^{page 102 note 1} The sword was rediscovered by the writer in 1953. He wishes to express his thanks to A. H. S. Megaw, Esq., C.B.E., M.A., F.S.A., Director of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus and to P. Dikaios, Esq., O.B.E., L. és L., Hon. D. Litt, F.S.A., Curator of the Cyprus Museum for consenting to the publication of the sword. He also gratefully acknowledges substantial assistance from Miss Nancy Sandars.

^{page 102 note 2} Naue, Die Vorrömischer Schwerter.

^{page 102 note 3} The sword was found in a drawer in the reserve collection. It bore no inventory number, and could not be traced in Cyprus Museum records.

^{page 102 note 4} Catalogue Numbers (6), (8), (9), (10), (11), (13) and (17).

^{page 103 note 1} I.e., Catalogue Numbers (3), (10) and (13).

^{page 103 note 2} Gjerstad, , Studies on Prehistoric Cyprus, 232 and 235, no. 4Google Scholar.

^{page 103 note 3} The date at which Gjerstad conducted his research in Cyprus, on which Studies is based.

^{page 104 note 1} Murray, , Smith, and Walters, , Excavations in Cyprus (1900), 1 ffGoogle Scholar. Enkomi is the scene of the important contemporary excavation of the joint British and French mission, cf. C. F. A. Schæffer, Enkomi-Alasia.

^{page 104 note 2} Murray, Smith and Walters, op. cit., 57 ff.

^{page 104 note 3} Markides, M., ‘A Mycenæan Bronze in the Cyprus Museum,’ B.S.A. XVIII, 95–7Google Scholar. Not a true excavation, but the looting of an extremely important tomb. See also McFadden, G., ‘A Late Cypriote III tomb from Kourion, Kaloriziki No. 40,’ A.J.A., 1954, 131/142Google Scholar.

^{page 104 note 4} Markides, , Annual Report of the Curator of Antiquities, 1915, 7–10Google Scholar.

^{page 104 note 5} Hogarth, and others, J.H.S., IX, 158 ff., especially 264 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 104 note 6} The Expedition published no account of its work at Kouklia. A very summary account of the excavation is preserved at the British Museum, in the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities, in the form of a letter from Welch to A. S. Murray.

^{page 104 note 7} As a case in point, there is in the British Museum a variety of objects of considerable importance found by the Turner Trust Expedition in Cyprus which remains unpublished to the present day—Murray, Smith, and Walters, op. cit. is an extremely selective work.

^{page 104 note 8} On this, see SirMyres, John, J.H.S., XVII, 147Google Scholar.

^{page 104 note 9} Catalogue Numbers (16) and (17).

^{page 104 note 10} Hoards from Enkomi include the so-called Foundry Hoard, Murray, Smith and Walters, op. cit. 16 and fig. 25. Schaeffer, 's ‘Tresor de Bronzes,’ Enkomi-Alasia, 37 ffGoogle Scholar. and a number of unpublished hoards, some found during excavation, others accidentally by villagers cultivating their fields. Elsewhere they are uncommon—note one at Mathiati, in the copper mining area, S.C.E. III, 665, fig. 374.

^{page 104 note 11} Lorimer, H. L., Homer and the Monuments, 264 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 104 note 12} Cf. Childe, V. G., ‘The Final Bronze Age in the Near East and Temperate Europe,’ P.P.S. XIV, 183, ffGoogle Scholar. C.F.C. Hawkes, ‘From Bronze Age to Iron Age: Middle Europe, Italy and the North and West,’ op. cit. 198 ff.

^{page 104 note 13} Cf. e.g. Peet, , B.S.A. XVIII, 282 ff.Google Scholar; Lorimer, op. cit. 264 ff.; Schaeffer, op. cit. 337 ff.; Peake, The Bronze Age and the Celtic World. Riis, P. J., Hama: Les Cimitières à Crémation, 121 fGoogle Scholar.

^{page 107 note 1} Nos. (12)—from Crete—and (17)—from Cyprus.

^{page 107 note 2} Of eleven swords complete or nearly so, six are within this size grouping.

^{page 107 note 3} No. (3)—Mycenae—No. (7)—Achæa—and (13)—Crete.

^{page 107 note 4} No. (8)—Achæa.

^{page 107 note 5} Nos. (11)—Crete—(22) and (23)—Egypt.

^{page 107 note 6} No. (23).

^{page 107 note 7} No. (5)—Tiryns.

^{page 107 note 8} Of the two Mouliana B swords, which must be nearly, if not quite contemporary, No. (11) has the spur, No. (12) lacks it.

^{page 107 note 9} Nos. (6) and (7)—Achæa.

^{page 107 note 10} No. (s)—Tiryns. One wonders, indeed, whether this sword was an unfinished weapon, part of the scrap merchant's stock-in-trade.

^{page 109 note 1} Schliemann, , Mycenæ, 144, fig. 264Google Scholar; cf. also Tsountas, , Ἐφημέρις Ἀρχαιολογιϰή 1891, 25Google Scholar; Naue, op. cit. pl. VI 3; Peake, op. cit. 96. Benton, S., Man., 1931Google Scholar, No. 134 (the best illustration) and Lorimer, op. cit., 264.

^{page 109 note 2} Schliemann, op. cit. 143/4.

^{page 109 note 3} Tsountas, op. cit. 1897, 110 and pl. VIII, 3, with which see Tsountas, op. cit. 1891, 25.

^{page 109 note 4} Tsountas, op. cit., 1891, 25, n. 1.

^{page 109 note 5} For similar hoards in Greece, cf. A.J.A. VI (First Series), 99 f. and pl. xv, from Anthedon in Bœotia; Montelius, , La Grèce Préclassique, 153 fGoogle Scholar and figs. 481 ff, from the Acropolis at Athens; Stubbings, , B.S.A. XLIX, 292, from MycenæGoogle Scholar.

^{page 110 note 1} Tsountas, op. cit. 1891, 25.

^{page 110 note 2} These are common in Greek hoards, having been found in all three quoted in n. 5, p. 109.

^{page 110 note 3} Tsountas compared these to one figured by Schliemann, Mycenæ, fig. 238, with which cf. Furumark, Arne, The Chronology of Mycenæan Pottery, 94, fig. 4, no. a2Google Scholar.

^{page 110 note 4} This was subsequently published by Tsountas, op. cit. 1897, 110 and pl. VIII, no. 4.

^{page 110 note 5} Illustrated in Ἐφημ Ἀρχ, 1891, pl. 11.5.

^{page 110 note 6} This, it is clear, is a razor of the type illustrated by Blegen, Prosymna, fig. 512: 4.

^{page 110 note 7} Probably for attaching to leather or wood; possibly comparable to objects from Kaloriziki Tomb 40 (Cyprus)—cf. McFadden, op. cit. pl. 26 and p. 140.

^{page 110 note 8} These were possibly similar to the tools figured by Montelius op. cit. 153, nos. 483 and 484.

^{page 110 note 9} The sickle-shaped knives were doubtless similar to those from the new Mycenæ hoard, Stubbings, , B.S.A., XLVIII, pl. 2.bGoogle Scholar, while the others are likely to have belonged to the familiar class of Late Helladic III knives, well exemplified by Blegen, op. cit. fig. 262: 1. cf. Sandars, , ‘The Antiquity of the One-edged Bronze Knife in the Aegean,’ P.P.S., XXI, 174 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 110 note 10} Tsountas may possibly have meant by this arrowheads similar to Montelius, op. cit. pl. 15, no. 6. It is, unfortunately, equally possible that he was describing a totally different type, of post-Bronze Age date, for which see, e.g., Myres, , Handbook of the Cesnola Collection, 489/90, nos. 4786–8Google Scholar.

^{page 110 note 11} Decapillatory tweezers, no doubt—cf. Blegen, op. cit., figs. 215 14; 244: 2; 283: 4:377: 3 and 4; 512: 2; 574.

^{page 110 note 12} This appears to be the bridle subsequently published by Reichel, , Homerische Waffen, 2nd edn., 142, fig. 90Google Scholar; see also Blegen, C. W., ‘Two Athenian Grave Groups of about 900 B.C.’, Hesperia XXI, 287 and refs, quotedGoogle Scholar. The writer owes to Dr. W. L. Brown the extremely interesting if tentative comparison of this bridle with examples from El Amarna in Egypt. As far as the writer knows, this is the only Late Helladic bridle attested, and a foreign origin is therefore quite possible.

^{page 110 note 13} P.P.S., 1952, 297.

^{page 110 note 14} See Gordon, G. H., ‘Swords, Rapiers and Horse Riders,’ Antiquity XXVII, 67 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 110 note 15} SirEvans, Arthur, Prehistoric Tombs at Knossos, 43, figs. 39a and 39bGoogle Scholar.

^{page 110 note 16} Fouilles de Delphes, V, 8, no. 19Google Scholar.

^{page 110 note 17} Furumark, op. cit. 76.

^{page 111 note 1} Loc. cit.

^{page 111 note 2} Cf. p. 110, n. (10) supra.

^{page 111 note 3} Post-Bronze Age arrow-heads have occurred at Mycenae, it seems. Cf. Wace, A. J. B., B.S.A. xxv, 71Google Scholar, for a single example, not, however, described in detail.

^{page 111 note 4} National Museum at Athens Inventory Number 2740. The writer is indebted to Miss Nancy Sandars for his knowledge of this fragment.

^{page 111 note 5} This feature is repeated on the Mouliana A sword (Catalogue No. 13).

^{page 111 note 6} Karo, , ‘Die Schact von Tiryns,’ Ath. Mitt. LV, 1930, 135, Beil. XXXVIIGoogle Scholar; cf. also Peake, op. cit. 97, Lorimer, op. cit. 265.

^{page 111 note 7} For example, the late date sometimes urged for the so-called Cypro-Phoenician rod tripod is quite un-necessary. Riis' date of 1200–1100 B.C. (‘Rod Tripods,’ Acta Arch., x, 7Google Scholar) is perfectly satisfactory, and could probably be raised 50 years for the inception of this class of tripods.

^{page 111 note 8} Of Late Helladic I date is the gold signet ring, Karo, op. cit.

^{page 111 note 9} Cf. n. (6), supra and references quoted.

^{page 111 note 10} The writer is greatly indebted to Mr V. R. Desborough, for calling his attention to the existence of this sword.

^{page 111 note 11} Kyparisses, Πραϰτιϰα, 1938, 118–9 and text figure.

^{page 112 note 1} Unlike, for example, the Cyprus Museum sword and the majority of weapons listed in the catalogue.

^{page 112 note 2} Kyparisses, op. cit., 1933, 90–3; 1936, 95–9; 1937, 84–93.

^{page 112 note 3} Kyparisses, op. cit. 1939, :104–6.

^{page 112 note 4} It could probably, however, be said with some confidence that the verbal descriptions of these vases suggest that none of the four tombs contained elements earlier than Mycenæan IIIB, and that the series may well continue into Mycenæan IIIC.

^{page 112 note 5} The writer acknowledges with much gratitude the generosity of Mr. Yalouris and of Dr. Hegan Biesantz of the German Archaeological Institute in Athens both for supplying information about this sword and No. (8), infra, and for permitting their inclusion in this paper.

^{page 112 note 6} Archæology in Greece, 1952/1953, 39Google Scholar; A.J.A., 1954, 235 and B.C.H. LXXVIII, 124.

^{page 112 note 7} The greave is figured in B.C.H., loc. cit., fig. 25.

^{page 112 note 8} Catalogue No. (16), from Enkomi tomb 18.

^{page 112 note 9} Catling, , ‘A Bronze Greave from a 13th Century B.C. Tomb at Enkomi,’ Opuscula Atheniensia 11, 35–36Google Scholar.

^{page 112 note 10} Tsountas, op. cit., 1897, 110, fig. 1.

^{page 112 note 11} Montelius, op. cit., pl. 14, fig. 4.

^{page 113 note 1} Catalogue no. (10), infra.

^{page 113 note 2} The writer is indebted to Miss Nancy Sandars for knowledge of this sword.

^{page 113 note 3} Xanthoudides, , Ἐφημέρις Ἀρχαιολογίϰη, 1904, 46, fig. 11Google Scholar, extreme right. Cf. Lorimer, op. cit., 265 and pl. XIX 2.

^{page 113 note 4} Xanthoudides, op. cit. fig. 9.

^{page 113 note 5} These should be compared with very similar objects from Kaloriziki in Cyprus, described by the excavator as shield bosses. Cf. McFadden, op. cit. pl. 25, fig. 33. The identification as cymbals seems to spring from the lack of stitch holes on the rim; they could, however, have been fastened to a shield by means of a thong passed through the hole in the boss and knotted on the outside.

^{page 113 note 6} Furumark, , Opuscula Archæologica III, 226Google Scholar.

^{page 113 note 7} Wace, , Ἐφημέρις Ἀρχαιολογιϰή, 1953/1954, 137–40Google Scholar.

^{page 113 note 8} Furumark, op. cit., 262.

^{page 113 note 9} Xanthoudides, op. cit., 48 and fig. 11, second from right.

^{page 113 note 10} Colonel Gordon (op. cit.) would class this not as a sword but as a dirk. Cf. also Catalogue no. 17.

^{page 114 note 1} Xanthoudides, op. cit., 1904, 30/31, and perhaps the top object on fig. 7.

^{page 114 note 2} The writer's grateful thanks are due to Mr. N. Platon, of the Greek Archaeological Service, Ephor of Antiquities in Crete, for permitting the publication of this sword.

^{page 114 note 3} The section is, in fact, comparable to that of no. (3), supra.

^{page 114 note 4} Cf. the condition of the iron cut-and-thrust sword in Keremeikos Grave 28—Keremeikos, IV, 26 and Taf. 38, M. 51, and Catalogue nos. (25)–(26), Hama.

^{page 114 note 5} Xanthoudides, op. cit., 21–50.

^{page 114 note 6} On this, and chronological problems associated with Tomb A, cf. Desborough, V. R., The Protogeometric Pottery, 269–70Google Scholar.

^{page 114 note 7} Xanthoudides, op. cit., fig. 7. Cf. Cf. Blinkenberg, , Les Fibules grecques et orientales, 68, fig. 44Google Scholar.

^{page 114 note 8} Desborough, loc. cit.

^{page 114 note 9} There is in fact a case to be made out for the sword belonging to the cremations rather than the inhumations—the other swords in the tomb had not been ‘killed,’ and are therefore, perhaps, appropriate to an inhumation; the ‘killing’ of the Naue II sword might be thought to correspond to the burning of the body of its owner. The Keremeikos sword (n. 4 supra) is comparable. It should be observed in passing, however, that ‘killings’ of weapons are recorded in the case of inhumations in Middle Bronze Age burial practice in Cyprus. Even so, since it is unknown how many cremations were in Tomb A, it would not be certain that the sword was contemporary with the D-shaped fibula or the Geometric vases.

^{page 114 note 10} The writer owes his knowledge of this sword to Miss Nancy Sandars.

^{page 114 note 11} The writer's grateful thanks are due to Professor Morricone for permitting the inclusion of this sword in the catalogue, and to Miss Sandars for drawing his attention to its existence.

^{page 114 note 12} Cf. J.H.S. LXV, 102Google Scholar; Stubbings, , Mycenæan Pottery from the Levant, 21Google Scholar.

^{page 115 note 1} Gjerstad, and others, Swedish Cyprus Expedition, I, 553, no. 70Google Scholar.

^{page 115 note 2} Schaeffer, op. cit. 337 ff., fig. 104.

^{page 115 note 3} Op. cit., pls. LXVII and LXVIII.

^{page 115 note 4} Cf. op. cit. pl. LXVIII for a reconstructed drawing.

^{page 115 note 5} Cf. Sjoqvist, , Problems of the Late Cypriot Bronze Age, 123Google Scholar; Furumark, op. cit., 68.

^{page 115 note 6} Gjerstad, op. cit., 548–51.

^{page 115 note 7} Schaeffer, op. cit., 327.

^{page 115 note 8} Catling, op. cit., 26 ff.

^{page 115 note 9} If Wace's new dating of the Mycenæan ceramic phases is accepted, this should perhaps be slightly earlier. cf. Wace, loc. cit.

^{page 115 note 10} Murray, Smith and Walters, op. cit. 16, fig. 31—it has recently been republished by Schaeffer, op. cit., 341/2, and fig. 107.

^{page 115 note 11} Gordon, op. cit.

^{page 115 note 12} Cf. Schaeffer, op. cit., fig. 107.

^{page 115 note 13} Murray, etc., op. cit. 50.

^{page 115 note 14} Catalogue of Jewellery in the British Museum, nos. 114, 170 and 172.

^{page 115 note 15} A classic instance of this long use of the tombs at Enkomi is furnished by Schaeffer's Tomb 5—Schaeffer, op. cit. 156 ff.

^{page 115 note 16} The writer's thanks are due to V. Karageorghis, Assistant Curator of the Cyprus Museum, for drawing his attention to this fragment, and to Dr. P. Dikaios for permission to publish it.

^{page 115 note 17} See p. 104, note 10, supra.

^{page 116 note 1} Burchardt, , Zwei bronzeschwerter aus Agypten, Z.f. agyptologische Sprache und Altertumskunde, 50 (1912), 61–3Google Scholar, pl. v: cf. also Wolf, Walther, Die Bewaffnung des altagyptischen Heeres, 103Google Scholar; Peet, , B.S.A. XVIII, 282 ff.Google Scholar; Peake, op. cit., pl. XII; Lorimer, op. cit., 265.

^{page 116 note 2} See also Schaeffer, , Antiquity XXIX, 226 ffGoogle Scholar. on the new Ras Shamra sword bearing a royal cartouche.

^{page 116 note 3} Childe, op. cit. 184; Hawkes, op. cit. 200.

^{page 116 note 4} Burchardt, op. cit.; cf. also Burchardt, , Präh. Z., 4 (1912), 233Google Scholar and Ebert, , Reallexikon, XI, pl. 144aGoogle Scholar.

^{page 116 note 5} Rowton, , J.E.A., 1948, 57 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 116 note 6} Cf. Burchardt, , Zeits. f. Ag. Sprache und Altertums. 50, p. 61 ff., pl. v 2Google Scholar; Wolf, op. cit., pl. XV 2; Peet, op. cit. fig. 1; Lorimer, op. cit. 265 and pl. XIX: 1 (2).

^{page 116 note 7} Wolf, op. cit., pl. XV 3; Ebert, op. cit. Taf. 144, c.; Lorimer, op. cit. pl. XIX: 1 (3).

^{page 116 note 8} Budge, E. Wallis, ‘On some Egyptian bronze weapons in the collections of John Evans, Esq., and the British Museum,’ Archæologia, 53, p. 83 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar, pl. 1, 1; Burchardt, op. cit. pl. v, 4; Wolf, op. cit. pl. xv, 4; Ebert, op. cit. Taf. 144 d; Petrie, Tools and Weapons, pl. XXXII, 9.

^{page 116 note 9} Cf. Budge, op. cit., pl. 1, 1.

^{page 116 note 10} Op. cit.

^{page 116 note 11} Op. cit.

^{page 117 note 1} Riis, , Hama, , Les Cimetières à Crémation. Copenhagen, 1948Google Scholar.

^{page 117 note 2} Op. cit. 202.

^{page 117 note 3} Op. cit. 121 f.

^{page 117 note 4} There are eleven iron swords from the site.

^{page 117 note 5} Op. cit. 232.

^{page 117 note 6} Ibid.

^{page 117 note 7} Op. cit. 238.

^{page 117 note 8} i.e. ‘killed’ — cf. Catalogue no. 13 and references quoted.

^{page 117 note 9} With cremation G IV–315, op. cit. 217.

^{page 117 note 10} Op. cit. 121–2.

^{page 117 note 11} Op. cit. 122.

^{page 117 note 12} Schaeffer, 's attempt, Stratigraphie, 112 ff.Google Scholar, to raise the date of Hama Level F (which would affect the dating of the cremations) is not convincing, particularly in putting its upper limit at 1400 B.C. The soundness of the dating of the Period II cremations is confirmed by the very advanced design of the swords.

^{page 117 note 13} In the case of each of these there is either some uncertainty about the accuracy of the provenance of the pieces concerned or doubt about their identification as Naue II swords, or both. For this reason they have not been included in the general discussion that follow the catalogue.

^{page 117 note 14} It appears in Walters, British Museum Catalogue of Bronzes, No. 2754, and is figured in A Guide to Greek and Roman Life, 1908, fig. 80a.

^{page 117 note 15} Miss Sandars first drew the writer's attention to this sword. His thanks are due to Professor B. Ashmole, Keeper of the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities, for assenting to its republication, and to Mr D. E. L. Haynes for providing essential information.

^{page 118 note 1} The Bronze Age and the Celtic World, pl. 12, 11.

^{page 118 note 2} Professor Geddes died in 1932. The writer has not been able to trace the present whereabouts of this piece.

^{page 118 note 3} ‘Excavations in Ithaka, III,’ B.S.A. xxxv, 72Google Scholar, fig. 20, 15a and b; fig. 21a.

^{page 118 note 4} Op. cit. fig. 21a.

^{page 118 note 5} Op. cit. fig. 20.

^{page 118 note 6} Note also the presence in this hypothetical hoard of a lanceolate spearhead of the type commented on by Childe, op. cit. p. 185 and n. 4.

^{page 118 note 7} Benton op. cit. 72, n. 1, citing Dacia II, 351, pl. 11, 7.

^{page 118 note 8} As far as can be determined from the photograph, the objects associated with these fragments are consistent with the date involved in assuming them to be Naue II fragments.

^{page 118 note 9} Catalogue nos. (6), (7) and (8).

^{page 118 note 10} Cf. Evans, , ‘Prehistoric Tombs at Knossos,’ Archæologia LIX, 495 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 118 note 11} Chapoutier, and Charbonneaux, , Études Crétoises I, pl. I and p. 60Google Scholar.

^{page 118 note 12} His views on this and other Ægean weapons are of the first importance in determining how the various members of the sword series were used, and in correcting previous concepts about Bronze Age fighting. Cf. Gordon, op. cit. 67 ff.

^{page 119 note 1} Cf., e.g., Chapoutier, , Études Crétoises v, pl. IX, 1Google Scholar; x, 1; Karo, , Schachtgraber von Mykenai, Taf. LXXXGoogle Scholar; Evans, , Palace of Minos, IV, Supplementary pl. LXVIIIGoogle Scholar; Papadimitriou, , ‘Ἀνασϰαφαὶ' εν Μυϰηναίς’, Πραϰτιϰά 1952, 446, fig. 14Google Scholar.

^{page 119 note 2} An idea of some of the stages in this development can be gained from the following references: Evans, Prehistoric Tombs at Knossos, fig. 109, 44b; Persson, Royal Tombs at Dendra, p;. XX; 1; Karo, op. cit. pl. LXXIV, 435; Blegen, Prosymna, fig. 298; Furtwangler and Loeschke, Mykenische Vasen, Text pl. D, no. 13 and no. 11; Tsountas, , Ἐφημερις Αρχαιολογιϰη 1891, pl. II, 5Google Scholar; Xanthoudides, , Ἐφημερις Αρχαιολογιϰη 1904, 30/31, fig. 7Google Scholar.

^{page 119 note 3} Evans, op. cit., 106, fig. 110.

^{page 119 note 4} Xanthoudides, loc. cit.

^{page 119 note 5} Montelius, La Grèce Préclassique, pls. 11–13 cf. ibid. pl. 14.

^{page 119 note 6} Cf. Furtwangler Loeschke, loc. cit. no. 13 with no. 11.

^{page 119 note 7} Not only is this true of swords, but also of the flat-bladed daggers/dirks/cleavers which begin to appear about the beginning of the 14th century. Cf. e.g., Blegen, op. cit. fig. 485, no. 1 (stage prior to inclusion of pommel in casting), ibid. fig. 377, no. 1; Evans, op. cit. 84, fig. 94; for a discussion of the dating of these (as well as other types), cf. Furumark, , Chronology of Mycenæan Pottery, 93 ff.Google Scholar, to be read with Benton, , ‘The Pelynt Sword Hilt,’ P.P.S. 1952, 237–38Google Scholar.

^{page 119 note 8} Note, however, the dagger with eared pommel from Zafer Papoura in Crete, Evans, op. cit. 82, fig. 90. Unfortunately it was the sole find in a plundered tomb. There are at least two others in the Herakleion Museum. Cf. also a similar piece from Phylakopi in Melos (B.S.A. XVII, pl. XIV). These daggers have a certain formal similarity with the Naue II profile, which was commented on by Evans. Cf. ‘Prehistoric Tombs’, Archæologia LIX 503/4Google Scholar and references. Miss Nancy Sandars has pointed out to the writer that these daggers belong to the ‘Peschiera’ type which are fairly frequent in Italy. She puts their appearance in the Ægean at the end of the Bronze Age, and believes that it is possible to establish an Ægean pedigree for them.

^{page 119 note 9} Blegen, op. cit., text, 330; plates, fig. 198.

^{page 119 note 10} Cf. Furtwangler-Loeschke, loc. cit. no. 11 and Tsountas, op. cit pl. 11, 5, from Rhodes and Mycenæ respectively.

^{page 120 note 1} I.e., Mouliana Tomb A—Xanthoudides, loc. cit., and the damaged blade from Kephallenia-Marinatos, ‘Αι 'ανασϰαφαὶ Goekoop 'εν Κεφαλληνια,’ Ἐφημερις Αρχαιολογίϰη, 1932, 25 and pl. 16, left.

^{page 120 note 2} Ibid.

^{page 120 note 3} On the Central European swords, cf. E. Sprockhoff, Die Germanischen Griffzungenschwerter. Cowen, J. D., ‘Eine Einführung in die Geschichte der bronzenen Griffzungenschwerter in Süddeutschland und der angrenzenden Gebieten’, Ber. d. Röm.-Genn. Komm. 1955, p. 52 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 120 note 4} Myres, , Who were the Greeks?, 429Google Scholar.

^{page 120 note 5} Lorimer, op. cit. 264.

^{page 120 note 6} Childe, , P.P.S. XIV, 183 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 120 note 7} Hawkes, op. cit. 200/1.

^{page 120 note 8} Childe, op. cit. 185.

^{page 120 note 9} Koşay, , Ausgrabungen von Alaça Hüyük, Taf. LXXXI, 26Google Scholar.

^{page 120 note 10} Childe, op. cit. pl XVIIIa; Schaeffer, , Syria x, 1929, pl. LX, fig. 3Google Scholar.

^{page 120 note 11} Op. cit. 200.

^{page 120 note 12} Gordon, op. cit., 75 and 78.

^{page 120 note 13} Cf. e.g., Lorimer, op. cit. 307 ff. Chariots are commonplace on Mycenæan vases, particularly in Cyprus. Cf. e.g., Furumark, , The Mycenæan Pottery, p. 333Google Scholar, fig. 56, and the same writer, ‘A Scarab from Cyprus,’ Opuscula Atheniensia, 1, 47 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 120 note 14} Schaeffer, , ‘A Bronze Sword from Ugarit with Cartouche of Mineptah,’ Antiquity, XXIX, 226–9Google Scholar.

^{page 120 note 15} Schaeffer shares Childe's belief, at which he seems to have arrived independently, that our cut-and-thrust swords are an Eastern invention. He thus seems to have abandoned his earlier view, expressed in Enkomi-Alasia, 337 ff, that Naue II swords were an Ægean product.

^{page 121 note 1} Closely comparable, in this, as Schaeffer points out, to the sword from El Kantara in Egypt. Cf. Ebert, , Reall. XI, Taf. 144eGoogle Scholar.

^{page 121 note 2} Syria x, 295Google Scholar.

^{page 121 note 3} This is promised in the forthcoming Ugaritica III.

^{page 121 note 4} Gordon, op. cit., 71, dates to c. 1400; Childe, op. cit., 184, accepts c. 1365 as the date of destruction of the building in which it was found; Lorimer, op. cit. 54, suggests c. 1300 or earlier.

^{page 121 note 5} Schaeffer, , Stratigraphie Comparée, 9Google Scholar.

^{page 121 note 6} Syria, loc. cit., pl. LX, fig. 1.

^{page 121 note 7} On these stands, see Riis, , Acta Arch., 1 ff.Google Scholar; Lamb, Winifred, Greek and Roman Bronzes 32 ffGoogle Scholar, and a brief discussion by the writer in the forthcoming publication of a Late Bronze Age site at Myrtou in north-west Cyprus, dealing with the group of stands figured in I.L.N. 22/3/52, 495, fig. 7.

^{page 121 note 8} Cf. amongst others, Gordon, op. cit. 71/2.

^{page 121 note 9} The writer was able to examine two of the Ras Shamra swords at the Aleppo Museum in 1953.

^{page 121 note 10} If so, it must be observed that none of the other objects in the hoard appear to be of this description.

^{page 122 note 1} Cf. Lorimer, op. cit. 266/7, and references quoted. The sword of this type, found at Gaza and now in the British Museum, is figured by Hall, H. R., Civilization of Greece in the Bronze Age, 254Google Scholar, fig. 329 and cf. Lorimer, loc. cit. fig. 33.

^{page 122 note 2} Taking, for the moment, the Peloponnese as the focus of the distribution.

^{page 122 note 3} Even the mass of Mycenæan material found in Cyprus datable to the period 1425–1210 B.C. is, in the writer's view, to be explained as the results of trade relationship, not of settlement or political domination.

^{page 122 note 4} 1230 B.C., and thereafter, according to Furumark; 1210 B.C. and thereafter, according to Wace.

^{page 123 note 1} Cf. Furumark, , A.J.A., LII, 531Google Scholar and the same writer, ‘Utgravningarna vid Sinda’ in Arkeologiska Forskningar och Fynd, 59–71Google Scholar (with English summary), cf. also Stubbings, , Mycencean Pottery from the Levant, 109, n. 3Google Scholar.

^{page 123 note 2} Cf. Archæology in Greece, 1954, 54Google Scholar, which also refers to a possibly similar site at Lara, north-west of Maa itself.

^{page 123 note 3} Not a single example of the conventional Ægean weapon series of Late Bronze Age date has so far been found in Cyprus; (earlier, however, a small number of Middle Minoan daggers found their way to Cyprus; cf. e.g., Dikaios, , ‘The Excavations at Vounous-Bellapais in Cyprus, 1931–32,’ Arch., 88, pl. XLII, b)Google Scholar; Ægean sealstones are unknown, and there is no plain Mycenæan pottery. The contrast between this pattern of finds and that recorded in Rhodes, where all these classes of material have been found, is very marked. Cf. e.g., Maiuri, , ‘Ialysos. Scavi della Missione Archeologica Italiana a Rhodi,’ Annuario VI–VII, 83 ff.Google Scholar; Jacopi, ‘Nuovo Scavi nella Necropoli Micenea di Jalisso,’ op. cit. XIII–XIV, 253 ff.; Monaco, , ‘Scavi nella zona Micenea di Jaliso,’ Clara Rhodos, x, 41 ff.Google Scholar, with the latter of which see Furumark, , ‘The Settlement at Ialysos and Ægean History, c. 1550–1400’ in Opuscula Archæolgica vi, 150 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 123 note 4} On the ivories in general, cf. Barnett, R. D., ‘Phœnician and Syrian Ivory Carvings,’ P.E.Q., 1939, 4 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 123 note 5} Murray, Smith and Walters, op. cit., pl. II, 872a. Cf. also Lorimer, op. cit. pl. II, 4; Frankfort, Art and Architecture of the Ancient Orient, pl. 149 b.

^{page 123 note 6} I.L.N. 2/5/53, p. 710, fig. 4, in which the negative was reversed in printing. For the subject, cf. also the pyxis fragment in the British Museum, Murray, etc., op. cit. pl. 11, 883.

^{page 123 note 7} Miss Lorimer earlier arrived at the same conclusion, op. cit. 268.

^{page 123 note 8} They are designed for tanged mirrors, unknown in Greece, but abundant in Cyprus. It should be noted, however, that tanged mirrors do occur in Mycenæan contexts in Rhodes—cf. Annuario, XIII–XIV, 253 ff.Google Scholar, figs. 4, 22, 35 and 65. For the normal mainland mirror type, cf. Blegen, Prosymna, figs. 158, 200, 378, etc. For mainland mirrors with handles (the form of which differs slightly from the Cypriot handles) see B.S.A. XXV, pl. LIX, from the Tomb of Clytæmnestra at Mycenæ, and Persson, Royal Tombs at Dendra, figs. 71 and 72, and also pl. XXXIII, top. Good evidence has recently come to light at Kouklia, from which the Lion-Slayer handle comes, for the existence of an ivory workers' shop. Cf. Archæology in Greece, 1952/1953, 57Google Scholar. Miss Kantor's views on the mirror handles—A.J.A. LI, 101—should be reconsidered in the light of the new evidence on Mycenæan IIIc material at Enkomi and elsewhere.

^{page 123 note 9} As was pointed out by Miss Lorimer.

^{page 123 note 10} On this, see Lorimer, op. cit. 151, 193 and 200.

^{page 123 note 11} On this type of helmet, cf. Reichel, op. cit., 102 ff. Lorimer, op. cit. 211 ff. For a contemporary description, cf. Homer, , Iliad, x, 260 ffGoogle Scholar, which passage, if accepted at face value, shows how an obsolete piece of equipment might easily remain in use long after it had been superseded.

^{page 124 note 1} As seems to have been the case earlier—cf. the two men carrying swords on a crater in the Louvre, , Bull. de Correspondance Hellenique, 1911, 232Google Scholar, figs. 10 and 11. Cf. also a crater from Enkomi Swedish Tomb 3, Sjoqvist, Problems of the Late Cypriote Bronze Age, fig. 20, 3. Daggers, on the other hand, seem to have been carried at the waist, perhaps on a belt. Cf. a sherd from Ras Shamra, Stubbings, op. cit. 72, fig. 22.

^{page 124 note 2} On the complicated topic of Mycenæan shields, cf. Lorimer, op. cit., 132 ff. and refs. quoted.

^{page 124 note 3} It should be observed that there are divergent views on the nature of the Mycenæan influence in Cyprus in the 1425–1210 B.C. period. Cf. e.g., Casson, Stanley, Ancient Cyprus, 110 ff.Google Scholar; Sjoqvist, op. cit. 198 ff; Daniel, J. F., A.J.A., 1942, 286 ffGoogle Scholar. Gjerstad, , ‘The Colonization of Cyprus in Greek legend,’ Opuscula Archæologica, III, 107 ffGoogle Scholar. Cf. also Kantor, Helen, ‘The Ægean and Orient in the Second Millennium, B.C.’, A.J.A., LI, 79, especially n. 3Google Scholar.

^{page 124 note 4} Catling, op. cit., 35/36.

^{page 124 note 5} Cf. Lorimer, op. cit. 87, and references quoted.

^{page 124 note 6} Cat. no. (20).

^{page 124 note 7} Lorimer, op. cit., 265.

^{page 124 note 8} It may be noted here that Cyprus, as well as Greece, later adopted iron versions of Naue II. Cf. inter alia, Myres, , Catalogue of the Cesnola Collection, 482Google Scholar, no. 4725 and figure. A Guide to Greek and Roman Life, 1908, 98, fig. 84bGoogle Scholar.

^{page 125 note 1} Which, it may be suggested, never rested on very convincing evidence, for why should these swords move from the North into Greece in complete isolation?

^{page 125 note 2} The writer owes to Miss Sandars the view that the Peschiera daggers cannot have influenced Naue II; he himself continues to be struck by the common feature of pommel ears. Cf. p. 119, note 8 above.

^{page 125 note 3} Cf. discussion of Cat. no. (7).

^{page 125 note 4} p. 120, note (1) above.