Antikythera, History and Antiquities

11/6/2014 Antikythera Online
http://www.archaiologia.gr/en/blog/2013/11/04/antikythera-history-and-antiquities/ 1/14
Antikythera
History and Antiquities
by - Monday, 4 November 2013
This text presents the antiquities identified in the last few years of excavation on the
island of Antikythera. It is for the first time that we are led to historical conclusions
regarding the relatively unknown (note 1) until today small island after having
analysed them along with literary and epigraphic data. It seems that the island played
an important role in the history of the Greek world during the Hellenistic period, from
the beginning of Alexanders the Great campaign, in the late 4th century BC until the
repression of the Cretan Revolution, with which the conquest of the whole Greek
land was completed by the Romans in 69-67 BC.
Antikythera (fig. 1) is a small island, almost 20 square kilometers, located in the
hazardous sea area between the islands of Kythera and Crete. Despite its strategic
position that controls the sea passage from the Aegean and the Black Sea to the
Western Mediterranean, it is very difficult for large groups of inhabitants to survive on
the island, and thus it was left in relative obscurity during almost the whole antiquity.
Only few are the references of ancient writers to Antikythera. The island is mentioned
as in Plutarch (note 2) and as in Stephanus Byzantius (note 3). In
several manuscripts (codes) of Claudius Ptolemy (note 4) the island is mentioned as
, , or (from the written in capital letters; where the was
spelled as , as it happened usually in the late years of antiquity, and the letters and
were incorrectly read as ) and in Pliny (note 5) as Aigila, Aigilia Aeglia. In the
inscriptions described below the island is mentioned as , while the adjective
refers to . The names of the island that have survived up to date are
Lioi in Kythera and in the Peloponnese, and Sigilio or Siglio in Crete, names that
originate from the ancient name. During the Venetian period, and after the conquest
of Crete by the Ottomans, the official name of the island became Cerigotto or
Cecerigo originating from the Italian name of the island of Kythera that was Cerigo.
The current name Antikythera that was established with the discovery of the
This original article is written in English .
No more available languages.
Nazca archaeological sites in danger near
Ica, Peru
Invasores (invaders) have taken
possession of two large tracts of land in a
protected area.
'Cowboy builders' blamed for Rome's
crumbling Colosseum
An ambitious attempt to save Rome's
Colosseum from collapse is being
undermined by the authorities' cost-cutting
decision to employ ordinary builders rather
than specialists to perform the delicate
overhaul, restoration experts have claimed.
New finds at Kissonerga-Skalia
The Ministry of Communications and Works,
Department of Antiquities announces the
completion of the latest season of
excavation at the EarlyMiddle Bronze Age
settlement of Kissonerga-Skalia.
New finds at Aigai
Three impressive funerary monuments which
might open a new chapter to the study of
the evolution of the so-called Macedonian
Tombs have been discovered.
An ancient city (1200-100 BC) comes to light
at Krousona
An important archaeological excavation has
just started at "Koupos" by Krosona. It is
expected to bring to light more findings from
a settlement that has already proved a life
Most Popular
shipwreck in 1901, is due to the Cephalonian radicals who restored the name of
Kythera instead of the Italian Cerigo and established a new name for the island of
Antikythera which that period was the most remote part of the British held Ionic
State.
Many Cephalonian and Zakynthian radicals were exiled to the remote island in the
1850s. Along with the other islands of the Ionian Sea, and after the consistent fight
of the inhabitants of the islands, it was offered to Greece in 1864. Since then, and
until the unification of the island of Crete with the Greek state (1912-1913),
Antikythera was the southern and most remote part of Greece.
The antiquities of the island are known since the 19th century, while the radical
Cephalonian Ilias Zervos-Iakovatos (note 6) makes specific reference to the antiquities
in his book.
Antiquities from Antikythera were firstly published in Archaeologiki Ephemeris in 1862
by Athanasios Rousopoulos (note 7), who also exported the antiquities he had
discovered and published (note 8)!
The visible today antiquities on the island are the Hellenistic fortified city in the old
settlement called Kastro, above the gulf of Xeropotamos, and the graves that are
dated to the late antiquity, in the settlements of Potamos, Charchaliana and
Batoudiana. Movable findings of the Hellenistic, the early, and after a break, middle
Byzantine period and finally of the late Venetian period, have been discovered on the
island after a survey that took place under the direction of the Canadian
Archaeological School and the 26th Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities
(note 9). The areas of the island from which historical conclusions are deduced are
presented in chronological order below.
The bay on Xeropotamos inlet, the ancient harbour and the Apollo
Sanctuary
On the side of Xeropotamos stream where it almost meets the sea, north to the
homonym little gulf, a by-the harbour sanctuary dedicated to Apollo and Artemis
operated since the second half of the 4th century BC.
In antiquity, the sea entered the gulf deeper, forming a hidden harbour, protected
from the strong northern winds. The strong earthquake that hit the island in 365 AD,
span of twelve centuries.
Current Research on the Phaestos Disk
by Archaeology Newsroom
New lighting for the Lindos Acropolis
The Treasure of Kythnos
Statuette of Artemis
Turks in the Aegean
Cycladic Seminar
M. Georgiadis, Kos in the Neolithic and Early
Bronze Age
Return to Keros
Journey from the Aegean to Gurob with a
model galley
Eleutherna on Crete: A Homeric site
revealed
First digitized book in Turning-the-Pages
program
Related
uplifted the island ca. 2,80m giving the coastline its current position (note 10).
In 1888, agricultural works in the area, uncovered a headless statue of Apollo, in the
type of the Guitar-Player (fig. 2). Research carried out by Valerios Stais (note 11)
uncovered an inscribed base of a monument (possibly of a statue) dedicated to
(Apollo of Aigilia) by
and () (Aristomenes, son of Aristomedes from
Pherae and Nikon, son of Kephisodoros from Athens) (fig. 3). From the two
monuments (note 12), it can be seen that a sanctuary dedicated to Apollo and
Artemis functioned during the whole Hellenistic period (fig. 4). Excavations that took
place in 2004 and 2005 uncovered the foundations of the ancient temple, in the
shape of , and the foundation of its altar (fig. 5). The axis of the temple is with
direction S-SW to N-NE (450), directed towards Delos. The peribolos (precinct) of the
sanctuary is very strong as it was in close contact with the harbour (fig. 7). Apart
from the statue and the inscribed base, pieces of marble statues and vessels
(perirranterio= basin for cleansing) have been found along with many arrowheads,
because it is known that Apollo had taught the Cretans the art of arching, as well as
many coins with representations of Apollo and Artemis, jewellery, gem stones and
earrings (fig. 8, 9, 10, 11).
Another, very important information provided by the reading of the above mentioned
inscription, was the origin of the two persons mentioned; the first was a Thessalian
and the second an Athenian. Stais, who published the inscription, thought that these
two were shipwrecked, they were saved on the island (note 13) and afterwards they
felt the need to express their gratitude to the god-protector of the island for their
surviving. Below, after the presentation of the whole archaeological site and the
results of the excavation, the conclusions will be discussed for the significance of the
two names and the role they played in an important time in the history of Hellenism.
Kastro (the fortified city) (fig. 12)
On the eastern bank of Xeropotamos stream two paths lead to the fortified
settlement of Kastro. The western path very close to the bay has been
significantly damaged due to time; it was narrow and no carts could pass. In many
parts, the protective retaining wall can be seen as well as rock cut or built with stones
steps. Almost 10m south of the gate that leads to the city, on the rock, where the
above mentioned path has been constructed, a rock sanctuary has been preserved
The Crossroads II, or There and Back Again
The Mycenaean settlement and the tombs
on Mygdalia hill, near Patras
20th Annual Meeting of the European
Association of Archaeologists
ship sank, everything lost
Poseidons Net
Coin hoards and pottery at ancient Rhizon
Excavations at Anogyra-Vlou
Excavations at the ancient theatre of Aptera
Of Gods and Glamour
The use of caves in west Crete during the
Minoan period
Ancient Olympia gets facelift
Greek Literary Epigram
Identity and Representation in Antiquity
Sleeping Eros
with two niches and one bench (fig. 13). It is a sanctuary outside the gate that led to
the eastern bank of the harbour, for those who would leave or return after a sea
voyage. The gate of the fort at the end of the path, that we called the Southwestern
Gate was relatively well constructed and decorated judging from a number of
architectural members that were found in the area (fig. 14, 15, 16).
The ancient city was built on the western slope of the peninsula of Kastro (fig. 17).
In the southern part of the fortification walls that looked towards the mainland of the
island and was accessible from there, a second gate was constructed, which we call
the South where the other path, east of the harbour, was leading (fig. 18).
The fortification walls covered the whole western slope of the peninsula, from the
rocky coast to the west and north until the mountain ridge to the east (fig. 19). A
second line of fortification walls, on the highest point, limited the administrative center
of the city, the Acropolis. On the Acropolis, the house of the chief of the city was
also situated, protected from the strong rock located higher to the east (fig. 20),
while the gate of the Acropolis towards the city was monumental too, but it seems
that from the beginning of its function, it had been destroyed by external attack and
its repair took place under a different plan (fig. 21).
The fortification walls are visible almost along their whole length (fig. 22), constructed
differently depending on the local material. At the parts where soft limestone was
accessible, the fortification walls consist of well-cut and worked blocks built in the
isodomic way (fig. 23, 24, 25, 26). At the parts where the local material was hard
and difficult to work limestone, the rough polygonal building was preferred. This
type of construction was also used for many forts in Crete, during the Hellenistic
period. It seems that the first constructors took care only of the appearance and the
stability of the exterior side, while, in the interior, the wall that separated the
Acropolis from the city, was primarily constructed in somehow untidy polygonal way
and later (it is unknown when, but not long after its primary construction) it was
covered with a pseudo-isodomic series of stones (fig. 28). Along the whole fort,
rectangular fortified towers protrude (fig. 29, 30, 31).
On the northern side of the fort, a significant area had been left without houses or
other constructions. This happened in places that were often attacked and these
areas were occupied by inhabitants, who found shelter and protection there or for
armies to camp (fig. 22).
Ancient cemetery came to light
Carabinieri recover Etruscan treasures
Limestone slab with engraved game
Knucklebones
The conservation and aesthetic restoration
of painted works of art
by
The chorus leader of the drama Electra in
two vase paintings
by .
The Church of the Panaghia Chalkeon (Our
Lady of the Coppersmiths) in Thessaloniki
by
Enhancement and Management of Cultural
Heritage (Part 4)
by
Pirates from Algiers, the Cat eater and the
bridge of Arta
by .
Heroes and Outcasts
by
Heritage (Part 3)
by -
The Sacred Slippers (emvades) of St.
Dionysius of Zakynthos
Two other monuments preserved almost intact inside the citadel are a shipshed and
an underground rock cut sanctuary the Prison as it is called by the current
inhabitants.
The whole length of the shipshed, almost 30m long, is visible today due to the uplift
of the island mentioned before. Today, visible also are the rock cut parts that in
antiquity were located under the sea water (fig. 32, 33). The usable length of the
shipshed is 18m. Still preserved on the natural rock is the ditch, where the strong
blocking gate would be placed that would receive all the pressure from the northern
winds, which in winter time are very strong (fig. 34).
The so called Prison is located in relatively close distance to the shipshed in the
center of a large quarry of porous stone (fig. 35). It is a rock cut rectangular area
with direction N-S and with two small chambers on the sides, one located east
opposite to the entrance and the other south. Along the western side, south of the
entrance, there is a built bench and in front of it a dug in the rock pit for offerings.
Above the pit and cut on the rock, there is a skylight from where offerings would be
thrown in the pit as dedications to the deity (fig. 36). The name of the chthonic
worshipped deity is not known.
The whole fortified area was covered with houses. The agricultural terraces built by
the modern inhabitants have covered the ancient constructions, but in many areas
traces of ancient houses, walls and parts of floors can be distinguished. In the
western part of the city, which is flat and rocky foundations of ancient houses are
preserved (fig. 37, 38), many of which have been constructed in absolute contact with
the western part of the fortification walls.
From the movable findings is deduced that the fortified city lived during the Hellenistic
period, and more specifically from the late 4th century BC until the first half of the 1st
century BC. Apart from a small piece of a stone Minoan vessel, a number of blades
and arrow heads of obsidian and local flint (note 14), no other item in the citadel is
dated to before the late 4th century BC. No findings are dated to after the second
quarter of the 1st century BC either. This is a closed complex that is dated only to
the Hellenistic period, which sets matters of historical interpretation due to the
monumentality and the strategic position of the island.
Before the discussion concerning the reasons and purposes that led to the
by .
Heritage (Part 2)
by
Dimitrios Kaloumenos
by .
Icons
Heritage (Part 1)
by
A proposal for the enhancement and ideal
administration of monuments in the town of
Trikala (Part II)
by
A proposal for the enhancement and ideal
administration of monuments in the town of
Trikala (Part 1)
by
Repatriated Treasures from Munich
by .
Activities of the Directorate for the
Documentation and Protection of Cultural
Property
by -
Cenae maiores in Greco-Roman Kissamos
The prehistoric settlement on Koukonisi,
Lemnos (Part 4)
by
The Heraion of Argos
by
construction of such an ambitious and magnificent fort (Stais states that The
construction of such fortification walls on an insignificant small island, hardly
mentioned by ancient writers seems to me paradoxical, note 15), we should note
that among the movable findings are warfare objects, arrowheads and spearheads
(fig. 39), sling bullets (fig. 40, 41, 42), as well as catapult balls of many different sizes
(fig. 43). All these are findings indicate a society in constant military activity (fig. 44).
It should also be noticed, based on coins (fig. 45) and on a number of ceramic
findings (fig. 46) that have been found, that the island during the largest part of its
life consisted part of the Cretan city, Phalasarna.
Historical conclusions
Valerios Stais tried for first time the historical interpretation of the site, after the rapid
excavation he carried out on Xeropotamos bay. Stais thought that the fort was
constructed by the Athenians during the Peloponnesian War, at the end of the 5th
century BC: It seems that due to its geographical position, it became useful during
the Peloponnesian war, when it would experience the fate of Kythera that was
conquest by the Athenians (he mentions Thucydides description)Possibly, the city
was fortified during the Peloponnesian war, similarly to Kythera (note 16).
In 1961, Helen Waterhouse and Richard Hope-Simpson (note 17), based on parts of
walls constructed in the polygonal way, without attempting any historical
interpretation, dated the construction of the fort to two phases; the first during
which the Acropolis was constructed, in the early 5th century BC and the second
phase during which its western wall was covered with isodomic construction (fig. 28)
and at the same time the whole settlement was fortified.
The archaeological-excavation data do not justify these two hypotheses, as it is
mentioned above. The polygonal way of construction is rough, as it usually occurs in
the late Classical and early Hellenistic period and it is imposed by the local material,
while from the movable findings no sign of habitation results dated before the third
quarter of the 4th century BC.
The question still remains however; who, when and why proceeded to the
construction of such an expensive work? Which were the income sources of the
population on an island that did not have enough croplands in order to feed its
inhabitants and also to create sufficient surplus for allowing such an expensive
Archaeological research in eastern Achaea
by
Lemnos (Part 3)
by
A Tree of Life depiction on a LG amphora
Lemnos (Part 2)
The Wealth of Psiloritis
by -
The prehistoric settlement on Koukonisi
(Lemnos)
by
Forming the Medical Concepts of Byzantium
in the 9th Century
by M
New finds from the Mentor shipwreck
fortification to be constructed? The first sensible answer is that a foreign power built
it, that would be interested in controlling the southern Aegean and that would
participate directly or indirectly into subsidizing the rulers of the island.
Of course, in the second half of the 4th century BC, when the Greek, but also the
world history changed course, the strategic position of the small island would interest
some powers to have the control over it. But even when the big Greek cities were free
(note 18), before the Battle of Chaeronea and the destruction of Thebes in 338 BC,
their interest was turned towards the northern danger, Macedonia of Philip and
Alexander. On the other hand, Macedonians turned towards the East and not towards
the Aegean. Another great power that could be interested in controlling the island of
Antikythera would be Persia that not long before had recovered Egypt and had
anticipated the antipersian plans of the Macedonians.
The answer is given by the inscription found in Xeropotamos. The first dedicator
mentioned on the inscription is Aristomenes son of Aristomedes, Thessalian from
Pherae, who is known from literature. One Aristomenes is mentioned as general in
the Persian fleet in the Aegean, after the entrance of the Macedonians into Asia Minor.
One Aristomedes, Thessalian from Pherae participated, leading 20.000 barbarians of
Persian army, in the Battle of Issus. As it is known, after the conquest of Thessaly by
Philip, many Thessalians that belonged to the leading group that was expelled by the
Macedonians sought refuge at the Great king as mercenaries with the hope to return
home (note 19).
We also know that after the defeat at the Battle of Granicus, the Persians took the
island of Chios and tried to be associated, via Spartan mediation and great quantities
of gold, with the Greek cities that did not participate in the campaign of Alexander the
Great (note 20). Cretan cities belonged to this category and it seems that the
attempt of Agis III, who was loaded with many gold talents from the Persians, was
directed towards this prospect (note 21). The appearance at the second half of the
4th century BC of a great number of strong and very expensive forts on the island of
Crete may be explained with the inflow of Persian gold, in the attempt of the empire
to organize its counterattack. The remarkable advance of Alexander who acted wisely
cutting off, on time, the access of the Persians into the Mediterranean cancelled all the
plans of the counterattack. We know that after the battle of Issus, Alexander was
occupied with the fortune of the island of Chios, imposing thus the return of the
democrats who were the main exponents of the anti-Persian (philo-Macedonian) party
(note 22). As far as remote Crete is concerned, however, in cities where the same
political processes (note 23) would have taken place, there is no evidence of
Alexandrine intervention, but his early death and the controversies of the successors
seem to have exempted Cretan cities from punishment for their attempt to support
the Persians.
Exactly after the disappearance of the Persian power the well-equipped and fortified
Phalasarna taking advantage of the strategic position of the island began to practice
piracy (note 24) and from very early it disturbed the developing commercial activity of
the Rhodians, and also of other weaker islands which were protected by Rhodes with
the appropriate compensation. Two inscriptions from Rhodes indicate exactly this
activity (note 25). The first concerns an honorary decree from the Rhodian demos for
some citizens who were distinguished in the campaign of the Rhodians against Aigilia.
The inscriptions are dated to the first half of the 3rd century BC and this matches
with the dating of the extensive, in many parts of Kastro, destruction layer. In the
same layer, a number of catapult stones were found that seem very likely to have
been thrown under the custody of the above mentioned on the inscriptions
specialized in catapults (in charge for throwing catapult stones) named Polemarchos,
son of Timakrates, from Casarea!
The same Polemarchos son of Timakrates, who was later promoted to
syntagmatarhes (colonel), is mentioned on a second, funerary, inscription along with
his brothers and it seems that they all three were killed in campaigns against pirates
in many places in the Mediterranean. His older brother who was ship captain,
according to a restoration on the inscription, was killed in Aigilia, in the campaign for
which Polemarchos was honoured, if we of course accept that the Rhodians
attacked Aigilia only once.
Antikythera is mentioned as the place, where the rebel (revolutionary) king of Sparta,
Cleomenes the III, resorted after his defeat in the Battle of Sellasia in 223 BC on his
way to Egypt (note 26), the king of which, Ptolemy the Benefactor, would support
him in order to return to Sparta. On the island of Antikythera, Cleomenes III came
into conflict with his follower, Therykion, because the latter considered unacceptable
as Spartans to have abandoned Sparta instead of returning and falling in battle. After
the reply of Cleomenes that his goal was not to prove futile heroism, but to return in
order to change the social structure of Sparta, Therykion committed suicide on the
island.
A few years after the arrival of Cleomenes, Antikythera was found in the midst of
conflicts between Cretan cities, but also of the attempt of the powers that were trying
to control the area of the southern Aegean and the sea passages towards the West,
where the power of Rome had already appeared. Two pretenders seem to have
participated in the Cretan affairs during that period, Philip V of Macedon and Nabis of
Sparta. They would both have attempted to control the small island, the first because
had found as an excuse the invitation to Crete by the Polyrrhenians (note 27), rivals
of Phalasarna, and the second because had practical engagement in the affairs of
western Crete (note 28). Material evidence from the visit of Nabis on the island
constitute many inscribed sling bullets of Laconian type, found in the area of Kastro,
with the title of the king, a title that Nabis gave himself the last years of his power
(fig. 41).
The 2nd century BC seems to have been a century of development for the
settlement. The first indication is provided by the construction (or reconstruction) of
the by the harbour sanctuary dedicated to Apollo and Artemis, also mentioned above.
The area occupied by the temple was filled in the 2nd century BC with the
construction of the strong peribolos (precinct) around the sanctuary that restricted
the channel that led to the hidden harbour. The second indication of the relative
growth of the settlement of Aigilia is based on the stratigraphy provided by the
excavation in the area of Kastro. The higher layer of the houses and the last, as it
seems to have been, is dated to the 2nd century BC.
What are the reasons, however, of the relative prosperity that is being observed? Of
course, the answer occurs in the incomes from the pirate activity of Phalasarna (note
29). Rome had dynamically entered the history of the Aegean area and the commercial
transactions between the eastern and central Mediterranean presented exceptional
growth. The involvement of the island into the Cretan conflicts is also noticeable in the
excavation data. A series of inscribed sling bullets found in Aigilia bear names of
Cretan officers from Cretan cities that were allied with the city of Phalasarna (note 30)
(fig. 42).
Aigilia suffered the vengeance of the Roman general Metellus who suppressed with
brutality the Cretan Revolution in 69-67 BC. The life in Kastro ceased exactly
those times. At the same time Phalasarna was destroyed by the Romans too.
Human presence is again testified on the island after the 5th century AD (fig. 47, 48,
49), when life in the Aegean Sea was normalized with the power of the Byzantine
fleet, until almost the beginning of the 8th century AD, when Arabic attacks began
and it seems that Antikythera lost its population again (fig. 50). The inhabitants
returned in the middle Byzantine period, a while after the Arabs were driven away
from Crete. After the 4th Crusade and until the Napoleonic wars the island belonged
along with the other islands of the Ionian Sea to the possessions of Venice.
Nowadays, the island goes through a new period of desolation, which does not
appear to reverse. Something can change only if antiquities will be used through
programmes of alternative tourism, which will constitute an attractive element and will
elongate the touristic period on the island (note 31).
A programme of archaeological tourism has already been proposed that will not only
turn Kastro into a well-organized and elegant archaeological site in which, however,
the visitor will remain simply a passing spectator. The proposal is based on the
creation of an alive, and I insist an alive Archaeological Park, where visitors will have
the chance to be active, and from simple spectators to become participants in action.
An archaeological site is exhausted by the visitor in one or two-day visits. But, as it is
proposed, in the living archaeological park the visitor will participate in the
archaeological work, in the organizing, promotion and presentation of the
archaeological site. In southern Greece, especially, the days of sunshine that allow
outdoor work begin in mid-March and last until the end of November. This allows an
archaeological activity to be programmed for the whole aforementioned period.
This archaeological activity is incorporated in a wider framework of alternative tourism
program. The interested visitors-tourists will come, not for a single visit, but to
participate in the process of uncovering antiquities and in the enhancement of the
archaeological site. Thus, the visitors-tourists will work as workers and at the same
time they will be taught the excavation process and all the other activities required for
the creation and function of an Archaeological Park, such as the uncover the
antiquities and their restoration, the opening and maintenance of paths in areas of
special interest and the guiding around the site. In the evenings, the visitors-tourists-
workers will be taught lessons concerning 1) the history of the archaeological site of
Kastro, 2) the way historical conclusions are deduced by excavation data, 3) the
objectives of the archaeological research in general and specially in Antikythera, 4) the
conservation and drawings of movable and not movable findings and 5) the ways the
visible and unearthed antiquities are presented to the wider audience.

Aris Tsaravopoulos
Archaeologist
Translated by Gely Fragou (archaeologist)
* I would like to note that all the activities mentioned in this article have taken place,
all these years, with the valuable volunteering work of archaeologists, conservators,
illustrators, topographers, professionals and students, and of other people outside
archaeology and related disciplines, who in the best case had their food covered by
small scale sponsorships from the Antikythera community and the Kytherian
community in Australia. It is impossible to mention here the hundreds of people who
worked the last twelve years on Antikythera. I would like however to thank all of them
because without them nothing would have been possible.
** Note to fig. 19: The mapping of the exterior fortification walls has been done by
the team of the Australian Archaeological Institute consisted of: Cosmos Koronaios,
Anthony Miller and Andrew Wilson. The mapping of the interior wall of the Acropolis
has been done by the illustrator of the 26th Department of Prehistoric and Classical
Antiquities Eleni Tolia and the topographer engineer Panagiotis Protopsaltis with the
aid of the rural policeman of Antikythera Manolis Charchalakis. All the above
mentioned offered their services voluntarily and the excavation team wishes to thank
them.
Notes

1. The island of Antikythera has become known internationally from the discovery of the Shipwreck in the sea, but the history of the island
during the antiquity and the medieval times was unknown.
2. Plutarch, Life of Cleomenes 31.1.
3. Steph. Byz. V .
4. Ptol. Geogr. III.14.45.
5. Pliny. IV.57.
6. , , , 1857 (2nd ed., Athens 1972).
7. Archaeologiki Ephemeris 1862, 314 no. 398, 400, 401, 402, pl. . The sling bullets from Antikythera published by C. Foss (Greek sling
bullets in Oxford, JHS, AReports for 1974-75, 40-44 no 9-11) probably come from looting activity conducted by Rousopoulos.
8. For this activity of A. Rousopoulos for which he was removed from the Archaeologiki Etaireia in 1882, see the two excellent studies by Y.
Galanakis: Galanakis, Y., "An unpublished stirrup jar from Athens and the 1871-2 private excavations in the outer Kerameikos", BSA 106/1
(2011), p. 167-200, and Galanakis Yannis / Skaltsa Stella, "Tomb robbers, art dealers, and a dikasts pinakion from an Athenian grave",
Hesperia 81 (2012), p. 619-653.
9. Bewan, A. / Conolly J. / Tsaravopoulos A., "The fragile communities of Antikythera", Archaeology International 10 (2006-7), p. 32-36.
10. Papadopoulos Gerasimos, A seismic history of Crete, earthquakes and tsunamis: 2000 BC-2011 AD, Ocelotos Publications, Athens 2011, p.
90-107.
11. Archaeologikon Deltion 5 (1889), p. 232, no. 42-44 and p. 237-242.
12. In contradiction to Stais (opinion also mentioned in the sculptures guide of the National Archaeological Museum, Kaltsas 2001, 271, no
567) it is about two different monuments that are dated with a difference of 150-200 years (Martin Flashar, Apollon Kitharodos,
Statuarische Typen des musischen Apollon, Wien 1992, p. 85). The inscription is dated to the end of the 4th century BC, as Stais writes
correctly, but the statue was sculptured in the 2nd century BC.
13. Stais, see above.
14. At Charchaliana, at the north-western part of the island we have identified veins of local white flint.
17. Waterhouse, H. / Hope Simpson, R., "Prehistoric Laconia, Part II", BSA 56 (1961), p. 160-163.
18. By the phrase free cities, the choice in foreign policy is meant, because even after 338 BC administratively, apart from a small number of
cases, Macedonia of Philip and Alexander did not end the internal political autonomy.
19. Curt. IV.1.36 and III.9.3.
20. Demosthenes, in his work About Alonnisos, 32, is ironically referred to the situation Pherae had been in, after the conquest of the city by
the Macedonians.
21. About the policy of the Persian Empire, to organize the counterattack against Alexander, see Sekunda N., "The date and Circumstances
of the Construction of the Fortifications at Phalasarna", HO 17-21 (2004-2009), p. 597-600 and Tsaravopoulos, A., "The inscription IG V
1, 948 and the inscribed sling bullets from Kastro, on the island of Antikythera", HO 17-21 (2004-2009), p. 327-348.
22. In the Archaeological Museum, on the island of Chios, is stored the inscription that mentions the message of Alexander the Great to the
Chians, after the Battle of Issus, with which Alexander imposed the return of the people exiled by the philo-Persian oligarchs.
23. Examining the fortifications of the second half of the 4th century BC differentiation in quality and in the cost of construction is observed.
Comparing the fortification walls of Phalasarna and Aegilia, Lissos and Aptera to talk only about north-western Crete with those of
Polyrrhenia, which did not have nautical power, and thus it did not interest the Persians, while it was in constant conflict with its
neighboring cities, it seems that in the first mentioned cities the fortifications were very expensive, while in the last one mentioned the fort
was constructed with financial difficulty as the results indicate.
24. For the piratical activity of Cretan cities during the Hellenistic period, see Brul P., La Piraterie crtoise hellnistique, Annales Littraires de
l Universit de Besanon, 223, Paris 1978.
25. Jacopi G., Clara Rhodos 2 (1932), p. 169-70. Mario Segre, Rivista di Filologia e di instruzione Classica, Torino, N.S. 10 (1932), p. 432-461.
26. Plutarch, Cleom. 31.
27. Polybius 4.55.1-5.
28. Karafotias, A., "Crete in search of a new protector: Nabis of Sparta and his relations with the island, Proceedings of the First Colloquium on
Post-Minoan Crete", BSA Studies 2 (1995), p. 105-111.
29. Hadjidaki, E., The Classical and Hellenistic Harbor at Phalasarna: a pirate s port?, University of California, Ph.D. dissertation, UMI, Ann
Arbor.
30. Tsaravopoulos, A., Appendix and conclusions, Gdanskie Studia Archeologiczne (GSA) 2, 2012, p. 211-212. Note: due to carelessness or
indifference, the editors of the journal made a number of mistakes in the paper I sent them for publication. Even the title of the article and
also the figure captions are unacceptably battered. For this reason, this bibliographical reference concerns only the two pages that are
immediately connected to this article and constitute a supplement for the sling bullets that are extensively presented, in Greek, in the
journal 17-21, 2004-2009, p. 327-348.
31. Tsaravopoulos A. / Fragou G., Archaeological Sites as Self-Sustained Resources for Economic Regeneration: Towards the Creation of Living
Archaeological Parks on the Islands of Kythera and Antikythera, Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, Vol. 15 No. 1,
London, 2013, p. 94-108. The proposal focused especially on Antikythera has been published on the Greek journal Ilissia 5-6, 2009-10, p.
52-59, and also in English, in the Proceedings of the International Conference Museums, Monuments and Tourism at the Lower Danube,
Neagu M. (ed.), in the journal Culture and Civilisation at the Lower Danube, 27 (2009), Clrai, p. 39-43.

Antikythera, History and Antiquities

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Antikythera, History and Antiquities

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

11/6/2014 Antikythera Online

You might also like