Praisos iv: A preliminary report on the 1993 and 1994 survey seasons

The Annual of the British School at Athens

Volumn 94, Issue 6, 1999, Pages 215-264

  Whitley, James ^a   Prent, Mieke ^b   Thorne, Stuart ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WALES   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85009647442     PISSN: 00682454     EISSN: 20452403     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0068245400000587     Document Type: Article

References (122)

1. The Praisos project is based in the University of Wales. Cardiff, and research in Greece is carried out under the auspices of the British School at Athens. Funding for the 1993 and 1994 survey seasons and for subsequent study seasons has been provided by the British School at Athens; the School of History and Archaeology. University of Wales, Cardiff: the Society of Antiquaries of London: the British Academy: and the Institute for Aegean Prehistory in New York. We are grateful to all these institutions for their support. The project has also been supported by members of the Greek Archaeological Service, principally the Ephors of East Crete. C. Davaras and then N. Papadakis, assisted by M. Tsipopoulou. Our survey has also been helped by a number of epimeletes who have worked with us, particularly Vassiliki Zographiki. JW acted as director, and MP and ST as field team leaders and assistant directors. Jonathan Berry acted as team leader for the 1994 urban survey of Praisos. and Kieran O'Conor (assisted by Rebecca Sweetman) undertook the topographical survey in 1994. Howard Mason and Amanda Kelly are responsible for most of the drawings. Subsequent study was undertaken by JW. Howard Mason. MP. ST. RS (for the fabrics) and A. Kelly, Survey and subsequent study has been aided by students from Cardiff, Cambridge, Edinburgh and Dublin: J. Rowlands, M. Ferguson, R. Parr, M. Brennan, S. Cohen, D. Martinez, H. Weston, J. Smith, T. Matthews, D. Caswell, S. Morris, P. Kenny, N. Goss, E. Cahill, R. Parness, P. Harvey, C. Hatzimichael and E. Wright. We had hoped to add a short note about the fabrics of pottery from the Praisos survey. A note on this subject will be written by Rebecca Sweetman, and will appear in a subsequent volume of the Annual.
2. Brief notices ot this work have appeared in BSAAR 1993-4, 5-26: BSAAR 1994-5, 26-7; AR 40 (1993-1994), 82 and AR 41 (1994-1995), 70 and J. Whitley, ‘From Minoans to Eteocretans: the Praisos region 1200-500 BC,’ in W. G. Cavanagh, M. Curtis, J. N. Coldstream, and A. W. Johnston (eds). Post-Minoan Crete: Proceedings of the First Colloquium (BSA Studies, 2: London, 1998, 27-39.
3. Previous surveys in Crete include the Lasithi plain; see L. V. Watrous, Lasithi: A History of Settlement on a Highland Plain in Crete. (Hesp. supp. 18: Princeton, 1982): the Mesara plain in Crete, for which see L. V. Watrous, D. Chatsi-Vallianou, K. Pope, N. Mourtzas, J. Shay, C. Thomas Shay, J. Bennet, D. Tsoungarakis, E. Angelomati-Tsoungarakis, Chr. Vallianos, and H. Blitzer, ‘A survey of the Western Mesara plain in Crete: preliminary report of the 1984, 1986, and 1987 field seasons’. Hesp. 62 (1993), 191-248 10.2307/148150 : the Ayiofarango valley, for which see D. J. Blackmail and K. Branigan, ‘An archaeological survey on the south coast of Crete between the Ayiofarango and Chrisostomos’. BSA 70 (1975), 17-36 and Blackman and Branigan, ‘An archaeological survey of the lower catchment of the Ayiofarango valley’, BSA 72 (1977, 13-84. The Canadian Sphakia survey in Western Crete has covered a wider area; see L. Nixon, J. Moody, and O. Rackham, ‘Archaeological survey in Sphakia, Crete,’ Classical Views, n.s. 7 (1988, 159-73: L. Nixon, J. Moody, S. Price, and O. Rackham, ‘Archaeological survey in Sphakia, Crete’. Classical Views, n.s. 8 (1989), 201-15; and L. Nixon, J. Moody, V. Niniou-Kindeli, S. Price and O. Rackham, ‘Archaeological survey in Sphakia, Crete,’ Classical Views, n.s. 9 (1990, 213-30.
4. For the Agia Photia survey, see M. Tsipopoulou, Archaeological Survey at Aghia Photia. Siteia (Partille, 1989): for work in the Itanos region see Th. Kalpaxis, A. Schnapp, and D. Viviers, ‘Rapport sur les travaux menés en collaboration avec l'École Française d'Athènes: Itanos (Crète Orientale)’. BCH 119 (1995), 713-3610.3406/bch.1995.7008.
5. For ancient references to Praisos and the Eteocretans, see Od. xix. 172-7; Hdt. vii. 170-1: Strabo x. 4.6-12. For the relationship between ‘Minoans’ and ‘Eteocretans’ see Whitley (n. 2).
6. For the terminology used to describe the three hills of Praisos, see Halbherr 1901, 371-4; see also Bosanquet 1902, 233-4: Whitley et al. 1995, 409 n. 24 and 410 fig. 2.
7. Pashley and Spratt are both jointly responsible for the correct identification of the site: see R. Pashley, Travels in Crete. I (London, 1837), 290-1: T. A. B. Spratt, Travels and Researches in Crete. I (London, 1865), 152-214 : Halbherr 1901: Bosanquet 1902. The association of the site with the Eteocretans was confirmed in the eyes of these scholars by the discovery of the so-called Eteocretan inscriptions. See especially R. S. Conway, ‘The pre-Hellenic inscriptions of Praesos’. BSA 8 (1901-1902, 125-56: Y. Duhoux, Les Étéocrétois: les textes. la langue Amsterdam, 1982, 55-85, 119-24. All inscriptions from Praisos (in both Greek and ‘Eteocretan’) have been published by Guardueei, I. Cret. III. 6. 1-34.
8. See Halbherr 1901: Bosanquet 1902. 54-9: E. S. Forster, ‘Praesos: the terracottas’. BSA 8 (1901-1902, 271-81.
9. Bosanquet 1902. 240-54: F. H. Marshall, ‘Tombs of Hellenic date at Praesos’. BSA 12 (1905-1906, 63-70.
10. It is not clear, however, exactly where ‘Sto Mavriki’ is to be located. The authors disagree on this point. Bosanquet locates it close to Mesamvrysis (though his language is ambiguous). See Bosanquet 1902, 238.
11. Bosanquet 1902, 236. The name ‘Tzanni’ suggests that the abandoned ‘Turkish’ houses near Ayios Konstantinos were also the location oi the ‘Tzani Metochi’ mentioned by other writers.
12. See Bosanquet 1902, 236.
13. Aerial photographs haw been supplied courtesy of the Aerial Photographic Archive of the University of Keele in Staffordshire. We should like to thank John Cherry for his help in this matter.
14. See Rackham and Moody 1996. III 14; and O. Rackham, ‘Observations on the historical ecology of Boeotia’. BSA 78 (1983, 291-351.
15. The practice of bulldozing hillsides to make new olive terraees is, however, by no means confined to Eastern Crete: see Rackham and Moody 1996. 211-12.
16. For the Keos survey, see J. Cherry, J. Davis, and E. Mantzourani, Landscape Archaeology as Long-Term History: Northern Keos in the Cycladic Islands. (Monumenta Archaeologica 16; Los Angeles, 1991), esp. 13-35 for field methods. It is instructive to compare their (and our) methods with those used by other surveys: see especially M. H. Jameson, C. N. Runnels, and T. H. van Andel, A Greek Countryside: The Southern Argolid from Prehistory to the Present Day (Stanford, 1994, 19-228 for the Southern Argolid: and J. L. Bintliff and A. M. Snodgrass, ‘The Cambridge/Bradford Boeotian Expedition: the first four years’. JFA 12 (1985), 123-6110.2307/530288. For the different methods used in surveys m Eastern Crete, see Hayden et al. 1992, 300-7: and Haggis 1996. 382-89.
17. Cherry et al. (n. 21), 37-54: see also the extended discussion of T. W. Gallant, ‘Background noise’ and site definition: a contribution to survey methodology’. JFA 13 (1986), 403-1810.2307/530167.
18. See Cherry et al. (n. 21), 28-31. For a discussion of a variety of ‘site-collecting’ strategies, see Bintliff and Snodgrass (n. 21), 133-7 and Jameson et al. (n. 21) 221-8. For the definition of sites in other E. Cretan surveys, see Hayden et al. 1992, 301-6; Haggis 1996, 388-9.
19. The EDM survey team was led by Dr Kieran O'Conor, assisted principally by Rebecca Sweetman, using methods described in Whitley et al. 1995. The plans were drawn up by Howard Mason.
20. S. E. Alcock, ‘Urban survey and the polis of Phlious’. Hesp. 60 (1991), 421-6310.2307/148266. For other approaches to ‘urban survey’ see T. M. Whitelaw and J. L. Davis. ‘The polis center of Koressos’, in Cherry et al. (n. 21) 265-84: and, more generally, J. Bintliff and A. Snodgrass, ‘Mediterranean survey and the city’. Antiquity, 62 (1988), 57-71.
21. Our ‘sampling’ methods were similar to Cherry's and Alcock's. but our terminology is different: see Alcock (n. 25), 440-44. Alcock's ‘tract samples’ are similar to our ‘line samples’; her ‘field grabs’ are equivalent to our ‘grab samples’; and her ‘field middle’ samples are, with some modification, similar to our ‘vacuum samples’.
22. See Rackham and Moody 1996, 140-5: and also O. Rackham and J. Moody, ‘Terraces’. in B. Wells (ed.). Agriculture in Ancient Greece (Stockholm, 1992, 123-30.
23. Bosanquet 1902. 235-6: Papadakis and Rutkowski 1985. For further references see Strasser 1992, 237.
24. Fabric VI is a semi-fine fabric. It has small gritty white inclusions, few black grits and few quartz crystals, it has linear voids and a conchoidal break (layered slightly). Inclusions - 10% of fabric, voids - 2-5%; see R. Sweetman, ‘Macroscopic fabric analysis of the Praisos survey pottery’, BSA forthcoming, Compare K. Nowicki, ‘Report on investigations in Greece X: studies in 1993 and 1994’. Archeologia, 46 (1995), 66.
25. For recent research in the coastal zones see Chryssoulaki and Vokotopoulos 1992. Inland sites have been explored by Nowicki (n. 29) is a semi-fine fabric.
26. For Neolithic sites in Eastern Crete, see R. C. Bosanquet, R. M. Dawkins, M. N. Tod, W. L. H. Duckworth, and J. L. Myres, ‘Excavations at Palaikasiro II’. BSA 9 (1902-1903, esp. 336-43: R.M. Dawkins, ‘Excavations at Palaikastro IV.’ BSA 11 (1904-1905, 258-92. esp. 260-8 ‘Neolithic settlement at Magasa’. See generally Strasser 1992-254.
27. The importance of defensibility for such sites has recently been stressed by Nowicki (n. 29). 65-6.
28. Watrous (n. 3) 11.
29. But see J. D. S. Pendlebury, The Archaeology of Crete (London, 1939) 78 L.V. Watrous, ‘Review of Aegean prehistory III: Crete from earliest prehistory through the protopalatial period.’ AJA 98 (1994), 717-2010.2307/506551 and Haggis 1996, 380 for the difficulties involved in the identification of relevant material in survey.
30. Bosanquet 1902, 235: F. Schachermeyr. ‘Vorbericht über eine Expedition nach Ostkreta’. AA 1938, 474.
31. Bosanquet 1902, 235: Papadakis and Rutkowski 1985. 134.
32. Whitley et al. 1995. 409-15. Likewise, a megalithic construction on the Third Acropolis, included in Bosanquet's map of the area (Bosanquet 1902, pl. 8). has not yet produced any pottery of BA date.
33. The value of tripod legs tor dating purposes in survey was recognized by S. Hood, P. Warren and G. Cadogan, ‘Travels in 1962’. BSA 59 (1964, 52-3. Tripod legs with thin oval sections were found with MM pottery at Sites 27 and 46. Pot forms, however, may also play a role in determining shape of legs and it is questionable how firmly we can take the strict typology proposed by Betancourt 1980.
34. For similar MM tripod legs see Betancourt 1980. 3. See the tripod leg from Site 46.
35. The present ground level is some 0.10 0.15 m below foundation of the wall, indicating the amount of erosion since its construction.
36. Bosanquet 1902. 236-40. fig. 7.
37. Bosanquet., 238-9.
38. Bosanquet., 237-8.
39. i.e. a doorway in one of the rooms, the partition wall between rooms H and G, and part of wall M. see Bosanquet., 239. It may further be relevant that Marshall himself mentioned ‘small “flower-pot” cups, several with burnt vegetable matter beneath them, and all showing some signs of fire――perhaps an early description of Minoan conical cttps.
40. Platon (n. 38) 302.
41. Inv. no. 1088. See Davaras. (n. 39), 393.
42. This could be an interior wall or a different building phase.
43. See Bosanquet 1902, 237. fig. 6.
44. Bosanquet., 236.
45. We thank Dr J. A. M. MacGillivray for this observation.
46. Tripod legs with thick oval section are assigned to the MM III/LM I period by Hood, Warren, and Cadogan (n. 41). 52 and by Betancourt (1980, xx). In this case, however, the small diameter ot the pot's base may have had some influence in determining the shape of the legs.
47. See e.g. the sherds numbered 48.0.3 and 48.0.4.
48. For the earliest suggestion that megalithic structures of this type in East Crete were of ‘Geometric’ date, see D. G. Hogarth, ‘Excavations at Zakro, Crete’, BSA 7 (1900-1991, 147-9. This view has been repeated by B. J. Hayden, The Development of Cretan Architecture from the LM III A through the Geometric Period (Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, 1981, 86-8, 95 n. 192; and by A. Mazarakis Ainian, From Rulers’ Dwellings to Temples: Architecture, Religion and Society in Early Iron Age Greece (SIMA 121: Jonsered, 1997), 207-8 with specific reference to the megalithic structure at Ayios Konstantinos. To assign such structures principally or solely to the Early Iron Age. however, is to ignore the work of the Minoan roads survey; see Tzedhakis et al. (n. 7).
49. Haggis 1996, 399.
50. Papadakis and Rutkowski 1985, 130.
51. Platon (n. 38), 302; Davaras (n. 39), 393.
52. Platon (n. 38), 294.
53. Haggis 1996, 401.
54. The most complete overview of LM III finds from the Praisos area is by Kanta 1980, 179-83. See also Tsipopoulou 1997 for a discussion of the larger Siteia area in LM III.
55. Bosanquet 1902, 239-40. Associated finds were a small Corinthian aryballos, some local pottery, some fragmentary silver jewellery, an ivory disc, and some worked bone.
56. Bosanquet., 237-8: Kanta 1980, 179.
57. Platon (n. 38). 302: Kanta 1980, 181.
58. Cf. Bosanquet 1902, 240 on the masonry of Tholos A, which consists of ‘soft white freestone quarried near Vavelloi’.
59. Platon (n. 38). 302. Kanta 1980, 182 thinks they may be later than LM III.
60. Since then the area has been bulldozed, removing any trace of this and the other tombs.
61. The name Riza is still used for the E NW lower slopes of Kapsalos.
62. See Bosanquet 1902, 254. fig. 26.
63. A bath-tub larnax was also found in Tholos Tomb B decorated, according to Bosanquet, ‘with meaningless serpentine curves in dark red paint on a buff slip’. Bosanquet 1902, 247 not illustrated.
64. As already suggested by Kanta 1980, 179.
65. See Platon. (n. 38) 302.
66. Possible Minoan sherds were noted in a road section in tract 119, see also the section on the Protopalatial period.
67. Platon (n. 38), 301-2; Kanta 1980. 179-80. 182. The latter observation was confirmed during the 1994 survey season, when several piles of small white cut stones were still visible.
68. It is not clear whether it is a rock-cut or a tholos tomb and the interior and exterior measurements as given are incompatible. Platon (n. 38), 301. See also Kanta 1980, 179.
69. Bosanquet 1902, 245-8. See also Kanta 1980, 179 and Tsipopoulou 1997, 239, who prefers an LM III C date for the tub larnax. It is difficult to accept the LM III A seal stone, found by Bosanquet in the plaster or mud mortar of a HL house on the First Acropolis, as evidence for funerary use of the rock-cut space behind it (‘Tomb D’, see Bosanquet 1902, 251-4). This may well be one of the CL HL rock cut cellars so frequently encountered on the First and Second Acropoleis.
70. See also the previous section on the MM and LM I periods.
71. Kanta 1980, 180, 182, 289. For the role of the Palaikastro workshop, see also Tsipopoulou 1997, 242-3.
72. Papadakis and Rutkowski 1985. esp. 134; Kanta 1980, 182; Bosanquet 1902, 235.
73. For the first phase of occupation, see p. 226.
74. According to P. Faure, ‘Grottes crétoises.’ BCH 80 (1956), 99 10.3406/bch.1956.2412, the cave facing Katsidonia was used as a hide-out by British soldiers during WW II.
75. For a building of similar plan and dimensions at Karphi, see K. Nowicki, ‘The history and setting of the town at Karphi’, SMEA 26 (1987, 255 fig. 5.
76. Ash, animal bones, and fine cup and bowl fragments have also been found at the highest rock peak of the refuge site near Pefki in south-east Crete. See K. Nowicki, ‘Report on investigations in Crete VIII. Studies in 1991’. Archeologia, 43 (1992), 116-17; id., ‘A Dark Age refuge settlement near Pefki, East Crete’, BSA 89 (1994), 250-2.
77. See e.g. the sherds from tract 89 numbered 40.4.19: 40.4.16: 40.80.4: 40.4.18.
78. See sherds numbered 40.1.36 legs: 40.1.20 (GS.V): 40.1.35: 40.C5.1 (CV): long slender leg 40.1.22.
79. See sherds numbered 40.1.36. 40.1.2 (GSII): 40.1.1 (GS II): lid 40.C4.1 (CIV), basins 40.2.26, 40.2.27, 40.87.9.
80. See sherds numbered 40.1.42, 40.1.43, 40.1.51, 40.87.10; 40.4.11; kylikes 40.C6.7; 40.4.2; 40.1.31.
81. For more details of the topography of Manoulis’ Metochi see the description of Site 11 on p. 226.
82. EN/EM I artefacts were also found in this valley, but were restricted to the area of Site 11, the rocky knoll opposite Site 17.
83. For a description of the geomorphology see Whitley (n. 13), 256.
84. Bosanquet 1902, 234 and pl. 8 for the position of his test trenches.
85. Bosanquet., 234. This is clearly illustrated by the numerous rock cuttings, which do not only consist of cellars and cisterns, but of whole house foundations.
86. The eastern slope of the First Acropolis appears to be unstable, with considerable soil movement by erosion and collapse of the upper ridge. The early sherd material found lower down this slope may therefore have travelled from quite far.
87. Sherds of LM III C dale included those numbered as follows: from the S slope of ihe First Acropolis (514.3/23): from its lower NE slope (597.1/1): 506.1/17 body and handle and 515.3/3 (near) rim from its upper S slope. There is a larger number of tripod legs with thumb impressions, often quite large, and of pithoi decorated with bands with herringbone incisions. As these are different both in shape and in fabric from those found at Kypia, it is assumed here that they are later. They will be discussed in the next section.
88. Analogous with the explanation for the presence of pottery in LM III B style at Kypia and other LM III C refuge settlements.
89. Platon (n. 38). 302.
90. See the previous section on the LM III A B periods. Ayios Konstantinos will not be further discussed here.
91. For the Kapsalos tombs: Kanta 1980, 179-180. For Ayios Nikolaos: Platon, (n. 38), 302.
92. K. Nowicki, ‘Topography of refuge settlement in Crete’. Jahrbuch des Röimsch-Germanisch Zentralmuseums in Mainz, 34 (1987, 217-19.
93. We have not yet been able to verify the existence of LM III C sites mentioned by Faure 1962 (n. 83), 39 at Plakalonia, 2 km south of Nea Praisos and at the summit of Potistiria. SE of Kypia and outside our survey area.
94. D. C. Haggis, ‘Intensive survey, traditional settlement patterns and Dark Age Crete: the case of Early Iron Age Kavousi’. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology, 6 (1993), 131-74. esp. 133, 143: id. 1996, 408-10.
95. With the exception of Bosanquet's LM III A seal, which may well have come from elsewhere, see above (n. 72).
96. See sherds numbered 578.6/4; 598.3/7; 540.2/23; 592.2/58, 542.2/4; 539.4/17.
97. See sherds numbered 572.1/16; 539.4/22.
98. Spratt (n. 10), 166-7; R.C. Bosanquet, ‘Dicte and the temples of Dictaean Zeus’, BSA 40 (1939-1940), 64. Both Spratt and Bosanquet considered the remains at the Prophitis Ilias too poor to be identified with one of the temples of Diktaian Zeus which according to Strabo belonged to the area of Praisos. More recently, however, P. Faure has revived this hypothesis. Faure 1960 (n. 83), 195.
99. See Halbherr 1901, 389: Forster (n. 11). 280.
100. Whether the establishment of the sanctuary at the Third Acropolis coincided with that of the settlement of Praisos or was preceded by a phase of habitation is unclear. The contexts for the pottery from the old excavations do not seem to have been recorded, so, even if the pottery is published, it will not help much to resolve this problem. It may seem fanciful to some to suggest that the three acropoleis of Praisos may somehow evoke the three hills (acropoleis?) of Kypia. However, this analogy suggests itself to most who have actually visited both sites, and is in keeping with a new ‘phenomenological’ approach to landscape archaeology, pioneered in classical archaeology by V. Scully, The Earth, The Temple and the Gods (New Haven, 1962). It is an approach revived in British prehistory by, among others. C. Tilley, A Phenomenology of Landscape (Oxford, 1994).
101. A brief list was given by Marshall (n. 12), 63-70.
102. Bosanquet 1902, 240-5, figs. 9-10. Because no undisturbed burials were found, Bosanquet suggested that Tholos A had been used for worship of a local hero. However, it is clear from more recent scholarship, notably J. N. Coldstream, Geometric Greece (London, 1977), 48-50, 99-102, 276-710.4324/9780203472781 and A. M. Snodgrass, The Dark Age of Greece (Edinburgh, 1971), 164-70, that multiple interments in chamber tombs and tholoi was normal practice in Crete during the Early Iron Age, and this is likely to have been true of Tholos tomb A too. The tomb's contents may have been disturbed in HL times, as Bosanquet himself pointed out. See also Tsipopoulou 1987, 264.
103. Bosanquet 1902, 248-51, fig. 21, pl. 9; J. P. Droop, ‘Some Geometric pottery from Crete’, BSA 12 (1904-1905), 25-8, figs. 1-2; Tsipopoulou 1987, 264.
104. Droop (n. 115), 28-33. fig. 3: Marshall (n. 12), 64; Tsipopoulou 1987, 264.
105. Bosanquet 1902, 245-6.
106. Davaras (n. 39), 392. See also Tsipopoulou 1987, 265-6. Her description of ‘Tomb 1978’ fits the one excavated by Davaras, but its location seems to have been confused with that of the tholos found in 1961.
107. Bosanquet 1902, 235-6. figs. 3-4: Papadakis and Rutkowski 1985, 136-7: Tsipopoulou 1987, 262-3.
108. Papadakis and Rutkowski 1985, 134-7 mention 43 G sherds, including fragments of an Attic or Corinthian krater, and of cups, lid, and jugs.
109. Tsipopoulou (n. 73). esp. 101-4.
110. Droop (n. 115), 36-7. fig. 1: Tsipopoulou 1987, 265.
111. Halbherr 1901; Bosanquet 1902, 236: E. S. Forster, ‘Terracotta plaques from Praesos’. BSA 11 (1904-1905), 243-57; id. (n. 11).
112. Halbherr 1901: Bosanquet 1902. 256-9: Forster (n. 11): S. Benton, ‘Bronzes from Palaikastro and Praisos’, BSA 40 (1939-1940, 51-9.
113. For the Knossian sequence, see in particular P. J. Callaghan, ‘Archaic to Hellenistic pottery,’ in Sackett et al. 1992, 89-136.
114. On loomweights, see Sackett et al. 1992, 399-406.
115. See Whitley et al. 1995, 411 fig. 3.
116. On rock-cut features at Praisos, see Whitley et al. 1995, 416-27. The only general study of such features in Crete remains D. Gondicas, Recherches sur la Crète Occidentale (Amsterdam, 1988).
117. See again Marshall (n. 12).
118. On terracottas, see Forster (n. 124).
119. On the early modern name for this site, see Spratt (n. 10). 163-70: Bosanquet 1902, 231-5: Pashley (n. 10), 290 n. 17. More information on the population of these villages in the early 19th c. is given in R. Pashley, Travels in Crete II (London, 1837, 322-3. Both Kalamafki and Vavelloi were Muslim villages at the time Pashley was writing. He notes that in his day Kalamafki had 10 families and Vavelloi 25. Pashley goes on to point out that the population of Vavelloi had been six times as large before the Cretan insurrection of 1821.
120. The Royal Commissions in England, Scotland and Wales no longer provide a useful model for comprehensive survey of ancient monuments. They are today more or less immoblized by different and conflicting objectives, mission statements, accountability, and all the other paraphernalia of modern politicized ‘management’.
121. Some of the views expressed in this paragraph are not shared by one of the authors, Mieke Prent. She wishes to disassociate herself from these statements.
122. Platon (n. 38), 302.