¹ BSA 80 (1985) 29–84. Hereafter abbreviated DA Sparta.

² I am greatly indebted to Nicholas Yalouris for making the necessary arrangements for the study of these vases and to Paul Cartledge and Carla Antonaccio for reading this manuscript and making suggestions for its improvement. Christopher Simon kindly provided the photograph of the sherd in Pl. 2e now in the Fitzwilliam Museum.

³ To date, the majority of finds from the area of Vrondama have been Classical and Hellenistic. A small acropolis some 2 km. west of Vrondama yielded fifth to fourth century BC black glazed ware and fragments of a few LH III kylikes and LH pithoi; cf. Waterhouse, H. and Hope Simpson, R., ‘Prehistoric Laconia: Part 1,’ BSA 55 (1960) 83 and 85, fig. 8.Google Scholar

⁴ Colors are designated according to the Munsell Soil Color Charts (Baltimore 1975).

⁵ FS 195; cf. Furumark, A., Mycenaean Pottery: Analysis and Classification (Stockholm 1941, 1972) 67Google Scholar, fig. 20. Also, Mountjoy, P.A., Mycenaean Decorated Pottery, SIMA 73 (Göteborg 1986) 31, fig. 29, 1.Google Scholar

⁶ Demakopoulou, K., ‘Μυχηναϊχὰ ἀγγεῑα ἐχ ϑαλαμοειδῶν τάΦων πεϱιχῆς Ἃγιου Ἰοάννου Μονεμβασίας,’ ADelt 23 (1968)Google Scholar A, 186, no. 82, Pl. 82δ. Demakapoulou assigns no date to this vase but notes its resemblance to FS 195 (LH IIIA2).

⁷ Demakopoulou, K., Τό Μυχηναϊχό ἱεϱό στό Αμυχλαῑο χαί ἠ ΥΕ ΙΙΙΓ χεϱίοδος στή Λαχωνία (Athens 1982) 120, Pl. 64, no. 145.Google Scholar

⁸ For bird vases, see Desborough, V.R.d'A., ‘Bird Vases,’ KrChron 24 (1972) 245–277Google Scholar; Pieridou, A., Ὀ Πϱωτογεωμετϱὸς Ῥυϑμός ἐν Κυπϱῷ (Athens 1973) 101, Pl. 28, 1–5.Google Scholar

⁹ DA Sparta 37.

¹⁰ DA Sparta 65.

¹¹ B. Wells, Asine II, fasc. 4: 2–3, The Protogeometric Period: An Analysis of the Settlement and Catalogue of the Pottery and Other Artifacts (Stockholm 1983) 42, 64. Also, Coldstream, J.N., Review of Asine II, JHS 105 (1985) 235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹² DA Sparta 39–45.

¹³ The latest pieces from Ayios Ioannis and Epidaurus Limera can be considered as having the same general chronological force as the Vrondama askos in narrowing the gap between IIIC and early DA in Laconia. This ceramic material, however, occurs in areas of Laconia other than at Amyclae and does not affect the gap at the Amyklaion. Indeed, the Vrondama vases do not correspond in either fabric, paint, shape, or decoration with the DA material from Amyclae. Demakopoulou (supra n.7) 174–175 suggests that, despite the gap at the Amyklaion, religious continuity was present in the form of memory of earlier cult practices. She contends that the shrine was not wholly abandoned but that the offerings consisted of simple libations which left no trace. In the final analysis, it may not be possible to close the gap at Amyclae with concrete archaeological evidence. A remnant population, for instance, could quite easily have maintained a religious tradition over several generations. Such a population, as has been suggested in DA Sparta 64, may have ultimately combined with an influx of newcomers from western Greece. The presence of imports of Amyclae style at Asine certainly suggests a wider circulation of people than has been permitted by our hitherto conventional picture of an impoverished DA Laconia.

¹⁴ DA Sparta 37.

¹⁵ The zig-zags, however, mostly occur in metopal panels; cf. Droop, J.P., in Dawkins, R.M., The Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia at Sparta (London 1929) 55, fig. 30dGoogle Scholar; Lane, E.A., ‘Lakonian Vase-Painting,’ BSA 34 (1933–1934) 106, fig. 3 third row, middle.Google Scholar

¹⁶ CVA Cambridge 1, Pl. 3, 18 (GR.518.1923). This sherd is said in the CVA to come from the Sub-Geometric, Proto-Corinthian stratum at the sanctuary, but on the basis of the similarity of its decoration to that on the shoulder of oinochoe 2, its date can be refined to MG II.

¹⁷ Courbin, P., La céramique géométrique de l'Argolide (Paris 1966) Pl. 4 (C. 30).Google Scholar This amphora in general is decorated in similar fashion to our oinochoe: the neck is dark, followed by a crosshatched zig-zag, narrow simple zig-zag, broken maeander, bands, and rows of dots; the belly has thin bands to the base which is monochrome coated. See also Coldstream, J.N., Greek Geometric Pottery (London 1968) Pl.25a.Google Scholar

¹⁸ von Massow, W., ‘Vom Amyklaion,’ AM 52 (1927) Pl. 11Google Scholar, top row. The broken maeander here has the form of high and low vertical bars. Note that Pl. 11, top row, middle, has a zig-zag above the vertical bars in similar fashion to our oinochoe.

¹⁹ For example, Courbin (supra, n.17) Pl. 16 (C.2440), Pl. 59 (C.2304, C.2465), and Pl.73 (C.534). The decorative scheme of oinochoe C.32 from Argos (Courbin, Pl.21) is also quite close with its zig-zag on the neck, rows of dots on the shoulder, and thin bands covering the belly. The shape of C.32 is more ovoid than that of our example, but overall the two are fairly close in shape and decoration.

²⁰ For example, Courbin (supra n.17) Pl. 110 (C.833). Attic vessels also have similarly decorated handles; cf. Kübler, K., Kerameikos V, 1Google Scholar, Die Nekropole des 10. bis 8.Jahrhunderts (Berlin 1954) Pl.48 (Inv. 1256) and Pl.52 (Inv.263).

²¹ For Argive influence on Laconian MG, see Coldstream, GGP (supra n.17) 214.