ABSTRACT
Because of the scarcity of the evidence, scholars have often implicitly constructed Dark Age religion with reference to Minoan, Mycenaean and, especially, historical Greek religion. The scant Dark Age data are sometimes studied through filters implicitly shaped by certain (implicit or explicit) perceptions about what Dark Age society and religion ‘must have been like’. Since we do not view data neutrally, but through perceptual filters shaped by culturally determined assumptions, this leads to serious distortions, as does any investigation based on model-building on the basis of probabilities and what appear to be reasonable assumptions: for all these notions and their application are inevitably radically culturally determined and any reconstruction which depends on them reflects modern preconceptions rather than the ancient realities. If one asks ‘can these (fragmentary and problematic) data fit model A?’ it is possible to structure those data in such a way, and, consciously and/or unconsciously, to make such adjustments as to permit an affirmative answer. But this is a different matter from the construction ‘A’ being the best explanation after a rigorous examination of all the data without a priori models and assumptions, and by means of a methodology designed to limit as much as possible the distorting effects of cultural determination.2 It is therefore crucial to clear the ground of false assumptions and misconceptions, which can become false structuring centres and create false perceptual filters that structure the discourse in insidious ways.
