdebris
44See plate 212.

4-'PM1,343,especially Footnote2. JosefDun-n,1910,p. 60, mentionedthat sometimber remainshave
beenpreservedin the Museumin Herakleionbut it seemsthat they havedisappeared since.
"PM 1,p. 344. Evans,in fact, suggestedthe speciescypressitssempervirens.However,Nctolitzky
statedthat the generalsimilarity of coniferoustimbersandthe stateof preservationprohibit sucha detailed
statement.1934,p. 176.
47Netolitzky,1934,p. 176f.
4'Ibid., p. 177f and Shaw, 1973,p. 136.
4'Netolitzky, 1934,p. 176. Modern methodsallow for a more detailedanalysisof the individual
speciesbut, asfar asI know, no onehasresearched the ancienttimber remainsof Knossosto date.
"'!Evans,1900,p. 38.

Peter Kienzle
which enabledthem to estimatetheir fon-ner ý'

dirnensions. At other places, sockets in the
walls indicated the woodwork of the ceiling construction 52Thus., the architects could
.
establishthe general layout of the timber structures but not the exact dimensions of the
individual members.This problern is best illustrated by two reconstruction proposals for
the Grand Staircase, both of which were executed by Christian Doll. Tile section of the
first reconstruction proposal showed massive timber bearns for ceiling construction,
architraves and wall-reinforcernent beams (Figure 12a). The second and probably later
53
proposal showed reinforcernent bearnsof much thinner dimensions (Figure i 2b).
----- -------
r77
Section A Section B
Figure 12 a.) Section of the Grand Staircase.C. Doll
b.) Section ofthe Grand Staircase.Probably C. Doll.
"Shaw, 1973, p. 134. The fluted columns at the balustradeof the Lustial Basin in the Little Palace
left impressionsoftheir shape in the clay mortar ofa later wall which blocked (lie balustrade. PNI 1, p. 344,
PM 11,p. 521 and PM 111, p. 323. Another exampleis the rotted throne canopy in flic Hall of the Double Axes,
PM 111,p. 336.
52PM11,p. 408.
"See fig 12. Both plans are unpuhlished and not dated. Figure I 2b k myned by Christian Doll but
figure 12a is not signed at all. However, the drawing style suggestsan execution by Christian Doll. Both
plans are from the Evans' Archive, Ashmolean Museurn, Oxford.
126 Chapter 2
Conservation and Reconstruction at the Palace ot'Minos at Knossos
For an analysisof the timber member's structural qualities the detail of how the individual
timber members were joined is even more important than their dimensions. Some
constructivejoints such as dovetail tenons or lap joints can transmit compression as well
as tension, while otherjoints such as simple tenons only transmit compression. No direct
archaeologicalevidencefor thesedetails hassurvived and (lie only information on timber
joints has beenobtainedfrom frescoes. Fyfe suggested that the black LI-shapedpieces in
the depiction of the cella walls in the Miniature Fresco's's temple represent mortised
cross beams. This would
indicate a mortise and tenon
detai ]. 5' Besides Fyfe, none of
the other architects who
worked on site cornmented on
the joints of timber beams. In
all his reconstruction drawings,

Christian Doll never depicted a
joint detail the beams simply

-
met and it was left to the
viewer to ima-ine ho\v they

1.11-nil-C I-i I<C"(Olc(l clc\, Itloll (11 tile IL oluillil .It' 'Mirilic In tile
had been joined, Ccim aI Couji. hobably Thcodoic Fyfe.
Timber was used for many purposesin Mliloan architectUre.Thejambs and Iintels of both
doors and windows, the ceilings and wall rcinforcemcni hearnswere madc of timber. It
must be anticipated that beyond its use as structural timbers, wood was used for doors,
windows and furniture. In fact, the gypsuni throne in the Throne Room is supposed to
be a copy of a wooden original and charcoaled remains in the Hall ol'the Double Axes
and the Anteroom suggests that wooden chairs or thrones were used..ý
ZnZl
54Fyfe, 1902,114. See figure 13. See also N60ing, 1995, p. 51 t'.
"I'M IV, p. 918 f. In fact, Evans hadseveral wooden copies ot'dieThrone made, one of'which is now
on display in the Ashmolean Museum and another is placed in the Anteroom.
-nie Palace at Knossos, its Construction, Destruction and Excavation 127

Peter Kienzle
The most important use of timber in the palace was to provide a reinforcement
framework for the masonry walls. This Minoan timber reinforcement framework is not
a timber framed building in the European sense. In medieval and modern European
timber framing, the thickness of the beams was equal to the thickness of the walls. A
timber frame skeleton was erected and the panels were later filled with windows, doors
or waffing materialssuch as stone, brick or wattle and daub." The structural loads, both
vertical and horizontal, were transmitted through the timber framework. The panels'
function was not structural, it only formed the space. By contrast, the Minoan
architecture was a stone structure and the timber beams' function was limited to
reinforcing the structure against horizontal forces. Too little of the upper parts of the
palace have survived in order to formulate any theory about different construction
techniques in the upper stories."
Horizontal timber reinforcementbeamswere used in rubble masonry walls as early as EM

II, and it seemsthat the use of vertical timber members was a late development." After
MM IIIa the use of timber decreased and the dimension of the timber members was
reduced. Evans suggested that this indicated a general shortage of timber in Crete. "'
However, timber reinforcement beams were commonly employed in conjunction with
rubble masonry and rarely with '

ashlar. Only in a few places,such as the North Entrance
Portico, was ashlar masonry combined with vertical posts. Normally the use of timber
was limited to horizontal members in ashlar unless they formed door or window frames.
Frequently, a horizontal reinforcement beam would also form the lintel for doors and
61
windoWS. Shaw suggested that timber was hardly ever used in exterior walls. Few
exterior walls have survived abovethe height where the lowest horizontal timber member
"Harris, 1993,p. 20 andGerner,1994,p. 107ff.

"Mis is basedonthearchaeological evidenceof the groundfloor andsomefirst floor featureswhich
have been excavatedso far. It is possiblethat upperstoreysof the palacesol'Crete wereconstructedin a
timberframework in theEuropeansensewith mudbrick infill. However,the archaeological evidencefor this
theoryis not sufficient.CompareShaw,1973,p. 189.
"Shaw, 1973,p. 139f andPM 19p. 72.
ITM 11,p. 565.
"Shaw, 1973,p. 148.
"Comparefigure 14.
128 Chapter 2
might be expected and at Knossos timber was used in exterior walls such as the North
Entrance Portico, the West Wall, the light well of the Hall of the Double Axes and the
Court of Distaffs. Thus, Shaw's theory cannotbe supported.
Figure 14 East wall Court of the Distaffs.
The horizontal reinforcementframescornmonlyconsistedof two timber beamswhich

werelaid at theouteredgesof the wallsconnectedwith short traversebeamsat the same
level and formed a ladder like structure." The cavities left in the ashlarfacadeof the
easternlight well of the Hall of theDoubleAxe provideevidencefor this system." It has

been mentionedearlierthat no evidencefor timberjointshassurvived,but this horizontal
timberframewasstructurallyeffective only whenthe traversebeamswerejoined to the
mainbeamswith,ajoint detail that respondedto tension.Only then did the frame tie the
two facesof the wallstogetherandprovidethe necessary
strengthto resistthe horizontal
forces such as those occurring during earthquakes,and prevent the wall faces from
"'Seefigure 15.
"See plate 137 and 138 The chip infill in this cavity was necessaryto prevent the collapse of the
masonry above.

PeterYjenzle
separating. Wooden dowels
fixed these timber beams to the
masonry structuresbelow. Many
dowel holes were found at the
top courses of masonry struc-

II
tures and Shaw believes that
they almost exclusively indicate Figure 15 Horizontal reinforcements structures. 'Me dovetail
features were joint is based on structural considerations not on
that wooden
archaeological evidence. Drawing by the author.
connected to the masonry. He
dismissedthe ideathat woodendowelsmighthaveconnectedstoneblocks asdid bronze
clampsin the Classical '
period. The dowelholeswerecommonlysquarewhich indicates
that they werechiselledratherthan drilled.65
The secondtypeof timberreinforcement

wasa timberstructurewhich not only employed
horizontalmembersbut alsovertical posts.Thesepostscommonlyrestedon stoneslabs
height abovefloor level so that rising damp 66
could not affect the post's ends.
at some
The lowest horizontalmemberwas installedat considerableheight aboveground.This
reinforcement beam was commonly also the lintel for doors and 67
windows. Shaw
explainsthat in the later Minoan periodstherewas an increasein the numberof vertical

timberswhich were usedas props andwhich were supposedto relievethe lower walls
from the weight of the upper storeys. He also noted an increaseof piersandpillars in
Minoanarchitectureanda reduceduseof transversal binders6' However,the dimensions
.
of the timbers,as far asthey can be established,weretoo small to carry the load of the
upper storeysby themselves.Someof the load was still carriedby the rubble masonry
betweenthe timber members.69
"Shaw, 1973,P. 167.Comparefor example,Korres, 1994b,p. 23.

'-'Shaw,1973,P. 161ff.
"See plate 132centreright.
C,
6IFyfe,1902,p. I 10.
"'Shaw, 1973,P. 144.
Iqt is difficultto quantifythisstatementbecauseit wasnot possibleto assurethe exactdimensionsfor
all timber members and to the
calculate exact weight
of the upper However,
storeys. 60 to 80 centimetrethick
mudceilings at two or three storeyswere too heavyto be carriedsolely by the thin timber framework.
130 Chapter 2
Most of the jarnbs and lintels of doors and
windowsin thepalacewereexecutedin a timber

framed construction in both rubble and ashlar
masonry. The vertical jamb construction of

doorsrestedon theverydistinct L-shapedor U-
shapedstone bases,thus forming a frame that

stretchesthe thicknessof the wall. There is no
conclusiveevidencehow the timberconstruction
was fixed to the gypsumand limestonejambs.
Shaw identified a few dowel holes at MalliO
AOCIC-Y' WAL4
Jý
but at Knossos, the jamb blocks have

IJ-
CYAFIIAf BAM
deterioratedtoo much to identify holes. Some
havealsobeencoveredby later reconstructions.
eAfARR&D
JrA low However, the revealof thejarnbs was madeof

alternatingstrips of plaster and vertical posts.
AMY. Evidencefor thisconstructionwas presentedby
Fi,c,,
Ure 16 Plan and elevation of a door Fyfein 1902 The laterreconstructions,as they
.71
jamb. Drawing by Ibeodore
Fyfe. were executed by Christian Doll featured a
horizontal transversalbeam at the lower and
upper end of the reveal. The reconstruction of the transversalbeams seems- for
structuralreasons- logical
C) but evidencefor sill-beams,in which the vertical postswere
socketedor an upper beam

transversal on which the I intel bearnsrestedwas not found
on site.7'
An important structural fact must be noted. It seemsthat the timber frarnes of the ground
floor were not connected with the timber framing of the upper storeys aside from a few
areassuch as the Grand Staircase.The discovery of the jarnb blocks of the upper Hall of
Double Axes at their original position indicatesthat the timber framing of the lower Hall
"Shaw, 1973, P. 162.

"See figure 16.
"Ibey were not mentioned in Mackenzie's diaries and were not recorded by Fyfe.

Peter KienzIe
of the Double Axes was completed at ceiling level. A new frame was begun on top of the
jamb blocks for the next storey.7' This theory is further supported by the fact that the
vertical reinforcement posts in the north wall of the northern portico of the Hall of
Colonnadesalso restedon stoneslabsand were not connectedwith the framesof the
groundflooO
The use of slender timber reinforcement beams in masonry or brick constructions is quite
common in many earthquake-prone areas around the world and is an ancient technology
used to reduce damage. This method proved to be highly successful in places such as
Kashmir, 71 Macedonia, 71 Pompeii and Herculaneum, 77 and Hissarlik. 71 Langenbach
discussed the use of slender 'timber reinforcement beams' to strengthen brick or rubble
masonry walls in Kashmir and he discovered a number of important features: (I) the taq
system consists not of complete frames but predominantly of 'runners' (horizontal
beams), (2) the beams are thin, (3) the use of mortar of negligible strength, (4) the lack
of bonding between the panels and the posts, and (5) the frequent use of heavy earthen
7'
roofS. The system employed by the Minoan builders can be described in almost the same
way and likewise probably were intended to counteract the forces of earthquakes. An
important detail of these earthquake resistant timber constructions are the joints between
the timber members which, unfortunately, have not survived at Knossos. 'O However, it
can be assumed that the timber reinforcement structures at Knossos were initially
designed to limit potential earthquake damage. "
"See plate 136.

"See plate98 centreandDoll's folder No. 8, plate 102.
I'Langenbach1989,p. 35.
'ýumanov 1989,p. 324. He refersto the Republicof Macedonia,a part of the former Yugoslavia.
"Maisonneuve1989,p. 402.
7'Dunn1910,p. 37.In fact,Wilhelm D6rpfeldwho excavatedat Hissarlik(Troy) visited Knossoson
7 May 1900andsuggested that the horizontalcavitiesat the LustralBasinwereleft by rottedreinforcement
beams.Until then Evansand Mackenziebelievedthat the cavities were remainsof water pipes which
providedwaterfor theLustralBasin.SeeEvansNotebook,7 May 1900,p. 64.1 am gratefulto VassoFotou
who broughtthis detailto my attention.
"Langenbach, 1989, p. 35 L
"Ungenbach, 1989, p. 36 and Sumanov,1990b,p. 203. Both authors discuss the importance of joint
details for earthquake resistant structures.
"Cadogan 1980,p. 54.
132 Chapter2
The particular difficulty for conservation is causedpredominantly by two elements. First,
placing the horizontal membersat the sameheight at either side of the wall narrowed the
section of the wall considerably at this level. The rubble walls consisted of carefully
executed outer skins on either side and a less careful infill consisting of mud and stone.
In the Magazines and in parts of the Domestic Quarter debris filled the rooms prior to
1
2"
a.) Original wall b.) Before excavation c.) After excavation d. ) After collapse
Figure 17 The decayprocessof the a rubble wall with two horizontal timber members at the same height.
Drawing by the Author.
the deteriorationof thetimbersin the walls. This debriskept the upperpartsof the walls
in positionevenafterthe timbersdeteriorateduntil theywere excavated.Now, the upper
parts of the wall were left without support and were exposedto the forces of the
environment. This led to the collapseof the upperparts andonly the lower part of the
wall survived to the height whereoncethe first horizontaltimber had beenplaced.12
Another peculiarity of Minoan timber work was that membersused by the Minoan
builderswerenot squaredor brought into regular shape." Only the front of the timbers
was adzed,while the other sideswere not treatedat all and were set in mud or a mud-
92
Seefigure 17.
X.
ISeefigures 16and 18.

PeterKienzle
lime mortar. " The impressions left by the deteriorated members in this matter are still
-visibleat some places such as in the Throne Room 85

area. Christian Doll has measured
the cavitiesleft by the siHbeamsof the window betweenthe East-WestCorridor and the
light well of the Hall of the Double Axes.86The depthof the cavity at the corridor side
ý44-4- -40-. - 37
133
19
or
71,
"s. A.
r. w., isl
Figure 18 WindowbetweentheHall of the DoubleAxes andthe Lower East-WestCorridor.Recording

of the cavity left by the decayedtimberbeams.ChristianDoll. undated(probably 1908).
(bottom) varies between24 and 41 centimetres,while at the light well side it varies
between26 and40 centimetres.
The heightof the masonryin the middle betweenthe two
reinforcementbeamsvaries between 30 centimetresat the east side (right) and 15
centimetresat the west side (left). Doll's drawing also showsthe placeof the former
transversalbeamandthe squaredowel holes.The cavitiesleft in the masonryafter the
irregulartimbersrottedbecameevenmore twisted by pressurethroughsuperincumbent
"'Shaw 1973, p. 144. Obviously the quality of craftsmanship varies within the palace, and some
timbers were treated better than others.
"See SectionC-C, Drawing 4.
"'Seefigure 18.
134 Chapter2
earth.Thesetimbersweremembersof the original structure.For the conservationof the

structure it became necessaryto fill the cavities with a load bearing material that could
be fitted in these irregular spaces.
2.1.3 Mud Ceilings and Mud Brick
Earth and mud are amongst the most ancient building materials and are still in use in
many parts of the world. The obvious advantageof thesematerials is that they are readily
available and cheap and, furthermore, do not require sophisticated tools or knowledge
to work them. At Knossos various types of earth were used for mud brick walls, for
plaster and for ceilingsor, as fired clay, for the construction of water and sewage pipes."
Fired clay is a very durable material and remains of both pottery and architectural
terracotta were found at the Palace of Minos but, it seems that no fired bricks were
8'
used. However, they are of little importance for the architectural conservation of the
site and, therefore, will not be discussed here.
Unlike the structures in Mesopotamia and the Middle East, the mud brick walls of
Minoan architecture were rather thin. Frequently they consisted of only a single row of
stretchers or were combined with a timber framework. Shaw suggested that the walls
were not load bearing and, frequently, they were later "
additions. It is quite possible that
upper parts of walls and larger parts of the upper storeys were constructed with mud
brick.' However, there is little archaeologicalevidencefor this theory aside from the fact
that a considerable amount of clay debris, which might come from dissolved mud brick
walls, was found at the lower levels. Shaw proposed that mud bricks were produced in
moulds and that he could establish regular sizes for the different Minoan Palaces."
However, mud brick was frequently used at Mallia, while only limited evidence has been
87Shaw, 1973, P. 198.

"Ibid., p. 188.
"Ibid., p. 188 f.
"Evans, 1905, p. 3.
9'Shaw, 1973, p. 187.

Peter YGenzle
found at Knossos, mostly at the Little Palace. Most of these earthen remains have
disappearedcompletely by now."'
The most important use of mud was probably the construction of mud ceilings. Again,
no direct archaeologicalevidencefor the ceiling construction survived but Evans argued
that no other roofing material, such as tiles survived and that the pictographic evidence
from house tablets and frescoes indicated that the palace had flat roofs." Furthermore,
Evans refers to flat roof construction which was still used in Crete at the turn of the
century. " This analogy has been commonly accepted by modern scholars of Aegean
95
prehistory.
The constructiontechniquefor flat mud roofs wascommonfor vernacularbuildings in

large parts of the Mediterranean.It providesa good useof the spaceunderneath,it is
weUadaptedto theclimate,requiresonly small amountsof timber, is simpleto construct

but it doesrequirecloseattentionandregularmaintenance.This constructiontechnique
wascommonfor vernacularbuildings in the mountainareasof Crete.The basicform of

thesehousesis a singlerooin. An internalsupportmust be provided for larger structures
in orderto preventthejoists from sagging.This supportcould be either woodenposts
(stdtisor kintis) supportinga mainbeam(messod6kz) it be
or could an arch in
(k-C1111dra)
which casethe housesarecalled kainar6spito.The spacebetweenthe outer walls and

the archesor the main beamswere coveredwith comparativelyshort and, frequently,
poorly grown timber joists. The next layer was madeof branches(sk(ses),on top of
which twigs andpartsof bushes(astyvides or sphdkes)
were placedin a thin but densely
packedlayer. They were coveredwith a ten to fifteen centimetrethick layer of mud

(pilor6doma) on top of which a layer of impermeableand insolatingclay (lep[da) was
placed.The top coatof mudwassometimesenrichedwith lime to provide a more water
resistantouter skin, but, nonetheless,theseflat mud ceilingsmust undergoan annual
"'Shaw, 1973, P. 197. Most evidence refers to the Little Palace.

93Seepage 415 ff.
9'PM 1, P. 327.
9'Seefor example: Evely, 1993, p. 210 and N6rling, 1995, p. 17 and Warren, 1972. p. 303 ff.
136 Chapter 2
repair cycle. Every year before the rainy seasonstarts a new layer of mud must be added
and rolled in with heavy stone drums, otherwise the roof will leak within a few years.96
Fioure 19 Schematicdrawingof ceiling constructionfor a vernacularCretanhouse.

C, Z_ 0
Jordanian flat mud roofs have almost identical construction methods, employed by the
local builders in the eighteenth and the nineteenth centuries.9' Jordan has comparable
climatic conditions to Crete and as a result the houses show a similar process of decay
due to neglect of the annual repair cycle. We have to presume that the Minoan roof
construction - if not identical - was at least very similar to the construction described
above. Therefore, the Minoan roofs, as soon as they were neglected, began to decay
18
within a short time. An earlier study in Jordan showed that the roof saggedin the
middleandcreateda puddlewhichheld water for a longer time than usual.Within a few
I
"Compare Bosineki-Didoni,1985,p. 59 L
"Kienzle, 1995,pp 35 - 39.
'Me timespansgivenherearetakenfromanearlierstudycarriedout by the authorin Jordanbut will
be very similar in Crete.

Peter Kienzle
years the roofs started leaking. After approximately five years the central parts of the
roof collapsedand piled up in the middle of the ground floor. The parts of the roof which
were above supporting main beams and the walls, remained intact for a longer time but,
after a period of about ten years, they collapsed as well. Then the vulnerable wall tops
were exposed to the weather.
Mud is a material with very distinct conservation problems. A fact made even more true
becausethe remainshave beenburied for three millennia. The unbaked or, in case of fire
as the causeof its destruction, only partly baked mud dissolved rapidly and formed a clay
matter that could not be identified as either a ceiling or mud bricks. " Together with the
0
mud plaster at the walls and lime plaster coatings it fon-ned a substance that was
described by Duncan Mackenzie as:
a depositthat,owing to the hardconcretelike characterhadso stubbornlyresistedall but the most

...
determinedattacksof the pick axe.'...
Naturally, this debris was removed in the process of excavation and nothing of it has
survived for study. Thus, our information on the mud features is limited.
2.1.4 Decoration
The rooms of the Palace at Knossos were decorated internally with a wide variety of
materials and techniques available to the Minoan builders. Some of these decorations
survived in situ but many of them were detached from their original position. Gypsum
dado is the most common decorative feature surviving in situ or in a position which
allowed to reconstruct its original place.The dado was made of decorative gypsurn which
could be easily sawn with toothless or toothed bronze saws."" The slabs had a
"Shaw, 1973, p. 191.

"DM 6 April 1905, p. 42.
"" Evely, 1993, p. 210 and Shaw, 1973, p. 59 ff.
138 Chapter2
considerable size (e.g. 1.96 mx1.80 m) but were only between 2.5 cm and 7 cm
thick. " 17hesegypsum slabs were attached to the lower parts of the walls with clay
mortar and held in position by floor "'

slabs. Basically the dados, made of gypsum, are
exposed to the same threat as gypsum stone described earlier but in addition the dados
face two more problems. First, in the absence of a protective roof water penetrated
behind the slabsand dissolvedthe clay mortar thus disconnecting the slab from the wall.
Second4owing to the thinness of the slabs and the bedding structure of the original
sedimentation the soaked dado slabs warped like timber. ""
Generallyspeaking,only the limestoneashlarmasonrywalls were exposedin Minoan

All if
times. other walls, not coveredwith gypsum dado, "'
were plastered. The surface
of the rubblewallswasuneven;therefore,the Minoan builder employeda comparatively
thick layer to
of mudplaster levelthe "
walls. This coat
plaster containedlittle if any lime
as a binding agent.A fine lime plastercoat was appliedonto this surfaceas a basefor
" Theexacttechniqueand compositionof the
furtherdecoration- especiallyin frescoes.
wall plastervariesdepending on the progressivesophisticationof the building technique

andthe functionof the roomswheretheplasteris applied.The compositionof the plaster
changedfrom a ratherlow calciumcarbonatecontent(30% - 40 %) in earlier periodsto
highercontentsin MM 1 (70% - 90 %). Shawarguesthat in the earlier periods,plaster
wasappliedfor strengtheningthe walls while in the later periodsthe decorativesystem

becamemoreimportant." Thiscannotbe left withoutcomment.Plastercannotcarry any
structuralloadbut it functionsasa protectivecoat which preventsthe mud mortar of the

rubblewallsfrom being by
affected water.Water penetrationwould inevitably lead to a
"'Shaw, 1973,p. 20.

`-'Evely, 1993,p.2 10.
"'See plate 173.
"'Shaw, 1973,p. 108.
""Fyfe, 1902,p. 108andCameron,1968,p. 3.
"PM 14P. 530 and Shaw, 1973, p. 207. The base material for plaster was burned calcium carbonate
and not gypsum,as was assumedby Fyfe, 1902, p. 108. The term 'fresco' has been widely used to describe
the murals in the Palace of Knossos, despite the fact that not all ofthern were executed in the real method
'buonfresco', Cameron 1968, p. 3. Many of them were simply murals.
"'Shaw, 1973, p. 211 212.
-

PetcrKienzlc
collapse of the wall. However,
Shaw correctly discovered that
finer plaster was employed in later
periods in order to provide a plain
surface for the sophisticated
murals. This development culmi-
nated in the technique described

by Cameron for the MM IlIb
'House of the Frescoes'. 109Here,
a layer of lime plaster was applied
on the levelling mud plaster. The
outline of the frescoes were
sketchedon this coat with orange

NoUre ZU riasteraecorationin MagazineX11.Drawingby
C C paint and then covered with a
Fyfe.
Theodore
very fine opaque slip of lime
plaster on which the actual fresco was executed. Principally, all plastered walls were
finished in colour with either humble designs with lines or friezes in the magazines or a
elaborate design with frescoes in the more important rooms. ""
Stucco was another decorative form used in the palace by the Minoan artists in the
palace. Moulded and pre-cast plaster elements were incorporated in the wall plaster or
in ceilings. Architectural elements, rosettes and spirals were found at various places of
the Palaceand Fyfe reconstructedthe ceiling of the Queen's Megaron on the basis of the
"'
remains. Besidesthese moulded and pre-cast work the Minoan artists modelled semi-
relief plaster figures. The Charging Bull Relief in the West Portico of the Northern
Entrance"' or the Prince of the Lilies may serve as examples for this technique. Figures
were modelled on the otherwise plain plaster, which was later decorated with a mural,
"'Cameron, 1968,p. 3.
'"Seefigure 20. SeealsoFyfe, 1902,p. III and PM L p. 530.
`Fyfe, 1902,p. 116ff. Seealso:PM III, p. 30 - 31.
112PM III, p. 158ff andPM IV, p. I ff.
140 Chapter 2
of the depiction.Furthermore,the timber ceilings

thusenhancingthe naturalappearance
seemedto havebeenplasteredand variouspaintedstuccofragmentswere attributedto
ceiling "
decorations.
'
-'---.
1T
yiý
7ým 4, w*
Figure 21 The ChargingBull Relief from the North EntrancePassage.

Lý Tie reconstructionis basedon
thedepictionof a chargingbull on a gypsumslabfoundat Mycenae.
0
Someparts of the wall decorationswerefound in their original position"" but many of

the well known frescoeswere found in a fallen position within the destructiondebris
above the floor. '" In the latter cases,tile original wall to which the fresco once might
havebeenattachedwas missingcompletely.It will be discussedlater how accuratewas
their replacementon the reconstructedwalls. Many of the fresco elementsstill in situ
were taken down and transferredto the Museum of Herakleion shortly after their
excavation.This wasconsiderednecessarywhen the plastercould not be shelteredfrom
the weatherandwater was able to penetratebehindthe plaster,dissolveits mud plaster
coat anddetachthe lime plastercoat from the wall. Besidesthe spiral frescoin the bath
adjacentto the Queen'sMegaronandplasterin the Lustral Basin of the Throne Room
hardly any plasterhassurvivedin situ.
11"PMIV, P. 874 f and Fyfe, 1902, p. 119.

"" For example in the Magazincs,the Throne Room or the Bath adjacent to the Queen's Megaron. See
Fyfe, 1902, p. I 10.
"'For exampletheMiniatureFresco,PM III, p. 29 f, the ChargingBull Fresco,PM III, p. 170or the
Dolphin Frescoin the Queen'sMegaron,PM III, p. 378.

Peter Kienzle
The gypsumdado slabsfrequentlycoveredthe timber reinforcementbeamsin the wall

to which they were attached.For example,in the Room with the PlasterCouch, the
cavities of the original vertical postsare still visible behindthe remainsof the gypsum
dado."' The plasterdecorationoften recreatedthe timber frameworkin its decorative
pattern. Where timber beamswere insertedin the wall, a band of spiral or circular
patternsdecoratedthe plasteras,for example,in the Bathroomadjacentto the Queen's
Megaron." Inevitably,cracksin the plasteroccurredwheretimber beamswere inserted
in the walls due to the different physicalpropertiesof timber andmasonry.The above
mentioneddecorativepatternwould minimise the visual effectsof thesecracks.
2.1.5 Conclusions
The previous sectiondescribedthe variousbuilding materialsand building techniques
employed by the Minoan craftsmen at the Palace of Knossos. It is necessaryto

understand the Minoan constructionsto appreciatethe conservationproblems the
architects,TheodoreFyfe, ChristianDoll and Piet de Jong, were facing. In Knossos
specificbuilding methodscausedvery specificconservationproblems:
" the useof soft building materialssuchasgypsum,timber andmud
" constructionmethodswhich focussedon appearance
ratherthan on quality
" useof timber reinforcementswhich, after rotting, left cavities
0 useof mud mortar,plasterandceilings which deterioratedquickly
Generally speaking, the palace was constructed with comparatively soft building
materialswhich deterioratequickly after the palacewas destroyed and they were exposed
to the forces of the environment. They survived well after their burial but began to
deteriorate again after their excavation. To a large extent they are responsible for the
need of reconstruction work.
"'Compare Section A-A, Drawing 8.

""Compare plates 184 and 185.
142 Chapter2
2.2 The Destruction Process
2.2.0 Introduction
The second issue which had a major influence on the preservation of the site was the
original destruction process at the end of the palace's life in Minoan tirnes. Fire destroys
a building in a manner different from that of earthquake and many buildings which were
simply deserted also decayed in different ways. At Knossos various types of destruction
occurred at different areas of the palace and were responsible for different states of
preservation of the original fabric. It is very important to note that Arthur Evans himself
z:-
recognised the occurrence of the three different main destruction causesat Knossos. It
was left to the Architects to find practical solutions to respond to the problems.
The typesof destructionwhich arecommonlymentionedin connectionwith the Palace
of Minos at Knossosare:
" Earthquake
" Fire
" Desertion
" The eruption of Santorini

Robbing of stone
Military raid
The issueof a militaryraid will not be discussedherebecauseit is not in itself a physical

way of destruction.It normallyresultedin a destructionof the site by fire or by desertion.
The other possibledestructioncauseswill be discussedin the following section.
As PeterWarren points out, the dateof the destructionof Knossosis of importanceto

in the Aegean."' The dateof destructionis linked to the rise
the prehistoricarchaeology
"'Warren, 1991. P. 33.

Pcter Kienzle
and fall of cultures and therefore is an important mark in the history of the region. In his
paper Warren gives a short overview of the different positions held by researchersin the
area."' While the date is disputed severely, hardly any of the researchersquestions the
event of a comprehensivedestruction of the Palace at a certain tirne. In this thesis it will

be of minor importance to establishthe exact date, but it is still essential to establish how
certain parts of the palace were destroyed and what influence this had on the necessary
conservation work.
2.2.1 Earthquake
Knossos is located in an earthquakezone,120and sorne scholars believe that an
earthquakedestroyed the 121

Palace. Many earthquakeshave beendocumented in the
historyof Creteand, with somegaps,lists can be madewhich stretchback centuries.122
Marinatos anticipates at least three earthquakes of different magnitudes in each century
-V::p
1(
Figure 22 Earthquake-prone
areasof the world.
0
"'Warren, 1991. SeealsoWarren, 1990.

"'Reed, 1995,P. 4.
"'See for exampleWarren, 1985,p. 84.
I`PM IL P. 313.
144 Chapter 2
and it is only reasonable to anticipate that similar earthquakes occurred in Minoan

times.' Arthur Evans finally adopted the theory that an earthquake was the main reason
behind the palace's destruction. In the last volume of his compendium Palace of Minoy
he writes:
Ube end was sudden and the evidence once more points to an earthquake as the cause followed by a
widespread conflagration and doubtless ensuing pillage of the ruins left. But on this occasion the
C0C
catastrophe was final. Squatters, indeed, after a short interval of years, occupied the probably
considerable shelter still offered by the remains of the fabric. '2'
Earthquakedamageis generatedby two typesof waves:the body wavesandthe surface
waves.S wavesand P wavesare body waveswhich move quickly throughthe body of

the earth.P wavestravelat approximately24,000km/h causingan up and down motion,
while S-waves,travellingat 16,000km/h,causea side to side movement.Commonly,S-
I
wavescausemore darnage to buildings than P-waves.Surface-waves
are low frequency
waves, travelling on the

crust surface. They shake
tall buildings. 12
-' Further-
more, close to the earth-
quake's epicentre and at
tectonic faults the upper
surface of the earth might

be deformed causing parts
of buildings to slip to a
lower level, to buckle or to
rl-urc
0 I..) JrIUj)UgiltIL)II Ul f- WIU a-WUVOSLI]FOUc-,
n ine earin.
be twisted in their ground
plan. 126
'I'Marinatos, 1959,p. 13.

I'M IV, P.xxiii.
12'Reed,1995,p. 3.
126S
tiros, 1996,p. 133

PeterKienzie
Normally, buildings are exposed to vertical loads while the horizontal forces are very
limited (wind or moving people and animals). The normal vertical loads in a building are
either static (weight of construction material) or change minimally and slowly (all goods
and personsin the structure, snow or rain on the roof). In contrast the horizontal forces
of an earthquakeaccelerateand slow down extremely quickly thus exposing the structure

to extremedistress. The Minoans did not erect tall buildings at Knossos and, therefore,
destruction through surface waves were less likely. P-waves generate an up and down
movement of the structures but the Minoan structures were, as far as archaeological
evidencepermits us to assess,
oversized and should have been able to carry the vertical
stress.The majority of the damage must have been causedby the side to side movement
of the S-waves.
While timber possessesa considerable tensile or ductile strength,

tl masonry will break
immediatelyupon being exposedto the stresscausedby the S-waves.The horizontal
timber-reinforcementsreduced the earthquakedamages at the 12'
palace. They tied
together the non-tensilerubble masonrystructure.Generally,at archaeological
C) sites,
damage causedby earthquakescan be recognisedby the horizontal dislocation of
building material.128ThiS, that its former location is known.
of course,presupposes
The south-eastangle of the palace, the House of the Fallen Blocks and the House of the
Sacrificed Oxen show distinct marks of the earthquake damage at the close of Middle
Minoan IIIb. " This areaof the Palacewas especiallyexposedbecauseit was constructed
on a subterraneanquarry and a sloping hill. 130

Obviously, other parts of the palace were
exposedto the sameearthquake but the damage might not have been as severe as in the
south-east angle which was abandoned after the destruction. The Domestic Quarter,
north of this areawas cut deeply into the neolithic strata, a fact which protected it quite
well from the forces of the 1.11

earthquake. Other parts of the Palace have been affected
"Compare Stiros, 1996, p. 150 and Coburn et al. 1995, p. 46 and also Langenbach and Sumanov.
12'SeeStiros, 1996,
129PM11, p. 288.
""Ibid., p. 330 L
"'Ibid., p. 348.
146 Chapter 2
by the earthquake but its traces have mostly vanished in the context of the consequent
reconstruction called the "Great Rebuilding' by Evans. "
It is more difficult to prove that an earthquake was responsible for the final destruction
of the Palace of Knossos. Collapsed ceilings in themselves are no indication for
earthquakes since almost all types of destruction result in collapsed ceilings. The
distinctive marks of Earthquake damage - dislocated masonry - could only be proven for
buildings which were abandoned in Middle Minoan Illb before the final destruction of
the Palace in Late Minoan 1.133
The Minoanswereusedto earthquakes,somethingwhich can be seenin their provision
of timber reinforcementsto counteract the forces of earthquakes"' and the quick

reconstruction after the earthquakein Middle Minoan IlIb. 11'
None of the excavated
architectural featuresshow definite signs of earthquakedamageas a final causeof

destructionbut thisdamagewould be most visible at the upperstoreyswhich havelong
sincedisappeared.
Evanssuggested otherindirectfactors,suchasincompletework in the
workshopsor overturnedvessels,but thesefactorsindicatean unspecificdisasterand not
necessarilyan earthquake.Fire or a military raid would have had the same effect.
Nonetheless,an earthquakecannotbe ruled out as a possibility for final destruction.
Typical conservation problems which occur after earthquakes are cracks in vaults,
masonry and internal disintegration of the two faces of a masonry wall. Some of these
cracks are big enough to cause the collapse of the entire structure. The conservation
work which is commonly necessary after earthquakes, is the joining together of the
disintegratedmembers.No excavatedstructure in the palace was affected by earthquake
damagein a way that imposedon the architectsparticular conservation problems. Cracks
might have openedin the wall but later rain probably liquefied the mud mortar and closed
`PM II, p. 365 ff.

"'See, for example,the Houseof the Fallen Blocks. Somescholars offer other dates for the destruction
of the Palace. See also Cadogan in Appendix 3.
"'Compare page 132.
1"Georgiou, 1979, p. 56.
Ile Palace at Knossos, its Construction, Destruction and Excavation 147

Peter Kienzle
the cracks again. One hundred years after the excavation and after several conservation
treatments of the structures no typical cracks can be seen which indicate earthquake
damage.Furthermore, the excavation diaries of Duncan Mackenzie and the Notebooks
of Arthur Evans mention no typical earthquake damage besides the blocks in the House
of the Fallen Blocks and the House of the Sacrificed Oxen.
2.2.2 Fire
Anothersourceof destructionfrequentlymentionedin contextwith the Palaceof Minos

is fire. "' The destructionof the West Wing andespeciallyof the Magazineshad been
caused or at least contributed to by fire. Burn marks are visible at the West Facade:
71bepresentfagadebearssignsof the final destructionof the Palace.On oneof the upright gypsum
slabsyoucanseethemarkwheretheendof a blazingbeamrested,while all to the north is blackened
by the wind driven smoke. Now violent south winds are commonest in late April to early May, and
the Athenian tradition maintained that this was the time of the year when Tbeseus sailed for
Knossos"'.
Several other parts of the Palace also show bum marks. 13'However, a blaze vast enough
to destroy the massive timbers of the Palace must leave more detectable traces. Ashurst
and Dimes identify four types of damage which commonly occur in structures affected
by fire: blackening, shattering, decomposition and oxidation. "' Limestone inevitably
converts to lirne above a certain temperature and sandstone changes its colour and sands
CD
off but these details are not present at the palace.
It can be arguedthat the walls were plasteredwith a mud plasterwhich protectedthe

stones.However, the bum marks in the West Wing are visible on the surface of the stone,
"'Castleden, 1990, p. 65.

11"Pendlebury,1954, p. 40.
"'For example the Queen's Megaron, PM III, p. 374
C,
"'Compare Ashurst and Dimes, 1990, p. 165.
148 Chapter 2
thus contradicting the existence of plaster at the time of the fire, unless, that is, one
assumesthat the first heat of the fire burned the plaster which fell off and exposed the
stones underneath. Furthermore, in the Magazines the blackening of the wall starts a
certain distance (60 100 cm) above the floor. 14"

The lower parts of the walls in the
-
Magazines were still plastered to a large extent when they were excavated in 1900. No
blackening can be discovered on them in the photographs and also in the excavation
diaries no blackening is mentioned. These details indicate that the mud ceiling has
collapsedand fffled the lower parts of the magazines, preserving the wall plaster in these
areas. At a later time when the plaster of the upper parts of the surviving walls had
disappeared, smaller fires were lighted such as those by local shepherdswho used the
ruins as shelters. The fires were not large or hot enough to start decomposition of the
sandstoneand limestone in the masonry.
Another fact frequently cited to prove the destruction of the Palace by fire are the burned
clay tablets inscribed with the Minoan script, Linear A and B, and burned pottery.
Sakellarakis suggests, that the Minoans used clay tablets to inscribe lists and other
administrativedocuments.These lists were later transferred to perishable materials and,

then, the tablets were reused. The clay tablets had survived accidentally, because they
were burnt in the fire that finally destroyed the Palace."' Pottery can be affected by fire
in various ways ranging from vitrification to liquification or from burning to cinders to
being almost unaffected.141
At Knossos much of the pottery is little affected but portions
show clear marks of fire.
The last argumentfor a final destruction by fire are traces of charcoaled timber at various
parts of the Palace. Evans commonly described the timber remains as carbonised but
suggested that this was a result of chemical action. 143
He believed that this carbonisation
was part of a deterioration processdue to the exclusion of oxygen and was not
""See plate 21. Stefie Chlouveraki is currently investigating the theory that this blackening was
actually not caused by fire (soot) but is the result of a fungi. Mrs Chlouveraki brought this to my attention.
"'Sakellarakis, 1994, p. 47.
"'Blegen in: Palmer 1963, p. 250.
143pM1,327, PM IV, p. 944, Evans, 1927, p. 258.

Peter Yienzle
necessarily the result of fire. " Though, thoroughly rotten timber can look as if it is
charcoaled, the remains from Knossos which have survived to date definitely were
charcoaled(combustion in 145
an oxygen reduced atmosphere). Peter Ian Kuniholm. who
is researchingancienttimber from the Aegean area stated that the timber elements from
146
Knossos which he has so far examined were definitely burned prior to their burial.
However, their number is few and it is not known from which part of the Palace these
timbers originate. They cannot be used to prove that all parts or which particular parts
of the Palace were destroyed by fire.
The commonproperty of timber beamsin a fire is that the surfaceof the beamsbums
after ignition but the carbonisedouter layer insulatesthe inner sectionsand the timber
to
membercontinues carry loadfor a considerabletime. "' It is now commonlyaccepted
by archaeologiststhat this hashappenedat Knossos."' Fire destructionhasobviously
taken place at the Palaceof Minos but not enoughevidencehas survivedto indicate
whetherfire was the only andcomprehensivedestructiveforce or if severalsinall fires
combinedwith other destructiveforcesoccurredon site.
In the excavationprocess,almost all timber remainshave been removed from the site and
brought to the museumin Herakleion. They were not conserved on site and imposed no
specificproblemson the architects.Some blackening on stonework is still visible but this

has had no impact on the conservation work. Particular conservation problems which
had their origin in fire destruction could not be detected.
"I'M 1,p. 325 and 327 f andPM 111,p. 287. Boardman, 1963, p. 83 Note 2 challenges this view. He
C
suggests that the timber members were charcoaled on the outside by a fire but remained sound internally.
Thus they were still able to carry load from the upper storeys and the charcoaled layer protected them from
rottin-.C This was the reason why Evans found timber remains on site.
""Shaw, 1973, p. 136 f and Peter Ian Kuniholm in an e-mail communication, 13 May 1996. Dr
Kuniholm headsa dendrochronologyresearchproject at Cornell University, Ithaca, New York. He researches
Bronze Age and Iron Age timber remains to establish an absolute dendrochronological sequencefor the
Aegean and Anatolia. See: Kuniholm et al., 1996 and Manning, 1990.
"'Personale-mailcommunication,13May 1996.
"'Fire ProtectionAssociation,( n. d.), p. 25.
14M
Seefor exampleBoardman,1963,p. 83.
150 Chapter 2
Conservationand Reconstructionat the Palaceof Minos at Knossos
2.2.3 Santorini Theory
The most disputedtheory of destructionat Knossosis the explosionof the volcanic

island of Santorini. All scholarsagreethat the explosionof the volcano happenedin
Minoantimesbut their interpretationon how mucheffecttheeruptionhad on the Minoan
"'
culture varies. Pumiceand ash were found in stratigraphiclayersdated to Minoan
periods as well as at the ground of the Mediterranean.The Minoan settlementat
Akrotitri, Thera,wasfound- like PompeiiandHerculaneum- buried undertephraof the
volcano.It is importantto understandthat this was not a minor volcanic eruption such
as might have happenedseveraltimes throughout the Minoan period but was a total
explosionof the volcano.
The explosionof Santoriniwascausedby a massiveblocking of the volcanofunnel. An
enormous pressuregraduallybuilt up which led to the explosionof the entire volcano

taking with it a large part of the island. The explosion of the volcano at Krakatau,
Philippines, is frequently referred to as an example for the magnitude of such an
"'
explosion. The circumstances
which were observed and
documented in the Philippines
might serveasmeansto assesthe
explosionof Santorini.While the
Knossos
explosion of Krakatau was
predatedby severalearthquakes,
it seemsthat the explosionitself
had not beenaccompaniedby an
However, Figure 24 Area affected by the ashfall from the lbera
earthquake. the
eruption.
explosion was probably accom-
" For a discussion

seethevariouspapersin Hardy andRenfrew(eds.) Theraand theAegeanWorld,
Vol.III. Chronology,especially
Warren,1990,p 26 ff andManning. 1990,p. 29 ff. SeealsoGraham,1987,
p. IIf. Page,1970;Marinatos,1939,p. 425 ff and 1959,p. 14 f.
"OForexampleMarinatos,1939,p. 431 f.

Peter Kienzle
by
partied a gigantic flood wave (tsunami) which caused damage at the coastal areas of
Crete.
Layers of volcanic ash sedimentshave been measuredat various places of the

Mediterranean.Subsequently,a map was drawn suggestingthat a north-westemwind
the the
carried ashacross easternpart of Crete."' However, no evidence was found at
thePalaceof Knossosthat indicateda destructionby eitherthe tsunamior the volcanic
eruption. The particulardestructivepattern of tsunamissuchas toppled walls or mud
be
sedimentsare not observedat Knossos. 152Despitethe abovementionedresearchat
the ground of the Mediterranean,no reasonableamount of ash or pumice can be
observedat Knossosandnoneof thesematerialsis mentionedin the excavationreports.
Thus, no evidencewas found at the palacethat definitely could be linked to a direct
impactof the volcanicexplosionnor to the subsequenttsunaini.Somescholarssuggest
thatearthquakes
preceded,accompaniedor followedtheeruptionof the volcanoand that
theseearthquakes
were actuallyresponsiblefor the destructionof the "'
palace. For our
this
purpose, was discussed
in the sectionon destruction.
earthquake
2.2.4 Robbing of Stone
It was common practice in the past and into our century to reuse building materials from
earlier structuresin new building work. Structures which had been abandonedor which
had been destroyed provide a good source of building materials, for example readily
dressedstonesin good sizesor seasonedand shapedtimber beams. Obviously it is much
simpler to re-use these building materials (spoliae) instead of producing new ones,
especially when the old structure was close to the new buildingZ:- site. Commonly, only
material which was easily accessible was reused, for example the upper layers of a
"'See figure 24. SeealsoCastleden, 1990a, p. 144 ff. The theory was first forwarded by Luce, 1969.
"'See Coburn et at, 1995, p. 14 f and Marinatos. 1939, p. 431 ff. Marinatos suggestedthat a tsunami
destroyed the coastal settlementsof Minoan Crete such as Amnissos. Nirou Khani, Mallia, Gournia, Zakro
but excludes Knossos which in his opinion declined later.
153Vallianou 1996, p. 153 ff and Page, 1970, p. 42.
152 Chapter 2
collapsedbuilding. The builders in searchof material were normally reluctant to excavate

structures to access material buried at a lower level or even to demolish vaulted
structures becausethe sudden collapse of the arch would be dangerous. Frequently, the
material was reshapedto fit the new purposes and, especially with stone, it is difficult to
prove their origin unless clear distinct features are visible such as masons marks or
specific dateable chisel marks.
In Knossos these spoliae were used by the Greeks, Romans and later by the Venetians
and Turks to build their houses and fortifications. Some material might even have been
reused several times in the past. For this reason, various parts of the palace were
destroyed by the Greek and Roman builders looking for adequate material.
Unfortunately, neither, is it known how much material was originally employed in the
construction of the palace nor, where the material has gone. Therefore it is impossible
to assesshow much material was lost in this way. Even shortly before Evans arrived at
Knossos, building material was taken from the palace by the Turkish landowners.154
The extraction of stone for the new building work can be established for several areas of
the Palace, for example the South West Corner and the West Entrance. 115However, it
can be traced most clearly at the North Entrance Passage.The fragments of the Charging
Bull Fresco, now restored in the Western Lobby of the North Entrance Passage,were
dated by Arthur Evans to Middle Minoan III, but they were found in one strata between
0.5 and 1.5 metres above the Late Minoan IIIa road in the passage."' In 1930 Arthur
Evans wrote:
71bewhole deposit seemsto mark a destruction of the upper fabric of the Portico, carried out at some
particular time. As the stratum itself was on averagequite a inctre higher

C,
than that on which LM III
a pottery rested,there is every reasonfor believing that this destruction took place not earlier, at least,
than geometrical Age, the remains of which appear in the neighbouring area North of this. "'
Cý 0
154pMH, p. 349 f.
`PM II, P. 350.
"PM III, p. 170. See figure 25.
'I'M III, p. 17 1.

Peter Y-icnzle
ELE.V,:V'iION OF WEST BASTIONS OF ENTRANCE PASSACE

. OF OF C--N-- P-*-L OURr AT n-P-CNE
L- v- SURFACE
-I------
C CN
EXSXV,: El MIN C ==IýýB, ýSTCN B BAS nON A
71
-4ýPCF WALL CP.,Ci 2L PcR. T; co
LEVELI OF SUPF. V- - -E--^Oi-LE-YE-L
CN WHIO, --------- I FALLUT
r* COLUMN
BULL PEUEFS FEFL---7*-*-*ý*
.. ........ ------, BASE
IT-T--I
OF LM 11L -0 9
-EVEL
:' z",
I'-0 ABOVE EARUER. I-.. A
'-a.
----iý
I to M3 PAvio
-.
I-
*II
...............
J&
1 7,2 ýýE
-E
, lco
E PUI17 DRAJ
mM
IIIIIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
--- ---------
SEl--rICN OF
NEOLITHIC
ON LLWJL SECTION OF LM Mr LEVEL RE-MAINS OF

LAPCE STORE CF LM=. POTS (400CXIBLE JAM) E
!! SIC14S (D -0 FýLLEN REMAINS OF NTRAL CCUZ,
CY--rv-EEN
Iý IM CHESTS ANO GREAT CEP -'SiTS OF
-L
TABLETS (CLASS B) LM Ir. JCN LM LEVELl
SCALE 4
am= Jý E--; L! T
Figure25 Elevationof WestBastionof NorthEntrance with find levelsof fragmentsof the fallen
Passage
Bull Relief Fresco.Drawingby Pietde Jong.
C,
whethera depositof a certainheight indicatesthe amountof time that

It is questionable
haspassed.Nonetheless,it can be proved that the Western Loggia
rD of the North Entrance
Passagewas destroyedat a point later than other palace structures. The Bull fresco was
removed from the wall and thrown into the passagewhile the stones of the back wall of
the Loggia were taken for re-use in the new structures. While it is not clear how much
of the fabric of the Minoan Palaceat Knossoswas re-usedin other buildings, it can
Cý
certainly be proved that some parts of the Palace were deliberately destroyed by the
buildersof later generationsin searchof adequatebuilding material.
For the areaof the Little Palace,Evansdocumentedclear evidence of looting of precious

158
metals. It must be anticipated that similar looting took part in the palace. However,
Minoanarchitectureemployedno metalclampsbetweenashlarblocks as it wascommon
in classicalarchitecture.Thus, the typical holescut into classicalashlarwalls to extract
thesemetal clampsdo not occur at Knossos.
"'The Times, 27 August 1908, p. 6.
154 Chapter 2
2.2.5 Other Factors
One of the most disturbingfacts in the excavationsof the Palaceof Minos is the good
preservationof remainsof the upper storeysof the DornesticQuarter and, especially,

GrandStaircase.Arthur Evans,himself puzzled,describesthe excavationof this areain
the following passage:
In the 'DomesticQuarter'themaintenance
of upperstoryremains, moreor lessat their original level,
wasnodoubthelpedby the fact that it wasbuilt into a Cý
greatcutting in the hill-side andhad received
0
a good deal of lateralsupport.But this itself was far from explainingthe at first sight miraculous
which hasmadeit possibleto recoveran
evidenceof upperstoryremainsthat we thereencountered,
almost perfect plan of the first floor.
The problem is seenunder its most striking aspectin the Hall of the Colonnades',where the
balustradeon the North side wasfoundas it weresuspendedalmostat its original level, while the
triple balustradeof the upperflight of stairson the West side is seento rest on a massof clay and
rubble, the supportingcolumnshaving beenin both casescarbonisedand disintegrated.It was
0
necessaryindeedto follow the downwardcourseof the lower flight of stairs by meansof a tunnel
carriedout with the aid of propsand with all the precautions
of mining 119
operations.
According to Evans, this clay and rubble mass were the materials of upper floors and
storeys which collapsedand fell in the light well of the Grand Staircase.160
In fact, this is
the reason why Evans believed that the timber elements were not burned but were
carbonisedby chemicalaction. In his theory the timber elements had to carry the load of
the upper storey until the spaceunder the Grand Staircaseand the Hall of the Colonnades
was filled completely with debris. Only then could the timber elements deteriorate.
The processof how the flat mud roofs collapse was described in an earlier section. 161In
multi-storey buildings, only after the roof has collapsed, will the next lower ceiling be
"'Evans 1927,p. 259.

"'PM 1,p. 327 f.
"'Compare page137f.

Peter Menzle
seriouslyaffected.The ceiling will collapsefaster than the roof because it has to carry the
additional load of the collapsed roof structure. Thus, the flat mud ceilings collapse one
after another and all debris piles up in the middle of the ground floor.
Both Fyfe's and Doll's proposals suggested that second and third floor of the Grand
Staircaseareahas to be reconstructedin a manner similar to the one of the first floor. At
least two floors and one ceiling must be anticipated above the Hall of Colonnades and
at least another two flight of steps must be anticipated above the surviving ones.
However, the ceilings of the Hall of Colonnades and the construction of the Grand
Staircase survived well. It is unlikely that the remains of upper storeys fell down in the
middle of the light well instead on top of the ceiling below or the stairs below.
Furthermore, it is unlikely that this debris moved right under the first floor construction
and the third flight of steps, supporting them and only then the timber began to
deteriorate. Furthermore, the amount of debris necessaryto fill the ground floor of the
Grand Staircasecan be estimatedto be roughly 300 d. The averagethickness of Minoan
mud brick wall constructions and ceiling constructions is 0.5 metres. This would seem
to indicate that approximately 600 0 of walls or ceilings have collapsed into the light
well of the Grand Staircase but there is no reasonable reconstruction which could
accommodate this amount of walls and ceilings close to the Grand Staircase area.
It seems rather likely that after an initial destruction through fire, earthquake or a
combination of both, the palace was reoccupied by settlers. The timbers were affected
by fire and the settlersconsideredthem unsafe. Repairing or replacing the timbers of the
ground floor structures which still carried heavy load might have appearedunpractical.
Consequently they decided to fill the lower storeys, which already contained a
considerableamount of debris from the initial destruction with further debris frorn upper
storeysor other areas.Only the upper levels of the original structure were to be used.162
"'Ms theory has not yet beentestedandcrosscheckedwith archaeological data, especially the pottery
sherds.It is basedexclusivelyon architecturalobservations. However, Popham mentioned that joinino( sherds
were found in two different rooms of the Domestic Quarter which supports the theory.
156 Chapter2
This process of deliberate filling of affected but still constructively stable structures
ensuredthe preservationof upper featuresbut also causedsevere conservation problems.

The debris was filled into the spacesbefore the timber members rotted and the structures
collapsed. Thus, the infill was responsible for keeping walls upright which would have
otherwise collapsedand for keeping the remains of upper stories at a]most exactly there
former position. In a common decay procedure the timber elements would have rotted
long before the spaces were filled with earth by the wind. After the excavation of the
infffl, the walls were bereft of both the original support of the timber structures and the
later support of the infill.
2.2.6 Conclusions
Various theories were brought forward on how the palace was originally destroyed."'
For the aim of the thesis it was not of importance to learn when the palace ceasedto be
used and which of the favoured destruction theories is the correct approach. Traces can
be found for both fire and earthquake but none of the typical conservation problems of
fire or earthquakedestruction could be found. It seemsthat, unlike Pornpeii or Thera, the
Palaceof Minos at Knossos,as it is presentedtoday, was not destroyed in a single event.
Obviously, the most important fact was that the site was reused by later settlers or
squatters, as Evans liked to call them. The reoccupation and the deliberate infill was
responsiblefor the survival of many remains but also for specific conservation problems.
The levels above this deliberate infill seem to have deteriorated like many other
excavation sites. After the site was abandoned it was used as quarry for later builders
and, thus, the material was taken from the site. Besides these two facts, most of the
remains presented no specific conservation problem caused by the original destruction,
a fact which distinguishes Knossos from other excavation sites.
'"Compare Popham,1970,p. 94.

Peter Yienzle
2.3 The Excavation Process
2.3.0 Introduction
The third major factor affecting conservation work at archaeological sites is the actual
excavationprocess.Basically, excavating a site is the reversion of the burial process that

happened hundreds or thousands of years ago. After their use, historic structures and
artefactsunderwent burial, either deliberately (e.g. graves or hidden treasures) or, after
being destroyedor abandonedby a slow process of nature. Some materials decay in this
new buried environment while others survive and, generally, tile surrounding earth
provides structural stability for the buried structures and artefacts. The buried
environmentunder ground is a balancedsystem,in which all deterioration processeshave
slowed down; sometimes they are slowed down to such an extent that they are hardly
detectable. Obviously, the methods employed to excavate the remains affect their
integrity and the survival of the materials of which they were made.
Obviously the excavationprocess must be undertaken carefully, and the excavator must
considerall possiblereactionsof structures and materials. In the process many decisions
must be taken such as whether to remove or to leave certain elernents, how to record
them and how to conserve them. Their function, importance and conservation require-
ments must be recognised immediately after they have been exposed. Many of these
details are obvious to the archaeologist after the entire area has been excavated but are
frequently difficult to realize in the actual excavation process. It depends on the tools
available,the number and quality of the workmen and the excavation methods to achieve
good results.
158 Chapter 2
2.3.1 The Workers at the Excavation
The excavations
at Knossos
startedFriday 23 March 1900with 32 "'
men, but the work
on site proved to be more comprehensivethan originally thought and soon Evans
employedup to 180 "
workmen. The methodof employingup to 250"' workers on the
excavationsitemightdisturbmodemarchaeologists,but this was commonat the turn of
thecentury.AlexanderConzeandWilhelm Dbrpfeld employedmore than 250 workers
at the excavationat Olympia andHeinrich Schliemann,who visited tile site of Knossos
in 1886,suggestedthat he could excavatethe palaceof which he only knew the West
Wing - in one week with 100labourers.167
The well documented employment figures for the year 1903 illustrate how an increasing
number of workmen were employed as the excavation proceeded, culminating with a
maximum of 165 workmen in early May. As one might expect, the numbers of workmen
were reduced gradually towards the end of the campaign

4:1 when no new trenches were
openedand work at the existing trenchesbeganto ceaseone by one. Few workmen were
neededfor clearing the site. Masons and carpenters were not needed at the beginning of
the seasonbut were successivelyemployed when their skills were dernanded.They were
employed in relatively high numbers at the end of the campaigns - tile natural time to
execute conservation and reconstruction work.
Evansinsistedon employingboth ChristianandMuslim workmenso that the excavation
might be a paradigmfor future cooperationbetweenthe creedson the island."' Most

workmen camefrom the nearbyvillages suchasMakryteichosandMetochi (Knossos)
but someworkerscamefrom further afield suchasthe foremanGregori Antoniou.""
""DM. 23 March 1900.

165Evans, 1900, p. 67.
"Evans, 1902, P. 1.
167
Castleden, 1990, p. 25.
"Evans, 1943, P. 239 ff.
16'Evans, 1943, P. 340.

Peter Kienzle
Workforceemployedat theexcavationsat Knossos

to theDaybook1903/2by DuncanMackenzie)
(According
Date Workmen Masons Carpenters

16 Feb. 1903 35
23 Feb. 1903 50
2 March 1903 64-87
9 March 1903 87
16 March 1903 113 6 1
23 March 1903 No informationavailable
30 March 1903 154 9 1
6 April 1903 161 9 1
18 April 1903 154 22 3
25 April 1903 159 23 3
2 May 1903 164 26 3
9 May 1903 165 32 4
16 May 1903 118 18 4
23 May 1903 79 23 4
30 May 1903 84 20 4
6 June 1903 88 16 4
10 June 1903 25 5 4
Table 2 Figures for workforce at the excavation at Knossos in 1903 (Diary Duncan Mackenzie)
Evans tried various systemsof paymentto achievemaximum productivity in his workers.

For some areassuch as the Minoan Viaduct and the Little Palace Evans paid his workers
according to the 'wager system' in which groups of workmen compete against each
other. Defined areas of the same size are staked out, each of which is excavated by a
group of workmen. The group which first reachesa fixed level is awarded a prize. Evans
claimed that he employed this system only if the upper remains were 'of a later date'
which meansthey were unimportant to him. '70The wager system considerably increased
the excavation speed.171In most areas of the palace the Minoan remains were
immediately under the surface. Here the traditional pay system was employed. The
workmen received a basic wage per week and got extra for finding objects or for
excellence. This was intended to ensure careful work. 172
IITM 11,P. 94 ff.

"'Horwitz, 1981, p. 176.
"'Brown, 1994, p. 22.
160 Chaptcr 2
2.3.2. Supervision of the Workers
As already described, Arthur Evans was familiar with the modern excavation and
conservation methods of the early twentieth century but was not an experienced
excavator himself."' He realizedthat he would needthe help of an expert excavator who
had worked in the Mediterranean before and, therefore, he employed the archaeologist
Duncan Mackenzie as his assistant." Duncan Mackenzie, who was born in the Scottish
Highlands, had gatheredexperienceexcavating at Phylokapi on the island of Melos from
1896 to 1899. He was responsible for the day to day management of the site and the
supervision of the workmen. Furthermore, Mackenzie wrote the daily notes in the
excavation diary which today form an important source for a critical assessmentof the
175
work on site. Furthermore, he kept a pottery notebook where new found pottery was
logged. Mackenzie was Evans's loyal assistantfor almost the entire period of excavation
work on site until be had to retire in 1929 due to ill health when he was replaced by John
Pendlebury.176
Most scholars attribute the scientific techniques and accuracy of the excavation to
Duncan Mackenzie rather than to Evans himself. 177
Mackenzie was permanently on site
supervising the foreman and the workers while Evans frequently followed other
business.178Arthur Evans relied heavily on Mackenzie's diaries when he wrote The
Palace of Minos becausehis own notebooks provided only insufficient data. However,
he frequently disagreed with Mackenzie's conclusions and the published results
sometimes vary considerably from the notes taken by his assistant.
"Compare page68 ff.

"'It seems that Duncan Mackenzie's role in the excavationsat Knossos so far has been
underestimated.NicolettaMomiglianois currentlyworking on a biographyof Mackenzieandthe publication
of her studywill providenew insight in his partof theexcavationwork.
"'Brown, 1994,p. 19. The Diaries by DuncanMackenzieare kept at the Evans' Archive at the
AshmoleanMuseum,Oxford.
"'Waterhouse,1986,p. 160.
'"Farnoux, 1993,p. 4 1.
""For Example in 1904, Evans was in England until March (Evans, 1943, p. 347) while the
excavationunderthe supervisionof Mackenziehadalreadystartedon 15February(Evans1904,p. 3)

Peter Kienzle
The workers were normally supervised by a foreman. The first foreman was dismissed
after only one season in 1900 because he exceeded the 'permissible amount of
peculation'. "" The new foreman Gregori Antoniou had worked for Hogarth at his
excavationsat Knossos in 1900. He was a poacherturned gamekeeper. Gregori spent his
youth in Cyprus robbing tombs but later worked for excavations for the British School
at Cyprus and Crete. "O Antoniou was succeededby Manolis Akournianakis, commonly
called Manolaki. He was born at Yerakari, a small mountain village in the Amari district
of Crete. He came to the excavation site as a young boy and Evans quickly recognised
Manolaki's skills. He became House servant at the Villa Ariadne and foreman of the
workers. Manolaki was killed by German troops in World War If. "'
2.3.3. Architects and Support Staff
A short time after Evans began excavating at Knossos he realised that he would need the
services of an architect to execute measured drawings of the excavated structures.

Theodore Fyfe, then architect for the British School at Athens, was contracted to work
Knossos. "' While Fyfe's tasks were initially limited to recording, he later also
at
engaged in reconstruction work and support structures. After the need to have an
4ý
architect on site had been established, Evans employed permanent architects for the
183
recording of the excavated structures and the conservation and restoration work.
However, it must be understood that the architects were only contracted for the
excavation period which usually lasted from February or March to July. The architects
executeddrawings for Evans' publication back in England but they must have had other
jobs besidesthe work at Knossos.Fyfe worked for Evans for five seasonsbetween 1900
and 1904.184In 1905 Christian Doll, who was then architectural student at the British
"'Evans, 1943,P. 340.

""'Brown, 1994,p. 15 f andEvans,1943.p. 340.
"'Powell, 1973,p. 142ff.
112Evans,1943,P. 333.
"'Evans, 1943,P. 338.
1"Evans,1900,p. 5; 1901,p. 1; 1902,p. 3; 1903,p. 2; 1904,p. I
162 Chapter2
School at Rome succeededFyfe. "5 He worked for Evans until 1910. After World War
I Piet de Jong worked as architect on site from 1922 to 1931. Their work will be
discussedin detail later.
Besides architects, Evans employed numerous artists and other staff at Knossos for
individual tasks. The Swiss artist Emile Gilli6ron, who had previously worked for
Heinrich SchIiemannand the French School at Athens was employed as soon as the first
fresco remains were exposed."' He was responsible for the restorations of the Griffins
in the Throne Room and the reconstruction of the Grand Stand Fresco. 187He was later
succeeded by his son Edouard with whom Emile ran a workshop in Athens. Both
Gilli6ron pýre and fils were also responsible for the reproduction of faience figures,
pottery and other artefacts for the Ashmolean Museurn in Oxford while the original
artefact remainedat the Archaeological Museum at Herakleion. "' Other artists employed
included the Danish painter Halvor Bagge who worked for Evans in 1903 and 1904,189
the fresco specialistNoel Heaton in 1910,"' and the architect FG Newton, who passed
Knossos on his way home from Tell-el Amarna, Egypt, in 1922.'9'
Evans employed many specialists on site. Some of thern such as Mackenzie or the
Architects worked for Evans for a long time, others came only for a few days. It has been
discussed in the previous chapter that Evans also relied on the expert opinion of other
excavatorssuch as D6rpfeld. Evans paid for the excavation and published the results. By
all means, it was his excavation but it seemsthat he actually relied to a large extent on
the special knowledge of other experts.
"'Evans, 1905,p. 25.

"'Evans, 1943,P. 333.
'"I'M
III, p. 66.
"'71bisfrequentlygaverise to the theoriesthat the two GillidronsforgedMinoan artefactsandsold
themasoriginal finds to visitors,museumsandalsoto Evanshinisell'.(Hitchcock, 1995)
"'Evans, 1903,p. 2 and 1904,p. 3,
"'The Times,Friday, 16September1910,p. 4.
"'Evans, 1922,P. 319.

Peter Kienzle
2.3.4 The Excavation Process
in thepreviouschapterthat stratigraphywasemployedin archaeological

It was discussed
of
excavations this time but its principleshad not yet reachedthe refinedstateof today.
Nonetheless, these basic principles of stratigraphy were understood by Evans and
Mackenzieandwere applied at
Knossos. The palace was
4c
excavatedareaby areaand the
pottery of the individual areas
LATER
PM. A( It
LATt! M
4 PALýZ
was collected and analysed.
This finally resultedin Evans'
rApurR r-ARLICS
systemof Minoan chronology
PALý& ;,
"Leff
which he presentedat the first

PIT T
ý7
International Congress of
C>
SFCTl(y4
I'M UZM.
1.11
14C r. 15T Archaeology at Athens in
P-)
Figure 26 Illustration for stratigraphic layers in the North-West 1905."2

area of the Palace. Drawing by Tbcodore Fyfe
Excavation work is a destructive process. In order to excavate tile remains of the palace
some structuresof later date had to be removed,notably the overlaying rectangular

building in the southernpart of the West Wing which was dated to the Hellenistic
period.193Evans alsohad removedblockingsfrom doorsandwalls which he considered

a later addition of the "
reoccupationperiod. Most of theseactivities are mentionedin
the annualreportsor at leastnotedin the diariesso that they can be retracedby scholars.
Furthermore, some new doorways were broken into ancient walls to allow the
communication between rooms such as the door between the Inner Sanctuary and the
""The Tinies, 12 April 1905, p. 4.

"'-'Driessen, 1990, believes that the building was part of a later Palace period but Warren, 1992, in
a review of Driessen's book objects to this theory. Since the building0 was removed by Evans, the only
information available are diary notes which are obviously not sufficient to solve this problem dcl-initively.
"'For Example: Evans, 1901, p. 4 1.
164 Chapter2
North ServiceWing in the Throne Room area. However, Evans refrained generally from
removing ancientfabric and left visible as many excavatedstructures as possible. In some

areas, such as the Stepped Portico south of the Throne Room, remains from different
Minoan periods were exposed.They were never visible at the same time which today can
causesome confusion with the visitors. Evans dug some trial pits under the level of the
Central Court and the West Court and established that there had been a large Neolithic
settlementunder the palace; but he refrained from removing the palace remains in order
to expose this settlement."'
The remainsof the Palaceof Minos andespeciallyof the DomesticQuarter were in a

Elerrie-nts
uniquestateof preservation. of upperstoriessurvivedat original levels or only
slightlysunken.Woodenpropsandsupportframeswereemployedto keepthem in their
original position. In someareastunnelswere dug underthe remainsof upperlevels so
theydid not haveto be removed.Thesedetailsillustratea comprehensiveunderstanding
of conservationissuesand excavationmethods.It was obviously an advantageto have
an architecton the sitewho coulddesignsupportframes and similar structuresand who
could supervisestructurallynecessarywork.
2.3.5 Conclusion
It has been discussed in the previous chapter that Arthur Evans was familiar with the
latest advancesin archaeologyand conservation. The description of tile excavation work
on site shows that Evans employed this knowledge and excavated the palace according
to state of art procedures at his time. The site was excavated according to stratigraphic
principles and the pottery was sorted and some of it was stored for further reference. To
employ 250 workmen and have them supervised by only one archaeologist is not
acceptable practice today but was common procedure at Evans's tirne. Set against the
measuresof his time Evans' work at Knossos was certainly quite advanced.
"'Compare PM 1,p. 28

Peter Kjenzle
Besides Duncan Mackenzie Evans employed artists and architects on site to execute
for him. By doing so he ensured the best possible treatment for the
specialistjobs
excavated pottery, the architectural remains and frescoes and small finds. The pottery
was recorded and analysed by Mackenzie, the architectural remains were recorded and
cared for by Theodore Fyfe and his successorsand the frescoes and small finds were
looked after by the Gilli6rons and Halvor Bagge. Evans drew upon all sources that were
available to him. The large workforce at Knossos had resulted in a fast pace at the
excavation. This probably affected the exact recording of the find place of small finds
thus, valuable archaeological information was lost but there is no

and pottery and,
indication that it affected the excavated architectural remains.
2.4 Conclusions
It has been described how various building materials and building techniques were
employed at the palace and how they affected the conservation work at Knossos. The
Minoans preferred soft materials such as gypsum, limestone and timber which could be
easily shaped with bronze tools. Many walls were constructed in rubble masonry and
were reinforced with timber beams. Finally, they employed mud ceilings which
deterioratedquickly after regular maintenancehad stopped. The particular Minoan habit
of paying much more attention to the appearanceof the construction than to stability and
technically sound construction added further to the conservation problems.
Many different theories of how the palace was finally destroyed are being currently
discussed in Aegean archaeology. For the purpose of this thesis it was discussed that
evidencefor fire, earthquakeand the robbing of materialscan be found on site. However,
the most important factor is that large areaswere reoccupied and the new settlers filled
ground floor rooms with debris from other parts of the palace before the load bearing
timber framework deteriorated.
166 Chapter 2
The excavation methods at Knossos complied with contemporary standards.The many
workers had little damaging effect as far as the architectural remains were concerned.
However, conservation architects were employed on site who, with their structural and
constructive expertise ensured the survival of many architectural features which

otherwise might have been removed from their context.
These different factors are part of a highly complex network which might be best
illustrated with an example.Being awareof the dangersof earthquakes,the Minoan
builders respondedto this dangerwith a highly elaboratebuilding construction.They
employedflexibletimbermembersplacedinto the rubblemasonrywalls to respondto the

tensileforcesof the earthquake.In the destructionof the Palacemud from the ceilings
and deliberateinfill filled ground floor rooms,therebypreventingthe rubble walls and
remains of upper storeys from collapsing,even after the timber reinforcementhas
vanished.This infill took over the structural support from the timbers.Thousandsof
yearslatertheexcavatorsremovedthe infill and, thus, the wall's support.To preventthe
collapse,the excavationarchitects,notablyTheodoreFyfe, constructedtimber support
frames.
This example might best show how the different factors of building construction,
destruction and excavation interact. These factors vary within the Palace. In the next
three chaptersit will be necessaryto describe the problems which the different architects
were facing at different areas of the palace and to explain the solutions which they
employed to solve their task.

Peter Menzie
168
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
PIM
ne Works by Fyfe 1900 to 1904
.1 _Theodore
), I , ý, ý,
-ý
.m11. ýý,
To uncover a monument and to leave it to perish bY exposure or bv

plundering, to destrov thus what has lastedjO'r thousands of' vears and
inight last, Mr thousands to come i's a crime.
(Flinders Petrie, 1904,1). 178.)
170 Chapter 3
Chapter 3
The Works by Theodore Fyfe 1900 to 1904
3.0 Introduction
TheodoreFyfe was the first architectto be employedby Arthur Evansat Knossos.He
worked at Knossos for five from

seasons 1900 to 1905. During this period, the main
excavationwork took place,andconsequentlyalmostall siteplanswere drawn or at least
begunby TheodoreFyfe with somelater alterationsand additionsbeing carriedout by
ChristianDoll and Piet de Jong. In a similar way, TheodoreFyfe was on site when the
majority of the excavation work was undertaken and consequently,it was his
responsibilityto designthefirst measures
takento supportandto conservethe excavated
to
structuresaswell as execute the first Some
reconstructions. of thesereconstructions
havesubsequently beenreplacedby later reconstructionwork or were incorporatedinto
the work of the later architects.However, in most areashis work can still be clearly
identified.
3.1 Before Knossos
TheodoreFyfewasbom 3 November1875at Yloilo in the Philippine Islands,the second

son of JamesSloaneFyfe and JaneCharlotteAbercrombieFyfe'. Theodore had two
brothers and one sister.When he was still very young, both his parents died probably due
to tropical fever. The children were brought back to Scotlandto be looked after by
'Anon, 1930,p. 1121(Who's Who).
The Works of 'Ibeodore Fyfe 1900 to 1904 171

Peter Kienzle
relativesbut, sadly, the family had to be broken up since none of the relatives were able
to take them all on. Theodore was adoptedby a maidenaunt who had only limited
means. Though not unkind shewas strict with him.'
Theodore Fyfe went to schoolat the Albany Academyin Glasgow,and from 1890to
1896wasarticledto the architectJohnBurnet3(later Sir JohnBurnet) in Glasgowwho
the
managed officetogether with his father J. "
Burnet. Thus he receivedhis architectural
trainingin a traditionalofficerun by a familyof architects.He later movedto London and
worked in the offices of Beresford Pite and of Aston Webb and IngressBell.' In 1898
he won the ArchitecturalAssociationTravelStudentship
andtravelledthe Mediterranean
area in 1898 and 1899. Records of his travel were publishedin the Architectural
AssociationJournal in 1903.Immediatelyaftercompletingthe ArchitecturalAssociation
Fyfebecamearchitecturalstudentat theBritishSchoolat Athensfor the year
Studentship
1899 to 1900 where he came into contact with Arthur Evans. In 1900 he became
architectto the CretanExplorationFund,setup by Arthur EvansandDavid Hogarth in

the sameyearto facilitatetheresearchin Crete.Evansdid not employ his architectfrom
the first day but
of excavation only after someareashavebeen "
uncovered. However,
from this point of time onwardsEvansalmostalwayshad architectson site.
Evans mentionedTheodore Fyfe in the introductory paragraphof all the reports he wrote
for the British School at Athens between 1900 and 1904. However, Fyfe is exclusively
mentionedas the architect responsible for the plans, sections and drawings .7It is only in
the introduction to the report for the year 1902 that Fyfe is linked to conservation work
while the practical part of the work was still allocated to the Greek foreman Gregorios
ý3asedon personalmemoryof JuneYorke who wasmarriedto TheodoreFyfe's eldestsoneRobert.

Shesendtheseinformationsto the authorin a twelve [! ] pagepersonalletterMarch 1998.
'For moreinformationon Sir JohnBurnetsee:Gray, 1985,pp. 128ff andPaterson,1938.p. 893 f.
"Who's Who in Architecture,1923,p. 97. BurnetrestoredDuart Castle,Mull, Scotlandin 1911-
1916. However,this was afterMeodore Fyfe left the Office and,probably,hasnot had any influenceon
conservationwork at Knossos.
$Anon, 1934, p. 124.
'Evans, 1943, p., 333.
'See: Evans, 1900, p. 5; Evans, 1901, p. 1; Evans, 1903, p. 2; Evans, 1904, p. 3.
172 Chapter 3
Antoniou. ' Thus, it is questionable whether all the building work on site in the named
period was designed by him or if some of the work was actually designed by Arthur
Evans himself and executed by Antoniou, thus, bypassing Fyfe. However, most of the
conservationand reconstruction work of this time was sketched and drawn by Theodore
Fyfe in his notebooks and can be attributed to him. ' It is also most likely that the other
work was executed by him as well, even if no definite proof survived, since it is rather
unlikely that Evans would employ an architect over a period of years but design buildings
himself. Furthermore, the work of the period from 1900 to 1904 features an uniform
architectural design language which indicates a single architect. Consequently, we can
assumethat all work in the namedperiod was planned and supervised by Theodore Fyfe
while it was executed by local craftsmen under the leadership of Gregorios Antoniou
under the determinative influence of Evans as employer and owner of the site.
3.2 Flat roof of the Throne Room in 1901
The remains of the Throne Room and the Anteroom, though only about two metres
below the surface,were preservedremarkably well. Some parts of the walls were a mere
30 centimetres from the surface. Large pieces of frescoes remained in situ and other
parts, still coherent,had slipped down the wall. Gypsum benches ran along the northern
and western walls and also along the parapet to the Lustral Basin. Gypsum floor slabs
covered the Throne Room, the Anteroom and the Lustral Basin where, in addition, the
walls were shieldedby a gypsum dado. Both frescoes and gypsum elements survived for
three and a half millennia under ground with little damage to them. An altar, made
predorninantlyof earth, was also found in the Inner Sanctuary,west of the Throne Room.
The Throne Room and the Inner Sanctuarywere excavated in 1900 but the rooms to the
'Evans, 1902a,P. 3.
"SeeTheodore Fyfe's notebooks at the Evans' Archive, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. No notebook
survived for the 1900 season.There are notebooks for 1901 and 1902 and two volumes for 1903 (v. L and
v. ii. ). These identification marks and the page numbering are a later addition by staff of the Ashmolean
Museurri.In fact, volume two is the first volume of 1903 and volume 1, pages 120 - 151 contains the second
part of 1903, written upside down starting from the back. Pages I- 73 of 1903 v. ii. Are in fact the notes
taken in 1904.
The Works of 'Ibeodore Fyfe 1900 to 1904 173

PeterKienzle
4r4 0. A - yd 1
174
north - the Room of the Stone Drum, the Room of the Stone Bench and the Room of the
Lady's Seat- and the roomsto the west - the ServiceSection- were excavatedonly in
.1
1901." These rooms also featuredmany sensitivefeaturessuch as plaster floors and
paintedwall plaster.
However,it becameobviousthat somesort of permanentsheltermust be found for the

ThroneRoom areain orderto protectthesesensitivefeatures.Whetherthis becameclear
" or only aroseafter
by the end of the first campaignin 1900as Ann Brown suggests,
the winter 1900/1901is debatable.In 1901,TheodoreFyfe wascommissionedby Arthur
Evansto erecta protectiveshelterto cover the sensitivefeaturesof the Throne Room.
This roof covers only the areaof the Throne Room and the Inner Sanctuary,not the
rooms to the north and west which were excavatedin the sameyear. It seemsthat the
Zlý '70'
zv
"ZIA IL: -
-4.4 t
( tm
Figure 28 Sketchplan of the roomsto the northandwestof theThroneRoom.Notebookof

TheodoreFyfe, 1901.
'OEvans,1901,p. 31 ff. Seefigure 28 andplate 7.

"Brown, 1994,p. 4 1.
Ile Works of lbeodore Fyfe 1900to 1904 175

PeterYienzle
decisionto cover the areawas taken before the sensitive features of the additional rooms
were discovered becausethe roof was limited to the rooms discovered in 1900. In his
letter to Arthur Evans of 19 June 1901, Fyfe reports the roof as being nearly finished.
Evans writes in his annualreport on the progressof the excavations in the Annuals of the
British School at Athens:
"Of the works of conservationundertaken the most important was the enclosing and rooring-in of the
Throne Room -a work rendered urgent by the effect which exposure to the weather was already
beginning to produce both on the throne itself and the seatsand parapet. In order to support the roof
it was necessaryto place some kind of pillars in the position formerly occupied by the Mycenaean
columns,the burnt remains of which were found fixed in the sockets of the stone bench opposite the
andthedesireto avoidthe introductionof any incongruous

throne.17hisnecessity C elements amid such
surroundingsdeterminedme to reproducethe form of the original Mycenaeancolumns.An exact
C,
model bothfor the shapeandcolouringwas happily at handin the small frescoof the templefagade,
""
andthe work wassuccessfullyexecutedunderMr. Fyfe's superintendence.
Clearly, Evans refers to the

reproduction of the form of the -
Tf4
L.
columns in the Throne Room but
'
=-
-".v
not to the reproduction of the
original While
material. excavating,
Evans identified timber as the -I
original material for the three

-.
columnsnext to the Lustral Basin, ( S)
charcoaledremainsof which were "tIb

still in situ. However, as can be
'4
seenin Plate47, the columnswere

reconstructedin limestone drums
& I. i-
for the shaft and a plasteredtimber
lathconstructionfor the capitals.It
had been Arthur Evans's primary Figure 29 columnin theThrone
Sketchof reconstructed
Room.TheodoreFyfe, Notebook1901,p. 77.
"Evans, 1901,p. 2.
176 Chapter3
intention to reconstruct the lost timber columns in their original material but it was not
possibledue to the fact that timber of the requireddimensionwas not available.In his
notebook for 1901Arthur Evans wrote, in his typical telegraphicform, an undatednote:
"rimber. The greatdifficulty in finding wood of largediameter.Practicallyimpossibleis get wood

for columnsof ThroneRoom.""
Brick pillars were erectedpartially outsidethe rooms and

partiallyrestingon theexcavatedwalls.Someof thesepillars
UPPER
AtIl ZA are still visible at the South wall of the Throne Room.14
Thesepillars werecoveredwith a limestonecoping stone"
i Orz
/RA-Le and a flat wooden framework construction was placedon
Rio
thernand on the reconstructedcolumns.As can be seenin
plates 49 and 55 the timber beams rest on the circular
Ir
limestonedrurns, while the lath and plaster capitals attached
MCI OCCUPIED 57
I. i4p. 61 $04if
to them rest at a slightly lower level, thus leaving a gap
CA111"Iffs WITIf
.
between the load bearing structure and the purely
ornamental capital. Surviving fragments of frescoes in the

Throne Room indicatedthe height of the ceiling at least two
and a half metres above the floor level. " In the excavation
process the remains of the Throne Room area were found

immediately under the surface and the upper parts of it,
including its original ceiling construction were not preserved.
Figure30 ne Fresco Nonetheless, the Throne Room was
ceilin-
r.) of the
remainsin the
Tbrone
Room at
reconstructed two anda half metresbut it could havebeen
muchhigher than reconstructed.Attachedto the main roof
"The note mentionedis written on Page31 which lies betweenthe last previousdatedentry from
March 15andthenextdatedentry from 8 May. But we do not haveany reasonto believethat all entriesare
in a chronological sequence.However,dating this note to April makesperfectly sensein respectto a
completiondateof the roof in June 1901.
"See GroundPlan,Drawing 1.
"See plate 46 and 49.
'6Evans,1900,P. 40.
The Works of Theodore Fyfe 1900 to 1904 177

Peter Kienzle
above the Throne Room which was reconstructed as a levelled flat roof, was a slightly
pitched roof covering the Inner Sanctuary to the west of it. " This pitched roof was not
supportedby brick pillars but by simpletimber posts. The outline of this pitched roof can
still be seen at the subdividing wall between the northern and the southern room of the
Inner Sanctuary.18It seemsthat it was decided to cover these rooms only after work at
the main roof had alreadybegun.The wooden framework of the ceiling was covered with
timber joists and boards." The actual rainproof covering of the roof seems to be a
tarpaulin, which appearsvery light in in the 20
- almost white colour - photographS.
The spacebetweenthe top of the excavatedMinoan walls and the new roof wasfilled
in with rubble masonrywhich, on the inside,was plasteredand paintedin red with a
white double line accordingto the remainsfound. It is important to note that the
reconstructedplasterworkcoveredonly the reconstructedupperpartsof the wall while
the originalwallsunderneath left
were exposed 2'The frescoremainsfound in the Throne
.
Room in situ havebeenremovedfrom the walls andbroughtto the Museum.
An interestingfact is that it seems there was no protection whatsoever to prevent water
penetrating through the skylight in the roof above the Lustral Basin. This is due to the
early interpretations of the Lustral Basin by Arthur Evans. Having no other Minoan
excavation site for comparison he suggesteda similarity between the excavated Lustral
Basin and an impluvium, the water basin in a Roman courtyard. " He continues with an
interpretation which seemedto be very logical to him at this stage:
"Ibere wasno visible outletto this stonebasinandtherecanbe little doubtthat it servedasa tank
ratherthana bath.Tankswith fish andborderedby floweringwater-plantsarefrequentfeaturesof
17
See plate 53 and 54
"See Section A-A, Drawing 3.
"'See plate 55.
2"Compare plate 54. This was a common construction method for roofs of railway coaches at this time:
The wooden boards were covered with cloth which was painted thickly with a lead paint.
"See plates48 and55.
'Evans Notebook 1900,p. 40. He suggestedthat the pillars carried a pitched roof which drained the
rain water in the basin. See also Evans, 1900, p. 38.
178 Chapter3
Egyptian houses and palaces, and the frescoes that adorned the Throne Room, in which both this
features occur, fully harmonize with this idea. The eels of the stream below - the ancient Kairatos -
arerenowned,and the defineationof a fish of this kind on the opposite wall suggeststhat the tank may
have served as a vivarium not unconnected with culinary purposes.""
Both interpretations, impluvium or vivarium, actually implied that the basin was open
to the sky-, consequently, the reconstructed roof features this opening above the Lustral
Basin. It recreated what Evans believed, at this point of time, to be the original
atmosphere. Nonetheless, it is surprising that on the one hand it was realised that gypsum
suffers severely if exposed to the weather", but on the other hand the rain-water was
allowed to enter the Lustral Basin through the skylight in the roof. Channelling rain
water into the Lustral Basin results in major damage since there is no way for the water
to flow out and, being roofed over, the sun cannot help to dry out the room. There is no
evidence for any assumption of a removable Ed, which could be fixed for the rainy winter
period. Thus the new roof of the Throne Room protected the sensitive gypsum throne
and the benches but not the Lustral Basin.
The 1901 report in the Annuals of the British School at Athens continues:
"In order to protectthe room from wantondamagewe were further reluctantlyobliged to place a
iron railing anddoor acrossthe entrance.For this, unfortunately,no Knossianmodelwas
substantial
forthcomingandthebestthatcouldbedonewasto get a nativesmith of Candiato makea scroll-work
railing of wroughtiron of the kind that is usualhereto placebeforeMahometanshrines,the spiral

designsof whichat leastarecuriouslyin harmonywith Mycenaeanpatterns.About the middle of the
openingin orderto give supportto this barriera stonepillar wassetup in a socketof the pavement
wherea woodenoneoncestood.""
Clearly, it was necessaryto protect the room from people entering it, so a gate was
Evansgaveto the designof the
installed.It is interestingto notehow muchconsideration
gate. The stone pillar which was set between the gates also was made for technical
"Evans, 1900, P. 39.

"'See quotation page 176.
"Evans, 1901, P. 2.

PeterICenzle
reasons of a material different from the original. A timber construction of the height
required could not be anchored firmly in the socket in the pavement unless the original
jamb was altered. A stone pillar, due to its own weight, fulfilled the requirements much
better. It is remarkablethat Evans consideredit worthwhile to mention in his report that
he employeda material different from the original. Thus, we sensethat great importance
was attached to the use of original materials.
The new building work of the Throne Room shelter falls into two parts: the one which
reconstructs the lost Minoan original and the other which is necessary for structural
reasons but obviously new. The columns and the elevated walls reconstruct Minoan
elements and, thus, were excepted in a way not easily distinguished from the Minoan
original. On the other hand, the brick pillars and the flat roof were clearly new elements
and did not recreate Minoan features. They in

were constructed materials, such as fired
brick, which were not used in Minoan times.
3.3 Work in the Domestic Quarter
Today,theDomesticQuarteris dominatedby the reconstructionsof the later architects

Christian Doll and, especially,Piet de Jong. Thus, the amountof work executedby
TheodoreFyfe in this areaof the palaceis frequentlyunderestimated.
With the aid of
in
photographs the Evans'sArchive of the AshmoleanMuseumthe work of Theodore
Fyfe in the Domestic Quarter may be re-established.Much of his work was of a
nature
preliminary andsomeof it wasneverintendedto last long. Other work, especially
masonryreconstructions,hasbeenincorporatedby the later architectsinto their work.
The specificproblemof the DomesticQuarterwas that its remainswere preservedto

morethantwo storeysheight including someof the upperfloor elements.This required
the engineeringsolutionto keepthe alreadyexcavatedpartsin position while allowing
theexcavationwork to proceedup to eight metresbelow the level of the CentralCourt.
Thus,supportwork was introducedat early stagesandreadjustedwith the progressof
180 Chapter 3
the excavationwork. Someof the scaffoldingwas left in position after the excavation
work finished, for exampleat the GrandStaircase,other frameworkwas replacedwith
a more permanentsolution,for examplein the Hall of the Double Axe.
Figure 31 Groundplan of the DomesticQuarter.Drawingby 'IbeodoreFyfe, 1902.
The Works of TheodoreFyfe 1900to 1904 181

Peter Yienzle
Severalparts of the Domestic Quarter were excavatedbetween 1901 and 1902 and
experienceddifferent stagesof supportwork. Hence,they will be in

analysed separate
paragraphs.
3.3.1. The Grand Staircase
The excavationof the Grand Staircase,or QuadrupleStaircaseas it was labelledin

Evans's earlier reports,26was one of the most challengingpiecesof work at Knossos.
WhenEvansexcavatedtheGrandStaircasein 1901the stepsof the third flight were still
in positionand,consequently, miningmethodswereemployed to tunnel under it in order
to exposethe first flight.2' Evansdescribedthis process:
"Ibe excavationof this part was of extraordinary difficulty, owing to the constant danger of bringing
C,
down the stairway above. It was altogether miner's work, necessitating a constant succession of
wooden arches.Two of our workmen, however, had worked in the Laurion mines, and after eight
days' slow progress, a passagedown the steps was finally cleared along the western wall of the
staircase. The outer wall was found to end below in another limestone base, with a socketed slab
above it for a wooden column, like that of the landing above.""
In this paragraph Evans explicitly mentions that two workmen with their knowledge of
mining operations facilitated the excavation of the Grand Staircase. Thus, we must
supposethat they aided Theodore Fyfe in designing the support frames and even might
have designed these frames themselves. Furthermore, it is important to note that the
excavationwork followed the western, (i. e. middle) wall. Consequently, the Eastern wall,
facing the courtyard, remained unexcavated aside from its northern end, where the
limestone block and the socketed slab was found 2' This resulted in the erroneous
.
"Evans, 1902a, P. 102.

27See plate 91.
'Evans, 1901, p. 104. The Laurion Mines are located in Attica, half-way between Athens and Cape
Sunion. For more details on the Laurion Mines see: Hopper, 1953 and Hopper, 1968.
"Compare plates 90 and 94.
182 Chapter 3
reconstruction of a massive Eastern wall featuring "

a small window. Fyfe wrote:
Diggingfromcolumnbaseson the lower wall of this [Hall of the Colonnades]towardsstaircaseled

to no result,but a dowel hole was foundon top of oneof the largestoneblocks,so I think it likely
therewasa wood construction+ perhapswindowsthereor somekind.-"
ýý---7
7i-rl;
S. C. " WESTýk
ts
I
f'
LL' &K-O LAST %ALL

KNOSSOS
arcTIc. 3 OF NC -11 OF IM Cftýý* M-CO
w.
Figure 32 RestoredSectionsof the Hall of Colonnades.

T'heodoreFyfe, 1901.
As will be seenlater,theexcavationsundertakenin 1905to facilitate the reconstruction
work underChristianDoll provedthis recobstructionwrong. However, at the end of the

campaign in June 1901 the wall immediately South of the Grand Staircase was
3OEvans, 1901, p. 09. But seealsofigure 32.

-"Letterfrom TheodoreFyfe to Arthur Evans,19June 1901.AshmoleanMuseumEvansArchive.
The Works of lbeodore Fyfe 1900to 1904 183

Pcter Yienzle
byIbeodore Fyfe while excavatingthe Court of Distaffs. " When returning

reconstructed
to the site one year later the middle wall separatingthe two flights of the Grand Staircase
had begun to lean dramatically. Evans reports in The Annuals of the British School at
Athens in 1902:
"Ibe leaning position of the thick rubble wall that formed the division between the upper staircases
involved a far more difficult problem. It had heeled over to such an extent above the third flight as to
threatenthe destruction of both the stone stairs and the parapet beyond. It was impossible to prop it
up adequately and it became necessaryto resort to heroic measures.I therefore had a deep incision
made at a low level on either side, wedges being at the same time inserted in the slit on the side to
which it leaned.71bewall was at the same time cut acrosstransversely at the point where the window
opening between the two staircaseslessenedthe amount of cutting necessary.The whole mass was
then casedwith planks on either side, and bound round with ropes so as to prevent its disintegration.
A wooden framework firmly buttressedagainst the inner terrace was now set up to act as a stop, its
face answeringto the original position of that of the wall on this side. Sixty men, harnessedby ropes
to the plank-encased wall-section, were now stationed on the terrace above the inner staircase, and
at a given signal the tug of war began. I'liere was a moment of great suspense,but the whole mass
moved homogenouslyand the wall righted itself in its original position. Stones and cement were ready
to fill up the wedge-shapedopening along the outer staircase,and the work was complete.1133
This paragraph is interesting for two reasons. First, Arthur Evans has not referred to
Theodore Fyfe but instead has named himself responsible for the idea of the work.
Secondly, in this action methods were employed which were very advanced in their
attitude towards the protection of the fabric. The middle wall is only 1.50 rn long and
0.80 metresthick with an height not exceeding1.65 metres.Thus it would have been less
time and labour intensive to pull down the wall and to reconstruct it with the same
material. Nonetheless,
a more expensiveand time-consumingmethod was chosen to keep
the fabric of the wall intact. After this work a pillar was erected at the northern end of
this wall and the landing block was placed at its approximate original position.
"Letter from Theodore Fyfe to Arthur Evans, 19 June 1901. Ashmolean Museum Evans' Archive.
See plate 96 centre right, 97 centre and 167.
"Evans, 1902a, p. 33. See also Evans, 1927, p. 261.
184 Chapter3
Adjacent to the Grand Staircase the Hall of the Colonnades was excavated in the same
year. The northern portico of the hall, which forms the continuation of the lower East-
West Corridor, consistsof a seriesof columns supporting the floor and breastwork of the
upper hall, which itself is the continuation of the upper East-West Corridor. The
colurrins, originally executed in timber, had vanished, but earth and debris had filled the
void and kept the breastwork in '
position. During the excavation process the breastwork
was supported with timber studs but, unfortunately, during the night of II June 1901 the
"
entire support work collapsed. Immediately a new timber frame was erected covered
with timber boards and the fallen breastwork "
was reinstalled. Eight days later, Theodore
Fyfe wrote a letter to Evans dated 19 June 1901:
Things are going on pretty well on the site. The carpenterhas practically finished today all the
woodworkof the new reconstructions 37
in the "Hall of the ColonnadeS".
Plate95 showsthe newly insertedtimber scaffoldingbut the entire breastworkhad not
yet beenreplaced. As can be seenin the photograph,remainsof original paving slabs

were stacked at the wall, but obviously this amountof materialwas not sufficient to
repavetheentirearea.However,by 1904theentireareaof the northernhall was repaved
with fragmentedpiecesof floor slabs,someof which must havebeenderivedfrom other
areasor beenquarriedfor this "
purpose.
However, the reinstallationof the floor was executedat the wrong height. It was
discussedin the previouschapterthat debrisand earth were deliberatelyfilled into the
area right under the timber construction supporting tile floor of the upper Hall of
Colonnades." Whenthetimberjoistshadfinally rottedaway,the floor slabssunk by the
' The westernpart of thefirst floor landingof the Grand
thicknessof theoriginaltimbers.
34Comparepage155ff.
C,
3'Evans.1901,p. 106.
36Seeplates94 and95.
"Letter from TheodoreFyfe to Arthur Evans,19June1901.AshmoleanMuseumEvansArchive.
3'Seeplate 158.
311
See figure 33 b.
'See figure 33 c.
The Works of Theodore Fyfc 1900 to 1904 185

PeterKienzle
Staircase was supported by a massive earth build-up underneath and the sill of the door
leading to the upper East-West Corridor in the east was supported by a wall.
Consequently, these two features remained at their original height, while the floor of the
upper hall, which connects both features, sunk to a lower level. The original height of the
floor was given by the first floor landing at the western end and the door sill at the
eastern end, and additionally by floor slabs sticking to the northern wall and supported
by earth. 41
--7=
11AV
TM-
\N, \N, ýA,
Z7,
777777-ý-ý
11 -, , 11
\T
Figure33 Schematicsectionthroughthe East-WestCorridor. 71beoriginal construction(a), after the

00
deliberateinfill (b), afterthe beamsrottedandthe floor sunk(c), andFyfe's reconstructionas
foundbut at the wroncyheight(d).
0 C,
It might be noteworthy that Arthur Evans described the breastwork of the north hall as
kept 'in position' in his report of 190142while he labels the same feature as 'practically
in position' in 1905! 3However, these minimal differences in Evans's writing should not
be overrated since the original height was clearly detectable at all times. It is more
prudent to assumethat Theodore Fyfe reconstructed the floor at its sunk level to avoid
problems with the connection to the third flight of stairs which had sunken by the same
amount and remained in position. Consequently, a ramp was constructed at either end
of the newly paved area leading to the higher original level. But this led to a very
unfortunate situation: the floor of the northern portico of the upper Hall of Colonnades
"See plate98 middle area.

"Evans, 1901,P 106.
"'Evans, 1905,P. 23.
186 Chapter3
was enclosedby the wall in the north and the reinstalled breastwork on its south side, as
well as by the ramps at its western and eastern end. Thus, a basin was created, which,
being open to the sky, was a rainwater trap, that slowly dispensed the water through the
joints of the fragmented paving slabs to the timber structure below. This, of course,
severely affected the wooden structure.
The door opening from the

lower Hall of the Colonnades
-MIR to the East-West Corridor
featured 'exceptionally well
preservedwooden posts and

lintel'.44Evansdid not discuss
these finds in more detail, so
we mayassurnethat the beams
fori-ning the original door
frame were found in position
but, quite certainly, in a
carbonised state. This might
havehelpedEvansandFyfe to
understandtile original door

constructions.Theodore Fyfe
Figure34 Sketchfor tile construction
of a doorframe.
111codore openedthe door by inserting a
Fyfe, Notebook1902.
new wooden lintel and brick
door jambs." The door
opening south from the Hall of Colonnades to the Corridor of the Demon Seals was
in a similarfashion,but heretimber uprightswereemployedandplacedin
reconstructed
front of the brick jambs, thus re-creatingthe original structuralsystern."
"Evans 1901, P. 105

"'See plate 92.
"See plate 112,bottom lcft corner.
Ilie Works of lbeodore Fyl'e 1900 to 1904 187

Peter Kienzle
3.3.2 The upper and lower East-West-Corridors
The northernpart of the DomesticQuarteris formedby the East-WestCorridorswhich

form thecontinuation to the eastof the northernportico of the Hall of Colonnades.At
its easternend the upper East-WestCorridor descendswith a flight of steps down to the
level of the lower corridor. " Evans described:
'Ten of these[steps] are preserved in an unbroken series, after which there is a small gap succeeded
by threemore steps,the first however, broken. The original flight consisted of fifteen steps, of which
two and a portion of a third are now wanting. The causeof this break is due to the fact that whereas
up to the tenth the steps rest on a solid foundation, at this point they reach to the beginning of the
lower East-West Corridor already referred to The roof of this end of the lower Corridor
collapsed,destroyingthe stepsaboveit at this point. Beyond this point, however, the floor of the upper
Corridor has remained intact for some distance, running, as was afterwards made clear, above the
lower gangway, the floor of which is about 4 metres below it. "'
Here Evans clearly explainedthe situation found and, from photographic evidence, it can
be traced how Theodore Fyfe reacted to these problems. Plate 93 shows the excavation
of the upper East-West Corridor. The still blocked door to the Room with the Drain
Head, north of the Domestic Quarter, is visible on the right, while in the foreground a
broken gypsum paving slab can be seen. Plate 95, taken probably some time after 19
June, 1901,49shows the newly inserted timber scaffolding in the Hall of the Colonnades
but still unexcavated earth in the area of the East-West Corridor.
The lower East West Corridor was excavated and fitted with a similar system in 1902,50
together with the work in the Hall of the Double Axes and the re-opening of the
" While plate
doorwaysto theHall of theDoubleAxesandto theHall of theColonnades.
"See Section B-B, Drawing 8.

"'Evans, 1902a, p. 99.
"'Compare letterlbeodore Fyfe to ArthurEvans, 19 June 1901, Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive.
"Evans, 1902a, P. 34.
"See page 187.
188 Chapter 3
95 indicates that, by far, not all paving slabs survived, plate 98, taken in 1903 or 1904,
features a new paving with what seems to be randomly selected fragments of paving
slabs.Additional paving material must have been supplied either from new quarrying or
from other parts of the palace. In context with the restoration of the floor of the East-
West Corridor, the missing steps were replaced with new material. In the plan the new
steps are clearly detectable by their "

crisp and unworn appearance.
3.3.3 The Hall of the Double Axes
The Hall of the Double Axes
required careful attention

from the very beginning of
the 1901excavationprocess.
In the original construction
the outer (eastern)hall was
enclosed at its eastern and
southern side by a wall of
piers and doors openingto a
portico. Another similar wall
separated the outer hall from

7-13
the inner (western) hall, a
feature that was repeated in
53
the upper storey. The base
stones of these piers of the

upper Hall of the Double
Axes were found almost Figure 35 Sketchelevation(top)andgroundplan (bottom)of the
doorjambsofthe Hall of the DoubleAxes.Ibeodore
exactly in their original Fyfe, Notebook1901.
position, slightly sunken
"See First Floor Plan,Drawing 7.

"See GroundPlan,Drawing 6 andFirst Floor Plan,Drawing 7.

PeterKienzle
below their former level.' As can be seen in plate 133, timber studs were employed
throughout the excavationprocessto keep the stonesin position while digging continued
around them. However, in June 19015' the stones were taken down and a light timber
framework was constructedto replacethem at their former, sunken position. This work
included replacement of the surviving pavement remains between the jamb baseS.56
This timber construction
was made of four up-
Fl right members in the
position of each pier,

tied together with
horizontal braces round
all four sides at a height

of approximately 50 cm.
to their lower and upper
end. Two diagonal

bracesin the middle pre-
vented the construction

from tilting to either the
eastor west, while tilting

'T' to the north or south
11 was prevented by the
walls. The upright
timbers rest, not on the
Figure36 Sketchplanandelevationfor the first timber supportframe
excavated door jamb
of the Hall of the Double Axes.Theodore Fyfe,Notebook
1901,p. 81. bases, but on the pave-
ment between their "

projecting ends. Certainly, this was not done to protect the door
"'Seefigure 35.
"Letter from TheodoreFyfe to Arthur Evans,19June1901.AshmoleanMuseumEvansArchive.
"'Seeplate 136.
"See plate 136.
190 Chapter 3
jambs because the pavement slabs were made of comparatively soft gypsum while the
doorjamb baseswere made of limestone and were much thicker than the paving slabs.
Nonetheless, the inadequate solution was chosen to place the load on the thinner slabs
of softer material. The reconstructed timber frame was a very light structure and faced
the sameproblem already described for the pillar at the entrance of the Throne Room. "
The timber frame could not be fixed at the limestone jarnbs without interfering with the
historic fabric. Subsequently,the upright posts were placed outside the jambs kept firrnly
in position by the projecting ends and the horizontal timber braces."
On top of thesetimber framework piers two beamsbridge from wall to wall." The
excavateddoor jamb basesand the remainsof paving were placedon timber boards
resting on thesebeams.Some distancefurther west, two diagonalbeamssupport a
shuttering which keepspart of the northernwall, which has no immediateconnection
with the in "
piers, position. This structureis a typical scaffoldinginsertedduring the
excavationprocess.
Already in 1902" the entire framework was taken down and replaced with a new or, at
least, altered,construction. In Plate 141 the same situation is depicted viewing from the
outer Hall of the Double Axes westwards. The new timber framework consists of four
upright timbers, this time placed on the projecting ends of the gypsum bases, thus
recreating the original construction as far as it was known .6-Braces were placed inside
the four upright members at ground level. The simple horizontal beams supporting the
bases of the upper storey in the earlier construction were replaced with a double layer
construction. All spaceswere filled with rubble masonry which was plastered over. Thus
the weight of the structure kept the timber frame fin-nly in position. While the earlier
5'Compare page 179 f.

"Compare plate 136.
'In plate 136 only two beams are visible. These two beams are strong enough to carry the load
imposed on them and, thus, we might assumeno more beams between these two.
"'Seeplates 142,145 and 159andfigure 36
"'SeeEvans,1902a,p. 117but seealsocompareplatesI and2.
'"CompareEvans,1900p. 55.

Peter YGerale
construction only stretched from north to south, the new construction projected at its
southto the eastand coveredanotherbay. Arthur Evansexplained:
"It hasalreadybeenmentionedthat a seriesof pillar basesand interveningsectionsof pavement

belongingto the roomabovethe Hall of the DoubleAxeswerefoundin position,only slightly sunk
belowtheirlevel.Two furtherpillar basessubsequently
cameto light, corresponding
to two of those
foundbelowfacingthe SouthernPortico.The first serieshadbeenalreadytemporarilysupportedin
their positionby woodenscaffolding,which both in the caseof theseandthe bases,hasnow been
by
replaced pillarsof woodandstuccoanswering as nearly as possiblein to
character thosewhich had
originally stoodthere[..] Thesereston the originalLimestonebasm'
looksquitesturdyin thephotographsandprobablylastedwell.
The earlierreconstruction
Most likely, the replacementof the first scaffoldingwas not drivenby its failure.The
discoveryof furtherbases,probablybelongingto the upperHall of the DoubleAxe, may
haveled to the desireto provide a supportstructurefor them.But this structurecould
havebeenexecutedidenticallyto the first timber frame.Anotherreasonwasresponsible
for a completelynew designedframework.The upright postsof the first scaffolding
imposeda heavyloadon thethin gypsumslabsandmayconsequentlyhavehan-nedthem.
Unliketheearlierconstruction,the newframewasfilled with masonryandfirmly rested
on the jamb blocks due to its weight. It requiredno additionaldetail to keep it in
position.It the
recreated original
structure
ascloselyaspossibleandtransmittedthe load
on to thejambstoneswhich weredesignedfor this purpose.Thus the desireto recreate

andthe technicalnecessitycoincided.
the original appearance
Another interesting detail can be observed in plate 135 which was taken by Theodore
Fyfe after the first timber frame was taken down and before the new framework was
erected. It shows the west wall of the Hall of the Double Axe with limestone ashlar
masonry courses interrupted by a horizontal interstice between the fourth and the fifth
course. As already explained in the previous chapter, the gap left by the vanishing
horizontal timbers causedstructural problems. Becauseof this, Fyfe had the interstices
in the ashlar masonry refilled with small stone chips to prevent the upper parts from
"Evans, 1902a, P. 44.
192 Chapter 3
collapsing.' Close to its southern end the stone infill is intcrTupted which marks the
fomier positionof a tie beamconnectingthe horizontaltimber reinforcementthis sideof

the wall with the one on the other side.This wasoriginally misinterpretedby Evansas
the location of ajettiedjoist carryinga balcony' but was correctedoneyear later.
- KN05505 -
HALLS ON EAST ZLOPP-*RESTORED
LONC-ITUD114AL SECTION
Lým cýýwk ýsr

k,Im, rr
I'me '" a",

LL OF TWC DOME AM
DWI Pý
Figure 37 RestoredSectionof the Grand Staircase,Hall of Colonnadesand the hall of the Double
Axes. I'heodore Fyfe
A doorway gives accessfrom the lower East-West Corridor to the Hall of the Double
Axes south of it, while west of this door a double window was opening from the corridor
to the light well of the hall. The masonry above the window collapsed into the opening
but the reconstruction drawings of 1901 show full ashlar masonry for this area."' The
door openingeastof it survived in a better state, and in 1902 was restored by Theodore
"See plates 137 and 138.

"Evans 1901,p. 113. Seefigure 37. Evans corrected his first interpretation already in 1902 (1902a,
p. 40) bu%nonetheless,was criticised for his first interpretation by Josef Durm, who visited the site in 1906,
in his book on Greek architecture in 1910 (1910, p. 58).
17See Evans, 1901, p. I 11.
The Works of lbeodore Fyfe 1900 to 1904 193

Peter Kienzle
in
Fyfe in the context of the other work the Hall of the Double Axes." He inserted new
limestone jambs, and a wooden lintel which was relieved from the weight of the upper
by the insertion of a corbelled arch.' The window was not opened by Theodore
waU
Fyfe, but remained filled until 1900' Plate 92 shows a view from the landing of the
Grand Staircaseeastwardsalong the lower East-WestCorridor. Clearly visible is the light
entering from the right a short distance behind the reconstructed doorway between the
Hall of the Colonnadesand the corridor which indicatesthe reconstructed doorway. Thus
it must be dated to 1902.71
Anotherdoorwaygivesaccessfrom theDog's Leg Corridor to the southsideof the Hall

of the Double Axe. This door was re-openedby TheodoreFyfe in 1902by the same
method employed for the door opposite,
connectingthe hall with the lower EastWest
Corridor.' A timber framewasinstalledwith up-braccssupportingthe lintel anda flat
limestonerelieving arch was placed above the door opening transferring the load of the
upper masonry to new limestone jambs. "' The reconstructed limestone jambs recede
slightly and thus left the front part of the gypsum base stone exposed.7'
3.3.4 The Queen's Nlegaron
The excavationof the Queen's Megaron and the adjacent areasstarted in 1902.75In the
excavationprocess a number of amphorae and large stirrup vaseswere found, dated by

Evans to the Mycenaean re-occupation, as well as fragments of pavement of the upper
"All relevantphotographsof 1902featurethereconstructed door while plate 136showstheNorth

wall of theHall of theDoubleAxe in 1901with thebasestonefor thedoorjambin theleft bottomcorner.
"See plate 139 and compare Evans 1902a,p. 40, figure 21.
"See page 249 f.
"See Evans, 1901, p. 106 and seealso page 185 f.
'Evans, 1902a, P. 45.
'See plate 163 and plate 164.
'See plate 164.
"Evans, 1902a, pp 45.
194 Chapter 3
76
storey. It appears that shortly before the final destruction of the palace, major
restoration work startedbecauselarge areasof the Queen's Megaron were covered with
a deposit of lime. In other parts it appearsas if plaster was deliberately picked from the
walls and stored in "
heaps. Adjacent to the Queen's Megaron a small bathroom with
gypsumdado slabsand painted

plaster friezes in a remarkably
P1ZRf well preserved state was
Ar
excavated. The division wall

Ic- SrAr
-t - JzAr-s
betweenthe Queen's Megaron
fly, ýsa proper and the portico east of

it was made of a raised
JZCVOIý
RZISTORED
stylobatesupporting a series of
lot 1 three pillars and low benches
1111111 11 *rAf
Figure 38 Restored section of the raised stylobate with the

"
on either side. The wall south
double benches.
of the Queen'sMegaron facing
the South Light Well was executed in the same manner. The western parts of the
Domestic Quarter were preservedin a remarkably good state becausethey were set into
the 'deep cutting'. " Further east, less height was preserved due to the fact that the
KephalaHifl slopesdown towards the Kairatos valley. Consequently, east-west walls in
the Domestic Quarters were preserved to a substantial height at their western end, but
the height remainingdeclinestowards the eastand finally terminate completely. Thus, the
easternends of the walls, in terms of conservation, required the most attention.
Within the same year of excavation, 1902, Theodore Fyfe started a reconstruction
programmeto strengthenthe sloping easternendsof the excavatedwalls. A new wall end

was constructedfor the wall south of the Corridor of the Painted Pithoi featuring ashlar
80
quoins. A similar construction was chosenfor the northernjamb of the window between
'Evans, 1902a.P. 46.

"Evans, 1902a. p. 48.
"'See figure 38.
"PM IL p. 348.
"See plate 178.

Petff YGenzle
the Queen'sMegaronandthebathroom.In contrast,a completelydifferent solution was

for
employed the northern wall of the Queen's
Megaron.Whilethelower part of this wall
wasconstructedin a similar technique,the upperpart featuresa timber cagefilled with

rubble masonry.The lower timber rail was placedin the heightof the Minoan timber
reinforcementrail, still in
recognisable the Bathroom.The upper memberof the cage
the
represented assumedceiling "
height.
To protect the excavated fresco

remains in the Bathroom a small
canopy was constructedprojecting
from the northern wall of the
Bathroom.Another four coursesof
4 ý11-91-MMLIGEM
it
reconstructed masonry above the
I ceilingheightprovidedthe necessary
counterweight to keep this con-
struction in position.The projecting
timber construction was covered
mcrlowL &I-VATIOM OY LINZ AA
a. with the replacedpaving material and
the jars found were placed on top of
it. " The driving force behind the
reconstruction of this part of the

. 0--p- 4
WOOVI. CCI&ffw
ot 2
,
ceiling was certainly to protect the
'it
fresco remainsrather than to reinstall
the pavement and to place the jars

found back to a place where they
SYPSU04ALM
ýT. D-IL . "as
F" V~D
might have come from. Thus we
hnvo- tf% iindpremnd th; c rF-rnn-
Figure 39 Plan and Elevation of the Bathroom with the "-*- '- -- .........
spiral frieze. Theodore Fyfe, 1902. struction as a work of predominantly
protective nature. The use of timber
"See plate 180.

'See plate 180.
196 Chapter 3
and the construction of the cageframework indicatesthat Theodore Fyfe tried to recreate
the former structural systememploying the same materials used by the Minoan builders.
However,in 1902TheodoreFyfeprepareda sketchplan in his diary showinga proposal

to covertheentireareaof theBathroomwith a roof. He suggestedto cover the window
and the door betweenthe Queen'sMegaronand the Bathroomwith brick arches.The
ceiling beamswere supposedto stretch north-southbeing supportedby two brick
arches." It is not clearif thissketchwasmadeon Fyfe's own initiative or if Evansasked
for it. It is not mentionedin Evans' notebooksof 1902and it was not executed.
IýIgure 4U Sketch proposal tor a root above the Bathroom. Iýyle, Notebook. 19UZ
In 1902 the eastern door jamb of the door leading from the Queen's Megaron to the
Private Staircase was reconstructed with rubble masonry and ashlar quoins. Timber
beamswere employed bridging from this reconstructedjamb over the Private Staircase
and the Dog's Leg Corridor in order to keep the upper landing block" of the Staircase
in position." In 1903Theodore Fyfe had to return to the Queen's Megaron to strengthen
the wall end of the partition wall between the Bathroom and the corridor in the same
technique by employing a timber cage and rubble masonry.86
"See figure 40.

"Evans, 1902a, p. 60.
"See plate 163 centre.
"See plate 179.

PeterKienzle
3.3.5 Other parts of the Domestic Quarter
The roomsto thewestof the Queeifs Megaronwereexcavatedin 1901and 1902.In his

letter to Arthur Evans of 19 June, 1901, Theodore Fyfe reports on the additional
excavations in the areasouth of the Court of the Distaffs, with the Room of the Stone
Seat at the first floor level and the Room of the PlasterCouch at ground floor level
underneath:
"'Ibe room with the seatsouthof greatstaircasehasbeenexcavatedright down to the groundfloor
(whichis verydeepdownandhasa slablining) andis now readyfor rebuilding.On the wall opposite
theseatthereis an interestingconstructionwhich hasprobablyfallen down from the upperlevel but
is still roughlyin position;consistingof threedoorsor scats,assketched.Jambsareratherto close
togetherfor doors(about1/2metre.)""
The west wall of the Room with the PlasterCouchwas also the retainingwall at the
westernsideof the deepcuttingwhich preventedthe CentralCourt from collapsinginto
this area.In 1901TheodoreFyfereconstructed

partsof it in order to recreateits function
as a retainingwall andto supportthe remainsof the gypsumbenchin the Room of the
Stone Seat at the first floor. The plates 168 and 169, which were taken by Theodore
Fyfe,showthe areabeforehis interventionand after he completedhis restoration.These
two platesclearlyillustratethe amountandthe quality of Fyfe's work on site. However,
the main part of the excavation work took place in 1902 and in the same year
"
reconstructionwork started. The eastwall of the Room of the PlasterCouchfeatures
threedoors.The northernoneleadsto theCorridorof the DemonSealswhich passesthe
Treasuryandthe ServiceStairsandfinallyleadsto the Hall of Colonnades.The southern
oneleadsto the Corridorof thePaintedPithoi andto the Queen'sMegaron.The middle
9xtter from71beodoreFyfe to Arthur Evans,19.June1901.AshmoleanMuseumEvans'sArchive.

It is interestingto note that all measurements at Knossoswere madein the metric systemand not in the
imperialsystem.
"Evans, 1902a,pp. 61.
198 Chapter3
FF-ý-
IV
CA.
I I-A
/
(. s53 ";:
Figure41 Groundplan of the brick pillar (centrebottom)andelevationof the eastwall.

Roomof the PlasterCouch.Sketchplan by 'I'lieodoreFyfe.
door opens to a small closet, which was a toilet" separated from the corridor with thin
upright gypsum slabs. In 1902 Theodore Fyfe reconstructed the jambs between these
three doors with brick masonry and reinstalled the stone doorjamb bases of the upper
room in their '

original positions. The brick pillars were framed with timber elements and
the areas between them were plastered. 9'
"Evans, 1902a,p. 62.

"Evans, 1902a,p. 62 and seealsothe plate in the samearticle p. 37.
"See figure 41
The Works of 71beodore

Fyfe 1900to 1904 199
PeterKienzle
The other doorsleading to the

Corridor of the Demon Seals
Er and the Treasury were also
executedin brick and timber.
Fyfe also constructed a
massive brick pillar in the
Treasurywhich supportedthe
western wall which was
leaning dramatically." It is
significant, that this essential

but rather unspectacularwork
wasnot mentionedexplicitly in
Figure42 Elevationsouthwall of theTreasury. the reports of Arthur Evans.
The windows opening to the
Court of Distaffs were re-
openedand supportedwith a
timber framework while the
jambswerereconstructedwith
limestone ashlar masonry."
Another timber-framed pillar
was erected to support the

gypsum block at the south-
westerncorner of the Service
' A projectingtimber
Staircase.
ceiling was constructedin the

south-westem comer of the
.. 5- -1 ---- - -- ---- - --- --- iiu%ýL LLamv., ý. Room with the PlasterCouch
specifically to protect this
"See figure 42
"Evans, 1902a,p. 64 andplate 170.Seefigure 43
"See plate 170.
200 Chapter3
featurefrom the weather.This ceiling, the areasbetweenthe doorjambs andthe firmly
supported areasaround the drain shaftswere paved with broken paving slabsin the
previously described "
method. In a similar way parts of the Corridor of the Painted
96The northernendof this ceiling restedon the southernwall of the
Pithoiwerecovered.
Treasurywhichfeaturedvertical gaps,whereformerly timber postshad been.Theodore
Fyfe inserted softwood timber posts to reinforce this wall, remainsof one of which
survivesin the Treasurytoday.9'
By 1903TheodoreFyfe returnedto the areato cover the Corridor of the Demon Seals
and the areaof the toilet eastof the Room of the PlasterCouch. Plate 178 which was
takenin 1902showsthe Corridorof thePaintedPithoipartially roofed." One year later,
the Corridorof the PaintedPithoioccursasa darkrectangularshape,thus indicating that
in 1903 the corridors were roofed completely." A timber structure,similar to the one
employed in the Hall of the Colonnadesin 1901, was erected in the area of the
Corridors.100
This indicatesthat theceiling constructionrestedpartially on reconstructed
wallsbut wasalsosupportedby timberposts.Onlya limitedamountof load was imposed
on the excavatedwalls. Most of the areawascoveredwith rectangularlimestoneslabs,
some of which were incorporatedby Christian Doll in his reconstructionwork, and
'O'
consequentlysurvivesuntil today. In the area of the toilet, this roofing over was
certainly necessaryto protectthe gypsumpartition walls.
It was probablyat the sametime that the ServiceStairsimmediatelysouth of the light

well of the Hall of the Colonnadeswere reconstructedin wood.` When Arthur Evans
"See Evans,1902a,p. 79.

"See plate 159bottomright cornerand 166centre.
'See sectionin figure 42.
"Plate 178centreleft.
"Seeplate179centreright Seealsoplate3 whichshowsa generalview of the site takenin 1903.The
plate was takenafter the constructionof the ObservationTower in 1903 but before the roofing of the
Magazinesof the knobbedPithoi in 1904which is datingthe ceilingsof the corridorsto 1903.
10ISeeplate 112top left comer.
'O'SeeDrawing 7.
"See plate 158.

PeterKienzle
excavated the area of the Service Stairs in 1902, he could not find any steps and
concluded that the 103

stair was originally made of wood. Consequently, Theodore Fyfe
introduced a wooden stair in this areain the reconstructions of 1903. This would explain
the necessity not only to cover the corridor above the toilet but also to cover the
Corridor of the Demon Seals. The gypsum comer block at the south-westem comer of
the Service Stairs which was reset at its original height on top of a timber framework
pillar in 1902 could now be held fu-mlyin position." Furthermore, accesswas given from
the stairs to the reconstructed first floor level in this area.
However,ascanbe seenin plate 159,the areaof the Corridor immediatelysouthof the

Hall of the Colonnades
waspavedwith the alreadyknown systemof brokenslabswhile
the other parts were pavedwith rectangularlimestoneslabs.It might be possiblethat
until then all paving materialhadbeentakenfrom the palaceareaand,at this point, no
more paving material
wasleft. Consequently,
TheodoreFyfe switchedto newly quarried
limestoneslabs.However,no other evidencesupportsthis theory.Plate 167showsthe
rectangularpaving slabsabovethe corridors and the toilet on the right side and the
broken slabsin the areaof the shaftson the left side.While the broken slabswerelaid
flush in mortar, the rectangularslabsfeaturedistinctivejoints and it appearsthat the
joints werenot pointed.Subsequently,theseopenjoints led to water penetrationwhich
affectedthe timber structurebelow.
3.4 The Lobby of the Wooden Posts
The Lobby of the WoodenPosts,north of the Hall of the Double Axes, was excavated
in 1901.'05Its namereferredto the manyvertical cavitieswhich were left in the walls
after the timber reinforcementbeams rotted. A gypsum block was found at 3.10 metres
above the pavement of the room and Evans suggested that this represented the floor
"Evans, 1902a, p. 75.

"See plate 167 centre right margin.
"Evans, 1901, P. 98.
202 Chaptcr3
level in this area. He further supposed that this block was originally supported by a
square wooden pillar which had decayed but left the gypsum block in its original
"
position. The block was left in its position supported by a pillar of unexcavated earth
underneathand timber "
props. However, in 1902 the gypsum block was removed and
the balustradeunderneath was restored. An ashlar pillar was constructed resting on the
balustrade. Timber beams were laid from the wall to the pillar on top, of which, the
gypsum block was replaced."'
An interesting detail of this work is the fact that the pillar was reconstructed in ashlar
masonry.Evans suggestedthat the original pillar was made of timber and Fyfe employed
this traditional technique - wooden frames filled with rubble masonry - for
reconstructionsat other areasof the palace.However, at the Lobby of the Wooden Posts
he used ashlarmasonrybut used horizontal timber beamson top of the pillar. Obviously,
Fyfe did not generally consider wood to be the wrong material. The pillar carried the
weight of the gypsum block but was, besides the two horizontal beams to the north, not
connected to any other structure. Fyfe probably employed ashlar masonry becausethis
material provided the necessaryweight which ensuredthe structural stability of the pillar.
3.5 The Retaining Wall in 1902
Probablyoneof themostelaborateworks undertakenoil site by TheodoreFyfe was the

constructionof the retainingwall of the CentralCourt. Owing to the geographyof the
site,the CentralCourt hadto be supportedon its eastside to preventits collapseinto the
areaof the newly excavatedDomesticQuarter.
Plate I shows a general view of the excavation site in 1901 with the retaining wall still
missing.In contrast plate 2 shows the new masonry structure supporting the platform of
"Evans, 1901,p. 98.

"See plate 129.
'O'Seeplate 131.
The Works of Micodore Fyfe 1900 to 1904 203

PeterKienzle
the Central Court. The wall stretches from the north-east corner of the Central Court to
the south-east comer, and continues at a lower height southward alongside the ramp.
Debris and unwanted pottery from the excavation campaigns of 1900 and 1901 were
dumped eastof the Central Court - visible in the foreground of plate I- but unfortunately
in 1902 it was discoveredthat the palaceextendedunder these heaps,and thus this debris
had to be removed in 1902." The first observation platform, erected in 1901.. is
carefully scratchedout in plate 2 and the observation tower in the Central Court was not
yet erected, thus plate 2 must be dated to 1902.
The northernpart of theretainingwall up to the stairsimmediatelynorth of the Corridor
of the Baysis still visibletoday.The southwardcontinuationof this wall is not visible any
more since a new wall was erectedeast of this retainingwall in connectionwith the
restorationof the Corridor of the Bays,the GrandStaircaseand the DomesticQuarter.
The gapbetweenthesetwo walls still existedin 1930but wasfilled in at a later date.' 11
A bridgeis visiblein this photographspanningfrom the retainingwall to the upperlevel
of the Grand Staircase restored by Piet de Jong in 19282" When the Greek
Servicewidenedthe stairsimmediatelynorth of the Corridor of Bays in
Archaeological
1996,theyexposedthisearlierwall whichhadnot beendestroyedwhenthe new wall was
executedin alignmentwith the westernwall of the DomesticQuarter.The new wall,
executedwithout incline, mostcertainly relieson the structuralpropertiesof the earlier
hiddenretainingwall.
As far as can bejudged from photographic evidence, the retaining wall was constructed
with dry stone 13

walling' in coursed rubble masonry where larger stone courses alternate
with chip infill. levelling courses.The entire structure featured an incline which is typical
and, for structural reasons,a necessaryelementof supporting walls. Thus this wall ideally
fulfilled its task to support the area of the Central Court. Water can penetrate through
"'Evans, 1902a, p 1.
""See page 208 L
III See aerial photograph, Plate G, page326.
"'See page 296 ff.
"'See plate 167.
204 Chapter 3
the masonryand is not caughtbehindthe wall. Thus a suddencollapseof the retaining

wall is unlikely.
3.6 The reconstruction of the Theatral Area in 1903
An interesting but, -as we will see later on, recurring fact is that Arthur Evans began
excavationsin an areaand exposedthe most important features but returned to the same
area at a later point to execute supplementary excavations to clarify details. He began
excavations in the Theatral Area in 1901 and came back in 1903 to continue and
complete his work; and, while doing so, he discovered more details clarifying the former
use and shape of this '"
area. He found the northern wall of the area which had sunk
because it had originally rested on earth. Consequently, the area was restored:
"Another large undertaking of that kind was the rebuilding ofthe upper part ofthe northern wall of
the Theatre and restoring the adjoining0 tiers of stone seats, without which the whole of these
interesting remains would have been rapidly disintegrated."'
Here again the retaining wall shows an incline, and judging from the photographic
evidence,the masonrywas executedas dry stone walling in which mortar was -only
apphedto the to intrusion
uppercourses preventrainwater "'. In the photographthe new
work is clearly visible as being much brighter than the original work. However, in
contrastto much of the conservationwork in the Palaceitself, this work was not based
on the necessityto protectspecificsensitivefeatures.The materialthe TheatralArea was
made of is in limestoneand the new work is limestoneas well. Clearly there is no
material-relatedreasonfor the work executed.More likely, we must assumethat the
missingnorthernwall allowedtheexcavatedstructureto slide down northwards.But this
I"DM 1903/ii pp. 1-29(8 April - 23 April 1903)

I"Evans, 1903,p 3.
"'Plate 78.

PcterYjenzle
Figure 44 Sketch plan of the Theatral Area. 'Meodore Fyfe
Figure 45 Plan and section of the Theatral Area indicating restoration work. 7beodore Fyfe.
206 Chaptcr3
certainly would not have beena 'rapid disintegration' and it could have easily been
prevented by piling some earth on to the northern side of the area.
Obviously, the decisionto carry out such extensiverestoration work must have had other
reasons.In the same report Arthur Evans describes:
"In die circumstancesI did not hesitate to secure the remains of this unique monument of the Minoan
world from ftwthercollapse and disintegration by undertaking the considerable task of rebuilding the
North supporting wall to what was probably its original height and by restoring the missing slabs of
theNorthEastsectionof the Southernflight of steps.Severalof the sunkenslabswerealsopartially

raisedand the remainingpartswerecarefullypreservedin their original
C context.The result has
....
beento a considerableextentto reproducewhat may havebeenthe original effect of this part of the
building."""
Clearly,it was intendedto restorethe TheatralArea to its former shape.Consequently,
we have to reject Evans's introductory statementof the conservationnecessityand

accepthis intentionto presentthe areain its 'original effect. Thus we haveanotherearly
exampleof restorationwork at Knossoswhich was not predominantlydriven by the
necessityfor protectionbut wasdrivenmuchmore by the desireto presentthe site in its
original stateor at leastwhat Evansbelievedto be its original state.
The reasonfor this restorationwas probably the annualvisit of the Germanscholar

WilhehnMrpfeld and his party on the palaceon the 'Inselreise'.It hasbeenmentioned
in chapteronethat Evansrespected
D6rpfeldandit seernsthat he wantedto impresshim
andhispartywith a performanceof traditionalGreekdances.Thus, he organiseda dance
of the Cretanworkmenand 'their womanfolk' at the restoredTheatralArea."'
"'Evans, 1903, p 104.

"'Evans, 1903, p. III and PM IL p. 585.

Peter Kienzle
3.7 The Construction of the Observation Towers in 1900 and 1903
In a strict sense,the observation towers cannot be called conservation or reconstruction
work. They have always beendistinctively new building work erected exclusively for the
purpose of presentation. Nonetheless, they should be discussed in the context of this
thesis since they may shed some light on the philosophy and the ethics on site.
By 1900 Arthur Evans probably had a wooden viewing platform erected above Magazine
IX This place was chosen at the end of the first campaign when Evans still believed the
Palaceconsisted exclusively of the West Range flanked by the West Court and an East
Court. For a palace covering such an area, the chosen site was excellent since it was in
the middle of the structure and was high enough to take photographs. Two stone slabs
4-:
1
wereplacedon eachof the partition walls betweenthe VIlIth and the IXth and on the
wall betweenthe IXth and the Xth magazine.A timber platform was erectedon these
stone slabswhich was accessiblevia a steepnarrow stair frorn the Xth Magazine.In
1901, a woodenpavilion frameworkconstructionwas placedon the platform" and a
ladder led from the platform to the flat roof, which offered a good overview of the
excavationand was usedto take photographs.
from 1901to 1903exposedtheDomesticQuarter,andconsequentlythe

The excavations
original viewing platform was renderedunusable.It was not only unsuitablylocatedat

the westernpart of the palacebut also wasnot high enoughto view the lower partsof
theeasternwing. Consequently,
anew observationtower wasbuilt in 1903"whichwas
positioned close to the easternend of the Central Court next to the Court of the
Distaffs12'.The newpositionandthe increasedheight of this tower allowed an overview
of the siteincludingobservationof theCourt of theDistaffsand other partsof the palace
which are locateddeepin the 'greatcutting'.
"'Tbeodore Fyfe in a letter to Arthur Evans, 19 June 1901. Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive.
"'Evans, 1903, p. 3.
"'See plate 3.
208 Chapter 3
The observation tower

consisted of four masonry
pillars stretching over three
storeys. On the first storey
the space between these
pillars was filled in with
rubble masonryand featured
a window at the eastside and
a door at the north side;
whereasthe secondand third
storeyshadwoodenplatforms
placedbetweentile pillars. An
additional viewing platform
was placed on top of the
tower. An internal stairway
gave accessto the different
levelsup to the rooftop of the
122 vigure 4o amcn Grawing or ine viewing piationn on top or tne
fourth storey. Since the
observationtower.TlicodoreFyre.
first storey was a closed room
it preventedunwantedaccessto the internal stairs.In tile backgroundof plate 78 the

tower is still under construction while the main object of the photograph shows the
completed Theatral Area. At a later date, however, the upper viewing platform was
removedand the tower remainedthreestoreyshigh until 1930.123
The construction of this observationtower was purely for presentationreasons,and
certainly servedneitherconservationnor reconstructionpurposes.According to Josef

Durm, who visited the site in 1906,the tower 'eases'the orientationat site, and this is
most certainly what Evansintendedby erectingthe tower. Consequently,we have to

understandthis as an early featureof site presentation.
"'See plate 3.
"See plates3 and5.
Tlie Works of 'IbeodoreFyfe 1900to 1904 209

PeterKienzle
3.8 Pitched roof of the Throne Room in 1904
In 1900 Arthur Evans excavated the Throne Room, the Antechamber, the Inner
Sanctuary;and the Room with the Lady's Seat - the easternmost room of the suite north
of the Throne Room. 124

There was no direct accessbetween the Room with the Lady's
Seat and the Throne Room area.'2-' The remaining rooms of the northern suite and the
Service Section, located between the Inner Sanctuary and the Long Corridor were
excavatedin In
1901.126 the sameyear Fyfe constructed the flat roof covering the Throne
Room and the Inner Sanctuary.In 1904Theodore Fyfe executed the pitched roof on top
of his earlier flat roof and he also constructed the lean-to which protected the suit of
servicerooms north of the Throne Room. However, this roof did not protect the Service
Section which was located between the Inner Sanctuary and the Long Corridor to the
west of this complex. 12'

Theodore Fyfe constructed this pitched roof in 1904, the year
in which he came to Knossos the final time as the excavation architect.
As describedearlier,the designof the flat roof of the Throne Room was basedon the
erroneousinterpretation of the Lustral Basin.After a short time it becameevidentthat

in
the open skylight resulted water collecting in the basin, thus damaging its gypsum
lining. Furthermore,it coveredonly the Throne Room and the Inner sanctuarybut left
otherroomsexposed.Three yearslater, in 1904,it was decidedthat the situationmust
be improved.Evansmentionedin his reportfor 1904:
"Theroofingof theThroneRoomhadalsoto becarriedout in a morepermanentandefficient way."128
"'Compare figure 27 andseeplate7.

"See Evans,1901,p. 35 L The Roomwith theLady's seatwascalledthe Roomwith the Cupboard
in the first report.
IIIDM 1901/i26 March to 9 April.
"'See GroundPlan,Drawing 1.
"'Evans, 1904, p 3.
210 Chapter 3
The flat roof wasleft in its position and a pitched roof was simply placedon top of it., "'
A sketch in Fyfe's notebook of 1904 suggeststhat it was a timber roof construction
covered with clay tiles."' Theseare likely to be a local Cretanproduct or of Greek
origin. A glazedskylightabovethe openingin the flat roof provided light for the Lustral
Basin. The easterngableend, facing the CentralCourt, was fitted with two windows
anotherwindow and door, giving accessto the loft, were fitted in the westerngable."'
The gableendsandpartsof the reconstructedwalls erectedin 1901were plastered.The
threeroomsto the northof theThroneRoom - the Room of the StoneDrum, the Room
of the StoneBenchandthe Roomof the Lady's Seat- werecoveredwith a lean-to roof.
:
.A
3- At
"
J 'II
I _f2i
Je-_ .
'p ( -'
4,
'I
Figure47 View of the Kitchenshowingplastertableandthe stoneseat.TheodoreFyfe
The ServiceSection- west of the Throne Room - was not covereddespitefeaturing
similar sensitivefeatures.Plate 51 showsthe Kitchen - the southernmostroom of the

Service Section The stone seat was embedded in a plaster floor and also the table and
.
"'See plates33 and58. The edgeof the flat roof is visible asa cornice.
`See Notebook1903/i, p. 14.Comparefootnote7 in this chapter.
"'See plate 58.
The Works of 'MeodoreFyfe 1900to 1904 211

PeterKienzle
the steps at the "'

western site were made of plaster. It is surprising, that these features
were not regardedworth protecting in the 1901 reconstruction or in the improvement of

1904. However, plate 58 shows a view from Magazine XI eastwards to the gable of the
Throne Room roof. On the right hand the gable is obstructed by a new masonry wall
which rested on the excavatedwall between the Service Section and the Long Corridor.
The new wall features a pitched outline at its upper end which, however, was not
identical with the incline of the roof abovethe Throne Room. In this photograph, the sun
castsa shadow on the gablewall which indicatesa beamsbridging from the new masonry
4D
wall to the gable.This to
seemed be somesort of protective shelterfor the sensitive
plasterfeaturesin the Kitchen underneath.
3.9 Other Pitched Roofs
In 1902 the Shrine of the Double Axes was excavatedin the south-eastpart of the palace.
This small room, located north of a passagewayrunning east to west, is divided into three
areas: the southernmost part with a plain stamped clay floor, a raised step with pebble
flooring in the middle part and, at the northern end, a bench made of clay and rubble. The
entire room was fiHedwith vesselsand objects, most probably used for offerings. "' Two
reasonsled to the decisionto roof over this shrine. First, the building materials employed
in the construction of the floors and stepswere very sensitive to the exposure to weather.
Second,the numerousobjects found in that shrine could be left in their original position
and exhibited to the visitors.
Takingthesereasonsinto account,TheodoreFyfe had a small hut constructedabovethe
area that covered the actual shrine and a part of the immediately
passageway to its
"'
south. The walls consistedof new rubble masonrywhich was placedon top of the
ruined walls of the chamber.A window openedto the eastand a door probablygave
"'Compare Evans,1901,p. 31 f.
"'Evans, 1902a,p. 96.
134
Seeplate2.
212 Chapter3
access to the building from the

Corridorof the SwordTablets in the
west.A pitchedroof wasconstructed

1ýT
F4 in tirnber andcoveredwith clay tiles
M' 'Xý.
... irv.
and a skylight was inserted in the
SHRINE OF
DouBLE AXE
is". C.Me
M. P,
! rMu
SECTION
er
.--
L
GODIiis
FEMALA
.1W
western rooL'--' With the
V"ý "I
iT-M-74 construction of this completely
%Alt
p"llp
closed house at the Shrine of the
. I,F96SL93
1LA3TtA FACING
'AM3
OF co. $; Ck-ý
Double Axes, the sensitive features,

CL06Y VIESSILS
clay floors and steps as well as the

artefactsfound, were protected from
01"", both weather and theft. Protection
--m
and presentation of the finds were
PLAN combined in this structure.
Figure 48 Plan and Section of the Shrine of the Double

Axes. Theodore Fyfe.
In a supplementaryexcavationof the north-easternquarter the Magazineof the Giant

Z1;
'
Pithoi was exposedin 1902."' It consistsof two parallel rooms, each of which is
approximatelythreemetreswideandfive metreslong.The pithoi, much largerthan those

excavatedin theWesternMagazines,were highly decoratedwith a patternof ropesand
knobs. Despitebeingcloseto the surfacebeforethe excavationprocess,they survived
particularly well. In 1904 Theodore Fyfe had a protective roof erected over the
37On top of the excavated
Magazine,therebypreservingthe restoredpithoi underneath.,
surroundingwallsof theMagazinenewthinnerrubble walls were erected,exceptfor the

southern area, which remainedopen. Insteadof a massivemiddle wall betweenthe
rooms, ashlarpillars were built at the northernand southernends.The southernpillar
featuresa nicheat its bottompart which was constructedto allow a mason'smark to be
"'See plate 120,background.

"'Evans, 1902a,p. 9 ff.
13'Evans,1904,p. 11.
The Works of Ibcodore Fyfe 1900to 1904 213

PeterKienzle
left visible."' The entire structure was covered with a pitched roof constructed in timber
andcoveredwith tileswhichfollowedtheslopeof the site.A window in the easternwall

and two skylights illuminatedthe 139At
structure. a later point, however,the skylights
wereremovedand a plain tiled roof "'
installed.
Both protection shelters show the same distinct features of Theodore Fyfe's attitude
towards reconstruction. Rubble masonry walls in combination with ashlar quoins have
been employed to elevate the excavated walls to the height required. The pitched roof
was constructed in timber and covered with clay tiles.
3.10 Theodore Fyfe after 1904
1904 was the last year Theodore Fyfe worked for an entire campaign for Arthur Evans
at Knossos, but he definitely returned to the site in 1908,1926 and perhaps at other
141
occasions. In late 1904 or early 1905142
Theodore Fyfe started his own private practice
in London. 143He also assistedSir John Burnet, " to whom he has already been articled
from 1890 to 1896. From 1905 until 1912 he was part of a team editing the annual
Architectural Association Sketchbooks. In 1907 he became Fellow of the R.I. B. A. and
in the following year he designed the Shaftesbury Institute Lodging Home for working
women in Lisson Grove, London. He married Mary Nina Brown in 1911 despite heavy
opposition of his family. 14-1
In the same year became Junior Partner at the architectural
"'See plate 87.

1"Seeplate4.
"See plate5.
14'TheTinies,27 August 1908,and Fyfe, 1926a,p. 479 f.
142Accordingto Who's Who in Architecture,1923,TheodoreFyfe wasassistantto Sir JohnBurnet
from 1904to 1913whereas,accordingto Who's Who, 1930,Fyfe held the assistantshipbetween1905and
1915.
"'Obituary: R.LB.A. Journal, February1945,p. 116.
""Sir JohnJamesBurnet(1857 1938),sonof an Glasgowarchitect,waseducatedin his father's
-
office andParis.He built in Scotland(mostlyEdinburghandGlasgow)and in London.He restoredDuart
Castle,Scotland,in 1911.His majorcontributionsarethe GeneralAccidentBuilding andthe Kodak House
in London.See:Gray, 1985,p. 128ff.
""June Yorke, in a private letter to the author.
214 Chapter3
office of Sir JohnBurnet.He stoppedboth his private practiceand the work for Burnet
in 1915 due to ill health.146
Subsequently,he movedto 34 King Street, Chesterin late
1915or early 1916and beganworking asHousingArchitect for the Ministry of Health
at Queensferry,west of 147
Chester One year later Theodore Fyfe moved to Lysfasi
.
Manor, Pentre-Celyn,North Wales,a few miles southof Ruthin. In the following years
he designedsomecottagesandfarm buildings in Lysfasi and in 1921becameCathedral
Architect to the Deanand Chapterof Chester.TheodoreFyfe executedrepair work at
14'andhe alsodesigneda memorialfor the ChesterYeomanry.In the same
the cathedral
year he started lecturing on Greek and Roman Architecture for the Architectural
AssociationSchoolandat the University of Oxford.149
In 1922hebecameMaster,andafterwards,Director of the newly establishedUniversity

150
Schoolof Architectureat Cambridge. In 1926andagain in 1927he was director at the
excavationsof GlastonburyAbbey. From 1932- 1934Fyfe held the Henry L. Florence
Bursary of the Royal Institute of British Architects, which enabledhim to travel the
EasternMediterraneanin the first half 1934.As a result of thesetravelshe publisheda
book on Hellenistic Architecturein 1936."'
In 1942Theodore Fyfe publisheda small book on A rchitecture in Callibl-idge. According
to his wife, he was askedby the Vice Chancellor of the University of Cambridge as early
as 1924 or 1925 to produce the book and illustrate it with his own drawings. `
Nonetheless, it took him until 1942 to publish the book. In the introduction, he
summarizes his attitude to architectural history:
Thereis no morecommonform of questionput to the historianor architecturethan 'How are we to
""Private letter of Nina Mary Fyfe to Mr. Spraggs of the R.I. B. A. dated II January 1945.
14'Privateletter of Nina Mary Fyfe to Mr. Spraggs of the R.I. B. A. dated II January 1945.
14'Seefile Chester Cathedral. Archive of S.P.A. B.
""Who's Who, 1930. p. 1121.
"The Builder, 19January1945,p. 59.
`Tyfe, 1936,p. vii. The book's title wasHellenisticArchitecture.All IntroductoryStudy
"'Private letterof Nina Mary Fyfe to Mr. Spraggsof the R.I.B.A. datcd II January1945.
The Works of Ilieodore Fyfe 1900to 1904 215

Peter Kienzle
knowthata buildingbelongsto a particularstyle or periodT We mustbe-in with construction,asin
anyconsiderationof architecturalstylewe cannotignorethe limitationsof particularmaterials;and

whatwe call a 'style' wassomething
which
Z, was madein a gradualprocess,controlled,moreor less
strictly, by local methodsof handling
Cýmaterials)"
He remained Head of the Department of Architecture until 1936 but, even after his
retirement, he kept close links with the University. During World War 11 he was
convenor of the 'Panel of Architects for Air Raid Damage to Buildings of Historic
Importance'. " Theodore Fyfe died I January 1945 as a result of a skating accident"'.
At this time he was working on another book called Little Country Church. "'
3.11 Conclusion
Throughout his life Theodore Fyfe was closely involved with historic buildings and he
maintainedthe strong position, that architectureis closely linked to materials, techniques

"'
and craftsmanship. Unsurprisingly, in all the work executed by Theodore Fyfe at
Knossos there is one significant factor: the use of traditional materials. As far as it was
technically possible, he employed the original materials, and in many areas even the
original structural system.Timber was employed as the structural elernent in many cases
except for the columns in the Throne Room and the pillars at the Lobby of the Wooden
Posts and at entrance to the Throne Room, to which Evans refers in an almost
"'
apologetical manner. Obviously, Fyfe tried to reproduce not only the appearancebut
also to reconstruct the historic structural system. In his theoretical approach Fyfe
believed that the missing elements should be replaced with original materials and with
techniques as close to the original ones as possible.
"-'Fyfe, 1942, p. 3. The word construction is highlighted by Theodore Fyfe himself.

's"The Times, 5 January 1945.
115
The Builder, 19 January 1945.
"'Private letter of Nina Mary Fyfe to Mr. Spraggsof the R.I. B. A. dated II January 1945.
... See Fyfe, 1942, p. 3.
"'Evans, 1901, P. 2.
216 Chapter3
Furthermore, most of the work executed by Theodore Fyfe is of comparatively small
scale.'Ibe Grand Staircasewas not excavated completely but propped up, and the roofs
are just small protective timber constructions covering a specific feature rather than an
entire room or hall. '" He executed his conservation and restoration work according to
the principles of minimal intervention.
In the northern portico of the Hall of the Colonnades lie responded to the sunken level
of the Staircaseand, thus, createda rainwater trap. Another important source is the letter
he wrote to Arthur Evansin 1901:
"Ibe roofsof ThroneRoomv [= et] Museumadjoiningare nearlyfinished.We hadbetterput a coat

Cý
of paint, by the way,on all of the externalwoodworkfor the winter. The accountfor wood will be
prettyheavy.Glavisos[?] sayswood is dear,andwe really needa gooddeal."
Clearly, the omission to paint the woodwork had facilitated the decay of timber
constructions, especiallywhen employing fir from Tyrol. "' Adequatetimber for the
reconstructionscould not be obtained in Crete and had to be imported from other
countries. As can be seenin the quotation above,this was expensiveand economic
reasonsmay have rather contradictedthe choice of timber. Nonetheless,timber was
chosenasthe correctreconstructionmaterial.
The timber support in the Hall of the Colonnadesfailed once; nonetheless, it was
replacedwith timber. The pillars in the Hall of the Double Axes featuredtwo stagesof
timber reconstructionand the Throne Room was roofed over twice within four years.
TheodoreFyfe must havebeenawareof the technicaldifficulties relatedto his wooden
The questionremains,to what extentwas he awareof thesedifficulties,
reconstructions.
andwhy did he chosesolutionswhich werelikely to fail?
"'For example fresco in the Bathroom, the plaster couch, the Toilet, etc.
"PM III, p. 288.
The Works of lbeodore Fyfe 1900to 1904 217

PeterYienzle
Roofing over the Throne Room and the two rooms immediately west of it was the first
major conservation work executed on site. From the very beginning, it was realised that
C'
the sensitive features in the Throne Room area needed protection. To address this a
protective roof was designed. Thus, these rooms were exposed to the weather for the
maximum period of one winter. However, while Evans reports in a very general way on
the reconstruction work, he highlights one issue very carefully:
"Me woodencolumnswerefound in their socketsin a carbonisedcondition,but togetherwith the

with my directions,beenrestored
upperpartof the walls andthe roof, they havenow, in accordance
by Mr. Fyfe after a wall-paintingof a small shrinefound in the palacc,so that this little gem of
Knossianarchitecturehasbeenrescuedfrom destruction.
""'
Considerableparts of Arthur Evans'sreport on the reconstructionwork are dedicated

to highlighting the truthfulnessof the work, for examplethe issues
of ceiling '
height, 62
the shapeof the 16'

columns and the colour scheme.This indicatesthat archaeological
was
research a very important
elementto facilitate the design;
reconstruction but, on the
otherhand,thereconstructionwork hadto be modelledafter the archaeologicalevidence
usingthe historic materialsandtechniques.
Thus, we are at the starting point of a classical dilemma. The reconstruction work was
necessary to prevent the excavated structures from collapse. The work was executed
with the original materials and techniques but the principle of minimal intervention was
also applied. Only fragmentaryparts of the palacewere reconstructed,but these were still
exposed to the weather and consequently collapsed later. Theodore Fyfe employed
methods which were as close to the original as possible but these building techniques
were designed to be employed in covered buildings. They failed in the ruins of an
excavation site.
"'Evans, 1902b, pp 99 - 100.

"'See page 414 C
"'See page 413 L
218 Chapter3
fýtl
Chapter
rl"l.
1
ne Works by ristian Doll 1905 to 1910
Td
There is ever less and less to preserve. And everwhing possible must be
garnered befbre it has entirel vanished. The present has its most serious
'v
cluty to history in saving the past. for the benefit qfthefittture.
(Flinders Petrie, 1904,1)130.
)
220 Chapter 2
Chapter 4
The Works by Christian Doll 1905 to 1910
4.0 Introduction
Christian Doll was the second architect employed by Arthur Evans at Knossos. He
succeededTheodore Fyfe, who left Knossos after the 1904 campaign to work for John
Burnet and to start his own practice. Like Theodore Fyfe, Christian Doll was only 25
he
years old when started working at Knossos and, like Fyfe, he came into contact with
Evans while he was admitted as architecturalstudent at the British School at Athens. But
by comparisonwith Fyfe, ChristianDoll had beenexposedto architecturefrom early
childhood through his father, CharlesFitzroy Doll. Christian Doll was employedby
Evansin March 1905,basedon his needto find an architectquickly. Born out of this
need, a five year working relationshipdeveloped;and even after 1910 ChristianDoll
executedoccasionalwork for Arthur Evans.
Doll was not only responsiblefor the reconstructionof the Grand Staircase,one of the
mostimpressivefeatureson site,he alsoexecutedmanyminorreconstructions.However,

it will becomeclear in this chapter how Doll's attitude towards conservationand
reconstruction,which differed completelyfrom that of his predecessor,helpedto shape

the excavationsite at Knossos.
'Me Works of ChristianDoll 1905to 1910 221

PeterKienzle
4.1 Before Knossos
Christian CharlesTyler Doll was bom in 1880 the eldest son of Charles Fitzroy Doll, an
architect and surveyor to the London estates of the Duke of Bedford. These estates
stretch between Bloomsbury Square and Russell Square, and Charles Fitzroy Doll not
only executed many important buildings in this area but also had his office at 5
Southampton Street, on this estate.' Not much is known about Doll's childhood but he
receivedhis training
architectural at the University of Cambridge,wherehe receivedan
MA (I st Class)andwasthen articledto his father's office in London?During this time,
CharlesFitzroy Doll constructedHotel Russell(1898) and the Imperial Hotel, now
demolished,at RussellPlacefor the Duke of Bedford.' Both buildingsborrowedmany
elementsfrom historicalsourcesandreproducethem in faience,terracottaand tile, while

the structural frame systemof the buildingswas executedin brick and metal girders.4
Christian,who wasan apprenticearchitectin his father's office at this time, participated

in theconstructionof thesetwo major buildings.Thus,he got an early insight in the up
to datemetropolitanconstructiontechniquesof the turn of the century,which - aswill
be shown- influencedhis approachto the reconstructionwork he executedat Knossos
between 1905 and 1910. In summer 1904, ChristianDoll left his father's office to
becomea studentat the British Schoolat Athens.
4.2 The reconstruction work in 1905
When Arthur EvansandDuncanMackenziereturnedto Knossosin March 1905they

discovered the damage on site caused by the heavy winter rains. Parts of the Grand
'Pevsner, 1952, P. 216 L

2R.I. B. A. Biographical File on C.C.T. Doll.
'Obituary in The Builder, 6 May 1955, p. 761.
"On the two hotels,Hotel Russelland the Imperial Hotel, see: Pevsner, 1952, p. 217 and Gray, 1985,
p. 175 L
222 Chapter 4
Staircase were on the verge of collapse.5 Theodore Fyfe, who had undertaken the
architectural work up to this point was no longer able to spend time in Knossos.
Consequently, Arthur Evans had to look for a new architect. Christian Doll was at
Athens in this time and had considerable experience in architecture. Thus, Evans
employed him to come to Knossos to tackle the task of reconstructing the collapsing
staircase.
4.2.1 The Theoretical Reconstruction of the Grand Staircase
The GrandStaircasewasexcavatedin 1901by meansof tunnelling underthe third flight.

This tunnel,linedwith woodenframessimilarto the onesemployedin mining operations,
was used to keep the third flight in position'. A similar constructionwas employedto
supportthe westernpart of theEast-WestCorridor,but it had collapsedby 11June 1901
7
and was subsequentlyreplacedwith a morepermanentsolution. However,both these
timbersupportframesgaveway in the winter of 1904/ 1905due to heavyrain. Arthur
Evanswrote in The Times:
"An exceptionally rainy seasonled to the falling of the second landing of the Grand Staircase. The
C,
wooden props inserted at that time of excavation to support the upper structures of this - which, in
default of the original wooden pillars, simply rested on indurated debris - had given way at this point
and the whole upper flights and balustrades, together with the adjoining upper corridor, were
threatened with ruin. To avert this demanded nothing less than heroic measures."'
Heavy rain was certainly the factor that triggeredthe collapseof the timber structures;
but, nonetheless,two other reasonsfacilitatedthis event.As alreadyexploredearlier,
Fyfe omittedto treat the timber prior to its installation, and he also employed softwood
rather than hardwood. Duncan Mackenzie described in more detail how the timber,
'See DM 1905,1 March to II March. Ashmolean Museum Oxford.

'See page 182 ff.
7See page 185.
'The Times, 31 October 1905, p 4.
The Works of ChristianDoll 1905to 1910 223

PeterKienzle
insertedin 1901and 1902,decayeddue to its exposureto the weather.For the Grand

Staircase,he wrote:
-Ms [decay]wasstill moreapparentin the regionof the East-Westcorridorandof the Royal Stair.
Herethemightof thedampsuperincurnbent
earthpressingon the decayingwoodenroof of our tunnel
0 C,
causedthisto collapsecarryingwith it the greaterpart of the upperlandingandof the flight
P of steps
of the stair up S. The reconstitutionof this landingandof this landingandof thesesstepswill form
oneseriousproblemin the work of this campaign.
"'
The third reasonfor the collapsecan be found in Evans's, Mackenzie'sand Fyfe's

mistakeninterpretationof theeasternwall of the first flight in 1901. What was supposed
to be a massivewall in 1901turnedout to benothino, more the fallen "
debris. The timber
C)
supportwork insertedin the first instancewasclearly not designedto reflect this. As can
be seen in plate 51, the timber framework was equipped with diagonal braces to
r>
withstandhorizontalforces in the north-southdirection alongsidethe steps.However,
rigure 4Y uranci btaircase elevation looking west by Fyfe, 1901 (left) and Doll, 1905 (right).
'DM, 1905,1 March to II March.

IODM,1905,Saturday,8 April.
224 Chapter 4
no braceswere insertedto withstandhorizontal forcesacrossthe stepsin the east-west

direction.This is adequatein a mining tunnelwith almostexclusivelyvertical forcesand
compression,but at the GrandStaircasethe easternwall consistedof debrisand not of

It
massivemasonry. was neitherpossiblefor the broken stepsof the third flight or the
floor slabsof the landing to respondto any tensile strengthnor could the outer wall or
the insertedtimber framerespondto horizontalforces.Furthermore,the timber of the
supportfi-amesdecayedbecauseit was affectedby damp.Rainwaterpenetratedthrough
the joints of paving slabsand stepsand saturatedthe unexcavatedearth betweenthe
thTiberboardson top of the framesandthe first floor paving. This in return affectedthe
timber boards and the load on this structure increaseddue to the saturation of the
superimposedearth with rain water. No part of the entire structure respondedto the
horizontal forces,dampaffectedthe timbersand the load increased.Consequently,the
collapseof the structure,sooneror later, was inevitable.
Most of Christian Doll's dated drawings relating to the Grand Staircase are marked April
or May 1905." The detailed information on the historic fabric indicates that Doll spent
his time at Knossos executing the plans on site. While he developed the reconstruction
proposal and ordered the materials in Britain, Duncan Mackenzie supervised the
deconstructionof the third flight and the upper balustrades of the staircase and all parts
of the upper East-West Corridor and the Hall of the Colonnades. Duncan Mackenzie,
who normally did not note any reconstruction work in his diaries, wrote 6 April 1905:
"Simultaneously with our work in the area of the Royal Road the most serious undertaking of the
seasonwas the reconstruction of the Royal Stair in the E. wing of the Palace which was rendered by
the partial collapse of the second floor landing as a result of the actions of the heavy winter rain to
which reference has been made in the beginning of this daybook. It was once apparent that unless
tremendousmeasureswere takenat once the whole upper fabric of the stair might collapse. Our plan
of operationswas as follows: while awaiting the arrival of an architect who could undertake the work
of reconstructionthe first thinc, to be done was the removal of the fallen debris that now encumbered
the lower landing at the foot of the lowest flight of steps.Here (secondly) the individual gypsum slabs
of the secondflight of the stair up S. [third flight] had to be carefully removed one by one beginning
"See Doll's drawings in the Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive.
'Me Works of Christian Doll 1905 to 1910 225

PeterKienzle
at thetop. Thirdlytheunexcavated debrisunderlyingthe stepsandoriginally -before the penetration
of our tunnelof 1901- entirelyfillingC,up the intervalbetweenthis andthe third flight of stepsup S.
which on the Ground floor expanded up to the upper flight:`
Steps and ashlar blocks were carefully taken down one by one, numbered and placed
together in the Central Court for re-use in the reconstruction. '3 Three drawings of the so
called 'Doll's Folder' in the Ashmolean Museum show details which could have only
come to light in the process of dismantling. " This indicates the close cooperation
between the archaeologist Duncan Mackenzie and the architect Doll. Taking down the
third flight of steps led to an important discovery. Until then it had been presumed that
a massive wall supported the third flight on its eastern side, and that the lower flight of
steps was lit by a small window. " Now it was discovered that, similar to the upper
storey, a stepped balustrade and colonnades supported the upper night. " This was
essential new knowledge which considerably altered the existing reconstruction drawing
by Theodore Fyfe.
Christian Doll produced a series of reconstruction drawings in ink, some of which were
printed in Arthur Evans's extensive publication on the excavations, 'The Palace of

Minos'. Since they are not dated, and only few are labelled, it is impossible to determine
the date of their production. However, theseink drawings show the reconstruction of the
original Minoan Grand Staircase and the adjoining features as they might have looked
more than 3,000 years ago. Drawing G/S I shows two sections of the Grand Staircase
in 1:50 scale, while drawing G/S 4 shows, based on the former plan, a isometric
reconstruction of the timber framework of the same 17

area. Both plans try to reconstruct
the former Minoan structural timber frame work of the Grand Staircase based on the
archaeological evidence of slots and charcoaled timber remains. However, both plans
`DM 1905,71bursday, 6 April.

"Evans, 1905,p. 25.
"Doll's FolderNr. 5, Nr. 6, Nr. 7.
"Comparefigure 49.
"rhe CretanExplorationFund, 1905, p. 3.
"'For drawingG/S I seefigure 50 for drawingG/S4 seeplate 101.
226 Chapter 4
werenevercompletedor
printed, and neither of
them was labelled with
any information. Draw-
ing G/S I featuresscales
at the bottom and a key

in the top right corner
but no information to go
with it. Christian Doll

also produced a third
drawing, G/S 2, in the
samescalebasedon the
previous two plans Figure 50 Drawing G/S 1, Sectionof GrandStaircase.Unpublished
drawingby ChristianDoll. 1905.
which is the only draw- C,
ing completed and published, shows the eastern elevation of the Grand Staircase."
Thesethreereconstructiondrawingsare similar in that they featureproblematicdetails.

For example,the stocky columnsat the middle wall betweenthe two flights of the
staircase seem,somehow,not to be right. But even more important is a problem of
structural engineering.According to drawing G/S 1, the load of the stone stepswas
carriedby the inclined beamswhich in turn restedon crossbeams.Surprisingly,at their
upperendsthe inclinedbeamsdid not rest on top of the crossbeamsbut rather stopped
beforethem.The only possibleway of fixing themto the crossbeamswould havebeen
a morticeandtenonjoint. This is technicallypossible,but it would be a very weak point

in the construction of the stairssincethe stonestepsand the hugely oversizedbeams
imposea considerable loadon thisjoint. This is a very unlikely detail. Doll alsoexecuted
a plan, G/S 7, where he superimposedin red ink the structural systemfeaturedin the
sectionon a copy of the elevationplan of the GrandStaircase." In this plan it becomes
evenmoreobviousthat the structuralsystem,as it was recreatedfrom the interpretation
"See figure 5 1.
"'See plate 100.

PeterKienzle
of archaeologicalevidence,could not have worked. In this plan, the pitched beams

carryingthebad of the stonestepsarealmostcompletelyinterruptedby the crossbeams
insteadof restingon thern.Thus,transferringtheloadto the groundwas renderedalmost
impossible.
A third problem is depictedin the eastelevationwherethe storeyheight for
the upperfloor is given asapproximatelyone metrelessthan the height for the ground
RECONSTRUCTEDELEWTION
OF GRRND
%3Tq1RCjqSE.
CH, 91=14H C. TDOLZ
SC.4 Lf OP -:! /0
ýoyý0
SCALE COrMETRES
Figure 51 Reconstructed elevation of Grand Staircase(G/S 2). Drawing by Christian Doll.
228 Chapter4
floor. Thusa flight of stepsbecamenecessary,which ran from the secondfloor landing

to the level of the CentralCourt which is one metre higher 20Thus, Doll was caughtin
.
the dilen-umwherearchaeological evidencecontradictedaesthetics,spatialunderstanding
and,evenworse,the technicalnecessitiesof structuralengineering.
These problems led to a

new reconstructionversion
based more on the under-
standingof structural logic

than on the actualfindings.
Christian Doll created a
new drawing, GS/HC 3,

which eliminated the
failures depicted in the
previousplans.Again, these
plans were not published;
but, apparently,they served
as a model for the physical

work on site. In this draw-
ing the proportions of the
column at the first landing Figure52 Fian cjs/tiu i. section or tiic Lirand staircase.
Unpublishedplan by ChristianDoll. Probably1905.
seem to be more appro-
priate now and the height of the upper storey is extended, so that a level access to the
Central Court was now possible. Doll was quoted in a discussion that followed Arthur
Evans's paper to the Society of Antiquaries, 9 December 1926, as saying that 'the
staircase could be reconstructed on mathematical lines, tile dimensions being multiples
of one another and the tread three times the riser. "' Obviously a more theoretical
approach was chosen. In GS/HC 3, the structural system of the suggested timber frame
is more logical in respect to the inclined beams, but now, however, the support beams
"See rigure 5 1.
"Evans, 1927,P. 267.
The Works of Christian Doll 1905 to 1910 229

Peter Kienzle
for the intermediatelanding seem to lack proper support. The east elevation in this plan
features a masonry balustrade which is not interrupted by the head ends of the cross
beamsas in the first elevation, G/S 2, which reflects the new reconstruction of the load-
bearing timber framework.
Plate 90 shows that obviously not enough fabric survived to indicate a balustrade,
originally made completely of ashlar masonry as depicted in the later reconstruction

drawing, GS/HC 3 22It is unlikely that these ashlar blocks were removed by masons of
.
a later historic period for re-use, since intact masonry survived above this level. Also, it
is unlikely that these blocks collapsed into the light well, when upper parts and more
sensitive features, for example the steps, stayed in position. Thus, it is reasonable to
anticipate that the first elevation, G/S 2, was modelled as closely as possible to the
archaeological evidence and the head ends of the beams might have been visible in the
elevation. However, this elevation was based on a reconstruction, which featured
aesthetical (stocky column), structural Ooint of beams) and spatial (access to Central
Court) problems. Thus, the first drawings were rejected either by Evans, or by Doll, or
jointly by both of them even before the plan was completed. Subsequently, a new
drawing was executed avoiding these mistakes. This new reconstruction drawing,
however, was not as close to the archaeological evidence as the previous one.
Based on this new reconstruction drawing, plan GS/HC 3, Christian Doll drew the
proposal plans for the reconstructionof the Grand Staircasein April and May 1905. This
included plans and sections of the Grand Staircase, the Hall of the Colonnades and the
western section of the East West Corridor which stretches between these two features.23
Thesequite large plans were executed in pencil on cardboard, inked over and coloured
with water colours. They show in minute details the work suggestedby Doll and include
the materials to be used. The detailed information on the historic fabric on site given in
theseplans indicatesthat Doll spent a considerable amount of time at Knossos sketching
or even executing his plans on site.
"See figure 52.

"See plates103to I 10.
230 Chapter 4
However, basing the physical reconstruction of the Grand Staircase on the later version
of the drawings caused another problem. The colurnn at the middle wall between the two
flights of stairs is much higher in the later plans than in the earlier one and, thus, the lintel
above this column rested at a higher level. The width of the opening to the north of this
column was given by archaeological evidence and, thus, the dimensions of the opening
were defined. An irregularity in the vaulted ceiling construction above the first flight
to this later 24As be in Christian Doll's it

responded reconstruction. can seen proposal,
was necessaryto place one of the iron girders higher than usual to allow for the opening
between the two flights of the stairs.Anticipating that the historic steps rested on massive
timber beams as shown in the drawings, these beams would have intersected with the
window if this is
reconstructedversion correct. Certainly, this is technically possible but
it seemsto be rather unlikely, sinceMinoan architecture was strongly concerned with the
visual qualities of the '

buildings. Obviously both the earlier and the later reconstructions
feature details which were wrong. This gives a clear indication that the exact original
construction of the Grand Staircase could not be understood from the archaeological
evidence.
4.2.2 The Physical Reconstruction of the Grand Staircase
Christian Doll had new columns placed at the position of the original timber columns in
both the sockets of the balustrade and on the column bases of the colonnades. These
columns, including capital and abacus, were made of limestone masonry, plastered over
and subsequentlypainted." The architraves were made of iron girders, which were laid
on top of the abaci.27 These architravessupported masonry balustrades which consisted
partially of reinstated original material, saved when it was taken down by Duncan
Mackenzie earlier on, but also a considerableamount of new material was employed. The
"See plate 104.

"Compare page 142.
"Evans, 1905, p. 25.
"See plate 107.
The Works of Christian DoIl 1905 to 1910 231

PeterKienzle
new masonry,executed in rectangular plain limestoneashlarblocks, standsout clearly

in plate 111 and,thus, is clearly distinguishablefrom the reusedoriginal material.The
ceilingof the corridor and the for

substructure the staircase was formed by iron I-beam
girders, which were laid acrossfrom wall to wall, and flat brick vaults which were
inserted between them." The spandrelson top of the brick vaults were filled with
concreteand the stepsand the broken paving slabs were re-laid in mortar. In the plans,
the iron girderswere labelled 'R.S.
J.s', which is the for
abbreviation rolled joists,
steel
a commonbuilding for
material floors in Britain at the turn of the century.Embeddedin
concrete, they provide a fireproof floor, but they were known to be a ratherexpensive
"
solution.
The rolled steeljoists of the architravewere casedwith timber boardsto representthe

massivebeamsof theoriginalMinoanconstruction.The vertical boardat the outer sides
and the outer soffit boardswerejoined finnly, while thejoints betweenthe threesoffit
boardsthemselves
were intensified'ý
Thus,it was that
accomplished the clad iron girders
looked like threetimber beamsnext to eachother,just asEvansstatedin 1926:
"In this way it waspossiblefor Mr. Doll to reproduceboth the effectandthereality of the original
timberframeworkof this part of the building
C,asit existedin the lastMiddle Minoan period.""
A constructiveproblem resultedfrom this detail. In Minoan architecturethe timber

beamsrestedflush on top of the abaci." In the reconstructedversion,the load-bearing
element, the steeljoists, had to rest on the abaci. Consequently,

the timber boards
underneaththe girderswerelocatedat a lower level andwere interruptedby the abacus

33
of eachColUmn.Anotherproblemwas how to fix the timber boardsto the iron girders.
A lath under-construction,to which the boardscould be nailed,had to be inserted.In
"See plate I 10.

"Adams, 1894,p. 60. andAnon., 1879,p. 271.
"See plate 114.
3'Evans,1927,p. 262.
"Comparefigure 51.
"See SectionB-B, Drawing 8 andplatesI 11 and 114.
232 Chapter4
contrast to the massiveoriginal beams,these timber boards were quite thin and, if
exposedto the weather,they warped.The poor under-constructioncould not respond
to theseforcesand,subsequently,the timber claddingfailed."
The drawings included proposals to
reconstructthe Hall of the Colonnades

in the sarneway with plasteredmasonry
columns, iron girders and brick vaults;

however, the plan for roofing the
eastern portico of the Hall of the

Colonnadeswas not executed at this
time. The columns and the architrave
were constructed in the same way as
already described, but only a few
coursesof masonrywere placedon top
of the architrave.In both the first and
the second inked reconstruction
drawing,a massivewall, facing the light it-igurez).j virst vioor grounapian, urana btaircase.
ChristianDoll, probably 1905.
well, was suggested for the upper
storeys of the Hall of the Colonnades. This massive wall featured windows in the upper
storeys overlooking the courtyard, but it had no colonnades. This was probably the
reason why the reconstruction of this wall terminated with an irregular top course, an
indication of the incomplete state of this wall. Also, some courses of masonry and door
jambs were placed at the joint between the Loggia and the corridor in the upper Hall of
-15Again, this reflected the reconstructionin both plans, G/S I and

the Colonnades.
GS/HC 3, which suggesteda wall and a door at this position.
It was planned to cover the eastern portico of the Hall of the Colonnades with a ceiling
which,if it hadbeenexecuted,would haveprovided a first floor accessfrom the Grand
34
Seeplate 116.
3'Seeplate 112,bottomright.
The Works of ChristianDoIl 1905to 1910 233

Peter Kienzle
Staircaseto the first floor corridors of the Domestic Quarter reconstructed by Theodore
Fyfe in 1902.3' However, the ceiling was not executed, despite Arthur Evans having
reported it done in both the report for the Annual of the British School at Athens"' and
the almost identical article in The Times." Evans was probably writing the articles in
Britain but, meanwhile back in Crete, Doll had difficulties to execute the planned
reconstruction work. In a later report Evans mentioned that some of the iron girders in
an unloading accident in the harbour of Candia fell into the water and could not be
retrieved. " No evidence survived which could help dating this accident. It must be left
open as to whether the missingceiling of the Hall of Colonnades is a direct result of this
accident.
In hisproposals,Doll suggesteda suspendedflat timber ceiling to cover the rolled steel

joists and brick vault construction." Thus, it appearedas if the ceiling was rnadeof
wooden beams. Plate 114 shows the flat ceiling inserted and tracesof the suspended
ceilingarestill visiblein the Hall of the Colonnades. This is anotherexampleof how Doll
focussedmuch more on the appearance
then on reconstructionof original materials.
As already discussedearlier,TheodoreFyfe, in the tradition of minimal intervention,

reconstructed the corridor at the sunkenlevel to preventmajor restorationwork. This
resultedin the construction of a basin,opento the sky, which collectedrain water and
dispensed it through the joints of the pavementto the earth and timber structure
underneath.This was one of the reasonswhy the support work failed, necessitating
ChristianDoll's reconstructionof the GrandStaircaseandthe Hall of the Colonnades.
Sinceit wasnecessary
to removeall uppermaterialanyway,the reconstructedheight of
the new stairscould resernblethe original heightwhich was derivedfrom the Western
part of thefirst floor landing, the door sill of the upperEast-WestCorridor and the two
"See page 198 ff.

"Evans. 1905, P. 26.
I'The Times, 1905, P. 4.
39Evans,1928, p. 97.
`See plate 106.
234 Chapter 4
floor fragmentsstill adheringto the wall." This was certainly not the driving force behind
the reconstructionwork, but it was a welcomeside effect.
Christian Doll also reconstructed the south wall of the light well adjacent to the Grand
Staircase. The wall originally featured a window above the fourth course of the ashlar
masonry,which was constructedwith a timber frame, fon-ningjambs, sill and lintel. In the
destruction of the palace the opening was filled with debris, subsequently the beams
deteriorated.With no firm support the upper structure sunk slightly. 42Theodore Fyfe left
the opening unexcavated,but obviously this never could have been a permanent solution.
After the areaof the light well to the north and the area of the Service Stairs to the south
of this wall were excavatedin 1901 and 1902 respectively, only debris with the thickness
4'
of the wall supportedthe upper structure . This debris was exposed to the weather and
could not possibly provide sufficient permanent support for the weight of the ashlar
blocks above. Thus, in 1905 Christian Doll removed the upper ashlar blocks and the
blocks to the right of the window' and, following this, recorded the blocks of the
uppermost course which had been left in 4'
position. Instead of using timber beams he
placed a framework of iron girders at this place and reinstalled the masonry. The visible
sides of the 1-beamswere covered with timber boards in the usual way, in order to
recreatethe imageof massivetimber 46

beams. Onceagain,Doll employeda systemwhere
the necessarystructural system was separatefrom the outer appearanceof the
reconstructionwork.
In earlyApril 1905DuncanMackenziesuperviseddismantlingthe remainsof the Grand

StaircaseandChristianDoll recordedthe remains47At the sametime, 8-9 April, Arthur
.
Evansattendedthe Congr6sInternationald Arch6ologieat Athens wherehe presented
"'See page 185 ff.

"'See plate 90.
"'See plate 96.
"See plates 106 and 108.
Doll's Folder 6 and 7, Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive.
'15See
'See plate 112.
"'SeeDM 1905,April.
Tbe Works of Christian Doll 1905 to 1910 235

Peter Kienzle
his Minoan chronology." However, the participantsalso discussedBalanos' conservation

Acropolis the " Balanos girders for the
work at the and probably visited site. employed
reconstructionsof both the Parthenon(1898 1902) and the Erechtheion (1902 - 1909).
-
The work at the Erechtheion was in progress when the conference happened.Thus, it is
debateablewhether Evans got the idea to employ iron girders at Knossos from the work
at the Acropolis or Doll got the idea from his practical experience in London. It is quite
likely, that Evans was impressedby Banalos' work, which was well received at this time,
and found an ideal partner in Doll who had worked with this material before.
4.2.3 The Throne Room Area
This section is placed here despite the fact that no exact information survives, which can
date the work described. The extension of Fyfe's pitched roof was executed between
1905, when Doll began working at Knossos, and 1908, since plate 4 proves that the roof
in by 50In 1905 Evans wrote that the Throne Room and the
1908.
was place adjoining
corridors were covered and shelveswere fitted to store pottery as a reference museum.5'
There is no clear indication whether this refers to Fyfe's pitched roof from the previous
year or to the extension by Doll at a later date. Nonetheless, it is possible that the
extension was built in 1905 and, therefore, this section was placed here.
In 1901 Fyfe constructed the flat roof covering the Throne Room and the Inner
Sanctuary. Three years later he executed the pitched roof on top of his earlier flat roof
and he also constructed the lean-to which protected the suite of rooms north of the
Throne Roon-LHowever, this roof did not protect the Service Section which was located
12
betweenthe Inner Sanctuary and the Long Corridor to the west of this complex. Fyfe
"'The Times, 12 April 1905, p. 4. See also Jokilehto, 1986, p. 420.

4'Mallouchou-Tufano, 1994, p. 83.
"'Plate 4 was taken after the reconstruction of the Queen's Megaron in 1908 but before the
reconstruction of the fourth fli-ht
0 of the staircase in 1910.
"Evans, 1905, p. 23. See also Pendlebury, 1933, p. 1.
"See Ground Floor Plan, Drawina 1.
C,
236 Chapter 4
constructed this pitched roof in the year in which he came to Knossos for the final time
as the excavation architect. Consequently, the extension of the pitched roof which
covered the Service Section must be assigned to a later architect, in most probability
Christian Doll.
A new west gable of rubble masonry was constructed on top of the excavated eastern
wall of the Long Corridor. No tracessurvived to indicate the incorporation of the earlier
rubble wall erected by Theodore Fyfe in 1904 to shelter the plaster features in the
Kitchen. However, parts of Doll's rubble wall were later incorporated by Piet de Jong
in his reconstructionsin 1930.The outline of the roof is still visible at the first floor level
this batten remains can be found. 5' The new wall constructed was
of wall where
considerably thinner than the original one.5' This not only reduces the load on the
historic structures underneath, it also clearly indicates the level above which the
reconstructions start. Ann Brown, anticipating that the entire pitched roof was built at
Figure 54 Elevation of west wall of the Service Section showing batten remains. Red line indicates
outline of former pitched roof.
"See Section C-C, Drawing 4.


Peter Kienzle
once, stated that the "

roof was constructed with metal girders. This, however, would be
a material most likely chosen by Christian Doll rather than Theodore Fyfe during his
reconstruction of 1904. Thus, it might be possible that the roof extension was
constructed with iron girders, while the main roof was conventionally executed in timber
but this is rather unlikely. However, on top of this construction, whether it was timber
or metal girders, wooden battens were fixed, remains of which still exist in sockets in the
western wall. 56
The extendedroof, like the original part,
was covered with tiles and in addition

to the three glazed skylights
4D already
insertedin the existing roof, another two
were installed in the new part. " Since
the new western gable no longer

featured a window and door, accessto
the upper floor must have been internal

and the newly roofed Service Section Figure55 Elevationofnorth wall of the Kitchenof
the ServiceSection.My recording.
most likely had no floor inserted. The
wall between the Kitchen and the room north of it in the Service Section features a
blocked secondary window, which distributed the light from the skylight in the south roof
to the rooms in the middle of the 5'

suite. The entire area was used for the Stratigraphical
Museum, the on site shard collection, but unfortunately no photograph from the interior
arrangements survives.
A new door was broken into the wall south of the Room of the Stone Drum to provide
access between the northern flight of rooms and the Inner Sanctuary. Both Theodore
Fyfe's sketch plan of 1901 and the published plan of the Throne Room area show
"Brown, 1994, p. 42. Unfortunately, Mrs Brown gives no reference. In a personal letter, Mrs Brown
regrets not having kept her notes but she could not remember the source of this statement.
"See figure 54.
"See plate 4.
"See figure 55.
238 Chapter 4
massivewalls at theseareas.59In contrastthe current stateshowsthe doorway inserted

later.' Both, the Inner Sanctuaryand the northernflight of rooms were usedto store
pottery from the excavationand this door was for
necessary internal communication
between the two areas.The new splayedjambs were constructedin brickwork and
dressedstoneblocks." It is not clearwhetherthis door wasbrokeninto the wall by Fyfe
in 1904 when he constructedthe lean-to or by ChristianDoll when he completedthe
pitched roof at a later date.The choice of material - brickwork combinedwith dressed
limestone- is frequentlyusedby Doll whereasFyfe preferredsimplebrickwork."
The kitchenof the ServiceSectionfeaturedvery sensitiveelementsof plaster,including

for example,the table andthe floor." The small roof executedby Fyfe in 1904was not
sufficient protection for thesefeatures,

and Christian
consequently Doll improved this
situation with a more permanent structure.The extensionof the existingroof was the
mostsuitablesolutionbecauseit alsoprovided additional storagespace for the growing
'
collection of shards.
4.3 The Villa Ariadne
InitiallyArthurEvansbelievedthatthesiteof Knossoscouldbeexcavated
within a few
years'. For the first campaignEvanshad renteda housecloseto the site, but it proved
' From 1901he renteda housein Candia(now Herakleion)in which to
to be unhealthy.
sleep but he kept the houseat Knossos
asan on site base 6'
camp. Evans,Mackenzieand
"See figure 27 andfigure 28.

'See GroundPlan,Drawing 1.
"See plate56.
'For Doll seebuttressesin theEast-WestCorridorandtheconstructionof the Villa Ariadne.For Fyfe
seethe buttressin the Treasuryandthe door Jambsin the Roomof the PlasterCouch.
"See plate 5 1.
'Pendlebury, 1933,p 1.
15See for example:Evans,1902a,p. 1; Evans1903,p. 114.
"Brown 1994,p. 30.
"Brown, 1994,p. 20 andp. 30.
Ile Works of ChristianDoll 1905to 1910 239

PeterKienzle
Fyfe had to ride to the excavation site every day to supervise the work. However, by
1905Evans realizedthat he would be staying in Knossos for a long time. Not only were
the excavations much larger than he had assumed,but he also realised that besides the
actual digging work long periods of research would be necessary. Thus, he decided to
have a housebuilt close to the site specificallyfor his purpose. According to Evans' half-
sister he decided on the building site of his excavation house already in 1895 when he
visited Knossos with Myres. "
Furthermore, Joan Evans suggested that Evans planned the Villa Ariadne himself and
Doll was duly executing the his plans 69However, this is contradicted by Doll's diary
.
'found difficulties in the idea'. 70
entries such as many way of carrying out my original
Evans and Doll had probably the normal architect-client relationship in which the client
voices his wishes while the architect producesplanswhich reflect these wishes and finally
the construction
of the 71
building. ChristianDoll designedand startedto build
supervises
anexcavationhouse in 1906,a year when Evansconductedno excavationwork on site,
and finished the in

work early 1907 7' The housewas namedVilla Ariadne after the
.
legendarydaughterof King Minos who helpedthe AthenianTheseusto overcomethe
Minotaur and escapethe maze.
The Villa is a two storey, flat roof building with an irregular shaped ground plan. The
semi-basementground floor accommodated bedrooms for Evans, Mackenzie, Doll and

visitors. The upper storey was composedof a dining room, offices and a hall. " A kitchen
and a house keeper's flat was accommodatedin an adjoining smaller wing. Christian Doll
employed some of the masons and carpenters, who normally would have executed
reconstruction work on site, to construct the house.The Villa Ariadne was built with the
sametechniques,employedby Doll for reconstruction work on site in the previous year.
"'Evans, 1943, P. 318

"Evans, 1943, P. 353.
"Doll diary, Wednesday 18 April 1906. Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive.
"For contrary opinions seeBrown, 1994, p. 22 or Powell, 1982, p. 3 1.
'See letters from Doll to Evans 1906 and 1907.Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive.
"Kiosse, 1998, p. 11.
240 Chapter 4
The thick wallswereconstructedin rubble masonry,wall endsandjambswere executed

in brick and dressedlimestoneblocks 7"The exterior walls were faced with irregular
.
stone slabswhile quoinsanddressingswereemphasisedwith vermiculatedrustication.
The ceiling constructionwas identicalto that employedon site: iron girdersand brick
vaults.A terracewasbuilt nextto themainentranceat the eastside and anotherone was
built at the west sideof the Villa. 7' Thus,the Villa wasextremelywell equippedfor the
hot Cretanclimate.The bedroomsin the semi-basement
stayedcomparativelycool and,
dependingon the time of day, a shadedterracecould be used.
Throughout the building process Christian Doll regularly wrote letters to Arthur Evans
informing him of the progress some of which survived to date. These letters give a very
detailed account of building work and the prices charged for it. In his letter of 3 October
76This
1906 Doll tells Evans about the difficulties getting cement through CUStOMS.
indicatesthat in 1906Doll still imported cement from Britain. He also kept close contact
with his father who gave advice for the building work and ordered some of the materials
in England.17In January1907he wrote to Evans:
I havereceivedall thegoodsorderedfrom Englandin a moreor lesssoundcondition.The bathwas

ordered by my father.He chosea porcelainone becauselie could get it for almostas little as an
enamellediron one.Of course,theyarebeyondcomparison.
""
The area around the villa was arrangedas a garden and included water basinsand
displayeda statuefound at the site of RomanKnossos.In threesuccessivelettersDoll
referred to trees,which were supposedto be plantedin the gardenand which had not
beendeliveredso far. Both houseand gardenwere a mixture of traditional English and
Mediterraneanfeatures.The headsof rainwaterdownpipeswhich were decoratedwith
double axesand the separationof servantquartersfrom the main building indicatethe
74Seeplate 222.
73plates223 and 224.
76Letterfrom Doll to Arthur Evans, 3 October 1906. Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive.
77Tbeletters have not survived but Doll noted all letters he wrote in his diary.
7K
Letter from Doll to Arthur Evans, 21 January 1907. Ashrnolean Museum, Evans Archive.

Peter Yjenzle
taste of a client who was brought up in Victorian England. The accommodation of bed
rooms in the basement, the flat roof and the many terraces refer to Mediterranean
"
sources. The considerationsspent for the design of house and garden as well as the high
quality of the brassfittings, the woodwork and the porcelain bath, show, how important
the Villa was to Evans as the employer and Doll as the architect.
The excavation of Knossos, by then seven years old, attracted numerous scholars and
visitors. Evans had not been in Crete in 1906 and Christian Doll had to entertain the
to
visitors and show them round the 80
palace. In 1906, one of these visitors was Josef
Durm, a German scholarwho published a book on Greek architecture in 1910. The part
on Knossos contains a devastating critique of the reconstructions on which much of the
later criticism was based.Dunn actually refers to Doll in a footnote of his accounts of the
Palace."
4.4 The work in 1908
After hecompletedthe Villa Ariadne in early 1907,ChristianDoll returnedto England;

however, he went back to Knossos in 1908, when he was principally engaged
4P in
work
executingreconstruction in three The
areas: Queen'sMegaron,the Room with the
PlasterCouchandtheeasternpart of the East-WestCorridor. Evanswrote in the report
for 1908:
"It is the DomesticQuarterwherethe remainsof upperstoreysaremostin evidence,that the work

hasinvolvedtheheaviest
of excavation responsibilities.The woodwork provisionallyinsertedfor the
supportof theupperfloors andgallerieshasprovedinsufficientto withstandthe violent extremesof
theCretanclimate.'Ibe GrandStaircase,indeed,hadbeenalreadyrescuedfrom its perilousposition,
ability this work wasdue,washappilyenabledto come
andMr. ChristianDoll, to whoseconstruction
out ac.; to follow up the work conservationin theborderinOr-
ainthisseason - region.
0
lbanks to his effort
.,
"Macdonald in a lecture to the Friends of the British School, 1997.

"Letter from Doll to Arthur Evans, 26 February, 1907. Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive.
"See: Durm, 1910.p. 50 ff.
242 Chapter4
the floor of the adjoininguppercorridor hasbeenthoroughlyre-supportedandat the sametime the

window of the lower gallery,looking on the light well of the Hall of the DoubleAxes, openedout -
a taskwhichinvolvedtheraising into their original positionaboveits restoredlintel of over six tons
a
weightof sunkenblocks.Anotherwindowoff the"Court of Distaffs" hasbeenopenedout in a similar
way,andthe pavedfloor of the room above,which is flankedby a stonebenchin position,hasbeen
""
reconstitutedandpermanentlysupported.
All these areasdescribedin the quotation abovehad beenattendedto previously by

TheodoreFyfe.Thus,ChristianDoll was not startingwork in new areasbut was mainly
concernedwith improving the reconstructionand support systemsintroduced by his

Duncan
predecessor. Mackenziealreadymentionedin his diary entry for I March to II
March 1905 that the timber framesinsertedby TheodoreFyfe were decaying.Evans
believedthat thiswasdueto the 'violentextremesof the Cretanclimate', but this is only
a minor factor.83As we have seenearlier, this was much more due to a range of
materiallybasedandstructuralproblems.Basically,thesewerethe sameproblemsfound
at the GrandStaircaseas well asat other areasof the DomesticQuarter.However, the
GrandStaircaserequiredthe mosturgent attentionand was resolvedin 1905.The other
areasfollowed in successiveyears.
4.4.1 The Queen's Megaron
After the Queen'sMegaronwas excavatedin 1902,Fyfe constructeda small projecting

84
roof to protectthe spiral frescoin the adjacentBath Room. The timber employedfor
15
this work is very dark in the photographs, thus we may anticipatethat, unlike the
Throne Room, the timber was properly treated with paint prior to its insertion.
Nonetheless,the projecting construction with its cover of broken paving slabs was
doomed to fail. Rain penetratedthrough the joints of the broken paving slabs and
92The Times, 27 August 1908, p. 6.

"The Times, 27 August 1908, p. 6.
"See page 195 ff.
"See for example plate 178.
The Works of Christian DoIl 1905 to 1910 243

PeterKienzle
affectedthe softwood timber structureunderneath.This constructionmay have lasted

for severalyears,but certainly could not haveenduredfor a longer period.In addition,
this projecting roof coveredonly one important featurewhile other sensitiveelements
were still for
exposed: examplethe gypsumdado slabsor the plasterbenches.
Thus, it
is not surprisingthat in 1908Arthur Evanscould write:
"In theneighbouring
"Queen'sMegaroif'a still moreseriousquestionconfrontedus,for this, the most
interestingof all thePalaceHallsremainedexposedto therapidly decomposingforcesof the elements.
To put it in apositionof permanentsecurityinvolvednothinglessthanthe roofing over of the whole
area,asa preliminaryto which the burntwoodencolumnsandpillars hadto be restoredin stoneand

a largepartof theeastwall reconstructed.
Mr. Doll's energy,however,hasbeenequalto the task,and
undertakinghasnow beenbroughtto a successfulconclusion.The glazingover of

thisconsiderable
thelight courton theEastsideof the Hall enablesit to fulfill the functionof a smallPalaceMuseum,
in whichsomefinepaintedjars havealreadybeenplacedandit is to be hopedthat the remainsof the
wall paintingsfoundhere,representingdolphinsandotherfishesamid seaspray,may be ultimately

set up oncemoreagainstthe wall to which theybelonged.'Me shapeandcolouringof the columns
and capitals of the adjoiningportico have beenreproducedfrom designssuppliedby other wall
paintings, the divan of the inner sectionof the hall hasbeenpartly restored,andthe columnof the
inneralcove,thatservedasa bathroom,hasbeenmodelledafteroneof the flutedexamplesof which
impressionswerepreservedin an impluviurnof the "Little Palace.
""
It is important to note that ChristianDoll carefully recordedthe areaof the Queen's

Megaronandthe adjoiningrooms to the east.87Unfortunately,this plan is not datedbut
it maybe reasonable
to anticipatethat Doll recordedthe areaprior to his reconstruction
work in 1908. Subsequently,he produced large plans showing the reconstruction
proposal.Unlike the drawingsof the GrandStaircase,thesewere executedwith pencil
8'
on cardboard.
Christian Doll's concept was similar to the one employed for the reconstruction of the
Grand Staircase. Both the columns in the easternlight well and the pillars between the
"The Tinies, 27 August 1908, p. 6.

"See Doll's Folder 15. Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive.
"See plate 181.
244 Chapter 4
bencheswere reconstructedin stone and coated with plaster in the way previously
described.The column in the Bath Room was reconstructedwith the sametechniques,
only in a differentshape.As seenin the quotationabove,the form was derivedfrom the

impressions
whichthe original woodencolumnsleft in the clay wall at the Little Palace.
Hence,a model from outsidethe palaceprecinctswasemployedfor the reconstruction
of the column.
The walls were elevatedto the necessaryheight by employing rubble masonry with ashlar
quoins at window jambs and wall ends. The walls of the eastern light well were
reconstructedin ashlarmasonryto a height of approximately 2.10 metres, at which level

a timber board was fixed in a horizontal slot to mark the position of the former horizontal
reinforcement beam. Both eastern and southem walls of the eastern light well survived
only to the height of one and in some areastwo courses of ashlar. The height of the slot
was derived from the northern wall which survived considerably higher. Above this
height plastered rubble masonry was utilized for the reconstruction of the walls.
All door and windowjambs were reconstructedin ashlar masonry which receded slightly
from the surviving jamb blocks. Timber dowels were inserted into the ashlarjambs and
timber boards, representing the original timber frarnework of the Minoan door
construction, were nailed to thern. In the same way, a timber board was fixed to the wall
at two metres above ground. It represented the original horizontal timber reinforcing
beam, remains of which have been discovered at the north wall of the light well as also
in the Bath Room. The area above these boards was plastered as was the under side of
the ceiling construction". The timber boards, besides the one in the light well, were
decoratedwith spiral patternsrecreatinga designfound in the Bath Room adjacent to the
Queen's Megaron and with rosettes.' However, the benches of the partition walls
between the inner room of the Queen's Megaron and the light wells had not yet been
reconstructed. "
"See plate 189.

"See plate 189.
"See plate 187.

Petff Kienzle
0
ta
0
61
cts
10
C
0
Q
0
r_
Cd
10
%D
P.
246 Chapter4
d
0
0
,0
CY
v3
In

PeterKienzle
The Queen's Megaron, including the Bath Room and the porch, was roofed over using
Christian Doll's usual method of iron-girders and brick vaultS.92At first floor level the
spandrels between these vaults were filled with concrete, and square slabs of 'Maltese
Stone' were placed in hot asphalt on top of it. " The broken paving slabs employed by
Theodore Fyfe to cover the projecting roof above the northern part of the Bath Room
were re-laid by Christian Doll in this "

particular area. The southern wall was elevated
above floor level like a balustrade and topped with coping stones. To prevent the
repetition of earlier mistakes, the floor above the Queen's Megaron was designed with
a decline towards two gaps in the balustrade at the southern end which led to stone
spouts.From here the rain water was drained into lead downpipes, which disgorged the
water into the old Minoan 9-Thus,
sewagecanal. a proper system was installed to prevent
any further water damage to the rooms, although one could criticise the re-use of the
Minoan sewage canals.
The easternlight well was covered with a pitched roof featuring three skylights. " Thus,
the light well was lit from above in a way which recreated the original I ight's fall. Th e
northern wall of the light well was elevatedand the former window recreated at the level
of the intermediate landing of the Private Staircase.The covered light well was used as
a small on-site museum in which two interesting finds from the Domestic Quarter were
exhibited: the drum shapedpithos, found in the Corridor of the Painted Pithos, and the
clay bath tub which was found in the Bath Room. Thus, both features were exhibited
close to the place where they were found and were also protected from the weather.
However, it seemsthat the skylights have not lasted well and at a later point they were
removed and a window was inserted in the eastern wall of the light "
well. The shape of
"See figure 57.

"Letter Mackenzie to Evans 14 September 1920. Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive.
"See plate 160.
"Plate 190. See also Doll's comment on Evans' lecture at the R.I. B. A. Evans, 1928, p. 101.
"See plate 5 and plate 181.
117
See plate 187.
248 Chapter 4
the fomrr window andthe outline of the pitchedroof are still detectableat the walls."'
Unfortunately,no informationhassurvivedthat could datethis alteration.
4.4.2 The Room of the Plaster Couch
The Room with the PlasterCouch is located immediately south of the Court of Distaffs.
The plaster couch from which the room gained its name, was identified by Evans as a
vulnerable feature as early as 1902. In order to protect the plaster couch Fyfe
reconstructeda projecting ceiling in timber in the south western comer but left all other
areas of the room 99

unattended. The northern wall of the room, towards the Court of
Distaffs, originally featured a door and window opening to the Court of Distaffs. After
its excavation in 1902 Theodore Fyfe reinforced this fragile wall with a rubble masonry
backing. By doing this, he blocked accessto the Court of Distaffs from this room, while
opening up the window from the Corridor of the Demon Seal to the court. 100
In June 1908Doll removedthe rubble masonrybackingand exposedthe former wall
construction. He took down the ashlar coursesabove the height of the lintels and
thoroughlyrecordedtheremainsfound.` As in the Queen'sMegaron,he reinstalledthe
jambs of the door and window in ashlarmasonry,which recededslightly from the
originalbuildinglineso that timberboardscouldbe fitted to imitate the original structural

beams.The lintelsweremadein the usualmethodby using iron girdersclad with timber
boards." The brick pillars at the easternsideof the room, which had beeninstalledby
Theodore Fyfe, were left in position but were strippedof their plaster and reducedin
height.Doll insertednewlintelsat a lower height which respondedto the lintel height of
"See plate 197.

"See plate 167.
"See plates167and 170.SeealsoPMl p. 339.
'O'SeeDoll's Folder21.
"See plate 171,right margin.
'ne Works of ChristianDoll 1905to 1910 249

PeterKienzle
3 ý'5
w
ý, ý '... A
qtr. -
I
-41 rL.
Figure 58 MeasuredDrawin- of the South Window of the Court of Distaffs. Dated Christian Doll, June
0
1908. Doll's Folder, Evans' archive, Ashmolean Museum.
the door andwindow in the 101

north wall. Subsequently,the ceiling was reconstructedin
the usualway employingiron girdersandbrick vaults.Again, the spandrelswere filled
with concrete but, unfortunately, no photograph survived which shows the paving
materialon top of thisconstruction.However,it is quite likely that he reusedthe broken
pavingslabsof Fyfe'sprojectingceilingandpavedthe remainingareawith Maltesestone
as he did at the Bath Room. '04Metal clamps were employed to tie the already
dangerouslyaffectedgypsumdadoslabsto the walls. In the sameway asalreadyapplied
in theThroneRoom,the reconstructed
walls wereplasteredwith a lime renderwhile the
original walls were left "
bare.
103
See Section C-C, Drawing 9 andcompareplate 96. There is no evidencethat the lower lintel
originatesfrom 1908but the usedmaterial- iron girdersandthe necessary constructivesequenceindicate
that the work wasexecutedby Doll in 1908.
"Both theBathRoomandtheRoomof the PlasterCouchwerestrippedof their pavingmaterialsby
Piet de Jong.He laid new concretefloors in theseareas.SeeFirst Floor Plan,Drawing 7.
"'See SectionA-A, Drawing 8 andSectionC-C, Drawing 9.
250 Chapter4
4.4.3 The East-West Corridor
After the Hall of the Colonnadesand the East-WestCorridor were excavatedin 1901,
Fyfe insertedtimber framesto support the remainsof the upper floors. The northern
portico of the Hall of Colonnades,which forms the westerncontinuationof the East-

West Corridor, collapsedon II June 1901 and was subsequentlyreplacedbut Fyfe's
in
construction the corridor itself surviveduntil "
1908. However, both thesetimber
support structures, the replacedone and the original one, faced identical long term
problems.The humidity trappedin the earthbetweenthe paving and the ceiling boards
hastenedthe deteriorationof the timber.
At the East-WestCorridor the load of the
upperfloor restedon timber postsand was

further supportedby two massivewalls to
the north and south.'O' Situated between
these two walls, the upper floor did not
have to withstandthe horizontal forces in 9 ý
iVnn71
the same way it had to in the northern 71ý
, 1:
1A. -k -- 'k -* ,o
portico of the Hall of Colonnadesand at

the Grand Staircase."' As a result, these Fiaure59 Schematic section of the northern
ZP
areas collapsed earlier and were porticoof the Hall of Colonnades(a)
andthe East-WestCorridor (b).
reconstructed with iron girders in 1905.
The timber support framesof the corridor
were left in position."'
'O'Seepage185and 188f.
"See plate 128.
10'Seefigure 59 andcomparepage223 ff.
"See plate 117left margin.

PeterKienzle
The timber structures in the East-West Corridor were facing the same long term
problems as the Grand Staircaseand by 1908 the deteriorationhasproceededto an
extent that they neededto be in "O

replaced a more permanentmanner. As discussed
previously,the structuralsystemintroducedby TheodoreFyfe in the East-WestCorridor
divergedfrom the originalMinoansystem.In theoriginal structure,the load of the upper
floor was carried to the ground through the walls while in the new systemthe timber
supportwork fulfilled this task."' This was now proposedto be altered.
ChristianDoll once againbeganhis work with a proper recordingof the area.For the
reconstructionwork he employedthe samesystemalreadyusedat other parts of the

Domestic Quarter. The walls were elevatedand strengthened,iron girders and brick
vaults being used for the ' 12

ceiling construction. Two vertical slots, left by the rotten
Minoan timber reinforcementbeams,were strengthenedwith brick and limestone
"' In contrastto the Queen'sMegaron,the brokenpaving slabsemployedby
buttresses.
TheodoreFyfe were re-laid in cementon top of this construction"'.
II -
-I!
Figure60 Sectionof the East-WestCorridor looking south.
""The Times,27 August 1908,p. 6.

...Compareplate92.
"'See SectionB-B, Drawing 8.
'"See Section B-B. Drawing 8 and Ground Plan, Drawing 6.
"'See First Floor Plan, Drawing 7.
C,
252 Chapter 4
The door betweenthe Lower East-WestCorridor and the HalI of the Double Axes was
alreadyopenedby TheodoreFyfe in 1902but he did not addressthe window next to it.
As part of the reconstruction of the upper floor of the corridor, the window was also
opened again by Christian Doll in 1908.1' Evans described this work:
"The windows, especially,presentedgreat difficulties, since owing to the carbonisationof their

woodenpostsand lintels,the greatlimestoneblocks with which the beamswereoverlaidhad sunk
deepinto their openingsand hadto be takenout stoneby stoneandreplacedat their original level.
Many tons of masonryhadthusto be extractedandre-set,notablyin the caseof the lower window
the
of right wall of the Hall of the DoubleAxes, which hadbeenalmostentirelychokedwith sunken
blocks."' 16
Doll started his work with a detailed recording of the individual ashlar blocks which
formed the wall of the western light well of the Hall of the Double Axes. Both sketch
detailed drawings in the Ashmolean Museum. '" The
recording and the completed survive
masonry above the window was carefully removed, measured and stored away. An
axonometric drawing it
of can be seen in figure 6 1."' Another detailed plan shows the
depth of the cavity left by the rotten horizontal timbers below the window sill. It is clearly
visible how the actual depth of the cavity variesconsiderably along the 19
window., It was
impossible to insert a new straight iron girder from the side and, thus, the overlaying
masonry was taken down to this level. Subsequently, an iron girder was introduced and
the masonry then reinstated. These careful recordings were made while the wall was
dismantled and later facilitated the reconstruction process.
the window in the usualway - with iron girdersas lintels and timber
Doll reconstructed
boards casing. At the north side of this wall, facing the East-West Corridor, one can
clearly distinguish between the masonry above the door and the masonry above the
"'The Times, Thursday, 27 August 1908. p. 6.

"'Evans, 1927, P. 262.
"'See: Doll's Folder No. IIa, 12 and 13, Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive.
'"Figure 61. Doll's Folder No. 14, Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive.
"'See figure 18.

PeterKienzle
LLlllr-btUilr. UIUL, &b UUUVC LIM WIILUUW LU Uir, JVLdll UL L. ýUUUK; J-VAVý. ý-IILIýUail LXUII 1.7VU-
rigurc uI
window. The first one was basically left in position by Theodore Fyfe in his
reconstruction of the door in 1902. He propped up the wall while he inserted a timber
beamas a new lintel. 120However, the wall above the window was removed completely
and rebuilt after the insertion of new jambs and lintel by Christian Doll in 1908.12'This,
of is
course, not exclusivelydue to the fact that both architectshad a different approach
to the site. The width of the door was much lessthan the width of the window and,
consequently,the upper masonrycollapsedinto the window openingto a much larger
extentthanit did into the door opening.However,the situationwas very similar to that
of the window in the southwall of the GrandStaircaselight well. Both sidesof the wall
and
wereexcavated a heavyload of sunken
masonrywasdiscovered
resting on the debris
whichfilled the window.Obviously,thiscouldnot be a permanentsolution andChristian

Doll hadto tackletheproblemwhichhadbeenleft to him by his predecessor.
As pointed
"'See plates139and 140andseeSectionB-B, Drawing 8.

"'See figure 61. Seealsoplate 108which indicatesthe sameprocedurefor the window in the light
well of the GrandStaircase.
254 Chapter4
out earlier,anotherremarkabledifferencebetweenthe two architectswas that Christian

Doll re-usedthe old structuralsystemand imposedthe load of the upper floor on the
original walls, while Fyfe frequently had introduced an independentload-bearing
systen-L'22
4.5 The Reconstructions of 1910
It seemsthat thecampaignof 1909wasdedicatedexclusivelyto research;no excavation

took place.However,in 1910 ChristianDoll returnedto Knossos
work or conservation
to executemore reconstructionwork in the DomesticQuarter and the roofing of the
sunkenbasinof theLittle Palace,locateda few hundredmetreseastof the Palace'. The
work in theDomesticQuarterfocussedon two places:the re-roofing of the corridors at
the DomesticQuarterandthe reconstructionof the fourth flight of the Grand Staircase.
Five yearsafter ChristianDoll startedhis work at Knossosat the Grand Staircase,he
returnedto this areain 1910to add anotherflight of steps.Thesereconstructionswere
the last major undertakingbeforeWorld War I interruptedthe work on site.
4.5.1. The Fourth Flight of the Grand Staircase
In July 1908, Christian Doll spent time recording the surviving fragments of original
plaster at the Grand Staircase and the East-West Corridor. "' He also re-measured the
remaining original steps of the Grand Staircase and subsequently drew a new plan of it;
however, no work was undertaken at the area in 1908.125Prior to the discovery of the
Grand Staircase,stepsbelonging to the fourth flight of the Grand Staircase, were found
in the initial excavation of the Central Court. Their importance was not recognized and
"See plate 92. Fyfe did actually impose some of the load onto the historic walls (lintel of the door)
but the main load was carried by an independent system.
"'The Times,16 September1910,p. 4.
"'See Doll's folder No 2,3,8 and 9. AshmoleanMuseum,EvansArchive.
12'Doll'sFolderNo 1.AshmoleanMuseum,EvansArchivc.

PeterKienzle
the steps were removed and laid along the edge of a trial trench where they were then
covered with timber boards for protection. After this, they were forgotten and
rediscoveredonly in 1910.The landing block at the secondfloor landing, featuring marks
of the fourth and fifth flight, had been replaced in its original position on top of the
reconstructedtirnber and rubble pillar by Furthermore,

1902.126 the landing block of the
second intermediate landing had been discovered earlier in the excavation process and
was still on site, but it was not in its original position, as was the South-Eastem comer
block of the third landing. Hence, the material for five steps of the fourth flight and all
the landing blocks were on site. Consequently, it was decided to replace the fourth flight
and all blocks to what was supposed to be their original position. "'
Since much of the substructureof this constructionhad vanished,it was necessaryto
reconstruct columns and beamsto place the three blocks in their former position.
ChristianDoll employeda different methodfor this work of reconstruction.Two new
columnswereerectedin the socketof the lowest of the steppedbalustradesof the third

flight as well as at the secondintermediatelandingbetweenthe third andfourth flight.
These columns were constructedin limestoneand, in contrastto the columnsin the
ground floor, were not 128

plastered. The landingblock at the secondmain landingwas
removed, and the timber and rubble pillar, previouslyexecutedby Theodore Fyfe in
1902, was replacedwith an ashlarpillar. Ashlar masonrywas also employedto build
pillarsat the southendof the intermediatelanding and at the north easterncornerof the
first mainlanding.Both thesepillars were necessaryto supportthe new beamswhich in
turn carriedthe original blocks.12'The walls betweenthe flights andwestof the fourth
flight werereconstructedin rubblemasonrywith ashlarwall ends.
Similar to the ground floor reconstruction,Doll employedrolled steeljoists andbrick

vaults for the load-bearing construction of the fourth flight. This construction was cut
"'See plate97.
'"The Times,Friday, 16 September1910,p. 4.
12'Seeplate 119.
""See plate 119.
256 Chapter4
backalongsidethe landingblock of the secondintermediatelanding to show the marks
of the historic stepsat its side. Iron-I-beamswere also employedas the structural
membersof the reconstructedbeams,but contrary to the reconstructionsof the ground
floor, thesebeamswere not casedwith timber boards.The newly reconstructedbeams
were exposedto the weatherconstantlyon all four sides,while the earlier beamswere
protectedto a certainextentby the overlayingreconstructions.As can be seenin plate
116,the timbercasingfaileda shorttimeafter their installation.Consequently,the newly
reconstructedbeamswere casedwith concreteratherthan timber and a trip mould was

formed at their lower side to control the rain water.130
Plates119and 120showthe finishedstateof reconstructionafter the work in 1910.The
originalwall separatingthe two flights, which wasrectified in 1902,is still visible at the
due to their much smoothersurface,
lower endof thethird flight. Clearlydistinguishable,
parts.Certainly no structuralreasonsnecessitatedthe work

arethe newlyreconstructed
executedby ChristianDoll at the Grand Staircasein 1910.The reconstructedfourth
flight now protectedthe secondflight of the staircase,but in return it exposedthe fabric
of the five newly discoveredstepsto the elements.The reconstructionof 1905kept all

elementsfirn-dYin position exceptfor, perhaps,the third storeylanding block on top of
the timberandrubble pillar. Replacingthe excavatedelementsin what is believedto be
their former position is a work of presentationalor didactic function. However,on the
other hand,it must be askedwhat might havehappenedto theseelementsif they were
not replaced?
This work showsthe first useof concretein structuralmembersof the reconstructions
at the excavationsite of Knossos.Thesereconstructionswere not reinforcedconcrete

in a narrow sense.In a reinforced concretestructure tension is carried by the steel
reinforcement,whilepressureis carriedby the concrete.In the reconstructionsexecuted

by Christian Doll, the iron girders are the only structural elements.They carry both
tension and pressure.The concreteftilfills two other functions. It preventsthe iron
"'See plate 119.

PcterKienzle
girders from rusting and it re-creates the shape of the original beams. Iron and concrete
form no structural compound as in a reinforced concrete member. Thus, this is the
earliest instanceof employing cement-based

concrete in a structural function even though
it is not the reinforced concrete of the later work by Piet de Jong.
4.5.2 The Corridors in the Domestic Quarter and the Service Stairs
Two areasin the DomesticQuarter,the Corridor of the Demon Sealandthe areawith

the toilet eastof theRoomwith the PlasterCouch, were roofed over by TheodoreFyfe
in 1903.Partsof the Corridorof thePaintedPithoswere alreadycoveredin 1902.It was
describedearlier how the new rectangularstoneslabscoveringpartsof thesecorridors
were not laid 13'
properly; but also the broken stone slabs,laid in mortar, were not
waterproof. Consequentlywater could penetrateand affect the timber support work
beneath.But therewereotherreasons,stemn-ýng
from Minoanbuildingconstruction,that
were for
responsible the decay.As early as 1905DuncanMackenziewrote in his Diary:
"Theconditionin whichwefoundthecorridorgoingE.W. from the Queen'sMegaronto the S. of this

room[thetreasury]showedhowmuchthepowersof disintegrationis assistedby the presenceof these
wood intervalsin the walls. Herethe floor of the uppercorridor hadbeenreplacedat a level lower
thanits original one.This original level, however,hadthe intervalsfor the original floor beamsand
of partof thewall abovetherebroughtdownthe greaterpartof the wood construction
thesubsidence
setup by us asthe newfloor of the corridor.The decayedconditionof our woodafteran intervalof
five yearsshowedhow deadlyis the effectof dampon this whenthe wood is not shelteredfrom this
damp."132
Doll's first duty in 1905 was to tackle the even more serious problems at the Grand
Staircase.In 1908 he dealt with the sensitivefeaturesof the Queen's Megaron, the Room
of the PlasterCouch and the East-West Corridor. But meanwhile the decay of the timber
support work in the remaining areas proceeded even further and it became urgent to
"'See page202.
"'DM 19095,Wednesday, I Marchto Saturday,II March 1905.Apparently.the woodenframeshad
beenin positionfor only 3 or 4 years.
258 Chapter4
Conservation
andReconstruction
at thePalaceof Minosat Knossos
replace the structures. Thus, Evans wrote in The Times:
'?&. Christ= Doll washappilyable againto comeout to superintendsomeseriousstructuralworks

that had becomenecessaryin the Domestic Quarter of the Palace.7be initial object was the
resupportingof upperfloors in a permanentmanner,the woodworkof the original supportsbeing
alreadyin a dangerouslydecayedstate.""'
Three areaswere re-coveredby Christian Doll in 1910: the Corridor of the Painted Pithoi
in the southernpart of the Domestic Quarter, which connects the Queen's Megaron with
the Room of the Plaster Couch; the Corridor of the Demon Seal in the north, which
connectsthe Room with the Plaster Couch with the Hall of Colonnades and, finally, the
toilet areabetweenthese two corridors to the east of the Room with the Plaster Couch.
After 1910, only the Treasury remained uncovered in the Domestic Quarter.
In 1908ChristianDoll hadalreadyrecordedtheDomesticQuarterwhen he re-roofedthe

Room with the PlasterCouch and the Queen'sMegaron.He produceda plan for the
ground floor and a plan for the upper floor, the first of which is dated 1910.114
The on
siterecordson which these planswere based survived in the Ashmolean Museum. "' The
original stone jambs and corner blocks of the upper storey were kept in position by
TheodoreFyfe'stimbersupportframesandarehighlightedin his plansby crosshatching.
Dashedlines indicatereconstructionswhile excavatedremainsweredrawn in full lines.
He also recordedthe ashlarmasonryof the eastfacadeof the Court of Distaffs. The
window in this wall, openingfrom the Corridor of the DemonSeals,was reconstructed

by TheodoreFyfe in 1902."' However,in 1910 ChristianDoll removedthe overlaying
masonryandFyfe'stimberframe,andrecordedthe wall including the dowel holesof the

"'
window sill. He reconstructedthe window in the samemannerhe employedin the
131
adjoining southernwall two yearsearlier.
"'The Times, 16 September 1910, p. 4.

`See figure 62.
...Doll's FolderNo 15 andNo 17.AshmoleanMuseum,EvansArchive.
"'See Evans,1902a,p. 64.
"'Doll's FolderNo 22. AshmoleanMuseum,EvansArchive.
...Seeplate 171.

Peter Kienzle
Figure 62 First floor plan of the Domestic Quarter. Christian Doll.
Christian Doll completely removed Fyfe's newly quarried rectangular

C, paving slabs of the
upper corridors as well as the timber structure underneath. The door iambs and corner
blocks which had beenreplacedon massivewalls in 1902 could be kept in position while
260 Chapter 4
other doorjambs, which restedon the timber structure were removed. 131)
He strengthened
and elevated the walls and the corridors were roofed over with iron 1-beamsand brick
vaults in a mannersimilar to that employed in the other areas.Thus, Dol I again recreated
the former structural system by imposing the load, which formerly was carried by
structurally independent timber frames, on the historic walls. Noel Heaton, who visited
Knossosin 1910 to researchfrescoes,took the photograph printed in plate 160. It shows
the newly insertedI-beamsfor the Service Stairs and the last remains of the paving being
removed from the timber sub-structure in the Corridor of the Dernon Seals. The
deteriorated state of the timber boards is clearly visible in the plate.
The brick vaults of the new structurewere coveredwith concreteto provide an even
surface,whichwasthencoveredwith squareMaltesestoneslabslike the floor abovethe

Queen's Megaron in 1908.Only the corridor to the eastof the Roorn with the Stone
Bench was repavedwith the reusedrectangularlimestoneslabsquarriedby Theodore
Fyfe. The area immediatelysouth of the Upper Hall of Colonnadeswas paved with
fragmentedstoneslabsin 1903.140
In the new reconstruction this areawas also paved
with squareMaltesestoneslabsand the surplusoriginal materialwas employedto pave
the door sills.All door sillswerepavedwith original floor slabs,despitethe fact that this
material could not be assignedto specificdoors not evento door sills in general.For
example,in the right marginof plate 167is shownthe door betweenthe corridor eastof
the Roomwith the StoneBenchandthe UpperCorridor of the Demon Seal.In this plate
the door silI is paved with rectangularstone slabsquarried by Fyfe in 1903. In the
author's recordingof 1997the samesituationfeaturesfragmentedstone slabs.141The
samesituationappliesfor the southernend of the samecorridor."'
"'Compare plate 160, top.

"'See plate 158.
""See figure 63.
""Compare plate 167 and figure 63.

PeterKienzle
Figure 63 First floor groundplan of westernsectionof DomesticQuarter.
It has beendiscussedin the previouschapterthat the first floor pavingmaterialwhich

at
wasexcavated the DomesticQuarterdid to the
not suffice pave corridors. It is likely
that Fyfecollectedpavingslabsfrorn variousareasto pavesomepartsof the corridor in
1902 but quarried new stonewhen he coveredthe corridors in 1903.Obviously,the
broken original paving slabshad not beenreplacedto their former position but were
liberallyused.It seemsthat Doll felt no obligationto placethe slabsat a specific position
but preferredto createa systemin whichthe squareMalteseslabscover the floors of the
corridorsandroomswhile the remainsof original slabswereusedfor door sills.
Another interesting detail can be found where the Upper Corridor of the Demon Seal
turns north to lead to the Hall of Colonnades. The situation is depicted in the top right
corner of plate 159. This shows the easternjamb block with the projecting end at its
262 Chapter4
northern side, but no block is visible at the westernjamb of the door. The author's
recordsmadein 1997showtwojamb blockswith theprojectingend at the southernside,
"' Theeasternblock is madeof concrete
the westernblock of whichis madein limestone.
but is distinctivelydifferentcomparedto the onesexecutedlater by Piet de Jong." Thus,
the block positionedto the easternjamb by TheodoreFyfe in 1903was movedto the
positionof thewesternjambin 1910,anda newwesternjamb block was cast in concrete.
This is also documentedin Doll's reconstructionplan for the this area.145
Doll also replacedthe ServiceStairs at the Corridor of the DaemonSeals.Thesehad

been reconstructedin timber by Theodore Fyfe in 1903. In May 1910 prior to the
restorationwork Doll recordedin two separateplansthe situationhe found in the area

of the ServiceStairs.146
Subsequently,he removedthe stairs and replacedthem with
limestone stepsresting on a substructureof iron girders.147The wooden stairs were
exposedto theweatherfor only sevenyearsand,contraryto the corridors, they were not

overlainby earthor pavingmaterialwhich trappedhumidity. Thus, the stairsshouldnot
havedeterioratedasmuchasthetiinberframes.However,the timber boardsusedfor the
constructionof the stairswere thin andthe stairswould not havelastedfor a long time
in anoutdoorsituationanyway.14'All the surroundingareaswere addressedby Christian
Doll, andrelatedto the bad experiencewith timber in the first instance,Doll and Evans
might havedecidedto replacethe stairsat that momentwhile they worked in this area
rather than returningin a few yearstime. However, it is significantto Doll's approach
that the stairs were replaced in longer lasting limestone,instead of timber, which
accordingto Evanswas the original material."'
""See First Floor Plan, Drawing 7.

'"See plate 176.
"'See Doll's Folder 17.
'"See Doll's Folder, Nr. 23 and Nr. 24.
"See plate 160.
149
See plate 158.
149F,
vans, 1902a. P. 75.
Ile Works of ChristianDoll 1905to 1910 263

PeterKienzle
4.6 After Knossos
150
In 1910 ChristianDoll, at the sametime as his Brother Mordaunt Henry CasparsDoll,
became a partner in his father's office which was then renamed C Fitzroy Doll & Sons. 151
However, even before this date he must have worked with his father, since most of the
plans executed for Arthur Evans at Knossos were labelled CCT. Doll, 5 Southampton
Place, Bloomsbury, London, the address of his father's office. His father, Charles Fitzroy
Doll was also mentioned in connection with ordering goods for the Villa Ariadne. Thus
we might assume that, at least to a certain extent, Charles Fitzroy Doll influenced the
architectural ideas of his son at Knossos. Christian Doll became fellow of the Royal
Institute of British Architects and succeeded his father as surveyor to the London
Estates of the Duke of Bedford but, it seems that he did not design many buildings of
outstanding architectural merit worth mentioning in relevant literature. However, he
carried out some restoration work at Winchester College following war damage in World
War 11.112In 1913 Doll became member of the Society for the Promotion of Hellenic
Studies. 153
Christian's father died in 1929 and one year later he started his political career. He
became a member of Holborn Borough Council in 1930 and was elected to the
Aldermanic Bench in 1949.This culminatedin his becomingMayor of Holborn in 1950 -
51 and deputy Mayor in 1951 - 1953.154Christian CT Doll died 5 April 1955 and was
buried 13 April at Kensall Green Cemetery.155
It seemsthat Doll's interest in architecture
was maintainedpredominantly through his father and after his father's death he became
more interested in politics than in building work.
"'Anon, 1923,P. 78.

"'Gray, 1985,p. 166.
152TheBuilder, 6 May 1955,p. 761.
...SeeJournal of Hellenic Studies,Vol. XXXHI, 1913.
""Holborn Council Minutes,27 April 1955.
"'The Holborn and Finsbury Guardian, 15 the April 1955.
264 Chapter 4
4.7 Conclusions
Christian Doll's predecessor,Theodore Fyfe, executed reconstruction and conservation
work at Knossosbetween 1900 and 1904. His work was determined by the principle of
minimal intervention and the search for building materials as similar as possible to the
original ones. However, his work failed in many aspects. For example, the untreated
softwood which was in contact with damp earth decayed,and his misinterpretation of the
excavatedstructuresled to the use of wrong support frames for the Grand Staircase. The
principle of minimal intervention turned out to have been intervention below the
necessaryminimum.
ChristianDoll wasmuchmorerigorousin his approach;andhe wasdriven predominantly

by technicalandengineering
issues.It seemsthat he was neverable to escapehis father's
architectural influencein his professionallife, but his technicalknowledge was good
enoughto allow him to constructfirm andpermanentsupportfor the collapsingruins.
The structural systemhe employedwas basedon the commontechniquesused in the
innercity of Londonat theturn of thecentury,wherehe hadworked with his father prior
to his arrival in Knossos.He replacedFyfe's reconstructionswherethey failed, and he
tackledthe areashis predecessorhad not attendedto, becausehe was concernedabout
the progressingdeteriorationon site.He expressedhis views in both the discussionafter
a papergiven by Arthur Evansin 1926and in anothergiven in 1928.'16He was quoted
in the report on the discussionafter the 1926paper:
"Mr. DOLL emphasized thenecessityto coveroverpartsof the siteasso muchgypsumhad beenused

in the buildings, nearlyall the pavementsbeing of that material.It expandeýon exposureto the
of pieces.I'lie dadoeshadbuckledand weretied up to keep

summersunandbrokeup intothousands
themon the walls.""'
"'Evans, 1927,p. 267 and Evans1928,p. 101.

117Evans,
1927,p. 267.

PeterKienzle
However, the unity betweenstructural system,material and appearance,achieved by Fyfe

in his work, was discontinuedby Doll. The structural systemwas executed in iron girders
which then were cased with timber boards to appear as beams. In his later work at the
Grand staircasehe even employed concrete to represent the timber beams. Both cement
and iron girders were imported from Britain at high expense for Arthur Evans.
Obviously, thesematerialswere deliberately chosen despite this obstacle because,on the
one hand, the materialschosenby Theodore Fyfe had been rejected as inappropriate, and
on the other hand, Doll was confident in the durability of the materials, with which he
was familiar.
ChristianDoll's approachto theconservation

problemson site weretechnical.Excavated
materialhadto be protectedandmasonry,someof which of considerableweight, had to
be supported.To achievetheseobjectiveshe employedstandardengineeringmethods
whichwerecoveredwith timberboards.Constructionandappearancewere two different

issuesto him.Furthermore,Doll addressedthe problemson site with a vigorousenergy,
frequently mentionedby Evans,which standsin contrastto Fyfe's careful, and even
sometimeshesitating,approach.
266 Chapter4
Chapter 5
nryl.
.1ne Works by et de Jong 1922 to 1930
Beaut will resultfl-om the. form and corerespondence ol the whole, with
,v
respect to the several parts, ofthe parts with regard to each other, and ()f*
these again to the whole,- that the structure ma), appear an entire an
complete body, wherein each member agrees with the other, and 4111
necessarv to compose what vou intend to. lonn.
(Palladio, 1570, book I Chaptcr 1)
269 Chapter 5
Chapter 5
The Works by Piet de Jong 1922 to 1930
5.0 Introduction
Piet de Jongwas the third andfinal architectemployedby Arthur Evansat Knossosfor
recordingwork as well as for conservationand He

reconstructions. was alreadya well
establishedconservationarchitect and draughtsmanat archaeologicalsites in Greece
whenEvansemployedhim. Unlike TheodoreFyfe andChristianDoll, he did not return
to Britain after the completionof his work at the site but remainedin Greeceand later
became Curator at Knossos.After Evans's death he plannedand supervisedmore
conservationandreconstructionwork in Knossosfor the Ephor Nikolaos Platon. Out of

the three architectsemployedby Arthur Evansat Knossos,he was the only one who
continuedworking in the field of archaeologyin Crete.
The site of Knossos,as it presentsitself today, is predominantlythe result of Piet de

on site,but also remodelled
Jong'swork. He not only executedlargenewreconstructions
someof the earlierwork carriedout by Doll andFyfe. The useof concreteas a material
for the reconstructionsis commonlylinked with his name;but, aswe havealreadyseen
in the last chapter, it was Christian Doll who introduced this material to Knossos.
Nonetheless,it was Piet de Jong who designedalmost all of the reinforced concrete
reconstructions.Sincemuch of the criticism of Knossosis focusedon concrete,this

certainly becomesan interestingpoint to study.
During theperiodof Pietde Jong's work at Knossosthe site was donatedto the British
School at Athens.In 1922Arthur Evans,then 71 yearsold, initiated the idea and two
The Works of Piet de Jong 1922to 1930 269

PeterKicnzle
years later, on II January 1924, the Deed of Gift was signed in Oxford. He also added
an endowment to pay for the salary of a curator! From this point on, Evans was
nominally no longer the owner of Knossos; but he still continued working in his
accustomed way. In the same year Piet de Jong was employed as the official School
architect of the British School at Athens. Consequently, Piet de Jong's work in Knossos
falls in two sections:first, the work he executedfor Evans in 1922 and 1923, when Evans
was owner of the site as well as de Jong's employer; and then after 1924, when de Jong
worked for him while the British School was owner of the site.
5.1 Before Knossos
Despitethe fact thathe is themostrecentof the threearchitects,little information about

him survives.Much of the informationon his life comesfrom Racheland Sinclair Hood,
who knew de Jong '
personally.Pietwasbom,on 8 August 1887in Leeds;his motherwas
from Yorkshireandhisfatherwasof Dutchorigin.Pietgrewup in Yorkshireand studied
architecture at the LeedsSchoolof Art. In 1911Piet de Jongdesigneda guild hall to
competefor the SoaneMedallion:in January1912,the prize awardingcommitteefound
itself unable to award the Medallion to either William Friskin or Piet de Jong and,
consequently, awardeda Honourable Mention and half the prize moneyto eachof them.3
In 7heBuilder,de Jong's proposal,submittedunderthe motto "Antm", was described:
"The schemeby Mr. Piet de Joug,[sic] is morecompact,betterarrangcdfor the circulationof the

publicat receptions,more"practical," workedout better,perhapsandif thereis anythingto choose
betweenthemon this scoreit may possiblyshowmoretechnicalaccomplishment;
but in its general
lay-out,massingandgrouping,andscaleof featureit makesno specialeffort to takeadvantageof the
characterof its siteor to expressthe influenceof its environment.It is not altogethera solutionof the
exactprobleminvolved.""
'Waterhouse,1986,p. 83.
2SeeSinclairHood's obituaryof Pietde Jongin TheTimes,27 April 1967,p. 12.
'The Builder, 26 January1912,p. 85.
"The Builder, 26 January1912,p. 86. The spellingof Piet de Jong'sNamewas correctedin The
C,
Builder, 2 February1912,p. 123.Seealso:Journalof R.I.B.A. 27 January1912,p. 228 and237.
270 Chapter5
ji
TI _YL
Side Elevation.
Figure 64 Side elevation.Design for a Guild "all. R.I.B.A. SoancMedallion.

Designby Piet de Jong.
Lý
The pricemoneyallowedPietde Jongto join his friendHerbertFoggitt travelling to Italy

to study historic buildings.He was admittedas an architecturalstudent to the British
Schoolat Romefor the season1911/1912.De Jong andFoggitt travelled widely in Italy

studying architecturein Rome, Florence,Perugia,and Siena.
-' He madearchitectural
drawings, some of which have been published in the Architectural Association
Sketchbooks of 1912 and 1913.Together with Foggitt lie recordedthe Bramante's
Tempietto di San Pietro in Montorio in '
Rome. Interestingly, at this time the AA
Sketchbookwas co-editedby TheodoreFyfe.
Pietde Jongreturnedto Britain andit seemsthat he workedfor the practiceof his friend,
Chorley, Gribbon and Foggitt.' The Church of Christ Scientist was planned by the
C)
architectural practice of Schofield and Barry but the execution was left to Chorley,
GribbonandFoggitt.De Jong produceda watercolourof the proposedchurch in 1913.
rND
He servedasa soldierin World War L probably for the entire period between1914and
1919.' After the war hejoined the EastMacedonianReconstructionServicewhich was
'Annual Report,British Schoolat Rome, 1911/1912.

1912,plan65 and66. For informationon Bramante'sTempiettosee:Murray, 1989,
'AA Sketchbook
p. 67.
'On Chorley,Gribbon and Foggitt see:Felstaed,1993,p. 170.711isinformationwas providedby
RachelHood.
'A photographshowingPietde Jongin uniform is dated 1916.In ownershipof RachelHood.
The Works of Pict de Jong 1922to 1930 271

Peter Kienzle
by
run the British ArchitectAustinHarrison.
He stayedin Greecewherehe met Effie, his
futurewife. Bom in Scotlandshelivedin GreecewhereshetaughtEnglish.They married

in Saloniki in 1921and settledin Greece.' Piet de Jonghad worked for Alan Wace,in
Mycenae after World War I and produced plans of the acropolis. Evans had been
impressed by these plans and invited de Jong to work for him at Knossos.10
5.2 The Reconstruction Work in 1922 and 1923.
In 1910ChristianDoll.designedhis last major reconstructionwork at Knossosand after

this date another excavation campaigntook place in 1913; but it seemsthat no
conservationor restoration
work wasexecutedat this time. After the outbreakof World
War 1, accessto Cretebecamedifficult andneitherArthur Evansnor DuncanMackenzie
visitedthe site againuntil 1920.In September

1920,EvanssentMackenzieto Knossos
to seeif it was safeto resumework. He reportedin a letter to Evans:
'It was dark when I got to Knossosbut I could realize that I had entered a grove of tall trees enclosing
Villa Ariadne on every side.Both the houseand the garden I found in quite good condition and indeed
quite different from the various tales (mostly Cretan lies) that had been arrivingCP
in England from time
to time.
I cannotsaythe samething aboutthe conditionof the Palacewhich I founda perfectwildernessof
weedsa metrehigh.'Ibis wastrueof the wholepalacewith the exceptionof the coveredpart of the
DomesticQuarter,andtheQueen'sMegaron,owing to its roof-pavementof Malteseslabs,wasquite
intact. The blamefor this conditionof thingsrestswith Hajidakiswho is responsiblefor Knossos
whereasthe othersitesin chargeof Xanthoudidisarein quite goodorder."' I
'Information in personal communication by Rachel Hood.

"Report in BSA, XXVI, p. 318 and Cottrell, 1953, p. 192.
"Letter from Mackenzie to Evans, 14 September 1920. Evans Archive, Ashmolean Museum.
Nicoletta Momigliano, who is researchingthe life and work of Duncan Mackenzie, has provided me with this
information. Joseph Hadjidakis (Hazzidakis) was a medical doctor and president of the Syllogos in
Herakleion,a local organisationinterestedin archaeology. StephanosXanthoudides was secretary and deputy
of the Syllogos.
272 Chapter 5
A negativeoutfall of World War I was Evans'sinability to gain accessand to arrange
carefor the siteduringthis lengthyperiod.In this periodhe wrote the first volume of The
PalaceqfMinos and,in the writing process,he discoveredseverallacunasin his research
but he could not return to Knossosto clarify thesedetails.12Furthermore,the lack of
maintenancefor over sevenyearsemphasisedthe differencesbetweenthe coveredareas
andthe exposedareasat Knossos.It could hardly havebeenmore visibly obviousto the

excavatorshow thereconstructionof ceilings protectedthe structuresunderneath.As a
resultit is not surprisingthat Evansmore decidedlyfavouredfurther reconstructionsat
the Palaceof Knossos.
5.2.1 The Magazines South of the Throne Room
In 1922EvansandMackenzieresumedwork at Knossosexcavatingthe Magazineof the

Arsenalat the north border of the palaceand at the southfront. The excavationsat the
south front led to a new understanding of how the original approachin Minoan times
might havebeen.Evanswrote in The Times:
"T'he corridor, with the remains of processional frescoes to which this state entrance, as it existed in
later times, gave access,had originally taken a turn east to a propylaeum on the south, from which
again a broad flight of steps led to the great columnar hall of this section of the Palace. Many new
evidencesof this approachwere brought to light by the present investigations, but it was on the north
borders of the hall that the most surprising new development took place. Here the "piano nobile"
consistedof an elongatedspace,approachedfrom the central court by a stepped portico of which the
remains of a second column base now came to light belonging to its uppermost steps. Blocks and
slabs, either ledged on the wall tops or sunk into the basements,showed that the portico had led on
the left to a corridor giving on the great hall and on the right to what had been the main staircase of
the West Palacewing; slightly broaderthan that of the "Domestic Quarter" on the East. The elements
of reconstructionwere indeedso full that I have been able to restore twelve steps of the first flight, so
that with the upper steps of the portico also completed, the whole has become one of the most
prominent featuresof the site. For the first time we have direct evidence of a second storey to the West
"Evans, 1922,p. 319.
The Works of Piet de Jong 1922 to 1930 273

PeterKienzle
Wing and so full are the materials that Mr F. G. Newton has been able to draw a detailed elevation
of this sectionof the Lqade, overlooking the Central Court and bordering,the Room of the Tbrone -,13
iýý
hl
Figure 65 Restoredview of a sectionof theWestWing. F.G. Newton
The new researchaltered the understandingof this area which can be seen in a
comparisonof the earlier plan of 1901with the executedreconstructionof 1922 and

1923.The first flight of stairsconsistsof only 8 stepsin the earlierplan andfeaturesonly
one column, while, in the later reconstruction,12 stepswere executedand a second

columnplacedat theupperendof the stairs."' The upperflight is missingcompletelyand
only the identificationof two stoneblocks with stepmarksat their side,facilitatedthe
reconstructionof a secondflight upwardsin 1922.15
"The Times,14 July 1922,p. 11.Seefigure 65.

"Evans, 1901,P. 21 f.
"The Times,14 July 1922,p. 11.
274 Chapter5
-KN--O=- PLAN 51fEWINGIZESMOATION Or UPPER MrClAPICN- EIC
L,
o E: 1:
- PIOPYl. 4 UM
HI 4.__ici_i__
I: J H
4.. :Li .
fl-Li I
JT
iL::.:
1I'.
JLJ
' .
'..,,
::
Th
Ii U
r"
=
0. im -- ==. --. -. - -rm

___:.
ý.
r
- ; I-
_ CINTU COURT
Figure 66 Plan of the West Wing in 1900. Ibeodore Fyfe
The substructureof the lower flight of stairsof

the SteppedPorticowasformed by the Middle
Minoan III Magazine while the first floor
corridor was located above two magazines,
southof the ThroneRoom.16The southernmost
of thesemagazineswas named the Magazine of
the Vase Tablets in Theodore Fyfe's plan of
1902, but this name never gained wide
acceptanceand is normally referred to as the

Magazineof the JewelFresco." The northern
Magazine, parallel to the Magazine of the
Jewel Fresco,was not namedby Evans.Both
magazinesare alignedeast to west with their
westernend bordering the Long Corridor. The
rigurc uI II. GbLVICU P1411 UL LIIU atCPPCU
Middle Minoan III Magazine,locatedtowards Portico.Probably Piet de Jong.
the CentralCourt at the easternend of the two
"CompareGroundPlan,Drawing I andFirst Floor Plan,Drawing 2.

"See Hood andTaylor, 1981, p. 17.

PeterYjcnzle
long magazines,was built, as the namesuggests,in the Middle Minoan III period and,
consequently,is not contemporaryto the other magazineswhich were build in Late
Minoan0 After an earthquakeat the closeof Middle Minoan Illb, the entire areawas
remodelled. This was referred to by Evans as the 'Great "

Rebuilding'. The eastern
facadeof theWest Wing was pushedtowardsthe CentralCourt, which allowed for the
construction of the Stepped "

Portico. To provide a firrn support for the steps,the
Middle Minoan III Magazinewas filled in. Later, in Late Minoan II, the Throne Room
area was completelyremodelled.2' Hence, the structuresin this area originate from
different Minoan periodsandnot all of them wereusedat the sametime.
VESTIBULE OF
STEPPED PORTICO (L. M. 11)
STEPS TO FLOOR
OF PORTICO (L. M. 11)
REM. INS OF GRýEN SCHI.ST PAVEVENT
DATUM LINE
LIMESTON. L WTUr CLNTRAL
tz,
OURI (6144
'"F IL0N 411V
FILLING
4" 1, AND
ci BfQ FOUNDATIO1 MS.
SOME M M. Ul w, 1, MIDDLE MINOAN
D
EL !,. - -47 STRATUM
'1
EO THI
,.:, z-'. i.ýd -'-NE6'LITHIC_ c -:z I- --
A c -A- .. _--!
I .... 10 -4 H: TRES
A* LIMESTONE CIST WITH M.M.111POTTERY Sf FAIENCE

B* CORRIDOR OR MAGAZINE WITH CYPSUM SLABBING SrDADOEi [FILLEDIN]
C, REMAINS OF L. M. LDITHOS' FOUND IN CORRIDOR
D. REMAINS OF BORDERS or 3 SUCCESSIVE PLASTER FLOORS
Figure 68 SchematicsectionunderSteppedPortico.ProbablyIleodore Fyfe.
In 1922Piet de Jongroofedoverthe Magazineof the JewelFrescoand the magazineto

its north and reconstructedthe first flight of stairs of the SteppedPortico abovethe
Middle MinoanIH Magazine.22Employing rubble masonry,he elevatedthe walls to the
projectedceilingheightwhichhe derivedfrom Fyfe'sreconstructionof the Throne Room
"Evans 1904,p. 30 ff andPM I p. 453 L

ITM IV, p. 872L
21PMIV, p. 873.
21pM IV, p. 902.
"The Times, 14 July 1922, p. 11.
276 Chapter5
in 1901.The originalwallshadsurvivedto a heightof approximately1.50metresand the
reconstructednew walls, resting on the excavatedstructures,had exactly the same

thicknessasthe ancientwalls.The line of reconstructionis only recognisableby the more
regularmasonrystyleof the rubblewallsanddetailslike the discontinuedslot for vertical
reinforcement beams 21 The reconstructionof the walls with the samethicknessasthe
.
originalswasnecessary in orderto providea firm basefor the plannedwalls of the upper
storey.The brick pillars, which had beenerectedby TheodoreFyfe during the roofing
of the Throne Room in 1901,were incorporatedin the new reconstruction.A natural
at thejunctionof the wall with the pitchedroof of the Throne
difficulty wasencountered
Room, which rested at its south side on the north wall of the newly reconstructed
SteppedPortico.In theupperpart of this wall a recesswas createdto allow a firm lateral
support for 2'

the pitchedroof. However, a way had to be found to drain away the rain
waterwhich collectedat this point.25A window was createdin the reconstructedsouth
wall of the Magazineof the JewelFrescowhich allowed air circulation and light. This
be for
enabledthe magazineto used storagepurposes. 26
Accordingto Fyfe'splanof 1902,accessto the Magazineof the JewelFrescooriginally
was from the Long Corridor at the West; but this was blocked later. The northern
magazinewas only accessiblefrom the Throne Room and no door connectedthe two
"
magazines. There was also no door connectingthe long magazineswith the Middle
MinoanIII Magazine.The cists in this magazinewerediscoveredin 1904andonly then
wasthe functionof thisspaceasa magazine fully 28

understood. It then becameclear that
the Middle Minoan III Magazineoriginally extendednorth but, had beencut off by the
constructionof the Throne Room areain Late Minoan 11.29
"See figure 69.

'Compare plate 59.
"See plate 33. Unfortunately,the photographdoesnot indicatehow the rainwaterdisposal
was
organised.
"See plate41.
"See Fyfe's Plan 1902,plate 8.
"Evans, 1904,p. 30 f.
"Evans, 1904,p. 30 L

Peter Kienzle
In the first reconstruction of 1901 the door, which linked the Throne Room with the
magazines had no lintel; however, the rafters of the flat roof fulfilled this function? ' In
1922, iron-I-beams were employed for the lintels above the door. These were laid at a
distancejust wide enough to place bricks between them.3'The other two doors, which
were not recorded in Fyfe's plan of 1902, were reconstructed in 1922.2 However, in
plate 54 both doors can be detected. The door leading to the Middle Minoan III
Magazine seemsto have existed near the first brick pillar; but this door was not recorded
in 1901 and it is rather unlikely that the two non-contemporary magazines had ever been
I
linked with doors. Rather it is more likely that this pan of the wall was cleared in 1901
to provide enough space for the erection of the brick pillar. 33 In 1922 Piet de Jong
utilised this cleared area to give accessto the Middle Minoan III Magazine, which then
was covered by the reconstructed steps and could not be accessedin any other way.
Brick and limestonewere employed for the jambs and the lintels were made in the same
way as for the door to the Throne Room. The other door between the two long
magazines is marked in the photograph by the large rectangular block close to the fourth
brick pillar from the right. 34In contrast to the other doors, this one was bridged with
three square wrought iron rods and covered with limestone blocks.--'
The ceiling was constructed using the method, employed by Christian Doll in his
reconstructions several years earlier. When work was resumed at Knossos after World
War 1, Evans, Mackenzie, and de Jong could see that this system had successfully
protected ancient fabric. In individual systems for each magazine, iron girders and brick
vaults were employed for the construction of the ceilings. De Jong also restored the first
Zl>
flight up from the Central Court to the Hall of the Jewel Frescoat first floor level.
"See plate 49.

"See Ground Plan, Drawing I and Section B-B, Drawing 3. Door between MM In Magazine and
magazine north of the Magazine of the Jewel Fresco.
12
. Compare Ground Plan, Drawing I and Plan 1902 in Plate 8.
"See plate 54.
"See plate 54 and compare the same block in the Section B-B, Drawing 3.
"See Section B-B, Drawing 3.
278 Chapter 5
Materialsurvivedonly for thefirst four stepsof the stairs,the other eight stepsand parts
of thesefour stepshad to be "

restoredwith new material. Remainsof a secondcolumn
basewere found in this areawhich was supposedto haveoriginally beenlocatedin the
middle of the uppermoststepsof the SteppedPortico. This reflecteda similar situation

at the bottom "'
steps. Theseremainswereincorporatedin a new limestonecolumn drum
which was placedat this level 3' The lower eight stepsrest on a massivesubstructure
.
whilethe upperfour stepswereabovetheMiddleMinoanIII Magazine.Here a new wall
was built which continues the line of the separatingwall between the two long
"
magazines. A brick arch spansfrom the wall end to the easternwall of the magazine,
the
separating room in two The
halves. northernareais roofed with the usual iron-girder
and brick vault techniqueand lines the vaults parallel to the ones in the two long
magazines.The ceiling constructionfor the southernpart of this room is much more
complicated.An iron girderwaslaid north-south,with its northernend terminatingat the
springof thebrick arch.The south-easternquarterwas left openand the south-western
quarterwascoveredwith brick to 'O
vaults alignedeast west. This constructionallowed
the visitors to see,while on the stairs, the cists in the Middle Minoan III Magazine
below."
In 1922 Piet de Jong also completed the first eight steps of the second flight. This
reconstruction includes the under-construction of three vaults similar to the ones

employed by Doll for the restoration of the Grand Staircase. Furthermore, he
reconstructedthe middle wall in this areato a height of approximately 1.60 metres above
the first floor level and also the basesof the division wall to the east of it. " This was the
full extent of his 1922 campaign
"See plate 54 and First Floor Plan, Drawing 2.

"'The Times, 14 July 1922, p. II and the sketch drawing of original fragments in figure 70.
"See plate 33 and compare with plate 54.
"Compare plate 54 and plan Fyfe 1902, plate 8, without the wall.
'See Section B-B, Drawing 3.
"'See plate 32, First Floor Plan, Drawing 2.
"See plate 32.

Peter Kienzle
Piet de Jong left Knossos on 12 June 1922 to work for Alan Wace in Mycenae! ' The
original elements, mentioned by Evans, were reinstated at their original positions in the
reconstructiom" PerhapsPiet de Jong and Evans considered the work completed at this
stage,but reconstruction work was resumed one year later. The early departure of Piet
de Jong, who probably had contractual obligations to work for Wace, might account for
the incompletenessof this restoration work. But a much more serious problem may have
caused de Jong to interrupt his reconstruction work at this point, and continue it later.
As can be seen in figure 69, approximately three metres west of the doorway between
the two long magazines, the ceiling construction sags but the concrete floor above it
remains horizontal. This subsidenceonly occurred at the middle wall between the two
magazines, and not at the northern and southern wall. As can be seen in plan 1, the
middle wall clearly shows irregularities in this area which do not occur at other parts of
the wall. The outer and inner face of this wall detached and bulged, causing the
subsidence.
There are three possibleexplanationswhy this had happened.First, this subsidencemight

have occurred during the winter 1922 to 1923 and was not responsible for the
interruption of the work. It being only discovered in 1923 when work was resumed.
Second,Evans reported that an earthquakehit Crete on 20 April 1922 but he mentioned
no damageto the palace or the reconstructions." The dissection of inner and outer face
of masonryis a typical earthquakedamagebut it can also originate in standard subsidence

'6
situations. Third, the subsidenceoccurred becauseof the construction of the first floor
middle wall in this area, which not only imposed its own weight upon the structures
below but also placed upon it half of the load of the upper stairs which received lateral
support from this wall. Piet de Jong constructed this wall to the height of only
approximately 1.60 metres above the first floor level. He then may have been forced to
stop the reconstructionwork in order to consolidate the middle wall in the ground floor
"Report, Annual of the BSA, No. XXV, p. 3.

"The Times, 14 July 1922, p. II and compare with the sketch drawing. Original parts are hatched.
4'Evans, 1922, p. 327.
'Binda and Anzani, 1997, p. 117.
280 Chapter 5
before returning to the completion of his work at the first floor level a year later.
Whatever reason caused the subsidence in this area; it changed the situation for Piet de
Jong considerably when he resumed work in 1923.
Pigure 69 Section ot the Stepped Portico and the Maoazine north ot the inaoazine of the Jewel Fresco
looking south. Original remains below green line. Reconstruction work of 1922 below the blue
line. Red line indicates horizontal line and shows subsidence.
5.2.2. The Stepped Portico
Piet de Jong returned to Knossoson 12 May 1923 to resurne reconstruction work at the
SteppedPortico. This work lasted until August, when he left to join Alan Wace again at
Nauplia." The secondflight of stairs, which had already been executed to the eighth step,
ZD 4D
was continued with another ten steps; a second floor landing 0 was also reconstructed.
The middle wall and the northern wall of the upper corridor were elevated to serve as
lateral support for the upper flight of steps and a limestone column was placed at the
eastern end of the middle wall and superimposed by a concrete beam 4' A horizontal
.
concrete beam was insertedin the middle wall at lintel hight, two metres above the floor.
"'Report, Annual of the BSA, No XXV, p. 5.

48See plate 37.

PeterKienzle
ni
7 4.
.,.
W,f
-ý
rt
V1 it,
Vý W,
01 tam
...
K
677
.
1Ln
-:
47
sQ,
t: t*,
-law q-r-
i%-x
Figure 70 of theSteppedPortico.Original Remainsarehatched.Piet de Jong

Planfor reconstruction
282 Chapter5
planfor the SteppedPortico showsthat no beamwas plannedin this

The reconstruction
its be
areaand constructionmust regardedas reactionto the subsidence 49The
probleMS.
colurrinwasexecutedin limestone- the sametechniqueemployedby Doll at the Grand
Staircasein 1910. The substructurefor the upperpart of the stairswas built using the
same method employed by de Jong one year earlier and copied from Doll's
reconstructions.A completely different approach,however,was chosen for the second
floor landing.The platform for this landingand the beamabovethe column were both
"
executed reinforcedconcrete. Piet de Jong alsoemployedreinforcedconcretefor
in
the door andwindowframesat the westwall of thereconstructionoverlooking the Long
Corridor.Here,for the first timegenuinereinforcedconcretewas employedasa building
materialfor the reconstructionson site.
employedfor thisreconstructionwork were exactly

Many of thematerialsandtechniques
the onesemployedby Doll in his reconstructionat the Grand Staircase.Among them
were iron girders,brick vaults and limestonecolumnsmadeof severaldrums.He also
copiedDoll's systemof leaving a gapbetweenoriginal stoneblocks with stepmarksat
their sideandthe new steps.The first threesteps,as well as stepsnumbersix and seven
of the second flight, were not extendedto the middle wall but revealthe marksof the
originalstepsat their "
side. However, photographic and literary evidencedatethe work
to 1922 and 1923 when Piet de Jong and, for a short stay, F. G. Newton were the
architectsin KnossosandDoll was not in Crete.The work, obviously, was executedby
de Jongand,in 1922,he almostexactlyreproducedthe methodsand materialsemployed
by Doll. In 1923 he seemsto have suddenlyswitchedto reinforced concrete.Three
be First,
possible explanationsmight advanced. the materialfor the earlier part of the
"'Seefigure70. The plan waslabelledby a staff memberof the AshmoleanMuseumT. Mackenzie

deL' (toprightcomer)and'see11.816, fig. 536' (bottomright corner).Howeverthe handwritingon the plan
diverges considerablyfrom Mackenzie'swriting. Furthermore,Mackenziealmost nevercommentedon
reconstructionwork in his diaries.It seemsillogical that he would producereconstructionplanswhile an
architectworkson site.I assume theplanwasmadeby de Jongor, perhapsby Newton.The plan is definitely
not a laterrecordof the situationafter the restorationbecauseit divergesin manydetailsfrom the executed
work suchas the light well at the westernend of the magazinenorth of the Magazineof the JewelFresco.
Comparewith plan 2.
"See plates34 and 36.
"See plate 33 sketchdrawingandreal drawing.
,

PeterKienzle
reconstructionwork had already been organisedand provided on site by Doll before

1in 1913.Piet de Jong may simply have
World War I brought the works to a standstil.
utilised material that had alreadybeenprovided.Second, the obvious success of Doll's
reconstruction work at other areasof the Palacemight have led de Jong to copy his
of sevenyears,the differencebetweenthe well-preserved

design.After a forcedabsence
areaswhich had beenroofed over and the exposedareas became clear. It is a logical
to
courseof action repeatwhat hadproved to be not
successful, only in principle but also
in techniqueandmaterial.Third, Arthur Evansmight haveaskedPiet de Jongto repeat
Doll's systemwithout allowing him freedomto expresshimself architecturally.This
is
explanatorymodel rootedpartiallyin the previousexplanation,and that
assumes Evans
felt Doll's systemwas successful.The third explanationis ratherunlikely, sinceEvans
allowed Piet de Jong considerablearchitecturalfreedomone year later. However, the

most likely explanationis, that Evans and de Jong decidedtogether to continue the
work
reconstruction in the techniques
and methods,
employedby ChristianDoll.
This changed in 1923 when de Jong returned to Knossos to continue the work he had
begun the previous year. He was forced to reproduce the brick vaulted substructure
under the second flight of steps for technical A

reasons. continuation of the stair in
reinforced concrete would have caused severe technical problems. At the second floor
level, however, he was able to employ his own architectural ideas. But what provoked
thesechanges?Certainly the most likely explanation may be found in the saggedceiling
construction of the ground floor. The brick vaults rested on iron girders which are,
structurally speaking, linear members. The lateral support for these members was
provided by the outside walls and the middle wall which, as we saw earlier on, had failed.
This resulted in the deflection of the ceiling in this area. A reinforced concrete ceiling is,
structurally speaking, a disc where the same failure of the wall would not have resulted
in deflection becausethe load is much more evenly distributed. Concrete ceiling discs are
more forgiving to inhomogeneous support than the brick vault and iron girder ceilings
of Doll, and employing the original walls meantproviding inhomogeneous support. Thus,
reinforced concrete ceilings seemedto solve the problems.
284 Chapter 5
5.3 Discourse: Reinforced Concrete
Reinforcedconcreteat Knossoshasalwaysbeenlinked with Piet de Jong's work. As

discussedin the previouschapter,it was ChristianDoll who introducedcement-based
concretein Knossos for the reconstructionwork of the Grand Staircasein 1905,but it
wasexclusivelyused as binding agentfor the mortar and to fill the spandrelsabovethe

brick vaults - not as structural concrete.52Concretewas also used to cover the iron
girders in Doll's last stageof reconstructionof the Grand Staircasein 1910, but here
againit was not usedas a structuralmaterial.
Concrete as a building material had been known since Roman times. Roman concrete,
a mixture of stone, gravel and mortar, has many advantages: it was cheap, could easily
be handled and shaped, was resistant to fire and strong in compression. Vitruvius
the to concrete water proof. " The disadvantage of

mentions ability of pozzuolana make
Roman concrete was that it could not withstand tension. It was only in 1824 that
14
Portland cement was introduced. This improved the tensile strength slightly.
Nonetheless the use of concrete was limited to structures under compression, for
example foundations or relatively thick walls or to non-structural decorative elements.

In 1875 a patent was granted to William Lascelles for a precast system, which he
employed at the Central Buffet at the Royal Albert Docks, London. Here he designed
columns with bases and ornamental capitals which were attached to the structural
frame".
Mass concretecannotbe employedfor structuresunder tensionor bendingsince,in a

bendingmember,someareasare under tension.It was known from early-on that the
tensile strength must be provided by another material incorporatedin the concrete
member.ChristopherWrenemployediron chainsembeddedin lime-basedconcretewhen
"See plate 104,brown matterabovebrick vaults.

I'Vitruvius, Liber secundus,VI.
54jones,1913,p.l.
"Hurst, 1996,p 292.

PeterYienzle
he constructed St. Pauls Cathedral in London (1675 - 1710).56In 1867 a patent was
granted to the French gardener Joseph Monier for concrete reinforced with a mesh of
rods and wires. He was a manufacturer of garden tools and appliances and his primary
intention was to reinforce his brittle planting tubs. However, he created the basic
elements of reinforced concrete structures. Of course, this patent must be seen as part
of a long evolution of inventionsconcerningreinforced concrete. It was not until the end
of the century that two Frenchmen facilitated the rise of reinforced concrete to be the
pre-eminent building material of the twentieth century. Edmond Coignet applied the
existing knowledge of mechanics and structural engineering to the new material while
FranqoisHennebiquecommercially exploited the patents and turned his business into an
international enterprise.57In 1897 Hennebique built Britain's first reinforced concrete
building, Weaver & Co. 's provender mill in Swansea.In the same year L. G. Mouchel
became General Agent for Hennebique in Britain. However, the knowledge of how to
build with reinforced concrete only remained in the hands of few. 58Concrete became
widely popular after the presentation of buildings by Edmond Coignet and Frangois
Hennebique at the International Exhibition in Paris in 1900.
In 1913 Bernard Jones described the advantages and disadvantages of reinforced

59
concrete. He explainedhow the disadvantagesof concrete are compensated for by the
steel reinforcement and vice versa. Concrete is a relatively cheap material and, while
strong in compression,it is very weak in tension. Steel is a rather expensive material and
very difficult to shape, but it is strong in tension. Both materials show almost identical
coefficients of thermal expansion and, therefore, are highly compatible. Small amounts
of steel provide the tensile strength of building members while the cheap concrete forms
the actual shapeof the member. Steel, which oxidises rapidly in the air, is protected by
the alkaline environment of the cement. These two materials complement each other
"Whinney, 1971. p. 122.

57jones,1913, p 9.
"Cusack, 1987, P. 63.
"Jones, 1913.p 4. Jones'book is only one out of manybooksand articleswritten on reinforced
concreteat this time. Numerousarticlesin The Builder and the Journal of R.LB.A. discussedthis topic
between1900andWorld War I. It is not knownwhich of thesepublicationsPietde Jongknew but, beinga
youngarchitectwhojust completedstudies,he musthavereadmanyof thesepublications.
286 Chapter5
perfectly and make an ideal building materialwhich is strong, durable,fire and water
resistant, has low maintenanceexpenses,can be shaped in almost any form, is
comparativelycheapand,in contrastto Romanconcrete,providestensilestrength.
On the one handit seemsthat Doll, whoseeducationwas completedbeforereinforced
concretebecamecommon,did not embracethe new materialwhile he worked in Crete.

However, there is no indicationthat cementwas generallyrejectedby either Evansor
Doll. On the other hand it seemsthat it was difficult to obtain cementin Crete and,
consequently,it would havebeendifficult to find trainedcraftsmenusing the material.

andpoliticallyspeaking,Cretehada marginallocation within Greeceand
Geographically
concrete,which startedto becomepopular
Europe;and,becauseof this, cement-based
in centralEurope in the first decadeof this century,arrived in Cretemuch later. Thus,
whenPiet de Jong his

started work in 1922,cement-based
concretehad beena common
building materialwhich was not only known to the architectbut also to the executing
craftsmenin Crete.Furthermore,sinceCretehadbecomepart of Greecein 1913,cement
which wasproducedin Athensbecamewidely availablein Crete.
5.4 The Work between 1924 and 1927
As previously noted, in 1924Piet de Jong becamethe official architectof the British

Schoolat Athens.In the sameyear Evanshandedthe site to the School.' Early partsof
the campaignof 1924were dedicatedto the questfor a Minoan road systemin order to
placethe siteof Knossosinto a widercontext.Arthur Evans,DuncanMackenzieand Piet
de Jong were travelling in Crete in order to discoverthe ancientroad network, which
coveredthe islandin Minoan times.6'As a result of this research,the Caravanseraiand

theMinoan Viaduct were found at somedistancesouthof the palace,and it seemsthat
theexcavationof thesestructuresandtheir reconstructionoccupieda major part of the
latterhalf of the 1924season.No major work was undertakenat the palacein this year.
'Waterhouse, 1986,p. 31 andp. 83.

"The Times,17 October 1924,p. 15 16.
-

PeterKienzle
In 1925 Piet de Jong started the reconstruction work which was to change the
appearance of the Palace completely. In this year, he began to employ reinforced

concreteas the main building material for the reconstruction work on site. He had gained
considerableexperiencewith this building technique by reconstructing the Caravanserai
in the previous year. While walls were still executed traditionally in rubble masonry, the
ceilings and stairs were produced in reinforced concrete. Piet de Jong also started to
employ cast moulds to reproduce in concrete large quantities of columns. The first
undertaking in the palace with this new material was the reconstruction of a part of the
West Wing.
5.4.1 The Reconstruction of the West Wing in 1925
The work in the West Wing was the logical continuationof the reconstructionof the
SteppedPortico in 1922 and 1923.The stepsgave accessto the first floor, but there was
nowhere to go at this level.
'With the aid of suchevidenceas could be obtained from fallen column bases.the sunken blocks and
stepsof stairsand the guide supplied by carbonised beams and posts, the whole central section of this
wing hasbeennow effectivelyrestoredto such an extent that the plan of the Propylaea and the central
hall abovethe pillar crypts below, with the steps and staircasesthat served them, has been recovered
in all its essential features. Where the floor itself had to be relaid the use of reinforced concrete has
proveninvaluableanda kind of bridgehasthusbeenconstructedfrom southto north,by meansof

which the visitor will henceforwardbe able to obtainan intelligible insight into the whole palace
systemon this side."'
The new concreteroof covered the Room of the Chariot Tablets, the Room of the Stone
Vases,the Steatite Vase Room and the Gallery of the House tablets. This also included
the construction of the Grand Staircase close to the South Propylon. " However, other
"'The Times, 9 October 1925, p. 15.

"Evans employedthe term 'Grand Staircase' for both the stairs in the West Win-, north of the South
Propylon and the Quadruple Staircase in the Domestic Quarter. To distinguish the two stairs Palmer (1963)
introduced the term SteppedWay for the stairs in the West Wing.
288 Chapter5
gypsum
roomswith sensitive paving, for examplethe Court of the Altar, the Hall of the
Column Bases,the Room of the Tall Pithos and the Temple Repositories,were not
to.
attended Also not includedin this work were the West Magazineswhich were roofed
over in the sametechniquein 1929.4
The excavatedwallswere raisedwith new rubble masonrywalls to ceiling height which
wasadoptedfrom the alreadyreconstructedpart at the SteppedPortico. The reinforced

concrete ceiling stretchedfrom the Grand Staircaseat the South Propylon to the
previously reconstructed SteppedPortico south of the Throne Roorn. Similar to the
already completed secondfloor landing of the Stepped Portico, the margins of the
concreteceilingweredesignedin a fringed fashion.Normally, a vertical timber boardis

fixed at theendof theshutteringto provide a barrier for the liquid concretebut de Jong
constructed this barrier of stone and - probably - mud mortar. After the concrete
solidified, the darn was removedand a fringed edge was left to indicate the theoretical
continuationof the floor. It looks as if the floor is brokenoff at this point.
Figure 71 Shutterina for edges of reintorced concrete ceilmys. Standard vertical boarding
CC
(left) and de Jong's method at Knossos (right).
C
The doorjambs,wereexecutedin concrete,in the samemethodwhich had alreadybeen
usedat the SteppedPortico.The coreof thejambswasbuilt in limestonerubble masonry

and was then casedwith shutteringand concretecast in the cavity. The areasof the
corners and, dependingon the thicknessof the wall, one or two vertical posts in the
"The Times,5 August, 1929,p. II

PeterYGenzle
the
middlerepresented formertirnber '
frarne. The areasbetweenthesetimber beams had
'
beenplasteredin Minoan times and this was reflected the reconstructions. These
by
areaswererecedingslightlyandcement mortar was employedto plasterthem. Thus, the
the
surfacerecreating beams wasvery smoothand showed the impressions of the timber
shuttering while the surfaceof the plaster areasin between showeda rougherplaster
'
surface. The lintels in
wereexecuted concrete reinforcedwith iron rods which were, as
in steel "
bars. The door andpillar wall south
was common earlyreinforcement,round
of the Room of the ColumnBase,which wasreconstructedwith iron girdersby Piet de
Jong in 1922, was incorporated in the new reconstructions. The pillars and lintels were
in for doors in the area. 9
redone the same way employed all other
Further excavationsto clarify the entrancesituationand the original approachto the

undertakenin the south west areaof the 7'
palace. The South Propylon was
palacewere
the endpoint for the accessroute to the palacefrom the West Court, and from there led
to the GrandStaircaseandtheupperfloor. As a result of this researchand asthe logical

continuation of the reconstructedfirst floor level and the staircase,the excavated remains
SouthPropylon to
wereelevated a height 60 71
of approximately centimetres.
of the
Both the wall tops of the excavated structures and the sensitive gypsum paving in this
arearequired urgent attention to prevent them from deteriorating completely. The walls
were repaired and strengthened in small scale non-documented work in the period
between 1900 and 1922.72However, gypsum material has been excavated in both the
rooms covered with the new concrete ceiling and in the rooms not attended to. For
6ISeesketchprovidedby'lbeodoreFyfefor Evans'sreportin 1900(BSA, p. 55) andthe moredetailed

drawing for his own paper in 1902.Comparewith SectionA-A, Drawing 3, right end or SectionC-C.
Drawing9, left end.
"Compare figures75 and 100.
'See for exampleplate61.
"Compare with Reynolds,1945,p. 93.
"'Seeplate 34.
"'The Times,9 October1925,p. 15.
"See plate 34.
72Compare plate 54 (1903) and plate 32 (1922). For example see walls west of the Room of the
column base (centre right in the plate).
290 Chapter5
example, the Long Corridor which featured large areas of gypsum paving, was not
attended to. This selection of only a few areas seems to have been rather arbitrary and
cannot be argued for from the conservation point of view. It seems that the main
objective was to replacesome of the architecturalfragments from the upper storey which
had been found in the area. These architectural elements, such as door jambs, column
bases and stair blocks have sunken or fallen to lower levels. Unlike elements at the
Domestic Quarter, they have not been in their original position or slightly sunken. They
were the key to Evans's theoretical reconstruction of the first floor plan and also became
focal point for its criticism. "' For example, two blocks in the reconstructed first floor
middle wall of the Stepped Portico show impressions of steps and thus indicate the
second flight up but plate 54 shows that they were not found in 74
SitU. Replacing them
in their position, or in at least what Evans believed to have been their original position,
facilitated the reconstruction of the second flight. 75
However, replacing these elements to their former position, presented to the visitor the
otherwise invisible theoretical reconstruction of the important rooms of the upper floor.
Thus, it seemsthat the needfor protection started a process which responded in a limited
way to the needof preservation,but which was clearly linked to presentation of the site."
5.4.2 The Reconstruction of the Pillared Portico
The PillaredPorticoandthe Verandahaboveare locatedin the West Wing of the palace
at the south-westcornerof the CentralCourt. This structureis directly connectedwith

the other partsof the West Wing which were reconstructedin 1925,but they were not
executed "
together. Unlesstwo distinctive constructionphasesare assumedto have
"See Evans,1901,p. 21 f. CompareHitchcock, 1994

'Compare figure 70 andpage408.
"'For a full discussionof theseproblemsseepage407 ff.
"'Comparewith Evans'sstatementin TheTimes,9 October 1925,p. 15;quotedabove.
"See PM IL p. 351.

Peter Kienzle
in 1925, the photographic evidence contradicts Evans's 7'

statement. Thus, this
occurred
work was either executed in late 1925 or in one of the later campaigns.The structure
consistsof a portico with concretepillars, fintels and a balustradeoverlooking the central

court. To the west of the back wall of this portico a narrow flight of steps, which
provided access to the verandah at the first floor level was reconstructed in concrete.
This floor level was identical with the previously reconstructed level at the West Wing;
and the reconstructed floor above the door and pillar wall, south of the Room of the
Column Base, connected the two areas.
The portico andthe verandahaboveoverlook the southwest part of the Central Court.
Abovethe lintela horizontalbandof discsin four colourshasbeenpaintedon the outer
faceof the balustrade,aswas suggestedin Newton's reconstructiondrawing in 1922.79
The bandsof discswerea recurringelementin Minoan representations 80
of architecture.
However, the conservationaspectof this reconstructionis very limited. No original
material which would haverequiredurgent attentionhad survivedin this areaand no
supported
material the designof this It
reconstruction. is very interesting,
however,that
thiswasthe first work which featureda distinctively designed,reconstructedfacadeat
a prominent part of the palace.Here, the presentationalaspectof the work seemsto
havebeenmuch more importantthan the conservationaspect.
5.4.3. Work at the South Front
In 1925 extensivesupplementaryresearchwas carried out at the south front of the
palace.This areaslopestowardsa small stream,the Vlychiý, and was largely destroyed

in anearthquakeat theendof MM IHb.8' In addition,a subterraneanstructure,the Early
" Due to these facts, the
Hypogeum, was responsible for further subsidence.
"Compare Hood and Taylor, 1981, p. 5.

"See plates 29 and 30 and Newton's drawing in figure 65.
"See page 415 ff.
"PM II, p. 288,347 f and 758 ff.
'212vans,1928, P. 95.
292 Chapter 5
archaeological evidence in this area was

muddled and prior to his publication of the
second volume of The Palace of Minos in
1928, Evans, in 1925, researchedthe south
front in more detail a second time. 83The
result of this research was an improved

understandingof the entrancesystem to the
palace from both the West Porch and the
South Corridor. " The road from the south
coast of the island had crossed the Vlychid

stream on a viaduct and then split into
three roads, the easternmost of which
would have ascended under the Steppeci Figure 72 Sketchof the SteppedPortico south
CP
Portico. " The final end point of this access west of the palace. F.G. Newton,
completedby T'heodoreFyfe.
was the South-North Corridor at the
southern border of the Central Court. " The access from the West Porch led through the
Corridor of Procession which initially led south but turned left twice and finally ended
at the South Propylon.
The new understandingof theseheavily disturbedareasat the south front led to the
reconstructionof the South-NorthCorridor in 1925and the South Propylon in 1926.11

Both structuresdo not servean immediateconservationpurpose.No materialhasbeen
excavatedat theseareaswhich would havebeenmore endangered

tý than at other areas
in the palace.The reasonfor thesereconstructionswereexplainedby Evansin 1927:
"Tbe paintedrelieforthePriest-Kingwith a crown of lily crestsand peacocks'plumesthat had fallen
from the wall of a corridor leadingup to the CentralCourt from the Southhasbeenreplacedby a
"The Tinies, 9 October 1925, p. 15.

"Compare with Evans's statement in Evans, 1928, p. 91 and p. 94.
"See figure 72. This structure is not identical with the Stepped Portico south of' the Throne Room.
"Evans, 1928, p. 91 f.
17See Evans, 1927, p. 266 and Hood and Taylor, 1981, p. 5.

PeterKienzle
RUBBLE WALLS GYP5UM 13

BLOCKS
CONJECTURAL DITTO CONJECTURAL DlTrTrO
FOU.NDATIONS. LIME5TONEBLOCKS
r
%nj
STEPS TO UPPE PRLOPYLAE

. COMrINUAT)OH OF
.. COP-Itt DOX IT14 J EBBLE CffAffriTlF' LQD9 EAS op
.. EARU opy-
LAVA
FOUNDATTO
z
VIV FCVI IDAMONS Oý Owmtj Bsa
114 w
cul 8L
4ý; CCIALmr
( TAK K ZZA)
(TA
Z UE-GREIN SCRIV
RIASSLI WAL
'a TH PlASTElt(]C)Vj 1ý AJ30VE po
.
< r
P, cl TZ
0
(L Tv Cot' 'of
t Y-
z Ott m
CaMF HT-- - cc
10 ý-
.. -: r.., ItiU ZZA). -: -*. r 1
w
CARV& STOr r JLOSEM
u FOUND HER
-e-sl ur. Gpzlm SCHI ý' ij
t* SELD;
Fl. 04)PtlrlG&n
cz X ki
u..
w
e
bL
LL
<
Ll
IL0
0 IL IL
0 LIGHT AREA LOWIR p
0
WITH REMAINS
IL OF WA
z OF TARAUA PAVEMENT CONTINU
< mi
SCALE OF-METRES
tE to
Figure 73 Plan of the South Propylaeum indicating excavated remains, conjectural reconstructions and
where fresco remains were found. Probably Piet de Jong.
294 Chapter5
painted stuccofacsimilein the place that it had occupied.This in turn had beenroofed over for
protection,ashad alreadybeendonein the caseof the Roomof the Thronewith its restoredGriffin
guardian
In the areaimmediatelyWestof this, theserenewedinvestigationshavethrownmuchfreshlight on

both the earlier and later form of what hadbeenthe principal entrancehall on that side,the South
whichnowprovesto havehadfour columnsandto havesuppliedon a granderscalethe
Propylaeum,
pe of thoseof Tyrins. The interior of this hall in its final shapehadbeenadornedwith a great
protot),
processionalwall-painting,continuedin the adjoiningcorridor, and the well-known Cup-Bearer
fresco,whichbelongedto this, wasfoundfallen from theWestwall of this structure.A carefulcopy
of this and of part of a similar subjectwhich had occupiedthe frieze above,executedfor me by

Monsieur Gilli6ron, fils, hasnow beenreplacedin its original position.To protectthis, one of the
androofing havebeenrestored,andthe visitor approaching

greatcolumnsandpartof theentablature
thePalacefromthatsidecannowobtainsomethingof the originaleffectof this monumentalentrance
hall.""
Obviously,the mainagendawasnot to protectarchitecturalelementswhich were still in
positionandin danger,but to display replicasof frescorestorations.The original fresco

fragments which have been found in these areas were employed by Gilli6ron to
reconstructlargefrescopanelswhicharenow on display in the Museumin Herakleion."

Thesereconstructionsin themselvesare questionedby severalscholars.90It is certainly
debatable whether the display of replicas of frescoesjustify the reconstruction of
architecturalstructures.However,the final sentence

of thequotationabovealso indicates
how Evanswantedto recreatethe effect of the former architecturein itself.
5.5 The Reconstruction Work of 1928
In the three years spanning1928 - 1930, Piet de Jong executedthe majority of his
reconstruction work which determines today's appearanceof the site. It seems that no
"Evans, 1927,p. 266.

"See Sakellarakis,1994,p. 113ff and alsoPM II, p. 704.
9'Seefor exampleCastleden,1990a,p. 178andFarnoux,1996,p. 128f.

Peter Kienzle
reconstruction work was executed in 1927 but one year later the reconstruction work
gainedunprecedented impetus.
The resultsof the of
earthquake 1926 were certainly one
of the driving factorswhich contributed to this momentum. It was describedby Evans:
"Manks largelyto theferro concreteof the floors,the reconstitutedpartsof thepalaceitself held out
well, orgya few columns beingsplit in the middle.But the hill villages, suffered
especially, terribly,
C,
andsome, like Voutes,werelargely "'
destroyed.
Thesepositive experienceswith the reinforced concrete reconstruction, specifically when
seen in contrast to the massive destruction in the neighbouring villages, certainly

92
contributed to the increased effort of reconstruction. Another factor was the
forthcoming publication of Volumes III and IV of Evans's book on the Palace, for which
he had to clarify details at several parts of the site. When Evans returned to these
particular areas with his old excavation notes, he could see clearly the progressive
deterioration of the architecturalelements.This, of course, created the desire to preserve
as much of the structure as possible.The re-investigation of specific areasgenerated new

knowledge of Minoan architecture which was employed to make the reconstructions as
accurate as possible.93Thus, the obvious need for protection, the improved knowledge
of Minoan architectureand the positive experiences with reinforced concrete resulted in
an increased effort of reconstruction.
5.5.1 The Loggia and an Overhaul of Earlier Work at the Grand Staircase
The area of the Grand Staircasewas attendedto numeroustimes. As part of the
excavationprocess,TheodoreFyfe introducedthe first timber supportframesin 1901.

These then had to be replacedwith better structureslater in the sameyear. In 1905
ChristianDoll reconstructedthe stairswith iron girdersandbrick vaults and in 1910 he
"The Times,20 September1926,p. 15 and seealsoPM R, p. 316.

"See alsoPM III, p. xii.
"See PM III, P. vi L andHood andTaylor, 1981,p. 4.
296 Chapter5
added another flight. However, Piet de Jong addressedthe same area again in 1928, and
the first floor abovethe easternportico of the Hall of the Colonnades,the
reconstructed
so-calledLoggia,andthe secondfloor aboveboththe northernandeasternportico of the
94
Hall of the Colonnades.
Three factors led to a renewed attention at the Grand Staircase area. First, the ceiling
above the Hall of the Colonnades had already been proposed by Christian Doll in his
plans for the reconstruction of the Grand Staircase, but this proposal was never
"
executed. The gypsum paving of the Hall of Colonnades was of the same fine quality
as the paving of the adjoining corridor and both pavings were in the same excellent state
of preservation when excavated in 1901. While the paving slabs of the corridor were
never exposed to the weather for long periods of time, the slabs of the hall had been
deteriorating for 27 years.To preservethe remaining parts of the historic fabric, the Hall
of the Colonnades had to be roofed over. Second, the broken floor slabs, which were
employedby Fyfe in his first timber reconstruction of the northern Portico of the Hall of
Colonnades and the upper East-West Corridor and were re-used later by Doll for his
work, also needed attention. This paving, laid in mortar, was not water proof and the
historic slabs were exposed to the weather. To Evans and de Jong, roofing over the
northern portico of the Hall of Colonnadesseemedto be a good solution to the problem.

Third, the reconstruction of the fourth flight of the Grand Staircase in 1910 ended with
its last step at the height of the Central Court. However, since no bridge crossed the gap
between the retaining wall of 1902 and the stair and the landing at this level was not
reconstructed, no accesswas possible from the court to the steps.96
All theseproblemswere addressedby roofing the northernportico and by building a
connectionbetweenthe CentralCourt andthe new secondfloor landing.In addition, the

Loggia,the newstructureabovetheHall of the Colonnades,would provide a connection
betweentheupperEast-WestCorridorandthe reconstructedupperfloor in the southern
"Evans, 1928,p. 97.

"See page233.
"See plate 120.

PeterKienzle
parts of the Domestic Quarter. Thus, the reconstructions of 1928 provided a better
systemof accesswithin the Domestic Quarter. This is clearly of presentational rather than
conservationnature. However, this does not justify the reconstruction of the second floor
the Loggia. "

reconstruction above
The reconstructedLoggia differs considerablyfrom the proposal in Christian Doll's plan.

He suggested colonnades facing the light well at the ground floor level, but the upper
in his drawing as massive walls with windows. 9' Doll also
storeys were reconstructed
suggesteda massive wall between the Loggia and the first floor northern portico of the
Hall of Colonnades." The reconstructionexecutedby Piet de Jong 18 years later features
in
colonnades all storeys. Furthermore, the formerly massive wall between the Loggia
and the upper northern portico is missing,despite the fact that both Fyfe and Doll placed
a Minoan doorjamb block at this place in their physical reconstructions." The back wall
of the Loggia also forms the back wall of the western light well of the Hall of the Double
Axes. This wall was restored with blocks of concrete cast in wooden casesto match the
Minoan ashlar masonry in the light well. 'O' No conservation reason necessitated the
reconstruction of this wall, but it was necessaryto elevate and strengthen the wall in
order to provide a firm base for the reconstruction of the ceiling above the Hall of the
Colonnades.One year later the west face of this wall, inside the Loggia, was decorated
with a fresco, recreated by Gilli6ron fIlS.102

A sketch proposal in Evans's notebook for
1929 shows the fresco. 103
'See First Floor Plan,Drawing 7 andSectionC-C. Drawing 9.

"See drawingGS/HC3.
"'Piet de Jong's reconstruction is, however, closer to T'heodoreFyfe's first reconstruction printed in
BSA 1901. p. 106, who suggestedtimber pillars for the upper storeys. Evans mentions the balustrade of the
Loggia of the Shields in the same article, p. 107, and again in the description of the reconstruction work in
PM III, p. 301.
""See plate 98 and compare page 233.
C,
""Evans, 1928,p. 97.
"'Evans, 1928,p. 97.
""Seefigure 74 andcompareplate 122.
298 Chapter 5
...
*'
-T
Ti
V
"17ý14
V URE
.K
i3
Figure 74 Sketchproposalfor decorationin the Loggia.Evans,1929.

. C,
The reconstructedsecondfloor level abovethe Hall of the Shieldsrises 8.30 metres

above the excavatedground floor level and 4.10 metresabovethe reconstructedfirst
floor level. To cover these height differences, all support walls terminate in a stepped
declinetowards the easternslope.This provided a moderaterise ratherthan an abrupt
waU.This approachis different from that of ChristianDoll who employedashlarpillars

for supportin the 1910 reconstructionof the Grand Staircase,and also differs from the
approachof Fyfewho employedsmallrubble masonrywith a horizontal top course.Piet

de Jong's wall tops are irregular, raggedand sloped.They were intendedto match the
excavatedruins.
Pietde Jongalsooverhauledtheearlierreconstructionwork executedby TheodoreFyfe
and ChristianDoll in the areaof the Grand Staircase.The timber beamsemployedby

Fyfe in the openingof the door in the southernpart of the Hall of the Colonnadeswere
replacedwith concrete.He alsoremovedthetimberboardcasingof the iron girder lintels

and door and window frames constructed by Christian Doll in 1905." As discussed
"Compare page232 L
71beWorks of Piet de Jong 1922to 1930 299

Peter Kienzle
earlier, the thin timber boards employed by Doll to case the metal girders, warped and
disintegrated due to the effects of the weather and to the lack of maintenance." An
efficient protection from rust could not have been guaranteedby the timber casing. As
a result, Christian Doll cased the beams of the fourth flight reconstruction in 1910 with
cement. Obviously, the most logical reaction for Piet de Jong was to remove the timber
boards and to casethe iron I-beamsin cement.He attachedadditional reinforcement rods
and casedthe Entelsandjambs with a timber shuttering in which concrete was cast. This
not only protected the iron girders much better with less maintenance effort but also
matched his reconstruction work.
5.5.2 The Hall of the Double Axes
The Hall of the Double Axes was excavatedin 1901and aspart of this work Theodore
Fyfeconstructeda timber supportwork to keepthe doorjamb basestonesof the upper
Hall of Double Axes in position.In 1902thesetimber supportshadbeenreplacedwith
a more permanent construction of timber frames and rubble masonry.106Doll
reconstructedthelower East-WestCorridor in 1908,but apartfrom this, the areaof the

hall was not attendedto until 1928.For twenty-sevenyearsfrom its first exposurein
1901up to 1928,the sensitivegypsumpavementwas subject,without protection, to
heat,weatherand visitors. At the time of the excavationsomeof the paving slabswere
broken,but otherwisetheywerein goodcondition.107
Twenty-sevenyearslater the same
pavingslabswerefragmented
into numeroussmallpiecesandthe plain floor had become
'O'
uneven. In 1928 John Pendleburytook a photographof the situation before the
removalof thetimberandrubblepillarswhichhadbeenerectedby Fyfe in 1902.It shows
that the pillars were affectedby the weather and by lack of maintenancebut seem
"It seem most logical that no maintenance was executed between 1913 and 1921 when Evans and
his team have not been on site. See Letter Mackenzie to Evans, 14 September 1920. Compare p. 272.
"See page 191 ff.
"See plate 136.
"'Compare plates 135 and 139 with 144 and 145. Also, compare the well preserved gypsum slabs
of the East-WestCorridor and the Hall of Colonnades with the fragmented remains of the Hall of the Double
Axes in Ground Plan, Drawina 6.
0
300 Chapter5
"
otherwise a reasonablegood state. It might be possiblethat Fyfe's work had
in
someattention;but it wascertainly the main intention of Piet de

decayedandden-unded
JongandArthur Evansin 1928to arrestthe further decayof the sensitivegypsumfloor
slabsin the Hall of the Double Axes. Evanswrote in 1928:
"In the courseof a five month campaignundertakenduring the spring and summer of the present year,
in which Mr. Piet de Jong, the architect of the British School at Athens, acted under my direction, it
hasbeenpossibleto carry out a very extensive schemeof reconstitution in the Domestic Quarter. The
greatestof all the Palace Halls - the "Hall of the Double Axes" - has in this way been entirely roofed
over, the gypsum slabs of its floor and dadoes being thus permanently rescued from rapid
disintegration due to the exposure to the weather. The upper floor here, the original height of which
had been somewhat miscalculated, has been restored at its original level, together with that of the
adjoining spaces,so that the whole original plan of this level is actually "'
accessible. "
In the original Minoan layout of the Hall of the Double Axes, three walls were
constructedof pillars with doors betweenthem. In 1902 TheodoreFyfe reconstructed

the wall betweenthe innerandouterhall and a part of the southernwall in order to keep
pavingslabsandthedoorjambsof the upperstoreyin position. Piet de Jongdismantled
thesetimberandrubblepillarsin 1928and put asidethe paving slabsand the doorjambs
for laterreuse.All threepillar and door walls were reconstructedin reinforcedconcrete
cast on site in a shutteringmadeof timber boards.The timber for the shutteringwas

deliberately left rough. This enabled the cast concrete membersto recreate the
appearanceof the original timber construction. This shuttering did not distinguish
betweenthe areasin the Minoandoor constructionthat representedthe timber frame and
the plasteredpanelsbetweenthe frame. The entire surfaceof the pillars was treated
equally and only the paint schemeproducedany distinction in the "'
end. This was the
most economicsolution becausethe uniform shutteringcould be re-usedfor both the
doors and the windows abovethem. However,at a later point the recessfor plasterin
the middle of the revealwas createdandrendered.
"See plate 145.

"OEvans,1928,p. 97.
...Seeplates 146,147 and 149.

PeterKienzle
The plan of the pillars - the typical I-shape - was determined by the position and the
the Minoan limestone jamb blocks on which the new pillars were placed-' 12
The
shapeof
elevation of these pillars varies considerably from the rubble and timber pillars erected
by Fyfe in 1902,aswell asfrom the elevationemployedby ChristianDoll in otherparts

of the Domestic Quarter.Fyfe's reconstructionsimply featuredpillars, abovewhich a
lintel carried the Minoan doorjamb blocks of the upper storey. The new concept of Piet
de Jong suggested a lintel above the doors, two metres above ground, and a window
door lintel height of 3.10 metres.' The height of the lower
abovethe with another at a
lintel was derived from the cavity left by a rotten reinforcement beam in the north wall
and in the south wall of the inner hall. On top of the higher lintel masonry would elevate
to ceiling height at four metres above ground. He sketched his proposed section in his
notebook of 1928.114This idea of window openings above the doors was derived from
the Faience Tablets. "'

examples at
As discussedpreviously,the horizontalcavitiesleft by the rottentimber reinforcement

beamsaffectedthe structuralstrengthof the wall. Above this horizontalrecessthe wall
wereonly ableto carry a minimalload.Consequently, the recreationof the upper storeys
with the aid of heavyconcreteceilings necessitated the

strengthening fragile walls. The
cavitiesleft by the rotten timber had to be filled with a load bearing material. Concrete
presented itself as the most logical choice. It could be cast in the irregular cavities
without anyproblem,andthe visible surfacecould be castin a timber shutteringso that
of this material.Evansdescribedin 1928:
it reproducedthe appearance
"In the walls aboveandbelow [the ceiling], the sockets left by the wooden skeleton of the fabric. and
which in nearly all casescontainedthe carbonisedremains of the wooden posts and beams, have been
filled in with ferro-concrete, painted to show a conventional wood colour." "'
I "See plates 144 and 146.

"'See plate 147.
'"See Piet de Jong Sketchbook 1928 BSA Archive Athens.
I "See PM I Fig 266 B. See discussion in chapter 7.
"'Evans, 1928, P. 97.
302 Chapter5
Evanspointsout in the samearticlethatthe wallstherebyregainedmuch of their original
strength, and this enabledthem to carry the load of the concreteceiling which now
covered the Hall of the Double Axes. Piet de Jong also overhauledthe reconstruction
TheodoreFyfe and ChristianDoll in a similar mannerto the
work by his predecessors
work he had done in the areaof the GrandStaircase.Furthermore,he castconcretein
the horizontalcavityin the light well of the hall, coveringthe chip stoneinfill of Fyfe."'
Thus, the reconstructionsof the Hall of the Double Axes, regardlessof their original
construction,receivedan uniform visual appearance.
Eight castconcretecolumns,identicalin shape,lengthand diameter,wereproducedfor

Two of thesecolumnswereplacedat the light well at the west end
the reconstructions.
of the hall,while the remainingsix columns,togetherwith anothertwo pillars, form the
outer portico. A flat concreteceiling, restingon the elevatedwalls, coveredthe entire
structureincludingthe door and pillar partitions and the reconstructedcolumns.Lines
wereincisedin the floor at first floor level, in order to recreatethe pavementpatternof
the hall underneath.De Jong incorporatedinto this concreteceiling the remainsof the
first floor doorjambsandthepavingof the sills, which had been,until that time, resting
on the tirriberframework.The missingdoorjambbaseswererecreatedin concrete.Metal

pipeswere fitted into the upper floor balustradefor the draining "'
of rain water.
5.5.3 Other Work in 1928
The two major reconstructionsof 1928 were accompaniedby minor work in their
surroundingareas.The Lobbyof theWoodenPostswasalsoreconstructedtogetherwith

the work at the Hall of theDoubleAxe. The remainsof a first floor block had beenfound
almostin original position and was supportedwith woodenprops in 1901.In 1902the
"'
propswere replacedwith an ashlarpillar. Evanswrote in 1930:
I"Comparepage192f.
"'Compare First Floor Plan,Drawing 7.
"'See page202 L

Petcr Kienzle
"As this block has servedas an early landmark on the East slope, being one of the few remains of the
original structurevisible at the time when its excavation work was first undertaken, it had at first been
supported at the exact level in which it was found. The more complete reconstitution of the upper
storeyelementsin this areaundertakenin 1928 made it advisable, however, to restore the block, with
the underlying lime-stone slabs on which it rested, to the level that it had originally occupied.""'
The techniques employed for these reconstructions are similar to the ones already
described.12'Thestone block above the pillar is supported from below and a gap was left
so that the concrete ceiling would not touch the stone block.
Piet de Jong also reconstructed the third flight of the Private Staircase between the Hall
of the Double Axes and the Queen's Megaron. This protected tile lower flight which
clearly had suffered from nearly thirty years of exposure. Together with this work he
probably removed the pitched roof above the light well of the Queen's Megaron and
erectedthe balustrades.Also probably in 1928 he covered the Treasury west of the Bath
Room with a concreteceiling after supplementaryexcavations had been conducted some
122
yearsearHer. Furthermore, the broken slab paving above the northern part of the Bath
Room, first installedby Fyfe in 1902,was now replaced with a concrete floor. "' Evans's
statementthat he employed 100 carpentersand masons and their assistantsfor nearly six
months might be an exaggeration in respect to the work executed on site. Nevertheless,
it certainly reflects the fact that large areasof the palace were reconstructed in 1928.
Both the North Lustral Basin and the North Entrance Passage had alread been
Iy
1901.124
excavatedin the secondcampaignof The groundplan for both areaswaseasily
"'PM 111,p. 271 L

121See plate 132.
"'Evans Notebook1922 1926.The entry is not dated.
-
121
Seeplate 161andcomparewith First Floor Plan,drawing7.
""Evans, 1901,p. 60 f. andp. 68 L
304 Chapter5
derived from the excavatedstructures,but the interpretation of the structures was rather
"
uncertain. At the time of excavation both structures left a somewhat unclear picture
of their function. When Arthur Evans published his first volume of The Palace of Minos
in 1921 he discussedthe North EntrancePassageand the North Lustral Basin in detail. "'
Unfortunately, due to the turmoil of World War 1, Evans had no accessto the site during
the writing up process for this book. Later on, it became clear that his account was not
sufficient and further research in the area was necessary.Thus, Evans decided in 1928
to conduct supplementary excavations which had to be set against the background of
almost thirty years of research in Minoan archaeology. In comparison, his research of

1901 must be set against a barely existing knowledge of Minoan archaeology.
The newresearchproducedresultswhichenabledPietde Jongto producereconstruction

drawings for the North Entrance Portico and the North Lustral Basin. These
reconstructionswere not only basedon the detailedresultsof the excavationsof 1928,

but also on the increasedconfidencethat the Minoan style could now be understood
more clearly. Regardingthe North EntrancePassage,Evanswrote:
"Something more, too, should if possible be done to restore at least some part of the upper elements
of the adjoining North Entrance Passage,

C, the most public and at the same time in many ways the
grandestof the avenuesof approach. Researchesrecently carried out in this area, and now embodied
in plans and elevations by Mr. de Jona,,show that here above the triple bastions on either side ran
porticoes backed by magnificent friezes of painted stucco reliefs of bull-hunting and bull-catching
C, 0
scenesresembling those shown in repouss6work on the Vapheio CUpS. "127
This staten-vent
of intention,givenin a lectureto the Royal Institute of British Architects
in 1928 was put into effect one year later. Thus, in 1929, one year after the
supplementary Pietde Jongreconstructedboth the North EntrancePassage

excavations,
andthe North LustralBasin.However, two different reasonsactedas the driving forces
behindthe two reconstructions.At the North Lustral Basin,decayingsensitivegypsum
"'Evans, 1901,p. 62 and p. 70.

126pM1, p. 392 405 and p. 405
- -4 10.
... Evans, 1928, p. 99.

Peter Kienzle
demanded
elements attention;
while the work at the North Entrance focused
Passage on
presentation.Arthur Evanswrote in 77zeTimes:
"My ownspecialobjecthasbeen, while carryingout completion- with the effectiveaid of Mr. Piet
de Jong, the architectof the British Schoolat Athens-a seriesof works of conservationand of
explanatory reconstruction,to undertakethe manynew investigationsthat were necessaryon the

northernandeasternbordersof the sitewith particularreferenceto my forthcomingthird volumeon
"the Houseof Mnos."1211
.
5.6.1 The North Lustral Basin
After its excavationin 1901,the North Lustral Basinwas left exposedto the weather.
Only a few new coping stoneswere provided to protect the sensitivewall tops of the
steppedbalustradealongsidethe stairsdownward.This work, to the credit of Theodore

Fyfe, was executedeven before the excavationwork was completed."' Besidesthis
minor work, the Lustral Basin was left unprotected for 27 years. Prior to the
supplementary excavation work in 1928, John Pendleburytook a photographof the
basinwhich clearly showsthe deteriorationof the gypsumdadoand steps."' Even the
new gypsum coping stones,which were plain and crisp in 1901, by that time were
fractured and bent.131The gypsumslabswhich lined the basinalso sufferedfrom the
weather.The author'srecordof 1997showsthe amountof materialwhich is left today.

By contrast,Fyfe's record of the situationshowsthe amountof materialstill in situ in
1902. Thus,it is not surprisingat all that in 1928it was decidedto havethe basinroofed
over. The work beganin 1928and was completedthe following year. In a short note
provided for the Annual of the British Schoolat Athens,Arthur Evanswrote:
128 The Times, 5 August 1929, p. 11. Emphasized by me.

129See plate 71. The area at the top right comer was still not excavated when the new coping stones
were positioned.
'"Plate 73.
"'See plate 73 and compare plate 7 1.
306 Chapter5
"On thenorth-west.
thesmallcolumnarlustralareaconnected
with the Minoan Goddessin her chontic
aspect,and with stairsleadingdown into the bosomof the earth,hasbeenrescuedfrom its parlous
condition,thecolumnshavebeenreplacedandthe wholeroofedover so asto protectits fine gypsum
casing.'Ibe sombrecoloursof the fallen plaster,someof themimitating a dark speckledstone,have
alsobeenreproducedon the walls.""'
Piet de Jong had a mould constructed to cast six identical concrete columns, three of
whichheplacedat a newlyconstructedbalustradeat the eastand southsidesof the new

structure.The remainingthreecolumnswereplacedat the basestonesexcavatedat the
stepped balustrade. The height
differencebetweenthe lowest base
and the middle base and between

the middle baseand the upperbase
were not identical.To compensate
for this difference,Piet de Jonghad
to introduce abaci of different
height."' Above ground, he con-
structed a rubble masonrybuilding

with closednorth and west facades
which featurethree small windows
at a highlevel.Thesewindows were
placed between a reinforced con-
crete reproduction of a timber
framework, which was executedin
ngure io v iewui uicr4unnLustrai oasin. riet Gejong.
slightly projecting beams and
painted in a way to represent the original timber. 13' The walls were plastered with
cement render and on it thin lines representing regular ashlar courses (opus isodomuin)
were incised. "'
"'Evans, 1929, p. 269.

"'See plate 76.
"'See plate 75.
"'See north, west and south elevation in Drawing 5.
ne Works of Piet de Jong 1922to 1930 307

Peter Kienzle
On its left part, the south wall

features massive masonry, similar to
the west and north facade, while the
right part of this facade is occupied

by a colonnade which continues
around the south-east comer to the

east facade. The remaining northern
part of the east facade is occupied by
the door opening to the steps which

FicrUre76 North Lustral Basin, southfacade.
descendto the sunkenbasin.A flat Z'
concrete roof covers the building; the westernpart of which is designedwith proper
eaves while the easternpart of the roof ends in a broken edge,therebyindicating the
theoreticalcontinuationof the roof in this direction.136
The inside of the building is plasteredcompletely apart from two 'windows' which allow
a view on the construction of the wall behind the 13

"
surface. This, of course, is not the
original construction, but once again, the recreation of what was believed to have been
the original Minoan building technique. The 'window' at the west side features the
original Minoan wall construction at its lower part while the concrete beam, aiming to
represent the original timber reinforcement, and the upper masonry were executed in
1929.138
The reconstruction of the North Lustral Basin in the shapeof this individual building was
basedon the latest interpretation of the function of the area, as published by Evans after
his additional research in 1928."9 Arthur Evans's reconstruction of this area proposed
a walkway for votaries who would have surroundedthe building prior to descending into
the lustral basin.140According to Arthur Evans, this area was destroyed already in the
""Seeelevations in Drawing5.
andsections
"'See sectionB-B in Drawing 5.
13'Seeplate76.
139pM III, p. 8 f.
"See figure 77 andPM III, p. 8L
308 Chapter5
MM IIIa period and never reconstructed.The basin was filled in and later Minoan
""
structuresoverlaid area. Theselater Minoan constructionscertainly disturbedthe
the
stratigraphy of the area and, thus, the proposed reconstruction above ground is
somewhatsuspect.
= LxrcRD?ORitmes
TH -LL CF INNER- -ýL. CE Ill
I PROBABLE EWIT c"PlIsIr SWILAR IC

ý 1)4^TOF LL6TWBMIN
O-F\VOTARIES -. A A, RUW04 al. w. Lam
60 LUS, RAL . Sr VA" CCNT, 4Mh&
AND
ENTRANCE CO\/R rr - 'o JW=ýSr(R L-C
EA. S IN RITUAL 41
OF KINC KH'I%?
,
INITIA70FZY
AREA 1-41 1N16ATORY
(Ope'l)
PROBAIBLE ENMA11C /AREA
OF VOTARIES
__j
2- 0::
- - i4, ,- -RES
'EPWAY
CONJECiTURAL ST
rp ro -71-T
,
fA i
Figure77 InitiatoryareaandLustralBasinaccordingto Evans'later interpretation.
It was necessaryto protect the sensitivegypsum lining of the North Lustral Basin, which
had alreadydecayedconsiderably.Thus, the roof was necessaryfor conservation reasons.
However, the shapeof the entire building, which stands like a solid block in the ruined
landscape,is a reflection of Evans's latest understandingof the function of the site. It was
built in this form for didactic reasons, or, as Evans put it, it was an explanatory
reconstruction. Thus, the need for conservation and the wish for presentation was
combined in this reconstruction.
5.6.2 The North Entrance Passage
The North EntrancePassageis the ramp which connectsthe North Pillar Hall, located
at a lower levelat the northernborderof thepalace,with the CentralCourt. The inclined
"'PM HL p. 12.

PcterKienzie
flanked by bastions first in 1901."'2 A

passagewas on either side which were excavated
this area took place in 1929, the results of which were published in
reinvestigation of
Volume III of The Palace of Minos in 1930. The drawing provided by Piet de Jong
indicatesthe different levels depositsof different periods were found. "' However,
where
when Piet de Jongexecutedthis drawing, the site had beenexcavatedfor 28 yearsand

the depictedlevels must havecomefrom eitherEvans'snotebooksor memory.
Figure 78 Plan of the northern entrance system of the palace. 'Ibe restored western portico of the North
EntrancePassageis markedBastion A, B and C (centre of the plan). Plan probably by Piet de
Jong.
Pietde Jongproducedan ink drawingof the situationasit was supposedto have looked
in Minoantimes. " Basedon this drawing the northernpart of the westernbastionwas
Three columnswere reconstructedto a height
reconstructedto floor height in 1929.145
of approximately 60 centimetres andparts of the back wall were The
constructed. base
of one of thesecolumns was found in a fallen position in the passagewhich suggested

this reconstructionbut a definitive proof is missing.Evanswrote in 1929:
"'Evans, 1901, P. 68 L Then still called the Northern Entrance Way.

143See figure 25.
'"See figure 79.
145
TheTimes,5 August 1929,p. 12. Seealsoplate 81.
310 Chapter5
'ý-. andtheupperterraceof thePorticoover the northernentranceon that sidehasbeenreconstituted.

It is proposed to replaceon its back wall, as a reminiscenceof the "Vapheio" reliefs that once
decorated it, the noble head of a charging bull in painted plaster. Some idea of the original
""'
magnificenceof this approachmay thusbe conveyed.
The proposedreconstructionof thebackwall andthe installationof a reconstructedbull-
grapplingrelief was executedone year later. However, this reconstructionwork, even

in its incompletestate,was of purely presentationalfunction. No conservationneeds
necessitatedthis work.
5.6.3 Roofing over the Magazines in the West Wing
Another work executedin 1929was the roofing of five magazinesin the West Wing.
This work certainly respondedto the necessityto protect the magazinesand their
content. The gypsum paving had suffered considerably in the period between its
excavationin 1900and "'
then, ashad the wall plasterwhich was depictedin a drawing
by TheodoreFyfe."' In addition, the opencists in the floor and the openstoragejars
werevulnerableandexposedto damage.Beingopento the sky, they collectedrain water

which then remainedwithout drying becausethe sun could not reachthe container's
bottoms. Dirt and dust had gatheredin the vesselsandcists,therebyproviding soil for
the growth of weedand plants.To preventfurther damage,the areahad to be covered
with a roof. In 1928Arthur Evansexpressedhis plan to roof the magazines.Thus, in
1929five of the magazineswere roofed with a concreteceiling:
"On thewesta longneeded measure

protective wastheroofingoverof fiveof themagazines,
containing
- just
asthey
were
uncovered
- thelongrows
of jars.
store It has
been possible,
moreover,
with theaidof existingarchitectural to give someideaof the concreteflooring aboveof two
elements,
of the greatupperhalls on this border."""
"Evans, 1929, P. 269.

"See plate 27.
"'Compare figure 20.
149TheTimes, 5 August 1929, p. 11.
Ile Works of Piet de Jong 1922 to 1930 311

Peter Kienzle
Of course, exposure to the elements of nature was not limited to these five magazines,
rather the same conditions were faced by all the magazines. However, the quotation
above suggeststhat the selection of only five magazineswas not arbitrary. By roofing
over these five magazines,it was possible to present elements of the two major upper
floor halls, which Evans reconstructed in this area.150
Buttresses in Magazine VH and in Magazine IX were built in Minoan times to support
the high load at these points of the upper level. According to Evans's and Fyfe's
reconstructions of the first floor, a hall was located above the Magazines VI X. ` It
-
featured two columns to support the roof, which were located above the buttresses.This
logical reconstructionwas supported by the stone column base which had been found in
this area.Immediately north of this two- column hall Evans reconstructed a hall featuring
two rows of columns above the division walls between Magazines XI and XII and
Magazines XII and XIII respectively. Again, this reconstruction was supported by the
discovery of stone column bases in the magazines of this area. The reconstruction
covered Magazines VIII to XII and included the buttress in Magazine VII with an
"'
appendix. This concrete roof protected not only the wall tops but also the gypsum
slabs; and the wall plaster and the jars were rescued from further decay. Furthermore,
reconstructed concrete column bases were placed above the buttresses. While the
buttress in Magazine IX was no longer visible to the visitors, the replaced column base
above the buttress in Magazine VII showed the visitor how the reconstruction of the
upper halls was based on logical conclusions.
This reconstruction work included the construction of a part of the west facade of the
palace which dominates the West Court and, thus, the view of any visitor approaching
the palace today. The reconstruction was executed in rubble masonry covered with a
thick cementplaster to recreatethe effect of massive ashlar blocks. While clear evidence
survived at the Palace of Phaistos for a horizontal reinforcement beam above the
`PM, VI, p. 648.

"'Compare generalplan in Volume II.
"'See plate 14.
312 Chapter5
orthostat course, only one dowel hole survived at Knossos.153

Nonetheless, a horizontal
beamwas reconstructedwith ashlar masonry placed above it. "' There was little but yet
existing evidence for the reinforcement beam but there was absolutely no evidence for
the ashlar masonry above the beam. The reconstruction of ashlar blocks in the west
facade of the palace is questioned by many scholars and Evans and Fyfe, in their first
theoretical reconstruction in 1902 suggested timber framing and panels rather than
massive masonry. 115 In the first floor level of this facade the sills of two window
openings were reconstructed which have also been questioned by later scholars.156
The most likely explanationasto why only five of the magazineswereroofed over are
the costs involved in a completeroofing. But it is also possiblethat Piet de Jong and
Evans wantedto maintainthe view of the ruined landscape.The roofing of the entire
WestWing would inevitablyhavedemandedan architecturalsolution of the west facade
which would have had an impact on the appearanceof the palacetowards the West
Court. SincePiet de Jong slopedthe walls in the domesticquarterto recreatea ruined
the secondargumentcannoteasilybe rejected.While roofing was necessary
appearance,
to protecta numberof pithoi andsomeof the architecturaldetails, the specific selection
of five of the magazineswas madefor didactic reasons.The reconstructionwork was
basedon the ideaof providingmoreinformationaboutthe groundplan of the halls in the
first floor.
The lastmajorreconstructionwork at the Palaceof Minos was executedin 1930.It had

beenEvans'sintention to dedicatethe 1930campaignexclusivelyto conservationand
reconstruction work, but new discoveriesat the West Court demandeda full scale
"'Shaw, 1973,p. 88.

"'See plate9.
"'Shaw, 1973,p. 90 andEvans,1900,p. 10 andFyfe, 1902,p. 114.
"'Pendlebury, 1963,p. 99, Graham,1960a,p. 329 and Cadogan,1980,p. 65.

Peter KienzIe
excavation. However, the main objective of the campaign was the completion of the
reconstructionwork at the North Entrance Passageand the roofing of the'Ibrone Room
area.
5.7.1 North Entrance Passage
The first work executedin 1930was the completionof the reconstructionwork at the
North EntrancePassageasproposedone year earlier.The main objectiveof this work
was to replacethe replica of the bull-grapplingrelief at the back wall of the portico.
Evanswrote in 1930:
"Ibe WesternterraceabovetheNorthernEntrancepassagee hasnot only beencompletedto its original

.,,
level,but partof the porticohasbeenreconstructed
anda sectionof the greatpaintedrelief shewing
[sic] anolivetreeandtheforepartof the chargingbull hasbeenreplacedin replica,so that to visitors
approachingthe Palacefrom the northmustappearmuchasit did to the first Greekintruders."'57
The relief fresco fragments found in this area were reconstructed by E. Gilli6ron, fils in
accordance with a similar gypsum relief found at Mycenae and brought to England by
Elgin. "' The size of the reconstructed bull-grappling relief determined the height of the
back wall and, thus, of the entire Portico. A sketch of the proposed work survived in Piet
de Jong's notebook. This sketch shows the ground plan with the passage'spaving (left)
a section of the portico indicating the height of the ashlar masonry courses and the
columns (top right) and the plan of the portico with fix point for the bull's eye (bottom
right). 1" The sketch indicates that both the bastion and the colonnades above were
planned at the same time and executed in two successiveyears.
"'Evans, 1930,p. 290.

`PM IV, P. 10.
"'Notebook Piet de Jong,Archive of theBritish Schoolat Athens.
314 Chapter 5
... '4e
II, -
...... .....
.
Figure 79 RestorationdrawingshowingNorth EntrancePassage.

Piet de Jong.

PcterYicnzle
71be walls were built in rubble masonry
and plasteredwith cementrender in which A r lj
lines were incised to imitate isodomic
ashlar masonry. The concrete columns,

already begun in 1929, were elevated to
full heighL" The entire portico was
AW
roofed with a flat concrete ceiling, the

eavesof which were decoratedwith round
discs.These discs were similar to the ones
executed in paint at the Pillared Portico,

but this time they were made three-
dimensionally in concrete.161At the back
of the structure a cross-wall was

13:
constructed which rose almost to the

portico's ceiling height, in order to secure Figure 80 Sketch plan and section of the
proposedreconstruction of the western
it against earthquake damage.161
portico of the North Entrance Passage.
Notebook Piet de Jong.
This work was of a purely presentationalnatureas can be seenin the quotationabove

and from Evans's statements in his book 'The Palaceof Minos'. `-' Therecertainly was
no needfor conservationwork in this area.Ratherit relied much more on the desireto
bull-grapplingrelief in the placewhereit was found. However,
displaythe reconstructed
both the reconstructionof the relief in itself aswell asthe reconstructionof the portico
arebasedon too little evidenceto be seenas faithful reconstructions.
`PM IV, P. 13.

"'Compare page 292 and plate 82.
I'M IV, P. 11.
IIIPM IV, p. 7.
316 Chapter5
5.7.2 The Throne Room Area
Today the Throne Room area,as it was reconstructedin 1930, dominates the appearance
of the Central Court. The Throne Room and the Inner Sanctuaryhad already been roofed
over in 1901, one year after their "
excavation. A pitched roof was constructed in 1904
and was extended later by Christian Doll to cover the Service Section at the west. "
However, the Anteroom and the staircasein the round corner were not covered and were
left to the destructive forces of the weather, despite the fact that these rooms featured
the samesensitivegypsum slabsas the Throne Room. After being exposed to the weather
for twenty-nine years, most of the paving material had deteriorated beyond repair and,
as a result, the Ante Room today predominantly features 166

new replacernent SlabS.
Immediateaction was necessaryto preservethe alreadyheavily affectedfeaturesin the

Anteroom.Pietde Jongfacedtwo options.He could designan extensionto the existing
roof or he could removethe old pitched roof and replaceit with a new construction.
There is no indication whatsoeverthat the pitched roof had not fulfilled its function
properly, even if the gutter at the south roof seemedto be a unfortunate detail '67
.
However, from an aestheticview, the pitchedroof of 1904was an alien elementin the
otherwise very uniforrn landscape 161

of ruins and reconstructions. In the Domestic
Quarterde Jongreplacedthe earlier door andwindow frarnesby Fyfe andDoll with his
own systemsto achieveanuniform appearance.It seernsto be logical that he wantedto

replace the much bigger alien element in the ruined landscapeof the West Wing.
Furthermore,thejoint betweenthe necessaryroof structureabovethe Ante Room and
the existingroof abovetheThroneRoomwould havebeena problematicpoint unlessthe
"'See page173ff.
"'See page236 ff.
'"Compare pavementof the ThroneRoomwith that of the Anteroomin GroundPlan,Drawing 1.
""Compareplates33 and59.
"'At Us timetheMagazineof the GiantPithoi hasalreadybeenroofedwith a flat concreteroof. 'Me
C,
onlysurvivingpitchedroofswereat theConidorof Baysandat the Shrineof the DoubleAxes.Comparewith
plate 6.

Peter Kienzle
pitched roof was extended.Thus, the pitched roof was removed and the entire area was
roofed over with a new concreteconstruction. Once again, the presentational element on
site playeda dominantrole. Arthur Evanswrote in the Annualsof the British School:
'Meanwhile, thanksto the structuralwork of ý&. Piet de Jong and the artistic skill of E. Gilli6ron, fils,
the works of restoration and reconstruction on which I had embarked have been successfully
completed.71he"Room of the Throne" and its Antechamber have not only been roofed over, but the
upper system, including a clere-storey and lantern, has been reconstructed in such a way that the
ancientsystemof fighting hasbeenrecovered.The original effect of the ceremonial chamber has been
further attained by the restoration of the frescoes of three more of the guardian Griffins. ""'
The walls of the Ante Room were elevatedwith rubble masonryand the pillars at the
westfront werecastin concretesimilar to the onesof the Hall of the Double Axes. The
pitchedroof of 1904and the underlyingflat timber ceiling of 1901were removed,but
Fyfe'sreconstructed
columnswereleft in position.Concretering beamswere cast in situ
on top of the elevatedwalls. An importantdetail can be seenin the photographstaken
by JohnPendleburyduringtheconstructionprocess.170 The ring beamsfeaturemortices.
The concreteceiling was cast in one piecewith the supportingcrossbeamsandrested
in thesemorticesbut was not firmly connectedwith the ring beamsandthe walls. The
newceilingstretchedfrom the CentralCourt to the reconstructedUpper Long Corridor.

An upper storey, the so called Loggia, was reconstructedwhich was modelled on
Newton's plan of 1922.The reconstructionof the Loggia did not incorporatea single
original element,but a few door jambs were reusedin the westernpart of the upper
Throne Room area.
Mass production facilitieswere employedto reproducethe architecturaldetailsof the
upperstoreyreconstructionin theThroneRoom area.All walls in the upperstoreywere

reconstructedapproximatelyseventy-fivecentimetreswide and the cast concretedoor
or windowjambsin thesewallsweremadeexactlyeighty centimetreswide. There is one
exceptionto this rule - the wall immediatelynorth of the reconstructedLoggia which is
"'Evans, 1930, P. 289 L

"'Plates 59 and 60.
318 Chapter5
only sixty centimetres wide - but this wall featured neither a door nor window. 171The
reason for this uniform thickness of the walls is that the repeated use of the same
concrete cast moulds naturally required all walls to be of identical thickness. The wall
which encloses the area on its west side, the former west gable of the earlier
reconstruction by Christian Doll, is ninety-five centimetres thick and the doorjambs are
hundred-and-four centimetres wide. This is due to the fact that it incorporated Doll's
gable and that the southern part of this wall was already constructed as part of the
Stepped Portico in 1922 and 1923.
Altogether,sevencolumnswere producedfor the areaof the Loggia abovethe Throne

Room.Fivecolumnswerepositionedat the balustradearoundthe light well and another
column was placedat the window overlookingthe CentralCourt. The seventhcolumn

was only half castandwas placedat a window westof the Loggia."' They are identical
in shapeandwerecastin reusablemoulds.The constructionof castmouldsis one of the
most expensiveparts of concreteconstruction,and this processbecomeseven more

costly,if sphericalforms mustbe producedaswith the column capitals.Thus, it was an
if severalcolumnscould be producedin one mould, asPiet de Jong
economicadvantage
hasdone."'
In the Throne Room, E. Gilli6ron reconstructed three more griffins to complete the
decorative scheme as suggested by himself earlier. "' These griffins were painted on
boards, probably plywood, and mounted to the wall while the areas above and below
these boards were plastered. Many fresco fragments were found at Knossos in various
places, some of which were restored by both Gilli6ron, p6re, and Gilli6ron, fils. The
originals were placed in the Museum at Candia (Herakleion), but replicas were made for
display on site. Since their original find context could not be reproduced, they were
displayedat the Loggia above the Throne Room. "' The design of this Loggia seemsto
"'Compare First Floor Plan, Drawing 2.

"'Compare Reynolds, 1945, p. 156.
""See plates 69 and 70.
175pMIV, p. 924.

Peter Kienzle
be very arbitrary and Evans admitted that it was 'conjectural'. "' The reconstruction
featured a first floor verandah overlooking the Central Court which, unlike all other
was
reconstructions, not fitted with a pillared portico.This basicdesignidea clearly was
takenfrom F. G. Newton's reconstruction drawing andwas not from Piet de Jong.177
A numberof reconstructionsby Piet de Jongat Knossos,suchas the EastBastion, the

Magazine of the Giant Pithoi, the South-EastStairwayand the South-EastHouseare
not mentioned in this chapter.The techniques
employed in thesereconstructionswere
identicalto the onesdescribedand most of theseareasunderwentonly one restoration
phase. Thus, in regardto the limited space these

available, have not beendiscussed in
detail. Piet de Jong executedsome restorationwork at the Little Palacein 1931, but
sincethis is outsidethe scopeof study,it will not be discussedeither.
5.8 After Knossos
When Piet de Jong executed his early work in Knossos, he was a private architect
employed by Arthur Evans for this specific job. This changed after 1924 when de Jong
becamethe official architect to the British School at Athens. At the Annual Meeting of
Subscribers of the British School at Athens it was announced that:
"...PietdeJong,formerlya Studentof theBritishSchoolatRome,andnowresidingin Athens,has

beenofficiallyappointedArchitectto theSchool,andit is hopedthatfor manyyearsto comethe
to havethebenefitof hisgiftedservices
will continue
school for its excavations.
Themeritof Mr de
Jong'swork at Mycenaeandat Knossos
is alreadywell known,andhis help at Sparta,in planningthe
site of the Tbeatre,provedinvaluable.

""'
In the sameyear he executedrepairsto the Director's houseat the British School at

Athens, where dry rot had affected the roof structure. Piet de Jong suggested that the
I`PM IV, p. 924.

"Compare drawingof Newton,figure 65.
"'BSA, Vol. XXVI, 1923-24/1924-25,p. 318.
320 Chapter 5
house'spitchedroof be strippedcompletelyandreplacedwith a flat concreteroof.17"His
wereendorsedandfinallyexecuted.It is interestingto seethat Piet de Jong,

suggestions
in a contextwherehedid not work for Evans,suggesteda solution similar to the one at
Knossos.From 1922and later as the School's architect,Piet de Jong worked not only
for Evansbut alsofor Alan Waceat Mycenae,wherehe alsoexecutedreconstructionand
conservation work. The work in Mycenae was much smaller in scale than at Knossos but
the materials and techniques employed were very similar. "'
OF ATREUS-
TREASURY
MATERI^LS
5- r3i CONGLOMERAlt "SLCIýr-: )LLL-ý
Roc K e:m
ýý, rm
77. -, POROS
LIMESTOM C]
SECCrION
-A 8
SECTION
A----- PLAN
SCAIE OF METRES
0ý
Fi(yure81 Treasuryof Atreusat Mycenae.Planby Piet de Jongfor Alan Wace.

4:1 r
He held the position as schoolarchitectuntil 1932,but due to the lack of funding the
"'
positionremainedvacant. Fromhis departurefrom the British Schooluntil World War
II Piet de Jongdrew mainlyfor theAmericanSchoolat their excavationsin the Athenian
179Annualof BSA, XXVI, 1923-24; 1924-25, p. 317.

"OSeeplates 219 and 220.
"'Waterhouse, 1986, p. 3 1.
Ilie Works of Piet de Jong 1922to 1930 321

PetcrICenzle
Agora. "' Throughout the war he produced precision tools in London and lived in his
cottage in Snetterton, Norwich. 183

He returned to Athens inunediately after the end of the
war to resume work with the American School at the Agora. After Richard W.
Hutchinson retired in 1947, Piet de Jong became curator at Knossos.'84His curatorship
ended in 1952 when, due to financial pressure, the site of Knossos was handed over to
the Greek GovemmenO' Piet de Jong stayed for a further few months in Knossos, but
as a private architect, not as curator.
He took on smalljobs at severalsites,mainly to recordthe excavatedstructuresand to
executereconstructiondrawingsof bothbuildingsandpottery. He worked with Nikolaos

Platon, the Greek archaeologistin chargeof Knossosafter 1952,andexecutedfurther
at thepalacesite.The Corridor of the bayswas coveredwith a concrete

reconstructions
ceiling,replacingthe pitchedroof
in this area.He alsoextendedthe
existing concrete ceiling in the

West Wing to include the Room
of the Niche and the adjoining
areas.For nineseasonshe worked
at Blegen's excavation of the
Palace of Nestor in pyloS.116In
1964he executeda reconstruction
drawing for the Throne Room at
thePalaceof Nestorwhich copied
the main features of the LL_L
reconstruction of the Throne Figure 82 Plan and section of central area, Palace of
Room at Knossos in 1930. A Nestor,Pylos.Pietde Jong.
"'The Times, 27 April 1967,p. 12. Seefor exampledrawingfig. 155 in: The AthenianAgora. A
Guideto the ExcavationandMuseum.By the AmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesat Athens.
183WySAGreenBook, 1941,p. 13.
'"Waterhouse,1986,p. 37.
"'Waterhouse,1986,p. 86.
116
SeeBlegenandRawson,1973,p. x and The Times,27 April 1967,p. 12.
322 Chapter 5
comparison between the section of the suggested reconstruction at Pylos and the
executedwork at Knossosshows the similarity. 187In 1965 he worked at the excavation
at Keos executing mainly drawingsandwatercoloursof potterybut surprisinglylittle

"'
architecturalrecords. Since1923he alsoproducednurnerouscartoons,predominantly
who worked in Greeceandpeoplerelatedto them,depicting them in
of archaeologists
a humorous way. "'
In 1965 his wife Effie died and Piet de Jong died soon after on 20 April 1967. Until a
year before his death he was still executing drawings for the British School. " Since his
wife died before him and they had no children or immediate family, hardly any material
on Piet de Jong's private life has survived. However, Piet de Jong's extensive work in
Crete, and especially his style of drawing lived on as a legacy and affected the
archaeological drawings and reconstructions in Crete. "' It seems that he was a quiet
character who was valued by most of the archaeologists in Greece as a valuable and
reliable member of the excavation staff. However, at most sites he produced some
beautiful reconstruction drawings of buildings but many more of pottery. Thus, he
became more a draughtsman than an architect. -
5.9 Conclusions
Piet de Jong's work at Knossosis determinedby two importantelements.First, is the

introductionof reinforcedconcreteasa cheapand durablematerial.It respondedmuch
better to the subsidenceproblemswhich occurredat the SteppedPortico in 1922and
proved beneficialin the earthquakeof 1926.Employingmassproduction and reusable

provedto be much more economicalthan all the
shuttering,the concretereconstructions
""Compare figure 82 and Section A-A, Drawing 3.

"'Coleman, 1977, p. viii.
1`17hecartoons are now in ownership of Rachel Hood who is in the process of publishing them.
"'The Times, 27 April 1967, p. 12.
`See Roikos, 1986, p 125 126.
-

Peter Kienzle
previous work on site. Second, the aesthetic feelings of Piet de Jong, clearly expressed
in his water colours, led him to display the reconstructions in a 'pseudo-ruined' state.
This diverges dramatically from the approach taken by Fyfe and Doll, where horizontal
top courses were employed for reconstructed walls and ashlar pillars were used to
support the beams at the Grand Staircase. The approach of stepping the reconstructed
walls down rather than having an abrupt end can be seen in both Piet de Jong's water
colours and his physical reconstructions. "'
Arthur Evans published the first volume of his monumental book The Palace qf Minos
in 1921 but he had not beento the site since he had left it in 1913. This forced period of
absencewas a devastatingexperiencefor Evans in two respects.First, he saw how much

the Palace had deteriorated since he left it. Second, for his forthcoming volumes he
started an energeticreinvestigation period after 1922. These new investigations, initially

planned to provide him with the necessaryinformation for his book, provided the base
for the reconstruction work by Piet de Jong.
The result of Piet de Jong's work was the combination of the following factors: the
obvious need for conservation work, the information provided to execute the
reconstructionsand the availability of a material which was as being
C>regarded appropriate
and was also cheap. Finally, Piet de Jong's aesthetic feelings of a picturesque ruin and
Evans' constant desire to pass on his knowledge to the visitors added further to the
circumstances which led to the work executed on site.
"'Compare plateH, p. 438, figure 75 plates82 and210.
324 Chapter5
Chapter 6
Evaluation of the
Aspects of the Reconstructions
_Technical
.w conservation (ý/' archaeological material must begill in the field;
plann ing for conservation needs must therefOre start when the excavation
is proposed. This obvious statement needs repeating; although
'first have developed immensel-y
excavation and other archaeological techniques
in the pastfifty years, the standards of conservation of'excavated material
have not generallY improved to the same extew.
(Nicholas Stanley-Price, 1984,1). 1)
326 Chapter 6
Chapter 6
Evaluation of the Technical Aspects of the Reconstructions
6.0 Introduction
The previousthree chaptersdescribedthe individual works of the architectsTheodore

Fyfe,ChristianDoll and Piet de Jong at the site of Knossos.Eachof them employedhis
own specifictechniquesand materialsfor the reconstructionswhich clearly distinguish

themfrom eachother.The chosenreconstructionmaterialsreflect both the financial and
limitationsandthe architecturalandengineeringknowledgeavailableat this
geographical
time, but they also reflect the specificconservationattitudesof the architects.
Evansfrequentlystressedthat the mainagendafor the reconstructionswas to protect the

It
excavatedstructures. hasalreadybeennotedthat Evanswas involved in conservation
debatesin Britain beforehebeganexcavationwork at Knossosand he was certainly not
ignorantof the philosophicalbackgroundandthe technicalknowledgeof conservation.'
0
It would be difficult to gainsaythe integrity of his publicly proclaimedposition that the
1P
reconstructionswere primarily intendedas protection for the excavatedstructures;it
seemscertainthat this is what he himself believedhe was doing.
In this chapterthe qualitiesof the different reconstructiontechniquesand materialswill
of their usein the

be discussed.The materialswill be analysedandthe appropriateness
reconstructionswill be discussed.Furthermore,there will be discussionof where they

havebeenusedin Knossosandhow they performedthere,especiallyhow they harmed
'Comparepage68 ff.
Evaluation of the Technical Aspects of the Reconstructions 327

Peter Kienzle
or benefitedthe original palace. In order to do so, each material will be discussed in the
following three categories:
6 How they have been used at Knossos
Its adequacyfor usein the reconstruction

Their performance,harm andbenefit to the historic fabric
6.1 Stone
Stone is the most obviousmaterialusedin the reconstructionat the Palace. The basic
materialwas readily availableat the site either in the form of Minoan building material
asspoilfrom theexcavationprocessor asnewly quarriedmaterialfrom sourcesnearby.
Local stonedominatestraditional Cretanarchitecture.The walls of both contemporary
town housesand farmhouseswere built in rubble masonry,and the window and door
dressingswere executedin dressedmasonry.2Consequently,skilled local stonemasons
wereavailableto executethe reconstructionwork at Knossos.Sincethe original Palace
was constructedto a large extent in masonry,to replacelike with like seemedto be a
good solution.
6.1.1. The Use of Stone in the Reconstruction Process
From the very beginning of the Palace's reconstruction process both, reused historic
stonesand newly quarried stone was used. The first and, by far, biggest source was the
stone which could be found at the excavation site itself. When the Palace was destroyed
and finally deserted,the stonesof higher parts of masonry walls collapsed into the rooms
and courtyards. Some of these stones have been removed in later historic periods but
much still remained on site? For most of the stones, which were no longer in their
'See Bosineki-Didoni, 1985.

'Compare page 152.
328 Chapter6
Conservation and Reconstruction at The Palace of Minos at Knossos
architectural context, the former position could not be securelyestablished.In the

excavationprocessthesestoneswere regardedasdebrisand clearedtherebyproviding
a large amount of stone suitable to reconstructrubble masonry.The re-use of this
material is a very economicalsolution sincehardly any production and transportation
costs occur. The reusedstones are predominantlyp6ros limestone,sandstoneand,
occasionally,gypsum.'
The secondgroup of stone used in the reconstruction process was newly quarried stones
for specific purposes and includes both gypsum and p6ros limestone. This material was
extracted from quarries in the vicinity of the Palace as, most likely, was the case in the
construction periods.' As in Minoan times, this kept the transportation costs to a
minimum. Both the original material and the new material came from, if not the same
quarry, at least the "
same geological strata. Hence, the physical properties of the newly
quarried stone are similar but, as we will see later on, not always identical with the
original material. This avoids some technical difficulties but creates another problem. If
the original gypsum material is weathering too quickly, replacing it with new gypsum
from the same source will not solve the problem. Another problem that arises from this
procedure is that it blends in too well. While much of the dressed stonework in the
reconstructionscan be identified as new material, it has become in many parts impossible
to distinguish between original Minoan rubble masonry walls and the new walls
constructed with reused and new stones a few decadesago.

I
In the reconstructionof theThroneRoom,dressedstoneslabswere usedto top the brick
piHarson whichtheroof constructionrested.TheodoreFyfe alsoused dressedlimestone

blocksfor the half heightpillar at the entranceof the Throne Room andemployedstone
drums for the constructionof the threecolumnsin the sameroom. The capitalson top
of the three columnswere made from plasteron a lath '

under-construction. Fyfe also
'Shaw, 1973,P.12 ff.

'Ibid., P. 12.
"Ibid., p. 38 ff andPM L p. 532.
'Seeplate 47.
Evaluationof the TechnicalAspectsof the Reconstructions 329

PeterKicnzle
employed dressedlimestone slabsfor the reconstruction of the TheatralArea in 1903and

for the floor construction at the first floor level in the Domestic Quarter. After the
excavationof theNorth Lustral Basin in 1901he replacedsomeof the coping stonesof

the steppedbalustradewith newgypsumslabsto preventfurther deterioration! Fyfe also
replaced the slabswhich coveredthe cists in the Long Corridor with newly quarried
gypsummaterial afterit was in
excavated 1903.9Furthermore,he useddressedlimestone
blocks for the quoins at wall endsand for someof the door and window jambs in the
DomesticQuarter.'OIn the latter case,the new ashlarmasonryrecededbehindthe line
of the former doorjambs, which were indicatedby the original jamb blocks, so that the
timber frameworkcould be fitted in front of it in its original position.
Frequently Fyfe usedrubble masonrywhich was fitted into a timber framework. This
timberframeworkprovideda rectangularcagestructurein which the small rubble stones
werebuild as,for example,at theHall of theDoubleAxes,the Queen'sMegaron and the
Roomwith the PlasterCouch." Manywallsweresimplerubblemasonrywalls with some
and
selected dressed stonesfor the cornersandwall endsas,for example,the retaining
waUs,wallsin the Domestic Quarter or the small houseabovethe Shrineof the Double
Axes. Fyfe's reconstructedmasonrywalls showeda common horizontal top course.
Thus,they wereeasilydistinguishablefrom the ruinousoriginal walls.
Z.
In contrast to Fyfe, Christian Doll used much more dressedstonework and even the
12
rubble masonryseemedto be more regular,employing
0 roughly dressedrubble stone.
While Theodore Fyfe, and later, Piet de Jong seemto have used randomlycollected
stonesfor their reconstructions,
ChristianDoll seemsto haveselectedthe stoneshe used
very carefully and evenreworked someof them. In 1905he employedneatly dressed

ashlarmasonryto replacethemissingpartsof the balustradewall of the GrandStaircase
'See plates 71 and 72. For further reading on gypsum seeAshurst and Dimes, 1990.
"Evans 1903, p. 3.
"See page 195.
"See page 196 and plate 180.
"Figure 83.
330 Chaptcr6
ConservationandReconstructionat The Palaceof Minos at Knossos
and in the 1910 reconstructionhe

usedblocksof limestoneto construct
the pillars and the column." All of
these pillars were designed with
coping stones to prevent water
penetration. When Doll recon-
structed the Queen's Megaron in
1908,he usednew limestoneblocks
for the lower coursesof the walls Figure83 jxuuL,i,z silubutiry oy rpe kaDOVeooor) ana oy
Doll (above window).
enclosingthe easternlight-well. The
upper part of theselight-well walls
were executedin rubble masonryas
were the balustradewalls in the first
floor level above the Queen's
Megaron. Both the rubble walls in
the light-well and in the upperstorey
were plastered and covered in the
area of the light-well with a pitched
roof, or with coping stones in the
caseof the balustrade." rigurr, O'f L,1,111L
wen, %4ueens megaron, souin wan
with ashlarmasonry(lower four courses) and
plastered rubble masonry above.
In his reconstructionsPiet de Jongusedrubble masonryto elevatethe excavatedwalls

to ceilingheightto providea firm basefor the concreteceilings. As an exception,he had
a columncarvedfrom limestonein his reconstructionof the SteppedPortico in 1923.11
Besidesthiscolumnandsomequoinblocksat wall ends,he hardly useddressedmasonry
in his work. Wallsweresteadilyrising to the requiredlevel so that abruptendsto walls,
asin Doll's work hardlyoccurred.The door and window jambs were executedin rubble
13
Seeplate 120.
"See plate 120,background.
"See page283.

Peter Kienzle
masonrywhich was cased with concrete replicas of the original timber framework. The
tops of the rubble walls were made waterproof through the use of cementitious mortars.
There is no evidence that Piet de Jong used new gypsum material. This must be seen as
a logical response to the clearly deteriorating gypsum replacements which were

introduced by Fyfe.
Rubblemasonrywasusedfrom the verybeginningof the reconstructionwork on site and

dressedstoneblocks were usedfor specificpurposes.It is prudentto assumethat the
corner blocks were newly quarriedstone,but it is impossibleto decideto what extent
newly quarried limestonewas employedin the constructionof the rubble walls. The
materialcamefrom the sameor similarsourcesandsomeof the ancientmaterialhasbeen
reworked.Howeverthe threearchitectsclearly showdifferencesin the way they treated
the rubble masonrywalls and how thesewalls were integratedin the ruins. While all
architects employednewly carved limestoneelementsat someplace or other, it was
clearly ChristianDoll who favouredthe materialandusedit most.
6.1.2 Adequacy of Stone as a Material for Reconstruction
From a technicalperspectivestoneis doubtlessa materialwhich is compatiblewith the

originalstructure.The physicalpropertiesof the repairmaterialarealmostidenticalwith
that of the original material and there is no reasonto expect structural, physical or
chemicaldifficulties.However,this is only the casewith the stoneswhile a wall consists
of both,stoneandmortar.The mortarusedin the historic constructionof the Palacewas
mud which gave the structures 16
a comparativesoftness. The roof above the walls
prevented the mortar from being washedaway by the weather.After the excavation
processthe wall topswereexposedto the weatherandthe wallsrapidly disintegrateddue
to rain affecting the solublemortar.Thesewall topsneededsomedurableprotection."
"Durm, 1910, P. 58.

'Tor ftirtherreadingin theconservation
of exposedwall topsat archaeologicalsitessee:Ashurstand
Dimes, 1990,Vol. 2, p. 6 ff.
332 Chapter 6
Conservation and Reconstruction atIbe Palace of Minos at Knossos
The new masonry, employing the same stone material but different mortars will always
feature physical properties different from the original walls, one of which is the wall's
structural properties, another its ability to breathe. The exchange of humidity between
the structures and the surrounding air is reduced by the new lime mortars affecting the
abUityof waHsto 'breath' as they could earlier. Furthermore, reconstructed rubble walls
cannot easily be distinguished from the original masonry if old material is reused. This
difficulty is increased by repointing the original walls with a mortar identical to the one
used in the reconstruction work. 18
Another point of interest is the joint between the historic masonry and the new
reconstructions.Reconstructedstonewalls imposeconsiderableamountof load onto a

structurewhichmightno longerbe ableto carryit. It hasbeennotedthat the walls in the
palacewereconstructedwith two outer shellsbetweenwhich rubble andclay hasbeen
infilled." Oncethe roof abovethe wall was removed,a processof disintegrationstarted
through water penetrationfrom the top. The bondingbetweenthe outer shellsand the
inner core of the wall is affectedwhich damagedthe structural integrity of the wall
considerablythoughthis is not alwaysvisible from the outside.
The load-bearingabilities of rubble masonrywalls vary considerablythroughout their

length.The internal strengthof a rubble masonrywall dependsboth on a good bo'n'ýing
betweenthe two outer shellsand a good integrationof the outer shellswith the inner
core.Furthermore,it dependson a good mixtureof rubble stonesand mortar in the core:

i.e. that stonesof varioussizeshavebeencompactedwell with the mortar. If small stones
are n-dssingin the mixture of the inner core, clay mortar hasto fulfill this task but this
in 20
results a weakerstructure. Furthermore,a comparativelysmooth inner side of the
in
outer shellof a wall results a weak bonding between the shell and the core.2'All these
"At Knossosmostof the repointingwork wasexecutedafterWorld War II by NikolaosPlatonand

PietdeJong.A redcolouredmortarwasusedwhich allows a cleardistinctionof this work from earlierwork
in Evans'stime.Thework is, somewhatsuperficially,describedin severalVolumesof KpnTIKa XPOVIKa.
"Comparepage123f.
0
"See figure 85 a and b.
"See figure 85 c.

PeterKienzIe
criteria are not visible from the outside of a wall, and in Evans' time no non-destructive
for investigating the inner composition of a wall was available.22 It has been
method
noted that the Minoan builders focussed more on visual appearancethan on the quality
of the construction 2' Different masons had originally constructed the palace and the
.
walls origin from different periods. Thus the workmanship of the masonry varies.
Furthermore, the destruction process and penetrating humidity affected different parts
of the walls to a different extent. Consequently, the ability to carry additional new load
varies considerablyalong the length of a wall even if the wall once carried a similar load.
Figure 85 Well constructedmasonrywith rubbleof varioussizes(a), weakmasonrywith small

stonesmissing(b) andmasonrywith weakinternalbond(c).
Most of the wallsat thePalaceof Minos areratherthick, a fact which hasalwaysserved
as an argumentindicating the former 2'

existenceof upper storeys. While almost all
agree
researchers on at least
oneupperstorey,otherssuggestedup to threeupper storeys
the
above ground floor.25Most wallswere,generallyspeaking,capableof carrying some
"in recent years ground penetrating radar, resistivity and magnetometry have been developed to
0 --
overcome these difficulties. However, to date none of these methods reached a state that would allow
predictions with the necessaryexactnessfor construction purposes.
23See page 142.
24Graham discusses this in his Paper on The Phaistos "Piano Nobile", American Journal of
Archaeology, 1956, p. 151 - 157. But see also Graham, 1979.
"For exampleFamoux, 1996.p. 8.
334 Chapter6
ConservationandReconstructionatIbe Palaceof Minos at Knossos
additional load and in many areas the reconstruction of masonry walls was limited to
elevating the excavated structures to ceiling height as in large areasof the West Wing
and in the easternand southernparts of the Domestic Quarter. This hardly exceeded one
metre in height and imposed only limited additional load. It was only in the areasof the
Grand Staircaseand the Throne Room that more storeys were reconstructed. However,
it was seenin the reconstructionat the Stepped Portico in 1922 that heavy load imposed
on weakenedhistoric masonrycan result in the collapse of the underlying historic wall. "
Rubble masonry is sensitive to concentrated heavy load at one point. The iron-girders
of Doll's and - at the Stepped Portico - de Jong's reconstruction did not rest on a load
disseminating wall plate but each of them were laid directly on the masonry of the walls.
Thus, the load from the ceiling was not distributed evenly. The collapse of the middle
wall under the Stepped Portico might have been avoided if a wall plate had been
introduced. However, Piet de Jong's reaction of employing reinforced concrete ceilings
C)
for ftirther reconstruction work reflected this problem. The stiff concrete slab distributes
the load better than the individual beams and girders. If consideration of this aspect is
taken, rubble masonry is an adequate material for the reconstructions.
Reconstructedrubble walls, by selectingthe right stones,can be fitted closely to the
existingraggedsurfaceof theexcavatedwalls.Only a few loosestonesmust be removed

or reset in mortar; otherwisethe historic fabric is not affectedby the addition of new
"
rubble masonry. The construction of a good rubble masonrywall needsthe same
craftsmanship as the construction of a dry stone wall but the Cretan vernacular
architecture is madeup of rubble masonryhousesand skilled craftsmenwere readily
available.If the right mortarsareused,the wall gainssomedegreeof flexibility. Through
its manyjoints, load can be disseminatedto someextentif no heavyconcentratedload
is imposed. The materialfor the walls was readily availableon the site and at local
quarries.This wasnot only veryeconomicalbut alsoguaranteedharmoniousintegration
26Seepage280 E
"Ms is very often a majorproblemin brokenload-bearingashlarmasonry.The new blockscannot
0
be carved to fit closelyto the brokensurfaceof the historic blocks and frequentlymore historic fabric is
removedto createa mathematicaldeterminedsurfaceonto which the new block is set.

PcterKicnzle
with the existing structures. Thus, as has been stated before, rubble masonry is certainly
to repair rubble masonry walls, but sometimes it is
an adequate medium with which
difficult to distinguishthe original masonryfrom the reconstructions.
6.1.3. Performance, Harm and Benefits
The general assumption will be that a material which has been employed in the original
structure cannot harm this structure if used in its reconstruction. This assumption,
however, cannot be supported in an unqualified way. Rubble masonry was used in the
original construction, but the properties of mortars employed in the reconstruction
process vary considerably from the mud mortar employed in Minoan times. The
particularity of rubble masonry is its consistence of many small stones rather than a few
big members.Load and structural forces can be diverted into many lines and movement
of the building membersis absorbedby the many joints in the masonry which is, in terms
of conservation, a desiredeffect. However, this property depends to a large extent on the
quality of the mortar. If the mortar is too hard and strong, the ability to absorb unwanted
forces is reduced.
An analysisof the mortars from Knossos, conducted by the Scottish Lime Centre on the
behalf, shows that all three architects used lime mortars." While cement was
author's
used for the reinforced concrete structures,it was not employed for mortars. All mortars
were comparatively soft with little evidence of cementitious binders but were still
stronger than the original mud mortar and the mortars used by de Jong were stronger
than the ones used by Fyfe and Doll. However, all repair mortars were comparatively
soft. As a result of this, no damagecould be detected at the Palace which was due to the
strength of the mortars used. Thin reconstructed walls responded by bending and
sometimescracks appearedin the mortar joints. For example, the South-North Corridor
was reconstructed by Piet de Jong in 1925. In the western part of the Corridor, three
"See Appendix5 for the full report.
336 Chapter6
wallsanda columnformeda very firm compound,

while at its easternside only one thin
the
waUsupported ceiling. The of
movement the flat concreteceiling is by the
absorbed
00
slim easternwall whichbendswhilethe thick westernwall clearly showsthe cracksin the
joints."
0 Z; c,
cl.
(n C%
r CN r- CIWZ
-
ON
e, 9 ýr r 04 cz rZ ý:
E Et E E itý Ei l
-
vs =U
Lime &
7.4 3.2 6.9 20.0 1.6 22.0 4.0 1.1
Limestone
Gypsum 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0
Clay 0.4 1.5 0.4 1.7 1.0 2.5 0.2 0.1

- 777 F1
Sand I I I II - I
Table 3 Mortar samplesfrom the Palaceof Minos.
It seems that no problems occurred at the interface between the historic walls and the
new reconstruction.On the one handthe original

Z
masonrystandsup to a considerable
height and rising dampwill still evaporatethrough the original walls rather than being
C; 0 In 0
blocked by the reconstruction mortars. On the other hand, these mortars were made of
lime and, therefore,they slightly impededbut did not preventthe evaporationprocess.

ZP
Many joints of the original walls had been repointed in the 1950sin campaignsby
Nikolaos Platon and Piet de Jong but they alsousedlime mortars." This madeit very
difficult to distinguish the original and the reconstructed walls in some places but it
should have limited affects to humidity exchange of the 31

wallS.
Employing a soft mortar,the additionalrubble masonryis reversiblewithout too much

damageto the historic fabric. The new masonryhasnot harmedthe historic fabric. The
"See plate 15.

"See table 3.
"There are somehumidity relatedproblemsin the DomesticQuarterwhich are probably due to
ratherthanhumidity trappedby mortars.
drainageproblemsandgenerallack of maintenance

PeterKienzle
additional load imposedon the excavatedstructures by the new walls was less than what
had beenresting on thesein Minoan times. Besides the one case of the reconstruction of
the SteppedPortico in 1922,the weight of the new walls did not cause problems for the
historic fabric.
It seems that no wall has been exclusively elevated and repointed to prevent further
damage to the exposed top. Most of the walls were elevated to carry a roof or at least
a door jamb or a similar element from the "

upper storeys. Some had other structural
functions as for example the retaining walls. They were reconstructed to support the
Central Court. Some walls were reconstructed for purely presentational reasons as for
example the walls at the Theatral Area. Thus, the benefit of the majority of the
reconstructed wall was that they carry the roof which protects the floors or fresco
remains.The benefit of protecting excavated walls themselves with new masonry on top
of it was not utilised. Most wall tops which were not elevated in order to fulfill a specific
function were not treated at all. "
Dressed stone has been used for the reconstruction of columns which in the original
construction had beenmade of timber. The columns in the Throne Room and in the 1905
reconstruction of the Grand Staircase were made of roughly dressed stone covered with
a plaster coat, while the columns of the 1910 reconstruction of tile Grand Staircase and
the SteppedPortico were madeof preciselycarved stone drums. Rising damp has caused
some salt crystallisation at the lower parts of these 3'

columns. The stone columns will
thus certainly last longer and require lessmaintenancethan a replacernentin timber would
have done. However, the stone columns are much heavier than the original timber
columns.The ones which were located in a upper storey situation, such as at the Grand
Staircase or the Stepped Portico may impose an amount of load which the structures
underneath cannot carry. It is debateablewhether the reconstruction of fewer storeys

with heavier materials imposes more or less weight than the originally existing storeys
"See for example elevated walls between magazine doors in Long Corridor. See plates 18 and 54.
"See plate 54.
-"See plate 125.
338 Chapter6
with lighter materials. In the case of the Stepped Portico the wall underneath actually
failed, even though it succeededat the Grand Staircase. This was due to the fact that at
Cý
the Grand Staircasethe load of the upper column was distributed onto a new iron girder
substruction underneath but such a construction was missing at the Stepped Portico.
The specific deterioration problemsof the material gypsum had been recognized as early
asthe first campaignin 1900.In his report for the British School at Athens Evans quotes
Theodore Fyfe:
"Thebestexampleof thematerial[gypsum]is from the long straightwall below tile SouthernTerrace

stones- (exceptfor a slight roundingwhich wasprobably
whichhasoneor two perfectlysharp-angled
intended)- in verygoodcondition.The materialis very horno.,Cneous,with no shell or otherorganic
impurities.This wall is quite greyin partsasare alsothe pillars in the Pillar Roombut mostof the
white, with a tendencyto small furrows,especiallyon the uppersurface

otherstoneshaveweathered
exposedmoredirectlyto theactionof water.The furrowing resemblestile watcr-dripchannelson the
sideof a cave."-15
After thecistsin 1heLong Corridor were discoveredin 1903andexcavatedin the same

year,the openingshadto becoveredagainin orderto preventrain water collecting in the
cists. TheodoreFyfe, in his own way, employednewly cut gypsumslabsfor this work
sincethe cistshaveoriginallybeencoveredwith this material.The decisionto replacethe
removedslabswith newgypsummaterialmusthaveoccurredwith the full awarenessof
the weatheringproperties of the material. In the original construction of the Palace
differenttypesof gypsumwereusedfor variouspurposesandit seemsthat somevarieties
weremoreresistantto the effects of rain than others.-" As early as 1900Fyfe identified

" andEvansconfirmedlater that sometypesof gypsumresist
differenttypesof gypsum,
the forcesof the weatherin a betterway than others.-" However,it seemsthat Fyfe had
usedeitherthe wrongtypeof gypsumor had neglectedto quarry the materialaccording
35Evans,1900, p. 53.
3'Shaw 1973, p. 20 and 22. See also PM III, p. 287 f.
3'Evans, 1900, p. 53.
39pM III, p. 288.

Peter Kienzle
to its bedding "

planes. Gypsum, as limestone, is a sedimentary rock and as all
sedimentaryrocks performs differently in its various directions. Slabs quarried and used
bedding last better than slabs quarried across the 40
accordingto the planes much planes.
The replaced slabsin the corridor today presentthemselvesin a much worse state of
"
preservationthan the original slabs.
Theodore Fyfe also replaced the coping stones of the stepped balustrade at the North
Lustral Basin with new gypsum slabs." Here again the material weathered quickly and
is now almost indistinguishable from the original slabs. Furthermore he replaced floor
the West Entrance 13

area. Fyfe's basic idea of replacingthe slabsto prevent
slabs at
further damageto the balustradeand the cists was certainlyjustified but replacingthe
floor slabsat the West Entrancecannot be justified from a conservationperspective.
Rather it is of a presentationalnatureand providesa more evenlypavedareafor the
visitors and indicatesthe original systemof in

causeways the courtyard The
pavernent.
ideaof replacinglike with like mustbe honoured.However,to replacea materialwhich
is alreadyknownto weathereasilywith the samematerialcould be teemedasa mistake.
There is evidencethat Doll removedpaving slabsin order to allow for supplementary
excavationsunder the floor "

level. It seemsthat he replacedthe original slabsat their
former position and had no new gypsumquarriedfor this purpose.There is also no
evidencethat de Jonghadnew gypsum He

quarried. replacedmissingpartswith concrete
replacements.
Today no damageto the excavatedstructurescan be detectedon site which originated

in theuseof rubblemasonrywallswhichis dueto the consistentuseof soft mortars.The
39Mrs.StefieChlouvcraki currently undertakesa detailed study on the conservation of Gypsum in the

Minoan Palacesof Crete. I owe gratitude to her for these information. However, I investigated the replaced
slabs all of which were quarried according to the bedding plans. Thus the deterioration must be due to the
wrong type of gypsum.
"See Ashurst and Dimes, 1990, Vol. 1, p. 171.
"See plate 24.
"'See plates 71 and 72.
43See PM II, fig, 427, p. 673.
"See plate 186 and plate E, p. 220.
340 Chapter 6
reconstructedmasonry walls had no protective function in themselves but carried roofs

which covered exposed floors or supported structures which were in danger of
collapsing. Thus, they were an adequate reconstruction method. However, the use of
easily deteriorating gypsum is questionable.
6.2 Timber
In Minoan times timber was usedextensivelyin the historic constructionof the Palace.
Not only ceilingsandcolumnsweremadeof timber, but also walls were reinforcedwith
a timber framework in order to withstandbetter the forces "

of earthquakes. It seemed
to be a logical choiceto usetimber beamsin the reconstructionprocess.However,not
survivestoday;mostof it hasbeenreplacedby later
muchof thesetimberreconstructions
iron girder or concretereconstructions.
6.2.1 The Use of Timber in the Reconstruction Process
Charcoaledremainsof originaltimber elementswere found at the palaceand it hasbeen

46
that cypressalongsidewith otherspecieswereusedby the Minoan builders.
established
Visitorsapproaching
the Palacetoday will find it enclosedby a grove of tall cypressand
pine trees. But thesetrees had beenplantedby Evansafter Word War I and give an
incorrectimpressionto the visitor. When Evansexcavatedthe site the landscapein the
Knossosareawas scarcelyforested.47Most of the treesvisible in the early photographs
aregrovesof olive trees.Timber hadbeenusedin the vernacularCretanhousesfor the

roof constructionand for furniture but the limited use and the particular construction
methodsindicatethat timber wasrare andexpensive. "
"Compare page 132 L

'Compare page 125.
"Compare plates 3 and 5.
"'Bosineki-Didoni, 1985, p. 56.
Evaluationof theTechnicalAspectsof the Reconstructions 341

Peter Kienzle
Cypress wood was not available in the required dimensions on Crete, and so Theodore
Fyfe had to look for a substitute. Fir, grown in the mountainous regions of Austria,
to be a good choice. " Due to the hard environmental conditions in the

seemed
mountains, the Austrian fir grows slowly and produces a comparatively dense and heavy
type of wood which was successfully used in the construction of timber buildings in this
Z>
for centuries. " Until Austria lost its access to the Adriatic Sea at the end of
region
World War I the timber could be brought to Trieste and transported further by ship to
Crete. " Evans refers to the timber employed in the reconstruction process as 'pine' and
not as 'fir' but the Austrian houses were built in fir which is more common in Austria
than pine. Furthermore, a survivingr) timber beam in the Treasury is fir and not pine
wood." The name pineis frequently of all typesof softwood and,

usedasa generalisation
mostlikely, this is what Evans wanted to "
express. Both cypress and fir areconiferous
Cypress,however,
trees,whichproducesoftwoodandhavesimilar weight and strength.
Z:.
is more durable, resists insects and can be used outdoors" while the use of untreated fir
5-1
cannot be recommended for use in unsheltered areas.
Timber hasbeenusedin the reconstructionprocessin two ways.On the one handnew

timber was employedto replace the decomposedwooden elementsof the original
construction.On the otherhand,
timber beams wereusedasadditional structuralsupport
with no intentionto any
recreate of the original timber The
elements. proppingup of the
Grand Staircaseand the East-WestCorridor is a typical exampleof the secondtype of
56
reconstruction. In its simplest form, beamswere cut precisely to fit under some
"IPM M, p. 288. Arthur Evanswasjailed by the Austrian Authorities in 1882 in Ragusa (Dubrovnik).
C,
He was charged with High Treason for supporting the struggle for independenceby the Bosnians but was
released after six weeks. Obviously, Evans put safeguarding the excavated remains over his own political
disagreements with Austria. See: Brown, 1993, p. 26.
5'SeeSchafer, 1984, p. 83 ff.
"See plate 213.
"See plate 174.
"Anon, 1879, P.35 1.
'Anon, 1879, p. 359. The authorevenmentionsthe use of cypress for building purposes in Malta and
Candia [Crete].
"Anon, 1879, P. 351 ff. See also Schwab, 1976, p. 260 ff.
"Compare page 185 ff.
342 Chapter 6
structures to keep them up. For instance,when the Hall of the Double Axes was
excavatedin 1901 timber posts kept the jamb blocks of the upper storey in their
"
position. At this stage,it wasnot knownwhatto expectat the lower level and sincethe
excavationprocesswasstill goingon, thiswasa goodandflexible methodof keepingthe
upperlevel elementsin their position.However,this proppingup was not a permanent
solution andArthur Evanswrote:
"Me hewing awayof the clay concretionsand the extraction of the various rubble and earthy materials
of the interveningg,
spacesleft a void between the upper and lower spacesthat threatened the collapse
of the whole. The carbonisedpostsand beamsand shafts, although their form and measurementcould
be often observed,splintered up when exposed and, of cour%c.could afford no support. The recourse
to mine props and miscellaneous timbering to hold up the superincumbent mass was at most
temporary and at times so insufficient that some dangerousral Is occurred.""

Cý
As soon as the excavationin theserooms was completed,the preliminaryposts were
replaced with a permanentstructure. Some of thesepermanentstructureswere not

designedto recreatethe original structuresbut were purely functional suchas the first
support frame at the Hall of the Double "

Axes. It has beennoted that the wooden
frameworkpfllarsrestedat the sameplaceswherethe original pillars had beenrestingon
the jamb blocks but were not placed on the blocks themselves 61'Another support
.
structure were two inclined props which kept a piece of upper storey masonry in
position.The pieceof masonrywascasedwith timberboardswhich then were supported
by the props.Individualpropscanonly keepup a singlestonewhile endangeredmasonry
walls need timber in

casing order not to "
disintegrate.
Besidesat the Hall of the Double Axes, Fyfe constructedthe frameworksat the Grand
Staircase,at the lowerEast-WestCorridorand at the corridors at the Domestic Quarter,
to name most important ones. He also constructed horizontal frameworks which
"See plate 133.

"I'M III, P. 288.
"See page 190and plate 136.
'Compare page190.
"See plate 136.

PeterKienzle
prevented upper elements from collapsing into excavated corridors; for example at the
Grand Staircase or at the Dog's Leg Corridor. 62
Besides these structures Theodore Fyfe also reconstructed timber frames which were
intendedto recreatecompletely or partially the original timber elements such as the 1902
reconstructionof the door and pillar wall of the Hall of the Double Axes. This structure
filled, in the original construction, with rubble masonry and then plastered.63Fyfe
was as
also built the pillar at the first floor landing of the Grand Staircase and a timber framed
cage in the Queen's Megaron which were treated in the same way. Furthermore he had
cantilever beamsinsertedin the wall, partly recreating

ZP
the original ceiling constructions.
0
They carriedprojecting roofs to protect sensitivefeaturesunderneath.In the Treasury
and in the neighbouring Corridor of the PaintedPithoi Fyfe insertednew timber postsin
the verticalslotsof the former reinforcement beams.' They were necessaryto reinforce
the wallswhichhadto carry a pieceof reinstalledfloor in this area.Here,the reinstalled

timberframeworknot only recreatedtheoriginalstructuralfunction of the missingparts,
but also recreatedthe original structurein materialanddimensions.
It hasbeennoted that in the original Minoan constructiontimber reinforcementbeams

were only roughlyshaped at the front while its back was left unworked. Because of this,
and further stressesin the destruction process, the slots left in the walls are very
irregular61This fact impededthe reinstallationof new beamsin the existing gaps.One
.
possibility was to widen the gap to accommodatea timber beam of the required
dimension which would result in the loss of historic fabric. Another possibilitywas to
provide a small timber memberto fit into the gap and fill the remainingcavity with
mortar. In this casethe timbersdid not provide the requiredstructural stability. Thus,
Fyfefilled only thesetwo vertical slotswith new beamsbut left most of the gapsin the
masonryvacantor filled themwith smallsstonerubblemasonry.Wherethe walls could
"'Seeplates158and 159.
"Compare page191.
"See plate 174and SectionA-A, Drawing 8.
"Comparepage133f.
344 Chapter6
not carry the load, he provided new independent timber frames to support the
reconstructed upper floor 66
areas.
The structureof the flat roof abovethe Throne Room was madeof timber, aswas the
later pitched roof aboveit. Further pitched roofs were constructedin timber by Fyfe
above the Shrine of the Double Axes and the Magazineof the Giant Pithoi and by
ChristianDoll at theQueen'sMegaron.This,however,is ratherexceptionalfor Doll. He
normally employedtimber only for claddingthe load-bearingiron girder construction

with thin boards,but he rarely usedmassivebeams.
The useof timberis a goodindicatorof thechangingattitudestowardsconservationand
reconstruction at the Palaceof Knossos.In the first reconstructionsTheodore Fyfe

frequentlyemployedtimber. In 1901after the supportwork for the East-WestCorridor
67
col.lapsedhe replacedthe structure with another wooden support frame. Only after the
collapseof the support work at the Grand Staircase in the winter 1904/05 did Christian
Doll replace the wooden constructions with iron girders which he clad with timber
boards. Thus, the function of timber has been reduced from being a structural member
to a mere superficial surface. Finally, Piet de Jong used timber only to construct the
shuttering for 6'

concrete. The concrete beams which were supposed to replicate timber
beamswere later paintedin a colour to resemblewood.61
6.2.2 Adequacy of Timber as a Material for Reconstruction
Timber hasalwaysbeenthe most importantmaterialfor supportstructuresof all kind.

It canbe cut easily,alteredandjoinedon siteso that it fits the specificfunction for which
it was selected.This work can be executedby almost any worker without specific
66Seepage 201.
"'Compare page 185.
C,
6'See plate 63.
"PM II, p. 352.

Peter ICenzle
training and the number of required tools is limited. Timber support work can be altered
easily if this is required by the progress

0 of excavation work in this area. For example, the
shore which supports a piece of masonry might be extended with the increasing depth of
the pit. Furthermore, wooden beams are, in relation to their strength, very light so that
I
they can be transportedeasily to the site and moved on site. For these reasons timber is
widely used for support work at many excavation sites even today.
Timber had beenused in the original construction of the palace.The beams provided both
the vertical support at pillar, door and window jambs and the required horizontal tensile
strength in the masonry walls. To replace like with like, i. e. the use of timber in the
reconstruction work seemedto be a good idea. Both iron girders and concrete beams
were also able to provide support and tensile strength but were not as flexible as timber.
Timberis an excellentandlastingbuilding materialbut is not very forgiving if the rules
of gooddesignareneglected.Theserules includekeepingtimber awayfrom the ground

andavoidingcontactwith earth.At excavationsitestheoriginal roof, which shelteredthe
buildings from the effectsof the weather,vanishedIong ago. The excavatedwalls are
tlp C>
to
exposed the in
weather a completelydifferent way than they usedto be in the original
building. Thus,timber which wasreplacedwheretimber originally hadbeenis affected
in a different way thanthe original member.For reconstructionwork at archaeological
sites where designpossibilitiesare limited, timber might often prove to be the wrong
material.
Normally, timber is an affordablematerial and even in Mediterraneanareasit is still
competitivewith metal.However,timber wasexpensivein CreteandFyfe wrote in his

letter to Arthur Evans,19 June 1901:
"T'he account for wood will be pretty heavy. Glavosis says wood is dear, and we really need a good
deal."O
"Letter from Tbeodore Fyfe to Arthur Evans 19 June 1901, Ashmolean Museum, Evans Archive.
346 Chapter6
Obviously Fyfe relied at the beginning of his reconstruction work on local sources but
later had to import timber from Austria. Both the price of local timber and the high
transport costsof importedtimber were a constraintto its extensiveuse.Furthermore,
importedfir was not the ideal type of wood to be usedin the reconstructionprocess.
6.2.4. The Performance, Harms and Benefits
TheodoreFyfe, and to someextent,ChristianDoll usedtimber for their reconstruction
work on site.Only smallaccountsof it surviveto date.Arthur Evansfrequentlyheld the

CretanClimate responsiblefor the fast deteriorationof wood. For example:
"In the first stage of the excavations in the West Quarter of' tile Palace, where the depth of the
excavatedarea was less and the amount of the upper story remains more limited, wooden props and
beams,with at most ii-onbars to reinforce them over horizontal openings, were made to serve. But the
quite unprecedentedconditions met with the 'Domestic Quarter' soon demonstrated the inadequacy
of suchsupports.The violent alterationsof the Cretan climate and vicissitudes of damp and heat were
found to rot woodwork in an incredibly short spaceof time, and some serious collapses of supports
and masonry were tile result.,,71
It is a fact that timber that was employed in sheltered areas of the Palace has survived
comparatively well. The timber boards installed in the Queen's Megaron in 1908 are still
in a perfect condition and so is the window in the Magazine of the Jewel Fresco which
was installed in 1922. The greatest danger to timber in Crete are insects and the timber
posts installed by Fyfe in the vertical slots in the Treasury and the Corridor of the Painted
Pithos have not been attacked by humidity, but by insectS.72
Obviously it has not beenthe 'violent alterationsof the Cretanclimate' but rather the
deficient design of the timber reconstructionsthat causedtheir collapse.The timber
7'Evans,1927,p. 262.But seealsoEvans,1905,p. 23, Evans, 1908,p. 586, Evans,1928,p. 97, PM

III, p. 288.
71
Seeplate 174.

Peter Kienzle
framework commonly employed by Fyfe was covered with wooden boards on which
earth and original paving slabs rested. Exposed to the weather the rain water penetrated
the joints between the slabs and was trapped between them and the boards. With the
basinEke structure at the northern portico of the Hall of Colonnades this effect was even
increased.73Here also the timber beams rested directly on the floor and not on the
original base stones. Furthermore, the original construction of the stepped colonnade
lowest flight of the Grand Staircase 74
alongside the was misunderstood.
The supportframesat the Hall of Colonnadesandthe GrandStaircasewere constructed

by two workmenwho had previousexperiencein a mine.However, the timber frames
in a mine are exposedto a constantlevel of humidity and temperature.Thus, direct
contact with the surroundingearth doeslittle harm. At Knossosthe humidity to which

the timber was exposedwasconstantlychanging;this is a much worsecondition but is
a conu-non problemfor manybuildings. The basicconstructionrules to keeptimber away

from the groundandto shelterit from humidity hadbeenneglected. " Wheretheserules
had beenfollowed more closely,timber survivedin goodconditions."
Whilethe first timbersupportframeat the door andPillar wall of the Hall of the Double
Axesresteddirectlyon the floor, thelateronerestedon the baseblocks.In Minoan times
thesebaseblocksweredesignedto keepthetimber framesof the pi IIarsfrom the ground
and were reusedin 1902 by Fyfe for exactly the 77
samepurpose. The secondstructure
lasteduntil Pietde JongreconstructedtheHall in 1928andthe photographtaken shortly
before its demolition indicatesa clear lack of maintenancebut no structuralfailures.78
Like any timber framedbuilding, the outer surfacewas affectedby the weatherbut the
"'Seepage185f.
74Comparepage183L
"Compare Gerner, 1994, p. 62. He notes that the life expectancy for softwood in dry conditions is
approximately 900 years, while softwood in waterlogged conditions survives for 90 years. Timber which is
0
exposed to changing humidity is expected to last only for 45 years.
16Itseemsthat this was not a willful neglect by Fyfe but rather a result of the excavation work. While
the digging work was going,on the support frames were adapted to fit the current needs.When the work was
finally completed in this area a proper construction simply was not produced.
"See page 191 f.
"'See plate 145.
348 Chapter 6
Conservation and Reconstruction at'Me Palace of Minos at Knossos
structure itself remainedsound.The better designedtimber structures survived for a long

time, but when Evans returned to Knossos after the forced break of Word War I he
realized that the timber elements required constant care. He was not able to look after
the reconsu=tions for more than seven years. On return to the site in 1922 he saw the
effects of weatheringand realizedhe had to ensure regular maintenance or to replace the

timberwork with a material that requires less maintenance.
Where timber was employed to construct roofs, covered with tarpaulin or tiles, it not
only survived for a long time in a sound condition but also provided good protection for
the sensitivefeaturesunderneath. The Throne Room was covered by a flat roof in 1901
and by the pitched roof from 1904 but the Anteroom was covered for the first time in
1930 when Piet de Jong executed the concrete restorations in this area. The floor slabs
of both Anteroom and Throne Room were in a similar state of preservation at their
excavation in 1900. Today, the slabs in the Throne Room are still in a good condition
Figure 86 Throne Room and Anteroom, The pavement of the Throne Room was covered one year at ter
excavation the Anteroom was left exposed for thirty ycars. R marks rcplaced slabs.

Peter Kienzle
while the ones in the Anteroom are heavily "

damaged. Here the efficacy of the protective
roof becomesevident. Other areaswhich were covered by timber roofs were Fyfe's small
housecovering the Shrine of the Double Axes, which lasted well until after World War
II when it was removed by Platon in order to install the steel and corrugated plastic
shelters.Fyfe also constructed the inclined roof above the Magazine of the Giant Pithoi
which was later replacedby de Jong by a flat concrete roof. These properly constructed
buildings survived well and fulfilled their protective function.
Timber had beenemployed in the original construction of the Palace in Minoan times and
is not a new material. The new inserted timber frames and support structures were very
thin and slender." They were, structurally speaking,soft and timber is a flexible material.
Consequently,it did not introduce incompatible new forces to the remaining structures,
which thesewere not able to handle.Due to the fact that excavation sites cannot provide
the required level of sheltering for the timber members, they were destructively exposed
to the weather. Furthermore, in a number of cases the design of timber frarnes was
provisional and neglected basic construction rules which affected their durability. As a
result, only few of the timber support structures, most of which were designed
z-:, and
executedin the ongoing excavationprocess,survived.Almost all of them were later

replacedwith iron girder and brick vault structuresor concretereconstructions.
6.3 Bricks
Firedbricks,astheywereusedin the reconstructionprocessesat Knossos,had not been
used in Minoan "

times. In the original constructionof the palace,andespeciallyin later
alterations,sundriedbricks 82
wereemployed. Theyhadbeena very importantandwidely
used building material at the Minoan Palaceat Mallia but they never achievedthat
"See GroundPlan,Drawing 1.
'See for examplethereconstructionof the door andpier wall at the Hall of DoubleAxes,plate 142.
"'Seepage135ff.
"Shaw, 1973,P. 189and seealsoPM 11,p. 519.
350 Chapter 6
ConservationandReconstructionat The Palaceof Minos at Knossos
importance at Knossos.However, unfired brick or, more generally speaking, earth is one
of the oldest, simplest,cheapestand widely used building materials." Earthen structures

require a careful planing of all details to avoid damage by water and, furthermore, they
need constant maintenance." At the palace no roof protects earthen structures from
water and regular maintenance cannot be guaranteed. Thus, to reconstruct parts of the
Palace with unfired bricks is impossible, and as the most likely substitute fired bricks
were employed on site for various parts of the reconstruction work.
6.3.1. The Use of Bricks in the Reconstruction Process
Fired clay bricks are a material which was used the by all three architects on site but
Christian Doll was the one who employed this material tile most. Like timber, brick is a
good material to study the different conservation attitudes of the architects. Theodore
Fyfe used bricks at several areas of the palace, mainly for structural reasons. In the
Treasury he supporteda leaningwall with a massive incl ined brick buttress to prevent its
collapse. Other work include the pillars of the Throne Room "
roof construction, the door
jambs in the Room of the Plaster Couch" and the brick arch at the South East House.
The philosophy of Theodore Fyfe seemsto be very clear. Rubble masonry was employed
to reconstruct walls where, to the best of his knowledge, walls had existed in Minoan
ZD
times. He increasedthe height of the excavatedremainsof existing walls with rubble
masonry.If permanentstructuralsupportwas necessarybut clearly no original masonry
had beenin this placebeforehand,he employedbrick work for exampleat the buttress
in the Treasury.
Christian Doll usedbricks predominantlyfor the constructionof vaults betweeniron

87
girders. This wasa commonconstructiontechniquein the secondhalf of the nineteenth
"Houben and Guilaud, 1994,p. 3.

94
SeeHoubenand Guilaud, 1994,p. 245 ff.
"Compare page 177.
"Compare page 198.
"Compare page 231 L

Peter Kienzle
century in Britain and promised to be more successful on site than the timber
reconstructions of Theodore Fyfe. According to Doll's reconstruction proposals, the
brick archeswere to be hidden by a suspendedtimber board ceiling. Thus, he employed
bricks for a purely functional purpose without any agendato show a new material in an
historic context.
Piet de Jong employed the same iron girder and brick vault technique in the
reconstruction of the Stepped Portico. The two magazinesbelow the Stepped Portico
were not open to the public but visitors could see the brick vaults at the light-well he
createdin the first flight of steps.The substructure of the second flight was also exposed
to the public. Unlike Doll, Piet de Jong did not try to hide the brick vaults behind wooden
boards which in themselves are an imitation of a real timber ceiling. It seems that his
attitude is much more in favour of an honest admission of the fact that certain parts have
been reconstructed. Most of the bricks used in the reconstruction work in the palace
were of uniform size and shape. They are twenty-one centimetres long, eleven centi-
metres wide and just under five centimetres thick; this seemsto have been a common
size.
The bricks usedby TheodoreFyfe were more irregular in shapeand lack the smooth
which
surface, distinguishes
the latermaterial.This is not due to tile fact that thesebricks
havebeenexposedto the weatherfor a long time. The shelteredbricks of the underside
of thebrick archin the SouthWest Houseshowthe samecondition asthe more heavily

exposedbricks. It seemsthat theseirregular and rough bricks were madein wooden
"
moulds. Theodore Fyfe, being closely acquaintedwith traditional and vernacular
buildingmaterials,was perfectly satisfiedwith the appearance
of thesebricks. Christian
DoU,dueto hisupbringingin Londonpreferredbricks with smoothand regularsurfaces.
Pietde Jongwho usedbricksonly in his 1922work at the SteppedPortico employedthe
"See Brunskill, 1990,p. 24.
352 Chapter 6
Conservation and Reconstruction at The Palaceof Minos at Knossos
same types as Doli. The bricks they
employed are of the same dimensions as

Fyfe's, but they are obviously made in a
metal lined mould and a stock. Thus, the

later bricks are all smooth and regular in
their appearanceand have all the distinctive

frogs createdby the mould." Three different
frog patternscan be identified at the soffit of
the lintel of the door between the Throne

Room and the magazine south of it. ' The
Arts and Crafts museumat Vori in the South
of Crete displaysvarious Cretan handicrafts,

including a brick which features an identical
frog. This proves that the bricks were a
Cretan product and not imported from

91 Fiaure 87 Bricks used by de Jong at the
overseas. C
Stepped Portico.
Creteis not a traditional brick areabut the traditional local architectureis basedon the
useof limestone 92
rnasonry. However,unfiredbrickswere usedin the Minoan period and
the Italianexcavationat Gortyn exposedfired bricks frorn the Romanperiod.9' in more
recent periods, the useof fired clay as a building materialhasalmostexclusivelybeen
limited to roof tiles both in the cities as well asin the countrysideand for useaspipes.
But it seemsthat from the turn of the century bricks were manufacturedin Crete and
must have beenused to someextent.94As a local material,brick had very few trans-
portation costs,but so had stone,which was availableon the excavationsite for free.
"'A 'frog' is anindentation

in thesurfaceof a brick which reducesits weight,makesit easierto handle
andminimisesthe clay usedin its manufacture.Brunskill, 1990,p. 100.
"See figure 87.
"For further readingin the area of brick making see:Notes on Building construction,Part IH,
C,
Materials,Rivingtons,London, 1879;Hamilton, 1978andBrunskill, 1990.
"Bosineki-Didoni, 1985,p. 9 ff.
"Gorys, 1989,p. 182ff.
"Compareexhibition at the Arts andCraftsMuseumVori.

Peter Kienzle
6.3.2. The Adequacy of Bricks as Material for Reconstruction
Bricks are fired clay blocks of a definite sizeor form. The raw materialis shapedin a
15
mouldandthe 'greenbricks' are dried in the sun.Later they are burnedin a brick kiln.
The qualityof thebricksdependslargelyon the quality of the clay andthe firing process.
Largequantitiesof brickscan be producedin a reasonabletime. The greatadvantageof
bricks is their uniform shapewhich allow brick walls to be thinnerand to carry higher
loadsthanrubblemasonrywalls. The thin vaults betweenthe iron girderscould only be
executedin brick becauseof its regular shapeand plain surfaces.Rubblemasonryis

unsuitablefor this purpose.
As early as 1823 GiuseppeValadier (1762 - 1839) supportedthe dilapidated western side
of the Colosseumat Rome with a brick buttressrecreatingthe historic form of arches and
cornices.Valadier has commonly been seen as a radical conservationist, and only recent
research claims that this approach was much more due to lack of sufficient funds than
6
conservationethics. Although from the very beginnings of the conservation movement
bricks have been used in the repair and reconstruction of historic monuments, it was in
the third decade of the twentieth century that brick experienced a huge appreciation as
a material for repair and reconstruction. In 1929 A. R. Powys in his book on the 'Repair
of Ancient Monuments' suggestedthe use of bricks and tiles for this purpose." Despite
Powys' advice to render the tile and brick repair of historic walls, so that the repaired
patches blend in with the surrounding masonry, much brickwork remained visible. For
example,in the 1930sMussolini started major, politically motivated works in historic city
centre of Rome. Brick was widely used in the reconstruction of ancient monuments, for
example at the Marcellus Theatre and the Forum Romanum.
"Brunskill. 1990, p. 21 ff.

"Schmidt, 1993, p. 62 ff.
"See also: Ashurst and Dimes, 1990, Vol. 2, p. 17.
354 Chapter 6
Conservation and Reconstruction at I'lie Palace of Minos at Knossos
The distinctive properties of brickwork make it such a good material in the

reconstruction process.Brickwork is made up of many small bricks with a high number
of joints in between them. If soft lime mortars are used, brickwork is, structurally
speaking,flexible. Masonry which is made up of these small bricks with its many joints,
is well suited to fit closely to the ragged surface of the ruins. There is no need to alter
the historic surfaceto fit to the reconstruction. Another advantage is the high number of
joints and the fired clay material of the bricks which allows water to evaporate easily.
This prevents damage related to trapped water in the structure.
work hasalwaysbeenthat the new work

Oneof thecommondemandsof reconstruction
is clearlydistinguishablefrom the original fabric. As long asthe original constructionis
not a brick building itself, the new brickwork is easilydetectibleas a new addition. In
Knossos,no brickworkwas usedin the Minoan Palaceand the unfired rnudbricks have
weatheredbeyondrecognition.Thus,the brick masonryby TheodoreFyfe can be easily

identified asa modernaddition ascan the brick vaultsby Doll andde Jong.
6.3.3. Performance, Harm and Benefits
As already outlined in the previous paragraph, brickwork is a suitable and adequate
material for the reconstruction process. Brickwork is in its structural behaviour quite
similar to the original
ZD rubble masonrywalls. No harm could be detected at any part of the
whichoriginatedin the usedof bricks on site. Neither was there any

Palaceinvestigated
damagecausedby humidityrelatedproblemsnor was thereany harm through structural
loadswhich had not beencontrolledproperly.
All brickwork,whichhasbeeninstalledon site hasfulfilled the function for which it was

of TheodoreFyf6 permanentlyhelpedto keepthe historic
designed.Thebrick buttresses
wallsin positionin theTreasuryand in the SouthEastHouse.The brick vaults between
the iron girdersworked well but a specificproblemmust be discussedhere.The floors
formed by thesebrick vaults in the DomesticQuarterand at the SteppedPortico were

Peter Kienzle
open to the sky and, thus, exposed to rain. In the first reconstruction of the northern
portico of the Hall of Colonnades in 1905, Christian Doll failed to provide a waterproof
coating for the floor. Water was seeping in through the joints of the broken floor slabs
first level harmed the brick vaults and the iron girders underneath.9'
at the storey and
While the rusting and expanding iron I-beams caused indirect harm to the vault
construction, soluble salt was carried through the ceiling and crystal I ised at the lower side
of the vaults which caused more direct harm to the brickwork.
Christian Doll must have realisedthis problem quickly. Even if he might not have
understood the full extent of possible long-term damage through rust and salt
.,
crystallisation,at leasthe had seenthe water penetrating.As a reaction,squareslabsof
MalteseStonewith joints filled with fine grout were usedat the reconstructionsof the
Queen's Megaron and the Corridors of the DomesticQuarter providing a watertight
floor." He also designeda systemof inclinedareasto drain the water of the first floor
it the
andchannel to gargoyles,whichempty water into the historic "o
water channels. In
the area east of the Room of the Plaster Couch, Doll reusedthe rectangularnew
limestoneslabsof Fyfe's earlier reconstruction.Here, as at the northernportico of the
waterpenetratesand affectsthe structuresunderneath.In 1922Piet
Hall of Colonnades
de Jong coveredthe first floor of the SteppedPortico with cementin order to prevent
water penetratingthe ceiling.
Bricks are a good materialfor reconstructionwork. The comparativelysmall size of

bricks allow brickwork to be fitted well to the ruined surfacesat an excavationsite.
Brickwork with a high percentageof joints and an adequatemortar is a quite flexible
structureandadaptswell to the variousforceson site.Furthermore,brickwork is durable
andresiststhe weatherquite well if the wall tops areplannedappropriately,preventing
water intrusion into the structure.
"See plate 125,127 and 177.

"See First Floor Plan, Drawing 7. Some of the joints have opened and have not been repointcd for
a long period. Subsequently, humidity related damage occurred at the brick vaults underneath.
""See First Floor Plan, Drawing 7, bottom.
356 Chapter6
Conservation and Reconstruction at Ile Palace of Minos at Knossos
6.4 Iron Beams
In contrast to timber and stone, iron I-beams have no equivalent in the historic
constructionof thebronzeagepalace.The basicfunction of the iron girdersis to replace
timber beamsand, thus, their use must be seenas a reactionto the failure of timber.
Unlike timber, iron will not rot and thus seemedto be a much better solution for the
problems on site. However, the physical and structural properties of iron are very
different from thoseof timber andwhile humidity may not inducerot it will causerust.
6.4.1. The Use of Iron in the Reconstruction Process
TheodoreFyfe usedsomewrought iron elementsandde Jongemployedreinforcement
rods for the concrete but Christian Doll was the architect to use iron as structural
elementsin the reconstructionprocess.Although iron hadbeenknown for almost 3000
wereexecutedthe materialwas not usedon a large scale
yearswhenthe reconstructions
for structural purposesuntil the late l8th, century. The industrial revolution not only
providedimprovements
to thequalityof iron andthecreationof steel,it also reducedthe
productioncosts.During
0ythe courseof 19thcentur the productioncostsdroppedby 80
'O'
percent. Steelbecameavailableandcompetitivewith traditionalbuilding methods.In
the latter half of the 19th century steel girders and steel frarnesbecamea common
buildingmaterialfor industrialbuildingsandinnercity areas.Probablythe first building
in Britain to use Iron girders and brick vaults, the systernemployedby Doll, was the
Main Mill Ditherington,Shrewsbury,in'1796/97.102
Peters,1996,p. 36. Petersis a very goodreadingto undermandthe generalbackgroundand spirit

0
of the 19thcenturyagainstwhich the restorationwork at Knossosmustbe set.
"Stratton andTrinder, 1997,p. 65.

Peter Kienzle
Doll used iron-I-beams or, as he used to call them, rolled steel joists (R. S.J.s). 'O' In a
contemporarysourcethey were described:
"RolledGirderIron, known alsoasRolledJoistIron, BeamIron, I Iron or H Iron. This is oneof the
mostusefulsectionsof iron for fireproof andotherfloors, partsof bridges roofs, etc., and is rolled
C
in depths of from 3 to 14 inches.An endlessvariety of sectionsis kept by different makerswho
generallypublishfull-size sections of their ironjoists, showingthe weight per foot run of eachjoist,
andthe distributedload that it will support.""
Iron girderswere not availablein Creteat this time andhad to be broughtto the island
from Britain. The transportby ship was not only very costly but alsotook a long
Zý time.
Transportandhandhngof the loncygirderswasdifficult andsomeof the I-beamsfell into

Co
the harbourbasin of Herakleionfrom be
whencethey could not retrieved. "
Doll employedthe iron girdersfor two purposes:as architraveand asfloor joists. Two
parallel iron girders formed the architraveson top of the reconstructedcolumnsand

pillarsin the Grand Staircase
areaand the Queen's Megaron. "16These architravescarried
masonryof the balustrade
abovebut, much more important, formed the substructurefor
the joists of the ceiling construction.The floor joists spanfrorn wall to wall or were
supported by these The
architraves. brick vaults which formed the ceiling restedon the
lower flange of the I-beamswhich formedthejoists."
In the reconstructionof the Room with the Plaster Couch and the corridors in the
Domestic Quarter as well as in de Jong's reconstructionat the SteppedPortico no
architraveswereemployed.Hereelevatedrubblemasonrywalls providedlateral support

to theceilingjoist on both sides.Sincethe ironwork of the ceiling
0 constructioncould not
be adaptedon site, the supportingwalls had to be brought to preciselythe necessary
`See plates 107,108,110.

"Anon., 1879, P. 271.
'"'Evans, 1928, p. 97.
"See plate 107.
"See plate 110.
358 Chaptcr6
at 7be Palaceof Minos at Knossos
height. All joists are supportedindividually,a load disseminatingwall plate is missing

is
which not only absent in the executedwork but also in the plans.Hence,therewere
no economicalreasonsomitting this platebut Doll regardedthernas beingunnecessary.
The girdersof the architraveswere casedin a box like constructionof woodenboards
resemblingtimber beamsand a suspendedtimber ceiling was placedunder the brick

vaultswhichcoveredthe ceiling construction.Thus regularinspectionand maintenance
be
couldnot executed. However, the suspendedceiling was removedat a later point.108
6.4.2. Adequacy
Iron can carry high loads but it is also a very stiff, hard and heavy material. It is
comparativelydifficult to work iron girders,cut them in lengthorjoin two girders.Joints
aremadewith iron platesrivettedor boltedto the All

girders. this work must be executed
with specialisedtools which are hard enough to work steel. Unless these tools are
operatedby electric power, it takesa long time to executethe work. Certainly it would
havebeenverydifficult to preparethison the building or excavationsitesandcommonly
the iron girdersandjoiningplateswere pre-fabricatedin the factory and then sentto the
site where they were then assembled.This was probably the way Doll executedhis
in theDomesticQuarter,a fact which explainshis carefulrecordingsand
reconstructions
elaboratereconstructionplans.To order the pre-fabricatedgirders in Britain, he had to
provide exact measurementsto the producer. Errors would be costly and time
consurning.
At new building sites, iron framesare usually the first structurewhich is erectedand
which dictatesthe shapeof all later work. This procedureis well suited for building
afreshbut is lesswell adaptedto the specificcircumstancesof excavationsitessincethe
straight and stiff memberscannot easily be fitted to the ragged surfaceof the ruins.
difficult to work, frameworksof this materialare designed
Becauseiron is comparatively
""It is not clear whenthe suspended

ceiling wasremovedbut it wasmost likcly removedin 1928
whende Jongremodelledthe area.

Peter Kienzle
with as few joints as possible and are, structurally speaking, very inflexible. This was a
desired effect in contemporary building work but is rather unwanted in conservation at
archaeological sites. Furthermore, iron has a considerable coefficient of thermal
expansion which, due to the stiffness of the iron framework, can impose considerable
forces on the historic fabric. Structurally speaking,the strong iron framework determines
the movements of all the historic elements which it supports.
At excavationsitesthe loads to be supported are comparatively low and there might not
be a structural reason for the use of iron girders. Furthermore, iron is only produced at
comparatively few placesand must be transported from the factories to the building site
which creates considerable transportation expenses.However, ill the case of Knossos

timber, which is the alternative to iron, also had to be transported from a long distance.
A clear advantageof iron girders is that they are obviously a new material which can be
easily distinguished from the original structures since iron girders were not used in
Minoan times. However, the physical properties of iron render it an unsuitable material
for reconstruction work at historic sites.
6.4.3 Performance, Harms and Benefits
The majorproblemof iron constructionsis to protectthe iron frorn rusting which can be
doneby applyinga coat of paint. However, this paint hasto be checkedand replaced
regularly. According to Doll's original plans, none of the iron girder's surfaceswas
accessibleto be regularly checkedand maintained.They were coveredby overlaying
masonry,the brick vaultsor hiddenby timber boardcasing.In roofedbuildings with no
water penetration,this might be acceptablebecausethe original coat of paint and the
limited humidity protects the iron for a long time. However, at excavationsites this
becomesa major problem.Due to different coefficientsof thermalexpansion,the iron
girdersandthe overlayingmasonrymove differently andcracksoccur in the overlaying
structure. This structureis exposedto the weatherand water penetratesthrough the
cracks.It collects in thejoint betweeniron beamandmasonry,wherethe coat of paint
360 Chapter 6
Conservation and Reconstruction at 7be Palace of Minos at Knossos
has been harmed by the building work. Inevitably, tile iron beams begin to rust. For
example, the floor above the northern portico of the Hall of Colonnades was made of
broken paving slabs set in mortar. They were subject to the expansion and contraction
movernents,of the iron girders underneathand, thus, cracks occurred in the joints. Being
exposedto the open sky, rainwater seepedin which affected the brick vaults and the iron
girders. Another problem occurred at the architraves clad with timber boards. Because
they were hidden behind these boards regular maintenance could not be executed.
It has already been discussed above, that Doll regarded as unnecessary a load
disseminatingwall plate. Structurally speaking,the iron girders fulfilled the same function
as the timber beamsin the original construction. However, iron girders are heavier than
timber beams and, due to their structural abilities, were more widely spaced and carry
greater io-ads. At the point of lateral support this greater load is dispersed to the
supporting structure in a much smaller area. Thus, the support for these girders has to
be very strong and the rubble masonryis not always able to provide this, as, for example
at the SteppedPortico. Most of the girders, however, rest on reconstructed walls which
had been designed for this task, and consequently, no problems occurred.
Like timberbeams,iron girdershavebeenemployedto produceceilings which protected

sensitivefeaturesunderneath.The floor slabsof the Lower East-WestCorridor are
clearly much betw preservedthan the onesin the Hall of the Double Axes. Thus, iron
constructionshaveprovideda goodservice.The buildingwork necessaryto facilitate the
instaHation
of the stiff and iron
cumbersome girdersis but
comprehensive the use of iron
in the reconstructionsmust be seenas a reaction to the failure of timber structures.
However, not enough care was taken to adapt the building techniques,which are
successfulin roofed buildings,to the environmentof excavationsites.Today the rust

damageto the reconstructionscausesconsiderableconservationproblems.

Peter Kienzle
6.5 Concrete
When Piet de Jong employed reinforced concrete for the reconstructions on a large scale
at Knossos it had been known as a building material for approximately thirty years. Thus
it was a relatively new material and experience of it was limited. A series of failures of
the earlier reconstructions in timber and iron had shown the limitations of these
reconstruction methods. Consequently, Piet de Jong and Arthur Evans decided that at
the reconstruction of the upper part of the Stepped Portico in 1923 reinforced concrete
would be the most suitable material. From this point it was increasingly used for the
z-:,
constructionof ceilings,pillarsand columns.It was that
supposed concretewas the best
materialto providesupportandprotectionto theexcavationsite,and furthermore,would

109
provide strengthagainstthe effectsof earthquakes.
Concrete has beenand still remainsthe focal point of the criticism on the reconstructions
of Knossos. While certain factors, such as the aesthetic qualities of concrete or its
production costs, have been known and could be assessedat Evans's time other qualities
of the material could only be assessedafter a longer period. One of the most important
questionswith such a new material is to analyse the behaviour of concrete as it ages. In
the following paragraphs it will be analysed whether the expectations placed upon this
new material have been matched.
6.5.1. The use of Concrete in the Reconstruction Process
It was noted that ChristianDoll was the first architectto useconcretein 1910 for the
reconstruction of the fourth flight of the Grand Staircase where he placed the found
gypsum landingblocks in their former position on concreteclad iron "'

girders. In the
"Fyfe, 1926, p. 479 and Evans 1928, p. 97.

"'See page 255 ff.
362 Chapter6
narrowsense,theseconcreteclad iron I-beamsare not reinforcedconcretebecausethe

concretehasno structuralfunction but both tensionand cornpressionare taken by the
iron girder. In contemporary literature, enveloping iron girders in concrete is
recommended inorder to achievea fire "'

proof construction, but this wascertainly not
high on Doll's agenda.Two other facts havebeenunderstoodand appreciatedin this
technique. First, the coefficient of thermal expansionof cement and steel is almost
identical.Thus, concreteand steelbarscanbe combinedeasily.Second,steelmembers
which are envelopedin concreteare protectedfrom the environmentwhich prevents

rusting. These two facts suited Doll but he also enjoyedanotheradvantageof this
technique:theconcreteenvelopeof the steelbeamcan be designedto recreatethe form
of the timberbeamof the originalMinoanconstruction.This methodwascertainly much
more adequatefor the extremelyexposedbeamsof the 1910reconstructionthan the
timber cladding of his earlier work. It is importantto note that here for the first time
concrete representedlost timber elements.Thus, it was not Piet de Jong's idea to
recreatetimber by the useof concrete.
When reinforcedconcretewas usedin the reconstructionwork at Knossosfrom 1923
asa buildingmaterialfor approximatelythan thirty years

onwards,it hadbeenestablished
which,in buildingtermsis a rathershort period.Howeversomeexperiencesexistedand
it seemedto solve all problemson site. Evanswrote later in the Journalof Antiquaries:
"Finally,in orderto preservethe resultsof considerablesupplementary undertakenin the

researches
WestQuarterand in the urbanareasurroundingthe wholePalacesite,I decidedto haverecourseto
at thattimegainedby ourCretanmasonsin theuseof ferro-concrcte.This materialwas

theexperience
thanthe ponderousgirders,but provedto be muchbetterfitted for
notonly muchmoremanageable
suchpurposesasthe reconstitutionof floors andcould be alsoappliedto the reconstructionof great
piersandcolumns."' 12
Employingreinforcedconcreterequiredtheprovisionof the basicingredients,especially

cement,trainedcraftsmenwho knew both, the materialconcreteand how to build good
...For example:Adams, 1894,p. 60.

"'Evans, 1927,p. 263.

PeterKienzle
shuttering and the skills of the in

architect planning and handling the material. When
Z,
Christian Doll Knossos in 1906 he still imported cement from Britain. "' In
worked at
1905 the first Greek cementproduction company,TITAN, was established in Athens and
the,cernentwas shipped from there to other parts of Greece.' 14However, Crete was an
independentterritory until 1913 and not a part of Greece. After 1913 cement, produced
in Athens, became more widely available and, subsequently, local craftsmen became
skilled in the useof the material.
PietdeJongwasprobablythe first architectto work at Knossoswho was trainedin the

use of reinforced concrete.When he startedworking in Knossosin 1922,cementand
reinforcementrods were regularlyshippedto Herakleionand readily availableon the
island. Crushedlimestonewhich was used as aggregatewas availablein abundance.
Finally, local craftsmanhad already some ten years of experiencein working the
"'
material. Thus, the conditionsfor the useof reinforcedconcretewere right.
The structural problems at the Stepped Portico and, perhaps, the experience of the
earthquake on 20 April 1922, led to the decision to use reinforce concrete for further
reconstruction work. "' This is a purely technical issue while Doll's 1910 reconstruction
of the Grand Staircasehad alreadyset the example to accept the use of concrete for both
practical reasons (weathering) and aesthetically as a surface representing timber in the
reconstructions. It is important to note that at Knossos the practical and aesthetical use
of concrete predatesthe structural technicaluse of reinforced concrete by thirteen years.
Between 1923 and 1930 Piet de Jong reconstructed large parts of the Palace with
He
concrete. covered largeareasof the WestWin., andthe Hall of the Double Axes with
a newconcreteceiling andalsoroofed severalsmallerstructuresfor examplethe North
"'Letter from Doll to Evans, 3 October 1906. Ashmolean Museum Oxford, Evans's Archive.
"'This information was given by Mr. Bounakis Konstantinos, Director of TITAN cement in
Herakleion. The telephoneinterview was conductedin Greek languageon iy behalf by Mrs. Stefie
Chlouveraki,whom I owe gratitude.
"'TelephoneinterviewBounakisKonstantinos.
"'Evans, 1922,p. 327.
364 Chapter 6
Lustral Basin, the South-North Corridor and the South Propylaeum. Furthermore, he
replaced earlier roofs by Fyfe at the Magazine of the Giant Pithoi and at the Throne
Roorn. Between 1905 and 1910 Doll prepared plans to cover some of these areas, such
as the Hall of the Colonnades or the Hall of the Double Axes with his standard iron
girder and brick vault system but, probably due to financial limitations, these plans were
""
never executed. Obviously, the reconstructions became possible only because the
reinforced concrete structures were much cheaper than Doll's method. "'
The reconstruction of the concrete ceilings and parts of the upper stories imposed new
loads on the historic walls. They could only carry this load if the gaps left by the rotten
timber frame work were filled in with somereinforcing load-bearing material. "' Both the
structural abilities and the simplicity of working with it favoured the use of reinforced
concrete. The fiquid concrete could be filled easily in the irregular and twisted gaps left
by the rotted timber reinforcement beams. In the original construction, the timber
framework had been installed to reduce the effects of earthquakeson the building. The
excavatedremainsof the palacewere even more exposedto these forces than the original
structure had beensincein its ruined state the missing cross walls and ceilings could not
provide the required stiffnessto the structure and the rotted timber reinforcement beams
could no longer provide tensile strength. In the earthquake of 26 June 1926, the already
reconstructed parts of the palace proved to be beneficiary to the historic ruins in
providing required strength to withstand the forces of the quake. The timber framework
which in the original structure supplied an earthquake resistivity, had been replaced by
reinforced concrete which considerablyimproved the ruin's performance in earthquakes.
Concretewasalsousedto reproducecolumnsandpillars.Onceagainthe great advantage
of concretewasusedby producingmouldsfor the columns.Thesemouldswere usedfor

the repeatedreproductionof columnsof the sametype. The two columnsat the western
light well of the Hall of the Double Axes, the six at the easternand southernverandah
"'See plate 143.

"'Compare alsoEvans,1928,p. 97.
"9PM II, p. 352.

Peter Kienzle
of the sameroom and the one at the North-South Corridor have all been produced from
the same mould. '2' All the seven columns in the upper storey of the Throne Room
reconstruction also have been cast in one mould. This repeated reproduction in moulds
was a clear economic advantage in comparison with the reproduction of individual
columns in stone. Piet de Jong also repeatedlyused the samemoulds for the reproduction
of door jambs. In the reconstruction of the upper storey of the Throne Room all walls
feature exactly the same width with exactly the same doorjambs. The only exception is
a wall north of the reconstructed Loggia which could be made thinner since it did not
feature any door. However, de Jong not only used concrete for his own new
reconstruction work but he also overhauled earlier work. The wooden lintels and door
framesof Fyfe's restoration were replacedwith reinforced concrete, for example the door
south of the Hall of the Colonnadesor in the lower East-WestCorridor. He also removed
most of the timber boards covering the iron girders in Doll's reconstructions and cast
them in concrete after adding additional reinforcement rods. "'
Piet de Jong also reconstructedconcretepillars on top of the excavated blocks south and
east of the Hall of the Double Axes. These pillars, necessaryto carry the ceiling above,
were built individually since they rested on excavated base blocks of individual shape.
Similar pillars were produced at the first floor landing of the Grand Staircase, replacing
Doll's dressedlimestone pillars. Furthermore, he cast concrete blocks which were used
in the construction of the western wall of the light well of the Hall of the Double Axes.
However, many walls which appear to be cast in monolithic concrete were actually
executedin rubble masonry and plastered with a cement mortar, for example east of the
Hall of the Double Axes or at the round corner of the Throne Room area.
The surfaceof the concreteceilings,the floors and the pillars were left untreated.The
texture and colour of the concrete material fitted well into the ruined landscape.
However, all concretereconstructionswhich replacedoriginal timber memberswere
painted to resemblethis material,at least in the areasaccessibleto tourists. A lighter
120Compare Ground Plan, Drawing 6 and plate 150.

0
12'Seeplates 204 and 207. The original timber boards survived only in the Queen's Mcgaron.
366 Chapter6
at Mie Palaceof Minos at Knossos
ochre paint was applied as an undercoat, upon which a darker paint then was applied
imitating wood grain. Plastered areas were painted in bright colours. "I
6.5.2. Adequacy of Concrete as Material for Reconstructions
Like the iron girders reinforced concretehas no equivalentin the Minoan building
constructions. Unlike the original construction, reinforced concreteceilings do not

consistof a seriesof individual linear membersbut insteadprovidea singlestiff disc i.e.
theyaremonolithic.As it hasbeenmentionedearlier,this was seenasa clear advantage,
sincethe quality of the supportingmasonrywas not consistentover tile entire length of
the walls and could not be properly assessed.In the light of the failure of the
reconstructionof the SteppedPortico in 1922it seemsto be a logical reaction.
It has been described previously that in reinforced concrete structures the pressure is
taken by the concrete while the tension forces are carried by the reinforcement rods. For
a successful construction in reinforced concrete it is essential to understand in minute

detail all forces within the structure. After the shuttering is erected, a network of
reinforcement rods is put in position and then the concrete poured in.
.
At excavatedsitesregularforms are ratheruncommon.The original structuremay have

beenirregularandthedestructiveforcestwistedthemevenfurther. Straightelementslike
timberor iron rarelyfit unlesspartsof the historic structureare removed.The distinctive
advantageof concreteis that, in its liquid form, it can be pouredin all shapesrequired
on site.At Knossos,the cavities left by rotted timberswerecoveredwith timber boards
at the front andconcretecastin thegaps.The simplicity of this methodof reconstructing
the missingbeamsborethe disadvantagethat the straighttimber boardof the shuttering
determinedthe width of the reconstructedconcretebearn.As a result they appearto be
straightandcomparativelythick in thereconstructions.
This will give a wrong impression
122
Seeplates 146and 149.

Petcr Kicnzle
to the visitors. In the original Minoan structure thin, twisted and badly shaped beams
have been used which have been, generally speaking, covered behind plaster. In the
reconstructions thick and straight beams appear to have been used. This dorninance
creates a generally wrong impression that the palace was a timber framed construction
rather than a rubble masonry construction with timber reinforcement beams.
Anotherdistinctive advantageis that mouldscan be producedand reusedseveraltimes

for theproductionof multiple identicalmemberslike columns.Thus,concreteis a very
economical However,
solution. the form of concreteconstructionsis only as good as the
shutteringwhichwas madefor it. Roundedmouldsaremore expensiveto produceand,

therefore, the shutteringfor most concreteconstructionsis formed of simple straight
boards. Simplistic straight and ungainly concrete sheltershardly enhancethe visual
qualitiesof an excavationsite."'
After the liquid concretehardens,it can withstandthe forcesof tile weatherextremely
well and requires only little maintenance.Unfortunately, the hardened concrete also
withstandsthe effort to remove it againand thus the reconstructions
are irreversible,or
at best, they are only reversible with a great loss of historic fabric. Furthermore,
reinforced concrete has a comparatively high coefficient of thermalexpansion. Thus,

large monolithic structurescan move considerablydue to temperaturedifferencesand
significant forces result. Severedamageresults where the concretereconstructionis
firmly connectedwith the excavatedhistoric structureswhich are frequentlyunableto
respondto theseforces.
The texture and surfaceandthe monolithic structureof concreteresemblessometypes
of stone but is still clearly distinguishablefrom any material used in the original
construction.Visitorscan identify concretereconstructions.While concretewas in high
favour as a good and modernbuilding materialearlierin this century,the public image
changed in the 124Today
1970's. it is not commonlyregardedasan appealingor pleasant
"'Compare Schmidt, 1988, p. 55 f.

"'Sutherland, 1996, p. 255 f.
368 Chapter6
Conservation and Reconstruction at ne Palace of Minos at Knossos
surface and will be rejectedby many visitors for this reason.However, this had not
affectedthe choiceof this materialin the 1920's.
Concrete provides a considerable number of long term problems which have only been
researchedrecently and could not have beenknown at the time Piet de Jong executed the
excavations. Concrete provides an alkaline environment which protects the iron
reinforcement rods from rusting. However, this alkaline environment does not remain
stable but the alkaline concrete reacts with the acid environment (air pollution). As a
result the ph-level of the concrete is reduced and finally sinks below the required
minimum and reinforcement bars start rusting. This is a very common problem for
concrete buildings
Z. and affects excavation sites even more, since at them the concrete
from
restorationsarenot sheltered the 12-'
weather. Furthermore,if the concretestructures
are affected, their removal or repair harms the historic fabric. Another problem,
specifically in limestoneareaslike Crete, is the incompatibility of the coefficient of
thermal expansionand contraction between cement basedconcrete and limestone
aggregates.Due to this fact fine cracks(hairlinecracks)occur in the concretesurface
which allow water penetrationand,thus,rusting of the reinforcementbars.126
6.5.3. Performance, Harms and Benerits
Pietde Jongmadecarefulconsiderationswhen planning the concretereconstructions.It
seemsthat heunderstoodthe forcesoccurring in the temperaturerelatedexpansionand

contractionof the flat concreteceilings or, at least,learnedabouttheseproblemsin the
processof executing reconstructionwork. Only at very few placesin the Domestic
Quarterdo the concreteslabsrest directly on the historic fabric whereasin most of the
walls.Thus, the forcesof the temperaturerelated

casesthe ceilingsreston reconstructed
expansion is hardly transmitted into the ancient walls. In his later work he even
reconstructedthe load-bearing
t) walls and the supporting
0 concrete beamsin a way to
"'Sutherland, 1996,p. 256, article 9.

126Veneýanin,
1990,602ff.

Peter Kienzle
prevent theseforces from being transmitted.Large areasof the Palace were covered with
concreteceilings which have beenconstructed in several sections and the joints between
thesesectionsare still visible; however they nonethelessform larger monolithic ceilings.
The ceiling of the West Wing, for example is approximately fifty nietres long from the
stairs in the south to the north end of the Throne Room area. The movement of the
expansion and contraction of this ceiling will be approximately:
111
11*10-6
*60*C*50in=0,033m
Ill*"C
Whilethe first figuregivesthecoefficientof thermalexpansionfor the materialconcrete,

the secondfigureprovidestheternperature
difference.In a summerday the bareexposed
concrete ceiling will heat up to approximatelysixty degreesCelsiuswhile it will cool

downto approximatelyzerodegreeCelsiuson a winter night. This, multiplied with the
lengthof the ceilingshowsa maximummovementof approximately0,033metresor 3.3
0
centimetres.The concreteceiling and the supportingmasonry
ZIP
has to deal with these
movements.
This problem is well illustrated at the
reconstruction of the North Lustral

Basin. The plastered surface of the
walls clearly shows the cracks which

occur right under the ceiling at the
corners of the building. While walls
can bend to some extent, the corners,
where two walls join, are stiff

L
structures and the maximum
movement of thermal expansion of
the concrete ceiling occurs at exactly
Fiaure 88 West elevation of the North Lustral Basin.
this point. The corners of the 0
370 Chapter 6
Conservation and Reconstruction at Tlie Palace of Minos at Knossos
structure could not

follow the move-
ments of the ceiling

and, consequently,
separated from it.
It seems that Piet
de Jong disregar-
ded this problem at
Figure 89 Expansionof flat concreteroof abovethe North Lustral.Basin
the small structure (a),bendingwall in themiddle(b) andcracksat the stiff comers
of the structure(c).
above the Lustral
Basinbut he laterbecameawareof theseproblemswhen lie designedthe reconstructions
of theThroneRoom. A ring beamwas caston top of the reconstructedrubble masonry

walls to tie them 12'The
together. top surfaceof thesering beamswas absolutelysmooth
and no reinforcementbars connectedthe beamswith the overlayingconcreteceiling.
Furthermore, the crossbeams,which form a structuralunit with the ceilingswere not
to
connected the but 12'
ring-beam simplyrested mortices. Hence,the horizontal forces
in
of thermalexpansionof the concreteceiling were not transmittedinto the masonry.
Provision was madefor the rain water to be drainedfi-om the concreteceilings.The

inclined ceilings directed the water to the edges and led to down pipes and gargoyles.
Walls crossing the flow of the water were designedwith smallopeningsin the lowest
in to
courseof masonry order not obstruct the flow. "' Canalswere formed in concrete
it be
to transportrainwaterto a point where could safely ""
discharged. Whereoriginal
stones were incorporatedin the concrete,small damsor canalswere built to prevent

water flowing into thejoint.
"'See plates59 and 60.

"'See plates59 and 60.
12"Seeplate 68 andsectionthroughopeningin centreof SectionC-C, Drawin,(-I,
4.
"'See plate 28.

PeterKienzle
Piet de Jong incorporated excavated gypsum corner blocks and door jambs into his
reconstructionsand where parts were missingthey were completed with concrete. These
repairs were not executed flush with the surface as it existed in the year of the
but be level. ",
reconstruction work recreated to what was then assumedto the original
While the concrete repairs have not weathered very much, the gypsum material has
deteriorated quickly. This was predominantly due to the much softer fabric of gypsum,
but it might also be accelerated by a chemical incompatibility of the two materials.132
However, the edges of the concrete supplements clearly show how much the gypsum
material suffered from the date of the reconstruction work up-to today. However, the
original gypsum elementswere replaced at their former position and incorporated in the
concrete structures.This should show to the visitors where they came from and that the
reconstructions were correct. 133

While the concrete construction protected the gypsum
pavementof the ground floor rooms, it exposed similarly sensitive gy psumjai-nb blocks
134
even more.
The concrete recon-
structions have lasted

very well. A few cracks
have occurred on top
of the ceilings, but con-

sidering the fact that
the ceilings are exposed
to the sun without any
top coat and limestone
Figure 9U Lintel construction witli iron I-beams. Cased With timber
boardsbyDoll (a) and with concrete by de Jongc(b). Blue line aggregates were used
indicates where iron is not protected by concrete.
"'See plate 151.

"'Zezza, 1994,p. 644 ff. Zezzasuggeststhat gypsumdeterioratesbecauseof the actionof rain but
CIO
StefieChlouveraki,who is researchinc, on the deteriorationof gypsum,communicatedin a personaltalk on
a
sitethattheremightbea possibilitythatorganicaction(bacteria)or chemicalincompatibilitybetweencement
basedconcreteand gypsumhave furtheredthe deterioration.Uis questionmust be left open until she
completesandpublishesher research.
'"I'M IL P. 350 f.
""Evans statedhis intentionto preservethe gypsumfloor slabs.PM III, p. xii.
372 Chapter 6
Conservation and Reconstruction at Tbe Palace of Minos at Knossos
in their construction it is rather surprising that there are not more cracks. ' 3-' The concrete
reconstructions suffered most where the iron I-beams of Doll's reconstruction have been
incorporated in concrete beams. The iron girders of lintels and architraves rested on
piUars orcolumns of masonry, a system which could not be altered. When the concrete
was castaround the girders, a finejoint remained between the old pillars and the new
concrete beams. Humidity could penetrate through this joint and affect the ends of the
iron-I-beams. Furthermore, since the beams were already in position, the thickness of the
concrete cover was limited. The iron girders started rusting and exploded their concrete
cover. 136
In the original construction,rubble masonrywalls had beenthe load bearingstructures
and the timber beamshad the function

reinforcement of providing horizontal tensile
stfength in the caseof earthquake.In the reconstruction,a new rigid framework of

I
Cý function. The rubble walls,
concretetook over from the rubble walls someload-bearing
which were constructedoriginally with mud mortar, are now much softer, structurally
than the surroundingconcreteframes.This resultedin a structurally mixed
speak7ing,
construction in which masonry,to someextent,might work more like panelswithin a
framework. This becomesclear in the reconstructionof the Hall of the Double Axes,
where stoneswere incorporatedin both the concretefi-ameand the panels.Inevitably

they crackeddue to forcesin the different structuralsystems."'
The functionof theoriginal timber reinforcementbearnshasalreadybeendiscussed.To
provide for the heavyload of the reconstructions,Piet de Jong filled the gapsof the
beamswith reinforcedconcrete.It is a ratherhypotheticalquestionwhether
idecomposed
or not this action preventedthe structuresfrom collapsingin an earthquake.Minor
tremorshaveoccurredin CreteandEvans'saccountof the 1926earthquakesupportsfor
the assumptionthat the reconstructionof the beamsin concrete was beneficial.'38
"'Compare, Venaanin, 1990,602 ff.

136
See plates 204,205,206 and 207.
137
See plate 156.
13'Seealso earthquake February 1930, PM III, p. xii.

Pcter KienzIe
However, by Lazar ýumanov in Macedonia had

research shows that structures which
their timber beams ""' However, only the next

ring replaced with concrete ones collapsed.
major earthquakewill show if the concretereplacements

were beneficial
or harmful in
this respect.
The reasonswhy concrete was employedat Knossoshave already been discussed and the
of
expectations this time arewhat the reconstructions
mustbe set against.In 1928,Evans
explained his intentions:
"But the cutting out of stone shafts and capitals and the raising of stone piers involved a prohibitive
amount of labour and expense.The iron girders brought to Candia by sea - some of them now lying
at the bottom of the harbour - were both cumbrous and costly, and woodwork was found rapidly to
rot owing to the violent alternations of the Cretan climate. It was only the adoption in recent years of
the wholesaleuseof ferro-concrcte that has made it possible to continue the work of conservation on
a larger scaleand in a more durable manner, and to rescue much that had been already done from the
imminent dangercausedby the rotting of the wooden supports. It has been thus possible to undertake
a much more considerable work of reconstitution. The restoration of lame areas of upper floors,
incorporating at the same time the existing slabs and doorjambs, has been much facilitated, and not
only the wooden posts and beams but the shafts and capitals of columns have been reproduced in
concrete, the exact dimensions being in many casesindicated by the carbonised remains." "
The most interesting part in the quotation above is certainly the words " on a larger
..
scale and in a more durable manner..". The drivinc, force behind the immense
reconstruction work was to cover as much of the Palace as possible. Only reinforced
concrete offered this possibility at an affordable price. Furthermore, the concrete
reconstructionsmust be seenas a reaction to the failures of earlier reconstruction work.
It is not clear if Evans intentionally usedthe words "more durable" in this qualifying way
or if it was believed that the concrete reconstructions were permanent. Certainly, they
were expectedto last longer than everything that was tried before, but by no means are
they permanent. It has been explained above how concrete ages and needs to be
1"Lmanov in a personal report on his forthcoming PhD-Thesis. Macedonia refers to the Republic
of Macedonia, formerly part of Yugoslavia.
"Evans, 1928, P. 97.
374 Chapter 6
maintained,repairedandaftersometime evenreplaced.It wasthe lack of this knowledge

that led to theunqualifieduseof concrete.It hasbeenseenas the advantageof concrete
that it could be poured in its liquid state in irregularshapesand then becomesa hard,
Today,
monolithicmaterial. this is not only known as its advantagebut also provesto be
a sourceof problems.It can only be removedwith extremedifficulties and with a great
loss of original fabric; but this might be exactly what is necessary.
haveshapedthe view of the site considerablyandmuch of

The concretereconstructions
the current criticism is focussed on this. After concrete was left visible in the
contemporaryarchitectureof the periodbetweenthe 1950sandthe 1970sit increasingly
becamea synonymfor ugliness.But alsoin the period of the reconstructionsat Knossos,
visibleconcretewasnot commonlyacceptedas good taste.Nonetheless,concretefloors

closelyresemblehistoricplasterfloors and thus were left untreated.But, when concrete
was usedto recreatetimber beamsit waspaintedto resemblethis material.It was not
appreciatedasa mediumin itselfbut ratherasa vehicle to achievethe airnsof protection
and reconstruction.
6.6 Conclusions
It becomesclear,that the architectsTheodoreFyfe, ChristianDoll and Piet de Jonghad
very different approachestowards conservationwhich were manifestedin their choice

of materials and the way they usedthem. They acted and plannedaccordingto their
beliefs; but, as it seems,not always to the best of their knowledge.Despite careful
in manyareas,for examplehow to drain off water,other basicrules were
considerations
neglected.The biggestfault to which all threearchitectswere pronewas the inability to
understandhow to treat a excavationsite differently from a building. A protectiveroof
above all structures is missing. Due to this fact the excavated remains and the
wereexposedto theelementsof the weatherdifferently than they would
reconstructions
be in a completebuilding.

Peter Yjenzle
Theodore Fyfe had to learn that he could not replace like with like if the circumstances
have changed.Timber beams cannot replace timber beams if the roof is gone. Christian
Doll had to learn that the iron girder and brick vault construction cannot simply be
covered with broken slabs.This is possibleinside buildings but at excavation sites he had
to cover thestructures with slabsand fill the joints with fine grout, as with roof terraces.
Piet de Jong had to learn that concrete slabs, especially if large and fully exposed to the
heat of the -sun,move tonsiderably. He reacted by designing his later reconstructions
adequately. Obviously all three architects overestimated the durability of their

reconstruction work. Fyfe's work was determined by the principle of minimal
intervention and their failure did not harm too much. Even Doll's larger reconstructions
were, to a large extent, reversible and did not caused too much damage. However, it
seemsthat de Jong believedhis reconstructionswould last forever. His massive concrete

ginal fabric.
reconstructions can ýonlybe removed with a great sacrifice of ori 0
It will be difficult to blame de Jong for this. It was discussedhow he reacted to the earlier
experiencesof how to keep the Palace of Knossos standing. Without the support work,
the walls would have long collapsed and without the ceilings the pavements would have
gone. Without recasting the missing timber beams the walls would not have supported
CD
the load of the ceilings and, perhaps,an earthquakecould have destroyed everything. The
reconstructions must be seen as a manifestation of effort rather than a final product.
376 Chapter6
Chapter 7
rv 7-
neoretical and
-z Philosophical
Aspects of the Reconstruction Work
cz
Ei
Figure 91 Sketch of the existing remains of the West Porch by Fyfe
. -A Ti
l
., 4 'AN:
Wit
Figure92 Restoredview of the WestPorchby F.G. Newton
What is architecture? Will I define it with Vitruvius as the art of building? No.
77zisdefinition contains a grass error. One must conceive in order to make. Our
forefathers only built their hut after they had conceivedits image. This production
of the mind, this creation is what constitutes architecture, that which we can now
define as the art to produce any building and bring it to perfection. The art of
building is thus only a secondaryart that it seemsappropriate to call the scientific
part of architecture.
(Etienne-LoiseBuIlde,1799,quotedin Johnson, 1994,p. 75)
378 Chapter7
Chapter 7
Theoretical and Philosophical

Aspects of the Reconstruction Work
7.0 Introduction
The evaluationof the technicalaspectsof the reconstructionwork at Knossosis easily
executedwith the evidenceprovided by the site itself. Tile author's recordsof the site
andhistoricphotographs
r.) show the performanceandtheir ageingbehaviourof materials
and construction techniques. However, it is much more difficult to evaluate the
theoretical and philosophical aspectsof the reconstructions. Besides Arthur Evans, only
Theodore Fyfe left some written evidence of his conservation philosophy. Doll and de
Jong left no statements which throw light on their attitude to conservation. ' These
written statements form a valuable source but it must be considered that they might be
distorted by what their authors desired as outcomes of their work.
Frequently,buildingsareperceivedasthe physicalresultof an architecturaldesignidea.

In realityfew elementsof the initial designideaareexecutedin an unalteredway. Laws
andregulations,financialandtechnicallimitations,the unavailabilityof certainmaterials
or skills at a specificplace or time are all constraintswhich determinethe difference
betweenthe intentionandthe result.This processis easilyunderstoodwhen it is closely
followed from the first design brief to the final result. The influenceof the various
limitations on the original designcan be identified and it is possibleto understandthe
'WhilePietdeJonghadleft no writtensourceshimselfhe wasquotedin bookssuchasCottrell, 1953,

P. 100ff.
'IbeoreticalandPhilosophicalAspectsof the ReconstructionWork 379

PeterKienzle
physical building as a result of this process. However, at historic structures only the
result, the physical building, is known. In order to discover the original design idea the
limitations which influence the process must be identified. In the case of Knossos the
reconstructions literally are before us in a concrete way. In the previous chapters every
effort has been expended to identify the technical constraints that have affected the
design.This chapter will examinethe theoretical and philosophical aspectsthat influenced
the reconstructions.
The first, and by far, most important factor influencing the desian of the reconstructions,
is the philosophy of Evans, Theodore Fyfe, Christian Doll and Piet de Jong. However,
the only sourceswe have, are their own statementsin writing which are few, as far as the
architectsare concerned,and the work they have left us. Thus, the next four sections will
extract the conservationphilosophy of Evans,Fyfe, Doll and de Jong from these sources.
The further sections will discuss the purpose and the aim of the reconstructions and it
will be considered how accurately the reconstructions represent the original Minoan
architecture.
7.1 The Conservation Philosophies of Arthur Evans, Theodore

Fyfe, Christian Doll and Piet de Jong
The reconstructionandconservationwork of the individual architectswas describedin

the relevantchapters.Their different conservationphilosophiescan be reconstructed
throughan analysisof the work executedon site and- asfar asFyfe is concerned- the
written sources.By contrast,establishingEvans' conservationattitudereliesto a large
extendon written sources.While changesin designandexecutionof the reconstruction
work indicatethe arrivalof a newarchitectwith differentconservationideasor a leaming
process,the continuumof the designobjectivesmust be attributedto Evans.
It goes far beyond the scope of this study to produce an individual psychological profile
of all thepeoplewho workedon site,for exampleEmile andEdouardGilli6ron, Duncan
380 Chapter 7
Conservation and Reconstruction atnie Place of Minos at Knossos
Mackenzie or the Greek foremen, masonsand carpenters.All of them had some influence
on the reconstructions.The work of Gilli6ron fils and pýre focussed on conservation and
copy of artefactsand 2
frescoes. Some structures such as the South Propylon, the South-
North Corridor or the North Entrance Passagewere reconstructed to facilitate the
replicas of frescoes executed by these two artists. This has not influenced the technical
execution of the reconstructions but their ability to provide Evans with the replicas had
an influenceon the designbrief. Without this option, there was no need to execute these
structures at all.
DuncanMackenziewas the loyal and trustedarchaeologistwho was not only in charge
of keepingthe excavationdiary, he alsosupervisedthe daily work on site. His sharein

the excavations has not yet been fully recognisedoutside a small expert group. 3
However, in his diary he referredonly onceto reconstructionwork and, thus, it is not
known how he influencedthe architect'sand Evans' conservationand reconstruction
ideas.Furthermore,the Greekforemanandworkers,with theirskills and knowledgehave
certainly influencedthe reconstructionwork but it can be assumedthat most of their

influencewason a detaillevelandhadlittle impacton the overall design.Thus, the main
actorswho influencedthe shapeof the reconstructionwork were Evans,Fyfe, Doll and

de Jong.
7.1.1 The Conservation Philosophy of Arthur Evans
The life of Arthur Evansand his early ideasof conservationwere describedin the first
chapter.He wrote an enormousamountof materialon variousaspectsof antiquity and

on Knossos including many passageson conservation and restoration work. He
2Little researchwasdoneon Gillidron, p6reandfils. However,KennethLapatin,BostonUniversity

has done someresearch.They were Swissartists who worked at variousexcavationsitesand produced
andmetalobjectsfor museumsbut werealsolinked to criminal forgery.Lapatin,
replicasof pottery,frescoes
e-mail on AegeanetDiscussionList, 27 September1997.
'Dr. NicolettaMomiglianois currentlyin the processof writing a biographyof DuncanMackenzie
C, CP
which will put his achievementsin the properperspective.
Ibeoretical.andPhilosophicalAspectsof the ReconstructionWork 381

Peter Kienzle
frequently explained the necessity for protection of many of the sensitive features,
somethingwhich alreadyhas been examined in chapters three. four and rive. It has been
that
established in many caseshe was definitely right and that protection measureswere
However,
necessary. Evans also frequently statedthat he wanted to show the visitor how
the structures once looked. He always openly admitted the presentation aspect of the
reconstructions.
The criticism on the reconstructions has not focussed on the protective sheltersper se,
they were undoubtedlynecessary,but on the decision to design the shelters in a 'Minoan
fashion'. The colourful and enthusiastic descriptions in Evans's publication give reason
to doubt whether the reconstructions were conscientious and accurate reproductions of

the original structures. It is important to not that Evans never stated that the
0
reconstructions were accurate reproductions but used phrases such as: "... it has been
possible to a great extent to ",

restore... '6 gives the best nonnal idea of % ".. to
.... .....
restore its general "
effect... or "...reproducing the probable method... "'.7 He also
frequently suppliednumerous evidence to illustrate why the suggestedreconstruction is
0Z,
the most likely "
version. Furthermore, all published plans distinguish clearly between
I
original remains and probable reconstructionO Obviously, he was aware that the
reconstruction work could not be accuratereproduction of the past but give only some
general impressionsand that it must be clearly labelled.
It hasbeenmadeclear in the previous chaptersthat both the presentation aspect and the
conservation aspect of the reconstructions were present from the very It

beocinning.
seemsthat in modemconservationphilosophyone of the most crucial questions is hardly

ever asked:for whom do we conserve.If we conservehistoric structuresnot just for their
own sake, we will conserve them for people to enjoy or to learn from them. The
TM H, P. 350.
'Ibid, p. 389.
'Ibid., P. 9.
IPM IV, p. 922.
TM 1. p. 328 f; PM 1. p. 336; PM 1.p. 343.
'See PM H, P. 397 f, ficUre 62 and fi-Urc 73.
c0
382 Chapter 7
Conservation and ReconstructionatIbe Place of Minos at Knossos
structuresare conservedfor the generations to come after us. If conservation of historic

structures meansthe conservation of information, we need to have a recipient for this
information. It has already been pointed out that Arthur Evans becamedirector of the
AshmoleanMuseum in 1884and that he supervisedthe construction and the move to the
new premises at Beaumont Street. Obviously, the public and the presentation of
archaeology to the public were of major importance to Evans.'
It is clear that both the presentation and the conservation aspectsof the reconstructions
at Knossosfocus on the same object: the visitor. In Evans' vision, people are supposed
to come to the site and seethe palace.While he was in Knossos, Evans guided them over
the site himself-,but he alsoensuredthat the palacecould be enjoyed by tile visitors of the
future. The visitor envisagedby Arthur Evans in the early twentieth century is certainly
not the samevisiting the site today. Then, the meansof travel were limited to upper class
and generallywcll-educatedpeopleand thesewere the visitors Evans catered for. Today,
Crete is a popular destinationfor packagetourism. The visitors today wi II generally have
a different perception of the site."
In a modern understanding of management of archaeological sites the issues of
conservation and interpretation are both important but they are usually addressed
independently.The interpretation of a site is usually presentedon boards, guide books
or in interpretation centres while the conservation of the ruins aims to alter the found
structures as little as possible and is generally unexplained. It is known today that the
interpretation of a site will change continuously. New knowledge of the past will alter
our perception of it and require a different interpretation. Concrete reconstructions

cannot adapt to this change. Evans addressedthe sarnetwo issues,interpretation and
conservation, but he unified both in one structure. Thus, they can be called 'protective
reconstructions'.The combination of the two aspectsresulted in an aestheticlandscape
of ruined structures, an effect which was certainly desired.
1OSee page 72 ff. and compare Lapourtas, 1997.

"Until a comprehensivestudy of the social backgroundof the visitors then and today has been made
this statementmust remain in a very generalform.
Tbeoretical and Philosophical Aspects of the ReconstructionWork 383

PeterKienzle
Arthur EvarWsbasic attitude to conservation and reconstruction changed little over the
he worked at Knossos. Both aspects, conservation and interpretation, were

period
the first roof above the Throne Room in 1901 and lasted until the final work
presentat
was completed in 1930. However, the physical form of the conservation work on site
This was due to contact with many visitors, fellow
underwent many changes.
the employed by
archaeologistsand, certainly, to the exchangeof views with architects
it
him, but was also due to the problems of the site, the failure of earlier work, the long
forced absencefrom the site during World War I and aesthetic shortcomings of support
work. As more work became necessaryhe realised that structural, but not recreative
support work was not only an aesthetic obstacle but also a hindrancetowards
understanding the site. Plate 4 shows that the roofs above the Throne Room. the
Magazineof the Giant Pithoi andthe easternlight well of the Queen'sMegaronform a
distinctivebut alienelementin the landscapeof the site.Covering the largeareaof the
0
Hall of the Double Axes with a flat roof or a pitched roof similar to the one of the Throne
Room would have impeded the understandingof the site considerably. Ibis negative
effect of non-reconstructive protection shelters became more obvious as more
conservationwork was neededand, consequently, the clement of reconstruction gained

more importance.
In the literature, the reconstructionsat Knossoshave been labelled almost exclusively as

Evans's work. " It has been discussedin previous chaptersthat the individual architects
executed the reconstructions in their own particular ways. However, it is important to
understand the relationship between Arthur Evans and the architects. Evans employed
them on site and for severalmonths every year they worked exclusively for Evans. 'Ibus
he was their boss. Nonetheless,they lived at the sameaccommodation and shared the
same food and they were part of the British excavation team as opposed to the Greek
workers. Their relationship was different from a standard architect-client relationship.

However, in a typical architect-client relationship there is hardly ever an architect who
can execute buildings according to his own design ideas. As it is common in these
53 ff.
12Compareliterature review in the introduction. pagge
384 Chaptcr 7
Conservationand Reconstructionat The Place of Minos at Knossos
relationships,the client approachedthe architect with a clear concept of what he wanted

to build. The architectemployshis aestheticskills and knowledge of construction to turn
0
the client's ideas into a proper plan and, finally, to realise them. In a good relationship,
this produces a constant dialogue over a long period of time. Fyfe, Doll and de Jong
worked a long time for Evans and it must be assumedthat their relationship was quite
good and they had a distinctive influence on the reconstruction work. "
Evans's designbrief haschangedremarkably little over the thirty years of reconstruction
work at Knossos. Although the elementsof protection and presentation were present
from the beginning,every new architect provided new aestheticskills and knowledge of
construction.Thus, the building programmechangedlittle while the way it was executed

0
changed greatly. The different philosophies of the three architects created different
results.
7.1.2 The Conservation Philosophy of Theodore Fyfe
Like Evans, but not to a similar extent, Theodore Fyfe has left some written material
about his philosophy.The most interestingwork in this context is certainly his paper 'The
Atelier versus The Builder's Yard' which he gave in 1911 to the Architectural
Association." It could be consideredcloseenoughto the date of his reconstruction work
at Knossos(1900 -1904) to be regardedas relevant. In this paper he strongly argues for

an architecturaltraining which includes both the builder's yard, where young architects
learnhow to deal with the structures and materials, and the atelier, where architects are
trained in draughtsmanshipand theory. In his opinion, only the combination of both skills
can result in good architecture. Thus, he puts himself in the tradition of the 'Arts and
Craft' movement and the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (S.P.A. B. )
which is further supportedby quoting William Morris, the founder of this organisation.
13SecLapourtas, 1997 who suggestsa different view of this relationship bctween Evans and the
architects at Knossos.
14FYfe, 1911,49 55.
-
Tbeoretical and Philosophical Aspects of the ReconstructionWork 385

PeterKienzle
Later he worked with the S.P.A. B. architects AR PowYs and WR Lethaby when he
became architect to the Dean and Chapter of Chester Cathedral in 1920.
In his reconstructions Theodore Fyfe used materials, which had been used in Minoan
times and it was his prime concern to replace like with like. However, as has been
analysedin the chapter three, much of it did not last very well and had subsequently been
replacedby Doll's and de Jong's later This

reconstructions. was not, as Evans wrote, due
to the Cretan climate but due to constructional mistakes and to a lack of understanding
of the different decay rates of materials on archaeological sites as opposed to those in
roofed buildings. However, a clear distinction must be made. Only the support work,
inserted to keep parts of the crumbling ruins in position, was affected by deterioration
but this support work was never intended to last. " Wherever he was able to design the
completely new reconstructions, they responded very well. " Theodore Fyfe's
reconstructions, though using traditional materials,were nonethelessdistinguishable from

r)
the original fabric in a sornewhat subtle way. Walls were executed in straight lines and
new walls always featured a straight horizontal top. This contrasted with the original
walls which were left in their fringed and ragged way.
WhenTheodoreFyferevisitedKnossosagainin 1926he was ableto look upon his own
reconstructions He
retrospectively. describedthe earlier reconstructions,his own and
Doll's work, in the Jounial of the Royal Institute of British Architects in 1926:
"...thepalace,asa whole,would graduallybecomea shapeless

andalmostunintelligibleruin unless
somepracticalmethodswere adoptedto ensureprotectionfrom the elementsfor its moreessential
features.Thesemethodshave been adoptedby Sir Arthur Evanswith constantand unwearying
forethoughtin all availabletime sincethe first yearsof excavation.Much of the earlier work of
tentativeandexperimental.This is now beingreplacedto a areatextent
wasnecessarily
preservation
by morepermanentmethods,anda lot of additionalwork hasbeendone.""
"Fyfe. 1926a, p. 479. For examplethe Grand Staircase,the northern portico of the Hall of
Colonnades,the East-WestCorridor,etc.
"See page 343 ff. For examplepillar wall Hall of the Double Axes,71ironeRoom,Shrineof the
DoubleAxes,Magazineof the Giant Pithoi,etc.
"Fyfe, 1926a,p. 479.
386 Chapter7
ConservationandReconstructionat The Placeof Minos at Knossos
He not only approvedof the later work but also acceptedthat the repairs he had executed
himself had not fully satisfied his and Evans's expectations. It is relevant moreover that
in 1926 Theodore Fyfe supervisedthe concretereconstruction of the Royal Villa" which
shows that he was prepared to adopt to new materials and techniques and learn from
earlier mistakes. This learning process focused on materials and techniques but Ws
conservationattitude changed very little, if at all. In 1922, when he had to defend work
he was responsible for as Cathedral Architect at Chester he wrote in the Diocesan
Gazette:
"We areherefaceto facewith a standpointbasedon historicvalueswhich is of*the very essenceof

thespirit in which the repairof historicstructuresmay bestbe approachednot to showthemasthey
were- an impossibletask- but mostworthily astheyare.""
It seems that this statement contradicts his earlier agreement on the concrete
21
reconstructionsat Knossosin 1926. In contrast to the spirit of his earlier work of
conservationthe concretereconstructionsseemto show how the palacewas in Minoan
timesandnot what it was in the early twentiethcentury.A closerlook revealsthat Fyfe
is much more critical of his earlier work than of the concreterestorations.His earlier
work used the original materialsin their original dimensionsat the placeswhere they
mighthavebeen.Theyaremore likely to be confusedwith the original remainsthan the
concretework of the 1920s.
Fyfe was, like Evans,concernedaboutthe outsidevisitor who hasto interpretthe site.

In both, the quotation in the DiocesanGazetteaboveand in a paper in 1926he talks
to
aboutshowingor suggesting the competentvisitor how the placeslooked in the "
past.
18TIieRoyalVilla wasreconstructedin 1926with concretesimilar to the palacefollowing plansby

PietdeJong.It seemsthatdeJongwasbusyelsewherein the palaceandthe supervisionof the work wasleft
to Ilieodore Fyfe.
"Ibeodore Fyfe, in DiocesanGazetteChester20th February1922,in S.P.A.B. Archive London.
Obviously, Fyfe's attitude to conservationhas maturedbetween 1904 and 1922 and the conservation
problemsat ChesterCathedral differ from the onesat Knossos.Nonetheless,
the quotationgivesa good idea
of Fyfe's thoughts.
"'CompareFyfe, 1926,p. 479.
"Compare quotationpage386.
TbeoreticalandPhilosophicalAspectsof the ReconstructionWork 387

Peter Kienzle
From 1921 Fyfe gave lectures at Oxford and from 1922 he was teaching at Cambridge;
but already in 1911 he discussed the education of architects in a paper in the
Architectural Association Jounial. 22Thus the didactic element was of considerable
importance in his later work, a viewpoint which he might have adopted from Evans while
he was working for him at Knossos. Fyfe believed, as far as can be judged from the
sourcesavailable, that the concrete reconstructions could clearly be distinguished from
the old material and would not harm the historic fabric. They have not replaced the
historic fabric but are an additional element to support in both the physical and the
didactic way.
In his earlier work on site, Theodore Fyfe used materials and techniquesin his
which
reconstruction were identicalwith the original Minoan ones.They could only be
throughtheir specificshape.The reconstructed
distinguished partsfeaturedstraight lines
while the original parts were rugged and fractured. These subtle differenceswere
frequently not recognized by non-trained visitors. To them the texture of the
partswasindistinguishable
reconstructed from the historic fabric. This problemoccurred
only graduallywith a larger numberof visitors on site who were no longer guidedby
Evanshimself but visited the site on their own.
7.1.3 The Conservation Philosophy of Christian Doll
It is more difficult to discuss Christian Doll's attitude towards conservation than that of
Evans and Fyfe. He has not left any writing on his work and he did not practise for long
either before or after his work at Knossos. As I described earlier, Doll focussed on
politics in his later life rather than on architecture. It almost seemsas if he never really
had an interest in architectureand was drawn into the profession by his father rather than
by his own desire. It seems that Doll's father had a considerable influence on the
22Fyfe, 1911, p. 49 55.

-
388 Chapter 7
Conservation and Reconstruction at'llie Place of Minos at Knossos
architectureof the Villa Ariadne and probably other works of Doll. " This indicates that
Doll was not a very confidentand creativepersonand JosefDurm, who met Christian
Doll at Knossosin 1906,refersto him in a similar way.24
However, his work at Knossos allows us to judge Christian Doll's attitude towards
conservation. He understood the conservation needsand provided technical solutions.

To Doll the work at Knossos was not an aesthetic or ethical challen-e but an technical
challenge.Iron girders and brick vaults were employedto cover the roorns and to replace
historic fabric to its former position. Unlike Fyfe he removed much of the overlaying
fabric and replaced it after iron girders were inserted. The structurally necessarywork
was clad with timber boards to concealthe load-bearingstructure and a suspendedceiling
covered the brick vaults. Obviously, a shift has happenedfrom the use of real materials
to a twofold system where the structurally necessarysteel constructions were hidden
behind timber boards. This construction method was not kept secret but was described
by Evans in 1905.` This honest and straightforward information policy will contradict
any speculation of a decisive intention of deception but the synthesis of Fyfe's system
was lost.
Anotherdetail distinguisheshis work from Fyfe's reconstructions.Doll's masonrywas
more accurateand stoneswere cut roughly into rectangularblocks while Fyfe 11sed
"
randomrubble. In manyareasDoll evenbuilt ashlarpillars, clearly distinguishablefrom
beams.He adoptedTheodoreFyfe's idea to show
the old fabric,to supportreconstructed
new work with straightedgesbut wentmuchfurtherthan his predecessor.
The recording
of the site,the reconstructionproposalsandthe final work on site, all witnessthe same

accuracyof Doll. Everythingis executedin precisestraightlines,technicallycorrectbut
somehowunimaginative.
2-'See
page24I.Whennotin Knossos,Doll workedin his fatlicr's off ice andwhile he wasat Knossos
hefrequentlyaskedhis fatherfor advice.The correspondence bctwccnDoll andhis I*athcrhasnot survived
but Doll regularlyreportedto Evansand in theselettershe referredto his father'sadvice.Someof these
letterssurvived(AshmoleanMuseum,Oxford).
2'Durm, 1910,p. 60 footnote 1.
25Evans,1905,p. 25.
2'Section
B-B, Drawing 8. Wall abovedoor (Fyfe) andwindow (Doll) in lower East-WestCorridor.
TheoreticalandPhilosophicalAspectsof the ReconstructionWork 389

Pcter Kicnzle
A statementof Doll that the Grand Staircase could be reconstructed on a mathematical

line with the treads three times the height of the risers illustrates his attitude. 27Exact
sciences such as mathematics and engineering were important to him rather than form
and design. These were elements which could be later attached to the structure. When
he developedthe plans for the Grand Staircase in 1905 and the archaeological evidence
did not coincide with his technical understanding, he favoured the latter. It has been
discussed in chapter four how his technical thinking had influenced the various
reconstructionproposalsfor the Grand Staircase.This highlights how technical problem-

solving dominated his thoughts.
It has alreadybeenmentionedthat Doll did not pursuehis architecturalcareer.This
seemsto be a logicalpersonaldevelopment.
An essentialquality in practisingarchitecture
is creativity. ChristianDoll's attitude to conservationand reconstructionon site was
formal and might have been a textbook examplebut was lacking in the necessary
imagination.
7.1.4 The Conservation Philosophy of Piet de Jong
Despite being the most recent architect employed at Knossos, little material on Piet de
Jong survives and he did not write any papers that give information on his attitude to
conservation.Consequently his philosophy has to be established basedon an analysis of

the building work he executed,in spite of the dangers connected to such an undertaking.
However, Piet de Jong not only worked at Knossos but also at Mycenae fact which
-a
allows us to compare the two sites. The excavations at Mycenae were directed by Alan
Wace, while Knossoswas excavatedby Evans.The similarities of the reconstruction and
conservation work must be de Jong's responsibility, while the differences probably

originate in the excavators' attitude. Much less reconstruction work was executed in
Mycenae, something predominantly due to the following facts:
"Doll in: Evans, 1927, p. 267.
390 Chapter7
Conservation and ReconstrLICtionat Ibe Place of Minos at Knossos
0 Mycenaewasfirst excavatedby HeinrichSchliernann

in 1876.Much of the historic
fabric had been dug away in the excavationprocessand Schliernannhad not
initiatedan immediateconservation
programmelike Evansat Knossos.Thus, much
of the historic fabric had vanishedlong beforede Jongstartedhis work.
0 Unlike Knossos,which was left up to threestoreyshigh in the DomesticQuarter,

at Mycenae,located on a hill top, remains of upper storeys were not found in situ.
The specific conservationproblemsof Knossoswere not presenthere.
0 Many of the impressivefortification walls were executed in large blocks of

Cyclopeanmasonry.They survivedquite well evenwithout protection while the
rubble masonrywalls of the housesinsidethe walls sufferedconsiderably.
0 Unlike Knossos,gypsumwasnot widely usedin Mycenae.In the few areaswhere

it wasused,suchasin theMegaronof the Palaceon the summit, restorationwork
was executed by de Jong." Since the gypsurnwas not shelteredby a roof it

0
weathered badly and was largely destroyed.
0 WhileEvanswasthe ownerof Knossosand hadconsiderablefinancial abilities to

executehis reconstructionwork, Mycenaewasan excavationof the British School
which always had very limited resourcesand frequentfinancial difficulties."
Despitethesedifferences,work executedby de Jongin Mycenaeshowssomesimilarity
with his work at Knossos.The choiceof materialand the specifictechniquesused to

employ it seem to be his contribution, while the amount and the place of the
reconstruction seem to be the input of the excavators- Alan Wace at Mycenae with
rather limited resourcesand Evans at Knossos with better facilities. For example,
reinforced concretewas used in a similar way at both sites. Concretefloors replaced
missingoriginalonesandfragmentsof theoriginalmaterialwere incorporatedin the new
"An exceptionis the porticoof the megaron.

"'SeeWaterhouse,1986,p. 92.

Peter Kienzle
concretecolumn bases 30
Thus, we have to anticipatethat de Jonggenuinelybelievedin
.
the materialconcreteandits abilitiesto solvetheconservationproblemson site.This fact
is supportedfurther by de Jong stripping the timber roof of Penrose'sBritish School
building in Athensin order to replaceit with a flat concreteconstruction."
Figure93 Planof theAcropolis of Mycenae.
At Knossos, Piet de Jong used reinforced concrete for the construction of the ceilings
and for the reproduction of the timber reinforcement beams both in the excavated ruins
and in the reconstructions.The material concrete was expected to last well in the Cretan
climate. In the areasaccessible to visitors, concrete that recreated timber was painted in
a two-colour technique resembling wooden grain. The colour used in this technique is
ochre-orange rather than brown and while it clearly indicates timber it hardly can be
mistakenfor it. Thus, Piet de Jong not only stated clearly that this was a reconstruction
but also which material had been used originally
.
"See plate 223.

"See page320 f.
392 Chapter 7
Conservation and Reconstruction at ne Place of Minos at Knossos
Piet de Jong introduced the idea of the picturesque ruin to Knossos. Fyfe's and Doll's
reconstructionswere comparatively small in scale.Their impact on the ruined landscape

of the site was limited, but when Piet de Jong started to cover large areas of the site with
concrete reconstructions the impact of the modern work could no longer be neglected.
In fact, he hesitated to reconstruct facades. For example, the Stepped Portico was
reconstructedin 1922 and 1923 and large parts of the West Wing were roofed in 1925,
12
but the Pillared Portico was constructed later and the West Facade as late as 1929.
In order to blend in with the existing ruins, he started to slope the reconstructed walls
Eke ruins from a low level to the required height.33Thus, his reconstructions might more
easily been mistaken for original ruins than the work of Fyfe or Doll. He compensated
for this problem by using reinforced concrete, a material which allowed for better
recognition than the materialsused by his Generally,

predecessors. there was a shift from
the visitor recognizing the reconstructions by their shape to a recognition by materials.
It hasbeennotedthat original elementswhich hadbeenfound in their original position,

had been incorporated in the concrete reconstructions.While the concrete ceiling
protected the gypsumfloor underneathit exposedtheseincorporatedelementsof the
samematerialto the weather.One cannot fail but seethe conflict betweenthesetwo
parts of one and the sameconstruction.However, this must be seenin its historic
context.The originalelementswerefoundin their position in the excavationprocessand
all subsequentstruts, timber support framesand reconstructionsairnedto keep them
there.Theyform an importantrole in understanding
the architectureof tile upper storeys
of the 34
palace. Alternative solutionsfor de Jongfor not placing theseelementsin their
formerpositionincludedaccommodating
themon sitein one of the shelteredareasor off
sitein a museum.In bothcasesthedoorjambswould be removedfrom their architectural
context and no longer provide valuableinformation to tile visitor. In respectto Evans'
philosophy,this wascertainly not desired.
"See page 272 ff.

3'Seeplates 82 and 161.
-'For example,the doorjambs of the upper Hall of Double Axes indicate that this hall had a floor plan
almost identical to the one at the ground floor. Compare figure 31 and figure 62.
Theoretical and Philosophical Aspects of the Reconstruction Work 393

Peter Kienzle
Piet de Jong's reconstructions are aestheticallYpleasing and photographs taken before
the construction of the the designqualities of his work. "' The large
modem sheltersshow
reconstructionswere designedwith a minimum of sharpcontrasts. The restored parts rise
gently above the ruins and the walls slope down or step down from the higher levels to
the original remains. This gentle transition led to confusion and it became difficult to
distinguishthe original from the reconstruction. However, employing this method it was
0
possible for Piet de Jong to fit an enormous area of reconstructed upper floor level into
the ruined landscapeof the site. For example, the reconstructed upper floor of the West
Wing covers approximately 1300 square metres and approximately the sarne area is
covered with a protection shelter at the Palace of Nestor at Pylos.3' In contrast to the
massive at
shelter Pylos, the solutionat Knossosis unobtrusiveandaestheticallypleasing.
Piet de Jong's skills and his aestheticfeeling have determinedhis approachto the
necessarywork on site.
7.2 The Aim, Function and Purpose of the Restoration Work
It has been discussed in the previous chapters that specific factors such as the material
and construction method of the Original Palaceand their survival up to three storeys high
demanded attention. The starting point for all work on site was this demand. Any
criticism which focused on the conservation and support work would not be justified
sincethis work was certainly necessaryand, in fact, hardly any critique on this work can
be found. Most disapprovalon the reconstructionsat Knossos imply that they have been,
at least in some parts, executed for purely representative reasons. It is cornmonly

assumedthat the intention of the reconstructions was to show how the ruins looked in
the past but their conservation aspect is frequently underestimated or completely
neglected. For example, Sinclair Hood wrote:
"See plates 29,82 and 161.

"See plate 221.
394 Chapter 7
Conservation and Reconstruction at The Place of Minos at Knossos
"Ibe aim of Evansin making thesereconstructionswas to try and give some impressions of how parts
CP
of the palacemight have looked in their original state. His reconstructions aroused much controversy
at the time, and have continued to do So.1137
The reconstruction work at Knossos has frequently been grouped into two sections: the
works of Theodore Fyfe and Christian Doll, commonly regarded as good and necessary,
and the work of Piet de Jong, which is more often labelled unnecessaryand wrong. The
separation into two phases is based on Arthur Evans's statement that a 'new era of
reconstruction'startedin the 1920s.38Commonly,this phrasewas interpretedas a new
understandingof conservation and reconstruction philosophy startingafter World War

1.39However,Evanswas only talking about a way that 'i-nadeit possiblemuch more
Cý
to
efficaciouslyandcheaply replaceupper floors. " Thus, there was no dramaticchange
in Evans'sattitude towards conservationbut the new materialallowed him to execute
what he had intendedto do for a long time.
The characteristicelementof the work at Knossosis the combination of two ideas in one
structure: conservation and reconstruction. Thus, the reconstitutions at Knossos are

by nature." While their conservation aspect cannot be
protective reconstructions
criticised, their reconstruction aspect can be and has been criticised. Restoration work
or the reconstruction of a past was condemned by William Morris in his S.P.A. B.
Maizifesto in 1877. It was mentionedthat Evans was involved in the conservation debate
in Britain in the late nineteenth century. There is no proof that Evans read or knew the
Manifesto but he was certainly familiar with the argurnents for conservation of his time.
Evans's aim was not to reconstruct the palace in order to reproduce something that had
never been there or for the sake of a pure style or the completeness of a structure. 'The
fragmentedreconstruction of only parts of the palace contradict this theory. His aim was
to preserve the excavated remains for their information value. If this is so, the question
"Hood and Taylor, 1981. p. 5.

"I'M III, p. 288. For interpretation see Lapourtas, 1997, p. 77 f. and Horwitz, 1981. p 197 ff.
"'See for example Lapourtas. 1997, p. 77 f and Horwitz, 1981, p. 197 ff.
*ýPM III, p. 289.
"'This term has been coined by the author first in a seminar at the University of York in 1996.
Compare: Kienzle, 1997, p. 122.

Peter Kienzle
he did not cover the site with a protective shelter but reconstructed it in
remains why
parts?
It has been discussed in chapter one that protective buildings were built above
features
archaeological in Germany, Switzerland and Britain at the end of the nineteenth
century. The idea of protective shelter was known at the time; however, the first
structure at Knossos, the flat roof above the Throne Room, differs in a minor but very
important detail from these buildings. To support the beams of the flat roof, structural
in
support was necessary the middle of the Throne Room. This support was designed in
a Minoan fashion. Evans, who claims responsibility for this decision, argued that the
reproduction of the original columns would avoid the introduction of "any incongruous
elements in such surroundings". 42When the timber support structures of the Grand
Staircase failed in the Winter 1904/1905 they were replaced with Christian Doll's iron
girder and brick vault construction. Again,

ZD reconstructed columns were chosen to
provide the required support. Evans explains in the Annuals of the British School:
"It being in any case necessaryto obtain strong and durable supports for the upper structures, the
a, 0
mininiunt of incongruity
C, seemed to be securedby restoring the columns themselves in their original
0V
form - but in stone with a plastcr facing in place of wood.""
C
From the verybeginningof conservationwork at Knossosan elementof reconstruction

of historic featureswas present.Evansarguedthat this was necessarybecauseother
structuresof supportwould be 'incongruent'.Therearetwo aspectsto this argumentone
beingaestheticandtheothereducational.Generallyspeaking,perspectivereconstruction
drawingsand, in recenttimes,animatedcomputerreconstructionshavebeenemployed
to help the understandingof vanishedarchitecturalspaces.They compensatefor the
missingpartsof the buildings
on site, so that visitors can obtain someimpressionsof the
At Knossos,props,polesand girdersof supportstructureswhich
spatialarrangements.
'Evans, 1901, P. 2.
"Evans, 1905, p. 25. Emphasis by Evans.
396 Chapter7
wereemployedto keepancientfabricin its position criss-crossedthe space." They were

not only an aestheticobstaclebut madeit difficult to experiencethe ancientspaces.Few
peoplewill be ableto penetrateintellectuallythe structuralsystemof an ancientbuilding
if the originalload-bearing
columnsare missingandthe roof is carriedby additionalnew
poles in different positions.If support of upper elementswas necessary,and this was
certainly the case in the Throne Room and the Grand Staircase,Evans felt, it was
desirableto reconstruct the original columns.This was regardednot only as more
pleasingaesthetically but also more accurateif shownto the visitor.
In his inaugurationspeechas the Keeper of the AshmoleanMuseum Arthur Evans

discussedthe use of facsimilesin a Museumcontext and supportedthe idea that they
be
might used if the originalcannotbe "
displayed. Evansusedreproductionsof frescoes
in the palacebut he was alwaysvery frank about the fact that they were not originals.
Furthermore,he alwaysdocumentedthe reconstructionwork in his annualreportswhich
clearly show that he had not intendedto fool anyonebut intendedto give as much
information as possibleto visitors so that they could understandtile Minoan past.
FlindersPetrie,who excavatedin Egypt and whom Evansfrequentlyquotesfor showing
relationshipsbetweenEgypt and Knossosdiscussedarchaeological

ethics in his book
CP
MethodsandAhns in Archaeologyof 1904:
"In archaeologythereis perhapsa greaterrangeof ethical questions,of the individual versusthe

C,
community,thanin any otherscience.And the resultsof actionarc the moreseriousasthe material
is limited, and perhapsno other chanceof observationmay ever occur. In most sciencesthe
is unlimited.If an alloy is spoiledit canbe remadeat once,
opportunityof experimentandobservation
if a staris not examinedto-nightit may be next night, if a plant is not grown this yearit may be next
year.But Theodoric'sgold armouroncemelted,we shall neverknow what it waslike; the headsof

statuesonceburnt to lime, aregonefor ever,or the Turin papyrusoncebrokenup, we
theParthenon
canhardly hopeeverto recoverall the history it contained.
""
"For exampleseeplates 129,136and 158.

'5Evans,1884.SeealsoLapourtas,1997,p. 72.
"Petrie 1904p. 169f.

Peter Kienzle
Once again, there is no proof that Evans knew this piece of writing but we can assume
M,
that he was familiar with Petrie's attitude. Arthur Evans understood, in the modern sense
the
of archaeology, site of the Palace at Knossos as a collection of information. He
in
frequentlyhad visitors at Knossosand took pride showingthem round the palace. ""
Arthur Evanswas passionateto showthe public the information he had excavatedand,

doubtlesshe preferred to show the original information rather than a replica. However,
he understood that if he wanted to continue giving information to the public, he had to
securethe survival of the medium of this information. He had to bring the sensitive fresco
1.7
fragments to the Museum in Candia. To allow his visitors a complete understanding of
the site he had replicas of the restored frescos fixed in the palace.
In 1928 Edouard Gillifton

:
restoredthe Dolphin Frescoat
:
the north wall of the Queen's
Megaron." The megaronwas
reconstructedby Doll in 1908
and for twenty years it had a

4' The
different paint scheme.
frescofragmentswere found in
1902 either side of the west
Fi(,Ure94 The Dolphin Fresco.Original remainsshaded.
wall of the light weUandEvans
assumed that it originally decoratedits back "
wall. Furthermore,figure 94 showsthat
the few remainsenabledGilli6ron to reconstructa generalschemebut not an exact
reproduction of the original fresco.Thus, a decorativeschemewas recreatedwhich is
neithera correct reproductionnor is it at its correctposition. However,in ThePalace

of Minos, Arthur Evansstated:
"See Brown, 1994,p. 30.

"Evans, 1928,P. 97.
41Seeplates188and 189.
"Evans, 1902,P. 46 and56. ComparealsoPalmer,1969,p. 87.
398 Chapter7
ConservationandReconstructionat The Placeof Minos at Knossos
'To restorein part the original effect,a spiritedamplificationofthe existingremainsof the Dolphin
Frescohasbeenexecutedfor ine by MonsieurGillidron, fils, alongthe upperpart of the north wall
"
of the innerSectionof the 'Megaron'.
C
A clearer picture can be drawn of Evans's intentions.First of all he understoodand
acceptedhis responsibilityasan excavatorto conservethe exposedremains.However,

conservationwork cannotbe an aim in itself.Effort and resourcesspentfor conservation
work alwaysinclude the question:for whom is it conserved?Conservationwork hasin
it a public dimension:historic sitesandartefactsare supposedto be seenby the public.
Evans,with his experiencein museumdisplay,alwayshad a strongintention to present
the excavatedsiteto visitors.It wasnot importantto him to recreatescientifically correct
reconstructionsbut to catch the spirit of the pastand to presentit to a wider audience.
TheodoreFyfebecamea memberof the S.P.A.B. in 1921and Director of the Cambridge

Schoolof Architectureoneyearlater.Thus, he had not only a reputableposition himself
but also was a committee mernberof the one organisationwhich was opposed to
restoration work in the strongest
ZD possibleway. Consequentlyhe had a mature and
distinctiveperspectivelooking at the reconstructionwork when he revisited Knossosin
1926.He wasno Iongertheyoungarchitectdependingon his employerArthur Evansas
00 Cý
he was almost twenty yearsearlier. Thus, his judgernentof the recent reconstruction
work is of high interest:
" It is oneexpresslyusedanddesiredto be used

'Mention hasbeenmadeof theword"re-constitution.
by Sir Arthur himself,andit meetsthe casevery well. Suchwork asthis is not, andoughtnot to be,
"restoration." Its objectsare (1) to preservethosekey positionsof the Palaceplan and structure
alreadyexistingthat are essentialfor its properunderstanding,and (2) to suggestto the competent

observerfurther methodsof constructionand finish that yearsof studyof evidencesin fresco,etc.,
of outlook in thesere-constitutions therecan be no
have elucidated.About tile generalsoundness
doubtwhatever:nothingthat hasbeendoneis eitherwild or improbable.So far asactualstructureis
concerned,thereis hardlya singlebit of new work that is not basedon factsascertainasany such
factscanbe."-'2
"I'M III, p. 378.

"Fyfe, 1926a,p. 479.
71beoretical
andPhilosophicalAspectsof the ReconstructionWork 399
PeterVjenzle
WhenFyfevisitedKnossosin 1926someof the most controversialreconstructionshad
not yet beenexecuted,such as the final work in the Throne Room, the North Lustral
Basinand the North EntrancePassage.However,if the reconstitutionsat Knossoshad
to servenot only for the preservationof the remainsbut also for visitors to understand
the site, then we haveto ask if the reconstructionsare a truthful replicaof the original
Minoan structures.
7.3 The Truthfulness of the Reconstructions
The questionwhich inevitablyariseswhendiscussingthe reconstitutionsat Knossosis
whether or not they are correct. Evans has frequently been criticised that his
reconstructionwork at Knossosfollowed a hiddenagenda.The reconstructionshave
been seen as a narrative, as his interpretationof the Minoan past cast eternally in
"
concrete. Castleden calls it a 'persuasionin concrete'.-" In order to evaluatethese
it hasto be established
accusations whetherthe reconstitutionswere accurateor just the
imaginationof Evansand the architects.However, first of all, it must be definedwhat
caccurate'meansin thiscontext.ChapterTwo describedhow ancientbuildingsin general
and the palace at Knossos in particular deterioratedand becameruins and finally

remains.Archaeological
archaeological aimsto reproducefully or partially
reconstruction
the formerstructure.This aimcanbe achievedby reassembling
existingoriginal remains
or by constructingnew parts.
The process of reassembling existing elements in their former position is called
anastylosis and was accepted in the Venice Charter as the only pen-nissibleform of
reconstruction at archaeological sites." However, anastylosis, in the absolute meaning
of the word has not yet been executed and, probably, never will. The original cause of
destruction to the site and subsequent looting for material by later generations have
"Hitchcock, 1994.
'Castleden. 1990, p. 32.
"Venice Charter, Article 15.
400 Chapter7
hardly ever left the complete and structurally sound material for anasýylosis.Chipped off
comers or missingmaterial needsto be replaced in order to provide a structurally sound
entity on site. Frequently, material for reconstitution is only available for some parts of
the building but not for the entire structure. Thus, it became common practice at many
Mediterraneansitesto reconstitute only a few columns or a corner of a building. Hartwig
Schmidt called this system Architekturprobe, architectural sample." This allows the
visitor to see the original height at one point which enables him to reconstruct in
combination with the excavated,visible ground plan, the original volurne of the structure
in his imagination.The problem with this method is that it does not recreate the complete
former structural system. Individual corners or columns which are not connected to the
in times, are easily affected by storm and earthquake."
surrounding structure as ancient
All reconstruction work in the Mediterranean has to be done with this fact in mind. "
Thus, alteration to the existing material and incorporation of new material is necessary
to guarantee the survival of these architectural samples.
It is virtually impossibleto reassembleancientpartswithout tile integrationof any new

materials.It hasbecomecommonhabit to call reconstitutionswhich needonly a small
part of new material anastylosisand to accept them as good practice while other
reconstitutionswhich rely on a larger amountof new materialare called by their name
andcondemned as bad practice.The border-linebetween the two groups remains to be
defined.It seemsthat the mainproblem is not the actualarnountof tile new material but
it
whether can be determinedhow the missing parts looked.
0
This problemmightbe bestillustratedby two drawingsof thepronaos of the Parthenon

Cý
at the Acropolis, by
Athens, Manolis "
Korres. The first drawing showsthe current state
"Schmidt, 1993,199.
"'Seefor exampleKarniros.Rhodeswheresix re-crectedcolumnswereknockeddown in a stormin
1962.Schmidt, 1993,p. 207.
"For a detaileddiscussion
of structuraldesignin connection
with reconstruction
at archaeologicalsites
C
see Wenzel, SFB 315, University of Karlsruhe,Germany.Wenzel was responsiblefor the structural
engineeringof the reconstitutionof a pertof the Trajaneunz,a templededicatedto Trajan at the Acropolis
of Pergamon.
"See: Korres, 1994c,p. 110ff.

PeterMenzle
of what has been left on site.' The second drawing shows the same facade with all
surviving parts which fon-nerly belonged to the facade. The white gaps in the columns
and the architrave are missing parts. Irregularities of the fluti to and the entasis of the
ng
columns allows every remaining drum to be positioned in their exact former position. All
missingparts can be exactly determined. Replacing the missing drums and parts enables
the original parts to be put back in their original place. After long and careful
deliberationsin the Acropolis Committee it was decided that Korres should execute this
work. ("
771e;
-711
zt,v-
Figure 95 Athens.The upperdrawingshowsthe currentsituation.The lower

Pronaosof theParthenon,
drawingshowsall survivingelementsin their formerposition.Drawingby M. Korres.
C, C,
'Images takenfrom Korres, 1994c,p. 132.

" Korres, 1994c,P. 131.
402 Chapter7
Conservation and Reconstruction at nc Place of Minos at Knossos
The above-described
interventionsat the Acropolis are generallyacceptedbecausethe
data availableto designthe missingparts is comparativelygood and the possibleerror
will be small. The classicperiod of Greeceis well researchedand paintings survive

depictingtheParthenonbeforeits destructionin the Turkish - Venetianwar in 1687and
1822- 27 and 1827- 33." However,
in the two siegesin the Greekwar of independence
placing the original parts in their former position and designingthe missingparts in
between is basedon logic and experience.A numberof elementarydesignrules were
employedto reconstructthe former facade.For example,in classicGreek templesthe

architraveis not interruptedandis alwaysat the samelevel. Roundarchesor architraves
at different levelsare a later Romaninvention.Furthermore,the entasisof the columns
will change gradually but consistently.Observingthese pre-set rules allows found
elementsto beplacedin their originalpositionevenif the adjoiningor supportingelement
C)
is missing.Still, it cannotbe guaranteedhow the original facadelooked like becauseit
anticipates two axioms. First it makesthe assumptionthat the original building has
Mowed theserulesbut, sincepartsare missing,we haveno guaranteefor that. Second,
it anticipatesthat our current level of understandingof tile architectureof this period is
correctand sufficient.
The Charterof Venicesimplystatesthat restorationmust stop whereconjecturebegins.

Only anastylosis,
thereassembling
of existingbut dismembered be 63
parts,can permitted.
However, it will be impossibleto executeany work without any new material and,
consequently,some conjecture.The statementcannot be acceptedas an imperative

demandbut must be seenasthe aim to reducethe amountof conjectureto a minimum.
Thus,thecorrectness
of a reconstructionis basedon the degreeof conjecture.However,
the systemin which the correctnesscan be evaluateddependson our knowledgeof the
past.Dietwulf Baatzcorrectly pointed out that every reconstructionis a documentation
of the contemporary level 6'
of research. Archaeologyprogressesand will gain more
detailed infori-nationon specific issues.Somethingthat was acceptedas correct at a
"Mallouchou - Tufano, 1994,p. 68 ff. Comparepage102ff.

"Charter of Venice,Article 9.
'Baatz, 1985,P. 119.
'FheoreticalandPhilosophicalAspectsof the ReconstructionWork 403

Peter Kienzle
specific point of time might be proved wrong later. Obviously, as more conjecture is
employed in the reconstitutions the more likel y it is that it will be proved wrong41ý
some
time in the future.
The maindifficulty in assessingthe correctnessof the reconstitutionsat Knossosis that

the information on the Minoan Bronze Age is limited. Unlike the classicaland later
periods no written sourcesare availablethat could help in reconstructingthe past; the
excavatedruins and pottery and other artefactsare the only sourcesleft.` When Evans
his work
started excavation in 1900the Minoan culture was unknown.It was he himself
who createdtheterminologyand,in 1905,the chronologywhich are,with amendments,

still in use today. The amountof information that was availableat the time when the
wereexecutedwasverylimited.Besideshis own work in Knossos,Evans
reconstitutions
obtained information on Minoan culture from the excavationsat Phaistos,begunby
Luigi PemierandFredericoHalbherrin 1900,' andtheexcavationsin Gourniaby Hawes
who started in
excavating 190L" From 1915he could alsoobtain information from the
new excavationsat Mallia by J "'

Hazzidakis. Nonetheless,the amountof comparative
data which would allow a clear picture of Minoan architecturewas very small at this
time. Thus, the sources from outside Knossos that could be employed for the
reconstitutionswere limited.
Generallyspeaking,the dangerin reconstructionlies in the preoccupationof the rnind of

theexecutingarchaeologist
C) "
or architect. When the work at Knossoswas executedthe
knowledge of architecturestretchedback to the classicalperiod of Greece and Rome and
to ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. Everyone involved in the reconstructions had

travelled widely in the Mediterraneanbefore they beganworking at Knossos." Therefore,
it was likely that their understanding of architecture was influenced by observation of
"Ibe Minoan writing systemsLinear A and Linear B are lists of goods but no descriptive texts.
6"La Rosa, 1992, p. 232 ff.
"Myers, Myers and Cadocran,1992, p. 104 ff.
"Myers, Myers and Cadogan, 1992, p. 175 ff.
"Compare Bintliff, 1984.
70See individual CV's of Evans, Fyfe, Doll and de Jong in Appendix 1. p. 489 ff.
404 Chapter 7
thesestructuresand their adaptationin later periods.The principleof this architecture

is largely definedby symmetrybut it is questionableto take this principle of symmetry
asthe right measureto reconstructthe palaceat Knossos.Surprisewas an integral part

of Minoanarchitecture:corridorsbendmanytimes and visitors were led from dark areas
to bright light, from the enclosedto the open. This constant surpriseis alien to the
classicalideaof how to approacha buflding.Lawrencedescribedit in the following way:
"It appears that the Minoans did not object to disorderly planning as such; they obviously saw no
advantage in symmetry and may have been lovers of the picturesque at all costs; in fact their
architecture resemblestheir other art in showing no senseof fonn. "

a
The dilemmasof reconstructionwork at Knossoswere that the knowledgeof Minoan
architecture was very limited and its principles not fully understood, and that the
architectural principles were not in line with the common systemderived from the
classicalperiod. Consequently,Evans'sclaim that he reconstructedin accordancewith
usual Minoan practice seems to be '2
questionable. For example, the disputed
reconstitution of a broad flight of stairs at the South Propylon seemsto be more
in its conceptthanseemsto fit the Minoan palace.The reconstitutedstaircase
dclassical'
is frequentlycriticisedbecauseno evidencecould be found on site; in tile early plansthe
siteof the stairs is labelledCentral Clay "

Area. A year later the sameareawas labelled
in the planasCourt of theAltar:" anda conjecturalstair to the upperlevel was suggested
north of the 7'

court. However, in 1907Arthur Evanswrote in The Times:
"Anotherdiscovery,done[?] in the sameexploratorymethods,in the neighbouring"clay area"must

beregardedasof f irst-ratcarchitecturalimportance.It hadbeensupposedtheoreticallythat a broad
nightof stepsledup firomthePropylaeurnto the southof this areato a seriesol'upper halls,of which
roomsof the westwing: but the earlierexplorationshad

thetracesarestill visibleabovethebasement
here cometo a full stop owing to the mistakenimpressionthat the underlyingstratumof Neolithic
7'Lawrence,1957,p 34.
7'PM1,p. 353.
7-'Evans,1900,p. 17.
7'Evans,1901,facing p. 1.
7"Basedon a suggestionby Dbrpfeld.Evans,1901,p. 21 IT.

PeterKienzle
clay, in places some 25 feet thick, had here been reached. So far as concerns[?] the slight ramp,
representingthe original ascentof the steps,this conclusion proved to be correct. But on the cast flank
of this the clay layer turned out to be only a shallow artificial platform due to later occupants of the
site who had here built out of the stair foundations a hall apparently of the mainland type. On
removing this intrusive clay stratum massive substructuresforming a solid rectangular block became
visible which evidently belonged to a great supporting bastion of the original stepway the exact
dimensions of which can now be ascertained.""
In 1925thebroadstairswerereconstitutedin concreteat thisplace." This reconstruction

is frequently criticised in later literature. For exampleCastledensuggestionof two
ground floor sanctuariesin this areais basedon the fact that Fyfe's first plan did not
"
show stairs. This interpretationwasonly possibleby completelyignoringthe finds of
1907.It might be possiblethat Evansmisinterpretedthe foundationshe found in 1907
in order to fit his earlier theory, but it might alsobe possiblethat it actuallyprovedhis
earHerideas.It is of uttermostimportanceto get anexactunderstandingof which sources

Evans employedfor his reconstitutionsand how reliablethesesourcesare in order to
assessthe reconstitutionsfor their correctness.Therefore,the next sectionwill analyse

the sourcesemployedfor the reconstructionwork.
7.4 The Site as Source for the Reconstructions
It hasbeenmentionedabovethat archaeologicalevidenceand logical thoughtare not on

their own sufficient to provide enoughdata to reconstructa site absolutelycorrectly.
However,a carefulconsideration of all availabledatawill leadto an approximationof the
'perfect' reconstruction.In this section it will be discussedwhich sourceshave been
employedto reconstructpartsof thepalace.Of course,the main sourcehasalwaysbeen

the physical remainsof the palace.However,two distinctive problemswereconnected
with theseremains.First, DuncanMackenzie,who wrote the daily reports has noted
76TheTimes, 15 July 1907, p. 8.

77TheTimes, 9 October 1925, p. 15.
78Castleden, 1990a, p. 83 f
406 Chapter7
pottery and small finds but referred to architecturalelementsonly if they were of

particular quality suchas carvedstones.Besidesthis, Mackenziesketchedthe walls of
in to
rooms order provide information on the find contextof pottery and small finds but
not asa recordin its "
own ri-ht. Recordingthe structuralremainsof the palacewas left
to Fyfe,but both FyfeandMackenziesketchedonly entire walls andsimilar big features
but disregardedindividual stones.80Thus, the preciseorigin of individual stoneswhich
were found in the excavation process and which were employed later in the
reconstructionsis frequently not known. Second,the architecturalremainsgive little
evidenceon the shapeof upperstructures.Whilesomegypsumblocks indicatethe layout
.,
of upperstoreys,information on the elevationswas This
scarce. information was taken
from secondarysourcessuchas frescoes,the faiencetabletsof the town mosaicand the
housemodels.
In principle, reconstructionsmust be additive.The original

ZD structuremight havebeen
higher, wider or longer than the remainsbut could not have been lower, smalleror
shorter than the existing fabric on site. However, this statementpresupposesthat all
materialis in its original placeand hasnot beenmovedby naturalor hurnanforcesprior
to the excavation.Furthermore,this statementis only true for the last period of use of
Knossos
a structure. had severalsuccessive periods of occupationand building phases.
In order to excavateearlier periods, later structureshave beenrernoved.81Here the
reconstructionpresentedlessmaterialthan the originally excavatedremains.
7.4.1 Archaeological Evidence
At Knossos,stonesfrorn the upperstoriessettledat a lower level after the load bearing

timber beamsrotted.82Architectural and archaeologicalknowledgeand interpretation
"'See Mackenzie's diaries, Ashmolcan Museum.

"In fact, there was no detailed record of the site until Hood and Taylor's plans in 1978.
"For examplePM 111,p. 488.
"Comparefor exampleGrandStaircase.

Peter Kienzle
mustbe employedto re-establishtheir formerpositions.Havethey only settledvertically

or havethey alsomovedin their positions? Already in theseminor detailsinterpretation
is usedto establishthe original shapeof a building feature.The difficulty facedwith this
interpretationcan be highlightedby three examples:The secondflight of the Stepped
Portico,the Grand Staircaseand the reconstructionof the greathalls at the upperfloor
of the West Wing. 83
Theevidencefor the first flight of stepsof the SteppedPortico was clearly given by the
first four stepswhich were still in situ when excavatedin 1900.14
In his report in the
Annual of the British School at Athens, Evans stated that no material of an upper
platformcould be "
found. However,ascan be seenin the plan of 1900the areaaround
the SteppedPortico was not completelyexcavatedin this year. Brown wrote on the
SteppedPortico:
"Ibe stepsled to the upper floor or Piano Nobile and a second flight gave accesseither to a second
floor or the roof. Mackenzie thought, probably wrongly, that two slabs forming a 'Seat' in the Room
of the Chariot Tablets were steps frorn here.""'
Mackenzie did not explain how these steps had got from the Stepped Portico to the
Room of the Chariot Tablets twenty metresto the south nor does he specify whether the
steps belong to the upper or the lower flight. Furthermore, Brown did not give a
judgement on the correct reconstruction of the stairs and whether Mackenzie's
interpretation has actually caused a wrong reconstruction. However. Papadopoulos
employs precisely this passageof Brown to support his argument that at least some of
17
the reconstructionsare wrong. Brown's statementthat Mackenzie mistook seatsfor
stepswere usedby Papadopoulosto show that the stairswere reconstructedwrongly.
Disregardingthe two stepsor seatsin question,the main argumentfor the existenceof
"Mere aremuchmoreareasin the palacewheretheseproblemsoccurbut thesethreeexamplesare

the mostsignificantones.
"See plan 1900,plate 7 andEvans,1900,p. 34 ff.
"Evans, 1900,P. 35.
"Brown, 1994,p. 42.
"Papadopoulos,1997,p. 115andseefootnote24.
408 Chapter7
Conservation and Reconstruction at 'rile Place of*Minos at Knossos
an upper flight of stairs is

a gypsum block with
traces of the steps on its
side which was reset in the

middle wall. This block
was mentioned neither by
Brown nor by Papado-
"
poulos. Plate 54 shows
that this block was not
kept in its original position Figure 96 SteppedPortico. Position ofsecond flight as reconstructed
to it higher or lower position of the found
and accordingCC
so it cannot prove the gypsurnblock.
exact position of the
second flight. ReplacingZ:' this block at a slightly higher level pushes the first step of the
--
second flight further west while placing4:) it at a lower level pushes the first step east. Thus,
the exact length

Cý and position of the second flight
C is questionable but not Its general
existence.
It has been explained in the section on the Grand Staircase that the first reconstruction
drawings of the cast elevation featured the head ends ot'cross beams. This was based on
the fact that gaps were left in the ashlarmasonry and Doll supposed that these gaps were
the places of timber cross beams." In later reconstruction drawings and in the final
execution of the reconstructions in 1905, ashlar masonry was used instead. It seems
illogical that the upper blocks of ashlar masonry and the gypsum parapet slabs were
zt,
found in position while lower stoneswere missing.They had not turnbled in the light well
and stone robbing can be excluded. While Evans suggest stone robbing for the North
Entrance Passage,it is very unlikely that masons would take blocks ol'a lower course if
good quality blocks were easily accessible in the Courseabove.'(' Obviously, the lack of
"See figure 70 and compare Brown, 1994 and Papadopoulos. 1997.

"Compare page 226 tT. and figure 5 1.
"Me reuse ot'buildingC material from earlier structures was a common practice and follows a few
practical rules. Generally, old structures are dismantled from top down to prevent (lie structure collapsing
onto the workers.
T'heoretical and Philosophical Aspects of the Reconstruction Work 409

Peter Kienzle
ashlarblocks in this area indicatesthat there never were any and thus did not go missing
in a later period. "
12
Another example is the reconstruction of the first floor in the West Wing. Evans
presenteda first reconstruction idea for the upper story in 1901"' but revised it later after
more excavations in the '

area. The first reconstruction shows less steps at the Stepped
Portico and Grand Staircase (the broad flight of stairs at the south end) indicating a
second floor on a lower level. Finally, the first floor was restored at a higher level with
more steps at both the Stepped Portico and the Grand Staircase. The reconstruction of
the two column hall in the middle of the west facade can be argued for by the two
Cý
andthe half columnbasefound nearby." The reconstruction
in the magazines
buttresses
of the hall, north of the middle hall is uncertainsinceneitherdoorjambsnor supporting

buttresseswere found. The thicker walls betweenMagazineXII and XIII and between
XIV andXV may supportthe ideathat they carriedcolumnsor pillars.' However,this
argumentis not conclusive.The walls may havecarriedthe load of upperwalls or may

have beenaccidentallythicker than the other walls. Thus, variousreconstructionsare
possible.
Castleden,who offers a completelydifferent interpretationof Knossosas a sanctuary

insteadof a palace,reconstructsthe upperWest Wing in a different way, which is more
suitable to his "
interpretation. However, the parts which have been physically
are
reconstructed almostidentical
in both "
interpretations. Only at tile not reconstructed
southern and northern ends Castleden'ssuggestionsdiffers from Evans' version.
Obviously,the elementsfoundin thisareaprovideenoughmaterialfor a relatively secure
"The absence of evidenceis not an evidenceof absence.However,in the given situationit seemsto
be the most logical explanation.
"See figure 97.
"Evans, 1901,P. 23. Seeflaurc 66.
'See Pendlebury,1933.p. 38.
"See figure 97 andcomparewith figure 4.
'Compare figure 4.
"'Castledcn,1990a,p. 162.
"Compare plansin figure 97 with plateG, p. 326.
410 Chapter 7
Conservation and Reconstruction at The Placc of Minos at Knossos
reconstruction of it which is undisputed by scholars who have completely different

interpretations of its function. Thus, Evans' intention of using reset original remains to
illustrate that his interpretation was correct, has worked well.
1'"
I..
I..
I
I..
let 7
0
'Umbo a
: r.1
r
Figure 97 Plan of the reconstructedupper floor. Evans' reconstruction(left) and Castleden's
reconstruction(right).
C,
From the startof theexcavationin 1900Evansemployedarchitectson site to record the
excavatedstructures.The main excavationwork took place in the first five campaigns

between1900and 1904.The basicplansof the palacewereexecutedby TheodoreFyfe
in this periodandwererevisedin successive
yearsby Doll and de Jong.Evansexplained:
"It may be said that the real work of exploration begins where wholesaleexcavationends.
Supplementaryresearches havebeencontinuedthroughoutthe Palacearea,andin carryingout this
work of revisionwe werefortunatein againsecuringthe servicesof Mr. TheodoreFyfc, the architect
to whom the earlier plans of the Palacewere due. The analysisof the sherdscontainedin the

Peter Kienzle
undisturbed parts of the walls and foundations has been found specially useful in determining the
relative chronology of various parts of the building, and its architectural stratification may now be
C
regarded as fairly determined. A great part of the Palace plan has also been thoroughly remodelled,
and it hasbeenpossibleto add or complete many important features especially at its southern borders
and in the Northern Portico. ""
Obviously, a more detailed investigation of areasexcavated earlier led to alterations in
the interpretation of the structures and their function. Fyfe, Doll and de Jong produced
numerous reconstruction proposals, discussing how parts of the Palace might have
looked. For example, Theodore Fyfe produced a plan of the Domestic Quarter, ground
floor and upper floor in 1902."" Christian Doll produced a new set of drawings of the
sameareain 19IWO' These drawings are very much alike and the only major difference
is the missing wall between the northern and eastern portico of the upper Hall of the
Colonnades in Doll's plan. 102Both sets of plans distinguish clearly between existing
materialsand probable reconstructions.Other plans, for example of the Theatral Area, 103
104or the South Propylaeum"' show similar distinctions.
the North Entrance Passage,
C.
Supplementaryresearchwas executedafter World War I in order to provide data for

'06 Evans did not hesitateto
both the forthcoming volumesand the reconstructions.
correct earlier reconstructionproposalswhen further researchproved them wrong.107

However, the main problem of reconstructionis not the groundplan but the elevation.
Unlike manyother sites,Knossosprovidedits excavatorswith a substantialamountof
material from the palace'supper stories.Nonetheless,much of tile information is still

missingand must be derivedfrom other sources,suchas frescoes,the town mosaicor
the housemodels.
"The Tinies,27 August 1908,p. 6.

....Evans1902,p, 56 f.
....Evans,1921,fig. 239 and240.
""Comparepage233. Seefigure 62.
I`See
figure 45.
"'See figure 78.
I`See figure 73.
"'Evans, 1927P. 264 f.
"'Compare SouthPropylon,Hall of DoubleAxes,QuadrupleStaircase(all Evans,1901
412 Chapter 7
7.4.2 The Frescoes
The frescoes found in the excavationprocessat Knossosplayeda crucial role in the
reconstruction of the elevations of the palace and, therefore in its physical

reconstitutions. Fyfe dedicateda sectionof his paperto the Royal Institute of British
to thefrescoesasa sourcefor the restorations.1`8He alsodiscussedhow wall
Arcfiýitects
decorationdeterminedthe room height in somepartsof the palace.
The Miniature Fresco was found in the northern part of tile Palacein 1900."' The
depictionof thecolumnsin this frescoprovidedthe evidencefor the constructionof the
colurimsin the ThroneRoom in 1901."' The specificshapeof the capitalsin this fresco
was recreatedonly in the Throne Room while the capitalsof later columns,featuringa
simplifiedform, were modelledafter anotherfresco found later."' Both frescoesdepict
the shaftof thecolumnsin a downwardstaperedform but only in the later fresco is this
real.ly obvious.The MiniatureFrescoof 1900wasin a very fragmentedcondition and the
entirecolumnis only a few centimetres
high.The only guidelinefor the Minoan artist was
a middleline incisedin the plaster.Thus, the minimal downwardtaperingcould haveits

origins in either the artist's shakyhand or in his deliberateintention. It was probably
Evans's incredibleeyesightfor details and his intuition that decidedhim to recreate
taperedcolumnsin the Throne Room. This intention was ultimately confin-nedby the
later finds.
The downward tapered columns attracted much criticism which was basedon the
classicalunderstandingthat columnshaveto be smallerin diameteron top than at the
....Fyfe, 1902. p. 114 ff.

"Evans, 1900, p. 44 and 46 ff. See plate 214.
"'Me first reconstruction proposals for the Grand Staircase and tile Hall of thc Colonnades by Fyfe
in 1901 (Evans, 1901, p. 106 and I 11) depict the same type of capital.
... Compare PM 1, p. 342 and 443 and Fyfe, 1902, p. 114.

Peter Kienzle
bottom. "2 No colurrin survived at Knossosand the examplesfrom the Treasury of Atreus
and Lion Gate at Mycenae could not provide conclusive evidence."' The reconstruction
of tapered columns in the Throne Room in 1901 was based on very little evidence but
later evidence supported the reconstruction. It has been suggested that the downward
tapering of the column had its origin in the practice of employing tree stems upside down
so that the sap could drain more easily and the trunks would last longer. "' This
explanation is not justified by physical evidence. However, the columns were,
structurally, a very good solution which reduced the span of the architrave and provide
a good resistance against horizontal forces.
Later researchconfirmed that the columnswere reconstructedcorrectly but in other

details such as the West Facade,the reconstructionswere proven wrong by later
research.Obviously,the for
evidence was
reconstruction not alwayssufficient and it was
chieflyEvans's imaginative
skill that led frequentlyto a reconstructionlater proven to be
correct.Piet de JongdescribedEvans'sskill :
"You know, one of Sir Arthur's greatestgifts was his capacity for visualizing. He could tell, just by
looking at a few broken stones,a fallen column, and a few bits of fresco, exactly how the whole room
get most impatient if his architect couldn't see it just as

or building0 originally looked. And he'd Cý
quickly. Yet when the architect had surveyed and measuredthe site. and studied all the architectural
evidence, the fact is that Sir Arthur was nearly always right. "I's
The exactheight of the first floor ceiling in the DomesticQuarterhadbeendetermined

by the remainsof the Grand Staircase.In the West Wing no suchfeaturesurvivedand
the ceiling height was reconstructedwith the aid of the wall decorationsin the Throne
Room and the Magazines.The plaster fragmentsdetermineda room height with a
minimumof 2.25 metresbut determined "'

no upper margin. The only other argument
"'Compare Durm, 1910, p. 60 ff. As late as 1931 Pernier doubted the correct interpretation of
Minoan columns (Pernier, 1933, p. 27 1).
I "PM I. P. 342.
"'Baker in: Evans, 1928, p. 102.
"'Piet de Jong as quoted in Cottrell, 1953, p. 176.
1`Fyfe, 1902, p. I 11, fig. 6.
414 Chapter 7
at The Placeof Minos at Knossos
wWch supported the reconstruction of a ceiling at this level was the ratio of a column's
diameter to its height. The diametersof the column basesin the Throne Room were given
and the ratio betweenbasediameter and height was determined from the fresco. This led
to the reconstructionof the columns and, consequently, the height of the Throne Room.
The first reconstruction of a flat roof above the Throne Room finally deten-nined the
ceiling height of the entire West Wing. However, it seems inconsistent to reconstruct
room heights of about 2.50 metres in the West Wing while room heights of
approximately 4.00 metres were archaeologically determined in the Domestic Quarter.
7.4.3 The Town Mosaic
Anothersourcefor the reconstructionof the elevationswas the so called town mosaic.

A seriesof morethan40 porcelaintabletswere found in the north-easternquarterof the
palacein "'
1902. They depict the facadesof housesand were interpretedby Evansas
representationsof the town housesof Knossosor of anotherconternporaryMinoan

town.' 18Evansarguedthat they should be usedasan examplefor the reconstructionof
the palace."' The representation
of walls at the tabletscan be divided into three groups:
regular ashlar masonry,horizontal beamswith intervals and horizontal beamswith
circulardiscs.The first groupwasstraightforwardlyinterpretedasbuildings constructed
in ashlarmasonrywhile the secondgroup was interpretedas a timber constructionwith
the intervals filled with plasteredrubble masonry.The third group was interpreted
similarlywith the circulardiscsrepresentingshorttie beaniscrossingthe thicknessof the
walls."O
117 Evans, 1902, p. 14 ff.

I "Ibid., p. 16; PM II, p 372.
... PM 1, p. 306.
'"Evans 1902, p. 16. See also Spiers, 1903b, p. 97.

Peter Kienzle
V,-ý;ý; . j-0
R.7717,
i IN, '. --I - 2! LV
N't-87n-
MRS
nv, tMAIE-IM" ELF.;
E-M -
60 'Wrv
.......... C=X2
I
JIM-
TA
t
MOL m
MET
E-73
ol-IM4
Figure 98 Faiencetabletsof theTown Mosaic.Drawingby TbeodoreFyfe.

0
The interpretation of the discs as beam ends is clearly a reaction to the criticism Evans
received for his suggestedreconstruction of a gallery in the Hall of the Double Axes in
1901.12' He admitted that the horizontal gap in the Light Well's masonry must be
interpreted as the place for a reinforcement timber beam and the holes crossing the wall
must be interpreted as the place of short tie beams. Thus, the circular features at the
House tablets must represent the ends of the tie beams.122Another detail of the House
Mosaic tablets influenced the reconstructions. Above the doors of some of the houses
windows were depicted. In fact, no archaeological evidence suggested the
reconstruction of windows above the doors in the Hall of the Double Axes. This feature
was exclusively derived from the tablets.
Anotherdetailin thereconstructionof the palacemight be attributedto the discoveryof

the tablets.In 1900the westfacadeof thepalacewasexcavatedandEvansassumedthat
abovethe courseof large 123
gypsumorthostatsrosea wall of more perishablematerial.
This was predominantlybasedon the complete absenceof any identifiable ashlar material
12'Comparepage 193.
"Evans 1902, pl. 40 f.
12'Evans,1900, p. 10.
416 Chapter 7
Conservation and Reconstruction at 7be Place of Minos at Knossos
from upper structures.In 1902,Fyfe followed Evans'sassumptionsand reconstructed
a waUwith timberframes 124However,

and panelS. in 1929the wall was rebuilt in rubble
masonrywith a cementfacing recreatingashlarmasonryabovea representationof a
timber reinforcementbeam.Evans arguesthat the limestoneashlar blocks had been
robbed by later (Greek,Romanand Venetian)buildersfor 12
re-use. -' However,thereis
no evidencefor any limestoneashlarmasonryabovea courseof gypsurnorthostatsand
there were absolutelyno traces of original ashlarblocks.126Furthermore,it is quiet
unlikelythat theMinoanbuilderswho could distinguishdifferent typesof limestoneand
used it appropriatelywould have placedthe harder limestoneon comparativelysoft
gypsumorthostats.Obviously, the reconstructionof the west facadein ashlarmasonry
wasinffiencedby otherideas,oneof whichwasprobablythedepictionof ashlarmasonry
on someof the housetablets.
However, the town mosaicclearly depictsindividualhouseswithin a townscapeand it

is questionableto what extentthe constructionof the palacecan be comparedwith the
constructionof town houses.The buildersof the much more importantpalaceprobably

had accessto better resourcesin materialsand skills than the buildersof the average
town houses.
7.4.4 The House Models
Another sourcefor the reconstructionswere the so-calledhousemodels.12'Theseclay
mdels of architecturalfeatureswere found at severalMinoan sites,howeveronly the

onesat Knossosmight havehadany influenceon the reconstructions.They were found
114Fyfe, 1902, p. 115.

"TM 11,p. 349. Evans, 1928, p. 349.
"'Shaw, 1973, p. 90.
12'For a full discussion see Schoep, 1994. Besides frescoes and the house models Schoep also
identifies representations on seals and sealings and on reliefs (for example the steatite rhyton from Zakro)
as possible sources for the reconstruction of architecture. However, there is no evidence that any of these
sources influenced the reconstructions at Knossos and, therefore, they arc not discussed here.

Peter Kienzle
in the Loomweight Basement in 1902."' The clay models show a chequered pattern
similar to the one depicted in the miniature fresco, cornices with circular red discs and
'homs of consecration' crenellating the structures. Schoep argues that the models form
some type of stage for (ritual) actions performed with figurines. "' The models lack
specific domestic features(doors, windows) and might rather represent a sacred structure
(altar?) than a house. However, the models doubtless depict architectural features and
have influenced the reconstructions.
00
00 0
0
00
*ýý
R00.0
!( IA 0-
r, f'_)
ICL 00
L :000
c
n c)o o- ooo
b
Figure 99 HouseModelsfrom tile LoomweightBasement,Knossos.Drawingby Schocp.
The Horns of Consecration mounted on the edge of a flat roof were not depicted in the
Miniature Fresco.There the horns were placed at floor level between columns. Another
fragment, wrongly interpreted for some time as part of the Miniature Fresco, allows for
an interpretation of horns at roof level but the fragment is too small and its place in this
130
context uncertain. It cannot provide conclusive evidence. The reconstruction of the
horns of consecration on the top of a wall and later on the edge of the South Propylon
4:1
roof had its origin in the house '-"
models. Another detail taken from the models was the
"'Evans, 1902,P. 30.

"'Schoep, 1994,p. 208.
'"I'M III, P. 84.
"'Plate 25.
418 Chapter7
cornice with the circular discs. The discs were supposedto represent the ends of beams
in the ceiling construction. Fyfe suggested that already in the Minoan architecture the
discs were used in a decorative or symbolic way and did not reflect real beam ends."'
The motif has been depicted in frescoes as well as in the models. However, only in the
models do the discs align in long bands as they have been recreated in both the
reconstruction of the Pillared Portico and the North Entrance Portico. While it was
executed as relief in the North Entrance Portico, it was only painted in the Pillared
Portico.
7.5 Influences from Outside
The-reconstructionswere not exclusivelydeten-ninedby the intellectual input of the

individual architectsand Arthur Evansand the data provided by the finds on site. The
work wasalso influencedby financial constraintsandthe criticism of other expertsand

the work on site reflectshow Arthur Evansreactedto theseinfluences.
7.5.1 Financial Aspects of the Reconstructions
The fact that Arthur Evanspaid for the majority of the work himself is anotheraspect
which influencedthe reconstructionand conservationwork on site and should not be

In 1899David Hogarth,then Director of the British Schoolat Athens,
underestimated.
and Arthur Evans establishedthe Cretan Exploration Fund to finance their work in
Crete."' The treasurerof the CretanExplorationFund, GeorgeMacMillan, wrote many
articles in the Times to convincethe public to donateto the fund, but his requestmet
13'Horwitz suggeststhat the ongoing Boer War in SouthAfrica may
with little success.
have diverted public attention but Lapourtasalso suggeststhat subscribersmay have
C.
...Fyfe, 1902,p. I 10.

13-'Brown, 1993,p. 84.
134
See:The Times,12April 1905,p. 4 but seealso5 Novcmber 1900,p. 9.
Ibeoretical andPhilosophicalAspectsof the ReconstructionWork 419

Peter Kienzle
disapprovedof Evans's expensiverestorations."' In a letter Hogarth

Cý wrote to Evans, he
suggested that subscribers were not willing to support a rich man's interest and rather
appreciatedthe work of a personlike FlindersPetrie who had to work with limited

"'
resources. Whetherthis reflectsthe public opinion or Hogarth's feelingsis not clear.
0
Besides the money from the Cretan Exploration Fund he was also supported by the
Cretan State.137On 15 March 1901, the Cretan Government agreed in a letter to Iosif
Hazzidakis, who was the Ephor in Herakleion, that he could use governmental funds to
support the construction of a protective roof above the Throne Room. 138However,
Arthur Evans was quite well off and could afford to pay for large parts of the excavation
work himself. For example,in 1905Evans paid between f: 700 and f 800 out of his own
139
pocket. Hereceivedfurther support from his father. Nonetheless, already in 1902 he
realizedthat the size of the palaceand the necessaryconservation work would cost much
more than originally ""
estimated. The expensesof the excavation and the reconstruction
work drained his resources and he was at times forced to sell parts of his collection in
order to continue working at Knossos.
In 1905 the Grand Staircasewas at the brink of collapsedue to heavywinter rain. It
requiredimmediateattentionandwassubsequently Tile Villa Ariadne was

reconstructed.
build in 1906/07but no reconstructionwork was doneon site. Chronologicallythe next
reconstructionwork wasthe roof abovethe Queen'sMegaron,
C> tile plans for which were
executedby Doll in June 1908shortly after JohnEvans'sdeath.JohnEvans,Arthur's
father,died on 31 May 1908and left his sona considerableamountof money."' which
allowed him to proceedwith a task he had envisagedfor a long time but had not been
4
ableto executeso far. The sensitivefeaturesof the Queen'sMe-aron
0 were protected by
135Horwitz,1981,p. 142f; seealsoLapourtas,1997,p. 74.

13'LetterHogarthto Evans,AshmoleanMuseum.Seepage89 ff. for descriptionof Petrie.
137
Until 1913Cretewas independentfrom Greece.
"'Documentstoredin theHerakleionMuseumArchive. SeeforthcomingBSA Supplementby Fotou,
Evely andHood.I owe to VassoFotouwho told me aboutthedocument.
13'CretanExploration Fund, 1905, p. 3.
"'Horwitz, 1981, P. 142 ff.
"'Evans, 1943, P. 356.
420 Chapter 7
Conservation and Reconstruction at ne Place of Minos at Knossos
Fyfe's timber constructions which needed improving but were not threatened by
immediate collapse. Thus, roofing the Queen's Megaron seemed desirable but was not
urgent and only after inheriting his father's wealth could he execute the work.
With the deathof ThomasGordonDickinson, the last rnaledescendantof his maternal
grandfatherJohnDickinson,on 28 October1908Evansinheritedthe Dickinson estate.142

Now, he wasevenwealthierthanhis fatherhadeverbeen.This inheritanceenabledEvans
to zarry out the covering over of the corridors in tile Domestic Quarter and the
reconstructionof thefourth flight of the GrandStaircase.Onceagain,the work in these
two areaswasdesirableand,due to rotting timber props,necessaryin tile long term but
they did not require immediateattention.With his inheritedmoney,Evanswas able to
executethem in 1910.The Hall of the Double Axes was anotherarea which needed
urgentattentionbecause of its floor of gypsumpavingslabs.Doll executeda plan to roof
the area with his standardsystemof iron girders and brick vaults.14
-' However, Evans
statedthat Doll's methodwas too expensiveand the work was not executeddespitethe
inheritance."'
Another example where money influencedthe

designof the reconstructions,is the treatmentof
the doors.A reconstructiondrawing by Christian
Doll showedthe timber frame work for the door
jambsand,in fact,heexecutedthem accordingto
hisplan.It consistedof verticalmembersandtwo
horizontal braces at the lower end and
immediately below the lintel beams.145The
horizontal braces are structurally necessaryto I-Igurc luu NectionInrough a door trame.
Drawing by Doll.
distribute the load from the four lintel beams.
""Evans, 1943, p. 356.

""See plate 143.
'"PM III, p. 289.
""See figure 100 and compare plate 189.

Peter Yjenzle
However, the reconstruction of the concrete door jambs by Piet de Jong did not show
this detail. In order to reuse the same shuttering at several doors of different height, the
representation of horizontal braces was ignored. In the Hall of the Double Axes the
bottom brace was painted on the concrete, but the upper rail was missing. 146
Reconstructeddoors in other areassuch as the Throne Room or the North Lustral Basin
lack the depiction of both upper and lower braces.Of course, the reproduction would not
serveany structural function, but it would have improved the visitor's understanding of
the historic construction. 117
The availability of funds for the reconstructionof partsof the Palaceat Knossosvaried
simplificationsthe availability of fundshadlittle
overtime.Besidesthe above-mentioned
influence on the quality of the reconstructions.The design and the shapeof the
were
reconstructions determined
by the for
quest thebestpossiblesolution to protect the
excavatedremains.Evanswasnot willing to compromisein the quality of work but only
in the quantity.
7.5.2. Other Archaeologists and Experts
It has already been mentioned in the first chapter that Arthur Evans was not a trained
archaeologist. His reputation at the beginning of the work at Knossos was that of a
researcher, collector and as the director of the Ashmolean Museum but not that of a
practising archaeologist. However, he organized a good team by employing Duncan
Mackenzie as an experiencedarchaeologist, Fyfe, Doll, de Jong as architects, the artists
Gillidron father and son, Halvor Bagge and other experts.
Evanshasfrequentlybeendescribedasa self-confident,sometimesevenoverconfident,
person."' Nonetheless, he was in constant contact with other archaeologists to discuss
"'Compare plate 146.

""CompareSectionA-A, Drawing 3.
""SeeLapourtas.1997,Harden,1983,Castleden,1990a.But seealsoCottrell. 1953,p. 108.
422 Chapter 7
his ideas.Like any other researcherhe neededapprovaland confirmation from other
scholars,and he to
referred recognised authorities like D61-pfeldand Karo, thereby
adding additional strength to his arguments.He invited these scholarsto come to

Knossosand seethe site.
D6rpfeld was a frequent visitor who came to Knossos every year as part of his
Mselrundreise, an organised study tour of the Greek islands. On 7 May 1901 he was
shown the Throne Room Areal which had been excavated in the previous year. A
horizontal rounded gap in the masonry of the wall behind the sunken basin was
interpreted by both Mackenzie and Evans as a water supply pipe. This interpretation was
in line with the idea that the sunken basin held water in Minoan times. "'
perfectly
However, it has been mentioned that horizontal timber reinforcement beams had been
employed at many places including Troy (Hissarlik) which was excavated by D6rpfeld
and Schliemann.In fact, it was D6rpfeld who suggested to Evans that tile horizontal gap
was the place of a former reinforcement beam and was not used for water supply. Evans
happily accepted this new view and later research in the area proved that D6rpfeld was
right. 150
The Theatral Area was excavatedbetween8 April and 23 April 1903.1-"It had been
restored immediately afterwards and when D6rpfeld visited Knossos with the
Inselrundreise in 1903 a dance was performed in the Theatral Area by the Cretan
"'
craftsmen. Obviously, the restoration was initiated in order to present the newly
excavatedareasin the best possiblelight to a scholar whose opinion Evans valued. In
fact, D6rpfeld reported favourably on Evans's work in Athener Mitteilungen, the
newsletter of the German ArchaeologicalInstitute in '"

Athens. It has already been
mentionedthat in 1902Dbrpfeld constructedan excavationhousein Pergamon

which
"'See page 178f.

13"ENB,1901,7 May.
"'See DM 1903.
... PM 11,p. 585.
"D6rpfeld, 1905 and 1907. He has not reported on the dance. Perhaps, he commented on the event
in his diary but these diaries are unfortunately kept in Pergamon and were inaccessible.

Peter KicnzIe
the Hellenistic peristyle house." It certainly encouraged

reused excavated walls of a
Evans to build new stmctures on top of excavated walls after this example was set by a
reputedscholarsuchasD6rpfeld.
The restoration of the Miniature Fresco is
anotherexampleof how other scholars influenced
the work at Knossos. The fresco was found in

1900, and in 1901 Evans published a restoration
drawing by Emile Gillifton with the upper part of
the central cell completed in a manner similar to

the two wings. '" Some years later an additional
part was found and the reconstruction was

"'
corrected. Furthermore, in 1907 an area was
identified east of the Temple Repositories which
might have accommodateda shrine similar to the frescofragment.

Figure101 Architectural C,
Drawingby Gillidron..
depicted in the fresco. 157
Based on this new C,
one
discovery and the corrected version of the Miniature Fresco, Theodore Fyfe executed an
elevationof how the original shrinemight have looked which was never published in
191L"' Later Rodenwaldtshowedthat the latter part was not tile roof of the central
"'
cell. The first reconstructionversionwas re-adopted,and a perspectivedrawing of the
entire east facade of the Central Court was executed by Newton. " A final coloured
drawing
reconstruction was executedby Edouard Gillidron and publishedin Volume III
of The Palace of Minos in 1930.161

Obviously,Evanswasconvincedby Rodenwaldt's
argumentand, altered
subsequently, his own interpretationa secondtime.
""See page88 andplate 218.

"'Evans, 1901b. For oriainal frescoremainsseeplate215.
""Evans, 1911,facing p. 290. Seefigure 101 and 102.
'"The Tinzes,15 July 1907,p. 8.
"'Evans, 1911.facing p. 294. Seeplate 214.
IITM 111,P. 83.
"See figure 65.
"'See plate216.
424 Chapter7
Ccowrvation and Reconstruction at Mic Placc of Minos at Knossos
01,11
vol (IMMININ
1ý.
MY 14
v UU)
Ong,
like
III IMF,
Figure 102 Reconstruction of miniature fresco incoq)oratin,(,,the new fragment.

I
Another example is Josef Durm's criticism. He was one of the earliest, and certainly one
of the fiercest, critics of the reconstructions.He visited Knossos in 1906 when only a few
reconstructions had been executed and the most frequently criticised concrete
reconstructionsby Piet de Jong had yet not even been considered. Durm's main criticism
he table 162
legs. He explained
wasthe shapeof the columnswhich regardedasgigantic
that the largetaperedpieceof charcoaledtimber, which had beenfound in the domestic
quarter, could not serveas proof for the taperedcolumns becauseit was not found in
situ. This pieceof timber could havebeena column taperedupwardsor an architrave.
Evansacceptedthis criticism andwithdrew his statementthat physicalproof was found
for his reconstructionof the taperedcolumns.However,he held up other evidenceand
maintainedthat the Minoan columnshad the distinctive taperedform. '63
"Durm, 1910,P. 59 f.
"PM 1,P. 343.

Peter Kienzle
It is clear that Evans always listened carefully to the criticisms and suggestionsof other
archaeologistsand architects.Some of them he accepted, and subsequently he altered his
interpretation or reconstruction of certain parts of the Palace. However, he rejected
others after discussingcarefully in the 'Palace of Minos' or other papers why they were
not justified. It cannot be said that he arrogantly ignored any of the comments on the
work of conservation and reconstruction at Knossos.
7.6 The Significance of the Reconstructions
While both constructionsheltersand reconstructionshad beenpreviouslyexecutedat
sites
excavation the
elsewhere, significance
of the reconstructions
at Knossosis that both
reconstructionand conservationwere unified in one structure.The uniquenessof the

work at Knossosis the vast scaleof it in both durationand areacovered.Furthermore,
Evans was one of the first excavatorsemploying a specialist team of architects,
archaeologists,and artistsfrom the start of the "
excavations.
These protective reconstructions changed in style and material but their ultimate aim
remained the same: the preservation and presentation to the visitor of the excavated
remainsof Minoan culture. The site and Evans's comprehensivepublications became well
known to an interestedpublic. Consequently, the reconstructions at Knossos influenced
architectsand archaeologistsin many ways. Three examples have been chosen to identify
influencesof the reconstructions at Knossos: a villa in Athens built in the Minoan Style,
the conservation work of the excavation site at Akrotiri (Thera) and the Charter of
Athens.
`Karo, 1959,p. 18.
426 Chapter7
7.6.1 A Villa in Athens
that the reconstructionswere influencedby contemporaryfashion

It hasbeensuggested
" A few buildingsfeaturea designlanguagesimilar to tile reconstructions
in architecture.
at Knossos,suchasLe BaronJenny'sSecondLeiter building in Chicago(1889 - 1891),

PeterBehrens'Mannesmann in Diisseldorf(1911-1912)or Tony Gamier's
Headquarters
Aboltoirs la Mouchein Lyon (1909).However,all thesebuildings were constructedfor
industrialpurposesand it seemsunlikely that they influencedthe reconstructionof the
Palace of Minos. Modern domestic architecture with a design similar to the
reconstructions
suchasPerret'sMaison in
Cassandre Versailles(1926) or Bruno Taut's
in Berlin, 1925- 1931)wereconstructedlong after Newton supplied
On'kel-Toms-Hfitte
his perspective drawing of the West Wing in 1922 which deten-ninedthe work at
Kmssos. " There is no strong evidencethat current architecturaldesignhad a major
influenceon the reconstructions.
However,the excavationsand reconstructionsat Knossosinfluencedother buildings in

the first half of the twentiethcentury.In 1936the GreekarchitectNikos Ch. Somrolides
(1888- 1969)built a villa for a relativeof his in Philotei, a northernsuburbof Athens."'
The building at I Kapodistrio was constructedin rubble masonryand concrete, and
employedseveralfeaturesfrorn Knossos.The columnsfollow thesereconstructedat

Knossos,taperingdownwardsand featuringa cushioncapital. Pillars similar to the ones
of the Queen'sMegaronwere recreated.The paint schennefollows the reconstructions

at Knossosand the floor tiles at the porch were obviously inspiredby the spiral relief
ceifing describedby Fyfe in 1902 and depicted in Piet de Jong's watercolour of the
Queen'sMegaron.
"Famoux, 1993,p. 95 ff.

"All informationon theabovenamedbuildings in Tafuriand Dal Co. 1988.This paragraphprovides
.,, A
only a short overview of contemporaryarchitecture. more dctailed study of contcmporary(English)
architectureis necessaryto assesswhetheror not it hadinfluencedthe designof the reconstructions.
"'See plates225 and 226. This informationwas given by the current owner of the building who
bought it from the first owner somedecadesago. I owe gratitudeto Dr. H. Kichnastfrom the German
Archaeological Institutewhofirst told meaboutthe building andMr. Dimitris Krokidis, MA, who helpedme
find the building andconductedthe interviewwith the owner.

Peter Kienzle
Nearby is another villa which recreates the stepped balustrade of the Grand Staircase.
Furthermore, in 1931 Luigi Pemier mentionedin his paper at the Athens Conference that
modem houseshave been build in the Minoan style in Athens. "' Obviously, the Minoan
style must have had an influence on the Greek architecture current at this time. A likely
explanationis that the villas reflect an affection for the recently discovered early roots of
Greek culture. The interesting fact is that the villas copy exactly the style of the
reconstructions as they were executed by de Jong. Thus, they copied Evans's and de
Jong's reconstruction architecture rather than the excavation architecture.
7.6.2 Excavations at Akrotiri (Santorini)
Many excavationsitesrelied on the reconstruction experiencewhich was gatheredat

Knossos.169Theexcavationsof Akrotiri on the islandof Santorini have beenchosen
becausethey feature similar structuresand, thus, similar conservationproblems.The
town of Akrotiri was destroyedin a volcanic eruptionat Santoriniand wascoveredby
severalmetres of 170
pumice. The archaeologist Spyridon Marinatos discoveredthe site
on the south side of the islandin a ravinewhen parts of the town were exposedafter
winter rain. The work began with a survey in 1967 and continued with full scale
excavationsfrom 1968onwards.
Similar to the palace at Knossos, the excavated houses at Akrotiri were constructed in
rubble masonryand timber reinforcement beams.Window and door openings were also
constructed in timber. The houses survived up to two stories high and were supported
by the pumice infill after the timber had rotted. "' Early in tile second season, the
excavation site was covered with a provisional shelter constructed with Dexion
profiles. "' This allowed the shelter to be fitted easily to the rugged terrain of the site,
01P
"'Pernier, 1933,p. 270.

119Forexamplesee:Evans,1927,p. 258.
17'SeeDournas,1998,p. 16ff.
"'See plates227 and228.
...Marinatos,1969.
428 Chapter 7
and,with theprogressof theexcavationin successive

years,extensionswerebuilt for the
shelter covering the newly designed '"
excavationareas. The annualconstructionof a
shelterextensionfor the newly designated
excavationareasleft no areaexposedto the
weather.It avoidedone of the big threatsEvansexperiencedat Knossosas rain water
could not affect plaster, frescoesand mud mortar. The shelter was understoodto be
provisional but remainsthere to this day. However, plans are currently underwayto
the
repiace shelterwith a permanentprotectionroof. "'
Visiting the sheltermadeclear what Evansand the architectstried to avoid at Knossos.

The Dexion lattice beamssupport a roof only slightly higher than the original top soil
level. Consequently,the lower side of these lattice beamsis immediatelyabove the
excavatedruins and tile lattice pillars rest in the ruined landscape. These structures
pmtect the site but adverselyaffect the visual appearanceof the ruins."'
A specific problem at Knossos has also reappearedat Akrotiri. The rotten timber
r6inforcement beams,jambs and lintels have left gaps which have threatenedthe
structural stability of the excavated "'
buildings. At KnossosPiet de Jong employed
reinforcedconcreteto preventthe walls from collapsing.This solution, executedin the

1920swassti.11regardedasthe bestmethodwhenthesameproblem occurredat Akrotiri
in the 1960s.Thus,reinforcedconcretewasemployedto recreatebeamsand lintells'and,
as at Knossos,the concretebeamswere stainedto simulatethe appearanceof wood.

Despite the shelter,which preventedthe weatherfrom affecting the structuresto the
samedegreethat it hadat Knossos,this work wasstill necessaryin order to preventtheir

collapse. The conservationproblem at Akrotiri was almost identical to the one at
the solutiondevelopedby Piet de Jong40 yearsearlier was
Knossosand,consequently,
copied.
173
Marinatos, 1970; 1971; 1972. See figure 103.
174
Dournas, 1997, p. 36 f.
175
See plates 227 and 228.
171COmpare
Dournas, 1998. p. 32.

Peter Kienzle
1,
DISTRIBUTION OF EARLY AND MIDDLE
BRONZE AGE FINDS AT AKROTIRI THERA

Ladies
me. se
KBA A "1
MINA
Square 3
I
I.
3
6.
West
"was
22 is 4
as
Square I
a-
an
t. 1'.
xeste 2
all
I14a.
ý so
ýIes -.
Square I
to jI as
I Me 0.0
a. A
36
lie al
c
Aa
33
1*3 :1
Xosto 3
Xesto 4
Lalz
ISO 41
tpm,". 6
.4
. ........... .... ...... .....A
I.
rigure 1U.3 Flan of the excavations at Akrotiri, Thera. The dotted line shows the extend of the protection
shelter; the numbered squares indicate support pillars of Dexion Profiles.
430 Chapter 7
Most of this work was executedin the 1960sand early 1970swhen concretewas still
seen as an appropriatebuilding materialbut the specificproblemsof this method are

knowntoday." The furtheruseof reinforcedconcretemust be strongly discouragedbut
so far no othermethodhasbeendevelopedwhichcouldfulfill its function. The excavated

waRswith cavitiesof rotted beamsneedstructuralsupportwhich unobtrusivelyfits into
the excavatedlandscape.Prior to future excavation work researchis necessaryto
developa systemwhichprovidesthe necessarystrengthfor the walls without causingthe
problemsof reinforcedconcrete.
7.6.3 The Reconstructions at Knossosand the Charter of Athens
The main criticism directedat Evanswas the sheeramountof reconstructionwork he
executed at Knossos; but he was also criticised for the actual shape of the
reconstructions.For example,manyscholarscould not acceptthe downward tapered
columns in the palace.The more distant the critics were frorn the work - in time and
place - the harshertheir criticism. The chief basis for this criticism is the tenets of
conservationput forward in the Charterof Athensand successivecharters,principally
the Charterof Venice.The Charterof Athenswas concludedin 1931, one year after the
work at the palacewas finished.Therefore,the actual text of the Charter of Athens
cannot be employedas a measureto assessthe reconstructionwork. However, the
accepted spirit of what is good and bad in conservationexisted before the actual
"'
meeting. Furthermore,the meetingin Athenswasgeographicallyandchronologically
closeto the reconstructionwork at Knossosthat hadjust beenfinished. In fact, Knossos
influencedthe Charterof Athensinsteadof being influencedby it.
The conferencein Athens was organisedby the InternationalMuseumsOffice. It took

placebetween21 and30 October1931andincludeda visit to the Acropolis and a cruise
177Compare page367 ff.

"See discussion of conservationideasin the nineteenthcenturyBritain in ChapterOneand seealso
lamandi, 1997,p. 18.
Ibeoretical andPhilosophicalAspectsof the ReconstructionWork 431

PeterKienzle
to Mycenae, Delos, Knossos and '79

Phaistos. The meeting was attended by architects and
archaeologistsfrom various European countries but was not attended by Arthur Evans.
However, a friend of Evans, the Italian archaeologist Luigi Pernier who excavated at
Phaistos,participated and delivered a paper. His paper was entitled Vie Conservation of
the Minoan Palaces of Crete and tackled, besides Phaistos, the work of Evans and his
architects at Knossos. "O
In hispaperhe pointedout that theMinoanstructures,unlike classicalmonuments,were

fragileandfeaturednumerouselementsof upperstories,which werefound in position.
He summarisesthe reconstructionhistory of Knossos,from timber and iron 1-beamsto
concrete,and explainsthe advantagesof concreteconstruction.Pernieralso discussed
the generalproblemsof reconstructions:the Minoan style, as it was known then, has
beencreatedthrough the reconstructionsbut not enoughwas known from the past.
Furthermore,Pernierregrettedthat the picturesqueruins had beenaltered.However, in
theend he strongly defendsboth aspectsof the work at Knossos:the conservationand
He furtherexplainsthat theamountof original fabric left and the nature
thepresentation.
of the original building materialsand techniquesdemandedconservationaction and he
concludes that the work at Knossos must be seen as the best possible solution.
Furthermorehe points out that Evans'scollaborationwith architects,techniciansand
artistswas beneficialfor the conservationof the site.
work at Minoanpalacesandanotherpaperby Paquet

Pemier'spaperon theconservation
on the use of reinforced concretepresentedpositive experiencesof the use of this
material. They were reflectedin the final recommendationsof the Athens Charter in
which the judicious use of reinforcedconcretewas approvedin the first paragraphof
sectionIV. '81The cooperationbetweenarchitectand archaeologistson site, which was
describedas beneficialin Pernier'spaperis recommendedin sectionVI of the Athens
Charter. In 1920trees were plantedaround the palaceand, indeed,sectionIII of the
1791mandi,
1997, P. 18.
"'See Pernier, 1933, pp. 266 273.
-
"'See charter of Athens, Appendix 4, p. 517.
432 Chaptcr7
Charter suggests to enhance the site with ornamental vegetation. 112Despite some
shortcomings,the work at Knossoswas acceptedby the expert participants of the Athens

conference as good practice and was recommended to be "'
repeated. Section I of the
Charter noted a "tendency to abandon restorations in toto". However, it is not known
whether it was the work at Knossos or Balanos' restorations at the Acropolis which
caused this reaction. Most likely the work at both places along with other projects
illustrated the danger of restoration work and led to this conclusion.
7.7 Conclusion
in thischapterthat the reconstructionsat Knossoswere neitherthe

It hasbeendiscussed
result of a singledesignprocessnor were they simply Evans'swork. Over a period of

thirty years different architectswith different attitudes to conservationdesignedthe
reconstructions.The work on site must be seenas a processand not as a single event.
reflectedknowledgegainedfrom earlier conservationmeasuresand
New reconstructions
criticism by outside experts. Financial limitations and new materialsand techniques
but the basicideaof protectionand presentation
alteredthe shapeof the reconstructions,
remainedthe samethroughout
4:1 the process.
The cultural significance of the work at Knossos lies in the combination of both the
conservation and the presentation of the site in one structure. The 'protective
reconstructions' at Knossos are a milestone in the development of conservation and
presentation at archaeological sites. Their cultural significance is documented in many
aspects which have been discussed in this chapter:
"'Compare letterMackenzieto Evans,25 Sept. 1920.AshinoleanMuseum,EvansArchive.

""Ibe actualdiscussionbetweenthe participantshasnot beenproperlyrecorded.It can be assumed
that the reconstructionsat Knossoswere discussedby the participantsboth at Athens and later on site.
However,the final conclusionsindicatethat theywerefinally endorsed.
lbeo'retical andPhilosophicalAspectsof the ReconstructionWork 433

Peter Kienzle
0 The reconstructionsat Knossosanticipate current ideas of presentation. The work
at Knossos was executed in the first three decadesof this century, at a time when
did Its huge popularity with tourists today shows that it
mass tourism not exist.
Minoan in to untrained visitors. It was
presents the culture an accessible way
understood that archaeology is not the sole domain of archaeologists but of the
public as well.
team of experts was employed on site (archaeologists, architects, artists, etc. )

0A
their
who all contributed skillsand knowledge.It hasbeenshownthat only a team
can satisfactorilyfulfill the complextask of reconstructingand presentinga site.

In Zý
This demandwas later adoptedby the Charterof Athens.
0 Carefulresearchwasundertakenandmany areaswere re-exarnineda secondtime
after World War I prior to any reconstruction work. The researchfor the
drew
reconstructions on all the sourcesavailable.
0 In trial and error the work on site moved slowly from soft materials and limited
to
reconstruction hard and
materials comprehensive Only
reconstructions. after the
softer versionfailed was a more ri-id
0 systemchosen.
0 The reconstruction and conservation work was well documented at various parts
of the Palace of Minos and other reports and many photographswere taken.
Unfortunately,the information was scatteredthroughoutthe variouspublications
and manyof the photographshaveneverbeenpublished.Thus, the extentof the

reconstructionwork, thematerialsusedand the reasonsfor its executionwere not
easilyunderstood.However,it was af irst steptoward the moderndemandthat all
conservationand reconstructionwork must be properly documented.
0 The reconstructionswere executedat a time when the restoration movement of the
nineteenthcentury was slowly disappearing and the conservation movement in the
modem sensebeganto gain momentum. In their partial and fragmented shape the
434 Chapter 7
reflectan indecisivemiddle way betweenthe two extremes.Thus,

reconstructions
it became a leading example for a common attitude today: a complete
reconstruction is unacceptablebut the reconstruction of parts giving some

impressionof the original structureis acceptedandpractisedwidely.184
Evans recognisedand acceptedhis duty to preservethe rernains of the excavation site for
the future and he employed architects and initiated conservation and reconstruction
programme. Although, technical faults were made as discussed in the previous chapter
the main criticism was that the reconstructions would predetermine the visitors
perception of Minoan culture. In short, the work at Knossos would reflect Evans's ideas
of the Minoan past rather than the reality.
It hasbeenexplainedthat Evansandthe architectsspentconsiderableamountsof effort
of the Minoan past.In somepartsthey were proven

to estabfisha correctrepresentation
right and in other parts they were proven wrong, but in the majority of the
reconstructions one can only say that they probably correctly reflect the original
structures.Too little is known from the Minoan pastto give a fully detailedpicture but
agreethat Knossosgenerallygives a fairly good picture of Minoan
mostarchaeologists
palaces.
Interpretation is a dangerous endeavour. Evans's decision to have protective shelters

designed with the recreation of Minoan building elements can be challenged. But
whoever challengesit must be askedfor the alternatives which had been possible in early
twentieth century Crete. The audiencefor which the reconstructions were designed were
wealthy and sophisticated travellers, intellectual people with an interest in antiquities.

Hitchcock claimed that the untrained eye of the modern visitor could not recognise the
reconstructionsand personal experience shows that indeed there are visitors who fail to
recognize the concrete reconstructions as part of a later addition. '" But is this visitor,
"'SeeSchmidt.Forexample
Pergamon Assos,Ephcsos,
Trajaneum, etc.
'"VY'hileI recordedthe reconstructions,I havebeenapproachedby visitors who believedthat the
concretefloors werefrom the Minoan period.However,they werea minority andwithout a detailedvisitor
surveyit will be impossibleto know what the vastmajority of themthinks.

Peter Kienzle
who cannotrecogniseconcrete,able to reconstructideally the non-reconstructed

palace
in his imagination?
From a modem perspective,the 'protective reconstruction' at Knossos might not be the

best solution for the problemsof the site, but to Evans's mind they were the best possible
and most logical choice at the time. The work at Knossos was intended to facilitate
protection and to illustrate the finds. Arthur Evans was aware that they were no accurate
reproductions of the past.
436 Chapter7
Conclusions
I
Between the idea and the reality,

Between the motion and the act,
Falls the shadow
(T. S. Eliot)
438 Summary and Conclusions

Summary and Conclusions
The results of the previous chaptersare surnmarisedin the following paragraphs,

recapitulating their findings. In the second part of this chapter the individual ideas of the
different chapterswill be unified in orderto answerthe study's centralquestion:
How can the reconstructionsat the Palaceof Minos at Knossosbe evaluatedin

both theirfunctional and their aestheticaspectsas an appropriate response to the
demandsof the original designbrief?
The original design brief does not survive and has had to be established from different
sources such as the writings of Arthur Evans and the executed work. Arthur Evans
published his book The Palace of Minos in four volurnes between 1921 and 1935 and
also wrote numerous articles and papers. The infon-nation which enables us to understand
his design brief for the reconstruction is spread throughout these publications but can
generally be described as serving two functions: providing r>protection for the excavated
ruins and giving the visitor an ideaof the former palace.However, he was frequently
0
accusedof having a hiddenagendain his reconstructionswith the main motivation for
their executionbeingto createa memorialto himselfor to supporthis own interpretation
of the past.
Sir Arthur Evanshasbeendescribedasa romanticand assomeonewho enjoyedseeing

himselfasa benevolentaristocrat.' This assessment
was frequentlysupportedby people
'Seefor exampleBintliff, 1984,p. 35.
SummaryandConclusions 439
Peter Kienzle
knew him personally, such as James Candy2 or Piet de Jong.' Some scholars have
who I
suggested that Evans's interpretation of the Minoan past was influenced by his Victorian
upper class background! In The Palace of Minos Evans reconstructed a peaceful Minoan
society with benevolent aristocratic rulers which, according to Bintliff, reflected the
'angst' in Europe 5
general political, social and emotional at this time. Evans was
frequently subject to this criticism becauseof his imaginative descriptions of the Minoan
past which were not firmly supported by archaeological evidence. However, one must
distinguishbetweena reconstructedsociety and imaginative naming of rooms oil the one
hand and the physicalreconstructionwork on the other. One cannot conclude from these
questionableover-enthusiasticdescriptionsthat the physical reconstructions were wrong.
Summary
In order to assessthe reconstructions, the first two chapters have provided background
information on Arthur Evans, on archaeologicaland conservation practice at his time and
on the problems faced on site. Chapters three, four and five described the work on site
and followed by a technical evaluation in chapter six and a theoretical assessmentin
chapter seven.
The first chapterdescribedArthur Evans'sfamily backgroundastile sonof JohnEvans,
a keen numismatistand researcher.Evans' interest in the past culminated in his

employment as keeper of the AshmoleanMuseum at Oxford. His views on the
restoration of St. Albans Cathedraland on the use of replicasin a museumcontext
illustratehis understanding
of conservationand the presentationof the pastto the wider
public.The next sectionshowedthat in Evans'stime archaeologywas developingfrom
a meretreasurehuntto a scientificdiscipline.Contemporarygoodexamples,for instance
'JamesS. Candyasquotedby Horwitz, 1981,p. 168ff.

'Piet de Jongasquotedin Cottrell, 1953,p. 108.
'SeeBintliff, 1984and Hitchcock, 1994.
'Bintliff, 1984,P. 35.
440 Summary and Conclusion

those set by Pitt-Rivers in Britain and Petrie in Egypt, were far frorn perfect; but they
must, in a modern understanding, be regarded as early forms of properly conducted

scientific excavations. However, academic research,study and teaching in archaeology
0
was at an early stagejust beginning at universities such as Oxford and Cambridge.
Furthermore, the chapter presentsthe contemporarydevelopmentof conservation

philosophy.The restorationof historicmonumentsincreasinglylost public acceptanceas
modernconservationideas,as proposedby William Morris in the S.P.A.B. Manifesto,
gained ground. Later, Charles Peers, from within tile Ministry of Public Works,
advocated the concept of a 'frozen monument'. It was shown that all important
conceptshadbeendevelopedby then,but it must be considered

theoreticalconservation
that both restoration and conservationmovementswere actively defendedby their
supporters.
Chaptertwo describedthe constructionmaterialsandtechniquesof tile Minoan palace
at Knossos.Comparativelysoft bronzetools favouredthe useof soft materialssuchas

timber, gypsumand limestone.Thesematerialsdeterioratequickly and especiallythe
lavishly used gypsum which suffers when exposed to the rain. The ground floor
structureswerebuilt predominantlywith stonewhile the upperpartsof the palacewere

constructedwith mud brick andtimber frames.Timber wasusedfor ceilings, stairsand
reinforcement beams. However, the Minoan builders paid more attention to the
appearanceof the buildings than to their structuralquality.
When the palacefell into disrepairand collapsedmany of the rooms were filled with
debrisbeforethe timberstructuresdecayed.This generateda conservationproblem after
the excavationprocess.The rottedbeamsleft the upperstructuresunsupportedand also
createdcavitiesin the walls. In order to respondto theseproblemsand to prevent the
soft gypsumfrom deterioratingfurther, immediateconservationactionswere necessary.
The third chapterdescribedthe reconstruction

andconservationwork on site asexecuted
by Theodore Fyfe between1900and 1904.His work was characterizedby the use of
Summary and Conclusions 441

Peter Kienzle
traditional materials, identical with the ones employed in the original Minoan
construction. He produced flat and pitch-roofed protection sheltersat several areaswhich

were in line of
with modem understanding recognisably new structures on site. Many of
his reconstructions, such as the pillars in the Hall of the Double Axes or the roof above
the Throne Room, survived for more than 25 years. They were still functional when they
were taken down and replaced with concrete structures which covered a larger area.
However, misinterpretation of the Minoan structures, such as the 'illipluviiall' of the
Throne Room or the 'massive wall' at the lower flight of the Grand Staircase, led to
some of the conservation structures being executed in an incorrect way. Furthermore,
many of the structures were executed in a provisional fashion during the actual
excavation process and were never intended to last. Subsequently they failed and were
improved or replaced at a later point. However, Fyfe's conservation attitude was close
to the modern ideas of minimal intervention and the use of sympathetic materials.
Christian Doll's work was described in the fourth chapter. His upbringing in a family of
architects in the centre of London and his technical, analytical mind determined his
approachto the conservationneedsat Knossos.Fyfe's timber structures eventually failed
and iron-girders were used for the restoration at the Acropolis at Athens, which was
acceptedas good practice. Subsequently,
Doll employed iron girders and brick vaults for
his reconstruction work at Knossos. The necessity to prefabricate the iron-frames in

Britain required careful recording on site, thus providing a positive side effect. Doll's
work seemed to be more durable than Fyfe's but was similarly exposed to the
environment in the unsheltered ruins. While Fyfe's timber constructions rotted, Doll's
metal frames started to rust. His system was considerably more expensive than Fyfe's
timber frames and only few reconstructionswere executed. He also constructed the Villa
Ariadne, Evans's excavation house at Knossos.
Chapter five discussed Piet de Jong's work at Knossos which started after World War
I and continued until 1930. Returning to Knossos in 1921 after seven years of forced
absence,Evans reaUsedhow the site had deteriorated.This resulted in an increased effort

to cover exposed areas with shelters. The first work at the Stepped Portico, following

Christian Doll's method, was executed with iron girders and brick vaults. Subsidence
problemsat themiddlewall led to the useof reinforcedconcrete,an action regardedby

Evansand de Jong asthe bestmethodto respondto the problemson site.
De Jong employed reinforced concrete not only at the Palace of Minos but also, on a
smaller scale,at the reconstructionsat MYcenae, for the repair of the director's house of
the British School at Athens and in other places.His work at Knossos was overshadowed
by two Earthquakes in 1922 and 1926. This furthered the use of reinforced concrete
which seemed to respond well to the forces of the earthquake. Furthermore, the mass
production of columns and door and window jambs in reusable shuttering proved to be
an economic asset.
Piet de Jong's by his attemptto protect large areasof the palace

Z-ý work wascharacterized
with constructionsthat requirelittle maintenancebut which nonethelesswould maintain

the aestheticsof an excavationsite. To achievethis aim lie replacedor coveredearlier
reconstructions by Fyfe and Doll with modern concrete structures. The ruinous
fragmentedappearanceof thereconstructions
whichcausesso muchconfusiontoday was
his understandingof a pleasingsite.
t"
Chapter six discussedthe different structural systems employed on site for the execution
of the protective reconstructions. It was explained that reconstructed rubble masonry

walls and the early timber framed constructions of Theodore Fyfe caused only minimal
intervention in the structure. But those works which were executed as emergency action
in the excavation process subsequently failed. Timber, which was used in the original
Minoan construction, was not adequate as a reconstruction material. It could not be
placed where it originally had been because the structure was no longer a covered
building but, rather, was a exposed ruin, thus permitting rainwater to penetrate and
damage the timber.
Although the iron-girder and brick-vault constructionsof Christian DoH were more
durable,the inflexible prefabricatedstructuresrequiredconsiderablealterationsto the

Peter Kienzle
historic fabric and their large compound of iron frames caused considerable stress to
historic structures.Furthermore, the transport of the girders frorn Britain to the site and
the handling of them once there was very expensive and cumbersome. This building
method, established for industrial buildings and large structures, was inadequate and
inappropriatefor the delicate problems experienced on site. They provided the required
protection but were too expensive and insufficiently flexible to adapt to the necessities
of the site. Similar to the timber reconstructions,the iron-l-beams needed to be protected

from the weather in order to prevent rusting, which the ruined environment on site could
not provide.
Finally, Piet de Jongbeganto usereinforcedconcreteon site, andthis seemedto solve
all the proplems experiencedpreviously. It did not rust and it was not subject to
as was the experienceat the reconstructionof the SteppedPortico. It could
subsidence
be cast in the cavities of the rotten timber reinforcementbeamsand could also be
employedfor the massproduction of columnsand door jambs. Reinforcedconcrete

allowedlarge areasto be coveredat reasonablecosts.Someof the problemsrelatedto
reinforced concrete, such as thermal expansion,were recognisedand appropriate
counteractive measureswere taken in later constructions. So far the concrete
reconstructionshave causedvery little damageto the site. However, the long term
problemsof this materialhaveonly recentlybeendiscoveredandrustingreinforcement
barswill causeconsiderableproblemsin the future dueto the irreversiblenatureof the
concretereconstructions.
The philosophical and theoretical aspectsof the 'protective reconstructions'were

analysedin chapterseven.Arthur Evans,asthe ownerof the site,employedthe architects
and paid for the reconstructionwork. His experienceas keeper of the Ashmolean
Museumin Oxford led to the decisionto provide for the protectionandpresentationof
the excavatedstructures.Furthermore,Evanswantedthe protection sheltersexecuted
in Minoan fashion in order to achievea minimum of incongruity. Theodore Fyfe's
conservationphilosophyfocussedon the useof traditional materialsandtechniquesand

the principle of minimal intervention. By contrast, Christian Doll perceived the
444 SummaryandConclusion
Conservation and ReconstrLICtionat the Palace of Minos at Knossos
conservation problems as technical challengeswhich could be solved with modern

techniquesand then clad with boardsto recreatetile palace'soriginal appearance.Piet
de Jong was an aesthetewho executedlargeamountsof new work and overhauledthe
to achievewhat heperceivedto be a pleasantruined landscape.
work of hispredecessors
Furthermore, it was explainedin chapterseventhat the aim of the reconstitutionsat

Knossosvariedfrom placeto place.Almostall structureswere madefor both protection
but thesetwo factorseachhaddifferingemphasisin different structures.
andpresentation
Furthermore, the sources which were used to design the missing parts for the
wereidentified.It wasshownthat the 'protective reconstructions'were

reconstructions
-alsoshapedby other influencingfactorssuchasfinancial resourcesand commentsfrom
other scholars.
Condusions
There will be no simple answer stating that the 'protective reconstructions' at Knossos
were all good or all bad; in a balanced view both technical and theoretical aspects must
be considered. However, the most important point is to understand that the work was
executedover a period of thirty yearsby three different architects. They are not the result
of a single master plan, but rather a collection of individual works which were
constructed for various reasons, with different techniques and responding to different
problems.The site as it presentsitself today is a result of Piet de Jong's reworking of the
reconstructions in the 1920s. However, under the uniform surface they are individual
pieces of work.
The TheatralArea was restoredwith traditionalmaterialsin 1903by TheodoreFyfe in
orderto stagedancesto impressWilhelmDbrpfeld.In 1905Christian Doll reconstructed

the Grand Staircasewith iron girdersbecausethe earlier timber framesfailed due to a
misinterpretation of the excavatedstructure. The Hall of the Double Axes was
reconstructed in concrete in 1928 to prevent the gypsum paving from further
Pcter Kienzle
deterioration. I deliberatelychosethree examples which invert the common idea that the
early work was necessary on the grounds of conservation and the later work pure
reconstruction.This illustratesthe complexity of motivations, philosophies, conservation
needsand the materialsandtechniquesemployedto respondto them.
The work at Knossos has been subject to much criticism, but almost all scholars who
have criticised the 'protective reconstructions' failed to analyse tile 'how' and 'why' of
the works. They have understood the work on site as reconstructions which exclusively
serve presentation and interpretation reasons. Only a few scholars such as Graham or
Karo understood the complex nature of the work on site. Karo claimed to be one of the
few scholarswho knew the conservationproblemsof Knossos in detail. He believed that
at a few points Evans was a victim of the temptation to do too much. But few of the
reconstructions can be called unnecessary.Furthermore, Karo states that the work at

Knossoshad the double function of preventing the ruins from collapsing and presenting
Z.
themto lay "
visitors.
It hasbeenclearly establishedthat the designbrief for the work at Knossos included both
protection and presentation. The work started with the roof above the Throne Room in
1901 where, for a better understanding of the covered space, tile supporting columns
were executed in a Minoan fashion.In 1930 it ended with the concrete reconstruction of
the Throne Room which covered the exposed gypsum paving of the Ante Room,
replaced the alien pitched roof of 1904 and provided the Gallery for the exhibition of
recreatedfrescoes. Both aspects,conservation and presentation. were present from the
beginning of the work right to the end. The significance of the work at Knossos lies in
the attempt to combine both aspects and to create 'protective reconstructions'.
Arthur Evans accepted his responsibility as an excavator and respondedto the

conservation needs of the site. Protective shelters and support work of a size similar to
the oneswhichwereactuallyexecutedin Minoan fashionon site were needed.Thus, the
'Karo, 1959,p. 24 f.
amount of work undertaken was necessary. It has been suggested that the reconstructions
were Victorian rather than Minoan because contemporary fashion had influenced their
execution. 'The wide range of sources employed by the architects and the archaeologist
to reconstruct the missing parts showed that there was a comprehensive and genuine
quest for determining the original architecture. However, this quest had all the
shortcomings and pitfalls which were discussed in respect to church restoration at the end
of the nineteenth century in Europe. The work at Knossos is too late to be called
Victorian although two aspects of it were typical of this age. It was generally believed
4n rP
in scienceandtechniquewould finally solveall problems.Thus, it was
that theadvances
believedthat the ruins of Knossoscould be permanentlyprotectedif the right materials
and techniqueswere chosen.Furthermore,the necessaryconservationwork could not

be merelytechnical,it also had to be aestheticin its chosenform: the Minoan style. The
Teplacement of thestill functionalsheltersabovethe Throne Room and the Magazineof

the Giant Pithoi towardthe end of the 1920'sis an indicationof this aestheticfeeling!
The architect who replacedthe simple but functional roofs at the above named areas was
the aesthetePiet de Jong. The conservationist Theodore Fyfe constructed shelters which
I
were adequate for the protection of the historic fabric underneath them but their
architectural form impeded the view of the site. Christian Doll, the technician, provided
a solution to the conservation problems on site. Arthur Evans initiated and financed the
tprotective reconstruction' on site but most of the physical outcome on site is the work
of his architects Theodore Fyfe, Christian Doll and Piet de Jong. The reconstructions
were influenced by various factors such as the original design brief, tile architects and
their philosophy, the conservation problems of the original construction, the materials
available in Crete, the criticisms of other scholars, the various sources employed to
reconstruct the missing forms and the financial limitations.
7For example:Bintliff, Farnoux,Hitchcock.MacEnroesug(yested Edwardianinfluences

Cz
*Ibe small building abovethe Shrineof the DoubleAxes wasremovedafterWorld War 11to allow
for the constructionof the new metalpole andcorrugatedplasticsheltersby Platonandde Jong.
PeterKienzie
The two main issues of modern excavation site management have been correctly
recognised at Knossos: conservation and presentation. The archaeological site of

Knossos is a source of information which must be preserved for future generations to
study and enjoy. The history of the reconstruction work at Knossos is also the history of
a struggle to find a good solution to the problems Evans and the architects were facing.
For every new work that became necessary,the previous reconstructions were analysed
and the experiences gained from them were included in the design of the new
reconstructions. Thus, the reconstructions at Knossos reflect a learning process.
Theodore Fyfe erected the first protective shelters and executed the early restoration
work according to the principles of minimal intervention. Timber was employed by the
Minoans for columns, reinforcement beams and ceiling constructions, and subsequently
Fyfe employed timber for his reconstructions.It failed because,unlike the original palace,
the ruins were no longer protected from the weather by a roof. To avoid rot, Doll used
iron girders, but these were also affected by penetrating water. To prevent further
damage he executed the ceilings in a system of square Maltese slabs instead of broken
original slabs. Subsidence problems, complicated by missing wall plates, caused Piet de
ZD
Jong to chose reinforced concrete for his reconstructions. Furthermore, reinforced
concrete promised to require little maintenance a fact which was seen as a major asset,
especially after seeing the damage to the ruins after seven years forced absenceduring
World War I. The development of conservation materials and techniques is an
understandable and logical process.
What have we learned ?
0 The conservationand reconstructionwork must be set againstboth the general
conservationmethodologyand philosophyof its time as well as againstthe con-

temporary knowledge of archaeological method. At Knossos a team of experts
excavated, documented and preserved the site in a method ahead of its time.

0 In orderto evaluatethe work on site the original designbrief mustbe established.

The design brief for different parts of the reconstructions such as the Theatral
Area,the North EntrancePassage

or theGrandStaircasevaried.Consequently,no
of all reconstructionandconservationwork can be made.
universalassessment
0 At Knossosconservationand reconstructionform an inseparableunity. Any

assessmentwhich focuses exclusively on one of the aspectsis unjustified.
0 Arthur Evans moved the exhibition of archaeologyfrorn the museum context to the
actual site. He understoodboth the need for conservationand the need for
presentation.
0 The work on site is not exclusively the work of Arthur Evans. He was the owner
of the site and the employerof Fyfe, Doll andde Jong,but much of the designof
the reconstructionwork is due to the architects.
0 The currentappearance
of the site at Knossosis the result of a thirty year process
of conservationandnot the resultof a singleperceiveddesignidea.Lessonslearnt
from earlier conservationwork led to changesin later reconstructions.
C)
0 The conservation work at Knossos was reaction, not action. At Knossos con-
servationand reconstructionmeasureswere implementedafter decayproblems,

subsidenceor collapsehad alreadyoccurredon site.
0 At Knossostimber, steel and reinforcedconcrete were successivelyused. The

decisionsto switchto othertechniques but in retrospectmany
wereunderstandable
of them weretakenwith an incompleteor mistakenanalysisof the problem.
0 The specific problemsof the site, such as building4-:1 materials and techniques, decay
pattern, and the archaeologicalremains,demandedconservationefforts different

from the onesusedat other sites.

PeterKienzle
The executed work was subject to financial and technical limitations and is thus
incomplete in reflecting the intentions and ambitions of Evans and the architects he
employed.
0 Carefulresearchwas undertakento facilitate the reconstructionandconservation

work on site. Evans employed imaginativedescriptionsand illustrative comparisons
to describe Minoan society, but the data for reconstruction was taken either
directly from the ruins or indirectly from archaeological evidence such as the
frescoes or the house models.
0 Evansfrequentlymentionedthat the greatestthreatto the reconstructionswas the
violentalterationsof theCretanclimate.This cannotbe upheld.The useof timber

in positionswheretimber wasemployedin Minoan times failed due to the lack of
constructive protection not because of the climatic conditions. Early timber
reconstructions in sheltered areassurvive even today.
At Knossos,what wasattemptedwas the unification of the two most important tasksat

an excavation site after the actual excavationprocessis completed:preservationand
presentation. The resultsof this attemptare the 'protective reconstructions'. Just as the
realityis differentfrom the platonic ideal form, the work at Knossoswas imperfect in its
execution. On the one hand, financial and technicallimitations did not allow for the
execution of the work to the desiredextent. Rightfully, Schmidtclaimsthat after the
work wascompletedin 1930th9rewerestill considerablepartsof the Palaceexposedto
'
the weather. On the other hand,Evansclaimedthat necessarysupportwork had to be
in
executed the Minoan style in orderto achievethe leastincongruity aswell asto give
the visitor an impressionof the Minoan past.Today, the reconstructionshaveaged,and
frequentlylaymencannotdistinguishthemfrom the original. What was supposedto help
promote an understandingof the site has, at least in some aspects,turned into a

hindrance.
"Schmidt, 1993,P. 107
Conservation and Reconstruction at the Palaec of Minos at Knossos
It was certainly one of Evans's great achievementsthat lie turned the excavation site into
a museum. Evans understood that the archaeological information of the site gains
significanceonly when it is disseminated to the public, both scholars and laypersons. In
order to do this he published numerous articles, wrote his comprehensive book The
Palace ofMinos and he reconstructedthe site. Evans had the necessary resources to act,
and act he did. Would it have been better not to act? Certainly, it would have been less
controversial and Knossos would be one of the thousands of other site which have lost
much of their archaeological data. At Knossos, Evans decided to present to the public
as much as he could and the place is now visited by millions, a figure he probably did not
even dream of.
At Knossos, the rudimentary elements of modern site management were present:
conservation and interpretation.The 'protective reconstructions' are not perfect but they
are the result of a genuine quest for the best solution for the problems on site. They are
a typical product of their time when both archaeology and conservation had a historic
development of approximately one hundred years but had not yet become firmly
established disciplines. The protective reconstructions were executed at a time when

necessary structures were aesthetically designed and when a firm belief in technical
advancesseemedto promise permanentsolutions to every problem. Today we know that
the interpretation of the past is a process which continuously changes and concrete
4ý
interpretationsare not able to adaptto this change.Furthermore,we know that we will
neversolveall problem-,andthat technicalsolutionsare not permanent.They themselves

in the future. The 'protective reconstructions'at Knossos
ageandwill needreplacement
cannot easilybe replaced.They are a consistent,logical, andunderstandable
milestone
in the developmentof archaeologicalsite management.
Recommendations
The 'protectivereconstructions'at Knossosprovide an excellentexamplewith which to

studyboth technicalandtheoreticalissuesof conservationat archaeologicalsites.A wide
Peter Kienzle
range of materials and techniques employed for different reasons by various architects
offer ample material for research. Furthermore, the rich documentary evidence of the
excavationand conservationprocessin the first three decadesof this century allow us to
understand the decay processesof original and replacement material.
From the evaluation of the reconstructions at Knossos a number of lessonscan be learnt

for future conservationwork, both thereand at other sites.The recommendationsare:
a Excavationis an interventioninto the archaeologyof the site which requires,for
ethicalreasons,conservationandpresentationwork. This work cannotexclusively

focuson scientificandacademicneedsbut hasto considertile aestheticsof the site
and the demandsof the public as a collective owner of the past.
0 Prior to anyexcavationwork it must be consideredhow the site will be conserved

and presented, and resources must be allocated for this work. Evans frequently
mentioned how the expenses for the reconstruction of the site drained his
resources, and it has been shown elsewherelo that the financial commitment
towards conservation exceeded the cost of excavation.
0 Detailed and comprehensive research into the structure of the excavated ruins is
essentialfor any conservationand reconstructionwork. Conservationarchitects

need to be employedfrom the beginning
ZIP of the excavationcampaign
0
when the
evidenceis exposedfor the first time.
A retrospectiveassessment of the interpretationof the site can only be executed

if large parts of the site have been conservedadequatelyand the proposed
interpretationby theexcavatorcanbecomparedwith the situationon site.The site
must be understoodas a documentof the pastand the conservationof the site is

part of this good documentation.
"'SeeKienzle, 1995,p. 62.
at tile Palaceof Minos at Knossos
0 AH conservation and reconstruction efforts at archaeological excavations need to

be documented. This allows to both assess tile success or failure of the
conservationefforts and allow for a distinction between new and old. At Knossos,
where some of the reconstructions have aged over the last hundred years, the
failure to identify reconstructions can lead to misinterpretations.
0 The problems of concretewere not known at the time of the executionof the
The abilities andthe lastingqualitiesof the materialwere grossly
reconstructions.
overestimated.Consequentlythe concretereconstructionswere undertakenin an
irreversiblemanner.Irreversibleconservationor presentationwork must not be
executed. All materialswhich are employedin conservationand reconstruction

work mustbeassessed
on theircompatibilityto the originalmaterialin a short term
C.
perspectiveaswell as in a long
0 term perspective.
0 The agingproblemsof concretehaveonly recentlybeendiscoveredand havenot

yet greatly affected the reconstructions on site. Further research into the aging
process of reinforced concrete on excavation sites and on possible solutions of
treatment,removalor replacementmust be conducted.
0 The original timber beams lasted well in the sheltered parts of the Minoan Palace
but the replacementbeamsdecayedquickly in exposedpositionswithin the ruin.

Materials identical with the original ones might not be adequate for the
I
conservation of archaeologicalruins. While this attitude is honourablein the
conservationof historicbuildings,it doesnot necessarilywork at excavationsites
becausethe circumstancesof the structureshavechanged.
0 Reconstructions
agelike anyotherbuildingstructure,andsometimesmore quickly,
becausethey are less protected by roofs. They must be designedfor repair or
replacement without harm to the original fabric.
Peter Kienzle
Besides the recommendations for practical application at excavation sites, other
recommendations can be made for the further research in the area of conservation and
reconstructionat Knossosand at other excavationsites.
0 Architectural work which includesconservation and reconstruction work must not

be understood as the result of a single perceived design idea. The physical
I
be
architecturemust understood as the result of a process influenced by numerous
factors such as the architect's abilities as well as his personal taste, design brief,
available materials, and financial limitations.
0 This researchpresentsa historic architecturalperspectiveof the reconstruction

work at Knossos. Today's importance of the reconstructions include its
appreciation by modern visitors and its impact on tourism in Crete. A complete

understanding of the 'protective reconstructions' includes both the historic-
architectural aspect as well as the modern tourism aspect.
0 One difficulty in writing this thesis was the lack of a comprehensive history of the
Minoan architectural style. Unless a synthetic Minoan architectural history is
written, the assessmentof how correct the reconstructionsare will always be

uncertain.
0 In the future it will be important to explain to the visitors that Evans had not
intendedto createa exact replicaof the lost Minoan structuresbut to give some
impressionof how thepalacemayhavelooked.This can be donewith the modern
meansof heritageinterpretationsuchasa visitor centreor informationpanels.The
tour guideswho work at Knossosmust be trainedon this issue.
0 Earthquakeswere importantfor the constructiontechniquein Minoan times,the

destruction of the palace and, finally in influencing the reconstruction programme
in the twentiethcentury.However,no planswere madeto determinehow the site

would withstandfutureearthquakeswhich, without doubt, will occur at Knossos.
Excavations of Minoan structuresface today the sameproblem Evans and the
architectsfacedat Knmos: the cavitiesleft by rottentimber beamsmust be filled

with a load-bearing "
material. Today, the aging problemsof concreteare known
00
anda methodmustbedevelopedto removetheconcretewith the leastharm to the
original fabric. For future excavationsof Minoan structuresa reversiblesystem
must be developedto supportthe walls without the useof concrete.
The aim of thisthesisand,may I say,the aim of all historic researchis to learnfrom the
past for the future. The site of Knossoswith its comprehensivedocurnentationwas an
exceflentexamplefrom which to learnaboutthe reconstructionand conservationwork
of an importantexcavationsite. This knowledgemust now be employedto preventthe
repetition of thesemistakesat new sitesand must show the areasnecessitatingfurther
research.
"For example:Marinatosat his excavationat Akrotiri, nict-a.
Author's Declaration
I declarethat thisthesisis my own unaidedwork. It is being submittedfor the degreeof

Doctor of Philosophyat theUniversityof York. It hasnot beensubmittedbefore for any
degreeor examinationat any other university.
PeterKienzle
27 October 1997
456 Author's Declaration

Glossary
Glossary
abacus (pl.: abaci) A rectangularslab of stone, marble or terracotta used on top of

columns in order to give them a broader head, and so afford a
better support to the beams which rest on them.
anastylosis The action of re-assemblingthe parts of a ancient structure

without the addition of any new material.
astyvfdes Branchesof busheswhich form the ceiling abovethe skfsesin

the vernacularCretanhouse.
cella The interior of a temple;the part comprisedby the four walls.
chthonic Refersto dwellings in or beneaththe earth.
fils Son (French).
impluvium. A cistern in the floor of the atrium in a roman house, into which
rain was conducted.
kamdra A middle wall or arch supporting flat roofs or ceilings in the

vernacular Cretan house.
kamar6spito A vernacularhousewith one arch supportingthe roof.

0
Untis A verticalpostsupportingth main beamsof a ceiling or roof in
,e
the vernacularCretanhouse.
lepfda Clay-rich upper earth layer on top of the flat mud-roof of the
vernacularCretanhouse.
messod6ki Main beamin the vernacularCretanhouse.
naos The interiorapartmentof a Greektemple; the cella of a Roman

temple.
narthex The vestibuleof a church.
Glossary 459
Peter Kienzle
opisthdomos A small chamber placed at the back of a temple, to which the

priests alone had access.
opisthonaos See opisthdomos
pediment The triangular crowning of a portico, usually supported by a row

of columns.
pere Father(French).
pilor6doma Lower basicearthlayer on a flat mud roof in vernacularCretan

houses.
pithos (pl: pithoi) A largeearthenware

jar
pronaos The spacein front of a templeenclosedby the sidewalls and a

portico.
pteron Wing. The colonnadedsidewings of a Greektemple.
skfses Timber joists usedin the constructionof flat mud roofs in the
vernacularCretanhouse. IE
sphdkes Reeds or branches of busheswhich form the ceiling above the

sk[ses in the vernacular Cretan house.
spolia Booty taken away in war; used also for building material of
earlier structures which was reused for new building work.
stdtis Vertical post supporting

z:- the messod6ki in the vernacular Cretan
house.
tsunami Gigantic coastal floodwave caused by volcanic underwater

eruption or underwater earthquakes.
vivarium A general term for any artificially created place in which live
animals are kept.
460 Glossary
Bibliography
4 blýý-
Bibliography
ADAMS, Henry (1894). 'The Practical Designing of Structural Ironwork" E. & F.N.
Spon, London, United Kingdom.
ADDYMAN, PeterV. (1994). "Reconstructionas interpretation:the exampleof the

Jorvik Viking Centre, York" in: GATHERCOLE, P. and LOWENTHAL, D.
(eds.) The Politics of the Past. Routledge,London, United Kingdom.
ALEXIOU, Stylanos(n.d.). "A Guide to the Minoan PalacesKnossos- Phaestos-

Mallia". SecondEdition, Alexiou, Herakleion,Greece.
ANDERSON,J. and SPIERS,R.P. (1907). "The Architecture of Greeceand Rome.

A Sketch of its Historic Development" B.T. Batsford, London, United
Kingdom.
anon. (1879). "Notes on Building Construction. Arranged to meet the Requirements

of the Syllabus of the Science & Art Department of the Committee of
Council on Education, South Kensington. Part 111.Materials" Rivingtons,
London, Oxford and Cambridge, United Kingdom.
anon. (1914). "Who's Who in Architecture 1914"
anon. (1923). "Who's who in Architecture 1923"
anon.(1925). "The Making & Testing of Portland Cement and Concrete" G. & T.
EarleLtd, Wilmington, Hull, United Kingdom.
0
anon.(1930). "Who's Who, 1930"
anon. (1934). "School Principals:Theodore Fyfe. Cambridge University, School of

Architecture" in The Architect's Journal, 18 January1934,p. 124.
anon. (1941). "West Yorkshire Society of Architects. Green Book 1941", West
Yorkshire Society of Architects, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Bibliography 463
Pcter Vienzle
APOSMOU, Marthas (1979). "Mivo(; KaAOKaigivoq" (in Greek) in: KgrjTOAOVia

8, pp 81 - 94.
A5KIN, Mustafa (1988). 'Troja (Ilion). Ausfühlicher Führer zu der Ruinenstätte

und Umgebung, Fakten und Legenden" (in German). Galeri Troya, Troya
Harabeleri, (7anakkale,Turkey.
ASTROM, Paul; PALMER, L. R. and POMERANCE, Leon (1984). "Studies in Aegean

Chronology" Paul Astr6ms F6rlag, G6teborg (Gothenburg), Sweden.
ASHURST, John and DIMES, Francis G. (1990). "Conservation of Building and

Decorative Stone." (Two Volumes). Butterworth-Heinemann, London, United
Kingdom.
BAATZ, Dietwulf (1985). "Die Saalburg - ein Limeskastell 80 Jahre nach der
Rekonstruktion"(in German)in: ULBERT,G and WEBER, G. Konservierte
Geschichte? Antike Bauten und ihre Erhaltung. Konrad Theiss Verlag,
Stuttgart,Germany.
BAATZ, Dietwulf (1990). "Die Saalburg, Probleme einer 90 Jahre alten

Rekonstruktion"(in German) in: Sinn und Unsinn archäologischer
Restaurierungen und Rekonstruktionen. Kolloquium im Rahmen der
Jahrestagung 1990, Verband der Landesarchäologender Bundesrepublik
Deutschland.
BANHAM, Reyner (1965). "Convenient Benches and Handy Hooks. Functional

Considerationsin the Criticism of the Art of Architecture" in: WHIFFEN,
Marcus.The History, Theory and Criticism of Architecture. pp 91 - 105.The
M. I.T. Press,Massachusetts
Institute of Technology,Cambridge,USA.
ZD
BINDA, L. And ANZANI, A. (1997). "Structural Behaviourand Durability of Stone
Masonry" in: BAER, S and SCHNETHLAGE, R. (Eds.) Saving our
Architectural Heritage. The Conservation of Historic Stone Structures.
Dahlem Workshop Report. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester,New York,
Weinheim,Brisbane,Singapore,Toronto.
BINTLEFF,John1.(1984)."StructuralismandMyth in Minoan Studies"in: Antiquity,

Vol. LVIII, pp. 33 - 38.
BLEGEN, CarlW. andRAWSON, Marion (1973)."The Palaceof Nestor at Pylos in

Western Messenia.Vol. 111".PrincetonUniversity Press,Princeton,USA.
BOARDMAN, John (1963). "the Date of the Knossos Tablets" in On the Knossos
Tablets, Clarendon Press, Oxford, United Kingdom.
464 Bibliography
BOSANQUET, R. C. (1912). "The Palacesof Crete" in: Proceedings of the

Llandadno and District Field Club, Volume VI, 1911/12,pp. 14 - 32.
BOSINEKI - DIDONI, Paraskevi(1985). "Griechische Traditionelle Architektur:

Kreta" (in German)Verlag Melissa,Athens,Greece.
BOSSERT, Helmut Theodor (1923). "Die filtesten Kulturen des Alittelmeerkreises.

Band 1: AItkreta. " (in German). Ernst Wasmuth, Berlin, Germany.
BOURAS, Charalambos (1984). "Areas of concern. Athens: The Parthenon" In:

Monumenturn, Vol 27, No. 2.
BOURAS, Charalambos(1994). "RestorationWork on the Parthenonand Changing

Attitudes towards the Conservationof Monurnents" in: TOURNIKITOS,
Panayotis(ed.) The Parthenon and its Impact in Modern Times. Melissa
PublishingHouse,Athens,Greece.
BOWDEN, Mark (1991). "Pitt Rivers. The life and archaeological work of
Lieu tenant-General Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt Rivers, DCL, FRS,
FSA". CambridgeUniversity Press,Cambridge,United Kingdom.
0
BOWER, Mim (1995). Marketing Nostalgia.An explorationof heritagemanagement
and its relation to the humanconsciousness"in: COOPER, M., FIRTH, A.,
CARMAN, J. andWHEATLEY, D. (eds.) Managing Archaeology. Routledge,
London, United Kingdom.
0
BRANIGAN, Keith (1970). "The Foundation of Palatial Crete". Routledge, London,
United Kingdom.
BRANIGAN, Keith (1983). "Craft Specialization in Minoan Crete" in:

KRZYSZKOWSKA,OlgaandNIXON, L. (eds)Minoan Society: Proceedings
of the Cambridge Colloquiurn 1981. Bristol ClassicalPress,Bristol, United
Kingdom.
BRrFISH ARCHITECrURAL LIBRARY, Royal Institute of British Architects (1993).

"Directory of British Architects. 1834- 1900" Compiledby: Alison Felstead,
JonathanFranklin,Leslie Pinfield. Mansell,London,United Kingdom.
BROWN, Baldwin(1905)."The care of Ancient Monuments". CambridgeUniversity

Press, Cambridge,United Kingdom.
BROWN, Ann (1986)."1 proposeto begin at Gnossos"In: The Annual of the British
School at Athens, Vol 8 1, pp 37 - 44.
BROWN, Ann (1993)."Before Knossos Arthur Evans's travels in the Balkans and
...
Crete" AshmoleanMuseum,Oxford, United Kingdom.
Bibliography 465
Peter Kienzle
BROWN, Ann (1994). "Arthur Evans and the Palace of Minos" Ashmolean Museum,
Oxford, United Kingdom.
BRUNSKILL, Ronald W. (1990). "Brick Building in Britain" Victor Gollancz Ltd.

BURROWS, Ronald M. (1907). "The Discoveries in Crete and their Bearing on the
History of Ancient Civilisation" John Murray, London, United Kingdom.
CADOGAN, Gerald (1980). "Palaces of Minoan Crete" (corrected edition) Methuen

& Co, London, United Kingdom.
CADOGAN, Gerald (1992a). "Ancient and Modern Crete" in: MYERS, MYERS,
CADOGAN (eds.) The Aerial Atlas of Ancient Crete. The University of
California Press,Berkeley and Los Angeles, USA.
CADOGAN, Gerald(1992b)."Knossos"in: MYERS, MYERS, CADOGAN (eds.) The

Aerial Atlas of Ancient Crete.The Universityof California Press,Berkeleyand
Los Angeles,USA.
CADOGAN, Gerald (1992c). "Gournia!'in: MYERS, MYERS, CADOGAN (eds.) The

Aerial Atlas of Ancient Crete. The University of California Press,Berkeley and
Los Angeles, USA.
CAMERON, M. A. S. (1968). "Unpublished Paintings from the 'House of the Frescoes'

at Knossos" in: Annual of the British School at Athens, Vol. 63, pp I-31.
CARMAN, John (1995). "The Importance of Things. Archaeology and the Law" in:
COOPER, M. A., FIRTH, A. CARMAN, J., WHEATLEY, D. (eds.)
,
Managing Archaeology. Routledge, London, United Kingdom.
CASTLEDEN,Rodney(I 990a)."The KnossosLabyrinth. A new View of the 'Palace

of Minos' at Knossos". Routledge,London, United Kingdom.
CASTLEDEN, Rodney (1990b). "The Minoans. Life in Bronze Age Crete".

Routledge, London, United Kingdom.
CERAM, C. W. (n.d.). "Gbtter, GrNber und Gelehrte. Roman der ArchHologie" (in
German),BertelsmannLesering,
CHAMBERLIN, E. R. (1979). "Preserving the Past" J.M. Dents & Sons Ltd. London,
United Kingdom.
COBURN, Andrew; HUGHES, Richard;POMONIS, Antonios and SPENCE,Robin

(1995). 'Technical Principles of Building for Safety". Intermediate
TechnologyPublications,London,United Kingdom.
466 Bibliography
COLEMAN, John E. (1977). "Keos. Results of excavations conducted by the

University of Cincinnati under the auspices of the American School of
Classical Studies at Athens. Volume I", American School of Classical Studies,
Princeton, New Jersey, United States.
COTTRELL, Leonard (1953). 'The Bull of Minos". Evans Brothers Limited, London,
United Kingdom.
COULTON, J. J. (1977). "Greek Architects at Work". Elek Books, London, United

Kingdom.
CRAMER, Johannes(1984). "Handbuch der Bauaufnahme" (in German). Deutsche

Verlags Anstalt, Stuttgart, Germany.
CUMMER, W. Wilson and SCHOFIELDS, Elizabeth(1984). "Keos. Vol. 111.Ayia

Irini: House A". Phillip von Zabern,Mainz, Germany.
CUSACK, Patricia (1987). "Agents of Change:Hennebique,Mouchel and Ferro-

Concretein Britain, 1897- 1908"in: Construction History, Vol. 3, pp. 61 - 73.
DANIEL, Glyn (1975). "A Hundred and Fifty Years of Archaeology". Duckworth,
DANIEL, Glyn (1981). "A Short History of Archaeology". Tharnesand Hudson,

DARVILL, Timothy (1995). "Value Systemsin Archaeology" in: COOPER, M.

A.,FIRTH, A., CARMAN, J., WHEATLEY, D. (eds.) Nlanaging Archaeology.
Routledge,London, United Kingdom.
00
DAVARIS, Costis (1976) "Guide to Cretan Antiquities". Noyes Press, Park Ridge,
New Jersey, USA.
DICKINSON, Oliver T. P. K. (1994). "The Aegean Bronze Age" Cambridge World

Archaeology, Cambridge University Press,Cambridge, United Kingdom.
DIMES, Francis G. (1989). "The nature of building and decorative stones" in

ASHURST, J. and DIMES, F. (eds) Conservation of Building and Decorative
Stone, Butterworth-Heinemann, London, United Kingdom.
DI VITA, Antonio (1996). "Earthquakes and Civil Life at Gortyn (Crete) in the Period
between Justinian and Constant II (6-7th Century AD) in: STIROS, S. and
."
JONES, R. E. (eds.): Archaeoseismology, Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper
7, British School at Athens, London, United Kingdom.
Bibliography 467
PeterKienzle
DÖRPIFELD, Wilhehn (1905). "Die Kretischen,Mykenischen und Homerischen Paläste"

(in German) in: Athener Mitteilungen, Vol. XXX, P. 257-297, Deutsches
Archäologisches Institut Athen.
DÖRPFELD, Wilhelm (1907). "Die kretischen Paläste" (in German) in: Athener
Mitteilungen, Vol. XXXII, P.576 - 603. DeutschesArchäologischesInstitut
Athen.
DOUMAS, Christos (1978). "The Stratigraphy of Akrotiri" in DOUMAS, C. and

PUCHELT, H. C. (eds.) Thera and the Aegean World, Volume 1. Thera
Foundation, London, United Kingdom.
DOUMAS, Christos(1992). "The Wall Paintings of Thera". The Thera Foundation-

PetrosM. Nomikos, Athens,Greece.
DOUMAS, Christos (1997). "Management

Z, Considerationsat a MediterraneanSite:
Akrotiri, Thera" in: DE LA TORRE, Martha (ed.) The Conservation of
Archaeological Sites in the Mediterranean Region, Tile Getty Conservation
Institute, Los Angeles,USA.
DOUMAS, Christos (1998). 'Santorini. A Guide to the Island and its Archaeological
Treasures". Ekdotike Atherion, Athens, Greece.
DRIESSEN, Jan (1987). "Earthquake-Resistant Construction and the Wrath of the

'Earth-Shaker"' in: Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol.
XLVI, pp. 171 - 178.
DRIESSEN, Jan (1990). "An Early Destruction at the Mycenaean Palace at

Knossos". Acta ArchaeologicaLouveniensia,Monographia 2, Leuven, Belgium.
DRIESSEN, Jan and MACDONALD, Colin F. (1997). "The Troubled Island. Minoan
Crete before and after the Santorini Eruption". AEGAEUM 17, Annales
d'arch6ologie 6ge6nne de I'Universit6 de Li6ge et UT-PASP, Universit6 de
Lfte, Belgium.
DROOP, J. P. (1915). "Archaeological Excavation". CambridgeUniversity Press,

Cambridge,United Kingdom.
DURM, Josef (1895). "Der Zustand der Antiken Athenischen Bauwerke auf der
Burg und in der Stadt" (in German). Ernst und Korn, Berlin, Germany.
DURM, Josef (1910). "Die Baukunst der Griechen" (in German). Alfred Körner
Verlag, Leipzig, Germany.
EARL, John (1996). "Building Conservation Philosophy". The College of Estate

Management, Reading, United Kingdom.
468 Bibliography
0
EMERICK, Keith (1997). "Archaeology and Architecture: A Tradition of Collaboration"

in: Journal of Architectural Conservation, Vol. 3, No. 1, March 1997, pp. 52 -
66.
EVANS, Arthur J. (1884). "rhe Ashmolean Museum as a Home for Archaeology in

Oxford. An inaugural lecture". Parker & Co., Oxford, United Kingdom.
EVANS, Arthur J. (1900). "Knossos. Summary Report of the Excavations in 1900" in

Annual of the British School at Athens, Vol VI, p. I- 70, British School at
Athens, London, United Kingdom.
EVANS, Arthur J. (1901). "The Palace of Knossos. Provisional Report of the

Excavationsfor the Year 1901" in Annual of the British School at Athens, Vol
VII, p. I- 120, British School at Athens, London, United Kingdom.
0
EVANS, Arthur J. (1902a). "The Palace of Knossos. Provisional Report of the

VIII, p. I- 124, British School at Athens, London, United Kingdom.
EVANS, Arthur J. (1902b). "A Bird-eyes view of the Minoan Palace of Knossos, Crete"
in: Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects, Vol. X, P. 97 - 106,
RIBA, London, United Kingdom.
EVANS, Arthur J. (1903). "The Palace of Knossos. Provisional Report of the

IX, p. I- 153, British School at Athens, London, United Kingdom.
EVANS, Arthur J. (1904). "The Palaceof Knossos. Tile Campaign of 1904" in Annual
of the British School at Athens, Vol X, p. I- 44, British School at Athens,
EVANS, Arthur J. (1905). "The Palace of Knossos and its Dependencies. Provisional
Report for the Year 1905" in Annual of the British School at Athens, Vol XI,
p. I- 26, British School at Athens, London, United Kingdom.
t
EVANS, Arthur J. (1906). "Essai de Classification des poques de la Civilisation
Minoenne". London, United Kingdom.
EVANS, Arthur J. (1911). "Restored Shrine on the central Court of the Palace of
Knossos" in: Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects, Vol. XIX,
P. 289 - 295, RIBA, London, United Kingdom.
EVANS, Arthur J. (192 1). "The Palace of Minos at Knossos. Volume I". MacMillan,
London, United Kingdom. (PM I).
Bibliogaphy 469
Peter Kienzle
EVANS, Arthur J. (1922). "New Discoveriesat Knossosý'in: The Antiquaries Journal,

Vol. II, pp 319 - 329.
EVANS, Arthur J. (1927). "Work of Reconstitutionin the Palaceof Knossos"in: The

Antiquaries journal, Vol. VII, pp 258 - 267.
EVANS, Arthur J. (1928). "The Palace of Knossos and its Dependencies in the light of
RecentDiscoveries and Reconstitutions" in: Journal of the Royal Institute of
British Architects, Vol. XXXVI, No. 3, P. 90 102, RIBA, London, United
-
Kingdom.
EVANS, Arthur J. (1928a). 'The Palace of Minos at Knossos. Volume 11".

MacMillan, London, United Kingdom. (PM 11).
EVANS, Arthur J. (1929)."Knossos"in Annual of the British School at Athens, Vol

XXX, p. 268 - 270, British Schoolat Athens,London, United Kingdom.
EVANS, Arthur J. (1930)."Sir Arthur Evans'Excavationat Knossos"in Annual of the

British School at Athens, Vol XXX, p. 289 290, British School at Athens,
-
London,United Kingdom.
EVANS, Arthur J. (1930a). "The Palace of Minos at Knossos. Volurne 111".

MacMillan, London, United Kingdom. (PM III).
EVANS, Arthur J. (193 1). "Knossos" in Annual of the British School at Athens, Vol
XXXI, p. 191 - 192, British School at Athens, London, United Kingdom.
EVANS, Arthur J. (1935). "The Palace of Minos at Knossos. Volume IV".

MacMillan, London, United Kingdom. (PM IV).
EVANS, Joan (1943). "Time and Chance: the story of Arthur Evans and his
Forebears". Lon-mans, Greenand Co., London, United Kingdom.
r)
EVANS, Joan(1950)."Sir Arthur EvansandKnossos"in: Archaeology, Vol. 3, pp. 134
-139.
EVELY, R. D. G. (1993). "Minoan Crafts. Tools and Techniques. An Intro-

duction". Paul Astr6ms Rrlag, G6teborg,Sweden.
FABRICIUS,Ernst(1886)."Alterthümerauf Kreta,IV Fundeder mykenäischenEpoche

in Knossos" (in German) in: Athener Mitteilungen, Vol II, p. 135 - 147.
DeutschesArchäologischesInstitut, Berlin, Germany.
FABRICIUS, Ernst (1897). "Die Insel Kreta7' (in German) in: Geographische
Zeitschrift, Volume 111,p. 361 507.
-
470 Bibliography
FARNOUX, Alexandre (1996). "Knossos. Unearthing a Legend". New Horizons,

Thames and Hudson, London. United Kingdom.
FELSTAED, Alison, FRANKLIN, Jonathan and PINFIELD, Leslie (1993). "Directory

of British Architects 1834 - 1900". British Architectural Library, Royal Institute
of British Architects, London, United Kingdom.
FILTZINGER, Phillip, PLANCK, Dieter and CAMMERER, Bernhard (1986). "Die

Rdmer in Baden-WfirttembeiV'(in German). Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart,
Germany.
FIMMEN, Dietrich (1909). "Zeit und Dauer der kretisch-mykenischen Kultur" (in
German). B. G. Teubner Verlag, Leipzig und Berlin, Germany.
FIMMEN, Dietrich (1921). "Die Kretisch-Mykenisclie Kultur" (in German).B.G.

TeubnerVerlag, TUbingen,Germany.
FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION (n.d.). "Heritage under Fire. A guide to the

el
protection of historic buildings" Fire ProtectionAssociation,London, United
Kingdom
FnTON, I Lesley(1995)."The Discoveryof the Greek Bronze Age" British Museum

Press,London, United Kingdom.
FLADMARK, Magnus (1994). "The Wealth of a Nation" The Robert Gordon

University, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
FORSYTH, W. A. (1914). "The Repair of Ancient Buildings" in The Architectural

Journal Vol. 21,3rd Series, p. 109 - 137.
FOTOU, Vassilikis(1997)"H apXcimý tpeuva" (in Greek)in: H KAOHMEPINH,

Sunday20 April 1997,pp 21 - 22.
FYFE, Theodore (1902). "Painted PlasterDecoration at Knossos with Special Reference

to the Architectural Schemes" in: Journal of the Royal Institute of British
Architects, Vol. X, P. 107 - 131, RIBA, London, United Kingdom.
FYFE, Theodore(1903a)."An Italian Tour" in: Architectural Association Notes, No.

197,July 1903,P. 98 - 100,ArchitecturalAssociation, London, United King-
dom.
FYFE, Theodore (1903b). "An Italian Tour continued" in: Architectural Association
Notes, No. 198, Aug 1903, P. 109 - 112, Architectural Association, London,
United Kingdom.
Bibliography 471
PeterKinzie
FYFE, Theodore(1903c). "An Italian Tour concluded" in: Architectural Association

Notes, No. 199, September1903, P. 130 - 131, Architectural Association,
FYFE, Theodore (1911). "The Atelier versusthe Builder's Yard" in: Architectural
Association Journal, Vol. XXVI, No. 289, P. 49 - 55, Architectural
Association, London, United Kingdom.
FYFE, Theodore(1926a)."The Palaceof Knossos:An Exampleof Conservation"in:

Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects, Vol. XXXIII, P. 479 -
480, RIBA, London, United Kingdom.
FYFE,Theodore(1926b)."GlastonburyAbbey Excavations,1926"in: Proceedingsof

the SomersetshireArchaeological and Natural History Society, Vol. 72, p.
20 - 22. United Kingdom.
FYFE, Theodore(1927). "GlastonburyAbbey Excavations,1927"in: Proceedingsof

the SomersetshireArchaeological and Natural History Society, Vol. 73, p.
86 - 87. United Kinadom.
0
FYFE, Theodore (1936). "Hellenistic Architecture. An Introductory Study".
CambridgeUniversity Press,Cambridge,United Kingdom.
C)
FYFE, Theodore (1942). "Architecture in Cambridge. Examples of English archi-

tectural styles from Saxon to Modern Times" Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge United Kingdom.
I
GALANOPOULOS, A. G. And BACON, Edward (1969). "Atlantis. The Truth
behind the Legend" Nelson, London, United Kingdom.
GALLAS, Klaus(1984)."Kreta. Ursprung Europas" (in German).Hirmer, M(Inchen,

Germany.
GALLAS, Klaus (1985). "Kreta. Von den Anrdngen Europas zur kretoveni-
zianischen Kunst" (in German). DuMont, K61n, Germany.
GARDNER, Percy (193 1). " The Palaceof Minos" in Antiquity, Vol. 5, pp. 315 - 321.
GEORGIOU, Hara (1979). 'The Late Minoan I Destruction of Crete: Metal Groups
and Stratigraphic Considerations". Monograph IX, Institute of Archaeology,
University of California, Los Angeles, USA.
GERNER, Manfred (1994). "Fachwerk. Entwicklung, Gefüge, Instandsetzung" (in

German). Deutsche Verlags Anstalt, Stuttgart, Germany.
472 Bibliography
GORYS,Erhard(1989)."Handbuch der Archliologie" (in German).Weltbild Verlag,

Augsburg,Germany.
GLASGOW, G. (1923). "The Minoans", JonathanCape,London, United Kingdom.
GOUVOUSSIS,N. (1994). "Knossos. The Palaceof Minos. Perspectivedrawing. "

Gouvoussis,Athens,Greece
GRAHAM, I Walter (1956). "The PhaistosPianoNobile" in: American Journal of

Archaeology Vol. 60, pp 151- 157.
GRAHAM, J. Walter (1957) " The Central Court as Minoan Bull Ring" in: American
Journal of Archaeology Vol. 61, pp 255 - 262.
GRAHAM, J. Walter (1959) " The ResidentialQuarter of the Minoan Palace" in:
American Journal of Archaeology Vol. 63, pp 47 - 52.
GRAHAM, J. Walter (1960a) "Windows, Recessesand the Piano Nobile in Minoan

Palaces"in: American Journal of Archaeology Vol. 64, pp 329 - 333.
GRAHAM, J Walter(I 960b)'The MinoanUnit of Lengtli

C> andMinoan PalacePlanning"
in: American Journal of Archaeology Vol. 64, pp 335 - 34 1.
GRAHAM, J Walter (1961) "The Minoan Banquet Hall" in: American Journal of
Archaeology Vol. 65, pp 165 - 172.
GRAHAM, J Walter (1979) "Further Notes on Minoan Palace Architecture" in:

American Journal of Archaeology Vol. 83, pp 49 - 69.
GRAHAM, J Walter (1987) "The Palaces of Crete" Princeton University Press,

Princeton,New Jersey,USA.
GRAY, Stuart A. (1985). "Edwardian Architecture. A Biographical Dictionary".

Duckworth & Co, London, United Kingdom.
GRUBEN,Gottfried(1986)"Die Tempel der Griechen" (in German).Hirmer Verlag,

München,Germany.
HALLAGER, Erik (1977). "The Mycenaean Palace at Knossos". Medelhausmuseet

Memoir 1, Stockholm,Sweden.
HAMILTON, David (1978). "The Thames and Hudson Manual of Architectural

Ceramics". ThamesandHudson,London, United Kingdom.
HARDEN, D. B. (1983). "Sir Arthur Evans 1851 - 1941. A Memoir". Ashmolean

Museum,Oxford, United Kingdom.
Bibliography 473
Pcter Kienzle
HARRIS, Richard (1993). "Discovering Timber-Framed Buildings". Shire

Publications, Ltd., Princes Risborough, Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom.
HITCHCOCK, Louise (1994) "Virtual Discourse: Arthur Evans and the

Reconstruction of the Minoan Palace at Knossos". Unpublished paper
presented at the Inaugural Meeting of the European Association of
Archaeologists, Ljubljana, Slovenia 22 - 25 September 1994.
HOPPER, R. J. (1953). "The Laurion Mines" in The Annuals of the British School at
Athens, Vol. XLVIII, pp. 200-254.
HOPPER, R. J. (1968). "The Laurion Mines in Attica" in The Annuals of the British
School at Athens, Vol. LXIII, pp. 293-326.
HOOD, Sinclair(1967) "The Home of the Heroes.The Aegeaii before the Greeks".
ThamesandHudson,London, United Kingdom.
HOOD, Sinclair (1994) "Knossos. Soundings in the Palace Area". In: The Annual of
the British School at Athens, Vol 89, pp 101 - 102.
HOOD, Sinclair and SMYTH, David (198 1) "Archaeological Survey of the Knossos
Area". Supplementary Volume 14, British School of Archaeology in Athens,
HOOD, Sinclair and TAYLOR, Wiliam (1981). "The Bronze Age Palace at Knossos.
Plan and Sections" Supplementary Volume 13, British School at Athens,
HORWITZ, Sylvia L. (1981). "The Find of a Lifetime. Sir Arthur Evans and the
Discovery of Knossos." WeidenfeldandNicolson,Loiidon, United Kingdom.
HOUBEN, Hugo and GUILLAUD, Hubert (1994). "Earth Construction. A

Comprehensive Guide". CRATerre-EAG, Interi-nediate Technology
Publications,London, United Kingdom.
HURST, B. L. (1996). "Structural use of cements in England before 1890" in:

Structures and Buildings. Proceedingsof the Institution of Civil Engineers,
Vol. 116,No 3&4, pp 283 - 294.
IMANDI, Christina (1997). "The Charters of Athens of 1931 and 1933. Coincidence,
controversy and convergence" in Conservation and Management of
Archaeological Sites, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 17 - 28.
JOHNSON,Paul-Allan(1994)."The Theory of Architecture. Concepts,Themes and

Practices". Van NostrandReinhold,New York, USA.
474 Bibliography
JOKILEHTO, Jukka (1986). "A history of Architectural Conservation". Unpublished

PhD Thesis, Institute of Advanced Architectural Studies, University of York,
United Kingdom.
JONES, Bernard E. (1913). "Cassell's Reinforced Concrete", The Waverly Book

Company, London. United Kingdom.
JUDGE, Joseph(1978). "Minoans and Mycenaeans. Greece's brilliant Bronze Age" in:
National Geographic, Vol. 153, No. 2, pp. 142 - 185.
KARETSOU, Alexandra (1997). "ro avar, -ropo PET61 rov Evans"(in Greek) in: H
KAGHMEPINH, Sunday 20 April 1997, pp. IS - 20.
KARO, Georg (1904). "Altkretische Kultstätten" (in German) in: Archiv für
Religionswissenschaft,Vol VII, p. 117-156.
KARO, Georg (1904). "Neue Fund von Knossos" (in German) in: Archiv für
Religionswissenschaft, Vol VIII, p. 1-4-
KARO, Georg (1906). "ArchäologischeFunde und Forschungen"(in German) in:

Archiv für Religionswissenschaft,Vol VIII, p. 511-525.
KARO, Georg (1959). "Greifen am Thron, Erinnerungen an Knossos" (in German).

Bruno Grimm, Baden-Baden, Germany.
KIEN2LE, Peter(1995). "Umm Qais. A Management Plan for the Excavation Site
and the Ottoman Settlementof a Northern Jordanian Village". Unpublished
MA-Dissertation,University of York, York, United Kingdom.
KIENZLE, Peter(1997). "Conservationand Reconstructionat the Palaceof Minos at

Knossos"in: Conservationand Managementof Archaeological Sites, Vol. II,
No. 2, pp. 121- 124.
Tnq KV6006" (in Greek)in: To B11pa,

KIOSSE,Chara(1998)."0 aWAIK6q K6TTOq
5 April 1998,Part 3 p. 11.
KOEHL, RobertB. (1990)."A Letter from Evansto Droop on the 'Problem' of Wace"
in: The ClassicalJournal, October/ November1990,Vol. 86, No. 1, p. 45 - 52.
KONDARATOS,Savas(1994).'The ParthenonasCultural Ideal" in: TOURNIKITOS,

Panayotis(ed.) The Parthenon and its Impact in Modern Times. Melissa
PublishingHouse,Athens,Greece.
KORRES, Manolis (1994a). "The Construction of Ancient Greek Temples" in:

ECONOMAKIS, Richard (ed.) Acropolis Restoration. The CCAM
Interventions. AcademiEditions,London, United Kingdom.
Bibliography 475
Peter Kienzle
KORRES, Manolis (1994b). "The History of the Acropolis Monuments" in:

ECONOMAKIS, Richard (ed.) Acropolis Restoration. The CCAM
Interventions. Academi Editions, London, United Kingdom.
C)
KORRES, Manolis (1994c). "The Restorationof the Parthenon"in: ECONOMAKIS,

Richard (ed.) Acropolis Restoration. The CCAM Interventions. Academi
Editions,London, United Kingdom.
KORRES, Manolis (1994d). "The Parthenon from Antiquity to tile 19th Century". in:
TOURNIKITOS, Panayotis (ed.) The Parthenon and its Impact in Modern
Times. Melissa Publishing House, Athens, Greece.
KOZIELSKI, Antoni and SOSNOWSKI, Stanislaw(1989). "Traditional Earthquake

Protection in the Casbah Citadel in Algiers" in: Proceedings of the 1st
International Seminar on Modern Principles in Conservation and
Restoration of Urban and Rural Cultural Heritage in Seismic Prone
Regions, RZZSK, IMS, ICCROM, Skopje,Yugoslavia.
KUNIHOLM, Peter Ian; KROMER, Bernd; MANNING, Stuart W.; NEWTON,

Maryanne;LATINI, ChristineE.; BRUCE, Mary Jaye.(1996) "Anatolian Tree
ringsandthe absolutechronologyof the easternMediterranean,2220 - 718 BC"
in: Nature, Vol 381,27 June 1996,pp 780 - 783.
KUTTRUFF, Carl (1994). "Fort Loudoun, Tennessee, a mid-18th century British

fortification: a case study in research archaeology, reconstruction, and
interpretive exhibi&'in: GATHERCOLE, P. and LOWENTHAL, D. (eds.) The
Politics of the Past. Routledge, London, United Kingdorn.
LANGENBACH, Randolph (1989). "Bricks, Mortars and Earthquakes. Historic

Preservation vs. Earthquake Safety" in: APT Bulletin. The Journal of
Preservation Technology, Vol XXI, No. 3&4, pp 30 43.
-
LAPOURTAS, Andreas(1997)."Arthur Evansand the Palaceof Minos" in: Museum

Archaeologist, Vol. 22, pp. 71 - 82.
LA ROSA, Vincenzo (1992). "Pliaistos" in: MYERS, MYERS, CADOGAN (eds.) The
Aerial Atlas of Ancient Crete. The University of California Press,Berkeley and
Los Angeles, USA.
LAWRENCE, Arnold Walter (1957). "Greek Architecture" PenguinBooks, Har-

mondsworth,United Kingdom.
LLOYD, Seton and MÜLLER, Hans Wolfgang (1987). "Weltgeschichte der

Architektur. Ägypten und Vorderasien" (in German). DVA, Stuttgart,
Germany.
476 Bibliography
Conservation and Reconstruction at the Palacc of Minos at Knossos
LOGIADOU-PLATONOS, Sosso, (n. d.). "Knossos. The Minoan Civilisation". 1.

Mathioulakis & Co., Athens, Greece.
LOWENTHAL, David (1994). "Conclusion" in: GATHERCOLE, P. and

LOWENTHAL, D. (eds.) The Politics of the Past. Routledge, London, United
Kingdom.
LUCE, J.W. (1969). "The End of Atlantis", Thamesand Hudson, London, United
Kingdom.
MACENROE, John (1995). "Sir Arthur Evans and Edwardian Archaeology" in

Classical Bulletin, Vol. 7 1, p. 3-18.
MACMILLAN, George A. (1905). "Exploration in Crete" in: The Times, 12 April

1905, p 4.
MANNING, Stuart W. (1990). "The Eruption of Thera: Date and Inplications" in:
HARDY, D. A. and RENFREW, A. C., "Thera and the Aegean World. Vol.
III: Chronology", pp. 29-40. The Thera Foundation, London, United Kingdom.
MAISONNEUVE, Patrick de (1989). "Old Buildings in Zones of High Seismic Risk7in:

Proceedings of the Ist International Seminar on Modern Principles in
Conservation and Restoration of Urban and Rural Cultural Heritage in
Seismic Prone Regions, RZZSK, IZIIS, ICCROM, Skopje, Yugoslavia.
MALLOUCHOU-TUFANO, Fani (1994). "The History of Interventiuons at the

Acropolis" in: ECONOMAKIS, Richard (ed.) Acropolis Restoration. The
CCAM Interventions. Academi Editions, London, United Kingdom.
MARINATOS, Spyridon (1935). "Ausgrabungen und Funde auf Kreta 1934 - 1935" (in
German) in: Arch5ologischer Anzeiger, No. 1/2, pp 244 - 259.
MARINATOS, Spyridon (1939) "The Volcanic Destruction of Minoan Crete" in:

Antiquity, Vol. 13, pp 425 - 439.
MARINATOS, Spyridon(1959). "Kreta und das Mykenische Hellas" (in German).

Hirmer, Manchen,Germany.
MARINATOS, Spyridon (1968). "Excavation at Thera. First Preliminary Report.

1967 Season" BIPXIO8E;KE; TE;q ev Mnvaiq ApXaIOXOYIKcq ETaipvaq
ApO. 64, Athens, Greece.
MARINATOS, Spyridon (1969). "Excavation at Thera IL Preliminary Report. 1968

Season" BIPAIOBCKC TE;(; ev AE)nvaiq ApXaIOAOYIKr-q ETaipeiaq ApO. 64,
Athens, Greece.
Bibliography 477
PeterKienzle
MARINATOS, Spyridon (1970). "Excavation at Thera 111.Preliminary Report. 1969

Season" BIDMOOCKC TCq ev Mrjvaiq ApXaI0XOYIKeq ETaipciaq Api(). 64,
Athens, Greece.
MARINATOS, Spyridon(1971)."Excavation at Thera IV. Preliminary Report. 1970

Season7'B@X1O8CKCTV; ev Mnvaiq ApXaIOXOYIKeq ETaipciaq ApiO. 64,
Athens,Greece.
MARINATOS, Spyridon (1972). "Excavation at Thera V. Preliminary Report. 1971

Seasotf'BIDA10OCKE: TCq ev AE)rlvaiq ApXaI0XOYIKeq ETaipeiaq ApiE). 64,
Athens, Greece.
MARTIN, Roland (1986). "Weltgeschichte der Architektur. Griechenland" (in

Gereman).DeutscheVerlagsAnstalt, Stuttgart,Germany.
McADAM, Ellen (1995). "Trying to make it happen"in: COOPER,M., FIRTH, A.,

CARMAN, J. andVvTEATLEY, D. (eds.): Managing Archaeology.Routledge,
MELLERSH, H.E.L. (1970). "The Destruction of Knossos. The Rise and Fall of
Minoan Crete." Barnesand Noble, New York, U.S.A.
MERTENS, Dieter (1984). "Planning and Executing Anastylosis of Stone Buildings" in:
PRICE, Nicholas Stanley (ed.) Conservation on Archaeological Excavations.
ICCROM, Rome, Italy.
MICHAILIDOU, Anna(1995)."Knossos.A completeGuide to the Palaceof Minos".

Ekdotike Athenon,Athens,Greece.
MIDDLETON, RobinandWATKIN, David(1987)."Weltgeschiclite der Architektur.

Klassizismus und Historismus" (in German). Deutsche Verlags Anstalt,
Stuttgart,Germany.
MIRIE, Sieglinde (1979). "Das Thronraumareal des Palastes von Knossos" (in
German) Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde, Band 26, Rudolf Habelt
Verlag, Bonn, Germany.
MURRAY, Peter (1989). "Weltgeschichte der Architektur: Renaissance" (in

German).DVA, Stuttgart,Germany.
MYERS, J. Wilson; MYERS, Eleanor E.; CADOGAN, Gerald (1992). "The Aerial
Atlas of Ancient Crete". University of California Press, Berkeley and Los
Angeles, USA.
MYLONAS, George (1981). "Mycenae. A guide to its Ruins and its History".
Ekdotike Athenon, Athens, Greece.
478 Bibliography
ConservationandReconstructionat the Palaccof Minos at Knossos
NETOLITZKY, Fritz (1934). "Pflanzliche Nahrungsmittel und Hölzer aus dem

prähistorischen Kreta und Kephallonia" (in German) in Buletinul Facultati de
Stinte Din Cernauti, Vol VIII, pp. 172 - 178.
NIEMEIER, Wolf-Dietrich (1994)."Knossosin the New PalacePeriod (MM III - LM

IB)" in: EVELY D., HUGHES-BROCK, H. -andMOMIGLIANO, N. (eds.):
Knossos.A labyrinth of History. Papersin Honour of Sinclair Hood. British
Schoolat Athens,London, United Kingdom.
NORLING, Thomas (1995). "AlffigNische Architekturbilder" (in German).

Archaeologica Heidelbergensia,Vol 2, Verlag Phillip von Zabern, Mainz,
Germany.
O'CONELL, Geoffrey(1990)."Groc's candid Guide to Crete and Mainland Ports".

Ashford Buchan& Enright, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
PAGE, D. L. (1970). "The Santorini Volcano and the Destruction of Minoan

Crete". The Societyfor thePromotionof HellenicStudies,SupplementaryPaper
No. 12.
Greek) in: H
PALEVOU, Claires (1997). "H nopcia TWV CTTICFKCTTT6V"(iii
KAeHMEPINH, Sunday 20 April 1997, pp. 23 - 25.
PALMER, L. R. (1963) "On the Knossos Tablets. The Find Places of the Knossos
Tablets". Clarendon Press, Oxford, United Kingdom.
4D
PALMER, L. R. (1969) "The Penultirnate Palaceat Knossos". Edizioni dell' Ateno,

Rome,Italy.
PAPADOPOULOS, John K. (1997). "Knossos" in: TORRE, Martha de la (ed.) The

Conservation of Archaeological Sites in the Mediterranean Region, The
Getty ConservationInstitute, Los Angeles,USA.
PATERSON,Alexander(1938)."Obituary. Sir JohnBurnet" in Journal of the Royal

Institute of Architects, July 1938,pp 893 - 894.
PENDLEBURY,JohnD.S. (1933). "A Guide to the Stratigraphical Museum in the

Palaceat Knossos".The British Schoolat Athens,London, United Kingdom.
PENDLEBURY, John D.S. (1954). "A Handbook to the Palace of Minos at

Knossos". New edition, London, United Kingdom.
PENDLEBURY, John D. S. (1963). "The Archaeology of Crete. An Introduction".

Reprint. Biblio and Tannen, New York, USA.
Bibliography 479
PeterKienzle
PERNIER, Luigi (1933). "La Conservationdes Palais Minoens en Cr6te" (in French) in:
La Conservation des monuments Wart et d'Histoire. Office International des
Mus6es, Paris, France.
PETERS, Tom F. (1996). "Building the Nineteenth Century". The MIT Press,
Cambridge,Massachusetts, USA.
PETRAKOS, Basil (1993). "National Museum". Clio Editions, Athens, Greece.
PETRIE, WM Flinders (1890). "The Egyptian Basis of Greek History" in journal of

Hellenic Studies, Vol XI, pp 271 - 277.
PETRIIE,WM Flinders(1904). "Methods and Aims in Archaeology". MacMillan&

Co, London, United Kingdom.
PETZET, Michael and MADER, Gert (1993). "Praktische Denkmalpilege" (in

German)KohlhammerVeriag, Stuttgart,Berlin and K61n,Germany.
PEVSNER, Nikolaus (1952). "The Buildings England. London, except the Cities of
London and Westminster". Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, Middlesex,
United Kingdom.
PLATON, Nikolaos (1959). "A Guide to the Archaeological Museum of Heraclion"

Third Revised Edition, Kalokairinou, Herakleion, Crete.
PLATON, Nicolas (1966)."Crete". Nagel Publishers,Geneva,Switzerland.
PLATON, Nikolaos (1983). "The Minoan Palaces:Centres of Organization of a

Theokratic Social and Political System" in: KRZYSZKOWSKA, Olga and
NIXON, L. (eds) Minoan Society: Proceedings of the Cambridge
Colloquiurn 1981.Bristol ClassicalPress,Bristol, United Kingdom.
0
POPHAM, Mervyn R. (1970). "The Destruction of the Palace at Knossos. Pottery of
the Late Minoan 111aPeriod. ". Studiesin Mediterranean Archaeology (SIMA),
G6teborg, Sweden.
POWELL, Dylis (1973).'The Villa Afladne". Hodder and Stoughton,London, United

Kingdom.
POWYS, Albert Reginald (1929). "Repair of Ancient Buildings". Dent, London,

United Kingdom.
PREZIOSI, Donald (1983). "Minoan Architectural Design. Formation and

Signification". Monton Publishers, Berlin, New York, Arnsterdam.
480 Bibliography
PRICE, Nicholas Stanley (1984). "Excavation and Conservation" in: PRICE, Nicholas
Stanley(ed.) Conservation on Archaeological Excavations. ICCROM, Rome,
Italy.
PRICE, Nicholas Stanky (1994). "Conservationand infon-nationin the display of

prehistoric sites7in: GATHERCOLE, P. and LOWENTHAL, D. (eds.) The
Politics of the Past. Routledge,London, United Kingdom.
RADT, Wolfgang (1988). "Pergamon. Geschichte und Bauten, Funde und

Erforschungen einer antiken Metropole" (in German). DuMont, Köln,
Gerrnany.
RAISON, Jaques(1988). "Le Palais du secondMill6naire A Knossos.Le Quartier

Nord" (in French).Itcole Frangaised' AtUnes, Paris,France.
RAISON, Jaques(1993)"Le Palaisdu secondMiNnaire A Knossos. Le Front Ouest

at sesMagasins" (in French).tcole d'
Frangaise Ath6nes,Paris,France.
RATHGEN, Dr. Friedrich (1905). "The Preservation of Antiquities" (translatedby

G.A. Auden and H.A. Auden) CambridgeUniversity Press,Cambridge,United
Kingdom.
REED, Sheila B. (1995). "Introduction to Hazards" Disaster Maliagement Trainin 9

Programme, UNDP.
REHAK, Paul and YOUNGER, John G. (1998). "Review of AegeanPrehistoryVII:

Neopalatial, Final Palatial and PostpalatialCrete" in: American Journal of
Archaeology. Vol. 102.
RENFREW, Colin (1996). "Kings, tree rings and the Old World" in: Nature, Vol 381,
27 June 1996, pp 733 - 734.
REYNOLDS,CharlesE. (1945). "Concrete Construction" SecondEdition, Concrete

PublicationsLimited, London,United Kingdom.
ROBERTS,Neil (1979)."The Location andEnvironmentof Knossos"in: The Annual

of the British School at Athens, Vol. LXXIV, pp 231 - 240.
ROIKOS, ? (1986). "Reconstructionof Arkhanes" in: Archaeological Reports for

1985 - 86, Council of the Society for Promotion of Hellenic Studiesand the
ManagingCommitteeof the British Schoolat Athens 1986,p 125- 126.
RUSKIN, John, (1849). The Seven Lamps of Architecture". Smith, London, United
Kingdom.
Bibliography 481
Peter Kienzle
SAKELLARAKIS, J.A. (1994). "HerakIeion. Das Arch5ologische Museum" (in

German). Ekdotike Athenon, Athens, Greece.
SCHACHERMEYR, Fritz (1964). "Die minoische Kultur des alten Kreta" (in
German).W. Kohlhammer,Stuttgart,Germany.
SCHAFER,Carl (1984). "Deutsche HolzbaukunsV' reprint (in German).Gerstenberg

Reprint,Hildesheim,Germany.
SCHÄFKE, Werner (1983). "Englische Kathedralen. Eine Reise zu den Höhe-

punkten englischer Architektur von 1066 bis heute" (in German). DuMont,
K61n, Germany.
SCHINA, Atheni (1988). "Knossos. The Palace of Minos. The Nlinoan Civilization"
(Translated by Catherine Tasso6li). N. Gouvodssis, Athens, Greece.
SCHMIDT, Hartwig (1985). "Antike Bau- und Bodendenkmalpflege- vom Sinn und den
0
Möglichkeiten ihrer Erhaltung und Gestaltung"(in Gen-nan)in: ULBERT, G and
WEBER, G. Konservierte Geschichte? Antike Bauten und ihre Erhaltung.
Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart, Germany.
SCHMIDT, Hartwig (1988). "Denkmalpilege an ArchNologischen St5tten 1:

SchutzbauteW'(in German). Architekturreferat des Deutschen Archdologischen
Z)
Instituts, Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart, Germany.
:_1
SCHMIDT, Hartwig (1990). "Konservierung, Restaurierung, Rekonstruktion. Denkmal-

pflegerische Konzepte fUr den Umgang mit Ruinen"(in German) in: Sinn und
Unsinn archNologischer Restaurierungen und Rekonstruktionen.
Kolloquiurn im Rahmender Jahrestagung1990,Verband der Landesarchaologen
der Bundesrepublik Deutschland.
SCHMIDT, Hartwig (1993). "Denkmalpflege an Archdologischen Stlitten 2: Wieder-

aufbau" (in German). Architekturreferat des Deutschen Archuologischen
Instituts, Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart, Germany.
SCHMIDT, Hartwig (1997)."Reconstruction

of Ancient Buildings" in: DE LA TORRE,
Martha(ed.) The Conservationof ArchaeologicalSites in the Mediterranean
Region, The Getty ConservationInstitute, Los Angeles,USA.
SCHOEP,Ilse (1994)."'Home sweetHome'. Somecommentson the so-calledHouse

Modelsfrom thePre-HellenicAegearf'in: Opuscula Atheniensia, Vol XX, No.
13,pp. 189-2 10.
SCHWAB, JUrgen(1976). "Das Grofle Buch vom. Holz" (in German). Schuler Verlag,
Herrsching, Germany.
482 Bibliography
SEKHNIASHVILI, E. A. (1988). "From the Experience of Earthquake Engineering in

Georgia and the Organization of the Protection of the Relics of History and
Culture in the USSR" in: Proceedings of the 1st International Seminar on
Modem Principles in Conservation and Restoration of Urban and Rural
Cultural Heritage in Seismic Prone Regions, RZZSK, IZIIS, ICCROM,
Skopje, Yugoslavia.
SHAW, Joseph W. (1973). "Minoan Architecture: Materials and Techniques" in:

Annuario dell Scuola Archeologica di Athene e delle Missione Italiane in
Oriente, VolumeXLIX, NuovaSerieXXXIII (1971), Instituto Poligrafico dello
Stato,Roma,Italy.
SPIERS, R. Phen6(1903a). "The Palaceat Knossos,Crete" in: The Architectural

Review, Vol 13,pp. 196- 200.
SPIERS, R. Phen6(1903b). "The Palaceat Knossos,Crete" in: The Architectural

Review, Vol 14,pp. 91 - 97.
STEVENSON, John James(1881). "Historical Documents" in Transactions of the

RoyaI Institute of British Architects, Session1880- 1881, pp. 175- 192.
STIROS, Stathis C. (1996). "Identification from Earthquakes from Archaeological Data:

Methodology, Criteria and Limitations. " in: STIROS, S. and JONES, R. E.
(eds.): Archaeoseismology, Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper 7, British School
at Athens, London, United Kingdom.
STRATTON, Michael and TRINDER, Barrie (1997). "English Heritage Book of

Industrial England". B. T. Batsford/ English Heritage,London, UK.
ýUMANOV, Lazar (1988). "Conservation,Restoration,Revitalizationand Increasing

the Resistanceof Structural Systemof Konak (temporary Lodgment) in St.
Joakim Osogovski Monastery near Kriva Palanka, Yugoslavia" in in:
C.
)
Proceedings of the 1st International Seminar on Modern Principles in
Conservation and Restoration of Urban and Rural Cultural Heritage in
SeismicProne Regions,RZZSK,IZIIS, ICCROM, Skopje,Yugoslavia,pp. 321
-330.
ýUMANOV, Lazar (1990)."A possibleOutline for both to Increasethe Strengthening
and to Keep the Value of Cultural Property" in Pact, Vol. 28, pp. 185- 194.
ýUMANOV, Lazar (1990). "Conservation, Restoration, Revitalization and Increasing
the Resistanceof Structural System- "Bondruk" - (Timber framing Construction)
of Konak (temporary Lodgment) in St. J. Osogovski Monastry near Kriva
Palanka, Yugoslavia" in Pact, Vol. 28, pp. 195 - 203.
Bibliography 483
Petcr Kienzle
SUTHERLAND, R. J.M. (1996). "Understanding Historical Concrete" in: Structures

Buildings. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Vol. 116,
and
No 3&4, pp 283 - 294.
TAFURI, Manfredo and DAL CO, Francesco (1988). "Weltgeschichte der

Architektur: Klassische Moderne" (in German). Deutsche Verlags Anstalt,
Stuttgart, Germany.
THE CRETAN EXPLORATION FUND (1905). "Report for the Season 1904 5. Mr.
-
Evans' Excavations at Knossos in 1905" Oxford?, United Kingdom
.
THE CRETAN EXPLORATION FUND (1907). "The Palace of Minos and the
Cretan Exploration Fund". Oxford?, United Kingdom
r)
THOMPSON, M. W. (1977). "General Pitt-Rivers. Evolution and Archaeology in

the nineteenth Century". Moonraker Press, Bradford on Avon, United
Kingdom.
THOMPSON, M. W. (1981). "Ruins. Their Preservation and Display". British

MuseumPublications,London,United Kingdom.
TORRE,Marthade la (ed).(1997)."The Conservation of Archaeological Sites in the

Mediterranean Region". An InternationalConferenceorganisedby the Getty
Conservation Institute and the J. Paul Getty Museum,May 1995.The Getty
ConservationInstitute, Los Angeles,U.S.A.
TOURNIKIOTIS, P. (ed). (1994). "The Parthenon and its Impact in Modern

Times", Melissa,Athens,Greece.
TURNER, Eric G. (1974). "Knossos" in: WHEELER, Sir Mortimer (ed.), Swan
Hellenic Cruises, Cruise Handbook, Swan Hellenic Ltd. London, United
Kingdom.
TRIGGER, Bruce G. (1989). "A History of Archaeological Thought". Cambridge

University Press,Cambridge,United Kingdom.
UNITED NATIONS (1995). "Introduction to Hazards. Trainers Guide" Disaster

TrainingProgramme,Departmentof HumanitarianAffairs, United
Management
Nations.
VALLIANOU, Despina(1996). "New Evidenceof EarthquakeDestructionsin Late

MinoanCrete." in: STIROS, S. and JONES,R. E. (eds.): Archaeoseismology,
FitchLaboratoryOccasionalPaper7, British Schoolat Athens,London, United
Kingdom.
484 Bibliography
VANDENABELLE, Frieda (1992). "Malia. The Palace of Malia and Chersonissos".

Ekdotike Athenon, Athens, Greece.
VASSILAKIS, Antonis (no date)."Phaistos". Mathioulakis & co., Athens,Greece.
VAUGHAN, Agnes Carr (1959). "The House of the Double Axe. The Palace at
Knossos". Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London, United Kingdorn.
VENECANIN, Srdjan (1990). "Thermal Incompatibility of Concrete Components and

Thermal Propertiesof CarbonateRocks" in: ACI Materials Journal, American
Concrete Institute, November - December 1990, p. 602 - 607.
WACE, Alan J.B. (1964)."Mycenae. An Archaeological History and Guide." Biblio

and Tannen, New York, United States.
WACE, Alan I B. (1979)."Excavationsat Mycenae1939- 1955". Edited by Elizabeth

French.Reprintedfrom the Annualsof The British Schoolat Athens,Volumes
45 - 56. The British School at Athens, SupplementaryVolurne 12, London,
United Kingdom.
WARREN, Peter (1985). "The Aegean Civilisations. From Ancient Crete to

Mycenae". Phaidon,Oxford, United Kingdorn.
WARREN, Peter and HANKEY, Vronwy (1989). " Aegean Bronze Age Chronology".
Bristol Classical Press, Bristol, United Kingdom.
WARREN, Peter (1990). "Summaryof Evidencefor tile Absolute Chronology of the

Early Partof theAegeanBronzeAge Derivedfi-ornHistorical Egyptian Sources"
IAegean Wqrld.
in: HARDY, D. A. and RENFREW, A. C., "Thera and the
Vol. III: Chronology", pp. 26 - 29. The Thera Foundation,London, United
Kingdom.
WARREN, Peter (1991). "The Destruction of the Palace of Knossos" in: The
Civilizations of the Aegean and their Diffusion in Cyprus and the Eastern
Mediterranean, 2000 - 600 B. C.. Proceedings of an International
Symposium. PieridesFoundationLarnaca,Larnaca,Cyprus.
WARREN, Peter(1992). "KnossosRevisited" in: The Classical Review. New Series,

Vol XLII, No. 1, pp. 137- 139.
WATERHOUSE,Helen (1986)."The British School at Athens. The First Hundred

Years" The British Schoolat AthensSupplementaryVolume No. 19, Thames
and Hudson,London, United Kingdom.
WEISS,Giinter (1994)."Peloponnes.Zu den Urspriingen der europNischenKultur

im. Sfiden Griechenlands" (in German).DuMont, K61n,Germany.
Bibliography 485
Peter Kienzle
WHINNEY, Margaret (197 1). "Wren". Thamesand Hudson, London, United Kingdom.
WOLTERS, P. (1910). "Ausgrabungen in Knossos" (in German) in: PrIihistorische

Zeitschrift. Vol. II, pp. 417 - 419.
WOOD, Michael (1985). "In Search of the Trojan War". British Broadcasting
Company,London, United Kingdom.
WUNDERLICH, Hans G. (1975). "The Secret of Crete", Souvenir Press.London,

United Kingdom.
YEOMANS, David (1997)."Construction since1900:Materials". B.T. Batsford Ltd.,

ZENTNER, Christian (1980). "Geschichtsführer" (in German).DeutscheBuch Ge-

meinschaft,Berlin, Gen-nany.
ZEZZA, Fulvio (1994)."Minoan Palaceof Knossos:weatheringof gypsumstones"in;

FASSINA, Vasco; OTT, Heinrich and ZEZZA, Fulvio: The Conservation of
Monuments in the Mediterranean Basin. Proceedingsof tile third international
Cý
Symposium,Venezia,22-25June1994,Soprintendenza ai Beni Artistici e Storici
di Venezia,Venice,Italy.
Articles in Newspapers
The Times, Monday, 5 November 1900,p. 9.

The Times, 14 June 1901, p5 and p. 9.
The Times, Friday, 12 April 1905,p. 4.
The Times, Thursday,31 October 1905,p. 4.
The Times, Monday, 15 July 1907,p. 8.
The Times, Thursday,27 August 1908,p. 6.
The Times, Friday, 16 September1910,p. 4.
The Times, Friday, 14 July 1922,p. 11.
The Times, Tuesday,28 August 1923,p. 9 f.
The Times, Wednesday,29 August 1923,p. IIf.
The Times, Thursday, 16 October 1924,p. 15 f.
The Times, Friday, 17 October 1924,p. 15 L
The Times, Friday, 9 October 1925,p. 15f.
The Times, Monday, 20 September1926,p. 15 L
The Times, Monday, 5 August 1929,p. IIL
The Times, Monday, 13July, 1931, p. 13 L
486 Bibliography
Appendices
Sir Arthur John Evans (1851 - 1941)
8.7.1851 Birth of Arthur John Evans, eldest son to the archaeologist and
numismatistJohnEvansandHarriet Evans(n6eDickinson).
1865- 1870 Harrow School.
1870- 1874 He graduatesin Oxford, BrasenoseCollege.

I
Spring 1875 Term at University G6ttingen.
1875 Travelswith brotherLewis in the Balkans.
1877 Balkan correspondentfor the Manchestei-Guai-dian.
1878 Married Margaret Freeman, daughter of the historian E.A. Freeman.
1878-1881 Travel, archaeological researchand politics in the Balkans.
7.3.1882 Imprisonedin Ragusaand later expelledfrom the Balkan.
17.6.1884 EvansbecomesKeeperof the AshmoleanMuseumin Oxford.
1884- 1894 Researchin Iron Age and RomanBritain.
1893 Evansbuys land at BoarsHill to build his House
11.3.1893 His wife Margaretdies
1894 AshmoleanMuseummovesto BeaumontStreetand Evansmovesto his

new House Youlbury at BoarsHill.
First travel to Crete.Evansbuys a quarterof the Land at Knossos
23.3.1900 Evansstartswith the excavationat Knossos.
1900 - 1905 First Main excavation campaign at Knossos
1906 Villa Ariadne built at Knossos.
CV of Sir Arthur Evans 489

Peter Kienzle
1908 D. G. Hogarth succeedsEvans as Keeper of the Ashmolean Museum in

Oxford.
31.5.1908 Sir JohnEvansdies.
28.10.1908 Thomas Gordon Dickinson dies.
1911 Awarded Knighthood in King George V's coronation ceremony.
1913 Last excavation term at Knossos before World War 1.
1914-1919 President of the Society of Antiquaries, London.
1921 Publication of the first volume of 77zePalace of Minos
1922 Returns to Knossos for further excavation and reconstruction work.
1924 Site of Knossosand Villa Adriadneare handedto the British School at

Athens.
1926 Earthquakeat Knossos.
1928 Evans 'The Taverna' restored as house for the Curator at Knossos.
Publication of the second volume of The Palace of Minos.
1930 Publication of the third volume of The Palace of Minos.
1931 Excavationof TempleTomb
1935 Last visit to Knossos.

Publicationof the fourth volumeof ThePalaceqf Minos
1938 RearrangedMinoan exhibition in the AshmoleanMuseum.
11.7.1941 Sir Arthur Evansdies in Oxford
490 Appendix I
Publications:
(1884). "The Ashmolean Museum as a Home for Archaeology in Oxford. An

--
inaugural lecture". Parker& Co., Oxford, United Kingdom.
(1900). "Knossos.Summary Report of the Excavations in 1900" in Annual of the

--
British Schoolat Athens, Vol VI, p. I- 70, British Schoolat Athens,London, United
Kingdom.
-- (1901). 'The Palaceof Knossos. ProvisionalReport of the Excavationsfor the Year

1901" in Annual of the British School at Athens, Vol V11, p. I- 120,British School
at Athens,London, United Kingdom.
(1902a).'The Palaceof Knossos.ProvisionalReport of the Excavationsfor the Year

--
1902"in Annual of the British Schoolat Athens, Vol VIII, p. I- 124,British School
(1902b)."A Bird-eyes view of the Minoan Palace of Knossos,Crete" in: Journal of

--
the Royal Institute of British Architects, Vol. X, P. 97 - 106,RIBA, London, United
Kingdom.
(1903).'The Palaceof Knossos.Provisional Reportof the Excavationsfor the Year

--
1903"in Annual of the British School at Athens, Vol IX, p. I- 153,British School
(1904)."The Palaceof Knossos. The Campaign of 1904" in Annual of the British

--
Schoolat Athens, Vol X, p. I- 44, BritishSchoolat Athens,London, United Kingdom.
(1905).'The Palace of Knossos andits Dependencies.ProvisionalReport for the Year

-
1905"in Annual of the British School at Athens, Vol X1, p. I- 26, British School at
Athens,London, United Kingdom.
(1906). "Essai de Classification des tpoques de la Civilisation Minoenne".

--
(1911). "Restored Shrine on the central Court of the Palace of Knossos" in: journal
--
of the Royal Institute of British Architects, Vol. XIX, P. 289 - 295, RIBA, London,
United Kingdom.
(1921). 'The Palace of Minos at Knossos. Volume I". MacMillan, London, United
--
Kingdom. (PM 1).
-- (1922). "New Discoveries at Knossos" in: The Antiquaries Journal, Vol. II, pp 319
-329.
CV of Sir Arthur Evans 491

Peter Kienzie
(1927). "Work of Reconstitution in the Palace of Knossos" in: The Antiquaries

--
Journal, Vol. VII, pp 258 - 267.
-- (1928). "The Palace of Knossos and its Dependenciesin the light of Recent
Discoveries and Reconstitutions" in: Journal of the Royal Institute of British
Architects, Vol. XXXVI, No. 3, P. 90 - 102,RIBA, London, United Kingdom.
- (1928a).'The Palaceof Minos at Knossos.

Volume 11".MacMillan, London, United
Kingdorn.(PM II).
-- (1929). "Knossos" in Annual of the British School at Athens, Vol XXX, p. 268 -
270, British Schoolat Athens,London,United Kingdom.
-- (1930)."Sir Arthur Evans'Excavationat Knossos"in Annual of the British School

at Athens,Vol XXX, p. 289- 290,British Schoolat Athens,London, United Kingdom.
-- (1930a). "The Palace of Minos at Knossos. Volume 111".MacMillan, London,

United Kingdom. (PM III).
-- (1931)."Knossos"in Annual of the British School at Athens, Vol XXXI, p. 191 -

192,British Schoolat Athens,London, United Kingdom.
-- (1935). "The Palace of Minos at Knossos. Volume IV". MacMillan, London,

United Kingdom. (PM IV).
Sources:
BROWN, Ann (1993)."Before Knossos Arthur Evans's travels in the Balkans and
...
Crete" AshmoleanMuseum,Oxford, United Kingdom.
BROWN,Ann (1994)."Arthur Evansand the Palaceof Minos" AshmoleanMuseum,

Oxford, United Kingdom.
EVANS, Joan (1943). "Time and Chance: the story of Arthur Evans and his
Forebears". Longmans,Greenand Co., London,United Kingdom.
EVANS, Joan(1950)."Sir Arthur EvansandKnossos"in: Archaeology, Vol. 3, pp. 134

-139.
HARDEN, D. B. (1983). "Sir Arthur Evans 1851 1941. A Memoir". Ashmolean

-
Museum,Oxford, United Kingdom.
HORWITZ, Sylvia L. (1981). "The Find of a Lifetime. Sir Arthur Evans and the
Discovery of Knossos.- WeidenfeldandNicolson,London,United Kingdom.
492 Appendix I
Theodore Fyfe (1875 - 1945)
3.11.1875 DavidTheodoreFyfe was born assecondson of JamesSloaneFyfe and

JaneCharlotteAbercrombieFyfe in Yloilo, Philippine Islands.
School at Albany Academy, Glasgow
1890- 1896 articled to JohnBurnet, Glasgow
8 Oct. 1897 Nominatedmemberto the ArchitecturalAssociation
27 Oct. 1897 Electedmemberto the Architecturalassociation.
1898-1899 ArchitecturalAssociationTravelling Student
1899-1900 ArchitecturalStudentshipof the British Schoolat Athens
1900 Fyfe is called in to Knossosby A. Evansto do tile recordingwork.
1901 Fyfe introduces a wooden scaffolding to support the walls, while

excavating the Hall of the Double Axes. He designsa woodenscaffolding
I
to tunnel underthe third flight of the GrandStaircase,keepingthe third
flight in position. Fyfe designsthe first permanentroof for the Throne
Room to protect the gypsumfloors.
1902 The scaffoldingin the Hall of the Double Axes is replacedby wood and
rubblepillars, coveredwith stucco.Work in the Queen'sMegaron.
1903 He becomesmember of the Society for the Promotion of Hellenic

Studies.He restoresthe Theatral areaand erectsthe observationtower.
Upper level in the DomesticQuarter?
1904 Fyfe adds a pitched roof on top of the existing flat roof at the Throne
Room.At theendof the 1904campaignTheodoreFyferetiresfrom work
in Knossos.
1905 - 1912 Co-editor of the AA-Sketchbook
1905-1915 Fyfe practisesin London and assistsSir JohnBurnet
CV Iheodore Fyfe 493

Peter Kienzle
1907 Electedfellow of the R.I.B.A.
1908 Fyfe works again for Evans
1911 He marriesMary Nina Brown

He movesto 2, MontaguePlace,RussellSquare,WC
25.6.1912 He was electedfor the Council of the Societyfor the Promotion

of Hellenic Studiesat the Annual Meeting with Sir Arthur Evans
in the Chair.
1915 Retiresfrom work with Burnet dueto ill health
1915-16 He moves to 34 King Street, Chester.
1916 Works as architectfor the Ministry of Health at Queensferry
1917 He movesto Llysfasi Manor, Pentre-Celyn,nr. Ruthin, North Wales.
1920 Architect to the Deanand Chapterof ChesterCathedral
1921 Lecturesin GreekandRomanArchitecturefor the Professorof Classical

Archaeologyin Oxford.
BecomesmemberandCommitteememberof S.P.A.B.
1922 - 1936 Director of the Cambridge School of Architecture
1926 He revisitedKnossos.Supervisesthe reconstructionof the Royal Villa.
1926& 1927Director of the excavationsat GlastonburyAbbey
1926- 1941 Fyfe is university lecturerat CambridgeSchoolof Architecture
1941 TheodoreFyfe retires
1.1.1945 Fyfe dies after an ice skatingaccident.
494 Appendix I
Conservation at tilePalaceof Minosat Knossos
andReconstruction
Publications:
1901."Some Architecture in Crete and Turkey". Paperreadto the Architectural

--
Association,8 February 1901.
1902. "Painted Plaster Decoration at Knossos with Special Referenceto the

--
Schemes"in: journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects, Vol.
Arclýtitectural
X, P. 107- 131, RIBA, London, United Kingdom.
1902b.Severaldrawingsin the AA-Sketchbook.
1903a."An Italian Tour" in: Architectural Association Notes, No. 197,July 1903,
P. 98 - 100,ArchitecturalAssociation, London, United Kingdom.
1903b."An Italian Tour continued" in: Architectural Association Notes, No. 198,
--
Aug 1903,P. 109- 112,ArchitecturalAssociation, London, United Kingdom.
1903c."An Italian Tour concluded"in: Architectural Association Notes, No. 199,

--
September1903,P. 130- 131, ArchitecturalAssociation, London, United Kingdom.
1904A drawing in the AA-Sketchbook
1911.'The Atelier versustheBuilder'sYard" in: Architectural Association Journal,

Vol. XXVI, No. 289,P. 49 - 55, ArchitecturalAssociation, London, United Kingdom.
1923."Deeside Regional Planning Scheme.Chester and Flintlisire". The report

--
prepared for the Committee of Local Authoritiesby P. Sydney
Abercombie, Kelly and
TheodoreFyfe. London, United Kingdom.
1926a. "The Palace of Knossos:An Example of Conservation" in: Journal of the

--
Royal Institute of British Architects, Vol. XXXIII, P. 479 - 480, RIBA, London,
United Kingdom.
1926b. "Glastonbury Abbey Excavations, 1926" in: Proceedings of the

--
Somersetshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, Vol. 72, p. 20 - 22.
United Kingdom.
1927.
"GlastonburyAbbey Excavations,1927" in: Proceedingsof the Somersetshire
--
Archaeological and Natural History Society, Vol. 73, p. 86 - 87. United Kingdom.
1936."Hellenistic Architecture. An Introductory Study". CambridgeUniversity

--
Press,Cambridge,United Kingdom.
1942. "Architecture in Cambridge. Examples of English Architectural Styles

--
from Saxon to Modern Times" CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge United
Kingdom.
CV TheodoreFyfe 495
Peter Kienzle
Sources:
The Architects Journal, 18 January 1934, p. 124.
TheBuilder, 19January,1945,p. 59.
RIB. A. Journal, February 1945.
The Times,5 January,1945
Who's Who in Architecture 1914,p. 85.
Who's Who in Architecture 1923, p. 97.
Who's Who, 1930,P. 1121.
496 Appendix I
Christian Doll (1880 - 1955)
1880 Born asoldest sonto CharlesFitzroy Doll, architectand

surveyorto the Bedford Estate,London.
1898 Helpedhis fatherto designHotel Russell,RussellSquare.
1904 He is admitted as student to the British School at Athens for

the year 1904 - 1905.
1905 Doll employedasexcavationarchitectuntil 1910.

Reconstitutionof the GrandStaircase.
1906- 1907 Doll builds the "Villa Adriadne".
1908 Work in the DomesticQuarter.
1910 Work in the DomesticQuarterand reconstructionof the 4th and the

5th flight of t the GrandStaircase.First useof concrete.
Doll joins the office of his fatherCharlesFitzroy Dol I as a Partner.
1913 Memberof the Societyfor the Promotionof Hellenic Studies.
1918 Plan of North Pillar Hall at Knossos.
1930 Begin of political careerin London.
1950 Mayor of Holborn.
1951- 1953 Deputy Mayor of Holborn.
5.4.1955 He dies in London.
CV ChristianDoll 497
PeterKienzle
Publications:
Sources:
GRAY, Stuart A. (1985). "Edwardian Architecture. A Biographical Dictionary".

Duckworth & Co, London, United Kingdom.
The Builder, 6 May 1955,p. 76 1.
Journal of Hellenic Studies, Volume XXXIII, 1913.
Holborn Council Minutes, 27 April 1955.
The Holborn andFinsburyGuardian,15 Aril 1955.
Who's Who in Architecture, 1923,p. 78.
498 AppendixI
Piet de Jong (1887 - 1967)
8.8.1887 Born in Leeds. He grew up in Leeds and was educated as

architectat the LeedsSchoolof Arts.
1911/12 Competedfor the SoaneMedallion. The prize committeecould

not decideon onewinnerandde Jongandhis competitorWilliam
Friskinwereboth awardeda Certificateof HonourableMention.
1912 AdmittedasArchitecturalStudentto the British School at Rome

for Season 1911/12. Records buildings in Rome, Florence,
Perugia and Siena.Someof his drawingswere publishedin the
AA Sketchbook1912and 1913.
1913- 1916 Practisingarchitectin Leeds,employedwith Chorley,Gibbon and

Foggit. He never becamea registered architect or fellow of
0
R.I. B. A. He produceda watercolour of The Church of Christ
Scientistin Leeds.
1916- 1918? Soldier in World War I.
ca. 1919 Takes part in a post-war-reconstructionproject in Macedonia

which wasorganisedby Austin Harrison.
1921 Participatesat Allan Wace's excavation at Mycenae. Piet de

Jong's presenceis not stated separately,the excavationlasted
from 22 May to 27 July. He getsmarriedto Effie from Scotland
who teachesEnglish in Greece.
1922 Reconstructionof lower flight of SteppedPortico south of the

Throne Room and first eight stepsof upper flight. Piet de Jong
stays in Knossos until 12 June when he leaves for Mycenae,
where he is employed as architectand draughtsman.
1923 Drawsplansin Athensfrom Februaryuntil 12 May when he went

to Knossos. Reconstructedthe upper section of the Stepped
Porticowith reinforcedconcrete.Excursionto "Fair Haven" with
EvansandMackenzie.Begins to work at Nauplia on 23 August.
CV Piet de Jong 499

PeterKienzIe
1924 Reconstructionof the Caravanseraiand the Viaduct.

Repairof the Director's Houseat the British Schoolat Athens.
1924-1932 School architect for the British School at Athens.
1925 Reconstruction work of the West Wing, the South-North

Corridor and the Pillared Portico.
1926 De Jong and Evans witness the earthquake at Knossos.
1927 No work at Knossos
1928 Reconstructionof the Loggia of the Grand Staircase and roofing

the Hall of the Double Axes with a flat concrete roof. This was
regarded as to expensive until then.
1929 Baseof the North EntrancePortico,The North Lustral Basin.
1930 CompletionNorth EntrancePortico,re-roofingthe Throne Room

Areal
1931 He restoresthe Little Palaceat Knossos.
WW II Piet de Jong spends WW II in Britain. He is registered at

'Vinfrey's', Snetterton, Norwich.
1947-1952 Curator for the British Schoolat Knossos.
1952 Beginsto work for Carl Blegen at the Palaceof Nestor at Pylos.
He works therefor nine seasons.
1965 De Jong works on the island of Keos where he produced

numerouswatercolourreconstructiondrawingsof pottery. His
wife Effie dies.
1966 Copying Minoan Frescoesfor the British Schoolat Knossos
20.4.1967 Piet de Jongdies.
1970 The StratigraphicalMuseumis build at Knossosfundedby the

bequestfrom Piet de Jong.
500 AppendixI
Publications:
AA SantaCroce,Florence(togetherwith Foggit).
Sketchbook1912,plans58 - 61
AA Sketchbook1912,plans62 - 63
SanMaria del Popolo,Rome.
AA Sketchbook1912,plan 64 SanMaria del Araceli, Rome.
AA Tempiettodi SanPietro in Montorio, Rome.
Sketchbook1912,plans65 - 66
(togetherwith Foggit)
AA Sketchbook1913,plans56 - 58 MediceoLaurentianLibrary, Florence
Sources:
The Builder, 26 January 1912, p. 85 f. and 2 February 1912, p. 123 f.
Wace, Annual of BSA No. XXV. Session1921-22;1922-23,p. 3.
GreenBook of the West Yorkshire Societyof Architects, 1941,p. 14 f.
Obituary by Sinclair Hood, The Times, 27 April 1967,p. 12.
BLEGEN, CarlW. andRAWSON, Marion (1973)."The Palaceof Nestor at Pylos in

Western Messenia.Vol. III". PrincetonUniversity Press,Princeton,USA.
COLEMAN, John E. (1977). "Keos. Results of excavations conducted by the

University of Cincinnati under the auspices of the American School of
Classical Studies at Athens. Volume I", American School of Classical Studies,
Princeton,New Jersey,United States.
WATERHOUSE,Helen (1986)."The British School at Athens. The First Hundred

Years" The British Schoolat AthensSupplementaryVolume No. 19, Thames
and Hudson,London, United Kingdom.
CV Piet de Jong 501

Peter Kienzle
502 Appendix I
Chronology of the Excavation Site at Knossos
Excavation Conservation and Reconstruction
1878 Throne Room"

RoOM2
1900 Ante Room, Throne
Magazines
1901 CompletingWest MagazineS3 Flat roof Throne Room

North Easternpart of Palace4 Supportwork for Staircase'
Grand Staircase,SchoolRoom WoodenscaffoldingHallof DoubleAxes
Court of the StoneSpout WoodensupportEast-WestCorridor
Hall of DoubleAxes SupportStoneBench
1902 Restof ResidentialQuarter6 FirstRestorationHall of theDoubleAxes

Royal Pottery stores
EastBastion South EastHouse
1903 South EastHousecompleted7 Restorationand retainingwall

Monolithic Pillar Basementcleared Theatralarea
Observationtower
New gypsumslabsin Long Corridor.
1904 Below West Court, Cists below Pitchedroof ThroneR. andservicewing

SteppedPorch
1905 Under pavementWest Court Grand Staircase8

Royal Road'
Little Palace
1906 No work Villa Ariadnelo
1907 South Corridor, South Porch" Villa Ariadnecompleted"

Early Hypogaeurn"
Koulouras I"
*Excavatedby Minos Kalokairinos
Chronologyof the ExcavationSiteat Knossos 503

Peter Kienzle
15
1908 South West House South House" Queen's Megaron incl. light well
,
West Court, Little Palace18 DQ first floor corridors"
Supplementary excavation Window Court of Distaffs'O
in the DQ21 Room with the Stone Bench"
1909 No work
1910 Stratigraphictests Grand Staircase fourth flight2l

Little Palace"' Replacingparts of Fyfe's work in DQ25
Roofing in the Little Palace21
1911 No work
1912 No work
1913 Under stepsin Theatralarea

Underpaving slabsin Hall of the
doubleAxes, QueensMegaron
and Dog-Leg-Corriclor
1914 No work
1915 No work
1916 No work
1917 No work
1918 No work
1919 No work
1920 No work
1921 Mackenziereturnsto Knossos Clearance of the site
1922 Additional SouthPorchand Stairs 12 Stepsof the first flight and 8 steps
PortiC027
SteppedPortico of secondflight of Stepped
1923 Upper part of the SteppedPortico

28
1926 RoyalVilla by Fyfe
FreSC029
1928 Blocking wall in LoggiaGrandStaircase,begin
EastCorridor removed Hall of Double AxeS30
504 Appendix 2
1929 Re-excavation of North Portico Roofing five of the West Magazines"

Prove of Water runnel North Lustral Basin 32
33
East Bastion East Bastion 34
South Portico (Verandah)35 Completion of the Shield Fresco Loggia
Grand Staircase"
PorticoNorthernEntrance(lowerpart)37
1930 Enceintewall West CoUrt38 Northern Entrance"

40
Koulouras2 and 3 Throne Room
1931 Temple Tomb"' Temple Tomb 42

High Priest House43 Little Palace"
Opposite Caravanserai45
Sources:
1. See:MaQ8aaAn0CYKIT0U(1979). Mivoq KaXOKaiQivoq' in: KL)9,ro I oy%a 8, pp

81-94.
2. Evans,1900,p. 8 ff.
3. Evans,1901, p. 2 ff.
4. Evans,1901,p. 54 ff.
5. Evans,1901, p. 102ff.
6. Evans,1902a.
7. Evans,1903,p. I ff.
8. Times,31 October 1905,P. 4.
9. Times,31 October 1905,p. 4.
10. See:Lettersby ChristianDoll to Sir Arthur Evans
11. Times, 15July 1907,p. 8.
12. See:Lettersby ChristianDoll to Sir Arthur Evans
13. Times, 15July 1907,p. 8.
14. Times, 15July 1907,p. 8.
15. Times,27 August 1908,p. 6.
20. Journalof R.I.B.A, 29 August 1908.P. 586
21. Times, 27 August 1908,p. 6.
22. Journalof R.I.B.A, 29 August 1908.P. 586
23. Times, 16Sept. 1910,p. 4.
24. Times, 16 Sept. 1910,p. 4.
Chronologyof the ExcavationSiteat Knossos 505

PeterKienzle
25. Times, 16 Sept. 1910, p. 4.

26. Times, 16 Sept. 1910, p. 4.
27. Times, 14 July 1922, p. 11.
28. PM 11,p. 403.
29. RIBA, 1928, p. 97.
30. RIBA, 1928, p. 97.
31. Times, 5 August 1929, p. 11.
C,
32. Times, 5 August 1929, p. 11.
33. Times, 5 August 1929, p. 12.
34. Times, 5 August 1929, p. 12.
35. Times, 5 August 1929, p. 12.
36. Times, 5 August 1929, p. 12.
37. BSA No XXX, p. 268
38. PM IV, p. 48 ff.
39. PM IV, P. I ff.
40. PM IV, p. 63 ff.
41. Times, 13 July 1931, p. 13 - 14
42. Times, 13 July 1931, p. 13 - 14
43. PM IV, p. 202
44. PM IV, p. 215
45. PM IV, p. 204
506 Appendix 2
History of Knossos,
Knossos is the longest-inhabitedplacein Crete, havingbeensettledearly in Neolithic

times, probably before 7000 B.C. It is famousin classicalmythology as the home of
Minos andin archaeology
asthe siteof theprincipalBronzeAge palaceof Crete.During
the New PalacePeriodit must havebeenthe capital of the island.
Evansstartedlarge-scaleexcavationof the Minoan Palacein 1900,calling the building

the palace in the title of his first annualreport. He used the periods he observedin
stratigraphyin (andaround)the palaceasthe basisof his chronologicalschemefor the
CretanBronzeAge, whichhe namedMinoan, after KingZIPMinos. Excavationand surface
explorationstill continueat Knossos,andthe site is far from fully exposed.Many parts
of its long history still needclarifying. The principal lack is probably a detailed and
systematicknowledgeof theMinoantown aroundthe palace.Reconstructionsthat show
the palacesetamid fields aremisleading.
The first settlerschosethe low freestandinghill in the Kairatos river valley known as
Kephala.Nearthe northcoastof Creteandin the Centreof the island,this hill hasa good
situationasmaybeconceivedfor communicatingby land with the rest of the island, yet
it is sufficiently far from the sea so that people could preparefor, or escapefrom,
enemiesattackingfrom that direction.Its key position is reflectedtoday in Herakleion's
economicdominanceof the island.The Neolithic settlementis principally known from
soundingsaround Kephala hill, from which the sequencehas been divided into ten
principal strata (X-I). The first settlement(StratumX, and possiblyearlier) covereda
small area (about 0.25 ha) of what was to be the site of the palace.The (Aceran-ic
Neolithic)settlersdid not usepottery but did build with mud brick and had a developed
' Cadoganin: Myers, Myers, Cadogan,1992, pp. 124 133.

-
The History of Knossos 507

Peter Kienzle
economy with mixed farming. They grew wheat, barley, and lentils and raised sheep and
goats, pigs, and some cattle.
During the long Early Neolithic I phase(Strata IX - V) the settlementseemsto have

grown to cover almost all of the palacesite (about 2 ha). During Early Neolithic I the
construction of the rectangularbuildings changed from mud brick to pis6, or packed
mud, laid on a stone foundation;but the principal innovation was in the introduction of
fired pottery at the beginningof the phase.Early Neolithic II (StratumIV) was also a
long phase,by the end of which the settlementhad grown to about3 ha. Near the end
of the phase,clay spinningandweavingequipment appearedfor the first time at Knossos,
the greatimportancethat the Linear B tabletsshow its wool industry had
foreshadowing
some three thousandyears later. Middle Neolithic (Stratum III), with considerable
evidenceof technologicalquickening,was followed by Late Neolithic (Strata11- 1),by
which time the settlement
may havecovered5 ha or more. From a Late Neolithic level
comes the earliest metal object from Crete, a copper axe; houses had fixed hearths for
the first time; and some of the latest (Final Neolithic) pottery shows close similarities
with that of Phaistos. Final Neolithic has also been found at Gortyn.
The transition from Neolithic to Early Minoan at Knossos, probably around the middle
of the 4th millennium B. C., is not yet understood. The principal evidence of Early
Minoan I is a deep well in the northeastern part of the palace filled with badly burned
pottery of the phase. Wether the destruction resulted from a small or widespread event
is unknown.
The Early Minoan II settlementseemsto havebeenlarge andprosperous,spreadingto

both sidesof the later Royal Road aswell asthe southfront of the palace,wherethere
arealsoEM III remains.Findsincludeimportedstonevasesfrom the CycladesandEgypt
andEarly Helladic II potteryfrom Mainland Greece.The bestEarly Minoan 11remains
belongto a partlyexcavatedandnow backfilledbuilding below the westcourt, the Early
MinoanIIA WestCourt House,which was destroyedby fire. It may havebeena ruler's
residenceor a centre of the communityof someother type: the quality of its pottery
suggestsa specialimportance.
508 Appendix 3
Early Minoan III seemsto have beena short phaseat Knossosleadinginto Middle
MinoanIA. A largebuildingof whichwallssurviveat the northwestcornerof the palace
may be a predecessorof the Old Palace,a "proto-palace." If so, it would representan
inten-nediate
stagebetweentheWest Court Houseand the Old Palace.The thick-walled
Keepat the northendof the CentralCourt may be relatedto it. Also contemporarymay
be the Hypogaeum,an undergroundcisternor granarybelow the South Porch.
The settlementgrew greatly in Middle Minoan IA, the lastphasebeforethe Old Palace,
both northeasttowardMakryteichosvillageand 500 m west-northwestup the Acropolis
hill. The viaduct and roadwaycrossingthe Vlychia streamsouth of the Palaceand the
SteppedPortico leadingup the Kephalahill may be of Middle Minoan IA date.
How the Old Palacecameinto beingin Middle Minoan IB (Evans'sdate)is unclear;and

the detailsof its phasing- andbuilding history - are underscrutiny.Little is preservedof
Zý
the buildina beneaththeNew Palace.Its plan is likely to havebeensimilar to that one of
0
the New Palace,with the structuressurroundingan openspace,the Central Court. (The
Throne Room openingonto the CentralCourt datesback to the Old Palace.) Whether
the Old Palacegrew frorn a collectionof blocks, or insulae,ashasoften beensuggested,
is difficult to establish.More certainis that it had (at least)two major building phases,
in the laterof whichtheWestCourt was laid out on a terraceoutsidethe palaceand the
roundpits knownasthe kouloureswereconstructedin it (which were probablygraqaries
or possiblyplacesfor sacredofferings- comparesimilar pits at Phaistosand the set of
eight circular structuresat Mallia). The pits were build over housesof the end of the
prepalatal period.
The WestCourt musthavebeenusedasa placeof public assemblyandthus was linked

betweenpalaceandtown. Roadsfrom the town leadin the direction of the palace.Inside
the buHding,thereis evidenceon the west sideof administration(Hieroglyphic tablets),
storage(earlystorerooms),and,probably,cult practice;the Vat Room depositseemsto
consistof ritual offerings.(Thiscombinationof functionsis particularly noticeableon the
westsidein New Palacetimes.) Otherstoreroomswereon the eastside, where the giant
pithoi and the so-calledRoyal PotteryStoreswere located.

Peter Kienzle
The Loom Weight basement on the east side had over four hundred loom weights 0 as
substantial evidence for weaving. That almost all the Middle Minoan pottery that went
Aegean islands, Greece and the Levant came from Knossos
abroad - to the mainland -
Phaistos workshops suggests that one or both palaces were the leaders in trade and
or
foreign relations.
It is difficult to know whether life in the Old Palace had a large religious component or
distinctions are valid at all in the Middle
was primarily secularand whether such modern
Bronze Age. By the time of the new Palaces,sacred and secular often appear completely
interlinked. Nor is clear how much Knossos should be seen as the capital of Middle
Minoan Crete. The considerableregional cultural diversity of the Old Palace Period may
reflect different political units, whereas the island-wide homogeneity of the New Palace
period supportsdominationfrom one centre,Knossos.
Little hasbeenrecoveredfrom the Old Palaceperiod town. A rescueexcavationon the

slopewestof the palacefound well-laid architectureand probablewater works. Tombs
of the period are known on the hill of Ailias east of the palace(the Ailias and Mavro
Spelio cemeteries)and on Gypsadeson the south.
The Old Palacewas destroyedby unknown meansat the end of the Middle Minoan III
or, more probably,early in Middle Minoan III. It was immediatelyrebuilt (despite- or
after- an earthquakewhose date in later Middle Minoan III or even at the transition to
Late Minoan IA is still to be agreed).This rebuildingandthe numberof grandhouses
build in the town of Knossosin Late Minoan I (the probableperiod when the palace
expandedmost),alongwith the splendour
and the variety of the works of art of the New
Palaceperiod,giveevidenceof the greatwealth Knossosmust haveaccumulatedby the
end of the Old Palaceperiod.
The Minoan town reachedits greatestextent, perhapsas much as 75 ha, in Middle

MinoanIII - Late MinoanI, a time whenits populationis estimatedto havebeenaround
12,000,similarto that of medievalHerakleion.Isolatedfarms havebeendetectedon the
edgeof the main settlement.
510 Appendix 3
The New Palaceperiod building program may have slowed only in later Late Minoan IA
after earthquakes that may be associatedwith the eruption of Thera. It did not pick up
significantly in Late Minoan IIB or Late Minoan 11.The unexplored mansion, for instance,
was left unfinished in Late Minoan IA.
During LateMinoanEBtherewasa majordestructionby fire in the town of Knossos,the

palace apparently being unaffected. Signs of the disaster have been observed in
excavationsnorthof the Royal Road,in the SouthHousebelow the southwest angle of
the palace,and,most strikingly, in new excavationsbehindthe StratigraphicalMuseum
up slopeto the westof theUnexploredMansion.Therethebonesof at leastfour children
havebeenfoundin what appearsto be a ritual context.The bonesshow butcherymarks.
With themwereediblesnailsandat leastone sheepthat hadbeenkilled. Most likely the
evidencedenotesritual cannibalism,perhapsan attemptto avert the disasterthat soon
overtook the town of Knossos.
Very few tombsareknownof MiddleMinoan III - Late Minoan I. The most remarkable
is the two-storeyTempleTomb, on the eastslopeof Gypsades,with its burial chamber,
courtyard,andpavilion.LateMinoanI saw the last useof the Ailias cerneteryand of the
Gypsadestholos tomb.
Late Minoan II broughtchangesin the culture that continuedinto LM IIIA and further
destructionby fire (on two separateoccasions,asobservedin the UnexploredMansion).
One immediatechangewas that burial groundswere dispersedand gravesusually for
single or family use, rather than communaluse as before. A new custom, probably
derivedfrom mainlandGreece,whereit is knownfirst in tile Late Helladic I Shaft Graves
of Mycenae,was burial with weaponsin the so-calledWarrior Graves,indicating Late
Minoan II-IIIAI squiresor officers, and/orburial with largenumbersof bronzevessels
(notablyin the lateMinoanIHA, SellopouloTombs3 and4 and in the Late Minoan IIIA2
Zapher PapouraTombs 14 and 36). Similar burials with bronzeshave been found at
Archanes-Phoumi,
Phaistos(Kalyvia.cemetery),andChania.Someof thesebronzeswere
madeby smithsworking at the UnexploredMansion beforeit burneddown during Late
Minoan II.

PeterKienzle
Other changesat Knossosincludethe introductionof rectangularchambertombs with

long straight dromoi (seenlater, for instance,at Armeni) and of built tholos tombs of
mainlandMycenaean derivationrather than Early Minoan and Middle Minoan Mesara,
type(compareArchanes-Phourni,whereboth varietiesof tholos tomb are found). With
themshouldbe placethetholoslike RoyalTomb at Isopata(destroyedin World War II)
and,perhaps,the Tomb of the Double Axes, which hasa gravein the floor in the shape
of a double axe.Finally, the contentsof manylate Minoan II - IIIA, tombsareclosely
similar to thoseof tombsin Mainland Greeceandon Rhodes.
The biggest change of all was the appearanceof the Greek language 45 t) in the Linear B
script, in a large archive of clay tablets dating from just before the destruction of the
palace.The deciphermentby Ventris (Ventris and Chatwick 1956) of the script as Greek
confirms what the other changes of culture suggest, that Mycenaean Greeks were in
00
chargeof Knossosand,probably,of all Crete,which they seemto havecontrolledby an
intensiveKnossos-basedbureaucracy.They most likely came in the aftermath,or as
agents, of the Late Minoan IB destructionby fire that occurredthrough much of the
island.
Late Minoan IIIA, for many scholars,notablyPopham(1970) representsthe last phase

during which the palaceof Knossosfunctionedas a palace.A fierce fire destroyedthe
palaceearlyin the Late Minoan IIIA2 phase,marking the end of the New Palaceperiod.
But othersthink the Palacewas destroyedat the transitionfrom Late Minoan IIIA2 to
Late Minoan IIIB, or even in Late Minoan IIIB. Since 1958 the issuehas aroused
considerablecontroversy,whichhashadthe benefit of leadingto closestudy both of the
stratigraphyandpotteryof thedestructiondepositsin the palaceand of their association
with the Linear B tablets.Two issuesgovernindividual views on where,between1370
and 1190B.C., the tabletsareto bedated:whathappened in CreteunderMycenaeanrule
and whether Knossosremainedthe principal centre of the island after 1370 (with a
relationshipto Chaniain westernCrete that hasyet to be defined)or cededits leading
role at that time to Chania,whereLinear B literacy continuedafter 1370B.C.
The newPalaceandthe buildings in the town may be consideredan architecturalunity,

although the period at Knossosspanstwo centuries(or three, accordingto the new
512 Appendix 3
"high" chronology). Determining the functions of the different parts of the palace, or of
other buildings, dependspartly on evidencethrough the Late Minoan IB phase and partly
on Late Minoan II - HI,,2evidence,though there is always an uncertainty in extrapolating
from one phase to the other. The principle changes of culture are noted above. Life
seemsto havecontinuedin much the sameway after the arrival of the Mycenaeans.
The westsideof thepalace,at groundlevel,wasdevotedto shrinesand storage(of farm

produce,works of art, andprobablypreciousraw materialsand textiles),with (linear B)
administration concentratedin the westernhalf of the north end of the building. The
parade of store rooms inside the west facadeand the great numberof boxes (cists)
beneaththe floors indicateanenormousstoragecapacityandwealth.The principal shrine
Cl
may have been the Throne Room, with the Throne usedfor a priestess(and queenor
princess?) As the epiphanyof the Minoan goddess,rather than for a king as Evans
thought. On the upper floor great stateroomsmay be reconstructed,with windows
opening onto the West Court that could havebeenusedfor ceremonialappearances.
Internal approachesto the storeroomsare restricted, as the plan shows. The main
approach to this part of the palacewas from the West Court by tile Corridor of the
ProcessionFresco,in which life-sizefigures are depictedenteringthe palacecarrying
gifts or offerings.Amongthe finds from the westsidearefemalefaiencefigures holding
snakes from the Temple Repositories- boxes beneaththe floor in a small room
immediatelysouth of the staircaseascendingto the upper west side from the Central
Court and behind (west of ) the Tripartite Shrinethat facesonto the Central Court.
The northendof thepalaceis dividedby a passage

comingup from the North Pillar Hall,
abovewhichtheremayhavebeena dininghaUEkethosethat havebeeninferred over the
pillared halls at the north endsof the CentralCourtsat Mallia and Zakro.
The WestCourt continuedin usefrom Old Palaceto New palacetimes (this was not the
caseat Phaistos).To the northwestis theTheatralArea, usedfor receptions,assemblies,
or performances andapproached by theRoyalRoadfrom the west. Its I ine, if prolonged,
continuesin the streetfoundin the new excavationsbehindthe StratigraphicalMuseum.

PeterKienzle
The East side of the palacehasthree floor levelspreserved,one at the level of the Central
Court and two dug into the east slope of the Kephala hill where it drops towards the
Kairatos river. Above the level of the Central Court there would have been at least one
floor. The Grand Staircase, a masterpiece of Minoan architecture, descendsfrom
more
the Central Court to the lower floors, which Evans took to be the Residential or
Domestic Quarter of the Palace.A complex group of rooms is similar - on a larger scale -
to those at the north end of Phaistos.
Drainage and water systemsare well preservedon the east side. There was a system that
brought clean water to the lavatory attached to the Dressing Room in the Domestic
Quarter and removed dirty water as well as removing storm water from the light wells;
and a drainheadand stone drainsprobably took ston-nwater away from the East Hall that
is presumed to have been immediately north of the Grand Staircase.
Of the Southfront little is preserved.As on the eastside,terracessupportedthe palace

buildings.The magnitudeof the earthquakethat occurredin Middle Minoan IIIB (or at
thebeginningof Late Minoan IA) is clear in the Houseof the Fallen Blocks closeto the
south front. Here huge stoneblocks fell from the Palacefacadeinto the house,where
they are still to be seen.The blocks themselvesare alsoevidenceof the imposingscale
of the first phaseof the New Palace.
Frescoesadornedthe walls of both the palaceandother buildings in the town. Study of

the Late Cycladic I (Late Minoan IA) frescoesat Akrotiri on Thera suggests that the
Cý
Knossos frescoeshave a thematiccharactercentredon the Minoan goddessand her
worship.In the later yearsof the New Palaceperiod,frescoesof chariot driving scenes
were painted,probably at the commandof the Mycenaeanrulers.
Little is known of the town of Knossosin the New Palaceperiod. Most buildings
excavatedare grandtown house,which maybe com paredto the grandhousesin the
countrysuchasthoseat Makryyialos,Myrtos-Pyrgos,Tylissos,or Vathypetro.Someof
the town houses,suchasthe SouthHouseandthe Houseof the ChancelScreen,impinge
on the palacealmostasmuch as the housesat Zakro do on the palacethere.This might
indicatethe powerof nobility,or it may havesomehumblerexplanation,suchas lack of
514 Appendix 3
Conservation
andReconstruction
at thePalaceof Minosat Knossos
space or force of habit. We know least about places where ordinary people lived. We
have some idea of workshops. Kilns, for instance, have been found southeast of the
palaceand in the excavationsbehindthe StratigraphicalMuseum;and the Unexplored

Mansion (so calledbecausefor a long time it was known to be there but had not been
investigated)had a bronzesmithy in Late Minoan II.
Post palatial Knossos,though still important,was lessso than Chania,which with its
evidencefor continuedLinear B literacy and for trade links with Cyprusandmainland
Greece, probably becamethe capital of Crete when Knossosfell. Ayia Triada, with
Kommos nearby,also rosein importanceat this time.
Traces of the Late Minoan IIIA2 - IIIB use are found scattered throughout the town, but
it is likely that occupation was much lessintensivethan before. The palace seemsto have
been a ruin with people inhabiting cleared-out parts; most rooms were full of debris.
(This story is different for those who date the destruction of the palace to late in Late
Minoan IIIB. ) Similarly, the Unexplored Mansion, which had some use in Late Minoan
IIIA2. was a ruin by Late Minoan IIIB, with a shrine on the upper floor. Another Late
Minoan HIB shrine,set up in the former lustral Basin of the Little Palace, was furnished
with curious natural stone concretions, which Evans interpreted as fetish symbols.
The new excavationsbehindthe stratigraphicalMuseurnhaverevealedno buildings of

Late Minoan IIIB date,but there is a new andextensiveLate Minoan HIC settlement,
with severalphasescontinuing into Sub-Minoan,that adds that adds greatly to our
hithertoscantlyknowledgeof thistimeat Knossos.Findsfrom nearbyrescueexcavations
suggestthat this LateMinoanHIC - Sub-Minoansettlementwestof the palaceruins was
quite large andcould haveservedasthe nucleusfor Knosssiansusing widely dispersed
cemeteries. are a horse'sskull and intramural
Unusualdiscoveriesin thenewexcavations
burials of babiesunder the floor, which was a mainlandMycenaeanpracticeffoundat
Knossosearlier in the Late Minoan II [Mycenaean]use of the Unexploredmansion).
Theseburialsalong with mainlandtraits in the pottery suggestthat somesettlersat this
new spotwereMycenaeans. Rootedmorein theMinoantraditionis the useof the Spring
Chambernext to the Caravanserai just abovethe VlYchiastreamas a shrine,It was a
fountain housein the New Palaceperiod.

PeterKienzle
The principal Late Minoan HIC - Sub-Minoan evidence is from tombs: in the Gypsades
cemetery to the south, the Fortetsa cemetery and the newly excavated North Cemetry to
the north, some burials in the Mavro Spelio cemetry to the east, and the reuse of the
Kephala tholos tomb and the Royal Tomb at Isopata. The Fortetsa cemetry and the North
Cemetry, both about 1.5 krn northwest of the palace, came into use in this phase (and
Gypsades went out of use), and they continued to be used into the Protogeometric period
and for a long time thereafter. At Knossos, then, there was a continuity both of
inhabitation during the transition from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age and of occupation
of a long-established lowland centre, even if its cemeteries were spread over 5 km.
Elsewhere in Crete at this time people retreated to mountain strongholds such as Karphi,
C'
Kavousi, and Vrokastro. Political conditions were not the same throu,, hout the island.
C)
516 Appendix 3
The Charter of Athens
Adopted at the First International Congress of Architects and Technicians of Historic

Monuments, Athens 1931
At the Congressin Athensthe following sevenmain resolutionswere madeandcalled

"Carta del Restauro":
International organizations for Restoration on operational and advisory levels are

to be established.
2. ProposedRestorationprojectsare to be subjectedto knowledgeablecriticism to

prevent mistakeswhich will causeloss of characterand historical valuesto the
structures.
3. Problemsof preservation of historicsitesareto be solvedby legislationat national

level for all countries.
4. Excavatedsiteswhicharenot subjectto immediaterestorationshouldbe reburied

for protection.
5. Modem techniquesand materialsmay be usedin restorationwork.
6. Historical sitesare to be given strict custodialprotection.
7. Attention shouldbe given to the protectionof areassurroundinghistoric sites.
The Charterof Athens 517

Peter Kienzle
General Conclusions of the Athens Conference
1. -- DOCTRINES. GENERAL PRINCIPLES.
The Conferenceheardthe statementof the generalprinciplesand doctrinesrelating to

the protectionof monuments.
Whatever may be the variety of concretecases,eachof which are open to a different

solution, the Conferencenoted that there predominatesin the different countries
represented a generaltendencyto abandonrestorationsin toto and to avoid the attendant
dangersby initiatinga systemof regularandpermanentmaintenancecalculatedto ensure
the preservationof the buildings.
When, as the result of decayor destruction,restorationappearsto be indispensable,it

recommends that the historic and artistic work of the pastshouldbe respected,without
excludingthe style of any given period.
The Conferencerecommendsthat the occupation of buildings, which ensuresthe

continuityof their life, shouldbe maintainedbut that they shouldbe usedfor a purpose
which respects their historic or artistic character.
ADMINISTRATIVE AND LEGISLATIVE MEASURES REGARDING

HISTORICAL MONUMENTS
The Conferenceheardthe statementof legislativemeasuresdevisedto protect monu-

mentsof artistic, historic or scientific interestandbelongingto the different countries.
It unanimouslyapprovedthe generaltendencywhich, in this connection,recognisesa

certainright of the community in regardto private ownership.
It notedthat the differencesexisting betweentheselegislativemeasureswere due to the

difficulty of reconcilingpublic law with the rights of individuals.
Consequently, while approvingthe generaltendencyof thesemeasures,the Conference

is of opinionthat they shouldbe in keepingwith local circumstancesand with the trend
of public opinion, so that the least possible opposition may be encountered,due
allowancebeingmadefor the sacrificeswhichthe ownersof propertymay be called upon
to makein the generalinterest.
It recommendsthat the public authorities in each country be empoweredto take

conservatorymeasuresin casesof emergency.
518 Appendix 4
It earnestlyhopesthat the InternationalMuseumsOffice will publish a repertoryanda

comparativetable of the legislativemeasuresin force in the different countriesandthat
this infon-nationwill be kept up to date.
111.-- AESTHETIC ENHANCEMENT OF ANCIENT MONUMENTS.
The Conferencerecommendsthat, in the constructionof buildings,the characterand

external aspect of the cities in which they are to be erected should be respected,
especiallyin the neighbourhoodof ancientmonuments,wherethe surroundingsshould
be given special consideration. Even certain groupings and certain particularly
picturesqueperspectivetreatmentshouldbe preserved.
A study should also be made of the ornamentalvegetation most suited to certain

I
monumentsor groupsof monumentsfrom the point of view of preservingtheir ancient
character. It speciallyrecommendsthe suppressionof all forms of publicity, of the
erectionof unsightlytelegraphpolesandthe exclusionof all noisy factoriesandevenof
tall shaftsin the neighbourhoodof artistic andhistoric monuments.
IV. -- RESTORATION OF MONUMENTS.
The experts heard various communications concerning the use of modern materials for
the consolidation of ancient monuments. They approved the judicious use of all the
resourcesat the disposalof modern techniqueand more especially of reinforced concrete.
They specifiedthat this work of consolidationshouldwheneverpossiblebe concealedin

order that the aspectand characterof the restoredmonumentmay be preserved.
They recommendedtheir adoptionmore particularlyin caseswheretheir use makesit

possibleto avoidthedangersof dismantlingandreinstatingthe portionsto be preserved.
I
V. -- THE DETERIORATION OF ANCIENT MONUMENTS.
The Conferencenotedthat, in the conditionsof presentday life, monumentsthroughout

the world were being threatenedto an ever-increasingdegreeby atmosphericagents.
Apart from the customaryprecautionsand the methodssuccessfullyapplied in the

preservationof monumentalstatuaryin currentpractice,it was impossible,in view of the
complexityof casesandwith the knowledgeat presentavailable,to formulate any general
rules.
The Conference recommends:

Peter Kienzle
That, in eachcountry, the architectsand curators of monuments should collaborate

with specialists in the physical, chemical, and natural sciences with a view to
determining the methods to be adopted in specific cases;
2. That the InternationalMuseumsOffice shouldkeep itself informedof the work

being done in eachcountry in this field andthat mentionshouldbe madethereof
in the publicationsof the Office.
With regard to the preservation of monumental sculpture, the Conference is of opinion

that the removal of works of art from the surroundings for which they were designed is,
in principle, to be discouraged. It recommends, by way of precaution, the preservation
of original models whenever these still exist or if this proves impossible, the taking of
casts.
VI. -- THE TECHNIQUE OF CONSERVATION.
The Conferenceis gratified to note that the principlesand technicalconsiderationsset

forth in the different detailedcommunicationsare inspiredby the sameidea,namely:
In thecaseof ruins, scrupulousconservationis necessary,and stepsshouldbe takento

reinstateany original fragmentsthat may be recovered(anastylosis),whenever this is
possible; the new materialsusedfor this purposeshould in all casesbe recognisable.
Z'
When the preservation of ruins brought to light in the course of excavations is found to
be impossible, the Conference recommends that they be buried, accurate records being
of course taken before filling-in operations are undertaken.
It should be unnecessaryto mentionthat the technicalwork undertakenin connection

with theexcavationandpreservationof ancientmonumentscalls for closecollaboration
betweenthe archaeologistand the architect.
With regard to other monuments,the experts unanimouslyagreed t) that, before any

consolidationor partialrestorationis undertaken,a thoroughanalysis shouldbe madeof
thedefectsand the natureof the decayof thesemonuments.They recognisedthat each
caseneededto be treatedindividually.
VII. -- THE CONSERVATION OF MONUMENTS AND INTERNATIONAL

COLLABORATION.
a) Technical and moral co-operation.
The Conference,convincedthat the question of the conservationof the artistic and

archaeologicalproperty of mankindis one that intereststhe communityof the States,
which are wardensof civilisation,
520 Appendix 4
Hopesthat the States,actingin the spirit of the Covenantof the Leagueof Nations,will
collaboratewith eachother on an ever-increasingscaleand in a more concretemanner
with a view to furthering the preservationof artistic and historic monuments;
Considersit highly desirablethat qualified institutionsandassociationsshould,without

in anymamer whatsoeverprejudicinginternationalpublic law, be given an opportunity
of manifestingtheir interestin the protection of works of art in which civilisation has
been expressedto the highestdegreeand which would seemto be threatenedwith
destruction;
Expresses the wish that requests to attain this end, submitted to the Intellectual
Co-operation Organisation of the League of Nations, be recommended to the earnest
attention of the States.
It will be for the InternationalCommitteeon IntellectualCo-operation,after an enquiry

conducted by the InternationalMuseumsOffice and after havingcollectedall relevant
information,moreparticularlyfrom theNationalCommitteeon IntellectualCo-operation
concerned,to expressan opinion on the expediencyof the stepsto be takenand on the
procedureto be followed in eachindividual case.
The membersof the Conference,after having visited in the courseof their deliberations
andduringthe studycruisewhich they were ableto makeon this occasion,a numberof
excavationsitesandancientGreekmonuments,unanimouslypaid a tribute to the Greek
Government,which,
for manyyearspast,hasbeenitselfresponsible
for extensiveworks and, at the sametime,
has acceptedthe collaborationof archaeologistsandexpertsfrom every country.
The membersof the Conferencethere saw an exampleof activity which can but
contributeto the realisationof the aims of intellectualco-operation,the needfor 'xhich
manifesteditself during their
Cý work.
b) 77zerole of educationin the respectof monuments.
The Conference, fin-nly convinced that the best guaranteein the matter of the
preservationof monumentsandworks of art derivesfrorn the respectand attachmentof
the peoplesthemselves;
Consideringthat thesefeelingscanverylargelybepromotedby appropriateaction on the

part of public authorities;
Recommends that educators should urge children and young people to abstain from
disfiguring monuments of every description and that they should teach them to take a
greater and more general interest in the protection of these concrete testimonies of all
ages of civilisation.

Peter Kienzle
c) Value of international documentation.
The Conferenceexpressesthe wish that:
Eachcountry,or the institutionscreatedor recognisedcompetentfor this purpose,

publish an inventory of ancientmonuments,with photoggraphs and explanatory
notes;
2. Eachcountryconstituteofficial recordswhich shall containall documentsrelating

to its historic monuments;
3. Each country deposit copies of its publications on artistic and historic monuments
with the International Museums Office;
4. The Officedevotea portionof its publicationsto articleson the generalprocesses

and methods employed in the preservation of historic monuments;
The Office studythe bestmeansof utilising the informationso centralised.
html
Source:http://www. icomos.org/athens-charter.
522 Appcndix 4
Analysis of Repair Mortars

Palace of Minos, Knossos, Crete.
(AP 206)
For:
The Institute of Advanced Architectural Studies,

The University of York.
18th
March 1998
The Scottish Lime Centre Trust

The Schoolhouse,
Rocks Road,
Charlestown,
Fife, K'YI I 3EN.
Tel: 01383 872722

Fax: 01383 872744
E-mail: scotlime@email. msn.com
Analysisof RepairMortars 523

Peter Kienzle
Introduction
Eight samplesof mortar were receivedby the Scottish Lime Centre in February 1998,
The mortar sampleswere taken from various phasesof repair to the Palaceof Minos,
Knossos,Crete which were carried out between 1900 and 1930. Two main questions
were raised:
The identity of the binder (lime, cement,clay etc.).
The overall strength of the mortar.
Information supplied suggestedthat there had beenthree phasesof repair, under

different architectswho had different opinions regarding the conservationof historic
buildings. Individual sampleswere supplied simply with a numberin order to avoid
subjectivity during the analysisprocess.
Given the difference in mortar type in this project comparedwith the majority of
samplesanalysedby the Scottish Lime Centre, the following points are relevant.
I The aggregatemay contain significant quantities of calcium carbonate

(limestone), thus distorting the binder: aggregateratio determinedby acid dissolution.
2 The original mortar in the Palaceof NIinos containsa clay binder; if clay is used
as a binder then the identification and quantification of hydraulic or cementitious
materialsis difficult.
The small samplesize (samples4,5,6 and 8 are 12 g or less;a minimum samplesize of

50 g is normally requested)meansthat the composition of the mortar given below is
semi-quantitative.There is a dangerthat the small samplesare not representativeof the
overall composition of the mortar and therefore that the variations observedare not a
true representationof the differencesin mortar mix specifications.
Mortar analysisby acid dissolution
The sampleswere examinedunder a binocular microscopebefore disaggregationand

were then placed in a 10% solution of hydrochloric acid. After acid dissolution was
complete,the acid insolubleresiduewas filtered, dried, disaggregatedand passed
through British Standardsieves.The results are summarisedin Table 1.
Sample examination
Colour
Themajorityof the samples

haveanoff-whiteto very palebrowncolouration.Sample
2 andto anextentsample5 havea browngreycolour,whilesample8 hasa distinct
light pink colour.
524 Appendix4
Lime inclusions
All samplesexcept numbers3 and 4 contain lime inclusions(calcium carbonatewhich

representslime putty of other binder ingredientsthat were not properly mixed during
mortar manufacture). Lime inclusionsare not abundant in any sample, and it is
probable that they are simply not represented in samples3&4, but are present in all of
the mortars.
Fractures
Samples3,5,6 and7 containfractureswithinthebinder.Thesefracturesarecommon

in samples3 and6.
Lime coatings
whicharecoatedin calciumcarbonate.
Samples1,2,4 and7 havesurfaces
Otherobservations
containingdarkclasts,possiblya
The samplesarecommonlyporouswith anaggregate
basicigneousrock, andabundant 5
Samples
quartz. and8 had brick
identifiable
fragments.
Theaggregate wasobservedto becoarsegrainedandin somesamples limestonewas

numbers2 and3, mayhavealsocontainedbrokenshell
identified.Two samples,
couldbe identified,it couldnot bequantified
fragments.Whilethe limestoneaggregate
andwaslost duringaciddissolution.
SamplesI and 2 were observedto be slightly more resistantto crushing, howeverthe
small size of some samplesmadecomparisonvery difficult.
Residue sieving
The acid insoluble residuecan be subdividedinto severalcomponents.
I Aggregate (non carbonate).
2 Clay or fine aggregate.'
3 Gypsum.
4 Residuesfrom hydraulic limes or cements.
5 Other materialssuch as coal or brick or tile fragments.
1Theterm to finesin anaggregate.

clayis hemusedto denotefineglainedmaterialusedasa binderasopposed
Thedistinctionis, to anextent.subjccfive of theproportionof fine materialwhich
andis basedonanassumption
wouldbeexpectedin a reasonably sortednaturalaggregate.

i-4ý-
WIN
,i, -W 11 7--14"
Peter Kienzle
The non carbonateaggregatein all of the samplesappearsto be similar, containing

quartz, a variety of basic igneousrocks with colours;(black, green, red) reflecting the
complex ferromagnesiansilicate mineralogy,feldspar and mica. Quartz is by far the
most common, with most igneousrock fragments>0.5 mm and most feldsparand mica
fragments<0.5 mm.
The fine fraction (clasts <0.15 mm) containsfine sandand silt as well as clay. A visual
estimatewas madeof the proportions of clay and sand/ silt. In most of the samples
there is a significant quantity of clay which has an olive brown colouration. In sample5
all of the residuepassedthe finest sieve.
Gypsumis only presentin sample1, where it forms a significant part of the mortar
composition. The gypsumin the residueis presentas fragmentsof various sizes.
I
Residuesfrom hydraulic lime or cementitiousbinderscould not be identified during
analysis.Theseresiduescannotbe distinguishedfrom clay material without detailed
chemicalanalysiswhich itself is not always conclusive.
All of the samplescontain small fragmentsof coal, this is probably an impurity from
the lime burning process.Samples1,2,3,5 and 8 contain fragmentsof brick or tile,
and sample2 contains small wood fragments.
Table 1: relative abundancesof main mortar constituents.
Sample 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Lime & 7.4 3.2 6.9 20.0 1.6 22.0 4.0 1.1
limestone
Gypsum 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Clay 0.4 1.5 0.4 1.7 1.0 2.5 0.2 0.1
Sand 11 11 11 11 II I II
-
- expressedas proportionsrelativeto the abundanceof aggregate(sand).
All figuresare
Discussion
All of the samplesappearto have beenmadeup from the following components:
An aggregatecontaining limestone,igneousrock, quartz and other

minor rninerals.
Limebinder,possiblya crudelyslakedputty or dry hydrate.
Clay, almost certainly addedas a binder and not part of the aggregate,
In addition,sampleI containssignificantamountsof gypsum,eithera binderor

fragmentsof plasterincorporatedinto the sample;sample8 containscommon
fragmentsof brick or tile.
526 Appendix4
Thereis alsoevidencefor the remobilizationof limein samples1.2,4 and7. Limeis

slightlysoluble,andcanbedissolvedandreprecipitated duringweathering.This
processcanleadto distortionsin the apparentlimecontentof a mortar,andcanalso
causethe mortarto appearto be strongerandbetterbound.
Conclusions
In answerto the original queries:
77zeidentity of the binder (7ime.cement,clay etc.).
The binder appearsto havebeena mixture of clay and lime. Sample I also containsa
proportion of gypsum (which may be a contaminant).Although this cannot be
quantified, many of the samplesappearto be binder rich. The evidenceof shrinkagein
samples3,5,6 and 7 appearsto confirm this.
Theoverall strengih of the mortar.
The mortars appearto be relatively soft with little evidenceof the use of cementitious
binders. SamplesI and 2 appearedto be more resistantto crushing, but also showed
evidenceof the remobilization of lime which can increaseapparentstrength.
The mortars cannot be subdividedreadily into groups but the following distinctions are
probably significant:
Sample I can be distinguishedby the presenceof gypsum, assumingthat it is not a

contaminant.
Sample8 has a higher proportion of brick or tile (sufficiently high to give a distinct
colour difference).
Samples4 and 6 have very high lime / limestone: sandratios, and also have relatively
high clay: sandratios.
Sample5 has very little (non carbonate)coarsegrained aggregate.
As shown by Table I the mortar composition is variable over a significant range.This

probably reflects both the small samplesize (and thus increasedanalyticalerror) and
the unknown quantity of limestoneaggregate.
Alick Leslie
For the Scottish Lime Centre Trust

PeterMenzle
j/
(ý 16 93 11
jQ
AI)X(110). OVIKe) IfOUOt'. iO
llpaKlviou Kpiitqq
Archaeological Musetim
or Heraklion Crete
G It E EC E,
If crak I ion
Information: Eleni Banou

To: PeterKlenzle
University of York
The Kings Manor
0
York YO I 2E?
U. S.A.
In reply to your letter of September7th I must say I find very interesting
the resultsof your researchregarding the different phasesof reconstructionof

variousareasof the Palaceat Knossosby different architects.
Since the repair mortars you ask permissionto analyseare not antique
you may proceedwith the work in the time of your convenienceprovided that
upon your arrival you contact with us so that we notify the antiquity quards
accordingly.
Looking forward to meetingyou.
Sincerelyyours
The Director
if7&
': *(IvO()US18()u2,110KIno Kp4crje.. T. K. 71202, Tnlt. (p(,)vo 22609-2 - Fax: '241515

2 Xanthoudidoit str. Ile rak I ion Crete, 71202. Te 1.081-226002, Fax: 081-M515
528 Appendix 5

Vol1 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vol1 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vol1 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Peter Kienzle

Conservation and Reconstruction at the Palace of Minos at Knossos

Submitted for the degree of

Conservation and Reconstruction at the Palaceof Minos at Knossos

The aimof this thesisis to evaluatethe conservationand reconstructionwork executed

excavatedBronze Age palaceat Knossos,Crete. The study aims to understandthe

at the Palaceof Minos at Knossosbe evaluatedin

photographsand lettersoriginating from Arthur Evansandhis teamhavebeenstudied.

Theoryandpracticeof archaeologyandconservationat the early twentieth century will

original building materialsand techniques,the destructionof the palaceand finally its

order to reach a qualifiedjudgement of the reconstruction work. However, it also.offers

conservation attitudes on site. The thesis argues to understand the physical

reconstructionson site as a result of a processwhich was influenced by the above named

Arthur Evans and his time 65

2 The Palace of Minos at Knossos III

3 The Works by Theodore Fyfe 1900 to 1904 169

4 The Works by Christian Doll 1905 to 1910 219

5 The Works by Piet de Jong 1922 to 1930 267

6 Evaluation of the Technical Aspects of the Reconstructions 325

7 Theoretical and Philosophical

Table I Chronological chart of Minoan periods. Based on Cadogan 35

Fig. I Map of the eastern Mediterranean. Source: the author ............. 38

Fig. 18 Window betweenthe Hall of the Double Axes andthe

Fig. 38 Restoredsectionof the raisedstylobatewith the doublebenches.

Fig. 57 Sectionof the Queen'sMegaronand the Bath Room.

Source:PM 1,p. 329 260

Fig. 77 Initiatory area and Lustral Basin according to Evans'

Fig. 97 Plan of the reconstructedupperfloor.

Plate A The North Entrance Passage.Watercolour by D. Zaverdinos

Plate I General view of the excavations of the palace, 1901

Plate 10 West Entrance with replaced gypsum slabs.

Plate33 Reconstructionof the SteppedPortico in 1922.

Plate 56 Door between Inner Sanctuary and the Service Wing.

Plate79 North EntrancePassagein 1901after excavation.

Plate 125 Northernportico of the Hall of Colonnades,groundfloor.

Plate 148 Hall of Double Axes, southwall with cavities.

Plate 194 Detail of doorjamb constructionin the Queen's Megaron

Plate 215 Fresco fragments representing Minoan temple.

DM DuncanMackenzieDiary (followed by dateof entry)

volumes).MacMillan & Co., London,United Kingdom.

I thank my supervisors Jane Grenville and Peter Burman for accompanying me on my

I thank Dr AlexandraKaretsou,Ephor of the Kr-Ephoria in Herakleionand Dr Eleni

Vasso Fotou, Dr Nico Momigliano, Conn Murphy, AndreasLapourtas, Evi Petropoulou,

Eric Johnson,Leigh SymmondsandRatishNandacorrectedmy English andalI mistakes

writing becauseit is short but nonethelessdetailed. It is a rather conservative

In 1905Arthur Evanspresentedat the Archaeologicalcongressin Athenshis systemfor

sections was subdividedinto three phaseslabelledwith Romannumbersso that, for

'Myers, Myers and Cadogan, 1992, p. 124 ff.

ýCongr6s Internationald'Archdologie,Athens, 1905.(SeeTheThnes,12 April 1905,p. 4). Evans's

not on my part an archaeological statement!

the conventionalterminology even if this was sometimes complicated and cumbersome.

in this thesisaregiven in the metric system.Arthur Evansemployed

andarchitecturalremainsin his notebooksand

'Myers, Myers and Cadogan, 1992, p. 33.

2100 BC - Early Minoan

Table I Chronologicalchartof Minoanperiods.Basedon Cadogan.

On 23 March 1900Arthur Evansand his assistantDuncanMackenziewith thirty-two

proved to be much larger than he had originally expected.

Figure 2 Map ot Crete showing Minoan archaeological