No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
It has long been axiomatic that amber is seldom found in Crete, and it is therefore of some interest to be able to record amber beads in two of the Gypsades tombs, Nos. II and VII. In Mycenaean sites on the mainland of Greece amber beads of different shapes are found in great numbers and so frequently as to appear a fairly constant feature of these sites; certainly as much as faience and rather more so than lapis lazuli, an exotic from Asia.
In the shaft-graves of both the new and old grave circles at Mycenae amber is plentiful and thereafter at Prosymna in graves dating from Late Helladic I to Late Helladic III; and this is characteristic of all the principal sites, though the number of beads found may be much smaller. Amber is also particularly plentiful on the west coast of the Peloponnese: at Kakovatos in Elis, in tholos A (dated L.H. IIA); at Epano Englianos in western Messenia, in the tholos excavated by Lord William Taylour, close to the palace, and dated to the fifteenth century or earlier, in which about 360 beads were recovered; and in the second tholos recently excavated by Professor Marinatos at Myrsinochorion in the same area. Farther north there was much in the Ionian Islands, particularly in Cephalonia; and a little has been found in Epirus.
41 Greek Pins figs. 402–3.
42 Prosymna 286, L.H. I, T. XLIV; L.H. II, T. II and III; L.H. III, T. VI, XLI–XLIII, LI.
42a AM xxxiv (1909) 278; AJA 58 (1954) 30–32. I am indebted to Lord William Taylour for information on the probable date of the amber in the tholos.
43 Antiquity xxxi (1957) 97–100.
44 Marinatos, , AE 1933, 92–93Google Scholar; Kalbaki in Epirus, shown to me by Mr. S. Dakaris, to whose kindness for information I am most grateful.
45 BCH lxxi–ii (1947–8) 220, pl. xxxviii, 11, 12, Delos from the Artemision. Zervos, Rhodes, Capitale du Dodécanese, figs. 156, 160, 162.
46 Ugaritica i. 100, fig 95, several beads published by Schaeffer, ; Woolley, , Atchana 203, At/37/33.Google Scholar
47 TDA, 42–43; PM ii. 2, 174, n. 2.
48 TDA, 43; Ugaritica i. 100, n. 2.
49 I am most grateful to the following for the loan of beads: to Prof. Blegen and Lord William Taylour for sample 1, to Dr. Makaronas, then director of the Archaeological Museum in Salonica, for sample 3, and to the Keeper of the Department of Antiquities, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, for other samples; also to Dr. Werner and the British Museum Research Laboratory for performing the analysis and reporting upon it.
50 BSA lxxxv (1934–5) 154–5. fig. 11.
51 Hogarth, , B.M. Excavations at Ephesus: The Archaic Artemision 213–16Google Scholar; see also Jacobsthal, , Greek Pins 33–37.Google Scholar
52 Hogarth, , Ephesus 215, pl. xlvii, 28Google Scholar; the measurements are 0·040 by 0·015.
53 Hogarth, , Ephesus pl. xlviii, 2Google Scholar; cf. TDA fig. 56.
54 Marinatos, , AE 1933, 92–93, fig. 43 and pl. 2Google Scholar; further information kindly given by Miss S. Benton.
55 Woolley, , Atchana 203.Google Scholar Supposed ‘amber’ from the British Museum excavations at Enkomi in Cyprus was found not to be a resin.
56 BSA xlix (1954) 217, 226 (see particularly pl. 28, 5): pendants from the large ornament and an amber spacer with simple boring re-used as a pendant in a rectangular gold setting. I am indebted to Dr. N. Platon for assistance in re-examining this interesting ornament. Arkades, , Ann. x–xii (1927–1929) 477.Google Scholar
57 Jacobsthal, , Greek Pins 33–37Google Scholar; as well as the gold ‘flower pins’ cited by Jacobsthal, the crystal pin-head, Hogarth, , Ephesus pl. xlvi, 29Google Scholar is more like Mycenaean shaft-grave pins than any other, e.g. Schachtgräber pl. xxxi, 103, and Mylonas, Ancient Mycenae fig. 57.
58 De Navarro, in Geographical Journal 66 (1925) 481–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Clark, J. G. D., Prehistoric Europe 261–4Google Scholar, and Sandars, , Bronze Age Cultures in France 72–77.Google Scholar