¹ The author is grateful to the late Miss Sylvia Benton and to the Managing Committee of the British School at Athens for permission to study and publish the Protogeometric pottery from the excavations at the Polis Cave on Ithaca. He would like to thank Vasileios Petrakos, then Ephor of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities at the Patras Ephoreia, for facilitating his work and especially Iphigenia Dekoulakou who in the Spring of 1974 accompanied him to Ithaca and made the logistical arrangements for his study of the vases located in the small museum in the village of Stavros. He would also like to thank Professor Vance Watrous for reading a preliminary version of the manuscript. The vases in the figures have been drawn by the author but inked by Roxane Portokala. No photographs accompany this article, since adequate photographs already exist in the original publications.

The following abbreviations have been used in the footnotes:

Benton = Benton, S., ‘Second Thoughts on “Mycenaean” Pottery in Ithaca’, BSA 44 (1949) 307–12.Google Scholar

DA Messenia = Coulson, W.D.E., The Dark Age Pottery of Messenia, SIMA Pocket-book 43 (Göteborg 1986).Google Scholar

Heurtley = Heurtley, W.A. and Lorimer, H.L., ‘Excavations in Ithaca, I’, BSA 33 (1932–1933) 22–65.Google Scholar

Nichoria III = McDonald, W.A., Coulson, W.D.E., and Rosser, J., Excavations at Nichoria in Southwest Greece III, Dark Age and Byzantine Occupation (Minneapolis 1983).Google Scholar

Polis I = Benton, S., ‘Excavations in Ithaca, III; The Cave at Polis, I’, BSA 35 (1934–1935) 45–73.Google Scholar

Polis II = Benton, S., ‘Excavations in Ithaca, III; The Cave at Polis, II’, BSA 39 (1938–1939) 1–51.Google Scholar

Wardle = Wardle, K.A., The Greek Bronze Age West of the Pindus (Diss. London University 1972).Google Scholar

² Polis I, 46–47. Previous excavations include that of the property owner Louisos, whom Schliemann saw at the site in 1864, and that of Vollgraff in 1904; for the latter, see Vollgraff, W., ‘Fouilles d'Ithaque’, BCH 29 (1905) 145–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar For a brief summary of Benton's work at the cave, see Wardle 169.

³ For Aetos, see Heurtley 22–65; also Heurtley, W.A. and Robertson, M., ‘Excavations in Ithaca, V’, BSA 43 (1948) 1–124Google Scholar; Benton, S., ‘Further Excavations at Aetos’, BSA 48 (1953) 255–361.Google Scholar

⁴ Polis I, 52.

⁵ The catalogue numbers used here and throughout the text are those which occur in the catalogue at the back of this article; at the end of each entry, the numbers used for this study have been correlated with Benton's numbers. An explanation of how Benton's numbers have been cited occurs in the preface to the catalogue. There are times in the text when the letter ‘M’ precedes a catalogue number; in such instances the ‘M’ (= Mycenaean) refers to those vases which Benton calls Mycenaean and which actually are Mycenaean.

⁶ Polis II, 16–17.

⁷ Benton 311. Benton's reclassification is followed by Desborough in his brief discussion of the Protogeometric material from the Polis Cave; cf. Desborough, V.R. d' A., Protogeometric Pottery (Oxford 1952) 281.Google Scholar

⁸ Benton 310.

⁹ For Nichoria, see Nichoria III; for Kaphirio, see DA Messenia 38–48.

¹⁰ See Coulson, W.D.E., ‘The Dark Age Pottery of Sparta’, BSA 80 (1985) 29–84, esp. 63–66Google Scholar; ‘The Dark Age Pottery of Sparta, II: Vrondama’, BSA 83 (1988) 21–24.

¹¹ DA Messenia 71.

¹² A summary of these phases and their main characteristics is provided in DA Messenia 9–11.

¹³ Coulson, W.D.E., The Greek Dark Ages: A Review of the Evidence and Suggestions for Future Research (Athens 1990) 10–14Google Scholar; also, Popham, M., ‘Review of Coulson, DA Messenia’, JHS 108 (1988) 267–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁴ Coulson, ‘Sparta II’ (supra n. 10) 24.

¹⁵ Polis II, 17–20; Coldstream, J.N., Greek Geometric Pottery (London 1968) 223–8Google Scholar, 330 (hereafter abbreviated GGP).

¹⁶ Kylikes M59–60 are paralleled by a series of kylikes from Grave A at Lakkithra on Kephallenia; see Marinatos, S., ‘Αἱ ἀνασκαφαὶ Goekoop ἐν Κεφαλληνίᾳ’, AE 1932, pl. 6Google Scholar, esp. nos. 43 (similar to M60) and 46 (similar to M59) and pl. 12. Stem fragment M68 is slightly swollen as those of Lakkithra, Grave A, nos. 43 and 47. See also Desborough, V.R. d'A., The Greek Dark Ages (London 1972) 89, pl. 15A.Google Scholar Two kylikes from Grave B at Hexalophos in Thessaly are also similar; cf. Hourmouziadis, D., ‘Ἑξάλοφος Τϱιϰάλων’, ADelt 23 (1968)Google Scholar B', Χρονιϰά, 263–4, pl. 201α. M33 is a deep bowl with running spirals framed by a hatched vertical line, a motif which also occurs at Lakkithra; cf. AE 1932, pl. 9, nos. 138, 138α (these two kraters, however, are much larger than M33, and the hatched line, which is curved, divides two registers of spirals).

¹⁷ Parallels and relevant bibliography are cited in DA Messenia 12–14.

¹⁸ Supra n. 17. Wardle, 172 and 477, no. 453 fig. 121, believes that Skyphos 3 is likely to be LH IIIC, citing its similarity in shape to FS 285. FS = Furumark shape; cf. Furumark, A., The Mycenaean Pottery: Analysis and Classification (Stockholm 1941, reprinted 1972) 49, fig. 14.Google Scholar Vase 3, however, and its counterpart 4 are much shallower in shape with a more sharply incurved lower belly than FS 285; they are much closer in shape to the DA I examples cited in note 17 and are thus perhaps better considered as early Dark Age.

¹⁹ Nichoria III, 67, motif 7.

²⁰ By LH IIIB2 deep bowls begin to acquire an interior monochrome coating, which becomes quite frequent in LH IIIC, especially IIIC middle and late; cf. Mountjoy, P.A., Mycenaean Decorated Pottery: A Guide to Identification, SIMA vol. 73 (Göteborg 1986) 130, fig. 161Google Scholar (LH IIIB2), 177–8 (LH IIIC middle), and 192 (LH IIIC late).

²¹ Nichoria III, 120, fig. 3–4 (P84, P208). These bases, however, are much larger than that on Skyphos 8 and probably belong to kraters.

²² FS 305–6. Wardle, 172 and 477, no. 455, fig. 121, considers Skyphos 5 to be late Mycenaean (either late LH IIIB or IIIC), relating its shape to FS 305 and decoration to FM 43. Yet, the shape of 5 is smaller than the broader stemmed bowls of FS 305 and the hand-drawn semicircles somewhat more roughly drawn than usually occur on LH IIIC vessels.

²³ See Nichoria III, 67.

²⁴ For the Ramovouni-Dorion kylix, see Karagiorga, Th., ‘Ανασϰαφὴ πεϱιοϰῆς ἀϱϰαίου Δωϱίου’ AE 1972, 18, pl. 19β ADelt 27 (1972) B, 258–62, pl. 196γGoogle Scholar; DA Messenia 114, fig. 3,3. For the Nichoria stems, see Nichoria III, 69, 120, fig. 3–4 (P310, P311). Ribbed stems from Aetos also have the same bulbous shape; see Heurtley 38, fig. 8, nos. 4, 6–7.

²⁵ Parallels for the shape of all the Polis kylix stems under discussion occur in the DA I period at Nichoria; see Nichoria III, 120–1. figs. 3–4 and 3–5.

²⁶ See for instance Nichoria III, 67, pl. 3–22 (P50).

²⁷ Indeed, Wardle, 171–2 and 477, no. 452, fig. 120, identifies Kylix 9 as belonging to the very end of the Mycenaean series in Ithaca; he notes the similarity of its shape to FS 276 and of its decoration to FM 61. Yet, the small stem, bulbous ribs, and exterior reserved bands are perhaps more suited to DA I. These factors lead to the argument being made in the text that it may represent a transitional piece from late IIIC to early DA.

²⁸ This development had previously been noted by the author at Kavousi on Crete with the three kylikes from Room B3 in the Vronda settlement. The broad, deep shape of Vronda 11 is quite similar to that of Polis 15. See Day, L.P., Coulson, W.D.E., and Gesell, G.C., ‘Kavousi, 1983–1984: The Settlement at Vronda’, Hesperia 55 (1986) 366–71, esp. 367, fig. 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar A hand-made kylix from Dodona has a similar deep, broad bowl with incurved rim. It is, however, of a coarse orange-red fabric and may be a local imitation of a fine ware prototype; cf. Wardle 207, 493, fig. 127, no. 575.

²⁹ FS 240.

³⁰ Nichoria III, 68.

³¹ FS 216; also, Mountjoy (supra n. 20) 171, fig. 219. Indeed, Wardle, 172 and 478, no. 458, fig. 121, on the basis of its shape considers Cup 24 as late Mycenaean, but its deep shape and monochrome coating with wavy line at rim fit better into the DA I typology and compare well with similar features on Cups 22 and 23.

³² See Nichoria III, 67, motif 3a; DA Messenia 16–17 (vase from Koukounara).

³³ DA Messenia 116, fig. 5, 18 (Malthi); 124, fig. 13, 126 (Kaphirio); 128, fig. 17, 305 (Tragana); 129, fig. 18, 312–13 (Koryphasion); 130, fig. 19, 337 (Osmanaga). The Osmanaga skyphos also has a main decorative motif of linked crosshatched diamonds.

³⁴ Coulson, ‘DA Sparta’ (supra n. 10) 37–38.

³⁵ Heurtley 40–41, esp. 40, fig. 10, no. 13; also, Coldstream, GGP 222.

³⁶ For example, the shape of Skyphos 30 is analogous to that of the skyphos from the pithos burial at Derveni in Achaea; for the pithos burial, see Vermeule, E., ‘The Mycenaeans in Achaia’, AJA 64 (1960) 16, no. 53, pl. 5, 39CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Coldstream, GGP 221–2, pl. 48e.

³⁷ Nichoria III, 82–83.

³⁸ See also Coldstream, GGP 221.

³⁹ For example: (a) Aetos: Heurtley 42–43, nos. 16–53 (Class D). (b) Achaea (Derveni): Vermeule (supra n. 36) 16, no. 57, pl. 5, 40, and Coldstream, GGP, pl. 48h (Patras Museum no. 487); Coldstream, GGP, pl. 48a (Patras Museum no. 488). (c) Aetolia (Agrinion): Vokotopoulou, I., ‘Πϱωτογεωμετϱιϰὰ ἀγγεῖα ἐϰ τῆς πεϱιοϰῆς Ἀγϱινίου ADelt 24 (1969) A, 76–78Google Scholar, nos. 6–9 (Ioannina Museum nos. 4577–80). (d) Aetolia (Stamna): Dekoulakou, I., ‘Κεϱαμιϰή 8ου ϰαί 7ου αἰ. π.Χ. ἀπό τάφους τñς Ἀϰαῖας ϰαί τῆς Αἰτωλίας’, AsAtene n.s. 44 (1982) 225, fig. 13.Google Scholar For illustrations of kantharoi from Derveni and Agrinion, see Fig. 8 a–e.

⁴⁰ All the kantharoi cited in note 39 above, with one exception, have as their main decorative scheme a form of crosshatched triangles, either in a row or in metopal panels. The exception is Patras 488 which has hatched triangles instead of crosshatched. Wardle, 172 and 478, no. 457, fig. 121, believes Kantharos 35 from Polis to be late Mycenaean, but its shape and decoration conform so closely with that of the comparative kantharoi cited in note 39 above that it should rather be considered as Dark Age and be assigned to the DA II phase.

⁴¹ For example: (a) Achaea (Derveni): Coldstream, GGP, pl. 48g (Patras Museum no. 491); Coldstream, GGP, pl. 48c (Patras Museum no. 489). (b) Aetolia (Agrinion): Vokotopoulou (supra n. 39) 74–75, nos. 1–2 (Ioannina Museum nos. 4572–3. (c) Aetolia (Pleuron): Dekoulakou (supra n. 39) 220, figs. 1–2. For illustrations of kantharoi from Derveni and Agrinion, see Fig. 8 f–h.

⁴² The kantharoi of Heurtley's Class D all appear to be of the broad variety (i.e. Type B at Polis): cf. Heurtley 42–43, 45.

⁴³ Heurtley 44–45, fig. 16, no. 52. A cup from the Kokevi tholos in southern Messenia has a deep S-shaped profile and may be considered as transitional between the Messenian S-shaped cup and the west Greek kantharos: cf. DA Messenia 50.

⁴⁴ For Aetos, see Heurtley 45, figs. 18–19, nos. 54–55 (Class E). For such cups in Messenia, see DA Messenia 115, fig. 4, nos. 11–12 (Rizes); 125, fig. 14, nos. 104, 113, 210, 279 (Kaphirio); Nichoria III, 150, fig. 3–34 and 3–35, shapes 2a and 2b.

⁴⁵ Heurtley 50–51, esp. fig. 27, no. 77.

⁴⁶ Coulson (supra n. 10) 63–66.

⁴⁷ DA Messenia 74–75.