Acknowledgements

I am very grateful to Lord William Taylour for offering me the opportunity of working on and publishing this material, supported by a grant from the Mediterranean Archaeological Trust. I am indebted to Mrs. Elizabeth French for her constant tuition of a novice, her patient advice and criticism. A large number of the preliminary drawings were the work of Mrs. D. Blackman and much of the typing was done by Mrs. A. Johnston.

Abbreviations additional to those in standard use

FM = Furumark Motive Number: A. Furumark, The Mycenaean Pottery.

FS = Furumark Shape Number: Ibid.

¹ See the introductory note by Lord William Taylour (p. 259) for the nature and scope of these excavations.

² This series of groups is divided into two parts. Mrs. French has been publishing material from outside the citadel at Mycenae in a series of articles in BSA, finishing with that in the present issue pp. 236 ff. This article is the first of a series dealing with material from within the citadel. The old format has been slightly altered; the new format will be followed in the subsequent articles (see n. 4). For the preliminary reports on the material under consideration in this article, see Archaeological Reports 1962–3, 14; for earlier comments as to its nature and position in the sequence, BSA lxi (1966) 217 and n. 8; BSA lviii (1963) 49 nn. 74, 51.

³ For use of this term see below, n. 21.

⁴ The format of this article, which will be followed in subsequent articles, is: An introductory section on the find site of the pottery and its condition. A discussion of the painted pottery and its bearing on the date of the deposit (pp. 264 ff.). Detailed discussion of the painted wares by shapes, in the order established by Furumark where possible; in this section, as in that on the unpainted pottery, the discussion has been kept as brief as possible, and is followed by the detailed descriptions of each registered piece of the shape; in addition, other illustrated pieces are described more briefly; this is followed by a short note on the more frequent patterns (pp. 278 f.), and a chart to show the vessel types on which particular patterns occur (p. 279). A discussion and detailed description of the unpainted wares following the same system as with the painted (pp. 280 ff.). Finally, there are notes on the earlier and later material, the terracottas and small finds, and indices to the illustrated pieces and to illustrations of registered vessels. Changes which have been introduced in this new series are the enlargement of the drawings to a scale of 1:3 (previously 1:4) and the abandoning of italics and capital letters for vessel types and patterns.

⁵ See the plan published in Archaeological Reports 1962–3, fig. 12. The excavation designations of this area are: Citadel House, Area Γ12; Room 3, and trenches E ii and E v. During the completion of excavation in this area in 1966, Room 3 extension was known as Room 15.

⁶ The excavation basket numbers corresponding to each of these phases are: A. 55, 62, 64. B. 48, 52, 54, 88, 93, 95, 96, 97. C. 31, 33, 41, 46, 79. D. 30, 37, 38, 78, 86, 89, 91, 92. E. 80, 80a, 83, 84, 85. F. 25, 27, 29, 35, 74, 75.

It must be emphasized that these phases are arbitrary and not those observed at the time of the excavation. They are given as a guide in case it should subsequently be possible to make subtler chronological distinctions in the pottery. The numbers of the levels as excavated are III–Va.

⁷ During the excavations of 1962, the bedrock was only reached at one end of the room because of the difficulties of working in the confined space, and lack of time; in 1966 the removal of only a shallow deposit, probably of wash, revealed bedrock throughout.

⁸ This structure has been called a ‘drain’ because this is the most informative description. It is, however, by no means certain that this channel served as a drain but in the absence of any other likely suggestion I have retained this title.

⁹ This is the destruction apparently common to the greater part of the Mycenae Citadel and dated to L.H. IIIB 2 by the material from the ‘ramp’ area: BSA lviii (1963) 51–2.

¹⁰ The deposit is too small to allow valid subdivision, and in any case the stratigraphic boundaries between the phases are uncertain.

¹¹ See p. 293.

¹² These are indicated by dots in section and plans, Fig. 1.

¹³ There are 180 patterned sherds in comparison with 6,869 unpainted ones. The chart on p. 279 may be used to determine the relation of patterns to shapes.

¹⁴ Fig. 6.

¹⁵ French, Elizabeth in BSA lxi (1966) 216 ff.Google Scholar and BSA lxii (1967) 151 ff.

¹⁶ For use of these terms see BSA lii (1957) 218 and ADelt 20 (1965) A 139.

¹⁷ These pieces are illustrated: Plate 62a: 3; Plate 62d: 1; Plate 62d: 4.

¹⁸ The ‘Zygouries’ kylix is one of the criteria for the early stages of L.H. IIIB (Schachermeyr, F., ‘Forschungsbericht über die Ausgrabungen und Neufunde zur ägäischen Frühzeit 1957–60’, AA 1962, Heft 2, 220 ff.Google Scholar).

Thanks to the kindness of the Greek Museum Authorities and Mr. Charles Williams, I recently made a hurried study of the sherd material from Zygouries, in the Corinth Museum, and was able to confirm the very small number of painted sherds of L.H. IIIB date from the ‘potter's shop’ or elsewhere. The sherds illustrated in the report are perhaps the only patterned pieces of this date, though there are a few more which can be assigned to L.H. IIIA 2. Pieces of the latter period with linear decoration only are slightly more common. Further study of the material, or preferably further excavation, would be required to verify this.

In view of this it is likely that the ‘potter's shop’ was destroyed at the start of L.H. IIIB 1; it would be interesting to see if this picture is repeated elsewhere and if the ‘Zygouries’ kylix could be used as a criterion for the start of L.H. IIIB 1 rather than the whole of this period.

It should be noted that the tombs at Zygouries are of somewhat later date, perhaps mid L.H. IIIB; and that the position at Berbati is the same, with tombs later than the settlement, as Åkerström has asserted in a personal communication to Mrs. French.

¹⁹ In the groups of L.H. IIIA 2 published in BSA lx (1965) 200–2, some 10 per cent of the patterned sherds from open vessels are from stemmed bowls, but in the group of L.H. IIIB 1 in BSA lxi (1966) 235 this has dropped to 3 per cent. Despite the small size of the sample, stemmed bowls seem to be equally rare in this group. On the other hand, at Tiryns in L.H. IIIB 2, there are again 10 per cent of stemmed bowls. Further evidence is required before we can suggest a temporary drop in popularity in L.H. IIIB 1.

²⁰ See n. 16.

²¹ Following Furumark, the design on these bowls is not a rosette FM 17, but a sea anemone FM 27. The distinction between elaborate examples of these is perhaps unclear, and in any case ‘rosette’ bowl seems a better descriptive term. The sole decoration of these bowls consists of a sea anemone on either side, a dotted rim, and three blobs on each of the handles.

²² See n. 9.

²³ BSA lxii (1967) 149 ff.

²⁴ Mrs. French has suggested that these vertical lines are simplified forms of foliate band decoration, FM 64: BSA lxii (1967) 171.

²⁵ s Compare the example illustrated in BCH 91 (1967) 658, fig. 16.

²⁶ For a fuller description of these flower and whorl-shell motifs see the separate section, pp. 278–80.

²⁷ This sherd was drawn in the pottery notebook at the time of the preliminary study in 1962, but has since been lost.

²⁸ For use of this term see BSA lxi (1966) 222.

²⁹ Though a triglyph is accepted to mean a vertical element consisting of two or more vertical lines, perhaps elaborated with zigzag between them and pendent semicircles in a horizontal row on either side, its function is to divide the surface of the vessel into a number of panels; these may contain further accessory ornament. The chevrons in 44, and the rows of linked lozenges in 49, fulfil, in my opinion, a similar function and may thus be termed triglyphs in a broader sense, It should in any case be noted that there is a difference in usage between Greek and English terminology; in Greek these portions of the design are termed metopes, and the panel in between, the triglyph: ADelt 20 (1965) A 139 n. 6.

³⁰ We may note the similarity of the motif in this style of decoration to that on later ‘rosette’ bowls; for other pieces with the same style of decoration see BSA lxii (1967) 180, and fig. 10: 107.

³¹ The criterion by which these fragments are distinguished from those of deep bowls, is their clearly lipped rim with a painted band below on the exterior.

³² The shallow linear saucer 68 is from the material deposited later; see p. 294.

³³ The exact purpose of these small vessels is uncertain. Children's toys or ritual vessels are both possibilities. In some respects their decoration is similar to that of figurines but this may be fortuitous. The types and decoration seem to change very little during Mycenaean times, but work is needed to verify this.

³⁴ For other patterns see the chart on p. 279.

³⁵ It is recorded in the pottery notebooks, written during the preliminary study, that there was one piece from a deep bowl with this pattern; this was, unfortunately, not kept.

³⁶ We know from the ‘potter's shop’ deposit at Zygouries that three whorl-shells can constitute a single motif.

³⁷ Patterned and linear: vessels 22, sherds 897.

Unpainted: vessels 61, sherds 6,869 — of which there are 3,648 body sherds with no indication of type.

³⁸ Kylikes: vessels 61, rim sherds 1,753.

Kylix bases 291; other bases 223.

³⁹ Bases: closed 95, open 114.

⁴⁰ Shallow angular bowl: vessels 5, sherds 85.

Shallow cup: vessels 8, sherds 35.

N.B. the possible sources of confusion between cups, kylikes and angular bowls.

⁴¹ Small bowls (all types): vessels 4, sherds 41.

Basins, open bowls: vessels 6, sherds 64.

⁴² Dippers: vessels 2, sherds 32.

⁴³ Coarse and cooking-pots: vessels 6, sherds 13.

⁴⁴ The addition of some grit is, of course, intentional in some of these heavy fabrics.

⁴⁵ As far as I know, the only large groups of unpainted wares to be published in any detail are those from Zygouries (Blegen, C. W., Zygouries, 1928Google Scholar), and Pylos (Blegen, C. W. and Rawson, M., The Palace of Nestor i, 1966Google Scholar). Zygouries probably dates to the earliest part of L.H. IIIB 1 (n. 15), and the destruction of the Palace of Nestor has been dated by the excavators to the L.H. IIIB 2/IIIC transition.

⁴⁶ This was beneath the inserted wall.

⁴⁷ See p. 266.

⁴⁸ It is likely that more rim sherds were present but could not be identified because of the great similarity to rim sherds from kylikes; see n. 40.

⁴⁹ Though it is possible that there are small cups with everted rims which have not been otherwise identified.

⁵⁰ See n. 38.

⁵¹ Some of the better quality rim sherds and handles might be from ‘Zygouries’ kylikes.

⁵² Furumark recognizes this type of handle only on rounded or conical kylikes, FS 273, etc. It is not recorded often, if at all, on carinated kylikes. I was able to identify two examples with certainty, and there were a further nine handles of this type with no indication of the bowl shape of the kylix.

⁵³ A complete unpainted kylix with this type of handle was found in the 1952 excavation of the ‘Poros Wall’ in the area of the Perseia Fountain House. It is illustrated in ILN 1 Nov. 1952 721, fig. 52. Reports of the excavation and of further work in the same area are in BSA xlviii (1953) 5 ff. and BSA 1 (1955) 209 ff. An example of this type of handle on a decorated kylix is illustrated in CVA Copenhagen 2, pl. 51, 2. This is from Vathi in Rhodes and has a deep bowl with stylized octopus decoration. A further example is illustrated in Furtwängler, and Löschke, , Mykenische Vasen pl. xi, 70.Google Scholar

Generally, undecorated kylikes do not have the handle ‘worked in’ below whereas the majority of decorated kylikes have this technical feature: it is characteristic of the better quality vessels including a few unpainted ones.

⁵⁴ See n. 40.

⁵⁵ See n. 41.

⁵⁶ This comes from the burnt level phase D.

⁵⁷ This was found below the top of the drain.

⁵⁸ At the time of the preliminary study in 1962 these pieces were described in the pottery notebook and then put in ‘sample collections’ representative of each period; accordingly they were not accessible to me and the account given below is a summary of the descriptions and identifications recorded in the pottery notebook.

⁵⁹ We may note how the content of earlier sherds falls away from the earliest phase:

A has 121 sherds M.H., 16 L.H. I and II, 1 L.H. IIIA 1 (total unpainted 741)

B has 5 sherds M.H., 1 L.H. I and II, 2 L.H. IIIA 1 (total unpainted 2,456)

C has 3 sherds M.H., 0 L.H. I and II, 5 L.H. IIIA 1 (total unpainted 1,782)

D has 1 sherd M.H., 1 L.H. I and II, 1 L.H. IIIA 1 (total unpainted 1,890)

⁶⁰ See n. 9.

⁶¹ See Blegen, C. W. and Rawson, M., The Palace of Nestor iGoogle Scholar for the example ‘shape 79, Broiling Pan’, p. 418, figs. 397, 398. This, however, has vertical handles and no legs.

⁶² The registered numbers of the terracottas in order of mention are (all with the prefix 62–): 265; 667, 173, 174, 175, 280, 362, 275; 261, 366, 371, 664; 264, 267, 270, 676; 268; 176; 274; 266; 672; 273; 369; 271, 361.