¹ The team was led by JW; KO'C acted as surveyor and HM as draughtsman, assisted by a number of students: two from Cardiff, M. Jones and S. Cox, and one from University College Dublin, R. Sweetman. The work was undertaken with financial support from the British Academy, the Society of Antiquaries of London, the British School at Athens, the School of History and Archaeology, University of Wales College of Cardiff, and Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge. Logistical support, help and encouragement was provided by the BSA, in particular its Director, Elizabeth French, its Assistant Director, Guy Sanders, and its Knossos Curator, Colin Macdonald. Nicoletta Momigliano, when ‘acting’ Knossos curator, also offered invaluable assistance at a crucial moment. Our work was also greatly assisted by the Greek Archaeological Service in E. Crete, particularly Costis Davaras, Metaxia Tsipopoulou, and Eleni Chatzidopavlaki (who also helped us in our drawing). We are very grateful to all these individuals and institutions for their help. We would also like to express our thanks to Anthony Snodgrass, Nicolas Coldstream, and Hector Catling for encouraging renewed British interest in Praisos. The following special abbreviations are used in this article:

Bosanquet 1902 = Bosanquet, R. C., ‘Excavations at Praesos: I’, BSA 8 (1901–1902), 231–70Google Scholar

Myers, Atlas = Myers, J. W., Myers, E. E., and Cadogan, G. (eds), The Aerial Atlas of Ancient Crete (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1992)Google Scholar

RCF = rock-cut feature (with number)

W = wall (with number)

² Brief reports of this season's work have already appeared in BSAAR 1991–2, 24–5; AR 39 (1992–3), 77–9; Whitley, J., ‘Excavations [sic] at Praisos’, The Caian, Nov. 1993, 67–70.Google Scholar

³ For a discussion of this, see Bosanquet, R. C., ‘Dicte and the temples of Dictacan Zeus’, BSA 40 (1939–1940), 60–77, esp. 72–5.Google Scholar

⁴ See Bosanquet 1902, 231 n. 1, with refs.

⁵ See Spratt, T. A. B., Travels and Researches in Crete (London, 1865), i. 163–70.Google Scholar

⁶ Halbherr found his first Eteocretan inscription in 1884, and began digging in two places in 1894; Mariani visited the site in 1894. See: Halbherr, F., ‘American expedition to Crete under Professor Halbherr’, AJA o.s. 9 (1894), 538–44, esp. 543–4Google Scholar; Comparetti, D., ‘Iscrizioni di varie città cretesi (Lyttos, Itanos, Praesos, Knossos)’, Museo italiano di antichità classica (Florence, 1888), ii. 669–86, esp. (for Praisos) 673–6Google Scholar; Mariani, L., ‘Antichità cretesi’, Monumenti antichi, 6 (1895), 153–348, esp. 283–88Google Scholar; and for Greek inscriptions Halbherr, F., ‘Iscrizioni cretesi’, Museo italiano di antichità classica (Florence, 1890), iii. 559–748, esp. 599–602 nos. 29–30.Google Scholar All the Praisos inscriptions are collected by Guarducci, , I. Cret, iii. 134–55Google Scholar ( = I. Cret. iii. 6. 1–34).

⁷ Halbherr, F., ‘Researches at Praesos’, AJA n.s. 5 (1901), 371–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar This refers mainly to Halbherr's excavations of 1894, on the Third Acropolis/Altar Hill and at the fountain at Vavelli.

⁸ Evans visited the site in 1894, 1896, 1898, and 1899 according to Bosanquet 1902, 232 (‘Dr Evans' unpublished diary of his journeyings in the district proved of infinite use’); this diary is unfortunately now lost. Evans stayed long enough to collect some antiquities. He also examined the Eteocretan inscription from Praisos published by Comparetti (n. 6); see Evans, A. J., ‘Primitive pictographs and a prae-Phoenician script with Libyan and proto-Egyptian comparisons’, JHS 17 (1894), 270–372, esp. 354–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Some of Evans's finds from Praisos were published by Boardman, J., The Cretan Collection at Oxford (Oxford, 1961), 106–7 no. 476Google Scholar; 115–16 no. 499; 117 nos 508–9. For Demargne's researches see Demargne, J., ‘Antiquités de Praesos et de l'antre dictéen’, BCH 26 (1902), 571–83, esp. 571–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁹ Bosanquet 1902, 254–9; id., ‘Archaeology in Greece, 1900–1901’, JHS 21 (1901), 334–52, esp. 339–41; Conway, R. S., ‘The pre-Hellenic inscriptions of Praesos’, BSA 8 (1901–1902), 125–56Google Scholar; id., ‘A third Eteocretan fragment’, BSA 10 (1903–4), 115–26. For inscriptions from Praisos in Greek see Bosanquet, R. C., ‘Inscriptions from Praesos’, BSA 16 (1909–1910), 281–9.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Bosanquet 1902, 253, 259–70.

¹¹ Bosanquet 1902, 240–54; Marshall, F. H., ‘Tombs of Hellenic date at Praesos’, BSA 12 (1905–1906), 63–70.Google Scholar

¹² Bosanquet 1902, 254–9; Forster, E. S., ‘Praesos: the terracottas’, BSA 8 (1901–1902), 271–81.Google Scholar

¹³ See below; for later publication of material from the 1901 season, see Hutchinson, R. W., Eccles, E., and Benton, S., ‘Unpublished objects from Palaikastro and Praisos’, BSA 40 (1939–1940), 38–59.Google Scholar JW is engaged in the task of publishing all previously unpublished material from British excavations on the site, which should appear in a subsequent BSA.

¹⁴ Tholos tomb B, see Bosanquet 1902, 245–8; sealstones: Bosanquet 1902, 251–4, esp. 252 fig. 25; Platon, N. and Pini, I., CMS Iraklion, Archäologisches Museum: die Siegel der Neupalastzeit (Berlin, 1984), ii. 2. 321–6 nos 271–5.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Bosanquet 1902, 236–40. A later, Dark Age date is usually given for the ‘Megalithic House’ at Ayios Konstantinos, and preferred by Hayden, B. J., The Development of Cretan Architecture from the LM III A through the Geometric Period (Ph.D. diss., Univ. of Pennsylvania, 1981), 86–8, 95 n. 192.Google Scholar In this she is simply following the suggestions of earlier British excavators, who have dated this and other ‘megalithic’ structures in E. Crete to the Geometric period: see esp. Bosanquet 1902, 239; Hogarth, D. G., ‘Excavations at Zakro, Crete’, BSA 7 (1900–1901), 121–49, esp. 147–9.Google Scholar

¹⁶ See generally Bosanquet 1902, 240–5, 248–51; Droop, J. P., ‘Some Geometric pottery from Crete’, BSA 12 (1905–1906), 24–62, esp. 25–36, 39–42Google Scholar; Hopkinson, J. H., ‘Note on the fragment of a painted pinax from Praesos’, BSA 10 (1903–1904), 148–53, pl. 3.Google Scholar These vases can be traced to the following proveniences: tholos tomb C (Bosanquet 1902, 248–51; Droop, op. cit. 24–8), of which only the vases illustrated in Bosanquet 1902, 250 fig. 21 could be Protogcometric; tholos tomb A (Bosanquet 1902, 240–5; Hopkinson, op. cit. 148–53 and pl. 3); and tomb 53 (Droop, op. cit. 28–33). For a discussion of E. Cretan Geometric and Protogeometric see Coldstream, , GGP 257–61Google Scholar; Desborough, V. R. d'A, The Last Mycenaeans and their Successors (Oxford, 1964), 268.Google Scholar For a recent discussion of some of the orientalizing pottery, see Tsipopoulou, M., ‘Κορινθιαϰή ϰεραμειϰή στην ανατολιϰή Κρήτη ϰατά τις φάσεις ύστερη Γεωμετριϰή ϰαι ά′Ηατλίζουσα’ Kr. Chron. 16 (1987), 262–82, esp. 268–75.Google Scholar

¹⁷ See Marshall (n. 11).

¹⁸ Halbherr (n. 7), 385–92 and pls 10–12; Bosanquet 1902, 254–9; Forster (n. 12); id., ‘Terracotta plaques from Praesos’, BSA 11 (1904–5), 243–57.

¹⁹ e.g. in the discussion of the finds from the Almond Tree House or Andreion: see Bosanquet 1902, 259–70. Bosanquet 1902, 234, states also: ‘Our examination of the remains of the classical city showed that the houses rest everywhere upon the rock without any accumulation of débris such as usually encumbers the site of a prehistoric city’.

²⁰ As suggested by Bosanquet (n. 3), 64: ‘The site of Praisos was well fitted for the capital of a large pastoral community, a tribal centre rather than a city-state, lying as it does midway between the northern and southern coasts, and flanked to east and west by limestone uplands, less naked then than now, on which the bulk of the tribesmen must have lived in scattered villages’. These comments are echoed by K. Branigan in his entry for Praisos in PECS 737.

²¹ Mavroeidis, M., ‘Ὁ τάφος τοῦ ἀθλητῆ Πραισοῦ: ἀρχαιολογιϰὲς ἔρευνες Σητείας’, Driros (Neapolis, Crete), 1 (1937), 140–2, 172–4Google Scholar; Platon, N., ‘Ἀνασϰαφαὶ εἰς τὴν περιοχὴν σητείας’, PAE 1953, 288–97, esp. 295–6Google Scholar; id., ‘᾿Αρχαιολογιϰὴ ϰίνησιος ἐν Κρήτη ϰατὰ τὸ ἔτος 1953’, Kr. Chron. 7 (1953), 485; id., ‘᾿Αρχαιολογιϰὴ ϰίνησιος ἐν Κρήτη ϰατὰ τὸ ἔτος 1959’, Kr. Chron. 13 (1959), 389–90; id., ‘᾿Ανασϰαφαὶ περιοχῆς Πραισοῦ’ PAE 1960, 294–307; Davaras, C., ‘Ἀρχαιότητες ϰαὶ μνημεῖα άνατολιϰῆς Κρήτης’, A. Delt. 33 B A. Delt. 33 B Chr. 392–3.Google Scholar

²² Davaras, C., ‘Περισυλλογή αρχαιοτήτων στην Πραισό’, PAE 1980, 408–11Google Scholar; Papadhakis, N. and Rutkowski, B., ‘New research at Skales cave near Praisos’, BSA 80 (1985), 129–37Google Scholar; for earlier research on the Skales (or Skalais) cave see Bosanquet 1902, 235–6.

²³ For a judicious summary of the controversies surrounding the inscriptions in Eteocretan, particularly concerning its relationship to the language(s) of Linear A and to Semitic languages, see Duhoux, Y., Les Étéocrétois; les textes, la langue (Amsterdam, 1982), esp. 55–85, 119–24.Google Scholar The most complete publication of the inscriptions, both Eteocretan and Greek, is given by Guarducci, M., I. Cret. iii. 6. 1–34Google Scholar, supplemented by LSAG ² 316 no. 19.

²⁴ See Bosanquet 1902, 234. Despite what Bosanquet says here, the terminology of Halbherr (n. 7), 372–3, does differ slightly.

²⁵ Particularly those given in Whitley, J., ‘Praisos’, in Myers, , Atlas, 256–61.Google Scholar

²⁶ Information from a sketch in Evans's unpublished diaries, kindly provided by Ann Brown (Ashmolean Museum, Oxford).

²⁷ There is unfortunately no good elevation drawing of any of the walls at Petras. Petras is currently being reinvestigated by M. Tsipopoulou. For earlier British work on the site see Bosanquet, R. C., ‘Excavations at Petras’, BSA 8 (1901–1902), 282–5.Google Scholar

²⁸ There is no elevation drawn from Palaikastro, but the walls of building 1 are minutely described by Driessen, J. in MacGillivray, J. A., Sackett, L. H., Driessen, J., Macdonald, C., and Smyth, D., ‘Excavations at Palaikastro, 1987’, BSA 83 (1988), 259–82, esp. 259–68 and fig. 2.Google Scholar

²⁹ Again there appears to be no good elevation drawing of any of the ‘cyclopean’ walls at Kato Zakro in any of the preliminary reports produced in PAE. We have, however, seen such walls ourselves, and the type of construction does seem to be very similar.

³⁰ On mainland wall types, see Scranton, R. L., Greek Walls (Cambridge, Mass., 1941)Google Scholar; Winter, F. E., Greek Fortifications (Toronto, 1971), 69–100, esp. 77–100.Google Scholar The best wall sequence is still Eleusis: Noack, F., Eleusis: die baugeschichtliche Entwicklung des Heiligtums, i–ii (Berlin and Leipzig, 1927).Google Scholar

³¹ Bosanquet 1902, pl. 7; id. (n. 3), BSA 40 (1939–40), 64.

³² See refs in n. 30 above.

³³ For these features see Bosanquet 1902, pl. 7; Whitley, in Myers, , Atlas, 257 fig. 37. 1.Google Scholar

³⁴ A similar kind of ‘hydraulic cement’ seems to have been used in Knossos in the late hellenistic period, particularly in the ‘bottle cistern’ (‘well 12’) from the deposits above the Unexplored Mansion. See Sackett, L. H., Jones, J. E. et al. , ‘Excavation and architecture’, in Sackett, L. H. (ed.) Knossos, from Greek City to Roman Colony: Excavations at the Unexplored Mansion, ii (BSA supp. vol. 21; London, 1992), 31–3Google Scholar; pls 12 b, 29. This cistern seems to be very similar in design to those at Praisos, and its earliest phase of construction as a cistern dates to 175–150 BC. A similar form of waterproofing can be seen on later Roman sites, e.g. in the natatio at the legionary fortress baths at Caerleon: Zienkiewicz, J. D., The Legionary Fortress Baths at Caerleon, i (National Museum of Wales/CADW Welsh Historic Monuments, Cardiff, 1986), 136.Google Scholar

³⁵ For Eleutherna see Themelis, P., ‘Eleutherna’, in Myers, , Atlas, 91–5.Google Scholar JW observed the rock-cut features on the acropolis here on a visit in 1989.

³⁶ For Polyrrhenia see Niniou-Kindeli, V., ‘Polyrrhenia’, in Myers, , Atlas, 251–5Google Scholar; see also Gondicas, D., Recherches sur la Cräte occidentale (Amsterdam, 1988), 173–257, esp. 178–83Google Scholar; cisterns, rock-cut stairs and rock-cut houses are mentioned.

³⁷ e.g. at Phalarsana: Gondicas (n. 36), 89–90; and at the possible ancient site of Rhokka (modern Troulli): Gondicas (n. 36), 265, 272–4. Many rock-cut houses and cisterns are mentioned, and one ‘grand salle’.

³⁸ For rock-cut houses on Minoa on Amorgos, see Marangou, L., ‘Ανασϰαφαί Μίνωασ Αμοργού’, PAE 1984, 349–91Google Scholar esp. discussion of the ‘apsidal house’ A and the nearby square house AI (p. 370 fig. 8; pp. 380–7; pls 200–1). The ‘apsidal house’ may be Geometric in date (though this is disputable), but the other house is almost certainly hellenistic.

³⁹ See Sackett and Jones (n. 34).

⁴⁰ Bosanquet 1902, 236 and fig. 5.

⁴¹ For a discussion of cisterns generally, see Winter (n. 30), 48–53; Lawrence, A. W., Greek Architecture (3rd edn, Harmondsworlh, 1973), 236 and 312 nn. 3–4.Google Scholar

⁴² For the waterworks at Perachora, see Tomlinson, R. A., ‘Perachora: the remains outside the two sanctuaries’, BSA 64 (1969), 155–258Google Scholar; id. and Demakopoulou, K., ‘Excavations at the circular building, Perachora’, BSA 80 (1985), 261–79Google Scholar; id., ‘Water supplies and ritual at the Heraion, Perachora’, in Hägg, R., Marinatos, N., and Nordquist, G. (eds), Early Greek Cult Practice (Stockholm, 1988), 167–71.Google Scholar Tomlinson now dates both the doubleapsidal cistern (BSA 64: 157–64) and the circular structure (BSA 80: 261–79) to around the middle of the 5th cent, BC; both are lined with a kind of waterproofing cement. Only the fountain house (BSA 64: 203–18) should still be dated to around 300 BC.

⁴³ See Bosanquet 1902, 264–8.

⁴⁴ See LSAG ² 308–16 and pls 59–60; also Jeffery, L. H., ‘Τὸ γράμμα И εἰς τὴν Κρήτην’, Kr. Chron. 3 (1949), 146–9.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ See Bosanquet 1902, 259–70. It may be that JW's republication of some of this material will uncover something earlier, but this seems unlikely.

⁴⁶ See Winter (n. 30), 77–91.

⁴⁷ See refs in n. 42 above.

⁴⁸ See Bosanquet (n. 3); BSA 40 (1939–40), 73–4; Bosanquet 1902, 257. The limits for the destruction of Praisos by Hierapytna are given by the death of Ptolemy Philometor in 146 BC and the consulship of G. Laelius at Rome in 140 (Guarducci, , I. Cret. iii, p. 136Google Scholar). The relevant epigraphical evidence comes from Itanos: I. Cret. iii. 4. 9, line 46; 4. 10, line 22.

⁴⁹ For Lato see generally Picard, O., ‘Lato’, in Myers, , Atlas, 154–9Google Scholar; for the plan see Demargne, J., ‘Les ruines de Goulas ou l'ancienne ville de Lato en Crète’, BCH 25 (1901), 282–307 and pls 20–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar