Precisely how the urban system worked is still open to speculation. The fragmentary archives preserved in the temples at the time of their destruction imply minutely centralized control and a high degree of order. The traditional interpretation of the large buildings at the major urban centres as palaces argues for a simple pyramid society, with all the produce and services coming into the king’s administrators’ hands for redistribution. The interpretation of the large buildings as temples makes the system more complex. If large volumes of raw materials and possibly manufactured and semi-finished goods were routed through the temples, what role does that leave the secular authority? In fact, once the evidence that Minos lived and ruled in the Labyrinth at Knossos has been seen as hopelessly insubstantial, it begins to look as if there might have been no king at all. Whilst that remains a possibility, it would be an extreme position to adopt, and it is still possible to visualize a full role for a dynasty of Minoan kings.
The temple was at the centre of the city of Knossos, geographically and economically, of that there seems little doubt. Agricultural produce flowed into it from the surrounding rural territory, some from estates which seem to have been owned by the temple, the rest in the form of tribute or offerings from the owners of private estates. The central administration of the temple, presumably the priesthood, redistributed the produce. In some cases the produce was earmarked for a particular deity or shrine, and therefore, by implication, the priests and servants of a particular sanctuary. In others, the dedication was more general. ‘To the Daidalaion’ (Knossos tablet Fp 1) would have allowed the administrators at Knossos to use the offering in any way that would benefit the Labyrinth.
Also flowing into the temple were imported raw materials such as silver, tin, copper, ivory, gold, lapis lazuli, ostrich eggs and plumes, exotic stones, and so on. Within the temple, and clustered round it, were craft workshops where the locally gathered and imported raw materials were made into manufactured goods. Some of these were to be offered as votives in the temple’s sanctuaries: others entered a trading network which might take them to the farthest ends of the island or overseas. Exports included cloth, olive oil, pottery and metalwork of various kinds.
There was no money as such, so some of the produce was redistributed in the form of rations or wages. Within the temple, it is likely that some sort of allocation was made to the priests, priestesses, scribes, servants and craft workers. Whether payments were made out of the temple’s revenues to sustain the king’s household is not known. It is possible. It is also possible that the king held his own country estates and was, to that extent, self-supporting.
The precise nature of the temple’s relationship with the town is also a matter for speculation. For instance, it may be that some craft workers, particularly those working very close to the temple, were operating under temple jurisdiction and supervision, whilst others were free to work independently. Certainly the temple depended on the town for its worshippers, for manpower in its many building and refurbishing projects, and for transport and trade.
The king, living in a residence apart from the temple, where - significantly - he is rarely, if ever, mentioned in the archives, probably had charge of the secular administration of the town and the surrounding territory as well as control over relations with other states on Crete and overseas. He also had a role to play in public ceremonial and it is likely that a carefully constructed ceremonial relationship existed between king and temple to ensure mutual support in the eyes of the people. As a secular leader, the king may have had charge of the army, although this may have been only a ceremonial role, since the tablets seem to tell us that there were generals. Much depends on our interpretation of the word ‘Lawagetas’, which was discussed in Chapter 2, pp. 21-9, ‘Social structure’. The picture that emerges, at least as a possibility, is of something close to the idea of a constitutional monarch, a king whose power was substantially restricted by the overwhelming spiritual, political and economic power of the priesthood.
How much political and economic activity took place outside the control of the priesthood or the king is unclear. As Alexiou says, the concentration of the economy in ‘royal’ hands - however interpreted - leaves little margin for private enterprise. Nevertheless, the excavations at Mallia may provide evidence that Minoan society had other dimensions. To the north of the temple’s West Court, an open square in the town has been interpreted as an early example of an agora, a place where citizens might gather for public meetings. A large building nearby, also to the north-west of the temple, has been interpreted as an assembly room and banquet hall for the leaders and representatives of the people, comparable to the prytaneum of the later Greek cities. The implication from Mallia is that free enterprise may have played some part in the Minoan economy, alongside the clearly dominant role of the temple. Systems comparable to this operated in the east, in Ugarit and the land of the Hatti, where ‘guilds’ of artisans were able to pursue their various callings in the town bazaars, and some development along these lines may have been possible in Minoan Crete. It may well be that future excavations at Mallia and Knossos will add substantially to the complex picture that is emerging.