The last two centuries of the late Minoan period were a time of decadence and re-occupation, following conquest (c. 1400 B.c.) by some outside power, probably Mycenae on the mainland of Greece. Architectural remains which are pre-Greek and yet sub sequent to moo B.c. are practically non-existent. The most impor tant is a unique temple building, of which considerable fragments were found, at Prinias in Crete (c. 700 B.c.). The doorway of this—cut out of soft stone and now in the Candia museum—is strongly reminiscent of Egypt. There is the same tendency to put shallow relief sculpture on architectural members. The horse appears for the first time in these reliefs. The lintel has an opening above it, flanked by seated figures of semi-Egyptian char acter, while the lintel itself has a full-length female figure carved on its underside, probably the mother-goddess of the earlier age.
Mycenae and Tiryns.—Mycenae is the outstanding example of a mainland architectural development intimately associated with the zenith and decline of Crete. There are the same motives in palace planning, and the same decorative outlook; but Mycenae —and even more pronouncedly the neighbouring fortress of Tiryns —show a cyclopean method of construction hardly found in Crete. The most impressive single feature is the Lion gate of the citadel of Mycenae ; the greatest structural works are the "beehive" tombs of the same centre, particularly the largest and best pre served—the so-called "Treasury of Atreus," which was undoubt edly a tomb. The galleries (or side entrance passages) of Tiryns can justly be placed beside them. We see quite clearly that this massive building development in stone reflects an age of insecurity, when powerful kings built fastnesses which were key positions, in periods succeeding one another approximately from 1700 to I 200 B.C. The Lion gate is an appropriate incident in such a fast ness. Its rude but semi-scientific cyclopean construction absorbs a feature which has made it famous—the great slab above the lintel, carved with two majestic maneless lions fronting a cen tral pillar. The beasts' heads are gone and may have faced the spectator, but whether in stone or in bronze we do not know. The existing remains are in a very hard breccia stone.
The beehive tomb shows by contrast, a fine method of con struction. The doorway to this tomb, even in its nearly stripped condition, is the most important purely architectural work of prehistoric times in Europe. Its scale is impressive; the inner lintel is 294 ft. long, 164 ft. deep, 3 ft. high and 120 tons in weight. The finish was given by attached half columns, applied
rosettes and bands of various forms, all richly carved in grey green and purple porphyry-like stones. Some considerable frag ments of these are in the British Museum. The tomb itself—which is nearly so ft. wide—is a pointed dome, but (as in more ruined Cretan examples) is built with overhanging stones laid flat. There is no sign of a true radiating arch or vault anywhere, the key stones of the vaulted galleries at Tiryns being the nearest ap proach to such construction.
Troy.—The city of Hissarlik, or Troy, on the eastern shore of the Dardanelles, is the remaining work of Mycenaean times on the mainland which need be noticed. It can show nothing of positive architectural value which cannot be seen at Tiryns or Mycenae. The great value of Troy is its burg or fortified site showing successive strata dating from c. 300o to moo B.c. As at Mycenae and Tiryns, the central round hearth is found, which was practically unknown in Crete. That this was a northern feature is certain. Another fact of interest is the use of crude brick for walling—an important link with Mesopotamia.
So far as we are aware, there was no continuity of tradition between the architectural forms of the Aegean civilization and those of historic Greece (see GREEK ARCHITECTURE), but there were several root forms, particularly in the plans of which are common to both and bring Greek structures much nearer to Aegean ones than to any others. (I) The idea of the Greek temple plan can be seen clearly in the megaron (hall) with its extended side walls at Mycenae and the contemporary Troy; (2) the plan of the Athenian propylaea or great entrance gate way to the Acropolis is based directly on forms in Crete and on the mainland ; (3) the high course of upright marble slabs at the base of the cella wall in the typical Greek temple of the 5th century B.C. can be seen in the west wall of the palace of Knossos and other Minoan sites; (4) the use of the column for various purposes is very much the same in both epochs. The decorative use of fresco in Cretan houses and palaces deserves special men tion, as its influence on Greek and subsequent painted decoration may have been profound, but only the threshold of this enquiry has, so far, been reached. The sense of decorative values and the acute observation of natural forms conventionally rendered, all produced in pure colour, bring the best Cretan fresco into line with Chinese and Japanese painting; and the oriental touch is surer than in the somewhat parallel art of Tel-el-Amarna (see