Archaeology Magazine - June 1972 - 70

architecture, particularly in a house
which may have belonged to a Mycenaean industrialist who was responsible for the great impetus to copper
production.The LG líc phase was apparently a period of peace and prosperity, at least for half a century; in
the midst of it, about 1250 b.c., it was
decided to erect a fortification wall
around the town and in Area III this
wall bordered the north side of the
large residence. Work in the copper
shops in the western sector of the complex in Area III ended abruptly when
the fortification wall was built; apparently the shops were moved elsewhere. Severe destruction followed
shortly thereafter; Dikaios connected
this with the catastrophic end of the
Mycenaean cities of mainland Greece,
as well as of many important cities of
the east Mediterranean coast. Fleeing
Mycenaeans, possibly together with
others recruited on the way east, may
have been responsiblefor raiding and
despoiling Enkomi, just one of the
many places in the east Mediterranean
similarlywreckedat this time.
Some ten or twenty years later another wave of Mycenaeans, abandoning the destroyed centers of Greece,
arrived at Enkomi and began the reconstruction of the town (Level II Ia,
1220/10-1190b.c.). The debris of the
destroyed buildings of Level He was
levelled and on it, in Area I, an entirely new kind of building was erected.
The use of dressed ashlar masonry for
the lower parts of the walls was the
greatest innovation. The so-calledAshlar Buildingwas erected in two stages,
first the large megara that became the
core of the whole building, then additional sectors on all four sides which
formed a great rectangular residence,
of a monumentality previously unknown here. With the rectangular type
of dwelling began a grid plan with
streets crossingat right angles and continuous blocks of buildings. In Area
III, to the north, bordering the fortification wall, the buildings retained
some of their old character; the two
megara survived, one receiving two
pillars to support the roof and both now
having benches added, giving them an
officialcharacter. The fortificationwall
itself was strengthened, a formidable
towerwasadded, and a large housebuilt
just inside the gate, forming a zig-zag
corridor around the house, an arrangement similar to that of the South Gate
of Troy VI. Shaft graves seem now to
have replaced chamber tombs. Mycenaean 11Ic pottery appeared and
238

gradually won ascendancy over the
local wares. Other finds, in great variety, show a marked Aegean orientation, including a remarkable CyproMinoan text, large numbers of clay
balls and handles inscribedwith CyproMinoan signs. All told, the new town
represented the wholesale arrival of a
new culture, Mycenaean in character
and believed to have been brought by
Mycenaeans fleeing Greece. The new
prosperity was brought to an abrupt
end about 1190 b.c.; there is evidence
of a severe conflagrationin the Ashlar
Building, equally visible in Area III.
This has been ascribed to attacks by
the Land and Sea Raiders, who must
have been masters of Enkomi,and presumably of the whole island, for a
short time.
A reconstructed and thoroughly rearranged Ashlar Buildingrose in Level
IIIb (1190-1125/1100 b.c.), though
the architectural principles remained
the same as in Level I IIa. One room
of the old megaronnow becamea ritual
center; here was found the bronze
statue of the Horned God. To this
image skulls of oxen were offered,
libations were poured from rhyta in
the form of bulls' heads. A bronze
female statuette found in an adjoining
room attests to a ritual in honor of a
female deity. The new buildings in
Area III also departed from the previous arrangement; the approaches to
the north gate were rearranged. In
each area there is a new shaft grave.
The most striking change in pottery
came with the appearance of the Glose
Style Mycenaeanware and of the Granary Class, both reflecting changes occurring on the Greek mainland; the
Granary ware, in particular, testifies
to the arrival of new peoples from the
Argolid after the destruction of Mycenae. Literacy is as well attested as
in the previousperiod.
It is the ritual centered around the
statue of the Horned God which is of
the greatest interest. The strong Minoan-Mycenaean stylistic features of the
statue have been emphasized in separate publications by Dikaios and by
Marinatos. Dikaios identified the god
as Apollo Keraiates and pointed out
parallels with Arcado-Messeniancult.
Many of the finds from Level IIIb
also testify to close trade connections
with the Greek mainland. Thus
Dikaios believed that those who rebuilt Enkomi after the destruction by
the Land and Sea Raiders came from
Greece,probablyhaving formed a powerful component of these raiders, who

stayed behind to occupy and rebuild
the site- thus a second wave of Mycenaean immigrants. But what they
wrought was to end in yet another
catastrophe, accompanied by a conflagration that spared no part of the
excavated buildings; evidencesuggests
that it was possibly an earthquake,
though a hostile attack cannot be ruled
out.
Whatever the cause, reconstruction
was immediate (LevelIIIc, 1125/11001075 b.c.) and the continuationof the
cult of the Horned God showscontinuity of population. There was no important change in the rebuilding of
Area I, Area III or the fortifications.
More shaft graves were dug; the characteristic pottery was Late Mycenaean
IIIc ware, especially of the Granary
style, which was copied locally.CyproMinoan writing was still in evidence,
but in lesser quantity. There were connections with Crete as well as with the
mainland, and some intercourse with
the East is also indicated. After less
than half a century the town was
abandoned,for reasonsthat are difficult
to fathom; possibly there was a new
threat of attack. This last level was so
close to the surface that much of the
evidenceis lost. The abandonmentmay
not have been long, possibly only a
quarter-century, for pottery of CyproGeometric types found on the surface
show that settlement resumed about
1050 b.c. It was a humble village at
best, but it continued on the site until
about 600 b.c., long after the foundation of the new town at Salamis,nearer to the coast, which replaced Enkomi.
Dikaios, finally, hesitated to identify
Enkomi as Alashiya itself, though he
suggested that it may have been part
of Alashiya,perhaps one of its towns.
Dikaios' account is in the best tradition of interpretation of archaeological finds: to write the history of
places and times that are either completely without written recordsor, as at
Enkomi, are proto-historic. It is the
vast mass of material remains that are
the basis for the historical summary
that occupies the bulk of the three
great volumes of this work. They are
all so meticulously described and illustrated that the reader has at hand
all the necessaryinformationfor checking Dikaios' conclusions.These hold up
extremelywell under close scrutiny and
form a great tribute to Dikaios' field
techniques,his knowledgeand his scholarship.
Saul S. Weinberg
Universityof Missouri-Columbia

Archaeology Magazine - June 1972

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Archaeology Magazine - June 1972