preview

Minoan Art Landscapes Are Not Necessarily Indicators Of Shrines, But Do Hold A Religious Context?

Decent Essays

Anne Chapin argues that Minoan art landscapes are not necessarily indicators of shrines, but do hold a religious context. She continues on to say that they exist for the elite, that few common people would have seen them, at that if they ever did it would signify to them the elite’s power and connection to the gods. She begins her argument by introducing past interpretations and the issues that arise from them, then explains the possible significance of the floral motifs in landscapes, and finishes with her interpretation of their meaning to the Minoan people. Evans begun the debate of what the landscapes mean in Aegean art when he declared that the Monkeys and Blue Bird Fresco was for a secular use of just existing for its aesthetic. Marinatos observed that the existence of crocuses and lilies are normally used as decoration for alters and offering tables, and that monkeys and doves are often in connection with goddesses, giving the fresco a much more religious connotation than Evans had originally believed. She also pointed out the inclusion of flowers from all different seasons and environments which led her to believe it was more than just wall decoration, and was contextualizing a room that was shrine. Another fresco from Room 14 of the Royal Villa, has all stirred discussion. Originally viewed as a bedroom due to remains of a bed found, now may be seen as a shrine due to a low platform found and its walls are covered in a landscape. The Spring Fresco found in Delta

Get Access