:
I
u 9 V0
: - :- :: :; : ;
EE
J A N U A R Y-M A R C H 2
0 0 3
-
I
THE
JOURNAL OF
THE
OF
C L A S S I C St L
S T ;t
00-
AMERICAN U D - '
.
I E S
AT VOLUME
SCHOOL AT 72:
H
E N
NUMBER
AmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthens 2003
S I
TheAmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthensis a research and teachinginstitutiondedicated to advanced studyof thearchaeology, art,history,philosophy, language, andliterature of Greeceandthe Greekworld.Established in 1881bya consortium of nineAmerican universities, the Schoolnowservesgraduate studentsandscholars frommorethan150affiliated collegesanduniversities, actingasa baseforresearch andstudyin Greece.The mainbuildingsof the Schoolandits libraryarelocatedin Athens,withadministrative and publications officesin Princeton, NewJersey.As partof its mission, the Schooldirectsongoingexcavations in theAthenianAgoraandat CorinthandsponsorsallotherAmerican-led excavations andsurveys on Greeksoil. It is theofficiallinkbetweenAmericanarchaeologists andclassicists andtheArchaeological Serviceof theGreekMinistry of Cultureand,assuch,is dedicated to thewisemanagement of cultural resources andto thedissemination of knowledge of the classical world.Inquiries aboutmembership in the Schoolorparticipationin the SummerSessionsshouldbe sentto theAmerican Schoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthens,6-8 CharltonStreet, Princeton, NewJersey08540-5232. Hesperiais published quarterly bytheAmericanSchoolof Classical
StudiesatAthens.Foundedin 1932anddevotedprimarily to the timelypublication of reportson School-sponsored andSchooldirectedprojects, Hesperiawelcomessubmissions fromallscholars workingin thefieldsof Greekarchaeology, art,epigraphy, history, materials science,ethnography, andliterature, fromearliestprehistoric timesonward. Hesperiais a refereed journal.
VOLUME 72: NUMBER
I
2003
JANUARY-MARCH
I-
I
SCHOOL OFTHEAMERICAN THEJOURNAL STUDIESATATHENS OFCLASSICAL
PUB LI CATI O N S STAFF
ANNASTROULIA Cave:A CloseLook StoneCeltsfromFranchthi Ground
1
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Cox
Kerri EDITOR,
Hesperia Cullen
Tracey EDITOR,
MONOGRAPHS
MANUSCRIPT Carol
31
Fitzgerald
Michael PRODUCTION Sarah
ROBERTL. POUNDERANDNORADIMITROVA Leagueto the GreatGods bytheThessalian Dedication inSamothrace
MANAGER George
Figueira
EDITOR
A. Stein
JACKL. DAVIS,AFRIMHOTI, IRIS POJANI, SHARONR. STOCKER,AAROND. WOLPERT, PHOEBEE. ACHESON,ANDJOHNW. HAYES Archaeological Project: TheDurresRegionalArchaeological in Albania of Epidamnus/Dyrrachium Surveyin theTerritory
PUBLICATIONS COMMITTEE ThomasG. Palaima(Chairman) Universityof Texasat Austin DariceBirge LoyolaUniversityof Chicago JeremyMcInerney Universityof Pennsylvania Miller Margaret Universityof Toronto JeniferNeils CaseWesternReserveUniversity KathleenW. Slane Universityof Missouri-Columbia RhysF.Townsend(ex ofXicio) ClarkUniversity
41
Copyright(C)2003 Submissions:Manuscriptsand communicationsshould be addressedto Dr.TraceyCullen,Editor,Hesperia,AmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesat The AmericanSchoolof NewJersey08540;tel.609-683-0800; ClassicalStudiesat Athens Athens,6-8CharltonStreet,Princeton, andphotoManuscripts fax609-924-0578;
[email protected]. mustbe submittedin triplicate;originalartworkand Producedat EdwardsBrothers, copiesof illustrations aremadewiththe Inc.,AnnArbor,Michigan. photographs shouldnot be sentunlesspriorarrangements ofthe articleshould Designby EllenMcKie. summarizing themajorconclusions editor.A shortabstract reviewprocessand alsobe included.Articlesaresubmittedto a double-blind Mapof Albania accordingly, withouttheir Coverillustration: authorsarerequestedto preparetheirmanuscripts notes, showingprincipalcentersof Greek preparation, The stylefor manuscript nameor affiliationappearing. canbefoundin theGuide- culture.CourtesyDurresRegional on submissions bibliography, andotherinformation Project,drawing Archaeological orbywritingto linesforAuthorson the School'sWebsite(www.ascsa.edu.gr) at the aboveaddress. ASCSAPublications R.J. Robertson TheAmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthenswillnotknowinglyprint the announcement orinitialscholin Hesperiaoranyof its otherpublications December 30,1970, byanymeans after arlypresentation of anyobjectacquired otherthanthroughan officiallysanctionedexcavationor survey,unlessthe existingcollectionorwaslegallyexportedfrom objectwaspartof a previously the countryof origin. price The annualsubscription Subscriptions: Hesperiais publishedquarterly. $110forinstitutions($120, inter($70, international), is $60 forindividuals national),and $35 for students(proofof studentstatusrequired).Payment mustbe in U.S.dollars,drawnon a U.S.bankorby moneyorder,andsentto Services,P.O.Box 529, Canton,MA 02021-0529; tel. Hesperia,Subscriber (U.S.) 800-821-7823; (outsideU.S.)781-828-8450; fax781-828-8915; e-mail of Singleissues(currentandbacknumberswhenavailable)
[email protected]. for $15 eachpluspostagefromthe DavidBrownBook Hesperiaareavailable Company,P.O.Box 511, Oakville,CT 06779; tel. 800-791-9354,860-9459329; fax 860-945-9468; or (outsideNorth America)OxbowBooks,Park End Place,OxfordOX1 1HN, U.K.;tel. +44 (0) 1865-241249; fax +44 (0) 13-17 and19-32 arealsoavailable 1865-794449. IndexII andSupplements fromDavidBrownBooks.Reprintsof IndexI, Supplements1-12 and 18, b.v., andearlyissuesof Hesperiashouldbe orderedfromSwetsandZeitlinger,
[email protected]. P.O.Box 810,2160 SZ Lisse,Netherlands;
postagepaidat Periodicals Princeton,NewJersey,andat additionalmailingoffices. Sendaddresschanges Postmaster: to Hesperia,P.O.Box529, Canton, MA 02021-0529,U.S.A. ISSN 0018-098X
HESPERIA
72 (2003)
G
Pages I-30
ROUN F ROM
D
STON
F RANCHTH
E
CE
LTS I
CAVE
A CLOSELOOK
ABSTRACT Thisarticlepresents in detailtheeighty-nine groundstoneceltsdiscovered inNeolithic levelsatFranchthi Cave.Theceltswerefashioned primarily from localmaterials, usingthetechniques of peckingandgrinding. No evidence forcraftspecialization in theirmanufacture hasbeendetected. Onlya small numberof thesetoolsarelargeor sturdyenoughto havebeenusedto Cut downtrees.Someoftheceltscouldhavebeenemployed inlightertasks(e.g., clearing shrubbery, working woodorbone),whileothersmighthaveserved ln a rltuacontext. *
.
The siteof Franchthi Caveis locatedon thecoastof thesouthern Argive peninsula in the northeastern Peloponnese, Greece(Figs.1-2).1Excavationsconducted from1967through1976underthedirectionofThomas W. Jacobsenrevealeda long sequenceof humanoccupationfromthe UpperPalaeolithic throughthe endof the Neolithicperiod(ca.25,0003000B.C.). Evidenceforhumanactivitycamefromtwointegralbutdistinctareas:the cave,a karsticformation150 m long;andthe so-called Paralia, a 15-m-widezoneextending alongthemodernshoreline(Fig.3). DuringtheNeolithic,Paralia waspartof anopensettlement thatis now 1.The studyof the groundstone celtsfromFranchthiCaveis partof a largerresearch projectthatcomprises allthe groundstonetoolsfoundat the site.The materialis storedin the NauplionArchaeological Museum, whereI examinedit in the summers of 1997,1998,and2000.My study wasmadepossibleby a Schrader Postdoctoral Fellowship, a Schrader SummerGrant,anda grantfromthe NationalEndowmentforthe Humanities (awarded to ThomasW.Jacobsen). Preparation of the illustrations was fundedby a Schrader SummerGrant
andthe InstituteforAegeanPrehistory. it withtheirusefulsuggestions, as did The finalresultsof mystudywillbe a thirdanonymous refereeandthe publishedas fascicle17 in theExcavaeditorof Hesperia.Unlessotherwise tionsat FranchthiCave)Greeceseries. noted,allphotographs arecourtesyof I wouldliketo thankThomasW. IndianaUniversity Archives,BloomJacobsenandKarenD. Vitellifor ington.All drawingsarebyAylaAkin. entrustingthe publication of the I amgratefulto Akinfordoingthe Franchthi groundstonetoolsto me. drawings, andto Strezewski forhelping I amalsogratefulto Vitelli,Michael withthe photography andthe editing. Strezewski, AylaAkin,andespecially The followingabbreviations are CatherinePerlesandMihalisFotiadis usedforthephasesof the Neolithic forreadingandcommenting upon period:EN (EarlyNeolithic),MN earlierversionsof thispaper.Curtis (MiddleNeolithic),LN (Late RunnelsandThomasStrasser, as Neolithic),FN (FinalNeolithic). Hesperiareferees, helpedme improve
2
ANNA
STROULIA
Figure1. View of FranchthiCave.
largelyunderwater.Theevidencesuggeststhatin thecourseof theUpper Palaeolithic andMesolithic periods various groupsofhunter-gatherers used thecaveasa basecamporasa habitation siteatleaston a seasonal basis. Theintroduction of domesticated plantandanimalspecies(wheat,barley, sheep,goats)andthe appearance of potterymarkthe beginningof the Neolithic,ca.6000B.C. Thesechangescoincidewiththeestablishment of thesettlement onParalia. Thepresence of stonestructures in thatareahas beeninterpreted asa signof a moresedentary wayof lifeandyear-round occupation thatcontinuedatleastuntiltheendof theMiddleNeolithic, ca.4500s.c.2 The excavations produceda plethoraof culturalandenvironmental remains (e.g.,pottery, tools,figurines, ornaments, humanskeletalremains, faunalandbotanical material) thatshedlightonthevariousaspectsof life anddeathof thepeoplewhousedFranchthi at different periods.In this articleI providea detailedanalysis of thegroundstoneceltsin anattempt to unravelandexplaintherangeof choicesmadebythepeoplewhoproduced,used,anddiscarded them.A thorough presentation of thematerial is necessary to helpfill the considerable gapin the literature regarding prehistoric Aegeangroundstoneceltsandgroundstonetoolsin general. Celtsaretoolsusedto cut,chop,scrape,incise,ordigworkedmaterialssuchaswood,bone,skin,meat,orsoil.Thediagnostic traitof aground stoneceltis anacutegroundedgelocatedon oneof thetwoends.Always aresultof manufacture, thisedgerepresents a conscious choiceof theproducersof thesetools.Duringuse,a celtactsthrough(director indirect) percussion orpressure of theworkingedgeon theworkedmaterial. The celtcanhaveaperpendicular orobliqueorientation inrelation totheworked material, whereas itsworkingedgecanmovelongitudinally ortransversely throughit.Mostof theceltsfromFranchthi represent onlythestoneportionsof originalcompositetoolsthatalsoincludedhaftingdevicesmade of (primarily) woodenshafts,aswellasperhaps somebindingoradhesive 2. SeeFranchthi1-10, 12;Jacobsen 1976,1981. material.
CELTS FROM FRANCHTHI CAVE
Figure2. Franchthi Cavein the southern Argolid.AfterFranchthi 1, p. 3, fig. 1. CourtesyIndianaUniversity Press.
Figure3. Planof Franchthi Caveand Paraliashowingexcavated trenches. AfterFranchthi 7, p. 8, fig.5. Courtesy IndianaUniversity Press.
3
4
ANNA
STROULIA
THE SAMPLE Theassemblage of celtsfromFranchthi consistsof eighty-nine items:seventy-ninecompleteandfragmentary toolsthatexhibitanacuteedge,and ten toolswithoutan acuteedge(Table1).The lattertoolsfallinto two groups:thosethatwereleft in a roughed-out form,the shapingof their edgehavingnevertakenplace;andthosewhoseedgewasobliterated at somepointin theiruselifewhentheywererecycledto servesomefunctionnotusuallyassociated withcelts.Inaddition to theseeighty-nine celts, the excavations uncovered fourteenfragments whoserawmaterialand overallshapepointto the likelihoodthattheyoncewerepartsof celts.3 Finally,fourserpentinite specimens havebeenfoundthatmayrepresent earlystagesof themanufacturing process: onecompleteunworked cobble, which,as suggested by Catherine Perles,4 mighthavebeencollectedas a celtblankbypeopleatFranchthi; andthreecobblefragments thatdisplay evidenceof pecking,andperhapsconstitute theremainsof accidents that occurred duringceltmanufacture. Fifty-nineof thecelts(66%)areconsidered complete,sincetheyare eitherintactor missinga parttoo smallto significantly affectthereconstruction oftheiroriginalshapeanddimensions.Twenty-eight celts(31%) arefragmentary. The percentage of celtsrepresented byfragments is low compared to thatforotherFranchthi groundstoneartifacts, suchasmillstones.5 This difference canat leastto somedegreebe attributed to the small,closed,convex,andthuslessvulnerable celtforms.The remaining two itemslistedin Table1 (1 and4) areceltpreforms andthusneither completenorfragmentary. Celtswerefoundin varioustrenches, bothin thecaveandon Paralia. Sixty-two(70%)wererecovered frominsidethecave,twenty-seven (30%) on Paralia(Table1).Thesepercentages areroughlyproportionate to the volumeof sedimentremoved fromNeolithiclevelsin eacharea(76%from thecave,24%fromtheParalia).6 TheParalia deposits,however, produced a somewhathigherpercentage of fragmentary celts:44%of the celtsrecoveredtherearefragmentary compared to 25%of thosefoundinsidethe cave.If notaccidental, therelatively highpercentage of fragmentary celts excavated on Paraliamightindicatea possiblepreference fordiscarding brokenceltsin this partof the site.Giventhe natureof occupation on Paraliaduringcertainphasesof the Neolithic,however, it is equallypossiblethatsomefragmentary celtsmighthavebeendepositedthereas fill (e.g.,floorings) orassecondary discard.7 No celtswerefoundin pre-Neolithic depositsandthereis no indication thatthe pre-Neolithic peopleof Franchthi producedor usedsuch tools.All theceltswerefoundin undisturbed ormixedNeolithicdeposits. Association withdatedceramics8 allowedtheassignment to specificNeolithicphasesof onlythirty-seven of thecelts(42%).Twenty-two of these datesarerelatively certain,the remaining fifteenprobable.9 The chronologicaldistribution ofthethirty-seven datedceltsshowsahighconcentrationin MN deposits(seeTable1).Thisconcentration cannotbe consideredtheresultof excavation biases,10 andmayreflecta moreintensiveuse (andsubsequent discard) of celtsduringthisparticular period.
3. All references to celtsbelow, however,areto the eighty-ninetools only.Thesetoolsareorganizedin Table1 according to preservation, with completeceltsfollowedby fragmentary examples. 4. Pers.comm.,July1997. 5. Morethan75%of the Franchthi millstonesarefragmentary (Franchthi 17, in prep.). 6. Franchthi12,pp.28-29;William R. Farrand, pers.comm.,January 1998. 7. E.g.,duringthe EN phase.See Franchthi8, pp.45-47. 8. SeeFranchthi8, pp.37-87; Franchthi10,pp.7-21. 9. InTable1 the probabledatesare glvenln parentzeses. 10.Accordingto Perles(Franchthi 15,in press),the largestvolumeof excavated Neolithicsedimentsderives fromEN levels,withsedimentsof MN datefollowingcloselybehind. .
.
CELTS FROM FRANCHTHI CAVE
s
of thedatedceltsin thetwoportionsof the A lookatthedistribution yieldedsixteenof thesecelts,disParalia patterns. siterevealsinteresting evenlyamongtheEN,MN, andFN periods.llIf thisdistribution tributed of celtson it suggeststhatthereis noMN concentration is representative, cave come the inside from recovered celts dated twenty-one The Paralia. comingfromMN.The fromMN, LN, andFN levels,withthemajority largenumberof MN celtsfoundwithinthecavemaysuggestthatduring this periodthe activitiesinvolvingceltstendedto takeplaceinsidethe fromthecavepredates cave.Thefact,ontheotherhand,thatnospecimen the MN period(Table1) is a possibleindicationthatpriorto thistime of Thisdistribution tookplaceoutsidethecaveon Paralia. theseactivities of the datedmillthe distribution the datedceltsby andlargeparallels thatthe theimpression reinforces Thissimilarity stonesfromFranchthi.l2 of the behavior represent ratherthanbeingaccidental, twodistributions, the tools. discarded and used, thepeoplewhoproduced, meaninganychronologically to distinguish It hasprovenimpossible This groupswithinthe celtassemblage. or functional ful morphological conservato the or dates available of number the limited mightbe dueto is itself.If thelatteris true,thenthisassemblage tivenatureof thematerial which,as not differentfromotherAegeanNeolithiccelt assemblages, pointedout by Perles,showlittle significantvariationthroughtime.l3 are allitemsin theceltassemblage Whateverthecase,in thispresentation two nevertheless, of theirdate.I distinguish, treatedtogetherregardless (length, ofthethreebasicdimensions analysis groupsonthebasisofacluster ingroup first The celts. complete of thefifty-nine width,andthickness) cludesthirty-ninesmallspecimens(length< 4.6 cm),whilethe second (length>4.6 cm).I willreferbelowto twentylargerspecimens comprises themembersof thefirstgroupas"smallcelts"andto thoseof thesecond celts,"butthereis noevidencethatthissimpledistinction groupas"larger to anyemicclassifications. corresponds RAW MATERIAL AND MANUFACTURE 11.No traceof LN activityhasbeen 10,p. 18). foundon Paralia(Franchthi 17. 12.Franchthi 13.Perles1992,p. 141;2001, see p.236. Forspecificassemblages, andGnardellis Moundrea-Agrafioti 1994,p. 197;Perles1981,p. 199; Warren1968,p.239, n. 1. 14.As recordedin the Franchthi Caveinventorynotebooks. forserpentinite 15.The preference Serpentiis notlimitedto Franchthi. nite(andgreenstonein general)has beenwidelyusedforthe manufacture of AegeanNeolithiccelts(seeMoun1996,p. 104;Perles drea-Agrafioti 2001,p.232).
analyAccordingto severalgeologistswho haveconductedmacroscopic usedin the manuis by farthe dominantrawmaterial ses,l4serpentinite It (sixty-sixcases,or 74%of the sample).l5 factureof celtsat Franchthi diaand basalt, Peridotite, gray. and of green tones of a variety in appears each,whilesteatiteis reprebyfourorfivespecimens basearerepresented felsite (andesite, A varietyof otherrawmaterials sentedbytwospecimens. arerepreandsandstone) limestone, diorite,magnetite, argillite, porphyry, sentedbyonespecimeneach(Table1).Apartfromthe medium-grained Theygenerally peridotiteof 1 and2, allthe stonesusedarefine-grained. scale,althoughthreeexno morethan4 on theMohshardness measure of thediabaseusedin 3 is 7, whilethatof the ceptionsexist:thehardness of 2 is 5.The softnessof therawmaterial andesiteof 4 andtheperidotite in easyto shapebutquitevulnerable suggeststhattheceltswererelatively It should orpercussion. thecontextof anyusethatinvolvedhighpressure tougher, be noted,though,thatmostof theotherstonesusedaregenerally
ANNA
6
STROULIA
TABLE 1. CELTS FROM FRANCHTHI CAVE Cat.Nro.Ins. Nro. Pros.
Pres.
Material
FS 227 FS 185 FS589 FS 755 FS 116 FS 117 FS 118 FS 1 FS33 FS 600 FS 212 FS 23 FS201 FS 11 FS 289 FS363 FS21 FS 826 FS 153 FS 159 FS 837 FS 893 FS 884 FS226 FS37 FS 902 FS 221 FS52 FS 899 FS 44 FS 680 FS 157 FS 779 FS398 FS 505 FS 883 FS278 FS24 FS 222 FS 12 FS 207 FS 219 FS 428 FS 22 FS 229
c c c c
peridotite diabase steatite diabase
c
serpentlnlte
c c c
serpentinite serpentinite diabase
c
serpentlnlte
c
serpentinite
c
serpentlnlte
2
3 5 6 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 51
C C P P C C C C C P C C C C C P C C C C C P P C C P C C P C P C P C C P C C C C C C C C C
.
.
.
.
Date
FN EN (MN)
(MN) FN
.
.
c
serpentlnlte
c
serpentinite
c
serpentlnlte
c
serpentlnlte
c
serpentinite
c
serpentlnite
c
serpentlnlte
c c
serpentinite serpentinite
c
serpentlnlte
c
serpentlnlte
c
basalt
c
serpentlnlte
c c c
argillite steatite MN felsiteporphyry FN
c
serpentlnlte
c
serpentinite
c
serpentlnite
c
serpentlnlte
c
serpentinite
c
serpentlnlte
c
serpentlnlte
c c
serpentinite serpentinite
c
serpentlnlte
c
diabase
c
serpentlnlte
c c
serpentinite serpentinite
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
(FN) .
(MN)
.
.
.
.
.
.
EN/MN EN/MN
.
.
MN
.
.
.
.
serpentlnlte
basalt serpentinite serpentlnlte
(MN) MN
.
c
c
(MN) MN (MN)
.
c c
.
6.9 5.5 4.6 4.4 9.6 7.6 5.9 6.9 6.5 7.0 6.2 6.1 2.5 2.2 3.2 2.4 5.8 6.1 4.5 7.1
.
(MN)
W
Th
L/W
W/Th
4.0
2.8
3.5
2.3
1.72 1.57 2.09 1.22 2.13 1.58 1.55 1.64 1.58 1.66 1.55 1.52 2.50 2.00 1.18
1.42 1.52 2.00 1.56 1.66 1.92 2.11 1.50 1.36 1.44 1.29 2.00 1.42 1.57 2.45 2.44 1.81 2.15 1.54 1.45 1.88 2.05 2.75 1.56 2.22 2.41 2.45 1.78 1.78 2.88 1.87 1.66 2.07
2.2
1.1
3.6 4.5
2.3
4.8
2.5
2.7
3.8
1.8
4.2
2.8
4.1
3.0
4.2 4.0
2.9 3.1
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.7
1.1
0.7
2.7
1.1
2.2
0.9
1.09
4.0
2.2
4.3
2.0
3.7 4.5
2.4
9.1
4.9
4.0 3.3 7.4 4.0 3.1 3.2 4.6 3.9 2.0 2.4 2.2 4.0 2.6
3.7
2.6 1.8
1.45 1.41 1.21 1.57 1.85 1.08 3.00 1.57 2.00 1.06 1.18 1.35 1.14 0.76 1.60 1.46 1.37 1.13 1.30 2.70 1.47 1.29 1.53 1.26 1.20 1.78 1.31 1.12 1.71
.
.
.
L
3.9 2.7 3.4 3.1 4.3 3.8 2.9 4.1 4.2 2.8 8.4
3.1
1.1
0.4
4.7
3.0
2.0
0.9
2.9
1.2
2.7
1.1
3.4
1.9
3.4
1.9
2.6 1.5
0.9
1.5
0.9
2.9
1.4
2.3
1.2
3.0
1.5
1.0
0.6 1.4
2.3
0.8
2.4
1.3
2.8
0.9
3.0
1.2
2.4
1.1
2.3 3.2
1.2 1.3
2.5 4.9
3.7
1.0
1.91
2.00 1.66 1.64 1.84 3.11 2.50 2.18 1.91
2.56 2.50 1.32
CELTS FROM FRANCHTHI CAVE
7
TABLE 1-Continued Cat.No. Inv.No. 57 59 67 68 71 72 73 79 81 83 84 85 86 89 31 48 49 50 52 53 54 55 56 58 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 69 70 74 75 76 77 78 80 82 87 88 1
4
Prov.
FS210 FS 374 FS 142 FS 149 FS239 FS32 FS34 FS 693 FS726 FS 885 FS90 FS93 FS94 Q5S:91/19 FS 751 FS 767 FS 789 FS 178 FS98 FS 430 FS 112 FS 160 FS 6 FS38 FS 737 FS 715 FS 838 FS577 FAWB:28 FAN:129 FF1:29 FS 180 S57 FS385 FS 425 FS 436 FS 617 FS 666 FS 714 FS 772 H:17(A) 05:84 FS311 FS36
C C C C C C C P P P C C C P P P P C C P C C C C P P C P C C C C C C C P P C P P C P C C
Pres.
Material .
.
c
serpentnlte
c c
serpentinite basalt
c
serpentnlte
c c
serpentinite diabase
c
serpentlnlte
c
c .lorlte
c c
serpentinite basalt
c
serpentnlte
c c c f f
serpentinite serpenumte magneate basalt serpenanlte
.
.
.
Date
.
.
MN MN
FN
.
.
(MN) FN
.
.
.
.
EN/MN
.
r
t
serpentnlte
f
serpentinite
(MN)
t
serpentlnlte
f f
peridotite serpentinite
(MN) EN
L 5.3 7.1 2.8 3.0 2.2 4.5 7.3 6.6 2.2 4.1 2.9 3.0 3.5 2.8 5.1 1.8 2.0 2.2
r
3.5 7.2 7.1
r
t
(MN)
serpentnlte
r
t
serpentnlte
f f f f
serpentinite sandstone serpenanlte serpentinite
t
serpentnlte
.
(MN) FN
.
.
.
r
t
serpentnlte
f
serpentinite
t
serpentnlte
.
.
r
MN
t
serpentnlte
f
serpentinite
r
t
serpentmlte
r
t
serpentlnlte
f f f f
serpentinite peridotite limestone serpentinite
t
serpentnlte
.
MN
LN MN (EN)
.
r
t
f n/a n/a
serpentnlte
serpentinite peridotite andesite
(EN) FN
4.5 3.3 6.4 6.3 6.2 6.3 1.6 3.2 1.2 3.5 4.3 3.9 4.2 4.0 3.6 1.3 3.3 3.1 1.2 6.3 1.7 7.0 7.4
W
Th
L/W
W/Th
1.30 1.65 1.64
2.22 1.43 2.12 2.45 2.20 2.05 1.31 1.60 1.14 1.37 1.45 2.33 1.85 3.20 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
4.0
1.8
4.3
3.0
1.7
0.8
2.7
1.1
1.11
1.1
0.5
3.7
1.8
4.2
3.2
3.7
2.3
0.8
0.7
1.1
0.8
2.00 1.21 1.73 1.78 2.75 3.70
2.9
2.0
1.00
2.8
1.2
1.3
0.7
1.07 2.69 0.87 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
3.2 3.7 2.5 1.4 1.8
1.0
2.5 1.3 9.0
1.7
6.0 4.8
3.3
4.2 4.7
3.2
4.3
2.3
5.7
2.2
5.2
0.6
3.3 2.1
5.2
1.5
5.0
2.0
1.4
0.8
1.5
0.4
0.4
0.2
3.3
0.7
0.8
0.6
3.2
1.8
2.0 3.5
0.8
1.0
1.3
0.5
0.7
0.3
2.5
0.6
3.8
0.8
1.1
0.6
3.9 1.2
2.2
4.5
3.2
4.1
2.5
0.4
All measurements arein centimeters. Abbreviations: Prov.= provenience, Pres.= preservation, L = length,W = width, Th = thickness,LMI = length/widthratio,W/Th = widthXthickness ratio,C-= cave,P = Paraliac = complete,f = fragmentary. Datesin parentheses aretentative.
8
A N N A ST ROU LI A
andthuslessbrittle,thanserpentinite. The thirteencompletetoolsmade of materialotherthanserpentinite represent bothsmallandlargercelts; no particular concentration is detectable in eithergroup. The mainrocksusedin the manufacture of celts(serpentinite, diabase,basalt, peridotite) arefoundintheophiolitecomplex oftheFranchthiErmioniregionaswellasin volcanicbodiesin theDiscouriahills,southwestof Ermioni,andat Vourlia, northwest of theFranchthi embayment. Theserocks,however, areeverywhere deeplyweathered andthe acquisitionof largepiecesof freshmaterial fromoutcropsmusthavebeenvery difficult.Streampebblesor cobblesconcentrated in the floatby natural processes area morelikelysource.l6 Suchpebblesandcobblescouldalso havebeenobtained atthebeachlocatednearthesiteduringtheNeolithic.l7 Thehypothesis thatwaterworn pebblesandcobbleswereusedasraw material forthemanufacture of celtsis reinforced bythemainlycurvilinearappearance ofthetools.Theproblem withthishypothesis, asvanAndel andVitaliano havepointedout,is thatsoundpebblesandcobblesarenow rareinthestreambeds around Franchthi.l8The ancientbeach,ontheother hand,is todayunderwaterandthusdifficultto explore.One canargue, however, followingPerles,thatpebblesorcobblessuitableforthe manufactureof celtsmighthavebeenmoreabundant in thepast,havingbeen subsequently depleted byhumanexploitation.l9 Thisideaseemsto besupportedby the findingsof the ArgolidExploration Project(AEP).The projectcovereda muchlargerareathanthatcoveredby the Franchthi geologicalsurveyandlocatedin thebedsof seasonalstreamscobblesthat appearmacroscopically to be of thesamerawmaterial asthatusedforthe Franchthi celts.20 If suchstreamcobblesoccurtodayin thewiderregion, theirscarcity in the areaof Franchthi mightverywellbe the outcomeof intensiveexploitation bydifferent groupsovera fewmillennia. Moreover, thecobbleslocatedbyAEPweresmall,matchingthegenerally smalldimensionsof theceltsfromFranchthi. If theinhabitants of Franchthi collectedrawmaterials locally,it is reasonable to assumethatthesematerials wereadequate forthepurposes forwhichthetoolswereintended. Therearetwocelts,however, forwhichtheuseof nonlocalrawmaterialseemslikely.The firstis 4, a tool madeof nonporphyritic andesite. Thismaterial, usedalsoto maketwomillstones atFranchthi, is notfound in theFranchthi areaand,asarguedbyRunnels, musthavebeenimported fromsourcesoutsidetheregion,probably in the SaronicGulf.2lInterestinglyenough,4 lacksa workingedge,havingbeenleft in a roughed-out state.If therawmaterial of 4 indeedhasanexogenous origin,it is possible thattheearlystagesof shaping(consisting of peckingandsomegrinding) tookplaceat the sourceareaawayfromthe site.The resultingpreform 16. SeevanAndelandVitaliano mighthavebeentakento the siteforthe restof the manufacturing pro- 1987,p.20;Vitaliano1987,pp.13-14. cess,whichforsomereasonneveroccurred. It is significant that,asmen17.Vitalianon.d.,p. ll. 18. SeevanAndelandVitaliano tionedearlier, theandesiteof 4 is harder(Mohsscale,5) andtougherthan the rawmaterialusedfor the majorityof celts.Theseareprobably the 1987,p.20. 19. Perles,citedin vanAndeland qualitiesthatcreatedtheincentives forimporting andesiteto thesite. Vitaliano1987,p.20. The secondexampleof a celtof nonlocalrawmaterialis 5 (Fig.6, 20. Kardulias andRunnels1995, below),whosematerial is macroscopically similarto thatusedforthelarge p. 111. 21. Runnels1981,p.104. numberof LN andFN opaquewhitebeadsdiscovered atFranchthi. The
CELTS FROM FRANCHTHI
22. Miller1998. 23. Miller1998. supportof 24. Forethnographic see,forexample,the thishypothesis, accountof stoneceltmanufacture amongthe HetaIndiansof southern Brazil(Kozak1972,p. 18). 25.Thesetwo techniqueshavebeen of commonlyusedin the manufacture AegeanNeolithiccelts(MoundreaAgrafioti1996,p. 104;Perles2001, p. 233). 26. Celtsat Franchthiarenot atypicalof AegeanNeolithicceltassemblagesin thisaspecteither;flakedcelts haverarelybeendetectedin Aegean Neolithicsamples(Perles2001,p. 233).
CAVE
9
to usedforthesebeads(andI assumealsofor5) is,according rawmaterial Oneof thereasonsthetechnique MicheleMiller,steatitethatwasfired.22 thesteatite's wasto increase sheargues, offiringmighthavebeenemployed, Millerbelievesthatthe firedsteatitebeadswereimportedto hardness. It is likelythat5 wasimported distance.23 froma considerable Franchthi plan. givenits FN dateanduniqueangular to thesitetoo,especially fromwaterworn thatmostceltsweremanufactured evidence Additional pebblesor cobblescomesfromexamplesretainingroundedwaterworn area(e.g.,6).The cortexwasretainedasthisarea cortexin theirproximal with the intendedshapeof the tool. not interfering wasleft untreated, insidethe caveuncovered as mentionedearlier,excavation Furthermore, cobble,whichmighthave serpentinite water-rolled one smallunworked if intoa celt.Finally, beencollectedandbroughtto thesitetobeconverted cobbleswithtracesof peckingindeed of serpentinite thethreefragments duringthe celtmanufacturthatoccurred remainsof accidents represent ing process,theymayalsoconstituteevidenceforthe use of waterworn cobblesasceltblanks. ofparticularpebbles theselection musthaveinformed concerns Several orcobblesasceltblanks,themostcrucialofwhichwasto findstoneswith Probably fortheintendedfinishedproducts. adequate physicalproperties closeto anotherconcernwasto use stoneswith shapesanddimensions thoseof thedesiredtools a rationalchoicethatcouldsavetimeandenIt is alsolikelythatsomeeffortwasputinto ergyduringmanufacture.24 wouldacquirea glossyappearfindingblanksthatduringmanufacture celtsreof the Franchthi appearance in the ance.The lackof uniformity butalsotheuniqueness variation, flectsnotonlyawiderangeoffunctional it suggeststhatthe toolswere of eachpebbleor cobbleused.Moreover, andthatstrictnormsasto howtheceltsshould byspecialists notproduced lookdidnotexist. intotools(orat leasttheir The pebblesor cobblesweretransformed pecking techniques: bytheuseof twomanufacturing stonecomponents) of evidence shows 4), no celt of 7 (Fig. Withtheexception andgrinding.25 flaking.Celt7, thelongesttoolin thegroup,hasa flakescarononefacein forthecretheareaof theworkingedge.Lightflakingis alsoresponsible partof the tool,a uniquetraitin ationof a kindof waistin theproximal mightbe signsof an this collection.Thesedeviationsfromthe "norm" exogenousorigin,although,it mustbe stressed,the rawmaterialof this asmostother andhardness withthesameappearance toolis serpentinite was a technique flaking possible that it is celts.Theoretically, Franchthi andthatflakescars of celtsatFranchthi in themanufacture usedregularly of thesurfaceof thesetools. treatment bythesubsequent wereobliterated giventhatthe rawmaterial however, unlikely, I considerthishypothesis its softnessmakes useddoesnot lenditselfeasilyto flaking.Moreover, flakingunnecessary.26 The initialshapingof celtsthusinvolvedpecking,forwhichhamthatpeckingwasnot however, musthavebeenused.It appears, merstones forpeckingonmostsmallcelts, lackofevidence universally.The employed grinding,most by subsequent ratherthanbeingthe resultof obliteration likelyreflectstheomissionof a peckingstage.Sucha choicecanbe easily
IO
ANNA
STROULIA
explained: grindingalonewouldhavebeensufficientto givethe desired size andshapeto the small,softpebblesusedfor smallcelts.Moreover, peckingsmallpebblesmusthavebeeninconvenient, sincetheywouldhave beenhardto holdandstrikewithhammerstones largerthanthemselves. Unlikethesmallcelts,mostof thelargerceltswerepeckedintoshape, a technique to beexpected giventhatgrindingalonewouldhavebeenvery time-consuming in shapinga largerpebbleora cobble.A combination of peckingandgrindingwouldhaveoffereda labor-saving advantage. The extentof theevideneeforpeckingon thesurfaceof thelargerceltsvaries. In a smallnumberof celtsthe peckingmarksarealmostundetectable, havingbeenlargelyeliminated by the subsequent treatment of the tools' surface(see,e.g.,Fig.4:8).In onecelt,7 (Fig.4),pecki-ng tracesrelatedto the originalmanufacturing processcoveralmostallof oneface.The majorityof thelargercelts,however, exhibitpeckingmarksmainlyon their proximal areaortheirsides(e.g.,Fig.4:9, 10,ll).The presence ofpecking markson theproximal partorthesideshasto dowiththefactthatthese areaswereoftenleft onlypartially groundor unground. The differential treatment of the distalandproximal partsof the largerceltssavedtime withoutjeopardizing the tools'efficacy, sinceit wasonlythe areaof the workingedgethathadto begroundin orderto reducefrictionagainstthe workedmaterial.27 Moreover, themakersof thesetoolsmaywellhavedecidednot to grindanareathatwouldbe insertedintoa handleandthus invisible, a decisionthatwouldnotdiminishtheaestheticappealof these objects.Finally,thistreatment mayhavehada specifictechnicalpurpose: to leavea roughorsemirough surfacethatwouldallowa moresecureattachment of thestonebladeto itshandle.28 Onewonders, though,whythe proximal partwasleftin a roughorsemirough statein sometoolsbutnot in others.Did this differential treatment haveto do withtimepressure, personal preference,29 orthekindof haftingdeviceused? Grinding-was the secondmanufacturing stagefor the largercelts thoughthesolemethodusedforthevastmajority of thesmallones.This processservedto createan acuteedgeat one endof the celtaswellas a smoothandoftenglossybodytexture.As experimental workandethnographicresearch suggest,30 grindingmusthavetakenplacewiththehelp ofwateronpassiveabrasive surfaces. Thewateris essentialin thisprocess: on theonehand,it washesawaythedetritusformedduringgrindingand, on the other,it preventsoverheating thatcancause-edgechippingand flaking.3l At Franchthi, passiveabrasive surfaces couldhavebeenprovided by millstones,a substantial numberof whichwereexcavated. As I have
27. SeeDickson1981, pp.33,99; O'Hare1990, p.130. 28. SeeDickson1981, p.32; Kozak1972, p.21; O'Hare1990, p.130. C£ Ricq-deBouardandBuret (1987, pp.178-180), who,on the basis of theirstudyof celtsfromMediterraneanFrance,arguethatthe presence of"residual" peckingprobably hasmore
to do withthe rawmaterialusedeach timethanwithhafting. 29. Accordingto Blackwood (1950, p.16), the differences in the extentof grindingof"adzes" amongthe Kukukukuof New Guinea"appear to be due moreto thepersonalequationrather thanto the kindof stoneused." 30. E.g.,Blackwood 1950, p.15;
Dickson1972, p.208; 1981, pp.42-44, 151-156; Hampton1999, pp.93-97; Nami1984, p.104; Petrequinand Petrequin1993, pp.181-194; Toth, Clark,andLigabue1992, p.91; Townsend1969, p.200; ViM 1940-1941, p. 159. 31. Dickson1981, p.41; Nami 1984, p.104.
w
..
CELTS FROM FRANCHTHI
v
. ....
.
e
....
s
.
s
z
. ..
CAVE
II
A /e:v h-::0 ?'
,
'
:',, s
'
¢
.'
* ', ,
.
.
%'
'
'.
?.
',
.
.
* ':
.:
'
'.",e'' ',' ',
'
¢,'
...
:.
,-J
,
.
.:
,
I
7
8
-n V-,
v
c;) 9
cX,
10
ll
Figure4. Largecelts7, 8, 9, 10, 11. Scale 1:2
millstones seemsinadequate thesizeof theFranchthi arguedelsewhere,32 cereals,butis suitableforgrindingstonetoolsandother forprocessing pointsto thepossiMoreover, theusewearon certainmillstones artifacts. of a spatialassociaOnlyoneexample bilityoftheiruseingrindingcelts.33 andevenin thatcase tionbetweena celtandmillstoneis known,however, grooves No bedrock association betweenthetwois doubtful.34 afunctional thatmightbe linkedwithgrindingceltshavebeenidentior"cupmarks" fiedatFranchthi.3s 32. Stroulia1999. SeealsoRunnels 1981, pp. 148-154; 1985, pp. 33-34. 33. SeeRunnels1981, pp. 148-154; 1985, pp. 33-34. 34. C£ Runnels(1981, p. 149), who between findsa functionalassociation the twolikely.
35. Suchcupmarksorgrooves areoftenmentionedin theliterature (seeAnderson1890,p. 74;Dickson 1972,pp.208-209;1981,pp.42-44; Hampton1999,pp.69, 93-97).At circular cupmarkswere Franchthi, foundon a naturalboulderat the
to mouthof the cavebut,according CurtisRunnels,who examined them(pers.comm.,April2002), thesefeaturesarenot suitablefor of or resharpening the manufacture celts.
:
ANNA
STROULIA
I2
e
-
@> s:
-
.
J
::?g::@-
:eX
c)
12
13
Ifweleaveasidetheangular-looking and exogenous 5,grinding ingeneralcreatedroundedfacesthatmeet possibly thesidesof theceltssmoothly (seeFigs.4-5: 10, 12, 13).In a fewcases, it formedlightfacets (asin Fig.4: 8) or strongerfacets(asin however, Fig.5: 14).In particular, strong faceting is evidenton someof the smallestcelts (seeFig.6: 15, 16).The faceting in thesetoolsprobably hasto dowiththeirsmallsize:onlya small surface couldat anyonetimebe exposedfor grinding. Giventhe glossinessthatcharacterizes mostof the celts,it is likely that thelaststageofgrindinginvolveda fine abrasive: fine,soft clay, orocher.36 In fact,oneof thesetools,17,hasa subtle sandstone, reddishcoloration on its body,whichmayrepresent tracesof clayorocherusedin this last stage.37 Themakersof thesetoolsmighthavealso rubbedthemwitha piece of leatherto achievethesameeffect.38 Apartfromservingasanindispensable stagein theceltmanufacturing process, grindingalsoservedto rejuvenate a dulledgeaftera toolhad been utilized.Grindingin thiscaseresultedin unifacial orbifacialbeveling nextto the edge the diagnostic traitof resharpening (seeFig.6:5, 15, 16, 18).It is alsopossible,if untraceable, forthewholetool to have been reground in thecourseof resharpening the if there was a needto redefinethetool'sproportions. edges,especially Peckingwasalsosometimesusedafter grinding(andutilization) of the celthadalready takenplace.It is possibleto distinguish two cases of this secondary pecking.In the firstcase,peckingremovedthe smooth ground surfacein anareabeginningat theproximal end of the tool and reaching upto themiddleof thebodyorevenhigher (see Figs. 7, 9: 19, 20, 21, 22).This kindof peckingmighthavebeen intended to redefine the shape orproportions of a toolthatforonereasonoranother hadbecome dysfunctional or to makeit fit a particular handle.39 In the secondand rarer case,peckingroughened up the smoothgroundsurfaceof onlythe sides of the celt,perhapsagainaspartof an effortto facilitateits secure adjustment to thehandle(seeFigs.5, 8:14,23). In a singlecase,24 (Fig.9), thegrinding of of a workingedgewerefollowedbyan thetoolandthecreation sharp intentional unifacial retouch that formed a serrated edge.Theretouchwasmostlikely accomplished by pressure ratherthanpercussion.
14
Figure 5. Largecelts 12, 13,14. Scale 1:2
36.Forsandstone, seeDickson 1981, p. 156. My ownexperiments
indicate thatclayis a quitegood polishing agent.Foranethnographic example of clayusedin thiscontext, see also Kozak1972, p. 20. 37.Redpigment,though,couldalso have been usedforstrictlydecorative purposes (seeHampton1999,p. 87). 38. Seeexperiments byM'Guire (1892, p. 169) andNami(1984, p. 104). 39. SeealsoMoundrea-Agrafioti 1981, p. 183.
\e \o
*
l |
*i
l
F
4
I3
CAVE
CELTS FROM FRANCHTHI
I
-X
PtS b
-. * l
o
c) -
l
//
16
15
5
Figure 6. Small celts 5, 15, 16, 18. Scale 1:1
18
'
Figure7. Largecelts 19, 20, 22. Scale 1:2
,4
,
cX,
19
20
22
I4
ANNA
STROULIA
The processof makinga celt musthavebeencompletedwith the manufacture of a haftandtheadjustment of the stonebladeintoit. Four antlersleevesconstitutethe onlydirectevidenceof haftingrecovered at Franchthi.40 Threeof them,however, arenotpreserved wellenoughto be usefulin thisdiscussion. Thefourthindeedhasa socket,butit is toosmall to fit eventhesmallestceltandmustthenhavebeenusedforotherkinds oftools(e.g.,chippedstoneorbonetools).Thescarcity of antlersleevesin the archaeological recordat Franchthi indicatesthatthishaftingdevice wasnotcommonly usedatthissite,andbyextensionthatthehaftsof the celts(andothertools)weremostoftenmadeof wood.The stoneblades couldhavebeenadjustedto the haftsdirectlyor with the aid of some bindingmaterial (e.g.,leather, vinestrips)oradhesive substance (e.g.,resin, beeswax), allperishable materials andthuspresently inaccessible.41 Forreasonsexplained above,thefollowingconfigurations canbeconsideredindirectevidencefor haftinglargercelts:an ungroundor semigroundsurfacein the proximal area(seeFig.4: 10, 11);or,in the same Figure8. Largecelt 23. Scale 1:2 area,a groundsurfaceroughened by secondary pecking(seeFigs.5, 7-9: 14,19,20, 21, 22,23).42We do notknowthemodeof haftingbutwe can assumethatthehandlewasplacedin thelongaxisof thestonehead,parallelorperpendicular to it. If therawmaterial forceltswasindeedfoundlocally,I wouldsuggest 40.This numberrefersto the inventhatthe manufacture of smallcelts requiring, withthreeorfourexceptoried specimensonly. tions,onlythegrindingof a smallpebble-tookplaceonthesite;thelarge 41. Forarchaeological, experimental, numberof millstones discovered andtheavailability of waterresources at andethnographic information about Franchthi makethisalikelyscenario.43 Thehypothesis is irther supported differentcelt-haftingtechniques,see by evidenceof a particular kindof celtgrinding resharpeninwhich, Becker1945;Blackwood1950,pp.21as a toolmaintenance technique, hadto havetakenplaceon the site.For 22;Carneiro1974,pp.110-111;1979, the samereasons,the grindingof largerceltsalsoprobably occurred lo- pp.24-27;Dickson1981,pp.158-167; cally,a likelihoodstrengthened bythediscovery of twopreforms (1 and4) GodelierandGaranger1973,pp.198200;Hampton1999,pp.72-88;Heider thatwereprobably intendedto go througha grindingstageon the site. 1967,p.56; Hellweg1984,p. 98; Butwherewasthepeckingof largerceltstakingplace?Peckingof celt Kozak1972,pp.21-22;Malinowski blankscouldhavebeendoneon the site,as indicatedby hammerstones 1934,p. 191;Moundrea-Agrafioti discovered duringthe excavations.44 The one complete,unworkedser- 1987;Muller-Beck1965,pp.13-49; pentinitecobble,if it is a celtblank,maysuggestthatcobblesweretaken PetrequinandPetrequin1993,pp.43to the siteto be transformed intocelts.If the threefragments of pecked 59;Pond1930,pp.93-94;Schoen 1969,p. 18;Sillitoe1988,pp.43-50; serpentinite cobbles(see above)areremainsof accidentsthat occurred Steensberg1980,pp.5-24;Toth,Clark, duringthe peckingstage,they too maysupportthe hypothesisthat andLigabue1992,p. 92;Tsountas peckingwas carriedout at Franchthi. Finally,the evidenceof second- 1908,pp.316-322. 42. Accordingto Ricq-deBouard arypecking(which,likeresharpening, musthavetakenplaceat the site), and Buret(1987,p. 181),of the two suggeststhatpeckingwasprobably a manufacturing stagethatoccurred treatments onlythe oneinvolving on site. secondary peckingis relatedto hafting. The discovery of onlyonecompleteunworked cobbleperhaps attests 43.The watercouldhavebeen to a tendencyto collectcelt blanksonlywhenneeded,andthusto an suppliedby eitherthe smallpoolat the expedienttechnology. Otherwiseonewouldexpectto finda numberof rearof the caveorthe now-submerged pebblesorcobbleswaitingto be converted intocelts.Thereis, of course, springsat the Franchthishore (Franchthi 7, p.5; vanAndeland thepossibility thata specialized celtproduction areaexistedat Franchthi Vitaliano 1987,p.18) andthatthe excavations didnotuncoverit. The lackof morphologically 44.Thesetools,however,arelikely homogeneous groupsandstandardization in thecontextof theceltindus- to haveserveda varietyof percussive try,however, arguesagainstthishypothesis. purposes.
CELTS FROM FRANCHTHI
I5
CAVE
25
21
Figure 9. Small celts 21, 24, 25. Scale 1:1
45. SeePetrequinandPetrequin 1993,pp.78-81;Sillitoe1988,p. 43.
{
X
24
onthesitedoesnotnecTheabsenceof evidencefora celtworkshop oruse bygenderin themanufacture essarily implya lackof specialization in manyconis knownethnographically of thesetools;suchspecialization though, forFranchthi, Suchahypothesis NewGuineagroups.45 temporary possiblethattheFranchthi It is, moreover, is forthemomentuntestable. of celtswerealsoinvolvedin peoplewhowereinvolvedin theproduction tools, andotherserpentinite ornaments of serpentinite the manufacture althoughagainevidencefor or againstsucha hypothesishas not been identified. Finally,the two toolsmadeof nonlocalrawmaterialdeservecomimportedto the sitein a finished ment:5, of firedsteatite,wasprobably whitebeads inwhichtheopaque throughthesamenetworks state,perhaps Thissuggeststhata smallnumberof celtsentered notedabovecirculated. thesitein a thesitein a finishedform.A fewothersseemto havereached madefroma nonlocal, by4, aceltpreform form,asissuggested roughed-out andesite. The initialshapingof 4 couldhavebeencomnonporphyritic orbypeoplewho of Franchthi pletedat theandesiticsourcebyresidents werein directorindirectcontactwiththem.Thistoolcouldhavecometo made millstones asthetwoFranchthi thesametrajectories thesitethrough tencanonlyremain suggestion, however, andesite.This ofnonporphyritic and4 arecontemporary. if thesetwomillstones tative,sinceit is unknown
I6
ANNA
STROULIA
TECHNOMORPHOLOGICAL ASPECTS The fifty-ninecompleteceltsfromFranchthi rangein lengthfrom2.0 to 9.6 cm.Sixty-sixpercentfallintothe 2.0-4.6cmrange,29%arebetween 5.3 and7.6 cmlong,and5%fallbetween 8.4and9.6 cm.Theheavyconcentration of toolsin the shortestrangeis reflected in the average length of4.54cm(s = 1.95)(Fig.10:a).Theabove distribution indicates that the celtsfromFranchthi areonthewholeshorter thanotherAegeanNeolithic celtassemblages.46 Thereare,nevertheless, twofragments thatmayhave beenpartof completeceltsmeasuring 10.0cm longor longer,47 leaving openthepossibility thata fewceltslongerthanthoserepresented among thecompletetoolswereatsomepointusedat Franchthi. A comparison of thelengthsof the completeceltsrecovered insidethe cavewiththoseof celtsfoundon Paraliashowsa high concentration of longerceltsin the cave; 90%of celtslongerthan4.6 cmwere excavated there(Table1).This distribution mightreflectdifferential useof the caveandParaliain relation to thesetools. The completeceltsrangein widthfrom0.8 to 4.9 cm.The majority (59%) fallintothe2.2-4.0 cmrange.Of the 46. Moundrea-Agrafioti remaining celts,halfarebe(1981, tween 0.8 and2.0 cmwideandtheotherhalfare pp. 199-200)notesthat63%of the between 4.1 and 4.9 cm wide. The average Thessalian celtsstudiedhavea length widthof the completeceltsis 3.01cm (s = 1.15),less between 4.0 and8.0 cm,while13%of than thatof otherceltsin AegeanNeolithiccelt assemblages48 (Fig. the samplearelongerthan8.0 cm.Of Five fragmentary celtsarewiderthananyof thecompletecelts,49 10:b). the forty-five however, completeceltsreported which suggeststhatthewidthsof thecompletecelts from Neolithic might Knossos(Evans1964), not be representative. Only6%of the completeceltsfoundon only a third are equalto orlessthan Paralia are widerthan 4.0 cm,incontrast 4.6 to25%ofthosefoundinsidethecave.In cm in length.Of the sixty-fivecelts general, smaller listed tools fromOlynthus,only11%are appearto havebeenusedon Paralia. 4.6 cm orlesslong,the restrangingin The completeceltsfromFranchthi rangein thicknessfrom0.4 to length from4.9 to 13.0cm (Mylonas 3.7 cm.Sixty-four percentarebetween0.4and1.5cmthick.The 1929, pp.71-72). Of the forty-four rest have athickness rangingfrom1.8 to 3.7 cm.The average celts listedfromDikiliTash,43%have thicknessis 1.67cm (s0.85) = (Fig.10:c).Theceltsfrom a length equalto orlessthan4.6 cm Franchthi areingeneralthinnerthan other AegeanNeolithiccelts.50 (Seferiades 1992,pp.87, 93).The averHalfof thecompleteceltsfoundinsidethe age lengthof the seventy-twocomplete cave havea thickness of 1.5cmorlessversustwo-thirds of thosefoundon or almost completeceltsfromServiais Paralia. over 7.5 cm (Mould,Ridley,andWarHowcanthesmallsize asexpressed dle 2000,pp.129-136).See,however, especiallyin length of a large number of theceltsbe explained? the eightceltsfromKitsos,sevenof Thistrendseemsevenodderin lightof the tools'generally which arebetween2.8 and3.8 cm in goodconditionandsharpworkingedges, features that length imply thattheceltsenteredthearchaeological (Perles1981,p. 198). recordwhentheywerestill 47. I amreferring hereto 53 and54 functional. It is temptingto seethesmallsizeof these tools as a (Fig. result 15). of repeated resharpening, whichseemsto besuggested bytheirgenerally 48.Forexample,the averagewidth low length/width ratio(average of length/width the ratio:1.59(s =0.55)(Fig.10:d). Thessalianceltsstudiedby There are,however,at leastthreeproblemswith Moundrea-Agrafioti is ca.4.0-4.5 cm this hypothesis. First, there arehighlysignificant 1981,pp.200correlations amongthethreebasicdimensions 201).(Moundrea-Agrafioti (length, width,thickness) of thecompletecelts(Table2), suggesting that 49.I amreferring hereto 52, 58 resharpening wasnotpracticed intensively enoughto havea dramatic (Fig.15), 60, 61, and62. impact ontheproportions ofthesetools.Second,thecorrelation 50. Forexample,only41%of the betweenthe length andlength/width ratiois notsignificant Thessalian celtsexaminedbyMoun(Table 2), which explains why somerelatively long celts(e.g.,Fig. 7: 22) havea verylow drea-Agrafioti havea thicknessof length/ 1.5orcm width ratiowhilesomeveryshortcelts(e.g.,Fig.9: less(Moundrea-Agrafioti 25) havea veryhigh 1981, pp.201-202).
-
CELTS FROM FRANCHTHI
I7
CAVE
-
12
12
b 10
10
2.00
3.00 2.50
4.00 3.50
5.00 4.50
6.00 5.50
7.00 6.50
8.00 7.50
9.00
1.00
8.50
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
9.50
Width (cm)
Length(cm) 14
16
d
c 14
12
12 10
10 8' 8' 6' 6' 4' 4'
.50
1.00 .75
1.50 1.25
2.00 1.75
2.50 2.25
Thickness (cm) Figure10. Frequencydistributions of completecelts (n = 59) by (a) length (s 1.95, mean4.54); (b) width (a 1.15, mean3.01); (c) thickness (s 0.85, mean 1.67);and(d) length/ widthratio(s 0.55, mean 1.59)
-
3.00 2.75
.75
3.50 3.25
3.75
1.25 1.00
1.75 1.50
2.25 2.00
2.75 2.50
3.25 3.00
3.75 3.50
Length/widthratio
length/width ratio(Table1).Third,andmostimportant, theresharpened toolsaccountforonlyabouthalfof thethirty-nine smallceltsandthereis no difference in the averagelength/width ratiobetweenthosethatwere resharpened andthosethatwerenot. Amongthesmallcelts,theresharpened toolsareasa ruletheshortest (average lengthof resharpened smallcelts:2.9 cm;average lengthofthose not resharpened: 3.7 cm).Thoughit mightthusbe arguedthatthevery shortlengthis theresultof resharpening, theproportionately smallwidth andthicknessmakeit unlikelythatthesespecimens wereinitiallymuch longer.It is,therefore, morereasonable to assumethatthesizeof thesmall celtsis primarily a manufacturing choice,presumably determined by the
ANNA
I8
STROULIA
TABLE 2. PEARSON CORRELATIONS OF DIMENSIONS OF COMPLETE CELTS Length
Length
PearsonCorrelation Sig.(2-tailed) N
Width
PearsonCorrelation Sig.(2-tailed) N Thickness PearsonCorrelation Sig.(2-tailed) N LMt Ratio PearsonCorrelation Sig.(2-tailed) N W/Th RatioPearsonCorrelation Sig.(2-tailed) N
Width
1
59
Thickness
0.845*
0.877*
0.000
0.000
59
59
0.845*
0.896*
0.000
0.000
59
59
W/ThRafio
0.085 0.522 59
-0.418*
-0.424* 0.001
0.001
59 -0.186 0.158 59
59
59
59
59
-0.184 0.164 59
59
-0.424*
-0. 184
0.877*
0.896*
0.000
0.000
59
L/WRafio
-0.557* 0.000
59
59
59
59
-0.371* 0.004 59
-0.418*
-0. 186
-0.557*
0.001
0.158
0.000
-0.371* 0.004 59
59
0.085 0.522
59
0.001
59
0.164
59
* Correlation is significantat (atleast)the 0.01 level(2-tailed).
is thescarcity of waysin whichthesetoolswereused.Equallyinteresting thelargercelts,whichsuggeststhatthesetools evidenceforresharpening It alsosuggests enoughto require resharpening. werenotusedintensively thatthesmallceltsarenotthelaststagein thehistoryof useoflargercelts; betweenlargerandsmallcelts. in otherwords,thereis no continuity It is possibleto constructsmallgroupsof toolswith similarshapes significance canbe atandsizes,althoughat presentno chronological shapein planviewforthe celtsis tachedto thesegroups.The preferred (sub)triangular, withthirty-twoinstancesamongthe fifty-ninecomplete widthcoincidesmoreorlesswith celts(54%).Inthesetoolsthemaximum the workingedge.Celtsof all sizesweremadein this shape(see,e.g., Figs.5, 8, 12,13:14,23,26,33).Thenextmostpopularshapeamongthe withsixteeninstances(27%)(see, completespecimens is (sub)rectangular, shape e.g.,Fig.13:27). Sixcompletecelts(10%)havea (sub)trapezoidal (e.g.,28),whereasfive(8%)haveanovoidshape(see,e.g.,Fig.5: 12).A shape,atleastasfarasthelargerceltsare preference fora (sub)triangular by the factthatduringusea taperedstone concerned, maybe explained intothe handle bladewedgesitselfmoretightly,andthusmoresecurely, thatthisis It mustbe noted,however, thanstonebladesof othershapes.51 nottrueforallhaftingdevices.52 ratioof the completeceltsrangesfrom1.14to The width/thickness 3.20withan averageof 1.93 (s - 0.47) (Table1, Fig. 11).The majority ratiobetween1.84 and of completecelts(56%)havea width/thickness completeceltshavea ratioof 3.20,andthusareflattish.The remaining Mostof thesmallceltsareflattish(e.g., 1.81orless,andthusaremassive. Fig.13:27,29),whilemostof thelargerceltsaremassive(e.g.,Fig.5:12). profiles havestronglyasymmetrical OnlysevenceltsfromFranchthi (see,e.g.,Figs.5-6, 12-13:5, 14, 15, 30, 31).Fiveof theseare,or come
51. See Dickson 1981, p. 60. 52. C. Perles (pers.comm., Septem ber 2000).
CELTS FROM FRANCHTHI
CAVE
I9
10
8'
6'
4'
-
-
1.13
Figure11. Frequencydistribution of completecelts (n = 59) bywidth/ thicknessratio(s 0.47, mean1.93)
-
-
1.38
1.25
-
-
1.63
1.50
-
-
1.88
1.75
-
-
2.13
2.00
-
-
2.38
2.25
-
-
2.63
2.50
-
-
2.88
2.75
-
-
3.13
3.00
3.25
Width/thickness ratio
,n,
'a, Figure12. Largecelts26, 31. Scale 1:2
53. Accordingto thisdefinition,an
axehasa symmetrical profileanda haft fixedparallelto its workingedge,while anadzehasanasymmetrical profileand a haftfixedperpendicularly to its edge. On the inadequacy of thisdefinition, see accountsof modernNew Guinea groupswhohafttheirstoneblades indiscriminately as adzesor axes, dependingon whatis neededat the timeorin sucha waythattheycanbe rotatedwithinthe handle(Heider 1967, p. 56; Malinowski 1934, p. 191; Sillitoe1988, pp. 43-44). 54. Dickson1972, p. 209; 1981, pp. 45, 102.
(
X
26
31
from,largercelts.On theotherhand,onlythreeceltshaveanabsolutely symmetrical profile:11 (Fig.4), 12 (Fig.5), and32 (Fig.13).Mostcelts areindeedslightlyasymmetrical in profile(see,e.g.,Fig.4: 9). Veryfew celts,therefore, fitperfectly theclassicdefinition of"axe" and"adze."53 On thisbasis,I wouldassumethatmostof thetimetherewasno greatconcernwithceltprofilesymmetry on thepartof theFranchthi people. The majority of celtshavea convexworkingedgein planview(e.g., Figs.4-5, 8-9:8, 14,21,23).Thepredominance of thisedgeshapecanbe tracedtotherawmaterial itself:aconvexedgefollowsthecurvilinear shape of the pebblesor cobblesthatservedas celtblanks.Moreimportantly, however, the convexedgeoffereda significant technicaladvantage, since an angularconnection of theworkingedgeto the sidesof the celtcould havecreatedfatalpointsof stressduringuse.54 A fewceltshavea straight edgein planview.All of thembelongto the groupof smallcelts(e.g.,
-
ANNA
20
. *
*
STROULIA
X
*. v
*ZebRtS
d
n \6:^ C p:*
i;is *-.sU w
,
34
27
29
I
c
D
32
30
-
-
I / Ws;
\ @*@ }
-
O\
/
, I
c
)
33
35
l
C
9
36
CELTS FROM FRANCHTHI CAVE
Figure13 (opposite). Small celts 27, 29, 30,32,33, 34,35,36. Scale 1:1
Figs.6, 13:16, 29, 33, 35). Finally,fourceltshavean edgethatis lopof sidedin planview (Figs.4, 6, 13:10, 18, 34, 36). The lopsidedness as the resultof resharpenin the literature edgeshas beeninterpreted applies Thisinterpretation ing partof the edgeafterlocalizeddamage.55 one to at leastone of thesetools,34 (Fig.13),butnot to at least other, 36 (Fig.13). haveedgesthatarestraight All butfiveof the celtsfromFranchthi alllargerceltsedges of the five exceptions frontally. The whenviewed areconvex(seeFigs.4, 5, 8, 12:8, 9, 14,23,31).Theseedgesaresharpand choice,ratherthantheproda manufacturing thusbeyonddoubtrepresent Toolswitha uctof usewiththefaces(forperhapspolishingorscraping). stronglyconvexedgein frontviewalsotendto havemoreasymmetrical profilesthanothertools.56 US E WEAR ANALYSI S SMALLCELTS
55. Spenneman1987,p.22; see also Semenov1964,pp.129-130. 56. A few celtswiththisparticular havebeenreported edgeconfiguration fromNeolithicThessaliansites(Moun1981,p. 186)andfrom drea-Agrafioti 1992,pp.88DikiliTash(Seferiades 90,94). I haveseenmanysuchceltsin fromthevicinity Neolithicassemblages of KozaniandKastoria. 57.The samplesizebecomeseven largerif the fourteenfragmentsof small celtsarealsotakeninto account. 58. Fora similarsituation,see Perles 1981,p.199, on the celtsfromKitsos; andSugaya1993,p. 443,on the smallestceltsfromTharrounia.
largenumberof smallcelts(39) above,thereis a surprisingly As discussed glossyappearance The smallsizecoupledwitha generally at Franchthi.57 makesonewonderwhethertheseceltsweremadenotto be usedastools objectsof status,articlesof personalatbutratherto serveasminiatures, is hardto promoteforthese however, tire,oreventoys.Sucha hypothesis, visibleon evidenceof usewearorresharpening celts,giventheabundant All butone of the celtsexhibitusewear,andabouthalfof theiredges.58 on oneorbothof theirfaces(e.g.,Fig.6:5, 15);a themwereresharpened twiceon the sameface. few (e.g.,Fig.6: 16, 18) havebeenresharpened andusewearinsomeofthesmallevidence ofresharpening Thecombined and est celtsindicatesthattheywereusedaftertheywereresharpened whentheyhadaveryshortlength(e.g.,Fig.13:33,35).Thereis no doubt thenthatthe smallceltswereused.Howtheywereusedis a muchmore analysis use-wear especially in theabsenceof microscopic complexmatter, asI discusstheuse studies.I willoffersomesuggestions or experimental wearof thesmallceltsbelow. exerthroughpressure The edgeof a celtenterstheworkedmaterial Given cisedon the tool'shaftor through(director indirect)percussion. was I assumepercussion the smallsizeof the toolsin question,however, visibleon the rarely. Fourkindsof useweararemacroscopically practiced of chippingandscoring;a a combination edgesof smallcelts:chipping; with or without andflattening, of chippingandrounding; combination .
.
c. :llpplng.
whileothersshowbifacial edgechipping, Sometoolsexhibitunifacial locationof thechipscarsmighthaveto do Thedifferential edgechipping. witha specificuseorhaftingtechniquethatexposedoneorbothfacesof In the caseof of theworkedmaterial. theworkingedgeto theresistance thetwofacesmighthavebeenexposedto theresisbifacialedgechipping, or alternately. The presence tanceof theworkedmaterialsimultaneously profilesandedgeshapes of bifacialedgechippingon toolswithdifferent exists (see,e.g., 35 [Fig. 13], 37, 38) suggeststhatno clearcorrelation
2I
ANNA
22
STROULIA
betweenthisparticular usewearanda certainsetof technomorphological .
c. zaracterlstlcs
.
.
Unifacial edgechipping occursmorerarelyamongthesmallcelts(e.g., 39 [Fig.14],40,41).The appearance of thiskindof usewearimpliesthat primarily one facewasmeetingthe resistance of theworkedmaterial. It hasbeenimpossible to detectanypatternconnecting the unifacialchippingto specifictechnomorphological features. Celt42 (Fig.14),a small tool exhibitingunifacialedgechipping,shouldbe mentionedseparately. Herethe chipscarsextendin differentdirections, suggesting thatdifferentpartsof the edgewereat differenttimesexposedto the resistance of theworkedmaterial. Thiskindof usewearis expected, if notexclusively, in thecaseof anindirectpercussive function. Thishypothesis is reinforced bypercussion scarsvisibleon the proximal endof the tool.The factthat percussion wasusedindicates thattheworkedmaterial wasrelatively hard, perhaps woodorbone.Celt24 (Fig.9), a sturdy, stubbytool,shouldalso be mentioned in relationto unifacial edgechipping. It is uniquein thatit has a serrated edgeproduced by unifacialretouch.The chippingof the edgein thiscaserepresents a manufacturing choiceratherthananunintendedresultof use.A toolwith sucha workingedgecouldhavebeen usedforcuttingskinsormeat. In a secondkindof usewearrepresented bythreetools,29 (Fig.13), 43, and44, the chippingis accompanied byveryfine,short(about1 mm long)scoringmarks. Thisscoringis perpendicular to theedgeandvisible withorwithoutlowmagnification on oneorbothfaces.The shortlength anddirectionof thescoringmarkssuggestthattheyaredueto userather thanmanufacture or resharpening, sinceit is veryhardto grindthe edge transversely foronlya millimeter withoutriskingflatteningit out.Given thesmallsizeof toolsshowingthisscoringandthegenerally goodconditionof theiredges,it is likelythatthescoringoccurred frompressure exercisedtransversely on theworkedmaterial. No specificpatternconnecting thisformof usewearwithspecifictechnomorphological characteristics is detectable in thiscaseeither.On29 and44,however, thechippingappears ononefaceof theedge,andthescoringontheother,raisingthepossibility thatthetwokindsof useweararetheresultof differentuses. In athirdkindof usewear,represented by6 and46 (Fig.14),chipping appears ononefaceof abluntorrounded edge.Arethedullnessandchippingof theworkingedgetheresultsof thesameuseordothetwokindsof usewearreflectdifferent uses?I tendto believethattheyaretheresultof the sameuse.The dulledgein bothtoolsmightbe theresultof dressing hidesor perhapsscrapingor burnishing the interiorof ceramicvessels. Interestingly, thechipscarson 6 areconsistently angledobliquely in relationto theedge.Thispatternpointsto atransverse andobliquemovement of theedgeovertheworkedmaterial. The last andmostunexpected kindof use wearthatI was ableto identifymacroscopically on smallceltsis a verynarrow flatzonecovering the entireedgeor a partof it.Threetoolsdisplaythisuse-wearpattern. On twoof them(Figs.6, 14:18,47),chippingfollowedtheformation of theflatzoneandis alsoapparent on theedge.59 59. SeealsoO'Hare1990,p. 131, Celt 16 (Fig.6), one of the smallestexamples, shouldalsobe men- fortwo examplesof flat-edgedcelts tionedhere.The edgeof thistoolhasbeensharpened twiceon oneface fromNeolithicsouthernItaly.
/n 11 CELTS FROM FRANCHTHI
celts39,42,46,47. l4. Smllll Figure
y<
23
CAVE
,
A
42
)
C
|
pl.s . i R,, Ip_
VJ
l 46
K
s*W_ _
l 1
47
butshowsno evidenceof use.It is possiblethatthetoolwaslostorabanorit couldhavebeencuratedto be ready donedafterit wasresharpened, forusewhenneeded. above,othIf someof thesmallceltswereusedin thewayssuggested bya suggested processes, ersmighthavebeeninvolvedin moreintriguing of smallcelts(e.g.,48, 49, 63) not touched groupof fourteenfragments accountforhalfof allcelt section.Thesefragments uponin theprevious highforthesetools,which,beis curiously This percentage fragments. causeof theirsmallsizeandsoftness,couldnothavebeensystematically exposedto forcesgreatenoughto breakthemduringuse.If, in fact,that hadbeenthe case,onewouldexpectthe edgesof thesetoolsto be quite in someusewear,aregenerally displaying worn.Yet,theseedges,although verygoodcondition,indicatingthattheywereexposedto a destructive thebreakMoreover, forceonlyonce:thetimeatwhichtheywerebroken. retain ageof thesetoolsdoesnot seemrandom.All fourteenfragments edgecornersconsisting partof theedgeandindeedtenof themrepresent of partof the edgeandoneside.It is hardto seehowthe normaluseof withoutany pattern breakage smallceltscouldhavecausedsuchapeculiar wearof theedges.Ontheotherhand,thecompleteabsenceof substantial makesit equallyhardto attribute bodypartsfromthesampleof fragments thattookplacebetweenepisodesof useorafter to accidents thebreakage
24
ANNA
STROULIA
thediscardof thesetools.Onthisbasis,I consider it likelythatsomesmall celtsatFranchthi weredeliberately broken. Indeed,several fragments consist of typicalor atypicalflakes.Sucha hypothesis mightexplainthelackof fragments withbodyparts:if smallceltsweredeliberately broken, thebody partscouldhavebeendeliberately removedanddepositedin someundiscoveredpartof thesiteorevenawayfromthesite. Deliberate breakage ofwholesanddeliberate removal of certainparts of thesewholesconstitute elementsof a ritualtreatment. It is possiblethat smallceltsweresometimes ritually"killed" to markspecificeventsin the lifeof thecommunity orritesof passagein thelivesof producers orusers (owners?) of thesetools.It is alsopossiblethatthe ritualdestruction of celtswasonlyone partof a long andrepeatedritualmanipulation that produced usewearalongtheedges oftenenoughto callforresharpening. The archaeological contextis notof muchhelpin testingthishypothesis, sincewithoneexceptionallfragments of smallcelts as is the casewith mostFranchthi celts camefromdisturbed Neolithicdeposits.The exception(50)wasfoundcloseto a hearth.A hearth,however, is a kindof neutralplaceregarding thishypothesis, sinceit canbe the focusof both everyday domesticandextraordinary ritualactivities. Ritualactivityis not onlyexpectedto havetakenplaceat Franchthi Cave,as in anyothercommunity (prehistoric or otherwise), buthasindeedbeenpostulated by K.D. Vitellifromat leasttheMiddleNeolithic throughthe FinalNeolithicon the basisof heranalysisof the ceramic assemblage.60 According to Vitelli,ritualactivitymusthavebeencrucial if not necessaryinitially(MN) in negotiatingthe tensionsconstantly arisingin themidstof theFranchthi community, andlater(LN andFN) in maintaining relations amongsmall,scattered, mobilegroups.6l Theintentional breakage of objectsatFranchthi is alsonota newidea.Vitellihas suggestedit forthe exceptional MN Urfirnispottery,LaurenTalalayfor MN split-legfigurines, andI myselfforsomeof themillstones; Catherine Perlesalsohintsatanunusualdestructive process(involving breaking and burning)for someFN foliatepoints.62 Moreover, deliberate fragmentationof a vatietyof artifacts (e.g.,pots,figurines, prosopomorphic lids,altartables,objectswithincisedsigns)andmanipulation of theirfragments 60. Franchthi 8, pp.213-219; waspartof a widespread socialpracticein theBalkanNeolithicthat,acFranchthi 10, pp. 96-104. cordingtoJohnChapman, wasaimedatthecreationandmaintenance of 61. Franchthi 8, p.217 (MN); a lastingbondbetweenindividuals orgroups.63 Franchthi 10,pp.99-104 (LN-FN). If someof theceltsatFranchthi hada ritualfunction,theywouldnot 62. Forpottery,seeFranchthi 8, be the firstto be recognized assuchin theNeolithicAegean.Thisinter- p. 216.Forfigurines,seeFranchthi 9, pretation hasalready beenproposed forthetwooversizeceltsexcavated at pp.45-46;Talalay1987.Accordingto 9, p. 45), split-leg theso-calledshrineof NeaNihomedeia andthefour(oneoversize) found Talalay(Franchthi figurinesmayhave"served as economic amongotherobjectsinsidea phialenearthevillageof Anemodouri in the contractsor identifyingtokens." Her Peloponnese.64 Interestingly enough,usewearhasbeenidentified onallof interpretation, however,doesnotprethesespecimens.65 Thereis stillmuchto belearnedabouttheordinary and cludethe splittingof figurineswithina extraordinary usesof celts,butthe combination of usewearwitha ritual ritualcontext.Forlithicsandground functionsuggeststhatthepictureof Neolithicceltsin theAegeanis more stonetools,seethe forthcomingvol15 and17,respectively. complexthanis oftenassumed. Mostimportantly, it unsettlesourclassifi- umesFranchthi 63. Chapman2000,pp.1-104. catoryschemesandrequires thatwebe morecarefulbothin definingcri64. Sugaya1992,pp.71-75. teriato distinguish betweenutilitarian andritualobjectsandin assuming 65. SampsonandSugaya1988thatthisis a legitimatedistinction in thefirstplace. 1989,p. 18;Sugaya1992,p. 72.
CELTS FROM FRANCHTHI CAVE
25
LARGECELTS arein theedgesof thelargerceltsfromFranchthi Witha fewexceptions, This implies not resharpened. good conditionand,moreover, relatively enoughto thatlargerceltswerenot usedfor a long timeor intensively damageto the toolsandrequirefrequentresharpening. causesubstantial of thelargercelts,it is Intheabsenceof evidenceforoveruseorexhaustion didnot needmorethana to assumethattheirusersprobably reasonable smallnumber. Althoughmostof the completelargerceltscould(andmust)have onlythreeof themare beenusedin shrubclearingandwoodworking, forfellingtrees:7 (Fig.4),23 candidates massiveenoughto be considered seemto comefromverylarge (Fig.8), and51 (Fig.15).Fourfragments celts:52,53 (Fig.15),54 (Fig.15),and55. Forthreeof thesesevencelts Celt23 hasa convexedgein faceview;this is required. somequalification fortree makethetoolunsuitable doesnotnecessarily edgeshape,however, of similarceltsusedto examples byethnographic cutting,asis suggested atsomepointin theirlife Twoothers,51 and53, wererecycled felltrees.66 theirworkingedge.Thus,we canonly andusedin a waythatobliterated task. thattheywereusedin a tree-felling hypothesize The scarcityof celtsthatcouldhaveservedto cutdowntreesmight implythatthis was not an importantactivityat Franchthiduringthe to evidence,according bypalynological Neolithic.Thisideais supported whichthe vegetationof the southernArgolidformostof the Neolithic wasveryopen,deciduousoakformingwoodlandsonlyat higherelevaforfarming,on the otherhand,couldhavebeen Landclearance tions.67 showthatthe resultingash carriedoutby burning.Indeed,experiments not involvingthe Additionaltree-fellingtechniques actsas a fertilizer.68 the ring-barking, literature; in theethnographic useof celtsaredescribed useof fire.69 andthecontrolled felling," drivingtreefallor"windrow it is possiblethattheusersof thelargestceltstookthem Theoretically, onewonders the site.In thatcase,however, they abandoned when along 66. SeeHampton1999,pp.59-92; state.It is usable a good and were in celts that other behind why they left PetrequinandPetrequin1993,pp.60site, where the awayfrom 67. alsopossiblethatthelargertoolswerediscarded 67. Bottema1990,p. 124;Franchthi theywereusedandeventually however, I findit hardto beliesre, damaged. 7,p.18. toolsdid precious, andthusprobably thatthe usersof theseheavy-duty, 68. SeeIversen1956,p 39. for repair to the settlement back bring them them and retrieve care to not 69. See,e.g.,Brass1941,p.561; intoothersmallertoolsorobjects.Nordoesanyethnographic orrecycling Carneiro1974,p. 114;Steensberg evidencesupportthisscenario.70 1980,pp.58-61. 70.Thereis, instead,ethnographic As alreadymentioned,a few largerceltshavea convexedgein face evidencefromthe Langdaof New view:8, 9, 14,23, and31 (Figs.4, 5, 8, 12).Thesetoolsarecharacterized Guineafora practiceof returningthe profile,in whichone faceis moreroundedandthe by an asymmetrical andworn-outceltsto the fragmentary for edgeshapemighthavebeenconvenient particular This flatter. other villagebecausetheirusers"'feelsorry' create charring-to of technique with the out logs-possibly hollowing (Toth,Clark,and fortheirhandiwork" or Ligabue1992,p.92). The aboveceltsshowsomeunifacial woodenbowls,ladles,andtools.71 71. Suchwoodenobjectsareknown bifacial chippingontheedges.In twocases,9 (Fig.4) and14 (Fig.5),the Neolithicsitesof fromthe lacustrine by scoringthatis a resultof use.Mostof these chippingis accompanied easternFranceandSwitzerland to theedge.This withthehandleperpendicular hafted probably were tools 1965,pp.103-119; (Muller-Beck doesnot seemto applyto 31 (Fig.12), however,whichhas a strongly PetrequinandPetrequin1988, profileas well as obliquescarsextendingin variousdirecasymmetrical pp.121-123).
NA ST ROU LIA AN
26
53
51
@:S
,
-
Figure15. Largecelts51, 53, 54, 58. 54
58
patternindicatesthattheedgemoved tionson bothfaces.Thisuse-wear in anindirect at differenttimesandthusprobably indifferentdirections mode.72 percussive edgesinfrontview.These ofthelargerceltshavestraight Themajority profiles(see,e.g.,Figs.5, 12:12, orasymmetrical toolshavesymmetrical orbifacialedgechipping(Figs.7, 12:19,26).In 26)andexhibitunifacial partof theremaining twotools,2 and57,oneedgecorneris flakedoff.On on identified those to flatzone,similar theedgeof57 onecanseea narrow afewsmallcelts. chippededge(e.g., A smallnumberof largeceltshavea dull,rounded whichis rounded Figs.4, 5, 15:7, 13,58).Onecelt,58,hasa longedge,73 partsshowsome edge Both 1.5cm. for3.3cmandsharpfortheremaining thattheywereused chippingaswellaspolish,althoughthereis no doubt ratio,58might Withitslongedgeandverylowwidth/thickness differently. haftingwouldnot havebeensuitablefordressinghides,a taskforwhich Celt10 (Fig.4), witha lopsidededgein planview, havebeennecessary. andmovedat thanpercussion) (rather musthavebeenusedwithpressure
1:2 Scale
72. C. Perles (pers.comm.,July 2000). 73. Of the entire assemblageof celts from Franchthi,58 has the longest edge.
CELTS FROM FRANCHTHI CAVE
27
an obliqueangle(ratherthanperpendicularly) in relationto theworked material. Otherwise, onlya fewmillimeters of theedgecouldhavebeenin contactwiththeworkedmaterial. Finally, thereareafewinstances atFranchthi oftherecycling of larger celts.In twocases,51 and53 (Fig.15),thecuttingedgewas(re)usedasa hammerstone. Thisusedestroyed theceltbit andcreateda roundededge withpercussive wear.It is hardto understand whythesesharp-edged tools wereturnedinto hammerstones. Perhapstheirusersno longerneeded sharp-edged toolsorperhaps laterusersturnedthemintohammerstones. In two othercases,13 and26 (Figs.5, 12),the proximalend seemsto havebeen(re)usedin anactivepercussive mode.Last,in someceltsboth the cuttingedgeandtheproximal endwerereusedin thatway(see,e.g., Fig.7:22). EPILOGUE
74. Fortools,seeFranchthi 17; for ornaments, seeMiller1997, pp.129133. 75. SeeFranchthi 7, pp.174-183; Franchthi 12, pp.96-97; Perles2001, pp.39-41. 76. Fora critiqueof thishypothesis see Perles2001, pp.231-232. 77. Obsidianandhoneyflintwere
usedforchippedstonetools(Perles 1989; Franchthi 15);andesitefor millstones,handstones, andone celt (seeRunnels1981, pp.103-lOS; Franchthi 17); andmarbleforf1gurines andvases(Franchthi 9, p. 12; vanAndel andVitaliano1987, p.20).
Theexcavations atFranchthi yieldedeighty-nine groundstoneceltsfrom undisturbed or,in mostinstances,mixedNeolithicdeposits.No ground stonecelthasbeenfoundin a Palaeolithic orMesolithiclayerandthereis no indicationthatsuchtoolsweremadeor usedpriorto the Neolithic period.Serpentinite, thematerial fromwhichmostoftheceltsweremade, wasrarelyusedforpre-Neolithic toolsorornaments.74 The techniques of peckingandgrindingwereknownto the pre-Neolithicinhabitants of Franchthi, butapparently not usedin the chazneoperatoire laterusedfor celts.If so,thentheNeolithicgroundstoneceltassemblage at Franchthi represents a newindustry thatemploysessentially newrawmaterials anda newchazneoperatoire. Theseinnovations canbe usedto supporttheargument formulated on thebasisof othermaterials andespecially geostratigraphy thattheNeolithiccultureat Franchthi is not a localevolution fromaMesolithic background butratheranexogenous development probablyrelatedto the arrival of a newgroup.75 Theintroduction of a newtoolandtheemployment of newmaterials anda newtechnology pointto an activityfirstundertaken at the beginningof the Neolithic.The activityusuallyassociated withgroundstone celtsis tree-felling, theassumption beingthatceltswerenecessary to sedentarycommunities forclearingthe landto farm.76 At Franchthi, however,thedimensions of thecelts,theproperties of therawmaterials used, andthe reconstruction of the palaeoenvironment do not in mostcases supportsucha hypothesis. A numberof celtscouldhavebeenusedto clear shrubbery, workwoodorbone,processhidesormeat,orfortasksrelated to potteryproduction. Nevertheless, therearequitea fewceltstoo small evenforthesetasks.The Franchthiotes werecertainly ableto procure raw materials of betterqualityandlargerdimensions throughtheirownexpeditionsorthroughtheexchange networks thatbroughtobsidian andhoney flint,andesite,andmarbleto the site.77 Thattheychosenot to suggests thattheproperties oftherawmaterialwere adequate fortheusesintended forthesetools.
STROULIA ANNA
28
elusive.If Thewaysinwhichsomeof thesmallceltswereusedremain broken,as I suggestedabove,it is possible toolswereintentionally these withina ritualcontext.The ritualuse and"killing" theyfilnctioned that thatwasremightbe anisolatedphenomenon celtsatFranchthi small of a moregeneral to a specificfimctionof the site78or aninstanceof lated maybeclarilikely more is withintheAegean.Whichof thetwo practice and series79 Cavepublication of the Franchthi withthe completion fied Neolithic of morethoroughstudiesof otherAegean thepublication with assemblages. celt CE S REFEREN of W. 1890."Description Anderson, SomeStoneWeaponsandImplementsUsedby the Aboriginesof New SouthWales,"Recordsof the GeologicalSurveyofNew South Wales2, pp.73-81.
C.J. 1945."NewFindsof Becker, HaftedNeolithicCelts,"ActaArch 16,pp.155-175. of B. 1950.TheTechnology Blackwood, a ModernStoneAgePeoplein New Papersin TechGuinea(Occasional nology3), Oxford.
EnviS. 1990."Holocene Bottema, ronmentof the SouthernArgolid: A PollenCorefromKiladhaBay," in Franchthi6, pp.117-138. L.J. 1941."StoneAge AgriculBrass, turein New Guinea,"Geographical Review 31, pp.555-569. R. L. 1974."OntheUse of Carneiro, the StoneAxebythe Amahuaca Indiansof EasternPeru,"EthnologischeZeitschriftZurich1, pp.107122.
. 1979."TreeFellingwiththe Carried StoneAx:An Experiment Indians Yanomamo the Out among in Ethnoof SouthernVenezuela,"
ImplicationsofEthnograarchaeology: ed., C. Kramer, phyforArchaeology,
NewYork,pp.21-58. J.2000.Fragmentationin Chapman,
People,Places,and Archaeology: BrokenObjectsin thePrehistoryof Europe,London. South-Eastern
Edge Dickson,F.P.1972."Ground Axes,"Mankind8, pp.206-211. . 1981.AustralianStoneHatchets: A Studyin Designand Dynamics,
Sydney.
in the D. 1964."Excavations Evans,J. NeolithicSettlementof Knossos, 1957-60:PartI,"BSA 59, pp.141240. = Excavationsat Franchthi Franchthi Cave,Greece,Bloomington.
1 =T.W.JacobsenandW. R. FranchthiCaveand ParaFarrand, lia:Maps,Plans,and Sections (Franchthi1), 1987.
2 =T. H. vanAndelandS. B. Sutton,Landscapeand Peopleof the FranchthiRegion(Franchthi2), 1987. 3 = C. Perles,Les industrieslithiquestaille'esdeFranchthi,Argolide et ge'ne'rale (Grece)1: Pre'sentation 3), (Franchthi pale'olithiques industries
1987. MarineMol4 =J. Shackleton, FranchthiCave luscanRemainsfRom 1988. (Franchthi4), 5 = C. Perles,Les industrieslithiquestaille'esde Franchthi,Argolide (Grece)2: Les industriesduMe'soinitial lithiqueet duNe'olithique 1990. 5), (Franchthi
6 =T.J.Wilkinsonand S. Duhon,FranchthiParalia:
and TheSediments,Stratigraphy, 6), (Franchthi Investigations OXshore 1990.
7 =J.M. Hansen,ThePalaeoofFranchthiCave ethnobotany 7), (Franchthi 1993. 8 = K.D. Vitelli,FranchthiNeoand lithicPottery1: Classification CeramicPhases1 and2 (Franchthi8), 1993. Deities,Dolls, 9 = L. E. Talalay, and Devices:NeolithicFigurinesprom
15. 78. SeeFranchthi 79.In additionto the eleven alreadypublishedin the series fascicles Cave,Greece, at Franchthi Excavations nineareprojected. another
CELTS FROM FRANCHTHI
Franchthi Cave,Greece (Franchthi 9), 1993. 10 = K.D. Vitelli,Franchthi Neolithic Pottery 2: TheLaterNeolithicPhases3-5 (Franchthi 10),
CAVE
mentsin EasternNew Guinea,"in EssaysPresented to C. G.Seligman, E. E. Evans-Pritchard, R. Firth, B. Malinowski,andI. Schapera, eds.,London,pp.189-196. 1999. M'Guire,J.D. 1892."Materials, 12 =W. R. Farrand, DepositionApparatus, andProcessesof the al HistoryofFranchthi AboriginalLapidary," Cave:SediTheA!merican ments,Stratigraphy, andChronology A!nthropologist 5, pp.165-176. (Franchthi 12),2000. Miller,M. A. 1997."Jewels of Shelland 15 = C. Perles,Lesindustries liStone,ClayandBone:The Producthiques tailleesdeFranchthi, Afrgolide tion,Function,andDistribution of (Grece) 3: Du Ne'olithique ancienau AegeanStoneAge Ornaments" Ne'olithiquefinal (Franchthi 15),in (diss.BostonUniversity). press. . 1998."TheDistribution of 17 = A. Stroulia,FlexibleStones: OpaqueWhiteBeads"(lecture, Ground StoneToolsfrom Franchthi Seattle1998). Cave(Franchthi 17),in preparation. Mould,C. A., C. Ridley,andK.A. Godelier,M., andJ.Garanger. 1973. Wardle.2000."TheStoneSmall "Outilsde pierre,outilsd'acierchez Finds,"in Servia1:A!nglo-Hellenic les Baruyade Nouvelle-Guinee," Rescue Excavations, 1971-73, L'Homme 13,pp.185-220. C. Ridley,K.A. Wardle,andC. A. Hampton,O. W. 1999.Culture of Mould,eds.,London,pp. 112-161. Stone:Sacred andProfaneUsesof Moundrea-Agrafioti, A. 1981."La StoneamongtheDani,College Thessaliedu Sud-EstauNeoliStation. thique:Outillagelithiqueet osseux" Heider,K. G. 1967."Archaeological (diss.Universityof ParisX). AssumptionsandEthnographical . 1987."Problemes d'emFacts:A CautionaryTale fromNew manchement dansle Neolithique Guinea,"Southwestern Journalof grec:Lesgaineset manchesen bois A!nthropology 23, pp.52-64. de cervide," in La mainetl'outil: Hellweg,P.1984.Flintknapping: The Manches etemmanchements pre'AfrtofMakingStoneTools,Canoga historiques, D. Stordeur, ed.,Lyon, Park,Calif. pp.247-256. Iversen,J.1956."ForestClearance in . 1996."OcrstvazaxAx0tva," the StoneAge,"ScientzificA!merican in N£oRcOcxo5roiCTC5U05 V 194,pp.36-41. ERAordor, G. Papathanassopoulos, Jacobsen, T.W. 1976."17,000Yearsof ed.,Athens,pp.103-106. GreekPrehistory," ScientiJicA!meri- Moundrea-Agrafioti, A., andC. Gnarcan234,pp.76-87. dellis.1994."Classification desou.1981. "Franchthi Caveandthe tilstranchants thessaliensen pierre Beginningof SettledVillageLifein polieparles methodesmultidimenGreece," Hesperia 50, pp.303-319. sionnelles," in La Thessalie: Quinze Kardulias, P.N., andC. Runnels.1995. anne'es derecherches arche'ologiques, "TheLithicArtifacts:FlakedStone 1975-1990.Bilansetperspectives 1, andOtherNonflakedLithics,"in Athens,pp.189-200. AfrtHact andA!ssemblage: TheFinds Muller-Beck, H. 1965.SeebergBurfroma RegionalSurveyoftheSouthgaschisee-Sud 5: Holzgerate und ernAfrgolid, Greece1: ThePrehistoric Holzbearbeitung, Bern. andEarlyIronAfgePotteryandthe Mylonas,G. E. 1929.Excavations at LithicAfrtifacts, C. Runnels,D. J. Olynthus I: TheNeolithic Settlement, Pullen,andS. Langdon,eds.,StanBaltimore. ford,pp.74-139. Nami,H. G. 1984."Experimental Kozak,V. 1972."StoneAge Revisited," Approachto the Manufacture of NaturalHistory 81,pp. 14-24. ChippedandGroundStoneArtiMalinowski, B. 1934."StoneImplefactsfromtheTunelSite,Tierradel
29
Fuego,Argentina," LithicTechnology 13,pp.102-107. O'Hare,G. B. 1990."APreliminary Studyof PolishedStoneArtifactsin Prehistoric SouthernItaly," PPS56, pp.123-152. Perles,C. 1981."Industries lithiques," in Lagrottepre'historique deKitsos (Attique): Missions 1968-1978, N. Lambert,ed.,Athens,pp. 123222. . 1989."FromStoneProcurementto NeolithicSocietyin Greece"(lecture,Bloomington 1989). . 1992."Systems of Exchange andOrganization of Production in NeolithicGreece,"JMA 5, pp. 115164. .2001. TheEarlyNeolithic in Greece, Cambridge. Petrequin, P.,andA.-M. Petrequin. 1988.LeNe'olithique deslacs:Pre'histoire deslacsdeChalainetde Clairvaux (400S2000 av.J.C.), Paris. . 1993.Ecologie d'unoutil:La hachedepierreenIrianJaya(Indone'sie), Paris. Pond,A. W. 1930.PrimitiveMethods of Working StoneBasedonExperimentsofHalvorL. Skavlem, Beloit. Ricq-deBouard,M., andC. Buret. 1987."Traces superficielles et emmanchement," in La mainet l'outil:Manches etemmanchements pre'historiques, D. Stordeur, ed., Lyon,pp.177-184. Runnels,C. 1981."ADiachronicStudy andEconomicAnalysisof MillstonesfromtheArgolid,Greece," (diss.IndianaUniversity). . 1985."Tradeandthe Demand forMillstonesin SouthernGreece in the Neolithicandthe Early BronzeAge,"in Prehistoric ProductionandExchange: TheAegean and EasternMediterranean, B. Knapp andT.Stech,eds.,LosAngeles, pp.3>43. Sampson,A., andC. Sugaya.19881989."TheGroundStone AxesfromEuboea,"Annals of Snthropology andArchaeology 3, pp.11-45.
AOfiCA
HV686
ANNA
3o
Schoen,I. L. 1969."Contact withthe StoneAge,"NaturalHistory78, pp.1>18, 66-67. Seferiades, M.1992. "Lapierrepolie," in DikiliTash:Village prehistorique deMacedoine orientale (BCH Suppl.16),R.Treuil,ed.,Athens, pp.84-99. Semenov,S.A. 1964.Prehistoric Technology, London. Sillitoe,P.1988.MadeinNiugini:Technologyin theHighlands ofPapuaNew Guinea, London. Spenneman, D. H. R. 1987."0n the Use-Wearof StoneAdzesand AxesandIts Implication forthe Assessmentof Humans'Handedness,"LithicTechnology 16, pp.2227. Steensberg, A. 1980.New Guinea Gardens: A StudyofHusbandry withParallels in Prehistoric Europe, Sydney.
TOV a686Tpr
STROULIA
Stroulia,A. 1999."Millstones and CerealProcessing in Neolithic Franchthi,"JX103,p.308 (abstract). Sugaya,C. 1992."TheFunctionof the NeolithicStoneAxe,"in ac£0V£5 zVV£8pCO
ylA gV
AR%=CA @£a-
%ortov7, Athens,pp.71-77.
. 1993."TheStoneAxesof Tharrounia," in ^OT£CVr @appouvc'cov: To vzryRorco, o OC^C(7U05, ZO(C10 V£Xp0T=v£CO, A. Sampson, ed.,Athens,pp.442-447. Talalay, L. E.1987. "Rethinking the Functionof ClayFigurineLegs fromNeolithicGreece:An ArgumentbyAnalogy," AJA91, pp.161-169. Toth,N., D. Clark,andG. Ligabue. 1992."TheLastStoneAx Makers,"ScientiWcAmerican 267, pp.88-93.
AnnaStroulia INDIANAUNIVERSITY GLENNA. BLACKLABORATORY OF ARCHAEOLOGY 4 23 NORTH FESS AVENUE BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA47405 astrouli@indiana. edu
@£0-
Townsend, W. H. 1969."Stoneand SteelToolUse in a New Guinea Society," Ethnology 8, pp.199-205. Tsountas,C. 1908.Aczrpoccropc^ac AXPOZOR£C5£aXi0V
^=C acyr
Athens. vanAndel,T. H., andC.J.Vitaliano. 1987."Water andOtherResources," in Franchthi 2, pp.17-20. Vial,L. G. 1940-1941."StoneAxes of MountHagen,New Guinea," Oceania 11,pp.157-163. Vitaliano,C.J. 1987."Geological History,"in Franchthi 2, pp.12-17. . n.d."Geologyof the KoiladaFournoi-Kranidhi Region,Peloponnesos,Greece," unpubl.manuscript. Warren,P.1968."StoneAxesand Maceheads: Materials," in "KnossosNeolithic,PartII,"BSA 63, pp.239-241.
HESPERIA
72
(2003)
Pages 31-39
DEDICATION BY TH
ESALIAN
TO
THE
IN
SAMOTH
THE
LEAGUE GODS
GREAT RACE
ABSTRACT The document publishedin this articlewas found in 1986 duringexcavations in the Sanctuaryof the Great Gods at Samothrace.The inscription represents a dedication by the Thessalian League to the Great Gods. It provides importantinformationabout the Thessalian League in the 2nd centuryB.C., one of the most active periodsin the League'shistory,and contributesto our knowledge of places in mainlandGreece that sent theoroito Samothrace. 1. An earlierversionof thisarticle waspresentedat theAnnualMeeting of the ArchaeologicalInstitute of America in San Antonio, Texas,in December 1986 (Pounder1987). The document is also included in Dimitrova 2002, pp. 132-145. We would like to thankJames R. McCredie, directorof the Samothrace Excavations,for permissionto publish this document,for commenting on our manuscript,and for his generoussupport of our work at Samothrace.Letters from ChristianHabicht of the Institute for Advanced Study,Princeton,of 13 January1987 to Robert Pounder,in which he discussedvariousaspectsof the inscription,and of 26 November 2001 to Nora Dimitrova,in which he proposedvaluablerevisions,have been very helpful.We are also indebted to Kevin Clinton (Cornell University)for his useful correctionsand comments, Rachel Kitzinger(VassarCollege) for her helpful advice,and Alain Bresson (Universitede Bordeaux)for his valuable suggestions.We wish to acknowledge with gratitudeassistancefrom the Haight Fund of VassarCollege. We also thank the Hesperiaanonymous reviewersfor their carefulremarks.
The new inscription presented here was recovered in excavations undertaken by the Institute of Fine Arts of New YorkUniversity in the Sanctuary of the Great Gods at Samothrace.1The document informs us that the Thessalian League sent sacred ambassadorsto Samothrace between 170 and 140 B.C. It also allows us to identify the leader of the delegation, Damothoinos, son of Leontomenes and a member of a prominentPheraianfamily, as the strategosof the League in 161/60. Moreover, the document nicely supplements current evidence about the League's history during one of the most active periods of its existence, following liberation from Macedonian rule.
PHYSICAL
DESCRIPTION
Samothrace inv. 01.2
Fig. 1
H. 0.804, W. 0.47, Th. 0.20, H. of letters: 0.010-0.025 m Block of coarse-grained white marble, broken below, smooth on the left, rough-picked in back, moderately rough-picked above, built into a wall of a Byzantine structurein the northwest corner of the Neorion.Two dowel holes with pour channels are visible on top, placed in opposite corners. One hole is situated 0.055 m from the left edge and 0.04 m from the front. The second occurs in a similar position in the right rearcorner,with some lead preservedin it. The position of the dowel holes suggests that a rectangular object, possibly a relief, covered the top of the base. There is a small, shallow rectangularcutting (ca. 0.05 m wide) approximatelymidway down the left side, 0.045 m from the front edge.
ROBERT
32
L. POUNDER
AND NORA DIMITROVA
Figure1. Blockwith inscribeddedicationby the ThessalianLeagueto the GreatGods in Samothrace. Photo N. Dimitrova
Discussion: McCredie 1990, p. 184 (brief mention); Pounder 1987 (abstract). 170-140 B.C.
T6 xoLVOv ?ecocX&v 0EogL [Tzy&aXoL 1rcI OscopUv vacat ca. 0.02 m
5
AcatoOoivoo-coI A?ovTOJIvoOS (IXovixou tov IOL)tArTo IOepcicov Ilactcpi ou -coi BaOvxXA?ou; Aoxiaxoou cob Br0ouxXLiooS AocpLaoocov
10
vacat ca. 0.02 m ?7rLpaOx(L)?o NuotipoGcopou To0 Oecv8ou.
DEDICATION
BY THE
EPIGRAPHICAL
THESSALIAN
LEAGUE
33
COMMENTARY
The letters are clear, carefully executed in comparison with most other Samothracianinscriptions,and adornedwith finials.The omicron and theta are usually smaller (0.010-0.012 m) than the other letters. The lettering resembles that of three Samothracian records of theoroi-proxenoi2and a new theoroilist mentioned by Chryssa Karadima.3It is consistent with lettering in 2nd-century inscriptions,notably a Samothracianlist of theoroiproxenoi4and a municipal document of Skotoussa, dated by the eponyms of the Thessalian League to 161/60 B.C.5
GENERAL COMMENTARY This document is a dedication by the Thessalian Confederacy to the Great Gods in Samothrace. The Thessalian delegation consists of two citizens from Pherai and two from Larisa. It is headed by the Pheraian Damothoinos, son of Leontomenes, without doubt none other than the strategos of the Thessalian League in 161/60.6 The other three theoroiseem to be unknown, although (with the exception of Bathykles) their names are attested in Thessaly.7 in line 3 should be understood as "repreThe expression Ec Oecopcov sented by the theoroi"or something similar.A parallel for such usage can be found in Delian inventory lists, e.g., IG XI.2 184, 186, 188, 190, and many others, where a gift by a certain delegation, whose leader is mentioned by name, is referredto as "&va60jioxrCr &0XLEOcpeou so-and-so." son of Leontomenes is known from other inDamothoinos, (line 4), scriptions, where he is mentioned as strategosof the League.8 He was part of a famous Pheraian family,whose members, attested from the 3rd century
B.C.
until the 1st century A.C., performed important public duties.
Both his great-grandfather Epikratidas and his grandfather Damothoinos II were gymnasiarchs at Pherai, ca. 241 and 216 B.C., respectively.9His father Leontomenes, son of Damothoinos, was strategosof the Thessalian League in 186/5, as IG IX.2 64, 67, and 274 testify. In the next year, 185/4, Leontomenes' brother (and Damothoinos's uncle) Pausanias held 2. Samothrace 2.1, no. 23; IGXII.8 163, 171. 3. Karadima1995, p. 492. 4. IGXII.8 170b (mid-2nd century B.C. or shortlythereafter).The date of this document is based on the mention in line 67 of a Timapolis, son of Euphragoras,attested also in Lindos2, 223 (ca. 149) and 228 (138), and in line 79 of two ambassadorsof King Attalos II (159-138) or III (138133). 5. Pouilloux 1955, pp. 443-459 (= SEG XV 370). For the date of this
document,see Kramolisch1978, p. 57, n.3. 6. Although Damothoinos is not called architheoros, the listing of his name before those of the other theoroi suggests that he was probably the most importantmemberof the delegation. 7. For instance,the name Pamphilos is attestedin IG IX.2 474A, line 42; 517, line 54; 557, line 25; 562, line 17; Lykiskosin IG IX.2 109a, line 38; 121, line 1; 275, lines 8-9; 288, line 12; 290a, line 2; 527, line 1; 851, line 1;
and Philonikos in IG IX.2 65, line 11; 2341, line 32; 257, line 1. Philippos is a very common name in Thessaly and is found elsewherein Pherai,IG IX.2 415, lines 51-52. 8. Pouilloux1955, pp. 443-459 (SEGXV 370); SIG3668, line 19 (see SEGXXVIII 505); and possibly Axenidis 1939, line 21 (see SEG XXVIII 505). For the two restorations in SEG XXVIII 505, see Kramolisch 1978, p. 58. 9. See Kramolisch1978, pp. 28, 31.
34
ROBERT
L. POUNDER
AND
NORA
DIMITROVA
that same office. Damothoinos's grandson, Leontomenes, son of Megalokles, was also strategos,ca. 100-90.10 A date before 170 B.C. for the present inscription is unlikely: Damothoinos, son of Leontomenes, would probably have been too young to head the embassy.As just noted, his father, Leontomenes, son of Damothoinos, was strategosin 186/5, which suggests that he was probably between 40 and 55 years old at the time. His son was then probably born between ca. 205 and 190, and in 170 would have been between 20 and 35 years old, not a very plausible (though theoretically possible) age to hold such an important public office as the head of an embassy. The eponymous king Nymphodoros, son of Theondas (lines 10-11), is otherwise unattested. The rare name Theondas, however, occurs elsewhere in connection with Samothrace:a Hadra vase from Egypt mentions a Samothracian ambassadorto Alexandria named Theondas, who died in 219 B.C.ll According to Livy, a Theondas was an eponymous king of The name is also attested on coins, dating perSamothrace in 168 B.C.12 from the same 168.13 The eponymous king recordedin the present haps year, dedication would have been too old between 170 and 140 B.C. (the suggested date of the document, see below) to have been the son of the ambassador Theondas. He would have been at least 55-85 years old at that time, if we assume that his father had died as early as age 40, which is possible, but unlikely.He might have been the son of the other Theondas, who was king in 168. This would mean that if the inscription is to be dated ca. 160 B.C., the time of Damothoinos's service as strategos,Nymphodoros must have served as eponymous king at a relatively early age (ca. 40), while his father served at a relatively late age (ca. 60), which is theoretically possible. A date around 150-140 B.C. for the inscription would suit this scheme a bit better, but of course one cannot be sure whether the two kings were indeed father and son. It is also unclearwhether the ambassadorTheondas was relatedto the eponymous king of 168, but the time interval is compatible with the possibility that he was the latter'sgrandfather,thereby conforming to the Greek custom of naming the grandson after his grandfather. In view of the name'srarity,the hypothesis that the eponymous king of 168 was the grandson of the ambassadorTheondas and the father of the Nymphodoros in the present inscription is attractive. Thus, a date between 170 and 140 can be safely suggested, in view of Damothoinos's generalship, which is dated to 161/60, and of Nymphodoros'spossible relation to the eponymous king of 168. Another question that the document poses is whether there was a specific occasion for the dedication. Such an event might have been the capture of Perseus by the Romans in August 168, followed by the liberation of Samothracefrom Macedonian rule.As mentioned above,Theondas was the eponymous king of Samothrace in 168 B.C., at the time when Perseus was captured,while the eponymous magistrate of the present inscription is Nymphodoros, son of Theondas. The inscription, therefore,cannot be dated to a civil year that included August 168. If the Samothraciancalendar was similar to the Athenian, i.e., if the year began with the first new
10. Kramolisch(1978, p. 31) provides a useful stemma of Damothoinos'sfamily. 11. Sammelbuch 1, p. 1639. 12. Livy 45.5.6-12. 13. Ashton (1988) demonstrates that the nameTheondes/Theondas appearson a posthumousAlexander tetradrachmof the earlyor mid-2nd centuryB.C.and on pseudo-Rhodian coins, which he is inclined to date to 168 B.c. and therebyacknowledgetheir Samothracianorigin (we aregrateful to A. Bressonfor this reference).For Samothraciancoins, see also Miinsterberg[1911-1927] 1973, p. 28; IGXII.8, p. 41. The nameTheondes is also attestedin a lead cursetablet that Dusenbery considersSamothracian (Samothrace 11.2, pp. 1165-1168).
DEDICATION
14. EtThas 3, p. 149; see also pp. 456-458. A recent discussionof the Thasian and Pariancalendarshas been providedin Trimpy 1997, pp. 65-72. We thank C. Habicht for this reference. 15. See Samuel 1972, p. 130. He lists two Samothracianmonths, Maimakterion(Samothrace 2.1, no. 5) and Poseideon (IG XII.8 169). Poseideon is not certainlyattested:the remains on the stone are almost illegible, and the placing of the supposedmonthfollowing the ethnic KuIlxlvc)v-is ratherawkward,since one would expect an ambassador'sname at this position. Cole (1984, p. 40, with n. 333 on p. 119) observesthat "neitherMounychion,nor Artemisiosis listed by Samuel as a Samothracianmonth." Mounychion appearsin an initiate list, publishedby McCredie (1965, p. 115). It correspondsto Roman May.Artemisios is mentioned in anotherlist of initiates (Robert 1936, pp. 52-53, a correctedversionof IGXII.8 195), but as a Macedonian,not a Samothracian, month. Triimpy(1997, p. 118) lists only Maimakterionfor Samothrace. 16. Cole 1989, p. 1568, n. 21. 17. Cole 1984, p. 39. 18. IGXI 161,199, 287; IDelos291, 298,313,1421,1425,1430,1432, 1441,1450, etc.; see also Bruneau1970, pp.94-100,111-112. 19. Boethius 1918, p. 137. 20. See Dimitrova2002, pp. 20-29. 21. McCredie 1979, p. 26; Samothrace 2.1, no. 13.
BY THE
THESSALIAN
LEAGUE
35
moon after the summer solstice, the first half of 167 is also precluded.The Thasian year, on the other hand, possibly began with the winter solstice (as did the Parian one), as Jean Pouilloux observed.14If Samothrace followed the example of Thasos (and if the Thasian year indeed began in the winter), then the inscriptioncould be dated to 167, i.e., shortlyafterPerseus's defeat. Too little is known, however, about the Samothracian calendar to provide a secureargument.Our only evidence is that Maimakterion, Mounychion, and possibly Poseideon were Samothracian months.15 The Thessalian League may, however, have sent sacred ambassadors to Samothrace without their visit being tied to a specific event. There is no indication that any theoroifrom other Greek states visited the island in connection with a particular event, such as an annual festival, for instance, despite the common assumption that theoroiwere sent to attend such festivals. In fact, the documentary sources for the Samothracian festival are rather slim. One record of initiates, CIL III 720, line 4, mentions at least three consecutive days when people became mystaepii. Susan Cole cites this document as evidence for "the festival at Samothrace,"presumably because of the listing of consecutive days.16This, however, cannot be taken as secure evidence for a festival. It is possible that the people enumerated in the document were initiated during a sequence of days unrelated to a festival. The document, in any case, is too fragmentary to yield any conclusions about either a festival or the possibility that initiation could be performed every day,if needed, which seems to be the alternative interpretation. Some literary sources, on the other hand, suggest the existence of a festival. Plutarch (Luc. 13.2) writes that Bokonios was delayed ev oSalo[UorjEvo< xaci avyupir4v, implying that initiation was separate Opax6xn from the panegyris.Apanegyris was a typical feature of a festival. Most of the initiation documents preserving the name of a month are dated in June, which prompted Cole to suggest that June may have been the month of the annual festival.17Thus the existence of a festival, perhaps in June, is a reasonable hypothesis, but there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that theoroivisited Samothrace in order to attend that festival. Parallels for theoroiwho were sent not in connection with a festival can be found elsewhere in the Greek world. The Delian inventory catalogues, for instance, list gifts presented by various officials, among whom theoroiand architheoroiappear frequently,but these individuals were neither attendingnor announcinga festival.1The Pythais,which can be viewed as a kind of theoria,was specifically an Athenian institution, not connected with any Delphic festival.l9 The only secure information that the Samothracian inscriptions provide is that the theoroiwere respected delegates of their home cities, usually honored with proxenia, at least in the 2nd and possibly the 1st century B.C.; that they probablyunderwent initiation; and that some of them set up dedications to the Great Gods.20 The document published here is not unique in mentioning theoroi setting up a dedication in Samothrace. A statue base and a round altar mention theoroifrom Paros offering dedications to the Great Gods.21The present inscription, however, adds to the geographical range of cities and
ROBERT
36
L. POUNDER
AND
NORA
DIMITROVA
institutions connected with Samothrace. Pherai and Larisa in Thessaly can now be included in the list of places known to have sent sacred ambassadors.The certain records of theoroi,i.e., those that explicitly contain the term theoroi,mention Keramos,Kyme, Ephesos, Halikarnassos,Kolophon, Priene, Samos, Klazomenai, Alabanda, Astypalaia, Maroneia, Kaunos, Abdera, Kos, Rhodes, Iasos, Stratonikeiain Karia,Parion,Dardanos, Paros, Myrina (perhaps in Asia Minor), Teos, and Elis. Almost as certain, i.e., attested in presumed records of sacred ambassadors(which happen to be missing the opening formula containing the term theoroi), are Thasos, Phokaia,Aigai/Aigeai, Kyzikos,Chios, Eresos,Mylasa, Mytilene, Bargylia, Naxos, Nysa, and Tarentum.22Thus it is evident that the best-represented regions in the Samothracianlists of theoroiareAsia Minor and the Aegean islands. Hitherto the only other place in mainland Greece that was attested to have sent theoroi(excluding Macedonia and Thrace, which were traditionally connected with Samothrace) was Elis, as a record of theoroiinitiates, IGXII.8 176, testifies. The new information that Thessaly sent theoroisuggests that we reexamine the identity of the city of Larisa attested in Fraser'sedition of Samothracian inscriptions (Samothrace2.1, no. 23, line 3) as having sent theoroi.Although it is not certain that Thessalian Larisa is meant, this possibility is now well worth considering.23
HISTORICAL CONTEXT The document introduced here is also interesting from a historical perspective.The Thessalian League underwent various stages of development during its long existence. In order to situate the present document within its historical context, we will focus on the League's history in the first half of the 2nd century B.C.A brief overview of the major events should suffice.24
22.Theselistsarebasedon a new studyof both publishedand unpublished documents;see Dimitrova2002, pp. 28-29. 23. Fraserassumes(Samothrace2.1, no. 23) that Larisa-on-Hermosis meant.The reasonfor this assumption seems to be its geographicalproximity to Ephesos and Kyme,which arelisted in the same inscriptionas sending sacreddelegates.In his introduction (p. 14), Frasertreatsthis identification as certain.J. and L. Robert (1964, no. 372), however,suggest Larisain Thessaly.The names that follow,
[..]! IA 'AptoloptivouS, [Egv]YptuooS Opoui6rcoo. E8ql)ptou,['A]v-riyovoS NtxoX6ov,are too common A%niyTpLog
to allow any definite conclusions, except that 'Av-ryovogis extremely popularin Thessaly,as a resultof Macedonianinfluence,as is Ntx6Xoro;. A Larisean inscription containing two
decreesin accordancewith Philip V's letters to the Thessalians,IG XI.2 517, mentions a Samothracianwho is given 2.1, p. 9). citizenship (cf. Samothrace On the other hand, no connection between Samothraceand Larisa-onHermos is known.The matteris furthercomplicatedby the fact that there aretwo other Larisasin Asia Minor: the Troadicand the Ephesian ones. Cook (1968, p. 38, n. 8; 1973, p. 221) suggeststhat Larisain the Troadis more likely to have sent
theoroithan Larisa-on-Hermos,which was not a very significantcity in the Hellenistic and Roman periods,while the Ephesian Larisawas even less importantthan the one on the Hermos and perhapslackedthe statusof a city. There is no evidence,however,for connections between Larisain the Troad and Samothrace.Thus, the suggestion that Larisain Thessaly is indicated seems slightlypreferable.See Dimitrova2002, p. 38. 24. The 2nd-centuryhistory of the League presentscomplex and controversialissues that we will not attempt to solve here, since they do not concern our inscriptiondirectly.
DEDICATION
BY THE
THESSALIAN
LEAGUE
37
After the Second Macedonian War (200-197 B.C.), the Thessalian Confederacywas liberatedby the Romans. In 194 Flamininus reorganized its structureby establishing strategoi,who presided over the federal government as annual officers.25A typical feature of the new constitution was the council, synedrion,which functioned as a representativegovernment.26 The Greek face of the new organization reflected the Roman desire to demonstrate that the League was indeed set free from Macedonian supremacy.The territory of the refounded state did not include some of its northern areas, formerly inhabited by perioeci,but in the south it gained Phthiotic Achaia, Aitolian Lamia, and other regions.27 The following period-the first half of the 2nd century B.C.-directly concerns our inscription.The Thessalian League experienceda full-fledged revival, marked by considerable political activity,with an expanded geographical scope. We learn from a decree of Phokaia, honoring a certain Apollodoros from Priene and dated ca. 190 B.C., that Priene was visited by Thessalian ambassadors.28A decree found at Delphi, dated to 186 or 184 B.C.,29honors Nikostratos, son of Anaxippos, a prominent citizen of Larisa. He fulfilled various diplomatic duties with distinction, including serviceas a hieromnemon of the Thessaliansin the reorganizedAmphictionic which now consisted of autonomous members (lines 3-4), as Council, its to opposed previous dependence on the Aitolians.30A decree of the Thessalian League found in Philia, near the federal sanctuary of Athena Itonia, and dated to 179-165 B.C.,31discusses financial aid given to Ambracia by the League and can serve as evidence for their good relations: Ambracian citizens were granted proxenia and invited to the sacrifice in honor of Athena Itonia. As Habicht has observed, the Thessalian koinon also sent theoroi to the Asklepieia in Mytilene and participatedin the Klaria of Kolophon, while Larisa, the capital of the League, honored officials of Eumenes II.32 The League fought on the Roman side against Perseus during the Third Macedonian War (171-168 B.C.), and subsequently regained the cities it had indirectly lost to Philip V during the Roman war with Antiochus III and the Aitolians in 192-188. (Philip had been allowed to 25. Livy 34.51.4-6. The reorganization of the ThessalianLeague by T. Quinctius Flamininusand the ten legatiare also referredto in SIG3674, lines 50-54. 26. Flamininuspresumablydrew inspirationfrom the Achaian League, which had alreadyhad a synedrionfor 200 years.See Larsen1968, p. 284. 27. Larsen 1968, p. 282. 28. IPriene65, lines 8-10. 29. SIG3613. 30. See especiallyHabicht's(1987, pp. 60-62) discussionof the decree. For the new Amphictionic Council,
see also Lefevre 1998, p. 205; Sanchez 2001, pp. 496-509 (we owe these referencesto C. Habicht). 31. SEGXXVI 688 (= Habicht 1976). 32. C. Habicht, pers. comm.; see above,n. 1. For Mytilene, see IG XII, suppl.,3, dated after 196 B.C.For the Klariaof Kolophon,see Picard 1922, pp. 345-347. For Larisa,see Polyb. 22.6; IG IX.2 512 (revisedtext, SEG XXXI 574); Gallis 1981-1982, pp. 246-249, no. 1 (= SEGXXXI 575), both inscriptions of 171 or 170 B.c.,
accordingto Habicht.
38
ROBERT
L. POUNDER
AND
NORA
DIMITROVA
conquer some Thessalian territoryas a rewardfor his help to the Romans.) The Thessalian cavalryperformed feats of braveryby helping the Romans at Kallikinos in 171, and in general played an active part in the war.33 To celebrate the Thessalians' valor,the contest of the Eleutheria in Larisa was founded.34Thessaly, on the winning side at last, was in a position to exert the influence that must have accompanied victory. In 168, immediately after Perseusreached Samothrace,embassies fromThessaly were dispatched: L. Aemilius Paullus gave audience to numerous delegations at Pella, according to Livy, "maximeex Thessalia."35 Against this background, the present monument informs us that the Thessalian League sent theoroito Samothrace-a fact hitherto unknown, and one that enriches our knowledge ofThessalian and Samothracianhistory in the 2nd century B.C.
REFERENCES Ashton, R. 1988. "Pseudo-Rhodian Drachms from Samothrace,"NC 148, pp. 129-134. Axenidis,T. 1939. "Maoveoc0ascatxixq Hellenika11, pp. 263srutypaypi," 271. Boethius, A. 1918. Die Pythais:Studien der Verbindungen zur Geschichte zwischenAthenundDelphi,Uppsala. surlescultes Bruneau,P. 1970. Recherches et a deDelosa l'epoquehellenistique l'epoqueimperiale,Paris. Cole, S. G. 1984. TheoiMegaloi:The Cultof the GreatGodsat Samothrace, Leiden. .1989. "The Mysteriesof Samothraceduring the Roman Period,"ANRWII 18.2, pp. 15641598. Cook, J. M. 1968. "Coinsfrom an Aeolic Site,"BSA 63, pp. 33-40. .1973. TheTroad:AnArchaeologicaland Topographical Study, Oxford. Dimitrova,N. 2002. "Theoroiand Initiatesin Samothrace"(diss. Cornell University). sur EtThas3 = J. Pouilloux,Recherches l'histoireet lescultesde Thasos(Etudes thasiennes3), Paris 1954. Gallis, K. I. 1981-1982. "N&aercypa1T A6aplo," (pLtxa ?pipuxCaaOCot6 AAA 13, 1980 [1981-1982], pp. 246-262. Habicht, C. 1976. "Ambrakiaund der thessalischeBund zur Zeit des in DemetriasI, Perseuskrieges,"
V. Milojcic and D. Theocharis, eds., Bonn, pp. 175-180. .1987. "The Role of Athens in the Reorganizationof the Delphic Amphictionyafter 189 B.c.," Hesperia56, pp. 59-71. Helly, B. 1995. L'Etatthessalien:Aleuas le Roux,lestetradeset les "Tagoi," Lyon. IDelos= InscriptionsdeDelos,7 vols., Paris 1926-1972. IPriene= F. Hiller von Gaertringen, Inschriftenvon Priene,Berlin 1906. Karadima,C. 1995. "ApXoatooytxoe zpycaxosgoTF MxapoVElaxOaT-Y
To1995," To ApXacoZcxEi0opax-q xat Maxe5ovcaO AoyoE6'Epyo aorM 487-496. Opdcxv9, pp. Kramolisch,H. 1978. DemetriasII: Die Strategendesthessalischen BundesvomJahr196 v. Chr.bis zumAusgangderromischen Republik, Bonn. Larsen,J. A. 0. 1968. GreekFederal States:TheirInstitutionsandHistory, Oxford. Lefevre,F. 1998. LAmphictioniepyleoHistoireet institutions, delphique: Paris. Lindos2 = C. Blinkenberg,Inscriptions (Lindos: Fouilles et recherches,1902-
1914 2), Berlin 1941. McCredie,J. R. 1965. "Samothrace: PreliminaryReporton the Campaignsof 1962-1964," Hesperia 34, pp. 100-124.
33. On the correctversionof the name Kallikinos,see Helly 1995, p. 264, n. 150. For the battle,see Livy 42.55-60. 34. Robertand Robert 1964, no. 227; Walbank1979, p. 305; IG IX.2 553. 35. Livy 44.46.9.
DEDICATION
.1979. "Samothrace:SupplementaryInvestigations,19681977,"Hesperia48, pp. 1-44. . 1990. "IO'EEpopicatpozLcoroxzot xXaoILxc)VOapXoitoTjTcov," pQLC)V
ArchDelt41, 1986, B [1990], p. 184. Miinsterberg,R. [1911-1927] 1973. Die Beamtennamen aufden griechi-
schenMiinzen, repr.Hildesheim. Picard,C. 1922. Epheseet Claros: Recherchessur les sanctuaires et les cultes de 'I'onie du nord, Paris.
Pouilloux,J. 1955. "Actesd'affranchissement thessaliens,"BCH 79, pp.442-463.
Robert L. Pounder VASSARCOLLEGE DEPARTMENT BOX
OF CLASSICS
511 NEW
POUGHKEEPSIE,
YORK
[email protected]
Nora Dimitrova CORNELL
UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT 120
GOLDWIN
ITHACA,
NEW
OF CLASSICS SMITH YORK
[email protected]
HALL I4853
I2604
BY THE
THESSALIAN
Pounder,R. L. 1987. "AThessalian Dedication at Samothrace," AJA91, pp. 270-271 (abstract). Robert,J., and L. Robert. 1964. Bulletin REG 1964. epigraphique, Robert,L. 1936. CollectionFroehnerI: Inscriptions grecques,Paris. 1 = Sammelbuchgriechischer Sammelbuch UrkundenausAgypten1, Strasbourg 1915. ExcavationsConducted Samothrace: by theInstituteof Fine Arts of New YorkUniversity 2.1 = P.M. Fraser,TheInscriptionson Stone(Samothrace 2.1), New York1960.
LEAGUE
39
11.2 = E. B. Dusenbery,The Nekropoleis: Cataloguesof Objectsby (Samothrace 11.2), Categories Princeton 1998. Samuel,A. 1972. GreekandRoman Calendarsand Yearsin Chronology: Munich. ClassicalAntiquity, Sanchez,P. 2001. LAmphictioniedes Pyleset deDelphes,Stuttgart. zu Triimpy,C. 1997. Untersuchungen denaltgriechischen Monatsnamen undMonatsfolgen,Heidelberg. Walbank,F. W. 1979. A Historical on Polybius3, Commentary Oxford.
*
HESPERIA
72 (2003)
Pages4I-II9
H
T A
RC P ROJ
U
D
E H
A
+
R R E S E O
LO
G
R E G
I O
I CA
L
L
NA
E CT
SURVEYIN ARCHAEOLOGICAL OFEPIDAMNUS/ THETERRITORY IN ALBANIA DYRRACHIUM ABSTRACT In the springof 2001thehillyuplandsimmediatelynorthwestofthe modern cityof Durreswereforthe firsttimeinvestigatedusingthe techniquesof intensivesurfacesurvey.In total,an areaof sixsquarekilometerswasexplored and twenty-ninesitesweredefined,most of them new.Remainsof Greek andgraves.One inscriptions plentifulandincludeunpublished antiquitywere unknownArchaictemple.Includedin sitemaybethelocationof apreviously alist of sites,anda cataofthe areasinvestigated, thisarticlearedescriptions logueof the mostdiagnosticartifactsrecovered.Patternsof settlementand landuse arediscussedandcomparedto those recordedby othersurveysin Albania. ModernDurresin centralAlbaniais todaythe largestseaportin the country and is linkedby a superhighwayto the capital,Tirana,35 km to the a east (Figs. 1-2).1 Durres is the location of Epidamnus/Dyrrachium, by Corcyra B.C. century 7th the later in Greekcolonythat was founded with supportfrom Corinth and other Dorian cities.2The ancientpolis centerhas long been the objectof archaeologicalresearch,and is particularlywell known to ancienthistoriansboth as the site of a revolution that constitutedone of the proximatecausesfor the outbreakof the PeloponnesianWar (Thuc.1.24-29) and as the site of a majorbattlebetween 1. Davis,Hoti, Pojani,Stocker,and forthe Wolpertarejointlyresponsible of thispaper.Acheoverallauthorship a reporton the results soncontributed of surveybyTeamB. Appendix2 and of descriptions mostof the catalogued artifactsaretheworkof Hayes.Unless are otherwisenoted,allphotographs fromthe projectarchives. We aregratefulto RichardHodges of EastAnglia),Henry (University and University), Hurst(Cambridge
especiallyto MariaGraziaAmoreand in LorencBejkofortheirassistance We alsothankthe planningfieldwork. Universityof Cincinnatiforits support We thankOls Lafe of ourresearch. andMariaGraziaAmoreforhelpin thisreportandLida proofreading Mirajforherhospitalityin Durreson wasconmanyoccasions.Fieldwork fromthe ductedwithpermission in Tirana; Instituteof Archaeology facilitated MuzaferKorkuti,its director,
ourmlsslonln everypOSSl Dleway. 2. Thuc.1.24.On the dateof the colony,see Eusebius(Schoene1866, continuation p. 89,line 1392).Jerome's of Eusebiusplacesthe foundationin 627 B.C., slightlyearlierthanthe textof Eusebiusitself(Helm1956,p. 97b).In of thisarticle,Epidamthe remainder to more is referred nus/Dyrrachium simplybythe nameof the moderncity, Durres. .
.
.
.
1
JACK L. DAVIS
42
t:
;:
ET AL.
f:'
:
L9h
0 \
T: )
s i
E
Apoll
Figure1. Map of Albaniashowing principalcentersof Greekculture. R. J. Robertson
JuliusCaesarandPompey(Caes.B Civ. 3.35-61)at Petrain 48 B.C.3 A steepridgeformsa backdrop forthemodernport.The topof thesouthernmosthill is todayoccupiedby the palaceof the formermonarchof Albania, AhmedZogu(Fig.3).It is clearthatmuchof thepresentcityhas beenbuiltoverancientremains. A historyof modernresearch in Durresmightproperly beginin 1861 withtheexplorations of LeonHeuzey,onecomponent in a FrenchMissionto Macedonia, andwiththedescription of theLateRomancircuitof
3. Heuzey1886,pp.35-88. Ancientsourcesforthe historyof Durres arereproduced, translated, anddiscussedin CabanesandDrini1995, pp.19-33, andarelistedin Myrto 1998,pp.76-86.
..
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
43
Figure2. City andportof the moderncityof Durres.FromTowerF, lookingsoutheast.
Figure3. Palaceof AhmedZogu. Lookingnorth-northwestfromthe newArchaeologicalMuseumof Durres.
publishedby HeuzeyandDaumetin 1876 (Fig.4).4The fortifications of theancientcitywas attemptto inventory theantiquities nextsystematic Soon andArnoldSchober.s thatof the AustriansCamilloPraschniker soundingsin variouslocain 1925conducted after,a Frenchexpedition 4. Heuzey1886,chap.2, pp.43-55; HeuzeyandDaumet1876,pp.349392.It remainsoddthatasyet no tracesof Hellenisticor earlierRoman
havebeenidentified fortifications Hoti,andHurst2001, (Gutteridge, pp.395,406, n. 23). Forthe most discussionof archaeocomprehensive
logicalresearch in Durres(complete through1993),seethe annotatedbibliography of Myrto(1998,pp.76-103). 5. Praschniker andSchober1919.
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
44
Figure4. Detail frommapof the Durresarea.AfterHeuzeyl886, plan4
. -fuk
Figure5. Architecturalterracotta foundin the moderncemeteryof Durres.CourtesyInstituteof Archaeology, Tirana
tionsanddetermined that,in thecentralzoneof themoderncity,levelsof Greekdatelie some5 m beneaththecurrent street.6 SinceWorldWarII, remainsof a Romanbath,a macellum, andan amphitheater havebeenexcavated, andthecourseofanaqueduct of Trajanic datehasbeendocumented. EvidencefortheGreekcityis moreexiguous andvirtually nothingis knownaboutthe sizeandpreciselocationof the originalcolony.7 Pre-Roman remains includeonlya Hellenistichouse;an altarof the 4th centuryB.C. discovered northeastof the portin drained marshland; andarchitectural terracottas of WesternGreekArchaicstyle foundin theareaof themoderncemetery of thecity(Fig.5).8Largenum-
6. Rey1925. 7. SeeHammond1967,pp.425426,469-470,forthe foundationof the originalcolony,theuncertainty of its location,andwhatlittleis known of its earlyhistory. 8. See,withearlierreferences, Miraj 1994(bath);Hoti 1989b,1996(macellum);To,ci1971andMiraj1990(amphitheater); MirajandMyrto1982 (aqueduct);Tartari 1988(Hellenistic
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
45
Figure6. Generalmapof theDurres area.R.J. Robertson house);Myrto1989(altar);andZeqo 1989(architectural terracottas). 9. Villais the hillof the palaceof AhmedZogu. 10.Tojci1976;Hidri1983,1997; Tartari1987;Myrto1998,p. 99.
bersof gravesandgravemarkers of ArchaicthroughEarlyRomandate havebeenlocatedin the valleysnorthandnorthwestof the cityon the slopesof thehillsof Dautaj,Kokoman, andVilla(Fig.6).9Othergraves havebeenfoundcloserto themarshintheareabetweenSpitalla andPorto Romano.l°
46
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
TH E ARC HAE O L O G I CAL SU RVEY
Figure7. Viewof thecityof Durres fromtractA077.Petraatfarrightin thedistance.Lookingsoutheast.
Tothenorthwest of theportof Durres,betweenthecityandthemodern villageof PortoRomano, areuplands, ca.10 km2 in extent.Theseformed theimmediate hinterland oftheancientpolisandincludetheancientcemeterieson thehillsof Dautaj,Kokoman, andVilla(Fig.7).Untilrecently the areawassparsely settledand,althoughfrequently thetargetof visits, extensiveinvestigation, andexcavation bypersonnel basedat the Durres museum,it hadneverbeensystematically explored. In 1999it wasclear, however,that antiquitiesin theseuplandswerebeingdestroyedat an accelerated rateas the resultof illegalsettlementof immigrants from northern Albania. Theideaof organizing anintensivearchaeological surveyherefirstbeganto be discussed amongmembers of theInternational Centerof AlbanianArchaeology in Tiranain the fallof thatyear,and preliminary reconnaissance wascarriedoutin a smallareanearthemoderncemetery of thecity.llSeveralconcentrations of potteryandtilewere foundthereby LorencBejkoandMariaGraziaAmoreof the Albanian RescueArchaeology Unit,aswellas a much-disturbed burialcontaining the neckof a red-figured amphora andtwo smallblack-glaze oinochoai (Fig.8).12 Fromthisauspicious beginningarosetheDurresRegional ArchaeologicalProject(DRAP),a rescuemissionintendedto serveasa preludeto 11.BejkoandAmore2000,pp.4546. 12. RobertF. Suttonhasexamined photographs of thesefindsandcommentsthatthe fabricof the amphora appearsto be Corinthian(ora related fabric),likethatof a smallchous-type oinochoefoundduringoursurvey(see
below,A048-02fromS007).Added miltosseemsto havebeenemployedto imitatethe colorof Atticred-figure pottery,anda thin,dullblackglazewas usedforthepartlyfugitivebackground. Erosis illustrated on bothsidesof the neck:on onesidehe is shootinga bow, andon the otherhe is seatedon a chair.
The scenesareframedaboveandbelow by a bandof egg motifs.On the shouldera bandof tonguemotifsis preserved.The amphora appearsto date to thelastthirdof the 5th centuryB.C. The dateof the oinochoaifoundby BejkoandAmoreis consistentwith thatof the amphora.
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
47
Figure8. Findsfromthevicinityof thecemetery of Durres:red-figured amphora neck(twoviews);small oinochoe.CourtesyL. Bejko,M. G. Amore,andInternational Centerof AlbanianArchaeology in Tirana
a long-termprogram of research in theDurresarea.Theprojectis sponsoredbytheInternational Centerof Albanian Archaeology inTirana,an instituteestablished in 1999andfundedbythePackard Humanities Institute(PHI).13 In August2000,Davis,Stocker,andPojani,togetherwith AdamGutteridge of Cambridge University, visitedthe areato be examined.Fieldwork wasconducted betweenMarch10 andApril5, 2001.14 A totalareaof ca.600 hawasinvestigated by twoteams,generally consistingof fivefieldwalkers anda teamleader, in thirteenanda halfdaysof fieldwork.l5
13.PHI is particularly concernedto ensurethe preservation of Albania's significantarchaeological heritage. 14.Membersof the projectincludedPhoebeE. Acheson(team leader,University of Cincinnati), Valbona,Coko(fieldwalker, University of Tirana),SiriolDavies(fieldwalker, University of Cincinnati), JackL. Davis(codirector, Universityof Cincinnati), RodneyD. Fitzsimons (fieldwalker, University of Cincinnati), AdamGutteridge(fieldwalker, CambridgeUniversity), JohnW. Hayes (ceramicanalyst,OxfordUniversity),
AfrimHoti (codirector, Instituteof Archaeology), GenciKotepano(driver, International Centerof Albanian Archaeology), RovenaKurti(fieldwalker,Universityof Tirana),Ols Lafe (fieldwalker, University of Cincinnati), ElvanaMetalla(fieldwalker, Institute of Archaeology), IrisPojani(codirector, International Centerof Albanian Archaeology), EduardShehi(fieldwalker,Instituteof Archaeology), BrikenaShkodra(fieldwalker, Instituteof Archaeology), SharonR. Stocker(codirector, Universityof Cincinnati), JohnL. Wallrodt(computeroperations, Universityof Cin-
cinnati),andAaronD. Wolpert(field director, Universityof Cincinnati). 15.TeamA wasledbyWolpert, TeamB byAcheson.The totalarea investigated wascalculated in two differentwayswithnearlyidentical results.Usingthe firstmethod,we calculated that598.75haweresurveyed:the areawascomputedas ([the totallengthwalkedin the courseof the projectby allteammembers]x 15 [spacebetweenfieldwalkers])/10,000. The secondmethod,whichsummed the areasof allpolygonsdefinedas tracts,yieldsa totalsurveyedareaof 600 ha.
48
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
In thefollowingsectionsof thisarticlewe firstdescribe the methods employed bythesurveyand,in retrospect, brieflyevaluate theireffectiveness.l6We discussin geographical orderfromnorthto souththewatershedsorcatchment areasinvestigated bytheprojectandourdiscoveries in each,particularly the majorconcentrations of artifacts(sites)thathave beenidentified. Next,thenatureof theartifacts collectedbyourteamsis examined, asareoverallpatterns in thedistribution of materials of specific dates.Finally,we attachtwolengthyappendices in whichsitesandother findspotsaredescribed in detailandwherea selectionof artifactsfrom themis presented. Extensive depositsof ceramics fromexcavations in the cityof Durresandfromits cemeteries havealready beenpublished in A1banianjournals, butthesearenot readilyavailable to foreignscholars. A relatively fulldescription of findsfromthehinterland ofDurreswill,therefore,be of valuebothto ceramicspecialists andto thosewhomayin the futurepursuethestudyof landscape archaeology alongtheeasternlittoral of theAdriaticSea. FIELD METHODS AND SURVEY STRATEGY In formulating theresearch strategy forDRAP,we didnotmakeanyprior assumptions aboutthelocationof ancientremains; ourgoalwasto cover theentiretyof thetargeted areasothatlarge-scale patterns in thedistributionof artifacts wouldbe mostintelligible. Althoughit wasourintention to collectremains of allperiodsof thepast,wehopedin particular thatour resultswouldsupplement the archaeological recordforthe Graeco-Romanperiod,andin particular the historyof the Greekcity.The highest priorityforfieldwork wastheconstruction of a Geographical Information System(GIS)thatwouldpermita comprehensive mapof surface remains of pasthumanactivityto be drawn.17 A highcoastalridge(187maslat its highestelevation)runsnorthsouthfromthemoderncityof Durresto PortoRomano,paralleled byan earthentrackhighon itseasternslopes(Fig.9).Todaythesouthern parts of thisareaarecalledSpitalla,the northern parts,PortoRomano. There aretwomodernreservoirs in theSpitallaarea.Thepresentcemetery of the cityis alsolocatedhereand,fartherto the north,thereis a largernew cemeterythatwillsoonbeginoperation. The surveyareawasdefinedby the seaon thewest,bytheDurres-Porto RomanoroadandtheDurresPortoRomanoirrigation canalon theeast,bythepalaceof AhmedZogu on thesouth,andbytheendof thecoastalridgeatPortoRomanoon the north.This areais, of course,onlya fractionof the totalhinterland of Durres,otherpartsofwhichmayprofitably beinvestigated in thefuture.18 The surveyareais underlain by sedimentary rocksof Plioceneand Mioceneageandby alluvialfandepositsdatingto the LatePleistocene andEarlyHolocene.Most extensivearePliocene-aged HelmesiSuite depositsthatconsistof mudrocks, siltstones, andsandstones. The steeply slopingridgein the westernpartof the surveyareamarksa geological contactbetweentheyoungerPliocenesedimentsandanolderMioceneageddepositthatconsistsof reduced, gray,deep-water marinesediments
16.Fieldandmuseumprocedures usedwerebroadlysimilarto thoseemployedbythe NemeaValleyArchaeologicalProject(Wrightet al. 1990),the PylosRegionalArchaeological Project (Daviset al. 1997),andthe Mallakastra RegionalArchaeological Project(Korkutiet al. 1998). 17.The DigitalElevationModel (DEM)usedforthe project's GISwas producedby Christopher Doreof Archaeological MappingSpecialists (Berkeley) at a scaleof 1:10,000from Albanianarmymaps.Wallrodt managedthe computersystems employedby the project. 18. Seethe discussionat the endof thisreportwherepossibilities forfuture research arediscussed. In 2001we did not surveyareasof densesettlement nearthe Durres-PortoRomanoroador the drainedmarsheastof the road.For antiquities fromthe marsh,seeMyrto 1989.
..
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
49
Figure9.Westendofzone8 with eastsideof coastalridgein the background. Lookingsouthwest.
19.We thankMichaelE. Timpson forthe geologicaldescription included in thisparagraph.
composedof mudrocks,siltstones,and sandstones.Deep outcropsof clayarecommonly foundin theMiocenedeposit.The gypsumalsocontainedin thisolderMiocene-aged depositwasformedin a periodof low sealevelwhenseawater in the Mediterranean becamesufficiently concentrated to precipitate sucha mineral. The smallvalleyson the eastern sideof the surveyareaareunderlain by LatePleistoceneto EarlyHolocenealluvialfan deposits,largelyformedfromlocalreworking of the olderPliocenebedrock. The fansconsistof coarsecolluviumandfiner slope-wash deposits.l9 Beforethe startof fieldwork twelvetopographic zonesweredefined (Fig.6). The definitionof the zonesdid not reflectancientsettlement patterns ormodernlanduse.Zones1-11 arecatchments thatforthemost partrunfromthehighcoastalridgedownto thedrained marsheastof the Durres-Porto Romanoroad.Zone12 comprises theentiretyof thesteep westernslopesof thecoastalridge.Thebasicunitof analysis withineach zonewasthe "tract," a polygondefinedon the spotby the leaderof the surveyteam,whotookintoaccount natural topography, man-made boundaries,soilconditions, andcurrent vegetation. Vegetation andmodernland usewerehelduniform,andstandardized categorical valueswereusedto
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
so
lS
x
)k Q3
a
b Figure10. a) Vegetationin the
measure attributes withineachtract(Fig.10).Tractswerealsokeptcon- surveyarea;b) landuse in the sistentlysmallso thatsubsequently it wouldbepossibleto producea fine- surveyarea.R.J.Robertson grainedpictureof therelationship betweenvegetation, landuse,andartifactdensity, andto mapthefindspots of specificartifacts withconsiderable precision.20
Onceboundaries weredefined,eachtractwastraversed byfiveto six fieldwalkers spaced15 m apart.Closespacingprovedparticularly importantsincethelandscape isverystableandoftenonlysmallerosional exposuresofferedwindowsof visibilitythroughwhichthe existenceof large artifactscatterscouldbe surmised. Teammembers countedartifacts that theyobservedandthenreported thosecountsto the teamleaderat the endof eachtract,whentheywererecorded in a commonnotebook; this information wasenteredin a databaseeachevening. Teammembers were instructed to collectallsherdsofpotterythatpreserved partofarim,handle, 20.Tractswerealmostneverlarger base,tracesof decoration, or thathadanotherwisedistinctive featureor than2.0 ha (99%< 2.0 ha;96%< 1.5 fabric;andallsmallfinds,includingallexamples of chippedandground ha;and84%< 1.0 ha).
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
5I
Figure11.Overallpremodern artifactdensityin thesurveyarea. R. J. Robertson
21. Artifactdensitywascalculated as (thesumof allpremodern artifacts observedin a tract)/(thesumof the distancescoveredby allwalkersin the tract).In thisreportsitesareidentified by a three-digitnumberprecededby theletter"S." In mostinstancessites wererevisited, butseveretimeconstraintsmadeit impossiblein 2001to collectsurfaceartifactsaccording to any systematic procedure.
stone.Onlythoseartifacts thatwereobviously modern(i.e.,post-World WarII)wereto beleftin thefield.The exactpositionof notableartifacts andfeaturessuchas graveswasdocumented in fieldnotes,forexample, "walker 04 observed a tilescatterat25 m."Theteamleaderalsosketched eachtractandrecorded thedirection thatwalkers walked,aswellastheir order. Theoutlinesof tractsweredigitizedattheendof eachdayof fieldwork.Artifactdensitieswerethenmappedforeachtractby dividingthe numberof premodern artifactsreportedby fieldwalkers by the distance thattheywalked(Fig.11).In total,938tractsweredefined.Twenty-nine anomalously denseconcentrations of premodern artifacts werelabeledas sites.2l
Fieldwalking beganin zones6 and8, the largestcatchments in the surveyarea;thesenowfeedthetworeservoirs in Spitalla. Bybeginning in thesebroadvalleysit waspossibleforteamleadersto estimatehowlongit wouldtaketo surveythe entireareaandaccordingly to set subsequent dailyworkschedules. Thesezoneswerealsorelatively easyto surveyand
52
JAC K L. DAVI S ET AL.
allowedinexperienced fieldwalkers to be trainedadequately beforeteams tackledthe moredifficulturbanfringesandthe areaof the ancientcemeteriesknownto existin zone9 andfarthersouth. Aftersurveying zones6-8 andthosepartsof zones9 and10 notcoveredbymodernconstructions, theteamsmovedintozones1-5, working fromthepassof Xhamadha northto PortoRomano. The twoteamsfor themostpartwalkedalternating zonesandworkedin tandemin zones5 and7,thusensuring thatanydifferences in aptitudes andabilitiesbetween fieldwalkers wouldnotbiasresults. Survey oftheprimary catchments (zones 1-10) wasfinishedin the secondweekof fieldwork, andsufficienttime remained to examinethe entiretyof theseaward sideof the coastalridge (zone12),withthe exceptionof dangerously steepslopesat the highest elevations.22
EVALUATION OF FIELD DATA Therewereveryfewareasthatcouldnotbe examined owingto precipitousslopesor impassable vegetation. Eventhe steepestslopeswereterraced,andonlycliffsnearthe crestof the coastalridgeandrockslides on its westfaceshowedno evidenceof recentmodification for agricultural purposes. We wereconcerned, however, aboutthe extentto whichgrass andcloverin meadowsandon abandoned terraces wouldobscuresurface artifactconcentrations. In comparison withmorearidAegeanlandscapes forwhichthe surveytechniquesappliedto the Durreshinterland were developed, conditions wereindeedmuchworse,andno doubtaggravated bythefactthatthesurveytookplacewhenspringgrowthwasatitsheight. Average groundvisibility wasjust33%in thesurveyareaonthewholeand was30%orlessin 73%of alldefinedtracts(683of 938tracts)(Fig.12). Despitethegenerally poorvisibility, premodern artifacts wererecorded in 645tracts.Thereis,however, a strongpositivecorrelation betweengood visibilityandelevatedartifactdensities,bothbetweenandwithintracts. We concludethatvariability in thevisibilityof artifacts is largelydeterminedbycurrent patternsof landuseandbypatternsof erosion.Almost everyplowedfieldyieldedat leasta modestpeakin premodern artifact density.On the otherhand,erosiononlyinfrequently occurson a scale largeenoughto exposeextensivescattersof premodern artifacts. Indeed, thereis relatively littleactiveerosionin the Durresregioncompared to southernGreece,probably becausethefacesof mostagricultural terraces havebeenstabilized byplantsandthehumidenvironment supports relativelylushvegetation. It is thusunlikelythatobserved artifacts havebeen transported longdistances. Continuousdisturbance of sedimentsis foundonlyon the highest partsof the coastalridge,where,becauseof the overallsteepnessof the terrain,eventerraced slopesareheavilyeroded.Elsewhere, activeerosion is generally localized,resultingfromseveralactivities: recentbulldozing, extensive inthevalleysof Spitalla; bunkerconstruction inthe1970s,which triggeredsubstantial downslopeerosion(Fig. 13);the buildingof field roads;andthe diggingof drainage gullies,someof whichareincisedto a depthof nearlya meter.In areasheavilybrowsed bylivestock, erosionalso
22. Zone 11 is entirelyurbanand no surveywas possible in it.
..
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
53
)i >D
Figure12. Overallgroundvisibility in the surveyarea.R.J. Robertson
23. On artifact"halos" in the southernAegeanandtheirinterpretation, seeAlcock,Cherry,andDavis1994, pp.141-142;Snodgrass1987,pp.113117.
occursalonganimalpaths,manyof which,likethegullies,havebecome deeplyincisedandserveaschannels forrainwater. Onstableterraces often theonlyartifacts collectedcamefromgullies,roads,orpaths(Fig.14). Theseconditions of thecontemporary landscape haveseriousconsequencesforthe interpretation of the resultsof survey. In particular, it is difficultto be certainthata lackof surfaceartifacts reflectstheabsenceof subsurface remains.It seemslikelythatwe havenot beensuccessful in findingartifacts in manyplacesbecausetheyarecoveredby stablesediments,andgapsin surfacedistributions maynot reflectanyunderlying patternin thelocationof premodern remains. Artifactconcentrations at Durresdo nothavea distinctcentersurrounded by"halos" of decreasing artifactdensity.Densitiesin mosttractsareeitherveryhighorverylow; the median"halo" tractsrecognized by manysurveysin the Aegeanare * * 23 mlsslng.
54
JACK L. DAVIS
ET AL.
Figure13. Collapsingbunkersat the eastedge of tractA228. Lookingwest.
Figure14.Terracescoveredwith heavyvegetation.TractsB036 and B037, lookingnortheast.
Sincecountsreportedby fieldwalkers wererecorded separately it is alsopossibleto assesstheextentto whichanindividual's skillandexperiencemayhaveaffectedourperceptions ofpatterning in thedistribution of artifacts. Such"walker effects" havebeenstudiedbyothersurveys.24 Our ownconclusion is thattheyhavehada negligible effecton ourinterpretationofresults. Foreachteammember ineachtractrawcountsofpremodern artifacts werestandardized bydividingthembythedistancewalked.The artifactdensitythuscalculated foreachindividual wascompared to the averaged densityforallthosewhowalkedthattract.Finallyforeachindividualthe sumtotalof suchdifferences in alltractswasaveraged to producea statisticthatrepresents theextentto whichanyindividual wasout of stepwithotherteammembers. Thestatisticforfiveof a totalof fifteen individuals deviatedfromthe average by morethanonestandard deviation,butonlyin oneinstancedifferedbymorethantwostandard deviations.Twoof thesefiveindividuals alsorecorded fewerpost-World WarI artifacts thantheircolleagues, perhaps in partexplaining whytheircounts of premodern artifacts werehigherthanthoseof theirteammates. A secondproportional statistic, calculated bydividing theaverage densityforeachteammemberin eachtractbytheaverage densitycalculated 24. See Cherry,Davis,and forthe entireteamthatexamined thattract,canbe employedto correct Mantzourani 1991,pp.37-53; forsituations whereawalker workedonlyinplaceswheremorepremodern Shennan1985,p. 35.
DURRES REGIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROJECT ..
ss
of werefound.In suchcasessimplesubtraction artifacts thanthe average artifacts countedbythewalkerfromthe averthe numberof premodern byhisteammates tendsto yielda higherabsolutedifference agerecorded of the thanin areasthatarelowerin density,althoughthe percentage whenindividuals maybelesssignificant. Therangeofvariation difference arescoredon thisstatisticleavesonlythreeof thefiveoutliers. The samplesizefortwoof theseteammembersis small(80 and73 to an averageof 271 tractsperwalker).These tractswalked,compared appearto havedeviatedfromthemeanto thisdegreebecause individuals artifactdensitieswere theywalkedmoretractsin areaswherepremodern Countsof onlyonewalkerapgenuinely higherorlowerthantheaverage. foundmoreartifacts aberrant. Thefactthatthisindividual peargenuinely thanotherwalkersmightbe a concernexceptthathis artifactcountsare andthereis no instance withthoseof his teammates generally correlated alone. in whicha sitewasdefinedon thebasisof hisobservations DESCRIPTION OF ZONES AND THE RESULTS OF FIELDWORK ZONEI surveyed(Fig. 15:a),one Two distinctareasin zone 1 wereintensively partsof the adjacent to zone2, theotherconsistingof the northernmost Houses,manyof themreheight).25 coastalridge(83.3maslmaximum centlybuilt,nowcoverthelowerhalfof theslopeof theridgeandmuchof of zone 1 is occupiedby a navalbaseto whichit wasnot the remainder slopesoftheridgearemostly Terraces ontheeastern possibletogainaccess. The cresthasbeenheavilybulldozedandscrubbrushis stableandgrassy. edgetheridgeis exAt its northernmost dominanton erodingoutcrops. thickdeposposedto strongwindsandstorms,andsteepcliffscontaining brickwallof Roman itsof fineclayfallto thesea.A segmentof amortared stylewas foundhere(S006)(Fig. 16).26Elsewherefindswereconcenin plowedfields. especially tratedin andnearbottomland, 25. Figures15:aand15:bshouldbe consultedthoughoutthissection.The followingabbreviations areusedto (PH); describeperiods:Prehistoric Neolithic(N);BronzeAge (BA); Archaic(A) 700-480 B.C.; Classical (CL)48s323 B.C.; Hellenistic(HL) 323-31 B.C.; Roman(R) 31 B.C.A.D. 610;DarkAges (DA) A.D. 600850;Byzantine(B) 850-1450;Medieval(MED) 600-1450;Ottoman(O) 1450-1912;Modern(M) 1912-2000; andunknown(UNKN).All of these into periodsmaybe furthersubdivided Early(E),Middle(M), andLate(L) phases:e.g.,LCLis the abbreviation forLateClassical.
MR?, 26. S006:Periodsrepresented: A-HL, A-R, R;rangesrepresented: CL-HL, R-MED,MR-LR,LR-DA, LR-EB.Thiswallsegmentis high abovethe remainsof thewell-known longRomanwallat PortoRomano (Karaiskaj andBajce1975;see Gutteridge,Hoti,andHurst2001,p. 394, whereit is assigneda datein the 4th centuryA.C.), andbothmusthavebeen partof the samedefensivesystem. Hayessuggeststhatthe systemis likely probably to dateto the 3rd-4thcentury, nearthebeginningof thisperiod;he alsoobservedthatpartof anoriginal gatewaythroughthewallis preserved. Thisgatewaywascompleteat the
beginningof the lastcenturyandwas describedandillustrated by Praschniker andSchober(1919,p. 46 andfig.58). Accordingto them,thewallentirely blockedentryto the uplandsnorthof Durres.It rannorthfromthe crestof the coastalridgedownhillto a small bay,thencontinuedeastforanother 200 m beforedisappearing intothe marsh.Heuzey(1886,p. 46) described thewallas"encore perceed'unegrande porteen arcade." Underwater explorationin the 1980sin the smallbayrevealedextensiveremainsof the 4th2nd centuryB.C. (CekaandZeqo 1984).SeealsoHammond1967, p. 470, n. 2.
\
t
>
/
g9g--z(g
t\
northernpartofthesurveyarea.
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
56
R ,
o
>,,',.'--, ,,,,i
>
,
......
*-B
M+6
->_5 1
/
/
,,
\
/
,
/
>
1 i
'
''t,B2'43ti233,, '>,,,c,,---"'^'''X$',B24i'''
.
''\x1 i
'
\
.
X
B234,
B242
\
'.'/'
'
'-
FiFre15:a.Tracts andsitesinthe
>- - \ S ----
\
>
ZONE2 Gardens, oliveorchards, andfruitgroveslie attheeasternendsof thelow ridges(77masland93 masl)thatdefinezone2 onthenorthandsouth.A springin tractB293supplies waterto residents of themoredenselypopulatedzone1.Theflat,scrub-covered bottomland slopesgentlyfromwest to eastandis usedforgrazing.Higherslopeson the southernridgeare mostlyterraced, withsomeoliveandfigtrees;terraces arelargelycovered bygrassandsomebrushgrowsontheirfaces.Thenorthern ridgehasfew trees,lesswell definedterraces, andmorescrubbrush.This sideof the
R.J.Robertson
fE \\\ ) ....... 352 tt A552 B3550/ B356; -B357 /[S ......A26 ')K....;B155 .2 1BS)) A561 . .. E..BR -
A24 A ........ A111 ............................................. - A°63 \ B079 B194 B1618162; a ......................................................... i4A112 ,', &_. Bt X)51 ,iB,S: ZA27B3199; '/, \ ,/1 ' ='................ }1iH 'A164 .\ o A183 ,°F/A279 A272 S:.AOS9 B107 A165 A29 *--E ' B130 A158 ..... , -;. .B18a 9/647 CAOZ3 A284W . E A156 ..... ........... A°1SO /AO48 AOS2 - A267. AO27 AO14 : A1<WU AO49 ........ .< :'. S AO51 -A223 AO13 A(i) [. .A218: .
DURRES
REGIONAL
a
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
57
l
)\!!-
\
RS;fefN0¢f;w>:gHEWd>:;:0f0\ff00A
\\Da:f: X X .
\;
; B064
A560
.
g
\
A562
A549
0
;
-.
0 .B358
A248X.:
YW;X S.
B088
AV9
//
3, A1OO
A°79
{
0
B348
B359
i3347
(
A129
-
|
-
--
i
B3610
A147
AO80
092
A105:
A104
A570
-
v
1
BU8
B197,
AO66
AO84
0.
"A113'
::
,
.-
A119 ,-
'
2
B184;'
t
B1B8
B191 ............................................... ,
. A231:
X
AO61
A128)-'
89
A166 A160
A129,--
,
A167
kv
mr9
,--
A1210:
............
: A149 .
\
A155
A1>X<
A1
t
A192
'A12
P
A191
A1@8 . A177
) (
D
A159
A208
t; A132A30A1z
(
\
\
/
4 \
B024
AC
,
; - A117
.
A135'
A172
t A182
A179 . A179
\
.
A181
\ 500
B101 .
R A270
A.0040N
SZA127
A
A2.02.A203
u
100
0
Br83
A123
114'
0
5
i S B199-
AO1
3
B133290 /186
4
AO8t20
'
i
-.
AOO8. C4°ASA
A094,
. <s
:
B
fs
A6095z
B047
Brog;\B1270
B126,
AO68
A
A1OX
B346
|
'A
'B119 02t; . 1;s
B1
A077
B125
ASAOO9,
{RRA207; )
.
.. B118 .'
"/
- B0697B046
\
iu
-
. B156
, ' B09S
l;°;
80
A263
A249
..
B080.
B11S '
A2a9
.
,
\
@
. '
B077 q
3X4S6 (3 B085. B084.
\
LL
B350
( .
B074
0
B061 .
'
B3S4
,0 .
i--
'-0
--. A563 . -
f
)
Figure15:b.Tractsandsitesin the southernpartof the surveyarea.
PROJECT
' '
ESE
1
\
\
R. J. Robertson
27. S028:Rangesrepresented: N-BA?,A-CL, A-HL, A-MED, CL-HL, R-O,MED-M, O-M, MO-M, LO-M. S020:Periodrepresented: M; rangesrepresented: A-CL, A-HL, A-R, CL-HL, CL-R, O-M, MO-M. 28. S014:Rangerepresented: A-HL.
valleyappearsto be grazedmoreextensively butthereis littleevidence thatthatactivityis promoting erosion.Manyartifacts are,however, clearly associated withdisturbed anderodedareas. Theseplacesincludethemain east-westaccessroadintothevalley(S028)andvariouslocationsat the eastend of the northernridge,in particular a dirtroadbetweentracts B307andB308(SO20).27 Finallyon a lowknollnortheast of thepassin zone3 thatleadsoverthe coastalridge(seebelow),anotherlow-density scatterwasnotedwheresteepterraces hadbeendisturbed (S014).28
__
rB
l
]
=
=$
| rb |
|
S i
ig_
J
l
W lii
-
IZAN
+
-
_[
Romano. [w!|iET
|
Figure Looklng 16. Bulldozed west.scarp and wall
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
58
.L
-
_tl
=
ilNii I
*=
!!|1F$1s
i: z i . ' | ilew __ jrS-
9--g<-=11
_|
ZONE3 Zone3 isboundedonthesouthbya steep-sided terraced ridge(98.3masl) thatbranches intothecrescent-shaped ridgeenclosing zone4.Thenorthernarmofthiscrescent runsnortheast toward thenorthern limitof Spitalla, justsouthof a largeHoxha-eramunitionsplantat PortoRomano;it is deeplyincisedby erosion.The ridgethatborderszone3 on the northis largelyunterraced, withbroadlowerslopesdescending gradually intothe valleybottom. Thesegrassy slopesaredivided intoseparate parcels bybarbed wireandappearto havebeenplowedin the recentpast;theyarelightly eroded.The slopeof this ridgebecomessteepernearthe northwestern cornerof the zone,wherea passleadsoverthe coastalridge.Southof a grassytrackleadingto thispassa few newfarmsteads havebeenestablished.The areaabovetheseis terraced. In the southwestern partof the zoneanother farmstead is nestledin afoldandis largelyhiddenfromview. Aboveit is the northernmost significant peakof the coastalridge(142 masl),a terraced triangular eminence, thetopofwhichhasbeendisturbed bytheconstruction of bunkers. Artifacts wereobserved ontheerodingslopesof thecoastalridgeand in plowedfieldsaroundthe southwestern farmstead (S012);findsfrom thissitewerealsofoundin the northwestern quadrant of zone5 where theyhadbeenredeposited througherosion.29 A concentrated scatterfartherto the east(SOll) wasexposedin an erodinganimaltrackneara bunker.30 A diffusedistribution of artifacts wasfoundin thelowerfields on the northernsideof the catchment(SO13).31 SOl9is locatedin the northeasternmost partof thezoneneartheDurres-Porto Romanoroad.32 29. S012:Periodrepresented: M; rangesrepresented: A-CL, A-HL, A-R. 30. SOll:Rangerepresented: A-HL.
31. S013:Periodsrepresented: MHL,M; rangesrepresented: A-HL, CL-HL, R-M. 32. S019:Periodrepresented: M; rangerepresented: A-HL.
fragrnentin tractB342 at Porto
DURRES REGIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROJECT ..
59
ZONE4 from andsoutheast northeast formedbylowridgesbranching Thecrescent betweenzones3 and5 the higherridgethatconstitutesthe boundary Romanoroad.Thisis the westof theDurres-Porto enclosesbottomland lowlandin thesurveyarea.Alfalfafieldsstretch unoccupied mostextensive housing,andthereis alargegrassy of forover300m to thewest canal-side Theridgesdefiningthecrescentarecompletely meadowatthesouthwest. terraced andlargelystableexceptin severalplacesneartheircrests.Localizederosiontherehasexposedscattersin tractsA324andA325andhas a shortdistanceintotractsA403andA404 artifacts possiblytransported devoidof findsexceptintractA317, wereotherwise (S010).33 Theterraces on the surfaceof a fieldroad wheretherewasa highdensityof artifacts andin thescarpaboveit. ZONE5
33. S010:Rangesrepresented: A-CL, A-HL, A-R, CL-HL, O-M, MO-LO. PH?, 34. S009:Periodsrepresented: A-CL, CL, O, M; rangesrepresented: A-HL, A-R, CL-HL, CL-R, CL-B, LCL-HL,HL-B, B-O, B-M, LB-O, LB-M?O-M, LO-M. HL, 35. S005:Periodsrepresented: MHL, LR?,M; rangesrepresented: CL-R?MHL-LHL, LHL or LR.
cobblesrunseast-westthroughzone5.There A roadpavedwithlimestone plantsnearits easternend chicken-andfish-processing areabandoned Scatfarther westwherethevalleybroadens. barracks andderelictmilitary arebeginningto teredhouseshavebeenbuiltalongtheroadandsquatters whichmayexThereis littleevidenceforpasturage, occupythebarracks. thezoneareso overon the southernridgebordering plainwhyterraces dividesthewesternendof thevalleyintotwo interfluve grown.A terraced fartheruphill areshallowandgrassy; parts.Northof it thelowestterraces on withmaquis,especially theyarea meterhigh,fairlybroad,andcovered (74-97masl)thereis activeerosion, theirfaces.At thehighestelevations slopesarelesssteep,and andthesoilis verysandy.Southof theinterfluve Lowerslopesareforthe most hilltopstendto be grassyandunterraced. exceptto the eastwherethereareolives withbrambles, partovergrown andopengrassyfields. in zone5 to thesouthwestof the newcemetery S009coversterraces of Durres,as wellas thatpartof zone4 thatincludesthe cemeteryand is locatedin a naturalamof it.34The cemetery terraces to thenorthwest a formation thatfunnelsslumpingsoiltowarda centralbasin. phitheater, paved concentric of semicircular in the amphitheater The construction erosion. substantial is promoting roadsandthreegrandconcretestaircases thediggingof a trenchforthefoundations At thetopof theamphitheater, broughtparticularly blockwallthatenclosesthecemetery of theconcrete to the surface(Fig.17).Artifactsareeroding of artifacts largequantities frombulldozedterracesin tractA399 andareembeddedas muchas a depositsremeterwithintheirmatrix,suggestingthatintactsubsurface mainandthatthesewereburiedby soilserodedwhena massivetunnel andsubsequent bunkerwas builthigheron the slope.In fieldwalking of S009thatappear components twoprincipal we discerned revisitation, aremoreplentifulin artifacts distinct:Archaic-Hellenistic to be spatially in thesouth. findsareconcentrated thenorthandMedieval-Ottoman (S005)among of artifacts west,thereis anotherconcentration Farther farmyard thatwere Parts of the farmbuildingsnextto thecobbledroad.35
wall _Q_i9+ ___S__
;>
modern 9*!v!1 background.
lookingeast. cemetery From
tractA331, in
the
JAC K L. DAVI S ET AL.
60
_
_
v
plowedproduced artifact densitiesthatwerehigherthannormal. Twosegmentsof an ancientmortared brickwallwerefoundin tractsB267and B268(Fig.18).Immediately eastof these,in tractB270,largepiecesof threeamphoras andtilewerecollected. ZONE6 The northernmost of thetworeservoirs at Spitallaliesat theeastendof zone 6. The entireareasouthof the reservoir andwestof the DurresPortoRomanoroadis nowfilledwithrecentlybuilthouses.In thevalley bottomarefarmsandplowedfields,althoughthe soilis poorlydrained. Tunnelbunkers intractsB112andB113renderslopesimpassable inplaces andearthfromtheirconstruction appears to havebeendumpedin tracts B090andB091.Buildingsarebeginningto be constructed attheeastern end of the ridgethatconstitutesthe northernborderof the valley,and thereareseveralfarmshigheron thisridge.Terraces, evenat thehighest elevations (95-104masl),aregenerally in goodrepair. Thesouthern ridge
Figure17.Site009,withenclosure
Figure18.Mortared brickwallat
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
6 I
Figure19. Site 004, with possible Archaictempleon the borderof zones 5 and6. FromtractB053, lookingwest.
(86.4-117.6masl)is moreovergrown thanthenorthern, whichhasscatteredgrassyfieldsontop.At thewesternendofthevalleybelowthecoastal ridgeroadareheavilygrazedterraces onwhichsomeolivesareplanted. S004is locatedon a lowknollthatprojectseastfroma highpeakin the coastalridge(Fig.19).36Artifactsfoundin tractsB213,B214,and B223 mayhavebeenerodeddownslopefromthe majorconcentration. Findsfromthesiteincludedcovertilesandlargepantiles(manyof them red-slipped), ridgetiles,a few Classical-Hellenistic black-glaze sherds, andtwofragments of anashlarblock.We suspectthatanArchaictemple maybelocatedatthissite.Some600m eastof S004a singlefragment of anArchaicarchitectural terracotta wascollected.Manyterracottas in an identicalstyleandfabricwerefoundsomeyearsagoin the areaof the modernDurrescemetery in zone8, andmayhavebeencarried therefrom S004.37 S021iswelldefined:artifacts aremostplentifulin a scarpof a terrace in tractB036 andon the uppermost terracesof tractB037.38Between S021andS004a less densescatter(S023)wasrecognized on two hilltops.39 At S029,highon thecoastalridgeto thesouth,a fewlithicswere collected; thesemaybe Neolithicin dateandmayrepresent the earliest humanactivity yetidentified intheimmediate environs ofDurres.40 Lower onthecoastalridgeto theeastis a low-density scatterof pottery(S024).41 NeartheDurres-Porto Romanoroadattheeasternendof thezonethere is a densescatterof artifactsin plowedfields(S022).42 Twoadditional sites(S025andS026)werefoundon the ridgethatdivideszone6 from zone7.43 36. S004:Periodrepresented: CL; rangesrepresented: A-ECL, A-CL, A-HL, A-R, CL-HL. 37. Seebelow,n. 88. 38. S021:Periodsrepresented: CL, M; rangesrepresented: A-CL, A-HL, A-R, CL-HL. 39. S023:Periodrepresented: HL?;
rangesrepresented: A-HL, A-R, CL-HL, R-M. 40. S029:Periodrepresented: N? 41. S024:Periodsrepresented: A, HL, M; rangesrepresented: A-CL, A-HL, A-R, LO-M. 42. S022:Periodsrepresented: CL, HL,M; rangesrepresented: A-CL,
A-HL, CL-HL,LCL-HL,MO-LO, LO-M. 43. S025:Periodrepresented: CL; rangesrepresented: A-HL, A-R, CL-HL. S026:Periodsrepresented: CL,HL, M; rangesrepresented: CL-HL, CL-R.
62
JAC K L. DAVI S ET AL.
ZONE7 Zone7 consistsof asymmetrical andsteep-sided valleythatascendsto the second-highest peakin thecoastalridge(182masl).ModernhousingcontinuesalongwayupthevalleyfloorfromtheDurres-Porto Romanoroad, andthereareseveralfarmson the lowestslopesof the ridgebordering zone7 on thesouth.Otherisolatedfarmsteads arelocatedatthewestern endofthevalleyathigherelevations in tractsB153-B155andB174.Most terraces in thiszoneareusedonlyforpasturage, withtheresultthatmany arereverting to scrubandmaquis; exceptions includea well-tended olive grovein tractA233.Tunnelbunkerscut into the eastern slopesof the coastalridgehaveprecipitated someerosionbutno artifacts werefound there.However, localizederosionhasexposedartifact scatters in a seriesof tractson a steeplyslopingknollbeneaththe coastalridge road(S027).44 Farther east,S017is a denseandwell-bounded scatterof tiles.45 Another significant concentration of artifacts existsattheeasternendof theridge thatformsthezone'ssouthernboundary (S008).46 ByzantineandMedieval-Ottoman potteryis densetherein apartlyplowedfieldandonslopes immediately northwest of the moderncemeteryof Durres.Thissiteappears tobespatially distinctfromtheClassical-Hellenistic remains (S007) foundon the southsideof the sameridgein zone 8, althoughthe two components overlapin tractson thecrestof theridge(e.g.,A050). ZONE8 Zone8 is the second-largest catchmentin the surveyarea(Fig.20). It extends westfromthesouthernmost of thetworeservoirs atSpitallaandis divided byalowspurthatprojects fromthecoastalridge.Theridge(63.9116masl)thatboundsthiscatchmenton the northis only sporadically terraced. Terraces bulldozedto controlerosionin tractA048cutthrough at leastone intactClassical-Late Classicalgrave,wherehumancranial fragments anda nearlycompleteoinochoewerefound(S007).47 During revisitation a largearchitectural blockwasobserved notfarto thewest. ArtifactshavebeenerodedfromS007andredeposited downslope in fields thatarecurrently plantedin alfalfa. Therearealsoartifacts eroding from the scarpsof terraces in tractA030.Otherfindsthatareprobably from graveswereretrieved froma shallowdrainage ditchin tractA025. On the northsideof the streamthatrunsthroughthevalley bottomis a notable concentration of artifacts in tractsA009,A010,A084-A086,and A092 (S002).48 Thehighestdensities wereassociated witharecently plowed field andtheintersection of agricultural roads. In thenorthwestern cornerof zone8 olivesgrowonwell-maintained terraces on the lowerslopesof the coastalridge.S003is located at the southern edgeoftheolivegroves,centered onalowknollcutbythecoastal ridge road.49 Farmers knewthatthereweretheremnants of anoldchurch here andthe areais called"Kishae Kallmit," i.e.,"Church of the Reeds" (Fig. 21).At thewesternendof the knollarefoundations of wallsanda marble slabin situ.Tiles andbrickswererecovered froma broaderarea that included tractsA079,A096,andA097.Immediately abovethecoastal ridge roada substantial numberof tilesarescattered in tractA101 and
44. S027:Rangesrepresented: A-CL, A-EHL, A-HL, CL-HL, CL-R, LCL-EHL. 45. S017:Rangesrepresented: A-HL, CL-HL. 46. S008:Periodsrepresented: O, M; rangesrepresented: A-HL, A-R, B-O, B-M, LB-O,MED-M, O-M, MO-LO. 47. S007:Periodsrepresented: A, CL, O, M; rangesrepresented: A-CL, A-HL, A-R, A-B, CL-LCL, CL-HL, CL-R, CL-EM,O-M, LO-M. 48. S002:Periodsrepresented: CL, M; rangesrepresented: A-CL, A-HL, A-R, LO-M. 49.S003:Periodsrepresented: MED, M;rangesrepresented: A-R, R-M, MR-LR.
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
63
Figure20. Coastalridgeand southernreservoirat Spitalla.From A152, lookingnorthwest.
Figure21. Zone 8. Lookingsouthwest towardheadof valleyand site 003 fromtractA070.
LCL; 50. S016:Periodrepresented: A-CL, A-HL, rangesrepresented: LCL-EHL,LCL-MHL. CL, Periodsrepresented: SOO1: A-CL, HL, R?,M; rangesrepresented: A-HL, A-R, CL-HL, LCL-EHL, LHL-R,MO-LO, LO-M.
A.C. werefoundin sherdsdatingto the4th-6thcentury severaldiagnostic typethatnowlies thescarpoftheroaditself.A columnofpaleo-Christian nearbyin tractA095is likelyalsoto be of thatdate. AboveS003is thesteepeasternfaceof thecoastalridge.Onitshighis a naval estpeak(187masl),at the northernendof the hillof Currila, on terraces bramble-covered station.Highandsometimes reconnaissance therearemiliAt lowerelevations usedforgrazing. theridgeareprimarily tarytrenches. ofzone8 boundary Theridge(65.1-98masl)thatformsthesouthern arTwosignificant cultivated. terraced butonlysporadically is completely stripof terraces onein aplacewherea narrow weredetected, tifactscatters intoa fencedgarden(S016),theotherat (40m wide)hasbeenconverted of theheavilyurbantheeasternendof theridge(S001)on theoutskirts AdemRoda,theownerof thegarden,showedusan izedareaof Durres.50 foundin the areaof the hill of gravestelethathe supposedly inscribed Dautaj(Figs.22-23). He alsopointedout an ashlarblockof uncertain whiledigginga pit forwaterin tractA143 functionthathe discovered withinthegardenwefounda substantial (Fig.24).Ontheplowedterraces butthetractsoneithersideofRoda's Greekartifacts, quantity ofdiagnostic material. fencedidnotyieldcomparable
64
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
Figure22. GravesteleS016-SF01. Obverse.
Figure23. GravesteleS016-SF01. Reverse.
Figure24. Cut blockfromsite 016
..
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
6S
SOO1 extendsfromthe crestof the ridgedownto a bulldozedroad southof thereservoir. Artifactsareconcentrated in placeswhereerosion hasbeenaccelerated byrecentconstruction projects. IntractA193,aplowed fieldon the crestof the ridge,a significant concentration of artifactsis likelytobein situ,butin fieldsbelowit andonslopesfarther westartifacts havebeenredeposited fromhigherupslope. A longcentralspur(96 masl)extendsfromthe hillof Currilaeastwardto theedgeof thereservoir, dividingzone8 in half.Undercommunismthisareawasdedicated to olivecultivation, butthenorthern faceof theridgeis nowso overgrown thatin placesit is unwalkable andterraces arecollapsing. The moregentlesouthernfaceis grassier; olivesappear healthyandwelltended. ZONE9 Zone9 is a narrow hairpin-shaped valleywitha modernclayquarry atits westernend.It is likelythatzone9 layoutsidethe limitsof the ancient Greekcity.Manyancientgraveshavebeenexcavated there.Todaynewly builthousesoccupytheentirevalleybottom,thelowerterraces aroundit, andthe topsof the easternendsof the northern(45 masl)andsouthern (33masl)ridgesthatborderthezone.Onlya smallareacouldbesurveyed: 15 tractsweredefinedin 4.7 ha,arrayed in a crescent-shaped bandthat includedrubbish-strewn slopesbetweenhousesat the headof thevalley andterraces recentlyclearedof olives.
Figure25.Tilegravein tractA185, lookingwest
51. S018:Periodrepresented: HL; rangesrepresented: A-HL, A-R, LB-MO.
At leastone intactHellenistictile grave(S018)is erodingout of a terrace scarp(tractA185)in thesoutheastern partof thehillof Dautaj,on a lowknollthathasbeenpartlydestroyed bybunkerconstruction andis surrounded onthreesidesbyhouses(Fig.25).51Othergraves(M00)were shownto members of theprojectbutlayoutsidethepartof zone9 that wassystematically surveyed (seeAppendix 2) (Fig.26).
|
i!l!LS2 l
l | ?? l?6m l SA
...
?. .
>S.
SS
:.
M.?.7.
0,,
i :.:
:Xi?;?, 7 ? ?RE ,i, ? 6i i ' it?? ii a/2s .?i l '?iig.
66
.;/.t;,
?*':
;'?^yif t it'*\
8 ;. t;i
;;
.?lt0 i
0
?i
li0t 7 {
?:tZ 0d?t ? XX: ii '
<0 i;; ;;
t+ i '6it,000 '.0;; '%?.iBU t?-ji? ii? iX
i':000;i s;' ??i ?02;ta.|; l ro ;t.; 07 i>i? 0 ?6i;?: ;,
i
E
i;0:; i ?BE '? iXii? 2 ,5.iz.;; p,. i?i2???,'0g' ';?.?: gE?
i,?i
r
7 ;;
ir':;r-
:
A
:.
PS t
6............................................................... ?^ ? ?
lgreze.l negrave lnscarp nemna
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
ZONEIO Zone 10 is evenmoreheavilyurbanized thanzone9 andstilllessof it couldbe systematically examined. Apartment blockslinecitystreetsthat leadto abrickandtilefactoryexploiting theclayquarry in zone9.A band of tractswaswalkedonthewesternsideof thenarrow ridgethatseparates the cityfromthe factoryandquarryto the west.It is impossible to be certainif the few artifactsfoundin tractsA177-A181arein situor to knowthe originalcontextof a largecorticalflakeof chertfoundin tract A180. ZONEII Zone11wasnotsurveyed.52 ZONEI2 Zone12constitutes theentiretyof thewesternseaward sideof thecoastal ridgeandis thelargestof ourcatchments. Steeprockslides maketheterrainimpassable at higherelevations, buttherearemoregentleslopesby theshore(Fig.27).Muchof thesouthern partof thezoneis terraced and wasonceplantedwitholives,almostallofwhichhavebeencutdownsince 1991.Mostof the terraces werebuiltby communist agricultural collectives.Thereis littleevidenceforsettlement, ancientormodern, in anypart of zone12.Thelandatpresentdoesnotappearto be extensively usedfor agricultural purposes; theterraces arecovered withtallgrassesandsometimesalsowithbrambles. Someevidenceof cultivation exists,however, includinga well-tended groveof matureolivetrees. In the north,slopesaremoregentle.Goatpathsareextensive, suggestingthatthe areais frequently grazed.Terraces at the highestelevationsarecovered bysparsevegetation andareeroding. It is clearthatsheep andgoatsenterthe coastalzonefromthevalleysto the eastandarepas-
52.Seeabove, n.22.
?u
>
/
r
1
r
1
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
67
Figure27. Erodedwest faceof coastalridge.Lookingsouthfrom west of tractB342.
turedhere.Flocksmovethroughseveralpasses,mostcommonlyone in the northwestern partof zone 3. In the northernmost partof zone 12 therehasbeenmassiverecentdisturbance fromthequarrying of clay-rich slopesin thevicinityof PortoRomano. In a flatsaddlesouthof anextensive housecomplexon theborderof zones8 and12 is a significant artifactconcentration (S015).53 ANALYSIS OF DISTRIBUTION OF ARTIFACTS
PATTERNS
Approximately 2,100artifacts werecollectedfrom430 of the 938 tracts definedbythetwosurveyteams.54 Allfindsbroughtin fromthefieldwere washed,counted,anddescribeddaily.55 Nonceramic objectsas well as loomweights andarchitectural terracottas wereenteredin a database of smallfinds.56 Ceramics fromeachtractweresortedbydate,andthequantityin eachchronological groupwasrecorded onpreprinted forms.Diagnosticartifacts withpreserved profilesornoteworthy decoration werephotographed anddrawn. Amongthelithicsthereis no obviousPalaeolithic orMesolithicmaterial.57 Several piecescouldbeNeolithicoroflaterprehistoric date,butit is notimpossible thatothersaremorerecent(e.g.,fromrelatively modern 53. S015:Periodrepresented: R; rangesrepresented: A-HL, CL-HL. 54.TeamA collected1,122artifacts, andTeamB collected962 artifacts. 55. Findswereprocessedin the newmuseumof Durresandanalyzed byHayesandStocker.Davisphotographedartifacts. MyrveteDajlani drewB065-01,B234-SFO1, and
A048-02,includingtheinkandwatercolorreproduction of its decoration (Fig.48).Drawingsof otherfindsare byHayes. 56. Fifty-eightartifacts werecollectedandcatalogued assmallfinds, includinga cointhatwascleanedin Tiranaunderthe supervision of ShpresaGjongeca;, a bronzering,two
architectural terracottas, oneterracottaloomweight,fifteenlithics,and twostonearchitectural members. Othersmallfindsincludeglass,slag, andgeologicalsamples. 57.We aregratefulto CurtisN. RunnelsandMuzaferKorkutifor noteson lithics.Thesehavein part beenincorporated intoourtext.
K L . DAVI S E T A L . JAC
68
the sleds).Notablearethe overallscarcityof lithicfindsand threshing in general.58 artifacts of prehistoric rarity (7.5%)of the aretiles.Eighty-eight Overhalf(1,166)of theartifacts hasbeen than percentage haveat leastoneslippedsurface,a higher tiles if this uncertain yet as Weare ofApollonia.59 in thehinterland recognized statesof preservation. regionalstylesorvariable reflectsdiffering variation fewcouldbeclosely relatively and small (860)weregenerally Potsherds onatleastone tracesofblackglaze Sixty-onesherds(7%)preserved dated. in this wareincludethe skyphos,pyxis, Shapesrepresented surface. sherds Forty(65%)of theblack-glaze andkrater. jug,amphora, oinochoe, wares Plain shape. specific a with to be associated too fragmentary were fora determined moreplentiful,althougha specificformcanonlybe are aremostcommon,buttheyconof thetotal.Amphoras percentage small only7%of the totalnumberof sherds,a muchlowerpercentage stitute than of Apollonia.Pithoiarelesswellrepresented in thehinterland than (2.5%). amphoras periodsaremost andHellenistic Classical, fromtheArchaic, Artifacts the Roman from Material (608;30%of all sherdsandtiles).60 prevalent Another 1%). (21 sherdsandtiles; underrepresented is noticeably period is the LateHellenistic.Onewouldexthatis poorlyrepresented period ItalianandAegeanfinewares,cookingwares,and to findstandard pect In addition, fromtheseperiods,butthesewererarelyfound.61 amphoras wares potteryis not plentiful,eventhough12th-14th-century Medieval Some226 artifacts(11%of all presentin the townof Durresitself.62 are may couldnotbe datedat all.Another783(38%of allartifacts) artifacts) (e.g., date in earlier bemodern,but at leastsomeof theseareprobably orOttoman). Byzantine TOWARD A HISTORY OF THE HINTERLAND OF DURRES .
.
of Durres,as notedat thebeginningof in theuplandsnorthwest Survey examinatowarda comprehensive thisarticle,is onlya firstcontribution about conclusions general drawing In of thecity. tionoftheentireterritory fact this hinterland, with its thehistoryof Durresor its relationship what summarizing it isworthwhile beborneinmind.Nevertheless, should mirrorsthe 58.This observation andexcasurvey extensive of results finds vation.Virtuallyno prehistoric havebeenreportedotherthansherds fromthe newport anda hammerstone to be of Late said are that Durres of BronzeAge date(Tojci1976,p. 301). Forthe scarcityof lithicfindsin the of Durresanddifferences hinterland our between resultsandthoseof other surveysin AlbaniaandGreece,see Davis,in press.
59.The resultsareasyetunpublished.On thisprojectseeJ. L. Davis, M. Korkuti,L. Bejko,M. L. Galaty, andS. R. Stocker,"The S.Mu,caj, RegionalArchaeological Mallakastra http://river.blg.uc.edu/mrap/ Project," seealsoKorkutiet al. MRAP.html.; 1998. 60. Materialof theseperiodsis well in the moderncityof represented Durresandhasbeenextensively published.See Hidri1986a(local
Archaic,Classical,andHellenistic bowls),1990 pottery),1988(Megarian (Archaicwares),and1994(Attic importsof the 6th-5thcenturyB.C.). 61.Waresof theseperiodsarefound in the cityof Durresandin its cemeteries.Forexample,see Hidri1988; Tartari1987,1991. 62. SeeHoti 1989aforanextensive reviewof ceramicsof the Middleand LateByzantineperiods.
..
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
69
of the historyof to anunderstanding we thinkourworkhascontributed the area. of Byzantium (in Stephanus Both Strabo(7.5.8)andEratosthenes s.v.lioppaxtov)describedEpidamnusas a city on a peninsulanamed It seemslikelythat (1.25)calledit anisthmus.63 Thucydides Dyrrachium. consistedof theuplandsthatwe of StraboandEratosthenes thepeninsula sepabeenalmostcompletely anareathathasuntilrecently haveexamined, we concludethatwe Therefore, ratedfromthe mainlandby a marsh.64 of the ancientpolis.But haveexamineda centralpartof the hinterland antiquitieshavealso been foundin the areaof the marsh(kenetein timestonguesof dry Albanian)andit is likelythatin Graeco-Roman intoit fromthe uplands,as wasstillthe casein the 19th landprojected century(Fig.4).65 overviewof settlement Forthe firsttimewe havea comprehensive theextentof the walked WhereasHammond andlandusein theuplands. recoastalridgeto PortoRomanoandbackwithoutfindingpre-Roman mains,wenowsuggestthattheentireareawasfullywithintheorbitof the be thatcandefinitively Greekpolis(Figs.28-29).Althoughfewartifacts assignedto theArchaicperiodwerefound,ClassicalandArchaic-Classiit seemslikelythatby Early Moreover, calfindsweremorewidespread.66 Hellenistictimesallof the areaeastof the coastalridgebetweenDurres At thistime purposes. andPortoRomanowasbeingusedforagricultural to haveexistedat PortoRomano.67 settlementalsoappears a substantial Butsincewe havenotbeenableto studysitesin detailit is asyetimposfarm(e.g.,permanent exploitation typesof agricultural sibleto knowwhat of thisareain theArchaic, werecharacteristic shelters) steads,temporary in lightof the substantial Classical,andHellenisticperiods,particularly problemsin visibilityfacedby ourteams.We hopethatfutureresearch thenatureof thesesites. willallowus to definewithgreateraccuracy aboutthe earlyhistoryof We mayoffera fewtentativeobservations Did the earlycityof Durresorigithe cityon thebasisof ourfieldwork. Appian(B Civ.2.39)described settlements? nallyconsistof twoseparate as locatedon a height.We have as a portandEpidamnus Dyrrachium villageortownexistedin the foundno evidencethatanypre-E{ellenistic is of twodistinctfociof settlement If thetradition areathatwe examined. true,wewonderif theywerenotso closetogetherthatbothlaywithinthe urbanareaof modernDurres.We mightthenimaginethattheclusterof andDautajourzones9 at Kokoman thathasbeenexcavated cemeteries area. urbanized ancient edge of the the and10 marked thattherewasa templeatS004, if we arecorrectin supposing Finally, of Archaicpotteryfoundbyourteams(Fig.28) suggests thedistribution 63. See Heuzey1886, p. 44, of this the interpretation regarding passageof Thucydidesin lightof the of the Durresarea. geography 64. In 1393 Venicedecidedto turn Durresinto anislandbydiggingcanals at boththe northern throughsandbars andsouthernendsof the marsh
(Sufflay1924, pp. 2>21). See also Ducellier1981, pp. 500, 507, 525; Schmitt2001, pp. 537-542. and 65. See alsoPraschniker Schober1919,fig.43. 66. We foundno evidencethat the uplandshadbeensettledbyIllyriantribespriorto thefoundationof
the Greekcolony,despitethe factthat Thucydidesis clearthatthe colonywas in Illyrianterritory(1.24) established andAppian(B Civ. 2.39) speaksof a minglingin the colonyof Corcyraeans andnativeTaulantians. 67. Its remainsarenowsubmerged. See above,n. 26.
7o
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
thatthis sanctuary, whenit wasfirstbuilt,stoodnearthe limitsof the territory exploited bythecolony.68 It is possible, therefore, thatitsposition marked theborderoftheArchaic city-state. Inanycase,suchanextraurban sanctuary ata highelevation in themidstof agricultural landswouldhave beena visiblesymbolof the secularandreligiousauthority of the polis overtheuplandsnorthwest of thecity. The historyof Durresin the lastthreecenturiesB.C. iS complicated 68. Potentially relevanthereare Polignac's arguments (1994)concerning extraurban templesasmarkers of sovereignty in the countryside (see alsoPolignac1995,chap.3).Temples situatedin the chorawereoftena
"deliberate statementof possession" (Polignac1995,p. 103).A border sanctuary couldmarkthefrontierof the originalterritory claimedby a colonyat its foundation, e.g.,the sanctuary of SanBiagioat Metapontum, ormarkits
Figures28-29. Distributionsof Archaic-Hellenistic(left) and pre-Romanartifacts.R. J. Robertson
expansionat a laterdate,e.g.,the sanctuaries of SantaAnnaandApollo Aleosat Croton(1995,p. 100).Edlund (1987)alsodiscussesthe extraurban sanctuaries of a numberof coloniesin MagnaGraecia.
..
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
7I
Figure30. Distributionof Roman .
,%
artltacts. R.J. Robertson
anda reviewof thescantyinformation preserved in ancienttextsdoesnot explainwhylaterHellenisticandRomanremainsareso rarein mostof the areathatwe investigated (Fig.30).In 317 B.C. Glaucias, kingof the Illyrian Taulantii tribethatinhabited theareaaroundDurres,offeredasylumto youngPyrrhus of Epirusafterhisfather,Aeacides, wasexpelledas kingof theMolossians (Plut.Pyrrh.3).69Glaucias hadmaritaltiesto the Epirotethronethroughhis wife,Boroea,who herselfwas a Molossian 69. On the areainhabitedbythe Taulantii, seeWilkes1992,map3. This is the sameGlauciaswho,allied withCleitus,sonof Bardylis, fought againstAlexander the Greatat Pelion in 335 B.C. (Arr.Anab. 1.5-6).For
detaileddiscussions of the Hellenistic historyof coastalAlbania,seeHammond1966;Cabanes1976;Hammond andWalbank1988,pp.154-155; Hammond1989,p. 264;andWilkes 1992,pp.122-125.
72
JAC K L. DAVI S ET AL.
princess.70 In 314 B.C. Cassander marched northfromAetoliaintoIllyria anddefeated Glaucias andhisalliedcities,DurresandApollonia. Cassander installeda garrisonat Durresandmadea treatywithGlauciasin which the Illyriankingpledgednot to attackanyalliesof Macedonia; he then returned home(Diod.Sic.19.67.6-7).Soonafterward, in 313/312B.C., theCorcyraeans wentto theaidof bothApolloniaandDurres.TheydismissedCassander's soldiers, freedApollonia, andgaveDurresto Glaucias (Diod.Sic.19.78.1). Severalyears later,in307B.C., Glaucias secured Pyrrhus ontheEpirotethrone.It is likelythatPyrrhus laterheldthecityof Durres aspartof hisEpiroteempireandperhaps evenextendedhisrulein Illyria asfarnorthasShkodra. AnnaComnenarecords thatPyrrhus livedin and usedDurresasthepointof departure forhis expedition to aidTarentum (Alexiad3.12.8).71 In themid-3rdcenturyB.C. a kingMonuniusissuedcoinagewithan ethnicthatincludesvariousabbreviations forthenameof thecity,butit is notclearif Durreswasactually partof hiskingdom.72 In 229 B.C. Durres soughtthe supportof Romewhenit wasbesiegedby the armiesof the IllyrianqueenTeuta(Polyb.2.9-10) andwasawarded the statusof amiCUs.73 In 148B.C. it wasformally incorporated intothenewlycreatedRomanprovinceof Macedonia. Soonafterward the Via Egnatiawasconstructedto linkthe citywithThessaloniki.74 By the endof the reignof Augustusit hadbecomea Romancolony.75 At the timeof Diocletianit becamethecapitalof EpirusNova. Elsewhere, in Greece,it hasbeensuggestedthatradicalchangesin the countryside followingthe Romanconquestreflecteda redistribution of land.76 The onlysignificantRomanremainsin the uplandsnorthof Durresareat PortoRomanowhereit is clearthatthe well-knownwall hadbeenbuiltbythe4th centuryA.C. The areasimmediately adjacent to it, nowpartof a militaryinstallation, couldnotbe examined, butsurface distributions in zone1 whereit waspossibleto surveysuggestthatthere wasa focusof Romanactivitythere. Althoughthecityclearlyremained avaluable possession forMedieval empires, asin the Romanperiodwe foundfewarchaeological remainsof thisphasein thosepartsof the countryside thatwe examined. The city 70. Plutarchtellshowthe infant PyrrhusgrabbedGlaucias's kneesand wonhis supportin spiteof his fearof angeringCassander, whoviewed Aeacidesas anenemy. 71. SeeCabanes1988,pp.147-153, andHammond1966,pp.246-247 and n. 30, on the northernextentof the kingdomof Pyrrhus. 72. Cabanes1988,pp.147-152;Picard1986.Generally, thewidedistributionof the Hellenisticcoinsof Durres in southeastern Europeis worthnoting; see Crawford1985,pp.224-245.
73. On relationsbetweenRomeand Durresin the Republicandunderthe Empire,see CabanesandDrini1995, pp.33-47. On the siegeof Durresand Rome'searlyinvolvement in Illyria,see Errington1989,pp.81-94. 74.Wilkes1992,p. 212;Fasolo 2003. 75.The nameof the Romancolony is nowknownto be IuliaAugustafrom inscriptions on leadpipesbelongingto anaqueductof the Hadrianicperiod andrestoredbyAlexanderSeverus (MirajandMyrto1982,pp.132-133,
figs.1-3; seealsoCILIII 1 709; AEpigr 1984,nos.811-813).Brunt (1971,p. 236)wouldliketo consider Durresa Caesarian colony.Octavian certainlypermitteddisplacedsupportersof Antonyto settlethere(Dio Cass. 51.4.6).SeeGrant1946,pp.275-280, wherethe statusof DurresunderRomanruleis considered at length.His treatmentis nowsuperseded by thatof Burnett,Amandry, andRipolles(1992, p. 289),who discusscoinageincorrectly attributed by Grantto Durres. 76.Alcock1993a,chap.2.
DURRES REGIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROJECT ..
I (491wasbesiegedbyTheodoricthe Greatin A.D. 478.77Anastasius 518),the Byzantineemperoranda nativeof Durres,is knownto have of nottheconstruction in thecity,butperhaps buildingprojects supported Justo him.78 Underhis successor, attributed generally the fortifications In the7th-12th byanearthquake. tinI (518-527),thecitywasdestroyed on theAdriatic, stronghold Byzantine Durreswastheprincipal centuries thatthe cityunderwenta totalof thirty-two but it hasbeencalculated between992and1392. changesin overlordship beDurreswasthe sceneof struggles In the 10thand11thcenturies Samueltookthecityin 989, tweenthetsarsof OhridandtheByzantines. thelast thenfellagaintoJohnVladislav, bytheByzantines, it wasretaken Durresin captured tsarof Ohrid,in 1017.TheNormanRobertGuiscard ThecitywasbesiegedbytheNormanBohemond 1081andheldit briefly. byWilliamII of Sicilyin 1185.Afterthe in 1107-1108,thencaptured in 1204,Durreswasoccupiedfora shorttimebyVenice, FourthCrusade of theDespotateof Epirus.It fellunderthejurisdiction butsubsequently for wasreceivedas a dowrybyManfredof Sicilyin 1258,butrecovered I of to Charles The city surrendered death in 1266. theDespotateafterhis earthA devastating ofAlbania. himselfking Anjouin 1272,whodeclared andbrieflyheldby quakewreckedhavocin 1273.Durreswascaptured KingStefanUrostII Milutinof Serbiain 1296.CharlesThopiatookthe it losingit in 1376to Louisof Evreuxandregaining cityin 1368,probably in 1383.Finallythe citybecamea possessionof Venicein 1392,which heldit until1501. in theuplandsbetweenDurres Thereis littleevidenceforoccupation andPortoRomanountilsometimeafterthe Turkishconquestin 1501 on the (Figs.31-32).Artifactsof the Ottomanperiodareconcentrated Romanoroad,andit easternedgesof theuplandsneartheDurres-Porto is notuntilthe20thcenturythattheyarefoundin theentirearea.At the as"alargedestroyed endof the 15thcenturyDurrescouldbe described in 1610consisted Harff.Theentirepopulation pilgrimArnold city"bythe In only 150huts.79 Nelebi found of 300houses,andfiftyyearslaterEvliya bytheAustro-Hungarian the firstmoderncensusof Albania,conducted were only147individuals armyin theseconddecadeof the20thcentury, undertheentrySpitalliand asresidentin theuplands(recorded reported althoughthe Mahallae portes[sic], andXhamallaj), includingKazanaj, living to 4,175individuals ofthetownof Durreshadincreased population in 955dwellings.80 77. On thelaterhistoryof Durres, see Ducellier1981;Fine 1983;Jirecek 1916;Kiel1990;Schmitt2001; and 2000. Stephenson Hoti, andHurst 78. See Gutteridge, 2001, pp. 397-398. 79. See Harff1860,p. 65. ForEvof Durres,see liyagelebi'sdescription DankoffandElsie2000, pp. 148-151. 80. Seiner1922, p. 33. Spitalliis
maybe clearlySpitalla,Xhamallaj modernXhamadha(seeFig.6), and Mahallae portes,"theneighborhood of thegate,"is certainlyPortoRomano, whichwascalledPortain the l9th afterthe arched century, presumably gatein the Romanwall;see Heuzey and 1886,p. 46, and,later,Praschniker Schober1919,p. 46, wherethe placeis called"Porthes."
73
JAC K L. DAVI S ET AL.
74
Figures31-32. Distributionsof Ottoman(left) andmodernartifacts. .
R. J. Robertson
.
THE DURRES HINTERLAND
IN CONTEXT
In additionto examining purelylocaltrendsin settlementandlanduse, it is important to compare theresultsof surveys withinAlbaniawitheach otheras well as withthoseof projectsin adjacent partsof the Adriatic to see if largerpatternscanbe discerned. Suchcomparative surveywill no doubtproveusefulin the studyof ancientIllyriaandEpirus,as it has elsewhere.8l At the sametime the problemsin visibilitydiscussed above,togetherwiththefactthatwe haveexamined onlypartof thehinterlandof Durres,shouldwarnus not to pushinterpretation of the data 81. E.g.,Alcock1993a,1993b; Bintliff1997;CherryandDavis1998. toofar.
DURRES REGIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROJECT
75
of fromthosein thehinterland OurresultsatDurresdifferstrikingly colonyonly60 krnto thesouth,andfrom anotherCorcyraean Apollonia, Mostobborder. thosearoundButrintnearthemodernGreek-Albanian landuse,bothat earlyprehistoric viousis thelackof evidenceforextensive DurresandButrint.At Apolloniaintensivesurveyhasproducedthoudatingfromthe sequence a nearlyunbroken sandsof lithicsthatrepresent Sucha picturemayproveto throughtheMesolithic.82 LowerPalaeolithic At Durres,ApolAlbania.83 in southern be moretypicalthanexceptional in theNeolonia,andButrintthereis onlyslightevidenceforsettlement thatthehumanimpact lithic,BronzeAge,andEarlyIronAge,suggesting was of coastalAlbaniaatthetimeof Greekcolonization on thelandscape slight. in thecountryAt Apolloniathereis muchlessevidenceforactivities sidethanatDurresbeforetheHellenisticperiod,exceptin its necropolis. to the security settingof Durresafforded Is it possiblethatthepeninsular of the colonyandthatthis senseof safetypermittedmore inhabitants atanearlierdate?Inbothplaces, of thecountryside intensiveexploitation findsoutsidetheimmelackof RomanandByzantine thereis a surprising fromthat different diateareaof thecitycenter.Sucha pictureis radically revealedby intensivesurveyaroundButrint,whereEarlyRoman,Late It werethe dominantwarescollected.84 Roman,andByzantineceramics Durres between differences which extent to the us to determine for remains ontheonehand,andButrint,ontheother,reflectthevariandApollonia, ablehistoriesof thesethreemajorcentersof Greekculturein theterritory thatmuchof the earlierhistory It is notimpossible of modernAlbania.85 bydeepalluvialdeposition. at Butrintis obscured of ruralsettlement THE FUTURE
82. See Korkutiet al. 1998.A fuller at http:// reportby Runnelsis available .html. river.blg.uc.edu/mrap/lithicsOl 83. Compare,forexample,the reof the resultsof centreexamination surveyby LuigiCardiniin the 1930s: Francis2001a,2001b. 84. Hodgeset al. 1997;Pluciennick 1996. betweenthe 85. Fordifferences historyof Durresandthatof Apollonia,seeWilkes1992,pp.111-113; forButrint,see Hammond1967, pp.385,474,499;Cabanes1976, s.v.Buthrotos. 86.Wrightet al. 1990.
Allopenground itspreliminaryobjectives. 2001accomplished Fieldworkin betweenthecityof DurresandPortoRomanowassystemin theuplands Muchremainsthatcouldbe donein a secondcamaticallyexamined. definitionof sitesandtheirgridded paign.Obviouslya moresystematic areaswithintheurban collectionareneeded.Therealsoremainsignificant in zonessouthof the especially sprawlthathavenotyetbeeninvestigated, Romanoroad.We andin placesneartheDurres-Porto moderncemetery didnotexaminethesedenselysettledareasand,in anycase,ourfieldprotacticswouldbethose Moresuitable wouldnothavebeeneffective. cedures in theNemea in thevillageofHeraklion insimilarcircumstances employed (onea native Thereteamsof twoindividuals Valley(1984-1986,1989).86 to inspect visitedeachhousein thevillage,askingforpermission speaker) butone procedure, labor-intensive a very its yardandgardens,obviously thatcouldandshouldbe followedat Durres.In additiontherearelocasurRomanoroadthatmightbeprofitably tionseastof theDurres-Porto investigations geomorphological veyed,especiallyif, priorto fieldwork, andremotesensingcanpinpointareasthatmayhavebeenabovewaterat t1mes1nthepast. var1ous .
.
.
-
76
JAC K L. DAVI S ET AL.
APPENDIX 1 GAZETTEEROF SITES
In thefollowinggazetteer, welistforeachsitethezoneinwhichitscenter is located,alltractsthatfallwithinitsborders, andthenumberof sherds thatcanbe assignedto a singleperiodor,lessspecifically, to a rangeof periods. Allmeasurements ofcatalogued artifacts aregiveninmeters. Under the heading"Associated Ceramics" we list onlythoseartifacts forwhich Hayesprovided a fullcatalogue description. SITE 001 Area:Zone8 Associated tracts: A148,A149,A150,A151,A152,A153,A154,A155,A156,
A157,A158,A164,A193 Periodsrepresented: CL (3);HL (2);R?(1);M (12) Rangesrepresented: A-CL (3);A-HL (17);A-R (3);CL-HL (1);LCL-
EHL(1);LHL-R(1);MO-LO (1);LO-M (1) Description: Locatedonthenorthern faceoftheridgethatseparates zones
8 and9, immediately to the southof the southernreservoir of Spitalla. Thesitecoverstwoknolls,andtheheaviestconcentration of artifacts is on topof theeasternmost one.Therearealsoartifacts downslope to thenorth in grassypastureandaroundnewhouses.Downslopeerosionis activeand substantial. A revisitto the siteyieldedmoreArchaic-Classical andMedieval-Ottoman pottery. AssociafedCeramics
A148-01 Basinorpithosrim,Corinthian coarseware
Figs.33, 44
P.Diam.est.0.43 (originally ca.0.05more?).Edgeof hanginglip wornaway.Corefiredlightgray,surfacelayerfiredorange-brown, wetsmoothed. Normalbrownmudstone grits,mediumto small.Flatrim withhighhanginglip,tiltedoutward. Archaic-Classical.
lg ::_ :: l .:: t :::::Diam. ::::::::: est. ::: . 0.20. "Local" orange r_ ware. Thin glaze covering , inside
..
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
77
Figure 33.Basinorpithosrim A148-01(aboqwe);tilefragment A149-01(right)
s
F
I
I _l
A193-01 Bowlrim
Figs.34,44
_
i
3ilt "l
|
=s
it
E
w--
----
u
.
=
r
appearinglightyellowover the slip Remains of light yellowwash covering exterior. Medium-thin. Sllghtlyincurved rim. Middle-LateOttoman.
. Ofher Cafalogged
Ceramics
A148-02 CorinthianTypeAamphorahandle Figure 34.BowlrimA193-01
Plaincoarsefabric.Corinthian import. Archaic-Classical. A149-01 Tile fragment
Fig.33,44
Threeletterspreserved in a rectangular frame:EIII[.Compare Hidri 1986b,pp.110,127,pl.XIV;Tartari andHidri1992;Myrto1998,p. 87; andCabanesandDrini1995,pp.159-162,fortilesfromDurres stamped withthenameof aneponymous magistrate in thegenitivecase followingthepreposition ss. Hellenistic. A151-01 Black-glaze amphora neckwithred-figure decoration PossibleAtticimport. 5thcenturyB.C., Archaic-Classical. A153-01 Plaincoarseamphora sherd Fabricwithvolcanicgrits.Italianimport. LateHellenistic-Roman.
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
78
Figure 35.Kioniskos A164-SF01 A154-01 Plainmediumcoarseamphora handle PossibleCorinthian TypeB, Corinthian import? Classical-Hellenistic. A193-02 Mediumcoarsecookingwarerim LateClassical-Early Hellenistic. UncataloguedCeramics
Threefineblack-glaze sherds,twoof whicharepossibleAtticimports. Classical. SmallFinds
A164-SF01Whitemarblekioniskos
Fig.35
Oblong,0.108x 0.094.P.H.0.21.Unbroken attop;brokenat bottom.Surfaces verybadlydamaged byplow.On formandtype,see CabanesandDrini1995,pp.50-52.Letterformsincludea broken-bar alpha.The characteristic formulain threelinesgivesnameof the deceased, patronymic, xatp£.Threelinesinscribed: ],uNvE ]NvE
Xat[p]£
3rd-lstcenturyB.C. Hellenistic.
DURRES REGIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROJECT
79
SITE 002 Area:Zone8 frarts:A009,A010,A084,A085,A086,A092 Associated CL (3);M (33) Periodsrepresented: A-CL (1);A-HL (16);A-R (1);LO-M (1) Rangesrepresented: Descritfion:Locatedon alowrisein thevalleybottomin thenorthwestern
on the northsideof a streamin partof zone8. Findswereconcentrated visibilitywas verylowin afieldofleafygroundcover locations; twodiscrete extensive arablebotthem(tractA086).Thesiteoverlooks thatseparated gentle tomlandandseemsa suitablelocationfor an ancientfarmstead; slopesnearbycouldsustainoliveswithoutterracing. CafaloguedCeramics
footof closedshape A084-01 Black-glaze Attic? Imported, Archaic-Classical. SmallFinds
A010-SF01Metalgunshell Modern. SITE 003 jqrea:Zone8 Sssociatedfracts:A079,A095,A096,A097,A098,A101 MED (1);M (4) Periodsrepresented: A-R (2);R-M (10);MR-LR(3);UNKN(5) Rangesrepresented: fromthecoastalridgein the Descritfion:Situatedon a spurthatdescends
partofzone8.TheareaisknownasKishae Kallmit("Church northwestern appearthatthebuildingwasstandIt doesnot,however, of the Reeds"). On theotherhand,it doesseemthat ingat anytimein the20thcentury. blockshavebeenrecentlyremovedfromthesite.At present architectural of wallsarevisible,andbricksanda pieceof marblevethe foundations of neerwerefound.Nearbyin tractA095is a marblecolumn.Potsherds the4th-6thcenturyA.C. werenotednextto thesitein a roadscarpin the courseot revls1tatzon. r
*
.
.
Sma#Finds
S003-SF01Marblecolumn
Fig.36
Diam.at top0.29;Diam.atbrokenend0.27.Not foundin situ. Middle-LateRoman.
JAC K L. DAVI S ET AL.
80
Figure36. Marblecolumn S003-SF01
A095R-SFO1Bronzefingerring
Fig.37
W. band0.0043;W. bezel0.0075.Madefroma thinbronzesheet, ca.0.007thick.Flatinside,convexoutside.Lightlyincisedlineson bezel. KomaniorArberor culture, 6th-7thcenturyA.c.87Medieval. Figure37. Bronzefingerring
SITE 004
A095R-SFO1. Scale 2:1
Area:Zone6 Associated tracts:B056,B065,B201,B202,B203,B213,B214,B223 Periodrepresented: CL (1) Rangesrepresented: A-ECL (1);A-CL (6);A-HL (21);A-R (15);CL-
HL (19) Description: Locatedon a lowknollthatprojects eastfroma highpeakin
thecoastalridgebetweenzones5 and6. Findsincludecovertilesandlarge pantiles(manyof themred-slipped), ridgetiles,andafewCL-HLblackglazefragments. Wesuspectthatthisplacemayhavebeenthelocationof anArchaictemple,fromwhichderivearchitectural terracottas foundin thevicinityof themodernDurrescemetery.88 CataloguedCeramics
B065-01Tilewithdarkredpaintedband
Fig. 38
Archaic-Early Classical. 87. Forthe significance of these culturesas transitional phasesin Albaniancivilization betweenantiquity andmoderntimes,seeWilkes1992, pp.273-278.We thankEtlevaNallbani forherassessment of thisartifactbased
on inspectionof photographs. 88. Zeqo1986,pp.181-182.Cf. Winter1993,pl.48, fromthe"BlassgelbesDach"at Calydonandfig. 131 fromtheTreasury of Epidamnus at Olympia.
A
..
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
8I
B
A
B
B
A
.
B065-01
B234-SF01
Figure 38.TileB065-01andcornice or pediment fragment B234-SFO1. Drawing M. Dajlani
0
5
2
5
cm I
Small Finds B201-SF01 Architecturalfragment Pieceof cutlimestoneblock. B203-SF01 Architecturalfragment Largelimestoneblock.
Fig. 39
B213-SF01 Slag
Figure 39. Architecturalfragment B203-SF01
Some 600 m farthereastin anisolatedtracta singlefragment of anArchaic architectural terracotta wasfound: B234-SF01 Partof corniceorpedimentof a templeroof Fig.38 Finished surfaces slippedyellowwithdecoration of blackbands. 6th-5thcenturyB.C.
JAC K L. DAVI S ET AL.
82
SITE 005 Area:Zone5 Associated tracts:B267,B268,B270 Periodsrepresented: HL (1);MHL (2);LR?(2);M (1) Rangesrepresented: CL-R (2);MHL-LHL(2);LHLorLR (1);
UNKN(4)
Description: Situatedatthewesternendof thevalley,near
themainlimestone-paved road.Twoancientmortared brickwallfragments (probably of LR date),eachabouta meterwide,wereobserved in tractsB267and B268.Bricksareca.0.07m in thickness. TractB270nearbymayalsobe associated withthe site.Severallargeamphora fragments, datableto the Hellenistic period,wererecovered there,aswasa fragment of anancient aralnplpe. 1
*
.
r
_
::-.-:...
::.:.::..:-:::....::::::.::.::.:.::.:-.::.::
Figure40. Cookingpot rimB267-01 AssociafedCeramics
B267-01 Cookingpotrim,withimprintof a Figs.40,44 missinghandle Diam.est.rim0.162;p.H.0.04.Wareprobably notlocal:darkgray, fairly fine-textured; finelimeinclusions, tracesof mica.Fairlythinwalled. Obliquerimwithsmallrisinglipanda smallledgeat lower edge on inside.Tracesof a handleonunderside of rim. Treatment of therimsuggestsa LateHellenisticorLateRoman (4th-6th centuryA.C.) date.Missinghandlepresumably loopedvertically downto thebody;thisis morelikelyto be a Roman/Late Roman feature. B270-01 Amphora, Graeco-Italic Fig.44 Diam.est.of outerlip0.20;p.H.0.10.Twolargerim fragments (not joining), eachwitha handle-top, apparently fromoppositesidesof the same vessel.Pinkish-red, hard-fired, clean-breaking, firedbuffat surfaces. Scatterof smallto medium-sized brownish grits(tracesof lime, nomica). Handlesof oval-lentoid section(W.attopca.0.06?Full
IF
l
^
DURRES
X
§
REGIONAL
-
,
,
b
,lf.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
l #
-§-
{
Wti.iti, w 1tl v
(right)
83
Hl$A$b
;t
Figure41.Amphora toeB270-02 (left)andamphora shoulder B270-03
PROJECT
L:L
#
t
10
widthnotpreserved). Sourceuncertain (SouthItalian? ItalianAdriatic coast?EvenSicilian?). Ca.250-150B.C. B270-02 Amphora toe,perhapsLamboglia type2
Figs. 41, 44
P.H.ca.0.155;Diam.of toe atbottom0.06.Close-grained buff ware,clean-breaking; somefinebrown-gray specks.Thick-walled. Short, thick,solidtoe (tipdamaged, perhapsrounded). Shallowlowerbodycurve. 2nd-lst centuryB.C. (presumably). B270-03 Amphora shoulder, Graeco-Italic orrelatedtype Figs.41,44 Diam.est.of shoulder angle0.25;p.H.ca0.115?Singlefragment. Lightorange,ratherclean-breaking; smallred-brown grits.Thickwalled.Slopingshoulder withsmallridgeatedgeandslightlybulging belly.Wareuncertain, possiblyfromanAdriaticsource. Around3rdcenturyB.C. SmallFinds
B267-SF01Ceramicbrickfromwall Ca.0.071thick,mortared. LateRoman? B267-SF02Mortarsamplefromwall LateRoman?
JAC K L. DAVI S ET AL.
84
SITE 006 Area:Zone1 Associated tracts:B338,B341,B342,B343,B344 Periodsrepresented: MR?(1);R (4);R?(1) Rangesrepresented: A-HL (7);A-R (2);CL-HL (2);R-MED(4);
MR-LR(4);LR-DA(1);LR-EB(1);LR-EB?(1);UNKN(2) Description:Locatedat the northernend of the coastalridgeat Porto
Romano. Theridgetophereconsistsof bareearth,andit is clearthatthe sitehasbeendisturbed bothbylong-termerosionandrecentbulldozing. Foundations of a mortarandbrickwallarepreserved, similarin technique to thewell-known wallatPortoRomano. CL-HLsherdsareprimarily in tractsB338andB344. AssociatedCeramics
B338-01Amphorarim,witha handle, EarlyChristian-Early Byzantine(?) type
Figs. 42, 44
Diam.est.rim0.039.Secondhandlenotpreserved (restored on drawing). Cleanlightyellow-brown ware(slightbrownspecks).Local fineware?Smallnarrow neck,lightlyribbed; ratherhigh-arched ovalsectionedhandle(s), withslightmedianarris.Remainsof a graffitoon neck,to leftof thepreserved handle(transposed in drawing to opposite faceof vessel). A datearoundthe6th-8thcenturyA.C. maybe suggested on generalform.LateRomanto DarkAges.
-
B338-02Tile fragment
-
-
-
-
:::: ::-
: ::: ::-
::::::.:-
Figure42. Amphorarimandhandle B338-01
Figure43.Tilefragment B338-02 Figs. 43, 44
H. atedge0.061.Onecornerpreserved. Mediumorange-brown fabric: finewhiteandbrowngrits,a fewlargerwhitelumps,sparse glintingspecks(calcite?); finegritson surface(especially upperface). Fairlysmoothbreaks. Plainrounded-off endface.Tiltedstraightrim, roundedof£Underside uneven.Not a normaltypefromthesurveyarea. RomanImperial(?) to LateRoman?
f
DURRES
L
REGIONAL
\-_
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
-
85
PROJECT
L
w--
z B267-01
A193-01
EHDb .....
...
.
B338-01 A149-01
P
A148-01
lWEo
-
s
ev
ff le lif
l
\
B274 0-01
|n
___
__
,0 B270-03
B270-02
-\s
\\
<
\\
\\
\
\
--
-
*'
B341 -02
-
0 |
5
2 I
_
5 I
cm
Figure44. Potteryandtile fragments fromsites 001, 005, and006. J. W. Hayes
86
JAC K L. DAVI S ET AL.
_
_
_
_
B341-02 Flattile
Figure45. Ribbedamphora fragment B342-01
Fig.44
H. atedge0.057.Onecorner. Thickish,upturned atedge,with beveled(tilted)lip.Edgeat sideroundedoff;a slightthickening atthe end.Lightbuffware(moreorlessthe"local" fabric),ratherclean(slight brownspecks). Typeuncommon here,andnottreatedin thenormal manner. LateRomanorEarlyByzantine? B342-01Amphora, laterRomanribbedtype(unclassified)Figs.45, 52 Diam.est.belly0.215;Diam.est.neck(atbreak)0.07;p.H.ca. 0.085.Onesideof shoulder, withlowerstumpof a handle;mendedfrom sevenpieces(oneortwomore,loose,maybelong).Fairlydeepbrown ware,smooth-textured; cleanbreakswithfinelimespecksandmica traces.Slenderribbedbody;mediumthickness. Straplike handle,sharply splayedatlowerattachment (max.W. 0.075).Typeperhaps twohandled.Fromanunknown Aegean(?) source(Argolid? AsiaMinor coast?Orsimilar). Apparently a copyof Mid-LateRomanAmphora3 (c£ Robinson's "micaceous wateriars" inAgoraV,pl.41),withsimilarhandletreatment butthickerwalls,whichwouldsuggesta 2nd-5th/6thcenturyA.C. date. Middle-LateRoman. OtherCatalogued Geramics B341-01Tilewithmortaron surface Roman-Early Byzantine. SmallFinds B342-SF01MortarsampletakenfromRomanwall MiddleRoman?
X __r
r
-
w
5
-
!
DURRES
B - I
-
X
_s
|
REGIONAL
I'=-
..
_X | ....
|
_ | ..
*S
..
SS _X
F
_ >
PROJECT
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
87
SITE 007 Area:Zone8 A024,A026,A028,A029,A030,A031,A047,A048,A049, Associated tracts:
A050,A051,A052 A (1);CL (1);O (4);M (14) Periodsrepresented: A-CL (4);A-HL (11);A-R (20);A-B (1);CL-LCL Rangesrepresented: (1);CL-HL (11);CL-R (1);CL-EM(6);O-M (36);LO-M (4); UNKN(31) westof themoderncemA densesurfacescatterimmediately Description: Humanbonefrageteryof Durreson high,recentlybulldozedterraces. theremrepresent A048-02,probably withanoinochoe, mentsassociated in is concentrated grave.The Ottomancomponent nantsof a disturbed x 0.42 x block (0.46 cut tractsA050,A051,andA052.A monumental 1.15m)wasfoundin tractA047in thecourseof revisitation.
_ _w
-
_
_w _
M l s |
1
[1>0-
! | | BfiW | Eg F
lS ! I | .
-' :
Figure46. SlyphosrimA024-01 (aboqwe) andbasinrimA047-01 (right)
AssociafedCeramics
miniature skyphosrim A024-01 Black-glaze
Figs.46, 52
Diam.est.rim0.065.Smoothlightbrownwithpolishedsurface; fabric? Votivesize? remainsof dullblackallover."Local" 6thcenturyB.C. A047-01 Rimof largebasin
Figs.46, 52
Diam.est.rim0.43;p.H.0.064.Verythickbufffabricwithslight specks.Thickenedrim,roundedon top;seriesof grooves brown-black applied(right Underrim,anarchedlug-handle below(threepreserved). oneof a pairon oppositesidesof thevessel).A endmissing;presumably fabric,less coarse-ware of theCorinthian moreregionalcounterpart gritty. Archaic-Classical.
88
JACK L. DAVIS
1|415|R ,l_
gl^
i
i9=-' ,_ - sj ,iiti
A048-02 Red-figure smalloinochoe(choustype)
ET AL.
.oJ
Figs.47, 48,52
P.H.0.132(originally ca.0.16?);Diam.body0.119;Diam.foot 0.088;Diam.min.of neckca.0.055;H. of mainfriezeca.0.105. Unbroken untilrecently. Corinthian orrelatedfabric:smoothlight yellowclay(slighttan-brown tintat surface) witha dullredwash.Slight tracesof redwashon unpainted bottom.Munsell:onbreak7.5YR8/4, polishedsurfaceto 5YR7.5/6;redwashca.lOR6.5/8. Good-quality blackgloss(somewhat dull),fireddarkbrownon insideof neck.Mostof innersurfaceof bodynotvisiblebecauseof lime deposit.Glosscoversallvisiblepartsof innersurface. Glossendsat outeredgeof foot,extending partway overrestingsurfaceon onesideof thevessel.Smalltriangular unpainted patchbehindlowerhandle attachment. Red-figure friezebordered belowbya continuous narrow reserved band(undecorated), andabovebya stripon neck(opposite handle)bearingblackpaintedornament. Addedcream/gold paintdetails on thefigure,poorlypreserved. Near-globular body,wide-based, withwideneck(originally trefoilmouthed,markedly pinched).Evidenceof rim-pinching visibleon preserved partof neck.Lowerstumpof a round-sectioned(?) handle preserved on shoulder(originally endingon topof rim,whichwould havebeenpinchedin atthispoint,witha knobbedterminal). Low squarish footring.
Figure47.Red-figureoinochoe A048-02
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
89
AO48-02
oinochoe Figure 48.Red-figure
0
A048-02-M.Dajlani
l l
5 '
l
10 cm
atsidesbyvertical friezein twopanels,separated Red-figure marking offtops withslightcross-stripes reserved bands,"columnar," bearredwash.Front areasof thedecoration andbottoms.All reserved to left,holdinga patera/large panel:seatedwoman,winged,draped, rocks.Woman: blobsunderthefigureindicating phiale.Somereserved lines(somethickerhems);toppartof wingonce finedrapery in gold,pairof white/goldbangleson eachwrist,white/gold overpainted on neck.At back,largeuprightpalmette(nine-lobed, dot-necklace pairand flankedbyvolutetendrils(horizontal fleshy,notrecurved), On reserved verticalpairflankinghandle;nowhite/goldadditions). remainsof a blackegg/ovoloband(eggswiththickandthin neck-strip, outlines); a blackdotbelowandbetweeneachelement.Remainsof two egg-motifspreserved. style Vesseltype(chous,notthetaller,lateversion)anddecorative or basically Atticof ca.420-370B.C., butthefabricis Corinthian notanearlySouthItalianproductof Probably colonialCorinthian. similardate. Middle-LateClassical.
JACK L. DAVIS
9o
ET AL.
OtherCataloguedCeramics
A050-01 Plainbasefragment withdrillholein bottom Ottoman-Modern. SmallFinds
A026-SF01Possiblestonepounder A029-SF01Glassfragment A048-SF01,SF02 Glassfragments A048-SF03Sampleof earthfrominsideoinochoe(A048-02) A048-SF04Bonesassociated withoinochoe(A048-02) A049-SF01Stone A050-SF01,SF02,SF03 Glassfragments SITE 008 Area:Zone7 Associated tracts: A210,A211,A212,A213,A214,A215,A216,A217,A223,
A224,A226 Periodsrepresented: O (4);M (1) Rangesrepresented: A-HL (1);A-R (1);B-O (16);B-M (13);LB-O (2);
MED-M (9);O-M (6);MO-LO (2) Description: High-densityscattersof artifactson the crestandnorthern
faceof theridgethatdivideszone7 fromzone8.Thissprawling scatterof sherdsis nearlyadjacent to S007andextendsalmostto the edgeof the urbanized areaof thecity.Artifactsaremostdenseimmediately northof themoderncemetery of Durres. AssociatedCeramics
A215-01 Bowlrim
Figs.49, 52
Diam.est.rim0.21."Local" ware,lightyellow-brown. Medium thickness. Brush-smoothed interiorwithyellowishwash,extendingover rippledexteriorof rim.Originally glazedon inside?No glazeremains. Upcurved rimwithslightripplingon exterior. A laterversionof A19301 (fromS001)?SeeB283-01(unassociated witha site)forpossible laterdevelopment. 18th-beginning of the20thcenturyA.C.
1|st
i
I
l l- |- ilocal facing BS variant amphitheater of the . earlier that is "Corinthian being * constructed B" (i.e., s to Corfu) serve Mseries? as the new Definitely t! cemetery
..
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
. Nl0s4.
_
|
Figure 49.BowlrimA215-01(lefi) andjarrimA215-02(righf)
i ww
s
A215-02Jarrim
9 I
< . _
t
Figs.49, 52
Diam.est.rim0.19-0.20."Local" ware(asA215-01),lightbrown. Glassylightyellowglaze(overslip)on inside,covering topof therim. Partof stumpof a straplike(?) handle,attachedatrim.Topof rim flattened, witha slightgroovebelowlip. Middle-LateOttoman. SmallFinds
A210-SF01Lithic SITE 009 Area:ZoneS Associated tracts: A297,A298,A317,A329,A330,A331,A332,A333,A334,
A336,A339,A340,A341,A342,A343,A344,A355,A356,A359, A360,A362,A363,A364,A372,A397,A398,A399,A400 Periodsrepresented: PH?(1);CL (2);O (8);M (16) Rangesrepresented: A-CL (14);A-HL (14);A-R (8);CL-HL(9);CL-R (3);CL-B (1);LCL-HL(1);HL-B (2);B-O (1);B-M (1S);LB-O (1);LB-M (3);O-M (92);LO-M (4) Description: Densescatterof artifacts in andaroundthelargenatural east-
1_ |
|
|
t
of Durres.Thebuildingof pavedaccessroadshasgreatlydisturbed subsurfacedeposits. Sssociafed Ceramics
A362-01 Amphorarim
Figs.50, 52
Diam.est.rim0.15-0.16."Local" ware,apparently; yellow-buff, firedorange-buff atcore.Fairlycleanbreaks; finebrownish specks.A Figure 50.Amphora rimA362-01
different fromtherimB135-02(fromS026). Presumably Sth-4thcenturyB.C.
.L
w
I
.
|
.
.
.
_
,
L5m> >_-ir
.
C&g-e_
|
.
|
Figure (lef
)
51. and bowl Rim of rim water A403-Ol jugA325-01 (rzght).
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
92
OfherCafaloguedCeramics A362-02 Amphora toe Classical-Hellenistic.
SmallFinds A359-SF01 Retouched flake Probablyprehistoric. A399-SF01 Marble fragment Possible architecturalfragment.
SITE
010
Area:Zone 4 Associated tracts:A324, A325, A403, A404 Rangesrepresented:A-CL (2); A-HL (19); A-R (1); CL-HL (1); O-M (2); MO-LO (2)
Description: A moderately dense scatter of artifacts in a low saddle just southeast of the point where the boundaries of zones 3, 4, and 5 meet. Artifacts were also found in minor drainages beneath the saddle on the eastern face of the ridge. Finds were most widespread in zone 5. . _ _
l
__
,.
_
-
_
Sssociafed Ceramics
A325-01 Rim of narrow-mouthed water jug(?)
Figs. 51, 52
Diam. est. rim 0.039. Only one handle preserved.Not much eroded. "Local"ware (plain counterpartof the glazed items above):brown, clean-textured,with red tint at handle-core. Handle of flattened section, rising a little above rim level, slightly ridged. Middle-Late Ottoman. A403-01 Bowl rim
Figs. 51, 52
Diam. est. rim 0.27. "Local"ware, light orange-brown. Creamyellow glaze over slip on interior, continued as a thinner (light yellow) glaze over exterior;standardadded colors. Wide tilted rim with slightly thickened lip, grooved on outside. Decoration on top of rim: darkgreen and darkyellow splashes. 18th-beginning of the 20th century A.C. Middle-Late Ottoman.
o
_
f.
|
M
DURRES
(
\:
\
-
REGIONAL
--a
cm
)
t
->
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
\
'
PROJECT
93
-
_-
'RA--
r''
l
A024-01
lEtt A325-01
-
sz
.__
A2 15-02
A403-01
'''
-
%**s
,:-R
l
/4--
X
)
W,
-/c
r
B342-01
A048-02
4r
A047-01
0 -
Figure52. Potteryfromsites 006410. J.W. Hayes
5
ts-wss
2
n
s%F=
'
JAC K L. DAVI S ET AL.
94
SITE 011 Area:Zone3 Associated tract:A410 Rangerepresented: A-HL (5) Description: Moderatequantities of artifacts in a saddleof the ridgethat divideszone 3 fromzone5. Artifactsweremostlyfoundin an eroding
animaltrack. SITE 012 Area:Zone3 Associated tracts:A390, A391,A413,A414,A416,A432,A433,A434,B261 Periodrepresented: M (1) Rangesrepresented: A-CL (8);A-HL (30);A-R (1) Description: Nearthejunctionof thecoastalridgeandtheridgethatforms theboundary betweenzone3 andzone5. The mostsubstantial concen-
trationswereon the faceof the coastalridgein the vicinityof a fenced houseandgardencomplex.Plowedfieldsthereyieldeda moderate quantityof Archaic-Hellenistic tile.Tilewasalsorecovered fromagrassyslope betweenthefencedproperty andbrambles underthecoastalridgeroad. SmallFinds
B261-SF01Marblefragment SITE 013 Area:Zone3 Associated tracts:A445, A467, A471, A476, A477, A479, A480, A498 Periodsrepresented: MHL (1);M (4) Rangesrepresented: A-HL (11);CL-HL (1);R-M (1);UNKN(3) Description: Associated tractson the northernsideof the mainroadthat runsthroughzone3. Thereis a low-density scatterof artifacts overa large
areaandit is notobviousthattheyareconcentrated in anyparticular tract. CataloguedCeramics
A445R-01Medium-coarse plainamphora rim Fabricwithreddishbrowngrits. 3rd-2ndcenturyB.C. SITE 014 Area:Zone2 Associated tracts:A493, A495 Rangerepresented: A-HL (2)
..
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
95
Description: Low-density scatteron a low knollimmediately northof a
passin thecoastalridgein thenorthwestern cornerofzone3.A roadleads throughthepass,thendownintoa sandandclayquarry. SITE 015 Area:Zone12 Associated tracts:A569,A204,A205 Periodrepresented: R (1) Rangesrepresented: A-HL (18);CL-HL (4) Description: High-density concentrations of artifacts erodingfromterrace
scarpsatthesouthern sideof a fieldroadattheedgeof a sheerdropintoa modernclayquarry. SITE 016 Area:Zone8 Associated tracts:A142,A143,A144,A145 Periodrepresented: LCL(1) Rangesrepresented: A-CL (1);A-HL (13);LCL-EHL(2);LCL-MHL
(1);UNKN(2) Description: A narrow fencedgarden(recently established in aformerolive
grove)on thenorthern faceof theridgethatdivideszone8 fromzone9. The sitestretches fromthe crestof theridgeto thevalleybottom.Finds seemconcentrated on the upperterraces wherethe owner,AdemRoda, unearthed an ashlarblockin the courseof digginga pit. He showedus variousartifacts he hadrecentlycollected,includinga pithosrimsaidto havebeenfoundnearbyandan inscribedgravestelesaidto havebeen foundca.300m to thesouth. Alssociated Ceramics
A142-01 Red-figure (orpatterned) lekanislid
-
-
-
-
Figure53. Red-figurelekanislid A142-01
Figs. 53, 60
Diam.of stem0.036;p.H.0.023.Wholeof stemof knobandpart of topof lidproper(twojoiningpieces).Smoothcleanlightbrownware withorangetint,nonmicaceous (as"local" fineware);redwashon outer (top)surface, withdecoration addedoverthisin black.Lowersurface brush-smoothed, withtracesof a thindarkslip. Standard latered-figure type(asin Apulianred-figure, etc.):shallow domedtop(downturned verticalrimatbottomnotpreserved), short thickstem,recessed top,tilted,arounda smallcentralwell(thesquarish projecting rimof theknobis lost).On top,sepiawashinsidewell, probably twoblackcircleson tiltedtop(poorlypreserved); rowof black blobs,continuing (tracesof radialstripes?) on bodyof lid proper. Below/ aroundthese,remainsof blackbands/blobs (couldbe a red-figure frieze, poorlypreserved). Derivative of anAttictype;couldbe eitherApulian ora local/regional product. 4th centuryB.C. LateClassical.
96
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
A143R-O1Lidknob(banded?)
Figs. 54, 60
Diam.knob0.037.Smoothyellowish-tan "local" fineware.Redslip coveringtheexterior, polished.Discoidtop,raiseda little.Tracesof possibleblackbandingon theslippedsurfaceoutside,belowthedisc, andon bodyatthelowerbreak.Technique perhaps to be compared with thatof thelekythoiM00-16andM00-17(seeAppendix 2).Type unknown. Archaic-Classical. Figure54. Lid knobA143R-O1.
OtherCataloguedCeramics
Scale 1:1
A145-01Fineblack-glaze bodysherd Shallowverticalribbingon exterior. 4th-3rdcenturyB.C. LateClassical-Hellenistic. SmallFinds
S016-SFO1Fragment of inscribed stele
Figs. 22, 23
Finewhitecrystalline marble.Flattop;quarter-round molding beneath. W. 0.30.Stillin possession of Roda.On theform,seeCabanes andDrini1995,no.12 (5th-4thcenturyB.C.). Onfrontneartop: ENQI OIAOKPATETE
The normalformulaforepitaphsatDurresemploysthenominative orvocativecaseforthedeceased followedbya patronymic in thegenitive.In thecaseof thisinscription thesequenceappears to be nominativefollowedbygenitive,with ENQI beingfemininenominative and OIAOKPATETEbeingmasculine genitive.The femininename £VX is attestedatDurres(Cabanes andDrini1995,p. 125,no.336)andthe masculine nameoCX0%pTN5 appears in aninscription fromOdessa honoringanEpidamnian (Cabanes andDrini1995,p. 154,no.516). A nominative form £VCt) wouldbeparalleled in theliterary Doricdialect(Thumb1932,p. 140,no.4; Sihler1995,p.333,n. 1).Thereareno masculine nounsknownatDurresthatendin -£05, noranyexample anywhere in theGreekworldof thenominative Philokrateus (LGPNI). Forthemasculine genitiveformoCX0%pT£05, compare Cabanesand Drini1995,p. 82,no.62 (forgenitive-£05 > -£05 byraising,seeBuck 1955,pp.40, 92;for-£0 > -£D in Corinthian, p. 164;in Megarian, p. 165).Reading ENQI asa masculine dativefromthenominative Xenosseemslesslikely;thisnameis possiblyattestedasa propername atButrint(SEGXXXVIII476;Cabanes1974,p. 124,no.VI,9),but notatDurres.Formsof letters:E withparallel bars;E withsplaying bars; withoutverticalbar.Missingareanyof thelateformsof letters characteristic of Epidamnian epitaphsof the3rd-lstcenturyB.C. (e.g., lunatesigmaandepsilon;minuscule omega;andbroken-bar alpha);see CabanesandDrini1995,p. 51.89 Classical-Early Hellenistic.
89.We aregratefulto Merle Langdonandto Holt Parkerfor readingandcommenting on a preliminary versionof thiscatalogue entry.
4
..
DURRES
_l
w
,
REGIONAL
W
i
X
_
--
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
3
_
_
PROJECT
97
SITE 017 Area:Zone7 Associated tract:A277 Rangesrepresented: A-HL (1);CL-HL (3) Description:Dense andhighlylocalized concentration oftilesonthenorth-
ernfaceof a knollin theridgethatdivideszone7 fromzone8. SITE 018 Area:Zone9 Associated tract:A185 Periodrepresented: HL (5) Rangesrepresented: A-HL (1);A-R (2);LB-MO(1) Description: A partially intacttile gravein the scarpof a terraceon the northernslopeof the hillof Dautaj.Covertilesprotrude fromthe scarp andforman archoverseveral diagnostic Hellenisticsherdsnotcollected.
Moretileswerefoundnearby. SssociatedCeramics
A185-01 Handleandbodysherdof a fineclosedshape
Fig.55
Inciseddecoration on exterior. 15th-17thcenturyA.C. LateByzantine-Middle Ottoman. ,< ;
i
'i
D
_
i i
_
^;S1^1i
i
-
t
Mix'
0
0
:
u
0
i
1
h
z
_
__i1i= _=__ Figure55.Handleandbodysherd A185-01 SITE 019 Area:Zone3 Associated tracts:B297,B298 Periodrepresented: M (1) Rangesrepresented: A-HL (4);UNKN(1) Description: Low-density scatter,mostlyof tile.Muchof the siteis ter-
racedandthelandscape appears to be stable.
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
98
SITE 020 Area:Zone2 Associated tracts:B304,B305,B307,B308,B309,B310,B311,B313 Periodrepresented: M (1) Rangesrepresented: A-CL (5);A-HL (16);A-R (2);CL-HL (1);CL-R
(1);O-M (5);MO-M (1);UNKN(5) Description: A moderately densescatterof artifacts onslopesattheeastern
endof theridgethatborders zone2 to thenorth.Theseslopesaremostly terraced andarenotverysteep.Theredoesnotappearto be a significant amountoferosionatpresentandthelandscape seemstoberelatively stable. Findsfromthe siteincludethosetypicalof anancienthouseholdassemblage:severalancientamphora fragments, fineblack-glaze fragments, a fewplainwares,a cookingwarefragment, andtiles. AssociafedCeramics
B313-01 Basefragment of smallskyphos(?), decorated
Figs.56, 60
Diam.est.foot0.042.Onesiderestored. "Local" fineware,light yellow-tan. Sepiaslipon inside.Smallsplayedfoot,offsetfromcenterof bottom.Bottomreserved (plain?), red-brown paintedbandon rounded underside of foot,dullblackbandon edgeof foot,possibleremainsof a redbandon topof foot.A derivative of Corinthian andsimilarskyphoi. 6th-5thcenturyB.C. SITE 021 Area:Zone6 Associated tracts:B032,B034,B036,B037,B070 Periodsrepresented: CL (24);M (2) Rangesrepresented:A-CL (7);A-HL (2);A-R (6);CL-HL (11);
UNKN(1) Description: Locatedon terraced slopesjustbelowthe flattenedtop of a
hillin the ridgethatdivideszone5 fromzone6. Highestconcentrations of artifacts wereobserved in erodingscarpsof terraces andin thebankof a fieldroad. Associafed Ceramics
B036-01 Black-glaze pedestal(?) footfragment, probably froma closedform
Figs. 57, 60
Diam.est.base0.095.Partof onesideonly."Local" fineware:light tan-orange; wornblack-glaze on exterior(downto edgeof resting surface). Bottomplain.Lowsplayedfootwithmoldingson exteriorand a smallstepon underside. Brokenawayatjunctionwithnarrow lower body. Classical.
Figure56. Slyphos basefragment B313-01
fragment .
(lefi)
B036-01
DURRES
and
REGIONAL
krater
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
--
-
PROJECT
99
Figure57. Black-glazepedestal(?) fragmentsB037-01, B036-02 (right)
B037-01,B036-02 Black-glaze krater, shoulder and handle-end
Figs.57, 60
Probably a column-krater. Fourjoiningpieces,plusoneadditional joiningsherd(B036-02).P.W.shoulder 0.155;Diam.est.atbelly0.37. Smoothyellow-to orange-brown ware;no obviousinclusions. Polished blackgloss("worn" appearance) on exterior, overa smoothsurface with slightredtint(cf.appearance of M00-01;seeAppendix 2). No slipon interior. Wide-bellied withroundedshoulder. A rectangular-sectioned appliedstrip,risingat steepangle,withoutcurved lowerend,preserved abovethebelly,presumably partof lowerterminal of a handle(e.g.,a transverse archedelementfromwhichrisesa verticalhandle-strap, as on Laconian black-glaze kraters). A variantof late6th-5thcenturyB.C. Corinthian/Laconian/Attic types,withdistinctive treatment of thehandleends(basedon a metaltype?).(Alternatively, if inverted, thiscouldbe interpreted asa dinosbasewithattached feet.) Archaic-Classical. SmallFinds
B032-SF01Metalfragment SITE 022 Area:Zone6 Associated tracts:B011,B016,B019,B021,B022,B101 Periodsrepresented: CL (1);HL (3);M (19) Rangesrepresented: A-CL (2);A-HL (26);CL-HL (14);LCL-HL(3);
MO-LO (1);LO-M (38);UNKN(3) Description: Densescattersof artifacts in tractsattheeasternendof theridge
bordering zone6 on thenorth.Severalfieldshadbeenplowedwhenthisarea wasexamined. Thereis littleactiveerosion. Themodernartifacts appear to be associated withcontemporary farmsandnewhouses.
JAC K L. DAVI S ET AL.
IOO
UncataloguedCeramics
Fine,black-glaze bodysherdfroma closedshape.Possibleredfiguredecoration. Classical. SITE 023 Area:Zone6 Associated tracts:B053?,B054,B055,B220 Periodrepresented: HL? Rangesrepresented: A-HL (4);A-R (10);CL-HL(4);R-M (3);
UNKN(1) Description: A low-density scatterof artifacts on twohilltopsin theridge
dividingzones5 and6.Artifacts weremostdensein a gullynearthecrest of oneof thehillsandin a plowedfieldnearby. AssociatedCeramics
BOSS-O1 Tilefragment
Fig. 60
H. of edge0.065.Rectangular chamfered insetundercorner(0.11x 0.08-0.09).Normal"local" lightyellow-brown fabric(likethatof"local" finewares). Hellenistic? SITE 024 Area:Zone6 Associated tracts:B060,B061,B062,B064,B080,B081,B082,B084,B115,
B117 Periodsrepresented:A (1);HL (1);HL?(1);M (3) Rangesrepresented: A-CL (1);A-HL (12);A-R (8);LO-M (2);
UNKN(7) Description:Low-densityscatter ofartifacts onthelowerslopesofthecoastal ridgeatthewesternendof thevalley. The sitehasno clearcenter. AssociatedCeramics
B084-01Bowlwithhorizontal handlesbelowrim
Figs.58, 60
Shallow"skyphos"? Diam.est.rimca.0.23;p.H.0.039."Local"(?) ware:light(brownish?) yellowware,medium-soft, withfinespecksonly. Tracesof dullsepiapaintpreserved in therimgrooves,possiblesepia bandson thehandle.Bowlupcurved towardrim;topof rimflattened. Partof a round-sectioned handle(presumably oneof a pair)on upper wall,sethorizontally, ratherwide-looped (W.est.ca.0.075).Three(?) fineshallowgroovesbelowtherim.Possiblepatternof thinvertical stripes(fourpercm)aroundoutsideof handle. Shapeanddecorative treatment suggesta dateof ca.650-550B.C.
Figure58. Bowlwith horizontal handlesB084-01
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
B060-01Tilefragment
PROJECT
IOI
Fig.60
H. of edge0.062.Pieceof rim;no cornerspreserved. "Local"(?) ware:light(brownish?) yellowware,medium-soft, withfinespecksonly. Somediagonalscratches on rimslope,possiblyancient? Hellenistic? SmallFinds
B061-SF01Bitumen? B084-SF01Bitumen? SITE 025 Area:Zone6 Associated tracts:B121,B122,B136,B138 Periodrepresented: CL (1) Rangesrepresented: A-HL (7);A-R (3);CL-HL (4);UNKN(2) Description: Locatedon a hilltopin the ridgethatdivideszone 6 from
zone7.Terraces onthehillarestableandplantedwithwell-tended olives. SITE 026 Area:Zone6 Associated tracts:B128,B129,B134,B135 Periodsrepresented: CL (1);HL (6);M (10) Rangesrepresented: CL-HL (5);CL-R (1);UNKN(1) Description: Perhapstwoseparate concentrations. Allofthetractsincluded
in the site consistof relatively stableterracedfields,andartifacts were observed onlyin areaswherethesoilhadbeendisturbed, e.g.,in ditches,a gully,andanerodingterrace scarp.S026andS025maybepartsof a single largesite. AssociatedCeramics
B135-02Amphora rim
Figs.59, 60
Diam.est.rim0.15.Brownware(yellowish tint),ratherroughtextured. Finecalcitelumps,finebrownspecks.Not local:froma karstic environment of aWesternGreekorIllyrianregion? Tapered rim,tilted upward; a slightgrooveandoffsetatjunctionwithneck. Probably 5th-4thcenturyB.C. OtherCataloguedCeramics
B135-01Tile,burnished on interior Figure59.Amphora rimB135-02
Hellenistic.
-
-
-
1
-
L. DAVIS ET AL. JACK I02
-)--1
s--I
ss
3-01 B31
43R-01 A1
B036-01
/)
t-8 -
A142-01
-
B135-02
B285-01
m B084-01 B060-01
.'fo ''""
F
,
/}
#th W'-W
f t
'.-;j,¢F
l
4
\ :0 \ - -
B037-01 /B036-02
2
5
o _
5
cmI
_
Figure60. Potteryfromsites 016, 020, 021, 023, 024, 026, and028. J.W. Hayes
\1 I _ ^ _ |__ li 11 l| |
DURRES
REGIONAL
II -
IlE |l I
|l E | g ht |
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
I_ _
-
Io3
PROJECT
SITE 027 Area:Zone7 Associated tracts:B166, B167, B169, B170,B171 Rangesrepresented: A-CL (2);A-EHL(1);A-HL (12);CL-HL(3);CLR (5);LCL-EHL(2) Description: A low-densityscatterof artifactsat a highelevationat the
westernendof thevalley,belowthecoastalridgeroad.Slopesarein part steepandproneto erosion. Theextentandfocusof subsurface depositsare unclear. SITE 028 Area:Zone2 Associated tracts:B282, B284, B285, B286 Rangesrepresented:N-BA? (1);A-CL (1);A-HL (11);A-MED (1);CLHL (2); R-O (1);MED-M (8); O-M (11);MO-M (3);LO-M (1) Description: Moderately densescatterof artifacts in a modernroadbed and
adjacent fields.The sourcefromwhichsherdsarebeingerodedhasnot beendetermined. ,sa _
h !| | X | | | T ^ z_
_l
|
I
_
l
- l ll | l _ 11111 I II | l _JF
l
Il * | _
_ _
.
_ _
Figure61. BowlorjarbaseB285-01 (lept) andcorewith end scraper B284-SFO1(right)
AssociatedCeramics
B285-01 Bowlorjarbase
Figs.60, 61
Diam.est.base0.16.Wareandtreatment asB283-01(possibly sameform,butthatsherdis unassociated witha site).Whiteglazeon interior. Flatbase,slightlyhollowed; slightexternal molding.Chattering markson bottom. LateOttoman-Modern. SmallFinds
B284-SF01Corewithendscraper Neolithic-BronzeAge?
Fig.61
__
and
B081-SF04 _ l (notched Figure
Io4
(notched 62. flake), LithicsB081-SF02 B081-SFOl flake). (flake),
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
_. Scale 1:1
SITE 029 Area:Zone6 Associated tract:B081 Periodrepresented: N? (8) Description: Localizedclusterof chippedstone(chert)artifacts, allfound
withinabout20 m of oneanotheron thesteepslopesof a hill.Thesoilat thesiteis sandyandthereis activeerosion. SmallFinds
B081-SF01-SF08Lithics
Fig.62
Fiveflakesandthreenotchedflakes. Neolithic. CATALO GUED ARTIFACTS UNAS S O CIATED WITH SITES POTTERY A192-01 Rimof largejarorbasin(typeuncertain)
Figs.63,64
Diam.est.rim0.36.Dullbrown,fairlyhard-fired; whiteandbrown/ blackspecks,traceof glintingspecks.Moreorlesscookingfabric.Flat rimwithfaintgrooveaboveedge,verticallipbearingtwogrooves; nearvertical "neck." Dateandsourceunknown(perhaps Hellenistic?). A428-01 Baseof largebowl(?)
Fig.64
Diam.est.of base-molding 0.155.Smooth-textured lightyellow clay;no paintorslipvisible(butcouldperhaps haveflakedoff). Flatbased,withheavyexternal moldingandsomewhat hollowedbottom. Innersurface verysmooth,so presumably anopenform.Warecloseto Corinthian, buttheformis nota veryobviousCorinthian one,so perhaps of colonialorigin. Looksearly(Archaic-Classical). B001-01 Black-glaze bowlbasefragment
Figs.63, 64
Diam.est.foot0.049."Local" fineware:lightbrownish-yellow; poor thinwornblackslip/gloss,attesteddownto loweredgeof foot(and
B001-01, B005-01.
black-glaze Bottom
bowlrow:rim
..
REGIONAL
DURRES
Figure63.Toprozv:jarorbasinrim A192-01,black-glazebasefragment
I
lidt
!
'
or 1
5
jb
1
1__ 1
1
-
Io5
PROJECT
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
i|
foot 2
hIf ' ' ' - -
XA
bU|
|
t
^ e ^
fragment B074-01,jarrimB205-01. ScaleasshownforBOOl-Ol.
probably endingthere;noton bottom).Tiltedfootring,roundedfloor fromcommonLateClassicalwithslightconeundercenter.Probably bowlwithincurved rim. Hellenistic 4th-2ndcenturyB.C. bowl rimof largekraterlike B005-01Black-glaze
Figs.63, 64
break, smoothfineware:orange-red Diam.est.rim0.29."Local" surfaces. Remainsof thinblackslipinsideandoutside. orange-brown rimwithtriangular lip. Shortoutcurved 4th-3rdcenturys.c.? B074-01 Lid(orpedestalfoot?)fragment
Figs.63, 64
Diam.est.atbase0.055;p.H.0.016.Oneside(ofrim?).Onesideof "Local" ware,lightbrown.Paintbandingon exterior/ drawing restored. Partof a flattishtop,steepside,thin top;interiorplain,smoothed. splayedlip.Onwall,dullblackpaintedband;possibletracesof fugitive on thetop redpaintedbandabove.Remainsof twoblacklinespreserved of Corinthian pyxislid shape? a missingknob?). Variant (surrounding LateArchaic/Classical? B205-01Jarrim,ApulianGeometric
Figs.63,64
Diam.est.rimca.0.22;p.H.0.034.Lightyellow,rathersoftand specks,rare surface. Somefinebrown/gray powdery; slightlycreamier faintglintingspecks.Rimpossiblypolishedon bothfaces,interiorof bodynotpolished.Rimof unevenwidth,perhapsfinishedon a turnWide-flaring rim, of bodyuncertain; handmade? table.Technique body.Possible taperedatlip;topof a rounded(?) sharplyoutturned, remainsof blackpaintonbody:bandatjunctionwithrim,slantinglines thanlocalequivalent of Iapygian below?MorelikelyApulianGeometric EarlyIron of the Salento. Jarrelatedto Apulian/Lucanian Geometric decoration. Agevesselswith"atenda" 8th-6th/5thcenturyB.C.
Io6
JAC K L. DAVI S ET AL.
:w: "
A428-01
...
_
_.
. .
_
. .-
X
f= + S
*'||--M ss:
B074-01
B001 -01
\
__-_
B283-01
B005-01
l
_
___
__
_
l
f
--
B205-01
0
=-
-| A192-01
5
2
5 I
l cm
Figure 64. Potteryunassociatedwith sites. J.W.Hayes
B283-01 Bowlrim
Figs. 64, 65
Diam.est.body0.236."Local" ware,lightbrown,smooth-textured. White glazeon interior. A fewpatchesof sliparevisibleundertheglaze (otherwise notpreserved). Thick-walled. Roundedform,slightly incurved at rim.Roundedrim,rippledexterior(fourshallow hollows and threeshallowridgespreserved). Possiblythefinalversionof the series A193-01(fromS001),A215-01(fromS008).Fora possiblebaseform, seeB285-01(fromS028). 20thcentury? LateOttoman-Modern? METAL A496-SF01 Bronzecoin90 Dyrrachium mint.2.78g. Diam.0.14-0.16.Obverse: headof Herakles. Reverse: armsof Herakles. Legend:ATP.SeeCeka1967, pp. 38-45, 132-134. 3rdcenturyB.C. Hellenistic.
90.We aregratefillto S. Gjongecaj for the identification of thiscoin.
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
Io7
I
Figure65. Bowlrim B283-01 (lefi); conicalloomweightA307-SF01 (right)
::::::
:::
::
::
:: ::: :
I
TERRACOTTA
A307-SF01Conicalloomweight
Fig.65
P.H.0.065.Verybadlyworn.Piercedwithsinglesuspension holeat top.C£ CorinthXII, pp.148-161,163-170. Toobadlydamaged to be datedtypologically.
Figure66. LithicsB175-01, B244-SFO1,A483-SFO1, B294-SFO1.Scale 1:1
LI T H I C S B175-SFO1Notchedflake
Fig. 66
B244-SFO1Bladesegment,retouched?
Fig. 66
A483-SFO1Unidirectionalcore
Fig. 66
Formedon a pebbleora reducedcore. B294-SFO1Denticulate Probably lateprehistoric.
Fig. 66
K L. DAVI S ET AL. JAC
Io8
APPENDIX2 TWOGRAV EGROUPS FROM THE Rl ES? DURRESCE METE *+
John W;Hayes by
to theMuseumof waspresented in thisappendix potterydescribed The shown of Dibra),whohadpreviously byAnastasArrse(formerly Durres Arrsesaidthatallthepots collectionto HotiandDavisin hishouse.91 the to be theremains froma singlegraveandpointedto whatappeared came of hishouse.He (north) ofa tilegravein thehighearthenscarpto theside the alsoindicatedan areaof burnedsoil in the earthenstepscut from downto hishouse. street withtwodistinctburiI canimaginethatthevesselswereassociated als,one of about300 B.C., the otherdatingto the mid-late3rdcentury. earlygroupwouldincludethe smallbowlM00-04,the Thepostulated The lelythoiM00-16andM00-17,andpossiblythe smalljugM00-18. cut rim the have both lelythoiM00-16 andM00-17,however, "early" which use(reburial?), ancientsecondary inthesameway,suggesting down skyphos fragmentary the Is group. grave single mightarguein favorof a CorinPresumed nearby? find M00-13partofthegravegrouporachance M00skyphos the thianHellenisticproductsincludeM00-02,M00-04, local skyphosM00-13.Therestarepresumably 12,andthering-handled slippedsurface Wareswith a polished/burnished (orregional)products. be earlierin may M00-17) addedpaint(asM00-16, andpoorlyadhering blackproper by followed(notbeforethe3rdcentury?) thelocalsequence, glossvessels. CATALO GUE stampeddecorationFigs.67,71 platewith"local" M00-01 Black-glaze Diam.0.158;H. ca.0.01.Nearlycomplete,in onepiece(rim lightorangeware(faintredtinge)withneatly chipped).Clean-textured streakto blackglossallover,flaking.Double-dipping smoothedsurface; Munsell7.5YR8/6 oneside,visibleonbothupperandlowersurfaces. yellow"(tendingto 6.25YR7/8 whendamp). "reddish on Flatfloor,thickroundedraisedrimwithbroadgrooveandoffset stamps foot.Fourunlinkedpalmette Simplesquare-cut underside. grooves atcenter;pairof encircling froma groove/circle radiating version later type, B.C. century (Diam.0.05).Copyof Attic4th-3rd
91. Arrse'shouseis located southof tractA195 in an immediately areathatwasnot intensivelysurveyed.
.
.
DURRES
-
: ::: -
:
Figure67. Black-glazeplateM00-01 (left)andblack-glazedishM00-02 (right)
-
:
-
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
-
:::: ;E-
PROJECT
:::00:E -
IO9
::: :::-
(withoutincisedarcslinkingthestamps,andwithoutscraped grooves). Oneof theearliestexamples recorded of thedouble-dipping treatment. Thisis notedon Corinthian reliefbowlsof theearlier2ndcenturyB.C., butis generally a Roman(Imperial) feature. Foranotherearlyexample, seea specimenfromWesternGreece(?) nowin theBritishMuseum (Hayes1997,p.23,pl.6). Later3rdcenturyB.C., presumably (theshapeseemsnotto survive anylater). M00-02 Black-glaze dish,Corinthian(?), white-painted androuletted
Figs. 67, 71
Diam.est.rim0.216;Diam.base0.08;H. 0.035.Wholeof base, withonesideof wideflaringrim(asinglepiece).Lightgrayish-buff, clean-textured. Munsellca.2.5YR7/5-8/4,fired10YRon exterior. Dullgrayishgloss-slip,endingatloweredgeof foot.Blackdotand reserved circleatcenter(crossed bya thinredarc),broadreserved line halfway outon floor(enclosing tondo);twosinglelinesof rouletting on outerpartof floor.Tondo:in addedwhite,poorlypreserved, a large eight-pointed ("Macedonian") starpattern, witha three-stroke "arrow" motifbetweeneachray(sethalfway outfromcenter,pointingoutward, leavinga subsidiary unpainted discaroundthecentraldotandcircle). On topof rim,twoorthreelinesof rouletting bordered byscraped/ reserved broadlines.Liphookedupward. Shallowgroovearoundlower partof foot.Rouletting consistsof shortneatstrokes(spacing3-4 mm): cf. Corinth VII.3,pp.39-40. Mid-late3rdcenturyB.C. M00-03 Black-glaze plate/dish, stampedand rouletted decoration, wareunclassified
Figs. 68, 71
Diam.0.195;Diam.foot0.086;H. 0.031-0.035(i.e.,rimtilted). Nearlycomplete, mostlyin onepiece(onerimfragment mended,two moremissing).Paletanware,smooth-textured; dullsepiato blackslip,
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
IIO
_ _ _ _
Figure 68.Black-glaze plate/dish M00-03
endinghalfwaydownoutside(applied bydipping,withoneortwo dribbles). Mediumthickness. Narrowround-topped raisedrim(topfaceted,forminga sharpangle atinneredge).Heavysquarish foot.Twoshallowgrooves(Diam.0.071) anda doublebandof rouletting (Diam.0.099;ratherlongstrokes) surrounding stampedtondo.Stamps: singlelargesix-petalrosette (Diam.0.016)atcenter,surrounded byfourlargeradialpalmettes (0.0017x 0.0012).Stampshaveinternalreliefdetails.Wareuncertain (probably notlocal,buthardlyCorinthian). Stampstreatedin anItalian/ AsiaMinormanner. Mid3rd-early 2ndcenturyB.C., on formandstyle. M00-04 Black-glaze smallbowlwithincurved rim ("salt-cellar"), Corinthian
Figs.69,71 _
Diam.0.064;Diam.est.foot3.1;H. est.0.034.Unbroken, butedge of footchipped,andslipworn.Claylightyellow-tan(MunselllOYR8/ 5),withslightsurface wash;dullblackslip,endingon outsideof foot. Fairlythick-walled; lowfoot,onlypartlyhollowedunderneath. Undecorated. Fairlyearlyin theseries,frompostulated "early" grave group. About300 s.c.?Cf. Corinth VII.3,pp.32-33.
_
0 | | |
The following"saucers" (M00-05to M00-11)areallin a smooth"local" fabric,withtheblackglossmostlysemilustrous orratherdullTheyprob- Figure69.Black-glaze smallbowl ablydateto themid-late3rdcenturyB.C. Theirsequence(if theyarenot M00-04Scale 2 3 allthesamedate)is uncertain. M00-05 Black-glaze "saucer" (smallplate),"local"
Figs.70, 71
Diam.0.113;H. 0.02-0.021.Complete. Mendedfromtwopieces. Claylightyellow-brown (Munsellca.5YR8/4). Blackglaze(partial) endsatrestingsurface. Almostflat;low upturned rim,footring.Incisedcircleatcenter. Mid-late3rdcenturyB.C.
..
DURRES
Figure 70.Black-glaze"saucers" M00-05(left),M00-06(right), andM00-07(bottom).Scaleasshown
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
III
_
forM00-07
M00-06 Black-glaze "saucer"
Fig.70
Diam.0.113;H. 0.027-0.029.Completeapartfromabrasions at rim.Mendedfromthreepieces. Dullblackglaze,tendingbrownish in parts;brownstackingdiscon floor(off-center). BlackglazeendsasonM00-05.Rathermorerounded floorthanonM00-05;onegroovearoundcenter.Relatedto M00-05. Mid-late3rdcenturyB.C. M00-07 Black-glaze "saucer"
Fig.70
Diam.0.111;H. ca.0.026.Complete.Onesidemended.Black glazeallover,dull,withvariousbrownpatches(fingermarks)on exterior. FormasM00-05;incisedcircleatcenter.Cf.M00-05. Mid-late3rdcenturyB.C. M00-08 Black-glaze "saucer"
Fig.71
Diam.0.116;H. 0.03-0.032.Baseandgreaterpartin a singlepiece. Clayfiredlightyellow-tan, glossstrealysepia-black. Blackglazeends aroundtopof foot.Flattenedconicalform;incisedcircleatcenter.Cf. M00-05. Mid-late3rdcenturyB.C.
II2
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
M00-09 Black-glaze "saucer"
Fig.71
Diam.est.0.112;H. ca.0.03.Baseandmostof oneside(four fragments, threejoining).Slopingfloor,riminturned withinternallip; coneunderbase;incisedcircleat center.Cf.M00-05. Mid-late3rdcenturyB.C. M00-10 Black-glaze"saucer" Diam.est.ca.0.115;H. est.0.024.Abouthalfpreserved: wholeof base,joiningrimsherd,looserimsherd.Partialslip/black glaze,ending underouterpartof floor.Flattishform,upturned rim;incisedcircleat center.Cf.M00-05. Mid-late3rdcenturyB.C. M00-11 Fragment of black-glaze "saucer" Diam.baseca.0.048.Singlepiece:baseandpartof floor.Slipends atrestingsurface. Smallspikebelowcenter.Groove(Diam.0.015) aroundcenterof floor.Typeapparently thesameasM00-05to M00-10. Mid-late3rdcenturyB.C. M00-12 Black-glaze smallskyphos,Corinthian
Fig.71
Diam.est.rim0.072;Diam.body0.072;H. 0.075.A rimfragment withhandlebroken,nowmended.Partsof rimandonehandlemissing. Corinthian ware:lightyellow,clean-textured; smoothblackgloss,rather dull,endingon lowerexterior. Somediluteblackfingersmearson unpainted areaabovefoot. Bodymarkedly contracted in lowerpart,withsmallfoot;outcurved lip;thin,nearlyhorizontal handles,onlyslightlycontracted towardwall (W.max.0.034,closeto body0.028).Standard Corinthian 4th-3rd centuryB.C. type,laterversion(seeCorinthVII.3,pp.66-71).Clayis normal, withblackglossbetterpreserved thanit wouldbe at Corinth. Mid-late3rdcenturyB.C. M00-13 Ring-handled skyphos, probably Corinthian (fragmentary)
Fig.71
Diam.est.base0.048;p.H.0.074(originally ca.0.09-0.095?). Singlefragment: abouthalfof vesselpreserved, withlowerpartof one thinstraplike handle;basechippedaroundtheedge.Restoredastwohandled.Cleandrablightgrayware(i.e.,misfired?); remainsof dull brownish grayslipallover,badlywornon innersurface. Bodymoreorlesshemispherical; to be restored withtwothin verticalringhandles,probably withflatspurs(fingerrests)on tops. Pedestalfootwithsolidstemandhollowstepped-out base.Waresimilar in appearance to thatof M00-02.Cf. CorinthVII.3,pp.74-76. Later3rdcenturys.c.?
-
_H
-
-
DURRES
-
adS-/J)
-
I
l
:
-
--
']
PROJECT
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
REGIONAL
II3
M00-04 l
M00-01
_
-
t_
_"
)
i
M00-09
M00-03
-
M00-08
J )
_-
T
-
M00-02
;' M00-05
-
_1<
- -- <
-
,<,,}
M00-13
M00-12 o
(!
5
2
5
cm
Figure71.Potteryfromthehouseof AnastasArrse.J.w. Hayes
_?
the ground-down upper edge (for stem. secondary use?).
II4
"Local"(?) fabric: j_ light
g
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
M00-14 Miniature skyphos, "local" ware
Figs.72,75
Diam.rim0.051;H. 0.051.Bodyunbroken. Handlesmissing.Buff ware,ratherclean,firedlightorange-brown underslip.Thinflaking sepia-black slip(dipped; partialcoating).Fingermarksvisiblearound Solidflatbase(wiremarks).Circular scarsof twosmallhorizontal handlesvisibleimmediately belowrim.Presumably a miniature "local" copyofthetypeof M00-12. Mid-late3rdcenturyB.C. orlater. M00-15 M1nzature skyphos, "local" ware
l ]g r i i _l
ffi q
t
_ gi,,!1,= j a
Fig.75
Diam.0.049;H. 0.048.Handlesmissing(onelostrecently). Clay orange,fairlyfine;thinslip,redto brownto black,partlylost.Slip appliedbydipping,endingon outsideof toe. Variant of typeof M00-14,withsolidpegliketoe (wire-drawn). A smallclayknob(accidental?) preserved flankingonehandle. Mid3rd-early 2ndcenturys.c.?
Figure 72.Miniature slyphos M00-14
M00-16 Talllekythos(copyinglateAttic/Apulian shape) Figs.73, 75
__
Diam.body0.103;Diam.foot0.07;p.H.0.18.Body,handle,and mostof neckin onepiece.Rimcutoff deliberately, witha slanting,
_
yellow-orange, withpolished(orange-brown) outersurface bearing painteddecoration in fugitivedarkpurplish-red (ironoxide). Lowfootring.Originalrimoutcurved, perhaps partlyclosedattop (i.e.,mushroom-shaped, perhaps quitewide:seeprofiledrawing). Painteddecoration: outsideof rimandmostof handlecoated,vertical stripesdownhandle;irregular patterncovering body,possiblyto be restored asa largefemalehead,facingleft,withhair-covering (small chignonatupperright?),orconceivably twoheads(confronted?). A paintbandencircling thefoot. Motifatthisdate,on theanalogyof lateAtticorApulianredfigure,mostlikelyto be asdescribed, spreadoutto coverthewhole surface, ora largeuprightpalmette(whichcannotbe restored fromwhat remainson thisvessel).Thisvesseltypeandthedecorative motifsare hardlyto be expectedlaterthanca.300-280B.C. Late4th-early3rdcenturyB.C.
g
_ j
i l l | . l l
_
_
__
Figure 73.TalllekflhosM00-16
M00-17 Talllekythos Diam.body0.11;Diam.foot0.07;p.H.0.195.In onepiece,with rimcutdownin antiquity asonM00-16.Paintedmotifsperhapssimilar (notyetcleaned).SametypeandwareasM00-16,a littlemoreslender. Late4th-early3rdcenturyB.C. M00-18 Smalljug/olpe(typewithhigh-swung handle)
%
=
Figs.74,75
Diam.body0.076;H. to rim0.115.Bodycomplete(inonepiece), exceptforrearpartof rim;handlemissing(restored on profiledrawing). Low-bellied formwithshortnarrow neck,splayedhookedrim.Two
-
DURRES
-
:::::::::::: :::::: -
-
-
REGIONAL
-
-
-
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
-
.
PROJECT
-
II5
:::::::::::
Figure74.Smalljug/olpeM00-18 (left),andblack-glaze amphoras M00-19(center)andM00-20(right)
flankinga handlerising appliedknobson topof rimat sides,presumably "Local" series;poortracesof a fromtopof rimandcurleddownward. dullblackslip. Greektype)orpossibly froma standard Later4thcentury(derived 3rdcenturyB.C., undefined smallamphora M00-19 Black-glaze
Figs.74,75
Diam.body0.123;Diam.rimflange0.06;Diam.foot0.066; recentdamage?). Fabric H. 0.148.Complete(wholeof rimdetached, cleanlightorangeware;dullblackglaze(appliedby presumed "local": dipping),partlyflakedoff,endingon lowerbody(abovebottomof the fluting).Rimflangeallblack.No evidenceof addedcolors.Innersurface coatedwithlimedeposit.Bottomundecorated. of bodycompletely neck,withtriangular rimflange(to supporta lid not Tapering handlesbearingtwogrooveseach.Pairof fine present). Flat-sectioned grooveson upperneck,slightmoldingatjunctionof neckandbody. withfine,closebody,lowmoldedfootring.Bodycovered Broad-bellied belowhandles(i.e.,appliedfirst),slightly setverticalfluting,continuous skewedto leftatbottoms;a finegrooveformslowerborder. that Flutingon bodyparallels Mid-late3rdcenturyB.C. (probably). on laterGnathiaware(ca.300-240B.C. orlater);mayormaynotbe earlierthanM00-20below. smallamphora M00-20 Black-glaze
Figs.74,75
Diam.body0.102;Diam.rimflange0.082;Diam.foot0.052; in onepiece.Newbreaksattop;onehandle H. 0.146.Bodypreserved slip ware;clayasM00-19,thindullsepia-black mended."Local" (appliedbydipping),endingon lowerbodyatlevelof groove.Interiorof bodycoatedwithlimedeposit.No evidenceof addedcolors.Topof rim wash. coatedwiththinred-brown flangeandoutsideof rimreserved, brushmarksfromfinishing. Horizontal
K
II6
\
I
__
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
MOO-1 4
T:y' f''
-
y ::
M00-18
M00-19
\
M00-20
0
5 -
4
j08:g 3,
M00- 16
2
5 { cm
Typerelatedto M00-19,butlessbaggy:wide,nearlycylindrical neckwiththinrimflange;high-bellied roundedbody,footringof small diameter. Handlesfrombelowrimflangeto abovebelly,eachbearing twogrooves/median arris.Bodyundecorated (nofluting).Pairof fine grooveson neck,slightridgeatjunctionwithbody,grooveon lower body. Mid-late3rdcenturyB.C. (perhaps thelatter).Laterin seriesthan M00-19.
Figure75.Potteryfromthehouseof AnastasArrse.J.w.Hayes
DURRES
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROJECT
II7
REFERENCES AgoraV = H. S. Robinson,Potteryof the RomanPeriod:Chronology (The AthenianAgoraV), Princeton1959. Alcock,S. E. 1993a.GraeciaCapta: TheLandscapes of RomanGreece,
Cambridge. . 1993b."Breaking Up the HellenisticWorld:Surveyand Society," in ClassicalGreece:Ancient HistoriesandModernArchaeologies,
I. Morris,ed.,Cambridge, pp.171192. Alcock,S. E.,J. F.Cherry,andJ.L. Davis.1994."Intensive Survey, Agricultural Practice,andthe ClassicalLandscape of Greece," in Classical Greece:Ancient Historiesand ModernArchaeologies, I. Morris,ed.,
Cambridge, pp.137-170. Bejko,L., andM. G. Amore.2000.
Ceka,H. 1967.Problemete numismatikesilire[Problems in Illyrian numlsmatcs
_
r m.
, . lrana.
Ceka,N., andM. Zeqo.1984."Kerkimenenujorene vijenbregdetare dheujrate brendeshme te vendit tone"[Underwater investigations alongthe coastlinesandinland watersof ourcountry],Monumentet28, pp.127-140. Cherry,J.F.,andJ.L. Davis.1998. "Northern Keosin Context," in Kea-Kythnos: HistoryandArchaeology,L. G. MendoniandA. Maza-
rakisAinian,eds.,Paris,pp.217226. Cherry, J. F.,J. L. Davis,andE. Mantzourani.1991.LandscapeArchaeologyas Long-TermHistory.Nlorthern Keosin the CycladicIslands,Los
AlbanianRescueArchaeological Unit, AnnualReport2000, Tirana.
Angeles. CorinthVII.3= G. R. Edwards,Corin-
Bintliff,J. 1997."Regional Survey, Demography, andthe Riseof ComplexSocietiesin theAncient Aegean:Core-Periphery, NeoMalthusian, andOtherInterpretive Models,"JFA 24, pp.1-38. Brunt,P.A. 1971.ItalianManpower 225B.C.-A.D. 14, Oxford. Buck,C. D. 1955.TheGreekDialects:
thianHellenisticPottery(Corinth
Grammar,SelectedInscriptions, Glossary,Chicago. Burnett,A., M. Amandry, andP.P. Ripolles.1992.RomanProvincial CoinageI: FromtheDeath of Caesar to theDeath of Vitellius(44 B.C.-A.D. 69).Pt. I:Introductionand Catalogue,
London. Cabanes,P.1974."Lesinscriptions du Theatrede Bouthrotos," inActesdu Colloque1972surl'esclavage,Paris, pp.105-209. . 1976.L'Epirede la mortde Pyrrhosa la conqueAte romaine(272167 av.; C.), Paris. . 1988.LesIllyriensdeBardylisa Genthios(IVe-IIe sieclesavantg-C.),
Paris. Cabanes,P.,andF.Drini.1995.Corpus desinscriptions gresquesd 'Illyriemeridionaleet d 'Epire1: Inscriptions d'Epidamne-Dyrrhachion et d'Apollonia (Etudesepigraphiques 2), Paris.
VII.3),Princeton1975. CorinthXII = G. R. Davidson,The Minor Objects(CorinthXII),
Princeton1952. Crawford, M. H. 1985.Coinageand MoneyundertheRomanRepublic: Italyand theMediterranean Economy,
Berkeley. Dankoff,R., andR. Elsie.2000. Evliya (elebi in AlbaniaandAdjacentRegions(Kosovo,Montenegro, Ohrid),Leiden.
Davis,J. L. In press."Arethe Landscapesof GreekPrehistory Hidden? A Comparative Approach," in Side-by-SideSurvey.Comparative RegionalStudiesin theMediterranean World,S. E. AlcockandJ. F.Cherry,
eds.,Oxford. Davis,J.L., S. E. Alcock,J.Bennet, Y. G. Lolos,andC. W. Shelmerdine.1997."ThePylosRegional Archaeological Project,PartI: OverviewandtheArchaeological Survey," Hesperia66, pp.391-494. Ducellier,A. 1981.LafaJcademaritime de lAlbanie au MoyenAge:Durazzo et ValonaduXI e auXVe siecle,
Thessaloniki. Edlund,I. E. M. 1987.TheGodsand thePlace.TheLocationand Function
of Sanctuariesin the Countryside ofEtruriaandMagna Graecia (700w00B.C.), Stockholm. Errington, R. M. 1989. "Romeand Greeceto 205 B.C.," in CAH2VIII:
Romeand theMediterraneanto 133
A. E. Astin,F.W. Walbank, M. W. Frederiksen, andR. M. Olgivie,eds.,Cambridge, pp.81-106. Fasolo,M. 2003. La ViaEgnatia I: B.C.,
Da Apolloniae Dyrrachiumad HerakleiaLynkestidos, Rome. Fine,J. V. 1983. TheEarlyMedieval Balkans:ACriticalSurveypromthe Sixthto theLate TwelthCentury,
AnnArbor. Francis,K.2001a.ExplorationsinAlbania. Relocatingthe Cavesof Luigi Cardini,Instituteof WorldArchae-
ology,Universityof EastAnglia, privatelycirculated. . 2001b."TheLost Cavesof LuigiCardini:Explorations in Albania1930-2001,"CaveArchaeologyand Palaeontology Research Archive3, http://www.shef.ac.uk/
capra/3/cardini.html. Grant,M. 1946. FromImperiumto Auctoritas:AHistoricalStudyof Aes Coinagein theRomanEmpire,
49 B.C.-A.D. 14, Cambridge . Gutteridge, A., A. Hoti,andH. R. Hurst.2001."TheWalledTown of Dyrrachium (Durres):SettlementandDynamics,"JRA 14, pp. 391-410.
Hammond,N. G. L. 1966. "TheKingdomsin Illyriacirca400-167 B.C.," BSA 61, pp.239-253. .1967. Epirus:TheGeography, theAncientRemains,theHistory, and the Topography of Epirusand AdjacentAreas,Oxford. .1989. TheMacedonianState: TheOrigins,InstitutionsandHistory,
Oxford. Hammond,N. G. L., andF.W. Walbank.1988. A HistoryofMacedonia 3: 336-167 B.C., Oxford. Harff,A. von.1860. Die Pilgerfahrdes RittersHrnoldvon HarJf E. V.
Groote,ed.,Cologne. Hayes,J.W. 1997. Handbookof MediterraneanRomanPottery,London.
JACK L. DAVIS ET AL.
II8
Helm,R. 1956.Die ChronikdesHieronymous(Eusebius Werke7), Berlin. Heuzey,L. 1886.LesoperationsmilitairesdeJulesCesar,Paris. Heuzey,L., andH. Daumet.1876. Missionarcheologique deMacedoine,
Paris. Hidri,H. 1983."Germime ne nekropoline Dyrrahut: Kodrate Dautes (viti1977)"[Excavations in the necropolisof Dyrrachium: The hill of Dautaj(1977)],Iliria 1983,1, pp.137-180. . 1986a."Prodhimi i qeramikes vendesete Dyrrahutne shek.Vl-II p. e. sone"[Theproduction of local potteryat Dyrrachium in the 6th2ndcenturiesB.C.], Iliria 1986,1, pp.187-195. . 1986b."Nekropoli antiki Dyrrahut: Rezultatete germimeve te viteve1973dhe 1980"[Theancientnecropolisof Dyrrachium: Resultsof excavations in theyears 1973and1980],Iliria 1986,2, pp.99-128. . 1988."Kupa me dekorne relievte Dyrrahut" [A cupwithrelief decoration fromDyrrachium], Iliria 1988,1, pp.75-89. . l990."Qeramika arkaikee Dyrrahut" [TheArchaicpottery of Dyrrachium], Iliria 1990,2, pp.161-206. . 1994."Qeramika e stilitatike zbuluarne Dyrrah,shek.Vl-V p.e.s."[Potteryof Atticstyles foundat Dyrrachium,6th-5th centuriesB.C.], Iliria 1994,1-2, pp.151-163. . 1997."Disate dhenambi topografine e nekropolitantik te Dyrrahut, shek.Vl-I" [Some information concerning the topography of the ancientnecropolisof Dyrrachium, 6th-lst centuries], Iliria 1997,1-2, pp.121-126. Hodges, R., G. SaraSi, W. Bowden, P.Chiles,O. Gilkes,K.Lako, A. Lane,S. Martin,J.Mitchell, J.Moreland,S. O'Hara,M. Pluciennik,andL.Watson.1997. "LateAntiqueandByzantine Butrint:InterimReporton the PortandIts Hinterland,"JRA 10, pp.207-234.
Hoti,A. 1989a."Eneme glazurenga qytetii Durresit(shek.X-XV)" [Glazedvesselsfromthe cityof Durres(lOth-15thcenturies)], Iliria 1989,1,pp.213-240. . 1989b."Durres: Qytet" [Durres: The city],Iliria 1989,2, pp.293-294. . 1996."Tedhenaarkeologike perkrishterimin e hershemne Dyrrah(shek.IV-VII)"[Archaeologicalinformation concerning earlyChristianity in Dyrrachium (4th-7thcenturies)], Iliria 1996, 1-2, pp.173-181. Jirecek, K. 1916."DieLageundVergangenheitderStadtDurazzoin Albanien," in Illyrische-Albanische Forschungen I, L. vonThalloczy,ed., Munich,pp.152-167. Karaiskaj, G., andA. Bajce.1975. "Kalaja e Durresitdhesistemii fortifikimetperrethne kohene vone antike"[Thefortressof Durresand the systemof surrounding fortificationsin lateantiquity], Monumentet9, pp.5-33. Kiel,M. 1990.OttomanArchitecture in Albania,1385-1912, Istanbul. Korkuti, M.,J. L. Davis,L. Bejko, M.L. Galaty,S.Mujcaj,and S. R. Stocker.1998."TheMallakastra RegionalArchaeological Project: FirstSeason,1998," Iliria 1998, 1-2,pp.253-273. LGP1X I = P. M. FraserandE. Matthews,A Lexiconof GreekPersonal lEames:TheAegeanIslands,Cyprus, and Cyrenaica,Oxford1987.
Miraj, L. 1990."Durres(Amfiteater e Terma)" [Durres(Theamphitheater andthebaths)],Iliria 1990,2, pp.258-259. . 1994."Termat e Dyrrahut" [Thebathsof Durres],Iliria 1994, 1-2, pp.207-224. Miraj, F.,andH. Myrto.1982."Ujesjellesii Dyrrahut" [Theaqueduct of Dyrrachium], Iliria 1982,1, pp.131-156. Myrto, H. 1989."Njesanktuar antikne periferite Durresit" [An ancient sanctuary in thevicinityof Durres], Iliria 1989,1, pp.87-108. . 1998.Albaniaarcheologica: Bibliografiasistematicadei centri antichi,Bari.
Picard,O. 1986."Illyriens, Thraces,et Grecs:Lamonnaiedansles rapports entrepopulations grecqueset non grecques," Iliria 1986,1, pp.137144. Pluciennik, M. 1996."InterimReport on Surveyin theAreaof Butrint, SouthernAlbania(1996),"unpublishedmanuscript. Polignac,F.de. 1994."Mediation, Competition, andSovereignty: The Evolutionof RuralSanctuaries in GeometricGreece," in Placing the Gods:Sanctuariesand Sacred Spacein AncientGreece,S. E. Alcock
andR. Osborne,eds.,Oxford, pp.3-18. . 1995.Cults,Territory,and the Originsof the GreekCity-State,
J. Lloyd,trans.,Chicago. Praschniker, C., andA. Schober.1919. Archaologische Forschungen in Albanien undMontenegro,Vienna.
Rey,L. 1925."Fouilles de la mission franSaise a Apollonied'Illyrieet a Durazzo(1923-1924),"Albania 1, pp.26-48. Schmitt, O.J. 2001.Das venezianische Albanien(1392-1479), Munich. Schoene, A. 1866.Eusebichronicorum libriduoII: Chronicorum canonum, Berlin. Seiner, F.,ed. 1922.Ergebnisseder Volkszahlungin Albanienin demvon den osterr.-ungar. Truppen1916-1918 besetztenGebiete(Schriftender Balkankommission, Linguistische Abteilung13), Vienna. Shennan, S.J. 1985.Experimentsin the CollectionandAnalysisofArchaeological SurveyData: TheEast Hampshire Survey,Sheffield. Sihler, A. L. 1995.lVewComparative Grammarof Latin and Greek,
Oxford. Snodgrass, A. M. 1987.An Archaeology of Greece: ThePresentStateand FutureScopeof a Discipline,Berkeley. Stephenson, P.2000.Byzantium'sBalkanFrontiers:APoliticalStudyof thelMorthern Balkans,Cambridge. Sufflay, M. von.1924.StadteundBurgenAlbanienshauptsachlich wahrend desMittelalters,Vienna.
Tartari, F. 1987."Njegrupvarresh te shek.II-IV te e. sonene zonen kodrinore te nekropolit te
DURRES
Dyrrahut" [A groupof gravesof the 2nd-4thcenturyA.C. in the hilly areaof the necropolisof Dyrrachium],Iliria 1987,1, pp.153-166. . 1988."Godinee lashtebanimi ne sheshine parkut'Rinia,'Durres" [A latedomesticstructure in the squareof the park"Rinia" at Durres],Iliria 1988,1, pp.91-117. . 1991."Ritedheformavarresh ngavarrezae Dyrrahute shek.I-V te e. sone"[Ritualsandtypesof gravesfromthe cemeteryof Dyrrachiumof the lst-5th centuriesA.C.], Iliria 1991,1-2, pp.187-201. Tartari,F.,andH. Hidri.1992."Vula antikembimaterialit e ndertimitte
REGIONAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
perdorura ne Dyrrahgate shekujve III-I p. e. sone"[Ancientsealings on buildingmaterials usedat Dyrrachiumduringthe 3rd-lst centuriesB.C.], Iliria 1992,1-2, pp.149-175. Thumb,A. 1932.Handbuchdergriechischen DialekteI, Heidelberg. Tojci,V. 1971."Amfiteatri i Durresit" [Theamphitheater of Durres], Monumentet2, pp.37-41. . 1976."Lapopulationillyriennede Dyrrhachion a la lumieredes donneeshistoriques et archeologiques," Iliria 4, pp.301306. Wilkes,J.1992.TheIllyrians,Oxford.
PROJECT
Winter,N. A. 1993.GreekArchitecturalTerracottasfrom Je Prehistoric totheEndoftheArchaic Period, Oxford. Wright,J.C.,J. F.Cherry,J.L. Davis, E. Mantzourani, andS. B. Sutton. 1990."TheNemeaValleyArchaeologicalProject: A Preliminary Report," Hesperia 59, pp.579-659. Zeqo,M. 1986.a-Deshmi te artitte lashtene Durres"[Evidencefor ancientartat Durres],Iliria1986, 1, pp.179-185. . 1989."Aspekte te artitte lashtene Durres"[Aspectsof ancientartin Durres],Ilirza1989,2, pp.87-102.
JackL. Davis
AaronD. Wolpert
UNIVERSITYOF CINCINNATI DEPARTMENT OF CLASSICS CINCINNATI,OHIO4522I-0226
UNIVERSITYOF CINCINNATI DEPARTMENT OF CEASSICS CINCINNATI,OHIO4522I-0226
j [email protected]
[email protected]
Afrim Hoti
PhoebeE. Acheson
INSTITUTIARKEOLOGJI K DEPARTAMENTI DURRES SHETITORJATAULANTIA DURRES,ALBANIA
UNIVERSITYOF CINCINNATI DEPARTMENT OF CLASSICS CINCINNATI,OHIO4522I-0226
.
.
[email protected]
[email protected]
John WHayes Iris Pojani QENDRANDERKOMBETARE PER ARKEOLOGJINE SHQIPTARE RRUGALEKDUKAGJINI9 TIRANE, ALBANIA ..
ipoj ani@albaniaonline . net
SharonR. Stocker UNIVERSITYOF CINCINNATI DEPARTMENT OF CLASSICS CINCINNATI,OHIO4522I-0226 [email protected]
II9
INSTITUTEOFARCHAEOLOGY 36 BEAUMONT STREET OXFORDOXI 2PG ENGLAND
RecentlyPublished
JAM ES Wl SEMAN AN D l
310 pages,118illustrations (11 color), 21 tables HesperiaSupplement 32. ISBN0-87661-532-9. March2003.Paper$35.00
Archaeology Greece
in
Southern
I
Thefirstin a two-volume series,LandscapeArchaeology in Southern Epirus, Greece presentstheresultsof theNikopolisProject(1991-1996),thefirst large-scale, systematic surveyin thisregionof Greece.The projectemployedintensivearchaeological surveyandgeologicalinvestigations to determine patternsof humanactivityandchangesto thelandscape from earliesttimesthroughthemedieval period.Thevolumecontainsanoverviewof theproject, a discussion of thesurveymethodology employed, the resultsof a separate Palaeolithic surveyanda spatialanalysis of thefindsat aremarkable UpperPalaeolithic site,andgeomorphological studiesofboth theAmbracian GulfandthelowerAcheronRivervalley.The resultsadd to thegrowingbodyof surveydatafromGreeceanddemonstrate theutilityof aninterdisciplinary approach to thestudyof thepast.
CHARLES K. Wl LLIAMS II AN D N A N CY B00 1
Corinth, the
Centenary:
I896
Forthcoming
I996
attheDecember of thepaperspresented twenty-five Thisbookpublishes anniverone-hundredth the heldin Athensto celebrate 1996symposium at Ancient saryof theAmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesexcavations therangein subjectmatter Corinth.Thepapersareintendedto illustrate by scholarsof AncientCorinth, beingundertaken currently of research workfor asa usefulreference serve will andtheirinclusionin onevolume Eachof the topics whichvarywidelyfromCorinthian nonspecialists. by the to Byzantinepottery is presented geologyto religiouspractices expertin thatarea. acknowledged of articlesandvolumes Thebookincludesa fullgeneralbibliography of onehundred at Corinth.As a summary excavated material concerning to come. of scholars it willbe usefulto generations yearsof research,
506 pages,ca.400 illustrations CorinthXX
ISBN0-87661-020-8 May2003. Cloth$75/ £57.50
HESPERIA SUPPLEMENTS 13 MarcusAurelius:Aspectsof Civicand CulturalPolicyin theEast, byJamesH. Oliver(1970) 14 ThePoliticalOrganizationofAttica,byJohnS.Traill(1975) 16 A Sanctuaryof Zeuson MountHymettos,by MerleK. Langdon(1976) 17 Kalliasof Sphettosand theRevoltofAthensin 286 B. C., byT. LeslieShearJr.(1978) 20 Studiesin AthenianArchitecture, Sculpture,and Topography Presentedto HomerA.Thompson(1982) 21 Excavationsat Pylosin Elis, byJohnE. Coleman(1986) 22 Attic GraveReliefsThatRepresentWomenin theDressof Isis, by ElizabethJ.Walters(1988) 23 HellenisticReliefMoldspromtheAthenianAgora,by ClaireveGrandjouan (1989) 24 ThePrepalatialCemeteries at Mochlosand Gourniaand theHouseTombsof BronzeAgeCrete,byJeffreyS. Soles(1992) 25 Debrisfroma PublicDining Placein theAthenianAgora, by SusanI. RotroffandJohnH. Oakley(1992) 26 TheSanctuaryofAthenaNike in Athens:Architectural Stagesand Chronology,by IraS. Mark(1993) 27 Proceedings of theInternationalConference on GreekArchitectural Terracottas ofthe ClassicalandHellenisticBeriods, December12-15,1991, editedby NancyA. Winter(1994) 28 Studiesin ArchaicCorinthianVasePainting,by D. A. AmyxandPatricia Lawrence(1996) 29 TheAthenianGrain-TaxLaw of 374/3 B.C., by RonaldS. Stroud(1998) 30 A LMIA CeramicKiln in South-CentralCrete:Functionand Pottery Production,byJosephW. Shaw,AleydisVande Moortel,PeterM. Day, andVassilisKilikoglou(2001) 31 Ceramicus Redivivus:TheEarlyIronAge Potters'Field in theAreaof the ClassicalAthenianAgora, byJohnK.Papadopoulos (2003) 32 LandscapeArchaeology in SouthernEpirus,GreeceI, editedbyJames WisemanandKonstantinos Zachos(2003)
I
-
THE OF
JOURNAL CLAS
SICAL
I
OF
THE
AMERICAN
S T U D I E S AT
SCHOOL
AT
H
E N
VOLUME72: NUMBER 2
APRIL-JUNE2003
AmencanSchool of Classical StudwsatAthens 20(23
S
and TheAmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthensis a research studyof thearchaeology, to advanced teachinginstitutiondedicated of Greeceandthe language, andliterature art,history,philosophy, of nineAmerican in 1881bya consortium Greekworld.Established studentsandscholars the Schoolnowservesgraduate universities, actingas a collegesanduniversities, frommorethan150affiliated andstudyin Greece.The mainbuildingsof the baseforresearch and Schoolandits libraryarelocatedin Athens,withadministrative NewJersey.As partof its mission, officesin Princeton, publications in theAthenianAgoraandat the Schooldirectsongoingexcavations andsurveys excavations CorinthandsponsorsallotherAmerican-led on Greeksoil. It is theofficiallinkbetweenAmericanarchaeologists Serviceof the GreekMinistry andtheArchaeological andclassicists of to thewisemanagement of Cultureand,assuch,is dedicated of the of knowledge andto thedissemination cultural resources in the Schoolorparticiworld.Inquiriesaboutmembership classical pationin the SummerSessionsshouldbe sentto theAmerican Schoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthens,6-8 CharltonStreet, NewJersey08540-5232. Princeton, bytheAmericanSchoolof Classical quarterly Hesperiais published to the StudiesatAthens.Foundedin 1932anddevotedprimarily andSchoolof reportson School-sponsored timelypublication fromallscholars Hesperiawelcomessubmissions -directedprojects, history, art,epigraphy, workingin thefieldsof Greekarchaeology, earliest prehistoric from andliterature, science,ethnography, materials journal. timesonward.Hesperiais a refereed
VOLUME
72: NUMBER
APRIL-JUNE
2
2003
I
R
I
THEJOURNAL OFTHEAMERICAN SCHOOL OFCLASSICAL STUDIESATATHENS
PUBLICATIONS STAFF
ANDREWSTEWARTAND S. REBECCAMARTIN HellenisticDiscoveries atTelDor,Israel
121
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Kerri
E D I T O R, Tracey EDITOR,
Cullen MONOGRAPHS
Michael
Fitzgerald
PRODUCTION Sarah MANUSCRIPT Carol
SHARONE. J. GERSTEL,MARKMUNN, HEATHERE. GROSSMAN,ETHNEBARNES, ARTHURH. ROHN,ANDMACHIELKIEL
Cox
Hesperia
A LateMedievalSettlementatPanakton
147
MANAGER George
Figueira
EDITOR
A. Stein
PUB LI CATI ON S C OMMITTEE CarolC. Mattusch(Chairman) GeorgeMasonUniversity DariceBirge LoyolaUniversityof Chicago JeremyMcInerney Universityof Pennsylvania Margaret Miller Universityof Toronto JeniferNeils CaseWesternReserveUniversity KathleenW. Slane Universityof Missouri-Columbia RhysF.Townsend(ex oScio) ClarkUniversity
NORADIMITROVAAND KEVINCLINTON An ArchaicInscription fromSamothrace
235
Submissions:Manuscriptsand communicationsshould be addressedto Dr.TraceyCullen,Editor,Hesperia,AmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesat Athens,6-8 CharltonStreet,Princeton, NewJersey08540;tel.609-683-0800; fax609-924-0578; [email protected]. Manuscripts andphotocopiesof illustrations mustbe submittedin triplicate;originalartworkand photographs shouldnot be sentunlesspriorarrangements aremadewiththe editor.A shortabstract summarizing themajorconclusions ofthearticleshould alsobe included.Articlesaresubmittedto a double-blind reviewprocessand authorsarerequestedto preparetheirmanuscripts accordingly, withouttheir nameor affiliationappearing. The stylefor manuscriptpreparation, notes, bibliography, andotherinformation onsubmissions canbefoundin theGuidelinesforAuthorson the School'sWebsite(www.ascsa.edu.gr) orbywritingto ASCSAPublications at the aboveaddress. The AmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthenswillnotknowinglyprint in Hesperiaoranyof its otherpublications the announcement orinitialscholarlypresentation of anyobjectacquired afterDecember30,1970, byanymeans otherthanthroughan officiallysanctionedexcavationor survey,unlessthe objectwaspartof a previously existingcollectionorwaslegallyexportedfrom the countryof origin.
Copyright(C)2003 The AmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesat Athens Producedat EdwardsBrothers, Inc.,AnnArbor,Michigan. Designby EllenMcKie. Coverillustration: Hellenistic mosaicfragment: theatricalmask. Tel Dor,Israel.CourtesyCenterof NauticalandRegionalArchaeology at Dor,Nachsholim.PhotoG. Laron. Periodicals postagepaidat Princeton,NewJersey,andat additionalmailingoffices. Postmaster: Sendaddresschanges to Hesperia,P.O.Box529, Canton,
Subscriptions: Hesperiais publishedquarterly. The annualsubscription price MA 02021-0529,U.S.A. is $60 forindividuals($70, international), $110forinstitutions($120, international),and $35 for students(proofof studentstatusrequired).Payment ISSN 0018-098X mustbe in U.S.dollars,drawnon a U.S.bankor by moneyorder,andsentto Hesperia,Subscriber Services,P.O.Box 529, Canton,MA 02021-0529; tel. (U.S.) 800-821-7823; (outsideU.S.)781-828-8450; fax781-828-8915; e-mail [email protected]. Singleissues(currentandbacknumberswhenavailable) of Hesperiaareavailable for $20 eachpluspostagefromthe DavidBrownBook Company,P.O.Box 511, OakviXe,CT 06779; tel.800-791-9354,860-9459329; fax 860-945-9468; or (outsideNorthAmerica)OxbowBooks,Park End Place,OxfordOX1 1HN, U.K.;tel. +44 (0) 1865-241249; fax +44 (0) 1865-794449. IndexII andSupplements 13-17 and19-32 arealsoavailable fromDavidBrownBooks.Reprintsof IndexI, Supplements1-12 and 18, andearlyissuesof Hesperiashouldbe orderedfromSwetsandZeitlinger, b.v., P.O.Box 810,2160 SZ Lisse,Netherlands; [email protected].
HESPERIA
72
(2003)
H
I$TIC
ELLEN
Pages 121-I45
LDI$COV[RnI[ T[L
flOR,
AT
ISRAEL
ABSTRACT This articleis a preliminary publicationof a seriesof findsmadein 2000 at Tel Dor, Israel,duringexcavationssponsoredjointlyby the HebrewUniandtheUniversityof CaliforniaatBerkeley. A limestone versityofJerusalem to Nike anda groupof architectural fragmentsareconjectured comefroma Dorictempleorpropylon.Fragmentsof a superb 3rd-or early-2nd-century theatricalmosaicor mosaicsin the opusvermiculatum techniqueareattributed to an andronor oecusand arecomparedwith mosaicsfromlate-3rdand2nd-century Delos,Pergamon, Rhodes,andPompeii. centuryAlexandria The findssuggestthe presenceof a sophisticatedHellenizedcommunityat HellenisticDor.
INTRODUCTION
1. See Garstang1924; cf. Stern 1995, 2000. Unless otherwise noted, all dates in this article are B.C.E.
Twenty years of excavation by an international consortium at the harbor town of Dor (ancient Dora: Figs. 1, 2) have yielded significant remains of the Hellenistic city.These include stretches of the town wall and its main gate (areas A, B, and C); an arsenal of catapult balls (area B); numerous houses (areasA, B, C, D2, F, G, and H); olive presses (areasA, D2, and F); and masses of small finds, particularlyterracottas,pottery, and coins. Evidence for both orthogonal plans and plans relating to contour lines (areas A, B, C, F, G, and H) has also been found. Furthermore,these campaigns have refuted a number of long-held beliefs about the site. Chief among these is the contention of its first excavator,John Garstang, that the impressive ashlar foundations and associated 10-m-high Ionic columns on the western, seawardside of the mound (areasF and H) are the remains of the earliest Hellenistic temple(s) in the Middle East. On the contrary,it is now clear that they are Roman and date to the later 2nd century C.E.1 In the summer of 2000, a team from the University of California at Berkeley opened five squares at Dor on the southern side of the mound (area D1) in order to clarify the chronology and form of a large building of the Late Persian/Early Hellenistic period, the so-called Persian Palace
122
ANDREW
STEWART
AND
S.
REBECCA
T0 4200
\
fM
\,~'
MARTIN
20
km
^> I \
(
(Fig. 3). Two large pits were discovered on the periphery of the building: one on the north side and one on the east (Fig. 3: squaresAS 14 and AQ 12). Pit 1 (Fig. 4) in squareAS 14 dates to the Late Hellenistic period. It produced a limestone statue of a Nike (Fig. 5) and two Doric capitals (Fig. 6:a-b) carved in the local sandstone, or kurkar.A nearby wall and fills below two nearby floors produced three more architecturalmembers attributable to the same building, including an Ionic anta capital (Fig. 6:c). Pit 2 in squareAQ12 was Roman, and yielded many fragments of one or more mosaic floors-most spectacularly,pieces of a superbcomposition in opusvermiculatumof theater masks and assorted flora (Figs. 8-10). These finds are described and illustratedin the following pages. Since excavation of the area and its surroundingshas not been completed, however,it is likely that additional fragments-and perhapsthe buildings from which these fragments originate-lie beneath the surface of the adjacent squares.This publication must therefore be regardedas preliminary.
SCULPTURE AND ARCHITECTURE SQUARE AS 14: PIT 1 Pit 1 included loci L 26111 and L 26171 in square AS 14 (Fig. 4). L 26171 (sealed by a Late Hellenistic or Roman wall, W 16150) yielded the Nike (1) and L 26111 two Doric column capitals (2, 3).
Figure 1. Map of the eastern Mediterranean in the Hellenistic period.E. Dintino
ii
HELLENISTIC
AT
DISCOVERIES
TEL
DOR,
ISRAEL
I23
14 0cr "
TEL DOR
_ g I
0
0 ii
so PA
so r r_ _
B
+
+
100Ft I
I
1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I I I
I7 Iii
D
I I I
+
t
/
G
I I Ii
4
+
I
+
+'
Figure 2. Tel Dor 2000, site plan. Areas excavated in 1980-2000 are marked in black. J. Berg
I
I
+
ANDREW
I24 AU
AT
STEWART
AS
AND
AR
S. REBECCA
MARTIN
AQ
15
14
13
Figure3 (left).Schematicplanof the easternpartof areaD1 showingthe so-calledPersianPalace,the buildings above,andthe locationsof pits 1 and2. J.Berg Persian [:
Hellenistic E
Roman
E
Diagnostic pottery and lamps recovered from the pit comprise the following:
Figure4 (above).AreaD1, view of the Nike (1) andcapitals(2, 3) in pit 1 duringexcavation. PhotoI. Hirschberg
wheelmade lamp (3rd century) imported Attic plate (4th century) bowl with outcurved rim decorated with rouletting and palmettes (3rd century) "Megarian"relief bowl fragment;unguentarium fragment brazier fragment "Megarian"relief bowl fragment;unguentarium fragment; Eastern-type relief bowl fragment (2nd century) imported Attic lamp with handle missing (4th century) unguentarium with tall foot and teardrop-shapedbody (late 3rd-early 2nd century)
Slane 1997, pp. 269-282 (Tel Anafa), where it first appearssealedundera building constructedca. 125; cf. Berlin
The pit contained no EasternTerraSigillata A, or ES(A), a fabricthat was introduced into northern Israel around 140-130. At Dor it first appears in areasA and C in stratum III, the earliest part of which dates to around 150-100 (though the chronology is imprecise).2The pit was thus probablyclosed in the mid- to late 2nd century,before ES(A) reached the site, and almost certainly no later than ca. 100.
lee, ES(A) is absentfrom the destruction level of 145 but appearsin the reoccupationlevel of the last quarter of the century(SharonHerbert,pers. comm., 2002). For Dor see Stern 1995, I:A, pp. 43-44,233-234; I:B, pp. 218221.
261206 261211 261212 261372 261374 261375
261418 261446
of ES(A)see 2. Forthe introduction
1997,p. 24;atTel Kedeshin the Gali-
HELLENISTIC
Figure5. Limestonefigureof Nike (1). Front,left profile,back.Nachsholim,Centerof Nauticaland RegionalArchaeologyat Dor. Scale ca. 1:6. Photos G. Laron.
1
DISCOVERIES
AT
Headlessstatueof a wingedNike
TEL
DOR,
ISRAEL
I25
Fig. 5
Inv. 261429. Limestone, no traces of plaster. H. 0.61; p.H. of figure 0.54; W. 0.27; D. 0.23 m. Missing head, both arms, right breast,wings, right shoulder, and much of right side above waist; battered and weathered. Draped in a long, V-necked peplos with overfold, girdled below the breasts, and a cloak crossing the back diagonally from lower right to upper left. The figure strides forward with right leg advanced and left arm extended sideways, perhaps to hold up the cloak. A roughly punched, rectangulartenon, 0.15 x 0.07 x 0.07 m thick, protrudes below the feet. On the front the recesses of the folds are roughly punched; the limbs and drapery are modeled with a fine claw chisel (three teeth/6 mm) overlaid by much flat chiseling; the back is sketched only, with a punch and coarse claw (five teeth/25 mm). 2
Doric capital Fig. 6:a Inv. 261430. Kurkar,with small fragments of plaster (0.015 m thick) adhering. H. 0.270; Diam. (column) 0.460; abacus 0.61 x 0.62; H. (shaft) 0.080; H. (echinus) 0.080; H. (abacus) 0.110 m. Upper edges of abacus beveled in a band 0.07 m wide, reducing height of sides of abacus to 0.08 m. Traces of three necking rings at top of shaft.
3
Doric capital Fig. 6:b Inv.261985. Kurkar, with someplaster(0.005-0.015 m thick)adhering. H. 0.370;Diam. (column)0.460;abacus0.62 x 0.62;H. (shaft)0.160; H. (echinus)0.090;H. (abacus)0.120 m. Upperedgesof abacusbeveledin a band0.10 m wide,reducingheightof sidesof abacusto 0.095 m including plastercoating.No neckingringsvisible.
ANDREW
I26
STEWART
AND
S. REBECCA
b
a
SQUARE AS/AT
MARTIN
14: WALL W 16360
Wall W 16360, constructed to the south of pit 1 (Fig. 3), is Late Hellenistic/Early Roman; no diagnostic pottery was recovered from it. In secondary use as part of the foundation of the wall was: 4
Doric capital Inv. 260202. Kurkar,with some plaster (0.005-0.015 m thick) adhering. H. 0.320; Diam. (column) 0.440; abacus 0.62 x 0.63; H. (shaft) 0.150; H. (echinus) 0.065; H. (abacus) 0.105 m. Upper edges of abacus beveled in a band 0.03 m wide, reducing height of sides of abacus to 0.10 m, including plaster coating. A single thick (0.015 m) necking ring visible.
SQUAREAR 15: FILL LOCI L 26212, L 26183 SquareAR 15 includes fill locus L 26212, 1 m below a fragmentaryfloor, F 26076; and fill locus L 26183, immediately below fragmentary floor F 26134, which itself underlies floor F 26076. Floor F 26076 is Roman; the latest pottery in the fill below it, L 26212, was typical of the Early Roman period, including fragments of ridged storagejars. Lying in the fill was: 5
Columndrum Inv.262260. Limestone,no plasteradhering.H. 0.530;lowerDiam. 0.585; upperDiam. 0.570 m. A beveledgrooverunsup its side,0.06 wide narrowingto 0.04 wide in the trough,and0.04 m deep;in its bedding,an empolioncutting 0.05 x 0.07 x 0.03 m deep. Floor F 26134 is also Early Roman, dated by the latest pottery from its fill locus L 26183. Lying in the fill was: 6
Ionic antacapital Fig. 6:c Inv.261744. Limestone,with smallfragmentsof plaster(0.002-0.005 m thick)adheringto cavettomoldingonly.H. 0.310;below,W. 0.237 x L. 0.525; above,0.295 x 0.575 m. On uppersurface,a dovetailclamphole:L. 0.10, W. 0.075/0.055,D. 0.03 m. H. (wallsection)0.135;H. (moldings)0.175 m: frombottom,half round;ovolo;halfround;cavetto;fascia.
c
Figure 6. (a, b) Doric capitals 2, 3; kurkar.(c) Ionic anta capital 6; limestone. Nachsholim, Center of Nautical and Regional Archaeology at Dor. Scale 1:10. A. Adams, E. Dintino.
HELLENISTIC
DISCOVERIES
AT
TEL
DOR,
ISRAEL
I27
DISCUSSION
I
'lI
I I
I
I''
IA
0
l
~~ ~
0.5
I
I
f
I METER
I
Figure7. Restoredelevationof Doric columnincorporating2 and5. E. Dintino
Although the actual building to which these fragments belong has yet to appear, the architectural fragments 2-5 could be from a Doric temple, propylon, stoa, porch, or colonnaded court. As will become clear,however, if these fragments, the anta capital (6), and the Nike (1) all belong together, then some of these possibilities can be excluded apriori. Despite their different materials (limestone and the local sandstone), these objects probablywere all associatedwith a single structure.Not only were they deposited near each other and at approximatelythe same level, but the diameter of the limestone column drum (5) neatly correspondsto that of the Doric capitals (2-4) when one allows for the obligatory diminution of the shaft (Fig. 7). The empolion cutting in the lower surface only and the material and size of the drum indicate that 5 was the lowest element, doweled to the building's stylobate for greater stability.Above it, the natural friction of the stone was evidently deemed sufficient, as was usual at Dor where clamps and dowels were rarelyused. The need to protect the columns from damage by passing foot traffic,together with a conviction that a tougher material than kurkarwas needed to carrythe heavy weight of the colonnade, could easily account for the substitution. The plaster coating, still visible on 2-4 and 6, would have covered any differences in color and texture. The anta capital (6) has roughly the same proportions as the column capitals (especially 4) and may also belong to the same structure.Here the choice of stone was perhapsdeterminedby the complicatedmolding, which would have been difficult to carve in kurkar.If the capital belongs to the ensemble, the order incorporated some Ionic elements-a common feature of Late Classical and Hellenistic Doric. If not, we have complementary fragments of two buildings of almost exactly the same scale, a kurkar and limestone Doric one and a limestone Ionic one, both destroyed at the same time-an unlikely alternative. The building apparentlywas securedwith a grille (fitted into the groove on 5) and embellished with Nike akroteria(as 1). No remains of its entablature came to light and perhaps none should be expected. Kurkaris too weak a stone to sustain a lintel of any length, and of the hundredsof miscellaneous Graeco-Roman architecturalfragments recoveredat Dor, not one (to our knowledge) is from this kind of entablature.The building's superstructurewas probably of timber. Garstang'sIonic "temple"on the west side of the mound (areaF) furnishes a precise parallel. As stated above, these Doric fragments could theoreticallybelong to a number of building types. Any freestanding structuremust have stood to the north of the excavated area (area Dl: Figs. 2, 3); the possibility of a porch immediately points to the still incompletely excavated"PersianPalace." But the porches of Hellenistic palaces and palatial mansions never seem to have been embellished with akroteria,and an interior colonnade affords no place for sculpturalrefinements of this kind. Furthermore,the dimensions of the Dor columns exceed all but those of the very largest temple and palatialcourtyardcolonnades in the Hellenistic Near East (see
128
ANDREW
STEWART
AND
S. REBECCA
MARTIN
below). Nor is a freestanding stoa a likely possibility; these were not popular in the Levant, and Hellenistic examples built elsewhere apparentlyeschewed sculptured akroteriacompletely.3 Therefore, unless this Doric building was uncanonical (always a possibility, especially in the East), or the Nike stood on another structureentirely,a temple or propylon is the most likely source for these architectural fragments. Yet, to our knowledge, no pre-Herodian/Early Roman Doric temples or propylaia have been discovered in Israel and only three such temples are known in Syria and Jordan:4 1. Tell Jebel Khalid (Amphipolis/Tourmeda/Nikatoris?), North Syria. Hexastyle amphiprostyle limestone Doric temple, ca. 13 x 20 m, surroundedby altars.Discovered in the summer of 2000. Published by G. Clarke et al.5Date: 3rd century. 2. Tell Nebi-Mend (Laodicea ad Libanum), South Syria.Tetrastyle prostyle limestone Doric temple, ca. 9 x 20 m. In area 10 of the lower town. Excavated in the early 1990s. Unpublished. Date: possibly late 3rd-early 2nd century. 3. Pella, Jordan. Stylobate and part of the facade of a Doric temple in pink marble/limestone. On Tell Husn (S. Hill), University of Sydney, area 34. Discovered in 1993. Unpublished. Date: 1st century? Unfortunately,the column heights of all three temples areuncertain. Nevertheless, as discussed below, the temple at Tell Nebi-Mend might be a useful guide to the possible appearanceof the building at Dor; its publication is eagerly awaited. The Dor columns are easy to reconstructon paper-though the meager remains do make the result look somewhat comical (Fig. 7). If 5 was indeed the lowest drum, simple extrapolation from its two diameters and the diameter of the column stump on 2-4 indicates a shaft about 4.06 m high and a total column height of ca. 4.27 m, or about 12 Ionic feet. As noted above, these dimensions exceed those of most Near Eastern sanctuary and palace colonnades, but they are perfectly acceptable for a small temple or sizeable propylon (see Table 1).6 The lower diameter/height 3. Synopses:Coulton1976,pp.5556; Nielsen 1994. See also Netzer 2001.
4. We thankGraemeClarke, directorof theTellJebelKhalid foralertingus to these excavations, andforprovidingus withplansand reconstructed elevationsof his newly discoveredDoric temple. For Doric in other contexts see, e.g., Bliss and Macalister1902, p. 57, pl. 19:7, 8 (Maresha:houses);Avigad 1954, p. 95, fig. 57; Fedak 1990, p. 142, figs. 203,204 (Jerusalem:Tomb of Bene Hezir); Dunand and Duru 1962, pp. 31-34, pls. 22,23, 98, 99 (Hammon: hypostylehall);Ploug 1985, p. 128, nos. 1,2, fig. 21 (Hama, Syria:
houses);Stucchi 1987, p. 258, fig. 14; Fedak 1990, pp. 148-150, fig. 221 (Es-Suweida, Syria:Tomb of Hamrath);Herbert 1994, pp. 37-42, fig. 2:7, 8, pls. 3-14 (Tel Anafa, Israel:mansion, drumsonly);Netzer 2001, pp. 88-91, 103,304-305, figs. 127, 128, 453 (Jericho:Hasmoneanpalace,pavilion and porticoes).The two temples at Hammon areIonic prostyleand amphiprostyle,and lack canonical propylaia:see Dunand and Duru 1962, p. 48, fig. 10, and p. 76, fig. 17. 5. Clarkeet al. 2000, pp. 123-126, fig. 2; Clarke,forthcoming,with revised elevationof the facade.For the conjecturedancient name and exact
location of the site, see Gawlikowski 1996, p. 128;Talbert2000, map 67 (squareG4). 6. In addition,at Dura, the citadel palace'scourtyardcolumns had a lower diameterof 0.61 m and an upper diameterof 0.51 m (Dura II, p. 14); at Nippur,the palace'scourtyard columnswere a massive0.84 m thick but only 4.2 m high, an idiosyncratic 1:5 ratio evidentlyoccasionedby the use of brick (Fisher 1904, p. 422); and at Jericho,the Hasmoneanpalace's pavilioncolumns (ca. 100-80) were about 5 m high and those of the garden colonnadeabout 4 m high (Netzer 2001, pp. 304-305, fig. 453).
HELLENISTIC
DISCOVERIES
TABLE 1. EXAMPLES OF DORIC LATE CLASSICAL PROPYLAIA,
AT
TEL
DOR,
ISRAEL
AND HELLENISTIC
I29
TEMPLES,
AND PORTICOES LowerDiam.
Structure
Epidauros,Tholos Tegea,Temple of Athena Alea Jebel Khalid, Doric temple Pergamon,Temple of Athena Nikephoros Pergamon,Doric Temple of Asklepios
Date
of Columns (m)
Interaxial
(m)
(m)
Lower Diam. to Column H.
Interaxial to to Column H.
ca. 360
1.0
6.88
2.37
1:6.9
1:2.9
ca. 340
1.55
9.56
3.58
1:6.2
1:2.6
3rd century
0.88
5.47 or 4.55
2.40
1:6.2 or 5.1
1:2.3 or 1.9
ca. 250
0.75
5.25
2.37
1:7.0
1:2.2
ca. 220-190
0.69
4.78
2.14
1:7.0
1:2.2
0.68
5.0
2.49
1:7.3
1:2.0
0.90
6.3
2.9
1:7.0
1:2.1
0.53
4.0
1.8
1:7.5
1:2.2
3rd century
0.70
3.6
2.1
1:5.2
1:1.7
ca. 250 222/221
0.70 0.56
ca. 4.5 3.92
ca. 150 ca. 150
0.70 0.74
5.2 5.23
2.53 2.16 (North) 2.42 (East) 2.32 2.43
1:6.4 1:7.0 1:7.0 1:7.4 1:7.1
1:1.8 1:1.8 1:1.6 1:2.2 1:2.2
Pergamon,Propylonto Athena ca. 160 Nikephoros sanctuary Dura Europos,Bicolumnar Monument (Propylon?) 2nd century? to Delos, Propylon 95/94 Kyntheionsanctuary Jebel Khalid,Portico of Governor'spalace Delos, Stoa of Antigonos Gonatas Hammon, Porticoesof Milk'Ashtartsanctuary Priene,Agora, North Stoa Athens, Stoa of Attalos II
Column H.
ratio of the column was about 1:7.3; a 1-cm-thick plaster coating (see 2-4) would have reduced this to about 1:7.0. As such, it is canonically Early to Mid-Hellenistic, as Table 1 shows.7 Furthermore,minus its beveled top, one of the Dor capitals (2) neatly conforms to the Vitruvian (i.e., Hellenistic) division of the Doric capital into three equal parts (Vitr. 4.3.4). All three of the Doric capitals (2-4), although idiosyncratically proportioned in other respects, roughly echo the High and Late Hellenistic ratio of echinus height over abacus width that characterizes the capitals of later Hellenistic buildings from Lindos and Delos, and the capitals from Hammon (Umm El'Amed) in southern Lebanon-a Phoenician cult site only 62 km up the coast from Dor. The capitals from Hammon are as unevenly proportioned and finished as those 7. Since some of the measurements upon which these ratios arebased are estimated (but must be correctto within a couple of centimeters),they have been roundedoff to one decimalplace. Sources:Roux 1961, pp. 177-178 (Tegea;Epidauros);Pakkanen1998, p. 73 (Tegea);Clarke2001a, p. 223,
fig. 18; 2001b; and forthcoming(Jebel Khalid);AvP II, pp. 11, 50 (Pergamon, Athena temple;propylon);AvPXI.2, pp. 19-25 (Asklepios temple);Downey 1988, p. 83, fig. 38 (Dura; Downey 2003 shows that the 2nd-century ensemble of her fig. 35 is a fiction, though the columns are real and are
indeed 7.3 times as high as their lower diameter);DelosXI, pp. 98-99 (Kyntheion); DelosV, pp. 17-18 (Antigonos stoa);Dunand and Duru 1962, p. 37 (Hammon, with p. 187 for the date); Wiegand and Schrader1904, p. 193 (Priene);Travlos,p. 513, fig. 645 (Attalos stoa).
I30
ANDREW
STEWART
AND
S. REBECCA
MARTIN
from Dor, and the site has also produced some Ionic anta capitals that are very similar to 6.8 This marks the limit of what can be plausibly extrapolated from the remains. But the combination of the Nike (1) and the column drum (5) with its ca. 0.60-m diameter prompts a further,purely speculative,conjecture.The statue is now headless, but when complete it stood around 0.670.70 m (2 Ionic feet) high. If it too conformed to Vitruvius'sprescriptions (Vitr. 3.5.12) and equaled the height of the building'stympanon, then the latter would also be around 0.67-0.70 m.9 Hellenistic Doric tympana are typically eight to ten times as wide as they are high and Hellenistic Doric horizontal cornices are around nine to thirteen times as wide as the tympanon height. So hypotheticallythe tympanon should measureca. 5.37 m wide and its horizontal cornice ca. 6.0-9 m wide. As for the colonnade, the examples listed in Table 1 indicate that a column diameter of 0.60 m would produce interaxials of around 1.8-2.1 m, and thus a tetrastyle facade of modest width (6-7 m), on a foundation about 8-9 m wide. As a crosscheck, the Doric capitals and drums tentatively attributed to the 7.5 x 3.5 m foundation of the Roman propylon to Temple H at Dor are about 10% smaller than 2-4 and also indicate a tetrastyle facade; the propylon to the Kyntheion at Delos offers a rough parallel.10A hexastyle facade for 2-4, however, would yield a much more substantialwidth (9.6-10.6 m), requiring a foundation around 11.5-12.5 m wide, and producing a tympanon considerablyhigher than the Nike (1). The excavation'snext priority,therefore, is to search for a foundation that is ca. 8-9 m across,tailoredfor a tetrastyleprostyleor amphiprostyletemple or, perhaps, a propylon. What of the Nike? The pose, tooling, and uneven finish indicate that the figure stood on the building'sleft-hand corner vis-a-vis the spectator.The material could suggest Cypriot manufacture,though the indifferent quality perhaps militates against this possibility.The pose is a stock one, exemplified most famously in the Hellenistic period by the Nike of Samothrace. Typologically the figure seems to fit between a collection of Late Classical Nikai from 4th-century Megara, Epidauros, and Delos, on the one hand, and a series of flamboyantly baroque ones from 2nd-century Pergamon, Samothrace, and Halikarnassos,on the other.l1The restrained pose and drapery align 1 squarelywith the former group, and the figure shows little sign of the strongly tapering proportions, sprung rhythms, and wild, frothy draperies of the latter. In the Aegean at least, this high baroque-even rococo-fashion began to emerge around 200, to judge by a fine terracottaNike in Paris from a well-dated grave at Myrina.l2Unlike the Nike from Dor, these 2nd-century Nikai wear their girdles hiked up so far that their breastsjut provocatively,and sometimes one breast is even left bare. Unfortunately, the hundred years between these two groups of Nikai (ca. 300-200) is something of a black hole: certifiably 3rd-century freestanding Nikai are all but nonexistent. The only viable candidate is the impressive statue, perhaps Athena Nike, from the ship monument in the
8. Cf. Coulton 1979, p. 81, figs. 2-4 (group 10); Dunand and Duru 1962, pp. 102, 104, 117, 133, figs. 23,26, 35, 52, pls. 22,23; cf. Shoe 1936, pp. 174176 and, e.g., pl. 17:8, 31 (Delos). 9. This rule was generallyobserved from the 5th centuryonward:King 2000, p. 104. 10. Inventorynumbers:the foundation is W 20270/20280; the capitals are202086,202205, and 203855; and the drumsare204409 and 203955. The capitalsand drums arefrom late (phase I or later,i.e., Crusader)fills. For the Kyntheion,see DelosXI, pp. 98-99. 11. On these Nikai in general,see King 2000, pp. 104-116; LIMC VI, 1992, pp. 881-883, nos. 381,388, 401406, s.v.Nike (U. Grote). For illustrations of the late-4th-centuryNikai, see Purgold 1881 (Megara);Marcade1951 (Delos); Alscher 1957, pl. 4 (Megara); Yalouris1967 (Epidauros);Gulaki 1981, figs. 35-41 (all);andWebb 1996, fig. 115 (Delos); and for the 2nd-century examples,see Marcade1951, p. 84, fig. ll:b (Delos); Schober1951, pls. 90, 98 (Pergamon);Grote 1992, pl. 15 (Pergamon);Webb 1996, fig. 135 (Samothrace);Poulsen 1997, pp. 77-78, figs. 97-100 (Halikarnassos). 12. Paris,LouvreMYR 171: Mollard-Besques1963, p. 67, pl. 80:d;the gravecontainedautonomouscoins of Myrina datableto 196-190.
HELLENISTIC
DISCOVERIES
AT
TEL
DOR,
ISRAEL
I3I
TABLE 2. DOR CHRONOLOGY: LATE 4TH THROUGH 1ST CENTURIES Date
Event
332
Alexanderthe Great passesby Dor on his marchfromTyre to Gaza and Egypt. Death of Alexander;Phoenicia (including Dor) soon disputedbetween Antigonos One-Eye (satrapof Syria)and Ptolemy (satrapof Egypt). Antigonos is defeated and killed at Ipsos;Ptolemy annexesJudea, Phoenicia, and Coele-Syria. Dor, now a Ptolemaic fortress,withstandsa siege by Antiochos III of Syria(Polyb.5.66.1), who then marcheson to defeat at Raphiain 217 (the so-called Fourth SyrianWar). Antiochos III returns,destroysthe Ptolemaic armyat Paneion (Banyas, North Galilee), and annexesCoele-Syria,Phoenicia (includingDor), andJudea (the so-called Fifth SyrianWar). Dor, now a Seleukiddependencyoccupiedby the pretenderTryphon,is besieged by Antiochos VII Sidetes and Simon Maccabee.Tryphon, however,managesto escape (I Maccabees15:11-37; Joseph.AJ 13.223-224; BJ 1.50). Dor, now ruled along with Gaza and Strato'sTowerby the tyrant Zoilos, is taken by the Hasmonean king AlexanderJannaeus,who treatsthe town harshly(Joseph.AJ 13.324 (335); 14.76; Syncellus558). Pompey abolishesthe Seleukidmonarchy,takesJerusalem,detaches Coele-Syria and southernPhoenicia from the Hasmonean kingdom, and gives Dor and the other cities their freedom(Joseph.AJ 14.4.4; BJ 1.7.7). Dor restartsits calendarat Year1 and mints coins dated from this year. Mark Antony gives KleopatraVII of Egypt the coastalcities of Phoenicia andJudea,with the exceptionsof Tyre and Sidon (Joseph.AJ 15.4.1; BJ 1.18.5). Battle of Actium; Octavianmarchessouth from Syria,invadesEgypt, and takesAlexandria.
323 301 219
202-199
139/138
102-99
63
34
31-30
13. See Ermeti 1981 (Cyrene); LIMC VIII, 1997, pp. 879-881, nos. 15, 26b, 36, s.v. Nike (P. Linant de Bellefonds). 14. For sourcesand discussion,see Dahl 1915, pp. 65-78.
Agora at Cyrene. Possibly erected in connection with the Third Syrian War of 246-241, the figure has a torso similarly proportioned to that of the Nike at Dor and achieves a similar relationship between clothing and body, but has far longer legs and a differently draped himation. Finally,the symmetricallyarrangedswallowtailfolds on the Dor Nike add an archaistic touch that is unparalleledin the genre until the Roman period, when hints of it occur on a number of Nikai from Palmyra and Jordan.13 If the temple or propylon was indeed built at Dor in the 3rd to early 2nd century,then it lasted barely a hundred years:the pottery in pit 1 dates its demolition to ca. 150-100. Although any number of factors could have occasioned its construction and destruction, the events outlined above in Table 2 are worth recalling.l4 A naturaltemptation would be to connect the Nike from Dor and its temple or propylon with the Raphia campaign of 219-217, and (in the
ANDREW
132
STEWART
AND
S. REBECCA
MARTIN
absence of recorded earthquakesor other natural disasters) their destruction either with Sidetes' siege in 139/138 or with that byJannaeus in 10299. According to Josephus, Sidetes besieged Dor both by land and sea, and catapult balls found on the city's seaward side demonstrate that it was indeed bombardedfrom that direction. As forJannaeus,his egregious brutality and relentless destruction of pagan shrines in the cities that resisted him were legendary. Indeed, Syncellus even lists Dor among the coastal towns that he destroyed and whose inhabitants he massacred.15But so far the site has yielded no evidence of widespread destruction in this period, and to make these or any other connections, more excavation and much more hard evidence are needed.
THE MOSAIC The superbfragmentarymask-and-garlandmosaic also unearthed in 2000 (Figs. 8-10) is the first major example of Hellenistic opusvermiculatumin the region. Unfortunately,it was not found in situ, but had been broken up and tossed into a Roman pit (pit 2) in areaDl on the southwest side of the tel (Figs. 2, 3). Given the quality of this mosaic, it is hard to believe that someone destroyed it on a whim. Earthquake damage or urban renewal come to mind as possible explanations,but until the original context of the mosaic is found, no firm conclusions are possible. The fragments vary in size from small clusters of tesserae to larger sections measuring over 0.40 x 0.30 m. Thanks to the efforts of colleagues from Hebrew University and at the site museum at Nachsholim, the disparate pieces of one mask and the area adjacent have been successfully restored;a fragment of a second mask and a separategeometric zone await supplementation from further excavation and restoration.The masks and garlands are almost certainlypart of a border frieze; the central emblema,if there was one, has yet to be identified. SQUARE AQI2:
PIT 2
Pit 2 in squareAQ12 included loci L 26053,26081-82,26121-22,26150and 26248. The pit con52,26164-65,26169,26195,26234,26236-37, tained many mosaic fragments, apparentlydiscardedat random. Unfortunately, the diagnostic pottery from the pit was extremely limited: 260674 260909
Roman lamp (2nd century C.E.) Attic black-glaze fragment; Roman Western Terra Sigillata
The major mosaic fragments are: 7
Sectionof a mask-and-garland frieze Fig. 8:a-c Inv.260885. Recomposedfromseveralfragments(A-I) foundin L 26081. Stone,ceramic,andglassset into shellymortar.H. 0.511;H. (field)0.428; W. 0.747;Th. 0.020-0.204 m. Extensivedamageon top,bottom,and sidesand
15. E.g.,at Gazashortlyafterward (Joseph.AJ13.364):see mostrecently
to nose and right eye of mask; heavily encrusted before restoration.Youthful
Bar-Kochva1996, pp. 127,132-133.
HELLENISTIC
DISCOVERIES
AT
TEL
DOR,
ISRAEL
I33
male mask facing to its right with speira(or coil of hair over the temples and forehead), hat, and wool fillet tied by a blue tainia, set against a background of fruits and flowers. Bordered below by a red band of three rows of tesserae and above by two similar red bands, separated by a strip of white. 8
Fragment of a bouquet Fig. 9 Inv. 261241. From L 26122. Stone, ceramic, and glass set into shelly mortar.H. 0.475; H. (field) 0.269; W. 0.294; Th. 0.204 m. Extensive damage on top, bottom, and sides; heavy encrustation. Red and gold cloth wrapped around a fruit and floral bouquet. Bordered above by two red strips, separated by a strip of white. 9
Fragment with perspectival meander Fig. 10, left Inv. 261718. From L 26169. Stone, ceramic, and glass set into shelly mortar.H. 0.168; H. (field) 0.120; W. 0.177; Th. 0.133 m. Damage to sides; very little encrustation. Perspectival meander set into blue field with rosettes framed by a partially preserved red and white border. 10 Fragment with perspectival meander Fig. 10, right From L Inv. 261718. 26169. Stone, ceramic, and glass set into shelly mortar. H. 0.135; H. (field) 0.122; W. 0.124; Th. 0.126 m. Damage to sides; very little encrustation. Perspectival meander set into blue field with rosettes.
The technique representedin these mosaics is true opusvermiculatum, using 3-5 mm2 tesserae in the field in a wide range of reds, blues, and yellows. There is also extensive use of glass in tones of blue and green, characteristic of Hellenistic mosaics.16 To date there is no evidence for the use of lead strips.17 The white limestone field is framed at top and bottom by red bands using larger tesserae up to 4 x 6 mm in size. Most of the tesserae used for this white background and adjacent sections of floor are rectilinear and laid horizontally. But as they approach the decorated areas they begin to curve and include tiny chips, often only 1 mm across, in order to follow the contours of the fruits, flowers, and mask. This technique is particularly clear where the top of the mask approaches the upper red border. The work is set into a bed of fine mortar 0.019 m thick, supported by a heavy backing of coarser mortar.l8
16. Guimier-Sorbetsand Nenna 1992. Westgate (2000) attests to the popularityof the color scheme. Its basic palette of red and yellow stone and bright blue and green glass was especiallypopularwith easternHellenistic mosaicistsbecauseof its visual kinshipwith opussectile. 17. Joyce (1979) sees the use of lead stripsin Delos as one indication of their origins in the pebble mosaics of mainlandGreece,whereasin PunicinfluencedPompeii,lead stripsare unknownin the earlyopussigninum
floors. Cf. Dunbabin 1979. 18. Preservedup to 0.204 m thick in the bouquet fragment.In PalaceV at Pergamonthe tesseraeare set into a thin mortarbackedby a thicker (0.015) one, a coarseaggregatemortar (0.03-0.04 thick), and rubble(ca. 0.20 thick);AvP V.1, pp. 53-54. At Delos the tesseraearegenerallyset into mortar0.015-0.02 thick, backedby a coarsermortar(0.03 thick) and then mortaredrubble(ca. 0.04 thick);Delos XXIX, pp. 26-27.
I34
ANDREW
STEWART
AND
S. REBECCA
MARTIN
THE MASK FRAGMENT The mask and its associated floral frieze (7) dominate the white limestone floor (Fig. 8:a-c). The mask occupies the right side of the fragment and is turned slightly to the spectator'sleft. The youthful face with its heavy eyelids, deep-set, large eyes, full mouth, and parted lips is typical of New Comedy masks (see below). Topping the mask is an extravagant, trefoil-shaped hat. The speira is held in place by a rolled, brown wool fillet secured by an X-shaped tainia. It is further embellished with sprays of broad-leafed and variegated ivy (kittos) and its fruits (korymboi).The blue ribbons that billow out on either side of the face are the ends of the tainia, implying that it serves a double function: it holds the whole concoction of hat, fillet, and fruits together, and it also secures the mask to the garland.The rich floral frieze enhances this luxuriantDionysiac atmosphere. It featuresivy sprays(kittosand korymboi),pinecones (konoior strobiloi), wild olives (agrielaiai), pomegranates (rhoai), and wild roses (rhoda agria).19 The mask itself is 0.361 m high and 0.369 m wide. The face is rendered in stones (nine to sixteen tesserae per square centimeter) laid along contour lines and curving around features to suggest their volume. No glass is used on the face. A wide range of colors is employed: pinkishbrown and light gray for skin; pinkish-red for rounded features like the cleft chin, ear, left cheek, and nostrils; and white mixed with soft yellow for highlights. The proper right side of the face is shaded dark brown to emphasize its recession. Various tones of red are used for the parted lips, with lighter red for highlights. The open mouth is brown-black and ends abruptly at its proper left in a vertical line, showing that it is cut through the fabric of the mask. The extant portions of the nose are prominently outlined in brown. The full right cheek, seen almost in profile, contrasts pointedly with the smooth left one, emphasizing the rotation of the face. The eyes are heavy-lidded and are hooded by thick, dark eyebrows.There are no eyelashes.The enormous pupils occupy three-quartersof the brown irises. Here the tesserae are truly tiny-the left iris and pupil use no fewer than twenty-eight of them. The face is framed at the sides by brown wavy hair and ringlets, and above by a thick, banded fillet. This fillet, renderedin browns and blues, is outlined at its bottom with blue glass. Four small clusters of light yellowgreen ivy fruits stud the trefoil-shapedred and gold hat; each casts a shadow rendered in the dark hues of the background stones, either red or blue. The ivy leaves are rendered in olive green and dark green glass and contrast sharply with the turquoise stone. The blue-green ribbon that ties them all together is renderedin darkblue, bright blue, and light blue glass; green glass; and stones that are nearly turquoise.These variations create a striking chiaroscuro and depth. The very small, tightly laid tesserae measure between 2 and 3 mm2. Like many other Hellenistic theatermasks,this one is eclectic. It seems to combine features of two comic masks described in Pollux's Onomasticon (4.147): mask 13, the Delicate Young Man, and mask 16, the episeistos,or Second Wavy-Haired (or perhapsFloppy-Haired) Young Man. These two
19. For identificationof floraltypes, see Abbe 1965, pp. 100, 147, 156-160; Harrison 1962.
HELLENISTIC
-?
YT
--7
M
DISCOVERIES
AT
TEL
DOR,
---------
1-
---a
b
Figure8. (a)Mosaicfragment7 with comicmaskandfloraldesign; (b)detailof ribbon,flowers,and pomegranates;(c)detailof mask. Nachsholim,Centerof Nautical and RegionalArchaeologyat Dor. Photos G. Laron
C
ISRAEL
I35
I36
ANDREW
STEWART
AND
S. REBECCA
MARTIN
Figure9 (left).Mosaicfragment8 with bouquetof flowersandfruits. Nachsholim,Centerof Nauticaland RegionalArchaeologyat Dor. PhotoG. Laron
youths spend too much time indoors enjoying parties. Pollux describes them as follows: (13) The Delicate Young Man has hair like the Admirable and is the youngest of all, white, reared in the shade, suggesting softness. (15) His hair is wavy, as is that of (16) the Second Wavy-Haired, who is more delicate and fair-haired.20 A terracotta suspension mask from Amisos (Fig. 11) also combines aspects of the masks describedby Pollux.21 The mask dates to the mid-2nd century,the beginning of Webster, Green, and Seeberg'speriod 3 (ca. 15050).22Like the mask from Dor, it has a soft, round face, large, heavy-lidded eyes, and wavy hair.Wool fillets and ribbons bind the hair and hang down on either side of the face;loose ringlets (only partiallypreservedon the left side of the mask) also frame the face. 20. Poll. 4.147: (13) 6 8' 6aacXg; C&?y-
vscvioxo;. TrpiX?; [iv xazca Tv
7rcavTcov 8? VEwT'OCTO, XeuxO;, XpqOtCOV,
6rroaX&cov. oxLao'po(piLx, xcaX6'rrTTa (15) eiLaSiovTat a clTpiX, w)a07e xal (16) tCO euirT?pcitoe,io'rp, acraX0oxai ocav6O x6o[Iv.Greek -TpcpOVTL %Tv
text and translationsarefromWebster, Green, and Seeberg 1995, vol. 1, pp. 19,21. 21. Paris,Louvreinv.D 510: Mollard-Besques1972, p. 87, pl. 111:d; cf. Webster,Green, and Seeberg 1995,
vol. 1, pp. 19-22. Webster,Green, and Seeberg (1995, vol. 2, p. 210) note that the Louvre mask should be reinterpreted as a female owing to its parted hair;but since no partingis visible in the publishedimage-the ribboncovers the spot where it should be-we continue to identify it as a young man (see Webster 1961, p. 89, mask ZT 5; and Webster 1969, p. 89, mask ZT 5). 22. Webster,Green, and Seeberg 1995, vol. 1, pp. 60-64.
Figure10 (above).Mosaicfragments 9 and 10 with perspectivalmeanders. Nachsholim,Centerof Nautical and RegionalArchaeologyat Dor. Photo Dor Excavations
HELLENISTIC
Figure11. Amisos,terracottacomic mask.Mid-2nd century.Paris,
DISCOVERIES
AT
TEL
DOR,
ISRAEL
I37
::
Louvre D 510. CourtesyReunion des .._..... Mus6es Nationaux/ArtResource,New York; Lewandowski H. photo
i:
..
The Dor mask'sfloral fringe consists primarily of ivy, with two olive leaves at the lower left. But in the frieze proper, olives and flowers soon take over, then pomegranates and oak leaves. The five- and six-petaled wild roses appear to be randomly placed, yet are usually located near the olive sprays;occasionally the flowers are shown in profile.With the exception of three glass tesserae in the centers of some flowers, the tesserae used for the flowers are of stone. Their petals are darkerat the center and shade to white at their edges. The two pomegranates (Fig. 8:a-b) are largely stone, with darker colors in fired clay. The uppermost is modeled with golden and pinkish-brown stones like those used on the face of the mask. The olive berriesarepredominantlystone: browns, olive green, and opaque white. Most of the green leaves employ only green glass. The olive leaves, however, use both blue and blue-green glass and opaque white stone, and the oak leaves are white and light blue, with blue and blue-green glass highlights. Most of the decorated area is set against a dark background of bluebrown stone. At times this background serves as a true shadow-as with the olive leaves below the chin of the mask and the lower edge of the fluttering ribbon. But in general it seems to function more as a darkbackdrop against which the lighter glass and stone tesserae stand out. Many of the garland's leaves and flowers (as well as the top of the mask) extend beyond this dark ground. THE
BOUQUET
FRAGMENT
The border zone and white background of the bouquet fragment (8, Fig. 9) are identical to those of 7. A cloth binding of deep gold with a red hem holds a bouquet that extends to the right. The bouquet's dark
ANDREW
I38
STEWART
AND
S. REBECCA
MARTIN
background is also identical to that of 7, and its flora arevery similar,with two pomegranates,wild roses, and olive leaves. Novelties include one yellow-green fruit and a six-petaled flower of gold and orange with white highlights and a red center.To the left of the flower is a partial blue-glass leaf with white highlights and central veins. The pomegranates are larger and slightly cruderthan those of 7. This is most evident in the lower of the two fruits, where the opening crown is awkwardly placed and clumsily shaped. Clearly,at least two craftsmen produced this mosaic. Extrapolating from 7, a 16-cm-high section of the field is missing. The fragment shows a clear continuation of the tessellated floor beyond the frieze, with large white tesserae at its top laid perpendicularlyto the banded border.There is no suggestion that the meander (see below) was laid in this direction. THE
MEANDER
FRAGMENTS
Two large sections of the mosaic's perspectival meander survive (9, 10; Fig. 10). The white keys are 0.073-0.079 m high, and the width of a complete sequence can be estimated at 0.14 m. The number of tesserae ranges from seven to nine per squarecentimeter. Each perspectival"box"created by the double meander contains a simple, geometrically rendered rosette; at least five more rosettes are preserved in other small fragments. A wide range of colors is represented in the many small and two large fragments: gold, severalblues, green, white, and red.23 Half of the tesseraeused in the meanderareglass (light blue and green), and the stones arewhite, two shades of red, and darkblue. The double key of the smaller fragment (10) is formed by a single row of white stones, and the illusion of depth is rendered in multiple colors: the "outside"of one exterior key is dark red, while the "inside"is light red. The center of the key on both sides is light blue, and the framed rosette is white with a blue center, set against the dark blue background. In the same fragment, the next sequence shows a variation on this color scheme, with dark and light blue glass for the exterior of the key, and shades of red for its interior.The larger of the two principal fragments (9) carriesthe same arrangementof colors, but here a more complete picture of the design can be seen, particularly the reversal of colors from exterior to interior. In this case, the dominant sequence is blue for the exterior and red for the interior.All of the rosettes contain the same colors. The meander zone is thus quite varied. It is difficult to determine how, if at all, this part of the mosaic related to the garland frieze, although their borders hint at a certain continuity. Perhaps it framed the mosaic's central emblema.The workmanship, materials (particularlythe heavy use of glass), and care in design indicate that this section was made by the same craftsmen who produced 7 and 8. Both 9 and 10 have vertical seams that extend to the bottom of their preserved mortar bedding (0.133 and 0.126 m thick, respectively).This pattern, a conventional one, was most certainly laid in situ.24Three other geometrical fragments (not meanders) from Dor have these vertical seams. Possibly some or all of them were laid at the edge of the pavement or enclosed a putative central emblema.No seams appear on the two large garland fragments (7, 8).
23.The doubleperspective meander
of mosaic 25 in niche 37 of the Agora
of the Italianson Delos,in whichthe of colorsis irregular, distribution sug-
gests how the disparatecolors of the Dor meanderwould haveworked together (DelosXXIX, pp. 136-139, figs. 29-31, pl. A:1). 24. For the mosaic-layingtechnique, see Ling 1998, pp. 14-15; Westgate 2000, pp. 272-273.
HELLENISTIC
DISCOVERIES
AT
TEL
DOR,
ISRAEL
I39
Figure12.Thmuis,mosaicwith personificationof Queen BerenikeII(?) by Sophilos.Late3rdcentury. Alexandria,Graeco-Roman Museum,inv.21739. Courtesy Deutsches Archiologisches Institut, Cairo
DISCUSSION
25. Graeco-RomanMuseum, inv.21739: Daszewski 1985, pp. 142158, pls. A, 32,42a; Grimm 1998, pp. 79-81, fig. 81:a, c; Dunbabin 1999, pp. 24-26, fig. 25, pl. 4.
Ongoing restoration of the dozens of remaining mosaic fragments and further excavation should yield a more complete picture of the composition. In particular,a second mask is suggested by a fragment of an eyebrow and adjacentwavy strands of hair.The colors used in this piece are identical to those of 7, and the hair is treated similarly.It seems to come from the proper left side of a now-missing mask. Since the eyebrow terminates close to the edge of the face, this mask was also slightly averted from the viewer and foreshortened, facing in the opposite direction as the restored mask. Its thin eyebrow indicates a different charactertype. Many of the other excavated fragments may come from different areas of the mosaic or from another floor entirely.They feature garlands, meanders, and other patterns that, in their current state, cannot be certainly connected with 7-10. Of particularinterest are several fragments that show two pomegranatestogether with red and blue fruits and flowers; grapes clustered among leaves and flowers;and two pinecones hanging by green glass pine needles. The possibility of a second floor is also raised by a decorative fragment that may represent part of Pan'sthrowing-stick, or lagobolon,and with a border consisting of only two rows of red tesserae. The Dor mosaics strongly recallthe technique, palette, and verisimilitude of Hellenistic works such as Sophilos's late-3rd-century personification from Thmuis now in the Graeco-Roman Museum at Alexandria (Fig. 12).25Sometimes identified as a portraitof Berenike II (reigned 246221), this figure also displays a full face, animated countenance, and subtle
I40
ANDREW
STEWART
AND
S. REBECCA
MARTIN
chiaroscurorendered in a virtuoso opusvermiculatum.The mid-2nd century garland of the Hephaistion mosaic from Palace V at Pergamon (now in Berlin) is set against a similar dark ground and contains a variety of scrolling vines from which fruits and flowers spring (Fig. 13). It also contains insects and playful erotes but remains more delicate and less lush and vibrant than the mosaics from Dor.26 The opus tessellatumand vermiculatummask-and-garland mosaics from Delos may provide parallels for the entire composition. The closest come from the mosaic borders of the reception/dining rooms (andronesor oeci) of some of the 2nd-century houses. For example, on frieze M of mosaic 68, a (damaged) garlandlinks bull-heads to theatrical masks.27Originally,there were three masks on each long side, two on each short side, and one angled bull-head at each corner.The eight preservedmasks are spaced 1.10-2.40 m apart and vary in size, but are generally shorter and much narrowerthan the mask on fragment 7 from Dor; the young man (mask I) measures 0.30 (H.) x 0.20 (W.) m.28The frieze is 0.35 m high and encloses several concentric geometric patterns and a very damaged central emblemawith a scene of Athena, Hermes, and an unidentified central figure. The mosaic is framed at the top and bottom by a thick black trim 0.06-0.09 m wide (with seven to ten rows of tesserae).2 These garland-and-mask mosaics are the visual equivalent of the floral "garlands"(stephanoi)of sympotic poetry "woven"for the Muses by the Hellenistic epigrammatists.They are the successors to the garlands that commonly embellish Classical and Early Hellenistic symposion-kraters,at least two of which have been found at Dor. By garlanding the room like
Figure13. Pergamon,garland mosaicfromPalaceV. Mid-2nd century.Berlin,Pergamonmuseum, inv. 70. AfterAvPV.1,pl. 18
26. Berlin,Pergamonmuseum, inv. 70:AvP V.1, pp. 53-61, pls. 17-19, figs. 27-38; Kriseleit2000, pp. 17-23, figs. 8-15. 27. DelosXXIX, pp. 156-169, figs. 55-79, pl. A:3-4. 28. DelosXXIX, pp. 160-163, fig. 70, pl. A:3. 29. Cf. DelosXXIX, pp. 245-251, no. 215, figs. 184-195; Siebert 1971; alsoAvP V.1, pp. 53-74, figs. 67-74, pls. 5,12-15,26-39; Radt 1999, pp. 63-78, figs. 18-22 (Pergamon: PalacesIV and V); and Konstantinopoulos 1986, pp. 148-150, pl. 27; Papachristodoulou1993, p. 37, pl. 22 (Rhodes).
HELLENISTIC
.';
v
Yi_w_ I
Ivv I
-
v
DOR,
vv
ISRAEL
I4I
tvv>iv
'MY-YVV 9
IBBVV W^WVS^sSSv.~~~~
r ...wsS
V
z N
l
v
_1
_ l vv
)V
YY?
VVVV'V
wvvvv _
Ivvv
v
VMVTVV
_NwTVVVV
AT TEL
DISCOVERIES
-VVV
'
VVVTVV_IVVVV
Figure 14. Pompeii, mask-andgarland mosaic from thefauces of the House of the Faun. Late 2nd century. Museo Nazionale di Napoli, watercolor inv. 9994. Aftera 19th-century NormanNeuerberg Archive, by G. Marsigli; of California at Berkeley University
30. See Anth. Pal. 4.1-2 (Meleager and Philip) with Gutzwiller1998, pp. 276-291; cf., e.g., Lissarrague 1990a, p. 197, pls. 17, 19-22; 1990b, pp. 26-29; Stern2000, color pl. 2:1 (Dor kraters). 31. Baldassare1994, pp. 94-96, figs. 12-14. 32. Museo Nazionale di Napoli, inv.9994. 33. Museo Nazionale di Napoli, inv. 9991: Baldassare1994, pp. 104105, fig. 28; Dunbabin 1999, pp. 43-44, fig. 43. 34. Its pervasivedarkbackground here is akin to easternHellenistic mosaics,like those from Pergamon: Dunbabin 1999, p. 44.
the banqueters themselves, the mosaics define it as a hospitable space marked by Dionysiac enthousiasmosand the altered state of consciousness it creates.30 Further comparanda come from the House of the Faun at Pompeii, The mask-and-garlandfrieze whose mosaics date to the late 2nd century.31 that borders the opussectilepavement in the house'sfauces (Fig. 14)32displays many similarities to the Dor mosaic. The field measures 0.49 x 2.81 m and contains two symmetricallyplaced, female theatrical masks facing away from each other, connected by a long garland.The garland is bound together with a spiraling ribbon that is yellow on one side and red and white on the other. It encircles the garland three times and is tied in two large bows, one at either end. The garland contains a range of flora similar to that in the Dor frieze:pomegranatesin variousstagesof ripening,quinces, pinecones, a shoot of grain, an acorn,ivy,and olives. These cover and overlap the edges of a rectilinear dark background set into a white field. The shading is more dramaticthan in fragment 7 from Dor, but the light source is not consistent. Room 34 of the house (probablyits triclinium)was decorated with the so-called Tiger-Rider Mosaic framed by a mask-and-garland frieze.33This frieze shares with the Dor mosaic the variety and opposing orientation of its masks; the multicolored ribbon that binds its garlands;and its dark backdrop.34 Although these parallelsaresuggestive,the extant fragmentsfrom Dor do not as yet entitle us to reconstruct the program of the mosaic floor or floors in any detail. It is likely, however, to have resembled the DelianPergamene andron/oecustype ratherthan the westernfaucestype.The technique, quality, and parallels (stylistic and iconographic) of the fragments allow us to date the mosaic at Dor with some confidence to the mid-late 2nd century.
ANDREW
142
STEWART
AND
S. REBECCA
MARTIN
CODA Although the Nike found in recent excavations at Tel Dor was probably carved by a local craftsman or perhaps a Cypriot, the mosaicist(s) must have been trained in one of the main centers of Hellenistic art, such as Pergamon or-perhaps more likely-Alexandria. Yet the mosaic itself is almost certainly not an import. Both the shelly mortar used for the thin bedding for the tesserae and the coarsermortarbelow look very much like the same, local material, although laboratory analysis of the support is necessary to confirm this observation. The makers of the mosaic surely traveledto Dor to execute it. There is good evidence that Hellenistic craftsmen of all kinds traveledwidely and there is some evidence that mosaicists themselves did so. Thus [Askle]piades from Arados in Syria signed a mosaic on Delos and Dionysios from Alexandria signed another at Segesta in Sicily.35The latter suggests an awareness of and desire for work of a particular style and quality-as does the newly discovered mosaic at Dor. The eagerness of Dor's inhabitants to identify with things Hellenic is evinced in their foundation myth.36The name "Doros"or "Dora"for the site came from a Hellenization of the Semitic "Dor."37 This name is tied to a mythical genealogy of the city, in which Doros, son of Poseidon, was its eponymous founder.38Although the group identity to which this genealogy bearswitness need not be legible as such in the archaeologicalrecord,39 the newly discovered architecturalfragments, Nike, and mosaic suggest that at least some residents of Dor considered themselves Hellenized or even ethnically Greek. Here an immediate question arises over the unusual popularity of the Doric order at Dor. In addition to the fragments published here and those attributed to the propylon of Temple H, the Roman "bouleuterion/synagogue" in area B was Doric, and many stray Doric capitals have been recovered in areas F and H. Did the inhabitants of Graeco-Roman Dor perhaps feel that the Doric order was somehow uniquely theirs? For if a Roman scholar could blandly conflate Doros son of Poseidon with Doros son of Hellen, renowned ancestor and eponymous hero of the Dorians and the Doric order'sinventor, afortiori so, surely,could they.40 The mosaic at Dor is an index of an individual's Hellenization that may owe its genesis to-and perhaps in turn even reinforced-the city's 35. Westgate 2000, p. 273.
36. Fordiscussions of Hellenicand Hellenisticidentity,see Hall1997, 2002; Morris 2000. 37. "Dor":see, e.g.,Joshua17:11; Kings4:11;"Dora/Doros":see, e.g., Polyb.5.66.1; Joseph.AJ 13.223-224; BJ 1.50; cf. Dahl 1915, pp. 16-20. The Hellenized versionwas apparentlycurrent as earlyas ca. 500 (Hekataiosof Miletos ap. Steph. Byz., s.v. Ac)po;; FGrHist 1 F275); it occursin shortened
form (AO)on silvertetradrachmsof Ptolemy V minted in the city in 205, and in full in 139/138 on Tryphon's lead sling bullet;from 64/63 it occurs regularlyon the city'sRoman-period coins. See Dahl 1915, pp. 16-20, 6263, 94-95; Stern 1995, I:B, p. 469, nos. 90-94 (coins), pp. 491-496 (bullet);2000, pp. 211-213,264-267, figs. 142, 182. 38. ClaudiusIolaus ap. Steph. Byz., s.v. Aopo;; FHG p. 363; Dahl 1915,
pp. 16-19, 91-95; Stern 1995, I:A, p. 2; 2000, p. 201. 39. See Waldbaum1997; Hall 1997; cf. Stern 1989; Berlin 1997. 40. Serv.adAen. 2.27: saneDorus Neptunifiliusfuit, undeDori originem ducunt;cf. Vitr. 4.1.3 for Doros son of Hellen and the Doric order.On the origins and developmentof Dorian self-consciousness,see Hall 2002, pp. 82-89.
HELLENISTIC
DISCOVERIES
AT
TEL
DOR,
ISRAEL
I43
self-styled Hellenic filiation. This stunning composition reaffirms that patrons living outside the major centers of art were at times sophisticated and resourcefulenough to turn to these centers to satisfy their tastes. Together with the architecturalfragments described above, the mosaic offers a glimpse of the ways in which self- and group identities could be subjectively formed, not only through myth, but also through material culture.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Although this article is a joint venture, Andrew Stewart is primarily responsible for the sections on architecture and sculpture, and S. Rebecca Martin, who excavatedthe mosaic, for the sections relating to it. We thank Ephraim Stern of the Institute of Archaeology at Hebrew University of Jerusalem,director of the Tel Dor excavations from 1980 to 2000, for permission to publish this material;his former deputy and the current director, Ilan Sharon, for his enthusiastic assistancewith the project both in the field and out of it; and Bracha Guz-Zilberstein for analyzing the ceramic evidence and, along with the other museum staff at the "Glasshouse"at Nachsholim, for offering unstinting help and encouragement. The University of California at Berkeley excavation staff in area D1 were Allen Estes (assistant director);Catherine McGowan (area supervisor); Bruce Redwine (recorder);and Sarah Kamp, Rebecca Martin, Jessica Nager, Annie Smiley, Sarah Stroup, and Martin Wells (unit supervisors). Wells and Kamp excavated the Nike and the architectural fragments. Amanda Adams, John Berg, Erin Dintino, and Svetlana Matskevich created the plans and architecturaldrawings.Tali Goldman and Matskevich assisted with research in Jerusalem;in Athens, Camilla MacKay and the staff of the Blegen Library at the American School of Classical Studies greatly facilitated our work, and Dorothy King kindly shared her expertise in figural akroteria and tombs; in Berkeley, John Ceballos and David Sullivan of the U.C. Berkeley librarykindly located and specially ordered key items for us. The mosaic was expertly conserved and mounted by Orna Cohen and photographed by Gabi Laron; all field photographs were taken by Israel Hirschberg. Ezra Marcus of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem identified the stone used for the Nike and architecturalfragments.Graeme Clarke of the AustralianNational University at Canberraalertedus to comparanda for the architectureand unstintingly furnished information, plans, and elevations of his new discoveries at Tell Jebel Khalid. Susan Downey of the University of California, Los Angeles, kindly communicated her current views on the Zeus Megistos sanctuaryat Dura. For generous guidance on the mosaic's technical, stylistic, and iconographic problems, we thank Katherine Dunbabin of McMaster University; Richard Green of the University of Sydney; Ze'ev Weiss of the Hebrew University ofJerusalem;and Ruth Westgate of Cardiff University. Finally, we are grateful to the three anonymous reviewers for Hesperia,who saved us from several errors and misstatements.
144
ANDREW
STEWART
AND
S. REBECCA
MARTIN
REFERENCES Abbe, E. 1965. ThePlantsof Virgil's Georgics,Ithaca. Plastik4, Alscher,L. 1957. Griechische Berlin. Avigad, N. 1954. AncientMonumentsin theKidronValley, Jerusalem. AvP II = R. Bohn, Das Heiligtumder AthenaPoliasNikephoros(AvP II), Berlin 1885. AvP V.1 = G. KawerauandT. Wiegand, Die PalastederHochburg (AvP V.1), Berlin 1930. AvPXI.2 = O. Ziegenaus and G. de Luca,DasAsklepieion(AvPX.2), Berlin 1975. Baldassare,I. 1994. Pompei:Pitturee mosaiciV: Regio VI,pt. 2, Rome. Bar-Kochva,B. 1996. Pseudo-Hecataeus, On the Jews:LegitimizingtheJewish Diaspora,Berkeley. Berlin, A. 1997. "BetweenLarge Forces:Palestinein the Hellenistic Period,"BiblArch60, pp. 3-51. Bliss, F., and R. Macalister.1902. Excavationsin PalestineduringtheYears 1898-1900, London. Clarke,G. W. 2001a. "The Governor's Palace,Acropolis,Jebel Khalid," in TheRoyalPalaceInstitutionin the First Millennium B.C.:Regional
Developmentand CulturalInterchangebetweenEast and West (Monographsof the Danish Institute at Athens 4), I. Nielsen, ed., Aarhus,pp. 215-247. .2001b. "The Governor'sPalace, Akropolis,"in JebelKhalidon theEuphrates: Reporton Excavations 1986-1996 (MeditArchSuppl.5), Sydney,pp. 25-48. .Forthcoming."JebelKhalid, 2002 Season,"MeditArch16. Clarke,G. W., et al. 2000. "Jebel Khalidon the Euphrates," MeditArch13, pp. 123-148. Coulton,J.J. 1976. TheArchitectural Developmentof the GreekStoa, Oxford. . 1979. "Doric Capitals:A ProportionalAnalysis,"BSA 74, pp. 81153. Dahl, G. 1915. "The Materialsfor the History of Dor,"Transactions of the and ConnecticutAcademy ofArts Sciences20, pp. 1-131.
Daszewski,W. 1985. CorpusofMosaics from Egypt 1: HellenisticandEarly RomanPeriod,Mainz. DelosV = F. Courby,Le PortiquedAntigoneoudu nord-estet lesconstructions voisines(DelosV), Paris 1912. DelosXI = A. Plassart,Lessanctuaireset lescultesdu Mont Cynthe(DelosXI), Paris 1928. DelosXXIX = P. Bruneau,Lesmosaiques (DelosXXIX), Paris 1972. Downey, S. B. 1988. Mesopotamian Alexander ReligiousArchitecture: throughtheParthians,Princeton. . 2003. "MesopotamianReligious Architectureafter the Greek Conquest:New Evidence and New Instituteof Ideas,"Archaeological America,104thAnnualMeeting: Abstracts26, pp. 119-120. Dunand, M., and R. Duru. 1962. OummElAmed, Paris. Dunbabin, K. 1979. "Techniqueand Materialsof Hellenistic Mosaics," AJA83, pp. 265-277. 1999. Mosaicsof the Greekand RomanWorld,Cambridge. Dura II = P. V. C. Baurand M. I. Rostovtzeff,eds., TheExcavationsat Dura Europos:PreliminaryReports II, New Haven 1931. Ermeti, A. L. 1981. LAgoradi Cirene III.1:Il monumentonavale,Rome. Fedak,J. 1990. MonumentalTombsof theHellenisticEra:A Studyof Selected Tombsfromthe Pre-Classicalto the EarlyImperialEra, Toronto. Fisher,C. S. 1904. "The Mycenaean Palaceat Nippur,"AJA 8, pp. 403432. Garstang,J.1924. "Tanturah(Dora)," Bulletinof theBritishSchoolofArchaeologyinJerusalem6, pp. 65-75. Gawlikowski,M. 1996. "Thapsacus and Zeugma:The Crossingof the Euphratesin Antiquity,"Iraq58, pp. 123-133. Grimm, G. 1998. Alexandria:Die erste Welt, Konigsstadtderhellenistischen Mainz. Grote, U. 1992. "Bauplastikaus Pergamon,"in Mousikosaner:Festschrift fir Max Wegnerzum 90. Geburtstag, O. Brehm and S. Klie, eds., Bonn, pp. 179-187.
Guimier-Sorbets,A.-M., and M.-D. Nenna. 1992. "L'emploidu verre, de la faience,et de la peinturedans les mosaiquesde Delos," BCH 116, pp.607-631. undklassiGulaki,A. 1981. Klassische zistischeNikedarstellungen, Bonn. Gutzwiller,K.J. 1998. PoeticGarlands: HellenisticEpigramsin Context, Berkeley. Hall,J. M. 1997. EthnicIdentityin GreekAntiquity,Cambridge. .2002. Hellenicity:Between Ethnicityand Culture,Chicago. Harrison,R. 1962. "Plants,"in The New BibleDictionary,J. Douglas, ed., Grand Rapids,pp. 10051006. Herbert,S. C. 1994. TelAnafa1.1-2: Final Reporton TenYearsofExcavation at a Hellenisticand Roman Settlementin NorthernIsrael(JRA Suppl. 10.1), Ann Arbor. Joyce,H. 1979. "Form,Function,and Techniquein the Pavementsof Delos and Pompeii,"AJA83, pp. 253-263. King, D. L. V. 2000. "The Sculptural Decoration of the Doric Order, ca. 375-31 B.C."(diss. King'sCollege, London). Konstantinopoulos,G. 1986. ApXala P68oo,Athens. Kriseleit,I. 2000. AntikeMosaiken, Mainz. Ling, R. 1998. AncientMosaics,London. Lissarrague,F 1990a. "Aroundthe Krater,"in Sympotica:ASymposium on the Symposion,O. Murray,ed., Oxford,pp. 196-208. .1990b. TheAesthetics of the GreekBanquet:Imagesof Wineand Ritual,A. Szegedy-Maszak,trans., Princeton. Marcad, J. 1951. "Les sculpturesdecorativesdu Monument des Taureaux a D61os,"BCH 75, pp. 55-89. Mollard-Besques,S. 1963. Catalogue raisonnedesfigurineset reliefsen et terre-cuitegrecques, 1trusques, romains2: Myrina, Paris. . 1972. Catalogueraisonnd des et terre-cuite en figurines reliefs et romains3: grecques,etrusques,
HELLENISTIC
Epoqueshellenistiqueet romaine, GreceetAsieMineure,Paris. as Cultural Morris, I. 2000. Archaeology Words and Thingsin IronAge History: Greece,Malden, Mass. Netzer, E. 2001. Hasmoneanand Herodian PalacesatJericho.Final Reports of the 1973-1987 Excavations1: JeruStratigraphyandArchitecture, salem. Nielsen, I. 1994. HellenisticPalaces: Traditionand Renewal, Aarhus. Pakkanen,J.1998. TheTempleof AthenaAlea at Tegea:AReconstruction of thePeristyleColumn,Helsinki. Papachristodoulou,I. 1993. ApXac'a P68o: 2,400 Xpd6va,Athens. Ploug, G. 1985. Hama 3.1: TheGraecoRomanTown,Copenhagen. Poulsen,B. 1997. "The Sculpturefrom a Late Roman Villa in Halicarnassus,"in Sculptorsand Sculptureof Cariaand theDodecanese,I. Jenkins and G. B. Waywell,eds., London, pp. 74-83. Purgold,K. 1881. "Nike aus Megara," AM 6, pp. 257-282. Radt,W. 1999. Pergamon:Geschichte undBauteneinerantikenMetropole, Darmstadt.
DEPARTMENT BERKELEY,
OF CALIFORNIA OF HISTORY CALIFORNIA
AT BERKELEY OF ART
94720-6020
[email protected]
S. RebeccaMartin UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT BERKELEY,
OF CALIFORNIA OF HISTORY CALIFORNIA
[email protected].
AT BERKELEY OF ART
94720-6020
edu
AT
de l'ArgoRoux, G. 1961. L'architecture lideaux IVe et IIe sieclesavantJ.-C. (BEFAR199), Paris. Schober,A. 1951. Die Kunstvon Pergamon,Innsbruck. Shoe, L. T. 1936. Profilesof GreekMoldings,Cambridge,Mass. Siebert,G. 1971. "Surle mosaiquede l'habitationV de l'ilot des bijoux a Delos," BCH 95, pp. 147-165. Slane, K. 1997. TelAnafa2.1: The Hellenisticand RomanFine Wares (JRA Suppl. 10.2), Ann Arbor. Stem, E. 1989. "The Beginning of Greek Settlement in Palestinein the Light of the Excavationsat Tel Dor,"in RecentExcavationsin Israel: Studiesin IronAgeArchaeology (AASOR49), S. Gitin andW. G. Dever, eds., Winona Lake, Ind., pp.107-124. . 1995. Excavationsat Dor:Final ReportI:A-B (QedemReports 1-2), Jerusalem. .2000. Dor:Rulerof the Seas, 2nd ed.,Jerusalem. funeraStucchi, S. 1987. "L'architettura ria suburbanacirenaicain rapporto a quelladella choravicinoreed a quellalibya ulteriore,con speciale riguardoall'etaellenistica,"QAL12, pp. 249-377.
Andrew Stewart UNIVERSITY
DISCOVERIES
TEL
DOR,
ISRAEL
I45
Talbert,R. A., ed. 2000. TheBarrington Atlas of the Greekand RomanWorld, Princeton. Waldbaum,J.C. 1997. "Greeksin the East or Greeks and the East?Problems in the Definition and Recognition of Presence,"BASOR305, pp. 1-18. Webb, P. 1996. HellenisticArchitectural Sculpture: FiguralMotifsin Western Anatoliaand theAegeanIslands, Madison. Webster,T. B. L. 1961. Monuments IllustratingNew Comedy(BICS Suppl. 11), London. . 1969. MonumentsIllustrating New Comedy(BICS Suppl.24), 2nd ed., London. Webster,T. B. L., J. R. Green, and A. Seeberg.1995. Monuments IllustratingNew Comedy(BICS Suppl. 50.1-2), 3rd ed., London. Westgate, R. 2000. "Pavimentaatque emblematavermiculata:Regional Styles in Hellenistic Mosaics and the First Mosaics at Pompeii," AJA 104, pp. 255-275. Wiegand, T., and H. Schrader.1904. Priene,Berlin. Yalouris,N. 1967. "Ta axpoTiopa Tob vato T;S 'Ap?iittao;,"ArchDelt 22
A', pp. 25-37.
HESPERIA
72 (2003)
PagesI47-234
A
LATE
MEDIEVAL SETTLEMENT AT PANA KTO N
ABSTRACT Excavationsin 1991 and 1992 partiallyuncoveredthe remainsof the late medievalvillagethat overliesthe ruinsof ancientPanakton.Dated to the 14thandearly15thcentury,the settlementwasbuiltandoccupiedat a time in whichcentralGreecewasruledby competingWesternpowers;both the identityof the residentsandthe medievalnameof the villageremainopen questions.This reportpresentsthe domesticstructuresexcavatedto date,as wellasthe ceramics,coins,andtoolsassociatedwithrurallife andthe agrarianeconomy.The reportalsodiscussesthevillage'scentralchurch,its carved andpainteddecoration,andthe burialsthatsurrounded it.
INTRODUCTION Panakton is locatedabovethevillageof Prasinoon a summitofthe ParnesKithaironridgeline,midwaybetween Athens and Thebes (Figs. 1, 2).1 Dominatedby the higherpeaksof Parnesto the eastand Kithaironto the west,Panaktoncommandswide views to the north and south and is conspicuous frommanydirections.Athens,Megara,andThebes arehiddenbehindinterveningridges,but fromthe ruinedmedievaltowerat the 1.This reportrepresents thework ofseveralindividuals. The firstfour sections (Introduction, SiteSurvey, Excavation Methodology, andDomesticArchitecture) andthe last(HistoricalSummary) werecoauthored by Sharon E.J. GerstelandMarkMunn; Gerstel is alsoresponsible forthe discussion of the centralchurch,the ceramic finds,andAppendix1.The remaining sectionsareby HeatherE. Grossman (Architectural Sculpture) and EthneBarnesandArthurH. Rohn (Medieval Burials); Appendix2 is by
Machiel Kiel.We thankDavidJacoby andAmyPapalexandrou forcommentingon anearlydraftof thisarticle.We aregratefulto the Hesperiareviewers fortheirthoroughandinsightfulcomments. We alsowishto thankallof thosenamedin the Acknowledgments atthe endof thisarticle. The excavations wereundertaken in collaboration withthe FirstEphoreiaof Byzantine Antiquitiesandthe Ninth Ephoreia of ClassicalandPrehistoric Antiquities. We thankthe directorsof both ephorates, andCharisKoilakou,
Vasilis Aravantinos, andKonstantinos Sarris, in particular, fortheircollaboration andsupportthroughout the course of excavation andstudy.The project wasdirectedbyMunn,assisted byGerstel,PatrickThomas,Mary LouZimmerman Munn,andCarl Lipo. A list of otherstaffmembers and excavators is providedin the Acknowledgments . Unlessotherwisenoted,all illustrations arefromthe project archives.
I48
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
Figure1. View of Panakton(center, on honzon) fromSkourta
summitof Panakton(elevation714 masl;Fig. 3), stretchesof the main routesbetweenthesecentersarein clearview.The site is alsosituated betweentwoimportant Byzantinemonasteries. HosiosMeletioscanbe seenon the lowerslopesof Kithairon just over4 km to the west.The churchnowdedicated to theVirgin,Zoodochos Pege,2oncethekatholikon of a largemonastery affiliatedwith HosiosMeletios,is locatedon the northfaceof a ridgeboundingthe SkourtaPlain.3The plain(average elevation530 masl)extendsnorthandeastfromthe foot of Panakton. In theMiddleByzantine period,its principal settlements werelocatedat LoukisianearPrasinoandat AyiosNikolaosandAyiosGeorgiosnear modernSkourta.4The fivemodernsettlements inthisuplandbasin,known as the Dervenochoria, "villages guardingthe passes," includePyli (formerlyDervenoSalesior Salesat),Skourta,Stephani(formerlyKrora), Panakto (formerly KakoNiskiri),andPrasino(formerly Kavasala).5 These villages,builtin the Turkishperiod,flankedan ancientand medieval routethatpassedthroughthemountains andconnected AtticawithBoeotia.Earlytravelers to theregionfollowedthesameroute.Althoughthey leftvividaccountsof the plain'sresidents, agricultural features, anddomesticarchitecture, theirdescriptions providelittleinformation aboutits antiquities.6
The identification of the archaeological ruinson this hilltop,most notablythe ancientfortification walls,hasbeenof interestto scholarsof ancientGreekhistory;it is nowgenerally agreedthattheseremainsmark thesiteof Panakton, a Classical garrison fortress firstmentioned byThucydides.7 The investigation of the ClassicalandEarlyHellenisticphases of Panakton promises to yieldinformation abouttheconstruction, population,andfunctionof Atticborderfortresses.8 Of no less importance, however, arethesite'slatemedieval remains, thehousesandsmallchapels of an agrarian village.While medievalsettlements of this typearewell attestedin writtensources,9 the physicalremainsof actualvillageshave yettobefilllyexplored. Panakton's locationwithinterritories heldbyWesternrulersmakesits investigation particularly interesting andraisesquestions aboutthe dailylives of Byzantinepeasants,now underforeign overlordship.l°
2. It is nowgenerallyacceptedthat the monastery shouldbe identifiedas thatof theMotherof God,mentioned in theLife of St. Meletios.SeeBouras 1993-1994,p.34. 3. Orlandos1935. 4. MunnandZimmerman Munn 1990,pp.38-39. 5. KoderandHild 1976,p. 96. For the modernhistoryof thevillages,see Tsevas1928,pp.380-384.Fortherole of the Dervenochoria in theTurkish acbmlnlstratlon ot tne reglon,see Giannopoulos 1971,pp.141-146.See alsoAppendix2. 6. Wheler1682,pp.333-334; Chandler1776,p. 174;Hobhouse 1813,pp.285-286;Gell 1819,pp.50 56;Dodwell1819,pp.51-52;Leake 1835,pp.369-370. 7.Thuc.5.3.5,18.7,39.2-3;5.42. Fortheidentification of the siteas Panakton, seeVanderpool 1978. 8. Munn1996. 9. Laiou-Thomadakis 1977. 10. Historiansandarthistorians havepreviously studiedquestionsof identityof localpopulations under foreignrulein the medievalMediterranean.The Panaktonremainsprovide the opportunity to investigate the dynamicsof relationships betweenthe indigenous, Orthodoxpopulationand Westernrulersin anarchaeological context. .
.
.
P
.
Figure 2. Northwest Ataca and
t
2
t
f
s
-rf
-
\
'
<--
.
;.'Ef
A LATE MEDIEVAL SETTLEMENT AT PANAKTON
< || 2 withmodern Boeotia southeast 20 kg 1ll sitesaround o andlateme&eval towns 1lilSlilililillXlililililililililililililililillilllulililililil theSkourtaPlain
ov
<
I49
< |
",-\__-v-
i 11)
'< --;'¢;
providesa wealthof material of medievalPanakton The excavation villagesingeneral.Findsfromthecentralchurch forthestudyof medieval of a smallreligious aboutthe paintingandfurnishing offerinformation of skeletalremainsandburial fortheanalysis aswellasmaterials structure usedto adornthebuildatthevillagelevel.Thestudyof sculpture practices for alsoresponsible withtheworkof artisans ingrevealscloseconnections of HosiosMeletios of thenearbymonastery decoration the 12th-century andsuggestsfilrtheravenuesfor andits metochia(monasticdependency) of ecclesiasandthesecondaryuse of regionalworkshops theinvestigation ceramicsraisesquestionsaboutthe ticalcarving.Analysisof Panakton's workwaresaswellasthelocationof a regional of functional distribution ofthevillage's mostofthevesselsonsite.Theexcavation shopthatproduced anddailylifein the aboutdomesticarchitecture housesyieldsinformation latemedievalperiodfor a segmentof societythathas left virtuallyno writtenrecords. desettlement a short-lived haverevealed Twoyearsof investigation of dailylifeis evidenced hardship production.The pendentonagricultural impressedon the bonesof both men and by stressmarkspermanently wereengaged Thatthevillagers the church. around in and womenburied (24), tools,suchasa plowshare in theagricultural is revealed in cultivation andlargestoragevesselsthatwerefoundwithindomesticcontexts(18, or numerous 19).The absenceof costlyarticlesof personaladornment of theinhabitlevel the economic that suggests vessels ceramic imported antswasnot high.The finestglazedvesselsandmostpreciousmetalobwith the church;simplesgraffltobowlsandplain jectswereassociated waressufflcedforthehome.Althoughthepreciseidentityof thevillagers
ISO
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
Figure3. Panakton:medievaltower
andthe medievalnameof Panakton remainopenquestions, we propose that the inhabitants of the settlementwereOrthodox.Theirreligious identityis manifested in findsrecovered in the church,includinga possibleasterisk(63)anda largesectionof a templonepistyle(71).Theresidentsremembered theirByzantinepastthroughtheirreuseof sculpture carvedduringimperial controlof theregionandthroughthepossession of Byzantinecoins,longoutof circulation, oneof thempiercedforsuspension(seeAppendix1).We suggest,on the basisof textualsources,that Panakton in thelatemedieval periodwasheldbya foreignlandlord, in the mannerdescribed in Catalandocuments forotheragrarian settlements in thisregionduringthisperiod,andthattheprominent towerthatcrowned the settlement proclaimed landownership anddemonstrated a readiness to defendterritory. SITE SURVEY Thetoweron thesummitof Panakton haslongbeena conspicuous landmark(Fig.3). Dueto its prominence, thesitewasoccasionally noticedin passingbytravelers ofthe18thandearlyl9th centuries, butit seemsnever to havebeenvisitedbythem.TypicalarethenotesmadebyWilliamGell uponhisarrival atPyli(calledbyhim"KakoSialesi") onhisitinerary from AthenstoThebesin 1805:"Theplainorvalleyof KakoSialesiis situated upona steepof Mt.Parnes,ata considerable elevation abovethevalleyof the Asopus.Thereareseveralvillagesnearit, suchas Kabasabati [i.e., Kavasala], withits castleon a hill.''llThe nameof this"castle" seemsto havebeenforgotten; thereis presently no reasonto believethatit shared thenameof thevillage,Kavasala (nowPrasino), thatwaslaterestablished at its foot.The earliestmentionof anyof the present-day villagesin the Dervenochoria, DervenoSalesi,is in an Ottomanregisterof 1521.12 To date,we havefoundno description in Ottomanorearliersourcesof a villagein theregionthatfitsthecharacteristics of medieval Panakton.l3
11. Gell 1819,p. 55. 12. Skourtais notyet mentioned in 1540and1570butdoesappear in the 1642polltaxregister. Forthe periodbetween1570and1642,no OttomanrecordsforBoeotiahaveyet beenidentified. 13. Svoronos(1959,p. 55) suggestedthatthevillageof Pileana,which is mentionedin thelate-llth- orearly12th-century CadasterofThebes, shouldperhapsbe ident;fiedas modern-dayPyli.This identification cannot be provenwithanycertaintyandresults of archaeological surveyin the areado not supporthabitationin thisperiod.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
I5I
F igure4. Myli: medievaltower
14.Dodwell1819,p.51. See also the noticeby Gell 1819,p.55:"The towerandpassof KakoSialesitoward Thebes.Thereareno positivevestiges of remoteantiquityon thisspot,butit hasbeenfortifiedbywalls,aswellas bythe tower,yetvisible." 15.Munn1989,pp.232-235; MunnandZimmerman Munn1989, 1990.The catalogues of medievaltowersin AtticaandBoeotiapresentedin Lock1986andLangdon1995do not includethe Pylitower.Lock(p.118) reportsthe towerat Panaktonsolelyon thebasisof its noticeby scholarsof classicaltopography. 16.Papadopoli 1893,p. 197,no.4. 17.MunnandZimmerman Munn 1989,pp.118-120,cat.nos.137-143, pls.XI,XII,XXXtV,XXXV. 18.Papadopoli 1893,p.253, no.9. 19.MunnandZimmerman Munn 1989,pp.119-120. 20. Munn1989,p.235.
Earlytravelers paidcloserattentionto themedieval towerthatstood on therockycrestabovethepassatPyli,directlyacrosstheplain(Fig.4). Writingof histripin 1805,EdwardDodwellprovides thefullestdescription:"Abovethe village[Kakasialesi] is a ruinedtoweron a rock,in a strongposition,andevidently erectedto guardthepass.It is apparently of Venetianconstruction; andtherearenottracesof antiquity, exceptat the footofthehill,wheresomefoundations ofwalls,composed of largerough blocks,indicate,perhaps, oneof the ancientAtticforts.''14 A moreaccuratedatingof the Pylitowerandthe medievalremainsat Panakton was not established untiltheseandothermedievalsitesin the vicinitywere studiedinthecourseofintensive archaeological surveyconducted between 1985and1989.15 Surveyon thesiteof thePylitowerdiscovered a singleVenetian torneselloof GiovanniDolfin(1356-1361),16 aswellaslatemedieval sherds fromglazedbowlsandcookingwares,whichwereidenticalin fabricand decoration to vesselssubsequently excavated atPanakton.17 Surveyonthe site of Panaktonrecovered numerous latemedievalsherds.Thesefragmentsincludeda glazedbowldecorated with incisedconcentric circles andthe raisedbasesof late medievalfinewarevessels.A torneselloof TomasoMocenigo(1414-1423)18 wasfoundin thefieldsbelowthesite.19 After analyzingpotteryrecovered fromthe summitof Panakton,the surveyors concluded: "thehomogeneity of the potteryat Panakton suggeststhatthe medievaloccupation therecanbe placedin thelaterfourteenthandfifteenthcentury, probably notlastingverylongintotheperiod of Turkishrule."20 Twoseasonsof excavation confirmed andrefinedthe surveyfindings:the medievalphasesof Panaktonlastedfor littlemore thana century, beginning intheearly1300sandendingbeforetheTurkish period. Unlikethe slighttraceof ruinsof lessthana quarter hectarearound thePylitower,thesiteextending downslope fromthetoweratPanakton is
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
I52
o
_
_
20m
'
X
_/
10
11
muchmoresubstantial. An areaof approximately a hectareboundedby tracesof Classical fortification wallsslopesgradually to thesouthfromthe summit(Fig.5).Withinthisarea,on a seriesof moreorlesslevelterraces runningeast-west,aresubstantial rumsof domesticandpublicstructures. The evidenceof reusedClassicalmasonryandthe abundance of prehistoric,Classical, andHellenlsticsherdson thesitedemonstrate thatit has beenan attractive placeforsettlementat severalperiodsin the past.Its commandingeriew, natural defensibility, andtheavailability of waterfrom a perennial springhalfwayfromthesummitto theplainon thewestside haveclearlyrecommended thesitewhenevera community of a fewhundredindinduals required a secureresidence inthisarea.Bytheevidenceof survey, confirmed byexcavation, thelasttimethatthe sitewasinhabited wasin thelatemedieval period.
Figure5.SsteplanofPanaktonwith medieval features. Contourinterval lm.
A LATE MEDIEVAL SETTLEMENT AT PANAKTON
I53
The similarity of thefindsbetweenPanakton andPyliandthecomparableconstruction of theirtowerssuggestthatthe sitesarecontemporaryandperhaps evenrelated. Thetowersareintervisible, andeachcommandsa viewof the immediateapproaches to the SkourtaPlainon one side,suggesting theircombinedutilityforwarningtheinhabitants of the plainof approaching dangers. In thisandotherrespects, thesearetypical of medieval towersfoundthroughout AtticaandBoeotia.21 ThePanakton toweris nearlysquarein plan,measuring6.64 x 6.69 m with a wall thickness of 1.40m.Dressedblocks,reusedancientmasonry, reinforce the cornersofthe structure; thewallsarecomposed of localstonessetin fairly regular courses.Onoccasion, bricksplintsleveloutthestonecourses. The Pylitoweris constructed in a similarfashion.Bothtowersarenowdiminishedin sizedueto erosion.Localresidents recallthatthePanakton tower oncehada lower,vaultedchamber; thesereportshaveyet to be verified throughexcavation of the heavyrubblefallnowsurrounding thebaseof the tower.Futureinvestigationof the towermayclarifyits original filnction. EXCAVATION METHOD OLOGY Inthesummers of 1991and1992excavations wereconducted forthefirst timeatPanakton.The studyofthefindsfromthisfirstprogram of excavationwascompleted in thesummerof 1999.Thisreportpresentsa detailed overviewof the medievalremainsexcavated thusfar.22 Followinga brief introduction to theexcavation methodology, wediscussthesite'sarchitecturalremains,as well as ceramic,metal,andglassfinds.Reportson the architectural sculpture andthemedieval cemetery followdiscussion of the site'scentralchurch.23 Medievalcoinsfoundon sitearecatalogued in Appendix1. Appendix2 presentsinformation fromOttomanarchiveson settlements in theplainduringtheTurkishperiod. The principal objective of the 1991seasonwasto obtaina sampleof stratigraphy acrossthe site in orderto establishthe spatialanddepositionaldistribution of theremains of thevariousperiodsrevealed bysurvey. To thisend,it wasdetermined thata seriesof 1 x 2 m testtrenches would beplacedsystematically acrossthesiteandexcavated to bedrock. The site is naturally alignedverycloseto the cardinal pointsof the compass, with the longitudinal axisof severalbuildingsalignedeast-westwiththe terracesandwithcrosswallsrunningnorth-south withtheslope.In orderto minimizethechancesof excavating testtrenchesthatparalleled wallsbut did not crossthem,it was decidedthattest trenchesshouldnot follow thisalignment.Therefore, a reference gridof 20-msquares (designated by alphanumeric coordinates as indicatedin Fig. 5) wasestablished across thesite,anchored atthesurveypinatoptheconcretecolumnonthetower 21.SeeLock1986,wherethese towersresemble hiscommon typeB, p. 105;seealsoLangdon 1995. 22.Forpreliminary analysis of these
remains, seeGerstel1996. 23.Theprehistoric andClassical phasesof thesiteuZill bepublished separately.
I54
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
atthetopofthesite,androtated clockwise 20degrees fromcompass north.24 Withinevery20-msquarethesame5-m squarewasdesignated forsampling,25 andthe1 x 2 m testtrenchwasselectedforexcavation withinthis square. Following thismethod,seventeen testtrenches wereopened,thirteenof whichwereexcavated to bedrockat depthsrangingfrom0.10 to 2.60 m belowpresentgroundsurface.26 All testsproduced medievaltiles andsherdsin theiruppermost strata;fourrevealed nothingbutmedieval deposition to a depthof asmuchas0.75m to bedrock;27 nineencountered remainsof wallsthatstoodin themedieval period.28 Thesefindingsconfirmtheimpression givenbysurface sherdsandrubblepilesthattheentire areawithinthecircuitof theruinedancientwallswasoncefilledwiththe buildings, yards,andintervening pathsof a medieval village. Beginningin 1991andcontinuingin 1992,someof the mostconspicuoussurfaceremainswereclearedof overlying rubbleandexcavated. A magnetometry surveyrevealed a strongmagneticanomaly atonepoint, andthistoowasexcavated (HouseIIIin Fig.5).Thetwoseasonsof work uncovered two churches,threecompletehouses,wallsfromadditional houses,andportionsof thesettlement's cemetery. DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE Mostof the remainson sitecanbe identifiedas smallhouses.Basedon surfacesurveyof rubbleremainsandsystematic testtrenches, we estimate thatat leastthirtyhousesoncestoodwithinthe circuitdefinedby the ruinsof theancientfortifications. Thereis no clearindication thata continuouswallwas erectedaroundthe medievalsettlement,althoughthe wallsof housesconstructed on theedgesof theterracemayhavecreateda barrier.29 ThePanakton housesprovideimportant, well-dated material for thestudyof domestic architecture inmedieval Greece.30 Dividedintoelongatedplansandsquareplanscentered on a courtyard, thehousesareconstructed oflocalstonesandwereoriginallyroofedwith ceramic tiles.Floors 24.The datumpointon the survey columnis markedaselevation713.852. This pointwasdesignated N(orth) 1000/E(ast)1000m on oursurveygrid, andmarksthe southwestcornerof the 20-m squareF8, so that,forexample, the southwestcornerof 20-m square K8is pointN 900/E 1000.Additional datumpointswereestablished by pinssetin concreteat N 929.279/E 1040.565(datum1), andN 908.392/E 1010.717(datum2). 25. Five-metersquaresarenumbered1-16, westto eastbeginning fromthe northwestcorner.Foreven spatialdistribution of samplingunits, we arbitrarily investigated square6 in every20-m square. Twoexceptions
weredictatedby the presenceof built featuresor steepdeclivity. Withinthese squares,1 x 2 m testtrencheswere placedin the southeastcorner.Adjustmentsweremadein caseswherethe presenceof featuresorbedrockpreventedexcavation. This testingprocedurewasdiscontinued afterthe first season;thesesquaresyieldeda consistentstratigraphic sample. 26.The following1 x 2 m test trenches(a fewenlargedto 2 x 2 m) wereexcavated: H9-6, I7-6, I9-6, I10-6,Ill-lO,J9-6,J10-6,J11-6, K8-6,K9-6,K10-6,K11-6,L9-6, L10-6,L11-6,M10-6,M11-2.Depositionwasgenerallydeeperdownslope. Excavation ceasedin K8-6,L9-6,
M10-6,andM11-2 beforebedrockwas reached. 27.The followingtrencheshadonly medievaldeposition: H9-6, I7-6, I9-6, J9-6. 28.The followingtesttrenches containedmedievalwalls:I9-6, I10-6, Ill-lO,J10-6, K8-6,K9-6,K10-6, L10-6,M11-2. 29.The Classicalcircuitwallwas originallymadeup of mudbricksabove a stonesocle,andthereforeexistedas no morethana foundationin the late medievalperiod. 30. See Coleman1986,pp.141149,forthe excavation of a 12th-or 13th-century housewithsimilarconstructionfeatures.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
I55
weremadeof packedearthandclay.Dueto thedensityof rubblefillfrom collapsed housewalls,doorvvays areoccasionally difficult to identify. Among thoseexcavated so far,thereis no evidencethatanyhousehadmorethan a singlestory. Bothmedievalandearlymodernhousesin thisregionaregenerally modestin sizeandbereftof amenities.John Hobhouse, whospentChristmaseve of 1809in Skourta,described his experience of a houseas "the worsthovelof whichwe hadeverbeeninmates. The cowsandpigsoccupiedthe lowerpartof the chamber, wheretherewereracksandmangers andotherappurtenances of a stable,andwewereputin possession of the upperquarter. Wewerealmostsuffocated withthesmoke,a commoncalamityin Greekcottages,inwhichthefireis generally madein themiddle oftheroom,andtheroof,havingnoaperture, wascoveredwith largeflakes of soot,thatsometimes showered uponus duringthenight.''3l Hobhouse describesa small,single-storied long housewith a singleroomdivided intotwosectionsbya changeof floorlevel. JohnSibthorpoffereda first-hand description of thesamehousetype basedon anovernight stayin thenearby villageof Koundoura onNovember16,1794:"Thehouses,covered withpantiles,consistof a singleroom, witha door-way in themiddle;theareais dividedintotwoparts,theone servesforthestable,theother,whichrisesa foothigher,is tenantedbythe peasantandhis family;in the centeris a fire-place, the smokepassing throughapertures madein the roo£"32 Manyof the traditional housesin theDervenochoria arebuiltaccording tothissimpleplan,whichwaspopularuntilthebeginningof the20thcenturyin Greece.33 Inthesingle-story, elongatedhousesin the region,the livingquarters of the familyandthe stablesforanimalsformedpartof a continuous architectural shell;individualroomsweredividedbya narrow crosswallandaccessed byseparate doorvvays.34 Chimneysarelocatedat the centerof the shortwallsof the houses.Familiarity withthesetraditional housesandthe livingarrangementsof thefamilyclarifies certainaspectsof thehousesof medieval Panakton.Forexample,both the late medievaland earlymodernhouses havetwoconnected butdiscretespaces,oneforhumanhabitation, andthe otherforanimalsor storage.Also,terracotta smokeholeswerefoundin the courseof excavation immediately outsidethe housesin the midstof wallandroofdebris(seebelow,Figs.11,25).Theirdiscovery, seemingly disassociated fromhearths,maysignalthat theywereonce locatedat the edgesof the roofs,at the top of a wall,as arechimneyson the early modernhouses. HOUSEI (SQUAREJ10)
31. Hobhouse1813,p. 285. 32.J. Sibthorp,in Walpole1817,
P 33. Demetsantou-Kremeze 1988 pp.22>233, pls.31-38. 34. Stedman1996.
HouseI, consisting of tworoomsona north-south axis,liesparallel to the westwallof thechurch(Figs.6, 7).The entirestructure measures 13.8m fromnorthto southandhasawidthrangingfrom4.8 to 5.0 m.Thesouth roomwasthefirstto bebuiltanda slightlysmallerroomwasaddedto the north.An additional wall,whichdescendsfromthe southeastcornerof the houseandrunsparallelto thewestwallof the church,mayhavedefinedthe house'scourtyard andmayhavealsoservedto isolatedomestic
I56
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
Figure 6. HouseI:plan
activities fromthoseof the adjacentecclesiastical structure andits surrounding graveyard. A surfaceof packedearthwithgravelto thewestof thehousemayhaveformeda paththatranon a north-southline,connecting thelowerlevelsof thesettlement to thetower(Fig.5). Thelower,southern room,withaninternaldimension of 6.0x 3.3 m, waspartially excavated in 1991;a testtrench(J10-6)dugon theeastside oftheroomdisturbed thelineof thewall.35 Thewallsof thesouthroom, 0.75m thick,areconstructed of rubblemasonry withbricksplintsusedto even outcoursesof localstone.Theentrance to theroomliesonthesouth sideandhassmoothjambs.The northwallis bowedslightlyinward, perhaps dueto pressure exertedbytheabuttingeastwallof thenorthroom. The1991testtrenchshoweda depositional patternthatis commonto all ofthemedieval buildingsexcavated to date:a thicklayerof largebuilding stones (approximately 0.30 m) coversa layerof rooftiles(approximately 0.20m).Belowthe tile layeris a shallowlevelof fill overpackedearth, which represents themedieval floor.Thefloorlevelrestsdirectly onalayer ofHellenisticrooftiles.A singlemedievalcoin,a deniertournois,36 was recovered in thetilelayerof thistrenchandsuggestsa 14th-century date for thehouse'soccupation (seeAppendix1).Unfortunately, thecoinis not wholly legibleandcannottherefore providea morerefineddate.Given the relativelysmall sizeofthetesttrench(2x2 m),a surprising numberof small findswererecovered belowthe tilelayer,thatis, at thelevelof the
35. In 1992,debriscoveringthe roof tiles, includinga largenumberof stones from the fallenwallsof the house,was removed in preparation forexcavation within thisroom. 36. Inv.no. 1991-16.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
I57
Figure7. HouseI:viewfromsouth
37. Nails,or nailfragments, from thisroomareinventoried as 1991-21, 1991-60,1991-68,1991-72,1991-99, 1991-101,1991-110,1991-647, 1991-648,1991-657,1991-681, 1991-682.
floor.Completenailsandnailfragments werefoundin the tileleveland werealsoassociated withthe floorsurfaceof the southroom.37 The remainingitemscanbe associated withdomesticandagricultural activities: a knifewitha bonehandle,a sectionof a beltbuckle,a plowshare, andan equineshoe(23-26). The upper,northroom,measuring 5.4 x 3.5 m on the interior, was completely excavated in 1992.Thewallsof thisroomarenotbondedwith thoseofthesouthroom.Thestratigraphy matched thepatternestablished inotherdomesticdepositsonsite.Largestonesthatonceformedthewalls ofthehouselayovera thickstratum ofrooftiles,excavated asstratigraphic units(SU)111,118,and129.The highestconcentration of tileswascollectedin the northeastcornerof the room,demonstrating thatthe roof collapsedfirstin this sectionandthat tiles subsequently slid into the building's interior. The entrance to theroomis locatedatthewestendof thesouthwallwherea Classical, inscribed stoneformeda flatthreshold. The blockwasplacedwiththe inscription sideup butturnedsideways; bothedgesof theinscription werewornbytreadmarks. Thedefiningfeatureofthe northroomis thestriated bedrock, which runsdiagonally throughthe upperhalfof the room,creatinganuneven andprotruding surface.In the northeastcorner,the bedrockformsthe foundation forthewall;theremaining wallsappearto bebuiltdirectlyon the soil.In the lowerhalfof the room,to the southof the bedrock,the flooris formedof earthmixedwithsmallpebbles. A number ofceramic vessels(7-19),primarily cookingwaresandlarge, coarsepotsintendedforstorage, wererecovered fromthelevelbelowthe rooftiles,i.e.,restingon thefloorsurface. Thesefinds,particularly in the southeast cornerofthe room,occurin unit133.Units126and131define anindentation withinthebedrock alongtheroom's eastwall.Thisnatural indentation mayhaveservedasa storageniche.Sixironnailswerediscoveredbelowthe tilelayerin thiscornerof the room,suggesting, together
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
I58
withthe largenumberof pots,the construction of a storageshelfor the attachment of metalpegsforsuspension.38 Mostofthepotteryfromsealed layerswasfoundin thesouthern halfof theroom,i.e.,to thesouthof the protruding bedrock. Fragments of cookingpots(10,13)werealsorecoveredin unit129,thetightlypackedsoilwithinthebedrockin theroom's northhalf.Thisunitcontained ahighconcentration ofbarleygrains, which mayindicatethatthe upperpartof the room,with its protruding floor surface, wasusedasa storagebin.39 The recovery of numerous fragments of cookingpots,mixingbowls,andstoragevesselssuggeststhatthisroom wasusedto housestaplesfordomesticuse. A singlecoinhelpsto situatethepotteryfoundwithinthisroomchronologically: a Venetiansoldinonuovomintedunderthe dogeFrancesco Dandolo(1329-1339)wasfoundimmediately adjacent to theexterior face of thelowestcourseof theeastwall,withina levelof earththathadaccumulatedagainstthe foundation(seeAppendix1).4° Althoughthe coin doesnotprovidea securedatefortheconstruction oftheroom,theperiod of thecoin'scirculation is coevalwiththeuseof theroomandthepottery foundwithinit. P O T T E RY
1
1999-4:Bowl
Fig.8
Fromtile layerof northroom(SU 120).Est. Diam.0.19 m. Rim fragmentof thin-walledbowl. Smooth,pink fabric(7.5YR7/4). Yellowglaze overwhite slip on interior;white slip aroundrim on exterior.Incisedgroovesbelowlip andrim on interior;incisedwavyline on uppersurfaceof rim. Fora possiblebasefragmentfromthe samevessel,see 3.
2
1999-28:Bowl Fig.8 Fromfloordepositin the southeastcornerof northroom(SU 133).P.H. 0.045,est.Diam.0.145m. Fivejoiningfragments of vertical,taperedrimand upperbody.Hard-fired fabricwithredcore(2.5YR6/8). Monochrome brown glaze(7.5YR5/8) coatinginteriorandexterior surfaces. Glazethickeratlip. Cf.WilliamsandZervos1994 p. 34 no.48 pl. 8. Fora baseof a similar vessel,see43.
38.Thenallsarelnventorled as 1992-235(SU111);1992-320(SU 131);1992-321(SU131);1992-327 3 1992-217:Bowl Fig.8 (SU133);1992-328(SU133);1992Fromwalldebrisimmediately belowsurfacein northroom(SU 103) PH 390(SU131).Additional nailsfound 0.05,Diam.of foot0.055m. High ringfoot andlowerbody.Hard-fired, pink in thecourse of excavating thisroom (5YR7/3)fabricwithsmallgritinclusions.Traces oftwotripodmarksoninterior. 1992159,1992160,1992178,1992 Yellowglazeoverwhiteslipon interior; smalltraceof glazeon exterior. Interior 240. incisedwithspiralcomposed of fivecirclinglinesatjointof bodyandbase. 39.Barley grains wereidentified Basesfromsimilarvesselsalsorecovered in SU 113,117,and119arecata- through seedflotation inunits111, loguedas 1999-11,1999-12,and1999-15.Fora possiblerimprofile,see1. 129,and131.These unitsimmediately overlie bedrock, whereprehistoric 4 1992-420: Juglet Fig.8 deposits oftenoccuronthesite. Fragments of glassandsherds from Fromfloordeposltbelowroofales ln northroomfound ln lndentaton ln ' medleval coarse wareswerealsofound bedrock(SU 126).P.H.0.097 Diam.of base0.057m.Twojoiningfragments of ln theseunlts,aswereFlnalNeollthlc baseandlowerbodywithhandleattachment. Moderately coarse,reddish-yellow sherds. Ottoman taxregisters record (5YR7/6) fabricwithgrayandwhitegritinclusions. Upperbodypaintedwith barley asa major cropgrownin the whiteslipwithtracesofgreenleaf(?)outlinedindarkbrownglaze;lowerbodyand plain(seeAppendix 2). interiorcovered in clearglaze. 40.Inv.no.1992-197.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
IS9
3
'''\\\\\\ Figure8. House I: fine wares(19). Scale 1:2
,
//y
X f :9
Handle from similarjuglet cataloguedas 1999-36. Cf. Armstrong1989, p. 20, no. 49, for an exampleof a slightlylargerjug with similardecorationdated to the 13th century. 5
1992-301:Mixingbowl
Fig. 9
Fromtile layerin north room (SU 111). P.H. 0.128, Diam. at base 0.115, Diam. at rim 0.359 m. Thirteen fragmentsof base, wall, and horizontalrim formingcompleteprofile.Coarse,reddish-yellow(5YR 6/6) fabricwith black andwhitegrits.Attachmentforwide,verticalhandleat rimandbody(0.07 m below rim).Deep green,mottledglaze on interiorandon portionsof uppersurface of rim. Fora similarbowl,thoughsmallerandwith a differentrim,see 27. 6
1999-l9:Bowl Fig.9 Fromwall debrisimmediatelybelow surfacein northroom (SU 103). P.H. 0.052, est. Diam. 0.24 m. Single fragmentof verticalrimwith incurvinglip and upperbody.Moderatelycoarse,reddish-yellow(5YR6/6) fabricwith sandyinclusions.Ridgeon exterioratjoin of rim andbody. Similarfragmentfoundin surveyof Pylitower:MunnandZimmermanMunn 1989, no.142. Cf. Sanders1993, no.53, for an early-13th-century examplefrom Sparta. 7
1999-53:Mixingbowl(?) Fig. 9 Fromfloordepositbelowrooftilesin northroom,southeastcorner(SU 133). P.H. 0.035, Diam. at base 0.11 m. Single fragmentfromthick ring base.Gritty, reddish-yellow(7.5YR6/6) fabricwith fine white inclusions.
V
X
F
e
-@
I60
J
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
-
M. MUNNy ET AL.
5
- --J 10 6
/X
=
=-X\s
7
ll
r
P-
-
-
s
-
E
-
f
12
8
f -
-
-
)
9
^
-
tsv
13
A LATE MEDIEVAL SETTLEMENT AT PANAKTON
Figure9(oppositeJ. HouseI:plain waresandcookingwares(5-13).
8
Scale 1:3
(Su
I6I
1992-421:Cookingpot Fig.9 Fromfloordepositbelowtiles in northroom;indentationin bedrock 111, 126,131).P.H.0.12,Diam.0.14,W. of handle0.029m.Fourteen join-
ingfragments of rim,upperbody,handle.Gritty,reddish-yellow (7.5YR7/6)fabricwithblackandwhiteinclusions. Thickened, upturned rimwithinnerresting ledge.Widehandlewithgrooveon uppersurfaceattached0.021m belowrim. Exterior surface burnedgrayto blackatbase. 9
1999-51:Cookingpot Fig.9 Fromtilelayerin northroom(SU111).Est.Diam.0.20m.Singlefragment of slightlyevertednm with innerrestingledge.Gritty,reddish-yellow (7.SYR 7/6)fabricwithdarkorange,black,andwhiteinclusions. Widehandle(0.037m) withgrooveon uppersurface. 10 1999-58:Cookingpot Fig.9 Fromtile layerin northpartof northroom(SU 129).P.H.0.032,Diam. 0.19m.Threejoiningfragments brokenbelowrim.Gritty,reddish-yellow (5YR 7/6) fabricwithsmallpittingandblackandwhiteinclusions. C£ 30. Similarfragment foundin surveyof Pylitower:MunnandZimmermanMunn1989,no.141. 11 1999-29:Cookingpot Fig.9 Fromtilelayerin northroomanddepositundertilesin southeast cornerof northroom(SU 111,133).P.H.0.039,Diam.0.175m. Fivefragments of elongatedverticalrimwithslightlyinturnedlip.Grittyfabricwithblackandwhite inclusions. Brokenatjoinof rimandshoulder. Burnedoverexterior surface. 12 1999-31:Cookingpot Fig.9 Fromtilelayerin northroom(SU 111).P.H.0.078,Diam.0.13 m. Single fragment ofvertical rimandupperbody.Gritty,reddish-yellow (7.5YR6/6)fabric withblackandwhitesandyinclusions. Horizontal ridgeson exteriorsurface belowrim. See31 forthesamerimprofileon a slightlylargervessel. 13 1999-30:Cookingpot Fig.9 Fromtilelayerin northpartof northroom(SU111,129)anddepositunder tile layerin indentation in bedrock(SU 126).P.H.0.031,Diam.0.137 m. Six fragments of nmbrokenabovejointobody.Gritty,reddish-yellow (5YR7/6)fabricwithfinewhiteinclusions. Grooveunderlipon interior. 14 1999-35:Closedvessel Fig.10 Fromtilelayerin northroom(SU111)anddepositundertilelayerin indentationinbedrock(SU126).P.H.0.084,Diam.of base0.089m.Fivejoiningfragmentsof flatbaseandlowerbody.Gritty,reddish-yellow (5YR6/6) fabricwith micaceous inclusions. Fragment of similarbasefromSU 111inventoried as 1999-38. 15 1999-33:Cookingpot Fig.10 Fromtilelayerin northroom(SU 111,118)anddepositbelowtilelayerin southeastcornerof room(SU 133).P.H.0.019,Diam.of base0.10 m. Seven
t
o
E
S
w
S. E. J. GERSTEL, I62
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
14 17
\<
-
/
/g{fof{-ffvosss\\sa5Wawss\s t
l
\ w
z
w
S
\>@;
18
7 \
7 \
}''s "
16 joining and one additionalfragmentof flat base.Coarse pink (7.5YR7/4) fabric with blackandwhite inclusions. Similarfragmentsfrom SU 111,118,132, and 133 inventoriedas 1999-32, 1999-37,1999-38, and 1999-42. 161999-57:Pitcher Fig.10 Fromtile layerin northroom (SU 111). P.H. 0.055 m. Fragmentof trefoil rim and upperneck.Coarse,reddish-yellow(5YR 7/6) fabricwith grittyinclusions. Incised,decorativebandon upperneck0.018 m belowrim. 171999-49:Storagepot Fig.10 Fromtile layerin northroom(SU 111),deposit belowtilesin indentationin bedrock (SU 131) andsoutheastcorner(SU 133). P.H.0.126,Diam.at rim0.087, W. ofhandle0.038 m. Fourfragmentsof verticalrim andcompletehandle.Coarse, reddish-yellow (7.5YR7/6) fabricwith fine white inclusions. 18 1999-80:Amphora Fig.10 Fromtile layerin northroom(SU 111);deposit belowtiles in indentationin bedrock (SU 126). P.H.0.17, Diam. of rim0.08, W. of handle0.07 m. Nineteen joining fragmentsof rim, shoulder,and two handles.Thick straphandle rises
Figure10. House I: cookingand coarsewares.Scales1:3(14-17) and 1:6(18)
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
I63
verticallyfromshoulderandattachesto upperbody.Coarse,reddish-yellow(5YR 6/6) fabricwith white and deep orangegrits.Tracesof burningon exteriorrim andshoulder.Incisedwavydecorationon shoulder;horizontalgrooveson exterior of body.Rib on neck. 19 1992-306:Pithos
Fig. ll
Fromtile layerin northroom(SU 111) anddepositbelowtilesin indentation in bedrock(SU 126). H.0.86, Diam. at base 0.475, Diam. at rim 0.475, interior Diam. of restingledge 0.37 m. Manyfragmentsyieldingnearlycompletestorage jar.Flat base. Inwardand outwardthickenedrim, interiorrestingledge for lid. Broadstraphandleattachedat rim.Coarse,reddish-yellow(5YR6/6) fabricwith largestoneinclusionsanddeeppitting.Smoothedsurfaceon exterior,roughsurfaceon interiorwith fingersmoothingoverjoinsbetweenbuiltsections.Twowavy lines incisedbetweenthreegrooveson the shoulder. A slightlysmallerpithos of similartype and fabricwas excavatedby Charis Koilakouat Akraiphnionin 1998. Koilakoudatesthe pithosto the end of the 12th or beginningof the 13th century.4
TILESANDSMOKEHOLES 20 1999-17:Smokehole Fig. ll Fromwall debrisin northroom (SU 103). P.L.0.23, W. fromrim to smoke hole 0.155, H. of flange 0.11 m. Single fragmentpreservingcompleteprofile. Coarse,reddish-yellowfabric(7.5YR 6/6) with stone inclusionsand pitting on surfaces.Fingerimpressionsaroundexteriorin continuousrows. Forotherexamples,see 38,39. 21 1999-6:Pan tile Fig. ll Fromtile layerin northroom (SU 111). L.0.58,W.0.35,Th.0.025 m. Five joining fragmentsof completepan tile. Coarse,reddish-yellow(5YR 6/6) fabric with redandwhitesmallstoneinclusions.Smootheduppersurfacedecoratedwith impressedS curvein center;two parallelgrooveson shortside for adhesion. Cf. AvP XV.2, pp.3>33, fig.10, pl. 14, for Late Byzantinetiles of comparablesize, profile,and decoration. 22 1999-7:Covertile Fig. ll Fromtile layerin northroom(SU 111). L.0.54,W.0.215,Th.0.025 m. Six joiningfragmentsof completecovertile. Coarse,reddish-yellow(5YR7/6) fabric with small stone inclusions.Smootheduppersurfacedecoratedwith impressed wavygrooveat centerandtwo parallelgroovesat shortend. Cf.AvPXV.2, pp.30-33, fig.10, pl.14. Additionalcompletecovertilesfrom this house,of similarsize anddecoration,cataloguedas 1999-8,1999-9.
SMALLFINDS
41. C. Koilakou, pers.comm.,2001.
23 1991-78:Ironknifewith bone handle Fig.12 Fromfloorof southroom(SU 11). L.0.215, Max.W. of blade0.024 m. Iron bladecomposedof two fragments.Bone handlein two partsattachedto bladeby fourrivetsof which two arepreserved.Upperandlowerbone handlecracked. Similarbone-handledknives,datedto the 13th and 14th century,havebeen recoveredin excavationsof the CarevgradPalace in Bulgaria;Georgievaand
I64
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
20
19 -
#
21
22
Figure11. House I: pitios (19), smokehole (20), androofdles (21, 22). Scale 1:6
-@^ ;_ SeeForbes 0 _$;_t pp. .0.038 From ment From 311-313, kg. floor floor holes Half 378-379, ofof ofsouth south iron on fig. preserved shoe room room 1976. 122. and (SU (SUFor four 11). 8). similar additional L. half L.0.04,W.0.041,Th.0.004 0.084, horseshoes W. fragments. 0.031, fromTh. Two a comparable 0.005 squared m. Iron m. attachWeight 12thbent ;
s
iS.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
.
SETTLEMENT
Figure12.HouseI:iron bonehandle(23)
X
.
I65
AT PANAKTON
knife with :-
-
__s
I
_ .','
Ct.
i
.0
1
0
7
.7.:-fff:
f
ff.
.
I
>:::
:
Et;; A::
:0.''; Figurel3. HouseI:ironplowshare (24)
_
_ 0
.
0 te
0
Nikolova1974,pp.216-219,fig.33. Seealsoa bone-handled knifefromThebes published in Papanikola-Bakirtzi 2002,p.109.Thisknife,datedto the12thcentury,measures 0.22m inlength.Twoadditional nonjoining bladefragments from thenorthroomof thehouse,SU 135,areinventoried as 1992-389. 24 1991-42:Ironplowshare Fig.13 Fromfloorof southroom(SU8). L. 0.128,Th. 0.015m.Weight0.365kg. Brokenatthestem.Heavilycorroded exterior. Typeis simplescratch-plow orard. i:: W
_W
_
'-'A
t
^,
25 1991-51:Equineshoe
Fig.14
;
::
Similarhorseshoes, datedto the13thand14thcentury, havebeenrecovered in excavations oftheCarevgrad PalaceinBulgaria; Georgieva andNikolova1974,
0^
;;:_ f'_ _ _
._
centurysettlement inThrace,seeFolet al.1989,fig.143. _
t
__
_ Figure14.HouseI:equineshoe(25)
26 1991-120:Beltbuckle intothecircular shapeof a bucklewithoneflattened side.Tonguemissing,butit maybe catalogued as 1991-680,whichhasthesamedimensions (L.0.041m) as thewidthof thebuckle.
I66
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
M. MUNN,
0
ET AL.
5m .
:
l
Figure15. House II: plan
Figure 16.HouseII:viewfromeast
HOUSEII (SQUAREK9) House II comprises tworoomsfacingeachotheracrossa courtyard and, thus, presentsa differentplanfromthatof the elongatedhouseson the site(Figs.15,16).Thebackwallof thewestroomusesawallof theadjacent Classical towerasa foundation. In 1991,surface clearing revealed the outlines of theroomsof thishouse.A 2 x 2 m sondagewasdugwithinthe west room,whichhasinteriordimensions of 5.7x 3.3 m.A layerof boulders covereda levelof medieval tiles.Belowthetileswasa medieval floor level, whichcovereda layerof HellenisticrooftilesmixedwithClassical and Hellenisticpottery. A secondtest trenchdugin 1991 (K9-6)encountered the exterior face of thenortheast cornerof theeastroom.Thisroom,measuring 3.8x 2.8 m on theinterior, wasexcavated in 1992.Thesetworoomswereconnected bya crosswallthatdefineda courtyard betweenthemanddivided
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
I67
themfroma secondhouse,whoseoutlinesappeared in surfacecleaning immediately to thenorth.The eastroomwasexcavated to thelevelof the packeddirtfloor.Fournailswerefoundatthislevel.42 Originally theroom wasroofedwith terracotta tiles;thesewerefoundembeddedin a thick layerof clay.43 In the sametilelevel,a fragmentof carbonized woodwas uncovered togetherwithironnails,perhaps partof thewoodenframework thatsupported theroof.A thickerlayerof tileswasdeposited onthesouth sideof theroom,witha heavyconcentration in thesouthwest corner. The tiledistribution demonstrates thattherooffirstcollapsed in thesouthwest corner,allowingthe tilesto slideintothebuilding's interior. A singledeniertournoisdatedto thereignof PhilipofTarentum (1307-1313)44 was foundbelowthesurfacein a levelof fallenwallmaterial (seeAppendix1).
27
28
30
P OT T ERY 27 1999-153:Mixingbowl
Figure17. Houses II andIII: cookingandcoarsewares(27, 28, 30). ScMe1:3
42.The nailsareinventoried as 1992-118,1992-323,1992-324, 1992-427. 43. In sizeandfabric,the tilesfrom thisroomareidenticalto thosefound in HouseIV. 44. Inv.no. 1992-84.
Fig.17
Fromtile layerof eastroom(SU 201). H.0.095, Diam.at base0.09, Diam.at rim0.265 m. Fourjoiningfragmentsformingcompleteprofilewith slightlyraised ring base and rolled,slightlyoutturnedrim. Coarse,reddish-yellow(5YR 6/6) fabricwith blackandwhite inclusions.Deep greenmottledglazecoatinginterior anduppersurfaceof rim.Ridgeunderlip on exterior. Fora similarbowl,thoughlargerandwith a differentrimprofile,see 5. 28 1999-136:Mortar(?) Fig.17 Fromtile layerof eastroom(SU 201). H.0.142, Diam. at base0.18, Diam. at rim 0.21 m. Two joining fragmentsformingcompleteprofileof smallbasin or high-walledmortar.Coarse,gray(1OYR8/2) fabricwith blackand white stone inclusions;pittingon surface.Smoothedinterioranduppersurfaceof rim.
SMALL FINDS 29 1999-112:Knifeblade Fromfloor level of east room (SU 214). P.L. 0.045, P.W. 0.016 m. Single fragmentof ironknifeblade.Heavilycorroded.
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
I68
ocCo>mO
o _
_
_6m
Figure18.HouseIII:plan
HOUSEIII (SQUARES I11, J11) Remains of HouseIIIwerediscovered in 1991aftera magnetometry surveyhaddetectedthepresenceof a magneticanomalydirectlyeastof the mainchurch(Figs.18, 19).45 Excavation uncovered thetopof a subterraneanstoragepithos(thesouthern of thetwopithoiin Fig.18).Thepithos wasconstructed of rubbleandcementin theformof anovalflattenedon thebottom,1.15m acrossat the mouth,1.50m at maximum diameter, reaching a depthof 1.50m.Thepithosappears to havebeenintentionally filledwithearthandrubble,andcoveredwithflatstoneslabs.No visible traces of burning werediscovered, andthecauseof themagneticanomaly remains unknown.46 The cornerof a roomto the southwasexposedin surface cleaning. Twoof thewallsof thisroom,at theedgeof theterrace, appear to havebeendestroyed byerosion. A roomto thenorth,withinteriordimensions measuring 2.2x 4.0 m, contains asecondsubterranean storage pithos.Thefoundations ofthewalls ofthisroom,likethewallfragments of the southroom,laycloseto the modern groundsurface, so thattheoriginalfloorof theroomandtherim ofthepithoshadbeendestroyed. Construction of thisroomencroached onthe edgeof a cemeteryextendingto this point,approximately 6m east of the apseof the mainchurch.The foot of grave1992-4(Fig.77, below) laybelowthefoundations of theroom'ssouthwest corner. Because thecemeterylies close to the west side of thesestoragestructures, it seems probable thatassociated housefoundations remainto bediscovered totheeast.
45.The magnetismof thisfeature indicated firingat a temperature approximating thatof a kiln.S. Papamarinopoulos madethissuggestionbased oncomparable anomaliesencountered onothersites. 46. S. Valamotihaspointedout that residue in storagepitsis sometimes fired to eliminatemolds.It is possible that thiscleansingprocessexplainsthe magnetism associated withthispithos, but the factthatit is a uniquemagnetic feature on a sitewithseveralsuchbuilt pithoi remainsa curiosity. Remainsof built pithoihavebeenfoundin squares K8, K10,andLll.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
I69
Figure19. House III:view from south
PO T T E RY
30 1999-184:Cookingpot
Fig. 17 Foundat floorsurfacebesidethe southernpithos (SU 57). P.H.0.064, Diam. 0.21m. Two joining fragmentsof elongated verticalrim and uppershoulder. Rounded, slightlyinturnedlip. Gritty,reddish-yellow(5YR 7/6) fabricwith black and white inclusions.Ridgeson shoulder. Cf. 10. Similarin profileandfabricto a sherd foundin surveyof Pyli tower: Munn and ZimmermanMunn 1989, no. 141.
HOUSE IV (SQUARES L10, L11)
47.It is possiblethatthe claylevel belongs to morethanonemedieval floor andthatthehousemayhavehad multiple phasesof construction or remodeling.
House IV,an elongatedstructure, is situatedat the edgeof the terrace adjacent to the Classicalfortification gate (Figs.20, 21). The house, built on aneast-westaxis,measures 12.2m in lengthandvariesin width from 4.2 to 4.75 m. HouseIV is dividedintothree separate roomsconnected by doorways; the locationof its mainentranceis not clear. The interior dimensions of the eastroomare1.9 x 2.8 m.The center room measures 2.6 x 2.5,andthewestroom,thelargest,measures 4.85x 3.1 m. Excavation in theeastroomendedjustbelowfloorlevel.The easternhalf of thecentralroomwasexcavated to floorlevel,as wasthe entirewest room. Inorderto understand betterthecomposition of thefloor,a shallow sondage wasdugin thesoutheast cornerof thewestroom.Wallconstruction withinthebuildingvariessomewhat, butallthewallshavetwofaces, reuse Classicalblocks,andemploymedievaltilesto level stonecourses. Traces of an earlierfoundation arevisiblein the eastroom,wherea low wall wasuncovered atfloorlevel.Deposition withinthehouseconsisted of wall tumbleabovea layerof rooftiles,whichcovereda layerof compact green-gray clay,generally 0.04-0.08m thick.Thisclaylevel,thebedding on which thetilesoriginally lay,covered a compressed clayfloor,which,in turn, coveredHellenisticfill.47
_
I70
.
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
0
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
5m
Figure20. House IV:plan
|
Figure21. House IV:viewfrom west overroomII
Aswithothermedieval structures onsite,thishousedatesto the14th century. A singlecoinwasfoundwithinthe tile layerof the house,an oboleof WilliamorGuyII dela Roche(1280-1308),whichwaspierced forsuspension (seeAppendix1).48 Theceramic findsincludefragments of glazedbowlswithincised,concentric circlesof the typecommonon the site.49 Fragments of coarsewarestoragevessels(34,36)werefoundin the tiledebrisabovethefloorin thecenterroom;othercoarsewarevessels(33, 37) wereassociated witha depression in the centerroom.A cookingpot (32)wasfoundrestingon the floorlevelin the southwestcornerof the eastroom,whereit hadbeencoveredby clayfromthe fallenroo£The ceramic vesselsrecovered in thisroomaresimilarin fabricandtypeto the assemblage fromHouseI. The discovery of severalsmokeholessuggests thatmorethanoneroomservedaslivingquarters.
48. Inv.no. 1992-219. 49. Fragments fromtwoglazed bowlswithinciseddecoration were inventoried as 1999-98and1999-99 butdo not appearin thiscatalogue. For the type,cf.3.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
I7I
P O T T E RY
Fig.22 31 1999-102:Cookingpot Fromrubbletumblein westhalfof eastroom(L11,SU 107).P.H.0.057, Diam.0.17 m. Singlefragmentof elongatedverticalrim andhandle.Gritty, Twogrooveson (5YR7/6) fabricwithblackandwhiteinclusions. reddish-yellow fromsamevesselinventoFragment of handle.Ridgeson shoulder. uppersurface riedas 1999-103. fromsurveyof Pylitower:MunnandZimmerman Fora similarfragment pot of similarshape,see Sanders1987, Munn1989,no. 141.Fora Corinthian p. 182,no.21,fig.6.21. Fig.22 32 1992-352:Cookingpot Foundon the floorlevelof the eastroom(L11,SU 106).Ninety-sixfragmentsof rim,body,andtwostraphandles.H. 0.22,Diam.of rim0.15 m.Tall, (5YR7/5) fabricwithmanyreddishslightlyflaringrim.Gritty,reddish-yellow gritsandwhiteandgrayinclusions. brownangular Fig.22 33 1999-106:Storagevessel in floorlevelatcenterof centerroom(L11,SU 111).P.H. Fromdepression of baseandlowerbody. 0.123,Diam.of base0.165m. Fivejoiningfragments (5YR6/6)fabricwithblackandwhitegrits.Wavycombed Coarse,reddish-yellow byincisedgrooveson shoulder. bandbordered Fig.22 34 1999-107:Storagevessel Fromtileandclaylayerbelowroofincenterroom(L11,SU109).P.H.0.114, of baseandlowerwalls. joiningfragments Diam.of base0.10 m.Twenty-one Deep whiteinclusions. black and fabric with 7/6) (5YR Coarse,reddish-yellow base. exterior above on greenglazesplattered Fig.23 jarlid 35 1992-403:Storage Fromlowerfill in easthalfof westroom(L10,SU 105).Est.Diam.0.14, (5YR7/6)fabricburned of thelid.Coarse,reddish-yellow Th.0.018m.A quarter to pinkishgray(7.5YR6/2) on upperandlowersurface.Smoothingon upper pointsonupsurfaceandaroundedges.Raisedradialribsandroughlyimpressed persurface. Forsimilarlidsfoundin sitesurveyin theValleyof theMusesanddatedto seeVroom1997,p.208,fig.5;1998,pp.538-539. the 14th-16thcenturies, Fig.24,left 36 1999-100:Pithoslid Fromtile andclaylayerbelowroofin centerroom(L11,SU 109).Diam. of lidwithbroad 0.44,Th. 0.011,W. of handle0.042m.Tenjoiningfragments (5YR6/6)fabricwithmanystoneinclusions. straphandle.Coarse,reddish-yellow Forthepithostype,see19. Fig.24,right 37 1992-423:Pithoslid in floorlevelatcenterof centerroom(L11,SU 111).Diam. Fromdepression ofpithoslidwithknobhandle.Coarse, 0.40,Th.0.015m.Sevenjoiningfragments Smoothed withblackandwhitestoneinclusions. (7.5YR7/6)fabric reddish-yellow on uppersurfaceandbevelededge. as1999-88. of a similarlidcatalogued Forthepithostype,see19.Fragment
-
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
I72
-
r
: -
-
-
-+
y
31
33
'\X\Xl
X I
)
I
t;; I
,1
},
I
/
I
/
11
X
,
I
J; /
/
j
1
1,
/ /
I
1,
' ',/
|
l
8
I
1
|
1
1
I
I ' ;/ /
t_,
'_
I
I
'
I
I
,
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
,
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
/
32
-
-
-
40
Figure22.HouseIV:cookingwares (31,32),coarsewares (33,34),and tile(40).Scales1:3(31-34) and 34
1:6(40)
f
f
f
0
:
X
0:
X
_
2
|
0
;
0
t
7
2
i
0;
0
_L. ?
2
g
0
.
<
i-D
i
f
r:
A LATE MEDIEVAL
<;;(i'
i)
!-)
*
l
: :; i;: ;9ii \:ftH: : t:;: ;: ; : ;:; t t; ;0;; ;N;(0
.td
SETTLEMENT
i.
'
:
-
.:l
5!_l-Qg'B
.
,B
h
t<-0 0e
E
-
AQ;:
S
...
.
,
;e
S
j
0
I73
AT PANAKTON
lW
L
-;:;
*
Figure23. House IV: storagejarlid (35)
-Wed!
|
1
X |
::
f
:5;:
: : :D:Ed;
: :0:7:i:fl::f-ES-:0000ffi-! ::D02-vE-:::jitA.! j
_ zE
:
: :: \ :;. M.
_
:
i::
:
-
.fi:
0
i-.
;
E
i
i:
.-
L;-0-: f:
V z
S
t t (0000
t_ *
_AgA
;
t_g
f
0;
;
,
i;
;E
t
i
.
0
;0
ti;
@
i;;-
itr-
0 .
g_£
t
d
!
;0
E7jE'^'z;z >;Y'X
><-0> ^;:;t - i :;!:;a00>: ;; ;E009 f :9!0 9i40-:: l; ............ .
- E f
f
-:
t;
- -!
S;
.
_
-0E.::
?
.>
--
A:
:A
: ,A
%->
' ;S0f''d ;'''T;iEV'''M'''P' _
:-0: 000:000 ;;f:i :;;::E f0 LLE:L:;! SC;000::{ :;;f00-::t:;0 : L9 4 )
|
,
i; F )00E'-::7;; Edy';t -iS E S7E-
1_W,,-'L';SiSi;
00F _
(36,37)
,99
|
_S
Flgure24. House IV:plthoshds
l?
: : ; XLt it:E SCCE:0:07 0:
-_^.0;0;; D_t'-;ft'-';
7
iS
;:ffi:;00rD; :;di;S;:.d*'':::
:: ::f..;_L:;0;; C
C.
: ;:iVE.:007:! ::::0000:f:
::
7j_L-.X;:X;
,_;:
f:
0
i
;0;00.;i000
i
A .S !;:
'';;.
dE;
'
.
.-.
95; '0i'->0-5
i
'
*"4.
r'
^'
. ' '
................................................................. ' f X .' ^ :5 0 4
05 $ 0 .V90
.'
'
-
ME F',
ve;*A-v ;?
i
"'5'^+
X
-
^
5t'
TILESANDSMOKE HOLES 38 1999-73:Smokehole
Fig.25, left Fromwall tumblein east half of west room(L10, SU 101). P.L.0.55, P.W. 0.15, P.H.of flange0.074, P.L.(smokehole) 0.34 m. Fivejoiningfragmentsconstitutingroughlya thirdoftile. Coarse,reddish-yellow (5YR7/8) fabricwithmany stone inclusions.Tracesof burningon lowersurfaceand on interiorof opening. Punchedcirclesbetweengroovesaroundperimeterof tile.
39
1992-206:Smokehole
Fig.25, right
From wall and roof tumble from the south exteriorof west room (L10, SU 102).L. (tile)0.64,W. (tile)0.38, L. (smokehole) 0.34,W. (smokehole) 0.23, H. of flange0.085 m. Sixjoiningfragmentsgivingfulldimensionsof tile. Coarse, reddish-yellow(5YR 6/6) fabricwith large white inclusions. Upper surface smoothed.Punchedcirclesforminghorseshoesat centerof eachside;incisedpalm frondsor pine treesin corners. Additionalfragmentsof anothersmokehole inventoriedas 1999-74a-c. 40 1992-208:Pan tile Fig.22 Fromlowertile level in east half of east room (Lll, SU 105). L. 0.60, W. 0.38, Th. 0.019-0.032 m. Sevenjoiningfragmentsgivingfull dimensionsof tile.
I74
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
Figure25. House IV:smokehole covers(38, 39)
Reddish-yellow (5YR6/6)coarsefabricwithred,white,andorangeinclusions. Evidenceof smoothing markson uppersurface. Decorated withparallel linesat edge,twostraight, verticallinesatcenterflankedbythick,doublewavylines. Additionaltilesfromthe housecatalogued as 1992-209,1992-210,1992211,1992-212,1992-213,1992-214,1992-215. Thetilesaredecorated withdifferentconfigurations of straight andwavylines.Cf.AVPXV.2, PP.30-33, fig.10, pl.l4, fora LateByzantine parallel.
SMALLFINDS 41 1999-371,1992-65: Knifeblades Fromeastexteriorof eastroomat floorlevelof house(SU201).L.O.O94, 0.051m.Fragments fromtwoironknifeblades; bothbrokenattips.
THE CENTRAL CHURCH Localtraditionascribesnamesto fourof the ruinedchurcheson the Panakton hill;it is impossibleto know,however,if thesenamesreflect theirinitialdedication. Twoof thechurches arelocatedoutsidethewalls of the fortress. A smallabandoned chapelimmediately belowthe main Classical gateis saidto be dedicated to St.Nicholas.A ruinedchapelon the slopesdescending to Prasinocarriesthenameof St. Kyriake; a small shrineis maintained to thisdatewithintherubble. Thusfar,twochurches havebeencleared withinthefortress. Thesmallchapelin squares G8-G9 nearthesummitof thesettlement is saidtobededicated to theAnnunciation.No findswerediscovered duringtheclearingof thebuilding, which restsonbedrock. At thecenterofthesettlement, insquaresJ10-11, is thechurchknown as "Sotera" (Figs.26-28).5°Measuring15 x 5.5 m overall,the churchis sitedon a narrowplateauandis flankedby HouseIII to the eastand HouseI to thewest.Thisis thelargestchurchon siteandit playeda centralrolein thelife of thevillagers. In additionto housingreligiousceremonies,it servedas theburialchurchforPanakton. Excavation revealed
50. Localvillagersbelievethatit wasnearthischurchthattworesistancefighterswereburied.No modern burialshaveso farbeendiscovered nearthe church.Shellcasingsandunfiredbullets,however, wererecovered fromsurfacelevelsin squaresK9,L10, andL11.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
l Figure 26. Church:plan
Figure 27. Church:view fromwest with narthexandtombsfollowing excavation
Figure 28.Church: viewfromeast
_ o
_
SETTLEMENT
5m
AT PANAKTON
I75
I76
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
gravesonthenorth,east,andsouthof thechurch,in additionto twobuilt tombsin the narthex(Fig.27). Illegaldiggingwithinthe churchproper between1993and1998revealed tracesof humanbonesin the centerof the nave;we canassume,therefore, thatburialswerealsolocatedunder thefloorof thechurch. The naveof the churchis constructed fromreusedstones,including sevenstelebasesandan inscribedmonumentbaseof the late4th centurys.c.51Thesestoneswerebuiltinto the wallfabricat variouslevels withoutregardfortheirproperorientation. The double-faced walls,preservedto a heightof 1 m, arecomprised of dressedstonesevenedoutby bricksplints. Thesearesupplemented byroughboulders andsmaller stones culledfromthe site.A dullwhitemortarwithbrokenceramicandstone inclusions is foundthroughout themasonry. Largeboulders setvertically serveasorthostates anddoorjambs, a construction technique thatis commonin medievalGreece.Soonafterthe church's construction a narthex, measuring 4.7x 4.0m,wasaddedto thewestendofthebuilding; itsnorth andsouthwallsarenotbondedto theoriginalstructure. Theouterfaceof thewallsalternates largecutblockswithsmallerstones.The masonryof theinterior faceofthenarthex consistsofsmaller stonessetinevencourses. The naveof thechurchis accessedbytwoentranceways. Uprightstones, includinga stelebase,flankthesouthdoorway. Thewestentrance, which leadsfromthe narthexto the nave,is bordered by dressedstonesset in evencoursesonthesouthandanuprightcutstoneonthenorth.Thewest doorto thenarthexis noton thesameaxisastheoriginalentrance to the church. A benchmadeupof largecutblocksrunsalongtheexterior south wallof thenarthex; thestonesarenotbondedto thechurchexterior. The positionof theapse,whichis off axisbutalignedwiththewest doorof thenave,presentsa curiouselement(Fig.28).Theapse'sdisplacementto thenorthsuggeststhatit wasrebuiltorformedpartof a rebuilding campaign at somepoint,perhapstheresultof earthquake damageor inherentstructural flaws(thereis currently anunevencrackthroughthe exteriorface).The northwallof the churchis 0.40 m narrower thanthe southandwestwalls;in alllikelihood, thewallwasrebuiltsometimeafter its initialconstruction. Anotheranomalywithinthe masonrysuggestsa disturbance to theoriginalnorthwall:a largeboulderthatoncestooduprightatthewestendof thewallfelloverintothenaveandrestson topof thefloortiles(Fig.30,rightside).Thestonecoursesabovethisboulderare largelyintactbut the wallimmediately to its eastnarrows considerably. The northwallof the narthexis alignedwiththe northwallof the nave, suggesting thatanyinterventions in thewallconstruction tookplaceprior to or contemporary withthe construction of the church's westernchamber.Effortsto traceanearlierwallto thenorthof thechurchin a location thatwoluld accountfortheoff-axispositionoftheapseandwestdoorwere interrupted by the discovery of a grave,1992-3,immediately outsidethe northwall,andtracesof otherskeletalremains(Fig.74,below). Threefactorssuggestthatthenavewasoriginally vaulted: thethicknessof thewalls(1 m on thesouthandwest);thelargenumberof stones thatwerefound,togetherwithfragments of rooftiles,in destruction debris;andthe survival of contemporary vaultedchurches in the areawith
51. Munn1996,pp.53-55, pl.20.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
I77
Figure29. Church: mullionandsill fragments fromapsewindow
52. Vaultedchurchesthatmaybe datedto thelatemedievalperiodare foundat Skourtaaswellas Daphni (formerly Darimari), acrossthepassin theAsopusvalley.See Gerstel1996, pls.30,31. 53. Inv.no. 1992-172. 54. Inv.no. 1992-200. 55. Inv.no. 1992-108. 56. Inv.no. 1992-199. 57. Inv.no. 1992-384. 58. Inv.no. 1992-55. 59. Inv.no. 1992-251. 60. Inv.no. 1991-439. 61. Inv.no. 1991-604.Bothpieces arefragments. The sillmeasures 0.39x 0.19 m.The mullion,whichis hexagonalin shapewithanarticulated, squarebase,is 0.24 m high.
similar construction features.52 ThevaultofthePanakton church wasoriginallycoveredwithtilesset into a mortarbed.Numeroustile fragments werefoundin theupperlevelsof theexcavation andonefragment, stillset intoits bedding,resteddirectlyon thefloorlevelof thechurch. The churchis datedby coinsfoundin goodstratigraphic levels(see Appendix1).Fivecoinswerefoundin thenarthex. Fourcoinswererecoveredfromunitsbelowthelayerof roofandtiledebris,thatis, restingon thefloorsurface. Ofthese,threearecoinsmintedforcirculation inVenice's coloniesandone is a deniertournoispossiblymintedin Thebes.53 The Venetian coinsincludea soldinonuovoofAndreaDandolo(1343-1354),54 atornesello ofAndreaContarini (1368-1382),55 andatornesello ofMichele Steno(1400-1413).56 An additional coin,a tornesello of AntonioVenier (1382-1400),57 wasfoundbelowthearticulated skeletoninthenorthgrave of thenarthex. Torneselli ofAndreaContarini58 andMicheleSteno59 were alsofoundin levelsof buildingdebrisexcavated on the westandnorth sidesof the church,respectively. Furthermore, a Venetiantorneselloof AntonioVenier60 was discovered behindthe altarat approximately the sameelevationas thefloortilesat thewestendof the nave.The numismaticfindssuggestthatthechurchwasconstructed in thesecondhalfof the 14thcentury. The narthex wasaddedshortlyafter.Thisdateaccords wellwiththeceramic finds,especially fromthenarthex, andthesurviving fragments of monumental paintingdiscovered in situandin thefill.The churchcontinuedto be in use in the firstdecadesof the 15thcentury. Lateruseof thebuildingis notattestedin thearchaeological record. Thechurchpreserves a number of itsoriginalfilrnishings anddecorativeelements. The originalaltarbase,an orthostate, standsat the center of the curvedapse(Fig.26).The uppersurfacemeasures 0.50x 0.70 m. The prothesis (offering) tablebase,0.30x 0.40m,is locatedon thenorth sideof the church,0.84 m fromthe eastwall.A doublelightwindow originally piercedtheapse'seastwall.Thefragmentary sillandmullionfor the window(Fig.29),61formedfromshellylimestone,werediscovered
_1
w
-
_#D
E
|
|
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
I78
1
S
|
1!l 11!
E_
end
of
M. MUNN,
Ll 1|1
|
i3
ET AL.
2
FD
togetherwith fragments of the altartableimmediately abovethe floor levelof theapse,signaling thattheeastwallcollapsed intothechurchand fractured themarbletabletop. The floorof the churchwasoriginally coveredin ceramicpavement tiles(Fig.30).Thesehada uniformthicknessof 0.04m andweredecoratedwithfourlightlyimpressed patterns: triplezigzag,crescent, parallel curves,andanS shape.62 Themostcompleteexamples werelocatedatthe westendof thechurchandalongthenorthandsouthwalls;thetilesatthe centerof thenavewereundoubtedly crushed whenthevaultfell.A lineof tilescrossesthenaveapproximately 2 m fromtheeastwallandmayindicatethelocationof a templonscreen(Fig.28).63 The evenspacingof the tilesdemonstrates thatthefloorwaslaidin rowsfromeastto west.Pieces of cuttilewereusedto fill the 0.15-mgapbetweenthe endof the pavementandthewestwall.Theearthfloorof thenarthex wascoatedinwhitish-blueplaster. A largenumberof ceramicvesselswerefoundin boththe naveand narthex. Thecatalogue presents vesselsassociated withthefloorlevelsand gravesof thechurch.A fulleranalysis of thechurchceramics is givenbelow(see"Summary of CeramicFinds"). WALL PAINTINGS Morethan2,000smallfragments of paintedplasterwerefoundon the interiorandsouthexterior of thechurchandnarthex, primarily inlevelsof stoneandtile debris(Figs.31-33).The recovered fragments represent a smallpercentage of the decorative program thatwouldhavecoveredthe 62.The tilesmeasure0.47x 0.40 m.The coarse,reddish-yellow (5YR6/6) fabrichaslargestoneinclusions.Thereis no evidencethatthe tileswereevenlydistributed across
nave
the flooraccording to theirpattern. 63. See71 fora probablefragment of the screen.At the samepointalong the southwallwe discovered thepainting of a saint'sgarment(Fig.31).
Figure30. Church:floortiles at west
A LATE MEDIEVAL
Figure31. Church:wallpainting fromsouthinteriorwall.Borderof saint'srobe.
Figure32. Church:wallpainting. Fragmentsfromsteppattern.
Figure33. Church:wallpainting. Fragmentsfromkufesquepattern.
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
I79
I80
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
wallsandvaultof the church.64 Manyof the fragments stillpreserve the mortarbackingthatevenedthewallsurfaceforthe application of paint. Redandbluesegmentsof paintwerefoundin situon thenorthandwest wallsof the naverespectively; thesebelongto the lowestregisterof the walldecoration andwerepresumably protected fromdestruction anddeterioration bytherubblefallfromthewallsandvault. Surviving piecesof plasterfoundwithintherubblefillweredecorated witha widevarietyof ornamental patterns. Therewereno tracesof inscribedletters.Onlytwofragments couldbeassociated withtherepresentationof humanfigures,a footandthehemof a garment. Thesmallfragmentof apaintedfootwitha stripedsandalis theonlycluethatthechurch wasoncedecorated withnarrative scenes.Of thestandard composition of full-length saintsthatdecorated thelowerwallsof churches in thisperiod, theonlysurviving traceatPanakton is theleftedgeof a garment foundon thesouthwallof thenavecloseto itseastend(Fig.31).Setagainsta deep bluebackground, thegarment, a longredtunicandsomesortof a mantle, cascades outward in threezigzagfoldsandterminates in a borderarticulatedbya thickwhitelineenclosingcrosslets. A similardecorative detail canbe seenin mid-13th-century churches in Attica,whereit ornaments theclothingor halosof saintlyfigures.65 The locationof thepainting,at theexactpointwherethetilepavement is interrupted, andthetracesof a vertical redfieldbordered inwhiteto theleftof thefiguresuggestthatthe saintwasdepictedbesidethesanctuary of thechurch; thepaintedborder demarcated thedivisionof ecclesiastical spacesand,asin manylaterByzantinechurches, mayhaveindicatedthelocationof a sanctuary barrier.66 The widerangeof ornamental patternson the fragments fits comfortably withinthe repertoire of decorative schemesusedin paintingin thisregion,andelsewhere, in theLateByzantine period.Twoof thepatternswerefoundin abundance; othersawaitfurtherreconstruction and study. A steppatterndecorates severallargefragments excavated in the church nave(Fig.32).Contained withinarectangular fieldframed inblack, thepatternis set againsta plainwhitebackground enclosedwithina red fieldof color.Withintheframedcomposition, thelightbluestepson the exterior of therectangle arevisuallyanchored to theborderbyambertriangles. Thesemotifs,inturn,encloseredsteppedcrossesdecorated attheir centers withyellowdiamonds withdashespointinginward. A narrowwhite lineanda hintof bluepaintarefoundat theedgeof thefragments. In all likelihood, this is the samebluepaintthatservesas a backdrop forthe sainted figureson thelowerregisterof thewalls.The segregation of the pattern suggeststhatitwasusedto fillanemptyspaceorto separate scenes within the church.The steppatternis popularin medievalchurchesin Greece anditsuseatPanakton situates thesettlement's ecclesiastical paintingwithinbroader trendsof churchdecoration of theperiod. Tracesof ornamental kuSesque paintedin blueandredon a white ground werealsodiscovered duringexcavation of thenave(Fig.33).One ofthefragments is decorated withthetipsof twocuneiform bars,which would havebeenthe uppermost pointof the pattern.Partsof flowering shoots thatusuallyspringat the bottomof the barsarepreserved on a second fragment. Thisdecorative elementwasoftenusedin latemedieval painting to fill spacesbetweennarrative scenesandholyportraits, and examples canbe foundin ruralchurches in AtticaandtheArgolid.67
64. A similarphenomenon of preservation, in whicha relatively small amount of paintedplasterwasfound, wasnotedin excavations of a churchat Nichoria, Messenia.There,the excavators concludedthat"theplasterfragments wouldhavedeteriorated and disintegrated moreeasilyif exposedto plowing andweathering." See Rosser 1983, p. 412. 65. Mouriki1975-1976,fig.74; Panselinos 1991-1992,p. 156,fig.2. Asimilartnotifwasemployedforthe bands thatencircletherowof prophets inthe churchof theTaxiarches; see Panselinos 1991-1992,pp.162-163, figs. 13-16. 66. It is possiblethatsomeof the sculpted worksfoundin the naveof the churchbelongedto a screen.See 71 (Fig.52),whichwasfoundin the northeast cornerof the nave. 67. Coumbaraki-Panselinou 1976, pl. 13;Panselinos1991-1992,p.163, fig. 14.
A LATE MEDlEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
I8I
CATALOGUE POTTERY 42 1991-594:Bowl Fig.34 Fromfloorlevelof southsideof naveanddepositon southexteriorof church (SU 153, 207, 250). Thirteenjoining and two nonjoiningfragmentsof rim and body.P.H.0.086, Diam.0.18 m. Fine,reddish-yellow(5YR6/6) fabricwith small stoneinclusions;tracesof pittingon exteriorsurface.Yellowglazeoverwhite slip on interiorand exteriorof rim. Incisedparallelgrooveson interiorbelow lip, at join of rim andupperbody,at middleof body,and atjoin of bodyandbase. Similarto a rimsherdfoundin surveyat Pyli tower:Munn andZimmerman Munn 1989, p.119, no.137. Similarbowls,datedto the 13th century,havebeen found at Thebes and Corinth.Cf. Koilakou1997, p. 81, fig. 20; Sanders1987, p.165,fig.2.1. 43 1999-181:Bowl
Fig.34
Fromfloorlevelof southside of nave(SU 207,250). Twojoiningfragments of ringbaseandlowerwallof bowl.P.H.0.028,Diam.of base0.05 m. Hard-fired, red(2.5YR5/8) fabric.Strongbrownglazeoverinteriorandexteriorsurface.Tripod markson interior. Fora similarvessel,see 2. 44 1991-595:Bowl
Fig.34
Fromfloor level of south side of nave(SU 207). Fourjoining fragmentsof raisedringbaseandlowerwallof bowl.P.H.0.046, Diam.of base0.067 m. Hardfired,fine reddish-yellow(5YR 6/6) fabricwith small stone inclusions.Yellow glaze overwhite slip on interior;plainexterior.Incisedspiralat join of base and lowerwall. 45 1991-593:Shallowbowl
Fig.35
Fromfill and floor level of nave (SU 101, 201, 206, 207). H. 0.05, Diam. of base 0.055, Diam. of rim 0.153 m. Fourteenjoining and five additionalfragmentscomprisingcompleteprofileof glaze-decorated platewith evertedrim.Fine, reddish-yellow(5YR7/8) fabricwith few inclusions.Greenandyellowglazeover white slip in interior;traceof glazeon exteriorrim andbody. Similarbowls,datedto the mid-13thcentury,havebeen foundat Corinth. Cf.Williamset al.1998, p.236, pl.44:d. See 50 for an additionalglaze-decorated vessel. 46 1999-116:Bowl
Fig.34
Fromfloorlevel of narthexand fill immediatelyabovefloor (SU 306,308). Elevenjoiningandthreeadditionalfragmentsformingcompleteprofile.H.0.07, Diam. at base0.05, Diam. at rim0.12 m. Fine,reddish-yellow(7.5YR7/6) fabric with smallstone inclusions.Slightlyincurvinglip with interiorridgebelow rim. Yellow-greenglazeon interiorovercream-colored slip.Deepergreenglazepooled at lip. Glaze overlip on exteriorwith some drippingon outersurfaceof vessel. Incisedspiralon interiorof base. 47 1999-131:Bowl Fig.34 From fill immediatelyabovefloor level of narthex(SU 306). Two joining fragmentsof ringbaseandlowerwall.P.H.0.032, Diam. of base0.05 m. Moderatelyfine,reddish-yellow(5YR7/8) fabricwith smallstoneinclusions;smoothed
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
I82
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
48
42
\ 43
\
50
44
46
51
Figure 34.Church: finewares.Scales 47
1:2 (42 44, 46 48, 51) and1:3(50)
A LATE MEDIEVAL
Figure35 (above, lefi).Church: fine wareplatefromnave(45). Scale ca. 1:2 Figure36 (above, right).Church: fine warebowlfromnarthexandtomb (49).Scale ca. 1:2
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
I83
exterior withsignsof pitting.Mustard yellowglazeoverwhiteslipon interior; plainexterior. Threeconcentric circlesincisedatcenterof base. 48 1999-145:Bowl Fig.34 Fromfloorlevelofnarthex (SU310).FourJolnlng fragments ofrlngbaseand lowerwall ofbowl.P.H.0.04,Diam.ofbase0.069m.Moderately coarse, reddishyellow(5YR7/6) fabricwithstoneinclusions; pittingon exterior. Yellowglaze overcream-colored sliponinterior. 49 1999-120:Bowl Fig.36 Fromfloorof narthex(SU 309,310)andinsidegrave1992-2.Withinthe tomb,fragments wererecovered in levelsaboveandbelowthemarblecoverslab (SU311,312).Sixteen joiningandeighteen additional fragments ofbodyofglazed bowl.P.H.0.057,est.Diam.0.20m.Fine,hard-fired pink(5YR7/6) fabricwith sandyinclusions. Tracesof twotripodmarkson uppersurface. Incisedwithabstractfloralpattern. 50 1991-644:Jug Fig.34 Fromlevelbelowcollapsed walldebristo the southeastof churchexterior (SU 102).Nineteenjoiningfragments of rimandupperbodyandthreejoining fragments ofbaseofjugletwithtrefoilrim(nearly complete profile). Est.H.0.17, Diam.of base0.07m. Fine,reddish-yellow (7.5YR7/6) fabricwithsmallstone inclusions. Flatbaseoffsetat baseof wall.Narrowhandle(0.018m) attached belowrim.Greenandbrownglazedecoration overwhiteslipon vesselexterior andoninterioraroundrim. See45 fora glaze-decorated plate. 51 1991-27:Pitcher Fig.34 Fromtesttrenchon southsideof church(J11-6,SU 6) in association with graves1991-1to 1991-4.H. 0.094,Diam.atbase0.034m. Sixteenjoiningfragmentsformingcomplete profile.Handlemissing.Coarse,reddish-yellow (7.5YR 7/6) fabricwithmanywhitegrittyinclusions. Deepgreen,mottledglazeapplied unevenly to outersurface.
55
1992-109: -
-
Silverring
/
/
I84
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
<
Fig
38
M. MUNN,
-
-
[Nt00V-0;
f
Es
t
ET AL.
w
/
t-
/
-<W1
I
K
t/bra3 2-=--
to
W-
X
v
\
X
53
' Figure37. Church:plainwareand cookingvessels(52-54). Scale1:3
52 1999-146:Bowl Fig. 37 Fromfloor level of narthex(SU 310). Six joining fragmentsof horizontal, thick rim and upperbody.P.H. 0.097, Diam. of rim 0.30 m. Coarse,reddishyellow(5YR6/8) fabricwith grittyinclusions;pittingon interiorandexteriorsurface.Smoothedon uppersurface.Two bandsof combed,wavylinesbelowrim. 53 1999-142:Cookingpot Fig. 37 Fromfloor level of narthex(SU 310). Thirteenfragmentsformingnearly completeprofile.Est. H. 0.106, Diam. at rim 0.12 m. Vertical,thickenedrim. Singlepreservedstraphandle(W. 0.026 m) attachedat rimandlowerbody.Gritty, light red(2.5YR6/8) fabricwith sandyinclusions.Tracesof burningon exterior. 54 1999-119:Tableamphora Fig. 37 Fromfill immediatelyabovefloorlevelof narthex(SU 306). Fifteenjoining fragmentsof rim,handle,andshoulder.P.H.0.15,W. of handle0.038-0.04,Diam. of rim 0.08 m. Gritty,reddish-yellow(5YR 6/8) fabricwith blackandwhite inclusions.Smoothedsurfaceon rim and outerface of handle.Parallelridgeson outersurfaceof handleand raisedridgemarkingjoin of rim and neck.Handle attachedat neckandupperbody.
SMALLFINDS
Q
.
.
;!. ;0
. ^:;ff: 0f9:";;,,'S" _
;: ;;
-
Er E7E
fi: - i- t: CA. :.:.00. : . !.;
g; :f;
Q
.ET.; j; f.;:
'§A-..L'^s.E.e,'>,',,,'
Fromfill immediatelyabovefloor level of narthex(SU 306). Diam. 0.021, Th. 0.003 m. Narrowstripbent into a circle;bezel missing. 56 1991-384:Bronzelamppendantor censerhandle Fig. 39 Fromfloorlevelon southsideof nave(SU 207). H. 0.036,W. 0.047 m. Copperalloyhandlewith threeloops for chainsuspension.
Figure38. Church:silverring(55)I -
-
go'
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
i;
0
_ | | "°TtU < ^t 'Y4ti,Me3
JM
o
.:
. s:.,;
j 4ov eS
I85
AT PANAKTON
r--
*
: l§t/.3yS
F
t i;:00 1.
q
( :;): T
a\t
Figure39 (above,leJ:t).Church: bronzelamppendantorcenser handle(56) Figure40 (above,right). Church: fragments of possiblecenser(57)
.
,
_
.;.
_
.
..
V
Similarhandlesfoundat Corinthhavebeendatedbroadly to theByzantine period.Cf. Corinth XlI,p. 128,nos.861,862. 57 1991-345:Bronzecenserbaseandlid(?) Fig.40 Fromfillbehindprothesis tablebase(SU208).Diam.of upperplate0.055, Diam.of lowerplate0.08m.Upper,circular discwithholeforsuspension attachment.Lowerdischassixpreserved rivetsforattachment. 58 1991-445,1992-163:Bronzehandles Fig.41 Fromfloorsurface of nave(SU207,250). Twohandlesfromvessel.Curved profile.L. 0.063,0.075 m.A holeat thebottomof thehandlesusedforattach-
mentto vessel. Cf.CorinthXlI, p. 75, no.565, "Byzantine period." Similarhandlesfoundin Frankish burialsin theHephaisteion in Athens;Ivison1993,fig.263. 59 1992-131:Bronzecandleholder
Fig.42 Fromlevelof destruction debrisalongnorthexteriorof church(SU 404). Upperspikefromcandlestick holder.Est.L. 0.093 m. SeeCorinth XlI,p. 128, no.864, "LateByzantine context." 60 1992-201:Bronzecuporbowl
Fig.43 Fromfloorlevelof narthex (SU308). L.0.044,W.0.023, Th.0.001m. Rim andupperbodyof flattenedbronzevessel.Stampedlilysurrounded by beaded circlebelowband. 61 1992-164,202,204,236: Bronzewickholders Fig.44 Fromfill andfloorlevelof narthex(SU306,308,310). Of varyinglengths
andwidths,68 thestripsarepiercedonceortwiceata singleendin orderto thread thewickthroughthemetalstrip.
Figure41. Church: bronzehandles fromvessel(58)
68. Representative dimensionsare providedin centimeters: 1992-8:L. 1.4, W. 1.13;1992-89:L. 3.97,W. 1.7; 1992-90:L. 4.1,W. 1.9;1992-164: L. 6.2,W. 1.01;1992-202:L. 7.5, W 1.5;1992-204(twofragments):
L.4.9,4.22, W.1.77,1.78; 1992-236: L.9.45,W.1.7; 1992-257:L.4.63, W.1.24; 1992-287:L.2.3, W.1.28; 1992-296:L.2.05,W.1.36; 1992-310: L.2.3, W.1.25.
^;-Aj
I86
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
M. MUNN,
;¢i
ET AL.
i
it4E
2 e
::
:E
E
Figure44. Church:bronzewick holders(61). Left to right:1992-204, 1992-164,1992-202, 1992-236. Figure42. Church:spikefrombronze candleholder(59)
Figure43. Church:rimof bronze bowl(60)
-
-
-
-
Figure45. Church:asterisk(?)(63)
Figure46. Church:ironnailsfrom naveandnarthex(65). Left to right, upperrow:1992-174,1992-258, 1992-21,1992-122,1992-121, 1992-173,1992-77,1992-304, 1992-123;lowerrow:1992-417, 1992-99,1992-229,1992-98, 1992-189,1992-307,1992-315, 1992-395.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
I87
Similarstripshavebeenfoundat numerousmedievalsitesin Greeceandare oftenassociated withchurchesorburials.ForwickholdersfromNichoria,Messenia, see Rosser1983, p. 406, nos. 513-518. At Corinth,the ends arenot piercedbut arefoldedto forma tubeto hold the wick.See WilliamsandZervos1996, p.24, no.6. Additionalwickholdersareinventoriedas 1992-8,1992-89,1992-90,1992257, 1992-287, 1992-296, 1992-310.
-
:
62 1992-297:Bronzebelt buckletongue Fromfloorlevel of narthex(SU 310). L. 0.024, Th. 0.002 m. Thin stripof bronzebent into a loop at one end andpointedat the otherend.
Ii.
^
.
t.y I ..
63 1992-43:Asterisk(?) Fig. 45 Fromfill along south exteriorwall belowwall tumble(SU 153). H. 0.036, L.0.091 m.Twoironstripscrossedandattachedat the center.Althoughthe shape resemblesan asterisk(a metalframeintendedto protectthe liturgicalofferings), the materialis unusual.
w
s
l
s *
X, *.
.
.;.?;.--
Figure47. Church:ironspikesand nailsfoundin grave1992-2 (66). Left to right,upperrow:1992-337, 1992-336,1992-393;lowerrow: 1992-343,1992-338,1992-332, 1992-339.
64 1991-402:Ironhook Fromfloorof nave(SU 207). L. 0.086 m. Ironhook curvedat one end and damagedat narrowend. Fig. 46 65 Ironnails More thanfortyironnailsandnail fragmentswererecoveredin the excavation of the narthex,primarilyin units306,308,309, and310, whichrepresentthe fill immediatelyabovethe floorandthe floorlevel.Additionalnailswerefoundin units150,154, and159, to the southof the church,aswell asin unit250, the floor levelof the apse.Most of the nailshavesquareshaftsandrectangular heads;many of the shaftstaperat the ends.Their size andtheirdiscoveryon the floorlevelof the narthexsuggestthatmanyof the nailswereassociatedwith roofconstruction. The nailsfromthe churchareinventoriedunderthe followingnumbers(the lengthsareprovidedfor eachin centimeters):SU 150: 1992-21 (6.84); SU 154: 1992-99 (4.6), 1992-100 (5.8); SU 159: 1992-98 (4.1); SU 250: 1992-259 (8.8); SU 306: 1992-77 (6.8), 1992-101 (3.8), 1992-121 (6.0), 1992-122 (6.5), 1992-123 (4.9),1992-124 (5.6), 1992-173(5.2),1992-174 (7.8),1992-188 (4.2), 1992-189 (4.0); SU 308: 1992-225 (5.9), 1992-227 (6.0), 1992-229 (4.9); SU 309: 1992-307 (3.7); SU 310: 1992-256 (nail head), 1992-258 (8.1), 1992-263 (4.1),1992-298 (3.3), 1992-299(3.9),1992-302 (3.4),1992-304 (5.5),1992-305 (6.7), 1992-308 (5.4), 1992-315 (2.9), 1992-395 (3.1), 1992-417 (5.7).
66 1992-332,336,337,338,339,343,393: Ironspikesandnails
69. In comparison, seethe placementof nailsfroma LateByzantine coffinexcavated in Polystylon, Thrace. SeeBakirtzis1983,p. 18,fig.5;AgelarakisandAgelarakis 1989,pl. IV.For woodencoffins,see alsoFolet al. 1989, pp.329-330.
Fig. 47
Sevenironspikesandnailswerefoundwithinthe northeasttombof the narthex (grave1992-2) restingon the lowerportionsof the skeletons.The largesize of the spikesexcludestheiruse in the constructionof a woodencoffin.69As discussedbelow,however,a thickwoodenboard(0.06 m) was placedoverthe lower halvesof the bodies, sealingthe tomb. It is possiblethat the long spikeswere driveninto the walls of the tomb in orderto form horizontalsupportsfor the plank,andfell into the tomb as the plasterliningandwood boarderoded. The spikesandnailsfromthe tombareinventoriedas follows(lengthis providedforeachin centimeters): 1992-332(6.8),1992-336 (17.3),1992-337(17.6), 1992-338 (5.3), 1992-339 (6.2), 1992-343 (8.8), 1992-393 (19.4).
_. :
S : : :f4-.:..:;f:.;;.:f.;::..; : -¢s ......................... _> ->Figure E.
>||ElL _W
!
.,
.
I88
48. Ysji_i
e
w%--
w_E?
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
Church: w_ s lamp from base nave of(67) glass >
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
= * 00:E
_
4
'7__
_
_ 1
:i;'
: ;
-
>
--0S
:^:g
t,
l.0:
-
G LA S S 67 1991-300;Lamp Fig.48 Fromfloorof navein northeast corner(SU205).Est.Diam.0.05m.Nipple baseoflampwiththreejoiningandeightadditional fragments fromwallofvessel. Inciseddoubleringmarks joinbetweenbaseandwallof vessel.Clearglasswith slightpurpletinge. 68 1991-321,1991-643:Lamp(s) Fig.49 Fromsurface clearing onsouthsideof church(SU101);mostlikelyassociatedwithstone-walled vaultat thesoutheast cornerof thechurch(grave1991-5). Twocoil handlesandonejoiningbodyfragmentof glasslamp(s).Topendof threadforhandleattached to body,looped,pinchedatpointof reattachment and thendraggeddownsideof body.Clearglasswithgreentinge;all surfacesare heavilyopacified. Althoughfragmentary, theglassmaybecompared to handlesonlampsthat wereexcavated in 14th-century levelsat Corinth; c£WilliamsandZervos1993, pp.22-25.
:igure49.Church:handlesandbody fragment ofglasslamp(s)foundon southexterior(68)
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
ARCHITECTURAL
AT PANAKTON
I89
SCULPTURE
The fragments of architectural sculpture revealstrongstylisticsimilarities to examples fromAtticaandBoeotia.Thenineworksareincomplete, suggestingthattheywerereusedforthedecoration of thechurch.It is unclear whethertheuseof spoliaforarchitectural decoration atPanakton signaled a consciousdesireto maintaincontinuity withearlierreligiousstructures in theareaorwasfosteredbyeconomicnecessity. In eithercase,theuseof spolia,alsoseenlocallyat the churchesof the ZoodochosPegenearPyli andatH. Paraskeve nearthemodernvillageof Panakto, is in keepingwith standard Byzantine buildingpractices.70 The sculptedfragments canbe dividedintothreefunctional groups: altartablepieces(69),doorjambs (70),andepistylefragments (71-77), someof whichwereusedas doorlintelsin the Panakton church.Close parallels canbefoundin 12th-century sculpture fromthechurchof Christ the Saviorin Amphissa,71 thekatholikon of the Sagmatamonastery near Thebes,72 andin HagiosNikolaosstaKambia,nearOrchomenos.73 The techniqueanddesignsof the carving,however, arebestcompared to the 12th-century sculpted ornamentation ofthekatholikon ofHosiosMeletios, a churchvisiblefromPanakton andanimportant monasticcenterin the region.74 In all likelihood,the atelierpatronized by H. Meletiosandits metochia carvedthemajority of thePanakton pieces.Althoughthebuildingorbuildings forwhichthesesculptures wereoriginally madecannotbe identified, it seemsmostlikelythattheornamented blocks,aswellasthe tabletopsanddoorjambs, arespoliafromlocalmonuments andthatlittle newcarvingwasundertaken forthedecoration of thePanakton church. CATALOGUE
70. ForZoodochosPegenearPyli, seeBouras1993-1994,p. 31, fig. 10; forH. Paraskeve nearPanakto,see Bouras,Kaloyeropoulou, andAndreadi 1970,figs.256, 257.An unpublished photograph of the altarat Panaktois foundin the BenakiPhotoArchives, no. 19306. 71. Vanderheyde 1994,pp.39S397. 72.WixomandEvans1997,p. 40. 73. SchultzandBarnsley1901, pl. 52:2. 74. Vanderheyde 1994,pp.396-402; Grabar1976,pp.102-103.
69 Fragmentsof rectangular table(s) Fig.50 Group I: a. 1991-598a:L. 0.275, W. 0.160, interiorTh. 0.042, borderTh. 0.055 m; b. 1991-598b: L. 0.419, W. 0.22, int. Th. 0.041, bor.Th. 0.060 m; c. 1991-598c:L.0.220, W.0.152, int.Th.0.041, bor.Th.0.060 m;group II:max. W.0.473 m; d. 1991-598d:L. 0.237, W.0.223, int.Th.0.037, bor.Th.0.059 m; e. 1991-598e:L. 0.173, W. 0.130, int.Th. 0.041, bor.Th. 0.062 m;J:1991-598f: L. 0.191, W. 0.141, int.Th. 0.036 m;g. 1991-598g:L. 0.113, W. 0.053, int.Th. 0.037 m; h. 1991-598h: L. 0.232, W. 0.177, int. Th. 0.040, bor.Th. 0.064 m; i. 1991-598i:L. 0.207, W. 0.149, int.Th. 0.039, bor.Th. 0.062 m;y:1991-598j: L. 0.108, W. 0.061, int. Th. 0.036-0.039 m; groupIII:k. 1991-598k:L. 0.110, W. 0.075, int.Th.0.040, bor.Th. 0.058 m; 1.1991-5981:L.0.320, W. 0.187, int. Th. 0.042, bor.Th. 0.059 m; m. 1991-598m:L. 0.193, W. 0.162, int.Th. 0.0390.042 m; other, nonjoiningpieces: n. 1991-598n:L.0.383, W.0.126, int.Th.0.042, bor.Th. 0.063 m; o. 1992-1: L. 0.158, W. 0.128, bor.Th. 0.065 m;p. 1992-26: L. 0.098, W 0.088, bor.Th. 0.057 m; q. 1992-27: L. 0.105, W. 0.550, bor.Th. 0.056 m; r. 1992-362: L. 0.134, W. 0.610, bor. Th. 0.595 m; s. J11-6 fragment:L.0.146,W.0.135, int.Th.0.031,bor.Th.0.053 m; t. 1992-363:L.0.083, W.0.049, bor.Th.0.057 m. Thirteenfragmentswerefoundin the churchinterior,twelveof them in the two layersabovethe medievalfloorwithin the curveof the apse (SU 202, 204).
I90
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
Figure50. Church:fragmentsof altartable(69) Fourfragmentswerefoundto the southexteriorof the churchin surfacecleaning, onewasfoundin the surfacecleaningof the narthex,andtwo pieceswerefoundto the west of the narthexexterior.The piecesformrectangular plaques,andon the basisof theirfindspotsweremostlikelyusedfor the upper,horizontalsurfacesof the altarand prothesis(offering)tables.The existenceof seven,nonjoiningcorners(groupI, groupII, n, o,p, r,ands) demonstratesthat at leasttwo tabletopsare represented.The tableshad raisedbordersrunningarounda very shallow,flat centerwell. A completesectionacrossthe width of the table (groupII) gives an absolutewidthof one tabletopof 0.473 m.This wouldnot be out of scalewith the 0.50 x 0.70 m stone altarbase still in situ.75The fragmentsof marblearevery white and havemanymineralinclusions.Fragmentsb-e, k, and I areall likelyto havebeen on the same side of one tableas they show similarcuttingmarkson theirexterioredges.A central,roughedareaflankedat top andbottombysmoother areassuggeststhat these fragmentsmayhavebeen cut downfroma plaquethat was originallymadewith a tongueto fit a groovedpost.The bottomsurfacesof manyof the fragmentsarecutwith diagonalchiselingmarks. The tablesshowverygeneralsimilaritiesto ClassicalGreektraydesignaltar tables,thoughno exactparallelis apparent.76 Antiquestelaiand EarlyChristian and Byzantinechancelbarrierspresentother typologicalparallels;the latteris appealinggiventhe possiblescarof a cut-downtongueon the one long edge.Also, the beveledborderof the Panaktonpiecesis rarein antiquestelai.EarlyChristian tablesof similarrectangular formincludea 6th-centurytablefromBasilicaA at Nikopolis,with an undecoratedsurfacesurrounded by a moldededge;the altarin situ at the east end of the north porticoof the atriumof the late-4th- or 5thcenturyextramural basilicaat Dion, with a crosscarvedat center;77 andtwo tables of ProconnesianmarblefromXanthos,one of whichwas decoratedwith a foliate design.78In all casesthough,the moldedborderis moreelaboratethanthe simple bevelof the Panaktonpieces.An EarlyChristiantablefromMactar,Tunisia,inscribedin both Latin and Greekand likely to be a reusedfuneraryslab,has a simplerborderbut is overallfarmoreroughlycut thanthe Panaktonfragments.79 None of the extantPanaktonfragmentshas anytraceof decorativereliefcarving. Date uncertain.
75. A similarlycomposedaltar,with a reusedmedievalplaqueset intoa masonrybase,fillsthe entireapseat H. Paraskeve nearmodernPanakto. 76. See Gill 1991,fig. 8, fordesigns of stonealtartablesfromthe Classical period;fig.28, forthe tableof Demeter, Kore,andZeusfromNaxos;pl. 18 fora fragmentpossiblyfroma culttablefor MenTyrannos, Athens;pl. 19 fortabletopfragments fromtheAmphiareion, Oropos;andpl.22 fora fullypreserved tabletopin theNationalMuseum, Athens.Thesecommonlyhavesimple, roundeddepressions, butthe lasttwo havemoldedrectangular rimsaround the escharai. Thesepieces,however,are onlygenerallysimilarto the Panakton fragments. 77. Chalkia1991,pp.54-55; 215-219;fig.44 (Nikopolis); figs.69, 70 (Dion).Note the tonguevisibleon the edgeof the altarslabin fig.70, whichis similarin placementto the scaron the Panaktontable. 78. Sodini1998,pp.42-43, figs.1-5. 79. Chalkia1987-1988,fig.4.
fragments Figure
51. (70)
0005 Church: 0
&>^5-dooUamb : t-Sty000; s^
A LATE MEDIEVAL
20
0d
- >SP
SETTLEMENT
-i-<<
AT PANAKTON
|
I9I
Fig.51 of doorjamb(s) 70 Fragments L. 0.510,W. 0.187,Th. 0.109m; b. 1991-599b:L. 0.495, a. 1991-599a: W.0.178,Th.0.121m;c.1992-13:L.0.20,W.0.180,Th.0.119m;d. 1992-221: L.0.143,W.0.033,Th.0.016m;e. 1992-312:L.0.050,W.0.023,Th.0.007m. apseinthesamerubble a wasfoundbehindthealtarinthechurch's Fragment bwas (SU204).Fragment of thealtartablefragments several layerthatcontained c was Fragment foundin the surfacelayerat thewestendof the naveinterior. sectionof thehousesituatedimfoundin a layerof rocktumblein thenorthern werefoundatthefloorlevel Thesmaller fragments mediately westof thechurch. piecesof doornarthex (SU308,310).Thethreelarge,nonjoining of thechurch's ca.0.033Thejambshavea centralconcavity, jambs,a-c, areallof similarprofile. 0.042mwide,flankedatbothsidesbytwoshallowflangesandthenflatexternal surfacesof 0.066-0.073m.The flangesareall of variedwidths,rangingfrom edges,showing 0.013to 0.024m.Thecutprofilesof a andb runto thefragment's border atoneend hasa terminal c,however, pieces.Fragment thattheyareinterior white areoffine-grained piece.Thefragments andthusis atop-orbottom-fitting and orveining,andtheprofileis cutin a softmanner marble withlittlecoloration back crispandangular relatively b andcpreserve abraded. Fragments is somewhat d (two Fragments profiles,althougha hasbeenroughlycutdownon thereverse. chips withroundedprofiles,probably joiningpieces)ande aresmallfragments pieces. fromthefilletsof otherdoorjamb Theprofileof thethreelargerpiecesisverysimilarto thatof anunpublished of H. Meletios.This maybe collectionat the monastery piecein the lapidary thatallof thepieces evidenceof an atelierworkingin the areaor,alternatively, earliersite.80 comefromanother, 12thcentury). (possibly Dateuncertain
of thecommunity 80.A member reported 71 Es1stylefrazment currently livingatH*Meletios Flg.52 w1thblrdmot1f X April2001)thatthe (pers.comm., a. 1991-600a:L. 0.480,W. 0.130,Th. 0.070m; b. 1991-600b:L. 0.225, had collection pieceinthelapidary dea andb werefoundin destruction W. 0.130,Th.0.060m.Joiningfragments beenfoundinthehillsabovethe It is possiblethattheyformedpartof a cornerof thechurch. brisin thenortheast monastery.
S. E. J. GERSTEL, I92
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
templonscreen.The piecescombinea foliatemotif with zoomorphicforms.Two rectangular panelsof acanthusleaf motifs are surroundedby a double-knotted angularguillocheof threeridges.The acanthus leavescurlarounddrillholes ca. 0.005-0.010m deep.A largeportionof the ornamental surfaceof the largerfragmentis coveredwith the motif of two birds eating from stackedfruit baskets. Acanthusleaves springfrom the lower basketand form a carpetpatternonto whichthe birdsaresuperimposed. The carvingis at differentlevels,with the birds protruding sharplyfromthe surface,while the foliage immediatelysurrounding themprojectsto a lesserextent.The interrupted guillocheand acanthusmotifs framing theseelementsarein lowestrelief,andthe birds, baskets,andcarpetpattern extendpastthe boundariesof the enclosing guilloche.The birds'bodieshave adecorativelycarvedsurfacepatternof parallelridges,whichservesto denotethe different partsof theirbodies.The fragments'carvingstyle favorsridgesdefined by fairlydeepgrooveswith angledsides.A smooth ledgeis adjacentto the top of the ornamentedsurface,while an areaof rougherpicking adjoinsthe bottomsurface. The reversesof the fragmentshavebeencut downandnow areconcavewith very roughpicking,in diagonalstrokes,acrossthe surfaces. The piecesareof white, fine-grained marble. The fragmentshaveclosecomparanda, notablytwo undatedpiecesfromthe Athenian Agora.8lThe firstof theseis a particularly closecomparison: it showsa bird, its bodycarvedwith the sametypesof linesto representits feathers,pecking atdouble-stacked basketsof grapesfromwhichvinessprout.In contrast,thebackground behindthe birdis plain,thoughthe piecemaybe unfinished.The second Agora piece showsa birdwith similarsurfacetreatment, thoughits breastplumage is pickedout in shallowlydrilledholes. Utilizingdifferentdepthsof carving, as atPanakton,the figureof the birdoverlaysan angularguilloche,seenunderits raised wing.Althoughthe headsaresomewhatdamaged, the eyesof the Panakton birds seem to havebeen carvedless fully than those in the Agorafragments.A 12th-century templonfragmentwith similarlycarvedbirds, drinkingor eating from a basinon a high pedestalsuperimposedon a lower,foliatebackground,is found at the churchof Christthe Saviorin Amphissa.82 The Panaktonmethodof bi-level carvingandthe formsand techniqueof the leaf and stem motifsarealso similar to thoseemployedin the 12th-century sculpturefromthe Sagmatamonastery in Boeotia,foundedby a pupil of Saint Meletios,83and in the fragment from the monasteryof H. IoannesKynegouat the ByzantineandChristianMuseum of Athens.84The angularguillocheof multiple ridgedelementsis relatively common in Attica and Boeotia in the late 12th and early 13th centuries.Examples maybe seenat the LittleMetropolis,Athens,and at H. Meletios.85 While only a singleknot was carvedin these works,the Panaktonpiecesfeaturea less common doubleknot. Late 12th or early13th century.
Figure52. Church:epistylefragment withbirdmotif (71)
81. Grabar1976,pl. LXXX,no. 87:a-b. The piecesappearto be missing from theAgoracollectionandhaveno recognizable Agoraaccessionnumber. 82.Vanderheyde 1994,p.407, figs. 8,9. 83. Bouras1977-1979,pp.67-68, figs.11-13, pl.25. 84.Bouras1977-1979,pp.67-68, fig.10,pl.25. 85.SeeGrabar1976,pl.LXVI:a, for theLittleMetropolis; pl. LXXVI:a, cH. forMeletios;alsoOrlandos19391940,p.73,fig.24,p.97,fig.44,p.101, fig. 48,p.105, fig.52. Otherpieces from theAthensregionthatarein the Byzantine andChristianMuseumof Athens alsohaveangular, knotted guilloches; seeMavroeidi1999,nos. 204-206.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
I93
Figure53 (above,lefi). Church: epistylefragment(72) Figure54 (above,right).Church: epistylefragmentwith foliatemotif (73)
Fig.53 72 Epistylefragment 1992-74: L. 0.110, W. 0.144, Th. 0.040 m. Foundat the church'sexterior, nearthe westernwallof the narthex.72 is a smallfragmentof an epistylemadeof fine-grainedwhitemarbledecoratedwith a foliaterinceautoppedby a plainverticalborder.The leavesareroundedandthe carvingstyle anddesignaresimilarto thoseof 73 and74. The top bandof 72 is the samewidthas thatof 73 and74. 72 maybe a nonjoiningpieceof 74, especiallygivenits findspot,or of 73. 12th century. 73 Epistylefragmentswith foliatemotif
Fig. 54
a. 1991-602a:L. 0.340,W. 0.150,Th. 0.100 m; b. 1991-602b:L. 0.078, W. 0.075, Th. 0.034 m. Fragmentsa and b, which do not join, were found in the easternhalf of the churchin a destructiondeposit.The two smallfragmentsare decoratedwith flat,softvegetalformssimilarto thoseseenon 74.The decoration comprisessweepsof flat ridgesswirlinginto the stemsof tendrilscurledaround drillholes.The carvingtechniqueis similarto that of 74, and the piecesmaybe fragmentsof the samework.The white marbleblock fromwhich this piece is carvedis moremassivethanthe otherepistylefragments,andits top edge is destroyed.In comparisonto otherpieces,the tilt of the carvedface is much more pronouncedin 73, as if it weremeantto be seen froma higherposition. 12th century.
Figure55. Church:epistylefragment with Greekcrossandfoliage(74) 86.Mavroeidi1999,no.241. 87. Orlandos1939-1940,p. 99, fig.46, bottom.
Fig. 55 74 Epistylefragmentwith Greekcrossandfoliage 1991-601:L. 0.157, W. 0.135, Th. 0.073 m. Found4 m southwestof the churchin a surfacedeposit.This smallfragmentof an epistyleis decoratedwith a Greekcross,brokenat its rightarm,andabstractvegetation.A lightlyinscribedX marksthe crossingof the two armsandthe crossis outlinedwith a secondband. The outlined,X-inscribedfoliatecrossmotif is also seen in a 12th-century windowcapitalfromAthens86andat H. Meletios,on the lintel abovethe northThe leavesof the ernmostdoorbetweenthe narthexandnaveof the katholikon.87 vegetation,whichcurlaroundfairlywide drillholes,arecarvedin a flat,soft techThe carvingtechniqueis similarto what niqueraisedfroma plainbackground. LaskarinaBourasdescribesas the 12thcentury's"soft"modelingstyle,andis close to thatof 73.The fragmentsmaycomefromthe samepiece.The decoratedfaceis flankedby smooth,flatprofiles,each0.025 m wide.As with severalotherpiecesin the Panaktongroup,a white,fine-grainedmarblewas used.The reverseseemsto havebeen cut down. 12th century.
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
I94
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
Figure56.Church: epistylefragment 75 Epistylefragment withabstract acanthus rinceauandbirds Fig.56 withabstract acanthus rinceauand 1992-233:L. 0.740,W. 0.230,Th. 0.214m.Thefragment wasfoundin the birds(75) doorway betweenthe narthexandnaveof thechurch,restingdirectlyabovethe medieval floorsurface. Theepistylefragment wasobviously cutdownandreused asa lintelblockforthenave'sprimary entrance. 75 is decorated withfivestylized spikyacanthus leavesboundedattheendsbyaneagleatleftandpeacock atright. Incisedlinesarticulate thebirds'bodiesanddenotetheirplumage. Varied patterns detaildifferent partsof theirbodies.Theeagle'sbreastandupperwingsaredecoratedusingarched,scalelikeincisions,whilelinesdemarcate its tailandlower wingfeathers. Thepeacock's feathers areexecutedsimilarly, withtheadditionof drillholesto showtheeyesof thetailplumage. Theeagleinterrupts theacanthus pattern, whilea morevinelikeleafsurrounds thepeacock. Theepistyleis damaged atthisend,cuttingoffthepeacock's head.Themotifs,widely spacedontheroughpickedbackground, arecarvedin a veryflat,champleve style.An undecorated, narrow flatbandcapsthefoliageandzoomorphs. Thebottomfaceis undecorated, andhasa doorpivotholeatright,belowthefourthandfifthacanthus elements. Several 1lth-century piecesprovide solidcomparisons forthisPanakton fragment.Anacanthus-decorated epistyle, reusedasalinteloverthenorthdoorofthe early12th-century churchof H. NikolaosstaKambia, nearOrchomenos, hasa verysimilarcarvingtechnique anddesign,andis closelyrelatedto thisepistyle.88 Sculpted piecesin Athensalsoshowstylisticsimilarity to thePanakton epistyle. TheByzantine andChristian MuseuminAthenshastwo1lth-century fragments thathavea comparably flatqualityto the carving, thoughthesearelesscrispin execution thanthePanakton piece.89 TheLittleMetropolis hastwozoomorphic panelsthatshowbirdswithdifferently patterned, thoughmorehighlystylized, plumage.90
11thcentury. 76 Chancelbarrier fragment withrinceauandguilloche Fig.57 1991-603:L. 0.209,W. 0.130,Th.0.070m.Foundin theeasternhalfof the churchinterior, in destruction debris.76 is a smallcornerfragment of a chancel plaquewitha flatrinceau bordering aninteriorangular guilloche of raised,ridged profiles.The guilloche is brokenoffandonlya cornerofitsborder andtheedgeof oneknotis extant. Therinceau bordersurrounding thisguilloche is carved in aflat technique withdrillholespunctuating theturning ofthevine'stendrils.The leaves arebroadandnotverydistinctfromthevines,endingin sharppoints.A shallow grooveseparates theareas,sothatwhilethesurface flatnessis similarto thatof 73, themotifis denserandmoreunifiedthanin theotherpiece.Therinceau is offset fromtheexterior of thepieceandtheguillochebyflat,undecorated bands.The
Figure57. Church:chancelbarrier fragmentwith rinceauandguilloche (76)
88. SchultzandBarnsley1901, p.70,pl.60. 89.Mavroeidi1999,nos.199-200. 90. Grabar1976,pp.98-99; pl. LXVIII,no. 81:a-b.
withacanthusinguiHoche(77)
400-;000 _
d- - 0 0 0 07000000000e;
wii;;-^'3
I95
A LATE MEDIEVAL SETTLEMENT AT PANAKTON
0 000 t'i
,,i$.
r ..
;fF;0:n (sy4000\\)
''\v&
t {+=D 0 ='1 ' r..
Figure58.Church:epistylefragment (-;t
--s
0;' i 00;? :f 7
0;
; !;
S;
0
:0 00
,,,
f.
; t;0: :0;>t
Thecorner if notthesame,whitemarbleasothersin thegroup. pieceis of similar, Thepieceis of a uniform andthebacksurface is alsohighlyabraded. is damaged Amongtheclosestcomparisons is theplaqueof thesouthchancelbarthickness. mixinga flat,broad-leafed wherethe carvingtechnique, rierof H. Meletios,91 withaninterior guilloche, is quitesimilar tothatusedinthePanakton outerborder collection A second,unpublished fragment in the H. Meletioslapidary piece.92 mix,andits guillocheis a betterparallelas it is formedof showsa comparable the H. Meletios ridgesof equalwidthratherthana bandwithfillets.However, byanangledborder. plaqueshavesunkeninteriorelementssurrounded Early12thcentury. Fig.58 withacanthus in guilloche 77 Epistylefragment a. 1992-2:L. 0.295,W. 0.135,Th.0.060m;b.1992-34:L. 0.080,W. 0.063, Th.0.040m;c.1992-268:L.0.175,W.0.146,Th.0.054m;d.1992-401:L.0.193, W. 0.070,Th.0.034m. of thenarthex, near Thisepistylesegmentwasfoundbrokenat theexterior thesefragments formedpartof thelinteloverthe thewestentry.In alllikelihood, of a reusedepistyleor The fourfragments comprisethe remnants westdoor.93 andguillochemotif. cutlinteldecorated on onefacewithanacanthus purposely The guillocheis madeof a thick,slightlyflattenedcentralbandflankedby two betweenandstemmingfromthe guillocheitselfare narrowfillets.Interspersed techleaves. Theleavesandbandsarecarvedin a ridgeandfurrow spikyacanthus pieces, in thePanakton marble group.As in otherPanakton niqueseenelsewhere acanthus areformedaroundwidedrillholes. thebottomleavesof the encircled undecoThe motifhasbeencarvedon a broadangledface,toppedbya vertical, ratedflange.Thebottomedgeof a is brokenoffin ajaggedline. of Thepieceis quitesimilarto thelintelsovertheeastdoorsin thenarthex haverounded tops. although in thelattertheleavesintheguilloche H. Meletios,94 datefor77,with suggestsanllth- or12th-century TheH. Meletioscomparison motifin Anotherpiecewithan acanthus-in-guilloche the laterdatepreferred. a 12thof theByzantine andChristian MuseuminAthenssupports thecollection centurydate.95 12thcentury. 91.Orlandos 1939-1940, p.73, fig.24. 92.Themotifofa foliateelement bya ridged guilloche and surrounded moresoftlycarved, foliate another, is generally foundinthe12th border
seeMavroeidi 1999, century andafter; no.296. 93.Gerstel1996,p.146. 1939-1940, p.70,fig. 94.Orlandos 1976,pl.LXXII,no.85:b,d. 21;Grabar 1999,no.251. 95.Mavroeidi
lSS
.
,
S;
s
.
_ identified , =2
I96
l
X
grave |S
i
s
91-3a<,^
>
x
7:) *,
' pitho °k
....
---
m/
5
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
l l
l
{ ,
z
1
,
l
{'
_
Yt/SStU0zz,,,z,,,,,zzz,,, -S,,,,-;-zX"zzzzzZzz{z"zzz z"zzntzz-zzz
g
aP)
_
X _
X
tt
_
A
l
/S
I
_
_
I
/
_ ,o,z,,t, |
o
^
',
x
7
,
wall
building limits of excavation units excavated grave
X
_ _ _ _ _ _ _J
scatteredhumanbone
9l i -
91-1 t9_g,
91-3b
Figure59.Planof churchand narthexshowingburiallocations
MEDIEVAL BURIALS The excavations revealed fivecompletegravesaswellas indications that othergravesstillawaitfutureexcavation (Fig.59). A minimumof five gravesareknownto existsouthofthechurch, atleastoneinsidethechurch, andatleastonemoreto theeastof thechurch.Scattered piecesof human bonesalsoturnedup in otherlocations.Someof thesecouldreflectthe reuseof gravesin the areaof the church,whileothersmaysimplyresult fromrandomdisturbance aroundthesite. The fivecompletely excavated gravesandportionsof fiveothersthat wereencountered in one test trench(J11-6;Fig. 79) indicatethattwo kindsof graveswerein useat Panakton duringthe 14thcentury. Within the church,two subfloorvaultswerebuiltof shapedstonesandmortar, projecting slightlyabovethefloorin thenortheast andsouthwest corners of thenarthex(Fig.27).A third,muchcruderconstruction wasaddedto the exterior wallof the churchat its southeastcorner(Fig.71).The two othergraves,andapparently mostof thepartially uncovered graves,consistedof simplepitsdugintotheearth.Theselayoutsidethechurchonits north,east,andsouthsides.
STONE-LINED GRAVE VAULTS All threestone-lined vaultswerein somewayincorporated intothestructureof the churchandits attachednarthex. The two insidethe narthex wereclearlymorecarefillly constructed thanwasthe oneattachedto the churchexterior wall. GRAVE1992-1
Figs.60-62
Grave1992-1layagainsttheinteriorfaceofthe southwallofthe narthex, extending 2.30m eastfromthewestwalland1.07m northfromthesouth
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
I97
AT PANAKTON
x
j g g o v)
g a
narthexwall face tombwall face standing limestoneslab outlineofhead cosrerslab hiddenbones
Figure60 (above,lefi). Church narthex:grave1992-1 coveringslab, fromwest Figure61 (above,right).Church narthex:grave1992-1 in gravevault
96.WilliamsandZervos1993, pp.22-25. See also68 above.
wall.The southandwestinteriorwallsof the narthexformedthe south andwestsidesof thevault.Cutlimestoneblocksstanding uprightformed theinteriornorthandeastsides.A secondrowof lesswellcutlimestone blocksframedtheinnerliningoutsideit onboththenorthandeastsides, makingthesesideseach0.48 m thick.The interiorspaceof the grave measured 1.80m east-westby0.56m north-south. Theskeletonlay0.47 mbelowthebaseof thenarthex southwall.Thisburialchamber hadbeen coveredby segmentsof a largelimestoneslabor slabsthathadcollapsed inward,suggesting a partially hollowspacebeneath(Fig.60).Therewas no traceof a prepared gravefloor.Beneaththecoverslabs,a secondlimestoneslabrestedupontheinnerlinerof thenorthwallandupona limestoneslabsetvertically insidethesouthwall.Thissecondslabcovered the headof thegrave's occupant. It measured roughly0.66m north-south by 0.40 m east-west.Yetanotherlimestoneslabstoodvertically abovethe innerlinerwallalongside thenorthendof thisheadcover,creatinga sort of alcoveabovetheheadof thegrave. Numerous smallandmedium-sized fragments of thinclearglass,includingtwoloophandles,wererecovered whileexcavating thegravefill. Theseglassfragments arereminiscent ofglasslampsfoundassociated with a Frankish-period cemetery at Corinth.96 The adultmalewhohadbeenlaidto restin thisgravevaultlayfillly extended onhisbackwithhisheadatthewestend(Fig.61).Hisheadhad beenproppedup slightlybetweenlimestonesideheadpropsto facetowardthe east.Therewasno signof anychinpropto preventthe mouth fromfallingopenafterrelaxation of rigormortis.Theman'selbowsflared slightlyfromhisbody.His forearms werecrossedoverhis torsowiththe
I98
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
rightforearm almostata rightangleto thespineandtherighthandlying betweenthe left hipandleft elbow.The left forearmangledupwardtowardtherightshoulder, andthelefthandlayabovetherightbreast.His legswerefilllyextended withthelowerthree-fourths of thelowerlegsand feetprojecting beneaththeeasterninnerliningwallof thegravevault.His kneesandfeetwerequiteclosetogether, astheywouldbeif theankleshad beenboundtogether. This indicatesthatthe innerliningwallhadbeen builtlaterthanthe body'sinterment, althoughthe conformity with the wallsof thenarthex strongly suggeststhathewasinterred afterthenarthex wasbuilt. We mightreconstruct the sequenceof eventsas follows.First,the narthex wasconstructed. Burial1992-1wasthenplacedin thesouthwest cornerof the narthexwith no stoneliningwallsotherthanthe narthex walls.Finally,the northandeaststonelinerswerebuiltabovethegrave, althoughtheeastlinerwallcovered theman'slowerlegsandfeet.Thetop of theheadlayca.0.20m awayfromwestwallof thegravevault,andthe bodyseemsto havebeentwistedsomewhattowardthe rightandbent slightlyin thesamedirection. No gravegoodswerefoundwiththisburial. OsteologicaI AnaZysis The bonesarein excellentcondition. The skeletonis fairlycomplete,althoughmissingmostbonesof thefeetandankles,andsomebonesfrom bothwrists.The robustbones,narrow pubicarchandsciaticnotchof the pelvis,largefemoralheaddiameter, andthe presenceof a largeossified thyroidcartilage indicatea male.The obliteration of endocranial sutures, ossification ofcartilage onsternal ribends,degenerative jointdisease present in the vertebral column,dentalstatus,andthe pubicsymphysis indicate anageof45 to 50years.Cranial shapeislongovoid,97 withinthemesocrany (medium)range,98 with slightlybulgingoccipital,slopinglow forehead, pronounced glabella(areaabovethe nose),verynarrowface,straight narrownose,squareeye orbits,largemastoids,andbroadsquarechin (Fig.62).Statureis estimated atabout176.23cm(58 ) onthebasisofthe lengthsof thefemurandtibia,usingtheregression formuladeveloped by TrotterandGleser.99 The teetharelargewith heavywearto the secondary dentin.The upperincisorshavebeenreducedto rootstubswithwell-wornandpolishedsurfaces,andthe left lowercanineandfirstpremolarshowwear slantingdownward towardthebackteeth,indicating thattheseteethwere usedastools.Somecalculus waspresentonthelowerteeth,andperiodontaldiseaseis represented bymoderate alveolar boneresorption. Smallinterproximal andneckcariesexistedin threeupperandthreelowerteeth, alongwithanabscessassociated withtheupperrightlateralincisor(missing).All threeupperleft molars,the secondpremolar, andtherightfirst andsecondmolarshadbeenlostlongbeforedeath.Thismanhadendured physicalviolenceto his faceandupperchestwith a depression fracture, approximately 7 x 23 mm, alongthe browridgeabovethe righteye (Fig.62), andinjurywherethe rightclaviclearticulates withthe manubrium.Bothinjurieshadhealed,buttheclaviclewasdisplaced behindits articulation withthemanubrium.
97. Rogers1984,p. 75. 98. Bass1995,p. 69. 99.TrotterandGleser1952,1958.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
I99
Figure62.Churchnarthex: burial 1992-1.Skullof male.
Osteoarthritis in theneckandback,alongwithevidenceof repetitive overuseof theshoulders fromrotatingtheupperarmsinwardandoutand loweringthemwhileflexingtheforearms withhandsclenched,indicates thatthis manwasaccustomed to heavyworkusinghis upperbodyand arms.Poirier's wearfacetson the femoralnecks,greateron the left side, indicaterepetitive extensionof the hipjointswithkneesflexed.l°° There aresomeunusuallyticlesionsatthebaseof thethirdandfourthmetatarsals,the etiologyof whichis unknown.Developmental variantsinclude inferiortransitional facetsontheelevenththoracic vertebra resulting from the borderbetweenthe thoracicandlumbarvertebrae shiftingupward duringdevelopment. The transitional facetsgenerally appearon the last thoracic, thetwelfth,interfacing withthedifferently shapedfacetsof the firstlumbarvertebra.l°l Signsof lunginfectionareapparent withthreadlikelinearlesionswithraisedborders indicative of inflamedbloodvessels on theinnersurfaces of theleft andrighteighthandninthribs,andthe lefttenthrib.Thisinfectionwasmostlikelythecauseof hisdeath. Figs. 63-69 1992-2 Grave1992-2extendedwestwardalongthe interiornorthwallof the narthexfromits northeastcorner,but it did not lie directlyagainstthe walls(Fig.26, above).It encompassed a spaceranging2.03 m westward fromthenorthsideof doorway in thenarthex's eastwalland1.05m south of thenorthwall.Threecutlimestoneblocks measuring 0.79,0.63,and 0.58m longandeach0.15m thick standuprightto formthesouthern sideof the vault.The topsof thesestonesroseabout0.20 m abovethe narthex floor.Thewestendwallconsisted of twocutlimestone blocksalso standing upright. A roughlybuiltwallof unshaped limestoneblocks,built insidethe northandeastwallsof the narthexbut separatefromthem, formsthevault'snorthsideanditseastend.Largelimestoneslabs,resting on topof bothsidewalls,coveredthevault. A second,lowerlayerof gravecoveringrestedon a shelfbuiltinside thebounding wallsof thevault.Thissecondcovering layerconsistedof a GRAVE
100.Kennedy1989,p. 147. 101.Barnes1994,p. 109.
S.E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
200
narthex north wall
> t -
/////XA
-
E ,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Wt narthex floor
-H Q
3
f
3;
9
g
t&OOOoO
.
.q
.
--:}
,,,,,5C,,m,Xx,,,,S,
limestone
tS
--:: wood *
ironspike
abovetheskulls, slabrestinghorizontally marble blueKarystian rectangular the marbleslab of edge east limestoneslabset againstthe atriangular 6 cmthick,overthe approximately abovethetorso,andwoodenplanking, lowertorsoandlegs(Fig.63).Thelimestoneslabrestedon smallerstones it.Whiteplasterlinedthelowerinteriorof designedto support apparently thisgravevault.The topsof bothinnershelvesandseverallumpsof this with woodenplankimpressions foundaroundthebodydisplayed plaster thatwood thebodyaxis),indicating thegrainalignedeast-west(paralleling thisgrave for space interior The cover. formedabouthalfthelowergrave widest the with 1.68m east-westby0.374.50 m north-south, measured portionin the middle.No gravefloorwasnoticed.The gravehadbeen pebblesandsandysoil,"about0.02 m thick,befilledwith"minuscule neathwhichwaslooseloamysoil.Piecesof whiteplaster(severalwith medievalceramicsherds(49, Fig.36), animal woodplankimpressions), not for fingerwear),threeironnails, bones,a thickironring(probably twelvesmallpiecesofwood further and glass, of lamp severalfragments fromthe fill.The gravewas a woodencovewere recovered suggesting thatlay fromthefloorlevelof thenarthex dugandconstructed apparently waseasily ca.0.20 m belowthetopof thegravewalls.Itsuppercovering narthex. visibleto peoplewhoenteredthe thefairlycompleteskeletalremainsof three Grave1992-2contained onewoman(1992-2a)andtwomen(1992-2bandc). individuals: separate The womanhadbeeninterredlast,andthe bonesof the two menhad on top beenpushedto thesouth(right)sideof thegraveandredeposited on extended of herlowerlegsandfeet (Fig.64). She(1992-2a)layfully There herbackwithherheadatthewestendof thegravefacingupward. two stacked the unless props head side of or prop wasno signof a chin Her such. as intended were skullsof the malesto the rightof herhead at a rightangle werefoldedacrossherstomach,theleftforearm forearms bentto placethe righthandoverher to herspine,andthe rightforearm Both thekneesslightlyseparated. with extended pelvis.Herlegswerefully side right the to next another one maleskullshadbeenstackedon topof facand up side skull.The topone(1992-2b)restedright of thewoman's addiingeastontopoftheother(1992-2c),whichlayupsidedown.Many tionaladultboneslayalongthe rightsideandon top of the articulated in a lowstackoverherlowerlegsandfeet. burial,especially woman's
grave Figure63.Churchnarthex: 1992-2.Crosssectionatindividual's hips.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
20I
Figure64. Churchnarthex:grave 1992-2, fromeast
102.Inv.no. 1992-384. 103.The materialfromCorinth is beingprepared byA. Rohnfora chapterto appearin a monograph by E. Barnesin the Corinth series.Fora comparable phenomenon of collective burialin Polystylon(Abdera),see Agelarakis 1997,pp.294-295.
Objectsdirectlyassociated withthebodiesin thegraveincludethree completeironspikesplusthe tip of a fourthandthreeironnails(66, Fig. 47). The longestspike 0.194 m long-was foundbetweenthe lowerleftribsof thearticulated womanwithitstipatthespine.Theother two spikes 0.173andO.176mlong, respectivelylayin the northeast cornerof thegraveandoutsidethewoman's rightthigh.Thethreenails0.062,0.068,and0.088mlong-encircledherleftlegandfeet.Therewas no evidencethattheseironspikespenetrated thewoman's body,oreither of the otherbodies.Theyapparently werearranged aroundthe bodyof thewoman. A Venetian tornesellomintedunderAntonioVenier(1382-1400)1°2 appeared beneaththe ribcageof the articulated woman'sskeleton(see Appendix1). It couldalsohaveoriginally restedon the bodyandfallen throughduringdecomposition. In eitherevent,thefinalinterment of the womanmostprobably postdates1382. As notedabove,thearrangement of skeletalremains inthegraveindicatesthatthewoman(1992-2a)hadbeenplacedin thegravelast,withthe bonesof theearliermaleoccupants pushedto onesideanddeposited partiallyoverherlegsandfeet.Multipleinterment in thismanner wasa commonpractice in theByzantine andFrankish periodsatCorinthandother sites.103 Aseachnewbodywas added,thebonesoftheprevious inhabitant(s) wereredeposited onandaroundthenewestaddition. Thepractice of reintermentcontinues in nearbymodern-day Pyli,aswellasin otherareasin Greece.The associated ironspikesandnailscouldalsohavebeenredepositedwiththebonesof theearliergraveoccupants, especially sincethey clusteraroundthelegs.The coin,however, seemsto relatespecifically to thelatestburial.
202
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
Osteological Analysis 1992-2a.The lastpersonplacedin thisgravewasdetermined to be an adultfemaleon the basisof gracilebonesandthe widepubicarchand sciaticnotchof the pelvis.Agewasestimatedbetween40 and45 years, basedon moderatedegenerative jointdiseaseof the spine,dentalstatus, andpubicsymphysis. All bonesof the skeletonarepresentandarein excellentcondition. The cranium is a broadpentagonoid shape(Fig.65),1°4 withinthe brachycrany (broad)range,l05 withbulgingoccipital,slightly pronounced glabella, slightpost-bregmatic depression behindthecoronal suture, verticalforehead, mediumface,squarish eyeorbits(Fig.66),wide straight nose,prominent chinwithbonyprotuberance, andmedium pointed mastoids(Fig.67).Statureis estimated around159.83cm(5'3"), basedon the lengthsof the femurandtibia.l06 Someteethwerelost afterburial. Mostof theremaining teethareheavilywornto thesecondary dentin,and thereis awidespacebetweentheupperandlowercentralincisors.Several interproximal andneckcariesexiston upperandlowerteeth,withtotal destruction of theupperrightsecondmolarandabscesses associated with threeuppermolarsandonelowermolar.Severealveolar boneresorption fromperiodontal diseaseandtoothlossis evident,alongwithsomecalculusbuildup. Theupperleftcanine,secondpremolar, andlowerfirstmolars werelostbeforedeath,andthelowercentralincisorswereaboutto belost atthetimeof death.
Figure65 (top).Churchnarthex: grave1992-2. Skulltops, fromleft to right:1992-2c,male;1992-2b,male; 1992-2a,female. Figure66 (bottom).Churchnarthex: grave1992-2. Upperfaces,fromleft to right:1992-2c,male;1992-2b, male;1992-2a,female.
104.Rogers1984,p. 75. 105.Bass1995,p. 69. 106.TrotterandGleser1952,1958.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
Figure67 (above,lefi). Churchnarthex:grave1992-2. Skullof 1992-2a, female. Figure68 (above,right).Churchnarthex:grave1992-2. Skullof 1992-2b, male.
107.Rogers1984,p. 75. 108.Bass1995,p. 69. 109.TrotterandGleser1952,1958.
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
203
is visibleon therightsideof the fracture A largeold,healedcircular aboveandbehindit, andan by a depression fracture skull,accompanied in the neckandmid-and of the nose.Osteoarthritis old healedfracture bendingandloadingstresson thespine.In addition, lowerbackindicates withthe raisingof her habitually overused hershoulders thisindividual arms,rotatingtheminward,down,andbackwith herelbowsflexedat thethumbandfingersof herrighthand, rightangles.Shealsooverused Shewasaccustomed toprolonged fromspinning. whichmayhaveresulted standingwithherupperthighsrotatedandkneesextendedandshealso asymmetrical torsion(unevenangles)of the femoral haddevelopmental necksof theupperlegs. 1992-2b.Mostof theskeletonof thesecondadultmaleplacedin the graveis presentandin goodcondition.Partsof the neckandbackare missing,alongwithsomehandbonesanda fewfootbones.The thyroid by cartilageossifiedandwasfoundwith the skull.Sexwasdetermined robustbonesandthe narrowpubicarchandsciaticnotchof the pelvis. between45 and50 years,basedon dentalstatus,deAgewasestimated sutureclosure,andpubic generative jointdiseasein thespine,endocranial withinthe doliThe craniumis longandovoid(Fig.65),1°7 symphysis. modbulgingoccipital, range,108 withmoderately chocrany (long-headed) narrowface, glabellaandbrowridges,lowforehead, eratelypronounced mediumstraightnose,verynarroweyeorbits(Fig.66),broadmastoids, broadchin,andflaringgonialsof the mandible(Fig.68). Fine pitting 170.35cm lesionsexiston the browridges.A statureof approximately on thebasisof thelengthsof femurandtibia.109 (5'6")is estimated dentin,withwearslantingbackMostteetharewornto secondary wardon lowercanines(lowerincisorsmissing).All of the uppermolars andthelowerrightfirstandthirdmolarswerelostbeforedeathwithsesufferedfromsevereperiboneresorption. This individual verealveolar odontaldisease,somecalculusbuildupon lowerfrontteeth,anda neck cariesof thelowerrightmolar.Healingwastakingplacefromanextensive Thereis evidenceof temwithoneof thelostmolars. abscessassociated jointdysfunction ontherightsideof thelowerjaw.Daily poromandibular loadingstressonthelowerback,andoveruseof activities causedrepetitive
204
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
Figure69. Churchnarthex:grave 1992-2. Skullof 1992-2c,male.
theshoulders whileflexingtheelbowsat rightangles.He alsoshowsevidenceofhavinghadOsgood-Schlatter disorder belowtherightkneewhen young.Thisdisorder is causedbyoveruseof thequadriceps musclespullingon thepatellar tendonduringadolescence. 1992-2c.Thefirstadultmaleplacedin thegravewasyounger thanthe othertwoadults.Age wasestimated between30 and40 years,basedon dentalstatus,openendocranial sutures, andlackof degenerative jointdiseasein thespine.Sexwasdetermined byrobustbonesanda narrow pubic archandsciaticnotchof thepelvis.Mostof thebonesof theskeletonare presentandin goodcondition, withdamageto the rightsideof the cranium,left shoulder, vertebral column,andpelvis.Somehandbonesand vertebrae aremissing.The cranium is longandovoid(Fig.65),1l°within the mesocrany range,lllwith bulgingoccipital,mediumforehead,pronouncedglabellaandbrowridges,narrowface,fairlystraightbutasymmetricalnarrownose,squarishnarroworbits(Fig.66),broadmastoids, andmediumchin(Fig.69). Staturewasestimatedat around170.94cm (56 ), basedon thelengthsof thefemurandtibia.ll2 All upperteethandlowerlateralincisorswerelost afterburial.The lowercentralincisors werelostbeforedeath,andtheremaining lowerteeth showmoderatewearwith slightsecondary dentinexposure. The lower caninesshowwearslantingbacktowardthe mouth.Thisindividual sufferedfromsevereperiodontal diseasewithsomecalculus buildup, andneck carieson secondandthirdmolars.Faintlinearenamelhypoplasias on the left canineindicatemetabolicdisturbances duringinfancyat around18 months,24 months,and34 months.Thebaseof thefirsttoeontheright foothasa healedfracture. Thereis evidenceof repetitive overuseof the rightshoulder, andbothupperarmshavewell-developed muscleattachments.Therightelbowshowssignsof repetitive overuseflexionata right angle,alongwithrepetitive overuseraisingtheleftforearm. Developmentalasymmetrical torsion(unevenangles)of thefemoralnecksis presentin theupperlegs.
110.Rogers1984,p. 75. 111.Bass1995,p. 69. 112.TrotterandGleser1952,1958.
Displaced
i
-
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
205
ce
o
o
In situ right frontal (1) right ilium (2) right fibula (4)
-.
< <
l
W
2
)/
> ffi
t >
0
tg rock 629 tile
$) concretemortar limit of plasteredfloor Figure70 (aboqJe, leJi). Church,south exterior:planof grave1991-5, showingolderchildbonesprobably still in theiroriginalposition Figure71 (above,rzght).Church, southexterior:jumbleof childbones in grave1991-5
G RAV
E
1991-5
Figs. 7>73
Grave1991-5is a roughlyrectangular stone-walled vaultbuiltagainstthe exterior of thesouthwallof thechurchatitssoutheast corner. Theexterior southwallof the churchformsthenorthwallof thevault.Thewestand southwallswerebuiltoflargeroughstoneblocksandsometilefragments set in concretemortar, whilethe eastwallandthe eastendof the south wallwereaccidentally removed withfallenrubblefromthechurch.However,remnants of mortarstillin placemarkedthe originallimitsof the vault(Figs.70, 71).The easterntwo-thirdsof the gravevaultfloorretainedits originalplastered surfacethatslopeddownward fromits center line towardthe southwall.The interiordimensions of thisgravevault, 1.58m east-westby0.50-0.57m north-south, werelargeenoughto hold anadultbody,althoughonlya veryfewadultbonesoccurred amongthe manyskeletalremainsfoundin it. Several jumblesofimmature boneswere foundinsidethisstone-walled vault.Somebonesbelongedto an olderchild(designated l991-Sb)and wereconcentrated alongthe southwallof the graveconstruction, away fromthe churchwall,althoughsomeelementslaycloseto it. Twolarge piecesof skullwerefromthisolderchild:therightparietalandoccipital lay0.08-0.10m fromthe northwallandca.0.37 m fromthewestend, whiletherightfrontalwas0.29m fromthewestwalland0.19m fromthe southwall,atoptheonlylargeflatrockfoundin thegravethatcouldhave servedasa headprop(Fig.70).
S.E. J. GERSTEL,
206
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
portionsof a youngerchild A secondclusterof bonesrepresenting 1991-5a)andaninfant(l991-Sc)wasfoundamongwalland (designated roofrubblefallenfromthe churcharoundthe graveandpossiblyin the eastendof thegrave.Manyelementsfromthisclustermatchedelements ofbothchildrenfoundwithinthegravewalls. properpositionrelative showseveralbonesin apparent Photographs (Fig.71).Thesebones wall south to the tooneanotheralongandparallel suggestthat the olderchild(l991-Sb) originallylay on its backwith thisheadhadbeenproppedup on a flat itsheadto the west.Probably, (ilium,femur,andfibula)layextended hip and leg slab.Itsright limestone towardthe east.The clusterof bonesbelongingto the youngerchild fromaroundthegraveandin its easternend,at one (l991-Sa),recovered timemaywellhavebeenstackedoverthelowerlegsandfeetof theolder units excavation andadjacent amongoverlying scattered child.Manybones have there that in thisgrave,indicating recorded belongto theindividuals overtime.Fromwhatevidencesurbeenseveralepisodesof disturbance events: following the vives,we canreconstruct largeenoughto containanadult,butit 1.The gravewasoriginally wasfirstusedfora subadult. placedin thegrave. youngerchild(l991-Sa)wasprobably The 2. back,andthedisits on interred was (l991-Sb) 3.The olderchild thenprobably were placedbonesof theyoungerchild(l991-Sa) stackedabovetheolderchild'slowerlegsandfeet.Portionsof an infant(l991-Sc)werealsoaddedto thegravef111. 4.Thebonesof theolderchild(l991-Sb)appearto havebeen to make pushedto thesouth(right)sideof thegraveseemingly howof a newperson.Thatinterment, roomfortheinterment place. took ever,never abouta dozen recovered In the top of the gravefill,the excavators (68,Fig.49), handles includingthreerimsandtwoloop glassfragments, thatbelongedto oneor moreglasslamps. Analysis Osteological uppercentral bythemandible, 1991-Sa.Theyoungerchildis represented andparts limbs, lower mostof the ribfragments, incisors,somevertebrae, is missing.An ageof sixto sevenyears of theupperlimbs.The cranium lengthsof andthediaphyseal development dental the by wasdetermined by a affected was molar first the longbones.The lowerrightdeciduous repetitive of caries.The righthumerusshowssigns distalinterproximal for overusein rotatingandflexingthearm;thiscouldnotbe determined theleftarrn. bypartsof the craniumand 1991-Sb.The olderchildis represented column,partsof the mostof thevertebral severalribfragments, mandible, upperlimbs,thepelvis,andtheupperlegs.An ageof nineto tenyearswas lengths withlongbonediaphyseal fromdentaldevelopment, determined with child, male a suggesting large, are teeth smallforthedentalage.The
Figure radii exterior: with 73
grave bright). functional 1991-5.Church, stress Fifth south lesions lumbar_
A LATE MEDIEVAL
_;0 non s ];0 -X-
SETTLEMENT
Figure 72(aboqwe). Church, south
f
;
vertebrawithunilateral(left) spondylolysis,9-10yearoldchild.
l
,, l
exterior:grave1991-5. Rightandleft
|
>> >
radial tuberosities from9-10yearold child,compared tonormal radius fromachild.
9
W47 *sX _ ^. -
207
AT PANAKTON
- _:^--
_
:
;
; ;X_ s-_f-
X
a
;
_
g g
g
0g-iS _ _
somecalculuson the lowerincisors.The upperlateralincisorsarepegshaped,andtherearecarabelli cuspson theupperpermanent molars. The metopicsuturethatdividesthe frontalboneduringinfancy,andusually disappears by theageof three,remainsin thisindividual. Thischildsuffereda smallovaldepression fracture thathadhealedon therightsideof theheadontheparietal bone.Thelastlumbar vertebra of thelowerspine showsa stressfracture thatseparated the neuralarchfromthevertebral body,facilitated bytheasymmetrical development of theneuralarchand failureoftheneuralarchto fuse.Thisis knownasaunilateral (left)spondylolysis(Fig.72).Repetitive overusefromliftingheavyloadsis represented by deeplyticlesionsforthe sternoclavicular ligamentson bothclavicles, greateron therightside,smallerlesionsforpectoralis majoron theright humerus (leftunknown), anddeeplyticlesionsonbothradialtuberosities (Fig.73).The bicepsmusclesinserthere,andthe deeplesionsindicate repetitive overusein hyperflexing theelbowswithpalmsof thehandsupward,aswithcarrying heavyloads.Thedistaldorsalaspectofbothfemurs showsshallowlesionsof unknownetiology. 1991-Sc.Onlya fewbonesandfragments represent thisindividual, includingtherighteyeorbit,rightscapula, a vertebral fragment, andthe left ilium.The size andfibrousnatureof the bonesindicatea newborn infant.
4
-0
'
^'-4-
@
_'
-
**
*_-S-
.-
4-
*W
9a
S.E. J. GERSTEL,
208
_B;''t;
>S.-
-'0'0;'>;'P$'
1'''t";i>9¢'
'7tN'''+
u_5--;^
iCe
<;8
M. MUNN,
t>';
ET AL.
Figure74.Church,northside:grave 1992-3,fromeast
3;3h<'4
-->
SIMPLEPIT GRAVES GRAVE1992-3
Figs.74-76
beenlaidto restin a simplepit Thebodyof anadultmalehadapparently (grave1992-3)dugintotherockyearthoutsidethenorthsideofthechurch. There matrix. of softersoilthanthesurrounding fillconsisted Thisgrave's was exThe individual wasno evidencefor a graveliningor covering. up on a propped and west the toward head tendedon his backwithhis of a sign no was There to facehis feet (Fig.74). stonealmostvertically forewerefoldedacrosshistorsowiththe right chinprop.His forearms pelvisandthe righthandlyingon theleft upper the toward armangled angleto the spinewiththeleftelbow right a at lay hip.The leftforearm flaringslightlyfromthe axisof the torsoandrestingon top of a small manysuchstones). sincethegroundcontained fortuitous stone(probably Thelefthandlayonthelowerrightribcage.Thelegsof thismanlayfully extendedtowardtheeastwithbothkneesandanklesabout0.10-0.15m human Disarticulated Thefeetpointedslightlytowardoneanother. apart. burialin thisgravewererecovered bonesnotbelongingto thearticulated none fiveotherindividuals, represent They it. above and fill grave the from They grave. this within interred intentionally to havebeen ofwhomappear fromothernearbygraves. mostlikelyindicatedisturbances Analysis Osteological
Mostof the skeletonis presentandin goodcondition,butthe skullwas onthebasisofrobustbones, Malesexwasdetermined somewhat. damaged pubicarchandsciaticnotch narrow the and largeossifiedthyroidcartilage,
A LATE MEDIEVAL
Figure75 (aboq)e, left).Church,north side:grave1992-3. Faceof malefrom grave. Figure76 (aboqwe, right).Church: fatalskullfractureof malein grave 1992-3
113.Rogers1984,p. 75. 114.Bass1995,p. 69. 115.TrotterandGleser1952,1958. 116.Barnes1994,p. 109.
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
209
of the pelvis.An age of 30 to 35 yearswas estimatedby dentalwear, absenceof degenerative jointdiseasein the spine,andpubicsymphysis. Thecranial shapeisbroadpentagonoid,ll3 withinthebrachycrany range,ll4 withroundedoccipital,mediumforehead, slightlypronounced glabella, wideface,squareorbits,mediumnose,smallsquarechin(Fig.75), and largepointedmastoids. Stature wasestimated atapproximately 175.00cm (58/), basedon lengthsof thefemurandtibia.ll5 Theuppercentralincisorswereseparated bya largespace,notunlike the femalein grave1992-2insidethe narthex. Dentalwearis moderate withsomesecondary dentinexposure on mostteeth,exceptforthethird molarsthatshowedlesswear.Whiletheupperfrontteethshowevenwear, the bottomfrontteethshowwearslantedtowardthe back.Slightperiodontaldiseaseoccurred aroundthe uppermolarsandpremolars along withmoderate calculus, whiletheupperleftcentralincisorwaslostbefore death.Thereis evidenceof repetitive overuseof theshoulders, greateron therightside,fromrotatingandliftingthearmsoverhead withforearms flexedandrotated, wristsextended, andrightthumbflexed.Bothcalcanei of the feethavefinepittinglesionslateralto the talararticulation where the talocalcaneal ligamentsattachon the outersideof the feet.The left femurshaftis broken,andthe exposedinnerbonycanalis abnormally filledwithtrabecular bone,obliterating the innermedullary canal,while the outercortexboneis unusually thin.Developmental variantsinclude posterior bridgingontheatlasvertebra in theneck(complete left,incompleteright)anda facetforanextraribon theleftsideof thefirstlumbar vertebra (rightunknown). Ribsgenerally do not appearon thisvertebra, unlessthe borderseparating the lastthoracicandfirstlumbarvertebrae shiftsdownward duringdevelopment.ll6 Thereis fusionof the lasttwo bonesof the left fifthtoe (rightunknown). Deathwascausedby a fatal skullfracture to thetopof theheadon theleftparietal, leavingradiating fracture linesbehind(Fig.76).
2IO
S.E. J. GERSTEL,
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
humanbonesfromthe fill of grave1992-3(SU408) Miscellaneous thefollowing: include shaftsof fragment; handbones;vertebral 1. Child'sskullfragments; Age pelvis. of ilium femurs,tibiae,andfibulaof legs;andleft unknown fromrighthand,anda 2. Adultfemalegracilefourthmetacarpal fewteeth of skull,ulnaof rightforearm, 3. Newborninfantfibrousfragments andtibiaeof lowerlegs bylefttemporal 4. Infantfourto sixmonthsof agerepresented of ribs, fragments and arm, humerusof right fromcranium, of length on diaphyseal ulna,femur,andtibia.Age estimated humerus humanbones,fromabovegrave1992-3(SU406) Othermiscellaneous froma skull,a fragments andallfromanotheradultmale,includeparietal largerobustpatellafromtherightknee,leftfootbones,anda fibulafragmentfromthelowerleg. G RAVE 1992-4
Figs.77, 78
Burial1992-4alayin a simpleearthenpit cutthroughrocky,rubble-rich Thepitwasjustlargeenoughto containthebody, soileastof thechurch. byabout0.40m deep. 1.62meast-westby0.50m north-south measuring A roughly matrix. surrounding the than andlooser" Thegravefillwas"softer headand the covered ca.40cmon a side squarelimestoneslabmeasuring theheadon upperchest(Fig.77).It restedona ringof stonessurrounding layextendedon its back the north,west,andsouthsides.The individual up withits headto thewestandslightlypropped (onearth?)to faceeastwerefoldedacrossthe torsowiththeleft forearmat ward.The forearms nearlya rightangleto thespineandwiththelefthandrestingabovethe angledtowardthecenterof the crestof therightpelvis.Therightforearm left upperarmwiththe righthandrestingon the left ribcage.The legs extendedstraightwithbothkneesandanklesno closerthanabout0.10fromground 0.15 m apart.The pelvishas shiftedsomewhat,probably byabout east-west m 1.40 about measured body The articulated pressure. includbones, human attheelbows.Someadditional 0.40m north-south additional ing skullparts,thatwerefoundin thegravefill mayrepresent humanbonesaddedto thegraveortheymaycomefromanotheradjacent atthesouth burial.Portionsof anotherskull(1992-4b)wereencountered sideof thegrave. OsteologicalAnalysis
in fairto goodcondition. Most of the skeletonis represented pubicarchand narrow the and bones robust by Malesexwasdetermined bydenestimated was years 45 sciaticnotchof thepelvis.An ageof 40 to degenerative presenceof some sutureobliteration, talstatus,endocranial Thecranialshape symphysis. pubic and ends, rib spine, the in jointdisease 1992-4a.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON 2II
Church,east Figure77 (above,leJ:t). side:grave1992-4, showingcover slaboverhead.Curveddashedline at bottomrepresentspithoswall. Figure78 (above,rzght).Church,east side:grave1992-4. Faceof malewith spacebetweenupperincisorteeth.
117.Rogers1984,p. 75. 118.Bass1995,p. 69. 119.TrotterandGleser1952,1958.
withslightlybulging range,ll8 withinthebrachycrany is broadsphenoidll7 straight glabella,medium-sized pronounced occipital,verticalforehead, gonials,andbroad eyeorbits,mediumchin,flaringmandibular nose,square statureof 162.73cm (54 ) wasestimatedon An approximate mastoids. thebasisof thelengthof thefemur.ll9 similarto that A largespaceoccursbetweentheuppercentralincisors, of the femalein grave1992-2 in the narthex,and the malein grave 1992-3on thenorthsideof thechurch(Fig.78).The upperrightmolars aremissing.The upperleft molarsandthe lowerrightsecondandthird diseasenotlongbeforedeath.Mostof molarswerelostdueto periodontal dentin,andthe teethareheavilywornto the secondary the remaining uppercentralincisorsarewornsmoothto the rootsfrombeingusedas withtheupperrightcanineand tools.Thereis a largeabscessassociated is presentonallteeth.Patchesof periosteal leftlateralincisor,andcalculus canbeseenonbothtibiae,andsevere fromirritation plaqueandstriations plaqueis alsopresent periostitis onbothfibulaeofthelowerlegs.Periosteal on the distaldorsalaspectof the rightfemur.The neckandbackshow someloadingstress.Thereis evidenceof repetitiverotationoveruseof with elbowsflexedat rightangles.The bothupperarmsandforearms, whileboththumbs rightforearmrotatedthe palmof the handupward, andmetacarpophalangeal facetsat interphalangeal showhyperextension of thethirdand is presentonthedistalphalanges joints,andosteoarthritis habitually fifthfingersof the righthand.This showsthatthe individual withforce,withoveruseof thefingerhisthumbsbackward overextended tipsof thethirdandfifthfingers.The leftleg showssignsof overuseextendingthe knee,andbothcalcaneishowbonyspiculesfromoveruseof theAchillestendons.
2I2
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
Developmental variantsincludemildupwardshiftingof the border betweenthe cervicalandthoracicvertebrae duringdevelopment, witha unilateral rightblunt,bonyextensionof thetransverse processof thelast cervicalvertebra an attemptat formingan extrarib.The firstlumbar vertebra hasribfacetsindicatingextraribswiththe borderbetweenthe thoracicandlumbarvertebrae shiftingdownward duringdevelopment, whiletheborderbetweenthelumbars andsacrum shiftedupward, causing therightsideof thelastlumbarto becomepartof thesacrum.l20 1992-4b. SkuHfragments foundat the southsideof the gravemost likelybelongto anadultfemale,basedon thesmallsizeandgracileness of theskeletalmaterial. Theleftparietal wasreconstructed, anda portionof the rightparietalis present,alongwiththe left temporal, leftzygomatic withattached leftmaxillacontaining theincisorswithonlymildwear,and a portionof thebaseof theskull.Thefirstcervical vertebra, theatlas,was incorporated intothebaseof theskull,resulting fromdownward shifting oftheborderbetweenthecervical vertebrae andthebaseof theskullduringdevelopment.12l Thereis alsoa matchingfragment of thesecondcervicalvertebra.
PITGRAVES OUTSIDETHECHURCH PARTIALLY DUG OREXPOSED Whileexcavating a 1 x 2 m testtrench(J11-6)duringthe 1991fieldseason,the excavators encountered portionsof severalburials.Eventhough theydidnotexcavate theburialsin theirentirety, we caninferthatatleast fiveburialsarestillin thegroundadjacent to thetesttrench(Fig.79).A glazed pitcherwasfoundamongthegravesandmayhavebeenrelatedto theburials(51,Fig.34).
GRAVE 1991-1
Figs.80, 81 Theskullof aninfantwasencountered projecting fromthenorthscarpof thetesttrenchalongwithseveralbonesof the rightshoulderandupper torso. Eventhoughtheexcavators discerned no graveoutline,it probably hadbeena simplepit in theearth.Tworocks,oroneslabbrokenin two, layabovethe faceandtorso.This infantlay about0.40-0.60m below ground surface,butit wasprobably not buriedso deeplyoriginally. The infant apparently hadbeenburiedlyingon its backwithits headto the west andpropped upca.70degreesfromhorizontal, probably onearth.Its head andrightshoulder appear(fromphotographs) to berestingonrocks. Anadultatlaslayalongside therighttemporal. Osteological Analysis The infant'sskullis fairlyintact(Figs.80, 81),missingthebaseoccipital. The rightarmis represented bythescapula, clavicle, humerus, andradius. There area few ribfragments, neuralarchesof all but the lastcervical vertebrae, andfragments of a fewhandbones.The metopicsutureis in place, anda smallanteriorfontanelle. An age of 12 to 14 monthswas
120.Barnes1994,pp. 103,112. 121.Barnes1994,p. 83.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
2I3
Figure79.J11-6 burials:1991 sondage
Figure80 (above,left).J11-6 burials: infantfacefromgrave1991-1 Figure81 (above,right).J11-6 burials:infantskullfromgrave 1991-1
estimatedby dentaldevelopment anddiaphyseal lengthsof longbones. Veryfinepittinglesionsin the roofsof botheyeorbitsindicateanemia resultingfromsystemicinfection.This babyshowsoveruseof the right shoulderandarm(unknown forleft arm).The bonesarerobust,witha bonyridgefortheconoidligamentandextended bonyshelfforthedeltoid on the clavicle,finepittingforpectoralis majorandsubscapularis on the humerus, andforthebicepson theradius. G R AV
E
1991-2
The distalcondylesof thelowerendsof twoadultfemorafromtheupper legsin excellentconditionwereseenprojecting fromthe northscarpof theexcavation unitnearitsnortheast corner. Theywerenotremoved. The apparent positionofthesetwobonesmightsuggestapossible bundleburial.
2I4
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
GRAVE1991-3a The distalhalfof a femurfromthe left upperleg articulated to its left lowerleg andheelandanassociated rightfoot(burial1991-3a)wereexposedagainstthesouthscarp.Onceagain,theexcavators coulddiscernno graveoutline,butit wasprobably a simplepit.Theboneslay0.50-0.60m belowgroundsurface. Visibleleg bonessuggestthe bodylayon its back withlegsextendedandfeetpointingtowardtheeast. Osteological Analysis The tibia,fibula,andpatellaof the left leg,calcaneifrombothfeet,and mostof thebonesof the rightfoot (minusmostof the toe bones)of an adultwereremoved. The bonesareof moderate size,witha malestature estimateof 168.56cm (56 ) basedon the tibialength.Thereis an old healedfracture of a proximal phalange of a toeon therightfoot.Malesex is indicatedby the presenceof bonyspiculeson thepatellafromthe left kneefromstrainon extensor muscles,andbonyspiculesontheheelof the calcaneus fromstresson theAchillestendon.Botharefrequently seenin adultmales,andrarelypresentin adultfemales.
GRAVE1991-3b A secondleft footfoundabout0.20 m eastof the rightfootof 1991-3a probably represents anotherindividual (burial1991-3b)buriedbeneath 1991-3a.Therestof bothof theseburialscanbe assumed to stilllie in the groundsouthof thisexcavation unit. Osteological Analysis Mostof the bonesof an adultleftfootandproximal phalanges fromthe firstandthirdtoesof therightfootwererecovered. Theleftcalcaneus and talusaremissing.The bonesaresmallandgracile,indicatinga female. Fusionof the lasttwobonesis presenton the fifthtoe.Thereis a small kneelingfacetonthefirstmetatarsal, andtheproximal phalange fromthe leftfirsttoe exhibitserosivelesionson thearticular base.
GRAVE1991-4 In thenorthwest cornerof theexcavation unit,mostof theleftfootanda fewbonesof therightfootbelonging to anadultwerefoundbeneatha flat limestoneslabthatextended backintothenorthandwestscarps. No grave outlinecouldbe determined, butit wasprobably a simplepitcovered byat leastonelargelimestoneslab.The remainder of theburialstillliesin the ground. Osteological Analysis Rightandlefttalus,mostof thebonesof theleftfoot,andafewphalanges fromtherightfoot,includingthefirstdistalphalange, wererecorded. The bonesaresmallandgracile,indicating a female.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
2I5
SUMMARY OSTEOLOGICAL interpretations The samplesizeis too smallto projectanydemographic based represent a mixedpopulation, (Table1).The sampledoes,however, two differentskullshapes,ovoidlong and on the presenceof primarily broadshapes.It is interestingto note thatonlymaleswith ovoidlong skullswere whileonlymaleswithbroader skullswereburiedin thechurch, foundoutsidethe church.The onlyfemale,buriedin the churchnarthex with two males,alsohasa broadskullsimilarto the skullshapesof the malesburiedoutsidethechurch(Figs.65,66).Thefemaleandmaleswith broadskullsalsosharea similargenetictrait,a widespacebetweenthe wouldhelpdeterof thecemetery upperfrontteeth.Furtherexcavations m1ne1tt.R1S 1S a pattern. Evidenceforinjurywaspresentonthreeof thesixadultskullsandon onechild'sskull.The blowto theheadof themalefromgrave1992-3on of blowsto thehead thenorthsideof thechurchwasfatal.Thefrequency appearsto be ratherhigh,evenwithinthissmallsample.Dentaldisease wascommon,affectingfiveout of six adults,andone child.The infant infec1991-1showssignsof anemiacausedby infection,andperiosteal tionwaspresenton thelowerlegsof themalefromgrave1992-4eastof The malefromgrave1992-1in the narthexshowssignsthat the church. he diedfroma lunginfection. overuseof muscles fromrepetitive stressresulting Signsof filnctional activities relatedto dailylifewerepresentonallof andjointswithhabitual the completeadultskeletons,the two childrenfromgrave1991-5,and wereafeventhe toddlerfromgrave1991-1.The armsandshoulders relatedto heavylifting,pulling,or byactivities fectedthemost,primarily flexedata rightangle. theelbowsto berepetitively thatrequired activities and theadultmalefrom the narthex 1992-1 in male from grave The adult grave1992-4eastof the churchshowsignsof havingusedtheirupper frontteethas tools.The even,smoothwear,highlypolishedto the root stubs,suggeststhattheywereusingtheirupperfrontteethto softenleather acrosstheseteeth,while or someothermaterialby passingit repeatedly thelowerteethheldit in place. developtorsionof thefemoralnecksis anuncommon Asymmetrical mentaltrait.The necksof the femurs,just belowwheretheyarticulate with the pelvicbones,usuallyangleat the samedegree.The anglesin The adult areunequal,butdo not causeanypathology. someindividuals female(1992-2a)andthe firstmale(1992-2c)buriedin the samegrave in skullshape.Two withinthenarthexsharethistrait,despitedifferences ofthe adultmalesburiedoutsidethechurch(1992-3and1992-4a)sharea on the trait.Both havelumbarrib expressions similardevelopmental resultingfromshiftingof the borderbetweenthe firstlumbarvertebra, The bordershifted duringdevelopment. lumbarandthoracicvertebrae vertebra to takeon thecharacterisforcingthenearestlumbar downward, fromthe tics of the overlyingthoracic,resultingin extraribsprojecting lumbarvertebra. of the left sideof the neuseparation spondylolysis, The unilateral of thechildfromgrave1991-5bis ralarchfromthelastlumbarvertebra, .
.
j
.
.
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
2I6
TABLE 1. INDIVIDUALS REPRESENTED IN MEDIEVAL CONTEXTS Grave/Burial
Location
Condition
Sex/Age
SE of church
incomplete
infant12-14mos
1991-3a
S of church
incomplete
maleadult
1991-3b
S of church
lncomplete
femaleadult
1991-4
S of church
incomplete
femaleadult
1991-5a
SE stone vault
partial
child6-7 yrs
1991-5b
SE stone vault
partial
child9-10 yrs
1991-5c
SE stone vault
fragments
infantnewborn
1992-1
narthex
complete
male45-50yrs
ovoidlong mesocrany
176.23 cm (5'8")
1992-2a
narthex
complete
female40-45 yrs
broadpentagonoid brachycrany
159.83 cm (5'3")
1992-2b
narthex
complete
male45-50 yrs
ovoidlong dolichocrany
170.35 cm (5'6t)
1992-2c
narthex
complete
male30-40yrs
ovoidlong mesocrany
170.94 cm (5'6")
1992-3
N of church
complete
male30-35yrs
broadpentagonoid brachycrany
175.00 cm (5'8t)
1992-4a
E of church
complete
male40-45 yrs
broadsphenoid brachycrany
162.73 cm (5'4#)
1992-4b
E of church
fragments
femaleadult
SU 20-22
E of church
fragments
adult
SU 92 and 101
E of church, aroundgrave92-4
partial
infantnewborn
a) fragments b) fragments
adult child 7-8 yrs
1991-1
S of churchdoor, isolate2 underceramicvessel SU 101 and 102 SU110
adjacentto apse
a) fragments b) fragments c) fragments
infant4-6 mos femaleadult male adult
SU115
SE of church
a) fragments b) fragments c) fragments
femaleadult child infantnewborn
SU 152-154
S of narthex
fragments
femaleadult
a) fragments b) fragments
femaleadult adolescent
a) fragments b) fragments
adult child
fragments
adult
SU 201 and252 churchfill SU 307-310
fillandfloor in narthex
SU 309 and311 abovegrave92-2
in narthex
SU 406
abovegrave92-3 N of church
fragments
maleadult
SU 408
in grave92-3 N of church
a) fragments b) fragments c) fragments d) fragments
femaleadult child infant4-6 mos infantnewborn
SU 409
NVVof church W of grave92-3
a) fragments b) fragments
femaleadult infantnewborn
SU 503-507
westof narthex
a) fragments b) fragments
adult child
CranialShape
Stature
168.56 cm (5'6")
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
2I7
of theneural causedbyunevendevelopment rare.Thisis a stressfracture archandfailureof thetwohalvesof the neuralarchto fuseduringdevelopment.Therearetwosimilarcases,bothontheleftside,in anadultmale and anotherchild at medievalCorinth, dating to the same time individuGeneticlinkagebetweentheexamined periodasthiscemetery. alsis suggested. a male(1992-3)anda female(1991-3b),havefilsed Twoindividuals, in meThistraitappears bonesin thefifthtoe,knownassymphalangism. at Corinthandmaybe morewidespread. dievalcemeteries BEHAVIOR OF FUNERARY RECONSTRUCTION
122.Danforth1982;Kurtzand Boardman1971. 123.Ludwig1972;Spitz1993. 124.It is possible,althoughit cannot be proven,thatthe silverringfound on the narthexfloor(55) mayhave beenassociated withone of theburials in thatspace.
canbe drawn. Althoughthesampleis quitesmall,severalinterpretations with Frankishandlaterburialsat Corinthandelsewhere Comparisons werepartof a thatfunerary practices at medievalPanakton demonstrate thatmayreflect pattern, butalsoincludedminorvariations broadcultural practices areasfollows: localcustom.The funerary of thegrave.Twokindsof graveswereidentifiedin the Preparation medievallevelsat Panakton.Stone-linedvaultswerefoundwithinthe churchnarthexandagainstthe churchexteriorwall.Thesevaultsmust wouldhave usuallyhavebeenbuiltaheadof timesincetheirconstruction andlabor. Thiscouldaccountfor of materials, required time,thegathering misfitin grave1991-5,locatedon the southexteriorof the the apparent church.In the caseof grave1992-1in the narthex,the vaultliningwas afterinterment. Grave1992-2hadevenbeencoatedon the constructed A simple,shallowpit sunkintotheearthsufinteriorwithwhiteplaster. ficedforthoseburiedoutsidethechurch.Suchgravescouldbe easilypreparedwithinthe shorttimeprecedinginterment(bodieswerenot embalmed).All of theinfantsin oursamplecamefromsucha context.If the usedforburial,thebonesof the formeroccugravehadbeenpreviously orpushedasideto makeroomforthenewlydeceased. pantswereremoved wasfollowedin graves1992-2and1991-5,bothstone-lined Thispractice a graveused vaults.It mayalsobe possiblethatanadultgravedemolished previously foraninfant.In thatcase,someof thebonesof theinfantwould be foundin theadult'sgravefill.Grave1992-3maybe anexampleof this phenomenon. hard of thebody.Whilewe haveno meansof recovering Preparation practices inruralGreecedescribe studiesoffuneral evidence, ethnographic The head,arms,and the processesof washinganddressingthe body.122 beforethe onsetof rigormortis,within legswouldhaveto be positioned mortuary garbat medieval Apparently, two to fourhoursafterdeath.123 Therewereno signsthat Panaktondid not includepersonaljewelry.l24 mayhavebeenencasedin cloth coffinswereusedatthissite;thedeceased theheads withthepassageof time.At Panakton, shrouds thatdeteriorated wereusuallyset in a proppedposition(fourof fivecases);grave1992-2a foldedacross Althougharmsweregenerally provided theloneexception. of forevariation in theplacement thelowertorso,therewasconsiderable armsandhands.The legswereextendedin a straightlinewiththespine; in onlyonecase(1992-1)werethekneesandanklescloseenoughto suggestthattheanklesmayhavebeenbound.
M. MUNN, ET AL. GERSTEL, E. J. S. 2IS
in theregion,some practices contemporary forblessing Containers at Panakton. place took ritual graveside sortof wasplacedin grave atthegrave.As thebody behind left were butunsubstances A similar, stone"pillow." a on up propped was the head 1991-1,19921992-3, ingrave1991-5.Ingraves existed have may case east.No atconfirmed, to bolsterthe headsto face andthere used was earth 1992-4, 1, and the headsbetweensidepropsThegrave weremadeto straighten tempts objectsplacedbeneaththechins.whatever traces no ofnonperishable were earth,containing excavated thefill. filledwiththepreviously then was beenpresentandcontaminating have may items discarded lost or graves1991-1,1991-4,1992-1,1992-2, andupper slabscoveredportionsof Stone the slabslay abovethe heads in grave 1992-4.In fourinstances, and the feetof the individual We canonlynotethe slabover orliningsin thesegraves,and torsos. Therewasno useof tilecoverings theironspikes 1991-4. Grave1992-2 contained rare. were accompaniments grave fill.The one coinfoundin the in objects iron other (66),plus nails and actof inclusion. seemsto reflectanintentional 1992-2a125 grave insidethe narthex vaults The grave commemoration. by Post-interment wouldhavebeeneasilynoticed they level; floor above were slightly projected gravemarkers No otherrecognizable yelenteringthe chamber. incised anyone smashed However,a thoroughly fieldwork. floor during narthex observed overthe 36) layscattered of four greenglazedbowl(49,Fig. and low vesselis reminiscent smashed This 1992-2. grave of when in thefill and inCorinthin 1997and1999 weobserved that filnerals break to funeral contemporary homethedayfollowingthe the in broken were thrown plates new the piecesweresubsequently patternof deathin the family; of thinclearglasstypicalof lamps the allthree the top of the grave.Fragments over andwithintheupperfillof narthex the of fill the in handles, plentiful loop were wereseveral graves.Amongthesefragments stone-lined ropesof glasson the appliqued displaying sherds body and over bases, nipple thatvotivelampswereburned suggest finds plentiful Such exterior. we builtgravesfollowingburial. specially the andportionsof othersobserved, graves complete five other the From (seeTable1).At leastseven east,await recognizesometwentyindividuals can outsideit to thesouthand and church the inside graves, known in thefuture. excavation full Inkeepingwith Interment.
FINDS SUMMARY OF CERAMIC providea filllpictureof the at Panakton excavated vessels settlement. Theceramic of a small,agrarian residents the to available ftnds wares rangeof above,togetherwithother presented been have vessels fromother Individual parallels wehaveprovided possible, to ceclosely fromthehouses.Wherever do notcompare vessels,however, the of paralmajority of The lack The sites. sitessuchasCorinth. well-established from potterytyramicfinds the absenceof a complete ways: two in of explained lelsmaybe andthe high percentage century 15th to study mid-14th in this pologyfor the Most of the potterycatalogued wares. common unglazed,
125.Inv.no. 1992-384.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
126.Relatively littleof thelate medievalpotteryfromThebeshasbeen published.Its eventualstudywill influencethe analysisof vesseltypes fromPanakton. 127.J.Vroom,pers.comm.,2000. 128.Unpublished; C. Koilakou, pers.comm.,2001.The vesselis currentlyhousedat the officeof the First Ephoreiaof ByzantineAntiquitiesin Athens. 129.Sanders1987;MacKay1967.
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
derivesfromsecurelydatedcontextson site;a few fragments havebeen 2I9 addedwhentheirunusualdecoration or shapesuggestedtheirpresentationforfurtherstudy. Ceramicwaresincludefineandplainwarebowls,cookingpots,everydaystoragevessels,andpithoi.In general,the vesselswerefoundin goodcondition,withsharpbreaksandmanyjoins.Withfewexceptions, the fabricsareconsistentin firingandcolor;the majorityfallwithina smallrangeof reddish-yellows on the Munsellchart(SYR6/6-7/8 and 7.5YR6/6-7/6).The repertoire of shapesis limited;manyof the excavatedshapes(e.g.,6,10,30) areparalleled atotherlatemedieval sitessurveyedin the SkourtaPlain,suchas the Pylitower,suggesting thatthese sitesdrewon the sameregionalworkshop.Greenglazeappliedto the unslippedPanaktonfabricon both openandclosedshapesproducesa thick,mottledgreenish-brown surface(5,34,51). Finewaresof localfabric areuniformlydecorated with a simplespiraldesign(3,44,46) and coarsepots areoccasionallymarkedby a punchedor combeddesign (35,38). Rooftiles,foundin abundance on site,andfloortiles,recovered in thechurch,displaya limitednumberof designson theiruppersurfaces (21,22,40), suggestinga singleworkshop for the manufacture of these largewares. Theclosestcomparisons to thePanakton vesselsarefromrescueexcavationsandsurveysin Thebesandits hinterland.126 A glazedbowlfrom thechurch(42) is mostcloselycompared to abowlexcavated in thecity.A seriesof large,thick-walled "mixing bowls"foundin severalof thehouses at Panakton(5,27) resemblesherdsfromvesselsfoundin surveyof the Valleyof the Muses,to the westof Thebes,as doesa highlydecorated storagejarlid (35).127 The closestparallelforthepithos(19) is a slightly smallervesselfoundin excavations of a small,latemedievalsettlementat Akraiphnion.l28 CookingpotrimsatPanakton donotgenerally matchthe seriesof profilesfoundatlatemedieval CorinthortheAthenianAgora,129 andpointtowardanothersourceforutilitarian wares. Onlyafewvesselshavesubstantially different fabricsandsurface treatmentandmayconstituteimportsfromoutsidetheregion.Theseinclude severalbrown-glazed bowlswithdarkredfabric(2,4,43) thatwerefound in HouseI andin thechurch; twovesselsfoundin thechurch,a plateand jugwithgreen-and-yellow andgreen-and-brown glazedecoration (45,50); anda glazedplatewitha complicated inciseddesign(49), somesherdsof whichwereincludedin grave1992-2.Closeparallels forthe shapesand surfacetreatments of thesevesselscanbe foundat Corinth. Theproportional distribution offilnctionalwares (fine,cooking, coarse) is uniformin thehousesexcavated acrossthesite.Potteryfromthechurch presentsa differentpicture.A comparison of the ceramicsfoundin the northroomof HouseI to thosefoundin the narthexof the churchsuggestshowtheproportional distribution of specificwaresmayvaryaccording to context.The storageroomandthe narthexarenearlyidenticalin sizebutarefunctionally distinct.Thepotteryfoundin HouseI represents the abandonment debrisof the northroomandsuggeststhe rangeand numberof vesselsthata singlefamilymighthaveusedin everyday cookingandstorage.Relatively fewof thevesselsfoundin thenorthroomwere
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
220
FROM TABLE 2. SHERDS LEVELS STRATIFIED
Context
WARES
FOUND
GlazedWares CookingWares CoarseWares
HOUSE I SU 129 SU 131 SU 133 SU 137
9 12 8 1
(4%) (2%) (4%) (3%)
10 (5%) 253 (39%) 208 (96%) 31 (86%)
NART H EX SU 308 SU 310
25 (14%) 78 (21%)
55 (15%)
IN
Total
4 (11%)
203 649 216 36
152 (86%) 234 (64%)
177 367
184 (91%) 384 (59%)
in thechurchnarthexhasa differentcharglazed.The potteryexcavated of thefindswereglazedandfewercookacter.A muchhigherpercentage ingwareswerefound. levelsin House of sherdsfoundin stratified of numbers A comparison (Table2).The sampleis smallbutit I andthechurchnarthexis revealing of fineto coarsewaresreflects The proportion a clearpattern. establishes The high in whichtheywerefound.130 usesof thestructures thedifferent ofglazedvesselsinthechurchmightsuggestthatbowlsandplates number in awidevarietyof lituruseorwereemployed weregivenforceremonial fortheglazed Thisis thecase,forexample, rituals. gicalandextra-liturgical floralpattern(49),piecesofwhich withanincised,abstract bowldecorated restingonthefloorof thenarthexandbelow werefoundin twolocations: thecoverslabof grave1992-2.Glazedbowlsfoundin thechurchandits holywater,to narthexmayhavebeenusedto drink,pour,or transport to containoil,to holditemsusedin theperformance anointthedeceased, service,orto storewine.A largenumberof coarsewares of theeucharistic in a religiousstructure, werealsofoundin thechurch,andtheirpresence, theGreekcountryside, of churches Evenin modern needsto beexplained. a largenumberof vesselsarefound,rangingfromplasticbottlesholding oil andwater,to bowlsholdingincense,to storagejarsholdingcandles.13l the properliturgical Thesecontainersin variousfabrics supplement metal,usedin ritualperformance. vessels,generally therangeofwaresthatwereavaildemonstrate ceramics ThePanakton The smallnumberof importssuggeststhat ablein a peasantsettlement. for securingfinelymadeanddecorated wereavailable limitedresources Thatglazedwareswereavailable orbarter. vessels,eitherthroughpayment with associated of glazeis notnecessarily on sitetellsusthatthepresence Whatmaybe viewedas aneconomicindexis the simpledecoraluxury. of glazedbowls,as menfinewares.The majority tion of the Panakton with incisedpatternsconsistingof a spiral tionedabove,aredecorated vessel,the decorated The mostelaborately executedin a sloppymanner. withthe narthextomb,mayhavebeenobsgraffitobowl(49)associated tainedforspecialusein theburialrite. servedtheneedsof atPanakton excavated theceramics In summary, demonstrates analysis Statistical limitedresources. asmallcommunitywith waresthat wereinvestedin imported whenavailable, thattheseresources,
130.Fora similarobservation, basedon potteryfromtheAustralian Archaeological Paliochora-Kythera Gregory,and Survey,see Caraher, Pettegrew2001. 131.Personalobservation.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
22I
weregivenoverto the serviceof the church.Thesefine waressupplementedasmallnumberof ceremonial metalobjects, primarily bronze,that werealsoemployed in churchritual(55{92).Thedomesticwaresfromthe sitecomprisea uniformassemblage. Thiscommonpotterywasproduced in theregion,mostlikelyin theareaofThebes,suggesting closeeconomic tieswiththatcenter. HI STO RICAL SUMMARY Twoyearsof excavation at Panakton haveuncovered buildings, bothdomesticandecclesiastic, of a medievalvillagebuiltwithinthe wallsof a Classicalcitadel.The numismatic evidence,aswellasceramics andsmall finds,suggeststhatthisvillagewasinhabited fornotmorethanahundred years,fromthemiddleof the 14thto theearly15thcentury. Thereareno tracesof earliermedievaloccupation on the site;strayByzantinecoins, oneof thempiercedforsuspension, appearto havebeenkeepsakes. There arealsono tracesof occupation on thesiteatanytimelaterthantheearly 15thcentury. The historyof medievalPanakton therefore belongsto the periodof the Catalan(1311-1388)andFlorentine(1388-1458)control oftheDuchyofAthensandThebes.The exactcircumstances thatspurred the construction andabandonment of medievalPanaktonareasyet unknown,however, as areits medievalnameandthe preciseidentityof its residents. It is possiblethatpreexisting settlements in the SkourtaPlaincontributedto thepopulation thatsettledatPanakton. Surveyhasidentified threemedieval villagesitesin the SkourtaPlain:Loukisia(nearPrasino), AyiosNikolaos(nearSkourta), andAyiosGeorgios(nearSkourta) with substantial remainsfromthe 12thand13thcenturies. Fragments of Byzantinearchitectural sculpture withstylisticaffiliations to carvingfromthe nearbymonastery of H. MeletioshavebeenidentifiedatLoukisia. Architectural fragments carvedin thesamestyle(71-75)werefoundin excavationof the Panaktonchurch;mostof thesehavebeendated,on stylistic grounds, to the 12thcentury. It is likelythatthePanakton fragments representspoliaderivedfromone or morebuildingsin the plain.It seems possiblethatvillagersfromthe plainmovedup to the mountaintop at somepointin the mid-14thcentury, takingfragments of sculpture with themfortheconstruction of theirnewchurch. ThelocationoftheSkourta Plainmidwaybetween AthensandThebes madeit unlikelythatvillagers livingin thisagricultural basinwouldhave remained unaffected bythepoliticalvicissitudes of the14thandearly15th centuries. Coinsfoundon site,associated withtheByzantine Empire,the princesofAchaia,thedukesofAthens,andVenice,demonstrate themany powersthatviedforeconomicandpoliticalcontroloftheregion.Panakton wasthemostsubstantial sitein theareaof the SkourtaPlainatthistime, andits historymusthavebeenshapedby its placein the geography of events.Threegeneralconsiderations drawnfromthehistoryof theregion in thisperiodmayinformourinterpretation of theremainswe haveuncoveredat Panakton: the effectsof warfare; the agricultural basisof the villageeconomy; andthemakeupof thepopulation.
222
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
Warfare frequently disrupted life in the countryside duringthisperiod,a factthatexplains thepreeminently defensive character ofthesettlementat Panakton. Itslocation,almostequidistant fromAthens,Megara, andThebes,maywellhavebeena factorin theestablishment of a strongholdatPanakton. Theyearsduringwhichhabitation atPanakton is most securely attestedbythenumismatic evidence, the 1360sthroughthesecond decadeof the 1400s,wereparticularly turbulent for the Duchyof AthensandThebes,andmorethanoncePanakton waslikelyto havebeen affectedbythisturbulence. Internal rivalries withintheCatalanduchyled to fightingin Boeotiain 1362-1365,in the courseof whicha Turkish forcewasbrieflyintroduced to Thebesby one of the Catalanfactions.132 A decadelater,in 1374,the ambitious Florentine lordof Corinth,Nerio Acciaiuoli, foundtheopportunity to expandhisterritory attheexpenseof theCatalans byseizingMegara.133 Panakton thusfounditselfon theborderbetweenCatalan andFlorentine territories. At thesametimethecastle of Sykaminon, nearOropos,belongedto theKnightsof St.John,134 a circumstance thatrendered therouteacrosstheSkourta Plainpractically the onlyconnectionbetweenCatalan-held AthensandThebesthatpassed throughfriendlyterritory. In 1379theCatalans lostThebesto a company ofNavarrese mercenaries, whoalsolaidsiegetoAthens.135 Whatever their connection to theseevents,theinhabitants of Panakton surelywitnessed thepassageof hostilearmies. In 1388NerioAcciaiuolicaptured theAcropolisof Athensfromthe 132.Setton[1948]1975,pp.52-64. Catalans aftera siegeofthreeyears,andtheCatalanDuchyofAthensand 133.Setton[1948]1975,p. 78; Thebesceasedto exist.136 Butthe firstdecadeof Florentinerulewasno Cheetham1981,p. 178 lessturbulent thanthe lastdecadesof the Catalans. Between1392and 134.Luttrell[1969]1982,pp.2411397,TurkishforcesenteredBoeotiaandAtticaseveraltimes,andlaid 248. siegeto the Acropolisof Athensbeforebeingdrivenoff by a Venetian 135.Dennis1960,fora datein force.137 Athensitselfpassed intothehandsof theVenetians, whileThebes 1378;Loenertz1978,p.229. 136.Miller[1908]1964,pp.322remained apossession ofAntonioAcciaiuoli, sonof Nerio.In 1402,Anto325; Setton[1948]1975,pp.174-181; nio invadedAtticafromhis stronghold in Thebes,andby 1405he had Cheetham1981,p. 180. gainedrecognition asthe Dukeof Athens.l38 Antonio'sdiplomatic skills 137.Miller[1908]1964,pp.345broughtcomparative peaceto his dominionsthereafter, untilhis death 359;Cheetham1981,pp.183-190. in 1435.139 138.Miller[1908]1964,pp.359It is temptingto speculate thatthetoweredstronghold andsettlement 362;Cheetham1981,pp.193-194. 139.Miller[1908]1964,p. 404; at Panakton weremaintained overthe spanof thistroubledhalf-century Cheetham1981,pp.208-210. precisely becausePanakton wassituatedmidway betweenthemoreimpor140.Twenty-sixsocketedironprotantcentersofWestern occupation atThebes, Megara, Athens,Sykaminon, jectilepoints,generallybetween4 and andNegroponte. The discovery of socketedironprojectile pointsof the 7 cmin length,wererecoveredfrom typeassociated with crossbowbolts(or"quarrels," see Fig. 82) in seven medievalstrataandtheuppermostlayer squares of thesite140 indicatesthatpreparations forwarfare wereneverfar of Hellenisticfill (medievalground fromeveryday concerns.l41 A stronghold onthissitecouldnotpreventthe level)in squaresIlO,JlO,J11,K9,K11, L10,andL11. passageof hostilearmies,but,togetherwiththe toweredsite abovePyli 141.The projectilepoints,which (Fig.4),it couldprovideanoutpostto keepwatchagainstthemovements wereprimarilyfoundin domestic of enemies,andto giverefugeto a localpopulation. contexts,mayalsohavebeenusedfor "arrowheads" Althoughtheprotective functionguaranteed bythecommanding vista hunting.Forcomparable from the 12th century, see Folet al. cannotbe denied,a towersuchas thatat Panakton(Fig.3) couldserve 1989,pp.116-120,withadditional multiplepurposes; the tall structure erectedoveran agricultural village bibliography. mightalsohavefunctioned asa territory oridentitymarker.142 Agriculture 142.Lock1986,pp.108-110;1989, wascertainly important to thelifeofthiscommunity, if wemaygeneralize pp.137-141;Langdon1995,pp.498fromthe evidenceof a plowshare andan equineshoefoundamongthe 503.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
^
SETTLEMENT
E
AT PANAKTON
223
.
x
1t- Q
l Figure82. Projectilepoints.Left to right:1991-2,1992-87, 1991-291.
!3,-
o
h i,
Scale 1:2
utensilsandvesselsin HouseI. A community of thesizesuggested bythe remainswe haveidentified(perhapsthirtyfamilies)musthavebeenactivelyengagedin theproduction of itsownfoodstuffs, andengaged, therefore,in farmingon theslopesof Panakton itself,aswaspracticed in early moderntimes,andin portionsof the SkourtaPlainbelow.143 Seasonal pondsdrainedby sinkholesrendered the centralportionof the Skourta Plainunusableforfarmingbutgoodforgrazing,andanimalhusbandry waslikelyto havebeenas important to the latemedievalinhabitants of Panakton as it hasbeento the earlymodernpopulation of theplain(see Appendix2).144 Despite,orperhapsevenbecauseof, theperiodicdisruptions of war, the various Western powers controlling this part of Greece endeavored to 143.Botanicalremainsrecovered strengthen the economic foundation of their regimes by fostering agriculfrommixedstrataacrossthe siteincludea varietyof pulses,grapepips, turalutilization of thecountryside. It is clear,moreover, thattheestablishandbarley.Becauseculturaldebris mentof agricultural settlements wasencouraged forthe dualpurposesof fromearlierstratais regularly mixedin providing a taxablebaseanda population thatcouldcontribute menand depositsof medievalmaterial,it hasnot In somecases,overlords livingin the region's cities beenpossibleto isolatepurelymedieval horsesforwarfare.145 administered ruralproperties in the surrounding countryside. Suchwas depositsof botanicalorfaunalremains. Forthe historicalecologyof the region, thecase,forexample, of ArnauSabater, originally fromBarcelona, whose see Rackham1983. will,filedin Thebeson December28, 1336,listsfour"casali," asyetun144.Duringfightingbetween identifiedin theregion,l46 andthenamesof theGreek"villanos" whoculGreekandTurkishforcesaround tivated the lands.147 In close proximity to Thebes and laboring below the Athensin 1826,Karaiskakis is reported shadow of the crowning tower, the villagers at Panakton may have worked to havecaptured10,000headof cattle maintained fortheTurksin the Skourta thelandforforeignoverlords. Plain(Gordon1832,p.339). Animal The settlementat Panaktontypifiesthe measures takento support bonesfrommixedstrataacrossthe site defensiveandagricultural objectives duringthe periodof Westernrule. represent sheep,goat,cow,pig,horse, The analysisof the skeletalremainsfromexcavated gravesin andaround deer,andfish. thechurchprovides unambiguous evidenceof a hard-working population. 145.Miller([1908]1964,p.317) to thestressplacedon allmembers of thecommunity byagriandSetton([1948]1975,p.255) report In addition a grantof temporary tax-exemption to cultural andconstruction work,traumas experienced bysomeof theadult GreekandAlbaniansettlerswithinthe malesarelikelyto havebeenthe resultof warfare. The seniormalewho Catalanduchyfollowingthe Navarrese wasburiedin oneofthe tombswithinthenarthex, grave1992-1,received incursionof 1379-1380. and recovered from blows to his face and upper chest duringhislifetime. 146.The siteslistedin the inventory The male buried outside the church in grave 1992-3 died froma blowto areTrippos,Bussancha, Pzagaritxa, and the top of his head. Erminis.Catalaninventories mayyet providecluesaboutthe originalname Perhapsthe mostintriguing questionaffectingourunderstanding of of the medievalsettlementat Panakton. medieval Panakton is the questionof the identityof its inhabitants. A1147.Perezi Castillo1989,p.146. thoughwe cannot,at present,identifythe originsof the peopleswhose We thankD. Jacobyforthisreference. remains we haveexcavated, the distinctions in skullshapesindicatethat Fora list of additionaldocumentsdethemalesburiedin thebuilttombsin thenarthexof thechurchrepresent tailingrurallandholdingsof the Catalans,seeJacoby2003,p. 85, n.37. one kinshipgroupthatwasintermarried witha femalerepresentative of
224
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
anotherkinshipgroup,a groupthatis alsorepresented amongthe males buriedoutsidethechurch. Taxinventories produced inthisperiodforcomparable sitesin thePeloponnesos demonstrate thatsmallvillageswereinhabitedby extendedfamilies.148 The churchdecoration andfurnishings demonstrate thatthispopulation wasOrthodox. The relationship of the inhabitants of Panakton to broader demographic patterns of latemedieval Greececanbe suggestedon the basisof the evidenceof the institutions andhistoricalpracticesattestedwithinthe late medievalperiodin the Duchyof AthensandThebes,aswellas taxregisters fromthe Ottoman period. The mostdistinctive featureregarding theinstitutional statusof this community is its attachment to a toweredstronghold. Scholars viewthese towersascharacteristic of settlement patternsestablished underWestern authority in thispartof Greece.149 InAtticaandBoeotiaatthistimesuch towershavebeenidentifiedasfeatures of landtenureofficiallyrecognized as the exclusiverightof thosewho enjoyedCatalancitizenship, or "enfranchisement." Documentary evidenceclearlyatteststhatlandtenurewasamongthe exclusiverightsof"enfranchisement" withinthe Catalandominionsin Greece,andthatin someinstancesfamiliesof Greekserfswereincluded amongthe propertyheld by thosewho enjoyedthe rightsof"enfranchisement.''150 Of particular interestforthe exampleof Panakton, however,arecaseswheresuchrightsarespecifically extendedto Greeksliving underCatalanrule.Greeksareattestedholdingsuchofficesas castellan (commander of a fortress)in the Countyof Salona(Amphissa), andnotary(secretary of state)atLevadia andAthensundertheCatalans.15l These andotherleadingGreekmenandwomen(oftenthewivesofWesterners) weregivenfilllrightsof property ownership andinheritance underWestern-influenced lawcodes,reflecting atthehighestlevelsof societya progressivebreakdown of barriers betweenLatinandGreekthatverylikely wasproceeding similarly amongthelesseminentmembers of thatsociety. Bythetimethatformalelementsof Westernruleof Greececameto anend,bythemid-lSthcentury, theoccupation ofthestronghold atPanaktonwasalsoover.Thefallentileroofsof Panakton's medieval housesbear witnessto thesite'sabandonment in thefirsthalfof the l5th centuryand thesubsequent decayof its structures. A centurylater,beginningin 1521, Turkish registers includethevillageof DervenoSalesi(Pyli).By1642,the villageis listedasa derbend,a settlement thatformeda sourceof revenue for the provincial administration andthe military.152 Suchvillageswere generally populated byChristians, manyof themAlbanian.153 It is tempting to speculate thatthe villagersof latemedievalPanakton hadmoved downto theplainandcontributed to theestablishment of thevillagesthat havesurvived untiltoday,butwe cannotexcludethe possibility thatthe villagersleft the mountains formorewelcomingareas.Present-day residentsof Prasinorecallthenamesof thechurches onthehillbutthereis no localnameforthe abandoned settlement; it is simplyto kastro,referring specifically to thetower.Thelatemedievalsettlement broughtto lightin ourexcavations is thusa mutewitnessto the dislocations andamalgamationsof peoplesthattookplacein difficultandviolenttimes.
148.LongnonandTopping1969. 149.SeeLock1986,1989;Langdon 1995.On Catalansettlementpatterns, seeJacoby2003. 150.Setton([1948]1975,p. 166) citesdocumentsattestingthatthe enfranchised GreekDemetriosRendi receiveda royal"grantthatcarriedwith it, in additionto dwellings,fields, vineyards, andfarmlands,twofamilies of Greekserfs." 151.The GreeksDimitriandMitro werecastellansat Salonaat the timeof the Navarrese invasion;Setton[1948] 1975,pp.114, 137-138.Constantine Mavro-Nichola andhis sonNicholas servedas notariesat Livadia,and DemetriosRendiandNicholasMacri servedasnotariesat Athensunderboth CatalanandFlorentinerule;Setton [1948]1975,pp.138,161,166-170, 252-254.Forthesesettlements, see Rubioy Lluch1910. 152.Fora discussionof the Ottomanregisters, seeAppendix2; andKiel 1997,1999. 153.Giannopoulos 1971,pp.141146.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
225
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS by theTresidder and wasprovided Financialsupportforthe excavations University. The 1999studyseasonwassupRosenberg Fundsof Stanford OaksProjectGrantandfundingfromthe 1984 portedby a Dumbarton bytheInstituteforArtsandHuFoundation. Fundswerealsoprovided the Officeof ReStateUniversity, manisticStudiesat the Pennsylvania searchandGraduateStudiesof the Collegeof the LiberalArtsat the andthe GeneralResearchBoardat the Pennsylvania StateUniversity, University of Maryland. and byMarthaTaylor,LeeAnnTurner, Excavations weresupervised Maria Hidiroglou, Hofstra, Elizabeth Langridge, Richard Westall.Susanne Valamoti assisted intherecording of finds.Soultana andDespoinaTsiafakis Helen YiannisHamilakis studiedfaunalremains. studiedbotanical remains. servedas JohnDeanandEllenBurchenal Altenservedas conservator. of coins on theidentification photographers. JohnH. Krollwasconsulted remotesensing conducted excavated in 1991.StavrosPapamarinopoulos byCarlLipo.DavidG. Romano on thesite.The sitegridwasestablished topographical map. surveyedthe sitein 1986andcreateda preliminary JasonBass,Peter excavators wereMatthewBandy, Studentandvolunteer LisaButler,MichaelCasey,BianetCastellanos, Blitz,FotiniBourdala, Dini,Daphne Corbin,AlisonDeal,Panayota BryanCooperrider,Jennifer BrittJohnson,ElizaKartaki, Edwards, MariaFotias,IouliaGavrilidou, KatiaKubicek, Koufousakis, JulesKeane,HaleyKing,KleaKoff,Lambrini HeatherLind,VictoriaNevius,Laura TebbKusserow, BenedictLanaras, Nicholas,Scott Ortman,SilviaRodriguez,LindaRosenberg,Robert Rosenberg, MichaelaSanchez,PaulineSanchez,MarkSeielstad,Spiros Sideridis,Thalia Sini, KarenSmelkinson,Amy Sweigert,Christina Zompolas.Theodore Traitoraki, AmyWelch,EleniZimi,andAnastasios organizational support. Chenowethprovided LouZimmerman wasassisted byMar,v Studyofthefindsforthisarticle Cline,Benjamin GrazBirkenmeier, Rangar Munn,PatrickThomas,John KeithKitchen,andRainaWeaver.Lorraine zini,MonikaHirschbichler, Findsweredrawnby ThomasShields Trusheimservedas conservator. andGerryWagner.
E.J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL. S.
226
APPENDIX1 COINS MEDIEVAL
in 1991and1992, at Panakton medievalcoinswererecovered Eighteen here(Fig.83). Of these,the majorityare of whichareillustrated nine Unusualamongthe in theregion.154 coinsmintedforcirculation Venetian of excavation is a follisof TiberiusII, whichwasfoundduringthe finds Early in the thatthesitewasinhabited I. Thereareno indications House of residents the for keepsake a period;thecoinmusthavebeen Byzantine medieval the of All house.The coinsarelistedbelowby findspot. this in surfacelevels. wererecovered foundin testtrenches coins locations: Coinswerefoundatthefollowing I House
1991-16:SU5 1992-197:SU 123 1992-329:SU 132 1992-409:SU 132 II House
1992-84:SU201 IV House
1992-219:Lll, SU 107
Church
1991-439:nave,SU 210 SU 503 1992-55:westexterior, SU 1992-108:narthex, 306 SU 306 1992-172:narthex, SU 308 narthex, 1992-199: SU 308 1992-200:narthex, SU406 1992-251:northexterior, 1992-384:narthextomb,SU 312
TestTrenches
1991-148:H9-6, SU2 1991-199:Jll, SU 9 1991-419:Jll, SU 110 1991-420:Jll,SU 110
154.Fora discussionof Venetian coinagein medievalGreece,see Stahl
1985.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
BYZANTINE COINAGE Tiberius II,A.D. 1992-409 A.D. 579
574-582
AT PANAKTON
227
(4)155
(Constantinople mint)
Bustof emperorwithmappa M ANNO 1.,00 r.
DOC I, 270, IIa;
Fig. 83
pl. LX
Anonymous Follis,ClassA2,A.D.976-1030/1035? (Constantinople mint) 1991-419
0: Bustof Christ R:Four-lineinscription Hole piercedthroughcoin
FRANKISH
COINAGE
DOC III.2,pp.649-675,
pls.XLVIII-LV
(4)
PRINCESOFACHAIA Philipof Tarentum, A.D. 1307-1313(Clarenza mint) 1992-84
Den.
+PHSPAChTARDRCross/ Metcalf1971,p. 184 +D'CLAR[ENC]IA CastleTournois
Fig. 83
Coindamaged ononeside
UncertainRulerof Achaia 1991-16 Den.
crosspattee + (DE)CLARENCIA CastleTournois
DUKESOFATHENS Williamor GuyII de la Roche,A.D.128F1308(Thebesmint) 1992-219 +G DUX ATEnES AR Obole Largefleur-de-lis/ +ThEBECIVISGenoesegate Hole piercedthroughcoin
Metcalf1983,pp.68-69
Fig.83
Uncertain Dukeof Athens(possibly Thebesmint) 1992-172 Den.
Illegible
VENETIAN COINAGE
Fig. 83
(IO)
Francesco Dandolo,A.D. 1329-1339 1992-197 AR
Doge kneeling/Lion rampant
Papadopoli 1893,p. 163, Fig. 83 no. 10
AndreaDandolo,A.D. 1343-1354 1992-200 AR 155.Thisnumberincludestwo illegibleByzantinebronzecoinsfound in surfacelevelsadjacentto the church (inv.1991-199,420).
Doge kneeling/Lion rampant
Marco Corner, A.D. 1365-1368 1991-148 Cross/Lionof SanMarco Bi (Tornesello)
Papadopoli 1893,p. 182, Fig. 83 no. 5
Papadopoli 1893,p. 204, no.5
S.E.J. GERSTEL,
228
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
1992-84
1992-197
1992-409
l 1992-200
1992-329
1992-219
1992-55
1992-172
1992-251 83.Coins.Scale Figure
A.D. 1368-1382 Contarini, Andrea 1992-55 Cross/Lionof SanMarco 992-108
1893,p. 217, Papadopoli no.7
Fig. 83
1893,p. 231, Papadopoli 7 no.
Fig. 83
1893,p.240, Papadopoli no.7
Fig.83
Bi (Tornesello)
AntonioVenier,A.D. 1382-1400 1992-329 Cross/Lionof SanMarco 992-384 991-439 Bi (Tornesello)
MicheleSteno,A.D. 1400-1413 1992-251 Cross/Lionof SanMarco 992-l99 Bi (Tornesello)
1:1
A LATE MEDIEVAL
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
229
APPENDIX 2 POPU LATION AN D PRODUCTION ACCORDING TO OTTOt/\AN TAX RECORDS
156. Kiel 1987.
The Ottomanpopulationandtaxationregistersof Boeotiaprovideimaboutthevillagesin the SkourtaPlain.Skourtaapportantinformation In 1642, in thefirsthalfof the 17thcentury. pearsin thepolltaxregisters in 1687only16,showingthedemographic thevillagehad25 households, andKroraarenot declineof the 17th century.KakoNiskiri,Kavasala, didnotexistatthistime,at mentioned in anyof thesourcesandevidently leastnotunderthesenames. havethenameSalesi:Salesi-iKebir Threevillagesin thetaxregisters DervenoSalesi,andSalesi-iSagir.Thefirstof these "Great"), (orBuzurg, villagesto be listed,Salesi-iKebir,is referredto as Albanian,andwas, a clanvillage. as a patronym, judgingby the manypeoplewith"Salesi" DervenoSalesi(modernPyli)wasa newvillage,to judgebyits statusas thatwere Settlements partof theestatesof theSultan(Hass-iHumayun). theregionwereusufoundedbytheOttomanswhentheyfirstregistered administraallyassignedto serveasa sourceof revenuefortheprovincial villageswereoftenmadeHassof Newlyestablished torsandthemilitary. hada fixedincomeandthecentraladmintheSultanbecausethemilitary wantedto preventchanges.Becauseof itslocationbya passleadistration ingfromthe SkourtaPlaintowardtheAsopusvalley,DervenoSalesiwas madea derbendbetween1570and1642. DervenoSalesifaredwelldueto Duringthecrisisofthe 17thcentury, crisis declinedduringthedemographic status.Itspopulation itsprivileged Salesi, whereas butDervenoSalesifaredbetterthan"Great" ofthiscentury, (Table3). altogether Salesidisappeared the"Small" aboutland providesomeinformation taxregisters Sixteenth-century figuresmayshed usein EarlyOttomanDervenoSalesi(Table4).l56These oneto twocentulighton thetypesof cropsthatweregrownatPanakton period. duringthelatemedieval riesearlier, wastheIstifehiml,orloadof Thebes,whichequaled Thelocalmeasure the priceof 167 kg. In 1540,the priceperhimlof wheatwas30 ak,ce; goldducat;in barleywas16 ak,ce.In 1540,55ak,ceequaledoneVenetian 1570,60 ak,ce.Sheepweretaxedat 1 ak,cepertwosheep,honeyat 1 ak,ce to of about5 kg.According perhive,andcottonat5 ak,ceperbale("teker") in the village.In 1570,the therewasno wineproduction the registers,
230
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
TABLE 3. DEMOGRAPHICS FOR THREE VILLAGES (NUMBERS OF HOUSEHOLDS) Year
DervenoSalesi
1466 1506 1521 1540 1570 1642 1646 1687
Salesi-iKebir
Salesi-iSagir
3 34 62 31 50 32 28 28
30 38 38 70 (derbend) 57 (derbend) 51 (derbend)
10 11 20
priceof a load(himl)of wheatwas46 akSe,barley25 akSe.Twosheep weretaxedat 1 akSeas in 1540,butthepriceof sheephadgoneupfrom 22 akSepersheepto 28 akSe.The noticeable amountof inflationis the resultof a growingpopulation thatincreased thedemandforfoodstuffs. Honeyandpigsaremoredifficultto assess.Honeywaspricedat 6 to 12 akSeperokka(1.286kg).Eachhivemayhaveproduced 8 to 12 kg of honeyperyear.A pig fattenedat homewas taxedat 1 akSeperhead peryearand1 akSefortwopigsrunningfreein thewoodsbutguarded andownedby individual peasants. In bothcasesit wasnot possiblefor the censuscommission to determineexactnumberssincebeehivesand free-ranging pigsareeasyto hide.The numbers thusreflecta dealor an estimate. Inthemid-16thcenturyanimamof a mosquewouldhaveearned3 to 5 akSeperday,a goodworkman(carpenter, mason,etc.)6 to 8 akSeper day.Manysoldiersof thegarrisons in thecastleshadto managewith3 or 4 akSeperday.Withthesenumbers in mindwe canworkouttotalvalues andproduction trends,remembering thatfor itemssuchas cerealsand cotton,13%of thetotalharvestwastaken,notmore.In 1540,perhousehold,1,724kgof wheat,777kgof barley, and3.8 balesof cottonareindicated.The 1570registerlists 1,758kg of wheat,946 kg of barley,and 5 balesof cottonperhousehold. Between1540and1570the amountof cerealsavailable fortheaverage household hadthusgrownfrom2,501to 2,704kg.The numberof sheephaddoubled(ageneraltrendin Boeotia), andthenumber ofpigsandhiveshadtripled. Anaverage familyinDerveno TABLE
4.
ENTRIES
FROM
TAX
REGISTERS
Households Bachelors Widows Tax (n) (n) (n) (akse)
FROM
Wheat (load)
Barley (load)
DERVENO
Sheep (akfe)
SALESI
Pigs (akfe)
Honey (hives)
Cotton (bales)
1540 REGISTER
38
14
3
4,732
51
28
572
25
51
19
38
5
3
6,200
52
28
1,200
68
150
25
1570 REGISTER
*Istanbul,PrimeMinister'sOttomanArchive,T.D. 431. **Ankara, Tapuve KadastroGenel Mudurlugu,157.
A LATE MEDIEVAL
157.McGowan1969;Asdrachas 1979;Livi-Bacci1991.
SETTLEMENT
AT PANAKTON
23I
Salesihad15sheepin 1540and31 in 1570(nomadfamiliescouldsurvive with 50-60 sheepperhousehold). The amountof cerealsis morethan sufficient(a familyof fiveneeds1,000kg peryearto eat).A fifthof the harvestwas neededfor seed,andan eighthto paythe tax.This is the minimum vitalworked outbya numberof scholars.l57The production figuresareas follows:200 kg of cerealsperpersonperyear,60 kg forseed, and37 kgfortax,fora totalof 297 kgperpersonperyear. With theirmanysheepandincreased honeyandtextileproduction, thepeasants of DervenoSalesiwerewelloffin the16thcenturyandcould weatherthestormofthe 17th,whenpopulation declined, pricescollapsed, andtaxesrose,andcouldsurvive wellintotheperiodof themodernGreek state.
REFERENCES Agelarakis,A.1997. "Excavationsat Polystylon (Abdera)Greece:Aspects of MortuaryPracticesand SkeletalBiology,"ArchDelt47-48, 1992-1993, Aw1 [1997], pp.293308. Agelarakis,A., and A. Agelarakis. 1989. "The PaleopathologicalEvidence at Polystylon,Abdera," ByzantinischeForschungen 14, pp.9-26. Armstrong,P. 1989. "Some Byzantine and Later Settlements in Eastern Phokis,"BSA 84, pp. 1X7. Asdrachas,S. 1979. "Problemsof the Economic History of the Period of Ottoman Domination,"Journalof the HellenicDiaspora6, pp.5-37. AvPXV.2 = K. Rheidt, Die Stadtgrabung2: Die byzantinischeWohnstadt(AvP XV.2), Berlin 1991. Bakirtzis,C. 1983."AvaaxaxpnIlokooiMBouAp8npxv,"Prakt1983, pp. 13-19. Barnes,E. 1994. DevelopmentalDefects of theAxial Skeletonin Paleopathology,Niwot, Colo. Bass,W. M. 1995. Human Osteology: A Laboratoryand Field Manual, 4th ed., Columbia,Mo. Bouras,C. 1993-1994. "EsavrgrTaq TouxaOoArRxou rrlc,Z°8°X°o Ilq, I\rpprvovaBrorR," DChAE 17, pp.25-36. Bouras,C., A. Kaloyeropoulou,and R. Andreadi.1970. Churches of A2ica, Athens. Bouras,L. 1977-1979."Architectural Sculpturesof the Twelfth and the
EarlyThirteenth Centuriesin Greece,"DChAE 9, pp. 63-75. Caraher,W., T. Gregory,and D. Pettegrew.2001. "Archaeological'Signatures'of Byzantine Churches: SurveyArchaeologyand the Creation of a ByzantineLandscape," ByzantineStudiesConferenceAbstractsof Papers27, p. 38. Chalkia,E. 1987-1988. "TpassCrg TT
*
yapUpxv: xat n i9
*
n - yasLa Tou
*
0000
Tou ccrv rVnvLxn ptp-
DChAE 14, pp. 101106. . 1991. Le mensepaleocristiane: Tipologiaefunzioni dellemense secondarie nelcultopaleocristiano, VaticanCity. Chandler,R. 1776. Travelsin Greece, oran Accountof a TourMadeat the Expenseof the Societyof Dilettanti, Oxford. Cheetham,N. 1981. MedievalGreece, New Haven. Coleman,J. 1986. Excavationsat Pylosin Elis (HesperiaSuppl.21), Princeton. CorinthXII = G. R. Davidson, The Minor Objects(CorinthX;II), Princeton 1952. Coumbaraki-Panselinou,N. 1976. Saint-Pierrede Kalysia-Kouvaraet la chapellede la ViergedeMerenta: Deux monumentsduXIIIe siecleen Attique,Thessaloniki. Danforth, L. M. 1982. TheDeath RitualsofRuralGreece,Princeton. DChAE = £21G'0Vrul5X,otortorvtxriS Atoypaxpta,"
ACOX=COROYCX>1S ETO(CCO£CO(S
OpytZVCeMtf
31£C0£af
ESado f
S. E. J. GERSTEL, M. MUNN, ET AL.
232
Demetsantou-Kremeze, A. 1988.ERAVCXr Z=p=8OgAXr
ApXGT£XTOVGX6:
Arroxr,Athens. Dennis,G. 1960."TheCaptureof Thebesbythe Navarrese (6 March 1378)andOtherChronological NotesinTwoParisManuscripts," Orientaliachristianaperiodica26, pp.42-50. DOC I = A. Bellinger,Catalogueof the
du moyenage2: Xle-XIVe siecle,
Paris. Hobhouse,J. C. 1813. A Journeythrough Albaniaand OtherProvincesof Turkeyin EuropeandAsia, to Constantinopleduringthe Years1809 and 1810 I, London. Ivison,E. 1993. "Mortuary Practices in Byzantium(c. 95S1453): An
Archaeological Contribution" (diss. ByzantineCoinsin theDumbarton Univ.of Birmingham). OaksCollectionand in the Whittemore Jacoby, D. 2003. "L'etat catalanen CollectionI: AnastasiusI to Maurice Grece:Societeet institutionspoli(491-602), Washington, D.C., tiques,"in Els Catalansa la Mediter1966. raniaorientala l'edatmedia,M. T. DOC III.2= P.Grierson,Catalogueof Ferreri Mallol,ed.,Barcelona, theByzantineCoinsin theDumbarton OaksCollectionand in the WhittemoreCollectionIII.2:BasilI to NicephorusIII (867-1081), Washington,
D.C., 1993. Dodwell,E. 1819.A Classicaland GeographicalTourthroughGreeceduring theYears1801, 1805, and l809 I,
London. Fol,A., R. Katincarov, J. Best,N. de Vries,K.Shoju,andH. Suzuki. 1989.Dyadovo:Bulgarian,Dutch, JapaneseExpedition1: Mediaeval Settlementand Necropolis(l lth 12th Century),Tokyo.
Forbes,H. A. 1976."The'ThricePloughed'Field:Cultivation Techniquesin AncientandModern Greece," Expedition21, pp.37A7. Gell,W. 1819.TheItineraryof Greece, ContainingOneHundredRoutesin A2ica, Boeotia,Phocis,Locris,and Thessaly,London.
Georgieva, S.,andJ.Nikolova.1974. CarevgradTarnov:Lepalais desrois bulgares pendantle deuxiemeroyaume bulgare(XIIe-XIVes.)2: Ceramique, obyetsdomestiques et armement, parureset tissues,Sofia.
Gerstel,S. E.J. 1996."AnIntroduction to MedievalPanakton," Boeotia Antiqua6, pp. 143-151. Giannopoulos, I. 1971.cHAoexrluxr XtZItZ T77V TovCoxoxCoale'av (13931821), Athens. Gill,D. 1991.GreekCultTables,New
York. Gordon,T. 1832.Historyof the Greek RevolutionII, London. Grabar, A. 1976.Sculptures byzantines
pp. 79-101.
Kennedy, K. R. 1989."Skeletal Markers of Occupational Stress," in ReconstructionofLifefromthe Skeleton,
M. Y. IscanandK.A. R. Kennedy, eds.,NewYork,pp.129-160. Kiel,M. 1987."Population Growthand FoodProduction in 16th-Century AthensandAtticaaccording to the OttomanTahrirDefters,"in ComiS internationald 'e'tudes pre'-ottomanes et ottomans:Proceedings of the VIth CambridgeSymposium, J.-L.Bacque-
GrammontandE. vanDonzel,eds., Istanbul,pp.115-133. . 1997."TheRiseandDecline of OttomanBoeotia,Late15thl9th Century," in RecentDevelopmentsin theHistoryandArchaeology of CentralGreece: Proceedings of the 6th InternationalBoeotianConference (BAR-IS666),J. Bintliff,ed., Oxford,pp.317-321.
. 1999."TheVillageof Goriani on the Othrysin the FormerKaza of Izdin(Lamia)according to the OttomanCensusandTaxation Recordsof the 15th-17thCentury," Pharos7, pp.111-122. Koder,J.,andF.Hild.1976.Hellas und Thessalia(TabulaImperii Byzantini 1, DenkschrWien 125),
Vienna. Koilakou,C. 1997. "(8)n pa,"ArchDelt 47,1992, Bw1[1997], pp.72-83. Kurtz,D. C., andJ. Boardman. 1971. GreekBurialCustoms,Ithaca. Laiou-Thomadakis, A. 1977. Peasant Societyin theLateByzantineEmpire: A SocialandDemographic Study,
Princeton.
Langdon,M. 1995."TheMortared Towersof CentralGreece:An Attic Supplement," BSA 90, pp.475-503. Leake,W. M. 1835.Travelsin Northern GreeceII, London. Livi-Bacci,M. 1991.Populationand Nutrition:AnEssayon European DemographicHistory, Cambridge.
Lock,P.1986."TheFrankish Towersof CentralGreece," BSA 81, pp.101123. . 1989."TheMedievalTowers of Greece:A Problemin Chronology andFunction," Mediterranean HistoricalReview 4, pp.129-145. Loenertz,R.-J.1978."Regestes et noticespourservira l'histoiredes DuchesCatalans(1311-1394)," ArchivumFratrumPraedicatorum 25, 1955,pp.100-212,428X31. Repr. in Byzantinaet Franco-Graeca(Storiae letteratura, raccoltadi studie testi145),Rome,pp.183-393. Longnon,J.,andP.Topping.1969. Documentssurle regimedesterresdans laprincipauEdeMoreeauXIVesiecle,
Paris. Ludwig,J. 1972.CurrentMethodsof AutopsyPractice,Philadelphia. Luttrell,A. [1969]1982."LaCorona de Aragony la Greciacatalana," AnuariodeEstudiosMedievales6, pp.219-252.Repr.in Luttrell, Latin Greece,theHospitallersand the Crusades, 1291-1440, London,
sectionXI. MacKay, T. S. 1967."MoreByzantine andFrankishPotteryfromCorinth,"Hesperia36, pp.249-320. Mavroeidi, M. 1999.riv,. ;= TOV Bv;avrevovMova£e'ov A0e1vct)v, Athens. McGowan,B. 1969."FoodSupplyand Taxationon the MiddleDanube (1568-1569),"ArchivumOttomanicum1, pp. 139-196.
Metcalf,D. M. 1971."ThePylia Hoard:DeniersTournoisof Frankish Greece,"ANSMN 17,pp.173227. . 1983.Coinageof the Crusades and theLatin East in theAshmolean Museum,Oxford,London. Miller,W. [1908]1964.TheLatins in theLevant:AHistoryof Frankish Greece(120F1566), repr.NewYork.
Mouriki,D. 1975-1976."AnUnusual Representation of the LastJudge-
A LATE MEDIEVAL SETTLEMENT AT PANAKTON
mentin aThirteenth-Century Frescoat St. GeorgenearKouvarasin Attika,"DChAE 8, pp.145171. Munn,M.1989. "NewLighton Panaktonandthe Attic-Boiotian Frontier," in Boiotika:Vortrage vom 5. InternationalenBootien-Kolloquiumzu Ehrenvon Professor Dr. SiegfriedLauffier, Munchen13.-17. Juni 1986, H. BeisterandJ. Buckler,
eds.,Munich,pp.231-244. . 1996."FirstExcavations at Panaktonon theAttic-Boiotian Frontier," BoeotiaSntiqua6, pp.4758. Munn,M., andM. L. Zimmerman Munn.1989."Studieson theAtticBoiotianFrontier: The Stanford SkourtaPlainProject,1985," BoeotiaSntiqua 1, pp.73-123. . l990."0n the Frontiers of AtticaandBoiotia:The Resultsof the StanfordSkourtaPlainProject," in Essaysin the Topography, History, and Cultureof Boiotia(Teiresias
Suppl.3),A. Schachter, ed.,Montreal,pp.33-40. Orlandos,A.1935. "'Hrst Toi)K0apxvos Movn rr5 HavayLaq Zxo8°X°0
IlNyN5,
>,0X£g0V I0V Bv;av-
TGV@VMvy£oov
Ta5 Eaaos
1,
pp.161-178. . 1939-1940."'H,uoEToi '0aL00
M£X£TL00
xat Ta sapaBaupta
airr 5, A,0X£g0V I0V BV;=VT!V@V
5, pp.34118. Panselinos, N.1991-1992. ''TotxoypaC£5 Tou 130oava o-,Xv AtoyoMV6,U£tCt)V T77f EiA=8o5
At8a:O vaos T0v Taitapxxv xat o 'AytosIxavvns 0 @£0X0yO5," DChAE 16,pp. 155-166. Papadopoli, N.1893. Le monetedi Venezia I, Venice. Papanikola-Bakirtzi, D.2002. KaOrl8£,0CVr ;06 0 Bviavtco (Effiibi-
tioncatalogue, Museumof ByzantineCulture,Thessaloniki), Thessaloniki. Perezi Castillo,A. 1989.aNoticiad'un inventaride l'Arxiude la Catedral de Barcelona: Els bensd'uncatalaa Tebas,"in Homenatgea la memoria delProf:Dr. Emilio Saez, S. ClaramuntandM. T. Ferreri Mallol, eds.,Barcelona, pp.139-149.
233
Rackham, 0.1983.a0bservationson the HistoricalEcologyof Boeotia," BSA78,pp.291-351. Rogers,S. L.1984. TheHumanSkull, Its Mechanics,Measurements, and Variations,Springfield.
Rosser,J.1983."The SmallFinds," in Excavationsat Nichoriain Southwest GreeceIII:DarkAgeand Byzantine Occupation, W. McDonald, W. Coulson,andJ.Rosser,eds., Minneapolis, pp.405-420. Rubioy Lluch,A. l910. Els castelis Catalansen Greciacontinental,
Barcelona. Sanders,G. D. R. 1987."AnAssemblageof FrankishPotteryat Corinth,"Hesperia56, pp.159-195. .1993. "Excavations at Sparta: The RomanStoa,1988-91:PreliminaryReport,Part1,"BSA 88, pp.251-286. Schultz,R.W., andS. H. Barnsley. 1901.TheMonasteryof Saint Luke of Stiris,in Phocis,and theDependent Monasteryof St. Nicolasin theFields, nearSkripou,in Boeotia,London. Setton,K. [1948]1975.CatalanDominationofAthens,1311-1388, repr.
London. Sodini,J.-P.1998. "Tablesde Xanthos," DChAE 20, pp.41-46. Spitz,W. U. 1993.Medicological InvestigationofDeath, Springfield. Stahl,A.1985. The VenetianTornesello: AMedieval ColonialCoinage,New York. Stedman,N. 1996.Land Use andSettlementin Post-Medieval Central Greece:An InterimDiscussion," in TheArchaeology ofMedievalGreece,
P.LockandG. Sanders,eds.,Oxford,pp.179-192. Svoronos,N. 1959.Recherches surle cadastrebyzantinet laf scaliteaux etXIIe siecles:Le cadastrede Thebes,Athens.
XIe
Trotter,M., andG. C. Gleser.1952. "Estimation of StaturefromLong Bonesof AmericanWhitesand Negroes," AmericanJournalof PhysicalAnthropology 10,pp.463514. .1958. "ARe-evaluation of Estimationbasedon Measurements of StatureTakenduringLifeandof LongBonesafterDeath,"American
S. E. J. GERSTEL,
234
JournalofPhysicalAnthropology 16, pp.79-123. Tsevas,G. D.1928. eIaropc'a TCt)V @rpst)V xac riys Bocst)rc'asaro TCt)V apXacorarct)vxpovct)vygXpcqs,oov II,
Athens. Vanderheyde, C.1994."Lasculpture architecturale du Katholikon d'HosiosMeletioset l'emergence d'un stylenouveauaudebutduXIIt siecle,"Byzantion64, pp.391-407. Vanderpool, E.1978. "RoadsandForts in Northwestern Attica,"CSCA11, pp.227-245. Vroom,J.1997."PotsandPans:New Perspectives on MedievalCeramics
M. MUNN,
ET AL.
in Greece," in MaterialCulturein MedievalEurope,G. de Boe and F.Verhaeghe, eds.,Zellick,pp.203213. . 1998."Medieval andPostMedievalPotteryfroma Sitein Boeotia:A CaseStudyExample of Post-Classical Archaeology in Greece," BSA 93, pp.513-546. Walpole,R. 1817.MemoirsRelatingto EuropeanandAsiaticTurkey,Edited from ManuscriptJournals, London. Wheler,G. 1682.A Journeyinto Greece in the Companyof Dr. SponofLyons,
London. Williams,C. K.,II, andO. H. Zervos.
1993."Frankish Corinth:1992," Hesperia62, pp.1-52.
. 1994."Frankish Corinth: 1993,"Hesperia63, pp.1-56. . 1996."Frankish Corinth: 1995,"Hesperia65, pp.1-55. Williams,C. K.,II, L. M. Snyder, E. Barnes,and0. H. Zervos.1998. "Frankish Corinth:1997,"Hesperia 67, pp.223-281. Wixom,W.,andH. C. Evans.1997. The Gloryof Byzantium:Artand Cultureof theMiddleByzantineEra CA.D.843-1261) (Exhibition
catalogue, Metropolitan Museumof Art),NewYork.
SharonE.J. Gerstel
EthneBarnes
UNIVERSITYOFMARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF ART HISTORYAND ARCHAEOLOGY COLLEGE PARK,MARYLAND 20742
UNIVERSITYOFARIZONA ARIZONASTATEMUSEUM TUCSON,ARIZONA8572I ethnebarnes@hotmail. com
sg 1 13 @umail .umd. e du
ArthurH.Rohn MarkMunn THE PENNSYLVANIA STATEUNIVERSITY DEPARTMENTS OF HISTORY,AND CLASSICSAND ANCIENTMEDITERRANEAN STUDIES WEAVERBUILDING UNIVERSITYPARK,PENNSYLVANIA I6802 mxm20@psu . e du
HeatherE.Grossman UNIVERSITYOFPENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF THE HISTORYOF ART 3405 WOODLAND WALK PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA I9IO4 [email protected]
WICHITASTATEUNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY WICHITA,KANSAS67260 ahrohn@hotmail. com
MachielKiel UNIVERSITYOFUTRECHT DEPARTMENT OF ORIENTALSTUDIES DRIFTI5 35I2 BR UTRECHT NETHERLANDS Machiel. [email protected]. nl
HESPERIA 72 (2003) Pages 235-239
ARCHAIC
AN I N
S C
R I PT
SAMOTH
I O
N
F RO
M
RACE
AB STRACT The presentpaperintroducesthe earliest-knowndocumentary inscription fromSamothrace,tentativelydatedto the late 6th centuryB.C. The documentcontainsa namein theIonicdialect,whichservesasanadditionalargumentthatthe Greekinhabitantsof the islandcamefromSamos.
In the courseof ourworkon inscriptions in theArchaeological Museum of Samothrace, we noticeda smallfragment of anArchaicinscription that hadbeenstoredin an apothekesinceat least1978 (Fig.1).1It was not foundin theAmericanexcavations (andhencehasno inventory number) butwasprobably broughtto themuseumasa strayfindandplacedin the storeroom. Thoughverysmall,it is the earliestGreekdocumentary inscriptionthathasturnedup on the island,andthereforepotentiallyof greatimportance forourknowledge of theearlyGreekcolonists. THE INSCRIPTION
1.We aregratefulto J. R. McCredie,directorof the excavations in Samothrace conductedby the Instituteof FineArts,NewYorkUniversity,forpermissionto publishthis fragment. We wouldalsoliketo thank A. W. JohnstonandA. J. Grahamfor theirhelpfuldiscussionof the manuscript,andthe editorandanonymous reviewers of Hesperiaforuseful comments.
Thin slabof grayish(probably Thasian)marble,brokenon all sidesbut the smoothbackandpartof the smoothbottom.Recordedin 1978in "Apotheke ShelfCatalogue," p.22,locationD3,as"small fragment ofGr[ee]k inscript[ion]." No inventory number. H. 0.067,W. 0.11,Th. 0.029,L.H.0.012-0.016m ca.525-500? 1
[- - - - - - -] xal lvO[-- - - - -] [
2
[
]-
] OvatCuL vacat
]
>
+
^
236
o
¢
+ w;
NORA DIMITROVA
=X
EPIGRAPHICAL
3 Figure
j
1.
Inscribed
Archaic
fragment
AND KEVIN CLINTON
_
t
COMMENTARY
At thebeginningof eachlinethereis a singlemidlinedot,apparently an interpunct. Betweenthelinestherightpartof a horizontal strokecanbe seen;it maywellbe aparagraphos. Linel:Therightstrokeofthealphadescends slightlybelow thecrossstroke,andascendsto meettheleftstrokeata pointthatis notpreserved butprobably liesatthesamelevelorslightlyabovethe(missing) topofthe verticalof kappa. Thecross-stroke of thealphameetstheleftstrokeatthe bottomof theline. The deltais unambiguous. The dottedomicronrepresents thelowerpartof a circle. Line2: The shapeof the thirdletteris extraordinary: a left vertical strokedescending onlyasfarasthemidlinehorizontal stroke,thena right strokedescending onlyfromthemidlinehorizontal tojustbelowthebase of theline.Faintvertical linescanperhaps bediscerned in thephotograph (Fig.1) belowthe left andabovethe rightvertical; theycannotbe confirmedon the stone,however, andtherefore do not seemto be original guidelines.Thereareseveralmarksonthestonethatdonotbelongto the letter,includinga shorthorizontal markjustto therightof thetopof the leftverticalanda shallowhorizontal markto the rightof thebottomof therightvertical. It is certainthatthecutterdidnotcuta traditional eta.If thecutterhadwishedto cuta traditional eta,it wouldhavebeennatural to cuteachverticalstrokefromthe topto thebottom(orviceversa)of the line,butthecutterstopped(orstarted)in themiddlein eachcaseanddid notfollowthrough.
SomSamothrace. PhotoK.Clinton, draw1ng N. Dimitrova
AN ARCHAIC
INSCRIPTION
FROM SAMOTHRACE
237
COMMENTARY document orarecordof some is perhaps a financial ThisGreekdocument2 With a paragraphos.3 sort,sincethe markbetweenthe linesis probably in Samothrace, it is diffiandso fewearlyinscriptions so littlepreserved with butthelettershapesseemto be consistent cultto datethefragment, of the6thcentury.4 It therefore in thelastquarter shapesfoundelsewhere in Samothrace.s Theunique documentary inscription represents ourearliest as an eta,6giventhe factthat letterformin line 2 mustbe interpreted thewordin line2 canhardlybe anythingbuta formof thepropername 'Ovaog.
It informsus thatthedialectof the The etais of criticalimportance. Ionic:theAeolicformwouldhavebeen'Ovadocument is mostprobably OLR0G.7 The sigmais in factanIonictype.8 hasbeena The identityof the Greekswho colonizedSamothrace writingin 1909,consinceantiquity. CarlFredrich, matterof controversy in favorof butfoundthetestimonia cludedthatthematterwasuncertain didnot andothers,however, Otto Rubensohn the Samianscompelling.9 findthemcompelling.l° onJune20, 1953,whenKarl A newelemententeredthe discussion disat Samothrace, Lehmann, thendirectorof theAmericanexcavations covered,in thevicinityof the GenoeseTowers,a fragmentof a 4th-cenTac, andsovEso).l1Fraser, twoAeolisms(woktog turydecreecontaining byanAeoliccity,conobserving thatthedecreemusthavebeenproduced Aeolicstrainin the population, cludedthattherewasa predominating 2. Althoughnon-Greektextshave (most beenfoundin Samothrace notablySamothrace 2.1, no.64), it is unlikelythatthe presentdocumentis non-Greek,sinceallof the preserved lettersmakesenseas Greekwordsor partsthereof,whilenothingin the nonGreekdocumentscanbe clearly recognizedas Greek. in IGI3 3. Cf.,e.g.,theparagraphoi are 386-387,389,430. Paragraphoi qulterareln decrees. 4. See,e.g.,Jeffery1990,p. 307, no.63 (Thasos,IGMI.8 356),pl. 58. If the marbleis indeedThasian,it contradictsC. Fredrich's hypothesis,adIG XII.8 151,thatThasianmarblewasnot usedin Samothracian documents beforethe 3rdcenturyB.C. 5. Butnot the earliestinscription, the honorof whichbelongs,apparently, to the inscribednamesof Agamemnon, Talthybius, andEpeiuson anArchaic reliefnowin the Louvre,IGXII.8226, to datedby historiansof sculpture ca.550 B.C. Jeffery(1990,p. 299) calls thatinscription "afineexampleof .
.
.
Fora fulldiseasternIoniclettering." cussionof its dateandSamothracian provenance, see Graham2002.Unfortunately, likethe presentdocument,it wasnot foundin an archaeological context,andwe thereforelackdecisive proofthatit waslocatedon Samothrace .
.
.
ln antlqulty.
1943, Cf. Lehmann-Hartleben pp. 130-134,witha goodphotograph the of the relief,pl.IX;he interprets scene.The reliefas anunderworld centralpartof the sigmain the relief to the sigmain the is not dissimilar presentfragment,butits upperstrokeis moreopenandits upperandlower joinedto the strokesaremoreangularly contiguousstrokesthanin the present fragment. The relief'salphashavea curvingrightstroke,andthe left and rightstrokesdescendbelowthe middle stroke. 6. A. W.Johnstoncallsourattentionto the unusualetain a graffitoon the undersideof a lekanefoundin the Agora:AgoraXX1, p. 13, C 18,pl. 5. Therethe secondverticalof the eta
apparently is not drawnin one case (in (patv),whilein two casesthe eta as aspirateis correctly formed. 7. Proto-Greek longalphain a contextsuchas thisbecomesetaonlyin Attic-Ionic(writtenas epsilonin the Atticalphabet). It is theoretically possiblethata foreignerof Ionicoriginwaslistedin anAeolicdocument. The dialectal featuresof namesareusuallyretained in documentswrittenin a different dialect;cf.,e.g.,forIonicnamesin Aeolicinscriptions, IGMI.2 15, 18. IdentifyingOnesimosin the present documentas a foreigner, however,is onlya remotepossibility, sincethe naturalassumption is thatthewhole documentis Ionic. 8. Cf.sigma3, IonicDodekapolis, inJeffery1990,p. 325. 9. IG£I.8, p. 37. 10. Rubensohn1892,pp.212-214. see Forreferences to earlierdiscussions, Fredrich, IGXII.8,andRubensohn 1892. 11. Samothrace 2.1, no. 1.
238
NORA DIMITROVA
AND KEVIN CLINTON
whileacknowledging alsoanIonicelement.l2 Similarly, Lehmann, noting thatthe GreekdialectwasAeolic,considered thisanindicationthatthe Greeksettlerscamefrom"northwestern Anatolia orLesbos,regionsclosely relatedto Samothrace bylegendandarchaeological evidencealike.''l3 JohnGraham, in a recentarticlein thisjournal,pointedoutthefragilityof Fraser's argument thatthe decreewasissuedby Samothrace.l4 Althoughthedecreementionsinlines2-3 TaswoktosTasLal[,uoOpaLxxv (asrestored by Fraser), andalthoughthereis no Aeoliccitywhosename beginsin Sa- (asFraserpointedout),we neednot concludewithFraser thatthisis a reference to theissuingcity;thereis noreasonwhythecityof Samothrace couldnotbe namedin a decreeof anothercity.l5 Thus,there is noobstacleto theassumption thatthisdecreebelongsto thecategory of decreespassedbya cityin honorof anothercityorin honorof oneormore of anothercity'scitizens,in gratitude forsomebenefaction, anda copyof it sentto the cityso honored.(Thepresentfragment, as notedabove,is perhaps partof a financialdocumentorrecord,i.e.,notthe sortof documentthata foreigncitywouldsendto Samothrace.) Grahamconvincingly demonstrated, aftera full discussionof the modernarchaeological evidenceandtheancientevidenceon theoriginof theGreeksettlerson Samothrace, thattheconsensus of theancientliterarysourcesin favorof Samosis"notcontradicted byanygoodevidenceor arguments, andweshouldtherefore acceptthattheGreekcolonistsof Samothrace camefromSamos.''l6 Especially important testimonia thatthe originalsettlerswereSamiancanbe foundin Antiphon,Or.15 (FGrHist 548 F5a),"OntheTributeof the Samothracians'';l7 Heracleides' epitome oftheAristotelianpoliteia ofthe Samothracians (FGrHist548F5b);l8and Pseudo-Scymnus, Periegesis 679-680,690-695.19 In addition,Herodotus (8.90.1-3)reports thata Samothracian shipwasincluded amongtheIonian shipsfightingon thesideof thePersians. Althoughwe cannotbe completely certainthatthe inscription presentedhereis Samothracian, sinceit wasnotfoundin anexcavated context,20 a Samothracian provenance canbepresumed in theabsenceof evidenceto thecontrary; theinscription cannot,forexample, havecomefrom Thasos.2l If it is indeedfromSamothrace, it provides furtherevidencethat the Samothracian dialectwasIonic,andthatthe Greeksof Samothrace camefromSamos. 12. Samothrace 2.1, p. 3. Ionicelement:Samothrace 2.1, no.5, line8, the monthMaimakterion. 13. Lehmann1998,p. 19. 14. Graham2002.We aredeeply gratefillto ProfessorGrahamfor allowingus to readthe manuscript of his articlein advanceof publication. 15.Thiswasalreadypointedoutby Bernard1964,esp.p. 92, n. 1. 16. Graham2002,p. 239.The name "Samothrace," or in Homer"Samos"
or"Thracian Samos"(II. 24.78,753; 13.12-13),apparently wasnotgivento the islandbythe Samians. 17. Samothrace 1, no.40. 18. Samothrace1, no.41. 19. Samothrace 1, no.58. 20. Professor McCrediehaspointed out at leastone importantobject foundon Samothrace thatcamefrom Thasos,namelya largemarbleovolo fromanArchaicbuilding.At leasttwo inscriptions fromthe mainlandwere
builtinto a Byzantinestructure in Samothrace. The oppositeflowseems alsoto haveoccurred: forreliefs apparently fromSamothrace nowin Thasos(published in EtThasXV, pp.87-89, nos.18-22),seeMantis 1998. 21. Omicronin Thasianinscriptions downto approximately the lastquarter of the 5th centurystandsforthelong vowel(omega).
AN ARCHAIC
INSCRIPTION
FROM SAMOTHRACE
239
REFERENCES and AgoraXXI = M. Lang, Grafjriti Dipinti (AgoraXX;1),Princeton 1976. Bernard,P. 1964. "Ceramiquesde la premieremoitie du VIIe siecle a Thasos,"BCH 88, pp. 77-146. EtThasXV = B. Holtzmann, Corpus desreliefs1 (EtudesthasiennesXV), Athens 1994. Graham,A. J.2002. "The Colonization of Samothrace,"Hesperia71, pp.231-260. Jeffery,L. H. 1990. TheLocalScripts ofArchaicGreece,rev.ed., with A. W. Johnston, Oxford. Guide Lehmann, K. 1998. Samothrace:A to theExcavationsandMuseum,6th ed., rev.J. R. McCredie, Salonica. Lehmann-Hartleben,K. 1943."Cyriacus of Ancona, Aristotle, and Teiresiasin Samothrace,"Hesperia 12, pp. 115-134.
Nora Dimitrowa CORNELLUNIVERSITY I20 GOLDWINSMITHHALL OF CLASSICS DEPARTMENT ITHACA,NEWYORKI4853 nmd5@co rnell . edu
KezvinClinton CORNELLUNIVERSITY I20 GOLDWINSMITHHALL OF CLASSICS DEPARTMENT ITHACA,NEWYORKI4853 kmc1@cornell . edu
Mantis,A. 1998."TaavayAu(pa parvuaxa TouI£pournsSaCuo0paxNs," in RegionalSchoolsof of Proceedings HellenisticSculpture: Held at an InternationalConference theAmericanSchoolof Classical StudiesatAthens,March15-17, 1996, O. PalagiaandW. Coulson,
eds.,Oxford,pp.209-225. O. 1892.Die MysterienRubensohn, heiligtumerin Eleusisund Samothrake,Berlin. by Samothrace: ExcavationsConducted theInstituteof Fine Arts ofNew York University 1 = N. Lewis,TheAncientLiterary 1), NewYork Sources(Samothrace
1958. 2.1 = P.M. Fraser,TheInscriptions 2.1),London on Stone(Samothrace 1960.
RecentlyPublished
(HARLES K. WILLIAMS 11 AND NANCY BOO KID IS, ED ITORS
Corin th, the Centenary: I 89 6
476 pages,ca.400 illustrations Corinth XX ISBN0-87661-020-3 May2003 Cloth$75/ £57.50
I9 9
6
Thisbookpublishes twenty-five of thepaperspresented attheDecember 1996symposium heldin Athensto celebrate theone-hundredth anniversaryof theAmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesexcavations at Ancient Corinth.Thepapersareintendedto illustrate therangein subjectmatter of research currently beingundertaken by scholarsof AncientCorinth, andtheirinclusionin onevolumewillserveasa usefillreference workfor nonspecialists. Eachof the topics-whichvarywidelyfromCorinthian geologyto religiouspractices to Byzantinepottery-is presented by the acknowledged expertin thatarea. Thebookincludesa filllgeneralbibliography of articlesandvolumes concerning material excavated at Corinth.As a summary of onehundred yearsof research, it willbe usefulto generations of scholars to come.
JAMES WISEMAN AND KONSTANTINOS ZACHOS, ED ITO RS
RecentlyPublished
Landscape Archaeology in Southern Epirus, GreeceI
Thefirstin a two-volume series,LandscapeArchaeology in Southern Epirus, Greece presentstheresultsof theNikopolisProject(1991-1996),thefirst large-scale, systematic surveyin thisregionof Greece.The projectemployedintensivearchaeological surveyandgeologicalinvestigations to determine patternsof humanactivityandchangesto thelandscape from earliesttimesthroughthemedieval period.Thevolumecontainsanoverviewof theproject,a discussion of thesurveymethodology employed, the resultsof a separate Palaeolithic surveyanda spatialanalysis ofthefindsat aremarkable UpperPalaeolithic site,andgeomorphological studiesofboth theAmbracian GulfandthelowerAcheronRivervalley.The resultsadd to thegrowingbodyof surveydatafromGreeceanddemonstrate theutilityof aninterdisciplinary approach to thestudyof thepast.
310 pages,118 illustrations (11 color), 21 tables HesperiaSupplement 32 ISBN0-87661-532-9 March2003.Paper$35.00
Forthcoming
JOH N K. PAPADOPOU LOS
CeramicusRedizvizvus:The Early Iron Age Potters ' Field in the Area of the Classical Ath enia n Agora
Ca.300 pages,200 illustrations 31 HesperiaSupplement ISBN0-87661-531-0 Fall2003.Paper$45.00
workshops withpotters' associated selectedmaterial Thisvolumepresents northEarlyIronAgecontexts fromsomefourteen andpotteryproduction thatrangeindatefromtheProtogeometric Acropolis westoftheAthenian LocatedintheareathatwastobecometheAgora periods. Archaic through depositsestablishthatthe placewasusedfor these of ClassicalAthens, intothe civic activityuntilthe areawasformallytransformed industrial centerof thecityin theearly5thcenturyB.C. The Early andcommercial in thisvolumeshedslighton manyasdebrispublished IronAgepotters' aswellas in the Classicaland in prehistory pectsof potteryproduction, wastersandotherproducincludestest-pieces, Thematerial laterperiods. Thereis alsoa reassessdebris. andavarietyof otherpotters' tiondiscards, thelaterTholos. withthekilnunderlying mentof theevidenceassociated
HESPERIA SUPPLEMENTS 13 MarcusAurelius:Aspects of Civicand CulturalPolicyin theEast, byJamesH. Oliver(1970) 14 ThePoliticalOrganizationofA2ica, byJohnS.Traill(1975) 16 A Sanctuaryof Zeuson MountHymettos,by MerleK.Langdon(1976) 17 Kalliasof Sphettosand theRevoltofAthensin 286 B.C., byT. LeslieShearJr.(1978) 20 Studiesin AthenianArchitecture, Sculpture,and Topography Presentedto HomerA.Thompson(1982) 21 Excavationsat Pylosin Elis, byJohnE. Coleman(1986) 22 A2ic GraveReliefsThatRepresentWomenin theDressof Isis, by ElizabethJ.Walters(1988) 23 HellenisticReliefMoldspromtheAthenianAgora,by ClaireveGrandjouan (1989) 24 ThePrepalatialCemeteries at Mochlosand Gourniaand theHouseTombsof BronzeAgeCrete,byJeffreyS. Soles(1992) 25 Debrisproma PublicDining Placein theAthenianAgora, by SusanI. RotroffandJohnH. Oakley(1992) 26 TheSanctuaryofAthenaNike in Athens:Architectural Stagesand Chronology,by IraS. Mark(1993) 27 Proceedings of theInternationalConference on GreekArchitectural Terracottas of the Classicaland HellenisticPeriods,Decemberl2-15, 1991, editedby NancyA. Winter(1994) 28 Studiesin ArchaicCorinthianVasePainting,by D. A. AmyxandPatricia Lawrence(1996) 29 TheAthenianGrain-Taxtaw of 374/3
B.C.,
by RonaldS. Stroud(1998)
30 A LMIA CeramicKiln in South-CentralCrete:Functionand Pottery Production,byJosephW. Shaw,AleydisVande Moortel,PeterM. Day,
andVassilisKilikoglou(2001) 31 Ceramicus Redivivus:TheEarlyIronAge Potters'Fieldin theAreaof the ClassicalAthenianAgora, byJohnK.Papadopoulos (forthcoming 2003) 32 LandscapeArchaeology in SouthernEpirus,GreeceI, editedbyJames WisemanandKonstantinos Zachos(2003)
I
-
THE OF
JOURNAL CLAS
SICAL
I
OF
THE
SCHOOL
AMERICAN
S T U D I E S AT
AT
H
E N
VOLUME 72: NUMBER 3 JULY-SEPTEMBER 2003
i:R
AmencanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthens 2003
S
and TheAmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthensis a research studyof thearchaeology, teachinginstitution dedicated to advanced of Greeceandthe art,history,philosophy, language, andliterature of nineAmerican Greekworld.Established in 1881bya consortium studentsandscholars universities, the Schoolnowservesgraduate actingasa frommorethan150affiliated collegesanduniversities, baseforresearch andstudyin Greece.The mainbuildingsof the and Schoolandits libraryarelocatedin Athens,withadministrative publications officesin Princeton, NewJersey.As partof its mission, in theAthenianAgoraandat the Schooldirectsongoingexcavations excavations andsurveys CorinthandsponsorsallotherAmerican-led on Greeksoil. It is theofficiallinkbetweenAmericanarchaeologists Serviceof the GreekMinistry andclassicists andtheArchaeological of of Cultureand,assuch,is dedicated to thewisemanagement of knowledge of the cultural resources andto the dissemination in the Schoolorparticiclassical world.Inquiries aboutmembership pationin the SummerSessionsshouldbe sentto theAmerican Schoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthens,6-8 CharltonStreet, Princeton, NewJersey08540-5232. Hesperiais published quarterly bytheAmericanSchoolof Classical
to the StudiesatAthens.Foundedin 1932anddevotedprimarily andSchooltimelypublication of reportson School-sponsored fromallscholars directedprojects, Hesperiawelcomessubmissions art,epigraphy, history, workingin thefieldsof Greekarchaeology, fromearliestprehistoric materials science,ethnography, andliterature, timesonward. Hesperiais a refereed journal.
72:
VOLUME
3 2003
NUMBER
JULY-SEPTEMBER
I
|-,
I
THEJOURNAL OFTHEAMERICAN SCHOOL OFCLASSICAL STUDIESATATHENS
PUB LI CATI ON S STAFF ACTING
Tracey
Cullen
Hesperia
Tracey
241
VASSILISARAVANTINOS, ANDREASKONECNY, AND RONALDT. MARCHESE
Cullen MONOGRAPHS
Michael
Fitzgerald
PRODUCTION Sarah MANUSCRIPT Carol
Excavations in theAthenianAgora:1998-2001
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
EDITOR,
EDITOR,
JOHNMCKESSONCAMPII
Plataiaiin Boiotia:A Preliminary Reportof the 1996-2001 wampalgns
281
MANAGER George
Figueira
EDITOR
A. Stein
ERANLUPU Sacrifice at theAmphiareion anda Fragmentary SacredLaw fromOropos 321
PUB LI CATI O N S C OMMITTEE CarolC. Mattusch(Chairman) GeorgeMasonUniversity JeremyMcInerney Universityof Pennsylvania Margaret Miller Universityof Toronto GloriaFerrariPinney HarvardUniversity DanielJ. Pullen FloridaStateUniversity KathleenW. Slane Universityof Missouri-Columbia RhysF.Townsend(exofJicio) ClarkUniversity
Submissions:Manuscriptsand communicationsshouldbe addressedto Dr.TraceyCullen,Editor,Hesperia,AmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesat Athens,6-8 CharltonStreet,Princeton, NewJersey08540;tel.609-683-0800; fax609-924-0578;[email protected]. Manuscripts andphotocopiesof illustrations mustbe submittedin triplicate;originalartworkand photographs shouldnotbe sentunlesspriorarrangements aremadewiththe editor.A shortabstract summarizing themajorconclusions ofthe articleshould alsobe included.Articlesaresubmittedto a double-blind reviewprocessand authorsarerequestedto preparetheirmanuscripts accordingly, withouttheir nameor affiliationappearing. The stylefor manuscript preparation, notes, bibliography, andotherinformation onsubmissions canbefoundin theGuidelinesforAuthorson the School'sWebsite(www.ascsa.edu.gr) orbywritingto ASCSAPublications at the aboveaddress. The AmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthenswill notknowinglyprint in Hesperiaoranyof its otherpublications the announcement orinitialscholarlypresentation of anyobjectacquired afterDecember30,1970,byanymeans otherthanthroughan officiallysanctionedexcavationor survey,unlessthe objectwaspartof a previously existingcollectionorwaslegallyexportedfrom the countryof origin.
Copyright(C)2003 The AmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesat Athens Producedat EdwardsBrothers, Inc.,AnnArbor,Michigan. Designby EllenMcKie. Coverillustration: Mycenaean figurineof a seatedfemale, AthenianAgora.CourtesyAgora Excavations, AmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesat Athens. Periodicals postagepaidat Princeton,NewJersey,andat additionalmailingoffices. Postmaster: Sendaddresschanges to Hesperia,P.O.Box529, Canton, MA 02021-0529, U.S.A.
Subscriptions: Hesperiais publishedquarterly. The annualsubscription price is $60 forindividuals($70,international), $110forinstitutions($120,inter- ISSN 0018-098X national),and $35 for students(proofof studentstatusrequired). Payment mustbe in U.S.dollars,drawnon a U.S.bankorby moneyorder,andsentto Hesperia,Subscriber Services,P.O.Box 529, Canton,MA 02021-0529;tel. (U.S.)800-821-7823;(outsideU.S.)781-828-8450;fax781-828-8915;e-mail [email protected]. Singleissues(currentandbacknumberswhenavailable) of Hesperiaareavailable for $20 eachpluspostagefromthe DavidBrownBook Company,P.O.Box 511, Oakville,CT 06779;tel. 800-791-9354,860-9459329;fax 860-945-9468;or (outsideNorth America)OxbowBooks,Park End Place,OxfordOX1 1HN, U.K.;tel. +44 (0) 1865-241249;fax +44 (0) 1865-794449.IndexII andSupplements 13-17 and19-32 arealsoavailable fromDavidBrownBooks.Reprintsof IndexI, Supplements1-12 and 18, andearlyissuesof Hesperiashouldbe orderedfromSwetsandZeitlinger, b.v., P.O.Box810,2160 SZ Lisse,Netherlands; [email protected].
HESPERIA
72
(2003)
Pages 241-280
IN THE EXCAVATIONS ATH
EN
IAN
AGOR
A
I998-200o
ABSTRACT This articlesummarizesthe resultsof four seasonsof excavation(1998-2001) in the Athenian Agora. Work concentrated on the Byzantine settlement (roads,houses, and large pithoi) built over the areaof the Stoa Poikile in the 10th and 11th centuries.Furtherworkwas done in the ClassicalCommercial Building (ca. 400 B.C.), and a mid-5th-century
B.C. well was cleared. Two
Mycenaean (LH II-IIIA) chambertombs, the first discoveredin the Agora in over a generation, representthe earliest materialyet found in the Agora excavationsnorth of the EridanosRiver.The reportconcludeswith the texts of two Hellenistic inscriptions. Excavations were carried out in the Athenian Agora in the summers of 1998-2001 by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens.' As in the recent past, work was concentrated largely at the northwest corner of the Agora, north of and behind the buildings identified as the Stoa Poikile and the sanctuary of Aphrodite. Here the area under excavation was expanded to the northwest by the expropriation and demolition in 1997 of the structureat 9 Astingos Street (city plot 1370/9). Much of the work in 1998-2001 has been concentratedon this new plot, excavatedas the northeastern continuation of section BZ. We also continued investigations into the earlier and lower levels immediately to the east, in section BE. As a result of our collaboration with our colleagues from the 1st Ephoreia, who are responsible for the improved presentation of the Agora 1. The excavationswere made possible only with the help, work, and support of dozens of individualsand it is a pleasantduty to acknowledgethem and their contributionsat the end of this article. Primaryfinancialsupportfor the work came from the David and Lucile PackardFoundation(1998) and the PackardHumanities Institute (1999, 2000,2001); other supportcame from
Randolph-MaconCollege, the PanathenaicSociety,and variousindividuals. I would like to recordhere my personalthanksto David W. Packard, Nicholas Burns,Roger Martin, C. N. Dombalis,Tom Skordas,Nick Kafantaris,Maria Keritsis,Pat Sotos, Kitsa Panos, Ned Moore, and Lisa Pratt.I am indebted also to the anonymous refereesfor Hesperia,whose suggestions have greatlyimprovedthe text.
Our colleaguesin the 1st Ephoreia of ClassicalAntiquities have continued to aid our work in everypossibleway and their good will and collaboration have been constant.I would like to expressour appreciationto the successive ephors,Ismene Triandiand Alkestis Choremi, and especiallyto their representative,Eleni Phoka, and her staff in the Stoa of Attalos.
/
.
242
McKESSON
JOHN
18
19
20'
,
1.'.
"' '
.,7 4
.. :'":.\ 11,t'10STr'??
'0soon 5 jEX9CAVATio10nl
I
5
6
8
\
/5 :.r.-'.X\ ..;i:: N,I
0o\\"'.
,
14
13
17 181 18'
16
615
9 1 2o
.
WA
BZ
..
. ...
=
1.
\".
o
' '
' . ,
.
7
P=PITMO3s?X
--
1
-.
('.
B:
.
T .?P'.. "
P = PITHO,5 Kv.
:, ":.
'P
aP 5m
'
SUPVIV'IG'
o.P
-.
6
'.
. \ -
Is l
1 4
E :5
LLS,
DE.3TPOYLD
3
H 'S AT M
.
OF SETIO13 PLAM1 OF LAT'-ST
or,
.'
1o,-
C=:,'
2
i
EXCAVAT I.O3..
?
-:BE[A.DPAPT
L:ATE WAL L3 .
12
..
([EAPLIEP
\ \ .:. *...*..*... ?
11I
II
CAMP
E P,-O:U'.S
.\ \
\ *.***..
l Ilo1
AGOPA
STPEET \t19881
o
99
.
P'
M?
?
A
i' '
'
p'
t
1
".
C.0
L? ,.WELL
't... . . . .
?~
~ ~~''~Figure
WELL=
1. Plan of Byzantine levels in
I-K/1-2): north-south streetwith-
?0
`---'
`
sections BE and BZ (grid squares C. Anderson Anderson R. C. on either houses eitherside. side. R. houseson
EXCAVATIONS
N-S
IN
THE
ROAD
ATHENIAN
AGORA
243
ROOM F
ROOM E
CESSPIT
I
:1"
PITHOS
WELL J 2:18
51.00
m
0 I
5 m I
I
Figure2. East-westcross-section throughroadand Byzantinehouses, lookingnorth-northwestthrough
J 2. D. Scahill
I
I
I
(both for the unification project of the archaeological zones and the upcoming Olympic Games), additional clearing was carried out in the area of the Eleusinion, southeast of the Agora.2 As always in the Agora, the recent excavations have produced a large body of varied material representing a wide chronological range: chamber tombs of the Late Bronze Age, a well of the 5th century B.C., Hellenistic inscriptions, and a domestic quarter of the 11th century A.C. We begin with the latest material, in the area of the northwest corner of the Agora.
MIDDLE BYZANTINE REMAINS
2. For the Eleusinion areain general,see AgoraXXXI. 3. Shear 1984, pp. 50-57; 1997, pp.521-535.
Immediately below the modern building we encountered the continuation of the medieval settlement which has been uncovered throughout the excavated area north of Hadrian Street. Though not yet fully excavated, in general the remains encountered here seem to correspond closely to the neighboring houses published in earlier reports.3This part of town was densely inhabited, with houses crowded together, sharing party walls. Parts of four houses and a north-south street were cleared in the new area (Figs. 1, 2). The houses have walls of fieldstones set in clay, ca. 0.55-0.60 m thick, with a fair number of reused blocks. Several of the reused pieces are funerary (reliefs, sarcophagus lids, and columnar grave monuments), indicating that the builders made use of material from earlier cemeteries outside the walls, some 500 m to the northwest. Other, larger,reused architectural blocks were harder to move and presumably were recovered from the immediate vicinity. The floors of the rooms were of packed earth and there was a surprisingly large number of pithoi or built storage containers set beneath floor level (Figs. 3, 4). For the most part these were found empty or partially filled with earth or water.The walls of some are sealed with a waterproof mortar, while others are simply built stone-lined pits. The few samples
244
JOHN
McKESSON
CAMP
II
Figure 3. Byzantine house west of street, with pithoi as found in 2000; road at extreme left. Coin hoard J 2:15 found just beyond central pithos. View from the northwest.
Figure 4. Byzantine house shown in Figure 3, as cleared in 2001, with pithoi at right, road at top, and cistern at left. View from the west.
EXCAVATIONS
IN
THE
ATHENIAN
AGORA
245
Figure5. Byzantinehouseeastof street,as clearedin 2000;pithoswith raisedmouthat right.View fromthe south.
4. DepositJ2:15,containingcoins BZ 924-944, foundJuly 23, 1999, at J/6-2/11 at 53.90-53.85 m. Bust of Christ on the obverse,and the four-line inscriptionIHSYSXRISTYSBASILET BASILEon the reverse.Class A(2), dated 976(?)-ca. 1030/1035, according to Grierson(1973, pp. 634-675); see alsoJohnson2001. Forwell K 1:2,with similar11th-centuryfolles, see Shear1997, pp. 533-535. 5. From our floor levels we have none of the earliestgreen and brown paintedwares,which, accordingto Frantz(1938, p. 436), "wereintroduced at some time earlyin the eleventh century."
of earth collected have not yet been analyzed for possible traces of the contents, but a roughly contemporarysource (Life of St. Lukeof Steiris80) indicates that they may have been used for the storage of wine, oil, or legumes. Other subterraneanchambers could be recognized as cisterns or cesspits. The depth of the foundations for the walls (between 1.0 and 1.5 m), as well as the large area reservedfor storage, with pithoi in almost every room, suggests that the houses had two stories: the ground floor used largely for storage,with the domestic quarterslocated upstairs. Two phases could be made out within many of the rooms; most of the floor levels were raised substantially(ca. 0.30 m) at least once, along with the mouths of the storage bins in order to keep them accessible (Fig. 5). Minor rebuilding of the walls of some rooms and the addition of some pithoi are associated with the second phase, though in general there seem not to have been major changes to the basic plans of the houses. A hoard of twenty-one copper coins (Fig. 6) was found in one of the rooms, apparently associatedwith the laterphase;they were all anonymousfolles, minted between A.D.976 and 1035, indicating-as have severalwells found in the adjacent area-that the neighborhood was in use primarily in the 10th and early 11th century.4 Dating the pottery in this period remains a problem.The assemblage is bracketedby the fine red wares of the Late Roman period and the more diagnostic Byzantine decorated and polychrome lead-glazed examples of the 11th to 13th centuries.5The very coarse fabricswith large inclusions
246
MCKESSON
JOHN
CAMP
II
I _~~~ _~~~ _V~
Figure6. Partof Byzantinecoin
WhoardJ ~
~
2:15
encountered in the houses are occasionally covered with a thin clear lead glaze, revealingthe brown color of the underlying clay.Among the shapes, plain water jars, open casseroles on low stands, and tall lamps predominate.6Almost no complete vessels were recoveredin the stratified fills. A clearer picture of the chronology of the pottery should emerge after the material from several of the household wells in this neighborhood has been studied in detail.7 The north-south street running through the area consists of layers of very hard-packed gravel, contemporary with the houses. These surfaces are the uppermost preserved layers of a deep deposit of successive roads; immediately to the south, this street has been traced back at least as early as the 5th century B.C. The house walls along the street have a large number of reused blocks built into their fabric. The provisions for storage are impressive, as is the crowded aspect of the neighborhood. It is not clear if these featuresrepresenttroubled times, with a need for collective security and hoarding of produce and coins, or good times, with a growing population and the storage of accumulated wealth. The construction of several small churches in the vicinity, including the Church of the Holy Apostles,8 perhaps suggests that the happier interpretation of a growing and prosperoustown is more likely. Beneath the Byzantine levels we encountered the first traces of the Late Roman levels below, usuallyin the form of walls set with a hardwhite lime mortar;in some instances the Byzantine walls were founded directly on earlierRoman ones. The plan of these Roman remains, as well as their chronology,is not yet clear,though it appearsthat they go out of use late in the 6th century A.C. The Roman levels were disturbed by the deep wall foundations of the Byzantine houses, the pits dug for pithoi, and the practice of reusing earlier blocks. In later fill we recovered two carved gemstones (1, 2) of the Roman period, as well as a concentration of some 114 bronze coins, which seem to represent the scattered remains of a hoard earlier than that mentioned above.9 6. Forthe shapesandtheglazed ware,seeFrantz1938,groupB,
pp.528-530,533-535. 8.AgoraXX,esp.pp.24-26.
Mostof the coinsareheavilycorroded andnot allhavebeenfullycleaned,but
pp. 433-434, 457-461; CorinthXI, pp.36-42. 7. See, for instance,Shear 1997,
9. Deposit J 1:2, containingcoins BZ 979,1001-1113, foundJuly 10-12, 2000, atJ/8-1/16, 17 at 53.50-53.08 m.
it seems that the latest coins date to the 4th or 5th centuryA.C.
EXCAVATIONS
1
Figure 7. Roman gemstones 1 and 2
IN
THE
ATHENIAN
_
AGORA
247
2
CATALOGUE
1
J 229: Carved gemstone
Fig. 7
From Byzantine road fill at J/20-1/9, at 55.38 m. H. 0.014, W. 0.010, max. Th. 0.003 m. Intact. Oval carnelian bezel with intaglio of Fortuna Panthea, turned to her left. Beveled edges, convex upper face. Standing winged female figure wearing helmet, holding a cornucopia in her right hand, an ear of wheat in her left. Indistinct object below. A ship's rudder(?)at her feet.10 2
J 230: Carved gemstone Fig. 7 From footing trench for north wall of Byzantine room C (J/17-1/13), at 55.12 m. H. 0.009, W. 0.006, max. Th. 0.0035 m. Intact. Translucent green oval bezel with intaglio of Athena Parthenos type. The goddess is helmeted and a shield rests by her side, with a figure of Nike on her outstretched hand on the other side. A short column rises under but not actually supporting the outstretched arm. No trace of the aegis, nor is the serpent readily discernible."
CLASSICAL
COMMERCIAL
BUILDING
To the east of section BZ and at a lower level, we continued investigating the floors of the Classical Commercial Building along the east side of the north-south street (Fig. 8). Two more Early Hellenistic pyre deposits (J 2:16 with twelve objects and J 3:7 with twenty) were recovered, the sixth and seventh to be uncovered thus far in the building.l2 These shallow pits, full of small vases and containing traces of burning and a few bones, represent a ritual not attested to in the literature. The pits are found in houses and shops, and rarely in public buildings or sanctuaries, and thus seem to be an expression of a private cult activity. The vases indicate that 10. For other gems with "Pantheistic Fortuna,"see Richter 1971, p. 52, nos. 235-237. I am indebted to Carol Lawton for her views on the identification of the figureand its multiple attributes.
11. For an earlierrepresentationof the Parthenosand a discussionof the position of the snakeand column, see Camp 1996, pp. 241-242. For other gemstones carvedwith the Parthenos, see Richter 1971, pp. 33-34, nos. 93-96.
12. For the Agora pyresand earlier bibliography,see Camp 1999, pp. 278280 and n. 16; the entire corpusof such pyresin the Agora is the subjectof a forthcomingstudyby Susan Rotroff and Lynn Snyder.
248
JOHN
McKESSON
'V
CAMP
II
4
C t
3
/
,e
\ Pit Deposit , ..)' J/K2:1
..Pyre J 2:9
H-
.
LU
4 4
I4J
Ostraka Deposit
Lw
)
2 H-
Layers
0C
1
Pyre .J 3:7
STOA
POI
K I L E
Figure 8. Plan of the Classical Commercial Building in section BE and earlier remains behind the Stoa Poikile, showing the position of the Early Hellenistic pyres, well J 2:14, and Mycenaean chamber tombs. M. Djordjevitchand D. Scahill
EXCAVATIONS
IN
THE
ATHENIAN
AGORA
249
J
NORTH END OF STOA
Approximate Level of Byzantine Chapel Cellar
I
50.00m 5m
0 I
Figure9. North-south cross-section takenthroughrooms1, 2, and3 of the ClassicalCommercialBuilding, lookingwest, showingthe Mycenaeantombs,severalHellenistic pyres,andthe laterfloorlevels. D. Scahill
I
I
I
I
I
dining and drinking were part of the ceremony,while the invariablepresence of a lamp perhaps suggests that the rite was nocturnal.The Classical Commercial Building in section BE has a higher concentration of these pyre deposits than anywhere else in the excavations. Some of the floor levels also produced signs of light industrialactivity: small chunks of slag and pieces of soft poros limestone marked and worn in such a way as to suggest that they were used for burnishing. The different construction techniques of the walls of the building are noteworthy (Fig. 9).The south wall is built of large poros limestone ashlars (1.28 x 0.60 x 0.45 m), resting on an equally well built euthynteria course (0.46 m high, left rough for the lower 0.27 m). The parallel crosswall between rooms 1 and 2 is made up of hard Acropolis limestone pieces set in a polygonal style, with stack work or laddering filling the interstices. The ladders are found only on the south face of the wall, and such a style is often used for exterior walls; the wall is ca. 0.46 m thick and sits directly on bedrock, with no foundations. The next crosswall to the north, between rooms 2 and 3, is composed of a properfoundation course ofAcropolis limestone, measuring some 0.70-0.77 m wide, one or two courses high; it is leveled on top to carry the wall itself, one orthostate of which, of Acropolis limestone, survives in situ at the west. We have not yet discovered the northern wall for room 3. The differences in technique and material of the three walls raise the possibility that the building was constructed piecemeal, room by room, rather than according to a single, unified plan. Further work is needed to determine if this is the case, and if there is a chronological distinction to be made among the rooms or if the varied construction simply reflects the resourcesand choices of different owners of the establishment. Determining the significance of the different floor levels of the individual rooms will also requirefurther study,though generally throughout all periods one can see a stepping down of the ground level toward the south and the banks of the Eridanos River.
JOHN
250
MCKESSON
CAMP
II
Figure 10. WellJ 2:14, in center,just to left of dromos of Mycenaean tomb K 2:5. View from the northwest.
CLASSICAL
WELL J 2:14
To the northeast of the Classical Commercial Building we encountered the shaft of an unlined well, ca. 1.20 m in diameter, sunk into bedrock (J 2:14; Figs. 8,10). We dug some 4 m before collapsing sides caused us to abandon the operation in 1999. Following the stabilizing of the walls by Craig Mauzy, we continued the excavations in 2000, reaching a depth of 5.30 m (at 46.90 masl). The lowest 0.45 meters contained a concentration of thin-walled water jars and must represent the period of use. A mass of sterile fill and a large terracottawellhead found immediately above should reflect the original collapse of the upper part of the well. Pottery recovered in the uppermost fill suggests that the well went out of use and was filled up at some time early in the second half of the 5th century B.c.13Its association with the adjacentCommercial Building is uncertain.It lies outside and behind the building, the rooms of which, where preserved,face west toward the street. The date of abandonment of the well seems to correspond to the construction of the Commercial Building rather than to its use. Pieces of burnishing stones similar to those found in the Classical Commercial Building were also recovered from the well, however, and may reflect activity carriedout in the areajust prior to the construction of the building.The fill in the well also contained a variety of standardblackglazed shapes, large fragments of three red-figured lekythoi (3-5), a complete red-figured pelike (6), and a lead vessel (9).
13. Some fifty pieces were catalogued from the well, and some fourteentins of fragmentarypottery were recoveredand saved.In all this materialtherewere no examplesof the type of stampedor incised decoration that became so popularin the third quarterof the 5th centuryB.C.on Athenian black-glazedopen shapes: AgoraXII, pp. 22-30. Beyond the figuredpieces presentedin the cataloguebelow,the shapesrepresented include lamps,lekythoi,lekanides,cups, bowls, skyphoi,mugs, plates,and oinochoai.A few animalbones were recovered;water sieving and flotation producedlittle additionalfloralor faunalmaterial.
EXCAVATIONS
IN
THE
ATHENIAN
AGORA
251
4
Figure 11. Red-figured lekythoi 3, 4, and 5
CATALOGUE 3
P 33584: Fragmentaryred-figured lekythos
Fig. 11
Dumped fill at 49.65-49.15 m. P.H. 0.144, max. W. 0.075 m. Mended; most of body preserved, missing base, shoulder, and mouth. Reservedband below shoulderwith meanderon white ground.Armed Athena, striding right with spearlowered. Reserved groundline, added white on helmet. Attic clay; good black glaze, cloudy on one side. Context date: ca. mid-5th century B.C. 4
P 33585: Red-figured lekythos fragment Fig. 11 at 49.15-48.80 m. fill Dumped P.H. 0.109, p.W. 0.055 m. Three joining fragments preservelower body and part of wall. Reserved band with meander at top. On reservedgroundline: a draped female figure seated right, holding a small mirror.Attic clay; lustrous black glaze. Context date: ca. mid-5th century B.C. P 33586: Fragmentaryred-figured lekythos Fig. 11 Dumped fill at 49.15-48.80 m. P.H. 0.145, Diam. 0.075 m. Mended; most of body and disk foot preserved,missing from shoulder on up. Reserved band below shoulder with meander between two lines. On reserved groundline: draped female figure walking right toward a garlanded altar.Outside and underside of foot reserved.Attic clay; somewhat dull black glaze, streaky on lower body. Context date: ca. mid-5th century B.C. 5
252
JOHN
MCKESSON
_
CAMP
II
I
P 33647: Red-figured pelike Fig. 12 Period-of-use fill. H. 0.325, Diam. 0.23 m. Mended; small chips missing. Large torus foot, squat roundedbody,outturned rounded lip. On one side: a drapedbarefoot woman in profile moving right, hands held out in front of her as though carrying something like a fillet, now missing. Left hand higher than right. Hair pulled back in a loose, large bun; simple loop earring.Other side: a barefoot heavily drapedyouth standing left. Right arm bare and outstretched, holding some sort of stick or wand. Left arm concealed in drapery. Short hair. Underside of vessel foot unglazed; outside of foot reserved, with added red; two reserved lines on inside of mouth, the uppermost with added red. Attic clay; dark lustrous black glaze. Context: mid-5th century B.C. 6
7
Fig. 13 fill. Period-of-use H. 0.155, Diam. 0.135 m. Complete except for vertical handle. Flaring ring foot, round body, trefoil mouth. Glazed juncture of foot and body, two glazed rings on lower body, glazed ring around neck with the inside and outside of the mouth glazed. Black-figured scene on front: a heavily draped woman walking right, carrying an indistinct object (stool, basket, tray?)on her head, followed by a male figure in a short chiton playing a long musical instrument (salpinx), held in his left hand. In front of each figure a single large ivy leaf rises from the groundline. Poor incision and fugitive added white for details of figures. Attic clay. Context: mid-5th century B.C.
Figure 12. Red-figured pelike 6, two views
P 33644: Black-figured chous, processional scene
"
Figure 13. Black-figured chous 7
EXCAVATIONS
IN
THE
Figure 14. Black-figured oinochoe 8 (right), and drawing of scene on body (above):Dionysos and rams. C. Grainger
ATHENIAN
AGORA
253
~ZZIZZlffi
8
P 33643: Black-figured oinochoe, Dionysos and rams
Fig. 14
47.80 masl, period of collapse of the well. H. 0.12, Diam. 0.088 m. Intact.Disk foot, tall elongatedbody,trefoilmouth. Lower partof body,handle, and mouth glazed. Veryfaded scene on body: Dionysos, drapedand bearded,standing right, a crown of some sort on his head, holding a drinking horn. Flanked by two rams with large curving horns. Grape clusters and other floral tendrils in background.Attic clay; very fugitive black glaze throughout, with poor incision. Mid-5th century B.C. 9
Figure15. Leadbottle9
IL 1939: Lead bottle
Fig. 15
Period-of-use fill. H. 0.21, Diam. 0.12, Weight 2.182 kg. Intact. Cylindrical lead bottle. Flat base, slightly tapering body, narrowneck, wider tall vertical lip. Thick upper surface of lip deeply grooved, presumablyfor a lid. Two curved handles, round in section, loop from shoulder to lower part of rim. Vertical seam where rolled sheet of lead was joined to form body. Another seam for outer part of rim, which was made separately;base also made of a separate piece and joined at bottom of body. Context: mid-5th century B.C.
254
JOHN
MYCENAEAN
McKESSON
CAMP
II
GRAVES
More work was also carriedout under the Classical Commercial Building. Here, two Mycenaean tombs (J-K 2:2 and K 2:5; Fig. 8) were excavatedin 1998 and 1999. They are the earliest remains discovered north of the Eridanos River in this part of the Agora excavations, some 300 years earlier than the two simple cist graves of Late Submycenaean times found in 1996 and 1997.14 The new tombs are roughly square chambers, between 2.00 and 2.50 m across, their lower parts preserved to a depth of 0.650.75 m. They are cut into relativelysoft virgin fill and, if roofed, their roofs collapsed in antiquity and the upper parts were then quarriedaway during later building activity in the area.Both tombs were used for multiple burials and contained considerableamounts of disarticulatedand brokenbones, most of them pushed toward the sides of the chambers. Numerous vases-both fragmentary and intact-and several bronze weapons or tools were found in the tombs (see catalogue, below). Grave K 2:5 also contained two terracottafigurines (45, 46) and severalhundred beads (48, 49). Though not as rich as the chambertomb with ivory pyxides found earlier on the north slopes of the Areopagos, these two graves are somewhat richer in grave goods-in particularin terms of bronzes (two in one tomb, five in the other)-than most of the other graves in the Agora cemetery.15As noted, the new tombs arenorth of the Eridanos River,which will have been more of a barrierin the Bronze Age than in later times, and it may be that these graves should be regarded as part of a separateburial ground from that found south of the river.16 The majority of the datable pottery in the two tombs seems to fall in the LH IIB-IIIA1 period; as the tombs contain multiple burials,a span of this sort need not worry us unduly.17A wide range of shapes is represented, and most vessels are small. As in most Mycenaean tombs excavated in the Agora, there is an absence of stirrupjars.18 The tombs add to the substantial corpus of LHIIIA burials known from Athens, in sharp contrast to the relative paucity of material from LH IIIB.19This imbalance raises significant issues of mortality,population, or chronology among those who concern themselves with the Bronze Age generally or Athens in particular.20 GRAVE J-K
2:2
The limits of grave J-K 2:2 were obscured both at the south and east by the walls of room 2 of the Classical Commercial Building (Figs. 8, 9, 16). The other two sides were better defined, though more work needs to be done along the west side, which is partiallycoveredby a Late Roman wall. The chamber measured at least 2.35 x 2.50 m and was preserved to a maximum depth of ca. 0.75 m. The floor lay at approximately50.40 masl andwas usuallywet due to the high watertable in this areanearthe Eridanos River. Preliminary analysis of the skeletal material by Maria Liston suggests that the remains of at least two adult males, one adult female, and a child are preserved.In all, seventeen vases were recoveredfrom this tomb, including a fragmentaryLate Protogeometric pyxis,which indicates a later intrusion or reuse. Two bronzes were also found: a dagger with gilded rivets (27) and a spear point with a central rib (28).
14. Camp 1999, pp. 263-265. 15. See AgoraXIII, pp. 158-169, for the tomb with the pyxides(N 21-22:1); pp. 170-177 for a tomb with comparablebronzes (M 21:2). 16. Where, how, and if the riverwas bridgedfrom Mycenaeanto Archaic times has not yet been determined. 17. On the uncertaindivision for many shapesbetween LH IIB and LH IIIA1, see Mountjoy 1981, p. 14. For her views on the dates of manyof the vases I am indebted to Penelope Mountjoy,who examinedthe material in the Stoa of Attalos on March 28, 2000. Dates in the cataloguegiven without bibliographyrepresent assessmentsexpressedduringher visit. 18. For the scarcityof stirrupjars in Mycenaeantombs in the Agora, see AgoraXIII, pp. 124, 151-152, where SaraImmerwahrarguesthat at this earlyperiod the squatalabastronserved the same purpose.There are three such alabastrain tomb J-K 2:2, and one in tomb K 2:5. See alsoTownsend 1955, pp. 204-208, for similaralabastrafrom the Agora. 19. A rough count of the tombs in AgoraXIII and Pantelidou1975 shows that there are many more of the earlier tombs:forty-fourdate to LH IIIA (plus the two reportedhere),while only six date to LH IIIB. 20. The issue is brieflyaddressedin Mountjoy 1995, p. 71; see also Agora XIII, pp. 110, 151-157.
EXCAVATIONS
IN
THE
ATHENIAN
AGORA
255
KeyforTomb Pots A=P33165 B = P33164 C = P33163 D= P 33580 E = P 33581 F = P 33582 G = P 33579
Figure16. Plan of Mycenaean
0
chamber tomb J-K 2:2. D. Scahill
I
H=P33160 1 = P 33162 = P33161 K= P33167 L = P 33166 M= P33177
5 I
I
I
I
CATALOGUE
10 P 33177:Ewer
Fig. 17
H. 0.285, Diam. 0.24 m. Mendedfromnumerousfragmentsfoundtogether.Disk foot,roundedbody, narrowneck,risingtroughspout.Junctureof neckandshoulderdefinedby a raised ridge.Ridgedhandle,knob at base.Decoration:outsideof foot glazed,with one glazed band above,two glazed bandshigherup; on upperbody,threelilies attachedto clustersof fivespiralsbelow;groupsof smallwavylineshighup on body. Twopaintedbandsbelow,one above,atjunctureof shoulderandneck.Neckdecoratedwith linkedspiralsandverticalwavylines.Bandsof glazeon spoutandrim. Quirkpatternon handles,tendrilsat base.Buff claywith numerouscoarseinclusions;dull reddish-brown glaze,peelingin places. LH IIIAl. Cf. Mountjoy1993, p. 76, no. 165, for shape;see alsoFurumark 1941, pp. 29-33, fig. 5, shapes143 (LH IIB) and 144 (LH IIIA). 11 P33166:Jugwithcutawayneck Fig. 17 H. 0.288, Diam. 0.20 m. Mended;completeexceptfor chips.Disk foot, piriformbody,narrowneck flaringat top andcut awayat back.Straphandlewith centralridge.Lowerpartof bodyglazed,with a singlebandabove.Main bodydecoratedwith curvedstripes, one broadstripealternatingwith a groupof threenarrowones.Neck, mouth,and handleglazed.A rowof glazeddots on uppershoulder;junctureof shoulderand neck definedby a raisedridge.Dark buff claywith inclusions;dull darkbrown glaze,peeledin places. LH IIIA2. Cf. Mountjoy1993, p. 76, no. 164 (= Mountjoy1986, p. 75, fig. 87, from Mycenae,Nauplion Museum 2586). Also Athens, NM 1806, from Ligoriou.For curvedstripepattern,see Furumark1941, p. 403, fig. 70, no. 9, motif 67.
256
JOHN
I
i
m
McKESSON
CAMP
II
EXCAVATIONS
13
IN
THE
ATHENIAN
257
1
s/
14
AGORA
1
P\
1
Figure18. Squatalabastra13 and 14
14 12 P 33163: Shallow cup with stylized argonauts Fig. 17 H. 0.05, Diam. 0.139 m. Mended; complete except for small chips. Small disk foot, concave underneath, broad body, flaring outturned rim, vertical strap handle. Body decorated with three groups of three coiled tentacles (no bodies). Foot, band above foot, rim, and handle glazed. Buff clay with inclusions; orange-brown glaze, peeled in places. LH IIIA1. Cf. Furumark1941, pp. 46-51, fig. 13, shape 219. It seems clear that the creature so sketchily depicted is not a nautilus but an argonaut. For the identification of argonautversus nautilus, see Bradfer 1998; Wiirtz 1989. 13 P 33165: Squat alabastron H. 0.05, Diam. 0.18 m.
Fig. 18
Mended; largely complete, one handle and part of lip missing. Very slightly concave underside,low body, outturned rim, rounded on top, three vertical handles on shoulder.Concentric glazed bands on underside;handles and rim glazed. Body once decorated with ivy tendrils now almost entirely gone. Dark buff clay; dark brown glaze on top, mostly gone, and reddish-brown glaze on underside. LH IIB/IIIA1. Cf. Furumark1941, pp. 39-43, fig. 11 (shape 84) and p. 299, no. 1 (motif). 19, fig. 14 P 33160: Squat alabastron H. 0.062, Diam. 0.13 m.
Figure 17 (opposite).Ewer 10, jug with cutaway neck 11, and shallow cup 12
Fig. 18
Mended; complete except for part of rim. Slightly concave base, rounded rising upper body, low neck with outturned rim, three slightly canted handles on shoulder. Decoration: a cross on underside of base, with glazed bands on lower body, stylized rock pattern on body, row of glazed dots on upper shoulder; neck, rim, handles glazed. Buff clay; orange-brown glaze, peeling in places. LH II. Cf. Mountjoy 1993, p. 76, no. 159; the cross instead of concentric circles on the base makes it likely that this piece dates to LH II (Mountjoy, pers. comm., 2000).
258
JOHN
I
is
15 P 33164: One-handled alabastron
CAMP
McKESSON
II
I
Fig. 19
H. 0.075, Diam. 0.09 m. Intact, except for small chip from rim. Small flat base, rounded biconical body,low neck, everted rim, single vertical straphandle on shoulder.Glazed around base and with a band on lower body. Upper body decorated with two horizontal
loops.Glaze on neck,rim,andhandle.Darkbuff clay;worn,darkorange-brown glaze. LH II (hatched loop). For the shape, see Furumark1941, p. 41, fig. 11, type
87. 16 P 33161: Squat pitcher
Fig. 19
side covered with a thin, dull, light brown wash.
LH IIIA.Cf AgoraXIII,tombXXIX-2:p. 231, pl. 55;Furumark 1941,p. 35, fig. 7, type 109/110. 17 P 33167:Smallamphora Fig. 20 P.H. 0.115, Diam.0.11 m. Upper neck, rim, and handlesmissing.Low disk foot, low roundedbody, wide neck,brokenabove.Attachmentsfor two verticalstraphandlesat point of largestdiameter.Darkreddish-brownclaywith inclusions;totallyglazed(except underhandles)with a poor,thin,verydarkbrownwash. Cf.MIountjoy 1981,pl.2. Mountjoyl981,
Figure 19. One-handled alabastron 15 and squat pitcher 16
EXCAVATIONS
IN
THE
ATHENIAN
AGORA
259
Figure 20. Small amphora 17 and pitcher(?) 18
18 P 33162: Pitcher(?) P.H. 0.155, Diam. 0.20 m.
Fig. 20
Mended; upperpart missing. Flat, slightly convex base. Curved biconical body, almost carinated at midpoint. Dark buff clay with inclusions; upper body covered in a very thin light brown wash. Fig. 21 H. 0.14, Diam. 0.13 m. Mended; complete. Small disk foot, ovoid body, wide low neck, everted rim, two strap handles from lip to shoulder. Dark brownish-buff clay with mica and inclusions; dull orange-brown glaze. 19 P 33579: Amphora
P 33580: Jug with cutaway neck Fig. 21 H. 0.212, Diam. 0.165 m. Mended; complete except for chips. Disk foot, rounded body, narrowupright neck with slightly everted lip. Strap handle. Coarse dark orange-brown clay with numerous inclusions; heavily worn slip.
20
Figure 21. Amphora 19 and jug with cutaway neck 20
m_
_
/I"......./........
260
JOHN
McKESSON
CAMP
II
m--
Figure 22. Decorated lamp(?) 21 21
L 6038: Decorated lamp(?)
22
P 33581: Amphora
Fig. 22 H. (with handle) 0.05, Diam. 0.092 m. Mended; complete. Flat base, shallow open saucer with flat horizontal rim. Looping strap handle at rim. Painted with dark brown glaze: outside with glazed circle, two ivy leaves with tendrils, rim; circle inside, oblique stripes on handle. Fine pale greenish-buff clay. LH IIB. Cf. Furumark1941, p. 48, fig. 13, no. 236, for shape. Fig. 23
"9
H. 0.159, Diam. 0.14 m. Mended; complete except for chips. Flat base, rounded body,wide neck, large mouth with slightly everted lip. Vertical thickened strap handles from body to upper neck below lip. Dark orange-brown clay with inclusions, smoothed on outside; traces of a darkerorange wash. 23
P 33582: Jug with cutaway neck Fig. 24 H. 0.13, Diam. 0.12 m. Intact except for chip. Disk foot, rounded body, slightly flaring cutaway spout, handle round in section. Decorated with dull brown glaze around foot, base of neck, and rim; five linked spirals on shoulder. Coarse dark buff clay with inclusions. For simple line spiral, cf. Furumark1941, p. 356, fig. 60, nos. 51-52.
24
P 33583: Amphora
Fig. 25
H. 0.221, Diam. 0.175 m. Mended; more than three-quarters complete. Flat base, ovoid body, broad
Figure 23. Amphora 22
EXCAVATIONS
IN
THE
ATHENIAN
26I
AGORA
-
Figure24. Jugwith cutawayneck23
neck with slightly everted lip, two vertical strap handles. Dark buff clay with inclusions; dull reddish-brown wash outside and inside rim. 25
P 33673: Amphora
Fig. 25 H. 0.23, Diam. 0.182 m. Mended; complete except for chips. Flat base, ovoid body, broad neck with slightly everted lip. Two vertical strap handles from just below rim to shoulder. Smoothed on outside, with reddish-orange wash outside, and inside rim; coarse orange-buff clay with inclusions. For similar shape, see Mountjoy 1981, pl. 2a, no. 7, from well E.
Figure 25. Amphoras 24 and 25
262
McKESSON
JOHN
CAMP
II
II
A
MII ___
L-
/
-
26 Globular pyxis 26 Figure 26.
-F
Fig. 26 P.H. 0.11, est. Diam. ca. 0.14 m. Mended; base and half of body missing. Round-bodied vessel, with low wide neck, everted lip. Two holes for suspension pierce lip. Band of geometric ornament at maximum diameter: oblique bars framed by oblique zigzags; dogs' teeth below, zigzags above. Fine dark buff Attic clay; good dull black glaze. Late Protogeometric (960 to after 900 B.C.). Cf. Desborough 1952, pp. 106112,294, pl. 8, esp. no. 912 (from Kerameikos grave 28).
26
P 33578: Late Protogeometric globular pyxis
27
B 2033: Bronze dagger
Fig. 27
L. ca. 0.412, max. W. (blade) 0.07, W. (pommel) 0.052 m. Complete, but broken into three pieces. Long, tapering blade, rounded near point. Handle widens at end to thin, curving pommel. Narrow, raised flange at end of blade and around handle. Remains of five rivets to hold missing handle (bone, wood?) to bronze: three on handle, two near end of blade. Four gilded bronze rivet heads recoveredfrom same area of tomb. For this relatively common Mycenaean form, see Papadopoulos 1998, pp. 21-24, pls. 14, 15 (cruciform type, variant C). 28
i S '-i
i,
; '"
Fig. 27
B 2032: Bronze spear point
f
B
'
-
L. 0.285, W. 0.034, Diam. (socket) 0.028 m. Complete, mended at socket. Elongated leaf-shaped blade,with thick rounded central rib, tapering to point. Hollow socket for attachment to shaft, pierced on either side with a small nail hole (ca. 0.004-0.005 m in diameter) for securing shaft.
mP~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^^B
'- '
'-
e.
28
'
.27
_ 0
'^O
+
Figure27. Bronzedagger27 (above) and bronze spear point 28 (left)
EXCAVATIONS
IN
THE
ATHENIAN
AGORA
263
GRAVE K 2:5
Figure28. Plan and cross-section (lookingnorth)of Mycenaean chamber tomb K 2:5. D. Scahill
The cutting for the tomb chamber of K 2:5 measures 1.90-2.20 m eastwest by 2.10 m north-south, and is preserved to a depth of ca. 0.65 m, with its bottom at ca. 50.40 masl (Figs. 8-10, 28). The grave goods, catalogued below, consisted of pottery, bronze weapons and tools, figurines, and stone and glass jewelry.There are multiple examples of piriformjars, kylikes, and, possibly, imitation ostrich eggs. A preliminary analysis by Liston of the skeletal material from the chamber suggests that we have here the remains of at least four adults-one a male who surviveda broken collarbone and ribs-and three children. A dromos ca. 1.00 m wide approaches the tomb from the west. Partially obscured by a Late Roman wall and wellJ 2:14 of the mid-5th century B.C., it was only uncovered in the 2001 season. Carefully set upright on the floor of the dromos, ca. 2.50 m from the blocked doorway,was the lower part of a Late Archaic Lesbian amphora, within which was some
0 i
I
I
I
I
I
5m I
LATEROMAN/ BYZANTINE WALL
51.00 0 I
m I
I
I
I
5 m II
264
JOHN
McKESSON
CAMP
II
ash and a single large iron nail.21The dromos enters the tomb at the north end of the west side and at an oblique angle. The reason for this irregularity became clear later in the summer of 2001, when the corner of another-presumably earlier-chamber tomb (J 2:19; Fig. 28) was found just to the south of the dromos. The westward orientation of the dromos suggests that in early times the naturalslope ran not only downhill toward the Eridanos River to the south, but also sloped down to the west, toward the later north-south street, the line of which may in fact be very early. CATALOGUE
29
P 33171: Small piriformjar with striped panels Fig. 29 H. 0.093, Diam. 0.087 m. Intact, except for small chips from rim. Ring foot, slightly rounded rim, three canted round handles on shoulder.Lower body decoratedwith glazed bands, shoulder decorated with groups of vertical stripes, five or six stripes per group. Neck glazed inside and out. Dark buff clay; dark brown glaze. LH IIIA1. Date based on the use of decoration under the handle (Mountjoy, pers. comm., 2000). 30 P 33169: Piriform jar with cross-hatching Fig. 30 H. 0.15, Diam. 0.13 m. Mended; complete except for chips and one handle. Projecting ring foot, outturned sloping rim, three canted handles on shoulder. Lower body decorated with glazed bands of unequal thickness and placement. Shoulder decorated with cross-hatching or a net pattern. Neck (inside and out) and handles glazed. Yellowish-buff clay; dark brown glaze, worn to orange-brown in places. LH IIIA1. Cf. Furumark 1941, p. 22, fig. 3, for the shape. According to Mountjoy (pers. comm., 2000), the down-sloping rim is a late feature. For the "diapernet" motif, see Furumark1941, p. 383, fig. 67, no. 57.2. 31 P 33170: Piriform jar with scale pattern
m _I=
?????????C7?t::: '' ;, :'::::::::.i,a
Fig. 30
H. 0.138, Diam. 0.115 m. Mended; complete except for chips. Ring foot, outturned flat rim, three vertical strap handles on shoulder. Lower body painted with bands of unequal thickness. Shoulder decorated with a scale pattern, with five rows of scales. Outside of handles glazed. Neck glazed inside and out. Top of rim decorated with glazed dots. Dark greenish-buff clay; dull peeling dark brown glaze. For scale pattern, cf. Furumark1941, p. 403, fig. 70, no. 1, motif 70.
Figure 29. Small piriform jar 29
32 P 33629: Alabastron
Fig. 31 P.H. 0.056, Diam. 0.137 m. Mended from numerous pieces; fragmentary.Most of body, two handles, and of part rim preserved.Flat rounded body, outturned rim. Bands of glaze on lower body, wave decoration in dark brown paint on body. Rim glazed inside and out. Greenish-buff clay. 33 P 33175: Unglazed kylix H. 0.134, Diam. 0.143 m.
Fig. 31
Mended; complete except for chips. Disk foot with high central dome, tall
21. The jar (P 33587) resemblesan amphorafound in the Kerameikos, datedby context to ca. 500 B.c.: Clinkenbeard1982, p. 265, no. 2, pls. 70, 71.
EXCAVATIONS
IN
THE
AGORA
ATHENIAN
265
1E,
.1.I.... F fo , 31
3%R Figur30;iiomar0ad3
x
)P-
31
-.-d
-
narrowstem, everted rim, two strap handles attached to rim. Hard yellowish-buff clay,pinkish in places. LH IIIA1. For shape, cf. Furumark1941, p. 60, fig. 16, no. 264. 34 P 33176: Unglazed kylix Fig. 31 H. 0.097, Diam. 0.12 m. Mended; complete except for small chips. Disk foot with high central dome, tall narrow stem, everted rim, two strap handles attached to rim. Buff clay. LH IIIA1. For shape, cf. Furumark1941, p. 60, fig. 16, no. 264. P 33174: One-handled goblet Fig. 31 H. 0.115, Diam. 0.138 m. Mended; complete except for chips. Disk foot with high central dome, very low stem, deep rounded body, offset rim, single vertical strap handle. Pinkish slip outside, remains of dark brown glaze on interior. Somewhat greenish-buff clay. LH IIB. For shape of body, cf. Furumark1941, p. 60, fig. 16, no. 263. 35
266
McKESSON
JOHN
.,,X s}" '00'a .,i,,
i.
r\
X
:;
as?r
CAMP
?
II
,~
3:'.;!?":'4~
;W
ar~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.
~~~~~~3
_= L
5
7w-< 34
35~~~~~~~~gl33 32, 32
._
-{
_
z~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~yie 33s
an 34nehnde laatrn32 !:l?;-~~~~~~~~Fgue31
ngae
35 ,> t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~gbe ~~~~~~~~~~X;:~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~R XW
:0'-0'F
Z~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
r |35 .M~~I~ i L* | |
a
:
,2 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ngae Alaba;:??;strn32 3. Figure 34,one-handled~~Y 33 and kylikes goblet 35, iI?'"~5
EXCAVATIONS
IN
THE
ATHENIAN
AGORA
267
.........
I
I .? ? ?
..
?r
I
I
.
..
36
I Figure 32. Handleless jars 36 and 37 36
0
P 33168: Handleless jar
Fig. 32 Diam. m. H. 0.08, 0.09 Intact, except for chips. Small flat base, low rounded body, low neck, everted rim. Glazed bands above foot and at shoulder. Neck and mouth glazed. Entire body decorated with painted stippling. Dark buff clay; orange to brown glaze. LH IIIA1. Cf. Mountjoy 1993, pp. 63-67, no. 128 ("diagnostic for LH IIIAl"); also EM 3902, from Markopoulo. For stippling, cf. Furumark 1941, p. 422, fig. 73, motif 77.2; and p. 423 for its suggested use in imitation of an ostrich egg. 37 P 33173: Handleless jar
Fig. 32
H. 0.15, Diam. 0.14 m. Mended; complete except for chips. Orange-buff clay. LH IIB/IIIA1. For the shape, cf. Furumark1941, p. 596, form 15, no. 77.
Figure 33. Unglazed shallow bowl (lamp?) 38
38 P 33178: Unglazed shallow bowl (lamp?) Fig. 33 Diam. 0.09, H. 0.023, H. (of handle) 0.055 m. Intact. Flat base, low open body, angled on outside, broad flat rim, highswung vertical handle. Inside and top of handle discolored gray.Coarse dark buff fabric with inclusions and mica; unglazed. LH IIA/B. Cf. Furumark1941, p. 48, fig. 13, shape 237.
268
JOHN
MCKESSON
CAMP
II
Figure 34. Small jar 39 39 P 33172: Small jar Fig. 34 Diam. 0.11, H. 0.113 m. Mended from several fragments. Missing two-thirds of neck and rim, sections of shoulder and body. Disk foot, slightly concave below, flaring lower body, rounded at midpoint and shoulder, high neck, slightly outturned rim. Outside of foot glazed, lower body reserved. Shoulder decoration: five running spirals,offset with bands of glaze above and below. Pale orange-buff fabric;buff slip, dull brown glaze, mostly worn off. LH IIIA. For running spiral motif, cf. Furumark 1941, pp. 352-358, motif 46, fig. 60; for shape, cf. p. 35, fig. 7, no. 135. 40
B 2038: Bronxe "axe"blade
41
B 2035: Bronze dagger
Fig. 35 L. 0.101, W. 0.083 m. Mended from several pieces; corroded. Very thin sheet of bronze. Tapers slightly,with wider edge very slightly curved.At opposite, narrowend, one corner has the shafts of two rivets for attachment to handle and the other corner is cut away in a broad crescent. Fig. 35
L. 0.32, W. 0.065 m. Complete, but handle broken. Wide blade, tapering near base, then straight for two-thirds of length before ending in a blunt point. Handle surrounded by raised flange or rim. End of handle is wider and curved. Remains of two rivets for attachment of handle survive,one near the end of the handle, the other at the base of the blade. Possible trace of a third, midway along handle, at break. LH IIIA. For similar Mycenaean daggers, see Papadopoulos 1998, pp. 2124, pls. 14, 15 (cruciform type, variant C). 42
B 2034: Bronze dagger
Fig. 35
L. 0.355, W. 0.065 m. Intact; some corrosion. Broad blade tapering to somewhat rounded point. Handle areasurroundedby raisedflange or rim. End of handle widened and curved. Handle originally attached by means of five rivets, two on shaft of handle, three acrossbase of blade. Later repairrepresentedby one additional rivet added to each side. Three broad rivet heads survive in situ on one side, two on the other. LH IIIA. See 41 for parallels.
IN
EXCAVATIONS
THE
ATHENIAN
AGORA
269
-A'
A-
B
40
---
-B' A'
A
I I I
i
42
41
^)
.p.
.
:v-0
.:: :'.' .".
I
I
.' ;.
i a-
Figure 35. Bronze "axe"blade 40, bronze daggers 41 and 42, bronze blade 43, bronze shaft 44
1
43
\^
44
270
43
JOHN
B 2036: Bronze blade
MCKESSON
CAMP
II
Fig. 35
L. 0.21, W. 0.035 m. Mended; complete but corroded.Wide flat blade with rounded point, tapering slightly toward handle. Two rivets for attachment to handle (now missing). 44
B 2037: Bronze shaft
Fig. 35
L. 0.225, W. 0.01 m. Intact; some corrosion. Long square shaft tapering graduallyto point. Slight indentation from wear or use just below upper end. 45 T 4474: Terracottafigurine: standing female
Fig. 36
H. 0.087, W. 0.036 m. Intact. Proto-phi type; standing female figurine,with molded eyes, hair,arms, and breasts.Right hand at abdomen, left arm curvedup with hand between breasts. Ponytail halfway down back. High recessed dome underneath, face pinched. Eyes, hair painted, rest of body decorated with wavy stripes. Dark buff clay; dull, somewhat worn, dark brown glaze. LH IIIA1. Cf. Mountjoy 1993, pp. 13-14, fig. 6 (from cist tomb 12, Deiras cemetery,Argos). See also French 1971, p. 108. 46 T 4475: Terracottafigurine: seated female
Fig. 37
H. 0.08, W. 0.62 m. Complete; head reattached.Proto-phi type;figuremade separatelyand molded to three-legged throne. Eyes and breasts molded, position of arms indicated in paint. Hair, eyes, and front of face glazed. Body and chair decorated with wavy glazed stripes. Yellowish-buff clay with inclusions; orange-brown glaze. For a similar female figure seated on a tripod throne, found at Mycenae and now in the Louvre, see Higgins 1967, p. 14, pl. 4A; for an unoccupied threelegged terracotta throne from another grave in Athens, see Pantelidou 1975, pp. 78-79, no. 4, figs. 19,20. 47
ST 951: Stone plaque(?) Fig. 38 H. 0.063, W. 0.054, Th. 0.012 m. Intact except for small chips. Very smooth rectangularplaque, slightly beveled at bottom of face. Crisp surfacesand edges. Pierced hole for suspension from rear of top surface to front face. No discernible decoration. Fine dark buff stone.
Figure 36. Terracotta figurine 45: multiple views
___
EXCAVATIONS
IN
____ THE
_________
ATHENIAN
_ ___
AGORA
27I
Figure 37. Terracotta figurine 46:
multipleviews
Fig. 39 Variousmaterials,but primarilycarnelian,glass, and glass paste; ca. 765 in all, various sizes, plus another 20-25 other components of differing materials and shapes, which may or may not be part of the same necklace. 48 Necklace components
a
J 227: Carnelian scarab
L. 0.01, W. 0.009,Th. 0.005 m. Intact except for chips. Features of beetle carved on convex upper surface, group of radiating lines incised on underside. Pierced longitudinally for stringing or attachment. b
J 228: Rose quartz bead Diam. 0.011-0.012, Th. 0.007 m. Worn cylindricalbead, pierced for suspensionwith a hole much larger(worn?) at one side than the other.
c
J 236: Carnelian bead, biconical Diam. 0.01, Th. 0.005 m.
d
J 236: 10 carnelian beads, round, small
Diam. ca. 0.004-0.006 m. e
J 236: 18 carnelianbeads,oval L. 0.008-0.011, Diam. 0.006-0.007 m.
f
J 235: 59 glass beads, round, of medium size Diam. 0.006-0.009 m.
;=: llg h Figure 38. Stone plaque(?) 47
J 231: 10 glassbeads,round,large Diam. 0.01-0.013 m.
J 232: 17 glass beads, small Diam. 0.002-0.005 m.
JOHN
272
McKESSON
CAMP
II
Figure 39. Necklace components 48 (left) and miniature glass and glass paste beads 48j (above) i
J 233: 18 glass paste beads, elongated, grooved L. 0.005-0.015, Diam. 0.003-0.006 m. Elongated, tapering beads, decorated with three or four grooves incised lon-
gitudinally. J 234: ca. 635 glass and glass paste beads, miniature Fig. 39 Diam. 0.002-0.0025, Th. ca. 0.001 m. Beads include many doublets, resulting from imperfect separation during manufacture(?),and fragments. Mixed colors: white, gray, tan, buff, bluish, and brick-red.
j
The carnelian scarab and hundreds of small faience beads presumably are intended to imitate Egyptian prototypes. An interest in Egyptian forms is also suggested by the ceramic imitation of ostrich eggs (36, 37), found in the same tomb. Actual Egyptian imports to Athens are virtually nonexistent in this period, while jewelry generally is rare in Mycenaean Athens.22 49
Conical buttons/beads Twenty-one conical beads or buttons of stone, varied sizes, colors, and forms.
a
ST 964, ST 966 (2 beads), ST 967, ST 968 (5 beads), ST 970: Conical buttons, straight sides, flat bases Diam. 0.014-0.018, H. 0.009-0.011 m. Dark gray,light brownish-gray,or deep purple in color.
b
ST 962: Conical button, flat above and below, rounded edges Diam 0.024, H. 0.016 m. Greenish stone.
c
ST 963: Conical button, straight sides, flat base Diam. 0.02, H. 0.014 m. Dark purple stone.
22. Lambrou-Phillipson1990, pp. 281-282; in Attica some Egyptian materialis found, but only at the LH IIIC cemeteryof Perati:see pp. 282-294. For the jewelry,see Konstantinidi2001, pp. 126-127; for the techniqueof bead-making,pp. 10-11 and the bibliography.
IN
EXCAVATIONS
THE
ATHENIAN
273
AGORA
d
ST 961: Conicalbutton,straightsides,flatbase Diam. 0.025, H. 0.015 m. Darkbrown-graystone.
e
ST 969:5 conicalbuttons,concavesidesand concavebases Diam. 0.013-0.021, H. 0.009-0.013 m. Light gray(4) anddarkgray(1).
f
ST 965: Conicalbutton,straightside,concaveunderneath Diam. 0.017, H. 0.008 m. Raised,well-wornlip or rim aroundupperhole.
g
ST 960: Conicalbutton,straightside,flat base Diam. 0.019, H. 0.018 m. Flat base,beveledabove.Cleartranslucentstone:rock-crystalor quartz?
h
ST 971: Biconicalbead/button Diam. 0.024, H. 0.019 m. Darkbrown-blackstone.
INSCRIPTIONS23 THE
ALLIANCE
WITH
SIKYON
Agora I 2636b+n
Fig. 40
P.H. 0.35, p.W. 0.238, Th. 0.15 m L.H. line 1: 0.0095; lines 2-17: 0.006-0.007 m Found during demolition of a modern wall on August 20, 1988, in grid squareJ 3. Preserved is the upper right-hand corner of a stele with pedimental top, broken at left and below. Part of a corner acroterionand moldings of the pediment survive. A raised band under the tympanum carries line 1 in largerletters, with a flattened ovolo below. Parts of sixteen lines of text below. Back rough-picked, top and sides finished with a claw chisel. Hymettian marble. The lettering of the decree is somewhat sloppy, characterizedby the use of a simple upright cross for the letter phi. It is the work of a prolific letterer known prosaicallyas the "Cutterof Ic 112 1262,"who carved some fifty texts in the years around 320-296 B.C.24 Stoich. 50 (lines 2-22)
303/2 B.C. [---
-
LluuE3Lcx~or
-
-]
Movco]o; [C'trl Ascoc-rcp6-cxou -pxovtoq iTCitc;A--XIq
23. I 7577, a fragmentof the revision of the law code by Nikomachos at the end of the 5th centuryB.C., is being preparedfor publicationby Laura Gawlinski. 24. Tracy1995, pp. 136-147, esp. pp. 140, 146.
8co8ex6u ; nCpoUt-
YAx][vEL'x;,4I AL6qxxov-co; ALovuuo8&pou(D1yo6uL]o; [eypoc]l[Li[ia'-eu6 5
et DUepaL, TPL-uEL 8Ox6Cr-r xcci s]]xo[Cusid]-Ct;7CP[D-Cx][Lp09opopL6VO; [va'ao; Cxxkrlm'oc xupL'ca-7v 7cnpoe'8pcov eiqfi~PeSv A~1E4kppoTo; o flmvovcb;xo&.Gv[1tP6saepoLdE`[ogEiv-r[CatL ['ApxscuRou 8[[ijciw vac. name - - - - - CMI3LEV' [.1 7;[Epi i7VO'L CnVEP E O ...]................ ]GV vyiXouu.v [dX7r]OXVYc'XXDCY ............... V -C[.]LOVY[.] z1Ltt]Lovy
- - - - -proposer's [.]cov [...............
[
274
JOHN
II
CAMP
McKESSON
Figure40. AgoraI 2636b+n 10
10[25 .........V?V]VOlaVO6X?LaV?V8V25 . . VEsi]VOO.]
[..............
[......................... [V .............
28
[. .............
27...........
[XuovLov
15[
.............
:V5sLxv[U]
YLVOj.?[v]OUDV-C; 7t6X?xs)[;] .]oUV ocTraYE1V Tayv 7ToXiV TYV EL-
(cp.X]c[v] . 17 ..
.
. . . . . . . ...........
[.]
[31 ...............] ]v[]
[.3 .....................
34..................
...............39
20
.. ............]ZTO
.............
15 [ .............27
v OtvXEotcxv
.. .]V a(C XO vJ?VG)V' pCOV TCVp? 37E[Co]-
. . ....................
XOLVYV
xOCLoLX?LOT-cTa
] orr6Xatv v TVa I.V.]x T.]OLT-Y[. ..
... .
0
. . .. . .]V ']L[ 7
[.]
LXCaVE[.] [J (X V .
[. .]
oc[
.]
7 tvxa[.]7..]5A0OLv
.................... x. oaTq(oCvCoaaL -Trv 8[lgov -Tov iEtxucovLCv UoT6Cravcot [oOCL XpoD]a6L
[ ...36
[ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. ]TT
COMMENTARY
The new piece, fragment n, preservesthe opening lines of a treaty (lines 1, 15) between Athens and Sikyon (line 9). It joins Agora I 2636b (lines 17fin-22 of the consolidated text), published by E. Schweigert in 1939.25 Fragmentsa-m ofI 2636 were found along the west side of the Panathenaic Way (grid square N 10), some 175 m to the southeast of the new fragment, mostly in contexts of the 3rd century A.C.On the basis of references in fragment a to Demetrios and the "Saviors,"Schweigert dated the alliance to 303/2 B.C.,when both Sikyon and Athens were under the control of Demetrios and Antigonos. From formulas in the publication clause he restored a stoichedon line of fifty letters, even though no single line had more than fifteen letters preserved. The new fragment confirms Schweigert'sskills as an epigraphist:both the date of 303/2 B.C.and the line length of fifty letters may now be regardedas certain.The opening preambleon the new piece, though fragmentary,must be restoredwith the name of the archon Leostratos (303/2 B.C.), and a line length of fifty letters on the basis of the name of the proedros, Deximbrotos Arkesilou Paianieus (lines 5-6). The preambleindicates that
25. Schweigert1939; also Schmitt 1969, no. 445; SEGXLI 50. See also AgoraXVI, no. 115, pp. 182-186, with the addendumon p. 186 referring
to thisnewfragment,aswellas SEG
XLV 91.
IN
EXCAVATIONS
ATHENIAN
THE
AGORA
27S
the decree was passed on the same day as IG JJ2 493 (honors for Nikon of Abydos) and the more fragmentaryIG 112 494*26 Schweigert's date of 303/2 has been challenged on the grounds that Sikyon was renamed after Demetrios following his capture of the city in 303 B.c. (Plut. Dem. 15.2, Diod. Sic. 20.102.3) and yet the alliance refers to the Sikyonians (line 9).27 The new fragment now lays to rest all questions as to the date of the treaty, however one addresses the problem of Sikyon/Demetrias. Athens and Sikyon had been allies not long before, during the Lamian War in 323/2 B.C.,according to Pausanias (1.25.4) and Diodorus Siculus (18.11.2). IC 112 448 of that year, honoring Euphron of Sikyon, refers to this alliance as well, with supplementary honors added in 318/7 B.C. For language similar to lines 10 and 14 in other inscriptions of this period, see IC 112456, 466, 470, 483, 492, and 503. HONORS
THE
FOR
KYDONIANS
Agora I 7602
Fig. 41
P.H. 0.28, p.W. 0.20, p.Th. 0.103 m L.H. 0.004-0.005 m Found July 18, 2000, against the east face of the Late Roman fortification wall, south of the Eleusinion, in grid squareT 14-22/1. Upper right-hand corner of a stele of Hymettian marble,broken above,below, at back, and at left. Part of right side preserved,finished with a claw chisel, with the beginning of a crowning molding preserved.The face is marred by several gouges and worn smooth from lines 15 to 22. Late 3rd century B.C.
Non-stoich. Ca.33 letters
E o; Eici [s i'1; Ci - - - ca.11 --- - Xp]xovt
5
ar)/ ]-
[pLt6co; - - - ca. 14 - - -] Tpuvcxv[sY'cx it NlxdrvCO v aio][p - - - ca. 14 - - -] ; eypoqCiV4t[rE]us)EV [0 pcI [EVvvl]l x[o(i] vxoc[j] ulqicsiotx-uBor1pl]o[cMVOc; [- - - ca. 8 - - Tcp Ev [-cC]7pu-ckoxvzL'cX []Ix[xX-q]Ia[]aoc
-rCov [L0Es6T-cpco KX[. 7Tpot-31pcv[C'17reI~['qLtrE:v 26. Tracy 1995, pp. 110-111, for an instance of four survivingdecrees passed on a single day.For discussion of the archonshipof Leostratos:SEG XLVI 129. 27. Ferguson1948, p. 126, n. 39; Taeuber1981 (SEGXXXI 86). There are severalinstanceswhere a population or part of a populationkept its name even though it had been relocated physically:e.g., the Phokaiansin list 2 (453/2 B.C.)of the AthenianTribute Lists, col. VIII, lines 7-9 (see Camp 1974, pp. 314-318) or the Geloans in the 3rd centuryB.C., resettledin Phintias (Diod. Sic. 22.2.2; Loomis 1996, p. 146, n. 47).
.1 - - - ca. 16 - - - -@xDoc]Xrllps[Ob] x:x[lGUY1tb7p6osf-po[lW
-C]CO ' [E"(o0V -C~L Dxci POU;f -ca. 15 ---Iv drm]v- 'T]7r1E [-
vac. KUocVo-
- ca. 18 - - --]oyysv4-[. .1 -cOb 8'O[OD -u11 [---ca. tC7ec-r]'XxoxLv [T]~Lpou;kit xo-
10
[--
15
7196; [.]AA[.] Ri- - ca. 14 - - - 7r7cspoyEyiv[c)1v --- - ca. 14 - - - x]o'i 7spL[. . .b]74.]o[. joouco [- - - ca. 18 - - - - -]EtEvcxxxi pLxcpxahoCx4.l C071 [- - -ca. 13 - - - (ptMkv xoxi oi[x]seLO'-M'r - - -ca.
17 - - - -
[- - -ca.16
-- -
-i - - ca. 17 - - - -
-20
-ca. 12
-
....
. .] ToCI;7coX.]
.. . X. .O.]v
.]Lxx [..
xcohrouL-
. ]acF(xv =2ptS
] t6> -6y'xOieLl
[8lsa6XOocl tC-
[UN'tic - - - ca. 13 - - -..o.. .]Ku&ovwI [- - -ca. 15 - - - - .]6aiJv]o;ocx[. [ --ca. 16.......I 1-Dc[......
276
JOHN
McKESSON
CAMP
II
Figure41. AgoraI 7602 EPIGRAPHICAL
COMMENTARY
Dotted letters: Line 3. First (left) sloping stroke of the first mu and the last (right) sloping stroke of the second. Line 6. Psi: tip of the left and part of the vertical stoke; epsilon: bottom horizontal. Line 7. Lambda:lower part of the right stroke;kappa:left vertical stroke; rho: vertical and part of top. Line 8. Omega: lower left tip. Line 10. Gamma: lower part of the left vertical stroke; epsilon: bottom horizontal stroke. Line 11. Eta: right vertical stroke;alpha:lower part of left stroke. Line 15. Iota: trace of the upright of the vertical stroke; omicron: upper curve of a round letter. Line 16. Lower part of vertical stroke oftau; alpha:two sloping strokes of a triangularletter; iota: part of a vertical stroke. Line 20. Delta: apex of a triangularletter. Line 21. Triangularletter after omicron. Several of the letter forms are distinctive, with an open apex on the alpha and delta;the opening on the deltas is noticeablywider than on the alphas. In the epsilons, the middle stroke extends as far to the right as those at top and bottom, but does not join the vertical stroke at the left. The omegas are rounded, with the bottom strokes horizontal or even declining. The hand is recognizable as that of the "Cutterof G II2 1706," active between ca. 229/8 and ca. 203 B.C.28
Line 1. The initial delta of the tribe holding the prytany is clear and the restoration of Demetrias therefore secure, indicating a date prior to 200 B.C. Line 2. The secretary,Nikanor, appearsalso in the undated and fragmentary IG II2 865 (line 2). Line 10. In view of the close ties between Kydonia and Athens (see below), the restoration [a]uyy?V?[.;] TOO638qtouseems likely.
28. Cf. Tracy1990, pp. 44-54; I am
indebtedto Professor Tracyforguidancein identifyingthe cutter.
EXCAVATIONS
IN
THE
ATHENIAN
AGORA
277
COMMENTARY
Kydoniawas a city of western Crete, now occupied by the modern town of Chania. The new inscription is one of several that attest Athenian relations with Crete, and specifically Kydonia, from the 4th to 2nd centuries B.C. At least one of these concerns the recovery of Athenians by ransom, inevitably bringing to mind the Cretan reputation for piracy in the Hellenistic period. From the 4th century,IG II2 399 records honors for Eurylochos of Kydonia,with a referenceto his ancestors,and Meritt, Woodhead, and Stamires1957, no. 86 (pp.229-231) concernsCrete and possibly Kydonia. According to IG II2 844, the Athenians had occasion, following the Social War of 220-217 B.C.(Polyb. 4.53-55), to honor one Eumaridas son of Pankles of Kydonia with a bronze statue, originally to be set up on the Acropolis and eventuallyerected in the sanctuaryof Demos and the Graces (lines 1-48). His son, Charmion, was also honored severalyearslater (lines 49-70). Other indications of Athenian contacts with Kydonia in the 3rd century include the very fragmentaryIG II2 745, part of a stele of Pentelic marble found on the Acropolis. Dating to the early 2nd century is IG II2 1130, a decree found in Athens, passed by an unidentified Cretan city in honor of the Athenians Lysikles and Thrasippos, sons of Kallias.29 In the years around200 B.C. Athenian ties with Crete, whether political or commercial, were close. Kydonia, along with the cities of Gortyn, Hierapytna, Knossos, Lappa, Polyrhenion, and Priansos, began to mint imitations of Athenian New Style tetradrachms,complete with the head of Athena on the obverse and the owl standing on an amphora within a wreath on the reverse.The traditional reverseof Kydonian coins, a hound suckling an infant, now appears only as a small symbol, along with the legend KTAQNIATQN,on the reverse.30
WORK IN THE STOA OF ATTALOS AND FUTURE PLANS
29. ForCretanpiracyandcommentary on some or all of the inscriptions listed above,see Brule 1978, pp. 16-24; de Souza 1999, pp. 65-67. I have benefited from discussionof this text with John Morgan. 30. Wroth 1884; Head 1911, pp. 462-464. See also Stefanakis2000.
In the Stoa of Attalos the staff provided essential support for the excavations (processing and recording of new finds, photography,conservation), maintained the permanent collection, providedlogistical supportfor scholars working on numerous Agora publication projects, and addressed the requests and needs of hundreds of visitors and other scholars.The Samuel H. Kress Foundation has provided support for the publication program of Agora material. In recent years the following scholars have worked in the Stoa as Kress Fellows:John Hayes (Roman pottery), Susan Rotroff (Hellenistic pottery), BarbaraTsakirgis (Greek and Roman houses), Marianne Stern (glass), and Carol Lawton (votive reliefs). At the instigation of the Packard Humanities Institute (PHI), and with its support, we are well into a five-year project to computerize the Agora records and to put them into a unified database:object catalogue, coins, conservation records, photography, and architecturaldrawings are all being scanned or entered by hand. In addition, we are working on the useful application of computer technology in the field. Also with the support of PHI, improvements were made to the conservation department.In particular,a special climate-controlled storeroom for all our metal objects
278
JOHN
MCKESSON
CAMP
II
was created by Craig Mauzy, according to specifications drawn up by our conservators,Alice Paterakis and Julie Unruh. In the future, we plan to remove the medieval remains in section BE and explore the Roman and earlier levels below. We have also acquired another property,to the east (Astingos 3, city plot 1370/6). Four of the remaining six properties overlying the Painted Stoa are under expropriation and we hope to acquirethose shortly.Two more houses and a short stretch of Hadrian Street will then be all that stand in the way of fulfilling the original commitment by the American School to fully excavate the civic center of ancient Athens and to present it as an archaeologicalpark.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The success of the projectwas due largelyto the staff in the Stoa ofAttalos: Craig Mauzy (resident director and photographer),Jan Jordan (registrar), Sylvie Dumont (assistant registrar),Angelique Sideris (assistant photographer),Alice Paterakis(head conservator),Anne BrysbaertandJulie Unruh (conservators),RichardAnderson (architect),and Anne Hooton and Freya Evenson (drafting).Numerous projectsinvolving computerswere handled by Bruce Hartzler and computer drafting was done by Samantha Martin, Marcie Handler, and David Scahill. Supervision in the field was the responsibilityof Mark Alonge (1999-2000), Kevin Daly (1998-2001), Laura Gawlinski (1999-2001), Marcie Handler (2001), Bruce Hartzler (2001), Michael Laughy (2000-2001), Anne McCabe (1999-2000), Lee Ann Riccardi (1998), David Scahill (1998-2001), Geoffrey Schmalz (1998), and Floris van den Eijnde (2001). Logistical support was provided by George Dervos, Kyriaki Moustaka, and Maria Stamatatou. The staff at the American School, especially Maria Pilali and Robert Bridges, has also facilitated our work. Studentvolunteersfrom manyAmericaninstitutionshave laboredin the trenchesover the past four seasons.Their essentialcontributionin labor,expertise,enthusiasm,and good will is gratefullyacknowledgedhere and their names arelisted below: Brandi Adams (1998), Adam Barcan (1998),Jeremy Bartczak (2001), Virginia Baydoun (2001), Paul Blomerus (2001), Kathleen Brody (1998), Jennifer Brown (1999-2000), Photini Canonis (1998-1999), Kimberley Christensen (1998), Morgan Clendaniel (1999), Erin Davis (2000), Michael Decker (2001), Michael Djordjevitch (1998-1999), Karen Donohue (1998), Carrie Duncan (1999), Melissa Eaby (1998-2000), Elli Eliades (1998), Ryan Fetters (1998-1999), Shrita Gajendragadkar(1998, 2000), KyriakiGiannopoulos (1998-2001),Jody Gordon (2001), Carolyn Grainger (2001), James Gregory III (2000), Joann Gulizio (2000-2001), Matthew Harrington (1999-2001), Thyra Heder (2001), Cecilia Hernandez (1999), Amanda Herring (2001), Steve Hoban (1998-1999), Emily Holt (2001), Emily Hughes (1999-2000), Sergey Ilyaschenko (1998),JeremyJohnson (1998-2000), EmilyJusino (2001), Amalia Kakissis (1998), Tanya Kane (1998-1999), Jennifer Knox (2000), Thomas Kune
EXCAVATIONS
IN
THE
ATHENIAN
AGORA
279
(1998), Jessica Langenbucher (1998-1999), Rachel Levine (1999), Thomas Lide (2001),Joey Lillywhite (1998-2001),John Maniatis (1998-1999), David Marshall (2000), Matthew McCallum (2001), Ada McMahon (2001), Henry McMahon (1999), Andreya Mihaloew (1998-2000), Maria Mikedakis (2000-2001), Benjamin Millis (1999), David Murray (20002001), Melpomene Nikiphoridou (1999-2000), Jennifer Nilson (2001), Anaka Nunnink (2000-2001),Thomas Oakley (2000), Adrian Ossi (19992000), Seth Pevnik (1999,2001), Kevin Pluta (1999-2001),Jessica Pryde (2001), Travis Quay (1998), Joel Rygorsky (2000-2001), Jennifer Sacher (2000-2001), Matthew Schrumpf(2000-2001), Susan Schumacher(2001), Phoebe Segal (1999-2000), Brooke Simpson (2001), Christine Smith (2000-2001), Chad Sterbenz (2000-2001), Karen Stern (1998), Suzanne Tetrault (2000), Marcus Toconita (2001), SarahWahlberg (1999), Corrie Ward (1998), Chris White (1998-1999), Paul Wilson (1999), Cynthia Wood (1998), and D. Ka'alaYezbik (1999). The following worked as interns or volunteersin the conservationlaboratory:in 1998, Candace Griggs, Johanna Kangas, Sari Pouta, and Marc Walton; in 1999, Bethann Barresi, Laura Lipcsei, and Marcela Rossello; in 2000, Lisa Ellis, Audrey Jawando, and Teresa Myers; and in 2001, Alexander Amtage, Gwynne Barney,Monica Davis, Carrie Hintz, Daniel Jost, Kate Maciniec, Bianca Madden, Mac Marston, Wendy Porter, and Liz Tipton.
REFERENCES Agora = The Athenian Agora, Princeton.
XII = B. A. Sparkesand L. Talcott, Black and Plain Pottery of the 6th, 5th, and 4th Centuries B.C., 1970.
XIII = S. A. Immerwahr,The Neolithic and BronzeAges, 1971. XVI = A. G. Woodhead, Inscriptions. The Decrees, 1997. XX = A. Frantz, The Churchof the Holy Apostles, 1971.
XXXI = M. M. Miles, TheCity Eleusinion, 1998.
Bradfer,I. 1998. "Nautileou argonaute? Remarquessurun motif egeen," RA 1998, pp. 107-118. Brule, P. 1978. Lapiraterie cretoisehellenistique, Paris.
Camp,J. McK. 1974. "GreekInscriptions,"Hesperia43, pp. 314-324. . 1996. "Excavationsin the Athenian Agora: 1994 and 1995," Hesperia 65, pp. 231-261.
.1999. "Excavationsin the Athenian Agora: 1996 and 1997," Hesperia 68, pp. 255-283.
Clinkenbeard,B. G. 1982. "Lesbian
Wine and StorageAmphoras: A ProgressReport on Identification,"Hesperia51, pp. 248-268. CorinthXI = C. H. Morgan II, The ByzantinePottery,Cambridge, Mass., 1942. Desborough,V. R. 1952. Protogeometric Pottery,Oxford 1952. de Souza, P. 1999. Piracyin the GraecoRomanWorld,Cambridge. Ferguson,W. S. 1948. "DemetriusPoliorcetesand the Hellenic League," Hesperia17, pp. 112-136. Frantz,A. M. 1938. "MiddleByzantine Potteryin Athens,"Hesperia7, pp.429-467. French,E. 1971. "The Development of MycenaeanTerracottaFigurines," BSA 66, pp. 101-187. Furumark,A. 1941. TheMycenaean and Classification, Pottery.:Analysis Stockholm. Grierson,P. 1973. Catalogueof theByzantine Coinsin theDumbartonOaks CollectionIII, pt. 2, Washington,
D.C.
280
JOHN
Head, B. 1911. HistoriaNumorum, Oxford. Higgins, R. A. 1967. GreekTerracottas, London. Johnson,J. 2001. "Pietyand Propaganda: John I Tsimiskesand the Invention of Class A' Anonymous Folles," Athanor19, pp. 7-15. Konstantinidi,E. 2001.JewelleryRevealedin theBurial Contextsof the GreekBronzeAge (BAR-IS 912), Oxford. Lambrou-Phillipson,C. 1990. Hellenorientalia:TheNearEasternPresence in theBronzeAgeAegean,ca.30001100 B.C.,Gbteborg.
Loomis, W. T. 1996. "EntellaTabletsVI (254-241 B.C.)and VII (20th cent. A.D.?),"HSCP 96, pp. 127-160. Meritt, B. D., A. G. Woodhead, and G. A. Stamires.1957. "GreekInscriptions,"Hesperia26, pp. 198-270. Mountjoy,P.A. 1981. FourEarlyMycenaeanWellsfromthe SouthSlopeof atAthens,Ghent. theAcropolis
McKESSON
EXCAVATIONS
AMERICAN 54
SOUIDIAS
I06-76
SCHOOL STREET
ATHENS
GREECE
[email protected]
OF CLASSICAL
II
. 1986. MycenaeanDecorated Pottery:AGuideto Identification, Goteborg. . 1993. MycenaeanPottery:An Introduction,Oxford. . 1995. MycenaeanAthens (SIMA-PB 127), Jonsered. Pantelidou,M. 1975. Al:poCa-ropwxal Athens. A407vat, Papadopoulos,T.J.1998. TheLate BronzeAgeDaggersof theAegean1: The GreekMainland(Prihistorische BronzefundeVI.11), Stuttgart. Richter,G. M. A. 1971. Engraved Gemsof the Greeks,Etruscans,and Romans2, London. der Schmitt, H. H. 1969. Die Vertrdge von bis Welt 338 griechisch-rdmischen 200 v. Chr.(Die Staatsvertragedes Altertums3), Munich. Schweigert,E. 1939. "GreekInscriptions,"Hesperia15, pp. 35-41. Shear,T. L., Jr.1984. "The Athenian Agora:Excavationsof 1980-1982," Hesperia53, pp. 1-57.
JohnMcKessonCampII AGORA
CAMP
STUDIES
AT
ATHENS
1997. "The Athenian Agora: Excavationsof 1989-1993," Hesperia 66, pp.495-548. Stefanakis,M. 2000. "Kydonthe Oikist or Zeus CretagenesKynotraphes? The Problemof InterpretingCretan Coin Types,"Eulimene1 (Rethymnon), pp. 79-90. Taeuber,H. 1981. "SikyonStatt Aigeira,"ZPE 42, pp. 179-192. Townsend,E. D. 1955. "AMycenaean ChamberTomb underthe Temple of Ares,"Hesperia24, pp. 187219. Tracy,S. V. 1990. Attic Letter-Cuttersof 229 to 86 B.c.,Berkeley.
. 1995. AthenianDemocracyin Transition:AtticLetter-Cuttersof 340 to 290 B.C.(Hellenistic Culture
and Society 20), Berkeley. Wroth, W. 1884. "CretanCoins,"NC 1884, pp.26-28. Wiirtz, M. 1989. Le nautile(Abysses 1), Genoa.
HESPERIA Pages
72
(2003)
PLATAIAI
IN
BOIOTIA
281-320
A PRELIMINARY I996-200I
REPORT
OF THE
CAMPAIGNS
ABSTRACT Recentresearchat Plataiaiin southernBoiotiaby the PlataiaiResearchProject (1996-2001) has added substantiallyto our knowledge of the site's history. Inhabited since the Neolithic period, Plataiaiwas protectedby fortifications from the early5th centuryB.C.onward.Under the aegis of King Philip II the settlement areawas greatly enlarged.The circuitwall was shortened by the insertion ofa diateichismaduringHellenistic times, and the citylaid out along an orthogonalgrid.The settlement remainedin this form until Late Roman times when a new fortificationwall againconstrictedthe perimeter.Occupation continued until medievaltimes, when Plataiaiwas abandoned,replaced by two smallervillages nearby. The battle of Plataiai, one of the most pivotal and decisive military engagements in antiquity, continues to draw attention in popular accounts as well as more scholarly treatises on the ancient world.1Various assumptions and a wealth of speculative commentary exist on the battle in general and, more specifically,the reconstruction of the difficult topography in which it took place. The latter is complicated by the almost complete loss of the historical and natural markersmentioned by Herodotos in his narration of the events of 479 B.C.2A preoccupation with the battle and the defeat of the Persian forces under Mardonios has overshadowed the 1. The following organizations and individualsdeserveour gratitude: the Greek Ministry of Culture,for generouslygrantingthe necessary permits,funding the excavations,and providingworkersand equipment;the OsterreichischesArchaologisches Institut (Vienna and Athens), the Universityof Minnesota, and the Institut fRirKlassischeArchiiologie, UniversitatWien, for supportingthe project;the Fitch Laboratoryat the British School at Athens, for conducting geophysicalprospection;Spectra
Precision/Trimble,Vienna, for lending equipment;Dora Bakoli,Alexandra Charami,PanagiotisDefingos, Peter Glass, Dimitris Koutsodimos,Fritz Krinzinger,VeronikaMitsopoulouLeon, Anne Salisbury,and Elena Vlachoiannifor their supportand cooperation.Ian K. Whitbread and MichaelJ. Boyd kindly contributeda reporton the geophysicalwork carried out at the site. Specialgratitudeis also due to the anonymousHesperia reviewers,whose comments considerably improvedthis article.
Fundingwas providedby the Greek Ministry of Culture,the Municipality of Plataies,the Jubilaumsfondsder OsterreichischenNationalbank,the OsterreichischesArchaologisches Institut, the Universityof Minnesota, and the Vienna City Council. All of the photographswere taken by Konecny. 2. Hdt. 9.17-88. See Pritchett 1957; 1965, pp. 103-121; 1980, pp. 289-294; 1982, pp. 88-101; 1985, pp. 92-135; Lazenby 1993, pp. 217-247, with extensivebibliography.
282
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
KONECNY,
AND
R. T. MARCHESE
community from which this crucial event took its name. Plataiai was a town of statureprior to the early 5th century and, on more than one occasion, played an important role in shaping the history of central and southern Greece. The Plataiai Research Project was consequently inauguratedin 1996 in order to gain a better understanding of the site and the role it played in the 5th and 4th centuries B.C. as well as in earlierperiods of history.Work has focused largely on defining the site's sequence of habitation and the severalbuilding phases of the extensive fortification walls. Field survey in the initial years of investigation was followed by a multinational trial excavation sponsored by the Ephorate of Boiotia, the University of Vienna, and the University of Minnesota. After six seasons the site has yielded a substantial body of data that clarifies a number of questions for both the prehistoric and historic periods. Plataiai was more than a name associated with a famous conflict. It was also a prosperouscommunity and an important part of the political development of central and southern Greece.3
GEOGRAPHICAL
SETTING
The site of Plataiai is located in an extremely fertile district below the slopes of Mt. Kithaironin southwestern Boiotia (Fig. 1).The ancient town occupied a site of considerable importance in antiquity due to its strategic location between Thebes, Athens, Megara, and Corinth. Situated a few kilometers to the west of the major land route from central Greece across Kithairontowardthe south into Attica and ultimatelyinto the Peloponnese, Plataiai lay within easy reach of a number of aggressivestates that coveted the site for economic and military reasons.The desire to control mountain passes from the Corinthian and Saronic Gulfs and the network of roads that passed through them-either into Boiotia in the north or via Athenian territory and the Corinthia to the Peloponnese in the south-placed a premium value on Plataiai in antiquity. Although a more easily traversedsouthern route between the Corinthian Gulf and the Aegean via the Isthmus of Corinth existed, an alternate route from the Gulf of Kreusis (modern Livadostra) and the Bay of Ayios Vassilios traversedthe Parasopia,passed near Plataiai, and continued, via the Asopos River, until it reached the straits of Euboia to the northeast.4 Although this diagonal course through the heart of Boiotia was important to the local population, its real value was as a route for interregional military campaigns. In this manner the "Kreusis-Euboian 3. For preliminary reports on the ongoing investigations at Plataiai, see Konecny 1998; Konecny, Boyd, and Whitbread 1999; Aravantinos and Konecny 2000; Aravantinos, Konecny, and Marchese 2001; Konecny, in press. These provide piecemeal, sometimes fragmentary, information on the various stages of the project as it developed. To
improve on this, the present article is intended as a concise, preliminary summary of the results of the 19962001 campaigns at the site. It does not, however, replace prior reports, where more details are provided for findings presented here. Additionally, much of the material retrieved during survey and excavation is currently under
evaluation and cannot yet be presented in great detail. A final report of the first phase of investigation at Plataiai is currently in preparation. 4. For this route see, e.g., Buck 1979, p. 12; Buckler 1980, p. 10; Kirsten 1950, col. 2267; and Pritchett 1965, pp. 52-57.
PLATAIAI
IN BOIOTIA:
CAMPAIGNS
1996-200I
283
/ -
Haliartos
Thebes A-
O X Thespiai
XLA,.' C C:, - '-
pI
i/ L
I PN
X Leuktr
l-^'\
.._..-
^*'^_^ J/^y
^'lalaiaii
iM
~^S\^ f"
Aigostthe
='4
ver
o
" E Eleutherai .,
/
accessible
% . ....... n''""\:: ^~' ?/e'/,,
:] -^
Figure 1. Map ofPlataiai and southwestern Boiotia. A. Konecny
more
sras-
.Mt,
and
heavily
'
Megarian Plain
- 2
road" offered one distinct advantage over the more accessible and heavily
traveled"Corinthianroad."By avoiding Corinthian territoryand the western Saronic Gulf, the road through Boiotia provided a possible alternative route to the Corinthian Gulf and, consequently, access to the northern Peloponnese if the southern route was blocked. The strategic potential that Plataiai possessed, however, could only be fully realized by a community of some substance. In essence, the control of Plataiai-by Thebes, Athens, or Corinth-would offer unique opportunities. Plataiai's importance in the political affairs of central and southern Greece was enhanced by its favorable environment. The plain of Plataiai possessed arable land of high quality while the mountain slopes to the south made pasturage and the cultivation of olives possible. These slopes were also heavily wooded and could furnish substantial wealth in wood products. Plataiai was also provided with abundant sources of fresh water. This combination of resourcesmust have been the primary reason for the establishment in the Neolithic period of a settlement at the base of the wide plateau that forms the ancient site of Plataiai.With a sustainable economic foundation-easy access to a continuous, secure supply of water and deep fertile soils in the immediate vicinity-as well as access to building materials from the slopes of Mt. Kithairon and a defendable location, Plataiai possessed the critical requirements for development and growth.
284
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
KONECNY,
AND
R. T. MARCHESE
It is evident, however, that the inhabitants of Plataiai faced a dilemma: unique strategic and economic factors guaranteed an important place in the political structureof centralGreece but such opportunitiesalso brought about specific consequences. The town could not stand alone as an independent entity, and its strategic and economic potential was too valuable to be ignored by the dominant states in the region.5
HISTORICAL
PERSPECTIVE
Plataiai is well representedin historical commentary,especially that of the Classical period. In this manner,the site possessed a degree of importance not sharedby comparablesmall communities in the region. Plataiai is first mentioned in the Catalogue of Ships for contributingtroops to the Boiotian contingent that went to Troy,indicating that the site was of some importance during the time from which Homer drew his sources.6During the Archaic period the site developed into a prosperoustown importantenough to challenge the authority of Thebes. Although Thebes was able to dominate its southern neighbor and much of the Parasopia earlier in the Archaic period, fierce antagonism toward their northern neighbor and a desire for autonomy led the Plataians to seek assistance from other cities. In 519 B.C. Plataiai appealed to Sparta and Athens. After arbitration by Corinth and a military engagement in which the Theban armywas routed by the Athenians, Plataiai became a protectorate of Athens, a situation bitterly resented by Thebes.7 During the PersianWars the Plataians, prompted by their special relationship with Athens, joined the side of the Greeks. No doubt their zeal to participateon the side of the Greeks was furtheredby their antagonism towardThebes, which championed the Persian cause. In 490 B.C., the citizens of Plataiai, according to Herodotos "all weapon-bearing citizens," contributed a substantial force to the Athenian victory at Marathon.8 In 480, Plataiai also provided a contingent of citizens to the Greek fleet at the battle at Artemision.9 After the retreat of the fleet from Artemision, the population of Plataiai was evacuated in the face of Xerxes' invasion of central and southern Greece.10The town suffered destruction by Persian troops, who without doubt were incited by their Theban allies to destroy it.1l A year later,the Greek armyunder the Spartanking Pausaniascrushed the Persians and their Greek allies a few kilometers to the east of the deserted settlement. Following this victory over the remnant ofXerxes' grand army,the council of the Greek strategoidecided to name the battle after Plataiai.The town was also granted special and protected status.12For five decadesthis specialstatussafeguardedPlataiai'ssecurity.Nevertheless,when tensions rose in Greece prior to the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War, Thebes once again tried to impose its authority over its southern neighbor. Supported by a pro-Theban faction, 300 elite Theban hoplites gained access to Plataiai by treachery.After their unsuccessful attempt to subdue the remainderof the population, they were slaughtered.Knowing that this
5. See, e.g., the remarksin Buckler 1980, pp. 11-12. 6. II. 2.504. See, e.g., Amit 1973, pp. 61-63. The existenceof a Bronze Age settlement at the site was first substantiatedby excavationsconducted by AndreasSkias in 1899 (Skias 1899) and laterconfirmedbyJohn M. Fossey, who recognizedNeolithic and Bronze Age potteryat the site (Fossey 1988, p. 109). Interestingly,in one of the KadmeiaTablets a region is named that can be identifiedwith the Parasopia; see Aravantinos1999; Aravantinos, Godart,and Sacconi2001 (tablet Av 104 [+] 191). The regionwas of some importanceto the wanax of Thebes. 7. Hdt. 6.108. For aspectsof Plataian historyin the Archaicperiod, see Amit 1973, pp. 61-67; Badian 1989; Buck 1979, pp. 42, 91, 99; Fossey 1991, pp. 181-195; Prandi1988, pp. 13-42. 8. Hdt. 6.108;Just. Epit. 2.9.9; Nep. Milt. 5. The last refersto 1,000 Plataianhoplites,probablyan exaggerated estimate. 9. Hdt. 8.1;Thuc. 3.54.2. 10. Hdt. 8.44. 11. Hdt. 8.50; see also Amit 1973, pp. 79-86; Prandi1988, pp. 47-56. 12. Hdt. 9.17-88; Thuc. 2.71, 3.58; Plut.Arist. 21. See also Badian 1989 for discussionof these events and the consequencesfor Plataiai.
PLATAIAI
13. Thuc. 2.2-6. See also Buck 1979, pp. 148-153; 1994, pp. 11-15; Prandi 1988, pp. 79-92. 14. Thuc. 2.71-78; see also Kern 1999, pp.97-111. 15. Thuc. 3.20-24,52-68; see also Bruce 1968, pp. 196-197. 16. Paus.4.1.4. See also Buck 1994, pp.62-63, 68-69, 78-79, 87-88, 94, 99; Buckler1980, pp. 15, 19-22. 17. Diod. Sic. 15.64; Xen. Hell. 6.3.1; Paus.9.1.5. See also Buck 1994, pp. 103-104; Buckler1980, pp. 19-22, 46; Kirsten1950, cols. 2309-2310; Prandi 1988, pp. 121-132. Sparta probablyoverextendedits position in Greece afterthe King'sPeace and eventually,before 375 B.c.,withdrewits guaranteeof protectionfor Plataiai. 18. Xen. Hell. 6.4.4; Diod. Sic. 15.53.2; Plut. Pel. 30.3; Paus. 9.13.3-4.
IN
BOIOTIA:
I996-200I
CAMPAIGNS
285
would lead to renewed attack,Plataiai'sprotector,Athens, decided to evacuate the civilians and prepare the town for a siege.13Thebes joined the Peloponnesians as an ally,most likely in exchange for a promise of support to regain control over Plataiai. In the third year of the Peloponnesian War, after unsuccessful invasions of Attica, Sparta decided to draw a tight noose around Athens in order to conciliate its important ally Thebes, and probably also to secure the land route into Boiotia by conquering Plataiai. In 429 B.C. the Spartan and allied army appearedbefore the walls of Plataiai and, after indecisive negotiations, surroundedthe town. In spite of its small size, the PlataianAthenian garrison managed to withstand all attacks on the town, even when carriedout with hitherto-unknown ingenuity.14The besiegers settled down to breakthe town'sresistanceby protractedsiege, intending to starve the defenders into submission. This took nearly two years to accomplish, during which time part of the garrison escaped in a daring counterattack. In the end the remaining Plataian-Athenian garrison was forced to capitulate and was executed after a mock trial.Thebes, the real victor in the siege, decided, after a year of procrastination,to destroy the town." Those who had escaped, as well as those already residing in Athens, had to remain in exile. For nearly forty years the site lay barren;after the King'sPeace in 386, the Spartans refounded Plataiai.16Their motivation was probably based on the site's proximity to the "Boiotian road"over Mt. Kithairon as well as its nearness to the Gulf of Kreusis. Both were favorite Spartan points of entry into Boiotia, especially since such entry was supported by Plataiai's well-known and reasonablyjustified anti-Theban sentiment. The Plataians would remain pro-Spartan and therefore safeguard this Lakedaimonian bridgehead in Boiotia. Such concerns had taken on a more pronounced meaning shortly after the end of the Peloponnesian War when old political and military allegiances dissolved into a bewildering assortment of new attachments. This led to a restructuring of alliances as old allies became enemies and hereditaryenemies friends. All of this was played out in and around the Isthmus of Corinth in the Corinthian War. Thebes, now opposed to Spartan hegemony in southern Greece, became Sparta's sworn enemy. In this context the site of Plataiai took on renewed strategic importance, precipitating its refoundation under Spartanauspices.Nevertheless, a decade later, prior to the battle of Leuktra in 371, a Theban army managed to conduct a successful surprise attack on Plataiai and once again forced its inhabitants into exile.'7 Plataiai was captured and destroyed. Shortly thereafter Sparta suffered a crushing defeat at the hands of the Thebans at Leuktra, a few kilometers to the west of Plataiai.18No longer protected by a benefactor, the Plataians had to reconcile themselves to a lengthy exile at Athens. For the next thirty years the situation in southern Boiotia remained relatively stable. The political structure of central and southern Greece was radically altered in 338 B.C.when Philip II of Macedon led his army to a resounding victory over the united armies of Athens and Thebes in the plain of
286
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
KONECNY,
AND
R. T. MARCHESE
Chaironeia. The king treated the Athenians generously, their Theban allies less so. They had to accept a Macedonian garrison on the Kadmeia as well as surrenderthe town of Plataiai. The town's inhabitants-or their offspring-were repatriatedto the community.l9Three years laterThebes revolted against Alexander the Great. He descended with lightning speed on the unlucky town, took it by force, and let those Boiotians who were at his side decide the fate of their vanquished brethren.The Plataians and others did their best to make the sentence as harsh as possible. This resulted in the enslavement of all those who had survivedthe general massacre of the Theban defenders in the final assault on the city.20 Afterward, the Boiotian symmachoiof Alexander decided to refortify Plataiai, no doubt to establish a strong, pro-Macedonian base near the important route across Mt. Kithairon.21It is also possible that many Boiotian as well as Plataian magistrates envisioned Plataiai as the new political and urban center for southern Boiotia since the destruction of Thebes had created a political vacuum in the region.22This idea was feasible for a number of reasons, not least of which was the surprisingsize of the refounded town. By 331 B.C., the project had apparentlynot been finished, since Alexander thought it necessary to dedicate a (probably substantial) sum of money to the reconstruction of Plataiai after his victory at Gaugamela.23Consequently,Alexander could secure his strategic interests in central Greece-probably more of a problem for Antipatros than for himself-while at the same time augmenting his propagandisticcampaign in which he presented himself as the avenger of the destruction wrought on Greece by the Persians in 480 and 479 B.C. After the death of Alexander, Plataiai remained faithful to the Macedonian cause and fought, at least during the early phase of the Lamian War, against the Greek symmachoi.24 Afterward, any aspirations that the town might become the new political center of southern Boiotia evaporated with the refoundation of Thebes by Kassandros at or shortly after 317 B.C.As a direct result of this refoundation, Plataiai was relegated to a position of unimportance. However, the Eleutheria, initiated in the 5th century as a memorial celebration for the Greek victory in 479 B.c., continued at Plataiai throughout the Hellenistic period.25The festival was more than a local affairand gained regional as well as limited international fame. The effect that the Eleutheria had on Plataiai is well stated in a verse by Poseidippos, who remarked that only during the festive days of the celebration could Plataiai be regardedas a polis.26In addition to celebrating the Eleutheria,the town also organizedthe Lesser and GreaterDaidala, both of which were of pan-Boiotian importance.27 Through all of this Plataiai remained, contrary to its position in the 6th through 4th centuries B.C., a loyal member of the Boiotian koinon.At the same time the town maintained cordial relations with Athens.28 In many respects,the shift in the geographicaland political focus of the Greek world in the Hellenistic period overshadowed the limited regional importance of communities like Plataiai. By the 3rd century B.C., Plataiai was relativelyinsignificant, one of many small ruralpoleis in Greece. This status did not change under Roman rule. The Eleutheria continued to be
19. Paus.4.27.10; 9.1.8. 20. Arr.Anab.1.9, passim;Diod. Sic. 17.11, passim;Plut. A/ex. 11.9. 21. Arr.Anab.1.9, passim. 22. Alreadysuggestedby Kirsten (1950, col. 2278).
23. Plut. Alex. 34.3. 24. Diod. Sic. 18.11. 25. Paus.9.2.6; Schachter1994, pp. 138-141. 26. Cited by HerakleidesKritikos, FHG II, 257 c 11 and 25. For the identificationof Dikaiarchoswith the Hellenistic authorHerakleidesKritikos, see RE VIII, 1912, cols. 484-486, s.v. Herakleides6 KpTicrx6o (H. Schultz). The cults celebratedat Plataiaior within the boundariesof its territory arelisted in Kirsten1950, cols. 23182330; Schachter1981, pp. 7, 33, 52, 127-128,158-159,208,242-250; 1986, pp.11-12,44,55-56,59-61, 115,119-121,199,201; 1994, pp. 125143, 173-175. 27. Paus.9.3.6; Schachter1981, pp.245-250. 28. See Kirsten1950, col. 2314.
PLATAIAI
IN BOIOTIA:
1996-200I
CAMPAIGNS
287
observed and in the 2nd century A.C. a level of style and sumptuous festivity was observed during the reign of the philhellenic emperorsTrajanand Hadrian. Fragments of a bilingual Latin and Greek copy of Diocletian's Edict of Prices found at the site indicate that the town continued to serve local economic needs as a place of trade in the 3rd century A.C.29Plataiai's name also occurs in the TabulaPeutingeriana.30 During the Byzantine and medieval periods Plataiai constructed and supported ten or more churches31and functioned as the suffragan see for southwestern Boiotia.32The place remained important enough-probably due to its straddling the strategic land route, or as the namesake of the still-famous battle in 479 B.C.-to warrant a visit by Mehmet Fatih, the conqueror of Constantinople and the Peloponnese in the 15th century.33 Sometime later, the Ottoman tax records list two villages with the name Kokla (Albanian settlements) in the vicinity of the ancient ruins.34One of them probably developed into the modern village of Plataies (still sometimes named Kokklain local parlance35).The village, however, lies off the site of the ancient and Byzantine town and thus the tax recordsmost likely indicate that Plataiai'ssettlement history had, after nearly unbroken continuity for several millennia, finally ended.
TOPOGRAPHY
29. Waldstein, Tarbell,andRolfe 1889, pp. 428-439. For a more detailed accountof Plataiai'shistory duringthe Roman and Late Roman periods,see Kirsten1950, cols. 2314-2318. 30. See Weber 1976, p. 58 (s.v.Plateas). 31. See the site plan in Waldstein, Washington, and Hunt 1890, pl. VII. 32. TabulaImperiiByzantiniI, pp. 243-244, with evidencefor the Early Byzantineperiod. 33. Gregorovius1889, II, pp. 390, 552. 34. This informationwas generously providedby John Bintliff (pers.comm., 1999,2001). 35. This was in fact the name of the village until it was renamedPlataies afterits ancientpredecessor;see, e.g., Kirsten1950, col. 2256, there spelled Kokla;Fossey 1988, p. 102. 36. For relativelyrecent changes in the hydrologicalsituationof the Parasopia in general,see the extremely valuableremarksin Pritchett 1985, pp.95-96.
The ruins of ancient Plataiai are situated along an extended but shallow projectionof Mt. Kithaironand cover an areaof approximately89 hectares (Figs. 1-2). The broad, gently sloping plateau is bordered on its flanks by shallow dry valleys.Toward the north, the primary ridge of the site is divided into three subsidiaryridges of various size. The western portion ends in a separateplateauof approximately11 ha, which is borderedon the north and west by rocky slopes. A substantialspring,the MEy6oXcl Bpoovl,exists at its base.The use of the spring dates to distant antiquity and it continues to be employed today as a major source of fresh water for the cultivation of nearby fields and for livestock. Additional sources of fresh water are provided by springs in the easternvalley as well as severalsprings noted by the American excavatorsduring the 1890s (see below) and by Ernst Kirstenin the 1940s. All originate from the subterraneangroundwater resources of Mt. Kithairon.Many of these springs, however,have now been exhausted from the use of water for intensive agriculturalcultivationon the site and in its immediate environs.The increaseddemand in nearbyvillages for water, especiallyin the later part of the 20th century,has also reducedthe amount of fresh water availableto the local population.36 As noted earlier,the availabilityof fresh water and arableland, with at least reasonable defensive capabilities, made Plataiai an attractive site for settlement. Although the plateau does not possess a prominent acropolis separated from the remainder of the site, no other site in the immediate environs offers comparable advantages. The remainder of the area that makes up ancient Plataiai, a series of undulating ridges and subtle depressions, no doubt was used as agriculturalland prior to the Late Classical
288
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
KONECNY,
AND
R. T. MARCHESE
/fT
0
---------------
100 in situ secure
200
300m
remains reconstruction
tentative reconstruction road grid overlay
/////
Areas of geophysical exploration
Figure 2. Plataiai 2000, site plan. A. Konecny
PLATAIAI
IN
BOIOTIA:
1996-200I
CAMPAIGNS
289
period, and later, in the 4th century B.C., was incorporated into the fortified perimeter of the site. The local topography,especially the shape of the plateau and its bordering valleys, necessitated the area'swholesale inclusion behind the fortification walls in order to satisfy the needs of the local population. Political considerations must also be taken into account in explaining the impressive size of the town. Whatever the reason, ancient Plataiai after the 4th century B.C.covered a substantialareawith imposing walls, towers, and gates.
HISTORY OF EXCAVATION AND RESEARCH
37. Wheler 1682, p. 473. 38. Waldstein,Tarbell,and Rolfe 1889;Waldstein,Washington, and Hunt 1890; Washington 1891; Richardson1891. 39. Skias 1899. 40. Skias 1899; Bonanno-Aravantinou 1988. 41. Spyropoulos1973a, 1973b; Fossey 1988, p. 109. 42. The resultswill be publishedby E. Vlachoianniin ArchDeltfor 1998 and 1999 (forthcoming). 43. Kirsten1950. 44. Fossey 1988, pp. 103-112.
The archaeological site near the village of Kokla (modern Plataies) was identified as ancient Plataiai by George Wheler in the 17th century.37Between 1889 and 1891 an American expedition under the direction of Charles Waldstein undertook excavations at the ancient town.38During the course of their work they unearthed the foundations of a Doric temple and several churches of Byzantine and medieval origin. A number of significant artifacts were also discovered, including the fragments of Diocletian's Edict of Prices noted above. The published site plan from these trial excavations, however, cannot be used to locate previously excavated areaswith any degree of certainty.Methodologically, these early explorations of Plataiai were typical for their time and the results have never been adequately published. Nearly the same is true for excavations undertaken by the Greek archaeologistAndreas Skias in 1899.39Among his finds were substantial fragments of a marble sarcophagus of Roman date depicting scenes from the Phaidra myth.40Since he fixed the topographical setting of his exploratorytrenches to the then-still-visible trenches of his American predecessors,it is impossible to discern the exact location of his work. Outside the town site, rescueexcavationswere often triggeredby chance finds. Such operationshavebeen conducted since the 1970s by the Ephorate of Boiotia and have yielded mostly graves and grave goods. In 1972 the ephor of Thebes, Theodoros Spyropoulos, excavateda multiple-burial site to the east of the town, which he interpreted as the Altar of Zeus Eleutherios, founded after the Greek victory at Plataiai.41Rescue excavations have been resumed recently by the Ephorate of Thebes at the site of the MeyrakXBpovcnrand to the west of the town, in the area of an ancient cemetery.42 Although limited excavations have established an initial body of artifactual data for the town, the best description and interpretationof the site is provided by Kirsten'sarticle "Plataiai"in the Real-Encyclopadie.43 Even though an accurate assessment of the town was made, especially in the evaluation of the ancient testimony on Plataiai, Kirsten'sarticle was intended only as a preliminaryexamination.The fundamental problem with his discussion, in an archaeological context, is that it was based primarily on the results of excavations undertaken half a century earlier, personal observations, and a limited number of aerial photographs. Three decades later, Fossey provided a short synopsis of Plataiai's history as part of his fundamental work on the overall settlement history of Boiotia.44 Like
290
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
KONECNY,
AND
R. T. MARCHESE
Kirsten, Fossey based his interpretation largely on the excavation reports of his predecessors.He also visited the site on a number of occasions and, in the process of inspecting the archaeological remains, made thorough notations on the distribution of ceramics. Despite the rich written testimony about the site, modern analysis has barely covered the intense occupational history of Plataiai.45Added to this is the fact that only four years of excavations have been conducted at Plataiai between 1889 and 1998. As a consequence, a number of fundamental questions need to be resolved in order to coordinate the history of the settlement, as described in the ancient literature,with its archaeologicalremains.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PROBLEMS
An obvious archaeological problem to address at Plataiai relates to the fortification system of the town, the most conspicuous and practicallythe only visible surface feature at the site. Four different phases of building activity can be distinguished. Prior to our work at the site, the extent, preservation, layout, typology, and date of the walls were largely unknown. Although some effort was made by Waldstein and Washington, and later by Kirsten, to clarify the town'sfortification complex, their results differed on severalimportant issues, primarilythe relativeand absolute chronology of the circuit wall(s). Consequently, a reexamination of the Plataian fortifications was desirable, especially in light of the recent advancements in the study of Greek fortifications. Fortification complexes became a crucial part of Greek public architecture at the end of the Archaic period and, over time, a fundamental element in the urban scheme of towns and cities. Unfortunately, the systematic study of municipal fortifications has been either neglected or overshadowed by the examination of more spectacularcivic and religious architecture.Although an earlyperiod of fortificationstudies exists, primarily confined to the initial decades of the 20th century,46the topic has gained renewed interest among a number of scholars only since the 1970s. Excellent studies now exist-many offering a solid foundation for a comparative examination of ancient municipal fortifications-at a number of sites of greaterhistorical importance than Plataiai, including Athens, Syracuse, Miletos, and Pergamon.47All of these sites managed to safeguard their urban schema by an elaborate defensive network. Security,especially for a community that possessed high strategic value, could not be ignored or minimized as insignificant and it is interesting that smaller,less wealthy towns in the Greek countryside solved similar security problems by the construction of elaboratefortifications.A lack of excavatedsites has meant that precise chronological parameters could not be established for many Greek fortificationsystems.The comparablywell preservedwalls at Plataiai provided an excellent opportunity to study an elaboratefortification complex that was attached to a ruralcommunity of moderate importance, especially since ancient commentary offered a chronological framework for the Plataian walls.
45. One book has been written on Plataiai'shistory:Prandi1988. It is concernedwith historicaland epigraphicalaspectsof Plataiaiand adds very little to the corpusof archaeological data for the town. 46. Much of this earlywork on fortificationswas done by German scholars.The best examplescan be found in Milet 11.3;Milet III.2; and Wrede 1933. 47. See the pioneeringwork of Ohly 1965;Winter 1971; Garlan 1974; and Lawrence1979. Since 1979 a number of additionalmonographsand articles have been published,including Cooper 2000; Corbet 1997; Debord and Descat 1994; Gassner2001; Held 1999; Karlsson 1992; Leriche 1992; Leriche and Treziny1986; Marksteiner1997; Pollhammer2002; Radt 1992; Rheidt 1992; SamosXV; Van de Maele and Fossey 1992; and Weiszl 1999.
PLATAIAI
IN
BOIOTIA:
1996-200I
THE FORTIFICATION
CAMPAIGNS
291
WALLS
The first three years (1996-1998) of activity by the Austrian archaeological expedition at Plataiai were devoted to survey and the construction of an updated site plan (Fig. 2). In the second, third, and fourth seasons, the Fitch Laboratory at the British School at Athens undertook geophysical prospection in and around the city walls (see below, pp. 315-317). One of the main objectives of the geophysical survey was to locate traces of the Spartan siege wall of 429-427 B.C.described by Thucydides.48Although this wall was not identified, important data on the fortification circuit and the internal plan of the community were gathered. In many respects the geophysical survey provided a substantial database for determining the extent and architectonic design of Plataiai's different circuit walls. It did not, however, resolve the chronological issues associated with the separate phases of fortification construction. A gate complex in the largest circuit wall, located by geophysical means, was therefore chosen for excavation in 1999. The partial exposure of the Western Gate (Fig. 2), conducted in joint excavationsby the Ephorate of Thebes and the University of Vienna, firmly established a chronology for its construction. The following year a largerportion of the gate complex and a small portion of a nearbybuilding were exposed. Based on research conducted between 1996 and 2000, four different fortification circuitscan be discerned:1) an earlycircuitwall on the acropolis; 2) a wall more than 3 km long, which delineates the greatest extent of Plataiai; 3) a later insertion, a diateichisma,which dissected the southern portion of the 3-km wall and excluded the southernmost part of the town from the protected zone; and 4) a later circuit wall on the acropolis. THE ACROPOLIS
48. Thuc. 2.78. 49. For "Lesbian"masonry,see, e.g., Wrede 1933, pp. 40-43; Scranton1941, pp. 25-45; Winter 1971, pp. 80-90; and EretriaIV, pp. 38-45. 50. Cf. EretriaIV, pp. 38-45, pls. 1, 34, 36; Maier 1967, pp. 308-309; Ohly 1965, figs. 51, 54.
FORTIFICATION:
FIRST
PHASE
Bp6roq,the outer face of a stretch Directly above the source of the McydrXk of wall approximately5 m in length is preserved in situ, representing the earliest extant fortification of Plataiai (Fig. 3). It consists of a course of large polygonal orthostate slabs set on a foundation of smallerblocks. Local brecciawas used as building material.The slabs have a flat, nearly smooth front face on which parallel chisel marks arevisible. The orthostates show the characteristicshapes of developed "Lesbian"polygonal masonry,49and their edges are finely delineated and sharply cut. The blocks of the foundations on which the orthostates rest are also polygonal in shape, but their edges areless well cut.Their correspondingfaces were only roughlyworked and protrude a few centimeters from the horizontal plane of the wall. At this point the foundation, which consists of two or three superimposed courses of blocks, is firmly fixed in bedrock. Better-preserved parallels at other Greek sites indicate that, above the socle of stone masonry,this wall consisted of mudbrick.50 Along the western fringe of the acropolis two more short stretches of this wall were located. Their state of preservationis much worse and they consist only of foundations, but with characteristicfeatures of "Lesbian"
292
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
KONECNY,
AND
R. T. MARCHESE
1
0
PNEENM
2m OM
Figure3. Southwesternpartof the acropolis:masonryof "Lesbian" style. A. Konecny
masonry. Along the northern edge of the acropolis, subsequent building activity destroyed all traces of the wall. It is also evident that much of the earlierwall was robbed in later periods or was subject to erosion. Since the rocky northern edge of the plateau must itself be regardedas a naturalline of defense, it seems very probable that the wall once followed this line. Along the eastern and southern borders of the acropolis, later building activity has completely covered all earlier remains. Only two dislocated blocks of "Lesbian"polygonal work were found outside the fortification line that delineated the acropolis at a later period. Their appearanceindicates that the "Lesbian"wall once followed approximatelythe same line as the later wall around the acropolis. The style of masonry employed in this early wall is one of the more conspicuous in Greek architectureand can be dated within well-defined chronological limits. "Lesbian"masonry is typical of the Late Archaic and Early Classicalperiods, especiallyin Boiotia, Phokis, and on Euboia, where it was frequentlyused for building fortifications.Better-preservedexamples exist at Eretria and Delphi where distinct stylistic parallels are dated by excavation to the years around or shortly after 479 B.C.51Consequently, it is reasonable to provisionally date the construction of this first phase of Plataiai'swalls to the first decades of the 5th century B.C.It remains unclear whether this wall was built before or after the sack of the town by Persian troops in 480 B.C.
THE
CIRCUIT
WALL
FROM
CA. 330
B.C.
At the southwestern edge of the acropolis a second wall is evident (Fig. 2). This wall follows the western ridge of the site toward the south, slightly changes direction twice and, after approximately250 m, turns toward the east to form a recess. At its inner apex two towers flanked a gate, the socalled Western Gate. Its location and shape were confirmed by geophysical investigations and later excavation (see below). To the south of this gate the wall continues southward along the edge of the ridge for another 700 m. In its course it changes direction several times, following the natural terrain that afforded additional protection from attack. Approximately 70 m to the north of the rocky lower slope of Mt. Kithairon the wall reaches a small elevation in the natural terrain, which is separated
51. EretriaIV, pp. 38-45; FdD II, pp. 35-121, esp. pp. 112-114.
PLATAIAI
IN BOIOTIA:
1996-2001
CAMPAIGNS
293
- - Ar o 1i1,31 W^^)CT af
~
,
Figure4. Largecircuitwall,eastern sector: front view (above) and ground plan (right). A. Konecny
r 00
55
-^
A.
10 m
1
from the mountain by a shallow saddle. Here it turns to the east at a right angle. After an additional 100 m it turns again to the northeast, where it descends along the eastern edge of the Plataian ridge. From this point the wall continues over a distance of more than 1,600 m, slightly changing its direction several times in order to remain on the edge of the ridge. At a point just south of the modern asphalt road between Plataies and Erythrai, two rectangular towers flank a badly preserved gate (the Eastern Gate). After nearly a kilometer, at the northern end of the ridge, the wall terminates in a round tower (Fig. 2:R 3), after which it turns to the west at a right angle. From here the wall cuts across the eastern valley. At the bottom of this shallow trough, geophysical prospection located a possible third gate, the Northern Gate, which is currently coveredby silt. Toward the west the wall crosses the northern end of a ridge and terminates at its western flank in a tower. From here scant vestiges of the wall can be traced, indicating that the wall turned to the south. After a few meters all traces of the wall arelost. It must have crossed the valley between this ridge and the acropolis, but its course remains an open question. Scant traces of this wall exist along the northern and western edge of the acropolis, but it seems to have followed the course of the earlier "Lesbian"fortification that it replaced. The preservationof this structureis sufficient to allow recognition of diagnostic masonry characteristics,and although subtle differences exist along its circuit at several locations, the masonry is generally uniform in style and technique (Figs. 4, 5). The wall generally measured 3.20 m from the outer to the inner face. Both faces normally consisted of one row of large orthogonal or trapezoidalblocks of local breccia.The averageheight of the masonry was approximately0.70 m. In many cases missing sections at the corners of the blocks were filled with small triangularor rectangular stone plugs, of which only a few remain in situ. The upper edge of this initial row of blocks was leveled to provide a secure and convenient base for the superimposed structureof the wall.
294
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
KONECNY,
AND
R. T. MARCHESE
0
Since the wall often followed sloping terrain,the upper edge of each row of masonry was stepped in places to compensate for the change in elevation. In many cases the upper edges of the outer and inner faces of the wall were not of the same height. This depended on the decline of the slope perpendicular to the wall. The space between the outer and inner face of the wall was filled with densely packed rubble.The orthostate row rested on a foundation of smaller,more roughly worked blocks of the same material. Their faces projected about 0.20 m, and the gaps between the blocks remained unfilled. This foundation row rested on bedrock or in shallow foundation trenches in the local soil. Rectangular towers were spaced unevenly along the entire circuit of the wall, ranging from 35 to more than 90 m apart.Their distribution was determined by the natural terrain in front of the wall; in areaswhere the wall was more vulnerable or accessible, towers were placed in close proximity and in a more systematic pattern.Their dimensions vary from place to place, but usually average approximately5.60 m in width by 4.50 m in depth. Like the walls, the towers consist of a row of orthostates above one or more rows of foundation blocks. The side walls of the towers bond to the outer face of the curtain wall, which normally does not continue behind them. At three locations semicircularor circulartowers were employed instead of rectangularstructures.One semicirculartower stood in front of the southern portion of the eastern branch of the fortification (Fig. 2:R 1). Its remains are barely preserved; only a few blocks are visible. A second example was located approximately200 m north of the Eastern Gate (Fig. 2:R 2). Nearly half of its perimeterwall (with a diameter of ca. 12 m) stands in situ. This tower replaceda rectangularpredecessorthat belonged to the original fortification wall at this location (Fig. 6). The tower had a triangularextension that projected from the inner face of the wall toward the town. It is evident that the space on top of the structure had to be enlarged. A third tower (Fig. 2:R 3), circularin plan (ca. 10 m in diameter), forms the northern end of the eastern wall. It flanks the vulnerable point in the circuit where the wall changes direction along the top of the eastern ridge and appears to have belonged to the original fortification. No indication of a rectangularpredecessoris evident on the surface and it is unlikely that one ever existed at this location. Access to the top of the fortification walls was provided by staircases along the inner face of the wall. Each staircasehad a stone foundation. An orthostate row identical to the inner face of the curtain wall and of the same height (ca. 0.70 m) constituted the lowest course of the staircase.In most cases the structures are bonded with the wall. Assuming a roughly
1
2m
Figure5. Largecircuitwall,northeasternsector:exteriorfront. A. Konecny
PLATAIAI
IN
BOIOTIA:
295
CAMPAIGNS
1996-200I
i
% \A
I
I -3
\I I
Figure6. Largecircuitwall,eastern sector:planof semicirculartower (R 2) replacingrectangulartower.
A. Konecny
0 r
5 I
10m I
even distribution of staircases along the wall, those still extant represent slightly less than half of their original number.Normally, but not in every case, staircaseswere located near a tower.52Where towers are absent staircases could not be located, even though access to the battlements would have been required along a considerable length of the wall. The whole structure-walls, towers, and staircases-featured a level upper course of orthostates with rubble fill between the inner and outer surfaces. Given such a solid foundation, the wall is virtually certain to have possessed a massive upper structureof mudbrick.53 The style of masonryas well as a varietyof architecturaldetails strongly suggests that construction of the fortification wall took place in the 4th centuryB.C.Although minor differencesexist,the parallelsofferedby similar walls at Athens and Eretriaare striking.54Historic evidence, as cited above, offers two possible dates for the circuit. The first is the refoundation of Plataiai as a Spartan protectorate after the King's Peace in 386 B.C.,the 52. Forsuchfeaturescf. Lawrence 1979,pp.343-355;Winter1971, pp.147-149. 53. Forsimilarstructures seeAdam Lawrence 1982,pp.19-23; 1979, pp.205-207;Martin1965,p. 358; Winter1971,pp.69-76. 54. Cf. Ohly1965;EretriaIV, the 62, p. pls.122,123.Interestingly,
walllacksanyresemblance-interms of masonrystyle,technique,andtacticallayout-to eitherthe fortifications of Boiotiaknownto havebeenbuilt duringthe 4th centuryB.C.,e.g.,
Khostia(Fossey1981,pp.37-78; FosseyandMorin1986,pp.119-145), 1977),Kreusis Siphai(Schwandner (GauvinandFossey1985),orthe
Atticborderfortifications, oneof which stands only a few kilometers
southeastof Plataiai(Beschi1968; Wrede1924;Cooper2000).Obviandalsothe ouslythe architects masonsof the Plataiancircuitfolloweda differenttraditionof wall construction.
296
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
KONECNY,
AND
R. T. MARCHESE
second during the years after Philip II had refoundedthe town. The earlier date seems ratherunlikely.The Plataianswho had returnedfrom exilewould not have possessed the abilityto build and sustainsuch an extended fortified precinct.Although the Spartansdid, for a time, stationa garrisonat Plataiai,55 it would havebeen much more logical for them to keep the defensiveperimeter as small as possible and retain or renovate the fortifications that had delineatedthe city until its destructionin the PeloponnesianWar.The later date, on the other hand, finds strong support in Arrian'sreporton the proceedings after the sack of Thebes in 335, when the victors decided on the fortification of Plataiai.56The donation by Alexander the Great after his victory at Gaugamela in 331 also suggests the later date, as it refersto a still decidedly unfinished state of the city'sfortifications. Excavations conducted at the Western Gate, discussed below, offer additional archaeologicalevidence that the wall was commissioned around or shortly after 330 B.C.The gateway, the construction of which can be securely dated by associated ceramics, cannot be imagined without the existence of the circuit wall. Stylistic and technical comparisons indicate that the gate and wall are contemporary, and that both features cannot date much later in the Hellenistic period.57We thus conclude that the whole circuit was constructed shortly after the refoundation of Plataiai by Philip II, with Alexander'scontribution to the effort primarilytaking the form of financial support. THE DIATEICHISMA
Sometime after the construction of the circuit wall, the southern portion was abandoned in favor of a more coherent and reduced plan. Approximately 70 m to the south of the southern apex of the circuitwall, the rocky slope of Mt. Kithairon increases in elevation. Within a hundred meters of the wall the ascending slope attains a height approximatelyequivalent to the level of the walkway behind the ramparts.This potentially dangerous situation would expose the defenders along this section of the wall to a barrage of missiles, especially after the rapid development of siege artillery in the Early Hellenistic period.58The nearby slope of Mt. Kithairon offered a perfect opportunity to post catapults within convenient firing 55. Isoc. 14.4. See also Buck 1994, pp. 78-79, 94, 99; Buckler 1980, pp. 19-22, 46; Kirsten1950, cols. 2309-2310; Prandi1988, p. 124. 56. Arr.Anab.1.9, passim. 57. The large circuitclosely resembles fortificationsthat date into the Late Classicalperiod and it lacks every component typical of Hellenistic city walls (see above,n. 54). Hellenistic walls normallyshow a more even distributionof towers and were solidly built in stone up to their battlements. Even if made from mudbrick,the
masonrysocles of the walls generally attaina greaterheight in orderto provide better protectionagainstattack. This was in responseto the sophisticated means of siege warfarecurrentin the 3rd centuryB.C.and later (see, e.g., Stahlin and Meyer 1934, pp. 80-93; Bakhuizen2000). In many cases means for an active defensewere integrated into the fortification,and largetowers providedroom and shelterfor defensive artillery.Additionally,Hellenistic masonryis markedlydifferentfrom the style employedin this circuit.For
Hellenistic fortifications,their characteristicsand possible means for their identification,see, e.g., Bakhuizen 1982; 2000; Held 1999; Konecny1997, pp. 74-83; Marksteiner1997, pp. 163172; McNicholl 1986; 1997; Pollhammer2002; SamosXV, pp. 64-99; Winter 1971; 1992, all with extensive bibliography. 58. Cf. Marsden 1969, pp. 73-82; Winter 1971, pp. 318-330; Lawrence 1979, pp. 43-52; and the views of Kirsten(1950, col. 2278).
PLATAIAI
IN
BOIOTIA:
1996-2001
CAMPAIGNS
297
0
1
2m
--
western Figure7. Diateichisma, sector:frontview (above)andground plan (right). A. Konecny
T ?
5
10m
distance from the parapet. Clearing the wall of its defenders would have been an easy task and, therefore, this part of the circuit would have been the most vulnerable during an assault on the town. This disadvantagewas rectified by the insertion of a diateichisma.The new wall originated from a point ca. 150 m southeast of the Western Gate (see Fig. 2). More than 100 m of the original fortification wall leading up to the diateichismawas dismantled to bedrock.This decision was presumably based on a practicalas well as tactical reason:potential attackerswould not be able to take cover behind the discardedwall. From the point where it starts, the new wall follows a straight line for more than 350 m to the southeast.After two slight changes in directionto the north, it turns sharply to the northeast. From here it continues for approximately250 m until it meets the course of the original circuit where it ends. At this juncture it is evident that the earlier wall leading into the diateichismahad also been dismantled for a considerable distance. Both faces of the diateichisma,which has a thickness of 2.65 m, were built from rectangularor, more often, trapezoidalblocks quarriedfrom the local breccia (Figs. 7, 8). The height of the courses that can still be inspected ranges from 0.70 to 0.90 m while the blocks themselves are 0.901.80 m in length. The upper and lower surfaces and joints were finely cut. The front faces of the blocks possess a slight bulge and feature densely set, parallel chisel marks that run either at a vertical or slightly oblique angle. Outwardly facing corners (at towers) bearvertical chamfersapproximately 0.10 m wide that were finished with a fine tool. The space between the two faces was filled with small, coarse blocks. The faces rested on a foundation of similarly worked blocks of lesser height. The foundation
298
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
KONECNY,
AND
R. T. MARCHESE
Figure 8. Diateichisma,western
sector:view of tower blocks projected approximately 0.10 m from the first exposed course of masonry. This part of the fortification circuitwas also flanked by evenly spaced, 6.50-m-wide, rectangular towers approximately 45 m apart. They are bonded to the wall and were filled with the same tumble of coarse rocks. Behind every second tower a 10-m-long staircaseled up to the top of the wall. In the western part of the diateichismaa sally port led through the wall to the right side (viewed from the interior of the fortress) of every tower that was served by a stairway.To date, four sally ports have been documented along this stretch of the diateichisma,as far as the southernmost apex. The eastern branch of the line appears not to have possessed this feature.The best-preserved part of the diateichismais a tower in the western sector (Fig. 8). Three rows of blocks still rest in situ on top of a foundation three courses high. Part of the fourth row can be found toppled around the tower. It seems reasonableto assume that the wall and towers were constructed entirely from stone blocks.59Inside, the structure contained a fill identical to that of the wall. No interior wall face was found, which suggests that the tower was solid at least to its preservedheight, and probablyup to the level of the walkway. Little evidence is availableto suggest a precise date for the construction of the diateichisma.What is certain is that it was built after the original circuit wall.60Stylistic and technical differences between the two walls are quite pronounced and indicate that some time intervened between 59.The exclusiveuseof stone blocks,however,mustremaina working hypothesisonly.At Demetriasin Thessaly the towersof the fortification of the acropolispossessedsocles of large,well-shapedashlarthat were severalmetershigh. Above these socles restedmassivebastionsmade of mudbrick.See Stahlin and Meyer 1934, pp. 80-93.
60. It cannot have been the original southernborderof the city precinct afterits enlargementunderPhilip and Alexander.In this case, the wall along the diateichismashould show the characteristicsof the circuit,and the wall along the resulting"southernextension" towardthe Kithaironshould show differentcharacteristics.In fact it is exactlythe opposite.For technicaland
stylisticreasonsthe largecircuitmust be regardedas the resultof a coherent and continuousconstructionprocess, give or take a few minor alterations in constrictedareasalong the wall, and the diateichisma a later additionor substitution.This questionwill find more elaborationin the forthcoming volume on Plataiai.
PLATAIAI IN BOIOTIA: 1996-200I
CAMPAIGNS
299
their construction. The even spacing of towers and the frequent and systematic employment of sally ports are improvements over the tactical layout of the circuit wall and are typical features of Early Hellenistic fortifications.61As argued above, the danger posed by the proliferation of artillery in the decades following the death of Alexander as well as the generally unsettled conditions in Greece may have been sufficient cause for the Plataian magistrates to reconsider the exposed weakness of the original wall. The refoundation of Thebes by Kassandroscertainly created an immediate if not urgent need for a shortened and better-protected circuit wall in the southern quadrant,and the never-ending sequence of wars in the 3rd century B.C.provided further incentive to make Plataiai'sfortification more steadfast.The exact chronology of the walls must await further investigation. THE ACROPOLIS
FORTIFICATION:
SECOND
PHASE
Considerably later the Plataians constructed a new fortification wall. The Hellenistic diateichisma,made of stone, had probably remained in good shape, but the large circuit wall, consisting of a mudbrick superstructure on a stone socle, must have requiredconsiderablemaintenance. It is highly likely that this wall had fallen into disrepairduring the protractedpeaceful conditions of Roman Achaia, and that much of its nondurable superstructure suffered the effects of erosion and collapse over the centuries. Moreover, the area requiring protection had considerably diminished. In a reduced form the town did not need-nor could it maintain-such a large fortification wall. As a consequence, only the acropolis, the site of the earlier circuit wall of the Archaic and Early Classical periods, received a new perimeterwall.62A well-preserved section of this wall cuts acrossthe southern and eastern boundaries of the plateau. On the north and west, however,it has almost completelydisappeared,evident only as rock-cutbeddings or scant stretches of wall, and often reusing portions of the earlier fortifications along the crest of the acropolis. In those areas of better preservation diagnostic evidence is available (Figs. 9, 10). The curtainwall is approximately2.70 m wide with both the inner and outer faces of the wall constructed of reused material.The surface treatment of many of the blocks indicates that they had originally been employed in the Hellenistic diateichisma.Some column drums and a number of blocks of different workmanship may have originated from 61. See Kirsten1950, col. 2278; McNicholl 1997, pp. 6-13, and passim; Winter 1971, pp. 115-125,244. The wall shows startlingsimilaritiesin its technicalpeculiaritiesas well as its masonrystyle to the walls of several cities in Phokis, especiallyNeon and Lilaia.The fortificationsof these towns had been dismantledafterthe end of the Third SacredWar and new defensiveperimeterswere probably
built duringthe Early Hellenistic period (Diod. Sic. 16.60.1-3; Paus. 10.3.1-3; see also Buckler1989, pp. 140-142; Fossey 1986, pp. 26-29, 4649; and also Tillard 1911, who provides an earlierchronologyfor the fortifications of these cities). 62. Scant tracesof this later perimeter wall can be seen along the prominentcrest of the acropolis,revealing characteristicfeaturesof later
fortificationarchitecture(e.g., employment of mortar).As discussedabove ("TheAcropolis Fortification:First Phase"),there is only slight evidence for the courseof the Archaiccity wall along the southernand easternborders of the acropolis.It must remaina hypothesis(albeit a very probableone) that the laterwall retracedthe line of its earlypredecessorin this areaas well.
V. ARAVANTINOS,
300
A.
AND
KONECNY,
R. T. MARCHESE
II
-/
~ _ \*s^-^^lFigure
0
-~0
55
lOin-~
l0 10 m mand
municipal buildings, many of which were probablydismantled as the wall was being constructed. Whenever possible, blocks were laid in horizontal courses. For this purpose building materials of similar dimensions were selected for placement in successive rows. This procedure resulted in a considerablyuneven facade. Gaps that appearedbetween the blocks were filled either with smaller stones or broken bricks and tiles. The latter elements were normally fixed in position with lime mortar.Otherwise, mortar was not used to bind the blocks together. The fill between the inner and outer faces consisted of densely packed rubble. No gateway or other type of entrance could be positively identified. Along the southern and eastern sections of the later acropolis circuit wall, the remains of rectangular,or nearly rectangular,towers are evident. These towers measure approximately5.50 x 6.00 m and feature a hollow lower story.The preservedwalls areapproximately1.30 m thick, constructed of material similar to that used for the curtainwall. No systematic pattern can be seen in the construction of the towers: some are connected to the wallswhile others abutthem. In one case an entranceinto the lower chamber of the tower is preserved.In other cases the curtainwall continues without interruption behind the tower chamber,indicating that it could only have been reached via a ladder.The extent to which the interior chamberswere elevated above the surroundingexterior cannot be judged due to a considerable amount of debris at the base of the wall. Along the northern and western sections of the circuit wall, only scant traces of towers exist. It nevertheless seems logical to assume that such structureswere spaced at regularintervals to provide an opportunity for flanking fire on an attacker. The few towers preservedin this areareemploy the foundations of similar structuresalong the earlier circuit wall.
0
i
I
2.
9. Later acropolis circuit wall, southern sector: front view (above) ground plan (left). A. Konecny
PLATAIAI
Figure10. Lateracropoliscircuit wall,southernsector:view of tower andcurtainwall
IN
BOIOTIA:
CAMPAIGNS
1996-2001
30I
The primary features of this small fortress are thus the intense reuse of building material for its construction and the employment of mortar, brick, and tile work. Earlierfortificationswere dismantled in orderto build the new wall. It is also clear that a number of municipal structures fell victim to this enterprise as well, which suggests a degree of urgency connected with the building programand supports a Late Antique date for its execution.The general turmoil that threatened the Balkans and the Greek mainland from the mid-3rd century A.C. onward probably provided the incentive to refortify Plataiai after several centuries of relative peace.63
THE INTERNAL
MUNICIPAL
SCHEMA
Inside the perimeter formed by the large circuit wall and the later diateichismato the south, several features of the Hellenistic town are evident (Fig. 2). Near the town center arethe remains of a Doric temple, excavated by the American expedition in 1891.64The areais completely coveredwith debris and subsequent agricultural use has destroyed the ground plan. Approximately 150 m to the east of the temple is a shallow depression that opens to the north. Scant vestiges of walls follow the slight curve of the structure.Its shape, less than a semicircle in diameter, indicates a poorly preserved theater of moderate size. Finally, in 1899 Skias excavated a 63. A date in the reign of the emperorJustinianwas proposedby Kirsten(1950, col. 2276), who based his suggestionon a remarkby Procopius (Aed.6.2.24). This seems unlikely. Boiotian fortificationsof this period featuredconstructiontechniquesthat arequite distinct.Walls consistedof small and medium-sizedunworked stones in a rich mortarbeddingwith
occasionalspoliainterspersed(cf., e.g., the earliestpartsof the fortressof Livadia;Bon 1937, pp. 187-208; Koilanou1999). The Late Roman and EarlyByzantinefortificationsof Moesia andThrace may be remote parallels,but even in those cases all of the walls were constructedin opus caementicum, completelyunlike the spoliaearchitectureof the late acropolis
fortificationat Plataiai.The lattermore closely resemblesthe so-called Herulian wall at Athens, built shortlyafter A.D. 287 (Agora XIV, pp. 208-210). Procopius'stestimonymight betterbe
asreferring to aJustinianic interpreted renovation of analreadyexistinglate fortificationof the acropolis. 64. Washington 1891.
302
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
KONECNY,
AND
R. T. MARCHESE
substantial structure that he interpreted as part of Plataiai's agora.65No trace of the structureis visible today.66 These were the more prominent buildings of Hellenistic Plataiai. A considerable number of additional walls and structuresare scattered over the remainder of the site. Many are visible as surface features and either form continuous walls or a sequence of stones indicating walls. Additional wall segments are suggested by a change in the vegetation while other subsurface anomalies were located by geophysical means.67If we consider these in combination, a rectangulargrid of streets less than 5 m wide, borderedby blocks of houses measuring approximately40 m east-west by 90 m north-south, was constructed for the site (Fig. 2). The main eastwest axis of the grid was defined by a line between the Eastern and Western Gates. The road that followed this line was approximately7 m wide and is considered the town's primary thoroughfare. Several additional features scattered throughout the town appear to relate to the orthogonal schema. Shallow troughs and concentrations of stone debris conspicuouslyfollow the municipal grid. A number of troughs fit the general dimensions of known streets.The posited Northern Gate is related to a road following the north-south axis while the remains of a Roman bridge to the east of the town lay nearly exactly at the end of one of the postulated roads. Even some modern field boundaries correspond to this orthogonal system of roads and blocks. The assembled evidence thus indicates that, within the perimeter wall, the town was laid out as an orthogonally planned site with a series of streets, avenues, and standardized blocks of domestic buildings.68
THE SETTLEMENT SEQUENCE From the beginning of the Plataiai Research Project, researchhas focused on discovering the location of the initial settlement and determining the length of habitation at the site.69To address these questions, a surveywas conducted each year, with a more extensive approach taken in 2001.70 The areawas randomly sampled, as resourceswere insufficient to conduct a survey over the entire 89-ha site. A random pattern of transects was 65. Skias 1899. 66. Skias'svague descriptionof the location of the relevanttrenchesindicates that the structureshould be sought a few hundredmetersto the north of the theatercavea.Nothing more precisecan be inferredfrom his report(Skias 1899). 67. Boyd andWhitbread2000; Whitbread 2001. See also the contribution by Whitbread and Boyd at the end of this article(pp. 315-317). 68. This grandiosescheme would have coveredabout 89 ha with at least 144 full-scaleblocks, providing space (at eight houses per block) for 1,152 houses. Significantpartsof the
settlement,however,were nevercovered by ancient structures.In an areain the southwesternquadrantof the site within the diateichisma,the natural bedrockis exposed and shows no traces of havingbeen worked. Similarly,the signs of ancient occupationin the southernpart of the site areinsignificant in comparisonto those in the northernpart and, south of the diateichisma,there is little evidenceto suggest any systematicoccupationin antiquity(see below). 69. See also the earlierdiscussions in Waldstein,Washington,and Hunt 1890, pp. 452-462; and Kirsten1950, cols. 2275-2280.
70. Transectsof differinglengths and orientationwere walkedto collect artifacts.Those ceramicsthat were considereddiagnosticwere drawnand photographed.Far from being complete,the surfacesurvey coveredapproximatelyhalf of Plataiai. Such a procedurecan provideonly provisionalanswersto questionsof settlementdensity and diachronic development.Final resultsmust await a systematicand intensive site survey.The resultsthus far achieved neverthelessadd considerablyto our knowledgeof Plataiai'shabitation history.
IN
PLATAIAI
BOIOTIA:
I996-2001
CAMPAIGNS
303
Figure 11. Plan in 2000 of the areas surveyed. A. Konecny
?
o0
200
300m
established, covering severalmajor areasin the northern and northeastern part of the site, some at the western and eastern borders of the acropolis, one majorareaaroundthe temple and the theater site, and additional areas in the southern part of the town within the diateichisma(Fig. 11). The territorysouth of the diateichismawas surveyedas well. A preliminaryanalysis of the surface finds that were collected indicates the following settlement pattern and diachronic use. Settlement density was always greatest in the northern and northwestern parts of the site. Early material was found on and around the acropolis plateau.The largest concentration of material occurredalong its western edge. In this area pottery dates from the prehistoric through the Archaic and Classical periods as well as to the Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine periods. To the northeast of the acropolis, on the bottom of the valley that separates the plateau from the neighboring ridge, pottery does not antedate the Late Classical period. In the northeastern sector of the town, which is bordered to the north and east by the circuit wall, only material from ca. 350 B.C. and later was identified. The same is true for all other parts of the town except those in the immediate vicinity of the
304
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
KONECNY,
AND
R. T. MARCHESE
Doric temple, southeast of the acropolis, where pottery of Archaic date was intermingled with a considerable quantity of Late Classical and later ceramics. The distribution of ceramics over the site makes it clear that the earliest focus of settlement activity was on the acropolis plateau, more precisely along its western crest.71This is not surprising since a major source of water,the MeydAXn Bp6ovn,exists at the base of the plateau and no doubt offered a key incentive for founding the settlement. The absence of any material earlierthan ca. 350 B.c. from outside the acropolis strongly indicates that this area was incorporated into the town only at the time the large perimeter wall was constructed.The exception is the areaaround the Doric temple, where it is likely that an extraurbansanctuaryexisted in the Archaic period.72The pre-4th century B.C. pottery found there is roughly contemporary with the first extant fortification walls of the town constructed in "Lesbian"masonry. Together the accumulated data suggest that, until 336 B.C., the town of Plataiai was primarilyconfined to the acropolis plateau, an area slightly over 11 ha.73It was this settlement that was destroyed three times, first by the Persians and twice by the Thebans. The Spartansiege of 429-427 B.C. invested a community that possessed a fortification wall approximately 1,300 m in length. It must nevertheless have taken an immense effort for the small garrison of 480 Plataians and Athenians to defend a wall of this size. Additional sherd scatter as well as concentrations of prehistoricArchaic material to the west and north of the acropolis probably derives from slope wash or nearby early cemeteries. From the remainder of the large area enclosed in ca. 330 B.C. by the circuit wall, only pottery later than ca. 350 B.C. has been retrieved.A high concentration was found in the northeastern quadrant of the town, in an area bordered to the north and east by the city wall and to the south approximately to the site of the theater.The pottery includes material from the last decades of the Classical period as well as from the Hellenistic, Roman, Late Roman, and Byzantine periods. The temple terrace and its surroundingsyielded equally high concentrations.To the south of the theater and temple, the density of pottery on the surface drops off dramatically,with an even more pronounced decline evident in the area south of the main road between the Western and Eastern Gates. In both areasnegligible amounts of ceramic debris, including roof tiles, were found. To the south of the diateichismapractically no pottery and only a few fragments of roof tiles could be identified. Judging from the distribution of ceramic remains, Plataiai's population between ca. 330 B.C.and the Roman Imperial period inhabited the acropolis plateau and the territorynorth of the theater to the fortification walls. An additional area along the main thoroughfarebetween the Western and Eastern Gates was also inhabited, but as the conspicuous scarcity of pottery and roof tiles indicates, it did not remain in use for very long and was probably only intermittently occupied. Most probably,not long after the foundation of Hellenistic Plataiai, the focus of settlement activity shifted to the north. It is entirely likely that the population of Plataiai was insufficient to occupy the entire areabehind the fortification walls and, as
71.This hasalreadybeennotedin Pritchett 1965, p. 119; 1982, p. 92.
72.This statementis supported by Herodotos's (9.52)of the description last move of the Greek forcespriorto the Battle of Plataiai.The Greek center, which had been orderedto retreatto a featurecalled"theisland,"did not stop there but continued to the Temple of Hera.This is describedas lying in front of the city (cf. also Kirsten1950, col. 2280). 73. See Fossey 1988, pp. 106-107; Kirsten1950, cols. 2277-2280.
PLATAIAI
IN
BOIOTIA:
I996-200I
CAMPAIGNS
305
Figure12. WesternGate:geophysical plot, area 5/98. M.J. BoydandI. K. Whitbread
a consequence, the inhabitants preferredto use land near the traditional centers of the town as their residence.The Late Roman settlement cannot be identified with any degree of certainty from the distribution of surface pottery. The same is true for the Byzantine and medieval periods, but it seems likely that all three habitation sequences were confined to the area of the late acropolisfortifications.The wide distributionof churches,probably of medieval date, indicates that after the later acropolis fortification went out of use, settlement activity was more dispersed around several small nuclei.
EXCAVATING THE WESTERN ADJACENT AREAS
74. See below,p. 316. 75. Open courtyardgates were common in the 4th centuryB.C.;see, e.g., Adam 1982, pp. 90-92; 1992, pp. 2032; Garlan1974, p. 197; Schulz 2000, pp. 45-79; Winter 1971, pp. 219-229 (all with bibliography).
GATE AND
In 1998 a geophysical surveywas conducted in an areawhere the western branch of the enceinte forms a substantial recess to the east. Scant traces on the surface as well as topographical features indicated a possible fortified gate. Geophysical data revealed a structurecharacterizedby two large bastionlike featuresin front of the curtainwall (Fig. 12).74They seemed to have been linked by a massive wall that left open a thoroughfarebetween the northern end and the northern bastion. Behind both bastions the curtain wall appearedto continue to the east. The results confirmed both an entrance to the town here-defining the western termination of the main street through the community-and that this gateway was of a distinct courtyardtype in plan.75Since gates are focal points in fortification enclosures, it was assumed that well-stratified material existed below the surface debris that might provide a chronological base for the fortification walls. In addition, we hoped that excavationmight clarifythe shape of this unique feature. In 1999 and 2000, guided by the geophysical profile,we partiallyexcavated the northern and southern bastions, along the front wall and to the
V. ARAVANTINOS,
306
A.
AND
KONECNY,
R. T. MARCHESE
r
L ""-
I I
D'
::3'.
_
.l
L
I I
r" L.
I
I'
,.1~~ ~
I
I i
I ..
II
L.
_ .I
I
I ;I-4~'Y
_
-i
_
I
_
I
L
L
~
'"-\
\ \
0
-
- -
5
10m
\
Figure 13. Western Gate: plan. A. Konecny
Figure 14. Western Gate: view from the north
rear at a feature that turned out to be the courtyard'srearwall (Fig. 13).76 Both bastions featured the same characteristicsin masonry as the fortification walls and towers of the circuit. Over a low foundation an orthostate courseof large,well-worked blockswas found in situ (Fig. 14).These blocks formed a level platform for a mudbrick structure, no part of which has remained in situ. Both bastions and the curtain walls behind them were bonded and therefore of the same building phase. Between the bastions the front of the courtyardwas 9.80 m wide. To the east the continuation of the northern and southern branches of the wall flanked a nearly rectangular courtyard14.40 m wide and 9.70 m deep.This was closed to the rearby a wall that was only half as wide as the curtain wall.
76. For a more detaileddescription of the resultsachievedin the gateway excavationsand of the design of the structure,see Aravantinosand Konecny 2000; Aravantinos,Konecny,and Marchese 2001; and an articleby Konecny that will appearin the proceedingsof the 10th InternationalConferenceon Boiotian Studies held at Montrealin October2001 (edited by J. M. Fossey).
PLATAIAI
a
Figure15. WesternGate:(a) original design;(b)finaldesign.A.Konecny
0
IN
BOIOTIA:
1996-200I
10
20m
CAMPAIGNS
307
A street led through the courtyardto the main road and eventually to the Eastern Gate. The front of the courtyardwas closed by a massive wall that began at the inner corner of the southern bastion. At this point it abutted the bastions' front, which had previously been worked enface. It terminated 2.40 m short of the northernbastion where a secondarythreshold, indicating the location of the gate, existed. The foundation trenches for this wall were less deep than were those of the two towers and the side and rearwalls of the courtyard.The stylistic and technical features of its masonryarevery similarto those of the other walls but not identical.Therefore, this wall should be considered a secondary addition to the gate. In the courtyard a sequence of three floors was partially excavated. The earliest consisted of local red earth that covered the lower part of the orthostate row of the side walls and the towers that bordered the courtyard;this material had been brought in and laid on top of the local, claybased alluvium. The upper edge of the foundation of the rear and front walls was level with this floor. It seems peculiar that the first floor of the courtyard already covered part of the socles of the wall, which appear to have been worked and thus presumablywere intended to be visible. A second anomaly in the construction is that this was the case only for the lower portions of the bastions and the sections of the curtain wall that continue toward the east, but not for the front and rearwalls. The only explanation possible is that the layout of the gate underwent a change of plan while the structure was still under construction. The original design had left the courtyardopen at the front (Fig. 15), but this plan was apparentlyconsidered unsatisfactory.As a consequence, the front of the courtyardwas closed by the insertion of a cross wall. This must have occurredbefore the flooring was brought in and before the rearwall was built. The latter was constructed thereafter to close the courtyard to the rear. Because it was no longer part of the original line of defense, the rearwall could be reduced to half the width of the fortification wall. The earliest floor in the courtyard-the red earth which covered the lowest part of the masonry of the bastions and the side walls-contained
308
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
KONECNY,
AND
R. T. MARCHESE
little ceramic material. What was found, however, was significant. The latest components of the ceramic assemblage date into the last third of the 4th century B.C. (e.g., Fig. 16).77As the floor must have been in place before the gate went into use, this pottery provides a terminus post quem for the completion of the structure. Since the gate cannot be regarded as isolated from the perimeter wall, both must be considered synchronous. Stylistic considerations and an analysis of the layout of the circuit in question make it quite improbablethat this fortification originated in the Hellenistic period.78The date provided by the ceramic material also coincides with the historical evidence in Arrian, Pausanias, and Plutarch. As noted earlier,the large perimeterwall of Plataiai should be regardedas the result of the town's refortification decreed after the sack of Thebes in 335 B.c., with financial support providedby Alexander the Great after his victory at Gaugamela in 331 B.C.The four years between the destruction of Thebes and the victory at Gaugamela would also have provided the Plataians with ample time for second thoughts concerning the gate's general plan. The initial floor was covered by a second one that contained Hellenistic pottery. Over this a third floor of gravel was placed, at which time part of the rearwall was torn down to its foundation course, which remains in situ.79Obviously the thoroughfarehad been too narrowand, before laying the new floor, which covered the foundations, the old and now useless doorjambswere removed.This renovation also involved inserting between the front wall and the northern bastion a new threshold made from several well-hewn blocks. Pottery from the gravel floor indicates that this development took place in the Roman period. Much later,when the circuitwall to which the gate belonged was abandoned, the whole gateway went out of use. A coin from the Antonine period found between two blocks of the southern bastion offers a tentative terminus post quem for its structural deterioration and abandonment. Seven meters to the rear of the gate the main road that cut through the town to the Eastern Gate commences. Excavations in this area,especially from under the lost road surfacesas well as flanking buildings,yielded a substantial amount of ceramic debris.This material had been deposited either in a thick stratum mixed with the local red soil or in medium-sized, densely packed deposits that were then covered with earth containing few ceramic remains. These deposits of pottery consisted nearly exclusively of two shapes:one-handled miniature cups and miniature kantharoi (Fig. 17). Both were probablyof local origin. A few miniature skyphoi and negligible quantities of full-size closed and open vessels complete the narrow spectrum of shapes. 77. This skyphosbase parallelsa shape that first appearsin the Athenian Agora around330 B.c. (seeAgoraXII, p. 260, no. 352; AgoraXXIX, p. 94, nos. 150-154). 78. See the discussionaboveand n. 57.
79. The chronology of the subsequent building phases of the Western
Gate must remaintentativeuntil a detailedstudy of the excavatedpottery has been undertaken.Both will appear in the forthcomingvolume on Plataiai.
~ /
////,//,/,,5"...//..
0
1
/ "'. ,;
5cm
Figure 16. Western Gate: skyphos base from the first functional floor. A. Konecny
IN BOIOTIA:
PLATAIAI
Figure17. WesternGate:miniature kantharosandthreeminiaturecups fromdepositsto the eastof the structure. A. Konecny
0
1
I996-200I
CAMPAIGNS
309
5cm
The identified shapes date to the early 4th century B.C.Given the overwhelming predominance of miniature drinking vessels, the deposit does not resemble a domestic assemblagebut ratherone of probablecultic origin and use.80The circumstancesfor the deposit make it clear that the pottery-or the earth that had contained it-had been used as a fill underneath both domestic floors and public areas. It seems highly likely that the materialwas retrievedfrom a discardeddeposit of votive offerings from a nearby sanctuaryand reused as convenient construction material. Interestingly enough, the foundation trenches of the gate's original structuredid not contain a single sherd. Only in the foundation trench of the front wall and in the first floor of the courtyardwas ceramic material evident. This pottery, with the exception of only a few later sherds, was similar to that from under the road and inside the adjacentbuildings. This discovery reaffirms our initial belief that the gate's original construction took place before the ceramic fill was deposited as a foundation for later floors and roads.The fortification wall was built first, construction at the rearof the gate beginning at a later date, but before the change of plan of the gateway had taken place.81 80. Close parallelsto the shapesare found in late-5th- to early-4th-century assemblagesat Olynthos (Olynthus XIII, nos. 707-714). 81. The front wall and earthfloor must have been constructedafterthe road and adjacentstructurehad begun to be used. Otherwise there would not be fragmentsof miniaturevessels
in the foundationtrench of these features.Nevertheless,as no pottery was excavatedin the foundation trenchesof the originalpartsof the gate, it is highly probablethat these trencheswere filled before the sanctuarydebriswas deposited at the gate site.
A.
V. ARAVANTINOS,
31I
AND
KONECNY,
I
R. T. MARCHESE
I
Figure 18. Acropolis excavations, plan. A. KonecnyandR.T. Marchese
I
I
L
I
~~~~~~~~~~~.__.!._.~---
0
5
I
10m
ACROPOLIS EXCAVATIONS AND EARLY PLATAIAI Surfacesurveyof the westernside of the acropolis,especiallyabovethe Bp6oq, revealed traces of settlement activity from as early as the Msyc&Xy
Neolithic and EarlyHelladic (EH) I-II periods.82In orderto obtain a completestratigraphicprofileof earlyPlataiai,two trencheseast of the LateArchaiccitywallwereexcavatedin 2000 (Fig. 18).83In the southern structurewas uncoveredbelowa thin layerof trench,partof a rectangular 82. The areaof the springwas first excavatedin the 1960s by the local village authoritieswhen a concrete basin was built at the site of the former laundryfacilityfor the villagersof Plataies.No documentationof these activitiesexists.In 1998 the village decided to restorethe areaand, as a consequence,salvageexcavationswere resumedin 1998 and 1999, directedby
E. Vlachoianni,with the assistance of D. Koutsodemos,both from the Ephorateof Boiotia.They showed that a walled channel from the spring had been built in the Hellenistic period and then was later replaced,once in Roman times and again in the Byzantine period.For preliminaryreports, see ArchDeltfor 1998 and 1999 (forthcoming).
83. For a more detailedpresentation of the archaeologicaldata retrieved from the trencheson the acropolis,see Aravantinos,Konecny,and Marchese 2001. The potteryretrievedfrom the acropolistrenchesis still under studyby specialists.The dates presentedhere are based on a short surveyof the material by the authorsand must be regardedas preliminary.
PLATAIAI
0
1
O
1
5cm//////
5cm
Figure19. Acropolis,southern trench:bodyfragmentoflekythos fromthe LateArchaic/Early Classical debris layer. A. Konecny
IN
BOIOTIA:
1996-200I
CAMPAIGNS
3II
disturbed earth. Two parallel walls and a third perpendicular one to the south probably formed a corridor.The walls consisted of small stones in a rich mortarbedding. They were preservedto a height of only 0.30-0.40 m and were presumablyfoundations. The fill between the walls yielded medieval ceramic material.To the west of the building was a well. The walls of this structurerested directly on top of a layer of debris that contained considerable amounts of broken roof tiles. The associated pottery from this debris field dates the stratum to the very first decades of the 5th century B.C. (see, e.g., Fig. 19). The debris coveredwalls constructed from medium-sized polygonal blocks.The small size of the areaexcavatedand the superimposed architecturalremains from the medieval period inhibited the reconstruction of these earlier remains, but the dimensions of the walls and their inability to support a substantial superstructureindicate that they belong to a domestic building. A stratum into which these walls had been built yielded a moderate amount of ceramic material, the latest of which dates to the late 6th-early 5th century B.C. (see, e.g., Fig. 20). The apparenthiatus between the Late Archaic and the medieval use of the areais probablyexplained by thorough terracingin the areaprior to the construction of the later structure. Post-Archaic strata were thereby simply removed. Pottery dating from the Classical, Hellenistic, and Roman periods was found in the medieval fill, indicating that this area was occupied in the earlierperiods. The debris layerbelow the medieval structure is dated by pottery to ca. 480 B.C. (see above). Although it is tantalizing to assume that it may have resulted from clearing activities after the Persian sack of the town, further excavation in the areais clearly necessary to substantiate this claim. What is evident is that this debris covered an earlier structure of polygonal masonry that had seen use for a number of decades prior to its destruction.
0
........
1
5cm
Figure 20. Acropolis, southern
trench:kraterrimfromthe stratum below the debris. A. Konecnyand D. Bakoli
In the northern trench a massive layer of debris covered the lowest layers of walls that formed the corner of a building (Fig. 18). Pottery from the fill within the walls dates this structure to the medieval period (Fig. 21). Roman, Hellenistic, and Classical stratawere again missing, with the medieval walls set into a much earlier packing that consisted of a sequence of earthen floors. Its uppermost level was covered by debris that yielded complete or nearly complete vessels, including distinctive Corinthian imports that date the assemblage to the period shortly after 550 B.C. (Figs. 22-24). Associated with this floor were badly preserved walls that formed the southeastern corner of a building. Below this another building was represented by wall foundations and another, lower floor of packed earth, clay, ash, and faunal remains. Occupational debris associated with
312
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
AND
KONECNY,
R. T. MARCHESE
Figure 21. Acropolis, northern trench: Byzantine and medieval pottery from uppermost debris layer and fill within building walls
0
Figure 22. Acropolis, northern trench: Corinthian aryballos from the uppermost floor, Archaic period.
5cm
1 I.
D. Bakoli
.:
*-"?)}??lz}8)tt)~u~lCUltttlil $1*1R3)J)s iU Ib~1?t$IsIj$flflI))
S
a,xY?
7-r-??
..r.
O
0
.~?.
??n
')
.'?
1
F.
.
....
5cm
1
5cm I
.
,
tvw
Figure 23. Acropolis, northern trench: Corinthian kotyle from the uppermost floor, Archaic period. D. Bakoli
Figure 24. Acropolis, northern trench: locally produced(?) cup from the uppermost floor, Archaic period. A. Konecny
PLATAIAI
IN
BOIOTIA:
I996-200I
CAMPAIGNS
3I3
Figure25. Acropolis,southern trench:fragmentsof an EH jug from laterstrata
84. Unfortunately,the permit to continue excavationsin this areaduring the followingyearwas withheld. 85. KalliopiSarri,pers.comm., October2002. Sarriwill study the Neolithic material. 86. This assessmentis based on a preliminaryoverviewof the abundant materialretrievedduringexcavations (see n. 83). The prehistoricpottery awaitsa more detailedstudy. 87. As no Mycenaeanceramic specialisthas yet studied the material,it would be unsoundto attempta more specificchronology,but we recognized LH IIIB-C potteryduringour preliminarystudy.
this floor included ceramic material dated to the second quarterof the 6th century.Below this structurea series of gravel floors are evident; they continued under the Archaic buildings and date to the Subgeometricand Early Archaic periods, respectively.The excavation could not be continued into deeper levels.84 To the west of this sequence of occupational layers, a massive wall, approximately 1.75 m wide, followed the acropolis slope from south to north (Fig. 18). It consisted of small and medium-sized unworked fieldstones in a clay bedding and showed a pronounced batter to its western (downhill) surface. Material on top of it and embedded into the clay of its uppermost preserved layer included Subgeometric pottery as the latest component. Directly to the west another wall made from crude blocks fixed in earth bedding was detected, again on a north-south axis. Part of a cross wall that runs from it toward the west may have formed a "compartment" similar to structures often found in the walls of early Greek fortifications. It seems probable that this feature at Plataiai represents the foundation of the inner face of the Archaic city wall; traces of its outer face are preserved on the surface ca. 10 m to the south. The date of both walls has still to be confirmed by further excavation. Directly on top of this complex of walls is substantial debris deposited by continuous surface erosion. A considerable amount of earlier pottery was found mixed into the material retrieved from both trenches. The sequence of datable material starts with fragments of Neolithic origin.85Early Helladic material was relatively common, with EH I and predominantly EH II sherds making up most, if not all, of the sample (Fig. 25).86Middle Helladic (MH) pottery includes diagnostic GrayMinyan and Matt-Painted wares, the former sometimes of very high quality (Figs. 26, 27). Bichrome ware from the transitional MH-Late Helladic (LH) period was also identified. Late Helladic pottery was abundant and continues into the LH IIIC period (Figs. 28, 29).87Dark Age and Protogeometric ceramics also occur but in limited quantities (Fig. 30). Geometric ceramic remains are evident and the Subgeometric period is also represented(Fig. 31), with examples associated with the earliest stratified architecturaldeposits on the acropolis.
3I4
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
KONECNY,
AND
R. T. MARCHESE
Figure 26. Acropolis, northern trench: MH Gray Minyan and coarse pottery from later strata
Figure 27. Acropolis, northern trench: MH Matt-Painted pottery from later strata
Figure 28. Acropolis, southern trench: LH pottery from later strata
Figure 29. Acropolis, northern trench: LH pottery from later strata
???
0
Figure 30. Acropolis, northern trench: Dark Age and Geometric pottery from later strata
1
5cm
Figure 31. Acropolis, southern trench: Subgeometric deep bowl. D. Bakoli
PLATAIAI
IN
BOIOTIA:
1996-200I
CAMPAIGNS
3I5
The ceramic remains clearly indicate that this part of Plataiai was settled from at least the fourth millennium through the third millennium B.C., with a possible hiatus during the EH III period.88For the MH and LH periods the relativeabundanceof materialsuggests a substantialsettlement at Plataiai, which probablycontinued to exist during the Dark Age. If the relative quantities of pottery may indeed be taken as an indicator of settlement floruit, Plataiai suffered a severe decline after the end of the Mycenaean period, slowly recovered in the Geometric period, and prospered in the late 7th and especially the 6th century B.C.89
GEOPHYSICAL
88. This hiatus remainsto be confirmed afterthe relevantmaterialhas been studied. 89. This patternof settlement development duringthe earlierpart of the first millennium B.C. seems to be typical for local centersin Boiotia that later attainedthe statusof polis (cf. Bintliff 1999). 90. Konecny,Boyd, and Whitbread 1999; Boyd and Whitbread2000; Whitbread 2001.
SURVEY
Ian K. Whitbread of the University of Leicester and Michael J. Boyd of the British School at Athens kindly contributed the following report on geophysical explorations at Plataiai: "The Fitch Laboratory conducted three seasons of geophysical prospection at Plataiai (1998-2000).90 The primaryobjectives of this research were to seek evidence of the 429-427 B.C.Spartan siege wall; identify elements of the circuit walls (in particularthe gateways); and verify the postulated grid of internal roads within the city. Most of the prospection was carried out using a GeoScan RM15 resistance meter, with occasional use of a GeoScan FM36 fluxgate gradiometer.The RM15 was preferredsince it detects structuresthrough electrical resistance as a function of soil moisture.This is most appropriatewhen seeking buried walls or ditches, which are relatively dry or damp, respectively, in contrast to surrounding soil. The FM36 detects changes in the magnetic gradient at each sample point. Although the FM36 can detect magnetic differences attributable to the presence of buried structures,it is susceptible to interference from areasof burning and buried metal, which caused problems in a number of grids at Plataiai.The sizes of the surveygrids were either 10 x 10 m or 20 x 20 m in area,depending on the terrainand the size of featuresbeing sought. Readings were undertaken at 1-m intervals and subsequently processed using proprietarysoftware and MapInfoR Professionalwith the add-on Vertical MapperR application. "Explorationfor traces of the siege wall to the north and west of the acropolis during the first two seasons was inconclusive (areas 1, 2, 3, 4/98, 2/99, and 1/00). This was not surprisinggiven thatThucydides (2.78; 3.2021) described the wall as being made of mudbrick; any remains would have blended into the background earth. It was considered worthwhile to seek evidence of the ditches that Thucydides described having been dug on either side of the circumvallation.Although these features would have been refilled with local earth, it remained a possibility that some remnant evidence could be detected. Unfortunately, no anomalies were identified as potentially arising from such structures. Instead, the areas to the north and west of the acropolis revealed scant anomalies that might, in some cases, indicate structures (possibly boundary walls) erected outside the city walls, but without any evidence for their date, it is not possible to say more.
316
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
AND
KONECNY,
R. T. MARCHESE
' .
10
0 {~I
I
20m -
IlM.
"Geophysical survey in the area of the Western Gate (area 5/98) was very successful using both methods (see above, Fig. 12); this success is mainly attributableto the contrastbetween the substantialstone walls and the surroundingdamp soil. Subsequent excavationrevealedstructuresthat closely followed the geophysical anomalies. A grid surveyed in the northeastern quadrant of the town displayed anomalies that may indicate the site of another gateway in the city wall (area2/00; Fig. 32). "Threegrids were surveyedin the second and third seasons to test the proposed internal street plan (areas 4/99, 5/99, and 3/00; Figs. 33, 34). Two of these grids were located at anticipated crossroads and the third followed a shallow,roughlynorth-south gully.91At both crossroadsanomalies were found that appearto support the expected layout of the road grid. In area 4/99 (Fig. 33) the anomalies were consistent with the anticipated structureof a crossroads:the roads form areas of relativelylow resistance compared to the edges, where remains of walls from city building blocks are likely to be located. In the second crossroadsto be tested, the surveyin the 20 x 20 m grid of area5/99 (Fig. 34) revealed anomalies of high resistance (probablywalls) around much of the perimeter of the grid, with a rectangularanomaly of about 10 x 10 m occupying the center of the grid. The organization of the physical structure(s)in this grid is not clear, and excavation would be necessary to establish its nature. Nevertheless, the anomalies could reflect a node within the city road grid, whether or not this constitutes a simple crossroadsor a more complex structure."
Figure32. Geophysicalsurvey,area 2/00: possiblenortherngateway. J. Boyd and I. K. Whitbread
91. BoydandWhitbread2000.
!
PLATAIAI
IN
BOIOTIA:
CAMPAIGNS
I996-200I
317
I I
I
I
I I I
I
I
Figure33. Geophysicalsurvey,area
I
I
I
4/99: crossroad. M.J. BoydandI. K.
I
Whitbread
_ --- -
I I I
_~~~~~L J
_
I
_
0
10
rI~~~~~~~~_
20m I
I I I I )
I
/I
I
Figure34. Geophysicalsurvey,area 5/99: internalfeatureat crossroad
,
site. M.J. BoydandI. K.Whitbread
,/ 0
I r.
10
20m I
I
CONCLUSION After six yearsof researchat Plataiaimuch has been achieved.The fortifications of the town have been fully documented and their function and date of construction are now better understood. The chronology of the large circuit wall is now based on solid, excavated evidence. The results of surface surveyhave also providedvaluable knowledge about the occupational sequence of the town and shed light on the difficult problems of settlement expansion and contraction throughout the site's history.The excavations on the acropolis have, despite their small scale, contributed substantially to our understanding of Plataiai'shistory.The town's existence extended over a much longer period than had hitherto been anticipated from ancient commentary and the published results of earlier excavations at the site.
3I8
V. ARAVANTINOS,
A.
KONECNY,
AND
R. T. MARCHESE
Nevertheless, the conclusions drawn in this article must remain provisional until further work is carried out at the site. Enlarging the excavated area at the Western Gate will lead to a better understanding of the architecturalsequences at this focal point of Plataiai'smost extended fortification circuit. Surface survey should continue on a regularand systematic basis. Much information concerning the chronology and extent of the settlement during its long existence still awaits analysis. Of even greater importance is the continuation of excavations on the acropolis. The ceramic sequence in this area covers a span of approximatelyfive millennia and indicates a potentially substantialcommunity of Archaic date, remains of which are situated below the occupational debris of later periods. In this sense the preliminary results presented here on the first six years of the Plataiai Research Project should be regardedless as a report on objectives achieved than as the beginning of a promising reevaluationof settlement organization and development in southwestern Boiotia.
REFERENCES Adam, J. P. 1982. L'architecturemilitaire grecque, Paris.
. 1992. "Approcheet defense des portes dans le monde hellenise," in Van de Maele and Fossey 1992, pp.5-43. Agora = The Athenian Agora, Princeton.
XII = B. A. Sparkesand L. Tal-
cott, Black and Plain Pottery of the 6th, 5th, and 4th Centuries B.C.,1970.
XIV = H. A. Thompson and R. E. Wycherley,TheAgoraof Athens: The History, Shape, and Uses ofan Ancient City Center, 1972. XXIX = S. I. Rotroff, Hellenistic Pottery:Athenian and Imported WheelmadeTable Wareand Related Material, 1997. Amit, M. 1973. Great and Small Poleis: A Study in the Relations between the Great Powers and the Small Cities in Ancient Greece,Brussels.
Aravantinos,V. 1999. "Mycenaean Texts and Contexts at Thebes: The Discovery of New LinearB Archivesat the Kadmeia,"in Floreant studia Mycenaea. Akten des X. internationalen Mykenologischen Colloquiums in Salzburg, 1.- 5. Mai
1995, S. Hiller and 0. Panagl,eds., Vienna, pp. 56-64. Aravantinos,V., L. Godart, and A. Sacconi. 2001. Thebes:Fouilles de
la Cadmee 1: Les tablettes de la Odos Pelopidou, Rome.
Aravantinos,V., and A. Konecny.2000. "Plataiai:Die Kampagne1999," OJh69, pp. 8-15. Aravantinos,V., A. Konecny,and R. Marchese.2001. "Plataiai:Die Kampagne2000," OJh 70, pp. 9-19. Badian,E. 1989. "Plataeabetween Athens and Sparta,"in Boiotika: Vortrige vom 5. Internationalen Bootien-Kolloquium, Miinchen, 13.-17.Juni 1986, H. Beister and
J. Buckler,eds., Munich, pp. 95111. Bakhuizen,S. C. 1982. "Lagrande batteriede Goritsa et l'artillerie defensive,"in Leriche andTreziny 1986, pp. 315-322. . 2000. A Greek City of the Fourth Century B.c.,Milan.
Beschi, L. 1968. "Lafortezzaellenica di Gyphtokastro,"in Lesfortifications depuis I'antiquitejusque a moyen-age dans le mond mediterraneen. Acts of the 8th Scientific Conference of the International Castles Insti-
tute,Athens, pp. 127-145. Bintliff,J. 1999. "The Origins and Nature of the Greek City-State and Its Significancefor World Settlement History,"in Les princes de la protohistoire et l'emer-
gence de l'etat. Actes de la table ronde internationale, Naples, 27-29
octobre1994, P. Ruby,ed., Naples, pp. 43-56. Bon, L. 1937. "Forteressesmedievales de la Grece centrale,"BCH61, pp.136-208. Bonanno-Aravantinou,M. 1988. "O0 ocxpx6opyoL Pc&tocxlxplg ESToXS TrlS Botcoiatcx:EVvoTrxi O0cEopYQrI," in Er?'7p(rpic rS e-rcipiaC PovICoZVtxov ?Lz/E-rov.A' &eOvC;aooviSpto Thebes,10-14 Pot,ovtxov ZEo-rcv), September1986, A. Bekiaris, ed.,
Athens, pp. 307-324. Boyd, M. J., and I. K. Whitbread.2000. "GeophysicalStudies at Plataiaiin 1999,"in Aravantinosand Konecny 2000,pp.12-15. Bruce,I. A. F. 1968. "Plataeaand the Fifth-Century Boeotian Confederacy,"Phoenix22, pp. 191-199. Buck, R. J. 1979. A History ofBoeotia,
Alberta. .1994. Boeotia and the Boeotian League, Alberta. Buckler, J. 1980. The Theban Hegemony, 371-362 B. ., Cambridge. . 1989. Philip II and the Sacred War,Leiden.
Cooper,F. A. 2000. "The Fortifications of Epaminondasand the Rise of the Monumental Greek City,"in City
PLATAIAI
Wall:The Urban Enceinte in Global
J. D. Tracy,ed., CamPerspective, bridge,pp. 155-191. Corbet,J. 1997. "Milet 1994-1995: Die Mauern sind die Stadt:Zur Stadtbefestigungdes antikenMilet," AA 1997, pp. 249-284. Debord, P., and R. Descat, eds. 1994. Fortifications et defensedu territoire en Asie Mineure occidentaleet meridionale.Acts of the Round Table,Istanbul 1993 (REA 96),
Bordeaux. Eretria IV = C. Krause, Das Westtor: Ergebnisse derAusgrabungen, 1964-
1968, Bern 1972. FdD II = P. Amandry, Topographieet architecture.La colonne des Naxiens et leportique desAtheniens, Paris
1953. Fossey,J. M. 1981. Khostia 1980,
Montreal. 1986. TheAncient Topography ofEastern Phokis, Amsterdam. 1988. Topographyand Population of Ancient Boeotia, Chicago. . 1991. Epigraphica Boeotica 1: Studies in Boiotian Inscriptions,
Amsterdam. Fossey,J.M., andJ. Morin. 1986. Khostia 1983, Amsterdam. Garlan, Y. 1974. Recherchesdepoliorcetiquegrecque, Paris.
Gassner,V. 2001. "Neue Forschungen zu den friihen Stadtmauernvon Velia," in Akten des 8. OsterreichischenArchdologentagsam Institut fur KlassischeArchdologieder Universitat Wien, 1999, F. Blakolmer and
H. D. Szementhy,eds., Vienna, pp. 81-90. Gauvin,G., andJ. M. Fossey.1985. "Livadhostra:Un relevetopographique des fortificationsde l'ancienne Kreusis," in La Beotie antique. Actes du Colloque international, Lyon, Saint-Etienne, 16-20 mai 1983,
P. Roesch and G. Argoud, eds., Paris,pp. 77-86. der Gregorovius,F. 1889. Geschichte StadtAthen im Mittelalter I-II,
Munich. Held, W. 1999. "Lorymain Karien," IstMitt 49, pp. 159-196. Karlsson, L. 1992. Fortification Towers and Masonry Techniquesin the
IN
BOIOTIA:
1996-200I
Hegemony of Syracuse,405-211 B.C.
(OpRom46), Stockholm. Kern, P.-B. 1999. Ancient Siege Warfare,
Bloomington. Kirsten,E. 1950. "Plataiai,"RE XX, cols. 2255-2332. Koilanou,C. 1999. "AI?LC3a6L," ArchDelt49, B' 1 (1994), pp.123-125. Konecny, A. 1997. Hellenistische Turmgehofte in Zentral- und Ostlykien,
Vienna. . 1998. "Der PlataiaiSurvey, 1996-1997," OJhBeibl67,pp. 53-62. . In press."The Walls of Plataiai:A PreliminaryReport,"Boeotian Studies 7-8.
Konecny,A., M. J. Boyd, and I. Whitbread.1999. "Der PlataiaiSurvey: Die Kampagne1998,"OJhBeibl68, pp. 41-52. Lawrence,A. W. 1979. GreekAimsin Fortification, Oxford.
Lazenby,J.-F. 1993. TheDefenceof Greece,490-479 B.C.,Warminster. Leriche, P. 1992. Lesfortifications grecquesde Mycene i Alexandre
(Dossiers d'archeologie172), Paris. Leriche, P., and H. Treziny,eds., 1986. Lafortification dans l'histoire du mondegrec. Actes du Colloque international, Valbonne,decembre1982,
Paris. Maier,F.-G. 1967. "Ausgrabungen in Alt Paphos:Stadtmauerund 1967, Belagerungswerke,"AA pp. 303-330. Marksteiner,T. 1997. Die Befestigte Siedlung von Limyra. Studien zur vorromischen Wehrarchitekturund Siedlungsentwicklung in Lykien unter besondererBeriicksichtigungder klassischenPeriode, Vienna. Marsden, E. W. 1969. Greekand Roman Artillery: Historical Development,
Oxford. Martin, R. 1965. Manuel d'architecture grecque, Paris.
McNicholl, A. 1986. "Developments in Techniquesof Siegecraftand Fortificationsin the GreekWorld, ca. 400-100 B.C.," in Leriche and
Treziny 1986, pp. 305-314. . 1997. Hellenistic Fortifications from theAegean to the Euphrates,
Oxford.
CAMPAIGNS
319
Milet 11.3 = A. von Gerkan,Die Stadtmauern,Berlin 1935. Milet 1.2 = F. Krischen,Die Befestigungenvon Herakleiaam Latmos, Berlin 1922. Ohly, D. 1965. "Kerameikosgrabung: Tatigkeitsbericht,1956-1961," AA 1965, pp. 360-376. OlynthusXIII = D. M. Robinson, Vases Foundin 1934 and 1938, Baltimore 1950. Pollhammer,E. 2002. "Das Kap Kolonna: Eine Festungder Attaliden auf FloAgina,"in Temenos: Festgabefuir rensFeltenund StefanHiller,B. Asamer et al., eds., Vienna, pp. 99-108. Prandi,L. 1988. Platea:Momentieproblemidellastoriadi unapolis, Padua. Pritchett,W. K. 1957. "New Light on Plataiai,"AJA61, pp. 9-28. .1965. Studiesin AncientGreek 1, Berkeley. Topography . 1980. Studiesin AncientGreek 3, Berkeley. Topography 1982. Studiesin AncientGreek 4, Berkeley. Topography 1985. Studiesin AncientGreek 5, Berkeley. Topography Radt,W. 1992. "Die friihestenWehrmauernvon Pergamonund die AA zugeh6rigenKeramikfunde," 1992, pp. 163-282. Rheidt, K. 1992. "Die obereAgora: Die Entwicklungdes hellenistischen Stadtzentrumsvon Pergamon,"A 1992, pp. 235-282. Richardson,R. B. 1891. "VotiveInscriptionsfrom Plataia,"AJA7, pp. 407-421. SamosXV = H. J. Kienast,Die Stadtmauervon Samos,Bonn 1978. Schachter,A. 1981. The CultsofBoeotia 1:Acheloosto Hera (BICS Suppl. 38.1), London. .1986. TheCultsofBoeotia2: Heraklesto Poseidon(BICS Suppl. 38.2), London. .1994. TheCultsofBoeotia3: Potniato Zeus(BICS Suppl.38.3), London. Schulz,A. 2000. Die Stadtmauernvon Neandriain derTroas(Asia Minor Studien 38), Bonn. Schwandner,E. L. 1977. "Die bootische Hafenstadt Siphai,"AA1977, pp.515-550.
V. ARAVANTINOS,
320
A.
Scranton,R. L. 1941. GreekWalls, Cambridge,Mass. ?v rIXtxSkias,A. 1899. "'Avaoxarpiq Prakt1899, pp. 42-56. xaoaL," Ex Spyropoulos,T. 1973a. "ELoYa(?S Boltaccq,"AAA6, pp. 375-381. .1973b. "SomeBoiotian Discoveries,I: Plataia,"Teiresias3, pp. 2-3. Stahlin,F., and E. Meyer. 1934. Pagasai undDemetrias,Berlin. TabulaImperiiByzantiniI = J. Koder and F. Hild, HellasundThessalia, Vienna 1976. Tillard, L. B. 1911. "The Fortifications of Phokis,"BSA 17, pp. 54-75. Van de Maele, S., andJ. M. Fossey,eds. 1992. Fortificationes antiquae, Amsterdam.
KONECNY,
AND
R. T. MARCHESE
Waldstein,C., F. B. Tarbell,andJ. C. Rolfe. 1889. "Discoveriesat Plataia in 1889,"AJA5, pp. 428-442. Waldstein,C., H. S. Washington,and W. Hunt. 1890. "Discoveriesat Plataiain 1890,"AJA6, pp. 445475. Washington,H. S. 1891. "Excavations by the American School at Plataia in 1891,"AJA7, pp. 390-405. Weber,E. 1976. TabulaPeutingeriana: CodexVindobonnensis 324, Kommentar,Graz. Weiszl, M. 1999. "Die Befestigungen derjiingeren Stadtanlagevon Pleuronin Aitolien,"OJh68, pp.105-146. Wheler, G. 1682. AJourneyinto Greece, London.
VassilisAravantinos MUSEUM OF THEBES PLATEIA
KERAMOPOULLOU THEBES
32-200 GREECE
[email protected]
Andreas Konecny INSTITUT FUR KLASSISCHEARCHAOLOGIE WIEN
UNIVERSITAT FRANZ
KLEIN-GASSE
A-II90
VIENNA
I
AUSTRIA
Andreas. L. Konecny@univie. ac. at
Ronald T. Marchese OF MINNESOTA
UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT 228
CINA
DULUTH,
OF SOCIOLOGY
HALL MINNESOTA
[email protected]
55812
AT DULUTH AND
ANTHROPOLOGY
Whitbread,I. K. 2001. "Geophysical Studies at Plataiaiin 2000," in Aravantinos,Konecny,and Marchese 2001, pp. 16-19. Winter, F. E. 1971. GreekFortifications, Toronto. .1986. "ASummaryof Recent Work on Greek Fortifications in Greece and Asia Minor,"in Leriche andTr6ziny1986, pp. 2338. .1992. "Philonof Byzantion and the Hellenistic Fortificationsof Rhodos,"in Van de Maele and Fossey 1992, pp. 185-209. Wrede,W. 1924. "Phyle,"AM49, pp.153-224. .1933. AttischeMauern,Athens.
HESPERIA
72 (2003)
Pages32I-340
AM
I AR
P H
TH
AT
FICE
SACRI F RAG
M
LAW
F ROM
N
E I O O
AN SAC
RY
E NTA
E
RO
D
A R E D
POS
AB STRACT sacrificeatie Amphiareion Therulesandnormsaffectingthepre-incubation 278.The herein lightof a newfragment,I.Oropos at Oroposarereexamined studyof thisfragmenttogetherwlthotherevidenceforsacrificeat the sanctuarysuggeststhat the rulesgoverningthe pre-incubationsacrificeat the weremoreflexibleduringthe4thcenturyB.C. thantheyappear Amphiareion from Pausanias'slater descriptionof incubationon a ram'sskin. I.Orosacrifitariff.Representative a sacrificial pos278is shownhereto incorporate cialtariffslistedin an appendixfurthersupportthisinterpretation. OC £21CypOC£f IOV Qprov, Vasileios Amongtheineditainhismonumental sacredlaws.1One of these,I.Oropos Petrakosincludedtwo fragmentary and madeby IoannisPapadimitriou in a transcription 279, is preserved nowto be lost.The other,I. Oropos278 (= SEGXLVII488),is a appears Museum(inv.408),whereI smallfragmentnowhousedat the Peiraieus studiedit inJuly2001. to ourknowlstate,thenewlawcontributes Despiteits fragmentary at Oroposduringthe 4th practiceat theAmphiareion edgeof sacrificial froma derivedprimarily evidenceforthispractice centuryB.C. Previously, LSCG69 (I.Oropos277),and passagein the greatcodeof the sanctuary, rams. ontheskinof sacrificed (1.34.5)ofincubation discussion Pausanias's I discussthesetwosourcesbelow,aswellas threevotivereliefsfromthe andexplainits thenewfragment in anattemptto interpret Amphiareion, rulesandnormsat the of sacrificial for ourunderstanding significance of the new Furtherevidencesupportingmy interpretation sanctuary. tariffslistedin the fragmentcanbe foundin the examplesof sacrificial appendix.
1. I amgratefulto the Greek Ministryof Culture,the 2nd Ephoreia andClassicalAntiquiof Prehistoric Ephor, ties,andGeorgiosSteinhauer, to studythe stoneand forpermission to publishthe resultsof mystudy of the squeeze. andthe photographs
I wouldalsoliketo thankYannis Museumfor Samantasof the Peiraieus in his expedienthelp.Forassistance permitsI am obtainingthe necessary gratefulto theAmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthens,especially MariaPilaliandVenetiaBarbopoulou.
For criticismand suggestionsI am gratefulto Kevin Clinton, Catherine Keesling,and the anonymousHesperia referees. OC EXCygO=?ES TOV Qsorov is referredto throughoutas I. Oropos.
\
\
n \
\
e
n
-
c
A
-
\
\
\e
,
e
ERAN LUPU
322
SACRIFICE IN LSCG 69 LSCG 69, whichprobably datesbetween387 and377 B.C. (seebelow, note73),regulates the rightsanddutiesof thepriestandthe neokoros at
theAmphiareion andthebehavior ofworshippers, devotesanentireparagraphto sacrifice. Thisparagraph seemsto havebeenregarded asunsatisfactoryinantiquity andthestoneunderwent erasures, perhaps, asAngeliki Petropoulou suggested,2 on threedifferentoccasions. It is insertedin the middleof the sectionof the lawthatregulates incubation, distinguished fromit bythe rasurain line25 andbythe sacatin line36. Petropoulou's textrunsasfollows:3 Stoich.35 25 [ * * 9 t
*
p@09
t09
*
DzazuXs0at8z @vtzvoxv zat zz-
z6Ttz697
0TaV
at0z6,
tt0zt
t09
oToev 8z ,uNwoetozt, TovHuovToe. zoetzt Huszt oe28 uTov zoCuTot zoeTzuxzsHoet zzoesTov, TXv 8z 8N,uotov
Tov
ttOzOt,V
v
og
uvo,uzvxv
zv Tot
tz-
tootwavv To8zto,uoe [Czto[ov ztwoe] , Huztv8z ziLV
zAV
0Ty
AV
D°X!TaL
zzas°St
T@V
8g
ZD0zZ
32 v ,urIztwoet zz(potoNv zix Touz,usvzog.t'Tot8z e
A
A
-
tzD0zy OLOOUV °S asT0
TOV
(1),UOV,
\
a
w
r
0°9TaS Gli(V
\
as° OTO(V
N
-
T°D g0t0T!
e
,
e
tz£°N°D gy
T0Tz
gZ 8g
0t1T-
o v 8N,uotov Ra,uDoevXx ,uov oe(p' zz0CoTou U 36 -v0t) ztoNoov :)< When he is present,the priestshallprayoverthe divineportions andplace(them)on the altar;when he is not present,thosewho offerthe sacrifice(shalldo so), and at the festival(X Hvoz), each shallprayfor himself,while the priest(shallpray)overthe public (victims). The skin of allvictimsofferedin the sanctuary[[shallbe] sacred3;4 eachpersonshallbe allowedto offeranythinghe wishes but meatshallnot be carriedout of the sacredprecinct.Those offeringsacrificeshallgive the priestthe shoulderof the victims exceptwhen the festivaltakesplace,on which occasionthe priest shallreceivethe shoulderof eachone of the publicvictims. LSCG69 distinguishesbetweentwo typesof sacrifice,namelyprivateand public,anddeterminesthe rolesof the worshippersandthe priest.It does not for the most partspecifythe occasionsfor sacrifice,probablybecause these were regardedas self-evident.Only one occasionis mentioneddirectly,i.e., the festival5at which the priestwouldprayoverthe publicvictims (thoseprovidedby the state),while privatepersonswouldprayover theirownvictims.Otheroccasionsfor sacrificearenot named;evensacrifice relatedto the sanctuary's main activity,incubation,is not mentioned directly,althoughincubationitself is discussedin relativedetail.6In respectto occasion,we learnonlythatworshippersoughtto handlethe sacrificethemselveswheneverthe priestis not present. The law is morespecificin respectto priestlyprerogatives, the treatment of the skins,the consumptionof the sacrificialmeat,andthe choice
2. Petropoulou 1981,pp.60-63. 3. Petropoulou (1981,p. 44) suggeststhatthe vacatat the beginning of line36 (andperhapsthe one at the endof line35) resultedfromthe stonecutter'sattemptto avoidflawsin the marble.Forthe useof vacantspaces forpunctuation in thisdocument, seePetropoulou 1981,pp.43-44. In line26, Petropoulou printslo; PetrakosIOV. The photographs in bothpublicationsshownu. 4. I.e.,it wouldbelongto the sanctuary. 5. Twoapobatesreliefsdatingto the late5th-early4th centuryB.C. seemto be the earliestattestations foran agonisticfestivalin honorof Amphiaraos. The earliestvictorcataloguefrom Oropos,I. Oropos520,datingbefore 338 B.C., mentionsthe GreaterAmphiareia,a pentaeteric festivalto be distinguishedfromthe postulated yearly LesserAmphiareia (Petrakos 1968, p. 94;cf.Durrbach1890,p. 128).See Petrakos1968,pp.194-198;Petropoulou 1981,p.56, n.54; forthe reliefssee Petrakos1968,pp.121-122,nos.16, 17,pls.38,39. 6. Lines20-24, 36-52.
SACRIFICE
323
AT THE AMPHIAREION
as in lines30-31 thatrefersto privatesacrifice, ofvictims.The stipulation may wish) person the wordingot oevDokoet zzototos(whatevereach of theworshippers, leavesthechoiceof victimsto thediscretion suggests, is somevictimstheychoose.This stipulation allowingthemto sacrifice to sacrifice In certainculticcontextsonefindsrequirements whatpeculiar. A prohibiothers.7 againstsacrificing animalsor prohibitions particular whatcanbe sacrificed,8 by stipulating indirectly tionmightbe expressed suchasthatin thepresentlawis positivestipulation butanall-embracing exceptional. onewishesmaycontrawhatever thelicenseto sacrifice Furthermore, sacrificeat the Amphiareion, dictwhatwe knowaboutpre-incubation Wemight of a specificanimal. thesacrifice whichseemsto havedemanded thatthey informworshippers authorities whythesanctuary's askourselves canofferwhatevertheywishwithoutmakinganyexceptionforthemost if it allowedonlya specificanimal. attheAmphiareion commonsacrifice andthevothe Forananswerwe needto consider evidenceof Pausanias tivereliefsfromtheAmphiareion. PAUSANIAS AND VOTIVE RELIEFS informsus Pausanias of theAmphiareion, In thecourseof hisdescription must the sanctuary at the worshippers (1.34.5)thatpriorto incubation, wasobtainedby offeringsacrificeto Thispurification purifythemselves. Whilethe onthealtar." and"toallthosewhosenamesappear Amphiaraos thepurification arenotclearfromthedescription, specificsof thepractice offeringseemsto havetakenplaceat thegreataltarof theAmphiareion. of fivepartsbelonging thealtarasconsisting describes In 1.34.3Pausanias Zeus, thefirstincludesHerakles, to fivegroupsof divinities: respectively the second,heroesandtheirwives;the andApollothe Healer(Iloetxv); Amchildren, and,of Amphiaraos's third,Hestia,Hermes,Amphiaraos, laso,Hygieia,andAthena the fourth,Aphrodite,Panakeia, philochos;9 Pan,andtheriversAcheandthefifth,thenymphs, theHealer(Ilottxvtot); corrobhasbeenatleastpartially testimony Pausanias's loosandKephisos. stelail°statingthattheybelong of two4th-century oratedbythediscovery I. Oropos withHermes: (perhaps together andAmphilochos toAmphiaraos 281).Pausaandto Hestia(I.Oropos I['Ep,uo]) I'A,u(ptRoXo 280,'A,u(ptotpoto prospective riteshavebeencompleted, niasaddsthatoncethepurification incubantsmayproceedto the nextstage:theymustsacrificea ramon whoseskintheywilllie downto sleep.l1 7. Forexample,the sacrificeof birds "oranythingone mightwishexcept in is prescribed he-goatsandshe-goats" POxy.XXXE 2797.6(seeRobert 1966,pp. 192-210);LSCG114A allowssacrificeof anythingonewishes, More butsheepandpigsareforbidden. examplesarelistedbelow,ns.8,21-22; cf.n. 78. 8. SeeParkerandObbink2000,
pp.416-417,lines4-5. LSCG161 CosED 62),A, lines2-3,5-7, (Iscr. victims whichmentionscustomary notesthat (C£t0£C0t TA VOMC4O£V[a]), sacrificeof a certainotheranimalis permitted,evidentlybecausethisani(Socustomary malwasnot considered i.e., chicken, xockocMcov, kolowski's makesgoodsensebutthe exactrestoracf.M. Segre'snote tionis uncertain;
here).Seein generalRobert1966, pp.196-197. 9. Or"thechildrenof Amphilochos,"whichis lesslikelyconsidering 280 (discussedimmediately I.Oropos comments, below);seePetrakos's p. 185;alsoSchachter1981, I.Oropos, p.26, n. 3; Durrbach1890,p. 111. 10. Petrakos1968,p. 96. 11. Cf. Durrbach1890,pp.131-132.
.*H
's li5;aju t0
z+Lirme*S ,,' ,
r, '
_
.,
f
'A-
-
Xk K _
,t--
,,
F
^,
o) .....
;t
f
,>
z
_
....
0
ERAN LUPU
324
Figure1. Fragmentary4th-century B.C. votiverelieffromthe Amphiareionat Oroposshowinga pig anda sheepbeingled to sacrifice.Athens, NationalArchaeologicalMuseum, inv.1395. CourtesyNationalArchaeologicalMuseum,Athens
Pausanias's testimony hasagainbeencorroborated byfurther archaeologicaldiscoveries. A fragmentary 4th-century B.C. votiverelieffromthe Amphiareionl2 depictstheincubant onwhatis clearlysheepfleece.l3 Another4th-century B.C. relieffromthesite(Fig.1) portrays a family(man, woman,child)withtwoattendants leadinga sheepandapigto sacrifice.l4 As FolkertvanStratennotes,l5thepigorpigletwouldbeofferedforpurification; thesheep,orrather, ram,wouldbe offeredforits skin.Whatwe havehereandin Pausanias's description is, in fact,a doublesacrifice: the firstis offeredto a groupof concerned divinities; thesecondis likelyto go to themaindivinity.l6 Togethertheycomprisea preliminary stepleading to themainevent,incubation. Despitetheevidenceof thesereliefsandof Pausanias, thereis reason to believethatwhilea ramwastheofferingof choiceforthepre-incubationsacrifice, it wasnotalwaysmandatory, norwassleepingonitsskin.As bothPetropoulou andvanStratenhavenoticed,l7 in additionto the licensegranted inLSCG69, lines30-31,toworshippers attheAmphiareion 12.Petrakos1968,p. 123,no.21, pl. 41:b. 13. SeePetropoulou 1985,pp.170171. 14.Athens,NationalArchaeologicalMuseum,inv.1395;Petrakos 1968,p. 123,no.20, withp. 133,
pl.41:a;I.Oropos,p.182. 15. SeevanStraten1995,pp.73-74. 16.A similarprocessis seen not wltnoutvarlants ln sanctuarles ot Asklepios.SeePetropoulou 1991, esp.pp.26-27. Despitethe considerablemeritsof thework,the discussion .
.
.
.
>
in EdelsteinandEdelstein1945 [1998],II, pp.186-187(testimonia in I, pp.290-294,nos.511-517)is outdated. 17.Petropoulou 1985,pp.175-176; vanStraten1995,pp.73-74.
SACRIFICE
AT THE AMPHIAREION
325
Figure2. Relieffromthe Amphiareionat Oroposdedicatedto AmphiaraosbyArchinos(400-350 B.C.). Athens,NationalArchaeological Museum,inv.3369. CourtesyNational Archaeological Museum,Athens
18. Athens, National Archaeological Museum, inv. 3369. Note Georg Kaibel'scomment on the linen cushion and pillow in Ar.Amphiaraos,fr. 18, quoted in PCG III 2, p. 43. 19. It is not inevitablethat at one time or anotheronly one sacrifice would be offeredor that bloodless offeringswere employedin the sacrificial process;see Petropoulou1985, p.l75. 20. So Petropoulou1985, p. 176. But Archinos,who had not slept on a ram'sskin,was wealthyenough to afforda high-qualityrelief. 21. For prohibitionssee, e.g., LSCG 126, line 7 (no pig);LSCG Suppl.57, line 12 (no goat);LSCG 14 B (neither goat nor pig). 22. For such requirementssee, e.g., LSCG 140, line 4 (pig); 170, line 1 (goat).
to sacrifice whatever theywish,no animalskinis evidentin theArchinos relieffromtheAmphiareion; theincubant is lyingon a sheetof cloththat alsocovershimas his upperbodyrestsagainsta pillow(Fig.2; I. Oropos 344,400-350s.c.).18 I assumethatthesacrificial reliefin Figure1 depictswhatwasorwas becomingthe norm;in realityandin agreement withthe stipulation in LSCG69, lines30-31,worshippers couldchoosetheiranimals.19 Whether thiswoulddependonfinancial20 orotherreasonsis noteasyto determine. Onemust,however, distinguish betweenrulesandnorms.Greeksacrificialregulations arein generalless concerned with normalpracticeand whatcanbeconsidered commonknowledge thanwithmodifications of or deviations fromnormalpractice. Forexample,normalpracticeincluded thesacrifice of goatsorpigsandthereis noneedfora lawto statethis.For casesin whichthe sacrifice of suchanimalswasundesirable, it wouldbe explicitly forbidden,21 in thesamewayasthesacrifice of a particular animalmightbeexplicitly prescribed.22 Thismayhelpto explainthestipulationin LSCG69, lines30-31.At theAmphiareion, thesacrifice depicted inthesacrificial reliefanddescribed byPausanias wasorbecamethenorm. It wasnottherule,however, atleastnotwhileLSCG69 wasin effect,and thepossibility of departing fromthenormis thereasonwhythelawstates thisruleso explicitly. An indication thatin the4thcentury therulesallowedsacrificial freedomcanbe foundin thenewfragment, I. Oropos 278, whichincorporates a sectionaddressing thegenerallicenseto sacrifice anything onewishesin a morespecificway,byproviding a list of animals.Beforeproceeding to the interpretation of thisfragment, I presentheremytextbasedon autopsy,withrestorations, epigraphical commentary, anda discussion ofpreviousscholarship.
PLU URAN E
326
NEWFRAGMENT THE I.278
Fig.3
Oropos
Th. 0.08m (bottom), 0.27,W. 0.071(top)-0.08 H. space0.009m 0.005m;interlinear m 0.007-0.008;O,(), andQ L.H. abovethe firstlineca.0.023-0.028 surface uninscribed Surviving on allsides. of a whitemarblestelebroken [northof] fragment weathered small, A behind "Discovered backsurvives. rough-picked original The andthe inscribed cut Thelettersarenot deeply line 7 is covered monument."23 Curio the in partof the lastletter rather is worn.The lower whichmaybe face cementandthe left side, Abovethe be to appears what of drop a by matter. rough,corroded thanbroken,is coveredby establishit as the originalfirst rather cut thatmay line,thereis vacantspace ordifferent first a spacebetweenparagraphs represent may likely, less or, line, documents. Non-stoich. IVa. saec.
vacat
ZXfV
8£,[Lav
rYlv
-]
[-
]
] TR°az£4[
-
[-
]
£-[
]aC,
[
4[- - - to]tzo86X[- - - - -] a
[-
- - -]
]
£ [- - - - - - -]
vvvvv
. (?)[-- -] [- - £,UDa]XA£69 - - -] oD[oRov [- - oVo]vtHog - - -] 8[- - -]ogAvooD[oRovs/, - -]
[-
- - - - - - - ]
8£[-
D00s
] -
[-
-]V
[-
Xt°£ta
]
] FLO0XFt
[
2[ [
] oxtE[v
] ]
] [
Chaniotis| |
Petrakos; Line1: [- - -]ac,£[- - -] [XXNv- - -?]Chaniotisl Petrakos; by supplied 8£i[Lav] Line3: Chaniotisl T[O aVoyvVoLov?] [£FDa]X£LV 6: Line | | Line4. Petrakos - - -] Lupu oU[oRov, Petrakos; Line 7: [- Lupu - -] Petrakos; Line8: oD[oRPetrakos 12. 8£ [- - -] Chaniotis Line Line9: D00G [T]ag
£[oL8ag?]
oVo]vt0og
-
-
-]
O[OXOVg/X7
1 I
COMMENTARY EPIGRAPHICAL thoughwitha fewirregulariexecuted nicely whole, the on are, Theletters smallerin the lower at timesrelatively and crowded more are ties.They in I.Oropos, 23. B. Leonardos, of T appearon partof thefragment. tips bottom monument and the left For upper than p.183,no.278. letter Line1. Whatlooklikethe preceding the to 15. no. closer E, lefttipis see no.444 andpl. thestone,althoughtheupper mightbe a scratch. on thestoneand T is elsewhere
SACRIFICE
AT THE AMPHIAREION
327
Figure3. I. Oropos278. Photographs of squeezes,takenin differentlight. Photosauthor
Line 6. The lasttracemightbe takenfora lowertip of a somewhat
slantingstroke.The closestparallelis the left lowerstrokeof the Q in line10 buta scratchis likely. Line 7. : Thelowerpartof theletteris concealed bywhatlookslikea dropof cementandtherightpartis damaged bythebreak.The letterP (soPetrakos) is possible. Line 9. Beforethe B thereis a trace,verylikelya scratch, whichmay be themiddlepartof a verticalstroke. COMMENTARY
24. I. Oropos,p. 183. 25. I.Oropos,p. 182.
26. ChaniotisandMylonopoulos 2000,p. 206.
Petrakos datedthe inscription to the 4th centuryB.C., identifying it as a sacredlawlistingofferings andsacrifices to a divinity.24 He referred to this inscription in hiscommentonLSCG69, lines30-31,notingthatleaving thechoiceof victimsto theworshippers wasa resultof thebroader policy of the sanctuary andaddinga reference to the sacrificial reliefdiscussed above(Fig.1)andtoPausanias's description ofincubation onaram's skin.25 Theinscription wasalsodiscussed twicebyAngelosChaniotis. InEBGR 1997 he observed thatthefragment seemedto concernsacrifices, recognizingthementionof atableofofferings, animals, anamountoftwoobols, anda leaseof anitemreferred to by ,ua0x,uin line 11.26In SEGXLVII 488he suggested [X]oeg ,u£[otdoeg?] in line1;8£i[LAV M@XNV- - -?] in line3;
328
ERAN LUPU
and[£Mp]X£LV T[0 atoyvtoLov?]in line6.27 In line2 he recognized a form of Tt0aZ£4A, notingthatTt0aZ£4X andTt0aZ£40@ werealsopossible. In line9 he recognized a 8£ afterDoog.In line 11 he notedthatCo0Xy suggested thatthisdocument "mayconcernthedutiesandrightsof a personwholeaseda priesthood." Inline12 he recognized a "provision forthe supplyof woodforsacrifices." Despitethe extremely fragmentary stateof the document,it seems possibleto distinguish, if onlyforthe sakeof discussion, betweentwoor perhapsthreesections,the firsttwo dividedby the vacatin line 5. The senseof lines6-9 is clear:thisis a sacrificial tariffenumerating requirementsforprivatepersonswho offersacrificeat the Amphiareion. It relates,asPetrakos hinted,to thestipulation of sacrificial freedomin LSCG 69,lines30-31. Sacrificial contextis evidentin lines1-5 andprobable in lines10-13,althougharticulation of thelatterlinesis considerably more difficult. In line2 thepresenceof a culttableis enoughto suggesta sacrificial contextand,moreprecisely, a clausedealingwithdistribution of theparts of a victim.Culttablesarenormallymentionedin sacredlawsin such clausesforthe simplereasonthatpartsof thevictimwouldbe placedon them.28 In practice, thesepartsarelikelyto havegoneto thepriest.29 As Chaniotisnoted,botha verbalform30 and(perhaps morelikely)a noun arepossiblehere.If a nounis correct,one mightrestore[£116 (8£?) TNV] TtOz£4[V] asin LSCG28 (SEGXLE 173) 3-4, 9, 10-11,14-15,18, 23 (wheretherestorations aresecure). Inline3, 8£i[LAV] iS mostlikelya reference to a partof avictim.KXN (thigh,ham)suggestedby Chaniotisis veryprobable.32 Whena distinctionbetweenrightandleftlegsis made,rightlegsusuallygoto thepriest.33 It is therefore verylikelythattherightthighis mentioned hereandwould be assignedto a priestasa prerogative forthe sacrifice. In line4 thepossiblereference to a tripodcouldmakesensein a sacrificialcontextsincea tripodcan simplybe a three-legged standfor a cauldron usedto cookthe meatof thevictims.34 Thisuseis evidenton a 27. Forline3, Chaniotiscitesthe zMv 8Lavr[X]! 8rEtavreceivedby the priestsin IG II21361(LSCG45), line5 (seeappendix: 1). Forline6, he citesI. Oropos276 (LSCGSuppl.35), lines4-5, andIG VII235 (I.Oropos 277,LSCG 69),lines13 and40, allof whichprescribe depositionof moneyin theAmphiareion's thesauros. 28.The tableof Amphiaraos is mentionedin thelate-3rd-century B.C. I. Oropos324 (LSCG 70),lines4-5 (cf.line 10).It stoodinsidethe great templebuiltaroundthe second quarterof the 4th centuryB.C. (see Petrakos1968,p. 69),wherea base possiblybelongingto it hasbeen discovered (Petrakos1968,p. 99). Cf. alsothe inscribedvotivecult
table,I. Oropos408 (3rdcenturyB.C.). 29.Thesepartsshould,of course, be distinguished fromdivineportions puton the altar,consistingof inedible organssuchasthighboneswrapped in fat.On priestlyprerogatives and portionsandculttables,seePuttkammer1912,pp.1-16;Gill 1991, pp.15-19;Le Guen-Pollet1991; vanStraten1995,pp.154-155. 30. Forverbalforms(restored instancesin brackets), seeLSCG [64, lines13-14];65, line86;125,lines2, [7, 9];I.Perg.III 161A, lines1, 7. 31.Therearemanyexamples. For a fewrepresentative casesseeLSCG 28 (SEG XLVI173),lines3-4, 9, 10-11, 14-15, 18,23; 163,line17; LSAM24 A, lines15-20;I.Kallatis47,
line3 (LSCG90, line5). 32. Anotherpossibilityis ,utztoattoa (halfthe head):LSCG28, lines4, 9, [11, 15], 19, [23];29, line8; SEG V 113,lines16, 17;cf.also Amipsias,Connus, fr.7 (PCG). 33. Leftlegsmaygo to the divinity (whomighthaveto settleforonlythe bones);so,too,as maythe left halfof the head,asis mentionedin Amipsias, Connus, fr.7 (PCG). SeePuttkammer 1912,pp.23-25;forthe rightthighsee alsoJamesonet al. 1993,p. 38. 34.Tripodswerededicatedat Oroposat the sanctuary of the nymph Halia(Petrakos1968,pp.54-58;for inscribedtripodbasesfromthissite, somenowat theAmphiareion, see I.Oropos, nos.511-516).
SACRIFICE
AT THE AMPHIAREION
329
Figure4. Fragmentof an Athenian black-figurevolutecratershowinga sacrificialscene.Athens,National ArchaeologicalMuseum,inv.Akr 654. CourtesyNationalArchaeological Museum,Athens
scene volutecraterwitha sacrificial fragment of anAthenianblack-figure meatin a lebeson (Fig.4),35depictinginteralia thecookingof sacrificial stands Theoriginaluseof tripodsascauldron topof a tripodovera fire.36 in sanctuaries.37 mayaccountforsometripoddedications duringsacrifice thenature of lines5-9 isverydifficult, Althoughtheexactrestoration of theoriginaltextis hintedatbytheusein line7 of thegenitivecasefor to a monetary value; tobeareference theanimal, followedbywhatappears endingin line 8, followedagainby a possible the possiblegenitive-case value;andtheanimalin thegenitivecasein line9. reference to monetary valueoccursin a The formulaof animalin the genitiveplusmonetary forthe feesto bepaidbyworshippers number of sacredlawsthatprescribe victims,withorwithoutlistingspecificpartsof the sacrifice of particular privatesacrifice,38 tendto regulate As thesedocuments respective animals. thatarelesslikelyto appearin docutheymaymentionsmallanimals39 of meataredispublicsacrifice inwhichlargequantities mentsregulating of thiskindmaybe retributed.40 Documents(orsectionsin documents) examples listof representative tariffs.An annotated ferredto assacrificial is presented in theappendix. theto moneyputinthesanctuary's [£M5a]X£LV, referring Chaniotis's ofwhichattheAmphiareion box),4l theexistence sauros(treasury/offertory oD[oRov] in line7 correct. Restoring is undoubtedly iswelldocumented,42 inline8 seemsequallysecureto me.Thesumsof money andoD[oRovg/X] arelikelyto havebeenpaidneitherfor here,however, putin thethesauros 35. Athens,NationalArchaeological Museum,inv.Akr654. Seefurthervan Straten1995, pp.147-148, fig. 154. vase 36. Cf. anAthenianred-figure in the BritishMuseum(E 163) showingJasonandMedeaflankinga threeleggedcauldronovera firewitha live raminsideandanothervasein Leiden, Rijksmuseum PC 32 (exCanino1345), showingtwomennextto a similar apparatus witha boyinside;LIMCV, 1999, p.634, pls.59,62, s.v.Iason (J.Neils).Fora pot,obviouslyfor context, cookingmeat,in a sacrificial 113, lines21-22, seeSEGADU(V [E]loBa £g16 TOV XUTpoV "woodforthe pot"(cf.LSCG7 B, line25, andLSCG Suppl.19, line92: ioBa£g16 TOV XpOV "woodforthe altar").
37.Theiroriginaluseascultimplementscertainlyaccountsfordedicationsof culttablesandaltarsthathave littleotheruse,butdoesnot necessarily meanthatallsuchobjectswereusedor intendedto be used;somemightbe onlythe representations preserving originalidea.Smalltripods(pso8Coxo)arementionedin the list of exvotosthatfollowsthe decreeconcerning old ex-votosin theAmphiareion (late3rdcenturyB.C.; I. Oropos324, lines65, 66 [LSCG70 hasonlylines14th52]) andin the fragmentary list,I. Oropos19, centuryB.C. inventory line 10.A tripodis depictedon a votive reliefof Apollo(secondhalfof the4th centuryB.C.) fromtheAmphiareion: Petrakos1968,p. 124,no.26, pl. 43:b.
38. See appendix:comment 5. 39. See appendix:6 (hare)and 7 (rooster).The bird in 4 may have a cultic significancedue to its special relationshipwith Aphrodite;see Parker and Obbink 2000, p. 438. 40. See, e.g., LSCG 33 B; LSCG Suppl.11; SEGXLV 1508 A. 41. For a study of which see Kaminski 1991; cf. Knoepfler1998; Parker and Obbink 2000, pp. 436-438. 42. For the depositionof money in the thesauros of the Amphiareion,see LSCG 69, lines 13,23,40; LSCG Suppl. 35, line 4. For the allocationof money collected,see I. Oropos324 (LSCG70), lines 33-39, and I. Oropos290, lines 1625, which are discussedin the appendix:comment 8.
33o
E RAN LU PU
incubation (LSCG69, lines23, 40; LSCGSuppl. 35 [I.Oropos 276], line4) norasa penalty(LSCG69, line13) but,asexamples 3-8 in theappendix suggest,relatedirectlyto the animalsmentionedthereafter. Thesesums arefeesthatworshippers wereto payforthesacrifice of theseanimals. The firstanimalmentioned(line7) maybe a chicken:the general otoveg refersmainly, thoughnotexclusively, to chickens.43 In thebeginning ofline8, ]ogoughtto betakenasagenitiveendingreferring to ananimal44 largerthantheotoveg, sincetariffstendto listanimalsaccording to size.45 A number of animals suchashare(i.e.,doeovzovg, [doeovzo8]og),46 goat(oe'eX, [oety]og),47 or,if thebirdis nota chicken,chickenorrooster(0t£XTt0V@V, 0t£XT0V@V]0g; ZXtg [XXt8]og;48 X£XT@t0, [aR£Xt0t0]0g)49 arepossible. Evidencecanbe citedforandagainsteachof thesepossibilities. The nextanimalthatappears in thetext(line9) is a bovine.Sincethe line'slengthcannotberestored withanydegreeof probability, it is impossibleto knowwhichanimals(if any)werementionedin betweenand whethertheywerenamedspecifically50 or referred to generally in classes suchas"quadrupeds" or"adult/young victims.''5l \£ (suggested byChaniotis) followingDoogwouldideallydistinguish thebovinefromsmalleranimals, but£V wouldordinarily be required, andasearlyasafter[oto]veHog.52 Littleelsecanbe saidwith anycertainty. The senseof lines6-9 is, however, quiteclear.It is a sacrificial tariff.The originalmighthavesaid somethinglike£[tg 8£ TOV HYlaautoov £MDa]X£LV T[OVg HvovTag (lacuna?) oto]veHog oD[oRov,(lacuna)[-- -]og dvo oD[oRovg/,(lacuna)]Doog 8£[- -] (Those whooffersacrifice shallputin thethesauros [- - -] anobol fora bird[- - -], twoobolsfora [- - -] fora bovine[- - -]). In line10 compare for[- - -]v XtO£tA [- - - -] SEG 1119,lines 28-29 (Nakone; ca.earlyto mid-3rdcenturyB.C.): zoeeToewoe Toev Hvotoev ooxvXtO£tA °
TaMeas
wat°rX£T@-
£aTt
ZR
The treasurer shallprovideanythingelseneededforsacrifice. The resemblance mightbe coincidental, but a similarphrase,assigning the provision of"anything elsethatmightbe neededforthe sacrifice" to someone be it worshippers or thesanctuary's authoritieswouldmake sensehere. 43. See Robert 1966, p. 196, n. 127. Cf. LSJ s.v. opvLS III. 44. See appendix:1-4, 7, and comment 4. 45. See appendix:comment 1. 46. See appendix:6. 47. A common victim but perhaps too largeif it is to follow the bird directly. 48. For the accent see LSJ s.v. xaRatS,the identificationof which as a chicken may not be entirelysecure. 49. See appendix:7; cf. Ar.jqmphiaraos,fr. 17 (PCG),discussedbelow (pp. 332-333). Outside of private
sacrifice, chickenstendto be offered withothervictims:the rooster(aR£x[puova]) in LSAM 67 B, line3, is offeredtogetherwitha numberof other, largeranimals;the chickens/roosters (xaRatg) in LSCG 60, lines5, 6, 23, are offeredin connectionwithcattlesacrifice;in LSCG 172,line4, xaRa8ta are offeredtogetherwitha goat.Three chickens/roosters appearin LSCG51: thefirst(aR£xTpuxv, line5) is probably whollyburnt;theothers(aR£xTop£g, line27) areofferedtogether. 50. As in examples2 and3 in the appendix.
51. As in 4 and7 (cf.8) in the appendix. Both4 and7 specifically namethe smallestanimal bird, rooster andthelargest bovine; notethe similarity to thepresent tariff;animalsbetweenthe smallest andlargestarereferred to in general terms. 52. See appendix: 1, 3, and4. A number,i.e.,8£[xa],is unlikelyhere sincethe sumof ten obolsis not a fractionof a drachma(sixobolsper drachma) andthe sumof ten drachmas wouldbe muchtoo high.
SACRIFICE
33I
AT THE AMPHIAREION
partof eithera nominal(,utoOct),uoe) maypreserve In line11, ,utoOct)uL A leaseof a priestof 1ltoOoct)). middle/passive (perfect or verbalform hood53seemsunlikely.Duringthe Hellenisticperiodthe saleof priestislandsbutit hoodsbecamecommonin partsof AsiaMinorandadjacent In mainlandGreecethe practiceappearsto is rarelyattestedelsewhere. The oneallusionto it in a sacredlaw havebeenalmostentirelyavoided.54 of A.C. document fromthe mainlandcomesfromthe early-2nd-century SEGXXXI122,lines17-18.Considering anAthenianculticassociation, orcontracting suchasleasingof sacredproperty55 this,otherpossibilities, seemmoreprobable. of cult,56 servicesessentialfortheperformance arecommon) ,vXa and(ppoyava In line 12,qc4X[v](i.e.,firewood; of woodfor to the provision a likelyreference is, as Chaniotissuggested, sacrifice.57 THE NEW FRAGMENT, LSCG 69, AND PRE-INCUBATION SACRIFICE relateto sacIt shouldbynowbe clearthatlines1-5 of thenewfragment rifice;the sameis probableforlines10-13. It is difficultto determine, sectionsandwhattheirrelawhethertheseareself-contained however, to thetariffarea theirrelations tionship,if any,is to eachother.Similarly, was andit is notclearwhethertheentiredocument matterforconjecture activityat general,i.e.,intendedto considerdifferentaspectsof sacrificial a (likeLSCG 69, lines25-36), or specific,regulating the Amphiareion parecuaractlv1ty. Moreprecisionis possiblein definingthe tariffitself(lines6-9) beof LSCG69,lines30to the stipulation causeof its obviousrelationship 31. LikeLSCG69, the tariffdealswithofferingsmadeby privateindia choiceof animal.Whereasthe viduals.Both allowtheseindividuals in LSCG69 in a general is expressed freedomthusenvisioned sacrificial way,it is givena moreconcreteformin thetariffbythelistingof possible of LSCG69 affectspre-incubavictims.As we haveseen,the stipulation I suggestthesamewastrueforthetariff.Thesumsof money tionsacrifice; of forthe sacrifice in thetariffarefeespaidbeforeincubation mentioned fee: the animalslisted.Thesefeesneednothavecanceledthe incubation .
53. Suggestedby Chaniotis,SEG XLVII488,citingLSCG Suppl.47; Andros,1stcenturyB.C. 54.The customis firstdocumented in the late4th centuryB.C. See GGR II2,pp.77-78, cf.I2,p. 732;Debord 1982,pp.63-71;ParkerandObbink 2000,pp.421-422,n. 16.MostevidencecomesfromIonia,Caria,and Cos.ForChiosseeLSCG Suppl.77-78. in The customis alsodocumented Egypt(Debord1982,p. 338,n. 117). OtherwiseseeThasos:LSCG Suppl.71 (2ndcenturyB.C.; saleof the eponymic
.
.
of Sarapists); titleof an association Tomi(a colonyof Miletos):LSCG87 (3rdcenturyB.C.). A recentlypublished fragmentfromSamos,IGXII 6 I 170, is likelyto haveoriginatedon the Ionianmainland(KlausHallof,pers. comm.,August2002). 55. Perhapsincluding,by analogyto at the the charterof the shopkeepers SamianHeraion(IGXtI 6 I 169; SEGXXVII545),leasingof shops suchasthosementionedin I.Oropos comment8). 290, line 18 (seeappendix: (line11) pertainsto 56. If ,utcef3x,u
price,"as in the 4th-century "contract forthe LesserPanB.C. regulations LSCG33 B, line28. athenaia, LSCG55, line 11; 57. SeeaxcZ,a: beLSCGSuppl.22, line7 (discussed low,p.332). _vXa:LSCG7 B, line25; 17 A b, line6; 96, line 18;177,line39 LSCGSuppl.7, line5; 19,lines86-92 passim;SEGXXXV113,lines21-22. LSCG2 A, lines2,8-9; B, @puyava: line6; D, lines5-6; 28 (SEGXLVI 173),lines2-8 passim,22; 151 C, lines13-14.
332
ERAN LUPU
incubation feeswouldbepaidattheveryoutsetof theprocess;58 sacrificial feeswouldbe paiduponsacrifice.59 Pre-incubation sacrificemayhavebeenthe mostcommonoccasion forsacrificeat the Amphiareion, butotheroccasionsmusthaveexisted, includingperhapsa thanksgiving offeringforthe cure60 or evensacrifice to otherdivinities, particularly thosewhosenameswereinscribed on the greataltar.61 The tariffmaybe as concerned withsuchoccasionsaswith pre-incubation sacrifice. Yet,in oracular andhealingsanctuaries feesare predominantly connected to consultation.62 The fragment shareskeyelementswithpre-incubation documents fromsanctuaries of Asklepiosand a comparison suggeststhatit is not impossiblefor the documentto be concerned in its entiretywithpre-incubation sacrifice. Provision of firewood(GCat)is mentioned alongside otheritems(barleygroats,wreaths) neededforthepre-incubation sacrificeat the Epidaurian Asklepicion in LSCGSuppl.22 (4th centurys.c.).63Prospective incubantsarecharged halfan obolforwoodforthe sacrificeof a sucklingvictimandan obol forwoodforthesacrifice of afull-grown victim.64 I.Perg.III 161(2ndcenturyA.C.)65 prescribes tableofferings(A,lines7-8) andthreeobolsto be putin the thesauros (A 8, lines22-23) at pre-incubation sacrifices at the Pergamene Asklepicion. Theveryfragmentary sacrificial regulations pertainingto the cultof AsklepiosfromAmphipolis, SEG XLIV505 (ca. 35S300 B.C.), mentionincubation (lines3, 8),onedrachma (line4),money (line11),andpossiblypayment(line15);evenwithoutthe restorations, pre-incubation sacrifice is verylikely.Onecanpursuesuchanalogies further66 butI avoiddoingsosincethefragmentary stateof thepresentdocumentcallsforcaution. Sheep fleece is knownto havebeen ascribedparticularpurificatoryvalue.67 Substituting a chickenfor a ramwouldseemridiculous. Yet,the notionof substitution maywellbe anachronistic, andone also mightwonderwhatrolethechicken(YlaR£Xovxv)playsat theAmphiareionin Aristophanes' Amphiaraos.68 Perhapsit wouldbe sacrificed as a 58. LSCG69, lines20-22, zzaplxrlv 8C8ouv ToXu ,uzABovTa (3zpaszvzcef3at vlso Tov(3zouxX:Whoeverintendsto be healedby thegod shallpayasa fee, etc.Cf.LSCGSuppl.35, lines3-5. 59.The sequenceof payment-sacrifice-incubation is in factevidentin the arrangement of LSCG69. 60. Cf.LSAM24,lines30-36 (Erythrai,380-360B.C.). In Pausanias's timepersonscuredat theAmphiareion expressed theirgratitudeby throwing moneyintothe god'ssacredspring (1.30.4).In I.Perg.III 161A, lines3133 onephokaisforApolloandone for Asklepiosareto be putintothe thesaurosaspaymentforthe cureat the PergameneAsklepieion. 61. On thesedivinitiesseePetrakos 1968,p. 96;Schachter1981,p.26. For othergodsat theAmphiareion see 8z
alsoI. Oropos282-283,336(?),345(?), 347(?),357,392,463.On sanctuaries of othergodsat OroposseePetrakos 1968,pp.54-55. Sacrifices, obviously public,bothto Amphiaraos andthe othergodsof theAmphiareion are referred to in the honorificdecree, I. Oropos297,lines14-15 (332/1B.C.). 62. See Sokolowski1954,pp.153154,158 (Petropoulou's [1991,pp.2526] interpretation of the feesin LSCG Suppl.22 seemsmorecorrect)andadd SEG XLIV505 andI.Perg.III 161A, lines8, 22-23. 63. Fullertextin Peek1969,no. 336;see,on thisinscription, Petropoulou 1991. 64. Cf.in thisrespectLSCG Suppl.7 (IGI3129)wherefirewoodseemsto be provided(perhaps witha payment) forthe sacrificeof a sucklingpig.It is
a purificatory offeringbutthe cultin 1S uninown. 65.The lawitselfis probably quite a bit earlier.SeeM. Worrle'scommentary,I.Perg.III,pp.169-170. 66. Forexample,analogyto LSCG Suppl.22 couldsuggestthat[- - -]v xpa [- - -] (line10) mighthavesomethingto do withprovisionof otherpreincubation itemssuchasthebarley groatsandwreathsmentionedthere. 67. SeeJamesonet al.1993,pp.83, 95. Fortheuse of fleecein the purificationof a murderer, addLSCGSuppl. 115B,line52. 68. Fr.17;note,on the roleof the chicken,Kaibel's commentquotedin PCGIII 2, p. 42.The playwasproducedin 414 B.C.; seePetropoulou 1981,pp.57-58. qUeStlOn
SACRIFICE
AT THE AMPHIAREION
333
or otheroffering.Perhapsthosewhowouldbe incubants thanksgiving69 Afterall,theymighthaveknown broughtit to offerbeforeincubation. he "eachpersonshallbeallowedto offeranything thatattheAmphiareion wishes."70
CONCLUSIONS becamein the course foundedin thelate5thcentury, TheAmphiareion, Theseyears, healingsanctuary. andpopular aprosperous ofthe4thcentury changedrepeatthe Amphiareion duringwhichthe powerscontrolling prompted undoubtedly byintensivebuildingactivity,72 edly,7laremarked camea of thecult.Withthegainin popularity bythegrowingpopularity to updatetheearliIt wasnecessary growingneedto codifyculticactivity. whichprobLSCGSuppl.35, estknownsacredlawfromtheAmphiareion, reached theKing'sPeace(387/6B.C.) andhasunfortunately ablyprecedes state.The updatedlaw,LSCG69, dating fragmentary us in anextremely frombetween387 and377 B.C., regulatesthe dutiesof the priest,the setsdownrulesforincubation; andthe conductof worshippers; neokoros, It is sufficiently atthesanctuary.73 anddealsin a generalwaywithsacrifice to be identifiedasa generallawcodefortheAmphiareion, wellpreserved the policiesgoverningdifferentaspectsof the sanctuary's summarizing .
.
.
actvltles.
a wishto of thesanctuary, Butfactorssuchasthegrowingpopularity buildingandmaintenance increasing of this situation,74 takeadvantage needto reworkthe in a continuing costs,andthechangeof rulersresulted of thecode evidentin theerasures evenafterthepublication regulations LSCGSuppl.35, line 6, had fee changed: The incubation it underwent. in LSCG69,lines22-23,thesum atleastoneBoiotiandrachma; required in a is inscribed of no lessthannineobols,payablein anylegalcurrency, proin LSCG69, line30, whichhadoriginally The stipulation rasura.75 wasat one point victimssacredproperty, nouncedall skinsof sacrificial In LSCG69,lines24-25, wasgiven.76 erasedthoughno newinformation to Asklepios" 69. Cf.the"Rooster (P1.Phdr.118a);see Edelsteinand Edelstein1945[1998],I, nos.482, 523-531;II, pp.188-190. 70. Healingat theAmphiareion cannotfurtherconcernus here.It endwithincubadidnot necessarily tion,butlittlecanbe saidwith any certaintyexceptthatthe fragments and of Aristophanes'Amphiaraos anecdotalcommentsin latesources absten(Philostr.VA2.37:three-days' tionfromwineanda one-dayabstentionfromfoodpriorto incubation; II 35.8:abstentionfrom Geoponica beansin the cultof Amphiaraos) suggesta complexprocess.Fordietary practicessee in generalDeubner1900, pp.14-17.
71. Forchronologysee Petrakos's 495-502,uptestimoniain I.Oropos datingPetrakos1968,pp.22-32. 72. Especiallybetween377 and 338 B.C. Fora summaryseePetrakos 1968,pp.68-70. 73. Forthe relationsbetweenthe two documentsandtheirdates,see 1981,pp.55-63 (esp. Petropoulou pp.58-59), whereshearguesthat LSCGSuppl.35, whichrequiresno lessthanone Boiotiandrachmaas an fee,oughtto antedatethe incubation King'sPeaceandthe dissolutionof the Boiotianleague.ShedatesLSCG69 between387 and377 B.C., whenOroandaccepted poswasautonomous from paymentin anylegalcurrency Thesedatesareaccepted the incubants.
by Petrakosin I.Oropos,p. 439;cf., esp. reservations, however,Knoepfler's 1988,p.233; 1992,p. 452;1998,p. 105, n.28. residesat Oropos" 74."Greediness atoxoocav xaTotxv zv qv Xuzv GGMI 104.25, 'Qtoz) [Dicaearchus] cf.100-101.7(=FHG II 259-260.25, cf.256-257.7);Durrbach1890,pp.8384. 1981,pp.6275. See Petropoulou 63;cf.p. 54, suggestingthatthe raise wasdueto inflation. (1981,pp.60-63) 76. Petropoulou suggeststhatthe erasurereflectsthe Greater inclusionof the pentaeteric amongtheAthenianfestiAmphiareia dermatikon valssubjectto Lykourgos's tax(forthe festivalsee above,n.5). _
7
LUPU ERAN
334
or the discussionof incubation erasureaffectedeitherthe preceding two moreerasures an affected in lines37-38 sectionon sacrifice; following resumedin line36.77 of incubation discussion the thesechangesmighthaveoccaThe exigenciesthatbroughtabout Suppl.35 and andtheextantsacredlaws,LSCG legislation, further sioned relateddocuonlya partof a largergroupof 69, mayrepresent LSCG to thisgroup.As we have The newfragmentis likelyto belong tariffandthe stipulation ments. betweenthe sacrificial a closerelationship seen, a newsourceof Besidesintroducing LSCG69,lines30-31,is obvious. in fee did not abolishthe incubation thatthe sacrificial (assuming income uponthegeneralstipulaa wishto elaborate thetariffmayrepresent fee), Whether it in morepreciseterms.78 of LSCG69,lines30-31,orstate tion policiesof thesanctuuponthesacrificial wishto elaborate acomparable thepublication motivated a singleeventormultipleevents regarding ary aretoo variables the Likewise, certainty. ofthelawI cannotsaywithany how for and bywhom, whenexactlyit waspublished, to determine many longit wasin effect. thatcult of this fragmentgoesbeyondindicating inthe The importance Oropos at matterattheAmphiareion wasa dynamic administration evidenceforsacriof otheravailable 4thcenturyB.C. Studiedin thelight supinformsus aboutthecultitselfby fragment the sanctuary, the at fice sacrificeat affectingthepre-incubation portingthe notionthatthe rules Pausanias's from weremoreflexiblethantheyappear no doubtprothe Amphiareion who Pausanias, Thisis by no meansto discredit account. attheAmphiareion prevailing norms the of description the videsanaccurate thatthesenormswerenotnecessarily in histime.It is onlyto suggest earlier. rule,atleastnotsome400years
77. Cf. Petropoulou'sdiscussion p. 61). (1981, 78. Variousreasonsmay underlie theneed for precision.For example, a list of animalswould make providing was itclearthat the choice of victim commonly animals to notlimited not offered,but also included some bird/ a as such commonlyoffered a spechicken.Permissionto sacrifice (see chicken a perhaps cificanimal, in LSCG n. 8 above),is explicitlygiven that because 161 A, lines 2-3, 5-7, victim customary a animalwas not line 2) and (C£o£aTa vo,uCo,u£v[a] self-evident. not was permission the
A P P EN D IX SAGRI FlGIAL TARI FFS
paytariffasusedhererefersonlyto listsprescribing Thetermsacrificial of victims mentin cashwithorwithoutpaymentin kindforthesacrifice Thebestexampleof suchalistis theca.late-4thto earlylistedalongside. Tariff(CIS I knownas the Marseilles B.C. Punicinscription 3rd-century lines. preserved partially twenty-one 165;EdI69; COS 1.98),comprising longer sections in Greektariffsareshorterandusuallyform Comparable witha examples I appendherea list of selectrepresentative documents. above.79 fewtechnicalcommentsto supportmydiscussion feeis 4th centuryB.C.). The sacrificial 1 LSCG 45,lines2-7 (Peiraieus, in kind: prerogatives byquiteextensive accompanied £aV 8£ TL5 t
065 £X£aTt
0£Xt T@V Op£@V@V 8£ t86Xv5
[£]av
TL5
TOV t£00V
8taovaL Hvut Nt H£Xt
Tft
aT£X£65 aDToUg t£p£aL
Hvt
HV£LV £V:
yaXaHNvov
IC: MaL MXV
To 8£pMa
[X]aL
8£pMa [X]XXYIV c
MaTa
79. Fora generaldiscussionsee Sokolowski1954;cf.Parkerand Obbink2000,pp.437-438. 80. Bendis. 81. Cf. the latersaleof thispriesthood,LSCG 166,lines62-65.The date to ParkerandObbink is according 2000,p. 422.
8£6Lav7
Tov
8£ T£X£0V:
8£pMa-
8taovaL
1ll: MaL
TavTa,
005
8£:
IC:MaL To
8£ Ta
,
t£p£XAVVa
[V £]V
8Lav£[X]f
MaL
0N[£]t@V
T@-
Tt
t£p£aL,
T@V 8£ pp£V@V
T@t t£p£t
sacrifices to the Whenoneof theorgeoneswhosharethesanctuary freeof tax.Whena privateperson theyshallsacrifice goddess,80 to thegoddess,he shallpaythepriestessfora suckling sacrifices victimoneanda halfobolsandtheskinandtherightlegin its victimthreeobolsandtheskinandthe fora full-grown entirety; thighin thesameway;fora bovineoneanda halfobolsandthe fromfemalevictimsshallbe givento the skin.Priestlyprerogatives thosefrommalevictimsto thepriest. priestess; A woman 2 Iscr.CosED 216 B,lines4-8 (Cos,ca.225 orca.175s.c.).81 shallgivethe priestessas preto DionysosThyllophoros who sacrifices rogatives (T£p):
336
ERAN LUPU
TOV £V [a]%£X05 [X]av
%aL %aL
woaas
t£t0£tOV %aL T£X£tO[V]
NXa[TO]v
8£O,Ua
%aL
%aL
TtoLO8oXovS
8£oQua
%aL
o8oXov!
[TtO]tODOXOV, XoLtoLoU 8£ %£9aXAV [[8]oo5
8£
o%£X05
%aL
8£oa
8£ £T£XXV %£9a-
TOV
%aL
8£
vog
%aL ZO8a5
o%£X05
%aL
%[aL] ODOXOV,
8toaFav
Forfull-grown sheepvictimstheleg,skin,andthreeobols;for yearlings thehead,skin,trotters, andanobol;fora pigthelegand threeobols;fora pigletthehead,trotters, andanobol;fora bovine theleg,skin,anda drachma. In a numberof casesthemoneyis to beputintoa thesauros. TheverbawatoX£sHatis employed in thefollowingexamples: 3 LSCG88, lines11-15 (Olbia,around230 s.c.).82The lawis written underalistof themembers of theboardof sevenin chargeof thethesauros. Thelargesumsareexplained astheactualpricesof thevictimsratherthan assacrificial fees.83 tovs HvovTasawatox£sHat [£]t5Tov Hsavtoov ,Soog£V XttoV5 8La%0aL0V5 t£t0£60V 8£ %atatyos ota%ootovs . £ . . ovs 0£ £G%ovTa. N
\
c sS,
Thoseofferingsacrifice shallfirstpayto thethesauros: fora bovine 1,200;fora sheep84 andfora goat300;for- - -(?)60. 4 ParkerandObbink2000,pp.416-417,lines10-12;saleof a priesthoodof AphroditePandamosandPontia(Cos,late2nd centuryB.C.). Lines16-22postulate thatthekeysofthethesauroi85 bekeptbytheprostatai, whowouldopenthemin thepresence of thepriestess, whowouldreceive halfthe sumcollectedtherein.The otherhalfwouldbe depositedin the goddess's accountin thepublicbankandbe usedforsanctuary constructionandrepairs asdetermined bytheassembly:86 awatox£sHxv8£ %atTot ta[t]
06z06
A(ptoodat£zt
8toaFaq dvo,£zt
£tOV
£V
8toaXMav, TOv
06
ZaVT£5
8£ aT£X£tOV
T06
Hvov£g £5 Tov Hsavtoov 8£
T060DOV,
TotsaRBots TOv o0V6{aL}005
£V
T£-
8£
ODOXOV-
All therestof thoseofferingsacrifice shallpayto the thesauros for Aphrodite fora bovinetwodrachmas, fortheresta drachma for full-grown victims,threeobolsfornon-full-grown victims,andan obolfora bird. 5 LSCGSuppl.72 A, lines1-3 (Thasos,1stcentury B.C.), inscribed ona thesauros, prescribes a flatfee andsentencestransgressors to a badconscience;eachyearthe thesaurosmoneywouldbe handedoverto the hieromnemon forsafekeeping. Oncethesumof 1,000drachmas hadbeen
82. Forthe date,Kaminski1991, p. 178. 83. See Sokolowski's commentary, LSCG 88;in line 15,he prints[. .], but the earliesteditorshe citesprinttraces. 84. Literally"victim"; seeEtym. Magn., s.v. t£p£60V, andcommentaries. 85. ParkerandObbink(2000, pp.436-437)suggestthatthesauroiare referred to in the pluralbecauseeach Aphroditehadone. 86. Cf.the similarstipulations in an oldersaleof thispriesthood, Iscr.Cos ED 178b (A),lines12-16;seefurther ParkerandObbink2000,pp.437-439.
TovsOvovocac: @£0y£VN
L
AT THE AMPHIAREION
SACRIFICE
337
or onthededication thecouncilandthepeoplewoulddeliberate collected, onwhichit shouldbe spent: forTheo(a)genes construction [E)a]cw[t]tasatoX£aOaL£65TOV H! £Rassov ODOXOVcwavtoov
to ThasianTheogenesshallpayto the Thoseofferingsacrifice notlessthananobol. thesauros is usedin thefollowingexamples: Theverb£u,BaBA£v victims,thedistri2ndcenturyB.C.) enumerates 6 LSCG125 (Mytilene, butionoftheirparts,andsumsofmoney(nowlost)tobeputintoathesauros, Specificpartsthatareto be placedon as a fee forthe sacrifice. obviously go to the priest.The phrase[£VDa]X£TO £65 TOV the culttableprobably in lines7-8. Lines restored occursin line5 andcanbesecurely HNcwa[vtoov] 6-8 read: vac.o dj£ %£ aaaVZO[8a oUtl voa]£65 8£ TOV H]-
[s£4X]sHx £V tav[a, £VpaX£[TO[cwavto]ov
- -]
a hareshallplaceon theculttablethesameparts Whoeversacrifices [- - -]. in lines2-3) andputintothethesauros (described 7
LSCGSuppl.108,lines8-12 (Rhodes,1stcenturyA.C.): %a0'adtTovs Hvovta £VDaX£LV £65 TOV HceavtoovDoos Aa', X[v] [.] aBAxvT£TtoaZo8Ov a£%TOtOOS
£ .
one in theadytonshallputintothethesauros Whoeversacrifices a forotherquadrupeds, drachma fora bovine,[halfa drachma?] fora rooster. of a drachma fifth(?)87 3rdcenturyB.C.), stipulates 8 LSAM 73, lines29-32 (Halikarnassos, andreforthegoddess(ArtemisPergaia) of a 0Ncwavtoos thepreparation quires(lines30-35)that:88 8£ 06
£V,8aX£TOAaV £V
HVOVT£5 £zt
TO T£X£LOt OOXOV5
aV0,
£zt
yaRaH£tvt OpOXOV avotyovv 8£ 06 £6£%at8tAd>o[v]Tov HNcwavtoov Tacwtat%aT' £vGavTv 8£
87. In line 12,E maydenote"afifth" (seeLSCG Suppl.,p. 177);Kaminski fiveobols, (1991,p. 180)understands whichmakesthe fee onlyone obol shortof the drachmapaidfora bovine. texton 88. I correctSokolowski's the basisof notesin Syll.31015.
TOV t
-
c
o
oo
\
t£t0£LaL 65 T£ zV
v
o
£st%0V0LaV
ff
1 %t
%aL Ct5 [%at£65tRuatoRuov {[t]uatoRuov}
\
r
£65 }
- -].
shallputin twoobolsfora full-grown Thoseofferingsacrifice victimandanobolfora sucklingvictim.The exetastaishallopenthe andgiveto thepriestessfortheepikouriasacrifice, annually thesauros forclothingandfor[- - -].
338
ERAN LUPU
COMMENTS 1.Animalsarelisted,bysize,according to species(2,3, 7),age(8),orboth (1, 4). Sometimesonlythe largestandsmallestarenamed(4, 7). When classification according to speciesis used,subclassification according to age maybe employed(2, cf. 4). The orderis eitherascending(1, 2) or descending (3,4, 7, 8).Similarprinciples canbeobserved intheMarseilles Tariff,whichis arranged in a descending order. 2. The feegenerally increases according to thesizeof animal(3,4, 7, 8). 3.In 1 andprobably 2,wherethemoneyis explicitly saidtobeapartof the priestlyprerogatives, anequalsubtotal valueof cashandin-kindprerogativesseemsto be intended.In 1 the differences betweentheprerogatives in cashandin kindbetweenthe full-grown (non-bovine) andthebovine victimsmaybe dueto an equalityin the combinedvalueof the prerogatives,i.e.,theskinof a bovineplusoneanda halfobolsequaledthevalue of the skin andthe leg of a non-bovinefull-grownvictimplusthree obols.Comparethe differences in prerogatives in the adult/yearling cat.
egorles
*
ln z.
A similarprinciple mightbe observed in thefragmentary Latintariff Kfrom Rome,CILVl 820.Thefollowingpointsshould,however, benoted: 1) Evenin 1 theyearlingdoesnot conformto thisprinciple. The reason maybe a wish to allowa moreaffordable offering.Significantly, the Marseilles Tariffhasa specialcategoryforthe poor(line15):"Foreach sacrifice thata personpoorin cattleorin birdsacrifices, thepriestsshall not receive[a thing]."2) The cashplusin-kindvalueof the bovinein 2 seemsgreaterthanthatof thefull-grown non-bovine victims. 4. The animalusuallyappears in thegenitive.'Ewtwiththe dativeis also possibleasin 4 and8. Example6 employsanentirelydifferentconstruchonconstsengot twoc auses. *
*
*
r
5. Privatesacrifice is evidentwherethecontextis clear(3 is notclear).In themoredetailedMarseilles Tariff,lines16-17 considersacrifice offered bygroups: "Anyassociation, anyclan,anyfellow-drinkers' association (in honor)of a god,andanymenwhosacrifice[- - -] thesemen[shallpay]a fee for eachsacrificeaccording to whatis set in the writtendocument [- - -]."Evenit doesnotdiscusspublicsacrifice. The Delphictelanos tariffs,prescribing culticfeespaidbyparticular citiesandtheirinhabitants, area different case;seeLSCGSuppl.39 (CID I 8) and41,lines8-12 (CID I 13);cf.38 A (CID I 7), lines25-32; CID I 1. 6.'Awapx£aOat vs.£,BaBA£v. Bothverbsprescribe thedeposition ofmoney inthethesauros. Whereas £,ulaV£vsimplyrefersto theaction,awapx£sHat definesit asanoffering.89 7. Moneyformally includedin priestlyprerogatives is givendirectlyto the priest(1,2).
89. See LSJs.v.II 2, III;cf.Parker andObbink2000,p. 436.
SACRIFICE
90. See Knoepfler1986. 91. A specialsacrificemadeupon to divine the occasionof alterations property. See Stengel1920,p. 134; Rudhardt1992,p. 269.
AT THE AMPHIAREION
339
is involved, whoeverhascontroloverit is in controlof 8.Whena thesauros the list of thosein chargeinscribed 3, considering the money(obviously abovethe tariff;also4, S, 8). The moneymaybe dividedbetweenthe priestessandthe divinity(4).In 8, moneygivento the priestessis to be expenses. In 4 and5, sacredmoneyis usedforsacred usedforcult-related expenses. thesauros is known of moneyfromtheAmphiareion's The treatment 290,lines13-25and324(LSCG70), lines33-39.In in twocases,I. Oropos to thefirstcase,thedecreeof Pandios(369/8B.C.),90 thepriestis required forinscribfromthemoneycollectedin thethesauros usetwentydrachmas therepairworksof thefountain describing inga stelewiththesyngraphai according to whichtheyhavebeenleasedout.Therest andtheconditions andmoneyfromtheshopsshouldbeused ofthe moneyfromthethesauros theremainder is to the neokoros; foranap£orrptov9landforreimbursing it to behandedoverto thosein chargeof sacredworkswhoareto transfer I. Oropos324, B.C. ex-votodecree In the late-3rd-century the contractor. money lines33-39 (LSCG70 containsonlylines1-52 of theinscription), is spentin thecourseof meltingolddedications. fromthethesauros
REFERENCES Chaniotis,A., andJ.Mylonopoulos. Bulletinof 2000."Epigraphic GreekReligion1997(EGBR 1997),"Kernos13,pp. 127-237. COS= W. W. Hallo,ed., TheContext of Scripture1: CanonicalCompositionspromtheBiblicalWorld,
Leiden1997. Debord,P.1982.Aspectssociauxet economiques de la vie religieusedans Leiden. IAnatoliegreco-romain, Deubner,L. 1900.De incubatione capztaquatuor,Lelpzlg. Durrbach, F. 1890.De Oropoet Amphiaraisacro,Paris. T
.
.
Edelstein,E.J., andL. Edelstein. 1945[1998]. Asclepius:Collection andInterpretationof the TestimoniesI-II, repr.,Baltimore. Gill,D. 1991.GreekCultTables,New
York. I. Oropos= V. C. Petrakos,Ocszcy,oorEfrov Q,orov, Athens
1997. Iscr.Cos= M. Segre,Iscrizionidi Cos
dellaScuola I-II (Monographie di AteneVl), Rome archeologica 1994. Jameson,M. H., D. R.Jordan,and R. D. Kotanski.1993.A lexsacra
from Selinous(GRBM 11),Durham,
N.C. KAI = H. DonnerandW. Rollig, Kanaanaischeundaramaisch Inschriften,2nd ed.,Wiesbaden
1966. Kaminski, G. 1991."Thesauros: zumantiken Untersuchungen 106,pp.63-181. Opferstock,"JdI Knoepfler, D. 1986."Undocument Le decretde attiquea reconsiderer: d'OroPandiossurl'Amphiareion pos,"Chiron16,pp.71-98. . 1988.Rev.of SEGXXXI, in Gnomon60, XXXII,andXII, pp.222-235. . 1992."Septanneesde rede Beotie cherchessurl'epigraphie (1985-1991),"Chiron22, pp.411503. . 1998."Letronca offrandes d'unneocoreeretrien,"AntK41, pp.101-115. B. 1991."Espace Le Guen-Pollet, sacrificiel et corpsdesbetesimmosurle vocabulees:Remarques lairedesignantla part du pretre dans la Greceantique,de l'epoque in classiquea l'epoqueimperiale," L'espace sacrificieldansles civilisations
34° mediterraneennes del'antiquite,
R. EtienneandM.-T.Le Dinahet, eds.,Paris,pp.3-23. LSAM = F. Sokolowski, Loissacreesde IAsieMineure,Paris1955. LSCG = F. Sokolowski, Loissacreesdes citesgresques, Paris1969. LSCG Suppl.= F. Sokolowski, Lois sacreesdescitesgresques(Supplement),
Paris1962. Parker, R., andD. Obbink.2000."Sales of Priesthoods on Cos I," Chiron30, pp.415-449. Peek,W. 1969.Inschriftenausdem Asklepieionvon Epidauros(AbhLeip
60.2),Berlin. Petrakos, V.C.1968. 'O'QgOCt)ZOfXAC 10 CEpOVIOV HvCpAOV, Athens. Petropoulou, A. B. 1981."TheEparche
Eran Lupu TEL AVIVUNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF CLASSICS P.O. BOX39 040 RAMATAVIV,TEL AVIV69978 I SRAEL e lup u@hotm ai 1.co m
E RAN LU PU
Documentsandthe EarlyOracleat Oropus," GRBS22, pp.39-63. .1985."Pausanias 1.34.5:Incubationon a RamSkin,"in La Beotie antique.Actesdu Colloqueinternational,Lyon,Saint-Etienne,16-20 mai 1983, P. RoeschandG. Argoud,
eds.,Paris,pp.169-177. . 1991."Prothysis andAltar: A CaseStudy," in L'espacesacrificieldanslescivilisationsmediterrane'ennes de l'antiquiteo, R. Etienne
andM.-T.Le Dinahet,eds.,Paris, pp.25-31. Puttkammer, F. 1912."Quomodo Graecivictimarum carnesdistribuerint" (diss.Konigsberg). Robert,L. 1966."Surun decretd'Ilion et surpapyrusconcernant descultes
royaux,"AmericanStudiesin Papyrology1, pp. 175-211 (= Opera MinoraSelectaVII, Amsterdam 1990, pp. 599-635). Rudhardt,J. 1992. Notionsfondamentalesde lapenseereligieuseet actes constitutifsdu cultedansla Grece classique,2nd ed., Paris. Schachter,A. 1981. Cultsof Boiotia1 (BICS Suppl. 38.1), London. Sokolowski,F. 1954. "FeesandTaxes in the Greek Cults,"HThR 47, pp. 153-164. Stengel, P. 1920. Diegriechischen Kultusaltertumer, 3rd ed., Munich. van Straten,F.T. 1995. Hierakala: ImagesofAnimal Sacrificein Archaic and ClassicalGreece,Leiden.
RecentlyPublishezl
CHARLES K. WILLIAMS 11 ANP NANCY BOOKIPl S, EPITORS Corinth,
476 pages,ca.400 illustrations Corinth E ISBN0-87661-020-3 May2003.Cloth$75/ £57.50
To order,contact: (inNorthAmerica) The DavidBrownBookCompany www.davidbrownbookco. com Tel.800-791-9354 (outside NorthAmerica) OxbowBooks www.oxbowbooks.com Tel.+44(0) 1865-241-249
the
Centenary:
I896
I996
Thisbookpublishes twenty-five of thepaperspresented attheDecember 1996symposium heldin Athensto celebrate theone-hundredth anniversaryof theAmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesexcavations at Ancient Corinth.Thepapersareintendedto illustrate therangein subjectmatter of research currently beingundertaken by scholarsof AncientCorinth, andtheirinclusionin onevolumewillserveasa usefulreference workfor nonspecialists. Eachof the topics- whichvarywidelyfromCorinthian geologyto religiouspractices to Byzantinepottery-is presented by the acknowledged expertin thatarea. Thebookincludesa fullgeneralbibliography of articlesandvolumes concerning material excavated at Corinth.As a summary of onehundred yearsof research, it willbe usefulto generations of scholars to come.
JOHN 1<. PAPADOPOULOS
Forthcoming
CeramicusRedfivisus: The Early Iron Age Potters ' Field! in the Area of the Classical Athen ian Agora
Thisvolumepresents selectedmaterial associated withpotters' workshops Ca.450 pages,200illustrations andpotteryproduction fromsomefourteen EarlyIronAgecontexts north- HesperiaSupplement31 ISBN0-87661-531-0 westoftheAthenian Acropolis thatrangeindatefromtheProtogeometric December2003.Paper$45.00 through Archaic periods. LocatedintheareathatwastobecometheAgora of ClassicalAthens,thesedepositsestablishthatthe placewasusedfor industrial activityuntilthe areawasformallytransformed intothe civic andcommercial centerof thecityin theearly5th centuryB.C. The Early IronAgepotters' debrispublished in thisvolumeshedslightonmanyaspectsof potteryproduction, in prehistory aswellas in the Classicaland laterperiods. Thematerial includestest-pieces, wastersandotherproductiondiscards, andavarietyof otherpotters' debris. Thereis alsoa reassessmentof theevidenceassociated withthekilnunderlying thelaterTholos.
To order,contact: (in NorthAmerica)
The DavidBrownBookCompany www.davidbrownbookco .com Tel.800-791-9354 (outsideNorthAmerica)
OxbowBooks www.oxbowbooks.com Tel.+44(0) 1865-241-249
HESPERIA SUPPLEMENTS 13 MarcusAurelius:Aspects of Civicand CulturalPolicyin theEast,
byJamesH. Oliver(1970) 14 ThePoliticalOrganizationofAttica,byJohnS.Traill(1975)
16 A Sanctuaryof Zeuson MountHymettos,by MerleK.Langdon(1976) 17 Kalliasof Sphettosand theRevoltofAthensin 286 B.C., byT. LeslieShearJr.(1978) 20 Studiesin AthenianArchitecture, Sculpture, and Topography Presentedto HomerA.Thompson(1982) 21 Excavationsat Pylosin Elis, byJohnE. Coleman(1986) 22 Attic GraveReliefsThatRepresentWomenin theDressofIsis, by ElizabethJ.Walters(1988) 23 HellenisticReliefMoldsprom theAthenianAgora,by ClaireveGrandjouan (1989) 24 ThePrepalatialCemeteries at Mochlosand Gourniaand theHouseTombsof BronzeAgeCrete,byJeffreyS. Soles(1992) 25 Debrisproma PublicDining Placein theAthenianAgora, by SusanI. RotroffandJohnH. Oakley(1992) 26 TheSanctuaryofAthenaNike in Athens:Architectural Stagesand Chronology,by IraS. Mark(1993) 27 Proceedingsof theInternationalConference on GreekArchitectural Terracottas of the Classicaland HellenisticPeriods,December12-15, 1991,
editedby NancyA. Winter(1994) 28 Studiesin ArchaicCorinthianVasePainting,by D. A. AmyxandPatricia Lawrence(1996) 29 TheAthenianGrain-TaxLaw of 374/3 B.C., by RonaldS. Stroud(1998) 30 A LMIA CeramicKiln in South-CentralCrete:Functionand Pottery Production,byJosephW. Shaw,AleydisVande Moortel,PeterM. Day, andVassilisKilikoglou(2001) 31 Ceramicus Redivivus:TheEarlyIronAgePotters'Fieldin theAreaof the ClassicalAthenianAgora, byJohnK.Papadopoulos (forthcoming 2003) 32 LandscapeArchaeology in SouthernEpirus,GreeceI, editedbyJames WisemanandKonstantinos Zachos(2003)
HESPERIA
72
(2003)
R E E K
G
E P I G
RA
P H
I CA
L
I N
D EX
PERSONS ca.333/2a., fatherof [/\£i]tCU5tOOTOg, (Ilaxavx£vs), ['Ato%£axBas] 328,andIlaCuspLXog, ca.200-170a., fatherof Av%Co%os, BaOv%XNs,
2736
327
Leape, byThessalian in dedication A£0VTOF£VOV5, theoros
/\aCuoooLvog
170-140a., 324 ['ADO%£aLA0V
[/\£i]tCUt00T05
naLavL£vg]>
303/2a., epistatesproedron
2735_6 (<>yovoLog)>
[/\Louvoo8Xtoog]
/\Louvoo8Xpov
[/\LospavTog
303/2
2733 ca.333/2a., fatherof [/\LospavTog], kataprytaneion secretary q>yovox]os,
a., 2733 ca.200-170
3211 a., fatherof NvCuspo8Xtoos, III a., 27567 epistatesproedronfin. KA£[..- - - 4>a]Xo£[vg], 324 a., fatherof hapoOotuos, A£0VTOF£VN5, ca.200-170 archon303/2 a., 2732 [A£XooaTos], O£OV8a5,
League, byThessalian theorosin dedication BaOv%X£xovs, Av%Co%os 170-140
a., 328
III a., 27523 kataprytaneionfin. Nx%av[o- - -]5,secretary byThessalian in dedication king eponymous O£OV8OV, NVpgo80t005 League,170-140 a., 321l (Durres), on gravestelefoundat Epidamnus £V(D4>tXO%tOaT£V5, ca.IV-IIIa., 961 ca.525-500? foundat Samothrace, - -], in archaicinscription OvaxCu[H
a., 2352
League, byThessalian theorosin dedication BaOv%X£xovs, IlaCuspxXos a., 327 325 ca.200-170 a., fatherof q>Ckovx%os, q>CAx=sos, 4>tBo%oarr1g, ca.IV-IIIa., fatherof £vx,962 170-140
League,170byThessalian theorosin dedication 4>CAx=sov, q>Ckovx%os 140a., 325
GREEK EPIGRAPHICAL
468
DEMOTICS, ETHNICS, PHYLAI, PLACES 'A0Nvatv, 27419 [AxavC8]os, 2732 /\[NpXtoxaAos],2751 2 @£aAaOV,
32
Kv8xvx[- - -], 2759 lo, 275 Aatoxaaxxv,329 [Ilatavx£vs],
2736
[E]C%v(ovtox, 2739, Sx[%vxvxxv],274l3l4,[Ex%vxvxxv], 274 [<)a]Xo£[v5], 2757 @£tOatOV,
326
[@nyovot]o5> 2733 MONTHS Bo8tooCuxxv: [Bo8to]oCuxxvos, 2754 S%Ctoospotoxxv: S[%Ctoospotoxxvos], 2733 4
INSCRIPTIONS STUDIED OR EMENDED AgoraXVI
115 273-275 AgoraInventory Number I 2636b+n 273-275 I 7602 275-277 Chiron
30,2000,pp.416-417 336(4) Durres Regional Archaeological Project Inventory A164-SF01 78 S016-SF01 96 Epigraphical Museum Inventory 7166 459 Hesperia
8,1939,pp.35-41(9) 273-275 Inscriptiones Graecae II2 417 459 4630 452-453 Iscrizionidi Cos
ED216B
335-336(2)
Loissacrees del'AsieMineure
73
337(8)
Loissacrees descitesgresques
45 69 88 125
335(1) 321-334 336(3) 337(6)
INDEX
GREEK
EPIGRAPHICAL
INDEX
descitesgresques(Supplement) Loissacrees
72A 108
336-337(5) 337(7)
rov Qpcoorov 0e soTtypoc(pes
326-331 278 Number Inventory Samothrace 31-38 01.2 Graecum Epigraphicum Supplementum
XLI50 XLVII488
273-275 326-331
469
I
H
I
E S P E R I A
THE
JOURNAL OF
O F
C L A S S I C A L
THE
AMERICAN
S T U D
Vo L U M E 2003
I E S
7
2
AT
SCHOOL AT
H
E N
S
Submissions:Manuscriptsand communicationsshouldbe addressedto Dr.TraceyCullen,Editor,Hesperia,AmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesat Athens,6-8 CharltonStreet,Princeton, NewJersey08540;tel.609-683-0800; fax609-924-0578;[email protected]. Manuscripts andphotocopiesof illustrations mustbe submittedin triplicate;originalartworkand photographs shouldnotbe sentunlesspriorarrangements aremadewiththe editor.A shortabstract summarizing themajorconclusions ofthe articleshould alsobe included.Articlesaresubmittedto a double-blind reviewprocessand authorsarerequestedto preparetheirmanuscripts accordingly, withouttheir nameor affiliationappearing. The stylefor manuscript preparation, notes, bibliography, andotherinformation onsubmissions canbefoundin theGuidelinesforAuthorson the School'sWebsite(www.ascsa.edu.gr) orbywritingto ASCSAPublications at the aboveaddress.
Copyright(C)2003 The AmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesat Athens
TheAmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthenswillnotknowinglyprint in Hesperiaoranyof its otherpublications the announcement orinitialscholarlypresentation of anyobjectacquired afterDecember30,1970,byanymeans otherthanthroughan officiallysanctionedexcavationor survey,unlessthe objectwaspartof a previously existingcollectionorwaslegallyexportedfrom the countryof origin.
MA 02021-0529,U.S.A.
Subscriptions: Hesperiais publishedquarterly. The annualsubscription price is $60 forindividuals ($70,international), $110forinstitutions($120,international),and $35 for students(proofof studentstatusrequired).Payment mustbe in U.S.dollars,drawnon a U.S.bankorby moneyorder,andsentto Hesperia,Subscriber Services,P.O.Box 529, Canton,MA 02021-0529;tel. (U.S.)800-821-7823;(outsideU.S.)781-828-8450;fax781-828-8915;e-mail [email protected]. Singleissues(currentandbacknumberswhenavailable) of Hesperiaareavailable for $20 eachpluspostagefromthe DavidBrownBook Company,P.O.Box 511, Oakville,CT 06779;tel. 800-791-9354,860-9459329;fax 860-945-9468;or (outsideNorth America)OxbowBooks,Park End Place,OxfordOX1 1HN, U.K.;tel. +44 (0) 1865-241249;fax +44 (0) 1865-794449.IndexII andSupplements 13-17 and19-32 arealsoavailable fromDavidBrownBooks.Reprintsof IndexI, Supplements1-12 and 18, andearlyissuesof Hesperiashouldbe orderedfromSwetsandZeitlinger, b.v., P.O.Box 810,2160 SZ Lisse,Netherlands; [email protected].
Producedat EdwardsBrothers, Inc.,AnnArbor,Michigan. Designby EllenMcKie. Periodicals postagepaidat Princeton,NewJersey,andat additionalmailingoffices. Postmaster: Sendaddresschanges to Hesperia,P.O.Box529, Canton,
ISSN 0018-098X
VOLUM E 72 (2003)
CO
PUBLICATION S STAFF
VASSILISARAVANTINOS, ANDREASKONECNY, AND RONALDT. MARCHESE
ACTINGEDITOR-IN-CHIEF TraceyCullen EDITOR,Hesperia TraceyCullen EDITOR,MONOGRAPHS Michael A. Fitzgerald PRODUCTION MANAGER SarahGeorge Figueira MANUSCRIPT EDITOR CarolA. Stein
Plataiaiin Boiotia:A Preliminary Reportof the 1996-2001 Campaigns 281-320
PUB LI CATI O N S C OMMITTEE Carol C. Mattusch (Chairman) George Mason University JeremyMcInerney Universityof Pennsylvania MargaretMiller Universityof Toronto Gloria FerrariPinney HarvardUniversity Daniel J. Pullen Florida State University KathleenW. Slane Universityof Missouri-Columbia Rhys F.Townsend (exoffcio) ClarkUniversity
NTE
NTS
JOHNMCKESSON CAMPII Excavations in theAthenianAgora:1998-2001
241-280
JACKL. DAVIS,AFRIMHOTI, IRIS POJANI, SHARONR. STOCKER,AAROND. WOLPERT, PHOEBEE. ACHESON,ANDJOHNW. HAYES The DurresRegionalArchaeological Project: Archaeological Surveyin theTerritory of Epidamnus/Dyrrachium in Albania 41-119 NORADIMITROVAAND KEVINCLINTON An ArchaicInscription fromSamothrace
235-239
SHARON E. J. GERSTEL, MARKMUNN, HEATHER E. GROSSMAN, ETHNEBARNES, ARTHURH. ROHN,ANDMACHIEL KIEL A LateMedievalSettlementat Panakton
147-234
KEVINGLOWACKI A Personification of Demoson a NewAtticDocumentRelief 447-466 ELIZABETHA. HENDRIX PaintedEarlyCycladicFigures: An Exploration of Context andMeaning 405-446
ERANLUPU SacredLaw anda Fragmentary Sacrifice attheAmphiareion 321-340 fromOropos ROBERTL. POUNDERANDNORADIMITROVA Leagueto the GreatGods DedicationbytheThessalian in Samothrace
31-39
ANDREWSTEWARTAND S. REBECCAMARTIN atTelDor,Israel HellenisticDiscoveries
121-145
SHARONR. STOCKER Project,PartV: PylosRegionalArchaeological DeriziotisAloni:A SmallBronzeAge Sitein Messenia
341-404
A NNA S TROULIA Cave:A CloseLook GroundStoneCeltsfromFranchthi INDEX GREEKEPIGRAPHICAL
1-30 467-469
-
mE| I
THE OF
JOURNAL OF
THE
AMERICAN
C LA S S I CA L S T U D I E S
AT
SCHOOL AT
H
E N
S
VOLUME72: NUMBER4 OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2003
AmericanSchool of Classical StudiesatSthens 2003
TheAmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthensis a research and teachinginstitution dedicated to advanced studyof the archaeology, art,history,philosophy, language, andliterature of Greeceandthe Greekworld.Established in 1881by a consortium of nineAmerican universities, the Schoolnowservesgraduate studentsandscholars frommorethan150 affiliated collegesanduniversities, actingasa baseforresearch andstudyin Greece.The mainbuildingsof the Schoolandits libraryarelocatedin Athens,withadministrative and publications officesin Princeton, NewJersey. As partof its mission, the Schooldirectsongoingexcavations in theAthenianAgoraandat CorinthandsponsorsallotherAmerican-led excavations andsurveys on Greeksoil.It is theofficiallinkbetweenAmericanarchaeologists andclassicists andtheArchaeological Serviceof the GreekMinistry of Cultureand,assuch,is dedicated to thewisemanagement of cultural resources andto thedissemination of knowledge of the classical world.Inquiries aboutmembership in the Schoolorpartici-pation in the SummerSessionsshouldbe sentto theAmerican Schoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthens,6-8 CharltonStreet, Princeton, NewJersey08540-5232. Hesperiais published quarterly bytheAmericanSchoolof Classical StudiesatAthens.Foundedin 1932 anddevotedprimarily to the
timelypublication of reportson School-sponsored andSchooldirectedprojects, Hesperiawelcomessubmissions fromallscholars workingin thefieldsof Greekarchaeology, art,epigraphy, history, materials science,ethnography, andliterature, fromearliestprehistoric timesonward. Hesperiais a refereed journal.
VOLUME
72: NUMBER
OCTOBER-DECEMBER
4 2003
Im
I
THEJOURNAL OFTHEAMERICAN SCHOOL OFCLASSICAL STUDIESATATHENS
PUB LI CATI ON S STAFF ACTING
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Tracey EDITOR,
341
ELIZABETHA. HENDRIX
Cullen MONOGRAPHS
Michael
A. Fitzgerald
PRODUCTION Sarah MANUSCRIPT Carol
PylosRegionalArchaeological Project,PartV: DeriziotisAloni:A SmallBronzeAge Sitein Messenia
Cullen
Hesperia
Tracey EDITOR,
SHARONR. STOCKER
PaintedEarlyCycladicFigures: An Exploration of Context andMeaning
405
MANAGER George
Figueira
EDITOR
A. Stein
KEVIN G LOWACKI A Personification of Demoson a NewAtticDocumentRelief GREEKEPIGRAPHICAL INDEX
PUB LI CATI ON S C OMMITTEE CarolC. Mattusch(Chairman) GeorgeMasonUniversity JeremyMcInerney Universityof Pennsylvania Margaret Miller Universityof Toronto GloriaFerrariPinney HarvardUniversity DanielJ. Pullen FloridaStateUniversity KathleenW. Slane Universityof Missouri-Columbia RhysF.Townsend(exofScio) ClarkUniversity
447 467
Copyright(C)2003 Submissions:Manuscriptsand communicationsshouldbe addressedto Dr.TraceyCullen,Editor,Hesperia,AmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesat The AmericanSchoolof NewJersey08540;tel.609-683-0800; ClassicalStudiesat Athens Athens,6-8CharltonStreet,Princeton, Manuscripts andphotofax609-924-0578;[email protected]. mustbe submittedin triplicate;originalartworkand Producedat EdwardsBrothers, copiesof illustrations aremadewiththe Inc.,AnnArbor,Michigan. photographs shouldnotbe sentunlesspriorarrangements ofthearticleshould Designby EllenMcKie. summarizing themajorconclusions editor.A shortabstract reviewprocessand alsobe included.Articlesaresubmittedto a double-blind Athens,Agora accordingly, withouttheir Coverillustration: authorsarerequestedto preparetheirmanuscripts preparation, notes, MuseumAS 146.Relieffroma The stylefor manuscript nameor affiliationappearing. canbefoundin theGuide- 4th-centuryB.C. honorarydecree. onsubmissions bibliography, andotherinformation Demos(?)crowninghonorand. orbywritingto linesforAuthorson the School'sWebsite(www.ascsa.edu.gr) CourtesyAgoraExcavations, at the aboveaddress. ASCSAPublications photoC. Mauzy TheAmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesatAthenswillnotknowinglyprint postagepaidat orinitialschol- Periodicals the announcement in Hesperiaoranyof its otherpublications afterDecember30,1970,byanymeans Princeton,NewJersey,andat arlypresentation of anyobjectacquired otherthanthroughan officiallysanctionedexcavationor survey,unlessthe additionalmailingoffices. existingcollectionorwaslegallyexportedfrom objectwaspartof a previously Postmaster: Sendaddresschanges the countryof origin. to Hesperia,P.O.Box529, Canton, price MA 02021-0529,U.S.A. The annualsubscription Subscriptions: Hesperiais publishedquarterly. X110forinstitutions(X120,interis $60 forindividuals($70,international), national),and X35for students(proofof studentstatusrequired).Payment ISSN 0018-098X mustbe in U.S.dollars,drawnon a U.S.bankorby moneyorder,andsentto Services,P.O.Box 529, Canton,MA 02021-0529;tel. Hesperia,Subscriber (U.S.)800-821-7823;(outsideU.S.)781-828-8450;fax781-828-8915;e-mail of [email protected]. Singleissues(currentandbacknumberswhenavailable) for X20eachpluspostagefromthe DavidBrownBook Hesperiaareavailable Company,P.O.Box 511, Oakville,CT 06779;tel. 800-791-9354,860-9459329;fax 860-945-9468;or (outsideNorth America)OxbowBooks,Park End Place,OxfordOX1 1HN, U.K.;tel. +44 (0) 1865-241249;fax +44 (0) 13-17 and19-32 arealsoavailable 1865-794449.IndexII andSupplements fromDavidBrownBooks.Reprintsof IndexI, Supplements1-12 and 18, b.v., andearlyissuesof Hesperiashouldbe orderedfromSwetsandZeitlinger, [email protected]. P.O.Box 810,2160 SZ Lisse,Netherlands;
HESPERIA
72 (2003)
Pages34I-404
PY
LO
S
R E G
I O
NA
L
ARCHAEOLOG ICAL PROJECT,
PARTV
DERIZIOTIS ALONI:A SMALL BRONZEAGE SITE IN MESSENIA
ABSTRACT In1958LordWilliamTaylourexcavatedthebadlyerodedremainsof a small lateEarlyHelladicIII siteatDeriziotisAlonion theEnglianosRidgenot far fromthe Palaceof Nestor.This paperconstitutesa detailedpresentation of Taylour's results.Twoapsidalbuildingsfromthe site areamongthe earliest apsidalstructuresknownfromMessenia,andthe ceramicsandsmallfinds areindicativeof a stageof prehistorypoorlyrepresented in the southwestern Peloponnese. DeriziotisAlonimayhavebeenoneof severalsimilarsitesthat coalesced in the MiddleHelladicperiodto formthe largercommunitythat ultimately gaveriseto the Palaceof Nestor.
Deriziotis Aloniis a smallsettlement ca.400m southwest of thePalaceof Nestor thatwasoccupiedfora shorttimeat theendof thethirdmillenniums.c.1The sitewasexcavated in 1958by LordWilliamTaylour, but published in onlya sketchyfashion.Thegoalof thisarticleis to assemble, reexamine, andre-present theimportant findsfromhisexcavation. In this regard I havebeenentirelydependent uponan examination of Taylour's excellent recordsformyinterpretation of the stratigraphy of the siteand itshistoryof excavation. The storyof DeriziotisAloniis essentially his.2 1.This projectwasundertaken as part of the PylosRegionalArchaeological Project(PRAP)andas such owes thanksto manybenefactors. Major filndingforPRAPwasprovided by the NationalEndowmentforthe Humanities, the NationalGeographic Society, the InstituteforAegeanPrehistory, andotherorganizations and individuals. FordetailsseeDaviset al. 1997, p. 488. WilliamA. Parkinson kindlyprovided a reporton the chippedstone finds. Drawingsof smallfindsand
pottery wereprepared by Rosemary J. Robertson andJackL. Davis,lithicsby John F.Cherry.All wereconvertedto digital imagesby Robertson. The photographs weretakenbyJohnBennet and prepared forpublication byJohn Wallrodt. The Directorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquitiesin Olympia approved PRAP'srequestto republish finds fromCarlW. Blegen'sexcavations, includingthosefromDeriziotis Aloni. I appreciate the enthusiasm of Xeni Arapoyianni andYioryiaHatzi
for myresearch. I wouldalsoliketo thank thoseindividuals namedin the Acknowledgments below. 2. The excavation is describedin Taylour's fieldnotebook(Taylour 1958), whichis storedin the archives of theAmericanSchoolof Classical Studies at Athens.I amgratefillto Natalia Vogeikoff-Brogan forfacilitatlng myaccessto orlglnaexcavatlon records. A copyof the notebookis also stored in the archivesof the Department of Classicsof theUniversityof Cincinnati. .
.
.
.
342
SHARON
R. STOCKER
Figure1. Plan ofthe vicinityofthe Palaceof Nestor.AfterBlegenet al. 1973,figs.301,312,andBennet1999, p. 13,fig.2.4;R.J. Robertson
littleis knownabouttheend becauserelatively is significant Thematerial Helladic beginningoftheMiddle (EH)periodandthe oftheEarlyHelladic of the (MH)periodin Messenia.It is hopedthatthepresentpublication to help will fromDeriziotisAloni smallfinds,andceramics architecture, fillthisgap. the sitebetweenJuly7 andJuly16, 1958,in conTaylourexcavated of the EnglianosRidge,andhe junctionwithCarlBlegen'sexplorations in ThePalaceofNestorIII.3Prehistheresultsof hisexcavations published
3.Taylour 1973, pp. 219-224, figs. 275-279, 347-350.
DERIZIOTIS
ALONI
343
Figure2. Plan of architectural remainsat DeriziotisAloni. AfterTaylour 1973,figs.347,348; R.J. Robertson
4. DeriziotisAloniis namedafter the currantdryingfloorof Eustathios Deriziotis,the ownerof the siteat the timeofTaylour's excavation. 5. Zanggeret al.1997,pp.551-552, 563-566. 6. Davis1998,p.xxxiii. 7.Taylour1958,p. 19. 8.Taylour1958,p. 19. 9.Taylour1973,p. 219. 10.Taylour1973,figs.347,348. 11.Taylour1973,p. 220.
toricremains werefoundunderamoder-n threshing floor(aloni) some500m southwest of thepalaceona Plioceneterrace attheedgeof analluvial slope of theEnglianos Ridge(Fig.1).4 The soilscovering themarlbedrock, like thebedrockitself,arehighlysusceptible to erosion.5 The SelasRiverlies to thewestof DeriziotisAloni,anda perennial streamrunsthroughthe floorof thevalleyimmediately to theeast.Thenearestspringtodayis approximately three-quarters of a kilometer northeast of thesite.Thesiteof DeriziotisAlonilookstowardthe Bayof Navarinoandthe sea,but,becauseit sitsontheEnglianos Ridge,it alsolooksinland.LikethePalaceof Nestoritself,the site commands a controlling positionalongthe route leadingto the mountain passthatoffersoneof the mostimportant conduitsbetweenthecoastof theIonianSeaandtheGulfof Messenia.6 Theeastsideofthesitewastruncated bytheconstruction ofthealoni. By1958muchofthesoutheastern halfofthealoni haditselferoded down theslope.Thelight-colored, softmarlbedrock wasfoundlessthana meter beneaththesurface in allpartsof theexcavation. In additionto thedrying floor,vineyard trenchescrisscrossed the siteandmodernplatefragments andpiecesof glasswerefoundin surfacelevels.7 The ownerof thepropertyreported thatmanystoneshadbeenclearedfromthearea.8 The areaof thealoni waschosenforexcavation becausea curvedline of stoneswasvisibleon the surfaceandit wasthoughtthata Mycenaean tholostombwouldbe found.9 Instead, Taylour discovered a smallprehistoricsitewithahomogeneous ceramic assemblage andthepartlypreserved remainsof two apsidalbuildings. Whenhe publishedthe resultsof his excavation, he includeda planandreconstruction of the architectural remains(superimposed in Fig.2).1°He alsoprovideda briefcatalogueof whatheconsidered themostimportant findsassociated withthem.Ninety percentof thepotteryfromalllevelswascoarseware.l1 Mostof it, about 70%of the total,wasthrownawayandonly"diagnostic" sampleswere saved.AlthoughTaylournotedfinewaresherdsandunusualfabricsin hisexcavation notebook, he includedlittleof thisinformation in hisfinal
344
SHARON
R. STOCKER
publication. Nor did he publishprofiledrawingsor photographs of the pots.Indeed,he specifically mentioned in hispublication onlyfourpieces of pottery, summarizing theremainder of theassemblage in thefinalsentencesof his catalogueas follows:"Therewasa certainamountof black Minyanof localmanufacture in theupperlevels,butit alsooccurred occasionallyin the lowerstrata.Coarseredandblackwareappeared in all levels.Incisedware(notoftenfound)seemedto be confinedlargelyto the upperones.''l2 The homogeneity of the ceramicfindssuggestedthatthe sitewas inhabited foronlya shortperiodof time.Taylourdatedits occupation to thetransition betweentheEarlyandMiddleHelladicperiods.l3 He noted thatsomeofthe material hadEarlyHelladictraits,buta MiddleHelladic datewassuggested bythepresence of thewarethathe identifiedasblack "Minyan." Sherdsandsmallfindsstoredin theChoraMuseumandrecorded in Taylour's excavation notesareallthatremaintodayto attestto the existenceof DeriziotisAloni.No traceof the siteis visible,nordidtherecent intensive surveyoftheEnglianos RidgebyPRAPdiscover pre-Mycenaean remainsin thisplace.Thevinesaregone,theareaof thethreshing flooris coveredbyolivetrees,andthestonesthatweretheremainsof theapsidal buildingshavebeenremoved. The remainder of thispaperis devotedto a thoroughreexamination ofthe findsfromDeriziotisAloni,includinga comprehensive description of stratigraphy andarchitecture, anddetailedsmall-finds andpotterycatalogues.I concludebyofferingmyownviewof howthissitefitsintoour current pictureof EarlyandMiddleBronzeAgeMessenia. WhileTaylour wascorrectin his generalassessment of the dateof the finds,it is now possible,in lightof recentpublications, to establishmoreclearlyrelationshipsbetweenthe findsfromDeriziotisAloniandmore"standard" EH III/MHI assemblages as definedin the "heartland" of the northeastern Peloponnese andcentralGreece. STRATI G RAPHY AND ARCHITECTURE BuildingM, the morerecentof the two apsidalbuildingsuncovered by Taylour, wassuperimposed on an earlierbuilding,AB (Figs.2-6). The bedrockon whichthe apsidalbuildingswerein partplacedwasnotleveledbeforeconstruction began.Taylournotedthatthe stereo(i.e.,bedrock)slopeddownfromeastto westin boththe northernandsouthern partsof histrenchA1 (Fig.3).The deepeststratigraphy foundanywhere on thesitewasin thesouthern partof thistrench:bedrockwasreachedat 0.95m beneaththe surface.Elsewhere, bedrocklayat anaverage of only 0.50m belowthesurface. Becausethebedrockof theEnglianosRidgeis marl,stonesusedin the construction of buildingsM andAB werepresumablybroughtfromelsewhere, probably fromthe nearbyvalleybottoms.The superstructures of buildingsM andAB seemto havebeen mudbrick; Taylourfoundfragmentsof a "sundried?" brickin the balk betweentrenchesA1 andA2.
12.Taylour1973,p. 224. 13.Taylour1973,p. 220.
Taylour 1958, p. 15; 1973, figs.
347, 348; .
/
:; ;./
i;
;
<
-;t:
0;
DERIZIOTIS ALONI R
f: is :, '
v
345 X
{
s
-
s
:; 1 a:
:
l:
JX {Edae tof Soni
\.
Figure3.Trenchplanofexcavations anaarcmtectural remams. After 1
r
*
R.J.Robertson
r
*
> <
;.0.;-:r. 0
:t:0:A70;^0:; -:.->0^ ;-::t:-L. A;00-<0:: 0^ .: . . 9 <;*
0:
;@
:
;;
7;
+5e
<°+
9
0
0
. .
Y7
<
-
--
--
' meters
X
BUILDINGM WallM is allthatremained of buildingM.Theextantportionofthewall consisted ofonecourseofunworked poroslimestone blocks,mostofwhich werevisiblebeforethe excavation. Its preserved widthwas0.50 m.The wallterminated abruptly in trenchA3 andno tracesof it werefoundfarthereastin trenchA5 orA6. Littlemorecanbe saidaboutthebuilding exceptthatwallM formedanapsewitha north-northeast orientation. No traceswerefoundof a crosswallthatmighthavedividedthebuildinginto tworooms,norwasthereanyconclusive evidenceforits floor. Smallfindsassociated with the apseof buildingM werefoundin level1, whichincludedartifacts fromthe first20 cm of earthexcavated beneaththe surface.FromtrenchA Taylourdescribed groupsof pithos sherds; a stonespoolorpestle(S1);a reusedpotbase,piercedin thecenter (S2);a pounderorgrinder(S10);a chertblade(S13);a chertdenticulate (S14);and"obsidian splinters." Pithosfragments werealsofoundat the samelevelin trenchA1 andsuggestthattheapseof buildingM mayhave beenusedforstorage.Veryfewsherdswererecovered fromthesouthern partoftrenchA in theareathatwouldhaveconstituted themainroomof buildingM. A smallgroupof pithosfragments wasfoundata depthof 0.15-0.20 m belowthe surfacein trenchA2 to thewestof buildingM, outsidethe apse,anda pithosrimdecorated withfingernail impressions wasfound northof theapsein trenchA4 at a depthof 0.12m. BUILDINGAB BuildingABwastheearlierof thetwoapsidalbuildingsandconsistedof wallsA andB.WallB in trenchA layunderwallM ofbuildingM andwas
346
SHARON
R. STOCKER
Figure4. Generalview of excavated areafromnorthwest. FromTaylour 1973, fig.276
Figure5. Generalviewof sitefrom southeast: easternpart.Courtesy University of Cincinnati, PylosArchives
DERIZIOTIS
ALONI
347
Figure6. Generalview of site from southeast:westernpart.Courtesy University of Cincinnati, PylosArchives
14.Taylour(1958)observed that wallB in trenchA1 curvedslightlyto the south-southwest afterintersecting withwallA, leadinghimto suggest thatbuildingAB mayhavebeenellipticalorcircular. It seemsmorelikely, however, thatbuildingAB wasapsidal; the irregularity to whichhe referred appearsnegligible.SeeFigs.2, 3. 15.Thesepithoicannotbe reconstructedandtheirfragments arestored in a boxwithsherdsfromseveralother .
*
pltnol.
.
separated fromit by a shallowlayerof earth.It is thusclearthatwallB belongedto a separate andearlierbuildingthatlayslightlynorthandeast ofthelaterbuilding. TheapseofbuildingAB,likethatofbuildingM,was orientedto thenortheast, butwaswider. WallB (of whichonlyone coursewaspreserved) wasbuiitof medium-sized porosstonessimilarto thoseusedforwallM. It wasfirstrecognizedin thenortheast sectorof trenchA in level2 at a depthof 0.300.35m belowthesurface. AftermeetingwallA, it terminated abruptly in trenchA1.WallB wasfoundin trenchesA3, A4, andA5, andcouldbe tracedasfarastheedgeof thealoni in trenchA6.ThereTaylour observed thatitswidthwas0.55-0.60m, 10 cmwiderthanelsewhere. Twocoursesof wallA, the chordwallof the apse,werepreserved. Thiswallwasbuiltof smallerporosstonesthanwereusedforeitherwall M orwallB, andit restedon bedrock. WallA wasfirstdiscovered at a depthof 0.30 m in trenchA; it couldbe tracedin trenchA1 whereit joinedwallB at a 90°angle.l4 In trenchA3,wallA wascutbya vineyard trenchandterminated abruptly. Its preserved widthvariedbetween0.30 and0.40m. Pithosfragments, someofwhicharequitelarge,werefoundin trench A betweenwallsA andB at a depthof 0.35-0.40m andit seemsclear that,as waslikelyin buildingM, pithoihadbeenstoredin the apseof buildingAB.15Otherfragments frompithoithatwereprobably in the apsewerefoundata depthof 0.35-0.40m in thenorthern partof trench A3, in thebalkbetweentrenchesA andA3, andat a depthof 0.20m in trenchA6.IntrenchA6 thesherdswerelyingflat,insidethecurveofwall
................ ,.;
i.
.
.
.
.
X
:
. ...
..
.
................ .................. i
: .. ...............
...........
n__} : ...........
...
348
-
.
...._
............. ..
,
...........................
.
........ .,
SHARON
.
e.;.
;
t
.............................................. .................. , . ,
.i
,
.......
..
)\ ..
........ .....
....
....... v
-.
e
. ... :...
-.
Z ...... ....
...i
- .. -
ch .:
.E \
............ . .......
,
..
t
/ )
R. STOCKER
S
N
vine trench
-H.A.5-
°
z
Stereo(white)
C
Dark coloured soil
m
Burnt red soil
H
Light coloured soil
E
Darkest coZollred soi1
1;
Tops of pithos sherds
lm.
Figure7.Section I,looking west. FromTaylour1973,fig.349
B.Otherfindsfromtheareaofthe apseinclude,in trenchA6,chertflakes and,in trenchA1, threestoneobjectsthatTaylour called"cannon balls.''l6 Garbageappears to havebeendumpednorthof the apseswhilethe buildings wereinuse.Bothcoarsewareandfinewaresherdswerefoundin trenchA6 in soft,blackearthimmediately outsidewallB. Sherds(the majority nonjoining andfromcoarsevessels)werealsofoundoutsidethe apsesin trenchA4. In the southernportionof trenchA andin trenchA1, at a depthof 0.25-0.30m in themainroomofbuildingAB,Taylour foundpithosfragmentsthatwere"carpeted on the floor"(Figs.2, 3, 7).Thesesherdsoutlinedtwohorseshoe-shaped "hearths" thatthemselves werefreeof sherds in theircenters(Fig.8).The openingof the southernmost andbest-preservedhearthfacedsouth.In the hollowed-out centerof the northernmosthearth,Taylour foundburntredearth.Noneof thepithosfragments themselvesshowedevidenceof burning.Slightlybelowthe levelof the hearths,a possiblepebblefloorabuttedthenorthsideof wallA in trench A3 (Figs.2, 9, 10). In trenchA1, northof wallA, Taylourrecovered severalpiecesof an almostcompletehemispherical EH II bowl(P119).Thisvesselmayhave restedonafloorpredating thepossiblepebblefloorofbuilding AB.Coarse sherdsandthreepithosfragments (alldiscarded) foundbelowthehearths mightalsohavebeenassociated withthis earlierfloorlevel.Stereowas reachedat 0.38m. A fragment ofboar'stusk(S12)andbrownandblackchertflakeswere recovered in trenchesA4 andA5,17buttheirprecisefindspotswerenot recorded. Itisthusunclear if theywerefoundinsideoroutsidebuilding AB. HISTORY OF THE SITE Littletimeappears to haveelapsedbetweenthe construction of the later floorin buildingAB andlevelsassociated withbuildingM, sincepottery fromallof thesefindspotsis stylistically identical. It doesseem,however, thatthe sitewasverybrieflyabandoned afterbuildingAB hadbeendestroyed.Especially in trenchA, Taylour foundpatchesof yellowishwhite << ,,. "clay" thathe called"stereo" abovetheremainsof buildingAB*The posi- Tavlour 16.By cannon balls or It1Szrinders. clearthat meant sounders tionof thisstratum is clearlyindicated in hisdiagram of sectionI (Fig.7). ThesethreeobJectswerenot retained. Butcultural material continued to be foundbeneaththisso-calledstereo, 17.Taylour1973,fig.279:3.
DERIZIOTIS
Figure8. Viewof hearths.From Taylour1973,fig.277
Figure9. Viewof possiblepebble floor(upperleft)andpithosfragmentsin trenches A andA3,from northandabove.FromTaylour1973, fig.278
ALONI
349
s
SHARON
35o
R. STOCKER
N
o
I ............ Darkbrownsoil ............
O
TOpsoil
I. : [ight brown to wh ite at base .
lm.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Figure10.SectionII, lookingwest.
andit seemsmostprobable thatthe "clay" hadbeendepositedthrough erosionduringa periodof site abandonment beforethe construction of buildingM. Indeedthelayerof soilfoundbetweenthe stonesof wallM andof wallB (seeabove)alsosuggeststhatthe sitewastemporarily vacated,as do slightdifferences in the orientation of thewallsof buildings M andAB. Becauseof the possibility thatan earlierfloorexistedunder buildingAB,it maybe concluded thatthesitealsohadbeenin usein EH II priorto thefirstapsidalbuildingconstructed there.
FromTaylour1973,fig.350
SMALL FINDS A completecatalogue of the smallfindsrecorded duringexcavation appearsbelow;thefindsallseemto beitemsintendedforhousehold use(see Figs.ll-14).l8 Theyconsistof a stonespoolorpestle(S1),a piercedpot base(S2),a spectaclehandle(S3),a possibleterracotta "button" (S4),a piercedterracotta disk(S5),threeslateroundels(S6, S7, S8), a saddle quern(S9),pounders andgrinders(oneretained, S10),a shaft-holestone axe(Sll), a fragmentof a boar'stusk(S12),andvariouschippedstone flakesandtools(S13-S25).Of thesefinds,severalmayhavebeenusedas spindlewhorls(S2,S5-S8).The terracotta "button" is similarin shapeto EarlyHelladicterracotta sealsbutdoesnotappear to havebeendecorated on its"stamping" surface. Withoneorpossiblytwoexceptions, allof the aboveappearto havebeenmanufactured fromlocallyavailable materials. The onlyartifactthatcandefinitelybe identifiedas animportis a single obsidianflake(S18).It is possiblethatthe stoneusedforthe shaft-hole axe(Sll) wasalsoimported.Bonetoolssuchas awls,scrapers, needles, pins,andknives,whilecommonat Lernain levelsIV andV,werenot foundatDeriziotis Aloni.Remarkable tooistheabsence ofvertically pierced terracotta whorlsof typesthatareabundant at Lernain EH III.19 Artifactsarepresentedandnumbered belowin the orderin which Taylouroriginally classifiedthem;wherecontextual information is available,I havespecifiedthetrenchandlevelinwhicheachobjectwasfound, andthe building,if any,withwhichit canbe associated.20 Objectsare assigned to categories according to thesystemestablished byBanks.2l Measurements, whenavailable, aregivenin centimeters.
18. S3 couldbe anexception,since thereareno parallelsforit andits useis unknown.A"rod"handleoriginally includedbyTaylouramongsmallfinds is listedin the ceramiccatalogueas P121. 19. It is likelythatthe pierceddisk (S5),the slateroundels(S6,S7, S8), andthe piercedEH II potbase(S2) performed the samefunctionas the verticallypiercedwhorls.See Carington Smith1992,p. 682. 20. References to "trench A3/5"are to the combinedareaof trenchesA3 andA5 afterthebalkbetweenthem wasremoved,latein the excavation. Taylourassignedhis owncatalogue numbers("WT"numbers)to many,but not all,of the finds,andin severalinstanceshe gavethe samecatalogue numberto morethanone object.Many smallfindsreceivedChoraMuseum inventorynumbers("CM"numbers), butsomedid not,andhere,too,sometimesmorethanone objecthasthe samenumber. WT andCM numbers arenotedwheretheyexist. 21. Banks1967.
. ern part) level
3 found on "pithos floor" of buildlnz
AB.
DERIZIOTIS ALONI
35I
TERRACOTTA, GROUND STONE,ANDBONE S1 Stonespoolorpestle Figs.11,12 CM 2110;WT 2. Taylour1973,p. 223, fig. 279:14.TrenchA (northern part);level1;buildingM. P.L.max.3.75;p.Diam.max.2.1;p.Diam.min.1.7. Madefromanoff-whitestone,probably limestone.22 Concavecylinder with flatends;surfaces wellsmoothed. Forparallels in terracotta fromEH levelsat Zygouries, see Blegen1928, pp.197-198,pl.XXII:14,16, 17, 18,20. Forshape,cf. examples fromLernain Banks'sPestlecategory(c), mostlyfromLernaIII andIV levels:Banks1967, pp.189-198,pl.81.SeealsoBlegenet al.1973,fig.104:20. S2 Ceramic potbase,centrally pierced(spindlewhorl?) Figs.11,12 CM2104;WT 1.Taylour 1973,p.224,fig.279:6.TrenchA (northern part); level1;buildingM. P.Diam.max.3.2-3.3;p.Th.max.0.9. The underside is concave.Fine,powdery, reddishyellowfabric(5YR7/6). Thesherdis hollowedto a depthof ca.0.2on theupperside. Probably madefroma reusedEH II ringbaselikethoseon thesmallersaucersassociated withtheHouseof theTiles;seeWiencke2000,pp.592-601,603604.S2 sitscomfortably in Banks'sPiercedDisc category(b-2),allexamples of whichweremadefromLernaIII (EH II) ringbases:Banks1967,p. 572.Disks in this categoryweremostprevalentin LernaIV C-D. At Nichoria,EH II baseswerealsocommonly reusedas spindlewhorls;seeCarington Smith1992, table11-2,"Type15"sherdwhorls.ThreepiercedEH II ringbaseswerefoundby M. Rawsonin the Petropoulos soundingson the EnglianosRidge;see Blegen et al.1973,p.64, fig.104:4,6,7. At Deriziotis Aloni(unlikeatNichoria) thereis alittleevidence foranEHII presence (seebelow,Table2). SeealsoP6 andP7,whichappear to be EH II ring basesbutareunpierced. S3 Terracotta spectacle handlewithholeforsuspension Figs.11,12 CM2113;WT7.Taylour 1973,p.224,fig.279:9.Trench A1;surface (center of trench); buildingM? P.L.max.8.95;p.W.max.1.48;p.W.min.1.6;p.Th.min.1.0. Verysoft,lightbrownish grayfabric(2.5Y6/2)witha graycore.Thehandle, brokenatthepointof attachment, variesfromrectangular to square in sectionand terminates in a flatround"ring." CarolZerner(pers.comm.)suggeststhatthisis a"spectacle handle" thatwas attached to therimof abowl.Spectacle handlesarefoundin MH levelsatLerna, butmostexamples arenotthishighorthin.LoophandlesfromMH Prosymna arealsoratherdifferent; seeBlegen1937,pp.381-384,figs.641,647. S4 Terracotta"button"?
Figs.11,12
22.I thankMichael L.Galatyfor CM2109;WT 10.Taylour1973,p.224,fig 279:13a-b. TrenchA1 (northnoungthls.l aylour haddescrlbed the ' ' . v . . asa<< . ,, l ¢ P.H.max.3.1ao.Dlam. max.4.2. ODJect terracotta SpOOl, maaeor | yellowclayandpossibly covered with Grittyfabric; lightreddish brownoutersurface (5YR6/3),blacktodarkbrown anoff-white wash.Galatyalsoprovided core.Piercedtransversely. Sidesconcave. geological identifications forother EHII?Taylour suggested thatthisobjectwasanEHbutton,butnotedthatit stonefindspublished here. is notvertically piercedanddoesnothaveconvexsides.The shapeis reminiscent
f
v
F
Xfi
:)
*X
: :
s*l'l4Sy O
F
sQ
I Q r >
<
o
X
;X D:
=F:;:
'.,8d
N
a
I
z o
f.
. . :.:. . .-::
\ \
.:,
^ ;::l
/:
x
d
lv)
:
1,
s
?l
|
lll:-l -
-
i
DERIZIOTIS
ALONI
353
S3
S2
S1
S5
S4
S6
S10
S8
S7
S12
Sll °
Figure12.SmallfindsS1-S8, Sl>S12
1
_
_
_
l°cm
354
SHARON
R. STOCKER
of someEH III andMH spindlewhorlsfromLerna,butallof thesearepierced vertically (Banks1967,p.545).Closerparallels maybe drawnwithseveralEH II terracotta seals,butno traceof decoration is preserved on its flatsmoothlower surface; cf. CMSV, nos.36,38,40,41,fromLerna;no.501 fromCorinth. S5 Piercedterracotta disk(spindlewhorl?) Figs.11,12 TrenchA1 orA6;surface orvineyard trench. P.Diam.max.7.6;p.Diam.max.of hole0.8;p.Th.min.1.2. Half-preserved. Mediumcoarse,soft,gritty,brightorangefabric(closeto 5YR7/8 butoranger) withblackandwhitestoneinclusions. Roundholein center. S5 fallsintoBanks's PiercedDisccategory(a).Onlythreeexamples of this typewerefoundatLerna:onefromLernaIV D, theothertwounphased. Banks (1967,p. 595) suggeststhatpiercedceramicdisksin bothcategory(a) and(b) wereusedforthe samepurpose,sinceone of the (a)typediskswasfoundwith threeof the(b)type.Claydiskspiercedin themiddlewerealsocommonin MH levelsatAsine;seeFrodinandPersson1938,p. 226.A similarpierceddiskwas foundnorthof thePalaceof Nestorin the Petropoulos soundings; Blegenet al. 1973,p.64, fig.104:5. S6 Grayslateroundel(spindlewhorl?) Figs.11,12 CM2106;WT 5.Taylour 1973,p.223,fig.279:10.TrenchA;level1;buildingM. P.Diam.max.4.9;p.Diam.max.ofholeatinside0.5;p.Diam.max.ofholeat outside1.0;p.Th.max.0.75;p.Th.min.0.68. Piercedcentrally bydrillingfrombothsides. S6 fitsintoBanks's PiercedDisccategory(b):Banks1967,pp.200-211.At Lerna,perforated disksof thissortwereverycommonin EHIII,whentheyseem to havebeenpartof the standard equipment fora household; see Banks1967, p. 689.In contrast to theexamples fromLerna,S6 andS7 fromDeriziotisAloni weredrilledequallyfrombothsides,likethosefoundin MH I levelsatNichoria; cf.Blitzer1992,pp.728,744,pl. 12-203.SeealsoBlegenet al.1973,fig.104:18, fromthePetropoulos soundings. S7 Brownslateroundel(spindlewhorl?) Figs.11,12 CM2106;WT5.Taylour 1973,p.223,fig.279:11.Trench A1;surface; buildingM (apse). P.Diam.max.4.4;p.Diam.min.4.05;p.Diam.max.of holeat inside0.65; p.Diam.max.of holeatoutside1.0;p.Th.min.0.73. Centrally perforated bydrillingfrombothsides. SeeS6 forparallels. S8 Grayslateroundel(spindlewhorl?) Figs.11,12 CM 2108;WT 9. Taylour1973,p. 223, fig.279:12.TrenchA3/5;level3; buildingAB? P.L.max.4.35;p.W.max.3.85;p.Th.min.0.8;p.Diam.max.of hole0.35. Darkgray.Oblong,drilleda fifthof thewaythrough, fromonesideonly. SeeS6 forparallels. S9 Saddlequern Mentioned inTaylour1973,p.223.TrenchA; surface; buildingM. Stone.Not located;apparently discarded.
DERIZIOTIS ALONI
S10 Pounderor grinder
355
Figs. 11, 12
CM 2111;WT 3. Taylour1973,p. 223, fig. 279:15.TrenchA; surface;building M. P.L.max.4.6; p.W. max.4.2; p.Th. max.3.85. Darkbluishpurplestone,probablyhematite.Roughlycubicalin shapewith roundedcorners;veryhardandrough. Five pounders(or grinders)were found and recorded,but only one was retained.Fourwerefoundin the lowestlevelof the site;the smallest(S10)was from the upperlevel.This example,now displayedin the ChoraMuseum,belongsto Banks'sPoundercategory(f-1, Polyhedronshaped),whichincludesexamplesfrom LernaIV andearlyV;Banks1967,pp. 113-143. It andthe othersfromDeriziotis Aloni aremost similarto 23 smallpiecesof hematitefoundat Nichoria,ranging in datefromMH I throughthe DarkAges. S11 Shaft-holestoneaxe
Figs. 11, 12
CM 2112;WT 6.Taylour1973,p. 223, fig.279:16.TrenchA1; surface;building M. P.H.max.5.9;p.L. max.6.1;p.Th. max.2.6; p.Th. min. 1.8;p.Diam.max.of hole 2.0. Lightgreenstone,probablygabbrooramphibolite.Speckled,veryhard.Semismooth circulargrooveon surfaceshowsclearsignsof drilling.Brokenunderneath; and flat on top. Verticallypiercedstone axe-headsfirst appearedin the middle of the EH III sequenceat Lerna,but aremorecommonin MH contexts;see Caskey1986, p. 18. S11 belongsto Lernatype B, with its hole closerto the butt end than to the center;see Banks1967, pp. 106-111. Both subtypesappearat the sametime and areused concurrentlythroughoutthe MH period.Two axesfrom Nichoria, both made of green gabbro,were found in closed MH I deposits;see Blitzer 1992, p. 728. Thereis no evidencefromDeriziotisAloni that S11 was produced locally. S12 Fragmentof boar'stusk
Fig. 12
CM 2107;WT 8. Taylour1973,p. 223, fig. 279:3.TrenchA4 or A5; bottom of level 1; apsidalcurveof buildingAB. P.L.max.4.85;p.W. max.1.05;p.Th. min. 0.73. No hole for attachment. One boar'stuskwasfoundin a MH I levelat Nichoria(Howell1992a,pp.2526). Two otherscomefrommixedMH/LH contexts.
CHIPPEDSTONE
23. See Taylour1973,p. 223, fig.279.
in alllevsplinters" chertand"obsidian recorded Taylour In hisnotebook nor to these, didhe numbers els,buthe usuallydidnotassignindividual oftenrecordtheircontexts.Most artifactsthoughtto be flintwereas2107,andmostthoughtto beobsidian, signedto ChoraMuseumnumber asobsidian, published thatTaylour finds seven of the But to CM 2105.23 onlyoneexampleactuallyis a tertiaryflakeS18 (Figs.13, 14).The refromvariousdarkcherts,mostof whichocmainderweremanufactured curlocally. the kindlyprovided of FloridaStateUniversity WilliamA. Parkinson entries. andcatalogue followingsummary
356
SHARON
R. STOCKER
Thirteenchippedstoneartifacts wereretained(Figs.13, 14). Nine lithicsareretouched, includingfoursickleelements(S13,S14,S15,and S17,whichis alsoanendscraper); a boreror awl(S16);anda bec(S20). Althougha smallnumberof core-reduction flakesarepresent, thereareno primary corticalflakes.Whilethiswouldseemto suggestthattheprocess of corereduction tookplaceelsewhere, it wouldnotbewiseto generalize on thebasisof sucha smallbodyof material. On typological grounds, the assemblage on its ownmeritcouldbe datedto almostanyperiodwithin theAegeanBronzeAge. S13 Blade Figs.13,14 CM2104;WT 1.Taylour1973,p.223,fig.279:7.TrenchA;surface; buildingM. P.L.max.3.82;p.W.max.2.54;p.Th.max.0.48. Distaltrapezoidal bladefragment of homogeneous blue-gray chertpatinated to a spottymilky-white in places.Snapped proximally, withdiscontinuous marginalretouchto rightproximal. Shallowinverseretouched notchon left lateral medial.Brokenalongrightlateral. Verylightsickleglossonleftlateraledge.Sickle element. S14 Denticulate Figs.13,14 CM2105;WT 4.Taylour1973,p.223,fig.279:4.TrenchA;surface; buildingM. P.L.max.3.2;p.W.max.2.0;p.Th.max.0.6. Secondary flakefromrolledcobbleof fractured brownchert(relatively homogeneous). Straight distaltruncation covering invasive retouchon dorsal.Denticulation alongrightlateralbyalternating pressure-flaked notches.Cortical platform.Sickleglossalongdenticulation. Sickleelement. S15 Denticulate Figs.13,14 CM2108;WT 9.Taylour1973,p.223,fig.279:8.Trench balkA5/A6;level unknown; buildingAB. P.L.max.3.25;p.W.max.2.65;p.Th.max.0.6. Secondary flakeof brownfractured chert.Corticated edgewithinverseand directmarginalretouchto left proximalcreatesconvexedge.Sinuouscontinuousdenticulation formedbyalternating notchesalongrightlateral.Sicklesheen alongdenticulated inverseandcovering rightdorsalsurface. Sickleelement. S16 Flake Figs.13,14 CM2107.Taylour1973,p.223,fig.279:1,bottom.Trench,level,andbuildingunknown. P.L.max.2.35;p.W.max.2.71;p.Th.max.1.22. Thicktertiaryflakeof lustrous, homogeneous, chocolate-brown chert.Partialretouchto leftlateral.Straight distaltruncation (retouched). Inversemarginal retouchto rightproximal to formborerorawl. S17 Flake Figs.13,14 CM2107.Taylour1973,p.223,fig.279:1,middle.Trench,level,andbuildingunknown. P.L.max.3.09;p.W.max.1.97;p.Th.max.0.75. Tertiary flakeofcoarsebrownchert.Veryrolledwithcalcium-carbonate con-
D E RI Z I OT I S A L O N I
357
PlainplatAbruptdistaltruncation. Irregular retouchalongrightlateral. cretions. form.Sicklesheenalongrightlateral.Sickleelement;endscraper. Figs.13,14 S18 Flake CM 2105.Taylour1973,p. 223, fig.279:2,left,secondfromtop.Trench, level,andbuildingunknown. P.L.max.1.64;p.W.max.1.86;p.Th.max.0.51. exceptfor Melian).Hydrated of obsidian(probably flakefragment Tertiary retouchto leftlateral.PlatSlightconvexmarginal recentbreak.Brokendistally. crushed. formpartially cores,blades,flakes,andpointswerefoundinMHI levelsatNichoObsidian see Blitzer1992,pp.720, 730-734.Blitzer ria,althoughnot in greatquantity; there. rarecommodity mighthavebeenasomewhat suggests(p.727)thatobsidian therarityof obsidianin thatalsoemphasizes 1999fora discussion SeeParkinson thePylosregionduringtheBronzeAge. Figs.13,14 S19 Flake level,andbuild1973,p.223,fig.279:2,right,top.Trench, CM2105.Taylour ingunknown. P.L.max.2.47;p.W.max.4.0;p.Th.max.0.72. inplaceswithcalcium-carbonate chert.Patinated flakeof crimson Secondary Plainplatform. in hingefracture. Termination onventral. concretions Figs.13,14 S20 Flake asanobsidian 1973,p.223,fig.279:2,left,top(identified CM2105.Taylour Trench,level,andbuildingunknown. splinter). P.L.max.2.69;p.W.max.2.0;p.Th.max.0.35. unhomogeneous brown,fractured, ofreddish flakefragment lamellar Proximal retouch nibbling distally. Discontinuous veins.Snapped chertwithwhitequartzite nibblingretouchto leftlateral(directandinverse)to to rightdistal.Continuous forma becatleftproximal. Fig.14 S21 Flake CM 2105.Taylour1973,p. 223,fig.279:2,right,bottom(identifiedas an Trench,level,andbuildingunknown. obsidiansplinter). P.L.max.2.70;p.W.max.2.22;p.Th.max.0.38. Marginal concretions. flakeof blackchertwithcalcium-carbonate Primary retouchto proximal. Fig.14 S22 Flake CM 2105.Taylour1973,p. 223, fig. 279:2,left,bottom(identifiedas an Trench,level,andbuildingunknown. obsidiansplinter). P.L.max.4.07;p.W.max.2.28;p.Th.max.0.59. concretions. as S20,withcalcium-carbonate flakeof samematerial Tertiary Retouchon leftlateral.Flatplainplatform. Fig.14 S23 Flake asa chertsplinter). 1973,p.223,fig.279:1,top(identified CM2107.Taylour Trench,level,andbuildingunknown. P.L.max.4.27;p.W.max.2.11;p.Th.max.0.69. Plain concretions. chertwithcalcium-carbonate flakeofbrown-gray Secondary nodule. Struckfromtabular platform.
S13
S17
358
SHARON
R. STOCKER
S14
S15
_
S18
\
S20
Sl9 0
_
1
_
5,
Icm
Figure13.ChippedstoneS13-S20. J.F.Cherry,R.J. Robertson
_
,cm
359
D E RI Z I OT I S A LON I
S14
S15
S13
S18
S16
S17
Sl9
S20
S21
S25
S23
O Figure14.ChippedstoneS13-S25
1
5
360
S24 Flake
SHARON
R. STOCKER
Fig. 14
CM 2105.Taylour1973,p. 223, fig. 279:2,left, secondfrombottom(identified as an obsidiansplinter).Trench,level,andbuildingunknown. P.L.max.1.55;p.W. max.2.64;p.Th. max.0.71. Tertiaryflakeof darkgraystriatedchert.Platformcrushed. S25 Flake
Fig. 14
CM 2105.Taylour1973,p. 223, fig.279:2,right,secondfrombottom.Trench, level,andbuildingunknown. P.L.max.2.17;p.W. max.2.41; p.Th. max.0.58. Tertiaryflakeof purplishbrownsemitranslucent chert.Plainplatform.Distal obliquelysnapped.
POTTERY
A majordifficulty forthestudyof EHIII/MHceramics is thelackofuniformityinceramic terminology. Ceramics haveoftenbeendefinedinterms of theirware,yetfewscholars haveprovided anexactdefinitionofwhatis meantbythisterm.24 Thispractice invariably resultsin aninadequate classificatory system,onein whicha "ware" is composedof a numberof variablesandonevesselcanbelongto severaldifferent wares.25 Furtherdifficultiesarisebecausethe sametermshavebeenusedto describedifferent ceramictypesanddifferenttermshavebeenusedto describethe same ceramic types."Adriatic ware," "Herringbone ware," and"Incised ware" are allusedto designatepotterythathascoarseincisionson theexteriorsurface.Theterm"Minyan ware"normally refersto a distinctgroupof MH wheelmade vesselswith"abiscuitandsurface whichwerefiredgraythroughout"andwithfinelyburnished surfaces thatusuallyhavea "soapy" feel.26 Howell,however, usesthe term"Minyan ware"to describea categoryof potteryatNichoriathatis simplydarkin colorwitha polishedsurface.27 In anattemptto avoidfurtherconfusion, I havetherefore resistedthe urgeto definetheceramics fromDeriziotisAloniin termsofwares.I have insteadgroupedthesmallbodyof potteryintoceramicclasses thataredefinedsolelyin termsof surfacefinish.28 Theclassesarenotintendedto be hardandfastcategories; theydo not andarenot meantto correspond to categories, wares,andclassesfoundin the northeastern Peloponnese and centralGreece. The classesI havedefinedincludeDarkBurnished (probably correspondingwithwhatHowellat NichoriacallslocalMinyanware),Dark Burnished andBlackCoated,BlackCoated, YellowSlipped, Incised,Raised Decoration, FineGrayUnburnished, FineUndecorated, andCoarseUndecorated (Table1). The DarkBurnishedclassof potteryis the best-represented decoratedclassin thepreserved ceramic assemblage; surfaces areusuallyhighly burnishedandvaryin colorbetweenblack,darkbrown,anddarkgray. Fabriccoloris not uniformthroughout the fracture. Twenty-twoof as manyas35 catalogue entriesin thisclasshavea finefabric.Oftheremaining 13,onlyfivearecoarse.Regularstriations leftby theburnishing tool
24. Among the most significant examplesof classificationby ware are Wace and Blegen 1918; Blegen 1921, 1928; Frodin and Persson1938; Caskey 1960; Saflund1965; Frenchand French 1971. The classificationof vessels by shape is an alternativesystem employed by Goldman 1931; Kunze 1934; Muller 1938; Caskey 1960; French 1972. 25. For example,Incised ware, becauseit is made from coarseunlevigated clay,can also be classifiedas coarseware in most schemes;see Rutter 1995, pp. 11-29. 26. Zerner 1978, p.135. See also Forsdyke1914, pp. 129-130, who was the first systematicallyto discussMinyan ware. 27. Howell 1992b, p. 43. He acknowledgesthat "apuristmight object that the fabricsdescribedhere as Minyan do not correspondexactlywith the traditionalMinyan fabricsin the NE Peloponneseand centralGreece." 28. Problemsof classificationof Early Bronze Age pottery have now been discussedin considerablymore detail by Rutter(1995, pp. 11-13), who opts for a system of typology based on classesof pottery in which surface treatmentis one importantattribute.
DERIZIOTIS
36I
ALONI
TABLE 1. CERAMIC CLASSES REPRESENTED Class
CatalogueNumber
DarkBurnished
P5,P9,P13,P14,P16,P20,P43,P52,P53,P61,P78, P79(?),P80,P81,P83(?),P84(?),P86,P98,P102,P106, PlO9,P124(?),P125,P126,P127,P131(?),P143,P150, P164,P165,P177,P178,P181,P183,P184
DarkBurnishedand BlackCoated
P2,P3,P4,P34,P42,P51,P58,P68,P69,P70,P77, P82,P87,P96(?),P121(?),P122(?),P123,P133,P134, P135,P136,P137,P146,P170
BlackCoated
P55,P90(?),P95(?),P97(?),P144,P153(?),P179, P188(?),P189(?)
YellowSlipped
P21(?),P26(?)
Incised
P12,P39,P66,P182
RaisedDecoration
P28,P30,P32,P46,P114(?),P115(?),P138,P139, P140,P154,P155,P156,P161,P163,P172(?),Pl9l
FineGrayUnburnished P37,P54,P103,P104,P148
rather 29. I callthe paint"glossy" because,as CarolZerner than"lustrous" pointedout to me,the term"lustrous paint"is betterreservedfora specific IV-V andMH LernaTransitional ceramicware. 30. Indeed,the blackcoatingwas not detecteduntilafterthe sherdswere washedin 1995.
FineUndecorated
Pl,PlO,Pll,P15,P18,P44,P45,P59,P62,P63,P64, P65,P71,P76,P89,P91,P99,PlOl,P105,P107,P120, P129,P130,P147,P149,P151,P160,P175,P185, P187,P190
CoarseUndecorated
Pl9,P22,P23,P24,P27,P29,P31,P33,P36,P38,P40, P41,P47,P48,P49,P50,P56,P57,P60,P67,P72,P73, P74,P75,P85,P88,P92,P93,P94,PlOO,P108,PllO, Plll,P112,P113,P116,P117,P118,P128,P132, P141,P145,P152,P157,P158,P159,P162,P166, P167,P168,P169,P171,P173,P174,P176,P186
of somesherds.It wouldbepossibleto mistake areevidentonthesurfaces theselinesforwheelmarksexceptthattheyoccurontopoftheburnishing. shapesin the DarkBurnishedclassarecups/ The best-represented bowls(P9,Figs.15, 16;P80,Figs.20, 21; P124,Fig.24;P125,Fig.24; P126,Fig.24;P143,Figs.23, 25).P43 (Figs.18, 19),P83 (Fig.20), and fabricconsisin surfacetreatment, P102 (Fig.22) arejars.Similarities catalogued individually suggestthatseveral tency,color,andwallthickness sherdsbelongto the samevessel. andBlackCoatedclassaredecorated Sherdsin the DarkBurnished Oftenonlyslighttracesof the black with glossyblackpaintor a slip.29 As in the makingit difficultto detect.30 coatingremainon the surfaces, class,surfacecolorvariesbetweenblack,darkgray,and DarkBurnished surfaceis red.In the darkbrown.In onecase(P2,Fig.15) theburnished asif theblackcoating andBlackCoatedclass,it appears DarkBurnished beenburnished. wasappliedto the surfaceof thepot afterit hadalready enandBlackCoatedcatalogue Thereareasmanyas24 DarkBurnished in fabriccolorandwallthicknesssuggestthatmostof tries.Similarities thesesherdsalsocomefromjusta fewpots.Again,cup/bowlis thebestbehandlethatprobably shape.P121(Figs.22,23) is a "rod" represented longedto a cuporbowl.
362
SHARON
R. STOCKER
The BlackCoatedclassis represented by ninecertainor probable examples, mostofwhicharefinebodysherds.In thiscasetheglossyblack coatingwasapplieddirectlyto anuntreated surfaceandit is oftendifficult to detect.It is likelythatseveralsherdsbelongto the samevessel.For example, P179,P188, andP189 allhavesimilar wallthicknesses andfabriccolors. Thereareonlytwopossibleexamples in the catalogue of theYellow Slippedclass.Oneoftheseis alargecoarse jarfragment (P21,Fig.15),the other,a finebroadstraphandlefragment(P26, Fig. 17). Bothof these piecesappearto havea yellowishwhitecoatingon the interiorandexteriorsurfaces. It is alsopossiblethatthiscoatingis adhered earth,although it didnotwashawaywithwater. Fourbodyfragments in the DeriziotisAloniassemblage aredecoratedwithincisionson the exteriorsurface. Thesecomprisethe Incised class.Threeof thesehavea coarsefabricandcomefromunknownshapes; the one finefragment(P66, Figs.20, 21) is froma broadverticalstrap handlethatprobably belongedto a cuporbowl.Coarsevesselsdecorated withincisionarecharacteristic of laterEH III andMH ceramicassemblages.3l
Ceramics intheRaisedDecoration classhaveeitherraisedplasticbands with decoration or raisedprotrusions. All the examplesfromDeriziotis Aloniinthisclasshavea coarsefabric.Thirteen ofthe16catalogue entries belongto pithoithathaddecorative bandson theirshoulders or necks. Ninearedecorated withropepatterns(P30, Fig. 19;P138;P139;P140; P154, Fig.25;Pl91 UoiningP155], Figs.25,26;P156;P161), onewitha connected C pattern(P28,Figs.16,17).P46 (Figs.18,19)is ajarthathas tworaiseddecorative knobson the shoulder. Therearefivecatalogue entriesin the FineGrayUnburnished class (P37, Fig. 17;P54, Figs.18,19;P103, Fig.22; P104;P148). All havea fine,oftenpowdery, fabricthatis uniformly grayatthesurfaces andin the core.Severalsherdsof thistypehavealsobeenidentifiedamongthosein thesurfacecollections of PRAP.Thisclassof fabricdoesnotappearto be foundin LernaIV levels,butZernermentionsa similarsoftgrayfabricas a categoryof GrayMinyanfromLernaTransitional IV-V levels.32 The FineUndecorated classcomprisespiecesthathaveno surface decoration andhavea fineto mediumfinefabric.The majority of these fragments arebodysherds.Cup/bowlis themostcommonshape(e.g.,P1, Figs.15,16;P44, Fig.18;P45, Fig.18).P120 (Figs.22,23)is arodhandle that probablybelonged to a cup or bowl. A possible jug (P64, Fig.19) andthreejars(P59;P65, Figs.19, 20;P160) arealsorepresented. TheCoarseUndecorated classincludescookingpots,storage jars,and pithoi(56 entries).Jarsarethe best-represented shapein the preserved assemblage. Elevenof 17 jarshavea mediumcoarsefabricwith either stoneor groginclusions. The cookingpots (eightexamples) oftenhave variegated, sometimes smoothed surfaces, largeinclusions, andthickwalls. Theyareall handmade andirregular in form.Manyareunevenlyfired. The varietyof pithosfragments suggeststhatwellovera dozenof these 31. See Rutterl99S, pp.445,632vesselswerepresentat the site.Crescentlug handlesfromlargeclosed 634. shapesof thiscategoryareparticularly distinctive of theDeriziotisAloni 32. Zerner1978,p. 136.See also assemblage. Rutter1983,p. 329,n. 6; l99S, p. 23.
DERIZIOTIS
ALONI
363
Thefragmentary natureof thepotteryfromDeriziotisAlonimakesit difficultto assignmostsherdsto a specificshape.Completeornearlycompleteprofilesarepreserved foronlytwovessels,Pll9 (Figs.22, 23) and P123(Figs.23, 24).Twohandleprofilesarecomplete,P9 (Figs.15, 16) andP103(Fig.22), bothverticalstraphandlesthatarecharacteristic of EH IIIthroughMH I cups,bowls,tankards, andkantharoi. P9 andP103 wereattached to shoulders of vessels,P103justbelowtherim.P153(Fig. 25) is a completeflatbase.Therestof theassemblage, excluding pithoi,is primarily composedof smallrim,handle,base,andbodyfragments. The mostdistinctive featuresof the DeriziotisAloniassemblage are tall flaringevertedrimsandroundedshouldersthat resembleEH III kantharoi andBassbowlsfromLerna.33 By the earlyMiddleHelladic, rimsat Lernawereshorterandprofilesmoreangular. As notedabove, crescentlug handlesprobably belongingto largecoarsestoragejarsare alsocommonin the assemblage. One example(P57,Figs.18, 19) preservesa pegthatwasusedto affixthehandleto thevessel.Lughandlesof thistypeappearfirstin phase3 of LernaIV.34 Howellnotesexamples of crescent lughandleswithpegattachments in theearliestBronzeAgelevelsatNichoria; crescent lughandlesseemto go outof fashiontherebythe endofMH I.35The"rod" handles,P120andP121(Figs.22,23),alsohave closeparallels in NichoriagroupsA, B, andc.36Thesetoopointto a date latein theEarlyBronzeAgeorveryearlyin theMiddleBronzeAge.37 On balanceoneshouldassigntheceramicassemblages associated withbuildingsAB andM to a stageverylatein theEH IIIperiod.38 Onlyfiveexamples fromDeriziotisAloniclearlyresemble EHII potteryas it is knownin MesseniaandElis (Table2): S2 (Figs.11, 12),P6 (Fig.16), P7 (Figs.15, 16),P35 (Figs.17, 19),P119 (Figs.22, 23);S4 (Figs.11, 12) andP180arepossibleadditional examples. Threeof these (S2,P6,P7) areprobably EH II ringbases,oneof whichis likelyto have beenreusedasa spindlewhorl.39 P35is a pedestaled baseof thetypeassociatedwith saucersandsauceboats of LernaIII. P119,a well-preserved hemispherical bowl,findsa closeparallel in thesaucers fromtheHouseof 33. See Rutter1986,pp.48-49. Forkantharoi, see Rutter1995,p. 44, ill. C-5;pp.348-354.ForBassbowls, seep. 45, ill. C-6;pp.354-376.It is worthnotingthathandlessuchasP9, P103,P122,andP143,if originating fromshoulder-handled bowls(Bass bowls,RuttershapeXII.2),arenot foundat Lernauntilphase3 of Lerna IV,an advancedstageof EH III. 34. Rutter1995,p. 63. 35. Howell1992b,p. 65. 36. See Howell1992b,figs.3-10, 3-11,3-12 (groupC Minyanshapes). An examplefromEutresiscitedby Taylouris not a closeparallel.A "rod" handlefromthe earliestMH tumulus at Voidokoilia maybe similarto the two examplesfromDeriziotisAloni butit is not illustrated (Korres1990,
p. 7).This typeof handleoccursin EH III,transitional EH/MH, and MH I assemblages (Zerner,pers. comm.).Zerner(1978)mentionsthree thatwerefoundin earlyMH levels (periodVA)at Lerna.One is in Gray Minyanfabric,the othertwo areMattPainted(D602/1 [p.64], D594/9-10 [p.71], respectively). Examplesfrom Nichoria(Howell1992b,p. 47) include P2086in groupB, whichcomesfroma bowlwithan evertedrimanda handle thatrisesaboveits rim;seeP2176for the sameshape,andP2177,alsofrom groupC, forthe samefabric.At Lefkandithishandletypeappearsin EH III andthe earliestMH levels (Howell1992b,p.47), andat Orchomenosin MH I levels(Kunze1934, pl.EX:4c, d, e). Dividedhandles
madeof two andthreerodsof clay appearto existalreadyin LernaIII;see Wiencke2000,p. 532, fig.II.73. 37. Howellwasthe firstscholarto suggesta dateforthe findsfromDeriziotisAlonithatis basedon andsupportedby the findsfroma stratified excavation, Nichoria(Howell1992b, pp.73, 81, n. 61).Thereare,however, someproblemsassociated withthe datethatHowellassignsto the material thathe usesforcomparison, i.e., group A andearlygroupC, sincegroupA appearsto be EH III in date(cf.Pullen 1993,p. 39;Rutter1993,p. 773). 38. C£ Rutter2001,p. 150,where he citesmyM.A. thesis(Stocker1995). 39. See discussionof S2 in catalogue,above.
364
SHARON
R. STOCKER
TABLE 2. ARTIFACTS OF PERIODS EARLIER AND LATER THAN PRINCIPAL PHASE OF OCCUPATION Period
Catalogue Sumber
EarlyHelladicII
S2, S4(?),P6, P7, P35,P119,P180(?)
LateHelladic
P8, P17,P142
Modern
P25(?)
theTilesphaseof LernaIII. Standard EH II shapessuchas sauceboats andfruitstands werenotdefinitely attested,norwasUrfirnisware.Forsen hasnotedthatpithoiwithraised"taenia" bands,likethosefromDeriziotis Aloni(e.g.,P154,Fig.25), arecommonin EH II,buttheyarealsocommonin EH III andtheMH period.40 Onlythreeprehistoric sherds(P8,Fig.15;P17;P142,Fig.23) from the excavation areclearlylaterin datethanthebeginningof theMiddle BronzeAgeandthesepresumably represent reuseofthesiteinMycenaean times.41 Onepithossherd(P25)maybe modern. The potteryfromthe siteis presented belowin the orderof thebag numbersassignedbyTaylourduringhis excavation. I havearbitrarily assignedsequencenumbers. Muchof the potterywas"papsed" (i.e.,discarded)soonafterexcavation. Unlessnotedotherwise,all sherdsdateto theprincipal periodof occupation atDeriziotisAloni,i.e.,lateEHIII.All dimensions arein centimeters. The drawings andphotographs of pottery arepresented in theorderin whichtheyappearin thecatalogue. CATALO GUE P1 Cuporbowl Figs.15,16 Bag1-1.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurfacelevel. Diam.13.0;H. 6.9;Th. of rim0.6;Th. of shoulder 0.9. FineUndecorated class.Twojoiningrim,neck,andshoulder fragments. Wide evertedrimthatthickenstowardshoulder. Mediumfine,powderyfabricwith lightyellowishbrowncore(1OYR 6/4).Reddishyellownearsurface(5YR6/8).42 Smallblackstoneinclusions. Unevenlyfired.Smoothedsurfaces.
P2 Jar
Fig. 15
Bag1-2.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurface level. Diam.18.0;H. 4.0;Th. of rim0.4;Th.of neck0.6. DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass.Twojoiningrimandneckfragments.Tallflarirlg evertedrim.Mediumfinebrownfabricandcore(1OYR 4/3) withdarkredlayer(2.5YR4/8)justbelowbrownsurface. Smallblackstoneinclusions.Burnished surfaces withtracesof glossyblackcoatingoninteriorandexte-
40. Forsen1992,p. 99. 41. In surfacecollectionby PRAP fourdifferenttractscoveredthe areaof DeriziotisAloni(B92-124,B92-125, rior. B92-126,andB92-128).Noneof these P3 Cuporbowl Fig.15 yieldedpotteryof EH orMH date.In tractB92-124,however,therewere Bag1-3.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurfacelevel. findsof LateHelladicdate. Diam.20.5;H. 4.9;Th.of rim0.5;Th. of shoulder 0.6. 42.The expression "nearsurface" DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass.Twojoiningrim,neck,andshoulder refersto the zoneof the fabricjust fragments. Evertedrimthatthickensslightlytowardshoulder. Finelightyellow- beneaththe surface.
365
DERIZIOTIS ALONI
ish brownfabric(1OYR6/4). Smoothblacksurfaces, highlyburnished. Regular marksfromburnishing toolvisibleonexterior surface. Tracesofglossyblackcoatng overDurnlshlng on lnterlorancexterzor. Similarto P4,butwiththickerwalls. .
.
..
.
.
.
P4 Cuporbowl Bag1-4.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurface level. H. 2.2;Th. of rim0.3;Th. of shoulder 0.7. DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass.Twojoiningrimandneckfragments.Thinevertedrimthatthickenstowardshoulder. Finepalebrownfabric (1OYR6/3). Biscuitis red(2.5YR6/8) nearsurfaces. Smoothhighlyburnished surfaces. Tracesof glossyblackcoatingon interiorandexterior. Similarto P3,butwiththinnerwalls. P5 Shapeunknown Figs.15,16 Bag1-5.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurface level. Diam.3.0;p.Diam.max.of hole1.0;H. 5.0;Th.of wall1.2-1.4. DarkBurnished class.Probably a spout,butperhaps apedestaled stemorrim with smallthickstraphandlefragment. Flaringat bothends.Finefabricwith lightbrownish graycore(1OYR 6/2) andthinreddishyellowto redlayer(7.5YR 6/6-2.5YR5/6) nearblacksurfaces. Probably burnt.Burnished exteriorsurface, smoothedinterior. P6 Saucerorcup Fig.16 Bag1-6.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurfacelevel. Diam.4.9. Completeslightlyraisedbase.Probably intendedto be reusedas a spindle whorlbutunfinished. No traceof wallspreserved. Fine,powdery, whitefabric (7.5YR8/1),reddishyellownearsurfaces (7.5YR8/6). EH II. Cf. Koumouzelis 1980,p. 64, fig.6:5 (fine,soft,pinkishwhiteand reddishyellowfabricfoundat Strephiin EH II levels). P7 Sauceboat orsaucer Figs.15,16 Bag1-7.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurface level. Diam.3.5. Completeringbase.Probably intendedto be reusedas a spindlewhorlbut unfinished. All tracesof wallshavebeenwornorsmoothedaway.Fine,powdery, reddishyellowfabric(7.5YR7/6). EH II. Cf.Koumouzelis 1980,p. 64,fig.6:9(ringbasefromshallowbowl). P8 Kylix Fig.15 Bag1-8.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurface level. H. 4.9. Stemandfoot.Fine,hard,reddish yellowfabric(5YR7/6)withpinkishgray core(7.5YR7/2). LH IIIA/B. P9 Cuporbowl Figs.15,16 Bag1-9.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurfacelevel. H. 6.3;W. of handleat top3.2;W. atbase4.7;Th.0.5.
366
SHARON
R. STOCKER
P5
P1
'I _l'
P2
,2
vs P8
/
'_
P3
<
/,
}X,< P12
0 1 _,_
_
_
_
P21 _
10
P9
t
cm
Figure15.PotteryP1-P21,selection. R.J. Robertson, J. L. Davis
DERIZIOTIS
367
ALONI
P6 P5 (ext.)
P5 (int*)
P1
P7
P12
p9
P22
P29
P28
Figure16.PotteryP1-P29,selection
0-s
1
cm 10
368
SHARON
R. STOCKER
DarkBurnished class.Completeverticalstraphandlewithrounded profile. Attachments at shoulderof vessel.Fineverypalebrowncoreandfabric(1OYR 7/4);yellowishredlayerjustbelowsurface(5YR5/8). Evenlyburnished black surfaces. Fingersmoothed. Handleshapesimilarto P10, P11, P15, P16, P26. Cf. Howell 1992b, p. 88, fig. 3-6, pl. 3-5 (similarin fabricandshapeto P2120,butprofilemore rounded). P10 Shapeunknown Bag1-10.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurface level. P.W.3.6;Th. 0.6. FineUndecorated class.Twojoiningfragments ofabroadstraphandle. Handle is rectangular in section.Fineverypalebrownfabric(1OYR7/3).Plainreddish yellowsurfaces (5YR6/8).Smallinclusions. Handleshapesimilarto P9,P11,P15,P16,P26. P11 Shapeunknown Bag1-11.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurface level. W.3.9;W.atbase5.5;Th.0.7. FineUndecorated class.Broadverticalstraphandlefragment. Upperattachment.Finelightbrownish grayfabric(2.5Y6/2);surface colorispalebrown(1OYR 6/3). Handleshapesimilarto P9,P10,P15,P16,P26. P12 Closedshape Figs.15,16 Bag1-12.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurface level. Th.0.8. Incised class. Twojoiningbodyfragments. Coarse fabric withdarkgrayish brown core(1OYR 4/2).Brownish toredexterior surface, lightbrowninterior. Stoneinclusions.Unevenly fired.Onehorizontal andfourobliqueincisedlinesonexterior. Cutsareshallower thanon P39. P13 Openshape Bag1-13.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurfacelevel. Th.0.5-0.6. DarkBurnished class.Bodyfragment; shoulder? Finefabricwithverypale browncore(1OYR 7/3),brownish yellownearsurface(1OYR 6/6).Smallorange groginclusions. Highlyburnished brownexterior andblackinteriorsurfaces. P14 Openshape Bag1-14.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurfacelevel. Th. 0.4-0.5. DarkBurnished class.Bodyfragment. Finepalebrownfabric(1OYR6/3). Highlyburnished browninteriorandexterior surfaces. P15 Shapeunknown Bag1-15.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurfacelevel. W. atbaseof handle4.8;Th. of handle0.5;Th. ofwallof vessel0.5. FineUndecorated class.Baseof verywidestraphandle.Fine,hard,reddish yellowfabric(5YR6/8)withgraycore(1OYR 6/1). Handleshapesimilarto P9,P10,P11,P16,P26.
DERIZIOTIS
ALONI
369
P16 Shapeunknown Bag 1-16. TrenchesA, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5; fromsurfacelevel. W. 3.3;Th. 0.6. DarkBurnishedclass.Smallverticalstraphandlefragment.Fine reddishyellow fabric(5YR 6/6) with thin pale yellow core (2.5Y 7/4). Highly burnished blacksurfaces.Handleshapesimilarto P9, P10, P11, P15, P26. P17 Shapeunknown Bag 1-17. TrenchesA, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5; fromsurfacelevel. P.L.4.0;W. 3.75;Th. 1.4. Thickverticalstraphandlefragment.Coarse,gritty,reddishfabricwith variegatedcore (1OR5/8-1OYR6/4). Fabricuniquein DeriziotisAloni assemblage. Smallstoneinclusions,perhapssandtemper. LH II? P18 Shapeunknown Bag 1-18. TrenchesA, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5; fromsurfacelevel. P.L.3.8;W. 2.2;Th. 0.9. Fine Undecoratedclass.Fragmentof smallverticalstraphandle.Fine light yellowishbrownfabric(1OYR6/4), yellowishrednearsurfaces(5YR5/8). P19 Jar Bag 1-19. TrenchesA, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5; fromsurfacelevel. Th.0.7-1.0. CoarseUndecoratedclass.Bodyfragment,unusuallythick.Coarse,cracked, redto darkbrownishblackfabric(1OYR3/2-2.5YR 5/6), variegatedreddishsurfaces.43Stoneinclusions.Unevenlyfired.Smoothedinteriorandexteriorsurfaces. P20 Open shape Bag 1-20. TrenchesA, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5; fromsurfacelevel. Th. 0.45. DarkBurnishedclass.Twojoiningbodyfragments.Fine reddishyellowfabric and core(7.5YR6/6). Highlyburnishedblacksurfaces.Slipped? P21 Storagejar
Fig. 15
Bag 1-21. TrenchesA, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5; fromsurfacelevel. P.Diam.max.at neck 14.0;Th. at neck 1.05;Th. at shoulder0.9. YellowSlippedclass?Shoulderand neck fragment.Coarselight yellowish brownfabric(1OYR6/4) with grayto blackcore.Stone andgroginclusions.Unevenlyfired.Yellowishwhite slip(?)on interiorand exteriorsurfaces. P22 Storagejar
Fig. 16
Bag 1-22. TrenchesA, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5; fromsurfacelevel. H. of handle4.1;W. of handlenearwall 8.1;W. higherup 7.1. CoarseUndecoratedclass.Roundbelly handleand body fragmentof large coarsevessel,handlenot complete.Coarse,soft, reddishyellowfabric(5YR 7/6) with a pinkishgraycore (7.5YR 7/2). Grog inclusions.Deep finger-groovebetweenhandleattachments. 43.Theuseoftheword"cracked" hereandelsewhereto describea fabric refersto cracksthatareprobably the resultof clayshrinkage.
P23 Pithos Bag 1-23. TrenchesA, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5; fromsurfacelevel. P.Th.of rim at top 5.5-6.2.
i Fig.17
37o
SHARON
R. STOCKER
CoarseUndecorated class.Twojoiningfragments of a flatrim.Coarsevery palebrown(1OYR7/4) to darkbrownfabric,reddishyellownearsurfaces (5YR 6/8-7/8).Blackstoneinclusions. Similarto P27. P24 Pithos Fig.17 Bag1-24.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurfacelevel. P.H.4.25. CoarseUndecorated class.Rimfragment. Topandexterior surfaces preserved. Uniformcoarseredfabric(2.5YR6/8).Largetangrogandstoneinclusions. P25 Pithos Fig.17 Bag1-25.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurfacelevel. P.H.5.4;Th. 3.5. Rounded rim.Coarsereddish yellowfabric(5YR7/8 butoranger). Blue-gray core,tansurfaces. Stoneandgroginclusions. Veryhardfired.Fingersmoothing marksorwheelmarkson interiorsurface? Modern? P26 Shapeunknown Fig.17 Bag1-26.Trenches A, A1,A2,A3,A4,A5;fromsurface level. P.W.3.25;est.W.3.7;Th.0.4-0.6. YellowSlippedclass?Broadstraphandlefragment. Finelightyellowish brown fabric(1OYR 6/4).Yellowish slipon interiorandexterior surfaces? Handleshapesimilarto P9,P10,P11,P15,P16. P27 Pithos Bag2-1.TrenchA;level1, at20 cm. P.W.max.of rim7.9;Th. of wall4.7. CoarseUndecorated class.Rim fragment.Profilenot preserved. Coarse, cracked, palebrownfabric(1OYR 6/3),rednearsurfaces (2.5YR6/8).Largestone inclusions. Smoothedsurfaces. Similarto P23. P28 Pithos Figs.16,17 Bag2-2.TrenchA;level1, at20 cm. P.H.9.6;Th. 3.4. Raised Decoration class.Shoulder fragment. Coarse redfabric (2.5YR6/8).Large tangroginclusions. Raisedplastic bandwithconnected C pattern onshoulder. P29 Pithos Fig.16 Bag2-3.TrenchA;level1, at20 cm. Diam.16.0-17.0;H. 7.5;Th.of base2.6;Th.of wall1.8. CoarseUndecorated class.Raisedbase.Coarselightyellowishbrownfabric (1OYR 6/4),redsurfaces (2.5YR6/8).Redgroginclusions. P30 Pithos Fig.19 Bag2-4.TrenchA;level1, at20 cm. P.H.8.5;p.W.8.1. RaisedDecoration class.Shoulder fragment. Coarse, cracked, redfabric(2.5YR 6/8).Largegroginclusions. Raisedplasticbandwithropepatterndecoration.
-
S ALONI
DERIZIOTI
37I
/ l
P25
P24
]
/
P23
_' P26
1/
l
P34
P35
j /
P33
P37
/ 0 l -
Figure17.PotteryP23-P37, selection.R. J. Robertson,J. L. Davis
-
1 -
-
-
-
-
10
cm
{I
372
SHARON
R. STOCKER
P31 Pithos Bag2-5.TrenchA;level1, at20 cm. CoarseUndecorated class.Rimfragment. Rimthinnerthanothers.Coarse redfabric(2.5YR6/8).Largetangroginclusions. P32 Pithos Fig.19 Bag2-6.TrenchA;level1, at20 cm. P.H.11.6;p.W.11.5. RaisedDecoration class.Shoulder fragment. Coarseredfabric(2.5YR6/8). Largegrogandstoneinclusions. Raisedplasticbandwithdecoration onshoulder. P33 Largestorage jar Fig.17 Bag2-7.TrenchA;level1, at20 cm. P.L.11.0;W.5.8;Th. attip0.8;Th. atbase2.0. CoarseUndecorated class.Handleattachment andpartof piercedcrescent lughandle.Mediumcoarsefabric. P34 Cuporbowl Figs.17,19 Bag3-1.Trenches A, A3;level2, below20 cm. Diam.16.0;H.5.1;Th. atrim0.4;Th. at shoulder 0.65. DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass.Rimandneckfragment. Thin,wide, flaring,evertedrimthatthickensas it descends.Fine,powdery, reddishyellow fabric(7.5YR6/6).Smallwhiteandblackstoneinclusions. Muchof surface worn away;remaining surfaceareasaredarkbrown,highlyburnished. Tracesof glossy blackcoatingon interiorandexterior surfaces. JoinsP82. P35 Sauceboat orsaucer? Figs.17,19 Bag3-2.Trenches A, A3;level2, below20 cm. Diam.atbase4.8;Diam.attopof base3.6;H. 1.9;Th.0.6. Twojoiningfragments of a pedestaled base.Profileofbaseis complete. Fine, soft,powdery, pinkfabric(5YR7/4),blue-gray core. EH II. Fabriclikethatof saucerfragmentP3784fromAyiosDhimitrios; Zachos1987,p.223,fig.41.Cf.alsoKoumouzelis 1980,p.65;forshape,fig.8 3. P36 Jar Bag3-3.Trenches A, A3;level2, below20 cm. Th.0.7. CoarseUndecorated class.Lowerstraphandleattachment andbodyfragment.Mediumcoarseredfabric(2.5YR5/6)withdarkgraycore(1OYR 4/1) and blacksurfaces. Redstoneinclusions. P37 Cup Fig.17 Bag3-4.Trenches A, A3;level2, below20 cm. Diam.15.0;H.3.1;Th. atrim0.4;Th.belowrim0.5. FineGrayUnburnished class.Rimfragment. Rimthickens veryslightlyasit descends. Fine,soft,grayfabric(5Y6/1) withblue-gray core.Smallblackstone inclusions. Burnt? P38 Jar Bag3-5.Trenches A, A3;level2, below20 cm. Th.0.85.
DERIZIOTIS
ALONI
373
and bellyhandleattachment class.Ovalor triangular CoarseUndecorated hard, Mediumcoarse, Thickfingerridgewherehandleis attached. bodyfragment. gritty,yellowishredfabric(5YR5/8) withpalebrowncore(1OYR6/3). Black smoothingmarksvisSmoothedinteriorandexteriorsurfaces; stoneinclusions. interior. ibleon P39 Shapeunknown A, A3;level2, below20 cm. Bag3-6.Trenches Th.0.85. brownish black gritty,crumbly, Mediumcoarse, Incisedclass.Bodyfragment. (5YR5/8). coreandyellowishredsurfaces fabricwithblack,almostcharcoal-like, surface. Unevenlyfired.Threedeepwideincisionson exterior Sandtemper. Cutsaredeeperthanon P12. P40 Jar A, A3;level2, below20 cm. Bag3-7.Trenches Th.0.8. class.Baseof verticalovalhandleandbodyfragment. CoarseUndecorated 6/4).Largegraystone verycoarse,lightyellowishbrownfabric(1OYR Uniform, inclusions. Fig.19 P41 Shapeunknown A, A3;level2, below20 cm. Bag3-8.Trenches P.L.7.8;W. 5.0;Th. atcenter1.15;Th. atedge0.7. class.Wide straphandlefragment.Mediumcoarse CoarseUndecorated reddishyellowfabric(5YR6/8), reddishyellowsurfaces(5YR7/6).Tangrog .
s
-
lncluslons.
P42 Shapeunknown A, A3;level2, below20 cm. Bag3-9.Trenches Th.0.44.5. Finelightyellowish andBlackCoatedclass.Bodyfragment. DarkBurnished surexterior 6/4).Highlyburnished (1OYR brownfabric(2.5Y6/3) andsurfaces surfaces. face.Tracesof glossyblackcoatingon interiorandexterior Figs.18,19 P43 Jar Bag4-1.TrenchA4;level2, below20 cm. Diam.11.0;H. 4.4;Th. atrim0.45;Th. atbaseof neck0.6. dark Finegrittyfabricwithvariegated class.Rimfragment. DarkBurnished brownto red(2.5YR6/8) core.Sandtemper.Unevenlyfired.Highlyburnished blackinterior. blackexterior, brownish surfaces: Fig.18 P44 Cuporbowl Bag4-2.TrenchA4;level2, below20 cm. Th. of handleatcenter0.75;Th. at edge0.45;Th. of vesselwall0.4. and of a handleattachment class.Fourjoiningfragments FineUndecorated the beginningof a broadstraphandle.Thinvesselwalls.Finefabricwithvery Smoothed. surfaces. 3/2).Dullblackinteriorandexterior darkbrowncore(1OYR P45 Cuporbowl Bag4-3.TrenchA4;level2, below20 cm. Diam.18.0;H. 3.1;Th. atrim0.4;Th. atbaseof neck0.6.
Fig.18
J SHARON
374
R. STOCKER
P44
P43
P45
P46
I
P47 ,,
I _\
P54 I k
w ,>
1,
,
P57
P55 o -
l -
-
10 -
l
| cm
Figure18. PotteryP43-P57, L. Davis selection.R.J.Robertson,J.
DERIZIOTIS
ALONI
375
P30
P32
P35
P34/P82 P41
P43
P46
P48 P47
P54 P57
P65 P64 0
Figure19. PotteryP3>P65, selection
1
.
:_
10 -
ass
cm
376
SHARON
R. STOCKER
FineUndecorated class.Twojoiningrimandneckfragments. Evertedrim widensslightlyas it descends. Thinwalls.Fineyellowishbrownfabric(1OYR 5/4),reddishyellowjustbelowsurfaces (5YR6/6).Dullblackinteriorandexterzorsurtaces. .
r
P46 Smallwide-mouthed jar Figs.18,19 Bag4-4.TrenchA4;level2, below20 cm. Th. of wall1.15;H. of decoration 2.0. RaisedDecoration class.Neckandbodyfragment. Coarselightyellowish brownfabric(1OYR6/4),weakredexteriorsurface(2.5YR6/4),blackinterior. Whitestoneandsandtemper.Smoothedinterior. Raisedknobdecoration consistingof twobumpson shoulder. Cf.Howell1992b,p.89, fig.3-8,pl.3-6,P2136.FromgroupC, early. P47 Cuporbowl Figs.18,19 Bag4-5.TrenchA4;level2, below20 cm. H.6.4;W.2.6;Th.1.25. CoarseUndecorated class.Twojoiningfragments of ahorizontal ovalhandle. Handleattached at rim;rimprofilenotpreserved. Mediumcoarsebrownfabric (1OYR 5/3).Redoutersurface(1OR4/8),blackinnersurface. Blackstoneinclusions.Smoothed. P48 Jar Figs.18,19 Bag4-6.TrenchA4;level2, below20 cm. H. of handle2.3;p.L.5.4;Th. at tip 1.2;Th. atbase1.5;Th. of vesselwall 0.8-0.9. CoarseUndecorated class.Handleattachment andbeginning ofpiercedcrescentlughandle(orientation uncertain). Handleis triangular in section.Medium coarse,hard,reddishyellowfabric(7.5YR5/6),withredsurfaces(2.5YR5/86/8).Stoneinclusions. Slightlysmoothedsurfaces. P49 Jar Bag4-7.TrenchA4;level2, below20 cm. L.7.1;W.2.8. CoarseUndecorated class.Bellyhandle.Mediumcoarse,powdery, reddish yellowfabric(5YR7/8 butoranger). Smalltangroginclusions. P50 Jar Bag4-8.TrenchA4;level2, below20 cm. CoarseUndecorated class.Bellyhandleattachment. Coarse,soft,lightyellowishbrownfabric(1OYR 6/4).Blackstoneinclusions. Verywornsurfaces. P51 Cuporbowl Bag4-9.TrenchA4;level2, below20 cm. DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass.Neckandshoulder fragment. Fine lightyellowish brownfabric(1OYR 6/4),reddish yellowjustbelowsurfaces (7.5YR 6/6). Highlyburnished surfaces; browninterior, blackexterior. Groovesleft by burnishing toolvisibleon exterior. Tracesof glossyblackcoatingon exterior. P52 Shapeunknown Bag4-10.TrenchA4;level2, below20 cm. W.3.0;Th. atedge0.4;Th. atcenter0.6.
DERIZIOTI
S ALONI
377
DarkBurnishedclass.Straphandle.Fineyellowishbrownfabric(1OYR5/4), darkbrowncore.Burnishedblackinteriorand exteriorsurfaces.Groovesleft by burnishingtool visibleon both surfaces. P53 Shapeunknown Bag 4-11. TrenchA4; level2, below20 cm. W. 3.5;Th. at edge 0.4;Th. at center0.6. DarkBurnishedclass.Straphandle.Fineyellowishbrownfabric(1OYR5/4). Burnishedblackinteriorand exteriorsurfaces.Groovesleft by burnishingtool visibleon both surfaces. Figs. 18, 19 P54 Goblet Bag 6-2.44TrenchesA1, A6; surfaceandvineyardtrench. H. 3.1. Fine GrayUnburnishedclass.Foot or shortpedestaledbase,concaveunderneath.Veryworn.Fine, mediumsoft,grayfabricwith slightlydarkercore.Small stoneinclusions. Cf. Howell 1992b,p. 88, fig. 3-7. Similarto pedestaledstrainerbaseP2126. FromgroupC, early. Fig. 18 P55 Shapeunknown Bag 6-3. TrenchesA1, A6; surfaceandvineyardtrench. Diam. 6.5;Th. 0.75. BlackCoatedclass.Thin flatbase.Mediumcoarseredfabric(2.5YR6/8 but oranger)with hardgraycore. Medium stone inclusions.Tracesof glossy black painton exteriorsurface. P56 Jar Bag 6-4. TrenchesA1, A6; surfaceandvineyardtrench. CoarseUndecoratedclass.Crescentlughandleandpartof vesselwall.Handle triangularin section.Mediumcoarse,gritty,soft,reddishyellowfabric(5YR7/6). Sandtemper. Figs. 18, 19 P57 Jar Bag 6-5. TrenchesA1, A6; surfaceandvineyardtrench. L. of peg 1.2. CoarseUndecoratedclass.Crescentlug handlefragment.Handlehaspeg for attachmentto body of vessel.Coarse,gritty,mediumsoft fabricwith graycore. Lightreddishbrownsurfaces(5YR6/4).White stoneandlargetangroginclusions. P58 Shapeunknown Bag 6-6. TrenchesA1, A6; surfaceandvineyardtrench. W. 3.4;Th. at edge 0.5;Th. at center0.6. DarkBurnishedandBlackCoatedclass.Fragmentof straphandleat curve. Edges of handleareraisedoutside.Fine, soft, powdery,light brownfabric.Burof glossyblackcoatingon interiorand nishedinteriorandexteriorsurfaces.Traces exterior.
44. Object6-1 = S5, pierced disk;see above. terracotta
P59 Jar Bag 7-1. TrenchA7; surfacelevel. Fine Undecoratedclass.Fragmentof piercedcrescentlug handle,triangular in section.Fine, soft, reddishyellowfabric(5YR 6/8).
378
SHARON
R. STOCKER
P60 Shapeunknown Bag7-2.TrenchA7;surface level. CoarseUndecorated class.Bodyfragment andattachment forhandle.Handle is triangular in section.Coarse, verygritty,grayfabricwithhardvitrified graycore. Tangroginclusionsandmultiplesmallstones,probably sand;surfacesarevery rough.Burnt. P61 Shapeunknown Bag7-3.TrenchA7;surface level. W. 3.1;Th. atedges0.4-0.5;Th. atcenter0.65. DarkBurnished class.Straphandlefragment. Edgesslightlyraisedoutside. Finefabricwithonelargestoneinclusion. Burnished blacksurfaces. P62 Closedshape Bag7-4.TrenchA7;surface level. FineUndecorated class.Bodyfragment. Fine,gritty,reddishyellowfabric (5YR5/8-6/8)withgrayexterior surface. P63 Closedshape Bag7-5.TrenchA7;surface level. FineUndecorated class.Bodyfragment. Fine,gritty, reddish yellowfabric(5YR 5/8-6/8).
P64 Jug? Fig.19 Bag8-1.TrenchA6;level2, below20 cm. H. 4.9;Th.0.6-0.7. FineUndecorated class.Spoutandshoulder. Mediumfine,soft,powdery, reddishyellowfabric(5YR7/8).Smallandmediuminclusions. P65 Jar Figs.19,20 Bag8-2.TrenchA6;level2, below20 cm. W. 3.0;Th.of lug1.6;Th.ofwallofvessel0.9. FineUndecorated class.Piercedcrescentlughandle?Narrower andthicker thanotherhandles.Mediumfine,soft,powdery, reddishyellowfabric(5YR7/8) withpalebrowncore(1OYR 6/3).Smallandmediuminclusions. P66 Cuporbowl Figs.20,21 Bag8-3.TrenchA6;level2, below20 cm. W.5.6;Th.0.8. Incisedclass.Broadverticalstraphandle.Fine,soft,reddishyellowfabric (7.5YR6/6)withhardblue-gray core.Sevenvertical parallel incisionsonexterior. Cf.Howell1992b,p.87,pl.3-4,P2101,forsimilarinciseddecoration butin a different fabric. P67 Shapeunknown Figs.20,21 Bag8-4.TrenchA6;level2, below20 cm. P.L.4.5;Th.1.2-1.5. CoarseUndecorated class.Endof scoophandle?Squarein section.Coarse verypalebrownfabric(1OYR 6/3).Plainreddish yellowsurfaces (5YR6/8).Large stone1ncuszons. .
.
DERIZIOTIS ALONI
379
P68 Shapeunknown Bag8-5.TrenchA6;level2, below20 cm. Th.0.55. Fineverypalebrown andBlackCoatedclass.Bodyfragment. DarkBurnished exteriorsur7/4),reddishyellownearsurface(5YR6/8).Burnished core(1OYR facewithtracesof glossyblackcoating. belongingto vesselP123. Similarto fragments P69 Shapeunknown Bag8-6.TrenchA6;level2, below20 cm. Th. 0.4-0.5. Finelightyellowish andBlackCoatedclass.Bodyfragment. DarkBurnished blackexteriorwith brownfabric(1OYR6/4). Blackinteriorsurface,burnished tracesof glossyblackcoating. P70 Shapeunknown Bag8-7.TrenchA6;level2, below20 cm. Th. 0.5-0.9. Fineverypalebrown andBlackCoatedclass.Bodyfragment. DarkBurnished (5YR5/8).Tracesofglossyblackcoating redsurface 7/4).Yellowish fabric(1OYR surface. on exterior overburnishing P71 Shapeunknown Bag8-8.TrenchA6;level2, below20 cm. Th. 0.6-1.05. redFine,powdery, bodyfragments. class.Twononjoining FineUndecorated dishyellowfabric(5YR7/8). Fig.20 P72 Cookingpot A1,A2,A4;level1, bottom. Bag9-1.Trenches H. 6.9;Th. atrim0.65;Th. atshoulder1.2. Coarse, class.Rim,neck,andbeginningof shoulder. CoarseUndecorated (5YR7/8butoranger). yellowsurfaces lightredfabric(1OR6/8)withreddish gritty, blackinterior.Sandandlargeredstoneinclusions. exteriorsurface, Variegated interior. Unevenlyfired.Smoothed samepotasP74. Probably Fig.20 P73 Jar 1, bottom. level A4; A1, A2, Trenches 9-2. Bag Diam.12.2;Th. at edge0.95;Th. atcenter1.2. class.Flatbase.Mediumcoarse,verygritty,redfabric CoarseUndecorated Smallgrogand redsurfaces. Yellowish (2.5YR6/8).Fabricis hardbutpowdery. withsandtemper. mediumstoneinclusions P74 Cookingpot A1,A2,A4;level1, bottom. Bag9-3.Trenches H. 2.7;Th. atrim0.55. Coarse,gritty,redfabric(2.5YR class.Rimfragment. CoarseUndecorated variegated interiorsurface, smoothed Black fired. 6/6). Sandtemper.Unevenly andgrittyexterior. samepotasP72. Probably
/
R. STOCKER SHARON 380
ll
l
\,S
l
l l/
P67
P66
P65
I /
\
P72
/
-
P75
< P73
/ /
/
P80
P83
P100 P91
0 s,
1
10 -
-
cm
-
Figure20. PotteryP65-P100, L. Davis selection.R.J. Robertson,J.
Figure
21.
Pottery
P66,
DERIZIOTIS
P67,
P80
U
1
cm
ALONI
P66
38I
P67 n 1
P80 1^
P75 Cookingpot Fig.20 Bag10-1.TrenchA1;level2, below20 cm. Th. of base1.7;Th.of wallof vessel2.15. CoarseUndecorated class.Thickflatbase.Verycoarsefabricwithblackcore andvariegated surface. Blackinteriorsurface, redexterior(1OR5/8). Largeand smallstoneinclusions. Unevenlyfired.Smoothedinteriorandexterior surfaces. Probably samepotasP85.Cf.Howell1992b,p.86, pl.3-3,P2077. P76 Cuporbowl Bag10-2.TrenchA1;level2, below20 cm. Th. of wall0.6. FineUndecorated class.Flatbase.Mostof undersurface sheared away.Fine, soft,powdery, reddishyellowfabric(closeto 5YR6/8 butoranger). Smoothed interior. P77 Openshape Bag10-3.TrenchA1;level2, below20 cm. Th. of wall0.4-0.8. DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass.Shoulder fragment. Thickensatone end.Fineto mediumfinepalebrownfabricandcore(1OYR 6/3).Brownexterior surface, blackburnished interior. Tracesof glossyblackpaintorsliponinterior. P78 Openshape Bag10-4.TrenchA1;level2, below20 cm. Th. 0.5. DarkBurnished class.Bodyfragment. Finefabricwithgraycore,reddish yellownearsurfaces(5YR6/8);flakedsurfaces. Highlyburnished darkbrown exterior, burnished lightbrowninterior. P79 Openshape Bag10-5.TrenchA1;level2, below20 cm. Th.0.9-1.0. DarkBurnished class?Thickcoarsebodyfragment. Coarsefabricwithblack andgraycore.Stoneinclusions. Unevenly fired.Smoothed exterior surface, highly burnished blackinterior. P80 Cuporbowl Figs.20,21 Bag11-1.TrenchA3/5;level3. W.3.65;Th. atedge0.7;Th. atcenter0.8. DarkBurnished class.Thinbroadstraphandlefragment. Mediumfinefabric withblackcore.Smallstoneinclusions. Highlyburnished blackto brownexterior surface, dullblackinterior. Cf.Howell1992b,p.86,pl.3-4,P2087(groupB).Thisexample fromNichoria is a littlewiderthanP80.
382
SHARON
R. STOCKER
P81 Open shape Bag 11-2. TrenchA3/5; level 3. H. 1.3;Th. at finishededge 0.4;Th. at brokenedge 0.6. DarkBurnishedclass.Smallrimfragmentor partof a straphandle.Medium fine light yellowishbrowncore (1OYR6/4), darkred nearsurface(2.5YR4/8). Smallgrittyinclusionswith one smallstonevisible.Highlyburnishedblackinteriorandexteriorsurfaces. P82 Cup or bowl
Fig. 19
Bag 12-1. BalkA/A1. H. 5.2;Th. at rim0.4;Th. at shoulder0.6. DarkBurnishedandBlackCoatedclass.Rim,neck,andshoulderfragment. Thin, wide, flaring,evertedrim. Fine, powdery,reddishyellow fabricand core (7.5YR6/6). Smallwhiteandblackstoneinclusions.Highlyburnisheddarkbrown interiorand exteriorsurfaces;partsof surfaceworn off. Tracesof glossy black coatingoverburnishon exterior. JoinsP34. P83 Jar
Fig. 20
Bag 12-2. BalkA/A1. Diam. at neck 11.5;Th. nearrim 0.4;Th. at shoulder0.5. Dark Burnishedclass?Neck and shoulderfragmentnear rim. Rim is not preserved,butwouldhavebeenwide andeverted.Mediumfine to fine,soft,powdery,verypalebrownfabric(1OYR7/4). Smallstoneandgroginclusions;surfaces veryworn.Tracesof brownburnishedsurfacepreservedon exterior. P84 Shapeunknown Bag 12-3. BalkA/A1. W. 3.85;Th. at edge 0.7;Th. at center0.8. Dark Burnishedclass?Straphandle fragment.Fine, powdery,pale brown fabric(1OYR6/3); surfacesworn.Tracesof burnishedsurfaceon underside? P85 Cookingpot? Bag 12-4. BalkA/A1. Th. 1.35-1.5. CoarseUndecoratedclass.Bodyfragment.Coarse,thick,cracked,redfabric (2.5YR5/6). Blackinteriorsurface,darkredexterior(2.5YR4/8). Largeandsmall stoneinclusions.Unevenlyfired.Smoothedinteriorandexteriorsurfaces. Probablyfromsamepot as P75. P86 Shapeunknown Bag 12-5. BalkA/A1. Th. 0.6-0.8. Dark Burnishedclass.Body fragment.Medium fine light yellowishbrown fabric(1OYR6/4). Smallstoneinclusions.One surfaceblackandhighlyburnished, the othersurfacevariegatedredwith tracesof black. P87 Open shape Bag 12-6. BalkA/A1. Th.0.4. DarkBurnishedand BlackCoatedclass.Body fragment.Fine brownfabric
DERIZIOTIS ALONI
383
(1OYR5/3). Verysmallinclusions.Blackburnishedon one surface,darkbrown burnishedon other.Tracesof glossyblackcoatingon interiorand exterior? P88 Shapeunknown Bag 12-7. BalkA/A1. Th. 0.55-0 9 CoarseUndecoratedclass.Body fragment.Medium coarse,gritty,medium soft, yellowishred fabricand outersurface(5YR 5/8). Fine sandand some mediumstoneinclusions. P89 Shapeunknown Bag 12-8. BalkA/A1. Th.0.6. Fine Undecoratedclass. Smallbody fragment.Fine, soft, pink fabric(5YR 7/4). P90 Shapeunknown Bag 12-9. BalkA/A1. Th. 0.9. BlackCoatedclass?Twojoiningbodyfragments.Fine, mediumthick,hard, reddishyellowfabric(7.5YR6/6) with browncore (7.5YR5/6). Smoothedinteriorand exteriorsurfaces.Coatedblackinterior? P91 Closedshape
Fig. 20
Bag 13-1. TrenchA4; level 3. H. 4.0;Th. at rim 0.8;Th. at shoulder1.15. Fine Undecoratedclass.Rim fragment.Fine fabricwith very darkgrayish browncore(1OYR3/2). Dull blacksurfaces.Fine sandtemper.Smoothedinterior and exteriorsurfaces. P92 Cookingpot Bag 13-2. TrenchA4; level 3. Th. of wall 1.0;Th. of base 1.2. CoarseUndecoratedclass.Flat base.Coarse,cracked,reddishyellowfabric (5YR 6/8) with verydarkgrayishbrowncore(1OYR3/2). Variegatedred to gray surfaces.Mediumstoneandgroginclusions.Smoothedinteriorandexteriorsurfaces. P93 Cookingpot Bag 13-3. TrenchA4; level 3. Th. 1.3-1.4. CoarseUndecoratedclass.Body fragment.Coarsered fabric(2.5YR 6/8), light brownjust below surfaces.Core is variegatedblack and red, surfacesare gray-black.Largestoneinclusions.Unevenlyfired. P94 Jar Bag 13-4. TrenchA4; level 3. Th.ofwallO.8. CoarseUndecoratedclass.Verticalstrapor crescentlug handleattachment and body fragment.Medium coarse,soft, powdery,gritty,reddishyellow fabric (5YR 6/8); surfacesareveryorange.Smallto mediuminclusions(sandtemper).
384
SHARON
R. STOCKER
P95 Jar Bag13-5.TrenchA4;level3. P.L.6.8;p.W.4.1;Th. attip0.8;Th. athole1.5-1.8. BlackCoatedclass?Piercedcrescentlughandle.Sectionis verytriangular. Fine,hard,reddish yellowfabric(5YR6/6),oranger surfaces. Tracesofblackcoating(underyellowadhered earth?). P96 Openshape Bag13-6.TrenchA4;level3. H.6.5;Th.nearrimO.6. DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass?Neckandshoulder fragment. Rim notpreserved, butwasoriginally flaring. Mediumcoarse, powdery, reddish yellow fabric(5YR6/8).Black,red,andwhitestoneinclusions (sandtemper). Burnished blacksurfaces. Tracesof glossyblackcoating? P97 Openshape Bag13-7.TrenchA4;level3. Th. 0.75-0.9. BlackCoatedclass?Bodyfragment. Fine,soft,lightbrownfabric(7.5YR 6/4).Reddishyellowsurfaces (5YR7/8).Tracesof blackcoatingon interiorand exterior surfaces (underyellowadhered earth?). P98 Openshape Bag13-8.TrenchA4;level3. Th. 0.6. DarkBurnished class.Smallbodyfragment. Finehardfabricwithblue-gray core.Lightbrownish graysurfaces. Onelargestoneinclusionvisible.Burnished interiorandexterior surfaces. P99 Shapeunknown Bag13-9.TrenchA4;level3. Th.0.4. FineUndecorated class.Threesmallnonjoining bodyfragments. Veryfine, soft,powdery, yellowish brownfabric(1OYR 5/4).Graysurfaces. P100 Cookingpot Fig.20 Bag14-1.TrenchA1;bottomof level2; hearths. Diam.20.0;H. 3.4;Th. atrim0.8. CoarseUndecorated class.Rimfragment. Coarseredfabric(1OR5/8) with blackcore(5YR2.5/1).Dullblackinteriorsurface, brownexterior. Stoneinclusions,coarsesandtemper.Smoothedinteriorandexterior surfaces. P101 Cuporbowl Bag14-2.TrenchA1;bottomof level2;hearths. W. 7.1;Th. 0.8;Th.of vesselwall0.6. FineUndecorated class.Baseof verywidestraphandle.Fine,semi-gritty, mediumsoft,yellowishredfabric(5YR5/6),withslightlydarkersurfaces (5YR 5/8).Smallstoneinclusions, finesandtemper. P102 Jar Bag14-3.TrenchA1;bottomof level2;hearths. Diam.20.0;H. 5.0;Th. atrim0.4;Th. atshoulder 0.6.
Fig.22
DERIZIOTIS ALONI
385
DarkBurnished class.Twojoiningrim,neck,andshoulder fragments. Wide evertedrim.Fine,lightyellowish brownfabric(1OYR 6/4).Darkbrownburnished interior andexterior surfaces. Muchoforiginal surfaces iswornoff.Cf.Koumouzelis 1980,fig.37:3,"Slipped andBurnished Ware." P103 Cuporbowl Fig.22 Bag14-4.TrenchA1;bottomof level2;hearths. H. 6.0;W. 3.0-3.4;Th.0.5. FineGrayUnburnished class.Fourjoininghandlefragments andpartofbody. Vertical straphandleis complete. Fine,soft,powdery, grayfabric(7.5YR6/1). JoinsP104. P104 Cuporbowl Bag14-5.TrenchA1;bottomof level2;hearths. Th. of handle0.6. FineGrayUnburnished class.Straphandleattachment andnonjoining body fragment. Fine,powdery, grayfabric(closeto 7.5YR6/1). JoinsP103. P105 Shapeunknown Bag14-6.TrenchA1;bottomof level2;hearths. Th.0.7. FineUndecorated class.Neckandshoulderfragmentnearrim.Fine,soft, powdery, lightyellowishbrownfabric(1OYR6/4), reddishyellownearsurface (5YR7/6).Whitestoneinclusions. P106 Shapeunknown Bag14-7.TrenchA1;bottomof level2;hearths. Th. of handle0.5;Th.of vesselwall0.4. DarkBurnished class.Straphandleattachment andbodyfragment. Fine, hard,lightgrayfabric(5Y7/1). Grayishbrownexteriorsurface, darkburnished .
.
nterlor.
P107 Shapeunknown Bag14-8.TrenchA1;bottomof level2;hearths. Th. 0.6-0.9. FineUndecorated class.Bodyfragment. Fine,slightlygritty,powdery, light redfabric(1OR6/8)withthinlightgraycore(5Y7/2).Finesandtemper. P108 Shapeunknown Bag14-9.TrenchA1;bottomof level2;hearths. Th. 0.7-0.9. CoarseUndecorated class.Bodyfragment. Coarse variegated fabric, darkgray to yellowishbrown(5YR4/1-lOYR5/4). Blacksurfaces. Stoneinclusions. Unevenlyfired.Smoothed interiorandexterior surfaces. P109 Openshape Bag14-10.TrenchA1;bottomof level2; hearths. Th.0.6. DarkBurnished class.Bodyfragment. Finepalebrownfabric(1OYR6/3). Darkburnished interiorsurface, exterior surface wornaway.
386
S H A RO N R . ST O C KE R
PllO Shapeunknown Bag14-11.TrenchA1;bottomof level2;hearths. Th. 0.95-1.15. CoarseUndecorated class.Bodyfragment. Coarse,gritty,redfabric(2.5YR 5/8). Blackishgrayinteriorsurface, redexterior. Stoneinclusions, sandtemper. Smoothedinteriorsurface. P111 Cookingpot Bag14-12.TrenchA1;bottomof level2;hearths. Th. 1.1. CoarseUndecorated class.Bodyfragment. Coarsefabric.Stoneinclusions. Smoothed blackinteriorandexterior surfaces. P112 Shapeunknown Bag14-13.TrenchA1;bottomof level2;hearths. Th.0.65-0.7. CoarseUndecorated class.Bodyfragment. Mediumcoarselightredfabric (1OR6/6).Stoneinclusions. Smoothed interiorandexterior surfaces. P113 Pithos Fig.22 Bag15-1.TrenchA1 (northern part);bottomof level2;pithoi. P.H.24.0;W. of rim7.6;Th.of wallof vessel3.5-4.0. CoarseUndecorated class.Twojoiningrim andshoulderfragments, one nonjoining bodyfragment. Coarsereddish yellowfabric(5YR6/8)withgraycore. Largetangroginclusions. P114 Jar Figs.22,23 Bag15-2.TrenchA1 (northern part);bottomof level2;pithoi. L. of handle3.8;Th.of vesselwall1.5. RaisedDecoration class?Lughandleandwallfragment. Fingerindentation aroundhandle.Verycoarse,lightbrownish grayfabric(1OYR 6/2).Redinterior surface(2.5YR6/8),reddishyellowexterior(5YR6/8). Largestoneinclusions. Raiseddecoration? P115 Pithos Bag15-3.TrenchA1 (northern part);bottomof level2;pithoi. Th. of wall3.5. RaisedDecoration class?Rimfragmentwith partofsurface broken off.Coarse, soft,reddishyellowfabric(5YR7/8 butoranger). Grogandsandinclusions. Scar fromplasticband? P116 Pithos Bag15-4.TrenchA1 (northern part);bottomof level2;pithoi. Th. atrim1.1. CoarseUndecorated class.Rimfragment, slightlysquared at edge.Coarse, soft,lightredfabric(1OR6/8).Largegroginclusions. P117 Pithos Bag15-5.TrenchA1 (northern part);bottomof level2;pithoi. Th. 1.4. CoarseUndecorated class.Rimfragment withrectangular edge.Coarsereddishyellowfabric(5YR6/8).Largetangroginclusions.
DERIZIOTIS ALONI
387
P118 Pithos Bag15-6.TrenchA1 (northern part);bottomof level2;pithoi. P.W.of rim5.4;Th.of wallof vessel2.8-3.9. CoarseUndecorated class.Largehorizontal rimfragment. Coarsereddish yellowfabric(5YR7/8).Largestoneandgroginclusions. P119 Hemispherical bowl Figs.22,23 Bag16-1.TrenchA1 (northern part);level3. Diam.base6.2-6.6;Th. atrim0.4;Th. nearbase0.6. Numerous joiningfragments of acomplete hemispherical bowlwithflatbase. Veryopenshape.No incurving of rim.Mediumcoarse,gritty,weakredfabric (2.5YR6/4),lightblue-gray core.Mediumblackandwhitestoneinclusions along withsomelargewhitestones. EHII.Theclosestparallels forthisshapecanbefoundin thetype1 undecoratedsaucersfromLernaIII,Houseof theTiles,phaseD (seeWiencke2000, p.596). P120 Cuporbowl? Figs.22,23 Bag16-2.TrenchA1 (northern part);level3. P.W.2.3;Th.0.7;W. of clayrod0.7. FineUndecorated class.Manyjoiningandnonjoining fragments of handle madeof fourclaycoils,or rods,threeof whichremainattachedto eachother. Fine,veryhard,pinkfabric(5YR7/4).Smoothed blackinteriorandexterior surfaces. Cf.P121.Korres(1990,p.7) suggeststhatthistypeof handleis froma kantharos. P121 Cuporbowl Figs.22,23 CM2104.1;WT 1.TrenchA1;level1. P.L.max.6.0;W.3.0;Th.0.67. DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass?Segmentof well-builthandlewith fourrods.Fine,veryhard,lightbrownish grayfabric(1OYR 6/2),reddishyellow nearsurfaces (7.5YR6/6).Burnished blackexterior surface, smoothed underneath. Cf.P120.Taylour suggested thatthishandlewaspainted. P122 Cuporbowl Fig.24 Bag18-1.Trenches A2,A7,balkA1/A2;level2. W.3.7;Th.0.55;Th.of vesselwall0.5. DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass?Bodyfragment withattachments forbroadverticalstraphandle.Mediumcoarse,soft,brownfabric(1OYR5/3), reddishyellownearsurface(5YR5/8). Lightsandtemper.Burnished surfaces? Tracesof blackcoatingon interiorandexterior? P123 Cuporbowl Figs.23,24 Bag18-2.Trenches A2,A7,balkA1/A2;level2. Diam.15.0;Th. atrim0.4;Th. at shoulder 0.6;Th. of vesselwall0.3. DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass.Elevenjoiningandonenonjoining rim,neck,shoulder, andbodyfragments. Halfof rimis preserved. Wideeverted rim,straightneck,carinated shoulder. Finereddishyellowfabric(5YR7/8).Mediumwhitestoneinclusions, lightsandtemper.Traces ofglossyblackcoatingover burnished interiorandexterior surfaces. SeealsoP68.
cm
_
.
X
388
!
.
s
S H A R O N R . ST O C KE R
.
P102
P103
l
l
P114
P113 0 1
-10
P119
-W
->
''. ''"t1'."''"t' .':;
.'..:.
@ j:
_
_
.t:
X
ly P121
P120 0
1
_cm10
Figure22. PotteryP102-P121, selection.R.J. Robertson, J. L. Davis
DERIZIOTIS
389
ALONI
P114
Pll9
P120
P121
P123
P142
P143
°
Figure23. PotteryP114-P143, selection
1
.
l°cm
/ SHARON
R. STOCKER
39o
/ /
P122
P123
-
-
'\
/
P124
l
l
P125
\
,/ P126
\
o' \
/
\
==== P133/P134 O
I
_
10
Figure24. PotteryP122-P126, P133/P134. R.J. Robertson, J. L. Davis
DERIZIOTIS
ALONI
39I
Fig.24 P124 Cuporbowl A2,A7,balkA1/A2;level2. Bag18-3.Trenches Diam.22.5;H. 4.0;Th. 0.65. Edgeofrimis flat.Fineto class? Twojoiningrimfragments. DarkBurnished (5YR yellownearsurfaces 7/4),reddish yellowfabric(1OYR mediumfinereddish Burnished? surfaces. Smoothed SmaSl blackstoneinclusions. 7/6-6/8butoranger). Fig.24 P125 Cuporbowl A2,A7,balkA1/A2;level2. Bag18-4.Trenches Diam.20.0;H.2.7;Th. atrim0.4;Th. atneck0.6. Wide evertedrim.Finefabricwith class.Rimfragment. DarkBurnished surfaces. interiorandexterior redcore.Darkburnished soft,brownish Fig.24 P126 Cuporbowl A2,A7,balkA1/A2;level2. Bag18-5.Trenches 0.6. Diam.20.0;H.2.7;Th. atrim0.5;Th. atshoulder Evertedrim.Mediumfinedarkgray class.Rimfragment. DarkBurnished surHighlyburnished fabricandcore(5YR4/1). Smallwhitestoneinclusions. faces;verysmooth. P127 Cuporbowl A2,A7,balkA1/A2;level2. Bag18-6.Trenches 0.5. H.2.6;Th. atrim0.4;Th. atshoulder Finepalebrownfabric(1OYR6/3). class.Rimfragment. DarkBurnished surfaces. blackinteriorandexterior Highlyburnished P128 Shapeunknown A2,A7,balkA1/A2;level2. Bag18-7.Trenches W.4.8;Th. 0.9-1.1(slightlythickeratoneend). Handleis class.Broadverticalstraphandlefragment. CoarseUndecorated reddishyellow in section,centeris concave.Coarse,gritty,powdery, rectangular fabric(5YR6/8).Sandtemper. P129 Shapeunknown A2,A7,balkA1/A2;level2. Bag18-8.Trenches Th. 0.6. Mediumfine,gritty,reddish class.Twobodyfragments. FineUndecorated yellowfabric(5YR7/6).Sandtemper. P130 Shapeunknown A2,A7,balkA1/A2;level2. Bag18-9.Trenches Th.0.5. brown Fine,lightyellowish veryworn. class.Bodyfragment, FineUndecorated wornaway. 6/4);surfaces fabric(1OYR P131 Cookingpot A2,A7,balkA1/A2;level2. Bag18-10.Trenches P.Th.0.7. Mediumcoarse,hard,gritty,redfabclass?Bodyfragment. DarkBurnished blackinteriorsurface. Burnished ric(2.5YR6/8)withgraycore.Sandinclusions. off. surfaceis sheared Exterior
392
SHARON
R. STOCKER
P132 Cuporbowl Bag19-1.Trenches A3/5,A6;level3. Th.of vesselwall0.9-1.0. CoarseUndecorated class.Threejoiningbodyfragments. Coarse,soft,powdery,reddishyellowfabric(5YR7/8 butoranger). Somelargegraystoneorfired groginclusions. Lightsandtemper. P133 Bowl Fig.24 Bag19-2.Trenches A3/5,A6;level3. Th. ofwallof vessel0.4. DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass.Fourjoiningbaseandbodyfragmentsofthin-walled, well-made potthatthickens atbase.Fineyellowfabric(1OYR 7/6)withpalebrowncore(1OYR 6/3).Smallwhiteandredstoneinclusions. Highly burnished brownishblackinteriorandexteriorsurfaces. Tracesof glossyblack coatingoverburnished surfaces. FromsamevesselasP134. P134 Bowl Fig.24 Bag19-3.Trenches A3/5,A6;level3. Diam.atbase12.0;Th. of wallatbase0.7. DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass.Twojoiningbasefragments of thinwalled,well-madepotthatthickensatbase.Fineyellowfabric(1OYR 7/6)with palebrowncore(1OYR6/3). Smallwhiteandredstoneinclusions. Highlyburnishedbrownish blackinterior andexterior surfaces.Traces ofglossyblack coating overburnished surfaces. FromsamevesselasP133. P135 Cuporbowl Bag19-4.Trenches A3/5,A6;level3. DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass.Bodyfragment, probably fromnear base.Finefabricwithpalebrowncore(1OYR6/3). Smallwhiteandredstone inclusions. Highlyburnished brownish blackinteriorandexterior surfaces. Traces of glossyblackcoatingon interiorandexterior. Nonjoining fragment fromsamevesselasP136andP137. P136 Cuporbowl Bag19-5.Trenches A3/5,A6;level3. DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass.Bodyfragment, probably fromnear base.Finefabricwithpalebrowncore(1OYR6/3). Smallwhiteandredstone inclusions. Highlyburnished brownish blackinteriorandexterior surfaces. Traces of glossyblackcoatingoninteriorandexterior. Nonjoining fragment fromsamevesselasP135andP137. P137 Cuporbowl Bag19-6.Trenches A3/5,A6;level3. DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass.Bodyfragment, probably fromnear base.Finefabricwithpalebrowncore(1OYR6/3). Smallwhiteandredstone inclusions. Highlyburnished brownish blackinteriorandexterior surfaces. Traces of glossyblackcoatingoninteriorandexterior. Nonjoining fragment fromsamevesselasP135andP136.
DERIZIOTIS ALONI
393
P138 Pithos A3/5,A6;level3. Bag19-7.Trenches Coarsedarkredfabric RaisedDecorationclass.Thickshoulderfragment. Raisedplasticbandwithropepat(2.5YR5/8).Largestoneandgroginclusions. terndecoration. P139 Pithos A3/5,A6;level3. Bag19-8.Trenches Small reddish yellowfabric. Mediumcoarse, class.Shoulder. RaisedDecoration Raisedplasticbandwithropepatterndecoration. stoneinclusions. P140 Pithos A3/5,A6;level3. Bag19-9.Trenches Coarsereddishyellowfabric(5YR class.Bodyfragment. RaisedDecoration Raisedplasticbandwithropepatterndecoration. 7/8).Largetangroginclusions. P141 Pithos A3/5,A6;level3. Bag19-10.Trenches Coarse,gritty,lightbrownfabric. class.Rimfragment. CoarseUndecorated Blackandwhitestoneinclusions. Fig.23 P142 Kylix A3/5,A6;level3. Bag19-11.Trenches D. of base5.6;D. of stem1.8. wheelindentation Well-defined underneath. Baseandpartof stem.Concave in base.Finepaleyellowfabric(5Y8/2). LH IIIB. Figs.23,25 P143 Cuporbowl Bag20-1.BalkA4/A5;pithoiin A5. W. of handle3.5;Th. of vesselwall0.5. withlowerhandle fragment class.Rim,neck,andshoulder DarkBurnished straphandle. Broadvertical lipnotpreserved. Rimisbroadandflaring, attachment. 7/1). yellowfabric(7.5YR6/6)withlightgraycore(1OYR Mediumcoarsereddish Black andtangroginclusions. (some0.7indiameter) Largewhitestoneinclusions Marksleft by finishingtoolvisibleon interiorandexteriorsurfaces. burnished nterioranc. exter1or. .
.
Figs.25,26 jar? P144 Wide-mouthed Bag20-2.BalkA4/A5;pithoiin A5. 5.0;Th. of handle0.8; P.W.of handlemax.3.6;W. of handleatattachment Th. of vesselwall0.85-1.0. withpartof straphandle(orientation BlackCoatedclass.Bodyfragment verypalebrownfabric(1OYR7/3), reddish Mediumfine,powdery, uncertain). Tracesof glossyblack (5YR7/8).Smallstoneandsandinclusions. yellowsurfaces surtace. on exterzor coat1ng .
.
P
P145 Shapeunknown Bag20-3.BalkA4/A5;pithoiin A5. P.W.max.5.9;Th. of handle0.7;Th. of vesselwall0.6.
Fig.25
394
SHARON
R. STOCKER
Coarsetindecorated class.Lowerattachment forbroadstraphandle(orientationuncertain). Coarselightyellowish brownfabric(1OYR 6/4),reddish yellow nearsurface (7.5YR6/6).Largeblackandwhitestoneinclusions. Smoothed exteriorsurface. P146 Shapeunknown Figs.25,26 Bag20-4.BalkA4/A5,pithoiin A5. W. 4.5;Th. atedge0.4;Th. atcenter0.7. DarkBurnished andBlackCoatedclass.Broadstraphandle.Mediumfine, soft,powdery, lightyellowishbrownfabric(1OYR6/4). Smallstoneinclusions. Tracesof glossyblackcoatingoverhighlyburnished exteriorsurface, dullblack .
.
lnterlor.
P147 Shapeunknown Fig.26 Bag20-5.BalkA4/A5;pithoiinA5. P.H.5.6;p.W.5.5. FineUndecorated class.Bodyfragment. Mediumfine,powdery, brownfabric.Carbonresidueon interiorsurface. P148 Cup Bag20-6.BalkA4/A5;pithoiin A5. FineGrayUnburnished class.Bodyfragment withlowerattachment forsmall flatverticalstraphandleanda nonjoining shoulder andnonjoining handlefragment.Fine,gritty,semihard, grayfabric(7.5YR5/1). P149 Shapeunknown Bag20-7.BalkA4/A5;pithoiinA5. FineUndecorated class.Rim,neck,andbeginning of shoulder. Mediumfine, gritty,brownfabric(7.5YR5/4).Sandtemper. P150 Openshape Bag20-8.BalkA4/A5;pithoiin A5. DarkBurnished class.Threejoiningbodyfragments. Mediumcoarse,gritty, palebrownfabric(1OYR 6/3). Sandtemper. Burnished interiorandexterior surfaces. P151 Shapeunknown Bag20-9.BalkA4/A5;pithoiin A5. FineUndecorated class.Bodyfragment. Finereddishyellowfabric(7.5YR 6/8).Smallgroginclusions. P152 Shapeunknown Bag20-10.BalkA4/A5;pithoiin A5. CoarseUndecorated class.Bodyfragment. Coarsepinkfabric(7.5YR7/4). Blackandredstoneinclusions. P153 Shapeunknown Fig.25 Bag21-1.TrenchA6;level2. Diam.atbase14.5;Th. of base0.65-0.7;Th. of vesselwall0.5. BlackCoatedclass?Fourjoiningfragments of completeflatbase.Medium
DERIZIOTI S ALONI
395
fine, gritty,light grayfabric(1OYR7/2) with reddishyellowsurfaces(5YR 6/8). Sandtemper.Tracesof glossyblackcoatingon exteriorsurface? Fig. 25 P154 Pithos Bag 22-1. TrenchA3/5; leveT3. Th. 2.7-2.8. RaisedDecorationclass.Largeshoulderfragment.Coarse,light yellowish brownto brownishgrayfabric(1OYR6/4-2.5Y 6/2). Red to reddishyellowsurfaces(SYR6/8-2.5YR 6/8). Blackstone andlargetan groginclusions.Unevenly fired.Raisedplasticbandwith doublerowof ropepatterndecoration. P155 Pithos Bag 22-2. TrenchA3/5; level 3. Th. 2.3-3.3. RaisedDecorationclass.Fragmentof rimornecknearrim.Coarsepalebrown fabric(1OYR6/3). Weak red to red surfaces(2.5YR 6/4-6/8). Largetan grog inclusions.Raisedplasticbandwith ropepatterndecoration. JoinsP191. P156 Pithos Bag 22-3. TrenchA3/5; level3. RaisedDecorationclass.Body fragment.Coarsefabric.Core is hardbluegrayto black.Variegatedsurfaces:darkred to darkbrownexterior(2.5YR 3/14/8), blackandcrackedinterior.Verylargestoneinclusions.Burnt?Raisedplastic bandwith ropepatterndecoration. P157 Pithos Bag 22-4. TrenchA3/5; level 3. Th. 3.9. CoarseUndecoratedclass. Rim fragment.Verycoarsefabric.Red surfaces (2.5YR6/8). Verylargeredstone and tan groginclusions. P158 Jar Bag 22-5. TrenchA3/5; level3. H. 4.2;Th. at rim 0.4;Th. at shoulder0.8. CoarseUndecoratedclass. Short evertedrim. Medium coarse,gritty,soft, reddishyellowfabric(5YR 6/8). Smallto mediumblackstoneinclusions. P159 Shapeunknown Bag 22-6. TrenchA3/5; level 3. CoarseUndecoratedclass. Body fragmentwith attachmentfor thick oval belly handle.Coarsedarkgrayishbrownfabric(1OYR4/2). Plain yellowishred surfaces(SYR5/8). P160 Jar Bag 22-7. TrenchA3/5; level 3. Fine Undecoratedclass. Body fragmentwith attachmentfor wide pierced crescentlug handle.Handle is trapezoidalin section.Medium fine, soft, light yellowishbrownfabric(1OYR6/4) with reddishyellowsurfaces(5YR 6/8). Sand temper.Smoothedsurfaces.
+ .
t-.-
f'-P
= -
;^gt.g:
a
396
Z - .............
SHARON
P143
'
R. STOCKER
P144
P145
P146
1
J'
l\
1?
P153 0 J_
P169
1 ]
10
_
I
I
-
_
cm
I
/
de_
X,ZJ/X.:mQ2r: a
^ \
_
0 P154
A
--
--
--' -
,
g
/'
/
l l
\ \
P191 0 1
2||_
_
-
-
l l
_10 cm Figure25. PotteryP143-Pl91, selection.R.J.Robertson,J. L. Davis
,g.i?.,.,,,,,,-, V : ,:
Si,.s<
SA-;?07.s. -
iM . ;0
.f,;;:::.
)0w-f,, *
X 7
.;f:.
f0 0
DERIZIOTIS
. .;;- 0
-
.;
f;
.
D
fA-.
br
n_E _g
ALONI
397
P146
P144
P169 P147
P173
P174 0 -
1 -
10
-
4
: :t;
(;S:r - .!
- - .00
i;; U _g
'"'''S;f;s'"'Z':; 0'X'''' 'V'' ';"D't :"'''
_
W e <:
P191 Figure26.PotteryP144-Pl91, selection
01 L--
-
-
10
cm
cm
398
SHARON
R. STOCKER
P161 Pithos Bag22-8.TrenchA3/5;level3. RaisedDecoration class.Threejoiningbodyfragments, oneofwhichis possiblypartof shoulder. Coarsebrownfabric(1OYR 5/3)withgraycore.Plainred surfaces (2.5YR6/8).Verylargetangrog,stone,andsandinclusions. Singleraised plasticbandwithropepatterndecoration. P162 Pithosorlargecoarsejar Bag22-9.TrenchA3/5;level3. Th. of base1.5;Th. of vesselwall1.4-1.6. CoarseUndecorated class.Fourjoiningfragments of raisedbase.Coarsereddishyellowfabric(5YR7/6)withgraycore.Largetangrogandblackstoneinclusions.
P163 Pithos Bag22-10.TrenchA3/5;level3. RaisedDecoration class.Smallbodyfragment. Coarseredfabric(2.5YR6/8) withlargestoneinclusions. Raisedplasticband,perhaps ropepatterndecoration. P164 Openshape Bag22-11.TrenchA3/5;level3. Th. 0.65-0.7. DarkBurnished class.Bodyfragment. Mediumfine,gritty,palebrownfabric (1OYR 6/3).Sandinclusions. Burnished blackinteriorsurface, smoothed exterior. P165 Openshape Bag22-12.TrenchA3/5;level3. Th. 1.15. DarkBurnished class.Bodyfragment. Coarse, hard,lightbrownfabric(7.5YR 6/4).Tangroginclusions. Highlyburnished interiorsurface. P166 Openshape Bag22-13.TrenchA3/5;level3. Th. 1.2-1.4. CoarseUndecorated class.Bodyfragment. Mediumcoarse,dense,hardfabricwithburntblue-gray core.Stoneandsandinclusions. Smoothedinterior. P167 Openshape Bag22-14.TrenchA3/5;level3. Th. 1.4. CoarseUndecorated class.Bodyfragment. Coarse,soft,powdery fabricwith blackcore.Largestoneinclusions. Smoothed blackinteriorandexterior surfaces. P168 Shapeunknown Bag22-15.TrenchA3/5;level3. Th. 0.9-1.0. CoarseUndecorated class.Bodyfragment. Coarse, gritty,reddish yellowfabric(5YR7/8).Stoneinclusions, coarsesandtemper. P169 Jar Figs.25,26 Bag24-1.BalksA1/A7andA/A7. P.W.of handle6.2;Th. at top edge0.7;Th. at baseof handle1.5;Th. of vesselwall0.9.
DERIZIOTIS ALONI
399
orienlughandle(halfpreserved; class.Piercedcrescent CoarseUndecorated in section,veryflatandbroad.Meto triangular Trapezoidal tationuncertain). 6/3).Smoothedreddiumcoarse,heavy,hardfabricwithpalebrowncore(1OYR (5YR5/8-6/8). dishyellowto yellowishredsurfaces Fabricsimilarto P173. P170 Shapeunknown Bag24-2.BalksA1/A7andA1A7. Th. of handleatedge0.4;Th. at center0.8;Th. of vesselwall0.4. withhandleattachandBlackCoatedclass.Bodyfragment DarkBurnished ment.Finehardfabric.Colorvariesbetweenyellowishbrown(1OYR5/4) and gray(1OYR6/1),withrednearandat surfaces(2.5YR6/8). Highlyburnished surTracesof glossyblackcoatingoverburnished interiorandexteriorsurfaces. faces. P171 Shapeunknown Bag24-3.BalksA1/A7andA1A7. Th.O.9-1.1. fabric.ColorvarCoarsecrumbly class.Bodyfragment. CoarseUndecorated iesbetweenverydarkgray(5YR3/1) andred(1OR4/8). Sandtemperwithwhite Unevenlyfired.Burnt? stoneinclusions. P172 Openshape Bag24-4.BalksA1/A7andA1A7. Th. 0.8-1.1. Coarse,gritty,palebrownfabric RaisedDecorationclass?Bodyfragment. (1OR5/8).Coarsesandtemper.Smoothedinteriorsur6/3).Redsurfaces (1OYR Raisedplasticbandwithdecoration? preserved. surface face.Verylittleof exterior Fig.26 P173 Jar Bag26-1.BalkA4, south. P.W.3.5;Th. at edge0.7;Th. athole1.5. Handle lughandle,halfpreserved. class.Piercedcrescent CoarseUndecorated in section.Mediumcoarse,heavy,hard,red(2.5YR to triangular is trapezoidal 5/2) fabric. 5/6) to grayishbrown(1OYR Fabricsimilarto P169. Fig.26 P174 Jar Bag26-2.BalkA4, south. P.W.max.7.5;H. max.4.3. withpiercedcrescentlughandle. class.Bodyfragment CoarseUndecorated Coarsereddishyellowfabric(5YR6/8).Smallwhitestoneinclusions. P175 Shapeunknown Bag26-3.BalkA4, south. W. 3.5;Th. at center0.9;Th. atedge0.7. withraisededgeson upper class.Straphandlefragment FineUndecorated (5YR redsurfaces 6/3).Yellowish Mediumfinepalebrownfabric(1OYR surface. 5/8). Smootheduppersurface. P176 Shapeunknown Bag26-4.BalkA4, south. Th. 0.8-1.0.
4oo
SHARON
R. STOCKER
CoarseUndecoratedclass.Baseor bodyfragment.Mediumcoarse,soft, red fabric(2.5YR6/8) with hardlight graycore(1OYR7/1). White stoneinclusions. P177 Open shape Bag 26-5. BalkA4, south. Th. 0.45-0 5 DarkBurnishedclass.Neck and shoulderfragment.Fine palebrownfabric (1OYR6/3). Burnishedblackinteriorand exteriorsurfaces. JoinsP178. P178 Open shape Bag 26-6. BalkA4, south. Th. 0.45-0.6. DarkBurnishedclass.Neckandshoulderfragment.Finelightyellowishbrown fabric(1OYR6/4). Burnishedblackinteriorand exteriorsurfaces. JoinsP177. P179 Shapeunknown Bag 26-7. BalkA4, south. Th. 0.6. BlackCoatedclass.Bodyfragment.Fine lightyellowishbrownfabric(1OYR 6/4). Reddishyellowsurfaces(5YR6/8).Tracesof glossyblackcoatingon exterior surface. P180 Shapeunknown Bag 26-8. BalkA4, south. Th. 0.6-0.8. Bodyfragment.Mediumfine,gritty,weakredto redfabric(2.5YR6/4-6/8). Fine sandtemper. EH II? P181 Shapeunknown Bag27-1. BalkA5/A6. Th. at edge 0.5;Th. at center0.7. Dark Burnishedclass.Straphandlefragment.Fine reddishyellow to light olive grayfabric(5Y 6/2-7/8). Darkburnishedinteriorand exteriorsurfaces;inner surfaceveryworn. P182 Shapeunknown Bag 27-2. BalkA5/A6. Th.O.9. Incisedclass.Body fragment.Medium coarse,soft, very pale brownfabric (1OYR7/3). Medium stone inclusions.Fourshallowincisedgrooveson exterior surface. P183 Open shape Bag 27-3. BalkA5/A6. DarkBurnishedclass.Two nonjoiningbodyfragments.Fine,soft,palebrown fabric(1OYR6/3). Darkburnishedinteriorand exteriorsurfaces.
DERIZIOTIS ALONI
40I
P184 Open shape Bag 27-4. BalkA5/A6. Dark Burnishedclass.Two nonjoiningbody fragments.Medium fine, soft, darkgrayishbrownfabric(1OYR4/2). Small stone inclusions.Dark burnished interiorandexteriorsurfaces. P185 Shapeunknown Bag27-5. BalkA5/A6. Th.O.9. Fine Undecoratedclass.Bodyfragment.Mediumfine,gritty,reddishyellow fabric(5YR 6/8). Fine sandtemper. P186 Shapeunknown Bag 27-6. BalkA5/A6. Th. 0.9. CoarseUndecoratedclass.Bodyfragment.Coarse,gritty,powdery,lightyellowish brownfabric(1OYR6/4), reddishyellow nearsurfaces(5YR 6/8). Sand temper. P187 Shapeunknown Bag 27-7. BalkA5/A6. Fine Undecoratedclass.Body fragment.Fine, soft, powdery,gritty,reddish yellowfabric(closeto 5YR 6/8 but oranger).Fine sandtemper. P188 Shapeunknown Bag27-8.BalkA5/A6. Th. 0.7-0.75. BlackCoatedclass?Body fragment,probablyfromshoulder.Fine light yellowish brownfabric(1OYR6/4). Reddishyellow surfaces(5YR 7/6). Tracesof glossyblackcoatingon exteriorsurface? P189 Shapeunknown Bag27-9. BalkA5/A6. Th.0.7. BlackCoatedclass?Bodyfragment,probablyfromshoulder.Fine light yellowish brownfabric(1OYR6/4). Reddishyellow surfaces(5YR 6/8). Tracesof glossyblackcoatingon exteriorsurface? Pl90
Shapeunknown
Bag 27-10. BalkA5/A6. FineUndecoratedclass.Twosmallbodyfragments.Fine,powdery,palebrown fabric(1OYR6/3); surfacesplainandveryworn. Pl91
Pithos
Figs.25, 26
Bag 29-1. TrenchesA1 (northernpart),A3, A5; level 3. Diam. 45.4;Th. 2.3-3.3. RaisedDecorationclass.Twojoiningrimfragments.Coarsepalebrownfabric (1OYR6/3). Weakredto redsurfaces(2.5YR6/4-6/8). Largetan groginclusions.Raisedplasticbandwith ropepatterndecoration. JoinsP155.
402
SHARON
R. STOCKER
CON CLUSION S DeriziotisAloniappears to havebeenoccupied fora relatively briefperiod of timein lateEH III.Buildings M andAB areamongtheearliestapsidal structures yetknownin Messenia.45 Thereis no evidencethatanyactivitiesotherthandomesticwereconducted in thesebuildings.Smallfinds recovered frombothbuildingsaresimilar, andareforthemostpartstandarditemsthatarefoundin EH III domesticcontexts. Theysuggestthat thosewholivedtherewerefamiliar withcloth-working andpotterymanufacture.46 Vesselsrepresented in theceramicassemblage arealsoof ordinarydomestic types.Allthebasicfilnctional ceramic categories arepresent: cupsandbowlsforserving,cookingpotsforthepreparation of food,and 45. An earlyMH apsidalbuildingis jarsandpithoiforstorage. The discovery of a completeEH II bowlap- reportedby Howell(1992a,pp.22, 36) parentlyon an earlierfloorbeneathbuildingAB, togetherwith several atNichoria.See alsoMaran's(1998, reworked EH II sherdsin levelsassociated withthetwoEH IIIbuildings, pp.199-201)discussionof apsidal indicatesthatthe sitewasalready in useat the timeof the Houseof the buildingson the Greekmainland.He disagrees(p.200 n. 464;p.182 n.255) Tilesat Lerna. withForsen's EH II dateforthe apsidal Thebulkof thepotteryfromDeriziotisAloni,alongwiththatfroma buildingsandpublishedartifactsat trenchexcavated in analoni ontheproperty of thePetropoulos family(see DeriziotisAloni(Forsen1992,p.99). below),constitutes theearliestpost-EHII ceramicassemblage published MoregenerallyseeMaran'suseful fromthePylosarea.Instyleit differssubstantially frompotteryinNichoria discussionof thewesternPeloponnese groupA andearlygroupC, theassemblages withwhichit findsitsclosest in the thirdmillenniumB.C. (Maran pp.15-25). parallels, eitherbecauseit waslocallyproduced orbecauseit is earlierin 1998, 46.Thereis no evidencefora kilnat date.MaterialculturewithinMesseniamayhavelackedthehomogeneity DeriziotisAloni,butstronglocal recognized in EH III in thenortheastern Peloponnese. Parallels between elementspresentin the styleof the DeriziotisAloniandthe Argolidcanbe drawnbut theyarenot exact. ceramicssuggestthatpotterywasmade if not at the siteitself. Vesselshapesshowan affinitywiththe EH III shapesof LernaIV,but regionally, therearemajordissimilarities. Standard waressuchasPattern-Decorated, 47. ForPRAPfinds,seeDaviset al. 1997,p. 434,wheretheseareprovisionPattern-Painted, FineGrayBurnished, and"Smear" waresarenoticeably allydatedbyY. Lolosandmyselfto absentatDeriziotisAloni,andthereis alsonoindication thatpottersknew MH I. The potteryin questioncomes aboutorusedthewheel. fromgridsquaresB94-90740817and Thereis someevidencethatothersettlements or homesteads con- B94-90741107in the immediate temporary withDeriziotisAloniexistedon the EnglianosRidge;surface vicinityof the Palaceof Nestor(see findssimilarto thosefromTaylour's excavation wererecovered byPRAP Fig. l). TractsC92-153andC92-156 in the areaof thesegridsquaresalso particularly in the areato the west andsouthwestof the laterpalace.47 yieldedMH pottery. Recentreexamination of findsfromBlegen's ownexcavations at the Pal48. Blegenet al.1973,pp.63-64, aceof Nestoralsoyieldedevidenceforceramic typesofthissort,recovered fig.104,forsmallfinds;fig. 159for in thelowestlevelof thetrenchopenedbyMarionRawsonin 1959onthe ceramics.Surfacecollectionsby PRAP in the areaof the Petropoulos aloni siteof GeorgePetropoulos's aloni, in thelowertownnearthenortheastern yieldedconsiderable quantitiesof MH endoftheacropolis (Fig.1).48Buildingremains fromthreedifferent levels potteryandseveralEH-MH sherds, wereuncovered in thenorthernmost sectionof hertrench.49 In thelowest specificallyin gridsquaresB94level,at1.25mbelowthesurface, awallrestedonbedrock. It is thuspossi- 90740019,B94-90740020,B94ble thattherewasoccupation in EH III at fourdistinctlocationson the 90740119,andB94-90740120. 49. Blegenet al. 1973,figs.93, 94. EnglianosRidgein thevicinityof the laterPalaceof Nestor.Theirulti50. Seefurtherdiscussionin Bennet mateabandonment infavorof a morenucleated locationintheplacewhere 1999, p. ll, fig.2.3;Daviset al.1997, thepalacewasbuiltmayhavecontributed to theremarkable expansion of pp.429-430,fig.12;Bennetand thatsite in the MiddleBronzeAge andto its growthas the dominant Shelmerdine 2001,p. 135;Shelmerdine 2001,p.113. centerin theregion.50
DERIZIOTIS
ALONI
4o3
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS anM.A.thesissubmitted constituted The subjectof thispaperoriginally of (Stocker1995).I thanktheDepartment of Cincinnati to theUniversity permitand mystudies thatfacilitated assistance Classicsforthefinancial Jack in PRAP.I amgratefillto myPRAPcolleagues, tedmyparticipation YiannosG. Lolos,andJohnBennet, L. Davis,CynthiaW. Shelmerdine, me in myworkandsharedwithme freelytheirknowlwhoencouraged B.Rutter,CarolW.Zerner, I alsothankJeremy edgeofAegeanprehistory. cominsightfill mythesisandforproviding Forsenforreading andJeanette as this articlewas mentsandadvice.JosephMoranprovidedassistance were andDianeHarris-Cline GiselaWalberg beingrevisedforpublication. Hesperia theircommentsandthoseof theanonymous mythesisadvisors; thefinalversionof thisarticle.Finally,special greatlyimproved reviewers thanksto my husbandandmy parentsfor theirunflaggingencouragethisprocess. andhelpthroughout ment,support, REFEREN CES Banks,E. 1967."TheEarlyandMiddle HelladicSmallObjectsfrom Lerna"(diss.Univ.of Cincinnati). Bennet,J. 1999."Pylos:The Expansion in Rethinkof a MycenaeanCenter," ing MycenaeanPalaces:New Interpretationsof an OldIdea, ed.M. L.
Los GalatyandW. A. Parkinson, Angeles,pp.9-18. Bennet,J.,andC.W. Shelmerdine. 2001."Notthe Palaceof Nestor: The Developmentof the'Lower Town'andOtherNon-Palatial Settlementsin WesternMessenia," in Urbanismin theBronzeSge, Sheffield,pp.135ed.K.Branigan, 140. Blegen,C. W. 1921.Korakou:S PrehistoricSettlementnearCorinth,
Boston. . 1928.Zygouries:SPrehistoric Settlementin the Valleyof Cleonae,
Mass. Cambridge, . 1937.Prosymna,Cambridge, Mass. Blegen,C. W., M. Rawson,W. Taylour, andW. P.Donovan.1973.The PalaceofNestorat Pylosin Western MesseniaIII, Princeton.
Blitzer,H. 1992."TheChippedStone, GroundStone,andWorkedBone in NichoriaII, pp.712Industries," 756.
CaringtonSmith,J.1992."Spinning in andWeavingEquipment," NichoriaII, pp.674-711. Caskey,J.L.1960. "TheEarlyHelladic Hesperia29, Periodin theArgolid," pp.285-303. .1986. "Didthe EarlyBronze Age End?"in TheEnd of theEarly BronzeXge,ed.G. Cadogan,Leiden, pp.9-30. of MesDavis,J.L. 1998."Glimpses seniaPast,"in SandyPylos:Hn HistorypromNestorto Jrchaeological Navarino, ed.J. L. Davis,Austin, .
pp. X-X
...
.111.
Davis,J.L., S. E. Alcock,J.Bennet, Y. G. Lolos,andC. W. Shelmerdine.1997."ThePylosRegional Project,PartI: Archaeological Overviewandthe Archaeological Hesperia66, pp.391-494. Survey," E. J.1914."ThePottery Forsdyke, CalledMinyanWare,"JHS 34, pp.126-156. Forsen,J.1992. TheTwilightof the EarlyHelladics:X Studyof the Disturbancesin East-Centraland SouthernGreecetowardstheEnd of theEarlyBronzeSge (SIMS-PB
116),Jonsered. French,D. H.1972. Noteson Prehistoric CentralGreece, PotteryGroupsprom
Athens.
4o4
French,D. H., andE. French.1971. "Prehistoric PotteryfromtheArea of theAgricultural PrisonatTiryns," in TirynsV, Mainz,pp.21-40. Frodin,O., andA. W. Persson.1938. Ssine: Resultsof theSwedishExcavations,1922-1930, Stockholm. Goldman,H.1931. Excavationsat Eutresisin Boeotia,Cambridge,
Mass. Howell,R.J.1992a."Middle Helladic Settlement: Stratigraphy andArchitecture," in NichoriaII, pp.15-42. .1992b."TheMiddleHelladic Settlement: Pottery," in NichoriaII, pp.43-204. Korres,G. S.1990."Excavations in the Regionof Pylos,"in EUMOUSIA: CeramicandIconographic Studiesin HonourofAlexanderCambitoglou,
ed.J.-P.Descoeudres, Sidney, pp. 1-11.
Koumouzelis, M.1980. "TheEarlyand MiddleHelladicPeriodsin Elis" (diss.BrandeisUniv.). Kunze,E.1934. Orchomenos III:Die KeramikderfruhenBronzezeit,
Munich. Maran,J.1998.Kulturwandelauf dem griechischen FestlandunddenKyAladenim spaten3. Jahrtausendv. Chr.,
Bonn. Muller,K.1938.TirynsIV: Die Urfirniskeramik, Munich. NichoriaII = W. A. McDonaldand N. C. Wilkie,eds.Excavationsat Nichoriain SouthwestGreeceII: TheBronzeAgeOccupation, Minneapolis1992
SharonR. Stocker UNIVERSITYOF CINCINNATI DEPARTMENTOF CLASSICS CINCINNATI,OHIO 4522I-0226 stockesr@email. uc . edu
SHARON
R. STOCKER
Parkinson, W. A. 1999."Chipping Awayat a Mycenaean Economy: ObsidianExchange,LinearB, andPalatialControlin LateBronze Age Messenia," in RethinkingMycenaeanPalaces:New Interpretations of an OldIdea,ed.M. L. Galaty
andW. A. Parkinson, LosAngeles, pp.73-85. Pullen,D. J. 1993.Rev.of NichoriaII, inXrchNews18, pp.38-40. Rutter,J.B. 1983."FineGrayBurnishedPotteryof the Early HelladicIII Period:The Ancestry of GrayMinyan," Hesperia52, pp.327-355. .1986."SomeCommentson theNatureandSignificance of the CeramicTransition fromEarly HelladicIII to MiddleHelladic," Hydra2, pp.29-57. . 1993."Reviewof AegeanPrehistoryII:The Prepalatial Bronze Age of the SouthernandCentral GreekMainland,"AJA 97, pp.745797. . 1995.Lerna,a PreclassicalSite in theArgolidIII:ThePotteryof LernaIX,Princeton. . 2001."Reviewof AegeanPrehistoryII:The Prepalatial Bronze Age of the SouthernandCentral GreekMainland.Addendum: 1993-1999,"inHegeanPrehistory. X Review, ed.T. Cullen,Boston, pp.148-155. Saflund,G. 1965.Excavationsat Berbati,1936-1937, Uppsala. Shelmerdine, C. W. 2001."TheEvo-
lutionof theAdministration at Pylos,"in Economyand Politicsin theMycenaeanPalaceStates,ed. S. VoutsakiandJ. Killen,Cambridge,pp.113-128. Stocker,S. R. 1995."Deriziotis Aloni: A SmallBronzeAge Sitein Messenia" (M.A.thesis,Univ.of Cincinnati). Taylour, W. D. 1958.Unpublished Excavation Notebookof Lord WilliamTaylour, Palaceof Nestor Excavations, Archivesof the AmericanSchoolof Classical StudiesatAthens. . 1973."AnEarlyHelladicSite," in Blegenet al.1973,pp.219-224. Wace,A.J. B., andC. W. Blegen. 1918."ThePre-Mycenaean Potteryof theMainland," BSA22, pp.175-189. Wiencke,M. H. 2000.Lerna,a PreclassicalSite in theArgolidIV: The Architecture, Stratification,and Potteryof LernaIII, Princeton.
Zachos,C. 1987."Ayios Dhimitrios, a Prehistoric Settlementin the Southwestern Peloponnesos: The NeolithicandEarlyHelladic Periods" (diss.BostonUniv.). Zangger,E., M. E. Timpson,S. B. Yazvenko, F.Kuhnke,andJ. Knauss. 1997."ThePylosRegional Archaeological ProjectII:LandscapeEvolutionandSitePreservation,"Hesperia66, pp.548-641. Zerner,C. W. 1978."TheBeginningof theMiddleHelladicPeriodat Lerna" (diss.Univ.of Cincinnati).
HESPERIA
72 (2003)
Pages 4 os-44 6
PAI
NTE
D
CYCLADIC
EARLY FIGU
RES
AN EXPLORATION OF CONTEXT ANDMEANING
ABSTRACT EarlyCycladicmarblefigureswerecommonlyenrichedwith paintedpatterns.Certainmotifsoccuron a greatnumberof figures,supportingthe hypothesisthatsmallcommunitiesseparated byspaceaswellastimewishedto acknowledge andconfirmculturalunity.Otherpatternsarerelativelyrare, suggestinga needto expresssmallergroupor individualidentities(perhaps associated with particularevents).Possiblefunctionsandmeaningsfor the figuresareproposedhereon the basisof thesepaintedmotifs,the archaeologicalcontextsof the figures,andethnographic parallels.
INTRODUCTION Theexamination ofEarlyCycladic figures incollections intheUnitedStates andabroadmakesit clearthatmostwerefinishedwith strongcolorsin patterns thatarenot easilyfathomable to observers today(e.g.,Fig. 1).1 Ihaveexamined approximately 450suchfigures undervarious conditionsmostlythroughvitrineglass-and haverecordedevidencefor painton morethan200 examples(e.g.,Figs.2, 3). To thisnumbercanbe added many figureswithevidenceforpaintthatI haveseenonlyin published illustrations.2 Whyweretheseworkspainted?In orderto approach this question, we mustaskanother: Whyweretheymadeat all? 1.This studycouldnot havebeen carried to thispointwithoutthe generous encouragement andcritical advice overthe lastseveralyearsof Tony Frantz,PatGetz-Gentle,Gunter Kopcke, JoanMertens,JohnM. Russell, andGeorgeWheeler.My debtto caretakers of collectionsin Greeceand the UnitedStatesis gratefully acknowledged; in particular I wishto thank Katie Demokopoulou, DollyGoulandris, NikolaosKaltsas,MarisaMarthari, JoanMertens,PhoteiniZapheiropoulou, andEos Zervoudaki.
Ihavealsobenefitedfromthe comments of audiencemembersat the Bronze Age Colloquiumin NewYork, where I presentedan earlierversionof thispaperon February 11,2002.I am grateful to RobertKoehlforinviting meto presentmyworkthere.My thanks alsoto the editorof Hesperia and to the anonymous reviewers, whose suggestions greatlyimprovedthe text. All photographs anddrawingsare the workof the author. 2. The majorityof EarlyCycladic (EC) figuresillustrated in catalogues
donot comefromdocumented excavations. Theseexamplescannonetheless provideinformation abouttheir original appearance if oneis willingto take the timeto checkforsurface patterns capturedbythe photograph (which is usuallycomposedandlit to show formratherthansurfacetexture). Some of the mostusefulillustrations can be foundin the followingcatalogues: Zervos1957;Thimmeand Getz-Preziosi 1977;Doumas1983; Getz-Preziosi 1987a,1987b;GetzGentle 2001;Renfrew1991.
406
ELIZABETH
A. HENDRIX
In this articleI seekto identifysomeof the possiblefilnctionsand meaningsassociated with the paintedfiguresof the EarlyBronzeAge Cyclades.3 Toaddress therelationship betweenindividuals andthemarble figuresthattheymadeandused,I consideronlysometypesof evidence relevant: 1) themarblefiguresthemselves, theirformsandespecially their paintedsurfaces, whicharemademorevisiblebyvariousmethodsofdocumentation; and2) patternsof deposition, the archaeological contextsof thefigures.I assumethatananalysis of theartifacts-thevisualinformation-will allowus to addressmyoriginalquestions: howdidthemarble figuresfilnctionin EarlyCycladic communities, andwhat(various things) couldtheyhavemeantto the peoplewho usedthem?That is, canwe discernthesortsof memories thatwerebeingmaintained andtransmitted bythefigures?4 The pursuitof thesequestionsmayalsorevealwhothose peoplewere.Whyweresomeindividuals associated withthefigureswhile otherswerenot? APPROACHES TO THE MATERIAL In referringbelowto EarlyCycladic"culture(s)" I mean,in a general Childeansense,thetendencyfora groupof peoplelivingin theCyclades to expressa commonidentityby makingartifacts or usingmaterialin a broadly consistent way.Thisexpression maychangeovertime,andsmaller groupswithinthe greaterenduringcommunity will addto andsubtract fromthebasicculturalcomplex,givingit a localflavor.Noneof thatdiminishestheoverriding "pan-Cycladic" identitythatcanberecognized as such(now,and,I wouldargue,duringthe EarlyBronzeAge),madetangiblein stone,clay,andmetal,andthroughburialhabitsandotherbehaviorslessresistantto the passageof time.5Thislargercommunity mayin facthaveencompassed onlysomeof theinhabited islands,butthesalient featureis thatmultiplesmallgroupsseemto havealliedthemselvesto forma largerentitycapableof satisfying generalneeds. Comparisons to othercultures willbe madewhenrelevant. TheseincludeNeolithicgroupsfromtheAegean,aswellasmodernnonindustrial groupsdescribed in theanthropological andethnographic literature. Neolithicexamples areusefulforinsightstheyprovideregarding thepossible originsof (anddepartures from)EarlyCycladicattitudestowardtheuse 3. Thefunctionof the paintedpatternwasto alerttheviewerthatanotherlayerof meaningwaspresenton the figure,whereasthe meaning of the particularmarkings wouldhavebeenunderstoodonlyby thosewho hadbeen taughtthe correspondence between motif(includingplacementon the body of the figure,color,contextof application)andconcept.SeeHoffman2002, p. 525,andespeciallyTalalay 1993, p. 38, fora generaldefinitionof the terms"function" and"meaning" in archaeological scholarship.
4. MelionandKuchler(1991,p. 3) definememoryas"aprocessprecipitatedandshapedbythe relayingof visualinformation." 5. As Nakou(1995,p. 13)writes, "theuseof metaltechnologies was tiedto thelife cycleof its users,while the persistence of the abstractforms throughconstantrepetitionandrecreationwitheachgeneration, ensured the timelesscontinuityof groupidentitywithinandabovethe individual community."
PAINTED
Figure1. EarlyCycladicmarble figurefromKeros,Kavos.H. 54.5 cm. Naxos,ArchaeologicalMuseum, Chora,4691.
EARLY CYCLADIC
FIGURES
4o7
A
408
ELIZABETH
t
etOt
w40>
A. HENDRIX
Figure2 (lefi). Detail of painted nostrilson EarlyCycladicfoldedarmfigure;no knownfindspot. H. 36.3 cm. New York,Metropolitan Museumof Art 34.11.3, Fletcher Fund,1934. Figure3 (below). Sketchof Early Cycladic"Violin"figuresfrom Naxos,Akrotiri,tombs20 (Naxos, ArchaeologicalMuseum,Chora, 1993) and21 (Naxos,Archaeological Museum,Chora,no visibleaccession number).
p.e.
e
bc\ - -\ts
sb t<
v ,qX
> of
7 oe
bv-_ ; v sowt cf iSk^" ob\z
tu.eTH ..
c
^
./
,...
.zA (
. 8'D ,{-
lfy
v4'F'sy |W
reve t
PAINTED
EARLY CYCLADIC
FIGURES
4o9
Studiesof moderngroups markings.6 of figuresandthefunctionof surface with figuresand areusefulfor suggestingpossiblemeaningsassociated especially theirpainted"skins." in graves, The EarlyCycladicfiguresarefoundalmostexclusively data.Recentworkhasmadeuse prompting theneedto examinemortuary betweenprehistoric the relationship of severalmethodsfor considering Forexample,typesof burialgoods Aegeanpeoplesandtheircemeteries. with,among fromEarlyandMiddleMinoanCretehavebeencorrelated aswellasrankingbothin life andin otherthings,"socialdifferentiation" types we tendto assumethatartifact death.7 In makingthesecorrelations, valuableto the people we findvaluabletodaywouldhavebeensimilarly on indiwhomadethemin thepast,andthata similarstatusis conferred is madethatthereare vidualsburiedwiththesegoods.The assumption labor-intentovalueexoticorrarematerials, consistent humantendencies skills.8As we shallsee,the archaeological siveproducts, andspecialized had datafromthe EarlyBronseAge suggestthatdifferentindividuals andwithinthis groupsomehadacaccessto certainkindsof artifacts, rare,areknownfora tombs,although quiredmoreof them.Well-provided goodsthatwerenot fewindividuals, butthesedidnotcontain(preserved) aboutsocialstratifiavailable to others.It is difficultto drawconclusions individuals, butwe maysurmisethatparticular cationfromthisevidence, setsof material.9 hadaccessto particular whether"rich" or"poor," that is the assumption Underlying muchof thefollowingdiscussion withcertain humanbeingsmake,use,andbecomeintimatelyassociated andcontrolthe worldthey kindsof objectsthathelpthemunderstand inhabit.The veryexistenceof gravetypes,burialgoods,andotherclues thatthe EarlyCycladic regarding attitudestowarddeathdemonstrates to helpthem specificsetof behaviors peopleshadworkedouta culturally thepastfour thathavesurvived remains copewiththisevent.Thematerial to fivemillenniacanthusbe treatedaswindowsto someaspectsof this behavior, andthemarblefiguresarea partof thisevidence.I wouldstress solefunction;as here,however,thatfinaldepositionneednot represent withthepaintedmotifssuggests detailedbelow,someevidenceassociated usesforthe figurespriorto burial. 6. The paintedmotifsfoundon MiddleandLateNeolithic(MN, LN) terracotta figuresfromtheAegeanand surrounding coastsprovideapparent antecedents forsomeof the motifs foundon EC marblefigures.Difficult to explain,however,is the dearthof on the decreased surfaceembellishment figures numberof anthropomorphic recovered fromsitesdatingto the Final Neolithic(FN) period,justpriorto the EarlyBronzeAge (EBA).Thereare twopossibilities: eitherthe motifswere materialssuch carriedon in perishable aswood,cloth,orbodypaint;or the apparent linksareasfortuitousas
parallelsdrawnbetweenskinembellishmentsin modernNew Guineaor AfricaandstrikinglysimilarEC deof allthe signs.Closeexamination beforeone alterevidenceis necessary nativecanbe favoredoverthe other. 7. Karytinos1998,pp.78-79;Maggidis1998,pp.87-91. 8. See Helms1993fora fulltreatmentof thisthesis. 9. Broodbank (2000,p. 263) andwithobservesthat"possession drawal[of goods]throughfianerary depositionwasstartingto be reworked in a fewpartsof the Cycladesinto a meansof definingstatusor controlling
value,anincipienttrendthatwasdrasticallyamplifiedin EBII."Helms (1993,pp.3-4) alsoarguesthatposor skills sessionof specialmaterials (amongotherthings)definesandis to the "elite." I wouldrather restricted remainmoreneutral,andusethe term forthosewho areactively "specialists" materials or withrestricted associated skills.MetcalfandHuntington(1991, p. 17) alsocautionthatthe equationof for on graveconstruction, expenditure example,withthe statusof the deceased is risky;muchmoreeffortmighthave or otherbebeendevotedto "rituals" record. haviorsthatleft no permanent
4IO
ELIZABETH
A. HENDRIX
Inaddition to mortuary studies, consideration ofcontemporary Bronze Agepractices relatedto bodymodification andmodernethnographic parallelsmayalsoshedlighton howsomeof the marblefigureswereused. Liketheproduction anduseof objects, bodymodification alsohelpsorganize the worldaccording to a group'svisuallexicon.Severalstudiesby TristanCarter,forexample,demonstrate thatprismaticobsidianblades wereoftendepositedin EarlyCycladicburialsunused,suggestingthat eventhepotentialeffectofusewassufficient.l° Carterarguesconvincingly thatthe ideaof thebladeswasintendedto conjurebodymodificationshaving, cicatrization, tattooing, bloodying-rather thanfoodpreparation or otherexternaltasks.The patternsof painton the marblefiguresmay similarly havesignifiedtheideaofbodyembellishment, eitheruponactual peopleorthosepersonae represented bythemarblefigures.ll GailHoffman,in a relatedstudy,concludes thatthelong-livedpracticeof womenscratching visible(bloody)linesdowntheircheeksaspart of the mourningritualin manypartsof the Mediterranean, eventoday, maybe represented bytheredstriations paintedon thecheeksof a numberof EarlyCycladicmarblefigures,as on laterandmorecertainrepresentationsof mourning women.l2 Theseredmarkings wouldhavebeen appliedattheappropriate time,suggesting a modification of meaningvia theactof painting,a pointI returnto below. The significance of paintedmotifsmaybe furtherrevealed by a consideration of elaborated "skin" in thelongertradition of figureembellishment,stretching backto theNeolithicperiodin thelandssurrounding the Aegean.LaurenTalalay, forexample, usesthe nonanatomical designson southernGreekclayfigurinesfromthe Neolithicto arguefor intersite communication, particularly betweenFranchthi CaveandCorinth.l3 The autonomous andpainted"split-leg" formsfromseveralMiddleNeolithic sitesin thevicinityof Franchthi CavefilrthersuggesttoTalalay thatthese sortsof objectsfunctionedas two halvesof a socialagreement between partiesatdifferent sites.Sheproposes that"thecirculation anduseof such deviceswouldonlymakesensein a sphereof regionalintegration where literacywasnot yet available to renderexplicita rangeof obligations or tiesamongseparate butinterdependent settlements.''l4 Herethe painted patterns helpto "match up"twohalves,physically demonstrating thebond the two partieshadwhenthe figuresweresplit.The ideaof agreement betweenseparate groupsembodiedin a paintedanthropomorphic figure is thepointthatinterestsmehere. In otherregionsandtimes,communities haveusedpaintedmotifson three-dimensional anthropomorphic figuresto expressthesocialstatusof the deceased, as,forexample,in the elaborately paintedMalangan wood 10. Carter1994,2002,andforthcoming. 11. Sherratt(2000;citedin Broodbank2000,p. 253) suggeststhatthe marblefiguresmayrepresent women broughthomeasbridesby seafarers withinexogamous networks. This seems to be pushingthe pointsomewhat. 12. Hoffman2002. 13.Talalay1993,pp.16,45, 83.
Pottery,too,mayprovidea "skin" for embellishment. Cullen(1985)suggests thatmotifson GreekUrfirnisware fromthe MN periodhelpedmaintain relationships amongdisparate communities.Emberling(1995,pp.182-192) demonstrates thatpainteddesignson early-third-millennium potteryfrom Mesopotamia andnorthwestern Iran canbe correlated withperiod,region,
andcontext(forpublicconsumption orin domesticor funerary spheres), describing deliberate expressions of community differences orsimilarities. He notes(p.190)thatthismarksa breakfromearlierperiodswherethe potterywas"largely undecorated, and asmuchas 90%mass-produced." 14.Talalay1993,p. 46.
PAINTED EARLY CYCLADIC FIGURES
4II
ritualsin PapuaNew Guinea.As Melionand madeforfianerary carvings bybeing imagesposittheirownbiography observe, "theengraved Kuchler motifswiththeirownhistory of independent depictedas an assemblage wouldbe ableto interpret individuals "Cultured" andtheirownfilture.''l5 andthereby themeaningsof thosemotifs,teachthemto theuninitiated, passdownspecificgroupmemories. theEarlyCycladic A moregeneralmodelthatseemstoworkwellwith datais looselybasedon G. W. F. Hegel'sdiscussionof ourtendencyas aspectsof ourrelaandparticular humanbeingsto seekboththeuniversal the individual In Hegel'sphilosophy, tionshipto societyandbeyond.l6 worldcan(andmust)serveas a toolforselfthatthe external recognizes freewill,whichpassesthrough generates Self-consciousness consciousness. within duringthegrowthoftheindividual threekeystagesof development offree2) establishment of selfinpossessions; "civil" society:1)expression (bysharingpossesthroughfamilial"contracts" domamongindividuals comon othersin a broader sions);and3) statedorunstateddependence This rightsto possessions.l7 munitythatdefinesandrespectsindividual his viewcanbeappliedto theBronzeAge:apersonachievesandexpresses relatimesa particular atdifferent by1) exhibiting orherownpersonality worldthroughspecificskills,roles,orpossessions; tionshipto theexternal throughfamaxis)relevance (alongatemporal 2) acknowledging"vertical" of ily/clanbondsthatconnectto the pastandfuturevia manifestations bonds throughcultural relevance "horizontal" and3) establishing memory; or community andclanto thelargercontemporary thatlinktheindividual and of particular existsas a duality Thusthe individual communities.l8 statesof being:I canownparticular things(includingskillsets universal androles)becauseI belongto a community thatacceptsthisideaof ownerprojecting ship-in thepast,present,andfuture.If we feeluncomfortable commupreindustrial ontoa prehistoric, the conceptof privateproperty goodsorskills," associated with"closely nity,we canreplace"possessions" forwhichthereis ampleevidencein thetombassemblages. GENERAL DESCRIPTION by the southernAegean The peoplewho inhabitedthe coastsbordered stylizedanthropopeculiarly Seaduringthe EarlyBronzeAgeproduced morphicfiguresthathavecometo be knownas"EarlyCycladicfigures" (Fig.4).Thesearewithsomefewexcep"figurines" or,ratherdismissively, thatresulted tionsmadeofwhitemarbleandwerefinishedwithabrasives 15. SeeMelionandKuchler1991, p. 29;the authorsgo on to write: areconceivedas skinsthat "Sculptures bodyof a replacethe decomposed deceasedpersonandthusprovidea containerforhis or herlife force.The life forcemergeswiththe material, whichis thoughtto comealivein the This meaning processof sculpting." changedoncethe carvingsbecamea valuablesourceof income(soldto
butthe functionof Westerncollectors), the motifsremainedaspotent,now protectedby a consensusthattreated themessentiallyas a variantof intelpeoplehadrightsover lectualproperty: certainmotifs,whichtheycould"lease" fortangiblegoodsor exchangeforright lands,etc.In of accessto neighboring otherwords,the sharedimageestabrelationships lishedandmaintained parties. betweenseparate
16. See alsoHelms1998,pp.3, of 6-13, on the basicorganization andgroup humansinto"individual of Us andnot-Us." identifications 17.The relevantpassagesin Hegel[1821]1981canbe foundin paragraphs 44, 75, 164, 170,and 186. 18.On the useof theseterms,see Helms1998,p. 37.
4I2
ELIZABETH
A. HENDRIX
Figure4. EarlyCycladicmarble figurefromKeros,Kavos.H. 58.0 cm. Naxos,ArchaeologicalMuseum, Chora,4181.
in smoothtransitions betweenforms.l9 Groovedlinesmadewithnarrow abrading toolsoftenemphasize interiordetailssuchastheneckline, pubic triangle, spine,buttocks, legs,andknees,aswellasdefinefingersandtoes on manyof the figures.Conspicuous in theirabsence,facialfeaturesare onlyveryrarelyindicated withgrooves, exceptontheearlier varieties, such as the so-calledPlastirastype,wherea shorthorizontalincisionsometimesrepresents themouth.20 Thechoiceofmaterial is significant. Inearlier periods, theoverwhelming majority of anthropomorphic figuresmadeon Creteandthe Greek mainland wereproduced in clay,whichlendsitselfto anadditivemodeof 19.Formanufacturing techniques, seeOustinoff1984,1987. 20. See,forexample,the Plastirastypefiguresillustrated in Thimmeand Getz-Preziosi1977,pp.231-235, nos.65-79;PreziosiandWeinberg
1970,p. 7, pl. I:4;andin theAthens NationalArchaeological Museum (NAM),no.3919,whichpreserves the pebblein theleft eye("Amorgos" is writtenon its labelbutI havenotbeen ableto confirmthatthisis the source).
Eyeswereoftenindicatedon thistype bypebblesinlaidin boredsockets;the socketsareusuallyallthatremaintoday. SeeGetz-Preziosi1987a,pls.18, 19, fora preserved pebbleinlay.
PAINTED EARLY CYCLADIC FIGURES
4I3
bystone.2l abrasive moderequired ratherthanthesubtractive, production Claycanbe smoothedandpolishedas a finalstep,as wascommonfor the plasticityof the materialpermits, pottery,but in figureproduction thejoiningtogetherof majorpartsandthe additionof evenencourages, detailson top of the basicshapes.Formsarequickly three-dimensional mistakes polisheddown.Planningis lesscritical; builtup,notlaboriously in a single maybe appliedspontaneously, areeasilyfixed.Surfacetextures This processis in stroke,andsmoothedoverif deemedunsatisfactory. rubmarkedcontrastto thatusedto shapemarblefigures:thepersistent appliedabratoolaidedby constantly bingbackandforthwitha narrow straight)surfacefeaturesin stone.The comsiveslurryto cut(generally for shapingstoneis fargreaterthanthatfor mitmentof timerequired sinceclayandstonewere is thussignificant clay;22 the choiceof material of theCyclades. to theinhabitants equallyavailable Toproasmuchasfinaleffect,mayberelevant. Modeof production, thatmusthavebeen ducea marblefigure,a grindingmotionis required mealfrom familiarto those(women,I imagine)in chargeof producing strength,patience,andan endurance, grain.It is an activitythatrequires concerns that bymoreimmediate abilityto resumeafterbeinginterrupted cropup duringa dayof domesticduties.On the otherhand,it is alsoan outin a socialsetting,sinceit is notdangeractivitythatcouldbe carried with largepiecesof equipment(asweavingon ous,loud,or associated it maybe noted,is alsoa major somekindsof loomswouldbe).Grinding, It is possiblethatwomenwerethe componentof pigmentpreparation. the scenariosuggestedaboveis consisof themarblefigures;23 producers workin ruralsettings.24 tentwithwomen's displaying of EarlyCycladicfiguresarefemale,25 The greatmajority breasts-usuallyof smallsize andpubictriangles.It shouldbe noted, beyondthe dithatthesegendersignifiersarenot exaggerated however, visualevidenceon Thereis no conventional anatomy. mensionsof average conceptsthat weretheprimary thesefiguresthatfertilityandprocreation groovesthat The few figureswith abdominal inspiredtheirproduction. 21. Forclayfigures,see illustrations 1996,pp.298, in Papathanassopoulos 299,302,307, nos.203,204,211,221. Talalay(1993,p.126, n.12) reports thatNeolithicstoneor marblefigures atThebesaswellas at predominate nearSparta;shedoes Kouphovouno, notlist sitesthatproducedbothclay andstonefiguresin equalabundance. therearemorewhite Significantly, stonethanclayNeolithicfiguresknown fromthe islands,excludingCrete;the oppositeis trueelsewherearoundthe Aegean.A notableexampleof a Neolithicstonefigureis the"FatLadyof a marbleseatedfemalefrom Saliagos," LN Saliagosthatis similarin formto Neolithicexamplesfromnon-Cycladic
regionsaroundtheAegean(seeEvans andRenfrew1968,fig. 75, andtext p. 86;see alsoPapawithbibliography, 1996,p. 319,no.240, thanassopoulos forcolorpls.).SeeTalalay1993,p. 30, fortechniquesof makingNeolithic figuresof clay. 22.Talalay(1993,p. 32) reportsthat it takesten minutesto anhourto create a clayfigure,and,citingOustinoff 1984,fiveto sixtyhoursto produce one of marble. 23. See Gero1991forthelikeliworked hoodthatwomenin prehistory stonefortoolsin a domesticsetting.It mayalsobe relevantthatat Franchthi Cave"ongivenoccasionsthroughout the Neolithic,figurineswereassociated
withdomesticworkareas,particularly thosewheresomekindof grinding (Talalay activitieswereconducted" 1993,p. 48). 24. In thevillageof TellAhmar, northernSyria,forexample,I have in wool-sortinggatherings, participated whereallthewomenof anextended familygroupconveneto separateraw woolaccordingto quality.Muchof the during villagenewswascommunicated to me andit appeared suchgatherings, amongwomenwere thatrelationships in thatsetting. formedandmaintained Seethe essaysin GeroandConkey to discerningthe 1991forapproaches ot womenln prellstory. Orgazzatlon 25. Butsee Getz-Preziosi1981. r
.
.
4I4
ELI ZA B ET H A . H EN D RIX
havebeeninterpreted aspost-partum linesmaybeexceptions.26 Thedepictionof identifiable roles,suchas(rare,andmainlymale)musicians, is unusual;the"folded-arm figures" aremuchmoreabundant. MostCycladicfiguresarequitegeneric,represented withfeetangled downward, legstogetherandbentslightlyattheknee,armsfoldedacross the chest(leftoverright),faceforwardandoccasionally tiltedupward. Hundreds, if not thousands, of examplesthatfit intothiscategorywere produced, evenif theproportions andanglesshiftedsomewhat overtime andplace.Whetherthiscanonical posturewasmeantto represent a recliningpositionor one moreor lessupright(leaningor perhapsheld)is debatable.27 Paintedfeatures mayweighttheargument in favorof thelatterposition(seebelow,pp.439-440). Establishing a chronology fortheEBACyclades is difficultgiventhe lackof stratified sites.Severalattemptshavebeenmadeto ordergroupsof artifacts basedon seriation, mostnotablybyColinRenfrewandChristos Doumas.28 Forpresentpurposes, I amconcerned withbroadtrends;the archaeological evidenceindicates thatEarlyCycladic peoplesburiedtheir deadwithpaintedanthropomorphic figuresthroughout thethirdmillenniumB.C. In this paperI seekto establishthe essentialmotivesof this practice; a studyestablishing the variations in paintedmotifsovertime mustbe leftto thefuture. It is important formyargument to useexcavated examples asoftenas possible;not onlyarequestionsof authenticity thusavoided,butassociatedburialgoodscanalsobringmoremeaningto the presenceof paint, andtothemarble figuresingeneral. I sometimes refer, however, tounproveniencedfiguresin NorthAmericanandEuropean collections in orderto makeit easierfora widelydispersed audienceto examineaccessible figures"intheflesh."Unlessthelightingfora photograph wasdesignedspecificallyto revealvestigialtracesof paint,it is nearlyimpossibleto see suchevidencein individual photographs of figuresin publications. Eventhenonspecialist caneasilyrecognize "Early Cycladic sculpture," as it is oftenreferred to today.Severalvarietiesandsubvarieties of the figureshavebeenrecognized, andthesecanbe seenasevolvingfromone to the nextoncetheirrelativechronology is identified.29 Whilethe term "sculpture" is anachronistic, its usesuggestshowtheseobjectshavecome to be categorized. In ourown agetheyhavemadethe transitionfrom "repulsively ugly"30 curiosities to elegantworksof art,worthyof displayin thefinestartcollections in theworld.Indeed,onemayarguethatin many casesa degreeof formalrefinement musthavebeena concernforsomeof 26. Getz-Gentle2001,p. 10. 27. Getz-Gentle(2001,pp.35-37) espousesa recliningposture. 28. Renfrew(1972,pp.72-75, 138142)developeda relativechronology basedprimarily on the stratigraphy of Emporioon the islandof Chiosand Phylakopion Melos.By comparing the potteryandotherfindsat thesesitesto findsfromlesswellstratifiedsitesin the islandsandsurrounding mainlands
(e.g.,AtticaandtheTroad),he wasable to arrangegroupsof objects,including the marblefigures,in roughlychronologicalorder.Althoughdetailsof this orderaredebated,(see,e.g.,Doumas 1972,p. 151,n. 1), thebasicframework stillholds.BarberandMacGillivray (1980)objectto Renfrew's identificationof chronological periodswith dominant"cultural" groups,andprefer insteadthe moregeneralEC I, EC II,
andEC IIIA andB.Thesearethe most commonlyuseddesignations forthe periodsRenfrewdescribesusingcultural terms.Fora recentexamination of EC chronology, see Broodbank 2000, pp.53-55. 29. Fora description of thevarieties, see Renfrew1969;Getz-Preziosi1987a. 30.Wolters1891,p. 47,"abstossend hassliche" (referring to a headin Athens,NAM 3909).
PAINTED EARLY CYCLADIC FIGURES
4I5
theEarlyCycladicmarbleworkers.31 No casecanbe made,however, that theoriginalpurposeof theworkswasto pleasetheeyeorsatisfya senseof aesthetics, althoughthisis a legitimateresponse fora modernaudience.32 If one considersthe additional surfaceelaboration on thesefigures (see,e.g.,Figs.1, 4), it is mucheasierto imaginethattheyweremadeto satisfya widerrangeof needs.Thepresence of anysortof embellishment on the polishedwhitesurfacesof EarlyCycladicfiguresmaybe visually startlingto oureyes,trainedto lookapprovingly at sculptural analogies suchasthoseproduced byModiglianiandBrancusi,33 butin the context of prehistoric figureproduction in the Aegeanbasin,the paintedEarly Cycladicfigurefits,evencomfortably, intoanearlierandapparently complextradition. METHODS FOR REVEALING EVIDENCE FOR PAINTED PATTERNS Usinga broadrangeof lightingandphotographic techniques, computer enhancement, andmicroscopic examination, I havebegunto document thepaintedsurfacefeatures thatwereappliedto EarlyCycladicfigures.34 The patternsrevealed includerecognizable featuressuchaseyes,jewelry, andhair,aswellaslesseasilyidentifiable markings on theheadandbody. In mostcasesno pigmentremains, butphotographic andcomputer manipulation techniques canenhancethe subtleeffectsof ancientpainting. Ultraviolet lighthasproveduseful,althoughthereasonsforitsefficacyare stillnotunderstood. Rakinglightexaggerates topographic differences on themarble's surface resulting fromtheeffectsof paint(orsurfacepreparationpriorto painting)longsincevanished. These"ghosts," described in 1970byPreziosiandWeinberg on a varietyof Cycladicfigures,hadbeen alreadyidentifiedearlierby Papathanassopoulos on a figurenowin the AthensNationalArchaeological Museum,althoughhe did not use the term"ghost."35 31. See Getz-Preziosi1987a.Cory minutetracesof extantpigment; (1956,p.33) reportsthatwhileany (3) ultraviolet (UV) visiblefluorescence memberof the modernBantucommuphotography, whichpermitsfluoresnitymaymakefigurinesforthe various cencein the visiblerangeof the specfunctionsforwhichtheyareneeded, trumto exposethe film;(4) UV-reflecthosewho aremostskilledaresuffitancephotography, whichpermitsonly cientlyvaluedto be invitedto make thosewavelengths belowthevisible figuresforothers.See alsoBroodbank rangeof the spectrumto exposethe 2000,p.63. film;and(5) computerenhancement 32. Fortheinfluenceof Cycladic of digitizedphotographs to expand designon modernsculptors, andthus andcontrastimageinformation. I also modernexpectations, see Sachini1984. producea detailedsketch(e.g.,Fig.3) 33. See Renfrew1991,pp.168-185, basedon prolongedobservation of the pls.116-119. object. 34. See Hendrix2003 forfull 35. PreziosiandWeinberg1970; descriptions of thesetechniques. In Papathanassopoulos 1963,p. 132. brief,I use (1) rakinglightphotography Differentkindsof paintintegratewith to enhancetopographic differences the marblesubstrate in differentways, causedby differential weathering; andtheythereforeaffectthe marble's (2) close-upphotography to capture abilityto withstandweatheringagents
differently. Finelydividedreds,which canbe suspendedin mediawithlow viscosities,tendto seepintothe pores of the stone,whilecoarsepigments, suchas azurite,stayon the surfaceof the stone,protectingthatsurfacefrom the corrosive effectsof water.Thislattersortof paintpreserves the surface whereverit is applied.Overtime,the unprotected surface(includingareas paintedwithlow-viscosity media) deteriorates morethanprotectedsurfaces.The variables thatcontroltherate andcharacter of the weathering, however,havenotyet beenstudied.I am gratefulto JerryPodanyat theJ. Paul GettyMuseumfordiscussingwithme (March2003)the problemsthatresult fromassumingwe understand these weatheringmechanisms on EC figures.
4I6
ELI ZA B ET H A . H E N D RIX
Inotherinstances, enoughpigmentparticles survive tobedocumented by close-upphotography. This salutary conditionhasin somecasespermittedelemental oropticalanalyses of pigments, resulting in theidentificationoftheminerals usedbytheCycladic islanders fortheircolors.These findingsmayhaveimportant ramifications regarding the significance of certainminerals beyondtheircoloringeffects(seebelow). Perhapsthe mostimportant methodforrevealing tracesof painton Cycladicfigures,however, is theproduction of a carefillsketchof thefigure(e.g.,Fig.3).Thetimerequired forthisexercise is timespentlooking, whicheventually enablesthe observerto distinguishevidencefor paint fromfortuitous burialstains. PAINT MOTIFS In the followingpages,I describethe motifsin orderof frequency of occurrence, withthecaveatthatwhatappears to be mostcommonis simplywhathasbeenmostcommonly (seenand)preserved; thismayormay not reflectwhatwas mostoftenpaintedin the EarlyBronzeAge. For example,if a yellowrobemadefromsaffronandsalivahadbeenrepresentedon everyfigure,therewouldbelittleorno evidenceforsuchpaintingtoday. EYES:ANATOMICAL, BELOWCROWNBAND Mostof theCycladicfiguresthatpreserve evidenceof paintbeartracesof almond-shaped eyes,placed(usually notentirelysymmetrically) oneither sideof the nose(e.g.,Fig. 1).Theyarethe moststrikingof the painted motifs,heralding a dramatic breakfromtheNeolithictradition of cursory sliteyes.36 TheseBronzeAgeeyesareoftenverylarge,extending fromthe noseto the edgeof the face,andarefrequently enlivenedwith pupils, lashes,andeyebrows. Accompanying theseeyes,verticalhair(?)strokesor, moreusually,a palehorizontal band("ghost") maybe seenat the top of thecrown.Thislatterpatternsuggestssomesortof hairstyle orheaddress (theearlier "Plastiras"-type figures wereoftenprovided withagrooveacross theforehead to indicatea polos). Numerous examples canbecited.Figures fromknowncontextsthatpreserve thismotifinclude alargeexample from Kavos(Keros)in the NaxosArchaeological Museumat Chora(Fig.4; no. 4181),andfourNaxianfiguresin the NationalArchaeological Museum(NAM) in Athens:one fromKarvounolakkoi (NAM 6140.16), anotherfromPhyrroges (Fig.5, NAM 6140.19),andtwo fromSpedos 36.Talalay(1993,p. 12) notesthat on NeolithicfiguresfromFranchthi Cave(produced throughout the Neolithicperiod),"facialfeaturesarefairly perfunctory: mouthsandearsarenever indicatedon anthropomorphic images, thoughtheyaredetailedon zoomor-
phicexamples. Eyesareinfrequently marked andsmall,andmodelednoses appearcommonly" (emphasismine). The figuresfromAchilleion,Sitagroi, andelsewheregenerallyhavecoffeebeanor sliteyes.Exceptionsto the canonicallargeopeneyeson Early
Cycladicfiguresexist,andmayhintat recollections of earlierfigures.A marble headfromtomb112of the Krasades cemeteryon Antiparos(NAM4848) hastwoincisedslitsforeyes,aswellas noseandearsin relief.
PAINTED
marblefigFigure5. EarlyCycladic tomb28. urefromNaxos,Phyrroges, H. 19.8cm.Athens,National Museum6140.19. Archaeological
EARLY CYCLADIC
FIGURES
4I7
4I8
ELIZABETH
A. HENDRIX
(NAM6140.21,6140.22),to lista few.37 Carefulexamination of illustrationsin catalogues of EarlyCycladicfigures,suchas thosepublished by Getz-Preziosi/Gentle, andDoumas,demonstrates thatthispatternwas evidently widespread andlong-lived.38 HAIR In additionto a polos, numerous Cycladicfiguresweregivenanelaborate coiffure. Again,symmetry wasnot alwaysimportant, althoughit is most oftenthesymmetrical examples thathavebeenpublished (reflecting modern receptiveness morethanBronzeAgecustom).Hairstyles madeupof curls or shortstraight"pigtails" or sideburns aregenerallypreserved as paint ghosts,suggesting the paintusedwasthickenoughto actas a barrier to weathering agents(seeFig.5).Thiswouldbeconsistent withapaintmade withazurite, whichrequires a thickmediuminwhichto suspendandbind thelargeparticles. Tentatively, I wouldsuggestthatmostcapsandmany hairstyles wereoriginally blue,39 withtheexception of a fringeof redverticalstrokesthatoccasionally appears acrosstheforehead(e.g.,on a head intheMetropolitan MuseumofArt[MMA],no.69.5.11,whoseredstripes wereidentifiedas cinnabar by energydispersive X-rayspectrometry40). Sometimes thisfringeappears inconjunction withaghostedbandasthough representing short-cropped hairprotruding belowthecap.Clearexamples maybe seenon figuresin the Metropolitan Museumof Art,theJ. Paul GettyMuseum,theHonoluluAcademyof Arts,andtheMuseumof Art andArchaeology, University of Missouri-Columbia.41 An excavated exampleof a figurewithelaborate coiffure"ghosts" is thefolded-arm figurefromPhyrroges tomb28 (Fig.5) mentionedabove in conjunction witheyeghosts.Althoughmanymoreexamplesaredisplayedin museums,I havenot beenableto tracethoseto documented excavations. Someexamples in disparate butaccessible collections include figuresin theNaxosArchaeological Museumin Chora(4695/8927),the 37. ForNaxos4181,see Zapheiropoulou1980,p.534, pl.240;forNAM 6140.16,seePapathanassopoulos 1963, p. 112,pl. 43;forNAM 6140.19,see Marangou1990,p. 152,no. 157 (color pl.) andbibliography. Thesefiguresare alsoillustrated, withdrawingsof paintedmotifs,in Hendrix2000: nos.23,28, and41. Largephotographs of the figuresfromSpedos,tombs13 (6140.21)and10 (6140.22),arepublishedin Zervos1957,pls.114and115, respectively. 38.The samemotifcanbe discernedon a marbleseatedfigurefrom LN Sangrion Naxos;anexcellentphotographis publishedin Papathanassopoulos1996(p.321,no.243).The contoursof the Sangrifigureforeshadow the shapeof the EC I "Violin" figures.
The topof the head,whichis flattened, hasa slightlypalerbandat the top of the crown,andthe righteye,withpupil andpossiblyeyelashes,is visibleas darkerlineson the stone.AlthoughI havenotyet examinedthisfigureoutsideits vitrine,additional painton the rightcheekof the figureseemsto be visiblein the photograph. As muchas the motifrecallsearliertraditions, it alsoheraldsthe newapproach to the humanform(specifically the openeyes) thattookholdin the EBACyclades. 39.This possibilityis alsosuggested by Getz-Preziosi(1987b,p. 169).A figurein the HonoluluAcademyof Arts(4386.1)preserves tracesof blue on the foreheadandrightsideburncurl, in additionto reddotson the cheeks andverticalstrokesacrossthe forehead;
see Getz-Preziosi1987b,p. 204, no.55. My sincerethanksto PatGetz-Gentle formakinghernotesfromthe"Cycladic Examination Project" (in connection withthe VirginiaMuseumof Fine Arts,Richmond,exhibitionandcatalogue)available to me.See alsoa figure in the BritishMuseum(no.1971.521.1),discussedbelow. 40. Hendrix1997-1998,pp.7-8 41. SeeHendrix1997-1998,p. 10, figs.10-12 (MMA34.11.3),andalso Getz-Preziosi1987b,p. 107,pl. III (J.PaulGettyMuseum);p. 204, no.55 (HonoluluAcademyof Arts4386.1); andpp.246-247,no.81,withdrawing of paintremains(University of Missouri-Columbia 76.214).See also n. 39 above.
PAINTED EARLY CYCLADIC FIGURES
4I9
LandesCollectionin Athens(304),andtheBadisches N. P.Goulandris (70/SSO).42 museumin Karlsruhe DOTS/STRIPESON FACE Rowsof dots single,double,ormultiple-werepaintedacrossthefaces of manyfiguresandon occasionextendaroundthe backof the heador occurelsewhereon the body.Stillevidentis a patternof blue-over-red onein a private I haveexamined, paint,neatlyusedontwolargeexamples collectionin NewYork,69 cmin height,theother,77 cmin height,in the The largesizeof context.43 BritishMuseum,neitherfroma documented thanthe more thesefiguresmaysuggestthattheywereuseddifferently common30- to 50-cm-tallfigures.Doesthelargersizesuggesta greater audience,eitherin termsof numberor status?Thereis no evidenceto doessuggestthat argueonewayortheother.The shiftin color,however, eitherbytime(theearliergroupseeseparated thereweretwoaudiences, thattwocolorswere ingonlythereddots)orbyaccessto theknowledge red,thoughonlythebluewas present(onegroupawareof theunderlying visible). roundeddotswerepaintedacrossthe At leastfiverowsof carefillly of theNewYorkfigure,andnineormorerowsacrossthecheeks, forehead bythemoutharea,where interrupted belowthenosebutperhaps extending At thebackof thehead,a neatlysquared preserved. dotsareonlypartially The dots,as dots.44 byblue-on-red hairmass(nowa ghost)wasbordered callatteneyesandeyebrows, wellastheverylarge(slightlyasymmetrical) areaof focuson thefigure. tionto theheadastheprimary Two rowsof dotswerepaintedacrossthe foreheadof the British onthecheeks. Museumfigure,andasmanyassevenrowscanbediscerned Moredifficultto detectareatleasttworowsof dotson thechin.A stripe downthe nosewasalsopaintedwithblueoverred.Bluepaintis clearly andontheleftsideof the visibleattheedgesof thelargeeyes,aseyebrows, just pattern);a shortdarkstrokeappears forehead(in an unidentifiable withredpaint, The spineof thisfigurewashighlighted belowthenose.45 asweretheincisionsbetweenthe neckandthebaseof the skullandthe jawline(theredon theBritishMuseumfigurewasanalyzedandidentiThefigurewasgivenrednostrils,a detailalsopreserved fiedascinnabar46). Museum(Fig.2, above). on a figurein theMetropolitan facedotsarein redpaint.Catalogues of the preserved The majority common thatfacedotswererelatively of Cycladicfiguresdemonstrate onbothlargeandsmallfigures,andonfiguresthatspantheEC II period 42. ForNaxos4695/8927,see 1980,pl.235;for Zapheiropoulou Museum Foundation, N. P.Goulandris OfCycladicArt,Coll.304,see Renfrew 1991,pls.2, 3, 100:7(detail);for 70/550,see BadischesLandesmuseum ThimmeandGetz-Preziosi1977, p. 271, no. 171. 43. SeeGetz-Preziosi1987a,
pl.Vl:a,forthe figurein NewYork; Fitton1989,frontandbackcover, forthe BritishMuseumfigure (no.1971.5-21.1). fora de44. Seebelow("Jewelry") paintedmotifs scriptionof additional on thisfigure.Also of interestis the patternin the surfacesheenof thebelly textilethatmusthave of a plain-weave
beenin contactwiththe marblewhile it wasburied.The patternis visiblein rakinglight(seebelow,Fig. 13). 45.This lineis describedasblackby Higgins(1972),butit mayoncehave beenredif it waspaintedwithcinnabar. SeeHendrix2001,pp.53-54, on the colorshiftof cinnabarfromredto black. 46. Higgins1972.
420
ELIZABETH
A. HENDRIX
(the KapsalathroughLateSpedosstyles).47 Unfortunately, noneto my knowledgecomefromdocumented excavations. Publishedexamplesin accessiblecollectionsincludeSpedos-typefiguresin Boston,Pasadena, Karlsruhe, andMunich.48 Vertical stripeson thecheeksarestillvisibleon a handfulof figures.49 As mentionedabove,Hoffmanhasrecentlyexplored themeaningof this motifin thecontextof mourning. Herargument is convincing, although otherinterpretations arealsopossible(e.g.,clanor age-related cicatrization).Thefiguresthatbearthesemarkings areunprovenienced worksdated onthebasisofformalstyle;thestylesrangefromthoseof theearlier phases of production of folded-arm figuresto thelater.Thusthemotifappears to spanatleastseveralhundred yearsin theCycladicperiod,andbeyond,if Hoffmanis correct. Unfortunately, heretoowe cannotturnto associated goodsor findspots. Therefore interpretations relyon theevidenceon the figuresthemselves. This evidencemaybe compared to the ethnographic andhistorical records,asHoffmanhasdone,butforidentifying possible functions, themotifmayalsobeusefullyconsidered inthecontextof other paintedfigures(seebelow). PAINTEDGROOVES Groovesbetweencontiguous bodyparts(suchasthespine,head/neck; not betweenarms/torso or legs)wereoftenpickedoutwithredpaint,as on thefigurein theBritishMuseumdescribed above.Fingersandtoeswere alsooccasionally coloredred,withpainteitherfillingincisionsordefining the digits.The earliestexamplewithwhichI amfamiliaris a "Pre-Canonical" figurewitharmsmeetingatthecenterof thetorsoin themanner of Plastiras-variety figures.Redstrokesdefinethe fingers,andredwas paintedin the toe incisions.Mercuryandleadweredetectedon the fingers,indicating thatcinnabar andperhaps redleadwereusedforthecolor.50 Redgrooves canbeobserved onfigures ofthePlastiras, Kapsala, andSpedos typesandon figuresfromtransitional phases,butnotonthe(later)DokathismataorChalandriani varieties.
JEWELRY Necklacesandarmbanglescanbe discerned on a fewEarlyCycladicfigures,althoughthismotifis not as commonas othersortsof embellishments,suchas facedots.One of the mostspectacular examplesin this respectis thefigurein a privatecollectionin NewYorkdiscussed above.5l Alongwith numerousanatomical detailsandskinembellishments, the figurewasprovided withbangleson the leftwrist,a "choker" belowthe chincomposedof linkedbutterflylike motifswith a bandof fringedescendingfromit. At thebaseof theneckis anothernecklace, thisoneof linkedscallopswithdotsatthecenterof eachscallop.Boththechokerand the necklaceextendpartway aroundthebackof the neck.They,andthe bangles,arepaintedred.Onotherfigures(see,e.g.,Fig.1),redlinesin the groovesbetweenthe headandbody(whichoccurat the top andat the baseof the neck)mayrepresent necklaces, or maybe relatedto the red-
47. SeeHendrix,2000,fig.18, fora sketchof fourteenexamples. 48.ThimmeandGetz-Preziosi 1977,nos.139,156,171,190.The Karlsruhe andMunichfiguresareprovidedwithtentativeproveniences in ThimmeandGetz-Preziosi1977, basedon old museumnotesassociated withtheiracquisition. Forpublished photographs of examplesin private collections,seeThimmeandGetzPreziosi1977,nos.141,209. 49. Hoffman2002,pp.526-530, withbibliography andcomparanda. See alsoHendrix2000,fig.22. 50. SeeHendrix2000,no.5. The figureis currently on loanto theMetropolitan Museumof Art, L.1997.70,fromtheWallachMuseum, ColumbiaUniversity. My thanksto SarahEllistonWeinerforpermission to examinethisfigure.SeeHendrix 2000,pp.95-97, tablesI:5 andI:6, whereadditionalfigureswithpainted groovesarelisted. 51. SeeGetz-Preziosi1987b,pl.I, no.24;Hendrix2000,no. 17.
PAINTED EARLY CYCLADIC FIGURES
42I
Figure6. EarlyCycladic marblehead fromfigurewithpainteddiadem; noknownfindspot.H. 10.6cm. Naxos,Archaeological Museum, Chora,4182.
Figure7. EarlyCycladic silver diademfromAmorgos,Dokathismata,tomb14.Athens,National Archaeological Museum4729. After Zervos
1957, pL 127
52. ThimmeandGetz-Preziosi 1977, p. 259, no. 151;Badisches Landesmuseum 75/49.
53. Carter,forthcoming.
paintedgroovesthatarefoundwith somefrequency elsewhereon the bodyasdescribed above.Thebangleson thewristsof a largefigurein the Badisches Landesmuseum in Karlsruhe52 anda smaller figureintheStaatlicheAntikensammlungen undGlyptothekin Munich(10.382)survive as grooves; no tracesof paint,if paintwaseverthere,remain. Thedottedlozengespaintedacrossthecrownof a headin theNaxos ChoraMuseum(Fig.6) mayrepresent a diadem,thesignificance ofwhich cannotbe precisely ascertained fromthearchaeological record.A similar headdress mayhavebeenwornby someEarlyCycladicpeople:a silver bandwithzigzagmotifwasfoundin a tombonAmorgos(Fig.7;seealso below,p. 440).Whethersucha headdress strictlyconveyed a specificstatusorwasmorefluidin its meaningis uncertain. Jewelrymotifsseemto be restricted to EC II, whichaccordswiththe dramatic increasein personaladornment atthistimeobserved by Carter.53
422
ELIZABETH
A. HENDRIX
Figure8. EarlyCycladicmarblefigure;no knownfindspot.H. 39.0 cm. Naxos,ArchaeologicalMuseum, Chora,4675.
ZIGZAGS/STRIPESON BODY Markings onthechestsof EarlyCycladic figuresmostoftentaketheform of a seriesof vertical,or nearlyvertical,stripesor a zigzag.Thisdeparts somewhat fromtheNeolithictendency to represent a crossed-strap motif, althoughsimilarities canbe found.54 The incisionson someViolin-type figuresfromtheverybeginnings of theBronzeAgemaypreserve thelast vestigesof theNeolithicformof thismotif(see,e.g.,Fig.17,below). A zigzagis visibleacrossthe chestof a figurein the NaxosChora Museum(Fig.8). In additionto the zigzagandthe commoneyesand crownband,thisSpedos-type figurealsoeffiibitsat leastfouradditional 54. See,e.g.,Papathanassopoulos "nonanatomical" eyes,a motifdiscussed in moredetailbelow.The upper 1996, pp.295,303,304,306,nos.196, halfofaDokathismata-type figurein theMetropolitan Museumof Artis 213,214,220. Fora clayfigurewith illustrated herein a photograph takenundernormallightconditionsas clearverticalstripesacrossthe chest wellasin anultraviolet reflectograph (Fig.9).The latteris characterized andzigzagsacrossthebelly,seep. 293, bya mottledsurface; a palezigzagcanbe discerned acrossthechest. no. 189.
PAINTED EARLY CYCLADIC FIGURES
a
Figure9. EarlyCycladicmarblefigure;no knownfindspot.H. 23 cm. New York,MetropolitanMuseum of Art 1971.258.1.Gift of Alastair BradleyMartin,1971. (a)Photographtakenundernormallight; (b)W-reflectance photograph.
55. Getz-Preziosi1987b,p. 207. 56. SeeHendrix1997-1998,p. 8, figs.6, 7. 57. SeeHendrix2003,tableI. On cinnabar, seebelow,n. 70.
423
b EarlyCycladicfigureswithverticalstripeson theirckestsmayin somecasesactually havebeengivenzigzagsoriginally, sincethemarksare generally poorlypreserved, andoftennotquitevertical.Stripesacrossthe chestappearclearlyon at leastfourEarlyCycladicfigures.One figure comesfromtomb14 at the siteof Dokathismata on Amorgos.Darkred stripes,slightlyoff-vertical, arestilleasilyvisibleacrossthechest(seebelow,pp. 435, 437, for a description of this figureandits archaeologicalcontext). The othersareunprovenienced works.In eachcasethecolor is red,butit is notcertainthatthesamepigmentwasusedforallof them. The redpigmenton the stripeson a figurein the VirginiaMuseumof FineArts,Richmond, wasidentified ascinnabar,55 whereas myattempts to analyzeby X-rayfluorescence spectroscopy (XRF)the stripeson the chestof a figurein theMetropolitan Museumof Art(a"Post-Canonical" or "Dokathismata" typehermaphrodite [possessing breastsandpenis], MMA1972.118.10356) yieldedslightlyelevated levelsofiron,butnomercury(whichwouldhavebeeneasilydetectedbytheinstrument) indicative of cinnabar. I havethustentatively identifiedtheredof theMetropolitan Museumfigure's cheststripesasironoxide(eitherredocherorhematite). Both cinnabarand iron havebeen identifiedon EarlyCycladicand NeolithicGreekfiguresandvessels.57 Unlikesomeof the previously describedmotifs,thestripesonthechestappear to bea motiffavored toward theendof theEC II period. A zigzagpatternon the bellyis stillvisibletodayon a figurefrom tomb14 of the Spedoscemeteryon Naxos,as it wason the photograph
ELIZABETH
424
A. HENDRIX
Figure10 (left).EarlyCycladic marblefigurefromNaxos,Spedos, tomb14.H. 33.5cm.Athens, NationalArchaeological Museum 6140.20. Figure11 (below).LateNeolithic fragment of claylegsfromThessaly, Sesklo.P.H.ca.6 cm.Athens, NationalArchaeological Museum 12246.
takenbyZervosin 1957beforetheencrustation wasremoved(Fig.10).58 Centuriesearlier, a verysimilarzigzagwasscratched on the surfaceof a clayfigurefragment fromLN Sesklo(Fig.11).Thereis no reasonto supposethatthemotifwascarefully passeddownoverthislongspanof time. Theideaof abeltwitha simplepattern, however, mayhavebeencommon to bothLNThessalyandEarlyCycladicNaxos. Vertical zigzagson the armsorlegswerealsoapplied. Thesemaybe opposed,forminga seriesof stackeddiamonds, as at thejunctureof the rightupperarmandtorsoof a Plastiras-type figurefromNaxos,Akrotiri, tomb20,59 andontherightthighof anunprovenienced LateSpedos-type figureillustrated in theKarlsruhe catalogue.60 Again,it is likelythathundredsofyearsseparate thesetwoexamples, suggesting thatmuchevidence forthe motifon intervening figureshasbeenlost,andthatmotifscould endure(asmotifs,notnecessarily asparticular symbols)overimpressively longintervals of time. 58. Zervos 1957, pl. 108. 59. Doumas 1977, p. 93, pl. 32:f-g; Hendrix 2000, no. 3. 60. Thimme and Getz-Preziosi 1977, p. 267, no. 162 (and p. 467,
wheretracesof redarenoted);Hendrix 2000,no.36. SeeHendrix2000,figs. 23 and24 forsketchesof figureswith .
vertlca
.
s zlgzags.
PAINTED EARLY CYCLADIC FIGURES
Figure12.EarlyCycladic marble headfromfigure;noknownfindspot. P.H.10.7cm.Athens,N. P.GoulandrisFoundation, Museumof Cycladic Art,Coll.701.
61. Doumas(2000,p. 146)shows howanotherlightingsituationreveals aeyesandeyebrows." An illustration in Renfrew1991(pl.76) alsoshowsaeyes andeyebrows," aswellas an almondshapedmouth.Neitherauthormentionsthe fourpupilsor the archabove the top set of eyes.
425
EYES:NONANATOMICAL I concludethis selectedcatalogueof motifswitha patternthatis more mysterious thanrare."Eyes" paintedonthebodyandmultiple(morethan two)eyesonthefacearevisibleon a surprising numberof EarlyCycladic figures.A clearexampleis in theNaxosChoraMuseum,mentionedand illustrated above(Fig.8).In additionto the zigzagon thechestandtwo verylarge openeyesonthefaceofthatfigure,alargedottedlozengeoreye is wellpreserved in greenpigmentat thebaseof theneck.Closerexaminationreveals thattwomoreeyescanbeseenonthefacebelowthebetterpreserved eyes.Whetherallfoureyeson thefacewerevisiblesimultaneouslyis difficultto determine, sincetheeffectsof themediamayresultin ghostsorothervestigialremainsevenafterthepigmenthadbeenmostly removedorhadflakedaway.Thegreeneyeat thebaseof theneck,however,wassurelyvisibleat the sametimeas twoor moreeyeson the face (sincetheyarestillvisibletoday),suggesting thatthesimultaneous display of multipleeyeswasin someinstances deliberate. It is possiblethata secondsetof eyeswaspaintedafterthefirsthadwornaway,butsufficiently soonafterfor the painterto avoidthe (charged?) spaceof the firstset. Anotherpossibility is thattwo setsof eyeswerepaintedto be visibleat once,twosetsrepresenting more"eyepower" thana singleset. A strikingexample of thisphenomenon occurson a headin theN. P. Goulandris Collection, intheMuseumofCycladic ArtinAthens(Fig.12). In rakinglight,thetwopupilson the rightsideof thefaceconfirmthat twosetsof eyeswerepainted not a singleset of eyeswitheyebrows, as previously thought.61 The archspanningthe top set of eyescanalsobe seenontwootherfiguresin thesamemuseum(Coll.252,280);thelarger example(Coll.280)is betterknownforits redparallelstripesthatcover
426
ELIZABETH
A. HENDRIX
theface,chest,forearms, andbelly.62 Including theheadillustrated in Figure12,I knowof sevenfiguresthatpreserve doublesetsof eyespaintedin thismanner, thatis,in approximately thesamelocationbutdistantenough fromeachotherto implythatonelocationwaschosenin orderto avoid theother.63 A seriesof relatively darkopenlozengeshapesarranged aroundthe faceappear in anultraviolet reflectograph of alargefigureintheMetropolitanMuseumofArt(MMA68.148).64 Whenthefigurewassubsequently examinedunderlow magnification with a stereomicroscope (x7 to x30 magnification), particlesof brightredpigmentwerediscerned. Afterthe particleshadbeenmapped,it wasapparent thatmany(althoughnot all) correlated withthelozengeshapes.Theseshapesareexceedingly difficult to discern,buttheirpresenceis rendered moreprobable bothby the remainsof pigmentandbythenumberof figuresthatbearthesefainttraces in similarplaces.65 MOTIFS: PLACEMENT, STYLE, MATERIALS Identification of themostcommonpositionsof themotifson thefigures provides another perspective onthesignificance ofthemotifs.These trends canbe considered apartfromthearchaeological context,givingus anidea of whatthe appropriate positionswereaccording to pan-Cycladic customs. Motifssuchashairconfigurations andjewelryoccurwhereonemight expect,buttherearetellinglimits.Althoughhaircurlsmayextenddown thesidesoftheneck,andwelldowntheback,66 theywerenotto myknowledgepainteddownthefrontof thetorso(asonkouroi,forexample) . Representations of bangleson the wristsareattested,but not on the upper armsor aroundthe ankles.We beginto forman ideaof EarlyCycladic groomingandadornment for(some)women.Thesemotifsreflectmaterial,three-dimensional objectsthatwerepartof the worldof the living; bracelets andpossiblenecklacecomponents havebeenfoundin a number of tombs,andwe canassumethatEarlyCycladichumansgrewhairthat required attendance. Dressis missingfromthe marblefigures,although textilepseudomorphs on atleastonelargefigure(Fig.13)hintatthepossibilitythatarticlesof clothingwereprovided asactualtextiles.67 62. Hoffman2002,p. 533,figs.7, 8. See Doumas2000,the mostrecent catalogueof thiscollection,p. 145, no.252;p. 158,no.280. See Hendrix 2000,no.43, fora "map" of the paint remains.
63.The sevenfiguresarepublished asfollows:1) MunichStaatliche Antikensammlungen undGlyptothek 10.382:Fellman1981,pp.14-16,no. 6; Hendrix2000,no.27;2) Athens,N. P. Goulandris Foundation, Museumof
CycladicArt,Coll.252:Renfrew1991, p. 117,pl. 77, fig. 10;Hendrix2000, no. 33;3) Karlsruhe, BadischesLandesmuseum70/550:Getz-Preziosi1987a, no.29, fig.42:g;Hendrix2000,no.48; 4) privatecollection:Hendrix2000, no.53;5) Athens,N. P.Goulandris Foundation, Museumof CycladicArt, Coll.701 (Fig.12 here):Renfrew1991, p. 121,pl. 76;Hendrix2000,no.55;6) privatecollection:Getz-Gentle2001, pl. 71:d("Keros hoard"); 7) Athens,
N. P.Goulandris Foundation, Museum of CycladicArt,Coll.1105:Doumas 2000,p. 138,no. 187. 64. SeeHendrix1997-1998, pp.12-13, figs.13-15 (fig.14 is the UV reflectograph). 65. SeeHendrix2000,fig. 19,for sketchesof ten figureswithnonanatomicaleyes. 66. See Renfrew1991,p. 122,fig. 7. 67. Hendrix2000,p. 47, n.64.
PAINTED
EARLY CYCLADIC
FIGURES
427
Figure13.Detailof textilepseudomorphon thebellyof anEarly Cycladic marblefigure;noknown findspot.P.H.69.4cm.NewYork, ShelbyWhite andLeonLevy Collection.
Motifsthatdo notseemto represent tangibleobjectsincludevarious sortsof stripes,zigzags,andthe nonanatomical eye.Thesemayhavehad correatlonsln palnt,scarrlng, ortattoolngon lvlng.wumans, ort.weymay havebeenreserved forthemarblefiguresalone.Theoretically theycould be appliedanywhere, so anyconsistency in theirpositionson the body shouldaidin theinterpretation of theirsignificance. Vertical stripesoccuron thecheeksandchestsof thefigures,butnot acrossthebacksor on thelegs.Rowsof dotswerepaintedon thecheeks andbrow,andveryoccasionally aroundthebackof thehead.Thismotif hasnotbeenobserved belowthe neck.Zigzags,however, mayappearon theface(asonMMA1971.258.1; seeabove,Fig.9),chest,upperarms,or legs.Whenalmondshapes,andalmondshapesvfithcentraldots(whichI interpretas eyes),wereapplied,theyalsoconsistently appearon certain partsof the anatomy. Setsof doubleeyeson thefacemayrepresent augmentedanatomical eyes.Otherpartsof thebodywerealsoprovided vfith eyes.The bellyandthroatarefavored,but eyesmayalsooccuron the upperchestandthighs.A figurein theNaxosChoraMuseum(Fig.4) has a largealmond-shaped motifon the belly(similarto the patternon the bellyof a figurein the N. P.Goulandris Collection,Coll.724).68Several almond-shaped motifsvfithoutcentraldotsappearon thefacebelowthe high-setanatomical eyes(twointhemouthregion),andseveral morevfith 68. ForColl.724^see Renfrew1991^ central dots appear on the throat. pls.2^78^96:20^100:8^ 103;also Somemotifsappearto be favoredin the earlierpartof the Early Hendrix2000^no.24^fora "map" of thepaintedpatterns. Cycladic period,andsomeinthelater.Earlymotifsincludethered-painted *
.
*
*
.
*
b
428
ELIZABETH A. HENDRIX
grooves, andlatemotifsincludethecheststripes(although thesamplesize is toosmallto feelconfidentaboutthesedistributions). Moreimportantly, mostof themotifsappear onfiguresof nearlyallvarieties, suggesting that theystayedin usefora longtime.Thepossiblefunctionsandmeanings of thesemotifsareconsidered below,followinga discussion of the archaeologicalcontextsandethnographic parallels. The playbetweensymmetry andasymmetry is manifestin the relationshipbetweencontour(exterior) andinteriordesignsandcannotbe easilydismissed asunintentional: incisions, breastforms,andpaintmotifs areasymmetrical moreoftenthancanbe ascribedto carelessness. The finalpolishingof the stonewill haveaffectedthe symmetry of the contours.Symmetrywas generally achieved, although itwouldhavebeenquite easyto abradeone side differently fromthe other.The interference of slurry, the difficultyof judgingprogress whileabrading the surfaces, and thetemptation to finishworkprematurely wereallovercome bystopping, cleaning,andcheckingrepeatedly duringthe process.Clearly, symmetry wasculturally desirable whenproducing thebasicform,whichwouldbe visiblefromsomedistance. The interiordetailswereapproached withquitea differentattitude. In manywaysthe eyesandhandthatjudgedsymmetry forthe contours couldhavefoundit easierto formbreastsat the sameheightandsame sizeon thechest,yetthisresultis infrequently observed. Similarly, separatingtwoequallysizedfeaturessuchaslegs,arms,andtoesshouldhave beena simplematter,hadit beendesired.Suchsymmetry, however,is alsorare(notethe oddplacementof the nosein Fig.4). We shouldnot be surprised to findeyesat differentheights,or in seeminglyoddlocations,orzigzagsswingingacrossincisions,orvariousstrandsof curlyand straighthaironthesamefigure.Theinteriormarkings weredirectedto a moreintimateaudience, withdifferent expectations of symmetry forthese details. The choiceof pigmentsmayalsobe significant. Red,blue,andless oftengreenhavebeenfoundon marblefigures,vessels,andin pigment containers. Redis by farthe predominant coloron the figures(asthey havebeenpreserved). Bothcinnabar andironoxidehavebeenidentified by analytical methodson the figuresaswellas in vessels.69 The linkbetweenthe colorredandbloodis wellattestedin the ethnographic literature,andHoffmanappliesthis connectionin herinterpretation of the cheekstripes.Butwhyuse cinnabar, a rareandexoticpigment,70 rather thanironoxide,whichis asbrilliant inhueasit is commonintheCyclades? I havetroubletellingthetwoapartvisuallysincethehueof eachcanvary, sometimesresembling eachotherclosely.Colormustnot havebeenthe onlyvaluable property of thepigment.Cinnabar is mercuric sulfide,and 69. See above,n. 57. 70. Carter(forthcoming) discusses severalpotentialpoor(i.e.,not commercially viable)sourcesof cinnabar in theAegean,includingNaxos,Chios, Samos,andEuboia.Thusit maynot
havebeenstrictlyexotic.It wascertainlyrare,however,andthe expenditureof knowledgeandtimeto locate andretrievethispigmenthighlightsits specialdesirability.
PAINTED EARLY CYCLADIC FIGURES
429
maybe associatedwith elementalmercuryat its source.It is possible andits exoticoriginaddedto thepotencyof thered thatthisassociation material.7l
claypotsor Bluepigmentis oftenfoundpackedintotinydecorated It is morerarelyfoundon the figuresthanredpigincisedbonetubes.72 if thepaintghostsvisibletoday ment,butmayoncehavebeenprevalent, paintedblue.Severalanalysesof the indicateareasthatwereoriginally Azuriteis themineralazurite.73 haveidentified bluein pigmentcontainers a coppermineralandmayalsohavebeenvaluedin partforits association withthismetal.Copperoresarefoundon Kythnosand,to a lesserextent, andnearthetipof on Siphnos(betterknownforitssilverores),Seriphos, Atticaat Laurion.All wereworkedin the EarlyBronzeAge, andboth highvaluein copperandsilverwerefashionedintoarticlesof apparently The closestsourceof theotherbluepigmentusedin early theCyclades.74 is thanazurite), chemistry lapislazuli(withanentirelydifferent antiquity, or their mostlikelybeyondthe reachof Cycladicislanders Afghanistan, if suchexisted.Todateit hasnotbeenidentifiedin assotradingpartners, ciationwith EarlyCycladicobjects.In sum,bluepigmentwasselected, interred, andusedon marblefigures. savedin specialpigmentcontainers, Thesechoicesreflectthevalueof thispigment. theraregreenpigmentsfoundin pigmentcontainers75 Unfortunately, butit andon theonefigureknownto me(Fig.8) havenotbeenanalyzed, maybe worthrecallingthatonegreenpigment malachite is foundin thesamegeologicalcontextsas azurite,thatis,withcopperores.Azurite contactwithwater,leavingopen afterprolonged canturnintomalachite of green thatonlyblueandredwereused,withoccurrences thepossibility of blue.76 testifyingto thehydration LOOKING AT PAINT MOTIFS featureswerepaintedin locationsthat anatomical When recognizable makesenseto us (e.g.,thenostrilsin Fig.2, orthehairin Fig.5), we are tracesof thepaintingin thoseareas,or morewillingto see(andpreserve) thatoccurfrequently, theexistenceof paintghosts.Patterns acknowledge discernsuchas a bandacrossthetopof the crown,becomeincreasingly themoof figuresexhibiting viewersasgreaternumbers ibleto individual tif arenoted. Evenpatternsthatrecallotherobjectsfromthe sameculturemaybe at first.As we haveseen,a marbleheadin the if reluctantly recognized, 71. SeeHelms1993fora discussion of travelingand of the importance to earlysocietiesforestablishtravelers tiesamongwideing andmaintaining andthe associated spreadcommunities, broughthome prestigeof materials fromafarby suchtravelers. 72. Hendrix2000,appendixII.
73. Hendrix2000,pp.137-138, tableIII. 2000,pp.79-80, 74. SeeBroodbank On the culturalimwithbibliography. portanceof metalsin the EC cultures, seeNakou1995,withbibliography. 75. Hendrix2000,appendixII. 76. Hendrix2001,p. 53.
.
43o
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ELIZABETH
.
A. HENDRIX
Figure14 (left). Tattooedmummy fromThebes,Egypt,latethird millennium B.C. Afterphotograph in NewYork,Metropolitan Museumof Art
Figure15 (above).Marblepebble figurefromDespotiko,Zoumbaria tomb 137. H. ca. 8 cm.Athens, NationalArchaeologicalMuseum 4885.6.
NaxosChoraMuseum(Fig.6) hasthe palecrovfnbandthatis so common,butit alsodisplaysa zigzagor lozengemotifacrossit, reminiscent of an objectof personaladornment suchas the silverdiademfoundin tomb14 at Dokathismata (Fig.7).Thismaybe a cluethatsomepainted geometric motifsrepresent objectsin therealworld. Similarly, someofthe dots,strtpes, orz1gzags maym1m1c s1gnsottattoo1ng, scar1t1cat1on, or zocWy paintingpracticed by the islanders. Thereis solidevidencefromthirdmillennium B.C. Egyptthatthesesortsof bodyalterations werepracticed (Fig.14).77 It is a greaterchallengeto acceptsimilarevidenceforasymmetrical designsorfamiliar shapesin the"wrong" locationsoronthe"wrong" sorts of objects.The verycleareye,vfithextantredpigmentaroundthe inner corner, ona pebblefigure(Fig.15)fromtomb137in theZoumbaria cemeteryon Despotikoeludedmeforyears,despitemyhavingdravfnit severaltimes.OnlywhenI wasopento thepossibility andsawthefigurein a certainlightdidthepaintsuddenly appear, andthentheeyewasbreathtakinglyobvious.Likevfise, a nonanatomical eyeon whitemarbleCycladic figures(e.g.,Fig.8) hasbeenverydifficultto accept,despitetheplethora of ethnographic examples fordisassociated eyes,aswellasisolatedeyeson nonanthropomorphic objects(e.g.,Fig. 16) fromthe laterBronzeAge 77. SeealsoBianchi1988;Talalay Cyclades. Onemustopenone'smindaswellasone'seyestothepossibilities. 1993,pp.7(F72.
PAINTED
EARLY CYCLADIC
FIGURES
43I
Figure16. Vesselswith eyesdepicted: (a) EarlyCycladicclayjug with incisedeye fromNaxos,Panormos. H. 20.4 cm. Naxos,Archaeological Museum,Chora357. AfterMarangou 1990,no.108
(b)Middle Cycladicclayboat model with darkbrownpainteddesigns, includingeyes,fromMelos, Phylakopi. L. 12.7 cm. Athens, National ArchaeologicalMuseum.AfterZervos 1957,pl.230
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
CONTEXTS
Howdo the archaeological contextsanddistribution of the figurescontributeto ourunderstanding of theirfunctionor theirmeaning?Early Cycladic marble figureshavebeenexcavated mainlyincemeteries, although occasionally theyhavebeendiscovered elsewhere, suchasatMandrestou Roussou,a rock-crevice siteon Amorgos,78 andat thesettlementof KastrakionNaxos(nearMelanes, theprimesourceofemeryintheCyclades).79 The siteof Daskaleio-Kavos on thetinyislandof Keros(betweenNaxos andAmorgos)hasyieldedhundreds of fragments of figures,marblevessels,andhumanbone.Thesitemaytestifyto secondary burialpractices in theCyclades in addition to theevidence forapuzzlingly largesettlement.80 RenfrewandDoumashaveeachexamined the archaeological contextsof 78. Marangou1997. 79. Kastraki waspublishedin very cursoryfashionby Stephanosin 1904, 1908,and1909.Additionalsettlement sitesin the EBACycladesthathave yieldedEC figuresincludePhylakopi on Melos(in a probablydisturbedcontextbelowMycenaean-period houses;
seeAtkinsonet al. 1904,pp.194-195, pls.2-8); AgiaIrinion Kea(alsoin post-EBAcontexts;see Caskey1971, 1974);andAkrotirionThera(EC I figuresfoundat the LBAsite,most from"Cenotaph Square," alsoa secondarycontextthatpointsto knowledge of theseobjectsbeyondthe EBA;see
Sotirakopoulou 1998).At leasttwenty otherEC settlementsiteshavebeen exploredwhereno anthropomorphic figureshavebeendocumented. 80. SeeBroodbank 2000,pp.223236,withbibliography. PeggySotirakopoulouis currently preparing a fuller publication of the findsfromthissite.
ELIZABETH
432
A. HENDRIX
TABLE 1. MINIMUM NUMBER OF EARLY CYCLADIC FIGURES PER ISLAND Island Andros(Northeast) Tenos(NE) Syros(NE) Mykonos(NE) Naxos(Southeast) (SE) GreaterParos Erimonisia(SE) Amorgos(SE) Ios (SE) Sikinos(SE) (SE) Pholegandros Thera(South) Kea(West) Kythnos(W) Seriphos(W) Siphnos(W) GreaterMelos(W)
ECI
ECII
ECIII
9
9
?
37 53 1 6
24 6 (350fromKerosHoard) 20 5
24
7
6
6
7
? ?
2
2000,p.225.Forthe KerosHoard, DatafromHendrix2000,appendixII;Broodbank figuresmaybelong seen. 80.A questionmarkindicatesthatsomeof the documented to the indicatedperiod;a dashindicateslackof data.
site reportshaveaddedto these figuresin the Cycladesandindividual syntheses.8l
Despitelacunaein the record the resultof lootingandthe cursory of manyEarlyCycladiccemeterysites someobservations publication formarblefiguresmaybe drawnfrompubpatterns deposition regarding isolatedtombsexist thethirdmillennium, Throughout lishedexcavations. of twoorthree clusters tiny size from range in aswellasburialsitesthat of wellovera hundredtombs.82 gravesto largecemeteries inpointanalysis(PPA)of theEBACyclades proximal Broodbank's betweenislandsarelikelyto havebeencomplex dicatesthatconnections He discernsawesterngroupinwithincertainboundaries.83 andvariable cludingKea,Kythnos,Seriphos,Siphnos,andtheMeliancluster,and,in the east,subsetsthatcenteron someof the largerislands,in particular of findspotsforEarlyCycladicfigNaxos.Whenthe overalldistribution standsat thatasourinformation it becomesapparent uresis considered, to Naxoshaveyieldedthegreatest present,theislandsin closestproximity miniTable1 provides thethirdmillennium. offiguresthroughout number of someislands (thelootingof sitesandlimitedexploration mumnumbers Despitethe gapsin ourknowlmustdeflatethe numbersconsiderably). it seemtohaveserved surrounding edge,Naxosandtheislandsimmediately of figures. asthefocalpointfortheconsumption evidencefromParos,Naxos,and A brieflookat the archaeological Amorgosgivesa generalideaof the depositionof figuresin this group I examinethemherein roughlychronologiduringthethirdmillennium.
81. Renfrew1972,esp.pp.135-195; Doumas1977;Barber1987.Fora list sites,seeLeekleyand of excavated Noyes1975;Hope SimpsonandDickinson1979;Fotou1983(forsiteson Naxos);Davis1992.Fora chartof most by EC objects,arranged excavated island,see Hendrix2000,appendixII. 82. See Hendrix2000,appendixII. 2000,pp.183-191, 83. Broodbank fig.53.
PAINTED
84.Tsountas1898,pp.140,150, 161-162,pls.8:37-43,60-61,9:40, 10:5,11:1,5,8,9,15,19. 85.The southerntip of Greater Paros(i.e.,DespotikoandAntiparos)is anticipated as the firstlinkbetweenthe Cycladesby westernandsoutheastern Broodbank's PPAfromthe earliest (leastpopulated)periods.SeeBroodbank2000,p.184, fig.53. 86. ForLivadia,seeTsountas1898, pp.162-164,pls.9:22,34,10:9,12.For Zoumbaria, seeTsountas1898,pp.141, 164-165,pls.8:22-36,11:2,3. 87.Tsountas1898,p.155, pls.8:11, 10:4,16,11:20. 88. Doumas1977,pp.97-100, pls.34:a-f,35:a-d,ll:h, 12:a. 89.Tsountas1898,pp.149-151, 158-160,pls.8:20,21,44-47, 49-52, 62,63, 9:14,18,27,10:17,11:4,6,7, 10,13, 14,17.
EARLY CYCLADIC
FIGURES
433
on GreaterParos(theisletsto thesouthof calorder;themaincemeteries to the Paroswouldhavebeenconnectedby landbridges)dategenerally earlierphasesof the EarlyBronzeAge, thoseon Naxosto the earlyto middlephases,andthoseonAmorgosto themiddlephases. Excavations on GreaterParosyieldedmoreschematicthanfoldedandtime,theseECI figureswouldhave armfigures.Intermsof materials beenless expensiveto producethanthe marblekandilesalsofound,an depositedin therelative "wealth" whenassessing important consideration onAntiparos of Krasades excavated theECI cemetery eachgrave. Tsountas publishing thecontentsof nineof themorethan in thelatel9th century, tomb(tomb provided The mostgenerously fiftygravesidentifiedthere.84 117)contained thirteenViolin-typefiguresdepositednearthefeetofthe twomarblevessels,oneverysimilarin skeleton. The tombalsocontained a linkto typeto theFN marblevesselsfromKephalaon Kea,suggesting Othertombsalsocontainedmarblefiguresandvesthewesternstring.85 sels(includinga kandilaanda phialewithbluecolorantin tomb113), quantity. althoughnotin suchanimpressive extipof Greater Paros,Tsountas At Despotiko,atthesouthernmost atLivadiaand in a goodstateof preservation cavatedtwoearlycemeteries Tomb129at twentygraves.86 approximately Zoumbaria, eachcomprising thebulkorallof thefigcontained Livadiaandtomb137at Zoumbaria ures(Livadia's tomb129 alsocontainedthe onlykandila,as well as the marblepalettewith pigmentcontainer a perforated onlydocumented withredpigredcolorantandtwopebbleson topof it, onealsosmeared ment),but othertombscontainedmarblevesselsor obsidianbladesin additionto potteryandbeads,andanothertombat Livadiahada marble tomb137 aremoresegregated, figureaswell.The findsfromZoumbaria one varieties, with a containingall the figures(six,of variousschematic largeredeyepaintedon it;seeFig.15).The othertombsforwhichfinds vessels,andoccasionally werereportedcontainedone or two terracotta equipped withoneundecorated beads(tomb135wasalsowellprovided, fiftybeads). potsandapproximately andtwodecorated The smallercemeteryat Glyphaon Paros,witha totalof tengraves, marblevessels(kandiles) numerous containedfourtombsthatproduced alsoresizedanddatedcemeteryat Plastiras andfigures.87 The similarly vealedavarietyof marblefiguresandvessels,butallofthefigures(andone of thekandiles, aswellasa marblebowlwithredpigment,smallfragments were embellishment?) of obsidian,anda copperneedle toolsfor"skin" foundin a singletomb,tomb9.88The largeEC I cemeteryof Pyrgoson byTsountas, heldfifty-eighttombs,of whichfourParos,alsoexcavated vesselsandpiercedstonebeads described.89 Terracotta teenwerespecifically werefoundin manyof thesetombs;marblefiguresand/orvesselswere documented in threegraves.One grave,tomb103, containedfourteen of shell,andapotwitha decoViolin-type figures,stonebeads,fragments In additionto two a marblekandila. ratedbase,whiletomb104contained terracotta pyxides,tomb98 wasoutfittedwitha marblebowlandpestle, tracesof redpigment. bothof whichpreserved wereinterred The findsfromGreaterParossuggestthatindividuals not everyburial withthemspecifically; withobjectsthatwereassociated
434
ELIZABETH
A. HENDRIX
hadthe samesuiteof offerings.In manycemeteriesone tombseemed moregenerously provided thantherest,butoftenanother oneortwograves werealsoprovided withnumerous or"expensive" goods.Theevidence hints at a loosecorrelation betweencertainindividuals andthe quantityand qualityof gravegoods,withonlya fewotherindividuals havingaccessto similarsetsof objects.The marblefiguresfromParosgenerallyfallinto thesetwoclassesof gravesduringEC I. Excavations on Naxoshaveto dateyieldedthe greatestnumbersof tombsandfindsin the Cycladicspherebyfar,thanksto thecarefulexcavationsof Doumas,andthe painstaking reconstructions of Stephanos's excavations by Papathanassopoulos.90 The evidencefromNaxosmaybe summarized asfollows.At Aeila,threetombswereexplored in a cemetery containing anunknownnumberof graves.Eachof thethreetombscontaineda distincttypeof offering: coppertools,terracotta drinking vessels, anda terracotta box(pyxis)withlid.Butthisis anexceptional situation. At AgioiAnargyroi, wheretheexcavator reported theexistence oftwentytwo graves(sevenof whichwereplundered), one tomb(tomb21) containeda Spedos-type marblefigureaswellas skeletalremains(including atleastninecrania), a stone"pillow slab," threemarblebowls,nineobsidianbladesorfragments, a terracotta cup,anda "frying pan.''91 At leastone othergrave(tomb5) hadan equallyimpressive arrayof goods,but no marblefigures,andseveralothergraveswerealsorichin finds.Thepresenceof the"frying pan,"anobjectthatis considered EC I in date,andthe Spedos-style figure,indicative of theECII period,in onegravewithmultipleinhumations stronglysuggeststhatthesubgroup utilizingthisgrave intendedto assertits longevity; the marblefigurecontributed to thisexpression.
A similar-sized cemetery onNaxos,Akrotiri, suffered lessthanAgioi Anargyroi fromplundering. Fourof the twenty-four gravesdocumented containedmarblefigures,andtwo containedboth a Violin-typeanda Plastiras-variety figure.92 The figuresin the remaining two graveswere alsosimpleschematic orViolin-type figures. Manyofthetombscontained a richvarietyof goods,includingmarblevessels,so it is unlikelythatthe tombswiththefigureswereoccupied byindividuals considered "wealthier" thanothersin thecommunity. A possibleexception is tomb5,whichcontainedoneof theViolin/Plastiras figurepairs,aswellas the onlymarble kandila, a marblepalette,stonebeads(andoneof copper),andtwodecoratedterracotta pyxides.Nevertheless, tomb21,withonlyoneViolinfigure,alsohada richassortment of othergoods(seebelow).Thedecisionto includemarblefiguresin tombsseemsto havebeenbasedon othercon90. Doumas 1977; Papathanassocerns,whichmaybefurtherilluminated bythepaintedandincisedmark- poulos 1963. ingson someof thesefigures. 91. "Fryingpans"are discussedby Of thetentombsatAplomatarecorded by Kontoleon(totalnumber Coleman 1985. 92. Doumas 1977, esp. pp. 87, 93, ofgravesunknown), sixcontained marblefigures oftenmorethanonepls. 28:i-k, 32:f-i. aswellasmarblevessels,marbleorterracotta "frying pans,"objectsmade 93. Kontoleon 1970, p. 151, pls. 192, ofmetal(personal ornaments, inonecasea sword,inanother asilverladle), 193, 195; 1971, pp. 178-179, pls. 210obsidianblades,orpigmentcontainers.93 The tombswithoutfiguresalso 215; 1972, pp. 149-151, 154, pls. 133, contained marblevessels,terracotta "frying pans," metalobjects,andbone 134, 136, 138, 139-144.
PAINTED
94. Stephanos1903,pp.56-57; 1906,p.88, n.1; Papathanassopoulos 1963,pp.114,115,120,122-125, pls.46:a,b,47:a-c,48,49:a-d,50:a-c, 51:a,b,52:a-d,53:a-c,54:a,b,55:a-c, 56:a,b,57:a-d,58:a-c,59:a,b,60:a-c, 61. 95. Doumas1977,pp.122-126, pls.22:e-g,49:e,h-n,51:b,e. 96. Marblefigureshavebeenfound in cemeteries withlessthanten graves on Amorgos:at Stauros(sixtombs; Tsountas1898,pp.138,153);Notina (seventombs;Dummler1886,pp.1718,pl. 1:3-5;Tsountas1898,p.138); andAigale(a singletomb;Tsountas 1898,p. 138;Renfrew1972,p.523); andalsoon Syrosat Pydima(twoor threetombs;Tsountas1899,p.79). 97. Fora figurein anisolatedgrave, seeTsountas1898,p.138 (Aigale). Verysmallcemeteriescontainingmarble figuresarepublishedin Tsountas 1898,p. 138 (KatoAkrotiri,two . graves),p. 153 (Stauros,sixgraves) 98. SeeHendrix2000,pp.191-194, fora list of findsfromAmorgos. 1989,p.325, table1. 99. Broodbank Bent's 100.Forexample,Jeremy publishedin excavations on Antiparos, the 1884volumeofJHS,arewrittenas a picturesque traveldiaryratherthanan excavation report.The reportsof Klon Stephanos(1903,1904,1906,1908, 1909,1910,1911)of his earlyexcavationson Naxos,publishedin Prakt,are justa fewpagesin length.
EARLY CYCLADIC
FIGURES
435
"economic" statuson the sole tubes,so againit is difficultto distinguish basisof marblefigures.A similarsituationexistsat the siteof Spedoson Naxos.94 If we turnourattentionto muchsmallerclustersof graves,we Threetombs,inwhichmultipleburialsevidently findsimilarassemblages. at Audelion Naxos.This smallsite tookplace,comprisethe "cemetery" blades, vessels,manyobsidian figuresaswellasmarble produced twomarble Objectsfroma (contemposilverpin.95 terracotta vessels,andanelaborate rary?)housenearbyincludea lumpof redocher(notanalyzedas farasI anda pieceof emery,suggesting amaware),anobsidianblade,a grinder, atthesite thatstoneworkingaswellaspaintingmayhavebeenpracticed Otherverysmallcemeteries despiteits distancefroma largersettlement. alsoindicatethaton Naxosmarblefigureswerenot the possessionsof alone.96 members of largercommunities morethan containing On theislandof Amorgostherearecemeteries halfthat andKapros, cemeteries twentytombs,suchas at Dokathismata isolatedburials.A1andAgiosPaulos,andnumerous size,as at Kapsala thoughthetombwiththegreatestnumberandvarietyof burialgoodsinwasfoundin oneof the cludingmarblefigures(tomb14atDokathismata) on the island,marblefigureswerealsofoundin much largestcemeteries Moreover, gravescontaining andevensolitary graves.97 smallercemeteries (asin a figuremightcontainnothingelse(asatAigale),ora fewceramics or a greatvarietyof otherobjectsincluding tomb13 at Dokathismata), Most sites additionalmarblefigures(as in tomb14 at Dokathismata). contained someevidenceof marblefigures,butseveraldidnot,including andPhoinikies (justtwograves). AgiosPaulos(withatotalofelevengraves) on Amorgosof whichI amaware, (Thetwo EarlyCycladicsettlements yieldedno Markiani andthe settlementneartheAgiosPauloscemetery, metalartifacts ormarblefigures.)Althoughthetotalnumberof recorded numunspecified goodsfromAmorgosisnotgreat(lessthan200,counting or "stonerubbers" as representing sherds" bersof itemssuchas "pottery wholeor partialmarblefigureswererefiveitems),at leasttwenty-five corded,suggestingthatthesewererelativelycommonburialgoodson shedlighton thepercentage do not,however, Amorgos.98 Thesenumbers of peoplewhowereburiedwithmarblefigures. of thepopulation It is evenmoredifficultto estimatethepercentage sizefrom attemptsto inferpopulation thatpossessed figures.Broodbank's butdo not account numbers of gravesmayprovideminimumnumbers,99 evenif sometombswithno fordeathsat seaor outsidethe community, skeletalremains wereintendedforthoselostsouls.Thepoorstateof presourattemptsto discernmultiple alsohampers ervation of skeletalmaterial burialsin singlegraves,forwhichthereis much,althoughnotconsistent, such formultiple inhumations, evidence evidence. Sometombsdopreserve but no as tomb10 at Kapsala(whichcontainedcopperandterracotta, marblegoods),andsomepreservea singlecranium(suchas tomb14 at Dokathismata, withtwo marblefiguresandmanyothergoods),butthe reportsformostgravesrecordno skeletalremainsat all.The ratherbrief comfromthelatel9th andearly20thcenturies accountsof excavations whetherboneswouldhavebeen as it is uncertain poundthe difficulty,100
436
ELIZABETH
A. HENDRIX
consistently documented evenif theyhadbeenfound.We canconclude fromthereportsontheexcavations atAmorgos, however, thattwenty-five marblefigureshavebeenrecovered thusfarfromabouteighty-sixgraves, withatleastfourgravescontaining morethanonefigure. The burialcontextsfromAmorgossuggestthatmarblefigureswere notthe exclusive possessions of onetypeof individual, andtheycouldbe associated withpersonsburiedeitheralone,orinlargeorsmallcemeteries. Someof theseindividuals hadno other(nonperishable) burialgoods,ora fewpiecesof pottery, butothershadimpressive amountsof burialgoods, includingitemsmadefromrelatively rarematerials suchascopperorsilver,whichalsowouldhaveentailedconsiderable laborto produce. This variability suggeststhatindividuals onAmorgospossessed marblefigures forreasonsthatcannotbe linkedsimplyto economicstatusorto singular rolesin theircommunities. It mayalsobe observedthattheburialswith themost"special" objects(metal,marble, elaborate pottery)didnotalways containa marblefigure. WhenthelargestEarlyCycladiccemeteries areexamined, suchasat Chalandriani on Syros(withmorethan500 tombs),a similarpattern emerges: seventy-five tombsarerecorded and,despitesomeplundering, onlyninehadnofindsbeyondskeletal material.10l Tomb307wasequipped withtwolateEC II marblefigures,marblevessels,threepigmenttubes,a terracotta "frying pan,"anda terracotta bowl.Tomb354 containeda late EC II figure,twomarblebowls(onewithgreenpigmentin its interior), andtwoterracotta jars.Tombs415 and468 eachincludeda singleschematicfigureof marble. Tomb447contained a marblefigureof theDokathismata variety (lateECII),terracotta vessels,andacranium. Othertombs, withoutfigures,contained manyitems,includinggoodsmadeof marble, copper,andsilver,orspecialized objectssuchaselaborately (andsymbolically)decorated "frying pans,"pigmenttubes,or obsidianblades.Again, this evidencedoesnot pointto the equivalence betweenmarblefigures and"wealth" perse. What conclusions canbe drawnfromthe archaeological datathus far?Mostbroadly, the varietyof gravegoodsandtheirpresencein both thesmallestandlargestburialsitesargueagainstthemarblefiguresserving to circumscribe anysortof expressed economichierarchy in Early Cycladicmortuary practices. Let us askinstead,however, who was interredwiththemarblefigures.Marblefiguresarefoundin themajority of cemeteries throughout the EBACyclades.Fromthe earlierto the later phasesof the period,theywereassociated mostoftenwith one or two tombs(containing, it mustbe acknowledged, anunknownnumberof individuals whowerenonetheless buriedasoneentity),withadditional tombs containing markedly fewerexamples. Thispatternis mostevidentat the beginningof the EarlyBronzeAge.Thus,in mostcommunities, oneentity (individual or family/occupational clan)wasmostcloselyassociated withthefigures. Ifwecandetermine thefilnction(s) ofthefigures, wemay beableto saysomething abouttherolesof thosepeoplewhowereinterred 101.See Hekman1990fortomb assemblages at Chalandriani. withthem.
PAINTED EARLY CYCLADIC FIGURES
437
Figure17. EarlyCycladicViolin-type figurefromNaxos,Akrotiri,tomb20. H. 10.5 cm. Naxos,Archaeological Museum,Chora,1993.
PAINTING: PERFORMANCE AND PARAPHERNALIA
102.SeeGetz-Gentle1996,p.179; Hendrix2000,p. 158. 103.Tsountas 1898,pp.154-155; Hendrix2000,p.192. 104.Getz-Gentle1996,p. 79, pl.VII(2):DandE (color),NAM 4724 (bowl)and4722(figure). 105.SeeThimmeandGetzPreziosi1977,pp.439-440,no.72 (description of painton p. 440),foran unprovenienced Plastiras-type figure withredhorizontalstripespaintedup theverylongneck.This figureis in a privatecollectionin Germany. 106.Doumas1977,p.94, pls.32:c, h, i,33:c,e.
A studyof burialassemblages revealsthatin additionto the marblefigures,itemsthatrelateto pigmentandpaintwerealsodeposited in numeroustombs.In somecasestheremaybe a directrelationship betweenthe activityof paintingandthemarblefigure(andthedeceased).102 Tomb14 at Dokathismata, mentionedabove,is wellknown.l03 In thisundeniably richgrave,one of two marblelug bowlscontaineda lumpof darkred pigment(unfortunately notanalyzedasyet);a verysimilarcolorwasappliedasa seriesof slightlyoff-vertical stripesarranged acrossthechestof oneof thetwomarblefiguresfoundin thetomb.104 At Akrotirion Naxos a Violin-typefigurewitha patternof grooveson the torso(includinga pubictriangle) wasfoundin tomb20 (Figs.3, 173.In addition,a seriesof redhorizontal stripesor partially preserved lozengeswaspaintedup the neckprong(Fig.3, left).105 AnotherViolinfigure(slightlysmaller)with similargroovesanda"notch" atthetopof theprongwasfoundin tomb21 (Fig.3, right).Althoughno tracesof paintwereobservedon thisfigure, tomb21 alsocontained two marblepestles,onewithXthe remainsof red pigmenton its grindingsurface, anda whitestonemortarwithredin its interior.106 Clayvesselswithinciseddecoration andstonebeads-one in the shapeof a bird werealsoincludedin tomb21 (itemsof personal
438
ELIZABETH
A. HENDRIX
adornment, perhapsa necklace?); a copperbeadanda marblePlastirastypefigurewerefoundin tomb20 alongwiththepaintedViolinfigure.In otherwords,theseweretombsthatmaybe describedas well provided (twoothertombs,of twenty-four, in the cemeterycontainedone marble figureeach,andanothertwocontainedobjectswithpigment:a bowlin tomb11, anda pestlein tomb23).The similarity of the Violinfigures fromtombs20 and21 andtheremainsof paint- on a figureandaspreparedforuse- suggestthatthesetwotomboccupants weresomehowconnectedandthatan eventrelatedto the actof paintingwasassociated at leastwiththeburialin tomb21.Whilepainteddesignsontheirowncommunicatemoreaboutthe finaleffectthanthe process,thisevidenceand thatfromtomb14 at Dokathismata suggestthattheprocessof painting itselfwasalsoculturally significant forsomeindividuals. Theimportance of suchprocesses in othercultures hasbeendiscussed in the anthropological literature. It is worthreviewing in somedetailone example, theMelvilleislanders (theTiwi),sincetheprocesses of carving, painting, anddanceaspartof theburialritualallcontribute to thesuccess of the event.107 The Tiwi carveandpaintwoodenburialpolesduringa two-to-four monthperiodaftera memberof thecommunity dies.Dueto taboosof proximity, thecreators108 of thepolesmustnotbe relatedto the deceased.The general process, fromselection ofrawmaterials tofinalpainting,is culturally prescribed, althoughdetailsof outputdependon thecreativityofthemaker, andonthewishes(andfinances) ofthedeceased's kin. Groupsof pole-makers gather,eachgroupresponsible fortheproduction of onepole.The polemustbe of a certainsizeandtypeof wood,andthe basicdesignmustconformto tradition, a mandate ensured bytheartisan's askingfor andreceivingadvicefromthe moreexperienced individuals workingnearby. When the polesarefinishedtheybecomethe focusof dancingritualsduringthefinalburialcelebration. Theparticular qualities of thiswholedisplayrelateto thedeceased's statusin lifeaswellasto his orherancestral status.Thepointof theritualis to facilitate thedeceased's transition to theworldof the"once-living" sincetheTiwibelievethatthe ancestors arepartaking in a simultaneous ritualof dancingin whichthe newlydeceasedmember joins.Afterthe dance,despiteallthe effortand materials expendedon them,the polesareno longersignificant andare leftto decaynaturally. The taboosanddancingassociated withthepoles, ratherthanthe polesthemselves, areclearlythe focusof the ritual.The polesareimportant insofarastheygivetangibleformto themaintenance of theritual. We do not knowwhetherthe marblefiguresweremadespecifically forburialrituals;repairsandmultiplepaintedmotifsmayindicatethat theyfunctioned in othercontextsaswell.In somecases,however, we may be justifiedin interpreting the findsas evidencefor mortuary behavior (ritualpainting)thatis eitherspecificto burialritesor thatrelatesto activitiescarriedon in life.The depositionof figures,paint,pigmentcontainers,vessels,needles,andobsidianbladesin gravesstronglysuggests thatburialpractices werecomplexandoften(butnotalways)required ata minimumtheparaphernalia thathavesurvived to thepresent.
107.GoodaleandKoss1967. 108.Primarily male,exceptwhena femaleshowsspecialaptitudeduring mockritualsin whichallchildrenpartakein allthe roles;see Goodaleand Koss1967,p. 188.
PAINTED
EARLY CYCLADIC
FIGURES
439
attestto a shared similar burialgoodassemblages IntheEBACyclades, (the communities possessions amongwidelydispersed senseof appropriate to the pastweremainconnections horizontalaxis).Justas importantly, withthedeceasedof goodsthatbearsimilarities tainedbythedeposition (theverticalaxis).The presto thosedepositedby previousgenerations suggeststhatindiburialgoodswithincemeteries enceof differentiated subsetsoftheEarlyCycladic particular vidualentitieswereassociatedwith roleswithin particular material culture, andthatthesesubsetsaccompanied societieswheredifferentiation the EC culturalmilieu.In nonindustrial agreeor material possessions, setsof knowledge is markedbyparticular to holdtheresponsibility thatsomeindividuals mentamonga population forexample, Helmshasobserved, maintain groupidentitymaybeattested. to transmitculcanbe empowered thatsomemembersof a community anduseof ofwhichtheproduction turalidentitythroughspecialactivities, Thisis (anddurable) role.l09 extra-utilitarian goodsmayplayanimportant paintparaphernalia, intowhichpaintedmarblefigures, theclassof artifact clayandmarble"fryingpans,"marblekandiles,andprismaticobsidian bladescould,amongother(andotherless durable)goods,be ascribed. Helmsdefinesthe peoplewho possesstheseobjectsandthe knowledge IntheEBACyclades ''aristocrats.''ll° systemsthatgivethemtheirmeaning this categoryseemsto haveexistedas well,but gravegoodsandburial fromothermemweredifferentiated contextsuggestthatthese"aristocrats" not in termsof materialwealth,butperhapsin bersof the community andpowers. termsof cultural responsibilities SUMMARY AND CONCLUDING
109.Helms1998, p. 7. 110.Helms1998, p. 6. 111.Talalay1993, p. 37. 1996, 112. SeePapathanassopoulos pp. 312-333, nos.231-233, foreyesin clayvisages,andfromThessaly,a marble headfroma figurinein the Athens Museum NationalArchaeological (6001).
REMARKS
In attempting to makesenseof the Cycladicpaintedfigures,andhaving assessment of considered the physicalevidence,I wouldextendTalalay's figuresintotheBronzeAge:"figurines GreekNeolithicanthropomorphic strategies of a givencommuwiththeadaptive wereultimately associated nityand[it is likely]thattheirfunctionsvaried.''lll motifson the faceand Doublesetsof eyes,multiplelozenge-shaped eyeson thewide-open"anatomical" otherpartsof thebody,andespecially so manyEarlyCycladicfiguresindicatea possibleshiftin meaningof figurative worksfromtheNeolithicto theEarlyBronzeAge.Onlyrarely of the Neolithic,which do we continueto seethe slit-eyescharacteristic Rather,the eyeson werefashionedon clayas well as marblefigures.ll2 EarlyCycladicfiguresarepaintedin sucha wayasto effecta returngaze. The figuresappearwideawake,focusingstraightahead,onereasonwhy thatthefigureswereutilizedin a reclining I cannotacceptthehypothesis position,althoughtheymayhavebeenstoredthatway.Rather,the animatedeyescombinedwith the size of the figures(almostall areunder painted 0.50m),theslightlypointedfeetandbentknees,andtheadditional featuressuggestthatthe slenderfigures,heldeasilyaroundthe waistby eduwomenor men,playedan active,uprightrolein ritual,storytelling, of socialusesoverthecourseof theiruse-life cating,orsomecombination
44o
ELIZABETH
A. HENDRIX
in thecommunity, priorto burial.Thattheycouldnotstandon theirown mayfurtherindicatethattheywereobjectsto behandledratherthanveneratedfromadistance, although thelargestfiguresmayhavebeenpropped againstwallsto increasetheirvisibility.1l3 Applications of painteddesignsspecificto a giveneventmayexplain therelatively poorstateof preservation of somemotifs(seebelow),while otherfeatures, suchasthetwonormaleyesandcrownband,wereintended to be morepermanent. The kindsof eventsthatmayhaveinspiredor required paintingdesignsorsymbolson figurescannotbe discerned from thearchaeological recordasit existsnow,withtheexceptionof theevent of death.Wedohavesomeevidencethatthematerials andactof painting werepartof theburialprocess. I havealready notedtheViolinfiguresand mortarandpestlewithredpigmentexcavated fromtombs20 and21 in the earlyEC I cemeteryat Akrotirion Naxos,andthe bowlwithpestle andredpigmentandfigurewithredstripespaintedacrossthechestfrom tomb14in theDokathismata cemetery onAmorgos,datingto lateECII. Tomb14 alsocontained thesilverdiademillustrated above(Fig.7),a humancranium, anothersimilarmarblefigure,a marblefour-lugged bowl, severalclayjars,a fragment of a silverbowl,a silverblade,a copperdagger withsilverrivets,twocopperbracelets, anda silverpinwithagoatfinial.1l4 Thiswasanexceptionally wellstockedtomb,highlysuggestive of anindividual(if indeedtherewasjust one individualburiedthere)who was wealthier thanothersin thecemetery. Partof thiswealthyperson's burial kit includedtoolsandmaterials thatcouldenablesomeoneto engagein theactof painting.It is clearthatpaintingasa processwassignificant in thiscontext.Pigmentsassociated withtombselsewhere in the Cyclades mayrelateto thispractice.1l5 It is necessary to speculate if we wantto suggestwhatsortof events duringa person's life wouldhavebeenaccompanied by the paintingof marblefigures.Herethepositionof themotifon thebodymaybe revealing.As we haveseen,theheadandneckarefavored. The headespecially, withits wide-openeyesandotherpossiblemotifs,wouldhavebeenthe focusof interest, commanding theattentionof theviewerto thefigureand whatever messageitwasmeantto communicate. Thefunctionofthepaint at this levelwas to expressthe authorityof the particular messagethe figurewassetto convey. The bellyis a frequentlocationfor zigzagmotifsandalsofor the nonanatomical eyes(Figs.4, 8, 10).Associations withpregnancy maynot be outof the question,signifyinga temporary conditionforthe persona embodiedin the marblefigure.EarlyCycladicfemalefiguresarerarely represented asobviously pregnant. Belliesthatprotrude greatlyenoughto indicatepregnancy unequivocally arefarlesscommonthanslightlyswollen abdomensthatseemmoreeharacteristic of normalfemaleanatomy (perhapsenhancedby age).l16 Enlargedbreasts,whichmayalsosignify pregnancy, arealtogether absenton EarlyCycladicfigures,as arebroad hipsorexaggerated buttocks; typicalprehistoric representations of"fertility"arenotfoundin EarlyCycladicfemalefigures.Nevertheless, theconditionof pregnancy musthavebeenfraughtwitha senseof awe,danger, mystery, responsibility, andoptimism,andwouldthereforeseeman ap-
113.SeeN. P.Goulandris Foundation,Museumof CycladicArt, Coll.968, a fragmentof handsholding a miniature figure,illustrated in GetzGentle2001,p. 37, fig. 18 (reconstructiondrawing),pl.26. Fora provocative anddetaileddiscussionof the possible functionsof anthropomorphic figures, seeTalalay1993,pp.37-79. A rich analysisof ethnographic parallels is alsoprovided. 114.Tsountas1898,pp.154-155, pls.8:1,2; 9:11,lla, 21; 10:6;12:2,8. 115.Yellowocherwasfounddistributedon the slabfloorof a double burialin tomb8 at AgioiAnargyroi on Naxos(Doumas1977,pp.101,108). Lumpsof red-brown "ocher" were notedjustoutsidethegravesin the samecemetery(Doumas1977,p. 119), andpigmentswerefoundthroughout tomb23 in theAplomatacemetery, also on Naxos(Kontoleon1972,p. 150; Coleman1985,p.210).Yellowpowder wasalsofoundspreadbeforetomb8 in the Plastirascemeteryon Paros(Doumas1977,p. 98), andtwolumpsof red pigmentwerefoundin tomb356 in the Chalandriani cemeteryon Syros (Tsountas1899,p. 113). 116.This ideawasfirstsuggestedto me in May1999by PatGetz-Gentle (pers.comm.).
PAINTED
117.On the "evileye"in othercultures,see Dundes1981andThomsen 1992. 118.Muller1978,p. 93. 119.Forthe intriguingconnections betweenanatomyandpower,seeWinter1989,1996. figures 120.Thereareexceptional suchas shell madeof othermaterials, orlead,andon Crete,ivory.See Fitton 1989,p. 58, fig.76, fora leadfigure 1977, fromAntiparos,andSakellarakis p. 151,fig. 143,forthe ivoryfigure fromTholosC at Archanes,Crete. pottery, 121.ForEC white-slipped see Doumas1977,pl. 36:c(wherethe kandilashapeclearlymimicsmarble andRenfrew1972,pl. 7 examples), patternsanalogous (withdark-painted effectsof painton to the contrasting marblefigures).
EARLY CYCLADIC
FIGURES
44I
song,andotherbehaviors storytelling, subjectforperformance, propriate the actof paintingon thebelly.Butthatwasonlyonecondisupporting tionworthyof socialattention. onthefigurealsopresumeyesthatappearelsewhere Nonanatomical althoughthe theyappear, where body of the the part to ablycallattention supgenerally parallels Ethnographic is unknown. significance particular portthisbroadmeaning.Symboliceyesareaddedto imagesorcreatedas isolateditems(ex-votos)in modernGreece,Turkey,Syria,Mexico,and in yarnbytheHuichol eyes"produced tsikuri,or"God's elsewhere.ll7The deityto "keepaneye aska particular symbolically in Mexico,forexample, who possessesthe tsikuri.ll8Eyesthatappearon paron"the individual of ticularbodypartsof marblefiguresmaysimilarlyaskforsafekeeping heart,andso on. thevoice,womb,spirit,arm/strength, Thezigzagspaintedontheupperarmsorlegsof somefiguresarealso onthoseareasmight Thefunctionof thesemarkings difficultto interpret. their orweakening be to callattentionto thelimbs,eitherstrengthening powersorthepowersthelimbsmayhavecometo symbolizeforaninditheymay Alternatively, ornetworkof communities.ll9 vidual,community, in the wornbylivingpeople.Clearly, simplymimicbodyembellishments the existto determine texts,too manyvariables absenceof contemporary precisemeaningof thismotif. veryfew,if any,EarlyCycladicfiguresof the As alreadymentioned, of a formof typesarefoundin clay.Thatis highlysuggestive developed At theveryleast,EarlyCycladicislandcontroloverproduction. cultural to fashionclayversionsforthemornecessary ersdidnotfindit desirable The female(occaeasyto do.l20 selves,whichwouldhavebeenrelatively sionallymale)humanfigurewasan objectthatforsomereason,andfor wasstrictlylinkedto whitemarble.Giventhewhiteslipon so centuries, manyEarlyCycladicclayvessels,thecolorof thestonewasnottheissue, of property perhapsin the samewaythatcolorwasnottheonlyvaluable thepigmentsused.l2l anMarbleworkersof variouslevelsof skillandambitionproduced world, theCycladic thathavebeenfoundthroughout figures thropomorphic At theveryleast,craftinga evenon islandswheremarbleis notavailable. norm,anda to apan-Cycladic conformity expressed figureof thismaterial timein theeffort.Thosearetwostrong to investconsiderable willingness messagesthat mayhavehelpedestablishand maintainbeneficialand subsetin everyEarly friendlyrelationsamongmembersof animportant of sucha figurein andhosts.Thepresence travelers Cycladiccommunity: thatthe ownerwas"oneof mayhavesignifiedto travelers a community associmorethanoneburialin a community us."Thattheregenerallywas withinthe atedwithfiguressuggeststhata numberof specialindividuals couldmaintainthe largergroupidentity.Multiplefiguresin community theextent andmayalsosymbolize oneburialmayhintatseveralnetworks, suppliesnuaswellasconfirmthem.The imagination of thosenetworks merousavenuesforspeculation. smallgroupof stylistic Ourabilityto dividefiguresinto a relatively At the sametime,thereis typesatteststo a certainlevelof conformity. canalsobefoundamong muchvarietywithinthetypes.Greatdifferences
442
ELIZABETH
A. HENDRIX
the types,fromthe rudimentary notchedpebblefiguresto the near-lifesizefolded-arm figures.l22 Nonetheless, allcanbe easilyidentifiedasCycladic,as opposedto Anatolianor Balkanor Levantine; theremusthave beena consensus amongtheislanders forformsappropriate to the Early Cycladiccultures. Howdoesthe presenceof paintcontribute to ourunderstanding of thefunctionandmeaningof thefigures? Certainmotifs,in particular the twoanatomical eyesandthecrownband,areso common,andso broadly consistent in form,thattheyseemto havebeenpartof thecanonthatwas communicated asintegral to thepan-Cycladic norm.Inthiscasethefunction andthe meaningseemto havebeenbroadlythe same:Hereis the activated imagethatyou,as a memberof this(pan-Cycladic) world,will recognize.
Certainotherpainteddesignsmayhavebeenappliedornot,depending on localcustomsor needs.l23 The formof the figurewasessentially generic,andseemsto havebeeninitiallydetailedwithtwo openeyesin orderto renderthe figurealert.The individual orgroupthatpossesseda figurecoulduseits genericformin a varietyof waysovertime,sinceits appearance wasnottiedto aspecificcondition suchaspregnancy ormourning.Its appearance, andthereforemeaning,couldbe alteredwithpaint, andperhaps dress,l24 to workon a symbolic levelforavarietyof particular occasions. In otherwords,anunspecified humanformcanbe particularizedto suita specificstageof lifeoreventbytheapplication of significant paintedfeatures.l25 Thishypothesis mayalsoaccountforthepoorstateof preservation of so manyof thepaintedmotifs.Manyof thesefeatures maynothavebeen intendedto lastlongerthantheduration of theeventforwhichtheywere applied.l26 The surprising absenceof themouthon mostCycladic figures maysuggesttwoexplanations: eithermouthsweresomehowinappropriateon theseworks(thehandlerdoingallthetalking),ortheywereindicatedwithmediathatweretemporary. As apossiblesymbolofvoice,story, song,channel,orportof nourishment, themouthmayhavebeenpainted in a changing varietyofwaysovertheuse-lifeof thefigure.Otherfeatures, suchastheanatomical eyes,mayhavebeenappliedin moredurable media 122.See,e.g.,platesin the abundantlyillustrated catalogues editedby ThimmeandGetz-Preziosi(1977)and Getz-Preziosi(1987b). 123.SeeTalalay1993,pp.4S44, fora discussionof ethnographic parallelsregarding the multipleusesof figuresin modernnonindustrialized communities. Songsandpoemscommonlyaccompany theuseof these figures;theyarepartof a complex teachingprogramaimedat passing downtraditionsthatprovidethe communitywithits worldview. 124.Dressdoesnot necessarily negatethe inction of paintedmotifs,
whosesignificance maybe realized as muchin the actasthe effectsof palntng.
125.Bynum,Harrel,andRichman (1986,p. 5) pointoutthata givenmotif mayhavedifferentmeaningsdepending on the statusof theviewer,a point alsoobservedbyTalalay(1993,p. 34). See alsoKelly,Lang,andWalters 1972,p. 62, on the creationanduse of anthropomorphic figuresby the Navahoin orderto helprestorehealth to peoplewhohavefallenill.Applied embellishments suchas dressand jewelryelementsaidin the task. 126.Talalay(1993,p. 17) suggests
thattheveryfriablebiscuitof some NeolithicclayfigurinesfromFranchthi Cavemayindicate"thatthe actof making the figurewasmoreimportantthan manipulating the artifact," whilehardfiredexamples"mightindicatethatthe figurewasintendedto havean'active' life and,consequently, thatthe maker intentionally exposedthe pieceto a thoroughfiringin orderto ensureits permanence." Shepoints(p 127,n. 27) to additionalstudies,suchasthosecarriedoutby Crowley(1973)andFernandez (1973),thatdemonstrate thatthe processof a figure'smanufacture wasat leastassignificantas the finalproduct.
PAINTED EARLY CYCLADIC FIGURES
443
or evenreapplied whennecessary, havinga morestablefunction.Those features willbe morelikelyto survivecorrosive burialconditions(aswell asmodern"cleaning" efforts). To conclude,I wouldproposethattherewasanimplicithierarchy of identitiesexpressed in EarlyCycladicfigures.First,theformsthemselves express,withoutdoubt,thatthe manufacturer andpossessorbelongto somedegreeto the samebroadgroupof peopleinhabiting the islandsin thesouthernAegean.AsJackDavishasobserved: In the EarlyBronzeAge,thesimilarities in theformalcharacteristicsof ceramics, marblevessels,figurines, andmetalobjectsthat typifythe EarlyCycladiccultureareindicative of socialandeconomictiesmaintained amongthesettlements of theislands;these relationships mayalsobe regarded asnecessary adaptations that wouldhaveprovided accessto additional resources of foodand manpower in timesof crisis.127 Thewhite,marble, pan-Cycladic, anthropomorphic formswerenotcomplete,however, beforetwolargeopeneyeswereappliedin paint.It is difficultto resistthenotionthattheseeyesweremeantto expressthemarble body'sconnection to theworldof humanbeings. Second,motifssuchas stripesor zigzags,certaincoiffures, perhaps, andredlinessegregating specificbodyparts128 mayhaveassociated the figurewithafamilyorothergroupwithinthebroader culture. Thefunerary contextandtheincisionsontheViolin-type figuresfromtombs20 and21 fromAkrotirion Naxos,for example,suggestsucha relationship. In a similarvein,linksmayhavebeenexpressed throughsimilarmotifsonfigures"belonging" to a woman's or man'sparental familyandsubsequently theirspousalfamily,tracking personal historiesof exogamy.129 Third,somemotifsmayhavebeenappliedin association withimportantevents:1nltlatons1ntoacu t groups,marr1age, pregnancy, an1mportantseaventure, and,ultimately, thevoyageto thenextworld.Tattooscan alsomarkpersonal eventsorstatus,ascanscarification andbodypainting, andevenhairstyles,as hasbeenarguedfortheyoungwomenpaintedin theTherafrescoes.130 Theconceptof paintingthemarblefiguresmayderivefromthe practiceof paintingactualhumanbodies.Talalay, among .
127.Davis1992,p. 704. 128.The relatively commonred linesonlyoccurin incisionsthatdelineateintegrated bodyparts,suchasthe juncturebetweenthe neckandhead, orthe spine.It is extremely rarefor separatebodyparts,suchas the lower foldedarmsandthe torso,to be outlinedin red.It is thereforetemptingto imaginethattheseredlinesmayalso havebeenpaintedon humanindividuals.Redpaintbetweenfingersandtoes is the exceptionto thisrule,andmaybe specificto marblefigures(vs.humans). 129.See Cullen1985,pp.94-97,
.
.
.
.
fordiscussionof ceramicdesignsimilaritiesin the contextof MiddleNeolithicsettlementexogamy. 130.Fortattoossee Helms1993, p. 59,withbibliography, andTalalay 1993,pp.70-72. SeeTalalay1993, pp.37-79, andRubin1988forbody markingthroughouttheworld.Forhair treatments in theTherafrescoes,see Davis1986.On the roleof womenas bodypainters(thebodiesof children andotherwomen),seeTurner's (1971) studyof theTchikrincultureof Brazil. In thatcommunitypaintedsymbols/ designson thebodyareusedto express
.
.
essentialagedivisionsthatareaccompaniedby differentsocialstatus,particularlyin regardto sexualavailability. Besidesvarioussortsof bodypaintand modesof application, theselife stages aremarkedby specifichairlengths,and by specificarticlesof dressandjewelry. Furthermore, the positionof the ornamentis meantto enhancethe (perceptionof) powerof the anatomyto which it refers.Men andwomenusedifferent methodsof applyingthepaint,and colorsaswellas positionon thebody addto the meaningof the patterns.
444
ELIZABETH
A. HENDRIX
others,hasnotedthata keydifference betweenbodypaintingandtattooing or scarification is permanence."While [tattooingandscarification] reflectpermanent changesin status,bodypaintis usedto symbolize more transientstatesor specialoccasions.''l3l Herethe choiceof materialmay againcomeintoplay:incisingclayfiguresfeels morelikepermanent methodsof bodymodification; paintingon marble feelsmorelikepaintingon flesh. I proposethatsomeof thepaintedemblems wereappropriate forcertainepisodesin the life or deathof the bearer, whethermarbleor flesh, addingparticular dimension tothehuman oratleastanthropomorphic bodyunderneath. Bodyembellishment wasnotaninnovation of theEarly Cycladicperiod,butneitherwasit rejectedthen,despitethemodernappearance ofsomemarble figures.The greatinnovation intheEarlyCycladic periodwasto provideanthropomorphic marblefemalefigureswithopen eyesin additionto otherbodymarkings, someof whichhadbeenused earlier. Thesemotifs,asappliedto themarblefigures,assistedindividuals orsmallgroupsin theirendeavor to transfer cultural memories acrossspace andthroughtime to participate in theprocessof"beingCycladic."
REFERENCES Atkinson,T. D., R. C. Bosanquet,C. C. Edgar,A. J. Evans,D. G. Hogarth, D. Mackenzie, C. Smith, and F. B. Welch. 1904. Excavationsat Phylakopiin Melos(JHS Suppl. 4), London. Barber,R. L. N. 1987. The Cycladesin theBronzeAge,London. Barber,R. L. N., andJ. A. MacGillivray.1980. "The EarlyCycladic Period:Matters of Definition and Terminology,"AJA84, pp. 141-157. Bent,J. T. 1884. "Researchesamong the Cyclades,"JHS5, pp. 42-59. Bianchi, R. S. 1988. "Tattooin Ancient Egypt,"in Rubin 1988, pp. 21-28. Broodbank,C. 1989."The Longboat and Society in the Cycladesin the Keros-SyrosCulture,"AJA93, pp. 319-337. . 2000. An IslandArchaeology of theEarly Cyclades,Cambridge. Bynum, C. W., S. Harrel,and P. Richman, eds. 1986. Genderand Religion: On the Complexityof Symbols, Boston. Carter,T. 1994. "SouthernAegean FashionVictims:An Overlooked Aspect of Early Bronze Age Burial Practices,"in Storiesin Stone (Lithics Study Society Occasional Paper4), ed. N. Ashton and A. David, London, pp. 127-144.
. 2002. "The Emergenceof the Individual:The Body and Society in EarlierCycladicPrehistory,"AJA 106, p. 292 (abstract). . Forthcoming."Cinnabarand the Cyclades:Body Modification and Political Structurein the Late EB I Aegean,"in TheAegeanin the Neolithic,Chalcolithic, andEarly BronzeAge,ed. H. Erkanal. Caskey,J. L. 1971. "MarbleFigurines from Ayia Irini in Keos,"Hesperia 40, pp. 113-126. . 1974."Addendato the Marble Figurinesfrom Ayia Irini,"Hesperia 43, pp. 77-79. Coleman,J. E. 1985. "'FryingPans'of the EarlyBronze Age Aegean," AJA89, pp. 191-219. Cory,H. 1956. AfricanFigurines:Their CeremonialUsein PubertyRites in Tanganyika,NewYork. Crowley,D. J. 1973. "AestheticValue and Professionalismin AfricanArt: Three Cases from the Katanga Chokwe,"in TheTraditionalArtist in AfricanSocieties,ed. W. L. d'Azevedo, Bloomington, pp. 221-249. Cullen, T. 1985. "SocialImplications of Ceramic Style in the Neolithic Peloponnese,"in AncientTechnology to ModernScience,ed. W. D. Kingery,Columbus,pp. 77-100.
131. Talalay1993, p. 71, with references to ethnographicparallels.
PAINTED
Davis, E. 1986. "Youthand Age in the Thera Frescoes,"AJA90, pp.399406. Davis,J. L. 1992. "Reviewof Aegean PrehistoryI: The Islands of the Aegean,"AJA96, pp. 699-756. Doumas, C. 1972."Notes on Early CycladicArchitecture,"AA87, pp.151-170. . 1977. EarlyBronzeAgeBurial Habits in the Cyclades(SIMA 48), Goteborg. . 1983. CycladicArt:Ancient Sculptureand Potteryprom theN. P GoulandrisCollection,London. .2000. Early CycladicCulture: The1\EP GoulandrisCollection, Athens. Dummler,F. 1886. "Mitteilungenvon den griechischenInseln, I: Reste vorgriechischerBevolkerungauf den Kykladen,"AM 11, pp. 15-46. Dundes,A. 1981. TheEvilEye.AFolkloreCasebook, New York. Emberling,G. 1995. "Ethnicityand the State in EarlyThird Millennium Mesopotamia"(diss. Univ. of Michigan). Evans,J. D., and C. Renfrew.1968. Excavationsat SaliagosnearAntiparos(BSA Suppl. 5), Oxford. Fellmann,B. 1981."FruheIdole in den MunchnerAntikensammlungen," MuJb32:3, pp. 7-24. Fernandez,J.1973."The Exposition and Imposition of Order:Artistic Expressionin Fang Culture,"in The TraditionalArtistin AfricanSocieties, ed. W. L. d'Azevedo,Bloomington, pp.194-220. Fitton, L. 1989. CycladicArt,Cambridge,Mass. Fotou, V. 1983. "Les sites de l'epoque neolithique et de l'age du bronze a Naxos (recherchesarcheologiques jusqu'en1980),"in Les Cyclades: Mate'riaux pour unee'tudede geographiehistorique.Tableronde re'uniea l'Universite'deDijon, ed. G. Rougemont, Paris,pp.15-57, 221-233. Gero,J.1991. "Genderlithics:Women's Roles in Stone Tool Production," in Gero and Conkey 1991, Oxford, pp. 163-187. Gero,J., and M. Conkey,eds. 1991. EngenderingArchaeology: Womenand Prehistory,Oxford. Getz-Gentle, P. 1996. StoneVessels of the
EARLY CYCLADIC
FIGURES
Cycladesin theEarlyBronzeAge,
445
Kelly,R. E., R. W. Lang, and H. Walt-
ers. 1972. NavahoFigurinesCalled UniversityPark. Dolls, SantaFe. . 2001.PersonalStylesin Early Kontoleon,N. 1970. "'AvasxafpN CycladicSculpture,Madison. Nagol),"Prakt1970, pp. 146-155. Getz-Preziosi, P.1981."TheMale . 1971. "'AvasxafpN Nagol)," Figurein EarlyCycladicSculpture," MMAJ16, pp.5-32. . 1987a.Sculptorsof the Cyclades, AnnArbor. , ed. 1987b. Early CycladicArt in NorthAmericanCollections,
Richmond. Goodale,J.C., andJ.D. Koss.1967. "TheCulturalContextof Creativity amongtheTiwi,"in Essayson the Verbaland VisualArts,ed.J. Helm, Seattle,pp.175-191. Hegel,F. [1821] 1981. ThePhilosophy of Right, trans.T. M. Knox,Oxford. Hekrnan, J.J. 1990. "Chalandriani on Syros,an EarlyBronzeAge Cemeteryin the Cyclades:Reportof the Research Undertaken in 1990," NetherlandsInstituteatAthensNewsletter3, pp.19-26. Helms,M. 1993. Craftand theKingly Ideal:Art,Trade,and Power,Austin. .1998. Accessto Origins:Affines, Ancestors,andAristocrats, Austin. Hendrix,E. 1997-1998."Painted Ladiesof the EarlyAegeanBronze Age,"BMMA 55:3, pp.4-15.
. 2000."ThePaintMotifson Early CycladicFigures" (diss.Insti-
tuteof FineArts,NewYorkUniv.). . 2001."Polychromy on the AmathusSarcophagus, a'RareGem of Art,"'MMAJ36, pp.43-58. .2003. "SomeMethodsfor RevealingPainton Early Cycladic Figures," in Metron:Measuringthe AegeanBronzeAge(Aegaeum24),
ed. K.P.FosterandR. Laffineur, Liege,pp.139-145. Higgins,R. A. 1972. "ACycladicIdol," BMQ 36, pp.3-4.
Hoffman,G. 2002. "Painted Ladies: Early CycladicII MourningFigures?"AJA106, pp.525-550. Hope Simpson,R., andO.T. P.K. Dickinson.1979. A Gazetteerof AegeanCivilisationin theBronze Age 1: TheMainlandandIslands (SIMA50), Goteborg. Karytinos, A. 1998. "Sealstones in Cemeteries: A Displayof Social Status?" in Cemeteryand Societyin theAegeanBronzeAge,ed. K.Branigan,Sheffield,pp.78-86.
Prakt1971, pp. 172-180. .1972. "'AvasxafpN Nagol)," Prakt1972, pp. 143-155. Leekley,D., and R. Noyes. 1975. Archaeological Excavationsin the Greek Islands,ParkRidge, NJ. Maggidis, C. 1998."From Polis to Necropolis:Social Rankingfrom Architecturaland MortuaryEvidence in the Minoan Cemetery at Phourni,Archanes,"in Cemetery and Societyin theAegeanBronzeAge, ed. K. Branigan,Sheffield, pp. 87102. Marangou,L., ed. 1990. Cycladic Culture:Naxos in the ThirdMillenniumB.C., Athens. Marangou,L. 1997. "New Archaeological Evidence for the Early History of Amorgos"(paper,New York1997). Melion, W., and S. Kuchler.1991. "Introduction:Memory,Cognition, and Image Production,"in Imagesof Memory:On Remembering and Representation,ed. S. Kuchlerand W. Melion, Washington,D.C., pp.1-46. Metcalf, P., and R. Huntington.1991. Celebrations of Death:TheAnthropologyofMortuaryRitual, 2nd ed., Cambridge. Muller, K. 1978. "HuicholArt and Acculturation,"in Art of theHuichol Indians,ed. K. Berrin,New York, pp. 84-100. Nakou, G. 1995."The Cutting Edge: A New Look at EarlyAegean Metallurgy,"J1W4 8:2, pp. 1-32. Oustinoff, E. 1984."The Manufacture of CycladicFigurines:A Practical Approach,"in Cycladica: Studies in MemoryofN. p Goulandris (Proceedings of the SeventhBritish MuseumClassicalCollofuium,June 1983), ed.J. L. Fitton, London, pp.38-47. . 1987. "The Early Cycladic Sculptor:Materialsand Methods," in Getz-Preziosi 1987b, pp. 90-102. Papathanassopoulos,G. A.1963. "Kl)XBa8Cza Nagol),"ArchDelt17, A' (1961-1962), pp.104-151.
446 Papathanassopoulos,G. A., ed. 1996. NeolithicCulturein Greece,trans. A. Doumas, Athens. Preziosi,P., and S. Weinberg.1970. "Evidencefor PaintedDetails in EarlyCycladicSculpture,"AntK 13, pp. 4-12. Renfrew,C. 1969."The Development and Chronology of the Early CycladicFigurines,"AJA73, pp. 1-32. . 1972. TheEmergenceof Civilisation:TheCycladesand theAegeanin the ThirdMillenniumB.C., London. . 1991. TheCycladicSpirit:Masterpiecesprom theNicholasp Goulandris Collection,Athens. Rubin,A., ed. 1988. Marksof Civilization:ArtisticTransformations of the HumanBody,Los Angeles. Sachini,A. 1984. "PrehistoricCycladic Figures andTheir Influence on EarlyTwentieth Century Sculpture" (M. Litt. thesis, Univ. of Edinburgh). Sakellarakis,J.1977."The Cyclades and Crete,"in Thimme and GetzPreziosi 1977, pp. 145-154. Sherratt,S. 2000. Catalogueof Cycladic Antiquitiesin theAshmoleanMuseum: TheCaptiveSpirit,Oxford.
ELIZABETH
A. HENDRIX
Sotirakopoulou, P.1998."TheEarly BronzeAge StoneFigurinesfrom Akrotirion TheraandTheirSignificanceforthe EarlyCycladic Settlement," BSA 93, pp.107-165. Stephanos,K. 1903."'Avasxacpat£V NaE,x," Prakt1903,pp.52-57. . 1904."'Avasxafpat £V NaE,x," Prakt1904,pp.57-61. . 1906."'Avasxafpat £V NaE,x," Prakt1906,pp.86-89. . 1908."'Avasxafpat £V NaE,x," Prakt1908,pp.114-117. . 1909."'Avasxafpat £V NaE,x," Prakt1909,pp.209-210. . 1910."'Avasxafpat £V NaE,x," Prakt1910,pp.270-273. . 1911."'Avasxafpat £V NaE,x," Prakt1911,p. 357. Talalay, L. 1993.Deities,Dolls,and Desices.NeolithicFigurinesprom FranchthiCave,Greece(Franchthi9),
Bloomington. Thimme,J.,andP.Getz-Preziosi, eds. 1977.Art and Cultureof the Cyclades, Karlsruhe. Thomsen,M. L. 1992."TheEvilEye in Mesopotamia,"JNES 51, pp.1932. Tsountas,C. 1898."Kl)XBa8Cza I," ArchEph1898,pp.137-212.
Elizabethjq.Hendrix MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTEOFTECHNOLOGY CENTERFORMATERIALS RESEARCH IN ARCHAEOLOGY AND ETHNOLOGY 77 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE,BUILDING8-I38 CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS 02I39 e he ndrix@mit . e du
. 1899."KoxBa8Cza II,"ArchEph 1899,pp.73-134. Turner, T. S. 1971."Cosmetics: The Languageof BodilyOrnament," in Conformityand Conflict,ed.J. P. SpradleyandD. W. McCurdy, Boston,pp.96-105. Winter,I. 1989."TheBodyof the AbleRuler:TowardanUnderstandingof the Statuesof Gudea," in Dumu-E2-dub-ba-a.Studiesin HonorofAke g Sjoberg(Occasional Publications of the SamuelNoah Kramer Fund11),ed.H. Behrens, D. Loding,andM. T. Roth,Philadelphia,pp.573-584. . 1996."Sex,Rhetoric,andthe PublicMonument: The Alluring Bodyof Naram-S1n of Agade,"in SexualityinAncientArt,ed.N. B. Kampen,Cambridge, Mass., pp.11-26. Wolters,P.1891."Marmorkopf aus Amorgos," MdI 16,pp.46-58. Zapheiropoulou, P.1980.44ntO0zoxBa8Cza rrg NaE,ou,"in £t8XLa
STHAH: Toyof £Cf y26y62 NcxoRofovKolvroR£olvro*Athens,
pp.532-540. Zervos,C. 1957.L'artdesCyclades, Paris.
HESPERIA
72
(2003)
Pages 447-466
PERSONIFICATION
A OF
DEMOS
ATTIC
ON
A
NEW
DOCUMENT
RELIEF
ABSTRACT This article presents a previously unpublished document relief discovered duringexcavationson the north slope of the Acropolis ofAthens in 1937. Although fragmentary,this relief contributesto the corpus of 4th-century B.C. documentreliefsby providinga well-preserveddepictionofwhat is most likely "Demos,"the personificationof the Athenian people, awardinga crown to a mortal man. The iconography of Demos is reviewed and an appendixpresents a list and concordanceof all extant representationsof Demos on Attic document reliefs.
1.The two mostthoroughand recentstudiesof the genreareby Meyer (1989) and Lawton (1995a). 2. Hamdorf 1964;TzachouAlexandri1993, 1994; Lawton 1993; 1995a, pp. 55-59; Smith 1997. For these civic personifications,see also LIMC III, 1986, pp. 145-147, s.v. Boule (V. Komninos);LIMC III, 1986, pp. 372-374, s.v. Demokratia,and pp. 375-382, s.v. Demos (O. TzachouAlexandri);LIMC IV, 1988, p. 120, s.v. Eutaxia(O. Palagia).A new study of political personificationsin Classical and Hellenistic art by Messerschmidt (2003) appearedtoo late for me to consult for the text of this article,but I have included the relevantdata in the appendix.I would like to thank Kristen Seamanfor this reference. 3. Lawton 1995a, pp. 1-4.
Document reliefs combine figural decoration with the official text of public records such as decrees, laws, treaties, cult regulations, and inventories, and thus represent an important class of evidence for the study of ancient Greek art, history,and politics.1Close examination of the iconography and historical context of Attic document reliefs from the Classical and Hellenistic periods has demonstrated how this unique body of securely dated, original Greek sculpture can provide new insights into the relationship of the visual arts and political ideology in ancient Athens. For example, document reliefs have been crucial in our understanding of the use and development of allegorical figures in Athenian public art, in particularthe personification of local and foreign places (e.g., Salamis, Messana), abstract qualities such as Demokratia (Democracy) and Eutaxia (Good Order), and civic institutions such as Demos (the People) and Boule (the Council).2 Most of the known Attic document reliefs were first discovered durthe excavations of the Athenian Acropolis in the 19th century.3Othing ers were found on the south slope, a few in the Agora, and a few elsewhere. While excavations in Athens still have the potential to bring to light future discoveries of document reliefs and their inscriptions, a carefulexamination of unpublished material from older projects-in a sense, the "excavation"of storerooms-can also provide important new evidence for the study of this genre. It is in this context that I present an Attic document relief recently identified among the sculptural fragments from the excavations on the north slope of the Acropolis conducted by Oscar Broneer
448
KEVIN
GLOWACKI
and the American School of Classical Studies at Athens prior to World War II. As with the examples found elsewhere on the slopes of the citadel, it is most likely that this monument originally stood within a sanctuaryon the Acropolis itself and made its way down to the north slope at some later time. Although the fragment does not preserve the text of the document that it crowned, it contributes to the corpus of Attic reliefs by providing a relativelywell preserved depiction of a figure who is most likely Demos, the personification of the Athenian people.
THE RELIEF Relief from an honorarydecree depicting Demos(?) crowning an honorand. Athens, Agora Museum Storeroom AS 146. Third to fourth quarter of the 4th century B.C. Figs. 1-3 P.H. 0.378; p.W. 0.218; Th. 0.118; H. of relief 0.015 m. FoundMay 28,1937, builtinto a "late"(probablyOttomanperiod)wallwithin the cleft of the MycenaeanFountain,nearthe easternentrance.4Preservedis the right half and top of the relief.Brokenat the bottom and on the left side. The back is roughlyfinishedwith a large,pointed chisel.The reliefwas bordered at right by an anta (0.035 m wide), now mostly chipped awaybut preservedas a slightlyraisededge on the background.The right side of the stone is finished flat with a fine-toothed chisel. Above the relief field is an entablature crownedwith antefixes,now worn and chipped.The surfaceis worn and there is some mineralencrustationand traces of mortaron the background and break surfaces.Fine-grained,white marblewith micaceous streaksand light reddish-tanpatina (Pentelic). None of the inscription is preserved,but the subject of the relief indicates that it once decorated an honorary decree. The relief depicts a small male figure being awarded a crown by a larger male figure at right. The honorand, whose entire left side is preserved to approximatelyknee level, stands in a completely frontal pose, wearing a long himation wrapped around his waist and draped over his left shoulder and arm. His left arm is bent at his waist, and part of his hand is preserved emerging from the himation. His hair is worn short and has the appearance of curls. His beard is also full, but his lower lip is clearly articulatedwithin the mass of facial hair. His eyes are deeply set, even at such a small scale and in this frontal view, and are framed by thick eyelids (Fig. 2). At right stands a mature male figure at a much larger scale, obviously intended to represent a divinity or personification. This larger figure is completely preserved except for the feet, which are broken at the ankles. The figure stands frontallywith his weight on his left leg, and his left hip is correspondinglyslightly raised.The right leg is free and the knee is bent inward toward the left leg. The left foot appearsto have been mostly frontal, while the outline of the broken right foot reveals that it was in threequarterview to left with the heel slightly raised. Like the honorand, this larger figure wears a long himation wrapped around his waist and thrown over his left shoulder,while his chest is bare.The himation is folded at the waist and falls diagonally from left to right toward the weight-bearing leg.
4. For the 1937 excavationson the north slope, see Broneer1938a, 1938b. The entranceto the MycenaeanFountain was erroneouslycalled at that time or "Caveof Aglauros." the "Aglaureion" The wall in which the reliefwas found is partiallyvisible in a photograph taken in 1934 priorto excavation.See Broneer1939, p. 323, fig. 3.
A PERSONIFICATION
Figure1. Athens,AgoraMuseum AS 146. Relieffroman honorary decree.Demos(?)crowning honorand.Third to fourthquarterof the 4th centuryB.C.Courtesy Agora Excavations, photoC. Mauzy
Figure2 (left).Athens,Agora MuseumAS 146. Detail of headof honorand. CourtesyAgora Excavations, photo C. Mauzy
Figure3 (right).Athens,Agora MuseumAS 146. Detail of headof Demos(?). CourtesyAgoraExcavations, photoC. Mauzy
OF DEMOS
449
450
KEVIN
GLOWACKI
The figure's left arm is bent and is completely covered by the garment, with the hand resting on the hip but held slightly behind the body. His right arm is raised and his hand is extended to hold a crown over the head of the honorand. The head of the larger figure is shown in three-quarter view to left, glancing in the direction of the mortal being crowned (Fig. 3). His hair is full and covers his ears but does not reach down to the shoulders. The rendering of the hair into two separate masses at front and back suggests that he wore a fillet around his head, once probablypicked out with paint. He has a thick, bushy beard, and his lower lip is fully formed within a deep recess between beard and moustache. His eyes are deeply set and framed with overhanging brows, and the eyelids are carefully articulated.
DISCUSSION On the basis of parallelswith other Athenian honorary reliefs, the larger male figure in this relief probablyrepresentsDemos, the physical embodiment of the Athenian people and state as well as the representationof the citizen body (the ekklesia,or assembly) that enacted the decree recorded in the now missing inscription. In this dual role, Demos appearsas one of the most common civic personifications in Athenian document reliefs.5He is consistently representedas a mature male figure,bearded,with medium to long hair frequently bound by a fillet. He wears a long himation over his left shoulder but is otherwise nude to the waist.6 He can be shown seated or standing, sometimes carrying or leaning on a staff. His overall appearance is very similar to that of Asklepios and Zeus, and may have even been modeled, to some degree, on representations of those two divinities in freestanding and relief sculpture.7He also recalls some of the standing/ leaning "Eponymous Heroes" and marshals on the Parthenon frieze, who themselves evoke the typical elder citizens of Athens. As noted by several scholars, it may have been an important part of the characterization of Demos in the visual arts to resemble, but on a larger scale, the citizens he personifies.8 A cult of Demos existed in Athens at least as early as the mid-5th century, and the personified Demos appears as a characterin the Knights of Aristophanes, performed in 424 B.C.9The earliest-attested depiction of Demos in ancient art, however, is a monumental painting by Parrhasios (last quarterof the 5th century).1?Later are paintings by Euphranor (mid5. For the variousand complex meaningsof the personifiedDemos on document reliefs,see Lawton 1995a, pp. 55-56; Smith 1997, pp. 76-78, 174-177. 6. LIMC III, 1986, p. 381, s.v. Demos (O. Tzachou-Alexandri);Palagia 1980, pp. 57-59; Tzachou-Alexandri 1994; Lawton 1995a, pp. 56-58; Smith 1997, pp. 174-177. 7. On the similarityof the various
types employedfor 4th-centuryrepresentationsof Demos and Asklepios (standingand seated),as well as for Zeus (seated),see Palagia1980, pp. 58-59. 8. Lawton 1995a, p. 58. See also Kron 1979, pp. 58-59; Meyer 1989, pp. 186-187. 9. A shrine of the Nymphs and Demos is indicatedby a rupestralinscription(IG I3 1065) on the Hill of
the Nymphs, west of the Agora. See Kron 1979, pp. 63-75; LIMC III, 1986, pp. 375-376, s.v.Demos (O. TzachouAlexandri). 10. Paintingof Demos by Parrhasios: Plin. HN35.69; Rumpf 1951, pp. 7-10; Hamdorf 1964, p. 31, no. 255a; Palagia1980, pp. 59-61, no. B1; LIMC III, 1986, p. 379, no. 47, s.v.Demos (O. Tzachou-Alexandri); Smith 1997, p. 237, no. MP3.
A PERSONIFICATION
OF DEMOS
45I
Figure4. Athens, Epigraphical Museum2791 (IG II2160). Demos andhonorand.Mid-4th centuryB.C. CourtesyMuseum
4th century) and Aristolaos (mid- to second half of the 4th century).11 Ancient sources also mention a statue of Demos by Leochares (mid-4th century) in the Piraeus, a resolution authorizing the creation of a colossal group of the Demos of Athens being crowned by the Demoi of Byzantion and Perinthos (4th century), and a bronze statue in the Bouleuterion of Athens by Lyson (date uncertain).l2Since these paintings and sculptures arenow lost, their influence on contemporaryand later art cannot be accurately determined and must remain a matter for speculation. The earliest securely identified and preserved depictions of the personified Demos, therefore, are to be found on document reliefs. Three representations of Demos, attested by inscribed labels, help to establish the two main figural types (standing and seated) in which this important personification is portrayed. The earliest is on a fragmentary honorary decree (EM 2791; Fig. 4) of the mid-4th century B.c.13 Here Demos is shown as a standing male figure wearing a himation and holding a staff. 11. Paintingof Theseus, Demos, and Demokratiaby Euphranor:Paus. 1.3.3-4; AgoraIII, p. 27, no. 30; Hamdorf 1964, p. 94, no. 255b, 112, no. 448b; Palagia1980, pp. 57-60; LIMC III, 1986, p. 379, no. 48, s.v. Demos (O. Tzachou-Alexandri);Smith 1997, p. 239, no. MP7. Paintingof Demos by Aristolaos: Plin. HN35.137; EAMI, 1958, pp. 648-649, s.v.Aristolaos(F. Magi);
Hamdorf1964,pp.31-32, no.255c; Palagia1980,p. 61, no.B2. 12. Statueof Demosby Leochares: Paus.1.1.3;Hamdorf1964,p. 94,
no. 253a; Palagia1980, p. 61, no. Cl; LIMC III, 1986,p. 377,no.8, s.v. Demos (O. Tzachou-Alexandri);Smith 1997, p. 267, no. S7. Colossal group of the Demoi of Athens, Byzantion,and Perinthos:
Dem. 18.90;Hamdorf1964,p. 94,
nos. 253b, 256; Palagia1980, p. 61,
no.C2;LIMCIII,1986,p. 378, no.36, s.v.Demos (O. Tzachou-Alexandri); Smith 1997, p. 270, no. S13. Statueby Lyson:Paus. 1.3.5;Agora III, pp. 131-132, no. 402; EAA IV, 1961, p. 753, s.v. Lyson (G. Mansuelli);
Palagia1980,pp.61-62, no.C3.A late
source(Gnomologium Vaticanum 339b) a statue of Demos "without mentioning ears"by the 4th-centurysculptorLy-
sipposis suspectandshouldnotbe
confusedwith this work by Lyson. 13. Athens, EpigraphicalMuseum 2791. Provenanceunknown.IG 112 160; Palagia1980, p. 62, no. D9; LIMC III, 1986, p. 381, no. 69, s.v.Demos (O. Tzachou-Alexandri);Meyer 1989, p. 307, no. A146, pl. 40:2;TzachouAlexandri1994, p. 67; Lawton 1995a, p. 133, no. 117, pl. 61; Smith 1997, p. 213, no. DR22.
452
KEVIN
GLOWACKI
Figure5. Athens,NationalArchaeologicalMuseum7272. Demos (of Aixone?)crownshonorand.Second half of the 4th century B.C.Courtesy Deutsches ArchaologischesInstitut,Athens; photo H. Wagner,neg. Attika 202
Figure6. Athens,NationalArchaeological Museum 2407 (IG II2 4630). Demos, Athena, and Heraldes. Third quarter of the 4th century B.C. CourtesyMuseum
A PERSONIFICATION
OF DEMOS
453
Although only the legs and feet of the figure are preserved, the mass of drapery hanging down along his left side (i.e., the "open"side of the garment) suggests that the himation was worn over the left shoulder. He is apparentlycrowning an honorand standing to left and depicted, as usual, at a much smaller scale. The names of both the mortal ([- --]APQN) and the personification (AHMOZ) are clearly inscribed on the taenia of the molding beneath the relief.14It has been suggested, on the basis of both the space required to restore the first line of the inscription and by comparison with similar reliefs, that another figure, either Athena or Boule, may have been depicted to the left of the honorand. The second relief (NM 7272; Fig. 5), also on an honorary decree (second half of the 4th century), has been badly damaged by having the figures systematically picked away.l5Enough is preserved of the outline of the figures, however, to identify the scene as a large divinity or personification reaching up with his left hand to crown a mortal.The identification of the larger figure as Demos is based upon an inscription on the architraveimmediately above his head (AH[MO2]). Since the relief was found in modern Trachones, however, it has been suggested that the figure represents the personification of the Demos of a nearby deme, probablyAixone, and not the Demos of Athens itself.l6 The third relief (NM 2407; Fig. 6), from an honorary decree(?) of the third quarterof the 4th century,depicts Demos as a mature, bearded man seated to left, presumablyfacing an honorand, now missing.17 His torso is turned in three-quarterview and his left arm is propped up on the back of his chair.He also wears a himation aroundhis waist and over his left shoulder.In back of Demos, to right, areAthena and Herakles. All three figures are identified by inscription on the architraveabove the scene ([A]HMOZ A?HNA HPAKAHE). Even without inscribed labels, the appearanceof Demos can be suggested, with varying degrees of probability,on several other reliefs. The strongest argument can perhaps be made for the representationof Demos on the famous anti-tyranny law of 337/6 B.c. from the Athenian Agora 14. Lawton (1995a, pp. 11-12; 1995b, p. 122) has noted that the profiled molding below the scene, a regular featureof document reliefsbut rareon votive reliefs,helps to distinguishthe two types of monumentseven when inscriptionsor other identifying characteristicsare not preserved. 15. Athens, National Museum 7272. FromTrachones(Attica). Meyer 1989, p. 314, no. A182, pl. 52:4; Lawton 1995a, p. 155, no. 176, pl. 91; Smith 1997, pp. 224-225, no. DR38. 16. On the depiction of local Demoi and their similarityto the Demos of Athens, see Smith 1997, pp. 172-179. In addition to Athens, National Mu-
seum 2407, local Demoi may be represented on Eleusis,Museum E958 (IG I3 79; LIMC II, 1984, p. 1013, no. 606, pl. 763, s.v.Athena [P.Demargne]; LIMC III, 1986, pp. 378-379, no. 42, s.v.Demos [O. Tzachou-Alexandri]; Meyer 1989, p. 266, no. A5; Lawton 1995a, pp. 82-83, no. 3, pl. 2; Smith 1997, p. 197, no. DR1) and on a relief in a privatecollection (St. Lydakis)in Athens (Meyer 1989, p. 299, no. A119, pl. 34:1; Lawton 1995a, p. 145, no. 147, pl. 78; Smith 1997, pp. 230-231, no. DR45). 17. Athens, National Museum 2407. Found nearthe Church of Ayios Dimitrios Loumbardiaris,between the
Pnyx and the PhilopapposMonument. IG II24630; Kron 1979, pp. 49-63, pl. 7:1-2; Palagia1980, p. 63, no. E4; LIMC III, 1986, p. 379, no. 46, pl. 274, s.v.Demos (O. Tzachou-Alexandri); Meyer 1989, p. 292, no. A94, pl. 28:2; Tzachou-Alexandri1994, p. 59, fig. 6; Lawton 1995a, p. 139, no. 133, pl. 71; Smith 1997, pp. 216-217, no. DR27. An older interpretationof the seated figure as the hero Akademos (based upon the conjecturalreading[AKAA]HMOS)is consideredunlikely.See Kron 1979, p. 58, and LIMC I, 1982, pp. 434-435, no. 2, s.v.Akademos (U. Kron).
454
KEVIN
GLOWACKI
(I 6524; Fig. 7), on which a mature,bearded, and long-haired male figure is seated on a throne.18The pose is comparable to but not identical with that of the seated figure on the previously mentioned relief (NM 2407; Fig. 6). On the Agora relief, Demos sits with his legs in profile to left, while his torso and head are turned frontally.His left arm is raised to the back of his chair,apparentlyto hold a staff, scepter,or spear (once painted). He wears a himation around his waist and over his left shoulder. Beside him is a standing, frontal, long-haired female who wears a sleeved, highbelted chiton and himation, also wrapped around her waist and draped over her left shoulder.With her right hand she reachesout to offer a crown to the seated male figure. While the identification of the seated male as Demos can be supported by comparisons with the type on other document reliefs, the identity of the female figure is based primarilyupon the text of the anti-tyrannylaw itself, where the "demosof the Athenians"and "democracyin Athens"arespecificallymentioned together threetimes (lines 8-9, 13-14, 16-17). It has been suggested that the depiction, or at least the pairing, of Demos and Demokratia on this relief may have been partially inspired by Euphranor'sfamous paintings in the Stoa of Zeus Eleutherios in the Agora (Paus. 1.3.3-4), where the two personifications may have been juxtaposed for the first time in the visual arts.19 18.Athens,AgoraI 6524.SEG XII 87;Meritt1952,pp.355-359, no.5, pls.89-90;Raubitschek 1962; AgoraXIV,pp.61, n. 173,102, pl.53:a;Palagia1980,p. 63, no.E3, fig.43;LIMCIII, 1986,p. 373,no.7,
pl.271, s.v.Demokratia (O.TzachouLIMCIII, 1986,p. 379, Alexandri); no.54, pl.271, s.v.Demos(O.Tzachou-Alexandri); Meyer1989,p. 293, no.A97,pl. 30:2;Tzachou-Alexandri 1994,pp.55-56, fig. 1;Lawton1995a,
pp.99-100,no.38, pl.20; Smith1997, pp.227-228,no.DR41. 19. Raubitschek 1962,p.238; AgoraXIV,p. 102;Palagia1980,p. 60; Lawton1995a,p. 100.Palagia(1980, refpp.58-59) alsonotesthe"indirect
A PERSONIFICATION
OF DEMOS
455
Figure8. Athens,NationalArchaeologicalMuseum2952 + 2961. AthenaandDemos(?)crowntwo honorands.Mid-thirdquarterof the 4th century B.C.CourtesyMuseum
Among the preservedstanding male types on other document reliefs, the most convincing identifications are those where Demos is pairedwith other important figures referring to the Athenian state, such as Athena, Boule, or both.20For example, on NM 2952 +2961 (Fig. 8) Athena and a large male figure frame the relief on left and right, respectively,and they crown two frontal honorands standing in the center.21The position of this unlabeled male divinity/personification, of whom only the lower legs and right hand holding the crown are preserved,is reminiscent of the labeled Demos on EM 2791 (Fig. 4). A similarpairing of Athena and Demos may be found on two reliefs decorating honorary decrees, both probablyfound erence"of Demos on this relief to Pheidian prototypessuch as the figureof Zeus on the east frieze and possiblyalso the east pediment of the Parthenon. 20. Lawton (1995a, p. 58) suggests that the personificationof Boule may have been invented specificallyfor document reliefs,and would probablynot be depictedin this genrewithout the presenceof Demos. Hence Lawton (1995a, pp. 142-143, no. 142, pl. 75) would restorea figureof Demos on the
now missing right side of a fragmentary documentrelief (Athens, National Museum 1473) of the third quarterof the 4th centurypreservingthe figuresof Athena and Boule (labeledBOAE)in the presenceof a mortalhonorand.On the other hand,Tzachou-Alexandri (1994, pp. 56-57, figs. 2-3) prefersto restoreanothermortalfigure,noting that the preservedhonorand,who faces left towardAthena and Boule, would have his back turnedtowardany hypo-
thetical Demos awardinghim a crown from the right. 21. Athens, National Museum 2952 + 2961 (mid-thirdquarterof the 4th century).Provenanceunknown.Palagia 1980, p. 62, no. D3; LIMC III, 1986, p. 380, no. 56, pl. 275, s.v. Demos (O. Tzachou-Alexandri);Meyer 1989, p. 292, no. A95, pl. 30:1;TzachouAlexandri1994, p. 67; Lawton 1995a, pp. 136-137, no. 126, pl. 67; Smith 1997, pp. 217-218, no. DR28.
456
KEVIN
GLOWACKI
Figure9. Athens,NationalArchaeologicalMuseum2946. Athena observesDemos(?)crowning honorand.Thirdto fourthquarterof the 4th century B.C.CourtesyMuseum
Figure10. Athens,AcropolisMuseum 7231. Demos(?)andAthena crownhonorand.Secondhalfof the 4th century B.C.CourtesyMuseum
A PERSONIFICATION
OF DEMOS
457
Figure11. Athens,NationalArchaeologicalMuseum1482 (IGI12448). Athenaobservesas Demos(?)awards crownto Euphronof Sikyon. 318/7 B.C.CourtesyMuseum
on the Acropolis (NM 2946 and AM 7231; Figs. 9, 10).22In the latter example (AM 7231) the Demos figure has moved to the left side of the relief, while on yet another (NM 1482; Fig. 11), a figure probably to be identified as Demos stands near the center of the composition, directly interacting with the honorand, while Athena observes from behind.23A slightly less secure identification of the pair appears on an honorary decree(?) of the mid-third quarterof the 4th century (NM 2986; Fig. 12), with a goddess standingin the centralposition, a small male figureat right, and Demos at left, in a himation and pose similar to that of the large figure on the north slope relief.24Variations of the Athena-honorand-Demos scheme 22. Athens, National Museum 2946
(thirdto fourthquarterof the 4th century).Palagia1980, p. 63, no. Dll; LIMC III, 1986, p. 380, no. 60, s.v. Demos (O. Tzachou-Alexandri);Meyer 1989, p. 298, no. A115, pl. 34:2; Tzachou-Alexandri1994, p. 67; Lawton 1995a, pp. 145-146, no. 149, pl. 79; Smith 1997, pp. 223-224, no. DR36. Athens, AcropolisMuseum 7231 (second half of the 4th century).LIMC III, 1986, p. 380, no. 55, s.v. Demos (O. Tzachou-Alexandri);Meyer 1989, p. 304, no. A138, pl. 35:1;TzachouAlexandri1994, p. 67; Lawton 1995a, p. 154, no. 172, pl. 89; Smith 1997, pp. 220-221, no. DR33. 23. Athens, National Museum 1482 (318/7 B.C.).Found in the Late Roman fortificationsnearthe Stoa of Attalos.
IG II2448; Palagia1980, p. 62, no. D7; LIMC III, 1986, p. 380, no. 58, pl. 275, s.v.Demos (O. Tzachou-Alexandri); Meyer 1989, p. 303, no. A134, pl. 39:1; Tzachou-Alexandri1994, pp. 66-67, fig. 17; Lawton 1995a, pp. 107-108, no. 54, pl. 28; Smith 1997, pp. 232233, no. DR48. 24. Athens, National Museum 2986. FromAthens. Tzachou-Alexandri 1994, pp. 59-66, figs. 7-16; Lawton 1995a, pp. 135-136, no. 123, pl. 66; Smith 1997, pp. 218-219, no. DR30. The identity of the female figure,who wears a high-belted peplos and a shouldermantle,is not immediately clear,since her head is missing and she does not have an aegis, shield, or other distinguishingattribute.Lawton considersher to be Hera, with her left arm raisedand possiblyholding out her veil
in a bridalgesture (anakalypsis). The largermale figurewould then represent Zeus holding a (once painted) scepter with his raisedright arm.TzachouAlexandri,however,arguesthat the pair depictsAthena and Demos, pointing out that the goddess'sdress,a highbelted peplos with himation draped down her back and over her right arm, is a characteristiccostume of Athena. Moreover,the goddess is not always depictedwith an aegis or shield, and her identity could have been made clear in other ways, such as by the presence of a helmet on her (now missing) head. Smith observesthat the male figure seems to be slightly shorterthan the female,a characterizationof inferior statusmore appropriatefor Demos than for Zeus.
458
KEVIN GLOWACKI
Figure12. Athens,NationalArchaeologicalMuseum2986. Demos/ Zeus(?)andAthena/Hera(?)in presence ofhonorand.Mid-thirdquarter of the 4th century. CourtesyMuseum
Figure13. Athens, Epigraphical Museum 2811 + 7180 (IG II2 367).
Athenaholdscrownandobserves as Boule(?)andDemos(?)crown Asklepiodoros. 323/2 B.C.Courtesy Museum
A PERSONIFICATION
OF DEMOS
459
Figure14. Athens,NationalArchaeologicalMuseum2958 (+ EM 7166 = IG II2417 [?]).Demos(?)crowns honorand(liturgist?)while Eutaxia observes.Fourthquarterof the 4th century. CourtesyMuseum
may also include other appropriatepersonifications, such as Boule (EM 2811 + 7180; Fig. 13) or Eutaxia (NM 2958; Fig. 14).25 The new fragment from the north slope of the Acropolis, therefore, fits into a well-established iconographic tradition in 4th-century Athens. The crowning of an honorand or honorands, depicted as mortal by their small scale comparedwith the divinity,hero, or personification bestowing the award, is the most common motif in reliefs decorating honorary decrees, especially those awarded by the bouleand demos.26Although there are no inscribed labels on the preserved sections of the north slope relief, the pose, age, dress, and features of the large, supernaturallysized, male figure crowning the mortal honorand all support his identification as Demos, the personification of the Athenian people and government. The frontal stance of the honorand, along with the tall and narrowproportions of the preserved fragment, makes it likely that at least one other largescale divinity or personification was once portrayed on the now-missing left half of the relief. 25. Athens,Epigraphical Museum
Lawton 1995a, pp. 105-106, no. 49, pl. 26; Smith 1997, pp. 231-232, no. DR47. Athens, National Museum 2958
p. 62, no.D8, fig.34;LIMCIII, 1986,
no.3, s.v.Boule(V.Komninos); LIMC
(fourthquarterof the4th century).
Meyer1989,p. 306, no.A142,pl.42:1;
III, 1986, p. 380, no. 57, pl. 275, s.v.
From the Acropolis.Possiblybelonging with Athens, EpigraphicalMuseum 7166 = IG II2417(?);Palagia1980,
Lawton 1995a, p. 146, no. 150, pl. 79;
2811+7180 (323/2 B.c.). From the Acropolis.IG II 367; Palagia1980, p. 62, no. D6; LIMC III, 1986, p. 146,
Demos(O.Tzachou-Alexandri); Meyer 1989, pp. 300-301, no. A125, pl. 35:2;
p. 380, no. 59, pl. 275, s.v.Demos
LIMCIV, (O.Tzachou-Alexandri); 1988, p. 120, s.v. Eutaxia(O. Palagia);
Smith1997,pp.233-234,no.DR49. 26. Lawton 1995a, pp. 30-36.
460
KEVIN
GLOWACKI
Figure15. Eleusis,Museum5100. MarblestatueofAsklepiosdedicated by Epikrates,son of Pamphilos,from demeof Leukonoion(IG II24414). Fourthquarterof the 4th centuryB.C. CourtesyMuseum
The date of the relief can be estimated by comparisonwith other dated monuments.The most numerousparallelsfor the dress and pose of Demos on the north slope relief are found in the second half of the 4th century.In large-scale sculpture,for example, a particularlyclose parallelcan be found in the "Eleusistype"of Asklepios, named after a freestanding statue found at Eleusis and dated to the fourth quarter of the 4th century (Fig. 15).27 Like the Demos on the north slope relief,Asklepios standswith his weight on his left leg while his right knee is bent and projects slightly forward. His left arm is completely covered by the himation, and his hand rests on his raised left hip. The triangularoverfold of his himation falls diagonally from left to right toward the weight-bearing leg. While the Asklepios of this type is usually shown leaning on his staff, the right arm of the north slope Demos figure is raised to crown the honorand, resulting in slight differences in the height of the himation on the right side of the body. Similarities between the two male figures also include the ridged folds of their mantles that stretch diagonally from ankle to hip in a manner typical of the third and fourth quartersof the century,
27. Eleusis,Museum 5100; Adam 1966, pp. 102-104, pls. 50-51; LIMC II, 1984, p. 882, no. 234, pl. 652,
s.v.Asklepios(B.Holtzmann). An inII2 records that the (IG 4414) scription statuewasdedicatedto Asklepiosby sonof Pamphilos, fromthe Epikrates, demeof Leukonoion. Forthe type,see LIMCII, 1984,pp.882-884,nos.234260, s.v.Asklepios(B.Holtzmann).
A PERSONIFICATION
OF DEMOS
46I
aswell asthe linesof foldsthatradiatein alldirectionsfroma centralpoint wherethe hand restson the hip.The samerenderingof folds can be observed,for example,on documentreliefsNM 2986 (Fig. 12) and,with a slightvariationin pose,NM 2946 (Fig. 9). Finally,the head and facialfeaturesof the north slope figure,with medium-longhair,full beard,and deep-seteyes,can be comparedto another Demos figureon documentreliefNM 1482 (Fig. 11), datableto 318/7 B.C.All of thesefactorspointto a datein the thirdto fourthquarter of the 4th centuryforthispreviouslyunpublishedfragmentof a document relieffromthe northslopeof the Acropolis.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wouldlike to recordmy thanksto the late OscarBroneerfor permission to studythe materialfromhis excavationson the northandeast slopesof the Acropolisfrom 1931 to 1939. For photographsof documentreliefs and permissionto reproducethem here I am gratefulto the First and Third Ephoreiasof Prehistoricand ClassicalArchaeology,the National ArchaeologicalMuseum,the EpigraphicalMuseum,the AcropolisMuthe DeutschesArchaoseum,the EleusisMuseum,theAgoraExcavations, in Alkestis Choremi,JanJorlogischesInstitut,Athens, and, particular, dan,NikolaosKaltsas,CharalambosKritzas,MichaelKrumme,Kalliope Lazaridi,Nelly Lazaridou,CraigMauzy,MarieMauzy,KalliopePapagandChristinaVlassopoulou. geli, LianaParlama,RosaProskynitopoulou, I wouldalsolike to thankNancyKlein,CarolLawton,Olga Palagia,Brunilde Ridgway,PeterSchultz,andthe editorand anonymousreviewersof Hesperiafor adviceand manyhelpfulcomments.My researchin Athens on the north slope materialhas been made possibleby generousgrants fromCharlesPagetandthe EdwardA. SchraderEndowedFundforClassicalArchaeologyat IndianaUniversity.
APPENDIX DEPICTIONS OF DEMOS ON ATTIC DOCUMENT RELIEFS
This appendix presents a list of all definite, probable, and possible depictions of Demos on Attic document reliefs currentlyknown to me. I have organized the material first according to "seated"and "standing"types (Table 1), followed by a few reliefs where a Demos-like figure is not actually preserved,but has been conjecturedon the basis of other factors, such as the presence of Boule or Athena (Table 2). It should be noted, however, that some of the identifications and restorations are very speculative and may not be accepted by all or even the majorityof scholars.The types have also been organized chronologically.Within any quartercentury,priority has been given to those reliefs dated by inscription to a specific year, followed by examples dated by sculpturalstyle alone. Since each of the reliefs has been described in full elsewhere, I present the materialin the form of a concordance,providing referencesto the museum or collection where the relief currentlyresides, inscription numbers in IG, SEG, or CIG, the date of the relief, and catalogue numbers in the most recent and thorough studies of Demos, document reliefs, and political personifications in Athenian art.28 The tables make clear that the depiction of Demos on Attic document reliefs is primarilya phenomenon of the second half of the 4th century B.C. Although some scholars have suggested that Demos appearson reliefs as early as the last quarter of the 5th century, the earliest monuments for which there is general agreement about the presence of this important political personification date to the middle of the 4th century or shortly before. The majority of monuments, both those firmly dated by inscription and those dated by sculptural style, belong to the third and fourth quartersof the 4th century.As Lawton has suggested, the increased popularity of Demos and other "democratic"personifications in the visual arts of this period may be a response to a combination of artistic,political, philosophical, and even religious factors as Athenian democracy becomes more specialized, more self-conscious, and more threatened by both internal and external forces.29In this way, the appearanceof Demos on Attic document reliefs reflects a close relationshipbetween public art and political ideology in 4th-century Athens.
28. The studies referredto in Tables 1 and 2 are as follows. Demos: Palagia1980;Tzachou-Alexandri= LIMC III, 1986, s.v. Demos. Document reliefs:Meyer 1989; Lawton 1995a. Politicalpersonifications:TzachouAlexandri1994; Smith 1997; Messerschmidt2003. 29. Lawton 1993, pp. 15-16; 1995a, p. 31.
A PERSONIFICATION
TABLE
1. DEPICTIONS
Museumand InscriptionNo. SEATED
Date (B.C.)
OF DEMOS(?)
Palagia
OF DEMOS
ON ATTIC
Tzachou-Alexandri
463
DOCUMENT
Meyer
RELIEFS
Lawton
Smith
Messerschmidt
DR12 Zeus; Demos doubtful
D2 Demos
DR41
D6 Demos
DEMOS(?)
EM 7859 IG II2 1410
376/5
NM 1467 IG II297
El "Demos"
71 Demos
A49
20
Kekrops
probably Erechtheus
375/4(?)
E2 "Demos"
53 Demos
A51 Demos
96 Zeus
Agora I 6524 SEG 12.87
337/6
E3 "Demos"
54 Demos
A97 Demos
38 Demos
NM 2407 IG 1124630
3rd quarter E4 4th cent. Demos
46
A94 Demos
133 Demos
DR27 Demos
EM 2809
2nd half 4th cent.
65 Demos
A144
167
DR34
divinity (Demos)
probably Demos
probably Demos
42 Demos of Eleusis more likely than
A5 Iakchos
3
DR1
probably Triptolemos
possibly Demos of Eleusis
E5 "Demos"
Demos
probably Demos
D4 Demos
STANDING DEMOS(?) Eleusis E958 (5093) IG I3 79
422/1
Triptolemos Lost.
ca. 432-
A12 man
411(?) Formerly Piraeus (413/2?) (+ Piraeus1595 = IG 3 136) Louvre MA 831 IG 3 375
409/8
NM 1479 IG II2 1392
397/6
AM 2427 + 2758
1st quarter 4th cent.
EM 7024 IG112 110
363/2
70 more likely a mortal
DR4 possibly Demos
worshiper or honorand D1
43
Kekrops, Erechtheus, or Demos
probably Demos
D2 (similarto D1, above)
44 Demos
(TzachouAlexandri 1994, p. 66) Demos
A16 Demos
8
D1 Demos
probably Erechtheus
A36
14
Hephaistos(?)
probably Erechtheus
A76 male figure
91 hero
DR11
A56 Demos
23
DR16
probably Demos or a
possibly Demos or
patrondeity
patrondeity
possibly Demos D3 Demos
KEVIN GLOWACKI
464
TABLE 1-Continued Museumand InscriptionNo.
Date (B.C.)
T /4 FM .l:VL Tl )79QA
11ibL.lt-hl1f l-al
TA -D-
70 I U
A 147
1-.. 1-L
DR 14
IG II2 167
4th cent.
"Demos"
Demos
divinity
divinity/party with which inscriptionwas concerned
possibly Demos
EM 2788
mid-4th cent.
115 hero or
DR21
A146 Demos
117 Demos
DR22 Demos
A88
35
D39
Apollonios
probably honorand
possibly Demos
EM 2791 IGII2 160
mid-4th cent.
NM 1471 IG 112212
347/6
Palagia
Tzachou-Alexandri
Meyer
Lawton
Smith
Messerschmidt
possibly possiblyDemos Demos D9 Demos
69 Demos
D13 Demos
Apollonios NM 2986
mid-3rd
(TzachouAlexandri1994, p. 66) Demos
quarter 4th cent.
123
DR30
probably Zeus
possibly Demos (or Zeus)
126
DR28
probably Demos
possibly Demos
NM 2952 + 2961
mid-3rd quarter 4th cent.
D3 "Demos"
56 Demos
A95
NM 2985 IG II2406
3rd quarter D5 "Demos" 4th cent.
45 Demos
A109
NM 2946
3rd-4th
Dll "Demos"
60 Demos
A115
149
DR36
divinity (Demos? Phyle hero?)
probably Demos
possibly Demos
(TzachouAlexandri 1994, p. 67) Demos
A103 Demos
45
DR43
probably Demos
possibly Demos
A81 Demos(?)
"notAttic" (p. 3, n. 13)
quarter 4th cent.
Agora AS 146
3rd-4th
EM 7155 IG II2347
322/1
Cambridge Fitzwilliam GR13.1865 CIG 3635
ca. 330
divinity
D5 Demos
DR29 132 Demos or, possibly more probably, Demos, Asklepios probably Asklepios D8 Demos
quarter 4th cent.
DR44 possibly Demos
D7 Demos
A PERSONIFICATION
OF DEMOS
465
TABLE 1-Continued Museumand InscriptionNo. Athens, St. Lydakis Collection
Date (B.C.)
324/3
EM 2811+ 7180 IG I2 367
323/2
NM 1482 IG II2448
318/7
NM 2958 (+ EM 7166
4th
NM 2404
2nd half 4th cent.
NM 7272
Meyer A119 Demos
57 Demos
2nd half 4th cent.
DR45 possibly Demos of
Acharnai(?)
Acharnai(?) DR46
divinity
48 unknown
A125 Demos
49 almost
DR47
58 Demos more likely than Zeus
A134 Demos
D8 "Demos" (LIMC III, 1988, p. 120, s.v. Eutaxia) Demos or phyle hero
59 Demos
A142
D10 "Demos"
61 Demos
2nd half 4th cent.
55 Demos
Messerschmidt
147
D7 Zeus Soter or Demos
2nd half 4th cent.
Smith
probably Demos of
A124
D6 "Demos"
Lawton
certainly Demos
quarter = IG II2 417[?]) 4th cent.
AM 7231
Tzachou-Alexandri
ca. 330320
Agora I 4224a + 4224b
EM 2798
Palagia
possibly Demos
probably Demos
54
DR48
probably Demos
probably Demos
divinity (Demos? Phyle hero?)
150 more likely Demos than phyle hero
probably Demos
A162 male
165 female
divinity
divinity (Kore)
A84 honorand
168 honorand
A138
172
DR33
divinity
probably Demos
probably Demos
A182
176
DR38 Demos,
probably Demos of Aixone(?)
DR49
D9 Demos
Dll Demos
D12 Demos
DR35 male, possibly Demos DR23 possibly Demos
perhapsof Aixone(?)
AM = Acropolis Museum; EM = EpigraphicalMuseum;NM = Athens, National Museum. For citations,see n. 28.
D10 Demos
KEVIN
466
TABLE 2. DEMOS MuseumNo.
Date (B.C.)
NM 1473
3rd quarter 4th cent.
AMi 6787
NOT PRESERVED,
BUT CONJECTURED
Tzachou-Alexandri
Palagia
GLOWACKI
(Tzachou-Alexandri A136 1994, p. 56) mortal
3rd quarter
A112
4th cent.
AM 3304
Lawton
Meyer
Smith
142 almost certainly Demos
probably Demos
134
DR26
Messerschmidt
DR19
Demos or honorand's possiblyDemos or patrondeity patrondeity likely A174
2nd half
4th cent.
163
DR32
Athena or Demos
probablyAthena or Demos
likely AM = AcropolisMuseum;NM = Athens, National Museum. For citations,see n. 28.
REFERENCES
ary and Epigraphical Testimonia,
des Demos in Athen,"AM 94, pp. 49-75. Lawton, C. 1993. "Representationsof Athenian Democracyin Attic Document Reliefs,"in TheBirth
1957. XIV = H. A. Thompson and R. E. Wycherley,TheAgoraof
ofDemocracy:An Exhibition Celebrating the 2500th Anniversary of Democracyat the NationalAr-
Athens: The History, Shape, and Uses of an Ancient City Center, 1972.
chives, Washington,D.C., June 15, 1993-January 2, 1994, ed. J. Ober
Adam, S. 1966. The Techniqueof Greek Sculpture,London. Princeton ThethenAgora Agora = TAtenagora,
III = R. E. Wycherley,TheLiter-
Broneer,0. 1938a. "Excavationson the North Slope of the Acropolis, 1937,"Hesperia7, pp. 161-263. . 1938b. "RecentDiscoverieson the North Slope of the Acropolisin Athens,"AJA42, pp. 161-164. . 1939. "AMycenaeanFountain on the Athenian Acropolis," Hesperia8, pp. 317-433.
Meyer, M. 1989. Die griechischen Urkundenreliefs (AM-BH 13), Berlin. Palagia,0. 1980. Euphranor, Leiden.
Raubitschek,A. E. 1962. "Demokratia,"Hesperia31, pp. 238-243. 55, Rumpf,A. 1951. "Parrhasios,"AJA 1-12. pp. Smith, A. 1997. "PoliticalPersonifications in ClassicalArt" (diss.Yale Univ.). Tzachou-Alexandri,0. 1993. "Personificationsof Democracy,"in The
and C. W. Hedrick,Athens, pp. 12-16. . 1995a. Attic Document Reliefs. Art and Politics in AncientAthens,
Birth of Democracy:An Exhibition Celebrating the 2500th Anniversary of Democracyat the NationalArchives, Washington,D.C., June 15,
Oxford. .1995b. "FourDocument Reliefs from the Athenian Agora," Hesperia64, pp. 121-130. Meritt, B. D. 1952. "GreekInscriptions,"Hesperia21, pp. 340-380. Messerschmidt,W. 2003. PROSOPO-
Hamdorf, F. 1964. GriechischeKultspersonifikationen der vorhellenistischen Zeit, Mainz.
1993-January2, 1994, ed. J. Ober and C. W. Hedrick,Athens, pp.149-155. .1994. "IIoXitLx6gTpooCo0rortoLijoSe,"in TheArchaeologyofAthens andAttica under the Democracy,ed.
POIIA: Personifikationenpolitischen Charaktersin spdtklassischerund hellenistischerKunst (Arbeiten zur
Kron,U. 1979. "Demos, Pnyx,und Nympenhugel:Zu Demos-Darstellungenund zum altesten Kultort
W. D. E. Coulson, O. Palagia,T. L. ShearJr.,H. A. Shapiro,and F.J. Frost, Oxford,pp. 55-72.
Archaologie),Cologne.
Kevin Glowacki INDIANA UNIVERSITY
1020
BALLANTINE EAST
HALL
KIRKWOOD
BLOOMINGTON,
INDIANA
[email protected]
54 AVENUE 47405
SCHOOL
AT ATHENS
STUDIES
OF CLASSICAL
DEPARTMENT 547
AMERICAN
SOUIDIAS
106-76
STREET
ATHENS
GREECE
[email protected]
OF CLASSICAL
STUDIES
lVezv Series
CH RISTOPH ER A. PFAFF The
Temple
xxx+ 367 pp,209 ills,8 pls ArgiveHeraionI
ISBN 0-87661-801-8 October2003. Cloth$100/ £75
To order,contact: (in NorthAmerica)
The DavidBrownBookCompany www.davidbrownbookco.com Tel.800-791-9354 (outsideNorthAmerica)
OxbowBooks www.oxbowbooks.com Tel.+44(0) 1865-241-249
Architecture of
of
the
Classical
Hera
detailedandup-to-date a newseriesproviding Thisvolumeinaugurates overmorethana century conducted andfieldwork of excavations analyses The book at theArgiveHeraion,a Classicaltemplein the Peloponnese. photoincluding history, excavation site's the of openswithan overview of the 1890s.Chapters1-12 fully graphstakenduringtheinvestigations templefrombottomto top,usingtheevidenceof theClassical reconstruct elements of the architectural andthe fragments the existingfoundations illustrated an by aresupported Thesediscussions of the superstructure. detailedandcontextual fragments, catalogueof the knownarchitectural andgraphicreconstrucdrawings, tables,actual-state site photographs, its tions.Chapters13-16 examinethe styleof the temple,in particular to placethebuildingwithin andAtticfeatures, blendingof Peloponnesian includFourappendixes, andpoliticalcontexts. geographical, itshistorical, of thetempleanda reporton thescientific inga noteon thefoot-module completethevolume.Thiswork,thefirst of thetemple'smarbles, analysis templeandthefirstconcerning devotedsolelyto theClassical monograph source in morethanfiftyyears,willbethedefinitive thesiteto bepublished Heraion Argive ofthe buildings the andstudentsinvestigating forscholars trendsof theperiod. architectural anda vitaltoolforthoseresearching
JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS Ceramicus Iron of
Age the
Redivisus: Potters' Classical
The Field
Athenian
Recently Published
Early in
the
Area
Agora
Thisvolumepresents selectedmaterial associated withpotters'workshopsxxiii+ 370 pp,232 ills,2 colorpls andpotteryproduction fromsomefourteen EarlyIronAgecontexts north- HesperiaSupplement31 westoftheAthenian Acropolis thatrangeindatefromtheProtogeometric ISBN0-87661-531-0 through Archaic periods. LocatedintheareathatwastobecometheAgora December2003.Paper$45/ £35 of ClassicalAthens,thesedepositsestablishthatthe placewasusedfor industrial activityuntilthe areawasformallytransformed into the civic andcommercial centerof thecityin theearly5th centuryB.C. The Early IronAgepotters' debrispublished in thisvolumeshedslighton manyaspectsof potteryproduction, in prehistory aswellas in the Classicaland laterperiods. Thematerial includestest-pieces, wastersandotherproductiondiscards, andavarietyof otherpotters' debris. Thereis alsoa reassessmentof theevidenceassociated withthekilnunderlying thelaterTholos.
To order,contact: (inNorthAmerica) The DavidBrownBookCompany www.davidbrownbookco .com Tel.800-791-9354 (outsideNorthAmerica)
OxbowBooks www.oxbowbooks .com Tel.+44(0) 1865-241-249
Forthcoming
ANNE P. (HAPIN, EDITOR
Charis: Essays in Hon or of Sara A. Immerwahr
xxxvi + 452 pp,177 iUs 33 HesperiaSupplement ISBN 0-87661-533-7 2004. Paper$50 / £37.50 February
To order,contact: (in NorthAmerica)
The DavidBrownBookCompany .com www.davidbrownbookco Tel.800-791-9354 (outsideNorthAmerica)
OxbowBooks www.oxbowbooks.com Tel.+44 (0) 1865-241-249
herfilllbiba shortbiography, comprises Thistributeto SaraImmerwahr her celebrating scholars andtwentyarticleswrittenby fellow liography, aswellas to thestudyof arthistoryandAegeanprehistory, contributions over andgeneroussupportof studentsandcolleagues herencouragement archaeology Age Bronze of scholars Thirteen career. the courseof her andritual presentpapersthataddressaspectsof social,political,religious, regionaltradeand in wallpaintings,mattersof chronology, significance Sevenscholarsof theArchaic,ClasandCretanarchitecture. interaction, pottery, architecture, sical,andRomanperiodsexploreissuesin sculpture, anddedications.
MARY C. STU RGEON
Forthcoming
Sculpture: The Assemblagefrom the Theater
of thesculpthepresentation IX.2)completes Thisvolume(withCorinth fromthe theaterin AncientCorinthby the American turesexcavated werediscovStudiesatAthens.Mostofthesculptures Schoolof Classical of 1896,1902-1910,and 1925-1929. eredduringthe earlycampaigns on the of sculptures Analysisof the findspotsleadsto a reconstruction A.C. Stylisof the2ndcentury Romanscaenaefronsof thesecondquarter onthesubnewinformation yieldsimportant ofthesculptures ticanalysis Inscripin Romantheaters. assemblages jects,dates,anduseof sculptural insightintothe honoree,patron, tionsfromthe theaterprovidevaluable Hadrianictheatercannowbe anddateof the scaenaefrons.Corinth's monudecorated andelaborately asoneof themostprominent visualized mentsin theRomancity.
Ca.300 pp,92 b/w ills,1 colorill IX.3 Corinth ISBN 0-87661-093-9 2004 Forthcoming Clothca.$75/ £60
To order,contact: (in NorthAmerica)
The DavidBrownBookCompany .com www.davidbrownbookco Tel.800-791-9354 (outsideNorthAmerica)
OxbowBooks www.oxbowbooks.com Tel.+44(0) 1865-241-249
Forthcoming
Wl LLIAt/\ B. Dl NSt/\OOR AN D WILLIAt/\ B. DINSt/\OOR JR. The
Propylaia
Akropolis
to I:
The
the
Athenian Classical
Building
EDITED BYANASTASIA NORREDlNSMOOR
Ca.500 pp,211ills,9 pls,10 tables PropylaiaII
ISBN0-87661-941-3 Forthcoming 2004 Cloth$125/£95
To order,contact: (in NorthAmerica)
The DavidBrownBookCompany www.davidbrownbookco .com Tel.800-791-9354 (outsideNorthAmerica)
OxbowBooks www.oxbowbooks.com Tel.+44(0) 1865-241-249
Thispublication presents theresultsofresearch conducted onthePropylaia oftheAthenian Akropolis byWilliamBellDinsmoor,who beganhisstudy in 1908,andWilliamBellDinsmoorJr., whotookuptheprojectin 1962. PartI comprises WilliamDinsmoor's accountof Mnesikles' planningof thisinnovative anduniquestructure duringconstruction, andwill be of particular interest totheorists andhistorians of architecture. PartII,aproductofthecollaboration offatherandson,presents thefirstcompletedocumentation of the Classical building.Supported bydrawings primarily by WilliamDinsmoorJr., it includesmuchinformation thatis nolongeraccessibleon the site becauseof restoration, weathering, or loss by other means,alongvfith$cholarly proofanddetailedargumentation thatsupporttheDinsmoors' conclusions regarding designandconstruction.
JOHN A/\CK.CAt/\P II
Recently Published
TheAthenian Agora: A ShortGuideto theEnscaqJations PictureBook16 (revised2003)
Ina newlyrevised versionof thispopu- 48 pp,numerouscolorills larsiteguide,thecurrent director of ex- ISBN0-87661-643-0 cavations in theAthenianAgoragives July2003.Paper$5 / £3.50 a briefaccountof thehistoryof thesite andits principal monuments. The text hasbeenupdated andexpanded tocover the mostrecentarchaeological discoveries,andthe guidenowfeaturesnumerouscolorillustrations.
JENIFER NEILS AND STEPHEN V. TRACY
TheGames atAthens PictureBook25
TheGames atAthens is a generalintro- 32 pp,numerouscolorills ductiontotheGreater Panathenaia, the ISBN0-87661-641-4 weeldong religious andcivicfestival held August2003.Paper$5 / £3.50 atAthenseveryfouryearsin honorof thecity'spatrongoddess,Athena.The highlightof thecity'sfestivalcalendar, withitsmusical, athletic, andequestrian contests,tribalevents,processions, sacrifices,andotheractivities, theGreater Panathenaia involvedall the residents ofAthens-notjustadultmalesbutalso women,children, metics,foreigners, and evenslaves.The facilities,administration,program events,prizes,andassociatedmonuments arebrieflydescribed in thisbooldet.
HESPERIA SUPPLEMENTS
* Out of print
1* S. Dow, Pryzaneis: A Studyof theInscriptions HonoringtheAthenianCouncillors (1937) 2* R. S.Young,LateGeometric Graves anda Seventh-Century Wellin theAgora (1939) 3* G. P.Stevens,TheSettingofthePericlean Parthenon (1940) 4* H. A. Thompson,TheTholos ofAthensandItsPredecessors (1940) 5* W. B. Dinsmoor,Observations ontheHephaisteion (1941) 6* J. H. Oliver,TheSacred Gerusia (1941) 7* G. R. DavidsonandD. B.Thompson,SmallObjectsfFom thePnyx:I (1943) 8* Commemorative Studiesin HonorofTheodore LeslieShear(1949) 9* J.V.A. Fine,Horoi:StudiesinMortgage, RealSecurity, andLandTenure inAncient Athens(1951) 10* L. Talcott,B. Philippaki, G. R. Edwards,andV. R. Grace,SmallObjectsfFom the Pnyx:II (1956) 11* J. R. McCredie,FortifedMilitaryCampsinAttica(1966) 12* D. J. Geagan,TheAthenian Constitution afterSulla(1967) 13 J.H. Oliver,MarcusAurelius:Aspects ofCivicandCultural Policyin theEast(1970) 14 J. S.Traill,ThePoliticalOrganization ofAttica(1975) 15 S. V.Tracy,TheLettering ofanAthenian Mason(1975) 16 M. K.Langdon,A Sanctuary ofZeusonMountHymettos (1976) 17 T. L. ShearJr., KalliasofSphettos andtheRevoltofAthensin 268 B.C.(1978) 18* L. V.Watrous,Lasithi:AHistoryofSettlement ona HighlandPlainin Crete(1982) 19 StudiesinAtticEpigraphy, History,andTopography Presented toEugeneVanderpool (1982) 20 Studiesin AthenianArchitecture, Sculpture, and Topography Presented to Homer A. Thompson (1982) 21 J. E. Coleman,Excavations at Pylosin Elis(1986) 22 E.J.Walters,AtticGraveReliefsThatRepresent Women in theDressofIsis(1988) 23 C. Grandjouan, Hellenistic ReliefMoldsfrom theAthenian Agora(1989) 24 J. S. Soles,ThePrepalatial Cemeteries at Mochlos andGournia andtheHouseTombs ofBronzeAge Crete(1992) 25 S. I. RotroSandJ. H. Oakley,Debris froma PublicDiningPlacein theAthenian Agora(1992) 26 I. S. Mark,TheSanctuary ofAthenaNikeinAthens:Architectural StagesandChronology(1993) 27 N. A. Winter,ed.,Proceedings oftheInternational Conference onGreekArchitectural Terracottas oftheClassical andHellenistic Periods, December 12-15, 1991 (1994) 28 D. A. AmyxandP.Lawrence, StudiesinArchaic Corinthian Vase Painting(1996) 29 R. S. Stroud,TheAthenian Grain-Tax Lawof374/3B.C. (1998) 30 J.W. Shaw,A. Vande Moortel,P.M. Day,andV. Kilikoglou, A LMIA Ceramic Kilnin South-Central Crete: Function andPottery Production (2001) 31 J. Papadopoulos, Ceramicus Redivivus: TheEarlyIronAgePotters'Field in theArea oftheClassicalAthenian Agora(2003) 32 J. Wisemanand K. Zachos,eds., Landscape Archaeology in SouthernEpirus, Greece I (2003)
