the iron age pottery from kommos - university of … iron age pottery from kommos peter j....

C H A P T E R 4

The Iron Age Pottery from Kommos

Peter J. Callaghan, Alan W. Johnston, Patricia Maynor Bikai,John W. Hayes, and Richard E. Jones

1. The Pottery from the Greek Temples at Kommos (P. J. Callaghanand A. W. Johnston)

2. Phoenician Ceramics from the Greek Sanctuary (P. M. Bikai)

3. Roman Pottery from the Sanctuary (J. W. Hayes)

4. The Roman Lamps from the Sanctuary (J. W. Hayes)

Appendix 4.1. Note on the Phoenician Imports from Building Q (P. M. Bikai)

Appendix 4.2. Chemical Analysis of Phoenician Imports at Kommos(R. E. Jones)

1. The Pottery from the Greek Temples at KommosPeter J. Callaghan and Alan W. Johnston

The catalogue following has been prepared for publication by Alan W. Johnston (AWJ) froma nearly complete manuscript submitted by Peter J. Callaghan (PJC). A few statements thatPJC had adumbrated have been retained, although the proper bibliographical support ismissing. The foreword and concluding remarks include some material sketched by PJC butare largely the work of AWJ, who wishes to acknowledge the assistance of Lesley Beaumontand Deborah Ruscillo in the completion of the work.

The main purpose of this catalogue is to present material of chronological importance inthe stratified deposits. No attempt has been made to conceal the problems that sometimesarise from the very mixed nature of many of these deposits and the tensions that are occasionallyseen between stratum and taxonomy. Although attention is indeed also given to finds thatare of purely ceramic interest, this is not the major aim of the catalogue; therefore, in thegeneral overview that follows it a few more pieces that are largely of such interest are

210

The Pottery from the Greek Temples at Kommos 211

mentioned, without being given detailed publication, in order to give a fuller typologicalpicture of the finds.1 In the overview two particular aspects of the material are examined: therecord of local as against imported wares, and the range of pottery types in use in the sanctuaryarea over the centuries.

The deposits vary widely in nature. The richest are from discarded votive material usedas fill to level surfaces in the temenos area, but they are often, save for a few clean Protogeome-tric or Hellenistic pockets, very mixed in composition. They need to be linked, generally orby specific joins, to the more scanty material from the temple itself to realize their full potential.Close dating is often achieved, directly or otherwise, through imported wares: Attic andCycladic in the tenth to eighth century B.C., Corinthian and East Greek in the eighth andseventh centuries, and Attic again in the fifth and fourth. Hellenistic material is only onceaccompanied in closed stratigraphy by an amphora stamp.

Much has already been signaled in preliminary reports in Hesperia (J. W. Shaw 1977b; 1979a;1980a; 1981a; 1982a; 1984a; 1986; J. W. Shaw et al. 1978; J. W. Shaw and M. C. Shaw 1993),not least the material involved in the dating of the earliest temple, the presence of Phoenicianpottery, and the richness of the Hellenistic deposits, which reveal much of the nature of thefestival activity at the temenos. Some of the Greek pottery is separately published (Johnston1993; 2000), while other ceramic material of significance is to be found in Section 2 of thischapter (by Patricia Maynor Bikai) and Chapter 2 (by Eric Csapo, Daniel Geagan, and AWJ).

The early history of Greek Kommos (Temples A and B, roughly the late eleventh until thelate seventh century B.C.) spans the period when trade within Greek lands began to movefrom a relatively small scale, and probably intermittent, redistribution of prestige items towarda far more widely based and continuous pattern of commodity exchange.2 The same periodwitnessed the eclipse of an earlier trade network reflected by the widespread distribution ofEuboean and Cycladic pottery and the concomitant rise of an even more extensive systemthe main archaeological indicator of which is pottery manufactured in Corinth and the citiesof East Greece.

In the seventh century B.C. such East Greek activity was found across the Mediterraneanbasin. At Al Mina, and along the Levantine coast generally, East Greek pottery displaced thatof the Euboeans and the islanders. In Egypt, East Greek traders appear to have played adominant role in the emporium established at Naukratis under royal licence. Pottery fromEast Greek centers reflected this dominance, not only at the emporium itself, but also atgarrison centers such as Daphnae and Migdol.3 In the Northern Aegean and around the shoresof the Black Sea, as well as in the Western Mediterranean, East Greek wares began to appearin significant quantities from the late seventh century (see Snodgrass 1994; Tsetskhladze 1994).In many cases, the pottery seems, in great part, to reflect intensive colonizing activities. Bothancient literary testimonia and the archaeological patterns on the ground, however, indicatethat the desire to trade went hand in hand with the need for more land, and in many casespreceded it.4 Recent literature has tended to underemphasize the importance of pottery in

212 The Iron Age Pottery from Kommos

such exchange networks, but Catherine Morgan, for example, has at least partially reinstatedexotic fine wares as prestige goods in their own right (Morgan 1988: 329–38), and NicolasColdstream has also hinted at the possibility that ambitiously decorated vases might havebeen used in gift exchange systems (more recently, Coldstream 1994). It is clear, however,that there can be no across-the-board model for the position of imported pottery in anyeconomic system. Each case must be decided on its own merits and by using the internaldistribution of “exotica” within a site or its region.

It is against this background of change and development that the patterns of importedpottery at Iron Age Kommos should be measured. This approach, however, cannot be use-fully applied to the later Classical and Hellenistic periods; after the fitful revival of the cultarea, material imported from outside Crete is largely confined to some Attic black-glaze anda very restricted number of transport amphora. Local ware is dominant and comprises forthe very great part a restricted set of shapes, whose development is outlined in the catalogue,based partly on the stratigraphy of the site and partly on parallels from sites where morehistorical dating is available. More specific patterns of usage are also picked out and anattempt made to allot functions to individual buildings in the temenos on the strength of suchdistribution.

Abbreviations and Comments

In the catalogue the word Profile is used as an abbreviation of “The preserved profile of thepiece gives . . . ” BG is used for black-glaze or -gloss. The use of drawings made over a longspan of time has inevitably meant that there are some inconsistencies in the conventions usedin the text figures.

Deposit 1 (33C/82): Temple A, Floor 1

The earlier floor of Temple A was exposed only over a limited area. It was associated witha narrow stone bench along the north wall and a sill of small stones delimiting the building’seastern side. By the second phase of the temple both had been covered over. The pottery fromthis deposit was sparse and badly fragmented, but sufficient to date part of the occupationto a period when Sub-Minoan shapes were still current. Certain forms, including some of thebell skyphoi (3 and 7) and the deep bowl (10), even seem to indicate that the initial constructionshould be placed within the eleventh century B.C., as is also indicated by the decoration of1. The earliest material from the votive strews outside the building (Deposit 2) implies aconstruction date at least as early. The painted as well as dipped bell skyphoi of exclusivelyearly types support as early a date as possible. The survival of the early carinated type ofbell skyphos in the following deposits would also suggest an early date for Deposit 1, but itis strange that few other shapes typical of the SM/EPG in the Mesara occur here. Perhaps


there was already a ritual prescription on the type of vessels used at the site. For a parallelexample of continuity from SM to EPG at Knossos, see Warren 1982–83: 83; Brock 1957: no.161.

1 (C 10544). Bowl, wall fragment. Pl. 4.40. Max surviving profile indicates that there was a dis-tinct change of angle below the handle zone, an-pres w 6.5. Fine ware (10 YR 7/3). Inside, wholly

painted. Outside, vertical panels of loops and other feature characteristic of the earlier skyphoifrom the site. Luigi Rocchetti sees this carinatedchevrons partly preserved.

The decoration is of Late Minoan IIIC pedigree form as a very early stage in the development ofthe shape, probably belonging to the eleventh(for a similar juxtaposition of the two elements,

see Rocchetti 1969–70: 42, A1), and the treatment century B.C. (Rocchetti 1969–70: 45, fig. 6, A5; p.53, B9; p. 54, fig. 17 no. 3). Group B there is aof the inside suggests a date not much later.deposit from a tomb in which all the forms appear

2 (C 3258). Bell skyphos, base to lower belly. Pl. to be early in the PG sequence. At Knossos there4.1. Max pres h 2.4, d at base 3.4. Fine ware (5 is a similar pattern of coexistence between newYR 5/8). Fully painted except for reserved tondo EPG types and basically SM forms (Coldstreamin bowl and underfoot. 1972: 67, 69, A18–24). A close parallel for the

The squat pedestal with slight concavity under- proportions of our skyphoi may be found in War-foot possesses the exterior relief band that, at ren 1982–83: 86, fig. 64 (Late SM or perhaps EPG;Knossos, is characteristic of the Early Proto- taller types may be slightly later). For the prob-geometric period (Coldstream 1972: 67) but that able coexistence of SM and EPG over a substantialcan also be found on cups of the SM period. The period see recently Coldstream 1977: 48; Roc-fact that this vase was painted rather than dipped chetti 1969–70: 68–70.would seem to indicate the earlier period.

8 (C 3263). Bowl, rim fragment. Pl. 4.1. Max pres3 (C 3260). Bell skyphos, fragments from rim and h 1.5, d at rim 11.0. Fine ware (5 YR 6/4). Surviv-upper belly. Pl. 4.1. Max pres h 3.5. Fine ware ing profile echinoid.(5 YR 7/8). Painted except for a small reserved“window” in the handle zone. 9 (C 3264). Bowl, rim fragment. Pl. 4.1. Max pres

The tradition of painting rather than dipping h 1.8, d at rim ca. 12.0. Fine ware (5 YR 6/4).seems to belong early in the sequence at Kommos. Fully painted. The profile is echinoid.Reserved “windows” disappear later, even when

10 (C 3257). Deep bowl, profile rim to lowerthe shape retains early features (see 7 for discus-belly. Pls. 4.1, 4.40. Max pres h 6.5, d at rim ca.sion of this type).13.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Slipped. Outside

4 (C 3261). Bell skyphos, rim fragment. Pl. 4.1. decorated with a simple squiggle between hori-Max pres h 3.0, d at rim 12.0. Fine ware (5 YR 6/ zontals; two reserved bands on inside of bowl.4). Fully painted. The shape and decoration are characteristic of

LM IIIC2. Here may be an indication of the true5 (C 3262). Bell skyphos, rim fragment. Pl. 4.1.foundation date, at some time in the transitionalMax pres h 2.1, d at rim ca. 11.0. Fine ware (5 YRperiod between the latest phase of SM and the6/4). Fully painted except for a reserved bandearliest of PG, which has been examined in detailbelow rim.by Rocchetti (1969–70: 41–70). Such an assump-tion would be supported by the consistently early6 (C 3265). Bell skyphos, rim fragment. Pl. 4.1.types of bell skyphoi found on this floor.Max pres h 2.0. Fine ware (5 YR 6/4). Fully

painted except for a reserved band below rim.11 (C 3256). Krater, fragments from the rim andshoulder. Pls. 4.1 (part), 4.40. Max pres h 4.5, d7 (C 3259). Bell skyphos, body fragments. Pl. 4.1.

Max pres h 3.2. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Painted at rim ca. 40.0. Fine ware (2.5 YR 6/8). Heavyledge rim, collared, its lower edge decorated withexcept for a “window” between and below the

handles. a relief rope pattern. Rim and interior painted.This looks, at first sight, to be an advancedFor painting rather than dipping see 3. The


version of the bell krater, but similar collared 12 (C 3255). Necked pithos, fragments from rimand body. Pls. 4.6, 4.40. D at rim ca. 35.0. Lightnecks occur in early contexts at nearby sites (Roc-

chetti 1967–68: 187, no. 24). Probably early in the red clay (5 YR 7/6). Fully painted inside and witha band of running spirals on the belly.PG sequence.

Deposit 2 (33C/81): Temple A, Floor 2, within the Cella

A clear upper floor was noted by the excavator within the cella of Temple A (33C/81). Thearea just outside the temple doorway also produced a clear contemporary use surface (33C/85, Deposit 3), and the rich material from that area proved to be particularly useful for datingpurposes. As the area around the temple was cleared it became possible to amalgamate moreand more material on the basis of cross joins between the rich courtyard strews and the ratherscrappy detritus remaining on the temple floor itself. Of particular importance were twostratified courtyard surfaces in Trench 63A (Deposits 4 and 5), both sealed beneath the layerof working chips that marked the construction of Temple B. The material from both surfacescould be associated with the upper floor of Temple A on the basis of cross joins, and earlierand later material found on that one floor could thus be distinguished, depending on whetherthe pottery could be associated with the upper or the lower of the courtyard surfaces. Elsewherein the sanctuary much pottery could be placed in this phase, again on the basis of cross joins,with either the temple floor itself or the material in Trench 63A or both. For the most part,the other deposits were relatively uncontrolled temple dumps, but it seems reasonable toassume that the pottery associated with one or more of the control vases also belongs to thisphase of the sanctuary’s existence. At all events, a line of construction chips effectively sealedthe Temple A material in most of these trenches from that of the following phase. The generalpatterns of juxtaposition over a relatively wide area in the temenos indicate a dramatic increasein ritual activity during the second phase of Temple A. Although it is difficult to identify anydiscrete courtyard deposit associated with the first floor, many of the objects definitely belong-ing to the second floor were found in the earliest Greek strata above the Minoan levels.

So far as absolute chronology is concerned, some data indicate that the second floor wasalready in use as early as the first quarter of the ninth century B.C. This precision is occasionedby the presence of fragments from Phoenician transport amphorae in the courtyard depositsassociated with the second floor of the temple. The latest occurrence of this shape in theLevant according to Eliezer Oren (personal communication) is at Hazor, dating to the reignof Ahab (869–850 B.C.). Patricia Maynor Bikai is in broad agreement with this dating (Section2). Her analysis would also seem to indicate that few of these vases should be placed verymuch earlier than the later tenth century B.C. Also interesting are the carinated bell skyphoithat seem to survive into this phase. The evidence from nearby Phaistos as well as Knossosseems to indicate that this is a very early form that retains links with SM predecessors ofsimilar form (and, ultimately, with the Mycenaean Granary Class cups), discussed in Deposit1. The presence of some undoubtedly EPG skyphoi in Floor 1 makes it highly unlikely that


they are actually of SM date. This would also suggest that the beginnings of Floor 2 shouldbe placed early within the PG sequence—possibly in the earlier tenth century B.C. (see Rocchetti1969–70: 53 f., B9–11, p. 69; Coldstream 1972: 69, A18). At Phaistos and Petrokephali the typedoes not seem to survive into the later phases of PG (Rocchettti 1969–70; 1974–75: 169 ff., seeespecially pp. 293–94). The somewhat erratic patterning at Phaistos does not agree entirelywith the evidence from Petrokephali, other tombs and deposits in the Mesara, or with Kommos,and may indicate a degree of intrusion.

13 (C 6166). Bell cup, profile except handle. Pl. 17 (C 6062). Krater, fragments from rim to lowerbelly. Pls. 4.6 (part), 4.40. D of lip ca. 50.0. Fine4.1. H 9.2, d at rim 9.8. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6).

Unpainted. ware (7.5 YR 8/4). Rim painted, with a broadhorizontal delimiting the bottom of the decoratedThe profile resembles those early types with

pronounced carination at the belly found on the zone. Decoration extremely complex, with thetwo faces completely different in style. On onefirst floor of Temple A. The wide, low, pedestal

base also looks early. Rocchetti places the angled fragment, repair hole just above the painted bandat the waist. The fragmentary condition of theprofile early within the Mesariote PG sequence

(1969–70: 53, B9–11, p. 69). The form is a direct vase makes a complete reconstruction extremelydifficult.survivor from the SM period (see 7). That it does

not actually date to that period is suggested by On the main face, the missing side handlesflanked by wide vertical panels consisting of solidthe presence of EPG types on the earlier temple

floor. vertical wave patterns outlined by three parallellines. The main panel apparently dark ground

14 (C 6167). Bell skyphos, base fragment. Max with reserved ovals, fringed around the edge andpres h 1.3, d at base 5.5. Fine ware (5 YR 7/2). aligned diagonally, possibly part of a giant qua-Conical pedestal decorated with close-set hori- trefoil.zontals, of which five survive. On the other side, a reserved ground seemingly

For a parallel see Rocchetti 1967–68: 182, fig. with a central panel of checkerboard edged by2. EPG? vertical fringing. Flanking panels apparently pos-

sessing a giant fringed lozenge as the central mo-15 (C 6168). Lid of a pot, two fragments from thetif with a hooked swastika on each side. A verticaledge. Pl. 4.1. D 18.0. Fine ware (2.5 YR 6/4 withtriglyph edged with arcading delimiting thisgray core). Top decorated with concentric re-zone; traces of another hooked swastika beyond.served bands.Lower edge of this field also bearing fringing.Joining fragment from 29A1/60.

Other fragments from 47A/45, 48, 51, 52, 58;44A/15; 51A1/68; 51A/29 and 37; and 63A/64.16 (C 6145). Bell krater, profile rim to upper belly.

Pl. 4.40. Max pres h 21.7, d at rim ca. 51.0. Semi- The fabric is unusual at Kommos and certainlynot local. The best parallels for the decorationcoarse ware (2.5 YR 6/6 with gray core). Slipped.

Central panel decorated with a spiral tree and belong in the SM and EPG periods. One face ispurely SM; the other has many SM motifs butflanking motifs of large stemmed spirals and

fringed verticals. has seemingly absorbed the idea of a central panelwith flanking symmetrically arranged pattern-Joining sherds from 37A/39, 47A/38 and 40,

50A/33, and 64A3/81. The likely date, in view work (likely under Attic influence). This wouldseem to indicate a date still within the Mesarioteof the developed rim molding, is Middle–Late

Protogeometric, while the decoration looks back EPG period. For a discussion of these stylisticphenomena see Coldstream 1972: 65–66 and, forto SM–EPG work like that of the painter of

Fortetsa 166 (Coldstream 1996b: 246, no. 60). Vo- the style, p. 69, A10.The stratigraphic position of the fragment fromlute trees with pendent spirals are a later creation

(Di Vita et al. 1984: 244; Coldstream 1984b: 95, Trench 63A is below the second courtyard surfaceassociated with Floor 2 of Temple A. This proba-for their development in PGB).


bly indicates that the vase belongs to an early It is entirely possible, of course, that in both con-texts the vase is a survivor from the first templephase of the floor. Associated carinated bell sky-

phoi support a date early within the PG period. floor.

Deposit 3 (33C/85): Temple A, Just outside the Doorway

A level contemporary with the upper floor of Temple A (Deposit 2) was discovered justoutside the temple. The rich deposit (33C/85), along with Deposits 4 and 5, was importantfor dating purposes.

18 (C 6171). BG cup, rim fragment. Pl. 4.1. Max 25 (C 3287). Bell skyphos, profile except rim. Pl.4.41. Restored h 9.2, d at base 4.0. Fine ware (5pres h 1.7, d at rim ca. 10.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/

6). Fully painted. YR 7/6). Painted as 22.Type as 22.The short flaring neck with continuous curve

into the shoulder is a good example of the begin-26 (C 6162). High-necked cup, profile restored.ning of the influence of Mainland types in thePl. 4.1. D at rim 13.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/4). Bodylater ninth century B.C. LPG/PGB by context.and neck painted with horizontal bands.

19 (C 6170). Bell cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.1. Max Other fragments from 33C/59 and 47A/68,pres h 2.4, d at base 4.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). where the context was ambiguous. The piece mayUnpainted. belong to the early years of Temple B. It certainly

The profile with shallow concavity underfoot seems too late to be associated with Temple A.looks reasonably early in the PG sequence at

27 (C 3292). Bell krater, profile rim to upper bellyKommos but is far heavier than the types foundexcept handle. Pl. 4.1. Max pres h 7.5, d at rimon Floor 1.ca. 17.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Fully painted.

20 (C 6169). Spouted bell cup, profile, rim and An early type without rim molding.upper body. Pl. 4.1. Max pres h 4.8, d at rim 9.0.Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Unpainted. 28 (C 3288). Hydria, rim fragment. Pl. 4.1. Max

pres h 2.4, d at rim ca. 16.0. Semicoarse fabric (521 (C 3284). Bell skyphos, body fragment includ- YR 7/6 at core). Painted band at rim.ing handle. Pl. 4.1. Max pres h 5.0. Fine ware (5 The thickened beveled rim is of LPG/PGB typeYR 7/6). Fully painted. at Kommos.

Of the same type as 22.29 (C 3294). Phoenician amphora, twenty as-

22 (C 3283). Bell skyphos, profile except handle. sorted sherds. Phoenician ware (5 YR 7/6).Pl. 4.1. H 9.0, d at rim 8.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/ Only one Phoenician fragment was found in6). Fully painted except for tondo in bowl and the lower floor of Temple A; most were associatedunderfoot. with Floor 2. The fabric of these fragments sug-The profile has a distinct carination on the gests a later-tenth- or early-ninth-century-B.C. date.lower belly, being similar in type to examples See Bikai, Section 2, Table 4.2.found on Floor 1 but with a heavier pedestal. Forcomment on the type see 7. 30 (C 6451). Phoenician amphora, type I (Oren)

or Type 9 (Bikai 1978: pls. 2–3), profile rim to23 (C 3285). Bell skyphos, profile without handle.bottom of shoulder. Pl. 4.1. D at rim ca. 16.0.H 8.5, d at rim ca. 9.4. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6).Phoenician ware (5 YR 6/8).Painted as 22.

Other sherds from 42A/47; 51A/31; 56A1/67;Type as 22.63A/47, 53, and 68; 64A/35; and 68A/37. Thethick rim indicates that this vessel was of type24 (C 3286). Bell skyphos, profile. Pl. 4.1. H 8.5, d

at rim 8.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Painted as 22. I, which had its latest known occurrence in theLevant according to Oren (personal communica-Type as 22 but with heavier pedestal.


tion) in Hazor, dating to the reign of Ahab. First vessel may be associated with an early phase ofTemple A, Floor 2. See Bikai, Section 2, for a fullerthird of ninth century B.C. or earlier. The occur-

rence of fragments in 63A/68 indicates that the discussion.

Deposit 4 (63A/54, 55, 57, 65, 67, 68, and 70–72): Temple A, Courtyard of Wall 2

As the area around Temple A was cleared it became possible to amalgamate more and morematerial on the basis of physical joins with vessels from Trench 33C. Material could also begrouped on purely stratigraphic grounds, since the builders of Temple B spread their workingchips to form the surface of their first sanctuary courtyard, effectively sealing the strews ofthe Temple A period below. In Trench 63A two superimposed courtyard surfaces, mentionedwith Deposit 2, provided the best opportunity to distinguish between earlier and later usephases for the second floor of Temple A. The earlier (lower) suface (Deposit 4) was thecourtyard of Wall 2.

The following vases connect this deposit with Temple A, Floor 2 (Deposit 2): 13–17, 26, 29,and 30.

31 (C 8612). Bell skyphos, profile base to lower the tiara/rim and the eyes; another placed in thecenter of the forehead. Settings for these presum-belly. Pl. 4.2. Max pres h 3.8, d at base 3.4. Fine

ware (5 YR 7/4). Rim dipped. ably impressed into the clay while it was stillleather hard, with the disks then inset after firing63A/54. The tall heavy pedestal with deep ar-

ticulation underfoot is late in the PG sequence. using a greenish substance as adhesive, traces ofwhich still remain. Painted decoration of facial

32 (C 8613). Bell skyphos, pedestal. Pl. 4.2. Max details: the eyebrows, eyelashes, and lips.pres h 2.2, d at base 4.3. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). 63A/68. The rim type, hollowed behind withUnpainted. a vertical molding, is known from PGB contexts

63A/54. The high conical foot with deep con- at Fortetsa (Brock 1957: nos. 340, 342, 349), andcavity underfoot is late in the PG sequence. the associated pottery at Kommos also suggests

a PGB date. The tradition of head protomes on33 (C 8614). Bell skyphos, profile base to handlejuglets has a long history in the Levant, and theirzone. Pl. 4.2. Max pres h 5.3, d at base 3.9. Granu-local adaptations in the eighth and seventh cen-lar fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Rim dipped.turies B.C. in ceramic and faience vases among63A/55. Form and date as 32.the East Greek cities and their colonial founda-

34 (C 8182). Attic or Cycladic skyphos, rim frag- tions are a well-known phenomenon. No otherment. Pl. 4.2. Max pres h 3.0, d at rim ca. 16.0. example of such borrowing in Greek lands, how-Attic or Cycladic fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Fully ever, is as early as this and, given the evidencepainted except for two reserved bands at rim at Kommos for Cypro-Levantine contacts, it isoutside; one inside. understandable that imported models could eas-

63A/67. Ninth century B.C., of a type that at ily have been available to South Cretan potters.Fortetsa is generally found in PGB contexts The use of faience beads as added decoration(Brock 1957: nos. 364–67, 462, 478, 520). to pottery vessels finds a parallel from recent

excavations in the Idean cave (I. Sakellarakis 1983:35 (C 8192). Jug, profile rim to lower neck. Pls.pl. 372β).4.2, 4.40. Max pres h 5.1, d at rim 5.5. Fine ware

(7.5 YR 7/2). Fragment preserving part of the 36 (C 8184). Juglet, fragments from rim, neck,and shoulder. D at rim 6.5. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/4).rim and neck of a jug, to the front of which was

attached a protome in the shape of a female head. Rim and neck decorated with painted horizontalbands. Shoulder zone delimited below by a broadFaience disks, hollow at the center, applied to


painted band surmounted by upright concentric 63A/64, 67, and 68 and 34A2/39. The vessel isa local copy of 132, and the decoration suggestssemicircle groups, the centers of which were dec-

orated with a crosshatched triangle flanked by a date early in the ninth or perhaps the late tenthcentury B.C.crosshatched leaf motifs.

63A/67. LPG/PGB.41 (C 8194). Bell krater, fragments from shoulder.Pl. 4.41. Max pres h 8.3, max pres w 4.9. Three37 (C 8180). Hydria, rim fragment. Max pres h

2.95, d at rim unknown. Semicoarse ware (5 YR joining fragments and a floater from the centralpanel of decoration. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Recon-7/6). Fully painted on exterior.

63A/67. The simple beveled rim form is typi- struction of the surviving fragments: at the top aframed panel of crosshatched horizontal zigzag;cal of the PG period, probably early in the se-

quence. below an hourglass pattern filled with checker-board, the intervening spaces being decorated

38 (C 8179). Hydria, rim fragment. Max pres h with concentric triangle groups whose centers are2.3, d at rim ca. 9.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/8). Simple crosshatched.rim beveled and decorated with a painted band 63A/64, 67, and 68. The patternwork has LPG/inside and out. PGB parallels at Fortetsa (Brock 1957: pattern 3p),63A/67. Date as 37. but the profile and thinness of the wall here sug-gest an LPG date.39 (C 8181). Bell krater, fragments from the rim

and shoulder. Pl. 4.41. Max pres h 11.9, max pres42 (C 8172). Bell krater, notably a fragment fromw 11.8. Semifine ware (5 YR 7/6). Collared rim main panel of decoration. Pl. 4.2. Max pres h 10.7.painted black. Preserved part of the main zone Semifine ware (5 YR 6/4). Among the survivingwith a central quiltlike panel: three vertical con- fragments, part of a wide central panel consistingcentric lozenge chains flanked by upright lines of alternating checkerboard and crosshatchedand a border pattern of a vertical chain of cross- rectangles that was flanked by ladder and spiralhatched lozenges. This panel would have been motif.flanked by concentric circle groups. 63A/65. The patternwork suggests an LPG63A/67. For the bordering pattern cf. Brock date (Brock 1957: pattern 1d).1957: pattern 5h. LPG. The thinness of the wall

and the subtlety of the collar molding on this 43 (C 8185). Basin, rim fragment. Max pres h 6.3,d at rim unknown. Coarse ware (2.5 YR 6/6).piece contrasts with the thick-walled, coarser kra-

ters belonging to the PGB period. This dichotomy Slipped. Rim a simple collared form.63A/67. LPG/PGB by context.is clear enough, perhaps, to permit the assigning

of problem pieces to one period or another on44 (C 8183). BG cup, fragments giving profile rimthese grounds alone. to lower belly. Max pres h ca. 6.5, d at rim ca.12.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Fully painted.40 (C 8243). Bell krater, fragments from rim to

lower belly. Pl. 4.6. D at rim 33.0. Semifine ware 63A/67. This form, with short everted lip andglobular body, is borrowed from the earlier Geo-(2.5 YR 6/6 with a darker core on the thicker

pieces of the lower belly). Painted decoration as metric tradition of the Greek mainland (Brock1957: no. 166, type B), although Coldstream (1972:Brock 1957: no. 166 but without the central verti-

cal line. 67) notes an earlier example from Knossos.

Deposit 5 (63A/26, 49, 50, and 51): Temple A, Courtyard of the Ceramic Horse

The second and final use surface associated with Temple A, Floor 2 (Deposit 2), in Trench63A was dubbed the courtyard of the ceramic horse.

In addition to the catalogued items listed here, the following provide by joins direct linkswith Floor 2 of Temple A: 17 (Deposit 2), 26 (Deposit 3), and 132 (Deposit 8). Of these only


the last may be safely regarded as belonging to this phase, since fragments of the other twowere found on the lower courtyard surface (Deposit 4).

45 (C 7889). Cycladic cup handle. Max pres h 3.5. 63A/49. The high splaying pedestal with deepconical underfoot dates to late in the ninth cen-Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/4). Decorated with zebra

stripes. tury B.C.63A/26. As Brock 1957: no. 467. PGB.

53 (C 8607). Attic or Cycladic cup, base to lower46 (C 7886). Skyphos, profile rim to upper belly. belly. Pl. 4.2. Max pres h 2.6, d at base ca. 6.0.Pl. 4.2. Max pres h 5.75, d at rim ca. 15.0. Attic Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Base reserved.or Cycladic fine ware (5 YR 7/4), micaceous. 63A/49. Ninth century B.C.

63A/26. The multiple zigzag in the rectangular54 (C 8051). Jug, profile rim to lower belly. Pls.panel between the handles dates to the late ninth4.2, 4.41. Max pres h 14.5, d at rim ca. 13.0. Finecentury B.C.ware (5 YR 7/6). Neck and rim decorated with

47 (C 7887). Skyphos, rim and shoulder. Pl. 4.41. horizontal bands enclosing a horizontal squiggle.Max pres h 3.3, d at rim 12.0. Fine ware (7.5 Shoulder with a hatched “cloud” pattern (BrockYR 7/4), slightly micaceous. Completely painted 1957: pattern 11n). Below, a broad band flankedinside. Outside, three horizontal stripes on rim by horizontal stripes; lower belly decorated withand a narrow row of short vertical strokes on a running wave pattern. Zebra stripes on handle.shoulder. Joining sherds from 63A/48 and 50 and 65A2/

63A/26. Probably an eighth-century-B.C. intru- 22. PGB. See Johnston 2000: cat. no. 41.sion.

55 (C 8167). Attic amphora, rim fragments. Pl.48 (C 8602). Bell skyphos, base to lower belly. Pl. 4.41. Max pres h 3.7, d at rim ca. 22.0. Attic fine4.2. Max pres h 3.7, d at base 3.3. Fine ware (7.5 ware (5 YR 7/6). Slightly flaring echinoid rimYR 7/6). Rim dipped. painted black; surviving wall of the neck plain.

63A/26. The pedestal is of an LPG type with Three ancient mend holes (and one aborted) indi-deep conical underfoot. cating that the vase was broken and repaired in

antiquity.49 (C 8603). Bell skyphos, base to upper belly.63A/64. Attic, PG, perhaps tenth century B.C.Pl. 4.2. Max pres h 5.1, d at base 3.2. Fine ware

(7.5 YR 8/4). Rim dipped. 56 (C 8615). Hydria, rim fragment. Pl. 4.2. Max63A/26. LPG/PGB by context. pres h 4.0, d at rim 15.5. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6).

Painted bands at rim inside and out.50 (C 8604). Bell skyphos, pedestal. Pl. 4.2. Max63A/48. The simple beveled rim is a character-pres h 4.1, d at base 4.8. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/4).

istic PG type at Kommos.Unpainted.63A/26. A very late PG type with tall splaying 57 (C 7888). Hydria, rim fragment. Pl. 4.2. Max

pedestal. pres h 5.6, d at rim ca. 13.0. Semicoarse ware (5YR 7/6). Painted band at rim inside and out.51 (C 8608). Bell skyphos, pedestal. Pl. 4.2. Max

63A/26. The profile with its vertical collaredpres h 2.5, d at base 3.8. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6).rim hollowed behind is characteristic of the Geo-Fully painted.metric period (Coldstream 1972: 92, F1), and like63A/49. The low delicate pedestal with shal-47 is probably intrusive in 63A/26, which lay justlow concavity underfoot and spiral relief bandunder the layer of working chips for the construc-on the surface belongs with the bases from Tem-tion of Temple B.ple A, Floor 1. The type seems characteristic of

the EPG period in northern Crete; see Coldstream58 (C 8279). Pedestaled bell krater, profile except1972: 67. Late tenth century B.C. lower belly. Pl. 4.41. D at rim ca. 40.0. Fine ware(10 YR 7/3) with a coarser ware being used for52 (C 8609). Bell skyphos, pedestal. Pl. 4.2. Max

pres h 3.2, d at base 5.9. Fine ware (5 YR 8/4). the handles and pedestal base. Rim painted black.Main zone decorated with a central metope con-Slipped.


sisting of a crosshatched cross within a cross- 63A/24 and 26. The walls are relatively thin,suggesting an LPG rather than a PGB date.hatched border, four crosshatched lozenges being

placed in the reserved areas; a border of stripes60 (C 8280). Bell krater, fragments from rim tosurrounding this panel on all but the top side.shoulder. Pl. 4.6. Restored h ca. 17.0, d at rimTwo compass-drawn concentric circle groups40.0+. Semicoarse ware (5 YR 6/3). Collar paint-flanking the central panel and attached to it byed. Broad central metope decorated with a seriesa horizontal zone of crosshatched triangles en-of crosshatched lozenge and hourglass patterns.closed within bands. On the other side this lastFlanking concentric circle group leaving a largefeature replaced by large crosshatched zigzags.reserved tondo decorated with a central cross-The area below the main zone decorated with twohatched lozenge attached to the circles above andbroad bands enclosing a group of four horizontalbelow by triple chevrons. Hatching in the zonestripes. Concentric semicircle groups pendentbetween the two outermost circles.from this zone. Lower belly painted black, as is

63A/23. The profile, fabric, and thickness ofthe pedestal except for a reserved band bearingthe wall imply a PGB date for the vase.a zigzag.

Fragments were found in 84A2/40; 44A/24,61 (C 8605). Bell krater, rim fragment. Pl. 4.2.31, and 46; 51A/14, 17, 26, 28, and 30; and 63A/Max pres h 4.0, d at rim ca. 25.0. Semifine ware23, 24, and 26. Some of these contexts lay above(7.5 YR 7/6). Fully painted.the Temple B construction chip deposit, but most

63A/49. An unusual flaring form with parallelsof the pot comes from pure PG deposits datingat Knossos (Coldstream 1972: 75, fig. 5, C18, B20).to Temple A. This vase belongs to a hybrid seriesLPG.of bell kraters provided with pedestaled bases

under Mainland influence. The profile is of later62 (C 8606). Bell krater, rim fragments. Pl. 4.2.PG type with emphatic collar below the rim, andMax pres h 2.9, d at rim ca. 29.0. Semifine warethe complicated decoration is also late in the PG(7.5 YR 7/6). Wide painted band at rim insidetradition. The fabric of most of the vase is excep-and out.tionally fine and it may be imported. LPG/PGB.

63A/49. The uncollared rim probably belongs59 (C 8260). Bell krater, fragments from the early in the PG sequence at Kommos. Ninth cen-shoulder. Pl. 4.41. Max pres h 9.8. Semifine ware tury B.C.(5 YR 7/4). Immediately below the rim a line offringed triglyphs. Wide central panel decorated 63 (C 8610). Phoenician amphora. Pl. 4.2. Max

pres h 3.8, d at rim ca. 15.0. Phoenician ware.with a quiltlike pattern of alternating checker-board and crosshatched squares and flanked by 63A/64. See 30 (Deposit 3) and Bikai, Section

2, 9 and Table 4.2. First half of ninth century B.C.a flaring ladder pattern ending in a concentriccircle group. or earlier.

Deposit 6 (34A2:34, 36, 37, and 40–48): Protogeometric Accumulation

In Trench 34A2 another rich deposit of PG pottery was found. Here, in contrast to some ofthe other dumps examined, the buildup appears to have been gradual, and it was possibleto divide the material into three phases (Stages 1–3), although none should be regarded asabsolutely discrete or secure.

Cross joins between Stage 1 and the courtyard of Wall 2 in Trench 63A (Deposit 5) indicatethat the dump in 34A2 began to be deposited early in the history of Temple A, Floor 2 (Deposit2). The fragments of early-ninth-century-B.C. vessels noted in the catalogue serve to documentthe later stages of the buildup, but some material should definitely be placed in the SM/EPGperiod.


Stage 1 (34A2/42, 44, 46, and 48) 71 (C 4145). Amphora, rim sherd. Pl. 4.3. Maxpres h 2.8, d at rim 16.0. Granular fine ware (2.5

64 (C 6524). Cup or deep bowl, rim and upper YR 6/8). Echinoid rim hollowed behind and dec-body. Pl. 4.2. Max pres h 3.6, d at rim ca. 10.0. orated with a horizontal band.Fine ware (5 YR 7/4). Interior painted except for 34A2/36. LPG/PGB.a broad band below the rim. Exterior with a care-

72 (C 4146). Amphora, fragments from rim andless horizontal squiggle below the rim.neck. Pl. 4.3. Max pres h 7.6, d at rim 20.0. Semi-34A2/44. It is exceptionally difficult to datefine ware (2.5 YR 6/8). Collared rim slightly hol-this piece, but in form and decoration it resembleslowed behind and decorated with a horizontalKnossian EPG cups, such as Brock 1957: no. 57band.and Coldstream 1972: pl. 15.25. Another distinct

34A2/36. LPG/PGB.possibility is that it is of the same date as 10(Deposit 1) and should therefore be placed within

73 (C 4157). Amphora, profile from rim to upperthe SM phase of the site.neck. Pl. 4.3. Max pres h 3.0, d at rim ca. 10.0.Fine ware (2.5 YR 6/8). Collared rim hollowed65 (C 4230). Amphora, rim fragment. Pl. 4.2. Maxbehind and decorated with a horizontal band.pres h 4.0, d at rim 18.0. Semifine ware (5 YR 7/

34A2/40. LPG/PGB by context.6). Flaring rim slightly thickened and painted.Another simple horizontal band around the neck. 74 (C 3125). Amphora, rim fragment. Pl. 4.3. Max

34A2/42. SM/EPG. pres h 4.1, d at rim ca. 13.0. Fine ware (5 YR 6/8). Collared rim hollowed behind and the exterior66 (C 3254). “Krater,” profile. Pls. 4.2, 4.42. Hdecorated with two horizontal bands.16.0, d at rim 13.0. Semicoarse ware. Lower belly

34A2/40. Date as 73.painted black, above which was placed a broadhorizontal band surmounting three horizontal 75 (C 4158). Jar or perhaps hydria, rim fragment.stripes. Another horizontal band marking the Pl. 4.3. Max pres h 3.3, d at rim 17.0. Medium-transition from shoulder to neck. Upright concen- coarse ware (5 YR 7/4). Thickened rim beveledtric semicircle groups decorating the shoulder. and decorated with a thick horizontal band inside

34A2/42. PG. and out.34A2/40. PG.67 (C 4229). Phoenician amphora, four body frag-

ments. Phoenician amphora ware. 76 (C 4163). Bell krater, body fragment with base34A2/42. Ninth century B.C. by context. See of collared neck. Semifine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Col-

Bikai, Section 2, Table 4.2. lar painted; small part of a concentric circle groupsurviving below.68 (C 4231). Phoenician amphora, five body frag-

34A2/43. The thinness of the wall and thements. Phoenician amphora ware.subtlety of the molding suggests a mature PG34A2/44. Date as 67. See Bikai, Section 2, Tabledate.4.2.

77 (C 4164). Bell krater, body fragment. Pl. 4.3.69 (C 4232). Phoenician amphora, two body frag-Max pres h 4.5. Semicoarse ware (7.5 YR 7/6).ments. Phoenician amphora ware.Part of the central metope with one of the com-34A2/46. Date as 67. See Bikai, Section 2, Tablepass-drawn concentric circle groups flanking it.4.2.

34A2/43. LPG/PGB by style.

78 (C 4148). Bell krater, rim fragment. Pl. 4.6.Max pres h 6.2, d at rim ca. 45.0. Medium-fine

Stage 2 (34A2/34, 36, 40, 43, 45, and 47) ware (10 YR 10/3).34A2/36. The very tall and emphatically ren-

70 (C 4162). Attic or Cycladic cup, handle. Max dered rim dates this late in the krater sequence.pres h 5.0. Attic or Cycladic fine ware. Decoratedwith zebra stripes. 79 (C 4161). Phoenician amphora, body frag-

ment. Max pres w 9.0. Phoenician amphora ware34A2/43. The type belongs in the ninth centuryB.C. Cf. Brock 1957: no. 467. (5 YR 7/6).


34A2/43. The thinness of the wall implies that 34A2/37. Later ninth century B.C.this sherd comes from an Oren type II vessel. See

84 (C 3107). Bell skyphos, profile. Pls. 4.3, 4.42.Bikai, Section 2, Table 4.2. Date by context: ninth H 9.8, d at rim 10.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Rimcentury B.C. dipped.34A2/37. The button base is highly unusual.

Date by context: 850–800 B.C.

Stage 3 (34A2/37 and 41) 85 (C 3127). Jug, fragment from shoulder. Pl. 4.3.Max pres w 5.6. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Decoration80 (C 3128). Bell skyphos, body fragment withof crosshatched lozenges between triple chevrons.handle. Pl. 4.3. Max pres h 4.8. Fine ware (5 YR

34A2/41. Close to Brock 1957: pattern 3af.7/6). Preserved profile with a carination belowLPG/PGB.the handle. Painted exterior with the area under86 (C 3113). Deep bowl, profile. Pls. 4.3, 4.42.the handle and a “window” between the handlesH 6.0, d at rim 6.9. Fine ware (5 YR 7/8). Wallreserved.decorated with close-set horizontals; reserved34A2/41. This type seems to be early in theshoulder zone with crosshatched triangles.local PG sequence, eleventh century B.C.

34A2/37. Date as 85.81 (C 3110). Bell skyphos, profile base to lower

87 (C 4215). Amphora, profile rim and neck. Pl.belly. Pl. 4.3. Max pres h 5.5, d at base 5.3. Fine4.3. Max pres h 7.3, d at rim ca. 13.0. Semicoarseware (5 YR 7/6). Painted inside, probably rimware (5 YR 6/6). Flaring rim thickening to formdipped.a beveled collar, painted black.34A2/37. The high pedestal with conical un-

34A2/37. Date as 85.derfoot is late, and the walls of the vessel proba-bly described an “S” curve characteristic of later 88 (C 4216). Amphora, profile rim to upperbell skyphoi at Kommos. Later ninth century B.C. shoulder. Max pres h 8.2, d at rim 9.5. Semicoarse

ware (5 YR 6/4).82 (C 3109). Bell skyphos, upper profile. Pl. 4.3. As 87.Max pres h 6.0, d at rim 8.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/

89 (C 4217). Bell krater, rim sherd. Pl. 4.6. Max6). Rim dipped.pres h 3.8, d at rim 35.0. Semicoarse ware (5 YR34A2/37. Ninth century B.C.7/4).

34A2/37. The emphatic collar molding is later83 (C 3108). Bell skyphos, profile. Pl. 4.3. H 9.7,d at rim 9.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Rim dipped. PG.

Deposit 7 (42A/68 and 70–76): Protogeometric Dump

A dump was deposited against the north face of the north wall of Minoan Building T. It datessolidly to LPG/PGB and was excavated as pails 68 and 70–76 of Trench 42A. Joins in pail 76with 132 (Deposit 8), also found in 63A/64, a deposit associated with Floor 2 of Temple A,indicate that the dump probably was made up of discarded offerings connected with thelatest use of the earliest temple. The dump was rich in pottery, and many items were ofsufficient importance to be catalogued. Whether it was a gradual or simultaneous depositionremains obscure.

42A/68 5/6 with black core). Traces of burning on bothinterior and exterior.90 (C 6180). Tripod cooking pot, profile except

for handles and base of tripod feet. Pl. 4.3. Recon- 91 (C 4430). Cycladic(?) skyphos, profile exceptfor handles. Pl. 4.3. H 8.6, d at rim 15.4. Fine warestructed h 20.5, d of rim 11.7. Pithos ware (5 YR


(5 YR 7/4). Most of the surface black, but with a shoulder. Pl. 4.3. Max pres h 3.8, d at rim 12.0.Fine ware, refired.line of double concentric lozenges in a reserved

handle zone panel. Compare 95.Other fragments found in 42A/41, 63, 72, 73,

and 79. The vase dates to the Middle Geometricperiod (ninth century B.C.). 42A/72

98 (C 4556). Dipped cup, profile except for handle.Pls. 4.3, 4.42. H 6.4, d at rim 9.6. As 95 and 97.

42A/70 99 (C 4557). Cycladic cup or skyphos, rim sherd.Pl. 4.3. Max pres h 3.7, d at rim ca. 9.0. Fine ware92 (C 6133). Cup, profile except for base. Pl. 4.3.(7.5 YR 6/4), wholly painted.Max pres h 6.5, d at rim 11.0. Fine ware (5 YR 8/

Imported EG Cycladic cup with very short4). Double dipped in a dull black paint.everted rim. Ninth century B.C.Sherds from 42A/70–74. This is representative

of a plain flat-based type of cup characteristic of 100 (C 4558). Closed vessel, body sherd. Pl. 4.4.the LPG/PGB periods. H 5.8, w 5.7. Fine ware (5 YR 6/6). Decorated with

horizontal lines and a crosshatched horizontal93 (C 6159). Hydria, profile of the neck. Pl. 4.3.zigzag (Brock 1957: pattern 3p).Max pres h 7.9, d at rim ca. 15.0. Semicoarse ware

LPG/PGB.(5 YR 6/4) with large inclusions. Flaring neckending in a slightly thickened echinoid rim. A 101 (C 6151). Attic cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.4.wide band of dull black paint at the rim, and a Max pres w 3.7. Attic fine ware (5 YR 7/8).rough wavy line in the reserved area below. This flat-based cup with all-over dark brown

Sherds from 42A/70–74. paint should belong within the ninth century B.C.

94 (C 6160). Jug or oinochoe, rim fragment. Maxpres h 3.5, d at rim ca. 7.5. Pl. 4.3. Attic or Cycladic 42A/73fine ware (10 YR 8/6). Completely covered indark paint. 102 (C 4560). Phoenician transport amphora, two

This fragment is probably from an Attic or is- body sherds. Largest sherd length 6.0, w 3.8. Lightland vase dating to the LPG/Early Geometric red ware (7.5 YR 5/2).periods. 103 (C 4562). Attic cup, sherds giving profile. Pl.

4.4. H 5.5, d at rim 9.2. Attic fine ware. Completelycovered with black paint except for the handle,which is decorated by a series of stripes; a re-42A/71served band on the exterior rim; and another just

95 (C 4554). Unpainted cup, upper body wall and below the interior rim.handle. Pl. 4.3. Max pres h 7.7, d at rim ca. 13.0. Joining sherds from 42A/72 and 47A/61. ThisFine ware (5 YR 6/4). Unpainted. type belongs to the later tenth century B.C.

Joining sherds from 42A/71 and 72, giving up-104 (C 6144). Jug, profile from base to lowerper body wall and handle. This cup would havebelly. Pl. 4.4. Max pres h 8.4, d at base 5.8. Im-been of the flat-based variety with simple “S”ported(?) fine buff ware.profile characteristic of the LPG/PGB periods.

Joining sherds from 42A/75 and 47A/36. Date96 (C 4472). Juglet, complete profile. Pls. 4.3, 4.42. by context: ninth century B.C.H 9.0, d at rim 3.0. Fine ware (5 YR 6/6). Mostof the body covered in dull black paint, withfour reserved horizontals just above the widest 42A/74diameter and a chain of linked double chevrons

105 (C 4610). Phoenician amphora, body frag-on the shoulder.ment. Length 4.8, w 4.0. Light red ware (7.5 YRLPG/PGB.6/6).

Ninth century B.C. by context.97 (C 4553). Dipped cup, sherds from rim and


106 (C 4611). Cup, profile except handle. Pl. 4.4. narrow horizontal reserved band just under thelip both inside and outside.H 7.05, d at base 3.2. Fine buff ware. Dipped

so that all but base covered with a dull black EG, ninth century B.C.paint.

Joining sherds from 42A/75. Compare 95, 97,and 98. 42A/75107 (C 4612). Jug, complete except for rim and

113 (C 4615). Kantharos, complete. Pls. 4.4, 4.43.handle. Pls. 4.4, 4.42. H 13.5, d at base 2.5. FineH 10.7, d at rim 12.2. Slightly gritty cream fabricware. Simple biconical body with flaring neck.(10 YR 7/4). Almost completely covered in brownThe upper two-thirds of the vase fully coatedpaint. Zebra stripes on handle and reservedwith dull black paint except for a reserved hori-bands just above pedestal in the handle zone,zontal containing a solid black zigzag.and one inside the lip. Horizontal band of solidNinth century B.C.lozenges (Brock 1957: pattern 5a) in the handleJ. W. Shaw 1982a: 188, pl. 55a; 1984a: 282, pl.zone.60c.

LPG/PGB.108 (C 4613). Cycladic oinochoe, profile except

114 (C 4616). Phoenician amphora, fragment.for rim and handle. Pls. 4.4, 4.43. Max pres h 16.8,Light red clay (7.5 YR 6/6).d at base 5.6. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/4). Completely

covered with black paint except for four reserved 115 (C 6132). Cup, profile rim to lower belly with-horizontals below the handle. out handle. Pl. 4.4. Max pres h 5.0, d of rim ca.

EG, ninth century B.C. 10.0. Fine ware, refired (2.5 YR 7/2).J. W. Shaw 1982a: 188, pl. 55c; 1984a: 282, pl. 60c. Other sherds in 47A/56. Cf. 106 and 122.

116 (C 4614). Jug. Pl. 4.4. H 11.6, d at rim 9.8.109 (C 4563). Imported closed vessel, assortedSemicooking ware (5 YR 6/6). Undecorated.sherds from the main panel of decoration on the

Ninth century B.C. by context.shoulder. Pls. 4.6, 4.43. Light red ware (7.5 YR 6/J. W. Shaw 1982a: 188, pl. 55c.6). Main panel defined by two horizontals at the

bottom and five at the top; four verticals flanking117 (C 6126). Bell skyphos, whole profile. Pl. 4.4.the design of two concentric circle groups and aH 12.55, d at rim 9.8. Fine buff ware. Dipped incentral panel of diagonal checkerboard and verti-dull black paint down to the lower belly. Elon-cals.gated profile on a high pedestal.Other fragments from 42A/76 and 77 and 43A/

Joining sherds from 47A/38. LPG/PGB.51 and 52. Ninth century B.C. by context.

110 (C 4609). Closed vessel, parts of shoulderzone. Pls. 4.4, 4.43. Fine ware (5 YR 7/3). Design 42A/76of stacked crosshatched winged lozenges.

Other fragments from 42A/39, 40, and 75. 118 (C 4617). Phoenician amphora, six fragments.Ninth century B.C. by context. Light red clay (10 YR 6/2 in core). See Bikai,

Section 2, 4, 10, Table 4.2.111 (C 6134). Dipped cup, upper profile. Pl. 4.4.J. W. Shaw 1982a: 188 n. 65.Max pres h 5.9, d at rim ca. 10.0. Fine buff ware

(7.5 YR 7/6). 119 (C 4620). Phoenician amphora, two frag-Flat-based dipped cups such as this were comments. Ware 5 YR 6/8. See Bikai, Section 2, Table

mon in the LPG/PGB period. 4.2.

120 (C 4618). Bell skyphos, whole profile. Pl. 4.4.112 (C 4608). Attic or Cycladic cup sherds givingupper profile. Pl. 4.4. Max pres h 3.3, d at rim ca. H 9.9, d at rim 8.5. Fine ware (10 YR 7/3). Rim

dipped.11.0. Attic or Cycladic fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6).Globular form with a very short, slightly offset, LPG/PGB by context.

J. W. Shaw 1982a: pl. 55c.rim. Completely covered with paint except for a


Deposit 8 (47A/36–41, 45, 48, 51, 52, 56, 58, 61, and 75):Protogeometric Dump

A rich PG dump was excavated above the Minoan road in Trench 47A and appears to berelated, on the basis of cross joins, to a similar dump found in Trench 42A (Deposit 7).Fragments from the following vases were found in various pails of Trench 47A: 16, in pails38 and 60; 17, in pails 48, 51, 58, and 61; 132, in pails 45, 56, and 61; 148, in pails 35, 51, and61. Of these, 16 and 17 had fragments on Floor 2 of Temple A (Deposit 2) or the equivalentlevel just outside the cella (Deposit 3). Multiple joins up and down the deposit make it likelythat this was a one-period dump. To maintain some precision, however, the material ispresented here pail by pail.

47A/36 Horizontal band at the neck–shoulder junction;two more on the lower belly. Three horizontal

121 (C 6077). Dipped cup, profile. Pl. 4.43. H 7.6, stripes just under the lower handle attachment,d at rim 10.1. Fine ware (7.5 YR 6/4). defining the shoulder.

The high, almost offset, rim places this late in LPG/PGB.the PG sequence at Kommos.

126 (C 6129). Juglet, profile except rim and upper122 (C 6187). Cup, profile. Pl. 4.4. H 6.5, d at rim handle. Pls. 4.4, 4.43. Max pres h 10.4, d at base9.5. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Unpainted. 5.1. Fine ware (10 YR 8/6). Reserved shoulder

For the type see 95. decorated with a horizontal squiggle.LPG/PGB.123 (C 6178). Amphora, profile rim to belly. Pl.

4.6. Max pres h 33.0, d at rim ca. 20.0. Semicoarse 127 (C 6154). Amphora, profile upper neck andware (5 YR 7/4). Collared rim hollowed behind; shoulder. Pl. 4.43. Max pres h 10.0. Semicoarseexterior painted black. Below, a zone of pendent ware (5 YR 7/4). Paint on handle.semicircle groups. Horizontal bands delimitingthe shoulder zone, which is decorated withgroups of concentric circles. Vertical squiggles

47A/39embellishing the handles.Other sherds from 47A/37 and 58 and 42A/ 128 (C 6121). Bell skyphos, profile. Pl. 4.4. H 8.75,

73. LPG by context. d at rim 6.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Dipped tolower belly.

LPG/PGB.

129 (C 6120). Krateriskos, profile rim to belly. Pl.47A/384.5. Max pres h 8.3, d at rim 9.8. Fine ware (10

124 (C 6152). Cup, profile except handle. Pl. 4.4. YR 8/6). High, almost vertical rim unusual. Hori-H 8.90, d at rim ca. 7.8. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). zontal stripes decorating the neck, placed belowTall, flat-based profile with a simple “S” curve. the handle zone. Upright concentric semicircleUpper half painted black with reserved horizon- groups embellishing the shoulder. Handlestal on the shoulder. Paint also covering the upper painted black.third of the inside.

130 (C 6176). Amphora, rim fragment. Pl. 4.5.LPG/PGB by context.Max pres h 4.4, d at rim ca. 25.0. Semicoarse ware(5 YR 7/6).125 (C 6155). Jug, profile except rim. Pl. 4.4. Max

pres h 16.5, d at base 5.2. Fine ware (10 YR 7/6). Shape and decoration similar to 123.


47A/40 YR 8/6). Unique decoration of concentric circleor semicircle groups on the lower belly.

131 (C 6150). Jug(?), body sherd. Max pres w 4.1. Other sherds from 47A/61. The high-rimmedFine ware (5 YR 7/4). Exterior painted with two ring base, almost a pedestal, probably points tothin stripes above a broad horizontal band. a late PG date.

EG?

132 (C 6143). Bell krater, fragments from rim andbody. Pls. 4.6, 4.44 (parts). Max pres h 31.5, d at 47A/48rim 35.5. Knossian fine ware (5 YR 7/8). Slightly

136 (C 6065). Bell skyphos, body sherds. Maxmolded rim painted. Parallel bands separatingpres h 5.4. Fine ware (7.5 YR 8/4). Painted, withthe lower belly from the handle zone, which has aa small “window” left under the handle.central motif of stacked horizontal zigzag groups

Probably earlier ninth century B.C.strung out on a vertical line, with flanking motifsof spiral ladders. 137 (C 6068). Bell skyphos, profile restored. Pl.

Other fragments from 47A/41, 45, 56, and 61; 4.5. Restored h 9.1, d at rim 8.2. Fine ware (5 YR34A2/37 and 42; 42A/76; 51A/27; and 63A/64. 7/6). Painted rather than dipped.At Knossos this pattern (Brock 1957: pattern 11b) The profile, with its distinct carination at thedoes not survive beyond EPG. The collared rim belly, seems to be a local and also an early typemay imply a slightly later date, but it seems that at Kommos.even this feature was known in the late tenthcentury B.C. at Knossos (see Coldstream 1996b:368–69, with particular reference to tomb 285.60,

47A/56with very similar decoration, but no collar [andslimmer], and 48.7, an early collared piece, of 138 (C 6157). Bell krater, rim fragment. Pl. 4.12.MPG). See also Rocchetti 1967–68: 186, fig. 9 right. Max pres h 8.5, d at rim ca. 40.0. Semicoarse wareLate tenth century B.C.? (7.5 YR 6/6).

The exceptionally high collared rim is late.PGB.

47A/41 139 (C 6149). Attic(?) cup or skyphos, bodysherd. Max pres h 4.1. Attic fine ware (5 YR 7/133 (C 6061). Bell krater, fragments from rim and4). Fully painted except for a reserved panel dec-shoulder. Pl. 4.6. Max pres h 9.6. Semicoarse wareorated with close-set horizontals.(7.5 YR 7/6). Surviving decoration forming met-

Later ninth century B.C.?opes decorated with crosshatched lozenges andbutterfly motifs, possibly repeated on each side 140 (C 6177). Jug, fragments from neck. Pl. 4.5.of the vase. Max pres length 5.1. Semicoarse ware (5 YR 7/

Further fragments from 44A/15, 32, and 34. 6). Decoration consisting of pendent semicircleThe heavy molded rim and thick walls are charac- groups below a horizontal band.teristic of the LPG/PGB period at Kommos. Another sherd from 42A/68.

141 (C 6108). Oinochoe, profile. Pl. 4.44. H 11.3,d at base 7.3. Semicoarse ware (5 YR 7/6). Un-painted.47A/45

The biconical profile with wide flat base is typi-134 (C 6055). Bell cup, profile. Pl. 4.5. H 10.85, d cal of the PG period.at rim 9.9. Fine ware (2.5 YR 6/6), with pale slip.

142 (C 6156). Amphora, profile rim to lowerRim dipped.belly. Max pres h ca. 32.0, d at rim ca. 14.0. Semi-The heavy pedestal looks late in the PG se-coarse ware (5 YR 6/4). Collared rim paintedquence at Kommos.black inside and out, with horizontal bandsplaced above and below the shoulder panel,135 (C 6184). Jug, profile base to lower belly. Pl.

4.5. Max pres h 5.2, d at base 6.5. Fine ware (7.5 which is decorated with concentric circle groups.


Other fragments from 42A/70 and 72–74 (De- der; from it are pendent groups of fringing (Brock1957: pattern 18a).posit 7). LPG.

PG.143 (C 6186). Amphora, profile rim to shoulder.

147 (C 6148). Bell krater, fragments from rim toPl. 4.5. Max pres h 8.5, d at rim 12.7. Semicoarsebase. Pl. 4.44 (part). D at base 21.0. Semicoarseware (5 YR 7/6). Rim and neck bearing horizontalware (2.5 YR 6/6) with gray core. Two broadbands; part of a concentric circle group preservedhorizontals placed at the base, a horizontal stripeon the shoulder.halfway up the belly, and another broad bandThe flaring rim with a hollow behind it is verymarking the lower limit of the decorated zoneadvanced in the local sequence. LPG/PGB.on the shoulder. Main zone preserved only infragments, but sufficient remains to attempt areconstruction: broad central panel made up of

47A/61 a crosshatched hourglass motif flanked by largefringed spirals.144 (C 6130). Attic cup, profile. Pl. 4.5. H 6.2, d

Other fragments from 34A2/39 and 44 andat rim 9.5. Attic fine ware. Fully painted except47A/40, 48, 50, and 61. The individual motifs lookfor reserved underfoot and reserved horizontalearly, and the profile can be related to SM typesinside rim.as well. The fabric is unusual at Kommos.Such pieces are not readily dated, but the squat

SM.body and flaring rim would suggest a date in thelater ninth century B.C. (Attic MG I), cf. Kubler 148 (C 6147). Krater, profile except pedestal. Pl.1954: pl. 105; Coldstream 1968: 18. 4.12. Max pres h 21.0, d at rim ca. 27.0. Fine ware,

probably Knossian (10 YR 7/4). Lower belly is145 (C 6128). Jug, profile neck to base. Pl. 4.5.fully painted; belly and rim decorated with hori-Max pres h 15.0, d at base 5.6. Fine ware, firedzontal stripes. Shoulder bearing a central panelpartly red 2.5 YR 6/8, partly buff 10 YR 7/4. Neckof a vertical crosshatched lozenge chain betweenpainted black; three horizontals placed below thetriglyphs, which is flanked by compass-drawnshoulder, which is decorated with solid hourglassconcentric circle groups.motifs within double chevrons.

Other sherds from 47A/35 and 51, 42A/75,PG.51A/30, and 63A/50, 64, and 67. Despite the ap-parently early shape of the krater, the closest par-146 (C 6153). Jug, fragment from shoulder. Pl.

4.44. Max pres length 6.8. Semicoarse ware (2.5 allel for the decoration is found on Brock 1957:no. 221, of developed PG date.YR 6/8). Horizontal band at the top of the shoul-

“Deposit” 9 (Various): Protogeometric Material from General Strews

149 (C 6415). Bell skyphos, profile. Pls. 4.5, 4.44. belly painted black. Base a hybrid form betweenpedestal and ring base.H 8.5, d at rim 8.4. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/4). Dipped.

51A/26. The high pedestal places this late in 63A/24. Ninth century B.C. by context.the local PG sequence. The shape resembles that

152 (C 7853). Juglet, profile shoulder to base. Pl.of 177 (Deposit 10).4.5. Max pres h 6, d at base 4.9. Fine ware (5 YR7/4). Fully painted except for a “window” on150 (C 6452). Cup, profile without handle. Pl. 4.5.

H 6.2, d at rim ca. 9.0. Fine ware (5 YR 6/8). Fully shoulder decorated with groups of chevronsabove two horizontal bands.painted except for reserved band inside rim.

51A/31. Ninth century B.C. 63A/21. The patternwork is influenced by thatof Attico-Cycladic skyphoi of the late ninth cen-

151 (C 8263). Jug, profile shoulder to base. Pl. tury B.C.4.5. Max pres h 15.0, d at base ca. 6.0. Fine ware(5 YR 6/4). Shoulder decorated with upright 153 (C 7854). Juglet, profile shoulder to base. Pl.

4.5. Max pres h 7.3, d at base 5.2. Fine ware (5semicircle groups above horizontal bands; lower


YR 7/4). Shoulder decorated with triple chevrons der to upper belly. Pl. 4.12. Max pres h 18.1. Semi-fine ware (5 YR 6/4).above bands.

63A/21. Later ninth century B.C. by context. 44A/28. The decoration is classic PGB. Lateninth century B.C.

154 (C 7851). Amphora, neck. Pl. 4.5. Max presh. ca.13. Attic or Cycladic fine ware (2.5 YR 6/ 157 (C 7852). Lekythos, profile restored. Pl. 4.7.6). Preserved decoration of a hatched meander Max restored h ca. 23.0, d at rim 6.5. Fine wareabove a horizontal line of hourglass motifs be- (5 YR 6/6). Vertical outlined solid leaves on thetween verticals. neck. Horizontal hatching and zigzags between

63A/21. Early eighth century B.C. lines on shoulder. Foot black, and on belly largeovoid leaves with solid fringed centers.155 (C 6690). Closed vessel, shoulder. Pl. 4.7. Max

63A/22. This seems to be a negative version ofpres h 14.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/4). Decoration ofthe quatrefoil pattern on 17 (Deposit 2). For thehatched arcading above a hatched meander.type, cf. Brock 1957: nos. 340, 342, 349, 505.50A/47. Early eighth century B.C.

PGB.156 (C 3925). Straight-sided pithos, profile shoul-

Deposit 10 (Various): Temple A, Strews

In various trenches the stone chips marking the construction of Temple B effectively sealedthe Temple A strews from later contamination. The pottery from these lower levels has beengathered together here specifically to illustrate the range of forms current during the lifetimeof the earliest temple.

In Trench 37A, strews belonging to the earliest temple were found in pails 17, 18, 38, and39. Two fragments of 16, from Temple A, Floor 2 (Deposit 2), were also discovered in 39A/39, as well as three fragments from 132 (Deposit 8).

In Trench 43A the pails directly under the working chips from the construction of TempleB were 52, 55, and 60. There were no catalogued items except for fragments of 109, whichgive a join with Deposit 7 (42A/74 and 76). Thus 109 definitely belongs to the Temple Aperiod, although other fragments in this trench are sometimes found above the workingchips.

37A/38 Attic or Cycladic fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Paintedwith zebra stripes.

158 (C 3666). Attic or possibly Cycladic skyphos, For the type cf. Brock 1957: no. 467. Late ninthprofile rim to lower belly. Pl. 4.7. Max pres h 8.0, d century B.C.at rim 18.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Fully painted

161 (C 3668). Dipped cup, profile rim to bellyexcept for two reserved bands at the rim outsideexcept handle. Pl. 4.7. Max pres h 4.7, d at rimand one inside.ca. 10.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Double dipped.For the type cf. Brock 1957: nos. 364–67. Later

A typical PG form. Ninth century B.C.ninth century B.C.162 (C 3669). Juglet, profile base to upper belly.159 (C 3667). Attic or possibly Cycladic skyphos,Pl. 4.7. Max pres h 5.5, d at base 4.5. Fine warerim and shoulder. Pl. 4.7. Max pres h 3.0, d at rim(5 YR 7/6). Exterior completely painted exceptunknown. Fine ware (5 YR 6/8). Fully painted.for two reserved horizontals on the lower belly.Similar to 158.

The decoration is influenced by mainland EGtypes. Ninth century B.C.160 (C 6498). Cup, handle. Pl. 4.44. Length 3.2.


163 (C 3673). Amphora, rim fragment. Pl. 4.7. 167 (C 3670). Bell krater, four body sherds. Pl.4.7. Max pres h 6.3. Semicoarse ware (5 YR 7/6).Max pres h 4.8, d at rim ca. 15.0. Medium fine

ware (5 YR 6/4). Fully painted. Preserved fragments showing a horizontal cross-hatched zigzag and groups of horizontal linesLater ninth century B.C. by context.above and below (Brock 1957: pattern 3p).

164 (C 3678). Amphora(?), profile lower neck and LPG/PGB.shoulder. Pl. 4.7. Max pres h ca. 8.0. Fine ware

168 (C 3674). Basin(?). Pl. 4.12. Max pres h 11.10,(2.5 YR 6/6). Neck-shoulder junction defined byd at rim 31.0+. Medium coarse ware (7.5 YR 7/a horizontal row of dots between horizontal lines.8). Slip. Scar of a horizontal handle.Shoulder decoration of lozenges with dotted bor-

PG by context.ders attached to diagonal lines continuing theline of the upper sides. Flanking borders of thick 169 (C 3677). Cooking pot, profile rim to lowervertical bands with reserved concentric circle belly. Pl. 4.7. Max pres h 12.5. Cooking ware (2.5groups. YR 5/6). Unpainted.

Later ninth century B.C. by context. PG by context.

165 (C 3675). Bell krater, body fragment. Pl. 4.7. 170 (C 4072). Phoenician amphora, profile rimMax pres h 7.9. Semicoarse ware (2.5 YR 7/4). and upper shoulder. Pl. 4.7. D at rim 10.0. Phoeni-Surviving decoration: part of a concentric circle cian amphora ware (5 YR 6/6).group, whose center is decorated with checker- Ninth century B.C. See Bikai, Section 2, 14, Tableboard. 4.2.

PGB.

166 (C 3672). Bell krater, rim and shoulder. Pls.4.12, 4.45. Max pres h 17.8, d at rim ca. 40.0. 37A/39Semifine ware (5 YR 7/4). High rim painted black.

171 (C 4071). Bell skyphos, profile base to lowerWide central panel apparently with rectilinear belly and one rim fragment. Pl. 4.7. Max pres hdecoration. Flanking concentric circle groups 4.7, d at base 3.2. Fine ware (7.5 YR 8/4). Dipped.with reserved sunbursts in the center. Nonjoining LPG type with conical underfoot.fragment indicating that lower border of maindecorative zone consisted of a horizontal line of 172 (C 4076). Bell krater, body fragments. Max

pres length 5.5. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Decora-solid lozenges above crosshatched arcading.Joining sherd from 47A/56 (Deposit 8). tion of crosshatched triangles.

LPG/PGB.PGB.

Deposit 11 (51A/14, 30, and 31): Temple B, Earliest Courtyard

In Trench 51A the burnt surface associated with the first courtyard of Temple B slopedmarkedly toward the southwest, marking the extreme edge of sanctuary activity at this point.Richer in PG pottery than 50A, this trench also provided many interesting joins with othercourtyard trenches. In several cases (e.g., 17 [Deposit 2] and 132 and 147 [Deposit 8]) someof the PG material could be shown to belong to the Temple A period and therefore representsurvivor fragments in the later phase. In pails 27 and 29, above the court surface, there wasso much PG material that some at least must be contemporary with the first use of the surface.Much of the rest of the pottery was Geometric. Pails 30 and 31, immediately under thecourtyard, just below the line of working chips from Temple B, were solidly PG. Only in pail17, above, did we find substantial amounts of intrusive later material, suggest-ing that there was some disturbance here. In the secure deposits, pails 30, 31, and 14, frag-


ments of the bell krater 58 (Deposit 5) were found, proving definitely that it should beassociated with Temple A, Floor 2. A large rim fragment of 148 (Deposit 8) was found in pail30, and in pail 31, fragments of the Phoenician amphora 30 (Deposit 3) and the cup 150(“Deposit” 9).

51A/30 7/6). Rough decoration consisting of two paintedhorizontals and a vertical.

173 (C 6432). Cup, profile. Pl. 4.45. H 7.3, d at Ninth century B.C. by context.rim 10.2. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/4). Unpainted.

Although this flat-based type was once thoughtto be no earlier than LPG, an example has been 51A/14found in an EPG context at Knossos (Coldstream

176 (C 6334). Pyxis, profile. Pls. 4.7, 4.45. H 10.0,1972: 67, no. A26). The proportions of 173 maked at rim 8.9. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Fully paintedit somewhat later.on exterior except for a reserved band on theLPG/PGB by context.lower shoulder, whose decoration consisted of a

174 (C 6435). Juglet, base fragment. Pl. 4.7. Max squiggle between two horizontal stripes.pres h 1.7, d at base 4.0. Fine ware (10 YR 7/4). PGB by context.Fully painted on exterior.

177 (C 6423). Bell skyphos, profile base to justNinth century B.C. by context.below rim. Pl. 4.45. Max pres h 7.9, d at base ca.3.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/8). Dipped.175 (C 6434). Jar, rim fragment. Pl. 4.45. Max pres

h 6.8, d at rim ca. 15.0. Semicoarse ware (5 YR LPG/PGB.

Deposit 12 (50A): Temple B, Earliest Courtyard, General

The earliest court surface associated with Temple B in Trenches 44A, 63A, 37A, 44A2, 42A,and 47A was also found in Trench 50A, where it was similarly characterized by burnt patches,limpet piles, and pebbles. Multiple links with adjacent trenches were noted, and there can beno doubt that here, too, the pottery represents the phases of earliest use for Temple B. Here,in the extreme southwest corner of the temenos, the dispersal of early material was some-what more attenuated than elsewhere. The pottery from under the courtyard surface is securelyPG but particularly unhelpful. The most that can be said is that nothing later than PGB wasdeposited before the establishment of the Temple B courtyard. As for the pails above thecourt surface, it should be noted that there is much Geometric and Orientalizing material,but even so a substantial complement of later-ninth-century-B.C. sherds probably representsthe first use of the second temple. Imported Attic or Cycladic amphorae and jugs as wellas skyphoi and BG cups are probably to be dated to Attic MG I (ca. 800 B.C.). They providethe most secure dating evidence. Fragments of local bell kraters and other large PG shapesare present, but there are very few pieces from smaller PG shapes, such as bell skyphoi,cups, and juglets. In this at least the trench seems to differ from those further north andwest.


Deposit 13 (63A/24): Temple B, Earliest Courtyard

The earliest level above the first Temple B surface in Trench 63A contained substantial numbersof PG fragments, but there were other vases that may help in dating the first phase of TempleB. See also 151 (Deposit 9).

178 (C 8262). Amphora, fragments from rim and 180 (C 8261). Bell krater, body fragments. Pl. 4.45.Fine ware (7.5 YR 6/4). Two concentric circleneck. Pl. 4.45. D at rim 24.5. Semifine ware (5 YR

6/6). Flaring rim painted; neck bearing a solid groups preserved that once flanked a central met-ope on the shoulder of the bell krater. Two setsbattlement pattern.

The motif is unparalleled at Fortetsa among of concentric circles; innermost separated fromthe other by a sunburst pattern. Center decoratedthe many amphorae found but is likely to date

to the late ninth or early eighth century B.C. with a crosshatched cross.Sherds from 63A/21, 23, 24, and 50 and 34A2/

179 (C 8258). Imported(?) amphora, sherds from 38. LPG/PGB. The fragment from 63A/50 im-the shoulder. Pl. 4.46. Fine ware (5 YR 6/6). Decora- plies that this vase actually belongs to Temple A,tion of groups of vertical squiggles and a panel with Floor 2.lozenges and dots above a broad painted band.

Eighth century B.C.

Deposit 14 (33C/79 and 80): Temple B, Foundation

The earliest layer within Temple B is represented by 33C/80. The material appears to havebeen consistently PG. This is probably merely a general redeposition of sherds from TempleA upon which the later temple was built, but, as Maria C. Shaw (Chap. 3, Section 1) hasnoted, the absolute depth of the material may very well force an association with the previousbuilding. Associated with this floor deposit was pail 79, excavated beneath the rectangularhearth. There were thirteen catalogued objects from this deposit, including 189–97.

Scrappy as it is, the material from pails 80 and 79 seems to belong consistently to the PGperiod, with the exception of 193, whose other findspots may suggest that it is intrusive, andthe flat-based BG cups, which should date to early in the Geometric period. When this evidenceis considered with that of the courtyard strews (Deposits 10–13), where there is no sign ofpost-PG material below the working chips marking the construction of Temple B, it seemsreasonable to conclude that the second temple was constructed toward the end of the ninthcentury B.C. or, at the latest, in the early eighth century, and that there was no gap in occupationof the site at this point.

183 (C 8352). Cup. Pl. 4.7. Max pres h 2.7, max33C/80pres w 3.3. Fine ware (5 YR 8/4). Unpainted.

181 (C 8348). Bell skyphos. Max pres h 1.5, max184 (C 8353). Cup. Pl. 4.7. Max pres h 3.9, maxpres w 2.5. Fine ware (7.5 YR 8/2). Painted insidepres w 2.1. Fine ware (2.5 YR 6/4). Unpainted.and out.

182 (C 8349). Bell skyphos. Pl. 4.7. Max pres h 185 (C 8351). Hydria, rim fragment. Pl. 4.7. Maxpres h 3.2, d at rim ca. 14.0. Semifine ware (5 YR3.0, max pres w 2.9. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Painted

inside and out. 7/3). Unpainted.


The flaring and slightly thickened rim con- Max pres h 2.6, d at rim ca. 14.0. Fine ware (5 YR8/4). Black paint inside and out.forms to LPG types.

The offset rim would suggest a date in the early186 (C 6165). Bell krater, rim and body fragments eighth century B.C.with one handle. Thirteen fragments. Pl. 4.7. Fine

192 (C 4337). Cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.8. Maxware (7.5 YR 8/4), probably Knossian. Rimpres h 2.0, d at base 4.0. Fine ware (5 YR 8/4).painted black; black horizontals just below theBlack paint inside and out.maximum diameter. Decoration in the handle

The flat base of this painted cup would suggestzone consisting of groups of concentric circlesa date within the early eighth century B.C.with crosshatched crosses. Nothing remaining of

the central panels, which must have existed. 193 (C 8377). Dipped cup, 24 sherds giving pro-Fragments were also found in 47A/56 and file. Pl. 4.8. H 8.7, d at rim 12.2. Fine ware (7.5

63A/24. The latter context would also suggest a YR 6/4).use contemporary with an earlier phase of Tem- Fragments were also found in 33C/54, 73, 77,ple B. and 78, and so the true stratigraphic position of

this cup is obscure. Eighth century B.C.187 (C 8350). Pyxis, two nonjoining fragments.

194 (C 4338). Cup, rim fragment. Pl. 4.8. MaxMax pres h 3.3, max pres w 2.9. Fine ware (5 YRpres h 1.2, d at rim ca. 13.0. Fine ware (5 YR 6/8/4). Unpainted except for three horizontal lines.6). Black paint inside and out.This seems to be a pyxis of PG type.

The short offset rim implies a date within theeighth century B.C.

195 (C 4339). Cup, rim fragment. Pl. 4.8. Maxpres h 1.2, d at rim 13.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/4).33C/79Black paint inside and out.

188 (C 8374). Bell skyphos, rim and wall frag- This cup is of the same type as 194.ment. Pl. 4.7. Max pres h 4.0, max pres w 4.9.

196 (C 4340). Ladle or lamp, handle and part ofFine ware (5 YR 7/6). Painted inside and out.rim. Pl. 4.8. Length of handle 17.0, d at rim ca.14.0. Unpainted. Red coarse ware (2.5 YR 6/8).189 (C 8375). Bell skyphos, pedestal. Max pres h

This shape is very popular in later phases of1.2, d at base 3.5. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6).Temple B (cf. 203–6).

190 (C 3495). Kalathos, rim fragments. Pl. 4.8.197 (C 3316). Votive kalathos, complete. Pl. 4.8.Max pres h 9.7, d at rim 13.0. Coarse ware (5 YRH 3.4, d at rim 6.15. Semicoarse ware (5 YR 7/5/3). Unpainted.6). Unpainted.

J. W. Shaw 1981a: 233.191 (C 8376). Cup fragment, rim and shoulder.

Deposit 15 (33C/58, 60, 64, 76, and 78): Temple B, Floor 1

Pails 58 and 76 in Trench 33C lay above the first floor of Temple B. Pail 78 was excavatedwithin the hearth. The pottery was often scrappy and difficult to date. On the floor therewere several fragments of Late Geometric black-painted cups, and one hydria rim was alsoGeometric. Two fragments of perhaps MG pithoi were present, but at least six LG cups indicatethat the floor continued in use until the later eighth century B.C. The fragments from largervessels are usually undiagnostic. There are many identifiable PG fragments from this lot,mainly from small juglets or cups with vertical handles. These may be survivor pieces fromthe earlier “floor.” In other words, continuity is suggested by, but is not demonstrable fromthe material from within the temple, when taken in isolation.


Probably associated with these early phases of Temple B are 33C/60 and 64. There weresix catalogued objects in pail 60, including 208–12.

198 (C 8395). Cup, rim fragment. Pl. 4.8. Max Max pres h 7.0, d at rim 19.6. Semicoarse ware(5 YR 6/6).pres h 1.7, d at rim 11.2. Fine ware (5 YR 6/4).

Painted inside and out. 33C/78.33C/58. The type belongs to the later eighth 206 (C 8385). Lamp or ladle, rim fragment. Pl.

or early seventh century B.C. 4.8. Max pres h 5.0, d at rim 26.5. Semicoarseware (5 YR 6/4).199 (C 8396). Cup, rim fragment. Pl. 4.8. Max

33C/78.pres h 3.6, d at rim 13.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/4).Unpainted. 207 (C 8378). Mug, profile without handle. Pl.

33C/58. Similar in type to 198. 4.8. H 12.0, d at rim 15.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 6/4), with silver mica inclusions.200 (C 3116). Lid. Pl. 4.8. D at rim 11.0. Fine ware

33C/57 and 78. This is an import from East(5 YR 7/6). Decoration consisting of concentricGreece and belongs to an early phase of thebands on the domed surface and small dashes atstraight-walled mug sequence from the Samianthe rim.Heraion (Andreas Furtwangler 1980: 159). Late33C/59 and 60. Lids of this type are frequentlyeighth to early seventh century B.C.found at Knossos and date to the seventh century

B.C. 208 (C 8355). Bell skyphos, seven sherds givingupper profile and one handle. Fine ware (10 YR201 (C 8363). Cup, rim fragment. Pl. 4.8. Max6/3). Unpainted.pres h 1.5, d at rim 14.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 8/4).

33C/60.Unpainted.33C/76. The short offset rim implies a date 209 (C 3135). Bell skyphos, whole profile except

within the first half of the eighth century B.C. handles. Pl. 4.8. H 8.2, d at rim 8.2. Fine ware (7.5YR 7/6). Rim dipped to just below handle.

202 (C 8386). Jar or amphora, body fragment. Pl. 33C/60.4.46. Max pres h 7.1, max pres w 5.0. Fine ware

210 (C 3134). Phoenician handle (from an am-(5 YR 7/4), with much silver mica. Surface deco-phora?). Max length 4.0. Ware 5 YR 7/6.rated with a group of concentric circles in dull

33C/60. See Bikai, Section 2, Table 4.2.brown paint.J. W. Shaw 1981a: 250 n. 130.33C/78. The mica suggests that this is an im-

port from the Cyclades or perhaps East Greece. 211 (C 8356). Hydria, rim fragments. Pl. 4.8. MaxEighth century B.C. pres h 2.2, d at rim 14.25. Semicoarse ware (7.5

YR 7/4). Paint at rim inside and out.203 (C 8382). Lamp or ladle, handle. Length 11.5.33C/60. This appears to be a PG form.Semicoarse ware (5 YR 7/6).

33C/78. 212 (C 8357). Skyphos, rim fragment. Pl. 4.8. Maxpres h 2.3, d at rim 14.2. Fine ware (5 YR 7/4).204 (C 8383). Lamp or ladle, handle. Length 13.5.Black paint inside and out.Semifine ware (5 YR 6/6).

33C/60. The type is imported from the33C/78.Cyclades or Attica and dates to the ninth centuryB.C.205 (C 8384). Lamp or ladle, bowl profile. Pl. 4.8.

Deposit 16 (29A1/84 and 87): Temple B, Floor 1

The earliest floor of Temple B in Trench 29A1 is represented by pails 84 and 87 and consistedof a deep ashy deposit above a hard-packed clay surface upon which stood the Tripillar Shrine.


On the whole, the floor deposit here was fairly scrappy but contained a relatively homogeneousselection of sherds.

The material from this floor dates solidly to the middle or second half of the eighth centuryB.C. with a few PG survivors. The most advanced forms are similar to those on the earliestfloor discovered in Trench 33C (Deposit 15), but there were large numbers of PG vases in thelatter trench, which, together with the evidence for construction from the courtyard deposits(Deposits 10–13), would suggest that the life of this early floor may have extended for almosta century.

29A1/87 216 (C 8841). BG cup, profile rim and shoulder.Pl. 4.8. D at rim ca. 13.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6).

213 (C 8838). BG cup, rim and body fragments. Fully painted.Pl. 4.8. Max pres h 3.8, d at rim ca. 12.0. Granular The thin walls and “S” profile resemble Brockfine ware (5 YR 7/6). 1957: no. 166, class B (III). LG.

The type with rounded body and slightly flar-217 (C 8842). Plain cup, fragments from rim anding lip seems to lie somewhere between the MGshoulder. Pl. 4.8. D at rim ca. 13.0. Fine ware (5and LG series of cups from Knossos.YR 7/6). Unpainted.

Shape similar to 214 and 215.

218 (C 2478). Hydria, rim sherd. Pl. 4.8. D at rim29A1/84ca. 13.0–15.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/4). Slipped.

214 (C 8839). BG cup, rim fragment. Pl. 4.8. Max The vertical collar with concavity behind is anpres h 2.6, d at rim ca. 12.0. Granular fine ware LG shape.(5 YR 7/4). Fully painted.

219 (C 2462). Lid or votive shield, profile. Pl. 4.8.Close to Brock 1957: 166–67, class B (III), earlyH 4.4, d 17.0. Granular fine ware (2.5 YR 7/2).LG.Slipped. Three concentric bands of verticalstrokes, the uppermost resembling petals. At least215 (C 8840). Plain cup, rim and body fragments.

Pl. 4.8. D at rim ca. 12.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/4). one suspension hole, presumably for hanging thearticle on the wall.Thick pale slip on exterior.

Same type as 213 and 214. Early LG. 750–700 B.C. by context.

Deposit 17 (33C/55, 72, 73, and 77): Temple B, Floor 2

The second-floor phase is represented in Trench 33C by pails 55, 72, 73, and 77 within thehearth. Multiple joins indicate that pail 54 (above 55) must be linked with this stage ofoccupation as well, or that there was a disturbance at this point. The floor deposit may bedated to the Geometric and Orientalizing periods on the basis of the BG cups, the flasks, andsome of the other smaller shapes. A characteristic feature of this floor is the quantity of EastGreek imported material. Fragments of several East Greek transport amphorae were found,as well as a small cylindrical cup and the handle of another cup-sized vessel. In contrast, nota single piece of Corinthian ware was found on the floor.

There were three catalogued objects from pail 55, six from pail 72, three from pail 73, andtwo from pail 77. Most are presented here.


33C/55 der and body. Pl. 4.46. Max pres h 4.4. Fine ware.Decoration consisting of groups of horizontals on

220 (C 8627). East Greek amphora, shoulder frag- the body and concentric circles between verticalments. Pl. 4.9. Largest sherd: max pres length lines on the shoulder.7.2, max pres w 8.5. Fine ware (5 YR 6/1), highly J. W. Shaw 1981a: 240, pl. 61e.micaceous. Decoration consisting of concentricsemicircle groups between panels of vertical lines.

Seventh century B.C. (Sub-Geometric style).33C/73

221 (C 8628). East Greek cylindrical cup, rim226 (C 8632). East Greek cup, profile except han-fragments. Pl. 4.9.dle. Pl. 4.9. H 10.3, d at rim 13.5. Fine ware (5 YRMax pres h 3.2, d at rim 15.0. Fine ware (7.57/3) with darker core, highly micaceous. FullyYR 7/4), highly micaceous. Fully painted in dullpainted except for a reserved horizontal just be-paint except for a reserved horizontal below thelow the rim inside and out.rim both inside and out.

Joining sherds found in 33C/53. Seventh cen-Seventh century B.C.tury B.C.

222 (C 8629). East Greek cup, handle. Max pres227 (C 3223). Aryballos, sherds from rim andlength 3.8. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/4), highly mica-shoulder. Pl. 4.9. D at rim. ca. 4.0. Fine ware (5ceous.YR 6/4). Decoration consisting of dashes on therim, petals on the shoulder, and a group of hori-zontal lines below.

33C/72 Seventh century B.C.

223 (C 3220). BG cup, multiple fragments givingwhole profile except for handle. Pl. 4.9. H 10.5,d at rim 15.0. Fine ware (2.5 YR 6/6). Completely 33C/77covered in dull paint.

228 (C 8387). Plain cup, handle. Length 33.0. FineSeventh century B.C.ware (7.5 YR 8/4).

224 (C 3221). Aryballos, profile from base to neck This handle is from an unpainted cup of eighth-with handle missing. Pls. 4.9, 4.46. Max pres h 7.4, or early-seventh-century-B.C. type.d at base 3.5. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/4). Decoration

229 (C 8381). Krater, nine body fragments. Pls.consisting of bands of horizontal lines and con-4.9, 4.46 (three fragments). Largest sherd: maxcentric circle groups on the shoulder.pres h 6.1. Fine ware (5 YR 6/4). Probably Attic.Seventh century B.C.

Other fragments from 33C/54, 55, 72, and 78;J. W. Shaw 1981a: 240, pl. 61e.42A/29; and 63A/21.

MG II, ninth century B.C.225 (C 3222). Aryballos, fragments from shoul-

Deposit 18 (33C/54, 68, 70, and 71): Temple B, Floor 3

The phase of the third floor in Temple B is represented by pails 54, 68, 70, and 71 in Trench33C. The extremely scrappy floor deposit was dated to the seventh century B.C. on the basisof stratigraphic position and by fragments of BG and plain cups.

There were seven catalogued items (230–36), all of the seventh century, in pail 54.

33C/54 Fine ware (5 YR 6/6). Decoration consisting of largeconcentric circle groups covering the entire body.

230 (C 8631). Aryballos, fragments from rim and Seventh century B.C. For the type cf. Brock 1957:pl. 97, nos. 1315, 1339, 1509.body. Pl. 4.46. Max pres h ca. 7.6, d at rim ca. 3.2.


231 (C 8637). Aryballos, shoulder fragments. Pls. 234 (C 3106). Shallow dish, sherds giving profile.Pls. 4.9, 4.47. H 7.0, d of base 15.6. Fine ware (2.54.9, 4.46. D at neck ca. 3.5. Fine ware (5 YR 6/

3). Groups of two concentric circles with vertical YR 6/8). Outer wall decorated with horizontallines. Base with a central large concentric circledividers. Outer circles decorated with white dots.group with smaller concentric circle groups

232 (C 8634). Cup, fragments giving profile. Pl. placed around it.4.9. H 6.6, d at rim 12.2. Fine ware (5 YR 7/4). Joining fragments from 33C/53 and 29A1/68.Unpainted. J. W. Shaw 1981a: 240, pl. 61c.233 (C 8635). East Greek cup, sherds giving pro- 235 (C 8633). Lid, lower part of profile. Pl. 4.9.file except base and handle. Pl. 4.9. Max pres h Max pres h 4.2, d at rim ca. 20.0. Coarse ware (57.8, d at rim 8.1. Fine ware (5 YR 5/3) with gray YR 6/6).core, highly micaceous. Upper and lower por-tions of the body painted dull black; reserved 236 (C 8636). East Greek skyphos, rim fragment.

Pl. 4.9. Max pres h 1.5, d at rim ca. 10.0. Fine warezone between decorated with close-packed hori-zontals. (5 YR 5/2). Dull paint inside and out, with three

reserved horizontals on rim.Joining sherds from 33C/53.

Deposit 19 (33C/52, 53, and 66): Temple B, Upper Levels

The phase of the upper levels in Temple B is represented by pails 52, 53, and 66 in Trench33C. It was associated with scattered blocks of stone. Both pails 52 and 53 had many joinswith the catalogued objects from pail 54 below (Deposit 18). In pail 52 there were joins with232, and in 53, joins with 233 and with 234, all from Deposit 18. In general terms the depositsassociated with this phase of the temple were rich in profiles and joining sherds. Drinkingcups, predominantly BG, were popular and possibly represent feasts or ritual meals. Amongthe large vessels also found on this surface, amphorae both for the table and for transportmake up the greater portion of the sherds. At least one hydria was present, as well as sherdsfrom a pithos decorated with horizontal fillets. A small amount of cooking ware was noted,but cooking seems to have played no significant part in the activities in the cella. There wereno food bowls. Among the cups and other shapes, the usual pattern for Kommos in theseventh century B.C. emerged: almost all the imports were East Greek, there being only onesherd from a Corinthian aryballos. As for chronology, the bases of the Cretan BG cups representsome of the most advanced stages of the shape sequence in Crete. Several possess the hollowedunderfoot with raised discus, which seems to be a late-seventh-century feature at Knossos.

Only two vessels were catalogued from these levels, the far richer dump just outside thetemple giving a better impression of the material.

237 (C 8641). Skyphos, profile except base and 238 (C 8640). East Greek cup, four rim fragments.Pl. 4.9. Max pres h 3.5, d at rim 15.1. Fine warelower belly. Pl. 4.9. Max pres h 7.6, d at rim 13.5.

Fine ware, refired. Completely covered in paint. (7.5 YR 7/4). Dull paint inside and out; reservedband under lip outside. Two reserved bands and33C/52. This piece seems to have the compara-

tively deep shape characteristic of the seventh a white line inside.33C/52 and 53.century B.C.


Deposit 20 (33C/68 and 72): Temple B, Early Orientalizing Occupation

In Trench 33C, pails 68 and 72 represented Early Orientalizing occupation within Temple B.

33C/68 Probably first half of the seventh century B.C.

239 (C 2395). BG cup. Pls. 4.9, 4.47. Max pres h 246 (C 2418). Aryballos, intact. Pls. 4.10, 4.48. H9.2, d at rim ca. 12.0. Fine ware (5 YR 6/3). Fully 8.0, d at base 3.65. Fine ware (7.5 YR 5/4). Bodypainted with simple incised guilloche decoration decorated with two zones of horizontals; shoul-on neck, and a runner and plant on the body. der with three pendent fronds.

Last third of seventh century B.C. Probably first half of the seventh century B.C.M. C. Shaw 1983: 446, pl. 62, fig. 6.

247 (C 2398). Oinochoe, belly fragment. Pl. 4.10.240 (C 2396). BG cup, profile to lower belly. Pls. Max pres h 5.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/4). Belly4.9, 4.47. Max pres h 11.4, d at rim 12.1. Fine ware decorated with varied sets of concentric circles.(5 YR 6/3). Fully painted with incised figured Copy of a Cypriot type. Seventh century B.C.decoration including a foot race and perhaps a by context.prothesis.

Joining sherds from 33C/50 and 53. Ca. 630– 248 (C 2399). Small oinochoe, fragment from600 B.C. shoulder. Pl. 4.10. Max pres length ca. 6.0. Fine

M. C. Shaw 1983: 443–46, pls. 61–62, figs. 1–5. ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Lower shoulder decoratedwith wide and narrow horizontals; small concen-

241 (C 2408). Cup, profile. Pls. 4.10, 4.47. H 13.0, tric circle group preserved above.d at rim ca. 14.0. Fine ware (5 YR 6/4). Two Creto-Cypriot type, seventh century B.C.horizontal bands delimiting shoulder and twomore on belly. Simple triglyph all that survives 249 (C 2397). Ovoid aryballos, intact. Pls. 4.10,of the main zone of decoration. 4.48. H 5.6, d at rim 2.45. Fine ware (10 YR 6/

The many other BG and plain cups from the 3). Refired. Surface and decoration completelypail were of the advanced seventh century B.C. eroded.in type. Either a Protocorinthian import or a local copy

(although there are no other known local imita-242 (C 2409). Bowl, profile rim to lower belly. Pl.tions of the type). Ca. 650 B.C.4.10. Max pres h 2.8, d at rim 11.5. Fine ware (5 YR

6/3). Double dipped. Stumps of one horizontal 250 (C 2406). Necked vessel, profile from rim tohandle preserved. middle neck. Pl. 4.10. Max pres h 10.5, d at rim ca.

29.0. Medium coarse ware (5 YR 7/4). Preserved243 (C 2405). Jug, profile rim to lower belly. Pl.neck decoration consisting of a concentric circle4.10. Max pres h 12.0, d at rim 5.1. Fine ware (5group.YR 6/4). Side dipped.

A South Cretan type. Seventh century B.C. bycontext.244 (C 2482). Ladle, handle fragment. Max pres

h 11.25. Medium coarse ware (2.5 YR 4/3). Un-251 (C 2404). Basin, profile rim to lower belly.painted.Pl. 4.10. Max pres h 7.5, d at rim ca. 23.0. Semi-One example of many sherds of this shape fromcoarse ware (7.5 YR 7/4). Unpainted, slipped.Temple B.

Seventh century B.C. by context.245 (C 2417). Aryballos, whole profile. Pls. 4.10,4.48. H 9.5, d at base 3.65. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/ 252 (C 2403). Cooking pot, profile rim to belly.

Pl. 4.10. Max pres h ca. 15.0, d at rim 12.0. Cooking6). Body decorated with four wide bands, six thinhorizontals being spaced between the upper two. ware (5 YR 5/6). Short, wide neck sitting atop a

globular body with five horizontal incisions be-Shoulder zone decorated with four sets of concen-tric circles. More horizontals decorating inside of low the handle zone.

Seventh century B.C. by context.rim; handle with zebra stripes.


Deposit 21 (Various Pails): Temple B, Cella

Many fragments or profiles were found within the cella of Temple B but in contexts that wereambiguous or insecure. The following entries represent a selection of the most interesting ofthese finds.

253 (C 2366). BG cup, profile restored. Pl. 4.10. 33C/48, 34A2/31, and 63A/8. The style is ofthe developed seventh century B.C.H 11.0, d at rim ca. 14.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6).

Fully painted with red wash.255 (C 3068). Neck-handled krater. Pl. 4.12. D at29A1/48 and 49. A seventh-century-B.C. typerim est 29.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 6/4). Slipped,with concave neck, pronounced “shoulder,” andpainted. Three horizontal bands of broken mean-narrow base.der decorating the neck; at least five more on the

254 (C 3043). Flask, fragments from rim to lower body. Inside of neck painted black; fragments ofshoulder. Pls. 4.10, 4.48 (part). Max pres h ca. 9.0, one reeded handle surviving.d at rim 8.4. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/4). Self-slipped 33C/51, 42A/29 and 34, and 51A/16 and 34.and painted. Inside of lip bearing a floral design. The handle may imply a date very late in theOn neck, a simplified meander. Fragments from seventh century B.C.shoulder with recumbent spotted felines.

Deposit 22 (36B/18 and 20–22): Geometric Occupation Layer

In Trench 36B part of a Geometric occupation layer5 was excavated as pails 18 and 20–22.The soil was dark and contained burnt material and many limpets. Other pottery of similardate was found above the main deposit and has been included here. The importance of thisdeposit is that it is uncontaminated by seventh-century-B.C. material and seems to representa single-period dump dating to the eighth century, and more specifically to late in the MGor early in the LG period. It is likely that East Greek, rather than Attic, models were theinspiration for many of these forms, given the presence of the earliest eastern material incontemporary deposits within the temple. For a discussion of the possible purely local patternof imports in this period, see 263. The full pottery assemblage is the subject of a separatepublication (Johnston 2000).

This relatively poor deposit seems to belong to the earlier part of the eighth century andfor some reason escaped contamination during the later history of Temple B. The cups andskyphoi provide the basic dating evidence, but the three pedestaled kraters of Mainland typeare all early and provide us with examples rarely found except in tombs of the MG periodat Knossos. As for decoration, if this is a true sample of MG types at Kommos, the repertoireof motifs has been so depleted that reserved horizontals and groups of vertical strokes seemthe only elements in common use. Perhaps, however, the major importance of this deposit isthat it preserves a group of pots from the earliest years of Temple B.


256 (C 3243). Cup or skyphos, profile rim to reserved horizontals decorated with groups ofvertical lines.shoulder. Pl. 4.10. Max pres h 4.4, d at rim ca.

14.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 6/4). Fully painted except 36B/21. A further fragment was found in 1992.Eighth century B.C. by context.for a reserved band at rim inside and out.

36B/21. 800–750 B.C. For the type cf. Cold- 262 (C 7040). Belly handled jar, profile rim tostream 1972: 82, fig. 7, D28. This type had already belly. Pl. 4.10. Max pres h ca. 14.0, d at rim ca. 15.0.arrived in Crete before the end of the MG period. Fine ware (5 YR 6/8). Exterior painted, except for

two reserved horizontals on upper shoulder and257 (C 7045). BG cup, profile rim to shoulder.a narrow metope between handles, which is dec-Max pres h 3.0, d at rim ca. 12.0. Fine ware (7.5orated with close-set verticals.YR 7/6). Fully painted.

36B/21 and 65A2/22. MG?36B/2. For the type, cf. Brock 1957: pl. 62, no.1032; Coldstream 1972: 95, no. D105. MG. 263 (C 7046). Krater, pedestal. Pl. 4.11. Max pres

h ca. 6.0, d at base ca. 22.0. Fine ware (2.5 YR 6/258 (C 7041). Skyphos, profile rim to belly. Pl. 6). Fully painted outside.4.11. Max pres h 4.2; d at rim ca. 17.0, of lip 21.0. 36B/2, 5, and 21 and 65A1/12. The shape andFine ware (5 YR 7/6). Fully painted except for a horizontal ribbing on the exterior are featuresreserved band inside the rim and a narrow met- borrowed most likely from Athens, which atope on the shoulder, where several vertical Knossos are largely confined to the EG and MGstripes survive. periods; cf. Coldstream 1996b: 375–76. Ionian or

36B/21. The short offset rim and globular body Euboean influence might perhaps also be enter-are early features. For the shape cf. Brock 1957: tained; cf. Walter 1968: pls. 7, 14 (800–750 B.C.);pl. 35, no. 494. Mid-eighth century B.C. Coldstream 1996b: 72, 87. For the apparent scant

extent of such influences in southern Crete, see259 (C 7039). Kantharos, sherds from rim to belly.Coldstream 1968: 256, although the material fromMax pres h 7.3, d at rim ca. 13.0. Fine ware (7.5Building Z tends to soften the difference. TheYR 7/6). Unpainted.subsequent history of imports at Kommos bids36B/21. On cups the “S” profile and thick nar-us beware of using Knossos as a model, and therow handle are early features, but the type sur-closer cemetery at Arkades has yet another pat-vives into the early LG period. Cf. Coldstreamtern of imported material.1972: 83, fig. 8, E3.264 (C 7047). Krater, fragmentary pedestal. Pl.

260 (C 3208). Hydria, rim to shoulder. Pl. 4.48. 4.11. D at base ca. 20.0. Fine ware (5 YR 6/6).Max pres h 15.5, d at rim ca. 17.0. Semicoarse Mostly painted on the exterior, but with twoware (7.5 YR 8/4). Slipped. groups of reserved horizontals.

36B/19. This vase comes from a level immedi- 36B/2, 5, and 21. Type and date similar to 263.ately above the main dump. LG. Cf. Coldstream

265 (C 7048). Krater, fragmentary pedestal. Pl.1972: 92, fig. 11, F1.4.11. Max pres h 5.3, d at top ca. 12.0. Fine ware(7.5 YR 6/6). Fully painted on exterior and inte-261 (C 7043). Amphora(?), profile shoulder to

belly. Pls. 4.10, 4.48. Max pres h 10.7. Fine ware rior of bowl. Ribbed.36B/5. Related to the previous two entries.(5 YR 6/6). Fully painted outside, except for two

Deposit 23 (42A/34 and 38–40): Altar U, Construction

The construction of Altar U postdates the deposition in Trench 42A of pails 39 and 40 andmay be associated with the bottom of pail 34 or the bottom of pail 38. All the pottery fromthese four pails dates to the LG/EO period, that is, the later eighth century B.C.


42A/40 d at rim 13.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Completelycovered in dull black paint. The short flaring off-

266 (C 3942). Globular skyphos, whole profile. set rim appears to belong early in the seventhPl. 4.11. H 6.9, d at rim 12.5. Fine ware (7.5 YR century B.C.6/4). Two horizontals decorating the rim, five thelower belly; a broad stripe encircling the base. 268 (C 3943). Corinthianizing aryballos, sherdHandle zone decorated with alternating groups giving profile from top of shoulder to upper belly.of concentric circles and small crosshatched Pl. 4.48. Max pres h 3.4. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6).squares. Shoulder decorated with small triangles between

For the type cf. Coldstream and Sackett 1978: verticals. Rest of the surface covered by narrow46 n. 7; Waterhouse and Hope Simpson 1960: 71. close packed lines in the PC fashion.Later eighth century B.C. Latest eighth to early seventh century B.C.267 (C 3944). BG cup, rim profile. Max pres h 1.8,

Deposit 24 (54A1/58–61 and 64): Building V

The southwest and southeast corners of Building V, apparently used for metalworking (seeRehder, Chap. 1, Appendix 1.2), were excavated in Trenches 54A1 and 66A. Only in the formertrench were floor surfaces recovered. The primary floor is represented by 54A1/59–61, wherethe material belongs to the later seventh century B.C. Three catalogued items (269–71) are tobe noted.

The upper floor (54A1/58) contained two whole vases and a whole profile. The date of thepottery from beneath this floor indicates that the vessels upon it belong to the final stage ofthe seventh century B.C. and that all activities within the building ceased at the same time asTemple B was abandoned. The full excavation of V in Trenches 72B and 73A in 1990 and1991 yielded further amounts of cups but no intact material. The dating was confirmed.

Primary Floor (54A1/59–61) 54A1/61. A late-seventh-century-B.C. type; seeMartelli Cristofani 1973: 11.

269 (C 6732). Late Protocorinthian kotyle, onebody sherd. Pl. 4.11. Max pres w 3.4. Corinthianfine ware (10 YR 8/3). The black-figure design

Upper Floor (54A1/58)probably represents a large bird or siren, al-though precise details are unclear. 272 (C 6703). Cup, complete. Pl. 4.11. H 8.65, d

54A1/59. at rim 12.5. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Rim dipped.The low elegant shape with narrow base hol-270 (C 6733). East Greek “bird” bowl. Pl. 4.11.

lowed underfoot is among the most advancedMax pres h 2.4, d at rim unknown. Fine ware (7.5types from Early Archaic Kommos.YR 7/4). Preserved surface showing one of the

triglyphs near the handle zone. 273 (C 6704). Skyphos, full profile. Pls. 4.11, 4.49.54A1/60. The shoulder profile suggests a date H 13.0, d at rim 16.3. Fine ware (7.5 YR 8/4). Rim

in the second half of the seventh century B.C. dipped.Late seventh century B.C. by context.

271 (C 6734). Cylindrical pyxis, base fragment.Pl. 4.11. Max pres h 2.8, d at base 10.5. Fine ware 274 (C 6705). BG cup, restored profile without

handle. Pl. 4.11. H 9.7, d at rim ca. 10.8. Fine ware(10 YR 7/3). Three horizontals on a clay groundpreserved. (5 YR 7/3). Fully painted.


The narrow base with molding and hollowed 276 (C 6707). BG cup, body fragment. Pl. 4.11.Max pres h 3.4. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Fullyunderfoot indicates a late-seventh-century-B.C. date.painted. Entire surface covered by small stamped

275 (C 6706). BG cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.11. circles.Max pres h 2.8, d at base 4.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR This sherd recalls the elaboration of the two8/4). Fully painted. incised cups from within Temple B, 239 and 240The narrow base with molding and discus un- (Deposit 20).derfoot dates to the last quarter of the seventhcentury B.C.

“Deposit” 25 (Various): Temple B, Material Not in Discrete Deposits

Vases 329–44 are a representive selection from the rich collection of transport amphorae fromthe site, although few were found in close proximity to the temple. Those from Building Qhave been treated by Johnston (1993), and he has also reviewed the material included here.

277 (C 6074). Skyphos, profile rim to shoulder. Painted except for reserved bands inside and out.59A1/36. Seventh century B.C.Pl. 4.11. Max pres h 6.3, d at rim ca. 17.0. Fine

ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Reserved band decorating283 (C 7015). Bowl, profile. Pl. 4.11. H 3.4, d atneck. Shoulder bearing a panel of discontinuousrim 14.8. Fine ware (5 YR 6/4). Decorated on therunning dog between triglyphs.outside with wavy lines and horizontal stripes; on47A/31. 700–650 B.C.the inside with horizontal stripes and a quatrefoilpattern with dot rosettes in the tondo.278 (C 3699). BG cup, profile. Pl. 4.11. H 9.6, d

at rim 12.1. Fine ware (5 YR 7/4). Fully painted. 59A/12 and 17. Later seventh century B.C. bycontext.42A/15. The high rim is ancestral to that of the

high-necked cups of the Classical period in Crete.284 (C 3719). Corinthianizing kotyle, profile. Pl.LO.4.13. H 11.4, d at rim 13.8. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6).

43A/15. The decoration is conservative, but the279 (C 7998). BG cup, profile. Pl. 4.11. H 6.2, dat rim 8.3. Fine ware (5 YR 8/4). Fully painted. deep form implies a seventh-century-B.C. date.

63A/38–42. This small variety of BG cup is285 (C 2330). Corinthianizing kotyle, profile. Pl.possibly votive in character but may also reflect4.13. H 6.9, d at rim 7.9. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6).the Greek symposium habit of beginning a feast

27B/3 and 4 and 50A1/30. Style and date simi-by drinking watered wine from large cups andlar to 284.moving on to unmixed wine in small cups after

the meal. For a similar duplication of types in the 286 (C 3849). Juglet, profile shoulder to base. Pl.Hellenistic period, cf. 580 (Deposit 42). 4.13. Max pres h 13.6, d at base 5.0. Fine ware

(7.5 YR 7/6). Decorated with solid leaves pendent280 (C 7997). BG cup, profile. Pl. 4.11. H 5.6, dfrom a horizontal squiggle between bands on theat rim 8.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/4). Fully painted.shoulder.63A/38–42. As 279.

43A/41. For the shape cf. Brock 1957: no. 761.700–650 B.C.281 (C 7999). Dipped cup, profile rim to lower

belly. Pl. 4.11. Max pres h 3.9, d at rim 9.0. Fine287 (C 6546). Jug, profile except rim. Pl. 4.13.ware (5 YR 7/6). Side dipped.Restored h 13.1, d at base 7.5. Fine ware (2.5 YR63A/38–42. The small scale of this vase is simi-6/6). Fully painted outside except for reservedlar to that of the previous two entries. Seventhbands on lower shoulder.century B.C.

50A/40. 630–610 B.C. The low globular profileis paralleled on later Orientalizing BG cups at282 (C 7213). Tray or plate, profile. Pl. 4.11. H

2.25, d at rim 21.0. Semifine ware (2.5 YR 5/6). Kommos.


288 (C 4397). Jug, upper profile. Pl. 4.12. Max at rim 27.6. Semifine ware (5 YR 7/4). Shoulderbearing hatched arcading below stacked zigzagspres h 14.6. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Decorated with

horizontal bands. between horizontal stripes; belly with alternatingbands and stripes.43A/77. Seventh century B.C. by context.

37A/6, 9, and 32. For the shoulder pattern cf.289 (C 6548). Jug, profile. Pl. 4.13. H 27.1, d at Brock 1957: pattern 10l. At Knossos this patternrim 9.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Dipped. is restricted to the EG period, but the profile of

50A/40 and 41. Seventh century B.C. by context. our vase with its constricted base is seventh-cen-tury-B.C. in type. This presumably indicates an290 (C 3904). Lekythos, profile. Pl. 4.13. H 13.2,innate conservatism on the part of Mesariote vased at base 3.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Decoratedpainters. Seventh century B.C.with large concentric circle groups on the sides

in the Creto-Cypriot manner. 297 (C 8719). Lekane, profile. Pl. 4.12. H 13.2, d42A/26. A local version of Knossian Orientaliz- at rim 27.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Decorated

ing vases like Brock 1957: nos. 1049 and 1315. with horizontal bands inside and out, with aLater seventh century B.C. wavy line in the handle zone.

68A/19 and 25. Late seventh century B.C.291 (C 6306). Aryballos, profile shoulder to base.Pl. 4.13. Max pres h 8.0, d at base 3.8. Fine ware 298 (C 6688). Jar, profile. Pl. 4.13. H 28.0, d at(5 YR 7/6). Decorated with horizontal lines on rim 13.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/4). Decorated withthe belly and concentric circle groups on the horizontal bands and stripes on the belly; hori-shoulder. zontal squiggle between handles.

50A/6 and 7. The base molding indicates a 51A/53. Later seventh century B.C.seventh-century-B.C. date. 299 (C 4876). Small krater, profile except handles.

Pl. 4.13. H 10.0, d at rim 14.8. Fine ware (7.5 YR292 (C 6387). Aryballos, profile shoulder to base.6/4). Rim dipped with dribble.Pl. 4.13. Max pres h 7.2, d at base 3.8. Fine ware

42A/15. The elegant shallow globular profile(2.5 YR 6/8). Concentric circle groups decorat-is shared with some of the latest jugs and BGing shoulder; alternating horizontal bands andcups of this period from the site. 630–610 B.C.groups of stripes on belly.

50A/21. The plain base probably indicates alate-eighth-century-B.C. date. For the belly deco-

Importsration, cf. Brock 1957: no. 1268.300 (C 6299). Cup, profile rim and shoulder. Pl.293 (C 6249). Aryballos, profile. Pl. 4.13. H 8.2, d4.13. Max pres h 3.1, d at rim 11.8. Fine ware (5at rim 3.8. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Belly decoratedYR 8/4). Decorated with horizontal stripes.with horizontal stripes, neck with squiggles be-

52A/9. One of only two Corinthian Thapsostween bands, and shoulder with spiraliformClass vases from the site (see also 301).rinceaux between triglyphs.301 (C 3746). Cup, profile rim and shoulder. Pl.55A/6. Seventh century B.C. by context.4.13. Max pres h 2.3, d at rim 12.0. Fine ware (10

294 (C 3803). Plastic vase, five fragments from YR 8/3). Decorated with close-set stripes.top and body. Fine ware (2.5 YR 6/4). 43A/27. Corinthian Thapsos Class.

50A/40 and 51A1/64. Fragments from a pan-302 (C 3671). Aryballos, profile. Pl. 4.13. H 7.4,ther vase, to be published more fully by AWJ.d at rim 3.2. Fine ware (2.5 Y 8/4). Decorated

295 (C 6549). Amphora, profile neck and upper with horizontal stripes and bands and four pen-shoulder. Pl. 4.13. Max pres h 8.8, d at rim ca. dent rays on the shoulder.12.0. Fine ware (5 YR 8/4). Decorated with widely 43A/18. Early Protocorinthian.spaced chevrons between vertical squiggles on

303 (C 6505). Corinthian aryballos, shoulderneck.fragment. Pl. 4.13. Max pres h 2.8. Fine ware (550A/40 and 50.YR 8/4). Decorated with horizontal stripes anddiscontinuous wave pattern on the shoulder.296 (C 2726). Ovoid pithos, profile (restored) rim

to lower belly. Pl. 4.12. Restored max h 50.3, d 50A/35. EPC.


304 (C 6667). Corinthian aryballos, profile shoul- 312 (C 3911). Corinthian kotyle, base. Pl. 4.14.Max pres h 2.3, d at base 3.9. Fine ware (5 YR 8/der to base. Pl. 4.13. Max pres h 6.3, d at base 1.6.

Fine ware (7.5 YR 8/4). Fully painted with incised 4). Decorated with ray pattern.42A/13. Seventh century B.C.petals on shoulder and lower belly; incised scale

pattern between. Probably once overpainted in313 (C 4032). Corinthian skyphos, profile re-white and purple.stored from base to top of shoulder. Pl. 4.14. Re-50A/42. LPC, probably close to 625 B.C.stored h 11.2, d at base 7.8. Fine ware (5 Y 7/2).Base and interior painted; close-set stripes decor-305 (C 7895). Corinthian aryballos, complete. Pl.

4.13. H 6.8, d at rim 3.0. Fine ware (10 YR 8/ ating belly. Rim and shoulder bearing broadgroups of vertical squiggles.3). Decorated with horizontal checkerboard, dot

rosettes, and ray pattern on body; spiraliform 43A/56 and 58. Probably related to ThapsosClass (cf. 300 and 301). 700–650 B.C.rinceaux on shoulder.

62D/41. LPC.314 (C 6739). East Greek “bird” bowl, profile. Pls.4.14, 4.49. H 5.9, d at rim 14.0. Fine ware (7.5306 (C 7066). Corinthian kotyle, profile restored.

Pl. 4.14. Restored h 9.8, d at rim 13.8. Fine ware YR 8/4). Handle zone once bearing the canonicalschema of a bird between crosshatched lozenges.(2.5 YR 8/6). Lower belly painted; horizontal

stripes above. Marsh birds and hourglass be- 51A1/64. 650–625 B.C. Coldstream 1977: 300,Group III.tween verticals in handle zone.

Fragments from 47A/47, 48, 50, and 51; 50A/315 (C 3778). East Greek “bird” bowl, rim frag-2; 51A/61, 64, and 66; and 60A/45. The decora-ment. Pl. 4.14. Max pres h 2.4. Fine ware (7.5 YRtion and squat profile date this piece to the later7/4). Part of the lozenge and triglyph surviving.eighth century B.C.

43A/36. 650–625 B.C.307 (C 6088). Corinthian kotyle, profile rim to

316 (C 6547). East Greek “bird” bowl, profile rimlower belly. Pl. 4.14. Max pres h 8.4, d at rim 13.9.to belly. Max pres h 3.8, d at rim 13.6. Fine wareFine ware (10 YR 8/3). Decoration as 306, except(7.5 YR 8/4). Surviving decoration preserving athat vertical squiggles replace the marsh birds incrosshatched lozenge and triglyph and part of athe handle zone.ray on the lower belly.29A/15. Date as 306.

50A/45. The exceptionally shallow profile andrays should date this piece to the period 625–600308 (C 3843). Corinthian kotyle, profile rim to

lower belly. Pl. 4.14. Max pres h 9.5, d at rim 15.0. B.C. Coldstream 1977: 300, Groups III–IV.Fine ware (5 YR 7/6).

317 (C 6543). Skyphos, profile rim to lower belly.44A/25. Type and decoration similar to 306.Pl. 4.14. Max pres h 10.2, d at rim 13.9. Fine ware(5 YR 7/8 at core; gray at edges). Identical with309 (C 3914). Corinthian kotyle, profile restored.

Pl. 4.14. Restored h 10.5, d at rim 14.9. Fine ware Milesian amphora fabric. SG skyphos with blackpainted belly and rim; black bands inside. Frag-(2.5 YR 8/2).

42A/34 and 41. Type and date as 306. ments of a frieze with verticals on shoulder.50A/39 and 40. 700–650 B.C.

310 (C 4398). Corinthian kotyle, profile rim tolower belly. Pl. 4.14. Max pres h 8.7, d at rim 14.9. 318 (C 988). East Greek skyphos, profile. Pl. 4.14.

H 9.0, d at rim 13.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6 at core,Fine ware (10 YR 8/3).43A/78 and 79. Type as 306. brown at surface). Painted black on belly and

inside; horizontals on rim. Short vertical squig-311 (C 3789). Corinthian kotyle, profile. Pl. 4.14. gles between verticals on shoulder.H 10.1, d at rim 13.9. Fine ware (10 YR 8/3). 20B1/22 and 25. Belonging to the LG/SG groupMarsh birds flanked by verticals on handle zone. from Ionia. Cf. Walter 1968: pl. 40, no. 223. 700–Horizontal lines and bands on belly. 650 B.C.

42A/27 and 20. The type is deeper than thosealready discussed (306–310), and the profile is 319 (C 3727). East Greek skyphos, profile rim to

lower belly. Pl. 4.15. Max pres h 11.3, d at rim 19.9.transitional between the eighth and the seventhcenturies B.C. Fine ware (gray at core, 10 YR 6/8 at surfaces).


Typical of Milesian transport amphora fabric. 326 (C 6312). Ionian skyphos, profile rim to belly.Pl. 4.15. Max pres h 4.7, d at rim ca. 13.0. FineBelly painted; thick bands inside. Rim bearing

horizontals; shoulder decorated with short verti- ware (5 YR 7/6). Rim reserved and decoratedwith horizontal stripes; narrow reserved panelcal squiggles between groups of vertical lines.

42A/9, 12, 15, 25, and 29. The shape appears between the handles.54A/12. 650–625 B.C.more developed than any LG types illustrated in

Walter 1968: pl. 40. Seventh century B.C.327 (C 6036). Ionian skyphos, profile. Pl. 4.15. H

320 (C 3658). East Greek skyphos, profile rim to 5.7, d at rim 14.1. Fine ware (2.5 YR 6/6, mica-upper belly. Pl. 4.15. Max pres h 4.8, d at rim ceous). Fully painted except for a reserved band15.9. Typical Milesian fine ware (gray at core and at rim and below handles.lighter brown 2.5 YR 6/6 at surface). Belly and 47A/16 and 17. Late seventh century B.C.inside painted; rim bearing horizontal stripes;

328 (C 3815). Amphora, profile neck to shoulder.shoulder with short vertical squiggles betweenPl. 4.15. Max pres h 11.2, d at rim 15.2. Semicoarseuprights.ware (5 YR 6/6), micaceous. Reserved band on42A/9. Late eighth century B.C.neck bearing six close-set wavy lines. Shoulder

321 (C 6533). East Greek skyphos, profile rim to hatched.shoulder. Pl. 4.15. Max pres h 3.7, d at rim 12.8. 42A/18. East Greek. Seventh century B.C. byFine ware (5 YR 7/6). Inside painted; rim bearing context.horizontal lines. Of the shoulder zone only a wide

329 (C 6089). Transport amphora, profile rim toband of close-set verticals remaining.lower neck. Pl. 4.15. Max pres h 9.2, d at rim ca.50A/39. Late eighth century B.C.13.0. Semifine ware (5 YR 7/6) with pale slip.

322 (C 3921). East Greek skyphos, profile except Unpainted.upper belly. Pl. 4.15. Restored h 11.0, d at rim 29A/15. Copy of a seventh-century-B.C. SOS12.9. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/4). Base painted, with amphora. Later seventh century.close-set horizontals above. Rim and shoulder

330 (C 6637). Attic SOS amphora, neck fragment.bearing groups of vertical squiggles; chevronsMax pres h 4.6. Attic amphora fabric (5 YR 7/6)decorating handle zone.with dark red inclusions. Of the decoration only42A/30. East Greek but not Milesian; relateda concentric circle group surviving.to “bird” bowls. 700–650 B.C.

54A2/44. The neck appears to be compara-323 (C 3712). East Greek skyphos, profile rim to tively short and is thus likely to belong in thebelly. Pl. 4.15. Max pres h 4.6, d at rim 13.9. Fine later seventh century B.C.ware (2.5 YR 5/6 at core, 2.5 YR 6/8 at surface).

331 (C 8665). Transport amphora, profile rim toSlipped. Interior painted. Outside, rim and uppershoulder. Pl. 4.15. Max pres h 13.5, d at rim 14.3.belly decorated with horizontal lines. In theSemifine ware (5 YR 7/6). Completely paintedshoulder zone a discontinuous line of Ss betweenoutside with traces of paint inside.triglyphs.

42A/15. “Laconian” type B (Johnston 1993:42A/13 and 50A/41. The fabric resembles358–62). Later seventh century B.C.Milesian. Late eighth to early seventh century B.C.

332 (C 3659). Transport amphora, profile rim and324 (C 8666). East Greek cup, profile base to up-neck. Pl. 4.15. Max pres h 9.0, d at rim 15.0. Semi-per belly. Pl. 4.14. Max pres h 9.0, d at base ca.fine ware (5 YR 6/2). Fully painted.7.6. Fine ware (5 YR 7/8 with gray surface), highly

42A/10. Related in type and fabric to “Laco-micaceous. Painted except for reserved bandnian” amphorae. Seventh century B.C.above base.

42A/34 and 38. Seventh century B.C. 333 (C 8710). East Greek transport amphora, pro-file restored rim to belly. D at rim 16.5. Fine mica-325 (C 3684). BG cup, profile. Pl. 4.14. H 9.2, d

at rim 10.0. Fine ware (5 YR 6/6). Fully painted. ceous ware with red core (10 YR 6/6) and grayat surface (5 YR 6/2). Unpainted.42A/12. The clay and paint are not local, but

this does not appear to be an East Greek fabric. 68A/15, 19, and 22. Close to Milesian fabric.Later seventh century B.C.Seventh century B.C.


334 (C 7305). East Greek transport amphora, pro- 339 (C 8723). Transport amphora, profile base tolower belly. Pl. 4.15. Max pres h 4.6, d at basefile base to lower shoulder. Max pres h 31.0, d at

base 8.5. Fine ware (5 YR 5/3 with core 5YR 5/ 8.3. Semicoarse ware (5 YR 7/6) with pale slip.68A/26. Not related to any published amphora4), small white inclusions and fine mica. Cream

slip. fabric; imitative of Samian type. Seventh centuryB.C. by context.56A1/46. The profile is characteristic of the

East Greek area, but the fabric is difficult to iden-340 (C 6271). Transport amphora, profile base totify. Later seventh century B.C.lower belly. Pl. 4.15. Max pres h 7.3, d at base

335 (C 6075). Attic SOS transport amphora, pro- 7.9. Fine ware (2.5 YR 6/8) with gray core (5 YRfile rim to shoulder. Pl. 4.16. Max pres h 12.5, d 5/2). Unpainted.at rim 18.5. Attic amphora fabric (5 YR 7/6), with 54A/3. Cycladic(?). Seventh century B.C.large dark red inclusions. Rim painted; neck bear-

341 (C 8663). Transport amphora, base. Pl. 4.15.ing the usual pattern of central concentric circleMax pres h 4.0, d at base ca. 12.0. Highly mica-group flanked by vertical squiggles. Below, threeceous fine ware (5 YR 7/8 at surface, gray core).horizontal lines. Handles striped.

42A/28. Related to Milesian. Seventh century47A/28, 30, and 34. Shape and decorationB.C.suggest a date in the early to middle seventh

century B.C. 342 (C 8649). Transport amphora, base. Pl. 4.16.Max pres h 6.2, d at base 11.8. Coarse ware (5336 (C 8722). East Greek transport amphora, pro-YR 6/6), with large brown and black inclusions.file base and lower belly. Pl. 4.16. Max pres h 4.3,Painted outside and under base.d at base ca. 9.0. Fine micaceous ware (5 YR 7/

42A/28. Seventh century B.C. by context.6) with pale slip. Painted band on base.68A/26. Seventh century B.C. by context. 343 (C 6758). East Greek transport amphora, pro-

file base to lower belly. Pl. 4.16. Max pres h 12.2,337 (C 6042). Transport amphora, profile base tod at base 8.7. Fine ware (2.5 YR 6/8), some mica.lower belly. Pl. 4.15. Max pres h 5.9, d at baseSlipped.9.8. Fine micaceous ware (2.5 YR 6/8). Painted

53A1/58. Seventh century B.C. by context.band on base.47A/27. Seventh century B.C. by context.

344 (C 8654). Transport amphora, base. Pl. 4.16.Max pres h 6.5, d at base 15.6. Fine ware (5 YR338 (C 8650). Transport amphora, profile base to

lower belly. Pl. 4.16. Max pres h 8.4, d at base 6/5), slightly micaceous. Fully painted outsideexcept for a reserved band above resting surface.10.7. Fine ware (5 YR 7/4). Fully painted outside.

42A/15. Related to “Laconian” type. Seventh 42A/15. Probably a copy of the SOS type, butthe fabric is not Attic.century B.C. by context.

Deposit 26 (42A/15 and 25): Temple B, End

In Trench 42A a rich dump of vases and whole profiles was excavated substantially as pails15 and 25. This material lay just outside the doorway of Temple B, and the fact that many ofthe pieces survived virtually intact after their deposition would seem to indicate that thedump suffered little disturbance, despite its proximity to both the temple and Altar U. Itseems likely, therefore, that this deposit represents a final clearing out of the temple at thepoint of desertion. Not all the vases are contemporary, and therefore some must have stoodin the temple for some time before their redeposition. Many others, however, include themost advanced forms found at EIA Kommos and suggest that the end of this period ofoccupation should be placed close to 600 B.C.


345 (C 4117). BG cup, profile except handle. Pl. der, and base. Pl. 4.17. D at rim 11.0, at base 5.0.Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6).4.16. H 9.3, d at base 4.8. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6).

Fully coated with partly fugitive brown paint. 42A/15. This cup probably belongs within theseventh century B.C.42A/15. The profile belongs to a developed

stage of the seventh century B.C.355 (C 3780). Dipped cup, profile except neck.

346 (C 4118). BG cup, profile of upper half. Pl. Pl. 4.17. Max pres h 4.1, d at base 3.5. Fine ware4.16. Max pres h 6.2, d at rim 13.6. Fine ware (5 (7.5 YR 8/4). Side dipped in dull black paint.YR 7/6). 42A/15. For the shape compare 353.

42A/15. The form dates to the seventh century356 (C 3731). Dipped cup, fragments from rim,B.C.body, and base. Pl. 4.17. D at base 6.3. Fine ware

347 (C 4114). BG cup, fragments from rim and (7.5 YR 7/6). Dipped in dull black paint.shoulder, base. Pl. 4.16. D at rim 10.0. Fine ware 42A/15. Seventh century B.C.(5 YR 7/4). Fully coated with a partly fugitive

357 (C 4122). Dipped cup, profile except rim andblack paint.handle. Pl. 4.17. Max pres h 5.8, d at base 5.0.42A/15. The form belongs to the seventh cen-Fine ware (5 YR 7/4).tury B.C.

42A/15. Compare 353.348 (C 3697). BG cup, profile except handle and

358 (C 4065). East Greek skyphos, profile of rimtop of rim. Pl. 4.16. Max pres h 8.0, d at base 5.2.and shoulder. Pl. 4.17. Max pres h 4.6, d at rimFine ware (5 YR 7/4). Fully coated with a partly14.7. Fine ware (5 YR 6/3), micaceous. Panel deco-fugitive black paint.ration of vertical squiggles between the handles.42A/15.Lower body painted in a dull black glaze; hori-

349 (C 3696). BG cup, profile except base. Pl. 4.16. zontal bands inside bowl.Max pres h 8.5, d at rim 13.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 42A/15. SG style, seventh century B.C.8/6). Fully coated with a dull black paint.

359 (C 3784). East Greek skyphos, sherd giving42A/15. The type belongs within the seventhprofile rim to belly and handle stump. Pl. 4.17.century B.C.Max pres h 5.3, d at rim ca. 13.0. Fine ware (2.5

350 (C 3869). BG cup, whole profile. Pl. 4.16. H YR 5/0). Horizontal stripes on the shoulder; body9.1, d at rim 12.0. Fine ware (10 YR 7/4). Fully covered in dull black paint.coated with dull black paint. 42A/15. SG style, seventh century B.C.

42A/25. The shape belongs within the seventh360 (C 3703). Skyphos, complete. Pl. 4.49. H 5.0,century B.C.d at rim 7.3. Fine ware (7.5 YR 8/2). Unpainted.

351 (C 3870). BG cup, profile. Pls. 4.16, 4.49. H 9.6, 42A/15. The flat base and globular shaped at rim 12.0. Fine ware (5 YR 6/6). Completely would probably place this piece in the earlier partcovered with a dull black paint. of the seventh century B.C.

42A/25. The shape with its hollowed underfoot361 (C 3705). PC kotyle, almost complete. Pl. 4.17.belongs within the seventh century B.C.D at base 5.3. Corinthian fine ware (10 YR 8/1).

352 (C 3871). BG cup, profile of the upper body. Reserved panel with squiggles flanked by verticalPl. 4.16. Max pres h 7.8, d at rim 11.0. Fine ware bars in the handle zone. Solid rays above base,(2.5 YR 8/2). rest of the body covered by fine horizontal lines.

42A/25 and 28. 42A/15 and 25, 43A/27, and 52A/14. The elon-gated proportions of this vase place it within the353 (C 4875). BG cup, profile except for top ofearly seventh century B.C.rim. Pl. 4.17. Max pres h 5.5, d at base 5.0. Fine

J. W. Shaw 1982a: 190, pl. 56c.ware (5 YR 7/3).42A/15. The low graceful profile and raised

362 (C 3776). PC kotyle, fragments from rim todisk underfoot place this example very latelower belly. Pls. 4.17, 4.49. Max pres h 11.0, maxwithin the seventh century B.C.d 13.5. Corinthian fine ware (5 YR 7/2). Rim zonereserved; main zone of decoration lying below354 (C 3726). BG cup. Fragments from rim, shoul-


handles. Solid rays occupying lower belly. In the profile. Pls. 4.17, 4.50. H 6.8, d at rim 17.0. EastGreek fine ware (5 YR 7/3). Decoration on outsidemain field, two carefully drawn panthers and a

wild boar in the black-figure technique. consisting of the usual dot rosette in the handlezone above a series of thin horizontals covering42A/25. This piece belongs within the finest

period of PC painting. Ca. 650 B.C. the body. Within the reserved tondo, a five-pointed star. Rest of the inside of the bowl cov-363 (C 3704). Flat-based kantharos, complete. Pl.ered with black paint and three sets of red and4.17. H 11.4, d at base 12.8. Fine ware (5 YR 6/white horizontals.4).

42A/15 and 25. An example of a developed42A/15. The unusual form of this vessel makeslate-seventh-century-B.C. form within the rosettedating difficult, but the hollowed underfoot isbowl sequence.probably sufficient to place it in the seventh cen-

J. W. Shaw 1982a: 191, pl. 56f.tury B.C.J. W. Shaw 1982a: 191, pl. 56f. 371 (C 3779). Jug, base to lower belly. Pl. 4.17.

Max pres h 7.7, d at base 9.3. Fine ware (10 YR 6/364 (C 8643). Dipped bowl, whole profile. Pl.8). Base and lower belly covered with dull black4.17. H 5.7, d at rim 13.5. Fine ware (5 YR 6/6).paint; part of a wide black band preserved at the42A/15. The low echinoid profile with horizon-top of the sherd.tal handles seems typical of seventh-century-B.C.

42A/15. The concave underfoot has an angularforms at Kommos. The low concavity underfootgroove forming a raised disk in the centerwould also support this date.roughly equivalent to that on BG cup bases of

365 (C 8644). Bowl, upper profile. Pl. 4.17. Max the late seventh century B.C.pres h 4, d at rim ca. 14.0. Semicoarse ware, re-

372 (C 3788). Corinthian jug, base to lower belly.fired.Pl. 4.17. Max pres h 3.8, d at base 8.0. Fine ware42A/15.(5 YR 7/1). Completely coated in dull black paint

366 (C 8645). Bowl, upper profile. Max pres h except for reserved underfoot.3.8, d at rim 12.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Dipped 42A/15. Later seventh century B.C.in dull brown glaze.

373 (C 4121). Corinthianizing trefoil jug, profile42A/15. Fabric and the horizontal horned han-rim to lower belly. Pl. 4.18. Max pres h 15.0, d atdles on the rim suggest a seventh-century-B.C.mouth 4.3. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Entire surfacedate for this piece.coated with a dull black paint with added white

367 (C 8655). Household bowl, upper profile. Pl. at the base of the shoulder, halfway down the4.24. Max pres h 7.0, d at rim 42.0. Semicoarse belly, and at the top of the neck. Two large whiteware (5 YR 7/6). Dull black horizontal band be- painted eyes decorating the pinched-in parts oflow rim inside and out, with hatched lines on top the rim.of rim. 42A/15. The form belongs very late in the sev-

42A/15. enth century B.C. Cf. Coldstream and Sackett1978: 52, fig 5.368 (C 8656). Household bowl, rim fragment. Pl.

4.24. Max pres h 7.0, d at rim ca. 49.0. Semicoarse 374 (C 3695). Aryballos, profile from top ofware (2.5 YR 6/0). Thickly slipped inside and shoulder to base. Pres h 6.0, d at base 2.4. Fineout. ware (7.5 YR 6/6). Fully glazed on the exterior.

42A/15. Context suggests a seventh-century- 42A/15. Seventh century B.C.B.C. date for this piece.

375 (C 3698). Aryballos, profile except neck and369 (C 8657). Household bowl, rim fragment. Pl. rim. Pls. 4.17, 4.50. Max pres h 7.2, d at base 4.0.4.24. Max pres h 6.5, d at rim 43.0. Semicoarse Fine ware. Lower belly painted solid black; twoware (2.5 YR 6/0). A very shallow basin with groups of thin horizontal lines below shoulder.thick rim, possibly a mortar, judging from the Roughly drawn birds and concentric circleprofile. Thickly slipped, unpainted. groups occupying shoulder.

42A/15. Seventh century B.C. by context. 42A/15. Seventh century B.C.J. W. Shaw 1982a: 191, pl. 56f.370 (C 4030). Rosette bowl, East Greek, whole


376 (C 3701). Aryballos, complete except for 42A/15. Seventh century B.C.parts of rim. Pls. 4.18, 4.49, 1.57. H 13.0, d at base

382 (C 8646). Attic SOS amphora, rim fragment.4.3. Fine ware. Undecorated.Pl. 4.18. Max pres h 5.4, d at rim ca. 21.0. Attic42A/15. Seventh century B.C.banded ware.J. W. Shaw 1982a: pl. 56e.

42A/15. The tall flaring echinoid rim indicates377 (C 3873). Amphora, fragments from rim, a date before the end of the seventh century B.C.neck, and shoulder. Pls. 4.12, 4.50 (not including

383 (C 8648). Attic SOS amphora, rim fragments.painted ledge rim, added in 1997). Max pres hPl. 4.18. Max pres h 5.4, d at rim ca. 20.0. Attic13.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 6/4). Thick horizontalbanded ware.bands delimiting the top and bottom of the shoul-

42A/15. The hollowed echinoid profile indi-der. Thin stripes decorating neck, upper shoul-cates a seventh-century-B.C. date.der, and upper belly. Main zone of decoration

consisting of metopes separated by groups of four 384 (C 8658). Attic SOS amphora, neck fragment.verticals and containing simple birds with a loz- Pl. 4.18. Max pres h 3.3. Attic banded ware.enge in the field. 42A/15. Sufficient remains to indicate that this

42A/15 and 18, 50A/33, and 51A1/64 and 66. vessel belonged in the seventh century B.C.First half of the seventh century B.C.

385 (C 8653). Transport amphora, base fragment.378 (C 3872). Hydria. D at rim 18.5. Fine ware Pl. 4.18. Max pres h 6.1, d at base 12.5. Semifine(7.5 YR 6/4). Horizontal bands decorating the ware (5 YR 6/8), highly micaceous. Traces of red-rim, neck, shoulder junction, bottom of the shoul- fired paint on exterior.der, and lower belly. A vertical squiggle occupy- 42A/15. East Greek fabric.ing handle zone.

386 (C 8651). Transport amphora, base fragment.42A/15 and 25. The flaring hollowed rim andPl. 4.18. Max pres h 4.8, d at base 11.6. Semicoarsedepressed ovoid shape indicate a developed sev-ware (5 YR 7/6) with gray core, highly micaceous.enth-century-B.C. date.

42A/15. East Greek fabric. The shape is Sam-379 (C 3785). Cooking jug, profile. Pl. 4.18. H ian, but the clay is too coarse for such an attribu-15.8, d at rim ca. 13.0. Cooking ware (5 YR 6/4). tion.Undecorated, with burning marks on the base

387 (C 8652). Transport amphora, base fragment.and body and on the rim.Pl. 4.18. Max pres h 6.1, d at base 8.6. Semicoarse42A/15.ware (5 YR 6/3), slightly micaceous. Exterior sur-J. W. Shaw 1982a: 191, pl. 56f.face coated with a thick creamy slip.

380 (C 3733). Cooking jug, profile rim to shoul- 42A/15. East Greek fabric.der. Pl. 4.18. Max pres h 8.0, d at rim ca. 10.0.

388 (C 8647). Transport amphora, rim fragment.Cooking fabric (7.5 YR 7/6).Pl. 4.18. Max pres h 5.8, d at rim ca. 15.0. Semi-42A/15. The horizontal ribbing on the neck iscoarse ware (7.5 YR 7/6), highly micaceous.known from Knossian examples. Seventh century

42A/15. East Greek fabric.B.C.

381 (C 4115). Cooking pot, profile rim to upper 389 (C 3732). Transport amphora, fragment giv-ing profile from base to lower shoulder. Pl. 4.50.belly. Pl. 4.18. Max pres h 12.0, d at rim ca. 11.0.

Cooking ware (7.5 YR 5/2). Undecorated. Re- Max pres h ca. 32.0, d at base 8.0. Semifine ware(7.5 YR 6/4). Undecorated.mains of two handles (one shown in drawing)

from rim to base of shoulder. 42A/15. East Greek fabric.

“Deposit” 27 (Various): Temple B Period, Latest Pottery

In various trenches around the site, material of the very late seventh century B.C. was discov-ered. It seemed best to gather these sherds together as one group in order to elucidate the


date of desertion or destruction of Temple B and its associated structures. In general, it wouldseem that a date around 600 B.C. is most likely for this event, since there is a little EarlyCorinthian material as well as more substantial evidence for the style’s influence upon localjugs and hydriai. Conversely, there is no evidence for the most popular East Greek types ofthe early sixth century.

390 (C 6658). EC alabastron, profile base to shoul- seventh century B.C. and continues into the earlysixth.der and neck to rim. Pl. 4.19. Restored h ca. 8.0,

d at base 1.7. Fine ware (7.5 YR 8/2). Rounded 394 (C 3700). Attic SOS amphora, base to lowerbase decorated with a rosette, above which are belly. Pl. 4.18. Max pres h 13.0, d at base 18.5.animal figures in black-figure, among which sub- Attic amphora fabric (7.5 YR 7/6). Covered exter-stantial parts of a seated lion survive. Flat rim nally in dull black paint, reserved band on lowerdecorated with concentric lines. part of foot.

50A/41, 53A/45, 54A2/46, and 62B/19. 42A/15. Type and date as 393. The best paral-lels for this vase come from Camarina, where their391 (C 8195). EC aryballos, profile rim todate is as suggested under 393 (Manni and Pirainoshoulder.1987: pls. 21 ff.; Johnston 1993–94: 166–67).64A/42. For a full description see Johnston

1993: no. 51. 395 (C 6636). Oinochoe, profile restored. Pl. 4.19.Restored h 25.3, d at base 9.7. Fine ware (5 YR392 (C 6635). EC oinochoe, profile base to lower7/6). Corinthianizing oinochoe of South Cretanneck. Pl. 4.19. Max pres h 18.2, d at base 8.2. Finetype. Eyes painted on the rim; neck and bellyware (7.5 YR 8/2). Lower belly decorated with acovered with close-set horizontal lines and bands.ray pattern; shoulder with alternating white andLower belly painted black with white over-red pendent petals outlined by incised lines. Bodypainted lines. On the shoulder, a stylized lotusblack with three groups of overpainted white hor-pattern linked to brackets that extend almost toizontals.the handle root.54A2/44 and 59A1/37 and 39. Last quarter of

54A2/44–47. A distant and indirect copy ofthe seventh century B.C.LPC/EC oinochoai with Knossian intermediar-ies. The neck follows EC models, but the body393 (C 8721). Attic SOS amphora. Pl. 4.18. Max

pres h 6.5, d at base 16.8. Attic amphora fabric retains the older local deep form. For parallels cf.D. Levi 1927–29: fig. 525; Coldstream and Sackettwith large dark red inclusions (5 YR 7/4).

68A/93. The type belongs to the very latest 1978: 52, fig. 5, no. 3. Ca. 610–600 B.C.

Deposit 28 (11A/5 and 6 and 72C/26): Building F

The well-built structure known as Building F was excavated in Trenches 11A and 72C. Thenorthern half did not possess a clearly defined floor, but in the south stone flagging helpedproduce secure control. The floor deposit (397–404; 72C/26) was remarkably pure with onlyone obviously intrusive pot (parts of C 8892). Ten pieces, of which eight are decorated vases,were catalogued from among the sherds found actually lying on the floor surface. Theyrepresent a series of secure juxtapositions dating to the years around 500 B.C. and, together,help illuminate the first stages of a ceramic tradition that continued uninterrupted until theRoman conquest. Only 55 g of small scraps come from vessels other than those catalogued,and these do little to change the picture presented in the catalogue following.


In this deposit there were four BG cups, one everted cup, two Kommos cups, one lekane,one lamp, and one mortar. Fragments of a jug and a juglet were found, as well as seven smallworn fragments of cooking or coarse ware and a mere 5 g of tiny cup fragments. The picturepresented is clear. Drinking is well represented as is the preparation, but not the cooking orserving, of food. There are no small eating bowls or real evidence for cooking or servingshapes. The activities such shapes would indicate may have taken place in an as yet unexcavatedpart of the building.

The floor deposit is the earliest known group postdating the mysterious gap in Cretancultural history during the sixth century B.C. We find here many of the forms that make upthe most popular shapes of the following centuries and that are characteristic of the regionalpottery tradition in Crete. An interesting feature of the pottery from the floor deposit is thegenerally poor quality of fabric and paint. The sherds are soft, and the paint is dull and oftenmottled or fugitive, in contrast to the fine hard fabrics of the late seventh century and theircharacteristically matt but high-quality glaze. One or two of the catalogued pieces (401 and402) are of better quality and point the way to the technological revolution of the fifth centurythat produced hard, often eggshell-thin, fragments and a paint that sometimes assumed ametallic sheen. Available evidence suggests that these improvements began at Knossos some-what earlier than in the south of the island.

Taken as a group, the floor deposit illustrates a stage of ceramic development about onegeneration earlier than the rich Knossian deposit, Well H (Coldstream 1973b: especially 48–60), of about 475 B.C. The BG cups (396–98) have wider, lower ring bases in the groupfrom Kommos and usually possess a raised disk underfoot, as opposed to the Knossiansimple concavity. The earliest Archaic pottery from above the Unexplored Mansion (De-posit H1), dating to the late sixth century, shares this characteristic feature (Callaghan 1992:90–91).

The Kommos cups are virtual twins of their Knossian counterparts, although from thefourth century the two areas part company in the development of this shape.

The secure floor deposit from Trench 72C allows the subsumption of material from 11A,where no floor deposit was discovered. These vessels are listed separately. Some of the materialfrom Trench 11A is not so clearly from this period of use. Pails 9 and 11 were above thebottom of the walls, but were transitional Minoan to Greek levels (405–8). The latest potteryindicates a terminus post quem for the construction. Pails 4 and 6 contained pottery that maybe contemporary with the period of use (396 and 409–11), but perhaps only 412, substantialparts of which are preserved, is a safe candidate. Pail 5 ran above the level of Building F’swalls and contained mixed pottery. Of some interest for the history of the site are two BGcups (413 and 414).

At the end of this deposit is listed some material dating to the sixth century from variousparts of the site. It indicates some form of activity between the desertion of Temple B andthe construction of Temple C.


396 (C 4462). Short-necked BG cup, profile re- This type, with globular profile and offset rim,is characteristic of the fifth century B.C; seestored. Pl. 4.19. Restored h 10.9; d at rim 12.9, at

base 6.6. Fine ware (7.5 YR 6/4). Fully painted. 489–94 (Deposit 37). A similar type exists in con-temporary Knossian contexts; see Coldstream11A/6. This cup is interesting as a transitional

type between the low globular forms of the late 1973b: 55, nos. 63–66; Coldstream and Sackett1978: 17, nos. 60–61. Early fifth century by con-seventh century B.C. and deeper types of the Clas-

sical period. For sixth-century precursors, see text.Boardman and Hayes 1973: 38, fig. 16, no. 2104;

402 (C 8890) Lamp, profile except spout. Pl. 4.19.1966: 80, fig. 39, no. 927. Both the Tocra examplesH 3.65; d at rim 8.3, at base 4.9. Fine ware (7.5share with this piece an almost vertical upperYR 7/6), with gray surface. Unpainted.wall and a distinct carination between “shoulder”

This lamp with its “S” profile does not closelyand lower belly. For the base with disk underfoot,resemble any Mainland or even contemporarysee Coldstream and Sackett: 1978: 7, no. 16; Cal-Knossian forms; see Coldstream 1973b: 56, nos.laghan 1992: pl. 74, H1, nos. 2, 5–7, and 12. Late71–75. It seems that the South Cretan penchantsixth century B.C.for raised rims was already present. Likely thespout was bridged. Ca. 500 B.C. by context.

403 (C 8887). Lekane, profile restored. Pl. 4.19.Floor Deposit (72C/26)Restored h 6.2, d at rim 15. Fine ware (5 YR 7/

397 (C 8885). Short-necked BG cup, profile re- 8). Unpainted.stored. Pl. 4.19. Restored h 10.7; d at rim 11.3, at This vase shares many features, including abase 5.5. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Fully painted. molded rim and carination at the belly, with

The raised disk underfoot is characteristic of Coldstream 1973b: 53, L39, the base of which hassixth-century-B.C. cups and other shapes. Late been used to suggest the likely form of its missingsixth century. lower parts. We might note, however, the wider,

lower proportions of the Kommos bowl and the398 (C 8884). Short-necked BG cup, profile re-more elaborate fillets at its rim. Both these fea-stored. Pl. 4.19. Restored h 11.2; d at rim 11.1, dtures probably indicate an earlier stage of devel-at base 7.0. Fine ware (5 YR 6/6). Fully painted.opment than that represented in the KnossianUnderfoot a simple concavity.deposit. Ca. 500 B.C.A very shallow angular groove suggests the

raised disk of less-developed types, but this cup 404 (C 8891). Mortar, fragment from upper wall.is closer to those from a Late Archaic group from Max pres length 9.0. Coarse ware (5 YR 7/6) withKnossos (Coldstream 1973b: 56, L 53–55). gray and white angular inclusions. Unpainted,

smoothed in the bowl.399 (C 8886). Everted rim cup, profile. Pl. 4.19.The break on the outer surface seems to be theH 5.8; d at rim 10, at base 4.7. Fine ware (5 YR

scar of a collared rim, such as those in Coldstream7/6). Fully painted.1973b: 52, nos. 30–33.The shape probably descends from seventh-

Ca. 500 B.C. by context.century-B.C. types and is the earliest example atKommos of a series that extends to the Late Helle-nistic. For slightly later examples see 529–31.

400 (C 8888). Kommos cup, base fragments. Pl. 11A/9–114.19. Max pres h 1.9, d at base 3.9. Fine ware (7.5

405 (C 502). Oinochoe, base fragment. Pl. 4.19.YR 7/6). Unpainted.Max pres h 2.2, d at base ca. 10.0. Corinthian fineThe slightly concave underfoot has a shallowware (10 YR 8/3). A series of solid rays decoratingraised disk, a feature shared by the BG cups inlower belly.the deposit. Later examples assume a simple con-

11A/10. Advanced PC. 650–600 B.C.cavity underfoot, as in the next entry.

401 (C 8889). Kommos cup, profile restored. Pl. 406 (C 498). Jug, belly fragments. Max pres h 2.8.Corinthian fine ware (10 YR 8/3). Incised scales.4.19. Restored h 8.1; d at rim 9.5, at base 5.0. Fine

ware (2.5 YR 6/6). Unpainted. 11A/9 and 11. Advanced PC. 650–600 B.C.


407 (C 501). Aryballos, shoulder fragment. Max 1.6, d at base ca. 7.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/4). Fullypainted.pres h 6.6. Local fine ware, burnt. Unpainted.

11A/11. A typical seventh-century-B.C. globu- The emphatic ring base with raised disk under-foot and dropped floor are all interesting features.lar aryballos.The type of paint suggests a seventh-century-B.C.408 (C 503). Pyxis, base fragment. Pl. 4.19. Maxdate, but it is possible that in fact this piece be-pres h 2.0, d at base 8.5. Fine ware (5 YR 6/1).longs in the sixth.Solid rays above four horizontals decorating the

walls; underfoot painted with concentric circles. 414 (C 4464). BG cup, profile base to lower belly.11A/11. 650–600 B.C. Pl. 4.20. Max pres h 2.8, d at base ca. 5.8. Fine

ware (10 YR 6/3). Painted inside, but exterior andunderfoot possibly plain.

The pedestal base, disk underfoot, and dropped11A/4 and 6floor find a good parallel in Callaghan 1978: no.409 (C 496). BG cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.19. Max16 and indicate distinct progress on the previouspres h ca. 3.4, d at base ca. 7.0. Fine ware (5 YRentry. Ca. 500 B.C.7/6). Fully painted.

11A/4. The angular flaring base with hollowedunderfoot seems to be a capital LO feature atKommos, and the steep lower wall may indicate Transitional Materiala progression toward the deeper cup types char-acteristic of the sixth century B.C. (cf. 419, Deposit 415 (C 3877). BG cup, profile except handle. Pl.29). 4.19. H 10.9, d at rim 11.2. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/

4). Fully painted.410 vacat.43A/45. Sixth century B.C.

411 (C 244). Bowl, profile rim to lower belly, with416 (C 6035). BG cup, profile base to below shoul-scar of ring base. Pl. 4.50. Max pres h 4.6, d atder. Pl. 4.20. Max pres h 7.4, d at base 7.4. Finerim ca. 14.0. Fine ware (10 YR 5/3). Slipped. Aware (7.5 YR 7/6). Fully painted.thin wave pattern between horizontals decorat-

47A/15. For parallels see 396 as well as 419ing upper wall. Inside floor of the bowl painted(Deposit 29) from near Altar H and 525 (Depositwith concentric bands.38) from the early material against the temenos11A/6. Fabric, shape, and decoration fit a later-wall in Trench 63A. Sixth century B.C.seventh-century-B.C. date.

412 (C 243). Jug, profile upper neck to base. Pls. 417 (C 3042). Amphora, profile rim to belly. Pl.4.24, 4.50. Max pres h 26.8, d at base 13.0. Fine 4.24. Max pres h ca. 26.0, d at rim 14.8. Semicoarseware (7.5 YR 6/4). Exterior fully painted except ware (7.5 YR 5/6). Painted with black bands onunderfoot. rim, neck, and belly.

11A/4 and 6. We can date this shape only by 34A2/31. The rim form postdates the seventhcontext, because secure parallels do not exist. The century B.C., and it is likely that this vase datesassociated pottery would suggest that it should to the later sixth century.belong to the sixth century B.C., and the dull

418 (C 975). Hydria, profile rim to belly. Pl. 4.24.brownish wash that covers it may point earlier.Max pres h ca. 18.0, d at rim ca. 8.8. Fine ware(7.5 YR 7/6). Painted with bands at rim, shoulder,and belly.11A/5 20B/15, 17, and 19. This vase probably post-dates the seventh century B.C.413 (C 499). BG cup, base. Pl. 4.20. Max pres h

Deposit 29 (20B1/30): Altar H

The foundations for Altar H were sunk into a deep seventh-century-B.C. layer that may wellhave been redeposited in order to raise the courtyard level at this point. The earliest surface


associated with the use of the altar consisted of brown earth with traces of burning, probablyfrom the sacrifices that took place on the altar. On the eastern side of the altar the pottery inthis deposit was consistently fourth to third century and later, but on the northern side (in20B1/30), it contained material that dated to the sixth and fifth centuries. There are threecatalogued items from this deposit (419–21).

The rest of the pottery from this small deposit corresponds in date with the cataloguedexamples and suggests that Altar H was probably built sometime in the second half of thesixth century. It would therefore have formed the only built feature in the sanctuary until theconstruction of Temple C in the fourth century.

419 (C 1003). Short-necked cup, whole profile. The angle of the profile and the size of the cupsuggest a date within the first half of the fifthPls. 4.20, 4.51. H 11.2, d at base 5.8. Fine ware (10

YR 8/4). Completely covered in dull brown paint. century B.C.This piece is an exceptionally important link

421 (C 3329). Hydria, base fragment. Pl. 4.20.in the development in the shape series. It datesMax pres h 2.2, d at base 10.0. Fine ware (5 YRto after the examples found at Tocra in Libya8/6). A thick horizontal painted band decoratingbut before a late-sixth-century-B.C. version ofthe base and lower belly.the shape at Knossos (see 416, Deposit 28, for

The simple concave underfoot is of the fifth-references).century-B.C. type (Callaghan 1992: 91–92, H1.C,nos. 13–15; H2, no. 7; H3, no. 7; H4, no. 7, illustrate420 (C 3330). BG cup, belly fragment. Pl. 4.20.

Max pres h 3.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Com- the transition from a disk underfoot to a shallowconcavity).pletely covered in dull paint.

Deposit 30 (29A1/48 and 33C/63): Temple C, Construction

Sealed beneath the stone-flagged floor of Temple C in Trench 29A1 were fragments from twovessels dating to the first half of the fourth century B.C.

422 (C 2365). Attic skyphos, fragment giving pro- 423 (C 8642). BG cup, belly fragment. Pl. 4.20.Max pres h 2.1. Fine ware (5 YR 6/4). Fully cov-file of base and lower belly. Pl. 4.20. Max pres h

4.1, d at base ca. 6.0. Fine ware (2.5 YR 5/6). ered with shiny black glaze.33C/63. The sherd comes from near the junction29A1/48. The angular foot and slightly concave

lower wall postdate the beginning of the fourth- of wall and base and proves that this vase pos-sessed the constricted transition characteristic ofcentury-B.C. development in Athens.

J. W. Shaw 1980a: 228 n. 45. the fourth rather than the fifth century B.C.

Deposit 31 (42A/12 and 15): Temple C, Construction of Court

In Trench 42A immediately to the east of Temple C a clear layer of construction chips markedthe first use of the Temple C court and effectively sealed the material beneath from latercontamination. No fewer than eighteen catalogued items from beneath the chips provide agood terminus post quem for the construction of the building. Several BG cups clearly belongto the first half of the fourth century B.C., while an Attic echinus bowl provides a usefulforeign control strongly implying that the building activity took place in the second quarterof that century.


Four fragments from ladles with long horizontal handles were found in 42A/12 (433–36).Although they cannot add to the dating evidence for the temple’s construction, their contextgives some control for types in use during the fourth century.

42A/12 4.20. Max pres h 1.6, d at rim ca. 13.0. Fine ware(5 YR 6/4). Fully painted.

424 (C 8453). BG cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.20. The development of this shape belongs withinMax pres h 1.4, d ca. 6.0. Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). the fourth century B.C. at Athens, and our frag-

The low conical pedestal with deeply articu- ment is rather more developed than the earliestlated underfoot and constricted junction of wall member of the sequence.and base is characteristic of one of the types cur-rent in the early fourth century B.C. 432 (C 8457). Lamp, body fragment. H ca. 2.0.

Fine ware (7.5 YR 7/6).425 (C 8455). BG cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.20. H The surviving profile indicates a shallow form1.7, d at base 7.0. Fine ware (2.5 YR 6/6). Com- with short spout and wide reservoir opening.pletely painted with brown glaze. Probably fourth century B.C.

Concave conical pedestal with double filletmolding and a deep concave underfoot leading 433 (C 8459). Ladle, profile rim to lower belly.toward an “omphalos.” The complex profile is Pl. 4.20. Max pres h 4.1, d at rim 12.5. Semifineunusual, but the wide resting surface is typical ware (10 YR 8/2). Unpainted. Surviving profileof the earlier fourth century B.C. indicating a deep shape with subtle “shoulder”

and conical lower body. A very slight groove at426 (C 3690). BG cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.20.the outer edge of the rim.Max pres h 1.2, d at base 5.5. Fine ware (5 YR 6/

In the Hellenistic period this shape was in fine6). Fully covered with black paint.ware.The simple conical form with constricted junc-

tion of wall and base and wide resting surface 434 (C 8460). Ladle, profile rim to upper belly.suggests an early-fourth-century-B.C. date. Pl. 4.20. D at rim ca. 13.8. Semifine ware (5 YR

8/4). Unpainted. Surviving profile indicating that427 (C 6472). BG cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.20.this was shallower than 433.Max pres h 1.8, d at base ca. 5.0. Fine ware (5 YR

6/6). Fully painted. 435 (C 8461). Ladle, rim fragment. Pl. 4.20. MaxThe high pedestal base with slight shoulder pres h 2.3, d at rim 12.3. Semifine ware (5 YR 8/

and concave underfoot certainly postdates the 4). Unpainted. A fairly simple deep form withfirst quarter of the fourth century B.C. wide ledge rim.

428 (C 8454). BG cup, belly fragment. Max pres 436 (C 8462). Ladle, rim fragment. Pl. 4.20. Maxh 2.1. Fine ware (5 YR 7/4). Fully painted. pres h 1.3, d at rim 13.4. Semifine ware (5 YR 7/

The preserved fragment is sufficient to indicate 4). Unpainted. Rim with thin grooves at the outerthat the vase possessed the constricted junction edges; beginning of a handle attachment underof wall and base characteristic of the fourth cen- the rim.tury B.C. and later.

429 (C 6473). BG cup, belly fragment. Max presh 3.7. Fine ware (5 YR 8/4). Fully painted. 42A/15Shape as 428.

437 (C 8660). BG cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.20.430 (C 6474). BG cup, belly fragment. Pl. 4.20.Max pres h 5.0, d at base 6.9. Fine ware (5 YR 7/Max pres h 4.8. Fine ware (2.5 YR 6/6). Fully4). Fully painted.painted.

The wide flattened bell-shaped base should be-Shape as 428.long in the later fifth century B.C. For the generaltype, cf. Callaghan 1978: no. 20.431 (C 6471). Attic echinus bowl, rim sherd. Pl.


438 (C 8661). Attic BG bowl or lekane, rim and 439 (C 8659). Lamp, profile except handle. Pl.4.20. H 2.4, d at rim ca. 6.5. Fine ware (2.5 YRupper body with traces of a spurred horizontal

handle. Pl. 4.20. Max pres h 3.0, d at rim ca. 18.1. 6/6). Painted lamp of Classical type with shortspout, straight walls, and wide reservoir mouth.Attic fine ware, refired.

Fourth century B.C.

Deposit 32 (51A/10 and 16): Temple C, Fill below First Surface

In Trench 51A the earliest surface associated with the Temple C period overlay a deep fillconsisting basically of Iron Age material redeposited at the time of Temple C’s construction,in order to fill in a large erosion gully and tidy up the area. Among the IA material therewere several later sherds sealed beneath the surface and therefore either contemporary withor earlier than the temple building program.

51A/10 pres h 2.2, d at base ca. 11.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/4). Unpainted.

440 (C 6324). Attic skyphos, base fragment. Pl. The high ring base with angular articulation4.20. Max pres h 2.1, d at base ca. 7.0. Attic fine underfoot postdates the fifth century B.C.ware (5 YR 7/8).

445 (C 6540). Jug, base fragment. Pl. 4.20. MaxThe surviving profile indicates a date aboutpres h 2.2, d at base ca. 10.5. Fine ware (2.5 YR375 B.C.6/6). Unpainted.

441 (C 6542). Bowl, base fragment. Pl. 4.20. H 1.8, The profile belongs in the fourth century B.C.d at base ca. 14.5. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Black

446 (C 6534). Kommos cup, profile rim to lowerpaint inside.belly. Pl. 4.20. Max pres h 7.4, d at rim ca. 9.0.The angular ring base with carefully articulatedFine ware (7.5 YR 7/6).underfoot would indicate a date after the fifth

This example is included here as a sample ofcentury B.C.the fourth-century-B.C. development of the shape;for similar pieces in a secure fourth-century con-442 (C 6541). Unpainted cup, base fragment. Pl.text, cf. 459 from the floor deposit of Building W4.20. H 2.4, d at base ca. 5.5. Fine ware (5 YR 7/(Deposit 34).4).

The wide flattened bell-shaped profile at the 447 (C 6538). Lamp, profile except handle. Pl.base can be compared with Callaghan 1978: 4.20. Max pres h 2.4. Fine ware (5 YR 7/8).nos. 21–22. The date should be late in the fifth This piece exhibits the short round spout andcentury B.C. large reservoir opening of the fourth century B.C.

443 (C 6536). High-necked cup, profile rim to 448 (C 6537). Tulip cup, profile rim and uppershoulder. Pl. 4.20. Max pres h 4.3, d at rim 8.0. body. Pl. 4.20. Max pres h 3.4, d at rim ca. 8.0.Fine ware (5 YR 6/8). Fully painted. Fine ware (5 YR 7/8). Fully painted.

The relatively small size of this vase and the The flaring rim and S-shaped profile indicateslightly concave profile of the flaring neck would a fourth-century-B.C. date for this piece.indicate a date after the first quarter of the fourth

449 (C 6535). Votive lekane, profile rim to lowercentury B.C. (the neck of all cups from the early-belly. Pl. 4.20. Max pres h 4.5, d at rim ca. 12.0.fourth-century Knossos kiln group is straightFine ware (7.5 YR 7/6). Unpainted.[Homann-Wedeking 1950]).

This piece is included as an example of thefourth-century-B.C. type by context.444 (C 6539). Jug, base fragment. Pl. 4.20. Max


probably be placed toward the middle of the51A/16century.

450 (C 6378). BG cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.20.Max pres h 2.1, d at base 6.0. Fine ware (2.5 YR 451 (C 6380). Cretan kantharos, base fragment.

Pl. 4.20. Max pres h 2.3, d at base ca. 8.0. Fine5/8). Fully painted.The profile is much more developed than any ware (5 YR 7/8).

The truncated conical profile is of the simplefrom the early fourth-century-B.C. Knossos kilngroup (Homann-Wedeking 1950) and should type characteristic of the fifth century B.C.

Deposit 33 (51A1/52): Temple C, Construction of Temenos Wall

In Trench 51A1, pail 52 ran directly up to the base of the temenos wall, and the material fromthis layer should date the construction of that feature. There was some earlier IA material,but the Classical fragments all seem to date from the fourth century B.C.

452 (C 6677). BG cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.21. Wedeking 1950). A date around the middle ofthe fourth century seems likely.Max pres h 1.7, d at base 6.8. Fine ware (2.5 YR

6/6). Fully painted.The simple truncated conical profile with con-

stricted junction of wall and base, wide resting 453 (C 6678). BG cup, fragment from the lowerbelly. Pl. 4.21. Max pres h 3.5. Fine ware (7.5 YRsurface, and prominent omphalos underfoot all

seem more developed than bases from the early- 8/6). Fully painted.Same type and date as 452.fourth-century-B.C. Knossos kiln group (Homann-

Deposit 34 (50A1/75 and 55A/1–3): Building W, Floor Deposit

Structurally connected with the temenos wall was Building W, the floor deposit of whichmirrored development in Trench 63A (see Deposit 37). The unit was dug in Trenches 50A1and 55A. The excavators recognized two floor surfaces, but massive cross joins among therelevant pails indicated that there was only one. The chronology of the occupation, whichseems to have been comparatively short lived, can be established on the basis of BG cup basesand the almost complete profile of an Attic skyphos of the second quarter of the fourth centuryB.C. (454). This date agrees closely with the evidence for the construction of the temenos wall(Deposit 33) and the initial use of the first Temple C courtyard noted in Trench 63A (Deposit37).

The nature of the deposit is abundantly clear: The smaller shapes are almost exclusivelyBG and Kommos cups. By bulk, however, fully half of the deposit consists of a single hydria(467) and a plain jug with echinoid rim (466). As for other shapes, fragments from at leasttwo more plain jugs and another hydria are present, as well as seven sherds from a chytra.Finally, we have a rim fragment (468) from a large shallow basin similar in profile to manyof those found in 63A/14 and 15. It would seem, then, that the deposit indicates a purely


domestic function for the room, but one more concerned with the consumption of food thanwith cooking. It may be noted in passing that the contemporary dump in Trench 63A isremarkably similar not only in date but in the distribution and popularity of types. The smallsize of the room precludes its use for dining, and it may well have been used to store manyof the vessels that were found in the nearby courtyard dumps. In other words, it could haveserved a purpose similar to that of Building B in the Hellenistic period. In all events, theperiod of use was exceptionally short lived, and the building seems to have been desertedor destroyed soon after the middle of the fourth century B.C.

454 (C 7300). Attic skyphos, profile from lower 50A1/75. Type as for 456. Note that both exam-ples have a slightly flaring neck, unlike the se-belly to just below rim. Pl. 4.21. Max pres h 8.3.

Attic fine ware (2.5 YR 5/6). Fully painted. verely vertical examples in the Knossos kilngroup (Homann-Wedeking 1950).55A/2 and 3. Shape as Callaghan 1978: no. 6.

Ca. 375–350 B.C.459 (C 6982). Kommos cup, profile except han-dle. Pl. 4.21. H 6.5, d at base 4.4. Fine ware (7.5455 (C 6983). Attic echinus bowl, profile exceptYR 6/6). Unpainted.base. Pl. 4.21. Max pres h 2.7, d at rim 5.0. Attic

50A1/75. The vase retains the slightly hol-fine ware (5 YR 6/8). Fully painted except for alowed underfoot of earlier Classical examples butreserved band above the base.has acquired the simple “S” profile that will50A1/75. There is no evidence in Athens forhenceforth be a hallmark of the type. The discus-the existence of this shape before ca. 380–350 B.C.sions for Deposits 37 and 38 in Trench 63A treatthis question in more detail. 375–350 B.C.456 (C 6981). High-necked cup, profile except

handle. Pls. 4.21, 4.51. H 11.8, d at rim 7.9. Fine460 (C 7298). Kommos cup, profile rim to shoul-ware (5 YR 6/6). Fully painted.der. Pl. 4.21. Max pres h 3.0, d at rim ca. 7.5. Fine50A1/76. The profile is characteristic for theware (5 YR 6/6). Unpainted.mid fourth century B.C. The type is more devel-

55A/2. Type as 459 with strong S-curved pro-oped than all those in the Knossos kiln groupfile.(Homann-Wedeking 1950) and has a high conical

pedestal with wide resting surface and a promi- 461 (C 7297). Kommos cup, profile except han-nent omphalos underfoot. An unusual feature is dle. Pl. 4.21. H 5.3, d at rim 10.0. Semifine warethe raised horizontal fillet, but this well-dated (5 YR 7/6). Unpainted.piece still provides a firm control for the local BG 55A/2. Type as 459 and 460, with slightly hol-cup sequence at the site. lowed underfoot. 375–350 B.C.

462 (C 7321). Kommos cup, rim fragment. Pl.457 (C 7296). BG cup, base. Pl. 4.21. Max pres h4.21. Max pres h 1.7, d at rim ca. 11.0. Fine ware1.6, d at base 6.4. Fine ware (5 YR 6/6). Fully(7.5 YR 7/6). Unpainted.painted.

55A/3. Type and date as 459–61.55A/2. In general, this pedestal resembles thatof 456, but its conical profile is slightly lower and

463 (C 7295). Kommos cup, profile rim to belly.more splaying. The type is more developed thanPl. 4.21. Max pres h 3.8, d at rim ca. 8.0. Fine wareanything in the Knossos kiln group (Homann-(5 YR 7/6). Unpainted. Rim slightly everted withWedeking 1950) and it must be almost contempo-a broad shallow groove beneath. Upper bodyrary with 456. 375–350 B.C.wall almost straight.

55A/1. This pot came from the accumulated458 (C 6984). High-necked cup, profile rim todebris above the floor deposit and may be laterupper belly. Pl. 4.21. Max pres h 7.1, d at rim 8.1.in date.Fine ware (5 YR 5/8). Fully painted.


464 (C 7299). Kommos cup, profile rim to belly. 12.0. Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Unpainted. Relativelyshort neck and a carefully turned echinoid mold-Max pres h ca. 7.5. Misfired fine ware. Unpainted.

55A/2. This pot came from the debris above ing at the rim. It was impossible to reconstructthe profile.the floor and was badly misfired in the kiln. So

severe is the warping that the pot is unlikely ever 55A/2 and 3. A close parallel for the rim type(C 8574) was found in a fourth-century-B.C. dumpto have been used. It does, however, indicate that

a pottery establishment existed nearby during the in 63A (Deposit 37). 375–350 B.C.Classical or Early Hellenistic period.

467 (C 8589). Hydria, fragments from shoulder465 (C 7322). Lamp, profile without nozzle and and belly. Semifine ware (5 YR 7/6). Painted hori-rim. Pl. 4.21. Max pres h 2.5, d at base ca. 7.0. zontals stood at the neck-shoulder and shoulder-Fine ware (5 YR 7/6). Unpainted. belly junctions. Another horizontal placed on the55A/3. The low open form with short vertical lower belly.neck finds parallels among the lamps of the Clas- 55A/2 and 3. The type is characteristic forsical Deposits 37 and 38 in Trench 63A, where Crete, but unfortunately no rim fragment sur-the associated pottery is approximately contem- vives, and we cannot tell whether this is an ear-porary with that of Building W. The type may ly example of a Hadra hydria. 375–350 B.C. bywell be an eccentric local variation of Howland context.1958: type 21, maintaining a more Archaic openreservoir. The best Cretan parallels occur in the 468 (C 8590). Basin, rim fragment. Pl. 4.24. MaxSanctuary of Demeter deposits B and H and be- pres h 6.4, d at rim ca. 45.0. Semicoarse ware (5long to the later fifth and early fourth century YR 7/6). Unpainted.B.C. (Coldstream 1973a: 24, 44). In the Knossos 55A/2 and 3. The collared neck and shallowkiln group (Homann-Wedeking 1950) vaguely profile find parallels in the contemporary court-similar local and Attic lamps were discovered yard deposits of Trench 63A (Deposits 37 andin an early-fourth-century context (cf. Homann- 38), and the piece represents a Classical predeces-Wedeking 1950: 174–75). 375–350 B.C. sor for the many shallow basins in Hellenistic

dumps. 375–350 B.C.466 (C 8588). Plain jug, 81 fragments. D at rim ca.

Deposit 35 (20B/5, 6, 13, 15, and 17): Building D

The best evidence for the date of Building D comes from Trench 20B and, more especially, asounding on the eastern side of the building. There a clear surface contemporary with thefirst use of the building was uncovered. Pails 5 and 6 above this surface included large amountsof BG material of the fourth century B.C. but, being unsealed, there were large proportionsof Hellenistic sherds as well, so that no secure date could be obtained from these levels.

More important were pails 13, 15, and 17 below the surface. It is obvious that the latestsherds here provide a terminus post quem for the construction of Building D. Much of thematerial was of the seventh century, but there was a reasonable amount of material datingto the second quarter of the fourth century. Since this is also the date for the earliest potteryabove the surface, it seems reasonable to conclude that Building D was constructed between375 and 350 B.C., the same date as Temple C, the temenos wall, and Building W.

Pail 15 produced eight fragments from fourth-century BG vessels (C 8463–C 8466). Nonecan be closely dated, but they support the general date bracket offered above. On the northern


side of Building D the original surface was reached with pail 69. The earliest material here(C 3300–C 3302) dates to the first half of the fourth century.

20B/13 century B.C. Together these features indicate adate close to 350 B.C.

469 (C 8467). BG cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.21.473 (C 8471). BG cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.21.Max pres h 1.8, d at base 5.8. Fine ware (5 YR 7/Max pres h 1.4, d at base 4.0. Fine ware (5 YR 6/6). Fully painted.4). Fully painted.The truncated conical pedestal with prominent

Similar to 469–72 but with a concave profile ofomphalos underfoot should date to about 375 B.C.a type antecedent to late-fourth- and early-third-

470 (C 8468). BG cup, base and lower belly. Pl. century-B.C. forms. About 350 B.C. or a little later.4.21. Max pres h 4.5, d at base 5.8. Fine ware (5

474 (C 8472). Tulip cup, rim fragment. Pl. 4.21.YR 7/6). Fully painted. Max pres h 2.1, d at rim ca. 10.0. Fine ware (5 YRAs 469 but slightly more developed. 7/6). Fully painted.The flaring rim is a fourth-century-B.C. devel-471 (C 8469). BG cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.21.

opment.Max pres h 3.1, d at base 5.5. Fine ware (5 YR 6/6). Fully painted. 475 (C 8474). Lamp, nozzle. H 2.8. Fine ware (5

Similar to 470. YR 7/6). Unpainted.Classical.472 (C 8470). BG cup, base fragment. Pl. 4.21.

Max pres h 2.2, d at base 4.9. Fine ware (5 YR 6/ 476 (C 8473). Hadra hydria, rim fragment. Pl.4.21. Max pres h 2.8, d at rim ca. 14.0. Fine ware6). Fully painted.

The base is less splaying than the previous ex- (7.5 YR 6/8). Dull brown paint at rim.The flat ledge rim is characteristic of the type,amples, the junction of base and belly is more

constricted, and the underfoot has lost the wide and the context would suggest this is a very earlyexample. 375–350 B.C.?resting surface characteristic of the earlier fourth

Deposit 36 (10A1/32 and 37): Altar C

There were three phases of construction for Altar C. The primary structure consisted of asimple rectangle made of ashlar blocks. The contemporary ground surface was marked by aline of stone chips at an appropriate level to link up with the chip layer marking the constructionof Temple C and the first use of its courtyard (Deposits 30, 31, and 37). From beneath the layerof chips came important groups of sherds that give a terminus post quem for the construction ofthe altar. Trench 10A1, pail 37, contained several jug bases of fourth-century-B.C. type. Althoughthese cannot be closely dated, they would suggest a broad contemporaneity between theconstruction of temple and altar. Pail 32 contains similar material of the fourth century and alsoan interesting group of fifth-century sherds that may document some form of preconstructionactivity in the area.

The northern extension to the altar, founded on a higher level, was associated with potterythat was not particularly diagnostic but that appears to date to the later fourth or third century.Inventoried items are C 362–C 364 and C 1538.

the iron age pottery from kommos - university of … iron age pottery from kommos peter j....

Documents