kathimerini.gr
Evans's Knossos Excavations: Reconstructions Hinder Accurate Analysis of Minoan Palace
Arthur Evans excavated the Minoan palace of Knossos in Crete, beginning in 1900, uncovering a large complex dating back over 3,500 years; however, his extensive reconstructions hinder modern understanding of the site's original features, revealing two palaces built between 2100 BC and 1450 BC, both destroyed by natural causes.
- How have Arthur Evans's reconstruction efforts at Knossos impacted modern archaeological research and interpretation of the site?
- Evans's imaginative reconstructions, while creating a visually impressive site for visitors, complicate modern research. The extensive alterations make it difficult to determine the original purpose and layout of the Minoan palace at Knossos, potentially preventing complete understanding of Minoan infrastructure and daily life. The blend of fact and artistic license leaves a lasting impact on interpretations of the Minoan civilization.
- Why did Arthur Evans, rather than Heinrich Schliemann, undertake the Knossos excavation, and what factors influenced his approach?
- Evans's decision to excavate Knossos stemmed from the promising initial discoveries made by Kalokairinos and his belief in the site's potential. The high cost of acquiring the excavation rights from Kalokairinos, however, priced out Schliemann. Evans's findings revealed two distinct palaces, the first destroyed by an earthquake around 1700 BC and a later palace destroyed by fire around 1350 BC, marking the end of the Minoan civilization.
- What were the key findings of Arthur Evans's excavation at Knossos, and what is their significance for understanding Minoan civilization?
- Arthur Evans, not Heinrich Schliemann, excavated Knossos in Crete after acquiring the rights from Minos Kalokairinos. Evans's excavations, beginning in 1900, revealed a large palace complex dating back over 3,500 years, uncovering numerous structures and connecting passageways. His work, however, was controversial due to extensive reconstructions using wood and cement, hindering accurate analysis of the original structures.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The narrative frames Evans as a central figure, highlighting his role in excavating Knossos and emphasizing the significance of his work, while Schliemann's initial interest and the role of Kalokairinos are downplayed. The headline could potentially emphasize Evans's contributions more prominently.
Language Bias
The language used is generally neutral but contains some potentially loaded terms. Phrases such as "minωική Disneyland" carry a subjective judgment of Evans's work. While the text notes Evans's "artistic freedom", it could benefit from using more neutral language to describe his reconstructions, e.g., instead of "artistic freedom", perhaps "interpretative reconstruction".
Bias by Omission
The text focuses heavily on Evans and his work, potentially omitting other significant figures or perspectives involved in the Minoan Palace excavations or interpretations. It doesn't discuss potential biases or limitations in Evans's methods beyond mentioning his reliance on imagination in reconstructions. The absence of alternative viewpoints on the Minoan civilization's decline could be considered a bias by omission.
False Dichotomy
The narrative presents a somewhat simplified view of the relationship between Evans and Schliemann, implying a clear choice between the two for excavating Knossos. The complex financial and logistical factors involved in such large-scale excavations are not fully explored.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the archaeological discoveries at Knossos, showcasing the importance of historical research and preservation of cultural heritage. This contributes to education by preserving and disseminating knowledge about past civilizations, enriching educational resources and promoting cultural understanding.