According to a long-standing urban legend, the Mycenaeans did not build temples but worshiped outdoors under open skies. This claim appears in popular books, casual discussions, and also surfaced in earlier scholarly interpretations of Bronze Age Greece.

However, archaeological evidence challenges this view. Material finds, Linear B texts, and remains of cult architecture all point in a different direction. The Mycenaeans did not restrict worship to open-air rituals alone; they also used structured sacred spaces within buildings. In fact, they developed organized religious environments that functioned in ways comparable to early temples.

The origin of the “open-air only” idea

The idea that the Mycenaeans worshiped exclusively outdoors stems from early comparisons with Minoan Crete. Some early researchers assumed that Bronze Age societies possessed no formal religious architecture and interpreted the absence of large, classical-style temples as evidence of informal worship practices.

In addition, early archaeologists often struggled to identify religious buildings at Mycenaean sites. Many structures appeared domestic or administrative in character, leading to an underestimation of their possible ritual functions. Over time, these assumptions produced a simplified narrative suggesting that Mycenaean religion remained primitive or underdeveloped. In this interpretation, formal temple construction was seen as something that emerged only in later Greek civilization.

Today, this view is considered outdated and overlooks both textual and archaeological evidence. It also projects later Greek architectural expectations onto an earlier cultural and historical context.

What the Linear B tablets reveal about Mycenaean temples and religious practice

The Iliad already refers to a temple within the Trojan citadel that houses the statue of a goddess, suggesting that structured sacred spaces were part of early Greek religious imagination. Beyond literary tradition, the Linear B tablets provide some of the strongest evidence against the “open-air-only” interpretation. These tablets preserve administrative and religious records from Mycenaean palace centers, offering a rare direct glimpse into how cult activity was organized.

They record offerings and mention deities associated with the later Greek pantheon, including Zeus, Poseidon, Hera, Artemis, and Hermes, while also documenting the management of cult resources by officials. This points to a system of structured worship rather than purely spontaneous outdoor ritual.

Importantly, the tablets often connect deities with specific locations, referring to sanctuaries, priests, and offerings tied to defined, organized spaces. This suggests that religious practice was not confined to natural settings but also embedded within institutional environments. Taken together, this written evidence weakens the idea of exclusively outdoor worship. Instead, it reveals planning, hierarchy, and dedicated sacred functions within Mycenaean religious life.

Archaeological evidence of cult spaces

Archaeology strengthens this conclusion. Excavations at Mycenaean sites have uncovered buildings with clearly identifiable ritual functions, including altars, offering areas, and religious artifacts. One of the most significant examples comes from Mycenae itself. The so-called “Tsountas House” provides key evidence for structured cult activity within a designed landscape.

The Tsountas House is located near the citadel of Mycenae and was first excavated during early investigations led by Christos Tsountas. The structure dates to the Late Bronze Age. At first glance, the building does not resemble a later classical temple, lacking the monumental stone columns associated with later Greek religious architecture. However, its interior evidence tells a different story. Researchers such as Kim Shelton have identified signs of ritual activity within the structure, including figurines, offering vessels, and spatial arrangements that suggest ceremonial use. The layout also indicates controlled movement through the building, reinforcing the impression of organized ritual practice.

Taken together, these features are significant. They show that Mycenaeans used enclosed architectural spaces for ritual purposes, effectively functioning as cult centers. Worship was not confined solely to mountains, peak sanctuaries, or open courtyards. Instead, structured sacred environments existed within administrative and residential settings. This evidence points to a broader religious system in which cult activity, palace administration, offerings recorded in Linear B texts, and outdoor sacred landscapes all formed interconnected components of Mycenaean religious life rather than isolated or competing practices.

Why the “no temples during the Mycenaean period” narrative fails

The “no temples” narrative fails largely because it relies on a narrow, anachronistic definition of what a temple must be. If one expects Mycenaean sacred architecture to resemble later classical Doric structures, then such buildings will not appear in the archaeological record. However, this expectation sets a false standard. It overlooks architectural evolution over time and ignores the cultural and functional differences between the Bronze Age and later Greek periods.

Mycenaean sacred architecture followed its own internal logic. Ritual spaces were frequently integrated into palatial complexes or elite residences, and smaller, multi-functional buildings often served religious purposes in place of large, freestanding temples. For this reason, the absence of classical-style temples does not imply the absence of religious architecture.

At the same time, Mycenaeans did perform rituals outdoors, likely at natural features such as hills, caves, and mountain peaks. Outdoor worship was an important component of Bronze Age religious practice, a pattern that continued into later Greek tradition. Nonetheless, outdoor ritual activity did not exclude indoor sacred spaces. Rather, both forms coexisted and fulfilled different roles within a broader religious system.

Mycenaean religion combined palace-based cult administration, offerings recorded in Linear B texts, enclosed ritual spaces, and outdoor sacred sites in the landscape. Together, these elements formed a structured, multi-layered system operating across both constructed environments and the natural world. This combination underscores not only complexity and organization but also continuity with later Greek religion. Structured sacred space did not emerge suddenly in the Classical period but developed gradually from earlier Bronze Age practices.

Why the myth persists today

The persistence of the “no temples” myth can be traced to three main sources. First, early scholarship shaped the expectations of later generations. Once an interpretation enters textbooks and reference works, it tends to persist, even when new evidence complicates or overturns it.

Secondly, the very word “temple” carries a strong classical bias. Readers often imagine columns, symmetry, and monumental marble architecture. When such features are absent in the Bronze Age record, this is interpreted as a lack of temples rather than a difference in architectural form.

Lastly, simplified narratives tend to spread more easily than nuanced archaeological interpretations. The idea of “primitive outdoor worship” is easy to remember and communicate, whereas the actual picture is more complex and layered. In reality, the Mycenaeans did not rely exclusively on open-air worship but also built and used structured indoor spaces for ritual activity that can reasonably be understood as early temple forms.

The claim that Mycenaeans lacked organized religious buildings does not withstand scrutiny. It reflects early interpretive bias more than archaeological evidence. Mycenaean religion combined indoor and outdoor elements and showed early forms of institutional organization. In this sense, it laid important foundations for the development of later Greek religious architecture and practice.

When the philosopher Karl Marx set out to unravel the mysteries of value, exchange, and labor in capitalist society, he found a surprising intellectual ally in Aristotle, the ancient Greek philosopher who lived two millennia earlier. Despite their different historical contexts, both thinkers examined how value arises not inherently from things but from their social relations—especially through the lens of use and exchange.

Marx, in Capital, openly acknowledged Aristotle’s importance. Not only did Aristotle lay the groundwork for distinguishing use-value from exchange-value but his reflections on early human society, property, and the role of labor and technology revealed a conceptual framework that Marx would radicalize for modern critique.

Use-value and exchange-value: Aristotle’s anticipation

Aristotle’s analysis of value in Politics distinguishes between two uses of a commodity. One is proper and natural while the other is improper or derivative. He writes:

“Every commodity has two uses: both belong to the thing itself, but not in the same manner—one is the proper use, the other is not. For example, a shoe serves either to be worn or to be exchanged; both are uses of the shoe, for he who gives a shoe in exchange to someone who needs it, receiving in return money or food, uses the shoe as a shoe, but not according to its proper use, for it was not made to be exchanged.”

This distinction—between use-value and exchange-value—is a cornerstone of Marx’s analysis. For Marx, this Aristotelian formulation prefigures what he calls the “value-form” of the commodity. Commodities are useful in particular ways (use-value), but also enter into a social system of equivalence when exchanged (exchange-value).

Marx directly builds on this by showing that exchange-value does not exist inherently in an object but arises through the abstraction of labor—because human labor makes different useful things commensurable. Aristotle notes that a shoe does not exist for exchange. Marx took this insight and asked: What kind of society inverts this logic and makes objects valuable only in proportion to their exchangeability rather than their utility?

From the household to the marketplace: society before exchange

Aristotle’s theory of the household (oikos) as the first form of society was essential for Marx’s historical materialism. In Politics, Aristotle describes early society as beginning with families. In these families, property was communal and exchange unnecessary. It was only as the population grew and self-sufficiency gave way to interdependence that markets and money emerged.

Marx adopts this trajectory in Capital and his Grundrisse notebooks, writing that commodity exchange is not a timeless activity. Instead, it is a historically specific development that reflects changes in social relations and property forms. The transition from common property to private ownership and from useful production to production for exchange is the material foundation of class society.

In Aristotle, we already see the seeds of this analysis. He distinguishes between natural wealth-getting (production for use) and unnatural chrematistics (the accumulation of wealth for its own sake). Marx seizes upon this distinction to critique capitalism as a system in which the unnatural pursuit of profit replaces human need as the goal of production.

The machine and slavery

One of the most striking moments in Capital (Vol. I) occurs when Marx discusses machinery and automation. Here, he ironically invokes Aristotle’s dream that if tools could operate themselves, no slaves would be needed:

“If—dreamed Aristotle, the greatest thinker of antiquity—if every tool could perform its task at command or even by anticipation, like the statues of Daedalus that moved of their own accord, or the tripods of Hephaestus that spontaneously began their sacred work, if the shuttles of the loom wove by themselves, then master craftsmen would not need assistants, nor masters slaves.”

This vision did not remain uniquely Aristotelian. Antipatros, a Greek poet from the era of Cicero, hailed the invention of the watermill—the earliest rudimentary form of productive machinery—not simply as a technical advancement but as a social revolution. He praised it as the liberator of enslaved women who had been condemned to grind grain by hand. He envisioned it as the usher of a new golden age of human dignity and freedom.

In these ancient myths and poetic praises, technology is seen not merely as efficiency but as emancipation. The ancients, despite their slave-based economies, understood that the highest purpose of tools was to free people from servitude.

Marx’s irony and the betrayal of the promise of automation

Marx, however, saw this ancient hope turned upside down in modern capitalist society. In his words, what was supposed to free labor had become its jailer:

“Ah, those idolaters! They knew nothing of political economy or Christianity, as discovered by clever Bastiat and even cleverer McCulloch. They failed to understand, among other things, that the machine is the most reliable means for lengthening the working day.”

Here, Marx mocks the liberal economists of his time. Frédéric Bastiat and John Ramsay McCulloch, champions of laissez-faire capitalism, celebrated mechanization without recognizing its role in intensifying exploitation. Unlike the “idol-worshiping pagans,” who at least had the imagination to conceive of automation as a force for liberation, these modern theorists lacked even that mythical foresight.

Marx continues with biting irony:

“They failed to understand, among other things, that the machine is the most reliable means for lengthening the working day.

Thus the strange phenomenon arises in the history of modern industry. That the machine, the most powerful instrument for reducing labor time, becomes the most unfailing means of converting the whole life of the worker and his family into labor-time for capital’s valorization.”

The true paradox for Marx is that mechanization offers a means to liberate humanity but capital instead weaponizes it to intensify exploitation. The ancients envisioned automation as a means of human emancipation. Capitalism uses it to deepen alienation and dependency.

The irony is profound: the ancients dreamed of freedom through the machine, and capitalism delivered machines that reinforce dependency. In this way, Marx reclaims the ancient vision but also shows how the promise of automation has been betrayed.

Aristotle and Marx: From ancient slavery to modern compulsion

Marx’s dialogue with Aristotle was not just academic—it was dialectical. He admired Aristotle’s clarity in distinguishing between types of value and his historical insight into the development of exchange. However, Marx also showed how the slave economy of antiquity historically constrained Aristotle’s ideas.

Ironically, in an age in which full automatism is increasingly possible, the prevailing economic model continues to reproduce the conditions that Aristotle associated with slavery—not through direct ownership of people but through economic compulsion and structural inequality. In that sense, Marx saw in Aristotle both the seed of critical insight and the limit of pre-modern social theory.

Hence, while Aristotle could not imagine that labor determines value in commodities, he sensed something essential: that value is not a thing but a relation and that social forms of labor determine the shape of society itself.

Alexander the Great’s (356-323 BC) death meant his vision for a Greco-Persian Empire was extinguished with him—or was it?

A hodgepodge of East and West, Mithridates’ Pontic Empire emerges as a compelling possibility of what Alexander’s empire could’ve been, a faint apparition of that fleeting dream.

Alexander 2.0

Mithridates (135–63 BC) was the inheritor of two cultures and, naturally, an incarnation of two worlds. He delighted in his Macedonian heritage as much as his Persian forbearers.

Claiming Macedonian ancestry on one side and Persian dynastic lineage on the other, Mithridates used his mixed descent to reveal the commonalities between his diverse subjects.

Taking on Alexander’s mantle of global empire, Mithridates envisioned an alternative to Roman supremacy, a new world order.

To achieve this ambitious aim, the Pontian King united his Greek, Anatolian, and Persian subjects under an anti-Roman cross-cultural coalition.

The result of this cooperation was three wars mounted against Rome, wars that escalated to the point of genocide.

How could he amass such a diverse following against such a formidable foe?

Mithridates took a page from Alexander’s book and embodied East and West, both in appearance and idea. 

Pontus: Alexander’s vision of empire?

Mithridates hailed from the Kingdom of Pontus, a cultural melting pot that Alexander the Great would have approved of.

The north of Pontus’s snow-clad Alps was a largely Hellenic-dominated coastline. There, Greek colonists had erected the city of Sinope, Mithridates’ capital.

The historian Strabo, himself a Pontian, claimed that it was “the most noteworthy of the cities in the region.”

South of the Alps was known as Katpatuka (land of horses) by the Iranians and, later, Cappadocia by the Greeks. There, villages predominated apart from a few settlements, such as Amaseia, Strabo’s hometown, and Cabeira.

While Hellenic culture dominated the coast, the Cappadocian hinterland preserved its old Anatolian non-Greek heritage. Rostovtzeff (1932), a pioneer in Pontic history, described the Hellenic influence around the Black Sea as “a thin Greek shell around a hard native kernel.”

The third influence on the region was Iranian. The enduring relics of Persian rule would have been visible to many a Hellenistic Pontian. Strabo says that the Pontic people took sacred vows at the state temple, Zela, which were dedicated to Persian deities: Anaitis, Omanus, and Anadatus.

Moreover, Zeus Stratios, most likely a syncretic reincarnation of Ahura Mazda, received lavish offerings from Persian Kings, which Pontian rulers, including Mithridates Eupator, continued. The continuation of Persian religious customs well after an eclipse of Achaemenid authority attests to the impression Persian presence had made on Pontic royalty and their subjects.

In the subsequent Hellenistic period, the increasing pace of Hellenization of the kingdom meant that the Mithridates Dynasty had to evolve.  There needed to be a balance between the new incoming wave of this ancient form of globalization with their Perso-Anatolian traditions that still held sway in their domain. 

Divine descent

Mithridates Eupator’s dual lineages afforded him illustrious ancestors and a unique hybrid set of dynastic customs. He was a Helleno-Persian Prince who practiced mixed religious rites.

Mithradates divine connections are well in accordance with Alexander the Great’s own claims. Like the Pontic King, Alexander claimed Heracles and Dionysus, among other numinous figures, as ancestors.

Consequently, the Pontic King embodied redemptive qualities resonating in the Greek and Perso-Anatolian worlds. For the Greeks, he established a mythical connection with Dionysus, the god of liberation and new beginnings, and took the theonym Mithridates Eupator Dionysus.

Likewise, Mithridates claimed heritage from Herakles, who emancipated the titan Prometheus, humanity’s creator. On the other hand, Mithridates’ star-signaling birth was said to fulfill Persian prophecies of a coming savior from the East, as did his name, “Mithras-sent.” 

Global principles

In addition to religious mediation, Mithridates weaponized the growing resentment of his subjects. Just like Alexander’s vision for his diverse empire, the Pontian King tried to respect Greek and Iranian values.

Both Greeks and Perso-Anatolians were chafing under Roman occupation. In mainland Greece and Anatolia, the common hatred towards Roman rule provoked a transcultural antagonism against Roman hegemony.

Debt accrued by Roman taxation hindered asa or Truth, a prominent Persian tenet. For the Greeks, Roman occupation was seen as compromising their eleutheria, or freedom, which was fundamental to Greek identity.

Mithridates acknowledged these grievances in his speeches, along with coins and other allusions. By showing sensitivity to both cultures, the Pontian King illustrated how compatible Iranian and Greek cultures could be.

This may be surprising, considering the tumultuous history that plagued the relations between Greeks and Iranians. Egregious crimes were committed in Athens by the Persians and by Greeks in Persepolis at Alexander’s instigation as punishment.

Yet Mithridates successfully harmonized the two cultures, as Alexander the Great’s policies aimed to accomplish.

Was Mithridates’ Pontian kingdom what Alexander’s empire could have been?

Sensitive to Greek and Perso-Anatolian culture, Mithridates entangled much of the Eastern Mediterranean in opposition to Rome. Mithridates carried on Alexander’s vision for an international empire even though he was unsuccessful in his wars against Rome. By doing so, the Pontian king proved Alexander the Great’s Helleno-Persian hypothesis was possible.

Alexander’s vision for joining East and West wasn’t an idyllic dream but was ultimately an achievable reality. 

In Homer’s Iliad, Thetis plays an important role in shaping the destiny of her son, Achilles. As a goddess, she intervenes at key moments in the epic, pushing the Greek hero to alter the course of events.

Although Thetis appears less frequently than many of the warriors and gods who dominate the battlefield at Troy, her actions influence some of the most significant developments in the poem. As a sea goddess and the mother of the greatest Greek warrior, she occupies a unique position between the divine and mortal worlds. She cannot prevent Achilles from dying, since the Fates have already decreed it, yet she repeatedly intervenes to protect his honor, ease his suffering, and ensure that his glory endures.

Through Thetis’ character, Homer explores themes of maternal love, fate, mortality, glory, and divine power. The first major instance of Thetis helping Achilles occurs in Book 1. After Agamemnon captures Briseis, a captive woman awarded to Achilles as a war prize, the Greek hero feels deeply dishonored and withdraws from battle. In his grief and anger, Achilles calls upon his mother. Thetis immediately rises from the sea to comfort him and listen to his complaint.

This scene reveals the extraordinary bond between mother and son. Unlike many divine figures in Greek mythology, Thetis responds with sympathy and tenderness. She understands Achilles’ suffering because she is painfully aware of his short lifespan. Her lament for him reflects a mother’s helplessness in the face of fate.

Thetis petitions Zeus to turn events in favor of Troy

After hearing Achilles’ request, Thetis undertakes one of the most consequential actions in the epic. She travels to Olympus and petitions Zeus to punish the Greeks by granting success to the Trojans. Her aim is not simply revenge but the restoration of Achilles’ honor. Zeus eventually agrees, and his decision alters the course of the war. The Trojans begin to gain the upper hand, while the Greeks suffer devastating losses. Through this intervention, Thetis helps Achilles achieve the recognition he believes Agamemnon has denied him.

This episode demonstrates the extent of Thetis’ influence among the gods. Although she cannot alter fate itself, she is capable of shaping the chain of events that leads toward it. Her appeal to Zeus succeeds in part because of a previous favor she had done for him. In this sense, her assistance rests not only on maternal devotion but also on her standing within the divine order. Achilles’ withdrawal from battle would have remained a private grievance without Thetis’ intervention. Instead, it escalates into a crisis that engulfs the entire Greek army.

The second major instance of Thetis helping Achilles occurs after the death of Patroclus. Patroclus, Achilles’ closest companion, enters battle wearing Achilles’ armor and is killed by Hector. When Achilles learns of his friend’s death, he is overwhelmed by grief and rage. Once again, Thetis hears her son’s cries and goes to him. This scene is among the most emotional in the Iliad. Thetis is aware that Achilles’ decision to return to battle will lead directly to his own death, yet she does not attempt to stop him. Instead, she offers comfort and practical assistance.

Hephaestus forges the invincible shield of Achilles

Achilles cannot immediately rejoin the fighting because Hector has confiscated his armor. Recognizing his need, Thetis travels to the forge of Hephaestus and requests new armor for her son. Hephaestus responds by crafting the magnificent shield of Achilles, one of the most celebrated objects in world literature. The shield depicts scenes of war and peace, labor and celebration, and life and death. With this armor, Thetis enables Achilles to return to battle and fulfill his heroic destiny.

This act of assistance is particularly significant because it highlights the limits of divine power. Thetis can secure the finest armor ever made, but she cannot save Achilles from mortality. Her help therefore reflects the tragic paradox that every action she takes to aid her son also brings him closer to the fate she most fears. The armor allows Achilles to defeat Hector, but it also marks the final stage of his journey toward death.

Thetis’ role after Hector’s death further underscores her importance. Achilles becomes consumed by grief and rage, dragging Hector’s body around the tomb of Patroclus. The gods disapprove of this behavior and decide that Hector must be returned to his family. Zeus sends Thetis to deliver his command to Achilles. She successfully persuades her son to release the body in exchange for ransom, helping restore moral balance and preparing the tale for closure.

This final intervention reveals another dimension of Thetis’ assistance. Earlier, she helped Achilles gain honor through vengeance; now she helps him regain humanity through compassion. Her influence guides him from destructive rage toward acceptance. The reconciliation between Achilles and Priam, one of the most moving scenes in ancient literature, would not have occurred without Thetis serving as the messenger between gods and mortals.

The complexity of Thetis, the mother of Achilles

Modern scholars have emphasized the complexity of Thetis’ character. Rather than portraying her simply as a nurturing mother, recent studies highlight her power and agency. Thetis is more than a grieving parent. She is a divine force capable of influencing both Olympus and the battlefield for the benefit of her son. This is evident in actions such as her request to Hephaestus to forge an impenetrable suit of armor for Achilles.

At the same time, scholars frequently stress the tragic nature of her motherhood. Classicist Emily Wilson observes that she has come to view the Iliad as “a poem about the pain of a goddess mother who adores her mortal child and can’t protect him.” This insight captures the emotional core of Thetis’ role in the epic. Despite her divine status, she remains powerless as a mother in the face of fate. Her interventions can shape events, but they cannot prevent the loss she knows is imminent.

Other scholars have also noted that grief defines Thetis’ presence throughout the epic poem. Classicist Serena Cannavale describes Thetis in the Iliad as “a figure of grief,” emphasizing that her sorrow is present long before Achilles actually dies. Her laments anticipate the tragedy that hangs over the entire narrative.

Ultimately, Thetis helps Achilles in three essential ways: she restores his honor by persuading Zeus to favor the Trojans, she equips him for revenge by obtaining new armor from Hephaestus, and she guides him back toward humanity by conveying Zeus’s command to release Hector’s body to Priam. These actions shape the central events of the Iliad and reveal the profound connection between mother and son. Yet the tragedy of Thetis lies in the fact that her power cannot overcome destiny. She can comfort Achilles, protect his reputation, and secure his everlasting glory, but she cannot save his life.

For this reason, Thetis embodies the tension between divine power and human mortality. Every time she helps Achilles, she demonstrates her love, yet every act of assistance also reminds readers that fate is stronger than even the gods. Through Thetis, Homer presents a moving portrait of maternal devotion in the face of inevitable loss, making her one of the emotional centers of the Iliad.

Editor's note: Got an opinion on anything you've read in the Kyiv Independent so far? Send it to letters@kyivindependent.com, and it may appear in our Letters section.

Key developments on June 6-7:

• 'Sky-high arrogance' — Russian drone strikes spent nuclear fuel depot

For many centuries, the ancient Macedonians lived on the fringes of the Greek world far removed from the prominent city-states of the south. For this reason, many have called their status as Greeks into question. Famously, only the Greeks could participate in the ancient Olympic Games. So then, what was the status of this northern tribe in that regard? Did the Macedonians participate in the ancient Greek Olympic Games or not?

The early years of the Olympic Games

According to the earliest tradition, the Greek hero Heracles founded the Olympic Games. The ancient historians placed the founding of this athletic competition in 776 BCE. For the first two centuries, there is no evidence that the Olympic Games involved the Macedonians. Why is this?

Put simply, the Macedonians generally did not have much to do with the Greeks of the south due to the fact that they lived so far north. This applied to numerous aspects of the Greek world and not just to the Olympics. They were generally quite isolated in terms of socio-political developments even though they worshipped the same gods and had the same traditions and language as the rest of the Greeks.

For this reason, it is no surprise that the Macedonians apparently did not, initially, express any interest in participating in the Olympic Games. They took place in Olympia at Elis in the Peloponnese far to the south of Macedonia.

King Alexander I, the first Macedonian in the Olympics

This changed at the turn of the 5th century BCE. At this time, King Alexander I of Macedonia wanted to participate in the athletic competition of Olympia. When he attempted to enter, the Hellanodikai, the judges of the competition, denied his request. There was, naturally, prejudice against Alexander’s people since they lived so far away from the rest of the Greeks.

However, Alexander was able to convince the judges to allow him to participate. He pointed out that his dynasty was founded by Perdiccas, the son of Temenus, a descendant of Heracles (Hercules). After hearing this explanation, the judges accepted that Alexander was a true Greek.

After Alexander participated in the Olympic Games, various other Macedonians also began doing so. It seems that he initiated an interest in the competition in his homeland.

Macedonians in the Olympic Games

At first, participation in the Olympic Games among Macedonians was limited to the royal dynasty. After Alexander I, there is a record of King Archelaus I participating. He competed in a chariot race and was victorious. This occurred in 408 BCE, still long before the expansion of Macedonian hegemony to all the Greek city-states.

In the following century, King Philip II also competed in the Games. He was the father of Alexander the Great. Philip actually participated three times. All three times, two of which were chariot races, he was the winner. These three victories occurred in 356, 352, and 348 BCE.

Just after this era, we find records of non-royal Macedonians participating in the Olympic Games. Perhaps King Philip’s impressive series of victories had something to do with this. In 328 BCE, there is a record of a man named Cliton winning the important running race. Based on the available records, he was the first non-royal Macedonian to win in the Games.

After Cliton, we find records of various other Macedonians participating in and winning many of the events in the Olympic Games. In fact, we find an average of approximately one Macedonian winner per decade over the next six decades. Additionally, we need to consider the fact that we only have records of the winners. Likely, many other Macedonians participated in the Olympic Games during this period, and we certainly know that they continued to do so thereafter.

Greece has fallen out of the world’s top 50 startup ecosystems, dropping to 51st place in StartupBlink’s Global Startup Ecosystem Index 2026. The country also slipped in Europe, ranking 29th, down from 27th in 2025.

According to the report, this is Greece’s lowest global position since 2022. The decline came despite positive annual ecosystem growth of 4.8 percent. However, that rate was well below the global average, meaning Greece lost ground as other startup ecosystems expanded more rapidly.

StartupBlink’s 2026 index ranks 1,556 cities and 100 countries, using indicators linked to startup quantity, quality, and the wider business environment. For Greece, the findings show a mixed picture: the country has recognizable startup successes, a sizeable ecosystem value, and improving policy tools, but its global momentum has slowed.

Greece’s business conditions are stronger than its startup outcomes

One of the clearest findings is the gap between Greece’s business environment and its overall startup ranking. Greece ranks 33rd among 125 countries in the Innovators Business Environment Index, significantly higher than its 51st position in the main startup ecosystem ranking.

This suggests that Greece has relatively strong underlying conditions for innovators, but these conditions have not yet fully translated into stronger startup ecosystem performance. The report estimates Greece’s startup ecosystem value at $12.1 billion. The country has two unicorns and three cities in the global top 1,000 startup cities.

Athens remains Greece’s dominant startup hub but weighs on national performance

Athens continues to dominate Greece’s startup scene, but its weaker performance was a major reason behind the country’s fall in the global ranking. The Greek capital dropped 17 places to 134th globally, after recording negative growth of 4.8 percent. In the Balkans, Athens also fell one position to third overall.

Despite this decline, Athens remains one of the region’s most mature startup ecosystems. The city leads the Balkans in the Ecosystem Maturity functional category, reflecting its track record in producing startup outcomes. StartupBlink also describes Greece’s level of ecosystem centralization as healthy. Athens scores 7.4 times higher than Thessaloniki, a ratio that points to a strong national hub while still leaving room for secondary cities to grow.

Thessaloniki grows although Heraklion records Greece’s strongest growth

Thessaloniki posted strong annual growth of 29.1 percent but still fell four places to 443rd globally because other cities advanced faster.

Heraklion, however, delivered Greece’s strongest city-level result. The port city of Crete climbed 89 places to 771st worldwide, with annual growth of 64.5 percent. That was the highest growth rate among Greek startup cities in the 2026 index. Heraklion’s performance shows that startup activity outside Athens is becoming increasingly visible even though the capital remains the country’s main innovation center.

Greece’s startup ecosystem ranks fifth in Southern Europe

Greece ranks fifth overall in Southern Europe. It performs slightly better in the Ecosystem Value functional category, where it ranks fourth in the subregion. In the Balkans, Greece ranks third overall, one place lower than last year. However, it performs better in specific sectors, ranking second in the region for both Fintech and Social & Leisure.

These sectoral rankings highlight areas where Greece has a stronger regional position, especially in financial technology and consumer-facing digital services.

Viva Wallet and PeopleCert remain Greece’s startup champions

The report identifies Viva Wallet and PeopleCert as Greece’s main startup ecosystem champions. Both are based in Athens and are privately valued at over $1 billion. Viva Wallet has a StartupBlink score of 570, while PeopleCert has a score of 277.

Viva Wallet became one of Greece’s most important startup success stories after JPMorgan acquired a 48.5 percent stake in the fintech company in 2022 in a deal valued at $2 billion. The transaction confirmed Viva Wallet’s status as Greece’s second unicorn and was described in the report as the country’s largest-ever startup deal.

PeopleCert crossed the $1 billion valuation mark in 2021 after acquiring AXELOS for approximately $525 million.

EquiFund, Elevate Greece, and NBG Business Seeds helped shape ecosystem

StartupBlink also points to several initiatives that have shaped Greece’s startup ecosystem over the past decade and a half. The National Bank of Greece launched NBG Business Seeds in 2010, with the report describing it as the country’s longest-running startup innovation competition.

Six years later, Greece and the European Investment Fund signed EquiFund, a fund-of-funds of approximately $290 million designed to help establish the country’s first professional venture capital market. Another important step came in 2020, when the Greek government launched Elevate Greece, the official national startup registry.

The platform gives startups access to state benefits, investor visibility, angel investor tax incentives, and Golden Visa eligibility. The report also names the National Bank of Greece / NBG Business Seeds, Elevate Greece, and Enterprise Greece as notable startup ecosystem builders.

Enterprise Greece is described as the country’s official investment and trade promotion agency, actively promoting the Greek startup ecosystem to international investors and supporting foreign founders through licensing and strategic investment frameworks.

New tax incentives and startup Golden Visa aim to attract capital

Recent policy developments also form part of the broader picture. In 2025, Greece introduced new tax incentives for angel investors, expanding the deduction cap to approximately $980 million, and launched a startup Golden Visa program. These measures are intended to attract startup investment and entrepreneurial talent.

In 2024, Greece, in partnership with the European Investment Fund, launched the EquiFund II equity mandate, with a focus on life sciences, health, and sustainability. Together, these initiatives indicate that Greece continues to strengthen the financial and policy framework supporting startups, even as its global ranking has declined.

Greece’s main challenge is faster startup ecosystem growth

The StartupBlink 2026 ranking does not depict Greece as a weak startup ecosystem. The country has two major startups valued above $1 billion, a total ecosystem value of $12.1 billion, strong business environment conditions, and clear institutional support.

The core issue is pace. Greece has grown but not quickly enough compared with global competitors. The contraction in Athens had a direct impact on the national ranking, while Thessaloniki and Heraklion demonstrate that regional ecosystems are still in a phase of development.

According to Greece’s Fire Service on Monday, sixty-four forest fires broke out across the country in the last two days, as rising temperatures heightened fire risk, with officials attributing most incidents to negligence during outdoor work and other activities.

Early assessments suggest that human carelessness is the primary cause in most cases. Specialized investigative units are currently examining each incident to establish the exact cause and determine responsibility where appropriate.

Heat and negligence heighten risk of forest fires across Greece

Officials said recent high temperatures have increased the risk of ignition and allowed fires to spread more rapidly. However, firefighting forces managed to bring most blazes under control at an early stage through rapid intervention.

The Hellenic Fire Service noted that the swift response prevented the fires from reaching populated areas, highlighting the importance of immediate mobilization in the critical moments after a fire breaks out.

The warning comes as Greece enters a particularly dangerous period for forest fire activity, when dry vegetation, rising temperatures, and local winds can quickly turn even a small spark into a fast-moving blaze.

Hundreds of fines and dozens of arrests since January

Authorities have stepped up enforcement of fire prevention regulations since the beginning of the year. From January 1 through June 7, they imposed 402 administrative fines across Greece, totaling around €383,395 ($442,500). During the same period, authorities made seventy-one arrests as called for under procedures for violations of fire prevention legislation.

The figures reflect a broader effort to discourage risky behavior before it leads to larger fires, particularly during periods when weather conditions make the natural environment more vulnerable.

Fire service urges public to avoid risky outdoor activity

The Fire Service has called on citizens to exercise extreme caution during outdoor activities, particularly those involving sparks, flames, machinery, burning materials, or labor near dry grass and forested areas.

Officials emphasized that most forest fires can be prevented by adhering to basic safety rules and avoiding actions that could ignite a blaze. “Attention from everyone is crucial for protecting human life, property, and the natural environment,” Greek authorities said.

Greece braces for forest fires as summer heat intensifies with expanded resources

The latest warning comes as Greece enters the wildfire season with a significantly reinforced firefighting plan designed to address increasingly intense and unpredictable summer blazes across the country. On the ground, the Hellenic Fire Service currently counts 17,727 permanent and seasonal firefighters, with the force expected to rise to 18,804 by the end of the year. More than 4,300 vehicles support this expanded manpower, enabling faster deployment and tactical assistance to regional units across both mainland and island areas.

Specialized forest commando units are expected to play a central role in this year’s strategy. These teams are trained to operate in challenging and inaccessible terrain where conventional firefighting forces may struggle to intervene quickly. The elite corps now consists of twenty-one units with 1,450 personnel, marking a sharp expansion compared to 2022, when the program began with just six units.

Greece has also strengthened its aerial firefighting capacity, with eighty to eighty-five aircraft expected to be available daily during the high-risk season, including thirty-three state-owned aircraft and fifty-one leased planes. These resources are intended to support rapid aerial containment, particularly in the critical early stages of a forest fire.

Authorities are increasingly relying on technology as well, including an expanded drone fleet, to improve surveillance and early detection in vulnerable areas. The goal is to identify smoke, heat signatures, or suspicious activity before fires spread, allowing Civil Protection and fire services to coordinate a faster response.

Located at just about a 1-hour drive from Athens, the Peloponnese region offers a plethora of historical sites, culture, and beauty to tourists looking for a spectacular trip in Greece; there are many reasons why this region of Greece is one that you do not want to miss! Let’s take a look at 10 reasons you will have an unforgettable trip in the Peloponnese this summer.

1. Nafplio

The first capital city of modern Greece was Nafplio, and until this day, you will see ruins of the fortress walls up high overlooking the town from the mountain side. This charming and romantic town has small streets that wrap around neoclassical buildings and squares and is the perfect place to visit any time of the year.

2. Epidavros

From ancient ruins and an impressive ancient theater to a quaint town with tavernas serving up local treats, Epidavros is a must-see on any trip through the Peloponnese. During summer months, there are weekend shows at the ancient theater that draw in crowds of thousands of spectators. It is simply an amazing experience!

3. Beaches

Check out the unspoiled beaches that this region has to offer! There is such diversity in terrains surrounding the sea in this region. The seas are clean and the beaches might have either pebbles or soft sand, and you can jump off of cliffs. There is something for everyone in the Peloponnese!

4. Ilia

This is where the mountain meets sea and provides tourists with the amazing experience of staying in a quaint, beautiful village with sandy beaches and clear blue waters outlined by forests of pine trees reaching down to the sea. There are also some significant archaeological sites you should check out while in Ilia, such as the Temple of Epicurios Apollo.

5. Arcadia

You will find Arcadia in the center of the Peloponnese Region. This area is famous for its huge mountains, such as Mainalo and Parnonas, as well as its natural landscapes. It was first settled by the Arcadians who are considered to be one of the oldest people in the Peloponnese and are purported to have been responsible for the establishment of numerous significant cities throughout the region.

6 &7. Olives and Kalamata

You can find 65 percent of Greece’s 132 million olive trees in the Peloponnese with the black Kalamata olives being the most well-known variety. So why not stop by Kalamata, enjoy some olives, try great local Greek dishes with fresh olive oil, and enjoy the villages and beaches in this beautiful part of the Peloponnese? You can purchase souvenirs, such as olive oil or sculptures made from olive tree wood that are locally hand-crafted.

8. Wine Tours and Vineyards

A perfect way to get to know the beautiful Peloponnese region of Greece is to enjoy an amazing wine tour during your visit. Greece is one of the oldest wine-producing regions in the world, having begun cultivating vineyards and producing wine over 6,500 years ago.

9. Achaia

Home to the port city of Patras, the biggest city in the Peloponnese, Achaia is the place to go for beautiful mountain and seaside landscapes, including some of the most desirable beach destinations in the region along the Corinthian Gulf. Achaia is considered Greece’s “seaside gate” to Western Europe and is one of the most historic sites in the Peloponnese. On the way to Patras from Athens, you will also pass the iconic Rio-Antirrio Bridge.

10. Something for Everyone

The Peloponnese Region is known for its variety of activities as well quite diverse landscape. From hiking to wine tours, there really is something for everyone in this region of Greece! Enjoy the breathtaking waters of the gulfs of Corinth, Patras, Saronic, Messinia, Argolida, and Laconia and the Peloponnese’s diverse climate, ranging from the less humid east to the colder climate with snow and rich vegetation in the central and more mountainous parts of the region and the rain and hot weather of the west.

The Minoan Road, over 3,500 years old, is the oldest known paved road in Europe. It connected the prominent Minoan cities of Knossos, Gortyn, and Lebena on ancient Crete.

Only small sections of the road remain intact today, but this impressive ancient route ran approximately 50 kilometers (31 miles) across Crete.

Built during the height of the Minoan civilization, around 1600 BC, the road showcases the advanced engineering skills of the Minoans, who created an infrastructure that supported both daily life and economic activity across Crete.

The road included side drains to handle water runoff, a feature that helped preserve its structure by preventing water damage. Its condition is remarkable for an ancient road.

It was constructed with a solid, 200 mm (8-inch) thick layer of sandstone blocks bound with a clay-gypsum mortar. This sturdy base layer was then topped with basaltic flagstones, providing a durable surface.

The road included defined shoulders, which may have functioned as pedestrian pathways or for animal traffic, keeping it orderly and safe for movement.

Mythical King Minos used the road to talk to Zeus

According to legend, King Minos, the mythical king of Crete, son of Zeus and Europa, set out on this road (then a mere pathway) from Knossos, covering a large part of the way to the sacred cave, to meet his father Zeus and speak with him in person. There, he would learn about the mistakes that had been made and receive oracles concerning the best legislation for the future.

He started from Knossos and ended in the stalagmite cave of Dikteon Andron, located on Mount Dikte of the Ida or Ideon mountains of Crete (the current mountain of Psiloritis).

Minoan Road a crucial link in the Minoan civilization

The Minoan Road was a crucial link in the Minoan civilization’s network, facilitating trade, communication, and cultural exchange across Crete. Knossos, one of its endpoints, was the center of Minoan political and cultural life, while Gortyn and Lebena were significant in both Minoan and later Greek periods.

This road not only attests to the Minoans’ ingenuity but also underscores the role of Crete as a cultural and commercial bridge between the civilizations of the ancient Mediterranean.

The Minoan civilization’s infrastructure, especially roads like this, laid the groundwork for the development of European trade routes and road-building techniques in the centuries that followed.

Throughout most of the Bronze Age, the Minoans were the rulers of Crete. Over the course of their civilization, they gradually built up an incredible palace complex at Knossos. This was the most powerful city on the island.

The palace complex at Knossos served temple functions and was also an administrative center.

 

Ancient Athens’ oldest coins, minted in the period of the Athenian tyranny in the lead up to democracy in the 6th century BC, were created from ores such as silver originating around the world, a recent study suggests, revealing a previously unknown ancient global trade.

The study, published in the journal Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, sheds light on how exiled Peisistratus, who ruled ancient Athens as a tyrant three times, managed to set up silver mining operations in spite of the fact that hostile local tribes controlled the regions and its mines. It has long been argued that Peisistratus sourced the silver from the districts of Mount Pangaion and the Strymon river in northern Greece, followed by the exploitation of mines in Lavrion, near Athens.

Athenian coinage was instigated by Peisitratus, who ruled Athens from 546 to 510 BC. This first series of coins in ancient Athens is known as Wappenmunzen, referring to an array of silver and electrum coins, of which the most important were the ‘horse,’ the ‘gorgon,’ and the ‘wheel,’ each of which had their own variations. They were later replaced by the long-lasting and emblematic design for which Athens’s coinage became best known—the owl of Athena.

Researchers studied 22 ancient coins from Peisistratus’ time, 16 from the Numismatic Museum in Athens and six from the British Museum in London. Apart from silver, the coins contain a mixture of other elements, including copper, zinc, gold and lead. They rubbed these pieces on paper strips to obtain a small quantity of the metals, then used a chemical analysis technique known as gas chromatography (a separation technique using gas flow through a glass or metal column that separates compounds). Lead mined from around the world has different isotopic signatures, reflecting those locations. Therefore the researchers were able to match the coins’ signatures to those held on a lead isotope database, allowing them to pinpoint where the material came from.

The analysis of the data researchers collected shows that the Athenians used a wide and unexpected variety of ore sources for the minting of their first series of coins, ranging from Spain in the west to the south of France, through to Turkey in the east and the Rhodope mountains and Romania in the north—the key finding of the study. Lavrion ores, according to the findings of the researchers, were not found in the 22 sampled Wappenmunzen. 

The authors suggest that Peisistratus must have tapped international connections to mint coins under his rule, while the overall analysis points to undocumented trading relationships and a much more interconnected ancient world.

Athens under Peisistratus, minter of Athens’ first coins

Peisistratus was an ancient Greek statesman who ruled Athens three times as a tyrant. His reforms laid the foundations for the city’s later supremacy in Greece.

Born around 600 BC, he first came to power with a coup in 561 BC and ruled Athens as a tyrant two more times, from 559 to 556 BC and again in 546 until his death in 528 BC. He was very popular with Athenians.

His defense of the lower class of Athens is an early example of populism. While in power, he confronted the aristocracy and significantly reduced their privileges, confiscating their estates and giving them to the poor.

He also funded many religious and artistic programs in order to improve the economy and distribute wealth more equally among Athenians.

Peisistratus’ legacy includes the unification of Attica, the organization of the Panathenaic Games and the first attempt to produce a definitive edition of Homer’s epics (until then hand-written copies were available only to the rich).

The Athenian ruler promoted the cults of Athena and Dionysus and began the construction of the temple to Athena on the Acropolis. He also promoted a number of other public works, including the Lyceum, temples to Apollo and Zeus, and the Fountain of the Nine Springs.

Furthermore, he supported literature and the arts, and the city’s Dionysia festival flourished during his time. The Athenian coinage had been introduced by about 550 BC and may reflect a policy of his, though there is no clear reference of this in contemporary documents.

The Ancient Greeks were active travelers, despite the dangers of land travel and the fear of highwaymen. Sea travel required ample supplies and means.

A fascinating archaeological find exhibited in the Agora Museum in Athens is rectangular clay tablets with inscribed names and occupations that purportedly served as travel documents in antiquity.

Most travelers were aristocrats and well-to-do citizens who traveled to witness and experience the wonders of the ancient world, and other famous places and sights.

Others traveled for pilgrimage; healing in sanctuaries such as the Sanctuary of Asclepius in Olympia, the Sanctuary of Apollo on Delos Island, or to attend religious festivals and monumental athletic events like the Olympic Games at Olympia or the Panathenaic Games in Athens.

Merchants also traveled to other parts of Greece, or across the Mediterranean and beyond to promote and sell their goods to destinations such as Egypt, Asia Minor, the Middle East, and the Black Sea.

The Ancient Greeks were curious about the world and had a great desire to learn. For that reason, they held travel in high regard. The most famous epic journeys, such as Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey or Jason’s expedition to retrieve the Golden Fleece, had protagonists who had to travel far and undergo trials to achieve their goals.

In their long journeys. They experienced great adventures, encountered grave dangers, and saw things and, above all, places they would never see if confined in their birthplace all their lives. These epics celebrated heroic adventures through travel.

Then people from all over Greece and beyond would travel far to consult the oracle at Delphi and plan their future.

Also, it was through travel that ancient Greeks discovered places worth exploring and exploiting, such as uninhabited fertile lands or seaside areas with great potential, where they established trading colonies.

Overall, the accounts of travelers provided valuable information about the contemporary world. In modern day, these accounts help us understand the world during that period.

Practical issues of traveling in antiquity

In addition, Greeks who traveled frequently brought back new ideas, Eastern tastes in clothing, jewelry, and foods, as well as architectural trends.

The ancient Greeks discovered new lands and established trading colonies across the Mediterranean, Asia Minor, and the Black Sea from the 8th through the 6th centuries. Many of these have evolved into the great cities that still stand today.

The most famous of the colonies were those in Magna Graecia, in today’s southern Italy and Sicily (Calabria, Apulia, Basilicata, Campania, Syracuse, Tarentum, Sybaris, and Croton), where the Greek element is still alive today, especially in the language.

Other important ancient Greek colonies were Massalia (modern-day Marseilles in France), Cyrene in Libya, and Byzantium on the Bosporus Strait, which later became Constantinople.

Greek philosophers on travelling

Several ancient Greek philosophers valued travelling as a means to gain knowledge and experience. Encountering different cultures and experiencing new environments broadens one’s perspective. Great figures like Thales and Pythagoras traveled to Egypt and other regions to study and acquire knowledge.

Aristotle believed that empirical observation and practical experience are good sources of knowledge. Provided, though, that one had the foundations in reason and virtue through formal education. Otherwise, one could not learn simply by travelling. The philosopher is known as saying, not in the exact words, that travel is education for the young and experience for the old.

For those who are older, Aristotle believed that they accumulate experience and wisdom by travelling. They reflect on their lives, gain new insights into the world, and may appreciate life more profoundly.

“Those who wish to know about the world must learn about it in its particular details,” said Heraclitus, the Greek philosopher from Ephesus. The quote implies that a man should travel to learn about the world with his own eyes. Heraclitus believed that the world is constantly changing: “The only thing that is constant is change,” is one of his famous quotes.

With his phrase “τα πάντα ρεί” (everything flows), Heraclitus said that the world is in perpetual motion; therefore, man should be constantly moving as well.

Plato is known for having traveled extensively, visiting Italy, Sicily, Egypt, and Libya. The reason he traveled so much was his disappointment with Athenian society. He was exposed to new cultures and ideas during his travels, which influenced his philosophical development and his Theory of Forms.

Other philosophers who traveled extensively were Thales of Miletus, who visited Egypt to study science and mathematics. Pythagoras traveled to Egypt, Israel, Babylonia, and possibly India. Democritus traveled in Asia, Egypt, and possibly India and Ethiopia.

Socrates, on the other hand, was against travelling and he never left Athens, his hometown. The father of philosophy, for many, believed that man should only make internal journeys. He emphasized self-knowledge and ethical development, which he believed were best pursued through internal reflection and dialogue.

The Minoan civilization was a rich and relatively advanced culture centered on ancient Crete during the Bronze Age. However, they did not refer to themselves as the Minoans. This is a modern name coined by British archaeologist Sir Arthur Evans in the early 20th century. What was the ancient name of the Minoans? What did they call themselves, and what did other nations call them?

Ancient Greek name for the Minoans

There are no Greek historical texts which describe the Bronze Age Minoan civilisation. However, texts from the Archaic Period, such as Homer’s Odyssey, mention a people on Crete called the Eteocretans.

This name means ‘true Cretans’. Later writers, such as the historian Diodorus of the first century BCE, viewed them as the native inhabitants of Crete. Therefore, it is likely that the Eteocretans were the descendants of the Minoans.

The foundation of this term can be traced back to the Bronze Age. A Linear B inscription from Pylos dating to c. 1300 BCE refers to Crete as ‘Ke-re-te’, reconstructed as ‘Kretes’.

Given that this dates from long after the Mycenaean Greeks had conquered Minoan Crete, this cannot be used to show what the Mycenaean Greeks called the Minoans, nor what they called their island.

The Bible’s name for the Minoans

Let us now consider what the Bible calls the Minoans. In the Book of Genesis, the tenth chapter contains the famous Table of Nations. This shows the genealogy of the world’s nations. Included among this list is a reference to Caphtorim, one of the sons of Mizraim.

Mizraim, according to his name and family members, is considered the forefather of the Egyptians. His son Caphtorim is meant to be the forefather of a nation that resided in a place called Caphtor in the Hebrew Scriptures.

Biblical references to Caphtor make it an island and the homeland of the Philistines. Archaeological evidence clearly shows that the Philistines originated from the region of the Aegean Sea.

This is further supported by the fact that the Bible associates the Philistines with a nation called the Cherethites. The latter ethnonym appears to be synonymous with ‘Cretans’, since the Greek Septuagint translated it as such.

Therefore, given this information, it is evident that the island of Caphtor in the Bible is Crete. Therefore, the Caphtorim, or people of Caphtor, is the Bible’s name for the Minoans. Since the reference to the Cherethites only appears in accounts set after the Mycenaean Greeks had conquered Minoan Crete, it is impossible to say whether ‘Cherethites’ is another name for the Minoans or a name for the Greeks of Crete instead.

What other Middle Eastern nations called the Minoans

Were the ancient Hebrew Scriptures of the Bible alone in using this term, Caphtorim, for the Minoans? The evidence shows that they were not. We find variations of this ethnonym in the records of several other Middle East nations.

An 18th-century BCE document from the city of Mari in Syria refers to the island as Kaptara. It uses this term in various contexts, including referencing “Caphtorite fabric.” This suggests that the island was well known by that name in the 18th century BCE, at least within Syria.

However, was this just the name of the island itself? One of the records in the Mari Tablets uses this term referring to a certain man’s ethnicity. This suggests that the ancient inhabitants of Syria, just as in the Bible, used this term for the Minoans as a people, and not merely as the name of the island.

In later centuries, the same term appears in Assyrian records, dating long after the fall of the Minoans. This shows that it was not limited to one particular civilization. Rather, it seems to have been used (at least among some nations) for the inhabitants of Crete regardless of ethnicity.

Egyptian records

In Egyptian records, we find the name ‘Keftiu’ used about Minoan Crete. This is used for Crete in general, even long after the Mycenaean Greeks had conquered it. The fact that this was the term for Crete is clear from the itinerary lists found in Egypt in the New Kingdom period.

Amenhotep III directly associated Keftiu with the place names ‘Knossos‘ and ‘Amnissos’, two of the most prominent cities on Bronze Age Crete. This leaves no doubt that Keftiu was the Egyptian name for that island.

The name ‘Keftiu’ is very similar to ‘Caphtor’ and ‘Kaptara’. The only substantial difference is the absence of the ‘r’ at the end of the Egyptian version. Nevertheless, this Egyptian form is so similar to the others that most scholars recognise that they must be cognate with each other.

In other words, ‘Keftiu’ is the Egyptian spelling of the same word recorded in the Bible as ‘Caphtor’ and in other Middle Eastern records as ‘Kaptara’.

What did the Minoans call themselves?

Unfortunately, we cannot be completely sure what the Minoans called themselves. The reason is that Minoan records use a script called Linear A. Linguists have not yet been able to decipher it, meaning that we cannot read the Minoan inscriptions.

This does not mean that there is no indication as to what they called themselves. The fact that nations as far apart as Egypt and Syria used a form of the same term for Crete is highly significant.

This strongly suggests that Keftiu/Capthor/Kaptara was not a name invented for Crete by any one of those outside nations. Rather, to account for this consistency across that part of the world, it seems far more likely that this came directly from the Minoans’ name for themselves.

When we consider the Egyptian evidence more closely, it becomes more likely that the Egyptians correctly preserved the name of the island. As previously noted, Egyptian records link Keftiu with the place names ‘Knossos’ and ‘Amnissos’, which were the Minoan names for those sites on Crete. If the Egyptians were able to maintain the names of those sites, it is plausible that they similarly preserved the name of the island as a whole.

Therefore, although we cannot be completely sure, it does seem very likely that the Minoans called themselves something similar to the Bible’s ‘Caphtorim’ or ‘Caphtorite’.

The recorded history of wine in Ancient Greece begins around the 15th century BC, while viticulture appears to have existed as early as the Neolithic era, 6,500 years ago.

Ancient Greece is also the place where modern wine culture began, as wine consumption stopped being solely a sacred act, as it had been when priests and rulers controlled the vineyards.

By the early Bronze Age, vineyard cultivation of grapes was widespread in ancient Greece, and by the time of the rise of the Minoan and Mycenaean civilizations, wine was part of everyday life, for consumption and/or production.

By that time in Greek society, wine was an economically important business.

Wine and commerce in ancient Greece

There was substantial interaction between the Mycenaean and Minoan cultures, based mainly on commerce.

Around 1200 BC, people from northern Greece invaded the southern Mycenaean area, which was a monarchy.

The war devastated the Mycenaean lands, generating thousands of poor refugee families who escaped to fortified cities for protection.

In order to consolidate their powers, the invaders gave more privileges to the common people, thus undermining the power of monarchs and aristocrats.

The new, democratic city-states were slowly created over time with the common people having more freedoms and opportunities.

Gradually, the common people started cultivating plots of land, with vineyards and olive groves being the most plentiful and lucrative.

People could thus own vineyards, cultivate them, and trade and drink their own wine. A new class of merchants, albeit a small one, was born.

At the same time, more and more people in ancient Greece began to drink wine for pleasure rather than as a sacred ritual.

Colonization and trade expansion

The Greek city-states then began to establish colonies throughout the Mediterranean. The settlers, already experienced in vine cultivation, brought grapevines with them and were able to better cultivate already-existing vineyards.

Moving west, Sicily and southern Italy were the first colonies established by ancient Greeks. Greeks even called the southern part of the Italian Peninsula Oenotria (“the land of vines”).

Other Greeks settled in Massalia (Marseille) in southern France while others moved east all the way to the shores of the Black Sea.

The colonies provided more opportunities for wine merchants. The Greeks could now introduce their wines as far as the western part of France and to the Black Sea in the east.

Athens was a large and lucrative market for wine, as the climate in the Attica region was ideal for vines, and production was substantial. Wine from Attica was traded in all the lands along the eastern Mediterranean Sea.

Other areas famous for wine in ancient Greece were the islands of Santorini and Thasos. This is especially true in Santorini, where the rich volcanic soil produced exceptional grapes. Ancient Greeks were very particular about the origin of their wines.

Major trading partners for wine in ancient Greece were Crimea, Egypt, Scythia, and Etruria among others, as the Greeks traded their knowledge of viticulture and winemaking.

Indicative of the lucrative trade of wine from Greece is a shipwreck discovered off the coast of southern France that held nearly 10,000 amphorae containing almost 300,000 liters (79,000 US gallons) of Greek wine.

Diluted wine

The wine in ancient Greece was unlike what we know today. It was not left undiluted but was mixed with water in precise proportions in a vessel called a krater.

In certain seaside areas or islands, such as Santorini, Greeks used to mix wine with salt water as a preservative and for the taste it imparted. Honey was sometimes added to sweeten the wine.

The mixing of water and wine was for the drinker to enable him or herself to maintain composure and self-control, traits that were highly valued in ancient Greek society.

In fact, ancient Greeks seemed to believe that only barbarians—in most cases that simply meant non-Greeks—drank unmixed wine, got drunk and behaved like…barbarians.

Modern wine culture begins in Greece

Along with their wine, Greeks had exported their way of life, including vine-growing, winemaking, and enjoying wine, to almost every port in the Mediterranean basin.

Socrates praised wine in the following quote:

“Wine moistens and tempers the spirit and lulls the cares of the mind to rest. It revives our joys and is oil to the dying flame of life.”

Plato also praised the fruit of the vine:

“What is better adapted than the festive use of wine in the first place to test, and in the second place to train, the character of a man, if care be taken in the use of it? What is there cheaper or more innocent?

The ubiquitousness of the word “symposium” in ancient Greece, which literally means “drinking with others”—meant that ancient Greeks loved to get together, eat, drink, and converse during and after the meal.

It was a favorite pastime for well-to-do ancient Greeks to eat, drink, discuss, and, occasionally, philosophize, at these symposia.

Such convivial get-togethers have been illustrated on many types of Greek vases and sculptures. Examples of discussions that took place in symposia can be found in Plato’s Symposium and Xenophon’s Symposium.

Usually, symposia were hosted by aristocratic men for their peers. They would relax in recliners called klinai and drink from terracotta or, depending on how rich the host was, from bronze, silver, even gold, cups.

Wine was also used for medicinal purposes in ancient Greece. The great  physician Hippocrates prescribed different wines depending on the disease.

Ancient Greeks also had a god of wine, the mischievous Dionysus. The god of the grape harvest, winemaking, fertility, orchards, fruit, vegetation, insanity, and ritual madness, he was also the god of religious ecstasy and festivity; overall, it was he who embodied the colorful, vibrant life of ancient Greece.

 

 

Greek authorities have arrested a 55-year-old Greek-Australian fugitive wanted for a 1999 murder in Sydney, ending a 27-year international manhunt. James Dalamangas, the target of a longstanding Interpol Red Notice, was apprehended in the Peloponnesian town of Aigio, near Patras, where he had been living off the grid under a false identity.

The arrest is a major development in a cold case that has spanned nearly three decades. Dalamangas is the prime suspect in the murder of Greek expatriate George Giannopoulos.

Who did Dalamangas kill in Sydney in 1999

The fatal incident occurred in 1999 at a nightclub in Sydney, Australia. According to the case file, Giannopoulos attempted to act as a peacemaker, stepping in to stop a violent brawl that had erupted between two patrons. During his intervention, Dalamangas allegedly launched a sudden attack, inflicting fatal knife wounds on the victim. While Australian law enforcement issued an arrest warrant within 24 hours of the stabbing, the suspect managed to flee Australia and escape to Greece before he could be detained.

For 27 years, Dalamangas lived undetected in the Aigialeia region, specifically in the Alsos community. He adopted the alias “Antonios Tzimas” to integrate into the local society, leaning on his family ties to the area, as his mother originally hailed from the nearby village of Temeni.

To maintain his cover, he resided in a property described by local media as a fortress. The house was entirely enclosed by high walls and guarded by a large pack of aggressive dogs, apparently a deliberate measure designed to prevent anyone from approaching the premises uninvited.

Greek police recently obtained significant intelligence regarding his exact whereabouts and initiated a strict stakeout. Officers maintained continuous surveillance outside the fortified compound for three days, waiting for the suspect to make a mistake. The operation concluded successfully when Dalamangas exited the property, accompanied by his father and his partner.

Officers immediately intercepted the group and requested identification. The 55-year-old initially stuck to his cover story, giving his alias. Because authorities possessed concrete proof regarding his true identity, they brought him in for further questioning. Faced with persistent interrogation at the police station, he ultimately confessed to being the fugitive wanted by Australian authorities since 1999. Following the admission, investigators searched the Aigio property to determine if he possessed additional forged documents. The search yielded a crossbow and various sharp objects.

What will happen to Dalamangas now

Dalamangas is currently held at the Aigio police headquarters. He is scheduled to appear before the appeals prosecutor in Patras on Monday, June 8, 2026. This hearing will initiate the official judicial procedures required for his extradition back to Australia.

The successful capture drew praise from the commander of the Aigio Security Department, who played a central role in coordinating the raid.