THE FINDS FROM THE PREHISTORIC SITE OF AYIOS

NIKOLAOS MYLON, SOUTHERN EUBOEA, GREECE

1
by arko Tankosi c* and Iro Mathioudaki

With a contribution on lithics by Catherine Perls

*Department of Anthropology, Indiana University, Bloomington, USA

University of Athens, Greece

In this paper we present the unpublished finds from the survey of Ayios Nikolaos Mylon. The site
is located on one of the foothills of Mount Ochi, on a strategic defensive position overlooking the
Bay of Karystos. The site, although unexcavated, is important for establishing the chronological
sequence of events in southern Euboean prehistory, as it is the only locality in the area that has
produced evidence for habitation which can be dated to the Middle Bronze Age. In the paper we
analyse the material and offer some tentative interpretations not only of the archaeological
evidence but also of the place of Ayios Nikolaos Mylon in the wider prehistoric world of the
Aegean.
INTRODUCTION
The primary goal of this paper is to present and examine the material collected from the
surface of the site of Ayios Nikolaos Mylon (hereafter Ay. Nikolaos). According to the
data from other archaeological surveys conducted in southern Euboea thus far, Ay.
Nikolaos is the only inhabited site of Middle Bronze date in the area (Cullen et al.
1
A great number of people have in some way participated in the shaping of this article and,
although we cannot mention them all, we owe them a debt of gratitude. We would like to
particularly thank Dr Donald Keller and the Southern Euboea Exploration Project for
generously allowing us to study and publish the material from Ay. Nikolaos and for his
comments on earlier drafts of this paper. Without the generous financial support from the
E. A. Schrader Endowment for Classical Archaeology at Indiana University our work would not
have been possible. We would also like to thank Dr Catherine Perls for deciding to participate
in this paper with her brief but disproportionately significant contribution. We owe many thanks
to a number of people who found time out of their busy schedules to read and comment on
various drafts of this paper, namely Karen D. Vitelli, Tracey Cullen, Jere Wickens, Walter
Gauss, and Fanis Mavridis; without them this paper would have been much poorer. We
particularly thank Professor Oliver Dickinson and an anonymous BSA reviewer for their
invaluable comments, suggestions, and edits. Nonetheless, all errors and transgressions in this
paper remain absolutely our own and we alone take full responsibility for each and every one of
them.
The Annual of the British School at Athens, to6(1), zo11, pp. 1(o The Council, British School at Athens
doi:1o.1o1;/Soo68z((11ooooz
forthcoming; Keller 18, 1z8; Tankosi c zoo8).
z
Therefore, the study of the material
from this site, even if it lacks stratigraphic information, can still contribute not only to
future pottery studies in the area but also to the general knowledge of prehistory in this
part of the Aegean.
Southern Euboea has been the subject of organised archaeological research for several
decades. The first systematic survey of the entire island was conducted by several scholars
for a prolonged period of time; it began in 1, but was not published until 16, since it
was interrupted, among other things, by the outbreak of World War II (Sackett et al.
166). The Karystia was also a part of extensive pan-Euboean surveys by Theocharis
(1) and Sampson (18o). The first systematic survey work focused on the Karystia
itself was carried out by Donald Keller (18) in the late 1;os as part of field research
for his doctoral dissertation at Indiana University, and was continued by the Southern
Euboea Exploration Project (SEEP), which was founded by Keller and the late
Malcolm Wallace in 18( to promote research on the Karystian past. SEEP has
conducted three systematic intensive surveys in the area since its establishment: the
survey of the Paximadhi Peninsula (Cullen et al. forthcoming), the route survey of
the portions of the Bouros-Kastri region located east of the Bay of Karystos, and the
survey of the Karystian Plain (Kampos) (Tankosi c zoo8). The knowledge of the areas
past obtained from the archaeological surface surveys has been greatly augmented by
the numerous and dedicated rescue excavations of the 11th Ephorate for Prehistoric
and Classical Antiquities from Chalkis and by SEEPs excavations at Plakari (Cullen
et al. forthcoming; Talalay et al. zoo) and in the Ayia Triadha Cave (Mavridis and
Tankosi c zoo), organised in collaboration with the 11th Ephorate and the Ephorate
for Paleoanthropology and Speleology of Southern Greece, respectively.
The huge leaps forward in the last few years notwithstanding, the prehistoric
chronological sequence in the Karystia is still insufficiently understood, particularly for
the long time span between the end of Early Bronze II and the Geometric period. This
is the reason we will attempt to put forward some ideas about general prehistoric
developments in the region around the Bay of Karystos, but also including the northern
Cycladic islands of Andros and Keos and the eastern coast of Attica. Thus, in the
following pages we present, describe, and analyse surface finds from Ay. Nikolaos and
interpret them in conjunction with evidence of the Middle Bronze Age known elsewhere
in Greece, since comparative material is absent from the immediate vicinity of the site.
THE LOCATION OF THE SITE
The site of Ay. Nikolaos is located in the southernmost part of the island of Euboea,
northeast of the town of Karystos, above the village of Myloi (Fig. 1). Southern
Euboea is frequently defined as the area south of the modern town of Styra. This
region is also referred to as the Karystia, after the name of its main and largest
settlement and current administrative centre, Karystos. A salient and distinguishing
feature of the Karystia is the twin peaks of Mount Ochi. The mountain rises north of
z
The international conference on the Middle Bronze Age titled MESOHELLADIKA: The
Greek Mainland in the Middle Bronze Age (held March 81z, zoo6) does not change the
picture as far as Euboea is concerned.
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 1oo

the Bay of Karystos to the height of 1(oo m above sea level, and effectively separates the
southernmost part of the Karystia from the rest of Euboea, serving as both geographical
and cultural barrier, and gives this section of the island its distinctive character. The
southern part of the Karystia, separated from the rest of the region by the mountain
ranges of Lykorema, Ochi, and Koukouvayia, consists of four very broadly defined
geographical units: the Paximadhi Peninsula, which forms the western boundary of the
Bay of Karystos; the Bouros-Kastri region/peninsula, which borders the bay to the east;
the Karystian Kampos, a large alluvial plain that runs approximately westeast and
opens at the head of the bay, forming the basin where the town of Karystos is located;
and the foothills of Mount Ochi, which slowly rise to the north of the Kampos and the
Karystos basin (Fig. z).
To the south of the Karystia lie the Cycladic islands. The two closest islands are
Andros, located c.1z km southeast of the Bouros-Kastri Peninsula at its closest, and
Keos, about o km south of the tip of the Paximadhi Peninsula. West of the Karystia,
across c.o km of the southern Euboean Channel, lie Attica and the Greek mainland.
The closest Cycladic islands and the mainland can usually be seen from anywhere
Fig. 1. Southern Euboea in its geographical context.
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 1o1
around the Bay of Karystos under most weather conditions, provided that the view is not
physically obstructed. On most days when humidity is low, even the second tier of the
Cyclades (i.e. Tinos and Siphnos) can be seen from the southern part of the Karystia.
The mountains that separate southern Euboea from the rest of the island also have a
strong influence on the climate of the area. They combine with the Euboean Channel,
which is at its widest between southern Euboea and Attica, to make the climate in the
southern Karystia more similar to that prevailing in the Aegean islands, particularly the
northern Cyclades, than to the rest of Euboea or the mainland. The winds, which blow
primarily from the north and northeast throughout most of the year and which are often
quite strong, form another salient feature of the Karystia. The Ochi range serves as a
barrier to these winds; however, instead of reducing their strength it increases it by
allowing the winds to accumulate on its northern slopes and then funnel down at great
velocities over the southern slopes of the mountain and parts of the Kampos. The
prevailing sea currents surrounding the Karystia also move from northeast to southwest.
The force of the winds and the currents comes together most markedly along the eastern
shores of the Karystia in the Kafiraeus Channel, which separates southern Euboea from
Andros. Strong winds and currents make this area very hard to navigate even today.
The site of Ay. Nikolaos occupies a commanding position on top of a rocky ridge
(elevation c.zo m above sea level) (Fig. ). At the southwestern end of the ridge, a
small plateau (c.o zo m) is sheltered from the infamous Karystian north winds by a
large rocky outcrop. The cultural deposits are most easily distinguishable at this
location (Fig. (). On the westernmost edge of the plateau a small chapel to Ayios
Nikolaos was built at some point in the relatively recent past (probably during the
nineteenth century). Prehistoric deposits were damaged and stone quarried during the
construction of the chapel. Another somewhat larger plateau extends to the southeast
and below the first one. On its northern side are a modern sheep pen and another
chapel, built in the second half of the twentieth century. At the foot of the ridge where
the Ay. Nikolaos chapel is situated, on its southwestern side, is a modern stone quarry
and a Greek Orthodox monastery. The prehistoric site lacks natural protection only on
the southeastern side, where the slope is gentler, and on the east, where the plateau is
connected to other foothills of Ochi. The main access to the site seems to have been
along a relatively narrow ridge to the east of the main plateau area.
Fig. z. South Karystia, topographic.
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 1oz

Water sources abound in the vicinity of the site: there is a spring c.zo m below the
summit and a perennial stream located roughly to the west of the Ay. Nikolaos hill
(about 1o minutes walking distance downhill). This stream has its source in the Ochi
Mountains and is fed, especially in the early spring, by snowmelt. Easily accessible
Fig. . Location of Ay. Nikolaos and the extent of the material scatter. North is up.
Fig. (. Ay. Nikolaos. View of the main plateau from east.
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 1o
arable land exists at the foot of the hill, along the northeastern end of the alluvial
Karystian Plain. At present, the southern and western slopes of the hill are covered
with agricultural terraces of indeterminable date. It is hard to tell whether such land
use arrangements existed in prehistory, since terracing is notoriously hard to date (e.g.
French and Whitelaw 1). Currently, Ay. Nikolaos and the area around it are used
mostly for grazing sheep and goats; a modern sheep pen lies c.1o m to the east of the
main plateau, at the beginning of the access ridge. Additionally, the area is currently
partitioned by several barbed wire fences used to contain the animals.
The original survey of Ay. Nikolaos was conducted in 1; by Dr Donald Keller as
part of his doctoral research at Indiana University and under the auspices of the
American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Dr Keller collected a number of
pottery sherds, chipped stone fragments, and several metal objects from the site, and
he also left behind a detailed description of the condition of the site both in his
unpublished dissertation and in the original field notes (Keller 18, 1z8o).
Subsequent visitations to the site were carried out in zoo and zoo6 as part of a larger
revisitation project of sites surveyed by SEEP in the eastern part of the Bay of
Karystos. At that time more sherds were collected from the surface of the site and
closer inspection was made of the features visible on the surface. Although additional
sherds were collected primarily to prevent their loss due to ongoing erosion on the hill
where Ay. Nikolaos is located, they proved to be a valuable source of additional
information on the chronological sequence of the site. Our analysis is based on the
material collected on those two occasions.
ARCHITECTURAL REMAINS
Although on the surface the deposits on the plateau consist chiefly of rubble, it is still
possible to discern the outlines of several walls (Fig. ). Unfortunately, we were not
able to create a proper sketch of the architectural remains that are visible in the field;
therefore, the architecture is currently best seen from the photographs. We do mark
the approximate position of the walls we were able to discern on the general sketch of
the site (Fig. 6).
The westernmost edge of the plateau is bordered by a double-faced curving wall that
roughly follows the upper contour of the slope (Figs. a and 6). This wall, although
partially reconstructed in modern times (especially below and, most likely, in relation to
the construction of the modern chapel), seems to have originated at an earlier, possibly
prehistoric date. This wall probably enveloped part or most of the southern and
southwestern edge of the plateau originally, because some of its surviving sections can
still be seen protruding from the ground and the rubble. The construction of the lower
courses and the general appearance of this wall are similar to the more securely identified
prehistoric walls among the rubble and material at the centre of the plateau. The wall
runs under and hence possibly pre-dates the rubble of some of the collapsed
prehistoric structures on the plateau. Its function is not altogether clear at present;
however, it is tempting to suggest, especially in view of its location, that this wall had
functions other than as a simple retaining wall, e.g. it may have served as a defensive wall.
Other architectural remains on the plateau include at least three straight and two
curved double-faced walls (Figs. b, c, d), all built by the same technique. They were
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 1o(

Fig. . Ay. Nikolaos. Walls visible on the surface.
Fig. 6. Location of visible walls on the plateau (topographic enlarged).
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 1o
constructed by arranging medium-sized, flattish boulders and slabs of rock (almost
exclusively local schist) in two parallel rows with the rocks touching or overlapping at
the centre of the wall. Usually the narrower sides of the rocks were turned to the
inside. The walls were probably constructed entirely of stone, although other types of
superstructure cannot be ruled out.
The two straight parallel walls roughly at the centre of the plateau and just above the
damaged area of the site are likely to be parts of two adjacent buildings with a narrow
passage between them (Fig. d). These sorts of arrangements are not uncommon in
areas exposed to damaging and constant winds, as they reduce the strength of the wind
by breaking it up, thus providing better shelter. One of the curved walls is positioned
in front of the modern access to the plateau, with its inner side facing away from the
plateau (Fig. b). Its function is unclear, because it appears too slight to be a
foundation wall. If the access to the site and the main plateau was at the same place in
prehistory as it is today, which seems likely due to the configuration of the terrain, this
wall may have served to restrict or direct access to the site, as it appears to have been
too feeble to serve serious defensive purposes.
Another larger curved wall, or a part of it, can be seen just below the southeastern part
of the main plateau (Fig. c). Compared to the other curved wall at the plateaus
entrance, this one is much more solid and more carefully built and was definitely a
part of a structure a fairly large apsidal building, which is still mostly covered by
rubble. The building technique of this wall is fairly typical for the Middle Bronze Age
and has parallels from other Middle Bronze sites (e.g. Goldman 11). Apsidal
buildings are one of the hallmarks of Middle Bronze architecture in Greece (Dickinson
1;;, ), although apsidal structures are not unknown from the preceding Early
Bronze Age or even Final Neolithic (e.g. at Strofilas on Andros [Televantou zoo8,
(]). Combined with the movable finds (primarily pottery), the visible architecture on
the site supports a strong Middle Bronze presence on Ay. Nikolaos.
THE FINDS
Aside from the nineteenth-century chapel and some evidence of a Classical presence on
the site, the assemblage consists almost exclusively of prehistoric material, among which
the bulk can be dated to the Middle Bronze Age, although low amounts of earlier and
later material are also present in the surface collection. In addition to pottery, there are
chipped stone tools, fragments of ground stone tools, a fragment of bronze tweezers, a
piece of bronze wire, a piece of amorphous lead, a fragment of a bronze ingot and a
relatively large lump of transparent crystal (i.e. quartz) that possibly exhibits signs of
deliberate alteration (C. Runnels pers. comm.). Several objects made of ground stone
were also collected by D. Keller; however, larger objects like saddle querns or door
pivot stones were left on the site. Some slag was also found on the main plateau of the
site. The present paper focuses on the pottery and stone tools recovered from the
surface of the site. The chipped and ground stone tools presented in this paper were
studied by Dr Catherine Perls.
The greatest concentration of surface material on Ay. Nikolaos can be found on the
main plateau, where it is intermingled with the large amounts of rubble. Outside the
main plateau, the archaeological material is densely scattered on the more gentle
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 1o6

western and southern slopes of the Ay. Nikolaos ridge, which are also intersected by a
series of retaining walls. It is probable, however, that some or most of the material
currently found on the slopes was re-deposited there through the action of erosion
from the deposits on the top of the plateau. According to the results of the original
survey, the area southeast of the main plateau yielded some quantities of slag, but little
other material. However, our revisitations have failed to discover any significant
amounts of slag, and the only sign of ancient presence in the area is a slab of local
conglomerate rock of the kind used for typical prehistoric quern stones in the area
(Fig. ;). This particular specimen, however, most likely had a different purpose, as it
has a relatively deep and narrow, slightly tapering hole located roughly in its middle.
This points to its use as a door pivot stone, and it is possible that it was re-deposited
at its current location at a later date. The difference between the situation as recorded
in the original survey and that visible today can be best explained by the extensive
modifications of the surface in this part of the Ay. Nikolaos hill. The area now has an
obvious agricultural use (it had been recently ploughed the last time we visited, in
zoo6), and several heaps of rocks suggest that the soil had been cleared of obstacles
beforehand. This may have removed most traces of prehistoric use.
POTTERY CLASSIFICATION
A sample of pottery collected from the surface of Ay. Nikolaos is presented in the
catalogue below. The catalogue illustrates o sherds, which are the most diagnostic
finds from Ay. Nikolaos. A total of 1o sherds was collected from the surface of the
site: these are now stored in the Karystos Museum. Most of them are heavily worn,
Fig. ;. Pivot stone.
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 1o;
weathered, and undiagnostic, as expected from a surface assemblage. Statistical analysis
was not conducted due to the collection methods, which produced a sample unsuitable
for this type of analysis. During the original survey, there was no systematic collection;
only a grab-bag sample was taken from the site. The same method was used during
subsequent revisitations of the site. Even though some general observations on
percentages of pottery types are presented later on, they should not be considered
indicative of the general situation on the site. The material has been inspected only
macroscopically, using a 1o geological magnifying lens.
The catalogue of pottery is arranged chronologically. We decided to catalogue the
ceramic finds according to fabric, combined with ware characteristics (e.g. surface
treatment, texture, use) and not according to shape, in order to clarify the character of
the local assemblage. The classification system used here is based on the one developed
by Zerner, in which pottery is named and classified according to fabric and clay
attributes (Zerner 186, 8). A similar way of forming pottery categories was followed
by Wilson (18;, 6) in the analysis of the material from Keos. An additional advantage
of this classification is the potential to categorise all the material, including body sherds.
The pottery is further classified according to shape and parts of vessel that are
presented. Items from the catalogue are illustrated with either a photograph or
a drawing, and in some cases with both. The catalogue also includes a non-
comprehensive list of references and parallels when we were able to find them. The
functional and analytical perspectives of the ceramic assemblage are discussed afterwards.
In order to clarify certain aspects of the cataloguing some comments concerning the
fabric analysis are in order. We divided the Middle Bronze Age material into three broad
categories, i.e. Karystian, Mainland, and Cycladic wares, according to observations on
fabric. The Karystian wares were further divided into three ware categories: plain,
slipped and burnished, and household wares.

Mainland wares, as they are

conventionally called, which constitute two well-known groups, Matt-Painted and Grey
Minyan pottery, are considered as non-local in the assemblage. This decision is based
on observations made while working with prehistoric Karystian pottery from several
different periods, but needs to be supported by petrographical or chemical analysis.
The clays available locally in the Karystia never produce the colours of surface and/or
biscuit that are typical of Matt-Painted and Grey Minyan ceramics found at Ay.
Nikolaos. Moreover, if inclusions are present in otherwise very well levigated clays of
the two ware types, they do not belong to the rocks/minerals typically found mixed
with local clays (i.e. quartzite and schist). The Cycladic wares are divided into two
groups according to clay attributes (i.e. presence of sparkling silvery mica, schist
flakes), colour, and texture of surface (Davis and Williams 181, z(; Vaughan
1o, (;68; Vaughan and Williams zoo;, 1zz).
The majority of the pottery can be fairly confidently identified as having been made
locally. The fabric has inclusions of local rocks/minerals, and colours of the clay are
generally light, varying from yellow-red (YR/6) to brown-red (z.YR/8). Non-local
pieces can be recognised by either containing inclusions that do not exist in southern
Euboea or having a fabric whose composition differs from the norm. Macroscopic
differentiation between local and other wares is hampered by the fact that southern

The term household is being used here conventionally as a defining term for the category of
coarse and unslipped vessels, which were probably used for cooking or serving purposes.
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 1o8

Euboea has a geological composition which is very similar to that of the northern
Cyclades and eastern Attica. There is some petrographic information concerning south
Euboean pottery from the Final Neolithic period, analysed and published by De Paepe
(18z) in an attempt to characterise and combine contemporary examples from
Karystos and Thorikos. The results of the analysis of the Karystian examples showed
relative abundance of mineral and rock fragments, while the lithic fraction is
distinctly coarser than the norm (De Paepe 18z, ;(); these are two of the
characteristics that are also encountered in the survey material. A large proportion
(nearly z%) of the local pottery is coarse to very coarse, with tabular-shaped or
elongated rock fragments and silver-coloured flakes of mica, schist, and/or quartzite
inclusions. Since mica is a common inclusion in the area of Karystos, micaceous wares
are not necessarily imported. Nonetheless, highly micaceous examples or sherds with
large mica platelets are not considered local, mainly due to similarities in fabric
consistency with Cycladic (i.e. Keian) or Aeginetan pottery, respectively. Generally, the
uniformity of the Karystian fabric is a determining factor in distinguishing local from
imported wares.
CATALOGUE OF POTTERY
Final Neolithic
t Deep bowl (8ocz.z)
Small rim fragment; incurving walls, rolled rim to exterior. Fine brown to dark brown (;.YR(/z;
YR/6 at core), hard fired with few whitish inclusions; slipped and burnished surfaces, some
sheen visible externally. Diam. c.11 cm, preserved H. z cm, Th. o.; cm.
Cf. Coleman 1;;, pl. 1.N, O; Wilson 1, pl. .1-(1.
z Scoop (?) (8ocz.1o8) (Fig. 8)
Handle and body fragment; vertical strap handle, curved walls. Coarse yellowish red mottled
(YR/8; 1oYR(/1 at core), unevenly fired with many whitish and yellow-white inclusions,
quartz, mica and schist; evened surfaces. Incised decoration of vertically and diagonally
arranged grooves externally. Dimensions 6 (.( cm, Th. o.6 cm.
Cf. Sackett et al. 166, pl. 1 a; Immerwahr 1;1, pl. 8.116, 1zo; Coleman 1;;, pl. 8z, 8 b, c, g.
Deep bowl (?) (8ocz.(6) (Fig. 8)
Part of an elephant lug (?) attached to body. Semi-fine yellowish brown (1oYR/(), hard fired
with some whitish inclusions; hand smoothed. Dimensions z.6 .( cm.
Cf. Coleman 1;;, pl. z8 B.
Early Bronze Age
q Barrel jar (8ocz.1o6) (Fig. 8)
Rim fragment of a barrel jar; thickened offset rim, flattened on top, straight conical walls. Coarse
yellowish red to brown (YR/8 internally; ;.YR/6 externally; 1oYR(/z at core), hard fired with
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 1o
many whitish inclusions and mica; handmade, evened to smoothed surfaces. Diam. c.( cm,
preserved H. (.; cm, Th. 1.z cm.
Possibly of Cycladic origin.
Cf. Barber zoo8, 66 and fig. ;.1o.
Deep bowl (8ocz.o) (Fig. 8)
Rim fragment of a deep bowl; incurving walls, thick T-rim with pointy edges. Semi-fine yellowish
red (YR/8; 1oYR(/z at core), hard fired with whitish inclusions; handmade. Diam. c.z cm,
preserved H. ( cm, Th. o.8 to 1. cm.
Fig. 8. Catalogued pottery (Scale 1:). Catalogue items: z;a, and ;b.
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 11o

Cf. Kunze 1(, 6; fig. z8 b; Caskey and Caskey 16o, 16, fig. ( III.Iy; Sampson 18, 6 fig. z1.
K and ;1 fig. zz.K ;z.
6 Pyxis (8ocz.;) (Fig. 8)
Body fragment with handle preserved; rounded incurving walls, cylindrical tubular lug vertically
pierced, leaves knob-like protrusion on interior. Coarse reddish brown (;.YR/6), hard fired
with whitish inclusions, some schist and mica also; handmade; red-slipped (z.YR/8)
smoothly burnished exterior. Dimensions 6. ;.; cm, Th. o.81. cm.
Cf. Caskey 1;z, fig. (.B(; Wilson 1, pl. 1;.II-8, ; Televantou 1, z fig. z(;
Rambach zooo (vol. I), pl. VI.T1 a; Renfrew and Evans zoo;, 1;8 fig. .z.(, 1(o.
Fig. . Catalogued pottery (Scale 1:). Catalogue items: ;c, ;d, and 8.
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 111
Middle Bronze Age
Karystian plain ware
Coarse yellow-red (yYRy/6, y/8, 6/8)
yad Pithos (8ocz.1 and ) (Figs. 8)
Four non-joining fragments; concave neck with thickened slightly outturned rim. a, b: rim
and neck fragments; rim made by a separate adjoined coil of uneven width. Diam. >z8 cm,
Fig. 1o. Catalogued pottery (Scale 1:). Catalogue items: , 1o, 1z, and 1(.
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 11z

preserved H. a 1o. cm and b (.z cm, Th. 1.z cm. c, d: parts of neck and shoulder with
applied band around lower neck; band decorated by finger-impressed rope pattern.
Dimensions: c. 1o.8 1. cm and d 1o.; 11 cm, Th. 1.z1.( cm. Coarse orange-red buff
(YR6/8), a clean paste with large mostly whitish inclusions, well fired; handmade, interior
crudely smoothed, partly coil-built construction. Plain.
Cf. Hanschmann and Milojci c 1;6, pl. zo.zz, pl. 8. and pl. .1z, 1;z1; Christmann
16, pl. XIX.(, fig. ;1.(; Wilson 1, pl. ;o.II-;(.
8 Pithos (8ocz.1o() (Fig. )
Rim fragment with upper part of cylindrical neck; spreading and thickened rim, flattened on
top, two vertical perforations that run through rim. Coarse yellowish red (YR/6; 1oYR(/ at
Fig. 11. Catalogued pottery (Scale 1:). Catalogue items: 1, 1;, zozz.
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 11
core), well fired throughout with whitish inclusions; handmade/coil construction; evened,
worn surfaces. Diam. >(o cm, preserved H. ;.z, Th. z. cm.
Pithos (8ocz.1o) (Fig. 1o)
Rim fragment with upper part of cylindrical neck; spreading and thickened rim, slightly
flattened on top, three vertical perforations that run through rim. Semi-coarse yellowish red
(YR/8), well fired with whitish inclusions and mica; handmade, evened surface. Diam. 6 cm,
preserved H. 6 cm, Th. o.8 cm.
to Pithos (8ocz.1;) (Fig. 1o, 1)
Rim and neck fragment; spreading and thickened rim, flattened on top, four vertical
perforations that run through rim. Coarse yellowish red (YR/8), well fired with whitish
Fig. 1z. Catalogued pottery (Scale 1:). Catalogue items: zz8, (, .
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 11(

inclusions; handmade, crudely evened and flaking surface. Diam. c.o cm, preserved H. 11 cm,
Th. zz. cm.
Coarse light red or red (:.yYRy/8, 6/8)
tt Jar/pithoid jar (8ocz.) (Fig. 1)
Large base fragment; broad raised ridge at lower body. Coarse light red (z.YR6/8), hard fired with
whitish inclusions; handmade, worn with heavy accretions. Diam. 1 cm, preserved H. (. cm.
Semi-fine yellow-red or red (yYRy/6, y/8, 6/8)
tz Jar (8ocz.1o) (Fig. 1o, 1)
Rim fragment with part of handle preserved; straight rim joined with vertical oval-sectioned
handle, the latter diagonally pierced in two places. Fine to semi-fine reddish yellow (YR/6;
1oYR/z at core) with whitish inclusions and mica; handmade, smoothed surfaces. Diam.
c.1( cm, handle dimensions 1.8 cm, preserved H. z. cm.
Fig. 1. Catalogued pottery (Scale 1:). Catalogue items: ;, and (1.
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 11
t Jar (8ocz.111)
Small rim fragment with part of handle preserved; straight rim joined with vertical oval-
sectioned handle, one vertical perforation through handle. Semi-fine reddish yellow (YR6/8)
with whitish inclusions and mica; handmade, evened surfaces. Dimensions . z.8 cm
(Diam. unclear).
tq Jar (8ocz.11z) (Fig. 1o)
Small rim fragment with part of handle preserved; straight rim joined with vertical
oval-sectioned handle, which is vertically pierced in one place. Semi-coarse reddish yellow
Fig. 1(. Catalogued pottery (Scale 1:). Catalogue items: (z((, (6(8, and o.
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 116

(YR6/8) with whitish and yellow-white inclusions; handmade, worn surface. Diam. c.1 cm,
handle dimensions . z cm.
Fine yellow-red or red (yYR6/6, 6/8, ;/6)
t Jar (8ocz.1) (Fig. 11)
Large rim, neck and body fragment; mended from eight sherds; flaring thickened square-
sectioned rim, tall cylindrical neck, smooth transition from neck to body. Fine reddish
Fig. 1. Catalogued pottery (photos): Catalogue items: 1oa and b, 11, 1z, zz and z.
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 11;
yellow (YR;/6), well fired; wheelmade, worn surfaces. Diam. 1( cm, preserved H. c.11 cm, Th.
o.6 cm.
Cf. Demakopoulou and Konsola 1;, fig. ;.;; Davis 186, pl. .AJ-1;; Rutter 1o, ((; fig.
1;.16; Maran 1za, pl. 1.; Sampson 1, 8 figs. (., o.z.
t6 Jar (8ocz.z1)
Body fragment with horizontal handle preserved; curved walls, thick handle of circular section
vertically perforated at both sides. Fine gritty reddish yellow (YR6/8) with whitish inclusions,
hard fired; handmade, smoothed exterior. Dimensions 1z. ; cm, handle diam. 1.8 cm,
Th. o. cm.
Cf. Lindblom zoo1, z8 fig. 6.1.
Fig. 16. Catalogued pottery (photos): Catalogue items: o, 1, , ;, (o, ( and (;.
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 118

ty Bowl (8ocz.1;) (Fig. 11)
Rim fragment with part of handle preserved; slightly everted rim flattened on top, horizontal
handle of oval section rising above rim. Fine to semi-fine yellowish brown (YR;/6) with
whitish inclusions; possibly wheelmade, smoothed surface internally/externally. Diam. hard to
measure, preserved H. (with handle) ;. cm, Th. o.6o.; cm.
Cf. Maran 1za, pl. 1(.1; 1zb, pls. 16. (; and z. o1.
t8 Bowl (8ocz.6)
Rim fragment; straight everted rim, shallow horizontal groove at rimbody transition. Fine red
(YR6/8) with whitish inclusions; possibly wheelmade, worn surface. Diam. hard to measure,
preserved H. z cm, Th. o.( cm.
Cf. Zerner 1;8, fig. 1.6o;.z.
t Bowl/krater (8ocz.()
Base and lower body fragment; ring-base, convex bottom. Fine yellowish red (YR6/8); possibly
wheelmade, worn surface. Diam. 8 cm, preserved H. z.z cm, Th. o. cm.
Cf. Goldman 11, 1(o fig. 11.1; Tzavella-Evjen 18(, pl. ; , ; Sampson 1, fig. (.(.
zo Lid(?) (8ocz.z;) (Fig. 11)
Rim fragment; thickened, slightly upturned rim, conical body, fragmented perforation
above rim. Fine reddish yellow (YR;/6) well fired; possibly wheelmade; worn surface. Diam.
z cm, preserved H. z. cm.
Karystian slipped and burnished ware
Fine/semi-fine yellow-red or red (yYR6/8)
zt Deep bowl (8ocz.1) (Fig. 11)
Rim fragment; thickened rounded rim, small part of body preserved. Fine to semi-fine reddish
yellow (YR6/8), hard fired with whitish inclusions and mica; handmade polished surfaces with
traces of yellowish brown slip. Diam. z cm, preserved H. cm, Th. o.8o. cm.
zz Deep bowl (8ocz.o) (Fig. 11, 1)
Rim fragment; thickened, slightly flattened rim, conical walls. Semi-fine red (z.YR/8), hard
fired with whitish inclusions; handmade; slipped (YR6/8) and burnished exterior, mottled
and blackened interior. Diam. < cm, preserved H. (.6 cm, Th. 1.1 cm.
Karystian household ware
Coarse incised ware; brown-red polished surface (:.yYRy/8, /8)
z Deep bowl (8ocz.() (Fig. 1z)
Base and body fragment; restored from six sherds; flat base with slightly curved lower body.
Medium coarse, reddish brown (z.YR/8), hard fired; gritty with small whitish inclusions;
handmade, smoothed exterior surface with strong accretions. Incised decoration of grooves
forming a vertically arranged and continuous herring-bone pattern; deep and relatively broad
grooves (z mm). Diam. 8. cm, preserved H. c.8 cm, Th. o.o.6 cm.
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 11
Cf. BSA Sherd Collection Nea Styra;
(
Goldman 11, 1; fig. zo; Deshayes 166, fig. z, pl.
XXXVII (top row in the middle); Sackett et al. 166, fig. zz.11;, pl. z1 a; Zerner 1;8, figs.
.z, 8.z6, 1.1; Overbeck 18, pl. (.;z (Group S) and pl. (.1z (Group T).
zq Bowl (8ocz.(z) (Fig. 1z)
Part of a vertical strap handle mended from two sherds. Coarse red (z.YR(/8; ;.YR/( at
core), hard fired with whitish inclusions; handmade, smoothed and slightly polished surface.
Incised decoration of shallow grooves forming a vertically arranged herring-bone pattern.
Handle dimensions (.; 1. cm, preserved H. . cm.
Coarse/semi-coarse yellow-red (yYRy/6, y/8)
z Cooking pot (8ocz.18) (Fig. 1z)
Body fragment with vertical handle preserved; part belonging to upper body, two knobs due to
pushed-in handle visible internally. Semi-fine yellowish red (YR/8), hard fired with whitish
inclusions; handmade, crudely smoothed exterior. Dimensions .; 6 cm, Th. o.6 cm.
Cf. Caskey 1;z, 8o fig. 1o.D88, pl. 8.D8; Overbeck 18, pls. (1.z (Group M), (1.z8
(Group N), (.8z (Group X), 6.1 (Group AX), 8o.1 (Group CE).
z6 Cooking pot (8ocz.1o;) (Fig. 1z)
Part of foot and lower body; three parallel incised grooves (depth o. cm) vertically arranged on
foot. Coarse yellowish red (YR/6), hard fired with whitish to yellow-white inclusions and
mica; handmade, smoothed surfaces. Dimensions 6 6. cm.
Cf. Overbeck 18, pls. ;.1 (Group C), 8.11 (Group E).
Matt-painted ware
Fine yellow-red or brown (;.yYR;/6, 6/6; IoYR;/); dark brown paint (IoYR/:)
zy Jar (8ocz.) (Fig. 1z)
Rim and shoulder fragment; offset thick squared-sectioned rim with perforation, flange at
interior lower rim to support lid; fine reddish yellow (;.YR;/6), well fired; possibly
wheelmade, smoothed exterior/interior; dark-on-light decoration externally, dark brown
(1oYR(/z) band around neck, underneath which is a vertically arranged group of diagonal
and vertical bands. Diam. z cm, Th. o.6 cm.
Cf. Caskey 1;z, figs. 8.D6 and .D(6 (for shape only); Maran 1za, pl. 8;..
z8 Jar (8ocz.1z) (Fig. 1z)
Neck and body fragment. Fine reddish yellow (;.YR6/6; YR;/z at core), well fired; possibly
wheelmade, smoothed. Dark-on-light decoration externally, fugitive dark brown (1oYR(/z)
band around neck, underneath which is another diagonal (hard to discern). Diam. (neck)
c.11. cm, preserved H. 6. cm, Th. o.6 cm.
(
We used the ASCSA and BSA Sherd Collections to compare our pottery with sherds from
other Euboean sites. We thank the American School of Classical Studies and the British School
at Athens for permission to see relevant material.
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 1zo

z Jar (8ocz.6) (Fig. 1)
Two joined body fragments; slightly curved walls belonging to lower body. Fine to semi-fine,
pale brown (1oYR;/(), medium fired, light paste with small whitish and orange inclusions
(possibly sandstone); handmade, smoothed exterior surface, while interior heavily eroded;
dark-on-light decoration externally, horizontal dark brown (1oYR/z) band, on which part of
another vertical visible (very small part of decoration preserved). Dimensions 1.z ;.; cm,
Th. 1.1 cm.
Grey Minyan ware
Fine light grey or grey (yYy/I, 6/I; IoYRy/I, 6/I)
o Goblet (8ocz.11) (Fig. 16)
Small rim fragment with part of handle preserved; horizontal loop handle rising above rim. Fine
grey (1oYR6/1), well fired; wheelmade. Handle dimensions 1.; 1.( cm, preserved H. . cm
(Diam. unclear).
Cf. BSA Sherd Collection Nea Styra; Sackett et al. 166, fig. zo.((, pl. z1 a; Overbeck 18, pls.
(8.(6 (Group X), 6;.(1 (Group BD); Maran 1za, pls. .;, 8.; Sampson 1, figs. ((.z,
(.; Sarri zo1o, 1z8 and pls. z6;.
t Footed goblet (8ocz.;) (Fig. 16)
Part of ridged stem; four horizontal ridges preserved, widely spaced. Fine light grey (Y6/1),
medium fired; wheelmade, of soapy texture. Dimensions .8 .6 cm.
Cf. Sarri zo1o, 1z( and pls. z(.
z Footed goblet (8ocz.8)
Part of ridged stem; two horizontal ridges preserved, widely spaced and worn. Fine light grey
(Y6/1), medium fired; wheelmade. Dimensions .( 6.1 cm.
Cf. Sarri zo1o, 1z( and pls. z(.
Footed goblet (8ocz.11) (Fig. 16)
Part of discoid base and stem; plain(?) flaring stem with smooth ridge at the edge, wide base.
Fine light grey (1oYR/1), well fired; wheelmade, striations internally; burnished surface,
sheen partly preserved externally. Diam. 1 cm, preserved H. (.; cm.
Cf. Sackett et al. 166, fig. z1.61; Caskey 1;z, fig. 8.D; Rutter 1o, (z; fig. 1o.1(z, 1((;
Sampson 1, 8z fig. (..
q Footed goblet (8ocz.116) (Fig. 1z)
Lower body fragment; part where stem was attached, three parallel horizontal ridges preserved.
Fine grey (1oYR6/1), well fired; wheelmade, smoothed surfaces. Upper stem diam. 6.z cm,
preserved H. c. cm, Th. o.6o. cm.
Cf. Sackett et al. 166, fig. z1.6.
Bass bowl (8ocz.) (Fig. 1z)
Rim fragment; offset flaring rim, smooth horizontal depression on rimshoulder transition.
Fine light grey (Y6/1), hard fired with darkish inclusions; wheelmade, striations parallel to
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 1z1
interior rim; burnished surface, dull sheen partly preserved externally. Diam. 16 cm, preserved
H. . cm.
Cf. Caskey 1;z, figs. 8.D(, D1z(; Zerner 1;8, fig. ;.z; Maran 1za, pls. 6.1(, ;.11, (1.1o,
(6.1, .(.
6 Bowl (8ocz.1)
Part of discoid base and lower body of a bowl; splayed and hollowed base, no stem. Fine light
grey (YR/1), well fired with whitish inclusions visible in fracture; wheelmade; worn surface,
unclear edges. Preserved H. c.z. cm; Diam. unclear.
Cf. BSA Sherd Collection Nea Styra; Lindblom zoo1, o fig. 8.1o.
Cycladic plain ware
Coarse yellow-red, brown or red (yYRy/6; :.yYRy/6; ;.yYRy/6)
y Pithos (8ocz.zz) (Fig. 1, 16)
Rim fragment; straight offset rim, sharp flange at interior lower rim to support lid, conical walls
as preserved. Coarse red (z.YR/6; z.YR/z at core), hard fired, with whitish inclusions, some
quartz and mica; handmade, smoothed but worn surfaces. Diam. c.o cm, preserved H. 6 cm,
Th. 1 cm.
Cf. BSA Sherd Collection Nea Styra; Caskey 1;z, figs. 8.D(6, .D6 (for the shape); Siedentopf
11, 1 fig. 1.1.
8 Pithos (8ocz.z) (Fig. 1)
Rim fragment; straight offset rim with rounded edge, small ledge at interior angle to support lid,
conical walls as preserved. Coarse yellowish red (YR/6; ;.YR/( at core), hard fired, gritty
with whitish inclusions and mica; handmade, smoothed surfaces. Diam. 6 cm, preserved
H. . cm, Th. 1 cm.
Cf. Caskey 1;z, figs. 8.D(6, .D6 (for the shape); Siedentopf 11, 1 fig. 1..
Pithos (8ocz.11;) (Fig. 1)
Rim fragment; straight offset rim with rounded lip, sharp flange at interior lower rim to support
lid, straight walls as preserved; part of vertical perforation through rim. Coarse brown (;.YR/6),
hard fired with whitish inclusions, schist and mica; handmade, crudely smoothed surfaces. Diam.
c.(o cm, preserved H. . cm, Th. 1.( cm.
Cf. Overbeck 18, pl. 1. (Group AE); Siedentopf 11, 1 fig. 1.8( (for the shape); Maran
1za, pl. ;;.1.
qo Pithos (8ocz.11) (Fig. 16)
Body fragment; part of neckshoulder transition decorated with horizontal relief band of rope
pattern. Coarse brown (;.YR/6) with whitish inclusions; handmade, smoothed surfaces.
Dimensions (. cm, Th. 1.1 cm.
qt Jar (8ocz.1z8) (Fig. 1)
Body fragment with handle preserved; horizontal crescent-shaped handle vertically pierced,
broad knobs due to pushed-in handle visible internally. Coarse brown to dark brown mottled
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 1zz

(;.YR/6), hard fired with whitish inclusions and schist; handmade, smoothed externally.
Dimensions 1.z 1o cm, Th. o.8 cm.
Cf. BSA Sherd Collection Nea Styra; Davis 186, pl. :U-;; Maran 1za, pl. zz:1.
qz Jar (8ocz.18) (Fig. 1()
Rim and neck fragment; flaring rim slightly flattened on top, straight walls. Coarse reddish grey
(YR/6), hard fired with whitish inclusions and schist; handmade, smoothed surfaces. Diam.
z cm, preserved H. (.8, Th. 1.1 cm.
Cf. Overbeck 18, pl. 1.11 (Group AC); Barber zoo;, zz6 fig. 6.1.;.
q Stand(?) (8ocz.1) (Fig. 1()
Base fragment; broad ring-base, flattened interior. Coarse red (z.YR/6) hard fired with
whitish inclusions and mica, some also gold; dark grey core; handmade, evened surfaces.
Diam. < cm, preserved H. 1.8 cm, Th. 1.z cm.
Semi-fine red (:.yYR/8, 6/8)
qq Jar (8ocz.1z;) (Fig. 1()
Rim and neck fragment; straight rim, slightly splaying on edge. Semi-fine red (z.YR(/8), well
fired with whitish inclusions and schist; handmade, smoothed exterior, worn interior. Stamped
decoration of curved parallel ridges diagonally arranged on interior rim. Diam. c.1o cm,
preserved H. .; cm, Th. o. cm.
q Jar (8ocz.16) (Fig. 16)
Body fragment with handle preserved; horizontal crescent-shaped handle vertically pierced.
Semi-fine light red (z.YR6/8), hard fired with whitish inclusions and grog; handmade,
polished exterior surface. Dimensions 1(. 1o.8 cm, Th. 1.( cm.
Cf. BSA Sherd Collection Nea Styra; Davis 186, pl. .U-;; Maran 1za, pl. zz.1; Lindblom
zoo1, z8 fig. 6.1(.
Non-local plain ware
Fine brown (IoYR;/)
q6 Krater or deep bowl (8ocz.) (Fig. 1()
Base and lower body fragment mended from four sherds; ring-base, slightly convex bottom.
Fine pale brown (1oYR;/(), soft fired; wheelmade, very worn surfaces. Diam. 6. cm,
preserved H. z cm, Th. o.o.; cm.
Cf. Sackett et al. 166, fig. zz.III-z; Caskey 1;z, fig. 8.D11o (for the shape).
Late Bronze Age
qy Kylix (8ocz.() (Fig. 1(, 16)
Stem fragment with part of discoid base. Fine brown (;.YR/6). Diam. stem z.z cm, preserved
H. 6. cm.
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 1z
q8 Kylix (8ocz.) (Fig. 1()
Stem fragment with part of lower body. Fine reddish yellow (YR6/6). Diam. stem 1.8 cm,
preserved H. c. cm.
q Kylix (8ocz.6)
Stem fragment with part of lower body. Fine reddish yellow (;.YR;/6); worn surface. Diam.
stem z.1 cm, preserved H. . cm.
o Deep bowl or krater (8ocz.z) (Fig. 1()
Rim and body fragment; everted, slightly flattened rim, straight conical walls. Fine reddish
yellow (YR6/8; 1oYR/z at core) with whitish inclusions; wheelmade smoothed surfaces.
Diam. c.zo cm, preserved H. . cm, Th. o.; cm.
Cf. Caskey 1;z, fig. 1(.M1.
THE CHARACTER OF THE CERAMIC ASSEMBLAGE
From the available evidence it is possible to determine, albeit tentatively, the periods of
the occupation of the site. Judging from the pottery finds, Ay. Nikolaos was first
occupied in the Final Neolithic. The Final Neolithic finds are scanty and seem to
belong to the later part of this period, since some of the typical forms common at the
nearby site of Kephala on Keos, as well as at other Final Neolithic sites in the
Karystia, e.g. cheese-pots, crusted pottery, pattern-burnished decoration, ceramics
with red-slipped and burnished surfaces, are absent from Ay. Nikolaos (Coleman 1;;;
Keller 18z; Talalay et al. zoo, z6). We suggest that the closest chronological parallels
for the Final Neolithic material should perhaps be sought among Ay. Irinis period I
deposits (Wilson 1, ;). However, the fragment that possibly belongs to a scoop (z)
finds its parallels at Kephala and not at Ay. Irini (Coleman 1;;, 1o1z, pls. 6, 8z).
Many of the Karystian Final Neolithic sites continued to be occupied in the Early
Bronze Age and Ay. Nikolaos seems to follow this pattern (Keller 18z; 18, 1zo;
Talalay et al. zoo). Early Bronze pottery is rare among the material collected from Ay.
Nikolaos. Ring bases like t are found both in Early and Middle Bronze Age
assemblages (Goldman 11, 1(o, fig. 11.1; Tzavella-Evjen 18(, 16o). The only rim
fragment of a barrel jar (q) is dated either to the last stages of the Early Bronze Age or
to the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age, corresponding to a pre-Ay. Irini IVb
period (Overbeck 18, (z). The T-rim bowl () occurs over a broad chronological
range from Early Bronze I to advanced Early Bronze II, according to similar finds
from Eutresis (Caskey and Caskey 16o, 16, fig. (.III.1) and Manika (Sampson
18, 6, ;1). 6 belongs to a Cycladic-type pyxis (Rambach zooo [vol. I], pl. VI TIya;
Renfrew and Evans zoo;, 1(o; Televantou 1, z fig. z(), found also in Early
Bronze I and II contexts in Tsepi at Marathon and Loutsa on the eastern coast of
Attica (Efstratiou, Stathi and Mathioudaki zoo; Pantelidou-Gofa zoo, pls. 11.;, 1;.;
zoo8, z88; Petrakos zoo(, 1; fig. ().
The Middle Bronze Age is represented by local pottery and typical Middle Bronze
wares: Grey Minyan, Matt-Painted and coarse incised ware. The bulk of the pottery,
c.;o% of the total, consists of local Karystian wares that form a fairly homogenous
group. Two main categories of plain pottery, a coarser and a finer one, are presented
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 1z(

in the catalogued material. Coarse to semi-fine fabrics, varying in colour from yellow-red
to red (YR/6-/8-6/8), were used for pithoid vessels, jars, or deep bowls. To this fabric-
based group belongs an interestingly uniform category of large vessels for storage, the
main characteristic of which is a row of vertical perforations on a thickened rim (8to).
Multiple perforations occur commonly also on handles of jars, suggesting their possible
use as sealed containers for goods (tztq). K.D. Vitelli, who examined the perforated
pieces, suggested that the perforations were perhaps used in the drying or firing stage
of pottery making (K.D. Vitelli pers. comm.). Such perforations can be traced back at
least to Neolithic times, as attested at Kephala (Coleman 1;;, pl. P, R). The
perforated handles (tztq) belong possibly to oval-mouthed jars like those produced in
coarse red fabrics in Ay. Irini periods IV and V (Davis 186, pl. 6z.AA-6z; Overbeck
18, 6, pl. 1.o [Group AB]). The only example of a similar vessel from Euboea
comes from Manika and bears perforations of the same type (ASCSA Sherd Collection:
Drawer no. , Box Cz). To the same fabric group belong four fragments of a large
pithos with plastic rope band on the neckshoulder transition (yad). Pithoid vessels
decorated in a similar way are commonly found in Euboean sites such as Amarynthos-
Palaiochora, Asmyni-Divouni, and Porto Kastri (ASCSA Sherd Collection: Drawer no.
8, Box C6, Drawer no. (o, Box Cz and Drawer no. (, Box C(6, respectively).
Numerous examples are also encountered in other central Greek sites, such as the
Athenian Acropolis (Hansen 1;, 66 and fig. 18 f ), and this type of decoration on
pithoid vessels and large bowls is common in Middle Bronze Thessaly as well, both at
Argissa-Magoula and Pefkakia (Hanschmann and Milojci c 1;6, pls. zo.zz, 8. and
.1z, 1;z1; Maran 1za, pls. 18., zo.1o, 6..). The dating of our piece is
uncertain, since plastic rope decoration was used from at least the Final Neolithic
through the Late Bronze periods and later (for Early Bronze Age examples see: Kunze
1(, ;, pl. XXXIII.z; Tzavella-Evjen 18(, pl. 1 a; Wilson 1, pl. 1z.II-zz. For
Late Bronze examples see Maran 1zb, pls. z1.6;, z6.811 (LH I)).
Crescent handles on jars or pithoid vessels also make their appearance in the coarse
material of Ay. Nikolaos, in both local and non-local fabrics (e.g. qt). On Euboea,
crescent handles frequently appear at Manika and Nea Styra (ASCSA Sherd Collection:
Drawer no. , Box Cz and BSA Sherd Collection, respectively). Jars with crescent
handles are also common at Plaka, the Middle Bronze site of Andros (Televantou
1, z1, figs. ;8), and at Ay. Irini periods IV and V (Davis 186, pl. .U-;;
Overbeck 18, pl. 1.o [Group AB]).
The second category of plain wares is characterised by finer fabrics, again yellow-red
to red in colour and in the form of small to medium-sized bowls or jars (tzo). The
exterior surface is smoothed with a slight burnish in a few cases. Of special interest
is the jar (t), representing a clearly defined Euboean ware category of wheelmade,
light-coloured vessels that appear in advanced Middle Bronze (or Late Helladic I)
phases. This category of pottery is especially common at Kalogerovrysi and Pefkakia
(Maran 1za, z, no. 11z; and z; 18, 1oo; Sampson 1, 8z). The sites
provide exact parallels to t in shape and fabric and are broadly assigned to the late
Middle Bronze Age (Maran 1za, pl. 1.; Sampson 1, figs. (., o.z).
Among Grey Minyan forms, the one almost exclusively present is the stemmed goblet
with both plain and ridged stems (tq). The goblets are all of the well-developed
angular types that are common in the developed and final Middle Bronze stages
(Dickinson 1;;, z1). is more probably a Bass bowl, like bowl of type 1EI from
Pefkakia, that has a long life-span there, covering phases ( to 6 Middle (Maran 1za,
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 1z
pls. ;.11, (1.1o, (6.1 and .(). The so-called Bass bowl is also common in Lefkandi
phase ( (Popham and Sackett 168, 1o) and Keos (Caskey 1;z, 8, fig. 8.D(,
D1z(), appearing usually in dark burnished wares. o, a goblet with tall horizontal
loop handles, is a common central Greek shape of the mature Minyan phase, like
those from Pefkakia (Maran 1za, pls. . ;, 8.) or Keos (Overbeck 18, 6o, pl.
(8.(6 [Group X], 1z6, pl. 6;.(1 [Group BD]; Overbeck zoo;, (o, ((, fig. z.BD-(1,
BD-(;), present in phases to 6 Middle and Ay. Irini IVa-b, respectively. This type of
goblet, related to the later Pteleos-type goblets (Pavuk zooz, o fig. 1o.8), appears
also at other Euboean sites like Yialtra, Nea Styra, and Kalogerovrysi (Sackett et al.
166, 1 fig. zo.(( and pl. z1 a; Sampson 1, ; figs. ((.z, (.). Howell
attributes the abundance of Grey Minyan pottery at Euboean sites such as Aliveri and
Nea Styra, and the variation of fabric characteristics among them, to their local
production (Sackett et al. 166, (, ). The same is suggested by Sampson for the
Grey Minyan pottery of Kalogerovrysi (Sampson 1, ;). The Karystian examples,
however, do not seem local. Their origin could be one of the Euboean centres such as
Lefkandi or Manika. The abundance and excellent quality of Minyan vessels at
Manika, according to Theocharis reports, suggest that the region of the Euripos was a
centre of production (Theocharis 1, z8, o1).
Only three sherds of large jars or pithoid vessels bearing Matt-Painted decoration were
found at Ay. Nikolaos. The profile of zy is not found among known Aeginetan examples.
It resembles rim profiles of central and northern Greek pithoi like those from Pefkakia
(Maran 1za, pl. 8;.). The curved profile of the upper body is a chronologically
early element. At Ay. Irini similar profiles of pithoi appear in early Middle Bronze red
burnished ware (Caskey 1;z, figs. 8.D6, .D(6). The profile and fineness of z8 are
reminiscent of Siedentopfs nos. 186 and z1z (Siedentopf 11, pls. (z and (8,
respectively), except that the clay is not Aeginetan. Both sherds lack gold mica (biotite
as opposed to muscovite), and are lighter in weight than, and different in texture
from, the Aeginetan Matt-Painted pottery.
Coarse incised ware, common in Middle Bronze assemblages, is also attested at Ay.
Nikolaos by a large, possibly one-handled bowl and a strap handle that belongs to
another vessel of the same type (zzq). Both pieces are treated here as a variety of
local household or cooking pottery, and stand among the very few examples of incised
ware of this period on Euboea. Nea Styra and Amarynthos are two other Euboean
sites where the ware is attested (Sackett et al. 166, 66, 8o, fig. zz.11;, pl. z1 a).
Coarse incised pottery is present at Ay. Irini on Keos (Overbeck 18, pls. (.;z
[Group S] and (.1z [Group T]), Eutresis (Goldman 11, 1; fig. zo.1), the
Aspis at Argos (Deshayes 166, fig. z [upper row in the middle], pl. XXXVII;
Touchais zoo;, 88 fig. 1.8, 11;), and Lerna (Zerner 1;8, 11, z( and 188, figs.
.z, 8.z6 and 1.1), among others. Two other pieces of local household ware, a
pushed-in handle of a jar and part of a foot (zz6), belong to cooking pots. z has
many parallels among large household vessels from Ay. Irini (Caskey 1;z, pl. 8.D8
and fig. 1o.D88). Coarse wide-mouthed jars, functioning as cooking pots, are common
in the shape repertoire of the early Middle Bronze Age and continued to be in use for
a long time, since later they become the well-known pedestalled and more delicate
cooking jars of the late Middle Bronze and Late Bronze I periods (Rutter 18, figs.
6.1;, ;.181; Rutter 1o, (o fig. 18). The early Middle Bronze type, represented by
our z, is commonly attested in the two earliest phases of Ay. Irini IV in coarse dark
red-brown to grey fabrics (Overbeck 18, 8, pls. (1.z [Group M], (1.z8 [Group
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 1z6

N], (.8z [Group X], 6.1 [Group AX], 8o.1 [Group CE]). z6, a foot of a cooking pot
that bears three deep parallel incisions, also has its parallels among Keian examples of Ay.
Irini IVb period (Overbeck 18, z, pl. ;.1 [Group C], 8.11 [Group E]; both pieces
have two vertical slashes at the top of their external surface). The link with Keos, as far as
this cooking pot type is concerned, is reinforced by the presence of similar fragments with
deep vertical slashes in the survey material of northern Keos (Cherry, Davis and
Mantzourani 11, 168).
Imported coarse to semi-fine wares of Cycladic origin constitute c.% of the total
assemblage. yq belong to the category of Cycladic plain wares, which is further
divided into two groups according to the colour of the clay. The majority of the sherds
are of coarse yellow-red, brown, or red fabric with many whitish inclusions (quartz or
quartzite schist), and a lot of mica grits. Large or medium-sized vessels dominate the
pottery assemblage. Some of them may be of northern or central Cycladic provenance.
The fabric corresponds in most cases to that of Keian semi-fine to coarse red-brown
ware defined in the Early Bronze Age pottery assemblages (Wilson 18;, 6). The
Keian provenance is further supported by the similarity of the fabric composition to that
of the majority of the sherds collected during the survey of northern Keos (Cherry,
Davis and Mantzourani 11, 166). Cycladic pithoid vessels are encountered in limited
quantities, mostly distinguished by offset perforated or unperforated rims with interior
flanges (y). Pithoi or pithoid jars of this type have many parallels in the red
burnished wares of Keos IV, and in the survey material of northern Keos, a fact that
suggests a Cycladic origin for our pieces (Caskey 1;z, ; fig. .D(6 and 8o fig. 1o.
D6; Overbeck 18, ;(, pl. 1. a [Group AE]; Cherry, Davis and Mantzourani 11,
16 fig. .1b.1-(, OS-). Rim fragments that belong to similar vessels have been found
at Nea Styra (BSA Sherd Collection). Large storage vessels with crescent-shaped handles
and restricted necks of Cycladic type are also present (qt and q). An interesting
fragment of possible Cycladic origin is qq, which belongs to a jar with stamped
decoration on its rim. Stamped decoration is commonly attested on rims of Early
Bronze Age bowls (Tzavella-Evjen 18(, type B bowls, fig. , , , , , pl. z ;
Cherry, Davis and Mantzourani 11, 1;o fig. -1). An almost identical fragment
decorated in such a manner comes from Pefkakia and is dated to the transitional
Early Bronze to Middle Bronze period (Maran 1za, pl. 1.1). Nevertheless, the piece
from Pefkakia is a bowl, while the Karystian fragment may belong to a closed vessel.
Of particular interest and definite Cycladic origin is q, a possible fragment of a
stand, whose red, highly micaceous fabric points to central Cycladic parallels (e.g. to
Naxos or Ios).
Finally, our scanty Late Bronze fragments are limited to three kylix stems and one rim
fragment of a deep bowl or krater (qyo). The kylix stems cover the periods of Late
Helladic IIB to Late Helladic IIIAz according to the height of the stem. o is more
probably a krater, as is indicated by an exact parallel from Keos (Caskey 1;z, fig.
1(.M1).
The difficulties occurring when trying to date survey material are well known and
thoroughly treated elsewhere (Cherry, Davis and Mantzourani 11, 166; Keller and
Rupp 18). We tried to date the material more precisely, rather than just assigning it
to a general chronological frame. If Sampsons (18;, 181) proposition that under
present circumstances a bipartite division of the MBA Euboea is possible proves valid,
the majority of the Middle Bronze material from Ay. Nikolaos should be dated to the
second half of the period (Middle Helladic II and onwards). Nevertheless, coarse
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 1z;
incised wares (zzq) are most common in earlier assemblages, as indicated by Keian
incised wide-mouthed jars assigned to Ay. Irini phase IVb (Overbeck 18, z pl.
;.1 [Group C] and z pl. 8.11[Group E]). Also, sherds of coarse incised and
usually burnished ware appear regularly in deposits of late Lerna IV (House D) and
constitute a common feature of Early Helladic as well as Middle Helladic deposits
(Zerner 1;8, 11 and z( figs. .z, 8.z6 and 1.1). Grey Minyan goblet stems like
our t and z are dated in the advanced Middle Bronze Age (Sarri zo1o, 1z( and pls.
z() and the same goes for goblets with horizontal loop handles (o) (Sarri zo1o, 1z8
and pls. z6;). The local slipped and burnished ware (ztzz) should be dated to the
stage subsequent to Lerna IV-V and VA as indicated by the absence of similar profiles
in both phases. Plain burnished wares have a long duration in northern Keos, but are
most characteristic of Ay. Irini phase IV (Cherry, Davis and Mantzourani 11, 168).
STONE TOOLS (BY CATHERINE PERLS) (Table 1)
The lithic assemblage from Ay. Nikolaos shows a sharp contrast between casually
produced flakes of flint and obsidian, sometimes cortical, and very rare pressure-flaked
obsidian bladelets. It is characterised by the use of a hard hammer for the removal of
the flakes as well as the frequent use of bipolar flaking, resulting in numerous pieces of
debris and splinters (Fig. 1;.(, , 8). The absence of rectilinear ridges on the few
elongated pieces (bladelets and blades) indicates that they too are by-products of a
flake production (Fig. 1;.;). Overall the workmanship shows ample evidence of
unskilled work: several flakes present traces of failed removal attempts due to
inadequately controlled percussion. The only obsidian core shows no preparation and
the simple removal of a small series of flakes on one face. The last removal presents a
hinged fracture, after which the core was abandoned (Fig. 1;.z). A fragmentary flat
flint flake core, with centripetal removals (Fig. 1;.6), as well as a fragmentary jasper
flake, indicates that flint or jasper was also worked locally for a flake production. The
small flakes detached from the flint core could easily have gone unnoticed during a
survey, which may explain why they are absent from the collection. There are no
retouched pieces in either flint or obsidian, and, chronologically speaking, this
assemblage is by itself completely undiagnostic.
Table 1. Chipped stone assemblage from 8ocz (Ay. Nikolaos). (Author: C. Perls.)
Flint Jasper Obsidian
Cores 1 z
Debris, splinter, small flake fragments 1;
Fragmentary flakes, cortical z
Fragmentary flakes, non-cortical 1
Pseudo-bladelet 1o
Irregular bladelet 1
Irregular blade 1
Pressure-flaked bladelet z
Pressure-flaked blade 1
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 1z8

The rare pressure-flaked unretouched obsidian bladelets (Fig. 1;.1), as well as a blade
that removed a superb pyramidion from a pressure-flaked conical core, typical of the
Bronze Age (Fig. 1;. ), come as a sharp contrast. Given the complete absence of
technical pieces relating to a pressure blade/bladelet reducing sequence, it can be
surmised that these pieces were not produced locally. However, the pyramidion blade,
Fig. 1;. Ay. Nikolaos. Chipped stone tools.
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 1z
which recalls Bronze Age Cycladic cores (Carter zoo;; Torrence 181), is absolutely
fresh, whereas all the other pieces are heavily patinated. This suggests that some of the
original settlement is still buried, and opens up the possibility of an earlier (Early
Bronze Age) component.
Whatever the case, we are clearly dealing with two distinct productions: a local,
unskilled production working on small fragments of flint and obsidian, and rare pieces
imported as finished products from highly skilled producers. If the respective
proportions can be relied upon in a surface assemblage, access to these specialised
products was restricted. This opposition between specialised and domestic productions
is not specific to sites located far from the sources: it was also documented by Carter
(zoo;) on Milos itself. On the other hand, the inhabitants from Ay. Nikolaos did have
access to some obsidian, and, in this case, it could not be found locally. The presence
of cortical flakes suggests that they had access either to raw material or possibly to
large cortical preparation flakes discarded from specialised workshops, as exemplified
by Manika in Euboea itself for the Early Bronze Age (Karabatsoli 1;).
Fig. 18. Ay. Nikolaos. Polished celt.
Fig. 1. Ay. Nikolaos. Ground stone tool.
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 1o

The chipped stone assemblage is accompanied by a fine polished celt (Fig. 18) of light
greenstone (possibly serpentinite), of small size (c.( cm). It is triangular in shape, and
almost as wide as it is long; in plane, the cutting edge is convex and slightly
asymmetrical. The section is biconvex with asymmetrical faces, but the cutting edge
itself is straight (this piece was discovered after the study of stone tools was completed,
and is here described from photographs).
Finally, ground stone implements are represented by three pieces: a natural beach
pebble, possibly marble, with traces of percussion on both ends (Fig. 1); a
fragmentary handstone of a light conglomerate shaped by pecking, of quadrangular
Fig. zo. Ay. Nikolaos. Ground stone tool.
Fig. z1. Ay. Nikolaos. Ground stone tool.
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 11
section, used on at least one surface (Fig. zo); and another handstone also manufactured
by pecking, made, in contrast, of a very dense, unidentified rock. It has a circular shape
and a parallelepipedic section with convex sides. Both flat surfaces were used (Fig. z1).
A HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF AY. NIKOLAOS AND ITS PLACE IN THE
PREHISTORIC KARYSTIA
It is difficult to say at present if the habitation at Ay. Nikolaos was continuous over
the entire duration of the periods that are represented by the archaeological material
on the site. The Final NeolithicEarly Bronze Age transition in Greece is poorly
documented as it is and, with the small amount of Final Neolithic pottery we have
from Ay. Nikolaos, it is impossible to draw any conclusions about the nature, extent,
and duration of the Final Neolithic use/habitation of the location. From the Karystia as
a whole, however, there is strong evidence for Final Neolithic habitation. The types of
sites dated to the Final Neolithic period range from simple restricted sherd/obsidian
scatters to possible fortified sites (e.g. Akri Rozos [Cullen et al. forthcoming]).
Unfortunately, only one of the Final Neolithic sites, Plakari, has been excavated thus
far (Cullen et al. forthcoming; Talalay et al. zoo); despite the very limited size of the
excavation, it yielded fairly large amounts of pottery, most of which has affinities with
the Final Neolithic material found on Kephala on Keos and other contemporary sites
in Attica (e.g. the Agora at Athens [Immerwahr 1;1] and Kitsos Cave [Lambert
181]). This firmly places at least some of the Final Neolithic sites from the Karystia
into the AtticaKephala cultural circle. The possible scoop (z) stands as another, albeit
isolated, piece of evidence for the link among sites in the broader region, since this
shape has been found on Kephala, Thorikos, Plakari, Ay. Triadha, and now Ay.
Nikolaos of Karystos (Coleman 1;;, 1o1z; Keller 18z). Andros also played an
important role as a step to Euboea and Attica, probably as early as Final Neolithic
times, according to analogies in the material evidence of Mikrogiali, a northern site
purportedly accessible only by sea (Televantou 1, ;, 1o; zoo8, 1), and Strofilas,
a large fortified Final Neolithic settlement (Televantou zoo8).
This may have had something to do with the role that the inhabitants of southern
Euboea probably played in the initial population of at least the very northern part of
the Cyclades (e.g. Andros and Keos), as it is possible that the earliest evidence for
human habitation in the region that includes not only southern Euboea, but Andros
and Keos as well, comes from a site in the Karystia the Ayia Triadha Cave (Keller
18, 1z;; Mavridis and Tankosi c zoo; Sampson 181, ). During the limited
excavation conducted in the cave in zoo; the joint team from the Ephorate for
Paleoanthropology and Speleology of Southern Greece and SEEP recovered pottery
dated to the very end of the Late Neolithic or the Late NeolithicFinal Neolithic
transitional period. However, it is hard to say, solely on the basis of the survey
evidence currently available to us, whether Ay. Nikolaos was a part of this interaction.
The Early Bronze finds are also inconclusive, because they are too few and
undiagnostic to allow any degree of certainty. Other Early Bronze settlements of the
Karystia are mainly on, or very near, the coast, and at least the larger ones (Ayia
Pelagia, Ayios Georgios and Akri Rozos), like their Final Neolithic predecessors, show
indications of involvement and participation in the Aegean communication networks of
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 1z

the Early Bronze II period in the form of Cycladic imports and shared material culture
with neighbouring areas (Keller 18z, passim; Papageorgiou zoo8, 1o). As is true of the
material from Ay. Irini phases II and III (Wilson 1, z;8), the pottery from the
Karystian sites that can be dated to the Early Bronze Age exhibits both mainland and
Cycladic traits, with the former being more prevalent.
At some point in the Middle Bronze Age only one of the Early Bronze sites was
reoccupied, if indeed it had ever been permanently abandoned (Keller 18, 1;6). This
settlement, Ay. Nikolaos, was located far away from the sea (unlike the Final Neolithic
and Early Bronze centres such as Plakari, Ay. Pelagia, and Akri Rozos), in an easily
defendable location, and with material culture that generally exhibits mainland Middle
Helladic features, although contacts with the Cyclades, even if indirect, were most
likely never completely abandoned. It seems that the people of Middle Bronze Ay.
Nikolaos were looking towards the mainland for their cultural identity, judging at least
by its material expressions. This can mean one of two things: either that a new
population entered the area, or that there was a radical change of the socioeconomic
conditions in the area that could, in turn, have influenced the identity and/or cultural
orientation of the population already inhabiting it. If the latter, then it seems possible
that its causes reach back to the end of Early Bronze II and the disruptions that
happened then (e.g. Angelopoulou zoo8; Rutter 1;; Sotirakopoulou 1).
Keller (18, 1;6) stressed the possibility of a nucleation in Middle Bronze southern
Euboea, a thought that is supported in Forsns detailed study of the period in the wider
Greek context (Forsn 1z, 1z). We are not able at the present stage of research to
give a proper answer to the question of nucleation, although survey evidence points in
that direction. An alternative or even a complementary explanation to nucleation is
population decrease. This depopulation would not have been a rapid process, although
it may seem so, since the time period that separates the end of Early Bronze II and the
beginning of the Middle Bronze Age is at least zoo years (Rutter 1, ;6 table z;
Shelmerdine zoo8, ( fig. 1.1). We should also bear in mind that we are discussing
relatively small populations, perhaps not more than 1oo people for the whole of the
southern Karystia at any given time during the Early Bronze Age (Broodbank zooo,
861).

In this period the area seems to have seen the highest population numbers of
all prehistoric periods, at least judging by the number and the size of the located sites
(Keller 18; Talalay et al. zoo; Tankosi c zoo8). Regardless of the exact cause of the
developments that reduced at least fifteen Early Bronze sites to only one Middle
Bronze site, they are not unique to this part of Greece. In fact, a reduction of the
number of settlements, whether because of nucleation or depopulation or both, is
characteristic of the beginning and early stages of the Middle Bronze period
throughout central and southern mainland Greece (e.g. Rutter 1). Be that as it
may, the different character of the location of Ay. Nikolaos in comparison to that of
the earlier settlements supports the argument for an imposed, possibly external, factor
that acted as at least one instigator of radical changes. Among other things, the site of
Ay. Nikolaos was obviously chosen for security reasons and defence purposes (Forsn
1z, z).

Broodbanks population estimates are directly pertinent to the Cycladic islands during the
Early Bronze period. Nonetheless, we believe that they are generally, albeit cautiously, applicable
to southern Euboea due to its evident Cycladic orientation during the same prehistoric period as
well as its general Cycladic-like appearance and resource base.
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 1
The survey finds, although inconclusive, suggest that the Middle Bronze community
using Ay. Nikolaos was mostly self-sufficient, with occasional contacts with the rest of the
Aegean world the northern Cyclades and east Attica in particular. The number of
identifiable imports is indicative of the latter. There was at least some storage of goods
at the site, to judge by the amount of sherds belonging to large vessels that constitutes
c.(% of the total, while cooking and serving pots account for 1% and %
respectively.
6
Nevertheless, the above estimates are preliminary, since the identification
of the function of ceramic vessels is mainly based on technological variables
insufficiently defined for the moment (Mills 18, 1().
Besides defence, the position of the site is well suited for agriculture, since it is located
in the vicinity of perennial water flows and has relatively easy access to arable land at the
foot of the hill as well as on the terraced slopes (Keller 18, 1;;). The chipped stone
tools were produced locally, although, obviously, obsidian procurement had to be done
through contact with outsiders. C. Perls argues that the chipped stone objects are of
poor craftsmanship and may be generally dated to the Middle Bronze Age, although
very few of them are diagnostic. This points to local production of a utilitarian nature.
One spindle whorl testifies, rather poorly, to the existence of textile production on the
site. The settlement might have been self-sufficient in metallurgical products as well
(but not in the raw materials needed for their production), although the question of
on-site metallurgy during the Middle Bronze Age remains open. The slag found on or
in the vicinity of what was most likely the centre of the site, as well as a fragment of a
bronze ingot and a very rare example of a swage block (Keller 18, z;6), suggests
that the Bronze Age inhabitants of Ay. Nikolaos were engaged in metallurgy (Fig. zz).
How to date these activities is somewhat problematic. The only datable metallurgy-
related object from the site is the swage block. Its only analogies, distant at that,
come mostly from Late Bronze Age contexts. However, we are uncertain that the
interpretation of this artefact as a swage block is the most correct one. Other examples
of swage blocks from the Aegean Bronze Age, whether made of metal or stone, are
much more complex than the Ay. Nikolaos piece (Schliemann 188o, (6 nos. 6o6
Fig. zz. Ay. Nikolaos. Swage block (Scale 1:1.).
6
Caution is needed here since large vessels usually fracture in large pieces, which are in turn
more easily spotted on the surface. Thus, a degree of bias can be introduced into the relative
numbers of pottery types, especially where non-systematic collection methods were employed
during the survey.
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 1(

and 6o;; Bosanquet and Dawkins 1z, 1z( fig. 1o; Bass 16;, fig. 11z.16).
Furthermore, they are made of sturdier material, which is essential for that type of tool
as it is constantly exposed to high pressure, forceful striking, and continually high
temperatures. The schist, which the Ay. Nikolaos example is made of, is too friable to
be used for those purposes and it tends to flake even under slight pressure. An
alternative explanation for this artefact could be its use as a so-called arrow-
straightener, a type of object known from Aegean contexts of similar and later date
but also well attested in the ethnographic record worldwide. These artefacts were most
likely used to make or maintain the shafts of arrows. The fragmented tweezers
(Fig. z) and the fragment of a bronze ingot (Keller 18, z;;8) (Fig. z() are no
more helpful in shedding light on Ay. Nikolaos metallurgical activities. Tweezers of
this type are hard to date. The Ay. Nikolaos example belongs to Branigans type II
(Branigan 1;(, 1 pl. 1), which is common in the Aegean during both Early and
Middle Bronze Age, probably due to its simplicity. As for the ingot fragment, its very
nature suggests on-site smelting. Keller classifies it as part of a Kissenbarren ingot,
which can be dated to the Middle Bronze Age (Keller 18, z;;8), although the small
size of the fragment prevents precise identification. This notwithstanding, we believe it
is far-fetched to base Karystian indigenous metallurgy solely on one possible ingot
fragment. It seems probable that a more substantiated answer to the question of the
plausible Middle Bronze Age metallurgy at Ay. Nikolaos and in the Karystia in general
will not be forthcoming without an excavation.
Finally, material datable to the Late Bronze Age is conspicuously absent from
southern Euboea. The only physical remains of Mycenaean Karystos, which is
mentioned by Homer and probably referred to in a Linear B tablet from Thebes as ka-
ru-to (Aravantinos 18;), are four fragments of kylix stems and the rim of a krater.
There are very few other traces of Late Bronze Age presence in southern Euboea. The
possibility remains that more substantial remains of the Late Bronze Age were
obliterated by subsequent activity in the area or that they have yet to be found.
The Late Bronze Age, if we accept the now tenuous claim that the Homeric epics refer
to this age, is the time when the Karystia, albeit very hazily, emerges from prehistory.
Three locations in southern Euboea are mentioned by Homer in the Iliad and the
Odyssey: Karystos (Iliad ii.), Styra (Iliad ii.), and Geraistos (Odyssey iii.1;;). As
mentioned above, besides Homer, another piece of written evidence for Late Bronze
Age Karystos is its mention on a Linear B sealing from ancient Thebes. Karystos is
mentioned there in the form of ka-ru-to, and Aravantinos (18;) is certain it refers to
Euboean Karystos, because another town on Euboea, Amarynthos, is mentioned on
another sealing from the same group.
Evidently, the Late Bronze Karystia left some mark in the evidence pertinent to the
period. How can we then explain the absence of more substantial Late Bronze Age
archaeological remains? Notwithstanding the unlikely possibility that the Late Bronze
material evidence was completely obliterated by subsequent processes, we think that
the explanation perhaps lies in the change of perspective more than in anything else.
The solution to our mystery of missing Mycenaeans might be in changing the way we
look at communities in the Late Bronze Age. As Canuto and Yaeger (zooo, passim)
have shown, communities are not necessarily site-based entities and they need not
contain a central, archaeologically easily recognisable settlement within their territory
to be defined as such. At the most basic level communities can be simply defined as
groups of people whose members consider themselves as part of such sociopolitical,
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 1
economic, cultural, or kinship-based entities. Thus, the Late Bronze Karystos mentioned
by Homer and on the sealing from Thebes may not have been an actual site but a
dispersed community of people who inhabited the area. This explanation, however,
does not account for the total absence of Late Bronze evidence elsewhere in southern
Karystia. Although literary evidence seems to suggest otherwise, it is also possible
(although to us it does not seem probable) that the Karystia was not permanently
occupied during the Late Bronze Age and that the scant remains from Ay. Nikolaos
represent evidence for one-time or, at best, infrequent visitation.
Fig. z. Ay. Nikolaos. Bronze tweezers (Scale 1:1.).
Fig. z(. Ay. Nikolaos. Bronze ingot.
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 16

CONCLUSIONS
The principal goals of this paper were to put the Karystia on the map of Middle Bronze
Age Greece by presenting the surface pottery and other finds from the site of Ay.
Nikolaos, and to examine the position of Ay. Nikolaos within the Karystian prehistoric
sequence. As evident from the data, Ay. Nikolaos is a diachronic site with a significant
Middle Bronze component. It is so far the only location in southern Euboea where
Middle Bronze and Late Bronze material has been recorded. As such, the site has an
enormous potential to shed light on the later prehistoric sequence in southern Euboea,
which is, recent advances notwithstanding, still insufficiently understood. We have
tried to put forward some ideas about the prehistoric periods in the area, which should
at this time be regarded more as hypotheses in need of testing than as proper
explanations. Despite the wealth of data streaming from the persistent and ongoing
archaeological work in the area, the complete picture of Karystian prehistory will be
hard to reconstruct without the excavation of Ay. Nikolaos.
ztankosi@indiana.edu
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Angelopoulou, A. zoo8. The Kastri Group:
Evidence from Korfari ton Amygdalion
(Panormos) Naxos, Dhaskalio Keros and
Akrotiri Thera, in Brodie, N., Dole, J.,
Gavalas, G., and Renfrew, C. (eds),
Horizon: A Colloquium on the Prehistory of
the Cyclades (Cambridge), 1(16(.
Aravantinos, V.L. 18;. Mycenaean place
names from Thebes: The new evidence,
in Killen, J.T., Melena, J.L. and Olivier,
J.-P. (eds), Studies in Mycenaean and
Classical Greek Presented to John Chadwick
(Minos XXXXII), (o.
Barber, R.L.N. zoo;. The Middle Cycladic
pottery, in Renfrew, A.C. (ed.), Excavations
at Phylakopi in Melos I;;; (British School
at Athens supp. vol. (z), 181z;.
Barber, R.L.N. zoo8. Unpublished pottery
from Phylakopi, Annual of the British
School at Athens 1o, (zzz.
Barber, R.L.N. and MacGillivray, J.A. 18o.
The Early Cycladic period: Matters of
definition and terminology, American
Journal of Archaeology 8((z), 1(11;.
Bass, G. 16;. Cape Gelidonya: A Bronze Age
Shipwreck (Transactions of the American
Philosophical Society ;).
Bosanquet, R. and Dawkins, R. 1z.
Palaikastro (British School at Athens supp.
vol. 1).
Branigan, K. 1;(. Aegean Metalwork of the
Early and Middle Bronze Age (Oxford).
Broodbank, C. zooo. An Island Archaeology of
the Early Cyclades (Cambridge).
Calligas, P.C. 18. Euboea and the
Cyclades, in Fitton, J.L. (ed.), Cycladica:
Studies in Memory of N.P. Goulandris.
Proceedings of the seventh British Museum
Classical Colloquium (London), 88.
Canuto, M.A. and Yaeger, J. (eds) zooo. The
Archaeology of Communities: A New World
Perspective (New York).
Carter, T. zoo;. The theatrics of technology:
Consuming obsidian in the early Cycladic
burial arena, Archaeological Papers of the
American Anthropological Association 1;.1,
8811;.
Caskey, J.L. 1;1. Investigations in Keos, part I:
Excavations and explorations, 1661;o,
Hesperia (o, 86.
Caskey, J.L. 1;z. Investigations in Keos, part
II: A conspectus of the pottery, Hesperia
(1, ;(o1.
Caskey, J.L. 1;. Ayia Irini, Keos: The
successive periods of occupation,
American Journal of Archaeology 8, (1z.
Caskey, J.L. and Caskey, E.G. 16o. The
earliest settlements at Eutresis:
Supplementary excavations, 18,
Hesperia z, 1z66;.
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 1;
Cherry, J.F., Davis, J.L. and Mantzourani, E.
11. Landscape Archaeology as Long-Term
History: Northern Keos in the Cycladic
Islands (Monumenta Archaeologica 16,
Los Angeles).
Christmann, E. 16. Die deutschen
Ausgrabungen auf der Pevkakia-Magula in
Thessalien II: Die frhe Bronzezeit (Bonn).
Coleman, J.E. 1;;. Keos I, Kephala: A
Late Neolithic Settlement and Cemetery
(Princeton).
Cullen, T., Talalay, L.E., Keller, D.R.,
Karimali, E. and Farrand, W.R.
(forthcoming) The Prehistory of the
Paximadhi Peninsula, Euboea (INSTAP
Prehistory Monographs, Philadelphia).
Davis, J.L. 186. Keos V, Ayia Irini: Period V
(Mainz).
Davis, J.L. 1z. Review of Aegean prehistory
I: The islands of the Aegean, American
Journal of Archaeology 6, 6;6.
Davis, J.L. and Williams, D.F. 181.
Petrological examination of Later Middle
Bronze Age pottery from Ay. Irini, Keos,
Hesperia o, z1oo.
Demakopoulou, . and Konsola, D. 1;.
,
,
o, , ((8.
De Paepe, P. 18z. A petrological examination
of Final Neolithic pottery from Thorikos
and Karystos, in Studies in South Attica, I
(Miscellanea Graeca , Ghent), 681.
Deshayes, J. 166. Argos. Les Fouilles de
la Deiras (tudes ploponnsiennes (,
Paris).
Dickinson, O.T.P.K. 1;;. The Origins of
Mycenaean Civilisation (Gothenburg).
Efstratiou, K., Stathi, M. and Mathioudaki, I.
zoo. An EH I building from Loutsa
Attikis, in Vasilopoulou, V. and
Katsarou-Tzeveleki, S. (eds), From
Mesogeia to Argosaronikos (Athens), zz1.
Forsn, J. 1z. The Twilight of the Early
Helladics (Studies in Mediterranean
Archaeology Pocketbook 116, Jonsered).
French, C.A.I. and Whitelaw, T.M. 1. Soil
erosion, agricultural terracing and site
formation processes at Markiani, Amorgos,
Greece: The micromorphological
perspective, Geoarchaeology 1((z), 118.
Gauss, W. and Smetana, R. zoo;.
Untersuchung zur frh- und
mittelhelladischen Keramik von gina
Kolonna, in Asamer, B., Hglinger, P.,
Reinholdt, C., Smetana, R. and
Wohlmayr, W. (eds), Temenos: Festgabe fr
Florens Felten und Stefan Hiller (Vienna),
111.
Goldman, H. 11. Excavations at Eutresis in
Boeotia (Cambridge, Mass.).
Hanschmann, I., and Milojci c, V. 1;6.
Die deutschen Ausgrabungen auf der Argissa-
Magula in Thessalien III. Die frhe
und beginnende mittlere Bronzezeit, Teil I
(Bonn).
Hansen, H.D. 1;. The prehistoric pottery
on the north slope of the Acropolis. 1;,
Hesperia 6, ;o.
Howell, R.J. 166. Euboea in the Middle
Bronze Age, in Sackett, L.H., Hankey,
V., Howell, R.J., Jacobsen, T.W. and
Popham, M.R., Prehistoric Euboea:
Contributions toward a survey, Annual of
the British School at Athens 61, o.
Immerwahr, S.A. 1;1. The Athenian Agora
XIII: The Neolithic and Bronze Ages
(Princeton).
Karabatsoli, A. 1;. La production de
lindustrie lithique taille en Grce
centrale pendant le Bronze ancien (diss.
Universit Paris X, Paris).
Keller, D.R. 18z. Final Neolithic Pottery from
Plakari, Karystos, in Studies in South Attica, I
(Miscellanea Graeca , Ghent), (;6;.
Keller, D.R. 18. Archaeological Survey in
Southern Euboea, Greece: A Reconstruction
of Human Activity from Neolithic Times
through the Byzantine Period (diss. Indiana
University, Bloomington).
Keller, D.R. and Rupp, D.W. 18.
Archaeological Survey in the Mediterranean
Region (British Archaeological Reports
International Series 1, Oxford).
Kunze, E. 1(. Orchomenos, III. Die Keramik
der frhen Bronzezeit (Munich).
Lambert, N. (ed.) 181. La Grotte prhistorique
de Kitsos (Attique): Missions I68I;8,
Vol. I, cole Franaise dAthnes.
Lindblom, M. zoo1. Marks and Makers:
Appearance, Distribution and Function of
Middle and Late Helladic Manufacturers
Marks on Aeginetan Pottery (Jonsered).
MacGillivray, J.A. and Barber, R.L.N. (eds)
18(. The Prehistoric Cyclades: Contributions
to a Workshop on Cycladic Chronology
(Edinburgh).
Maran, J. 1za. Die deutschen Ausgrabungen auf
der Pevkakia-Magula in Thessalien III: Die
mittlere Bronzezeit (Bonn).
Maran, J. 1zb. Kiapha-Thiti. Ergebnisse der
Ausgrabungen II.:. Keramik und Kleinfunde,
Marburger Winckelmann-Programm 1o
(Marburg).
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 18

Maran, J. 18. Kulturwandel auf demgriechischen
Festland und den Kykladen im spten .
Jahrtausend v. Chr., Teil I and II,
Universittsforschungen zur prhistorischen
Archologie Band (Bonn).
Mavridis, F. and Tankosi c, . zoo. The Ayia
Triadha cave, southern Euboea: Finds
and implications of the earliest human
habitation in the area (a preliminary
report), Mediterranean Archaeology and
Archaeometry (z), (;.
Mills, B.J. 18. Integrating functional
analyses of vessels and sherds through
models of ceramic assemblage formation,
World Archaeology z1(1), 1(;.
Overbeck, J.C. 18z. The hub of commerce:
Keos and Middle Helladic Greece, Temple
University Aegean Symposium ;, 8(.
Overbeck, J.C. 18. Keos VIII, Ayia Irini:
Period IV (Mainz).
Overbeck, J.C. zoo;. The Middle Bronze Age
sequences of Kea and Aegina, in Felten,
F., Gauss, W. and Smetana, R. (eds),
Middle Helladic Pottery and Synchronisms
(Vienna), (6.
Pantelidou-Gofa, M. zoo. T .
w (Athens).
Pantelidou-Gofa, M. zoo8. The EH I Deposit
at Tsepi, Marathon: Features, formation
and the breakage of the finds, in Renfrew,
A.C., Brodie, N., Gavalas, G. and Doole, J.
(eds), Horizon. A Colloquium on the
Prehistory of the Cyclades (Cambridge), z81.
Papageorgiou, D. zoo8. Sea routes in the
prehistoric Cyclades, in Renfrew, A.C.,
Brodie, N., Gavalas, G. and Doole, J. (eds),
Horizon. A Colloquium on the Prehistory of the
Cyclades (Cambridge), (8.
Pavuk, P. zooz. Troia VI and VIIa. The
Blegen pottery shapes: Towards a
typology, Studia Troica 1z, ;;1.
Petrakos, B.C. zoo(.
:oo
(Athens).
Popham, M.R., and Sackett, L.H. (eds) 168.
Excavations at Lefkandi, Euboea I666: A
Preliminary Report (London).
Rambach, J. zooo. Kykladen I-II. Die frhe
Bronzezeit. I: Grab- und Siedlungsbefunde.
:: Frhbronzezeitliche Beigabensittenkreise
auf den Kykladen, relative Chronologie und
Verbreitung (Bonn).
Renfrew, C. and Evans, R.K. zoo;. The Early
Bronze Age pottery, in Renfrew, A.C.
(ed.), Excavations at Phylakopi in Melos
I;;; (British School at Athens supp.
vol. (z), 1z8o.
Rice, P.M. 1;6. Rethinking the ware
concept, American Antiquity (1, 8(.
Rutter, J.B. 1;. Ceramic Change in the Aegean
Early Bronze Age: The Kastri Group,
Lefkandi I, and Lerna IV: A Theory
Concerning the Origin of Early Helladic III
Ceramics (Occasional Paper No. ,
Institute of Archaeology, University of
California, Los Angeles).
Rutter, J.B. 18. Some observations on the
Cyclades in the later third and early
second millennia, American Journal of
Archaeology 8;, 6;6.
Rutter, J.B. 18(. The Early Cycladic III
Gap: What it is and how to go about filling
it without making it go away, in
MacGillivray and Barber (eds) 18(, 1o;.
Rutter, J.B. 186. Some comments on the
nature and significance of the ceramic
transition from Early Helladic III to
Middle Helladic, HYDRA z, z(.
Rutter, J.B. 18. A ceramic definition of Late
Helladic I from Tsoungiza, HYDRA 6,
11.
Rutter, J.B. 1o. Pottery groups of the end of
the Middle Bronze Age from Tsoungiza,
Hesperia , ;(8.
Rutter, J.B. 1. Review of Aegean prehistory
II: The prepalatial Bronze Age of the
southern and central Greek mainland,
American Journal of Archaeology ;, ;(;.
Rutter, J.B. 1. Lerna III, The Pottery of Lerna
IV (Princeton, New Jersey).
Sackett, L.H., Hankey, V., Howell, R.J.,
Jacobsen, T.W. and Popham, M.R. 166.
Prehistoric Euboea: Contributions toward
a survey, Annual of the British School at
Athens 61, 11z.
Sampson, A. 18o.
(thens).
Sampson, A. 18. Manika I (Athens).
Sampson, A. 181.
(thens).
Sampson, A. 18;.

, thens
nnals of rchaeology zo, 1;z8.
Sampson, A. 1. .


(thens).
Sarri, K. zo1o. Orchomenos IV, Orchomenos in
der mittleren Bronzezeit (Munich).
Schliemann, H. 188o. Ilios (London).
Shelmerdine, C.W. (ed.) zoo8. The Cambridge
Companion to the Aegean Bronze Age
(Cambridge).
THE FINDS FROM AYIOS NIKOLAOS MYLON 1
Siedentopf, H.B. 11. Alt-gina vol. IV.z:
Mattbemalte Keramik der mittleren
Bronzezeit (Mainz).
Sotirakopoulou, P. 1. The chronology of
the Kastri Group reconsidered, Annual
of the British School at Athens 88, zo.
Talalay, L.E., Cullen, T., Keller, D.R. and
Karimali, E. zoo. Prehistoric occupation
in southern Euboea: An overview, in
Kennell, N.M. and Tomlinson, J.E. (eds),
Ancient Greece at the Turn of the
Millennium: Recent Work and Future
Perspectives (Athens), z1((.
Tankosi c, . zoo8. The Karystian Kampos
survey project: Results of the fieldwork
from the seasons of zoo6 and zoo;
(paper presented at American Institute of
Archaeology Meetings, Chicago zoo8).
Televantou, C.A. 1(. ,
(, , 6;88;.
Televantou, C.A. 1. .

O, in Marthari, M.E. (ed.), The
Early Bronze Age in the Cyclades in the Light of
recent Research at Settlement Sites. Proceedings
of a one-day colloquium, Hermoupolis, Syros
(Hermoupolis, Syros), ;6.
Televantou, C.A. zoo8. Strofilas: A Neolithic
settlement on Andros, in Renfrew, A.C.,
Brodie, N., Gavalas, G. and Doole, J. (eds),
Horizon. A Colloquium on the Prehistory of the
Cyclades (Cambridge), (.
Theocharis, D.R. 1(. ,
w,
w 1(, Part , ;6.
Televantou, C.A. 1.
,
6, z;z8.
Torrence, R. 181. A technological approach
to Cycladic blade industries, in Davis,
J.L. and Cherry, J.F. (eds), Papers in
Cycladic Prehistory (Los Angeles), 6686.
Touchais, G. zoo;. Coarse ware from the
Middle Helladic settlement of Aspis,
Argos: Local production and imports, in
Felten, F., Gauss, W. and Smetana, R.
(eds), Middle Helladic Pottery and
Synchronisms (Vienna), 816.
Tzavella-Evjen, H. 18(. , Publications
of the ArchDelt no. z (thens).
Vaughan, S.J. 1o. Petrographic analysis of
the early Cycladic wares from Akrotiri,
Thera, in Hardy, D.A., Doumas, C.G.,
Sakellarakis, J.A. and Warren, P.M. (eds),
Thera and the Aegean World III. Vol. I:
Archaeology. Proceedings of the Third
International Congress, Santorini, Greece,
September I8 (London), (;o8;.
Vaughan, S.J. and Williams, D. zoo;. The
pottery fabrics, in Renfrew, A.C. (ed),
Excavations at Phylakopi in Melos I;;;
(British School at Athens supp. vol. (z),
11z.
Wilson, D.E. 18;. Keos and east Attike in
Early Bronze II: Beyond pottery typology,
in Fossey, J.M. (ed.),
McGill: Papers in Greek Archaeology and
History in Memory of Colin D. Gordon
(Amsterdam), (.
Wilson, D.E. 1. Keos IX, Ay. Irini: Periods IIII,
The Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Settlements,
Part I: Pottery and Small Finds (Mainz).
Zerner, C.W. 1;8. The Beginning of the
Middle Helladic period at Lerna (diss.
University of Cincinnati).
Zerner, C.W. 186. Middle Helladic and Late
Helladic I pottery from Lerna, HYDRA z,
8;z.
Zerner, C.W. 1. New perspectives on trade
in the Middle and Early Late Helladic
periods on the mainland, in Zerner, C.W.,
Zerner, P.C. and Winder, J. (eds), Wace and
Blegen: Pottery as Evidence for Trade in the
Aegean Bronze Age (Amsterdam), 6.
, ,

w
. ,
. ,
w,
, w
.
,

.
ARKO TANKOSI

C AND IRO MATHIOUDAKI 1(o