This article offers the first critical edition of and philological commentary on a previously unpublished prefatory text (Ἕτερον προοίμιον) transmitted under the name of Theophilos Korydalleus and found in over forty-five manuscripts of his Aristotelian Logic. It examines the status, content, and manuscript transmission of this brief philosophical treatise, which has hitherto been neglected in favour of the more extensive prologue printed in the 1729 edition. Drawing on new manuscript evidence, particularly a marginal scholion by Iakovos Argeios (Add MS 7143, British Library), the study argues that the Ἕτερον προοίμιον constitutes the authentic preface by Korydalleus himself, whereas the longer prologue should be attributed to his disciple and successor Ioannes Karyophylles. This attribution, if accepted, sheds light on the process of textual interpolation and ideological appropriation within the Patriarchal Academy of Constantinople during the late seventeenth century. The study situates the controversy over the two prologues within the broader intellectual and political conflict between the Korydallean tradition, represented by Karyophylles, and the faction aligned with Alexander Mavrokordatos. By highlighting the interplay between manuscript transmission, authorship, and institutional power, the article contributes to ongoing efforts to reassess the contours of post-Byzantine philosophical education and the editorial challenges posed by early modern Greek Aristotelianism.

The case of Caelia Q.l. Chia – named on an inscribed block decorated with a balustrade and pilasters from the Venizeleion burial ground that formed part of the North Cemetery of Knossos – raises the question: how can we identify some of the colonial families at Roman Knossos? This freedwoman can be identified in multiple ways as a member of a colonial family. The text naming her adds a new inscription of early date, and one in Latin, to the corpus of the Roman colony. She was, moreover, one of a small number of individuals known to have been buried in Italian-style mausolea in the Venizeleion burial ground. Her family name is one that suggests migration to the colony in the imperial period, perhaps when Colonia Iulia Nobilis Cnosus was founded, or not long thereafter. Her full name also utilises a distinctly Roman onomastic formula to identify her as a freedwoman, one of those who formed a distinctive part of the colonial population. Caelia’s monumental funerary inscription and others from this burial ground join colonial coinage and a range of inscriptions on stone and ceramics as sources of evidence for identifying some of the colonial families at Roman Knossos.

This article, based on an oral presentation by the author at the BSA’s annual general meeting in February 2025, summarizes the activities of the British School at Athens with a focus on the calendar year 2024. It gives us great pleasure to present the innovative and varied work of BSA-sponsored field and research projects, the Fitch Laboratory, Knossos Research Centre, Archive, and Library as well as the inspiring work of the School students, post docs, and fellows.

Over 100 archaeological survey projects – of various kinds – have taken place in Greece over the last quarter century, making it one of the most intensively studied countries in Europe from the perspective of landscape archaeology, defined by various types of interest in settlement patterns and human–environmental interaction at spatial scales beyond the individual site. This article examines the practice of survey archaeology in Greece over the last 25 years, with a particular focus on projects that have taken place in the last 10 years. More broadly, it presents large-scale trends in surveys since their coalescence as a systematic form of archaeological research in the late 1950s, based on a dataset of 204 individual projects, mapped and classified according to type, spatial scale, methods, and chronology. Surveys in the twenty-first century exhibit considerable variety in methods and goals, with many characterized by smaller spatial scales, the integration of various types of remote sensing, and a focus on archaeological sites; we see fewer of the large-scale, diachronic regional surveys that became widespread in the later twentieth century. This variety – along with the increasing production and availability of high-quality, multi-modal data – should be applauded, though regional analysis remains a critical strength and important goal for landscape archaeologists in Greece. Lingering problems include publication lag, digital data availability and interoperability, and (occasional) over-emphasis on methodology as an end in and of itself, sometimes at the expense of historical and anthropological research questions. Promising developments for the future concern: (1) the investigation of landscapes that have received little attention from systematic surveys (highlands, mountains, forests, uninhabited islands), especially via remote sensing; (2) the publication, reanalysis, and interpretation of ‘legacy’ datasets; and (3) the integration of survey datasets across multiple scales to address ‘big-picture’ questions in the history and archaeology of Greece, as well as themes of wider significance.

Over the past decade, archaeobotanical research in Greece has undergone significant transformation, expanding both in scope and methodological sophistication since the publication of ‘Archaeobotany in Greece’ in the 2014 volume of Archaeological Reports. While earlier studies largely focused on agricultural practices in prehistoric northern Greece and Crete, recent research has broadened its thematic, chronological, and geographical horizons. Chronologically, research now spans from the Mesolithic and Bronze Age to historical periods, while geographically it increasingly incorporates underrepresented regions.

Methodologically, the field has embraced advanced analytical techniques including isotope analysis, geometric morphometry, experimental archaeobotany, ethnographic approaches, and extensive use of Scanning Electron Microscopy. These innovations have enabled more nuanced interpretations of plant use, subsistence strategies, and human–environment interactions. A landmark achievement has been the award of an ERC Consolidator Grant to Professor Soultana Maria Valamoti (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki), which has elevated Greek archaeobotany onto the European and international stage.

This paper provides a comprehensive overview of archaeobotanical research in Greece over the last decade, focusing exclusively on plant macro remains (excluding charcoal). It surveys recent studies across prehistoric and historical periods, methodological advancements, regional investigations, and the contribution of ERC-funded projects. By highlighting both achievements and persistent challenges, the paper underscores the growing importance of archaeobotanical research for understanding past societies and for contributing to contemporary discussions on agriculture, sustainability, and resilience.

Over the past decade, archaeological research in Roman-period Macedonia has seen significant advances, driven by the emergence of Roman archaeology as a distinct discipline focused on spatial organization, identity, and provincial dynamics within the Mediterranean context. Large-scale infrastructure projects, such as Thessaloniki’s Metro and the Trans Adriatic Pipeline, have provided unprecedented opportunities to investigate both urban and rural landscapes, revealing dense settlement patterns, economic networks, and cultural continuity from the Hellenistic to the Late Antiquity periods.

Urban excavations in key Macedonian sites such as Thessaloniki, Dion, Philippi, Edessa, and Amphipolis have refined our understanding of urban development, architectural sophistication, and resilience amid political and natural challenges. The Thessaloniki Metro project stands out for uncovering well-preserved urban grids, monumental public architecture, and diverse burial grounds, highlighting the city’s evolution and enduring cultural vitality. Similarly, discoveries of elite residences, public buildings, and monumental statues across Macedonia reveal the complexity and transformation of provincial urban centres. In parallel, public work-facilitated archaeological investigations have exposed a vibrant countryside marked by small cemeteries, artisanal workshops, agricultural estates, and infrastructure such as roads and bridges. These findings challenge traditional villa-centric models, emphasizing continuous rural habitation, intensified agricultural activity, and sophisticated land management strategies. Interdisciplinary approaches, including geoarchaeology and bioarchaeology, further illuminate the socio-economic networks and daily lives of rural communities. Despite challenges such as economic constraints and publication delays, recent archaeological efforts have fostered a holistic understanding of Macedonian antiquity, integrating technological innovation and collaborative methodologies. The cumulative research underscores the resilience and adaptability of both urban and rural populations, revealing a complex, interconnected landscape that reshaped our perceptions of ancient life in this key Roman province.

This introduction presents the structure and contents of the current issue of Archaeological Reports. It also offers an overview (not meant to be exhaustive) of archaeological activity in Greece over the past 12 months, focusing on major exhibitions and other cultural events as well as important recent publications.

Newsround offers a platform for new discoveries that do not appear within the specialist contributions of this year’s Archaeological Reports, but which nevertheless warrant emphasis, either as a result of their particular characteristics or for the contribution they make to broader archaeological narratives. This section is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather an overview of archaeological research in Greece. It comprises largely preliminary reports (results of excavations that took place up to and including June 2025, where possible) that complement the digital content made available through Archaeology in Greece Online (https://chronique.efa.gr). Due to the diachronic nature of a number of the sites, and for ease of reference, the material is organized geographically in the first instance and then chronologically (earliest to latest) within each section as far as possible.

The study of Byzantine sculpture in Greece made significant progress during the first quarter of the twenty-first century. The beginning of this period was marked by the first international conference on this subject, held in Athens in 2000, as well as by several monographs published by Greek scholars, which sparked renewed interest in the field. Greece is quite rich in sculptural material, much of which is still waiting to be studied and published.

This renewed research interest is mainly expressed in a series of publications of new material. Monographs, doctoral dissertations, and articles by Greek and foreign scholars have provided a large amount of new data covering various chronological periods and geographical areas of the country. The general trend in this activity is to offer well-documented groups and catalogues of sculptures, while there are fewer integrative works. What is missing from this production is interdisciplinary approaches and, in particular, laboratory analysis of the origin of marble and other stones used in sculpture.

Meanwhile, during the last quarter of the century, the Greek Ministry of Culture changed its attitude towards Byzantine sculpture. Two new museum collections dedicated to this art were inaugurated in Arta and Chalkida, while many works of sculpture were incorporated into new thematic Byzantine museums and archaeological museums throughout the country. In line with this policy, Byzantine sculptures are no longer neglected and overlooked in the gardens and storerooms of museums and archaeological sites, but play an important role in the narrative of permanent exhibitions.

Future challenges include documenting the hundreds of spolia scattered throughout the country, further studying unpublished material, interdisciplinary approaches, and further measures to protect sculptures that are still exposed outdoors and suffer from erosion and other dangers.

Caves have long been valued in archaeology for their exceptional preservation of stratified deposits and other finds (e.g. palaeontological), making them vital sites for chronological sequencing and interpretive analysis. While some cave sites exemplify the value of stratigraphic integrity, many cave contexts present methodological and epistemological challenges due to palimpsest layers, complex usage histories, and symbolic dimensions. This paper critically examines the multifaceted nature of caves with particular focus on southern Greece. It is based on some of the most recently available data, exploring their archaeological, cultural, and environmental significance from the Palaeolithic to medieval periods. Given the extensive number of cave sites in Greece, this paper argues that caves are case-specific sites characterized by the implementation of specific archaeological research and conservation strategies, and that they are critical loci for interpreting human–environment interaction and cultural expression across millennia.

This article offers a critical synthesis of recent archaeological research on Byzantine Thrace (seventh–fourteenth centuries), emphasizing work undertaken in Bulgaria, Greece, and Türkiye over the past decade. Drawing on systematic excavations, regional surveys, and interdisciplinary projects, we highlight how new discoveries and re-examinations of legacy data have significantly reshaped our understanding of the landscape, settlements, and modes of connectivity in this strategically vital region. Key themes include long-term human–environment interactions, settlement hierarchies, and the interplay between urban and rural landscapes.

Case studies of fortified centres such as Skopelos, Philippopolis, and Karasura reveal Thrace’s integration into imperial defence and trade networks, while investigations of port landscapes at Firuzköy, Ainos, and sites along the Black Sea coast underscore the centrality of waterways in structuring economic and social life. Research on monastic landscapes, from Mount Papikion to the Kosmosoteira monastery at Bera, demonstrates how religious communities functioned as hubs of economic production and aristocratic patronage. Parallel studies of rural and rupestrian sites highlight the dynamism of the countryside, challenging urban-centric models and foregrounding the adaptability of local populations to political and environmental change.

Beyond individual sites, these findings reframe Thrace not as a peripheral hinterland but as a mosaic of interconnected microregions, each shaped by distinct ecological, cultural, and geopolitical conditions. They reveal both resilience and innovation in the face of shifting imperial borders, foreign incursions, and long-term environmental transformation. Yet the study also underscores the need for greater cross-border collaboration, as modern political boundaries continue to fragment the region’s archaeological record. By integrating diverse datasets and advocating for a transnational approach, this review situates Byzantine Thrace within broader Mediterranean discourse and highlights its potential to illuminate processes of connectivity, resilience, and change across the Byzantine world.