^{page 3 note 1} To appear in the forthcoming number of the Journal of Hellenic Studies.

^{page 3 note 2} ‘Painted plaster decoration at Knossos,’ Journal of the R. Inst. of British Architects, Third Series, Vol. X. (No. 4), p. 107 seqq. Mr. Fyfe has executed the Architectural Plans in this Report.

^{page 8 note 1} Between the two pillars however was a deposit which does not seem to be flooring.

^{page 8 note 2} See Annual, vi. (1899–1900), p. 83.

^{page 8 note 3} See Annual, 1900–1901, p. 94.

^{page 11 note 1} B.S. Annual, 1900–1901, pp. 85, 86: Fig. 26, 28.

^{page 12 note 1} B.S. Annual, 1900–1901, p, 93.

^{page 14 note 1} In this space or on its borders were also found what appear to be large draught-men of ivory, 73 to 82 millimetres in height and 80 to 82 in diameter, and almost exactly answering to the diameter of the circles of the Gaming Table. One type has engraved below a disk surrounded by sixteen rays. Another type shows eight small engraved circles forming a ring. That these actually represent the pieces belonging to the board found only a few metres off, is highly probable.

^{page 19 note 1} See Chipiez's reconstruction of a Theban house of the Eighteenth Dynasty. Perrot, et Chipiez, , L'Art, &c. vol. 1, p. 283Google Scholar, Fig. 267.

^{page 19 note 2} See my Mycenaean Tree and Pillar Cuit, p. 88 seqq.

^{page 22 note 1} See The Palace of Knossos in its Egyptian Relations, p. 3 (Archaeological Report of. Expl. Fund, 1899–1900, p. 66).

^{page 24 note 1} See Fyfe, Theodore, op. cit. Journ. R. I. B. A., 1902, p. 109Google Scholar, figs. 1, 2.

^{page 28 note 1} I can only refer to what I have said on the subject of the sacred pillar exhibited as performing structural functions and a ‘Pillar of the House’ in my Mycenaean Tree and Pillar Cult, p. 45 seqq. (J.H.S. vol. xxi. 1901, p. 143 seqq.)

^{page 29 note 1} See op. cit. p. 58 seqq.

^{page 29 note 2} In the monograph above cited (p. 42) I had already ventured to suggest this explanation ot the triple pillar cells of the Mycenaean dove-shrines surmounted as they are by a single altar.

^{page 29 note 3} As pointed out below (pp. 98, 99) the dove is primarily the image of the divine descent and of the consequent possession of the baetylic column by a spiritual being. This is not necessarily a female divinity, for the dove also appears as the “Messengery” of Zeus, but the evidence seems to show however that it had early attached itself as a special attribute of a Goddess in the Aegean lands.

^{page 30 note 1} M. Salomon Reinach has well shown, La Sculpture en Europe avant les inuences Gréco-Romaines, p. 561 seqq. (Anthropologie, VI.), that there is not the slightest reason for deriving the Dove Goddess from Babylonia.

^{page 30 note 2} Myc. Tree and Pillar Worship, p. 103, Fig. 2.

^{page 32 note 1} The breaks are wrongly restored as knobs in Fig. 15b.

^{page 35 note 1} This block was maintained in the position in which it was found by means of wooden props, till the disintegrated pillar that had once supported it could be replaced by. one of stone. This has now been done, and the block is thus permanently fixed at the level at which it was found.

^{page 36 note 1} See p. 52, 53 arrd Fig. 27.

^{page 36 note 2} Not fifteen, as stated in Report B.S.A. vii. 1901, p. 99.

^{page 39 note 1} Fortnum Collection.

^{page 40 note 1} Report, &c. 1901, p. 113.

^{page 42 note 1} The spaces between the columns were 1·64 and 1·60 m., between the East column and pillar 2 m., between the West column and pilaster 1·98 m.

^{page 44 note 1} The newly made supporting pillars with their corner posts of wood are clearly shown in this figure.

^{page 50 note 1} Hogarth, D. G., ‘The Zakro Sealings,’ J.H.S. xxii., Pl. VI. 3Google Scholar; and cf. p. 77, Fig. 2.

^{page 54 note 1} See Fyfe, D. T., op. cit., Journal of R.I.B.A., 1902, p. 120Google Scholar, Fig. 43 (upper fig.).

^{page 58 note 1} Annual B.S.A. iv. Pl. III.

^{page 59 note 1} The steps had 36 cm. tread and 12 riser.

^{page 60 note 1} 9·4 cm. long 0·9 broad at edge.

^{page 61 note 1} See Fyfe, D. T., Journ. R.I.B.A. 1892, p. 111Google Scholar, Fig. 8.

^{page 66 note 1} Fyfe, , ‘Painted Plaster Decoration of Knossos,’ Journ. R.I.B.A. 1902, p. 128Google Scholar, Fig. 69, (but placed wrong way up).

^{page 69 note 1} Cretan Pictographs, &c., p. 12 (281), Fig. 8.

^{page 70 note 1} One was found round the corner by the latrine.

^{page 70 note 2} L. Pernier, Scavi, &c., 1900–1901. Rapporto Preliminare, p. 107, Fig. 39.

^{page 81 note 1} See Report, 1901, end.

^{page 87 note 1} The steps are 72 cm. wide, their riser 12, and tread 27.

^{page 88 note 1} ·06 in thickness.

^{page 88 note 2} The taller of these is 1·10 metres high.

^{page 89 note 1} Careful researches in the neighbourhood of this tomb did not result in the discovery of any further interments.

^{page 89 note 2} E.g. a plain vase, shaped like those represented in Figs. 13 a and 13 b above—the commonest ‘Kamáres’ form.

^{page 90 note 1} This lay just outside the chest, but may originally have been contained within it.

^{page 90 note 2} That shown in Fig. 51 is 7·3 cm. in height and 8·8 in diameter. Its ground colour is a warm buff with a dull surface, with black, slightly glazed streaks.

^{page 90 note 3} 23 cm. in height.

^{page 92 note 1} Fig. 51, 7, is 33 cm. high and has a reddish brown ground. Fig. 51, 10, is 25·5 high with similar ground.

^{page 93 note 1} For examples of these, see M. Saglio's article ‘Candelabra,’ Dictionnaire des Antiquités.

^{page 93 note 2} A somewhat analogous form of clay utensil, but with a larger socket, is found in Cypriote Tombs of the sixth century B.C. Others were found at Lachish.

^{page 95 note 1} See Report 1901, pp. 62, 63. The plan, Fig. 19, on p. 62 requires correction, the Northern passage of the double gangway not being blocked as there indicated.

^{page 98 note 1} Compare the figure in the Belgrade Museum found near Kostolatz (S. Reinach, La Sculpture en Europe avant les Influences Gréco-Romaines, p. 31, Figs. 78, 79). It was found with a bucchero vase of Bronze Age character showing spiral reliefs.

^{page 98 note 2} For an example see above, p. 27, Fig. 13 b.

^{page 98 note 3} See p. 29, Fig. 14.

^{page 100 note 1} Mycenaean Tree and Pillar Cult, p. 7 (J.H.S. 1901, p. 105), The Dove Cult of Primitive Greece. In another form we see a survival of this bird-inspiration in the Eagles carved above the twin pillars of the Arcadian Zeus Lykaios (of. cit. p. 29 [127], or the Eagle engraved on the conical black stone of the Mountain God of Emesa, as seen on the coins of Helagabalus.

^{page 100 note 2} Mycenaean Tree and Pillar Cult, § 15.

^{page 100 note 3} See above, p. 30 seqq.

^{page 100 note 4} Op. cit., p. 9, Fig. 3. [J.H.S., 1901, p. 107.]

^{page 100 note 5} Found by Mr. T. H. Marshall, to be published in the present volume of the B. S. Annual.

^{page 101 note 1} S. A. Xanthondides, ̕ΕΦ. ̕Αρχ., 1900, p. 26 seqq. and Plates 3, 4.

^{page 102 note 1} Diod. Lib. V. c. lxv. 1.

^{page 102 note 2} In Mycenaean Tree and Pillar Cult, p. 70 [J.H.S., 1891, p. 168], I had already ventured to remark: ‘It is probable that in Mycenaean religion as in the later Phrygian the female aspect of divinity predominated … The male divinity is not so much the consort as the son or youthful favourite. The relationship is rather that of Rhea than of Hera to Zeus, of Adonis rather than of Ares to Aphrodite … the God is either in the background as on the great Akropolis ring or holds a secondary place, as when he approaches the seated Goddess.’

^{page 103 note 1} The only other mark found on the pottery here was a T sometimes placed on its side.

^{page 110 note 1} See Fyfe, , R.I.B.A. Journ., 1902, p. 112Google Scholar, Fig. 13.

^{page 119 note 1} Both of these illustrations are from black and white drawings by Mr. Theodore Fyfe.

^{page 119 note 2} The same design in a coarser form is applied to a characteristic series of Cretan stone bowls of the type figured in Cretan Pictographs, &c. (Quaritch, 1895) Deposit of H. Onuphrios, p. 123, Fig. 123. A variety with a double calix was found in the North doorway of the Hall of the Double Axes (see above, p. 39).

^{page 121 note 1} Sepukhral Deposit of Hagios Onuphrios in Cretan Pictographs, &c. (Quaritch, 1895), pp. 117, 118).

^{page 121 note 2} Further Discoveries of Cretan, &c. Script (J.H.S., xvii. 1898, p. 362, seqq.).

^{page 122 note 1} Professor Petrie considers it to be of the Fourth Dynasty and in no circumstances later than the Sixth. Professor Waldemar Schmidt, of Copenhagen, considers that these bowls were made during the Fourth Dynasty, and that though they may have been in use during the Fifth Dynasty it is impossible to bring them down to a later date.

^{page 122 note 2} This conclusion is confirmed on the geological side by Professor W. J. Solias.

^{page 123 note 1} This is Professor Miers' opinion.