~STERREICHISCHE AKADEMIE DER WISSENSCHAFTEN DENKSCHRIFTEN DER GESAMTAKADEMIE, BAND XX
THE WHITE SLIP WM OF LATE BRONZE AGE CYPRUS
Proceedings of an International Conference Organized by the Anastasios G. Leventis Foundation, Nicosia in Honour of Malcolm Wiener
Nicosia 29th130h October 1998
Edited bY VASSOS KARAGEORGHIS Editorial Assistance: Ernst Czerny and Ian A. Todd
VERLAG DER~STERREICHISCHENAKADEMIEDERWISSENSCHAFTEN WIEN 2001 ~STERREICHISCHE AKADEMIE DER ~ISSENSCHAFTEN DENKSCHRIFTEN DER GESAMTAKADEMIE, BAND XX
Contributions to theChronology of the EasternMediterranean
Edited by Manfred Bietak and Hermann Hunger
Volume II
VEBEAG DER OSTEBBEICHISCHEN AKADEMIE DER WISSENSCHAFTEN WlEN 2001 Vorgelegt von w. M. MANPWI) ~IIC’I’AK in der Sitzung am 17. Marz 2000
Gedruckt mit Untersttitzung der Universitat Wien
Spezialforschungsbereich SCIEM 2000 ,,Die Synchronisierung der Hochkulturen im o&lichen Mittelmeerraum im 2. Jahrtausend v. Chr.” der Gsterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften beim Fonds zur Forderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
Special Research Programme SCIEM 2000 “The Synchronisation of Civihsations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the Second Millennium B.C.” of the Austrian Academy of Sciences at the Austrian Science Fund
British Library Cataloguing in Publication data.
A Catalogue record of this book is available from the British Library.
Alle Rechte vorbehalten ISBN 3-7001-2935-l Copyright 0 2001 by Gsterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Wien Layout: Angela Schwab Gesamtherstellung: Weitzer t Partner GmbH, A-8045 Graz Printed and bound in Austria 5 CONTENTS
Abbreviations ...... 6 PrefaCebyVASSOSKARACEORGHIS ...... 7 Preface by the Editors of the series ...... 8
V ASSOS KARAGEORCHIS WhyWhiteSlip? ...... 9
ELENI ALOUPI, VASSILIS PERUIKATS~S and A NNA LEKKA Assessment of the White Slip Classification Scheme based on Physioo-chemical Aspects of the Technique ...... 15
IAN A. Tonn and DESPO PIIX)ES The Archaeology of White Slip Production...... 27
M ERVYN PO~~HA~I t Problems Encountered in the Preparation of the Section on White Slip Ware for SCE IV ...... 45
PAUL AsTltO~l The Relative and Absolute Chronology of Proto White Slip Ware ...... 49
K ATHRYN 0. ERIKSSON Cypriote Proto White Slip and White Slip I: Chronological Beacons on Relations between Late Cypriote I Cyprus and Contemporary Societies of the Eastern Mediterranean ...... , ...... 51
ALISON K. S OUTH and L OUISE STEEL The White Slip Sequence at Kalavasos ...... 65
G ERALD CADOCAN , E LLEN H ERSCHER , P AMELA RUSSELL and S TURT M ANNING Maroni-Vournes: a Long White Slip Sequence and its Chronology . , ...... 75
R OBERT S. M ERRILLEES Some Cypriote White Slip Pottery from the Aegean ...... 89 LUCIA VACNh”ITI How far did White Slip Pottery Travel? Some Evidence from Italy and from the Libyan Coast ...... 101
MICHAL A RTZY White Slip Ware for Export? The Economics of Production ...... 107
M ARGUERITE YON . White Slip Ware in the Northern Levant . . . . . , ...... , ...... , ...... , ...... 117 ELIEZER D. OREN Early White Slip Pottery in Canaan: Spatial and Chronological Perspectives ...... 127
C ELIA J. B ERGOFPEN The Proto White Slip and White Slip I Pottery from Tell el-Ajjul ...... _ ...... 145
T RUDE DOTHAN White Slip Pottery from Tel Miqne-Ekron in Philistia and Deir el-Balah: Stratigraphy, Chronology and Function . . . . . 157
PETER M. F ISCHER White Slip I and II from Tell Abu al-Kharaz, Jordan Valley: Pottery Synchronism and Dating ...... 161
MANFRED B IETAK and I RMGARD HEIN The Context of White Slip Wares in the Stratigraphy of Tell el-DabCa and some Conclusions on Aegean Chronology . . . 171
MALCOL~I H. W IENER 1 The White Slip I of Tell el-DabCa and Thera: Critical Challenge for the Aegean Long Chronology ...... 195
IAN A. T ODD Early Connections of Cyprus with Anatolia ...... 203 GeneralDiscussion...... ~...... 215 White Slip Conference: Addresses of Contributors . . . . , ...... , ...... , . , ...... , ...... 225 Bibliography ...... 227 THE W HITE SLIP I OF TELL EL-DABCA AND THER A: CRITICAL CFULLENGE FOR THE AEGEAN LONG CHRONOLOGY *
Malcolm H. Wiener
In recent years the Aegean Long Chronology, which absorbed from the atmosphere was greater than the places the eruption of Thera during a mature stage of amount of decay resulting from the half-life of the LM IA at 1628 BC, has gained many adherents. “C atom (M ANNING 1995). Unusual sunspot activity Advocated by BETANCOURT ( 1987)) N IEMEIER (1990) has been suggested as a possible major cause for this and M ANNING (1995)) the Long Chronology has been phenomenon, along with varying rates of release of accepted as a matter of fact in review articles in the 'Y! by oceanic, atmospheric and stratospheric reser- American Journal of Archaeology (DAV IS 1992 , voirs. The oceans contain about forty times the 736-37; idem 1995,733 [ “dendrochronology and rein- amount of radiocarbon as the atmosphere (W IENER terpretation of precision radiocarbon dates have now forthcoming b). virtually resolved the dispute... “]; R UTTER 1993, 756; The second main factor cited in support of the R EHAK and Y OUNGER 1998, 97-100); in an article Aegean Long Chronology is evidence of a major cli- entitled “Revising Bronze Age Chronology” in the mate-forcing event affecting tree-ring formation in magazine Archaeology that refers to “the 1628 BC 1628 BC, with the eruption of Thera suggested as the eruption of Thera ” (R OSE 1995, 20), and recently in likely event in question. The 1628 BC event is reflect- a review of the current state of Aegean archaeology ed in trees in higher elevations in California and in in the Journal of Archaeological Research (BENNET trees in northern Europe. A splendid data set of and G ALATY 1997, 83-84). Others, including in par- sixty-two logs from a posterngate at the Hittite ticular P. W ARREN (e.g., W ARREN and HANKEY 1989; fortress at Porsuk above the Cilician Gates, 840 km. W ARREN 1998), have steadfastly upheldthe Aegean to the east of Thera, shows average growth of 240% Short Chronology which would place the eruption of of normal in 1628 BC, with individual logs showing Thera between 1530 and 1500 BC. growth of as much as 740% of normal (K UNIHOLM et Advocates of the Long Chronology rely princi- al. 1996 and pers. comm.). ’There is, however, no pally on two factors: radiocarbon dates and the indi- direct evidence to link the 1628 BC tree-ring event cations (and absence of indications) in tree rings of with the eruption of Thera rather than another vol- climate-forcing volcanic eruptions. As to the for.mer, cano or some non-volcanic climatic disturbance. Long Chronology adherents contend that radiocar- The most cogent argument for the Aegean Long bon dates indicate early dates for the beginning of Chronology lies in the fact that there is no indication the Aegean Late Bronze Age and the Theran erup- in the tree-ring sequences of long-lived trees - the tion (B ETANCOURT 1998). The radiocarbon evidence, bristlecone pines of southern California, foxtail however, remains inconclusive for a number of rea- pines of the California-Nevada border, or oaks of sons, particularly the notorious ‘back-bending ’ or Ireland, England or Germany - of a severe climatic ‘oscillating ’ calibration curve for the period ca . event between 1550 and 1450 BC, the dates within 1670-1535 BC, during which the amount of“C trees which the massive Theran eruption that buried LBA
’ I am deeply indebted to Manfred Bietak and Irmgard Hein, and James Weinstein for much beneficial commentary and Kathryn Eriksson, Robert Merrillees and EliezerOren for advice; to Hector Catling for an extensive commentary dis- making available to me their contributions to this confer- tilling four decades of experience with the material and the ence and allowing me to incorporate their research and con- sites; to Mervyn Popham for a detailed and most helpful clusions with my own; to James Allen, Susan Allen and line-by-line critique; and to Jayne Warner andBragan Daphna Ben-Tor for permitting me to see their review prior Thomas for editorial assistance. to publication; to James Allen, Susan Allen, Dorothea Studies of the direction of the fall of Theran pumice from Arnold, Celia Bergoffen, Manfred Bietak, Mary Jaye Bruce, the Bronze Age eruption show a strong dispersion to the east Kathryn Eriksson, Vassos Karageorghis, Peter Kuniholm, (NINKOVI ’I’CH and HEEZEN 1965; S TANLEY and SHENC; 1986; Sturt Manning, EliezerOren, Jeremy Rutter, Peter Warren SULLIVAN 1988; KM,I,EH et al. 1990; GUICHARD et al. 1993). 196 Malcolm Ii. Wiener
Akrotiri would fall on the Aegean Short Chronology. of the work of K. K ITCHEN and also M. B IERBRIER Work is ongoing as to why a massive eruption might on the Third Intermediate Period, there now exists a not be recorded in a distant tree-ring record. Possi- continuous sequence of textual sources allowing New ble reasons include: (1) an eruption of low sulfur con- Kingdom dates in all likelihood to be fixed within tent; (2) an eruption outside the spring to early fall about a dozen years (BTERRI~IEI~ 1975; K ITCHEN growth season for trees and hence less likely to 1987, 1991a, 1991b, 1992, 1996a and 1996b; W IENER impact tree growth significantly, and whoseejecta 1998a). The most likely date now for the accession of are dissipated or offset by other factors prior to the Tuthmosis III, in whose reign interconnections with following growth season; and (3) an eruption whose the Aegean and Cyprus become marked, is Kitchen ’s effect on the trees in question is diminished or offset preferred Egyptian Middle Chronology date of 1479 by conditions of cloud cover, wind velocity and direc- BC, although 1490, the next available lunar date, tion, temperature and/or soil moisture (W IENER remains a possibility (K ITCHEN 1987, 4&41). forthcoming b).3 The chronology of the preceding Second Inter- Unfortunately we do not ‘as yet have a sufficient- mediate Period in Egypt is not securely based on a ly comprehensive and sensitive nearby Aegean or succession of interlocking texts and inscriptions, but Anatolian dendrochronological sequence for the rather rests in the first instance on the Turin Canon, years 1550 to 1450 BC. The Porsuk sequence noted a papyrus which on the verso of a Ramesside tax supra effectively ends in 1551 BC, the year in which record of about 1200 BC lists Hyksos rulers whose all but five of the sixty-two trees were felled. None of reigns span 108 years5 While it is possible that the the live exceptions, the latest felled in 1527 BC, shows compiler of the Turin Canon underestimated the any indication of a major climate event, but the interval somewhat, or that he wished, perhaps sub- small size of the sample, diminishing from five to one, consciously, to minimize the period of foreign rule, inhibits any inference being drawn. Eight logs from and that the scarab of a Hyksos ruler calledShen- Gordion show no major climate-induced response shek found at Tell el-DabCa between strata D/2 and during the years 1550-1450 BC, but these logs show D/3 is not that of an earlier Hyksos ruler previously no great response in 1628 BC either, perhaps because known by a somewhat similar name (B IETAK 1989a, at the time of that volcanic eruption (whatever the 96) or a minor ruler not a part of the official list, but source) the trees from Gordion had already received rather the scarab of a previously unknown ruler of adequate moisture, in which case massive rains would some duration to be added to the list, any major not necessarily trigger a growth spurt, or because of chronological extension of the Hyksos period is lim- high local variability in weather effects of volcanic ited by a well-supported 12th Dynasty astronomical eruptions. ’ date (L UFT 1986, 1989 and 1992; K RAUSS 1981 and The proposed Aegean Long Chronology is severe- 1985) and generally by Near Eastern interconnec- ly challenged by links between Egyptian historical tions independently dated by the Babylonian/Assyr- chronology and Minoan/Cypriote interconnections ian Chronology (G ASCHE , A RMSTRONG , C OLE and with Egypt. The last fifteen years have seen a dra- GUI~ZADYAN 1998), supported by recent den- matic change with respect to New Kingdom chronol- drochronological evidence which favours the Low, or ogy, for we are no longer dependent as before on dis- at the most a Lower/Middle, Babylonian Chronology puted astronomical calculations. Largely as a result (KUNIHOI,I+~ et al. 1996, 782).
Many trees exhibit little response to climatic events. The The Heliopolitan priest Manetho, writing in the 3rd century more marginal the environment, the greater the effect of a BC, gives a much longer period, including, for example, a major weather event on tree growth; e.g., trees in semi-arid reign of Apophis, the penultimate Hyksos ruler, of sixty-one environments (such as the Porsuk trees) will grow dramati- years rather than the forty years listed in the Turin papyrus, cally as a result of a superabundance of rain in the growth which is generally accepted as the preferable account ( VOX season, whereas trees above the dew line (such as the Cali- B ECKERATH 1964; R YHOLT 1997; ALLEN, ALI,EN and BEN- fornia bristlecone pines) or in cold climates (such as the T OR 1999). For the problematic history/chronology of the Irish oaks) will experience significantly less growth as a Second Intermediate Period in general, see in addition SAVE- result of increased coldness. I am most grateful to P. KUNI- SODERBERGH 1951; H ELCK 1956; idem 1971, 89106; V AN HOLM for discussing these matters with me. SETER~ 1966; BI~TAK 1980, 1984, 199lb, 1994, 1996 and POST 1977, l-26; P. KUNIHOLM, pers. comm., for which I am 1997; Redford 1970; idem 1992,82-122; idem 1997; KE~II~IN- most grateful. The chronological implications drawn, how- SKI 1985, 1990, 1992 and 1997; WARI) in TUFNELL 1984, II, ever, are solely those of the author. pt. 1,162-79; O ’C ONNOR 1997; OREN 1997; SCHNEIDER 1998. The White Slip I of Tell el-Dab% and Thera: Critical Challenge for the Aegean Long Chronology 197
Given the New Kingdom dates, the Aegean Long While the presence of both the wall paintings and Chronology faces serious obstacles on the M inoanpumice in New Kingdom contexts supports the front. In order to fill the period between the pro- Aegean Short Chronology, neither is conclusive. As posed 1628 BC Long Chronology date for theTheran regards the wall paintings, it has been argued that eruption and theCCL . 1479 BC accession of Tuthmo- the paucity of L M IA comparanda from Crete leaves sis III, in whose reign M inoan objects similar in open the possibility that theDabCa paintings may be appearance to those found in L M IB destructionof a later date than those of Thera. The existence of deposits on Crete are depicted onTheban tombs, it is M inoan or M inoanizing paintings at the Hyksos site necessary either to extend the L M IA period for sev- of Tell Kabri and at Alalakh, together with the use of eral decades after the eruption and to stretch L M yellow IB as a skin colour at Tell el-DabCa, not thus far to fill at least three generations, or to extend L M attested IB in Crete, has led to the suggestion that the to five generations. It is possible to reduce the gap by Dabca wall paintings were the work ofM inoan- a generation by postulating that the objects of trained artists or families of artists who had lived LM IB aspect which M inoans are shown carrying abroad fora number of years, if not generations were heirlooms or removed from earlier deposits, or (SHAW 1995, llO). ’ It is also possible that pattern had been circulating in the eastern M editerranean,books existed and remained in use, and even that the or were still being manufactured in L(W MIENER II DabCa wall paintings represent two time periods, sim- 1998a). Any major increase in the chronological span ilarities between the two deposits of wall painting between the Theran eruption late in L M IA and the fragments notwithstanding. The forthcoming publi- destructions at the end of L M IB strikes many cation of new reconstructions of theDabCa paintings M inoan specialists as unlikely, however, given the based on the discovery and cleaning of additional lack of any site with successive L M IB strata pro-fragments and the use of computer imagery, howev- viding indications of stylistic evolution of the pot- er, should provide support for the view that some of tery. In addition, the Aegean Long Chronology these paintings are among the finest of M inoan requires that a series of Aegean objects in Egyptian works, executed at least in part by a Knossian artist, and Near Eastern contexts must have been deposit- and that at least some of the depictions, particularly ed later than their floruit in the Aegean, and a that of the griffin,are very close to theirTheran scarab bearing the cartouche of Amenophis III from counterparts7 Sellopoulo Tomb 4 at Knossos must have arrived and Similarly, the first appearance ofTheran pumice been deposited very soon after his accession inco. at Tell el-DabCa in early New Kingdom stratum C is 1390 BC, or have been deposited after the period of certainly a significant argument in favour of the production of the LM /LH IIIAl pottery in the tomb Aegean Short Chronology, but the fact that the (M ANNING 1995, 226). None of these propositions is pumice was waterborne and could have been picked attractive singly, and the problem is compounded up at any time, or even deliberately imported as an when they are considered collectively. abrasive, means that this evidence also is inconclusive. The most serious challenge to the Aegean Long Theran eruption pumice is very often found in the Chronology, however, comes from the evidence gath- Aegean in much later contexts (W IENER 1998b, 26). ered in the current excavations at Tellel-DabCa, It is the Cypriote pottery from Tellel-Dab ”a, and ancient Avaris. Ma terial from New Kingdom stratum particularly the White Slip I and Proto-White Slip, C there includes M inoan or M inoanizing wall paint- which is critical to the debate. The finds there, to ings that in a number of respects closely resemble date, include ten examples each of PWS and WS I those of Thera, Theran waterborne pumice chemical- plus another four of WS II and eight examples which ly determined to be from the Bronze Age eruption, are undiagnostic (B IETAK and HEIN, this volume). and above all, White Slip I pottery(B IETAK 1996, 76, Six of the PWS examples come from the final Hyk- 78; 1998; see alsoB IETAK , this volume). SOS stratum D/2, including one complete bowl clearly idem 1
’ M. B IETAK has noted (pers. comm.) that one of the Xeste I am most grateful to Professor MANFRED BIETAK for show- III boys from Thera has a yellow colouration not always ing and discussing with me the wall painting fragments and apparent in reproductions. M. POPHAM has kindly called my reconstructions at Tell el-DabCa in the week following this attention to the fact that analysis of the pigments conference. employed at Thera disclosed the use of the colour yellow (FILII~IBAKIS 1978). 198 Malcolm H. Wiener stratified in a child ’s tomb. Five of the WS I frag- ognizable, have been identified among the millions of ments come from New Kingdom stratum C. The vessels and sherds uncovered by the current ongoing remaining examples all come from unstratified con- excavations. As a result of the meticulous research of texts. As to whether WS I might already have been R. MERRILLEES concerning the history of the French present in Hyksos stratum D/2, I.HEIN concludes excavations and the sherds in question (this volume), (this volume) that there is “only a slight possibility there can now be no doubt that the French excava- but it is very unlikely ”.* tors and BUKNOUF, then the Director of the French To date the site has yielded a total of 600 frag- School, believed that the WS I sherds from Thera ments of Middle and early Late Cypriote pottery, a belonged with the other eighty-one piecescatalogued large proportion of which came from a particular by RENAUDIN (1922) and that all of them came from stratum, although usually not from a fixed context beneath the tephra of the eruption. The question such as an intact tomb or destruction level. Pottery remains whether the WS I bowl from which the seriation plus scarabs (and in one case a statue) of sherds came could have been deposited or deliberate- known rulers help define the successive strata ly buried, perhaps as a cult offering, by a post-erup- (BIETAK and HEIN, this volume; B IETAK 1996, 1997 tion visitor to Thera, for example at the deepest point and 1998). The stratified Cypriote pottery follows the in the ravine which runs along the site of Akrotiri, chronological pottery progression established for one of the places where G ORCEIX and MAnlET dug? Cyprus by the Swedish Cyprus Expedition, in partic- S. M ARINATOS reported that when he began his exca- ular by P.ASTROIC? and M. Popmnf (STROM 1972b), vations the tephra and ash cover was only 70 cm. and is supported by Cypriote pottery sequences in thick in some places as a result of rainwater washing the eastern Mediterranean (OREN, this volume). At through the ravine, and that along the beach the top- Tell el-Dabca stratified PWS in the D/2 final Hyksos soil had been exposed by erosion (1968, 4-8). More- stratum and WS I in the earliest 18th Dynasty stra- over, S. MARINATOS specifically mentioned encounter- tum occur just where they would be expected in rela- ing Volcanic Destruction Level (VDL) remains a tion to other Cypriote wares and to the Aegean Short metre below the surface in an area near where he Chronology. Of course, any particular object from believed MAMET had dug (1968, 8). Could violent abroad may arrive and reach its final resting place storms, in the year following the eruption or subse- with a long delay, but it is not credible that such a quently, have sent water rushing down the ravine, process could affect so many items uniformly over removing some of the tephra cover and allowing the centuries and in different regions. bowl to be placed into a cavity, perhaps deliberately If the eruption of Thera occurred in 1628 BC as dug, in proximity with the VDL material? Could the proposed by the Aegean Long Chronology, how is it stratigraphy have been disturbed by subsequent possible to explain the discovery by the Frenchexca- earthquakes and eruptions of Thera, in such a man- vation in 1870 of sherds of a WS I bowl below the ner that a post-eruption offering became difficult to tephra of the eruption, a century or so earlier than distinguish fromVDL material? None of these the first appearance of WS I at Tellel-DabCa and hypotheses seems at all likely, and accordingly the elsewhere according to Egyptian historical chronolo- possibility of post-eruption deposition of the WS I gy (supra)? T he d ta e of the New Kingdom conquest bowl is remote. of Avaris, the Hyksos capital at Tellel-Dabca, by The contemporaneity of LM IA and WS I is fur- Ahmose, and hence the beginning of New Kingdom ther supported by the finds at Toumba tou Skourou in stratum C in which WS I pottery first appears, can- Cyprus (E RIKSSON , this volume). not have been prior to 1540 BC, and was probably no If the VDL context of the WS I sherds from earlier than 1530 BC (K ITCHEN 1992,327). Thera appears secure, and is reinforced by other First, is there any possibility that the WS I bowl LM IA-LC I links, what possibilities remain to sup- from which theaherds came was deposited on Thera port a 1628 BC date for the eruption of Thera, a cen- after the eruption? The 1870 French expedition left tury or so earlier than the first appearance of WS I no information as to the exact find-spot of the at Tellel-DabCa in the form of five sherds in New sherds, and no subsequent WS sherds, so easilyrec- Kingdom stratum C(supra)? The problem iscom-
’ Two of the WS I sherds come from the later phase of stratum C which extends into the reign of Thutmosis III. WS I-Thutmo- sis III links exist at various sites including Tell el-Ajjul (OREN, t,his volume) and Toumba tou Skourou (EI~IK~SON, this volume). The White Slip I of Tell el-Dabca and Thera: Critical Challenge for the Aegean Long Chronology 199 pounded by the fact that no example of WS I has ferred at Tell el-DabCa. Given the fact that PWS/ appeared in a stratified MB context at any site in WS I bowls were distinctive in appearance, pleasant Cyprus, the eastern Mediterranean or the Aegean to handle, easy to clean, impervious to liquids and (OREN, this volume; E RIKSSON , this volume; cf. easily stackable aboard ship, the scarcity of exports BERGOFI~EN, this volume, discussed infra). The prob- of these wares, readily recognizable when they lem is even more acute if it is accepted that PWS pre- appear in excavation sherd trays, underscores the cedes WS I in the main, since six examples of PWS, emphasis given to the contents of closed containers including a whole bowl in a stratified tomb, appear in as exchange goods in the MB and beginning of the the final Hyksos stratum D/2 at Tell el-DabCa, which LBA. With the great increase in seaborne trade in the must also begin considerably after 1628 BC. 14th century BC, transport of open shapes increases. Proposed explanations for the gap of a century Over 1,000 examples of WS II have been found in between Thera and Tell el-Dabca created by the Palestine to date (OREN, this volume). Aegean Long Chronology combine (1) infrequency of There is, however, one clear and one possible sig- export of open shapes in general; (2) regionalism in nificant exception to the general absence of Cypriote Cyprus, with Cypriote pottery exports in MB limited open shapes from sites abroad in the Middle and early almost entirely to wares from SE Cyprus whereas Late Bronze Age. At Tell Atchana (Alalakh), both PWS and WS I were produced in the west; and (3) the the palace and individual houses contained numerous lack of clearly stratified successive building levels at WS bowls, particularly in Level IV where they are sites in Cyprus and particularly in the NW to rebut the most common drinking vessel (WOOLLEY 1953 the possibility that PWS and WS I were in use in NW and 1955). Although WOOLLEY referred to many of Cyprus for half a century before reaching sites on the these as WS I, subsequent examination by E. OREN south and east coasts in any number, where they of the sherds from Alalakh in the collection of Uni- would be available for export to Egypt.’ versity College, London identified only about twenty Certainly Cypriote open shapes are rarely found as WS I, and the remainder as WS II. The Alalakh abroad during LC I. PWS and WS I hardly appear at collections in the Ashmolean Museum and the British such extensively excavated sites as Ugarit, Ashdod, Museum contain almost no WS I. ‘” Level IV probably Megiddo, Hazor or Lachish (OREN, this volume). begins in the reign of Thutmosis III (G ATES 1987; Such pottery typically would not have been the sub- MCCLELLAN 1989, 188-89). Some WS I bowls appear ject of state exchange, nor is it likely to have been in earlier contexts, but none clearly prior in date to much involved in merchants ’ or captains’ trade, since the beginning of the New Kingdom, although uncer- filling any space available aboard ship between pre- tainties as to the stratigraphy have led to a variety of cious metals, luxury objects and copper or tin ingots views regarding absolute dates (M CCLELLAN 1989, or other state-exchange goods with small juglets con- 182-86 and references cited therein). No examples of taining perfume, oil, honey or opium (and any combi- PWS have been identified at Alalakh. nations thereof) would likely have been more prof- The clear illustration of major WS I export is itable. The Middle Cypriote pottery found at Tell el- found at Tell el-Ajjul, the Hyksos stronghold and DabCa and other sites abroad consists almost exclu- port near Gaza, perhaps the ancient Sharuhen. Here sively of such juglets used as containers (M AGUIRE PETRIE uncovered about 1,100 examples of Cypriote 1995,54). The one exception found thus far at Tell el- imports, of which 200 were various MB wares, DabCa is a Red-on-Black bowl handle from stratum 25 PWS, and 200 WS I (OREN, this volume; BERGOF- E/l. PWS and WS I open milk bowls may largely FEN 1989, this volume). Over 50% of the MB exam- have represented sailors’trade, and their arrival at a ples were Red-on-Red or Red-on-Black open shapes, site may have depended on the point of departure and the prevalence of open shapes increases at the and place of origin of the ship plus an element of beginning of LB. The majority of the WS I milk chance. Moreover, during the period of strata D/3 bowls were found in the area of the Tell el-Ajjul and D/2, Hyksos Egyptian acculturation was under- palace, but some were found in the town as well way, and Egyptian tablewares may have been pre- (OREN, this volume). The open shapes at Tell el-Ajjul
” 8. M ANNING , lettera of 26 September and 1 October 1996, for ‘I’ l’ers. comm., for which I am moat grateful. C. ~PltoOl~*rEN’8 which 1 am most grateful. upcoming re-examination of the Alalakh material in Antakya may shed light on this question. 200 Malcolm H. Wiener may represent a special elite drinking practice (OREN, restricted export of open shapes) to explain the puta- this volume), the consumption pf a particular food- tive export of a WS I bowl from western Cyprus to stuff such as yogurt, or simply a familiarity with Thera a century before WS I pottery can be docu- Cypriote pottery arising from trade connections, mented in the eastern Mediterranean or the Nile which in the case of PWS and WS I milk bowls may Delta. ” The Cypriote juglets and jugs which appear reflect both the attractions of the pottery and the in eastern Mediterranean and Nile Delta sites are opening of new direct links to western Cyprus with almost exclusively SE Cypriote wares. Ideas travel its metal sources in the Troodos. overseas as well, again with SE Cyprus as the inter- Some of the WS I examples from Ajjul have close locutor. White Paintedjuglets produced in Syria are parallels atToumba tou Skourou in NW Cyprus. E. closely similar to Cypriote White Painted Eyelet OREN (this volume) has noted that Tell el-Ajjul also Style juglets (K ARAGEORGHIS 1995a, 74). Other SE shows particularly close connections (in architecture, Cypriote and Syrian wares display reciprocal influ- burials, jewellery and pottery imports, Egyptian as ences, to the point of constituting a single hybrid well as Cypriote) to Tell el-DabCa. It seems likely that style (M AGUIRE 1995, 65). Western Cypriote versions Tell el-Ajjul was a key node in a network distributing of White Painted IV, V and VI with geometric deco- copper and perhaps other goods from NW Cyprus ration are thus far represented at Tell el-DabCa only and that by LC IB at the latest(E RIKSSON , this vol- by a few sherds of White Painted V. MB White ume) the network extended in the other direction to Painted III/IV wares produced in the north are the Aegean(W IENER 1990). WS I appears in the almost totally absent on the SE coast (MAGUIR~~: Aegean in LB I in a few instances, in addition to the 1992, 118, following flSTROI\I 1972a). Moreover, the bowl from Thera (C ATLING 1991), but in no other case great majority of Tell el-Yahudiyeh juglets travel- in a clear LM IA context. ling in the reverse direction are found in the SE The Cypriote pottery from Tell el-Ajjul is of region of Cyprus. Internal regionalism clearly chronological significance, inasmuch as a re-examina- played a role at times in limiting the movement of tion of the stratigraphy (OREN, this volume ; pottery from western Cyprus to the eastern Mediter- B ERGOFFEN 1989, this volume) reveals that the pro- ranean and Egypt. During MC III-LC IA, insecuri- gression of Cypriote wares including PWS and WS ty in Cyprus (evidenced by the appearance, inter set forth by P. kmtOnf and M. POPHAM in Th e alia, of fortifications and new weapons) may have Swedish Cyprus Expedition in 1972, and observed in limited traffic across a NW-SE divide(M ERRILLEES the successive strata at Tellel-Dabca, applies at Tell 1971; MAGUIRE 1995, 54). el-Ajjul as well. Moreover, WS I at the city site first The internal division is not absolute, however, as appears stratified in contexts later than the begin- shown for example by the parallel development of ning of the New Kingdom in Egypt. ” The site of White Painted V and VI in east and west at the end Megiddo displays the same WS sequence (although of the Middle Cypriote period. H.CATLING ’” has with far fewer Cypriote imports): PWS appears in the noted the contrast between on the one hand the dis- final MB stratum X and WS I in LBA stratum VIII, tribution of wares clearly localized, such as MC Red- along with Egyptian New Kingdom material (OREN, on-Black, White Shaved and Palestinian Wheelmade this volume). At the large and well-excavated sites of Bichrome, and on the other hand PWS and WS I, Tel Batash and Tel Sippori, WS I and other Lat e which appear, at least at some points or points in Cypriote wares do not appear before the beginning of time, in reasonable quantites in central Cyprus (e.g., the New Kingdom(OREN, this volume), but the num- Akhera, Dhenia, Politiko, Akaki, Ayia Puruskevi and ber of stratified Cypriote ’ sherds is small (BERGOF- Ayios Sozomenos);at Enkomi and nearby Trachonas; FEN, pers. comm.). at Kalopsidha; and at sites on Larnaca Bay (Arpera Regionalism in Cypriote pottery production has Chiftlik, Klavdhia,Hala Sultan Tekke andPyla- been suggested as a second factor (in addition to Verghu). Further west on the south coast, Kourion
” The contexts of the WS found in the palace area at Ajjul ial from the palace area will provide further information on are confused by pits resulting from rebuilding; WS I, local this question. MB and Islamic pottery are sometimes found mixed (OREN, I2 The closest counterpart to the Thera bowl comes from pers. comm.). B ERGOFFEN (this volume) suggests that some Tomb 104 at Palaepaphos-Teratsoudhia on the SW coast of of the WS I may belong with the Hyksos palace. The Cyprus (MERRILI~EES, this volume). restudy now underway of the contexts of all of the mater- la Letter of 22 July 1999 for which I am most grateful. The White Slip I of Tell el-DabCa and Thera: Critical Challenge for the Aegean Long Chronology 201
(Bamboula) receives significant quantities of WS I er with Bichrome ware) in D/2 continuing into stra- (BENSON 1961, 1969 and 1970). The internal barrier tum C of the 18th Dynasty(B IETAK and HEIN, this hypothesis would require that WS I did not appear in volume). the south or east of Cyprus in significant quantity Accordingly, in order to rescue the Aegean Long until LB IB. Some Tell el-Yahudiyehjuglets made of Chronology based on a putative overlap of WS I pro- N ile clay, along with a larger number of Cypriote imi- duction with earlier wares, it is necessary to imagine tations, appear in the NW of Cyprus, at least by LC I the creation around 1650 BC of PWS and shortly (BIETAK and HEIN, this volume; ERRILLEES M 1974a, thereafter WS I, presumably somewhere in the 43-79). Of course PWS reaches sites in the eastern foothills of the Troodos judging from the clay used, M editerranean and the Nile Delta by the end of MBand a period of local use of both PWS and WS I and WS I at the beginning of LB, as described above. (except for the only known exception, a WS I bowl The third factor cited in support of a putative which arrives in Tlrera prior to the putative 1628 BC early development of WS I is the scarcity ofwell- eruption), then a period of widening use encompass- stratified building levels forMB and early LB ing first sites in the SW, west and NW of Cyprus , Cyprus, a situation which is said to open the way to and finally the south coast of Cyprus followed even- proposals that wares commonly accepted as chrono- tually by export of WS I to Tell el-Ajjul, Tellel- logically distinct, for exampleProto Base-ring/ DabCa and other points abroad first documented Base-ring and PWSIWS I, are in fact contemporary after ca. 1530 BC. Sucha scenario seems highly regional variants(EAMES 1994). K. E RIKSSO N ’S unlikely. detailed analysis (this volume) presents a convincing It is worth noting that other Cypriote wares, case for a chronological progression in the burials at including Proto Base-ring/Base-ring, Bichrome and the Toumba tou Skourou cemetery in NW Cyprus, in particular, Red Lustrous Wheelmade(E RIKSSON and generally for the progression from PWS to 1992, 178-81), magnify the problem posed by Cypri- WS I , w ith an overlap only between the production ote pottery for the Aegean Long Chronology, for they of the third and final phase ofPWS w ith WSI. ” appear with PWS or WS I and not earlier in Cyprus, The LC IA period of PWS and Proto Base-ring pro- and maintain the same relationship in the stratified duction preceding the introduction of WS and Base- sites abroad. Finally, we should observe that the ring in LC IB proposed by E RIKSSON is however rel- Aegean Long Chronology would require a period of atively brief. The chronological progression from production of White Slip I of 175 years and a Late PWS in Hyksos strata to WS I in New Kingdom Cypriote I period of 200 years. strata has been observed in settlement contexts at To what extent would the prospects for the Tell el-DabCa, Tell el-Ajjul and M egiddo, as noted . Aegean Long Chronology be improved if the D/2 above. stratum at DabCa encompassed sixty years rather In the main, the chronological progression of than the thirty years proposed by the excavator, and Cypriote MB to LB I wares seems secure, with recent the massive fortification wall ofD /2 became the work in Cyprus an&abroad confirming the Swedish work not of Apophis, the penultimate Hyksos ruler, Cyprus Expedition sequence set forth in 1972. The but perhaps of Khyan, as proposed by‘S. M ANNING Tell el-Dabca Cypriote catalogueof 600 fragments, a (pers. comm.)? On the basis of transformations in large percentage of which can be assigned to strata, architecture, burial practices, weapons and other is important not only for what isnot present - strat- finds including royal scarabs, the Hyksos period at ified P WS before stratum D/2, stratified WS I before Tell el-DabCa is believed to include strata D/3, E/l stratum C - but also for what is present, namely a and perhaps part of E/2 as well as D/2 (B IETAK 1996, coherent Cypriote sequence including White Paint- 6 fig. 3, 64). A sixty-year D/2 stratum beginning ed III-IV in strata G to E/l, White Painted V in D/3 around 1600-1590 BC would account for more than w ith a floruit in D/2, and White Painted VI (togeth- half of the total Hyksos period stated in the Turin
I4 The initial version of this paper, presented at the confer- FEN (this volume) who argues on stylistic grounds that the ence, referred to “early WS I”. In the general discussion, WS bowl from Thera appears to be earlier than the WS M. POI~HAM observed that it would be preferable to speak of fragments from New Kingdom levels at Tell et-DabCa. Clear “WS I normal”, reserving “WS I late” for examples which stratigraphic evidence for a temporal distinction in WS are transitional to mass-produced WS II. References to decoration is currently lacking, however. “early WS I” have accordingly been deleted. Cf. BERGOF- 202 Malcolm H. Wiener
Canon.i6 In order to accommodate a 1628 BC date Line Styles of White Painted III/IV as well, for the WS I bowl in the Volcanic Destruction Level notwithstanding the fact that such an overlap is not at Thera, the Aegean Long Chronology would still observable at any site in Cyprus, the eastern require: (1) the deposit of the stratified PWS bowl Mediterranean or the Nile Delta, and goes against from a DabCa D/2 tomb (together with the other nine the evidence atToumba tou Skourou, Tell el-Ajjul examples of PWS from that stratum) near the and Tell el-DabCa (E RIKSSON , this volume;OREN, beginning of the time period encompassed by stra- this volume; B ERGOFFEN , this volume;BIETAK and tum D/2; (2) the production of the PWS bowl fifty HEIN, this volume). years prior to the date of its deposition in Egypt, Each of these four propositions is individually together with all of the PWS and WS I fragments unlikely, and the chance of all of them obtaining is found in D/2 and C respectively (unless they are sur- slim indeed. The White Slip pottery from Tellel- vivals from earlier strata in which no such examples, Dabca and Thera accordingly presents a most critical but large numbers of MB Cypriote wares, were challenge to the proposed 1628 BCdate for the erup- found); (3) the arrival of one of the earliest pieces of tion of Thera and to the Aegean Long Chronology. WS I at Thera not long before the eruption (notwith- standing some evidence that the bowl in question was repaired in antiquity, as noted by M ERRILLEES, this volume); and (4) the existence of significant chronological overlap betweenPWS/WS I and White DIEICUSSION Painted V at least, if not the Pendent Line and Cross There was no discussion following this paper.
” All dates would be raised by eleven years if the accession stratified PWS bowl from a child ’s tomb in stratum D/2 date for Thutmosis III is 1490 BC rather than 1479 BC and the other nine pieces of PWS from the same stratum at (supru). The absolute date of the end of stratum D/2 will Tell el-DabCa pose for the Aegean Long Chronology; how- also reflect when in the decade after the eleventh year of ever, the longer the duration of D/2, the less likely it Ahmose the conquest of Avarie (Tell el-Dabca) occurred. becomes that the absence thus far of WS I in stratum D/2 (The longer the duration of stratum D/2, the less of an is fortuitous.) obstacle, although formidable in any event, the clearly B IBLIOGRAPH Y
Abd el-Maksoud, M. Anati, E. 1983 “Un monument du roi Aa-ah-f Nhsy a Tell Heboua 1959 “Tell Abu Hawam”, %tiqot 2, 89102. (Sinai Nerd)“, ASAE 70, 3-5. Artzy, M. 1992 Tell Heboua. These soutenue a l’Universit6 Charles- 1985 “Supply and Demand: A Study of Second Millenni- de-Gaulle-Lille III, Lille. um Pottery in the Levant”, 93-99, in: A. B. Knapp 1998 “Tjarou, Porte de l’orient”, 61-65, in: D. Valbelle and T. Stech (eds.), Production and Exchange in and C. Bonnet (eds.), Le Sinai: durant l’ilntiquite Aegean and Mediterranean Prehistory. Los Angeles. et le moyen age. Paris. 1987 “On Boats and Sea Peoples”, BASOR 266,75-85. Academic des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 1995 “Nami: A Second Millennium International Mar- 1875 Comptes rendus des seances de 1’Acaddmie des itime Trading Center in the Mediterranean”, 1740, Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. ,Juillet-aot%septem- in: 8. Gitin (cd.), Recent Excavations in Israel: a bre. View to the West. Dubuque. Albright, W. F. 1997 “Nomads of the Sea”, t-16, in: S. Swiny, R. Hohlfelder and H. W. Swiny (eds.), Res Maritimae: 1938 “The Chronology of a South Palestinian City: Tell Cyprus and the Eastern Mediterranean from Pre- el-Ajjul”, AJSL 55, 337-59. history to Late Antiquity. Atlanta. Alkim, U .B. 1998 “Routes, Trade, Boats and Nomads of the Sea”, 1968 Anatolia I, Cleveland and New York. 43948, in: S. Gittin, A. Mazar and E. Stern (eds.), Allen, J., Allen, S. and Ben-Tor, D. Mediterranean Peoples in Transition. Thirteenth to Early Tenth Centuries BCE. Jerusalem. 1999 “Seals and Kings”, review of K. S. B. Ryholt, The Political Situation in Egypt During the Second Artzy, M. and Marcus, E. Intermediate Period c. 1800-1550 B.C., BASOR 1992 “Stratafied Cypriote Pottery in MBIIa Context at Tel 315,47-74. Nami”, 103-10, in: G. Ioannides (ed.), Studies in Allen, S. H. Honour of Vassos Karageorghis (Kypriakai Spoudai 54-55, 1990-91). Nicosia. 1991 “Late Bronze Age they Wares in Cyprus”, 151-67, Artzy, M., Perlman, I. and Asaro, F. in: J. A. Barlow, D. L. Bolger and B. Kling (eds.), 1991. 1976 “Wheel Made Pottery of the MC III and LC I Peri- ods in Cyprus”, RDAC, 20-28. Aloupi, E. 1981 “Cypriote Imports at Ras Shamra”, IEJ 31,37-47. 1994 Nature and Micromorphology of Paint Layeh on Ancient Ceramics. A new approach to the investiga- Astrom, L. tion of ancient ceramic technology. Ioannina. 1972 The Swedish Cyprus Expedition Vol. IV, Part lD, Aloupi, E. and Maniatis, Y. The Late Cypriote Bronze Age. Other Arts and Crafts. 473-622. Lund. 1990 “Znvestigation of the Technology of Manufacture of local LBA Theran Pottery: the Body and Pigment Astrbm, P. Analysis”, 459-69, in: D. A. Hardy, C. G. Doumas, 1966 Excavations at Kalopsidha and Ayios Iakovos in J. A. Sakellarakis and P. M. Warren (eds.), Thera Cyprus. (SIMA 2). Lund. and the Aegean World III, Vol. I. London. 1969 “The Economy of Cyprus and its Development in Aloupi, E., Karydas, A., Kokkinias, P., Paradelis, T., Lekka, the Ilad millennium”, Archaeologia Viva II No. 3, A. and Karageorghis, V. 73-80.
1999 “Multidisciplinary Survey of the Pottery Collection in 1972a The Swedish Cyprus Expedition Vol. IV, Part 1B. the Nicosia (Cyprus) Museum using non-destructive The Middle Cypriote Bronze Age. Lund. Analysis and Digital Recording Technjques”, Pro- 1972b The Swedish Cyprus Expedition Vol. IV, Part 1C. ceedings of the 3rd Symposium of the Greek Society The Late Cypriote Bronze Age. Architecture and Pot- for Archaeometry. Athens. tery; Part 1D. The Late Cypriote Bronze Age. Relative Alp, S. and Absolute Chronology, Foreign Relations, Summa- ry and Historical Conclusions. Lund. 1965 “Eine goldene Gesichtsmaske vom zweiten 1972c “Some Aspects of the Late Cypriots I Period”, vorchristlichen Jahrtausend aus Anatolien”, Bel- RDAC, 4657. leten 29, 19-23. 1972d “Finger-prints on Cypriote Bronze Age Potte y”, 1-3, Amiran, It. in: Acts of the First International Cyprological 1969 Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land. Jerusalem-Ran& Gsn. Congress (Nicosia, 14-19 April 1969) Vol. 1. Nicosia. 228 Bibliography
1980 “Cyprus and Troy”, OpAth 13, 23-28. forthcoming “Tell Abu Hawam (port antique de Haffa, Zsrae ’l): Stratum ZZZ et la poussde phdnicienne vers 1987 “The Chronology of the Middle Cypriole Bronze Age”, 1 ‘Occident”, in: Proceedings of the IV Congreso 57-66, in: Astrom (ed.), 1987/1989, Part 1. International de Estudios Fenicios y Punicos, 1988 “Relations between Cyprus and the Dodecanese in the Cadis 1995. in: S. Dietz and I. Bronze Age”, 76-79, Balenwi, J., Horrorn, M. D. and Artzy, M. Papachristodoulou (eds.), Archaeology in the Dodecanese. Copenhagen. 1993 “Tell Abu Hawam”, 7-14, in: E. Stern (ed.) 1993.
1989 “Early Connections between Anatolia and Cyprus”, Balmuth, M. S. (ed.) 15-17, in: K. Emre, B. Hrouda, M. Mellink and 1987 & Studies in Sardinian Archaeology III. Nuragic Sar- N. Gzgui (eds.), Anatolia and the Ancient Near dinia and the Mycenaean World. Oxford. East. Studies in Honor of Tahsin Gzgilp. Ankara. Balmuth, M. S. and Tykot, R. H. (eds.) 1989a Hala Sultan Tekke 9. Trenches 1972-1987 with an Index for Volumes l-9. Gothenburg. 1998 Sardinian and Aegean Chronology: Towards t he Res- olution of Relative and Absolute Dating in the 1989b Katydhata. A Bronze Age Site in Cyprus (SIMA 86). Mediterranean. Proceedings of the International Col- Gothenburg. loquium ‘Sardinian Stratigraphy and Mediterranean Astrom, P. (ed.) Chronology’, Tufts University, Medford, Massachu- setts, March 17-19, 1995. Oxford. 1987/1989 High, Middle or Low? Acts of an International Collo- quium on Absolute Chronology held at the University Barlow, J. A., Bolger, D. L. and Kling, B. (eds.) of Gothenburg 20-22 August 1987, Parts l-3. 1991 Cypriote Ceramics: Reading the Prehistoric Record Gothenburg. (University Museum Monographs 74). Philadelphia. 1992 ActaCypria. Acts of an Znternational Congress on Bass, G. F. Cypriote Archaeology held in Gothenburg on 22-24 August 1991 (SIMA Pocket-book 120:3). Jonsered. 1967 “Cape Gelidonya: a Bronze Age Shipwreck”, Trans- actions of the American Philosophical Society 57, Astrom, P. and Herscher, E. (eds.) Part 8, Philadelphia. 1996 in Late Bronze Age Settlement Cyprus: Function and Beck, P. and Zevulun, U. Relationship (SIMA Pocket-Book 126). Jonsered. 1996 “Back to Square One”, BASOR 304,66-72. Aupert, P. (ed.) Ben-Dar, I. Guide d ;4mathonte. Paris. 1944 “Palestinian Alabaster Vases”, QDAP 11, 93-l 12. Badre, L Bennet, J. and Galaty, M. 1998 “Late Bronze and Iron Age Imported Pottery from the Archaeological Excavations of Urban Beirut”, 73-84, 1997 “Ancient Greece: Recent Developments in Aegean in: V. Karageorghis and N. Stampolidis (eds.), Archaeology and Regional Studies”, Journal of Eastern Mediterranean: Cyprus-Dodecanese-Crete, Archaeological Research 5, 75-120. 16th - 6th cent. B.C. Athens. Benson, J. L. Bagh, T. 1961 “The White Slip Sequence at Bamboula, Kourion”, 1998 “‘Ezbet Rushdi and the 12th Dyn. Levantine Con- PEQ 93,61-69. nection”, Egypt and the Levant 8, 4749. 1969 “Bamboula at Kourion: the Stratification of the Baird, D. Settlement”, RDAC, l-28. 1996 “Konya Plain”, Anatolian Archaeology 2, 12. 1970 “Bamboula at Kourion: the Stratification of the Settlement. Supplementary Remarks on Stratifica- 1997 “The Konya Plain”, Anatolian Archaeology 3, tion”, RDAC, 25-74. 12-13. 1972 Bamboula at Kourion. The Necropolis and the Finds. “Konya Plain”, Anatolian Archaeology 4, 16. Philadelphia. Baker, H. D. et al. Bergoffen, C. J. 1995 “Kilise Tepe 1994”, AS 45, 139-91. 1988 “Some Cypriote Pottery from Ashkelon”, Levant 20, Balensi, J. 161-168.
1980 Les Fouilles de R. W Hamilton a Tell Abu Hawam, 1989 A Comparative Study of the Regional .Distribution of Niveaux IV et V: dossier sur l’histoire d ’un port Cypriote Pottery in Canaan and Egypt in the Lute Mediterratien durant les ages du Bronze et du Fer Bronze Age. Ph.D. Dissertation, New York University. Ph.D. dissertation, Strasbourg. (1600-950 au. J.C). 1991 “Overland Trade in Northern Sinai: the Evidence 1985 “Revisiting Tell Abu Hawam”, BASOR 257, 65-74. of the Late Cypriote Pottery”, BASOR 284,59-76. Bibliography 229
Betancourt, P. P. 1996 Avaris, the Capital of the Hyksos: Recent Excavations at Tell el-Dabca. London. 1987 “Dating the Aegean Late Bronze Age with Radio- carbon”, Archaeometry 29,4549. 1997 “The Center of Hyksos Rule: Avaris (Tell el-Dab=a) “, 87-139, in: Oren (ed.) 1997. 1998 “The Chronology of the Aegean Late Bronze Age: Unanswered Questions”, 291-96, in: Balmuth and 1998 “The Late Cypriot White Slip Z Ware as an Obstacle of Tykot (eds.) 1998. the High Aegean Chronology”,in: M. S. Balmuth and R. H. Tykot (eds.) 1998. Bichler, M., Egger, H., Preisinger, A. et al. Bietak, M. and Dorner, J. 1995 “NAA of the ‘Minoan Pumice’at Thera and Com- parison to Alluvial Pumice Deposits in the Eastern 1998 “Der Tempel und die Siedlung des Mittleren Reich- Mediterranean Region”, .Journul of Radioanalytical es bei ‘Ezbet Ruschdi, Grabungsvorbericht 1996 and Nuclear Chemislry 224, 7-14. (Mit Beitrilgen von’I’. Bagh und E. Czerny)“, Egypt and the Levant 8, 949. Bienkowski, P. Bikai, P. M. 1989 “The Division of Middle Bronze IIB-C in Pales- 1978 The Pottery of Tyre. Warminster. tine”, Levant 21, 169-79. Biran, A., llan, D. and Greenberg, R. Bierbrier, M. 1996 Dan I: A Chronicle of the Excavations, the Pottery 1975 The Late New Kingdom in Egypt. Warminster. Neolithic, the Early Bronze Age and the Middle Bronze J~ietak, M. Age Tombs. Jerusalem: Nelson Glueck School of J~ildicd Arolmwlogy. Hebrew Union College-Jew- 1980 “Hyksos”, cots. 93-103, in: W. Helck, E. Otto and ish Institute of Religion. W. Westendorf (eds.), Lexikon der Bgyptologie, Vol. 3. Wiesbaden. Blaylock, S. 1984 “Problems of Middle Bronze Age Chronology: New 1998 “Rescue Excavation8 by the BZAA at Tille H6yUk, on Ihe Euphrates, fY79-1900”, 111-26, in: I~. Evidence from Egypt”, AJA 88, 471-85. Matthews (ed.), Ancient Anatolia. Fifty Years ’ 1989 ‘ilrctiologischer Befund und historische Interpretu- Work by the British Institute of Archaeology at tion am Beispiel der Tell el-Yahudiya Ware”, 7-34, Ankara. London. in: S. Schoske (cd.), Akten des 4. Internationalen iigyptologenkongresses. Mtinchen 1985 (SAK-Bei- Bourke, S. J. hefte, Bd. 2). Hamburg. 1981 Studies in the White Slip Wares of the Late Cypriote I Period. Unpub. BA (Hons.) thesis in Near Eastern 1989a “The Middle Bronze Age in the Levant - A New Archaeology, University of Sydney. Approach to Relative and Absolute Chronology”, 78 120, in: I’ Antriim (WI.) 1987/1!389, Part 3. Bourke, H. ,J. et al. 199la Tell el-Dabca V, Ein Friedhofsbezirk mit Totentetipel 1994 “Preliminary Report on the University of Sydney ’s der Mittleren Bronzezeit im dstlichen Nildelta (unter Fourteenth Season of Excavations at Pella Mitarbeit von Christa Mlinar und Angela Schwab. (Tabaqat Fahl) in 1992”, ADAJ 38,9&94. Unt~!rHlic:llllnRc!n dor ZweigHtc!llo I
Cadogan, G. Cline, E. H.
1972 “Cypriot Objects in the Bronze Age Aegean and their 1991 “A possible Hittite Embargo against the Myce- Zmporlanee”, 5-13 in: V. ’ Karageorghis and A. naonns”, Hiatoria 40, I-9. Christodnulou (eds.), I@YK~IK& zov r@&ov Am?w~ 1994 Sailing the Wine-Dark Sea. International Trade and KvII~~.Io~~KoG Zvv&piov, Tbpg A ’, Apxaiov Tpigua. the Late Bronze Age Aegean (BAR lnt. Ser. 591). (Proceedings of the First International Cyprologi- Oxford. cal Congress Vol. A). Nicosia. Cline, E. H. and Harris-Cline, D. (eds.) 1979 “Cyprus and Crete c. 2000-1400 B.C.“, 63-68, in: Acts of the International Archaeological Sympo- 1998 The Aegean and the Orient in the Second Millennium. sium: “The Relations between Cyprus and Crete Proceedings of the 50th Anniversary Symposium, ca. 2000-500 B.C.“. Nicosia. s Cincinnati, 18-20 April 1997. Liege and Austin. 1980 Review of P. Astrdm, D. M. Bailey and V. Kara- Conwell, D. georghis, Hala Sultan Tekke 1; G. Hult and D. 1987 “On Ostrich Eggs and Libyans. Traces of Bronze McCaslin, Hala Sultan Tekke IV; and U. Obrink, Age People from Bates’ Island, Egypt”, Expedition Hala Sultan Tekke VI, AJA 84, 38&l. 29(3), 25-34. 1984 “Maroni and the Late Bronze Age of Cyprus”, t-10, Corder, P. in: V. Karageorghis and J. D. Muhly (eds.), Cyprus at the Close of the Late Bronze Age. Nicosia. 1959 “The Structure of Romano-British Pottery Kilns”, Archaeological Journal 114, 10-27. 1992a “The British Museum’s Work at Maroni”, 123-6, in: Courbin, P. G. C. Ioannides (ed.), Studies in Honour of Vassos Karageorghis (Kypriakai Spoudai 54-55, 199@-91). 1986 “Rapport Ras Bassit”, Syria 63, 175-220, 387-91. Nicosia. Courtois, J.-C. 1992b “Maroni VI”, RDAC, 51-58. 1981 Alasia Il. Paris. 1996 “Maroni: Change in Late Bronze Age Cyprus”, Co’urtois, J.-C. and Courtois, L. 15-22, in: P. Astram and E. Herscher (eds.) 1996. 1978 “Corpus cbramique de Ras Shamra Ugarit, 1998 “The Thirteenth-century Changes in Cyprus in their Niveaux historiques d’ugarit, II”, 192-370, in: C. East Mediterranean Context”, 6-16, in: S. Gitin, Schaeffer, Ugaritica VII. Paris. A. Mazar and E. Stern (eds.), Mediterranean Peo- ples in Transition. Thirteenth to Early Tenth Cen- Courtois, L. turies BCE. Jerusalem. 1969 “Le mobilier funbraire c&amique de la tombe 4253 du Bronze RBcent (Ville Sud d’ugarit)“, 121-37, in: Calvet, Y. and Geyer, B. Ugaritica VI. Paris. 1987 “L’eau d&ns l’hubitat”, 129-56, in: M. Yon (ed.), Ras 1970 “Note prbliminaire sur l’origine des diffbrentes fab- Shamra-Ougarit Ill. Le Centre de la ville. 38e44e riques de la poterie du Chypriote RBcent”, RDAC, campagnes (1978-1984). Paris. 81-85. Carpenter, J. R. 1971 Description physico-chimique de la ctramique anci- 1981 “Exravatiom at Z’hanaromeni, 1975-1978”, 59-78, enne. La ni;ram,ique: de Chfypre au Bronze Ricent, in: J. C. Biers and D. Soren (eds.), Studies in Cypri- Ph.D. Thesis, Universiti de Clermont. ate Archaeology. Los Angeles. Courtois, L. and Velde, B. Casson, S. 1980 “Petrographic and Electron Microprobe Studies of Cypriot White Slip Ware (Late Bronze Age)“, 1937 Ancient Cyprus. Its Art and Archaeology. London. Revue d’Ar&ometrie: Actes du XX Symposium Catalogue 1983 Catalogue Friihe Phdnizier im Libanon, 20 International d’rlrchdometrie Vol. Ill (Bulletin de Jahre deutsche Ausgrabungen in Kamid el-Loz. liaison du Groupe des Mdthodee Physiques et Chim- Mainz. iques de lilrchdologie), SupplBment, 3743. Catling, H. W. Croft, P. 1957 “The Bronze Age Pottery”, 26-59, in: J. du Plat Tay- 1999 Lemba and Kissonerga (Bank of Cyprus Cultural lor, Myrtou-Pigadhes. A Late Bronze Age Sanctu- Foundation). Nicosia. ary in Cyprus. Oxford. Curvers, H. H. and Schwartz, G. M. 1991 “A Late Cypriot Import in Rhodes” BSA 86, l-7. 1997 “Umm el-Marra, a Bronze Age Urban Center in the Christou, D. Jabbul Plain, Western Syria”, AJA 101, 201-27. Czerny, E. 1996 “Chronique des fouilles et d&ouvertes archbologiques B Chypre en 1995” BCH 120, 1998 “Zur Keramik von ‘Ezbet Ruschdi (Stand Mai 1049-l loo. 1997)“, Egypt and the Levant 8,4146. Bibliography 231
1999 Tell el-Da&a IX. Eine Plansiedlung des frilhen Mitt- 1961 A Guide to the Cyprus Museum (third rev. ed.). leren Reiches (Untersuchungen der Zweigstelle Nicosia. Kairo des Osterreichischen Archiiologischen Insti- 1962 “The Stone Age”, l-204, in: The Swedish Cyprus tutes XV). Vienna. Expedition Vol. IV, Part 1A. Lund. Davies, W. V. and Schofield, L. (eds.) 1969-1971 Enkomi. Excavations 1948-1958. I-III. Mainz am 1995 Egypt, the Aegean and the Levant: Interconnections Rhein. in the Second Millennium BC. London. darner, J. Davis, J. L. 1994 “&terreichisches Arch&ologisches lnstitut, Gra- 1982 “The Earliest Minoans in the South-east Aegean: a bungen 1993. ligypten: Tell cl-Daboa”, bJH 63, Reconsideration of the Evidence”, AS 32,334l. Beiblatt, 6-7. 1992 “Review of Aegean Prehistory 1: The Islands of 1994a “Ergebnis der Geliindeuntersuchungen zur Rekon- the Aegean”, AJA 96,699-756. struktion der historischen Topographie von Auaris 1995 “An Aegean Prehistory Textbook for the lQQOs?“, und Piramesse - ein Vorbericht”, Egypt and the AJA 99,732-35. Levant 4, 11-15. De Genouillac, H. 1995 “&terreichisches Arch&ologisches lnstitut, Gra- bungen 1994. Agypten: Tell el-Daboa”, OJH 64, 1926 C&amique cappadocienne. Paris. Beiblatt, 14. De Miro, E. 1996 “Osterreichisches Archliologisches lnstitut, Gra- 1996 “Recenti ritrovamenti micenei nell’Agrigentino”. bungen 1995. Agypten: Tell cl-Dabca”, OJH 65, 995-1011, in: De Miro, Godart and Sacconi (eds.) Beiblatt, 14. 1996. Dothan, M. 1999 “Un emporio egeo sulla co& agrigentina”, 439-49, in: La Rosa, Palermo and Vagnetti (eds.) 1999. 1986 “Sardinia at Akko?“, 105-15, in: M. S. Balmuth (ed.), Studies in Sardinian Archaeology Vol. II. De Miro, E., Godart, L. and Sacconi, A. (eds.) Sardinia in the Mediterranean. Ann Arbor.
1996 Atti e memorie de1 II Congresso Intern&on&e di 1993 “Tel Acco.“, 16-24, in: E. Stern (ed.) 1993. Miceneologia (Rome-Naples 1991). Rome. Dothan, T. De Vaux, R. 1979 Excavations at the Cemetery of Deir el-Balah (Qedem 1955 “Les fouilles de Tell el-Far ‘ah, pr&s Naplouse. 10). Jerusalem. Cinquieme campagne”, Revue Biblique 62, 541-89. 1997 in: E.M. Meyers (cd.), The Deorsola, D. “Deir el-Balah”, 14@-41, Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near 1996 “I1 villaggio de1 Medio Bronzo di Cannatello press0 East, Vol. 2. New York and Oxford. Agrigento”, 1029-38, in: De Miro, Godart and Sac- coni (eds.) 1996. Dothan, T. and Gitin, S. Dessel, J. P., Meyers, C. L. and Meyers, E. 1997 “Tel Miqne”, 3%35, in: E. M. Meyers (ed.), The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near 1998 “Tell ‘En Sippori 1997”, IEJ 48, 281-85. East, Vol. 4. New York and Oxford. Dever, W.G. . Du Mesnil du Buisson, R. 1990 “Hyksos Egyptian Destructions, and the End of lS?S “L’ancienne Qatna ou lea ruines d’el-Mishrifb au the Palestinian Middle Bronze age”, Levant 22, NE de Horns (&m&se). Deuxibme campagne de 75-81. fouilles (1927)“, Syria 9, 6-24. 1992 “The Chronology of Syria-Palestine in the Second Millennium B.C.E.: a Review of Current Issues”, 1932 “Une campagne de fouiltes B Khan Sheikhoun”, Syria 13, 171-88. BASOR 288, 1-25. 1997 “Settlement Patterns and Chronology of Palestine in 1935 Le site arcMologique de Mishrifd-Qatnu. Paris. the Middle Bronze Age”, 28&301, in: Oren (ed.) 1997. Dumont, A. 1 Dia ‘Abou-Ghazi (ed.) 1874 “Vases peints de la Gr&ce propre”, Gazette des 1988 Introduction to Egyptian Archaeology wi’th Special Beaux-Arts, 121-33. Reference to the Egyptian Muaeum, Cairo. Cairo. Dumont, A. and Chaplain, J. Dikaios, I? 1888 Les cdramiques de la G&e propre. 1. Paris. 1953 A Guide to the Cyprus Museum, 2nd ed. Nicoaia. Dunand, M. and Saliby, N. 1960 “Early Conneclions of Cyprus with Anatolia”, Q-13, in: 22nd Congress of Orientalists, Istanbul, 1951, 1957 “‘A la recherche de Simyra”, Annalee Archdologiques Vol. 11. Istanbul. de Syrie 7, 3-16. 232 Bibliography
Duprb, S. Fischer, P. M. 1983 Porsuk I. La ceramique de 1’Age du Bronze et de Z’Age 1988 ‘Classification of Pottery by Micro Colour Analy- du Fer. Paris. sis: a Pilot Study”, Hydra 5, 3841. Dussaud, R. 199la “Tell Abu al-Kharaz. The Swedish Jordan Expedi- 1907 “L’lle de Chypre particulierement aux ages du tion 1989. First, Season Preliminary Report from cuivre et au bronze”, Revue de E’Ecole d’Anthropolo- Trial Soundings”. ADAJ 35, 67-104. gie de Paris 17, 145-75. 19911~ “Canaanile l’ottnrly from. Rala Sultan Tekke: Tradi- 1914 Les civilisations prdhelleniques dans le bassin de la tional Classification and Micro-Colour Analysis mer EgCe, 2 ad ed. Paris. (MCA)“, 73-79, in: J. A. Barlow, D. L. Bolger, and B. Kling (eds.) 1991. Eames, S. ,,.T 1992 “A Possible Late Bronze Age Sanctuary at Tell 1994 “A Re-examination of the Definition, Distribution, Abu al-Kharaz, Transjordan”, Journal of Prehis- and Relative Chronology of Proto Base Ring toric Religion 5, 42-47. Ware”, Mediterranean Archaeology 7, 12740. 1993 “Tell Abu al-Kharaz. The Swedish Jordan Expedi- Edgar, C. C. tion 1991. Second Season Preliminary Excavation 1898-Q “Excavations in Melos, 1899. C. The Pottery”, BSA 5, Report”, ADAJ 37, 279-306. 14-19. 1994 “Tell Abu al-Kharaz. The Swedish Jordan Expedi- 1904 “The Pottery”, 80-180, in: T. D. Atkinson et al., tion 1992. Third Season Preliminary Excavation Excavations at Phylakopi in Melos. London. Report”, ADAJ 38, 12745. 1911 Catalogue general des antiquit& dgyptiennes du 1995 “Tell Abu al-Kharaz. The Swedish Jordan Expedi- Musde de Caire, Nos. 26124-26349 et 32377-32394. t,ion 1993. Fourth Season Preliminary Excavation Greek Vases. Cairo. Report”, ADAJ 39, 93-l 19. Epstein, C. 1996 “Tell Abu al-Kharaz. The Swedish Jordan Expedi- . 1966 Palestinian Biehrome Ware. Leiden. tion 1994. Fifth Season Preliminary Excavation Report”, ADAJ 40, 101-10. Eriksson, K. 0. 1997a “Tell Abu al-Kharaz. The Swedish Jordan Expedi- 1991 “Red Lustrous Wheelmade Ware: a Product of Late tion 1995 and 1996. Sixth and Seventh Seasons Bronze Age Cyprus”, 81-96, in: J. A. Barlow, D. L. Preliminary Excavation Report”, ADAJ 41, Bolger and B. Kling (eds.) 1991. 129-44. 1992 “Late Cypriot Z and Thera: Relative Chronology in the 1997b A Late Bronze to Early Iron Age Tomb at Sahem, Jor- Eastern Mediterranean”, 152-223, in: P. Astrom dan (Abhandlungen des Deutschen Palastina-Vere- (ed.) 1992. ins 21). Wiesbaden. 1993 Red Lustrous Wheel-made Ware (SIMA 103). Jon- 1997c “Tell Abu al-Kharaz, Occupation throughout the sered. Ages. The Fauna1 and Botanical Evidence”, 159-65, Etienne, R. in: G. Bisheh, M. Zaghloul, and I. Kehrberg (eds.), 1996 “Ecole franpaise d’Athenes, 1846-1996”, BCH 120, Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jor- 3-22. dan 6 Amman. Evans, J. 1998 “Tell Abu al-Kharaz. The Swedish Jordan Expedi- tion 1997. Eighth Season Preliminary Excavation 1943 Time and Chance. The Story of Arthur Evans and his Report”, ADAJ 42, 213-223. Forebears. London, 1999 “Chocolate-on-White Ware. Typology, Chronology, Ferrarese Ceruti, M. I,., Vagnett,i, 1,. and Lo Schinvn, F. and Provenance: The Evidence frown Tell Abu al- 1987 “Minoici, Micenei e Ciprioti in Sardegna alla lute Kharaz, Jordan Valley”, BASOR 313, l-29. delle piu recenti scoperte”, 7-37, in: Balmuth (ed.) 2000 “The Early Bronze Age at Tell Abu al-Kharaz, Jordan 1987. Valley. A Study of Pottery Typology and Provenance, Filippakis, S. E. Radiocarbon Dates, and the Synchronization of Pales- During O-Z”, 201-232, in: G. 1978 ‘IAnalysis of Pigments from Thera”, 599-604, in: C. tine and Egypt Dynasty Doumas (ed.), Thera and the Aegean World. Philip and D. Baird (eds.), Breaking with the Past: Papers presented at the Second International Sci- Ceramic and Changes in the Early Bronze Age of entific Congress, Santorini, Greece, August 1978, the Southern Levant. Sheffield Academic Press. Vol. I. London. Fischer, P.M. and Toivonen-Skage, E. Finkelstein, I., Ussishkin, D and Halpern, B. (eds.) 1995 “Metallic Burnished Early Bronze Age Ware from 2000 Megiddo III: The 1992-1996 Seasons. Tel Aviv Uni- Tell Abu al-Kharaz”, 587-96, in: K. ‘Amr, F. Zaya- versity, Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of dine, and M. Zaghloul (eds.), Studies in the History Archaeology. Monograph Series 18. Tel Aviv. and Archaeology of Jordan 5. Amman. Bibliography 233
FouquB, F. Gittlen, B. M. tn79 Santorin et se8 druptions. Paris. 1975 “Cypriot While Slip Pottery in its Palestinian Strati- graphic Context”, 111-20, in: N. Robertson (ed.), Franke, D. The Archaeology of Cyprus. Recent Developments. 1988 “Zur Chronologie des Mittleren Reiches, Teil II”, Park Ridge. Orienlalia 57, 245-74. 1977 Studies in I?be Late Cypriot Pottery Found in Pales- Frankel, D. and Webb, J. M. tine. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Pennsylva- nia. 1996 Marki Alonia. An Early and Middle Bronze Age Town in Cyprus. Excavations 1990-1994 (SIMA 1981 “The Cultural and Chronological Implications of 123: 1). .Jonncrc?d. the Cypro-Palestinian Trade during the Late Bronze Age”, BASOIl 241, 49-59. Franken, H. J. and Ibrahim, M. M. Gjerstad, E. 1977-78 “Two Seasons of Excavations at Tell Deir ‘Alla”, 1926 Studies on Prehistoric Cyprus. Uppsala. ADA,J 22,57-80. Gjerstutl, E. sl al. French, IJ. H. 1934 1~. Gjerstad, J. Lindros, E. Sjiiqvist, A. Westholm, 1965a “Surface Finds from Various Sites 6. Bayat, Bor”, The Swedish Cyprus Expedition. Finds and Results AS 15, 34, 39. of the Excavations in Cyprus 1927-1931, Vol. I. 196513 “Prehistoric Sites in the Gbksu Valley”, AS 15, Stockholm. 177-201. Clueck, N. French, E. 1951 “Explorations in Eastern Palestine IV”, AASOR 1975 “A Reassessment of the Mycenaean Pottery at Tar- 25-28,261-75. sus”, AS 25, 53-74. Goldman, H. 1993 “Turkey and the East Aegean”, 155-58, in: C. Zern- 1956 Excavations at Gtirlu Kule, Tarsucr 11. From the er (ed.) 1993. Neolithic through the Bronze Age. Princeton. Fugmann, E. Gomez, B. et al. I !J58 Ilawtu. lhuilh (4 recharchm I!)3 1-105X Jl, I. L’Ar- 1995 “Neutron Activation Analysis of Obsidian from chileclure des plriodes pr~helldnisliques. Copen - Kelavusos-‘l&h”, JlclA 22, 503-08. hagen. Gonen, R. Furtwaengler, A. and Loeschke, G. 1992 Burial Patterns and Cultural Diversity in Lat e Bronze Age Canaan. Winona Lake. I HH(l ~!l@~risr:lte lhvr. I~~rlrr:lk!t~incIrc! Tlwrcyc@wc~ WUII den& Gebiete des Mittelmeeres. Berlin. Gore&x, H. and Mamet, H. Gale, N.H. (ed.) . 1870 “Recherches et fouilles faites B There (Santorin)“, Bulletin de 1 ‘&Cole franpicle d ‘AtUnes Vol. I No. IX, 1991 Z3ronze Age Trade in the Mediterranean. Papers pre- 183-91, No. X, 199-203. .uc!nlnd al I/I 11 (~o@~rcm.ccc! held a1 Irlewlg Ilouwn, Oxford thing, IZ. in December f.989. (81MA ‘JO). Jonsered. 1983 Late Cypriot Goldwork. Ph.D. Dissertation, Bedford Gasche, H., Armstrong, J. A., Cole, S. W. and Gurzadyan, V. G. College, University of London. 1998 Dating the Fall of Babylon: A Reappraisal of Second- Greenberg, R. and Porat, N. h/illeILt&m (!hro&oyg (Monol”‘l.cLttlitIn II i&)ry and Environment Series 2, Memoirs 4). Ghent and 1996 “A Third Millennium Levantine Production Cen- Chicago. ter”, BASOR 301,5-24. Gates, M.-H. Guichard, I+‘., Carey, S., Arthur, M. A., Sigurdsson, H. and Arnold, M. I IJN7 ‘iI Itcltrl:ir ntrtl (:hrotc.olr~g,fl Rgftitl,“, 00 HO, in: 1’. llNJ3 “‘l’uphru I’rotu Lhu Miuoau ICruplion of Htrntoriui in Astram (cd.) t987/t989, Part 2 (with discussion in Sediments of the Black Sea”, Nature 363,610-12. Part 3, 67-73). Guilaine, J. et al. 1999a “1997 Archaeological Excavations at Rinet IZ&yuk (Ycyil-/Mr/pl Iltrlrcy)“, 250 HI, in: XX. Kw1 1995 “T,‘Btahlissement dnlithique de Shillourokambos ~~IIII~~ILI’I ‘~‘~~IILIHI, I. (!ilh Aukura. (I’UrultltlinJlrr, (%yJwu). I’rwniurn rb#lJlt&+“, RDAC, 1 l-32. J 9991, “Kinet HOyuk in Eastern Cilicia: a Case Study for Acculturation in Ancient Harbors”, Olba 2,303-12. Habachi, L. 1972 again& ~~cwtonhlith, I? The Second Stela of Kamose and his Struggle llrc~ Il~~knon R&T cm1 Itin t+hl ( AbhancJlungen des 1983 The Levant at the Beginning of the Middle Bron.ze Deutschen Arch&ologischen institutes Kairo , Age. Winona Lake. Agyptologische Reihe, Vol. 8). Glilckstadt. Bibliography
Haines, R. C. Herscher, E. 1971 Excavations in the Plain of Antioch Il. The Structur- 1984 “The Pottey of Maroni and Regionalism in Late al Remains of the Later Phases. Chatal Huytik, Tell Bronze Age Cyprus”, 23-28, in: V. Karageorghis al-Judaiduh and Tell Ta‘yinat (OIP XCV). Chicago. and J. D. Muhly (eds.), Cyprus at the Close of the Late Bronze Age. Nicosia. Hamilton, It. W. 1991 “Ceramics”, 51-62, in: 1. A. Todd et al. “Excava- 1934 “Excavations at Tell Abu Hawam”, QDAP 3, 78-80. tions at Sanidha 1990”, RDAC, 37-74. 1935 “Excavations at Tell Abu Hawam”, QDAP 4, l-69. Herzog, Z et al. Hampe, R. and Winter, A. 1989 Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel. Tel Aviv. 1962 Bei Tiipfern und T(ipferinnen in Kreta, Messenien Hill, G. . und Zypern. Mainz (reprinted 1976). 1949 A History of Cypru.s, Vol. I. Cambridge. Hankey, V. Hiller, S.
1981 “The Aegean Interest in El Amarna”, JMA 1, 1991 “The Mycenaeans and the Black Sea”, 207-16, in: R. 4445 . Lafflneur and L. Basch (eds.), Thalassa. L’egee 1983 “The Ceramic Tradition in Late Bronze Age prehistorique et la mer (Aegaeum 7). LiL?ge Cyprus”, RDAC, 168-72. Hirschfeld, N. 1993 “Pottery as Evidence for Trade: the Levant from the 1992 “Cypriot Marks on Mycenaean Pottery”, 315-19, in: Mouth of the River Orontes to the Egyptian Border”, J. P. Olivier (cd.), Mykena~ka. Actes du Colloque 101-08, in: C. Zerner (ed.) 1993. lnt. sur lea Textes Mycbniens et Bgbens (Athens 1991). Paris. Hein, I. 1993 “Zncised Marks (post-firing) on Aegean Wares”, 1992 “Two Excavation Areas from Tell el-Dabca”, 24%53, 311-18, in: Zerner (ed.) 1993. in: Seato congress0 internazionale di Egittologia. Atti Vol. 1. Turin. 1996 “Cypriots in the Mycenaean Aegean”, 289-97, in: De Miro, Godart and Sacconi (eds.) 1996. 1994a “Erste Beobachtungen zur Keramik aus ‘Ezbet Helmi”, Egypt and the Levant 4, 3943. Hi)ckmann, 0.
199413 In Pharaonen und Fremde. Dynastien im Dunkel. 1974 “Die Katastrophe von Thera: Arch&ologische Katalog der 194. Sonderausstellung des Hi&or. Gesichtspunkte”, Jahrbuch des R&misch-Germuni- Museums der Stadt Wien. Vienna. schen Zentralmuseums Mainz 21,4&92. Hoffmeier, J. K.. 1998 ““Ezbet Helmi - Tell el-Da&a: Chronological Aspects of Pottery”, 547-54, in: C. J. Eyre (ed.), Proceedings 1989 “Reconsidering Egypt’s Part in the Termination of of the Seventh International Congress of Egyptol- the Middle Bronze Age in Palestine”, Levant 21, ogists, Cambridge 1995 (Orientalia Lovaniensia 181-93. Analecta 82). Leuven. 1990 “Some Thoughts on William G. Dever ’e ‘Hyksos’ Helck, W. Egyptian Destructions, and the End of the Pales- tinian Middle Bronze Age”, Levant 22, 83-89. 1956 Untersuchungen zu Manetho und den tigyptischen K&&listen. Berlin. Holladay, J. S. 1971 Die Beziehungen A’gyptens zu Vorderaaien im 3. und 1997 “The Eastern Nile Delta during the Hyksos and Pre- 2. Jahrtauaend v. Chr., 2nd ed. (Bgyptologische Hyksos Periods: Towards a Systemic/Socioeconomic Abhandlungen 6). Wiesbaden. Understanding”, 183-226, in: Oren (ed.) 1997. 1983 “Schwachstellen der Chronologie-Diskussion”, Got- Hommel, P. tinger Miszellen 67,4349. 1959-60 “Die Ausgrabung beim Athena-Tempel in Milet 1957 - II. Der Abschnitt &tlich des Athenatem- Hennessy, B. 111. pels”, Z&Mitt 9-10, 31-62. 1991 The Lozenge Survey. An Archaeological Investigation Hope, C. into the Distribution of Ancient Sites in the Area of Vryssoules and Ayios Nikolaos, Famugu&a District, 1989 “The XVIII’h Dynasty Pottery from Malkatta”, 345, Cyprus. Unpublished report. in: Pottery of the Egyptian New Kingdom. Three Studies (Victoria College, Archaeology Research 1963 Stephania. A Middle and Late Bronze Age Cemetery unit. Occasional Paper no. 2). in Cyprus. London. Hornung, E. Hennessy, J. B., Eriksson, K.O. and Kehrberg, I.C. 1964 Untersuchungen zur Chronologie und Geschichte des 1988 Ayia Paraskevi and V&silia: Excavations by J.R.B. Neuen Reiches (Bgyptologische Abhandlungen 11). Stewart (SIMA 82). Gothenburg. Wiesbaden. Bibliography 235
Hulin, L. 1976 “Chronique des fouilles et dbcouvertes arch&o- logiques B Chypre en 1975”, 100,83~906. 1989 “Marsa Matruh 1987, Preliminary Ceramic Re- BCH port”, JARCE 26, 115-26. 1977 “Chronique des fouilles et d&ouvertes archko- logiques B Chypre en 1976,” 101, 707-79. Hult, G. BCH 1981 “Recent Archueological Discoveries at Kouklia”, 89- 1992 Nitovikla Reconsidered. Stockholm. 95, in: J. C. l3inrs. und D. Soren (eclts.), Studies in lbrahim, M. and van der Kooij, 0. Cypriote Archaeology. Los Angeles.
1983 “Excavations at Tell Deir ‘Alla, Season 1982”, 1982 Cyprus from the Stone Age to the Remans. London. ADAJ 27,577-S& 1987 “Chronique des fouilles et d&ouvertes arch8olo- ,Ji\nosi, I? giques B CllyJux en 1986”, UUl 111, 663-733.
1994 “Tell cl-Dab”a - “Ezbet Helmi. Vorbericht iiber den 1990 Tombs at Palaepaphos 1. Teratsoudhia 2. Eliomylia. Grabungsplatz H/I (1989-1992)“, Egypt and the Nicosia. Levanl4, 20-38. 1993 “Le commerce chypriote aveo I’Occident au Bronze “ Ik,~cLxrc.tllrc~lc!~~, tlar N@lrn Il,t$wrrz~il utbtl rlcr 18 . ~ti!l!lbllt~: l~lll!~l~“l!H IlllllVl!~~l~N l~6l:l,llVl!~t.l!H”, n/k‘,I, Dytuwlie in Tell el-Uabra und “Yzbel Helmi”, 85-02, 577-88. in: M. Bietak (ed.), House and Palace in Ancient 1995 new Egypt. International Symposium in Cairo, April 8 “Cyprus and the Western Mediterranean: some Interrelations”, 93-7, in: J. B. Carter to 11,1992. Evidence for and S. 1’. Morris (edn.), The Ages of Homer. A Trih- ‘* I)ic! l~‘f~~i~~1~~iti~i~i~l~ilfill~~riii. c,iuc,a I’ctln.*lf~ (?) ~/IV II~! t.1) hily ‘~‘~)wI~N~!II~~ Vi:rl~l~!llki Auntin. ~p~ten Hyksoszeil ,in “h’zbel ZZelmi (Tell el-DabPa) “, 1995a “Relations between Cyprus and Egypt: Second 93-98, in: M. Bietak (ed.), House and Palace in Intermediate Period and XVIIIth Dynasty”, Ancient Egypt. International Symposium in Cairo, Egypt and the Levant 5, 73-79. April 8 to 11, J 992. I998 Cypriole Johnson, J. Archaeoloy?l ‘Ibday. Achiewtnenls and Per- spectives. Glasgow. 1980 Maroni de Chypre (SIMA 59). Gothenburg. 1999 “An Anatolian Terracotta Bull ’s Head from the Johnson, P. Late Cypriote Necropolis of Agia Paraskevi”, 111).4(!. l-17 I DO. I I)Hz’ “‘l’lii~ hlitltllir (!yl)i*ich I’c~l~t~ctry I~IIIII~~ ii1 l’~h&ii~“, OpAth 14, 4%72. Karageorghis, V., Kourou, N. and Aloupi, E.
Jones, It. E. 1997 “New Technologies in Cypriote Archueology: a current 1986 Orc,rX: rcttrl Cy~rrvIot Pollrry - ,I R~~iric~ii, of Akicvrl~~ir: research proyrawh on avzient oerawbic technology”, 3-8, AVrrrlirw. Al.l~ttl~rc. in: I). l)irkr+c~~ ~rutl 0. VOII IUy (wl~.), OJ~tic:ul’lL:i:h- nologies in the Humanities (OWLS IV). Berlin. Jones, R. E. and Day, P.M. Keller, *J., Rehren, ‘I’. and Stadlbauer, E. 1987 “Late Bronze Age Aegean and Cypriot-type Pottery on Sardinio. Itl~~~nnti~icalion of Ivuportn nud ~MYZZ Ivtkiln- 1990 “Explosive Volcanism in the Hellenic Arc: A Rumma- lioiin II!/ I’li!jnic,o-~!Iic~tii~ic:ctl .,I itrdf~~i.v”. L!fi7 (II), iii : rtJ natl Ir’aadcra”. I :I 26, in: I). A. Hardy, ,I. J lU8J Syrien und Pal&&stina (Kansan) in der letzten P&e Kaplan, M. F. der Mittelbronze IZB Zeit (1650-1579 v. Chr.). Wies- lIll1llvl. I l) HO ‘l’lw Oriyirr wit1 I~iulriliuli~u cd’ ‘1k:ll cl YuhudiyI:h 1985 “Some Observa&ms on Ware (SIMA 62). Gothenburg. the Hyksos (XVth) Dynasty and ils G’tznnnnile Origins”, 129-37, in: 8. I@raelit- I~urugcorgliis, V. Groll (ed.), l’haraonio Egypt, the Bible and Chris- I oar, l,iwlilly. .IwI~J~I~~I~I. I IUI hlcyiclrlo: .-I (!ily-Nlule UILJ lbyul Ce&rc la N&h larael. Munich, 236 Bibliography 1990 “Two Scarabs of Yakubum”, 63243, in: S. lsraelit- 1985 Sothis- und Mondo?aten. Studien zur aslronomischen Groll (ed.), Studies in Egyptology Presented to und technischen Chronologie Altiigyptens Miriam Lichtheim. Jerusalem. (Hildesheimer Agyptologische Beitritge 20). Hildesheim. 1992 “The Middle Bronze Age”, 159-210, in: A. Ren-Tor (cd.), The Archaeology of Ancient Israel. New Kromholz, A. Haven and London. 1978 Cypriole White Slip II ZIemispherical Bowls, Ph.D. 1993 “Tell el-xjjul”, 52-3, in: E. Stern (cd.) 1993. Dissertation, Brandeis University. 1997 “The Hyksos: A View from Northern Canaan and Kuniholm, P., Kromer, B., Manning, S., Newton, M., Latini, C. Syria”, 327-34, in: E. D. Oren (ed.) 1997. E. and Bruce, M. J. Kenyon, K. . 1996 , “Anatolian Tree Rings and the Absolute Chronolo- gy of the Eastern Mediterranean”, Nature 381, 1971 “Palestine in the Time of the Eighteenth Dynasty”, 780-83. 526-56, in: 1. E. S. Edwards et al. (eds.), CAH, 3rd ed., Vol. 11, Part 1. Cambridge. La Rosa, V., Palermo, D. and Vagnetti, L. (eds.) Kilian, K. 1999 bni lrdvrov rraa<&pevol. Simposio Italian0 di Studi Egei dedicate a L. Bernabd Brea e G. Pugliese Car- 1981 “Ausgrabungen in Tiryns 1978, 1979. Bericht zu ratelli. Rome. den Grabungen”, AA, 149-94. Lagarce, J. and Lagarce, E. 1988 “Ausgrabungen in Tiryns 1982/83. Bericht zu den Grabungen”, AA, 105-51. 1985 Deux Tombes du Chypriote Rlcent d%nkomi (Tombes 1851 et 1907) (Mission Arch6ologique Kitchen, K. A. Franpaise d’Alasia, tome 111). Paris. 1987 in “The Basics of Egyptian Chronology Relation to Lambrou-Phillipson, C. the Bronze Age”, 37-55, in: Astrem (ed.) 1987/1989, Part 1. 1990 Hellenorientalia. The Near Eastern Presence in the I Bronze Age Aegean, ca. 3000-1100 B.C. Interconnec- 1989 “Supplementary Notes on the ‘The Basics of Egypt- tions based on the Material Record and the Written ian Chronology”‘, 152-59, in: P. Astrom (ed.) 1989, Evidence plus Orienfalia. A Cafalogue. Gothenburg. Part 3. Le Brun, A. 1991a “The Chronology of Ancient Egypt”, Worl d Archaeology 23, 201-208. 1981 Un site ntolithique prbtramique en Chypre: Cap Andreas-Kastros. Paris. 199lb “Egyptian Chronology: Problem or Solution?“, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 1, 235-39. 1989 Fouilles rice&es ci Khirokitia (Chypre) 1983-1986. Paris. 1992 “Egypt, History of (Chronology)“, 321-31, in: D.N. Freedman (ed.), The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1994 Fouilles rCcentes d Khirokitia (Chypre) 1988-1991. Vol. 2. New York. Paris. 1996a “The Historical Chronology of Ancient Egypt: a Cur- Leonard, A. rent Assessment”, in: K. Randsborg (ed.), Absolute 1981 “Kataret es-Samra, a Late Bronze Age Cemetery Chronology: Archaeological Europe 250&5OO B.C., in Transjordan?“, ADAJ 25, 179-95. Acta Archaeologica 67 (Acta Archaeologica Supple- menta 1). Copenhagen. Lo Schiavo, F. 1998 “Sardinian Oxhide Ingots 1998”, 9%112, in: T. 1996b The Third Intermediate Period in Egypt (1100-650 Rehren et al. (eds.), Metallurgica Antiqua in Hon- B.C.), 2nd edition with supplement. Warminster. our of H.-G. Bachmann and R. Maddin, Bochum Knapp, A. B. (Der An&nit& Beiheft 8). 1986 Copper Production and Divine Protection: Archueolo- 1999 “I lingotti oxhide nel Mediterraneo ed in Europa cen- gy, Ideology and Social Complexity on Bronze Age &ale”, 499-518, in: La Rosa, Palermo and Vagnetti Cyprus (SIMA Pocket-book 42). Gothenburg. (eds.) 1999. 1989 “Complexity and Collapse in the North Jordan Val- Lo Schiavo, F., Macnamara, E. and Vagnetti, L. ley: Archaeometry and Society in the Middle - Late 1985 “Late Cypriot Imports to Italy and their Influence Bronze Ages”, ZEJ 39, 129-48. on local Bronzework”, Papers of the British School 1994 “Emergence, Development and Decline on Bronze Age at Rome 53, t-70. Cyprus”, 271-304, in: C. Mathers and S. Stoddart Loud, G. (eds.), Development and Decline in the Mediter- ranean. Sheffield. 1948 Megiddo 11: Seasons of 1935-39. Chicago. Krauss, R. Luft, u. 1981 “Sothis, Elephantine und die altiigyptische 1986 “Noch einmal zum Ebers-Kalender”, Gattinger Chronologie”, Gdltinger Miszellen 50, 71-80. Miszellen 92, 69-77. Bibliography 237 1989 “Illahun Studien IV. Zur chronologischen Verwert- Manning, S. W. barkeit des Sothisdatums”, Studien zur altdgypti- 1988 “The Bronze Age Eruption of Thera: Absolute schen Kullur 16, 217-33. Dating, Aegean Chronology and Mediterranean 1992 Die chronologische Fixierung des Ugyptischen Mittle- Cultural Interrelations”, JMA l(l), 17-82. ren Reiches nach dem Tempelarchiv von Zllahun 1989 “The Santorini Eruption: An Up-date”, JMA 2, (Ver(Sffentlichungen der ligyptischen Kommission 303-13. No. 2, &err. Akademie der Wissenschaften). Vienna. 1995 The Absolute Chronology of the Aegean Early Bronze Age: Archaeology, Radiocarbon and History. Lund, J. Sheffield. 1986 Sukas VIII. The Habitation Quarters. Copenhagen. 1998a “Changing Pasts and Socio-political Cognition in Macdonald, 1. Late Bronze Age Cyprus”, World Archaeology 30, 39-58. 1932 Beth Pelet Il. London. 1998b “Tsaroukkm, Mycenaeans and Trade Project: Pre- Macqueen, J. G. liminary Report on the 1996-1997 Seasons”, 1986 The Hit&es and their Contemporaries in Asia Minor. RDAC, 39-54. London. Manning, S. W. and Monks, S. J. Maffre, J.-J. 1998 “Late Cypriot Tombs at Maroni Tsaroukkas, 1972 “Collection de l’&eole frappaise d’Ath8nes Ill. Cyprus”, BSA 93,297-351. CBramique”, BCH 106, 21-72. Manning, S. W., Sewell, D. and Herscher, E. Magness-Gardiner, 73. in preparation “Report on a Late Cypriot IA Sea-bed Deposit 1997 “The Middle Bronze Age of Transjordan”, 303-26, at Maroni-Tsaroukkas”. in: E. D. Oren (ed.) 1997. Manning, S. W., Weninger, B., South, A.K., Kling, B., Muhly, J. Maguire, L.C. D., Kuniholm, P.I., Hadjisavvas, S., Sewell, D. and Cadogan, G. 1987 “Zmported Cypriote PotterrJ from Middle Bronze Age forthcoming “‘Absolute Age Range of the Late Cypriot IIC Levels at Kabri”, 44-51, in: A. Kempinski (ed.), Urban Phase on Cyprus”, Antiquity. Excavations at Kabri, Preliminary Report of 1986 Season. Tel Aviv. Marinatos, S. 1968 Preliminary 1991 The Circulalicm of Cypriot Pottery in the Middle Excavations al Thera I: First Reporl Bronze Age. Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of Edinburgh (pub- (1967 Season). Athens. lication forthcoming). Mazar, A. 1992 “A Cautious Approach to the Middle Bronze Age 1997 Timna (Tel Batash) 1: Stratigraphy and Architec- Chronology of Cyprus”, Egypt and the Levant 3, ture. Jerusalem. J 16-120. McClellan, M., Russell, P. J. and Todd, 1. A. 1995 “Tell el-DabCa: the Cypriot Connection”, 54-65, in: W. V. Davies and L. Schofield (eds.) 1995. 1988 “Kalavasos-Mangia: Rescue Excavations at a Late Bronze Age Cemetery”, RDAC (Pt l), 201-22. Maisler, 73. McClellan, T. L. 1950-51 “The Excavations at Tell Qasile. Preliminary Report - III”, ZEJ 1, 194-218. 1989 “The Chronology and Ceramic Assemblages o f Alalakh”, 181-212, in: A. Leonard and B. B. Malbran-Labat, F. Williams (eds.), Essays in Ancient Civilization Pre- 1999 “Nouvelles don&es bpigraphiques sur Chypre et sented to Helene J. Kantor. Chicago. Ougarit”, RDAC, 121-23. Mee, C. Malmgren, K. 1978 “Aegean Trade and Settlement in Anatolia in the 1999 “The White Slip Ware from Kluvdhia-Tremithos”, Second Millennium B.C.“, AS 28, 121-55. 77-96, in: K. H. Niklasson (ed.), Cypriote Archaeol- 1982 in ogy in Gothenburg. Jonsered. Rhodes the Bronze Age. An Archueological Survey. Warminster. Mamet, H. 1998 ‘ilnatolia and the Aegean in the Late Bronze Age”, 1874 De Znsulu Thera. Paris. 13746, in: Cline and Harris-Cline (eds.) 1998. Maniatis, Y. and Tite, M. Melas, E. M. 1981 “Technological Examination of Neolithic-Bronze 1988 “The Dodecanese and West Anatolia in Prehistory: Age Pottery from central and south-east Europe Interrelationships, Ethnicity and Regional Geog- llnd from the Near I’:ast”, JAS 8, SO-76. raphy”, AS 38, 109-20. 238 Bibliography Mellaart, J. Muhly, J. D., Maddin, R. and Stech, T. 1963 “Early Cultures of the South Anatolian Plateau II”, 1988 “Cyprus, Crete and Sardinia: Copper Ox-Hide AS 13, 199-236. Ingots and the Bronze Age Metals Trade”, RDAC, 1967 Catal Htiytik. A Neolithic Town in Anatolia. London. 281-99. Mellink, M. J. Mtiller-Karpe, A. 1991 “Anatolian Contacts with Chalcolithic Cyprus”, 1995 “Untersuchungen in Ku$akll 1992-94”, MDOG 127, BASOR 2821283, 167-75. 5-36. Merrillees, R. S. Myres, J. L. 1968 The Cypriote Bronze Age Pottery Found in Egypt (SIMA 18). Lund. 1897 ’ “Excavations in Cyprus in 1894”, JHS 17, 134-53. 1971 “The Early History of Late Cypriote I”, Levant 3, 1898 “Copper and Bronze in Cyprus and South-East 56-79. Europe”, Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 27, 171-77. 1974 “Tell el- %fiul Fine and Imported Wares”, 86111, in: J.R Stewart et al., Tell et- ‘Ajjul: The Middle Bronze 1914 The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Handbook of the Age Remains (SIMA 38). Gothenburg. Cesnola Collection of Antiquities from Cyprus. New 1974a Trade and Transcendence in the Bronze Age Levant York. (SIMA 39). Gothenburg. Myres, J. L. and Ohnefalsch-Richter, M. 1975 “The Cypriote Bronze Age Pottery found in Egypt: Oxford. a Reply”, RDAC, 81-90. 1899 A Catalogue of the Cyprus Museum. 1977 “The Absolute Chronology of the Bronze Age in Naue, J. Cyprus”, RDAC, 33-50. 1888 “The Copper Bronze and Iron Weapons of 1984 “Ambelikou-Ale&i: a Preliminary Report”, RDAC, \ Cyprus”, The Owl. Science Literature and Art No. 4, t-13. Saturday, 13 October, 25-29. 1985 ‘2 Late Cypriote Bronze Age Tomb and its Asiatic Negbi, 0. Connections”, 114-35, in: J.N. Tubb (ed.), Palestine in the Bronze and Iron Ages. Papers in Honour of 1970 The Hoards of Goldwork from Tell el-Ajjul. Olga Tufnell. London. (SIMA 25). Gothenburg. 1992 “The Absolute Chronology of the Bronze Age in Nicolaou, I. and Nicolaou, K. Cyprus: a Revision”, BASOR 288,47-52. 1989 Kazaphani. A Middle/Late Cypriot Tomb at Kaza- Merrillees, R. S. and Krpata, M. phani-Ayios Andronikos: T. ZA, B. Nicosia. 1997 “Schliemann and Ohnefalsch-Richter: the Cyprus Connection”, Centre d’dtudes Chypriotes, Cahier 27, Niemeier, B. and Niemeier, W.-D. 13743. 1997 “Milet 1994-1995. Projekt “Minoisch-Mykenisches Merrillees, R. S. and Tubb, J. N. bis Protogeometrisches Milet”. Zielsetzung und Grabungen auf dem Stadionhtigel und am Athena- “A Syro/Cilician Jug from Middle Bronze Age 1979 tempel”, AA, 189-248. Cyprus”, RDAC, 223-29. Monchambert, J.-Y. Niemeier, W.-D. 1983 “La &ramique de fabrication locale B Ougarit B la 1980 “Die Katastrophe von Thera und die spiltminoi- fin du Bronze R¢: quelques exemples”, Syria ache Chronologie”, JDAZ 95, l-76. 60, 2545. 1990 “New Archaeological Evidence for a 171h Centu y Dale Mosso, A. of the ‘Minoan Eruption’ from Israel (Tel Kabri, 1907 “Villuggi preistorici di Caldare e Cannatello press0 Western Galilee) “, 120-26, in: D.A. Hardy and A. C. Girgenti”, Monumenti Antichi dell’Accademia dei Renfrew (eds.), Thera and the Aegean World Ill, Lincei 17, 61&84. Vol. 3, Chronology. London. Mountjoy, P. A. 1998a “The Mycenaeans in Western Anutolia and the Prob- lem of the Origins of th,e Sea Peoples”, 17-65, in: S. 1986 Mycenaean Decorated Pottery (SIMA 73). Gothen- Gitin, A. Mazar and E. Stern (eds.), Mediterranean burg. Peoples in Transition. Thirteenth to early Tenth 1995 Mycenaean Athena. Jonsered. Centuries BCE. Jerusalem. Muhly, J. 1998b “The Minoans in tk South-Eastern Aegean and in 1991 “The Development of Copper Metallurgy in Late Cyprus”, 2947, in: V. Karageorghis and N. Stam- Bronze Age Cyprus”, lS@-QS, in: N. H. Gale (ed.) polidis (eds.), Eastern Mediterranean: Cyprus- 1991. Dodecanese-Crete, 16th8th cent. B.C. Athens. Bibliography 239 Ninkovitch, D. and Heezen, B.C. Pecorella, P. E. 1965 “Santorini Tephra”, 413-53, in: W.F. Whittard and 1977 Le tombe dell%tci de1 Bronze Tardo della Necropoli a R. Bradshaw (eds.), Submarine Geology and Geo- mare di Ayia Zrini ‘Paleokastro ‘. Rome. physics. Proceedings of the 17th Symposium of the Colston Research Society. London. Peet, T. E. and Loat, W. L. S. Noll, W. 1913 The Cemeteries of Abydos Part 111. - 1912-1913. 1982 “Techniken der Dekoration antiker Keramik”, London. Berichte der Deutschen Keramischen Gesellschaft 59, Peltenburg, E. J. 3-17. 1979 “Troulli Reconsidered”, 21-45, in: V. Karageorghis O’Connor, I). et al. (eds.), Studies Presented in Memory of Por- 1997 “The Hyksos Period in Egypt”, 45-67, in: E. D. Oren phyrios Dikaios. Nicosia. (ed.) 1997. 1982 Recent Developments in the Later Prehistory of Ohnefalseh-Richter, M. Cyprus. Gothenburg. 1899 “Neues iiber die auf Cypern mit Unterstfitzung 1985 “Ras Shamra IVC and the Prehistoy of Cyprus”, Seiner Majeat(it des Kaisers, der Berliner Museen 2741, in: T. Papadopoulos and S. Hadjistylli und der Rudolf-Virchow-Stiftung angestellten Aus- (eds.), I@Y~~~K& TOV Z@&ov AlEewi)S Kvlrpo- grabungen”, Verhandlungen der Berliner Gesellschaft iloyl~oti Xvv&Spiov, T&s A ’, Ap~aiov Tp@a. ftir Anlhropologie, E’lhnologie und Urgeschichte, Nicosia. 29-78. 1996 “From Zsolation to State Formation in Cyprus, C. Oren, E. D. 3500-1500 B.C.“, 1744, in: V. Karageorghis and 1969 “Cypriote Imports in the Palestinian Late Bronze 1 D. Michaelides (eds.), The Development of the Context”, OpAth. 9, 127-50. Cypriot Economy from the Prehistoric Period to 1975 “The Pottery from the Achzib Defence System, the Present Day. Nicosia. Area D: 1963 and 1964 Seasons”, IEJ 25,211-25. Perrot, G. and Chipiez, C. 1993 “North Sinai”, 1329-35;in: E.Stern (ed.) 1993. 1894 Histoire de l’art duns l’antiquitt?. Tome VI. La Grlce l9!!)7 “ 71e ‘Kingdom (4 Sharuhe7L ’ and the ZZyknos King- primilive, L’art mycdnien. Paris. dom”, 253-84, in: Oren (ed.) 1997. Petrie, W. M . F. Oren, E. D. (ed.) 1997 The Hyksos: New Historical and Archaeological Per- 1931 Ancient Gaze 1, Tell el-Ajjul. London. .up&i~oc~.y (ITnivcrnit,y Muscum Motiographn l)(l). 1932 Avui~~l (&a 11, Tell el-Ajiul. London. l’hiladelphiu. 1933 Ancient Gaza 111, Tell el-Ajjul. London. Orthmann, W. \ 1963 Die Keramik der Ftihen Bronzezeit aus Znnerana- 1934 Ancient Gaze IV, Tell el-Ajjul. London. hlirn. Jk?rlin. i’atriu, W. M. I<‘.‘., Muckuy, IC..J. H. atul Murruy, M. A. ottossol:, M. 1952 City of Shepherd Kings and Ancient Gaze V. Lon- 1969 Gilead. Tradition and History (Coniectanea Biblica. don. Old Testament Series 3). Lund. Phelps, W., Lolos, Y. and Vichos, Y. (eds.) 1999 The Point lria Wreck: Znlerconnections in th e Excavations at MaCat Hbytik and Znvestigations in its Mediterranean ea. 1200 BC. Proceedings of the Inter- Vicinity. Ankara. nalional Conference, Island of Spelses, 19 September 1982 Macat Hciyilk 11. A Hit&e Center Nor.!heast of 1998. Athens. Z&azkay. Ankara. l’ilitlcs, I). l’udgett, M. 1992 “Ceramics”, 89-102, in: I. A. Todd et al. “Excava- 1990 “White Slip”, 371-75, in: E. D. T. Vermeule and F. Z. Wolsky, Toumba tou Skourou. A Bronze Age tions at Sanidha 1991”, RDAC, 75-112. Potters ’ Quarter on Morphnu Bay in Cyprus. Cam- Po~hm, M. It. briclge MA. 1962 “The Proto White Slip Pottery of Cyprus” Appendix Page, D. L. I, in: I? Astrom and C. R. H. Wright, “Two Bronze 1970 The Santorini Volcano and the Destruction of Minoan Age Tombs at Dhenia in Cyprus” OpAth. 4,277-97. Crate. T,ondnn. I Im ‘Two Cypriot, Sherth from Crcho”, IMA AH, 80 93. l’i*arlttiiu1, I). 1966 “White Slip Ware”, 94-97, in: P. Astram 1966. 1985 “Kalavasos Village, Tomb 51: Tomb of an Unknown Soldier”, RDAC, 164-79. 1972 “White Slip Ware” 431-71, in: P. Astr6m 1972b. 240 Bibliography Portugali, Y. and Knapp, A. B. Rainey, A. F. 1995 “Cyprus and the Aegean: a Spatial Analysis of Znter- 1993 “ShahLn/Sharuhen - The Problem of ldentifica- action in the IP-14th Cepturies B.C.“, 44-78, in: tinn”, Eretz-Zsrael 24, 178-87. A. B. Knapp and T. Stech (eds.), Prehistoric Pro- Ramsey, C. B. duction and Rxchnng~: The Aqwn and EaRtern Mediterranean. Los Angeles. 1995 “Radiocarbon Calibration and Analysis of Stratig- raphy: the OxCal Program”, Radiocarbon 37, Post, J. D. 425-30. 1977 The Last Great Subsistence Crisis in the %‘eslern Rautman, M. et al. World. Baltimore and London. 1993 “Neutron Activation Analysis of Late Roman Postgate, N. Ceramics from Kalavasos-Kopetra and the Environs 1998a “Kilise Tepe”, Anatolian Archaeology 4, 13-14. ’ of the Vasilikoa Valley”, RDAC, 233-64. 1998b “Between the Plateau and the Sea: Kilise Tepe Redford, D. B. Z994-97”, 12741, in: R. Matthews (ed.), Ancient 1970 “The Hyksos Invasion in History and Tradition”, Anatolia. Fifty .Years’ Work by the British lnsti- Orientaliu 39, l-51. tute of Archaeology at Ankara. London. 1992 Egypt, Canaan and Israel in Ancient Times. Prince- Pottier, E. ton. 1896 Musde du Louvre. Catalogue des vases antiques de 1997 “Textual Sources for the Hyksos Period”, 144, in: terre cuite. Part 1. Paris. Oren (ed.) 1997. Potts, T. F., Bourke, S. J., Edwards, P. C., Richards, F. and Rehak, P. and Younger, J. G. Wightman, G. J. 1998 “Review of Aegean Prehistory VII: Neopalatial, 1988 “Preliminary Report on the Eighth and Ninth Sea- Final Palatial, and Postpalatial Crete”, AJA 102, sons of Excavation by the University of Sydney at 91-173. Pella (Tabaqat Fahl), 1986-1987”, ADAJ 32, 11549. Renaudin, L. Prausnitz, M. 1922 “Vases prbhell&iques de Th&a L l’$cole franpaise d’Ath&nes” BCH 46, 113-59. 1975 “The Planning of the Middle Bronze Age Town of Riis, P. J., Jensen, J., Buhl, M.-L. and Otzen, B. Achzib and its Defences”, ZEJ 25, 202-10. 1996 Suka.s X. The Bronze and Early Zron Age Remains at Price-Williams, D. the Southern Harbour. Copenhagen. 1977 The Tombs of the Middle Bronze Age II period from Rose, M. the “500” Cemetery at Tell Fara (South). London. 1995 “Revising Bronze Age Chronology”, Archaeology Pulak, C. 48( 1), 20. 1988 “The Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu Burun, Russell, P. J. Turkey: 1985 Campaign”, AJA 92, l-37. 1983 “Ceramics”, in: A. K. South, “Kalavasos-Ayios 1997 “The Uluburun Shipwreck”, 233-62, in: S. Swiny, Dhimitrios 1982”, RDAC, 92-116 (104-113). R. L. Hohlfelder and H. W. Swiny (eds.), Res Mar- itimae. Cyprus and the Eastern Mediterranean 1986 The Pottery from the Lale Cypriol ZZC Settlement at from Prehistory to Late Antiquity. Atlanta. Kaluvasos-Ayios Dhimitrios, Cyprus: the 1979-1984 Excavation Seasons, Ph.D. Dissertation, University Pythian-Adams, W. J. of Pennsylvania. 1923 “Report on the Stratification of Ashkalon”, PEFQ, 1989 ” Th,e Fine Ware Ceramics: the Settlement Deposits in 60-84. the West, Central, East and South-East Areas”, l-l 1, Quilici, L. in: A. South, P. Russell and P. S. Keswani, 1989. 1990 La tomba dell’eta’ de1 bronze tardo dall’abitato di Rutter, J. B. Ayia Zrini. Rome. Paleokastro press0 1993 “Review of Aegean Prehistory 11: the Prepalatial Raban, A and Galili, E. Bronze Age of the Southern and Central Greek Mainland”, AJA 97, 745-97. 1985 “Recent Maritime Archaeological Research in Israel - a Preliminary Report”, International Jour- 1999 “Cretan External Relations during the LM ZZZA2-B nal of Nautical Archaeology and Underwater Explo- (ea. 1370-1200 BC): a View from the Mesara”, ration 14, 281-86. 139-86, in: Phelps, Lolos and Vichos (eds.) 1999. Radet, G. Ryholt, K. S. B. 1901 L’histoire et l ’oeuvre de l’Z?cole franpise d’AtMnes. 1997 The Political Situation in Egypt During the Second Paris. Intermediate Period c. 1800-1550 B.C. Copenhagen. Bibliography 241 Saidah, R. Sherratt, S. 1978 Sidon et la Phdnicie mdridionale au XIVe s. av. J.-C. 1994 “Commerce, Zron and Ideology: Metallurgical Znnova- A propos des tombes de Dakerman. Thesis, Univer- tion in Z.@-11th Century Cyprus”, 59-106, in: site de Paris. V. Karageorghis (cd.), Cyprus in the llth Century B.C. Nicosia. Salam&Sarkis, H. Sjtiqvist, E. 1973 “Chronique arch&ologique du Liban-Nord 11: 1973-1974”, Bulletin du Mu&e de Beyrouth 26, 1940 Problems of the Lale Cypriote Bronze Age. Stock- 91-102. holm. Salles, J.-F. South, A. K. 1980 La ndcropole K de Byblos. Paris. 1988 “Kalavasos-Ayios Dhimilrios 1987: an Important Ceramic Group from Building X”, RDAC, 223-8. Saltz, D. L. 1992 “Kalavasos-Ayios Dhimilrios 1991”, RDAC , “The Chronology of the Middle Cypriote Period”, 1977 13346. RDAC, 51-69. 1996 “Kalavasos-Ayios Dhimitrios and the Organisation of Sapouna-Sakellarakis, E. Late Bronze Age Cyprus”, 3949, in: P. Astrom and n.d. Cycladic Civilization and the Cycladic Collection of E. Herscher (eds.) 1996. the National Archaeological Museum of Athens. 1997 “Kalavasos-Ayios Dhimitrios 1992-1996”, RDAC, Athens. 151-75 S&ve-SBderbergh, T. (forthcoming) Vailikos Valley Project 4: Kalavasos-Ayios 1951 “The Hyksos Rule in Egypt”, JEA 37,53-71. Dhimilrios Ill (SIMA 71:4). Schaeffer, C. F. A. South, A. K. and Russell, P. J. 1936 Missions en Chypre 1932-1935. Paris. 1993 “Mycenaean Pottery and Social Hierarchy at Kalava- solos-Ayios Dhimitrios, Cyprus”, 303-10, in: C. Zer- 1949 “Corpus cbramique: Premiere partie”, in: C. Schaef- ner (ed.) 1993. fer, Uguritica Il. Paris. South, A. K., Russell, P. J. and Keswani, P.S. 1962 Ugaritica IV. Paris. 1989 Vasilikos Valley Project 3: Kalavasos-Ayios Dhim- 1966 “Neue Entdeckungen und Funde in Ugarit itrios Il. Ceramics, Objects, Tombs, Specialist Studies (1962-1964)“, Archiv filr Orientforschung 2 1, (SIMA 71:3). Gothenburg. 131-37. Stager, L. E., Walker, A. and Wright, G. E. (eds.) Schiering, W. 1974 American Expedition to Idalion, Cyprus. First Pre- 1959-60 “Die Ausgrabung beim Athena-Tempel in Milet liminary Report: Seasons of 1971 and 1972. Cam- 1957 - 1. Siidabschnitt”, Z&Mitt Q-10, 4-30. bridge MA. . Schneider, T. Stampolidis N., Karetsou, A. and Kanta, A. 1998 Ausl(inder in A’gyplen wlthrend des Mitlleren Reiches 1998 Eastern Mediterranean. Cyprus-Dodecanese-Crete, und der Hyksoszeit, Vol. 1, Die ausl~ndischen K&ige 16rh-6th cent. B.C. Heraklion. (ligypten und Altes Testament 42). Wiesbaden. Stanley D. J. and Sheng, H. Schumacher, G. 1986 “Volcanic Shards from Santorini (Upper Minoan 1908 Tell el-Mutesellim 1. Leipzig. Ash) in the Nile Delta, Egypt”, Nature 320, 733-35. Seiler, A. Stavrinou. M. 1999 “Zur Formentwicklung der Keramik wilhrend der 199 6 “Gustave FougBres, l’I&ole franpaise d’Ath8nee et Zweiten Zwischenzeit und der frtihen 18. Dynastie”, la propagande en Gr&e durant lea annbes 204-224, in: W. Kaiser et al., Stadt und Tempel 1917-1918”, BCH 120,83-99. von Elephantine, 25.126.127. Grabungsbericht, Steel, L. MDAIK 55. 1994 “Representations of a shrine on a Mycenaean char- Seton Williams, V. iot krater from Kalavasos-Ayios Dhimitrios, Cyprus”, BSA, 201-t 1. 1954 “Cilician Survey”, AS 4, 121-74. ' Shaw, M. C. 1997 “Pictorial White Slip - the Discovery of a New Ceramic Style in Cyprus”, 3747, in: V. Kara- 1995 “Bull Leaping Frescoes at Knossos and their lnflu- georghis, R. Laftineur and F. Vandenabeele (eds.), ence on the Tell cl-Dabea Murals”, Egypt and the Four Thousand Years of Images on Cypriote Pot- Levant 5, 91-120. tery. Brussels-LiBge-Nicosia. Sherratt, E. S. and Crouwel, J. H. Stern, E. ted.1 1987 “Mycenaean Pottery from Cilicia in Oxford”, 1984 Excavations at Tel Mevorakh (1973-76) Part. 2. The OJA 6,325-52. Bronze Age (Qedem 18). Jerusalem. 242 Bibliography 1993 The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations The Egyptian Museutn, Cairo in the Holy Land, 4 vols., Jerusalem. 1956 The Egyptian Museum, Cairo. A Brief Description of Stewart, J. R. the Principal Monuments. Cairo. 1974 Tell el Xjjul: the Middle Bronze Age Remain s Tite M., Bimson, M. and Freestone, I. C. (SIMA 38). Gothenburg. 1983 “An Examination of the high gloss surface Finish- Stos-Gale, Z. A., Maliotis, G. and Gale, N. es on Greek Attic and Roman Samian wares”, Archaeometry 25(I), 17-27. 1998 ‘IA Preliminary Survey of the Cypriot Slag Heaps and their Contribution to the Reconstruction of Copper Todd, 1. A. Production on Cyprus”, 235-62, in: T. Rehren, A. 1978 “Vasilikos Valley Project: Second Preliminary Hauptmann and J. D. Muhly (eds.), Metallurgica Report, 1977”, JFA 5, 161-95. Antiqua (Der Anschnitt, Beiheft 8). Bochum. 1980 The Prehistory of Central Anatolia 1: the Neolithic Stos-Gale, Z. A., Maliotis, G., Gale, N. H. and Annetts, N. Period (SIMA 60). Gothenburg. 1997 “Lead Isotope Characteristics of the Cyprus Cop- 1986 Vasilikos Valley Project 1: The Bronze Age Cemetery per Ore Deposits applied to Provenance Studies of in Kalavasos Village (SIMA 7l:l). Gothenburg. Copper Oxhide Ingots”, Archaeometry 39(l), 1987 Vasilikos Valley Project 6. Excavations at Kaluvasos- 83-123. Tenta 1 (SIMA 71:6). Gothenburg. Stuiver, M., Reimer, P. J., Bard, E., Beck, J. W., Burr, G. S., 1988 “The Middle Bronze Age in the Kalavasos Area”, Hughen, K. A., Kromer, B., McCormac, G., van der RDAC, 13340. Plicht, J. and Spurk, M. 1989 “The 1988 Field Survey in the Vasilikos Valley”, 1998 “INTCALQS Radiocarbon Age Calibration, 24,000- RDAC, 41-50. 0 cal BP”, Radiocarbon 40: 1041-83. 1990 “Sanidha-Moutti tou Ayiou Serkou: a Late Bronze Sullivan, D. G. . Age Site in the Troodos Foothills”, ArchCypr 2, 1988 “The Discovery of Santnrini Minoan Tephra in 53-62. Western Turkey”, Nature 333, 552-54. 1993 “‘A Late Bronze Age Ceramic-manufacturing Cen- Summers, G. D. ter at Sanidha, Cyprus”, Research and Exploration Q(3), 387-8. 1993 Tille Htiy;yilk 4. The Late Bronze Age and the Iron Age 1993 “Kalavasos-Laroumena: Test Excavation of a Mid- Transition. London. dle Bronze Age Settlement,“, RDAC, 81-96. Swift, G. F. Todd, 1. A. et al. 1958 The Pottery of the arnuq Phases K-O, and its Histor- 1991 “Excavations at Sanidha 1990”, RDAC, 37-74. ical Relationships. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Chicago. 1992 “Excavations at Sanida 1991”, RDAC, 75-112. Swiny, S. Todd, 1. A. and Pilides, D: 1979 Southern Cyprus, c. 2000-1500 B.C. Ph.D. Disserta- 1993 “Excavations at Sanida 1992”, RDAC, 97-146. tion, Institute of Archaeology, University of Lon- Todd, 1. A. and South, A. K. don. 1992 “The Late Bronze Age in the Vasilikos Valley: Recent Szafranski, Z. Research”, 191-204, in: G. C. loannides (ed.), Stud- ies in Honour of Vassos Karageorghis (Kypriakai 1997 “Seriation and Aperture Index of Beer Bottles Spoudai 54-55, 1990-91). Nicosia. from Tell cl-Dabca”, Egypt and the Levant 7, 95-l 19. Treuil, R. Taylor, J. du P. 1996 “L’I&ole franqaise d’Ath&nes et la pr6histoire/pro- ’ tohistoire du monde BgBen”, BCH 120,407-39. 1957 Myrtou-Pigadhes. A Late Bronze Age Sanctuary in Cyprus. Oxford. Tsetskhladze, G. R. Taylour, W. 1998 “Greeks in the Black Sea before Greek Colonisation?“, 18-19, in: H. W. Horsnaes (ed.), Greeks and the 1958 Mycenaean Pottery in Ztaly and adjacent Areas. Cam- Others in the Early First Millennium BC (Classical bridge. Archaeological Notes, Occasional Papers 1). Copen- Thalmann, J.-P. hagen. 1978 “Tell Arqa (Liban Nord). Campagnes I-III Tufnell, 0. (1972-74). Rapport prbliminaire”, Syria 55, t-152. 1940 Lachish II (Tell ed-Duweir). The Fosse Temple. London. 1989 “La trouCe de Homa”, in: Catalogue de l ’exposition “Contribution franpaise 8, l’arch8ologie syrienne”. 1958 Lachish IV (Tell ed-Duweir). The Bronze Age. Lon- Damascus. don. Bibliography 243 1984 Studies on Scarab Seala, Vol. 11, Scarab Seals and 1997 Chronologie des pharaonischen k’gypten. Die Zeitbe- their Contribution to History in the Early Second Mil- stimmung der (igyptischen Geschichte von der Vorzeit lennium B.C. Warminster. bis 332 v. Chr. (Mtinchner Agyptologieche Stu- dien 46). Mainz. 1993 “Tell el-‘Ajjul”, 49-52, in: E. Stern (ed.) 1993. Tzedakis, Y. Y. Voza, G. 1972 “Kypriakai Keramiki sli Dytike Kriti”, 163-6, in: V. 1985 “1 contatti precoloniali co1 mona’o Greco”, 543-62, in Karageorghie and A. Christodoulou (eds.), l7~~- G. Pugliese Carratelli (ed.), Sikanie. Storia e civil& TtK& rot) l$&oV Ala8w~ KVlrpoiloytKOfi ‘%VE6piOV, della Sicilia greca. Milan. T&q A’, Apxaiov Tp@a. (Proceedings of the First Walters, H. B. International Cyprological Congress Vol. A). Nicosia. 1897 “On some Antiquities of the Mycenaean Age recently acquired by the British Museum”, JHS 17, Vagnetti, L. 63-77. J 982 Magna Qrecia e Mondo Miceneo. Nuovi Documenti. Naples. 1905 History of Ancient Pottery. Greek, Etruscan, and Roman, Vol. 1. London. 1986 “Cypriot Elements beyond the Aegean in the Bronze Age”, 201-14, in: V. Karageorghis (ed.), Acts of the Warren, P. M. International Symposium “Cyprus between the 1998 “Aegean Late Bronze l-2 Absolute Chronology: Some Orient and the Occident”. Nicosia. New Contributions”, 323-31, in: Balmuth and Tykot 1993 “Mycenaean Pottery in Italy: Fifty Years of Study”, (eds.) 1998. 143-54, in: C. Zerner (ed.) 1993. Warren, P. M. and Hankey, V. 1999 “Mycenaeana and Cypriols in the Central Mediter- ranean before and after 1200 BC”, 187-208, in : 1989 Aegean Bronze Age Chronology. Bristol. Phelps, Lolos and Vichos (eds.) 1999. Watkins, T. F. Vagnetti, L. and Lo Schiavo, F. 1970 “Philia-Drakes Site A: Pottery, Stratigraphy, 1988 “Late Bronze Age Long Distance Trade in the Chronology”, RDAC, l-9. Mediterranean. The Role of the Cypriots”, 217-43, in: E. Peltenburg (ed.), Early Society in Cyprus. Watrous, L. V. Edinburgh. 1992 Kommos III. The Late Bronze Age Pottery. Princeton. Van Seters, J. Webb, J. M. 1966 The Hyksos: A New Invesligation. New Haven and 1997 Cypriote Antiquities in Australian Collections 1. Cor- London. pus of Cypriote Antiquities 18. Jonsered. Vandersleyen, C. . Webb, J. M. and Frankel, D. 1971 Les guerres d’Amosis, fona’aleur de la XVIZZi2n~ dynastic (Monographies Reine &lisabeth I). 1999 “Characterizing the Philia Facies. Material Culture, Brussels. Chronology, and the Origin of the Bronze Age in Cyprus”, AJA 103, 343. Vermeule, E. D. T. Weickert, C. 1974 Toumba tou Skourou: the Mound of Darkness. A Bronze Age Town on Morphou Bay in Cyprus. Th e 1960 “Die Ausgrabung beim Athena-Tempel in Milet Harvard University Cyprus Archaeological Expe- 1957 - Ill. Der Westabschnitt”, I&Mitt Q-10, dition and the Museum of Fine Arts. Boston. 63-66. Vermeule, E. D. T. and Wolsky, F. Z. Weinstein, J. 1990 Toumba tou Skourou. A Bronze Age Potters’Quarter 1981 “The Egyptian Empire in Palestine: a Reassess- on Morphou Bay in Cyprus. Cambridge MA. ment”, BASOR 241, l-28. Vitto, F. and Edelstein, G. 1991 “Egypt and the Middle Bronze IlC/Late Bronze IA 1993 “Tel Ridan”, 1283, in: E. Stern (ed.) 1993. Transition in Palestine”, Levant 23, 105-15. von Beckerath, J. 1992 “The Chronology of Palestine in the Early Second Millennium B.C.E.“, BASOR 288, 2746. 1964 Untersuchungen zur politischen Geschichte der Zwei- ten Zwischenzeit in k’gypten. Glilckstadt. 1995 “Reflections on the Chronology of Tell el-DabCa”, 1987 “Das Kalendariutn des Papyrus Ebers und das 84-90, in: W. V. Davies and T,. Schofield (eds.) Sothisdatum vom 9. Jahr Amenophis ’ I”, SAK 14, 1995. 27-33. 1996 “A Wolf in Sheep ’s Clothing: How the High Chrono- 1994 Chronologie des &gyp&hen Neuen Reiches (Hildes- logy became the Middle Chronology”, BASOR 304, heimer ligyptologische Beitrgge 39). Hildesheim. 55-63. 244 Bibliography Wentworth, C. K. Yadin, Y. et al. 1922 “A Scale of Grade and Class Terms for Clastic Sed- 1958 Hazer 1, Jerusalem. iments”, Journal of Geoloay 30, 377-92. 1961 Hazer III-IV. The Third and Fourth Seasons 1933 “li’unclnmantnl lAirnits to the Sizes of Clastic 1957-1958. Plates. Jerusalem. Grains”, Science 77, 633-34. 1989 Hazer III-IV. The Third and Fourth Seasons White, D. 1057-1958. Text. .Jerusaletn. 1986 “1985 Excavations on Bates ’ Island, Marsa Yakar, J. Matruh”, JARCE 23,51-84. 1976 “Hittite Involvement in Western Anatolia”, AS 26, 1989 “1987 Excavations on Bates ’ Island, Marsa 117-28. Matruh. Second Preliminary Report”, JARCE 26, Yener, K‘. A. 87-l 14. 1998 ‘A View from the Amuq in South-central Turkey: 1990 “Provisional Evidence for the Seasonal Occupation of Societies in Transformation in the Second Millenni; the Marsa Matruh Area by Late Bronze Age urn BC”, 273-79, in: Cline and Harris-Cline (eds.) Libyans”, 1-14, in: A. Lehay (ed.), Libya and 1998. Egypt c. 1300-750 BC. London. Yener, K. A. and Ozbal, H. 1994 current “Before the Greeks came: a Survey of Archae- 1987 “Tin in the Turkish Taurus Mountains: the Bolkar- ological Evidence for Pre-Greek Libyans”, 31-44, in: da% Mining District”, Antiquity 61, 220-26. J. Reynolds (ed.), Cyrenaican Archaeology. An International Colloquium. Cambridge 29-31 March Yon, M. 1993 (Libyan Studies 25). 1992 “The End of the Kingdom of Ugarit”, 111-22, in: 1996 “Coastal Sites of Northeast Africa: the Case W. Ward and M. S. Joukowsky (eda.), The Crisis against Bronze Age Ports”, JARCE 33, 1130. Years: the 12th Century. Dubuque. Wiener, M. H. 1997 La Gild d’ougarit sur le tell de Ras Shamra. Paris. 1990 “The Isles of Crete? The Minoan Thalassocracy ;999 “Chypre et Ougarit B la fin du Bronze Rbcent”, Revisited”, 128-61, in: D. A. Hardy, C. G. Doumas, RDAC, 113-19 J. A. Sakellarakis and P. M. Warren (eds.), Thera Yon, M. and Caubet, A. and the Aegean World III, Vol. 1, Archaeology. London. 1985 Kition-Bamboula 111. Paris. I998a “The Absolute Chronology of Late Helladic ZZZAZ”, 1990 in: L. Badre, “Tell Kazel, Syria: AUB Museum 309-19, in: Balmuth and Tykot (eds.) 1998. Excavations 1985-1987. Preliminary Reports. Appendix 11: Lea c&amiques importees d e 1998b “Separate Lives: The Ahmose Tempest Stela and l’ouest”, Berytus 38, 98-l 18. the Theran Eruption”, JNES 57, l-28. Yon, M., Renisio, M. and Lombard, P. forthcoming a “The Date of the Theran Eruption and its Implications for Aegean Prehistory and Egypto- 1987 “L’organisaation de l’habitat. Les maisons A, B et E”, Aegean Relations”. 11-128, in: M. Yon (ed.), Ras Shamra-Ougarit III. Le Centre de la ville. 38e-44e campagne s forthcoming b The Chronology of the Late Bronze Age from Egypt to the Aegean: Science, Texts, Interconnections. (1978-1984). Paris. Wilson, R. J. A. Zerner, C. (ed.) 1987-88 “Archaeology in Sicily, 1982-1987”, AR 34, 105-50. 1993 Wace and Blegen. Pottery as Evidence for Trade in the Aegean Bronze Age 1939-1989. Proceedings of the Woolley, C. L. International Conference held at the American School 1937 “Excavations near Antinch in 1936”, Antiquaries of Classical Studies al Athens (Dec.ember 2-3, 1989). Journal 17, l-15. Amsterdam. 1953 A Forgotten Kingdom. Harmondsworth. 1955 Alalakh. An Account of the Excavations al Tell Atchana in the Hatay, 1937-1949. Oxford. GENERAL DISCUSSION Karageorghis: Now that we have come to the general chemical sequence or a technological sequence for discussion, so that we do not create confusion, I sug- your pottery, apart from trying to solve only prove- gest that we discuss each aspect of the symposium nance questions. As far as we may have established separately. Let us start with the techniques and man- some of the characteristics of other sequences apart ufacture of White Slip, the first three papers of the from the Kouklia sequence, I think that we will be meeting. able to solve, or you will be able to solve some typo- Todd: As one of the participants in the first three logical and chronological aspects or problems. papers, now that you have had the chance to see the Erikmon: In relation to your paper, I noted the con- fire-bars from Sanidha in the museum and also to centration on the analysis of the sherds from the handle a few here, does anyone have any suggestions Kouklia area, and then you also analysed material at or any new information on similar artifacts which random that was available in the Cyprus Museum in they know of which they did not mention before? Nicosia. There have been a lot of analyses done of Please, help! White Slip; Peter (Fischer) mentioned some that he Dothan: As to your barsfrom the kiln, when we has done, Manchester has also undertaken some looked at them here in the office, I mentioned that analyses. It would be really great if we could bring they reminded me very much of what I found in kilns these analyses together and look at aspects of region- in Deir el-Balah of the13th century in which we al production and work along the lines that Sarah think that the coffins were fired. I will check it when Vaughan developed for the Base-ring series. I return to Jerusalem. On the upper part of a large Aloupi: Our results and those sherds will be available kiln which we found, there were bricks in this shape to other groups, and it will be very useful to give our which we thought could have been the upper struc- results for petrographic analysis and also Neutron ture of this kiln. Maybe your examples at Sanidha Activation analysis, and I hope that these sherds will will help us out. be included in data bases in future. The problem is Todd: I would love to find some anthropoid sar-. that the results that we published up to now are cophagi at Sanidha! results that refer to different techniques. For exam- Herscher: I would like to comment on the paper by ple, we have results from Neutron Activation analy- Aloupi and Lekka. I think we paid a lot of attention ses from a certain area or certain type of White Slip. to the details which they talked about which were We have results concerning petrographic analyses, very interesting, but to me what was really striking and we have our results that refer to the chemistry of about the paper was the way in which they demon- the slip, the decoration and the chemistry of the strated what a really phenomenal technological body and technological aspects such as firing temper- advance the invention of White Slip ware was, what a ature and so on. But they are still scattered. In future technological feat especially in terms of the pyrotech- we can form some groups and work together with nology, and to create the bichrome effect considering archaeologists and be very careful in sampling. These the unsuitability of the slip to the fabric etc. We are all common problems when we apply these ana- should put this in the context of the culture of the lytical techniques. time, perhaps related to advances in metallurgy as Artzy: I would just like to add that there are, I think, well, also a pyrotechnological development. I think hundreds of samples which have been analysed at the that really helped to put that transition, in which I Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. The laboratory is no am interested, into a very important larger picture. longer active, in fact it has not been active for many AIoupi: What I tried to show was that you, as archae- years, and the samples have been lying around ever ologists, must try to convince the scientists with since. We have analysed the wares of WS I and WS II whom you collaborate to analyse the slip and the dec- frorn quite a few sites; this is material from the oration apart from the body, to try to establish a Swedish Cyprus Expedition, material which was sent 216 General Discussion by Gjerstad many years ago to the Lawrence Berke- work, and she will be undertaking analyses of White ley Laboratory, and some I should add sent by our Slip and other Cypriote wares.I support Eliezer host. After I arrived there we started running the (Oren ’s) plea for coordination: we do not want dupli- tests on the slip rather than the ware; the ware seems cation. Perhaps a small working group could be to be similar, but the slips change from WS I to WS II. established to facilitate this. All this material is there; the numbers are in Berkeley Karageorghis: The local person who could undertake but I have all of the information in Israel, and if peo- such liaison is Lena Kassianidou of the Archaeologi- ple are interested you are very welcome to it. cal Research Unit. She is qualified for this and she Oren: There are more and more studies on physical reside9 in Cyprus. aspects of the White Slip, the paste, slip, paints and Popham: It seems to me rather fantastic that after so so on done by different laboratories and scholars, and many years we only know of one White Slip furnace I think that one of the happy outcomes of this con- production centre. There must be others and they ference should bean appeal for better coordination. I must be fairly easily recognizable. If we are looking, do not think that we have enough funding to dupli- as I believe we are, at the pillow lavas of Troodos I cate the tests, and we should coordinate these past wonder whether we should bring in the Forestry efforts which involved great expense. Department who walk over a lot of this land and Cadogan: I just have a simpleton ’s question. With probably know nothing about archaeology. petrography, which has been useful in other parts of Karageorghis: We move now to the second unit of the world including Crete in sorting out various prob- our symposium which is styles of PWS, WS I and lems of provenance, is there enough distinction ws II. among the deposits around the Troodos that it would Popham: As chairkan of the last session 1 was get- be a helpful tool or not? ting very worried about the constant use of the AIoupi: I am afraid that I am not the person to give term “White Slip I early ”. I wish I knew what “White you an answer to that question since I am not famil- Slip I early ” was! iar with Cypriote geology. But many analyses have Wiener: Perhaps foolishly I would like to attempt a been done in the past by Sarah Vaughan. There are brief response to MervynPopham ’s question. I some people who collaborated with EllenHerscher; I picked up the term from Robert Merrillees ’ paper and am thinking of Basil Gomez, and you may be able to Sturt Manning has also been using the term. I would answer this. have thought that the typical example was what Hemcher: I really do not know very much about it. To Mervyn (Popham) himself described as the lozenge make a comment from the archaeologist ’s point of and ladder style of WS I atToumba tou Skourou. I view, we have collaborated and helped a number of think that is really what people mean by it and sup- people in the past, but we have had a great deal of pose that that was early in the WS I sequence. But trouble in ever obtaining any results from them. I there are others far more competent than I am to have a small note in the next RDAC on this very mat- comment on this. ter, that many archaeologists have been willing to MerriIIeea: When I used the term “early ” I used it in cooperate and provide samples and participate in the context of describing a WS I bowl as an early these kinds of studies, and I think we are all very WS I bowl. But when you put the adjective at the eager to obtain results, but we never receive any end, “White Slip I early ”, then you are creating a results from those who are doing the study. In one new category which I certainly did not intend to do case something was published which had never been on the basis of one bowl. My purpose was to indicate submitted to the excavators andit, was totally wrong that I thought it came early in the series. But it does in terms of the archaeological information. I think we enable me to make one point that has become all need to work together more closely. increasingly clear to me in using these categories, Ma&g: To answer Gerald Cadogan ’s question, which are very useful rules of thumb for classifying John Williams, who has been working with Eliezer all of the White Slip pottery, and that is that if Oren, has managed to identify the source of samples you wish to try to attribute a particular White Slip derived from the different geological regions of sherd, bowl or whatever it is to a particular chrono- Cyprus quite successfully. I would also like to intro- logical horizon, you cannot rely exclusively on calling duce Helen Hatcher who is just beginning a Ph.D. it WS I. If you call it WS I, you give it a possible studentship at the University of Reading which has chronological range of LC IA:2 right down to the end facilities for doing thin sections and this type of of LC IB and possibly into LC IIA. If you want to be General Discussion 217 more precise than that, then you have to compare the normal style of WS I is not found outside Cyprus in piece with others that are well dated, and that is the Levant or in Egypt with the sole exception of exactly what I tried to do in my own paper, to find Tell el-Ajjul. By contrast it is found on Thera, and exact or the closest possible parallels for the Thera that is the notable fact about the Theran bowl. The bowl in the corpus of White Slip wares that we have Phylakopi piece was called early in a publication available to us for comparative purposes. some years ago, and today it is being called a variety Popham: Thank you for the clarification. I think that of things. I phrased the railway track motif, which is until we are a little more sure of where we are going the two slightly thicker parallel lines with the very it might be better to fteep to “White SlipT normal ” much fainter little nicked ones in between, mature and “White Slip I late ”. We ftnow what might be late WS 1 or even later. This is arguable, but it is by no stylistically; I am not at all convinced that the means early. It counts in the classic phase, and the bichrome is an early stage, I would have thought that piece from Trianda, which surprisingly has not been it might be a much later stage. That is why I say I illustrated at all during the conference, is a classic think we ought not to jump the gun too much. But example of the two parallel lines with lozenge in the what it does provide for us is almost the equivalent of middle, and it comes from a context with Late Black and Red Figure ware. This painter stands out, Minoan IB and nothing earlier. It is an absolutely and I do not think there can be more than one or two definite LM IB context. That is the later, mature painting like that. And I noticed another feature of phase as found in most of the contexts across the east that particular painter or, if I am going too far, fac- Mediterranean. It is the early phase that should, in tory, that unlike any other normal White Slip bowl I some senses, be of most interest to us and which is know, the base has been flattened. Flat bases are the most enigmatic because it is not, in fact, found in quite normal with spouted bowls and they are quite nice contexts abroad. This does not mean that either normal with the small lug bowl, but I know of no the high or low chronology is correct; the point is normal, ordinary WS I bowl with a flattened base. I that we cannot tell because we are lacking this mate- have just been looking through Eriksson ’s paper on rial at Tell el-Dabca; it is also lacking at Tell Atchana, WS I and I see that she has some sherds that look as and I have looked in the Antakya museum amongst though they are bichrome of this type, and sure other places, it just is not there. The only place where enough she has marked it “flat base ”. It is not a real it is found is Tell el-Ajjul, and as Eliezer (Oren) will base. My other point on style is that I am delighted undoubtedly tell me if I try to claim anything, the that it now looks pretty definite that PWS is, in fact, stratigraphy there is somewhat debatable. I hope a stage, and an earlier stage on the whole than WS 1, that his forthcoming study may elucidate it, but I although inevitably there may be some overlap.i‘he fear that the answer will be negative. centre of manufacture looks as though it is in the Karageorghis: With this we come to the problem of Morphou-Nicosia foothills. I am surprised to find so diffusion. much on other sites that were not known before such Popham: I am not going to talk about diffusion since as Maroni, Kouklia and so on. my knowledge of its export abroad is very much out Manning: As somCbody who has been partly blamed of date. It is almost a circular argument to say that for introducing the term, I should try to explain the early WS I is not found outside the island. You have basis for it. I think Mervyn (Popham ’s) term “White already defined what early WS I is. The fact that we Slip I normal ”,as opposed to “White Slip I late ”, is get the ladder pattern as you were describing it, and the same as “White Slip I early ”. We are talking I am sure that the Thera bowl is of that type, I don ’t about the same category and it is a question of the think it has anything to do with chronology in that name applied to ,it. But the point that should be particular context. emphasized is that it is quite possible to distinguish a Menillees: I would just like to take up the question of later or subsequent or mature phase of W’S I which confusion. In the discussion on diffusion reference has, has two parallel lines with lozenges inside which on several occasions, been made to things called Mid- equals a variety of things which we have seen from dle Cypriote fabrics. I have had occasion before to Tell el-Dabca in particular, which is all mature or question this particular usage of the term, because later WS 1, versus an earlier or normal or initial or there are no such things as Middle Cypriote fabrics, if whatever you might like to call it phase represented it means that fabrics that are called Middle Cypriote at Toumba tou Skourou and elsewhere on the island, cannot go into Late Cypriote. In fact nearly all of the This is the distinction that is effectively being drawn, fabrics of MC III continue throughout LC IA. All of and the notable feature is that this earlier or initial or the White Painted Cross Line style,Pendent Line 218 General Discussion style, White PaintedV, Red-on-Black, Black Slip including these other kinds of wares that are per- (Reserved Slip) wares, indeed all of the characteristic haps not so attractive and that we have not picked and diagnostic ceramic features of MC III, continue out so much, but these are the wares that arrive in almost unceasingly throughout the whole of LC IA the Levant. I would also like to add an update:Hala and only begin to die out in LC IB. If you use the term Sultan Tekke is very much a part of this trade. Middle Cypriote fabrics you must be absolutely specif- There is PWS at Hala Sultan Tekke. Very recently I ic what you mean by this. If you then try to say that looked again at the sherds in Larnaca Museum which Middle Cypriote fabrics never occur with PWS, that is, I excavated in a trench there in 1972, and I am of course, in terms of the Cypriot relative chronology, pleased to say that I have learnt something more in a nonsense, because PWS in Cyprus occurs very irreg- the last quarter century about LC I pottery. In ularly in many contexts in LC IA and the overwhelm- Trench 15 at Hala Sultan Tekke there is well strati- ing masses of pottery in both stratigraphic and funer- fied PWS at the bottom, then there is a layer of ary contexts are all what is called Middle Cypriote- brick and some sort of disturbance, and above that that is fabrics that belong to those particular wares WS I. I would also like to add that in that lowest that I have just described. All of this is set out in full level at Hala Sultan Tekke and in other somewhat detail in SCE IV, 1B where you will never find anyone disturbed LC IA contexts, there is a fairly substan- referring to Middle Cypriote fabrics. tial amount of Canaanite jars. From the limited Karageorghis: We are going to discuss chronology amount of work undertaken on the site in those later, so let us stick to the subject of diffusion now. early levels, I think we can see that it is very much the same pattern as at Maroni. Oren: As far as diffusion is concerned, we have focused Karageorghis: Of course our knowledge of centres of on the early styles of White Slip - PWS, WS I and production is not that complete in order to determine not WS II which is totally different, and I think that which region was exporting where. what emerges so far is that, unless there are some real surprises in the field, we are dealing with the diffu- f&zy: Let us not forget Enkomi. sion of a trickle of PWS and WS I outside Cyprus. Karageorghis: We have quite enough material from This is probably not going to change in general terms, Enkomi, but there are other sites all along the Lar- and it is interesting that the major concentration of naca district coast which have not yet been excavat- this is Tell el-Ajjul and to a lesser extent at Tell el- ed, so the picture may change radically. Dabca in the Delta. If we would like to refer to this as Manning: To follow up on what Ellen(Herscher) was a phenomenon, it is certainly a phenomenon which is saying, I would like to propose two ideas or hypothe- in total contrast to what we know about WS II. I ses to engage discussion. The first is: if you look in think this is one aspect that has emerged out of this Egypt until very recently, and basically that means meeting. Robert Merrillees ’ book, two WS I bowls have been Heracher: I was very glad to hear Malcolm (Wiener) found in the whole of Egypt. In other words WS I remind us that most of the trade to the Levant prob- was clearly not very popular in most of Egypt that ably came from SE Cyprus, because the theme of the had been explored until the end of the 1960s. The conference being White Slip, there have been many obvious place that had not been explored was the references to NW Cyprus where, of course, Toumba Delta. I think this is interesting. Then if you look in tou Skourou and the other sites have yielded so much Cyprus there istflis quite sharp differentiation fine PWS and WS I ware. But the vast majority of between SE/south coastal Cyprus and the NW/west- the wares found in the Levant do come from eastern ern part of the island at the end of the Middle Cypri- Cyprus as Malcolm (Wiener) correctly pointed out. ote and beginning of the Late Cypriote. This is not an This is where I think Maroni is going to be extreme- original observation. Astrijm and Merrillees have ly important. For the first time at Maroni, both with debated this since the early 1960s onwards. The south the settlement deposits, particularly in the southern coast/SE region, whichever sites are involved, is the part of Vournes, and with the seabed deposit which area exporting to the Levant and particularly to Tell we only briefly referred to (and I have just complet- el-Dabca at the end of the Middle Bronze Age. These ed the report on the ceramics of that deposit, and I sites perhaps, in their so-called PWS phase, are going think they fit in very well), we see the Cypriote side to last a little bit longer in this phase than those in the of the trade that we have already seen in the Levant, north, where they have a slightly different tradition the same sort of assortment of wares, the Red-on- and which may well have been producing what we are Black, Black Slip and so on with White Painted also, going to describe as initial WS I at the same time as General Discussion 219 sites in the south were continuing to produce PWS. Hiiyiik near Zile. This takes us back to what Vassos There is no clear evidence of that but it is possible. (Karageorghis) said when we started, there must be But the question has to be, at Tell el-Dabca for exam- dozens, I would think, of maybe small White Slip ple, why are we finding PWS and WS I there and not sherds lying unrecognized amongst the excavated elsewhere in Egypt? When it comes to diffusion, the material from many sites. And I would add that it is topic of the present part of the discussion, why were not only a question of White Slip sherds, but also those wares popular there and not elsewhere in earlier Cypriote wares such as White Painted ware. Egypt? Bowls are a drinking type of vessel used in We know of a White Painted Pendent Line style certain rituals, they are not trading containers. This juglet at Ktiltepe. How much more White Slip is would seem to be an interesting problem for future there still to be recognized? We have looked at the research $0 explain this differential pattern. west, the south, the east, but we must also bear the Oren: Also on the subject of diffusion, another site, in north in mind. my opinion, of major interest and somewhat over- Karageorghis: For the record I asked Wolf Niemeier looked by students is that of Tell Heboua in the east- to be with us and report on Anatolia, but at the last ern Delta, and a smaller sister site to Tell el-Dabca minute he was not able to come. right off the Suez Canal. This site under the direction Wiener: I can provide one piece of information, that of Abd el-Maksoud is of interest simply because it in the last two weeks of this season Wolf (Niemeier) yielded a vast deposit of the late Hyksos period found a PWS/WS I bowl but it was out of context. including certainly WS I and I suspect also PWS On the subject of Anatolia I was well aware that alongside the bichrome, some White Painted and of there was WS II in many places, but I was not aware course the array of Canaanite imports. So what is of ws I. perhaps emerging is that we are dealing here with two Todd: I was referring to White Slip in general, not clusters of sites, one in the eastern Delta with Tell el- specifically to WS I. Dabca and its environs, the other at Tell el-Ajjul and neighbouring sites such as Tel Ridan. It would, of Kerageorghis: We turn now to the problem of course, be exciting to try to answer the question of chronology. Please be calm during this discussion! why specifically these regions, but I think the under- Let us start with the less controversial aspects. lying answer is that we are dealing here with a certain Popham: My worry is not so much absolute chronol- economic phenomenon that has to do with the Hyk- ogy, but definition. Now that we have got rid of the SOS and their economy. expression Middle Cypriote fabric because it goes on Hein: Regarding Tell Heboua, I know that WS I was into Late Cypriote, what defines LC I? I can only found there. We must remember that few settlements think of PWS, if PWS comes before Proto Base-ring. have been explored in Egypt. It seems that White Astrom: We have to go back to Sjiiqvist who made Slip ware occurs mainly in settlement deposits, but the following terminology: LC IA is the period when how many excavated settlement deposits do we have WS I begins. He did not know about PWS ware; it in Egypt? Tell ei-Dabca is one of the few points in the existed but it was not known. When I had to put it eastern Delta, and we work very carefully. But how into the sequence I did not want to change the old many other tells in the Delta have been excavated in terminology too much, but it was obvious that the that way! PWS belonged to the Late Cypriote series, not to the Todd: I would like to draw your attention to the fact Middle Cypriote. That was why I divided LC IA into that I think our geographical coverage of the White two phases. The first a PWS phase, and the next Slip occurrences on the mainland has been somewhat (LC IA:2) the WS I phase when PWS continues. incomplete. We have looked at it in Sicily, the Libyan LC IA:2 in Cyprus is the period when WS I begins. coast and we have seen especially the Levant from The relative sequence in Cyprus is clear. The absolute Ras Shamra right down to the Egyptian Delta, but date is quite a different matter and whether it occurs we must surely mention the Anatolian plateau. before or after the beginning of the New Kingdom is Admittedly we know of Troy. The information that another matter. is available is extremely scanty, but we must be Popham: I am not in any way criticizing what you aware that White Slip s’herds, even in small quanti- did. What I am saying is that if we have two deposits, ties, are being distributed by whatever means as far one known by God to be Middle Cypriote, the other north as the north central plateau. White Slip and known by God to be Late Cypriote but which did not Mycenaean sherds have been reported at Magat have PWS, how would we distinguish them? 220 I General Discussion Wiener: In the earli draft of my paper I referred sively is that a date after the middle of the 16til cen- to the White Slip b from T&l1 Heboua, but I was tury is almost impossible, not just as a result of one told that 1 ,shouf to it since its stratigrapfiy analysis but all forms of scientific analysis, and I was highly doubtful. hy is it significant? It is cer- would even argue from a good look at Cypriote tainly not because th is no New Kingdom materi- stratigraphy. As Robert Merrillees commented, you al on the site. cannot ignore the sequence here; it has to be based on Hein: There i gdom material at Tell the Cypriote evidence, the sequence of White Slip nd tell you in which par- and other materials that we have. At Maroni I think ticular place. Nomad looters have collected fine we can start to look at a period that runs from the there could be White Slip late 17th century ormid-16t ’l century through for some 200 years, and I think that should be the basis of chronology I would of the chronology of the Late Cypriote period from entirely in the sense that now on. I have taken Maroni as an example but there issues here. One is build- are other similar sites. ing up a relative se in Cyprus from stratified MerriIIeea: I have previously pointed out that the use excavations; for bia sons I have to draw atten- of the term “high chronology ” tends to mislead tion to Gerald Cad paper which personally I everybody. There is no agreed absolute chronology think was one of th e significant papers of this for the Late Bronze Age or, indeed, for the Middle conference, in that wed a continuous sequence Cypriote period in Cyprus. There is the ultra-high, from initial LC IA:1 e are going to call it that) the high, the middle, the low and the ultra-low. There through to LC IIC i stratified deposit based on is no way that you caq classify them except by look- actual settlement e, not tombs, not seriation, ing at the various differences. There are more people ic features or anything else. who agree with the middlechronofog.y, which ccntrcs LC IA can, ther defined by the material in around the one that has been put forward by Paul that deposit, and this tails WP V occurring with Astriim, th an with the others. I am not certain WP VI, Black Slip, P oming in and so on. I think whether Sturt (Manning) has yet put forward a date Mervyn (Popham ’s) tion can be answered by for the beginning of LC IA at 1700 or 1675 BC. He material from new ex ions, especially Ellen (Her- has only talked about the explosion of Thera and the scher ’s) publication he material fromVournes. implications of the bowl for chronology. So that he This evidence also exi her sites such as Hala really cannot be held for having a high chronology for ay not have been recog- the Cypriote Bronze Age yet unless he wishes to com- nized as clearly at the ‘me. The seabed deposit that mit himself to it. But there are many chronologies. vides a very nice tight Wiener: On the radiocarbon dates, as Sturt Manning material. Recognizing has himself pointed out so successfully, and I owe that and recognizing t phase of WS I, I think we much of my knowledge to Sturt, the radiocarbon are almost becotn contentious amongstthe curve becomes smooth again around 1535 L3C, 1530 number of people esented papers here. That at the latest. Before that it is very hard to distin- leaves us in absolute ronology witha different guish, on a radiocarbon basis, between let ’s say 1628 debate. In Egypt in y New Kingdom levels we and 1535. I noted earlier that a cotnment was made have mature and late I. I don ’t think this can be about how the curve becomes rather flat in the question that remains 13”11--12~ll centuries, but the famous back-bending, or is, where early phase I crops up, no one has ruled as I called it in the book, oscillating radiocarbon out that occurring in t Tell el-Dabca or late Mid- curve of the 17th-16th centuries is, of course, much dle Bronze Age. T e area of potential debate. worse, because trees, as a result of sunspot activity ot The evidence at and the radiocarbon evi- whatever other cause, take in more 14C than they lose dence that we show compatible with the high through the half-life decay rate in this period, and chronology, but also atible with our compro- the curve turns backward. It is our curse that we mise early chronology h is going to have a mid- have difficulty with radiocarbon dates in that period. 16th century beginni Late Minoan I, LC I etc. I Of course, radiocarbon has tremendous uses asMan- regard that as an eq viable position. The only fred Korfmann has shown with his careful work. He thing I would try to p ut, and Malcolm (Wiener) can now pin down Troy II to 50 years whereas in our did express his sceptic about radiocarbon dating, youth it was dated anywhere from 3400 BC to the one thing that sci can say very comprehen- 2800 BC. It is just that we have this particular prob- General Discussion 221 lem for the 17th-l6tll centu y BC. On another ques- and he is also going to give us his negatives. I would tion, I did note in Sturt ’s faour that Manfred Bietak like to thank him most sincerely for his generosity. 1 said that he could imagine a 60 year D/2 period for We are going to put them in good order here at the Tell el-Dabca. Now if that period is 60 years, and if Foundation, and this archive will be at the disposal of the fact that there is no W I in D/2 is purely fortu- any of you who would like to make use of them. The itous, then the long chron fogy might have a faint slides include material that has been lost and is ; no chance. longer accessible. Karageorghis: Instead of cbnclusions I would fifte to &t&m: This symposium has provided much new ask some of you to give ur general impressions. material, many impressive new results from which I Mervyn (Popham), som s after the SCE article, have profited. The general outline remains, but we which is still our basis e study of White Slip, have refined earlier results, and that is how it should how do you feel that this rence has contributed, be. Let me say that I find Kathryn Eriksson ’s divi- if it has, or what are you sion of PWS into three phasesan excellent move for- ward. She has studied the stratigraphy of tombs - Popham: From my point w it has been wonder- that is what we have - and I am absolutely convinced ful because I have been sl n to be generally right! I that you can make divisions there. That is also a step am still not sure whet the important point of forward. There are many points upon which I could whether PWS precedes to Base-ring has been comment. For instance the new analysis of the tech- now draw on sites like solved. For PWS we c nique is new to me; it was very illuminating and Maroni and Hala Sultan kke which were quite out instructive. Oren ’s presentation of the evidence from of the picture in Israel was excellent and very useful. There have been come to conclusions, an many excellent papers. One point that has not been enced by the beautiful erial from Toumba to u mentioned concerns the conclusions reached by Skourou. I don ’t think th s necessarily where they Kromholz in his thesis. We were talking about diffu- were made. Concerning t bdivision of White Slip sion; his book has not been diffused enough to show I still think it is too early I still feel that we want his results which were that in the beginning WS II more evidence, particu y settlement evidence, was diffused to the northern part of Syria and Israel and only in the later period to the south. I think per- still remains in the Kouk area probably stretching haps that should be emphasized a little more. To con- as far as Episkopi. The o good thing from my tinue: if the terminology which we worked out in the point of view was the evidence which has SCE does not appeal to people and if you want to mopped up my oddities. re was the curious flask change it, then do so as long as we are agreed. in SCE IV, there was a ag line with dots, there MerrilIees: I think the one thing that has impressed were scale patterns, ther re loops, all of which did me most is that unlike, it has to be said, quite a num- not fit in at all with reg White Slip II. They are ber of other conferences which I have attended, this we want to know where one has brought together participants who have con- those were mad tributed fresh information on a great many aspects of Whether we can divide WS II further I am not the White Slip problem, if we can call it that, both sure. Stylistically it is cer n that the bar in the front new and old information. For all of us this has been and subsidiary de ought to be earlier, but is very much a learning experience, and in that respect it? I would like to e evidence for it being so. I it has meant that we are now going to take away with am even more worried ut the final stage. We have us a great deal of information that has not hitherto been shown several Slip sherds from levels been accessible. This we will be able to digest and use thought to date tocu. BC. If they are regular in our own studies. It has also demonstrated one other thing, the value of having on an occasion like Slip. How are we going in White Slip III, choco- this the person responsible for classifying White Slip late White Slip, if it is a nological thing, between for the Swedish Cyprus Expedition, and Mervyn that date and the be or at least early Maa? Popham ’s presence has enabled us to feel that this I am still not happy ite Slip III, that it is a process with which we are dealing is itself not just piircly clirono1ogio~~l clis ickioti arid not, iwcesswily, simply personal but also historical and, therefore, can in part at least, a region be addressed in a continuing manner. It is also equal- Karageorghis: A cou of hours ago Mervyn ly valuable to have Paul Astrijm here because the rel- Popham gave me aft his our slides from his archive, ative chronology of the SCE and indeed the entire 222 General Discussion system has not been replaced, challenged or supplant- Bronze Age or, if you wish, the MB III. In other ed by anybody who has come onto the scene in this words, the pieces that we have tend to come mostly area afterwards. I thihk that is a great vindication of from graves, and the graves seem to yield no WS I. the foresight both of the classificatory and the On the contrary, there is Cypriotebichrome ware, chronological systems which we all now adhere to. In there is even Chocolate-on-White, there is Tellel- that respect it seems to me that we have a particular Yahudiyeh ware but noPWS or WS I. I think that advantage; if we are in any disagreement or uncer- although Ian (Todd) said we have spoken so much tainty about how to apply a certain pottery name or about the eastern side, we are missing quite a lot of a relative chronological term, we can turn to theSCE what is going on in the northern part of that area in because it is the one basic frame of reference that we terms,of the very early part of White Slip. However, all use. But we have heard today that Palestinian if we go on to the WS II in the northern part of archaeology, which I have known for years, isbedev- Israel and further north, we are finding out that we ‘illed with different relative chronologies. I must have are dealing with large amounts of WS II. Although I been out of the system for some time since I did not hesitated about trying to divide the material into even know that there existed such a thing as MB III, families or into areas of manufacture on stylistic which I now realize, of course, is MB IIB and IIC. So grounds, I think it should be done. I think,fol I think we in Cyprus are extraordinarily well off. But instance, the material from Tell Abu Hawam should it does mean that otlhers who come here to try to be treated in this way and I am sure Jacqueline understand our system must do it on our terms. I will Balensi will do so. The same is true for Akko. These end by making one point that is very important to us should then be compared to areas in Cyprus. from that point of view: in so many other places Karageorghis: Sophocles Hadjisavvas, the view from which do not have a pottery classification system like Cyprus? ours, there is a tendency to use relative chronology to .Hadjisawaa: Last month I was asked by the orga- describe pottery wares, and that, I think, we do not do nizers of yet another conference on Cypriote archae- because we do not need to do it. In that respect we are ology to summarize the results. I told them directly very well off, and that is why I made my earlier point that we are not yet ready to have conclusions. New because I think it is most misleading in a cultural sit- material is coming to light day after day; some very uation like that of Cyprus actually to put chronolog- important excavations, including my own at Alassa, ical labels on various artifacts, material sequences etc. are not yet published. The Kouklia material is not yet that serve to confuse rather than enlighten. If you published. I think that we must publish all the impor- know your cultural sequence in the Bronze Age on tant excavations.. . Cyprus well, you realize that it is very much subject to Karageorghis: Or perish! regional variations. This is a critical point of under- Hadjisawaa: You know my ideas on that subject. standing about all that you deal with here in the Perhaps I am a bit stricter than you were in your Bronze Age at least, perhaps a little bit less in the time. I am also pressing my Cypriote colleagues to Iron Age, that the regional variations are the under- publish, not only the foreign colleagues. I think that pinning of an understanding of the civilization. OUI we have to wait for all these sites to be published, and terms should facilitate the clarification of those vari- material which was excavated before and not proper- ations rather than obscure them. ly published to be re-published in the light of the new Kamgeorghia: Michal (Artzy), the view from the evidence which we have. The sciences will also come east? to our help; in that way we are luckier than our pre- Artzy: Most of the discussion here has been on the decessors. I believe that scientific analyses will be of earlier appearances of the PWS and WS I, and I assistance, especially with absolute chronology. The would like to mention that there seems to be a great Department of Antiquities is ready to collaborate difference between what happens in the north and with any scientific centres that wish to undertake sci- what happens in the south. We have been hearing entific research on finds from Cyprus. We are also about Tell et-Ajjul correctly compared with Tell el- ready to collaborate with any foreign institutions Dabca in the south; in the north we are speaking of which want to come and work on the island. My Akko which, I think, is better than Tell Abu Hawam impressions from this conference are excellent. I fully which did not exist at the time relevant to all of these agree with what Paul &trGm and Robert Merrillees questions about which we have been speaking. In have said about our meetings. It is yet another bridge Akko we seem to have a very different picture so far. on the road we are trying to construct on Cypriote We never really excavated the beginning of the Late archaeology. General Discussion 223 Karageorghis: Kathryn (Eriksson), the view of the White Slip sequence there which we have not dis- younger generation (not that others are not young!)? cussed. In the publication Catling only illustrated Eriksson: It is wonderful to be in the company of so pottery from Periods III and IV. We do not know the many experts on White Slip. The situation with nature of the White Slip from the early levels, and it regard to PWS and WS I is very interesting, and this is possible that there might be PWS together with the is the area upon which I concentrated. I am also 97% of the Middle Cypriote type vessels. It would be interested in WS II, and I would like to remark that instructive if we could look at that material again. in Egypt, at the settlement of Memphis at Kom Karageorghis: It remains for me to express my grati- Rabia, we do have WS II around the time of fication that you are not too displeased with the Horemheb. We also have White Shaved as well. Sturt results of this conference. I thank you all for your (Manning) brought up the point why do we not have participation, for your patience, for your wisdom, more White Slip in Egypt? lrmgard (Hein) suggested both those who read papers and those who took part that we do not have enough excavated settlements, in the discussion. I would also like to thank Linda but we have so many tombs which Robert Merrillees Hulin and Anna Lekka who helped with the projec- detailed in his thesis of 1968. We have lots of Base- tion of the slides, the technicians who hopefully will ring I, we have lots of Red Lustrous. Why the situa- give us many tapes which Ian Todd will take over. I tion in Egypt is different from that in Palestine is a am sure that you will agree that the one person who very interesting question but I do not have the deserves particular thanks is my secretary Maria answer as to why the patterns change. In relation to Georgiou. You have heard Manfred Bietak telling us the chronology of these early wares, we have sup- the good news that the National Research Council of ported the view that Mervyn Popham put forward, Austria has approved the whole project which he and I would like to say that Pendayia and Akhera himself conceived. This means that we will go on only have PWS; there is no WS I in these tombs, and with the project, and together with Paul Astrijm we Mervyn Popham classified all of these as PWS in the have started thinking of the next conference which 1972 classification. At Pendayia there is no Proto will be in Stockholm. Base-ring or Base-ring; at Akhera there is Proto &&r&m: I am thinking of a meeting on Bichrome Base-ring/Monochrome and this is supported by the Wheelmade ware and Base-ring ware, one day for evidence at Toumba tou Skourou Tomb III where each, in October 2000. WS I and Base-ring I are missing. This is supported Karageorghis: Those of us who may be optimistic by the stratified settlement material from the same will put down this date. On a serious note, the pro- site. Support is also forthcoming from the Maroni- ceedings of this conference will be published, and you sequence, and I was really interested to hear Vournes . are urged to collaborate in the timely submission of about the Hala Sultan Tekke evidence as well. One your papers. We aim to achieve publication within further point concerns Myrtou-Pigadhes and the one year of the event. Thank you aft very much.