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: 27 September 2013
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.
2 See Hood, S. and Smyth, D., Archaeological Survey of the Knossos Area (BSA Supplementary Volume 14; London, 1981), 35 no. 17Google Scholar.
3 KT.
4 Cadogan 1967; Popham 1977, 186–8 and fig. 1 c and pl. 26 c–d; Popham 1978, 185 and fig. 1 e.
5 A report to the British School by Hutchinson, dated 13 Nov. 1945, records that ‘The Tholos on Paspati's land on the Kephala was saved from destruction by the Germans owing to the efforts of Mr Platon; and is in excellent condition’ (BSA archives: Knossos Correspondence 1940–59: folder ‘1945’). A later and more detailed report, presumably also written by Hutchinson, included the following information: ‘The tholos tomb excavated in 1938–9 would also have been destroyed but for the energetic protests of Mr. Platon, the Ephor of Antiquities for Crete. It is impossible to speak too highly of the manner in which the Ephor stood up to the German authorities in defence of his antiquities and his museum; his most remarkable performance was his prevention of a battle between the Germans and the “Andartes” on the site of Knossos just before the German retirement from the Heraklion zone, a battle which probably would have resulted in the complete destruction of the Palace of Minos’ (BSA archives: Knossos Correspondence 1940–59: folder ‘1948’).
6 The ceramic material studied at the Stratigraphical Museum at Knossos is listed in Appendix 1 (excavation codes 1938/3 and 1939/2). Correspondence from the Wace Archive (094) was consulted, and the following material in the BSA archives: the excavation notebooks of V. Fisher (Cat. Nos. Knossos 66 and 67) and V. R. Desborough (Day Books 8 and 20); notebooks of R. W. Hutchinson (Cat. Nos. Knossos 65(2) and 292); plans and photographs (Knossos Cat. 347; and in Box 3 ‘Knossos Minoan Cemeteries’: ‘Tholos 1938/9 Tholos and dromos’, ‘Tholos 1938/9 Filling’ and ‘Kephala Tholos’); and general correspondence (Knossos Excavations 1920–1970; Knossos Correspondence 1930–39; Knossos Correspondence 1940–59; Desborough Correspondence 1938–77). G. Cadogan kindly provided written notes on the small finds by V. Fisher and R. W. Hutchinson.
7 These pits have been infilled since the excavation, so their locations as marked in FIG. 1 are based on the original tomb plan presented in KT, 75 fig. 1.
8 Excavation commenced on 5 Dec. 1938. In letters to G. M. Young (the BSA Director) dated 6 Dec. 1938 and 21 May 1939 respectively, Hutchinson described the tholos as ‘probably MM III–LM I A in date’ and ‘not later than LM I A’ (BSA archives: Knossos Correspondence 1930–9: folders ‘1938’ and ‘1939’).
9 KT, 78.
10 Popham cites ‘joining sherds’ as supporting a LM II date, though no more details are given—Popham, M., ‘Review of R. W. Hutchinson's “Prehistoric Crete”’, JHS 84 (1964), 209–10, at 210Google Scholar; see also Popham 1977, 186. Hood also advocates a LM II date, on the basis of the Palace Style Jar sherds—Hood, S., The Minoans: Crete in the Bronze Age (London, 1971), 59Google Scholar. Pelon advocates either a LM I B or LM II date—Pelon 1976, 422 and n. 7.
11 Pelon 1976, 419–23.
12 Wace, A. J. B., ‘Report of the School excavations at Mycenae, 1921–1923’, BSA 25 (1923), at 284–5Google Scholar; Cavanagh, W. and Laxton, R., ‘Corbelled vaulting in the Late Minoan tholos tombs of Crete’, BSA 77 (1982), 65–77Google Scholar; Voutsaki, S., ‘Mortuary evidence, symbolic meanings and social change: a comparison between Messenia and the Argolid in the Mycenaean Period’, in Branigan, K. (ed.), Cemetery and Society in the Aegean Bronze Age (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology, 1; Sheffield, 1998), 41–58Google Scholar.
13 KT, 76.
14 This dating is given in a later publication: Hutchinson, R. W., Prehistoric Crete (Harmondsworth, 1962), 290Google Scholar.
15 See Preston, L., ‘Mortuary practices and the negotiation of social identities at LM II Knossos’, BSA 94 (1999), 131–43, at 135 n. 23Google Scholar.
16 Evans, A., The Prehistoric Tombs of Knossos, ii: The Royal Tomb of Isopata (London, 1906), 136–72, at 166Google Scholar; also PM iii. 244Google Scholar.
17 Although Hood does not challenge this hypothesis; see Hood, S., ‘Mason's marks in the palaces’, in Hägg, R. and Marinatos, N. (eds), Function of the Minoan Palaces (Stockholm, 1987), 205–12, at 205Google Scholar.
18 As also observed by Pelon 1976, 421.
19 KT, 78.
20 KT, 77. This deposit of 25 sherds seems to have occurred in grave delta; this is described later in the report (KT, 79) as having produced 23 MM III sherds, but a letter from Hutchinson to Wace (19 Mar. 1939, at p. 8) cites the grave as containing 25 MM sherds.
21 As also noted by Pelon 1976, 422, and Schachermeyr, F. (‘Forschungsbericht zur Ägäischen Frühzeit 1957–1960’, AA 1962, 105–382, at 144Google Scholar).
22 See also Pelon 1976, 422 and Hood, S., ‘Tholos tombs of the Aegean’, Antiquity, 34 (1960), 166–76, at 169 n. 13CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
23 See, for example, PM ii. 287, and PM iv. 283 and 887.
24 Fitton, J. L., The Discovery of the Bronze Age (London, 2001), 154–5Google Scholar.
25 Wace, A. J. B. and Blegen, C., ‘Pottery as evidence for trade and colonisation in the Aegean Bronze Age’, Klio, 32 (1939), 131–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
26 See Wace (n. 12), 292, 296 and 316 for each of the Group I tholoi.
27 As set out in Evans, A., The Shaft Graves and Bee-Hive Tombs of Mycenae and their Interrelation (London, 1929), esp. 67–9Google Scholar.
28 Letter to Young, 6 Dec. 1938 (BSA Archives: Knossos Correspondence 1930–39).
29 This possibility was occasionally voiced, however, for example by Blegen, C. (‘The coming of the Greeks’, AJA 32 (1928), 146–54 at 151CrossRefGoogle Scholar), who suggested mainland domination of Crete after the fall of the Neopalatial palaces (at this time dated to the end of LM II), and by Wace, A. J. B. (cited in Pendlebury, J., The Archaeology of Crete: An Introduction (London, 1939), 229Google Scholar).
30 e.g. Popham, M., ‘Late Minoan II to the end of the Bronze Age’, in Evely, D., Hughes-Brock, H. and Momigliano, N. (eds), Knossos, A Labyrinth of History: Papers Presented in Honour of Sinclair Hood (London, 1994), 89–102, at 94Google Scholar. See also Popham 1964 (n. 10), 210.
31 As does Pini, I. (Beiträge zur minoischen Gräberkunde (Wiesbaden, 1968), 47 and 83 no. VI)Google Scholar; also P. Rehak and J. Younger, though dating the tomb slightly more broadly, to ‘MM III–LM I’ (‘Review of Aegean Prehistory VII: Neopalatial, Final Palatial and Postpalatial Crete’, in Cullen, T. (ed.), Aegean Prehistory: A Review (AJA Supplement 1; United States, 2001), 383–473, at 402Google Scholar.
32 Niemeier, W.-D., ‘The character of the Knossian palace society in the second half of the fifteenth century B.C.: Mycenaean or Minoan?’, in Krzyszkowska, O. and Nixon, L. (eds), Minoan Society: Proceedings of the Cambridge Colloquium 1981 (Bristol, 1983), 217–36, at 226Google Scholar; Niemeier, W.-D., Die Palaststilkeramik von Knossos: Stil, Chronologic und historischer Kontext (Berlin, 1985), 211–12Google Scholar; S. Hood (n. 22); Kanta, A., ‘Tholos tombs, origins and evolution’, in Driessen, J. and Farnoux, A. (eds), La Crète Mycénienne (BCH Supplement 30; Paris, 1997), 229–47Google Scholar. Kanta does not propose a date for the Kephala Tholos itself, appealing rather to evidence from Archanes Phourni and the Mesara. Here, an ongoing tradition of Cretan tholos-building and the reimportation of the idea from the mainland in LM III are both proposed, though it is not explored in detail how these two scenarios fit together.
33 e.g. Driessen, J. and Macdonald, C., ‘Some military aspects of the Aegean in the late fifteenth and early fourteenth centuries B.C.’, BSA 79 (1984), 49–74, at 65Google Scholar; Driessen, J. and Macdonald, C., The Troubled Island: Minoan Crete Before and After the Santorini Eruption (Aegaeum 17; Belgium, 1997), 28–9Google Scholar.
34 As noted in the preliminary report on the tomb in the BSA archives (Knossos Excavations 1920–1970: Knossos Excavation Reports 1935–49), at 2–3; also Desborough 8 for 14 Dec. 1938.
35 See A. Evans 1906 (n. 16) for the Isopata Royal Tomb, and Evans, A., The Tomb of the Double Axes and Associated Group, and Pillar Rooms and Ritual Vessels of the ‘Little Palace’ at Knossos (London, 1914), 6–13Google Scholar for Isopata tomb 1.
36 From a letter to Wace (19 Mar. 1939, at p. 1). It is also worth noting, though, that Fyfe observed that in the Isopata Royal Tomb, ‘the face of the stonework is not finely dressed or rubbed as is the finest Palace work at Knossos. Here tool marks are everywhere visible’ (in Evans 1906 (n. 16), at 164).
37 Isopata tomb 1 is no longer visible, but see Evans 1914 (n. 35), 8 fig. 12.
38 In fact, there were probably more smaller stones in the interstices between the blocks in the Kephala Tholos at the time of its excavation than are preserved today: a number of these, with the soil packing in which they were embedded, have probably been washed away over the past six decades of exposure to the elements.
39 From a letter to Wace (7 Jan. 1939, at p. 3). See also KT, 75–6.
40 The presence of a blocking wall at the start of the dromos is paralleled in several mainland tholoi, e.g. the Kato Phournos, Lion Tomb, Treasury of Atreus, Clytemnestra, and Tomb of the Genii tholoi at Mycenae, and the Argive Heraion (Wace 1923 (n. 12), 283–402). It is unclear, however, whether their dromoi and façades were blocked from view immediately after the first burials, or following a period when their architectural grandeur was open to view.
41 Although at least one further piece of gypsum was possibly also built into the wall of the main chamber, as noted in a letter from Fisher to Wace, dated 7 Apr. 1939, and sketches in Fisher 66, for 12 May 1939 and Desborough 8, for 5 Dec. 1938. The gypsum piece visible today above the lintel of the south side-niche in the forehall (see FIG. 1) may have been moved to its current position during the conservation and consolidation of the tomb at some point since the excavation.
42 It is worth noting that a similar explanation may also account for the comparative monumentality of the dromos (and forehall) of Isopata tomb 1: this is out of proportion with the small size of the burial chamber itself, if compared with the dimensions of the Isopata Royal Tomb, and this area may have been deliberately elaborated in order to impress a more extensive audience than might have been admitted to the interior of the tomb.
43 Hutchinson remarked in the official publication that the dromos walling was from an earlier building (KT, 76) and in an unpublished report on the tomb that the forehall material was also in secondary use (BSA archives: Knossos Excavations 1920–70: Knossos Excavation Reports 1935–49, at 1–2). A brief summary of the excavation at the back of Desborough 20, suggests that ‘many, if not all’ of the blocks used to construct the dromos and forehall are reused.
44 Letter to Wace (7 Apr. 1939). The chamber elevation in FIG. 1 shows the block which forms the lintel stone at the chamber entrance, and KT, pl. 10 a shows the exposed blocks of the forehall roof behind it. Fisher cites possible parallels from the palace's vicinity in PM ii. 520 fig. 321 and 553 fig. 350.
45 Hood, S., ‘Cretans in Laconia?’, in Sandars, J. M. (ed.), Philolakon: Lakonian Studies in Honour of Hector Catling (London, 1992), 135–9, at 137Google Scholar.
46 These are: joining fragments from a LM II–III kylix in Boxes 331 and 336 (uncatalogued); joining fragments of a LM II–III kylix in Boxes 319 and 312 (uncatalogued); non-joining sherds from a LM III A jar in Boxes 336 and 337 (P44); the lower part of a LM III C closed vessel in Boxes 312 and 318 (P74); and sherds from a LM II Palace Style Jar in Boxes 313, 318 and 337 (P27; see also below, n. 54).
47 The depth below the surface to which the material from Box 3 extends is unclear, and has only been estimated in FIG. 3.
48 KT, 77, 79. In a letter to Wace (19 Mar. 1939, at p. 5), Hutchinson says that among the datable tomb pottery, there are ‘perhaps a dozen sherds’ of MM I or II.
49 A MM I B/II rim sherd in Box 317, with light-on-dark decoration, was also noted, possibly from a bridge spouted jar. However, its provenance is unclear, as this box's contents seem to include mixed material both from the 1938 tomb excavation and the 1939 tests around the tomb (see Appendix 1).
50 These sherds were stored separately in Box 333, and no record is given of their original findspots. All the sherds pictured in KT, pl. 11 a–c are stored in this box.
51 KT, 77.
52 Hutchinson, in a letter to Wace (19 Mar. 1939, at p. 5), refers to roughly 54 sherds of ‘Palace amphorae’ retrieved from the tomb. However, Hutchinson assigns them a date-range from LM I A to LM II.
53 These were also stored separately in Box 333 (cf. n. 50).
54 See KT, 78. Vessel P27 had a particularly wide distribution: as well as sherds from grave gamma and 2.8–3.25 m depth in the chamber, two further sherds (now in Box 333) shown in a photograph sent by Fisher to Wace (letter of 23 Feb. 1939) are labelled as ‘LM II sherd from blocking wall of tholos’. The accompanying notes say that the small sherd on the right ‘came from above the capstone before we got into the tholos at all!’. These seem to be the same sherds referred to by Hutchinson in a letter to Wace (19 Mar. 1939, at p. 3) as coming from a hole at the top of the otherwise undisturbed blocking wall at the chamber entrance. Hutchinson also notes that one of these sherds joins with two sherds from the north side-niche. In short, then, this vessel appears to have had fragments scattered in the lower levels of the chamber, the entrance and the north side-niche.
55 See especially the LM III C vessels catalogued by Cadogan: P61, P64, P66–8, P70–1, P76–8, and possibly P81–2. Apart from the imported Anatolian jug (P35), the only earlier vessels from the tomb that were retrieved complete or almost complete were conical cups (both Neopalatial and LM II–III); this vessel type does generally stand a better chance of complete preservation than do many others because of its small size and sturdiness.
56 Apart from the Stratigraphical Museum material, the publication cites sherds of this date from just above the chamber floor and in grave delta (KT, 78–9).
57 The material in the Stratigraphical Museum and that studied by Cadogan derive from various levels in the chamber (at depths of 1.1 m, c. 1.3 m–2.1 m, 2.2–2.6 m and 2.8–3.25 m, as well as graves alpha and gamma). The excavation and ceramic notebooks are in broad agreement with this: Hutchinson's notebook mentions three LM III C kylix stems at c. 2.1 m depth, three small sherds in grave gamma and two joining fragments of a deep bowl at 1.75–2.1 m depth.
58 KT, 78; Cadogan 1967, 257; Desborough, V. R., The Last Mycenaeans and their Successors: an Archaeological Survey C.1200–C.1000 BC (Oxford, 1964), 179Google Scholar.
59 Fisher and Desborough noted a stirrup vase associated with bones in the NE or NW part of the chamber at about this depth (Fisher 66, sketch for 10 Dec. 1939); this is presumably P71. However, neither of these excavators referred to bowls, a second stirrup jar, or an aryballos at this depth. The association of P70 with this level is also questionable on the basis of surviving records, which state that it could derive from one of two different locations within the chamber: either below the ‘3rd bone deposit’ (significantly above c. 2.1 m depth) or near grave gamma (presumably near floor level). Also, as Cadogan observes (1967, 257), P76, if it is the same vessel as Hutchinson's ‘aryballos’, was found much lower than this level (at 3 m depth).
60 The official report does not mention this burial deposit at all. Desborough and Fisher both noted a small amphora here, Desborough associating it with a burial (Desborough 8, and Fisher 67, for 8 Dec. 1938). An excavation report in BSA archives (Knossos Excavation Reports 1935–39, at P. 2) states that ‘Under the lintel at the west entrance to the fore-hall … we found the remains of a rather disturbed burial associated with a squat stirrup-jar and a miniature amphora, both sub-Minoan in style’. The ‘stirrup-jar’ probably refers to P81, a jug found in the north side-niche on 7 Dec. 1938, though not explicitly associated with human remains by either Desborough or Fisher.
61 Desborough 8, for 8 Dec. 1938. Similarly, Desborough's comment that ‘the greatest amount of pottery [from the tomb as a whole] belongs to the LM III B period’ is probably in reference to LM III C material. Fisher writes in notes accompanying a letter to Wace (23 Feb. 1939) that ‘the majority of pottery seems to be late, that is of pottery which has been mended, and we have a few stirrup jars and deep bowls, rather approaching the Karphi material, so Vincent says’.
62 KT, 74.
63 Desborough 8, for 5 Dec. 1938.
64 Fisher 67, for 10 Dec. 1938.
65 Ibid., in a sketch of the chamber for 8 Dec. 1938.
66 KT, 77.
67 Unfortunately, it has not been possible to study this material, now housed in Heraklion Museum.
68 The only exceptions are: SF22 (ivory inlay): no. 17 in KT; SF23 (stone mould): no. 19 in KT; SF25 (sealstone): no. 18 in KT; SF28 (nautilus-shaped faience bead): no. 31 in KT; SF33 (gold ring): no. 2 in KT; SF35 (curved bronze blade): no. 6 in KT; SF37 (gold rosette): no. 3 in KT; and SF52 (gold rosette): no. 4 in KT.
69 Hutchinson notes in a report in the BSA archives (Knossos Excavation Reports 1920–1970: Knossos Excavation Reports 1935–49, at p. 3), ‘Besides the antler we also found bones of sheep and oxen and a number of olive kernels, but the animal remains were so scattered that it is difficult to say whether they had been offerings to the dead or intended for some other purpose’.
70 Desborough 8, and Fisher 67, for 10 Dec. 1938.
71 Desborough's excavation notes indicate that he photographed the stag bones, though it has not been possible so far to trace this photograph. The antler is sketched by both Desborough (8, for 14 Dec. 1938) and Fisher (67, for same date).
72 I am grateful to Dr P. Halstead for identifying these remains. Dr R. Gowland noted further faunal remains mingled with the retained human remains from the tomb: an animal tooth in one of the bags marked ‘Tholos 2.10–2.30’, and eight animal cranium fragments and animal long bone shaft fragments (very weathered) in the bag marked ‘?THOLOS? 1938/3? 2 Crania’.
73 KT, 78.
74 KT, 79.
75 Hutchinson's notebook Cat. No. 292, at p. 9.
76 KT, 79.
77 Fisher 66, for 11 May 1939.
78 The label records that they were found on 12 May 1939, with ‘top stones, in fill at S side of Tholos’. Both rods are bent. One is c. 0.09 long and 0.07 in diameter, with oval section. The other is about 0.18 long, and heavily corroded so that the original diameter is unascertainable, but it is narrower than the first and both its ends seem shaped.
79 Fisher 66, for 11 May 1939.
80 Desborough 8, for 16 and 15 May 1939 respectively.
81 KT, 79.
82 Desborough 8, for 16 May 1939. The wall is variously described as running in a westerly and north westerly direction in the notebooks, so its positioning in FIG. 3 is approximate.
83 This information from Fisher's and Desborough's excavation notebooks appears to contradict Hutchinson's note that kouskouras was reached at 0.6–0.75 m depth in all trenches (KT, 79).
84 Desborough 8, for 15 May 1939. Fisher notes an almost whole ‘calathos’ at 2.3 m depth (Fisher 66, for 15 May 1939).
85 Fisher 66, for 15 May 1939 and Desborough 8, for 15 and 16 May 1939. Fisher adds that in trench A, ‘stones and bones begin. No appreciable difference in colour but there is one in consistency’.
86 KT, 79.
87 Hutchinson's notes record ‘almost solid MM III (and earlier)’, with ‘1 LM I A sherd’ from a depth of 2–2.9 m in Trench A (Cat. No. 292, at p. 10).
88 Popham 1977. This may be the same vessel that Hutchinson describes as a ‘LM II kylix’ from this trench: notebook Cat. No. 292, p. 8.
89 Hutchinson's notebook Cat. No. 292, p. 11.
90 Desborough 8, for 13 and 19 May 1939, and Fisher 66, for 13, 15, and 16 May 1939.
91 Fisher 66, for 15 May 1939.
92 This may be intrusive, having been moved from one of the other three compartments in Box 316, all of which contained material from the tomb itself (see Appendix 1).
93 Fisher 66, for 15 May 1939.
94 These are: the Isopata Royal tomb (Evans 1906 (n. 16)), tombs 1 and 2 of the Isopata cemetery (Evans 1914 (n. 35), 6–15, 33–59), New Hospital Site tombs I, III, and V (Hood, S. and de Jong, P., ‘Late Minoan warrior-graves from Ayios Ioannis and the New Hospital Site at Knossos’, BSA 47 (1952), 243–77Google Scholar), Katsambas tombs Delta and Epsilon (Alexiou, S., Late Minoan Tombs at the Harbour-Town of Knossos (Katsambas) (Athens, 1967))Google Scholar. Katsambas tombs Alpha and Zeta (Ibid.) also produced such vessels, though it is not clear whether they were associated with the LM II or LM III A burials in these tombs.
95 See Preston, L., ‘A mortuary perspective on elites in Final and Post-palatial Crete’, AJA 108 (2004), 332 table 2Google Scholar.
96 For example, a letter from Hutchinson to Wace (18 June 1939) states that ‘There is a building of MM III–LM I date about 50 metres South East of our tholos and it is quite conceivable that material from this may be included in the tholos but if the tholos dated from LM III it seems almost incredible that it should include a fair quantity of MM III material, a few LM I A sherds and not a sherd of later date in the structure or the filling behind it’.
97 Important contributions here are the publication of one of the Poros chamber tombs (Muhly, P., Μινωιχός Λαξευτός Τάφος στον Πόϱο Ηϱαχλείου (Athens, 1992Google Scholar)) and of the MM burials at Mavro Spelio (Alberti, L., ‘Costumi funerari medio-minoici a Cnosos: la necropoli di Mavro Spelio’, SMEA 43/2 (2001), 163–87Google Scholar).
98 Preston 1999 (n. 15).
99 Compare the bull and horse remains from tholos Alpha at Archanes Phourni, from the later phase of mortuary ostentation at that centre in LM III A2 (Sakellarakis, Y. and Sapouna-Sakellaraki, E., Archanes: Minoan Crete in a New Light (Athens, 1997), 158–68Google Scholar).
100 Shaft Grave IV produced 2 gold pin heads with representations of stag antlers, a silver rhyton in the shape of a stag, and a gold signet ring depicting the hunting of a stag from a chariot. Shaft Grave III produced several gold pin heads decorated with recumbent stags (Karo, G., Die Schachtgräber von Mykenai (Munich, 1930), 50–1Google Scholar (nos. 98 45–6), 73–4 (no. 240), 75 (nos. 246–7) and 94 (no. 388).
101 Vanschoonwinkel, J., ‘Les animaux dans l'art minoen’, in Reese, D. (ed.), Pleistocene and Holocene Fauna of Crete and its First Settlers (Madison, 1996), 351–412 at 358–9, and 393Google Scholar.
102 See Hubbard, R., ‘Fallow deer in prehistoric Greece, and the analogy between faunal spectra and pollen analyses’, Antiquity, 69 (1995), 527–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
103 Jarman, M. R., ‘Human influence in the development of the Cretan mammalian fauna’, in Reese, D. (ed.), Pleistocene and Holocene Fauna of Crete and its First Settlers (Madison, 1996), 211–29, at 219Google Scholar.
104 See Evans 1906 (n. 16) for the Isopata Royal Tomb. For Nea Alikarnassos, see Lembesi, A., ‘Ἀνασϰαφιϰαὶ ἔϱευναι—ἐπισήμανσις ἀϱχαίων’, AD Chron. 28 (1973, published 1977), 564–9, at 564–7Google Scholar.
105 Three blocks from the chamber vault were uncovered on the first day of the excavation, with one of the forehall capstones; see KT, 75.
106 Desborough 8, for 13 Dec. 1938.
107 Desborough records for 8 Dec. 1938, ‘we are now getting to the layer of fallen stones’; on this day, excavation in the chamber went down to 1–1.5 m depth (Fisher 67, for 8 Dec. 1938). At 1.85 m, Desborough notes that the stones ‘appear to be less frequent’ (Desborough 8, for 10 Dec. 1938). But Fisher then observes that ‘they seem to be appearing again about 10 or 15 cms lower. Today go from 1.5 m to 2.1 m depth’ (Fisher 67, for 10 Dec. 1938). At 2.1–2.2 m, Desborough notes ‘we do seem to be getting rather more worked blocks’ (Desborough 8 for 12 Dec. 1938) and Fisher, in notes accompanying a letter to Wace (23 Feb. 1939), states that ‘between 2.10 and 2.20 m we came upon a number of worked blocks. It was, in fact, a very stony area’. Finally, Desborough's review of the tomb excavation notes that ‘The fallen blocks were found between two and three metres below the ground level immediately above the floor of the tholos’.
108 BSA archives: Knossos Excavation Reports 1935–39.
109 Catling, H. W., ‘The Subminoan phase in the North Cemetery’, in Coldstream, J. N. and Catling, H. W. (eds), Knossos North Cemetery, II: Discussion (London, 1996), 639–49, at 643Google Scholar.
110 Fisher 67, for 8 Dec. 1938.
111 See Catling 1996 (n. 109).
112 Hood, S. and Coldstream, J. N., ‘A Late Minoan tomb at Ayios Ioannis near Knossos’, BSA 63 (1968), 205–18Google Scholar.
113 Tomb 7 (Hood, S., Huxley, G. and Sandars, N., ‘A Minoan cemetery on upper Gypsadhes’, BSA 53–4 (1959), 194–261, at 205–8Google Scholar). Deposit VIa and the two stirrup jars outside tomb VII also appear to be associated with mortuary activities in the cemetery, though not constituting assemblages accompanying a burial.
114 KT, 77, 78.
115 Desborough does note ‘remains of a large pithos (blackish clay (burnt?))’ at a depth of c. 1.5 m, in association with ‘many bones’ (Desborough 8, for 10 Dec. 1938), and Fisher seems to be describing the same burial when she notes a pithos with bones near the chamber entrance at 1.3–1.75 m depth (Fisher 67, for 10 Dec. 1938). However, no associated pottery is mentioned that could help date the deposit, nor are burnt bones specifically referred to.
116 See Hood and Smyth 1980 (n. 2), 35, no. 16.
117 Payne, H. G. G., ‘Early Greek vases from Knossos’, BSA 29 (1927–1928), 224–98, at 225Google Scholar.
118 Hood and Smyth 1980 (n. 2), at 35 no. 17.
119 Payne 1928 (n. 117), 232 and figs. 3 and 32. 25.
120 Coldstream, J. N., ‘Five tombs at Knossos’, BSA 58 (1963), 30–43, at 38Google Scholar.
121 e.g. Coldstream, J. N., ‘Urns with lids: the visible face of the Knossian “Dark Age”’, in Evely, et al. (n. 30), 105–21Google Scholar; id., ‘Minos redivivus: some nostalgic Knossians of the ninth century BC’, in W. Cavanagh and M. Curtis (eds), Post-Minoan Crete: Proceedings of the First Colloquium (London, 1998), 58–61; Prent, M., ‘Glories of the past in the past: ritual activities at palatial ruins in Early Iron Age Crete’, in van Dyke, R. and Alcock, S. (eds), Archaeologies of Memory (Oxford, 2003), 81–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wallace, S., ‘The perpetuated past: reuse or continuity in material culture and structuring of identity in Early Iron Age Crete’, BSA 98 (2003), 251–77Google Scholar.
122 As Whitley has pointed out regarding this last point, the explanation of legitimation through claimed ancestral links with prestigious individuals or groups in the past can actually embrace a variety of different possible scenarios, or could be entirely misleading. Much more work on appeals to the past in different locales and phases is needed before headway can be made on this point. See Whitley, J., ‘Too many ancestors’, Antiquity, 76 (2002), 119–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
123 See Preston 2004 (n. 95).
124 As Wallace points out (2004 (n. 121), 270 n. 79), retrospection to the past in the LM III C and SM periods seems to be as targeted and deliberate as that in the 9th c., though expressed in different ways.
125 It is interesting to develop this distinction between the LM III C and SM phases, since we are fortunate enough to have a very refined ceramic chronology that allows temporal changes to be drawn out at this level. Against a LM III C background where the Knossians had all but abandoned tomb use (as Coldstream has rightly emphasized), the Subminoan period sees a change in the mortuary landscape and an increase in explicit retrospection, both through revisitation of older tomb sites and, more significantly, the construction of new tombs that deliberately echo earlier, Bronze Age designs.
126 See Coldstream 1994 (n. 121).
127 W. G. Cavanagh, ‘The burial customs’, in Coldstream and Catling (n. 109), 651–75, at 656–7.
128 The wooden label for this compartment was actually found in Box 332, to which it had probably been accidentally transferred.
129 The paper labels in this box are probably intrusive, belonging originally to Box 338.
130 This box has no inked number on the exterior, but ‘319’ is written in chalk. The wooden label in compartment 1 gives two different findspots, and the exterior label a third. The wooden labels in the two compartments of this box may have been changed over.
131 Hood and de jong (n. 94), 243–77.
132 Alexiou 1967 (n. 94).
133 Rutter, J., ‘Southwestern Anatolian pottery from Late Minoan Crete: evidence for direct contacts between Arzawa and Keftiu?’, in Warner, J. (ed.), Pottery and Society: The Impact of Recent Studies in Minoan Pottery. Gold Medal Colloquium in Honor of Philip P. Betancourt (104th Annual Meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America, New Orleans, Louisiana, 5 January 2003)Google Scholar (forthcoming).
134 See n. 94.
135 Krogman, W. M. and İşcan, M. Y., The Human Skeleton in Forensic Medicine (Springfield, Ill., 1986Google Scholar); Buikstra, J. and Ubelaker, D. H., Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains (Ankara Archaeological Survey Research series no. 44; Fayetteville, Ark., 1994Google Scholar).
136 Brothwell, D. R., Digging Up Bones, 2nd edn. (Ithaca, 1981Google Scholar).
137 Hallager, B. P. and McGeorge, P. J. P., Late Minoan III Burials at Khania (Goteborg, 1992Google Scholar).
138 Moorees, C. F. A., Fanning, E. A., and Hunt, E. E., ‘Age variation of formation stages for ten permanent teeth’, Journal of Dental Research, 42 (1963), 1490–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ubelaker, D. H., Human Skeletal Remains, 2nd edn. (Washington, DC, 1989Google Scholar).
139 Hillson, S., Teeth (Cambridge, 1986Google ScholarPubMed).
140 Hallager and McGeorge 1992 (n. 137).
141 Hillson 1986 (n. 139); Roberts, C. and Manchester, K., The Archaeology of Disease, 2nd edn. (New York, 1995Google Scholar).
142 Hallager and McGeorge 1992 (n. 137).
143 Ibid.
144 Lewis, M., ‘Non-adult palaeopathology: current status and future potential’, in Cox, M. and Mays, S. (eds), Human Osteology in Archaeology and Forensic Science (London, 2000), at 39–57Google Scholar.
145 Ortner, D. J., Identification of Pathological Conditions in Human Skeletal Remains (New York, 2003), at 369Google Scholar.
146 Stuart-Macadam, P., ‘Porotic hyperostosis: changing interpretations’, in Ortner, D. J. and Aufderheide, A. C. (eds), Human Palaeopathology: Current Synthesis and Future Options (Washington, DC, 1991), 36–9Google Scholar.
