The excavation of the ‘House of the Frescoes’, discovered in 1923 by Sir Arthur Evans to the north-west of the Palace at Knossos, revealed a large deposit of fresco fragments from floral and faunal compositions in Room E on the ground floor. From the broken pieces Evans's Swiss draughtsman, E. Gilliéron fils, was able to reconstruct three ‘panels’: these show a blue monkey on a red backgroundin a rocky and floral setting (PM II, pl. x, opp. p. 447; here called ‘panel A’); a blue monkey on an unpainted white ground in a papyrus thicket (ibid. 451, fig. 264, here ‘panel B’); and a blue bird perched on a rocky outcrop surrounded by wild flowers (ibid., pl. xi, opp. p. 454, here ‘panel C’). Evans thought panels A and B in particular contained Nilotic elements, and he suggested that the monkeys might have been depicted as hunting for birds' eggs, possibly of waterfowl. In addition, Evans published designs for the restoration of pancratium lily, myrtle and ‘jet d'eau’ compositions, and illustrations of fragments showing the head of a third monkey and part of a second ‘jet d'eau’.

The ‘House of the Frescoes’ was constructed after the earthquake at the end of M.M. IIIB and was destroyed in L.M. IA, as shown by pottery of that period on the floors of the house. The paintings therefore belonged to a single period of occupation, and evidently formed in some way a unified system of decoration ‘in the same style, by the same hands and executed at the same time’.

Returning to Smyrna from a journey up the Aeolic coast in July 1960, I stopped at the village of Buruncuk, which lies at the foot of an ancient site on the north edge of the Hermus Plain. The site is the excavated one commonly identified as Larisa Phrikonis or Larisa Aegyptia.

It is not, however, certain that the identification is correct. In view of its position on the Hermus Plain and the sudden access of prosperity that the excavations show to have occurred there after the middle of the sixth century, we can confidently recognize the site as one of the two towns of the Hermus Plain that were given by Cyrus the Great to the soldiers of the Egyptian guard after the defeat of Croesus in front of Sardis; and we know that Larisa was one of the two towns. But the possibility remains that the Buruncuk site is the other of the two towns (i.e. Cyllene) and that Larisa itself was the more impressive site on the hill above Yanik Köy four miles further east. We shall return to this problem; but for the present purpose we may note that Larisa and Neon Teichos, which is commonly identified with the Yanik Köy site, lay close together in the vicinity of the Hermus Plain.

The possibility of relations between Greece, especially Crete, and Libya, in the Bronze Age has been explored by many scholars. The Minoans and Mycenaeans seem to have been no less intrepid seafarers than their successors in the period of Greek colonization, to whom the shores of Cyrenaica soon became familiar. Professor Stucchi has reviewed these matters in (Quaderni di archeologia della Libia v (1967) 19 ff., but he goes further since he believes that he can add the evidence of actual Late Minoan imports to Cyrene, and it is this evidence which I wish to discuss in this article. Through his kindness I was able personally to examine the relevant material.

In Roman fill at Cyrene was found a cup fragment which Stucchi has restored as part of a kylix with argonaut decoration and dated to L.M. IIIA 2, by Furumark's classification. My Fig. 1 copies his photograph of the sherd (loc. cit., fig. 1) and Fig. 2 his reconstruction (Ibid., fig. 2). There seem to me some difficulties in this explanation of the fragment. The way the interior is painted over is not normally met in L.H./L.M. IIIA and it is very rare later. The addition of horizontal white stripes (Stucchi notes two on the interior) is, so far as I know, completely irregular. For the exterior, the spiral might be restored as some part of a marine device, but the three dashes above do not really suggest the filling pattern which is restored, nor are they truly comparable with the Minoan foliate pattern.

The term ‘Island Marble’ was coined by G. R. Lepsius in 1890. In a first flush of enthusiasm for the recently developed technique of cutting thin sections of rocks for microscopic examination, he claimed to distinguish various Attic and other marbles of mainland Greece, Parian and Naxian marble, and a residual category, ‘Inselmarmor’.

Obviously the ability to determine the place of origin of the raw material, by examination of a specimen of marble, would be of very great value to the archaeologist. With a long series of Classical sculptures from Greece, Lepsius claimed to do this, and became the first of a line of scholars describing marble as ‘Pentelic’, ‘Hymettan’, ‘Parian’, ‘Naxian’, or ‘Island’, usually on the sole basis of visual examination. Prehistorians also have sought to identify as Cycladic figurines and other objects of marble found in contexts outside the Cyclades, purely on the grounds of the material used.

The geological basis for such an identification seems today highly doubtful, and since the question is of considerable relevance to Cycladic prehistory, as well as of more general interest in later periods, we decided to make a systematic, if limited, study of the problem.

Trench V of the 1927 excavations of the British Academy in the Hippodrome of Constantinople was located just beyond the tomb of Ahmet I, in the direction of St. Sophia. With two extensions (VA and VE) it became a considerable excavation, which uncovered a series of massive piers of brick interrupted by occasional courses of stone. These the excavators identified as part of the Baths of Zeuxippus. In 1928 they uncovered more of the building and, to the south-east of it, part of a separate portico with a large exedra. This second building fitted the identification, as part of the connected gymnasium, particularly when two pedestals were found inscribed with the names of Hecuba and Aeschines, both of whom are known to have had statues there.

Objections to the identification have been raised; notably on the grounds that the excavators found no water-tanks or hypocausts. This particular objection was removed in 1952 by the discovery near by, during the laying of a sewer, of connected structures; for these included a plastered cistern and basins. In a recent review of the topography of the approaches to the Great Palace the identification is accepted; nor does it appear to be invalidated by any of the testimonia relating to the Baths of Zeuxippus which have lately been collected.

The Ashmolean Museum, with the help of the Sir Arthur Evans Fund, has recently acquired three sets of material, vases and bronzes, said to have been found in Crete. Such a provenance is confirmed by the nature of the objects themselves. The three sets were acquired at different times on the London market, but the first (sixteen painted vases) and the second (eleven bronze weapons and tools) were said to have come from one and the same site, reputed to be somewhere in the region of Siteia. The remaining set of objects (eleven painted vases) has no more precise provenance than ‘Crete’.

The material appears all to be of Late Minoan III date; the twenty-seven painted vases include examples of Late Minoan IIIA, IIIB, and IIIC date, and there is probably a similar chronological spread among the bronzes. As comparatively little material of the same categories has been published in detail, the opportunity is taken to illustrate and describe these Oxford acquisitions as a contribution to Late Minoan III studies.

In the spring of 1962 workmen digging the foundation shafts for the construction of a house at Atsalenio hit upon two Geometric tombs. Atsalenio is a quarter outside Heraklion, midway between the city centre and Knossos. The site of the tombs, which is the property of the contractors, D. Ritsopoulos and D. Serdherakis, lies about 100 metres to the west of the road to Knossos and about 200 metres to the north of the modern graveyard of Atsalenio. As the tombs were just outside the Knossos area of the British School, although belonging to the Geometric cemeteries of Knossos, I undertook their excavation as Epimelete of the Archaeological Service.

The site of the tombs, like most of the adjacent area, was a vineyard before building began, and the soil was cultivated to a depth of c. 0·7 m. This had destroyed the roofs of the tombs. The digging of the foundation shafts for the building had also destroyed all but the beginning of the dromos of Tomb A and had just reached the upper level of its burials before work was halted. Nearly all Tomb B, too, had been destroyed; the sherds from it were recovered for the most part from the earth thrown out by the builders.

The long stoa at the Amphiaraion, Oropos, was excavated by the Greek Archaeological Society in 1884, 1886, and 1887, and received a preliminary description in PAE 1884, 93–4, pl. E. by Doerpfeld and in PAE 1887, 59–62 by Leonardos. A much fuller publication of the stoa by F. Versace appeared in AM xxxiii (1908) 247–72, since when no detailed study of the building has been published. In view of the interest presented by certain features of the plan and orders of the building a close reconsideration of its original appearance and its stylistic affiliations seems worthwhile. For Versace's publication, though in many ways excellent, is insufficiently illustrated and does not treat satisfactorily some of the problems presented by the stoa. The present study, which attempts to shed further light on these problems and to supplement the description of Versace, is based, except where mentioned, on new drawings, plans, and measurements.

In 1961 Miss Sandars published her important paper on the ancestry of the Aegean long-sword. She argued that the long-sword was an Aegean invention under Syrian influence, and traced some of the features of the long-sword back to the Early Bronze Age weapons of Crete. The present writer has recently published a comprehensive survey of these Early Bronze Age weapons and demonstrated that in E.M. III and M.M. IA several Syrian features were adopted for the Minoan long daggers. It has also proved possible to illustrate an influx of actual Syrian daggers, probably in M.M. IB–M.M. II, and to suggest the place they should occupy in the development of Minoan metallurgy. Despite these various inquiries, however, the vital transitional period of Minoan metalworking—M.M. IB–M.M. II—remains obscure. Apart from one or two exceptional pieces like the Mallia swords and the decorated dagger from Lasithi the products of this period have gone unstudied and their importance to the emergence of the long-sword and broad dagger has gone unrecognized. It is this situation which the writer seeks to remedy. This paper attempts to trace the development of the four main weapons of M.M. III–L.M. II (the long-sword, short-sword, broad dagger, and ‘winged’ dagger) from the end of the Early Bronze Age. A catalogue gives details of thirty-two weapons which the writer considers to belong to this transitional phase. Many of these were found in association with material of M.M. IB–M.M. II date, but some are not closely datable and others are probably to be dated to M.M. IA or possibly even E.M. III. This is because the qualification for entry into the catalogue has been that a weapon is of a transitional character, rather than of a certain date. In fact the transitional phase would seem to overlap to some extent with the end of the distinct and quite individual Early Bronze Age phase of metallurgy.

In January 1959, when a trench was being dug in order to lay a water pipe in connection with the building of an orphanage (Κέντρον βρεφῶν “Ἤ Μητέρα”) on the south edge of Ayios Ioannis between Knossos and Herakleion a sinking of the ground suggested the presence of a collapsed tomb chamber. As the site lay within the Knossos area, Dr. St. Alexiou, Ephor of Antiquities for Crete, kindly invited the School to make trials there during the course of their excavations at Knossos in the summer of 1959.

The tomb which these trials revealed proved to be Minoan, and assignable to the L.M. II period, to judge from the remains of a couple of clay vases, a stemmed goblet (A.1) and an alabastron (A.2), which had evidently belonged with the original burial or burials. The deep-cut dromos, narrow with distinctly inward leaning sides, was of a type which it is often suggested may be of Mycenaean origin. But this is disputable, and the tomb at Ayios Ioannis appears to be as early as, if not earlier than, any of the tombs with this type of dromos on the Greek mainland. At Mycenae itself tombs with dromoi like this are not attested before L.H. III. On the other hand both at Mycenae and at Knossos there are tombs with shorter dromoi whose sides lean inwards, and some of these tombs may be earlier in date. Tomb 529 at Mycenae, with a short dromos whose sides lean markedly inwards, is assignable to L.H. I–II.

At the turn of the nineteenth century there arose an interest in the origin and development of the Minoan larnax. After many years of research it is understandable that we find the views published at that time inadequately furnished with arguments. The scholars of the past investigated only some selected questions, because their studies were prompted by the finding of a single tomb containing larnakes, as when in 1890 the larnakes at Pentamodi and Vasilika Anogeia were discovered, and P. Orsi published a study on the origin of the chest-larnax. Nevertheless in the early stage of these studies no one could imagine that the coffin chest was a shape of short duration and one which was introduced into burial rites rather late. This is of some importance for the study of the origin of the chest-larnax.

There is the very interesting problem of the theoretical background of the views expressed at that time, which we shall here pass briefly in review. The opinions published at the time were influenced by a general theory of culture which was rather vaguely accepted by scholars. The three main ideas were as follows (1) the theory of diffusion, (2) the belief in the evolutionary development of society, and (3) a supposition that there existed an interconnection of shape, plan, and to some degree of furnishing between grave and house.

This is the second of two pieces (connected by Wilhelm, BSA vii. 156 ff.) of an Athenian inscription recording honours granted in 314–313 B.C. to a Macedonian, Asandros. The purpose of this note is to point out an error begun by Pittakis (L'ancienne Athènes 494; cf. IG ii. 410) and perpetuated by Wilhelm (loc. cit.) and Kirchner (IG ii2. 450b; cf. also Wycherley in The Athenian Agora iii, no. 278), in spite of an accurate copy by Koehler (IG ii. 5, p. 109, no. 410). The latest restored version (Kirchner's) runs in part (ll. 7–9):

This piece of the inscription is regular stoichedon (though section a has some minor irregularities: Wilhelm 160), each line with 21 letters; the restoration ἐ[ξεῖ]|ναι gives 23 to l. 7. The space after epsilon is quite unreadable but is large enough for only one letter, and the edges of the stone are sufficiently well preserved to make it certain that no additional letters were inscribed at the end of l. 7 or the beginning of l. 8. The word must therefore be restored ε[ἶ]|ναι, with the same sense as ἐξεῖναι. Clearly, as Wilhelm noted (158), Asandros was himself responsible for the erection of his statue.

An ancient reed-blown pipe (αὐλός) has recently been acquired by the Museum of Greek Archaeology in Reading University. This article contains a full descriptive account of the instrument, and a brief discussion of its relationship to other surviving auloi.

The instrument is designed to be played with one hand, and must therefore have been one of a pair; its especial value as evidence for ancient auloi lies in the fact that it is more nearly complete than almost any other surviving ancient instrument. Two losses, however, are particularly to be regretted; as with all other ancient instruments, the reed has been lost, and (so far as I know) the other pipe of the pair does not survive. So we cannot gain any new information on two of the most vexed questions regarding the aulos—the size and structure of the reed, and the method of playing two pipes together.

For convenience of description, this instrument may be divided into seven sections (see Plate 55). Some of these have been put together, not very expertly, in modern times; in particular, the joins at each end of the sixth section (F and G) are badly out of alignment. These divisions have been chosen because they are externally visible; the method of construction will be examined more closely later.

All the axes are of Cretan materials. The majority, fifty-nine out of seventy-one, are of altered basic igneous rock consisting of various minerals, usually with much chlorite and serpentine. Group A is called serpentine as this mineral is predominant. In appearance the axes are blue/grey/black mottled, sometimes with brown mottling also. Group B is called greenstone since the minerals epidote and chlorite are present in large quantities and the specimens have a distinct greyish-green appearance. Group C is again altered basic rock, including chlorite and serpentine, though neither predominates.

There are a number of outcrops of chlorite and serpentine among the limestones of Crete, especially in the northern and southern foothills of the Mt. Ida massif.

Two axes appear to be of haematite, which occurs in Crete, two of limestone and one of schist. The materials of seven others are not certain, though several are probably of altered basic rock (see The Catalogue).

The materials agree with those of other stone axes from Crete, for serpentiniferous basic rock and greenstone examples have been picked up in various parts of the island. Greenstone and haematite were the predominant materials of the Late Neolithic axes from Magasá near Palaikastro.

The absolute chronology for the Early Bronze Age of Central and Northern Europe, including that for the Wessex culture of southern Britain, is not yet reliably established. This point was emphasized by V. Gordon Childe in his Retrospect, and the following words were indeed the very last which he wrote. Speaking of ‘the urgency of establishing a reliable chronology’, he stated: ‘a great deal of the argument depends on a precise date for the beginning of Unétice, that is at best very slightly the most probable out of perfectly possible guesses ranging over five centuries’.

At that time the basis for the absolute chronology of the Early Bronze Age was, as it largely remains today, a framework of synchronous links built up across Europe to the Mycenaean world of the Aegean Late Bronze Age. The assumption was made—and Childe stressed that it was an assumption—that European development and chronology were to be viewed in terms of ‘the irradation of European barbarism by Oriental civilisation’. Possible links for the European Early Bronze Age with Mycenae and indeed the Near East were eagerly sought in an attempt to build up a coherent chronology founded on this assumption.

Pausanias' Book viii on Arcadia contains at the beginning a list of Arcadia's early kings from Pelasgus onwards, and later in the book more information of a similar sort is attached to Pausanias' accounts of various Arcadian communities. This material has received considerable attention, notably from Hiller von Gaertringen, and there has recently been a full and careful examination by Hejnic of this ‘phenomenon quite unique in the whole ancient literature’. The main effort of modern analysis has been directed at establishing Pausanias' sources, and evaluating how far the form of the material is due to Pausanias' own redaction and how far to discernible earlier redactions, with the further hope of extracting from Pausanias' account an original core of material and using it to reconstruct Arcadian history, especially of the archaic period. It is the purpose of this article, apart from making a minor contribution to this process, to suggest that the form of Pausanias' material owes more to Pausanias himself, and therefore presents more serious obstacles to interpretation, than has been realized.

Here only one part of the material is examined, namely the sons of Lycaon. Pausanias' account of them is almost certainly drawn from Arcadian belief of his own day; the other main account of them, by Apollodorus, probably stems from a non-Arcadian literary development.

The present article follows on one published some years ago in the Annual, which dealt with the administrative problems connected with the so-called silver mines of south-east Attica and with their relation to other economic activity particularly in the fourth century B.C. This second discussion, based on a number of visits to the mining area, is an attempt to relate what can be seen on the ground to the literary and epigraphical sources, and to previous writing on the subject; to draw some historical and economic conclusions if this seems possible; at the least to point out problems.

The mining region has been almost completely neglected by the excavator. A recent exception to this, a very carefully carried out Greco-Belgian excavation at Thorikos, which still continues, is an encouragement to look again at this ancient industrial activity.

The excavations at Thorikos, a site already well known for its theatre and Mycenaean tombs, are proceeding at several points on or near the Velatouri Hill. The following are the important discoveries from the standpoint of mining activity.

The appearance this year of the late Professor Wace's book on the Marlborough Tapestries at Blenheim Palace completes the tale of his published work. This seems an opportune moment to bring up to date the Bibliography published in the Festschrift Volume, xlvi of this Annual. The new entries will observe as far as possible the categories there adopted.

A53 (red) from Mycenae is identical with two of the Kyprianon samples (Ky 3 and 4) and differs from two others (Ky 6 and 7) only in the composition of one accessory mineral, viz. the feldspar. These are all typical rosso antico marbles.

A51 (grey-green) is not exactly matched either in texture or by accessory minerals with any single sample from Kyprianon, but all its accessories, and approximations to its structural characters, are found among different grey-green (Ky 2, Ky 7) and white (Ky 5W) samples. Further search would probably yield an exact match.

The evidence indicates that a source for the Mycenae marbles on the outcrop of the beds exposed in the Kyprianon quarries is highly probable.