Society, Ritual, and Identity in Ancient Cypriot Mortuary Practice

Kourion Museum Cyprus Collection

For millennia, the inhabitants of Cyprus engaged with their dead in ways that were both deeply personal and intensely social. Across the island, the bedrock is riddled with the rock-cut chamber tombs that are the most common and enduring feature of its ancient mortuary landscape [1, p. 23; 2, p. 23]. These subterranean spaces were not simply final resting places; they were active arenas for ritual, social negotiation, and the construction of identity. The material remains from these tombs—the disarticulated bones of generations, the curated assemblages of pottery, the rare glint of metal, and the enigmatic forms of figurines—offer a detailed, if complex, record of changing beliefs and social structures [2, p. 22]. The custom of multiple, successive interments often produced a confusing archaeological picture, a situation frequently compounded by ancient looting and the challenges of modern excavation [3, p. 305; 4, p. 8]. Yet, careful analysis of these contexts reveals a dynamic history of how Cypriot communities conceived of death, memory, and their place in the world.

This article traces the long-term development of mortuary practices on Cyprus, from the island’s first settled agricultural communities in the Neolithic period through the transformative urbanism of the Bronze Age and into the reconfigured world of the Iron Age. By examining shifts in tomb architecture, the treatment of the deceased, and the changing roles of grave goods, it is possible to reconstruct how death rituals both reflected and actively shaped Cypriot society. These practices reveal a continuous dialogue between local traditions and external influences, and between the assertion of group solidarity and the rise of individual prestige.

Neolithic and Chalcolithic Foundations (c. 7000–2500 BCE)

The earliest substantial evidence for mortuary practice on Cyprus comes from the Aceramic Neolithic period, where a close physical and conceptual link existed between the living and the dead. At sites like Khirokitia, the deceased were most often interred beneath the floors of domestic structures [5, p. 4; 6, p. 10]. These burials were typically individual, with the body placed in a contracted position, often on its right side [7, p. 77]. The general absence of elaborate grave goods in these early burials suggests a relatively egalitarian social structure [5, p. 4]. However, this simplicity masks complex ritual behaviours. The physical remains of the dead were often manipulated; bodies were dismantled, wrapped, and sometimes displayed before final burial [7, p. 117]. This engagement with the corpse suggests that death was a prolonged process, managed by the living to undo the deceased’s material ties to the world and perhaps to control the transition to another state of being [7, p. 142].

The treatment of the dead varied according to age. Adults were typically laid in a highly contracted position, while infants were less tightly flexed [7, p. 77]. There is also evidence for differential treatment by sex. At Khirokitia, Dentalium shell and carnelian bead necklaces are found predominantly with females, suggesting that body ornamentation was an early marker of a distinct social status for women [8, p. 104; 7, p. 71]. The carnelian, not native to Cyprus, points to early maritime contacts with the Levant [8, p. 104].

During the Chalcolithic period (c. 3900–2500 BCE), mortuary practices began to diversify. While intramural burial continued, chamber tombs used for multiple individuals first appeared in the Late Chalcolithic, a significant innovation that would become central to Cypriot practice for the next two millennia [9, p. 348]. These collective burials suggest a growing emphasis on kin groups or lineages [10, p. 94]. This period also saw an expansion in the types of personal adornment deposited in tombs. At sites like Souskiou Vathyrkakas and Kissonerga Mosphilia, burials contained elaborate necklaces combining local Dentalium shells with pendants made of picrolite, a soft greenish stone from Cypriot riverbeds [8, p. 104]. Most distinctive are the cruciform picrolite figurines, often found with burials of adults and children of both sexes [8, p. 104; 11, p. 377; 12, p. 377]. Many of these show signs of wear, indicating they were used in life before their final deposition in the tomb [8, p. 104]. While their exact meaning is debated, their presence across age and sex categories implies a complex role beyond simple fertility charms [8, p. 104].

A key development was the appearance of secondary burial, where the remains of the dead were moved from a primary location and reinterred. At sites like Lemba Lakkous and Kissonerga Mosphilia, the remains of infants and children were subject to secondary treatment [2, p. 41]. In some cases, disarticulated bones from several individuals were gathered in ossuaries [11, p. 48; 12, p. 48]. This manipulation of skeletal remains points to a multi-stage funerary program, where the dead were not simply buried and forgotten but were actively curated as part of an ongoing relationship with the living, perhaps as part of emerging ancestor-focused rituals [1, p. 10; 13, p. 14].

The Early and Middle Bronze Age (c. 2500–1650 BCE): Ancestors, Feasting, and Competitive Display

The beginning of the Bronze Age heralded fundamental changes in Cypriot society, including the adoption of plow agriculture and new forms of social organization [2, p. 149]. These shifts are clearly visible in the mortuary record. The most significant change was the move from burials within settlements to organized, extramural cemeteries [14, p. 124]. This separation of the domains of the living and the dead likely coincided with a new emphasis on land, lineage, and the veneration of ancestors, whose tombs now served as permanent markers of group identity on the landscape [15, p. 129; 16, p. 6].

The rock-cut chamber tomb, accessed by a vertical shaft or sloping passage (dromos), became the standard burial facility across the island, though with distinct regional peculiarities in construction [17, p. 16; 2, p. 109]. These tombs were communal, used for multiple burials over many generations [3, p. 305]. This practice necessitated a complex, multi-stage mortuary program. When a tomb was reopened for a new burial, the remains of previous occupants and their grave goods were often swept aside, collected into piles, or placed in side niches to make room [1, p. 10]. This deliberate rearrangement was a normative part of the burial process, transforming the tomb into a layered archive of a kin group's history [1, p. 10]. The retention of skeletal material, especially skulls and long bones, suggests that these remains were important focal points in rituals that reaffirmed a group’s connection to its ancestors [9, p. 361].

Grave goods from this period suggest that funerals became primary occasions for social display and competition [9, p. 342]. Pottery is the most common offering, often found in large quantities [18, p. 305]. Regional differences in ceramic assemblages point to varied funerary customs. At the northern cemetery of Vounous, for instance, a high number of jugs suggests that ritual drinking was a prominent part of funerary events, while at Psematismenos on the south coast, a greater proportion of large bowls may indicate a focus on the communal sharing of food [19, p. 7]. The presence of large quantities of cattle, sheep, and goat bones in tombs at Vounous provides direct evidence for funerary feasting, likely involving the slaughter and consumption of animals at the cemetery itself [20, p. 85; 1, p. 13].

Metal objects, particularly those of copper and bronze, became an increasingly important component of burial assemblages, signaling a significant investment of wealth in the funerary sphere [21, p. 14]. At wealthy sites like Lapithos, male burials were often accompanied by a standardized set of metal items: a spearhead, a knife, and personal grooming articles like tweezers and a razor [22, p. 16]. These objects were frequently placed around the upper torso and remained with the skeleton even as other goods were cleared away, suggesting a powerful, inalienable link between the individual's identity and their metal possessions [22, p. 16; 23, p. 12]. The deposition of weapons and tools, many likely used in life, was a form of conspicuous consumption that solidified the status of the deceased and their kin group [9, p. 391].

Anthropomorphic figurines are another key feature of Early-Middle Bronze Age burials. The highly stylized, incised "plank-shaped" figurines appear in tombs that also contain metal objects, perhaps linking them to elite displays [23, p. 10; 10, p. 201]. These figurines had lives before the tomb; their discovery in settlement contexts shows they were not made exclusively for funerary use [24, p. 55]. Their inclusion in the grave may have been part of a process of transferring a valued personal possession from the world of the living to the world of the dead, its meaning potentially shifting in the process [24, p. 55; 11, p. 22; 12, p. 22].

The Late Bronze Age (c. 1650–1050 BCE): Urban Living and Death

The Late Bronze Age was an era of intense urbanism, international trade, and growing social stratification, driven by Cyprus's central role in the production and trade of copper [10, p. 121]. These developments prompted another significant shift in mortuary customs, particularly in the new coastal urban centers like Enkomi, Kition, and Hala Sultan Tekke. In a reversal of earlier practice, burial once again moved largely within the boundaries of the settlement, with tombs located below streets and in the courtyards of houses and workshops [25, p. 4; 26, p. 51; 27, p. 51]. This may reflect an attempt by powerful urban lineages to assert and legitimize their claims to property and resources within the crowded, competitive environment of the city [2, p. 105; 28, p. 19].

Rock-cut chamber tombs remained the most common type of burial facility, but their form evolved [2, p. 109]. On average, tombs became smaller than their Middle Bronze Age predecessors, a trend perhaps necessitated by the limited space in urban areas [2, p. 142]. This decrease in construction effort was, however, offset by a dramatic increase in the wealth and exoticism of the grave goods deposited within them [8, p. 96]. At Enkomi, new forms of built tombs appeared, including rectangular ashlar-masonry tombs and rounded tholos tombs, which show clear influence from elite burial architecture in Syria and Palestine [2, p. 142]. This adoption of foreign architectural styles was a new mode of status display for Cypriot elites engaged in international networks [15, p. 270].

The grave assemblages of this period reflect a society with marked wealth disparities [29, p. 15]. The richest tombs contained impressive collections of imported luxury goods that served as the pre-eminent symbols of prestige [2, p. 128]. Mycenaean pottery, particularly pictorial kraters used for mixing wine and stirrup jars for perfumed oil, was imported in large quantities [25, p. 4; 30, p. 277]. These vessels, along with objects of gold, silver, ivory, faience, and glass, were used to furnish the tombs of the elite [31, p. 663; 29, p. 15]. Many of these items show signs of wear, indicating they were used in ceremonies during life before being removed from circulation at death [2, p. 142]. The ability to acquire and conspicuously dispose of such foreign exotica was a key strategy for urban elites to establish and maintain their elevated status [9, p. 343; 15, p. 383].

However, the distribution of these goods was not always straightforward. Imported objects are sometimes found in tombs that are otherwise not exceptionally wealthy, suggesting that access to overseas trade was not monopolized by a single, monolithic elite [32, p. 418; 14, p. 187]. A perplexing feature of this period is the relative scarcity of copper and bronze artifacts in tombs before Late Cypriot IIC, especially given the island's role as a major copper producer [2, p. 128]. It is possible that the economic importance of copper as an export commodity led to restrictions on its local deposition, with prestige being demonstrated through the imported valuables acquired in exchange for it [2, p. 128].

Rituals associated with the dead continued to evolve. While tombs were reused for generations, affirming kin group identity, some were used for only a short period, perhaps indicating a fissioning of households and lineages in the competitive urban context [2, p. 107; 28, p. 19]. There is evidence for feasting and ritual drinking, and some scholars have suggested the existence of ceremonial drinking clubs, known as the marzeah in the Levant, may have existed on Cyprus [33, p. 35; 29, p. 16]. At sites like Enkomi, the accessibility of intramural tombs may have facilitated post-funerary rites and offerings to the dead, a practice for which there is textual evidence at the contemporary Syrian city of Ugarit [34, p. 5].

The Iron Age (c. 1050 BCE onward): New Traditions for a New Era

The transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Iron Age was a period of profound cultural change across the Eastern Mediterranean, with Cyprus experiencing significant disruption and realignment, including the arrival of new populations from the Aegean [35, p. 62]. These changes are starkly reflected in mortuary practices, which saw a sharp break with many long-standing Bronze Age traditions [36, p. 9].

The most visible change was in tomb architecture. While rock-cut chamber tombs continued, a new type with a long, narrow dromos became the island-wide standard [37, p. 12]. The form has clear parallels in the Aegean and its widespread adoption suggests a major cultural shift, possibly driven by an influential immigrant population [38, p. 12; 37, p. 12]. In addition, a new level of monumentality was achieved with the appearance of large, lavishly constructed built tombs, most famously the "Royal Tombs" of Salamis [39, p. 40; 40, p. 40]. These tombs, with their rich deposits of metalwork, ivory, and evidence for horse sacrifice, were ostentatious displays of power by the rulers of the newly formed Cypriot city-kingdoms [33, p. 35].

The complex, multi-stage funerary rituals of the Bronze Age, which involved the manipulation and curation of bones, came to an abrupt end [36, p. 9]. This cessation suggests a fundamental change in the relationship between the living and the dead, with the emphasis on ancestor veneration seemingly declining. New customs for burying infants and young children also emerged. At sites like Kition, infants were interred in reused Canaanite jars, a practice known as enchytrismos [36, p. 10]. These jar burials were often located within settlement walls and typically lacked grave goods, suggesting they were part of a more private, abbreviated ritual, distinct from the communal ceremonies for adults [36, p. 10; 41, p. 19; 42, p. 18]. This practice stands in contrast to the increased inclusion of children in chamber tombs during the Late Bronze Age and marks another significant ideological shift [36, p. 10; 15, p. 385].

Funerary assemblages in the Iron Age continued to be used to express status, but the symbolic language changed. In elite burials, weapons made of iron became important markers of prestige [43, p. 5; 44, p. 6]. Imported goods, particularly from Phoenicia and the Aegean, remained vital for elite display, demonstrating the continued integration of Cypriot kingdoms into Mediterranean exchange networks [45, p. 20]. Terracotta figurines continued to be placed in tombs, but their interpretation is complicated by the fact that identical types were also dedicated in sanctuaries, blurring the line between mortuary and religious symbolism [46, p. 19; 47, p. 321].

Conclusion: The Social Life of Death

The long history of Cypriot mortuary practice is not a simple, linear evolution but a dynamic story of continuity and change. For over two millennia, from the Chalcolithic to the end of the Bronze Age, the core traditions remained remarkably consistent: collective burial in rock-cut chamber tombs, the multi-generational reuse of these tombs, and complex rituals involving the manipulation of skeletal remains and feasting. These practices underscored the importance of kinship, ancestry, and the community in the social fabric of prehistoric Cyprus.

Upon this stable foundation, however, were layered significant transformations that reflect the island's changing social and political landscape. The move to extramural cemeteries in the Early Bronze Age signaled a new relationship with the land and the formalization of ancestor veneration. The return to intramural burial in the Late Bronze Age was an urban phenomenon, a strategy for asserting property and lineage in burgeoning cosmopolitan centers. The grave goods tell a parallel story, shifting from the pottery and copper of local competitive display in the Early and Middle Bronze Age to the imported exotica that marked elite status in the international world of the Late Bronze Age.

The sharp break in traditions at the onset of the Iron Age, with the adoption of new tomb types and the cessation of ancestral rites, marks the most significant rupture in this long history. It reflects a reordering of society, ideology, and identity in a period of migration and political reorganization.

Many questions remain. The poor preservation of skeletal material has often limited bioarchaeological research, hindering a deeper understanding of demography, health, and kinship within tomb groups [5, p. 1; 48, p. 115]. Future research combining detailed osteological analysis with new scientific methods like isotopic and ancient DNA studies holds the potential to populate these tombs with individuals whose life histories can be more fully known [2, p. 161; 49, p. 215]. Furthermore, a more complete understanding of mortuary ritual requires greater knowledge of the settlement contexts from which burial goods originated, underscoring the need for continued excavation of domestic and workshop areas [24, p. 55; 46, p. 19]. The tombs of Cyprus, though often disturbed and difficult to interpret, remain one of our most direct sources for understanding how ancient societies confronted mortality and, in doing so, defined themselves.

References

  1. Webb, J. M., & Frankel, D. (2010). Social Strategies, Ritual and Cosmology in Early Bronze Age Cyprus: An Investigation of Burial Data from the North Coast. Levant, 42(2), 185-189. https://doi.org/10.1179/175638010X12797237885776
  2. Keswani, P. (2005). *Mortuary ritual and society in Bronze Age Cyprus*. Equinox Publishing.
  3. Jones, R. E. (1986). A review of scientific studies: Greek and Cypriot pottery (Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper 1). The British School at Athens.
  4. Webb, J. M. (2017). Lapithos Tomb 322. Voice, context and the archaeological record. In J. M. Webb, D. Frankel, & A. S. McCarthy (Eds.), *Text and the Material World* (Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology Pocket-book 185, pp. 1–22). Astrom Editions Ltd.
  5. Harper, N. K., & Fox, S. C. (2008). Recent research in Cypriot bioarchaeology. Bioarchaeology of the Near East, 2, 1–38.
  6. Clarke, J. (2013). Cyprus during the Neolithic Period. In M. L. Steiner & A. E. Killebrew (Eds.), T​he Oxford handbook of the archaeology of the Levant: c. 8000-300 BC (pp. 177–181). Oxford University Press.
  7. Jones, P. L. (2008). *Moving heaven and earth: Landscape, death and memory in the Aceramic Neolithic of Cyprus* (BAR International Series 1795). BAR Publishing. https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407302836
  8. Pilides, D., & Papadimitriou, N. (Eds.). (2012). *Ancient Cyprus: Cultures in dialogue*. Department of Antiquities, Cyprus.
  9. Keswani, P. S. (2005). Death, prestige, and copper in Bronze Age Cyprus. *American Journal of Archaeology*, *109*(3), 341–401. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40026118
  10. Bolger, D., & Serwint, N. (Eds.). (2002). *Engendering Aphrodite: Women and society in ancient Cyprus*. American Schools of Oriental Research.
  11. Winkelmann, C. (2020). The Neolithic and Chalcolithic Figurines of Cyprus (Studien zur Vorderasiatischen Archäologie, Bd. 2). Zaphon.
  12. Winkelmann, C. (2020). The Neolithic and Chalcolithic Figurines of Cyprus. Zaphon.
  13. Bachhuber, C. (n.d.). The Anatolian context of Philia material culture in Cyprus. In A. B. Knapp & P. van Dommelen (Eds.), *The Cambridge Prehistory of the Bronze and Iron Age Mediterranean*. Cambridge University Press.
  14. Kearns, C., & Manning, S. W. (Eds.). (2019). New directions in Cypriot archaeology. Cornell University Press.
  15. Knapp, A. B. (2008). *Prehistoric and protohistoric Cyprus: Identity, insularity, and connectivity.* Oxford University Press.
  16. Steel, L. (2023). Transforming landscapes: Exploring the creation of a sacred landscape in north-east Cyprus at the beginning of the Late Bronze Age. In *Sacred Landscapes in Antiquity: Creation, Transformation and Manipulation*. Oxbow Books.
  17. Sneddon, A. C. (2016). The cemeteries at Marki: Using a looted landscape to investigate prehistoric Bronze Age Cyprus (BAR International Series No. 1028). BAR Publishing. https://doi.org/10.30861/9781841714066
  18. Jones, R. E. (1986). *Greek and Cypriot pottery: A review of scientific studies*. The British School at Athens.
  19. Webb, J. M. (n.d.). Pots and People: An Investigation of Individual and Collective Identities in Early Bronze Age Cyprus.
  20. Yildiz, N. (2018). Vounous revisited: Teaching history through a symposium and a ceramic workshop. *Arts & Humanities Open Access Journal*, *2*(2), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.15406/ahoaj.2018.02.00037
  21. Voskos, I., Kloukinas, D., & Mantzourani, E. (Eds.). (2023). *Prehistoric lifeways in Cyprus from the Early Holocene to the Middle Bronze Age*. Astrom Editions. (Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology, Vol. CLV)
  22. Bourogiannis, G., & Mühlenbock, C. (Eds.). (2016). Ancient Cyprus Today: Museum Collections and New Research. Åströms förlag.
  23. Mina, M., Triantaphyllou, S., & Papadatos, Y. (Eds.). (2016). An archaeology of prehistoric bodies and embodied identities in the Eastern Mediterranean. Oxbow Books.
  24. Knox, D.-K. (2012). *Making sense of figurines in Bronze Age Cyprus: A comprehensive analysis of Cypriot ceramic figurative material from EC I – LC IIIA (c.2300BC – c.1100BC)* [Doctoral dissertation, The University of Manchester].
  25. Steel, L. (2013). Cyprus during the Late Bronze Age. In The Oxford handbook of the archaeology of the Levant: c. 8000–332 BCE (pp. 571–585).
  26. Monahan, E. M. (2010). *Dwelling with the dead: Mortuary landscapes and the production of community during the prehistoric Bronze Age on Cyprus* (Master's thesis, Cornell University).
  27. Monahan, E. M. (2010). *Dwelling with the dead: Mortuary landscapes and the production of community during the prehistoric Bronze Age on Cyprus* [Master's thesis, Cornell University].
  28. Meyer, N., & Knapp, A. B. (2021). Resilient Social Actors in the Transition from the Late Bronze to the Early Iron Age on Cyprus. Journal of World Prehistory. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10963-021-09163-7
  29. Bürge, T., & Recht, L. (Eds.). (2024). T. Bürge & L. Recht (Eds.), *Dynamics and developments of social structures and networks in prehistoric and protohistoric Cyprus*. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003320203
  30. Graziadio, G. (2025). The Aegean and Cyprus: Interaction Between Two Distinct Cultural Mediterranean Areas from the Third Millennium to Ca 1200 BC. Edizioni Ca’ Foscari – Venice University Press. https://doi.org/10.30687/978-88-6969-857-6
  31. Voskos, I., & Knapp, A. B. (2008). Cyprus at the End of the Late Bronze Age: Crisis and Colonization or Continuity and Hybridization? American Journal of Archaeology, 112, 659-684.
  32. Andreou, G.-M. (2014). *Traversing Space: Landscape and Identity in Bronze Age Cyprus* [Doctoral dissertation, The University of Edinburgh].
  33. Cadogan, G., Iacovou, M., Kopaka, K., & Whitley, J. (Eds.). (2012). Parallel lives: Ancient island societies in Crete and Cyprus. The British School at Athens.
  34. Crewe, L. (2017). Feasting with the Dead? Tomb 66 at Enkomi. In A. Georgiadou & C. T. Crewe (Eds.), Ancient Cyprus in the British Museum: Essays in Honour of Veronica Tatton-Brown (pp. 27–40). The British Museum.
  35. Karageorghis, V., & Raptou, E. (2016). *Palaepaphos-Skales: Tombs of the Late Cypriote IIIB and Cypro-Geometric Periods (Excavations of 2008 and 2011)*. The Cyprus Institute.
  36. Steel, L. (2008). Creation and expression of identity in Cyprus at the end of the Late Bronze Age. In C. Gallou, M. Georgiadis, & G. M. Muskett (Eds.), *Dioskouroi: Studies presented to W.G. Cavanagh and C.B. Mee on the anniversary of their 30-year joint contribution to Aegean Archaeology*. Archaeopress.
  37. Iacovou, M. (2008). Cultural and political configurations in Iron Age Cyprus: The sequel to a protohistoric episode. *American Journal of Archaeology, 112*(4), 625–57. https://doi.org/10.3764/aja.112.4.625
  38. Iacovou, M. (2008). Cultural and Political Configurations in Iron Age Cyprus: The Sequel to a Protohistoric Episode. American Journal of Archaeology, 112(4), 625-657. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20627513
  39. Carstens, A. M. (2001). Cypriot chamber tombs.
  40. Carstens, A. M. (n.d.). Cypriot chamber tombs. In [Book Title] (pp. 125-129). [Publisher].
  41. Fourrier, S., Georgiadou, A., Chamel, B., Denninger, N., Gardeisen, A., Papayanni, K., & Theodoropoulou, T. (2021). The death of infants in Early Iron Age Cyprus. A jar burial from Kition-Bamboula. Opuscula. Annual of the Swedish Institutes at Athens and Rome, 14, 281-304. https://doi.org/10.30549/opathrom-14-13
  42. Fourrier, S., Georgiadou, A., Chamel, B., Denninger, N., Gardeisen, A., Papayanni, K., & Theodoropoulou, T. (2021). The death of infants in Early Iron Age Cyprus: A jar burial from Kition-Bamboula. Opuscula, 14, 282–311. https://doi.org/10.30549/opathrom-14-13
  43. Kassianidou, V., & Charalambous, A. (2019). Analysis of the copper alloy artefacts from the necropolis of Salamis. In S. Rogge, C. Ioannou, & T. Mavrojannis (Eds.), *Salamis of Cyprus: History and archaeology from the earliest times to late antiquity* (pp. 229–). Waxmann Verlag GmbH.
  44. Vonhoff, C. (2013). Offensive weapons in Cypriot Early Iron Age elite burials (LC III B/CG) as indicators for autochthonous traditions and external cultural influences. Pasiphae: Rivista di filologia e antichità egee, 7, 195-205.
  45. Kaba, H. (2021). Contextualising the Necropolis of Soloi within the Cypro-Archaic Mortuary Horizon. *Cedrus, 9*, 65-93. https://doi.org/10.13113/CEDRUS.202104
  46. Averett, E. W. (n.d.). The Iron Age Terracotta Figurines from Cyprus.
  47. Darby, E. D., & de Hulster, I. J. (Eds.). (2022). *Iron Age terracotta figurines from the Southern Levant in context*. Brill.
  48. Goude, G., Clarke, J., Webb, J. M., Frankel, D., Georgiou, G., Herrscher, E., & Lorentz, K. O. (2018). Exploring the potential of human bone and teeth collagen from Prehistoric Cyprus for isotopic analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 22, 115–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2018.09.018
  49. Voskos, I., Vika, E., & Mantzourani, E. (2021). Strontium isotopes and human mobility in Ceramic Neolithic-Middle Chalcolithic Cyprus (ca. 5200/5000–3000/2800 B.C.): A pilot study. *Athens University Review of Archaeology (AURA)*, *4*, 207–224.