The Architecture of the Temples and Other Buildings · 2 The Architecture of the Temples and Other...

C H A P T E R 1

The Architecture of the Temples and Other Buildings

Joseph W. Shaw

1. Introduction

2. The Period of Temple A, Ca. 1020–800 B.C.

3. The Period of Temple B, Ca. 800–600 B.C.

4. Partial Desertion of the Kommos Site, Ca. 600–375/350 B.C.

5. The Period of Temple C, Ca. 375/350 B.C.–A.D. 160/170

6. Architectural Fragments

Appendix 1.1. Conservation of Walls and Scarps

Appendix 1.2. Ironworking in the Greek Sanctuary (J. E. Rehder)

1. IntroductionOur exposition of the architectural development of the Greek Sanctuary at Kommos is chrono-logical, from the earliest through the latest temples and their associated structures (see Table1.1 for a chronological chart; Pls. 1.1–1.14 for general views and plans). A small rural shrine(Temple A), founded as early as the end of the eleventh century B.C., was eventually replacedby a building (Temple B) constructed on the same site. The new building served, especiallyin the seventh century, as a popular cult center featuring worship and ritual meals. After aperiod of relative disuse it, too, was replaced during the fourth century (by Temple C). Overtime, new buildings were added as the sanctuary became increasingly popular, but towardthe end of the Hellenistic period the area went largely out of use.

Since the methodology of excavation exposes the later remains first, and our understandingof the sanctuary began with aspects of its latest phase, a review of that excavation process, asexperienced, should be related. It will also help to familiarize the reader with the nomenclatureadopted for the areas and buildings encountered. For those who helped with the excavationprocess, see Table 1.2 (1991–98) and J. W. Shaw and M. C. Shaw 1995: table 2.1 (1976–90).

As detailed in the preliminary reports in Hesperia (J. W. Shaw 1977b; 1979a; 1980a; 1981a;

1

2 The Architecture of the Temples and Other Buildings

Table 1.1. Chronology chart for the Greek Sanctuary at Kommos.

Period Date Events

Late Minoan IIIB ca. 1250 B.C. Minoan town and civic buildings abandonedHiatus—site unoccupied

Sub-Minoan ca. 1020 Temple A, Floor 1, constructedGeometric 875 Temple A, Floor 2, constructed

800 Temple B, Floor 1, constructedBuilding Z in use

760 Temple B, Floor 2, constructed

Orientalizing and Archaic 700 Altar U constructed650 Temple B, Floor 3, constructed625 Buildings Q and V constructed600 Buildings in disuse and abandoned

Hiatus—site used only occasionally550–500 Altar H and Building F constructed

Classical and Hellenistic 375–350 Temple C (Building A2) and retaining wall constructedAltar C, Round Building D, Building W, and Base Y constructed

150–50 Room A1 constructed north of Temple CBuilding B constructedBuilding E and Altars L and M constructed

Roman ca. 50 Temple C interior platforms and exterior benches constructedBuilding B exterior benches constructed

50–25 Sanctuary in disuse, possible burning25 B.C.–A.D. 50 Building B and Temple C occasionally usedA.D. 50–170 Temple C cleaned and reusedA.D. 200 Kommos area abandoned

1982a; 1984a; 1986; J. W. Shaw et al. 1978; J. W. Shaw and M. C. Shaw 1993), during 1976, theinitial year of excavation on the Kommos site, we first realized that there were post-Minoanremains as the result of a sounding made in deep sand.1 This discovery was followed in 1977by the clearance of thousands of cubic meters of drifted sand from the upper and lower slopesof the hillside (see also J. W. Shaw 1995: passim; Gifford 1995: passim). During this carefullymonitored process, carried out in the spring before actual excavation began, the exteriors offour of the later Greek buildings were partially defined. These were later to be given thealphabetical labels A, B, E, and F (Pl. 1.6).2

During 1977, work in the Southern Area concentrated on Building B, one of the first to bediscovered as it emerged from the sand. A boulder, first appearing to be lying loose on thehillside, proved to be the northwestern corner of a two-roomed structure. The exterior areasof the building were cleared, including that to the south, which later turned out to be partof the sanctuary court. The structure was termed Burned Building B after its south wall, whichhad been severely burnt by a fire lit in the court during a very late phase. The blaze seared

Introduction 3

Table 1.2. List of staff during the years 1991–98, indicating the year, home institution, and role(s)on the Kommos excavation.

Years at Kommos

Name Institution 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98

Bianco, Giuliana University of Toronto; architect/artist x x x x x

Bravo, Jorge University of California at Berkeley;trenchmaster x

Cain, C. D. (Kommos University of Toronto; studentand Toronto) assistant x x x x x

Carey, Sheila (Toronto) University of Toronto; studentassistant x x

Clarke, Joseph P. Artist x x

Costaki, Leda University of Toronto; cataloguer x x x

Critchley, John Brock University; trenchmaster x

Dabney, Taylor Pratt Institute; photographer x x x x x x

Doole, Jenny Profiler x x

Downie, Susan University of Toronto; trenchmaster x

Duclos, Rebecca University of Toronto; student(Toronto) assistant x

Fasoulakis, Sifis Pitsidia; excavation foreman x x x x x x x x

Fitzsimons, Rod University of Toronto; trenchmaster x

Hagen-Plattenberg, University of London; conservatorClarissa x x

Hall, Katherine University of Texas at Austin;conservator x x x

Hamann, Barbara Oriental Institute of Chicago;conservator x x x

Hewitt, Sonia McMaster University; trenchmaster x

Hirschfeld, Nicole University of Texas at Austin; profiler x

Ibronyi, Barbara Editorial consultant(Toronto) x x x x x x x x

Johnston, Alan W. University College London; potteryanalyst x x x x x x x x

Kantzios, Niki Bryn Mawr College; chief cataloguer x x x x x

Luke, Christina Scripps College; profiler x

Monroe, Christopher University of Michigan; trenchmaster x

Nixon, Gordon University of Toronto; trenchmaster x x x

Perron, Ann Metropolitan Toronto Separate SchoolBoard; photographer x

Pfaff, Julia University of Toronto; profiler x x x x x


Table 1.2. (Continued)

Years at Kommos

Name Institution 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98

Phillips, Jacke University of Toronto; student(Toronto) assistant x

Raymond, Amy University of Toronto; trenchmaster(Kommos and Toronto) and student assistant x x

Reese, David S. Field Museum of Natural History;faunal analyst x

Rehder, J. E. Metal specialist x

Ruscillo, Deborah University of Toronto; trenchmaster,assistant cataloguer x x x x x x x

Rutter, Jeremy Dartmouth College; ceramic analyst x x x x x x x x

Sabourin, Josee University of Toronto; trenchmaster x x x x

Shaw, Joseph W. University of Toronto; director x x x x x x x x

Shaw, Maria C. University of Toronto; assistantdirector x x x x x x x x

Smith, Brenda University of Pennsylvania;conservator x

Tabac, Lara Columbia University; trenchmaster x

Van de Moortel, Bryn Mawr College; ceramic analystAleydis x x x x x x

Verstraete, Jan University of Cincinnati; assistantceramic analyst x

Walsh, Katherine University of Texas at Austin;trenchmaster x

Whittaker, Helene University of Toronto; cataloguer x x

the court surface and left layers of black soot upon it and in the sand layers associated withthe interior of Room A1 to the west. While B’s interior rooms were being cleared, Altar Cwas discovered during sand clearing just north of what then was the southern property lineof the excavation. At first appearing to be the end of a thick wall, upon investigation thestructure was revealed to be an altar, as shown by the many burnt bones upon and aroundit and the animal figurines associated with it. One figurine was still standing upon the southernend of the altar. Shortly afterward Round Building D was discovered east of Building B. Itwas covered not with the usual layer but with accumulated clayish sand and earth, the result

Introduction 5

of erosion of the hillslope to the east and north. East of D, Building F, only the foundationof which remains, was excavated during the same year and later, during 1990.

In 1978 three structures—Room A1, part of Building E, and Altar H—were cleared. Thefirst turned out to be designed for groups of people, being capacious and surrounded on theinterior by a bench and having a central rectangular hearth. The excavation of this buildingbrought with it the first intimations that public, perhaps civic, buildings characterized theSouthern Area. Of E, which then continued into the scarp to the south, only an end room,subsequently interpreted as an annex, could be excavated. H, definitely an altar on line withAltar C discovered the year before, reinforced the impression that sanctuary buildings mightbe involved. Subsequent efforts, thanks to the generosity of the owner of the land (see J. W.Shaw 1995: 29 n. 11), enabled us to expand the excavation property to the south in order touncover, south of Room A1, a temple (then called Building A2) of a recognizable Cretan type,with its longitudinal axis aligned to Altars C and H, as we had hoped the case might be.During the same year the outline and general arrangement of the sanctuary court were finallyestablished with the clearing of Altars L and M, south of the two altars already discovered.

Two discoveries in 1979 enhanced our understanding of Minoan and Greek Kommos. Thefirst came with what was called Building J just west of the temple.3 Initially we consideredthis structure to be Greek, perhaps a stoa west of the temple, but soon its monumental natureand pottery content demonstrated that it was Minoan, of dimensions hardly commensuratewith the humble Minoan houses being found to the north. With the revelation of this buildingbegan the discovery of the Minoan civic structures underlying and spreading out beyond thesanctuary area, the object of succeeding years’ work and the subject of a future volume inthis series (Volume V). The second revelation came when, with the aim of determining theconstruction date of the temple, we temporarily removed some of its floor slabs and, excavatingbelow, discovered numerous earlier stratified levels, chiefly Archaic. A curious altar wasrevealed, surrounded by votive gifts. It consisted of three tapering pillars morticed into atriangular block. Clearly here were important remains, and so it was with some thought forthe future that the remainder of the season’s work was devoted to completing excavation ofthe Classical and Hellenistic sanctuary. Indeed, almost all contemporary structures and levelsnear the temple had been cleared by then, with the exception of the still-only-partially-excavated Building V, east of Round Building D, and the small enigmatic Building W, as wellas the wall retaining the sanctuary court along its southern perimeter. These were clearedduring later seasons.

During 1980, aside from further investigation of deeper Minoan levels west of the temple,we removed the Greek temple dumps south of it and excavated down to Minoan levels at thatpoint, recovering from the intervening strata first rich Archaic and then Geometric deposits. Atthe same time we opened up another space below the temple floor and found clearly delineatedlevels of not one but two earlier temples, one superposed on the other. The intermediate


building (Temple B), of which almost the entire plan was traceable, was open to the east andhad at least one interior platform or bench. Its ritual center in its first phase (three main phasescould be discerned) was the pillared shrine discovered during the previous year. The lowesttemple could be traced only partially because of the superincumbent later walls, hearths, andcolumn bases that could not be removed. Parts of its plan and the character and dating of itstwo phases, however, could be determined, a matter further clarified by the study of potterydeposits recovered elsewhere in the sanctuary.

When it became clear that the lowest temple rested upon Minoan levels and was, therefore,the first structure to be built above the Minoan ruins, we gave names to the three buildings,in sequential order, with A being the earliest and C the last, the subphases of each beingdesignated as, for instance, Temple A, Phase 1, or Temple C, Phase 5 (Pls. 1.19, 1.30, 1.81–1.82).

During the next year, 1981, the ancient topography of the areas outside the sanctuarybuildings became clearer as successive trenches were excavated to the east and south. Immedi-ately east of the temples Altar U was discovered, belonging to Temple B, Phase 2, along witha scatter of discarded pottery on the court surface. In 1982 a trench just to the north revealeda contemporary hearth and, further down, the massive north facade wall of Minoan BuildingT facing onto an east-west road (Road 17). Above the road was a dump of pottery and animalfigurines, many from the late Temple A period, apparently part of the clean up from the endof its second phase, when Temple B and its court were established.

Later work on the east here was to show that Temple A was a lone structure set withinthe still-Minoan landscape formed by the ruins of Buildings N and T. The users of TempleB, more ambitious than those of A, gradually extended the court eastward, a tendency alsonoticeable in connection with the later Temple C. During a late phase of Temple C, BuildingE was built. Part of E (the northern annex) had been excavated in 1979. In 1985 excavationof the remainder of the building revealed a two-roomed structure with an entrance from theeast bordered on one side by an exterior bench, with both entrance and bench facing awayfrom the sanctuary. Of the two interconnected rooms, that on the south was paved, and thaton the north had a hearth and pottery, suggesting a domestic function that may have led tothe building of the annex to the north.

South of the temples a series of trenches was cleared (during 1982–86) through lenses ofIron Age dump deposits sloping down to the south. On the upper Greek level was foundBuilding W, a small, almost square enclosure contemporary with Temple C, as well as thewall retaining the later sanctuary on the south. The retaining wall was set there no doubt tolimit erosion of the small plateau created by the temple and court construction above thecollapsed remains of Minoan Building T. Partly below W and extending to the west and eastwas discovered Archaic Building Q, an unusually long, narrow building, oriented east-westand with six interconnected rooms. Access to Q was apparently limited to the west, from theseashore area. Storage amphorae found in all its rooms suggest that the building was a depotfor goods, probably including wine and/or oil, some of which were imported from abroad.

Introduction 7

Bordering Q on the south was a sandy court with a hearth also connected with Phase 3 ofTemple B.

A final phase of excavation during 1991–95 focussed on the Minoan ashlar buildings eastand southeast of the Greek Sanctuary. It became clear during the process of work that whilethe later levels, usually above the collapsed walls of the Minoan buildings, were frequentedduring the later periods, the sanctuary proper and its attendant buildings were concentratednear the temple area and directly east of it. It is likely, as well, that there are more buildingsof the Greek period east of Buildings E and F, beyond the present excavation perimeter. Thereis no evidence that the area north of the sanctuary area was used extensively during the post-Minoan period.4

New structures of the Greek period were nevertheless identified. South of Building E, forinstance, steps leading down to a spring chamber, used during the Greek period, were foundbuilt within the northeastern corner of the northernmost gallery of Minoan Building P (GalleryP1). Southwest of here Building P also once provided a partial framework for GeometricBuilding Z, built within the western part of Gallery P3. The only new freestanding structureto be found, however, was Base Y, presumably a statue base, set far south of the sanctuarycourt.

The drawings and photographs of specific areas and features in the Greek Sanctuary areusually sequenced in terms of time, first Temple A, then Temple B, then Temple C. Generalphotographs and plans of the area precede them. Five overlapping state plans, Foldouts A–E,at 1:75, present both Minoan and Greek remains. These can be used for the study of thesanctuary as well as the Minoan civic buildings, in the latter case, either now or in connectionwith the Kommos preliminary reports in Hesperia (J. W. Shaw 1977b; 1979a; 1980a; 1981a;1982a; 1984a; 1986; J. W. Shaw et al. 1978; J. W. Shaw and M. C. Shaw 1993), or in the futurewhen the civic buildings are published on their own, at present planned for Volume V in theseries. The same applies to the three long sections through the sanctuary area, one of whichis east-west through the temples (Section C″–C″ in Pls. 1.9A–D and 1.10A–D). Two sectionsare north-south (Section O′–O′ in Pls. 1.11A–C and 1.12A–C and N′–N′ in Pls. 1.13A–C and1.14A–C). Each of the three sections is presented as a pair: first as an architectural elevationand second as an archaeological section showing the character of the material excavated (seethe general key on Pl. 1.10A) and ancient surfaces. The depth of the aeolian sand accumulationabove the ancient remains is also indicated. The extent of separate trenches is shown (for thelocation of all trenches in the Southern Area in plan see Pls. 1.7 and 1.8). Separate pails areindicated where they are cut by the line of the section. In the identifications, descriptions,and interpretations that follow throughout this volume, pail numbers are often given andsometimes can be located in the relevant section. Scholars wishing more exact location andcontext are referred to the microfiches of the separate notebooks and reports, a copy of whichis available for use, with permission, at the American School of Classical Studies at Athensor in the University Archives, University of Toronto.


Table 1.3. Selected items from within Temple A. See also reports on fauna (Chap. 6) and flora(Chap. 7).

KommosNumber Description Catalogue Reference

Within Floor 1 (33C/83)

C 3270 Phoenician amphora fragment Bikai, Chap. 4, Section 2

S 746 Cobble J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 9, Table 5.8; Blitzer 1995:GS 500 (Type 11)

On and above Floor 1 (33C/82)

B 149 Arrowhead J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 1

B 153 Folded strip Uncatalogued

Pottery Deposit 2 Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1

On and above Floor 2 (33C/81)

C 3317 Chariot wheel rim M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB27

C 3345 Bull body fragments M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB40

F 25 Two beads Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 6

S 773 Bead Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 8


Just outside doorsill of Temple A, contemporary with Floor 2 (33C/85 and 86)

B 150 Arrowhead J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 4

B 152 Fragment Uncatalogued

B 155 Shaft, square in section Uncatalogued

C 3293 Bull’s leg M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB65


C 6172 Bull’s horn M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB35

F 24 Beads Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 5

Mi 69 Glass bead Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 4

S 754 Obsidian flakes Blitzer 1995: CS 63


2. The Period of Temple A, Ca. 1020–800 B.C.(Pls. 1.15–1.27; Tables 1.3, 8.1)Temple A was excavated chiefly in Trench 33C in 1980, when a portion of the slab floor ofTemple C was removed.5 Lying as it does below the superposed walls and floor features ofTemples B and C, only glimpses of it were possible, yet those glimpses sufficed to identifya building with two distinguishable levels of use.

Temple A was built over the stoa of Late Minoan I Building T.6 LM IIIB–C sherds found

The Period of Temple A, Ca. 1020–800 B.C. 9

on the slope of Building N and a rough wall accompanied by sherds above Space N7 attestto sporadic passersby on the site after that time and before the first temple was built.7 Thetemple itself was founded sometime during the Sub-Minoan period (ca. 1020–970 B.C.), basedon the style of the fragments of bowls, kraters, pithoi, and skyphoi associated with its firstfloor (Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1, Deposit 1).8 The builders of A selected aspot upon the long east-west ridge formed by the rubble of collapsed Minoan walls, althoughsome walls were still standing over a meter above the ground. It is likely that the buildersleveled an area about 15 m east-west by perhaps 6 m north-south at a point already definedby Minoan walls on the north, south, and perhaps on the west. The packed earth floor wasset at +4.20 m above datum.9

Phase 1

The most substantial evidence for Temple A was found in its northeast corner, where thenorth wall of Temple B (Pl. 1.23 at 1) was set upon it. In Plate 1.27 can be seen Floor 1 of A(at 1) and the building’s northeast corner (at 2), barely visible in the confined area that couldbe cleared. The earlier wall, of carefully shaped slabs at least 0.30 m wide, projects out slightly(0.10 m) to the east.10 Set against the side of the wall, upon Floor 1, were two layers of slabs(Pl. 1.27 at 3), 0.44 m wide, interpreted by us as a bench or platform. The function suggestedseems likely, since the slabs are unbonded—walls at Kommos are usually composed ofoverlapping slabs—and are set against another wall, a function reinforced by Temple B abovethem, where the bench or platform and wall relationship is sure (Pl. 1.27 at 5 and 6). A smallarea of open space, or “court,” in front of the temple could be excavated, at the same levelas the floor on the interior, at +4.20 m. This sloped up to where, some 5 m away to the east,it merged with a pile of rubble that was later to be covered by accumulations of earth anddebris (in Trench 42A).

Either contemporary with or set in position somewhat later than Phase 1 of Temple A is anorth-south wall of one course (Pl. 1.27 at 4; see also Pl. 1.28), with its top at about +4.37 m.It continues under Temple B’s pillar (Pl. 1.27 at 7), which it later was to help support. Thiswall can be considered the sill of Temple A. The northernmost block of the sill (1.00 m long,0.43 m wide, and 0.24 m thick) is especially fine. The face of the sill is to the east, toward thecourt.11

The character of A’s walls should be discussed. Concerning the north one, owing to theconfined space within the sounding, only part of the wall could be exposed. Its lowest coursecould not be determined, but it continues down at least two courses below A’s floor. Thiswall, actually, is either set on or is part of a reused Minoan wall, namely, the north wall ofBuilding T, the orthostate-faced facade of which extends east and west of A (Pl. 1.52).12

For A’s south wall there are two candidates. The first (Pl. 1.24) was found in 1979, beforeTemple A was identified, in a confined sounding made in the southeast corner of Temple C.


There a projecting slab (Pl. 1.24 at 1), its bottom set at +4.20 m (the level of A’s Floor 1), could,by analogy with the situation in the northeast corner (Pl. 1.27), be the base for a first bench/platform. The wall set upon it (Pl. 1.24 at 2) would then be the south wall of A.13 The other,more likely, possibility is presented by a Minoan wall end or corner, consisting of two blocks,visible in the southern scarp below the later temples (Pl. 1.48 at d). Its top is at +4.31 m. Itprobably represents the southeast corner of a room (R) built with reused blocks in LM I, assuggested by what we know to have occurred further to the east, where we were freer toexplore the Minoan levels (J. W. Shaw 1986: 241–50).14 The top of the Minoan wall end wasabout 0.10 m above the floor level of Temple A, and so it must have been visible at the time.

In LM IIIA2/B, the same LM I Room R probably formed at least part of the base for thenorthernmost room of the eastern “wing” of Building N.15 The west wall of the same room,still unseen by us, since it underlies the temples, may have supported the back, or west, wallof Temple A. The east wall of this room, also not seen by us but probably set upon LM I R,may have been removed by Temple A’s builders, for A was to be left open on the east, withonly a sill.16 There is no evidence that R in either its LM I or LM III phase (as part of BuildingN) was of a religious character.17

Phase 2

A second phase of Temple A could be recognized both inside and outside the building. Inside,as the floor level rose through use, a new tamped-earth floor was established at +4.53 m,completely covering the earlier sill and also putting the bench along the north wall out ofuse (it could have been replaced by a wooden bench; a projecting slab further to the westmay represent a later bench). General levels found outside were analogous to those withinthe temples: a series of hard-packed, often burnt levels, occasionally with significant depositsof bone and pottery.18 For the pottery of Floor 2, see Peter J. Callaghan and Alan W. Johnston,Chap. 4, Section 1, Deposit 2. Among catalogued artifacts recovered from on or above thisfloor were a chariot wheel rim (M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB27) and three beads, twoof faience and one of stone (Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 6 and 8). Outside, the court levelwas raised to correspond. Found lying upon it, near a pebbled surface, were a number ofProtogeometric bell skyphoi (Pl. 1.26; Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1, Deposit 3,22, 24, and 25), a leg belonging to what was once a rather large bull figurine of terra-cotta(M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB65), a terra-cotta animal’s leg or horn (M. C. Shaw,Chap. 3, Section 2, AB35), faience beads as well as one of glass (Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3,5 and 4), and a fine bronze arrowhead (Pl. 1.25 near b; J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Sec-tion 7, 4), which is similar to another discovered within A (J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5,Section 7, 1).

Presumably the arrowheads were votive gifts. The bull’s leg is an indication of an earlytradition that was to continue for a long time in the sanctuary: one of the best examples in


the series is the bull figurine found still standing on Altar C (Pl. 1.146; M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3,Section 2, C9), an altar built more than five hundred years after Temple A was constructed.Within the same deposit of A appear fragments of Phoenician amphorae, evidence of veryearly Eastern contacts that by their very nature must be attributed to seagoing trade andsuggest that the jars with their contents arrived at Kommos by ship (for the Phoenician pottery,see Bikai, Chap. 4, Section 2).19

From the evidence at hand, however, there is no indication that a Bronze Age religioustradition on the same site continued into the Iron Age, for the LM I–II buildings upon whichTemple A was built have not produced artifacts suggesting ritual. It is probably best, therefore,to conclude that A’s founders decided to establish the temple not to perpetuate a religioustradition but, rather, made their decision at least partly on the basis of the walls and buildingmaterial available. No doubt they were also in awe of their ancestors, whose enormousbuildings they could hardly hope to emulate. Accessibility to the nearby sea and shore wasalso probably a factor, as was, perhaps, the assent of the landowner (who may very well havebeen A’s builder). Fresh water was also available nearby. The temple’s open entrance to theeast should probably be associated, as is the case with numerous later temples, with a generalexposure to the rising sun, a tradition that was to continue throughout the history of theKommos sanctuary.20 There is no indication from the remains themselves concerning theparticular deity or deities worshipped in A.

During both periods of Temple A, one presumably entered from the east, during the firstperiod by stepping over the sill. There is no evidence for roof support on A’s presumed axis(as in the case of Temple B with its central pillar), although the slab just north of the pillar’sbase (Pl. 1.27 at 4) could have served that function. It is possible, therefore, that A washypaethral. No evidence exists for a hearth in A’s interior. In comparison with the stratifiedlayers of ash in Temple B above, there was comparatively little burning noted in A’s flooraccumulation. If there was a hearth, on axis to the west, it lies too deeply buried below theaccumulation of later, superposed hearths to be detected. The lack of evidence for hearths inA brings up the question of whether the tradition of ritual dining in the temple, for whichthere is clear evidence in subsequent Kommos buildings, had begun by then. The presenceof the probable bench and the continuity of pottery shapes between Temples A and B do notsuggest a change in temple activity, however. It is always possible that the meals were preparedsomewhere nearby and consumed within A.

Concerning the temple’s general dimensions, its north-south maximum width was perhaps5.54 m. There is no direct evidence for its east-west dimension, the range being about 4 m(from exterior sill edge to the point where Temple A’s floor is obscured by later levels) to6.70 m. The latter measurement (chosen for Pl. 1.19) was determined by projecting the lineof an LM III wall of Building N, with its top at +4.66 m (in Pl. 1.19), northward under the temples.Since the east wall of this LM III room (top at +4.70 m in Pl. 1.19) abuts the aforementioned LMI wall end in Room R (Pl. 1.48 at d), then there may be a similar correspondence between the


west wall of underlying LM I Room R and the LM III wall placed upon it.21 If so (and thatwest wall has not been found but must underlie the temples, since it was not discovered westof them), then, as was the case with the north wall of A, it may have served as a base for A’swest wall. Thus the earliest temple form probably reflects that of the underlying Minoanstructure.

Sanctuary Area in Phases 1 and 2

Outside the building the position and character of the deposits of pottery dumps are veryinformative. From the point of view of temple use, the variety of pottery there supplementsthe otherwise restricted view that we might have if our conclusions were based only onmaterial recovered within the temple. Moreover, the secure dating of the deposits, often withjoins between them or with pottery found within the temples, is also ensured by the layeringof the deposits. By their very presence above the Minoan levels, moreover, the pottery canbe used to determine the Minoan topography as preserved some 350 years after the site’sdesertion in ca. 1250 B.C. Proceeding clockwise around the temple, from northeast to northwest,one realizes, for instance, that the long channel formed by the east-west Minoan Road 17paralleling the facade of Building T on the north had remained open during the Early IronAge, with the result that the Protogeometric level begins at +3.27 m, only about 0.40 m abovethe slabs of the road then covered by a layer of nearly pure sand with a scattering of LM IIIsherds.22 A large painted bull’s leg of terra cotta (M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB40) wasfound there, as were other votive figurines, as well as a series of small terra-cotta wheelsupon which the horses would ride (M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, e.g., AB20, AB22, AB24,and AB25). This dump, with its lenses of deposit but with numerous joins between levels,probably represents a periodic clean up of Temple A’s interior. The dump’s position northeastof the temple contrasts with the later practice of discarding temple material either directlyoutside or on the slopes to the south. By the time of the founding of Temple B, the roadhollow at this point had been filled in, which, perhaps not coincidentally, made the sanctuaryarea more accessible from the north.

In front of Temple A, even during Phase 2, the court sloped up to the east from +4.53 mto +5.10 m, where it merged with Minoan rubble.23 When A was founded, numerous Minoanwalls were still visible on the south (Pl. 1.19), including LM III walls of Building N and theretaining wall built just north of the court of Building P (J. W. Shaw 1986: 261 n. 87, fig. 6d,pl. 53d, e). Here the strata sloped down during the earliest Greek periods from ca. +4.40 mjust south of A, to +3.44 m some 6 m further south. There an east-west retaining wall of rough,reused Minoan blocks (Pl. 1.49) was set in during a late period of A or during the period ofTemple B.24 The top of that wall is at about +4.02 m as preserved.

The first major dump, clear indication of the sanctuary’s increasing popularity, to accumulatebetween Temple A and the area of this retaining wall belongs to Phase 2. The material it


comprised came from Trench 34A2 (Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1, Deposit 6,Stage 1) and, continuing south, Trench 63A (Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1,Deposit 4). Within it, above an LM III layer with numerous imports from Cyprus and theEast, were fragments of bell kraters, skyphoi, an unusual protome attachment for a vessel(Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1, 35), jugs and juglets, hydriae, bowls, and amphoraeboth local and Phoenician. Above this sloping level (top at +4.48 m on the north and+4.03 m on the south) was Deposit 6, Stage 2 (Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1),and, to its south, Deposit 5 (Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1), the latter namedafter the ceramic horse found within it (M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB17). Therein cupsand other vessels, as well as Phoenician amphorae, continued the tradition of those below.In turn there was another layer in Trench 34A2 upon it, also from Phase 2 (Callaghan andJohnston, Chap. 4, Section 1, Deposit 6, Stage 3). Herein and in associated levels south andsoutheast of A were numerous figurines and figurine fragments of bronze and terra-cotta,including bulls and a small figure of a man (M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB1, AB6, AB79,AB80, AB84, and AB79), unusual for the Kommos site, where the human figure appears onlyrarely. It was probably up these pottery-strewn slopes that visitors would approach TempleA from the south. In turn these layers were to be covered by accumulations from Temple B,built on a somewhat higher level.

A similar pattern of sloping, sometimes eroded layers accumulating next to Minoan wallsand above the drifted sand that had not been eroded away was noted south and southwestof Temple A. Although pottery was abundant (Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1,Deposits 9, 10, and 12), votive material was much scarcer than further east, probably anindication of the relative ease with which the users of the temple could simply walk out itsentrance on the east and discard materials either to the left, within the hollow created by theMinoan road, or to the right and downslope. They did this rather than walk eastward aroundor over Minoan walls that still protruded above the ground surface even during A’s laterstages.

West of Temple A the PG levels begin above the roadway, near the northeast corner ofMinoan Building T, Room 5, at ca. +3.80 m, 1.36 m above the road’s pavement and 1.50 mbelow the building’s corner.25 To the south, Minoan Room 4’s earliest IA pottery, perhapsbelonging to Temple B, Phase 1, is at +4.75 m, 0.40 m below the top of its north wall. Duringthe period of Temple A, although the surface west of the temple was used and built upaccordingly (Trenches 37A, 43A, and 51A; see Pl. 1.19; Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4,Section 1, Deposit 10), Minoan structures do not seem to have been used as extensively asthey were during the ensuing period of Temple B.

Outside the immediate area of Temple A2, the only place with indication of substantial useduring this period was in the western part of Minoan Building P’s Gallery 3, where the wallsmay still have been standing high enough to provide at least some shelter.26 A rough hearthmade of slabs as well as a possible bench (Pls. 1.58, Phase 1; 1.61) were set upon the LM IIIB


accumulation.27 Here, to judge from the ash, bones, and coarse cooking ware recovered, andthe evident lack of a religious context, visitors prepared their meals.

3. The Period of Temple B, Ca. 800–600 B.C.(Pls. 1.16–1.73, 1.192–1.199; Tables 1.4, 8.1–8.3)Phase 1 (Pl. 1.30)

Temple A was closely succeeded by Temple B,28 a religious center that was to endure sometwo hundred years. The temple was founded almost directly upon A. Temple B’s northeastcorner shows clearly its relationship with its predecessor, for its wall end, formed by a curiousT-shaped block (Pl. 1.27 at 5),29 sits directly upon A’s wall (Pl. 1.27 at 2).30 Temple B’s bench/platform (Pl. 1.27 at 6), projecting slightly eastward, rested partly upon a fill of earth; at itsend it was supported from below by two slabs. On axis at B’s entrance, propped up by a fewsmall slabs resting on A’s sill (Pl. 1.27 at 7), was a stone pillar (0.80 m high, 0.46 m wide, and0.54 m deep). Undoubtedly this ashlar block, originally cut so as to fit lengthwise into a wallcourse, was reused by the Greeks from a Minoan building nearby. Two, or perhaps three,more similar blocks, also set on end, would probably have carried up to the lintel, althoughthey were not found in the immediate vicinity. A wooden post may have performed the samefunction. The presence of the pillar confirms that the building was roofed, probably with aflat roof in the local tradition.31 The building seems, like Temple A, to have been open to theeast since there are no visible arrangements for closure.

The width of Temple B, unlike that of Temple A, is sure, for the foundation, made againof reused blocks, has been identified on the south (Pl. 1.47 at B), giving an exterior north-south measurement of ca. 6.40 m, about 0.90 m wider than A’s seems to have been.32 Thesoutheast wall end of B, however, is missing. Nor do we know whether there was a bench/platform along B’s south wall; perhaps the wall found in one of the soundings made belowthe floor of later Temple C (Trench 29A1 on the south) exposed the base for such a bench(Pl. 1.24 at 2). Even though the level corresponds, the identification remains unsure. We arealso fortunate to know the exterior length of B, about 8.08 m, for, again, the foundations, thistime for part of B’s west wall, were discovered where they project from the line that laterTemple C was to take (Pl. 1.47 at B and C, respectively). As is visible in Plate 1.47, B’s foundationwas originally set with a definite slope down to the south, rather than being leveled as C’swas.33 Upon the foundation of B would have been set a wall, presumably of reused but reshapedashlars such as those shown in Plate 1.29. Some 3.40 m of this north wall could be revealed.Aside from their foundations, the west and south walls were robbed out.

Although not all of Temple B’s interior could be exposed because of later temple featuresthat could not be removed, we nevertheless know much of its original plan. On the east itshard-packed floor (Floor 1) and court, plastered just inside and just outside the temple, were

The Period of Temple B, Ca. 800–600 B.C. 15

Table 1.4. Selected items from within Temple B and associated structures.


Foundation of Temple B (33C/79 and 80)

Bo 34 Worked bone fragment Schwab, Chap. 5, Section 10, 40

F 26 Bowl base fragments Schwab, Chap. 5, Section 11, 13


Temple B, Floor 1 (29A1/58, 84, and 87; 33C/58 and 76)

B 15 Arrowhead or possible javelin point J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 5

C 6173 Horns M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB34

C 6174 Horn or leg M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB36

C 8757 Animal leg M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB71

C 8763 Animal fragments M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB53

Mi 75 Scaraboid bead Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 25

O 4 Wooden “bowl” near Tripillar Shrine J. W. Shaw, Chap. 1, Section 3

Pottery Deposits 15 and 16 Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1

Hearth/Altar 1 (33/79)

B 151 Perforated disk Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 17


C 8758 Animal legs M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB55


C 8760 Small quadruped M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB38


C 8778 Animal leg M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB73

F 23 Bowl fragments Schwab, Chap. 5, Section 11, 17

See also report on fauna Reese, Chap. 6

Temple B, Floor 2 (33C/55, 72, and 77)


Mi 84 Curving iron knife J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 8

Mi 123 Iron sickle (?) J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 9

Mi 124 Iron arrowhead J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 11


Hearth/Altar 2 (33C/77 and 78)

No catalogued objects

Southern sounding (29A1/56)

B 82 Fishhook Blitzer 1995: M 106; redated to Temple B, Floor1/2

C 2389 Chariot wheel fragment M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB28




Vicinity of the base slab of the Tripillar Shrine (29A1/45 and 67 [in part], 71, 73–76, 78, 85, and 87)

B 17 Bronze horse M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB83

B 19 Disk Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 16

B 21 Decorated bronze shield J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 6

B 22 Bull figurine M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB82

B 79 Rod Uncatalogued

B 216 Sheet fragments Uncatalogued

B 227 Miniature shield fragment Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 15

C 2457 Animal legs M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB75

C 2486 Bull’s head? M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB50

C 8843 Vehicle/horse model M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB14

C 8845 Quadruped hoof M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB72

F 5 Egyptian figurine of Sehkmet M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB85

F 9 Bead Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 33

F 10 Egyptian figurine of Nefertum M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB86


F 12 Miniature beads Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 32


G 1 Foil fragment Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 9

G 3 Foil fragment Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 9





Mi 63 Iron spearhead J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 12

O 4 Wooden “bowl” fragment J. W. Shaw, Chap. 1, Section 3

S 1396 Pebble, Blizter 1995: type 16D J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 9, Table 5.8

Temple B, Floor 3


Rectangular Hearth/Altar 4 (33C/68–70)

Bone, 825 g (750 g burnt) Reese, Chap. 6; Rose, Chap. 6, Section 4

Vicinity of Hearth/Altar 3, incorporating top of Tripillar Shrine (29A1/45 and 67 [in part, 82])

Fauna Reese, Chap. 6

B 211 Sheet fragment Uncatalogued





Mi 62 Half a horse bit J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 38

West of Hearth/Altar 3 (29A1/68 and 72)

A 1 Ring Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 10

B 16 Ring Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 12


F 6 Scarab Skon-Jedele and Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 4, 1

F 29 Fragments Uncatalogued


Temple B, upper levels (33C/52, 53, and 66)

C 8769 Hollow wheel-made bull M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB54

C 8785 Horn M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB37

L 7 Plummet Schwab, Chap. 5, Section 10, 21

Mi 80 Nail or rod J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 8, Table 5.6


Temple B, other upper levels (33C/46–51, 56, 63–65, 67, and 73)


C 3058 Bull’s head fragments M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB49

C 8766 Quadruped ear M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB45

F 16 Scarab Skon-Jedele and Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 4, 2


Mi 82 Iron rod Uncatalogued

S 723 Cobble J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 9, Table 5.8

S 1325 Hematite fragment Uncatalogued

S 1502 Pebble J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 9, Table 5.8

Exterior Altar U (42A/17 and 21)

Bone, 37,950 g (37,900 g burnt) Reese, Chap. 6

Exterior Double Hearth (47A/18, 24, and 26 [ashy fill nearby])

Fauna Reese and Rose, Chap. 6

Mi 129a–d Four iron knives J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 18–21

RELATED BUILDINGS

Building Z (Selected pails from above base of Geometric wall: 36B/18 and 20–22; 65A2/13–15, 17, 20, 22, and23; 82A, B/8, 9, 23, and 26)

B 349 Fragmentary fishhook Uncatalogued




C 3245A andC 7855 Phoenician jug fragments Bikai, Chap. 4, Section 2, 18 and 19, Table 4.2

C 10695 Phoenician flask fragment

L 8 Line weight Schwab, Chap. 5, Section 10, 20


Mi 217–Mi 220 Iron spearheads J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 13–16

Mi 221 Iron rod, pointed at one end Uncatalogued

S 2179 Spindle whorl Uncatalogued

S 2181 Ten differentially weathered objects, J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 9, 3possibly fishing weights

S 2193 Pestle, broken J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 9, Table 5.8

S 2203 Mortar J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 9, Table 5.8

S 2215 Pierced weight J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 9, Table 5.8

Fauna Reese, Chap. 6


Building Q (from floor levels, west to east)

Pottery deposits See Johnston 1993: passim; Bikai, Chap. 4,Appendix 4.1

Room 40

Mi 171 Iron ring (lower floor) Uncatalogued

Room 39

None

Room 38, lower floor

C 8397 Two inscribed sherds Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 62 and 63

I 66 Inscribed sherd Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 60

Sh 2 Murex shells Reese, Chap. 6, Appendix 6.1

Room 38, upper floor



B 316 Bronze needle Schwab, Chap. 5, Section 10, 5















C 8320 Loomweight Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 5, Table 5.2, 1










C 7487 Inscribed sherd Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 71




Room 30

None

Building V (72B/13, 20, 21, 28, and 29)

Mi 179, Mi 181–Mi 185 Iron detritus Uncatalogued


“HIATUS” PERIOD (post late seventh century B.C.)

Building F (11A/5 and 6; 72C/26)

L 22 Lead fishing weight Schwab, Chap. 5, Section 10, 24


Altar H (Trench 20B1)

C 942 Animal leg, hooved M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, C18

C 949 Quadruped ear M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, C42

C 987 Animal body fragments Uncatalogued

C 1031 Quadruped ear M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, C43

Faunal remains Reese, Chap. 6



set at +4.70 m, about 0.20 m above the last floor of Temple A. At that time the top of thebench of B was about 0.40 m above the floor. The visible part of the bench (Pl. 1.29), 0.44 mwide and set upon floor level, is composed of two long blocks (1.68 and 1.53 m, respectively,from east to west) with a small slab set vertically between them. At the trench scarp on thewest, a somewhat broader block suggests that the bench widened to 0.54 m after that point.On line to the west with the central pillar already discussed was a hearth (Hearth 1; Pl. 1.35at x) composed of a group of rounded cobbles set in a circle, the first evidence for an interiorhearth in the Kommos temple series.34 Within it were found numerous fragments of terra-cotta animals (M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, e.g., AB38, AB40, AB55, AB61, and AB73), abronze disk (Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 17), and a part of a faience vase (Schwab, Chap. 5,Section 11, 17).35

West of the hearth, in turn, and some distance from the back wall, was discovered perhapsthe most unusual Iron Age construction at the Kommos site. Set into a triangular, reusedMinoan block36 resting on the clay floor, with the finished face of the block facing the entrance,were three upright pillars (Pls. 1.32, 1.37–1.39, 1.42–1.43).37 The bottoms of the three pillarswere cut with tenons that in turn fit into mortices set ca. 0.27 m back from the stone’s easternedge. Of these mortices only two are completely visible, cut with their western edges in line.The southern socket is significantly larger than that of its neighbor, for no apparent reason.

The southernmost pillar is square in section and stubby (0.175 m wide at its base and only0.20 m high). Its somewhat rough upper surface suggests that it may once have continuedup further, but how far cannot be ascertained. The central pillar (0.24 m wide and 0.15 mthick at its base; Pl. 1.43), tapers only when seen from the front or back, unlike the southernexample, which tapers on all sides. An enigmatic shallow vertical cutting (0.083 m wide)began 0.23 m above the base of the pillar. The cutting contained no trace of color or decoration.It may always have been plain; it may once have been painted. A thin plaque may have beenset into it, but the cutting is too shallow to have served to anchor anything substantial. Tojudge from its uneven upper surface, this central pillar probably was broken off in antiquity.The third, northern pillar, on the other hand, seems to be complete.

Behind what we might refer to henceforth as the Tripillar Shrine was a curious woodenfeature of cypress (Cupressus; O 4; Pl. 1.41) set in the floor.38 The remains give the impressionof an oval wooden bowl (0.25–0.34 m in diameter on the interior and 0.26 m deep), its topsomewhat lower than that of the triangular slab base. It was found filled with the clayish,unburnt soil that characterized the overlying stratum. It was quite charred, which explainsits preservation. If not a bowl it might have been the stump of a wooden pillar that wasburned.39 Or, if a short column, it could have been the support for a bowl, chalice, or tabletop,or something could have been attached to it or hung from it. Perhaps it was carved. If weare dealing, however, with a wooden bowl, then it was perhaps 0.30 m high and placed uponFloor 1 of B, although it is curious that a wooden receptacle would be chosen.40 This again


would not explain the burning unless there was a general burning within the building forwhich, however, we have no evidence. Perhaps the bowl was being used as a lamp.

In seeking a practical explanation for the tripillar structure, the possibility that the pillarswere used to support a flat object, such as a tabletop, must be eliminated, for they are unevenin height and set in a line, rather than in a triangular, tripod fashion. Nor, apparently, werethe pillars provided with means for attachment. The only viable alternative seems to be thatthe pillars were freestanding, as seen in Plate 1.32. They were not found with accompanyingfurniture, although they may originally have been surrounded by figurines and other vo-tive objects, such as those found in connection with them but dating to a later period ofTemple B.41

The form of the Tripillar Shrine remains to be explained. Elsewhere it has been argued indetail that there is no known contemporary local tradition for such structures, nor doesevidence from the Minoan period seem strong enough to support the hypothesis that theshrine owes its form to earlier precedent. Rather, evidence from abroad—from Syria, Cyprus,Sicily, and North Africa—demonstrates the tradition of similar structures that were part ofthe Phoenician/Punic tradition, such as that depicted in a stele from Nora (J. W. Shaw 1989:fig. 15), in which the pillars were shown to have been set on (or into) a base, the shrine beingset within a naiskos that derives its form from Egypt. It would seem, therefore, that the formof the Tripillar Shrine is Phoenician.42

The date of the setting in of the base of the shrine in Temple B at Kommos should bediscussed, for either Phase 1 or 2 remains a possibility. For instance, the shrine may havebeen set into the floor of Temple B, Phase 2, and be much later than the founding of thetemple; however, no evidence for its later placement, in the form of a small foundation trencharound the base, was found—indeed, the floor of Phase 2 ran up against the edge of the slabinto which the pillars were set. The presence in the temples, in their respective dumps, andin Building Z of Phoenician transport amphorae, moreover, reinforces an argument for anearly placement, for the number of amphorae peaks during Temple A, Phase 2, and theyhardly appear in Temple B, Phase 2 (see Bikai, Chap. 4, Section 2). Since it appears that thePhoenicians were passing by the coast and visiting Kommos at least as early as Temple A,Phase 2, it seems reasonable to propose that they were the impetus for the construction ofsuch a shrine, and that the Temple A, Phase 2/Temple B, Phase 1, period is the likely oneduring which the installation took place.43

Among the pottery within Floor 1 of Temple B were numerous fragments of cups, skyphoi,lamps or ladles, hydriae, a lid, and a mug, all suggesting drinking (Callaghan and Johnston,Chap. 4, Section 1, Deposits 15 and 16). Among the nonpottery finds were a bronze arrowhead(J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 5), reminiscent of those from Temple A, Phase2; numerous fragments of terra-cotta figurines (M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB36, AB53,and AB71); and a scaraboid bead (Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 25).


Phase 2 (Pls. 1.31–1.32)

As erosion and accumulation from use raised the courtyard level, a retaining wall (0.30 mhigh) was built at Temple B’s entrance, raising the outside level to ca. +5.00 m (Pl. 1.33). Theslabs of the wall were set with their faces to the west, evidence that the eastern edge of thewall was to be covered. At the same time the interior level was raised to +4.66 m (Floor 2),creating a step down, such as that which may have occurred in Temple A when its sill wasset in place. While the plan of B remained essentially the same, the raising of the floor loweredthe relative height of the bench/platform (that on the north was reduced to ca. 0.40 m high,if the upper surface was not raised). Also, the hearth was rebuilt at a higher level at the samespot with a roughly circular arrangement of stones (Hearth 2). Within contemporary levelson the interior were fragments of terra-cotta figurines (M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, e.g.,AB59) and iron objects (a curving blade, a knife, and an arrowhead; J. W. Shaw and Harlan,Chap. 5, Section 7, 8, 9, and 11), as well as a bronze fishhook (Blitzer 1995: M 106). Geometricand Orientalizing cups and flasks were common, as were aryballoi and East Greek transportamphorae (Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1, Deposit 17). The strata were typifiedhere and in the rest of the temple by alternating lenses of earth and burning resulting fromfloor renewal, erosion from the east, and the probable scattering of the remains from thefrequent fires over the floor.

Further west, the rising floor was then approaching the level of the top of the base blockof the Tripillar Shrine (at +4.90 m), and the wooden “bowl” behind it had by now been coveredwith earth. At about this time the users of the temple decided to make the shrine moreelaborate by placing a shield (J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 6), probably a leatherone with a wooden framework, behind the pillars. Only the bronze decoration that coveredit survived; numerous scattered pieces were found above and at the level of the later floor(Floor 3; Pl. 1.45). Indications of the shield’s placement were those pieces found directly behindthe pillars on the base slab. There a number of thin stone slabs had been set vertically behindthe pillars to keep the shield in place. Behind them a thicker, irregular slab (Pl. 1.32 at C4,lower right, Pl. 1.37 at 4), the lower unshaped portion of which was set into the roughlyrectangular depression cut into the edge of triangular stone base, was set on edge to thesouth.44 The shrine’s appearance during this period is shown in Plate 1.31, a restoration ofthe temple during B2, a time when the first exterior altar, Altar U, was established in thecourtyard to the west.45

At about this time a bronze figurine of a horse was positioned between the two southernpillars, facing east (M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB83; Pls. 1.38, 1.40). Also, with whatmust have been an exotic but appropriate touch, a fine Egyptian faience figurine of war-goddess Sekhmet (M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB85) was then placed horizontally, herhead to the west, upon the Greek horse. Both Sekhmet and the horse were firmly wedgedbetween the pillars, a position designed to make their removal difficult, perhaps because the


temple was open and subject to pilfering by passersby. Between the central and northernpillar was set another faience figurine (M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB86), possibly to beidentified as Nefertum, son of Sekhmet, and the second of the Memphite triad of Sekhmet,Nefertum, and Ptah.

Numerous other small offerings were found among the accumulated ashes upon the baseslab next to the pillars. Behind the pillars on the west was a bronze bull (M. C. Shaw, Chap.3, Section 2, AB82), numerous beads of faience and glass (Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 26, 29,32, and 34), and more fragments of the bronze shield decoration already mentioned. In frontof the slab on the east were the head of a terra-cotta horse and figurine legs (M. C. Shaw,Chap. 3, Section 2, AB50 and AB75), beads (Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 27 and 28), an ironspearhead (J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 12), and a bit of gold foil (Dabney,Chap. 5, Section 3, 9).

Phase 3 (Pl. 1.30)

Temple B’s interior was to have another phase of use when the floor (Floor 3) and courtoutside rose to yet another level, to about 5.07 m in the center of the temple. At that time thesurface of the northern bench was at floor level, ruling it out as a platform for sitting (unless,for instance, a wooden construction was set upon it), although offerings might still have beenplaced upon it. The earlier retaining wall at the entrance of B had, moreover, become in effecta rough threshold. The major new addition during this period was a fine rectangular hearth(Hearth 4; Pl. 1.136), framed by carefully selected slabs, that was 0.84 m2 as measured on theinterior. It was quite filled with ash and bone, with a carefully smoothed clay bottom surfaceat +5.05 m and another of clay at +5.30 m, almost even with the tops of the slabs.46 This wasthe earliest formalized hearth to be found within B and, continuing the tradition begun earlier,was set above its predecessors. Its construction is of a type known elsewhere in Crete at thetime.

Another hearth (ca. 0.60 m2), also enclosed by slabs, was set in to the west at about thistime (Hearth 3; Pl. 1.38).47 Within it, aside from the bone and ash, were a few fragments ofbronze sheet (B 211 and B 222) and, near it, part of a horse bit (J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap.5, Section 7, 38).48 The hearth’s western side was formed by the projecting upper part ofthe pillars of the Tripillar Shrine—perhaps it was at this time that the top of the centralpillar was broken off.49 The depth of ash below this hearth, a layer that extended furthereast into the unexcavated scarp, indicates that fires were probably lit directly in front of theTripillar Shrine.50 The new Hearth 3, however, seems to signify a break with the past tradi-tion of worship being carried out in the visible presence of the pillars. It is unlikely thatthe symbolism of the three pillars was pertinent to those who covered them, incorporat-ing them into the hearth. Nor, as far as we know, were the pillars supplanted by any knowncult focus save the hearth itself.51 Here it is perhaps realistic to suggest that at this time, when


the Orientalizing period was nearing its end, the Phoenicians were even more remote in theminds of the worshippers. Local tradition, moreover, may have become dominant, if notexclusive.

Nevertheless, the area of the new hearth remained the center for dedication within thetemple. Around the hearth, but especially behind it, was found a thick layer of burned stratawith many offerings, especially aryballoi and cups, of which the most informative may bethe unusual cups with figurative scenes (Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1, Deposit20, 239 and 240).52 Found along with the pottery were two finger rings (Dabney, Chap. 5,Section 3, 10 and 12); a scarab (Skon-Jedele and Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 4, 1); a number offossil oysters, including a very large one (Reese, Chap. 5, Section 14); numerous bivalve shells(mainly Mactra and Donax; see Pl. 6.10) laid neatly valve down; fragments of faience; andsome terra-cotta animal figurines (M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, AB39, AB50, AB72, AB75,and AB82), the last among the few attributable to Phase 3.

Although there may have been changes in the formal nature of the cult, the tradition ofritual meals was to continue within Temple B, but during the later seventh century B.C., thelast years of temple use, cooking may not have taken place within the cella itself. The normalroutine of cleaning and leveling within the temple seems to have ceased, for the upper levelsof B as found (Pl. 1.34) contained small groups of stones, sandy earth, a pit, and a few slabs.Not far from the pillar on the east were some rather large pieces of carbonized wood thatmight have been used in the building’s construction. The burning, however, aside from a fewpatches here and there, seemed more incidental than the result of conflagration, and the wallblocks bore no sign of scorching. No horizontal levels that might be securely identified asfloors were found above Floor 3 of Phase 3.53 Before B was deserted, there seems to have beena clean out, if not a pilfering of the structure, during which many of the vessels that had beenin the temple for some time were thrown out, along with other materials including a finesaddle quern (J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 9, 1), into the court (Callaghan and Johnston, Chap.4, Section 1, Deposit 26). Their relatively complete state, as found on the court surface, suggeststhat few people came to the Archaic sanctuary after that point.

Sanctuary Area in Phase 1

While we have reviewed the architectural and stratigraphic history within Temple B, we mustnow trace the development of the sanctuary area outside the temple during the same period.We begin with Phase 1, the time of the foundation of the temple over the remains of TempleA, which were most likely visible at the time. Unlike the work in A, when it would appearthat reused blocks were set in place without much reshaping in order to form the exteriorwalls, in places stone chips (like those from Temple C in Pl. 1.178) indicate work done by B’smasons as the blocks were being shaped, especially on the west.54 The level above the founda-tions of B may have been raised intentionally or through a combination of erosion and use


accumulation shortly after the building was set in place, for the court levels surroundingPhase 1 (as shown in Pl. 1.30) are about 0.20 m above those of the working chips.

Upon the founding of Temple B or shortly afterward, the Minoan road on the northeastwas covered over. In front of the new temple, the court sloped up once again to the LM IIIrubble piles, but at a somewhat higher level than in the case of Temple A. Upon this courtwas set a small enigmatic structure consisting of three slabs arranged on edge to form a U(Pl. 1.56), of a type that occurs rather commonly in connection with later phases of TempleB (described in more detail in the next section). On the south, where the Minoan walls werestill visible, material continued to accumulate from sanctuary activities, often upon a levelcharacterized by burnt patches and strews of limpets with a good deal of pottery (Callaghanand Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1, Deposits 12 [Trench 50A], 11 [Trench 51A], and 13 [Trench63A]). Upon one of the Minoan walls were found two bull’s legs (M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section2, AB76), their position probably the fortuitous result of dumping activities from Temple B,Phase 1, or from later phases of the same building. West of the temple there was considerableactivity. For apparently the first time extensive use was made of Minoan Room 4 (Pl. 1.30),with its floor level then at +4.75 m. The east wall of Minoan Building T, Room 5, continuedto define the western boundary of the sanctuary, projecting at this time somewhat less thana meter above the use level. Northeast of that structure, onto the sand accumulation abovethe Minoan road, was set a north-south retaining wall. Somewhat west of that wall a hearthof slabs was established, probably for cooking.

B U I L D I N G Z ( P L S . 1 . 5 8 [ P H A S E 2 ] – 1 . 6 1 )

The structure known as Building Z was set within the western part of Minoan Building P,Gallery P3, upon the earlier remains from the time of Temple A, Phase 2 (see Section 2) andabout the time when Temple B was constructed. This use constitutes the second phase of theGreek occupation in the gallery in the Middle–Late Geometric period, probably not long aftera general wall collapse (Pl. 1.58, Phase 2). The debris from the collapsed Minoan walls wascollected and reused to build a rough wall alongside the north wall of P3, but higher thanP’s floor. Then a north-south wall, its only good face to the west, was built on the east withits base at +3.95 m, about 0.50 m above the original LM IIIB floor.55 Beach pebbles were broughtin to form a hard-packed floor. The resulting Building Z was probably roofed, to judge fromthe new east-west wall that shortened the width to be spanned.56

Measuring from the northeastern interior corner of Building Z, the east-west wall extendedat least 12.70 m to where it has been destroyed, probably by erosion and later quarryingactivities.57 In Plate 1.58 the wall has been restored as continuing to the western end of GalleryP3. The west wall may have appeared like the one found closing off the end of Gallery P6and built like a retaining wall with a single face to the east (J. W. Shaw and M. C. Shaw 1993:pl. 42b). An entrance into Z from the north has been restored where a large reused block mayhave served as a threshold.


The material accumulated on the floor suggests domestic use, for it includes many fragmentsof cooking and drinking vessels,58 bones, and several kilograms of limpet shells. Interestingis a series of ten differentially weathered pebbles, which were undoubtedly used as weights,perhaps for fishing (J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 9, 3). There were multiple lenses of burning,especially in the center of the room, probably from cooking fires. On the west was an ironarrowhead (J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 10), and not far above a floor level(at +4.35 m), four iron spearheads (J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 13–16) werefound in about the center of the building.59 Perhaps they had been brought by a soldier whohad intended to dedicate them in the temple but who abandoned them here for unknownreasons. The pottery included kraters, amphorae, cups, and skyphoi, as well as cooking pots,among which were fragments of a Phoenician jar (Bikai, Chap. 4, Section 2, 18 and 19) anda fragment of a Phoenician flask (C 10695). Just east of Building Z, above the earlier Geometriclevel that extended below the later cross wall, was an outdoor area (Pl. 1.60) with numerousburnt surfaces, similar pottery, and a possible fishing weight like those found in Z (S 2212).The area had less bone and shell, which may be an indication that it was used less for eatingthan for food preparation.60

Building Z may have collapsed during the late eighth century B.C. It was razed to its presentlevel in the early seventh century, when the area was used for food preparation by peoplevisiting the sanctuary area, as shown by the numerous Archaic burned surfaces often accompa-nied by bone, limpets, and fragments of cooking vessels. During the late seventh century,Building Q (for which see the next section) was built to the north and west of Z.

The Sanctuary Area during Phases 2 and 3

During the second phase of Temple B, as the sanctuary became increasingly popular, anextensive court of tamped earth was established east of the temple. Beginning at +5.05 moutside B, the court rose gradually to the east until some 35 m away it was at +5.50 m (inTrench 58A). Any earlier Greek remains that may have been there were removed.61 On thenorth it covered Minoan Road 17 and merged with the hillside. The thin layer of workingchips on the east probably resulted from the dismantling of Minoan walls, especially the northwalls of Buildings T and P, although we do not know where the material was used, perhapsin Buildings F, V, or Q (for these structures, see below). Much of the northern east-west facadeof Minoan Building T had been removed and covered over during LM III, but part of it wasleft projecting slightly above Temple B’s court surface.

Along the south the court extended up to and, in places, over the long north wall of LMIII Building P, but much of the wall remained standing above ground level and furnished adurable, convenient southern border for the court. The court sloped down to the south, from+6.78 m on the north to +5.00 m on the south some 25 m east of the temple.62 The court createdwas at least 12.10 m wide (from P’s north wall to T’s north wall) and at least 50 m long. It


seems inconsistent, given the care that the Greeks gave to their temple and its court here,that they did not build a retaining wall south of the Temple in order to prevent erosion. Itis probable, therefore, that the remains of the wall in Plate 1.49 represent what was once amuch longer, higher wall built to retain the Archaic court. Its date is Archaic and its positionwould have fulfilled that purpose. Perhaps it was dismantled to furnish material for ArchaicBuilding Q, built south of it not much later.

Upon the Archaic court, northeast of Temple B, was established an unusual double hearth(Pls. 1.53–1.54) at a level of +5.18 m. Although parts of the hearth are missing and its doubleform is unprecedented at least at Kommos, its construction of slabs set on edge is knownfrom late Temple B (e.g., Hearth 4 in Pl. 1.36) as well as from later Hellenistic Room A1 (Pl.1.125). The double hearth itself is 2.00 m east-west by 0.85 m north-south; the interior of thebetter-preserved western compartment measures 0.75 m east-west by 0.85 m north-south andis 0.20 m deep. In the western compartment there was a good deal of ash. The easterncompartment contained no ash, but there was much alongside it to the east and numerouslimpets along its northern side; had it just been cleaned out? The ashes contained pig bonesand also many fish bones (Reese, Chap. 6, Section 3; Rose, Chap. 6, Section 4)—both pig andfish were probably cooked here. A number of knives, perhaps for butchering or cleaningthem, were found nearby (J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 18–21).

At about the same time as Temple B, Phase 3, a low platform composed of a single line ofslabs was laid to the southeast (Pl. 1.30, Phase 2; for such platforms see also Foldout F). Later,just south of Altar U (for which see below), another platform was built, two slabs high andfacing south (Pl. 1.50 at B), apparently replacing the earlier one, which had been covered bythis time with accumulation. Nothing discovered near these platforms, found only east of thetemples, explains their use, but their position on the court suggests that they may have servedas bases for placing objects, perhaps pottery or cooking utensils, or that they even functionedas low seats.

Contemporary with these platforms is a series of curious small U-shaped compartmentsformed by three slabs set on edge. Some eight of these were found (for their location seeFoldout F). Two were east of Temple B. The earliest (Pl. 1.56), already mentioned, was inconnection with Temple B, Phase 1, the other with Phase 2. The remainder date to Phase 2or, possibly, Phase 3. Two of these were found below the floor of later-seventh-century-B.C.Building Q (Foldout Plate F, eastern room). One was built on Q’s south wall after its destruction,and three were west and southwest of Temple B (one is shown in Pls. 1.46 at c and 1.56).63

The enclosures’ function remains unknown. One was found with faint traces of burning,limpets and bones were found in connection with another, and there was much ash near athird.64 Their open ends are to the north (one), west (two), west-southwest (one), east-southeast(two), and south-southeast (one), without a discernible pattern. They occupy very little space,ranging from 0.10 to 0.60 m on a side. The back slab of the enclosure in Plate 1.56, west ofTemple B, where the level had risen during Phase 2 to the point that the Minoan walls of all


but Building T, Room 5, had been covered over,65 is higher than the two side ones. Thisprobably rules out anything’s being set above the small opening unless it rested only on thetwo side slabs. Perhaps these compartments were small hearths used for boiling limpets,which were found in the thousands in associated levels, but it cannot be shown that thesestructures actually performed that function.

The exterior surfaces of Phases 2 and 3 are characterized by the thousands of limpet shells,which are designated by groups as “Marine meals” in the faunal section (Reese, Chap. 6,Table 6.27). The surfaces upon which they lay are often burnt in places.

Also characteristic of the Archaic period are cobbles, large waterworn pebbles. In twoinstances they are set one next to the other to form a circular bedding. This was the case inthe earliest hearth within Temple B, Phase 1, and in a similar but later circular arrangement,depressed in the center and without obvious signs of burning, located south of the sanctuary(Pl. 1.71; 87B/79). More often, the cobbles appeared as scattered groups,66 such as the groupfrom the Temple C period, probably representing the continuation of the same activity (Pl.1.156).67 From what we can now discern, such cobble groups, found without obvious order,were not burnt. Could they, possibly, have been used in the practice of sacrifice, such as atthe Sanctuary of Poseidon at Isthmia, where they may have been cast at the sacrificial victims?68

Perhaps, but these cobbles are not found in specifically sacrificial contexts, such as in thehearths or Altar U. In Phase 3 strata there are also occasional small patches of chalky materialof lavender, lilac, orange, and white kaolin clay found on all sides of the temple but, again,of unknown use.69

A L T A R U ( P L S . 1 . 3 0 , 1 . 5 0 – 1 . 5 2 ; T A B L E 8 . 2 )

Some 2.70 m south of the double hearth was built Altar U, its base upon the sloping Minoanrubble and its blocks and slabs supplied by nearby structures. Unlike later Altar C, built dueeast of Temple C, Temple B’s altar lies north of its axis. Altar U is 0.50 m high on the south,its original lateral dimensions being 1.50 m on the south, 1.35 m on the east, 1.74 m on thenorth, and 1.47 m on the west.

Within it were found almost 38 kg of burnt cattle and sheep/goat bones left over from thesacrifices that took place prior to the ritual meals (Reese, Chap. 6, Table 6.1, Pls. 6.3–6.4;J. W. Shaw, Chap. 8, Section 1, “Animal Sacrifice at Kommos”). From the founding level atits base were recovered an eighth-century-B.C. aryballos, cup, and skyphos (Callaghan andJohnston, Chap. 4, Section 1, Deposit 23, 266–68) that enable one to attribute the altar to thetime of Temple B, Phase 2.

Later, in connection with Phase 3, the altar was extended westward by means of a roughplatform of slabs and small blocks built up against it, increasing its east-west dimensions to2.05 m on the south and 2.30 m on the north. The purpose of the platform remains unknown,but perhaps sacrificial activities, such as the carving of meat, were carried out or objects wereset on it.


B U I L D I N G V ( P L S . 1 . 6 2 – 1 . 6 3 ; A P P E N D I X 1 . 2 )

Built and used in the seventh century B.C., as shown by the pottery found below, within, andabove it, Building V provides further evidence for new activity in the sanctuary during TempleB, Phases 2 and 3, especially the latter. Unlike Phase 1, without important contemporarystructures nearby, in Phase 2 and, more likely, Phase 3, Temple B faced at least one buildingthat was further east, Building V. This structure was set at an angle on the slope north of B’scourt, supported by a retaining wall on the south.70 Only walls on the south (partially robbedout), east, and west were found. On the upper slope no wall was found, although it couldstill lie beyond the excavated area. Building V, 6.30 m east-west, probably had no north walland lacked interior supports. Unlike other sanctuary structures at Kommos, its floor was notlevel but had a series of three rough east-west platforms stepping downslope from +6.99 mon the north to +6.51 m next to the south wall (Pl. 1.62). Along part of its east and west wallson the interior were two slab platforms facing each other—perhaps benches. Near the westernbench were a number of drinking cups (Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1, Deposit24, 272–76).

It is possible that Building V may have been constructed originally as a temporary platformfor visitors to the sanctuary, perhaps even as a tent platform associated with sanctuary ritual(as described in Goldstein 1982: 8). It was used, in any case, as an area for the working ofiron during the seventh century B.C., for quantities of iron detritus were recovered near thefacing slab platforms and in connection with a rough rubble platform set within the building’snorthern border, as well as in contemporary contexts elsewhere in the sanctuary area. Smallquantities of iron ore from the sanctuary, perhaps obtained locally, were also associated withthese finds (discussed along with the iron detritus in J. E. Rehder’s Appendix 1.2).

South of Building V and beginning with the seventh-century level at +5.67 m, we found ashaft-smelting furnace that was used by a smith to produce workable iron (Pls. 1.194–1.197,1.199). The earth surrounding the pit was scorched orange-red and was very hard. We carefullycleared around the furnace in stages, eventually removed it in four large pieces, along withthe compact earth surrounding it, and then took it to Pitsidia for study (see Appendix 1.2).

Also probably connected with the working of iron at Late Archaic Kommos is a curious,intricately made cubical iron object formed of packages of iron plates (Mi 76; Pls. 1.192–1.193;Appendix 1.2). It was found southwest of the furnace, along with a strew of pottery and otherobjects probably discarded from Temple B (Pl. 1.57). Its unusual, apparently nonutilitarianform suggests to Rehder that it is an imaginative tour de force made by the smith workingin Building V and dedicated by him as an offering within the temple.71 This object, the furnace,and V, where the forming work was done, should be of interest to students of ancientmetallurgy. The type of furnace has also been reported from Knossos.72

Perhaps the smith produced some of the iron objects, for instance, knives, spearheads, orarrowheads associated with seventh-century contexts in the sanctuary (J. W. Shaw and Harlan,Chap. 5, Section 7, 18–27, 29, and 31–33). He may also have sharpened and pointed weapons


brought by visitors to the sanctuary and produced some of the iron rods, found only in pieces,that were used as spits for roasting meat. Unfortunately we do not have the tools that heused, unless an axe and a hammer found near the temple may be left over from his work(J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 35 and 36). Perhaps he came only at the time ofsanctuary festivals from some nearby town, such as Phaistos, for as Rehder notes, there isnot as much slag as might be expected if the work had gone on for long. Such metalworkingactivity, apparently confined as it is to the seventh century B.C., does not seem at this pointto have been intimately connected with the nature of the sanctuary ritual during the thousandyears that the temple tradition continued at the Kommos site.73

The Archaic temple court extended south of Building V, where a number of small pits, asmall platform of slabs, and burned surfaces attest to the activities of visitors to the sanctuary.74

There was also a circular well (Foldout F), a meter in diameter, within which a bovid skullwas found at water level. A hearth and a slab enclosure were found set northeast of the well,at +5.45 m (J. W. Shaw and M. C. Shaw 1993: 183–84, pl. 43d).

The Archaic court here was bordered on the south by the north wall of Minoan BuildingP. On the west P’s wall projected only some 0.40 m above the court surface (the latter, at+4.70 m), but on the east P’s well-preserved northeast corner stood at +6.58 m, at least 1.50 mabove the court surface, one that continues to the east beyond the present border of thearchaeological zone. Although there is no evidence for Archaic buildings in the area exposedhere, there may be some under the deep sand to the east, and these could be connected withan Archaic settlement.75 Of that settlement little is known, but it could have extended up theslopes of the eastern hill. On a small terrace of that hill is located Site 66 in the Kommossurvey (Hope Simpson 1995: 361–62), where a few walls are visible. The pottery collectedfrom the surface there consists of local ware as well as East Greek ware (Samian or Lesbian?)and part of an Attic SOS amphora, all contemporary with the last days of the Archaic sanctuaryat Kommos.76

South of Temple B’s eastern court, many of the partially collapsed walls of Building P, itseastern facade, and its east-west walls must have been visible during the Archaic period.77

The galleries themselves were probably obscured by growth, with uneven surfaces and blockslying about, although burned areas found by us indicate where passersby camped out. Onemight think, however, that the galleries would have been used extensively. Instead, as far aswe have cleared them, there are only two instances of major reuse.78 The first is Building Z,already described, set in the western end of Gallery P3. That building went out of use sometime before structurally independent Building Q was built above the galleries at a higherlevel. The second is a walk-down well, probably Archaic, built within the northeast cornerof Minoan Building P’s first gallery (Pls. 1.64–1.65). From the level of Temple B’s court onestepped onto P’s north wall and then descended to the east a flight of steps to the water.Some thirteen steps continue down to at least +2.00 m, below groundwater level, which wasat +2.20 m in 1991.79 Its use as a well is confirmed by the many small and large fragments of


Hellenistic amphorae found near the top of the stairs, on the steps themselves, and below thewater level, many of them probably left by the inhabitants of later Hellenistic Building E. Thetime of the well’s construction is suggested by the Archaic sherds that were found immediatelysouth of the staircase wall.80 It was probably during this period, as the general ground levelrose, that two of the wall blocks of P’s eastern facade were hollowed out to form basins(J. W. Shaw and M. C. Shaw 1993: 163, pls. 30c, 31b). Most likely they were filled with waterfrom the well, perhaps so that animals brought to the sanctuary as beasts of burden or forsacrifice could drink. In one basin were sherds from a banded jug (C 9189), probably of theseventh century B.C.

B U I L D I N G Q ( P L S . 1 . 6 6 – 1 . 6 8 )

One of the major surprises of the 1984–85 campaigns was the discovery of Building Q, aseventh-century-B.C. building of unusual size and plan bordering the sanctuary on the south.Q might originally have been simply a long east-west wall designed as a retaining or temenoswall for the sanctuary, and only during its later stages was it incorporated into the buildingwe know now. For instance, the north wall of Q does not bond with any of its cross walls,and at its northeastern end does not bond with its end wall even though the southeast cornerbonds with the south wall. The hypothesis of an open space here south of a retaining wallis supported by the existence of two Archaic U-shaped enclosures (Foldout F) below Q’s floorand earlier than the building itself (these two are among the enclosures described earlier inconnection with the sanctuary area in Phases 2 and 3). To judge from those found in thesanctuary, the enclosures were probably set and used in the open air. They were probablyplaced there during the seventh century, before Q proper was built. They may be contemporarywith what appears to have been a working area far to the south, but also set above the earlierMinoan central court of Building T. Although we cannot specify the activity carried out there,two roughly parallel lines of small stones connected with burning were found, south of whichwas a circular bed of unburnt cobbles (Pl. 1.71) and, further south, a slab surface (Pl. 1.70)also set not far above the LM I court of Minoan Building T.

In the Late Archaic period Q was a very long, narrow building. South of it was a largeopen space, the remains of the LM III court. On the court was set a three-sided hearth (Pl.1.69), with its interior base going down to the LM I court. There was much burning to thewest and south, and nearby were found large curving fragments of terra cotta (C 8332 andC 8334). At first we thought these were beehives because of their fenestrations, but furtherstudy suggested that they belong to terra-cotta well heads.81

Building Q itself is 38 m long. Its exterior width ranges from 5.40 m on the east to 6.20 mon the west. The north wall (the possible retaining wall) is fairly straight, but the south wallbows out. Originally the building had either five or six rooms and, presumably, a flat, tilelessroof like that proposed for Temple B. Also like B, Q was built on the natural slope of thehillside without any effort made to level the area, so that the floor of the eastern room is at


+4.39 m, and the original floor of its western room is at +2.40 m, a 2-m difference. On theeast the building was set above and within Geometric levels (Callaghan and Johnston, Chap.4, Section 1, Deposit 22), but on the west, where there had been more erosion, its walls actuallypenetrated the LM I court of Building T. Like all post–LM I structures on the site, Q wasconstructed with reused Minoan blocks, but the builders worked without a great deal of care,often simply setting the blocks in position without either reshaping them or placing them inneat courses, as is visible in Pl. 1.68.

The first room on the west, Room 40 (Pl. 1.66), was a covered porch, about 3.80 m wideand 1.00 m deep, with a doorway 0.90 m wide, at the north end of the east wall, leading intoRoom 39.82 This interior doorway is unlike the other four of Building Q, which are next tothe south wall.83 The columnless porch faced the seaside and was probably set just far enoughback from it not to be endangered by the waves generated by winter storms. It is possiblethat the north and south walls continued further west, but this seems unlikely, since the wallends discovered are set upon special subfoundations not seen elsewhere in the building andwhich may have acted as antae. Erosion by the waves of a continuation of Q on the west (afate certainly suffered by Building T, Room 5, to the north) still remains a possibility, however.The porch had two major phases of use. Its first earthen floor, quite burnt, had an oval area0.30 m by 0.40 m of pumice of uncertain use, 0.80 m from the east wall. Above was a secondfloor at +2.65 m, also burnt; between the floors were fragments of seventh-century-B.C. transportamphorae of micaceous fabric similar to others found in Q’s eastern rooms (Johnston 1993).

Neighboring Room 39 lies largely below later Building W. Of the western part of the roomwe could ascertain only that there were at least two floors, the original, lower one joiningthat in Room 40, and an upper one (at +3.10 m), partially paved with slabs that were evenwith the top of their common cross wall. It is possible that this upper surface represents athird, higher floor of 39, or it may correspond to the second one in 40, the upper part of thecross wall having been removed so that one could step down to the west from 39 to 40.

Perhaps in the first phase of Building Q, Rooms 38 and 39 were a single room ca. 11.15 mlong, for the thin wall separating them and the adjacent stubby one are certainly later additions.Another cross wall, however, may still be obscured by Building W, which could not beremoved. In 38 there were two floors. The lower one (at +3.11 m) had a few flat stone slabs,flat sherds (some inscribed), and burning, as well as a thick mass of some 4.4 kg of crushedMurex trunculus shells (Pl. 6.11), representing over 1,030 individuals, the first time that adeposit of this size was found at the Kommos site (see Reese, Chap. 6, Appendix 6.1). Nodoubt the accumulation of shells was the result of obtaining the base material for purple dye.The shells were used as packing for the floor, perhaps having been brought in from outside,where the crushing and extraction had been carried out.84 Just above this floor was another,of burnt hard-packed clay. It continued, via a doorway, into Room 37. Later, perhaps whenthe floor was raised, the doorway was partially blocked.

Room 37 was quite large (6.56 m long) and was found filled with rubble from the fallen


walls. Its lower floor of burnt earth, flat sherds (some inscribed), bone, and shell, with anumber of limpets, sloped north-south from +3.48 m to +3.30 m. On the floor were a bronzeneedle (Schwab, Chap. 5, Section 10, 5) and an iron arrowhead (J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap.5, Section 7, 33). Much of the south wall has been robbed out, so one cannot be sure thatthere was not a doorway, but the positioning of the blocks that remain makes a doorwayseem doubtful. On the upper floor of 37, aside from pottery (some inscribed), there was aloomweight (Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 5, 14).

The floor of Room 31 (5.78 m east-west) was composed of thick multiple levels with muchfragmentary pottery (some inscribed), limpets, and burnt earth. The impression is that thisdump, which slopes down to the west from the common cross wall, was formed when peoplewithin Room 30 threw their refuse into 31.

The easternmost room of Building Q, Room 30, had east-west dimensions of 6.20 m on thenorth and 6.50 m on the south. It had two somewhat ephemeral floors, the latest of whichretained a few small slabs (at +4.39 m).85 Little was found upon the floor save a few fragmentsof bronze and iron, limpets, a bone tool, a few stone tools, pumice, and two Ovis/Capraastragali. A number of the last were also found below the floor (Reese, Chap. 5, Section 12).

On all of Building Q’s floors, in the rubble heaps above them, and on the adjacent courtsouth of Q, were recovered many fragments of Attic, Chian, Lesbian, and East Greek transportamphorae. Over 150 representative examples were inventoried by Alan W. Johnston (1993).These, along with the many examples of other shapes from the temple strews to the north,provide important information about commercial interrelations. Such interrelations can beshown by the more delicate and attractive fine ware but also by the amphorae, whose contentsof wine, oil, and other commodities were the actual object of the exchange. The trading beingcarried out by foreign Greeks of diverse origins during this general period is also shown bythe variety of graffiti discovered (Csapo et al., Chap. 2; but also Csapo 1991; 1993). Eric Csapopostulates merchants from Central Greece, perhaps from Boeotia, Locris, or Phocis, havinginscribed locally made drinking cups in the sanctuary during the eighth but especially duringthe seventh century B.C. All of Q’s vessels certainly date to the last half and probably to thelast quarter of the seventh century, the time of late Temple B, when the sanctuary was stillpopular, and yet, ironically, on the verge of a long period of partial abandonment.

The plan of Building Q remains without a clear local precedent, although it resemblessuperficially the long Roman building at the Cretan seaside sanctuary of Asklepios at Lebena,southeast of Kommos, tentatively identified as a hostel for the suppliants of the healing god(Pl. 8.16; Pernier and Banti 1947: 69, pl. 75 at 7). Q’s proportions are those of a stoa, but itssides were closed. Unlike a stoa it could not be entered easily. The northern and eastern, andmost likely the southern, sides are preserved high enough to preclude doorways there, so Qseems to have been entered only from the west. From there one passed through successiverooms, their floors stepping up to the east, following the slope of the hillside.

The shape of Building Q, on the other hand, may have been dictated by the earlier use of


its northern wall as a retaining wall, against which Q’s builders set the various rooms,as already argued. This would explain to some extent the plan that Q took.86 It does notexplain, however, the arrangement of wall openings. For instance, the entrance to Q,through the westernmost cross wall, is on the north, whereas passage between the interiorrooms is on the south. Could this have been arranged in order to ensure the privacy of theinner rooms? Second, the position of the doors next to a long south wall must be explained,perhaps simply as a curious local custom or to provide the maximum usable space for materialor people.

In the latter case, no floor features suggest benches or couches for dining, such as in RoomA1 and Temple C in the sanctuary, nor do the ceramic finds suggest ritual or ritual dining,as they do in the sanctuary deposits both inside the temples and outside in the temple dumps.Rather, the masses of transport amphora fragments throughout the floor deposits suggest thestorage of goods, in particular, liquids imported from abroad. It does seem that this amphoratrade was a continuation of the local tradition of Kommos as a landing spot, as it had beenduring the Late Bronze Age and, later, during the ninth–eighth centuries B.C. During theseventh century Building Q seems to have been a storehouse on the shore for safeguardingtrade goods, foreign or local, a facility that would have been a welcome convenience for thoseeither administering or visiting the nearby sanctuary. Further study will be necessary toexplore the nature of the exchange between the Kommos area and the Mesara hinterland, inparticular, the population centers at Gortyn and Phaistos. As Johnston has suggested, Q mayalso have played a role as a trading post for provisioning the Greek colonies Cyrene andTocra in Cyrenaica (Johnston 1993: 376).

Of particular interest from the point of view of sanctuary activity are the cups, amphorae,and other vessels with graffiti that are contemporary with Temple B, Phase 2, or later. Thereare 25 inscribed drinking cups (Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 3–15, 18–22A, and 23–28), including 1skyphos (Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 4), all of local fabric. Three of these graffiti are certainly orvery probably owners’ names (Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 21, 22, and 27), and the rest are verylikely to be owners’ marks (also on one jar; Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 17). A number of these(Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 8–23) are from the dump southwest of Temple B. One was foundoutside the temple to the northeast (Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 24); another (Csapo et al., Chap.2, 3) is from within the temple itself. Two cups (Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 25 and 26) were foundin connection with the upper floors of Room 31 in Building Q. Of the commercial jars withgraffiti, usually imported amphorae, almost two-thirds are from within the central three roomsof Q: three from Room 38, ten from 37, and seven from 31. Q was used for the storage ofgoods, including imported wine, some of which must have been consumed in the sanctuary.Some inscribed vessels (Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 29, 30, 32–38, 41–45, 48, 49, and 51) were foundwith the cups in the southwest dump, already mentioned. Another (4) is from the dump nearAltar U.

The above distribution, especially of the cups with the proprietary graffiti, is important,


for the personal names suggest the probability that people who came to the sanctuary acquiredthe cups there and inscribed their names (or had their names inscribed) so that they couldreuse the cups on a number of occasions. Most relevant is that the cups and the jar with theproprietary inscription are all incised after firing—the cups are of local manufacture—andalmost all the alphabetic inscriptions are written in non-Cretan hands. Some of the cups couldhave been stored within Building Q (two inscribed cups were found within the building).Johnston (1993) has shown that Q’s chief function was that of storage, mainly of liquid (wine,perhaps oil) and was possibly the “china cupboard of the cult” (Johnston 1993: 375)—perhapsthe two cups in question belonged to people working within Q. More likely, as suggested bythe findspot of the numerous cups and other vessels in the southwest dump, most were keptin Temple B. They as well as the wine containers broken during use would have been thrownout during one of the periodic clearings, when refuse was carried outside the building bysomeone who, turning right after exiting, threw the cups and pottery fragments, along withlimpets and bones left over from meals, onto the eroded slope southwest of the temple, apattern similar to what was to occur later during the period of Temple C. The inscribed cupfragment within the temple (Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 3) was covered by a later floor.

The patches of burning on the floors of Building Q, the layers of carbon and earth mixedwith sherds in Room 31, as well as the scatter of limpets should still be explained. Some ofthe burning might be the result of a general burning of the roof timbers, but nowhere werethe burnt deposits thick or pure enough to be convincing. It seems preferable, therefore, tothink that there were other occasional uses made of the storerooms by the building’s guardiansor those connected with the import-export trade, whether with the shipping, cartage, or someother aspect. The three-sided hearth already mentioned (Pls. 1.68–1.69) might well have beentheirs, as well as that represented by a single scorched slab set against Q’s wall to the southof later Building W.

Summary

A general summary of the events and structures associated with Temple B may be helpful.The temple was founded upon the walls of Temple A, which itself was set partly on Minoanwalls. At about the same time Building Z, to the south, was constructed. Inside B, a benchwas set along the north and, perhaps, the south wall. On axis was set a small hearth and,west of it, a tripillar structure serving as the center of worship. During the second phase ofthe temple, a broad and long court was established east of the temple, as well as the firstoutdoor altar (Altar U). Inside, with the floor level raised, a new hearth (Hearth 2) replacedthe original one, and the Tripillar Shrine received votives of animal figurines, jewellery, anda shield. In the final phase of major use, again with a rise in floor level, a new hearth (Hearth4) replaced its predecessor. Still another hearth (Hearth 3) incorporated the upper portionsof the shrine’s pillars which were therefore no longer visible, even though the area retained


some of its original sanctity. Outside, new buildings were constructed on the east (BuildingV) and to the south (Building Q).

4. Partial Desertion of the Kommos Site, Ca. 600–375/350 B.C.Altar H (Pls. 1.74–1.78; Table 8.2)

After the abandonment of Temple B and Building Q in about 600 B.C., the Kommos site wasapparently less frequented. Occasional use is demonstrated during the sixth century B.C.,however, by discarded pottery found in the temple area (Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4,Section 1, Deposit 28, 415–18). That the original religious role of the area was not forgotten,moreover, is shown by the construction of Altar H at about the midpoint of the Archaic courteast of Temple B.

Probably built sometime in the second half of the sixth century (as demonstrated by thecups and hydria in Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1, Deposit 29), Altar H is thefirst low monumental type of altar known to have been built at the Kommos site.87 Unlike atAltar U, built in connection with Temple B, Phase 2, offerings were made on the roughlyhorizontal surface of the top of the structure rather than being placed into (or even, perhaps,poured into) a hollow receptacle. H (Pl. 1.76) is sizable, being 1.94–1.96 m wide and 3.00–3.26m long. It was about 0.65 m high above the top of its first course. It was found bare of artifacts,but its function was nevertheless suggested by the burnt bones found upon it, with some250 g on its northern half (see Reese, Chap. 6, Table 6.1).

Altar H had at least two structural phases, for while cleaning its top we found that itoriginally was 1.89 m long and 1.17 m wide, with additions of 1.11 m to its length on thesouth and 0.77 m to its width on the west. A limited sounding was made along its northernside in order to ascertain its history. Next to its foundations (it was without krepidoma, unlikelater Altar C), was early Greek and Minoan pottery above Minoan walls.

Building F (Pls. 1.72–1.73)

Some distance to the northeast of Altar H, Building F was discovered in 1977 below a thicklayer of hard clay. During that season its northwest corner was excavated; in 1990 the remainderof the west wall was cleared down to the southwest corner. Only the western part of thebuilding (7.80 m long north-south) could be investigated, because F lies next to the easternproperty line, and the remainder of the building disappears into the scarp. Unlike BuildingV, built roughly of slabs, F is constructed of carefully trimmed limestone blocks, two courseshigh and 0.60 m wide, set upon a foundation wall penetrating into Minoan strata. The coursesare carefully leveled, unlike those of earlier Temple B. The upper walls of this once substantialbuilding, perhaps even an important one for understanding the sanctuary’s history, have been

The Period of Temple C, Ca. 375/350 B.C.–A.D. 160/170 37

robbed out, as have its larger corner blocks. Fortunately, its floor was partly preserved onthe south, where four rows of slabs had been neatly laid along the south wall (Pl. 1.72). Uponthe slabs was a lead line weight (Schwab, Chap. 5, Section 10, 24) as well as an importantseries of cups (Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1, Deposit 28, 396–401) that date thefinal use of the building to the years around 500 B.C., a time for which there are few actualexamples of major building activity in Crete.

During the period of Altar H and Building F, which were probably in use at the same time,the temple area remained abandoned, with Temple B derelict. It is tempting, therefore, topostulate a functional connection between H and F, for F was extremely well built and couldpossibly have been a public if not a religious structure. The few finds within F, however, maywell represent a domestic deposit, since there is no evidence so far for religious use. Also,the apparent lack of a door in the west wall of F suggests that the building faced east (likelater Hellenistic Building E), away from H and the sanctuary area.88

5. The Period of Temple C, Ca. 375/350 B.C.–A.D. 160/170(Pls. 1.79–1.168; Tables 1.5, 8.1–8.3)After over two hundred years of relative disuse, the sanctuary was revived ca. 375–350 B.C.with a new set of buildings: a temple (Temple C),89 an altar (Altar C), a circular structure(Building D), and a possible base with a statue (Base Y; Pls. 1.6, 1.167–1.168).

Phase 1

Temple C followed precedent at the site by being constructed largely, if not exclusively, oflocally available Minoan blocks from Buildings T and P, culled from the western seasidescarps or from the south in the area of Archaic Building Q.90 Some of Temple B’s wall blocksmay have been reused as well. C was set over the remains of B, with its level slab floor (Floor1) at +5.67 m, about 0.60 m above the final floor of Temple B (Floor 3).91 (The relationship onthe interior can be seen in Plate 1.23, right, where C’s floor slabs are set on a packing overB’s north wall.) C, however, did not follow its predecessor’s orientation, its east-west axisbeing set some six degrees further northeast then B’s.92 The reason for this change, unlessfortuitous (which is doubtful), was probably so that the axis of the new temple would bisectArchaic Altar H, thereby making possible a direct view of the earlier altar, as well as anyactivities carried out there, from the interior of the temple.93 It seems clear that C’s buildersknew of B’s existence, probably because of walls visible at the time. Moreover, at one pointin the northwest corner the foundations of the two buildings were actually merged (Pl. 1.47),with B’s being partially reused for the later structure.

Although the west walls of the two temples were set at approximately the same point,Temple C’s builders were more ambitious, for they made their building level, as compared


Table 1.5. Selected items from within Temple C and related structures.


TEMPLE C, INTERIOR

Above and on lower slab floor (29A1/25, 26, and 30; 33C/45)

B 12 Hadrianic coin (A.D. 117–138) Walker, Chap. 5, Section 2, 3

B 13 Coin of the period of Antoninus Pius Walker, Chap. 5, Section 2, 4(A.D. 138–161)


Bo 25 Needle fragments Schwab, Chap. 5, Section 10, 35

Bo 27 Needle fragment Schwab, Chap. 5, Section 10, 37

C 2133 Candarlı ware dish Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 3

C 2172 Lamp Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 4, 56

C 2173 Oversize lamp disk (temple lamp?) Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 4, 72




C 2271 Cup Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 23

C 2272 Cooking pot Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 29

C 2273 Dish Uncatalogued






C 2506 Bowl fragment Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 5

C 2507 Bowl fragment See Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 5



C 8894 Platter Uncatalogued


C 8896 Votive bowl Uncatalogued, but see Hayes, Chap. 4, Section3, Deposit 56

C 8897 Lekane Uncatalogued


I 9 Inscribed tripod altar (29A1/12, 14, 19, Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 7521, 22, and 30)


L 4 Strips Schwab, Chap. 5, Section 10, 32




Mi 29 Iron knife with ivory and bronze haft J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 42

Mi 32 Glass unguentarium Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 8

Mi 33 Glass dish/shallow bowl Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 6

Mi 40 Glass deep bowl, rim Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 17

Mi 46 Glass beaker Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 23

Mi 47 Glass handle Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 10

Mi 48 Glass dish Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 5

Mi 54 Glass beaker, fragments Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 22 and 24; seealso 17

Mi 61 Glass Uncatalogued


Mi 103 Two nails J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 8, 26 and 27

Mi 105 Nail J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 8, Table 5.3

Mi 106 Grill/grate Uncatalogued

Mi 107 Two nails J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 8, Table 5.3

Mi 155 Sheet fragment Uncatalogued

S 653 Perirrhanterion/table base (joins S 1538 J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 6, 2from 50A/3)

S 654 Tripodal base J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 6, 1

S 801 Column drum J. W. Shaw, Chap. 1, Section 6, 3

S 802 Statue base block J. W. Shaw, Chap. 1, Section 6, 1

S 870 Architectural molding J. W. Shaw, Chap. 1, Section 6, 8

S 1440 Pebble J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 9, Table 5.8

S 2118 Squared base in situ outside east facade J. W. Shaw, Chap. 1, Section 6, 2

Sh 4A Shell collection from Temple C Reese, Chap. 6

Pottery included in Deposit 57 Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3

Exterior enclosure south of doorway (34A3/73)


Above and on upper earth floor (29A1/12, 14, 19, 21, and 22)

B 73 Flattened wire Uncatalogued

Bo 22 Needle Schwab, Chap. 5, Section 10, 39


Bo 24 Eye cornea M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 4

C 1997 Casserole rim Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 27

C 1999 Inscribed pan tile Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 87




C 2000 Inscribed pan tile Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 88



C 2027 Waster Uncatalogued

C 2028 Vessel with false bottom Uncatalogued

C 2100 Jug Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 35

C 2107 Frying pan Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 25


C 2127 Bowl Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 1


C 2129 Basin Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 2

C 2131 Cooking bowl fragment Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 30



C 2722 Amphora fragment Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 50

C 2723 Amphora fragment, neck Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 53

C 2890 Coarse red conical cup fragment Uncatalogued

C 2899 Flat dish Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 7

C 2900 Flat dish Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 8

C 6079 Cooking pot fragment Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 31

C 6080 Amphora base fragment Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 54

C 6092 Amphora base fragment Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 51

I 9 Inscribed altar (also 29A1/12, 14, 19, 21, Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 7522, and 30)

I 10 Inscribed basin (also 10A3/49; 29A/1; Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 78; J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5,29A1/3, 10, 19, and 29; 82/46) Section 6, 12



Mi 13 Glass bowl Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 4


Mi 18 Glass dish/bowl Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 2

Mi 19 Glass flagon Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 31

Mi 21 Glass beaker/bowl Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 27

Mi 22 Glass closed vessel, neck fragment Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 32

Mi 23 Glass small bowl or beaker Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 3




Mi 24 Glass beaker or bowl, base fragment Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 25

Mi 26 Glass unguentarium Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 9

Mi 27 Glass beaker base fragment Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 26


Mi 36 Glass small bowl Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 7

Mi 38 Glass flask(?) base Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 33

Mi 40 Glass deep bowl rim Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 17

Mi 102 Two nails J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 8, 25



S 197 Relief with Pan M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 5

S 282 Vegetal relief fragment Uncatalogued

S 283 Minoan lamp in reuse Schwab 1996: no. 42

S 655 Block with herringbone pattern J. W. Shaw, Chap. 1, Section 6, 7

S 656 Doric anta capital with hawksbeak J. W. Shaw, Chap. 1, Section 6, 4molding

S 1367 Pebble J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 9, Table 5.8;Blitzer 1995: GS 130

Sh 3 Snail shells from below Minoan lamp Reese, Chap. 6, Section 6(S 283)

Northeastern enclosure (29A1/24, 27, and 32)


C 2171 Red-glazed bowl Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 9

Mi 43 Glass bowl Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 14

S 2114 Fragmentary stone basin J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 6, 11

S 1476 Pebble, differentially weathered J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 9, Table 5.8;Blitzer 1995: GS 626

Northwestern enclosure (29A1/37, 39, and 40; 34A5/81)

C 2295 Mug Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 20





C 2900 Bowl rim Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 8






I 11 Inscribed stone slab (29A1/39; 29A2/17 Csapo et al., Chap. 2, 77and 34)

Mi 50 Glass deep bowl Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 16

Mi 55 Glass bowl, fragments Hayes, Chap. 5, Section 1, 15

S 866 Carved marble anchor stock J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 6, 13


Central rectangular hearth (29A1/28 and 35; 46A)




Southeastern upper hearth (29A1/18)

No objects inventoried

STRUCTURES CONTEMPORARY WITH TEMPLE C (PHASE 1)

Round Building D (14A/12; 20B2/52; 46A3/1 and 2)

B 47 Nail J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 8, 11

C 810 Worn sherd Uncatalogued

C 3230 Black-glazed cup base Uncatalogued


C 3232 Tulip cup rim fragment Uncatalogued

C 3233 Cup rim, handle fragment Uncatalogued

Upper pails (14A/9 and 10; 20B2/47, 50, and 54)

B 7 Fishhook, unbarbed Blitzer 1995: M 60

B 207 Pin Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 39

C 1117 Jar Uncatalogued


C 3227 Cup body fragment Uncatalogued

C 3228 Everted rim cup rim Uncatalogued

C 3229 Kommos cup rim fragment Uncatalogued

C 3295 Cylindrical cup base fragment Uncatalogued

C 3297 Everted rim cup base Uncatalogued

C 3298 Cooking pot rim fragment Uncatalogued

C 3299 Cooking pot fragments Uncatalogued




C 8452 Kommos cup, late Uncatalogued

Mi 96 Nail J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 8, 10

Exterior deposit establishing foundation


Building W (50A1/63, 71, and 75; 55A/1–4)

No nonpottery finds inventoried



Altar C

Top of altar (10A1/23 and 27)

B 169 Tack J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 8, 60

C 268 Bull figurine M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, C9

C 345 Three bull’s legs M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, C17

C 377 Cylindrical cup Uncatalogued

C 378 Cooking pot Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 33


3,100 g bone (3,050 g burnt) Reese, Chap. 6

Interior of altar (10A1/31)

B 205 Knife J. W. Shaw and Harlan, Chap. 5, Section 7, 39

Around the sides of altar (10A1/25, 26, and 28)

A 3 Bead(?) fragments Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 59



C 269 Bull(?) eye/face M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, C44

C 279 Bowl/mug fragment Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 16

C 390 Dish rim fragment Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 22

Slab enclosure south of altar (33A1/15)

No inventoried items


Foundation and use of Altar C

B 293 Laurel leaf fragment Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 36

Mi 170 Iron grill or grate fragment Uncatalogued


Pottery Deposits 36 and 37 Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1




SANCTUARY AND OTHER STRUCTURES AFTER THE EARLY PHASE OF TEMPLE C

Room A1

For the date of the foundation, see floor Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1Pottery Deposit 40, and for the latest useof the floor, see Pottery Deposit 41

Central hearth (23A/25; 46A1/1)

No catalogued itemsFaunal remains Reese, Chap. 6

Building B

Western Room, first floor, inner room (10A/38)

B 5b Tacks J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 8, 4


Western Room, first floor, outer room (10A/41, 45, and 71)

C 736 Pan tile, Type A J. W. Shaw, Chap. 1, Section 6, 17


Western Room, soil layer immediately above lower floor, inner room (10A/35)

B 2 Ring Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 37

B 6 Fibula Dabney, Chap. 5, Section 3, 58

C 368 Cup Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1,Deposit 49

C 369 Cylindrical cup fragment Uncatalogued

C 370 Cup fragment Uncatalogued

C 374 Lamp Uncatalogued

Western Room, within level of roof tile collapse (10A/15, 16, 20, and 21)

C 8899 Amphora, Augustan Uncatalogued

C 8900 Cooking vessel, Augustan Uncatalogued

C 8901 Amphora, Augustan Uncatalogued

C 8902 Basin, Augustan Uncatalogued

C 8903 Local “Arrentine” vessel Uncatalogued

Western Room, upper late reoccupation level (10A/13 and 14)




C 8904 Cylindrical cup, Augustan Uncatalogued









Western Room, within upper wall collapse (10A/3 and 8)

C 141 Amphora rim fragment Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 44

C 245 Jug Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 43

C 281 Lamp(?) Uncatalogued

C 735 Cover tile J. W. Shaw, Chap. 1, Section 6, 19

C 1901 Amphora, rim fragment Uncatalogued

C 1902 Amphora, body fragment Uncatalogued

C 8908 Everted rim cup, Augustan Uncatalogued

C 8911 Everted rim cup, A.D. 1–50 Uncatalogued

S 270 Cobble J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 9, Table 5.8;Blitzer 1995: GS 487

Eastern Room, on lower floor (10A/54, 63, 66, and 67)

B 4 Miniature shield, phiale, or cymbal Schwab, Chap. 5, Section 10, 18

B 32a and b Nail shafts J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 8, 5 and 6

B 160 Nail with lead casing J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 8, 14

B 163 Nail shaft J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 8, Table 5.3

Mi 3 Iron nail, from pivot socket J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 8, 21

Mi 4 Iron nail J. W. Shaw, Chap. 4, Section 8, 22


Eastern Room, upper, later occupation level (10A/18, 21, 22, 24)

C 478 Lamp base Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 4, 19

C 479 Lamp base Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 4, 45

Eastern Room, hearth in southeast corner (10A/52; 46A2/1)

No objects inventoried


Eastern Room, upper collapse (10A/12)


C 282 Lamp Uncatalogued

C 283 Roman red ware sherd Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 11

C 455 Amphora profile Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 45

C 8910 Votive bowl, Augustan Uncatalogued, but see Hayes, Chap. 4, Section3, Deposit 55





Also relating to roofing structure

C 737 Pan tile, Type 2 (10A/61); from general J. W. Shaw, Chap. 1, Section 6, 18tile collection

C 776 Sima fragment (10A/69), from north of UncataloguedBuilding B

C 8912 Cover tile fragment (10A/59) Uncatalogued

Associated dump outside Building B: Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1Pottery Deposit 49

Altar LNo inventoried artifacts1 unburnt bone

Scarp just east of Altar L (29A/20)



C 2110 Incurved bowl Uncatalogued

C 2111 Commercial amphora fragment Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 47

C 2179 Amphora Hayes, Chap. 4, Section 3, 52



C 2182 Bull’s leg M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 2, C24

C 2183 Cup profile Uncatalogued

C 2184 Amphora Uncatalogued

C 8594 Two lumps of burnt clay Uncatalogued

Altar M (29A/31)No inventoried artifacts1 unburnt bone

Building E

Northern Annex (20A/18 and 23)

Pottery Deposit 45 (in part) Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1

Central Room (20A/12, 28, and 29)


Pottery Deposit 45 (in part) Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1

Southern Room (67A/10)

S 1995 Cobble, worn J. W. Shaw, Chap. 5, Section 9, Table 5.8


Associated dump in Deposit 50 Callaghan and Johnston, Chap. 4, Section 1

Building YNo objects inventoried


with Temple B’s being set without special buildup of the natural slope (the difference isclearest in Pl. 1.47, where the west walls of B and C are visible). Also, they created a significantlylarger structure, which was wider and longer, ca. 9.00 m wide and 11.50 m long on the exteriorversus 6.40 and 8.08 m for the earlier building. Unfortunately, only a few actual wall blocksof the building were not removed by later stone robbers; those can be seen in Plate 1.46, alongthe western side of the building. The foundation at the point illustrated is 0.88 m wide. Thewall itself, about 0.71 m wide, was set back about 0.16 m from the outer edge of the foundation.94

A single course of blocks with faces on the interior and exterior sufficed for the foundations.The foundations of C on the south, where not robbed out, can be seen in Plate 1.48, wherethey are about 0.97 m wide. Those on the east are illustrated in Plate 1.83.

Evidence for the cutting of the blocks, in the form of stone-working chips (Pl. 1.178), wasfound throughout the sanctuary, but especially in the vicinity of Temple C. Not only was C’sslab floor set largely upon them, but in at least one instance the builders excavated downinto the debris within Temple B (in order to recover earth to mix with the chips for the floorpacking?) and refilled the pits with chips (Pl. 1.34, upper left; Pl. 1.35, below C’s hearth, centerright). The same was done north of Temple C.95 Chips were found west of the temple, abovethe Archaic level, as well as to the south.96 They were especially common east of the temple,where they covered over Altar U, spreading eastward to join with those from contemporaryAltar C, where they would predictably appear during excavation as an indication of themasons’ work. It was probably here that many of the blocks were brought to be shaped priorto being set in place in Temple C, apparently the only building in the sanctuary to be con-structed with such care.97 These chips and earth were used to form C’s first court, which, likethat of B, sloped down to the southwest, following the natural inclination of the land, from+5.30 to +5.15 m.98

To ensure the court’s stability, a retaining wall of rough blocks, with occasional holes topermit drainage, was built along the southern edge of the sanctuary (Pl. 1.79).99 A gap ofabout 3 m, later to be filled, was left on the west, perhaps to allow passage just east ofcontemporary Building W (for W, see “Structures Contemporary with Temple C, Phase 1”following). Although built probably at the same time as Temple C, the retaining wall was tobe renewed sporadically.100 Against its southern face, upon the north wall of Archaic BuildingQ’s Room 30, was set at this time or later a small enclosure (Pl. 1.155) that contained ash,bone, and burnt grape pips, as well as a miniature votive lekane (C 6700) dating to the firstcentury B.C. Two more lekanai were found in the nearby sand. Why was the enclosure setnext to the retaining wall? One possibility is that there was an entrance to the temenos nearhere, and people approaching it from the south would make offerings as they arrived.

The enclosure (0.65 m north-south and 0.65 m east-west, as measured on the exterior)resembles and probably functioned rather like the one built against the ashlar facade of TempleC probably not long after C was built (Pl. 1.116), to one’s left when entering the temple.In an earlier phase (Pl. 1.81, Phase 1), the latter enclosure was 0.45 m long north-south and


0.50 m wide on the interior, and the layers of burnt clay in its interior suggest that firesmay have been lit within it, probably scorching the exterior face of the temple’s wall (now,unfortunately, missing). In a second phase (Pl. 1.81, Phase 2), when the structure was about0.60 m long and 0.40 m wide and set at a somewhat raised level, the dark soil and burnt boneindicate that use continued.101 Perhaps offerings were burnt here, as on the altars outside, aswell as on the hearth within the temple.

North of this slab enclosure and on the other side of the doorway, outside the temple, wasset a well-cut, rectangular block of limestone (Section 6, 2; Pls. 1.117–1.118). It is 0.44 m long,0.49 m wide, and about 0.30 m high. Into its upper surface was cut a cylindrical socket,0.13 m in diameter and 0.05 m deep. A shallow, rough-cut, circular depression 0.30 m indiameter surrounds the socket, suggesting that a round base (perhaps a dedicatory column?)had once been secured on it with a dowel perhaps stabilized by lead.102 The bottom of thisbase rests at the top of the stone-chip level (at +5.50 m), and thus most likely belongs to thefirst architectural phase of Temple C.

The slab enclosure and base, therefore, were on one’s left and right, respectively, as oneentered Temple C. The threshold between them, now missing, constituted a step up of0.10 m into the temple (to +5.75 m), and then one stepped down onto the slab floor (at+5.66 m). Here there was a double door, the socket of which for the southern pivot (0.20 mby 0.14 m and 0.07 m deep) was found cut into one of the floor slabs (Pls. 1.87, 1.86, left).103

The door, presumably wooden, swung inward as one entered. Circular scratch marks on thefloor slabs north of the center of the doorway show that there were two leaves to the door,the northern one probably set onto a similar slab, now missing.

The form of the temple doorway can most likely be determined by joining fragments of aDoric anta block (Section 6, 4), found inside the temple (Pls. 1.113–1.114; the block is 0.80 mlong, 0.556 m wide, and 0.35 m high). It was probably not taken by the stone robbers eitherbecause it was covered over before they did their work, having tumbled into the cella earlier,or because it was eschewed by them and unceremoniously dumped into the cella, since thehawksbeak molding and projection would have had to be trimmed off during reuse.104 Theanta block has two rectangular lewis holes in its upper surface, the only such cuttings foundat Kommos. They were intended to serve as sockets so that machinery could hoist the blockinto position. Smaller blocks would have been set by hand. This block probably belonged tothe northern door frame, on the right as one entered the temple, as suggested in the restorationof the doorway (Frontispiece); no trace of the corresponding block crowning the southerndoorframe was found. The doorframe would have been set against the back (interior) of theeast wall. This anta capital is the only clear indication of formal sculpted decoration on theexterior of Temple C.105

As originally designed (the temple had six periods of use), there were two columns on axis,each set on rounded limestone bases that are at the same height (+5.91 m) and project some0.24–0.28 m above floor level. The plain column bases (Pl. 1.98) taper slightly. Their upper


surfaces are 0.59 m (the eastern) and 0.63 m (the western) in diameter.106 Both bases weredeeply set into the earth below the floor, as was made clear during the process of the soundings(Pls. 1.23, 1.37). The western base was positioned, perhaps unintentionally, upon the northernpillar of the Tripillar Shrine that formed the center of worship in earlier Temple B. The formof the columns set upon these bases is unsure, but a likely candidate for part of one of themwas found in the northwest corner of the temple (Pl. 1.96). There a much eroded columndrum (Section 7, 3; Pl. 1.95) was used to block part of the corner, or the piece was simplydragged to that position after it had fallen, in order to move it out of the way. The drum is1.185 m long and tapers from a diameter of 0.495 to 0.438 m; it is orderless and withoutfluting, and it lacks empolion. Although much weathered, especially along one of its sides,enough remains of its original surface to show that it was roughly cut, unlike the anta capitalalready described and the statue base to the west (see following). Perhaps originally the drumwas plastered to improve its appearance. No fragments of capitals were found that might beattributed to it, but if capitals were used, they were probably of the Doric order.107

Also on axis, and set between the column bases in about the middle of the room, is a hearth(ca. 1.15 m north-south and 1.44 m east-west and 0.20 m high) found filled with dark ash(Pls. 1.89–1.90).108 The faces of the small blocks of which it is made are set to the outside.

West of the hearth and against the west wall was set a well-built platform (ca. 2.85 m longand 1.50 m wide, and originally at least 0.95 m high; Pl. 1.99). It formed a statue base thatonce projected by itself from the back wall of the room.109 The statue base consisted of threecourses of blocks. The lowest course on the east (0.35 m high) was set on the working chipsfrom Temple C’s construction, with the temple’s slab floor bordering it on the east, showingthat the base is either earlier than, or most likely contemporary with, the slab floor. The secondcourse (0.29 m high) was also of three blocks and was much weathered. The third course(0.316 m high) was preserved in the form of only one block (Section 6, 1). Although muchweathered on the east, the base molding still survives, as does part of the cornice. The basemolding (Pls. 1.97, 1.104) is that of a cavetto and half round; the cornice is very worn.110 Thebase molding continues to the south, where, in a later phase, an additional platform was set,and also around the north side of the statue base, where it is partly obscured by later construc-tion. On the south, if it was not completely chopped off when the later platform was set in,it remains hidden.

The block with the weathered cornice (Section 6, 1; Pls. 1.99, 1.100, and 1.105) originallyformed part of the top of the platform. This is partially confirmed by its position as well asby the pry hole along its northern edge on the course below. As such, it is the only block insitu of the perhaps seven blocks originally used. We are most fortunate that it is there. On itare several somewhat enigmatic cuttings, but they are probably related to the cult statue(s),perhaps one to which the bone eye (Bo 24; M. C. Shaw, Chap. 3, Section 4) found in the templefill may be attributed.

During its later phases there were interior benches around the southern, eastern, and


northern sides of Temple C, but were they there during this primary period of temple use?Evidence for this aspect of the early floor plan is to be found especially in the southwest andnorthwest corners. In the former, as will be seen shortly, the molding of the additional platformsouth of the statue base ended before reaching the south wall, about 0.50 m from where thewall once was (Pl. 1.107). Moreover, the end of the molding was left unfinished, most likelybecause that part of it was not visible. Nor did the floor slabs continue there. It is reasonableto conclude, therefore, that, as in the case of the statue base, the floor slabs ran up to the edgeof a feature, now missing, that occupied that space, and that the molding projected partlyinto or below it.111 Since there is no evidence for a wall at that point, and the later history ofthe room featured a series of benches there, a wooden bench (0.50–0.60 m wide) has beenrestored in Plate 1.81, Phase 1.112 It may have been renewed a number of times, like the stonebenches that replaced it.

In the northwest corner, during an investigation that revealed at least four phases of use(Pl. 1.93),113 it became clear that almost the entire corner was originally accessible, for the slabfloor continued under the accumulated remains to end almost at the north and west walls.Along the north wall there were three slabs, worn perhaps by passing feet (Pl. 1.93, 1′). Theslabs may have served as a step down from a minor entrance to the room from the northwestduring its first period, before Room A1 was built to the north.114

Concerning the placement of the columns within the temple, both were set with their centerson the horizontal axis (ca. 3.75 m from the side walls) and with the same intercolumniation(Pl. 1.84). It is curious that whereas the hearth was set toward the center of the building,perhaps in order to provide equal access to all, the two major supports for the span ofthe ridge beam, the columns themselves, were not distributed evenly. Indeed, the ridge (ca.10.00 m long from west to east wall) was subdivided into three lengths: from west to east,2.43–2.50 m, 3.74 m, and 3.86 m.115 That these lengths are not fortuitous is suggested by thefact that the two eastern ones are similar to each other and to the distances from center ofridge beam to side walls (3.75 m).

A possible explanation of the shifting of the columns toward the west is that the builderswished to allow for an unimpeded interior floor space as people entered or left. The fact thatthe hearth is set next to the eastern column, rather than being centered between the two, mayalso be accounted for by the builders’ desire to leave floor space between the hearth and thewestern column. This space may have allowed freer circulation. On the other hand, it mayalso have been reserved for tables, perhaps of wood, or for other accoutrements set up foroccasions of ritual feasting. The general arrangement in plan may be related to the setting ofa projecting lantern on the roof for smoke to leave the building.

For the height of the temple’s walls and the form of the roof (as suggested in Pl. 1.85), thereis only indirect evidence. The former might be estimated as corresponding to the top of thebeams, which rested in turn on the tops of the columns (capitals?), since as is usual anycrossbeams would have been inset into the top of the wall (horizontal cornice). A minimum

Date post:	28-Jul-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	hoangdieu
View:	219 times
Download:	0 times

The Architecture of the Temples and Other Buildings · 2 The Architecture of the Temples and Other...

Documents