Notes by P. Dikaios on Dr. Schaeffer's analysis of P. Dikaios' report on his "compound" at EnkomiPorphyrios Dikaios

Continued from scan 15

… of excavation I reported to Dr. Schaeffer that we saw here a good place of evidence that the tomb was provided for in the plan of the building. But at that time (before going through all the pottery) I was convinced from Dr. Schaeffer's provisional report that buildings of this kind had to be attributed to the 14th century. This dating was (in my view of the matter at that time) supported by the few Mycenaean sherds found on top of the hearth of floor V of Room XIV, under which hearth I discovered only last spring the 12th century Mycenean pottery. Naturally after the study of the pottery I had to revise my views. The tomb contained stuff of the IIIB period. The earliest floors of the compound yielded pottery of the 12th century. Moreover the road along the north facade of the compound seals the tomb and its dromos altogether (p.17 of my report), a fact which Dr. Schaeffer fails to mention in his analysis of my report (p.13-14). If the road passing along the north facade of the building is connected with it, as seems to be the case, it follows that the tomb and dromos sealed by the road were not. If the tomb had been used during the time of the compound it should have been left accessible for burials and not buried under the road. Moreover if the compound dates from the 14th century and was abandoned for a considerable period, as Dr. Schaeffer suggests, (p.12 of his analysis) how are we to explain that the people who abandoned the buildings continued to effect burials in the tomb?

Other tombs sealed by roads have appeared outside the north-western and south-western parts of the /compound … continues