² Benton, S., ‘The Ionian Islands’, BSA 32 (1931–1932), 213–46 at 245–6Google Scholar.

³ See Waterhouse, H. and Simpson, R. Hope, ‘Prehistoric Laconia: part II’, BSA 56 (1961), 114–75Google Scholar at 148–60, for an early survey of the site and its tombs. Kythera for publication of the 1960s excavations by Coldstream and Huxley at Kastri.

⁴ Sakellarakis, Y.Sakellarakis, E., ‘Minoan religious influence in the Aegean: the case of Kythera’, BSA 91 (1996), 81–99Google Scholar.

⁵ Broodbank, C., ‘Kythera survey: preliminary report on the 1998 season’, BSA 94 (1999), 191–214Google Scholar. See also Blackman, D., ‘Archaeology in Greece 1999–2000’, AR 46 (2000), 23Google Scholar; Blackman, , AR 47 (2001), 20Google Scholar.

⁶ In all cases, the vessel surfaces were very poorly preserved and fabrics were soft and fragile even when they were obviously highly fired.

⁷ It proved necessary to clean the pottery in a weak acid solution followed by prolonged rinsing; before this, ten sherds had been removed for possible future organic residue analysis.

⁸ The method was dictated by the absence of a flotation machine and the limited amount of soil processed was due to water shortage experienced that year on the island.

⁹ The remaining soil samples are currently stored in the KIP apotheke (Mitata, Kythera) for further processing, although on present evidence it is thought unlikely that they contain any bioarchaeological material.

¹⁰ Leontsinis, G. N., The Island of Kythera: A Social History (Athens, 1987), 203–4, 228Google Scholar.

¹¹ Within this fill were some red clay inclusions, some of which may have been degraded pottery.

¹² Pebbles were also found in a lamp in tomb A: Kythera, 228 no. 1.

¹³ They were removed as four sherd concentrations; excavation find numbers: 156, 157, 171, 173.1 (not catalogued).

¹⁴ These techniques are explained in Roux, V. and Courty, M.-A., ‘Identification of wheel-fashioning methods: technological analysis of 4th–3rd millennium BC oriental ceramics’, JAS 25 (1998), 747–63Google Scholar. In a Cretan context, Knappett, C., ‘Technological innovation and social diversity at Middle Minoan Knossos’, in Cavanagh, W. and Hatzaki, E. (eds), Knossos: Palace, City, State (BSA Studies; London, in press)Google Scholar.

¹⁵ For Deposit η (LM 1 A), see Kythera, 116, no. 31; Deposit θ (LM I A), ibid., 122, no. 16; for Deposit μ (LM I B), ibid., 130–1, no. 28; for Deposit γ (LM I B), ibid., 136, no. 29; for Deposit ? (LM I B), ibid., 144, no. 90.

¹⁶ Ibid., 131.

¹⁷ Ibid., 285 (LM I A summary) and 294 (LM 1 B summary).

¹⁸ e.g. ibid., 243–4, 253, fig. 87, pl. 75.

¹⁹ Ibid., 294.

²⁰ Some of the Cretan examples have pierced bases and thus were used as rhyta; those from Kythera do not possess this feature. Evans shows Cretan stemmed cups of both LM I A and LM I B date, PM iv. 363–4, fig. 304. The one he illustrates as belonging to LM I A is actually from Palaikastro, see also Bosanquet, R. C. and Dawkins, R. M., The Unpublished Objects from the Palaikastro Excavations 1902–1906, i (BSA supp. paper 1; London, 1923)Google Scholar, pl. 17 b. Indeed, the Palaikastro LM I A example (with typical LM I A decoration of medallion spirals) has a foot more like our 244 (the decoration of which we suppose to be LM I A), whereas Evans's LM I B example (fig. 304 c, in fact from Phaistos) resembles our 144 (which we suppose to be LM I B judging by its decoration) in its stem.

²¹ Kythera, 121.

²² Ibid., 293.

²³ see Warren, P. M., Minoan Stones Vases (Cambridge, 1969), 98Google Scholar: tankards = type 40.

²⁴ Kythera, 245–6 (nos. 17–19).

²⁵ Ibid., 234 (no. 7) and 236 (no. 26).

²⁶ Ibid., 286.

²⁷ The examples reported by Coldstream and Huxley come solely from deposits assigned to LM I A, with no mention of any continuation into LM I B.

²⁸ e.g. Kythera, pl. 82, 8–9.

²⁹ Ibid., 286.

³⁰ The Cretan parallels referred to are from the Magazine of the Lily Vases in PM i. 577, fig. 421, 8; and from the House of the Sacrificed Oxen, PM ii. 304, fig. 176 L. The Knossian parallels are very broad; they simply show that the general shape was known on Crete.

³¹ Though the shape is not dissimilar to that of the silver cups from the Kastri settlement; Kythera, pls. 59. 23–4, 60, 23–4.

³² PM ii. 624, 637–44, figs. 402–3, 407, 409 B; Matthaus, H., Die Bronzegefäße der kretisch-mykenischen Kultur (PBF 2. 1; Munich, 1980)Google Scholar. Matthäus has very useful information on ring-handled basins, which he terms Breitrandschalen, from all of the abovementioned contexts, such as Mycenae etc. His work supersedes to a large extent Catling, H., Cypriot Bronzework in the Mycenaean World (Oxford, 1964)Google Scholar, e.g. 174, form 10.

³³ Doumas, C., The Wall-Paintings of Thera (Athens, 1992), 147, 151Google Scholar, pls. in, 115.

³⁴ Kythera, 237, no. 31 (pl. 71).

³⁵ Ibid., 237–8, nos. 28–38.

³⁶ Ibid., 286.

³⁷ Ibid., 294.

³⁸ Coldstream and Huxley (Kythera, 286) have the following to say about LM 1 A blossom bowls: ‘of peculiar interest are our local imitations of closed stone bowls. Serpentine blossom bowls, decorated with six lily petals in relief, were imported from Crete to Kythera (L 13–16); the closest—and perhaps therefore the earliest—of the clay imitations try to reproduce the heavy thick walls and the grey soapy surface of the originals (D 9–10, E 22). The others are made in the normal technique; yet when the lily petals are gouged out of the surface (E 20, J 16), the illusion of stone is still preserved. Latest, perhaps, are E 23–4, where the potters have resorted to a time-saving device in adding the petals by the appliqué technique; furthermore, the collar and disc foot are foreign to the serpentine prototype.’ Other examples of ceramic blossom bowls have been found at Mallia (Deshayes, J. and Desscnne, A., Fouilles Executées à Mallia. Explorations des Maisons et Quartiers d'Habitation [Paris, 1959Google Scholar – Études Crétoises 11], 47 no. 1), Agia Irini (Cummer, W.W. and Schofield, E., Keos III: Ayia Irini: House A [Mainz, 1984], 68, 104Google Scholar, nos. 361, 1170, pls. 53, 76) and Tsoungiza (J. Rutter pers. comm.).

³⁹ Warren (n. 23), 14–17.

⁴⁰ Further discussion of the ceramic skeuomorphs of stone vessels on Kythera can be found in Bevan, A. H., ‘Value Regimes in the Eastern Mediterranean Bronze Age: A Study Through Stone Vessels’ (unpublished PhD diss., UCL 2001), 235–6Google Scholar.

⁴¹ Kythera, 287.

⁴² Coldstream and Huxley contrast it with the ‘high-spouted jug’, a feature of both MM III B and LM I B but not LM I A, and a shape that might more commonly be dubbed ‘beaked jug’ or ‘jug with cutaway spout’.

⁴³ Particularly close is no. 59 from Tomb E (Kythera, pl. 79). Vessel dimensions are also informative: in height the 12 examples published by Coldstream and Huxley vary between 16.5 and 21.4 em, D. (rim) 12–15.6 cm, and D. (base) 6–11 cm. The two published here have heights of 20.1 and 22.2 cm, D. (rim) 13.5 and 14.5 cm, (base) 10 and 10.8 cm. They thus fall substantially within the very same size range. Moreover, they also have rather elliptical rims, a feature of at least two of those published in 1972.

⁴⁴ No. 151 does not have any neck or rim, but it seems rather certain to be a ewer due to its body form (Fig. 16).

⁴⁵ Kythera, pl. 72: 61, 63.

⁴⁶ Ibid., 287.

⁴⁷ No. 44 from Tomb D: H. 32 cm, D. (rim) 12 cm, (base) 6 cm. No. 149 from feature 5: H. 32 cm, D. (rim) 11.5 cm, (base) 9.3 cm.

⁴⁸ Kythera, no. 43, on pp. 248–9, and pl. 77, fig. 89.

⁴⁹ E. Kiriatzi, ‘Sherds, fabrics and clay sources: reconstructing the ceramic landscapes of prehistoric Kythera’, paper presented at METRON conference, University of Yale, New Haven, April 2002.

⁵⁰ See pottery from Kastri Deposit α: Kythera, 75–83.

⁵¹ Ibid., 93, and pl. 21, nos. 25–9.

⁵² This material and its implications will be returned to in further study of the surface material of Kastri.

⁵³ Although this fabric is used for braziers and lamps found in tombs at Kastri, these shapes cannot be confirmed at Tholos, and certainly not in this fabric.

⁵⁴ Additional evidence of possible interspersed tombs and settlement on Kythera will be provided by the publication of the KIP survey data.

⁵⁵ Esp. Tomb E: Kythera, 223.

⁵⁶ Cadogan, G., ‘Pyrgos, Crete, 1970–7’, AR 24 (1977–1978), 70–84Google Scholar. See figs. 5 and 8, and p.73: ‘the LM I offerings of Pyrgos IV had been placed on the upper floor and eventually tumbled down over the burials below’.

⁵⁷ Sakellarakis, Y. and Sakellarakis, E., Archanes: Minoan Crete in a New Light (Athens, 1997), 223–9Google Scholar. Building 4 is within the Phourni cemetery but was not used for burial. In this, and in the fact that it was in large part devoted to craft activities, it differs somewhat from the other contexts discussed here.

⁵⁸ Note the possible brazier in feature 5 and a possible alabastron in feature 21.

⁵⁹ This is based on the known heights of chambers in the 1960s tombs (1–1.6 m) and the (at least) 20–30 cm of bedrock on top of them.

⁶⁰ The Palaiopolis area was brought under more intensive cultivation by the inhabitants of several inland villages from c. 1800 AD; see Leontsinis (n. 8), 36, 204.

⁶¹ C. Frederick and A. Krahtopoulou (pers. comm.). Changes to the coastline around Kastri are part of an ongoing geoarchacological study (as part of KIP) to be published elsewhere.

⁶² Kythera, figs. 2–3.

⁶³ These have been documented by L. Preston and are part of a wider study of the Kytheran funerary landscape (as part of KIP) to be published elsewhere.

⁶⁴ For the Protopalatial, see MacGillivray, J. A., Knossos: Pottery Groups of the Old Palace Period (BSA Studies 5; London, 1998)Google Scholar. For the Neopalatial, and particularly MM III, see Hood, M. S. F., ‘Back to basics with Middle Minoan IIIB’, in Evely, D., Lemos, I., and Sherratt, S. (eds), Minotaur and Centaur: Studies in the Archaeology of Crete and Euboea Presented to Mervyn Popham (BAR S638; Oxford, 1996), 10–16Google Scholar; also van de Moortel, A., ‘The Transition from the Protopalatial to the Neopalatial Society in South-Central Crete: A Ceramic Perspective’ (Diss., Bryn Mawr College, 1997)Google Scholar.

⁶⁵ Hood (n. 64); van de Moortel (n. 64); also C. Knappett and T. F. Cunningham, ‘Three Neopalatial deposits from Palaikastro, East Crete’ (forthcoming).

⁶⁶ Although of course the settlement at Kastri does see significant changes between LM I A and I B, notably in the importation of finewares from Crete.

⁶⁷ Driessen, J. and Macdonald, C., The Troubled Island: Minoan Crete Before and After the Santorini Eruption (Aegaeum 17; Liège, 1997)Google Scholar.

⁶⁸ Kythera, 220–6.

⁶⁹ Ibid., 223, fig. 74. Note that the pebble deposit is described as ‘much disturbed’ and is portrayed as one or two discrete concentrations (50+ cm across, which is roughly the size of the Tholos patches) in the section drawing, so these may also have been isolated pebbled zones within the chamber.

⁷⁰ Kythera, pl. 65 d.

⁷¹ e.g. ibid., silver cups: pls. 59: 23–4, 60: 23–4; stone vessels: ibid., pls. 61: 37; 62: 6, 62, 152, 154, 346, 348; 69: 39; 82: 8, 9, 11; 83: 6–7, 13–16.

⁷² Forsdyke, E. J., ‘The Mavrospelio cemetery at Knossos’, BSA 28 (1926–1927), 243–96Google Scholar.

⁷³ Dimopoulou, N., ‘The Neopalatial cemetery of the Knossian harbour-town at Poros: mortuary behaviour and social ranking,’ in Kilian-Dirlmeier, I. (ed.), Eliten in der Bronzezeit (Bonn, 1999), 27–36Google Scholar. She notes the ‘overall similarities with the Kythera tombs with multiple chambers’ (p. 28), as well as the ubiquity of the conical cup in the Poros tombs (p. 29).

⁷⁴ For an important recent discussion, see Preston, L., ‘A Mortuary Approach to Cultural Interaction and Political Dynamics in Late Minoan II–IIIB’ (unpublished PhD diss., UCL 2001)Google Scholar, ch. 3.