Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros146.2Recherches à Dréros IThe Early Iron Age to Hellenistic...

Recherches à Dréros I

The Early Iron Age to Hellenistic, and the Medieval and Modern pottery from the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros

Η κεραµική του ιερού στη  δυτική ακρόπολη της ∆ρήρου από την Πρώιµη Εποχή του Σιδήρου ως την Ελληνιστική Εποχή και κατά τον Μεσαίωνα και τους Νεότερους Χρόνους
La céramique du sanctuaire de l’acropole ouest de Dréros du début de l’âge du fer à la période hellénistique, et des époques médiévale et moderne
Antonis Kotsonas
p. 565-682

Résumés

Cette étude publie la céramique du début de l’âge du fer à l’époque l’hellénistique ainsi que la céramique, bien moins abondante, de l’époque médiévale à l’époque moderne. Ce matériel provient des fouilles franco-grecques de l’acropole ouest de Dréros. Il se compose de 200 pièces, qui ont été trouvées à l’intérieur du temple A et dans les structures et dépôts adjacents. L’analyse contextuelle de cette céramique réaffirme l’identification d’un sanctuaire sur le site, proposée par son premier fouilleur Stefanos Xanthoudidis, plutôt que d’un andreion, comme l’a supposé Spyridon Marinatos. En outre, cette analyse offre une riche documentation sur l’archéologie du culte de ce sanctuaire, et, de manière plus générale, sur l’histoire et l’archéologie de Dréros sur plus d’un demi-millénaire. J’examine également la production locale de céramique et l’importation de récipients et de tendances stylistiques provenant d’autres régions de Crète et de l’étranger.

Haut de page

Plan

Haut de page

Notes de l’auteur

I am grateful to Vasso Zographaki and Alexandre Farnoux for their invitation to study this material, and to Thomas Brisart, who was involved in the primary study of the material and produced most photographs and a few of the pencil drawings. Fani Skyvalida produced most of the pencil drawings and all the digital drawings, processed the photographs, and helped with other practical matters. I have benefited from discussions with the excavators, and with Nicolas Kyriakidis, Peter Callaghan, Eleni Nodarou, Natalia Poulou-Papadimitriou, and Natalia Vogeikoff-Brogan. Vanna Niniou-Kindeli and Peter Callaghan generously shared unpublished information on their work at Aptera and Tsiskiana, and Knossos Little Palace North, respectively. I am grateful to Donald Haggis and Brice Erickson for their feedback on my text, and to Carol Hershenson for proofreading it. Many thanks are due to Louise Fauchier and Bertrand Grandsagne for copy editing my text. My work was supported by the University of Amsterdam, and the Semple Fund of the University of Cincinnati. The manuscript was completed in 2015 and has since been updated. The work is dedicated to the family of Nikos Skoulikaris and to the memory of Eleftheria Oikonomaki, residents of the broader area around Dreros.

Texte intégral

1. Introduction

  • 1 Halbherr, Orsi 1888.
  • 2 Sporn 2002; Prent 2005.
  • 3 See Sporn 2002, pp. 348–356; Kotsonas 2024, pp. 3–5.
  • 4 Kommos: Shaw J., Shaw M. (eds.) 2000 (pottery studies: Callaghan, Johnston 2000; Johnston 2000; Joh (...)
  • 5 E.g. Coldstream 1973b; Watrous 1996; Johannowsky 2002; Anzalone 2013. See also Kotsonas 2024, pp. 1 (...)

1The first major publication of an archaeological excavation in Crete concerns a renowned sanctuary of the historical period, namely the Idaean Cave.1 Dating from 1888, this publication presents a rich collection of finds from the site, including bronzes, ivories and other rare and exotic materials, but places extremely little attention on pottery. Following that work, many Cretan sanctuaries of the 1st millennium BC have attracted fieldwork,2 but the findings from most of these sites remain unpublished, and any published studies typically prioritize materials other than pottery.3 The most notable exceptions regard the sanctuaries of Kommos and Syme Viannou.4 Sizeable bodies of ceramic material are known from a few more Cretan sanctuaries of the 1st millennium BC,5 but studies of such scope remain relatively rare. Thus, the publication of the pottery from the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros is a contribution to an underdeveloped field of research.

  • 6 Xanthoudidis 1918. Followed by: Mulliez 2011; Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, p. 633; Farnoux, Kyriakidis(...)
  • 7 Marinatos 1936, p. 254.
  • 8 Xanthoudidis 1918, pp. 25, 27.

2The pottery from the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros, from within and around Temple A, consists of a sizeable body of 200 pieces. This material offers rich evidence on the archaeology of cult at the sanctuary, and on the history and archaeology of Dreros for more than half a millennium. It also sheds light on local ceramic production and the importation of material from elsewhere in Crete and from overseas. The material further reaffirms the identification of a sanctuary at the site, which was proposed by Stefanos Xanthoudidis,6 rather than of an andreion, as Spyridon Marinatos hypothesized.7 Notwithstanding its potential, the study of this material is compromised by two factors. The first factor is the earlier excavations at the site. Xanthoudidis, who dug there in 1917, noted the bad state of preservation of Temple A, and the grave effects of cultivation and of earlier clandestine excavations.8 Additionally, Xanthoudidis was not thorough in collecting pottery fragments, as is indicated by the numerous diagnostic sherds found in the backfilling of his trenches during the excavation campaigns of 2009–2012, and 2014. The second constraint is posed by the non-exhaustive excavation of the area around Temple A by the recent campaigns, which means that unexplored areas may hold crucial evidence for the interpretation of the site and its ceramic record.

  • 9 Stissi 2002, p. 232 (cf. p. 239).

3The present study begins with section 2, which discusses previous research on the pottery from Dreros, and section 3, which treats the characteristics of the local pottery fabrics. The core of the work, however, is the long section 4 which presents the analysis of the pottery according to spatial configurations and stratigraphic units. This approach comes as a reaction to the established practice of publishing sanctuary pottery “as objects without context,”9 and is intended to promote the understanding of diachronic and synchronic variation in the use of pottery at the sanctuary. These insights are analyzed in section 5, which synthesizes the major findings of this work, and evaluates their significance for the study of the sanctuary of the west acropolis, and of the history and archaeology of Dreros and Crete.

2. Previous research on pottery from Dreros: styles and chronologies

4The Drerian pottery of the 1st millennium BC has attracted varying attention in primary and secondary literature. The Archaic to Hellenistic material is poorly known, whereas the Early Iron Age pottery has been discussed much more, even if relevant studies are limited in scope, outdated and inadequately illustrated.

  • 10 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 28.
  • 11 Xanthoudidis 1918, pp. 28–29.
  • 12 Levi 1930–1931, pp. 81–82, fig. 30.
  • 13 Levi 1930–1931, p. 82, n. 2 cites Levi 1927–1929, p. 420, fig. 555 for comparison.
  • 14 See Kotsonas 2008, p. 210, type Bvii. Coldstream (Coldstream 1996, pp. 386–388) was the first to no (...)

5Xanthoudidis commented only briefly on the pottery from Temple A and did not illustrate any vase.10 In addition to an undecorated cup and an aryballos with ducks on the shoulder, he mentioned plain wares and pithoi (the kind of material he also found in a domestic unit at the site).11 A description, a photograph and a drawing of the aryballos with the ducks were published by Doro Levi,12 who also mentioned two fragmentary cups from the sanctuary, and commented on the scarcity of ceramic finds from the excavation of Xanthoudidis. Thanks to Levi’s reference,13 one of these cups can be dated to the Early Protoarchaic period.14

  • 15 Levi 1930–1931, pp. 78–83. Xanthoudidis (Xanthoudidis 1918, pp. 27–28) had previously drawn compari (...)
  • 16 A cup found in the same box cannot be identified securely with the cup mentioned in Xanthoudidis 19 (...)

6Levi studied the few clay vessels from Dreros in the context of his publication of the bronzes from Axos.15 Indeed, it was actually among bronzes and other material from Axos that the aryballos with the ducks found at Dreros was re-discovered by the author in the Archaeological Museum of Heraklion (fig. 1).16 The piece is catalogued as follows:

Aryballos, mended from three sherds and partly restored; the neck and handle are missing. A piece of paper with some text is glued on the interior.

Height: 8.3. Base Diameter: 4. Maximum Diameter: 8.7. Fine pink (7.5YR 7/4 to 8/4) fabric. Flat base, plump ovoid body and slim vertical handle, elliptical in section. Ducks alternate with rosettes on the shoulder. The ducks have leaf-shaped hatched bodies, and slim legs and necks, and one of them holds a warm in the mouth. The rosettes consist of a circle with central dot and seven rays with rounded ends. A slim band and a zone with vertical strokes mark the lower part of the shoulder and fourteen slim bands, separated by a broad one, decorate the belly. Coating on the back of the handle.

Fig. 1 — Photographs and drawing of the aryballos excavated by Xanthoudidis at Temple A.

Fig. 1 — Photographs and drawing of the aryballos excavated by Xanthoudidis at Temple A.

Photos: A. Kotsonas; drawing: F. Skyvalida.

  • 17 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 28. Followed by: D’Acunto 2002–2003, p. 56; Farnoux, Kyriakidis, Zographaki 2 (...)
  • 18 Levi 1930–1931, p. 82. Cf. Prent 2005, p. 284: Early Orientalizing.
  • 19 For Knossian comparisons of similar type, see: Brock 1957, p. 159, type K; Moignard 1996, p. 153, t (...)
  • 20 See Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 405–408, where the type is not represented. Cf. however, two pieces from (...)
  • 21 Levi 1930–1931, pp. 78–82; D’Acunto 2002–2003, p. 56; Prent 2005, p. 284 (with references); Farnoux(...)
  • 22 Individual pieces are possibly illustrated in Marinatos 1936, p. 265, fig. 68.
  • 23 Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937, pp. 19–21.
  • 24 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 61–62; Van Effenterre 2009, pp. 141–146.

7Based on my study of the aryballos, I consider that the Late Geometric date, which was proposed by Xanthoudidis and proved popular,17 is too early; Levi’s argument for the Orientalizing style of the piece is preferable.18 Indeed, the vase finds rich Late Orientalizing typological comparisons in Knossos19 (and hardly any comparisons in east Crete).20 Thus, the aryballos is nearly contemporary to the bronze weapons from Temple A, which are generally assigned to the late 7th–early 6th century BC.21 The elaborate style and especially the fairly hard fired, fine fabric suggest that the vase is imported from north-central Crete. The shape is very rare among the material from around Dreros Temple A, and also Temple B (which is located by the agora),22 and the houses around the latter,23 but aryballoi and other unguent vases were found in abundance in Drerian tombs.24

  • 25 Marinatos 1936. Also: D’Acunto 2002–2003; Kotsonas 2013a; Gaignerot-Driessen 2016, pp. 222–225.
  • 26 Marinatos 1936, pp. 257–268. Also: D’Acunto 2002–2003, pp. 17, 39; Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 53–54; Gai (...)
  • 27 Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937. Also, Gaignerot-Driessen 2016, pp. 225–228.
  • 28 Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937, p. 21. Also, Gaignerot-Driessen 2016, pp. 229–233.

8Temple B and the cemetery of Dreros were excavated in the early and mid-1930s and yielded large bodies of ceramics, which were published shortly before and after World War II. In 1936, Marinatos published his excavation of Temple B, which is renowned for the discovery of three bronze statues (sphyrelata).25 The pottery he found within the temple was of very limited quantity and included cups, one kalathos, two stands and perhaps two lamps. The area around the temple, however, and especially an adjacent storeroom, produced fragments of many pithoi, jars, and a range of fine ware vessels of Late Geometric and Archaic date.26 The local pithoi of the Geometric and Archaic period received more attention in a study of the pottery from the houses surrounding the agora, which appeared in 1937.27 The same study also reported briefly on the local Classical and Hellenistic material.28

  • 29 Van Effenterre 1948.
  • 30 Van Effenterre 2009. Cf. Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 54–56; Rizzotto 2015, pp. 163–166.
  • 31 Van Effenterre 1948, p. 37; Van Effenterre 2009, p. 154.
  • 32 Van Effenterre 1948, p. 38; Van Effenterre 2009, p. 154.

9In 1948, Henri Van Effenterre published a long report on the Early Iron Age cemetery of Dreros.29 The emphasis of this report is on artifact classes, rather than contexts, and, in the case of pottery, on shape typology. Van Effenterre offered a more balanced approach to the archaeology of the cemetery in another study, the manuscript of which was discovered after his death and was recently published.30 In both works, Van Effenterre placed the Early Iron Age pottery of Dreros within the ceramic tradition(s) of the Mirabello Gulf,31 despite the rich comparisons he drew with the pottery from Knossos and central Crete.32

  • 33 Desborough 1952, pp. 260–262. Kanta (Kanta 1980, p. 133) dates tomb 1 to Late Minoan IIIC late, and (...)
  • 34 Coldstream 2008, pp. 234, 245, 257–258.
  • 35 Coldstream 2008, pp. 234, 245, 257–258.
  • 36 Snodgrass 1971, p. 164.

10The grand syntheses of Greek Early Iron Age pottery, which appeared in the 1950s and 1960s, discussed the pottery from the tombs (but not the sanctuaries) of Dreros. Vincent Desborough considered tomb 1 as Subminoan, but all other tombs as Geometric. Based on the lack of any Protogeometric material, he hypothesized a lull in communication between north-central and east Crete.33 Conversely, Coldstream established that vases from the area of Knossos reached Dreros in the Late Geometric period and he hypothesized the existence of a local Atticizing Middle Geometric and Late Geometric style, comparable to that of Knossos.34 Unlike Van Effenterre and Desborough, Coldstream thought of Dreros as part of central Crete, and considered that the Knossian style extended from the Mirabello in the east to Eleutherna in the west. He further argued that the east Cretan or “Eteocretan” Geometric prevailed only beyond the Isthmus of Ierapetra.35 A different view, which was closer to Van Effenterre’s, was introduced by Anthony Snodgrass in 1971. Indeed, Snodgrass commented briefly that the evidence of Early Iron Age pottery sketched a border between central and east Crete along “the defile on the road from Mallia to Dreros, close to the modern town of Neapolis.”36

  • 37 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 53–64.
  • 38 Tsipopoulou 1987, pp. viiiix, 9; Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 25–27, 53; Tsipopoulou 2013, p. 133, where (...)
  • 39 Dyhoux 1982, pp. 27–54, 112–118.
  • 40 Whitley 2006, pp. 612–614; Sjögren 2006–2007.

11Questions over of the date and stylistic affinities of the Drerian pottery were revisited by Metaxia Tsipopoulou in the 2000s. Tsipopoulou dated the material from Temple B to the Late Geometric and Protoarchaic periods (also referring to some later pieces), and assigned the pottery from the cemetery (excluding tomb 1) to the Late Geometric and Protoarchaic periods.37 Tsipopoulou did not directly engage with Coldstream’s idea that the Drerian pottery conformed to the Knossian style. She, however, grouped this pottery together with the pottery from the Lassithi nome (excluding the Lassithi plateau), to which she applied the term “Eteocretan”; she further called Dreros a “city of the Eteocretans,”38 based on the discovery at the site of at least one inscription in the non-Greek language called Eteocretan.39 However, recent scholarship has acknowledged the problems and limitations of identifying an Eteocretan ethnic identity in the archaeological record,40 which is why the term Eteocretan is avoided here.

  • 41 Lebessi 1987, p. 158; Stampolidis 1993, p. 20; Stampolidis 1994, p. 141; Mook 2004, p. 173; Coldstr (...)
  • 42 Kotsonas 2008, pp. 49–50 (notable ceramic correspondences between the two sites are identifiable on (...)
  • 43 On the ceramic links between Anavlochos and north-central Crete, see: Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 41; Cold (...)
  • 44 Coldstream 2008, pp. 260–261.
  • 45 Whitley 2009, p. 276.
  • 46 Eaby 2007; Eaby 2011; Perna 2011.
  • 47 Gaignerot-Driessen 2016.

12Coldstream’s idea that Dreros and the Mirabello formed the east frontier of the extent of the Knossian style has proven popular,41 in defiance of Van Effenterre’s argument, the observations of Desborough and Snodgrass, and Tsipopoulou’s choice. The pottery from the area of Temple A does not lend support to this widespread idea (see below), and my own research has questioned Coldstream’s ideas on the westward impact of the Knossian style, with reference to Eleutherna, and has revisited regionalism in Early Iron Age Crete.42 Although Eleutherna, like Dreros, has yielded imported Knossian vases, local pottery does not show any strong influence from Knossos in the Late Geometric and Early Protoarchaic period. The mountains that separate north-central Crete from the Gulf of Mirabello perhaps obstructed the spread of the Knossian style, which had a more obvious impact on the pottery from Anavlochos, west of Dreros.43 On the other hand, the east Cretan or “Eteocretan” Geometric style, as defined by Coldstream,44 is not represented at Dreros. Drerian pottery can best be seen as part of a central-east ceramic sub-region, which remains to be defined. This sub-region may correspond with the western part of what James Whitley has identified as a “gray area” between central and east Crete.45 Indeed, recent analyses of Cretan burial customs of the Early Iron Age locate Dreros in a sub-region that extends from the area which lies north of the Lassithi plateau to the north end of the Isthmus of Ierapetra,46 and this sub-region – called the Mirabello – has recently received a broader study of its archaeology from the Late Bronze Age to the Protoarchaic period.47

  • 48 Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, p. 633. Note, however, that the architecture is assigned to the Protoarch (...)
  • 49 Farnoux, Kyriakidis, Zographaki 2012, pp. 181–183; Zographaki, Farnoux 2014b, p. 106.
  • 50 Lefèvre-Novaro et al. 2013, p. 15.
  • 51 Gaignerot-Driessen 2014, p. 15; Gaignerot-Driessen 2016, p. 229.
  • 52 Sporn 2002, p. 81; Prent 2005, pp. 283–284 (but see the hypothesis on pp. 460–461); Zographaki, Far (...)

13The renewed excavations at Dreros revived the interest in the pottery from the site, with special reference to the sanctuary on the west acropolis. In the first preliminary reports, the excavators noted that the earliest material from the sanctuary was ranging from the end of the Bronze Age to the beginning of the Geometric period.48 However, following the study season of the pottery in 2011, a later date in the 8th to 7th centuries BC was proposed.49 Other scholarship hypothesized a Protogeometric to Geometric,50 or a Late Geometric to Early Protoarchaic date for this material.51 These dates are revised below in the light of the analysis of the pottery, which also sheds light on the history of the sanctuary after the Protoarchaic period that has received very limited attention in both excavation reports and secondary literature.52

  • 53 See especially Coldstream 1996, pp. 409–412, 414–420; Moignard 1996, pp. 461–462; Coldstream 2001, (...)
  • 54 See especially Mook 2004. Further literature is cited in Kotsonas 2008, pp. 236–239.
  • 55 Cf. Kotsonas 2008, pp. 39–40; Kotsonas 2013b, p. 238. Also, Coulié 2013, p. 271. The aryballos foun (...)

14The varied dates proposed for the material from the sanctuary on the west acropolis are indicative of our unsatisfactory understanding of the local relative and absolute chronology in the 1st millennium BC. The problem is aggravated by the fact that the east Cretan ceramic sequence is largely modeled on the well-studied Knossian sequence.53 Current work on Kavousi and Azoria will eventually establish an alternative sequence,54 with due attention to local and regional idiosyncrasies. In anticipation of this development, I follow the established relative chronology of Cretan pottery. Nevertheless, I use the term Protoarchaic, for Drerian pottery of the 7th century BC, for reasons I have explained elsewhere; in brief, I hold that the term Orientalizing would be inappropriate for the material in question, since this does not show any Orientalizing attributes.55 Also, I use the term Archaic for the 6th and early 5th century BC and Late Archaic for material from around 500 BC.

3. The macroscopic fabric groups (MFGs) of the pottery from the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros

  • 56 The ceramic assemblage from the sanctuary on the west acropolis was considered to be an unfavorable (...)

15The macroscopic characterization of the fabrics from the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros is based on the macroscopic examination of the material from the new excavations. It also draws, however, on: previously published descriptions of local fabrics; personal examination of material from earlier excavations at Dreros; and an ongoing project of petrographic analysis of the ceramic assemblage from a Hellenistic house, which was conducted by Eleni Nodarou in collaboration with Benoit Dercy.56 Notwithstanding these contributions, the pottery from Dreros deserves a study of diachronic scope involving interdisciplinary analyses.

  • 57 Xathoudidis 1918, p. 28.
  • 58 Marinatos 1936, pp. 258–265.
  • 59 Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 53.

16Published references to the fabric of Drerian ceramics are not detailed. Xanthoudidis did not comment on the fabric of the pottery from the area of Temple A, with the exception of a cup.57 Marinatos made brief references to the fabric of individual pieces from Temple B, but he did not systematize this information. He distinguished between the pale friable fabric of some fine wares, the fine yellow fabric of others, and the pale or reddish coarse fabric of the pithoi.58 Tsipopoulou also mentioned that the material from Temple B is largely made of fine yellow clay.59

  • 60 Van Effenterre 1948, pp. 23–24, 59–64; Van Effenterre 2009, pp. 91–92.
  • 61 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 57–64.

17More detailed and varied descriptions of pottery fabrics are available for the material from the cemetery.60 Van Effenterre considered that these vessels were made of locally available raw materials, and noted that a pottery workshop was active in his time at the village of Limnes east of Dreros. The coarse wares, he noted, are characterized by orange-pink, red and brown fabric, which is often low-fired. The color of the fabric of the fine wares depends on firing and can range from bluish grey, reddish, and yellow to greenish. Comparable fabric descriptions were given by Tsipopoulou for the pottery from the same context.61

18All previous discussions of Drerian fabrics do not comment on the properties of the inclusions, an attribute that is essential for the macroscopic and analytical characterization of ceramics. Because of the paucity of published references to inclusions, I cannot draw any secure links between the fabrics described by earlier scholars and the six MFGs identified here for the material from the sanctuary on the west acropolis (fig. 2).

Fig. 2 — Dino-lite photographs of samples of macroscopic fabric groups A, B, C, D, E, F.

Fig. 2 — Dino-lite photographs of samples of macroscopic fabric groups A, B, C, D, E, F.

Photos: A. Kotsonas.

19MFG A: semi-coarse pale fabric characterized by golden mica.

The matrix is reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) without any grey core. The exterior is reddish yellow (7.5YR 7/6) and the interior is pink (7.5YR 7/4) or very pale brown (10YR 7/4). This is a soft fabric of rough feel and hackly fracture. Voids are common, especially vesicles and rarely vughs, and run parallel to breaks. Non-plastic inclusions are dominant and well-sorted. They are 1–2 mm long, but occasionally bigger (3 mm), and range from sub-rounded to angular. Dull dark, sub-rounded to sub-angular inclusions are dominant, and the same applies to white or off-white, dull to glassy, angular to sub-angular inclusions. Golden mica flakes are common.

20MFG A occurs on plain ware vessels, especially (and perhaps exclusively) on kalathoi. The exterior (but not the interior) surface of these vessels is smoothened, and their wall is 0.6–1.1 cm thick. MFG A occurs on limited Geometric–Protoarchaic pottery and figurines from the West and East Terraces, but is apparently missing from later material and from other contexts in the sanctuary. Furthermore, the MFG is not represented in the Hellenistic material sampled by Nodarou.

21MFG B: semi-coarse to coarse and very rarely semi-fine reddish fabric characterized by schist.

The matrix is light red (2.5YR 6/8 to 6/6), reddish yellow (5YR 7/6), pink (5YR 7/4), and rarely light reddish brown (5YR 6/4), without any grey core. The exterior is light red (2.5YR 6/8 to 6/6), reddish yellow (5YR 7/6), pink (5YR 7/4) and rarely light reddish brown (5YR 6/4). The interior is light red (2.5YR 6/8 to 6/6), reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) and rarely reddish brown (2.5YR 5/4) or light reddish brown (5YR 6/4). This is a soft fabric of smooth feel and smooth fracture. Voids (vesicles) are common, and non-plastic inclusions are dominant and poorly sorted and range from angular to sub-rounded. Schist inclusions of dark to brown or purple color, ranging from glassy to dull, are predominant to dominant (1–6 mm in size). Dull white or off-white rounded or sub-rounded inclusions of small size (1 mm) are few to rare, if any, and the same applies to small particles of silver (?) mica.

22MFG B occurs on plain ware vessels of all sizes, from cups and kalathoi to pithoi, but is especially common on ladles. The exterior (but not the interior) surface of these vessels is smoothened, and their wall is typically 0.6–1 cm thick (but occasionally as thick as 1.5 cm). In Dreros, this MFG is uncommon on Geometric and Protoarchaic pottery and figurines, but very common on Hellenistic pottery, especially ladles. MFG B can be associated with petrographic fabric group 1, which was defined on the basis of Hellenistic material. Nodarou describes this fabric as coarse metamorphic with “low grade metamorphic rock fragments, namely fine grained phyllites in a brown or silvery grey color, some containing muscovite mica. There are also fragments of quartz and quartzite in varying quantities, and rare sandstone.” Nodarou further comments on the possibility of various sources for this material in the region, and as far west as Mallia. Indeed, MFG B seems to be widely attested on Early Iron Age pottery from Anavlochos, which is located between Mallia and Dreros.

23MFG C: semi-fine or semi-coarse and rarely coarse orange fabric characterized by a variety of inclusions and many voids.

The matrix is light red (2.5YR 6/8) and rarely reddish yellow (5YR 7/6), normally without any grey core. The exterior and interior is mostly reddish yellow (5YR 7/6 or 7/8), but occasionally the exterior is light red (2.5YR 6/6). This is a soft fabric of powdery feel and smooth fracture. Voids (vesicles) are predominant, and non-plastic inclusions are dominant to few, well sorted and range from sub-angular to sub-rounded. Dull white to off-white, sub-angular to angular inclusions of 1–2 mm are common to dominant (and rarely few). Dull dark to brown, sub-angular to sub-rounded inclusions of 1–2 mm are rare to common. There are two more kinds of inclusions that are rarely attested, if at all: glassy (and rarely dull) dark to brown, angular to sub-angular schist particles (< 1 mm); and silver (?) mica particles.

24MFG C occurs on plain ware and decorated vessels of small to fairly large size and varied shapes (including basins and ladles). The exterior (but not the interior) surface of these vessels is smoothened, and their wall is 0.4–1.1 cm thick (and rarely as thick as 1.5 cm). MFG C seems common on Geometric to Hellenistic material and is also attested on figurines from Temple A. MFG C is perhaps related to MFG D (below) and can be associated with petrographic fabric group 4, which was defined on the basis of Hellenistic material. Nodarou characterizes this fabric as metamorphic with pellets, in addition to “small quartz fragments unevenly distributed in the clay matrix, as well as phyllite, quartzite, and chert.”

25MFG D: semi-fine (and rarely semi-coarse) reddish fabric characterized by a few small inclusions.

The matrix is reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) and rarely light red (2.5YR 6/6), occasionally without any grey core. The exterior and interior is reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) or light red (2.5YR 6/6 to 6/8). This fabric ranges from hard to soft, and is of smooth feel and smooth fracture. Voids (vesicles) are few to common, and non-plastic inclusions are few to rare, small (1 mm) and very well sorted, and range from sub-angular to sub-rounded. Dull dark, sub-angular to sub-rounded inclusions are rare to common. Dull white, sub-angular particles, and dark grey, glassy sub-angular schists are rarely attested, if at all.

26MFG D occurs on decorated vessels of small to medium size (with wall 0.3–0.7 cm thick), especially drinking vessels and rarely basins. The surfaces are smoothened and covered by black gloss. MFG D is common on Geometric–Archaic material, but its persistence in the Classical and Hellenistic periods is uncertain. There is possibly a link between this MFG and the much coarser MFG C.

27MFG D can be associated with petrographic fabric group 3, which was defined on the basis of Hellenistic material. Nodarou describes this fabric as metamorphic with quartz, “as well as a few phyllites and rare chert.” She further connects petrographic fabric groups 3 and 4 and considers that they “represent a coarse and a finer version of the same recipe.”

28MFG E: fine to semi-fine light pink fabric.

The matrix is pink (7.5YR 8/4) and rarely light red (2.5YR 7/6 on vessels with thicker wall), light reddish brown (2.5YR 6/4) or reddish yellow (5YR 7/6), without any grey core. The exterior and interior is pink (7.5YR 8/4) to very pale brown (10YR 8/4 to 8/3). This is a soft fabric of smooth feel and smooth fracture. Voids (vesicles) are rare, and non-plastic inclusions are small (up to 1 mm), few to rare and very well sorted. Dull dark, sub-angular to sub-rounded inclusions are rare to few, and silver mica particles are rare.

29MFG E occurs on decorated pottery, mostly on drinking and rarely on pouring vessels of small to medium size (with wall 0.3–0.7 cm thick), which date from the Geometric to the Hellenistic period. The same MFG is attested on pottery from the cemetery of Dreros.

30MFG F: coarse to semi-coarse red hard fabric, characterized by silver mica and varied inclusions.

The matrix is pink (2.5YR 6/8) and rarely reddish brown (2.5YR 5/4) or weak red (10R 5/4); a grey core is not uncommon. The surfaces are normally fired to an even color, normally red (2.5YR 5/6) and rarely light red (2.5YR 6/6) or reddish brown (5YR 5/4). This is a hard fabric of rough feel and hackly fracture. Voids (vesicles and vughs) are common, and non-plastic inclusions are small (up to 1 mm and rarely to 2 mm), predominant to dominant, very well sorted, sub-angular to sub-rounded. Particles and rarely flakes of silver mica are predominant to dominant, whereas dull white and off-white inclusions are common. Other kinds of inclusions (glassy dark, dull grey, and dull brown) are few. There are also glassy purple schist inclusions, which are rare, if present at all.

  • 62 The exterior (but not the interior) surface of these vessels is smoothened, and occasionally preser (...)
  • 63 Kotsonas 2012a, pp. 29–30 (amphoriskos: Tsipopoulou 1985, pp. 40–41; Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 59, no. Η (...)
  • 64 This impression is informed by the finds of the excavations I am co‑directing at Lyktos/Lyttos (see (...)
  • 65 Haggis, Mook 1993, p. 277, fabric type XVI (Late Minoan IIIC) [cf. the comment by Peter Day in Cold (...)

31MFG F can be associated tentatively with petrographic fabric group 2, which largely consists of Hellenistic pithos fragments. Nodarou considers this fabric group as broadly local and characterizes it as metamorphic with mica, as well as with “large fragments of low grade metamorphic rocks (phyllite), some quartzite and many fragments of quartz … [and] chert.” The uncertainties over the association of the macroscopic and the petrographic group in question are complicated by the exclusive representation of MFG F on large Classical cups and medium-sized jugs (only the feet of which could be identified) and Early Iron Age jugs with grooved neck (the wall thickness of these vessels is 0.4–0.6 cm).62 This narrow repertory raises the possibility of non-local provenance. Indeed, I have previously hypothesized that an amphoriskos and a body fragment of a similar piece, which are made in this fabric and were found in the cemetery of Dreros, may come from Lyktos/Lyttos and the district of Pediada,63 where coarse red micaceous fabrics are attested copiously.64 The micaceous fabrics of Early Iron Age Kavousi, however, may also be relevant.65 The question of the provenance of MFG F must remain open, but the traces of burning, which are commonly found on the feet of some of these vessels and are probably because of the conditions of firing, can tentatively be identified as a technological characteristic of the (Pediada?) workshop represented.

  • 66 Cf. Kotsonas 2008, pp. 236–237.
  • 67 Van Effenterre 1948, pp. 23–24, 37; Van Effenterre 2009, pp. 94–95.
  • 68 Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 55.

32A number of pieces published here do not belong to the MFGs treated above, hence their fabrics receive detailed catalogue entries below. These pieces are probably imported, mostly from elsewhere in Crete, rather than from overseas.66 Van Effenterre was the first to raise the possibility of imported ceramics at Dreros, and he tentatively identified a few Attic Geometric pieces.67 These identifications did not gain support, and Tsipopoulou considered a Cycladic provenance for them.68 The material discussed below does not involve any similar pieces.

4. Pottery from the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros (Temple A)

  • 69 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 25.
  • 70 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 27.
  • 71 Abbreviations: H: Height; D: Diameter; BD: Base Diameter; RD: Rim Diameter; L: Length; frg(s): frag (...)

33The sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros can be divided in four primary spatial units: 1) the West Terrace and 2) the East Terrace, which are outlined by architecture (Xanthoudidis considered that these were the sekos and the pronaos of the temple respectively,69 but the new research established that this was not the case); 3) the area south and east of the East Terrace, which does not involve any architecture; and 4) the North Terrace, which is the space Xanthoudidis identified as the “Archive.”70 This quadripartite division is maintained in the ensuing study of the pottery, which is structured on a contextual basis. The stratigraphy described below distinguishes between: a) the “backfill,” which translates the French term remblais de fouilles, and is applied to earth affected by the operations of Xanthoudidis or from illegal excavations in modern times; and b) the “fill,” which translates the French term remblais de construction, and characterizes earth layers formed in antiquity during construction, leveling operations and other arrangements. The discussion of the pottery from each context – and the entries of the corresponding catalogue – treat first the fine and decorated wares (which are generally more diagnostic) and then the plain and coarse wares. The material under consideration does not lend itself to synthetic typological analysis. This excludes the kalathoi and the ladles, the typological analysis of which is included in the discussion of the find contexts that yielded the bulk of these vessels. The catalogue entries provide the publication number, followed by the excavation number (e.g. P16 (4104.6)), and they document the state of preservation, the dimensions, the fabric and the morphology of the vessels.71

4.1. Pottery from the West Terrace

34The surface cleaning and the backfill of the West Terrace yielded some diagnostic pottery, but the richest material came from the fill of trenches 9 and 14 (below structure 5), which were adjacent to the east wall of the terrace. This fill is particularly important in revising existing ideas about the emergence and character of ritual activity at the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros.

4.1.1. Surface cleaning and backfill (figs. 3–4)

  • 72 Erickson 2002, pp. 59, 61, especially nos. 61 and 67 (Afrati).
  • 73 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 259, no. 471 (Kommos); Erickson 2002, pp. 71, 73, no. 99 (Syme Viannou (...)
  • 74 Cf. Erickson 2010a, p. 84, no. 121 (Eleutherna); p. 146, no. 327; pp. 157–158, nos. 352–353 (Knosso (...)
  • 75 Coldstream, Eiring 2001, p. 78. Cf. Erickson 2010a, pp. 104–108 (Eleutherna).
  • 76 Callaghan 1978, pp. 12–15; Coldstream, Eiring 2001, p. 82.
  • 77 See, for example, Erickson 2010a, pp. 64–76 (Eleutherna), 122 (Knossos).
  • 78 Apostolakou, Zographaki 2006, pp. 97–105. Many pieces are on display at the Archaeological Museum o (...)

35The surface cleaning operations on the West Terrace produced several diagnostic pieces, particularly from drinking vessels of Archaic or Classical date. P1 and P2 are feet of cups, the former of the late 5th century BC,72 the latter of the early to mid‑4th century BC.73 An early to mid‑4th century BC date is likely for the cup foot P3.74 The profile of two other open vessels, the low-necked cup P4 (H of lip 1.2),75 and the bell-krater P5, finds comparisons in different phases of the Early Iron Age to Early Classical periods, but the quality of manufacture favors a Late Archaic (–Early Classical) date. The krater can be associated with the Knossian “Household Krater Type II,” and especially with the earliest examples of the Late Archaic period.76 Two black-gloss sherds are imports of the Archaic–Classical periods. P6 is a small closed vessel, which probably comes from within the island. On the contrary, P7, a piece from the lower body of a footed cup, is possibly an Attic import. Although not particularly common, such imports are known from Crete,77 and finds from Olous suggest the availability of such material in the Gulf of Mirabello.78

  • 79 Cf. Erickson 2010a, pp. 205–208, nos. 465–480 (Praisos).
  • 80 Cf. Erickson 2002, p. 73, no. 99 (Syme Viannou).

36Two feet are fairly large and must belong to jugs, rather than cups. The profile of P8 finds comparisons on Archaic jugs and cups,79 while the larger foot P9 (which is made in a peculiar coarse fabric) occurs on jugs of the early to mid‑4th century BC.80

37The ladle, a shape that is widely attested in trenches east and south of the East Terrace (see below), is largely missing from the West (and also the East) Terrace. The typology of the Drerian ladles is explained below, with reference to the rich material from trench 17. P10 can be assigned to type IIa, and P11 to the related sub‑type IIb, but the handle P12 cannot be classified.

  • 81 Van Effenterre 1948, pp. 29–30; Van Effenterre 2009, pp. 110–116.
  • 82 Kotsonas 2005, p. 160.

38Lastly, P13 is tentatively identified as the disk of a coarse stirrup jar. Stirrup-jars are well-represented in the cemetery of Dreros,81 and elsewhere in Early Iron Age Crete,82 but they are usually made in fine ware.

Fig. 3 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the surface cleaning and the backfill of the West Terrace: P1, P3, P4, P5, P6, P7, P8, P9 (outside and inside), P10, P11, P12, and P13.

Fig. 3 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the surface cleaning and the backfill of the West Terrace: P1, P3, P4, P5, P6, P7, P8, P9 (outside and inside), P10, P11, P12, and P13.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 4 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the surface cleaning and the backfill of the West Terrace: P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, P8, P9, P10, and P13.

Fig. 4 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the surface cleaning and the backfill of the West Terrace: P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, P8, P9, P10, and P13.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

P1 (4006.4‑5). Cup, two non-joining frgs. of foot.
H. 1.6. BD. 8. Fabric F, c. High conical foot with shallow groove on the top and traces of burning.

P2 (4048.1). Cup, frg. of lower body and foot.
H. 1.8. BD. 7. Fabric F, sc. Conical foot, with dropped floor.

P3 (4228.2). Cup, frg. of foot.
H. 2.6. BD. 7. Fabric F, sf. Flaring low conical foot.

P4 (4054.1). Cup, part of body and lip with handle.
H. 5.7. Fabric C, sf. Fairly short, everted lip, bellied body, broad strap handle. Coated in slip, black on the outside, brown-red on the inside.

P5 (4105.1). Bell-krater, part of shoulder and lip mended from two sherds.
H. 7.5. RD. 33. Fabric C, sf. to sc. Continuous profile from the body to the short, slightly everted lip. Coated in black slip.

P6 (4006.6). Small closed vessel, body frg.
H. 2.3. D. max. 7. Fine, soft, slightly powdery, reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) fabric. The exterior is covered in black gloss.

P7 (4017.3). Cup, part of bottom.
H. 1.5. Pink (5YR 7/4) fabric with little silver mica. Very shallow body preserving the attachment of the foot. Coated in black gloss.

P8 (4141.5). Jug (or cup), frg. of lower body and foot.
H. 2. BD. 8. Fabric F, c. Low conical foot with traces of burning.

P9 (4124.4). Jug (or cup), frg. of foot and lower body.
H. 2.3. BD. 10. Hard, light red (2.5YR 6/8) fabric with many red, some white and a few dark inclusions. Tall conical foot with dropped floor.

P10 (4160.1). Ladle, frg. of body and lip.
H. 3.8. RD. 15. Fabric B, sc. Hemispherical body and flat lip.

P11 (4040.3). Ladle (?), frg. of body and lip.
H. 2.5. Fabric B, sc. Hemispherical body and rounded lip.

P12 (4260.1). Ladle, frg. of handle and lip.
L. 4.2. Fabric B, c. Flat lip. Curved handle, elliptical in section.

P13 (4015.1). Stirrup jar (?), frg. of disc top.
H. 1.2. Fabric B, c.‑sc. The disc top preserves the attachment of one handle and has a concentric relief spiral on top.

4.1.2. Fill (and related layers)

39The excavation of trenches 9, 14, 16, and the baulk between trenches 9 and 14, reached down to the fill. However, the material from the fill of trench 16 was little and undiagnostic, while the limited material from trench 9 comes from layers which cannot be securely identified as either fill or backfill. Nevertheless, the fill of trench 14 produced copious material.

4.1.2.1. Trench 9

4.1.2.1.1. Trench 9: layers of indeterminate character (figs. 5–6)

40Zembils 4092 and 4097 yielded very few diagnostic fragments. A piece from these zembils joins one from the fill (see P20 below), while another fragment possibly joins a piece from trench 14.

  • 83 Mook 1993, pp. 35, 329, no. P1.93.
  • 84 Zographaki, Gaignerot-Driessen, Devolder 2012–2013, p. 533, no. i.

41Ladle P14, one of the very few ladles not made in MFG B, can be assigned to the earlier type Ia. The profile of basin P15 recalls P41 (below), finds a close Early Iron Age comparison from Kavousi Kastro,83 and recalls a Geometric piece from Anavlochos.84

P14 (4092.2). Ladle, frg. of body and lip.
H. 2.6. RD. 14. Fabric D, sf. Carinated body and fairly broad, everted lip.

P15 (4092.6). Basin, frg. of body and lip.
H. 4. Fabric D, sc. Short, sharply everted lip, with ridge below and straight wall tapering sharply toward the base.

4.1.2.1.2. Trench 9: fill (figs. 5–6)

42The material from the fill (zembils 4104, 4111, 4115, 4138, 4139, 4145) is less fragmentary than that discussed above, and includes more diagnostic pieces. Open vessels of small and medium size predominate.

  • 85 Cf. Kotsonas 2008, p. 208, type Bv (Eleutherna, with comparisons from elsewhere in Crete).
  • 86 Coldstream, Macdonald 1997, p. 213, nos. F.11 and F.14.

43The profile and especially the tall lip (1.7 cm) of the coated cup P16 is indicative of a (Late Geometric–) Early Protoarchaic date.85 A Geometric–Protoarchaic date is also suggested for the fragments of two medium-sized closed vessels decorated with bands (P17 and P18). Ladle P19 belongs to the earlier type Ia, whereas kalathoi P20 and P21 belong to the kalathos types III and I respectively (the typology of the ladles and the kalathoi is treated below). Lastly, basin P22 has a distinct profile, which finds early 7th century BC comparisons from Knossos.86

Fig. 5 — Photographs of pottery fragments from trench 9, and from the baulk between trenches 9 and 14 in the West Terrace: P14, P15, P18, P21, P22, and P23.

Fig. 5 — Photographs of pottery fragments from trench 9, and from the baulk between trenches 9 and 14 in the West Terrace: P14, P15, P18, P21, P22, and P23.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 6 — Drawings of pottery fragments from trench 9, from the fill of trench 9, and from the baulk between trenches 9 and 14 in the West Terrace: P14, P15, P16, P19, P20, P22, and P23.

Fig. 6 — Drawings of pottery fragments from trench 9, from the fill of trench 9, and from the baulk between trenches 9 and 14 in the West Terrace: P14, P15, P16, P19, P20, P22, and P23.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

P16 (4104.6). Cup, frg. of body and lip.
H. 3.5. RD. 13. Fabric D. Bellied body and tall offset lip. Fully coated in black slip.

P17 (4111.2). Medium-sized closed vessel, frg. of body and base.
H. 4.5. BD. 6. Fabric D. Ovoid (?) body and flat base. Traces of slip on the exterior. Band in red slip on the lowest part of the body.

P18 (4115.1). Medium-sized closed vessel, frg. of body.
H. 4. Light red (2.5YR 6/6) fabric, very pale brown (10YR 8/3) toward the surfaces, with many small and medium-sized dark grey inclusions. Slim band between two broad ones, rendered in black slip.

P19 (4104.4). Ladle, frg. of body and lip.
H. 3.7. RD. 17. Fabric B, sc. Carinated body and flat lip.

P20 (4104.3+4097.1). Kalathos, frg. of body and lip.
H. 4.8. Fabric B, sc. Short, sharply everted lip with groove below; straight wall which tapers toward the base.

P21 (4115.2). Kalathos, three joining frgs. of body and lip.
H. 6.5. RD. 32. Fabric A, sc. Flat lip and straight wall tapering toward the base. Traces of burning on the interior.

P22 (4134.1). Basin, five joining frgs. of body and lip.
H. 4.1. RD. 36. Fabric D. The vase was deformed during firing. Carinated body and sharply everted lip, which overhangs both the exterior and the interior.

4.1.2.2. Baulk between trenches 9 and 14 (figs. 5 and 6)

  • 87 Cf. Kotsonas 2008, pp. 206–207, types Bii-Biii (Eleutherna, with comparisons from elsewhere in Cret (...)

44The little pottery recovered from this baulk comes from the fill (zembils 4090, 4091, 4096). The profile and especially the short lip (1 cm) of the coated cup P23 is indicative of a Middle Geometric date.87

P23 (4090.4). Cup, frg. of body and lip.
H. 2.2. RD. 11. Fabric D. Bellied body and low offset lip. Traces of brown slip on the exterior.

4.1.2.3. Trench 14 (figs. 7–12)

  • 88 Mulliez 2011; Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, p. 633; Farnoux, Kyriakidis, Zographaki 2012, p. 183; Zogra (...)

45Preliminary reports on the recent excavations at the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros highlight the discovery of the rich deposit of pottery and figurines in trench 14, below structure 5, the top of which had previously been exposed by Xanthoudidis.88 The ceramic material from the fill of this deposit (zembils 4103, 4125, 4129, 4130, 4150, 4151, 4152) is very different to the material from the overlying layers of the West Terrace. Indeed, the deposit yielded abundant diagnostic pieces which are considerably less fragmented than usual. Open vessels predominate, and the minimum number of pieces from the different shapes is as follows: two kraters, two small jugs, one skyphos, eight cups or, less likely, skyphoi (the six vertical handles preserved clearly belong to cups; three of the eight vessels are monochrome and three are decorated more elaborately), and eighteen kalathoi and basins (ten pieces can be reconstructed to a great extent, while eight more are estimated on the basis of lip fragments, with fabrics also taken into account). There were many cross-joins within the assemblage, and between this assemblage and zembils in other contexts, as explained below.

  • 89 Cf. Mook 2004, p. 175, fig. 12/10: A, E, F, L.
  • 90 Kotsonas 2008, p. 206, type Bii (Eleutherna, with comparisons from elsewhere in Crete).
  • 91 Kotsonas 2008, p. 207, type Biii (Eleutherna, with comparisons from elsewhere in Crete).
  • 92 Kotsonas 2008, pp. 207–208, type Biv (Eleutherna, with comparisons from elsewhere in Crete).

46The deposit in question yielded a notable concentration of cups and skyphoi. The earliest piece is the coated cup P24, the size (RD. 11 cm) and short everted lip of which favor an Early Geometric–Middle Geometric date.89 The coated cup P25 with its narrow rough base and low lip (1 cm) finds Early Geometric–Middle Geometric comparisons from elsewhere in Crete,90 whereas the broader mouth and low (0.8 cm) lip of P26 favor a Middle Geometric date.91 A later, Late Geometric (–Early Protoarchaic) date, is suggested for the coated cup P27, which is considerably larger and has a taller lip (1.2 cm).92 P28 is of similar size and preserves light colored slip, which indicates that the piece once carried decoration.

  • 93 Van Effenterre 2009, pp. 123–124, nos. 15, 15bis and 15ter (for the first piece, see also Van Effen (...)
  • 94 Cf. Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 134, no. 2385 (Late Geometric piece from Agios Georgios).
  • 95 Coldstream 1996, p. 382, no. 76.2.
  • 96 Cf. Van Effenterre 2009, p. 123, nos. 14 and 14bis (for the first piece, see also Van Effenterre 19 (...)
  • 97 Cf. Van Effenterre 2009, p. 94, fig. 34, no. 2 and pl. vi.1; Zographaki, Gaignerot-Driessen, Devold (...)
  • 98 Mook 1993, p. 219, nos. P1.96 and P7.108.

47Skyphos P29, with banded decoration on the shoulder and the lip, finds three close comparisons from the cemetery of Dreros, which Van Effenterre considered Middle Geometric.93 The type seems rare elsewhere in Crete, but there is a Late Geometric comparison from Agios Georgios in Sitia,94 and another, Late Geometric/Early Orientalizing piece, from Knossos.95 A Late Geometric–Early Protoarchaic date is suggested for P29 because of its fairly tall lip (1.5 cm). Two other skyphoi, with vertical lines on the shoulder (P30 and P31), find one comparison from the East Terrace (P76) and two more from the cemetery of Dreros.96 P31 (and P76), with the frieze of vertical lines, must be Late Geometric, especially because of its short lip profile. P30 with its taller lip (1.5 cm) and the groups of vertical lines which alternate empty (?) metopes is considered Early Protoarchaic.97 Lastly, the profile of krater P32 finds close Late Geometric–Early Protoarchaic comparisons from the site (see P58 and P103 below), as well as Late Geometric parallels from Kavousi.98

48The only closed vessels are two medium-sized jugs (P33, P34). Both preserve undiagnostic parts of their profile, but their simple linear decoration suggests a Geometric–Protoarchaic date.

49Plain and coarse wares abound among this material. Ladles, however, remain rare, as in the backfill of this terrace. P35 and P36 can be assigned to type Ia and confirm the early attestation of the type.

  • 99 Cf. Mook 1993, pp. 168, 210 (Kavousi); Day 2011, p. 282 (Karphi).
  • 100 Palermo 1992, pp. 58–62.
  • 101 Seiradaki 1960, p. 9; Day 2011, p. 282.
  • 102 E.g. Coldstream 1972, p. 86, fig. 9.
  • 103 E.g. Palermo 1992, p. 59, fig. 10.

50The typological range of the basins from trench 14 (and from the sanctuary in general) is very broad, which may suggest that the shape served a range of functions. Some pieces – including P41 and P42 from the West Terrace, and P88, P89 and P90 from the East Terrace (on which see below) – show traces of burning, which can be taken as evidence for the use of basins for food preparation.99 Drerian basins are typically made in plain semi-coarse fabrics and often show thick wall (thicker than that of the kalathoi). Hardly any full profile is preserved and the shape resists typological classification because of the great variation in the form of the lip. High variation also characterizes the profile of the basins which were produced in a single ceramic workshop at Prinias around 600 BC.100 Most of the basins from the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros show carination or ridge below the lip. This attribute is attested on different types of Late Minoan IIIC basins from Karphi,101 is less common on Knossian Protogeometric–Geometric examples,102 and wanes off from the Protoarchaic period.103

  • 104 Kotsonas 2008, p. 226, type C.
  • 105 Coldstream 1973a, p. 39, no. H41; Moignard 1996, p. 452; Coldstream 2002, p. 63.
  • 106 Palermo 1992, p. 66, nos. 140 and 142.
  • 107 Johnston 1993, p. 349, no. 42.
  • 108 Kritzas 2006, pp. 186–187, fig. 3.
  • 109 Kotsonas 2008, pp. 217–226, types A and B (handles were shown to be important for the typology and (...)
  • 110 Kotsonas 2008, p. 220, type Aia, nos. A140β and A138.
  • 111 Kotsonas 2008, pp. 220–221, type Aia, no. A151.
  • 112 Day, Glowacki 2012, p. 118, no. N2 P12.
  • 113 Haggis 2005, p. 133, no. 71.8.
  • 114 Wallace 2010b, p. 30, nos. AYP 10 and AYPNE 10.
  • 115 Palermo 1992, pp. 58–61, nos. 70–71 and 88.
  • 116 Wallace 2010b, p. 54, no. RKES 2.

51Close Geometric–Archaic comparisons are available for the basins from the context in question. The profile of basin P37 is matched on Protoarchaic (–Archaic) examples from Eleutherna,104 Knossos,105 Prinias,106 Kommos,107 and the sanctuary by the peak of Mt. Ida.108 The lipless basins P38, P39 and P40 adhere to a Geometric–Protoarchaic type, which has only been studied in the case of Eleutherna109 (the pieces from Eleutherna are largely fine wares, whereas those from Dreros are coarsewares). P38 and P39, which present strong technological and morphological similarities and must come from the same workshop, are characterized by convex wall and find Early Geometric–Middle Geometric comparisons at Eleutherna,110 whereas the straight wall and grooves of P40 characterize a Middle Geometric example from that site.111 The profile of basin P41, and of the related P42, finds Late Minoan IIIC comparisons from Kavousi Vronda,112 and Azoria,113 and Late Minoan IIIC to Protoarchaic ones from Kera Papoura.114 Conversely, basins from Prinias, dating from around 600 BC,115 and a probably earlier piece from Rotasi Kephala,116 match the profile of P43 and P44, the lip of which overhangs both the exterior and the interior.

  • 117 Mulliez 2011; Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, p. 633; Farnoux, Kyriakidis, Zographaki 2012, p. 183; Zogra (...)
  • 118 On fine ware kalathoi, see Kotsonas 2008, pp. 216–217 (with references).
  • 119 Cf. Seiradaki 1960, p. 11.

52The discovery of a considerable number of kalathoi in the context in question received considerable attention in preliminary reports.117 These vessels are typically made in plain, often coarse ware, and as such they are differentiated from their Cretan fine ware counterparts, which served as bowls for offerings and as urn lids in the Early Iron Age.118 The bowl of the Drerian kalathoi is deep with relatively thin wall (0.5–0.7 cm) splaying toward the lip, which is not pronounced. All vessels are wobbly and show imperfections and prominent wheelmarks.119

  • 120 Day 2011, p. 274.
  • 121 Seiradaki 1960, p. 11; Day 2011, p. 274.
  • 122 Mook 1993, pp. 240–241.

53In her study of the pottery from Karphi, Leslie Preston Day summarized the problems with the typological classification of the kalathoi: “The kalathos shape is simple and has few variations, generally in the treatment of the rim and the base; it resists easy typological distinctions.”120 At Karphi, different types were identified on the basis of the profile of the rim and the base, but “any rim may occur on any base.”121 A typology based on rim profile is also available for the material from Kavousi Kastro.122 As indicated by the material from these two sites, vessel profile is not characteristic of any specific date.

54Three types of kalathoi can be distinguished on the material from the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros:

  • 123 Cf. the lip of type 2 kalathoi from Karphi (Seiradaki 1960, pp. 11–12).

55Type I is characterized by simple flat lip.123 Vessels from this type (P45, P46, and also P21 above) are made in MFG A. One example of the type carries a plastic horn on the lip (P45), whereas the two better preserved pieces show traces of burning on the interior (P21 and P46).

  • 124 Cf. the lip of type 4 kalathoi from Karphi (Seiradaki 1960, pp. 11–12).

56Type II shows a flat lip, which overhangs the interior of the bowl.124 Vessels from this type are made in MFG A (P47, P48) and C (?) (P49). P47 preserves full profile and P49 two handle attachments; both pieces show traces of slip. All three vases carry traces of burning on the interior. The well-preserved P47 forms a pair with P50 (which preserves no lip): they are both made in MFG A and show similar profile and manufacturing imperfections. The two vessels must come from the same workshop.

  • 125 Cf. isolated examples from Karphi (Day 2011, pp. 273–274, nos. K26.7 and K149.21) and kalathos type (...)

57Type III is characterized by flat lip, which overhangs the exterior.125 Vessels from this type (P51, and also P20 above and P74 below) are made in MFGs B and D. P51, which preserves full profile, is made in MFG D, like other fragmentary kalathoi from the same deposit which cannot be assigned to specific types (P52, P53, P54, P55). Most vessels made in this fabric (P51, P52, P55) show traces of burning on the interior.

58A fourth type is perhaps represented by kalathoi P56 and P57, which stand out in having been made in MFG C that is otherwise rarely used for the shape. The low conical base of P57 is peculiar, but the two vessels preserve no lip and therefore resist classification. Both carry traces of burning on the interior.

  • 126 Day 2011, pp. 274–275 (Karphi); Tsipopoulou 2004, p. 115 (Khalasmenos).
  • 127 Gesell 1999, p. 285 (with references).
  • 128 Gesell 1999.
  • 129 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 232, no. 197; Johnston 2000, p. 219, no. 114; Johnston 2005, p. 357, n (...)
  • 130 Secondary burning is highly unlikely, since the animal figurines found together with the kalathoi h (...)
  • 131 Day 2011, p. 274. Contrast the kalathoi from the Late Minoan IIIC sanctuary at Kavousi Vronda, some (...)
  • 132 Mook 1993, p. 335, no. P1.121; p. 402, no. P3.141.
  • 133 Haggis et al. 2011, p. 60, n. 145.
  • 134 Anzalone 2013, p. 231.
  • 135 Gesell 1999, p. 286.
  • 136 Day 2011, p. 274; cf. Wallace 2020, p. 86.
  • 137 Haggis et al. 2011, p. 60, n. 145.
  • 138 Rutter 2013, pp. 36–37.
  • 139 Cf. Gesell 1999, p. 286.

59The discovery of coarse kalathoi in both domestic and ritual contexts in Late Minoan IIIC Karphi and Khalasmenos suggests these vessels were multifunctional.126 Similar kalathoi were found in the Late Minoan IIIA2–IIIB sanctuaries of Gournia and Kannia,127 and the Late Minoan IIIC sanctuary at Kavousi Vronda,128 while a few Geometric and Early Protoarchaic examples were identified at the sanctuary of Kommos.129 The function of the kalathoi from the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros is indicated by the traces of burning, which occur on the interior (but not on the exterior) of nearly all well-preserved examples, and are attributed to the primary use of these vessels.130 Many of the kalathoi from Karphi also show traces of burning and must have been used in fire-related activities.131 Similar traces are identifiable on kalathoi from Kavousi Kastro,132 Azoria,133 and Gortyn.134 According, to Geraldine Gesell, some kalathoi could have been used for the burning of incense or for food offerings.135 Preston Day has hypothesized that the kalathoi from Karphi were used as lamps or as braziers,136 and the Archaic pieces from Azoria are also taken to have been used as lamps.137 More recently, Jeremy Rutter argued that the kalathos-lamp replaced the stone lamp in Postpalatial Crete, especially from the Late Minoan IIIA2 period onward.138 The Drerian kalathoi confirm the persistence of the use of the shape for fire-related activities, probably including lighting, into the Early Iron Age. It remains possible, however, that individual pieces from the sanctuary on the west acropolis were used as containers of food offerings.139

  • 140 Marinatos 1936, pp. 267–268, fig. 31; Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 54, 411, pl. 105, no. H∆ (right).
  • 141 Alexiou 1956, pp. 13, 15, no. 16; Coulson et al. 1997, p. 328, fig. 8:5; Gesell 1999, pp. 284–285, (...)
  • 142 Seiradaki 1960, p. 11, type 3; Day 2011, p. 274.
  • 143 Lebessi 1985, p. 268, pl. 127ε; Kotsonas 2024, p. 153, no. P262, p. 222, no. P420.
  • 144 Johnston 2000, p. 219, no. 114.
  • 145 Platon 1945–1947, p. 64, no. 87; pp. 81–82, n. 1.
  • 146 Marinatos 1937, pp. 283–284, fig. 7, upper left.
  • 147 Rizza 2008, p. 135, no. H5.
  • 148 Johannowsky 2002, pp. 42–44, nos. 294–298. Another piece is published as Late Minoan IIIC (Anzalone(...)
  • 149 Kotsonas 2005, p. 224.
  • 150 Hallager E., Hallager B. (eds.) 1997, p. 54, no. 73-P 0122.
  • 151 Platon 1945–1947, pp. 81–82, n. 1.
  • 152 Gesell 1999, p. 285; Gessel 2004, p. 141.

60Kalathos P45, with the horn attachment on the lip, is comparable to P87 from the East Terrace (see below), and to several pieces from the area of Dreros Temple B.140 Kalathoi with horns or bosses on the lip are also attested at several Cretan sites of the Late Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age and are typically found in sanctuaries from east to west Crete, namely at: Kavousi (Late Minoan IIIC to Early Orientalizing),141 Karphi (Late Minoan IIIC–Subminoan),142 Syme Viannou (Late Minoan IIIC–Protogeometric),143 Kommos,144 Agies Paraskies (Geometric–Orientalizing),145 Gazi (Late Minoan IIIB),146 Prinias (Orientalizing (?)),147 Gortyn (Early Orientalizing),148 Eleutherna (Protoarchaic),149 and Khania (Late Geometric II).150 Nikolaos Platon assumed that these bosses served to hold firebrands, recalling the Eleusinian kernoi,151 but the finds from Kavousi suggest that the bosses represent horns of consecration.152

Fig. 7 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P24, P25, P26, P29, P30, P31, P33, P34, P35 and P36.

Fig. 7 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P24, P25, P26, P29, P30, P31, P33, P34, P35 and P36.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 8 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P37, P38, P39, P41, P42, P44, P46 and P47.

Fig. 8 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P37, P38, P39, P41, P42, P44, P46 and P47.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 9 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P48, P49 (two parts), P51, P52, P53, P54, P55 and P57.

Fig. 9 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P48, P49 (two parts), P51, P52, P53, P54, P55 and P57.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 10 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P24, P26, P29, P30, P31, P32, P34, P35, P36, P37, and P38.

Fig. 10 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P24, P26, P29, P30, P31, P32, P34, P35, P36, P37, and P38.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

Fig. 11 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P39, P40, P41, P42, P43, P45, P47, P48, and P49.

Fig. 11 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P39, P40, P41, P42, P43, P45, P47, P48, and P49.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

Fig. 12 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P50, P51 (two fragments), P52, P53, P54, P56, and P57.

Fig. 12 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P50, P51 (two fragments), P52, P53, P54, P56, and P57.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

P24 (4150.12). Cup, frg. of body and lip.
H. 1.9. RD. 11. Fabric B, sc. Short everted lip in continuous profile with the bell-shaped (?) body. Fully coated in black to brown slip.

P25 (4130.3). Cup, twenty-four non-joining frgs., which could represent more than one vase. Possible joins come from the fill of trench 14 (4125, 4152), and from the backfill of trench 16 (4142: cup base).
H. 3.1. RD. 11. BD. 3.8. Fabric E. Short offset lip, bellied body, flat base and vertical handle, elliptical in section. Fully coated in dark brown slip.

P26 (4150-OB002). Cup, ten joining and two non-joining frgs. Three sherds from zembil 4150, three from 4151 and two from 4130.
H. 6.3. RD. 12. Fabric E. Short offset lip and bellied body. Coated in black slip.

P27 (4150.1). Large cup, eight joining and six non-joining frgs. of body and lip.
H. 4.5. BD. 6. Fabric B, sc. High offset lip, bellied body and flat base. The vase is coated in black slip.

P28 (4150.11). Cup, frg. of body and lip.
H. 2.6. RD. 12. Fabric B, sc. Tall offset lip and bellied (?) body. Traces of pale slip on the exterior.

P29 (4130.2). Skyphos, two joining frgs. of body and lip.
H. 3. RD. 11. Fabric D. Low everted lip in continuous profile with the shallow body. Bands in black slip on the exterior and coating on the interior.

P30 (4103.2). Skyphos, part of body, handle and lip mended from six frgs. Four non-joining frgs. of body and lip perhaps belong to the same vase. Most of the sherds come from zembil 4103, and three from 4092.
H. 5.8. RD. 13. Fabric B, sc. Tall offset lip and shallow bellied body preserving part of a horizontal handle, round in section. Traces of pale and black slip on the exterior. A band adorns the lip and another the upper belly. The handle zone shows traces of a group of vertical lines.

P31 (4130.5). Cup/skyphos, frg. of body and lip.
H. 3.1. RD. 11. Fabric C, sf. Low everted lip in continuous profile with the shallow body. Decoration in red slip. Bands on the lip and zone with vertical lines on the shoulder. Coating (?) on the interior.

P32 (4150.4). Bell (?) krater, frg. of lip and neck.
H. 4.7. RD. 33. Fabric C, sc.‑c. Flat lip with high rounded ridge on the transition to the body. The exterior is covered in red slip.

P33 (4103.6+4092.5). Medium-sized pouring vessel, two joining frgs. of handle.
H. 4.2. Fabric D. Vertical strap handle adorned with three vertical bands in brown slip.

P34 (4130.1). Medium-sized pouring vessel, twelve frgs. joined in two groups, and eleven other frgs.
H. ca. 17. BD. 7. Fabric E. Ovoid body and flat base. The exterior was coated in black to brown slip and was perhaps partly banded.

P35 (4150.3). Ladle, two joining frgs. of lip, bowl and handle.
H. 3. RD. 17. Fabric B, sc. Carinated body and sharply everted lip. Flat handle with shallow groove on the upper surface.

P36 (4150.9). Ladle, frg. of body and lip.
H. 4. RD. 17. Fabric B, sc. Carinated body and sharply everted lip, turned downward.

P37 (4125.4). Basin, four joining frgs. of body and lip.
H. 8.4. RD. 26. Fabric D. The vase was deformed during firing. It has a sharply everted lip, triangular in section, and convex wall.

P38 (4129-OB004). Kalathos, two parts mended from a few frgs. Up to two dozen non-joining small frgs. (some of which may belong to P39).
H. 8.5. BD. 14. RD. 25. Fabric B. Handmade shallow bowl with convex wall rising to a simple rim. Distinct flat base. Traces of burnish. Heavy traces of burning on the interior.

P39 (4129-OB005). Kalathos, two parts mended from seven and eleven frgs. Up to two dozen non-joining small frgs.
H. 5.8. BD. 14.6. Fabric B. Handmade shallow bowl with convex wall. Distinct flat base. Traces of burnish. Heavy traces of burning on the interior and very limited ones on the exterior.

P40 (4151.2). Basin, two joining frgs. of body and lip.
H. 4.9. RD. 24. Fabric D, sc. Simple rim and straight wall, tapering slightly toward the base. One shallow groove below the rim, and three more further below.

P41 (4125.1). Basin, two joining frgs. of body and lip.
H. 6.4. RD. 32. Fabric D. Sharply everted lip with underlying ridge on the convex wall. Traces of burning on the interior.

P42 (4150.5). Large basin, two joining frgs. of body and lip. Two other joining frgs. of body and lip perhaps belong together.
H. 4. RD. 34. Fabric C, sc. Short, sharply everted lip with groove on the transition to the convex wall. Traces of burning on the lip and on the interior.

P43 (4103.4). Basin, frg. of body and lip.
H. 2.7. Fabric D. The lip is elliptical in section and overhangs both the exterior and the interior. The wall is straight and tapers sharply toward the base.

P44 (4150.2). Basin, four joining frgs. of body and lip.
H. 6. RD. 26. Fabric D. The vase is deformed from firing and has a lip which is elliptical in section and overhangs both the exterior and the interior. The wall is straight and tapers slightly toward the base.

P45 (4130.11). Kalathos, two frgs. of body and lip.
H. 3.4. RD. 24. Fabric A, sc. Flat lip and straight wall tapering sharply toward the base. Two conical attachments on the lip resemble horns.

P46 (4150.6). Kalathos, frg. of lip and body.
H. 4. RD. ca. 31. Fabric A, sc. Flat lip with high and straight wall tapering sharply toward the base.

P47 (4130-OB001). Kalathos, mended from many sherds and partly restored on the lip. Seven sherds come from zembil 4130, seven sherds from 4090, two sherds from 4091, one sherd from 4103, one sherd from 4125, two sherds from 4151, one sherd from 4192, and one sherd from 4111. Traces of burning on the interior.
H. 12.8. BD. 10.5. RD. 27.5. Fabric A. Flat distinct base, straight wall splaying toward the flat lip, which overhangs the interior and barely the exterior. Traces of brown slip on the exterior and the interior.

P48 (4130.10). Kalathos, two pairs of joining frgs. of body and lip. Three sherds from zembil 4130 and one from 4111.
H. 5.8. RD. 28. Fabric A, sc. Flat lip, slightly overhanging the interior, and straight wall tapering sharply toward the base.

P49 (4103.1). Kalathos, seven joining and one non-joining frg. of body and lip.
H. 12. RD. 39. Fabric C (?), c. Flat lip, which slightly overhangs the interior, and convex wall preserving the attachments of the horizontal handles. Traces of brown slip on both the exterior and the interior.

P50 (4129-OB006). Kalathos, large part mended from eight sherds.
H. 7.5. BD. 15. Fabric A. Flat base with heavy production marks on the underside. Straight (?) wall. Traces of burning on the interior.

P51 (4103-OB003). Kalathos, large part mended from eleven sherds. Three sherds come from zembil 4130 and one sherd from 4151.
H. 13.2. BD. 11.3. RD. 22. Fabric D. Flat base and straight wall splaying toward the flat lip, which overhangs the exterior. Traces of burning on the interior.

P52 (4129-OB001). Kalathos, large part mended from twenty-two frgs.; also, a dozen non-joining small frgs.
H. 10. BD. 14. Fabric D. Flat base and straight wall. Limited traces of burning on the interior.

P53 (4129-OB003). Kalathos, small part mended from six sherds. Two dozen non-joining small frgs.
H. 4.8. BD. 13. Fabric D. Flat base and straight (?) wall. Limited traces of burning on the interior.

P54 (4130-OB002). Kalathos, one part mended from eight sherds and slightly restored; four more sherds mended in pairs.
H. 4.7. BD. 11. Fabric D. Made on a slow wheel (?). Distinct flat base and straight (?) wall. No traces of burning.

P55 (4130-OB003). Kalathos, one part mended from twelve sherds and slightly restored. No traces of burning.
H. 4.8. BD. 10.5. Fabric D. Distinct flat base and straight (?) wall.

P56 (4103-OB004). Kalathos, large part mended from twenty sherds (seven sherds from zembil 4130 and two from 4103). A dozen non-joing small to medium-sized frgs.
H. 9.5. BD. 9–9.5. Fabric D. Flat distinct base, very worn. Straight wall. Limited traces of burning on the interior.

P57 (4129-OB002). Kalathos, large part mended from six sherds. Limited traces of burning on the interior.
H. 8.6. BD. 12. Fabric C. Low conical base with string marks on the underside. Straight wall.

Cross-joins between this deposit and zembils in neighboring trenches of the West Terrace (including both catalogued and non-catalogued pieces):

1) A large open vessel with incisions on the lip is represented by one piece from zembil 4151, which joins one piece from the fill of trench 9 (zembil). There is also a non-joining fragment from 4103 (trench 14).

2) Parts of a handle were found in zembils 4151 and 4090, the latter zembil originating from the baulk between trenches 9 and 14.

3) Several fragments of kalathos P47 come from the baulk between trenches 9 and 14.

Joining and non-joining fragments between this deposit and the backfill of the same trench or of neighboring trenches of the West Terrace:

1) Fragments from a coated cup come from zembil 4125, and probably also from the backfill of trench 14 (4124, 4126).

2) One piece from zembil 4152 joins another from the backfill of trench 14 (4134).

3) P33 presents a cross-join between this deposit and the backfill of trench 9.

4) Non-joining fragments of a basin come from zembil 4150, and also 4134 in the backfill of trench 14.

5) Two non-joining fragments of a krater come from zembil 4150, and also 4097 in the backfill of trench 9.

6) Two non-joining fragments of a basin come from zembil 4152, and also 4097 in the backfill of trench 9.

7) Cup P25 has possible cross-joins in the fill of trench 14 (4125, 4152), but also from the surface of trench 16 (4142).

Cross-joins between this deposit and finds from the backfill of the other terraces:

1) Kalathos P47 has two joining fragments from the backfill of the East Terrace, and another from the backfill of trench 17.

2) Kalathos P48 joins a piece from zembil 4111 on the surface of the East Terrace.

3) One piece from zembil 4152 joins another from 4135 on the surface of the East Terrace.

4) One piece from zembil 4103 joins another from 4197 on the surface from the North Terrace.

4.1.2.4. Trench 16

61This trench yielded very little and very fragmentary material, hence no piece was catalogued. The material suggests that zembils 4142, 4143 and 4146 belong to the backfill. However, a piece from zembil 4142 probably belongs together with several cup fragments from the fill of trench 14 (see P25 above).

4.2. Pottery from the East Terrace

62The exploration of the East Terrace was most productive on the north and, secondarily, the central part. Trenches 7, 8 and 20 covered almost the entire north part, whereas trench 22 was planted on the central part. The surface cleaning and the backfill yielded roughly as much diagnostic material as the fill.

4.2.1. Surface cleaning (figs. 13–14)

63The material recovered from the surface cleaning operations dates mostly from the Protoarchaic period, but also includes a few Archaic–Classical pieces and a modern one. The material is characterized by small to medium-sized open and pouring vessels.

  • 153 Van Effenterre 1948, p. 37; Van Effenterre 2009, p. 96.
  • 154 Marinatos 1936, pp. 265–266.
  • 155 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 510–511.
  • 156 On the attestation of this decorative scheme across Crete, see Kotsonas 2008, p. 58. For east Crete (...)

64The 7th century BC is represented by several pieces. First is P58, a fragment of a large bell (?) krater with white-on-dark decoration. The shape finds close comparisons in trenches 12 (P32) and 19 (P106). The decorative scheme is also attested at the cemetery of Dreros,153 and the area of Temple B,154 and is typical for east Cretan Protoarchaic pottery (having been introduced in the transition from the Late Geometric period).155 White-on-dark decoration occurs on Late Geometric and occasionally earlier pottery from the central and central-west part of the island.156

  • 157 Coldstream 2001, p. 70.
  • 158 Cf. Moignard 1996, p. 434, oinochoai of types A and D, jugs of type A.
  • 159 For the peculiar fabric and style of the vase, see: Kotsonas 2005, p. 761, no. I‑SK.7; Kotsonas 200 (...)
  • 160 See, for example, Coldstream, Catling (eds.) 1996, p. 115, no. 75.155 (Late Orientalizing).

65Two pieces show sets of double or triple circles in peculiar arrangements. Close comparisons are rare, but the idiosyncratic treatment of circular ornaments is characteristic of Cretan 7th century BC pottery.157 The triangular arrangement of (triple) concentric circles on pouring vessel P59 is probably inspired by Creto-Cypriot juglets and suggests a Protoarchaic date.158 The only comparison known to me for this peculiar arrangement is on a Cretan Late Geometric/Early Protoarchaic skyphos imported to Eleutherna.159 Less peculiar is the vertical arrangement of the double circles on the small krater P60.160

  • 161 For a closer Cretan imitation from Eleutherna, which is of Early Protoarchaic advanced/late date, s (...)
  • 162 Van Effenterre 1948, pp. 32–33, no. D 23; Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 56, 406, no. H∆. 23; Van Effenterre(...)
  • 163 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 371–379, nos. H1997, H1993, AN1787, H1992, H697, AN 1786.
  • 164 Palermo 1992, p. 73, no. 211.

66P61 is an aryballos with conical body, which follows loosely the shape of the advanced Protocorinthian aryballos.161 The type is rare in east Crete, where aryballoi are typically globular, but an Early Protoarchaic piece from the cemetery of Dreros also shows a straight-sided, even if cylindrical, body.162 A Protoarchaic date is also probable for hydria P62, which shows a ridge below the lip. This feature gains some popularity on east Cretan hydriae of the Late Geometric-late and especially the Early Protoarchaic period.163 The thick lip of P62, and also of P95 below, finds a comparison in Prinias dating from the Protoarchaic/Archaic transition.164

  • 165 Coldstream 1996, pp. 336–337; Coldstream 2001, p. 23; Kotsonas 2008, p. 92.
  • 166 For a few Late Geometric–Protoarchaic pieces, see: Levi 1927–1929, pp. 370–371, fig. 487 (Afrati; t (...)
  • 167 East Crete: Hall 1914, p. 99, fig. 54: Late Geometric (?) (Vrokastro); Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 312, 3 (...)

67Closed vessel P63, which preserves part of a bucranium handle, shows peculiar fabric and pale slip and must be an import from elsewhere in Crete. This type of handle is typically associated with belly-handled amphorae, and was introduced in the central Cretan ceramic repertory by imported Attic Middle Geometric I examples.165 The central Cretan examples are basically Protogeometric B to Early Geometric,166 but Middle Geometric to Early Protoarchaic pieces are known from east and west Cretan sites.167 A Geometric to Early Protoarchaic date is probable for P63.

  • 168 Erickson 2002, pp. 59, 61, especially nos. 59, 62, 68 (Afrati).
  • 169 On the Cretan kantharos, see: Coldstream, Eiring 2001, p. 80; Eiring 2001, pp. 97–98; Erickson 2010 (...)
  • 170 Watrous 2012, p. 164, fig. 47:D9, pl. 40:D35–D36 (one of the last two is misspelled D38 in fig. 47)
  • 171 Hayden et al. 2005, p. 48, fig. 80, no. 2360.
  • 172 Erickson 2010b, pp. 316–317, fig. 9:2 (475–450 BC), with a less pronounced collared lip.

68The material that post-dates the Early Iron Age is limited. The peculiar foot of P64 belongs to a high-necked cup of the late 5th century BC.168 The small handle fragment P65, which belongs to a black gloss kantharos imported to Dreros perhaps from elsewhere in Crete, cannot be dated with any precision other than (Classical–) Hellenistic.169 A Classical date is suggested for the collared lip of basin P66, which finds comparisons from Prophetes Elias in the Isthmus of Ierapetra,170 Vrokastro,171 and Priniatikos Pyrgos.172 From the two ladles identified, the fragmentary P67 probably belongs to type IIa, and P68 to the rare type III, which is possibly the earliest (see below). Lastly, the dark green glazing of P69 is suggestive of a modern date.

Fig. 13 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the surface cleaning and the backfill of the East Terrace: P58, P59, P60, P62, P63, P65, P66, P67, P68, P69, P71, P73, and P74.

Fig. 13 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the surface cleaning and the backfill of the East Terrace: P58, P59, P60, P62, P63, P65, P66, P67, P68, P69, P71, P73, and P74.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 14 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the surface cleaning of the East Terrace: P58, P59, P60, P61, P62, P64, P65, P66, P67, and P68.

Fig. 14 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the surface cleaning of the East Terrace: P58, P59, P60, P61, P62, P64, P65, P66, P67, and P68.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

P58 (4121.3). Krater, shoulder frg.
H. 5.5. D. max. ca. 27. Fabric B, sc. Bell-krater with high, sharp ridge below the lip. The upper edge shows part of a reserved band, but the rest of the exterior is covered in black slip and carries decoration in added white: a horizontal band below the ridge runs above densely spaced vertical lines. The upper edge of the interior has a band in dark slip.

P59 (4177.1). Pouring vessel, shoulder frg.
H. 3. D. max. 24. Fabric E. Shallow groove separates the shoulder from the neck and is covered in dark slip. Three triple concentric circles in triangular arrangement.

P60 (4121.6). Small krater, frg. of shoulder and neck.
H. 5. D. max. 24. Fabric E. Smooth transition from shoulder to neck. A band in dark slip runs on the lower part of the lip and two vertically arranged, triple concentric circles adorn the shoulder. The interior is coated.

P61 (4201.1). Aryballos, frg. of lower body and base.
H. 2.8. RD. 3. Fabric C, sf. Conical body and flat base with rough underside.

P62 (4177.2). Hydria, lip frg.
H. 2.1. RD. ca. 13. Fabric B, sc. Moulded lip and low ridge below.

P63 (4133.1). Large closed vessel, frg. of body and handle.
H. 9.2. Light red (2.5YR 7/8) fabric with very few brown-red inclusions. Horizontal double-arched rolled handle with triangular juncture with rounded tip (bucranium). The body carries pale slip and the handle dark slip.

P64 (4162.6). Cup, frg. of foot.
H. 1.5. BD. 7. Fabric E. High conical foot with dropped floor and deep groove on the underfoot. The vase was fully covered in slip, dark brown outside, brown-red inside.

P65 (4118.1). Kantharos, handle frg.
H. 3.1. Fine hard fired pink (7.5YR 7/4) fabric. Vertical handle, trapezoidal in section, getting broader toward the lip. Covered in black gloss.

P66 (4228.1+4123.2+4001.2). Basin, six non-joining frgs. of body and lip, tentatively attributed to one vase. The three joining fragments come from the backfill of the West (4228, 4123) and the East (4001) Terrace.
H. 3. RD. ca. 33. Light red (2.5YR 7/6) fabric with many red, and some white and glassy black inclusions. Conical body with folded lip, the lower edge of which creates a hawk’s beak effect. Two horizontal, broad and shallow grooves adorn the lip. The vase is fully covered in red slip.

P67 (4109.1). Ladle, frg. of body, lip and handle.
H. 1.7. RD. 10. Fabric B, sc. Probably hemispherical body and flat lip. Flat handle.

P68 (4163.1). Ladle, frg. of body and lip.
H. 3.8. RD. ca. 12. Fabric B, sc. Conical body with horizontal shallow grooves below the short flat lip.

P69 (4094.2). Medium-sized open vessel, body frg.
H. 2. D. max. 18. Very hard fired reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) fabric with a few dark inclusions. The interior is covered in dark green glaze.

4.2.2. Backfill (figs. 13 and 15)

  • 173 Cf. Kotsonas 2008, p. 208, type Bv (Eleutherna, with comparisons from elsewhere in Crete).
  • 174 Central Crete: for Early Iron Age examples from Knossos, see: Coldstream 1996, p. 347, type Eii; Co (...)
  • 175 Haggis 2012, p. 159, with reference to fig. 43:C109.
  • 176 The sherds in question are unpublished. They are numbered D272 and D273 and can be found in one of (...)
  • 177 Wallace 2010b, p. 40, no. KCM 75 (Kalo Chorio Maza).

69The zembils from the backfill (4059, 4060, 4061, 4062, 4063, 4065, 4066, 4069, 4070, 4217, 4219, 4271) yielded ample body fragments (though only a few from trench 8), and relatively few diagnostic pieces (none of which from trenches 20 and 22). Accordingly, these zembils are assigned to the backfill from Xanthoudidis’ excavation. The repertory of shapes represented is broad, from pithoi to cups, but decorated pieces are largely limited to monochrome cups. The banded body fragment P70 belongs to a small krater of Geometric–Protoarchaic date. The cup P71 is assigned to the (Late Geometric–) Early Protoarchaic period because of its tall lip (1.6 cm).173 Although the fabric of this piece may be a fine version of the local MFG E, it is hard fired and carries fairly lustrous black slip, which raises the possibility of importation from elsewhere in (north-central (?)) Crete. The fragments of one or two jugs of micaceous fabric (MFG F) and grooved neck (P72 and P73; see P99 below) can be assigned to a type that is commonly found in central and east Crete of the Early Iron Age,174 and is considered particularly common in east Crete during the Late Geometric and Protoarchaic periods.175 The coating of P72 is unusual, even though fine ware jugs with grooved and coated neck are known from the cemetery of Dreros.176 Kalathos P74, which belongs to the local type III, is one of the extremely few pieces of kalathoi that were found beyond the West Terrace (see P47, above, and P87 and perhaps P92 below). This piece finds a comparison of Late Minoan IIIC–Protogeometric date.177

Fig. 15 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the backfill of the East Terrace: P71, P73, and P74.

Fig. 15 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the backfill of the East Terrace: P71, P73, and P74.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

P70 (4063.9). Small krater, body frg.
H. 5. Fabric E. Decoration in black slip: three bands on the exterior, coating on the interior.

P71 (4069.2). Cup, frg. of lip and body.
H. 2.7. BD. 14. Fabric close to E, but harder and with better slip. Tall, almost vertical lip, coated in dark, slightly glossy slip.

P72 (4063.3). Jug (?), frg. of neck and rim.
H. 2.5. RD. 10. Fabric F, sc. Straight neck with simple rim. Black slip and five horizontal grooves on the neck.

P73 (4065.1). Jug (?), frg. of neck.
H. 4.1. D. max. 10. Fabric F, sc. Straight neck decorated with at least four horizontal grooves of decreasing size.

P74 (4065.2). Kalathos, part of upper body and lip.
H. 5. RD. ca. 40. Fabric B, sc. Conical body with low ridge well below the short horizontal lip.

4.2.3. Fill

4.2.3.1. Trench 7 (figs. 16–19)

70The material from the associated zembils (4071, 4075, 4078, 4081, 4083, 4084) is abundant, but highly fragmented, with any joins remaining rare. The many diagnostic pieces contrast the picture from the overlying backfill, but the range of shapes, styles and fabrics is similar to that from the backfill. P82 presents a join between the fill and the backfill of trench 7.

  • 178 Kotsonas 2009, p. 1052.
  • 179 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 84, 91, 409, no. H702. Also, cf. a slightly earlier example, which is either (...)
  • 180 See Kotsonas 2008, p. 208, type Biv for P78 and type Bv for P77 (Eleutherna, with comparisons from (...)

71P75 can be tentatively identified as a pendent semicircle skyphos, even though its shoulder decoration is worn. Adapting the form of imported Euboean skyphoi, Cretan potters introduced a type of large skyphos/small krater with pendent semicircles in the Middle Protogeometric–Late Protogeometric period.178 The type is basically limited to central Crete, but there is a Late Geometric example from Kavousi.179 A similar – or slightly later – date is likely for P75, given the height of its lip. A Late Geometric date is also suggested for skyphos P76, which recalls P30 and P31 and two pieces from the cemetery of Dreros (see above). The coated cups P77 and P78, with bellied bodies and fairly tall lips (1.6 and 1.2 cm), find copious Late Geometric and Early Protoarchaic comparisons from across Crete.180

  • 181 Haggis 2012, p. 159, fig. 43:C104–C105. A bowl of comparable profile, which comes from a Middle Geo (...)
  • 182 Hayden et al. 2005, p. 50, fig. 102, no. 2113; p. 51, fig. 95, no. 2078.
  • 183 Vogeikoff-Brogan, Kirkpatrick Smith 2009–2010, p. 95, no. 7 (the comparison mentioned on p. 91, n.  (...)
  • 184 Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 430, type a. Cf. a piece from Kommos, which has grooving on the lip, and comes (...)
  • 185 Callaghan 1992, p. 91, no. H2:4 (Knossos); Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 251, no. 403 (Kommos); Eric (...)

72Two fragmentary bowls, P79 and P80, belong to a poorly documented shape/type. The grooved profile of P79 is matched on P100 below, and the two vases find close comparisons from Prophetes Elias in the Isthmus of Ierapetra,181 Vrokastro,182 and Meseleroi.183 The examples from Prophetes Elias are tentatively dated to the Late Geometric period, and those from Vrokastro in the Archaic–Classical period, but the vase from Meseleroi comes from a closed context of the Early Protoarchaic period, which is perhaps suggestive of the date of all the pieces. Also, Donald Haggis (personal communication) reports Late Geometric to Early Protoarchaic examples from Kavousi Kastro and Protoarchaic pieces from Azoria. The Drerian vessels could represent an intermediate (Protoarchaic) stage in a sequence that commences with some Late Geometric shallow and lipless bowls from Praisos, which resemble lids and show no grooving,184 and concludes with some Archaic bowls from different Cretan sites, which show a deep form with grooving and very short, but distinct lip.185 It remains difficult to place P80 within the sequence because of its distinct lip.

  • 186 Erickson 2010a, p. 209, no. 482 (575–525 BC); p. 212, no. 504 (525–500 BC).
  • 187 Erickson 2002, p. 73, nos. 94 and 95 (Syme Viannou); Erickson 2010a, pp. 84–85, nos. 120 and 122 (E (...)

73Two open vessels are of later date. The profile of the foot of P81, a medium-sized open vessel that is probably imported from elsewhere in east Crete, finds comparisons on (smaller) high necked cups of the 6th century BC from the area of Praisos.186 The high foot of P82 is typical for the beginning of the 4th century BC.187

  • 188 Kotsonas 2008, p. 154, n. 1157 (hydriae); p. 161 (oinochoe); p. 253 (jugs).
  • 189 Kotsonas 2008, pp. 252–253 (with references). Also, cf. a piece from the cemetery of Dreros: Van Ef (...)
  • 190 Tray D308 consists of two joining fragments that preserve full profile. For the location of this pi (...)

74Pouring vessels include three small to medium-sized pieces (P83, P84, P85). The S on the handle of P85 is paralleled on Cretan pouring vessels of the Early Iron Age.188 Closer dating is possible for P84, since its set of bands with thick external band is suggestive of an Early Protoarchaic date. A class of jugs that is widely attested in north-central Crete typically combines this feature with concentric circles.189 P84 is imported to Dreros; a provenance from the Messara is likely because of the fine, very soft fabric. The fabric and dark slip of this piece find close comparison on an unpublished tray from the cemetery of Dreros.190

  • 191 Marinatos 1936, pp. 267–268, fig. 31; Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 54, 411, pl. 105, no. H∆ (right).
  • 192 See Kotsonas 2008, pp. 220–221, type Aia.
  • 193 See Kotsonas 2008, pp. 217–226.
  • 194 Coldstream 1973a, p. 54, no. 38.
  • 195 Day 2011, pp. 281–282, no. K44.7.

75Plain and coarse ware pottery was found in abundance, but there was only a single ladle, P86, which belongs to type IIb. P87, a horn attachment to the lip of a kalathos, is comparable to P45 from the West Terrace and to pieces from Temple B (see above).191 The lipless basins P88 and P89 recall a type of basins that is best documented in Eleutherna (see the discussion of P38, P39 and P40 above). The slightly convex wall and grooves of P88 find Early Geometric–Middle Geometric comparisons in Eleutherna,192 while the straight wall of P89 suggests a Middle Geometric–Protoarchaic date.193 Two other basins show more peculiar lip profiles. P90 finds a comparison from a Late Archaic deposit in Knossos,194 while P91 recalls a Late Minoan IIIC piece from Karphi.195

  • 196 Van Effenterre 1948, p. 28, no. D 7; Van Effenterre 2009, p. 105, no. 3. Also: Desborough 1952, p.  (...)
  • 197 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 237, no. 251.
  • 198 Marinatos 1936, pp. 257–258, 265–268, figs. 22, 28.7, 31, 33.
  • 199 Girella 2002, pp. 168, 185. Also: Kanta 1980, p. 285; Demetriou 1989, pp. 38–39.
  • 200 Brock 1957, p. 162, nos. 59, 189, 1429; Coldstream 1996, pp. 376–377, type B; Coldstream, Macdonald(...)
  • 201 Rethemiotakis, Englezou 2010, p. 152, no. Π30946.
  • 202 Desborough 1952, p. 258.
  • 203 Seiradaki 1960, p. 12, fig. 7:6; Day 2011, pp. 271–272.
  • 204 Hall 1914, p. 110, no. 2; Desborough 1952, p. 260; Hayden 2003, p. 37, no. 64.
  • 205 Mook 1993, p. 241, nos. P2.143 and P2.187.
  • 206 Dawkins 1903–1904, pp. 220–222.
  • 207 Kotsonas 2005, pp. 191–192, no. SK.2.
  • 208 Johannowsky 2002, pp. 25–38; Anzalone 2013, p. 233, no. 197.
  • 209 Prent 2005, p. 416, tables 6–7; Erickson 2010c, p. 230; Kotsonas 2024, pp. 526–532.
  • 210 Erickson 2010c, pp. 230–234, 248, nos. 98–106; the profile of P92 compares only to that of no. 98, (...)
  • 211 Xanthoudidis 1905–1906, pp. 18–19, figs. 4–5.

76P92 is a basin (or kalathos) with a cup attached to the lip. A kalathos with a cup on the lip comes from the cemetery of Dreros,196 but the profile of P92 finds a better Protoarchaic comparison from Kommos.197 Several kalathoi or related vases with other plastic attachments were found inside and around Dreros Temple B.198 Miniature attachments occur on Cretan vases since the Middle Minoan period, but cups were applied to the lip of kalathoi by the Late Minoan IIIA2 period.199 Miniature cups also occur on Late Minoan IIIC–Middle Protogeometric kalathoi from Knossos,200 Eltyna,201 Phaistos (Liliana),202 Karphi,203 and Vrokastro,204 and, from the later Protogeometric period, they are attested on a variety of shapes from Kavousi,205 Palaikastro,206 and Eleutherna.207 Miniature cups were also attached to kernoi, including to (Protogeometric B to) Late Orientalizing specimens from sanctuaries at Gortyn.208 Protoarchaic–Archaic pieces are known from Syme Viannou, Olous, Siteia and Vavelli,209 and Classical and Hellenistic examples have been identified at Roussa Ekklesia,210 and Lato pros Kamara.211

Fig. 16 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 7 in the East Terrace: P75, P76, P77, P78, P79, P80, P81, P82, P83, P84, and P85.

Fig. 16 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 7 in the East Terrace: P75, P76, P77, P78, P79, P80, P81, P82, P83, P84, and P85.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 17 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 7 in the East Terrace: P86, P87, P88, P89, P90, P91, and P92 (outside and inside).

Fig. 17 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 7 in the East Terrace: P86, P87, P88, P89, P90, P91, and P92 (outside and inside).

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 18 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of Trench 7 in the East Terrace: P75, P76, P77, P78, P79, P80, P81, P82, and P83.

Fig. 18 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of Trench 7 in the East Terrace: P75, P76, P77, P78, P79, P80, P81, P82, and P83.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

Fig. 19 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of Trench 7 in the East Terrace: P84, P85, P86, P87, P88, P89, P90, P91, and P92.

Fig. 19 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of Trench 7 in the East Terrace: P84, P85, P86, P87, P88, P89, P90, P91, and P92.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

P75 (4081.2). Large skyphos, frg. of body and lip.
H. 4.2. RD. 19. Fabric D, sf. Shallow bellied body and fairly tall, offset lip. Decorated in brown red slip, which covers the exterior of the lip and the interior of the vase. The shoulder carries a pendent ornament, perhaps quintuple hand-drawn semicircles.

P76 (4084.6). Cup or skyphos, frg. of body and lip.
H. 2.7. D. max. ca. 13. Fabric D, sf. Bellied body with shallow groove on the transition to the offset lip. Decoration in red slip: a horizontal band on the lip and a series of vertical lines below. The interior is coated.

P77 (4081.9). Cup, large part of body, handle and lip mended from two frgs.
H. 6.6. RD. ca. 13. Fabric D, sf. Bellied body and fairly tall, offset lip with part of a strap handle. Fully coated in black slip.

P78 (4084.13). Cup, frg. of lip with part of the body.
H. 2.5. RD. 13. Fine grey fabric probably because of overfiring; a few small dark inclusions. Fairly tall, offset lip and bellied body, coated in thick brown slip.

P79 (4071.5). Bowl (?), two joining frgs. of rim and wall.
H. 1.6. RD. 14. Fabric E. Straight rim, separated from the wall by three horizontal grooves. Brown slip on the exterior.

P80 (4084.9). Bowl (?), frg. of lip with part of the body.
H. 2.2. RD. 14. Fabric E. Straight rim, separated from the body by three grooves. Red slip on the interior and on the rim.

P81 (4084.2). Medium-sized open vessel, three frgs. of foot and lower body.
H. 4. BD. 9. Hard, very pale brown (10YR 8/4 to 7/4) fabric with many fine dark inclusions and fewer white ones. Low ring foot and bellied body, coated in thick black slip.

P82 (4078.3+4062.3). Cup, two joining frgs. of foot, bottom and lower body.
H. 1.3. BD. 8. Fabric F, sf. Relatively high, conical foot.

P83 (4071.2). Aryballos or juglet, part of lower body and base.
H. 2.5. BD. 4. Fabric D, sf. (though overfired). Flat base and plump body.

P84 (4084.8). Medium-sized pouring vessel, shoulder frg.
H. 2.5. D. max. ca. 15. Fine, very soft, very pale brown (10YR 7/3) fabric with dark inclusions. Decoration in fairly lustrous black slip: part of a circle with one thick and two slim bands below.

P85 (4081.12). Medium-sized pouring vessel, frg. of handle.
H. 6.4. Fabric E. Vertical handle, round in section, is attached to the shoulder. Decoration in black slip: a band around the handle root and an S (?) on the back of the handle.

P86 (4081.5). Ladle (?), three frgs., including two joining ones of lip and body.
H. 4.2. BD. 21. Fabric close to B, sc., but with little schist and more white inclusions. Hemispherical body and flat lip.

P87 (4081.7). Horn attachment from kalathos (?).
H. 2.9. Fabric C, sf. Pointed horn splaying toward the attachment to the lip of a vase.

P88 (4075.1). Basin, frg. of body and lip.
H. 5.7. RD. ca. 21. Fabric B, sc.‑c. Deep form with slightly convex wall splaying toward the simple rim, below which there are three grooves. Traces of burning on the rim and the interior.

P89 (4081.8). Basin, frg. of body and lip.
H. 6. RD. ca. 21. Fabric B, sc.‑c. Deep form with straight wall splaying toward the simple rim, below which there are three grooves. Traces of burning on the exterior.

P90 (4084.1). Basin, two joining frgs. of body and lip.
H. 5.5. RD. 28. Fabric C, sc. Straight wall splaying toward a vestigial lip. Traces of burning on the interior.

P91 (4081.1+4084.11). Basin, three frgs. including two joining ones of lip and body.
H. 5.5. RD. ca. 45. Fabric B, sc. Carinated body and thick lip, which overhangs both the exterior and the interior.

P92 (4081.10+4081.11+4084.12). Basin/kalathos, two joining and one non-joining frg. of lower body and foot.
H. 7.1. RD. ca. 30. Fabric D, sf. Thick broad horizontal lip, below which there is a high sharp ridge. The upper surface of the lip carries incisions rendered pre-firing and an attachment in the form of a miniature cup with tall conical foot, which is deformed. The exterior, including the outward-facing side of the cup, are covered in black slip, traces of which also occur on the interior of the cup.

4.2.3.2. Trench 8 (figs. 20 and 22)

77Zembils 4085 and 4087 yielded abundant material with several diagnostic fragments, especially from medium-sized and small vessels, and they clearly belong to the fill. The undiagnostic nature of the pottery from zembils 4072 and 4082 creates uncertainty over their attribution to the fill. Nevertheless, a piece from zembil 4082 joins another from the fill of trench 20 (zembil 4250).

  • 212 Cf. Kotsonas 2008, pp. 207–208, type Biv.
  • 213 Coldstream, Eiring 2001, p. 78; Eiring 2001, p. 97; Erickson 2010a, pp. 86–103, 133–147, 205–219.

78The large size and fairy tall lip of P93 is suggestive of a Late Geometric date.212 P94 is a high-necked cup, a popular type of vessel in Crete from the Archaic to the Early Hellenistic period.213 The piece is too fragmentary to be dated specifically, but the very high neck favors a post-Archaic date. The hydria neck P95 and jug rim P96 cannot be dated with any precision, but the quantity of golden mica and the range of inclusions in the fabric of the latter piece suggest it is imported. P97 and P98 are ladles, and the latter can be assigned to type IIa.

Fig. 20 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trenches 8, 20 and 22 in the East Terrace: P94, P95, P96, P97, P99, P100, P101, P102, P103, and P105.

Fig. 20 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trenches 8, 20 and 22 in the East Terrace: P94, P95, P96, P97, P99, P100, P101, P102, P103, and P105.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 21 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 22 in the East Terrace: P104 (two parts).

Fig. 21 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 22 in the East Terrace: P104 (two parts).

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 22 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of Trenches 8, 20 and 22 in the East Terrace: P93, P94, P95, P100, P101, P102, P103, P104, and P105.

Fig. 22 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of Trenches 8, 20 and 22 in the East Terrace: P93, P94, P95, P100, P101, P102, P103, P104, and P105.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

P93 (4085.3). Cup, frg. of body and lip.
H. 3.2. RD. 10. Fabric D, f. Fairly tall, offset lip and bellied body, coated in black slip.

P94 (4087.3). Cup, frg. of lip.
H. 3.4. RD. 10. Fabric D, f. High necked cup, with wall splaying upward. Pale yellow slip on the interior.

P95 (4087.1). Jug, two joining frgs. of neck and lip.
H. 4.7. RD. 13. Fabric D, sc. Moulded lip, triangular in section and straight neck. Traces of a dark slip band on the interior of the lip.

P96 (4072.2). Jar, frg. of lip.
H. 2. D. max. ca. 24. Reddish brown (5YR 5/4) to red (2.5YR 5/6) fabric with much golden mica (including flakes) and a wide range of small inclusions: glassy off-white, dull white, red-brown and glassy black. The shoulder wall terminates in a rounded, thick lip.

P97 (4072.1). Ladle, frg. of handle.
L. 6.5. Fabric B, c. Flat handle tapering toward the edge. Slight traces of burning.

P98 (4072.4). Ladle (?), frg. of body and lip.
H. 3. RD. 23. Fabric B, c. Everted lip and carinated bowl. Traces of burning on the interior.

4.2.3.3. Trench 20 (figs. 20 and 22)

  • 214 Erickson 2002, pp. 59, 61, especially nos. 61 and 67 (Afrati).

79The three different layers which were identified in the fill of this trench during excavation are indistinguishable on ceramic grounds. The pottery from the relevant zembils (4218, 4227, 4231, 4236, 4239, 4240, 4246, 4250, 4257) is characterized by high fragmentation, and is dominated by sherds from small and medium-sized vessels. Coarse ware jugs with grooves on the neck, like P99 (and also P72 and P73 from the backfill on the East Terrace), are widely found in Early Iron Age Crete (see above). Bowl P100 was discussed above together with P79. The medium-sized closed vessel P101, which is perhaps Archaic, is characterized by fairly fine and soapy fabric and is clearly imported. Lastly, the high foot of cup P102 dates to the late 5th century BC.214

P99 (4231.2). Jug, lip frg.
H. 2. RD. ca. 9. Fabric F, sc. Simple rim with four grooves below.

P100 (4250.3). Bowl, two joining frgs. of body and rim.
H. 2.5. RD. ca. 12. Fabric E, f. Straight rim. Hemispherical bowl with two horizontal grooves below the simple rim. Coated in brown slip.

P101 (4240.2). Medium-sized, probably closed vessel, frg. of foot and lower body.
H. 1.2. BD. 14. Soft pink (7.5YR 7/4) fabric with a few small dark and white inclusions. Low ring base.

P102 (4227.2). Cup, frg. of foot and lower body.
H. 1.8. BD. 8. Fabric F, sf. Conical foot with dropped floor.

4.2.3.4. Trench 22 (figs. 20–22)

  • 215 Coldstream 2001, p. 37. Full references in Kotsonas 2008, p. 156.
  • 216 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 371–379. For bracket ornaments (but not circles) on an east Cretan hydria fro (...)
  • 217 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 84, 87, 410, nos. H693 and H694. Add a fragmentary Geometric piece from Kavou (...)
  • 218 Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 410. Also, Hayden 2003, pp. 62–63, no. 159.
  • 219 Coldstream 1996, pp. 375–376, type Cii; Coldstream 2001, p. 51.
  • 220 Van Effenterre 1948, p. 37, pl. xx.4; Van Effenterre 2009, p. 133, no. 26.

80The fill of this trench (zembils 4275 and 4280) yielded very little and highly fragmentary material, with a few diagnostic pieces from medium-sized vessels. Jug P103 is not particularly diagnostic, but the circle decoration and pendent brackets of P104 are typical for Late Geometric and Protoarchaic hydriae from central Crete.215 Although rarer, circles occur on east Cretan hydriae, which, however, do not combine them with bracket ornaments.216 P105 belong to a type of pedestalled krater that is represented by two Late Geometric pieces at Kavousi,217 but is otherwise very rare in east Crete. Comparable pieces were imported to the region from Attica or the Cyclades, and from central Crete.218 In central Crete, the production of the type covers the entire Geometric period,219 and a fragmentary krater from the cemetery of Dreros may be a central Cretan Middle Geometric import.220

P103 (4280.1). Jug, frg. of neck and rim with handle.
H. 4. RD. 11. Fabric F, sc. Flaring neck rising to a simple rim. Vertical strap handle.

P104 (4275.ISO.1+4280.ISO.1). Medium-sized closed vessel (hydria (?)), frgs. of body and handle.
H. ca. 20. D. max. 26. Fabric D, sf. Plump ovoid body with horizontal handles, round in section, attached to the belly. The decoration is rendered in dark slip: three (?) bands on the lower body, the top one with pendent brackets; groups of quintuple concentric circles and bands on the shoulder.

P105 (4275.1). Medium-sized krater, frg. of pedestal.
H. 5.6. D. max. 7. Fabric E. Tall pedestal splaying toward the base. Two bands in faded dark slip.

4.3. Pottery from areas south and east of the East Terrace

81The exploration of the areas lying immediately south and east of the East Terrace involved four trenches. Trenches 17 and 23 were along the south wall of the East Terrace; trench 19 covered most of the area immediately east of this terrace, whereas trench 24 was lying further east. The surface cleaning and the backfill yielded limited diagnostic pottery, but the fill of trenches 17 and 24 produced ample material.

82The four trenches in question are not enclosed by any structure and do not form a single context, and are therefore treated individually below. The limited material from trenches 19 and 23 is discussed first, and priority is given to the pottery from the former trench, which largely corresponds in date with the earlier material from the West and East Terraces. The analysis closes with the pottery from trenches 17 and 24, which is dominated by a single ceramic shape, the ladle.

4.3.1. Trench 19 (figs. 23 and 25)

83Both the backfill (zembils 4094, 4099, 4110, 4158, 4162, 4164, 4165, 4168, 4170, 4178, 4213, 4214, 4220) and the fill (zembils 4221, 4222, 4223, 4224, 4225, 4226, 4229, 4230, 4276, 4281) of trench 19 yielded very fragmentary material, but only the fill produced any diagnostic pieces (including a few larger fragments – some of which are diagnostic Geometric and Protoarchaic pieces – from zembil 4276). The ceramic record does not lend full confidence to the identification of the fill of trench 19 as such.

  • 221 Cf. Brock 1957, p. 175, pattern 9g.
  • 222 Johnston 1993, p. 347, no. 28; Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 249, no. 395.
  • 223 Haggis 2012, p. 160, fig. 45:C125.
  • 224 Cf. the foot of type 1 kantharoi in Englezou 2005, pp. 166–168. Also, cf. Watrous 2012, p. 166, fig (...)

84Three decorated pieces are (Late Geometric–) Protoarchaic in date. This includes the coated bell-krater P106, which is comparable to pieces from the West and East Terraces (P32 and P58, the latter Early Protoarchaic); and two shoulder fragments of large closed vessels, P107 with a quintuple concentric circle that is typical for Cretan Early Protoarchaic pottery,221 and P108 which is probably imported from elsewhere in Crete. P109, the base of a jug, is also imported. The fine pale fabric recalls Corinthian pottery, but is softer and Kees Nees kindly informed me that this base profile has no Corinthian comparisons. On the contrary, both the fabric and the profile are at home in the Messara; two close comparisons from Kommos date from the end of the 7th century BC.222 A piece of similar date comes from Prophetes Elias in the Isthmus of Ierapetra.223 P109 also recalls the Archaic cup bases P124 and P156. Lastly, the kantharos/cup foot P110 is probably imported from elsewhere in Crete, and dates much later, to around 300 BC.224

Fig. 23 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 19, by the East Terrace: P106, P107, P108, P109 and P110 (from above and from below).

Fig. 23 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 19, by the East Terrace: P106, P107, P108, P109 and P110 (from above and from below).

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 24 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 23, by the East Terrace: P111, P112, P113, and P114.

Fig. 24 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 23, by the East Terrace: P111, P112, P113, and P114.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 25 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of Trenches 19 and 23, by the East Terrace: P106, P107, P108, P109, P111, P112, P113, and P114.

Fig. 25 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of Trenches 19 and 23, by the East Terrace: P106, P107, P108, P109, P111, P112, P113, and P114.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

P106 (4276.1). Krater, two joining and one non-joining frg. of upper body.
H. 6.2. D. max. 36. Fabric B, sc. Bell-krater with high ridge on the transition to the probably everted lip. Fully coated in black slip.

P107 (4229.1). Large closed vessel, shoulder frg.
H. 5.8. D. max. 28. Fabric C, sf. Traces of a quintuple concentric circle in black slip.

P108 (4276.2). Large closed vessel, frg. of shoulder and neck.
H. 6.5. D. max. 36. Reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) fabric with many medium-sized dark grey schist flakes, and some smaller white and black inclusions. Low rounded ridge, underscored by a shallow groove, marks the transition from the shoulder to the neck. The exterior is coated in black slip.

P109 (4221.1). Medium-sized closed vessel, frg. of foot.
H. 1.7. BD. ca. 7. Fine, very soft, very pale brown (10YR 8/4) fabric. Low conical foot with low ridge on the perimeter of the underfoot. Traces of dark slip on the exterior, including the underfoot.

P110 (4225.2+4165.2). Kantharos/cup, two joining frgs. of foot.
H. 2. BD. 5. Soft, light brownish grey (10YR 6/2) fabric, probably overfired, with some small dark inclusions. Conical foot, with concave underfoot, two relief rings on the exterior and a shallow groove on the resting surface. The vase is coated in black slip.

4.3.2. Trench 23 (figs. 24–25)

  • 225 Coldstream 1973b, p. 36, no. F14.
  • 226 Cf. Coldstream 1973b, p. 32, no. E18 (late 3rd century BC).

85The backfill of this trench yielded very fragmentary material (including some small ladle fragments), and no piece was catalogued. High fragmentation also characterized the pottery from the fill (zembils 4265, 4269, 4273, 4282, 4285), though zembils 4265 and 4282 produced a few large diagnostic pieces. This includes two ladles, P111 and P112, which can be assigned to type Ia (see below). The remaining two pieces are imported. P113 is a small open vessel made in micaceous fabric. The profile of its fairly tall foot finds close comparisons of the late 3rd century BC.225 P114, which is hard to date, is the broad base (24 cm) of either a very deep basin,226 or of a storage vessel, as suggested by the preserved height (12.5 cm) and the slip on the exterior. In any case, the occurrence of slip on the resting surface is peculiar.

P111 (4282.3). Ladle (?), frg. of body and lip.
H. 2. RD. 15. Fabric B, sc. Shallow carinated body with flat lip.

P112 (4285.2). Ladle, frg. of body and lip.
H. 2.5. RD. 15. Fabric B, sf. Carinated body with flat lip marked by seven concentric grooves.

P113 (4282.1). Small open vessel, two joining frgs. of foot and lower body.
H. 2.5. BD. 6. Hard reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) fabric, with many small to large, light and dark inclusions, and many flakes of silver and golden mica. Fairly tall ring foot with thick edge. Brown slip on the interior.

P114 (4265.1). Basin/pithos, frg. of foot.
H. 12.5. BD. 24. Light brown (7.5YR 6/4) fabric with many small white and dark inclusions. Conical body and flat but distinct base with groove underneath. Brown slip on the exterior, including the resting surface.

4.3.3. Trench 17 (figs. 26–30)

  • 227 These ladles are indicative of the ritual character of the site (Zographaki, Farnoux 2012–2013, p.  (...)

86During excavation, a distinction was drawn between the backfill (zembils 4190, 4191, 4192, 4193, 4194), and the fill of trench 17 (zembils 4196, 4198, 4199, 4200, 4203, 4204, 4206, 4207, 4208, 4209, 4210, 4211, 4215, 4216). However, on ceramic grounds, the pottery looks uniform, as evidenced by the predominance of ladles in all zembils,227 and the numerous cross-joins between pieces from the alleged fill and the alleged backfill (notwithstanding the higher fragmentation of the material from the zembils closer to the surface). This uniformity is also indicated by the closely datable pottery.

  • 228 Brock 1957, p. 175, pattern 9i.
  • 229 Knossos: Coldstream 1973a, p. 53, no. 30 (500–480 BC). Azoria: Haggis et al. 2007, p. 288, fig. 14: (...)
  • 230 Erickson 2010a, pp. 142–143, nos. 293, 303–304 and p. 151, nos. 333–334; Erickson 2010c, p. 229–230 (...)
  • 231 Erickson 2010a, p. 219, nos. 537–539.
  • 232 Coldstream 1999, p. 325, no. O7; Erickson 2010a, pp. 218–219, no. 537 (also, cf. p. 146, no. 328).
  • 233 Coldstream 1973b, pp. 41–42, no. 50; Coldstream 1999, p. 330, no. Q7 and p. 333, no. R34. Cf. an At (...)
  • 234 Callaghan 1992, pp. 108–109, no. H16:8 (Callaghan, personal communication, considers this the foot (...)
  • 235 Coldstream 1973b, p. 32, no. E18.
  • 236 La Rosa, Portale 1996–1997, pp. 323, 355, no. 104.
  • 237 Marinatos 1936, pp. 257–258, fig. 22 (middle); Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 54, 411, pl. 105, no. H∆ (left (...)

87The date range of the material from the alleged backfill is Late Archaic to Hellenistic. The only exception is P115, the quadruple circle of which suggests a Geometric–Protoarchaic date.228 The profile of mortar P116 can be matched on Late Archaic pieces from Knossos and Azoria.229 The cup base P117 recalls Early Classical examples, especially of the second and third quarter of the 5th century BC,230 whereas jug foot P118 finds 4th century BC comparisons from near Praisos.231 A 4th century date is also suggested for two small open vessels made in non-local fabrics. The pair includes the delicate, tall, splaying foot of the imported cup P119, which finds comparisons of the (early to mid‑) 4th century BC,232 and the bowl P120, which recalls pieces dating from the third quarter of the 4th century BC.233 Two pieces, P121 and P122, date to the end of the 3rd century BC. The former piece is from a medium‑sized closed vessel, probably a jug, in a non-local fabric. Its sturdy low conical foot, which is reinforced by a ridge, finds no close match but recalls the feet of kantharoi dating from around 200 BC.234 Likewise, P122 recalls basins from Knossos of the mid‑ to late 3rd century BC,235 and Phaistos of the late 3rd or 2nd century BC.236 A kalathos of indeterminate date from Dreros Temple B is also comparable.237

  • 238 Haggis et al. 2004, p. 362, fig. 17.5; Haggis et al. 2007, p. 251, fig. 6.9 and p. 282, fig. 29.9. (...)
  • 239 Donald Haggis (personal communication). More distant comparisons are perhaps to be identified in th (...)
  • 240 Hadjimichali 1971, p. 204, no. 426.
  • 241 Englezou 2005, p. 51, no. 125.
  • 242 Englezou 2005, p. 103, no. 464; p. 107, nos. 497–498. Cf. Englezou 2000, p. 63.

88The closely datable material from the alleged fill has a comparable date range, from the Late Archaic to the Middle Hellenistic period. The squared profile of the pithos lip P123 has Archaic comparisons from Azoria.238 The cup base P124, which may not be local, is characterized by two penannular grooves on the resting surface. The piece matches P156 below, recalls the Archaic jug base P109 above, and belongs to a type that is widely represented in Archaic contexts at Azoria.239 The lip profile of basin P125 shows some resemblance to that of mortar P177 (which is less pronounced) and finds comparisons from Lato dated to the late 4th–early 3rd century BC,240 and Knossian parallels of the early to mid‑3rd century BC,241 while also recalling vessels found in the destruction layer at Lyktos/Lyttos which dates to 221/220 BC.242 Lastly, P126 is one of the very few pieces of kalathoi found outside the West Terrace. The piece must be imported since its fabric is peculiar and the profile does not conform to the local typology, which was discussed above. P126, however, recalls local kalathoi from trench 14 in carrying an attachment to the lip, and traces of burning on the interior.

  • 243 The number of bases of ladles recovered is surprisingly low in comparison to the number of handles (...)

89The closely datable pieces from trench 17 suggest an Archaic to Middle Hellenistic date range for the associated quantity of ladles. The Minimum Number of Individuals (MNI) represented by the handle edges, and the handle and body attachments, is 36 and 38 respectively.243 The numerous ladles from trench 17 are discussed here together with the much fewer pieces found elsewhere at the sanctuary.

  • 244 Mercando 1974–1975, pp. 119–121 (bracieri); Mook 1993, pp. 190–191, 229–230 (scuttles); Francis et  (...)
  • 245 Πυριατήρια: Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1985, pp. 16, 18, 24; Niniou-Kindeli 1995, p. 682; Niniou-Kindeli 20 (...)
  • 246 Seiradaki 1960, p. 12; Mook 1993, p. 190; Callaghan, Johnston 2000, pp. 232–233, nos. 196, 203–206; (...)
  • 247 Karamaliki 2010, p. 514 (settlement of Agia Irini, Rethymno).
  • 248 Allegro et al. 2008, p. 117.
  • 249 Sofianou 2010, p. 180. Several pieces are on display at the Archaeological Museum of Siteia.
  • 250 Vanna Niniou-Kindeli (personal communication).
  • 251 The same applies to the pieces from a sanctuary at Gortyn (Anzalone 2013, pp. 231, 234). There is, (...)
  • 252 Cf. Georgiou 1986, p. 29.
  • 253 Interior: P188 and P189 (which are perhaps from the same vase); lip: P160; exterior, including hand (...)
  • 254 Cf. Georgiou 1986, p. 29; Mook 1993, p. 190; Day 2011, p. 276.
  • 255 Marinatos 1936, pp. 259–260, fig. 23.

90The shape of a shallow bowl equipped with a long horizontal handle proved multifunctional in antiquity. Cretan archaeology calls this shape by different names related to (assumed) function: ladles, braziers, scuttles, and even kalathoi and lekanai in English;244 αρύταινες, πυριατήρια, πύραυνα in Greek.245 Most of these names suggest the use of these vessels in connection with fire, and especially the transport of coals. Also, vessels of this shape are occasionally identified with lamps or are thought to have functioned as lamps.246 Traces of burning are often seen on representative examples, including on sets found together in specific Hellenistic domestic,247 and especially cultic contexts, like the Thesmophorion of Gortyn,248 the sanctuary of Cybele (?) at Praisos,249 and a room by the theater of Aptera.250 Unfortunately, there is no contextual information on the function of the vessels from the Drerian sanctuary.251 However, all are relatively small in size and are made in coarse ware. The use of the Drerian pieces as braziers/scuttles is unlikely, given the small capacity of their bowl, which could not hold enough coal to heat even a small space.252 The possibility of such a function is further weakened by the paucity of traces of burning. Indeed, only very few examples carry such traces,253 and these probably represent secondary burning. In any cases, the traces are not concentrated on the lip, as one would expect if the vases were used as lamps,254 and proper lamps are missing from the area of Dreros Temple A, as opposed to Temple B.255 Accordingly, the ladles from the sanctuary on the west acropolis are unlikely to have been used in connection with fire.

  • 256 Francis et al. 2000, p. 450.
  • 257 For an exception to the general pattern, see Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 281, no. 690. Peter Calla (...)
  • 258 Niniou-Kindeli 1995, p. 682; Niniou-Kindeli 2002, pp. 263, 266. Most of the ladles from Tsiskiana a (...)
  • 259 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, pp. 291, 297, no. 915 (Kommos); Francis et al. 2000, pp. 450–451 (Agiasma (...)
  • 260 Niniou-Kindeli 1995, p. 682; Niniou-Kindeli 2002, pp. 263, 266; Vanna Niniou-Kindeli (personal comm (...)

91Traces of burning are missing from the nearly two hundred Hellenistic and Early Roman ladles from the sanctuary of Agiasmatsi at Sphakia,256 the vast majority of the Hellenistic ladles from Kommos,257 and the Hellenistic ladles that dominate the ceramic record from the sanctuary of Tsiskiana.258 Accordingly, the ladles from these sanctuaries are thought to have been used for serving food in ritual meals, or for transferring and pouring liquid offerings.259 Interestingly, the Drerian sanctuary and Tsiskiana yielded ladles together with bull figurines,260 but in the case of Dreros the two classes of material are largely from different contexts and chronological periods.

  • 261 Francis et al. 2000, especially pp. 440–441, 449–451 (with references). Add Portale 2000, p. 81. Fo (...)
  • 262 Mercando 1974–1975, pp. 119–121, nos. 33–36 (Geometric settlement at Phaistos); Andreadaki-Vlasaki (...)

92Jane Francis and her collaborators, who studied the material from Agiasmatsi, produced the only study of ladles from Crete of the 1st millennium BC.261 They discussed the morphological similarities and differences between the shape of the historical period and the Minoan brazier, they contrasted the popularity of the latter and the rarity of the former, and they assumed a break in production from the end of the Bronze Age until the Hellenistic period. Old and new evidence suggests, however, that the bowl with horizontal handle occurs in Cretan domestic, burial, and especially sanctuary contexts throughout the 1st millennium BC,262 even if it only becomes popular in the Hellenistic period.

  • 263 For Kommos, see the references in n. 267 below. Callaghan argues that, at both Kommos and Knossos, (...)
  • 264 Francis et al. 2000, pp. 441, 446.
  • 265 Cf. Day 2011, p. 276.
  • 266 Francis et al. 2000, pp. 441, 446.

93All ladles from the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros are made in coarse to semi-coarse ware, specifically in MFG B (exceptions include P14 and P131). Early Iron Age to Classical ladles from Kommos are made in semi-coarse fabrics, with semi-fine to fine ware examples taking over in the Hellenistic period.263 Also, the Hellenistic and Early Roman finds from Agiasmatsi are typically made in semi-fine fabric.264 If the Drerian ladles were used to hold fire (which I find unlikely), the coarse schist content of MFG B would have been appreciated because it would have increased the resistance of the pot to thermal shock.265 However, coarse wares predominate in the Drerian sanctuary, hence there need be no special reason for the coarseness of the ladle fabric. In any case, the near monopoly of a single fabric on the ladles from Dreros is paralleled on the assemblage from Agiasmatsi.266

94The ladles from the sanctuary on the west acropolis can be classified on the basis of the profile of the bowl, which is carinated (type I), hemispherical (type II) or conical (type III). Within types I and II, two variants may be distinguished according to the shape of the lip, which can be slim, sharply everted to flat (a), or thick, rounded or squared (b). Type III comes with simple rim or vestigial lip. Ladle bases are poorly preserved in the entire assemblage, but can be flat and slightly concave (e.g. P139) or articulated (e.g. P189). The different types identified involve considerable variation in detail, and it is hard to find two identical pieces. The different types and sub-types are unequally represented. Ladles with hemispherical bowl (type II) are more numerous than those with carinated bowl (type I), whereas pieces with slim lip (types Ia and IIa) far outnumber examples with thick lip (types Ib and IIb). Lastly, type III is very rare (P68, P141). The many ladles from trench 17 largely conform to these general patterns. Indeed, the vast majority belongs to type IIa (P127, P128, P129, P130, P131, P132, P133, P134, P135), while types Ia (P137, P138), IIb (P136) and type III (P141) are poorly represented, and two pieces (P139, P140) cannot be classified.

95The dating of the different types is suggested by contextual evidence from the sanctuary on the west acropolis. Significantly, type I (especially Ia) is the only one that is represented in the fill of the West Terrace, among Middle Geometric to Protoarchaic material. The persistence of this type to later times is indicated by its occurrence in the Archaic to Middle Hellenistic assemblages from trenches 17, 18, and 24. The type is, however, underrepresented in these assemblages, and probably gave way to type II in the course of the Classical period. Indeed, type II (especially IIa) dominates the pottery from trenches 17 and 24. The poorly represented type III cannot be dated with any precision, and the few specimens come from Archaic to Hellenistic contexts.

  • 267 The quantity of ladles found at Kommos is considerably larger than the list of entries in the publi (...)
  • 268 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, pp. 232–233, nos. 196 and 203–206; p. 237, no. 244; p. 254, nos. 433–436; (...)
  • 269 For the carination, see Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 254, no. 434 (4th century BC).
  • 270 Francis et al. 2000, p. 440, figs. 13:50 and 14:55.
  • 271 The development of a shallower form in the course of the 2nd century BC is also attested at Knossos (...)
  • 272 Allegro et al. 2008, p. 117.
  • 273 Francis et al. 2000, p. 440, figs. 7, 13–14.

96External evidence for chronology can be found only at the sanctuary of Kommos (especially Temples B and C), the single Cretan site that has produced abundant evidence for ladles in securely dated contexts.267 The ladle is attested in Kommos from the Protogeometric, and especially the Geometric period, to the end of the Hellenistic period.268 The Protogeometric to Early Protoarchaic examples at Kommos are characterized by very low lip and straight wall, thus recalling Dreros type III. By the Classical period, when the shape reappears at Kommos, a hemispherical body form is established, as on Dreros type II. The carination, which is the hallmark of Dreros type I, is attested on only one Late Classical ladle from Kommos,269 but is more common on the Hellenistic and Early Roman material from Agiasmatsi.270 In the Late Classical period (first half of the 4th century BC), the ladles of Kommos develop a broad lip, which is mostly horizontal and resembles the lip of Dreros types Ia and IIa. At Kommos, a shallow hemispherical body and broad lip is typical for examples of the 2nd century BC,271 which can also show a distinct base, whereas the latest examples of the 1st century BC grow considerably deeper (this deep form is not attested at Dreros). The shallow form also prevails on the Hellenistic braziers from the Thesmophorion of Gortyn,272 and the Hellenistic and Early Roman ladles from Agiasmatsi.273 To conclude, the typological sequence from Kommos (and the little relevant evidence from other Cretan sites) offers limited help for the dating of Dreros type I, but favors an Early Iron Age date for the rare Dreros type III, and a Classical to Middle Hellenistic date for Dreros type II. In this last case (type II), the evidence from Kommos aligns itself neatly to the evidence from the Drerian sanctuary.

  • 274 P98 (from trench 8), which has a RD. of 23 cm, may not be a ladle.
  • 275 Cf. Francis et al. 2000, pp. 440–441.

97The Drerian ladles show some variation in secondary morphological attributes. The RD. varies between 10 and 21 cm, but is mostly 14–15 cm.274 Handles are solid and are either flat or rolled/rounded, the second type being much rarer. The edge of the handles shows some variation,275 the sparrow-tailed ending being most characteristic (P136 and P191). The flat handles are 0.8–1.9 cm thick, and the rolled handles have a diameter of 1.8 to 4.5 cm. The thick handles of the larger ladles can show a firing hole by the attachment (P128).

  • 276 Marinatos 1936, pp. 267–268, figs. 31 and 33 (the central piece of fig. 31 matches P140); Tsipopoul (...)
  • 277 Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 448.
  • 278 Day 2011, p. 276.
  • 279 Cf. Francis et al. 2000, p. 441 (Agiasmatsi).
  • 280 P112, P164, and P188 show grooves on the upper surface of the lip. Grooves also run on the upper bo (...)
  • 281 Francis et al. 2000, pp. 440–441.
  • 282 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 266, nos. 559 and 563.
  • 283 Allegro et al. 2008, p. 117.
  • 284 Seiradaki 1960, p. 12; Day 2011, p. 276.

98The Drerian ladles are typically not decorated. One notable exception is P140, which has a bird protome attached to the lip. The area of Dreros Temple B also yielded open vessels with animal head attachments to the lip.276 Also, an animal protome occurs on a Protoarchaic brazier from Praisos,277 and a bird protome is reported from a scuttle from Karphi.278 Other forms of surface treatment include the coating of the vessel in thick brown or black slip (P191),279 or, more commonly, grooving on the body or the lip.280 Both features are found on the ladles from Agiasmatsi,281 but only grooving is attested on those from Kommos,282 as well as on braziers from Gortyn,283 and on (much earlier) scuttles from Karphi.284

Fig. 26 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the alleged backfill and fill of trench 17, by the East Terrace: P115, P116, P117, P118, P119, P120, P121, P122, P123, P124, P125, P126, and P127.

Fig. 26 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the alleged backfill and fill of trench 17, by the East Terrace: P115, P116, P117, P118, P119, P120, P121, P122, P123, P124, P125, P126, and P127.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 27 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the alleged backfill and fill of trench 17, by the East Terrace: P128, P129, P130, P131, P132, P133, P136 (different views), and P137.

Fig. 27 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the alleged backfill and fill of trench 17, by the East Terrace: P128, P129, P130, P131, P132, P133, P136 (different views), and P137.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 28 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the alleged fill of trench 17, by the East Terrace: P134, P135, P138, P139, P140, and P141.

Fig. 28 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the alleged fill of trench 17, by the East Terrace: P134, P135, P138, P139, P140, and P141.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 29 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the alleged backfill of trench 17, by the East Terrace: P115, P116, P117, P119, P120, P121, P122, P129, and P137.

Fig. 29 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the alleged backfill of trench 17, by the East Terrace: P115, P116, P117, P119, P120, P121, P122, P129, and P137.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

Fig. 30 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the alleged fill of trench 17, by the East Terrace: P123, P124, P125, P131, P132, P133, P135, P136, P139, P140, and P141.

Fig. 30 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the alleged fill of trench 17, by the East Terrace: P123, P124, P125, P131, P132, P133, P135, P136, P139, P140, and P141.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

P115 (4190.2). Large closed vessel or, less likely, lid, frg. of wall.
H. 2.5. Fabric E, sf. Four concentric circles in worn slip on the exterior.

P116 (4192.1). Mortar, frg. of body and lip.
H. 4.1. RD. 21. Coarse, hard, pale red fabric with white inclusions of varying size: red inclusions of small to medium size, small dark inclusions and large quantities of mica. Tall, thick lip, with groove on the underside.

P117 (4191.2). Cup, frg. of foot and lower body.
H. 2.8. BD. 8. Fabric E, sf. Broad conical foot with thin dropped floor.

P118 (4194.9). Jug, frg. of foot.
H. 0.8. BD. 8. Fabric F, sf. Flaring conical foot.

P119 (4192.5). Cup, frg. of foot and lower body.
H. 2.1. BD. 9. Hard, light red (2.5YR 6/8) fabric with mica, some small dark inclusions and a few white ones. Conical foot, relatively high and flaring. Red gloss on the exterior.

P120 (4190.3). Bowl, frg. of body, lip and handle.
H. 5.8. RD. ca. 25. Soft, porous, very pale brown (10YR 7/4) fabric with dark inclusions. Shallow bowl with conical wall and thick, slightly incurving lip. Horizontal handle, round in section. Coated in brown slip.

P121 (4194.4). Medium-sized closed vessel (jug), frg. of foot and lower body.
H. 2.8. D. max. 9. Soft reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) fabric with a few small red inclusions. Low conical foot, with dropped floor and thick wall reinforced by a broad ridge. Black slip on the exterior, including the underfoot.

P122 (4191.1). Large open vessel, frg. of lip.
H. 1.6. RD. ca. 22. Fabric F, sc. Broad flat lip with vertical projection on the edge (almost Π‑shaped section).

P123 (4196.5). Pithos, frg. of neck and lip.
H. 4.8. RD. ca. 50. Fabric B, c. Cylindrical neck and thick lip, rectangular in section. Black slip on the exterior, below the lip.

P124 (4196.10+4199.6). Cup, two joining frgs. of foot and lower body.
H. 2. BD. 7. Hard, light red (2.5YR 6/8) fabric with some small brown inclusions. Low conical base with two concentric grooves underneath.

P125 (4200.2). Large open vessel (basin (?)), frg. of lip.
H. 4.5. RD. ca. 30. Fabric B, c. Thick, sharply outturned lip with plastic ridge below.

P126 (4200.3). Kalathos, two joining frgs. of body and lip.
H. 4.3. RD. 22. Soft reddish yellow (5YR 7/8) fabric with some small dark and slightly larger brown inclusions. Conical body with low ridge and two shallow grooves below the squared lip. Remains of plastic feature on the lip. Traces of burning on the interior.

P127 (4190.1). Ladle, two joining frgs. of lip and handle.
L. 12. Handle 3.1 by 2.2. Hard, light red (2.5YR 6/8) fabric with many inclusions of varying size, mostly white but also red and grey. Flat lip and rounded handle, tapering toward the edge.

P128 (4192.4). Ladle, frg. of body, lip and handle.
H. 3.4. RD. ca. 20. Fabric B, c. Conical body and flat lip. Rounded handle with firing hole by the lip.

P129 (4193.2). Ladle, frg. of body and lip.
H. 2.9. RD. 14. Fabric B, sc. Hemispherical body and flat lip.

P130 (4194.5). Ladle, frg. of body and lip.
H. 2.4. RD. 10. Fabric B, sf. Hemispherical body and flat lip.

P131 (4196.7). Ladle, frg. of body, lip and handle.
H. 3.2. RD. 10. Thickness of handle 1.5. Hard reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) fabric with many small, orange and brown inclusions, and fewer small white ones. Hemispherical body and flat lip. Flat handle.

P132 (4199.1). Ladle, three joining frgs. of body, base and lip.
H. 4.2. RD. 10. BD. 5. Fabric B, sc. Flat, distinct base. Hemispherical body with flat lip.

P133 (4207.4). Ladle, frg. of body and lip.
H. 3.5. RD. 13. Fabric B, sc.‑c. Hemispherical body and flat lip.

P134 (4207.5). Ladle, frg. of body and lip.
H. 3.3. RD. 10. Fabric B, sf. Conical body and flat lip. Traces of burning on the exterior, below the lip.

P135 (4207.7). Ladle, frg. of body, base and lip preserving heavy wheelmarks.
H. 4.7. RD. 10. Fabric B, sf. Conical body and flat lip.

P136 (4199-ISO.001). Ladle, six joining frgs. of body, lip and handle.
H. 6. RD. 14. Handle 2.7 by 1.5. Fabric B, c. Hemispherical body and rounded lip. Curving, flat handle with sparrow-tailed edge. Two grooves on the upper surface.

P137 (4192.3). Ladle, frg. of body and lip.
H. 3. D. 15. Fabric B, c. Carinated body and flat lip. Brown slip on the interior. Traces of burning on the upper part of the exterior.

P138 (4204.1). Ladle, two joining frgs. of lip and bowl.
H. 4. RD. 14. Fabric B, sc. Carinated body and flat lip.

P139 (4199.4). Ladle, two joining frgs. of body and base.
H. 3.2. BD. 6. Fabric B, sc. Flat base, slightly convex on the interior. Hemispherical body.

P140 (4204.3). Ladle (?), frg. of lip.
H. 3.2. RD. 14. Fabric F, sc. Flat lip with attachment shaped as a bird head. Coated in brown slip.

P141 (4204.2). Ladle, three joining frgs. of base, body and lip.
H. 5.6. RD. 14. BD. 6. Fabric B, sc. Flat distinct base, conical body and flat lip, slightly overhanging the interior. Coated in black slip.

4.3.4. Trench 24

4.3.4.1. Trench 24: backfill (figs. 31–32)

  • 285 The date reported in Zographaki, Farnoux 2012–2013, p. 658 is revised here.
  • 286 Erickson 2002, pp. 57–58, nos. 42–45 (Syme Viannou); Haggis et al. 2007, p. 255, fig. 84 and p. 258 (...)
  • 287 Cf. Erickson 2002, p. 207, no. 465 (Praisos, 575–525 BC).
  • 288 Erickson 2002, p. 73, nos. 97 and 99 (Lyktos/Lyttos); Erickson 2010a, p. 146, nos. 327–328 (Knossos (...)
  • 289 Coldstream 1999, pp. 324, 328, no. O12.
  • 290 Englezou 2005, pp. 206–207, no. 425 (Lyktos/Lyttos, third quarter of 3rd century BC); Rotroff 2006, (...)
  • 291 Englezou 2005, p. 273 (especially pp. 86–87, no. 368, Knossos, 3rd century BC). For 3rd or 2nd cent (...)
  • 292 Cf. Poulou-Papadimitriou 2008, pp. 49–50.

99The backfill of trench 24 (zembils 4300, 4301, 4302, 4307, 4308, 4309) yielded little and very fragmentary material. Most diagnostic pieces are Late Archaic and Classical.285 The profile of the base of cup P142 finds rich comparisons of the last quarter of the 6th and the first quarter of the 5th century BC,286 whereas a slightly earlier date is possible for the – unusually large – cup P143, the underfoot of which is worn. A similar profile occurs on the broader foot of P144, which belongs to a jug.287 A considerably later date in the first quarter of the 4th century BC is suggested for the splaying conical foot and dropped floor of cup/jug P145.288 The pedestalled base and dropped floor of the large cup or jug P146, matches P185 below, and recalls a Knossian cup of the first half of the 4th century BC.289 The spike on the handle of jug P147 has no close match, but finds Attic and Cretan comparisons of the mid‑4th and 3rd centuries BC.290 P148 is a small basin possibly dating to the 3rd century BC,291 and is considered imported on account of its peculiar semi-fine fabric and unusual form of lip. Lastly, plate P149, which is covered in white and green glaze, and plate P150, which carries white glaze, date to the (late 12th–) early 13th century AD according to Natalia Poulou-Papadimitriou.292

100The backfill of trench 24 yielded a small number of ladles, with body profiles suggesting an MNI of five. A range of ladle types are represented: Ia (P151, P152), IIa (P153), and IIb (P154, P155).

Fig. 31 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the backfill of trench 24, by the East Terrace: P142, P143, P144, P145, P146, P147, P148, P149, P150, P151, P152, P153, P154, and P155.

Fig. 31 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the backfill of trench 24, by the East Terrace: P142, P143, P144, P145, P146, P147, P148, P149, P150, P151, P152, P153, P154, and P155.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 32 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the backfill of Trench 24, by the East Terrace: P143, P144, P145, P146, P148, P151, P152, P154, and P155.

Fig. 32 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the backfill of Trench 24, by the East Terrace: P143, P144, P145, P146, P148, P151, P152, P154, and P155.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

P142 (4300.5). Cup, base frg.
H. 1.4. BD. 6. Fabric E, f. Low conical base.

P143 (4302.2). Cup, base frg.
H. 1. BD. 8. Reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) fabric with a few dark inclusions, close to fabric E. Low conical foot with worn stepped underfoot (?). Coated in dark slip, ranging from dark on the exterior to brown-red on the interior.

P144 (4300.4). Jug, base frg.
H. 1.5. BD. 8. Fabric F, c. Low conical base.

P145 (4302.1). Cup/jug, frg. of foot.
H. 1.1. BD. 8. Overfired Fabric F, c. Splaying conical foot and dropped floor.

P146 (4308.2). Cup/jug, two joining frgs. of foot.
H. 1.6. BD. 8. Fabric C, sc. Low broad conical foot with three grooves on the exterior. Dropped floor.

P147 (4301.2). Jug, handle frg.
H. 2. Overfired fabric turned blue. Slim strap handle, much broader toward the upper attachment, and with pointed spike on top. Traces of black slip on the underside.

P148 (4301.4). Small basin, lip frg.
H. 1.2. RD. 16. Pink (5YR 7/4) fabric with abundant small brown inclusions, a few dark ones, and individual schist flakes. Hemispherical body and broad, thick, horizontal lip with three grooves on the upper surface and two on the edge. Traces of burning on the interior.

P149 (4300.1). Plate (?), body frg.
H. 3. Fine light reddish brown (5YR 6/4) fabric. Covered in white slip and colorless glaze. Trickles of green glaze on the interior, and trickles of thick white glaze on the exterior.

P150 (4301.1). Plate, lip frg.
H. 1.6. Light red (2.5 YR 6/6) fabric with some small white inclusions. Rounded lip. White glaze on both the interior and the exterior.

P151 (4300.2). Ladle, lip frg.
H. 2.2. RD. 15. Fabric B, c. Carinated body and everted lip.

P152 (4308.1). Ladle, frg. of body and lip.
H. 3. RD. 18–19. Fabric B, c. Carinated body and short everted lip.

P153 (4301.5). Ladle, frg. of body and lip with handle.
H. 2.3. RD. ca. 18. Handle D. 3.3. Fabric B, c. Hemispherical (?) body with short everted lip; the handle is elliptical in section.

P154 (4300.3). Ladle, lip frg.
H. 1.9. RD. 14–15. Fabric B, c. Hemispherical body and thick lip with cavity on the underside.

P155 (4301.3). Ladle, lip frg.
H. 2.2. RD. 14–17. Fabric B, c. Hemispherical body and thick squared lip with cavity on the underside.

4.3.4.2. Trench 24: fill (figs. 33–37)

101The ceramic record from the different zembils of the fill was not uniform. Zembils 4310 and 4311 yielded very little and very fragmentary material. Zembils 4303 and 4305 produced modest amounts of pottery (especially ladles, but also a wide range of other shapes) which is not very fragmentary. The same trends are manifested in 4304, which produced, however, a much larger amount of material that was even less fragmentary, and was dominated by basins in addition to ladles.

  • 293 Erickson 2002, pp. 71, 73, no. 99; Kotsonas 2024, p. 110, no. P172; p. 115, no. P187; p. 245, no. 4 (...)
  • 294 Erickson 2010a, p. 147, no. 329 (Knossos, 400–375 BC); p. 219, nos. 543–545 (Praisos, 4th to 2nd ce (...)
  • 295 Erickson 2010b, p. 313, figs. 7.4 and 7.7–9; p. 315, fig. 8.4; pp. 324–325, figs. 15.5 and 16.4; p. (...)

102The well-dated pieces from the fill range from the Archaic to the Classical period. Cup base P156 recalls the Archaic P124 (above). Cup P157 finds numerous comparisons at the sanctuary of Syme Viannou, which date from the second and third quarter of the 4th century BC,293 whereas a 4th (rather than a 3rd) century BC date is suggested for the pedestalled base of P158.294 Lastly, the foot of krater P159 finds comparison on cups and jugs from Priniatikos Pyrgos dating from 475–450 BC.295

103Unlike the few ladles from the backfill of trench 24, the numerous pieces coming from the fill of the same trench show remarkable typological homogeneity. Type IIa is predominant (P160, P161, P162, P163, P164, P165, P166, and the variant P167), whereas types Ia (P168) and III (P169) are poorly represented. P170 shows a peculiar profile, with conical wall marked by a ridge, and a short, sharply everted lip. Peculiarities in secondary features include the grooved body of P162 and the grooved lip of P164.

104The MNI for ladles in the fill of trench 24 was estimated on the basis of handle edges, and of handle and body attachments. The MNI for these features among the pottery from zembil 4304 was six and seven respectively. A minimum of six more items is estimated for the material from the other zembils of the fill (4303, 4305) on the basis of handle and body attachments. Thus, the number of ladles in trench 24 is clearly much smaller than the one from trench 17. The attestation of the two assemblages is important in documenting that the use of ladles was not limited to a specific spot, and in suggesting that this use was not restricted to a single episode.

  • 296 A close match for the lip profile comes from a (Protogeometric–) Geometric context at Kommos (Calla (...)
  • 297 Johnston 2005, p. 361, no. 184. Cf. a 6th century BC piece from Corinth (Villing, Pemberton 2010, p (...)
  • 298 Levi 1927–1929, p. 498, fig. 592‑D, form l (Afrati); Palermo 1992, p. 62, no. 115 (Prinias); Kotson (...)
  • 299 Prinias: Palermo 1992, p. 76, nos. 237 and 238 respectively (also, cf. the small basin no. 121). Go (...)
  • 300 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 262, no. 500. Cf. an Attic mid‑4th century BC import from Priniatikos (...)
  • 301 Cf. Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 258, no. 468; p. 264, no. 537.
  • 302 Callaghan 1992, p. 96, no. H8.12.
  • 303 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, pp. 254–255, nos. 433 and 449.

105Other open vessels in plain and coarse ware include P171, a type II kalathos, which is one of the few examples of the shape found outside the West Terrace.296 Mortar P172 finds a comparison from a (probably) 7th century BC context at Kommos.297 Basins with reflex handles, like those of P173, occur at different Cretan sites in the 7th century BC and the form seems to grow a distinct lip by the turn to the 6th century BC.298 P173, which shows a short everted lip, is tentatively assigned to the latter century. The related profiles of basins P174 and P175 find comparisons from Prinias and Gortyn dated circa 600 BC.299 P175 in particular recalls some basins from the West and East Terraces in carrying traces of burning on the interior. A date in the early 4th century BC is likely for the lip profile of basin P176,300 whereas the profile of basin P177 looks like an earlier version of that of P125, which dates to the late 4th to 3rd century BC. Accordingly, P177 is placed in the first half of the 4th century BC.301 Bowl P178 recalls early to mid‑4th century BC pieces from Knossos,302 and Kommos.303

  • 304 Mook 1993, p. 192 (Kavousi); Wallace 2010b, p. 42, no. KK 8 (Krousonas Koupo) and p. 53, no. RKES 4 (...)
  • 305 Marinatos 1936, pp. 260–262, fig. 24.
  • 306 Santaniello 2004, p. 456, nos. SOS/55, SOS 58 and SOS/5. For the similar profile of a Late Archaic (...)
  • 307 Marinatos 1936, p. 247; Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937, p. 21 (Hellenistic).
  • 308 On the gradual refinement of the fabric of some types of Aegean transport amphorae see, for example (...)

106Closed vessels are underrepresented. The raised band with incised two‑bar chevrons on pithos sherd P179 is commonly found on Cretan pithoi of the Late Minoan IIIC to Protogeometric periods.304 A pithos from Temple B, which carries both two‑bar and three-bar chevrons, was considered by Marinatos as a Minoan or Protogeometric antique.305 The broad base P180 probably belongs to an Archaic fairly large closed vessel.306 P181 is the foot of a transport amphora, a class of material which is also attested thinly in the area of Temple B.307 The profile of the piece in question is undiagnostic, but the fairly coarse fabric and the banded decoration favor an Archaic date.308 The fabric is not typical for any of the well-known types of Aegean amphorae, but the provenance of our piece should perhaps be sought in the east Aegean, and especially Ionia. Lastly, the jug foot P182 cannot be dated with any precision.

Fig. 33 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 24, by the East Terrace: P156, P157, P158, P159, P160, P161, P162, P163, P164, P165, P166, P167, P168, P169, P170, and P171.

Fig. 33 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 24, by the East Terrace: P156, P157, P158, P159, P160, P161, P162, P163, P164, P165, P166, P167, P168, P169, P170, and P171.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 34 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 24, by the East Terrace: P172, P173, P174, P175, P176, P177, P178, P179, P180, P181, and P182.

Fig. 34 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 24, by the East Terrace: P172, P173, P174, P175, P176, P177, P178, P179, P180, P181, and P182.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 35 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of Trench 24, by the East Terrace: P156, P157, P158, P159, P162, P164, P167, P168, P169, and P170.

Fig. 35 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of Trench 24, by the East Terrace: P156, P157, P158, P159, P162, P164, P167, P168, P169, and P170.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

Fig. 36 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 24, by the East Terrace: P171, P172, P174, P175, P176, and P177.

Fig. 36 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 24, by the East Terrace: P171, P172, P174, P175, P176, and P177.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

Fig. 37 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 24, by the East Terrace: P178, P180, P181, and P182.

Fig. 37 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 24, by the East Terrace: P178, P180, P181, and P182.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

P156 (4304.11). Cup, base frg.
H. 1.4. BD. 5. Fabric E, f. Ring base with two grooves on the underside.

P157 (4304.13). Cup, lower body.
H. 2.5. BD. 5.5. Overfired fabric, bluish grey with many small white inclusions. Tall foot with dropped floor. Thick wall and low ridge on the exterior.

P158 (4311.1). Cup/kantharos, two non-joining frgs. of foot.
H. 3.3. BD. 8. Fabric D, sf. Tall splaying conical foot. A low ridge and a very shallow groove run on the exterior, which also preserves traces of brown slip.

P159 (4303.1). Krater, frg. of foot.
H. 1.5. BD. ≥ 12. Fine very pale brown (10YR 8/3) fabric. Low conical foot, coated in black slip.

P160 (4304.16). Ladle, lip frg.
H. 2.9. RD. 15. Fabric B, c. Hemispherical body and short everted lip. Heavy traces of burning on the lip.

P161 (4304.17). Ladle, lip frg.
H. 3.4. RD. 13. Fabric B, c. Hemispherical body with thick, fairly broad, everted lip.

P162 (4304.18). Ladle, lip frg.
H. 1.7. RD. 16. Fabric B, sc. Hemispherical body with two shallow grooves below the short everted lip.

P163 (4304.19). Ladle, lip frg.
H. 2. RD. 14. Fabric B, c. Hemispherical body and everted lip.

P164 (4305.1). Ladle, lip frg.
H. 1.9. RD. 16–18. Fabric B, sc. Hemispherical body and everted lip with three grooves on the upper surface.

P165 (4305.2). Ladle, frg. of handle and lip.
H. 3. Handle D. 2. Fabric B, sc. Hemispherical body and short everted lip. Round handle.

P166 (4305.3). Ladle, part of the body with handle and lip.
H. 3.5. Handle D. 2.3. Fabric C, c. Hemispherical body and very short everted lip. The handle is square in section.

P167 (4311.3). Ladle (?), lip frg.
H. 2.5. RD. 15–16. Fabric B, c. Hemispherical body and everted lip, overhanging both the exterior and the interior.

P168 (4303.2). Ladle, lip frg.
H. 2.2. RD. 14–15. Fabric B, c. Carinated body and broad everted lip.

P169 (4304.14). Ladle, part of handle and lip.
H. 3.2. Handle D. 3. Fabric B, c. Hemispherical (?) body and short everted lip. Thick handle, elliptical in section.

P170 (4304.15). Ladle, one piece preserving full profile.
H. 5.7. Fabric C, c. Hemispherical body and short everted lip.

P171 (4304.9). Kalathos, lip frg.
H. 4. RD. 40. Fabric B, sc. Straight wall and thick flat lip, below which there is a low ridge and a trace of handle attachment.

P172 (4304.5). Mortar, lip frg.
H. 7.5. RD. 40–50. Fabric B, sc. Conical body and thick lip with shallow undercutting. Use wear on the interior.

P173 (4304.2). Basin, three large non-joining frgs.
H. 3.4. RD. 19. Fabric B (?), c. (but overfired). Hemispherical body with short sharply everted lip, to which a horizontal reflex handle, round in section, is attached.

P174 (4304.1). Basin, three large non-joining frgs.
H. 7.6. RD. 35. Fabric B, c. Carinated body with deep groove below the broad flat lip.

P175 (4304.3). Basin, lip frg.
H. 3.8. RD. 27. Fabric B, c. Carinated body with deep groove below the fairly broad everted lip. Traces of burning on the interior.

P176 (4304.4). Basin, lip frg.
H. 2.5. RD. 30. Fabric D (?), sc. Hemispherical body and thick rounded lip with deep undercutting.

P177 (4304.6). Mortar, lip frg.
H. 4.5. RD. ca. 35. Fabric B, c. Conical body and sharply outturned lip (almost triangular in section) with ridge below.

P178 (4304.10). Bowl, lip frg.
H. 2.2. RD. 27. Fine, soft, slightly powdery, very pale brown (10YR 8/4) fabric. Hemispherical body and broad, sharply everted lip. Traces of brown to dark slip on the interior and the exterior.

P179 (4304.7). Pithos, body frg.
H. 6. Fabric C, c. Raised band with incised two‑bar chevrons (the bars are separated by a groove). A broad groove separates this band from another, which is barely preserved.

P180 (4304.12). Fairly large closed vessel, base frg.
H. 2. BD. 13–14. Fabric E, f. Vestigial ring base with domed underside.

P181 (4304.8). Amphora, much of the base with frgs. from the body.
H. 5. BD. 17. Soft, powdery, sf., reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) fabric with small to medium-sized red inclusions, small dark ones and abundant particles of silver mica. Thick and tall conical foot. Slim band on the transition to the body.

P182 (4311.2). Jug, frg. of foot.
H. 2.8. BD. 8. Fabric F, c. Tall and heavy, conical foot.

4.4. Pottery from the North Terrace

  • 309 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 27.

107Trench 18 targeted the North Terrace, which Xanthoudidis called the “Archive.”309 Nearly all the diagnostic material from within the structure comes from the backfill, but several pieces of pottery were located in a fill lying just west of the structure.

4.4.1. Trench 18

4.4.1.1. Backfill (figs. 38–40)

108Xanthoudidis backfilled the “Archive” after excavating it, but natural processes over the last century may have contributed to the make‑up of this backfill (zembils 4197, 4202, 4233, 4272; 4242, 4244, 4249, 4255, 4277, 4283; 4256, 4259, 4262). A considerable number of fragmentary, but diagnostic, pieces were recovered from this backfill. P185 represents joins between the backfill and the fill thus confirming that the former included soil and material from the “Archive” itself. One sherd from this vase, as well as P192, came from north of the north wall of the “Archive” (wall 14).

  • 310 Erickson 2002, pp. 60–61, nos. 47–48 and 58; Kotsonas 2024, p. 96, no. P131; p. 99, no. P140; p. 16 (...)
  • 311 Kotsonas 2024, pp. 456, 469.
  • 312 Erickson 2002, p. 73, nos. 94–95, especially no. 94 (Afrati). Also, cf. Erickson 2010a, p. 86, no.  (...)
  • 313 Coldstream 1999, pp. 324, 328, no. O12.
  • 314 Eiring 2001, p. 97.
  • 315 Englezou 2005, pp. 171–175. Add Kalpaxis, Furtwängler, Schnapp (eds.) 1994, p. 84, no. K47 (Eleuthe (...)

109Numerous fragmentary, but diagnostic, pieces were recovered from the backfill of the “Archive.” Cup P183 is imported, and its base with penannular groove finds several comparisons at Syme Viannou.310 Erickson has identified the vessels from Syme Viannou as products of a workshop at Afrati, and has dated them to the second and third quarter of the 5th century BC. The soft pale fabric of the piece from Dreros is compatible with such a provenance, but I am not convinced that this fabric can be associated exclusively with Afrati.311 Cup foot P184 is also imported, but from elsewhere in Crete. Its conical and flaring profile and the dropped floor suggest an early 4th century date.312 The pedestalled base and dropped floor of P185, a large cup/jug which matches P146 above, find comparison on a Knossian cup of the first half of the 4th century BC.313 P186 is a body fragment of a small open vessel of Classical or Hellenistic date, which is considered imported because of the finesse of its fabric and the metallic black gloss. The latest piece is P187, the pedestal of a Cretan type kantharos with dropped floor and some elaboration on the foot. In Knossos, Cretan kantharoi are typically found in sanctuaries.314 P187 can be assigned to Englezou’s variety B, which extends from the mid‑3rd to the mid‑2nd century, but finds its best comparisons in the first half of this period.315

  • 316 Cf. Francis et al. 2000, p. 441 (Agiasmatsi).
  • 317 Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937, p. 21.

110P188, and the probably joining P189, are attributed to ladle type Ia. The fragmentary P190 perhaps belongs to type IIa, whereas the ladle handle P191 cannot be classified. The last piece is peculiar in being coated in brown slip.316 Finally, the handle P192, which is tentatively attributed to a ladle, carries a trident-shaped graffito incised after firing on the upper surface. Graffiti are not entirely unknown in Dreros, and alphabetic examples have been identified on Hellenistic transport amphorae from the area of the agora.317

  • 318 Marinatos 1936, p. 247; Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937, p. 21.

111Closed vessels are poorly represented in trench 18, as in all other areas of the sanctuary. P193, a large body fragment of an imported transport amphora, is hard to date. It is probably later than the Archaic P181 and therefore more closely comparable to the transport amphorae from the area of Temple B.318

  • 319 Cf. Poulou-Papadimitriou 2008, pp. 49–50; Poulou-Papadimitriou 2012, p. 317.

112Lastly, there are two pieces that indicate activity in more recent times. Plate P194, which is covered in green glaze and is assigned to the painted incised ware, dates to the early 13th century AD, according to Poulou-Papadimitriou.319 The hard-fired tile (?) P195 is probably modern.

Fig. 38 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the backfill of trench 18 in the North Terrace: P183, P184, P185, P186, P187 (outside and inside), P188, P190, P191, and P192.

Fig. 38 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the backfill of trench 18 in the North Terrace: P183, P184, P185, P186, P187 (outside and inside), P188, P190, P191, and P192.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 39 — Photographs of pottery fragments from trench 18 in the North Terrace: P193, P194, P195, P196, P197, P198, P199 (outside and inside), and P200.

Fig. 39 — Photographs of pottery fragments from trench 18 in the North Terrace: P193, P194, P195, P196, P197, P198, P199 (outside and inside), and P200.

Photos: Th. Brisart.

Fig. 40 — Drawings of pottery fragments from trench 18 (backfill and fill from within the “Archive”) in the North Terrace: P183, P184, P185, P187, P188, P189, P192, P193, P194, and P196.

Fig. 40 — Drawings of pottery fragments from trench 18 (backfill and fill from within the “Archive”) in the North Terrace: P183, P184, P185, P187, P188, P189, P192, P193, P194, and P196.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

P183 (4233.6). Cup, frg. of base and lower body.
H. 1. BD. 7. Soft, very pale brown (10YR 8/4) fabric with a few small brown inclusions. Low conical base, with groove underneath. Coated in brown slip, which extends to the underfoot.

P184 (4202.2). Cup, frg. of foot and lower body.
H. 1.5. BD. ca. 10. Fabric F, sf. Conical foot, high and slightly flaring, with low ridge on the exterior, and dropped floor. Traces of burning.

P185 (4202.5+4233.4+4274.2+4286.1). Large cup/jug, four frgs. (including two joining frgs.) of foot and lower body.
H. 3. BD. 9. Fabric C, sf. Low broad conical foot with three grooves on the exterior. Dropped floor. Traces of burning.

P186 (4233.7). Small open vessel, frg. of wall.
H. 2. D. max. ca. 8. Soft reddish yellow (5YR 6/8) fabric with much silver mica in small flakes. Coated in black gloss.

P187 (4242.1). Kantharos, frg. of foot and lower body.
H. 2.5. BD. 7. Hard, light red (2.5YR 6/8) fabric with many small red inclusions and fewer small white inclusions. Conical foot, high and flaring, with dropped floor and groove on the resting surface. Fairly lustrous brown slip on the exterior.

P188 (4244.2). Ladle, frg. of body and lip (probably joins P189).
H. 3. RD. 19. Fabric B, sc. Carinated body and sharply everted lip. Shallow groove on the upper surface of the lip, and traces of burning on the interior.

P189 (4244.1). Ladle, frg. of body and base (probably joins P188).
H. 3.5. BD. 7. Fabric B, sc. Hemispherical body with slightly convex resting surface. Traces of burning.

P190 (4242.3). Ladle, handle with frg. of lip.
L. 12.5. D. 2.6. Fabric B, c. Flat lip and rounded handle.

P191 (4249.2). Ladle, frg. of handle.
L. 5.5. Handle 3 by 1.1. Fabric B, sc. Flat handle with curving profile, ending in sparrow tail. Coated in brown slip.

P192 (4263.1). Jug or ladle, frg. of body, lip and handle.
H. 3. BD. 12. Fabric C, sc. The form of the lip is uncertain. An incised trident is rendered post-firing on the upper surface of the handle.

P193 (4197-ISO.001). Transport amphora, eighteen frgs. (three body parts of joining frgs. and two isolated pieces) from belly and neck.
H. of the largest part 17. D. max. of the same part ca. 40. Reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) fabric with many small brown and red inclusions, a few larger white inclusions, and little mica. Continuous profile from belly to neck.

P194 (4202.4). Plate, frg. of lip.
H. 1.8. RD. 12. Hard reddish fabric with a few small mica flakes. Offset lip with horizontal incision under the edge on the exterior and the interior. Coated in pale green glaze overlying pinkish slip.

P195 (4233.3). Tile (?) frg.
H. 5.3. Thickness 0.6. Very hard, dark grey (10YR 4/1) fabric with some dark inclusions and silver mica. Flat piece with three ridges.

4.4.1.2. Fill from within the “Archive” (figs. 39, 40)

  • 320 Erickson 2002, pp. 53–54, nos. 19–27; Kotsonas 2024, pp. 494–495, fig. 4.5 (Syme Viannou). Also, Er (...)

113The fill (zembils 4243, 4248, 4254, 4279, 4286) yielded highly fragmented material from small and medium-sized vessels, with no diagnostics, except for P196. This cup is imported from eslewhere in crete and its stepped base is indicative of a date in the last quarter of the 6th century BC.320

P196 (4243.2). Cup, frg. of foot and lower body.
H. 2.4. BD. 6. Hard, light red (2.5YR 6/6) fabric with some small white inclusions. Low base, with stepped underside. Coated in brown slip.

4.4.1.3. Fill from west of the “Archive” (figs. 39, 41)

114This fill (zembils 4234, 4241, 4247, 4253, 4287) was located directly west of the west wall of the “Archive” (wall 17). The pottery from zembils 4234 and 4241 is considerably more fragmentary than that from the other three zembils of the fill.

  • 321 Marinatos 1936, p. 263, fig. 27.
  • 322 Wallace 2010b, pp. 24, 30, no. AYP 27 (Kera Papoura); p. 47, no. KK 3 (Krousonas Koupo).
  • 323 Mook 1993, p. 230, nos. P1.141, P2.206 and P3.70.
  • 324 Boardman 1961, p. 118, nos. 519–520 (Hyrtakos); Stefanakis 2011, pp. 779–780, figs. 6–7 (Choumeri a (...)
  • 325 Coldstream, Eiring 2001, p. 78; Eiring 2001, p. 97; Erickson 2010a, pp. 86–103, 133–147, 205–219.
  • 326 Callaghan 1978, pp. 10–11, nos. 24–25; Erickson 2010a, p. 184, no. 434 (the piece is identified as (...)
  • 327 Coldstream 1973b, pp. 40–41, nos. H30–H31 and H38; Callaghan 1978, pp. 4–6, nos. 1–9; La Rosa, Port (...)
  • 328 Erickson 1998–2000, pp. 241–242; Englezou 2005, pp. 189–191.

115Only a few diagnostic pieces were identified in this fill, but they range from the Archaic to the Early Hellenistic period. Pithos fragments decorated with spirals, like P197, were found in the area of Dreros Temple B.321 The pattern is traced back to the Protogeometric period in central Crete,322 but the stratigraphy at Kavousi Kastro suggests the motif was introduced there in the Late Geometric period.323 Close comparisons from elsewhere in Crete are assigned to the Protoarchaic and Archaic periods.324 P198 is the tall lip of a high-necked cup, a vessel type which was popular in Crete from the Archaic to the Early Hellenistic period.325 Our piece is too fragmentary to be dated specifically, but the very high neck favors a post-Archaic date. The foot of kantharos P199 finds close comparisons at Knossos dating from the third quarter of the 5th century BC.326 Skyphos P200 conforms to an Attic type that was imported to Crete in the 5th and especially the 4th centuries,327 and was locally imitated in the central part of the island around 300 BC.328 The fabric of the piece from Dreros is non-local and is compatible with a provenance from central Crete.

Fig. 41 — Drawings of pottery fragments from Trench 18 (fill from west of the “Archive”) in the North Terrace: P197, P198, P199, and P200.

Fig. 41 — Drawings of pottery fragments from Trench 18 (fill from west of the “Archive”) in the North Terrace: P197, P198, P199, and P200.

Drawings: F. Skyvalida.

P197 (4287.1). Pithos, frg. of lip.
H. 2.5. RD. ca. 60. MFG B, c. Squared lip with impressed spirals on the exterior (five survive).

P198 (4287.2). Cup, frg. of lip.
H. 3.6. RD. 10. MFG C, sf. High necked cup, with slightly flaring edge of lip. Coated in brown slip.

P199 (4247.2). Kantharos, frg. of foot and lower body.
H. 3. BD. 7. MFG F, sf. High conical foot with thin dropped floor. Traces of burning.

P200 (4241.4+4247.1). Skyphos, three frgs. of foot and lower body.
H. 3.3. BD. 6. Fairly soft, light red (5YR 6/6) fabric with a few very small dark inclusions. Low ring foot, slightly flaring. Convex bottom. Almost vertical body wall. Coated in brown gloss, which extends to the underside of the base.

5. Dates, contexts, styles and functions of the pottery

  • 329 Van Effenterre 1946, pp. 601–604.

116The present study of 200 ceramic fragments is one of the few publications of a substantial body of pottery from a Cretan sanctuary of the 1st millennium BC. The preceding analysis revealed notable patterns with reference to the date, context, style and function of the pottery from the sanctuary of the west acropolis. These patterns, which perhaps conform to a broader concern of the Drerians to regularize cultic activity, as reflected in Archaic laws from the site,329 are explored further below. The discussion is centered on spatial configuration, but also proceeds chronologically.

5.1. The Geometric to Protoarchaic pottery from the earliest deposit (below structure 5)

  • 330 Marinatos 1936.
  • 331 Van Effenterre 1948; Van Effenterre 2009; Gaignerot-Driessen 2016, p. 231.
  • 332 Structure 5 is the only structure of the sanctuary which has a fixed terminus post quem provided by (...)
  • 333 The homogeneity of the material from trenches 9 and 14 is indicated by the cross-joins identified a (...)

117The earliest activity at the sanctuary of the west acropolis is placed in the early to mid‑8th century BC, at roughly the time Temple B was erected,330 and the use of the cemetery of Dreros was revived.331 This activity is documented by the deposit recovered below structure 5 in trench 14 of the West Terrace,332 and by the associated material from trench 9, which was lying immediately north (section 4.1.2).333 The analysis above demonstrated that this material dates from the Middle Geometric to the Protoarchaic period, i.e. from the early to mid‑8th century BC to the mid‑ and perhaps the late 7th century BC. This conclusion revises relevant suggestions made in preliminary excavation reports and other literature.

  • 334 The study of the archaeobotanical remains confirms that this is a secondary deposition (Moniaki 202 (...)

118The Middle Geometric–Protoarchaic date range proposed for the deposit establishes that the material in it represents activity extending for over a century to a century and a half. Clearly, several decades separate the production of much of this material, from its final deposition in the cavity below structure 5. This deposition is secondary as indicated by the incomplete state of all vases recovered, and, especially, by the identification of cross-joins between this context and the fill and the backfill of the West Terrace, and (in individual cases) the backfill of the other terraces.334 The deposition did not involve the gradual accumulation of the material, given that different pieces, which date from the Middle Geometric, Late Geometric and Protoarchaic periods, were found in the same zembils.

  • 335 Xanthoudidis 1918; Marinatos 1936, p. 254. Xanthoudidis’s view was confirmed by the new fieldwork: (...)
  • 336 Marinatos 1936, pp. 257–258, 265–268, figs. 22, 28.7, 31, 33.

119The material in question offers important evidence for the character of the site, which relates to the debated identification of the building that was later constructed on the spot, either as a temple, as Xanthoudidis proposed, or as an andreion, as Marinatos hypothesized.335 The cultic role of the ceramic deposit from below structure 5 is undeniable, as confirmed by: a) the repertory of shapes represented and the nearly exclusive attestation of open vessels; b) the predominance of kalathoi, including pieces with attachments on the lip, comparable to those found in Temple B;336 c) the numerous clay figurines recovered in the same context.

  • 337 Moniaki 2020, pp. 316–318.
  • 338 Parisinou 2000, pp. 77–78, 93–96, 124–161.

120The traces of burning on the interior of all well-preserved kalathoi and of several basins from trench 14 suggest that cultic activity in the 8th and 7th centuries BC involved fire-related rituals. It is tempting to associate these traces of burning on the pottery with the burned archaeobotanical remains of cereals, legumes and fruits identified in the same context.337 Nevertheless, the close examination of these remains revealed that they had not been processed for consumption, which argues against any cooking inside the kalathoi. Thus, these vessels could have served as lamps, as is widely hypothesized for Postpalatial to Archaic kalathoi, especially from east Crete, or they could have been used for fire-related rituals, like those documented in ancient Greek literature and iconography.338

  • 339 Day et al. 2006.

121The kalathoi show notable variation in fabric (with MFGs A, B, C and D represented) and the form of the lip, but pairs can be distinguished on technological and morphological grounds. Furthermore, the fabric of particular kalathoi is matched on one or two figurines from the same context. These correspondences are not necessarily accidental, and recall the (considerably richer) sets of ritual objects discovered in the Late Minoan IIIC sanctuary at Kavousi Vronda, which were made in specific raw materials and in accordance with specific technological traditions.339

  • 340 Cf. Zographaki, Farnoux 2014b, p. 106 (cups).

122The scarcity of kalathoi in all other contexts (outside the West Terrace), which are later in date, suggests that aspects of the ritual performed in the sanctuary changed in the course of the 7th century BC, perhaps in relation to the construction of Temple A. The change, however, may not have been very sharp, since the basin, the shape that is closest to the kalathos, remained in use from the Geometric to the Classical and the Hellenistic period (see especially the fill of trenches 14 and 24). Also, the collection of drinking vessels (cups and skyphoi), which were represented below structure 5,340 recalls the copious attestation of Geometric to Hellenistic drinking vessels in different contexts of the sanctuary. Nevertheless, the ceramic repertory of the Classical and Hellenistic period is dominated by the ladle, which is attested only thinly among the material found below structure 5.

5.2. The Geometric to Classical pottery from the West and the East Terrace

123It is unclear whether the pottery from the deposit which was partly covered by structure 5 is representative of the otherwise missing fill of the West Terrace. Indications for the range of the ceramic material which could have been found in this fill are arguably offered by the pottery from (1) the fill of the East Terrace, as well as by the pottery from the surface and the backfill of both the (2) West, and the (3) East Terrace. The following paragraphs focus on the material from these three contexts and discuss its relevance to the study of the missing fill of the West Terrace.

  • 341 Xanthoudidis 1918, pp. 27–28; Prent 2005, p. 301 (with references). This scholarship treats the Eas (...)

124According to the analysis above, the pottery from the fill of the East Terrace (section 4.2.3) dates from the Late Geometric to the Classical period (from the late 8th century to after 400 BC). This date is well supported by the material from trenches 7 and 8, and – to a lesser extent – trenches 20 and 22. Significantly, the date range established for the fill of the East Terrace corresponds to the date range of the material from the surface and the backfill of the East (Late Geometric–Classical) and the West (Archaic–Classical) Terrace. This correspondence suggests that the East, and probably the West Terrace as well, was used until after 400 BC. Thus, Temple A remained in use for considerably longer than the Late Geometric–Archaic period which was previously assumed.341

  • 342 D’Acunto 2002–2003, p. 56; Prent 2005, p. 284; Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, p. 631; Farnoux, Kyriakidi (...)

125Older scholarship and recent excavation reports suggest a 7th century BC date for Temple A and the West Terrace.342 The Middle Geometric to Protoarchaic material found below structure 5 can be taken to support a 7th century BC construction date, but presents no stratigraphic association with any wall, and thus no secure chronological terminus.

126There is clear chronological difference between the fill below structure 5 in the West Terrace, and the fill of the East Terrace. This is indicated not only by the stylistic dates proposed for numerous pieces in the West and East Terrace, but also by the infrequency of the kalathos in the latter context (only trench 7 produced one or two pieces of kalathoi). This difference can be taken to confirm the conclusion of the architectural study by Nicolas Kyriakidis on the different construction dates of the West and the East Terrace. Notwithstanding the changes in the ceramic repertory which were noted above, continuity is attested in the representation of other shapes in the fill of the two terraces: basins and cups remain common, and ladles are thinly represented, as evidenced especially by the material from trenches 7 and 8 (trenches 20 and 22 yielded very little material).

127The material from the surface and the backfill of the West Terrace was Archaic and Classical, ranging from the 6th to the early 4th century BC (section 4.1.1). Only a few shapes are represented, and this is only very thinly, but drinking vessels predominate. Most of these drinking vessels are made in MFG F, which is perhaps imported from the Pediada (see below). If P7 is correctly identified as Attic, it is one of only two overseas imports found at the sanctuary.

128The pottery from the surface and/or backfill of the East Terrace is Protoarchaic (7th century BC), and secondarily Archaic and Classical (6th to late 5th centuries BC) [section 4.2.1 and 4.2.2]. A broad repertory of shapes is represented thinly. The limited post‑7th century material recalls the pottery from the surface and/or the backfill of the West Terrace in including cups and ladles.

129In short, the pottery from the surface and/or the backfill of the West and East Terraces is not very different to that from the fill of the East Terrace. This pattern, however, need not be representative of the largely missing fill of the West Terrace, since the material from below (and around) structure 5 in trenches 9 and 14 is considerably different.

  • 343 For the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros, see above (note that the earliest material from (...)
  • 344 For Dreros Temple A, see above; for Dreros Temple B, see Marinatos 1936, pp. 257–260, figs. 22–23. (...)
  • 345 Marinatos 1936, pp. 257, 259–260, figs. 22–23.
  • 346 Xanthoudidis 1918, pp. 25, 28, fig. 12 (only one handle is illustrated, but more items are referred (...)
  • 347 Compare: Xanthoudidis 1918, pp. 27–28 with Marinatos 1936, pp. 257–260. See also: D’Acunto 2002–200 (...)

130It is worth comparing the pottery from the West and East Terraces of the sanctuary on the west acropolis with the pottery from other sanctuaries in Dreros and elsewhere in Crete. The ceramic record from the West and East Terraces shows notable correspondences to the one from within Temple B. In both cases, the date range is Middle Geometric/Late Geometric to Classical,343 and the shape repertory is dominated by kalathoi and cups.344 Differences between the two assemblages are represented by the lamps and stands from Temple B,345 and the basins and bronze vessels from Temple A.346 Further disparities are indicated by other finds, most notably the bronze statues (sphyrelata) and the quantity of animal bone from Temple B.347

  • 348 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 26.
  • 349 Xanthoudidis 1918, pp. 27–28.
  • 350 Gesell 1999; Gesell 2004; Klein, Glowacki 2009.
  • 351 The beginning of the Gortynian sanctuary is placed in the 12th century BC (Anzalone 2013), but I se (...)

131Aspects of the archaeology of the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros find further comparisons elsewhere in Crete. Indeed, the architecture of Temple A has been associated with the temples of Prinias,348 and its bronze and terracotta finds have been compared to those from the sanctuaries of Axos and Praisos,349 but the poorly known pottery from these contexts does not allow for any evaluation of the relevance of pottery for this connection. The abundance of kalathoi among the Geometric and Protoarchaic material from the west acropolis of Dreros recalls the ceramic evidence from Cretan Late Minoan IIIC temples.350 This remains, however, a selective association, since other important classes of finds seen in Late Minoan IIIC temples are not attested at the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros. The pottery from this sanctuary compares more closely with the recently published material from “Edifizio A” on the hill of Armi at Gortyn. Open vessels, including kalathoi, basins and ladles (as well as animal bone and modest numbers of animal figurines), characterize the record from these two hilltop sanctuaries, which were used from the Early Iron Age to the Hellenistic period.351

5.3. The Archaic to Hellenistic pottery from around the East Terrace and from the North Terrace

  • 352 Marinatos 1936. Cf. Sporn 2002, p. 83; Prent 2005, pp. 285–286.
  • 353 Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937, p. 21.
  • 354 Klein, Glowacki 2009, p. 164, n. 48.
  • 355 Wallace 2010a, pp. 284, 331, 342.
  • 356 Kotsonas 2011b.
  • 357 Prent 1997; Coldstream, Huxley 1999; Kotsonas 2002; Kotsonas 2023, p. 135.
  • 358 Erickson 2002; Erickson 2010a; Kotsonas 2024.
  • 359 Haggis et al. 2004; Haggis et al. 2007; Haggis et al. 2011.
  • 360 Archaic pottery has been located by the new fieldwork at houses near the agora (Farnoux et al. 2022 (...)

132The pottery published here establishes continuity of cult at the sanctuary of the west acropolis from the Geometric to the Hellenistic period. This conclusion is particularly important in the light of the reported paucity of Archaic and Classical material from Temple B,352 and from the domestic units in its vicinity,353 which has puzzled scholars.354 In the light of this paucity, Dreros is assumed to have been abandoned in the Archaic period.355 I have previously questioned this assumption,356 and I prefer to associate this paucity with the relatively poor archaeological visibility of the material culture of 6th century BC Crete, which has fueled notions of an “Archaic gap.”357 Studies of the last fifteen years, and especially the work of Brice Erickson, have dispelled the notion of a gap, and have started building the ceramic sequence of the island in the 6th century BC.358 This is increasingly refined by the work of Donald Haggis and Peggy Mook at Azoria.359 It is on the basis of these recent studies that I have identified the Archaic (and Classical) material from the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros and established continuity of cult. This basis was unavailable to the excavators of Temple B and the houses by the agora of Dreros, who worked in the 1930s, which explains why they failed to identify any pottery of Archaic (and Classical) date.360

133Although the Archaic pottery from the sanctuary on the west acropolis is not particularly rich, the Archaic period was a phase of expansion of activity to the east and south of the East Terrace, and also to the North Terrace (“Archive”). These areas remained in use until well into the Hellenistic period, in contrast to the West and the East Terraces which yielded no evidence that can be dated after the Late Classical period. This change in the space in use can perhaps be associated with the relatively abundant representation of Classical material, especially cups, which predominate among the material of the late 5th to mid‑4th century BC.

  • 361 Callaghan, Johnston 2000.
  • 362 Francis et al. 2000.
  • 363 Sporn 2002, p. 83; D’Acunto 2002–2003, p. 57.

134The pottery from the area south and east of the East Terrace (section 4.3) is dominated by a single shape, the ladle, which is indicative of ritual activity. Ladles were found in abundance at the sanctuary of Kommos (where they mostly date to the Hellenistic period),361 and they dominate the Hellenistic and Early Roman ceramic record from Agiasmatsi.362 It is not easy to connect these two extra-urban sanctuaries with the urban sanctuary of Dreros (also because Agiasmatsi was a cave sanctuary). Neither these comparisons, nor any of the pottery published here, is indicative of the deity worshipped at the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros. Indeed, they cannot confirm previous suggestions for either Apollo or Athena.363

  • 364 Note, however, the technological and morphological similarities between kalathoi and braziers from (...)
  • 365 Van Effenterre 1946, p. 603.
  • 366 Guarducci 1935, pp. 84–86, no. 1.

135The popularity of ladles among the Archaic to Hellenistic material comes along with the persistence of drinking vessels and basins in considerable numbers, and the continued scarcity of closed vessels. The increased popularity of the ladle can be associated with the demise in the representation of the kalathos, even if the former shape should not be conceived as a replacement for the latter. Unlike the kalathoi, the ladles typically show no traces of burning and thus they indicate the demise of fire-related rituals. Also, the small size of the bowl of the ladles does not compare to that of the kalathoi.364 The ladles from Dreros, like those from Kommos and Agiasmatsi, must have been used for the serving of food in ritual meals, or for the pouring of liquid offerings (see above). Furthermore, they could have been connected with purification rituals, which are referred to in an Archaic inscription from Dreros.365 These rituals remain indeterminate, but the scores of ladles from trenches 14 and 24 cannot represent a single episode of ritual practice involving dozens of individuals, like the oath taken by 180 male youths of Dreros in the late 3rd century BC.366 Both morphological and, to an extent, stratigraphic evidence suggests the gradual accumulation of the material. The gradual replacement of the earlier carinated ladle type Ia, by the later type IIa with the hemispherical bowl, is indicative in this respect.

136Less informative, especially with reference to the use of space, is the limited diagnostic material from the North Terrace (“Archive”) [section 4.4]. The earliest pottery from both inside and immediately outside this structure dates from the Archaic period, while Classical to Middle Hellenistic material is also represented. In accordance with broader patterns identified across the sanctuary, the pottery from the “Archive” is dominated by drinking vessels and shows a scarcity of closed vessels; however, it includes only a few ladles and no kalathoi or basins, unlike the pottery from the other areas of the sanctuary.

  • 367 Guarducci 1935, pp. 84–86, no. 1, line 48.
  • 368 Jeffery 1949, p. 37.

137The ceramic imports from the sanctuary on the west acropolis mostly originate from within Crete, with two exceptions: the Attic (?) cup P7, and the east Aegean transport amphora P181. The pottery from this sanctuary, and also from elsewhere at Dreros, shows that overseas imports apparently had no notable impact on local ceramic production. Imports from within Crete are much more numerous at the site and are adequately represented from the Protoarchaic to the Middle Hellenistic period. Indeed, the Early to Middle Hellenistic period perhaps represents a relative rise in the quantity of imported wares. The famous Hellenistic inscription of the oath of the Drerian ephebes records the “philo-Knossian” attitudes of the local community and their hatred toward Lyktos/Lyttos,367 and epigraphic links between Dreros and Knossos have been traced back to the 6th century, albeit tentatively.368 However, Drerian pottery presents a very different picture on the connections of the site. Ceramic imports from the area of Knossos are currently limited to the imported 7th century BC aryballos discovered by Xanthoudidis, and Knossian influence on Geometric and Protoarchaic pottery from Dreros is weak, much weaker than on the pottery from Anavlochos, which is located at a short distance to the west. On this basis, I question preexisting assumptions which include Dreros in the area covered by the Knossian style, and I tentatively place the site in a central-east ceramic sub-region which remains to be defined with further study and publication. A closer connection with Lyktos/Lyttos – the nemesis of Dreros in the Hellenistic period – may be identifiable, if MFG F comes from the Pediada, as I argued above. A few imports come from elsewhere in central Crete, including Afrati (?) (P183), the Messara (P84, P109) and elsewhere (P200). A considerable stronger ceramic link is identifiable between Dreros and the neighboring Anavlochos, as the potters from the two sites apparently shared access to the raw materials used for MFG B, which is amply represented at both sites.

  • 369 Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, pp. 634, 638, 645; Gaignerot-Driessen 2013, especially p. 291.

138The latest evidence for cultic activity at the sanctuary on the west acropolis comes from the area to the east and south of the East Terrace, and also from the North Terrace (“Archive”). The pottery from these contexts dates no later than the late 3rd century BC, and this terminus largely corresponds with the destruction of Dreros by Lyktos/Lyttos, which is placed between 206 and 195 BC on epigraphic and archaeological grounds.369 Clearly, the sanctuary did not survive the destruction that swept the local community at the time.

  • 370 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 24; Marinatos 1936, p. 216; Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937, pp. 7–8; Van Effen (...)
  • 371 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 26.
  • 372 Van Effenterre 1992, p. 89; Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, p. 637; Gaignerot-Driessen 2013, p. 291.

139The area of the sanctuary on the west acropolis was deserted for roughly one and a half millennia. The resumption of limited activity is represented by a thin scatter of sherds which come from the surface and the backfill of certain areas (P149, P150, P195) and date from the medieval period, especially the 13th century AD. This evidence recalls the much richer material from the east acropolis of Dreros, which was occupied in the 12th and 13th centuries AD.370 It is uncertain whether the few pieces from the west acropolis can be associated with any structure. Following another gap of approximately half a millennium, modern activity is represented by one or two pieces of pottery (P196 and probably P69). Xanthoudidis entertained the possibility that a layer of bluish schist he identified in the West Terrace could belong to the roof of a modern structure, but he concluded that it formed part of the roof of the temple.371 Nevertheless, traces of lime plaster located during the recent excavations lend support to the possibility of medieval or modern activity in this area, especially since kilns of modern date have been identified elsewhere at Dreros.372

6. Epilogue

140For this brief epilogue, I weave together the history of the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros and the history of the site as a whole. The establishment of cult on the west hill in the early to mid‑8th century BC is largely contemporary with the intensification of – especially ritual – activity across the site. At this time, Temple B was erected and the use of the cemetery was resumed. For the half millennium which followed, the sanctuary on the west acropolis, and Dreros in general, stood in relative isolation from Aegean ceramic networks. The increasing contacts with central Crete and the Mirabello, which are identifiable in the Drerian ceramic record of the Hellenistic period, probably came along with some rise in prosperity; however, eventually these contacts caused the destruction of the city circa 200 BC, since the Drerians were caught in the conflict between more powerful central Cretan neighbors. The destruction sealed the fate of Dreros, including the sanctuary on the west acropolis. There is very little trace of later activity in the area of the sanctuary, but this reflects two important episodes of the more recent history of the site: the occupation of the east acropolis in the late medieval period, and the modern discovery of the ancient city.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Alexiou 1956 = Stelios Alexiou, “Ιερόν παρά το Καβούσι Ιεράπετρας”, Κρητικά Χρονικά 10, 1956, pp. 7–19.

Allegro et al. 2008 = Nunzio Allegro et al., “Lo scarico del thesmophorion di Gortina”, in Carmela A. Di Stefano (ed.), Demetra : la divinità, i santuari, il culto, la leggenda. Atti del I congresso internazionale, Enna, 1‑4 Luglio 2004, Pisa, Rome, Serra, 2008, pp. 107–121.

Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1985 = Maria Andreadaki-Vlasaki, “Γεωµετρικά νεκροταφεία στo Νοµό Χανίων”, in Theocharis Detorakis (ed.), Πεπραγµένα του Ε’ διεθνούς κρητολογικού συνεδρίου : Άγιος Νικόλαος, 25 Σεπτεµβρίου‑1 Οκτωβρίου 1981, vol. A, Heraklion, Εταιρία Κρητικών Ιστορικών Μελετών, 1985, pp. 10–35.

Anzalone 2013 = Rosario Maria Anzalone, “Una nuova area sacra di Gortina preromana : l’‘Edifizio A’ sulla collina di Armì”, ASAA 91, 2013, pp. 229–285.

Apostolakou, Zographaki 2006 = Vili Apostolakou, Vassiliki Zographaki, “Εικονιστική κεραµική από τον αποθέτη Ολούντος”, in Theocharis Detorakis, Alexis Kalokairinos (eds.), Πεπραγµένα Θ´ διεθνούς αρχαιολογικού συνεδρίου : Ελούντα, 1‑6 Οκτωβρίου 2001, vol. A5, Heraklion, Εταιρία Κρητικών Ιστορικών Μελετών, 2006, pp. 95–114.

Boardman 1961 = John Boardman, The Cretan Collection in Oxford: The Dictaean Cave and Iron Age Crete, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1961.

Brisart 2014 = Thomas Brisart, “Isolation, Austerity and Fancy Pottery: Acquiring and Using Overseas Imported Fine Wares in 6th‑ and 5th‑Century Eastern Crete”, in Oliver Pilz, Gunnar Seelentag (eds.), Cultural Practices and Material Culture in Archaic and Classical Crete: Proceedings of the International Conference, Mainz, May 20‒21, 2011, Berlin, Boston, De Gruyter, 2014, pp. 263–277.

Brock 1957 = James K. Brock, Fortetsa: Early Greek Tombs near Knossos, Cambridge, UP, 1957.

Callaghan 1978 = Peter J. Callaghan, “KRS 1976: Excavations at a Shrine of Glaukos, Knossos”, ABSA 73, 1978, pp. 1–30.

Callaghan 1992 = Peter J. Callaghan, “Archaic to Hellenistic Pottery”, in L. Hugh Sackett (ed.), Knossos: From Greek City to Roman Colony. Excavations at the Unexplored Mansion II, Athens, BSA, ABSA Suppl. 21, 1992, pp. 89–136.

Callaghan forthcoming = Peter J. Callaghan, “Archaic to Hellenistic Pottery from Little Palace North”, forthcoming.

Callaghan, Johnston 2000 = Peter J. Callaghan, Alan W. Johnston, “The Pottery from the Greek Temples at Kommos”, in Joseph W. Shaw, Maria C. Shaw (eds.), Kommos IV: The Greek Sanctuary, Princeton, UP, 2000, pp. 210–301.

Coldstream 1972 = John N. Coldstream, “Knossos 1951–61: Protogeometric and Geometric Pottery from the Town”, ABSA 67, 1972, pp. 63–98.

Coldstream 1973a = John N. Coldstream, “Knossos 1951–61: Orientalizing and Archaic Pottery from the Town”, ABSA 68, 1973, pp. 33–63.

Coldstream 1973b = John N. Coldstream, Knossos: The Sanctuary of Demeter, London, Thames and Hudson, ABSA Suppl. 8, 1973.

Coldstream 1992 = John N. Coldstream, “Early Hellenic Pottery”, in L. Hugh Sackett (ed.), Knossos: From Greek City to Roman Colony. Excavations at the Unexplored Mansion II, Athens, BSA, ABSA Suppl. 21, 1992, pp. 67–88.

Coldstream 1996 = John N. Coldstream, “The Protogeometric and Geometric Pottery”, in John N. Coldstream, Hector W. Catling (eds.), Knossos North Cemetery: Early Greek Tombs, vol. 2, London, BSA, ABSA Suppl. 28, 1996, pp. 311–420.

Coldstream 1999 = John N. Coldstream, “Knossos 1951–61: Classical and Hellenistic Pottery from the Town”, ABSA 94, 1999, pp. 321–351.

Coldstream 2000 = John N. Coldstream, “A Strange Prelude to the Cypriot Unguent Trade in Crete”, in Georgios K. Ioannidis, Stelios Chatzistyllis (eds.), Πρακτικά του Γ ́ διεθνούς κυπρολογικού συνεδρίου, Λευκωσία, 16‑20 Απριλίου 1996, vol. A, Nicosia, Εταιρεία Κυπριακών Σπουδών, 2000, pp. 463–469.

Coldstream 2001 = John N. Coldstream, “The Early Greek Period”, in Coldstream, Eiring, Forster (eds.) 2001, pp. 23–76.

Coldstream 2002 = John N. Coldstream, “Knossos: ‘Geometric’ Tombs Excavated by D. G. Hogarth, 1900”, ABSA 97, 2002, pp. 201–216.

Coldstream 2008 = John N. Coldstream, Greek Geometric Pottery: A Survey of Ten Local Styles and Their Chronology, 2nd ed., Bristol, Phoenix Press, 2008.

Coldstream, Catling (eds.) 1996 = John N. Coldstream, Hector W. Catling (eds.), Knossos North Cemetery: Early Greek Tombs, vol. 1–4, London, BSA, ABSA Suppl. 28, 1996.

Coldstream, Eiring 2001 = John N. Coldstream, L. Jonas Eiring, “The Late Archaic and Classical Periods”, in Coldstream, Eiring, Forster (eds.) 2001, pp. 77–87.

Coldstream, Eiring, Forster (eds.) 2001 = John N. Coldstream, L. Jonas Eiring, Gary Forster (eds.), Knossos Pottery Handbook: Greek and Roman, London, BSA, Studies 7, 2001.

Coldstream, Huxley 1999 = John N. Coldstream, George L. Huxley, “Knossos: The Archaic Gap”, ABSA 94, 1999, pp. 289–307.

Coldstream, Macdonald 1997 = John N. Coldstream, Colin F. Macdonald, “Knossos: Area of South-West Houses. Early Hellenic Occupation”, ABSA 92, 1997, pp. 189–245.

Coulié 2013 = Anne Coulié, La céramique grecque aux époques géométrique et orientalisante (xievie siècle av. J.‑C.), Paris, Picard, 2013.

Coulson et al. 1997 = William D. E. Coulson et al., “Excavations on the Kastro at Kavousi: An Architectural Overview”, Hesperia 66, 1997, pp. 315–390.

D’Acunto 2002–2003 = Matteo D’Acunto, “Il tempio di Apollo a Dreros : il culto e la ‘cucina del sacrificio’”, AION(archeol) 9–10, 2002–2003, pp. 9–62.

Dawkins 1903–1904 = Richard M. Dawkins, “Excavations at Palaikastro III”, ABSA 10, 1903–1904, pp. 192–226.

Day 2011 = Leslie P. Day, The Pottery from Karphi: A Re‑Examination, London, BSA, Studies 19, 2011.

Day, Glowacki 2012 = Leslie P. Day, Kevin T. Glowacki, Kavousi IIB: The Late Minoan IIIC Settlement at Vronda. The Buildings on the Periphery, Philadelphia, INSTAP Academic Press, 2012.

Day, Klein, Turner 2009 = Leslie P. Day, Nancy L. Klein, Lee A. Turner, Kavousi IIA: The Late Minoan IIIC Settlement at Vronda. The Buildings on the Summit, Philadelphia, INSTAP Academic Press, 2009.

Day et al. 2006 = Peter M. Day et al., “Goddesses, Snake Tubes, and Plaques: Analysis of Ceramic Ritual Objects from the LM IIIC Shrine at Kavousi”, Hesperia 75, 2006, pp. 137–175.

Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937 = Pierre Demargne, Henri Van Effenterre, “Recherches à Dréros”, BCH 61, 1937, pp. 5–32.

Demetriou 1989 = Andreas Demetriou, Cypro-Aegean Relations in the Early Iron Age, Gothenburg, Astrom, 1989.

Desborough 1952 = Vincent R. D’A. Desborough, Protogeometric Pottery, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1952.

Dyhoux 1982 = Yves Dyhoux, L’Éteocrétois : les textes, la langue, Amsterdam, Gieben, 1982.

Eaby 2007 = Melissa S. Eaby, Mortuary Variability in Early Iron Age Cretan Burials, PhD Dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2007.

Eaby 2011 = Melissa S. Eaby, “Regionalism in Early Iron Age Cretan Burials”, in Joanne M. A. Murphy (ed.), Prehistoric Crete: Regional and Diachronic Studies on Mortuary Systems, Philadelphia, INSTAP Academic Press, 2011, pp. 165–202.

Eiring 2001 = L. Jonas Eiring, “The Hellenistic Period”, in Coldstream, Eiring, Forster (eds.) 2001, pp. 91–135.

Englezou 2000 = Maria Englezou, “Ελληνιστική κεραµική από την αρχαία Λύκτο”, in Stella Drougou (ed.), Ε’ επιστηµονική συνάντηση για την ελληνιστική κεραµική, Athens, Τ.Α.Π.Α., 2000, pp. 61–68.

Englezou 2005 = Maria Englezou, Ελληνιστική κεραµική Κρήτης : κεντρική Κρήτη, Athens, Τ.Α.Π.Α., 2005.

Erickson 1998–2000 = Brice L. Erickson, “Historical Greek Pottery from the Excavations of the Odeion, Gortyn”, ASAA 76–78, 1998–2000, pp. 235–245.

Erickson 2002 = Brice L. Erickson, “Aphrati and Kato Syme: Pottery, Continuity, and Cult in Late Archaic and Classical Crete”, Hesperia 71, 2002, pp. 41–90.

Erickson 2010a = Brice L. Erickson, Crete in Transition: Pottery Styles and Island History in the Archaic and Classical Periods, Princeton, ASCSA, Hesperia Suppl. 45, 2010.

Erickson 2010b = Brice L. Erickson, “Priniatikos Pyrgos and the Classical Period in Eastern Crete: Feasting and Island Identities”, Hesperia 79, 2010, pp. 305–349.

Erickson 2010c = Brice L. Erickson, “Roussa Ekklesia: Part 2. Lamps, Drinking Vessels, and Kernoi”, AJA 114, 2010, pp. 217–252.

Erickson 2017 = Brice L. Erickson, “Appendix F: Protogeometric to Hellenistic Pottery”, in L. Vance Watrous et al. (eds.), The Galatas Survey: The Socio-Economic and Political Development of a Contested Territory in Central Crete during the Neolithic to Ottoman Periods, Philadelphia, INSTAP Academic Press, 2017, pp. 227–233.

Faraklas 2011 = Nikolaos Faraklas, “Η µεγάλη πόλις της Κνωσού : η Κνωσός στην πρώτη προχριστιανική χιλιετία”, in Liana Chaniotaki-Starida (ed.), Ο µίτος της Αριάδνης : ξετυλίγοντας την ιστορία της πόλης του Ηρακλείου, Heraklion, Μύστις, 2011, pp. 37–53.

Farnoux, Kyriakidis, Zographaki 2012 = Alexandre Farnoux, Nicolas Kyriakidis, Vassiliki Zographaki, “Nouvelles recherches à Dréros”, RA, 2012, pp. 179–184.

Farnoux, Zographaki 2018 = Alexandre Farnoux, Vassiliki Zographaki, “∆ρήρος : νέες έρευνες 2009-2011”, in E. Gavrilaki (ed.), Πεπραγµένα ΙΑ’ διεθνούς κρητολογικού συνεδρίου : Ρέθυµνο, 21‑27 Οκτωβρίου 2011, vol. A2.1, Rethymno, Ιστορική και Λαογραφική Εταιρεία Ρεθύµνης, 2018, pp. 203–219.

Farnoux et al. 2022 = Alexandre Farnoux et al., “Mission franco-grecque de Dréros, Crète (2020)”, Bulletin archéologique des Écoles françaises à l’étranger, 2022, pp. 1–11.

Francis et al. 2000 = Jane Francis et al., “Agiasmatsi: A Greek Cave Sanctuary in Sphakia, SW Crete”, ABSA 95, 2000, pp. 427–471.

Gaignerot-Driessen 2013 = Florence Gaignerot-Driessen, “The ‘Killing’ of a City: A Destruction by Enforced Abandonment”, in Jan Driessen (ed.), Destruction: Archaeological, Philological and Historical Perspectives, Louvain‑la-Neuve, PU, 2013, pp. 285–297.

Gaignerot-Driessen 2014 = Florence Gaignerot-Driessen, “Introduction: Reading Cretan Cities, Writing Cretan Cities”, in Florence Gaignerot-Driessen, Jan Driessen (eds.), Cretan Cities: Formation and Transformation, Louvain‑la-Neuve, PU, 2014, pp. 13–19.

Gaignerot-Driessen 2016 = Florence Gaignerot-Driessen, De l’occupation postpalatiale à la cité grecque : le cas du Mirambello (Crète), Liège, Leuven, Peeters, Aegaeum 40, 2016.

Georgiou 1986 = Hara S. Georgiou, Ayia Irini VI: Specialized Domestic and Industrial Pottery, Mainz, Ph. von Zabern, Keos 6, 1986.

Gesell 1999 = Geraldine C. Gesell, “Ritual Kalathoi in the Shrine at Kavousi”, in Philip P. Betancourt et al. (eds.), Meletemata: Studies in Aegean Archaeology Presented to Malcolm H. Wiener As He Enters His 65th Year, vol. 1, Liège, Université de Liège, Austin, University of Texas-Program in Aegean Scripts and Prehistory, Aegaeum 20, 1999, pp. 283–287.

Gesell 2004 = Geraldine C. Gesell, “From Knossos to Kavousi: The Popularizing of the Minoan Palace Goddess”, in Anne P. Chapin (ed.), ΧΑΡΙΣ: Essays in Honor of Sara A. Immerwahr, Athens, ASCSA, Hesperia Suppl. 34, 2004, pp. 131–150.

Gesell, Coulson, Day 1991 = Geraldine C. Gesell, William D. E. Coulson, Leslie P. Day, “Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1988”, Hesperia 60, 1991, pp. 145–177.

Girella 2002 = Luca Girella, “Vasi rituali con elementi miniaturizzati a Creta, in Egeo e nel Mediterraneo orientale alla fine dell’Età del Bronzo : indicatori archeologici ed etnici”, Creta Antica 3, 2002, pp. 167–216.

Guarducci 1935 = Margarita Guarducci, Inscriptiones Creticae, I: Tituli Cretae mediae praeter Gortynios, Rome, La Libreria dello stato, 1935.

Hadjimichali 1971 = Vanna Hadjimichali, “Recherches à Latô, III : maisons”, BCH 95, 1971, pp. 167–222.

Haggis 2005 = Donald C. Haggis, Kavousi I: The Archaeological Survey of the Kavousi Region, Philadelphia, INSTAP Academic Press, 2005.

Haggis 2012 = Donald C. Haggis, “Late Minoan IIIC–Orientalizing Pottery”, in L. Vance Watrous et al. (eds.), An Archaeological Survey of the Gournia Landscape: A Regional History of the Mirabello Bay, Crete, in Antiquity, Philadelphia, INSTAP Academic Press, 2012, pp. 155–161.

Haggis, Mook 1993 = Donald C. Haggis, Margaret S. Mook, “The Kavousi Coarse Wares: A Bronze Age Chronology for Survey in the Mirabello Area, East Crete”, AJA 97, 1993, pp. 265–293.

Haggis et al. 2004 = Donald C. Haggis et al., “Excavations at Azoria, 2002”, Hesperia 73, 2004, pp. 339–400.

Haggis et al. 2007 = Donald C. Haggis et al., “Excavations at Azoria 2003–2004, Part 1: The Archaic Civic Complex”, Hesperia 76, 2007, pp. 243–321.

Haggis et al. 2011 = Donald C. Haggis et al., “The Excavation of Archaic Houses at Azoria in 2005–2006”, Hesperia 80, 2011, pp. 431–489.

Halbherr, Orsi 1888 = Federico Halbherr, Paolo Orsi, Antichità dell’antro di Zeus Ideo e di altre località in Creta, Florence, Loescher, 1888.

Hall 1914 = Edith H. Hall, Excavations in Eastern Crete Vrokastro, Philadelphia, University Museum, 1914.

Hallager E., Hallager B. (eds.) 1997 = Erik Hallager, Birgitta P. Hallager (eds.), The Greek-Swedish Excavations at the Agia Aikaterini Square Kastelli, Khania 1970–1987, vol. 1.1–2: From the Geometric to the Modern Greek Period, Jonsered, Astrom, 1997.

Hayden 2003 = Barbara J. Hayden, Reports on the Vrokastro Area, Eastern Crete, vol. 1: Catalogue of Pottery from the Bronze and Early Iron Age Settlement of Vrokastro in the Collections of the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology and the Archaeological Museum, Herakleion, Crete, Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania, Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, 2003.

Hayden et al. 2005 = Barbara J. Hayden et al., Reports on the Vrokastro Area, Eastern Crete, vol. 3: The Vrokastro Regional Survey Project: Sites and Pottery, Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania, Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, 2005.

Homann-Wedeking 1950 = Betty Homann-Wedeking, “A Kiln Site at Knossos”, ABSA 45, 1950, pp. 165–192.

Jeffery 1949 = Lilian H. Jeffery, “Comments on Some Archaic Greek Inscriptions”, JHS 69, 1949, pp. 25–38.

Johannowsky 2002 = Werner Johannowsky, Il santuario sull’acropoli di Gortina, II, Athens, SAIA, 2002.

Johnston 1993 = Alan W. Johnston, “Pottery from Archaic Building Q at Kommos”, Hesperia 62, 1993, pp. 339–382.

Johnston 2000 = Alan W. Johnston, “Building Z at Kommos: An 8th‑Century Pottery Sequence”, Hesperia 69, 2000, pp. 189–226.

Johnston 2005 = Alan W. Johnston, “Kommos: Further Iron Age Pottery”, Hesperia 74, 2005, pp. 309–393.

Kalpaxis, Furtwängler, Schnapp (eds.) 1994 = Thanassis Kalpaxis, Andreas Furtwängler, Alain Schnapp (eds.), Ελεύθερνα II.2 : ένα ελληνιστικό σπίτι Σπίτι Α») στη θέση Νησί, Rethymno, Πανεπιστηµιακές Εκδόσεις Κρήτης, 1994.

Kanta 1980 = Athanassia Kanta, The Late Minoan III Period in Crete: A Survey of Sites, Pottery and Their Distribution, Gothenburg, Astrom, SIMA 53, 1980.

Karamaliki 2010 = Nota Karamaliki, “Ελληνιστικός οικισµός στην Αγία Ειρήνη Ρεθύµνου”, in Michalis Andrianakis, Iris Tzachili (eds.), Αρχαιολογικό έργο Κρήτης, 1: Πρακτικά της 1ης συνάντησης, Ρέθυµνο, 28‑30 Νοεµβρίου 2008, Rethymno, Εκδόσεις Φιλοσοφικής Σχολής Πανεπιστηµίου Κρήτης, 2010, pp. 512–524.

Klein, Glowacki 2009 = Nancy L. Klein, Kevin T. Glowacki, “From Kavousi Vronda to Dreros: Architecture and Display in Cretan Cult Buildings”, in Anna L. D’Agata, Aleydis Van de Moortel (eds.), Archaeologies of Cult: Essays on Ritual and Cult in Crete, Princeton, ASCSA, Hesperia Suppl. 42, 2009, pp. 153–167.

Kotsonas 2002 = Antonis Kotsonas, “The Rise of the Polis in Central Crete”, Eulimene 3, 2002, pp. 37–74.

Kotsonas 2005 = Antonis Kotsonas, Ceramic Styles in Iron Age Crete: Production, Dissemination and Consumption. A Study of Pottery from the Iron Age Necropolis of Orthi Petra in Eleutherna, PhD Dissertation, University of Edinburgh, 2005.

Kotsonas 2008 = Antonis Kotsonas, The Archaeology of Tomb A1K1 of Orthi Petra in Eleutherna: The Early Iron Age Pottery, Heraklion, University of Crete, 2008.

Kotsonas 2009 = Antonis Kotsonas, “Central Greece and Crete in the Early Iron Age”, in Alexandros Mazarakis Ainian (ed.), Αρχαιολογικό έργο Θεσσαλίας και Στερεάς Ελλάδας, 2, Volos, Εργαστήριο Αρχαιολογίας Πανεπιστηµίου Θεσσαλίας, Υπουργείο Πολιτισµού, 2009, pp. 1051–1065.

Kotsonas 2011a = Antonis Kotsonas, “Ceramic Variability and Drinking Habits in Iron Age Crete”, in Alexandros Mazarakis Ainian (ed.), The “Dark Ages” Revisited: Acts of an International Conference in Memory of William D.E. Coulson, Volos, University of Thessaly Press, 2011, pp. 847–859.

Kotsonas 2011b = Antonis Kotsonas, “Review of Wallace, S. Ancient Crete: From Successful Collapse to Democracy’s Alternatives, Twelfth to Fifth Centuries B.C. Cambridge – New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010”, BMCRev 2011.04.52. http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2011/2011-04-52.html.

Kotsonas 2012a = Antonis Kotsonas, “‘Creto-Cypriot’ and ‘Cypro-Phoenician’ Complexities in the Archaeology of Interaction between Crete and Cyprus”, in Maria Iacovou (ed.), Cyprus and the Aegean in the Early Iron Age: The Legacy of Nicolas Coldstream. Proceedings of an Archaeological Workshop Held in Memory of Professor J.N. Coldstream (1927–2008), Nicosia, Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation, 2012, pp. 153–179.

Kotsonas 2012b = Antonis Kotsonas, “Η ενεπίγραφη κεραµική του ‘Υπογείου’ : προέλευση, τυπολογία, χρονολόγηση και ερµηνεία”, in Matthaios Bessios, Yannis Z. Tzifopoulos, Antonis Kotsonas, Μεθώνη Πιερίας Ι : επιγραφές, χαράγµατα και εµπορικά σύµβολα στη γεωµετρική και αρχαϊκή κεραµική από το ‘Υπόγειο’ της Μεθώνης Πιερίας στη Μακεδονία, Thessaloniki, Κέντρο Ελληνικής Γλώσσας, 2012, pp. 113–304.

Kotsonas 2013a = Antonis Kotsonas, The Encyclopedia of Ancient History, 2013, s.v. “Dreros”, p. 2227.

Kotsonas 2013b = Antonis Kotsonas, “Orientalizing Ceramic Styles and Wares in Early Iron Age Crete”, in Wolf-Dietrich Niemeier, Oliver Pilz, Ivonne Kaiser (eds.), Kreta in der geometrischen und archaischen Zeit: Akten des Internationalen Kolloquiums am Deutschen Archäologischen Institut, Abteilung Athen, 27.–29. Januar 2006, Munich, DAI, Hirmer, 2013, pp. 233–252.

Kotsonas 2023 = Antonis Kotsonas, “Early Iron Age to Classical Crete”, AR 68 (2021–2022), 2023, pp. 133–167.

Kotsonas 2024 = Antonis Kotsonas, The Sanctuary of Hermes and Aphrodite at Syme Viannou VI: The Greek and Roman Pottery, Athens, Archaeological Society at Athens, New York, UP, 2024.

Kotsonas forthcoming = Antonis Kotsonas, “Borders, Territories, and Archaeological Regions in Crete: Before and beyond the City-States”, in Quentin Drillat, Giacomo Fadelli (eds.), Borders in First Millennium BC Crete, Athens, ASAA, forthcoming.

Kotsonas, Sythiakaki, Chaniotis 2021 = Antonis Kotsonas, Vasiliki Sythiakaki, Angelos Chaniotis, “Ανασκαφή Λύκτου”, PAAH, 2021, pp. 213–264.

Kritzas 2006 = Charalampos B. Kritzas, “Ενδείξεις αρχαίας λατρείας στην κορυφή της ίδης”, in Irini Gavrilaki, Yannis Z. Tzifopoulos (eds.), Ο Μυλοπόταµος από την αρχαιότητα ως σήµερα, vol. 3, Rethymno, Ιστορική και Λαογραφική Εταιρεία Ρεθύµνου, 2006, pp. 183–202.

La Rosa, Portale 1996–1997 = Vincenzo La Rosa, Elisa Ch. Portale, “Le case ellenistiche ad ovest del Piazzale I a Festòs”, ASAA 74–75, 1996–1997, pp. 215–395.

Lebessi 1985 = Angeliki Lebessi, “Ιερό του Ερµή και της Αφροδίτης στη Σύµη Βιάννου”, PAAH, 1985, pp. 263–285.

Lebessi 1987 = Angeliki Lebessi, “Η Κρητών Πολιτεία (1100-300 π.Χ.)”, in Nikolaos M. Panagiotakis (ed.), Κρήτη : ιστορία και πολιτισµός, Heraklion, Σύνδεσµος Τοπικών Ενώσεων ∆ήµων και Κοινοτήτων Κρήτης, 1987, pp. 131–172.

Lefèvre-Novaro et al. 2013 = Daniela Lefèvre-Novaro et al., “Dreros e Priniàs : nuovi dati e prospettive di ricerca sulla polis a Creta”, Thiasos 2.2, 2013, pp. 3–20.

Levi 1927–1929 = Doro Levi, “Arkades : una città cretese all’alba della civiltà ellenica”, ASAA 10–12, 1927–1929, pp. 5–710.

Levi 1930–1931 = Doro Levi, “I bronzi di Axὸs”, ASAA 13–14, 1930–1931, pp. 43–146.

Marinatos 1936 = Spyridon Marinatos, “Le temple géométrique de Dréros”, BCH 60, 1936, pp. 214–285.

Marinatos 1937 = Spyridon Marinatos, “Αι µινωικαί θεαί του Γάζι”, AEph 76, 1937, pp. 278–291.

Mazonaki 1976 = Evangelia Mazonaki, “Χάλκινη λαβή από τη ∆ρήρο”, Αρχαιολογικά Ανάλεκτα εξ Αθηνών 9, 1976, pp. 57–61.

Mercando 1974–1975 = Liliana Mercando, “Lampade, lucerne, bracieri di Festòs (scavi 1950-1970)”, ASAA 52–53, 1974–1975, pp. 15–167.

Moignard 1996 = Elizabeth Moignard, “The Orientalizing Pottery”, in John N. Coldstream, Hector W. Catling (eds.), Knossos North Cemetery: Early Greek Tombs, vol. 2, London, BSA, ABSA Suppl. 28, 1996, pp. 421–462.

Moniaki 2020 = Katerina Moniaki, “Αρχαιοβοτανικές µαρτυρίες από την ανατολική Κρήτη”, in Paulina Karanastasi et al. (eds.), Αρχαιολογικό έργο Κρήτης, 4: Πρακτικά της 4ης συνάντησης, Ρέθυµνο, 24‑27 Νοεµβρίου 2016, Rethymno, Εκδόσεις Φιλοσοφικής Σχολής Πανεπιστηµίου Κρήτης, 2020, pp. 315–324.

Mook 1993 = Margaret S. Mook, The Northwest Building: Houses of the Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages on the Kastro at Kavousi, East Crete, PhD Dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1993.

Mook 2004 = Margaret S. Mook, “From Foundation to Abandonment: New Ceramic Phasing for the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age on the Kastro at Kavousi”, in Leslie P. Day, Margaret S. Mook, James D. Muhly (eds.), Crete beyond the Palaces: Proceedings of the Crete 2000 Conference, Philadelphia, INSTAP Academic Press, 2004, pp. 163–179.

Mulliez 2011 = Dominique Mulliez, “Le Mirambello : Latô, Dréros, l’Anavlochos. 2010”, Chronique des fouilles en ligne, 2011, online, http://chronique.efa.gr/index.php/fiches/voir/1957/.

Niniou-Kindeli 1995 = Vanna Niniou-Kindeli, “Υπαίθριο ιερό στα Τσισκιανά Σελίνου (Ν. Χανίων)”, in Nikolaos E. Papadogiannakis (ed.), Πεπραγµένα του Ζ’ διεθνούς κρητολογικού συνεδρίου, vol. A.2, Rethymno, Εταιρία Κρητικών Ιστορικών Μελετών, 1995, pp. 681–689.

Niniou-Kindeli 2002 = Vanna Niniou-Kindeli, “Τσισκιανά”, Κρητική Εστία 9, 2002, pp. 263–266.

Nowicki 2000 = Krzysztof Nowicki, Defensible Sites in Crete c. 1200–800 B.C. (LM IIIB/IIIC through Early Geometric), Liège, Université de Liège, Austin, University of Texas-Program in Aegean Scripts and Prehistory, Aegaeum 21, 2000.

Palermo 1992 = Dario Palermo, “L’edificio e i materiali”, in Giovanni Rizza, Dario Palermo, Francesco Tomasello (eds.), Mandra di Gipari : una officina protoarcaica di vasai nel territorio di Priniàs, Catania, Università di Catania, Istituto di Archeologia, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Centro di Studi per l’Archeologia Greca, 1992, pp. 27–114.

Papadopoulos 2004 = Jeannette Papadopoulos, “Ceramica a vernice nera e ceramica fine di età ellenistica”, in Antonio Di Vita (ed.), Gortina VI : scavi 1979-1982, Padua, Bottega d’Erasmo, Athens, SAIA, 2004, pp. 156–183.

Papadopoulou, Tzahili 2005 = Eleni Papadopoulou, Iris Tzahili, “Ιερό κορυφής Βρύσινα”, AD 60, B2, 2005, pp. 1047–1049.

Parisinou 2000 = Eva Parisinou, The Light of the Gods: The Role of Light in Archaic and Classical Greek Cult, London, Duckworth, 2000.

Perna 2011 = Katia Perna, “LM IIIC Burial Culture in Crete: A Socioeconomic Perspective”, in Joanne M. A. Murphy (ed.), Prehistoric Crete: Regional and Diachronic Studies on Mortuary Systems, Philadelphia, INSTAP Academic Press, 2011, pp. 119–164.

Pilz, Krumme 2011 = Oliver Pilz, Michael Krumme, “Il deposito votivo di Κακό Πλάι sull’Anavlochos : risultati preliminary dello studio dei materiali”, in Giovanni Rizza (ed.), Identità culturale, etnicità, processi di trasformazione a Creta fra Dark Age e arcaismo : per i cento anni dello scavo di Priniàs 1906-2006, Catania, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Università di Catania, Centro di Archeologia Cretese, 2011, pp. 597–617.

Platon 1945–1947 = Nikolaos Platon, “Γεωµετρικός τάφος Αγίων Παρασκιών Ηρακλείου”, AEph 84–86, 1945–1947, pp. 47–97.

Portale 2000 = Elisa Ch. Portale, “Ceramica comune e da fuoco da contesti della metà del ii secolo a.C. a Festòs : la c.d. ‘officinal del figulo’ e i vani adiacenti”, in Stella Drougou (ed.), Ε’ επιστηµονική συνάντηση για την ελληνιστική κεραµική, Athens, Τ.Α.Π.Α., 2000, pp. 75–86.

Poulou-Papadimitriou 2008 = Natalia Poulou-Papadimitriou, “Βυζαντινή κεραµική από την Ελεύθερνα : η στέρνα της Αγίας Άννας”, in Thanassis E. Kalpaxis (ed.), Ελεύθερνα ΙΙ.3 : βυζαντινό σπίτι στην Αγία Άννα, Rethymno, Πανεπιστηµιακές Εκδόσεις Κρήτης, 2008, pp. 25–187.

Poulou-Papadimitriou 2012 = Natalia Poulou-Papadimitriou, “Pottery of the Middle Byzantine Period and the First Centuries of the Venetian Occupation from Petras, Siteia”, in Metaxia Tsipopoulou (ed.), Petras, Siteia: 25 Years of Excavation and Studies. Acts of a Two‑Day Conference Held at the Danish Institute at Athens, 9–10 October 2010, Athens, DIA, Aarhus, UP, MoDIA 16, 2012, pp. 315–326.

Prent 1997 = Mieke Prent, “The 6th Century BC in Crete: The Best Candidate for Being a Dark Age?”, in Marianne Maaskant-Kleibrink, Marja Vink (eds.), Caeculus, III: Debating Dark Ages, Groningen, Archaeological Institute, Groningen University, 1997, pp. 35–46.

Prent 2005 = Mieke Prent, Cretan Sanctuaries and Cults: Continuity and Change from Late Minoan IIIC to the Archaic Period, Leiden, Boston, Brill, 2005.

Rethemiotakis, Englezou 2010 = Giorgos Rethemiotakis, Maria Englezou, Το γεωµετρικό νεκροταφείο της Έλτυνας, Heraklion, Ministry of Culture, Archaeological Institute of Cretological Studies, 2010.

Rizza 2008 = Giovanni Rizza, Priniàs : la città arcaica sulla Patela. Scavi condotti negli anni 1969-2000, Catania, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Studi e Materiali di Archeologia Greca 8.1, 2008.

Rizzotto 2015 = Laura-Concetta Rizzotto, “Sein Zum Tode…”: Untersuchungen zu den gesellschaftlichen Strukturen anhand der Nekropolen und Gräber der protogeometrischen und geometrischen Epoche aus Mittel-und Ostkreta, Oxford, Archaeopress, BAR International Series 2749, 2015.

Rotroff 2006 = Susan I. Rotroff, Hellenistic Pottery: The Plain Wares, Princeton, ASCSA, The Athenian Agora 33, 2006.

Rutter 2013 = Jeremy B. Rutter, “What Happened to the Lights?: Changes in the Usage of Ceramic Lamps at Neopalatial and Early Postpalatial Kommos”, in Giampaolo Graziadio et al. (eds.), Φιλική Συναυλία: Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology for Mario Benzi, Oxford, Archaeopress, BAR International Series 2460, 2013, pp. 31–38.

Santaniello 2004 = Emanuela Santaniello, “Produzione ceramica a Gortyna tra età orientalizzante e arcaica : i rinvenimenti dell’oikopedo SAIA”, ASAA 82, 2004, pp. 443–475.

Seiradaki 1960 = Mercy Seiradaki, “Pottery from Karphi”, ABSA 55, 1960, pp. 1–37.

Shaw J., Shaw M. (eds.) 2000 = Joseph W. Shaw, Maria C. Shaw (eds.), Kommos IV: The Greek Sanctuary, Princeton, UP, 2000.

Sjögren 2006–2007 = Lena Sjögren, “The Eteocretans: Ancient Traditions and Modern Constructions of an Ethnic Identity”, Oath 31–32, 2006–2007, pp. 221–230.

Snodgrass 1971 = Anthony M. Snodgrass, The Dark Age of Greece: An Archeological Survey of the Eleventh to the Eighth Centuries B.C., Edinburgh, UP, 1971.

Sofianou 2006 = Chrysa Sofianou, “Πραισός Σητείας”, AD 61, B2, 2006, pp. 1172–1173.

Sofianou 2010 = Chrysa Sofianou, “Ανασκαφές Πραισού 2005-2006 : ειδώλιο Κυβέλης”, in Michalis Andrianakis, Iris Tzachili (eds.), Αρχαιολογικό έργο Κρήτης, 1: Πρακτικά της 1ης συνάντησης, Ρέθυµνο, 28‑30 Νοεµβρίου 2008, Rethymno, Εκδόσεις Φιλοσοφικής Σχολής Πανεπιστηµίου Κρήτης, 2010, pp. 179–187.

Sporn 2002 = Katja Sporn, Heiligtümer und Kulte Kretas in klassischer und hellenistischer Zeit, Heidelberg, Archäologie und Geschichte, 2002.

Stampolidis 1993 = Nikolaos Chr. Stampolidis, Ελεύθερνα ΙΙΙ.1 : γεωµετρικά-αρχαϊκά χρόνια. Οδηγός στην έκθεση Το γεωµετρικό-αρχαϊκό νεκροταφείο της Ορθής Πέτρας, Rethymno, Πανεπιστηµιακές Εκδόσεις Κρήτης, 1993.

Stampolidis 1994 = Nikolaos Chr. Stampolidis, Ελεύθερνα ΙΙΙ.2 : από τη γεωµετρική και αρχαϊκή νεκρόπολη. Ταφικές πυρές και οµηρικά έπη, Rethymno, Πανεπιστηµιακές Εκδόσεις Κρήτης, 1994.

Stampolidis 1996 = Nikolaos Chr. Stampolidis, Reprisals: Contribution to the Study of Customs of the Geometric–Archaic Period, Rethymno, Πανεπιστηµιακές Εκδόσεις Κρήτης, 1996.

Stefanakis 2011 = Manolis I. Stefanakis, “Αρχαϊκή ανάγλυφη κεραµική από την Πεδιάδα”, in Maria Andreadaki-Vlasaki, Eleni Papadopoulou (eds.), Πεπραγµένα του I’ διεθνούς κρητολογικού συνεδρίου : Χανιά 1‑8 Οκτωβρίου 2006, vol. A2, Chania, Φιλολογικός Σύλλογος “Ο Χρυσόστοµος”, 2011, pp. 775–788.

Stissi 2002 = Vladimir V. Stissi, Pottery to the People: The Production, Distribution and Consumption of Decorated Pottery in the Greek World in the Archaic Period (650–480 B.C.), PhD Dissertation, Universiteit van Amsterdam, 2002.

Tsipopoulou 1985 = Metaxia Tsipopoulou, “Κυπριακά στοιχεία στη γεωµετρική και ανατολίζουσα κεραµεική της ανατολικής Κρήτης”, Κυπριακή Αρχαιολογία 1, 1985, pp. 33–49.

Tsipopoulou 1987 = Metaxia Tsipopoulou, Γεωµετρική και ανατολίζουσα κεραµεική της ετεοκρητικής περιοχής, PhD Dissertation, Πανεπιστήµιο Αθηνών, 1987.

Tsipopoulou 2004 = Metaxia Tsipopoulou, “Halasmenos, Destroyed but Not Invisible: New Insights on the LM IIIC Period in the Isthmus of Ierapetra. First Presentation of the Pottery from the 1992–1997 Campaigns”, in Leslie P. Day, Margaret S. Mook, James D. Muhly (eds.), Crete beyond the Palaces: Proceedings of the Crete 2000 Conference, Philadelphia, INSTAP Academic Press, 2004, pp. 103–123.

Tsipopoulou 2005 = Metaxia Tsipopoulou, Η ανατολική Κρήτη στην πρώιµη εποχή του σιδήρου, Heraklion, ΥΠΠΟ, Αρχαιολογικό Ινστιτούτο Κρητολογικών Σπουδών, 2005.

Tsipopoulou 2013 = Metaxia Tsipopoulou, “Eteocretan Geometric Revisited”, in Wolf-Dietrich Niemeier, Oliver Pilz, Ivonne Kaiser (eds.), Kreta in der geometrischen und archaischen Zeit: Akten des Internationalen Kolloquiums am Deutschen Archäologischen Institut, Abteilung Athen, 27.–29. Januar 2006, Munich, DAI, Hirmer, 2013, pp. 133–156.

Van Effenterre 1946 = Henri Van Effenterre, “Inscriptions archaïques crétoises”, BCH 70, 1946, pp. 588–606.

Van Effenterre 1948 = Henri Van Effenterre, Nécropoles du Mirabello, Paris, Paul Geuthner, Et. cret. 8.1, 1948.

Van Effenterre 1992 = Henri Van Effenterre, “Dreros”, in Wilson Myers, Eleanor E. Myers, Gerald Cadogan (eds.), The Aerial Atlas of Ancient Crete, Berkeley, Los Angeles, University of California Press, 1992, pp. 86–90.

Van Effenterre 2009 = Henri Van Effenterre, La nécropole de Dréros, Athens, EFA, Naples, Università degli Studi di Napoli Suor Orsola Benincasa, Et. cret. 8.2, 2009.

Villing, Pemberton 2010 = Alexandra Villing, Elizabeth G. Pemberton, “Mortaria from Ancient Corinth: Form and Function”, Hesperia 79, 2010, pp. 555–638.

Vogeikoff-Brogan, Kirkpatrick Smith 2009–2010 = Natalia Vogeikoff-Brogan, Susan Kirkpatrick Smith, “A Male Spinner? A Late Geometric–Early Orientalizing Pithos Burial near Meseleroi, Ierapetra”, Aegean Archaeology 10, 2009–2010, pp. 87–104.

Wallace 2010a = Saro Wallace, Ancient Crete: From Successful Collapse to Democracy’s Alternatives, Twelfth to Fifth Centuries BC, Cambridge, New York, CUP, 2010.

Wallace 2010b = Saro Wallace, “The Roots of the Cretan Polis: Surface Evidence for the History of Large Settlements in Central Crete”, AA, 2010, pp. 13–89.

Wallace 2012 = Saro Wallace, “Surviving Crisis: Insights from New Excavation at Karphi, 2008”, ABSA 107, 2012, pp. 1–85.

Wallace 2020 = Saro Wallace, Karphi Revisited: A Settlement and Landscape of the Aegean Crisis Period, c. 1200–1000 BC, London, BSA, ABSA Suppl. 50, 2020.

Watrous 1996 = L. Vance Watrous, The Cave Sanctuary of Zeus at Psychro: A Study of Extra-Urban Sanctuaries in Minoan and Early Iron Age Crete, Liège, Université de Liège, Austin, University of Texas-Program in Aegean Scripts and Prehistory, Aegaeum 15, 1996.

Watrous 2012 = L. Vance Watrous, “Archaic–Hellenistic Pottery: Population Nucleation and Development of the Polis”, in L. Vance Watrous et al. (eds.), An Archaeological Survey of the Gournia Landscape: A Regional History of the Mirabello Bay, Crete, in Antiquity, Philadelphia, INSTAP Academic Press, 2012, pp. 163–166.

Whitley 2006 = James Whitley, “Praisos: Political Evolution and Ethnic Identity in Eastern Crete”, in Sigrid Deger-Jalkotzy, Irene S. Lemos (eds.), Ancient Greece: From the Mycenaean Palaces to the Age of Homer, Edinburgh, UP, 2006, pp. 597–617.

Whitley 2009 = James Whitley, “Crete”, in Kurt A. Raaflaub, Hans Van Wees (eds.), A Companion to Archaic Greece, Chichester, Malden, Wiley-Blackwell, 2009, pp. 273–293.

Xanthoudidis 1905–1906 = Stefanos A. Xanthoudidis, “Cretan Kernoi”, ABSA 12, 1905–1906, pp. 9–23.

Xanthoudidis 1918 = Stefanos A. Xanthoudidis, “∆ρήρος”, AD 4, παράρτηµα, 1918, pp. 23–30.

Zographaki 2012 = Vassiliki Zographaki, “Νέες έρευνες στον οικισµό του Ανάβλοχου Βραχασίου”, Επιστηµονική Επετηρίδα Ιεράς Μητροπόλεως Πέτρας και Χερρονήσου, 2012, pp. 499–508.

Zographaki, Farnoux 2011 = Vasso Zographaki, Alexandre Farnoux, “Dréros : mission franco-hellénique de Dréros”, BCH 135, 2011, pp. 625–646.

Zographaki, Farnoux 2012–2013 = Vasso Zographaki, Alexandre Farnoux, “Dréros : mission franco-hellénique de Dréros”, BCH 136–137, 2012–2013, pp. 651–660.

Zographaki, Farnoux 2014a = Vasso Zographaki, Alexandre Farnoux, “Dréros : mission franco-hellénique de Dréros”, BCH 138, 2014, pp. 785–791.

Zographaki, Farnoux 2014b = Vasso Zographaki, Alexandre Farnoux, “Dréros : cité et sanctuaires”, in Florence Gaignerot-Driessen, Jan Driessen (eds.), Cretan Cities: Formation and Transformation, Louvain-la-Neuve, PU, 2014, pp. 103–117.

Zographaki, Gaignerot-Driessen, Devolder 2012–2013 = Vasso Zographaki, Florence Gaignerot-Driessen, Maud Devolder, “Nouvelles recherches sur l’Anavlochos”, BCH 136–137, 2012–2013, pp. 513–535.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Halbherr, Orsi 1888.

2 Sporn 2002; Prent 2005.

3 See Sporn 2002, pp. 348–356; Kotsonas 2024, pp. 3–5.

4 Kommos: Shaw J., Shaw M. (eds.) 2000 (pottery studies: Callaghan, Johnston 2000; Johnston 2000; Johnston 2005). Syme Viannou: Kotsonas 2024.

5 E.g. Coldstream 1973b; Watrous 1996; Johannowsky 2002; Anzalone 2013. See also Kotsonas 2024, pp. 16–19.

6 Xanthoudidis 1918. Followed by: Mulliez 2011; Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, p. 633; Farnoux, Kyriakidis, Zographaki 2012, p. 183; Gaignerot-Driessen 2016, pp. 228–229.

7 Marinatos 1936, p. 254.

8 Xanthoudidis 1918, pp. 25, 27.

9 Stissi 2002, p. 232 (cf. p. 239).

10 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 28.

11 Xanthoudidis 1918, pp. 28–29.

12 Levi 1930–1931, pp. 81–82, fig. 30.

13 Levi 1930–1931, p. 82, n. 2 cites Levi 1927–1929, p. 420, fig. 555 for comparison.

14 See Kotsonas 2008, p. 210, type Bvii. Coldstream (Coldstream 1996, pp. 386–388) was the first to note the significance of the height of the lip for chronology, and I have revised and extended this scheme (Kotsonas 2008, pp. 205–211; Kotsonas 2011a).

15 Levi 1930–1931, pp. 78–83. Xanthoudidis (Xanthoudidis 1918, pp. 27–28) had previously drawn comparisons between the bronze weapons and the ceramic figurines of Axos and Dreros.

16 A cup found in the same box cannot be identified securely with the cup mentioned in Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 28.

17 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 28. Followed by: D’Acunto 2002–2003, p. 56; Farnoux, Kyriakidis, Zographaki 2012, p. 181; Farnoux, Zographaki 2018, pp. 71–72.

18 Levi 1930–1931, p. 82. Cf. Prent 2005, p. 284: Early Orientalizing.

19 For Knossian comparisons of similar type, see: Brock 1957, p. 159, type K; Moignard 1996, p. 153, type D. The decoration is matched on a Knossian Orientalizing cotyle (Brock 1957, p. 133, no. 1542), but similar rosettes and ducks are also attested on aryballoi (Brock 1957, p. 182, pattern 14h and p. 185, patterns 17ae to 17aj).

20 See Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 405–408, where the type is not represented. Cf. however, two pieces from Kavousi (Gesell, Coulson, Day 1991, p. 175, fig. 13.2: an Early Orientalizing date is suggested for one of the two pieces despite the Knossian Late Orientalizing comparisons. Mook 1993, p. 236, no. P2.176; Mook 2004, p. 177, fig. 12.12: J and K). Pictorial decoration is very rare on east Cretan vases, and occurs mostly on large pots, and not on aryballoi (Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 499–503).

21 Levi 1930–1931, pp. 78–82; D’Acunto 2002–2003, p. 56; Prent 2005, p. 284 (with references); Farnoux, Kyriakidis, Zographaki 2012, p. 181; Farnoux, Zographaki 2018, pp. 72–73.

22 Individual pieces are possibly illustrated in Marinatos 1936, p. 265, fig. 68.

23 Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937, pp. 19–21.

24 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 61–62; Van Effenterre 2009, pp. 141–146.

25 Marinatos 1936. Also: D’Acunto 2002–2003; Kotsonas 2013a; Gaignerot-Driessen 2016, pp. 222–225.

26 Marinatos 1936, pp. 257–268. Also: D’Acunto 2002–2003, pp. 17, 39; Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 53–54; Gaignerot-Driessen 2016, p. 225.

27 Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937. Also, Gaignerot-Driessen 2016, pp. 225–228.

28 Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937, p. 21. Also, Gaignerot-Driessen 2016, pp. 229–233.

29 Van Effenterre 1948.

30 Van Effenterre 2009. Cf. Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 54–56; Rizzotto 2015, pp. 163–166.

31 Van Effenterre 1948, p. 37; Van Effenterre 2009, p. 154.

32 Van Effenterre 1948, p. 38; Van Effenterre 2009, p. 154.

33 Desborough 1952, pp. 260–262. Kanta (Kanta 1980, p. 133) dates tomb 1 to Late Minoan IIIC late, and Gaignerot-Driessen (Gaignerot-Driessen 2016, p. 231) to Late Minoan IIIC–Subminoan. Late Minoan IIIC and Protogeometric material from Dreros is reported in: Nowicki 2000, p. 173; Gaignerot-Driessen 2016, p. 223.

34 Coldstream 2008, pp. 234, 245, 257–258.

35 Coldstream 2008, pp. 234, 245, 257–258.

36 Snodgrass 1971, p. 164.

37 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 53–64.

38 Tsipopoulou 1987, pp. viiiix, 9; Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 25–27, 53; Tsipopoulou 2013, p. 133, where Coldstream is taken (incorrectly) to have included the pottery of Dreros in the “Eteocretan” style. For Coldstream’s view, see Coldstream 2008, pp. 234, 245, 257–258.

39 Dyhoux 1982, pp. 27–54, 112–118.

40 Whitley 2006, pp. 612–614; Sjögren 2006–2007.

41 Lebessi 1987, p. 158; Stampolidis 1993, p. 20; Stampolidis 1994, p. 141; Mook 2004, p. 173; Coldstream 2008, p. 476; Faraklas 2011, p. 41.

42 Kotsonas 2008, pp. 49–50 (notable ceramic correspondences between the two sites are identifiable only in the Protogeometric B–Early Geometric period), 237–242 (Knossian imports at Eleutherna). The dissociation of Eleuthernian pottery from the Knossian sequence is accepted in Coldstream 2008, p. 476. See also Kotsonas forthcoming.

43 On the ceramic links between Anavlochos and north-central Crete, see: Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 41; Coldstream 2008, pp. 251, 257; Zographaki 2012, p. 507. The links are confirmed by personal study of new material from burial contexts at Anavlochos (see the conference paper: Vasso Zographaki, Antonis Kotsonas, “Νέα στοιχεία από τον Ανάβλοχο Βραχασίου”, in Αρχαιολογικό Έργο Κρήτης, 3: Πρακτικά της 3ης συνάντησης, Ρέθυµνο, 5‑8 ∆εκεµβρίου 2013). For Early Iron Age pottery from Anavlochos, see also Pilz, Krumme 2011 and Zographaki, Gaignerot-Driessen, Devolder 2012–2013.

44 Coldstream 2008, pp. 260–261.

45 Whitley 2009, p. 276.

46 Eaby 2007; Eaby 2011; Perna 2011.

47 Gaignerot-Driessen 2016.

48 Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, p. 633. Note, however, that the architecture is assigned to the Protoarchaic period (Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, p. 631; Farnoux, Kyriakidis, Zographaki 2012, pp. 181–183).

49 Farnoux, Kyriakidis, Zographaki 2012, pp. 181–183; Zographaki, Farnoux 2014b, p. 106.

50 Lefèvre-Novaro et al. 2013, p. 15.

51 Gaignerot-Driessen 2014, p. 15; Gaignerot-Driessen 2016, p. 229.

52 Sporn 2002, p. 81; Prent 2005, pp. 283–284 (but see the hypothesis on pp. 460–461); Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, p. 631.

53 See especially Coldstream 1996, pp. 409–412, 414–420; Moignard 1996, pp. 461–462; Coldstream 2001, pp. 65–72; Coldstream, Eiring 2001; Eiring 2001. See the critical review in Kotsonas 2008, pp. 31–41.

54 See especially Mook 2004. Further literature is cited in Kotsonas 2008, pp. 236–239.

55 Cf. Kotsonas 2008, pp. 39–40; Kotsonas 2013b, p. 238. Also, Coulié 2013, p. 271. The aryballos found by Xanthoudidis is the sole piece of Orientalizing style, but it is imported from elsewhere in Crete.

56 The ceramic assemblage from the sanctuary on the west acropolis was considered to be an unfavorable starting point for analytical research on Drerian pottery. This is largely because of the complex excavation history of this context, and the selective representation of the ceramic repertory, which is heavily biased toward kalathoi, basins and ladles.

57 Xathoudidis 1918, p. 28.

58 Marinatos 1936, pp. 258–265.

59 Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 53.

60 Van Effenterre 1948, pp. 23–24, 59–64; Van Effenterre 2009, pp. 91–92.

61 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 57–64.

62 The exterior (but not the interior) surface of these vessels is smoothened, and occasionally preserves traces of dark slip.

63 Kotsonas 2012a, pp. 29–30 (amphoriskos: Tsipopoulou 1985, pp. 40–41; Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 59, no. Η∆2 and p. 358; Van Effenterre 2009, p. 129, no. 21. Body fragment: Van Effenterre 2009, p. 129, pl. ii, no. 3). I examined only the body fragment.

64 This impression is informed by the finds of the excavations I am co‑directing at Lyktos/Lyttos (see e.g. Kotsonas, Sythiakaki, Chaniotis 2021). For the macroscopic and petrographic analysis of a coarse red micaceous fabric, which is amply represented on Greek pottery from Syme Viannou and probably originates from the Pediada, see Kotsonas 2024, pp. 438–440, 456–458.

65 Haggis, Mook 1993, p. 277, fabric type XVI (Late Minoan IIIC) [cf. the comment by Peter Day in Coldstream 2000, pp. 466–467]. Cooking jugs with grooved neck, made in micaceous fabric, are attested at Kavousi Kastro from the second half of the 9th century BC (Mook 1993, p. 208).

66 Cf. Kotsonas 2008, pp. 236–237.

67 Van Effenterre 1948, pp. 23–24, 37; Van Effenterre 2009, pp. 94–95.

68 Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 55.

69 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 25.

70 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 27.

71 Abbreviations: H: Height; D: Diameter; BD: Base Diameter; RD: Rim Diameter; L: Length; frg(s): fragment(s); MFG: macroscopic fabric group; sf: semifine; f: fine; sc: semicoarse; c: coarse; ca: circa; max.: maximum. Measurements are given in cm. The description of fabric color follows The Munsell Soil Color Charts 2000 edition.

72 Erickson 2002, pp. 59, 61, especially nos. 61 and 67 (Afrati).

73 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 259, no. 471 (Kommos); Erickson 2002, pp. 71, 73, no. 99 (Syme Viannou).

74 Cf. Erickson 2010a, p. 84, no. 121 (Eleutherna); p. 146, no. 327; pp. 157–158, nos. 352–353 (Knossos).

75 Coldstream, Eiring 2001, p. 78. Cf. Erickson 2010a, pp. 104–108 (Eleutherna).

76 Callaghan 1978, pp. 12–15; Coldstream, Eiring 2001, p. 82.

77 See, for example, Erickson 2010a, pp. 64–76 (Eleutherna), 122 (Knossos).

78 Apostolakou, Zographaki 2006, pp. 97–105. Many pieces are on display at the Archaeological Museum of Agios Nikolaos. For east Crete in general, see Brisart 2014.

79 Cf. Erickson 2010a, pp. 205–208, nos. 465–480 (Praisos).

80 Cf. Erickson 2002, p. 73, no. 99 (Syme Viannou).

81 Van Effenterre 1948, pp. 29–30; Van Effenterre 2009, pp. 110–116.

82 Kotsonas 2005, p. 160.

83 Mook 1993, pp. 35, 329, no. P1.93.

84 Zographaki, Gaignerot-Driessen, Devolder 2012–2013, p. 533, no. i.

85 Cf. Kotsonas 2008, p. 208, type Bv (Eleutherna, with comparisons from elsewhere in Crete).

86 Coldstream, Macdonald 1997, p. 213, nos. F.11 and F.14.

87 Cf. Kotsonas 2008, pp. 206–207, types Bii-Biii (Eleutherna, with comparisons from elsewhere in Crete).

88 Mulliez 2011; Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, p. 633; Farnoux, Kyriakidis, Zographaki 2012, p. 183; Zographaki, Farnoux 2014b, pp. 106–109; Farnoux, Zographaki 2018, pp. 71–72. The study of the figurines is conducted by Vasso Zografaki and is forthcoming.

89 Cf. Mook 2004, p. 175, fig. 12/10: A, E, F, L.

90 Kotsonas 2008, p. 206, type Bii (Eleutherna, with comparisons from elsewhere in Crete).

91 Kotsonas 2008, p. 207, type Biii (Eleutherna, with comparisons from elsewhere in Crete).

92 Kotsonas 2008, pp. 207–208, type Biv (Eleutherna, with comparisons from elsewhere in Crete).

93 Van Effenterre 2009, pp. 123–124, nos. 15, 15bis and 15ter (for the first piece, see also Van Effenterre 1948, pp. 63–64, no. D 38).

94 Cf. Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 134, no. 2385 (Late Geometric piece from Agios Georgios).

95 Coldstream 1996, p. 382, no. 76.2.

96 Cf. Van Effenterre 2009, p. 123, nos. 14 and 14bis (for the first piece, see also Van Effenterre 1948, p. 63, no. D 37).

97 Cf. Van Effenterre 2009, p. 94, fig. 34, no. 2 and pl. vi.1; Zographaki, Gaignerot-Driessen, Devolder 2012–2013, p. 532, no. a.

98 Mook 1993, p. 219, nos. P1.96 and P7.108.

99 Cf. Mook 1993, pp. 168, 210 (Kavousi); Day 2011, p. 282 (Karphi).

100 Palermo 1992, pp. 58–62.

101 Seiradaki 1960, p. 9; Day 2011, p. 282.

102 E.g. Coldstream 1972, p. 86, fig. 9.

103 E.g. Palermo 1992, p. 59, fig. 10.

104 Kotsonas 2008, p. 226, type C.

105 Coldstream 1973a, p. 39, no. H41; Moignard 1996, p. 452; Coldstream 2002, p. 63.

106 Palermo 1992, p. 66, nos. 140 and 142.

107 Johnston 1993, p. 349, no. 42.

108 Kritzas 2006, pp. 186–187, fig. 3.

109 Kotsonas 2008, pp. 217–226, types A and B (handles were shown to be important for the typology and chronology of the lipless basins from Eleutherna, but the examples from Dreros preserve no handles).

110 Kotsonas 2008, p. 220, type Aia, nos. A140β and A138.

111 Kotsonas 2008, pp. 220–221, type Aia, no. A151.

112 Day, Glowacki 2012, p. 118, no. N2 P12.

113 Haggis 2005, p. 133, no. 71.8.

114 Wallace 2010b, p. 30, nos. AYP 10 and AYPNE 10.

115 Palermo 1992, pp. 58–61, nos. 70–71 and 88.

116 Wallace 2010b, p. 54, no. RKES 2.

117 Mulliez 2011; Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, p. 633; Farnoux, Kyriakidis, Zographaki 2012, p. 183; Zographaki, Farnoux 2014b, p. 106; Farnoux, Zographaki 2018, p. 72.

118 On fine ware kalathoi, see Kotsonas 2008, pp. 216–217 (with references).

119 Cf. Seiradaki 1960, p. 11.

120 Day 2011, p. 274.

121 Seiradaki 1960, p. 11; Day 2011, p. 274.

122 Mook 1993, pp. 240–241.

123 Cf. the lip of type 2 kalathoi from Karphi (Seiradaki 1960, pp. 11–12).

124 Cf. the lip of type 4 kalathoi from Karphi (Seiradaki 1960, pp. 11–12).

125 Cf. isolated examples from Karphi (Day 2011, pp. 273–274, nos. K26.7 and K149.21) and kalathos types 3 and 4 from Kavousi Kastro (Mook 1993, pp. 240–241).

126 Day 2011, pp. 274–275 (Karphi); Tsipopoulou 2004, p. 115 (Khalasmenos).

127 Gesell 1999, p. 285 (with references).

128 Gesell 1999.

129 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 232, no. 197; Johnston 2000, p. 219, no. 114; Johnston 2005, p. 357, no. 172.

130 Secondary burning is highly unlikely, since the animal figurines found together with the kalathoi hardly show any such traces.

131 Day 2011, p. 274. Contrast the kalathoi from the Late Minoan IIIC sanctuary at Kavousi Vronda, some of which do not carry any traces of burning (Gesell 1999, pp. 285–286).

132 Mook 1993, p. 335, no. P1.121; p. 402, no. P3.141.

133 Haggis et al. 2011, p. 60, n. 145.

134 Anzalone 2013, p. 231.

135 Gesell 1999, p. 286.

136 Day 2011, p. 274; cf. Wallace 2020, p. 86.

137 Haggis et al. 2011, p. 60, n. 145.

138 Rutter 2013, pp. 36–37.

139 Cf. Gesell 1999, p. 286.

140 Marinatos 1936, pp. 267–268, fig. 31; Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 54, 411, pl. 105, no. H∆ (right).

141 Alexiou 1956, pp. 13, 15, no. 16; Coulson et al. 1997, p. 328, fig. 8:5; Gesell 1999, pp. 284–285, kalathos 3; Gesell 2004, p. 141, fig. 7.9; Day, Klein, Turner 2009, p. 38, nos. B3 P14 and P16. Also, Day, Glowacki 2012, p. 24, no. E2 P18; p. 122, no. N3 P7; p. 146, no. L1 P2.

142 Seiradaki 1960, p. 11, type 3; Day 2011, p. 274.

143 Lebessi 1985, p. 268, pl. 127ε; Kotsonas 2024, p. 153, no. P262, p. 222, no. P420.

144 Johnston 2000, p. 219, no. 114.

145 Platon 1945–1947, p. 64, no. 87; pp. 81–82, n. 1.

146 Marinatos 1937, pp. 283–284, fig. 7, upper left.

147 Rizza 2008, p. 135, no. H5.

148 Johannowsky 2002, pp. 42–44, nos. 294–298. Another piece is published as Late Minoan IIIC (Anzalone 2013, p. 231, no. 189), but need not be earlier than Protogeometric. Emanuela Santaniello showed me a recent find of Protogeometric date.

149 Kotsonas 2005, p. 224.

150 Hallager E., Hallager B. (eds.) 1997, p. 54, no. 73-P 0122.

151 Platon 1945–1947, pp. 81–82, n. 1.

152 Gesell 1999, p. 285; Gessel 2004, p. 141.

153 Van Effenterre 1948, p. 37; Van Effenterre 2009, p. 96.

154 Marinatos 1936, pp. 265–266.

155 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 510–511.

156 On the attestation of this decorative scheme across Crete, see Kotsonas 2008, p. 58. For east Crete, see Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 510–511. For Knossos and central Crete, see: Brock 1957, p. 188; Coldstream 1992, p. 83; Coldstream 1996, p. 412. For Eleutherna, see Kotsonas 2008, pp. 44, 46, 50, 58.

157 Coldstream 2001, p. 70.

158 Cf. Moignard 1996, p. 434, oinochoai of types A and D, jugs of type A.

159 For the peculiar fabric and style of the vase, see: Kotsonas 2005, p. 761, no. I‑SK.7; Kotsonas 2008, p. 254. The vase is illustrated in Stampolidis 1996, pp. 60–61, no. 36.

160 See, for example, Coldstream, Catling (eds.) 1996, p. 115, no. 75.155 (Late Orientalizing).

161 For a closer Cretan imitation from Eleutherna, which is of Early Protoarchaic advanced/late date, see Kotsonas 2005, pp. 175, 527, no. AR.36.

162 Van Effenterre 1948, pp. 32–33, no. D 23; Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 56, 406, no. H∆. 23; Van Effenterre 2009, p. 146, no. 44.

163 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 371–379, nos. H1997, H1993, AN1787, H1992, H697, AN 1786.

164 Palermo 1992, p. 73, no. 211.

165 Coldstream 1996, pp. 336–337; Coldstream 2001, p. 23; Kotsonas 2008, p. 92.

166 For a few Late Geometric–Protoarchaic pieces, see: Levi 1927–1929, pp. 370–371, fig. 487 (Afrati; the piece in fig. 580 is perhaps imported); Kotsonas 2008, pp. 97–98 (Eleutherna).

167 East Crete: Hall 1914, p. 99, fig. 54: Late Geometric (?) (Vrokastro); Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 312, 366, no. Σ4084: Middle Geometric (Sklavoi in Sitia); Vogeikoff-Brogan, Kirkpatrick Smith 2009–2010, p. 95, no. 4: Early Protoarchaic (Meseleroi); Hallager E., Hallager B. (eds.) 1997, p. 217, no. 71‑P 1174: Late Geometric (?) (Chania).

168 Erickson 2002, pp. 59, 61, especially nos. 59, 62, 68 (Afrati).

169 On the Cretan kantharos, see: Coldstream, Eiring 2001, p. 80; Eiring 2001, pp. 97–98; Erickson 2010a, pp. 152–153; Englezou 2005, pp. 166–169, types 1 and 2.

170 Watrous 2012, p. 164, fig. 47:D9, pl. 40:D35–D36 (one of the last two is misspelled D38 in fig. 47).

171 Hayden et al. 2005, p. 48, fig. 80, no. 2360.

172 Erickson 2010b, pp. 316–317, fig. 9:2 (475–450 BC), with a less pronounced collared lip.

173 Cf. Kotsonas 2008, p. 208, type Bv (Eleutherna, with comparisons from elsewhere in Crete).

174 Central Crete: for Early Iron Age examples from Knossos, see: Coldstream 1996, p. 347, type Eii; Coldstream 2001, p. 63. For an Archaic one, see Callaghan 1992, p. 91, no. H3:8. See also: Kotsonas 2008, pp. 158–160; Wallace 2012, p. 58. East Crete: Mook 1993, p. 208. For a piece from Anavlochos, see Zographaki, Gaignerot-Driessen, Devolder 2012–2013, p. 532, no. f.

175 Haggis 2012, p. 159, with reference to fig. 43:C109.

176 The sherds in question are unpublished. They are numbered D272 and D273 and can be found in one of the three small crates of published and unpublished sherds from the French excavations at the cemetery of Dreros, which are kept in the archaeological storeroom at Neapolis.

177 Wallace 2010b, p. 40, no. KCM 75 (Kalo Chorio Maza).

178 Kotsonas 2009, p. 1052.

179 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 84, 91, 409, no. H702. Also, cf. a slightly earlier example, which is either an Euboean import or a Cretan imitation (Mook 1993, p. 199, no. P8.24).

180 See Kotsonas 2008, p. 208, type Biv for P78 and type Bv for P77 (Eleutherna, with comparisons from elsewhere in Crete).

181 Haggis 2012, p. 159, fig. 43:C104–C105. A bowl of comparable profile, which comes from a Middle Geometric context at Kommos (Johnston 2000, p. 216, no. 103), is considerably larger than the pieces discussed here.

182 Hayden et al. 2005, p. 50, fig. 102, no. 2113; p. 51, fig. 95, no. 2078.

183 Vogeikoff-Brogan, Kirkpatrick Smith 2009–2010, p. 95, no. 7 (the comparison mentioned on p. 91, n. 5 does not show the characteristic grooving).

184 Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 430, type a. Cf. a piece from Kommos, which has grooving on the lip, and comes from a Middle Geometric to early Late Geometric context (Johnston 2000, p. 216, no. 103).

185 Callaghan 1992, p. 91, no. H2:4 (Knossos); Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 251, no. 403 (Kommos); Erickson 2010a, pp. 113–114, no. 231 (Eleutherna); Haggis 2005, p. 131, no. 70.1 (Panagia Skali). For a late 5th century BC Knossian piece with grooving below a distinct lip, see Coldstream 1973b, p. 22, no. B6. A piece from Eleutherna (Kalpaxis, Furtwängler, Schnapp (eds.) 1994, p. 82, no. 19) is closer to the Protoarchaic type. For shallower Hellenistic comparisons, see Papadopoulos 2004, p. 158, nos. 58 and 61.

186 Erickson 2010a, p. 209, no. 482 (575–525 BC); p. 212, no. 504 (525–500 BC).

187 Erickson 2002, p. 73, nos. 94 and 95 (Syme Viannou); Erickson 2010a, pp. 84–85, nos. 120 and 122 (Eleutherna).

188 Kotsonas 2008, p. 154, n. 1157 (hydriae); p. 161 (oinochoe); p. 253 (jugs).

189 Kotsonas 2008, pp. 252–253 (with references). Also, cf. a piece from the cemetery of Dreros: Van Effenterre 1948, p. 36, pl. xviii.4; Van Effenterre 2009, p. 93, pl. ii.1 (erroneously dated to the Protogeometric period).

190 Tray D308 consists of two joining fragments that preserve full profile. For the location of this piece, see n. 176 above.

191 Marinatos 1936, pp. 267–268, fig. 31; Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 54, 411, pl. 105, no. H∆ (right).

192 See Kotsonas 2008, pp. 220–221, type Aia.

193 See Kotsonas 2008, pp. 217–226.

194 Coldstream 1973a, p. 54, no. 38.

195 Day 2011, pp. 281–282, no. K44.7.

196 Van Effenterre 1948, p. 28, no. D 7; Van Effenterre 2009, p. 105, no. 3. Also: Desborough 1952, p. 261; Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 411, no. H∆7.

197 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 237, no. 251.

198 Marinatos 1936, pp. 257–258, 265–268, figs. 22, 28.7, 31, 33.

199 Girella 2002, pp. 168, 185. Also: Kanta 1980, p. 285; Demetriou 1989, pp. 38–39.

200 Brock 1957, p. 162, nos. 59, 189, 1429; Coldstream 1996, pp. 376–377, type B; Coldstream, Macdonald 1997, p. 230, no. X1; Coldstream 2001, p. 59; Coldstream 2002, p. 214, no. 6.15.

201 Rethemiotakis, Englezou 2010, p. 152, no. Π30946.

202 Desborough 1952, p. 258.

203 Seiradaki 1960, p. 12, fig. 7:6; Day 2011, pp. 271–272.

204 Hall 1914, p. 110, no. 2; Desborough 1952, p. 260; Hayden 2003, p. 37, no. 64.

205 Mook 1993, p. 241, nos. P2.143 and P2.187.

206 Dawkins 1903–1904, pp. 220–222.

207 Kotsonas 2005, pp. 191–192, no. SK.2.

208 Johannowsky 2002, pp. 25–38; Anzalone 2013, p. 233, no. 197.

209 Prent 2005, p. 416, tables 6–7; Erickson 2010c, p. 230; Kotsonas 2024, pp. 526–532.

210 Erickson 2010c, pp. 230–234, 248, nos. 98–106; the profile of P92 compares only to that of no. 98, which is dated to the Classical–Hellenistic period.

211 Xanthoudidis 1905–1906, pp. 18–19, figs. 4–5.

212 Cf. Kotsonas 2008, pp. 207–208, type Biv.

213 Coldstream, Eiring 2001, p. 78; Eiring 2001, p. 97; Erickson 2010a, pp. 86–103, 133–147, 205–219.

214 Erickson 2002, pp. 59, 61, especially nos. 61 and 67 (Afrati).

215 Coldstream 2001, p. 37. Full references in Kotsonas 2008, p. 156.

216 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 371–379. For bracket ornaments (but not circles) on an east Cretan hydria from Vrokastro, see Hayden 2003, pp. 38–39, no. 71.

217 Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 84, 87, 410, nos. H693 and H694. Add a fragmentary Geometric piece from Kavousi (Mook 1993, pp. 330–331, no. P1.99; Mook 2004, p. 175, fig. 12.10: BB).

218 Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 410. Also, Hayden 2003, pp. 62–63, no. 159.

219 Coldstream 1996, pp. 375–376, type Cii; Coldstream 2001, p. 51.

220 Van Effenterre 1948, p. 37, pl. xx.4; Van Effenterre 2009, p. 133, no. 26.

221 Cf. Brock 1957, p. 175, pattern 9g.

222 Johnston 1993, p. 347, no. 28; Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 249, no. 395.

223 Haggis 2012, p. 160, fig. 45:C125.

224 Cf. the foot of type 1 kantharoi in Englezou 2005, pp. 166–168. Also, cf. Watrous 2012, p. 166, fig. 48:D51 and D79 (the Knossian comparisons cited are not close). For a kantharos from elsewhere in Dreros showing ridges on the foot, see Zographaki, Farnoux 2014a, p. 790, fig. 10.

225 Coldstream 1973b, p. 36, no. F14.

226 Cf. Coldstream 1973b, p. 32, no. E18 (late 3rd century BC).

227 These ladles are indicative of the ritual character of the site (Zographaki, Farnoux 2012–2013, p. 659; Farnoux, Zographaki 2018, p. 73).

228 Brock 1957, p. 175, pattern 9i.

229 Knossos: Coldstream 1973a, p. 53, no. 30 (500–480 BC). Azoria: Haggis et al. 2007, p. 288, fig. 14:2 (500–480 BC).

230 Erickson 2010a, pp. 142–143, nos. 293, 303–304 and p. 151, nos. 333–334; Erickson 2010c, p. 229–230, no. 62; Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 261, nos. 483 and 485.

231 Erickson 2010a, p. 219, nos. 537–539.

232 Coldstream 1999, p. 325, no. O7; Erickson 2010a, pp. 218–219, no. 537 (also, cf. p. 146, no. 328).

233 Coldstream 1973b, pp. 41–42, no. 50; Coldstream 1999, p. 330, no. Q7 and p. 333, no. R34. Cf. an Attic import from Eleutherna (Erickson 2010a, p. 76, no. 104).

234 Callaghan 1992, pp. 108–109, no. H16:8 (Callaghan, personal communication, considers this the foot of a baggy kantharos of the last quarter of the 3rd century BC); Englezou 2005, pp. 60–61, no. 201.

235 Coldstream 1973b, p. 32, no. E18.

236 La Rosa, Portale 1996–1997, pp. 323, 355, no. 104.

237 Marinatos 1936, pp. 257–258, fig. 22 (middle); Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 54, 411, pl. 105, no. H∆ (left).

238 Haggis et al. 2004, p. 362, fig. 17.5; Haggis et al. 2007, p. 251, fig. 6.9 and p. 282, fig. 29.9. Late Geometric (?) pithoi from the cemetery of Dreros show a less pronounced lip (Van Effenterre 2009, pp. 126–127).

239 Donald Haggis (personal communication). More distant comparisons are perhaps to be identified in the cups with low conical foot and one (instead of two) penannular grooves, which are known from Syme Viannou, are identified as products of a workshop at Afrati, and are dated to the second and third quarter of the 5th century BC (Erickson 2002, pp. 60–61, nos. 47–48 and 58). On the pottery from Syme Viannou, see Kotsonas 2024. For Knossian comparisons, see Erickson 2010a, pp. 141–143, nos. 294 (= Callaghan 1978, p. 8, no. 16) and 307; p. 145, no. 321.

240 Hadjimichali 1971, p. 204, no. 426.

241 Englezou 2005, p. 51, no. 125.

242 Englezou 2005, p. 103, no. 464; p. 107, nos. 497–498. Cf. Englezou 2000, p. 63.

243 The number of bases of ladles recovered is surprisingly low in comparison to the number of handles and rims.

244 Mercando 1974–1975, pp. 119–121 (bracieri); Mook 1993, pp. 190–191, 229–230 (scuttles); Francis et al. 2000, pp. 449–450 (ladles or braziers); Haggis et al. 2007, p. 260, fig. 14:8 (scuttle) and p. 288, fig. 34:1 (lekane); Allegro et al. 2008, p. 117 (braziers or ladles); Day 2011, pp. 275–276 (scuttles); Haggis et al. 2011, p. 60, n. 145 (lekanai, kalathoi); Anzalone 2013, pp. 231, 234 (bracieri). On the term incense burners, which has also been used, but has long been abandoned, see Day 2011, p. 276. For the use of the term ladles in the publications of the Cretan sanctuaries of Agiasmatsi and Kommos, see below.

245 Πυριατήρια: Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1985, pp. 16, 18, 24; Niniou-Kindeli 1995, p. 682; Niniou-Kindeli 2002, pp. 263, 266; Karamaliki 2010, p. 514. Πύραυνα: Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 259, no. Η4532; Sofianou 2006; Sofianou 2010, p. 180. Αρύταινες: Francis et al. 2000 (Greek abstract).

246 Seiradaki 1960, p. 12; Mook 1993, p. 190; Callaghan, Johnston 2000, pp. 232–233, nos. 196, 203–206; Hayden 2003, p. 54, no. 125; Haggis et al. 2011, p. 60, n. 145.

247 Karamaliki 2010, p. 514 (settlement of Agia Irini, Rethymno).

248 Allegro et al. 2008, p. 117.

249 Sofianou 2010, p. 180. Several pieces are on display at the Archaeological Museum of Siteia.

250 Vanna Niniou-Kindeli (personal communication).

251 The same applies to the pieces from a sanctuary at Gortyn (Anzalone 2013, pp. 231, 234). There is, however, contextual information on the pieces from the sanctuaries of Karphi (Day 2011, p. 276, with reference to the forthcoming publication of related material from the sanctuary at Kavousi Vronda) and Praisos (Sofianou 2006; Sofianou 2010, p. 180). For relevant evidence from settlements, see Karamaliki 2010, p. 514 (Agia Irini, Rethymno).

252 Cf. Georgiou 1986, p. 29.

253 Interior: P188 and P189 (which are perhaps from the same vase); lip: P160; exterior, including handle: P97, P137 and P134.

254 Cf. Georgiou 1986, p. 29; Mook 1993, p. 190; Day 2011, p. 276.

255 Marinatos 1936, pp. 259–260, fig. 23.

256 Francis et al. 2000, p. 450.

257 For an exception to the general pattern, see Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 281, no. 690. Peter Callaghan informs me that, before cleaning, some of the ladles from Kommos preserved a line of soot opposite the handle, which is perhaps indicative of a wick.

258 Niniou-Kindeli 1995, p. 682; Niniou-Kindeli 2002, pp. 263, 266. Most of the ladles from Tsiskiana are made in fine or semi-fine fabrics and preserve no traces of burning. The few coarse examples are very fragmentary (Vanna Niniou-Kindeli, personal communication).

259 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, pp. 291, 297, no. 915 (Kommos); Francis et al. 2000, pp. 450–451 (Agiasmatsi); Portale 2000, p. 81; Vanna Niniou-Kindeli (personal communication).

260 Niniou-Kindeli 1995, p. 682; Niniou-Kindeli 2002, pp. 263, 266; Vanna Niniou-Kindeli (personal communication). Note that the Minoan peak sanctuary of Vrysinas yielded braziers and bull figurines (Papadopoulou, Tzahili 2005, pp. 1048–1049).

261 Francis et al. 2000, especially pp. 440–441, 449–451 (with references). Add Portale 2000, p. 81. For examples from the Aegean Bronze Age, see Georgiou 1986, pp. 28–29.

262 Mercando 1974–1975, pp. 119–121, nos. 33–36 (Geometric settlement at Phaistos); Andreadaki-Vlasaki 1985, pp. 16, 18, 24 (Geometric burials at Gouves and Gavalomouri); Haggis et al. 2011, p. 60, n. 145 (Archaic settlement at Azoria); Homann-Wedeking 1950, p. 183 and Callaghan 1992, p. 101, no. H12.28; p. 107, no. H15.15; p. 121, no. H30.10 (Hellenistic domestic contexts at Knossos); Portale 2000, p. 81 (Early to Middle Hellenistic domestic context at Phaistos); Karamaliki 2010, p. 514 (Middle Hellenistic settlement at Agia Irini in Rethymno); Sofianou 2006 and Sofianou 2010, p. 180, figs. 4–5 (Early to Middle Hellenistic sanctuary at Praisos); Francis et al. 2000 (Hellenistic and Early Roman sanctuary at Agiasmatsi).

263 For Kommos, see the references in n. 267 below. Callaghan argues that, at both Kommos and Knossos, the change from coarse to fine fabric occurs in the Classical period (Callaghan forthcoming no. C6.10).

264 Francis et al. 2000, pp. 441, 446.

265 Cf. Day 2011, p. 276.

266 Francis et al. 2000, pp. 441, 446.

267 The quantity of ladles found at Kommos is considerably larger than the list of entries in the published catalogues, as explained in Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 237, no. 244 (many sherds in Temple B, which dates from the Geometric and Protoarchaic periods); p. 271 (many pieces also in Hellenistic deposits associated with Temple C). The sequence from Kommos is the basis for dating the ladles from “Edifizio A” at Gortyn (Anzalone 2013, p. 234).

268 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, pp. 232–233, nos. 196 and 203–206; p. 237, no. 244; p. 254, nos. 433–436; p. 264, no. 533; pp. 266–267, nos. 559–563, 567, 570; p. 272, no. 611; pp. 281–282, nos. 689–690, 709–710; p. 284, nos. 733–735; p. 287, nos. 775–778; p. 293, nos. 866–868; p. 297, no. 915. Also, Johnston 2005, pp. 381–382, nos. 272–273.

269 For the carination, see Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 254, no. 434 (4th century BC).

270 Francis et al. 2000, p. 440, figs. 13:50 and 14:55.

271 The development of a shallower form in the course of the 2nd century BC is also attested at Knossos (Callaghan 1992, p. 121).

272 Allegro et al. 2008, p. 117.

273 Francis et al. 2000, p. 440, figs. 7, 13–14.

274 P98 (from trench 8), which has a RD. of 23 cm, may not be a ladle.

275 Cf. Francis et al. 2000, pp. 440–441.

276 Marinatos 1936, pp. 267–268, figs. 31 and 33 (the central piece of fig. 31 matches P140); Tsipopoulou 2005, pp. 54, 411.

277 Tsipopoulou 2005, p. 448.

278 Day 2011, p. 276.

279 Cf. Francis et al. 2000, p. 441 (Agiasmatsi).

280 P112, P164, and P188 show grooves on the upper surface of the lip. Grooves also run on the upper body of P68, and the handle of P136.

281 Francis et al. 2000, pp. 440–441.

282 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 266, nos. 559 and 563.

283 Allegro et al. 2008, p. 117.

284 Seiradaki 1960, p. 12; Day 2011, p. 276.

285 The date reported in Zographaki, Farnoux 2012–2013, p. 658 is revised here.

286 Erickson 2002, pp. 57–58, nos. 42–45 (Syme Viannou); Haggis et al. 2007, p. 255, fig. 84 and p. 258, fig. 11.6 (Azoria). Also, Erickson 2010a, pp. 99–100, nos. 173–183 (Eleutherna); pp. 139–140, nos. 287–288 and 293 (Knossos; cf. the larger jug base Callaghan 1992, p. 91, no. H1.15); pp. 179–180, nos. 414–419 (Gortyn).

287 Cf. Erickson 2002, p. 207, no. 465 (Praisos, 575–525 BC).

288 Erickson 2002, p. 73, nos. 97 and 99 (Lyktos/Lyttos); Erickson 2010a, p. 146, nos. 327–328 (Knossos).

289 Coldstream 1999, pp. 324, 328, no. O12.

290 Englezou 2005, pp. 206–207, no. 425 (Lyktos/Lyttos, third quarter of 3rd century BC); Rotroff 2006, pp. 69–71 (Attica, mid‑4th to early 3rd century BC).

291 Englezou 2005, p. 273 (especially pp. 86–87, no. 368, Knossos, 3rd century BC). For 3rd or 2nd century BC examples from Phaistos, see La Rosa, Portale 1996–1997, pp. 286, 354–355, nos. 31 to 31i. Note that P148 also shows some morphological resemblance to type Ia ladles.

292 Cf. Poulou-Papadimitriou 2008, pp. 49–50.

293 Erickson 2002, pp. 71, 73, no. 99; Kotsonas 2024, p. 110, no. P172; p. 115, no. P187; p. 245, no. 474.

294 Erickson 2010a, p. 147, no. 329 (Knossos, 400–375 BC); p. 219, nos. 543–545 (Praisos, 4th to 2nd century BC).

295 Erickson 2010b, p. 313, figs. 7.4 and 7.7–9; p. 315, fig. 8.4; pp. 324–325, figs. 15.5 and 16.4; p. 327, fig. 18.2.

296 A close match for the lip profile comes from a (Protogeometric–) Geometric context at Kommos (Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 233, no. 206: classified as lamp/ladle).

297 Johnston 2005, p. 361, no. 184. Cf. a 6th century BC piece from Corinth (Villing, Pemberton 2010, p. 570, no. 4).

298 Levi 1927–1929, p. 498, fig. 592‑D, form l (Afrati); Palermo 1992, p. 62, no. 115 (Prinias); Kotsonas 2008, p. 222, nos. A41α and A70 (Eleutherna). The development is indicated by a comparison of the pieces from Eleutherna and the example from Prinias.

299 Prinias: Palermo 1992, p. 76, nos. 237 and 238 respectively (also, cf. the small basin no. 121). Gortyn: Santaniello 2004, p. 455, nos. SOS/108–109. The development of this form in the Classical period is represented by Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 264, no. 534.

300 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 262, no. 500. Cf. an Attic mid‑4th century BC import from Priniatikos Pyrgos with more squared lip (Erickson 2010b, pp. 326–327, fig. 18.10).

301 Cf. Callaghan, Johnston 2000, p. 258, no. 468; p. 264, no. 537.

302 Callaghan 1992, p. 96, no. H8.12.

303 Callaghan, Johnston 2000, pp. 254–255, nos. 433 and 449.

304 Mook 1993, p. 192 (Kavousi); Wallace 2010b, p. 42, no. KK 8 (Krousonas Koupo) and p. 53, no. RKES 4 (Rotasi Kephala); Day 2011, p. 307 (Karphi). Cf. Nowicki 2000, pls. xxiilii.

305 Marinatos 1936, pp. 260–262, fig. 24.

306 Santaniello 2004, p. 456, nos. SOS/55, SOS 58 and SOS/5. For the similar profile of a Late Archaic basin, see Callaghan 1992, p. 91, no. H2.10.

307 Marinatos 1936, p. 247; Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937, p. 21 (Hellenistic).

308 On the gradual refinement of the fabric of some types of Aegean transport amphorae see, for example, Kotsonas 2012b, p. 202.

309 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 27.

310 Erickson 2002, pp. 60–61, nos. 47–48 and 58; Kotsonas 2024, p. 96, no. P131; p. 99, no. P140; p. 168, no. P302; p. 170, no. P309. For Knossian comparisons, see Erickson 2010a, pp. 141–143, nos. 294 (= Callaghan 1978, p. 8, no. 16) and 307.

311 Kotsonas 2024, pp. 456, 469.

312 Erickson 2002, p. 73, nos. 94–95, especially no. 94 (Afrati). Also, cf. Erickson 2010a, p. 86, no. 130 (Eleutherna); p. 146, nos. 325 and 327 (Knossos).

313 Coldstream 1999, pp. 324, 328, no. O12.

314 Eiring 2001, p. 97.

315 Englezou 2005, pp. 171–175. Add Kalpaxis, Furtwängler, Schnapp (eds.) 1994, p. 84, no. K47 (Eleutherna).

316 Cf. Francis et al. 2000, p. 441 (Agiasmatsi).

317 Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937, p. 21.

318 Marinatos 1936, p. 247; Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937, p. 21.

319 Cf. Poulou-Papadimitriou 2008, pp. 49–50; Poulou-Papadimitriou 2012, p. 317.

320 Erickson 2002, pp. 53–54, nos. 19–27; Kotsonas 2024, pp. 494–495, fig. 4.5 (Syme Viannou). Also, Erickson 2010a, pp. 128–132, nos. 262–279 (Knossos); pp. 178–179, nos. 408–413 (Gortyn); pp. 213–214, nos. 510–524 (Praisos).

321 Marinatos 1936, p. 263, fig. 27.

322 Wallace 2010b, pp. 24, 30, no. AYP 27 (Kera Papoura); p. 47, no. KK 3 (Krousonas Koupo).

323 Mook 1993, p. 230, nos. P1.141, P2.206 and P3.70.

324 Boardman 1961, p. 118, nos. 519–520 (Hyrtakos); Stefanakis 2011, pp. 779–780, figs. 6–7 (Choumeri and Thrapsanos); Rizza 2008, p. 190, no. TH2 (Prinias); Erickson 2017, p. 228 (northwest Pediada).

325 Coldstream, Eiring 2001, p. 78; Eiring 2001, p. 97; Erickson 2010a, pp. 86–103, 133–147, 205–219.

326 Callaghan 1978, pp. 10–11, nos. 24–25; Erickson 2010a, p. 184, no. 434 (the piece is identified as a kantharos in Callaghan forthcoming, and Erickson concurs). Also: Coldstream, Eiring 2001, p. 80; Englezou 2005, p. 171.

327 Coldstream 1973b, pp. 40–41, nos. H30–H31 and H38; Callaghan 1978, pp. 4–6, nos. 1–9; La Rosa, Portale 1996–1997, pp. 309, 353, nos. 86 to 86b. Also, Coldstream 1999, p. 325, no. O4; p. 330, nos. Q1–2; p. 332, nos. R7–8.

328 Erickson 1998–2000, pp. 241–242; Englezou 2005, pp. 189–191.

329 Van Effenterre 1946, pp. 601–604.

330 Marinatos 1936.

331 Van Effenterre 1948; Van Effenterre 2009; Gaignerot-Driessen 2016, p. 231.

332 Structure 5 is the only structure of the sanctuary which has a fixed terminus post quem provided by ceramics. In all other cases, ceramics provide dates for the layers enclosed by structures, but these dates are not necessarily indicative of the time these structures were built.

333 The homogeneity of the material from trenches 9 and 14 is indicated by the cross-joins identified above.

334 The study of the archaeobotanical remains confirms that this is a secondary deposition (Moniaki 2020, pp. 316–318).

335 Xanthoudidis 1918; Marinatos 1936, p. 254. Xanthoudidis’s view was confirmed by the new fieldwork: Mulliez 2011; Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, p. 633; Farnoux, Kyriakidis, Zographaki 2012, p. 183.

336 Marinatos 1936, pp. 257–258, 265–268, figs. 22, 28.7, 31, 33.

337 Moniaki 2020, pp. 316–318.

338 Parisinou 2000, pp. 77–78, 93–96, 124–161.

339 Day et al. 2006.

340 Cf. Zographaki, Farnoux 2014b, p. 106 (cups).

341 Xanthoudidis 1918, pp. 27–28; Prent 2005, p. 301 (with references). This scholarship treats the East Terrace as the pronaos of Temple A.

342 D’Acunto 2002–2003, p. 56; Prent 2005, p. 284; Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, p. 631; Farnoux, Kyriakidis, Zographaki 2012, pp. 181–183; Zographaki, Farnoux 2014b, p. 106.

343 For the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros, see above (note that the earliest material from trench 14 in the West Terrace pre-dates the construction of temple A); for Dreros Temple B, see Marinatos 1936, pp. 259–260, fig. 23 (the Classical lamp is the latest piece). Marinatos (Marinatos 1936, pp. 255–256) proposed that Temple B was constructed in the first half of the 8th century BC and certainly by 750 BC; the latter date is accepted in: Van Effenterre 1992, p. 89; Prent 2005, p. 285.

344 For Dreros Temple A, see above; for Dreros Temple B, see Marinatos 1936, pp. 257–260, figs. 22–23. Note the very different ceramic assemblage from the area west of Temple B (Marinatos 1936, pp. 257, 260–268, figs. 24–33), and the rare attestation of kalathoi and cups (and the lack of any basins) in the cemetery of Dreros, which largely dates from the Middle Geometric to the Early Protoarchaic period: Van Effenterre 2009, p. 105, no. 3; pp. 124–125, no. 16 (kalathoi); p. 136, nos. 29–30 (undecorated cups). Kalathoi were also found in another ritual context circa 50 m. east of Temple A (Zographaki, Farnoux 2014b, p. 109).

345 Marinatos 1936, pp. 257, 259–260, figs. 22–23.

346 Xanthoudidis 1918, pp. 25, 28, fig. 12 (only one handle is illustrated, but more items are referred to). The handle from another, early 6th century BC bronze vessel from Temple A was looted before the time of Xanthoudidis (Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 25; Mazonaki 1976).

347 Compare: Xanthoudidis 1918, pp. 27–28 with Marinatos 1936, pp. 257–260. See also: D’Acunto 2002–2003; Prent 2005, pp. 283–288; Klein, Glowacki 2009, pp. 166–167.

348 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 26.

349 Xanthoudidis 1918, pp. 27–28.

350 Gesell 1999; Gesell 2004; Klein, Glowacki 2009.

351 The beginning of the Gortynian sanctuary is placed in the 12th century BC (Anzalone 2013), but I see reliable evidence only from the 9th century BC. Unlike Dreros Temple A, the Gortynian sanctuary did not produce any bronzes or archaeobotanical remains (however, the offering of agricultural produce is hypothesized in Anzalone 2013, p. 240).

352 Marinatos 1936. Cf. Sporn 2002, p. 83; Prent 2005, pp. 285–286.

353 Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937, p. 21.

354 Klein, Glowacki 2009, p. 164, n. 48.

355 Wallace 2010a, pp. 284, 331, 342.

356 Kotsonas 2011b.

357 Prent 1997; Coldstream, Huxley 1999; Kotsonas 2002; Kotsonas 2023, p. 135.

358 Erickson 2002; Erickson 2010a; Kotsonas 2024.

359 Haggis et al. 2004; Haggis et al. 2007; Haggis et al. 2011.

360 Archaic pottery has been located by the new fieldwork at houses near the agora (Farnoux et al. 2022, p. 5).

361 Callaghan, Johnston 2000.

362 Francis et al. 2000.

363 Sporn 2002, p. 83; D’Acunto 2002–2003, p. 57.

364 Note, however, the technological and morphological similarities between kalathoi and braziers from Karphi (Seiradaki 1960, p. 12; Day 2011, pp. 274, 275) and Kavousi (Mook 1993, pp. 191, 229–230).

365 Van Effenterre 1946, p. 603.

366 Guarducci 1935, pp. 84–86, no. 1.

367 Guarducci 1935, pp. 84–86, no. 1, line 48.

368 Jeffery 1949, p. 37.

369 Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, pp. 634, 638, 645; Gaignerot-Driessen 2013, especially p. 291.

370 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 24; Marinatos 1936, p. 216; Demargne, Van Effenterre 1937, pp. 7–8; Van Effenterre 1992, p. 89; Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, pp. 627–628; Farnoux et al. 2022, pp. 7–8.

371 Xanthoudidis 1918, p. 26.

372 Van Effenterre 1992, p. 89; Zographaki, Farnoux 2011, p. 637; Gaignerot-Driessen 2013, p. 291.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig. 1 — Photographs and drawing of the aryballos excavated by Xanthoudidis at Temple A.
Crédits Photos: A. Kotsonas; drawing: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 529k
Titre Fig. 2 — Dino-lite photographs of samples of macroscopic fabric groups A, B, C, D, E, F.
Crédits Photos: A. Kotsonas.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 554k
Titre Fig. 3 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the surface cleaning and the backfill of the West Terrace: P1, P3, P4, P5, P6, P7, P8, P9 (outside and inside), P10, P11, P12, and P13.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 531k
Titre Fig. 4 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the surface cleaning and the backfill of the West Terrace: P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, P8, P9, P10, and P13.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 319k
Titre Fig. 5 — Photographs of pottery fragments from trench 9, and from the baulk between trenches 9 and 14 in the West Terrace: P14, P15, P18, P21, P22, and P23.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 539k
Titre Fig. 6 — Drawings of pottery fragments from trench 9, from the fill of trench 9, and from the baulk between trenches 9 and 14 in the West Terrace: P14, P15, P16, P19, P20, P22, and P23.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 258k
Titre Fig. 7 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P24, P25, P26, P29, P30, P31, P33, P34, P35 and P36.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 581k
Titre Fig. 8 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P37, P38, P39, P41, P42, P44, P46 and P47.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 552k
Titre Fig. 9 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P48, P49 (two parts), P51, P52, P53, P54, P55 and P57.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 540k
Titre Fig. 10 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P24, P26, P29, P30, P31, P32, P34, P35, P36, P37, and P38.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 332k
Titre Fig. 11 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P39, P40, P41, P42, P43, P45, P47, P48, and P49.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-11.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 288k
Titre Fig. 12 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 14 in the West Terrace: P50, P51 (two fragments), P52, P53, P54, P56, and P57.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-12.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 268k
Titre Fig. 13 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the surface cleaning and the backfill of the East Terrace: P58, P59, P60, P62, P63, P65, P66, P67, P68, P69, P71, P73, and P74.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-13.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 560k
Titre Fig. 14 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the surface cleaning of the East Terrace: P58, P59, P60, P61, P62, P64, P65, P66, P67, and P68.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-14.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 274k
Titre Fig. 15 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the backfill of the East Terrace: P71, P73, and P74.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-15.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 221k
Titre Fig. 16 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 7 in the East Terrace: P75, P76, P77, P78, P79, P80, P81, P82, P83, P84, and P85.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-16.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 520k
Titre Fig. 17 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 7 in the East Terrace: P86, P87, P88, P89, P90, P91, and P92 (outside and inside).
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-17.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 535k
Titre Fig. 18 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of Trench 7 in the East Terrace: P75, P76, P77, P78, P79, P80, P81, P82, and P83.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-18.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 359k
Titre Fig. 19 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of Trench 7 in the East Terrace: P84, P85, P86, P87, P88, P89, P90, P91, and P92.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-19.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 276k
Titre Fig. 20 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trenches 8, 20 and 22 in the East Terrace: P94, P95, P96, P97, P99, P100, P101, P102, P103, and P105.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-20.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 542k
Titre Fig. 21 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 22 in the East Terrace: P104 (two parts).
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-21.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 562k
Titre Fig. 22 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of Trenches 8, 20 and 22 in the East Terrace: P93, P94, P95, P100, P101, P102, P103, P104, and P105.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-22.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 257k
Titre Fig. 23 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 19, by the East Terrace: P106, P107, P108, P109 and P110 (from above and from below).
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-23.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 553k
Titre Fig. 24 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 23, by the East Terrace: P111, P112, P113, and P114.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-24.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 499k
Titre Fig. 25 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of Trenches 19 and 23, by the East Terrace: P106, P107, P108, P109, P111, P112, P113, and P114.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-25.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 314k
Titre Fig. 26 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the alleged backfill and fill of trench 17, by the East Terrace: P115, P116, P117, P118, P119, P120, P121, P122, P123, P124, P125, P126, and P127.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-26.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 568k
Titre Fig. 27 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the alleged backfill and fill of trench 17, by the East Terrace: P128, P129, P130, P131, P132, P133, P136 (different views), and P137.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-27.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 554k
Titre Fig. 28 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the alleged fill of trench 17, by the East Terrace: P134, P135, P138, P139, P140, and P141.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-28.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 544k
Titre Fig. 29 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the alleged backfill of trench 17, by the East Terrace: P115, P116, P117, P119, P120, P121, P122, P129, and P137.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-29.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 245k
Titre Fig. 30 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the alleged fill of trench 17, by the East Terrace: P123, P124, P125, P131, P132, P133, P135, P136, P139, P140, and P141.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-30.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 292k
Titre Fig. 31 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the backfill of trench 24, by the East Terrace: P142, P143, P144, P145, P146, P147, P148, P149, P150, P151, P152, P153, P154, and P155.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-31.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 550k
Titre Fig. 32 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the backfill of Trench 24, by the East Terrace: P143, P144, P145, P146, P148, P151, P152, P154, and P155.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-32.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 293k
Titre Fig. 33 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 24, by the East Terrace: P156, P157, P158, P159, P160, P161, P162, P163, P164, P165, P166, P167, P168, P169, P170, and P171.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-33.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 550k
Titre Fig. 34 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 24, by the East Terrace: P172, P173, P174, P175, P176, P177, P178, P179, P180, P181, and P182.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-34.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 559k
Titre Fig. 35 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of Trench 24, by the East Terrace: P156, P157, P158, P159, P162, P164, P167, P168, P169, and P170.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-35.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 259k
Titre Fig. 36 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 24, by the East Terrace: P171, P172, P174, P175, P176, and P177.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-36.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 241k
Titre Fig. 37 — Drawings of pottery fragments from the fill of trench 24, by the East Terrace: P178, P180, P181, and P182.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-37.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 150k
Titre Fig. 38 — Photographs of pottery fragments from the backfill of trench 18 in the North Terrace: P183, P184, P185, P186, P187 (outside and inside), P188, P190, P191, and P192.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-38.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 538k
Titre Fig. 39 — Photographs of pottery fragments from trench 18 in the North Terrace: P193, P194, P195, P196, P197, P198, P199 (outside and inside), and P200.
Crédits Photos: Th. Brisart.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-39.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 539k
Titre Fig. 40 — Drawings of pottery fragments from trench 18 (backfill and fill from within the “Archive”) in the North Terrace: P183, P184, P185, P187, P188, P189, P192, P193, P194, and P196.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-40.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 268k
Titre Fig. 41 — Drawings of pottery fragments from Trench 18 (fill from west of the “Archive”) in the North Terrace: P197, P198, P199, and P200.
Crédits Drawings: F. Skyvalida.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bch/docannexe/image/1626/img-41.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 250k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Antonis Kotsonas, « The Early Iron Age to Hellenistic, and the Medieval and Modern pottery from the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros »Bulletin de correspondance hellénique, 146.2 | 2022, 565-682.

Référence électronique

Antonis Kotsonas, « The Early Iron Age to Hellenistic, and the Medieval and Modern pottery from the sanctuary on the west acropolis of Dreros »Bulletin de correspondance hellénique [En ligne], 146.2 | 2022, mis en ligne le 20 février 2025, consulté le 18 février 2026. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/bch/1626 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/13g39

Haut de page

Auteur

Antonis Kotsonas

Associate Professor of Mediterranean History and Archaeology, Institute for the Study of the Ancient World, New York University.

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont susceptibles d’être soumis à des autorisations d’usage spécifiques.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search