^{page 113 note 1} Cf. Fig. 1.

^{page 113 note 2} Cf. ibid.

^{page 114 note 1} Cf. Fig. 1.

^{page 120 note 1} Diagram to illustrate division into Periods (based on Pits A–E, A 1–C 1).

In the illustrations, in addition to the designation of the pit, Arabic numerals indicate depth in half-metres below top of Pit A. US. = unstratified.

^{page 120 note 2} E.g. Várdino, Hágios Mámas, Kritsaná, Olynthus.

^{page 122 note 1} Cf. Chalcidice, Fig. 37, 2, 3.

^{page 122 note 2} Cf. ibid. Fig. 10, 12.

^{page 122 note 3} Cf. ibid. Fig. 17, c; also Kritsaná (not yet published).

^{page 123 note 1} Cf. Chalcidice, Fig. 38, 8.

^{page 123 note 2} Cf. Vardaróftsa, Pl. IV, 12.

^{page 124 note 1} Cf. Vardaróftsa, Pl. VI.

^{page 126 note 1} No. 4 has numerous parallels elsewhere. Cf. Chalcidice, Fig. 13, 4, p. 134, note 2.

^{page 126 note 2} Cf. Vardaróftsa, Pl. VII (b).

^{page 126 note 3} Cf. Chalcidice, Fig. 11, 5, Fig. 15, 1, 3.

^{page 126 note 4} Cf. ibid. Fig. 11, 8.

^{page 127 note 1} Cf. Vardaróftsa, Pl. III (a).

^{page 127 note 2} Cf. ibid. Pl. VIII (a).

^{page 128 note 1} Cf. Vardaróftsa, p. 17.

^{page 129 note 1} Cf. Vardaróftsa, Pl. IX (a).

^{page 129 note 2} The handle is angular in section.

^{page 129 note 3} Cf. ibid. Pl. III (a). They seem to have been used as supports for other vases, or, turned upside down, as receptacles.

^{page 129 note 4} Unstratified, but assigned here.

^{page 129 note 5} Probably two-handled. Cf. B.S.A. xxviii, p. 173Google Scholar, Fig. 21, 12 (from Bouboústi), which has parallels at Páteli.

^{page 130 note 1} White filling inserted to bring out the pattern.

^{page 130 note 2} Antiq. Journal, vi, Pl. XIV.

^{page 130 note 3} Both it and Fig. 11,17 have a good deal in common with the Fourth Incised Style of Vardaróftsa. Cf. Vardaróftsa, Pl. XIV (b).

^{page 131 note 1} Cf. Chalcidice, Fig. 12, 6.

^{page 133 note 1} All the examples shewn in Fig. 23 have been discoloured by fire.

^{page 133 note 2} Cf. B.S.A. xxv, Fig. 33, b, d (from Mycenae). From it a common Macedonian Iron Age type is derived, B.S.A. xxvi, p. 15Google Scholar, Fig. 6, e–g.

^{page 134 note 1} One is shaped like a spur.

^{page 135 note 1} Cf. Vardaróftsa, Pl. XVIII (b).

^{page 135 note 2} Cf. ibid. Pl. XX (a), 1.

^{page 136 note 1} Cf. Vardaróftsa, Pl. XXI (a).

^{page 137 note 1} Cf. Vardaróftsa. Pl. XX (b) 3.

^{page 138 note 1} The vase to which this handle belongs is decorated with concentric semi-circles. The ‘join’ was discovered recently by Mr. Skeat.

^{page 138 note 2} Fig. 29, 1 (= Fig. 30, 1), though found in a contaminated stratum, is assigned to Period A. The stone of No. 5 is ‘tuf volcanique metamorphosé.’

^{page 138 note 3} The stone of the latter is ‘grès.’

^{page 140 note 1} Cf. Vardaróftsa, p. 33, note 1.

^{page 143 note 1} Of the gold hair-ring, Mr. W. E. Woodward writes provisionally:

‘(1) I do not know whether the material was melted in the process of manufacture or not, it might have been hammered together in some hot state.

‘(2) I am nearly certain that the ring has been produced by means of a die: one end is nice and circular where it entered, and the other end looks as if it had been nicked to break it off a longer piece of wire.

‘(3) Some time or other the ring has been heated, whether intentionally to remove the drawing strains I do not know, or because the village happened to get burned down. Of course both of these things may have happened and we cannot tell.

‘(4) The wire of which the ring is formed is so nearly circular that I do not believe it is possible to have produced such a good article by hammering.’

^{page 143 note 2} Mr. O. Davies says of these pieces: ‘This (the unstratified piece) is of the same character as others that I have examined. It is very friable, and there are few stains of iron. I could not discover traces of gold in it, but I think it is almost certainly a gold slag.’

Of the piece from Period A: ‘This slag is almost exactly the same as the last, except that it is rather darker, which indicates perhaps the presence of a little more iron in combination; but nothing should be made of this, and though I could find no traces of gold, I feel certain that it is not to be separated from the other slags above.’

^{page 144 note 1} Mr. O. Davies writes: ‘Externally this looked like a large lump of earth stained with copper carbonate; but when cleaned it turned out to be a portion of a blade in shape trapezoidal, about I inch long and ½ inch broad at the narrowest end. It was impossible to make out definitely if it was broken, but it appeared to have an edge at the smaller end and along one side.”

No Sb., Aq., Bi., Ni.

^{page 144 note 2} ‘The original was entirely rusted away and only stains were left.

The piece was so rusted that it was very difficult to say what the original character of the metal was. But both zinc and tin do not dissolve, and as calamine was not intentionally added to copper until very late Greek times and zinc percentages were never very high before that, it is probable that the tin figures should be marked down also, and the piece is copper, not bronze. The iron percentage is high, but it is quite likely that some was introduced from water or the earth with which the specimen was inextricably mixed. The silica estimate represents this earthy matter.’ (O. Davies.)

^{page 144 note 3} ‘The piece was completely converted into CuO, and there were traces of CuCo³ all through.

This may be described as a poor-tin bronze, as probably a certain amount of copper has dissolved away.’ (O. Davies.)

^{page 145 note 1} ‘Also a poor-tin bronze.’ (O. Davies.)

^{page 145 note 2} ‘This is probably copper, with some old scraps of metal introduced, which accounts for the tin percentage.’ (O. Davies.)

^{page 147 note 1} Cf. Rey, , Observations, B.C.H. xli–xliii, p. 154Google Scholar, note 2.

^{page 147 note 2} Information kindly supplied by Lt.-Col. A. J. Peile, R.A.

^{page 147 note 3} Of these Mr. W. N. Edwards writes: ‘All those that are at all identifiable seem to belong to a species of oak, which, from a consideration of the oaks still found in the neighbourhood, might be Quercus lanuginosa.’

^{page 147 note 4} B.S.A. xxvii, pp. 1–66Google Scholar.

^{page 147 note 5} Antiq. Journal, vi, pp. 59–72Google Scholar.

^{page 147 note 6} Excavated 1929 by the British School at Athens. Not yet published.

^{page 147 note 7} B.C.H. 41–43, 1917–1919, PP. 143. 154Google Scholar.

^{page 147 note 8} To these may be added, in W. Macedonia, Sérvia and Armenochóri (excavated by the British School in 1930, 1931 respectively).

^{page 148 note 1} Cf. Chalcidice, p. 185.

^{page 148 note 2} I.e. the makers of Minyan pottery.

^{page 149 note 1} Or rather, Proto-Geometric.

^{page 149 note 2} And in W. Macedonia, at Palaiográtsiano in the Haliakmon valley.

^{page 149 note 3} i.e. South Greek.

^{page 149 note 4} Cf. Chalcidice, Fig. 14 (b).