"Type","Collection","Chronology","dc-description","dc-date","dc-title","Redirect","dc-creator","dc-publisher","Id","Name","dc-subject","UserLevel","Icon"
"Report","Corinth","","Katherine Harrington, Jana Mokrišová; Team Blue, Session 1; Nezi Field Excavations; N: 1017.20 N, S: 1006.90 N, E: 263.50 E, W: 255.50 E; 1-25 April, 2013; ; This is the final summary of the first session of excavation in 2013 in the northwest area of Nezi field. Guy Sanders (director) and Rossana Valente (field director) supervised. The blue excavation team consisted of Katherine Harrington and Jana Mokrišová (recorders), Athanasios Notis (foreman and pickman), Athanasios Sakellariou (pickman), Christos Sakellariou (barrowman), and Panayiotis Rontzokos (shovelman). ;     ; The excavation area was initially bounded by the Giambouranis House (also referred to as the Turkish house; NB 252, NB 262, 1015.90N) to the north, Wall 540 (264.20 E) to the east, Wall 366 (1006.90 N) to the south and the baulk of Nezi field (255.50 E) to the west. However, the northern boundary was extended in course of the excavation by the discovery of N-S drain to the northernmost point of the drain (1017.20 N), and after the removal of the wall 540 the eastern boundary was moved to 263.50 E.; ; The goal of this session was to remove final traces of Byzantine occupation in the excavation area and to further explore the Late Antique levels with the hopes of better understanding the Late Roman/ Late Antique occupational activities in the area. In addition, we also re-examined the sequence of Middle and Late Byzantine walls in the area. ; ; Late Antique (5th-7th century CE); ; We reached the Late Antique levels in most of the excavation area, except possibly any remaining fill in Cut 1040 (N-S 1016.46-1014.59, E-W 259.47-258.59), a robbing trench running N-S next to the eastern wall of the Turkish house, which may continue deeper. Additionally, we believe that there might be an extension of this robbing trench on the south side of Cut 870 in an area that was not investigated during this session (under Context 927). ; ; An ovoid hearth, with a schist and tile bottom, was revealed in the southeastern part of the excavation area (N-S 1012.49-1011.56, E-W 262.46-261.57), but was subsequently excavated by Mohammed Bhatti and Daniel Diffendale. The fill within the hearth contained a single illegible coin (no. 2013-144), a possible minimus dated to the 5th-6th century CE, and Late Roman coarse wares. ; ; The most significant Late Roman activity in the excavation area is the series of tile destruction fills dumped in the western side of the excavation area (immediately west of Cut 870). The earliest and the largest fill, Deposit 1080 (N-S 1015.83-1011.22, E-W 258.48-255.73), yielded a large amount of broken tile, charcoal, as well as over 200 kg of pottery and a significant amount of glass, metal, and animal bone. This is clearly a dump consisting of a large amount of cooking wares, storage vessels (e.g. amphorae), as well as glass tableware, which seems to be an assemblage of a wealthy household or households. Special objects include three bone plaques with incised concentric circles, possibly belonging to a single wooden box (MF-2013-6a-c), an iron buckle (MF-2013-4), a bronze tack (MF-2013-5), and several rare forms of African Red Slip Ware (C-2013-3, C-2013-4). Most of the 56 coins found in this layer were illegible. Some coins, however, provide a useful terminus post quem for the dating of this layer. One such coin, 2013-128, might date to after the 491 CE reform of Anastasius due to the possible presence of denomination mark. Similarly, Coin 2013-139 may also bear a denomination mark. However, the identification of these coins is tentative due to their poor preservation and will need to be verified by Orestes Zevros.  Several other 5th century CE coins (nos. 2013-91, 2013-96, 2013-113) and an interesting possibly counterfeit coin of “barbaric style” dating to 383-402 CE (no. 2013-123) were also found in the context. Ceramic evidence was more useful in dating this context. Most of the pottery from dates to late 5th century CE. However, the context has very few early 5th century sherds, and the lamps and African Red Slip forms present in the context suggest a slightly later date of 500-525 CE. ; ; Above the tile fill in the southern part of this area, two parallel curvilinear walls (S1068 and S1069), 0.45 m apart, rested on a deposit containing much dissolved mudbrick (Context 1073; N-S 1013.60-1011.79, E-W 257.53-255.71). The inner Wall 1068 was made of two courses of limestone cobbles (with the second course represented by only one stone) and a reused marble fragment (A-2013-1), while the outer Wall 1069 had only one preserved course. One section of both walls was covered with a localized concentration of mudbrick, clay, and stone (Context 1047). We originally identified this concentration as a structure, but later we concluded that it was probably a dump of building material or a dense filling between the two walls. The walls run into the western scarp, and unfortunately not enough was preserved to determine their function.   ; ; Above the northern side of the large destruction Context1080, there was another dense fill, Context 1058 (N-S 1015.65-1013.46, E-W 258.47-255.65), which was relatively tile-free, but contained a large amount of coarse and cooking pottery, many of which had joins. While this is not as clearly a destruction level since it did not contain much tile or other building material, there is no clear use-surface above or below it, and the presence of large pieces of charcoal and the joins in the pottery suggests that this may also have been a dumped destruction fill. Some rare pottery types and lamps from this context were saved, including a lamp from the workshop of Chionis (L-2013-1) dated to the late 5th/early 6th century CE, which seems to correspond well with the date based on the remaining pottery. ; ; The fill of Context 1046 (N-S 1015.80-1013.35, E-W 255.60-257.91), yet another layer rich in tile, ceramic, and bone, was smaller in extent and thinner than Context1080, but it included a similar range of materials. The pottery forms seem to be later and are dated to the second half 6th century CE. Similarly, the glass from this deposit contained a number of tubular ring goblet feet, which were introduced in the second half of the 5th century CE and were made with new technology. These were absent from Deposit 1080, which contained only vertical stemmed goblet feet. Thus, here we have two different types of technology represented in two separate deposits. According to Athenian Agora XXXIV, however, the two types may slightly overlap chronologically. Therefore, these two deposits may either represent two chronologically separate events, or may reflect the presence of two separate, but contemporary, households who both dumped material in the same area. Significant other finds include a large ovoid marble fragment, which may be a finial or part of a balustrade. ; ; The interpretation of the nature of the activities in this area is made difficult by the presence of large pit Cut 870 in the middle of the excavation area as well as the presence of the Turkish house to the north and the western baulk of the excavation area, all of which truncated the dumped fills. Given that the pottery dates for each of the three layers described above, it is difficult to determine whether these dumps are related to a single destructive event in the wider neighborhood or represent a series of independent events. One possibility may be that this area lay behind a N-S wall which once filled Cut 1040, which we believe to be a robbing trench. Thus, this may have been a convenient exterior dumping ground used over time. Another possibility may be that a large destructive event, such as the earthquake of 522, afflicted the area causing several households to dump their debris in one single area as a part of a general clean-up project. However, at this point we are reluctant to connect these deposits to a single historical event without further study of the pottery from these levels. Above these dumped fills were a series of leveling fills, which may have been laid down in order to reuse the area for new purposes at the end of the Late Roman period. ; ; The remaining Late Roman activity was located in the northwestern part of the excavation area. A well preserved section of a drain, Structure 1026 (N-S 1017.17- 1014.96, E-W 260.14- 259.75), ran N-S at the northern edge of the excavation area and was parallel to the robbing trench 1040. It appears to have been truncated by the building of Wall 918. The drain dates before the middle of the 6th century CE, based on stratigraphy, but since the structure itself and the fill it rests upon were not yet excavated, this date remains preliminary. The drain may have been connected to the well—excavated in the 1960s—located just north of it, immediately to the east of the Turkish house and may have been part of the drainage system of structure related to the wall we theorize filled Cut 1040. ; ; The latest Late Antique activity in the area is present in thin deposits preserved below Wall 540 on the east side of the excavation area. The wall, which dates to the early 12th century, was left pedestalled during the 2012 season (top H. 86.56m, bottom H. 85.98m). Excavation continued on both sides of the wall, and after its removal we were able to correlate this season’s deposits to some of those excavated in 2012. ; ; The pedestal below Wall 540 was preserved in three sections, interrupted by two robbing trenches, Cut 980 and Deposit 985. We excavated the two northern sections and Daniel Diffendale and Mohammed Bhatti excavated the southern section. Each of the two northern sections of the baulk below the wall contained two tile destruction levels, separated by a layer of leveling fill. This clear sequence allowed us to find equivalent layers of the baulk across the robbing trench of Wall 918/992 (filled by Contexts 975 and 985), which separated our two sections of the baulk. ; ; The lowest layers of the pedestal were excavated as Deposits 990 and 991 (990 N-S 1016.20-1014.64, E-W264.68-263.66; 991: N-S 1014.62-1011.63, E-W 264.59-263.76) and correspond to Structure 936 (dated to mid 6th- early 7th century CE), a compact floor surface excavated in 2012. They also relate to Deposit 1035, excavated by Bhatti and Diffendale. Given the narrowness of the pedestal, we cannot add much to the interpretation of this surface at this point. The possibility of further succession of floors below this level was suggested by George and Valente in 2012 report, but was explored by Bhatti and Diffendale during this season. ; ; The earliest tile destruction layer, Contexts 989 and 984, are equal to Contexts 934 and 929 excavated in 2012, due to their roughly equivalent elevations and presence of tile. This allows us to confirm that this tile destruction layer ran under the wall, as theorized by Valente and George in 2012. Our tile layer must have been part of a larger dump of tile, possibly resulting from the clean-up of a destroyed building elsewhere, or—as theorized in 2012—from the collapse of a roof. We were not able to equate the other layers of the pedestal (including the later tile layer) to levels excavated in the previous season, unfortunately. This may be due to a disturbance from the foundation trench of the wall or other activity in the area after the Wall 540 was built, which preserved the later tile layer under the wall, but removed it to the east and west. The layer intervening between the two tile dumps and the later tile dump itself date to the late 6th/early 7th century CE, while the top-most level of the baulk (Contexts 974 and 986) dates to the 7th century CE. ; ; ; Middle to Late Byzantine (802-1210 CE); ; During the mid-10th to late 11th centuries CE, there was a very large pit in the middle of the excavation area (Cut 870, N-S 1014.56-1011.63, E-W 261.89-258.43), which was previously identified as a bothros by George and Valente in 2012. This pit seems to have been filled over a period of time, with the cut and first preserved fill (Context 1002) dated to the late 10th-early 11th centuries and the latest fill (Context 844, excavated in 2012) dated to the late 11th century. This extremely large and deep cut may have functioned as a disposal bothros during this period. The bothros seems to have been filled by the time that the Late Byzantine walls in the area were built, so we are currently unable to associate it with any architecture. However, it must have existed in an exterior space at its time of use.; ; There seems to have been a flurry of building activity in this area during the late 11th and early 12th centuries. Wall 747/1087 seems to have been erected first, in the late 11th-early 12th centuries (1087: N-S 1010.81-101.11 E-W 258.29-255.75; 747: N-S 1010.80-1010.40, E-W 264.15-263.30).  During the 2012 season, the foundation trench (Cut 809) for Wall 1087 was partially excavated, but we removed the final layer of fill within the cut during this season, as Context 1086 (N-S 1011.38-1010.62, E-W 258.24-255.68), and we also exposed further foundations of the wall during cleaning. We are uncertain what space was defined by this wall in its earliest phase, but during a later phase in the early 12th century, it appears to have been abutted by the slightly later N-S Wall 540. Therefore, it seems that the space to the west of Wall 540 was divided into a northern and a southern section by Wall 747/1087. However, we cannot be certain whether these spaces were interior or exterior and we do not yet have evidence of any further walls defining the space.; ; Wall 540 (N-S 1015.20-1007.26, E-W 264.76-263.68), which consisted of two faces of roughly worked small boulders with cobbles and rubble in the interior, was removed during this season, allowing us to clarify its relationship with several other walls in the area. We are now certain that two E-W walls in the area, Wall 918/992  (N-S 1015.10-1014.57, E-W 266.12-259.56) and Wall 945 (N-S 1011.69-1010.89, E-W 264.50-260.95), were out of use by the time that Wall 540 was built, because Wall 540 was constructed over the robbing trenches of each of these walls. Perhaps these walls were removed in preparation for the building of Wall 540 or as part of a larger rebuilding project in the area. ; ; Recommendations for the future:; 1.    Excavate any remaining fill in Cut 1040 and investigate the possibility that this robbing trench continued on the south side of Cut 870. This would shed light on our theory that the wall which once filled this cut was related to the dumping ground to its west. ; 2.    Continue investigating the area bounded by Walls 992 and 945 to the east of Cut 870 in order to continue exploring the Late Roman levels. Special attention should be paid to any evidence of dumped destruction fills. ; 3.    Remove Drain 1026 and the fill below it to clarify the date of the drain. ; 4.    Consider excavating part of Wall 747/1087 for chronological purposes. ; 5.    Clean the bottom of Cut 870 to better understand the material exposed at its bottom and take closing levels, which we were unable to do during this session.","","2013 Session 1, TeamBlue, Final Summary","","","","Corinth:Report:Nezi Field 2013 by Katherine Harrington, Jana Mokrišová (2013-05-09 to 2007-05-24)","Nezi Field 2013 by Katherine Harrington, Jana Mokrišová (2013-05-09 to 2007-05-24)","Corinthia | Ancient Corinth | Central Area | Nezi Field","",""
"Report","Corinth","","Kate Larson and Jon Meyer; ASCSA Corinth Excavations; Blue Team Session 3 Final Report; N :1016.50 N, E: 263.00 E, S: 1005.70 N, W: 255.50 E; May 27 – June 18, 2013; ; During Session 3 2013, the Blue Team excavated in three distinct areas in the northwest section of Nezi Field (N. 1016.50 N, E. 263.00 E, S. 1005.70 N, W. 255.50 E), with the goal of reaching Late Roman (4th-6th century) occupation layers, discovering discrete Late Roman contexts to clarify an absolute ceramic chronology, and learning more about the activity in and around Nezi at that point in time.  Additionally, we have been able to refine the dating and use of the space immediately north of wall 366, around well 742, in the late 11th and 12th century.  Under the directorship of Guy Sanders and field directorship of Rossana Valente, the Blue Team consisted of Athanasios Notis (pickman), Christos Sakellariou (shovelman), Panayiotis Rontzokos (barrowman), and Kate Larson and Jon Meyer (recorders).  ; ; On May 27th, the Blue team conducted a minor operation in the area immediately south and east of the Giambouranis (Turkish) House (N. 1016.50 N, E. 259.80 E, S. 1014.25 N, W. 257.85 E), clarifying N-S cut 1040 and removing the skin balk between 1040 and the large tile deposit 1080 excavated in Session 1 by Katherine Harrington and Jana Mokrišová.  Beginning on May 28th, the Blue team moved south to the area bounded by E-W walls 1087 and 945 on the north (1010.50 N), robbing trench 1171 on the east (263.00 E), wall 366 on the south (1005.70 N), and the western scarp of Nezi on the west (255.50 E), last excavated during Session 3 2012 by Rossana Valente and Charles George.  In this area, we have identified a Frankish pit and robbing activity, several late 11th-early 12th century Byzantine structures suggesting intensive activity, and a thick Late Roman fill, mostly of earlier architectural debris, which is probably related to the construction and elevation of well 742 in the 5th or early 6th century.  By the end of the season, we reached early-middle Roman strata which indicate possible domestic occupation in Nezi but will require additional investigation in future seasons before any clear conclusions can be reached.; ; During the final week of excavation, Rossana Valente under the auspices of the Blue Team excavated a late 11th century coin hoard just south of wall 366 and east of wall 332, north of and under structure 452 (N. 1006.08 N, E. 264.20 E, S. 1003.70 N, W. 262.70 E), an area most recently excavated in 2009.  While the original intention of this limited project had been to properly excavate a large, mostly intact jar which had become exposed due to weathering over the past several years, the discovery of the coin hoard in context 1235 offers excellent corroborative dating evidence for associated Late Byzantine pottery, and further excavation should be conducted in this area in subsequent seasons.  ; ; Early-Middle Roman (1st-3rd century); Based on stratigraphy, N-S wall 1222 was built sometime before the 4th century, by which time it had gone out of use and was covered over (see below).  The wall begins at 1010.03 N (where it abuts wall 1087) and extends south into the baulk at 1006.08 N.  At the preserved elevation of 85.84 masl, the wall is constructed in two distinct manners: from uncut fieldstones of 0.15-0.20 m in its northern half, and (reused?) larger cut ashlars (0.35-0.55) at the south, possibly indicating a repair or extension of wall 1222.   An earlier phase of E-W wall 366, running from 261.50 E to 262.90 E, where it disappears into the east balk, probably also was built in this period.  The west end of this wall was robbed or otherwise disrupted in the Late Roman period, but the large ashlar stones still contain traces of red wall plaster in situ.  A third Early Roman wall may have been located 3.60 m east of wall 1222, represented by Late Byzantine robbing trench 1171.  The numerous ornate Masonry style and faux marble wall painting fragments found in the Late Roman fill in this area (contexts 1227, 1210, and 1187) could well have come from these walls, and suggest a rather wealthy domestic or semi-public space.; ; These walls are possibly related to the pebble floor found in situ near the north end of wall 1222, 0.50 m to the east, at 85.17 masl  and/or the tile floor at 85.01 masl 2.5 m east of 1222 and a bit further south.  Both these surfaces should date sometime in or before the 2nd century, based upon the material excavated directly above them (contexts 1202 and 1242, respectively), but further excavation is required to determine their actual date and extent.  A third floor for which we found evidence but no in situ remains was made from cut down tiles which were used as bricks, set in a limey matrix, and covered over with soft limey plaster.  This floor was destroyed by the 2nd or 3rd century and dumped in sizable chunks, the largest 0.60 x 0.70, into the area between wall 1087 and wall 945, and excavated as contexts 1202 and 1250; these contexts are dated by a large piece of square lipped water pipe dated by Palinkas and Herbst to the late 2nd-early 3rd century (Hesperia 2011 80.2), but no pottery is later than the 1st century CE.; ; Late Roman (5th-6th century); Well 742 may have been constructed and in use as early as the fourth century, although further excavation around it and removal of the well structure itself will have to confirm this date.  Beginning around 85.60 masl (excavated as context 1227), the walls of the well shaft were reinforced with uncut cobbles and fieldstones, built into and laid against the sides of the well shaft; the soil is completely undifferentiated from the surrounding fill.  This rudimentary construction, which was clearly not intended to be seen, ceases after about half a meter, at 86.10 masl.  The top of the preserved well shaft was made from three courses of larger rectangular stones roughly hewn on the exterior and more nicely cut into a curvilinear shape for the interior of the well shaft start (one course removed this season as context 1185).  We have identified no external cut into which the well was dug; before it opens into a larger cistern or chamber, the well shaft is composed of the same hard packed soil we are finding throughout the excavation area which seems to have been packed or cut inside the well. Unlike at higher elevations, we have found no evidence below 85.60 masl or so of the reinforcing cobbles around the well structure which indicate built construction.  The only soil we excavated below these cobbles, which seems possibly to have been cut rather than built as part of the well, contained no pottery dating later than the 1st century CE, although the deposit did contain a coin of Hadrian (coin 2013-251; context 1246). ; ; We suggest that a series of superimposed dump fills represents a construction or raising of well 742 and the surrounding area, possibly to correspond to the street level of Late Roman Nezi.   These fills cover the entire area bounded by later walls 1087 on the north, 366 on the south, robbing trench 1171 on the east, and the scarp of Nezi excavations on the west (N: 1010.08 N, E: 262.10 E, S: 1007.00 N, W: 255.50 E).  The earliest, 1227 and its associated contexts (1239, 1240, and 1248, plus 1233 excavated by the Pink team this session), was laid down in the 4th century, possibly early 5th (as dated by the pottery from 1233).  This filling operation was dense and over half a meter thick.  Context 1210, immediately over 1227, was very similar in composition, differentiated only by the inclusion of small quantities of pottery dating to the 6th century.  Similarly, context 1187, immediately overlying 1227, contained almost all 4th century and earlier material redeposited with two rims of 6th century cookware and a tubular foot goblet which dates to the second half of the 5th century or later.  These fills were built up against and covered over the early-middle Roman walls 1222 and the earlier phase of 366, as discussed above.   ; ; Most of the cultural material from these fills is architectural in origin, including abundant tiles, bricks, painted and unpainted wall plaster, architectural moldings, and assorted floor tesserae.  These fills likely also contained a large quantity of mudbricks which have since disintegrated, leaving behind small pieces of poorly preserved Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic, and Early Roman (1st century) pottery which we found in much greater quantities in these contexts than we did pottery which is contemporaneous with the deposit itself.  Although truncated at the north by wall 1087 and the trenches to either side and the east by robbing trench 1171, this fill clearly extends south into the baulk under wall 366 and west into the baulk of Nezi.; ; Because there is so little material throughout these fills which is contemporary with the filling operation itself, it is unclear whether these three large deposits all represent a single construction event or the raising of the well gradually over time from the 4th-6th centuries.  That these fills represent a single event is supported by the continuity in the construction method of the well, which was uncut fieldstones, cobbles, and soil (as discussed above) up to about 86.10 masl (exposed as contexts 1187 and 1210), and by the lack of evidence for floors or surfaces below surface 1157 at 86.46 masl.; ; A sequence of surfaces built above the huge dump fills are likely related to the use of the well in the 6th century or later.   No trace of these floors and their subfloors was found west of well 742, but the high degree of disruption by later Byzantine and Frankish occupation may have destroyed them.  Surface 1157 (86.46 masl) is a rock and tile floor bound together with plaster, covering the entire area east of well 742 up to robbing trench 1171.  It was supported by a 0.25 m thick sandy and rocky fill containing 4th-5th NPD pottery (deposit 1162, 86.28 masl), which may have been some sort of bedding or leveling layer for the surface; during its excavation, Guy Sanders noted that this sandy limestone is the local bedrock and suggested this deposit in particular may originate from construction (or expansion?) of well 742 or well 902 to the northeast.  Surface 1157 was replaced by surface 911, a reddish limey floor (N: 1009.42 N, E: 262.04 E, S: 1007.37 N, W: 259.22 E, 86.59 masl).  This floor was quite well constructed, with a plastered cobble subfloor (structure 1153, 86.54 masl) and a highly compact soil bedding layer (structure 1156, 86.46 masl).  By contrast, dirt surface 912 above it (N: 1009.33 N, E: 261.96 E, S: 1007.69 N, W: 259.63 E, 86.62 masl) was quite patchy and, having been exposed for a year, rather difficult to identify the boundaries of; had it not been identified as a surface last season, we probably would not have recognized it as such.  All of these contexts were nearly sterile of cultural material other than tile, but they overlay context 1210 which contained 6th century material.; ; A series of square structures was built up against the south side of well 742, presumably in the Late Roman period along with the other features associated with the well (although we found virtually no datable material in any of them, and stratigraphically they can only be associated clearly with the well itself).  All covered about the same area of 1007.15-1007.90 N and 258.35-259.15 E (0.75 x 0.80 m).  We are uncertain about their use and function: the most likely is that they represent a sequence of entrances or thresholds to the well from the south, but they were not associated with any floors we identified during excavation; further excavation of Late Roman strata in the Byzantine room to the south may help resolve this.  The earliest (no context number; unexcavated) is a platform or base consisting of a single layer of uncut cobbles and fieldstones 0.08-0.20 m large.  These stones are difficult to differentiate from the stones supporting well 742 and from the stones of wall 1222, immediately to the west.  This structure seems to have been built over the southeastern half of wall 1222, and extends further south than the overlying tile and ashlar structures, into the line of wall 366 and southern baulk.  Excavation of this platform and the underlying soil deposit is necessary to clarify these relationships.  These stones may have been a bedding surface for a level of flat laying tiles immediately above them (context 1220, 86.12, pottery Roman NPD).  These tiles were then covered with a 0.05-0.10 m thick layer of reddish clayey sand (deposit 1209) which resembles the Late Roman fill operation of context 1210 (above).  A large cut ashlar (0.60x0.70x0.40), which may have come from wall 1222, was placed on this soil, and topped by another layer of flat lying tiles (context 1158, 86.54 masl).  ; ; Unfortunately, we have not been able to identify any walls or primary deposits which correspond to the Late Roman use of the well, possibly suggesting that it was in an exterior space, or roofed with a simple wooden structure.  It should also be noted that we retrieved no evidence for the well head in any period (i.e. no stones with use wear rope cuttings), which was therefore either wooden or spoliated at a later date for use elsewhere.  ; ; Around the Turkish House, we provided additional dating evidence for context 1080 (Session 1 Blue).  Deposit 1143 is part of the same destruction fill as deposit 1080.  Like 1080, 1143 contained large quantities of tile, along with pottery, glass (especially vertical foot goblets), and three additional coins (C-2013-192, -193, and -194, all illegible minimi).  According to the current ceramic chronology, the pottery indicates a date in the second half of the 5th century, but a North African style moldmade lamp in local Corinthian fabric (L-2013-4) suggests a date closer to the mid-6th century for this deposition of material based on comparanda with material from the Fountain of Lamps. ; ; Early-Middle Byzantine (7th- 10th century); No early Byzantine activity has been detected in the excavation area, based on the lack of ceramic material dating to this period.; ; Middle-Late Byzantine (11th- 12th century); Prior excavations have clarified that the large bothros pit in the middle of NW Nezi (Cut 870) was filled over the course of the mid 10th-late 11th century (see Session 1 2013 Blue final report).  The putative N-S robbing trench Cut 1040 was also filled during this period (deposit 1136), further support that the far northwest corner of Nezi field around the Turkish House served as a source of stone for new construction activities and a garbage dumping area during this century and a half.  So far, we have been unable to ascertain whether Cut 1040 (and therefore a now-missing wall from a prior period) continues south of Cut 870, as suggested by Harrington and Mokrišová.; ; South of wall 1087/747, which Harrington and Mokrišová date to the late 11th-early 12th century, another N-S wall was robbed at some point during the 11th century, represented by rectangular cut 1171 (N-S 1009.57-1007.06 N, E-W 262.98-262.28 E) extending northward from wall 366.  Both fills in this cut, 888 and 1167, contained material dated to the 11th century.  Based on the flurry of activity in this vicinity dated to the late 11th century, it is likely that cuts 1040 and 1171 provided source lime and stone for these constructions.  Immediately south of wall 1087 is lime pit 882, initially identified and preliminarily excavated by George and Valente in 2012, dated by them to the late 11th century (based on material excavated from context 917; we recovered no material from the removal of the lime plaster itself which dates later than two micaceous water jar bases from the 6th century in context 1176).  Even though the stratigraphy is unclear as none of these structures connect, the pottery phasings and common sense suggest that the sequence of events in this area is 1) robbing of walls, 2) cutting and use of the lime pit to create mortar for the walls from the robbed stone, and 3) construction of walls 1087/747 and 366 .   ; ; Well 742 potentially served as the source of water for mixing lime mortar, as the lime pit appeared to be set immediately against its north side.  We identified a possible narrow cut around the top of the well, filled with a loose, dark black soil (deposit 1175, 86.40-86.16 masl) which was quite distinct from the surrounding red sandy Late Roman matrix; both this deposit and the comparable black soil around highest preserved course of the well (context 1185) contained 11th century pottery.  Therefore, we suspect that well 742 was a two-phase structure, as after removal of the upper course, we have been unable to identify any type of cut around the well to indicate that the lower Late Roman fill was disturbed during the course of well construction.  However, the construction method of the highest preserved course of the well – three rectangular ashlars with roughly carved exteriors, and a well carved curved interior surface around the opening for the well, held together with cobble chinking stones – is quite similar to what we can ascertain of the lower levels; on the other hand, George and Valente removed several stones from around the well in 2012, and these may represent the true 11th century construction and use phase of the well.  ; ; After construction of the walls, the area was adapted for occupational use, probably as a form of interior or exterior domestic space bounded by the wall 1087 at the north and 366 at the south.  Our 2013 excavation of round, stone built hearth 910 generated ceramics dated to the late 11th century; the interior fills excavated by George and Valente in 2012 were dated to the early 12th, suggesting this hearth was only in use for a few decades at most.  Construction of the hearth seems to have disrupted the western edge of lime pit 882, which was never concretely identified by either us or George and Valente; all we found were spotty bits of lime visible in the western face of the pit, quite dissimilar from the much better preserved solid surfaces of lime found to the east.  Well 742 likely continued to be used as well.  ; ; Excavations in the area E of Wall 332 (N: 1006.06 N; S: 1003.75 N; E: 264.17 E; W: 262.77 E) allowed further investigation of the Byzantine strata in Nezi field. ; ; The structure 452 (N 1005.51, S 1004.01, E 263.75, W 262.78) exposed during excavation in 2009 and removed in June 2013 has now been interpreted as the foundation of a staircase. It did not directly lay against any walls or other structures: the closest wall to this staircase, Wall 332, was separated from structure 452 by a thin layer of soil, 2 cm thick on average. Nevertheless we can argue that staircase 452 can be related at least to the western room bounded by Wall 332, Wall 366 and Wall. And it seems to be contemporary to northern Walls 540, 749 and 1087 the eastern Wall 807, even though no physical relationships are preserved. At the moment we can infer that during the Late Byzantine period the building identified in this area consisted at least of two floors.   ; ; Structure 452 laid on a hard packed earth deposit (deposit 1235). This fill was dumped South of Wall 366 and West of Wall 332 in order to have a proper surface for bedding the staircase foundation (structure 452). When deposit 1235 was dumped a hoard of bronze coins was deposited below the north side of Structure 452, few centimeters beneath the lowest course of stones. These coins belong almost all to the reigns of Nicephorus III and Alexius I, and range from 1178 to 1118 (coins 2013-221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 236, 238, 252, 254, 255, 256), except for two earlier ones: coin 2013-231 dated to 969-1030 and coin 2013-234 dated to1070 -1075, which were likely still in use at the beginning of the 12th century. The coins do not seem to have been contained in a ceramic vessel, we hypothesize that they were originally in a leather bag.  The presence of a hoard beneath staircase does not seem to be unique in Nezi: in the field N of Nezi another hoard was identified in similar condition of preservation according to G. Sanders.; ; Unfortunately not much pottery was associated with this hoard. On the contrary, the new, wide deposit exposed beneath it and unexcavated appears to be very rich in ceramics. This new context is around the Frankish pits 527 and 528 and, according to the stratigraphy exposed in these cuts, it seems to be all the same deposit exposed beneath 1235 and to continue further south. We definitely encourage more excavation here: the numerous coins we found in 1235 can provide a terminus ante quem for this layer exposed beneath 1235. ; ; Frankish (13th century); The Frankish period is another phase of disruption, rather than occupation, in this area; George and Valente also identified a series of pits and wall robbings dating to the 13th century (see Final Report Session 3 Blue 2012).  The western extent of wall 366 was robbed, an action described by cut 687 , and a shallow circular pit was dug below it at the presumed intersection of walls 366 and 306 (N-S 1006.91-1005.81 N, E-W 258.23-257.15 E, 86.17-85.82 masl).  These cuts were then filled by deposits 1204 and 1183 around the third quarter of the 13th century.  ; ; Outstanding Issues; For the next season of excavation in Nezi Field, we recommend the following for this area:; 1.    Excavate the single course stone feature immediately south of well 742 and the fill beneath it in order to investigate the nature of the sequence of stone and tile structures overlaying it.  More work may need to be done in the Byzantine room to the south in order to determine the full southern extend of the stone feature and the late Roman fills which pass under wall 366.; 2.    Remove the remainder of well 742 and the soil surface around it to resolve its initial construction and use.; 3.    Expose more of the pebble floor and tile floor to determine their extent, date, and relationship to walls 1222 and the earlier phase of 366, in order to learn more about Early-Middle Roman Nezi.; 4.    Resume work in the area around the Frankish pit 527, because the coin hoard in 1235 provides an excellent terminus ante quem for the underlying deposits","","Session 3 2013 Blue Northwest Nezi Field, Early/Middle Roman to Frankish Periods","","","","Corinth:Report:Nezi Field 2013 by Kate Larson and Jon Meyer (2013-05-27 to 2013-06-18)","Nezi Field 2013 by Kate Larson and Jon Meyer (2013-05-27 to 2013-06-18)","Corinthia | Ancient Corinth | Central Area | Nezi Field","",""
"Report","Corinth","","Nezi 2013 Season; Session 3 Final Report; Grace Erny and Emily Joy ; N 1005.89 – 1022.92; E 255.66 – 271.22; 27 May – 21 June 2013; ; This is the final report for the third session of excavation at Nezi, 2013.  Guy Sanders (director) and Rossana Valente (field director) supervised.  The Pink excavation team for this session consisted of Grace Erny and Emily Joy (recorders) and Panos Kakouros (pickman).  The first ten days of excavation focused briefly on the area south of wall w35 and east of wall 5218, then moved north and east into the area south of wall 5484 and east of wall 1154.  Previous excavation in this area was undertaken during the 2007 season. Our excavation goals for this area included clarifying the relationships between the various walls and surfaces present there.  In the final six days of excavation, we moved south in Nezi field to work in the area west of Wall 1222. This area is bounded to the north by a foundation trench for the Late Byzantine Wall 1087 (C809), and to the south and the west by unexcavated scarps. As we excavated the deposits west of 1222, the Blue team continued to work to the east of the wall.  By digging in this area, we hoped to determine the extent and possible construction date of wall 1222, to compare the finds from the area west of the wall to the finds from the area east of it, and to ascertain whether the pebble mosaic floor uncovered in situ by the Blue team roughly 0.5 m east of the north end of wall 1222 continued below this wall to the west.  It was also suggested that excavations in this area might encounter a continuation of the tile-rich dump deposit 1080 excavated during Session 1 of the 2013 season, which yielded much Late Roman pottery, including several rare forms, and many coins.; ; The two areas in which we excavated in this session are far apart, and since we did not dig the contexts in between them we will present the two areas separately in this report.  ; ; Area 1:  27 May – 7 June (N 1015.44 – 1022.92; E 266.44 – 271.22); ; The number of walls, floor-like surfaces of hard-packed earth, and fill deposits in this area suggests that it was an interior space, likely residential. It appears to have served this function from the Early Roman period through the Late Roman period and to have undergone a destruction and several fill operations and reconfigurations within that time.; ; Early Roman, ca. 1st c. BCE – early 2nd c. CE; ; In the Early or Middle Roman period, probably in the second century BCE or earlier (based on the pottery dates from the fill dumped on top of it), a floor of hard-packed, grayish, clay-rich earth (structure 1191) was in use in the area.  Two walls, wall 1154 (N 1020.04-1020.43, E 268.32-268.89, orientation NW-SE, constructed with a mixture of roughly hewn and squared limestone blocks bonded with mud) and wall 1213 (N 1020.07-1020.64, E 270.14-271.09, orientation E-W, constructed similarly to 1154 with the addition of roof tiles) were in use at the same time as this floor, which extends directly up to them with no cuts for foundation trenches visible.  These two walls may have formed part of a room at this point, with a space left for an entryway between the east face of 1154 and the western end of 1213. Wall 5435 and wall 5218 prevented us from digging further to the north and east, confirming the extent of the floor.  Floor 1191 probably continued south through the putative entryway between 1154 and 1213, possibly into another room to the south, although the presence of the later Roman wall 1155 makes this difficult to determine.  Excavations directly south of wall 1155 and 1213 in the western part of deposit 1199 descended upon a hard-packed surface with a similar composition and elevation to 1191.  The hypothesis that this surface is a continuation of floor 1191 is supported by the presence of patches of charcoal and ash directly above both surfaces.  These ash and charcoal deposits do not have clear edges and do not contain enough material to constitute hearths.  Rather, they seem to be the remains of small, localized, one-time events, perhaps related to cooking.  At some point during the floor’s use, pockets of tiny (approximately 0.001 m) greenish-brown seeds collected on top of it (at the bottom of deposit 1199).  This material may also indicate food preparation activities in this area, although an identification of the seeds by an archaeobotanist would be helpful for interpretation here.  ; ; One squared limestone block of wall 1213 has a rectangular groove (length 0.08 m, width 0.02 m, depth 0.04 m) incised on its upper surface.  The block appears to be in secondary use here, and it is possible that the groove was originally used to support a stele with a tongue at its base.  The presence of such a block is consistent with evidence for Hellenistic cult activity in the vicinity.; ; Middle Roman, ca. 2nd - 4th c. CE; ; In the Middle Roman period, this area saw much activity, including multiple fill operations and a destruction.  In the potential room bounded by wall 1154 to the west and wall 1213 to the south, floor 1191 went out of use as material was dumped on top of it. This material was deposited in two discrete events.  The deposit laying directly against wall 1154 in the western half of the area (context 1151) was rich in crushed mudbrick and large broken pieces of roof tile mixed together.  The soil here was quite red, a common effect of mudbrick being exposed to heat, and contained inclusions of charcoal.  These observations suggest that a destruction occurred here, possibly involving the partial burning of a building.  Similar deposits containing high proportions of mudbrick and rooftiles were excavated directly above context 1151 in 2007 (B5069, B5082) and reportedly did not extend further west than the east face of wall 1154, which implies that the putative destruction postdates wall 1154.  ; ; The deposit to the east of this destruction (context 1169), by contrast, contained almost no mudbrick, and the roof tile pieces present were less numerous and smaller.  One notable find from context 1169 was a fragment of furnace brick with some bronze adhering to it, which suggests that bronze production was occurring in this area during or before the Middle Roman period.  The deposit directly above 1169 was also excavated in 2007 (B5070) and consisted of a clayey surface identified by the excavators as a possible floor and dated by  them to the second half of the 3rd century, presumably based on pottery.  1169 is likely leveling fill which was dumped into the area as a preparation for this surface.  The pottery from this context, which was dated to the 2nd c. npd, supports this interpretation.; ; It is difficult to reconstruct whether the leveling operation or the destruction event occurred first.  Both of them were dumped directly on top of floor 1191.  The large fragments of tile, however, became somewhat scarcer towards the bottom of the destruction deposit 1151, although the change was not dramatic enough to warrant a change of context.  Neither we nor the previous excavators noticed an extension of the putative floor 5070 into the western half of the area, which seems odd given that there is no evidence for a wall or other boundary that might curtail its westward extent.  One possibility is that the surface 5070 originally extended as far west as wall 1154, and then the destruction occurred sometime after the floor’s construction in the late 3rd century.  This event then destroyed the western part of this surface, which would mean that deposit 1151 would postdate both 5070 and the leveling fill 1169 below it.  Ceramic evidence support this interpretation, as the pottery recovered from the destruction (1151) was dated to the Middle to Late Roman period, is later than the 2nd century pottery date assigned to the leveling fill (1169).  A carved gemstone depicting Aphrodite Hoplismeni (MF 2013-13) was also recovered from 1151. Although we dated it on the basis of comparanda to the Early Roman period (1st-2nd c. CE), a valuable or heirloom item such as this may have been kept for a long time and does not necessarily imply a date this early for the entire context.; ; This destruction event seems to have prompted a reconfiguration of space in the area in the later part of the Middle Roman period.  To the south of wall 1213, at least two pebble-rich, hard packed, slightly uneven surfaces were in use sometime before the 4th century CE, but after floor 1191 went out of use.  One overlays the other, but their similar compositions and elevations suggest that they may have been used at roughly the same time and perhaps represent repairs to the same surface.  Time constraints prevented us from excavating these putative floors and gaining a better understanding of their stratigraphic relationships to each other and the surrounding walls, but they are shown on the bottom plan for context 1199 and are labeled as Floors 1 and 2.   ; ; In the 4th century, these two surfaces went out of use as more fill (deposit 1199) was dumped on top of them, possibly as preparation for a later floor.  Wall 1213 also went out of use at this time as it was covered by the same fill. This fill contained much redeposited earlier material, including Early Roman redwares and relief lamps (all Broneer type 22; see in particular L 2013-5), Hellenistic and 4th century BCE loomweights, and several earlier figurines (MF 2013-22, probably Early Roman, and MF 2013-15, possibly 4th century BCE).  Stone tesserae and large quantities of painted wall plaster were also present in this fill, probably from earlier Roman domestic or semi-public spaces in the area.  ; ; After this fill operation was performed, wall 1155 (N 1020.24-1020.56, E 268.90-270.09, orientation E-W, constructed with limestone, roof tiles and pebble conglomerate bonded with mud) was constructed along the same line as but at a higher elevation than the earlier wall 1213.  Wall 1155 abuts wall 1154 at its western end but stops at the east with a large squared limestone block (height 0.90 m, top surface 0.50 m x 0.40 m).  This block possibly delineated the western edge of a point of entrance into an interior space bounded by wall 1154 to the west and wall 1155 to the south.  ; ; The area south of wall w35 and east of wall 5218 also appears to have been in use in the Middle Roman period, when a series of floors was constructed in the area.  Deposit 1148 was comprised of areas of looser, sandier soil alternating with compact, flat layers of more clayey soil, which we interpreted as several layers of flooring with patches of crushed mudbrick fill in between.  Pottery from this deposit supports a Middle Roman date. The boundaries between these successive floors were difficult to distinguish, and they were likely laid down roughly contemporaneously as part of repair operations in an interior space.  A shallow carbon and ash-rich deposit (1147) was laid on top of this series of surfaces and was probably in use at roughly the same time, but it did not appear to be a proper hearth, and the area was probably only sporadically used for burning. ; ; Late Roman, ca. 5th c. CE; ; A new floor (1142) was laid over the series of Middle Roman floors sometime in the 5th century (based on pottery dates).  Both this floor and 1199 were cut by a robbing trench, which was cut by a pit.  The fill of the trench and pit were dug in 2007 (B5151 and B5152 for the trench and B5148 and B5150 for the pit) and yielded very mixed pottery dates, ranging from Hellenistic to 5th century CE.  This may indicate that there were few pieces of definitive pottery from these fills and that stratigraphic dating would be more useful in establishing a chronology for this area.  Based on our current stratigraphy, both the trench and the pit should date to the 5th century or later.; ; Suggestions for future excavators; ; Two future plans for excavation in this area spring to mind.  The first of these would be to continue digging in the area exposed by the excavation of the fill deposit 1199, where four different contexts (three surfaces and one deposit) are now visible.  We did not assign context numbers to these four contexts since we were unable to dig them at this time, but the bottom plan for context 1199 shows their elevations and locations.  Excavating the later two surfaces would help to clarify their extent and exactly when they were in use.  They could be compared to the series of Middle Roman surfaces (deposit 1148) that we excavated to the west of the robbing trench and might aid in an understanding of the relationship between the areas to the east and west of the robbing trench.  Removing these two surfaces would also allow us to see more clearly if the Early Roman floor 1191 does indeed continue south below wall 1155.  Another deposit, not a surface, was also exposed below the fill 1199.  It is at a lower elevation than floor 1191 and may constitute leveling fill for the floor, so digging in this area could help give a more secure stratigraphic date for the surface 1191.; ; Another place where further excavation could be useful is in the area west of the robbing trench.  Digging more here might clarify the relative construction dates of wall w35, which abuts and extends west of wall 1154, and wall 1155, which abuts and extends east of wall 1154.  We could also see if an earlier floor similar to 1191 exists in this area as well, which would help link the areas east and west of the trench and determine if they formed two halves of the same interior space in the Early, Middle, and Late Roman periods.; ; ; ; ; Area 2:  10 June – 17 June (N 1005.89 -1010.04; E 255.66 – 258.13); ; Late Roman, ca. 5th-6th century CE; ; In the fifth century, multiple dump fill operations took place in the area west of the Early to Middle Roman wall 1222 (for coordinates, construction, and dating of this wall, see the final report of the Session 3 Blue team, Kate Larson and Jon Meyer).  The first of these dump operations (deposit 1247, N 1009.25-1010.04, E 255.71-257.79, pottery Late Roman 5th century) was deposited on top of two hard-packed earth surfaces (further excavation would be needed to determine their date and function).  This dump was particularly rich in large pieces of broken roof tile.  Although the tile-rich fill extended all the way up to the west face of wall 1222, the Blue team reported no continuation of this fill east of the wall, and so the deposit was probably dumped over the western edge of wall 1222.  It may represent the southern edge of the tile-rich dump deposit 1080, which was excavated in Session 1 by Katherine Harrington and Jana Mokrišová.  If this is the case, then this fill layer was cut in the Late Byzantine period by the foundation trench for wall 1087 (cut C809).; ; Later in the fifth century (dated by ceramic evidence), more than 0.4 m of fill was dumped to the west of wall 1222 (deposit 1233, likely equivalent to deposits 1227 and 1248 excavated by the Larson and Meyer this session, which were on the east side and overlaying the north end of wall 1222).  This large dump operation probably took place in discrete smaller dump operations over a span of hours or days, which led to minor variations in color and composition throughout the deposit.  Many of the finds recovered from these fills were architectural or construction-related, including many broken roof tiles, pieces of pebble conglomerate flooring, rectangular bricks, painted wall plaster, brown-coat plaster, marble revetment, and a diamond-shaped brick of a type commonly used for flooring.  The presence of these materials may indicate that the fill operation was carried out in conjunction with other building projects in the area. Large pieces of slag, possibly from glass production or metal refinement, also imply that industrial activity was taking place in the environs in the Late Roman period or earlier.; ; At one point during the fill operation, a hard-packed earth surface (context 1236, N 1005.89-1007.44, E 256.85-257.61) was briefly in use in the southeastern part of this area.  It seems unlikely that it was a proper floor, as it was quite irregularly shaped and did not extend up to the west face of wall 1222.  Since the fill above and below it was very similar in composition and in date (Late Roman 5th century, based on pottery), this surface was probably a work surface that was used as a place from which to dump more material.  It could have become compacted through heavy foot traffic or after being exposed to the elements during a hiatus in the fill operation.  In any case, more fill was soon deposited on top of it (context 1226; see Larson and Meyer’s report for a description of the later 6th century fills in this area). ; ; What could have prompted so many filling operations?  There was clearly a need to raise the ground level in this area sometime during the 5th century.  As Larson and Meyer have proposed in their report, the fills may have been related to the construction or reconstruction of feature 742, a well or manhole.  We could find no evidence in previous notebooks of Late Roman surfaces constructed on top of these fills in our area, but this does not mean that such surfaces never existed – they may have been disturbed or disrupted by later Byzantine and medieval activity in the area.  ; ; Suggestions for future excavators; ; Time constraints prevented us from fully excavating all of the Late Roman dump fill in this area.  However, removing more of this fill would allow future excavators to determine the extent of the packed earth surfaces that we began to expose below deposits 1233 and 1247 and to ascertain whether these represent work surfaces or more permanent and earlier structures.  It would be interesting to see if the pebble and tile floors (probably of Early to Middle Roman date) that were exposed by Larson and Meyer on the east side of wall 1222 continue to the west of it.  Such information could tell us more about the use of space in this area before the fifth century dump operation.  Further excavation of the deposits laid against wall 1222 would also clarify the stratigraphy in this area and give a more precise idea of the date of the wall’s construction.","","Session 3, 2013, Pink Team, Nezi Field North","","","","Corinth:Report:Nezi Field 2013 by Grace Erny and Emily Joy (2013-06-22 to 2013-06-23)","Nezi Field 2013 by Grace Erny and Emily Joy (2013-06-22 to 2013-06-23)","Corinthia | Ancient Corinth | Central Area | Nezi Field","",""
"Report","Corinth","","Nezi 2013 Season; Session 2 Final Report; Kyle Jazwa; Hilary Lehmann; N 1011.50-1017.49; E 259.60-269.70; 23 May 2013; ; This is the final report for the second session of excavation at Nezi, 2013. Guy Sanders (director) and Rossana Valente (field director) supervised. The excavation team of this session consisted of Kyle Jazwa and Hilary Lehmann (recorders), Panos Kakouros and Tasos Tsogas (pickmen), and Vassilis Kollias (shovelman). Our excavation area encompassed the area between walls 1007, 918, 945 and pit 870 in the first half of the session (hereafter referred to as “South Section”). During the third week, our efforts focused on the quadrant north of 918 and west of W5218 (bounded by the Turkish building) (hereafter referred to as “Northwestern Quadrant”). Our excavation goals are to elucidate the stratigraphy of these areas and the function of the architectural features. With this, we hoped to find uncontaminated habitation levels that would help us to determine the chronology of human interaction in this area.  ; ; Previous excavation in this area was undertaken predominantly by Session 1, Mohammed Bhatti and Dan Diffendale, and some contexts by Session 1, Jana Mokrisova and Katherine Harrington. During Session 1, a series of surfaces, cut and fills were uncovered that can be dated from the Late Roman (4th-6th c. CE) to the Byzantine period (8th-12th c. CE). The state of the trench at the beginning of Session 2 included a possible cut (filled by context 1009) in the SE, the partial exposure of the top surface of walls 1007 and 866, and pit 870. The eastern half of the trench was relatively level though not homogenous. The western half retained the mortar foundation of a hearth 1065, a lower level under 1078, an ashy surface under 1083 and a slightly raised area under 1084. In the Northwestern Quadrant, there was heavy disturbance by 1960s and 1970s excavation, the results and details of which are not preserved. Session one fully revealed the tile drain 1026 and a series of partial surfaces and uneven contexts under 1050, 1060, and 1061.; ; Because of the nature of the depositional material and the heavy pitting and dumping, we were unable to identify discrete chronological phases in this section. Significantly, there was not a single continuous or uncontaminated surface. Instead, our excavation revealed a series of dump fills of destruction and non-destruction debris and several pits and robbing trenches. Due to the notable absence of distinct chronological phases, we will present our material in relative chronological order. The South Section and the Northwestern Quadrant are separated by architectural feature W918 and we, therefore, cannot to discern the precise relationship between the contexts in each area. For this reason, we will present each material separately. Furthermore, excavation of the South Section was begun with a clear distinction in soil and contexts between the east and western side. Thus, the exact relative chronology between the two sides cannot be determined, despite appearing to be roughly contemporary (Late Roman). As a result, we will present each “side” with a separate subsection.   ; ; South Section – April 29-May 10 (259.80; 269.70 E | 1011.50; 1014.30 N); ; East Side; The earliest deposit excavated in the East Side is 1100. Although we originally believed 1101 cut the fill of 1100, excavation of 1101 revealed the deposit associated with context 1100 continuing under 1101. 1100 was a tile-rich and clayey deposit. It contained a dense mix of pottery, fragments of painted plaster, early roman lamps, pebble pavement and some bronze and iron. The mixed content of the deposit suggests 1100 was a dump fill. 1101 was dumped in the western portion of the fill. This context is relatively better sorted than 1100. It has fewer cobbles and tiles and is more compact and light than 1101. Despite the ostensibly different quality of soil, the ceramics found within the context point to a similar approximate 1st c. CE date as 1101. In spite of this low ceramic date (we must stress that neither context provides a precise date), these two contexts must date to the fifth c CE date because they partially overly C1106-1108 – three layers firmly dated to the Late Roman period. The appearance of Early Bronze burnished pottery and other earlier sherds, suggest a thorough mixing of the deposit.; ; Immediately superimposed over 1100 and 1101 was a dump fill, context 1099. This fill was a dark reddish brown color and very loose. It contained a moderate amount of pebbles, small cobbles and other finds. The finds are very mixed and include assorted painted plasters, iron nails, glass fragments, a lamp and a fragment of a terracotta animal figurine (as MF 10733). Further suggestive of a mixed debris deposit, the pottery was very mixed (Neolithic? bowl, Geometric skyphos) and contained little to no joins. ; ; There were three cuts into the deposit of 1099. C1098 initially appeared to be the foundation trench for wall 1007. Upon completion of the excavation of the fill of this cut (1097), it became apparent that the wall continued beneath the soil. 1097 was a dark and clayey soil with a few fragments of wall plaster, a terracotta draped female figurine, pebbles and tiles. The pottery consists of a varied collection of Roman and pre-Roman sherds; there is nothing of significance to provide a fixed date of the context, but stratigraphically it can be dated to the fifth c CE. C1096 and C1094 were two roughly rectangular cuts appx. 15 cm deep in the N portion of 1099. Too little pottery was recovered to provide any information relevant to the dating of the cuts. In the fill of 1094 (1093) was a large piece of wall plaster and a terracotta figurine with a high hair-bun (similar to MF 9001?). The fill of 1096 (1095) contained only two pre-Roman sherds. 1096 was roughly round in shape and was similar to a secondary depression in the SW corner of 1094 (and approximately level with each other). It was originally hypothesized that these were possible post holes. However, the shallow depth of the cut (ca. 15 cm) mitigates against this.; ; Immediately overlying context 1099 is deposit 1092, a relatively homogenous deposit of firm yellowish brown soil. In it were found plenty of plaster, ceramics, bones, carbonized wood, several iron nail fragments, worked obsidian and flint, and a figurine with a right hand preserved. Above 1092 were two distinct dump fills, 1091 and 1090. 1091 was a dense and dark tile and cobble filled area with sigillata and arretine pottery. Accompanying the pottery are nine pieces of iron, two pieces of glass slag, a fragment of a terracotta figurine of a child cradled in a disembodied arm (similar to MF-4106) and a black glaze lamp. 1090 was lighter and looser than 1091 and appears to have been deposited after 1090. Despite the soil difference relative to 1091, the inclusions within the fill are relatively similar. This includes several pieces of iron, glass, pebble flooring, wall plaster and a dark reddish-glazed lamp with raised cross-and-dot circle pattern (similar to Broneer XIX) (L2013-3). The pottery contains a Late Roman combed ware amphora with a wavy comb pattern.  This provides a terminus post quem for the deposit. Because neither deposit 1090 or 1091 can be precisely dated, they must be dated stratigraphically. Overlying 1092, they must post-date the Late Roman period - fifth c CE.; ; Immediately to the W of wall 1007, a hard rectangular surface was excavated. This context, 1088, contained a compact yellowish brown fill. Initially, we thought this context might be a pit, but it turned out to be a relatively shallow dump fill over 1092. There was relatively little pottery recovered.; ; In addition to the excavation area outlined in the first paragraph, a small context on top of the south portion of 1007 and between walls 1007 and 866 was excavated, 1089. This was done to reveal the southern extent of 1007. This fill appears to be mixed with some iron and plaster. The pottery was non-distinct and unable to provide a firm date. Of note, however, was the base of an Attic-type black gloss skyphos inscribed on the foot (C2013-10) and a lead “star” with a hole in the center. Through the excavation of this area, we could determine that W1007 was robbed in the south. This robbing was replaced by an E-W wall of small cobbles (W845), faced by slightly larger stones.; ; West Side; The earliest deposit excavated on the western part of our area (1111) was a dump fill consisting of dark, sandy soil filled with substantial pieces of tile and plaster, as well as other assorted debris such as charcoal, glass, iron, and part of a terra cotta figurine. At about the same time as this deposit, a smaller dump fill, deposit 1112, was deposited slightly to the west, which contained far fewer inclusions and consisted of a siltier soil than that of 1111. Beneath these two deposits, the entire area bounded by Pit 870 and Walls 945, 918, and 1007 was covered with a dense layer of dark-yellowish clayey soil which was, however, too irregular to be classified as a surface.; Into this layer was cut a pit, C1110, which contained deposit 1109. The pit was bounded to the south by Wall 945 and had a sheer vertical face to the East with more sloping faces to the north and west. Its dimensions were 1.7 x 1.4 x .86 m. and its depth was 0.65 m. The bottom of the pit sloped downwards to the south with a 0.20 m. difference between its highest and lowest points. Before this pit was filled, about 6-8 courses of Wall 945 were revealed: although this was not visible before the pit was originally cut, the wall is built up of alternating levels of roughly ashlar stones and tile leveling courses. The construction of the pit also revealed the NE corner of Wall 945—its finished face suggests that the wall may continue to the South. The SW wall of the pit cut through a surface of packed clayey soil, about 0.54 m. from the surface. Perhaps this surface represents a habitation level.; ; The fill of this pit consisted of dark red soil with a high percentage of tile, brick, and mortar inclusions, probably refuse from the destruction of a nearby architectural feature. Providing a terminus post quem for the fill is a coin of Constantius (337-361 c CE; 2013-168) and the pottery which yielded many interesting example of Late Roman (mid fifth c. CE) ceramics, including an LR C bowl, a type 77 Niederbieber, a bowl as Hesperia 2005 1-32 and a LR bowl as Hesperia 2005 242. The highest proportion of plaster inclusions was located in the deeper parts of the pit. The east face of the pit showed that this area was repeatedly spread with debris containing tile, pebbles, and other such inclusions. And this behavior continued: the interaction of people with this environment during the periods we are focusing on seem to have primarily consisted of depositing fill after fill of debris into this area. ; ; At some time after pit 1110 was filled, a series of discrete but related deposits were laid on top of it: these are deposits 1106, 1107, and 1108. The earliest of these is 1108, which is a small, shallow deposit just north of Wall 945 and west of deposit 1101. The chronological relationship between deposits 1108 and 1101 is unclear. Deposit 1108 consisted of dark, silty earth; although it had somewhat fewer ceramic and tile inclusions than other deposits at the same elevation, it did contain a great number of fragments of marble revetment in purple and white. Perhaps contemporary with deposit 1108, although the relative chronology is not understood exactly, is deposit 1107, a slightly larger context 0.5 meters to the west of 1108. The soil of this deposit is the same as that of 1108, but the types of items included in this fill are quite different. Notably, this deposit included several pieces of glass, including one waster which suggests that glass may have been manufactured nearby. A terracotta sima, decorated with a spiral pattern and painted red, was deposited with this context, as well as one coin possibly of Valentinian (337-361 CE; 2013-166).; ; After the deposition of 1107 and 1108, a darker, a debris layer was placed between and partially above them—this is deposit 1106. In this context was deposited a large amount of pottery, some nails, plaster, and glass, and, again, several pieces of marble revetment. One interesting item placed in this context is a fragment of a terracotta figurine of a person holding a baby (MF2013-11). A coin of Constantius II (346-350 CE) was also placed in this deposit (2013-165). ; ; To the west of deposits 1106-1108 and probably contemporaneous with them is a large deposit of debris, 1105. This deposit was bounded by pit 870 to the west (its chronological relationship to the pit is unknown) and by Walls 918 and 945 to the north and south. The soil in this area is much redder than that found in deposits 1106-1108 and resembles more closely the soil of deposit 1109, the fill of pit 1110. Deposit 1105 is very large and rich: there was a large number of ceramic and tile inclusions and a great quantity of glass fragments placed in this context. The pottery can be dated roughly to the fifth c. CE based on several fragments of Late Roman type 1 and 2 amphoras, As in the neighboring deposits, there is a good deal of painted wall plaster and marble revetment in this context, as well as a large (0.515 x 0.29 x 0.11 m) piece of pebble pavement. Also placed in this deposit were two loom weights, several iron nails, and 6 coins (2013-157, 159-164) all with a late fourth c CE date. These coins include a coin of Valentinian (388-392 CE; 2013-164) and a Constantius with Victory (337-361 CE; 2013-157). A good amount of plant matter was deposited in this context, including burned seeds and wood. The deposit overall is characterized by its ashiness in addition to the redness of its soil, which may be composed of disintegrated mudbrick.; ; Beneath 1106-1108 and to the east of 1105 is context 1103, which is made up of loose, yellowish, silty soil and debris similar to that found in 1105. A large quantity of pottery was placed in this layer, including a corrugated basin that joins a fragment in 1107, an Agora M234 amphora, an eastern Aegean cookpot as Hesperia 2005, 2-34.  In addition, there were several pieces of marble revetment and pebble pavement, a fair amount of glass, a loom weight, painted plaster, and iron nails. Also present in this deposit were three large pieces of plaster flooring and the base of a marble vessel. Only one coin (2013-155) was deposited in this context; interestingly, it was placed at the far western edge of the area, directly contiguous to the outline of deposit 1105. This coin has a head of an emperor on the obverse and with the legend VOTMULT on the reverse, a typical late fourth c CE design. Despite the similarities between 1103 and 1105, however, they should be considered as discrete because the ash that is found throughout 1105 is not present in 1103. The context, however, should be considered another dump fill similar to 1106-1108, due to the join with 1107 and the variegated mix of architectural elements.; ; On top of context 1105 and to the north was placed deposit 1104, a small and extremely ashy layer. ; Very few ceramics or other small items were included in this deposit, although one coin was placed among the debris (2013-156). However, a significant amount of charred plant matter is present in the context. Although both 1105 and 1104 contained a high percentage of ash, the evidence shows that neither was itself a destruction layer. To the south of 1104, a yellowish, silty deposit was placed on top of 1105. This deposit, 1102, contained some mid-fifth CE pottery, several pieces of glass, iron nails, a coin of emperor Arcadius ca. 383-392 CE (2013-151) and some wall plaster. On top of 1102, hearth 1065 was built, a structure associated with the surface 1093.; ; The final report of the 2013 session 1 Pink Team suggested that beneath 1083 and the adjacent dump fill 1084 a real destruction layer might be found. However, despite the presence of a great deal of ash in deposits 1104 and 1105, this destruction layer has not yet been identified. ; ; Northwest Quadrant – May 13-17 (259.60; 268.00 E | 1014.80; 1017.50 N); ; This area was brought to a roughly even level by Session 1 excavations, with a few raised contexts in the eastern portion. The northern portion of this area was heavily pitted and disturbed by the 1960/1970s excavation. In the west, a ca. 0.5 m wide extension protruded north on which a tile drain was built (1026; the cut for the drain is 1119, and it is filled with 1118). The leveling fill under this trench contained early Roman pottery of the 3rd-4th c CE date, thus providing a terminus post quem. Of note is the extremely dense concentration of painted wall plaster found herein. The debris from the destruction of a wall (or several) was clearly used for the fill of this leveling area. This extension still remains and is not fully excavated. Immediately to the west is a much later robbing trench.; ; The earliest deposit in this section is wall 1123. This wall was discovered at the bottom of robbing trench C1122. This wall is comprised of squared limestone blocks in ashlar masonry and appears to proceed under wall 918. A few blocks of this wall are found in pit 870: it appears that the corner of the wall is revealed, turning east. Directly under wall 918, a second course is preserved. We did not full excavate this wall or its foundation trench, so it is impossible to provide a firm date for this wall as of yet.  ; ; Wall 918 was constructed sometime thereafter (likely much later, in the Roman period). The foundation of the wall was revealed in the robbing trenches of C1122 and C1127 and is comprised of a heavy tile and ceramic inclusions. Wall 1123 was likely still above the surface at the time of the construction of wall 918. We know this because the walls of C1117 slope upwards to wall 918 and to the hypothetical face of wall 1123 and the hypothetical wall that was robbed in C1127. The robbing trench is equal in dimension and orientated the same way as C1122. Sometime thereafter, C1117 was filled with contexts 1115-1116 (1116 was a martyr left to make sure 1115 would not be contaminated from the accumulation in the 1960/1970s excavation pit immediately to the north).  1115 is a compact, clayey layer rife with pottery, metal fragments, several shards of glass, wall plaster and three coins. Although two of the three coins are illegible (2013-173; 2013-174), 2013-175 was a particularly well preserved silver coin of Mark Antony (ca. 32-31 BC). The coin has a galley steered by Victory on the obverse and three legionary standards (including the Aquila) with LEG II indicated on the reverse. The pottery in the fill suggests a 4th c CE date with several sherds of African Red Slip pottery and a Niederbieber. Two distinct strata were then superimposed on top of this: 1114 and 1113. Although there is a discernible soil change between these three layers, the nature of the finds is consistent between them.; ; The eastern portion of the quadrant is also covered by 1160/1161, but its deposition history cannot be defined in relation to the western portion with precision because C1127 separates it from the tile drain and C1117. However, the eastern portion under 1160/1161 (context 1129) is cut by C1127. Thus, we can say that the deposition of these layers pre-dates the cut and robbing of the hypothetical ashlar wall in C1127. ; ; 1135 represents the earliest level in the eastern portion of the northwest quadrant. It is a surface that was partially exposed and partially uncovered by the excavation of 1129-1134. Overlying 1135, 1133 and 1134 are possible pieces of earthen floor with flattened pottery (1133 has a broken amphora on surface) and some small pebbles. Although the deposit contains pottery suggestive of an early Roman 1-2nd c CE date, the contexts were so small that no precise date can be assigned to these floors. Similarly, 1132 was a raised triangular fill with a small assortment of Roman sherds overlaying the western portion of 1135. Because 1132 was such a small context, no diagnostic finds were able to help provide a date for the layer. A narrow trench along wall W5218 (similar and shape in form to C1098) cuts both 1132 and 1135 (and thus necessarily postdates both deposits). The fill of this (1130), is dated to Middle-Late Roman based on the pottery, including a Late Roman bowl (after Hesperia 2005, 243) and a late fourth c CE coin of Constantius (2013-182). 1133 and 134 were overlain by 1129, a dump fill of an imprecisely-dated Late Roman period. The layer contains fragments of marble revetment, a late second c. CE coin of Commodus (2013-181) and a fragment of a marble column.  ; ; Under 1060/1061, but necessarily postdating 1129 and 1113, are the cuts 1122 and 1127.  Although the relationship between the cuts cannot be precisely ascertained, it is likely that they were robbing trenches of two parallel ashlar walls. As stated explained above, these cuts postdate C1117. Because the foundation trench for W918 was not found within the cuts and because C1117’s wall of soil slopes up the face of W918 (and C1117 predates C1122 and C1127), wall 918 must necessarily have been in place at the time of the robbing of the two ashlar walls. The fill of these trenches appear to be of the mid-fifth c CE date. 1121 (fill of C1122) has one 11th c. CE sherd, but this is likely a contamination from the 1960/1970s excavations. Additional 5th c. CE pottery includes a Late Roman bowl, stewpot and a Niederbieber. The inclusions of the fill are rather heterogeneous and include a loomweight with a GLYK stamp (cf. Corinth XII no. 1153), a late 6th c. BCE loomweight (profile IV), much marble revetment, bronze, and an early coin. 1123-1125 were the fills of 1127 and is similarly heterogenous. It is filled mostly with pottery (mid fifth c CE), tile, and architectural revetments.; ; Conclusions and Future Study; ; Our excavations this session failed to produce any discernible or continuous floors or architectural features. Instead, we excavated a series of Late Roman dump fills and pits. Because of this, there is a distinct lack of evidence for definite habitation phases in the area. With the rampant pitting and looting of the area, however, we were able to catch a glimpse at the underlying layers via the profile of C1127 and pits 1110 and 870. Within both, we could see no distinct floor levels. For at least a meter in each instance, the deposition appears to be dump fill after dump fill. The only possible exception can be found in the pits south of W918 (C870 and C1110). In both pits, we were able to distinguish flat lying pebble flooring set in concrete. At some point, it was suggested that this might indicate a possible floor level that seals off pre-Roman material in the area. We took the elevation of both floor fragments, however, and there was a 14 cm discrepancy between the two pieces of flooring. Either there was a strong slope to the floor or the appearance of the two pieces of pebble flooring is merely coincidence.; ; Because of the dearth of clear floor levels or other habitation surfaces in the area, it might be wise to continue future excavations in the area to the east of wall 1007. Perhaps with luck, this area may yield distinct phasings or surfaces. In our immediate excavation area, however, one could test the possibility of the pebble floor ca. 0.5 m under the current excavation level. If such a surface does exist, it would provide a very useful starting point with which to examine early Roman and Hellenistic habitation in this area with it effectively sealing off these earlier layers from much of the later contamination and fills.","","Sesssion 2, Nezi Field, Final Report","","","","Corinth:Report:Nezi Field 2013 by Kyle Jazwa Hilary Lehmann (2013-04-29 to 2013-05-17)","Nezi Field 2013 by Kyle Jazwa; Hilary Lehmann (2013-04-29 to 2013-05-17)","Corinthia | Ancient Corinth | Central Area | Nezi Field","",""