1100 BC to 69 BC
Theories about the origins of the Dorians are numerous and contradictory, and even the existence of a distinct Dorian tribal entity has been called into doubt. The literary evidence from classical historians and the linguistic evidence are inconclusive, and there is little clarity to be gained from archaeology. Nevertheless, at some stage, various communities in parts of Greece, especially Sparta, began to identify themselves as having a common Dorian identity. In Crete, the exact nature and timescale of the transition from Mycenaean to Dorian is unknown but, for the sake of simplicity, I shall refer to the whole period as Dorian.
According to Homer, there was a mixture of races existing side by side in Crete, but the history of this period is almost entirely the history of the dominant Dorians:
Out in the wine-dark sea, there lies a land called Crete, a rich and lovely land surrounded by the sea, densely populated, with ninety cities and several different languages. First, there are the Achaeans; then the Eteocretans, proud of their native stock; next the Kydonians; the Dorians, with their three clans; and finally the noble Pelasgians.1
There is no reason to doubt this analysis, and, apart from the Dorians, the Achaeans can be clearly identified as the Mycenaeans. On the other hand, the other groups are by no means clear. According to Herodotus, the Kydonians may have been Syrian and Samian refugees from a failed revolt. The other two races are intriguing. The Eteocretans (“true Cretans”) could well have been the remnants of the Minoans, while the identity of the Pelasgians is very unclear. They seem to have been pre-Greek, or a different early tribe of Greek speakers, but beyond that the academic arguments still rage.
Little is known of the early process of change in Crete, but it is fairly certain that there were early Spartan colonies in Lyttos (Lyktos) and Gortyn. There was steady migration from the mainland well into the ninth century BC, and there is evidence of struggles between the settlers and the Mycenaean and Minoan inhabitants. It is not clear, however, where all these immigrants came from. Strong fortifications were built at Gortyn, Prinias, Axos and Hyrtakina (and probably other locations) and, by the end of the ninth century BC, most of the cities of Crete were proclaiming their allegiance to a shared Dorian heritage. Trade still existed, though on a much-reduced scale, as the Phoenicians took over command of the seas and became the major trading nation in the eastern Mediterranean.
With the general expansion of Greek colonialism in the eighth century BC, there was a revival in trade. From about 735 BC, Crete established colonies in Sicily, Etruria and near Massalia (Marseilles). A joint colony with Thera was established in Kyrene (Libya) around 631 BC – probably the first Greek colony in North Africa. By the end of the seventh century BC, however, there seems to have been a further decline in Crete’s fortunes, brought about by a combination of factors. This period saw the rise of Ionian Greek city states such as Athens and Miletus, and the Dorians of Crete – having inflexible political and social systems and being riven by internal disputes – were unable to respond to this challenge to their dominance. Whatever the reason, Crete now became largely isolated from the rest of the Greek world for about 100 years.
Although the island was largely marginalised, some trade continued, including Cretan cypress exports to Athens and Kerkyra (also known as Corfu), but the demand was usually related to specific major building projects and was intermittent. Agriculture during this period, and indeed right up to the Roman invasion, was restricted to subsistence farming, producing enough food for the cities but leaving little surplus for export. The only significant exports for most of the Dorian period were of high-quality Hadra vases, which have been shown to have originated in Crete. Recent archaeological evidence demonstrates that at least one city, Knossos, remained a major trading centre, rich in imports from all over the Mediterranean. It is also now believed that the city was at least three times bigger than earlier estimates suggest.2
Meanwhile, alliances were still being made between various cities and states, notably Rhodes, Argos and Lindos. These were almost certainly part of the ongoing power struggles between the cities, which continued to weaken the power of the island as a whole. With frequent wars, coups and revolts, Crete during this period resembled England during the devastating wars between King Stephen and Empress Matilda in the twelfth century AD. In his Laws, written in the fourth century BC, Plato has the Cretan Kleinias outline the problem:
For what men in general term peace would be said by him [the Cretan legislator] to be only a name; in reality every city is in a natural state of war with every other, not indeed proclaimed by heralds, but everlasting.3
These chaotic times had a disastrous effect on the economy, leading to extreme poverty across much of the island. This in turn resulted in a trend that lasted for many centuries: emigration. Because of the rugged nature of the terrain in Crete, horse riding was practically unknown and strong and agile foot soldiers, usually equipped with bows and arrows, were the norm. So skilled did the Cretan archers become that they were highly sought after as mercenaries. There were Cretan archers in almost every army and in almost every period, from the Greek cities’ war with Persia through the Peloponnesian War and Alexander’s campaigns, and right up to Julius Caesar’s campaigns in Gaul. A Roman historian quotes a somewhat cynical exchange between Julius Caesar and a mercenary:
A Cretan came to the consul Julius and offered to act as a traitor. “If by my help,” he said, “you defeat your enemies, what reward will you give me?” Caesar replied, “I’ll make you a citizen of Rome, and you will be in favour with me.” At these words, the Cretan laughed and said, “Citizenship is considered a nonsense amongst the Cretans. We aim at gain when we shoot our arrows; we only work on land and sea to get money, and so I have come here in search of money. As for political rights, grant that to those who are fighting for it and who are buying this nonsense with their blood.” The consul laughed at this and said to the man, “Well, if we are successful, I will give a reward of a thousand drachmae.”4
The Ptolemy dynasty of Egypt also made frequent use of Cretan mercenaries, a habit which was to have interesting consequences later, when Cretans fought for both sides in the war between Octavian (later Augustus) and Cleopatra.
There seems to have been a decrease in population during the classical period. This, together with its inherent instability and weak economy, resulted in Crete playing little part in mainland history. Apart from providing a continuous supply of mercenaries, the Cretan cities remained neutral during the major wars of the fifth century BC. They did not join the rest of Greece in the fight against the Persians under Xerxes in 481 BC, using a warning from the Oracle at Delphi as divine justification. This was not so much an act of cowardice as practical politics. Separated from the mainland and closer to the Levant, it was unlikely that Crete could have withstood a concerted attack by the Persians. Crete also remained neutral during the bitter Peloponnesian War (431 BC to 404 BC) between Athens and Sparta, in spite of the kinship between the two Dorian communities. A naval attack by an Athenian fleet on Kydonia in 429 BC seems to have been targeted at pro-Spartan fugitives from Aegina, rather than being a direct assault on Cretan territory. Nevertheless, in typical Dorian Cretan fashion, Gortyn and its neighbour Polichna used the occasion to join in the assault on Kydonia.
By the mid-fourth century BC, Crete began to re-emerge onto centre stage as its strategic location and usefulness in political alliances became apparent. At the same time, the perceived distinctive constitution and society of the Dorian cities became of interest to philosophers and historians. Plato and Aristotle, among others, left us with a great deal of useful description and analysis, although it is now apparent that their views were somewhat simplified, and there was less homogeneity among the cities than they believed.
Meanwhile, the struggles between the cities continued but with little resolution. An event in 346 BC is particularly illuminating: the so-called Foreign War. Knossos, not for the first (or last) time, was claiming first place among the cities and, aided by a mercenary army, besieged Lyttos, a Spartan settlement. Lyttos called on Sparta for help, and a Spartan army crushed the mercenary army and relieved the siege. The interesting thing about this is that, in spite of their willingness to engage in war, neither city had the strength to fight alone, leading them to rely on outside support.
After the death of Alexander the Great, his empire was divided up, creating new states such as Ptolemaic Egypt and the Seleucid Empire. Crete continued to remain independent of any of these, but as its geopolitical importance grew there were increasing attempts by various states to create alliances with Cretan cities and gain influence over the island. The quarrelling between the cities became endemic, and the shifting alliances grew more and more complex. However, there is a growing body of opinion that, in spite of the wars, there was still a fairly flourishing economy in many areas. There is evidence of a thriving fishing industry, and rural settlements grew up near the main cities, leading to an increase in population. The prosperity of the cities can also be deduced from expensive large-scale improvements to the defensive walls at Gortyn and the restoration and refurbishment of the sanctuary complex of Asklepios, both carried out during this period.5
There were two driving forces behind most of the changing alliances and inter-city wars of the period: the struggle for domination between Knossos and Gortyn, and attempts by other states in the region to gain power or at least influence over the island. The aims of Knossos were imperialistic; it sought complete domination of the island, as succinctly explained by one historian writing in the classical period:
The Knossians contended for the sovereignty of the island, which they alleged belonged to them, on account of both the ancient dignity of the city, and the glory and renown of their ancestors in the heroic age.6
Gortyn, on the other hand, was more interested in leading the island as head of a federation. In fact, the ambitions of both cities were often curbed by Lyttos and Kydonia, sometimes allied with each other, sometimes in conflict. To complicate things further, Lyttos, Gortyn and several other cities were also heavily influenced by Sparta, which became increasingly involved in Cretan politics.
In about 270 BC, Itanos was, not for the first time, in dispute with Praisos over control of the important sanctuary of Diktaion Zeus at Palaikastro. Eventually, the city appealed for help from Ptolemy II of Egypt, who sent a military force under General Patroklos to establish a base at Itanos. Patroklos was declared a citizen of the city, with responsibility for the direct administration of Itanos, and the Egyptian garrison remained for the next century. Soon Egyptian influence spread to many other cities, and the east of Crete became a virtual protectorate of the Ptolemies, although, with the exception of Itanos, this was mainly achieved through military aid and diplomacy.
In a surprising development, the two great rivals, Knossos and Gortyn, formed an alliance to share control of the whole island – apart from Lyttos, which refused to submit to the dual rule. Knossos was not actually keen on the idea of an independent Lyttos, but wasn’t strong enough to do much about it. Gortyn was, at that time, weakened by a dispute between the “Elders”, who supported Knossos, and the “Young Ones”, who wanted to maintain an independent Lyttos. In 220 BC, Knossos imported 1,000 Aetolian mercenaries to seize Gortyn and secure the power of the Elders. In spite of several other cities breaking ranks and supporting Lyttos, Knossos now felt confident enough to turn on the city. While its men were absent on a campaign against Hierapytna (modern Ierapetra), Lyttos was totally destroyed in an attack, vicious even by the standards of the time, vividly described by Polybius:
The Lyttians, having left with their whole force for an expedition into the enemy’s country, the Knossians getting word of it seized on Lyttos which was left without defenders, and having sent off the women and children to Knossos, and burnt, demolished, and in every way they could wrecked the town, returned home. When the Lyttians came back to their city from the expedition and saw what had happened, they were so much affected that none of them had the heart even to enter his native town, but one and all, after marching round it and many times bewailing and lamenting the fate of their country and themselves, turned their backs on it and retired to Lappa ... Thus was Lyttos, a colony of the Spartans and allied to them by blood, the most ancient city in Crete, and ever, as all acknowledged, the breeding-place of her bravest men, utterly and unexpectedly made away with.7
One interesting result of the brief agreement between Knossos and Gortyn for joint control of the island in 221 BC was the establishment of the Koinon of the Cretans (loosely meaning the Cretan League). This was a sort of assembly of representatives from all the cities. Each city was deemed equal but, in practice, Knossos and Gortyn were “more equal than others”, playing the leading role in organisation and control. The exact function of the koinon is not fully understood, and we don’t know how frequently it met. There seem to have been two chambers: a council of delegates and a general assembly. It is likely to have been responsible for setting a basic legal code to which all the cities adhered, and it may have regulated trade relations between the cities. Perhaps the intention was to maintain the peace, although this was not entirely successful. Whatever its failings, the koinon did later come into its own as a unifying factor against external enemies, such as the Romans. Plutarch made a perceptive point when he advised his readers to emulate the practice of the Cretans, “who, being accustomed to frequent skirmishes and fights, nevertheless, as soon as they were attacked by a foreign enemy, were reconciled and went together”.8
The continuing resistance to Knossos led to Polyrrhenia and Lappa eventually seeking help from Philip V of Macedonia, who saw the opportunity to gain Cretan support in his ambitions to control the entire Aegean. He sent an expeditionary force of 700 troops, which led to three more cities breaking from Knossos, resulting in something of a stalemate. Philip now had control or influence over a large part of western Crete and, by 216 BC, a Macedonian protectorate was established. Together with other Greek states, Philip brokered a peace between the cities and set out to gain their support against his biggest rival (and supposed ally), Rhodes, a major naval power which controlled almost all sea trade in the area. He began by using Cretan pirates, supported by Nabis, the king of Sparta, to destabilise the trade routes. He then called on the Cretan cities to declare war on Rhodes. Olous (modern Elounda) and Hierapytna were the first to answer the call, but Rhodes immediately called on Rome for assistance. Rome declared war on Macedonia, leaving Rhodes free to respond to the Cretan threat. In alliance with Knossos, Rhodes attacked Hierapytna and Olous, defeating both and imposing stringent terms, including total control over all harbours and naval bases. This meant that not only did Rhodes now more or less control eastern Crete, it had bases from which it could protect its fleet from pirates.
There now seems to have arisen a slightly odd situation in which eastern Crete was a protectorate of Egypt, with at least two cities actually controlled by Rhodes, while western Crete was a Macedonian protectorate, with many harbours under the control of Sparta. Complicated? It gets worse.
The piracy continued from bases in western Crete loyal to Nabis (who was a supporter of Rome and supplied it with 300 Cretan mercenaries), mainly from Gortyn. Having finally defeated Philip of Macedonia in 197 BC, Rome turned on its former ally, Nabis, and imposed a treaty on him which, among other things, forced him to break off all relations with the Cretan cities and give control of all ports under his control to Rome. Although the Romans did not involve themselves directly in control of the cities, this began more than a century of increasing Roman involvement in Cretan affairs. In 189 BC, for example, there was an attempt to free thousands of Roman prisoners taken by pirates – although all the cities refused to release them except for Gortyn, which remained consistently pro-Roman.
After the defeat of Carthage in the Second Punic War, Hannibal sought refuge in Crete for some time. On the pretext of mediating between the cities, many important Romans – including the victor over Carthage, Scipio Africanus – travelled around the island trying to seek Hannibal out. The labyrinthine diplomacy of the day is illustrated well by events in 170 BC. Some years earlier, Gortyn and Kydonia, along with thirty other cities, had signed a treaty with Pergamum, a Greek city state on the coast of Anatolia. When yet another dispute arose between Gortyn and Kydonia, Pergamum sent 300 troops in support of Kydonia against its other ally! Again, the Romans intervened to keep the peace. A second war between some of the cities of Crete and Rhodes, caused by continuing piracy, led to a request by Rhodes for Roman support and yet another imposed peace treaty. It seemed to the Romans that something would have to be done about Crete.
Throughout the complexities of 1,000 or so years of wars and alliances, Dorian society showed remarkable consistency, right up to the Roman conquest of 69 BC. Moreover, in spite of warfare and instability, there was a basic similarity in the institutions of the Cretan cities, alongside considerable variations in the details of law, customs and political systems. Inherently conservative, the Dorians brought with them not only the use of iron for tools and weapons but a more austere and martial lifestyle, closely similar to that of the Spartans. In fact, many ancient historians believed that it was from Crete that Sparta derived its laws and customs, although the two systems diverged over time:
The Spartan regime may have adopted a Cretan “starter-kit”, but its systems continued to develop thereafter towards greater complexity.9
In Crete, on the other hand, the Dorians quickly abandoned monarchy, replacing it with an oligarchy formed from the great Dorian families, so that the system was somewhat less rigid than that of Sparta and even had some superficially democratic elements.
The class system was simple, divided into free citizens (Dorians), free inhabitants and slaves. The Dorians were, of course, the ruling elite, with exclusive control of all military and political affairs. All land was administered by this group and held in common – and, in general, displaying private wealth and prioritising the individual at the expense of the social group were frowned upon. On the other hand, a drinking song of the fourth century BC illustrates a swaggering arrogance among the Dorians towards the hoi polloi, reminiscent of the attitude of some Norman lords towards the Saxons:
I have great wealth: a spear and a sword,
And a fine leather shield to protect my skin.
For with this I plough, with this I reap,
With this I trample the sweet wine from the vines,
With this I am called master of serfs.
Those who do not dare to have a spear and a sword
And a fine leather shield to protect their skin
All cower at my knee and prostrate themselves,
Calling me master and great king.10
The free inhabitants were the non-Dorian original inhabitants of Crete. In Gortyn and Knossos they were called apetairoi (meaning “without political rights”) but nothing is known for sure about their exact status in the other cities. The majority were peasants who owned land and paid taxes, but the class also included craftsmen, merchants and seamen.
Enslaved people were either native Cretans or captives from military campaigns and pirate raids, and they could either be privately owned or belong to the community. There is some uncertainty about the exact nature of slavery in Crete, as contemporary historians and inscriptions sometimes use different words to describe the slaves: “dolos” and “woikeus”. On the one hand, it has been argued that there were in fact different categories of enslaved people, a dolos being more like a serf, tied to the land but allowed to marry and hold property, while a woikeus may have been a chattel slave in the more traditional sense of being the property of the master, his “mortal property”, along with livestock. Another interpretation, and one that has growing support among scholars, is that both terms described a single legal status, although they had different nuances. For example, the words “dog” and “hound” are basically synonyms, but are used in different contexts. They were probably used inconsistently in the archaic legislation and this inconsistency was carried forward into the later Gortyn Code. There is no positive evidence of serfs who were bound to specific plots of land, and it is probable that Gortyn, like other Greek cities, had just one servile status: slaves. Each city had its own rules stipulating the obligations and legal position of enslaved people, but we only know the details of these in Gortyn. It is unlikely that these people had rights as such. Although the law codes do include protection against overly harsh and unjust treatment of enslaved people, this invariably refers to abuse at the hands of a third party. This, together with the absence of any rules limiting a master’s right to inflict harm on his slave, implies that the laws were more about protecting the master’s “property” from damage than protecting the interests of the enslaved. There was, however, provision for enslaved people to become free inhabitants, although the division between free citizens and free inhabitants remained absolute.11
One aspect of slavery in Crete which is intriguing is the absence of slave revolts there compared with other Dorian states, especially Sparta. Aristotle notes this phenomenon and offers two reasons for it. He states that the laws governing slaves in Crete were relatively mild, the Cretans allowing enslaved people everything except access to the gymnasia and the right to bear arms. He also conjectures that there was perhaps a sort of gentlemen’s agreement between the cities that, even in war, there would be no attempt to incite the enslaved workers of an opposing city to revolt in order to weaken the city. This was obviously in the interests of all cities so, again, unlike in parts of the Greek mainland, there was no external influence or provocation.
In addition to Aristotle’s arguments, several other factors preventing slave rebellions have been identified. Firstly, there were considerable geographical differences between Sparta and Crete. The Spartan territory was enormous: some 8,500 km2, bisected by a massive mountain range. Since the citizens of Sparta lived in the city itself, they were almost entirely absent from their farms and had little direct contact with their slaves (known as “helots”). Moreover, in the early fifth century BC, it is known that the helots outnumbered the Spartan citizens by at least seven to one, and this ratio certainly increased over time. In contrast, the average Cretan city’s territory was only about 120 km2 and absenteeism was far less acute, while the farms in Crete were generally small, allowing closer supervision of enslaved workers. It is very unlikely that the enslaved in Crete outnumbered their masters to anything like the same degree as the helots of Sparta. Although there would undoubtedly be runaways, the size of the island offered little scope to form large colonies of people who had escaped slavery, as existed in Sparta. Finally, the safety valve of religious rites like the Hermaea (described below) may well have served to ease tensions and prevent potential conflicts.12
The political and social organisation of Dorian Crete varied between the cities, but the differences were largely in the detail, and there was still a great deal of homogeneity in the underlying structures and beliefs. In all the cities, one could find a preoccupation with status and a focus on military training; common meals and men’s clubs; limitations on non-citizens’ rights, including those of women, foreigners and artisans; entrenched conservatism; and a tendency towards petrification of social and political institutions.
It is not so important whether Gortyn had ten kosmoi and another city only five. What is far more important is the fact that wherever we find kosmoi – and we do find them in almost every city – these officials represent the executive power, that the entire board of the annually elected kosmoi belonged to a single tribe and that, consequently, they must have been military leaders of the tribes.13
Although the titles, number and selection process varied between the cities, the main administration of a city was in the hands of the kosmoi14, a ruling committee of between four and eleven members. These members were elected from and by the aristocracy and held office for one year, with re-election forbidden for between three and ten years. In times of war, the committee became the military high command. During peacetime, members were assigned ministries for specific purposes, such as alien affairs or religious matters. One of the kosmoi was designated protokosmos, roughly analogous to prime minister. The kosmoi were able to summon all the free citizens to assembly to ratify decisions, but were not obliged to. However, at the end of the year, they had to give an account of their policies, and any failure of duty or misuse of privileges was subject to severe penalties.
The Council of Elders was an advisory body, composed of previous kosmoi of particular experience and prestige. They were always available for advice and may have had judicial powers of appeal. In the event of the kosmoi being dismissed for misbehaviour or cowardice, the council could act as an interim administration. The third element, the Ekklesia (Assembly) had only one function, to ratify the decisions of the kosmoi. It was called on certain specific days or for emergency sessions and was, of course, composed only of free citizens.
We know a fair bit about the laws of Dorian Crete, partly through the works of classical Greek writers like Plato and Aristotle, but we are also fortunate to have about seventy inscriptions of some of the laws of Gortyn, dating from the late sixth or early fifth century BC. Early fragments relate to loans, mortgages, funerals, use of water resources, purification and the status of freedmen, but the most famous is the Great Gortyn Law Code. Written in the ancient Dorian dialect of Crete, the greater part of it still survives on a wall in the Odeon at Gortyn. It is extremely likely that similar laws existed in other Cretan cities, and the laws probably date back to much earlier than the date of the inscription, making the Gortyn Code one of the earliest examples of a written legal system in Greece. Like many inscriptions of the time, it reads alternately from left to right, then right to left.
There is no logical sequence to the laws, but the code covers many aspects of personal liberty (of free citizens), clear distinctions between the classes, civil and criminal offences and family law. In spite of the strictness and austerity of Dorian society, punishments were rarely severe and always had to be sanctioned by the Council of Elders. It has been suggested that the difference between the Cretan legal system and that of other Dorian states may stem from its incorporation of earlier Minoan and Mycenaean law codes. There is no mention of a death penalty, although the existing code doesn’t cover crimes such as murder or treason.
A few examples will give some idea of the nature of the Gortyn Code.15 The most serious crime mentioned is rape, which is punishable by a fine, varying according to the relative status of rapist and victim:
If one commits rape on a free man or woman, he shall pay 100 staters, and if on the son or daughter of an apetairos ten, and if a slave on a free man or woman, he shall pay double, and if a free man on a male or female slave five drachmas, and if a slave on a male or female slave, five staters.16
Although the status of women was not high in Dorian society, they did have some legal protection:
If a husband and wife be divorced, she shall have her own property that she came with to her husband, and the half of the income if it be from her own property, and whatever she has woven, the half, whatever it may be, and five staters, if her husband be the cause of her dismissal; but if the husband deny that he was the cause, the judge shall decide on oath.
There is some evidence that enslaved people here had more rights than those in other parts of Greece, including Athens. The enslaved were able to possess and inherit property; marriage between enslaved and free people was possible; and the children of such a marriage could, in certain circumstances, be free:
If a slave, going to [live with] a free woman, shall wed her, the children shall be free; but if the free woman [goes to live with] a slave, the children shall be slaves; and if from the same mother free and slave children be born, if the mother die and there be property, the free children shall have it; otherwise her free relatives shall succeed to it.
Because of the difficulty in making unambiguous translations of the early Dorian language, there has been recent debate about the exact meaning of this section, and it has been argued that the status of enslaved people may not have been as liberal as suggested.
One of the most interesting of the Dorian institutions was the Andreion (men’s hall), which also existed in Sparta. Every city had this public mess hall in which the male free citizens ate communally. All adult citizens were organised into groups called hetaireiai, each group having its own table in the Andreion. In addition, there were two guest tables, where guests were treated with great hospitality. Indeed, the hospitality of the Cretans was noted by several contemporary historians, who compared it favourably with the Spartans’ reputed xenophobia. The public mess tables were paid for from a citizens’ tax, based on a fixed proportion of citizens’ income and the income from publicly owned land. This was different from the Spartan system of a poll tax that was fixed, regardless of income, which could lead to impoverishment of citizens during economic downturns:
Now the Cretan arrangements for the public mess-tables are better than the Spartan; for at Sparta each citizen pays a fixed poll-tax, failing which he is prevented by law from taking part in the government, as has been said before; but in Crete the system is more communal, for out of all the crops and cattle produced from the public lands, and the tributes paid by the serfs, one part is assigned for the worship of the gods and the maintenance of the public services, and the other for the public mess-tables, so that all the citizens are maintained from the common funds, women and children as well as men.17
The food was prepared by women, assisted by enslaved workers. Although women and girls didn’t eat in the Andreion, portions of the food were distributed to their homes. The size of each person’s portion depended on their status, ordinary citizens receiving a normal portion, male children a half portion and the ruling aristocracy a quadruple portion. The separation of men and women was noted by Aristotle as a deliberate policy for population control, although it is not clear whether the sexes lived completely separately for most of the time.
The Andreion was a very important element in the political affairs of the Cretan city. Somewhat like a gentlemen’s club in England, it was a place where city affairs could be discussed in a relaxed way, while social cohesion was strengthened through battle songs and tales of worthy citizens, and young men could learn the customs and values of Dorian society.
Aristotle described how the education of the young (boys only) in Dorian Crete was dedicated to the single aim of creating brave warriors to serve the military system:
In Sparta and Crete both the system of education and the mass of the laws are framed in the main with a view to war.18
Up to the age of eighteen, boys were educated within the family. They learned to read and write and, when ready, were taught other subjects necessary for their future life, as described by a Roman author:
In Crete, the children of free citizens were firstly taught the laws by means of song, so that they might more easily retain them in the memory, and so that if they were ever to infringe the laws they could not plead ignorance of them. Secondly, they had to learn hymns to the gods. And thirdly, they learned eulogies on great men.19
At the age of eighteen, the young men joined groups called agelai for military training. Each group was led by the father of one of the members and the emphasis was on strict discipline, austerity and gruelling exercise. Lessons involved physical training, hunting training and weapons training, especially archery and javelin. In war games, they practised real combat to the extent that genuine injuries often resulted:
With a view that courage, and not fear, should predominate, they were accustomed from childhood to the use of arms, and to endure fatigue. Hence they disregarded heat and cold, rugged and steep roads, blows received in gymnastic exercises and in set battles.20
Intriguingly, in addition to all this martial training, each member of the group had to plant an olive tree at the beginning of his training and cultivate it until it had reached a specific size. Failure in this task resulted in a fine of fifty gold pieces. At the end of training, the members swore an oath of allegiance to the homeland – presumably the city – and the group was disbanded. All young men were obliged to marry on completion of their training, and it is likely that mass weddings were organised for the purpose. This system of education remained virtually unchanged until well into the second century BC.
It could be argued that a form of education devoted exclusively to the creation of a military elite may have been a contributing factor in the continuous warfare between the cities. After being trained in the arts of war, it is not surprising that the young men looked for some adventure and, in the absence of a common external enemy, either became mercenaries or fought against other cities.
There is little evidence of cultural activity in the early years of Dorian Crete. Dorian society was geared towards the arts of war and, apart from martial songs, there was little time for the “finer things in life”. Plato’s description of Spartan education in his work Hippias Major probably applies equally to Crete. In Plato’s dialogue, when asked what the Spartans enjoy listening to most, the character Hippias scorns astronomy, geometry, logic, poetry and music, but says:
They are very fond of hearing about the genealogies of heroes and men and the foundations of cities in ancient times and, in short, about antiquity in general.21
The attractive Geometric style of pottery was probably imported from the East, but there was some Dorian Cretan activity in the architectural field. The first actual temples were built during this period, and the one at Kommos (near Pitsidia in Messara) may be the oldest in Greece. In the eighth century BC, there was a brief renaissance, also influenced by the East, and beautifully decorated bronze weapons and shields have been discovered. However, the most important development of this period was in sculpture. A sculptor called Daidalos (not the probably mythical Minoan) invented new instruments for sculptural carving, which enabled him to produce the first large-scale statues in marble and earthenware. He is also reputed to have developed the use of hammered bronze for statues, and the first examples of such work have been found in Dreros. Daidalos and his pupils set up a workshop in the Peloponnese, and there is a lot of evidence that other Cretan artists could be found in Athens and other parts of Greece during the seventh century BC. It is therefore possible that Crete was, at this time, an important artistic centre, acting as a link between the artistic world of the East and mainland Greece.
The general opinion, even among contemporary writers, is that for most of the classical and Hellenistic periods Crete itself was something of a cultural wasteland. Plato has his Cretan character Kleinias admit, “We Cretans do not indulge much in foreign poetry.” In spite of such comments, this does not mean that talented writers, sculptors and architects did not exist in Crete. Not for the last time, the lack of scope in Crete led to a brain drain as, like the mercenaries previously mentioned, people emigrated to areas with better conditions and opportunities.
On the other hand, at least three eminent philosophers were of Cretan origin. Possibly the most important was Epimenides, who was a contemporary and friend of Solon, the great Athenian statesman and lawgiver. As well as being a philosopher, he was a poet, prophet, historian and healer, especially learned in herbs and their medicinal value. Certainly, Pythagoras is believed to have gained his knowledge of herbs from Epimenides, when he stayed with the seer in the Idaion Cave. Epimenides’ contemporaries regarded him as the originator of some of the purification rites, and such was his fame that, in 612 BC, he was invited to Athens to conduct the purification ceremonies of the city after a sacrilegious murder in the Temple of Athena. He is also reputed to have given Solon advice on sacrifices and funeral rites, and was later put in charge of all religious affairs and festivals in Crete. He was regarded as one of the seven sages of ancient Greece and, upon his death at a very advanced age, was worshipped as a god in Crete. Epimenides is probably best known for saying that all Cretans are liars, as quoted by Saint Paul from a poem Epimenides wrote, in which Minos addresses Zeus to refute the Cretan belief that Zeus had died:
They fashioned a tomb for you, holy and high one,
Cretans, always liars, evil beasts, idle bellies.
But you are not dead: you live and abide forever,
For in you we live and move and have our being.22
Although there is no indication that anything ironic is intended in the poem, the so-called Epimenides paradox has become an example of the liar paradox: since Epimenides is a Cretan, his statement that Cretans are always liars must be itself a lie. Therefore, Cretans are not liars. (Stop there, or it might blow your mind.)
There is some argument over whether the fifth-century-BC philosopher Diogenes of Apollonia was from the Cretan city of that name or from Thrace, but he was a major figure in pre-Socratic philosophy. In some ways very modern in his thinking, Diogenes made the first attempt to describe in scientific detail the structure and organisation of the physical world in his great work On Nature. Although his basic assertion that air is the principal element from which all other matter is formed might have been superseded, it was definitely a starting point. His detailed description of the blood and its circulation, on the other hand, was considered by Aristotle worthy of quoting in full,23 and was not improved on until William Harvey’s work in the seventeenth century AD. Another first achieved by Diogenes was his suggestion that meteorites came from outer space:
Along with the visible bodies are carried around invisible stones which, being invisible, have gone unrecognized. They often fall to the earth and are extinguished, as happened to the rocky heavenly body that fell in a blaze of fire at Aegospotami.24
The Cretan philosopher Ainesidimos of Knossos lived in Alexandria in the first century BC and was responsible for a revival of the Sceptic school of philosophy, but only fragments of his work remain. Briefly, in reaction against Plato’s somewhat dogmatic approach, he claimed that humans are in no position to affirm or deny anything categorically.
Little is known of the three Cretan poets who can be identified from the period, although there is evidence from contemporary sources that they were influential. The first, Thaletas (or Thales) of Gortyn, was a seventh-century-BC poet and musician who introduced Cretan music and dance to Sparta:
Thales (Thaletas) passed as a lyric poet, and screened himself behind this art, but in reality he did the work of one of the mightiest lawgivers. For his odes were so many exhortations to obedience and harmony, and their measured rhythms were permeated with ordered tranquillity, so that those who listened to them were insensibly softened in their dispositions, insomuch that they renounced the mutual hatreds which were so rife at that time, and dwelt together in a common pursuit of what was high and noble.25
Thaletas was the inventor of the Cretan metre, a particular kind of poetry accompanied by music. According to at least one early historian, he was also the originator of many Cretan customs, such as the giving of gifts of weapons and the wearing of military-style dress.
The second, Rhianos, was a third-century-BC epic and love poet. He seems to have produced a vast output, but only forty-four verses remain.
The third and most interesting of the poets was Sotades of Maroneia, a third-century-BC writer of coarse satirical verses, who lived in Alexandria. He seems to have made a habit of abusing and mocking kings in various cities. His most famous poem attacked Ptolemy II for his incestuous marriage to his sister (something of a habit among the Ptolemies): “He pierced forbidden fruit with deadly sting.” For this, Sotades was sentenced to death, but he escaped to the island of Kaunos in south-west Anatolia. There, he was captured by Ptolemy’s general, who sealed him up in a lead pot, carried him out to the open sea and drowned him. Unfortunately, with the exception of the somewhat sanitised quotation given here, the only examples of his work I have been able to find are utterly obscene and not suitable for quoting.
In the field of the plastic arts, sculptors from Crete also joined the emigrants. Two sixth-century-BC sculptors, Aristokles of Kydonia and Cheirisophos, produced fine bronzes at Olympia and Tegea in Arcadia. Pliny reports seeing four works by Kresilas of Kydonia at Olympia, including a statue of Perikles and a self-portrait. Kresilas was a contemporary of the great fifth-century-BC Athenian sculptor Pheidias. A father-and-son team of architects, Chersiphron and Metagenes of Knossos, were responsible for the famous temple of Artemis at Ephesus, while in Crete itself the ruins of some interesting buildings can still be seen. These include the superb temple of Asclepius at Lebena; temples dedicated to Apollo at Knossos (the Delphinium) and Gortyn (the Pythium); and the temple of Athene at Lyttos.
During the Dorian period, the Greek Olympian deities became firmly established as the primary focus of Cretan religion, but with local variations based on earlier Minoan and Mycenaean beliefs. As noted in the previous chapter, Britomartis and Diktynna found a place in Greek mythology, while, as the birthplace of Zeus Kretagenes (meaning “Zeus born in Crete”) and much of the Greek pantheon, Crete was regarded as a place worthy of particular reverence. In a possible echo of Minoan religion, Zeus Kretagenes was worshipped as a young man who died and was reborn each year, a belief regarded as blasphemous by many Greeks.
There were major temples to Apollo at Knossos and Gortyn, and a temple to Athene at Itanos, while the Idaion Cave continued to be a major religious sanctuary. One intriguing and plausible theory is that the Cretan caves acted as religious academies where priests and holy men could pass on their knowledge to pupils, as in the case of Epimenides and Pythagoras. In the sanctuary of Diktaion Zeus at Palaikastro (near Siteia), a largely intact inscription found in 1904 turned out to be a hymn to Zeus. It began:
Hail! Supreme Son of Kronos, master of all gone below ground,
You stand at the head of the gods.
Come back to Dikti at the turn of the year
And take pleasure in our happy song,
Which we blend with harps and pipes,
And sing having taken our places around your well-walled altar.
An important temple to Asclepius, including an impressive mosaic floor and several almost-intact pillars, can still be seen at Lebena. The worship of Asclepius, god of medicine and healing, together with his daughter Hygeia, goddess of health, cleanliness and hygiene, was a major cult in both Hellenistic and Roman times. The procedure was for the patient, after purification rites, to sleep in the temple; from his or her dreams the priests would devise the correct treatment. This would be based largely on herbal remedies, including hibiscus, cardamom, bay, quince and figs, together with water from sacred springs. It was also common for people to leave dedicatory statues of their children to ensure good health and protection.
The sanctuaries, whether temples or cave sanctuaries, were operated jointly by priests, who were responsible for the performance of rituals, and by magistrates, who administered the holy places. The latter organised the sacrifices, dedications and festivals; distributed war booty; and, more practically, repaired and erected statues, temples and altars. The mountain sanctuaries also played a significant role in coming-of-age rituals. We know of one example from the sanctuary of Hermes Kedrites in Simi, but the pattern was almost certainly repeated elsewhere. Under strict regulation, a young man would be “abducted” by an adult of high social rank and taken to the sanctuary, where they would live together in the mountains for two months. They would hunt together, and the young man would receive instruction in religious rites and beliefs. When they returned, the boy would be introduced to the citizen community, receiving gifts of a cup, a warrior’s dress and an animal, which would later be sacrificed during a festival of Zeus.
Another interesting aspect of the sanctuaries is their possible political role. Most of them seem to have been outside the cities, often on the border between two, possibly indicating territorial claims to an area. They would often attract worshippers from the wider region, and there is evidence that at least three were not part of the territory of any one city but sacred land dedicated to a particular god. What we don’t know is who was responsible for the administration of these “independent” sanctuaries: a single city, several cities in rotation, or a combination of cities? However they were run, there is a strong possibility that these neutral holy places were used as meeting places for informal discussions and the formation of alliances. On the other hand, the presence of citizens from different, sometimes opposing, cities could also have created flashpoints for the beginning of yet more wars.26
In Crete as in other Greek areas, the Hellenistic period saw the introduction of exotic deities from Egypt and the East. Temples to Isis and Serapis have been found at Gortyn. It was also at this time that Jewish immigration to Crete began, probably from Alexandria. There was a large Jewish community in Gortyn, as well as a Samaritan community in Knossos. There may well have been other communities in Crete, but we have no clear evidence.
There were a large number of religious festivals during the year, which usually followed the practices in other parts of Greece. Of particular interest was the Hermaea, a festival in celebration of Hermes. Normally, this involved fairly rowdy and rough athletic contests of various kinds, but in Kydonia the festival bore more resemblance to the later Roman Saturnalia or Christian Carnival. The enslaved workers were allowed to take over the city, while the freemen had to serve them at meals. The slaves were even allowed to whip the citizens if they “misbehaved”. We have little information about this custom, but this opportunity for minor retribution once a year, together with the previously mentioned laws affording some level of protection to enslaved people, could explain the relative lack of slave revolts in Crete compared with Sparta.