The Linear B administrative texts of Late Bronze Age Greece were written on clay tablets, whose production therefore formed the first stage in the process of document creation, though it generally remains unclear whether the tablets’ writers were also their makers. This study combines experimental archaeology with autopsy of the tablets from Pylos in order to investigate the methods by which the Linear B tablets were created at this site. It thereby sheds light not only on the physical processes involved in shaping the clay, but also on the decisions involved on the part of the tablet-makers, and hence on the relationship between the ‘making’ and ‘writing’ stages of the process of creating the Linear B documents.

During the archaeological survey research project ‘Island Cultures in a Diachronic Perspective: the case of Therasia’, large amounts of pottery were recorded throughout the island of Therasia, ranging in date from the Bronze Age to modern times. Focusing on the prehistoric period, pottery of the Early Cycladic and late Middle Cycladic periods was recovered at Panaghia Koimisis, which is situated on the southern part of the island. This paper presents the petrographic data and results of the analysis carried out on pottery samples which are representative of variable surface treatments and different macro-fabrics of these two prehistoric periods. Tackling issues of provenance and technology, the current scientific analysis attests the coexistence of Theran and off-Theran pottery fabrics already at Panaghia Koimisis in the Early Cycladic period. The majority of the pottery fabrics at Panaghia Koimisis were identified as Theran and the analysis demonstrates intensive contacts between the southern parts of Thera and Therasia throughout the Early and late Middle Cycladic phases. Moreover, adding support to previous studies, this research indicates a wide Cycladic pottery network, in which the site participated as a consumer. During the late Middle Cycladic period major changes in the Theran production are documented, including the disappearance of the earlier pottery recipe, which had been prevalent at Panaghia Koimisis.

Under the same title M. M. Vasić published an article forty years ago, which was then the first step towards a systematic study of the connections between the Aegean area and the Serbian and North Balkan spheres. M. Vasić's article was the first result of the first systematic researches at Vinča, the most important site of the Northern Balkans. From this time on many excavations have been made at Vinč and other prehistoric sites, and the material has piled up too rapidly for scientific evaluation to cope with. As the past forty years, ending with World War II and the subsequent events in Yugoslavia, must no doubt be reckoned an entire phase in the history of this study, it seems appropriate now to attempt to give a summary of the results so far gained.

The Petrota chert source, in Greek Thrace, was exploited in the Middle Palaeolithic and again in the Neolithic and the beginning of the Early Bronze Age. An extensive scatter of products of that exploitation today surrounds the source. The site was systematically surveyed between 1998 and 2010. The present paper is devoted exclusively to the issue of the chronology of the Middle Palaeolithic component. The best, though still imperfect, indicator of chronology is the presence in the scatter of bifacially flaked leaf-points. A review of the literature on the chronostratigraphy of such artefacts in Europe, from Thuringia to Crimea, shows that they had a long career. They first appeared about 200,000 years ago and were still manufactured about 45,000 years ago. On the basis of various considerations, it is suggested that the leaf-points of Petrota and, accordingly, the Palaeolithic component at the site, belong to an advanced stage of that long period, probably dating between roughly 100,000 and 45/40,000 years ago.

The valley is 12 km in length and is divided by a watershed at 550 m. from basins draining northwards to the Mesara Plain. The study area forms the southernmost part of the catchment, draining south, by the A. Kyriaki River, to the Libyan Sea. The river and several of its tributaries are ephemeral (Fig. 2).

It is evident that the geology of the area dictates the shape of the land, and in the past, as now, controlled the quantity of flat land available for settlement and cultivation.

Samples of seventeen painted Geometric vases from Veii in southern Etruria were subjected to Mössbauer analysis, a technique that has recently achieved the notoriously elusive distinction between LG made at and imported to Pithekoussai. The two main groups (A, B) and three subgroups (B-i, B-ii, B-iii) established analytically at Veii are compared with the identifications proposed on stylistic grounds for the same pieces by J.-P. Descœudres and R. Kearsley in BSA 78 (1983) 9–53. Only the five non-calcareous samples in group A appear to qualify for imported Euboean status; of the calcareous subgroups, B-i (four samples) is tentatively equated with Veii itself and B-ii (four samples) with mainland Campania; no provenance can as yet be assigned to B-iii (two samples); there are two ‘rogues’. Agreement with Descœudres and Kearsley is possible on six samples, and partially so on three more; disagreement is total in the six cases where the origin is defined stylistically as Greek and analytically as Italian (or vice versa). In view of the current shortage of comparable Mössbauer analyses, the authors stress the need for caution in interpreting the present results, and refer briefly to the circumstances in which some ‘Euboean Geometric’ from western sites might have been made by immigrant potters.

This deposit is one of a series of stratified groups from the recent excavations at Mycenae' which should form the basis for a closer definition of the pottery sequence there than has been possible before; it should also help with the identification of the sequence elsewhere, particularly in the Argolid.

It was found in a room in the ‘House with the Idols’ (Citade lHouse) constructed at or very near the beginning of the period defined as L.H. IIIB 1, and seems to be household rubbish which accumulated during a span of some years; subsequently it was covered by an inserted wall before the conflagration during the period L.H. IIIB 2 which destroyed so many of the buildings at Mycenae. The deposit consists of a small but distinctive quantity of painted wares, largely open shapes, and a large group of unpainted pottery including many whole profiles. Its date is clearly within L.H. IIIB 1, with ‘Zygouries’ type kylikes, ‘open style’ deep bowls, and only slight evidence for the presence of deep bowls with monochrome interiors and none for ‘rosette’ bowls, two of the main criteria for the subsequent period. In my opinion it represents, when viewed as a whole, a slightly later stage of development than the group published in BSA lxi by Mrs. French, there seem to be fewer of the elements surviving from earlier, and a rather more limited range of patterns. The various stages of deposition cover an unknown period of time, ending perhaps as late as the beginning of L.H. IIIB 2. Despite the small number of pieces it may be that this is a more typical selection of L.H. IIIB 1 pottery than the group previously published.

The main epigraphic evidence for the water-supply of Aphrodisias in Roman times is to be found in the fragmentary inscriptions published by Doublet and Deschamps in BCH XIV (1890), 611–13, nos. 7–10, and CIG 2782, ll. 40–2. From the former group of texts it has been assumed that two water-systems were installed, one in the time of Vespasian and the other in the time of Domitian; I hope to show that these texts refer to one water-system only, that built in the time of Domitian. From the latter passage it has sometimes been thought that M. Ulpius Carminius Claudianus paid for the laying-on of the waters of the river Timeles to the city in the age of the Antonines. This assumption rested on the false reading ὲλ[ειο]δ[ι]ὰκτο[υ]ς introduced by Boeckh. The word ὲλειοδὶὰκτος is taken to mean a ‘conduit for draining marshes’ (LS9, s.v.). Sherard's copy preserves the true reading ἒλ <α> ια δρακτοῖς πολλὰκις τεθεικὸτα. All that can be proved by the inscription is that Carminius Claudianus made several distributions of oil ὲν τῶ̣ καιρῶ̣ τῆς τοῦ Τε<ι>μὲλου ποταμοῦ εἰσαγωγῆς (l. 41); there is no proof that he paid for the construction of the aqueduct.

The epigraphic evidence for the earlier water-system rests on the reconstruction of the text of which BCH XIV (1890), 611–13, nos. 7 (cf. REG XIX (1906), 223–4, no. 126), 8 and 9 are fragments; no. 10 seems to be part of another copy of this, or a similar, inscription. Of these fragments the only one found by the expedition led by Professor Calder in 1934 was no. 7; the improved readings in this inscription are from a photograph.

I discuss four Linear A axe-head inscriptions. Two of them have not previously been published, one is discussed (though without a photograph) in AE 1953–4 (ii), 64 by N. K. Boufides, and one, though published by Evans in his first article on Cretan script before his excavations at Knossos (JHS xiv (1894), 280), is referred to neither in S.M. i nor by Carratelli. Its attribution to Linear A is probable but not certain.

Four letters written in 1879, 1880, and 1884, by Thomas B. Sandwith, the British Consul in Crete, to the British Museum throw light on the early history of the site of the Bronze Age palace at Knossos. The first of these letters (1879) contains a brief eyewitness account of the excavations of Minos Kalokairinos there in the winter of 1878–9 and urges the British Museum to continue his work. The two later letters (1884) deal with his gift of a pithos from the palace excavations to the Museum. The letters also refer to clandestine excavations in the Sanctuary of Demeter at Knossos.

As a rule, it is extremely difficult to distinguish the boundary between legend and history. In the case of Lemnos, however, this difficulty does not arise chiefly owing to a lack of material, as very little is known about the early days of the island, and, as far as our knowledge goes at present, the first date in its history is B.C. 512. At this time it was still independent, and though, no doubt, Athenians lived in the island, there was no official connection between Lemnos and Athens. Athens was at war with Persia, and Darius sent Otanes, who was in command of the Persian forces on the sea coast of Asia Minor, on a punitive expedition. As a result of the invasion of Thrace and Macedonia by Megabazus, Lemnos with several of the other Aegaean islands came under the Persian rule; but the islanders did not surrender without a struggle and put up a very gallant fight.

In the summer of 1975 the owner of a small estate on the eastern slopes of Lower Gypsadhes decided to build a private road upslope to a belvedere overlooking the palace area. In the course of grading, several archaeological features were damaged before work was halted by the intervention of the Antiquities Guard. The Ephor of Antiquities at Herakleion then asked the British School to undertake rescue excavations in the area, and the Director of the School requested that I investigate the most important of the damaged constructions, an Iron Age chamber tomb.

About half-way along the course of the new road was a large area covered with the shattered remains of Geometric and Orientalizing vessels, but no sign of a tomb remained above ground. Preliminary excavation revealed the cause of this pattern.

This article deals with the finds from a cist grave which is located in the bed of the River Xerias at Argos. The grave was in use during the fourth century bc for multiple burials, a usual practice for Argive cemeteries. The burials are presented in chronological order based on the interpretation of the excavation data and the chronology of the pottery. The finds from the grave reveal hitherto unknown burial practices at Argos; however, our limited knowledge on the cemeteries of the Late Classical period impedes assessment of them. The study of the vases from the tomb illuminates the otherwise unknown makeup of the local workshops in the fourth century bc, where influences from abroad coexist harmoniously alongside experimentation and novelty.

If we look at the aryballos represented in the field of our vase (Pl. III), we ask ourselves what the tags are which we see hanging on the shoulder. This question involves another, how the aryballos was carried. I shall try to answer both questions.

The old, Corinthian type of aryballos was suspended by its big, solid handle, through which a cord or string was passed.

The Attic type, on the other hand, was carried by a cord tied round the neck of the vase. That is the rule, even when there are handles. Such handles are narrow and consequently fragile; and there was no reason to reject a perfectly satisfactory method of suspension because of a change in detail.

I. The simplest way is as follows. Make a loop in a cord, knotting the cord at a (Fig. 1, 1). See that the loose ends are of the same length. Then pass the ends round the neck of the vase, and make another knot on the other side at b (Fig. 1, 2). Two ends thus hang down from the neck, on the side opposite to the loop by which the vase is carried. Seen in profile : Fig. 1, 3. As soon as you carry the vase, it naturally tips up (Fig. 1, 4) (just as the Corinthian type did which was carried by the handle).

Two inscriptions commemorating the battle of Marathon and set up soon after 490 have come down to us. Both are epigrams and both have profited by recent discovery and research. The one, IG I2 763, has had its left-hand portion added by a fortunate find in the Agora, giving the beginnings of four hexameters: the other, IG I2 609, an inscribed column formerly carrying a statue, has now, as a result of recent study, been reunited with the dedication it once bore, a winged woman, a Nike, it is thought. The group is one of the more spectacular fruits of the long-sustained and still continuing attempt to reunite the scattered pieces of the ‘Perserschutt’. The reasons for dealing again with this latter dedication are new readings offered as a result of an examination of the inscription in the Epigraphical Museum in Athens.

The following is an account of several excavations that I undertook on behalf of Professor Wace during the seasons of 1952 and 1953 at Mycenae. These were roughly confined to the area between the so-called Tombs of Clytemnestra and Aegisthus, but also included an extension to the east of the Perseia Fountain House, excavated in 1952. The excavations are dealt with under four sections which are as follows:

1. Area Z (the extension east of the Perseia Fountain House).

2. The East–West Wall (south of the Perseia Fountain House).

3. The area round the Tomb of Aegisthus.

4. The Great Poros Wall (on the east flank of the Tomb of Clytemnestra).

The epigraphic record of Miletus records an eminent family using the names Iphicrates, Menestheus, and Zopyros. The name Iphicrates is not common: it is suggested that it passed into the family after a member of it served under the Athenian general Iphicrates, whose second son was called Menestheus. Apollonios son of Menestheus, strategos of Koile Syria and Phoenicia under Seleucus IV, is probably a descendant of this Milesian family.