My drawing (Fig. 1) shows a tentative restoration of tomb S 201 at Cyrene, and Fig. 2 its plan. In Cassels's catalogue of the Cyrene tombs, which recognizes its importance, it is described simply as a built rectangular tomb and marked as such on his map. My investigations suggest that it is rather more complicated, and belongs to a specialized class of tomb of considerable architectural interest.

The present condition of the tomb can be seen in Plate 44, a. Part of the walling is still upright, but most of the superstructure has collapsed, encumbering the ruins. This, together with the very short time at my disposal, made it impossible to carry out a complete investigation, which would require clearing the tomb and arranging the various fallen blocks accessibly. Nevertheless the tomb is important enough to deserve a study based on the information available, even though, inevitably, some of the details will have to remain conjectural.

The tomb comprises a rectangular forecourt excavated into the rock, which here forms a virtually level ground surface, and a rock-cut chamber opening off its north-west side. This is the normal practice at Cyrene when rock-cut tombs are constructed on the level parts of the plateau. I could not take full measurements of the court; its width is a little under 12 metres, other details being obscured by fallen masonry and silt.

The graves published here lie in a group by the junction of the main Knossos–Heraklion road and the secondary road to Ambelakia (Fig. 1). In May 1939 workmen widening the road to Ambelakia uncovered a tomb (Tomb I) which was cleared by the British School's Curator at Knossos, Mr. R. W. Hutchinson. In the summer of the same year the late Mr. T. J. Dunbabin, then Assistant Director of the British School, excavated five other tombs (Tombs II–VI) in the roadside. During the war a rectangular pit was dug near the road-corner by the occupying forces in Crete, presumably for a shelter which was never constructed. The pit revealed at least two other tombs whose contents were taken to Heraklion. The vases were subsequently removed from the island but for two which the ephor, Dr. N. Platon, rescued for the museum, and which he has kindly permitted me to publish here (Vases A and B). In September 1953 I excavated the dromoi of the two tombs which had been in the pit and cleared a side chamber in one of them (Tomb VIII), as well as a small tomb which had been partially disturbed by the pit (Tomb VII).

Towards the end of Schliemann's excavations at Mycenae in 1877 a small group of gold objects was found, in the region just south of the Grave Circle, by his engineer Drosinos and the Greek archaeologist Stamatakis. Owing to the circumstances of its discovery, this find received less mention than its importance deserved, and, while individual objects from it have been frequently referred to and illustrated, its existence as a closed group has been obscured, and is not even recognised in the inventory or arrangement of the Athens National Museum. Consequently its exact nature and chronological place at Mycenae have never been defined; Schliemann himself, Tsountas and Wace thought it the remains of a Shaft Grave that was partially plundered and destroyed when a drain was built across it in LH III (see BSA XXV p. 119 and plan, Pl. I). Schuchhardt, followed by Stais in the Museum Catalogue, thought it a hoard, and Karo considers it a parallel to the Tiryns Treasure. It has been suggested to me by Professor Wace that a further study and more adequate illustration of these objects might decide this point and also discover some grounds for assigning them to a definite place in the chronological order of Mycenae finds.

Several fragments of 4th-century BC Athenian decree-inscriptions are discussed. Joins are made between IG ii2. 13a and 68 and Hesperia, 40, no. 3; IG ii2. 257 and 300; 242 and 373; 407 and SEG 32. 94; IG ii2. 309 and 552; 530 and 590. Attributed to the same stele, but not joining, are IG ii2. 139 and 289; 277 and 428; 540a and SEG 24. 117; IG ii2. 540b and Hesperia, 21, no. 17; IG ii2. 286 and 625; 414a and 403; 398a (+ 438) and 612; 484 and 558; 489 and 532; 495 and 709; 405 and Hesperia, 4, no. 32. Other decrees discussed, mainly in light of the work of A.S. Henry on the formulae of Athenian decrees, are IG ii2. 44; 81; 121; 129; 147; 154; 155; 156; 285+ 414d; 321; 335; 364; 406; 416; 1001; and SEG 21. 362 and 25. 85.

In a previous article I argued that the one major stratified deposit published as LH I and accepted as such by Furumark, from Korakou, was in fact late LH IIA, and considered the implications of this redating for the development of LH II. If this view is accepted, it raises the question: what, then, is LH I ? In this article I wish to describe what I believe to be LH I; as I am not able to make use of a good closed deposit, I shall rely largely upon published material, much of which I have seen or handled, identified by style, shape, and features of manufacture. Since photographs of this material are readily accessible in well-known publications, I show only a few characteristic pieces (plate 20).

Hoards of metalwork are a common feature of the Bronze Age cultures of Europe and some of them have received a detailed treatment in recent years. Such hoards are relatively rare in the Aegean Early Bronze Age however, and in publishing the Kythnos hoard Dr. Renfrew could only point to three other hoards of third millennium date from the Aegean. Two of these indeed are still unpublished, so that the publication of the complete hoard from Kythnos is an invaluable addition to our previous knowledge. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to four groups of metal objects which the writer believes to represent metal hoards of this period, and to discuss the composition and nature of these and the four hoards which Renfrew described.

In BSA 74 (1979) 1–80, an account was given of MM III and LM I buildings and their contents uncovered in 1975 at Knossos during a rescue excavation undertaken by the British School, in the northern half of the Staphylakis field, on the south-east flank of the acropolis (Site Plan, Fig. 1). In that account reference was made (p. 4) to the discovery of other ancient features within the heavily ploughed area. The more important of these finds are briefly described in what follows, to complete the summary publication of the results of the 1975 operation.

Full details of the circumstances in which this investigation was undertaken are given in BSA 74, together with acknowledgements to all those who assisted the authors on the site and in the preparation of the material for publication. A brief account of the whole excavation appeared in AR 1976–77.

In the Stratigraphical Museum at Knossos the material preserved from the excavations of Cists 2 to 6 in Magazine XIII consists largely of fragments of unfinished stone vases and waste pieces from the manufacture of stone vases. The material is all gypsum and is what remains of a gypsum vase-maker's workshop. No account of it has previously been given, though one ‘trial piece’ that almost certainly belonged with it was published by Evans because he believed it bore a Linear A inscription (see below). The present article publishes the material and discusses two questions arising from it, namely the additional information the workshop provides in relation to that of other Cretan stone vase workshops, and the relation between the workshop and gypsum stone vases.

The two most important Fikellura vase painters are here studied and their works catalogued. The earlier of the two, the Altenburg Painter, was recognized first by R. M. Cook (BSA 34 (1933–4) 1–98), but the number of vases attributed to this painter has greatly increased and now includes some of the earliest Fikellura vases with figure decoration. His career covers most of the third quarter of the sixth century. The second painter, named the Painter of the Running Satyrs, is studied for the first time here. His production spans most of the fourth quarter of the century. Although not very numerous, his vases have novel themes and show a vigorous figure style. The study of these two painters' careers helps in dating some of Cook's various groups of Fikellura vases and clarifies their relationship with the work of these painters. The source of most Fikellura is now seen to be Miletus, but the question of the origin or antecedents of Fikellura pottery is still not entirely settled. Some explanation is, however, offered for the sudden appearance of this ware about the mid sixth century.

Working from an inscription discovered in Athens nearly 20 years ago, suggestions have been recently made by Robertson, Shear, and Dontas for the proper placement of the Archaic agora and for the Aglaurion, Prytaneion, Theseion, and Anakeion. Based upon these recent suggestions, we may now propose a location for the Archaic Altars of the Dread Goddesses (Semnai Theai) and for the route that Kylon's followers took down from the Akropolis before they were murdered in the aftermath of their conspiracy c. 632 BC.

In March 1937 peasant digging on the lower south-east slope of Monasteriako Kephali, by Knossos, discovered various sherds which included a few kiln wasters. It was clear that there had been a kiln site near and it seemed best to try to find it at once and so anticipate its being accidentally destroyed. Mr. Hutchinson, Mr. Dunbabin and a few students, including myself, supervised a brief excavation. A short description of the remains of the two kilns discovered appeared in the JHS summary of that year's excavations. Before the war I had intended to publish a further short account of the site and of some pottery connected with it; and in spite of the loss of some relevant notes and illustrations in the intervening years it still seems worth recording such data as I have.

Rearrangement of the Stratigraphical Museum at Knossos, emergency digs, chance finds, and interrupted projects of study have combined to leave the author with material which is largely disjointed though some can be welded into cohesive units. Presented partly in the form of a catalogue and partly as expanded notes, it may be useful to those working in the various periods and fields of Minoan studies.

The catalogue below covers some of the finds preserved in the Stratigraphical Museum from the excavations of Evans and Curators at Knossos, which they did not publish or which have been subsequently restored; to these have been added more recent chance finds and objects from emergency excavations in the Knossos area for which the author was responsible. This is followed by an account of some of Evans's deposits from the Palace which have a bearing on the relationship of MM IIIB and LM IA pottery.

This paper publishes the results of excavations of the Kephala Tholos tomb and its immediate vicinity, north of the palace of Knossos, carried out by R. W. Hutchinson in 1938–9. It presents the ceramic and osteological data from the excavations and an architectural study of the tomb structure. The analysis addresses the contentious issue of the dating of the construction of the Tholos, arguing for an LM II date on the basis of the material evidence. It also discusses the equally interesting subsequent history of reuse of the tomb, during phases of LM III and as late as the Protogeometric period, and sets this within the broader context of changing burial practices at Knossos. It considers especially possible motivations for periodic reuse of the Kephala site in terms of strategic appeals to the past, within different political and cultural contexts, from LM II onwards.

The present study explores the possible interpretation of the terracotta cylindrical models found in Late Minoan to Early Iron Age contexts (generally known as “(circular) hut models”) as reduced-scale models of tholos tombs. Theoretical issues concerning the relationship of an ‘architectural model’ with the archaeological context in which it is found are examined in order to support the above-mentioned suggestion. Archaeological data concerning the morphology, chronology, distribution, use and significance of the Late Minoan and Early Iron Age tholos tombs are explored in order to contribute to the discussion. The possible connection between the presence of the LM III tomb models in domestic contexts and the absence of contemporary intramural burials allows us to expand on the possible significance of these artefacts for our knowledge of LM mortuary practices and beliefs, especially those concerning the possible practice of ‘ancestor worship’. The presence of terracotta figurines of the ‘Minoan Goddess with Upraised Arms’ type attached in the interior of two examples (from SM Knossos and PG B Archanes) is considered as a late development within the tradition of these models and linked with the practice of placing MGUA figures in Early Iron Age tholos tombs (Rhotasi, Kourtes).

Recent years have seen the publication of two demotic Greek craft-manuals from the Middle Ages; or perhaps we might say from the Renaissance, for in both books the connections with Western European ideas and practices are clear. The first is a Portolano, a mariner's guide in the tradition stretching back at least to Hellenistic times, and brought up to date by successive generations of sea-captains until its form was crystallized in sixteenth-century Venetian editions. The other is a Shipwright's Manual dealing with the rigging of a sailing-ship, with the names and measures of all its sails and cordage.

To these is now added a third, a Gunner's Manual, shorter than the other texts, but in some ways more interesting. For although, as in the others, the material forces it to be repetitive and tabular, it is not so forbiddingly technical; and the beginning and the end have a greater freedom of matter which brings the language very close to the style and cadences of ordinary speech—a rarity in Renaissance Greek.

The manuscript in which it is found is catalogued as number 23 of the collection once formed by Archbishop Laud, and now in the Bodleian Library. The paper is uniform throughout, and the contents are as follows:

(i) foll. 1r–26r, A Shipwright's Manual. I hope to deal on another occasion with its relationship to the texts used by Delatte. The work is very corrupt and presents great difficulties. At the beginning are the words: ‘κύριε κατευόδωνε τὸν δοῦλόν σου Νικόλαον Σκούρα’.

Questions were raised in the past regarding the use of Mycenaean tiles as ‘roof tiles’ on the basis of the small numbers of them recovered in excavations and their overall scarcity in Mycenaean domestic contexts. The investigation of the Theodorou plot in 2008 in the southern part of the Kadmeia hill at Thebes yielded the single and, so far, largest known assemblage per square metre of Mycenaean tiles from a well-documented excavation. This material allows, for the first time convincingly, to identify the existence of a Mycenaean tiled roof. This paper presents the results of our work on the Theodorou tiles, placing emphasis on their construction, form and modes of production, offering the most systematic study of Mycenaean tiles to date. It also revisits contexts of discovery of similar material from excavations across Thebes. Popular as tiles might have been in Boeotia, and despite their spatially widespread attestation, their use in Aegean Late Bronze Age architecture appears, on the whole, irregular with central Greece and the north-east Peloponnese being the regions with the most sites known to have yielded such objects. Mycenaean roof tiles date mostly from the mid- and late fourteenth century bc to the twelfth century bc. A study of their construction, form, production and contexts suggests that their role, apart from adding extra insulation, might have been one of signposting certain buildings in the landscape. We also present the idea that Mycenaean tile-making was guided by a particular conventional knowledge which was largely influenced by ceramic-related technologies (pottery- and drain-making). While production of roof tiles might have been palace-instigated to begin with, it does not appear to have been strictly controlled. This approach to Mycenaean tile-making may also help explain their uneven (in terms of intensity of use) yet widespread distribution.

The inscribed fragments here published were discovered in the third season of the excavations at Palaikastro. We knew already that a Hellenic temple had stood on the site of the Minoan town. The building itself had been destroyed, but architectural terracottas, bronze shields, and other votive offerings were found near the surface in sufficient numbers to indicate its position, while a bed of ashes fixed that of the altar. The finding among its scattered débris of a Hymn addressed to Zeus of Dikte furnished a welcome identification. It left no doubt that our temple was the temple of Diktaean Zeus which is several times mentioned in the famous award of the Magnesian Arbitrators in the frontier dispute between Itanos and Hierapytna, and that the plain of Palaikastro was the Heleia which both cities claimed.

Despite the old image of degradation and fall, modern research has shown that Roman Greece underwent a series of changes which are best reflected in the central public space of the ancient city, the agora. A variety of different factors, such as the dynamic presence of the local elite, the exploitation of the past, the imperial presence and most importantly the will to maximise functionality and monumentality, contributed to the formation of the spatial and architectural framework of the agora. In many cities the development of the agora is best described as the juxtaposition of old and new, which was achieved by the preservation and enhancement of the traditional landscape as well as by its enrichment with new buildings, many of which, like the Roman-style baths, improved the provision of services. In this context the term Romanisation describes the effort of each city to adapt to the requirements of the urban framework of the Imperial period, a framework characterised by monumentality and functionality. Roman colonies were the newest additions in the city pattern of Greece. In contrast to the Roman colonies in the west, many of the Roman foundations in Greece were founded over pre-existing cities with long histories. Therefore, they raise a series of questions concerning not only their architectural development but also the process of restructuring the existing landscape in order to create an urban framework that reflects their romanitas.

Drawing upon the mapping of ceramic distribution patterns, this article analyses the dynamics of the settlement pattern of the Late Roman hinterland of the Skouriotissa copper mine, the largest in Cyprus, and its relationship to the nearest city, Soli. This article contextualises the hinterland in relation to the copper-producing landscapes of Cyprus to the east and south, and supra-regionally in relation to the cities on the south coast of Asia Minor as well as chronologically and geographically in relation to the Early Roman ceramic zones defined by previous research. Although the regional coherence of the Hellenistic to Early Roman period is to some extent intact in the Late Roman period, the analysis suggests that the Late Roman hinterland of Skouriotissa demonstrates some organisational peculiarities for which an explanation is sought in the extraordinary resources of the region.

As a result of their alliances with Rome in the first two wars with Macedon, the Attalids made a number of small territorial gains in the western Aegean. Among these was the island of Aigina, which was captured by the Romans in 210 B.C., during the First Macedonian War, passed into the possession of the Aitolians in accordance with the terms of their treaty with Rome, and was finally purchased from them by Attalos I of Pergamon for the sum of thirty talents (Polyb. xxii. 8. 10): Αἰτωλοί, κύριοι γενόμενοι τῆς πόλεως κατὰ τὰς πρὸς Ῥωμαίους συνθήκας, Ἀττάλῳ παραδοῖεν, τριάκοντα τάλαντα παρ᾿ αὐτοῦ λαβόντες. This action requires some explanation, especially as the issue has been obscured by the widely held view that Attalos' fleet took part in the capture of the island; some clarification can be found in the literary accounts referring to Attalos' activity during the first years of his involvement in the war. Rome, as is well known, avoided total commitment in Greece even after Laevinus' treaty of 212/11.