² The relative and absolute chronology of the north-west Anatolian EBA and the Troy I culture are discussed extensively by Manning in Aegean Chronology, and by M. J. Mellink, ‘Anatolian Chronology’, in R. W. Ehrich (ed.), Chronologies in Old World Archaeology (Chicago and London, 1992, 3rd edn), I, 207–20, II, 171–84. Mellink also provides very useful chronological tables as a context for our discussion of Lesbos presented here. The EBA ‘Lydian’ culture (and Lesbos' place within it) was defined originally by Bittel, French, and Mellaart, and has been re-examined recently by Seeher, Efe, Meriç, and Manning. See K. Bittel, Prähistorische Forschungen in Kleinasien (Istanbuler Forschungen 6; Istanbul, 1934); ‘LCH pottery’, 99–141; D. H. French, ‘Late Chalcolithic pottery in northwest Turkey and the Aegean, additional notes’, AnatSt 14 (1964), 134–7; id., ‘Prehistoric pottery from Macedonia and Thrace’, PZ 42 (1964), 30–48; id., ‘Early pottery sites from western Anatolia’, BIALond 5 (1965), 15–24; ‘Iznik’, 49–100; Anatolia/Aegean; ‘Bahkesir/Akhisar-Manisa’, 41–98; J. Mellaart, The Neolithic of the Near East (London, 1975), 246 and fig. 157; J. Seeher, ‘Vorläufiger Bericht über die Keramik des Beşik-Sivritepe’, AA (1985), 172–82; Demircihüyük III, I; id., ‘Prähistorische Funde aus Gülpmar/Chryse. Neue Belege für einen vortrojanischen Horizont an der Nordwestküste Kleinasiens’, AA (1987), 533–56; R. Meriç, ‘1986 yili Izmir ve Manisa illeri yüzey araşturmasi’, in V. Araştirma Sonuçlari Toplantisi I (Ankara, 1987), 247–56; id., ‘1987 Izmir-Manisa-Aydin illeri yüzey araştirmasi’, in VI. Araş;tirma Sonuçlari Toplantisi (Ankara, 1988), 385–92; id., ‘1987 yili Alaşehir kazisi’, in X. Kazi Sonuçlari Toplantisi I (Ankara, 1988), 157–70; Demircihüyük III, 2; J. Seeher, ‘Coşkuntepe - anatolisches Neolithikum am Nordostufer der Ägäis’, IstMitt 40 (1990), 9–15; R. Meriç, ‘Pre-Bronze Age settlements of west-central Anatolia’, Anatolica 19 (1993), 143–8; Aegean Chronology, 74–7. For our own recent work at Altinova and me Madra Çay delta, see n. 14.

³ Thermi. For Gavurtepe/Alaşehir, see Meriç, ‘Alaşehir kazisoi’ (n. 2).

⁴ D. Mitten, ‘Prehistoric survey of the Gygean lake and excavations at Ahlatli Tepecik’, BASOR 191 (1968), 6–10; D. Mitten and G. Yüğrüm, ‘The Gygean lake, 1969: Eski Bahkhane, preliminary report’, HSCP 75 (1971), 191–5; D. Mitten and G. Yüğrüm, ‘Ahlatli Tepecik’, Archaeology, 27 (1974), 22–32.

⁵ A number of recent works all limit their discussion of settlement on the island to a review of the evidence from Thermi: for example, Cherry, J. F., ‘Pattern and process in the earliest colonization of the Mediterranean islands’, PPS 47 (1981), 41–68; Céramiques monochromes; R. Treuil, Le Néolithique et le Bronze Ancien Égéens (Paris, 1983); J. Yakar, The Later Prehistory of Anatolia. The Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age (BAR International Series no. 268; Oxford, 1985); J. F. Cherry, ‘Islands out of the stream: isolation and interaction in early east Mediterranean insular prehistory’, in B. Knapp and T Stech (eds) Prehistoric Production and Exchange: the Aegean and East Mediterranean, 12–29 (Institute of Archaeology, Monograph XXV, University of California; Los Angeles, 1985); Demircihüyük III, 1; Demircihüyük III, 2; J. F. Cherry, ‘The first colonization of the Mediterranean islands: a review of recent research’, JMA 3 (1990), 145–221; M. Patton, Islands in Time: Island Sociogeography and Mediterranean Prehistory (London and New York, 1996), 50. To our knowledge, only French (in Anatolia/Aegean, a work never fully published) and Buchholz (in Methymna 121–37, and fig. 34), have attempted a more comprehensive assessment of prehistoric site distribution in LesbosGoogle Scholar.

⁶ Thermi, 208: ‘One branch of this Western Anatolian black ware culture founded near the shore of the Dardanelles a city … Troy; another branch crossed the narrow straits between Asia Minor and Lesbos and built a smaller town on the east coast facing its land of origin. We have called it by the name of Thermi’ (emphasis ours).

⁷ K. Jones, ‘An outline of the geology of the islands of Mytilene and Chios’, in A. Campbell (ed.), Geology and History of Turkey (Tripoli, 1971), 275–83, fig. 1.

⁸ Ibid.

⁹ See T. H. van Andel and J. Shackleton, ‘Late Palaeolithic and Mesolithic coastlines of Greece and the Aegean’, JFA 9 (1982), 445–54, fig. 2; Cherry, ‘Islands out of the stream’ (n. 5), fig. 2. 2; O. Psychoyos, Déplacements de la ligne de rivage et de sites archéologiques dans les régions côtières de la mer Égée, au néolithique et à l'Âge du Bronze (Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology and Literature, pocket book 62, Jonsered; 1988); id., ‘Μορφολογική εξέλιξη των παραλιακών πεδιάδων του Αιγαίου και η πληθυσμιακή σε αυτέζ’, Ανθρωπολογιχὰ Ανὰλεχτα 22 (1988), 89–93; K. Lambrianides, ‘Palaeogeographic factors in the development of early coastal communities on the Aegean coast of Turkey’, AnatSt 40 (1990), 24–6. In ‘Lesbos and Altinova’, fig. 10, there is a reconstruction of the prehistoric coastlines of Lesbos and Altinova on the basis of bathymetric charts; see also the local sea-level curves obtained for the east Aegean by I. Kayan, ‘Late Holocene sea-level changes on the western Anatolian coast’, Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 68 (1988), 205–18, fig. 4; id., ‘Holocene geomorphic evolution of the Beşik plain and changing environment of ancient man’ (Studia Troica 1; Mainz, 1991), 79–92, fig. 5; Patton (n. 5), fig. 3.3 p. 39; M. H. Jameson el al., A Greek Countryside: the Southern Argolid from Prehistory to the Present Day (Stanford, 1994), 194–213.

¹⁰ R. Fairbanks, ‘A 17,000-year-old glacio-eustatic sea-level record: influence of glacial melting rates on the Younger Dryas event and deep ocean circulation’, Nature, 342 (1989), 637–42; T. H. van Andel, ‘Late Quaternary sea-level changes and archaeology’, Antiquity, 63 (1989), 733–45; id., ‘Addendum to “Late Quaternary sea-level changes and archaeology”’, Antiquity, 64 (1990), 151–2.

¹¹ For Datça see Kayan, ‘sea-level changes’ (n. 9), fig. 4; for the Troad/Beşik Bay, id., ‘Geomorphic evolution’ (n. 9); for Franchthi Cave, T. van Andel, T. Jacobsen, J. Jolly, and N. Lianos ‘Late Quaternary history of the coastal zone near Franchthi Cave, southern Argolid, Greece’, JFA 7 (1980), 389–402; T. H. van Andel and N. Lianos, ‘High resolution seismic reflection profiles for the reconstruction of postglacial transgressive shorelines: an example from Greece’, Quaternary Research, 22 (1984), 31–45; T. H. van Andel and S. B. Sutton, Landscape and People of the Franchthi Region (Excavations at Franchthi Cave, Greece, Fascicle 2; Bloomington and Indianapolis, 1987); J. Shackleton, ‘Reconstructing past shorelines as an approach to determining factors affecting shellfish collecting in the prehistoric past’, in G. Bailey and J. Parkington (eds), The Archaeology of Prehistoric Coastlines (Cambridge, 1988), 11–21; Jameson el al. (n. 9), ibid; cf. K. Lambeck, ‘sea-level change and shore-line evolution in Aegean Greece since Upper Palaeolithic time’, Antiquity, 70 (1996), 588–611.

¹² See Kayan, ‘sea-level changes’ (n. 9), fig. 4; id., ‘Geomorphic evolution’ (n. 9), fig. 5.

¹³ Ibid, (both refs.); see also Psychoyos, Déplacements (n. 9), fig. IV.

¹⁴ For detailed discussion of these mainland sites in the Madra Çay delta see K. Lambrianides, ‘Preliminary survey and core sampling on the Aegean coast of Turkey’, AnatSt, 42 (1992), 75–8; id., ‘Preliminary survey of the Madra Çay delta at Altinova, near Ayvalik’, in X. Araştirma Sonuçlari Toplantisi, 227–30 (Ankara, 1992); ‘Lesbos and Altinova’, passim; N. Spencer and K. Lambrianides, ‘The Madra Çay delta archaeological project’, Anatolian Archaeology, 1 (1995), 21; N. Spencer, ‘Where East meets West’, Worcester College Gazette (1996), 5; N. Spencer and K. Lambrianides, ‘Madra Çay’, Anatolian Archaeology, 2 (1996), 25–6; K. Lambrianides and N. Spencer, ‘The Madra Çay delta archaeology project first preliminary report: geomorphological survey and borehole sampling of the Altinova coastal plain on the Aegean coast of Northwest Turkey’, AnatSt, 46 (1996), 167–200; N. Spencer and K. Lambrianides, ‘Geomorphological survey at Altinova in northwest Turkey’, in XII. Arkeometri Sonuçlari Toplantisi (Ankara, 1997), 177–99; K. Lambrianides and N. Spencer, ‘The origins and development of Early Bronze Age settlement in Lesbos: some initial proposals’, in C. Doumas and V. La Rosa (eds), Poliochni and the Early Bronze Age in the North Aegean (Athens, forthcoming). For the ceramics of Kaymaktepe specifically, see K. Kökten, ‘1949 yili tarih öncesi araştirmalari hakkinda kisa rapor’, Belleten, 13 (1949), 811–31.

¹⁵ For the material from Chios (and from sites to the south of Lesbos in Samos and Kalymnos) see ‘samos/Kalimnos/Chios’ and Emporio/Ayio Gala.

¹⁶ See Aegean Chronology, 74–7 for the summary of these links.

¹⁷ For Lamb's more simplistic view of a one-way colonization from the East towards Lesbos see n. 6 above, and for a fuller discussion of her diffusionist views see ‘Lesbos and Altinova’, 10–17, 23–30; ‘Communities in transition’, 73.

¹⁸ See the reports on the fieldwork under the direction of the present authors in the Madra Çay delta at Altinova (n. 14).

¹⁹ J. Caskey, ‘Excavations in Keos, 1963’, Hesperia, 33 (1964), 314–35; J. Coleman, Keos I. Kephala (Princeton, 1977); J. Cherry, ‘Island origins’, in B. Cunliffe (ed.), Origins: the Roots of European Civilization (London, 1987), 22—3 and fig. 2.5; cf. Emergence, pl. 14.

²⁰ Thermi, 7; see also M. Korfmann, Demircihüyük: Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen 1975–1978. I. Architektur, Stratigraphie und Befunde (Mainz, 1983), 229–30; ‘Lesbos and Altinova’, 169–70; ‘Communities in transition’, 85—6 and n. 8.

²¹ Thermi, 7.

²² W. Lamb, ‘Archaeology in Greece 1928–29’, JHS 49 (1929), 223–4; ead., ‘Archaeology in Greece 1929–30’, JHS 50 (1930), 247–8; ead., ‘Excavations at Thermi in Lesbos 1928–30’, BSA 30 (1930), 1–52; ead., ‘Archaeology in Greece 1930–31’ JHS 51 (1931), 201–2; ead., ‘Excavations at Thermi in Lesbos 1930–31’, BSA 31 (1930–1), 148–65; ead., ‘Grey wares from Lesbos’, JHS 52 (1932), 1–12; ead., ‘Archaeology in Greece 1932–33’, JHS 53 (1933), 284–6; ead., ‘Archaeological discussions, 1932’, AJA 37 (1933), 127; Thermi. For Thermi see also Methymna, 121–3; Kontis, 136—7; Céramiques monochromes, 25–6; Treuil (n. 5), 27–8; Yakar (n. 5), 151–2.

²³ C. T. Newton, Travels and Discoveries in the Levant, 2 vols (London, 1865).

²⁴ A. Conze, Reise auf der Insel Lesbos (Hanover, 1865; repr. Amsterdam, 1982).

²⁵ Antike Baureste.

²⁶ D. Evangelidis, ‘Λέσβου ἐπιγραφαί’, ArchDelt 6 (1921), 143–53; id., 'Ανασχαφαὶ χαὶ ὲρευναι ὲν ὲσβω' ArchDelt 9 (1924–5), supp. 41–54; id, ῾᾿Ανασχαφαὶ χαὶ ἀρχαι̑α ἐχ Μυτιλήνης ᾿ ArchDelt 11 (1927–8), supp. 14–22; id., ῾᾿Ανασχαφή Κλοπεδῆς Λέσβου ᾿ PAE (1928), 126–37.

²⁷ Thermi, 1; see also nn. 6, 17 above.

²⁸ The material from the trial trenches at Methymna of Nov. 1928 was exclusively of Iron Age date, see Gazetteer, 1 and nn. 6, 9. A few sherds from Lamb's excavations at Antissa were said to have been identified subsequently by Mellaart as being of Troy II type; nearly all the material is otherwise of late Bronze Age date, see Methymna, 123 (and fig. 34 on p. 122). These EBA sherds are said to be stored in the Institute of Archaeology in London but after repeated attempts during 1990—4 could not be located.

²⁹ Thermi, 5 and fig. 25.

³⁰ Ibid., 73.

³¹ Ibid., 73–8 and figs. 26–7.

³² Troy I, figs. 223 a–267 passim.

³³ yortan, pls III–XV, figs. 23–76.

³⁴ See Demircihüyük III, 2, fig. 98; D. Easton, 'schliemann's excavations at Troy 1870–73’ (Diss., University of London, 1990), table XXXIII; M. Cosmopoulos, The Early Bronze 2 in the Aegean (SIMA 98; Göteborg, 1991), 51, and table 4.8; M. Korfmann, Demircihüyük: Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen 1975–1978, II: Naturwissenschaftliche Untersuchungen (Mainz, 1987), p. xviii, fig. 4; Aegean Chronology, 76–7, 154–7.

³⁵ F. Begemann et al., ‘The metal finds from Thermi III–V: a chemical isotope study’ (Studia Troica, 2; Mainz, 1992), 221; Korfmann, loc. cit.; cf. Aegean Chronology, loc. cit.

³⁶ Begemann et al., loc. cit.

³⁷ All Thermi ¹⁴C dates were obtained from charcoal; cf. a Poliochni Blue ¹⁴C date of 2910–2672 BC (calibrated), Begemann et al. (n. 35), 220–1.

³⁸ See Kastro Tigani, 105 n. 413 and pls. 49.4, 84.1; J. L. Davis, ‘Review of Aegean prehistory I: the islands of the Aegean’, AJA 96 (1992), 724 and n. 103. There is, of course, no positive evidence to justify this proposal and, in any case, pattern-burnishing is a technique widespread both in time and space: D. Easton (pers. comm. 1995) reports its existence in Troy VI, for instance.

³⁹ F. Fischer, ‘Ägäische Politurmusterware’, IstMitt 17 (1967) 22–33, fig. I; Seeher, ‘Vorläufiger Bericht’ (n. 2), fig. 15; for a similar view of local variation in this style of decoration see Aegean Chronology, 75—6.

⁴⁰ The only known examples of pattern-burnish in the Lydian ceramic zone are a single sherd with striations very similar to the Thermi piece from Kaymaktepe at Altinova, see Kökten (n. 14), pl. XCVI, fig. 10 row three; cf. Beycesultan: map II; Seeher, ‘Prähistorische Funde’, (n. 2), 549; another example at Gümüşova-Deresi Tepe I in the Bakir Çay valley, see ‘Kaikosebene’, fig. 1.11; and finally in Akhisar-Manisa and Balikesir, ‘LCH Pottery’, 102 and fig. 5.50, 51, 52.

⁴¹ Seeher, ‘Prähistorische Funde’, (n. 2); it is also much in evidence, at Kum Tepe in the Troad, ‘Kum Tepe’, passim.

⁴² ‘samos/Kalimnos/Chios’, 187, 205–8 and fig. 6 nos. 67–8, 71–2 and fig. 15, pl. XVII; Kastro Tigani, no. 143 (p. 156 and pl. 19.5) (Tigani II) and nos. 228–9, 231, 233–4 (pp. 165–6, pl. 23.5 and pls. 59–60) (Tigani III).

⁴³ Branigan, K., Aegean Metalwork of the Early and Middle Bronze Age (Oxford, 1974), 100Google Scholar; Pernicka, E. et al. , ‘On the composition and provenance of metal artefacts from Poliochni on Lemnos’, OJA 9 (1990), 273Google Scholar; Begemann et al. (n. 35) 223; cf. Begemann, F., Pernicka, E., and Schmitt-Strecker, S., ‘Metal finds from Ihpinar and the advent of arsenical copper’, Anatolica, 20 (1994), 203–19.Google Scholar For EBA metalwork in the north Aegean, see most recently Nakou, G., ‘The role of Poliochni and the north Aegean in the development of Aegean metallurgy’ in Doumas, C. and Rosa, V. La (eds), Poliochni and the Early Bronze Age in the North Aegean (Athens, forthcoming).Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Thermi, 165, and pl. XXIV. 30. 43.

⁴⁵ Ibid., 157.

⁴⁶ Ibid., 157, fig. 44. 31. 72.

⁴⁷ Ibid., 4 and plan 7.

⁴⁸ Coleman (n. 19), 3–4 and Appendix 1, 113–14.

⁴⁹ Begemann, F., Pernicka, E., and Schmitt-Strecker, S., ‘Thermi on Lesbos: a case study of changing trade patterns’, OJA 14 (1995) 123 and 130–5Google Scholar; cf. also the reassessment of this article by N. H. Gale, ‘Comments on Begemann, F., Pernicka, E., Schmitt-Strecker, S., ‘Thermi on Lesbos: a case study of changing trade patterns’, OJA 14(2) (1995), 123–135’Google Scholar, OJA 15 (1996), 113–20.

⁵⁰ For the three known schematic ‘fiddle-shaped’ idols in marble, see Thermi, 177, pl. XXVI. 30. 54 (from Town I), 30. 35 (from Town II/early III), 31·73 (also Town II/early III); cf. Renfrew, A. C., ‘The chronology of the Early Cycladic figurines’, AJA 73 (1969), 1–32, illustration I.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵¹ Thermi, 177.

⁵² Bittel (n. 2), 36–7.

⁵³ e.g., Thermi, 177, pl. XXVI.30.21; also fig. 51. 30. 42 (Town I), 30. 46 (Town II), 30. 25 and 31. 57 (Town III).

⁵⁴ A stone figurine of the type now known as ‘Kiliya’ was reported from Lesbos long ago by Evangelidis, ῾᾿Ανασχαφαί χαί ἀρχαια ἐ Μυτιλἡνης ᾿ (n. 26), 19 and fig. 10. The provenance is unknown and the object has since disappeared, but its presence on Lesbos may be an additional indication that the island was indeed a member of the north-west Anatolian LCH culture complex during the period of the ‘Beşik-Sivritepe-Kum Tepe la-Emporio X–VIII’ horizon, as argued by Seeher, J., ‘Die kleinasiatischen Marmorstatuetten vom Typ Kiliya’, AA (1992), 153–70.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Thermi, fig. 28.

⁵⁶ Ibid., 150–6, 177, pls. XX–XXIII.

⁵⁷ Ibid., 25, 30–1, 116, 202 and fig. 9. For a fuller discussion of the diachronic changes in material culture at Thermi see ‘Lesbos and Altinova’, 169–83; ‘Communities in transition’, 72–88.

⁵⁸ Thermi, 150–6; ‘Lesbos and Altinova’, loc. cit.; ‘Communities in transition’, loc. cit.

⁵⁹ Korfmann, M., ‘Demircihüyük’, IstMitt 27/8 (1977/8), 26–7Google Scholar, figs. 17–20. 2, pl. 9; Korfmann, M., ‘Demircihüyük: Eine vorgeschichtliche Festung an der phrygisch-bithynischen Grenze’, IstMitt 29 (1979), 9–47Google Scholar, figs. 5–6.

⁶⁰ Höckmann, O., ‘The Neolithic and Early Bronze Age idols of Anatolia’, in Thimme, J. (ed.), Art and Culture of the Cyclades (Karlsruhe, 1978), 176.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Begemann et al. (n. 49), 130.

⁶² Ibid., 134, fig. 4.

⁶³ Thermi, 74, fig. 29.

⁶⁴ Ibid., 90.

⁶⁵ Ibid., fig. 32. 521. For a more detailed discussion of the architectural sequence at Thermi, including the relationship between changes in material culture at the site and its external contacts, see ‘Lesbos and Altinova’, 169–83; ‘Communities in transition’, 73–86.

⁶⁶ Thermi, 165; Begemann et al. (n. 35), 219—21.

⁶⁷ Begemann et al. (n. 35), 219.

⁶⁸ Perpatontas, 19, where a report of the ephoreia is quoted which dated the material to ‘3000 BC’.

⁶⁹ See Spencer, N., ‘Early Lesbos between East and West: a ‘grey area’ of Aegean archaeology’, BSA 90 (1995), 277–9 and fig. 3.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 180 (p. 270; coarse grey/brown cooking pot), fig. 127.180 and pl. 38; no. 186 (p. 270; coarse, light grey cooking pot) fig. 127·186 and pl. 33 a; no. 206 (p. 271; grey brown, rough surface) and fig. 128. 206; no. 239 (p. 272; grey/black fine ware jar), and fig. 129. 239. Cf. Kum Tepe lai: ‘Kum Tepe’, nos. 134–5 (p. 322; both coarse, brick red), fig. 10.134–35 and pl. 72. Sperling (ibid., 322) compared these wares to those present at Hanay Tepe, Beşik-Sivritepe, the Upper Cave of Ayio Gala, Phylakopi, Olynthos, Saratse, and Grotta (Naxos); Poliochni Green: Poliochni I, pl. CXIX.f-h; Aphrodisias LC2: M. S. Joukowsky, Prehistoric Aphrodisias (Providence, R. I., 1986), I? fig. 399.18 (p. 556; dark grey ware).

⁷¹ Periods V–IV (where the idea of such a knob was common): Emporio/Ayio Gala, 422–3 and figs. 163–4, 166–8, 174 and 176–7. In Period II the ‘warts’ (as such knobs were termed by Hood) became longer and more like the Mytilene example, see ibid., nos. 1513—15 (p. 442; all grey-brown, burnished), and fig. 198. 1513—15; also nos. 1734–8 (p. 462; both burnished and unburnished examples), and fig. 207. 1734–8. Perhaps the closest parallel geographically is at Thermi, see Thermi pl. XXXV nos. 27, 167; cf. Podzuweit, C., Trojanische Gefäβformen der Frühbronzezeit in Anatolien, der Ägäis und angrenzenden Gebieten (Mainz, 1979), pl. 20, form IIb2.Google Scholar

⁷² Troy: Troy I, fig. 237.1–2, 4–7 (= Troy lb); Aphrodisias: Joukowsky, M., Prehistoric Aphrodisias: Excavations and Studies (Providence, R. I., 1986) IGoogle Scholar, fig. 327 (p. 394); the everted rim cookpots especially common in the BA₄ (=EBA 3b)-MBA levels are also close to the profile of the Mytilene vessel, ibid., Table 106; see also ibid., fig. 444. 26 (p. 621; light red-brown ware), also in BA ₄-MBA levels; Beycesultan: Beycesultan, level XVIII (=EB 1) fig. P.16. 4; level XV (=EB 2), fig. P. 33. 2 and level XII–XI (=EB 3a), fig. P. 48. 20–21; Kusura: Lamb, W., ‘Excavations at Kusura near Afyon Karahisar: II’, Archaeologia 87 (1937)Google Scholar, level B (probably = EB 2), 242 and pl. LXXXIII. 3 (grey, polished); Samih and Kerhane (Konya Plain): Mellaart, J., ‘Early cultures of the south Anatolian plateau, II: the late Chalcolithic and early Bronze Ages in the Konya Plain’, AnatSt 13 (1963)Google Scholar, fig. 11. 17, 20–2 (Samih) and 11. 18 (Kerhane) (probably EB 2, see pp. 218–20) washed/burnished red/buff ware (fig. 11. 22 esp. close); Çerkez Hüyük (southwest from Ankara): Orthmann, W., Die Keramik der Frühen Bronzezeit aus Inneranatolien (Berlin, 1963), 61–2Google Scholar, 170 and pl. 90 no. 31/18 (=EB 2–3); Üyücektepe: ‘Kaikosebene’, 89–91 and fig. 6. 13 (fabric not specified).

⁷³ Periods VIII—VII: Emporio/Ayio Gala, nos. 724–5 (p. 337; examples brown-orange, burnished and unburnished) and figs. 155. 724–5; Period VI: ibid., nos. 739, 741 (p. 338; purple-brown burnished), and fig. 156. 739, 741.

⁷⁴ Period VI–V: Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 1226 (p. 401; light brown, burnished) and fig. 181. 1226; Periods V–IV: ibid., nos. 1275–7 (p. 408; coarse, gritty grey-browns) and fig. 184. 1275–7; Period II: fig. 204 jar classes BI–III.

⁷⁵ Where sites and material referred to in this section are not illustrated, it is because we have been unable to obtain permission to reproduce the pictures here. However, in most cases readers will be able to consult the relevant publications in which illustrations are provided since the libraries of the British School and the other foreign Institutes/Schools in Athens do possess all the publications to which reference is made.

⁷⁶ Charitonidis 1960, pls. 206ς'–07.

⁷⁷ Ibid., 235; cf. Gazetteer, 10 (site 35).

⁷⁸ Charitonidis, ibid.

⁷⁹ Kontis, 210; Perpatontas, 89 and pl. 11.

⁸⁰ Transhumant pastoralism has long been seen as implicated in the process of cultural diffusion; for instance, Wace, A. and Thompson, M., The Nomads of the Balkans (London, 1914)Google Scholar; Childe, G., New Light on the Most Ancient East: The Oriental Prelude to European Prehistory (London, 1934), 284Google Scholar; Kosmopoulos, L.Walker, The Prehistoric Inhabitation of Corinth (Munich, 1948)Google Scholar; Jacobsen, T., ‘Transhumance as a mechanism of exchange in Neolithic Greece’, AIA Abstracts 3, 47 (1978)Google Scholar; Halstead, P., ‘Counting sheep in Neolithic and Bronze Age Greece’, in Hodder, I., Isaac, G., and Hammond, N. (eds), Pattern of the Past (Cambridge, 1981), 307–39Google Scholar; Jacobsen, T., ‘seasonal pastoralism in the Neolithic of southern Greece. A consideration of the ecology of Neolithic Urfirnis pottery’, in Rice, P. (ed.), Pots and Potters: Current Approaches in Ceramic Archaeology (Los Angeles, 1984), 27–43Google Scholar; id., ‘Another modest proposal: ethnoarchaeology in Greece’, in Wilkie, N. and Coulson, W. (eds), Contributions to Aegean Archaeology: Studies in Honour of W. McDonald (Minneapolis, 1985), 91–107Google Scholar; Halstead, P., ‘Traditional and ancient rural economy in Mediterranean Europe: plus ça change?’, JHS 107 (1987), 77–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Halstead, P. and O'shea, J. (eds), Bad γear Economics: Cultural Responses to Risk and Uncertainty (Cambridge, 1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Halstead, P. and Jones, G., ‘Agrarian ecology in the Greek islands: time stress, scale and risk’, JHS 109 (1989), 41–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Halstead, P., ‘Present to past in the Pindos: diversification and specialization in mountain economies’, RStLig 56. 1 (1990), 61–80.Google Scholar See also the extensive discussions in ‘Lesbos and Altinova’, 149–51, ‘Communities in Transition’, 64–72.

⁸¹ Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 639 (p. 327; coarse grey/brown burnished example) and fig. 153. 639.

⁸² Kastro Tigani, no. 463 (p. 195, termed ‘Kanne’; black polished example) and pl. 73.

⁸³ Tigani I–II: 'samos/Kalimnos/Chios’, Shape A. 4 (a ‘Jug’, p. 181) and fig. 4. F38–40 (p. 177, said on p. 174 to be from periods I–II), coarse ware unslipped and unburnished; Tigani IVB: Kostro Tigani, no. 402 (p. 188; a black-polished piece) and pls 39. 6, 69. 402; no. 407 (pp. 188–9; smoothed brown/red ware) and pls 40. 1, 69. 407, although this sherd exhibits white decoration; no. 463 (p. 195; black-polished) and pl. 73. 463 (probably from Phase IVB, see p. 68); Tigani IV (Heidenreich): ibid., pl. 45. 6 (no description given); ibid., no. 37. 1 (p. 208; black/grey smoothed coarse ware fabric) and pl. 79. 37. 1, exact level unclear (Felsch noted [ibid., p. 208] that the fabric of the last sherd was similar to the coarse wares of Phase III, but suggested that the vessel was probably not earlier than Phase IV).

⁸⁴ ‘samos/Kalimnos/Chios’, fig. 12. 16 (where it is called a ‘narrow-necked jar’) (pp. 196, 212; a coarse ware red/brown slipped and burnished example).

⁸⁵ See n. 81.

⁸⁶ As cited in 'samos/Kalimnos/Chios’, 181. Thermi, fig. 26 Jug forms 8–9 (Class A), e.g. in red coarse ware from Towns I—II, no. 101 (p. 104) and pl. XXXV 101. This form may be compared with the very common shape at Demircihüyük near Eskişehir (LCH Ware ‘F’ and EBA Ware ‘FI’), which, however, is over 300 km distant; see Demircihüyük 111, 1, 77–8, pl. 26. 1 (cat. entry p. 98) and 26. 3 (cat. entry p. 98). Both examples are of fine ware, burnished and grey/beige in colour. Seeher (ibid., 78) noted that the Chalcolithic Wares F and G at Demircihüyük found parallels not only in mid-Ghalcolithic horizons of Anatolia but also in the LCH levels at Beycesultan, Kum Tepe IA-B, and Emporio X–VI. An example in red/brown coarse ware (Phase ‘FI’, Ware 2c) also came from the EBA levels at Demircihüyük, Seeher (ibid.) 167 and pl. 47. 1 (cat. entry p. 184).

⁸⁷ For the similar jugs from Tigani IVB, see n. 83.

⁸⁸ ‘Kaikosebene’, fig. 5.30 (p. 87; from Yeni Yeldeğirmentepe). The fabric of this particular sherd is not given, but Driehaus noted (ibid., 85) that most of the material from the site was not black ware but rather a light-dark grey polished surface with other grey/brown-dark brown ware also being present (a lack of lustrous red ware was also noted).

⁸⁹ Beycesultan, fig. P 8. 25 (p. 89; jet black burnished example from level XXIX = LCH 2) and fig. P. 13. 2 (p. 103; strawfaced brown ware from level XXIV = LCH 4).

⁹⁰ Thermi, figs. 26, 28–9; see also the jugs in the earliest EBA levels at Demircihüyük which all exhibit spouts; Demircihüyük III, 1, 127 (forms 1–2) and pls. 30. 9–14, 32. 10–12 and 37–40.

⁹¹ ‘Kum Tepe’, pl. 78.

⁹² See Emporio/Ayio Gala, figs. 150–1 where the Emporio VII–VI jars have already begun to exhibit lips; the lips of the examples from Agios Bartholomaios are more like those from phase X at Emporio: ibid., no. 161 (p. 260; grey-brown burnished), fig. 124 and pl. 31.

⁹³ Beycesultan, figs. P. 14–19 (EB 1).

⁹⁴ This problem is discussed by Seeher, , Demircihüyük III, 1, 60–3Google Scholar, 77–8; Seeher, ‘Prähistorische Funde’ (n. 2) 536–40, 552–3; ‘Lesbos and Altinova’, 122–44. A similar example appears in the EB 2 shapes of the east Aegean discussed by Cosmopoulos (n. 34) fig. 4. 4 (p. 50) Group B shape B 1.

⁹⁵ Kastro Tigani, nos. 408–9 (p. 189; smoothed red/brown outer surface (408), grey/brown smoothed surface (409)) and pl. 70. 408–9.

⁹⁶ See the important discussion by Seeher in Demircihüyük III, 1, 58–63.

⁹⁷ Kastro Tigani, no. 495 (p. 198; black/grey fabric, whitish/grey coating with traces of polish), pls 43. 1, 74; ibid., no. 441 (p. 192; brown/red polished surface) and pl. 71.

⁹⁸ Beycesultan, fig. P. 5. 1 (p. 83; a black-burnished example from level XXXIV = LCH 1); for the distribution of similar bowls see Melas, M., ‘The Dodecanese and west Anatolia in prehistory’, AnatSt 38 (1988) fig. 2Google Scholar; ‘Lesbos and Altinova’, part 2. 6 b.

⁹⁹ Thermi, fig. 28, bowls 5, 10. Cf. ‘Kum Tepe’, 316 and fig. 8. 103–4; Seeher, ‘Vorläufiger Bericht’, (n. 2) fig. 17 top 3 rows (from Beşik-Sivritepe); id., ‘Prähistorische Funde’, (n. 2), 538–40 (from Gülpinar); Demircihüyük III, 1, 59.

¹⁰⁰ Troy I, 70 and figs. 229 and 233 b (bottom two pots) (forms C 17–18).

¹⁰¹ Thermi, fig. 29 a (lower row no. 1).

¹⁰² Emporio/Ayio Gala, nos. 9–12 (pp. 16–17; coarse and fine wares, all burnished) and fig. 5. 9–12.

¹⁰³ Emporio/Ayio Gala, 190; see also ibid., fig. 101 (types 30, 34) and no. 657 (p. 332; brown burnished), fig. 150. 657 and pl. 47.

¹⁰⁴ Emporio/Ayio Gala, 190.

¹⁰⁵ See Melas (n. 98), fig. 1 for the distribution.

¹⁰⁶ Axiotis, M., ‘η προϊοτορία στη Λέσβο,’ Αρχαιολογία 59 (1996), 74.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ Ibid., fig. 3 (p. 74) (the two sherds left and second left in the top row).

¹⁰⁸ Ibid.; cf. Gazetteer, 4–5 (site 2).

¹⁰⁹ See the collected bibliography for this site in Gazetteer, 49 (site 238); the site is also mentioned in Axiotis (n. 106), 74.

¹¹⁰ Axiotis, M., Μία νέα προϊστοριϰή θέση στη Λέσβο’, Αρχαιολογία 40 (1991), 79–80.Google Scholar

¹¹¹ Thermi Class A: Thermi, fig. 26 Jugs 1–9. Note the subsequent development of jugs in Classes B and C, ibid. figs. 28–9.

¹¹² See Gazetteer, 18 (site 84) for full details of the location. For reports on the site see Charitonidis, S. in Καθημερινή, 18 Dec. 1960Google Scholar; Charitonidis 1960, 237 and pl. 209 γ; Hood, S., ‘Archaeology in Greece, 1960–61’, AR 7 (1961), 23Google Scholar; Kontis, 359; Perpatontas, 580.

¹¹³ Charitonidis 1960, 237.

¹¹⁴ Ibid.

¹¹⁵ Thermi, fig. 26 bowl forms 1–4. Other parallels may be found at Emporio V–IV: Emporio/Ayio Gala, nos. 985, 992 (p. 372; both light brown-red, fine burnished), and fig. 167. 985, 992; Troy: Troy I, figs. 258–9 (shapes A 12–A 13, A 15 at Troy I (most common in Troy Ia-f)). Sherd I of our catalogue is particularly close to the bowl rim from Troy Ie: ibid., fig. 259 (top row, 7th from right); and Kum Tepe: bowl rims from Kum Tepe Ic1 include a particularly similar example to I, see ‘Kum Tepe’, no. 716 (p. 348) and fig. 23. 716.

¹¹⁶ Thermi: Thermi, fig. 28 Class B bowl forms 1–2, examples from Town III, no. 231 (p. 112; polished brown ware) and pl. XIII. 231; no. 242–3 (p. 113; both polished red-black ware); from Town IV, no. 321 (p. 118; brown ware) and pl. X. 321; Troy: Troy I, 165 and fig. 259 (two rims furthest right, from Phase Ih).

¹¹⁷ Similar shapes are apparent at the Upper Cave of Ayio Gala: Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 274 (p. 58; gritty light-brown, traces of burnish) and fig. 41.274 (from the Upper Levels of the cave). Concerning the debate over the precise correlation of the Agio Gala phases with those of Emporio see Davis (n. 38), 726 and n. 117. The upper levels of the Upper Cave from which the sherd cited here comes were equated by Hood with Emporio VII–VI, see Emporio/Ayio Gala, 79–81. Other examples are found in Emporio V–II; Period V: Emporio/Ayio Gala, nos. 1176–7 (p. 395; red-light/dusky brown, coarse) and pls. 70–1; Period IV: ibid., nos. 1178–82 (p. 395; light/dusky brown-red, coarse), fig. 78. 1178–82 and pl. 71; ibid., no. 2329 (p. 529; light/dusky brown-red, coarse) and pl. 99; Period II: ibid., nos. 1578–86 (pp. 448–9; dusky brown-red, burnished), fig. 202 and pl. 84 (no. 1581 esp. similar); ibid., nos. 2078–9 (p. 501; red-light/dark brown, fabric not specified) and pl. 84; Poliochni Black: Poliochni I, 70 and pl. V. f (polished black ware); Poliochni Blue Phase: ibid., 172, 578 and pl. LXIX. c–d (grey fabric); Troy Ic-f: Troy I, 108, 121 and 162, figs. 242. 13–23 (esp. no. 17, coarse ware), 245. 34–7; ibid., 133 and n. 3, and fig. 248. 15 (Troy Id-f); ibid., 116 and figs. 233. 37. 1138 (coarse red/buff); Kum Tepe Ia2: ‘Kum Tepe’, 325, fig. 9. 218–20 (tan-light grey fine ware) and pl. 73. Similar forms are apparent in the Class A Tripod Cooking cups forms 1–2, although in Lamb's catalogue none of these cups were in black ware similar to the Chalakies example, see Thermi, fig. 26 Tripod Cooking Cups 1–2, Cat. nos. 26—8 (p. 100), 144–5 (p. 107), 167 (p. 108), 209–11 (p. III) and 258–9 (p. 114).

¹¹⁸ Thermi, tripod cooking cup 2 (fig. 26). Examples come from Town III, ibid., no. 210 (p. III; coarse brownish ware, slightly polished), pls IX. 210 and XXXV 210; no. 211 (p. 119; red ware) and pl. XXXV. 211. Cf. also Troy Ic: Troy I, (shape C 17) 70, 8o, 107 and figs. 131 a, 223 b, (shape D 24) 75–6, 107 and figs. 132, 233. 37. 1138, 242. 2, 4–6, 11. Shape D 24 was noted to be ‘very common’ among the coarse wares of phase Ic (ibid., 107); surface finds from three sites in the Bakir Çay valley, Ayazköy: ‘Kaikosebene’, 83 and fig. 3. 18 (grey/brown ware); Yeni Yeldeğirmentepe: ibid., 85 and fig. 5. 1, 6, 8, 16, 23 (grey/brown ware); üyücektepe: ibid., 91 and fig. 6. 17 (coarse ware cooking pot fragment). Driehaus noted (ibid., 96) that of all the sites in the plain only Ayazköy and Yeni Yeldeğirmentepe yielded a significant amount of black burnished wares. The tripod cooking pot at Emporio periods V–I with ribs on the rim is a good example of this form also, Emporio/Ayio Gala, fig. 99 form 27 (esp. common in levels V–I, ibid., 189). Examples come from Period IV: ibid., no. 1126 (p. 384; coarse cooking pot ware, dusky brown, hint of burnishing) and fig. 172. 1126; no. 1127 (p. 384; light brown, well burnished outside, possibly from cooking pot) and fig. 172. 1127; no. 1178 (p. 395; light brown-dusky red) fig. 178. 1178 and pl. 71; no. 1179 (p. 395; light brown/red, burnished, but worn) fig. 178. 1179 and pl. 71; ibid., no. 2329 (p. 529; light/dark brown-reddish) and pl. 99. 2329.

¹¹⁹ Emporio/Ayio Gala, 276 and fig. 132. 291 (outcurved rim of bowl in red fabric, period VIII). In his summary of fabrics for periods VII–VI at the site, Hood noted (ibid., 301) that lighter fabrics amongst the bowls were especially abundant, with reds and light-browns being more common in VII than VI (by which time the majority of sherds were grey-brown/black, as they had also been in phases X–IX).

¹²⁰ Examples appear in levels X–VIII at Emporio Period X: Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 327 (p. 283; grey-brown, worn burnish with lug on rim) and fig. 135.327 and pl. 37; Period VIII: no. 361 (p. 288; red-dark brown wash, burnished with lug on rim); Tigani I: Kastro Tigani, pl. 81. UP 11–12 (both examples with lugs on the rim). These two sherds were compared in form by Felsch with two others from Tigani I which again both have their lugs on the rim: ibid., no. 69 (p. 146; light brown, unpolished) and pl. 14.2; no. 75 (p. 147; pale yellow, polished) and pls 14. 6, 54·75; Beşik-Sivritepe: Seeher, ‘Vorläufiger Bericht’, (n. 2), fig. 17. LL83. 34/14; Nisyros: Melas, M., ‘Exploration in the Dodecanese: new prehistoric and Mycenaean finds’, BSA 83 (1988), 292 and fig. 8·19 (where the sherd is dated to the ‘LCH’ and parallels are drawn with Emporio X–VIII and Poliochni Blue material).Google Scholar

¹²¹ Ayio Gala, Upper levels of Upper Cave: Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 265 (p. 58; dark brown-grey, finely burnished inside and out) and fig. 40.265. Hood (ibid., 79–80) equated these levels with Emporio VII–VI (and possibly continuing into levels V–IV), but see the discussion of Hood's correlation cited in n. 117; Emporio VII: Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 483 (p. 312; fine black ware, burnished) and fig. 144. 483; no. 691 (p. 336; light brown-red, poor burnish) and fig. 155. 691; no. 692 (p. 336; black ware, superficial burnish) fig. 155. 692 and pl. 45; no. 693 (p. 336; grey-brown ware, burnished), fig. 155.693 and pl. 45; Emporio VI: ibid., no. 486 (p. 313; red-brown wash, burnished); Emporio VI/V: ibid., no. 459 (p. 311; grey-brown, fine burnish) and fig. 143. 459; Emporio V: ibid., no. 916 (p. 364; grey, worn burnish) and fig. 164. 916.

¹²² Charitonidis 1960, 237 (Museum No. 1361, ‘Grey ware amphora from Chalakies, Polychnitos’).

¹²³ An especially close example, similar in both shape and fabric is Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 261 (p. 275; silvery grey ware of very fine hard fabric, shades dark grey-light brown, burnished so that almost metallic in appearance) and pl. 32. 261 (from Period VIII). Hood restored the handle tops on this pot as rounded, but they could equally have been more pointed as on the Chalakies example. For Hood's comment that such jars were especially common in Period VIII, ibid., 194. Other related wares are also known from Tigani III and Kum Tepe IB. Tigani III: Kastro Tigani, no. 215 (p. 164; red/orange-yellow polished surface) and pls 23. 3, 59. 215; ibid., no. 342 (p. 182; brown-grey/brown polished surface) and pl. 67. 342; Kum Tepe IB 4: (where only the necks are preserved), ‘Kum Tepe’, nos. 626–7 (esp. 627) (P. 339) and fig. 19, 626–7. No fabric is given for these two sherds, but it is noted (ibid., 338) that many of the ceramics from this level were grey wares.

¹²⁴ Emporio/Ayio Gala, fig. 101. Similar jars to this later Type 43 are known in fine wares from early-mid Troy I: Troy I 69 and fig. 223b (shape C4), and Kum Tepe IC 2: ‘Kum Tepe’, no. 822 (pp. 352–3; red-brown slipped and burnished) and pl. 79. 822.

¹²⁵ Thermi, fig. 29 a.

¹²⁶ For this derivation of the toponym and the site's topographical setting, see Paraskevaidis, M., ‘ἘπίμΕτρον: βιβλογραφιϰά ρχαιογνωσίας τῆς περιοχῆς Ἀγίας Παπαϰενῆς λeacgr;σβου’ in Makistos, K., Ἡ Σλλάδα τῆζ Ὰγίαζ Παρασϰευῆζ Λέσβου (Athens, 1970) 259Google Scholar (a copy of which can be found in the library of the British School at Athens); Kontis, 359.

¹²⁷ Paraskevaidis, M., ‘Τὰ νέα προβλήματα τῆζ ἕρευναζ τῶν προϊστοπιϰῶν οἰϰισμῶν τῆζ Λέσβου’, Λεσβιαϰά 6 (1973), 132–3Google Scholar (where J. Coleman is said to have considered the site to be more important than Thermi, Chalakies, or Perama); Kontis, 360, where the site is defined as ‘extremely important’.

¹²⁸ Kontis, 359.

¹²⁹ Some of the house remains were dated by Coleman to the ‘Chalcolithic’ period. See M. Paraskevaidis, ‘Μια Λέα ἀνίχνευσιζ τῶν θέσεων προϊοτοριϰῶν οἰϰισμῶν τῆζ λέσβου’, Δημόϰριτοζ 22 June 1973, where the author states that Professor J. Coleman visited the site with him on Friday 8 June 1973 and swam offshore, examining the submerged remains. Other submerged harbour works have been reported just offshore from the site by a number of authors: see Gazetteer, 20 (site 91).

¹³⁰ By S. Charitonidis in Καθημερινὴ (n. 112); cf. Hood (n. 112) 22–3.

¹³¹ In 1966 M. Paraskevaidis presented sherds from Kourtir to Petrakos and Charitonidis, and in 1969 to Tsirivakos; Paraskevaidis (n. 126) 262.

¹³² Paraskevaidis (n. 127) 127–8.

¹³³ Chatzi 1971, 457 and pl. 461 γ; Paraskevaidis (n. 127) 128–9.

¹³⁴ Report dated 14 Sept. 1970. The whole report is quoted in Paraskevaidis, loc. cit..

¹³⁵ Paraskevaidis (n. 127) 131. The excavation took place from 26 July to 5 Aug. 1972. Paraskevaidis reports (ibid.) that two of the trenches were in the plot of Yiannoglou near the shore, and a third was opened actually in the exposed scarp on the north side of the site. This brief excavation (without any detailed comment) is also referred to in Kontis, 360.

¹³⁶ Paraskevaidis, loc. cit., 131. It is unclear in the summary description provided from exactly which stratum of the site the skeleton came, but its presence within the area of settlement is noteworthy.

¹³⁷ The authors are grateful to Mrs. A. Archontidou-Argyri for this information. Paraskevaidis, loc. cit., reported that so much pottery was taken back from the site to Mytilene museum that the assistants on the excavation thought a number of the museum's rooms could be filled simply with material from Kourtir.

¹³⁸ Kum Tepe IA 1: ‘Kum Tepe’, 316 and n. 7, pl. 72. 113 a–b is perhaps the most similar; Agio Gala Upper Cave, Upper Levels, without context: Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 149 (p. 43; brown/black inside, fine burnished, dark brown outside with pattern burnish), fig. 25. 149 and pl. 10c. Hood (ibid., 59) suggested that this piece should be assigned to the period of Emporio VIII, but see n. 117 above concerning recent reassessments of Hood's correlations. Tigani II: Kostro Tigani, no. 144 (pp. 156–7; brown surface and faint pattern burnish) and pls 19. 6 and 57. 144; Gülpinar: Seeher, ‘Prähistorische Funde’ (n. 2), 544 and fig. 6. 1.

¹³⁹ J. Mellaart (pers. comm. 1994) has suggested that it is pre-Bronze Age.

¹⁴⁰ As confirmed by the Mycenaean octopus stirrup jar specialist, Michimasa Doi (pers. comm. 1995).

¹⁴¹ Paraskevaidis (n. 126).

¹⁴² Paraskevaidis (n. 126), unnumbered photographs pp. 263–64; Perpatontas, pl. 126. Concerning the lack of illustrations in this section, see n. 75.

¹⁴³ Paraskevaidis (n. 126), unnumbered photograph on p. 264.

¹⁴⁴ Poliochni I 71, 543 and pls 6 f, 8 a–c (polished fine ware).

¹⁴⁵ Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 970 (p. 369; grey-brown burnished) and fig. 166. 970; all sherds on fig. 167 (pp. 371–3), fig. 173 (pp. 385–6; black-light reddish, all burnished); ibid., nos. 2327–8 (p. 529; grey-brown/black burnished), fig. 231. 2327–8 and pl. 99.

¹⁴⁶ Troy (Troy IV c-e = EB 3): Troy II (shape A 33) 125, 191, 212 and figs. 180. 25 (Phase IV c), 184.9 (Phase IV e), both red-coated ware; Beycesultan (EB 2–3 a): Beycesultan, figs. P. 24. 11 (p. 147; red coarse ware, burnished), P. 50.44 (p. 209; gold wash on buff ware); Karataş (EB 2): Mellink, M. J., ‘Excavations at Karataş-Semayük in Lycia, 1965’, AJA 70 (1966), 249 and pl. 60 fig. 23 (black burnished)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Inegöl I (Troy III–V): ‘Iznik’, fig. 10. 13 (p. 61; red-brown, burnished); Inegöl II (probably Troy II): ibid., fig. 10.21 (p. 61; red-brown burnished); Pazaryeri I (probably Troy II): ibid., fig. 17.22 (p. 59; black burnished); Üyücek: (probably Troy II): ibid., fig. 19. 20 (p. 59; black burnished), also fig. 19. 46 (p. 66; unclassified).

¹⁴⁷ An example with similar plastic moulding comes from Kum Tepe II (correlated with Troy V): ‘Kum Tepe’, no. 902 (p. 363; red-coated ware), fig. 24. 902 and pl. 81.

¹⁴⁸ Perpatontas, pl. 126.

¹⁴⁹ Museum No. 7202.

¹⁵⁰ Thermi, fig. 26 jug form 5, no. 18 (p. 99; coarse black ware from Town I) and pl. XXXV. 18; Thermi Class B: ibid., fig. 28 jug form 7, no. 347 (p. 119; greyish brown ware, traces of polish, from Town IV) and pl. XXXVI. 347; Thermi Class C: ibid., fig. 29 jug form 2, no. 415 (p. 124; coarse brown ware, from Town IV) and pl. XXXVII. 415.

¹⁵¹ ‘period II and later’: Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 2305 (p. 524; brown-black, coarse burnish), fig. 230.2305 and pl. 97. 2305; cf. the mid-late EBA 1 levels at Demircihüyük. The miniature jugs represented in phases HI–K2: Demircihüyük III, 2, fig. 94 (p. 77), phases which are dated to mid/late EBA 1 by Efe, ibid., fig. 98 (p. 117).

¹⁵² Paraskevaidis (n. 126) unnumbered photograph p. 263. The fabric of which is unclear from the only published photograph.

¹⁵³ Emporio I: Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 2503 (p. 552; grey-brown, partly burnished) fig. 245. 2503 and pl. 95; Troy IIf: Troy I (shape A 27) no. 36. 855 (p. 306; a red slipped and polished example), figs 370 a, 379. 36. 855; Beycesultan VI a: Beycesultan, fig. P. 66. 20 (p. 241; pale buff coarse ware); and Hashüyük (35 km from Kerşehir): L. Delaporte, ‘Grabung am Hashüyük’, AA (1932), fig. 2 p. 231 (plain ware). The finds from Hashüyük are said to be of ‘Copper Age’ date, Céramiques monochromes, vol. 2, table 33 (type A2. 124), but there seems little in Delaporte's report (pp. 230–3) to verify this chronological conclusion. All these examples of internal handles are on bowls which exhibit a much less pronounced incurved rim than is apparent on the bowl from Kourtir. The latter profile is most closely paralleled at Aharköy (north from Demircihüyük), see Demircihüyük III, 2, 163 and pl. 63. 4, dated to EBA 2b/3a (although in this case both ends of the handle are attached to the rim rather than one being placed inside the bowl). The shape has also now been reported in an EBA context at the site of Liman Tepe near İzmir by Prof. Dr Erkanal at the Ankara Symposium in May 1997.

¹⁵⁴ Antike Baureste, 35, 81.

¹⁵⁵ Paraskevaidis, M., ‘Ὁ προϊστοριϰὸζ οίϰισμὸζ τοῦ λόφου Προφήτη ᾘλίαζ Παρασϰευῆζ Λέσβου’, Λεσβιαϰά 7 (1978), 161—81Google Scholar (also reported by the scholar in an article with exactly the same title in Τò Βῆμα, 16 Feb. 1979).

¹⁵⁶ Perpatontas, 340–1.

¹⁵⁷ Thermi Class A: Thermi, fig. 26 bowl forms 1–2 and pl. XXXV 2; cf. Kum Tepe IB 4-C 1: ‘Kum Tepe’, figs. 19–20, 22; Troy I: Troy I, figs. 258–60 (esp. phases Ia–d on fig. 258). For the large number of other sites where monochrome incurved rim bowls occur see Céramiques monochromes, ii, tables 37–45 and pls 63–69 (type A3. 1131).

¹⁵⁸ Paraskevaidis (n. 155).

¹³⁹ Paraskevaidis (n. 155), pls. β. 2, γ. 11, 14.

¹⁶⁰ Thermi: Thermi, fig. 26 bowl forms 1–2; see also Troy: Troy I (shapes A 12–13, present in all phases of the site) 60–1 and figs. 224. 35. 536 (p. 102; fine grey, polished), 225. 33. 169 (p. 113; fine grey, polished). This shape is also illustrated among the sketches of sherds from Profitis Ilias illustrated by Paraskevaidis (n. 155), pl. γ. 8–9.

¹⁶¹ Thermi, 97–112 passim, bowl forms A 1–2 (Cat. no. 187, p. 110 and pl. XXXV is noted as a ‘rare’ coarse red fabric in the shape).

¹⁶² Schaus, G. P., ‘An archaeological field survey at Eresos, Lesbos’, EMC/CV 40 (N.S. 15) (1996), 62–3 and pl. 8 (sherds 43–6 at the ‘Hole Hill’ site).Google Scholar

¹⁶³ Céramiques monochromes, ii, pls 78. 2924 (from Thermi I), 80. 1312, 1329, 1395 (from Troy Ib), 2922 (from Thermi I); Kum Tepe IB 4: ‘Kum Tepe’, no. 617 (p. 339; fine ware, burnished) and fig. 19. 617; Kum Tepe IC 1: ibid., no. 711 (p. 348; fine ware, burnished) and fig. 22. 711.

¹⁶⁴ Thermi, figs. 26 (bowl form 4), 28 (bowl form 2).

¹⁶⁵ Paraskevaidis (n. 155) pl. γ. 17.

¹⁶⁶ Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 1142 (p. 386; black burnished, suggested to be an import because of the fabric) and fig. 172. 1142.

¹⁶⁷ Troy I 61, 131 and fig. 262. 2–4 (for the three closest parallels to the Profitis Ilias example). At Troy this shape is exclusively from the early phases and also only occurs in fine wares (ibid., 61).

¹⁶⁸ ‘Kaikosebene’, 87 and fig. 4·4, 8 (p. 84). This site is not to be confused with that possessing the same name in the Madra Çay delta referred to on p. 79 above, FIG. 3 and in n. 14.

¹⁶⁹ Thermi, fig. 26.

¹⁷⁰ Chatzi 1972, pl. 546 α, γ.

¹⁷¹ Perpatontas, pl. 73·3, 5.

¹⁷² Kum Tepe IB 3: ‘Kum Tepe’, no. 558 (p. 337; semicoarse smoothed ware, mottled light brown-grey), fig. 18μ558 and pl. 76; Kum Tepe IB 4: ibid., 344 in same fabric (no specific sherds cited); Kum Tepe IC 1: ibid., 349 (single example, without description, cited as an ‘older form’).

¹⁷³ Thermi, fig. 29 tripod cooking pots 1–2. Examples include no. 440 (p. 125; coarse red-brown ware) and pl. IX. 440 (from Town IV).

¹⁷⁴ Ibid., figs. 26, 28–9 a.

¹⁷⁵ Ibid., figs. 26, 28–9 and pl. XLIII (the last shows miniature vases, again from all phases).

¹⁷⁶ Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 2537 (p. 558; sandy orange clay, red wash), fig. 248.2537 and pl. 107.

¹⁷⁷ Cosmopoulos (n. 34) 52, fig. 4.4 Group B. shape A 45. Cosmopoulos suggested also (ibid., n. 74 p. 55) that the absence of this form at Thermi V meant that this latest EBA phase had ended before Troy IId. For the recently published report on Palamari on Skyros which illustrated a similar depas amphikypellon, proposing that Skyros was part of the north-east Aegean cultural sphere, see Kounenakis, P., ‘Αϰμαίοζ προϊστοριϰόζ οιϰισμότζ στη Σϰύρο’, καθημερϊνή, 28 May 1995, 37.Google Scholar

¹⁷⁸ Paraskevaidis (n. 155)5 pl. γ.

¹⁷⁹ Ibid., pl. g. 16.

¹⁸⁰ Kastro Tigani, no. 464 (p. 195; red-brown), no.465 (p. 195; light grey, polished) and pls 42. 3 and 73. 464–5.

¹⁸¹ Paraskevaidis (n. 155) pls α. 3–4, β. 2 and γ. 1.

¹⁸² Thermi: Thermi, pl. XXXV no. 73; Eresos: sherds 18–23 at the Profitis Ilias site in the Eresos valley, Schaus (n. 162), 59–60.

¹⁸³ Emporio X–VIII: Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 174 (p. 267; grey-brown, smoothed rather than burnished) and fig. 125. 174.

¹⁸⁴ For the large number of examples at Anatolian sites see Céramiques monochromes, ii, tables 214–16 and pls 321–3.

¹⁸⁵ Thermi, 79–82 and pl. XVI. 1 (from Towns I–V).

¹⁸⁶ Emporiol/Ayio Gala, 227–38 where Hood noted that incised wares were apparent from the earliest levels at the site (X), but that rarely were the incisions filled with white paint before phases V–IV, at which point such filling became ‘usual’ (ibid., 233). The example of whitefilled incised decoration illustrated here from Profitis Ilias is most similar to the design at Emporio shown in ibid., fig. 115·2, and also sherd no. 1301 (p. 413; dark purple-brown, burnished), fig. 188. 1301 and pl. 75 (from Period IV). See also Céramiques monochromes, ii, pls 171–6 for a list of the sites where such wares appear: Thermi I–V, Troy I–IIc, Yortan, Tigani, Heraion I, Beycesultan VI a–XVI (= Troy II a–V), Tarsus BA I–IIC (an especially large number of examples) and a number of other smaller Anatolian sites.

¹⁸⁷ Thermi, fig. 26 bowl form 5 b–6 (although with only one hole in handle), see also the miniature vase form 7 on pl. XLI.

¹⁸⁸ J. Mellaart (pers. comm. 1994).

¹⁸⁹ Emporio/Ayio Gala, 14; 'samos/Kalimnos/Chios’, 194.

¹⁹⁰ Schaus, G. P. and Spencer, N., ‘Notes on the topography of Eresos’, AJA 98 (1994), 415–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar, nn. 23–8 and fig. 2; Gazetteer, 28–9 (site 131).

¹⁹¹ Anatolia/Aegean, fig. 29. b. 1, n. 439.

¹⁹² The remains at the valley mouth are scattered over an area c. 1 km × 0.5 km, and apart from the Bronze Age remains comprise Archaic, Classical and Hellenistic defences and ancient cisterns, see n. 190.

¹⁹³ Thermi, figs. 26, 28 (esp. fig. 26 bowl form 2, Class A).

¹⁹⁴ Kum Tepe IB 2: ‘Kum Tepe’, no. 402 (p. 330; grey, streaks of light brown); Kum Tepe IB 3: ibid., no. 513 (p. 332; fine ware bowl, no colour specified), fig. 14. 513 and pl. 75; no. 531 (p. 333; coarse ware bowl, no colour specified) and pl. 75.

¹⁹⁵ The thick lug handles from Tigani IV are similar, both in fabric and form: see Kastro Tigani, no 434 (p. 191; brown ware, polished), pls. 41. 4 and 74. 434, no. 438 (p. 192; light red-brown, mottled black, polished), pls. 41. 4 and 71. 438. Cf. Meriç, ‘1987 yüzey araştirmasi’ (n. 2), resim 5.

¹⁹⁶ The position of the lug on the pot is similar to Poliochni I 236, 554 and pls XIV–XVI (esp. XIV b).

¹⁹⁷ Troy I, figs. 258–9 (Phases I a-g have such examples).

¹⁹⁸ Kum Tepe IB 4: ‘Kum Tepe’, no. 617 (p. 339; fine burnished ware, no colour specified) and fig. 19. 617; Kum Tepe IC 2: ibid., no. 711 (p. 348; fine burnished ware, no colour specified) and fig. 22. 711.

¹⁹⁹ Gümüşova-deresi: ‘Kaikosebene’, fig. 1. 5, 9 (no. 9 specified as black-burnished); Başantepe (Dikili): ibid., fig. 2. 12, 19; Ayazköy: ibid., fig. 3. 1, 5; Yeni Yeldeğirmentepe: ibid., fig. 4. 3, 5, 13; Üyücektepe: ibid., fig. 6. 5 (where in all cases the lugs are either above or below the incurve of the bowl, but do not straddle it as happens at Makara). Fabrics not stated apart from the one given above.

²⁰⁰ ‘LCH Pottery’, fig. 5. 23 (p. 102; grey-black burnished). Similar narrow lugs which almost have the appearance of a handle proper can be found at Tigani IV, see n. 195.

²⁰¹ See nn. 117–18.

²⁰² Charitonidis 1961–62, 265; Perpatontas, 530–1 and pls. 62, 62 α.

²⁰³ For the tombS at Makara see Schaus and Spencer (n. 190) 415 and n. 23; for Psara see Davis (n. 38) 727 and n. 120.

²⁰⁴ Ch. Doumas, Early Bronze Age Burial Habits in the Cyclades (SIMA 48; Göteborg, 1977), 37–47 and figs. 29–31. Although far to the south on the Carian coast, it is useful to bear in mind the many cist burials of Iasos which also date to this early period, Pecorella, P., La Cultura Preistorica di lasos a Caria (Rome, 1984) 13–42Google Scholar, figs. 9–112, pls V-XXX.

²⁰⁵ The similar tombs on Psara (and more cists at Emporio) had large numbers of Mycenaean sherds associated with them, see Davis (n. 38) 725 n. 110, 727.

²⁰⁶ Charitonidis 1965, 490 states that Paraskevaidis found 1–2 diagnostic EBA pieces on the hill of Arisbe.

²⁰⁷ Bayne, N. P., ‘The Grey Wares of North-West Anatolia in the Middle and Late Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age and their Relation to the Early Greek Settlements’ (Diss. Oxford, 1963), 118, 246Google Scholar; Chatzi 1972, 593–5 and pls. 543–5, 546 α, γ, 547 α. See also Kontis, 267, Perpatontas, 325–8 and pl. 68.

²⁰⁸ Chatzi's photographs (1972, pl. 546 α, γ) are dark and it is difficult to be clear concerning the fabric of the sherds. In addition to the cooking pot feet, the sherd in pl. 546 α (third from the left in the top row) may be a knob rather than a pot foot.

²⁰⁹ Anatolia/Aegean, fig. 29 b. 1, n. 440 (by the name of Palaiokastro).

²¹⁰ Thermi, fig. 28 bowl forms 2, 4 (e.g. no. 231 (p. 112; polished brown ware) and pl. XIII. 231 from Town III).

²¹¹ Thermi, miniature vase pl. XLI form 7 (exclusively found in Town I) and form 10 (exclusively found in Town III).

²¹² Emporio/Ayio Gala, no. 1326 (p. 418; burnished brown ware) and fig. 192. 1326.

²¹³ Troy I 132 (fine polished ware, Phase I c, fig. 253·1 9), figs. 253. 18–19 (single holes), 254 (Phase lb, Id), 264. 27 (one hole) 264. 28 (with two holes), 265. 13 (one hole). See also Troy I figs. 224. 33. 167 and 266. 3–6, (pp. 58, 114 brown/black polished ware).

²¹⁴ Beycesultan, fig. P. 16. 14 (p. 123; coarse grey ware cook pot); cf. a (probably EB 1–2) piece from Kerhane (in the Konya Plain); Mellaart (n. 72), 214 and fig. 9. 7 (p. 217; red burnished and slipped).

²¹⁵ The comment of Bayne (an experienced surface surveyor of the island's sites) should not be overlooked. On his visit to Arisbe he commented that the largest proportion of diagnostic sherds apparent were EBA, Hellenistic and Roman; Bayne (n. 207), 246.

²¹⁶ Chatzi, D., ‘Λέσβοζ’, Δομή 9 (1971), 324–9Google Scholar; Chatzi 1972, 599; cf. Paraskevaidis (n. 127) 133.

²¹⁷ Chatzi 1972, ibid.

²¹⁸ An informative side-on view of the promontory was published byj. D. Quinn, ‘Cape Phokas, Lesbos – site of an archaic sanctuary for Zeus, Hera and Dionysus?’, AJA 65 (1961), pls 128–9.

²¹⁹ Perpatontas, 604 and pl. 136; Gazetteer, 15 (site 64).

²²⁰ A sketch of the jug and cutaway spout comparable to examples from Thermi and Yortan (Thermi, fig. 26. 3–4 and pl. XII: 116; γortan, figs. 45–64) was shown to us by M. Axiotis in 1994.

²²¹ See n. 219. The piece is very similar to the plain lid with central knob that is common at Thermi: Thermi, pl. XVII: 173; Kaymaktepe (near Altinova): Kokten (n. 14), fig. XCVI, third row; Yortan Class A: γortan, figs. 33, 80, or 82.

²²² Thermi, 11, 27–8 and pl. VII. 3. The two jar burials at Thermi were of infants, both from the levels of Town I; but see the human remains at Kourtir cited in n. 136; see also Makara (nn. 203–5) and Megalonisi (Gazetteer, 32 (site 147)). Pithos burials are common on the west Anatolian mainland, however; see Wheeler, T., ‘Early Bronze Age burial customs in western Anatolia’, AJA 78 (1974), 415–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar; cf. Yortan (and other sites in Balikesir): γortan; Marmara Gölü in the Gediz Valley (the sites of Ahlatli Tepecik and Eski Balikhane): n. 4; Demircihüyük-Sariket and Küçükhöyük (Eskişehir plain): Seeher, J., ‘Die Nekropole von Demircihüyük-Sariket. Grabungskampagne 1990, mit einem Beitrag zur geomagnetischen Prospection von Hans Günter Jansen’, IstMitt 41 (1991), 97–124Google Scholar; id., ‘Die Nekropole von Demircihüyük-Sariket. Grabungskampagne 1991’, IstMitt 42 (1992), 5–19; Gürkan, G. and Seeher, J. ‘Die frühbronzezeitliche Necropole von Küçükhöyük bei Bozüyük’, IstMitt 41 (1992), 39–96Google Scholar; Karataş-Semayük (Elmali plain near Antalya): Mellink, M., ‘Excavations at Karataş in Lycia, 1966’, AJA 71 (1967), 251–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ead., ‘Excavations at Karataş in Lycia, 1968’, AJA 73 (1969), 319–31. To the west of Lesbos also, one should not ignore the occurrence of pithos burials in Early Cycladic sites in the Aegean, for example at Kephala (Kea): Caskey (n. 19) pl. 45. d, pl. 46. h, i.

²²³ Charitonidis 1965, 489–90 and pl. 628 α.

²²⁴ Charitonidis 1965, 490.

²²⁵ Perpatontas, 550–1.

²²⁶ Ibid.

²²⁷ For the collected references to the two temples see Gazetteer, 24 (site III).

²²⁸ Evangelidis, 'Ανασχαφὴ' (n. 26), 136 and pl. I.

²²⁹ Ibid., fig. 17.

²³⁰ Kontis, 299.

²³¹ Thermi Town I: Thermi, no. 9 (p. 99; red/black fabric with four handles), fig. 26 pyxis 1 pl. VIII. 9 and XXXV. 9; Thermi Town II: ibid., no. 113 (p. 105; also red/black with four handles) pl. XXXV. 113; Thermi Town III: ibid., no. 196 (p. no; black, originally polished, four vertically-pierced handles) pl. XXXV. 194; and no. 250 (p. 113; red coarse ware, four vertically-pierced lug handles) pl. XXXVI. 250; Yortan Class A: γortan, fig. 33·77–9 (p. 89, grey/burnished); Troy: W. Dörpfeld, Troja und Ilion (Athens, 1902) fig. 109 (for the shape) and fig. 124 g (for the base); cf. Kontis, 267; Methymna, 123.

²³² For a detailed discussion of these two sites see Schaus (n. 162), 56–67, fig. 2 and pls 5–10.

²³³ For a detailed account of the Eresos topography see Schaus and Spencer (n. 190), 411–20, figs. 6–7, 9–11.

²³⁴ Anatolia/Aegean, fig. 29 b. 1, no. 437.

²³⁵ See the findings of the present authors at Altinova cited in n. 14.

²³⁶ Axiotis (n. 106) figs. 1–2.

²³⁷ See n. 6.

²³⁸ On these cultural links see the discussions of French, ‘Early pottery sites’ (n. 2) 15–24; Meriç, ‘1986 yili araştirmasi’ (n. 2); id., ‘1987 yüzey araştirmasi’ (n. 2); id., ‘Alaşehir kazisi’ (n. 2); id., ‘Pre-Bronze Age settlements’ (n. 2). See also ‘Lesbos and Altinova’, 203–20.