"Redirect","UserLevel","dc-title","Id","dc-publisher","Type","Collection","Name","Chronology","Icon","dc-subject","dc-description","dc-creator","dc-date"
"","","Preliminary Report on the 2003 Excavation Season","Agora:Report:2003 Excavations","","Report","Agora","2003 Excavations","","Agora:Image:2003.08.0021::/Agora/2003/2003.08/2003.08.0021.tif::1894::2868","Checked","Excavations in 2003 were carried out largely in the northwest corner of the Agora known as Section BZ. The area was divided into two parts: the north-south road and areas to the west, and east of the road.; After several years of exploring the Byzantine houses of the 10th century A.D. which overlay the area, the foundations were stripped away and substantial progress into the underlying Roman remains were made. Much of what was exposed dated from the 3rd to the 6th centuries A.D. The main topographical feature was the north-south street which divided the area in two parts with late Roman walls on both sides of the street. West of the road, remains of a bath built in the 3rd century A.D. were excavated. East of the road, further evidence of occupation in the area were discovered, as well as of activity by coroplasts.; A new area of excavation was opened up to the east (north part of Section ΒΗ) and medieval walls were revealed.; The work in the Eleusinon area was completed this season with the excavation of two wells.","John McK. Camp II","13 Jun-25 Jul 2003"
"","","Preliminary Report on the 2008 Excavation Season","Agora:Report:2008 Excavations","","Report","Agora","2008 Excavations","","Agora:Image:2008.15.0129::/Agora/2008/2008.15/2008.15.0129.tif::639::851","Checked","Excavations took place in three sections, two north of Hadrian Street (ΒΗ and ΒΘ) and one in the old area south of the Tholos (Γ).; In Section ΒΗ, layers in, over and behind the building identified as the Painted Stoa were excavated to down below the middle Byzantine walls. The back wall and the interior colonnade were explored and detailed information about the building construction were gained. Behind the back wall a small fragment of a large terra cotta pipe was found in situ in middle Byzantine layers. Layers contemporary with the Stoa were not reached this season. A rubble wall may represent a late blocking of the interior colonnade, relatively common in the late Roman period.; In Section ΒΘ, a new section was opened up after the demolition of two houses. Mostly late fills were dug but the top of Byzantine walls came to sight in some places, as was large worked blocks that may have come from one or several Classical buildings.; In Section Γ, the exploration of some small buildings of the Classical period continued. The aim was to try to determine if these buildings were public or private. A tile-lined well was found and its location should indicate that the area was an open courtyard surrounded by buildings. The well went probably out of use in the 4th century B.C. Elsewhere various floor levels and pits were dug, most of them dating to the 4th century B.C. Some fill contained pottery of the 8th and 7th centuries B.C., perhaps indicative of earlier houses or disturbed burials.","John McK. Camp II","10 Jun-1 Aug 2008"
"","","Preliminary Report on the 2009 Excavation Season","Agora:Report:2009 Excavations","","Report","Agora","2009 Excavations","","Agora:Image:2009.22.0123::/Agora/2009/2009.22/2009.22.0123.tif::5616::3744","Checked","Excavations were conducted in four sections: Γ, ΒΘ, ΒΗ and ΒΖ.; In Section Γ, the investigation of the Classical buildings south of the Tholos continued with the aim to find out if they were civil, commercial or domestic. It was clarified that the complex consists of three houses grouped around a central courtyard. A well in the courtyard was emptied, and the finds recovered indicate a domestic or commercial use of the buildings. The well is one of the earliest tile-lined wells found in the Agora, dating to the first half of the 4th century B.C. ; In Section ΒΘ, excavations continued. At its west end the bottoms of the modern foundations were reached. A pit with the remains of several horses were revealed in 16th century fills. No architecture is associate with the fills which indicate that the area was a dumping ground outside of the inhabited area. Byzantine pottery started to emerge by the end of the season. No walls were reached but was seen in the scarps. In the eastern part of section ΒΘ, rubble walls, presumably of modest houses of the 10th century A.D., were uncovered. In the walls some worked blocks of limestone and marble were reused, perhaps coming even from the Stoa Poikile which ΒΘ overlies. Various other features were found, such as pithoi and pits.; In section ΒΗ, most of the 10th century A.D. house walls were removed and more remains of the back wall and two interior columns of the Stoa Poikile were exposed. The rubble walls dividing the stoa into rooms were also removed. These rooms were built in the 5th and 6th centuries, and were probably used as shops. The building went out use in the late 6th century. Behind the back wall, two terracotta pipelines were uncovered. The lower one is temporary with the stoa (2nd quarter of the 5th century B.C.) and has also been traced further west.; In section ΒΖ, the exploration of the Classical Commercial Building continued. It became clear that it was a building with a least six adjacent rooms in a row opening on to the street in front. Most of the work was concentrated on two rooms. In one, while clearing the area of a presumed collapsed cistern, an intact Mycenaean alabastron was found, indicating that the collapse is a Mycenaean chamber tomb. Two more pyres were uncovered within the building.","John McK. Camp II","8 Jun-31 Jul 2009"
"","","Kosmopoulos Material From the National Archaeological Museum at Athens Returned to Ancient Corinth Museum","Corinth:Report:Kosmopoulos Trenches 2020 by Belza, Anna (2020-09-28 to 2020-11-20)","","Report","Corinth","Kosmopoulos Trenches 2020 by Belza, Anna (2020-09-28 to 2020-11-20)","","","Corinthia | Ancient Corinth | Central Area | | Kosmopoulos Trenches","Anna Belza, PhD Candidate University of Cincinnati ASCSA Corinth Museum Project Volunteer; Fall 2020–Spring 2021; Project: Alice Leslie Walker Kosmopoulos, repatriation of Prehistoric material from the National Archaeological Museum in Athens; ; INTRODUCTION; ; Alice Leslie Walker Kosmopoulos was a student of the ASCSA 1909–1914, and associated with the School until 1937. She was assigned the study and publication of the pottery from the Corinth excavations (ca. 1896–1935); later the scope was narrowed to the pre- Byzantine pottery, and eventually to only the Prehistoric period material. The material she included in her study were from her own excavations at Corinth (1911, 1914, 1920, 1930, 1935); and those of other excavators (1904, 1905, 1908, 1916, 1926, 1931, 1932).; ; Kosmopoulos conducted her study at Corinth before relocating to Athens ca. 1935. Her reasons for moving were twofold: her poor health which was worsened by conditions at Corinth (e.g., dampness, mosquitos—she had previously contracted malaria at Corinth); her expulsion from the Corinth excavations due to her falling out with the ASCSA. Kosmopoulos writes about her interactions with the school in the preface to her published work: The Prehistoric Pottery of Corinth (1948). In sum, conflict between Kosmopoulos and the ASCSA regarded her poor/nonexistent publication record. Kosmopoulos responded by relocating some Prehistoric material from Corinth to Athens.; The Prehistoric pottery from Corinth was stored at the National Archaeological Museum (NAM) at Athens in order to facilitate Kosmopoulos’s study and publication process. When the ASCSA severed ties with Kosmospoulous (ca. 1937) they demanded the material be returned to Corinth. Some material was returned to Corinth and is referred to in the Corinth storage system as the Kosmopoulos series or K- series. A large quantity of pottery remained at the NAM following Kosmopoulos’s death in 1954.; Kosmopoulos published one volume on Prehistoric Corinth in 1948. The introductory volume provides basic insight into her ceramic classes and chronological scheme (see Appendix 1). She did not publish all the material that was removed from Corinth to Athens. Attempts were made to return the material to the Corinth Museum1 (viz., Lavezzi in the 1970s–1980s). Robert Bridges visited the NAM in the 1980s and did a basic inventory of the Corinth material. In September 2020 the material was returned to Corinth. The quantity and quality of the material was unknown.; My museum project involved: the unboxing and processing of the Prehistoric Corinth material returned from the NAM; separating the material into lots; and entering all the material into the Corinth records. The prime objective was to process material quickly in order to learn what Kosmopoulos had taken from Corinth and glean evidence of Prehistoric activity otherwise unknown. The quick processing benefited positively PhD candidates Jeffrey Banks (University of Cincinnati) and Katie Fine (Florida State University) who are writing dissertations about Early Bronze Age and Neolithic Corinth, respectively.2; After all the material was sorted, it became clear that it was possible to lot the pottery (more on this below, Phases 2 and 3). I also transcribed the Kosmopoulos label notebooks (Appendix 2) which were given to Ioulia Tzonou to eventually be incorporated into and assigned Corinth Notebook numbers. We do not have Komospoulos’ excavation notebooks from Corinth (the ASCSA archives have her Halae notebooks). Their exact whereabouts is unknown. At one point, decedents from her husband’s side of the family living in Peiraeus attempted to sell a trunk that belonged to her to Henry Robinson. Robinson declined to purchase the trunk blindly (i.e., without knowing the contents) at their high price: without knowing whether the notebooks were there, the trunk and its contents would have been a waste. Jeffrey Banks has attempted to reach out to the family members with no success as of yet (May 2021). Banks believes that the Corinth notebooks went to California with Kosmopoulos in the late 1930s. Kosmopoulos finalized the publication of her book in California and was then in the process of a planned second and third volume. It is almost certain that she had them with her as she continued her work in California because the second volume was meant to be a large presentation of the prehistoric material from Corinth. Problematically, the Halae books did make it to the ASCSA archives which was meant; to form part of the third volume of her study, but that body of material is much smaller and there are indications she was finished with it.; ; Phase 1: Processing the Kosmopoulos Material Returned to Corinth from the National Archaeological Museum, Athens, in 2020; Kosmopoulos used cardboard shoeboxes to store and transport her material. The material placed inside the shoeboxes was grouped in smaller packages of paper tyropita bags, reused envelopes, and, in some cases, loose in the box. Material occasionally was found grouped in clear plastic bags, likely a solution by the NAM to replace old paper bags that had decayed. The storage shoeboxes were transported to the basement of the Corinth Museum in thirty-three wooden storage trays. Processing occurred in the basement of the Corinth Museum.3; The system for processing material involved using iDig on an iPad and recording various information in Microsoft Excel on a Corinth project laptop. James Herbst and Manolis Papadakis set up a context labeled Kosmopoulos in the iDig database. Every “shoebox” was photographed: before opening to record all markings on the exterior of the box; when opened with the contents left in situ, showing the storage of the bags and interior markings; and unboxed with objects strewed. Shoeboxes often had writing on their exterior in one or more crayon colors. The writing was often illegible, written over/crossed out and remarked multiple times, and/or contained a series of undeciphered abbreviations. All but one shoebox were discarded after being photographed and all such marking recorded. In large part, these marking could not be deciphered. It is clear that some of the marking referred to the one time contents; but with the multiple reuses of the boxes and multiple packing and re-strewing of her material in Corinth and Athens over a twenty year period, these marking did not seem to correlate in any meaningful or useful way for what was stored within when they were opened in 2020.; The contents of the shoeboxes, mainly ceramics, were strewn on three tables in the Corinth Museum basement for processing. Contents from each shoebox were kept and photographed together so that any given object could possibly be associated/reassociated to the markings on the box if they are ever deciphered (i.e., everything from one shoebox was laid out together on a table). Sherds stored together in bags or envelopes were laid out atop the bags from which they came. The bags and envelopes also often had illegible and/or abbreviated handwriting in crayon. A few times, typewritten text was used instead. In some instances, these markings were clearly a count of sherds of various types (her classes or the colloquial classes of pottery at that time) stored within: e.g., “5–Urf[irnish], 2–B[lack]B[burnished], 3–Myc[enaean]”, etc.; It was often not possible to discern why Kosmopoulos separated sherds into individual bags, if not by diagnostic features or grouping of decorations. For example, all material of a single class is not conveniently grouped together nor are groups associated based upon their excavation context. The divisions of bags seem to reflect the process by which Kosmopoulos read the objects, recorded them, and stored them, probably working in small batches of pottery because of space issues at the NAM and in light of the considerable amount of material she was working with.; Kosmopoulos seems to have generally followed Wace and Blegen’s classification system for the Early Bronze Age and Wace and Thompson’s system for the Neolithic, though she did not use the same terminology/abbreviations as far as we can tell from the markings on bags and boxes (e.g., she often prefers German terms, likely from her work with Dörpfeld and study of the prehistorics at Leukas). Sherds contained inconsistent markings (discussed further in Phase 2 and Phase 3) that reveal various information: their find spot, their depth, and year excavated. The markings played a large part in our ability to re-lot the material and for Banks to recreate the original contexts for his dissertation (described in Phase 2 below).; Objects of note were removed to receive inventory numbers (CP or MF), discussed below; all those not selected for inventory numbers were stored together with other objects from the same bag (i.e., the Kosmopoulos bagging system was the organizing principle of recording individual “units” in the initial sorting and identifying of material). Some, such as Neolithic gray wares, were often boxed together even if sherds came from different envelopes in one shoebox. There was no clear reason to distinguish the Neolithic graywares and there were no sherd markings or envelope markings that would give a reason why they should not be combined and the storage units pared down. The original envelope context was recorded in the processing photos.; Once material had been processed, they were stored in Corinth Excavation cardboard boxes (open top) which were placed into wooden storage trays. Each box received two numbers: a “K-NAM” number and “box” number. K-NAM numbers represent the shoebox in which items were found: these numbers were not from the original boxes, but were assigned based on the order in which they were processed; they simply help identify all the material that was originally boxed together in the NAM (i.e., to retain an association of the material with the marking on the original shoeboxes). Box numbers identify subdivisions of storage within the shoe boxes: most often, this was simply the paper bags or envelopes within which items were stored. Again, the box numbers only reflect the order in which the material was processed, they were not derived from information on these bags. Box identifies items grouped together in Kosmopoulos bags; K- NAM identifies the shoebox in which larger groups of these bag/box objects were stored.; The individual cardboard boxes were then placed in a wooden tray in the basement of the museum. During the sorting and recording of these items, many objects were assigned inventory numbers: 530 objects were assigned Corinth Pottery (CP) numbers; 45 were assigned Miscellaneous Find (MF) numbers. Their original Box and K-NAM numbers were recorded with these inventoried pieces, but the objects were disassociated from the box/tray system described above.4 Inventoried objects were recorded in iDig as “Objects” and photographed individually. Later, each inventoried object was fully measured and described according to the Corinth Excavations recording system. A running list of the CP and MF numbers were printed out and left with the crates. Inventoried objects were set aside in their own trays in the Museum basement for conservation and photography to eventually process (as of June 2021, the objects have not been conserved or photographed). Eventually these will enter the study collection. A Neolithic expert in particular should go through the objects and vet whether all of these specimen are worth retaining as CPs/MFs, particularly in light of the greater number of objects selected.; K-NAM and box numbers and CP and MF numbers were recorded in three excel sheets. At the beginning of the processing system, before the use of iDig (about a 1-week period), we; were not recording shoebox/K-NAM numbers, as we were still attempting to discern Kosmopoulos’ recording and storage system. In order to record what processed objects/tyropita bags were found together in one shoebox, we recorded that information as “Packed in K-NAM Shoebox with K-NAM Museum Box #”. Using context numbers in iDig rectified this problem; however, we continued to record boxes found together and this was superseded by the K-NAM number system which was retroactively applied to all of the individual box units that had been sorted prior to the advent of this system.; For example, this is the format used to record processed material:; ; Other fields used in excel are:; ; Bag or card info to signify if there was any written information found with pottery on their bag or card:; Contents: sherd count, general chronology, shape, fabric.; CP assigned to objects: CP number(s) given to something from that box. MF assigned to objects: MF number(s) given to something from that box.; Other notes: includes comparanda or publication information in cases where these objects were published in Kosmopoulos’ book (book, page number, etc.), notes to Jeffrey Banks, Katie Fine, or Ioulia Tzonou about specific items from the box that may be of interest to their EBA, Neolithic, and Mycenaean studies, respectively.; Recorded in iDig: whether or not it was recorded in iDig (Yes = yes; Blank = no). Notations on sherds: markings in pen or pencil that were legible, originally made by; Kosmopoulos to preserve excavation context information.; ; ; In total 173 KNAM shoeboxes were processed into 267 cardboard boxes. Two boxes were found in the NAM material that need to be returned to Athens. The first is an orange box with pottery ranging in date from EBA–Classical, obsidian, and a loom weight. Pottery find spots were recorded on the sherds (e.g., Thera). A notecard was found inside the box stating that the material was seized from the German Archaeological Institute (DAI). It seems to be a study collection and seems to have nothing to do with Kosmopoulos or Corinth, returned to Corinth with the Kosmopoulos material by accident. The second box contained numerous tags from various sites (not Corinth), all placed within a foam mold for a bronze spearhead or knife. Banks believes that the latter box might have been the commercial packaging for a knife that was used to hold a bronze dagger found by Komopoulos at Corinth, which she dated to the Middle Neolithic (it was not, but almost certainly EBA); the whereabouts of the dagger are unknown, and it is likely to have eroded away or remains in Athens.; ; Phase 2: Establishing Original Contexts for the Kosmopoulos Material from the National Archaeological Museum; Kosmopoulos abbreviated original excavation context information (e.g., trench and/or year, depths) in pencil or pen on many sherds, almost certainly whenever she removed material from its original context-tagged pottery storage tin.5 Sherds determined to be insignificant were grouped in tins, labeled, and stored at Corinth in the Old Museum.6 All this material was originally taken to the NAM by Kosmopoulos but returned when ASCSA demanded the return of all Corinth material and severed ties with Kosmopoulos in ca. 1937. “Insignificant” material was returned, while the “significant” material remained at the NAM (i.e., highly diagnostic objects that seemingly would have been published in the Kosmopoulos planned—but never finished— volumes on prehistoric Corinth).; Jeffrey Banks and I sorted sherds back into their original contexts. Pottery was separated into trays based on the markings on them that designated their findspots. The EBA and Neolithic pottery were kept separate within their context units to facilitate future study. The process took place in the Museum basement and courtyard.; Two additional columns were added to the KNAM excel sheet to keep track of markings on sherds and where items were being combined/lotted: Kosmopoulos Area Notations on Sherds and Re-lotted. The former recorded markings found on sherds (e.g., “E35”). If notations; were illegible or difficult to distinguish, they were returned to their box and placed in a tray for future revisiting (highlighted in the excel sheet in orange so that we could return and reprocess these after an initial sorting). The latter column (“Re-lotted”) recorded whether items were re- lotted (yes or no) and, if so, into what trays they were combined (e.g., E35, 2TH, 11 Heer 7, etc.). In some cases, all the material from boxes were inventoried (i.e., received CP numbers) and thus did not get lotted (e.g., see table below—“No context pottery to sort”). In many cases, all material from a box was lotted by context, and that box number no longer exists as a discreet storage unit, other than as a recording unit for objects’ original location.; ; Banks partook in the process in order to better understand where the Early Bronze Age material was found and to see if it was possible to rectify stratigraphy based on elevation markings on some sherds. He was able to use the sherd markings and Kosmopoulos trench system and depths to reconstruct a number of contexts across the site and combine this information with her publication, various excavators notebooks, and archival material to get a full understanding of what most of the sherd markings mean.; ; Kosmopoulos Series in New Apotheke and Old Museum: Preparing it for Lotting with the K- NAM material; After processing all of the K-NAM material (i.e., the Kosmopoulos material that was returned to Corinth in 2020), Banks and I  went to the ASCSA Apotheke7 to examine the “Kosmopoulos Series”8 material had never left Corinth, or which was returned to Corinth by Kosmopoulos in the 1930s. This was around Christmas break (Dec. 25, 2020–Jan 15, 2021) when the Italian conservation team vacated the facility for the holidays. At the end of this period, when the conservators returned, this “Kosmopoulos series” material was moved to the Old Museum so we could continue our work.9; The Kosmopoulos series material stored in the New Apotheke was sorted and examined previously by John Lavezzi and Katie Fine. Lavezzi had sorted the EBA and Neolithic material based on chronological periods and distinct wares (e.g., red slipped rims) to facilitate an eventual attempt to combine the NAM material and look for joins. Katie Fine sorted four trays of the material Lavezzi had not managed to sort while a regular member as museum project. Fine’s sorting grouped material based on features of sherds: (e.g., Prehistoric–Roman rims or bases) regardless of chronology or context. Both these sorting methods were no longer relevant in light of our greater understanding of the original excavation contexts which had become the primary lotting principle of the Kosmopoulos material.; Banks and I applied the same sorting technique described above to the material in the Kosmopoulos Series: sherds were separated into boxes based on the notations about original excavations. In total we sorted through twenty trays. The contents included: ceramics, figurine fragments, stone tools (various), and shells. Four trays were unsorted/unstudied material ranging in date from the Neolithic–Roman periods.; In January 2021, Banks and I began to work in the Old Museum courtyard with (ca. 48) trays of Kosmopoulos Series material.10 Mostly, this material lacked individual sherd markings, and the impression is that this was the “insignificant material” Kosmopoulos left behind in Corinth or sent back. Based on Banks’ understanding of the history of the Kosmopoulos material and its various storage and papsing processes it received while in Corinth, these were almost certainly stored in tins that distinguished original context and depth; at some point this information was lost when the material was combined into trays and the original storage tin units lost. Some tags were included in boxes within trays, making it possible to glean, at times, where some material originated from, although almost all of these tags identified that the sherds within had come from more than one context.; Material that could be assigned to a specific context were combined with the proper excavation context/lot units that had been assigned for the KNAM material and the Kosmopoulos Series material from the New Apotheke.11; ; Phase 3: Assigning Lot Numbers to Context Pottery; ; Once all of the K-NAM material was sorted by context, Ioulia Tzontou, Jeff Banks and I agreed that lot numbers could be assigned to the pottery based on original excavation units (for the most part, these refer to identifiable/spatially known trenches). The lotting could not have taken place if sherds had not been marked with excavation data (e.g., trench abbreviation, depth). Banks provides full detail about the lots and contexts in the study for his dissertation and is in the process of generating lot descriptions. The lotting process is ongoing as of June 2021: the final quantities of material that cannot be assigned to a specific context will have to be considered (e.g., combine all Kosmopoulos unidentified location material to a single lot, lots based upon possible locations, toss some material, etc.).; ; Topographical Reconstruction of Prehistoric Habitation at Corinth; ; The K-NAM material attests a larger spatial and chronological use of the site than known previously. The quantity of material returned doubled the amount of known Prehistoric ceramics found in excavations. For more information the topographical reconstruction of the site with deposit information, see Banks’ dissertation.; Chronological Implications; ; Weinberg’s publication of Neolithic–EBA material from his excavations remain an important source for understanding Prehistoric activity at Corinth.12 The K-NAM material offers a more nuanced understanding of chronological periods because of the quantity and quality of material and the fact that they derive from deposits across the site. See above and Banks’ dissertation for a thorough discussion of the relevance of the Kosmopoulos material.; It is unclear whether Kosmopoulos saved all the Prehistoric material from her excavations. It seems likely when one considers the amount of Final Neolithic grayware body sherds she saved. It remains possible that Kosmopoulos intended to papse material at a later date but never finished with the material or had the time to do so. This is especially true of the later material excavated in the 1930’s were the extreme volumes of material and particularly the inclusion of what would normally be termed “insignificant” sherds suggested a near to 100% retention of excavated material, at least until they had been studied.; Below is a rough count of the pottery from the K-NAM processing. It is meant to give an idea of quantities representing chronological periods. The number will surely change after specialists complete their studies. The numbers represent the Kosmopoulos material returned to Corinth from the NAM in 2020 (i.e., they do not include the Kosmopoulos material that had already been in Corinth since the later 1930’s).; EN: ~16 sherds, including 1 mendable variegated bowl (CP 3967) MN: ~70 sherds; LN: ~3,536 sherds EH: ~1,433 sherds; MH: ~2 sherds (CP 3970: Gray Minyan goblet; CP 3977:1 possible Standard matt painted figure 8 around handle); LH: ~10 LH III (CP 3974–3976); ; A few of the LH sherds were marked with “Zyg”, or “Zyg dump”. From Kosmopoulos’ publication, these almost certainly refer to a pile of pottery that had been dumped outside of the Old Museum: it included Bronze Age Zygouries and Neolithic Lechaeion Road East material and excavation unit tags and seems to have been thrown out after Blegen and Hill fell out with ASCSA and were no longer working at Corinth. Kosmopoulos recovered the material. These sherds were placed in the Zygouries study collection drawers in a small bag with a printed explanation included.;         ;         Endnotes; 1 For the sake of posterity: Corinth Museum refers to what is often referred to as the “New Museum”; more clearly, this is the contemporary Museum function currently (2020–2021). There are plans to build a new New Museum, so this may cause confusion in the future.; 2 For a detailed biographical/archival analysis of Kosmopoulos and her work on Corinth and Prehistoric Greece, see Banks’s dissertation (forthecoming).; 3 The basement provided poor light, and in many cases information and notations gleamed from Kosmopoulos were more apparent when viewed in the sunlight at, e.g., the ASCSA Apotheke on Asklepius Street. An additional reading of all the sherds in a more suitable location may reveal additional details of Kosmopoulos’ work and methodology, particularly since her notebooks are missing and the seriation of her excavation units could only be recreated by Banks based on the depth markings on sherds.; 4 Ioulia Tzontou (Assistant Director) selected sherds and objects to receive CP and MF numbers, particularly for the Neolithic. Jeffrey Banks selected Early Helladic sherds to receive CP numbers based on their relevance of specifically for inclusion in his study of the EH period for his dissertation and later publication.; 5 Kosmopoulos 1948, p. 8, fn. 19.; 6 For the sake of posterity: since there is a new museum being planned, “Old Museum” might refer to one of two structures. Old Museum is the original/first Museum, which currently functions solely as a storage space and makes due as a study space, located on the south side of Apollo Street, just west of the village plateia, along the northern edge of the archaeological site—west of the exit gate and east of the Roman North Market.; 7 For the sake of posterity: this storage facility if currently (2020–2021) referred to as the New Apotheke. There is currently plans to create another Apotheke and either also create a fresco lab or retain the New Apotheke as a frescolab as it is currently functioning as such. For sake of clarity, this apotheke is on the north side of Asklepius street, east of Cheliotomylos, northwest of the main archaeological site and current Museum.; 8 The Kosmopoulos Series is a term used to refer to the Kosmopoulos material stored in Corinth in tins (later in trays) that were assigned “K” numbers for storage recording (K-1, K-2, etc.); 9 See fn. 5 for more on the Old Museum.; 10 See fn. 5 for more on the Old Museum.; 11 See fn. 6 for more on the New Apotheke.; 12 Weinberg, S. S. 1937. “Remains from Prehistoric Corinth,” Hesperia 6, pp. 487–524.","",""
"","","NET Trench 19B, Session II Final Report","Corinth:Report:Northeast of Theater 2022, Trench 19B,  by O’Connor, Kelly E. and Uritis, Catherine A. (2022-05-09 to 2022-05-27)","","Report","Corinth","Northeast of Theater 2022, Trench 19B,  by O’Connor, Kelly E. and Uritis, Catherine A. (2022-05-09 to 2022-05-27)","","","Corinthia | Ancient Corinth | Northeast of Theater","Kelly E. O’Connor and Catherine A. Uritis; Corinth 2022 Session II (5/9/22- 5/27/22); 27 May 2022; ; Northeast of Theater, Trench 19B, Session II Final Report; ; Elevations of Identified Road Levels in 19B South East Extension ; – Measured in Northern Scarp of Cut 46 “Cut through Upper Road”; – Subject to change upon further examination; 1 (Potential paved road)    58.95; 2 Additional potential layers between Roman fill    TBD; 3 (Exposed, compact road, cut for wall 30)    60.12; 4 (Thin road, cut for wall 30)    60.17; 5 (Over wall 30)    60.35; 6 (Entirely through scarp)    60.60; 7 (Disturbed by gulley)    60.93; 8 (Disturbed by gulley)    61.02; 9 (Exposed upper road)    61.52; ; PERSONNEL; Christopher Pfaff (Director), Ioulia Tzonou (Associate Director), James Herbst (Architect), Panos Kakauros (Foreman), Vasilis Kollias (shovelman), Phanis Kollias (wheelbarrow and sieve), Kelly E. O’Connor (recorder) and Catherine A. Uritis (recorder); ; INTRODUCTION; In Session II May 9-28, 2022, it was decided that excavation of the destruction layer in NET 19B (Deposit 30) would be completed and then 19B would be extended to the south in an attempt to define Wall 25 and the compact surface (floor?) of Deposit 31. The first area of excavation, 19B 30 is located from 1378 N-1375 N and 28 E -35 E. The first extension is located from1375 N – 1373 N and 28 E – 33 E, to the south of wall 25. The southern extension revealed multiple soft fills, most notably a mixed fill in the East (Deposits 37 and 41). Dr. Pfaff determined that this mixed fill was a result of T. Leslie Shear’s 1920’s excavations. Once we reached Wall 30 at the bottom of Deposit 41, it was decided that another extension would be opened to the East and South to determine the depth of the previous excavation trench, located 1375 N – 1371 N and 33 E – 35 E. Most of this session was dedicated to defining and understanding previous excavation decisions. More definitive chronology was discovered in the scarp during study week and K. O’Connor and C. Uritis split their time between the museum and the site. Once the final depth of the modern deposit was discovered and Panos indicated a change in soil, excavation ceased on Thursday May 26, 2022.; ; ROMAN ; The earliest Roman activity appears within Context 46. As very little non-contaminated pottery was found, stratigraphy is the main source of identification of this chronology. Excavation identified a potential paved road (1) running north-south, indicated by a large, flat stone beneath later layers of road and road fill. Other layers of road (2) are potentially identifiable in the scarp of the ancient cut through the roads but will require more study for comprehensive understanding. More fill was accumulated over these potential surfaces, after which a very compact road (3) was laid. The eastern edge of road 3 begins 1,05m from the east scarp and has a width of 1,07 m. Road 3 continues into both north and south scarp, but was cut to the east, down to at least the level of road 1, after its construction. The reasoning for this is unknown and would require further investigation, but the area of the cut would presumably have been filled in the Roman period. Over the compact road, another level of Roman road (4) was laid, which is identified within the north scarp of Contexts 46 and 41. This next phase extends 2,12 m from the east in the northern scarp, where the compact road also terminates. After this road was constructed, both roads 3 and 4 were cut on the western side, presumably to allow for the construction of wall 30 which abuts both road levels. The wall is 1,13 m wide, beginning 2,12 m from the eastern scarp, and has an elevation of 60.51-60.20. The western half shows a more finished face, while the eastern half of the wall may have been robbed out, leaving just the cobbling to be seen. ; ; BYZANTINE; Wall 30 was demolished, signaling some sort of change in use of space. While it is unknown whether the destruction was intentional or not, it allowed for a new road surface (5) to be laid over the entire length of the scarp. Separated by additional fill, Byzantine roads 6-9 were built. The Upper Road (9) is a continuation of the surface identified bellow Deposit 19B 6. The western sides of the 3 final road layers are obscured in the northern scarp as road fill, as the gulley identified in 18B 19 and 19B 8 presumably continued through the road. ; ; To the northeast of the roads, a flat, very hard floor was identified, the same as found in Context 29. The floor slopes down from the south, indicating that the builders did not cut the earth to make a level surface. Wall 25 was then built over the compacted surface, suggesting that the floor was associated with the wall in one structure. The floor may be the coeval with the one on which Wall 20 in 18 B sits. After the wall and floor were constructed, there was some sort of destruction, indicated by a debris layer (discovered in 19B 28, further revealed in 19B 29, and excavated in 19B 30) of ash and burnt tiles, primarily the local Laconian style. As mentioned in 19B 16 and 19B 17, a later Byzantine robbing trench (8) cut through the debris and was filled.; ; MODERN; A deposit of modern soft fill was discovered in Deposits 37, 41, and 45, with a max. depth of 3 m. The modern fill cut through the upper road surface, down through the layers of Byzantine and Roman roads to the level of road 3 and wall 30. The modern fill then continued down through the ancient cut of road 3 to a level of undisturbed soil at the elevation 58.95. Excavation notebook 324 confirmed that this fill was a result of T. Leslie Shear’s 1929 excavations. Modern ceramic finds additionally substantiate the identification. The trench was labeled “North Trench” and was excavated by DeWaele. It measures 36 m east/west, approx. 3 m north/south, and 3 m deep.  On April 12, 1929 a plan was drawn of the trench (p.883). 19B overlaps with L 15, M 15, and N15; the wall is present in the plan, labeled as “l” and described as a “well built foundation [ion?] (1.50)”. The road surfaces are not mentioned. While Shear was attempting to locate the road north of the theater, it appears excavators removed all Byzantine and most Roman roads in the process.; ; An additional modern cut was found through the modern fill for an irrigation trench and pipe, presumably for the orange grove above. ; ; CONCLUSION/FUTURE RESEARCH QUESTIONS; Further study can be done to better define the Roman and Byzantine road surfaces exposed in the scarp of Shear’s trench. Additionally, excavations can be conducted to the south to reveal what lays beyond Shear’s excavated area. Other important questions include the direction and extent of the ancient north-south cut through the road surfaces. As the end of the modern fill was reached, continuing to excavate further down within said cut may provide a better chronology and understanding of its nature. Finally, the pipes of 16B which were originally expected to be seen within the scarp, are apparently missing. Excavations to the north may clarify their location or the lack thereof.","",""
"","","2015 Session II, Corridor N of Church and Room 6","Corinth:Report:Temple E, Southeast 2015 by Wesley Bennett, Lucas Stephens (2015-05-04 to 2015-05-22)","","Report","Corinth","Temple E, Southeast 2015 by Wesley Bennett, Lucas Stephens (2015-05-04 to 2015-05-22)","","","Corinthia | Ancient Corinth | Central Area | Temple E, Temenos | Temple E, Southeast","Wesley Bennett and Lucas Stephens; Session II; Temple E Southeast Excavations; Corridor North of Church: 1075-1078.5 N, 121.5-129.5 E; Room 6: 1077-1085 N, 116.85-120.7 E; 04-22.05.2015; ; This is the summary of the second session of excavations in the Corridor North of the Church (hereafter, “Corridor”) and Room 6 in Unit II in the area of Temple E SE. The corridor was excavated from the 4th to the 13th of May by Wesley Bennett and Lucas Stephens (Area Supervisors), Thanassis Notis (pick-man), Kostas Arberoris (pick-man/shovel-man), and Vassilis Kollias (shovel-man/barrow-man), as part of Session II. This same area was excavated previously in Session I by Wesley Bennett and by two different groups during the 2014 season: Jennifer Swalec and Emily Wilson during Session 3, and Dylan Rodgers and Maggie Burr during Session 2. Before the 2014 season, the Corridor was excavated in 1993 under Charles K. Williams II (NB 863). Grave 2015-07 in the Corridor was documented and excavated by Elina Salminen during excavation of Room 6. Room 6 was excavated from the 13th to the 22nd of May by Lucas Stephens (Area Supervisor), Thanassis Notis (pick-man), Kostas Arberoris (pick-man/shovel-man), and Vassilis Kollias (shovel-man/barrow-man). Room 6 was excavated in Session I by Emilio Rodriguez-Alvarez and in Session I of 2014 by Sarah Rous and Rebecca Worsham. ; The southern boundary of the Corridor is formed wholly by the northern wall of the church (Wall 20: 1074.5-1076.1 N, 122.06-130.1 E) and its associated robbing trench (NB 835, pp. 35-44, 65-66; 1074.3-1076.1 N, 122.00-130.30 E), while its northern boundary is formed in part by the southern wall of Unit 2, Rooms 8 and 9 (Wall 156: 1077.5-1079.3 N, 123.5-129.7 E, NB 864, pp. 43-44). The latter wall (Wall 156) encloses only the eastern two-thirds of the Corridor, except for the far eastern portion which is the earlier Wall 729 (1078.48-1079.62 N, 128.35-132.11 E), before turning the corner to the north and changing into Wall 157, which forms the eastern side of Room 7. At the junction of this corner, Wall 156 continues slightly westwards to form a stub wall. During Session I, Bennett decided to establish an arbitrary line at 1078 N in order to define better the northern boundary of the trench vis-à-vis Unit 2, Room 7. An artificial line also delineated the eastern boundary of the trench (1076.12-1078.50 N, 129.00-129.60 E), while Wall 59 - the eastern limit of Room 6 (1076.00-1077.40 N, 120.90-121.78 E), extended to the south by another artificial line to Wall 20, defined the western boundary. During excavation of Grave 2015-07, it was found that the eastern end of this grave extended under the east scarp, and a 1 x 1 m extension was made to the east along Wall 20 to facilitate documentation and removal. The material from this extension was not sieved or kept for study until the grave cut was reached.; Excavation in Room 6 was bounded on the west by Wall 58 (1077-1083.3 N, 116.9-118.8 E) and on the east by Wall 59 (1082.3-1084.65 N, 119.25-120.2 E) and its associated robbing trench. The southern boundary was an arbitrary line running west-east from the southern end of Wall 58 (1077 N). The northern boundary was formed by the northern edge of Pit 8 (NB 864, B 38, 41, 69, 70; 1082.9-1084.7 N, 116.85-118.3 E, associated with the building of the museum) and an arbitrary line running southwest-northeast from the northeastern corner of Pit 8 to the western face of Wall 11 (NB 877 pp. 159; 1084.3-1085.45 N, 118.25-119.15 E). ; The goals of excavation in the Corridor were to better understand the use of the space and to provide dating criteria for the construction of the church by excavating a foundation trench for Wall 20. During session II, a one meter wide area running north-south was sectioned off near the center of the Corridor (1078.2-1075.6 N, 126-127 E) in order to better define the boundaries and stratigraphy of the foundation trench of Wall 20. Once the dimensions of the cut for the trench were clear, we decided to continue excavation east of the section in order to collect more datable material associated with the foundations of the church. Goals for the excavation of Room 6 were to clarify the function and phasing of the room and to prepare it for consolidation. ; ; Middle Byzantine (AD 802-1058); Corridor; In its earliest phase this area seems to have been open and little used. Neither Wall 156 to the north (dated by Bennett in Session I to the late third quarter of the 13th century), nor Wall 20 to the south had yet been constructed. The presence of faunal remains and construction material in several fill layers (Contexts 682, 702, 705, 707, 710, 718, 722, 723, 724, 725), the earliest of which (725) is dated by pottery to the early 12th century, attests to mixed activities in this area, although relative to later, Frankish contexts these were fairly sterile of finds. ; ; ; Frankish 1210-1458; Corridor; In the middle of the 13th century (dated by coin 2015-151 from context 743, and pottery from context 714) a foundation trench for Wall 20 was dug .56 m into the soil (Cut 745, 5.5 x 1.2 m, 1076.6-1075.4 N, 124.8-130.3 E, filled by contexts 714, 728, 731, 734, 735, 739, 742, 743). This was likely one of the first steps in the construction of the church to the south of the Corridor and seems to have changed the use of this area. The foundation trench was likely filled with the same soil into which it was dug, and contained predominantly 12th century material including Coin 2015-131 from context 714.  The cement pointing on the exterior of Wall 20 identified by Bennett in Session I (dated to the mid-13th century by its relationship to context 640) likely represents the earliest phase of decoration for this side of the church, soon after but not contemporary with its initial construction. ; Soon thereafter but also in the mid-13th century the area started to be used as a burial ground. Grave 2015-07 (contexts 741, 757, 767, 804) was dug into the foundation trench itself (cf. Salminen, Session II summary). Burial continued next to the church (as attested by Graves 2015-01, 2014-08, 2014-09 and 2014-11) throughout the subsequent filling and leveling operations which defined the use of the area until the third quarter of the 13th century when Wall 156 was built. The burials are generally oriented east-west immediately adjacent to Wall 20 with the head at the east, the body supine, and the legs extended to the west. Many of the graves have covering tiles over the skull and torso and stones or tiles propping up the skull. The density of burial in this area was such that later graves occasionally disturbed earlier ones (as with graves 2014-09 and 2014-01, both dated to the mid-13th century; cf. Swalec and Wilson, pp. 1-3). The skeletons represent both sexes and a range of ages including a child (Grave 2014-08, Bone Lot 2014-17), a male adolescent 17-21 years of age (Grave 2014-11, Bone Lot 2014-20), and a female adult likely over 50 years of age (Grave 2014-09, Bone Lot 2014-18). ; Simultaneously to the use of the area as a burial ground, several layers of mixed fill (contexts 645, 646, 655, 658, 662, 669, 671, 680, 686, 687) containing faunal remains, charcoal, and building materials were deposited across the area. These filling operations raised the ground level of the area more than 30 cm in some places. Coins from these layers (nos. 2015-50 – context 645, 2015-55 – context 646, 2015-61 – context 658, 2015-71 – context 662, 2015-74 – context 662, 2015-76 – context 662, 2015-77 – context 662, 2015-99 – context 691) date to the 12th and 13th centuries and attest to economic activity involving both contemporary and earlier money. These fill layers are all below Wall 156 (dated by Bennett in Session I to the late third quarter of the 13th century) whose construction formed the area into a passageway linking two specific spaces: Unit 2, Room 7, and the Paved Court to the east of the church nave. ; Room 6; Over the course of the 13th and 14th centuries this area underwent several phases of use as a burial site with intermediary floor layers and deep fills separating the graves. ; Grave 2015-10 (cut context 803; preserved coordinates: 1079.2-1079.85 N, 118.8-119.3 E; fill context 801) was the earliest burial excavated this session in Room 6 (dated by pottery to the second quarter of the 13th century). The cut for this grave was truncated by Grave 1996-02 at the north and east and by Grave 1996-01 at the south, leaving us in doubt as to its exact dimensions (preserved L .65 m, W .5 m, Depth .14 m) and which surface it was cut into. The burial was oriented roughly north-south almost in the center of the room. It contained the skeleton (context 802, Bone Lot 2015-11) of a subadult laid supine, missing its skull and most of the left side of its body. The absent skull would have been at the north. ; Grave 2015-09 (cut context 800; preserved coordinates 1079-1080.5 N, 118.15-119 E; fill context 795) was cut into Floor 6, oriented north-south along the eastern face of Wall 58 late in the 13th or early in the 14th century (NB 864 B 62; dated by Rous and Worsham for stratigraphic reasons to the late 13th – early 14th century). The grave was a simple, narrow pit preserved to a length of 1.5 m, a width of .85 m, and a depth of .64 m. It contained the skeleton of a young adult male in excellent condition (context 797, Bone Lot 2015-10) laid supine with its head at the south propped up by several stones, arms crossed over the torso, and legs and feet extended to the south. The head was covered by half of a roof tile (context 798; preserved L .28 m, complete W .38 m). The grave was later disturbed at its northern and southern ends by Graves 2015-08 and 1996-01 respectively. ; These graves were sealed by Floor 5 (context 789; NB 864 B 56, dated by the excavators to the 1260s – 1270s) dated by pottery to the third quarter of the 13th century. Rous and Worsham place Floor 5 slightly later due to stratigraphic reasons. Floor 5 was excavated in 1996 in the southern half of Room 6, but left unexcavated in the northern half. Graves 2014-01, 2014-05, 1996-01, and 1996-02 were cut into it in the southern half of the room. In the northern half, Graves 2015-05, 2015-06, and 2015-08 also cut into this surface. ; Grave 2015-05 (cut context 765; 1082-1083.15 N, 119.05-119.6; fill context 756) was dug 30 cm below Floor 5, against the western face of Wall 59. The grave was oriented roughly north-south and measured 115 x 55 cm. It contained a well preserved juvenile skeleton (context 761, Bone Lot 2015-05) laid supine with its head at the south, arms crossed over its torso, and feet outstretched to the north. The skull was propped up by stones and along with the torso was covered by a single tile broken into two pieces (context 758; complete L .42 m, W .17 m). Pottery in the fill dated this burial to last quarter of the 13th century. ; Grave 2015-06 (cut context 766; 1082.75-1083.15 N, 117.45-118.05 E; fill contexts 762, 759) was almost completely robbed out by Pit 8 from the 1931 excavations. It was dug 42 cm into Floor 5 near the eastern face of Wall 58 in the early 14th century (dated by pottery of context 759). The grave was oriented N-S and contained the top half of an adult skull (context 764, Bone Lot 2015-06) propped up by stones and covered by a broken tile (context 760; preserved L .18 m, complete W .30 m). The head was therefore at the southern end of the grave. ; Grave 2015-08 contained two burials. The earlier burial (cut context 788; 1080.55-1081.95 N, 118.05-118.6 E; fill context 784) contained a well-preserved juvenile skeleton (context 783, Bone Lot 2015-09) laid supine with its torso at a slight angle to its legs, arms crossed over its torso, and head at the south. This grave was disturbed by the later burial in Grave 2015-08 (cut context 781; 1080.2-1081.95 N, 117.65-118.85 E; fill context 770) which was dug almost immediately on top of the earlier burial. The diggers of the second burial must have encountered and disturbed the skull (context 779, Bone Lot 2015-08A) of the first skeleton which was found disarticulated and placed to the side of the later skeleton (context 775, Bone Lot 2015-08B) underneath the later skeleton’s associated covering tile (context 774; complete L .61 m, W .36 m). This disturbance truncated the top of the earlier grave cut and made it impossible to associate the earlier burial with the stratigraphy of the rest of Room 6. The later burial contained the well-preserved skeleton of a juvenile, laid supine with its head at the south propped up by stones, its arms crossed over its torso, and it legs extended to the south. Both the skull and torso were covered by tiles (context 774) – a larger one (.36 x .61 m) covered the torso and was partially overlaid on the smaller (preserved .30 x .29 m) which covered the skull. The earlier burial was dated by pottery to the first quarter of the 14th century, the later to the late 13th-early 14th century, but their fills were likely mixed. The western side of Grave 2015-08 was later disturbed by Grave 1996-04. These graves were then sealed by Floor 4 (NB 864, B 52, 53, 54), dated by the excavators to the last quarter of the 13th century. ; If we follow Rous and Worsham’s date for Floor 6 in the late 13th – early 14th century, then all of this burial activity (as well as the laying down of Floors 5 and 4) must take place in a short period of time at the end of the 13th or beginning of the 14th century. ; Both burial activity and the deep fill layers seem to end in the early 14th century, when the stratigraphy give way to much thinner layers (contexts 753, 752, 751, 749, 748) above Floor 4 which may be my context 754 (dated by pottery to the first quarter of the 14th century). ; ; Conclusion; Corridor; We met the goal of finding a foundation trench for Wall 20, and it currently dates the construction of the church to the middle of the 13th century (based on coin 2015-151 from context 743). There seems to have been a gap in activity in the area between the 12th (latest context 702) and the mid-13th centuries. Further excavation could address this apparent gap and better define the use of the space in pre-Frankish levels. Following the construction of the church, the area immediately adjacent to its north wall became a popular location for inhumation. Burial practice continued while the level of soil in the area was raised by several filling operations until, in the third quarter of the 13th century, Wall 156 was built, which seems to have again changed the use of the space. Osteological analyses will provide further information regarding those individuals buried in this area, and their relationship to contemporary populations. The stratigraphy towards the western end of the trench became very difficult for the workmen to read during excavation of contexts 682, 698, and 701. Context 682 (which should predate the construction of the church) was left partially unexcavated for this reason. ; Room 6; Figuring out the phasing of Room 6 is made difficult by the patchy state of excavation. The northern half of the room needs to be further excavated and put better into line with the stratigraphy of the previously excavated southern portion. This is made difficult by the high density of burial in the room - an unexcavated skeleton was found beneath Grave 1996-02 and needs to be removed.","",""
"","","2015 Session I Excavations: Corridor North of the Church in Unit 2","Corinth:Report:Temple E, Southeast 2015 by Wesley Bennett (2015-04-21 to 2015-04-28)","","Report","Corinth","Temple E, Southeast 2015 by Wesley Bennett (2015-04-21 to 2015-04-28)","","","Corinthia | Ancient Corinth | Central Area | Temple E, Temenos | Temple E, Southeast","Wesley Bennett; Session I; Temple E Southeast Excavations; 1075-1078.5 N, 121.5-129.5 E; 21-28.04.2015; ; This is the end-of-session summary of the first session of excavations in 2015 in the Corridor North of the Church (hereafter, “Corridor”). The Corridor was excavated from the 21st to the 28th of April by Wesley Bennett (Area Supervisor), Thanassis Notis (pick-man), Kostas Arberoris (pick-man/shovel-man), and Marios Vathis (shovel-man/barrow-man), as part of Session I. This same area was excavated previously by two different groups during the 2014 season: Jennifer Swalec and Emily Wilson during Session 3, and Dylan Rodgers and Maggie Burr during Session 2. Before the 2014 season, the Corridor was excavated in 1993 under Charles K. Williams II (NB 863).; ; The southern boundary of the Corridor is formed wholly by the northern wall of the church (Wall 20: 1074.5-1076.1 N, 122.06-130.1 E) and its associated robbing trench (NB 835, pp. 35-44, 65-66; 1074.3-1076.1 N, 122.00-130.30 E), while its northern boundary is formed in part by the southern wall of Unit 2, Room 8 (Wall 156: 1077.5-1079.3 N, 123.5-129.7 E, NB 864, pp. 43-44). The latter wall (Wall 156) encloses only the eastern two-thirds of the Corridor before turning the corner to the north and changing into Wall 157, which forms the eastern side of Unit 2, Room 7. At the junction of this corner, Wall 156 continues slightly westwards to form a stub wall. During the middle of excavations this season, we decided to establish an arbitrary line at 1078 N in order to define better the northern boundary of the trench vis-à-vis Unit 2, Room 7. An artificial line also delineated the eastern boundary of the trench (1076.12-1078.50 N, 129.00-129.60 E), while Wall 59 (1076.00-1077.40 N, 120.90-121.78 E), extended to the south by another artificial line to Wall 20, defined the western boundary.; ; As in years past, excavation in the Corridor was undertaken in an effort to understand better the use of the space, as well as the phasing and dating of the church and surrounding complex.; ; ; Frankish (AD 1210-1458); ; The earliest level reached this session is primarily an unexcavated hard surface that covers the majority of the trench. In its earliest phase, a relatively open space was present along the north wall of the church (Wall 20). This surface (unexcavated as of the close of Session I) consists of pebble- and cobble-sized stones, tile, and brick, all of which are flattened within the soil matrix, suggesting that the surface had been left exposed long enough for it to become well-trod or simply stamped down before more fill was dumped into the area. ; ; The exterior of the church was covered with a cement point during the mid-13th century, as dated by pottery and coins in the fill directly underlying the surface represented by this pointing (Context 640). The floor associated with this pointing either was never recognized during excavation or was completely deconstructed before several fills raised the ground surface level substantially.; ; From the excavations in previous years, we have gathered that there were essentially two main phases of use in the Corridor. In the earlier phase, the space that would eventually become the Corridor had not yet been enclosed by Wall 156, the southern wall of Room 8. Instead, this area seems to have been a well-trod outdoor space used for the dumping of construction and dining refuse and the burial of deceased persons, especially immediately adjacent to the northern wall of the church (Graves 2014-09 and 2014-11; cf. Swalec and Wilson, pp. 1-3). The date at which Wall 156 was built and thus formed the Corridor as we see it now is problematic. Swalec and Wilson discovered a foundation trench that ran along the entirety of the wall (and around the stub wall extension). In their final report, they mention that this foundation trench was not fully excavated; the workman removed only the top lens of the fill of the trench (Swalec and Wilson, pp. 3). No continuation of this trench could be found this year, however, suggesting that they had indeed removed it all. If this is the case, the pottery from the excavated lens, dating to the middle-to-third-quarter of the 13th century, should date the construction of Wall 156. Since this year we excavated primarily several fills at a level underneath the bottom of the wall dating to the mid-13th century, we favor a late date in this range, perhaps in the late third quarter of the 13th century for the construction of Wall 156 and the formation of the Corridor. After its construction, the Corridor served as a passageway linking two specific spaces: Unit 2, Room 7, and the Paved Court to the east of the church nave. Nevertheless, the space continued to be used intermittently as a site for burial (Grave 2014-08) and the dumping of refuse to raise and level out the ground surface.; ; A series of fills dating by pottery primarily to the mid-13th century (Contexts 598, 606, 610, 613, 616, 618, 619, 622, 626, 629, 632, 637) overlies the level of this pointing, indicating that the floor level of the Corridor was risen deliberately and relatively quickly. In the western half of the trench, a large amount of faunal remains (notably cattle, pig, goat, sheep, dog, oysters) was dumped, coinciding with a great deal of charcoal. Either the space was used for food preparation or the fill represents the refuse of dining that was subsequently dumped and possibly burned as trash. The eastern half of the trench produced much less of both, and so seems to have had a different origin. It is altogether possible that these two very different types of fills were being deposited in the Corridor space at the same time, and commingled in the middle. Aside from faunal remains and pottery, these fills often contained a variety of construction material (fragmentary tile, brick, lime mortar, and iron nails), which attests to building activity in the area. Coins (2015-22, -24, -26, -28-42, -44) were found frequently and generally confirm the dates derived from the pottery. Along with a chance find (MF 2014-04), a glass weight depicting a lion with upturned tail facing stage left, the coins are a testament to the economic activity happening in the area.; ; Once deposited, these fills in total raised the level of the trench surface more than 30 cm. in some places. The top surfaces of some of these fills, like the unexcavated surface mentioned above, seem to have been left exposed at least long enough for the inclusions within the fill matrix to become flattened by trampling upon the surface.  Given that the ground surface was raised so high in such a short period of time, however, it is likely that none of these fills was exposed for any substantial period of time. Rodgers and Burr seem to be of the same opinion of the upper fills also (cf. Rodgers and Burr, pp. 5). Instead, it seems to us that a conscious decision to raise the ground surface level was made at some point in the middle of the 13th century, and in order to accomplish this, several fills were dumped into the Corridor space and intermittently trampled to flatten, level, and compact, the soils before more fills were deposited above them. ; ; It is tempting to connect this great filling and levelling event with the development of the complex north of the church during the latter half of the 13th century, including the formation of the Corridor itself, but until the phasing of the complex to the north of the church is better understood, such a connection should remain mere conjecture. It is also possible that the filling event both raised and leveled the surface in preparation for paving the Corridor. Though dating is uncertain, possibly during the 14th century a small court, paved with rough, square limestone blocks, existed to the east of the church nave. A similar paving block lies just to the east of the Corridor trench, perhaps indicating that the paved surface of the court to the east of the church originally ran around the northeastern corner of the nave and into the Corridor as well (cf. NB 829 B.29, pp. 53-6; Rodgers and Burr, pp. 5). In 2014, Rodgers and Burr thought that they discovered the final levelling events (Contexts 313, 300, 321) in preparation for the paving of the Corridor, but perhaps it took a greater amount of effort and soil to raise and level the surface than they initially thought.; ; Grave 2015-01, which was truncated by the later Grave 2014-09, was cut into one such mid-13th c. fill (Cut Context 609). This cist grave (Contexts 604, 605; Cut 609; Bone Lot 2015-1; 1075.65-1076.35 N, 125.00-126.50 E) was missing the skull and pelvis among other bones due to the installation of Grave 2014-09. Though sex could not be determined due to fragmentation, enough skeletal material was preserved to indicate that the body was outstretched, supine, from west-northwest to east-southeast along the north wall of the church, with the (missing) head at the west and the feet at the east. Both arms were crossed over the chest, and the fingers were tucked around the body. No finds were discovered directly associated with the deceased. The pottery in the grave fill dates the cut to the mid-13th century, as was the fill into which the grave was cut, again suggesting that these fill deposits were never left exposed for long. While a fragmentary crochet hook was found in the fill of the grave cut with the deceased, its association as a grave offering is suspect, especially since the sex of the individual could not be determined. Perhaps it belonged instead to the woman who occupied Grave 2014-09. In any case, the crochet hook attests to weaving activity somewhere in the vicinity.; ; ; Conclusion; ; Although we did not get down far enough, and thus failed, to meet the primary objective of the session, i.e. to find the foundation trench of Wall 20, the northern wall of the church nave, in order to date the church itself, we learned a great deal about how the Corridor space developed throughout the mid-13th century. Several different fills raised and leveled the ground significantly in the middle of the 13th century, perhaps in preparation for the development of the complex north of the church. We were able to date a floor of the Corridor fairly securely to the mid-13th century, and we were able to give a more precise date of the construction of Wall 156, and thus the formation of the Corridor (late third quarter of the 13th century). We also gathered significant amounts of faunal remains that should certainly be studied by specialists in the future to gain insight into the dining activities of the people who resided in the area. ; ; ; Recommendations for Future Excavation:; ; 1. Continue excavation in the Corridor to find the foundation trench for wall 20.; ; 2. Excavate in the space between the Corridor and Unit 2, Room 7, to gain better insight into how the two spaces related to one another throughout time.","",""