Correspondence between Schaeffer and Karageorghis on the anniversary date of the discovery of the Enkomi-Alasia siteClaude Frédéric-Armand Schaeffer and Vassos Karageorghis

Alasia I. According to my research (see Enkomi-Alasia 1952, p. 239 ss. and 250 ss.) the date goes back to the XIIIth c. B.C. and possibly to the end of the XIVth.

2° The Mycenaean colonization of Enkomi-Alasia (and not only commercial intercourse with the Mycenaean Greek continent) occured already in the XIVth and during the XIIIth c.

3° I have reasons to believe that the building remains discovered by me in sectors 6 K and W of the same plan denominated "temple of the column" in the provisional guide may in fact have belonged to the XIVth and XIIIth c. palace (see Alasia I, p. 569-570). The two column elements are of Greek date and have nothing to do with the original building.

I hope that during the excavations now directed in the field by Mr. Peltonen, who has been nominated as my proposition to that position, will allow to find new material for the solution of these three problems. I am also convinced that the tomb-in discovered by me at Enkomi was called in the Bronze Age "Alasia", name which was given at the same time to the whole island, accordingly to an old Near Eastern tradition: Ugarit (capital city) and Ugarit Kingdom, Hatti (city and country), Babylon and Babylonia, Assyria and Assyria, and so on.

The delphement of the tablets, now a possibility, see the forthcoming report of E. Hansen in the G.A.I. 1973 (meeting of January 12th), will give hope that the town name occur in the tooks already found in Enkomi-Alasia or will come to light during further excavations. Already texts found by me in the Ugarit-Ugarit mention an important city of Alasia which must have been overseas not far off from Ugarit. To that Alasia have replied members of the royal house of Ugarit have been sent into exile. I believe the great built tombs found in squares 3 K and 4 E belong to these Syrian princes having lived with their families and their entire household in Enkomi-Alasia during the XIIIth c. B.C.

I am convinced you will appreciate that I would like to have time to publish my views on these problems before further honors are bestowed to me. Also I would like that your excavations and finds from Kition are published, which may be of same importance on these problems. I therefore propose you to delay the suggested date of an anniversary of the beginning of the Enkomi-Alasia townsite chronology: 1930 + 50 = makes 1980 A.D. I think that I would then be really able to enjoy your noticed proposition and also be more sure that I deserve the suggested honors.

Yours always,