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.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 October 2013
The tombs fall into two groups. The first and, as far as can be seen, largest, at the spot called τὰ μνήματα (the tombs), lies round about the spring Vitzelovrysis on the way up to the city from the plain. The second, close to the spring Astividhero (Brushwood spring), lies near the path up to the city from the plain of Nesimos.
The tombs in each group were numbered as they were excavated, not in chronological order, and the objects from them were catalogued in the general series with the prefix M. (for Ta Mnemata) or A. (for Astividhero), followed by the tomb number.
page 109 note 1 As in the case of the city, north is ‘local north,’ i.e., as in Egypt the Nile is always assumed to run north and south, so here the hillside is assumed to run north and south or east and west.
page 111 note 1 AJA 1901 p. 270Google Scholar; ibid. p. 283 and Annuario X–XII 389; ibid. p. 174; Mon. Ant. IX 402Google Scholar.
page 111 note 2 BCH 1931 365 ffGoogle Scholar.
page 111 note 3 JHS 1932 p. 255Google ScholarPubMed; AJA 1901 p. 125Google ScholarPubMed; 1904 p. 21; BSA VIII 240Google Scholar; Vrokastro passim.
page 111 note 4 AJA 1901 p. 437Google Scholar; ibid p. 287.
page 111 note 5 Trans. Penn. Univ. II p. 129Google Scholar; BSA XX 14Google Scholar. Note that none of the above sites are in districts where the true ‘Protogeometric’ pottery flourished.
page 111 note 6 Cf. Kourtais, loc. cit., where this was the practice even though the tomb was buried.