There are two contexts which make this work interesting for a contemporary researcher. From one hand, it is a point of historiography, reflecting a reception of the ‘new discipline on language’ and the so called ‘paleontological method’ by N.Ya. Marr in the field of archaeology and religious history; it is also a sample of interpretation of iconographic and archaeological material in the light of Marr’s theories. From the other hand, it is an attempt of and independent and original response at the still actual question about the male god in the Minoan culture: on his characteristic features, the time of shaping, iconography and so on. The author’s starting point was an idea of Marr about the ambivalent nature of archaic gods; B. tried it at the data of the Minoan culture. He demonstrates the secondary and later origin of the male god in comparison with the goddess – the author explains it with matriarchate. He puts a special attention at the asexual/bisexual nature of the male god, and his possible status of a castrate, which anticipated the later gods of Asia Minor (Tammuz, Attis) and Jesus.