LM IB pottery relative chronology and regional differences

Acts of a workshop held at the Danish Institute at Athens in collaboration with the INSTAP Study Center for East , 27–29 June 2007

Edited by Thomas M. Brogan & Erik Hallager

Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens Volume 11, 1

3 © Copyright The Danish Institute at Athens, Athens 2011

LM IB pottery – relative chronology and regional differences

Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens Volume 11, 1

General Editor: Rune Fredriksen and Erik Hallager Graphic design: Erik Hallager Printed at Narayana Press

Printed in Denmark on permanent paper conforming to ANSI Z 39.48–1992

The publication was sponsored by: The Carlsberg Foundation The Institute for Aegean Prehistory

ISBN: 978 87 7934 573 7

Distributed by: AARHUS UNIVERSITY PRESS Langelandsgade 177 DK–8200 Århus N www.unipress.dk

Gazelle Book Services Ltd. White Cross Mills, Hightown Lancaster LA1 4XS, England www.gazellebooks.com

The David Brown Book Company (DBBC) P.O. Box 511 Oakville, CT. 06779, USA www.davidbrownbookco.uk

Cover illustration: Double vase from the Royal Road: North at Knossos

4 Contents

Volume 1

8 List of contributors

11 Preface Erik Hallager & Thomas M. Brogan

13 Bibliography

39 Introduction Thomas M. Brogan

55 LM IB pottery in Khania Maria Andreadaki-Vlazaki 75 From LM IB Marine Style to LM II marine motifs. Stratigraphy, chronology and the social context of a ceramic transformation: a response to Maria Andreadaki-Vlazaki Eleni Hatzaki

93 The LM I pottery from the ceramic workshop at Zominthos Sebastian Traunmueller 109 Response to Sebastian Traunmueller Nicola Cucuzza

117 LM IB pottery from the colonies. Hagios Georgios sto Vouno, Kythera Iphigenia Tournavitou 141 Kythera, the Levant, -Pyrgos and Knossos: a response to Iphigenia Tournavitou Gerald Cadogan

153 Knossos Royal Road: North, LM IB deposits Sinclair Hood 175 Response to Sinclair Hood Birgitta P. Hallager

183 Late Minoan IB pottery from Knossos: Stratigraphical Museum Excavations, the North Building Peter M. Warren 197 The final LM IB destructions at Knossos and at Phaistos: a response to Peter Warren Orazio Palio

205 LM I pottery groups from the Palace and the town of Galatas, Pediada Giorgos Rethemiotakis & Kostis S. Christakis

5 229 Response to Giorgos Rethemiotakis & Kostis Christakis Tim Cunningham

241 Pithoi and economy in LM IB state societies Kostis S. Christakis 255 Remarks on storage and chronology in Late Cycladic I Akrotiri, Thera: a response to Kostis Christakis Irene Nikolakopoulou

267 From the end of LM IA to the end of LM IB: the pottery evidence from Dario Puglisi 291 Makrygialos reloaded: the LM IB pottery: a response to Dario Puglisi Eleni Mantzourani

307 Late Minoan IB at Kommos: a sequence of at least three distinct stages Jeremy B. Rutter

Volume 2

345 LM IB pottery from the rural Villa of Pitsidia: a response to Jeremy Rutter Despina Chatzi-Vallianou

379 Pottery from the LM IB building at Skinias Stella Mandalaki 393 Time, place and practice in the East Mesara: the case of Skinias. A response to Stella Mandalaki Carl Knappett

401 Pottery at Pseira in LM IB Philip P. Betancourt 413 Response to Philip P. Betancourt Penelope Mountjoy

427 Pottery of the late Neopalatial periods at Mochlos Kellee A. Barnard & Thomas M. Brogan 451 LM IB phases at Mochlos and the single phase of LM IB at Knossos: a response to Kellee Barnard & Thomas Brogan Colin F. Macdonald

463 LM IB Petras: the pottery from Room E in House II.1 Metaxia Tsipopoulou & Maria Emanuela Alberti 499 An introduction to the LM IB pottery from Poros: a response to Metaxia Tsipopoulou and Emanuela Alberti Eleni S. Banou

6 513 The LM IB Renaissance at postdiluvian Pre-Mycenaean Palaikastro Seán Hemingway, J. Alexander MacGillivray & L. Hugh Sackett 531 LM IB ceramic phases at Palaikastro and Malia: a response to Seán Hemingway, J. Alexander MacGillivray & L. Hugh Sackett Aleydis Van de Moortel

553 Between Palaikastro and Zakros: the pottery from the final Neopalatial horizon of the Sea Guard- House, Karoumes Leonidas Vokotopoulos 573 The LM IB pottery from Papadiokampos: a response to Leonidas Vokotopoulos Thomas M. Brogan, Chrysa Sofianou & Jerolyn E. Morrison

595 Zakros: one or two destructions around the end of the LM IB period Lefteris Platon 613 A West Cretan response (Nerokourou) to Lefteris Platon and the LM IB pottery from Zakros Athanasia Kanta

627 Closing comments Wolf-Dietrich Niemeier

629 General Discussion

647 Shape illustration index Thomas M. Brogan

650 Index

7 List of contributors

Maria Emanuela Alberti Thomas M. Brogan Birgitta P. Hallager University of Udine, Italy INSTAP Study Center for East Greek-Swedish Excavations correspondence to: Crete c/o Danish Institute at Athens Via Anapo 29 Pacheia Ammos Herefondos 14 I-00199 Roma GR-72200 GR-10558 Athens Italy Greece [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Maria Andreadaki-Vlazaki Gerald Cadogan Erik Hallager General Director of Antiquities The Old Rectory Danish Institute at Athens Hellenic Ministry of Culture and Culworth Herefondos 14 Tourism Banbury OX17 2AT GR-10558 Athens Bouboulinas 20–22 England Greece GR-106 82 Athens [email protected] [email protected] Greece [email protected] Despina Chatzi-Vallianou Eleni Hatzaki Museum of Cretan Ethnology Asst. Professor of Mediterranean Eleni Banou Researche Centre – Vori – Archaeology Director of the Department of GR-70200 , Crete Department of Classics Sites at the Greece University of Cincinnati Second Ephorate of Prehistoric [email protected] P.O. Box 210226 and Classical Antiquities Cincinnati OH 45221–0226 Sygrou Ave. 98–100 Kostis S. Christakis USA GR-11741 Athens University of Crete [email protected] Greece Department of Education [email protected] Rethimnon, Crete Seán Hemingway Greece Associate Curator Kellee A. Barnard [email protected] Department of Greek and Roman Classics Department Art McCormack 4/649 Nicola Cucuzza The Metropolitan Museum of Art University of Massachusetts Università di Genova 1000 Fifth Avenue Boston, MA 02125 Dipartimento di Archeologia e New York, New York 10028–0198 USA Filologia Classica USA [email protected] via Balbi, 4 [email protected] I-16126 Genova Philip P. Betancourt Italy Sinclair Hood Department of Art History [email protected] The Old Vicarage, Tyler School of Art Building Great Milton, Oxford, Temple University Tim Cunningham OX44 7PB, Philadelphia, PA 19122 Département d’Archaéologie U.K. USA Université Catholique de Louvain [email protected] Place B. Pascal 1 B-1348 Louvain-la-Neuve Belgium [email protected]

8 Athanasia Kanta Penelope Mountjoy Giorgos Rethemiotakis 23rd Ephorate of Prehistoric and British School at Athens Director Classical Antiquities Souidias 52 The Archaeological Museum Xanthoudidou & Hadjidaki 1 GR-10676 Athens Xanthoudidou 1 GR-712 02 Greece GR-712 02 Heraklion Greece Greece [email protected] Irene Nikolakopoulou [email protected] Archaeological Institute of Aegean Carl Knappett Studies Jeremy B. Rutter Walter Graham/Homer Thompson Plateia Megalou Alexandrou Department of Classics Chair in Aegean Prehistory, GR-85100 Rhodes Dartmouth College Department of Art, Greece Hanover, New Hampshire 03755– University of Toronto, [email protected] 3506 Canada U.S.A. [email protected] Wolf-Dietrich Niemeier [email protected] Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Colin Macdonald Athen L. Hugh Sackett British School at Athens Fidiou 1 Co-director Palaikastro Excavations Souidias 52 GR-10678 Athens British School at Athens, GR-10676 Athens Greece 52 Souidias Greece [email protected] GR-106 76 Athens [email protected] Greece Orazio Palio [email protected] J. Alexander MacGillivray Dipartimento Processi Formativi Co-director Palaikastro Excavations Università di Catania Iphigenia Tournavitou of the British School at Athens Via Biblioteca 4 Associate Professor Ampelonon 50 I-95124 Catania Department of History, GR-19002 Paiania Italy Archaeology and Social Greece [email protected] Anthropology [email protected] University of Thessaly Lefteris Platon Argonafton & Filellinon St. Stella Mandalaki Department of History and GR-382 21 Volos 23rd Ephorate of Prehistoric and Archaeology Greece Classical Antiquities University of Athens [email protected] Xanthoudidou & Hadjidaki 1 School of Philosophy [email protected] GR-712 02 Heraklion University Campus, Zographou Greece GR-15784 Athens Sebastian Traunmueller [email protected] Greece Institut für Klassische Archäologie [email protected] Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Eleni Mantzourani Heidelberg Professor of Prehistoric Dario Puglisi Marstallhof 4 Archaeology Università di Catania DE-69117 Heidelberg Dept. of History and Archaeology Dipartimento SAFIST Germany School of Philosophy via Biblioteca 4 (Palazzo Ingrassia) sebastian.traunmueller@ University of Athens I-95124, Catania googlemail.com University Campus, Zographou Italy GR-15784 Athens [email protected] Greece [email protected]

9 Metaxia Tsipopoulou Aleydis Van de Moortel Peter M. Warren Hellenic Ministry of Culture and Department of Classics Professor Emeritus Tourism University of Tennessee Dept of Archaeology and Director Knoxville, TN 37996 Anthropology, Directorate of the National U.S.A. University of Bristol, Archive of Monuments [email protected] 43 Woodland Road, 11, Agion Asomaton Street BRISTOL BS8 1UU GR-105 53 Athens Leonidas Vokotopoulos UK Greece Aghias Varvaras 32 [email protected] [email protected] GR–152 31 Chalandri, Athens Greece [email protected]

The participants of the workshop gathered in the Hagia Aikaterini Square outside the Danish Institute.

10 Preface

Once upon a time – in early 2005 – when the Banou for her reply to the Petras paper, which was Minoan Seminar was still under the auspices of the read at the workshop in her absence. Danish Institute at Athens, Tom Brogan mentioned For three days, from the 27th to the 29th of June that it might be a good idea to have a workshop on 2007, 30 scholars presented their material and re- LM IB pottery focusing on the disagreement and sponded to questions from a wider audience in an unsolved problems connected with recent excava- informal and relaxed atmosphere, and there was tions in East Crete. We talked about it a couple plenty of discussion after each of the presentations. of times without doing much, but then during We want to thank the staff of the Danish Insti- the summer of 2006 we started to ask around and tute, who kindly facilitated our workshop during a found that the time was ripe for such a workshop. very warm spell in Athens, and Yuki Furuya, who We were particularly fortunate because the timing helped manage logistical problems and recorded the of the 10th Cretological Congress in Khania al- discussions. We also owe a warm round of thanks to lowed us to discuss the matter with our colleagues Alexander MacGillivray for transcribing the discus- who were not resident in Greece. After many posi- sions. tive reactions we started to plan. Because it had Concerning the publication of the workshop, to be a low-budget workshop, we chose late June the editing of the figures and illustrations was left 2007 when most excavators with knowledge of to Erik Hallager, while Tom Brogan undertook the LM IB pottery would be in Greece and accom- review and editing of the contributions – except modations in Athens would not be so difficult to his own. In this technical editorial work, he was arrange. greatly assisted by Dr. Melissa Eaby whose skill and With the experience from the LM III pottery competence in copy editing has greatly improved workshop held at the Danish Institute in 1994, the outcome of the publication. We also want to we decided to invite excavators with unpublished, thank Birgitta Hallager for assisting in the edito- stratified LM IB deposits as speakers. Each speaker rial work. Because the text editor of the book is would also have a respondent who was an excavator American we have, perhaps to the distress of some with unpublished LM IB material so that they could British authors (and the general editor of the series use the experience and knowledge from their own of the Danish Institute), used American English for excavations in preparing their responses. In the few the book. cases where we could not find excavators with LM Throughout the book all drawings of pottery IB material as respondents, we invited scholars who are – unless otherwise stated – given at a scale of were experienced in the topic. As with the LM III 1:3. Greek place names are with very few excep- pottery workshop, there were no strict time lim- tions spelled according to the suggestions given by its for any of the presentations. Not everyone was the INSTAP Academic Press. All measurements are able to attend the workshop, and we are grateful given as provided by the authors, while a few ab- that Leonidas Vokotopoulos offered his paper on breviations have been standardized throughout the Karoumes for the publication and that T.M. Bro- book: gan, Ch. Sofianou, and J.E. Morrison could pro- d. for diameter; h. for height; th. for thickness; vide a response to his paper. We also thank Eleni pres. for preserved; and dep. for deposit.

11 One issue that the workshop did not try to ad- the selection and scanning of images for his Royal dress was terminology. In Denmark there is a prov- Road paper. erb “a beloved child has many names” and during We want to thank all who contributed financial- the workshop we realized that LM IB pottery la- ly to the workshop and the publication, particularly bels are like beloved children to the participants. To our institutions, the Danish Institute at Athens and remedy any confusion this may cause, we have cre- the INSTAP Study Center for East Crete. As al- ated a shape index, and in the ordinary index given ways we want to acknowledge our gratitude to the page references in italics when a shape is illustrated. Institute for Aegean Prehistory for their constant Both Tom and Erik want to thank all the con- support. Last but not least, our sincere thanks are tributors for their excellent collaboration in all also due to the Carlsberg Foundation and the Insti- matters and for their patience with our requests tute for Aegaean Prehistory for covering the costs concerning both texts and illustrations. In addition, of the publication. Birgitta and Erik Hallager want to thank Rachel and Sinclair Hood for their warm hospitality at Crete, May 2011 Great Milton, while assisting Sinclair Hood with Erik Hallager & Thomas M. Brogan

12 Late Minoan IB at Kommos: a sequence of at least three distinct stages*

Jeremy B. Rutter

The primary purpose of the following paper is to spatial distribution of these destructions according present in summary form the existing evidence to their temporal sequencing may result in new for a sequence of at least three stages of ceramic approaches to the interpretation of Neopalatial development at Kommos between the end of Crete’s collapse, but it already seems clear that what what we have termed Late Minoan IA (the last was once considered a single destruction horizon phase of which we call Late Minoan IA Final) and that might plausibly have affected all of Crete at a Late Minoan II horizon that exhibits numerous one and the same time, and thus might potentially close parallels with the ceramics from the major have been due to a single natural disaster, can no destruction level of the Minoan Unexplored longer be explained in such a simplistic fashion. Mansion (hereafter, MUM) at Knossos, the very large and extensively published body of material that presently defines the advanced LM II phase Late Minoan IB Early for Crete as a whole.1 These three stages will henceforth be referred to by the terms “Late The ceramic horizon at Kommos here termed LM Minoan IB Early”, “Late Minoan IB Late”, and IB Early is poorly represented by floor deposits or “Late Minoan IB Final”. homogeneous dumped fills. The single context A secondary purpose of this paper is to present a of any size that exemplifies this phase comes table (Table 4) that lays out the correlations between from a stratified dumped fill below a staircase in the schema of LM IB ceramic phasing at Kommos the northwestern wing of monumental Building and major published deposits of this period from T.3 A number of nearby contexts in or adjacent other sites throughout Crete, especially those in the to the North Stoa of Building T appear to have western Mesara most recently surveyed by Dario been closed at approximately the same time, but Puglisi.2 these contain a fairly high percentage of earlier A third purpose of the paper is to draw particular attention to the morphological, decorative, and technological features that characterize the last phase * The capitalization of the motifs in this paper differs from the rest of the volume but is consistent with the author’s earlier of LM IB ceramic development at Kommos (Table publications of this material (ed). 5). As the correlations outlined in Table 4 indicate, 1 For Late Minoan IA Final at Kommos, see Rutter 2006a, the distinction of this terminal phase from its 436–44; for the Late Minoan II pottery from the MUM at immediate predecessor suggests that the widespread Knossos, Popham 1984, 159–81. 2 destructions that characterize the later LM IB phase The phase corresponding to LM IB Late at Kommos has been termed “LM IB Destruction of the Villa,” or simply throughout Crete were spread across both of these “LM IB DFV” by Puglisi at Hagia Triada (2006 passim, esp. phases rather than being restricted to one or the 529). The phase corresponding to LM IB Final at Kommos other. As a consequence, the burnt destructions of has been termed “LM IB After the Destruction of the Villa (at large numbers of settlements that have traditionally Hagia Triada)”, or simply “LM IB PDFV,” at Hagia Triada; for the same phase, Barnard and Brogan prefer either “LM IB defined the end of the Minoan Neopalatial era are Final” or “LM IB/II Transitional” as terms (2003, 109). shown to be part of a longer-term phenomenon 3 Rutter 2006a, 458–61 [Group 40], 699–702 n. 119, 123, than conventionally recognized. Analysis of the 130.

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 307 Fig. 1. Kommos. LM IB Early conical cups: Type C (31/2, 36/2, 37a/5, 37e/11, 37e/12, 40/23, 40/24, 40/25. 41/4); Type D (33/4, 37a/6); Types P–Q (37e/4, 40/7); Type J (33/3, 38/1); Type V (37b/1, 39/1) [after Rutter 2006a].

Neopalatial material as well. Two truncated floor small and have either conical or slightly convex body deposits that appear to be contemporary were profiles, the variety at Kommos that we have termed exposed only in small patches and thus produced Type C (Fig. 1); made in generally finer fabrics than very little in the way of comparative material.4 The in LM IA Final and seemingly more homogeneous meager amount of material from these deposits is in terms of size and wall thickness, conical cups of summarized quantitatively in Table 1A, with the this type now feature (for the first time) a distinct defining features of the phase’s shape and decorative angle on the interior of their profile at the junction ranges recapitulated in Table 1B. Comparatively of the body and base. A few deeper-bodied cups few shapes are plentifully enough represented to with more ovoid body profiles are somewhat larger, allow much in the way of meaningful comment on and we distinguish these as Type D. Cups of about more than a handful of the most common forms, the same size as regular Type C examples, but with but the combination of this particular assemblage flat-topped rims that are provided with an irregular of shapes and a number of decorative peculiarities band at the rim, we call Type J. Larger, fully coated allow material of this sub-phase to be distinguished handleless cups with ovoid or hemispherical body clearly enough from deposits of the preceding LM profiles, the types we call P and Q respectively, are IA Final and succeeding LM IB Late sub-phases. Unpainted conical cups are almost invariably 4 Rutter 2006a, 448–9 [Groups 35–6], 700–1 n. 122.

308 Jeremy B. Rutter Fig. 2. Kommos. LM IB Early semiglobular cups: Running Spirals (37a/4, 37d/1, 39/2, 40/8, 40/11, 40/12, 259); Quirk (37b/2, 37e/5); horizontal Wavy Bands (257, 37d/2, 37e/6, 41/1); Floral Paneled Style (258, 37e/7) [after Watrous 1992 for three-digit numbers, Rutter 2006a for slashed numbers].

quite common, but the smaller ovoid light-on-dark common feature of LM IA Final at Kommos that patterned cups we call Type V are very rare and will has likewise disappeared by LM IB Early is the disappear completely after this phase.5 decoration of semiglobular cups with a patterned The linear bell-shaped cups with a simple band at the rim that were quite common in LM IA in both 5 For purposes of comparison with the conical cup typology vertical-handled and handleless forms have already established for Hagia Triada by Puglisi (2006, 342–8), Kommos Type C is equivalent to Hagia Triada tipo 1, disappeared, as has the spidery form of Ripple that Kommos Type D to Hagia Triada tipo 3, Kommos Type J to appears commonly on virtually all patterned shapes Hagia Triada tipi 2 and 5, and Kommos Types P and Q to in the later LM IA period at Kommos. Another Hagia Triada tipo 6.

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 309 Fig. 3. Kommos. LM IB cups from Kommos decorated in the Floral Paneled Style [after Rutter 2004, fig. 4.7].

lower body zone, almost invariably occupied by a single row of fat diagonal leaves, rare examples of horizontal wavy line or band. Patterned semiglobular Quirk, and occasionally a double row of thinner cups are now most frequently decorated with leaves (Foliate Band) or even a miniature version of Running Spirals, although multiple horizontal an alternating Floral Paneled scheme. Added white Wavy Lines are also common (Fig. 2), as are cups is also used to enhance or accent the patterns on decorated with two alternating kinds of plant the exterior of in-and-out bowls and occasional ornament, one consisting of multiple vertically or semiglobular cups. The dark-on-light patterns on somewhat diagonally oriented tall, thin leaves, in a the bowls (Fig. 4) typically consist of either Floral style that I have termed Floral Paneled (Fig. 3). This Paneled compositions or of single horizontal Wavy style began in LM IA Final, but is at its most popular Bands or multiple vertical ones, the last especially in LM IB Early, not only on semiglobular cups but on interiors. Locally produced semiglobular cups also on in-and-out bowls and on collar-necked jugs. have nothing but a rim band on the interior, most of The style seems to be particularly well-represented which is thus left unpainted and is normally finely in the western Mesara.6 burnished. Thus cups with coated interiors are Especially characteristic of the LM IB Early easily identifiable as imports, and so are patterned sub-phase at Kommos, although once again straight-sided cups of any kind, these last having beginning in LM IA Final and still occurring in disappeared even before the end of LM IA from the small quantities in later LM IB, is the application local ceramic repertoire. of patterns in added white over the dark rim bands Too few closed shapes survive to allow much to on semiglobular cups and in-and-out bowls. The be said about them (Fig. 5). The preferred pouring range of such added white patterns is narrow, being limited to a horizontal Wavy Line or Zigzag, a 6 Rutter 2004; 2006a, 471–2.

310 Jeremy B. Rutter Fig. 4. Kommos. LM IB Early in-and-out bowls: Quirk (37b/3, 37e/10), Foliate Band (266), Floral Paneled Style (37e/8, 37e/9 (?), 38/3, 39/4, 267) [after Watrous 1992 for three-digit numbers, Rutter 2006a for slashed numbers].

vessels produced as dark-on-light patterned shapes (Fig. 6). I have suggested that this kind of decorative are bridge-spouted jars and collar-necked jugs; beak- parallelism was designed specifically with the aim spouted jugs, like straight-sided cups, appear to be of producing sets of fine ware shapes intended for alien to the local repertoire, however common they feasting activities to be held in Building T’s central may have been at contemporary Phaistos and Hagia court.7 Triada just a short distance away. Collar-necked jugs Imports from outside the island, while not often appear to be decorated with ornament closely common, are nevertheless more abundant than paralleling that which appears on contemporary at most Minoan sites and represent a truly wide semiglobular cups and in-and-out bowls (e.g., the geographical range for the first time at Kommos Floral Paneled Style) or alternatively that which appears on both the interior and exterior of thin- walled kalathoi (diagonal or vertical Reed chains) 7 Rutter 2006a, 475–6.

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 311 Fig. 5. Kommos. LM IB Early collar-necked jugs (31/1, 36/1 (?), 37e/1, 37e/2, 40/2, 40/4, 264, 265) and bridge- spouted jars (37a/1, 37a/2 (?), 40/1) [after Watrous 1992 for three-digit numbers, Rutter 2006a for slashed numbers].

312 Jeremy B. Rutter Fig. 6. Kommos. LM IB Early kalathoi (37c/8, 41/2) and collar-necked jugs (40/4) decorated with Reed Patterns [after Rutter 2006a].

in this phase: Egypt, Cyprus, and the Mycenaean into a lipless, ovoid variant we have termed Type mainland are all represented.8 K. The end result of these changes is that all of the decorative variants of the common handleless cup now resemble each other more closely in terms of Late Minoan IB Late shape and size than they ever had before. As throughout the later stages of LM IA and Contexts termed LM IB Late at Kommos are LM IB Early, locally produced patterned cups are neither much more abundant nor much richer almost exclusively semiglobular in shape and bear than those of LM IB Early. Moreover, we have not only a painted rim band on the interior (Fig. 8). found a significant deposit of the later sub-phase Thus the examples of patterned straight-sided cups, stratified directly above one of the earlier sub- bell cups, and wishbone-handled cups which now phase, with the result that it is difficult to gauge appear in somewhat greater numbers than before how much time may separate these two phases. are all imports, as are some semiglobular cups with Indeed, there may be a significant gap between the solidly coated or unfinished interiors (Fig. 9). The two that could in theory be filled by an assemblage practice of decorating local patterned cups with of intermediate date (Table 4, hypothetical LM IB added white patterns on the exterior rim band has Developed sub-phase). The evidence for the size, sharply declined. New in this phase and extremely frequency, and distribution of significant LM IB popular are cups decorated with a horizontal Reed Late deposits identified at Kommos over the last pattern, possibly a local West Mesaran response decade is summarized in Table 2A, while Table to the extremely common Reed cups of North- 2B provides a synopsis of the more common vessel central Crete on which the Reed is oriented either forms and decorative types. vertically or diagonally. In-and-out bowls may no Among unpainted conical cups (Fig. 7), the longer be produced by local potters, their places conical Type C is now no longer as numerically having been taken by horizontal-handled bowls dominant as it had been in LM IB Early, the deeper- with plain or linear interiors (Fig. 10). The numbers bodied Type D having become considerably more and shape range of vessels decorated in the Floral popular. A corresponding deepening of the body Paneled Style have both declined, the only vehicles on solidly coated cups of Type P has also been for this kind of decoration now being collar-necked noted,9 along with a significant decrease of roughly jugs and semiglobular cups. The appearance of 15% in the average rim diameter. And finally, the larger and denser spirals, and thus the replacement linear conical cups with a simple band at the rim no longer feature the flat-topped rim and conical 8 Rutter 2006a, 647–9, 653–8, 666–72, 684. body profile of Type J but instead have developed 9 Rutter 2006a, 483.

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 313 Fig. 7. Kommos. LM IB Late conical cups from House X: Type C (X2:4/15–7, X2:6/14, X7:1/4, X11:1/11–2); Type D (X2:4/18–9, X2:15–6, X7:1/5); Type J (X2:4/3); Type K (X2:6/3–4, X11:1/7); Types P–Q (X2:4/4–6, X2:6/5–7, X2:6/8, X7:1/1). of Running Spiral compositions by Isolated Spirals Kommos is the appearance of vessels produced in on both semiglobular cups and collar-necked jugs, one or another of the four styles of the so-called is another development that seems to distinguish Special Palatial Tradition,10 all of which stick out LM IB Late from LM IB Early. for one reason or another as imports rather than Aside from the occurrence in considerable being possible local products (Figs. 9, 11). Examples numbers of the West Mesaran form of Reed cup, the most striking novelty of LM IB Late at 10 Betancourt 1985, 140–8, pls. 20–2; Mountjoy 2003, 78–9.

314 Jeremy B. Rutter Fig. 8. Kommos. LM IB Late semiglobular cups: horizontal Reed (X2:4/9, X2:5/5, X3:2/2), Running Spirals (X2:4/7–8, X2:5/2, X2:5/4, X2:6/10, X7:1/2, 44b/6–7), Isolated Spirals (44b/8–11), horizontal Wavy Bands (X3:2/1) [House X for numbers prefixed by X; after Rutter 2006a for simple slashed numbers].

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 315 Fig. 9. Kommos. LM IB Late cups imported to Kommos (X2:4/11–13, X2:6/11, X3:2/3, 44b/12, 44b/20) [House X for numbers prefixed by X; after Rutter 2006a for simple slashed numbers].

Fig. 10. Kommos. LM IB Late horizontal-handled bowls (X7:1/3, X11:1/10, 44b/13–4) [House X for numbers prefixed by X; after Rutter 2006a for simple slashed numbers].

Fig. 11 (opposite). Kommos. LM IB Late closed shapes imported to Kommos (X2:6/2, X11:1/3, 44b/4–5, 44b/17– 9) [House X for numbers prefixed by X; after Rutter 2006a for simple slashed numbers].

316 Jeremy B. Rutter Late Minoan IB at Kommos 317 Fig. 12. Kommos. LM IB Final semiglobular cups from House X: horizontal Reed (X2:7/3), Running Spirals (X3N:3/8–9), Quirk (X3N:3/10), Foliate Band (X2:7/4, X3N:3/11), monochrome painted (X3N:3/13). of the Marine Style (Fig. 9: X3:2/3), the Floral Late Minoan IB Final Style (Fig. 11: 44b/4), and the Alternating Style (Fig. 9: 44b/12; X2:4/11) are all represented, but The number of deposits at Kommos that can be the quantities of such material are very small, so assigned to the subsequent stage of development that one cannot depend upon its presence as an here termed LM IB Final is not a large one – indicator of a LM IB Late date. just three fills and a single floor deposit (Table One final minor difference distinguishing LM 3A) – but they are substantially larger than those IB Late from LM IB Early is the disappearance of representing the LM IB Late phase. The two fills imported Cypriot Red/Black Slip jugs or tankards that accumulated or, more probably, were dumped and the first appearance of Cypriot Plain White against the south (or downhill) wall of the House imports (Fig. 11: 44b/17), but once again the numbers are so small as to make this criterion of little practical value for dating.11 11 Rutter 2006a, 653–8, 684–5.

318 Jeremy B. Rutter Fig. 13. Kommos. LM IB Final semiglobular cups from the House of the Snake Tube: horizontal Reed (348), Circles (281), Festoons (347, 353, 356), Diaper Net (345), Foliate Band (349, 352), Floral Paneled Style (346, 354), blob (350), monochrome painted (351) [after Watrous 1992]. of the Snake Tube on the Central Hillside portion to the same phase as a similar fill dumped just north of the site – Watrous’ Deposits 8 and 16 – are (or uphill) of House X’s Room 3 on top of a stratum stratified one above the other, the lower one resting on a packing that contains mixed Neopalatial sherd 12 Watrous’ Deposit 16 (1992, 20–5, 200–1, figs. 18–21, pls. material including pieces datable to LM IB Late.12 9–11 nos. 339–428) overlies and entirely seals his Deposit 8 (1992, 16, 198, fig. 18, pl. 7 nos. 279–95), as is apparent from As recently as 2006, I accepted Watrous’ dates of the north-south section extending south of the House of the LM IB for his Deposit 8 and LM II for his Deposit Snake Tube’s south wall (Watrous 1992, fig. 5). Deposit 8 16,13 but such datings are no longer tenable in view overlies Watrous’ Deposit 1 (1992, 1–2, fig. 12, pls. 1, 18 nos. of Dario Puglisi’s findings at Hagia Triada and the 1–20), within which was found at least one fragment of an LM evidence from both inside and immediately north IB Late Reed cup (Watrous 1992, 2 no. 9, pl. 18). 13 For Watrous’ Deposit 8, see Rutter 2006a, 482 Table 3.62; of House X at Kommos itself. Instead, both of these for his Deposit 16, Rutter 2006a, 508–9 Table 3.64, 706 note fills from Kommos’ Central Hillside can be assigned 160.

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 319 Fig. 14. Kommos. LM IB Final horizontal-handled bowls from House X: Festoons (X3N:3/14), multiple Zigzag (X3N:3/15 (?)), Scale (X3N:3/16).

datable to LM IA Final and covered by a fill of more likely to belong to horizontal-handled developed LM II date.14 A small floor deposit from bowls. Room 2 within House X,15 stratified above at least Other common features typical of developed two LM IB Late floors16 and sealed by a fill of mixed LM II that are lacking in LM IB Final deposits MM II through developed LM II date,17 appears to involve decoration more than shape. For example, be contemporary with the three much larger fills there are no pattern-decorated pyxides of the kinds and provides welcome confirmation that this LM commonly found in the MUM at Knossos and also IB Final phase followed closely after the LM IB Late well attested at Kommos itself in LM II contexts, phase just described. A synopsis of the principal although the shape does appear rarely at LM IB Final shapes and their decorative treatments at Kommos Kommos in unpainted form (X3N:3/24).20 There during LM IB Final is presented in Table 3B. The phase termed LM IB Final at Kommos 14 The pottery from this more recently excavated LM IB Final can be distinguished from what we recognize as fill will be published, Rutter in progress as Group X3N:3, traditional LM II most easily by the absence of with that from the strata below and above as Groups X3N:2 goblets or kylikes, whether pattern-decorated, and X3N:4, respectively. 15 solidly coated, or plain. Although Watrous claimed To be published, Rutter in progress, Group X2:7. 16 The pottery from these two LM IB Late floor levels will be that a half-dozen or so fragments from his Deposit published as Groups X2:4–6, Rutter in progress. 16 belonged to LM II kylikes,18 in fact none of the 17 The pottery from this mixed fill will be published as Group pieces cited do.19 This very large deposit of close to X2:8, Rutter in progress. 6000 sherds weighing over 145 kilograms contains 18 Watrous 1992, 23 nos. 382–8, 121, figs. 19–20, pls. 9–10. 19 Rutter 2006a, 513–4, 706 n. 157, 159, 160. no unambiguous rim and handle fragments, stems, 20 For decorated pyxides from the Knossian MUM, Popham or foot fragments from LM II goblets; all of the 1984, 172–3, pls. 65b-c, 67c-d, 94b, e-f, 111d, 155:1–8, pieces that Watrous attributed to kylikes are far 163:1–2.

320 Jeremy B. Rutter Fig. 15. Kommos. LM IB Final horizontal-handled bowls from the House of the Snake Tube: diagonal Reed (392), Festoons (390), Quirk (382, 383, 385, 391), Scale (384), patchy Stipple (389), undeterminable pattern (386) [after Watrous 1992].

are no examples of the tricurved arch patterns on with the thickened lowermost loop – also often cups and bowls that are so common in the MUM described as festoon groups – that are exceptionally deposits21 nor any usage of horizontal wavy bands, which regularly alternate between thick and thin as 21 they loop down and up as frames or upper borders For example, Popham 1984, pl. 164.7–10; Niemeier 1985, fig. 39. 22 of other patterns. There are also no examples of 22 For example, Popham 1984, pls. 164.8, 10–1, 14, 19, 21; the multiple pendent semicircle group patterns 165.30, 33–5, 44–5, 53; 166.66, 68.

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 321 Fig. 16. Kommos. LM IB Final new shapes from House X: stirrup jar (X3N:3/6), carinated cup or lid (X3N:3/17), western Anatolian jug (X3N:3/25). popular in both LM II and the succeeding LM IIIA1 horizontal-handled bowls are far more popular in phase, although there are hints that such ornament LM IB Final (Figs. 14–5) than they had been in LM is just about to appear in some of the pieces from IB Late, while in-and-out bowls have altogether Watrous’ Deposit 16.23 Although patches of floating disappeared. Local semiglobular cups (Figs. 12–3) Stipple occasionally appear,24 this pattern is not occur in a much wider range of sizes than before, yet combined with Curved Stripes, columns of the smaller examples with rim diameters of less lunettes, or debased Reed as it will commonly be than 10 cm, perhaps imitating imported LM IB in developed LM II in both the MUM deposits and 25 at Kommos. 23 For LM II, Popham 1984, pl. 164.11–8; Niemeier 1985, At the same time, although this phase at Kommos fig. 53.4–5, 9–10. For LM IIIA1, Popham 1984, pl. 171.8; is clearly not what we recognize as developed Niemeier 1985, fig. 53.13, 19–20, 22–4, 28–9, 32–6. For the LM II, it is just as obviously quite different from incipient versions of this pattern from Watrous’ Deposit 16, Watrous 1992, 23 nos. 384, 395, pls. 9–10. what we are calling LM IB Late. Once again, the 24 For example, Watrous 1992, 23 no. 389, fig. 20, pl. 10. differences are chiefly decorative ones, though 25 For such LM II combinations of Stipple with other patterns at there are a few changes in shapes as well. Thus the Knossian MUM, Popham 1984, pls. 156.4, 5, 7; 167.89.

322 Jeremy B. Rutter Fig. 17. Kommos. LM IB Final tall alabastron decorated in debased Marine Style from House X (X2:7/1).

Late pattern-decorated bell cups.26 The first ring- Reed, Running Spirals, and multiple horizontal based carinated cups appear as imports (Fig. 16: Wavy Lines – such holdovers are swamped by such X3N:3/17),27 a shape otherwise attested only at new patterns as Festoons, Foliate Band, and Quirk, LM II Knossos to my knowledge, where it has each in a variety of different forms, and also by been interpreted by Popham as a lid. Also among solid Circles, Diaper Net, Scale, and simple foliate the imports that are such a prominent feature of the sprays in continuous horizontal series rather than ceramic record at Kommos, the western Anatolian alternating with panels of leaves as in the earlier jugs that become common in developed LM II and Floral Paneled Style (Figs. 12–3). Ancillary dot rows LM IIIA make their initial appearance at this time have also become popular. The dipped semiglobular (Fig. 16: X3N:3/25).28 cup decorated with roughly semicircular patches of But it is in the syntax of decoration, as well as paint inside and out – the so-called blob cup – now in the much broader range of patterns that appear also makes its initial appearance. The overall range of on locally produced semiglobular cups, horizontal- patterns on horizontal-handled bowls (Figs. 14–5) handled bowls, and collar-necked jugs, that the is much the same as on cups, although some motifs differences between LM IB Late and LM IB Final at are peculiar to one shape or the other. Examples Kommos are most apparent. With respect to syntax, of such shape-specific patterns on bowls include the patterns on cups and bowls have generally been elaborated Scale patterns featuring blob fills30 or shifted upward on the vessel body so that they often are either pendent from the rim band or in the case of some Foliate Band motifs actually replace the 26 For example, Watrous 1992, 16 no. 281, 21 no. 347, fig. 18. 29 rim band (Fig 12: X2:7/4). Equally striking is the 27 Kommos: X3N:3/17; also Watrous 1992, 37 no. 642, 45 no. virtual explosion in the number of patterns that 775, 106 no. 1684, figs. 27, 32, 67, pls. 15, 18, 48. Knossos: now decorate cups and bowls in particular (contrast Popham 1984, 173, pls. 59a-c; 94d, top right; 151.13; 156.12; the lists of such motifs itemized in Tables 2B and Mountjoy 2003, 125, 127, fig. 4.34.588–91. 28 Rutter 2006b, 658–63; 2006c. 3B). While the most common patterns on locally 29 For Foliate Band at the rim, X2:7/4; Watrous 1992, nos. produced cups survive from LM IB Late into LM 383, 386, figs. 19–20. IB Final in small numbers – for example, horizontal 30 Fig. 14: X3N:3/16; Watrous 1992, 23 no. 387, pl. 9.

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 323 doubly outlined scales31 and cross-hatched versions X Room 2, as well as south of the House of the of Quirk combined with floral buds that Watrous Snake Tube) and below those of LM II (north of identified as attempts to render fish.32 A further link House X Room 3 and once again south of the with developed LM II in this phase is the appearance House of the Snake Tube) has raised issues of of the “moustache” form of decoration around the terminology that were profitably debated in July horizontal handles of horizontal-handled bowls.33 2007 at the workshop on “LM IB pottery: relative On closed shapes, the diagonal Reed pattern chronology and regional differences” and that have now appears for the first time in a debased form been the subject of extensive consultation since consisting of rows of teardrop-shaped dashes that that time.38 The principal issue at hand is how will become the dominant form of the pattern in to label the ceramic phase identified at Kommos developed LM II.34 A bizarre new form of stirrup as chronologically intermediate between LM IB jar appears (Fig. 16: X3N:3/6) on which the false Late and LM II. At least three different labels neck has been reduced to little more than a raised have been proposed at one time or another: a bump that serves as the point of attachment for the term incorporating “LM IB” that communicated stirrup handles. An additional feature of this phase unambiguously that the phase in question is drawn to my attention by Puglisi’s work at Hagia subsequent to LM IB Late; LM II Early; or an Triada is the usage of motifs characteristic of the altogether new relative chronological designator, Special Palatial Tradition of LM IB Late in ways LM IC. that are alien to its constituent styles and which In previous discussions of the newly recognized reveal that the decorators of LM IB Final vessels and isolated phase,39 as well as in the oral had little understanding of the representational presentation of this paper in Athens on 28 July motifs that they were imitating.35 Examples include 2007, I employed the term “LM II Early”. the Whorl-shells alternating with Parallel Chevron During the general discussion at the end of the groups on a tall alabastron from House X Room 2 workshop on 29 July and in a subsequent mailing (Fig. 17) and the Argonauts decorating a wishbone- to all participants distributed in August 2007, I handled cup from the Central Hillside; probably proposed the term “LM IC” instead, in response also to be identified as an example of this debased to the cogent arguments presented by a number of version of the Marine Style is a bridge-spouted jar colleagues to the effect that a label incorporating from Watrous’ Deposit 3 (just uphill from the House “LM II” was inappropriate in view of the implied of the Snake Tube) decorated with symmetrically Mycenaean element and a Monopalatial political rendered Octopi in what appears to be an imitation context that such a label would entail for the slice of the Ephyraean style.36 of time in question. The suggestion that “LM IC” might be a useful term to invoke for a phase Terminology 31 Watrous 1992, 23 no. 384, fig. 20, pl. 10. 32 Watrous 1992, 23 nos. 382, 385, figs. 19–20, pl. 10. The distinction between early and late stages of 33 Fig. 14: X3N:3/16; Popham 1984, 164, pl. 157g. LM IB ceramic development at Kommos now has 34 Watrous 1992, 24 no. 402, fig. 20, pl. 11; Niemeier 1985, a published history of more than a decade, and the fig. 26.13, 18. 35 terms LM IB Early and LM IB Late as applied locally Puglisi 2006, 477–8. 36 Fig. 17: X2:7/1; Watrous 1992, 22 no. 358, fig. 19, pl. both to substantial deposits of pottery – that is, 10; 8 no. 124, fig. 14, pl. 2 (= Mountjoy 1984, 192 no. 5a), assemblages – as well as to individual ceramic types respectively. or features can be considered to have become fully 37 Van de Moortel 1997, 28–9, 70–1, 268–74; Shaw & Shaw 2006; Rutter 2006a, 444–86, 698–703. established with the final publication of Kommos’ 38 37 I would like to thank P. P. Betancourt, D. Puglisi, and A. monumental buildings in 2006. The isolation of Van de Moortel especially for their sage counsel on these a discrete phase of ceramic development stratified terminological issues. above contexts datable to LM IB Late (in House 39 Rutter 2006a, 513–4, 706 n. 160.

324 Jeremy B. Rutter of ceramic development that clearly followed of LM IB Late but not of LM IB Final; as already what had already been termed LM IB Late, and noted, LM IB Final vessels decorated with marine that moreover appeared, by virtue of its defining motifs are readily distinguishable from examples characteristics (Table 5), to be recognizable at a of the true Marine Style of LM IB Late, and such number of sites other than Kommos alone (Table examples of the Alternating Style as occur in well- 4), likewise received little support. Even those who dated contexts at the site appear in LM IB Late were willing to accept the existence of a discrete and not in LM IB Final (compare Tables 2B and ceramic phase intermediate between LM IB Late 3B).40 How much absolute time each of these two and LM II as here defined considered that achieving phases represents is largely a matter of guesswork widespread acceptance of such a basic change in with the evidence presently available, but neither the standard archaeological nomenclature would be is likely to be shorter than a couple of decades, exceptionally difficult, worthy neither of the effort and both could be longer, albeit surely no longer invested nor of the potential confusion caused. than half a century in either case. Furthermore, even if such an intermediate phase Secondly, LM IB Final exhibits several features that were conceded to exist at Kommos and in the are truly transitional between LM IB Late and LM II. western Mesara, or for that matter throughout all This newly recognized phase thus serves to smooth of South-central Crete, could a phase so defined the ceramic discontinuities that to some degree have be recognized in other major regions of the island traditionally differentiated LM IB from LM II, and (notably the far east and the far west) at a time when thus makes the shift from the Neopalatial to the ceramic regionalism has already been demonstrated Monopalatial era even less abrupt, from a ceramic to be quite pronounced? But even more important point of view at least, than it already was. In view was the simple fact that many participants at the of the copious evidence for the destructions by fire workshop, by virtue of their own experiences at of settlements throughout the island during the LM the sites with which they were most familiar, IB Late and LM IB Final phases, the smoothening conceive of LM IB pottery as that typical of the of the ceramic transitions during what were clearly very phase for which the new term in question is turbulent times that resulted in a dramatic and being sought. To ask the excavators of Knossos, for widespread change in the sociopolitical order is a example, to abandon the LM IB label in favor of noteworthy phenomenon. something altogether new when they had never Thirdly, the essence of the distinction between applied the term LM IB to anything other than LM IB Late and LM IB Final at Kommos with the assemblage for which the novel label was being respect to the pottery that was locally produced41 is a sought (as is the case for the major deposits of this dramatic expansion of the ornamental repertoire on phase recovered in both the Royal Road: North the most common pattern-decorated open shapes, and Stratigraphic Museum Excavations; see Table 4 especially the semiglobular cup and the horizontal- and the contributions of Hood and Warren to this volume) was clearly altogether inappropriate. 40 Watrous (1992, 8 no. 124 [C953], 118) describes a bridge- The term chosen for the problematic phase spouted jar from Kommos decorated with widely spaced has therefore here become LM IB Final. A few octopi at 90-degree intervals around the body as though it important points about this phase ought to be were an example of the Alternating Style. There is, however, stressed here, inasmuch as they are not transparent no alternation of two different motifs on this vessel, and it is better viewed as an example of the debased version of the from the term used to designate it. First of Marine Style that is characteristic of LM IB Final, like the tall all, this phase is markedly different in several alabastron X2:7/1 (Kommos C9364) illustrated in Fig. 17. As significant respects from that which immediately noted in the text, the bridge-spouted jar C953 is stylistically precedes it (LM IB Late) and the two should closer to the Ephyraean Style of the LH IIB Greek mainland than to the true Alternating Style of LM IB Late Crete. not be considered to be essentially the same. For 41 As opposed to imported from North-central Crete (i.e., example, at Kommos the various styles of the Knossos and its immediate surroundings) or from one or more Special Palatial Tradition (SPT) are characteristic areas in the eastern part of the island.

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 325 handled bowl. Many of the new patterns (Table 5) are The evidence from Kommos and Mochlos, as variants of the semicircle, whether pendent as single perhaps also that from Khania, strongly suggests or multiple loops in chains of festoons or alternating that LM IB was longer-lived than the 50–60 years in rows as scales, either pendent or upright. Other (ca. 1480–1425 BC) conventionally assigned to novelties are simply more schematic versions of it according to the traditional Aegean absolute varieties of plant ornament such as Reed and Foliate chronology (henceforth the “low chronology”)43 Band that had been current throughout the LM IB or even than the expanded span of 70 to 90 period. Although both a predilection for pendent years (ca. 1520/1510–1440/1430 BC) more festoons and a tendency to schematize naturalistic recently accorded to the phase by adherents of motifs are hallmarks of mainland Greek approaches to this low chronology.44 The duration of roughly a ceramic ornamentation in the later Middle Helladic century accorded to the period by Manning (ca. and early Mycenaean eras, nothing in the shape 1600/1580–1500/1490 BC) with the Aegean repertoire of LM IB Final suggests any connections “high chronology” seems more appropriate.45 with the Helladic tradition of the mainland. Such The distinguishing features of the LM IB decorative resemblances between LM IB Final and Final phase at Kommos (Table 5) are particularly early Mycenaean (LH I – IIB) ceramic ornament as well represented in the later LM IB destruction exist are therefore probably fortuitous. deposits of North-central Crete at the sites of Knossos, Nirou Chani, and Tylissos (Table 4).46 By contrast, the principal destruction horizon Intra-Cretan correlations and encountered in the South-central portion of the island at Hagia Triada, Phaistos, and Pitsidia Plakes their implications dates to the earlier LM IB Late phase, although Table 4 displays in schematic form the chronological LM IB Final material is attested in the south correlations suggested here between the sequence at Hagia Triada and Seli as well as at Kommos, of LM IB phases recognized at Kommos and major and the destruction of the Chalara complex at deposits of LM IB pottery published from other Phaistos belongs to this later phase.47 The resulting sites in Central and East-central Crete.42 As full picture of destructions by fire at discrete, but not and complex as the Kommos sequence appears all that widely separated intervals, some of them to be on the present evidence, it should not be resulting in a site’s abandonment (e.g., Pitsidia considered complete. As noted earlier, what Plakes, Nirou Chani) but in other cases clearly happens between the phases here termed LM IB not (e.g., Knossos), or at least not immediately Early and LM IB Late is uncertain, as is the length (Hagia Triada, Phaistos), is rather confusing when of time that elapsed between the laying down of deposits closed in LM IB Early (Table 1A) and the corresponding deposition of contexts assigned 42 Sites in the far east of the island (e.g., Palaikastro, Zakros) and far west (e.g., Khania) have been omitted. to LM IB Late (Table 2A). With the possible 43 Warren & Hankey 1989, 78–81, 138–44, 169; Driessen & exception of Mochlos, no other site presented in Macdonald 1997, 21–3, fig. 2.3. any detail at the workshop hosted by the Danish 44 Warren 2006, 318. Institute in July 2007 appears to have significant 45 Manning 1999, 335–40, fig. 62. 46 deposits of material that might be assigned to the The destructions of Nirou Chani and Tylissos were recognized long ago by Niemeier (1985, 177–8) as being intermediary horizon between these two phases at later, on ceramic grounds, than the LM IB destructions of the Kommos, which has been tentatively designated Palaces at Kato Zakros, Malia, and Phaistos and the Villa at “LM IB Developed” in Table 4. How to define Hagia Triada. 47 the beginning of LM IB with criteria that have For a helpful and detailed overview of the complex situation in the western Mesara during the LM IB Late and Final more than purely local (whether regional or even phases, particularly useful for the numerous sites explored site-specific) applicability is a separate though by the Italian School of Archaeology at Athens (e.g., Hagia related question to which I shall return below. Triada, Kannia, Phaistos, and Seli), see Puglisi 2006, 471–513.

326 Jeremy B. Rutter juxtaposed against the conventional picture of Additional issues of concern a single destruction horizon across virtually the entire island at the end of LM IB, followed by involving the LM IB phase and a period of widespread abandonment during the its ceramics ensuing LM II period. Kommos, of course, never suffered a site-wide destruction during the LM How should the beginning of the LM IB phase IB period, thus further complicating any simple be defined in ceramic terms? At Kommos, we or straightforward interpretation of the event- have cobbled together a series of criteria for filled terminal stages of the Neopalatial era in distinguishing the two ceramic horizons we have the western Mesara. The recent recognition of a termed LM IA Final and LM IB Early, but we similarly bewildering picture with respect to the recognize that these are unlikely to apply to regions destruction and abandonment of the two most of Crete outside the western Mesara.50 Indeed, since recently investigated major sites in and around it has proven quite challenging to align the various the Bay of Mirabello in the northeast, Pseira LM IA and LM IB ceramic phases identified at sites and Mochlos, suggests that the western Mesara as close to one another physically as are Kommos, may not be all that atypical: Pseira was evidently Phaistos, and Hagia Triada,51 one is entitled to be destroyed in LM IB Late and largely, but not skeptical about the chances of reaching consensus completely, deserted during LM IB Final before on how to do so from one end of the island to the being abandoned for the rest of the prehistoric era other. At Kommos we have relied heavily on the thereafter; Mochlos was destroyed only in LM IB most commonly occurring open shapes – conical Final, but entirely abandoned for several decades cups, semiglobular and straight-sided cups, in-and- thereafter.48 out bowls – to define our phases. Closed shapes As was made abundantly clear by Driessen have provided relatively little help by comparison, and Macdonald a decade ago, the collapse of and in some cases – the bridge-spouted jar springs Neopalatial is an enormously immediately to mind – it is very difficult to trace complicated phenomenon.49 The more finely their morphological or decorative development tuned our ceramically based relative chronologies through time with any real confidence. Changes are becoming, the more complex the situation is in the popularity of easily recognizable motifs – turning out to be, not only across the entire island especially Ripple and Running Spirals for LM IA but even within its comparatively small regions. It is and various kinds of floral ornament for LM IB – perhaps time at long last to give up overly simplistic offer a supplementary approach to documenting approaches, such as invocations of single natural temporal developments. At the same time, disasters, whether these be volcanic eruptions, considerations about the functions of the various earthquakes, tidal waves, or combinations thereof, ceramic types whose decoration is being quantified, and to acknowledge that we need to build up a and related concerns about what shapes would have more complete data bank of actual events through been in regular demand at the various different fuller publication before we launch into the process kinds of sites for which dates are being determined, of interpretation. It is, after all, not only the LM IB should always be part of our overall assessments. phase that is turning out to be characterized by two Perhaps the cooking pottery repertoire can be more or more chronologically differentiable destruction usefully investigated for the purposes of chronology horizons – the same is true of the immediately preceding LM IA phase! 48 Betancourt, this volume; Betancourt & Davaras 1995; 1998a; 1999; Floyd 1998; Brogan, Smith, & Soles 2002. 49 Driessen & Macdonald 1997. 50 Van de Moortel 1997, 268–74; Rutter 2006a, 467–77. 51 For various relatively recent attempts at such correlations, see Van de Moortel 1997; Puglisi 2006, 461–529; Shaw & Shaw 2006, 866–73.

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 327 than it has been in the past.52 However this problem would consider to be in any sense debased versions of definition is ultimately approached, it should be of that style. Previous efforts to isolate a stylistically clear from what has already been said above that the more advanced stage of the Marine Style have lack of explicit definitions of what ceramic criteria been focused chiefly on variants of the Octopus define both the beginning and the end of the LM and Argonaut motifs,58 but Müller’s exceptionally IB period will inevitably make more difficult the detailed investigation of the SPT has shown how task of interpreting any observed cultural changes a number of other motif variants can be attributed within it. The list of features presented in Table 5 to earlier and later stages within this class of is intended as a specific proposal for defining the elaborately and complexly decorated ceramics.59 A period’s end, not only at Kommos but also elsewhere group of vessels bearing a distinctive version of the in what is roughly the central two-thirds of Crete. Triton shell, lacking interior spikes around its upper One suggestion made at the July 2007 workshop opening and with a distinctive body shape as well as for recognizing the beginning of LM IB was to take additional decorative details, prove to come in four the volcanic eruption horizon on Thera as marking out of six cases from contexts that can be assigned the end of the preceding LM IA period. By the on other grounds to the sub-phase identified here workshop’s end, however, this promising suggestion as LM IB Final (Table 4). Four of the six have been unfortunately remained nothing more than that. attributed to the same painter by Müller:60 a bridge- Within the later LM IB period, the flowering spouted bucket jar from Nirou Chani;61 two pithoid of the so-called Special Palatial Tradition with jars from Knossos, one of them from the court just its particularly elaborate approaches to vessel north of the Stratigraphical Museum Excavations’ ornamentation has made possible the identification North House;62 and a closed body sherd from the (if not often the localization) of individual South House at Knossos.63 Closely related versions workshops and even artists’ hands.53 Presented with of the Triton shell decorate two other vases, a pithoid this degree of precision with regard to production, jar from the Royal Road: North deposit64 and the we should in theory be able to construct as sophisticated a relative chronology for high-end 52 Minoan ceramics as has been possible for the Note, for example, the interesting comments of Barnard & Brogan 2003, 81 on changes taking place between LM IA output of Corinthian black-figure vase painters of and LM IB with respect to the varieties of tripod cooking the Archaic era.54 But a number of factors have kept pots conventionally identified, following Betancourt 1980, as this from happening, some of them truly beyond Types A and B. 53 our control (for example, the comparative dearth Most recently and in the greatest detail, Müller 1997. 54 Amyx 1988; Amyx & Lawrence 1996. of complete vessels decorated in the SPT from 55 Puglisi 2006, 476 and n. 19–21. funerary contexts, especially on Crete). Even what 56 Mountjoy 1974a; 1984, 161 note 1; Müller 1997. ought to have been the relatively straightforward 57 Barnard & Brogan 2003, 108; Puglisi 2006, 476 n. 18. determination of whether or not the Alternating 58 Mountjoy 1974; Mountjoy, Jones & Cherry 1978, 143–6, Style constitutes a genuinely later stage of LM IB fig. 2; Müller 1997, 212–43. 59 Müller 1997, 308–14. ceramic development than that represented by 60 Der Maler der Tritonamphora: Müller 1997, 269–71, fig. such other SPT styles as the Marine, Floral, and 153. Geometric has become a much debated but as yet 61 Heraklion Museum 7572: Xanthoudides 1922, 20, fig. 17; still unresolved question.55 Attempts to discern Mountjoy 1984, 193 Nirou Chani 1, pl. 27f; Müller 1997, 348 Zyl 66, pl. 32. different stages in the development of the Marine 62 Mountjoy 1984, 182 Knossos 44–5, pl. 21d-e; Müller 1997, Style56 are said to be based more on purely stylistic 353 PAm 86–7, pls. 39–40 (the latter illustrated by Warren arguments than on solid contextual evidence.57 But 1981, fig. 45; also Warren, this volume). it may now be possible to point to one variant of 63 Mountjoy 1984, 189 Knossos 139, fig. 18; Müller 1997, 448 XG 485, pl. 97. a popular Marine Style motif that is characteristic 64 Heraklion Museum 15060: Hood 1962a, figs. 10–1; of LM IB Final rather than LM IB Late contexts, Mountjoy 1984, 179 Knossos 22, pl. 19d; Müller 1997, 357 yet is part of overall decorative schemes that no one PAm 103, pls. 50–1.

328 Jeremy B. Rutter well-known Marine Style goblet from the South from numerous locales distributed throughout the Corridor of the MUM at Knossos,65 considered island, it is disappointing how little can yet be said by Müller to have been produced by the same with confidence about the nature and extent of workshop, if not necessarily the same artist, on ceramic regionalism on Crete during the three or the grounds of the very close resemblance in the four generations that this period may have lasted. freely contoured Rockwork that accompanies the For example, it is not possible to gauge the degree distinctive version of the Triton shell on these two of such regionalism with respect to that of the vessels.66 The close correspondence, in the cases of preceding LM IA period nor in comparison to four of these six vessels, between independently that of the first subsequent ceramic period that determined stylistic and contextual dates suggests is widely represented throughout the island, LM that it may be possible in the future to identify IIIA1. The workshops producing the elaborately additional stylistic traits within the SPT decorative decorated vessels of the SPT during LM IB Late repertoire that serve to distinguish LM IB Final are conventionally considered to have been located from LM IB Late. at or in the immediate neighborhood of Knossos, In spite of the massive amounts of carefully but Puglisi has presented compelling evidence for excavated Neopalatial ceramic remains recovered the production of at least some SPT vases at Hagia during some fifteen field seasons at Kommos Triada.67 The comparatively recent publication of between 1976 and 1995, the number of genuinely substantial bodies of Neopalatial pottery from a useful deposits for the purposes of defining phases diverse and rapidly growing number of settlement within LM IB has thus far proven to be a very sites by the individual contexts in which this pottery small one (Tables 1A–3A). There are several readily was recovered68 has resulted in the identification of intelligible and perfectly valid explanations for this: other distinctive styles and product lines peculiar for example, relatively few contexts at Kommos to specific regions or sites. For example, the Floral have been left altogether undisturbed since their Paneled Style of LM IA Final and LM IB Early was original deposition, thanks to the site’s long history evidently produced at or near Kommos, while a of occupation in both prehistoric and historic distinctive class of LM IB piriform jars decorated times, and no site-wide destruction horizons have with incised lilies was manufactured at or near ever been documented, in marked contrast to the Mochlos and cups painted with a particular form situation at the vast majority of other Minoan of Lily pattern were produced at LM IB Late and sites excavated as intensively over an equivalent Final Hagia Triada.69 It thus seems likely that amount of time. Nevertheless, the small number of many Cretan sites and regions will have produced such chronologically useful deposits is a sobering distinctive vessel forms, decorative motifs, and fact. One result of this, as already noted, is our especially combinations of the two during the ignorance about how much time may have elapsed LM IB period. The identification of additional between what has been described above as LM IB examples will obviously allow much more to be Early and LM IB Late. The comparatively small said about ceramic regionalism. The discovery and number of sites thus far reported at which multiple stages of LM IB ceramic development have been noted is striking (Table 4: Hagia Triada, Kommos, 65 Popham 1984, 97 SC18, 158, pl. 124b; Mountjoy 1984, 188 Malia, Mochlos, Pseira; also Khania), but recent Knossos 97, pl. 28c; Müller 1997, 416 Sf313, pl. 86. 66 Müller 1997, 181, 212, figs. 102, 121. publications, including this volume, suggest that 67 Puglisi, this volume. the documentation of multiple LM IB ceramic 68 These sites include Hagia Triada, Kommos, Mochlos, phases at individual sites will henceforth become Palaikastro, Pseira, and Seli in addition to the already well- considerably more common. represented palatial sites of Knossos, Malia, Phaistos, and Zakros. In view of how long the LM IB period has been 69 Rutter 2004; 2006a, 443, 475–6, 485–6 [Kommos]; Barnard recognized and how richly represented at least some & Brogan 2003, 73, figs. 37, 39–40 and Brogan 2004, 29–41 stages within it are by major destruction deposits [Mochlos]; Puglisi 2006, 449–50 and n. 23 [Hagia Triada].

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 329 publication of such distinctive pieces from well- investigation. Further study of the rise and decline dated contexts, whether as imports or as local of the earlier Floral Paneled Style might similarly products, will likewise facilitate the correlation be rewarding, with comparisons of the natures and of site-specific ceramic sequences throughout the histories of regional styles of tableware being at island. The variable distribution of such items as least one logical outgrowth of such more focused imports will have much to say about the nature of analyses. My own experience at Kommos has shown Minoan exchange, as will the differential impacts me that spotting individual vessels as imports at a site that localized types had outside their production where one has spent a considerable amount of time locales. The rise of the SPT to a position of pan- is not all that difficult – but identifying the source Cretan, and indeed pan-Aegean, importance in of that import is a far more challenging task, chiefly LM IB Late, as well as its apparent decline in LM because of the inadequate state of publication of IB Final (at least in some regions of Crete such as regional ceramic traditions within Crete, especially the western Mesara) and eventual disappearance during the Neopalatial and Post-palatial eras of the in LM II are phenomena that merit more detailed Late Bronze Age.

330 Jeremy B. Rutter 2 (5) 1 (3) 0 (2) 0 (1) 1 (1) 1 (1) 2 (2) 0 (3) 0 (4) 1 (3) 5 (11) 14 (22) frags) vases (inv. (inv. vases Complete or fully restorable fully restorable kg. > 34.70 (> 1010) sherds) 1.055 (198) 0.70 (ca. 40) Weight in Weight 4.65 (ca. 110) 8.72 (ca. 220) 7.00 (ca. 140) 2.10 (ca. 150) 6.20 (ca. 400) 2.33 (ca. 120) 3.23 ( ca. 100) 24.51 (ca. 740) 14.02 (ca. 440) (number of (number LM II LM III above to LM IB to LM IB LM IIIA2 LM IIIA1 LM IIIA2 LM IIIA2 LM IIIA2 Date of stratum Neopalatial LM IB Early LM IA Final to LM IIIA2 Early Mixed LM IB to Mixed Mixed LM IA to Mixed Mixed Neopalatial Mixed Mixed Neopalatial Mixed Mixed Mixed Mixed Mixed LM IA LM IA below Advanced LM IA (?) Date of stratum Neopalatial Neopalatial Neopalatial LM IA Final LM IA Final LM IA Final LM IB Early Unexcavated LM IB Early?) LM IA Final (- LM IA Final to LM IA 80] 18, 30] [Tr.44A/52] 37a , pl. 3.40–1) 37e , pl. 3.42–3) [Tr.44A/49, 50] [Tr.44A/49, Table 1A: Late Minoan IB Early at Kommos: significant contexts. Table 700–1 n. 122, pl. 3.40) 698–700 n. 119, pl. 3.44–6) Group 31 , pl. 3.39) (Rutter 2006a, 445 Group Group 39 , pl. 3.44) (Rutter 2006a, 457 Group Group 33 , pl. 3.39) (Rutter 2006a, 446–7 Group 38 , pl. 3.43) (Rutter 2006a, 456–7 Group Group 37b , pl. 3.41) (Rutter 2006a, 450–1 Group 37d , pl. 3.42) (Rutter 2006a, 453–4 Group PUBLICATION REFERENCES PUBLICATION of North Stoa’s west end [Tr.37A/52, 53, 57, 59, 60] end [Tr.37A/52, west of North Stoa’s , table 3.57, pl. 3.46) 41 , table (Rutter 2006a, 461–2 Group Group 35 , 700–1 n. 122, pl. 3.40) (Rutter 2006a, 448 Group Building T, clayey fill directly overlying preceding preceding group overlying fill directly clayey Building T, Building T, Space 22, west end [Tr.53A1/57, 62, 63, 64] end [Tr.53A1/57, Space 22, west Building T, ]; Van 1992, 14–6, figs. 17–8, pls. 6–7 [ Deposit 7 ]; Van (Watrous (Van de Moortel 1997, 741–2; Rutter 2006a, 454–6 Group (Van Building T; removal of “platform” in Room 16 [Tr.62D/96] of “platform” removal Building T; Building T, Room 42, fourth floor [Tr.52A/53; Tr.62D/70] Room 42, fourth floor [Tr.52A/53; Building T, Building T, Space 28 at west end [Tr.94A/68, 76, 77, 78, 79, end [Tr.94A/68, Space 28 at west Building T, Building T, portion of pebbled court below later Room N13 court portion below of pebbled Building T, (Van de Moortel 1997, 741–2; Rutter 2006a, 449–50 Group (Van de Moortel 40 , 1997, 739–40; Rutter 2006a, 458–61 Group (Van de Moortel 36 , 1997, 740; Rutter 2006a, 448–9 Group (Van Building T, Space 11 = North Stoa near west end [Tr.37A/27, 29] [Tr.37A/27, end west near Stoa North = 11 Space T, Building Building T, Space 11 = North Stoa near west end [Tr.43A/93] Space 11 = North Stoa near west Building T, end [Tr.43A/94] Space 10 = North Stoa near west Building T, [Tr.36A/4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 14, 15, Room 5A, sottoscala [Tr.36A/4, Building T, Building T, North Stoa, east end, fourth floor [Tr.62D/74, 80] North Stoa, east end, fourth floor [Tr.62D/74, Building T, Building T, northwest part of pebbled court part northwest immediately south of pebbled Building T, OF pottery major fills substantial Neopalatial NATURE NATURE but containing but [Rutter 2006a, 474 table 3.61] 474 table in LM IB Early DEPOSITS Contexts closed Floor deposits and amounts of Earlier

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 331 Comments Coated interior Coated interior 3-petaled buds possibly residual LM IA Final. Added white common on rim band Zigzag 53, FM Line Wavy formof in diagonal plump of row single 61, FM leaves or double row of thin leaves Band FM 64). (Foliate Residual LM IA (?) LM IA residual (?) LM IA residual Added white common on rim band Line formWavy in 48, FM Quirk of of row single 61, FM Zigzag 53, FM plump diagonal leaves (Foliate Band FM 64), or Floral added Paneled white Style; also used for dark patterns on exterior. over accents midrib; have may Unpainted version exceedingly thin-walled. all are Added white on handle (31/1) Ripple FM 78 on LM IA residuals (?) residuals IA LM on 78 FM Ripple 3-petaled buds indicative of LM IA (?) residual 1 39/3 39/2 39/4 40/1 33/2 33/1 33/1 40/2 37a/1 37e/3 37e/1 37a/7 40/15 40/19 40/34 40/35 40/30 40/31 40/16 40/17 37b/3 37e/16 37e/13 37e/14 35/1 (?) 37b/4 (?) 40/3, 40/4 37e/9, 38/3 37e/10, 41/3 37e/7, 40/14 37e/8, 40/18 37a/7, 40/28 40/36, 40/37 40/11, 40/12 40/26, 40/27 37b/2, 37e/5 37b/3, 37e/10 37a/3, 38/2(?) 37a/2(?), 40/2 41/2 (also 37c/8 ) 38/3, 39/4, 40/18 37e/15, 40/32, 40/33 31/2, 36/2, 37a/5, 37e/11–2, 31/1(?), 36/1(?), 37e/2 37d/2, 37e/6, 40/13, 41/1 Inventoried Examples Inventoried 40/20–5, 41/4 37a/4, 37d/1, 40/8, 40/9, 40/10, Type Type C: D: 33/4, 37a/6 Type P: 37e/4, 40/6–7 Type J: 33/3, 38/1, 40/5 Type 37b/1, 39/1 V: Type DECORATION Table 1B: Late Minoan IB Early at Kommos: common vessel types. common vessel 1B: Late Minoan IB Early at Kommos: Table occasionally retorted) body zone) zone) body zones) Patterned: Running Spiral FM 46 (Knossian?) Stone FM 76 (Knossian) Variegated Minoan source) (unknown Ware Fine Grey Egyptian, unpainted Cypriot Wheelmade ware Red Lustrous Cypriot Red/Black Slip IV Mycenaean patterned (Running Spiral FM 46) Patterned Exterior: Quirk FM 48 Band FM 64 Foliate style Floral Paneled Interior: Band FM 53 horizontal Wavy Lines FM 53 Wavy vertical style Floral Paneled spatters undeterminable pattern Patterned: Running Spiral FM 46 (usually “stemmed”, Quirk FM 48 Isolated Spiral FM 52 Lines FM 53 horizontal multiple Wavy 3-petaled buds style Floral Paneled Solidly coated Unpainted Unpainted Unpainted (conical Type C; tall ovoid Type D) Type C; tall ovoid Unpainted (conical Type P) Type Solidly coated (ovoid J) Linear: band at rim (conical Type V) Type Light-on-dark patterned (ovoid Patterned: Running Spiral FM 46 (shoulder) multiple horizontal Lines Wavy FM 53 (lower body zone) Ripple FM 78 (lower Solidly coated (?) Unpainted Patterned: Reed FM 16 inside and out vertical Patterned: Lines FM 53 horizontal Wavy Patterned: Line horizontalFM 53 Wavy (neck; body lower diagonal Reed FM 16 (shoulder only) body) diagonal Reed FM 16 (entire Running Spiral FM 46 (shoulder) style (shoulder) Floral Paneled Patterned: Running Spiral FM 46 (shoulder) multiple horizontal Lines Wavy FM 53 (lower Solidly coated (?) Unpainted (?) Patterned: Diaper Net FM 57 (shoulder) (mid-body zone) 3-petaled buds Kalathos Amphora SHAPE Alabastron Pithoid Jar IMPORTS Cooking Jar Conical Cup Vapheio Cup Vapheio Spindle Bottle Spouted Basin Jug or Tankard Jug In-and-out Bowl Globular Rhyton Globular Side-spouted Cup Collar-necked Jug Collar-necked Semiglobular Cup Semiglobular Semiglobular Cup Semiglobular Bridge-spouted Jar Tubular-spouted Jar Tubular-spouted Tripod Cooking Pot Tripod Oval-mouthed Amphora Oval-mouthed

332 Jeremy B. Rutter Comments Coated interior Coated interior 3-petaled buds possibly residual LM IA Final. Added white common on rim band Zigzag 53, FM Line Wavy formof in diagonal plump of row single 61, FM leaves or double row of thin leaves Band FM 64). (Foliate Residual LM IA (?) LM IA residual (?) LM IA residual Added white common on rim band Line formWavy in 48, FM Quirk of of row single 61, FM Zigzag 53, FM plump diagonal leaves (Foliate Band FM 64), or Floral added Paneled white Style; also used for dark patterns on exterior. over accents midrib; have may Unpainted version exceedingly thin-walled. all are Added white on handle (31/1) Ripple FM 78 on LM IA residuals (?) residuals IA LM on 78 FM Ripple 3-petaled buds indicative of LM IA (?) residual 1 39/3 39/2 39/4 40/1 33/2 33/1 33/1 40/2 37a/1 37e/3 37e/1 37a/7 40/15 40/19 40/34 40/35 40/30 40/31 40/16 40/17 37b/3 37e/16 37e/13 37e/14 35/1 (?) 37b/4 (?) 40/3, 40/4 37e/9, 38/3 37e/10, 41/3 37e/7, 40/14 37e/8, 40/18 37a/7, 40/28 40/36, 40/37 40/11, 40/12 40/26, 40/27 37b/2, 37e/5 37b/3, 37e/10 37a/3, 38/2(?) 37a/2(?), 40/2 41/2 (also 37c/8 ) 38/3, 39/4, 40/18 37e/15, 40/32, 40/33 31/2, 36/2, 37a/5, 37e/11–2, 31/1(?), 36/1(?), 37e/2 37d/2, 37e/6, 40/13, 41/1 Inventoried Examples Inventoried 40/20–5, 41/4 37a/4, 37d/1, 40/8, 40/9, 40/10, Type Type C: D: 33/4, 37a/6 Type P: 37e/4, 40/6–7 Type J: 33/3, 38/1, 40/5 Type 37b/1, 39/1 V: Type DECORATION Table 1B: Late Minoan IB Early at Kommos: common vessel types. common vessel 1B: Late Minoan IB Early at Kommos: Table occasionally retorted) body zone) zone) body zones) Patterned: Running Spiral FM 46 (Knossian?) Stone FM 76 (Knossian) Variegated Minoan source) (unknown Ware Fine Grey Egyptian, unpainted Cypriot Wheelmade ware Red Lustrous Cypriot Red/Black Slip IV Mycenaean patterned (Running Spiral FM 46) Patterned Exterior: Quirk FM 48 Band FM 64 Foliate style Floral Paneled Interior: Band FM 53 horizontal Wavy Lines FM 53 Wavy vertical style Floral Paneled spatters undeterminable pattern Patterned: Running Spiral FM 46 (usually “stemmed”, Quirk FM 48 Isolated Spiral FM 52 Lines FM 53 horizontal multiple Wavy 3-petaled buds style Floral Paneled Solidly coated Unpainted Unpainted Unpainted (conical Type C; tall ovoid Type D) Type C; tall ovoid Unpainted (conical Type P) Type Solidly coated (ovoid J) Linear: band at rim (conical Type V) Type Light-on-dark patterned (ovoid Patterned: Running Spiral FM 46 (shoulder) multiple horizontal Lines Wavy FM 53 (lower body zone) Ripple FM 78 (lower Solidly coated (?) Unpainted Patterned: Reed FM 16 inside and out vertical Patterned: Lines FM 53 horizontal Wavy Patterned: Line horizontalFM 53 Wavy (neck; body lower diagonal Reed FM 16 (shoulder only) body) diagonal Reed FM 16 (entire Running Spiral FM 46 (shoulder) style (shoulder) Floral Paneled Patterned: Running Spiral FM 46 (shoulder) multiple horizontal Lines Wavy FM 53 (lower Solidly coated (?) Unpainted (?) Patterned: Diaper Net FM 57 (shoulder) (mid-body zone) 3-petaled buds Kalathos Amphora SHAPE Alabastron Pithoid Jar IMPORTS Cooking Jar Conical Cup Vapheio Cup Vapheio Spindle Bottle Spouted Basin Jug or Tankard Jug In-and-out Bowl Globular Rhyton Globular Side-spouted Cup Collar-necked Jug Collar-necked Semiglobular Cup Semiglobular Semiglobular Cup Semiglobular Bridge-spouted Jar Tubular-spouted Jar Tubular-spouted Tripod Cooking Pot Tripod Oval-mouthed Amphora Oval-mouthed All references in this column are to the catalog numbers of pieces published in Rutter 2006a. numbers of pieces published to the catalog in this column are All references 1

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 333 1 (4) 0 (5) 0 (4) 0 (12) 3 (14) 0 (20) 7 (24) (inv. frags) (inv. restorable vases vases restorable Complete or fully 1.13 4.64 8.48 (160) (470) (1284) c. 6.635 c. c. 14.54 c. c. 5.885 c. > 16.44 (ca. 930) (ca. 954) (ca. 540) (> 3910) sherds) (number of (number Weight in kg. Weight LM II LM II LM II LM II LM II above Date of stratum LM IB Late LM IB Final below Date of stratum LM IB Late LM IB Late LM IA Final LM IA Final Unexcavated Unexcavated to LM IA Final Mixed MM IIA Mixed 76] X11:1 ) 95A, 95B] Tr.93E/103 Table 2A: Late Minoan IB Late at Kommos: significant contexts. 2A: Late Minoan IB at Kommos: Table Group X3:2 ) Group Group X2:6 ) Group Groups X2:4–5 ) Groups 3.59–60, pl. 3.46–8) Tr.80A/41, 42, 43, 44] Tr.80A/41, ) X7:1 Group (Rutter in progress, ) X6:2 Group (Rutter in progress, Tr.100D/34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41] Tr.100D/34, PUBLICATION REFERENCES PUBLICATION (Van de Moortel 1997, 744; Rutter in progress, de Moortel 1997, 744; Rutter in progress, (Van – 0.15 m of fill [Tr.74B/75A, 76A; Tr.93E/101] 76A; – 0.15 m of fill [Tr.74B/75A, overlying 0.20 m of fill [Tr.74A/77, 77A, 78, 79; 0.20 m of fill [Tr.74A/77, overlying House X, Room 2, pebble floor at 4.89/4.90 and House X, Room 2, pebble (Van de Moortel 1997, 742–3; Rutter in.progress, de Moortel 1997, 742–3; Rutter in.progress, (Van (Van de Moortel 1997, 742–3; Rutter in progress, de Moortel 1997, 742–3; Rutter in progress, (Van m of fill above pebbled surface of court [Tr.50A/79; surface of court pebbled [Tr.50A/79; m of fill above overlying 0.10 – 0.15 m of fill [Tr.11A/30 = Watrous Watrous = 0.10 – 0.15 m of fill [Tr.11A/30 overlying House X, Room 6, beaten earth floor at ca. 4.85 and overlying 0.05 m of fill [Tr.66A/40; Tr.73B/112, 116; Tr.73B/112, 0.05 m of fill [Tr.66A/40; overlying 1992: 17, pl. 7 nos. 296–302 [Deposit 9]; Tr.73B/107] Building T, northwest corner northwest of central court, ca. 0.14 Building T, Group Group de Moortel 1997, 744; Rutter in progress, (Van House X, Room 2, beaten earth floor at 5.04/5.09 and , 700 n. 120, tables 44a-b , 700 n. 120, tables (Rutter 2006a, 463–7 Groups House X, Room 11, beaten earth floor at 5.00/5.05 and House X, Room 3, floor at 5.08/5.14 and overlying 0.05 overlying House X, Room 3, floor at 5.08/5.14 and 4.81/4.82 and overlying 0.10 m of fill [Tr.73A/67A, 94B, 94B, 0.10 m of fill [Tr.73A/67A, 4.81/4.82 and overlying House X, Room 7, floor of stone slabs and beaten earth at overlying 0.20 – 0.25 m of fill [Tr.66A/25, 28; Tr.74A/75, Tr.74A/75, 28; 0.20 – 0.25 m of fill [Tr.66A/25, overlying OF 3.62] [cf. Rutter NATURE NATURE Floor deposits and major fills DEPOSITS 2006a: 482 table 2006a: 482 table

334 Jeremy B. Rutter ) 44b/6–7 Comments Examples with ( residuals Early IB LM added probably white at earlier residual Possible rim Residual LM IA. Types C and D become somewhat larger. larger. somewhat become D and C Types Type P becomes somewhat smaller and deeper. 1 44b/3 44b/2 44b/11 X3:2/1 X2:4/2 X2:6/1 X11:1/9 X2:6/13 X2:4/20 X2:4/21 X11:1/1 X2:6/3–4; X6:2/3; 44b/8–10 X11:1/10 X2:4/4–6; X2:6/5–9; X7:1/3 (?) 44b/15; X2:4/18–9; X2:4/15–7; X2:6/14; X2:6/12; X6:2/4 X2:6/10; X7:1/2 X6:2/1; X11:1/2, 5(?) X7:1/4; X11:1/11–12 X2:6/15–6; X7:1/5 X7:1/1 X11:1/7–8 X2:4/9; X2:5/5; X3:2/2; Inventoried Examples Inventoried 44b/6–7; X2:4/7–8; X2:5/2–4; Type Type C: Type Type D: Types P-Q: Types J: X2:4/3 Type Type K: DECORATION Table 2B: Late Minoan IB Late at Kommos: common vessel types. common vessel 2B: Late Minoan IB at Kommos: Table Reed FM 16 (shoulder) (mid-body) ovoid lipless Type K) lipless Type ovoid Patterned: Running Spiral FM 46 (?) Quirk FM 48 Solidly coated Linear Patterned: double horizontal Line Wavy FM 53 (neck), diagonal horizontal(shoulder), Style 16 FM Reed Paneled Floral Isolated Spiral FM 52 (shoulder) Unpainted (conical Type C; tall ovoid or conical Type D) Type conical or ovoid tall C; Type (conical Unpainted Q) hemispherical Type P, Type Solidly coated (ovoid Linear: band at rim (conical Type J with flattened lip; Patterned: horizontal Reed FM 16 Running Spiral FM 46 Running Spiral FM 46 with grouped tangents Isolated Spirals FM 52 Lines FM 53 horizontal multiple Wavy Solidly coated Patterned: FM 35 (shoulder) Axes Double Running Spiral FM 46 (shoulder) Solidly coated Patterned: Running Spiral FM 46 (shoulder) Bowl Bell Cup SHAPE Conical Cup Miniature Brazier Miniature Collar-necked Jug Collar-necked Semiglobular Cup Semiglobular Bridge-spouted Jar Tubular-spouted Jar Tubular-spouted Horizontal-handled All references in this column are to the catalog numbers of pieces published in Rutter 2006a (for Group 44b from Building T) or to the cataloge numbers in Rutter in progress progress in Rutter in numbers cataloge the to or T) Building from 44b Group (for 2006a Rutter in published pieces of numbers catalog the to are column this in references All for all pieces from House X prefixed with the letter X followed by the relevant room number). room relevant by the with the letter X followed House X prefixed for all pieces from 1

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 335 Perfectly paralleled at Phaistos Palace Perfectly Coated interior Coated interior Coated interior Coated interior Coated interior White pattern on solidly coated cup Unfinished surfaces lines on panels Added white vertical Cypriot Plain White import 44b/4 44b/5 44b/16 44b/20 44b/12 44b/19 44b/17 X3:2/3 X6:2/2 X2:6/2 X2:5/1 X2:4/14 X2:4/25 X2:6/11 X2:4/11 X2:4/13 X2:4/12 X2:4/10 X11:1/3 44b/13–4 44b/18 (?) X2:4/22–4 44b/1; X2:4/1 Style) body) (Alternating Style) Pattern FM 66 (lower Crocus FM 10 + Trefoil FM 29 (Alternating Style) FM 10 + Trefoil Crocus Patterned: Running Spiral FM 46 (shoulder)) Solidly coated Unpainted Patterned: MM III examples re-used Unpainted Patterned: FM 30 (Marine Style) FM 28 + Seaweed Rockwork Stone FM 76 Variegated Linear Patterned: Patterned: Crocus FM 10 + Tricurved Arch FM 62 (Alternating Patterned: tangents Running Spiral FM 46 with blob-flanked FM 11 (Lyrical Floral Style) Light-on-dark Papyrus Band FM 64 Foliate Patterned: Band FM 53. Interior: Stipple Exterior: Wavy broad Band ( 13 ) at, or Wheel 14 on base FM 77 with Wavy Patterned: FM 41 (neck) solid Circles body) Reed FM 16 (all over vertical Quirk FM 48 (shoulder) Band FM 64 (mid-body) Foliate Patterned: Sacral Ivy FM 12 FM 13 Canopy Ogival Patterned: Sacral Ivy FM 12 + Shield FM 37 (shoulder), Arcade FM 75 and Stipple 77 Panels Unpainted Table 2B (continued from previous page): Late Minoan IB Late at Kommos: common vessel types. common vessel page): Late Minoan IB at Kommos: previous from 2B (continued Table Pithos Pitharaki (Cypriot) (Knossian) (Knossian) (Knossian) (Knossian) Pithoid Jar Beaked Jug Beaked (Knossian?) (Knossian?) (Knossian?) IMPORTS (Mycenaean) (Mycenaean) In-and-out Bowl In-and-out Bowl Semiglobular Cup Semiglobular Bridge-spouted or Straight-sided Cup Miscellaneous Cup Bridge-spouted Jug Trefoil-mouthed Jug Jug Trefoil-mouthed Bell Cup (Knossian?) Misc. Jug (Knossian?) Jug Misc. Beaked Jug (Knossian?) Jug Beaked (unknown Minoan source) Minoan (unknown source) Minoan (unknown (unknown Minoan source) Minoan (unknown Wishbone-handled Cup Wishbone-handled

336 Jeremy B. Rutter 5 (2) 0 (17) 5 (85) 0 (25) (inv. frgs) (inv. restorable vases vases restorable Complete or fully kg. 8.31 3.20 22.60 (1832) (5917) (1655) 145.54 (ca. 278) sherds) Weight in Weight (number of (number IIIA1 LM II above to LM II Date of stratum LM IB Final LM II to Mixed MM II Mixed Mixed, mostly Mixed, below Date of stratum LM IB Late LM IB Late LM IB Final LM IA Final Neopalatial to X2:7 ) 19, 20] Table 3A: Late Minoan IB Final at Kommos: significant contexts. 3A: Late Minoan IB Final at Kommos: Table 9–11 nos. 339–428) 95; Van de Moortel 1997, 745) 95; Van [Tr.93E/67, 68, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76] [Tr.93E/67, ) X3N:3 Group (Rutter in progress, PUBLICATION REFERENCES PUBLICATION House X, Room 2, beaten earth floor at 5.30 and running north from midpoint of Room 3’s north wall north wall running midpoint of Room 3’s north from overlying 0.15 – 0.40 m of fill [Tr.66A/21; Tr.74A/74] 0.15 – 0.40 m of fill [Tr.66A/21; overlying North of House X Room 3, dumped fill ca. 0.50–0.55 House of the Snake Tube, deposit of yellowish earth ca. deposit of yellowish Tube, House of the Snake m thick against north wall of room, east of retaining wall wall east of retaining of room, m thick against north wall (Watrous 1992, 20–5 Deposit 16, 200–1, figs. 18–21, pls. (Watrous 0.30–0.35 m deep against south side of house [Tr.9A/17] (Watrous 1992, 16 Deposit 8, 198, fig. 18, pl. 7 nos. 279– (Watrous Group Group de Moortel 1997, 742–3; Rutter in progress, (Van 0.70 m deep overlying the previous deposit [Tr.9A/12, 15, deposit [Tr.9A/12, the previous 0.70 m deep overlying House of the Snake Tube, deposit of soft dark gray earth c. deposit of soft dark gray earth c. Tube, House of the Snake OF NATURE NATURE Floor deposits and major fills DEPOSITS

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 337 Comments no. 346 a LM IB Early residual? no. a of example attested securely Only handleless version of the common Reed cup locally produced Residual LM IA? Type E exceedingly rare Type Troughed, not bridged, spout. Troughed, 1 368 buds) at rim), X2:7/3 X2:7/1 X2:7/2 X3N:3/2 X3N:3/1 X3N:3/6 X3N:3/20 X3N:3/12 X3N:3/15 X3N:3/24 wavy line below) wavy Watrous 1992, no. 375 1992, no. Watrous 366 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 388 1992, no. Watrous 384 1992, no. Watrous 389 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 381 1992, no. Watrous 348 1992, no. Watrous 376 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 402 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992: no. 392 1992: no. Watrous 395 1992, no. Watrous 399 1992, no. Watrous 391 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 411 1992, no. Watrous ; Watrous 1992: nos. 351, 372, 397 372, 351, nos. 1992: Watrous ; X2:7/5–6; X3N:3/18–9 ; Watrous ; Watrous X3N:3/7 ; 1992, Watrous no. 279, Watrous 1992, nos. 367, 380 Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 289, 370 Watrous 1992, nos. 283, 345 Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 359, 364 Watrous 1992, nos. 377, 398 Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 400, 409 Watrous Inventoried Examples Inventoried Watrous 1992, nos. 346, 354, 371 Watrous 1992, nos. 287, 350, 373 Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 282, 362, 379 Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 400, 406, 409 Watrous 1992, nos. 280, 340, 341 344 ; Watrous 1992, no. 387 1992, no. X3N:3/16 ; Watrous ; Watrous 1992, no. 369 1992, no. X3N:3/10 ; Watrous ; Watrous 1992, no. 390 1992, no. X3N:3/14 ; Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 382 (below pendent 1992, nos. 382 (below Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 349, 374 (dots above, 1992, nos. 349, 374 (dots above, Watrous dashes at rim), 385 (combined with floral ; Watrous 1992, nos. 284, 290, X3N:3/8–9 ; Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 383 (below Foliate Band Foliate 383 (below 1992, no. Watrous (at rim); Watrous 1992, no. 352 (in 1992, no. X2:7/4 (at rim); Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 285, 347, 353, 356, 365 Watrous X3N:3/13 spaced pairs); X3N:3/11 (with dotted leaves) Type Type C: Type E: Watrous 1992, no. 342 1992, no. E: Watrous Type 343 1992, no. P-Q: Watrous Types Type K: DECORATION at base of bowl double double horizontal Wavy Line FM 53 body) (mid- zone) FM 58 (debased Marine Style) Table 3B (continues next page): Late Minoan IB Final at Kommos: common vessel types. common vessel next page): Late Minoan IB Final at Kommos: 3B (continues Table Patterned: horizontal Reed FM 16 Linear Patterned: above) FM 10 (with dot row Crocus horizontal Reed FM 16 horizontal Reed FM 16 with central line FM 41 solid Circles FM 42:2 (single row) Festoons row) FM 42:2 (double Festoons FM 42:2 (triple Festoons row) Running Spiral FM 46 Quirk FM 48 Lines FM 53 horizontal multiple Wavy Diaper Net FM 57 of leaves) Band FM 64 (single row Foliate of leaves) row Band FM 64 (double Foliate Scale FM 70 (with iris at base) buds floral sprays Floral Paneled Blob decoration Linear only Solidly coated all over Solidly coated exterior, rim band on interior Unpainted (conical Type C; ovoid Type E) Type C; ovoid Unpainted (conical Type Q) hemispherical Type P, Type Solidly coated (ovoid K) lipless Type Linear: band at rim (ovoid Patterned: Band FM 53 (neck) horizontal Wavy debased Reed FM 16 (shoulder) FM 42:2 (single row) Festoons Patterned: rim diagonal Reed FM 16 (pendent from band) FM 42:2 (single row) Festoons FM 42:2 (triple Festoons row) Running Spiral FM 46 Quirk FM 48 (bisected) Quirk FM 48 (cross-hatched) blobs) with fill of dots and Quirk FM 48 (double, Zigzag FM 61 multiple Stripes Curved FM 67 (?) with fill of solid circles) Scale FM 70 (single, Scale FM 70 (double); Line horizontalFM 53 Wavy Stipple FM 77 patchy Unpainted Patterned: blob-centered Stemmed Spirals FM 51 (shoulder), Patterned: Running Spiral FM 46 (shoulder) multiple horizontal Lines Wavy FM 53 (lowermost Band FM 64 (upper shoulder) Foliate Solidly coated Patterned: vertical Whorl-shells FM 23 and Parallel Chevrons Cup Pyxis Bowl Pitharaki Bell Cup Stirrup Jar SHAPE Conical Cup Tall Alabastron Tall Collar-necked Jug Collar-necked Semiglobular Cup Semiglobular Bridge-spouted Jar Horizontal-handled Handleless Rounded

338 Jeremy B. Rutter Comments no. 346 a LM IB Early residual? no. a of example attested securely Only handleless version of the common Reed cup locally produced Residual LM IA? Type E exceedingly rare Type Troughed, not bridged, spout. Troughed, 1 368 buds) at rim), X2:7/3 X2:7/1 X2:7/2 X3N:3/2 X3N:3/1 X3N:3/6 X3N:3/20 X3N:3/12 X3N:3/15 X3N:3/24 wavy line below) wavy Watrous 1992, no. 375 1992, no. Watrous 366 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 388 1992, no. Watrous 384 1992, no. Watrous 389 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 381 1992, no. Watrous 348 1992, no. Watrous 376 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 402 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992: no. 392 1992: no. Watrous 395 1992, no. Watrous 399 1992, no. Watrous 391 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 411 1992, no. Watrous ; Watrous 1992: nos. 351, 372, 397 372, 351, nos. 1992: Watrous ; X2:7/5–6; X3N:3/18–9 ; Watrous ; Watrous X3N:3/7 ; 1992, Watrous no. 279, Watrous 1992, nos. 367, 380 Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 289, 370 Watrous 1992, nos. 283, 345 Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 359, 364 Watrous 1992, nos. 377, 398 Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 400, 409 Watrous Inventoried Examples Inventoried Watrous 1992, nos. 346, 354, 371 Watrous 1992, nos. 287, 350, 373 Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 282, 362, 379 Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 400, 406, 409 Watrous 1992, nos. 280, 340, 341 344 ; Watrous 1992, no. 387 1992, no. X3N:3/16 ; Watrous ; Watrous 1992, no. 369 1992, no. X3N:3/10 ; Watrous ; Watrous 1992, no. 390 1992, no. X3N:3/14 ; Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 382 (below pendent 1992, nos. 382 (below Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 349, 374 (dots above, 1992, nos. 349, 374 (dots above, Watrous dashes at rim), 385 (combined with floral ; Watrous 1992, nos. 284, 290, X3N:3/8–9 ; Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 383 (below Foliate Band Foliate 383 (below 1992, no. Watrous (at rim); Watrous 1992, no. 352 (in 1992, no. X2:7/4 (at rim); Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 285, 347, 353, 356, 365 Watrous X3N:3/13 spaced pairs); X3N:3/11 (with dotted leaves) Type Type C: Type E: Watrous 1992, no. 342 1992, no. E: Watrous Type 343 1992, no. P-Q: Watrous Types Type K: DECORATION at base of bowl double double horizontal Wavy Line FM 53 body) (mid- zone) FM 58 (debased Marine Style) Table 3B (continues next page): Late Minoan IB Final at Kommos: common vessel types. common vessel next page): Late Minoan IB Final at Kommos: 3B (continues Table Patterned: horizontal Reed FM 16 Linear Patterned: above) FM 10 (with dot row Crocus horizontal Reed FM 16 horizontal Reed FM 16 with central line FM 41 solid Circles FM 42:2 (single row) Festoons row) FM 42:2 (double Festoons FM 42:2 (triple Festoons row) Running Spiral FM 46 Quirk FM 48 Lines FM 53 horizontal multiple Wavy Diaper Net FM 57 of leaves) Band FM 64 (single row Foliate of leaves) row Band FM 64 (double Foliate Scale FM 70 (with iris at base) buds floral sprays Floral Paneled Blob decoration Linear only Solidly coated all over Solidly coated exterior, rim band on interior Unpainted (conical Type C; ovoid Type E) Type C; ovoid Unpainted (conical Type Q) hemispherical Type P, Type Solidly coated (ovoid K) lipless Type Linear: band at rim (ovoid Patterned: Band FM 53 (neck) horizontal Wavy debased Reed FM 16 (shoulder) FM 42:2 (single row) Festoons Patterned: rim diagonal Reed FM 16 (pendent from band) FM 42:2 (single row) Festoons FM 42:2 (triple Festoons row) Running Spiral FM 46 Quirk FM 48 (bisected) Quirk FM 48 (cross-hatched) blobs) with fill of dots and Quirk FM 48 (double, Zigzag FM 61 multiple Stripes Curved FM 67 (?) with fill of solid circles) Scale FM 70 (single, Scale FM 70 (double); Line horizontalFM 53 Wavy Stipple FM 77 patchy Unpainted Patterned: blob-centered Stemmed Spirals FM 51 (shoulder), Patterned: Running Spiral FM 46 (shoulder) multiple horizontal Lines Wavy FM 53 (lowermost Band FM 64 (upper shoulder) Foliate Solidly coated Patterned: vertical Whorl-shells FM 23 and Parallel Chevrons Cup Pyxis Bowl Pitharaki Bell Cup Stirrup Jar SHAPE Conical Cup Tall Alabastron Tall Collar-necked Jug Collar-necked Semiglobular Cup Semiglobular Bridge-spouted Jar Horizontal-handled Handleless Rounded All references in this column are to the catalog numbers in Rutter in progress (for all pieces from House X prefixed with the letter X followed by the relevant room number room relevant the by followed X letter the with prefixed X House from pieces all (for progress numbersin Rutter in catalog the to are column this in references All and printed in bold) or to items published by L. V. Watrous in Kommos III (1992). Watrous and printed L. V. by in bold) or to items published 1

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 339 2 1 3 IB-II debris

340 Jeremy B. Rutter 2 1 3 IB-II debris

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 341 IB] [Knossos, LM II] OTHER SITES OTHER 151:13 [Knossos, LM II] [Mochlos, LM IB Late/Final] [Mochlos, LM IB Late/Final] Popham 1984, 161, pl. 157a-b Popham [with dates as applicable] Hood, this volume [Knossos, LM IB] Hood, this volume Hazzidakis 1921, fig. 12a [Tylissos LM IB] Hazzidakis 1921, fig. 12a [Tylissos (lower left), 20.3, 5 [Nirou Chani, LM IB] left), 20.3, 5 [Nirou (lower Popham 1984, 164, pl. 157g [Knossos, LM II] Popham Popham 1984, 173, pls. 59a-c, 94d (top right), 1984, 173, pls. 59a-c, Popham Hazzidakis 1912, 207 nos. 3–6, fig. 12 gamma, Barnard & Brogan 2003, no. 369, fig. 29, pl. 17 2003, no. Barnard & Brogan fig. 19, lower left and lower Chani, right [Nirou left and lower fig. 19, lower Xanthoudides 1922, fig. 16:3 [Nirou Chani, LM Xanthoudides 1922, fig. 16:3 [Nirou Hazzidakis 1912, 208 nos. 2–3, fig. 13: eta, theta 1984, 162, pls. 79b-d, 160: 2–3 [Knossos, LM II] Xanthoudides 1922, fig. 20.11 [Nirou Chani, LM Xanthoudides 1922, fig. 20.11 [Nirou 8, pls. 7–8 [Mochlos, LM IB Late/Final]; Popham 8, pls. 7–8 [Mochlos, LM IB Late/Final]; Popham ILLUSTRATED EXAMPLES FROM EXAMPLES FROM ILLUSTRATED epsilon, nu [Tylissos, LM IB]; Xanthoudides 1922, [Tylissos, epsilon, nu (= Hazzidakis 1921, fig. 13g-h; see also 31 and LM IB]; Popham 1984, 164–5, pls. 52–53, 148.5–8 LM IB]; Popham 12g) [Tylissos, LM IB]; Xanthoudides 1922, figs. 19 12g) [Tylissos, Barnard & Brogan 2003, nos. 206, 214, 218, figs. 6, Barnard & Brogan IB]; Barnard & Brogan 2003, no. 328, fig. 24, pl. 14 2003, no. IB]; Barnard & Brogan 386 354 X2:7/4 124, 358 383, 386 X3N:3/9 X3N:3/6 X3N:3/16 X3N:3/17 necked jug] necked 1992, no. 400 1992, no. 391 KOMMOS STRATIFIED STRATIFIED Watrous 1992, no. 281 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 395 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 382 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 384 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1990, no. 350 1990, no. Watrous CONTEXTS AT CONTEXTS AT EXAMPLES FROM EXAMPLES FROM X2:7/1; Watrous 1992, nos. X2:7/1; Watrous X2:7/4; Watrous 1992, nos. X2:7/4; Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 353, 356 Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 355, 390; Watrous Kommos X3N:3/14; Watrous X3N:3/14; Watrous Kommos X3N:3/10; Watrous 1992, no. 1992, no. X3N:3/10; Watrous X3N:3/11; Watrous 1992, no. 1992, no. X3N:3/11; Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 402 [collar- 1992, no. Watrous Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 382, 385, bowls of bowls Blob cups and bowls Table 5: Late Minoan IB Final: defining characteristics. Table updraft kilns?] fills or outlines Alternating Style 340–8 Motive 43.23) 340–8 Motive Carinated Cup (or Lid) (in significant numbers)(in significant semiglobular cup handles semiglobular horizontal-handled bowls horizontal-handled bowls Horizontal-handled Bowls bump at the top of vase bump Horizontal or diagonal bars on doubled outlines (Motive 70.8) outlines (Motive doubled VERBAL DESCRIPTION VERBAL Cuttlefish FM 21, Argonaut 22, dotted centers (Motive 70.2) or with dotted centers (Motive the canonical Marine Style of LM IB Solid Circles (FurumarkSolid Circles 1941, 335–7 Scale pattern (Furumark 1941, 405–6 Degenerate Marine Style motifs (e.g., from the rimfrom bands of cups and bowls powdery fabricpowdery on which the original shapes or pendent on the shoulders of pendent from the rimpendent from band of cups or base of the neck on collar-necked jugs base of the neck on collar-necked semiglobular cups, bell and small semiglobular Moustache” decoration of handles on “ Moustache” multichanneled kilns to simple circular kilns to simple circular multichanneled Motive 70.1) on the shoulder of closed Motive in full [symptomatic of a change kiln rim not decorated in the of open vessels bowls, expecially when elaborated with bowls, Initial appearance of soft, greenish-gray, Initial appearance of soft, greenish-gray, the patterned cups zone of semiglobular Motive 41.3) as the principal patternMotive on 396–400 Motive 64.6) pendent from the 64.6) pendent from 396–400 Motive Series of triple (i.e . semicircles) Festoons Row of pendent leaves (Furumark 1941, of pendent leaves Row pendent from rimpendent from band (Furumark 1941, burnished surface and paint rarely survive burnished surface survive and paint rarely Whorl-shell FM 23) used in ways alien to Whorl-shell FM 23) used in ways 1941, 337–40 Motive 42.2) pendent from 42.2) pendent from 1941, 337–40 Motive Isolated double Quirk floating in a row in row Quirk floating in a Isolated double Other versions of Quirk (FurumarkOther versions 1941, semicircles) Series (i.e . semicircles) Festoons of double Elaboration of earlier patterns with dotted 359–61 Motive 48) with bisected or cross- 359–61 Motive a distinct false neck but simply a thickened a distinct false simply a thickened neck but Stirrup small to medium-sized without jar, usage, possibly the switch from Neopalatial from the switch possibly usage, Single row of Festoons in a row (Furumark in a row of Festoons Single row hatched centers floating in the handle zone the rim bands of cups or bowls or from the the rim or from bands of cups or bowls Degenerate Reed Pattern (Furumark 1941, 282 Motive 16) on closed shapes and bowls 282 Motive Fringes Band?) pendent (degenerate Foliate MOTIFS MOTIFS SHAPES FEATURES FEATURES STYLISTIC DECORATIVE DECORATIVE DECORATIVE DECORATIVE DECORATIVE ACCESSORIES Critical for the date in terms of the criteria adopted here for LM IB Final (Table 5) are the numerous blob cups (Barnard & Brogan 2003, 46, 48 IB.206, 214, 218, figs. 6, 8, 6, figs. 218, 214, IB.206, 48 46, 2003, (BarnardBrogan cups & blob numerous the are 5) Critical termsin date the criteriafor the of (Table Final IB LM for here adopted 53i) 51e, 39, figs. 685, no. 329 652, no. 326 629, no. 325 414, no. 312 319, no. 304 242, no. 299 2001b, (Palio cups blob of examples multiple the are Criticaldating this for Critical for this dating are a semiglobular cup decorated with double festoons pendent at the rim (La Rosa & Cucuzza 2001, figs.117 148,XLVII-4, 252) and a probable pls. 7–8), a bridge-spouted jug decorated with dot-outlined triple festoons on the neck and a blob-centered Scale pattern on the shoulder (Barnard & Brogan 2003, 63 IB.328, IB.328, 63 2003, Brogan & (Barnard shoulder the patternon Scale blob-centered a and neck the on triplefestoons dot-outlined with decorated bridge-spoutedjug a 7–8), pls. frontispiece [bottom], pl. 17). fig. 24, pl. 14), and a stirrup fig. 29, 2003, 70 IB.369, jar decorated with three-armed octopi (Barnard & Brogan or cups whether shapes, open some as from well rims as 45n), fig. 236, no. 299 2001b, rim the at (Palio groups piriformsemicircle a pendent and multiple with decorated cup 303 nos. 306–7). 2001b, Band (Palio decorated with Foliate bowls, horizontal-handled fragment (La Rosa & Cucuzza 2001, 114 XLII-1, figs. 147, 267). bowl 1 2 3 TECHNOLOGICAL TECHNOLOGICAL

342 Jeremy B. Rutter IB] [Knossos, LM II] OTHER SITES OTHER 151:13 [Knossos, LM II] [Mochlos, LM IB Late/Final] [Mochlos, LM IB Late/Final] Popham 1984, 161, pl. 157a-b Popham [with dates as applicable] Hood, this volume [Knossos, LM IB] Hood, this volume Hazzidakis 1921, fig. 12a [Tylissos LM IB] Hazzidakis 1921, fig. 12a [Tylissos (lower left), 20.3, 5 [Nirou Chani, LM IB] left), 20.3, 5 [Nirou (lower Popham 1984, 164, pl. 157g [Knossos, LM II] Popham Popham 1984, 173, pls. 59a-c, 94d (top right), 1984, 173, pls. 59a-c, Popham Hazzidakis 1912, 207 nos. 3–6, fig. 12 gamma, Barnard & Brogan 2003, no. 369, fig. 29, pl. 17 2003, no. Barnard & Brogan fig. 19, lower left and lower Chani, right [Nirou left and lower fig. 19, lower Xanthoudides 1922, fig. 16:3 [Nirou Chani, LM Xanthoudides 1922, fig. 16:3 [Nirou Hazzidakis 1912, 208 nos. 2–3, fig. 13: eta, theta 1984, 162, pls. 79b-d, 160: 2–3 [Knossos, LM II] Xanthoudides 1922, fig. 20.11 [Nirou Chani, LM Xanthoudides 1922, fig. 20.11 [Nirou 8, pls. 7–8 [Mochlos, LM IB Late/Final]; Popham 8, pls. 7–8 [Mochlos, LM IB Late/Final]; Popham ILLUSTRATED EXAMPLES FROM EXAMPLES FROM ILLUSTRATED epsilon, nu [Tylissos, LM IB]; Xanthoudides 1922, [Tylissos, epsilon, nu (= Hazzidakis 1921, fig. 13g-h; see also 31 and LM IB]; Popham 1984, 164–5, pls. 52–53, 148.5–8 LM IB]; Popham 12g) [Tylissos, LM IB]; Xanthoudides 1922, figs. 19 12g) [Tylissos, Barnard & Brogan 2003, nos. 206, 214, 218, figs. 6, Barnard & Brogan IB]; Barnard & Brogan 2003, no. 328, fig. 24, pl. 14 2003, no. IB]; Barnard & Brogan 386 354 X2:7/4 124, 358 383, 386 X3N:3/9 X3N:3/6 X3N:3/16 X3N:3/17 necked jug] necked 1992, no. 400 1992, no. 391 KOMMOS STRATIFIED STRATIFIED Watrous 1992, no. 281 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 395 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 382 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 384 1992, no. Watrous Watrous 1990, no. 350 1990, no. Watrous CONTEXTS AT CONTEXTS AT EXAMPLES FROM EXAMPLES FROM X2:7/1; Watrous 1992, nos. X2:7/1; Watrous X2:7/4; Watrous 1992, nos. X2:7/4; Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 353, 356 Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 355, 390; Watrous Kommos X3N:3/14; Watrous X3N:3/14; Watrous Kommos X3N:3/10; Watrous 1992, no. 1992, no. X3N:3/10; Watrous X3N:3/11; Watrous 1992, no. 1992, no. X3N:3/11; Watrous Watrous 1992, no. 402 [collar- 1992, no. Watrous Watrous Watrous 1992, nos. 382, 385, bowls of bowls Blob cups and bowls Table 5: Late Minoan IB Final: defining characteristics. Table updraft kilns?] fills or outlines Alternating Style 340–8 Motive 43.23) 340–8 Motive Carinated Cup (or Lid) (in significant numbers)(in significant semiglobular cup handles semiglobular horizontal-handled bowls horizontal-handled bowls Horizontal-handled Bowls bump at the top of vase bump Horizontal or diagonal bars on doubled outlines (Motive 70.8) outlines (Motive doubled VERBAL DESCRIPTION VERBAL Cuttlefish FM 21, Argonaut 22, dotted centers (Motive 70.2) or with dotted centers (Motive the canonical Marine Style of LM IB Solid Circles (FurumarkSolid Circles 1941, 335–7 Scale pattern (Furumark 1941, 405–6 Degenerate Marine Style motifs (e.g., from the rimfrom bands of cups and bowls powdery fabricpowdery on which the original shapes or pendent on the shoulders of pendent from the rimpendent from band of cups or base of the neck on collar-necked jugs base of the neck on collar-necked semiglobular cups, bell and small semiglobular Moustache” decoration of handles on “ Moustache” multichanneled kilns to simple circular kilns to simple circular multichanneled Motive 70.1) on the shoulder of closed Motive in full [symptomatic of a change kiln rim not decorated in the of open vessels bowls, expecially when elaborated with bowls, Initial appearance of soft, greenish-gray, Initial appearance of soft, greenish-gray, the patterned cups zone of semiglobular Motive 41.3) as the principal patternMotive on 396–400 Motive 64.6) pendent from the 64.6) pendent from 396–400 Motive Series of triple (i.e . semicircles) Festoons Row of pendent leaves (Furumark 1941, of pendent leaves Row pendent from rimpendent from band (Furumark 1941, burnished surface and paint rarely survive burnished surface survive and paint rarely Whorl-shell FM 23) used in ways alien to Whorl-shell FM 23) used in ways 1941, 337–40 Motive 42.2) pendent from 42.2) pendent from 1941, 337–40 Motive Isolated double Quirk floating in a row in row Quirk floating in a Isolated double Other versions of Quirk (FurumarkOther versions 1941, semicircles) Series (i.e . semicircles) Festoons of double Elaboration of earlier patterns with dotted 359–61 Motive 48) with bisected or cross- 359–61 Motive a distinct false neck but simply a thickened a distinct false simply a thickened neck but Stirrup small to medium-sized without jar, usage, possibly the switch from Neopalatial from the switch possibly usage, Single row of Festoons in a row (Furumark in a row of Festoons Single row hatched centers floating in the handle zone the rim bands of cups or bowls or from the the rim or from bands of cups or bowls Degenerate Reed Pattern (Furumark 1941, 282 Motive 16) on closed shapes and bowls 282 Motive Fringes Band?) pendent (degenerate Foliate MOTIFS MOTIFS SHAPES FEATURES FEATURES STYLISTIC DECORATIVE DECORATIVE DECORATIVE DECORATIVE DECORATIVE ACCESSORIES TECHNOLOGICAL TECHNOLOGICAL

Late Minoan IB at Kommos 343 344 Jeremy B. Rutter LM IB pottery from the rural Villa of Pitsidia: a response to Jeremy Rutter*

Despina Chatzi-Vallianou

Professor J. Rutter’s presentation of the Late also should stress that the information provided by Minoan IB sequence at Kommos raises a host of recent excavations in the western Mesara does not questions as it leads us towards new conclusions convince me that some of the material belongs to regarding the identification and chronology of LM the LM II period, as originally proposed by Rutter, IB and LM II pottery. Rutter’s research is based for reasons I will outline below. on the pottery from different levels and deposits at As the main focus of the Conference is the Kommos, especially those from Building T, House problem of dating the final phase of the LM IB X (Rooms 2, 3, 6, 7, and 11) and the House of period and the transition to LM II, I will attempt the Snake Tube. Portions of the Kommos material to review Rutter’s proposals in connection with have been studied by Rutter, Van de Moortel, and with my own views, which are based on clearly Watrous,1 all of whom draw comparisons with stratified finds from recent excavations in the deposits from other sites with LM IB and LM II Mesara. Specifically, my presentation will focus on Early Phases, particularly Hagia Triada, Phaistos, the study of stratified material from the Minoan Seli, Tylissos, Nirou Chani and Mochlos. rural Villa of Pitsidia, drawing conclusions through On the basis of both the forms and decoration of the comparison of this material with other finds the pottery, the division of the Late Minoan IB pe- from Neopalatial settlements in the western Mesara riod into two phases has previously been proposed: and other parts of Crete. My goal is to provide a LM IB Early and LM IB Late. Rutter now divides more secure relative chronology for material within the Late Minoan IB pottery at Kommos into three the LM IB period. phases: LM IB Early, LM IB Late and LM IB Final. The description of this final phase is a departure from both his recent publication of 2006 and his The Minoan Villa of Pitsidia: presentation at the LM IB pottery conference in 2007; previously he had described this last selection the site and the building of Kommos pottery as Late Minoan II Early. This In 1978 extensive Minoan and Hellenistic remains is a new and important idea which Rutter drew were discovered at Plakes, north of the village of attention to during the discussion at the Athens Pitsidia. Located within the “The Great Minoan Conference, and again in a letter of August 2007 Triangle”2 formed by the sites of Hagia Triada, in which he confirms his identification of this third Phaistos and Kommos, the Neopalatial Villa of phase. What we call this phase remains a hard nut to crack. He now suggests three options: LM IB Final, * I would like to thank INSTAP and particularly Prof. P. LM IC, or LM II Early, opting for the first, LM IB Betancourt for their support over the past few years, without Final. which I would not have been able to present material from First, I agree with the view that there is no the rural Villa of Pitsidia at this meeting. Drawings are by M. precise information regarding the duration of the Schumacher and photos by A. Vallianos. 1 Rutter 2006a; Van de Moortel 1997; and Watrous 1992. See LM IB period, and also with his approach providing also Shaw & Shaw 2006. a sequential distinction of its early and late phases. I 2 Shaw & Shaw 1985.

LMLate IB IB from at Kommos the rural Villa of Pitsidia 345 Fig. 1. Map of the western Mesara, showing the location Fig. 2. The Villa of Pitsidia. View from the north. of the Minoan Villa of Pitsidia (Plakes) within the “Great Minoan Triangle” of Phaistos, Hagia Triada and Kommos. Pitsidia lay a short distance from Kommos (2500 m), Phaistos (3550 m) and Hagia Triada (4050 m) (Fig. 1). It was also built close to the road to Kalamaki, which possibly served as the second Minoan port of Phaistos. The Villa at Pitsidia was excavated during brief seasons between 1988 and 1992 and again from 1997 to 2000, after what appears to have been repeated illegal excavations at the site.3 The Villa exhibits an excellent architectural design and careful construction (Figs. 2–3). Its rooms and storerooms were laid out in zones around a Central Hall (XXII) and separated by corridors, which created various functional areas and provided access and communication between rooms and zones of different activities. Two staircases on the east and north sides led to the upper story, which had collapsed. The building is located on a small hillside with a slope running up from north to south. The walls of the building are preserved to a height of 1.20–1.40 m on the west side; those on the east side are preserved to a much lower height, if at all. The fill preserved inside the rooms was ofa

3 For preliminary reports, see Chatzi-Vallianou 1987; 1988; Fig. 3. Plan of the rural Villa of Pitsidia. Scale 1:100. 1989; 1990; 1995; 1997a; 1997b; 1998; 1999; 2002.

346 Despina Chatzi-VallianouJeremy B. Rutter PIT. XXI. P1

PIT. XIV. P18 PIT.XVIII.P12

PIT.XVIII.P38 PIT. XVIII. P1 PIT.VII.P33

PIT. XVIII. P23 0 1 2cm. PIT.XIV. P19 PIT.XXIII.P2

0 2 4cm. PIT. XVIII. A1 PIT.XX.A1 0 2 4cm.

Fig. 4. Pottery from LM IA destruction layers beneath Rooms XVIII-XXI. Scale 1:6. similar thickness. While the deposition over the an earthquake as reported at the Archaeoseismology rooms was of uniform thickness, careful excavation Congress of Athens.4 revealed that the upper and lower story walls Various evidence points to the fact that the Villa collapsed towards the southeast. When combined with the fact that there were few traces of fire, it appears likely that the building was destroyed by 4 Vallianou 1996.

LateLM IB Minoan pottery IB from at Kommos the rural Villa of Pitsidia 347 was built over an earlier construction destroyed in the relationship of these events to those observed LM IA. One piece of evidence was provided by at other centers in the western Mesara. Due to small test trenches opened beneath various floors the brief length of this paper, a full treatment of (e.g., Room XIX) during the excavations. Another the pottery will not be possible. Instead, this study was the deep “trench” sunk during illegal digging considers a selection of vessels from four rooms, under the floors of Rooms XVIII and XXI (Fig. 4), which can be dated on the basis of stratigraphy and finally the test trenches dug to the east and west and by comparison with LM IB material from of the Villa for the construction of a shelter. All Central Crete, particularly Knossos, and sites in the show that the Villa was built over structures with western Mesara, including Phaistos, Hagia Triada a destruction layer of LM IA date. The occupants and Kommos. After presenting the pottery from conducted minor repairs to the structure after this these rooms, the report then addresses a selection of LM IA event, but the Villa was again destroyed at interesting vases from the other rooms in the Villa the end of the LM IB period and then abandoned. at Pitsidia. Because the site was never reoccupied (with The presentation focuses on Room VII, the the exception of a limited habitation in the late Central Hall XXII, storeroom XIV and the small Classical-Hellenistic period), the floor deposits workshop XIX (Fig. 3). There are several reasons were found undisturbed. for selecting these contexts. First, they present The architectural layout and the finds allow us a broad range of vessel forms, functions and to distinguish clearly the function of the rooms on decoration. Equally important, the floor deposits the ground floor. The Central Hall XXII, south of in these spaces are uniform and undisturbed by the the entrance and the east staircase, was complete- later cultivation and illicit excavations. The floor ly paved, with the exception of a central hearth. surfaces were easily recognizable by the presence It appears to have served as the most important of pavement (XXII, XIX) or the natural limestone, room in the building. Room VIII, to the north of which was covered with clay packing (XIV). These the entrance, was probably used for cult activities. surfaces also ensure that the material under study Rooms XIII, XIV, XV, XIX, XX were a series was actually used in the rooms. Finally, excavation of storerooms and workshops forming the central in Room VII revealed different building phases, zone on the western side of the Villa. The rooms which were clearly identifiable. These included wall south of Central Hall XXII and Corridor XVIa collapse, the floor surface of the final phase, and an (Rooms V, VI, VII, XVIII, XXI) probably sup- earlier LM IA destruction deposit, sealed beneath ported reception and dining activities taking place the floor. Similar stratigraphy was also observed in nearby in the Central Hall. Finally, the rooms the trench sunk by looters in neighboring Rooms forming the northern wing (Rooms I, II, IX, XI, XVIII and XXI (Fig. 3). XVII, XXIV) were used as storerooms and work- shops (e.g., Room XVII was a textile workshop). These spaces may have belonged to the women’s Room VII apartments, which were probably located upstairs over this part of the Villa and accessible from the The stratigraphy in Room VII is complex. The north staircase (Room X). first layer included a fill, 1.30 m deep, with stone and earth debris from the collapse of the superstructure. Immediately below lay two The pottery thinner layers. The first (Layer 2) was comprised of soft gray earth which covered the projecting The subject of this paper is the pottery from the foundation of the north wall; the second (Layer 3) last phase of habitation. This material provides the was the beaten earth floor, which was 0.10–0.25 m most accurate record for the chronology of the thick. Digging beneath the floor revealed another destruction and abandonment of the Villa, and for floor layer (Layer 4), 0.30 m thick, which probably

348 Despina Chatzi-VallianouJeremy B. Rutter PIT.VII.P1 PIT.VII.A18 PIT.VII.A17

PIT.VII.P61 PIT.VII.A8 PIT.VII.A15

PIT.VII.P63 PIT.VII.P39 PIT.VII.P75

PIT.VII.P83 PIT.VII.P64 PIT.VII.P31

PITSIDIA, Room VII 0 1 2cm. PIT.VII.P5 PIT.VII.P81

Fig. 5. Semiglobular cups from Room VII. Drawings and photos (no. VII.A8, no. VII.A15).

LMLate IB Minoan pottery IB from at Kommos the rural Villa of Pitsidia 349 PIT.VII.P2

PIT.VII.P60

PIT.VII.A19

PIT.VII.P44 PIT.VII.P62 PIT.VII.P34

PIT.VII.P32 PIT.VII.P41 PIT.VII.P30

PIT.VII.P85 PIT.VII.P91

PIT.VII.A16 0 1 2cm. PIT.VII.P33 Fig. 6. Semiglobular cups and other decorated vases from Room VII. sagged down in places over an even lower fill of and cups (Figs. 5–9). The cups (kyathoi), with two earlier LM IA destruction material (Layer 5) which exceptions (a monochrome, rim-spouted cup, had settled unevenly. Fig. 5, VII.A18, and another plain example with The floor deposit produced a series of complete a banded base, Fig. 5, VII.P1) were all decorated and fragmentary drinking vessels, mostly conical “teacups” with a semiglobular profile and a single cups but also several decorated semiglobular bowls vertical handle or no handle (Figs. 5–6). The

350 Despina Chatzi-VallianouJeremy B. Rutter PIT.VII.P64 PIT.VII.P75

PIT.VII.P39 PIT.VII.P63 PIT.XIV. P25

PIT.VII.A15 PIT.XXI.A7

PIT.XIII.P65 PIT.VII.A8

PIT.II.A6 0 1 2 PIT.III.A1

Fig. 7. Decorated cups from Rooms VII and II (no. II.A6 drawing & photo), III, XIII, XXI. dark-on-light pattern decoration is limited to the VII.P15, VII.P75, VII.P39, and VII.P83) in the shoulder zone between a band on the rim and a West Mesara, as suggested by Rutter.5 Rutter’s pair of bands on the lower body. The painted motifs include vegetal elements like horizontal and 5 Presented at the July 2007 Conference and in Rutter this diagonal reed, of which the former was particularly volume, figs. 8–9, nos. X2:4/9, X2:5/5, X3:2/2, X2:4/10, popular (e.g., Fig. 5, VII.A8, VII.P63, VII.P64, dated to LM IB Late. See also Watrous 1992, nos. 83, 86.

LMLate IB Minoan pottery IB from at Kommos the rural Villa of Pitsidia 351 PIT.VII.P19

PIT. XIX.A13 PIT.XIV.A22

PIT.XIII.P66 PIT.XI. A6 PIT. XIV. P49

PIT.XI.P1

PIT. XVII.P20

PIT.VII.P30

PIT.VII.P34 PIT.XVIII.P14

PIT.VII.P62

PIT.XVIII.P17 0 1 2cm. PIT.XX.A3 PIT.VII.P44 Fig. 8. Decorated semiglobular cups and bowls from Rooms VII, XI, XIII, XIV, XVII, XVIII, XIX, XX.

6 For Kommos, see Rutter in this volume, nos. C75, C2914, Floral Paneled Style is also present with festoons C2919, 258, dated LM IB Early. See also Watrous 1992, nos. (Fig. 5, VII.A17) or floral sprays (Fig. 5, VII.P31).6 258, 346. Other motifs include horizontal wavy bands (Fig. 7 For Kommos, see Rutter this volume, fig. 2, no. 37d/2, 6, VII.A19, VII.P2, and VII.P60)7 and running 41/1, 37e/6 and 257, semiglobular cups dated to LM IB Early. 8 See also Watrous 1992, 87, 266, 257. spirals (Fig. 6, VII P30, P34, and P62). 8 For Kommos, see Rutter this volume, fig. 2, the early LM The shape and decoration of these cups have IB semiglobular cups nos. 37d/1, 40/11, 4012, 259, Watrous many parallels. In addition to the examples from 1992, no. 1259.

352 Despina Chatzi-VallianouJeremy B. Rutter PIT.VII.A3 PIT.VII.P73 PIT.VII.A PIT.VII.A10 PIT.VII.P93

PIT.VII.P72 PIT.VII.A20 PIT.VII.A7 PIT.VII.P68 PIT.VII.P20

PIT.VII.P98 PIT. VII. A9 PIT.VII.A22 PIT.VII.P13 PIT.VII.P67

PIT.VII.A21 PIT.VII.A1 PIT.VII.P8

Fig. 9. Conical cups from Room VII. PIT.VII.A13 0 1 2cm.

Kommos mentioned previously,9 several exist from destruction level of several more rooms (XI, XIII, sites in the western Mesara: Hagia Triada,10 Phais- XIV, XXII, XIX) of the Villa (Figs. 7–8). One tos,11 Hagia Photeini,12 Chalara13 and Seli.14 They may belong to Rutter’s LM IB Late, but I prefer to date them nearer the end of the period, to late LM 9 See also Rutter 2006a, for LM IB Early cups: pl. 3.42, IB or final LM IB. Watrous’ date of LM II for one nos. 37d/1, 37d/2; pl. 3.44, nos. 39/2, 40/8, 40/11, 40/12; semiglobular cup from Deposit 16 at Kommos (no. for LM IB Early – Late: pl. 3.46, nos. 41/1, 43/3, 43/4; pl. 3.47, nos. 44b/6, 44b/7, 44b/9, 44b/10, 44b/11; pl. 346) with alternating leaves and arcs and a white 3.48, no. 45/3; for LM IB Late: pl. 3.50, 46a/3, 47/4, 47/5, line on the rim band probably should be changed; 47/8, 47/9; pl. 3.51; 50/2; and Van de Moortel 1997, 997– it too belongs to Rutter’s LM IB Late or Final.15 8, 1012. A few semiglobular cups with the same decoration 10 Puglisi 2003a, 163–78, figs. 6–8, 10, 12, 13; 2006, nos. 8.9, (foliate band, spirals, wavy bands), dated to the LM 8.14, 11.56, 11.62, 11.72, from destruction layers and nos. 36.10, 41.5, 41.6, 42.10, 46.12. IB period, have been found at the Knossos South 11 Pernier & Banti 1951, 104; Levi 1967–8, fig. 80. House16 and Mochlos.17 12 See Palio 2001b, 252–6, 263–7, figs. 11–7, 23–4. A miniature pithos from the same layer of Room 13 See Levi 1967–8; Palio 2001a, 380–1, figs. 37–44. VII (Fig. 6, VIIA16) points to the same date.18 14 La Rosa & Cucuzza 2001. 15 See Watrous 1992, 20–1, 119. Semiglobular cups (kyathoi) and a horizontal- 16 Mountjoy 2003, no. 323, 353, 382, figs. 4.21–23. handled bowl (skyphos) with the same decorationPITSIDIA, Room17 Barnard VII & Brogan 2003, fig. 9, no. IB.231 and 222. of reeds, spiral and wavy bands were found in the 18 Watrous 1992, no. 214; Levi 1967–8, fig. 80.

LMLate IB Minoan pottery IB from at Kommos the rural Villa of Pitsidia 353 Fig. 10. The Minoan Villa of Pitsidia. Room XIV, destruction layer.

of the semiglobular cups (Fig. 8, XVII, P20) is of the Villa’s residents and, in particular, occasions decorated with tendril scroll, a motif found in the for “hospitality” (i.e., occasions for drinking and Mesara and elsewhere in LM IA but also in LM IB eating) in the Central Hall XXII.24 layers (e.g., Hagia Photeini at Phaistos,19 Kannia, Also from deeper in Layer 4 come a few sherds of and Chalara).20 semiglobular cups (Fig. 6, VII.P91, VII.P85, VII. I believe that the cup with solid circles (a dot P44, VII.P41) with the same decoration mentioned band) as its principal decoration, which was found above (spirals) on the shoulder zone, but with an in the destruction layer of Room II at Pitsidia (Fig. added white wavy band or zigzag on the dark 7, Pit.II.A6) also belongs to the LM IB destruction rim band. There are also two sherds with a closed horizon. It is very similar to a cup (no. 281) from spiral, which finds parallels at other sites in the Deposit 8 of the House of the Snake Tube at Mesara dated to the final LM IA period.25 These Kommos. Watrous notes that this deposit “….lay sherds indicate the chronological horizon and thus directly on the packing level for the house and was sealed provide a possible date for the reconstruction of the by Deposit 16.”21 It should, however, be dated to Villa following the destruction of its first phase.26 LM IB rather than LM IB Final, as Rutter suggests for this distinctive decorative motif.22 The nine conical cups found in the same destruction layer of Room VII (Fig. 9, VII.A1, A3, A7, A20, P8, and P20–2) have the small size 19 Palio 2001b, 258, fig. 19. and shape of the LM IB cups at Kommos.23 The 20 Levi 1967–8, fig. 75. 21 cups found in the pit or floor cavity (Layer 4), by Watrous 1992, 16, fig. 18, pl. 7; See also cup no. 376, pl. 9, from Deposit 16, which should perhaps be re-examined, and contrast, are slightly larger (Fig. 9, Pit.VII P13, Puglisi 2006, no. 57.1, 59.8, 62.2, 67.2, 68.3. P67–8, P72–3, P93, P98, and A9–10). 22 Rutter this volume. We note that the pottery in Room VII 23 Rutter 2006a and Van de Moortel 1997. was almost exclusively small drinking vessels, 24 See Rutter 2004. 25 La Rosa 1989a; 2002; D’ Agata 1989; Puglisi 2003a; Palio conical cups and semiglobular cups, with similar 2001a-b; Rutter 2006a. decoration. One is tempted to suggest that some 26 For Knossos, see Macdonald 1990; Hood 1978; Popham may have formed “ceramic sets” to serve the needs 1984; and Mountjoy 2003.

354 Despina Chatzi-VallianouJeremy B. Rutter Room XIV or basins from Kommos are dated to LM IA Ad- vanced by Rutter32 and Van de Moortel,33 while The walls of this semi-underground room are Watrous placed an example from Deposit 17 (no. preserved to a height of 1.21 m. The floor of the 439) in the LM II period.34 This basin is the latest room consisted of the flattened limestone bedrock parallel for this shape at Pitsidia; however, some and earth which filled various natural cavities. A caution is warranted because Deposit 17 at Kom- thick layer of collapsed debris covered the room. It mos was a mixed layer containing “predominately consisted of successive layers of earth, clay plaster LM II” but also “a few MM III and LM I sherds.” and a large mass of stones from the superstructure In any case, storage vessels enjoy long lives and can of the two-story building, the roof and the upper “survive” for long periods of time. story floor. Excavation of these layers down to the floor recovered a mix of fragmentary vessels, including both medium-sized storage jars and B) Decorated vases in fine fabrics smaller decorated shapes. The stratigraphy clearly Room XIV contained an ovoid rhyton, fragments indicates that the destruction layer contained both of several semiglobular bowls, a horizontal-han- a deposit of storage vessels on the ground floor dled skyphos or bowl, and several closed shapes and pots from the collapsed upper story. It should (amphorae or jugs) all of which provide a secure be noted that there were relatively intense traces of date for the deposit (Fig. 12). The rhyton XIV. fire in the floor deposit, one of the few examples P6 (Fig. 12a-b) was mostly restored from sherds of such burning in the Villa (Fig. 10). found in Layers 1 to 4, and it obviously fell from The following vessels were restored from the the upper floor. The vase was reconstructed by sherds scattered throughout the destruction layer comparison with other parallels, and the neck and the floor deposit: of a similar rhyton was found in Room VI (Fig. 12, VI. A1). It was made with a fine yellow- ish pink clay and received a highly burnished A) Six storage vessels surface with dark, almost black decoration. The 1) Two four-handled “conical pithoi” with painted pattern decoration consists of three zones of trickle patterns under the vertical handles (Fig. 11, scale pattern between triple bands. The rhyton XIV.A26 and XIV.A27), a form found in MM III probably comes from a Knossian workshop pro- and LM I deposits27 in the Mesara and in the LM ducing pottery in the so-called LM IB Special IB destruction deposit at Chalara.28 Palatial Tradition. The ovoid rhyton itself is one 2) One pithoid amphora with a narrow mouth and of the new shapes appearing in this period, and high collar (Fig. 11, XIV.A1) examples were often decorated in palatial styles 3) Three conical basins (kadoi) (Fig. 11, XIV.A29, (e.g., the Marine Style rhyta from Pseira and Pa- XIV.A28 and XIV.A7) laikastro).35 These same vases use scale pattern occasionally as a filling ornament (e.g., the Ma- The kadoi or basins have two horizontal handles and added bands of rope decoration below the rim and around the base (one band on no. XIV. A29 27 and two bands on the other pair). Kados or basin Christakis 2005, 19, fig. 23, form 107. 28 Levi 1967–8, 69b; Palio 2001a, fig. 47a, no. 283. A29 has diagonal and horizontal lines scored on 29 Christakis 2005, 19, fig. 23, form 109. the interior. The shape is common across Crete 30 Levi 1961–2, 70, fig. 83. from the MM II to LM I periods, continuing spo- 31 La Rosa & Cucuzza 2001, fig. 132, no. XXVII, 19 and fig. radically into LM II.29 Parallels in the Mesara have 131, no. XXXI, 2. 32 30 Rutter 2006a, 1130, pl. 3.37, no. 26/4. been found at Phaistos and at Seli in the Sifakis 33 Van de Moortel 1997, fig. 32, no. C10534. 31 field and the Volakakis house, which are dated 34 Watrous 1992, 25, fig. 22. to LM IB and LM IA respectively. Similar kadoi 35 Betancourt 1985, 140, pl. 20 A,B,C.

LMLate IB Minoan pottery IB from at Kommos the rural Villa of Pitsidia 355 PIT.XIV.A26 PIT.XIV.A27

PIT.XIV.A1 PIT.XIV.A29

0 2 4 cm. PIT.XIV.A28 PIT.XIV.A7

Fig. 11. Storage vessels from Room XIV (drawings and photo of no. XIV.A29). Scale ca. 1:9.2.

36 rine Style alabastron from Phaistos, the ewer 36 37 38 La Rosa & D’Agata 1984, 180, fig. 267. from Poros and other Knossian vases), or as the 37 PITSIDIA, Room XIV, pithoiDimopoulou - kadoi 1999, 217–26. main ornament (as here). Because the ovoid form 38 Popham 1967, pl. 81c; Mountjoy 2003, 93, fig. 4.19, no. does not seem to have continued into the LM II 251.

356 Despina Chatzi-VallianouJeremy B. Rutter PIT. VI. A1

PIT XIV.P7 PIT. XIV. P6

18/19 cm.

PIT. XIV. P49

PIT. XIV. P97 PIT.XIV.A22

PIT.XIV. P25

~27,5 cm.

0 1 2cm. A36/90 PIT. .XIV.A5

Fig. 12. Rhyta from Rooms XIV (no. XIV.P6) and VI (no. VI.A1), semiglobular bowls and other decorated vases from Room XIV. period, at least not in the Mesara, the Pitsidia rhyton The same date can be argued for the semiglobular provides an excellent basis for dating the destruction cups, which are decorated with two or more bands layer of Room XIV and the Villa in general to the of horizontal wavy lines or a horizontal band of end of the LM IB period. reed on the shoulder zone, similar to those found

LateLM IB Minoan pottery IB from at Kommos the rural Villa of Pitsidia 357 Fig. 13. Amphorae decorated (a-b) with reeds from Room IX (no. IX.A6) and linked spirals and ogival canopy motif from Room XVII (no. XVII.A9).

0 1 2cm.

PIT. IX. A6 (A 40+A 43)

0 1 2cm.

in Room VII (Fig. 12, XIV.A22 c-d, XIV.P49, from Kommos,40 the four-handled amphorae and XIV.P25). The cup XIV.P7 (Fig. 12) was from Chalara, Hagia Photeini in Phaistos,41 Hagia restored with sherds from Layers 2 and 4 and is of Triada,42 Aphratia, and Kamilari43and the amphorae particular interest; it was heavily burnished, and and cylindrical jars [kadoi] from Nirou Chani, the shoulder zone was decorated with a free and Sklavokampos and Tylissos).44 complex composition of stylized foliate bands, At Pitsidia, in addition to the sherds with reed zigzag lines, wavy bands and semicircles between two thick bands. A cup-rhyton from the Sifakis 39 See La Rosa & Cucuzza 2001, 114, XCII–1, figs. 147 and 267. field at Seli, dated to the end of LM IB, provides a 40 Rutter 2006a; Rutter this volume fig. 5 and no. 265, 37c/8, good parallel.39 (LM IB Early) and 44b/4 (LM IB Late). The vertical reed pattern decorating the base 41 Levi 1967–8, figs. 70, 73; Palio 2001a, fig. 50. 42 and body of the closed vessels is a typical motif on Puglisi 2006, nos. 5.54, 76.51, 76.52, 76.53, 76.56, 76.65. 43 Chatzi-Vallianou 1989, 436. Mesara pottery. The reed usually covers most of 44 Xanthoudides 1922, fig. 15, pl. 1; Marinatos 1939–41, pl. I, the surface of large vases (e.g., the jugs and kalathoi 3–4; Hazzidakis 1912, 204, fig. 8; Hazzidakis 1921, 21, fig. 7.

358 Despina Chatzi-VallianouJeremy B. Rutter PIT. XIV. P59 PIT.XIV.A16 PIT.XIV.A21 PIT.XIV.A15 PIT.XIV.A24

PIT.XIV.A3 PIT.XIV.A19 PIT.XIV.A12 PIT.XIV.A18 PIT.XIV.A8

PIT.XIV.A9 PIT.XIV.A20 PIT.XIV.A10 PIT.XIV.P28 PIT.XIV.P53

PIT.XIV.A6 0 1 2cm. Fig. 14. Conical cups from Room XIV.

(Fig. 12, XIV.A36/90 and XIV.P5), we also have the Greek mainland and to be of LM II date.47 restored an oval-mouthed amphora found in 139 However, the Pitsidia excavation data points to an pieces in the floor deposit (Level 5b-c) of Room earlier date.48 IX. The vase carries a field of reeds in the main zone Both the floor deposit and the destruction layer (Fig. 13, no. IX.A6) and the shape and decoration of the upper levels produced a series of conical are very characteristic of Mesara pottery from the cups (Fig. 14). I also want to note the presence of LM IA–LM IB periods. It is worth noting that an a few sherds with tortoise shell ripple and running ovoid amphora decorated with ogival canopy was spirals from the floor deposit (Fig. 15, XIV.P27, found at Chalara in the same destruction layer as no. XIV.P19) and upper levels of the destruction ovoid amphorae with reed patterns.45 At Pitsidia, layer in Room XIV. These objects and the ewer too, a similar amphora with the ogival canopy (Figs. 15 and 20, XIV, A23) found in the lower motif (perhaps by the same painter) was found level of the destruction layer (probably fallen from in 79 fragments in the destruction (Layers 1–4) of Room XVII (Fig. 13 nos XVII.A9).46 It was decorated with stylized crocus flowers and curved 45 Levi 1967–8, figs. 70a and 71b. rows of dots between the handles and a wide 46 Unfortunately, the restoration and documentation of this vase has not been completed. band of linked running spirals with solid centers 47 Furumark 1941, 174, fig. 37. on the shoulder above a register of ogival canopy. 48 See Palio 2001a, 380–1; Warren 1999, 895; Niemeier 1994, This motif was originally thought to originate on 72.

LMLate IB Minoan pottery IB from at Kommos the rural Villa of Pitsidia 359 PIT. XIV. A33

PIT. XIV. P20

PIT.XIV.A23

PIT.XIV.P16

PIT. XIV. P 39

PIT.XIV. P45

PIT. XIV. P27

0 1 2cm. PIT.XIV.P19 PIT. XIV. P23 PIT. XIV. P20

Fig. 15. Ewer (no. XIV.A23) and other decorated vases from the destruction level of Room XIV.

360 Despina Chatzi-VallianouJeremy B. Rutter PIT. XIV. P21

PIT. XIV. P21b PIT.XIV.A14 PIT. XIV.P3 PIT.XIV. P13 PIT.XIV.A17

PIT.XXI-XXII.A11

PIT.XXII.P62

SA02P028 SA98P027

PIT.XXII.A7 0 2 4 cm. PIT.XXII.A13

Fig. 16. Cooking pots from Rooms XIV (above line) and XXII (below line). Scale ca. 1:9.2.

the upper story) should be dated to the early LM Central Hall XXII IB period. The upper levels of the destruction layer also The walls of the Central Hall stand to a height of produced five tripod cooking pots and a cooking 0.60–1 m above the paved floor on the south, west tray, currently under study by N. Lokou. The pots find good comparisons in Type B cooking pots PITSIDIA, Room XIV49 , XXII from Chalara,49 Hagia Triada,50 and Kommos,51 Levi 1967–8, fig. 84. 50 dated to the early LM IB period (Fig. 16 above, Puglisi 2006, nos. 5.21, 5.61, 5.62 and nos. 106.23 and106.29, which are from destruction layers. XIV.P13, XIV.P3, XIV.21, XIV.A14, XIV.P21b, 51 Betancourt 1980; Van de Moortel 1997, fig. 77, 1960 and and XIV.A17). Rutter 2006a, pl. 3.45, Group 40/31, 32, 34.

LateLM IB Minoan pottery IB from at Kommos the rural Villa of Pitsidia 361 Fig. 17. Vases from the Central Hall XXII. Drawings and photo of no. XXII.A9.

PIT.XXII.A1 PIT.XXII.A6

: 13 cm. : 12 cm.

PIT.XXII.A9

0 1 2 cm. PIT.XXII.A5 and north sides; the east side was damaged by the those found in Room XIV (Pl. 16, below). One original collapse and modern cultivation and is not of them (no. XXII.A13) is a sizeable cooking jar, preserved. The stratigraphy in the room consisted while another (no. XXII.A11) was restored from of earth and a mass of large stones PITSIDIA, from the Room sherds XXII found in the Central Hall and Room XXI, collapsed superstructure down to the paved floor a fact indicative of the violent destruction. From and the central hearth. In this destruction layer, the same destruction layer came a beak-spouted there were three Type B tripod cooking pots like jug (Fig. 17, no. XXII.A1). The floor deposit

362 Despina Chatzi-VallianouJeremy B. Rutter 0 2 4cm. PIT.IV.A3

0 2 4cm. PIT.X.A2

0 2 4cm. PIT.XVII.P2

0 2 4cm. 0 2 4cm. PIT.XXII.A1 PIT.XVII.A5 Fig. 18. Jugs from Rooms IV, X, XVII, XXII. Drawings (scale 1:6) and photos. contained a conical cup (Fig. 17, no. XXII.A6), a at Phaistos.54 Another from Hagia Photeini is firebox (Fig. 17, no. XXII.A5) and a straight-sided decorated with diagonal wavy bands and other jar (Fig. 17 no. XXII.A9), providing the date of the geometric patterns.55 The raised rope decoration destruction and abandonment of the room. under the rim and around the base of the Pitsidia The elegant straight-sided jar (or small cylin­ jar is reminiscent of a similar LM IA example from drical kados) is particularly interesting (Fig. 17, Knossos;56 however, the shape of the Pitsidia vase no. XXII.A9.) The shape is popular in LM I and the decoration in the main frieze, with running when it occurs in several Minoan villas in central spiral interposed with supplementary secondary and eastern Crete. Among the parallels are three elements (rocks or coral?) between dark bands exceptional examples of Neopalatial pottery: two vases from Sklavokampos52 decorated with reeds and a vase in the Marine Style from Nirou Chani, 52 Marinatos 1948, pl. I, 3–4. 53 Xanthoudides 1922, 20, fig. 17; Marinatos 1925–6. which Xanthoudides called “the most splendid 54 53 Levi 1967–8, fig. 76; Palio 2001a, 399, fig. 48. of the pottery vases from the Megaron.” In the 55 Palio 2001b, fig. 5. Mesara, the closest comparison for the shape and 56 Betancourt 1985, pl. 16C; Mountjoy 2003, 63, figs. 4–5, decoration is the cylindrical jar from Chalara no. 61; Mountjoy 1974a.

LMLate IB Minoan pottery IB from at Kommos the rural Villa of Pitsidia 363 0 2 4 cm. PIT. XXII-XXIII.A3

PIT. XXII. A4 Fig. 19. Pithos and ewer from the Central Hall XXII. Scale ca. 1:9.2. with added white wavy lines, suggests an LM IB body; bands probably covered all the lower body, date. Additional support for this date is drawn from although only three are preserved. the straight-sided jar from Knossos painted in the The beak-spouted jug was clearly popular at Pit- Special Palatial Tradition and the jars from Pseira57 sidia. Room IV contained the body of a second jug and Mochlos58 painted in the Standard Tradition. with running spiral (Fig. 18, no. IV.A3). The up- Finally, the other material on the floor of the per part of a jug with a racket motif was found in Central Hall is LM IB. Room XVII (Fig. 18, no. XVII. P2) together with The beak-spouted jug (or oinochoe) is another a second plain jug decorated with small clay pellets popular shape in central and eastern Crete in LM on the spout resembling eyes (Fig. 18, no. XVII.A5). IB. Five examples were found in the Megaron But the most beautiful beak-spouted jug (one of of Nirou Chani and Tylissos;59 several more hail the finest vases in the Villa) was found in Room X, from Knossos;60 and we have good representative near the north staircase, where it had probably fallen LM IB examples from East Crete (e.g., the from the women’s upper story. The vase is made of houses at Mochlos and Pseira).61 In the Messara, light yellow clay with a buff, burnished surface (Fig. the excavations at Kommos have recovered a 18, no. X.A2). It carries three zones of decoration, few examples;62 however, Phaistos and Hagia Triada have produced some of the masterpieces of this shape decorated in the Floral Style63 and 57 Betancourt 1985, 137–48, pl. 20D, fig. 104A. 58 64 Barnard & Brogan 2003, IB.338, IB.339, IB.341. Alternating Style. Also there is oinochoe F. 3787 59 65 Xanthoudides 1922, fig. 14. from Chalara. The form and decoration of the 60 See Mountjoy 2003, 87–90, fig. 4.16, 4.17; Hazzidakis jug (Fig. 17, Pit.XXII.A1) from the Central Hall of 1921, fig. 11,30. Pitsidia belongs to the LM IB Standard Tradition. 61 See Barnard & Brogan 2003, no. IB.310; Betancourt 1985, The neck is decorated with net pattern while the fig. 104,I. 62 Rutter 2006a, Group 44b/4; perhaps no. 36/1. upper shoulder carries three bands framing two 63 Betancourt 1985, 140, pl. 21A, E. rows of slashes. The main ornament is a frieze 64 La Rosa & D’Agata 1985, 180, fig. 268. of well executed running spirals on the upper 65 Levi 1967–8, fig. 75.

364 Despina Chatzi-VallianouJeremy B. Rutter Fig. 20. Ewers from Rooms I, IX and XIV, drawings (Scale 1:6) and photos.

0 2 4cm. PIT.I.A4

0 2 4cm. PIT.XIV.A23

0 2 4cm. PIT.IX.A11

LMLate IB Minoan pottery IB from at Kommos the rural Villa of Pitsidia 365 PIT.XIX.A33 PIT.XIX.A6 PIT.XIX.A44 PIT.XIX.A42

PIT.XIX.A8 PIT.XIX.A1 PIT.XIX.A89 PIT.XIX.A26

PIT.XIX. A53 PIT.XIX.A60 PIT.XIX.A18 PIT. XIX. A75

PIT. XIX. A22 PIT.XIX.A72

PIT.XIX.A86 PIT. XIX. A70

PIT.XIX.A99 PIT. XIX. A35 PIT.XIX.A87 0 1 2cm. PIT. XIX. A74 Fig. 21a. Conical cups from Room XIX – the pottery workshop. ranging from light red to dark brown in color, sepa- From the collapse over the Central Hall XXII rated by three rows of dark bands. Oblique reeds fill comes another fragmentary four-handled ovoid the zone on the neck, while the large frieze on the pithos (Fig. 19, no. XXII.A4) decorated with upper body contains a row of four figure-of-eight simple trickle patterns and dated to LM IB.68 The shields alternating with bunches of leaves filled with racket pattern. There is a band of running spirals on the lower body. The shape and the Alternating 66 See Rutter this volume, fig. 9 and for the figure-of-eight Style66 date the vase to the LM IB Late period, while shield decoration no. X2:5/1 and other LM IB Late Special the quality of the clay and the surface treatment (like Palatial Tradition imports to Kommos. 67 Xanthoudides 1922, 17. the vases from Nirou Chani) probably indicate that 68 See Christakis 2005, 10, fig. 9, forms 37–40 and Van de it was produced in North-central Crete.67 Moortel 1997, fig. 69, n. 9704.

366 Despina Chatzi-VallianouJeremy B. Rutter Fig. 21b. Conical cups from Room XIX – the pottery workshop.

same layer contained fragments of a ewer restored Palatial Tradition (e.g., from Poros, Palaikastro, with sherds from the floor deposit of Corridor and Marseilles), and are probably produced by a XXIII that connected Room XXII to the women’s conservative local workshop in the LM IB Early apartment (Fig. 19, no. XXII–XXIII.A3). The period, drawing on the tradition of earlier forms upper body of the ewer is decorated with large and decoration.72 brown-black spirals on a light beige ground, while It is certainly remarkable that so many examples horizontal bands cover the neck, handle and rim. of this exquisite vessel, one of the most graceful This ewer is similar to another, no. XIV. A23, of the special Minoan shapes,73 were found in the which was recovered in Room XIV (Fig. 15, no. Villa of Pitsidia. This, combined with the fact that XIV.A23). so many of the sherds were found scattered in the Two more ewers were found in Room I (Fig. collapsed upper levels of the destruction layer, 20, no. I.A4) and Room IX (Fig. 20, no. IX.A11). probably fallen from the upper floor, means we This pair carry light-on-dark decoration. The must investigate their use in relation to the function second (no. IX. A11) has a frieze of large spirals of the Villa. between horizontal bands on the upper body and a single band at the base. There are additional drips of red and white on the dark ground of the Room XIX rim interior, while the join of neck and body is decorated with a raised ridge of clay imitating The walls of this small room are preserved to a the seams on metal jugs. The light-on-dark height of 1.30 m above the paved floor.74 In the decoration on these vessels may indicate an LM IA date. Their fine shape and decoration certainly look more advanced than the MM III ewers of 69 Betancourt 1985, pl. 13, J and 14. 70 Knossos from the Temple Repositories69 or the Van de Moortel 1997, fig. 49, 1032; Rutter 2006a, pl. 2.28, 70 6/13. Note also the new ewer from Zominthos, which is ewers from Kommos dated to LM IA. The presented by Traunmueller in this volume. closest parallel in the Mesara comes from Hagia 71 La Rosa & D’ Agata 1985, 178, fig. 262. See also Puglisi Triada in a context dated LM I A–B71 and is almost 2006, fig. 7, no. HTR074. identical to ewer no. IX.A11. These vases with 72 The conservatism of the Zominthos ewer may have to do with the fact that the products of the workshop there were light-on-dark decoration have little in common destined for worship at the Idaean Cave every nine years. with the elegant ewers from Knossian and East 73 Betancourt 1985, 140. Cretan workshops decorated with the Special 74 See Chatzi-Vallianou 1995; 1997a.

LMLate IB Minoan pottery IB from at Kommos the rural Villa of Pitsidia 367 PIT.XIX.A30 PIT.XIX.A25 PIT.XIX.A37

PIT.XIX.A21

PIT.XIX.A29 PIT.XIX.A58 PIT. XIX.A47

0 1 2cm. SA91P001 PIT.XIX.P1 Fig. 22. Above: Conical cups. Below: the potter’s wheel from the pottery workshop (Room XIX ).

northeast corner, excavation revealed a small opening on the eastern side just above the floor. stone chimney-shaped structure which encloses The purpose of this structure (possibly a hiding- a space of 0.27 x 0.40 m and has a rectangular place?) still eludes us, but a similar unexplained

368 Despina Chatzi-VallianouJeremy B. Rutter 0 2 4cm.

PIT.XIX.A88

1 PIT. XIX.A13 0 2cm. PIT.XIX.A82

Fig. 23. Decorated pots from Room XIX. Drawings and photo.

feature was found by Italian excavators in Room 107 at Phaistos.75 Inside we found a deposit of 99 complete and fragmentary conical cups. With two exceptions, all were of small size and with profiles that exhibit considerable variation (Fig. 21a-b). Many of the cups were shaped and cut off the wheel carelessly, leaving rough or distinctive marks on the bases. The cups rarely show signs of use with the exception of a few with traces of fire on the rim (Fig. 22 ). With the undecorated cups in the upper layer of the fill, there were also three decorated LM IB PITSIDIA, Room XIX

1 75 0 2cm. PIT.XIX.A2 See Levi 1976, 604–9.

LMLate IB Minoan pottery IB from at Kommos the rural Villa of Pitsidia 369 PIT.X. P10

PIT. XVIII. A10

PIT. XXI.A5 PIT.XXI.A6 PIT. XVII-IX.A2

PIT.XIX.A88

0 2 4 cm. PIT.IX.A7 Fig. 24. Decorated amphorae and jugs from Rooms IX, X, XVII, XVIII, XIX, XXI. Scale ca. 1:9.2. bowls (Fig. 23, nos. Pit.XIX.A2, Pit.XIX.A13, bowl (XIX.A13) carries three horizontal wavy lines and Pit.XIX.A82). One bowl (XIX.A2) carries a above a pair of dark bands on the lower body and a row of pendent stem spirals filled with dot bands single band at the rim over which a thin wavy line between the rim band and a pair of bands on the of white is added. The third bowl (XIX.A82) has a lower body. The everted rim carries groups of dark frieze of spirals between dark bands and a wavy line slashes while the interior is decoratedPITSIDIA, with decorated careless amphores-prochoi of white added to the rim band. These bowls find crosses and drips above two dark bands. The second good parallels in the semiglobular cups from Room

370 Despina Chatzi-VallianouJeremy B. Rutter Fig. 25a-b. a) Drawing of Room XIX as it was found during excavation; b) reconstruction of the potter’s workshop with a foot-wheel.

VII and other rooms of the Villa. The deposit clay potter’s wheel found at the north end of the effectively sealed the hiding-place and provided a room on the floor with the other conical cups (Fig. terminus ante quem of LM IB for the group of cups 22 below 32, no. XIX.P1). This discovery led us to inside. suspect that the area served as a pottery workshop. The floor deposit in the room contained six The detailed drawing and study of the stone objects conical cups and a decorated pithoid jar or amphora found on the floor of the room, in conjunction with four horizontal and vertical handles on the with modern ethnographic research, allowed us shoulder (Fig. 23, no. XIX.A88). The decoration to make a reconstruction (Fig. 25a-b) of a potter’s covers the whole vessel, with a main frieze of workshop with a foot-wheel that was used to make retorted running spirals around the widest part of LM IB fine ware (Fig. 26). This reconstruction the body, three horizontal bands on the lower body was presented at the 7th International Cretological and a wavy band between horizontal bands on the Conference and the 1st International Conference shoulder between the handles. A similar jar was on Ancient Greek Technology in Thessaloniki,78 found at Flega, Prinias, where it is dated to LM while the restoration of the potter’s wheel was IA.76 visible in the room until recently. At Pitsidia there are a series of amphorae, jars, and jugs with similar decoration. They come from the destruction layer or floor deposits of Rooms IX, X, XVII, XVIII, XIX, and XXI and provide clear evidence that vessels with this decoration must 76 be dated to the destruction horizon of the Villa in Rizza & Rizzo 1984, 235, fig. 439. 77 For similar vases from Hagia Triada, see Puglisi 2006, nos. 77 LM IB (Fig. 24). B1- HTR 024, B.6- HTR 0321. The most important find in Room XIX was a 78 Chatzi-Vallianou 1995; 1997a.

LateLM IB Minoan pottery IB from at Kommos the rural Villa of Pitsidia 371 Villa, express the particular characteristics of the Neopalatial period, an exceptionally important cultural horizon for Crete. Moreover, I agree with colleagues who hold that, even if certain vases like the bowls with festoon decoration are found in LM IB and LM II layers, this does not mean that there was a change in the cultural environment in LM IB or that a new cultural horizon began at this moment. There are pottery shapes, like cups and horizontal-handled bowls, and decoration, like single rows or a series of festoons, versions of quirk, pendent leaves or scale pattern, and solid circles which serve as the principle ornament, that begin in LM IB and develop and continue in LM II in different compositions, often as free or stylized motifs. Even if some Mycenaeans had already reached the coastal settlements of northern Crete in LM IB, this does not mean there was a major cultural change across the island. I would prefer a definition for the latest LM I pottery (in limited levels) at certain places, like Kommos or Khania, as LM IC but not as LM II, which refers to a new period with new characteristics and a new cultural horizon. Fig. 26. Restoration of the potter’s wheel. The Villa of Pitsidia was destroyed and abandoned at the end of LM IB Final and never reoccupied. I have suggested,80on the basis of the excavation data, Conclusions that the destruction was caused by an earthquake like that of the earlier final LM IA, which also affected Our preliminary study of the pottery from the Villa other settlements in the Mesara and Crete as whole. at Pitsidia suggests that the material is relatively The Palace of Phaistos, the buildings at Chalara and conservative in character. Much of the material Hagia Photeini, some buildings at Hagia Triada, appears to continue earlier Neopalatial styles, the house in the Sifakis field at Seli , the specifically LM IA, with very few innovative Villa at Kannia near Gortys – the coastal settlement features. With a few noticeable exceptions, the at Aphratia – Tympaki, the Megaron at Nirou majority of the vessels come from local workshops, Chani, Knossos, Galatas, Zakros and even the perhaps the pottery workshop of the Villa itself, Artisan’s Quarter at Mochlos, all appear to have where small pots were thrown on the foot-wheel. been destroyed at the same time – at the end of The latest pottery is dated to LM IB Final (Fig. the LM IB period.81 I believe the most probable 23). Nothing more recent has been found. It is worth cause of the destruction and abandonment to be a noting that we have found none of the innovative features of the LM II period, like the short-stemmed 79 Popham 1984, 165. kylix or goblet (the “LM II innovation borrowed 80 Vallianou 1996. from the Mycenaeans”)79 or the blob cup. Nor does 81 See La Rosa & D’Agata 1985; Levi 1959; Marinatos 1925–6 and papers of Hood; Warren; Rethemiotakis & Christakis; the material show any intermediate or transitional Puglisi; Mandalaki; Betancourt; Barnard & Brogan; links between LM IB and LM II. The forms and Tsipopoulou & Alberti; Hemingway, MacGillivray & Sackett; decoration of the vases, like the architecture of the Platon, in this volume and elsewhere.

372 Despina Chatzi-VallianouJeremy B. Rutter natural phenomenon, such as an earthquake. It is abandonment of the Minoan palaces and villas that difficult to accept that the destruction of the Villa had prospered during LM I. What followed was a at Pitsidia was the result of a Mycenaean attempt to new cultural horizon, a new historical period, and conquer Crete. Niemeier’s view attributing these a new style of pottery. But this fascinating problem destructions at the end of LM IB to “internecine must form the subject of another meeting. conflicts between Knossos and the other palaces” would be more acceptable.82 It is very likely that there was widespread social upheaval at the end of the Neopalatial period, following destructive earthquakes or other forces, which led to the 82 Niemeier 1994, 88.

LMLate IB Minoan pottery IB from at Kommos the rural Villa of Pitsidia 373 Discussion

Warren This extremely useful presentation of the Villa at Plakes shows one interesting point in relation to Hagia Triada – that poorly painted pieces can be found alongside very finely painted pieces in the same destruction of the Villa. They don’t have to be chronologically separate. And regarding the main paper of Jerry Rutter, I suppose the first thing is that he, of course, would have to call this destruction early LM II (or LM IB Final), since it contained the cups with the pendent loops from the rim, which he now wishes to assign to the early LM II phase (or LM IB Final), thus bringing Knossos, Tylissos and Nirou Chani into the destruction of this period. But, I would like very briefly to go back to Jerry’s own paper. It is always a great pleasure to be given the full Rutter treatment when you come to an international conference. But I noted that Jerry was very careful to say that there was no example in Kommos of what he is defining as a later LM IB phase, stratified above an early LM IB phase. In other words, the entire construct is stylistical, not necessarily wrong, of course, but as a stylistical construct it becomes open to discussion on another level. We are not talking about stratified floors with whole pots on them. And, Jerry might wish to clarify for us whether he also had what he chooses to define as early LM II (or LM IB Final) directly stratified above what he calls early LM IB. He said that he had only two or three fills to define the proposed early LM II (or LM IB Final) phase. So, there again, if there is no stratification and the construct is a stylistic one, then that becomes open to discussion at a stylistic level, where, of course, there might be a very wide range of views.

Rutter Yes. I think we should go back and take a look. I think the illustration of the material from the Plakes Villa is a perfect example of the final destruction of the Villa at Hagia Triada. I didn’t see anything there that I would like to call LM II Early (or LM IB Final) at all.

Warren Room 14.

Rutter Let’s go back and look at it.

Warren There in the middle.

Rutter Those are two horizontal wavy bands. They aren’t loops. Those are perfectly okay. So, in fact for me, the destruction level here at Plakes illustrates perfectly what we would call LM IB Late. Okay? So what I would like to draw your attention to then is the features that are later. And in fact I can’t remember which table it is now, but there is a table that shows where we have these LM II Early (or LM IB Final) deposits as one floor level directly on top of two LM IB Late floors. So, we do have the LM II Early (or LM IB Final) floor directly on top of LM IB Late. What we don’t have

374 Discussion Rutter-Vallianou is LM IB Late directly on top of LM IB Early. Nobody here seems to want to talk about LM IB Early, however.

Kanta I would like to ask Despina Vallianou whether there are any sherds at Pitsidia of the Marine Style.

Vallianou: No, we do not have any vases or sherds of pure Marine Style.

Kanta Not to say that it is not IB, I am just asking.

Vallianou We do have a few vases or sherds with some elements of the Marine Style decoration, but not classical Marine Style.

Macdonald Jerry Rutter just said that nobody wanted to talk about LM IB Early, but surely this is all quite simple. This is a methodological and stratigraphical matter, but, at certain sites there are divisions, stratigraphically different phases of IB as we will see particularly at Mochlos when we come to it. Whereas in North-central Crete, none of us have been able to find a different phase or to subdivide LM IB. Therefore, those of us who have mostly worked in North-central Crete will not talk about early LM IB because we haven’t got the evidence to support it. But elsewhere in Crete, particularly in the east, Mochlos, for example, has several different levels of LM IB. So that’s perfectly alright on a site by site basis. And then it’s up to us as this conference progresses to decide the usefulness of these divisions. Whether they are merely stratigraphic at each site, or whether they can really be defined in any useful way to help us in different parts of Crete.

Sackett I think that Palaikastro comes up a bit later; we do find two stratified LM IB levels there, but this isn’t the time to get into a stylistic discussion.

Rutter If I may respond to the point that Colin [Macdonald] just made. I don’t want to be mean here, and I am not trying to pick a fight, or something like that, but the situation that I see right now is that … I don’t want to get bogged down in terminological issues either but the horizon that I was describing as LM II Early (or LM IB Final), which I am perfectly happy to call something else, I don’t insist upon it being called LM II Early (or LM IB Final). What I do sort of insist upon is that this is a later phase than what Dario [Puglisi] was discussing as the final destruction in the Villa, and it’s a later phase than what Despina [Chatzi-Vallianou] just showed us. And both the final destruction of the Villa and Despina’s material would qualify in my scheme of things as late LM IB, perhaps not final LM IB, but something very late in LM IB. Here’s the situation: you just said you don’t have any of this final phase of LM IB, so I am taking the big plunge and calling it LM II Early (or LM IB Final), okay? And you’re telling me that you don’t have stratified or different phases of LM IB at Knossos or anywhere in North-central Crete right now. I mean, as far as I can see, you don’t have any LM IB! What you are calling LM IB Late I would call LM II Early (or LM IB Final), and the earliest phase that you have before that is what you would call LM IA Late, so, excuse me, what happened to LM IB?

Discussion Rutter-Vallianou 375 Warren This is indeed the central question. In a way, what labels we apply are much less important than discovering whether we are talking about synchronous events, or getting as close as we can in different parts of the island. Now, the direct implication of what Jerry is saying is that the destruction which we call final LM IB in North- central Crete (Nirou Chani, Sklavokampos, Tylissos and, indeed, Knossos) and there is enough evidence to say that it must represent a single event in North-central Crete – is it later than the destruction of the Villa at Hagia Triada? My own feeling, certainly up to this stage, is that we are talking about one event at the same time. Obviously, you think that there are chronologically separate events here. I fully agree that this is the central issue, and one which, surely when Wolf [Niemeier] chairs the final discussion, we really will have to discuss in some detail, after of course we’ve had the evidence from Mochlos and Zakros and other sites in eastern Crete.

Vlazaki I am also waiting for the final discussion, but I must remind you that at Khania we too have more than one layer of LM IB. And I have also spoken about the different names for this phase between LM IB and LM II, as Coldstream said IC, for example, which is not to say that I made it up. But just to say that the spread of the final destruction in the Khania settled area has much to do with the beginning of LM II, but the crucial point is that this deposit goes well with the Linear A archives, and so we couldn’t say LM II, for example.

Brogan We have a couple of questions about paneled cups. We find them. I don’t know that we illustrate them in our paper, but we found one of your paneled cups in the olive oil workshop which we think dates to the end of LM IA. You have mentioned them mostly in LM IB Early. I think we had four or five of those cups at Mochlos and they all looked foreign. So, we do have them. The other thing that strikes me when we look at Kommos versus Mochlos is this idea of regional production. There are such differences, and certain shapes and decoration stand out when you compare the two. On the one hand, it’s apples and oranges. We get so confused by your wavy-line bowls, which are early LM IB at Kommos, whereas we get that decoration at the very end of LM IB. That’s what we would call LM IB Final or LM IB/II. Those are not characteristic of our early LM IB levels and yet they’re even found in LM IA Final at Kommos. And then the bridge-spouted jars. Our bridge-spouted jars are from early LM IB, and that is a central point of our paper, to try and define early LM IB at Mochlos. We also get straight-sided jars (bucket jars) that represent a break from LM IA to LM IB, while in Central Crete you get them in both periods. Our bridge- spouted jars go from piriform to bucket-shaped, whereas they stay piriform, from what I can see, in North-central and South-central Crete, particularly South-central Crete, through the end of LM IB. So there are these real differences that sometimes make it difficult to create these links. And so, the piriform bridge-spouted jar really is a factor.

Hood Just completing Peter’s [Warren] question: did you have the late LM IA stratified over early LM IA?

Rutter Do we have final LM IA stratified? Well, we have three phases of LM IA,so,I wouldn’t even talk about LM IA. Stratified? In some cases, sure, but I don’t think

376 Discussion Rutter-Vallianou we have a full sequence of early, advanced and final LM IA. No. We have situations where there is Final over Advanced and situations where there is Advanced over Early. It’s all in the publications.

Cunningham I am sorry, but this is also about LM IA. You asked about when to end LM IA or start LM IB, and I know that it might not be much use for you and it doesn’t matter for us because we use site periods, but would you consider the eruption? I mean … ash plays an important role in our local site period designations; we have ash everywhere, it’s unmistakable whether you are before or after the eruption and that just draws a line for us. It does conveniently match up. Our earliest deposits after the eruption already have what we would consider our local Period XI; Period XII has LM IB ogival cups and a couple of other features, so there’s not really any difficulty to it. Or do you want just a stylistic division?

Rutter Well, we don’t have the ash, so there is nothing we can do there, and that’s one of the big questions: is there an LM IA sub-phase after the eruption? I don’t know if anyone can answer that question, yet. There is no good evidence for one, I don’t think, as yet, but depending on where you put the LM IA/LM IB dividing line, that’s going to determine whether there is or isn’t one, it seems to me. As long as that dividing line can sort of float, you are going to have this problem of whether or not there is an LM IA phase after the eruption.

Discussion Rutter-Vallianou 377 General discussion

E. Hallager But the natural question would be: would they start LM IB just because of the Theran eruption?

Van de Moortel If we do that, we would create a discrepancy with the LC I chronology because Cherry and Davis recognized a post-Theran eruption LC I phase. And Yannis Lolos has also recognized post-Theran eruption LH I.

Rethemiotakis Just a small point. When in stylistic terms the LM IA period finishes, this could be a good starting point for the next period. I have heard in several papers here, an argumentum ex silentio about the elimination of ripple. Most scholars here agree by consensus that this motif does not occur in LM IB whatsoever.

Niemeier I think we had some examples; Lefteris Platon showed one.

Platon On this matter, I think that the people who identify LM IA Final consider that ripple is almost absent then. This is the problem, that the same is also said for the LM IB pottery. There is a little ripple in LM IB and in LM IA Final. What is the difference?

Macdonald Jerry Rutter just said that nobody wanted to talk about LM IB Early, but surely this is all quite simple. This is a methodological and stratigraphical matter, but, at certain sites there are divisions, stratigraphically different phases of IB, as we will see particularly at Mochlos when we come to it. Whereas in North-central Crete, none of us has been able to find a different phase or to subdivide LM IB. Therefore, those of us who have worked mostly in North-central Crete will not talk about early LM IB because we haven’t got the evidence to support it. But elsewhere in Crete, particularly in the east, Mochlos, for example, has several different levels of LM IB. So that’s perfectly alright on a site by site basis. And then it’s up to us as this conference progresses to decide the usefulness of these divisions. Whether they are merely stratigraphic at each site, or whether they can really be defined in any useful way to help us in different parts of Crete.

Hood The Minoan periods in general are defined by the horizons of destruction throughout the island, and what could be better than the eruption of a great volcano? Also, it is nice to have an outside, independent as it were, umpire. The eruption of Thera does seem to me a very good point at which to draw the line, and anything above a deposit of tephra must by definition be early LM IB. Also, of course, Evans always said that the pottery designs were based on what the fresco painters had done. There is, Christos [Doumas] assures me, no Marine Style pottery from Thera. But, in harmony with the views of Evans, there is the plaster offering table with incipient Marine Style

General discussion 629 decoration, doubtless the work of someone more regularly employed in painting wall frescoes.

Betancourt I think it’s very difficult to try to define any phase on the absence of something because of the problem of heirlooms and antiques; very often the deposits have only a few vases, and if one of them happens to be an antique with a motif from the previous phase, then that is a problem. It would be much better to define something, if it must be done on the basis of motifs and shapes, on the appearance rather than the disappearance.

Doumas It seems that as pottery is continually being produced, it is logical to think that the style which we consider LM IB started within the floruit of the LM IA style. It must have started somewhere in a geographical place. And perhaps those sites which happen to be covered with volcanic ash had not yet introduced, or accepted, or adopted this new style, while others adopted it earlier and continued on a parallel path. I don’t see that we have to have a clear-cut ending.

Rutter The advantage in using the Theran eruption would be, as we heard from Irene [Nikolakopoulou] earlier, that the number of imported Minoan vessels coming from, presumably, many different centers on Crete (though the majority may come from Knossos) would be somewhere in the neighborhood of 800 whole pots; this is a larger group of chronologically homogeneous material than I know of from any single Minoan site anywhere. And it would be great just to accept this, but you have to publish all of the LM IA pots from the eruption horizon and just draw a line and say “we arbitrarily call this the end of LM IA.” And you would then have the advantage of including not only Knossos but also other production regions. We know that there is regionalism in Crete already in LM IA, but that would be built into this mechanism because you would have these pots represented at Akrotiri. Otherwise, it’s hard for me to imagine, and I represent a site where we have no destructions; so, if you have to find a great destruction in order to define a phase, well you can just leave Kommos out of the argument altogether. I don’t think that’s the way to proceed. And I agree with Phil [Betancourt] about the survival problems of ripple.

Brogan Mochlos provides the flip side of this observation. Several of our Neopalatial buildings are completely rebuilt in what we believe is a post-eruption horizon; we think it happens very soon after the eruption. Kellee [Barnard] and I may have made a mistake in our paper yesterday, and that was showing you the lowest level of Room 1 in House C.7; that’s the one Colin [Macdonald] picked up on right away. We were trying to show this level as a mix, a room we think was in use already before the eruption and continued in use after the eruption; it thus had this mix, perhaps one would call it half and half. That deposit confused us and we showed it to you. If we had taken that deposit out, and just showed you what we were much more confident were post-eruption levels, there would have been less confusion. And so for Mochlos to work, not from the negative (i.e. the things that are missing) but from the positive (i.e. the things that we see happening in the post-eruption horizon), we get, like Aleydis [Van de Moortel] showed today, conical cups suddenly being produced in a buff fabric with a very consistent shape. At the same time we get the ogival cup,

630 General discussion which I think many sites in East Crete have, in a post-eruption horizon. We may get a few strange things in the fill, but it’s very clear that they are different; the ogival cups that come in with the eruption have an almost straight side, and there are very few of them. And then, I would say that we also have the advantage of considering the difference between sites that are producing pottery like Mochlos and sites that are consuming pottery like Pseira. After the eruption, the Mochlos Artisans’ Quarter begins, but Mochlos was probably producing its own pottery earlier in the MM III – LM IA horizon as well. Thus we have the advantage of seeing the impact of a major new production center introduced right after the eruption. And we see its impact on many shapes. It wasn’t something that we emphasized heavily in the paper. But, there again you have the potential emphasis of a local production center starting new things, you see new ideas, new shapes, and we would argue, some new decoration. So, there is something to be said on the positive side.

Van de Moortel Just a small addition to this, the advantage of doing it this way is that the new elements that come in after the Theran destruction continue into the phase in which we have Marine Style and Special Palatial Tradition, so that is an argument to say that we see LM IB at that point. At least in East Crete.

Warren I think that Jerry [Rutter] has begun to get us into some of the fundamentals of the discussion. I am beginning to feel that in some ways we have to hold certain things in what we might call “creative tension.” We will always have a situation where we have bodies of material that are stylistically consistent, which we’ll say: it’s reasonable to call that LM IA. And we will have other bodies of material, which, for the reasons that are already clear, with the Special Palatial Tradition and so on, we will call LM IB. And therefore we accept that after all we are talking about a passage of time, though perhaps not yet the absolute number of years, in which there are ceramic styles coming and going and developing; it may simply be meaningless to say some sharp line can be drawn between these. But, nonetheless, we can hold that in a kind of tension with the fact that we can isolate deposits here and there, as Jerry [Rutter] began to touch on; I would agree with Sinclair’s [Hood] point that you could perhaps take major horizons of destruction, but that’s a natural phenomenon and it’s quite by chance whether it might or might not affect ceramic styles. You could have a major horizon and you could say “right, we will call it that”. At first sight, the Theran eruption is a tremendous major horizon. But, as we all know, it is not easily traceable all over the island of Crete. It may be clear in some places but it’s absolutely invisible in others. So that outside of Thera, it is difficult to use that as a criterion. On the other hand, we do have two really substantial destruction horizons. There isn’t full agreement on what label to stick on the first one I call it MM IIIB/LM IA transition, others call it MM IIIB, and still others call it early LM IA, but it does represent a horizon that you can put your finger on at many sites across the island. And the second one, of course, is the LM IB destruction horizon. Certainly, I think it’s been well demonstrated in this meeting that there is some phasing within LM IB (internal phasing within sites), both of which can be called LM IB. But it’s equally impressive that the evidence suggests that there is not a great time gap between these phases within LM IB. Mochlos may perhaps point a little bit the other way, but at several sites no big gap seems to be involved, so that when you move to the wider level, the gap is small and we’re not

General discussion 631 really talking about a whole different phase within LM IB that can be very clearly demonstrated. So, we have this sort of “creative tension”, where we have different ceramic groups. The problem of regionalism and conservatism is a very real one; when we study Cretan pottery over a long period, we seem to have this sort of time-lag in many phases. I’m not trying to score points here for Knossos, perhaps I have to make that clear, but there is a sort of time-lag where you have developments; we think of the MM IB/II position, where eastern Crete is perhaps lagging a bit, as new styles have begun to be advanced in the center of Crete, whereas the older styles are carrying on a little longer in the East, but in real terms they are actually contemporary. But I don’t think we should agonize too much about this. We have deposits which we can safely call LM IA, and we have huge numbers of deposits we can safely call LM IB, but perhaps we should try not to agonize over whether or not we can draw a very sharp line between them. I don’t think Thera will work because it’s a natural phenomenon that doesn’t actually apply all over Crete; if it did, that would be a different matter.

Niemeier Just as Doumas said, the problem is that we have a continuous development, and the lines we cut are conventions to define a phase, therefore, I asked this question at the beginning. Of course I agree with Colin [Macdonald] that we would need deposits to define what is LM IA. But the problem is that everyone at the conference has his own picture of the transition from LM IA to LM IB because there is not a clear distinction between what we may call mature LM IA and early LM IB; this is a floating development and therefore we have a problem, we can’t agree where to put an exact border line. But what do we then teach the students, who want to have definitions; we have these tables where we put absolute chronology, which we fortunately left out of this conference up to now, so we are aware of those problems, I think. And there is the problem of the existence of a horizon which is contemporary all over the island; others have a different view of that. So, the Knossos excavators have shown us that, without a doubt, LM IB is a single phase. The only exception is the Minoan Unexplored Mansion South Corridor deposit, but Eleni [Hatzaki] said that one deposit doesn’t make a phase, or sub-phase, and that’s the only deposit that could be considered a chronologically different phase, at the end of LM IB or between LM IB and LM II. But we have seen Khania, and I think Maria [Vlazaki] said that we will have another look at the Khania material because, unfortunately, we started with her before we had seen all of the other material from eastern Crete. I believe that you [speaking to Maria Vlazaki] argued that you have a phase later than all of the LM IB destructions.

Vlazaki Later than the material I saw from the Royal Road published in the Kritika Chronika, I said.

Niemeier But you argued that you have classical Marine Style, but not in the last destruction.

Vlazaki Yes, that’s what I said; I have it in the earlier destruction.

Niemeier So, if I understand your argument correctly, then you think that the destruction of Khania may be a little later than some of the other LM IB destructions with classical Marine Style.

632 General discussion Vlazaki As I now understand it, it looks as though we are together with the rest of Crete; only Knossos has one destruction.

Rutter Let’s be fair before we say all of North-central Crete. I would say Nirou Chani, Tylissos, Knossos. Those three. And the other sites we would have to leave out.

Vlazaki We have LM IA groups of pottery from below the final destruction, below the last floor, and all of them have Marine Style. And you see also what Aleydis [Van de Moortel] said about the fine decorated material; it looks like hers. This material belongs to the earlier floor and below, but not above. It has nothing to do with the last floor. We have not found full Marine Style in situ in the final deposits. It doesn’t mean that we might not find it in the future. We also have these vases, which are the same as one from the Royal Road excavations which could be from Khania, in deposits earlier than the final destruction. The fabric that Sinclair Hood describes looks like Khaniote. The earlier pottery is better made, at the end it is more hastily done. Of course, it only covers a short time and goes with the destruction of the Royal Road, and I put all these together, as I had some photos from the Kritika Chronika, in a short phase before the final one. We have Alternating Style vases, but this pottery comes from the second stage, an advanced phase. They are not locally made, they come from Knossos, I think, but we haven’t yet done analysis. And we also have something different in the architecture. Repairs were being made in several rooms of House 1 when the final destruction came. The “Sevah Building” was under repair; they closed the doors and covered the clays pipes; they put a hearth on top of a door, that’s why I think that this represents later activity.

Brogan Our Marine Style, like hers, is broken up; it’s not in use at the time of the destruction.

Warren Right! So! Let’s put the problem the other way around. Let’s say we’ll take Khania as the base from which, just for the purposes of the discussion, we can discuss this matter. Obviously, Maria, we fully accept that you have two stratigraphical phases, your early one and later one, both of which are LM IB. The point I am making is a purely stratigraphical one, you have two phases. What you are suggesting at the moment is that the lower, the earlier, the first of your two phases corresponds closely with the Royal Road, and that would mean also with my Stratigraphical Museum material, and that, therefore, your later material, as it were, would be later than the horizon we are talking about at Knossos. Well, the problem there is that there are perfectly good vessels, indeed the very last one, the lily cup that you showed, which are present in the Knossos destruction, that is, material from your later phase, classic pieces; Lefteris [Platon] has one in Zakros, which we saw, and we have exact parallels of classic pieces of your later phase in the Knossos material that we are talking about. So, the solution to this problem is actually very, very simple. You have two phases, Knossos has only one. The question is almost a false one: which one of your two does Knossos go with, because it’s very obvious that they have to be extremely close together in time.

Vlazaki They are close together in time since we have a Marine Style amphora in the first [phase]. That’s why I said it is at the end. But there are two [phases]. Something

General discussion 633 happens after the first. And I would prefer to have the assemblage go with the example that Lefteris [Platon] showed us. It could be with your early destruction, I don’t have the assemblage to see this. … Anyway, the one from Mochlos, which is at the same stage of the Alternating Style, is not in the final destruction, it is in the middle.

E. Hallager Maria, I want to make one point, because I think that what Lefteris [Platon] pointed out to us was very important, that the Marine Style was far less than 1 % of the entire assemblage. So, even though you have excavated a lot of plots in Khania, we cannot be absolutely certain that the Marine Style will not turn up in the late phase.

Vlazaki We have not found any vase of full classic Marine Style in situ in the destruction. Maybe we will find it in the future, maybe a little more advanced. For the moment we have not. Just a few sherds, mainly in mixed deposits, and then we have them in the lower one.

Platon Let’s see again the context in House B which we are sure belongs with the latest phase. Here we have a known cup, which is very similar to that from the Royal Road, together with ogival cups and Alternating Style pieces, as I have shown. So, I believe that the House B context dates to the latest phase, and matches very well with the Royal Road, and, of course, matches both the first and the latest phase of the Khania assemblages.

Vlazaki But these look to be the earlier stage of Alternating Style.

Mountjoy I did say this yesterday, but perhaps people didn’t take it on board. I suggested that the LM IB destructions on Crete, including Kastelli, Khania and Kastri, and the abandonment on Kythera are all contemporary, and that the fact that you have a different kind of Alternating Style, an open kind, at Kastri and Kastelli, in the last phase, indicates a regional West Cretan development. That’s why it’s less common in Central and East Crete, but it’s there, I showed some pieces, it’s there in the destructions, so you can’t say that it’s later. There is also the matter of the everted cup, which in fact was not later, but is present in those Central Cretan destructions. At Kastri in the final IB deposit with the Alternating Style you’ve also got the crowded type and the open type together with classical IB; you have got Reed Style, you’ve got spirals with arcades, and classic Marine Style; it’s contemporary, all of it. And Maria has these in her deposit. You haven’t got the Marine Style, I agree with you, that’s extremely curious, but you do say that what you should perhaps have is the little tiny Argonauts on the little cups. You haven’t got them, but you might get them.

Cunningham I just want to make a methodological point. I don’t understand why we are trying to use the Marine Style for any chronological purpose, I mean, of all the possible things you could use this seems to me by far the least trustworthy, partly because we don’t really know where it’s being made or where it could be copied. People will have kept this even when it’s broken and in a fragmentary state. The distribution is strange and very special, so we don’t know how it’s being distributed or how it’s being consumed; some places have it, some don’t. I just don’t see any reason to try to use it for any chronological purpose. And secondly, when we talk about LM II, or Knossian LM

634 General discussion II, I am confused as to what would mark that. Is there anything other than these Ephyraean goblets? I mean even in the deposits that Peter [Warren] was talking about, he had his sixty intrusive sherds, all kylikes, and he hadn’t actually noticed if there was anything else to go along with them. I mean the normal occurrence of kylikes in an LM II deposit would be what, from one percent, ten percent? No matter what, there’s thousands of other sherds that should have been LM II in that deposit. So essentially, there is no stylistic criteria for LM II, from what I’ve heard, or, if there is, then what is it?

Warren Actually, I am not going to accept Tim’s perfectly fair challenge just yet because we haven’t got to LM II in the discussion, but I did want to say a word about Marine Style. In one sense I agree with your comment about the difficulty of using Marine Style, but we might remind ourselves that we are talking about a particular form of pottery which, going right back to Sir Arthur Evans (and he was followed by Penelope [Mountjoy] in an article at the French School symposium many years ago), almost invariably is found in special contexts associated with ritual and cult. This is certainly the case in the North Building that I was illustrating at Knossos where we have plenty of Marine Style that definitely is final LM IB, but, equally due to the nature of the material, it might not appear somewhere else. The Zakros Palace has an astonishing amount, but you need to look at it room by room and see; I’m sure you will find plenty of rooms in the Zakros Palace where there is no Marine Style. But, equally, from the Zakros Palace as a whole, there is plenty. It’s a very specific kind of material, so, in that sense, you can’t use it as the be all and end all of defining the end of LM IB, but it does, nevertheless, have to be part of the picture of how we look at LM IB. However, its absence may not mean that we are not at the same point of time as instances where it does occur in other rooms or in other buildings.

B.P. Hallager Anyhow, for later periods it is very important when new shapes appear. I can see that there are some differences concerning shapes between LM IA and LM IB deposits. Has anyone found any flasks in LM IA? I haven’t seen any presented here. Or, for that matter, the Mycenaean type squat alabastron with one handle? That also seems to appear for the first time and to be a hallmark of LM IB. There could be other shapes, like the small stirrup jars, or, for that matter, the alabastra, which are not in LM IA deposits but seem to appear in LM IB. You could go on. Shapes are very important in LM III, more important than motifs, because old motifs continue to be used on new shapes. We have many, many examples of that. One of the classic examples that we have often talked about is Mervyn Popham’s famous goblet decorated with marine motifs (BSA 73, 1978, 181–2, fig. 1b, pl. 24). And, while some people have tried to say that it is late LM IB, this is totally impossible because it’s on a new shape introduced in LM II, an LM II goblet, even Mervyn admitted that.

Cadogan From your list, Birgitta, for flasks, I can’t think of any LM IA ones, but one can think of some late MM ones; therefore, I am not sure that the fact that we may not have LM IA examples matters. But I do think small stirrup jars, meaning non-transport stirrup jars, represent a very significant development in LM IB. And both the large version and that very odd small one that I showed looked as if they ought to be LM IIIB depressed!

General discussion 635 Betancourt A light-on-dark small stirrup jar comes from Kommos in a pure MM III deposit, along with flasks.

B.P. Hallager There always has to be a beginning. When I said that the squat alabastron seems to have been introduced in LM IB deposits, there is this curious, strange forerunner in Hagia Triada, which has been dated MM IIIB (Creta Antica 1984, 188, fig. 289). So, of course, it has to start somewhere, but when we can see that it becomes frequent, then we will have entered another phase.

Barnard I think there is one thing that we must be careful about with phasing, and I’m feeling guilty about our Mochlos phases here, because everyone is saying “Mochlos has this, Mochlos has that”. Yes, Mochlos has it, but this does not mean that the same tendencies and styles must be present everywhere. Nobody in South-central Crete is going to get an ogival cup. We will, and we won’t have it in our LM IB deposits. Same thing with Marine Style. I fully agree with Peter Warren’s comments on Marine Style, and Tim’s as well; it is a very special type of artifact, which at so many sites is not local and thus is imported. You’re not only dealing with the style and the chronology of the style, but accessibility. Are you accessing the trade route that is bringing this in to you, or not? What does it mean for social and religious preferences for things of that special nature? I think that each site must identify its own phasing and it can’t be done without stratigraphy. And you can’t expect them all to match up and align. The best we can do is to get the broad picture of pan-Cretan synchronisms that show tendencies across time.

Hatzaki I think that one of the major problems in trying to look at synchronisms is the fact that there are so many regional ceramic styles, so many different workshops that are producing their own things. So, it’s far more easy within particular regions to look and say things are contemporary; for example, what we have been saying about North-central Crete; the Mesara region is a very tight group, at least for, let’s say, table ware; Khania; East Crete. The problem is when we look at the Standard Tradition pottery, and we have ogival cups in East Crete but no production of the semiglobular cups with fancy decoration that are found in North-central Crete; that’s when we start having problems and this is where we are introducing Marine Style and Alternating Style. We have to use a combination of all three different features together in order to reach synchronisms. It’s not going to work only with Marine Style, or with the Standard Tradition, or Alternating Style. It must be a combination of the three, and sometimes at sites we don’t have all three together, or, rather, we don’t have Alternating, Marine and Standard Tradition. So, this is what I see as our main problem at the moment; we should combine features together. Also, I would like to emphasize again what Peter [Warren] said about Marine Style, it is so socially restricted that its absence on its own is not necessarily a criterion for dating something to a later phase.

Betancourt We are probably trying to do something twenty-five years too soon; that is, until we define these regional styles, we are going to have a very hard time fitting them into the same phase in another region. Maybe what we should be concentrating on is suggesting that we all try to publish our regional styles over the next few years. There

636 General discussion have been relatively few articles on regional styles in print, and maybe if we did that for a while it would help.

Niemeier I think that would be very important and we have seen the regional styles in these presentations, but they haven’t yet been defined. Of course, everyone has to define his own regional style for his own excavation.

E. Hallager That is something you could add to your papers.

Niemeier Perhaps we should return again to the end of the period. We have now discussed Khania; the excavators of Hagia Triada, Kommos, Pseira, Mochlos and Palaikastro have all argued that they have a phase which is later than the main LM IB destruction. The question is whether we all accept this; there have also been several suggestions of how we should call this phase, including final LM IB, LM IC, LM IB2, early LM II. Sitting next to Jerry I can see that he has prepared something on this point.

Rutter I would like to start by finding out if we do in fact have a consensus on whether there are these two different horizons because it is pointless for me to continue if we don’t have a consensus on that. These two horizons are, it seems to me, clearly identifiable in Central Crete. We can talk about what the problem is in East Crete later on, or how you would line them up. But, Peter [Warren], if you and I are not going to agree on the fact that we have two different horizons, we are not going to make progress. I think that Dario [Puglisi] and I are convinced that there are two different stages.

Warren For what it’s worth, I have no problem at all with the fact that this has been demonstrated. Wolf [Niemeier] has just given a list of sites where there is internal evidence for phasing in LM IB. It has been very well shown; that is perhaps one of the most interesting things to come out of this workshop. We can agree on that. The question which then arises is: do we consider the latest of those phases at all of the individual sites to be more or less contemporary around the island, or are we talking about a significant period of time, which at some sites represents a later stage. I hope that we are going to move the discussion away from simply discussing ceramic typologies to some speculations about the historical interpretation of all this material. My own feeling at the moment (and I came here very ready to learn and see what people had to say) is that we seem to end with a horizon of destruction around the island, which in some sites (for example Khania) appears to be preceded by an earlier stage of disturbance in LM IB. The evidence from Zakros, Mochlos, and your [Rutter’s] site of course indicates that we end with a horizon which is more or less, perhaps not exactly, contemporary with our data. So, I come back to you [Rutter] and say: are you actually proposing from the Kommos material to place something significantly in advance chronologically of what I seem to see; and as Penelope [Mountjoy] and lots of other people have said, all around the island, we seem to have more or less a contemporary, final horizon. So, do you put some sites, including your own, significantly later than that point?

Rutter I will just lay out what I see, and you tell me what you don’t agree with. It seems to me that there is a major destruction of the Villa at Hagia Triada and that this is

General discussion 637 contemporary with a destruction of the Villa at Plakes, Pitsidia; I think those are equivalent in time. And based on what I saw yesterday, I would also link them with the destruction at Makrygialos. I would put all three together with what I called in my paper LM IB Late. That is one horizon. A separate horizon is Knossos Royal Road: North, Knossos SEX North Building, Nirou Chani, Tylissos, Kolokythi Skinias, and what I was calling LM II Early in my paper. That’s a separate horizon and, if you want the list of features that separate those two, I am happy to give them to you. I bet I could come up with about ten to a dozen features. And this is not Marine Style, this is not fancy, exotic stuff, this is basic stuff that, really, we should be using, that occurs on common open shapes and so on and so forth, that we can trace easily. One of the things that really impresses me about the later stage, your terminal LM IB, is that it is easily recognizable over enormous expanses of the island. So, my question to the group is: how do we articulate in a terminological fashion this distinction. Now, if you want to ignore the distinction, fine, we don’t have to do any business. But, if you want to say, yes, this is a significant distinction, what can we do? It seems to me there are three options, and I think that we’ve heard some of them, but let me just run them by you again: 1) we can subdivide IB (IB1, IB2, IB3); 2) we can call one horizon IB and the second some kind of sub-stage of LM II, as I said in my paper; or 3) we can go with Maria [Vlazaki] and identify the later of these two stages as IC, but I suggest that we agree as a group, because if we don’t, somebody is going to commit academic suicide here. I think this is important because we are defining a couple of major ceramic horizons, which do have chronological value in my estimation, and we haven’t even started to talk about the interpretation. The interpretation is a whole separate ball game, as far as I’m concerned. It’s the definition of these horizons and whether we agree that they exist or not, that is the key. Mochlos, the Artisans’ Quarter, I think, belongs to the later of these horizons. I also think Maria’s [Vlazaki] final destruction may well belong to the later horizon, I don’t know, we would have to take a look into that. It seems to me that the Zakros Palace final destruction is the earlier horizon, and so what I want to suggest to you is that it’s a real patchwork. Why is Zakros earlier? Because none of the features that I am calling the identifying characteristics of the later horizon show up at Zakros, and the thing that is so striking about Zakros is that so much of its material has perfect analogues at Knossos. So, where are the little cups with the loops at the rim? Where are these features that are among the latest material? Zakros would be earlier than the Knossos Royal Road destructions.

Warren I have to say that if ever two deposits looked contemporary, it’s the final destruction material of the Palace at Zakros and the material we are speaking about from Knossos. I am really amazed that you want to put Zakros as an earlier LM IB horizon. And then you go the other way around, because Maria [Vlazaki] is saying exactly the opposite.

Platon I do not agree that the Zakros Palace is dated to the earlier phase. I agree with Professor Warren. I can show you what I mean. First of all, we have many of them, which are dated at Mochlos to late LM IB, the last phase, and we have also the squat alabastron, which is very late, with argonauts of Type C. And here, we have three vases from House B, belonging to the latest phase, together with a cup similar to the

638 General discussion Royal Road; and here we have the identical vases from the Palace destruction layer, which are, I think, proof that the Zakros Palace destruction layer is simultaneous with the House B one, which is dated to the latest phase.

Betancourt A question. Do you also have any blob cups, or any large horizontal-handled bowls with a diameter from sixteen – eighteen centimeters?

Platon No, we do not. I think it is very clear that this phase is absent from Zakros.

Barnard We are again back to this argument from silence. Just because you don’t have something doesn’t mean you’re still not in the right period. We need to work, as Eleni [Hatzaki] said, from what we do have in common, and I have to agree with both Lefteris [Platon] and Peter [Warren] that the Royal Road is closely connected to the Zakros destruction deposits. But also, one thing I want to ask Jerry [Rutter]: Why three periods? Why A, B, C? You said you had two horizons. [Rutter responds off microphone] Oh. Okay, you’re not putting three phases in LM IB. That was my confusion.

Puglisi Do you have at Zakros a whitish greenish fabric and a one-handled cup with bars or slashes on the handle?

Platon I do, but not very many examples. From House Delta Alpha I have a flask of a very soft greenish fabric.

Puglisi Do you have slashes on the handles of rounded cups or bowls, not on closed vessels?

Platon Yes, but I can’t remember very well, among the thousands of fragments; I think, it does exist, it’s not a strange thing.

B.P. Hallager It’s not a criterion for LM II; there are several in LM IB Khania.

Puglisi And also in LM IB Late at Kommos and in LM IB contexts at Hagia Photeini and Chalara, and maybe also at Pitsidia. So, I think such characteristics may be later in LM IB. I think we have to work with contexts, not with single vases. In addition, we have handles with slashes and the whitish greenish fabric at Hagia Triada in contexts which are later than the final destruction of the Villa. So these are regional characteristics in the Mesara, the dump at Kommos confirms this. For the rest of Crete, I don’t know.

Van de Moortel This is just a suggestion. Since we have such a hard time defining two really separate phases (an LM IB Late and an LM II Early or whatever), is it just possible that at the various sites certain features appeared at different stages, and the sites that we are talking about were destroyed at different moments in time between LM IB Late and LM II Early? I think that’s why you don’t get the real pure phases from the various sites.

Barnard You also have to look at the entire context. Yes, Mochlos in its final phase has blob cups and horizontal-handled bowls and some other strange things. We have, I think, two blob cups and maybe ten horizontal-handled-bowls. We have thousands of other

General discussion 639 things that don’t lead us into the LM II period. There is no reason not to see that any style that is going to occur later must have precursors. Things don’t start from a vacuum. You’re going to have traces in an earlier period of things that become standard in the later period; you can’t just immediately develop a whole new style out of the blue.

Rutter It was a bad idea of mine to mention Zakros, a bad idea! I’m perfectly happy to leave Zakros out of the picture pending further information, that’s fine with me. But, the question is: what are we going to call these two periods, if in fact we agree that they are different periods? And because I agree that it opens up a whole can of worms, if we talk about two … My own preference would be to vote for IC; I don’t think we want to start sub-dividing IB, if we do, then where do we begin? We haven’t even agreed on how many phases we have in IB. I am happy to publish the material from Kommos as LM IC, and I’ll probably never go back to Crete again for the rest of my life anyway, which is probably a good thing. But, it would be great, if I had a little company.

Warren I very much hope we shall be seeing Jerry in Crete for many, many years, but, in truth, I don’t really care about what number we use. I take the point that, if you start calling things II, there is a whole lot of baggage attached to the number II in this instance, and we haven’t yet even come to talk about the first moment of the arrival of Mycenaeans and all of that, so, perhaps we should stay somehow or other with the number I. I don’t mind, if we want to decide at this conference that the final stage of LM IB should be called LM IC, if that’s the general feeling. But, what is at issue is exactly what you put in that hypothetical IC. You’ve accepted to withdraw your idea of putting Zakros before IC, and, we would need to see your list, because I have the feeling that quite a few people around this room would want to put things in IC that you want to put earlier, including Skinias and Makrygialos. That’s what we’re really talking about, what goes with what? It thus doesn’t matter too much if you want to call it IC or IB Final or something like that.

Betancourt I also do not agree with putting Nerokourou in LM IC, and I think that the Zakros final phase of LM IB and the earlier phase of LM IB are both LM IB, not LM IC. I would also put the Pseira main destruction in LM IB, and I would put the later one, LM IB Final, contemporary with LM II Early, because I think it is later than the Knossos deposit that we have seen; it already has items like blob cups that are very clearly there in the Unexplored Mansion as published by Mervyn Popham. I think we have more than just two phases, I think we have identified several phases, even if we can not characterize them very carefully, or very completely.

Dabney To the earlier suggestion about having people work together to define regions, such as East, North-central and South-central, I would like to add that you should start talking about contexts, whether ceremonial or not, palatial or not, port or not, and then you might find that you really don’t yet have enough material to start defining these things.

Rethemiotakis Well, after having been tired out a bit by such elaborate conversations about pottery and ceramic sequences, I feel ready to pose a fatal question to the congress: does anyone have a definitive answer, a clue about what might have caused all these destructions?

640 General discussion I think this is a crucial issue to be addressed, because I have the impression that such elaborate sequences with so many destructions, or sub-destructions, or whatever, in such a comparatively short period of time need a better explanation. I think that the seismic theory is not adequate to explain such events. Perhaps human agency was involved in the events we are talking about. Well, this is an open issue, which I think we must say something about. I have experience from another site, Hellenistic Lyttos, which was destroyed in a fire caused by the Knossians – once more Knossos is involved in the Pediada! Well, when I was excavating at Kastelli, Pediada, I was puzzled by the destruction sequence; the depositional history of Kastelli was very similar to what I saw at Lyttos, which was invaded and burned by the Knossians (cf. Rethemiotakis 1992–3, 34 with Rethemiotakis 1984, 53). What happened at Kastelli is unknown, of course. I realized, and this must be of some importance, that even the domestic pottery and the pithoi in the magazines were left behind in the destruction at Lyttos, as fire swept through the building. Even their contents were not removed, olive oil and cereals remained in situ. And also, all the other vases, domestic and fine ware, remained there trapped in the destruction debris. Exactly the same feature was observed in the destroyed building at Minoan Kastelli. So, the first event is directly related to an invasion. It is human agency – the destruction of the city, which is well described by Polybius. This is my question: can we always speak about destruction by earthquakes, such earthquakes all over the island at so many sites simultaneously, or in different periods in short time gaps?

Warren I think you’re absolutely right, it really is time we moved on to major historical things, rather than an infinite discussion of pot motifs and so on. Where are we these days in scholarship? There are roughly three possibilities, aren’t there, for trying to explain the LM IB destruction and whether it was a kind of staggered destruction; we discussed that fully enough. One is the earthquake, the natural agency view of things. The other is, of course, the possibility of an invasion, and, if that’s so, it could only mean a Mycenaean military intervention of some kind. But there is also a third possibility: that society reached a stage of internal collapse. This was the original version years and years ago of catastrophe theory, that it is internal tensions, competition, faction and all the rest of it, which bring things to such a state that everybody starts killing everybody else and burning their settlements down. I have always felt that the natural agency view is the strongest, the earthquake view, if you like. And, if you want an example for practically the whole of the island, Ammianus Marcellinus describes the fourth century earthquake, which affected the whole of the southern Aegean, not just Crete. But, if we are going to identify earthquakes, I would say that you have to have really, really good evidence, not just burnt pots on a floor, or even a fallen wall, because they could easily result from human intervention. What you really have to have are examples of walls that have been shifted out of position. And, to be honest, almost the only example I know of is from Zominthos, where the walls have been shaken from position, though these are of course, as we’ve heard, probably LM IA.

E. Hallager Well, I think Peter [Warren] has summed up very well the three possibilities, and when Tom [Brogan] and I organized this conference, we were talking about whether this should also be a topic, but we thought it would be too big and it is really a topic

General discussion 641 for a small workshop by itself. I don’t want to cut off the discussion, if there is anyone else who want to make comments on what Peter said, please.

Platon Only a small comment. In Zakros we have some works activated just a few days before the final destruction. We have saws on the floors of the luxurious Hall of the Ceremonies, we also have blocks half-sawn to make some architectural members. We have some consolidation work. And these, I think, put the matter in the direction of a seismic catastrophe. And I agree with Professor Warren that it is the most possible explanation.

Betancourt A fourth possibility is that we have some of each. Some sites are destroyed in one way, and others in another. In the case of Pseira, for example, our main destruction is accompanied by buildings that are emptied of their contents and then burned, and that, to me, suggests warfare.

Cadogan Obviously the evidence from Pyrgos does not support earthquakes, as one finds destruction at the big place in the middle and not in the places around. Human wickedness is always a very strong motive, one must remember that. Going back to the earlier discussion, not to re-open things but just to leave a thought with you, there has been the same problem with what used to be called the Philia culture at the transition from the Chalcolithic to the Early Bronze Age in Cyprus. After much discussion, the present view is that, rather than trying to define it precisely, we may now call it the Philia facies – which allows it to float in both time and space. So, this might be a little solution.

Cunningham The final destruction at Palaikastro, as we know from the deposition, particularly of the statuette, is definitely due to human agency, which does not rule out an earthquake for other places, or even for the earlier destruction. So, there is certainly the possibility to have both. But there is absolutely no way that these fires weren’t arson. We’ve even reconstructed the way the building was set on fire. Likewise, at Mochlos, I believe, there is a building where an ashlar wall was pulled down and the blocks pulled around the corner and down an alleyway. I think it’s physically impossible for something like an earthquake to have moved those blocks there, so, definitely there is human agency, and it looks not like some kind of marauding or internal fighting but like a very well-planned, orchestrated thing done by a very major power. I mean, basically a central power coming out and taking care of business, not internal fighting.

Macdonald When Jan Driessen and I wrote The Troubled Island, we went through as many sites as possible detailing such things as blocked doorways, changes in circulation and similar things. But, as you know, it was ten years ago and in certain instances, we made the assumption that the original plan would have been LM IA, with the changes being made in LM IB, followed by a destruction. And it affected the way in which we interpreted the history, if you like, of Crete during that period. Obviously, if we try to rewrite that book, it will require heavy re-interpretation in light of the much more detailed stratigraphies and architectural observations that now exist. I agree totally with the idea that we may be dealing with both natural and man-made

642 General discussion disasters, that is certainly a possibility, and the probability of having a single Cretan- wide earthquake from one end of the island to the other is highly unlikely. It may happen once every five hundred years, or once every thousand years, but it really is unlikely. Anyway, but that’s as may be. What I have been impressed by is Lefteris’ observations at Zakros, of changes immediately before the destruction. The same is apparently true with Metaxia [Tsipopoulou] in her earlier LM IB destruction; before that she was thinking that things were on their last legs. This kind of observation by excavators, I think, is to be valued greatly because the person who is actually digging it up, or looking at the original notebooks, gets an idea that we can’t possibly get from reading the final publication.

Brogan Mochlos is often brought up in this context because Richard Seager claims to have found human bodies inside the LM IB destruction. Seager excavated part of Block A, at least one LM IB house in Block B, and little bits of Blocks C and D. He excavated half of the site that is now exposed. In the more recent excavations, we have instances where human body parts were found in the LM IB destruction. We found part of a body in a street of Block A, and we found the head of a young woman in the basement of a house. Jeff Soles has a very different interpretation for how that head got there, so we need to keep that out (see Soles 2010). So, we have some questions. You then might say: was Richard Seager able to identify human remains? I think he probably was because Boyd had already been doing a good job identifying human remains at Gournia from the tombs. What I would note is another difference. Not only did Seager find bodies and we don’t, but he found burnt destructions. In his buildings there is evidence of a major fire (i.e. Houses B and D). When you examine Richard Seager’s photographs, you see the preserved marks of half timbering in the walls; we never find that. And, our buildings do not appear to have been burned. So, Seager excavates at least House D, and what he calls House B, both of which suffered major fire destructions, and that’s where he finds the bodies. We don’t. And so, there is some variation in how different parts of the site were destroyed. We think very strongly that it was human agency, and we describe that in Aegean Archaeology (Vol. 6, 2002, 95–6). Tremendous amounts of metal were left, some of which looks to have been hoarded, and we have finally started to find medium-sized knives, almost like daggers; they didn’t take them with them, they were still in these hoards. It looks like a sudden event wiped out the town and then nobody went back to pick up anything from the buildings. And so, that’s where we get into the argument of the gap at the site. It’s a tough question as the site, like Zakros, is in full swing; they have no idea what’s coming, apart from this question of the hoards. At Zakros the metal tools, the saws, axes, etc., are in use inside the houses, and we have the same thing; not all of the metal is in the hoards, twenty or thirty percent of it is found in use throughout the houses. Still there was no attempt to take the metal with them when they left the buildings, no attempt to take the stone vases, lead weights, ivory boxes, glass beads, there are all sorts of equipment that you would have expected people to have taken with them if they had had time to clear things out. So, we think the cause is human agency, unexpected and massive, wiping out the settlement.

Kanta One thing that we must keep in mind is that some of it may well have been human agency, of course, but human agency does not destroy the whole island completely,

General discussion 643 because how are the conquerors then going to survive? What are they going to eat? Where are they going to stay? You have your battles, you subdue the inhabitants, you punish a few, you destroy a bit and you take over the rest. This is something that we must keep in mind. Also, you must keep in mind, and I noticed at Nerokourou a long time ago, and at other sites, that there was a main “political” event sometime before the final destruction, which changed the function of all these fine buildings. At Nerokourou, for example, they were storing pithoi and working in the main Minoan hall. This shows that there may have been other reasons, as said just before, a combination of reasons.

Betancourt One somewhat allied comment is that I think we could all agree that these ceramic changes had already started to occur before the destructions. That is, that they are internal Cretan developments within the ceramic tradition; they are not introduced by a putative Mycenaean invading army. I think we all would agree to separate the late LM I phases that we have suggested from the Unexplored Mansion, which is mature LM II; that is the point where we start to get the Mycenaean shapes like the Ephyraean goblet and so forth. So, what we are talking about is a transitional situation with some internal development within the LM IB pottery, but not yet the Mycenaean shapes.

Chatzi-Vallianou Yes, LM IC but not LM II.

Vlazaki The crucial point for Khania is that at the end we have the destruction of the Linear A archives, so it cannot be LM II. But I have the feeling that this last destruction came after Knossos, but maybe I am wrong, I don’t know.

Hood When invasion starts, my ears go up. It is quite obvious that if there was a Mycenaean invasion, a great mass of the people survived it, and some of them may have even been quislings and joined the invaders. But, it’s also clear that one aspect of that is these fashions, which I must say do seem to me a Mycenaean introduction, these Ephyraean goblets and so on, I leave it to my elders and betters like Blegen and Wace; they don’t spread all over Crete, those fashions, there are large areas where they don’t seem to have penetrated at all. And if you believe in invasion, there is no reason there shouldn’t be some slight time lag between destructions in one part of the island and the other. You can’t do that with natural causes.

Rethemiotakis Just a small remark, to state my personal opinion after the provocative question I asked. This situation reminds me very much of what is known from a much later period in Hellenistic Crete, when the two predominant cities of Crete, Knossos and Gortys, which were involved in a prolonged civil war, each captured and destroyed the allies of the other city. So, there was widespread disaster and de-population, conflagration and civil war all over Crete.

Cadogan As Giorgos was saying, of course, their primary goal would have been to take out the main buildings, and perhaps we have been doing rather too much looking at main buildings not, I agree, at Mochlos and Pseira, but in other places, or even at Gournia.

644 General discussion Brogan Another interesting find from Mirabello is Krzysztof Nowicki’s publication of Metaxia [Tsipopoulou’s] excavations at Katalimata, Monastiraki (2008). He has an intriguing phase at the site with pottery that might be late LM IB, East Cretan LM II, or maybe IIIA1; he has a hard time defining it. It’s a very unusual site. I think the copper ingot also comes from this phase. You remember that the houses at Mochlos, Gournia and Pseira all have copper ingots in this period of abandonment. And so, this again, I think, points to a level of continued worry by the local population, the fact that they would flee to a place like Katalimata. And that’s when they’re moving to this site, during times of tension. This suggests that during LM II in Central Cretan terms, they’re moving up to a site like Katalimata. It suggests that there’s a real problem in the area and they’re no longer able to continue living down at these coastal sites. You can see the pottery in the final publication; it’s not crystal clear but I think he’s on the right track.

Tsipopoulou I just thought that civil war, or an internal disturbance hypothesis would explain the lack of radical change in the material culture. And, it would also explain the change in the function of important areas from an earlier period like at Nerokourou and Petras. This is better explained by internal upheaval rather than by the arrival of Mycenaeans.

Niemeier I would just like to mention again some points which already came up in the discussion of the different papers. The Special Palatial Tradition and, especially, the Marine Style we heard about also in our final discussion, that this is ceremonial pottery that comes only from very special contexts, as Penelope Mountjoy has shown. We had a question about the role of Knossos in the production and distribution of the Special Palatial Tradition. And, Sinclair Hood had the idea that they may also be diplomatic gifts to elites around the island; we had the question of whether the Special Palatial Tradition was only produced in the Palace and did this thus signify a palatial tradition. We thought up to now that the central production center was the Palace of Knossos, and we were a little embarrassed by Galatas, with its local version of the Olive Spray Painter. I still have a problem imagining traveling painters. What should be the model? So, if these were palatial workshops, then those potters and painters were employed, let us say, by the court of Knossos and there would thus be no freelance potters who could travel all around the island and paint their vases here and there. But I think we are only at the very beginning of this discussion. Perhaps we have to do more clay analysis. Is Galatas a single case, or are these individual painters? Are the Reed Painter and the Olive Spray Painter not individual painters, but did they also copy certain motifs? Did they use some kind of pattern books where certain motifs could be copied, either by individual artists, or else copied again and again by different painters? That’s an open question. I remember a paper by John Cherry at the Hobart conference about the problem of the individual painter. Can we use, like Sir John Beazley, certain motifs or manners in which the motifs are executed, to distinguish individual artists; John Cherry was very skeptical about this, and denied it, and I too find it rather problematic. Because, of course, the Olive Spray Painter, if he existed, didn’t paint only olive sprays for his entire life. He must also have painted other motifs. And, of course, Phil Betancourt and Penelope Mountjoy, and also myself, have tried to identify individual painters within the Marine Style, and

General discussion 645 there you can compare the motifs. But why should the Olive Spray Painter not also have painted octopi on stirrup jars? There is no method to recognize this.

Van de Moortel About the Olive Spray Painter, actually I was thinking last night about another group of vases that the Olive Spray Painter could have produced, and those are vases that you have in Knossos, I think, and in Nirou Chani, in Kommos we have one and in Skinias: these similar teacups or rounded cups, which have a double row of very, very nicely executed spirals, small spirals (Van de Moortel 1997, 602–3, fig. 83, C9653); they have exactly the same shape as the olive spray teacups and exactly the same thicker central band and the thinner bands underneath. And, I know from the Mochlos cup that the rim is very specific, that it is slightly undercut and is actually leaf-shaped in section, so that’s one of the things we can look for.

Rethemiotakis I just remembered a very similar case for the scenario of Knossos trade potters traveling all over Crete, on occasion and on demand. A few years ago, a similar event was attested by Eleni Banou and myself when we studied and published the material from Psari Phorada, Viannos (La Crete Mycenienne (BCH Suppl. 30), 1997, 23–57). There we had vessels which were almost exact copies of Knossian examples. Not only subjects and excution but even the fabric looked Knossian. We were uncertain whether they were Knossian imported or locally made. And besides pottery, we also had pithoi, which had exact parallels in the Knossian magazines. To our surprise, when we made clay analysis we realized that they were locally made. So, they were made, apparently, by Knossian potters and painters who traveled as far as the south coast of Crete, in the area of Viannos, in LM II and IIIA1 and not only painted vases in the Knossian manner but also chose local clays similar to Knossian so as to produce faithful copies.

Niemeier Regarding the last point, we can’t discuss it here now, but we have already touched on the need to know more about regional developments and regional styles. So, I had the impression from the slides we’ve seen these last few days that there really are distinct regional styles. Khania and West Crete is a very special case, the Mesara, East Crete, and I think that we have to learn more about this. It’s very important because, as we have seen, the Special Palatial Tradition, which connects all of Crete, represents only a very small percentage; this is just the tip of the iceberg of the pottery we have. We need more knowledge about the regional styles in order to better know and study interregional relations.

E. Hallager Again, I think the publication will be a very good starting point for this investigation.

646 General discussion Bibliography

Abramovitz, K. 1980 Andreadaki-Vlasaki, M. 2002 Apostolakou, S., T.M. Brogan & ‘Frescoes from Ayia Irini, Keos. ‘Are we approaching the Minoan P.P. Betancourt forthcoming Parts II–IV’, Hesperia 49, 57–85. Palace of Khania?’, in Driessen, ‘New evidence for the production Schoep & Laffineur 2002, 157–66. of purple dye from the Minoan Adamo, O., S. Agodi, R.M. settlement on Chryssi Island’, Albanese, A.L. D’Agata, M.C. Andreadaki-Vlasaki, M. 2005 Aegaeum. Martinelli, S. Nicotra, O. Palio, E. ‘Cultes et divinitées dans la ville Procelli & L. Sapuppo 1999 minoenne de La Canée. Quelques Archontaki, A. forthcoming ‘L’Età del Bronzo e del Ferro in refléxions’, inΚΡΗΣ ΤΕΧΝΙΤΗΣ, ‘Ανασυνθέτοντας τις δραστηριότητες Sicilia’, in Cocchi Genick 1999, L’ artisan cretois, Recueil d’ articles ενός νοικοκυριού: η περίπτωση 475–95. en l’ honneur de Jean-Claude Pour- του Κτηρίου των Κογχών στο sat, publie a l’ occasion des 40 ans νεοανακτορικό οικισμό της Ζάκρου’, Alexiou, S. 1967 de la decouverte du Quartier Mu, I. in Πεπραγμένα του I΄ Διεθνούς Υστερομινωϊκοί τάφοι Λιμένος Κνωσού Bradfer-Burdet, B. Detournay & Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου. (Κατσαμπά), Athens. R. Laffineur (eds.), (Aegaeum 26), Liege and Austin, 17–26. Aston, M. & T. Taylor 1998 Amiran R. 1969–70 The atlas of archaeology, New York. Ancient pottery from the Holy Land, Andreadaki-Vlazaki, M. 2009 (ed.) Jerusalem. Χανιά (Κυδωνία). Περιήγηση σε χώρους Bagella, S., A. Depalmes, M.R. αρχαίας μνήμης, Χανιά. Manunzu, G. Marras & S. Sebis Amyx, D.A. 1988 1999 Corinthian vase painting of the Archaic Andreadaki-Vlazaki, M. & L. ‘Le forme vascolari del Bronzo in period (California Studies in the Godart 1982 Sardegna’, in Cocchi Genick 1999, History of Art 25), Berkeley. ‘Une nouvelle tablette en linéaire 513–25. A de la Canée’, SMEA 23, 51–60. Amyx, D.A. & P. Lawrence 1996 Banou, E. 1992 Studies in Archaic Corinthian vase Antona, A., U. Badas, F. Campus, Pottery groups from the west side painting (Hesperia Supplement 28), T. Cossu, A. Forci, V. Leonelli, F. of Area A at Pseira, Crete, Ph.D. Princeton. Lo Schiavo, D. Marras, P. Melis, dissertation, University of the M. Perra, M.G. Puddu, R. Relli, Pennsylvania. Andreadaki-Vlazaki, M. 1988 M. Sanges & A. Usai 1999 ‘Υπόγειο άδυτο ή ‘δεξαμενή καθαρ- ‘I criteri di nomenclatura e Banou, E.S. 1995a μών’ στα Χανιά’, ΑΑΑ 21, 56–76. terminologia applicati alla ‘The pottery, Building AA’, in definizione delle forme vascolari Betancourt & Davaras 1995, Andreadaki-Vlazaki, M. 1987 nuragiche dal Bronzo Medio 19–21. ‘Ομάδα νεοανακτορικών αγγείων all’Età del Ferro’, in Cocchi απο τον Σταυρωμένο Ρεθύμνης’, Genick 1999, 497–512. Banou, E.S. 1995b in Ειλαπίνη. Τόμος τιμητικός για τον ‘The pottery, Building AD North’, Καθηγητή Νικόλαο Πλάτωνα, L. Apostolakou, S., P.P. Betancourt & in Betancourt & Davaras 1995, Kastrinaki, G. Orphanou & N. T.M. Brogan 2010 94–6. Giannadakis (eds.), Herakleion, ‘Ανασκαφικές έρευνες στην Παχειά 55–68. ‘Αμμο και τη Χρυσή Ιεράπετρας’, Banou, E. 1995c in Αρχαιολογικό Έργο Κρήτης ‘The pottery, Building AB Andreadaki-Vlazaki, M. 1994–6 1. Πρακτικά της 1ης Συνάντησης (Seager’s House B)’, in Betancourt ‘Προϊστορικός οικισμός στα Νο- Ρέθυμνο, 28–30 Νοεμβρίου 2008, M. & Davaras 1995, 33–40. πήγεια Κισάμου’, Kritiki Estia 5, Andrianakis & I. Tzachili (eds.), 11–45. Rethymnon, 143–54. Banou, E. 1996 ‘KΓ’ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών 13 και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων. Baurain, C. & P. Darcque 1989 Sphoungaras, Priniatikos Pyrgos, and Ανασκαφικές εργασίες. Πόρος. ‘Cinq ans de fouilles au nord-est other sites (University Museum Οικόπεδο Ι. Λιούνη’, ArchDelt 51 du palais de Malia’, in Πεπραγμένα Monograph 47), Philadelphia. Β’2, 630–2. του ΣΤ΄ Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου A1, Khania, 135–9. Betancourt, P.P. 1984a Banou, E.S. 1998 East Cretan white-on-dark ware. ‘The pottery, Building AC’, in Belardelli, C., M. Bettelli, D. Studies on handmade pottery of the Betancourt & Davaras 1998a, Cocchi Genick, D. De Angelis, D. Early to Middle Minoan periods 13–26, 133–6. Gatti, L. Incerti, M. Lo Zupone, P. (University Museum Monograph Talamo, & A.M. Tunzi Sisto 1999 51), Philadelphia. Banou, E. & G. Rethemiotakis ‘Il Bronzo Medio e Recente 1997 nell’Italia centro-meridionale’, in Betancourt, P.P. 1984b ‘Centre and periphery: new Cocchi Genick 1999, 372–93. ‘Ethnology and the interpretation evidence for the relations between of the archaeological record’, in Knossos and the area of Viannos Bennet, J. 2008 Betancourt 1984a, 158–63. in the LM II – IIIA periods’, in ‘Now you see it; now you Driessen & Farnoux 1997, 23–57. don’t! The disappearance of Betancourt, P.P. 1985 the Linear A script on Crete’, The history of Minoan pottery, Banou, E.S. & E. Tsivilika 2006 in The disappearance of writing Princeton. ‘Provincial Middle Minoan systems. Perspectives on literacy and pottery: the case of Pera Galenoi’, communication, J. Baines, J. Bennet Betancourt, P.P. 1985 in Wiener et al. 2006, 94–118. & S. Houston (eds.), London and Η ιστορία της Μινωϊκής κεραμεικής, Oakville, 1–29. Athens (transl.). Barber, R. 1974 ‘Phylakopi 1911 and the history Berg, I. 2004 Betancourt, P.P. 1990 of the later Cycladic Bronze Age’, ‘The meanings of standardisation: Kommos II. The Final Neolithic BSA 69, 1–53. conical cups in the late Bronze Age through Middle Minoan III pottery, Aegean’, Antiquity 78, 74–85. Princeton. Barnard, K.A. 2001 Transition, production and Bernini, L.E. 1995 Betancourt, P.P. 1995 standardization in Minoan ceramics: ‘Ceramics of the early Neo-palatial ‘Comments and conclusions, a view from Neopalatial Mochlos, period at Palaikastro’, BSA 90, Building AA’, in Betancourt & Ph.D. dissertation, University of 55–82. Davaras 1995, 23. Pennsylvania. Betancourt, P.P. 1976 Betancourt, P.P. 1999 Barnard, K.A. 2003 ‘Economic implications of the ‘The pottery, Building BT’, in ‘A macroscopic analysis of the Reed Painter’s vases’, TUAS 1, Betancourt & Davaras 1999, Neopalatial fabrics’, in Barnard & 15–17. 177–83. Brogan 2003, 3–11. Betancourt, P.P. 1978 Betancourt, P.P. 2001 Barnard, K.A. & T.M. Brogan ‘LM IA pottery from Priniatikos ‘The household shrine in the 2003 Pyrgos’, in Doumas 1978b, 381–7. house of the rhyta at Pseira’, in Mochlos IB. Period III. Neopalatial POTNIA. Deities and religion in the settlement on the coast: the Artisans’ Betancourt, P.P. 1980 Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the Quarter and the farmhouse at Cooking vessels from Minoan 8th International Aegean Conference, Chalinomouri. The Neopalatial Kommos: a preliminary report Göteborg, Göteborg University, 12–15 pottery (Prehistory Monographs 8), (Occasional Paper of the Institute April 2000, R. Laffineur & R. Philadelphia. of Archaeology, University of Hägg (eds.), (Aegaeum 22), Liège California 7), Los Angeles. and Austin, 145–9. Barrett, J.C. & P. Halstead (eds.) 2004 Betancourt, P.P. 1983 Betancourt, P.P. 2004 The emergence of civilization revisited The Cretan Collection in the ‘Knossian expansion in Late (Sheffield Studies in Aegean University Museum, University of Minoan IB: the evidence of the Archaeology 6), Oxford. Pennsylvania Vol. I. Minoan objects Spirals and Arcading Group’, in excavated from Vasilike, Pseira,

14 Cadogan, Hatzaki & Vasilakis Betancourt, P.P. & C. Davaras Blitzer, H. 1984 2004, 295–8. (eds.) 2004 ‘Traditional pottery production Pseira VIII. The archaeological survey in Kentri, Crete: workshops, Betancourt, P.P. & E. S. Banou of Pseira island part 1 (Prehistory materials, techniques, and trade’, in 1999 Monographs 11), Philadelphia. Betancourt 1984a, 143–57. ‘The pottery, Building BQ,’ in Betancourt and Davaras 1999, Betancourt, P.P. & C. Davaras Borgna, E. 1997 134–6. (eds.) 2005 ‘Kitchen-ware from LM IIIC Pseira IX. The archaeological survey Phaistos. Cooking traditions and Betancourt, P.P. & C. Davaras of Pseira island part 2 (Prehistory ritual activities in LBA Cretan (eds.) 1995 Monographs 12), Philadelphia. societies’, SMEA 39, 189–217. Pseira I. The Minoan buildings on the west side of Area A (University Betancourt, P.P. & C. Davaras Borgna, E. 2000 Museum Monograph 90), (eds.) 2009 ‘Food preparation and ritual Philadelphia. Pseira X. The excavation of Block activity in LM IIIC Crete’, AF (Prehistory Monographs 28), in Πεπραγμένα του Η΄ Διεθνούς Betancourt, P.P. & C. Davaras Philadelphia. Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου A1, (eds.) 1998a Herakleion, 147–59. Pseira II. Building AC (the ‘Shrine’) Betancourt, P.P., P. Goldberg, R. and other buildings in Area A Hope Simpson & C.J. Vitaliano Bosanquet, R.C. 1901–2 (University Museum Monograph 1990 ‘Excavations at Palaikastro. I’, BSA 94), Philadelphia. ‘Excavations at Pseira: the evidence 8, 286–316. for the Theran eruption’, in Hardy Betancourt, P.P. & C. Davaras & Renfrew 1990, 96–9. Bosanquet, R.C. 1902–3 (eds.) 1998b ‘Excavations at Palaikastro. II’, BSA Pseira III. The plateia building Betancourt, P.P., V. Karageorghis, 9, 274–89. (University Museum Monograph R. Laffineur & W.-D. Niemeier 102), by C.R. Floyd, Philadelphia. (eds.) 1999 Bosanquet, R.C. & R.M. Dawkins Meletemata. Studies in Aegean 1923 Betancourt, P.P. & C. Davaras archaeology presented to Malcolm H. The unpublished objects from the (eds.) 1999 Wiener as he enters his 65th year Palaikastro excavations 1902–1906. Pseira IV. Minoan buildings in (Aegaeum 20), Liège and Austin. Part I (BSA Supplementary Paper Areas B, C, D, and F (University No.1), London. Museum Monograph 105), Betancourt, P.P. & J.S. Silverman Philadelphia. 1991 Bosanquet, R.C., R.M. Dawkins, The Cretan Collection in the M.N. Tod, W.L.H. Duckworth & Betancourt, P.P. & C. Davaras University Museum, University of J.L. Myres 1902–3 (eds.) 2001 Pennsylvania Vol. II. Pottery from ‘Excavations at Palaikastro II’, BSA Pseira V. The architecture of Pseira Gournia (University Museum 9, 274–387. (University Museum Monograph Monograph 72), Philadelphia. 109), Philadelphia. Boulotis, C. 1990 Bevan, A., E. Kiriatzi, C. ‘Villes et palais dans l’art égéen du Betancourt, P.P. & C. Davaras Knappett, E. Kappa & S. IIe millénaire av. J.-C.’, in Darcque (eds.) 2002 Papachristou 2002 & Treuil 1990, 421–59. Pseira VI. The Pseira cemetery 1: ‘Excavation of Neopalatial deposits the cemetery survey (Prehistory at Tholos (Kastri), Kythera’, BSA Bourriau, J.D. & K.O. Eriksson Monographs 5), Philadelphia. 97, 55–96. 1997 ‘A Late Minoan sherd from an Betancourt, P.P. & C. Davaras Blake, E. 2002 early 18th Dynasty context at (eds.) 2003 ‘Spatiality past and present: an Kom Rabi’a, Memphis’, in Ancient Pseira VII. The Pseira cemetery 2: interview with Edward Soja, Los Egypt, the Aegean, and the Near excavation of the tombs (Prehistory Angeles, 12 April 2001’, Journal of East. Studies in honour of Martha Monographs 6), Philadelphia. Social Archaeology 2(2), 139–58. Rhoads Bell, J. Phillips (ed.), San Antonio, 95–120.

15 Boyd, M.J., I.K. Whitbread & J.A. in the Greek world: improving the B.C.’, in Acts of the International MacGillivray 2006 integration of archaeology and science, Archaeological Symposium “The ‘Geophysical investigations at International conference, Athens, relations between Cyprus and Palaikastro’, BSA 101, 89–134. 22-24 March 2010 organized by Crete, ca. 2000–500 B.C.”, V. the Netherlands Institute at Athens Karageorghis (ed.), Nicosia, 63–8. Branigan, K. (ed.) 2001 (NIA) and the Hellenic Society of Urbanism in the Aegean Bronze Archaeometry (EAE). Cadogan, G. 1984 Age (Sheffield Studies in Aegean ‘Cycladic jugs at Pyrgos’, in The Archaeology 4), Sheffield. Broodbank, C. 2004 prehistoric Cyclades. Contributions to ‘Minoanization’, Proceedings of the a workshop on Cycladic chronology, Brogan, T.M. 2004 Cambridge Philosophical Society 50, J.A. MacGillivray & R.L.N. Barber ‘The incised and relief lily jars 46–81. (eds.), Edinburgh, 162–4. from Mochlos’, in Day, Mook & Muhly 2004, 29–41. Broodbank, C., E. Kiriatzi & J. Cadogan, G. 2009 Rutter 2005 ‘Tubular stands in Neopalatial Brogan, T.M. & K.A. Barnard ‘From Pharoah’s feet to the slave- Crete’, in D’Agata & Van de forthcoming women of Pylos? The history Moortel 2009, 201–12. ‘Household archaeology at and cultural dynamics of Kythera Mochlos: statistical recipes from in the Third Palace Period’, in Cadogan, G & A. Chaniotis 2010 the Late Minoan I kitchen’, in Autochthon. Papers presented to ‘Inscriptions from Crete’, BSA Glowacki & Vogeikoff-Brogan. O.T.P.K. Dickinson on the occasion 105, 291–304. of his retirement, Institute of Classical Brogan, T.M. & A.J. Koh 2008 Studies, University of London, 9 Cadogan, G., E. Hatzaki & A. ‘Feasting at Mochlos? New November 2005, A. Dakouri-Hild Vasilakis (eds.) 2004 evidence for wine production, & S. Sherratt (eds.), (BAR-IS Knossos: palace, city, state. Proceedings storage and consumption from 1432), Oxford, 70–96. of the conference in Herakleion a Bronze Age harbor town on organised by the British School at Crete’, in Dais. The Aegean feast. Broodbank, C & E. Kiriatzi 2007 Athens and the 23rd Ephoreia of Proceedings of the 12th International ‘The first ‘Minoans’ of Kythera Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities Aegean Conference, University of revisited: technology, demography, of Herakleion, in November 2000, Melbourne, Centre for Classics and and landscape in the Prepalatial for the centenary of Sir Arthur Evans’s Archaeology, 25–29 March 2008, Aegean’, AJA 111, 241–74. excavations at Knossos (BSA Studies L.A. Hitchcock, R. Laffineur & 12), London. J. Crowley (eds.), (Aegaeum 29), Bruins, H.J., J.A. MacGillivray, Liège and Austin, 125–31. C.E. Synolakis, C. Benjamini, J. Cadogan, G. & K. Kopaka 2010 Keller, H.J. Kisch, A. Klügel & J. ‘Coping with the offshore giant: Brogan, T.M., R.A.K. Smith & J.S. Van der Plicht 2008 Middle Helladic interactions Soles 2002 ‘Geoarchaeological tsunami with Middle Minoan Crete’, in ‘Myceneans at Mochlos? Exploring deposits at Palaikastro (Crete) and Mesohelladika: the Greek mainland in culture and identity in the Late the Late Minoan IA eruption of the Middle Bronze Age, G. Touchais Minoan IB to IIIA1 transition’, Santorini’, JAS 35, 191–212. et al. (ed.), (BCH Supplement 52), Aegean Archaeology 6, 89–118. Paris, 847-58. Burke, B. 2006 Brogan, T.M. & Ch. Sofianou 2009 ‘Textile production at Petras: Cameron, M.A.S. 1987 ‘Papadiokambos: new evidence for the evidence from House 2’, ‘The ‘Palatial’ thematic system in the impact of the Theran eruption in Πεπραγμένα του Θ΄ Διεθνούς the Knossos murals. Last notes on the northeast coast of Crete’, in Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου Α1, on Knossos frescoes’ in Hägg & Warburton 2009, 117–124. Herakleion, 279–95. Marinatos 1987, 320–8.

Brogan, T.M., Ch. Sofianou, J.E. Cadogan, G. 1978 Cameron, C.M. 1991 Morrison, E. Margaritis & D. ‘Pyrgos, Crete, 1970–7’, AR 24, ‘Structure abandonment in Mylonas forthcoming 70–84. villages’, in Archaeological method ‘Living off the fruit of the sea and theory. Vol. 3, M.B. Schiffer House A at Papadiokampos’, in Cadogan, G. 1979 (ed.), Tuscon, 155–94. Subsistence, economy and society ‘Cyprus and Crete c. 2000–1400

16 Campus, F. & V. Leonelli 2000 Chatzi-Vallianou, D. 1987 in Aegean prehistory’, in Laffineur La tipologia della ceramica nuragica. Il ‘Πιτσίδια’, ArchDelt 42 B’2, 548. & Crowley 1992, 123–44. materiale edito, Sassari. Chatzi-Vallianou, D. 1988 Christakis, K.S. 1996 Catling, E.A., H.W. Catling & D. ‘Πιτσίδια. Μινωική αγρέπαυλη (θέση ‘Craft specialization in Minoan Smyth 1979 Πλάκες)’, ArchDelt 43 B’2, 531–4. Crete: the case for itinerant pithos ‘Knossos 1975: Middle Minoan III makers’, Aegean Archaeology 3, 63–74. and Late Minoan I houses by the Chatzi-Vallianou, D. 1989 Acropolis’, BSA 74, 1–80. ‘Πιτσίδια’, ArchDelt 44 B’2, 438– Christakis, K.S. 1999a 41. Minoan pithoi and their significance Catling, H.W. 1983 for the household subsistence economy ‘Archaeology in Greece, 1982–83’, Chatzi-Vallianou, D. 1990 of Neopalatial Crete, Ph.D. AR 29, 3–62. ‘Πιτσίδια. Θέση Πλάκες. Μινωική dissertation, University of Bristol. αγρέπαυλη’, ArchDelt 45 B’2, Catling, H.W. 1989 417–20. Christakis, K.S. 1999b ‘Archaeology in Greece, 1988–89’, ‘Pithoi and food storage in AR 35, 3–116. Chatzi-Vallianou, D. 1995 Neopalatial Crete: a domestic ‘Μινωικά κεραμικά εργαστήρια. perspective’, World Archaeology 31 Catling, H.W. 1996 Μια εθνολογική προσέγγιση με νέα (1), 1–20. ‘Minoan and ‘Minoan’ pottery at δεδομένα’, in Πεπραγμένα του Ζ΄ the Menelaion, Sparta’, in Evely, Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου A2, Christakis, K.S. 2003 Lemos & Sherratt 1996, 70–8. Rethymnon, 1035–60. ‘Pithoi and staple storage in the South House’, in Mountjoy 2003, Catling, H.W. & A. Millett 1965 Chatzi-Vallianou, D. 1997a 153–61. ‘A study of the inscribed stirrup- ‘Κεραμική τεχνολογία στη Μινωική jars from Thebes’, Archaeometry 8, Κρήτη’, in Πρακτικά Α΄ Συνεδρίου για Christakis, K.S. 2004 3–85. “Αρχαία Τεχνολογία“, Thessaloniki, ‘Palatial economy and storage 487–503. in Late Bronze Age Knossos’, Chapouthier, F. & J. in Cadogan, Hatzaki & Vasilakis Charbonneaux 1928 Chatzi-Vallianou, D. 1997b 2004, 299–309. Fouilles exécutées à Mallia. Premier ‘Πιτσίδια’, ArchDelt 52 B’3, 1057– rapport (1922–1924) (ÉtCrét 1), 63. Christakis, K.S. 2005 Paris. Cretan Bronze Age pithoi. Traditions Chatzi-Vallianou, D. 1998 and trends in the production and Chapouthier, F. & P. Demargne ‘Πιτσίδια’, ArchDelt 53 B’3, 920–3. consumption of storage containers 1942 in Bronze Age Crete (Prehistory Fouilles executes à Mallia. Troisième Chatzi-Vallianou, D. 1999 Monographs 18), Philadelphia. rapport. Exploration du palais bordures ‘Πιτσίδια – Μινωική αγρέπαυλη’, orientale et septentrionale (1927, ArchDelt 54 B’2, 906–10. Christakis, K.S. 2006 1928, 1931, 1932) (ÉtCrét 6), ‘Traditions and trends in the Paris. Chatzi-Vallianou, D. 2002 production and consumption of ‘Επαρχία Πυργιωτίσσης. Πιτσίδια’, storage containers in Protopalatial Chapouthier, F. & P. Demargne Kritiki Estia 9, 326–30. and Neopalatial Crete’, in Wiener 1962 et al. 2006, 119–37. Fouilles exécutées à Mallia. Quatrième Cherry, J.F. 1986 rapport. Exploration du palais ‘Polities and palaces: some Christakis, K.S. 2008 bordure méridionale et recherches problems in Minoan state The politics of storage. Storage and complémentaires (1929–1935 et formation’, in Peer polity interaction sociopolitical complexity in Neopalatial 1946–1960) (ÉtCrét 12), Paris. and socio-political change, C. Crete (Prehistory Monographs 25), Renfrew & J.F. Cherry (eds.), Philadelphia. Chapouthier, F. & R. Joly 1936 Cambridge, 19–45. Fouilles exécutées à Mallia. Deuxième Christakis, K.S. 2011 rapport. Exploration du palais (1925– Cherry, J.F. 1992 ‘Redistribution and political 1926) (ÉtCrét 4), Paris. ‘Beazley in the Bronze Age? economies in Bronze Age Crete’, Reflections on attribution studies AJA 115, 197-205.

17 Christakis, K.S. forthcoming Cummer, W.W. & E. Schofield Moortel (eds.) 2009 ‘The implications of archaeological 1984 Archaeologies of cult. Essays on ritual formation processes in the study Keos. Results of excavations conducted and cult in Crete in honor of Geraldine of the domestic sector of Late by the University of Cincinnati under C. Gesell (Hesperia Supplement Minoan IB society’, in Glowacki & the auspices of the American School of 42), Princeton. Vogeikoff-Brogan. Classical Studies at Athens. Vol. III. Ayia Irini: House A, Mainz. Darcque, P. & R. Treuil (eds.) Christakis, K.S. & G. 1990 Rethemiotakis forthcoming Cunningham, T. 2001 L’habitat égéen préhistorique. Actes ‘Identifying household activities: ‘Variations on a theme: divergence de la table ronde internationale the case of House 2 at Galatas in settlement patterns and spatial organisée par le Centre National de la Pediada, Crete’, in Glowacki & organization in the far east of Crete Recherche Scientifique, l’Université de Vogeikoff-Brogan. during the Proto- and Neopalatial Paris I et l’École française d’Athènes periods’, in Branigan 2001, 72–86. (Athènes, 23–25 juin 1987) (BCH Chryssoulaki, S. 2000 Supplement 19), Paris. ‘Εργαστηριακές εγκαταστάσεις στην Cunningham, T. 2007 περιοχή Ζάκρου’, in Πεπραγμένα του ‘Havoc: the destruction of power Darcque, P. & A. Van de Moortel Η΄ Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου and the power of destruction 2009 A3, Herakleion, 581–97. in Minoan Crete’, in Power and ‘Special, ritual or cultic: a case architecture. Monumental public study from Malia’, in D’Agata & Cocchi Genick, D. (ed.) 1999 architecture in the Bronze Age Near Van de Moortel 2009, 31–42. Criteri di nomenclatura e di East and Aegean. Proceedings of terminologia inerente alla definizione the international conference Power Davaras, C. 1973 delle forme vascolari del Neolitico/ and Architecture organized by the ‘Μακρυγιαλός Σητείας’, ArchDelt 28 Eneolitico e del Bronzo/Ferro, Atti Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, the B’2, 590–1. del Congresso di Lido di Camaiore, Université Catholique de Louvain and 26–29 Marzo 1998, Florence. the Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Davaras, C. 1977 Münster on the 21st and 22nd of ‘Μακρυγιαλός Σητείας’, ArchDelt 32 Coldstream, J.N. 1978 November 2002, J. Bretschneider, B’2, 338–9. ‘Kythera and the southern J. Driessen & K. Van Lerberghe Peloponnese in the LM I period’, (eds.), Leuven, Paris, and Dudley, Davaras, C. 1980 in Doumas 1978b, 389–401. MA, 23–43. ‘A Minoan pottery kiln at Palaikastro’, BSA 75, 115–26. Coldstream, J.N. & G.L. Huxley Dabney, M.K. 1997 (eds.) 1972 ‘Craft product consumption as an Davaras, C. 1985 Kythera. Excavations and studies economic indicator of site status ‘Αρχιτεκτονικά στοιχεία της ΥΜ conducted by the University of in regional studies’, in Laffineur & ΙΒ έπαυλης του Μακρυγιαλού’, Pennsylvania Museum and the British Betancourt 1997, 467–71. in Πεπραγμένα του Ε΄ Διεθνούς School at Athens, London. Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου A, D’Agata, A.L. 1989 Herakleion, 77–92. Coldstream, J.N. & G.L. Huxley ‘Some MM IIIB/LM IA pottery 1984 from Haghia Triada’, in Laffineur Davaras, C. 1997 ‘The Minoans of Kythera’, in Hägg 1989, 93–7. ‘The “cult villa” at Makrygialos’, & Marinatos 1984, 107–12. in Hägg 1997, 117–35. D’Agata, A.L. 1999 Crouwel, J. H. & C. E. Morris ‘Dinamiche sociali, modelli Davis, J.L. 1986 1995 culturali e indicatori etnici Keos. Results of excavations conducted ‘Pictorial pottery of Late Minoan a Haghia Triada nel TM III. by the University of Cincinnati under II-IIIA2 Early from Knossos’ BSA L’evidenza offerta dalla ceramica’, the auspices of the American School 90, 157–82. in Epì pònton plazòmenoi. Simposio of Classical Studies at Athens. Vol V. Italiano di Studi Egei (Roma 1998), Ayia Irini: Period V, Mainz. Cucuzza, N. 2003 V. La Rosa, D. Palermo & L. ‘Il volo del grifo: osservazioni sulla Vagnetti (eds.), Rome, 189–98. Davis, J.L. & J.F. Cherry 2007 Haghia Triada ‘micenea’, Creta ‘The Cycladic pottery from Late Antica 4, 199–272. D’Agata, A.L. & A. Van de

18 Bronze I levels’, in Renfrew 2007, Day, P.M. 1995 Exploration des maisons et quartiers 265–306. ‘Pottery production and d’habitation (1921–1948) I (ÉtCrét consumption in the Bay area 9), Paris. Davis, J.L. & D.F. Williams 1981 during the New Palace Period’, ‘Petrological examination of later in Tsipopoulou & Vagnetti 1995, Deshayes, J. & A. Dessenne 1959 Middle Bronze Age pottery from 149–75. Fouilles exécutées à Mallia. Ayia Irini, Keos’, Hesperia 50, Exploration des maisons et quartiers 291–300. Day, P.M. 1997 d’habitation (1948–1954) II (ÉtCrét ‘Ceramic exchange between 11), Paris. Dawkins, R.M. 1903 towns and outlying settlements in ‘Pottery from Zakro’, JHS 23, Neopalatial East Crete’, in Hägg Dewolf, Y, F. Postel, & H. Van 248–60. 1997, 219–28. Effenterre 1963 ‘Géographie préhistorique de Dawkins, R.M. 1905–6 Day, P.M., L. Joyner & M. Relaki la région de Mallia’, in Fouilles ‘Excavations at Palaikastro. V’, 2003 exécutées à Mallia. Étude du site BSA 12, 1–8. ‘A petrographic analysis of the (1956–1957) et exploration des Neopalatial pottery’, in Barnard & nécropoles (1915–1928), H. Van Dawkins, R.M. & C.T. Currelly Brogan 2003, 13–32. Effenterre & M. Van Effenterre 1903–4 (eds.), (ÉtCrét 13), Paris, 28–53. ‘Excavations at Palaikastro. III’, Day, P.M. & M. Relaki 2002 BSA 10, 192–231. ‘Past factions and present fictions; Dickinson, O.T.P.K. 1974 palaces in the study of Minoan ‘The definition of Late Helladic I’, Dawkins, R.M., C.H. Hawes & Crete’, in Driessen, Schoep & BSA 69, 109–20. R.C. Bosanquet 1904–5 Laffineur 2002, 217–34. ‘Excavations at Palaikastro. IV’, Dickinson, O. 1994 BSA 11, 258–308. Day, P.M., M. Relaki & E.W. The Aegean Bronze Age, Faber 2006 Cambridge. Dawkins, R.M. & J.P. Droop ‘Pottery making and social 1910–11 reproduction in the Bronze Age Dikaios, P. 1969 ‘The excavations at Phylakopi in Mesara’, in Wiener et al. 2006, Enkomi. Excavations 1948–1958 I– Melos, 1911’, BSA 17, 1–22. 22–72. III, Mainz.

Day, L.P., M.S. Mook & J.D. Day, P.M., M. Relaki, M., & S. Dimopoulou, N. 1999 Muhly (eds.) 2004 Todaro 2010 ‘The Marine Style ewer from Crete beyond the palaces: proceedings ’Living from pots? Ceramic Poros’, in Betancourt et al. 1999, of the Crete 2000 Conference perspectives on the economies of 217–26. (Prehistory Monographs 10), Prepalatial Crete’, in Pullen 2010b, Philadelphia. 205-29. Dimopoulou, N. 2000 ‘119α-β. Πρόχους του «θαλάσσιου Day, P.M. 1988 Day, P.M., D.E. Wilson & E. πυθμού»’, in Karetsou, Andreadaki- ‘The production and distribution Kiriatzi 1997 Vlazaki & Papadakis 2000, 142–4. of storage jars in Neopalatial ‘Reassessing specialization in Crete’, in Problems in Greek Prepalatial Cretan ceramic Dimopoulou-Rethemiotaki, N. prehistory. Papers presented at the production’, in Laffineur & 1987 centenary conference of the British Betancourt 1997, 275–89. ‘KΓ’ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών School of Archaeology at Athens, και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων. Manchester, April 1986, E.B. French Demakopoulou, K. 1993 Ανασκαφικές εργασίες. Πόρος’, & K.A. Wardle (eds.), Bristol, ‘Argive Mycenaean pottery: ArchDelt 42 B’2, 528–9. 499–508. evidence from the necropolis at Kokla’, in Zerner, Zerner & Dimopoulou-Rethemiotaki, N. Day, P.M. 1991 Winder 1993, 57–75. 1993 A petrographic approach to the study ‘Πόρος-Κατσαμπάς’, ArchDelt 48 of pottery in Neopalatial East Crete, Demargne, P. & H. Gallet de B’2, 450–9. Ph.D. dissertation, Cambridge Santerre 1953 University. Fouilles exécutées à Mallia.

19 Dimopoulou-Rethemiotaki, N. ‘Pithoi, size and symbols: some the centenary of archaeological research 2004 preliminary considerations on the by the British School at Athens ‘Το επίνειο της Κνωσού στον Πόρο- Akrotiri evidence’, in Hardy et al. (1902–2002), London. Κατσαμπά’, in Cadogan, Hatzaki & 1990, 41–3. Vasilakis 2004, 363–80. Driessen, J., J.A. MacGillivray & Doumas, C., M. Marthari & C. A.L.H. Sackett 2006 Dimopoulou–Rethemiotaki, N. Televantou 2000 ‘The Late Minoan I period at 2005 Museum of prehistoric Thera. A brief Palaikastro. New evidence for the The Archaeological Museum of guide, Athens. Santorini eruption’, in Πεπραγμένα Herakleion, Athens. του Θ΄Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Doumas, C. & L. Papazoglou 1980 Συνεδρίου A1, Herakleion, 379–87. Di Vita, A. 1984a ‘Santorini tephra from Rhodes’, ‘Atti della Scuola 1981–1984’, Nature 287, 322–4. Driessen, J., I. Schoep & R. ASAtene 62 (n.s. 46), 199–263. Laffineur (eds.) 2002 Driessen, J. 2001 Monuments of Minos. Rethinking Di Vita, A. (ed.) 1984b ‘History and hierarchy. Preliminary the Minoan palaces. Proceedings of Creta Antica. Cento anni di observations on the settlement the International Workshop “Crete archeologia italiana (1884–1984), pattern of Minoan Crete’, in of the hundred Palaces?” held at the Rome. Branigan 2001, 51–71. Université Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, 14–15 December Di Vita, A. 1986–7 Driessen, J. & A. Farnoux (eds.) 2001 (Aegaeum 23), Liège and ‘Atti della Scuola 1986–1987’, 1997 Austin. ASAtene 64–5 (n.s. 48–9), 435– La Crète Mycénienne. Actes de la 534. table ronde internationale organisée Eriksson, K.O. 2003 par l’École française d’Athènes 26–28 ‘A preliminary synthesis of recent Doumas, C. 1978a Mars 1991 (BCH Supplement 30), chronological observations on ‘Πιθάρια με ενδείξη για το υγρό Paris. the relations between Cyprus περιεχόμενο τους απο την ΥΜ and other eastern Mediterranean ΙΑ Θήρα’, in STELE. Τόμος εις Driessen, J. & C.F. Macdonald societies during the late Middle μνήμην Νικολάου Κοντολέοντος, N. 1997 Bronze – Late Bronze II periods’, Zafeiropoulos et al. (eds.), Athens, The troubled island. Minoan Crete in The synchronisation of civilisations 117–24. before and after the Santorini eruption in the eastern Mediterranean in the (Aegaeum 17), Liège and Austin. second millennium B.C. II, M. Doumas, C. (ed.) 1978b Bietak (ed.), Vienna, 411–29. Thera and the Aegean world I. Papers Driessen, J. 2000 presented at the Second International ‘The New Palace period’, in Cretan Eustratiou, Κ. 1980 Scientific Congress, Santorini, Greece, quests. British explorers, excavators and ‘Από την κεραμική των νεοανακτορι- August 1978, London. historians, D. Huxley (ed.), London, κών χρόνων στα Χανιά’, in Πεπραγ- 113–28. μένα του Δ΄ Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Doumas, C. 1980 Συνεδρίου Α2, Athens, 654–8. ‘Ανασκαφή Θήρας’, Prakt 1980, Driessen, J. 2001 289–96. ‘History and hierarchy’, in Evans, A.J. 1903–4 Branigan 2001, 51–71. ‘The Palace of Knossos’, BSA 10, Doumas, C. 1992 1–62. The wall-paintings of Thera, Athens. Driessen, J.M. and J.A. MacGillivray forthcoming Evans, A.J. 1906 Doumas, C. 1999 ‘Swept away in LM IA’, in Essai de classification des époques de ‘Εικονιστικός πίθος απο το Πεπραγμένα του I’ Διεθνούς la civilisation minoenne. Resume d’un Ακρωτήρί Θήρας’, in Φως Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου. discours fait au Congrès d’Archéologie κυκλαδικόν. Τιμητικός τόμος στη μνήμη à Athènes, Londres. του Νίκου Ζαφειρόπουλου, N.C. Driessen, J., A. MacGillivray & H. Stampolidis (ed.), Athens, 54–73. Sackett (eds.) 2002 Evans, A. 1921 Palaikastro. A Bronze Age town of The Palace of Minos at Knossos, I, Doumas, C. & A.G. Minoan Crete, birthplace of Diktaian London. Constantinides 1990 Zeus. A retrospective exhibit to mark

20 Evans, A. 1928 Floyd, C.R. 2000 μινωική εγκατάσταση της Ζάκρου’, The Palace of Minos at Knossos, II, ‘Chrysokamino. The habitation in Πεπραγμένα του I΄Διεθνούς London. site’, in One hundred years of Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου. American archaeological work on Crete, Evans, A. 1930 J.D. Muhly (ed.), Athens, 65–9. Gesell, G.C. 1976 The Palace of Minos at Knossos, III, ‘The Minoan snake tube: a survey London. Floyd, C.R. 2009 and catalogue’, AJA 80, 247–59. ‘Pottery from Block AF’, in Evans, A. 1934 Betancourt & Davaras, 39–98. Gesell, G.C. 1999 The Palace of Minos at Knossos, IV, ‘Ritual kalathoi in the shrine at London. Foster, K.P. 1982 ’, in Betancourt et al. 1999, Minoan ceramic relief (SIMA 64), 283–8. Evans, J. 1936 Göteborg. Index to the Palace of Minos, Giannopoulou, M. & S. London. Furumark, A. 1941a Demesticha 1998 The Mycenaean pottery. Analysis and Τσικαλαριά: τα εργαστήρια Evely, R.D.G. 1999 classification, Stockholm. αγγειοπλαστικής της περιοχής Fresco: a passport into the past. Μανταμάδου Λέσβου, Athens. Minoan Crete through the eyes of Furumark, A. 1941b Mark Cameron. Athens. The chronology of Mycenaean pottery, Gillis, C. 1990 Stockholm. Minoan conical cups. Form, function Evely, R.D.G. 2000 and significance (SIMA 89), Minoan crafts: tools and techniques. Furumark, A. 1950 Göteborg. An introduction. Vol. 2 (SIMA ‘The settlement at Ialysos and 92:2), Jonsered. Aegean history c. 1550–1400 Glowacki, K. & N. Vogeikoff- B.C.’, OpArch 6, 150–271. Brogan forthcoming Evely, D., I.S. Lemos & S. Sherratt Stega: the archaeology of houses and (eds.) 1996 Furumark, A. 1972 households in ancient Crete (Hesperia Minotaur and centaur. Studies in Mycenaean pottery II. Chronology, Supplement). the archaeology of Crete and Euboea Stockholm. presented to Mervyn Popham (BAR- Gosselain, O.P. 2000 IS 638), Oxford. Galanaki, P. & G. Rethemiotakis ‘Materialising identities: an African 1999 perspective’, Journal of Archaeological Filippa-Touchais, A. 2000 ‘Καστέλλι’, Kρητική Εστία 7, 241–4. Method and Theory 7(3), 187–217. ‘Η τριποδική χύτρα στον αιγιακό χώρο κατά τη Μέση Χαλκοκρατία. Georgiou, H.S. 1980 Hägg, R. (ed.) 1997 Διάδοση και σημασία’, in ‘Minoan fireboxes: a study of form The function of the “Minoan Villa”. Πεπραγμένα του Η΄ Διεθνούς and function’, SMEA 21, 123–92. Proceedings of the Eighth International Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου Α3, Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Herakleion, 421–2. Georgiou, H. 1983 Athens, 6–8 June 1992 (SkrAth 4°, ‘Minoan coarse ware and Minoan 46), Stockholm. Fitton, L. 2000 technology’, in Minoan society. ‘124. Aλάβαστρο’, in Karetsou, Proceedings of the Cambridge Hägg, R. & N. Marinatos (eds.) Andreadaki-Vlazaki & Papadakis Colloquium 1981, O. Krzyszkowska 1984 2000, 147. & L. Nixon (eds.), Bristol, 75–91. The Minoan thalassocracy. Myth and reality. Proceedings of the Third Floyd, C.R. 1998 Gerondakou, E. 2000 International Symposium at the Pseira III. The Plateia Building ‘Λεκάνες σε σχήμα σκαφής από Swedish Institute in Athens, 31 May (University Monographs 102), τη Ζάκρο’, in Πεπραγμένα του Η΄ – 5 June, 1982 (SkrAth 4º , 32), Philadelphia. Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου Α1, Stockholm. Herakleion, 211–22. Floyd, C.R. 1999 Hägg, R. & N. Marinatos (eds.) ‘The Minoan scoop’, in Gerondakou, E. forthcoming 1987 Betancourt et al. 1999, 249–57. ‘Ο χαρακτήρας ενός σημαντικού The function of the Minoan palaces. «στρωματογραφικού ορίζοντα» στη Proceedings of the fourth international

21 symposium at the Swedish Institute in in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings review of the evidence’, OJA 15, Athens, 10–16 June, 1984 (SkrAth of the 5th International Aegean 1–32. 4°, 35), Stockholm. Conference, University of Heidelberg, Archäologisches Institut, 10–13 Hamilakis, Y. 1999 Haggis, D.C. 2000 April, 1994, R. Laffineur & W.-D. ‘Food technologies/technologies ‘Coarse ware ceramic distribution Niemeier (eds.), (Aegaeum 12), of the body: the social context in the north isthmus of Ierapetra Liège, 547–56. of wine and oil production and in the Bronze Age’, Πεπραγμένα του consumption in Bronze Age H΄ Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου Hallager, E. & B.P. Hallager (eds.) Crete’, World Archaeology 31, A1, Herakleion, 535–43. 1997 38–54. Late Minoan III pottery. Chronology Haggis, D.C. 2007 and terminology. Acts of a meeting Hamilakis, Y. 2002 ‘Stylistic diversity and diacritical held at the Danish Institute at Athens, ‘Factional competition in feasting at Protopalatial Petras: a August 12–14, 1994 (Monographs Neopalatial Crete’, in Driessen, preliminary analysis of the Lakkos of the Danish Institute at Athens Schoep & Laffineur 2002, 179–99. deposit’, AJA 111, 715–75. 1), Athens. Hankey, V. 1987 Haggis, D.C. & M.S. Mook 1993 Hallager, E. & B.P. Hallager (eds.) ‘The chronology of the Aegean ‘The Kavousi coarse ware: a 2000 Late Bronze Age’, in High, middle Bronze Age chronology for survey The Greek-Swedish excavations at or low? Acts of an international in the Mirabello area, East Crete’, the Agia Aikaterini Square, Kastelli, colloquium on absolute chronology AJA 97, 265–93. Khania, 1970–1987. Vol. II. The held at the University of Gothenburg Late Minoan IIIC settlement (SkrAth 20th–22nd August 1987, part 2, P. Halbherr, F., E. Stefani & L. Banti 4° 47/2), Stockholm. Åström (ed.), Gothenburg, 39–59. 1977 ‘Haghia Triada nel periodo tardo Hallager, E. & B.P. Hallager (eds.) Hardy, D.A., C.G. Doumas, J.A. palaziale’, ASAtene 55 (n.s. 39), 2003 Sakellarakis & P.M. Warren (eds.) 7–296. The Greek-Swedish excavations at 1990 the Agia Aikaterini Square, Kastelli, Thera and the Aegean world III. Hallager, B.P. 1997a Khania, 1970–1987 and 2001. Vol. 1. Archaeology. Proceedings of ‘Terminology – the Late Minoan Vol. III. The Late Minoan IIIB:2 the Third International Congress, goblet, kylix and footed cup’, in settlement (SkrAth 4° 47/3 i-ii), Santorini, Greece, 3–9 September Hallager & Hallager 1997, 15–44. Stockholm. 1989, London.

Hallager, B.P., 1997b Hallager E. & Y. Tzedakis 1988 Hardy, D.A. & A.C. Renfrew ‘Appendix. LM III pottery shapes ‘The Greek-Swedish Excavations (eds.) 1990 and their nomenclature’, in at Kastelli, Khania I. The 1989 ex- Thera and the Aegean world III. Hallager & Hallager 1997, 407–17. cavation, II. The 1990 excavation’, Vol. 3. Chronology. Proceedings of AAA 21, 15–55. the Third International Congress, Hallager, E. 1985 Santorini, Greece, 3–9 September The Master Impression. A clay sealing Halstead, P. 1996 1989, London. from the Greek-Swedish excavations ‘Pastoralism or household herding? at Kastelli, Khania (SIMA 69), Problems of scale and specialisation Hatzaki, E. M. 2005 Göteborg. in early Greek animal husbandry’, Knossos: The Little Palace (BSA, World Archaeology 28, 20–42. Supplementary Volume 38), Hallager, E. 1996 London. The Minoan roundel and other sealed Halstead, P. & J.C. Barrett (eds.) documents in the Neopalatial Linear 2004 Hatzaki, E. 2007a A Administration (Aegaeum 14), Food, cuisine and society in prehistoric ‘Neopalatial (MM IIIB-LM IB): Liège. Greece (Sheffield Studies in Aegean KS 178, Gypsades Well (upper Archaeology 5), Oxford. deposit), and SEX North House Hallager, B.P. & E. Hallager 1995 groups’, in Momigliano 2007b, ‘The Knossian bull-political Hamilakis, Y. 1996 151–96. propaganda in Neo-palatial ‘Wine, oil, and the dialectics of Crete?’, in Politeia: society and state power in Bronze Age Crete: a

22 Hatzaki, E. 2007b sites on the isthmus of Hierapetra, Hood, M.S.F. 1962b ‘Final Palatial (LM II-LM IIIA2) Crete. Excavations of the Wells- ‘Archaeology in Greece, 1961–62’, and Postpalatial (LM IIIB-LM Houston-Cramp Expeditions 1901, AR 8, 3–31. IIIC early): MUM South Sector, 1903, 1904, Philadelphia. Long Corridor cists, MUM pits Hood, M.S.F. 1962c (8, 10–11), Makritikhos ‘kitchen’, Hazzidakis, I. 1912 ‘Stratigraphic excavations at MUM North Platform pits, and ‘Τύλισος Μινωϊκή’, ArchEph 1912, Knossos, 1957–61’, CretChron SEX southern half groups’, in 197–233. 15–16, 92–8. Momigliano 2007b, 197–252. Hazzidakis, J. 1921 Hood, S. 1964 Hatzaki, E.M. 2007c Tylissos a l’époque Minoenne, Paris. ‘Inscribed cup from a Late Minoan ‘Well 576: the pottery deposits and IB deposit at Knossos’, Kadmos 3, ceramic sequence’, in MacGillivray, Hazzidakis, J. 1934 111–3. Sackett & Driessen 2007, 15–95. Les villas Minoennes de Tylissos (ÉtCrét 3), Paris. Hood, S. 1973 Hatzaki, E. forthcoming a ‘The eruption of Thera and its ‘Pots, frescoes, textiles and people. Hitchcock, L.A. 2000 effects in Crete in Late Minoan The social life of decorated ‘Of bar stools and beehives: an I’, in Πεπραγμένα του Γ’ Διεθνούς pottery at Late Bronze Age interpretive dialog about a Minoan Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου A, Athens, Knossos, Crete’, in Technologies store room’, in Πεπραγμένα του Η΄ 111–18. of representation, J. Bennet (ed.), Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου A1, Sheffield Round Table 2008. Herakleion, 593–606. Hood, S. 1978 ‘Traces of the eruption outside Hatzaki, E. forthcoming b Hitchcock, L.A. 2007 Thera’, in Doumas 1978b, 681–90. ‘The end of an intermezzo at ‘Naturalising the cultural: Knossos: ceramic wares, deposits, architectonised landscape as Hood, S. 1985 and architecture in context’, in ideology in Minoan Crete’, ‘Warlike destruction in Crete c. Intermezzo: intermediacy and regen- in Building communities: house, 1450 B.C.’, in Πεπραγμένα του Ε’ eration in Middle Minoan III Crete, settlement and society in the Aegean Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου A, C. Knappett, C. Macdonald & E. and beyond (British School at Herakleion, 170–8. Banou (eds), BSA Studies Series. Athens Studies 15), R. Westgate, N. Fisher & J. Whitley (eds.), Hood, S. 1996 Hatzaki, E. forthcoming c London, 91-7. ‘Back to basics with Middle ‘Mortuary practices and ideology Minoan IIIB’, in Evely, Lemos & in Bronze-Early Iron Age’, in JHogarth, D.G. 1900–1 Sherratt 1996, 10–16. Parallel lives: ancient island societies in ‘Excavations at Zakro, Crete’, BSA Crete and Cyprus, G. Cadogan, M. 7, 121–49. Hood, S. 2005 Iacovou, K. Kopaka and J. Whitley ‘Dating the Knossos frescoes’ in (eds), BSA Studies Series. Hood, M.S.F. 1956 Aegean wall painting: a tribute to ‘Another warrior-grave at Ayios Mark Cameron, L. Morgan (ed.) Hatzaki, E. forthcoming d Ioannis near Knossos’, BSA 51, (BSA Studies 13), London, 45–81. ‘Ceramic production and 81–99. consumption at the Neopalatial Hood, S. & D. Smyth 1981 settlement of Myrtos-Pyrgos’. Hood, M.S.F. 1961–2 Archaeological survey of the Knossos ‘Stratigraphic excavations at area (BSA Supplement 14), Hatzaki, E., M. Prent, N. Knossos, 1957–61’, in Πεπραγμένα London. Coldstream, D. Evely, A. Livarda, του Α΄Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού 2008 Συνεδρίου A, Herakleion, 92–8. Housely, R.A., S.W. Manning, G. ‘Knossos, the Little Palace North Cadogan, R.E. Jones, & R.E.M. Project, Part 1: the Early Greek Hood, M.S.F. 1962a Hedges 1999 periods’ BSA 103, 235–89. ‘Sir Arthur Evans vindicated: ‘Radiocarbon, calibration, and the a remarkable discovery of Late chronology of the Late Minoan IB Hawes, H. Boyd, B.E. Williams, Minoan IB vases from beside the phase,’ JAS 26, 159–71. R.B. Seager & E.H. Hall 1908 Royal Road at Knossos’, ILN 240 Gournia, Vasiliki and other prehistoric no. 6394 [17 February], 259–61.

23 Hutchinson, R.W. 1939–40 Katsa-Tomara, L. 1990 functions in selected contexts’, in ‘Unpublished objects from ‘The pottery-producing system Hardy et al. 1990, 350–62. Palaikastro and Praisos’, BSA 40, at Akrotiri: an index of exchange 38–50. and social activity’, in Hardy et al. Koehl, R.B. 2000 1990, 31–40. ‘Minoan rhyta in Egypt’, in Johnson, M. 1999 Karetsou, Andreadaki-Vlazaki & Archaeological theory: an introduction, Kemp, B.J. & R.S. Merrillees 1980 Papadakis 2000, 94–100. Oxford. Minoan pottery in second millennium Egypt, Mainz. Koehl, R.B. 2006 Johnston, A. 2000 Aegean Bronze Age rhyta (Prehistory ‘120α. Κύπελλο. 120β. Κύπελλο. Kenna, V.E.G. 1972 Monographs 19), Philadelphia. 121. Κύπελλο’, in Karetsou, CMS 12. Nordamerika I. New York, Andreadaki-Vlazaki & Papadakis The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Kopaka, K. & L. Platon 1993 2000, 144–6. Berlin. ‘Ληνοί μινωικοί. Installations Minoennes de traitement des Jones, R.E. 1993 Knappett, C. 1997 produits liquides’, BCH 117, ‘Appendix: chemical analysis ‘Ceramic production in the 35–101. of some Mycenaean vases from Protopalatial Mallia “State”: Kokla’, in Zerner, Zerner & evidence from Quartier Mu and Kopytroff, I. 1986 Winder 1993, 76–80. Myrtos Pyrgos’, in Laffineur & ‘The cultural biography of things: Betancourt 1997, 305–11. commodization as process’, in The Kanta A. 1984 social life of things. commodities in ‘The Minoan settlement of the Knappett, C. 1999 cultural perspective, A. Appadurai northern part of the district Apo- ‘Can’t live without them – (ed.), Cambridge. koronas and Minoan Apatawa’, producing and consuming Minoan in Aux origines de l’ Hellènisme: La conical cups’, in Betancourt et al. Krzyszkowska, O. 2005 Crète et Grèce. Hommage à Henri van 1999, 415–20. Aegean seals. An introduction (BICS Effenterre presente par le Centre G. Supplement 85), London. Glotz, Paris, 9–14. Knappett, C. 2000 ‘The production of domestic Laffineur, R. & P.P. Betancourt Kanta, A. & L. Rocchetti 1989 pottery from Middle Minoan II (eds.) 1997 ‘La ceramica del primo edificio’, Myrtos Pyrgos’, in Πεπραγμένα του TEXNH. Craftsmen, craftswomen in Tzedakis & Sacconi 1989, Η΄ Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου and craftsmanship in the Aegean 101–279. B’, Herakleion, 51–62. Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 6th International Aegean Conference, Karageorghis, V. 2002 Knappett, C. & T.F. Cunningham Philadelphia, Temple University, Early Cyprus. Crossroads of the 2003 18–21 April 1996 (Aegaeum 16), Mediterranean, Los Angeles. ‘Three Neopalatial deposits from Liège and Austin. Palaikastro, East Crete’, BSA 98, Karetsou, A. 1975 107–88. Laffineur, R. & J.L. Crowley (eds.) ‘Το Ιερό Κορυφής του Γιούχτα’, 1992 Prakt 1975, 330–42. Knappett, C.J. & T. Cunningham EIKON. Aegean Bronze Age forthcoming Iconography: Shaping a Methodology. Karetsou, A., M. Andreadaki- Block M at Palaikastro: the Proto- and 4th International Aegean Conference, Vlazaki & N. Papadakis (eds.) 2000 Neopalatial town. Excavations 1986– University of Tasmania, Hobart, 6–9 Κρήτη-Αίγυπτος. Πολιτισμικοί 2003 (BSA Supplement), London. April 1992 (Aegaeum 8), Liège and δεσμοί τριών χιλιετιών. Κατάλογος, Austin. Herakleion. Koehl, R.B. 1986 ‘A marinescape floor from the Lamb, W. 1936 Karetsou, A., M. Andreadaki- palace at Knossos’, AJA 90, 407– Corpus vasorum antiquorum. Great Vlazaki & N. Papadakis (eds.) 2001 17. Britain, fascicule II. Cambridge, Crete-Egypt. Three thousand years of Fitzwilliam Museum, fascicule 2, cultural links. Catalogue, Herakleion. Koehl, R.B. 1990 Oxford. ‘The rhyta from Akrotiri and some preliminary observations on their

24 LaMotta, V.M. & M.B. Schiffer Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου A2, Levi, D. 1976 1999 Herakleion, 137–53. Festòs e la civiltà minoica I ‘Formation processes of house (Incunabula Graeca 60), Rome. floor assemblages’, in The La Rosa, V. 2002 archaeology of household activities, ‘Pour une révision préliminaire Levi, D. 1988 P.M. Allison (ed.), London, 19–29. du second palais de Phaistos’, in Festòs e la civiltà minoica II Driessen, Schoep & Laffineur (Incunabula Graeca 77), Rome. La Rosa, V. 1979–80 2002, 71–97. ‘Haghia Triada, II: relazione Levi, D. & C. Laviosa 1979–80 preliminare sui saggi del 1978 e La Rosa, V. 2006 ‘Il forno minoico da vasaio di 1979’, ASAtene 57–8 (n.s. 41–2), ‘Considerazioni sull’area ad W del Haghia Triada’, ASAtene 57–8 (n.s. 49–164. c.d. Bastione di Haghia Triada,’ 41–2), 7–47. ASAtene 84 (Series III, 6), 819–78. La Rosa, V. 1989a Lolos, J.G. 1985 ‘Nouvelles données du bronze La Rosa, V. & N. Cucuzza 2001 ‘The Late Helladic I pottery of the moyen au bronze récent à Haghia L’insediamento di Selì di Kamilari southwestern Peloponnesos and its local Triada’, in Transition. Le monde nel territorio di Festòs (Studi di characteristics’, Ph.D. dissertation, égéen du bronze moyen au bronze Archeologia Cretese 1), Padova. University of London, Bedford récent. Actes de la deuxième Rencontre College. égéenne internationale de l’Université La Rosa, V. & A.L. D’Agata 1984 de Liège (18–20 avril 1988), R. ‘Festòs’, ‘Haghia Triada’, ‘Materiali Lolos, Y.G. 1990 Laffineur (ed.), (Aegaeum 3), dalle Raccolte pubbliche italiane’, ‘On the Late Helladic I of Akrotiri, Liège, 81–92. in Di Vita 1984b, 121–226. Thera’, in Hardy & Renfrew 1990, 51–6. La Rosa, V. 1989b Lebessi, A. 1967 ‘Recenti acquisizioni nel settore ‘Ανασκαφή σπηλαιώδους τάφου εις Macdonald, C. 1990 nord dell’abitato di Haghia Triada’, Πόρον Ηρακλείου’, Prakt 1967, ‘Destruction and construction in in Πεπραγμένα του ΣΤ’ Διεθνούς 195–209. the palace at Knossos: LM IA-B’, Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου A1, Khania, in Hardy & Renfrew 1990, 82–8. 411–18. Leonard Jr., A. 1994 An index to the Late Bronze Age Macdonald, C.F. 1996 La Rosa, V. 1992–3 Aegean pottery from Syria-Palestine ‘Notes on some Late Minoan IA ‘La c.d. Tomba degli ori e il nuovo (SIMA 114), Jonsered. contexts from the palace of Minos settore nord-est dell’insediamento and its immediate vicinity’, in di Haghia Triada’, ASAtene 70–1 Levi, D. 1959 Evely, Lemos & Sherratt 1996, (n.s. 54–5), 121–74. ‘La villa rurale minoica di Gortina’, 17–26. BdA 44, 237–65. La Rosa, V. 1995 Macdonald, C.F. 2001 ‘Le campagne 1986–1991 e la Levi, D. 1961–2 Review of A test of time: the conclusione del primo ciclo ‘Gli scavi a Festòs negli anni 1958– volcano of Thera and the chronology di lavori ad Haghia Triada’, 1960’, ASAtene 39–40 (n.s. 23–4), and history of the Aegean and in Πεπραγμένα του Z’ Διεθνούς 377–504. East Mediterranean in the mid- Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου A2, second millennium B.C. by Stuart Rethymnon, 523–43. Levi, D. 1965–6 Manning, AJA 105, 527–32. ‘La conclusione degli scavi a La Rosa, V. 1997 Festòs’, ASAtene 43–4 (n.s. 27–8), Macdonald, C. 2004 ‘Haghia Triada à l’époque 313–99. ‘Ceramic and contextual confusion mycénienne: l’utopie d’une ville in the Old and New Palace capitale’, in Driessen & Farnoux Levi, D. 1967–8 periods’, in Cadogan, Hatzaki & 1977, 149–266. ‘L’abitato di Festòs in località Vasilakis 2004, 239–51. Chálara’, ASAtene 45–6 (n.s. 29– La Rosa, V. 2000 30), 55–166. Macdonald, C.F. 2005 ‘Preghiere fatte in casa? Altari Knossos, London. mobili da un edificio di H. Triada’, in Πεπραγμένα του H’

25 Macdonald, C. F. & C. Knappett MacGillivray, J.A. & L.H. Sackett in the mid-second millennium BC, 2007 1992 Oxford. Knossos: Protopalatial deposits in ‘Palaikastro’, in The aerial atlas Early Magazine A and the South- of ancient Crete, J.W. Myers, E.E. Manning, S.W. 2009 West Houses (BSA Supplement 41), Myers & G. Cadogan (eds.), ‘Beyond the Santorini eruption: London. Berkeley and Los Angeles, 222–31. some notes on dating the Late Minoan IB period on Crete, and MacGillivray, J.A. 1997a MacGillivray, J.A., L.H. Sackett & implications for Cretan-Egyptian ‘Late Minoan II and III pottery J.M. Driessen 1998 relations in the 15th century and chronology at Palaikastro: ‘Excavations at Palaikastro, 1994 BC (and especially LM II)’ in an introduction’, in Hallager & and 1996’, BSA 93, 221–68. Warburton 2009, 207–26. Hallager 1997, 193–207. MacGillivray, J.A., L.H. Sackett & Manning, S. 2010 MacGillivray, J.A. 1997b J.M. Driessen (eds.) 2007 ‘Chronology and terminology’ in ‘The re-occupation of eastern Palaikastro: two Late Minoan wells The Oxford handbook of the Bronze Crete in the Late Minoan II- (BSA Supplement 43), London. Age Aegean (ca. 3000–1000 BC), E. IIIA1/2 periods’, in Driessen & Cline (ed.), Oxford. Farnoux 1997, 275–9. MacGillivray, J.A., L.H. Sackett, J. Driessen, R. Bridges & D. Smyth Manning, S.W. & C.B. Ramsey MacGillivray, J.A. 2000a 1989 2003 ‘Sir Arthur Evans’s Minoans and ‘Excavations at Palaikastro, 1988’, ‘A Late Minoan I-II absolute the Egyptian Renaissance of the BSA 84, 417–45. chronology for the Aegean New Kingdom’, in Kρήτη-Αίγυπτος. – combining archaeology Πολιτισμικοί δεσμοί τριών χιλιετιών. MacGillivray, J.A., L.H. Sackett, J. with radiocarbon’, in The Μελέτες, A. Karetsou (ed.), Athens, Driessen, A. Farnoux & D. Smyth synchronisation of civilisations in the 150–3. 1991 eastern Mediterranean in the second ‘Excavations at Palaikastro, 1990’, millennium B.C. II. Proceedings of MacGillivray, J.A. 2000b BSA 86, 121–47. the SCIEM 2000 – EuroConference, ‘The Great Kouros in Cretan Haindorf, 2nd of May – 7th of May art’, in MacGillivray, Driessen & MacGillivray, J.A., L.H. Sackett, 2001, M. Bietak (ed.), Vienna, Sackett 2000, 123–30. J.M. Driessen & S. Hemingway 111–33. 1992 MacGillivray, J.A. 2009 ‘Excavations at Palaikastro, 1991’, Manning, S.W, C.B. Ramsey, ‘Thera, Hatshepsut and the Keftiu: BSA 87, 121–52. C. Doumas, T. Marketou, G. crisis and response in Egypt and Cadogan & C.L. Pearson 2002 the Aegean in the mid-second MacGillivray, J.A., L.H. Sackett, ‘New evidence for an early date millennium BC’, in Warburton J. Driessen, C. Macdonald & D. for the Aegean Late Bronze Age 2009, 155–70. Smyth 1988 and Thera eruption’, Antiquity 76, ‘Excavations at Palaikastro, 1987’, 733–44. MacGillvray, J.A. & J.M. Driessen BSA 83, 259–82. 1989 Manning, S.W., C.B. Ramsey, W. ‘Excavations at Palaikastro, 1988’, McEnroe, J.C. 2010 Kutschera, T. Higham, B. Kromer, BSA 84, 417–45. Architecture of Minoan Crete: P. Steier & E.M. Wild 2006 constructing identity in the Aegean ‘Chronology for the Aegean Late MacGillivray, J.A. & J.M. Driessen Bronze Age, Austin. Bronze Age 1700–1400 B.C.’, 1990 Science 312, 565–9. ‘Minoan settlement at Palaikastro’, in Mandalaki, S. 1998 Darcque & Treuil 1990, 395–412. Σκινιάς. Θέση κολοκύθι (αγρός Mannoni, T. & E. Giannichedda Ε. Μπριτζολάκη - Γ. Γαλανάκη)’, 1996 MacGillivray, J.A., J.M. Driessen & ArchDelt 53 B’3, 849–51. Archeologia della produzione, Torino. L.H. Sackett (eds.) 2000 The Palaikastro kouros. A Minoan Manning, S.W. 1999 Mantzourani, E., G. Vavouranakis chryselephantine statuette and its A test of time: the volcano of Thera & C. Kanellopoulos 2005 Aegean Bronze Age context (BSA and the chronology and history of ‘The Klimataria-Manares building Supplement 6), London. the Aegean and East Mediterranean reconsidered’, AJA 109, 743–76.

26 Marinatos, S. 1924–5 based on the stratigraphy’, in the centenary conference of the British ‘Μεσομινωικό οικία εν Κάτω Hardy & Renfrew 1990, 100–13. School of Archaeology at Athens, Μεσαρά’, ArchDelt 9, 53–78. Manchester, April 1986, E.B. French Marketou, T. et al. 2006 & K.A. Wardle (eds.), Bristol, Marinatos, S. 1925–6 ‘Pottery wares from the prehistoric 421–4. ‘Ανασκαφαί Νίρου Χάνι Κρήτης’, settlement at Ialysos (Trianda) in Prakt 1925–6, 141–7. Rhodes’, BSA 106, 1–55. Martlew, H. 1996 ‘What a difference a spout makes: Marinatos, S. 1939–41 Marthari, M. 1980 Minoan and Mycenaean cooking ‘Το Μινωικόν μέγαρον ‘Ακρωτήρι, κεραμεική vessels and what they can tell us’, Σκλαβόκαμπου’, ArchEph 1939–41, Μεσοελλαδικής παράδοσης BICS 41, 144–5. 69–96. στο στρώμα της ηφαιστειακής καταστροφής’, AE 1980, 182–211. Matthäus, H. 1980 Marinatos, S. 1969 Die bronzegefässe der kretisch- Excavations at Thera II (1968 Marthari, M. 1987 mykenischen kultur (Prähistorische season), Athens. ‘The local pottery wares with Bronzefunde II: 1), Munich. painted decoration from the Marinatos, S. 1971 volcanic destruction level of Mavroudi, N. 2004 Excavations at Thera IV (1970 Akrotiri, Thera. A preliminary Προσεγγίσεις της οικιακής season), Athens. report’, AA 1987, 359–79. αρχιτεκτονικής στην Κρήτη κατά τη Νεοανακτορική περίοδο. Το Marinatos, S. 1972 Marthari, M. 1990 παράδειγμα του Σπιτιού ΙΙ στον Excavations at Thera V (1971 ‘The chronology of the last phases Πετρά, Unpublished MA Thesis, season), Athens. of occupation at Akrotiri in the University of Rethymnon. light of the evidence from the West Marinatos, S. 1974 House pottery groups’, in Hardy & Merrillees, R.S. & J. Evans 1980 Excavations at Thera VI (1972 Renfrew 1990, 57–70. ‘An essay in provenance: the Late season), Athens. Minoan IB pottery from Egypt’, Marthari, M. 1993a Berytus 28, 1–45. Marinatos, S. 1976 Ακρωτήρι Θήρας. Η κεραμεική Excavations at Thera VII. Athens. του στρώματος της ηφαιστειακής Merrillees, R.S. & J. Winter 1972 καταστροφης, Ph.D. dissertation, ‘Bronze Age trade between the Marinatos, S. 1999a University of Athens. Aegean and Egypt: Minoan and Excavations at Thera IV–V. 1970– Mycenaean pottery from Egypt in 1971 seasons (The Archeological Marthari, M. 1993b the Brooklyn Museum’, Miscellanea Society at Athens Library no. 179), ‘The ceramic evidence for contacts Wilbouriana 1, 101–33. Athens. between Thera and the Greek mainland’, in Zerner, Zerner & Michaelidis, P. 1993 Marinatos, S. 1999b Winder 1993, 249–56. ‘Potters’ workshops in Minoan Excavations at Thera VI–VII. 1972– Crete’, SMEA 32, 7–39. 1973 seasons (The Archeological Marthari, M. 2000 Society at Athens Library no. 180), ‘The attraction of the pictorial: Militello, P. 1989 Athens. observations on the relationship of ‘Gli scribi di Haghia Triada, alcune Theran pottery and Theran fresco osservazioni’, PP 44, 126–47. Marinatos, S. & M. Hirmer 1960 iconography’, in Proceedings of the Crete and Mycenae, London. First International Symposium “The Militello, P. 1992 wall paintings of Thera”, Petros M. ‘Aspetti del funzionamento del Marinatos, S. & M. Hirmer 1973 Nomikos Conference Centre, Thera, sistema amministrativo ad Hagia Kreta, Thera und das mykenische Hellas, 30 August-4 September 1997, Triada’, in Mykenaika. Actes du Hellas, Munich. S. Sherratt (ed.), Athens, 873–89. IXe colloque international sur les texts mycéniens et égéens organisé par Marketou, T. 1990 Martlew, H. 1988 le Centre de l’Antiquité Grecque et ‘Santorini tephra from Rhodes and ‘Domestic coarse pottery in Romaine de la Fondation Hellénique Kos: some chronological remarks Bronze Age Crete’, in Problems in des Recherches Scientifiques et l’École Greek prehistory. Papers presented at française d’Athènes (Athènes, 2–6

27 octobre 1990), J.-P. Olivier (eds.), Moody, J. 1985 South House at Mycenae’, BSA (BCH Supplement 25), Paris, ‘The development of a Bronze 71, 77–111. 411–4. Age coarse ware chronology for the Khania region of West Crete’, Mountjoy, P.A. 1976b Militello, P. 2000 TUAS 10, 51–65. ‘A Late Minoan IB Marine Style ‘Organizzazione dello spazio e rhyton from Pseira’, AAA 9, 83–6. vita quotidiana nelle case TM I di Moody, J. forthcoming Haghia Triada’, in Πεπραγμένα του ‘Hinterlands and hinterseas: Mountjoy, P.A. 1983 H’ Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου resources and production zones in ‘The Ephyraean goblet reviewed’, A2, Herakleion, 313–34. Bronze and Iron Age Crete’, in BSA 78, 265–71 Parallel lives: ancient island societies in Moak, M. 2000 Crete and Cyprus, G. Cadogan, K. Mountjoy, P.A. 1984 ‘The Palaikastro kouros’, in Kopaka & M. Iacovou (eds.), (BSA ‘The Marine Style pottery of LM MacGillivray, Driessen & Sackett Studies Series) IB/LH IIA: towards a corpus’, 2000, 65–86. BSA 79, 161–219. Moody, J., H.L. Robinson, J. Molloy, B. 2008 Francis, L. Nixon & L. Wilson Mountjoy, P.A. 1985 ‘Martial arts and materiality: a 2003 ‘Ritual associations for LM combat archaeology perspective on ‘Ceramic fabric analysis and survey IB Marine Style vases’, in Aegean swords of the fifteenth and archaeology: the Sphakia Survey’, L’iconographie minoenne. Actes de la fourteenth centuries BC’, World BSA 98, 37–105. table ronde d’Athénes (21–22 avril Archaeology 40.1, 116–34. 1983), P. Darcque & J.-C. Poursat Mook, M.S. 1999 (eds.), (BCH Supplement 11), Molloy, B., 2010. ‘Swords and ‘Cooking dishes from the Kastro’, Athens, 231–42. swordsmanship in the Aegean in Betancourt et al. 1999, 503–9. Bronze Age’ AJA 114, 403–28. Mountjoy, P.A. 1986 Morgan, L. 1988 Mycenaean decorated pottery: a Momigliano, N. 1999 The miniature wall paintings of guide to identification (SIMA 73), Duncan Mackenzie: a cautious canny Thera: a study in Aegean culture and Göteborg. Highlander and the palace of Minos at iconography, Cambridge. Knossos, London. Mountjoy, P.A. 1999 Morgan, L. (ed.) 2005 Regional Mycenaean decorated pottery, Momigliano, N. 2001 Aegean wall painting. A tribute to Rahden/Westf. ‘Bronze Age Carian Iasos’, Mark Cameron (BSA Studies 13), Anatolian Archaeology 7, 15. London. Mountjoy, P.A. 2003 Knossos. The South House (BSA Momigliano, N. 2007a Morricone, L. 1972–3 Supplement 34), London. ‘Kamares or not Kamares? This ‘Coo – scavi e scoperte nel is [not] the question. Southeast “serraglio” e in località minori Mountjoy, P.A. 2004 Aegean Light-On-Dark (LOD) (1935–1943)’, ASAtene 50–1 (n.s. ‘Knossos and the Cyclades in Late and Dark-On-Light (DOL) 34–5), 139–396. Minoan IB’, in Cadogan, Hatzaki pottery: synchronisms, production & Vasilakis 2004, 399–404. centers, and distribution’, in Middle Mountjoy, P.A. 1974a Helladic pottery and synchronisms. ‘A later development in the Late Mountjoy, P.A. 2007 Proceedings of the International Minoan IB Marine Style’, BSA 69, ‘The Mycenaean and Late Minoan Workshop held at Salzburg, October 177–80. I­-II pottery’, in Excavations at 31st-November 2nd, 2004, F. Felten, Phylakopi in Melos 1974–77, C. W. Gauss & R. Smetana (eds.), Mountjoy, P.A. 1974b Renfrew (ed.), (BSA Supplement Vienna, 257–72. ‘A note on the LM IB Marine 42), London, 307–70. Style at Knossos’, BSA 69, 173–5. Momigliano, N. (ed.) 2007b Mountjoy, P.A. 2009 Knossos pottery handbook. Neolithic Mountjoy, P.A. 1976a ‘Some LM IB/LH IIA Marine and Bronze Age (Minoan) (BSA ‘Late Helladic IIIB 1 pottery Style pottery from Kea’, in Studies 14), London. dating the construction of the ΔΩΡΟΝ: Τιμητικός τόμος για

28 τον Καθνγητή Σπύρο Ιακοβίδη, D. Minoan Society. Proceedings of the from Middle Cycladic Akrotiri, Danielidou (ed.), Athens, 441-56. Cambridge Colloquium 1981, O. Thera’, in Horizon. A colloquium Krzyszkowska & L. Nixon (eds.), on the prehistory of the Cyclades, Mountjoy, P.A., R.E. Jones & J.F. Bristol, 217–27. N. Brodie, J. Doole, G. Gavalas Cherry 1978 & C. Renfrew (eds), Cambridge, ‘Provenance studies of the LMIB/ Niemeier, W.-D. 1984 311–24. LHIIA Marine Style’, BSA 73, ‘The end of the Minoan 143–71. thalassocracy’, in Hägg & Nodarou, E. 2003 Marinatos 1984, 205–15. ‘A petrographic analysis of a clay Mountjoy, P.A. & M.J. Ponting sample from the field adjacent to 2000 Niemeier, W.-D. 1985 the Artisans’ Quarter’, in Barnard ‘The Minoan thalassocracy Die Palaststilkeramik von Knossos. & Brogan 2003, 171–4. reconsidered: provenance studies Stil, chronologie und historischer of LH II A/LM I B pottery from kontext (AF 13), Berlin. Nowicki, K. 2002 Phylakopi, Ay. Irini and Athens’, ‘A Middle Minoan II deposit at BSA 95, 141–84. Niemeier, W.-D. 1994 the refuge site of Monastiraki ‘Knossos in the New Palace period Katalimata (East Crete)’, Aegean Muhly, P. 1984 (MM III-LM IB)’, in Knossos. A Archaeology 5, 27–45. ‘Minoan hearths’, AJA 88, 107–22. labyrinth of history. Papers presented in honour of Sinclair Hood, D. Evely, H. Nowicki, K. 2008 Muhly, P. 1992 Hughes-Brock & N. Momigliano Monastiraki Katalimata. Excavation Μινωικός λαξευτός τάφος στον (eds.), Athens, 71–88. of a Cretan refuge site, 1993–2000 Πόρο Ηρακλείου (ανασκαφής 1967) (Prehistory Monographs 24), (Βιβλιοθήκη της εν Αθήναις Nikolakopoulou, I. 2002 Philadelphia. Αρχαιολογικής Εταιρείας αρ. 129), Storage, storage facilities and island Athens. economy: the evidence from LC I Overbeck, J.C. 1989 Akrotiri, Thera, Ph.D. dissertation, Keos. Results of excavations conducted Müller, W. 1997 University of Bristol. by the University of Cincinnati under Kretische tongefässe mit meeresdekor. the auspices of the American School Entwicklung und stellung innerhalb der Nikolakopoulou, I. 2003 of Classical Studies at Athens. Vol. feinen keramik von Spätminoisch I B ‘Ακρωτήρι Θήρας. Η πόλη σε VII. Ayia Irini: Period IV. Part 1: auf Kreta (AF 19), Berlin. κατάσταση έκτακτης ανάγκης’, in the stratigraphy and the find deposits, Αργοναύτης. Τιμητικός τόμος για τον Mainz. Myer, G.H. & P.P. Betancourt Καθηγητή Χρίστο Γ. Ντούμα, A. 1990 Vlachopoulos & K. Birtacha (eds.), Palio, O. 2001a ‘The fabrics at Kommos’, in Athens, 554–73. ‘La casa tardo minoico I di Chalara Betancourt 1990, 3–13. a Festòs’, in Studi di Archeologia Nikolakopoulou, I. 2006 Cretese II, Padova, 243–422. Myer, G.H., K.G. McIntosh & P.P. ‘Μινωικοί πίθοι απο το Ακρωτήρι Betancourt 1995 Θήρας’, in Πεπραγμένα Θ’ Διεθνούς Palio, O. 2001b ‘Definition of pottery fabrics Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου A4, ‘Tardo Minoico I: la casa di Haghia by ceramic petrography’, in Herakleion, 91–107. Fotinì’, in I cento anni dello scavo di Betancourt and Davaras 1995, Festòs (Roma, 13–14 dicembre 2000) 143–53. Nikolakopoulou, I. 2010 (Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei: ‘Middle Cycladic iconography: a Atti dei Convegni Lincei 173), Niemeier, W.-D. 1980 social context for ‚a new chapter Rome, 243–72. ‘Die katastrophe von Thera und in Aegean art’, In Cretan offerings. die Spätminoische chronologie’, Studies in honour of Peter Warren, O. Palio, O. in press JdI 95, 1–76. Krzyszkowska (ed.), (BSA Studies ‘Consumo di cibo e attività 18), Athens, 213-22. rituale a Festòs in età neopalaziale: Niemeier, W.-D. 1983 l’edificio di Haghia Photinì’, in ‘The character of the Knossian Nikolakopoulou, I., F. Georma, A. Cibo per gli uomini, cibo per gli dei. palace society in the second half Moschou & F. Sophianou 2008 Archeologia del pasto rituale (Piazza of the fifteenth century B.C.: ‘Trapped in the middle: new Armerina – Enna, 4–8 maggio Mycenaean or Minoan?’, in stratigraphic and ceramic evidence 2005).

29 Palyvou, C. 2005 Pelon, O. 1966 Vol. I. Gli strati più antichi e il promo ‘Architecture in Aegean Bronze ‘Maison d’Hagia Varvara et palazzo, Rome. Age art: façades with no interiors’, architecture domestique à Mallia’, in Morgan 2005, 185–97. BCH 90, 552–85. Pernier, L. & L. Banti 1951 Il Palazzo Minoico di Festòs. Scavi Panagiotakis, N. 2003 Pelon, O. 1970 e studi della Missione Archeologica ‘L’évolution archéologique de la Fouilles exécutées à Mallia. Italiana a Creta dal 1900 al 1950. Pédiada (Crète centrale): premier Exploration des maisons et quartiers Vol. II. Il Secondo Palazzo, Rome. bilan d’une prospection’, BCH d’habitation (1963–1966). Troisième 127, 327–430. fascicule (ÉtCrét 16), Paris. Petrakos, V. 2005 ‘Ζάκρος’, Ergon 2005, 74–5. Papadatos, Y. forthcoming Pelon, O. 1980 ‘Η μετάβαση από τη Νεολιθική Le palais de Malia V, 1 (ÉtCrét 25), Phaklaris, P.B. 1990 στην Πρώιμη Εποχή του Χαλκού: Paris. Αρχαία Κυνουρία. Aνθρώπινη νέα δεδομένα από τον οικισμό δραστηριότητα και περιβάλλον στην Κεφάλα Πετρά Σητείας’, Pelon, O. 1992 (Publications of ArchDelt 43), in Πεπραγμένα του I΄ Διεθνούς Guide de Malia. Le palais et la Athens. Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου. nécropole de Chrysolakkos (École Française d’Athènes: Sites et Pilafidis-Williams, K 1998 Papadopoulos, S. 1999 momuments 9), Athens. The sanctuary of Aphaia on Aigina in Παραδοσιακά Αγγειοπλαστεία της the Bronze Age, Munich. Θάσου, Αθήνα. Pelon, O. 1997 ‘Le palais post-palatial à Malia’, in Platon, L. 1996 Papagiannopoulou, A.G. 1991 Driessen & Farnoux 1997, 341–55. ‘Εργασίες συντήρησης και The influence of Middle Minoan προκαταρκτικής μελέτης υλικού pottery on the Cyclades (SIMA-PB Pelon, O. 2005 ανασκαφών Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1996, 96), Göteborg. ‘Les deux destructions du palais 321–4. de Malia’, in ΚΡΗΣ ΤΕΧΝΙΤΗΣ. Papastamatiou, J. et al. 1959a L’artisan crétois. Recueil d’articles en Platon, L. 1997a Geological Map of Greece l’honneur de Jean-Claude Poursat, ‘Έκθεση εργασιών μελέτης και 1:50,000. Sitia Sheet. Institute for publié à l’occasion des 40 ans de συντήρησης ευρημάτων των Geology and Subsurface Research, la découverte du Quartier Mu, I. ανασκαφών Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1997, Athens. Bradfer-Burdet, B. Detournay & 211–4. R. Laffineur (eds.), (Aegaeum 26), Papastamatiou, J. et al. 1959b Liège and Austin, 185–97. Platon, L. 1997b Geological Map of Greece ‘The Minoan “villa” in eastern 1:50,000. Ierapetra Sheet. Institute Pendlebury, J.D.S. 1933 Crete. Riza, Akhladia, and for Geology and Subsurface A guide to the Stratigraphical Museum Prophetes Elias, Praissos: two Research, Athens. in the palace at Knossos, London. different specimens of one category?’, in Hägg 1997, 187– Pecorella, P.E. 1973 Pendlebury, J.D.S. 1939 202. ‘Mycenaean pottery from Ayia The Archaeology of Crete. London. Irini’, in Acts of the International Platon, L. 1997c Archaeological Symposium Pendlebury, H.W., J.D.S. ‘Caractère, morphologie et ‘The Mycenaeans in the eastern Pendlebury & M.B. Money-Coutts datation de la baurgade post- Mediterranean’, Nicosia 27th March 1935–36. palatiale de Kèphali Chondrou – 2nd April 1972, V. Karageorghis ‘Excavations in the plain of Lasithi. Viannou’, in Driessen & Farnoux (ed.), Nicosia, 19–24. I. The cave of Trapeza’, BSA 36, 1977, 357–74. 5–131. Pecorella, P.E. 1977 Platon, L. 1998 Le tombe dell’età del bronzo tardo Pernier, L. 1935 ‘Εργασίες μελέτης και συντήρησης della necropoli a mare di Ayia Irini Il Palazzo Minoico di Festòs. Scavi ευρημάτων ανασκαφών Ζάκρου’, ‘Paleokastro’ (Biblioteca di antichità e studi della Missione Archeologica Prakt 1998, 189–93. cypriote 4), Rome. Italiana a Creta dal 1900 al 1934.

30 Platon, L. 1999a καταστροφή’, in Πεπραγμένα του Platon, N. 1969 ‘Ανυπόγραφα «έργα τέχνης» I΄Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου. ‘Ανασκαφή Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1969, στα χέρια ιδιωτών κατά τη 197–237. νεοανακτορική περίοδο στην Platon, L. & E. Karantzali 2003 Κρήτη’, in Eliten in der Bronzezeit. ‘New evidence for the history Platon, N. 1970 Ergebnisse zweier kolloquien in Mainz of the Minoan presence on ‘Ανασκαφή Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1970, und Athen, Mainz, 37–50. Karpathos’, BSA 98, 189–202. 208–51.

Platon, L. 1999b Platon, N. 1951 Platon, N. 1971a ‘New evidence for the occupation ‘Το Ιερόν Μαζά (Καλού Χωριού ‘Ανασκαφή Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1971, at Zakros before the LM I palace’, Πεδιάδος) και τα μινωϊκά Ιερά 231–75. in Betancourt et al. 1999, 671–81. Κορυφής’, CretChron 5, 96–160. Platon, N. 1971b Platon, L. 2000a Platon N. 1956 Zakros. The discovery of a lost palace ‘Ανακτορικά χαρακτηριστικά στη ‘Ανασκαφή μινωικής αγροικίας εις of ancient Crete, New York. μινωική οικιακή αρχιτεκτονική’, Ζου Σητείας’, Prakt 1956, 232–40. in Πεπραγμένα του Η’ Διεθνούς Platon, N. 1972 Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου A3, Platon, N. 1961 ‘Ανασκαφή Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1972, Herakleion, 51–77. ‘Ανασκαφή Κάτω Ζάκρου’, Prakt 159–92. 1961, 216–24. Platon, L. 2000b Platon, N. 1973a ‘Εργασίες μελέτης και συντήρησης Platon, N. 1962 ‘Ανασκαφή Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1973, ευρημάτων ανασκαφών Ζάκρου’, ‘Ανασκαφή Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1962, 137–66. Prakt 2000, 195–8. 142–68. Platon, N. 1973b Platon, L. 2001 Platon, N. 1963 ‘La chronologie des réceptacles de ‘Εργασίες μελέτης και συντήρησης ‘Ανασκαφαί Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1963, trésors du sanctuaire – the “Temple ευρημάτων ανασκαφών Ζάκρου’, 160–88. Repositories”– et des autres Prakt 2001, 137–40. dépôts contemporains du palais Platon, N. 1964 de Cnossos’, in Πεπραγμένα του Platon, L. 2002a ‘Ανασκαφαί Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1964, Γ΄Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου A, ‘Τα μινωικά αγγεία και το κρασί’, 142–68. Athens, 241–53. in Οίνος παλαιός ηδύποτος. Το κρητικό κρασί από τα προϊστορικά ως τα νεότερα Platon, N. 1965 Platon, N. 1974 χρόνια, A.K. Mylopotamitaki ‘Ανασκαφαί Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1965, Ζάκρος. Το νέον μινωικόν ανάκτορον, (ed.), (Αρχαιολογικού Ινστιτούτου 187–224. Athens. Κρήτης, Αρ. 1), Herakleion, 5–24. Platon, N. 1966 Platon, N. 1975 Platon, L. 2002b ‘Ανασκαφαί Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1966, ‘Ανασκαφή Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1975, ‘The political and cultural 139–73. 343–75. influence of the Zakros palace on nearby sites and in a wider Platon, N. 1967 Platon, N. 1976 context’, in Driessen, Schoep & ‘Ανασκαφαί Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1967, ‘Ανασκαφή Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1976, Laffineur 2002, 145–56. 162–94. 419–39.

Platon, L. 2004 Platon, N. 1968a Platon, N. 1977 ‘Το Υστερομινωικό Ι ανάκτορο της ‘Ανασκαφή Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1968, ‘Ανασκαφή Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1977, Ζάκρου: μία “Κνωσός” έξω από την 149–83. 421–46. Κνωσό;’, in Cadogan, Hatzaki & Vasilakis 2004, 381–92. Platon, N. 1968b Platon, N. 1978 ‘Η τελική καταστροφή των μινωικών ‘Ανασκαφή Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1978, Platon, L. forthcoming ανακτόρων’, in Πεπραγμένα του Β’ 259–99. ‘Το ανάκτορο και ο μινωικός Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου A, οικισμός της Ζάκρου, λίγες Athens, 220–8. μόνο ώρες πριν από τη μεγάλη

31 Platon, N. 1985 Giannadakis (eds.), Herakleion, meridionale, Ph.D. dissertation, ‘Ανασκαφή Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1985, 457–60. University of Udine. 217–62. Popham, M.R. 1994 Puglisi, D. 2007 Platon, N. 1986 ‘Late Minoan II to the end of the ‘L’organizzazione a terrazze nel ‘Ανασκαφή Ζάκρου’, Prakt 1986, Bronze Age’, in Knossos: a labyrinth ‘Villaggio’ TM I di Haghia Triada’, 243–97. of history. Papers presented in honour Creta Antica 8, 169–200. of Sinclair Hood, D. Evely, H. Poblome, J. & C. Dumon 1987–8 Hughes-Brock & N. Momigliano Puglisi, D. forthcoming a ‘A Minoan building program? (eds.), Athens, 89–102. ‘Nuovi depositi ceramici Tardo Some comments on the Minoico I da Haghia Triada’, Unexplored Mansion at Knossos’, Poursat, J.-C. 1988 in Πεπραγμένα του I’ Διεθνούς ActaArchLov 26–7, 69–73. ‘La ville minoenne de Malia: Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου. recherches et publications Popham, M. 1967 récentes’, RA 1, 61–82. Puglisi, D. forthcoming b ‘Late Minoan pottery, a summary’, ‘Le ceramiche Tardo Minoico I BSA 62, 337–51. Poursat, J.-C. & C. Knappett 2005 dal saggio nell’area della fornace Fouilles exécutées à Mallia. Le di Haghia Triada’, forthcoming in Popham, M. 1969 Quartier Mu IV. La poterie du minoen Creta Antica 12. ‘The Late Minoan goblet and moyen II: production et utilisation kylix’, BSA 64, 299–304. (ÉtCrét 33), Paris. Pullen, D.J. 2010a ‘Introduction: political economies Popham, M. 1970a Preston, L. 2004 of the Aegean Bronze Age’, in ‘A Late Minoan shrine at Knossos’, ‘A mortuary perspective on Pullen 2010b, 1-11. BSA 65, 191–4. political changes in Late Minoan II-IIIB Crete’, AJA 108, 321–48. Pullen, D. (ed.) 2010b Popham, M.R. 1970b Political economies of the Aegean The destruction of the Palace at Psaropoulou, B. 1984 Bronze Age. Papers from the Langford Knossos. Pottery of the Late Minoan Last potters of the East Aegean, Conference, Florida State University, III A period, (SIMA 12), Göteborg. Nauplion. Tallahassee, 22-24 February 2007, Oxford. Popham, M. 1974 Psaropoulou, B. 1990 Review of Coldstream & Huxley Η κεραμεική του χτές στα Κύθηρα και Quilici, L. 1990 1972, Antiquaries Journal 54, 320– στην Κύθνο, Athens. La tomba dell’età del bronzo tardo 31. dall’abitato di Paleokastro presso Puglisi, D. 2001 Ayia Irini (Biblioteca di antichità Popham, M. 1977 ‘Il problema degli inizi del TM I cypriote 6), Rome. ‘Notes from Knossos, part I’, BSA nella Messarà alla luce dei nuovi 72, 185–95. dati da Haghia Triada’, Creta Antica Raban, A. 1980 2, 91–104. The commercial jar in the ancient Near Popham, M. 1978 East: its evidence for interconnections ‘Notes from Knossos, part II’, BSA Puglisi, D. 2003a amongst the Biblical Lands, Ph.D. 73, 179–87. ‘Haghia Triada nel periodo Tardo dissertation, Hebrew University. Minoico I’, Creta Antica 4, 145–98. Popham, M.R. (ed.) 1984 Relaki, M. 2004 The Minoan Unexplored Mansion Puglisi, D. 2003b ‘Constructing a region: the at Knossos (BSA Supplement 17), ‘Il Bastione Tardo Minoico I ad contested landscapes of Prepalatial London. Haghia Triada: nuove osservazioni Mesara’, in Barrett & Halstead su cronologia e funzione’, ASAtene 2004, 170-88. Popham, M. 1987 81 (Series III, 3), 573–93. ‘Four alabastra from Ayia Triadha’, Renfrew, C. 2007 in Ειλαπίνη. Τόμος τιμητικός για τον Puglisi, D. 2006 Excavations at Phylakopi in Melos Καθηγητή Νικόλαο Πλάτωνα, L. Produzioni ceramiche TM I ad Haghia 1974–77 (BSA Supplementary Kastrinaki, G. Orphanou & N. Triada nel contesto della Creta centro- Volume 42), London

32 Rethemiotakis, G. 1984 Rice, P.M. 1987 Rutter, J.B. 2006c ‘Ανασκαφική έρευνα στη Λύκτο’, Pottery analysis. A sourcebook, ‘Southwestern Anatolian pottery Λύκτος 1, 49–65. Chicago. from Late Minoan Crete: evidence for direct contacts between Arzawa Richards, C.C., & J.S. Thomas and Keftiu?’, in Wiener et al. 2006, Rethemiotakis, G. 1992–3 1984 138–53. ‘Tο μινωικό ‘κεντρικό κτήριο’ στο ‘Ritual activity and structured Καστέλλι Πεδιάδας’, ArchDelt 47–8, deposition in later Neolithic Rutter, J.B. in progress A, 29–64. Wessex’, in Neolithic studies: a review Kommos: House X, A Minoan of some current research, R. J. Bradley mansion near the sea II: the pottery, Rethemiotakis, G. 1994 & J. Gardiner (eds.), (BAR-BS Philadelphia. ‘ΚΓ’ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών 133), Oxford, 189–218. και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων. Rutter, J.B. & S.H. Rutter 1976 Ανασκαφικές εργασίες. Γαλατάς Riley, J.A. 1983 The transition to Mycenaean. A Πεδιάδος’, ArchDelt 49 B‘2, 701–7. ‘The contribution of ceramic stratified Middle Helladic II to petrology to our understanding Late Helladic IIA pottery sequence Rethemiotakis, G. 1999 of Minoan society’, in Minoan from Ayios Stephanos in Lakonia ‘Το νέο μινωικό ανάκτορο στον Society. Proceedings of the Cambridge (Monumenta Archaeologica 4), Γαλατά Πεδιάδος και το “ιερό Colloquium 1981, O. Krzyszkowska Los Angeles. σπήλαιο” Αρκαλοχωρίου’, & L. Nixon (eds.), Bristol, 283–92. in Κρήτες Θαλασσοδρόμοι. Κύκλος Rutter, J.B. & A. Van de Moortel διαλέξεων, Ιανουάριος – Απρίλιος 1996 Rizza G. & M. Rizzo 1984 2006 (συνεργασία ΚΓΕΠΚΑ & 13 ΕΒΑ, ‘Prinias’, in Di Vita 1984b, 227– ‘Minoan pottery from the χορηγός ΟΑΝΑΚ), A. Karestou 56. Southern Area’, in Shaw & Shaw (ed.), Herakleion, 91–111. 2006, 261–715. Roehrig, C.H., R. Dreyfus & C.A. Rethemiotakis, G. 2002 Keller (eds.) 2005 Sackett, L.H. 1992 ‘Evidence on social and economic Hatshepsut: from Queen to Pharoah, Knossos: from Greek city to Roman changes at Galatas and Pediada New York. colony. Excavations at the Unexplored in the New-Palace period’, in Mansion 2 (BSA Supplement 21), Driessen, Schoep & Laffineur Rutter, J. B. 1998 London. 2002, 55–69. ‘Review of Hallager & Hallager 1997, AJA 102, 435–6. Sackett, H. 1996 Rethemiotakis, G. & K.S. ‘A bull’s head rhyton from Christakis 2004 Rutter, J.B. 2004 Palaikastro’, in Evely, Lemos & ‘Cultural interaction between ‘Ceramic sets in context: one Sherratt 1996, 51–8. Knossos and Pediada: the evidence dimension of food preparation and from the Middle Minoan IB consumption in a Minoan palatial Sackett, L.H. 2006 pottery’, in Cadogan, Hatzaki & setting’, in Food, cuisine and society The Palaikastro kouros. A masterpiece Vasilakis 2004, 169–75. in prehistoric Greece, P. Halstead of Minoan sculpture in ivory and gold, & J.C. Barrett (eds.), (Sheffield Athens. Rethemiotakis, G. & K.S. Studies in Archaeology 5), Oxford, Christakis, in preparation 63–89. Sackett, L.H. & M. Popham 1970 ‘Power strategies and cultural ‘Excavations at Palaikastro VII’, idiosyncrasies: an assessment of Rutter, J.B. 2006a BSA 65, 203–42. the current evidence from the ‘Neopalatial and later Minoan Protopalatial settlement at Galatas, pottery’, in Shaw & Shaw 2006, Sackett, L.H., M.R. Popham & Pediada’ (to be submitted in the 377–630. P.M. Warren 1965 BSA). ‘Excavations at Palaikastro VI’, Rutter, J.B. 2006b BSA 60, 248–315. Rice, P.M. 1976 ‘Ceramic imports of the ‘Rethinking the ware concept’, Neopalatial and later Bronze Age Sakellarakis, Y. 1983 American Antiquity 41, 538–43. eras’, in Shaw & Shaw 2006, ‘Ανασκαφή Ιδαίου Άνδρου’, Prakt 646–88. 1983, 415–500.

33 Sakellarakis, Y. 1984 to consumption. A preliminary Seager, R.B. 1910 ‘Ανασκαφή Ιδαίου Άνδρου’, Prakt approach to their study’, BSA 96, Excavations on the island of Pseira, 1984, 507–99. 27–40. Crete, Philadelphia.

Sakellarakis, Y. 1996 Schäfer, J. 1992 Shaw, J.W. 2009 Digging for the past, Athens. Amnisos. Nach den archäologischen, Minoan architecture: materials and historischen und epigraphischen techniques, Padova. Sakellarakis, Y. & D. zeugnissen des altertums und der Panagiotopoulos 2004 neuzeit, Berlin. Shaw, J.W. & M.C. Shaw (eds.) ‘Ανασκαφή Ζομίνθου’, Prakt 2004, 1985 99–110. Scheffer, C. 1984 A great Minoan triangle in southcentral ‘Aegean, bronze-age, spit supports Crete: Kommos, Hagia Triadha, Sakellarakis, Y. & D. with scalloped tops’, OpAth 15, Phaistos (Scripta Mediterranea 6), Panagiotopoulos 2006 155–62. Toronto. ‘Minoan Zominthos’, in Ο Μυλοπόταμος απο την αρχαιότητα ως Schiffer, M.B. 1987 Shaw, J.W. & M. Shaw (eds.) 1996 σήμερα. Περιβάλλον – αρχαιολογία – Formation process of the archaeological Kommos I. The Kommos region ιστορία – λαογραφία – κοινωνιολογία. ΙΙ: record, Albuquerque. and houses of the Minoan town, αρχαίοι χρόνοι, E. Gavrilaki & Y.Z. Princeton. Tzifopoulos (eds.), Rethymnon, Schoch, M. 1995 47–75. Die minoische chronologie: Shaw, J.W. & M.C. Shaw (eds.) möglichkeiten und grenzen 2006 Sakellarakis, Y. & E. Sapouna- konventioneller und Kommos V. The monumental Minoan Sakellarakis 1991 naturwissenschaftlicher methoden buildings at Kommos, Princeton. Archanes, Athens. (Documenta naturae no.94), Munich. Shaw, J.W., A. Van de Moortel, Sakellarakis, Y. & E. Sakellarakis P.M. Day & V. Kilikoglou 2001 1997 Schoep, I.M. 1999 A LM IA ceramic kiln in south- Archanes. Minoan Crete in a new ‘Tablets and territories? central Crete. Function and pottery light, Athens. Reconstructing Late Minoan production (Hesperia Supplement IB political geography through 30), Princeton. Sakellariou, A. 1980 undeciphered documents’, AJA ‘The West House miniature 103, 201–21. Shelmerdine, C.W. (ed.) 2008 frescoes’, in Thera and the Aegean The Cambridge companion to the world II. Papers and proceedings of Schoep, I.M. 2002 Aegean Bronze Age, Cambridge. the Second International Scientific The administration of Neopalatial Congress, Santorini, Greece, August Crete. A critical assessment of the Siebenmorgen, H. (ed.) 2000 1978, C. Doumas (ed.), London, Linear A tablets and their role in Im labyrinth des Minos. Kreta – erste 147–53. the administrative process (Minos europäische hochkultur. Ausstellung Supplement 17), Salamanca. des Badischen Landesmuseums Sapouna-Sakellaraki, E. 1988–9 27.1. bis 29.4.2001, Karlsruhe, ‘Η κεραμική του θαλάσσιου ρυθμού Schoep, I. 2004 Schloss (Archäologische από τις Aρχάνες και η πιθανή ύπαρξη ‘The socio-economic context Veröffentlichungen des Badischen τοπικού εργαστηρίου, CretChron of seal use and administration at Landesmuseums Band 2), Munich. 28–9, 28–52. Knossos’, in Cadogan, Hatzaki & Vasilakis 2004, 283–94. Silverman, J. 1978 Sarpaki, A. 1992 ‘The LM IB painted pottery of ‘A palaeoethnobotanical study of Seager, R.B. 1907 eastern Crete’, TUAS 3, 31–5. the West House, Akrotiri’, BSA ‘Report of excavations at Vasiliki, 87, 219–30. Crete, in 1906’, in Transactions Smith, A.T. 2003 of the Free Museum of Science and The political landscape. Constellations Sarpaki, A. 2001 Art (University Museum) 2:2, of authority in early complex polities, ‘Processed cereals and pulses Philadelphia, 111–32. Berkeley. from the Late Bronze Age site of Akrotiri, Thera: preparations prior

34 Sofianou, Ch. & T.M. Brogan (eds.), (Prehistory Monographs chronology, Ph.D. dissertation, 2009 23), Philadelphia, 5–128. University of Heidelberg. ‘The excavation of House A.1 at Papadiokampos’, Kentro. The Soles, J.S. & C. Davaras 1990 Tsakanika-Theochari, E. 2006 newsletter of the INSTAP Study ‘Theran ash in Minoan Crete: new Ο δομικός ρόλος του ξύλου στην Center for East Crete 12, 6–9. excavations on Mochlos’, in Hardy τοιχοποιϊα των ανακτορικού τύπου & Renfrew 1990, 89–95. κτιρίων της Μινωικής Κρήτης, Ph.D. Sofianou, Ch. & T.M. Brogan dissertation, Εθνικό Μετσόβιο 2010 Soles, J.S. & C. Davaras 1992 Πολυτεχνείο, Τμήμα Αρχιτεκτόνων ‘Μινωικός οικισμός Παπαδιόκαμπου ‘Excavations at Mochlos, 1989’, Μηχανικών. Σητείας. Η ανασκαφή της οικίας Hesperia 61, 413–45. Β1 κατά το 2008’, in Αρχαιολογικό Tsipopoulou M. 1990 Έργο Κρήτης 1. Πρακτικά της 1ης Soles, J.S. & C. Davaras 1994 ‘Νέα στοιχεία για τη μινωική Συνάντησης Ρέθυμνο, 28–30 Νοεμβρίου ‘Excavations at Mochlos, 1990– κατοίκηση στην περιοχή της πόλης 2008, M. Andrianakis & I. Tzachili 1991’, Hesperia 63, 391–436. της Σητείας’, in Πεπραγμένα του ΣΤ΄ (eds.), Rethymnon, 134–42. Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου Α2, Soles, J.S. & C. Davaras 1996 Khania, 305–21. Soles, J.S. 2002 ‘Excavations at Mochlos, 1992– ‘A central court at Gournia?’, 1993’, Hesperia 65, 175–230. Tsipopoulou, M. 1995 in Driessen, Schoep & Laffineur ‘Kεραμεικά σημεία από την 2002, 123–32. Tainter, J.A. 1988 ανασκαφή Πετρά Σητείας (1989– The collapse of complex societies, 1990)’, in Πεπραγμένα του Z΄ Soles, J.S. 2003 Cambridge. Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου Α2, Mochlos IA. Period III. Neopalatial Rethymnon, 931–71. settlement on the coast: the Artisans’ Tarling, D.H. & W.S. Downey Quarter and the farmhouse 1989 Tsipopoulou, M. 1997 at Chalinomouri. The sites, ‘Archaeomagnetic study of the ‘Late Minoan III reoccupation in Philadelphia. Late Minoan Kiln 2, Stratigraphical the area of the Palatial Building Museum Extension, Knossos’, BSA at Petras, Siteia’, in Hallager & Soles, J.S. 2004 84, 345–52. Hallager 1997, 209–57. ‘New construction at Mochlos in the LM IB period’, in Day, Mook Tarling, D.H. & W.S. Downey Tsipopoulou, M. 1998 & Muhly 2004, 153–62. 1990 ‘The hieroglyphic archive at Petras, ‘Archaeomagnetic results from Siteia’, BCH 122, 436–40. Soles, J.S. 2004b Late Minoan destruction levels on Mochlos IC. Period III. Neopalatial Crete and the ‘Minoan’ tephra on Tsipopoulou, M. 1999 settlement on the coast: the Artisans’ Thera’, in Hardy & Renfrew 1990, ‘Before, during, after: architectural Quarter and the Farmhouse at 146–59. phases of the Palatial Building at Chalinomouri. The small finds, Petras, Siteia’, in Betancourt et al. (Prehistory Monographs 9), Touchais, G. 1989 1999, 847–56. Philadelphia. ‘Chronique des fouilles et découvertes archéologiques en Tsipopoulou, M. 2002 Soles, J.S. 2009 Grèce en 1988’, BCH 113, 581– ‘Petras, Siteia: the palace, the town, ‘The impact of the Minoan 788. the hinterland and the Protopalatial eruption of Santorini on Mochlos, background’, in Driessen, Schoep, a small Minoan town on the north Tournavitou, I. 2000 & Laffineur, 133–44. coast of Crete’, in Warburton ‘Μινωικό ιερό κορυφής στα Κύθη- 2009, 107–16. ρα: η κεραμεική’, in Πεπραγμενα Η’ Tsipopoulou, M. 2007 Διεθνους Κριτολογικου Συνεδριου Α3, ‘The central court of the Palace Soles, J.S. & T.M. Brogan 2008 Herakleion, 297–316. of Petras,’ in Krinoi and limenes. ‘The Late Minoan III settlement’, Studies in honor of Joseph and Maria in Mochlos IIA. Period IV. The Traunmueller, S. 2009 Shaw (Prehistory Monographs 22), Mycenaean settlement and cemetery. The Neopalatial pottery from the P.P. Betancourt, M.C. Nelson & The sites, J.S. Soles & C. Davaras ceramic workshop at Zominthos and H. Williams (eds.), Philadelphia, its implications for Minoan relative 49–59.

35 Tsipopoulou, M. forthcoming τομές στο ανακτορικό κτίριο του Van de Moortel, A. 2001 ‘Πρόσφατα ευρήματα στον Πετρά Πετρά Σητείας’, Πεπραγμένα του Η΄ ‘The area around the kiln, and Σητείας. Οι ανασκαφές του 21ου Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου Α3, the pottery from the kiln and the αιώνα’, in Πεπραγμένα του I΄ Διεθνούς Herakleion, 359–77. kiln dump’, in Shaw et al. 2001, Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου. 25–110. Tzedakis, Y. 1973–4 Tsipopoulou, M. & H. Dierckx ‘Αρχαιότητες και μνημεία δυτικής Van de Moortel, A. & P. Darcque 2006 Κρήτης’, ArchDelt 29 Β’3, 917–21. 2006 ‘Υστερομινωικό ΙΑ Σπίτι I.1 στον ‘Late Minoan I architectural Πετρά Σητείας: δομή, λειτουργία Tzedakis, Y. 1977 phases and ceramic chronology και κατανομή των ευρημάτων’, ‘Αρχαιότητες και μνημεία δυτικής at Malia’, in Πεπραγμένα Θ’ Πεπραγμένα του Θ΄ Διεθνούς Κρήτης’, ArchDelt 32 Β’2, 323–33. Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου A1, Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου Α1, Herakleion, 177–88. Herakleion, 298–315. Tzedakis, Y. 1980 ‘ΚΕ΄ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών και Van Effenterre, H. 1980 Tsipopoulou, M. & B. Hayden Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων’, ArchDelt Le palais de Mallia et la cité minoenne 2005 35 Β’2, 501–17. II (Incunabula Graeca 76), Rome. ‘Excavations at Priniatikos Pyrgos, Istron, Mirabello, 2005’, Kentro 8, Tzedakis, Y., S. Chryssoulaki, Y. Van Effenterre, H. & M. Van 2–7. Venieri & M. Avgouli 1990 Effenterre 1969 ‘Les routes minoennes: le poste de Fouilles exécutées à Mallia. Le centre Tsipopoulou, M. & E. Hallager Χοιρόμανδρες et le contrôle des politique I. L’agora (1960–1966) 1996a communications’, BCH 114, 43–65. (ÉtCrét 17), Paris. ‘Inscriptions with hieroglyphs and Linear A from Petras, Siteia’, Tzedakis, Y. & H. Martlew (eds.) Van Effenterre, H. & M. Van SMEA 37, 7–46. 1999 Effenterre 1976 Minoans and Mycenaeans. Flavours Fouilles exécutés à Mallia. Tsipopoulou, M. & E. Hallager of their time. National Archaeological Explorations des maisons et quartiers 1996b Museum, 12 July – 27 November d’habitation (1956–1960) (ÉtCrét ‘A new hieroglyphic archive at 1999, Athens. 22), Paris. Petras, Siteia’, Kadmos 35, 164–7. Tzedakis, I. & A. Sacconi (eds.) Vasilakis, A. 1997 Tsipopoulou, M. & L. Vagnetti 1989 Τύλισος, Tylisos. 1994 Scavi a Nerokourou, Kydonias ‘A Late Minoan III grey wheel- (Incunabula Graeca 90), Rome. Vitale, S. 2006 made piriform jar from eastern ‘L’insediamento di “Serraglio” Crete’, SMEA 34, 43–50. Vagnetti, L. 1977 durante il Tardo Bronzo. Riesame ‘Tracce di due insediamenti dei principali contesti portati Tsipopoulou, M. & A. neolitici nel territorio dell’antica alla luce da Luigi Morricone tra Papacostopoulou 1997 Gortina’, AntCr 1, 1–9. il 1935 ed il 1946’, ASAtene 83 ‘“Villas” and villages in the (Series III, 5), 71–94. hinterland of Petras, Siteia’, in Vallianou, D. 1996 Hägg 1997, 203–14. ‘New evidence of earthquake Vitaliano, C.J. & D.B. Vitaliano destructions in Late Minoan 1998 Tsipopoulou, M. & L. Vagnetti Crete’, in Archaeoseismology, S. ‘Volcanic ash and pumice studies’, 1995 Stiros & R.E. Jones (eds.), (Fitch in Betancourt & Davaras 1998a, Achladia. Scavi e ricerche della Laboratory Occasional Paper 7), 43–6. Missione Greco-Italiana in Creta Athens, 153–67. Orientale (1991–1993) (Incunabula Vokotopoulos, L. 2006 Graeca 97), Rome. Van de Moortel, A. 1997 ‘Το κτηριακό συγκρότημα του The transition from the Protopalatial to «Φυλακίου της θάλασσας» στις Tsipopoulou, M. & M. Wedde the Neopalatial society in south-central Καρούμες Σητείας’, in Πεπραγμένα 2000 Crete: a ceramic perspective, Ph.D. Θ’ Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου ‘Διαβάζοντας ένα χωμάτινο dissertation, Bryn Mawr College. A1, Herakleion, 347–63. παλίμψηστο: στρωματογραφικές

36 Vokotopoulos, L. 2007 Warren, P. 1972 Warren, P. 1991 Το κτηριακό συγκρότημα του Φυλακίου Myrtos. An Early Bronze ‘A new Minoan deposit from της Θάλασσας στον όρμο Καρούμες Age settlement in Crete (BSA Knossos, c. 1600 B.C., and its και η περιοχή του. Ο χαρακτήρας της Supplement 7), London. wider relations’, BSA 86, 319–40. κατοίκησης στην ύπαιθρο της ανατολικής Κρήτης κατά τη Νεοανακτορική εποχή, Warren, P. 1973a Warren, P. 1996 Ph.D. dissertation, Aristotle ‘Knossos. Excavation in the area of ‘A new Minoan decoration – the University of Thessaloniki. the Royal Road’, ArchDelt 28 B’2, Jackson Pollock style – and its 574–6. place in Minoan art’, in Evely, Vokotopoulos, L. forthcoming Lemos & Sherratt 1996, 46–50. ‘A view of the Neopalatial Warren, P. 1973b countryside: settlement and Review of Coldstream and Huxley Warren, P. 1999 social organization in the area 1972, Antiquity 47, 321–3. ‘LM IA: Knossos, Thera, Gournia’, of Karoumes, eastern Crete’, in in Betancourt et al. 1999, 893–903. STEGA: The archaeology of houses Warren, P.M. 1980–1 and households in ancient Crete, N. ‘Knossos: Stratigraphical Museum Warren, P. 2001 Vogeikoff-Brogan & K. Glowacki excavations, 1978–1980. Part I’, Review of Driessen & Macdonald (eds.), (Hesperia Suppl. Series), AR 27, 73–92. 1997, AJA 105, 115–8. Princeton. Warren, P. 1981 Warren, P.M. 2002 Voyatzoglou, M. 1984 ‘Minoan Crete and ecstatic ‘Political Structure in Neopalatial ‘Thrapsano, village of jar makers. religion. Preliminary observations Crete’, in Driessen, Schoep & Traditional ceramics in modern on the 1979 excavations at Laffineur 2002, 201–5. Greece’, in Betancourt 1984a, Knossos’, in Sanctuaries and cults in 130–42. the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings Warren, P. 2004 of the First International Symposium ‘Terra cognita? The territory and Wace, A.J.B. & C.W. Blegen 1939 at the Swedish Institute in Athens, boundaries of the early Neopalatial ‘Pottery as evidence for trade and 12–13 May, 1980, R. Hägg & N. Knossian state’, in Cadogan, colonisation in the Aegean Bronze Marinatos (eds.), (SkrAth 4°, 28), Hatzaki & Vasilakis 2004, 159–68. Age’, Klio 32, 131–47. Stockholm 155–67. Warren, P. 2005 Walberg, G. 1981 Warren, P.M. 1982–3 ‘Flowers for the goddess? New ‘Mittelminoische keramik. ‘Knossos: Stratigraphical Museum fragments of wall paintings from Methoden und probleme’, AA excavations, 1978–1982. Part II’, Knossos’, in Morgan 2005, 131– 1981, 1–14. AR 29, 63–87. 48.

Walberg, G. 1992 Warren, P. 1984a Warren, P.M. 2006 Middle Minoan III – a time of ‘Circular platforms at Minoan ‘The date of the Thera eruption transition (SIMA 97), Jonsered Knossos’, BSA 79, 307–23. in relation to Aegean-Egyptian interconnections and the Egyptian Wall, S.M., J.H. Musgrave & P.M. Warren, P. 1984b historical chronology’, in Timelines. Warren 1986 ‘Knossos: new excavations and Studies in honour of Manfred Bietak ‘Human bones from a Late Minoan discoveries’, Archaeology 37 (4), II, E. Czerny, I. Hein, H. Hunger, IB house at Knossos’, BSA 81, 48–56. D. Melman & A. Schwab (eds.), 333–88. (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta Warren, P. 1988 149), Leuven, 305–21. Warburton, D.A. (ed.) 2009 Minoan religion as ritual action, Time’s up! Dating the Minoan Göteborg. Warren, P. & V. Hankey 1989 eruption of Santorini. Acts of the Aegean Bronze Age chronology, Minoan Eruption Chronology Warren, P.M. 1990–1 Bristol. Workshop, Sandbjerg November 2007 ‘The Minoan civilisation of Crete initiated by Jan Heinemeier & Walter and the volcano of Thera’, Journal Watrous, L.V. 1981 L. Friedrich (Monographs of the of the Ancient Chronology Forum 4, ‘The relationship of Late Minoan Danish Institute at Athens 10), 29–39. II to Late Minoan III A1’, AJA 85, Athens. 75–7.

37 Watrous, L.V. 1992 defining the human dimensions of the Archaeological Institute of Kommos III. The Late Bronze Age of Minoan urbanism’, in Branigan America, New Orleans, Louisiana, 5 pottery, Princeton. 2001, 15–37. January 2003), Boston.

Watrous, L.V. & D. Hadzi- Whitelaw, T. 2000 Wilson, D. & P. Day 1994 Vallianou 2004 ‘191. Φιάλη και κύπελλα. 192. Άωτα ‘Ceramic regionalism in Prepalatial ‘Palatial rule and collapse (Middle κύπελλα. 193. Λοπάδια και κύπελλα’, central Crete: the Mesara imports Minoan IB-Late Minoan IIIB)’, in in Karetsou, Andreadaki-Vlazaki & at EM I to EM IIA Knossos’, BSA Watrous, Hadzi-Vallianou & Blitzer Papadakis 2000, 197–9. 89, 1–87. 2004, 277–304. Whitelaw, T., P.M. Day, E. Xanthoudides, S.A. 1922 Watrous, L.V., D. Hadzi-Vallianou Kiriatzi, V. Kilikoglou, & D.E. ‘Μινωικόν μέγαρον Νίρου’, ArchEph & H. Blitzer 2004 Wilson 1997 1922, 1–25. The plain of Phaistos. Cycles of social ‘Ceramic traditions at EM IIB complexity in the Mesara region of Myrtos Fournou Korifi’, in Zapheiropoulou, D. 2007 Crete (Monumenta Archaeologica Laffineur and Betancourt 1997, Archaeological Museum of Herakleion. 23), Los Angeles. 265–74. Temporary exhibition, Athens.

Weingarten, J. 1990 Whitley, J. et al. 2007 Zerner, C., P. Zerner & J. Winder ‘Three upheavals in Minoan sealing ‘Archaeology in Greece 2006– (eds.) 1993 administration: evidence for radical 2007’, AR 53, 1–122. Proceedings of the international change’, in Aegean seals, sealings, conference “Wace and Blegen: pottery and administration. Proceedings of Wiener, M.H. 1984 as evidence for trade in the Aegean the NEH-Dickinson Conference ‘Crete and the Cyclades in LM Bronze Age, 1939–1989” held at the of the Program of Aegean Scripts I: the tale of the conical cups’, in American School of Classical Studies and Prehistory of the Department Hägg & Marinatos 1984, 261–6. at Athens, Athens, December 2–3, of Classics, University of Texas at 1989, Amsterdam. Austin, January 11-13 1989, T. Wiener, M.H. 1990 Palaima (ed.), Liège, 105–20. ‘The isles of Crete? The Minoan Zois, A. 1976 thallasocracy revisited’, in Hardy et Ανασκαφή Βρυσών Κυδωνίας Ι. 1974, Whitbread, I.K. 1995 al. 1990, 128–61. Athens. Greek transport amphorae. A petrological and archaeological study Wiener, M.H., J.L. Warner, J. (BSA Fitch Laboratory Occasional Polonsky & E.E. Hayes (eds.) 2006 Paper 4), Athens. Pottery and society. The impact of recent studies in Minoan pottery. Gold Whitelaw, T. 2001 Medal Colloquium in honor of Philip ‘From sites to communities: P. Betancourt (104th Annual Meeting

38