Butrint 4: The Archaeology and Histories of an Ionian Town (Butrint Archaeological Monographs) 1842174622, 9781842174623

Table of contents :
Cover
Title Page
Copyright Page
Contents
Preface and acknowledgements
Chapter 1: Excavating away the ‘poison’: the topographic history of Butrint, ancient Buthrotum
Chapter 2: Landscape and environmental change: new perspectives
Chapter 3: Butrint and the Pavllas River Valley in the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age
Chatper 4: The acropolis of Butrint reassessed
Chapter 5: The aqueduct of Butrint
Chapter 6: The Roman Bridge of Butrint
Chapter 7: Roman sculpture from Butrint: a reviewof recent finds
Chapter 8: The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries
Chatper 9: Two Roman mausolea on the Vrina Plain
Chapter 10: The western cemetery: archaeological survey of Roman tombs along the Vivari Channel
Chapter 11: The Great Basilica: a reassessment
Chapter 12: The medieval church and cemetery at the Well of Junia Rufina
Chapter 13: The Western Defences
Appendix: The glass from Tower 1 in the Western Defences
Chapter 14: Material boundaries: the city walls at Butrint
Chapter 15: Late Venetian Butrint: 16th–18th centuries
Chapter 16: The Castle of Ali Pasha at Butrint
Chatper 17: Archaeologists as placemakers: making the Butrint National Park
List of photographers and illustrators
Index
Plates

Citation preview

BUTRINT 4 The archaeology and histories of an ionian town

Butrint Archaeological Monographs

BUTRINT 4

The archaeology and histories of an ionian town

Inge Lyse Hansen, Richard Hodges and Sarah Leppard

OXBOW BOOKS FOR THE BUTRINT FOUNDATION Oxbow Books

Oxford and Oakville

Published by Oxbow Books, Oxford, UK © Oxbow Books, Inge Lyse Hansen, Richard Hodges, Sarah Leppard and the individual authors 2013 ISBN 978-1-84217-462-3

This book is available direct from Oxbow Books, Oxford, UK (Phone: 01865-241249; Fax: 01865-794449) and The David Brown Book Company PO Box 511, Oakville, CT 06779, USA (Phone: 860-945-9329; Fax: 860-945-9468) or from our website www.oxbowbooks.com A CIP record is available for this book from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Butrint 4 : the archaeology and histories of an Ionian town / [edited by] Inge Lyse Hansen, Richard Hodges and Sarah Leppard. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-84217-462-3 1. Butrint (Albania)--Antiquities. 2. Excavations (Archaeology)--Albania--Butrint. 3. Butrint (Albania)--History. I. Hansen, Inge Lyse. II. Hodges, Richard. III. Leppard, Sarah. IV. Title: Butrint four. DR998.B88B88 2012 939’.465--dc23 2012030401

Front cover: View of Butrint, Lake Butrint (right) and the Straits of Corfu (rear) Back cover: Details of objects and images from Butrint: 13th-century RMR ware dish; 2nd-century togate statue; 11th-century Benno brooch; 18th-century Venetian map; 1980s inscription; 10th-century silver earrings; 5th/6th-century mosaic pavement Printed in Great Britain by Short Run Press, Exeter

To the memory of Sarah Jennings (1947–2009)

Butrint Archaeological Monograph Series: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999 Richard Hodges, William Bowden and Kosta Lako Roman Butrint: An Assessment Inge Lyse Hansen and Richard Hodges Butrint 3: Excavations at the Triconch Palace William Bowden and Richard Hodges Butrint 4: The Archaeology and Histories of an Ionian Town Inge Lyse Hansen, Richard Hodges and Sarah Leppard

Contents

Preface and acknowledgements

ix

1 Excavating away the ‘poison’: the topographic history of Butrint, ancient Buthrotum Richard Hodges

1

2 Landscape and environmental change: new perspectives David Bescoby

22

3 Butrint and the Pavllas River Valley in the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age Sarah Lima

31

4 The acropolis of Butrint reassessed Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue

47

5 The aqueduct of Butrint Andrew Wilson

77

6 The Roman Bridge of Butrint Sarah Leppard

97

7 Roman sculpture from Butrint: a review of recent finds Inge Lyse Hansen

105

8 The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries Simon Greenslade

123

9 Two Roman mausolea on the Vrina Plain Oliver J. Gilkes, Valbona Hysa and Dhimitër Çondi with a contribution by Inge Lyse Hansen

165

10 The western cemetery: archaeological survey of Roman tombs along the Vivari Channel David R. Hernandez and John Mitchell

182

11 The Great Basilica: a reassessment Nevila Molla

202

12 The medieval church and cemetery at the Well of Junia Rufina Alessandro Sebastiani, Dawn Gooney, John Mitchell, Pagona Papadopoulou, Paul Reynolds, Emanuele Vaccaro and Joanita Vroom

215

viii

Contents

13 The Western Defences Solinda Kamani Appendix: The glass from Tower 1 in the Western Defences Sarah Jennings and Karen Stark

245

14 Material boundaries: the city walls at Butrint Nevila Molla, Maria Francesca Paris and Francesco Venturini

260

15 Late Venetian Butrint: 16th–18th centuries Siriol Davies

280

16 The Castle of Ali Pasha at Butrint José C. Carvajal and Ana Palanco

289

17 Archaeologists as placemakers: making the Butrint National Park Richard Hodges

309

List of photographers and illustrators Index Plates

323 325 331

257

Preface and acknowledgements

We may agree that ancient history is often used to be too urban in outlook, but what is needed now is not paradox or exaggeration but a balanced approach which recognizes the crucial element that towns represented – even in the Bronze Age Mediterranean and certainly later. William Harris This volume brings together seventeen studies of Butrint from its Bronze Age origins until its present success as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Butrint, ancient Buthrotum, sits at the crossroads of the Mediterranean. It is tucked off to the east side of the Straits of Corfu, directly opposite Corfu’s mountainous north coast. ‘Corfu lies like a sickle beside the flanks of the mainland’, Lawrence Durrell reminds us in The Greek Islands, ‘forming a great calm bay, which narrows at both ends so that the tides are squeezed and calmed as they pass it.’ From this extraordinary setting, Butrint commands the sea-routes up the Adriatic Sea to Venice, across to Sicily and Spain, and south through the Ionian Sea to the Aegean. Like ancient Dyrrhachium (Epidamnus in the 7th century BC; modern Durrës) to the north, it also controlled a passage into the mountainous Balkan interior. Here began a route to Thessalonika and, beyond, Constantinople. Each of the studies in this collection illustrates the importance of studying a Mediterranean town not just for its celebrated moments in time but also for those periods when it was reduced to little more than fortified fishing-traps. Our aim has been to review all aspects of the archaeology and history, paying special importance to its long history as a fortified port and its significance as a gateway into a fertile micro-region reaching up as far as the inland town of Konispol. Each of these reports aims also to situate the archaeology not within a national framework but within the broader arena of Mediterranean studies. The authors and editors are particularly grateful to Lord Rothschild and Lord Sainsbury of Preston Candover, who established the Butrint Foundation in 1993, and with great determination have sustained it. We owe a special debt to Dr. David Packard, President of the Packard Humanities

Institute, for his singular support in a partnership with the Butrint Foundation. Our thanks, too, to other supporters of these excavations: in particular, Dame Drue Heinz of the Drue Heinz Trust, the David and Lucille Packard Foundation, and the World Monuments Fund. We also wish to acknowledge a grant from the British Academy for the 1994 season. The conservation and presentation of the excavated site in 2005 was made possible by support from the Howard and Nancy Marks Family Fund. A grant from John Cabot University covered image reproduction fees for this volume. We are especially indebted to Sir Patrick Fairweather, formerly British ambassador to Albania (1992–96), and from 1997–2004, the Director of the Butrint Foundation. Thanks, too, to Daniel Renton, Director of the Foundation between 2004–6 who oversaw the conservation and presentation of the Triconch Palace; to Rupert Smith, Director of the Foundation during 2007–8; and to Brian Ayers, Director during 2008–2012. Our thanks to Iris Pojani and Diana Ndrenika successive Directors of the International Centre for Albanian Archaeology, now the Albanian Heritage Foundation, in Tirana. Thanks also to our Albanian colleagues: Lorenc Bejko, Neritan Ceka, Ylli Cerova, Dhimitër Çondi, Reshad Gega, Ilir Gjipali, Shpresa Gjongecaj, Gjerak Karaskaj, Telemark Llakhana, Etleva Nallbani, Guri Pani and Artan Shkrelli. Finally, we owe a special debt to the Director of the Institute of Archaeology during the course of these excavations, Professor Muzafer Korkuti. We are grateful to the many institutions that have grated permission to reproduce images: the Albanian Heritage Foundation; the Archivio di Stato di Venezia; the Arheološki muzej Narona; the Österreichisches



Preface

Staatsarchiv, Kriegsarchiv, as well as to the Taddei family archive, the Museo della Civiltà Romana and the Instituti i Arkeologjisë for their invaluable, long-term support. The project began with the support of the British School at Rome, where Maria Pia Malvezzi and Tommaso Astolfi played an instrumental role in the early years. Since 1996 it has formed part of the research programme of the Institute of World Archaeology in the University of East Anglia, Norwich. Richard Hodges and John Mitchell made the initial visit in 1993 with Gjergj Saraçi, Kosta Lako and Astrid Nanaj at the invitation of Professor Namik Bodinaku, then Director of the Institute of Archaeology, and with the support and encouragement of Lord Rothschild and Lord Sainsbury of Preston Candover of the Butrint Foundation as well as Sir Patrick Fairweather, then British ambassador to Albania. Richard Hodges and Gjergj Saraçi served as co-directors of the Butrint Foundation project from 1994–96; and Richard Hodges and Kosta Lako with Ilir Gjipali were codirectors from 1998–99. Richard Hodges and Ilir Gjipali were co-directors from 2000–2010. The field seasons were: September 1994; April 1995; September–October 1995; April 1996; September 1996; and September 1998. The September–October 1999 season was devoted to studying the finds. There then followed eleven major seasons of excavations: April–May 2000; June–July 2001; June–July and September–October 2002; April–July 2003; May–July 2004; June–July 2005; June–July 2006; June–July 2007; June–July 2008 being primarily a finds season; and May– July 2009. Sally Martin acted as project manager of the 1994–2003 seasons; Louise Schofield project managed the 2004 season, Andrew Crowson the 2005–2010 seasons. Site photography was by James Barclay-Brown, Steve Diehl, Brian Donovan, Alket Islami, Martin Smith and Massimo Zanfini, as well as the Butrint Foundation team. Site conservation and presentation of all the excavated remains within Butrint and on the outer-lying sites since 2005 was masterminded by Daniel Renton; the conservation of the monuments was led by Rene Rice and Albana Hakani, with on site conservation of the mosaics by Jacques Neguer and Elda Omari. The illustrative panels around Butrint were made by Studio Inklink of Florence. A small army of excavators took part in these projects. Special thanks should go to David Bescoby, Peter Crawley,

Oliver Gilkes, Emily Glass, Simon Greenslade, Benen Hayden, Charlotte Hodges, Valbona Hoxha, Valbona Hysa, Solinda Kamani, Sarah Leppard, Sarah Lima, Matthew Logue, Sinoida Martallozi, Nevila Molla, Jerry O’Dwyer, John Percival, Erjona Qilla, Alessandro Sebastiani and Riley Thorne. The processing of the finds was managed by David Boschi and Inge Lyse Hansen, and in 2008–9 by Sarah Leppard, assisted by Ilir Papa, Blerina Shametaj, Liri Shametaj and Sabina Veseli. Pippa Pearce masterminded the finds conservation. Finds photography and illustration was undertaken by James Barclay-Brown, Patricia Caprino, Michael Grayley, Adelheid Heil, Julia Jarrett and Martin Smith. Paul Reynolds has studied the Roman pottery and Joanita Vroom has studied the medieval ceramics. Sarah Jennings has been responsible for glass, and John Mitchell for the small finds. The Hellenistic and Roman coins have been studied by Richard Abdy, Shpresa Gjongecaj and Sam Moorhead, and the Byzantine and Medieval coins by Pagona Papadopoulou. The Butrint Physical Anthropology Project was led by Todd Fenton. Adrienne Powell managed all the faunal remains. John Giorgi reviewed the palaeobotaical evidence, and David Bescoby provided assistance with the geomorphology and issues relating to seismic episodes. Management of the team’s accommodation and daily routine was overseen by Gjoni Marko from 2001–5. Mention should also be made of tireless Muzafer Lazë, our driver and general factotum. To all these friends and collaborators who worked we extend our warmest, heart-felt thanks. Finally, this book is dedicated to the memory of the late Sarah Jennings, a friend and colleague on this project for a decade, and a friend to one of the editors for nearly forty years. Sarah was a consummate professional, working systematically through the exceptional collection of glass fragments from the many episodes in the long history of this Ionian town. Her presence and her knowledge are sorely missed by all of us.

References Durrell, L. (1978) The Greek Islands. London, Thames and Hudson. Harris, W. V. (2005) Rethinking the Mediterranean. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

HUNGARY

SLOVENIA CROATIA

ROMANIA

BOSNIA HERZEGOVINA ITALY

SERBIA

MONTENEGRO

BULGARIA KOSOVO

ADRIATIC SEA

THE REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA ALBANIA TURKEY GREECE

IONIAN SEA

Saranda Butrint Corfu

IONIAN SEA 0

AEGEAN SEA

Igoumenitsa

MEDITERRANEAN SEA

50 km

Fig. 0.1. The location of Butrint in the Mediterranean

MACEDONIA

ITALY Apollonia

Brundisium (Brindisi)

Byllis Aulon

ALBANIA

Otranto

Phoenice Onchesmos (Saranda) Butrint

GREECE Dodona

Corcyra (Corfu)

Ambracia Nicopolis

Ionian Sea Kephallonia Dyme

0

100 km

Zakynthus

Fig. 0.2. The location of Butrint in the Ionian Sea

Patras

Ksamil peninsula Lake Butrint

Diaporit

Kalivo

Mount Sotira Butrint Vivari Channel

Shën Dimitri

Vrina Plain Shën Dëlli Bay of Butrint

Vrina Xarra

Cape Stillo

Ko

Pav raf

llas

iH

ills

Riv

er

Fig. 0.3. Butrint and its hinterland

0

2 km

1  Excavating away the ‘poison’: the topographic history of Butrint, ancient Buthrotum Richard Hodges

Modern history was born in the nineteenth century, conceived and developed as an instrument of European nationalism. As a tool of nationalist ideology, the history of Europe’s nations was a great success, but it has turned our understanding of the past into a toxic waste dump, filled with the poison of ethnic nationalism, and the poison has seeped deep into popular consciousness. Clearing up this waste is the most daunting challenge facing historians today. Patrick Geary1 Inhabited since prehistoric times, Butrint has been the site of a Greek colony, a Roman city and a bishopric. Following a period of prosperity under Byzantine administration, then a brief occupation by the Venetians, the city was abandoned in the late Middle Ages after marshes formed in the area. UNESCO World Heritage List: Butrint2

The UNESCO World Heritage Site of Butrint for much of its recent history has been a subject of nationalist interpretation.3 Dissect UNESCO’s 1992 inscription, as we shall do later in this chapter, and it is clear that the World Heritage Centre imbibed the ‘poison’ Patrick Geary describes as a trait of nationalism. Little interest has been expressed by this global arbiter in Butrint’s larger Mediterranean context. Instead, UNESCO, following closely the largely nationalist conclusions drawn by Italian, Greek and Albanian archaeologists, focussed upon its location and apparent continuous history in terms of the contemporary texts associated with it.4 These texts have been deployed to define it as Greek, Roman, Christian, Byzantine, and briefly Venetian, omitting an Ottoman presence altogether. It might be exaggerated to describe this as a toxic history (to use Geary’s term), but the Butrint Foundation excavations made between 1994–2009 show that the changing topographic character of the site differs markedly from its reduction to a place of enduring occupation until the environment contributed significantly towards terminating town life. As we shall see, Butrint for much of its history belonged to the wider conditions of the Adriatic Sea (Fig.1.1). More specifically, it was either an outlier on the Epirote coast of Corfiot interests or a stronghold on the Straits of Corfu deliberately challenging Corfiot interests. This much was in evidence when Butrint and Cape Styllo to the immediate south were unexpectedly apportioned to the new republic of Albania in August 1913 at the Treaty of London after the Great Powers succumbed to aggressive Italian diplomatic

pressure and agreed that the Straits of Corfu, being of such crucial strategic importance, should not be controlled by one nation state, Greece, but by two: Albania (on the Epirote side) and Greece (on the Corfiot side).5 This decision in the summer of 1913 inadvertently created a historical place for Butrint. First, it was isolated in a no-man’s land on the southern border of the new republic of Albania in a largely Greek-speaking territory, then since 1992, in post-communist times, Butrint has established a renewed relationship with Corfu insofar as tourists from the Greek island, mostly on day tours, provide significant income to Albania’s premier UNESCO World Heritage Site. The Butrint Foundation project, launched in 1993 (and in the field in 1994), described in this volume took its point of departure from the previous studies of Butrint, principally the 1928–40 Italian mission and the post-war socialist excavations. These earlier excavations, as is discussed below, were undertaken with explicit nationalist motives. No less significantly, large areas within Butrint were excavated by teams of workmen but very little of the excavated evidence was reported upon.6 Almost no stratigraphic records from pre-1992 were published, and most reports from these Italian and early Albanian excavations pay little attention to associated finds. Instead, the interpretation of Butrint’s long history before 1992 rested primarily upon interpretations of the architectural, artistic and largely undated topographic elements found at the site. On occasions epigraphic evidence was used to affirm interpretations of Butrint’s history. By contrast, our point of departure for the excavation



Richard Hodges

Figure 1.1. View of Butrint, Lake Butrint and the Straits of Corfu from Mount Mile

methodology was Martin Carver’s Arguments in Stone that readily assumed (as we did) that a north European methodology (rooted in north European historiographic traditions) might be easily translated to a Mediterranean context.7 As in many similar projects, such an assumption was soon to be dispelled. First, our Albanian collaborators, as we have recorded elsewhere, had their own historical paradigm rooted in sustaining a national myth that took no account of contemporary historiography. 8 Second, although our approach involved sampling on a major scale, identifying stratigraphic deposits as predicated by Carver’s method, this was complicated by tree cover, by the changing and high water table, and most of all by the realization that only open-area excavation with an immense commitment to labour and post-excavation analysis offers a suitable instrument for interpreting inter-period and intrasettlement differentiations. Put more baldly, Carver’s method, which advocated small-scale excavation to solve specific problems of urban topography, together with computer-generated simulations known as ‘deposit modelling’ between excavated samples, did not work in the context of late antique and medieval Butrint. Problems of residuality, the repeated remodelling and re-use of structures throughout the Roman period and the large-scale secondary movement of deposits in antiquity (during construction work and terracing) meant that the results of keyhole archaeology were inconclusive at best and totally misleading at worst. As a result, our initial investigations from 1994–99, summarized in Byzantine Butrint, although dramatically increasing our understanding of Butrint, provided only an imprecise overview of the town and its changing topography.9 Many projects would have halted after this extensive range of investigations but, with support from the Packard

Humanities Institute, from 2000–09 we developed a constellation of major excavations (Fig. 1.2). Large excavations were initially opened at the Triconch Palace to review a waterside sector of the city, and at the lakeside villa at Diaporit, identified in the field survey 4 km northeast of Butrint.10 Concurrently, we embarked upon a programme to identify the suburb of Butrint on the Vrina Plain, first by a new extensive geophysical survey (following initial surveys in 1996–1998) with an associated study of the environmental conditions, initially by test-trenching along a drainage dyke made in the 1960s, and then by making two large open-area excavations focussed upon two very different parts of the suburb.11 The combined area of the project’s excavation trenches covers approximately 8,250 m2. These excavations, supported in particular by the remarkable knowledge and dedication of our ceramic specialists, Paul Reynolds and Joanita Vroom, have given us an entirely new understanding of the urban history of Butrint from its earliest occupation until the Ottoman age. Plainly, some of this approach evolved strategically to confront different period-based paradigms. However, our understanding of the 7th- to 12th-century history has been enhanced not always as a result of judgements taken to identify these periods but by serendipity, in that some of the most significant discoveries relating to the Byzantine Dark Age have been more by accident than design.12 How, we need to ask, are we to interpret this serendipity – bearing in mind of course, the same serendipity for the most part has determined the survival of the historical texts that form the framework for this period? Serendipity entered into this as the chance arose to excavate a limited area in the centre of Butrint with a view to finding the Roman forum. Further opportunities then

1.  Excavating away the ‘poison’



Lake Butrint

Diaporit

Kalivo Western cemetery

Butrint Vrina Plain

Ali Pasha's Castle

10

11

9 8

7

4

6

5

Cape Stillo Marsh

1

3 2

0

2 km

0

1 - Western Defences 2 - Merchant's House 3 - Triconch Palace 4 - Forum 5 - Nymphaeum 6 - Baptistery bath-house 7 - Roman bridge 8 - Acropolis Sanctuary 9 - Acropolis Basilica 10 - Well of Junia Rufina 11 - Cemetery 200 m

Figure 1.2. Map showing the location of the Butrint Foundation excavations and geophysical survey, 1993–2010

followed – (i) to explore a section of the acropolis prior to backfilling and landscaping the 1990–94 excavations as well as the eastern summit prior to landscaping, (ii) to excavate ahead of conservation of the Western Defences, and (iii) to investigate an area adjacent to the well of Junia Rufina beside the northern postern gate, known as the Lion Gate.13 These new excavations, executed with a knowledge gained from the excavations at Diaporit, the Vrina Plain and the Triconch Palace, have been particularly important for developing a new understanding of the Byzantine period. Based upon these new excavations, we have re-examined many of the standing monuments, including the fortifications, the Great Basilica and, in so doing, discovered close to the Water Gate the remains of a Roman bridge.14 There has been, in other words, a sequence of investi­

gations that initially followed a strategy of the kind propagated by Carver, which serendipitously gave rise to excavation opportunities, which in turn have lead to the development of new field strategies. In this chapter, we shall examine the topographic evidence arising from this mixture of approaches to Butrint, culminating in a proposed new paradigm for the history of the site.

Changing paradigms Colonel William Martin Leake was by no means the first to take an interest in Butrint’s archaeological remains, but his account laid the foundations for subsequent research of ancient Buthrotum.15 His visit by boat in 1805 was not published for thirty years, but the ample and romantic description of the ancient city located in this marginal

Richard Hodges



13

15 14

12

16 22

11

10 21

17

9

20

18

8 19

7

5

6

4

Marsh

3 2

1 - Bath-house 2 - Building in woods 3 - Triconch Palace 4 - Theatre baths 5 - Gymnasium 6 - Baptistery 7 - Bath-house 8 - Small bath-house 9 - Nymphaeum 10 - Tower Gate 11 - City walls 12 - Hellenistic house 13 - City walls 14 - Well of Junia Rufina 15 - Mausoleum 16 - North Gate 17 - Cemetery 18 - City walls 19 - Theatre and Asclepius' shrine 20 - Venetian castle 21 - Cistern/Store room(?) 22 - Acropolis Basilica Ugolini's excavations Post Ugolini excavations (Marconi and Mustilli)

1

0

200 m

Figure 1.3. Map showing the location of the excavations by the Italian mission, 1928–40 maritime environment almost certainly served as an impetus and guide for the Italian prehistorian Luigi Maria Ugolini’s first visit in 1924. Ugolini was no less of a romantic than Colonel Leake. On behalf of his government, Ugolini’s task was to establish an Italian archaeological presence in Albania in effect to compete with the new French archaeological project at Apollonia near Albania’s oilfields.16 But Ugolini proved a master at sustaining his political obligations while pursuing a contemporary research agenda. He tells us in the preface of his Butrinto. Il mito d’Enea, gli scavi – a monograph he dedicated to Benito Mussolini – that he wished to emulate Heinrich Schliemann, the excavator of Mycenae and Troy by unearthing a place associated with the mythic figure, Aeneas.17 Unsaid, he was seeking a connection between the founder of Rome and this small lagoonal place in Albania. Following in Virgil’s footsteps, he paid homage to the political court in Mussolini’s ‘new’ Rome, just as Virgil brought Butrint into his mythic story of Aeneas, paying discreet homage to the princeps and to the family of Agrippa, the architect of Octavian’s victory over Mark Antony and Cleopatra at Actium, whose in-laws owned property at Butrint.18 In

fact, Ugolini’s massive archaeological campaigns between 1928–36 found very little he could precisely relate to Virgil’s account in The Aeneid (Fig. 1.3). The ‘Troy in miniature’, as Virgil had christened it, was essentially a late Hellenistic and Roman city with precious little that shed light on its earlier origins. The Scaean gate (the Lake Gate) to which Ugolini somewhat self-consciously contrived to ascribe Trojan allusions, was constructed in the later Hellenistic period about a millennium after the fateful events involving the Trojans described by Virgil. Ugolini undoubtedly knew this well, but masterfully marketed the connection to help resource his project. Indeed, Ugolini’s efforts to seek Bronze Age origins that might shed light on the era of the Trojan exiles were restrained in comparison to his desire to furnish Butrint with a diachronic context that was exceptional for the era. In keeping with the ethos of the 1920s and 1930s, using large numbers of workmen, Ugolini and his small staff uncovered large tracts of the south side of Butrint, and made small-scale excavations on the acropolis, in the northern citadel and in the cemetery immediately outside the West Gate (Fig.1.3). Working on this considerable scale, spread out across the site, his

1.  Excavating away the ‘poison’ investigations enabled him to chart the vicissitudes of the site from the Archaic Greek period through to the Venetian age, with considerable emphasis being placed upon a ribbon of continuity that spanned more than two millennia. In this way, by implicit virtue of this continuity, Butrint retained a connection to Rome, severed only by the rise of the Turks and the loss of Butrint to the Ottomans in 1797. Through these connections, extending over millennia, Ugolini aimed to establish Italian propriety to Butrint and, perhaps too in the early uncertain years of the new League of Nations, to this strategically located bulwark on the Straits of Corfu. After the Second World War Butrint remained in a frontier area and therefore largely neglected until in 1959 Enver Hoxha decided to show the site to Nikita Khrushchev, the Soviet party secretary.19 The Saranda-based archaeologist, Dhimosten Budina, trained in the Soviet Union, was charged with constructing the 20 km-long road from Saranda via Ksamil to the site for the Soviet leader’s visit, making Butrint accessible to motorised transport for the first time. The road also provided access to the no-man’s land beyond, where exiles from the Greek civil war were settled. This new venture made industrialised agriculture feasible in these marshlands. It also facilitated the making of Butrint into an archaeological park, a cultural heritage destination for the small number of foreign tourists, bringing invaluable hard currency. Butrint was now fenced, the western limits running just beyond the medieval defences, and a new entrance was created close to the new chain ferry link across the Vivari channel (which connected the Saranda road to the collective farms and villages southeast of Butrint). By the end of the 1960s a path had been laid through the park, connecting the principal features found or made by Luigi Maria Ugolini. Easier access as well as its newly recognized cultural heritage value in turn led to a steady reprise of archaeological interest in Butrint over the following forty years. Led by Budina, Albanian archaeologists first explored the environs of Butrint encompassing the Vrina Plain and the Pavllas Valley to the southeast in advance of intensive agrarian investment – a frontier no-man’s land between Albania and Greece since 1945.20 From the 1970s Budina and a new generation of Albanian archaeologists concentrated upon elaborating Ugolini’s model within the framework of the explicitly nationalist policies of the era.21 Given, therefore, Albania’s obsession with fortification, as an isolated country at odds with most European countries, it is hardly surprising that it was Butrint’s well-preserved defences that caught the imagination of the next generation to work here. Muzafer Korkuti, long time Director of the Institute of Archaeology, put it explicitly as follows: ‘The Albanians built castles ... to defend themselves from the attacks which came from all directions’.22 Between the late 1960s and early 1980s Apollon Baçe, Neritan Ceka and Gjerak Karaiskaj all published major studies laying great emphasis upon the long sequence of fortifications beginning in the Archaic Greek era and ending in the Ottoman age.23 Added to this, while many small-scale excavations were made, only one of substance was undertaken and published – by Kosta Lako in 1975–76 – and this too concentrated upon



the fortifications (the only other major studies published in this era were by Aleksandër Meksi, who had made architectural surveys of the Great Basilica and Baptistery in 1983).24 All the other excavations in this period were essentially unpublished and in many cases not recorded in much detail (Fig. 1.4). Limited by the inability to obtain post-war foreign archaeological studies, new interpretations of Ugolini’s research were bound to be difficult. Indeed, just as Ugolini’s mission was guided by an unstated Italian political mission to establish a cultural bulwark on the Straits of Corfu in the midst of an unsettled Greek minority, so the post-war socialists were directed by Enver Hoxha’s maxim mounted on the Butrint museum shortly after his death (Fig. 1.5): Përveç kulturës Helene e Romake në këtë zonë ishte zhvilluar edhe lulëzonte një kulturë tjetër e lashtë. Kultura Ilire. Besides the Greek and Roman cultures, another ancient culture developed and prospered here: the Illyrian culture. In this case, though, Hoxha explicitly urged his archaeologists to seek their nationalist roots in some continuity with the country’s Illyrian past, a mission given full expression in a speech the dictator gave at Shkodra in 1979.25 Ne jemi pasardhësit e fiseve ilire. Në këto troje të lashta të të parëve tanë kanë vërshuar grekët, romakët, normandët, sllavët, anzhuinët, bizantinët, venedikasit, osmanët e shumë e shumë pushtues të tjerë, por ata nuk i zhdukën dot as popullin shqiptar, as kulturën e vjetër ilire, as vazhdimësinë e saj shqiptare. We are the descendents of the Illyrian tribes. Into the land of our ancestors have come Greeks, Romans, Normans, Slavs, Angevins, Byzantines, Venetians, Ottomans and numerous other invaders, without having been able to destroy the Albanian people, the ancient Illyrian civilisation and later the Albanians. Post-war research at Butrint, therefore, had three limited but specific aims. First, following Khrushchev’s visit, Butrint was increasingly employed as a cultural heritage attraction to obtain foreign currency. This culminated in the reconstruction of the Butrint museum in 1988, enlarging the inter-war version created by Ugolini. Second, only limited effort was made to enlarge the diachronic knowledge of the archaeological site and its immediate surroundings; instead, Ugolini’s interpretation of Butrint was sustained even though the statue to him erected before the Second World War was removed (because he was considered an imperialist and fascist). Third, several studies concentrated upon the prominent fortifications of Butrint, accentuating the notion that in earlier ages the country had always been subjected to near continuous invasion, invariably by western imperialists. Ugolini’s model not surprisingly was the basis of the Butrint Foundation research project that began in 1994. There were some differences, however. The Butrint

Richard Hodges



9

8

10 7 2 6 3 1

5

1 - Prytaneum 2 - Shrines 3 - Gymnasium 4 - Triconch Palace 5 - Venetian house 6 - Baptistery 7 - Hellenistic wall 8 - Great Basilica 9 - Acropolis 10 - Cemetery Budina (1965 - c.80)

Marsh

Lako (1975-77/1981-84)

4

Çondi (1980's) Meksi (1980-83) Nanaj (1982-86) Hadzis (1989-94) Anamali (1983) Spahiu (1983-84)

0

200 m

Figure 1.4. Map showing the location of the principal excavations by Albanian archaeologists, 1959–92

Figure 1.5. Bronze inscription erected in the Butrint Museum in the late 1980s

Foundation set out at once to comprehend the environmental context and settlement history of the lagoon, enlarging upon the field survey made by Dhimosten Budina in the 1960s. Perhaps the most important outcome of this was to show that remains of the ancient town were not confined to the promontory explored and known since Colonel Leake’s

time. Across the Vivari Channel, on the Vrina Plain, a Roman nucleus existed that was also occupied in late Roman and mid-Byzantine times. It also demonstrated beyond doubt that the environmental circumstances at Butrint have never been static, and in different ways over nearly three millennia the people here have adapted accordingly.

1.  Excavating away the ‘poison’

A topographic history Luigi Maria Ugolini and the Albanian archaeologists who excavated at Butrint between 1945–92 viewed it as continuously occupied from Archaic Greek to Venetian times, acknowledging of course the changing scale of the town at different points in this continuum. Butrint was eternal until the Ottomans seized and, in effect, closed it, looking eastwards rather than to the Mediterranean. This interpretation, as we have already indicated, rests on an interpretation of the texts and architecture, not the archaeology. The new archaeological evidence points to an altogether different history. First, the history of the lagoon is only now coming into focus.26 The large embayment of later prehistory almost certainly gave rise to fishing opportunities for Middle and Upper Palaeolithic groups whose plentiful lithics have been found at Butrint itself, close to Xarra and on the south-east shore of Lake Butrint.27 Evidence of Neolithic occupation hereabouts is conspicuously missing. But it is evident that there was still a considerable embayment here during the Middle to Late Bronze Ages, when small communities occupied various prominent hilltop points around the lagoon.28 This changed in the later first millennium BC. During this period the narrow passage known as the Vivari channel formed along the south side of the promontory that was to be Butrint, as to the south there was formed the Vrina Plain. This new topography was certainly apparent by the late Republican period if not earlier, and significantly, the Vrina Plain could be farmed and colonised by the early imperial period. We must envisage that initially, before the 2nd to 1st centuries BC, this also meant that the strip of land between the southern course of the later Hellenistic city wall running just south of the sanctuary of Butrint and the Vivari channel some 80 metres further south could not be colonised and occupied (cf. Fig. 1.7). This was a shortlived condition and certainly by the 1st century AD the city covered the area seen today. Widespread coastal uplift in the Mediterranean between the 4th and 6th centuries AD, in an episode known as the early Byzantine Tectonic Paroxysm, caused a change of between 0.5 and 1 m on the Ionian islands of Kephallonia and Zante, although it was up to 9 m on Crete.29 This sort of tectonic movement almost certainly resulted in a wide range of localised variations, however, and it seems this area of Butrint was lowered by earthquakes in the 4th century.30 The skirt of land immediately to the south of Butrint’s Roman-period forum apparently slumped as a result of tectonic movement (evidenced by the 0.50 m drop on the south side of the forum pavement). From this period onwards the land either side of the Vivari Channel was evidently subjected to seasonal or at least intermittent flooding, making settlement on all but the highest points of the Vrina Plain much less tenable. In fact, a small settlement was sustained on the south side of the Vivari Channel at one key point, close to a deep inlet, up until the 13th century (cf. Figs 1.9, 1.12, 1.13). Then, at about this time increasing amounts



of colluvium made permanent occupation intolerable, as it accelerated the flooding and the steady transition of this area into the marshes observed by Leake in the early 19th century and photographed by Ugolini in the 1920s.31 Only in the 1960s, with the making of a collective farm at Shën Dëlli, was a reclamation system (that included drainage channels and a pumping station) devised to prevent seasonal inundations. This system collapsed in 1992 and since then the Vrina Plain has reverted to being flooded during the wintertime. In sum, with the brief exception of the early Roman imperial investment in managed, centuriated farming, this was always a quintessential maritime environment. It was both often inhospitable as a place to build permanent settlement, but also exceptionally rich in fishing resources. It was also on a sea-lane – a major thoroughfare – that provided connections across the width and breadth of the Mediterranean. Lastly, we must note that such environments punctuate the long eastern coast of the Adriatic, as well as parts of the Italian coastline. With these maritime places, we may envisage, the inhabitants of Butrint from time to time found more commonality than perhaps is evident today. Second, the 1994–96 field survey, followed up intermittently by other surveys by the Butrint Foundation, shows that Butrint was only briefly – in the early Imperial Roman period – at the centre of a densely managed and occupied landscape. Otherwise, in the periods before and after the early Empire, settlement in the immediate vicinity of Butrint was adapted to the minor topographic conditions and often appears to have been ephemeral. Butrint, in other words, it can be surmised, was essentially a place focussed upon exploiting the lagoonal resources as opposed to systematically establishing itself as an agrarian as well as a maritime nucleus.32 Third, the evolving topography of Butrint is all the more interesting in the light of these environmental circumstances. From the Archaic Greek period until the early Venetian age two axes appear to have been constant. Thereafter, from the 16th to the 20th centuries, until the road to Butrint was constructed in 1959, only one axis served the old town, the Vivari Channel. The two access points to Butrint were replicated in various forms over more than two millennia. The western access appears to have been along the narrow isthmus that connects the promontory to Mount Sotira (behind the present Livia Hotel). The southeastern access was by boat or, during the Roman period, by a bridge to a higher point towards the eastern sector of the lower town (occupied from late antiquity onwards by the Great Basilica). Let us look further at these two access points. Beginning with the western access, the isthmus led up to a point just below the acropolis where in the later Hellenistic period the West Gate was constructed (Fig. 1.7). Travellers would have reached this isthmus by one of three routes: first, by way of the Vivari Channel and disembarking perhaps at a dock 50 m or so west of Butrint; second, by following the west side of Lake Butrint until

Richard Hodges



Acropolis Archaic sanctuary Terrace wall

Lower town?

Marsh

Proposed Archaic Hellenistic shoreline

Marsh

Gravel bank

Roman shoreline

Area of excavation that uncovered Corinthian black-figure wares

0

200 m

Figure 1.6. The topography of Archaic Greek Butrint

it reached the isthmus; third, by boat across Lake Butrint, disembarking on the north side of the narrow isthmus. The 1959 road from Saranda has altogether altered this earlier topography, having been cut into the steep and generally inaccessible south-facing flank of Mount Sotira in order to descend to Butrint. No pre-existing path of any import, we surmise, followed this route but the presence of the Dema wall, belonging to the Hellenistic period, closing off the Ksamil peninsula at the north end of Lake Butrint, suggests that the land route connecting Phoenice to Butrint in this period was at least symbolically important. On arriving by way of the isthmus at the western shoulder of the acropolis, two points need to be emphasized. First, this access point existed because, we may assume, the ground immediately to the west (i.e. in front of the later Roman to Venetian Western Defences, where the modern gate is located) was subject to seasonal waterlogging.33 Second, having reached this point on the western shoulder of the acropolis, there were three further feeder routes: (i) up onto the acropolis itself; (ii) from the acropolis to the north citadel (i.e. the northern slopes of the hill); (iii) either

from the acropolis to the lower (south-facing) town or, and at certain periods this remains enigmatic, from the point on the western shoulder around the south side of the hill to what, in Hellenistic times became the sanctuary area. The first two feeder routes are fairly straightforward; the third begs further consideration (see below). The southeastern access point provided a connection between the inland north-south valleys and Butrint. Today, this route descends from the upper northern side of the Pavllas Valley to the village of Xarra before traversing the reclaimed plain to the village of Vrina, and then passing directly to the chain ferry. In other words, the road serves the interests of the communist-period communities here. Before this, the Pavllas River cut across the plain, arriving at an islet in the Vivari Channel opposite Butrint.34 Travellers instead appear to have descended to Xarra and then followed either the top or sides of the ridged hill known as Shën Dimitri, before descending to the marshes below either taking a ‘ferry’ close to Xarra for Butrint or crossing to a point almost directly opposite Butrint where a deep inlet led off the Vivari Channel.35 At the latter

1.  Excavating away the ‘poison’



Lake Gate

Lion Gate

Northern citadel North Gate

Acropolis Archaic sanctuary Gate

West Gate

Cemetery

Temple

Tower Gate

Theatre Well

Proposed ArchaicHellenistic shoreline

Agora? Treasury Asclepieion Gate

Marsh

Marsh

Gravel bank

Roman shoreline

Vivari Channel

0

200 m

Figure 1.7. The topography of later Hellenistic Butrint

point, unidentified by Ugolini and his Albanian successors, adjacent to the line of the Roman imperial aqueduct, a low, multi-arched Roman road bridge connected the plain, possibly first reclaimed in the Hellenistic period, to a point directly in front of the monumental Tower Gate. The Tower Gate, erected in the Hellenistic period, probably in the later 3rd century is the key here. This elegantly made entrance sits immediately west of the raised easternmost sector of the lower town (where the Great Basilica was later constructed). Three points need to be made about this gate. First, why was the finest Hellenistic gate made some 200 m east of the burgeoning Hellenistic sanctuary and not immediately adjacent to the sanctuary itself? Almost certainly, it represented an entry point that, like the West Gate (on the west shoulder of the acropolis), had an established antiquity. Second, however, the imposing character of the Tower Gate in contrast to the West Gate tends to suggest that this was the principal entry-point to Butrint at this time, and possibly had been previously. Third, situated at the point where the low-lying ground in the lower town meets the rising ground behind, it suggests

that the skirt of land between the Tower Gate and the Vivari Channel was not occupied in any effective way. The location of the Tower Gate, we may surmise, prefigured the construction of the road-bridge in early Roman times, and in turn the late antique Water Gate and, beside it, the Great Basilica, which endured as a major church into the later Middle Ages. Now let us examine the topographic history in a little more detail. The earliest sedentary occupation at Butrint appears to have been in the Middle to Late Bronze Age and concentrated in the shallow fold midway along the south side of the acropolis (Fig. 1.6). Further occupation was not found at the highest, eastern end, and any evidence at the western end of the hilltop was obliterated by the construction of a castle here in the 1930s. We may conclude, therefore, that this small nucleus was not seeking the most defensible location on the acropolis, or indeed a view overlooking Lake Butrint, but instead was situated at a point where a path traversing the south-facing slope of the acropolis emerged on the saddle on the summit. Of course, if a small nucleus

10

Richard Hodges

existed at the west end, overlooking the point occupied by the later West Gate, this site in the fold in the centre may have been no more than a subsidiary encampment. Nevertheless, here, intriguingly, the Archaic Greek period sanctuary also appears to have been made, its south-facing side seemingly being elevated by a substantial polygonal terrace wall (Fig.1.6). The principal elements of the small later 8th- to 6th-century complex (dated by imported Corinthian black-figure wares) was aggregated immediately beyond the raised wall, and extended back into the shallow dip in the saddle of the hill. From this point, the sanctuary looked south to Corfu town in the far distance, besides overlooking the lower town and the marshes beyond. Here, though, a path, we may surmise, descended across the steep south-facing flank of the acropolis. No traces of this period were discovered on the high eastern summit, whilst as before, any evidence at the prominent western end of the hill was obliterated by the construction of the castle (such a western nucleus would have been even more conspicuous from Corfu).36 Were there other Archaic Greek buildings here, down in the lower town beside the presumed later sacred springs for example, or was the modest sanctuary on the acropolis an isolated entity? Sanctuaries seldom occur in isolation, but there is as yet no archaeological evidence to suppose that Butrint at this time was an urban settlement of any kind. This challenges Ugolini’s view, later reaffirmed by Neritan Ceka, amongst others, that the acropolis was entirely enclosed by fortifications at this time.37 With the new research, Hammond’s conclusion that the extant, south-facing Archaic wall was simply a terrace has become increasingly compelling, given the absence of stratified Archaic-period material from the Butrint Foundation excavations.38 The Archaic Greek sanctuary presumably was the impetus for a larger early 4th-century BC sanctuary located directly below the Archaic one. The sanctuary dedicated to Asclepius appears to have complemented the earlier one. Situated at the very bottom of the south-facing acropolis slope in the space between two wells, by the mid 2nd century BC it would comprise a temple, a treasury, a theatre and associated accommodation (Fig. 1.7).39 The acropolis temple would have retained its significance, we may surmise, due to its age and location. Perhaps, as Asclepius and Zeus are both depicted, and in a similar manner, on the first Butrint coinage minted in the late Republic, the temple to Zeus Soter, as yet identified, might be the older sanctuary on the acropolis. How was the sanctuary to Asclepius approached? This is mere conjecture because all traces have been removed by later construction, but it appears that any pilgrim had three choices: arriving from the southeast through the Tower Gate; arriving along the Vivari Channel, where the Asclepieion Gate provided a surprisingly simple, though defended, access to the sanctuary; arriving by way of the isthmus and either venturing around the western end of the hill, or else, traversed the acropolis, and descended down the slope to reach the south end of the nucleus.

The first walled sanctuary may offer further clues (Fig. 1.7). Almost certainly dating to the late 3rd century BC, these Hellenistic walls enclose a large area, including most of the so-called northern citadel that was well above the water table.40 These powerful and well-made walls extended from the new West Gate on the western shoulder of the acropolis and then arced tightly down to a point immediately beyond (i.e. west of) the Asclepian sanctuary, passing along the low-lying ground to the Tower Gate. Several important features have now become evident for the first time. First, the Tower Gate is the most monumental of the gates, and conceivably the ingress used by members of the later koinon who lived in the valley extending eastwards to Çuka e Ajtoit.41 Secondly, several powerful gates offer ingress to the northern citadel where we may suppose a residential zone was created. Thirdly, the acropolis was not fortified or made into a separate sector of any kind. Fourthly, the sanctuary existed as a kind of appendix to this walled area, tightly packed up against the south-facing slope of the acropolis, unable to extend out onto the skirt of land beyond because at this date it was too marshy. Most probably, at this time an agora of some kind was inserted immediately east of the sanctuary, accessed from the Tower Gate by way of the rising land immediately behind the new south-facing city wall. Lastly, the only graves from this period occur alongside the road traversing the isthmus beyond the West Gate. Possibly the ground on the route southwards, beyond the south side of the Vivari Channel, was too marshy and thus unsuitable for a cemetery. This was no Greek colony, pace the Unesco inscription (see above), but a small sanctuary that had expanded into a substantial town covering 7 ha. It was also an administrative centre of a koinon encompassing the adjacent valley as far as modern Konispol, a point powerfully made by the imposing Tower Gate, the access to this area. Almost certainly, it benefited from the substantial growth in Republican Roman seaborne trade to the region – especially evident at neighbouring Phoenice – arising from their annexation of Epirus.42 As a sanctuary, too, it almost certainly prospered at the expense of the hitherto most important sacred site in the region, Dodona. In size and wealth, though, it was dwarfed by the neighbouring town of Phoenice at this time, which had expansive Adriatic Sea connections.43 The early Roman colony explicitly developed the topographic elements of the Hellenistic town. The origins of the colony have been discussed elsewhere.44 Suffice it to note that the new investment here immediately after the Battle of Actium in 31 BC effectively changed its standing vis-à-vis Phoenice, making it now a serious competitor and, equally, must have caused grave disquiet in Corfu, the previously unrivalled urban centre in the region.45 No new fortifications graced the colony (Fig. 1.8). Instead, it was furnished with significant new civic investment, foremost of which was the bridge making an easy connection between the Vrina Plain and the preexisting Tower Gate. It is tempting to assume that this was a 45–46-arched bridge resembling the one at Mérida, Spain

1.  Excavating away the ‘poison’

Mausoleum

11

Lake Gate

Lion Gate Well of Junia Rufina

North Gate Acropolis Tower Gate

West Gate

Nymphaeum

Theatre Well

Aqueduct header-tank

Bridge

Tomb Forum Nymphaeum

Bath-house

Bath-house Aqueduct piers

‘Gymnasium’

Asclepieion Gate

Road Triconch domus

Vivari Channel domus

Bath-house

0

Cemeteries

Vrina Plain

200 m

Figure 1.8. The topography of Roman Butrint

Mount Sotira

Lake Butrint

Mausoleum Bridge Vrina Plain suburb Road Vivari Channel

Shën Dimitri

Aqueduct

Gravel bank

Cemeteries

0

500 m

Figure 1.9. The topography of the Roman city and its cemeteries

that would have blocked any large-scale mercantile traffic from Butrint across Lake Butrint to Phoenice and at a stroke provided economic empowerment to the citizens of Butrint (Fig. 1.9). On the other hand, the accompanying aqueduct took a divergent route to the town, probably passing beneath the channel.46 If this was indeed the case, we may surmise that a wooden section of the bridge that could be drawn up, or a high-arched central section, permitted boats to pass into the lake towards Phoenice.

The forum too was probably re-fashioned from the earlier agora in this period, as we surmise was a new street grid (Fig. 1.10). Soon afterwards, possibly in the early to mid 1st century AD there was an expansion of the residential areas across the skirt of land separating the Asclepian sanctuary from the Vivari Channel, and then the making of a bridgehead suburb on the south side of the channel. From here, probably at this time, the previously unmanaged, in part marshy landscape was centuriated.

12

Richard Hodges

Agora?

Forum

0

30 m

Figure 1.10. Plan of the agora/forum space

The central axis of the first phase of centuriation appears to have followed the Butrint–Çuka e Ajtoit road that led to the Butrint bridge. This urban and agrarian investment closely resembles the broadly contemporary circumstances at another important Roman colony, Corinth.47 These elements were consolidated in the mid to later 1st and 2nd centuries, with an increasing emphasis upon major houses, with access to the sea and the lake, occupying the plots on the north side of the Vivari Channel, as well as in the suburb at the bridgehead. By now, waterborne maritime traffic, we may surmise, as well as fishing, was a premier resource for the town. A small piazza with a civic building, later a large (public?) granary, of some kind along its north side, may also have been made in this suburb. Tellingly, the cemeteries reveal the increasing economic reach and demographic scale of Butrint as a town. Several small

mausolea lay alongside the rocky, north side of the Vivari Channel; a mausoleum lay beside the road leading around the west side of Lake Butrint; lesser burials were interred on the isthmus; others were interred in several mausolea (columbaria?) immediately outside the Lion Gate; and finally, small but well fashioned mausolea lay alongside the road running past the suburb, in advance of a string of gravefields on the Shën Dimitri ridge.48 This topographic matrix established in the late 1st century BC and fixed in the 1st century AD appears to have remained largely unaltered until the later 5th century. By this time, Butrint had experienced at least one major earthquake in the 4th century that, together with more widespread tectonic changes, irrevocably reversed the situation beside the Vivari Channel.49 These premium channel-side residences now began to suffer seasonal water

1.  Excavating away the ‘poison’

13

Lake Gate

Lion Gate Junia Rufina chapel

North Gate

West Gate

Gate

Acropolis Basilica

Great Basilica

Tower house

Water Gate

‘Gymnasium’ church

Baptistery

Chapel?

Triconch Palace Western Defences

Gate?

Merchant's House Road Gate

Gate Vrina Plain basilica

Vivari Channel 0

200 m

Figure 1.11. The topography of late antique Butrint

logging, leading to the cessation of building activity at the Triconch Palace, the largest of these dwellings, during the early to mid 5th century. Even before the construction of a new set of town walls, most probably in the early 6th century, the Roman topography of Butrint was in flux. The late antique walls respected the two principal access points from the isthmus in the west and the road bridge on the east side (Fig. 1.11). Whether the bridge was actually still standing is not altogether certain. But the adjacent Water Gate with its recessed area for mooring boats affirms the importance of this eastern entrance into the town. The walls followed the Hellenistic circuit around the north side of Butrint, but on the south side followed the Vivari Channel. In other words, the Roman residential building on the channel side, notwithstanding the waterlogging here, persuaded the wall-builders to enclose the entire area up to the water’s edge. These new early 6th-century walls demarcated the Butrint that were an index of the town’s extent for Ugolini, the subsequent Albanian archaeologists, and, in 1992, UNESCO’s world heritage centre. Many features of this new layout merit observation. First, arriving at the West Gate, the traveller might have soon discovered a new sacred area on the very eastern summit of the hill, a basilica with a triconch and a nearby, south-facing tower-house. Second, descending into the lower town, the most formidable towers punctuated the western, seaward-facing, defences.50 But much of the old

civic centre was now abandoned or occupied by minor dwellings. Third, a gravel road provided access from the gate by the Merchant’s House, leading towards the old civic centre, though by the 6th century, although undoubtedly used by fishermen and smiths, the area once occupied by the former Merchant’s House and Triconch Palace was now used peripherally. Fourth, a significant, perhaps the most significant sector in the town, lay immediately east of the Tower Gate. Here, on raised ground, earlier Roman buildings were demolished to make way for a Great Basilica, which like the triconch church on the summit, commanded the countryside to the east, including the lagoon, rather than the seaway leading to the Straits of Corfu. Lastly, as if to emphasize this eastward countenance, a large basilica with associated buildings was made within the large suburban townhouse occupying the south bridgehead on the Vrina Plain.51 The imposing presence of the Church in the new urban layout, notwithstanding Butrint’s prominent trading status, was evident.52 It is equally evident that the rhetoric of its buildings was designed to dominate the fishing-grounds and route inland. By the later 6th century much of Butrint including the Vrina Plain basilica was deserted. There is no evidence of any cataclysm or indeed of the arrival, for example, of the Slavs. Steadily, the community shrunk and simply disappeared. Ceramics and coins belonging to the early 7th century occur in small numbers; those from the later

Richard Hodges

14

Lake Gate

Lion Gate

North Gate

Gate Acropolis

West Gate Water Gate Marsh

Lower town

Triconch Palace

Western Defences

Gate Gate?

Vivari Channel Vrina Plain oikos

Gate

Areas of occupation

0

200 m

Figure 1.12. The location of the kastron in the Western Defences, c. AD 800, in relation to the 9th- to 10th-century aristocratic oikos on the Vrina Plain

7th century are absent. Sporadic occupation, probably making use of earlier structures, almost certainly continued on the acropolis and in the lower town.53 As well as the acropolis, the principal stronghold at Butrint appears to have been located in at least two towers in the lower town’s west-facing, seaward defences (Fig. 1.12). Here, we may imagine, control – perhaps more symbolic than actual – could be exercised over traffic passing down the Straits of Corfu. Both towers, as it happens, burnt down, sealing a rare and rich assemblage of artefacts from c. AD 800.54 Two such cataclysms cannot have been coincidental and strongly suggest that the towers were destroyed deliberately, presumably in an attack. Who attacked whom? The artefacts show that the towers contained the portable property of a rich household with extensive connections to all quarters of the Byzantine Empire. Butrint, we may deduce with caution, was administered by a commander sympathetic to Byzantium. Yet, the region, known as Vagenetia, was in the hands of a Slavic community, the Baiounetai. Was there some brief uprising as occurred, according to the Monemvasia Chronicles, further south in AD 805 at Patras? Judging from the archaeological evidence, Byzantine interests plainly suffered, but, to judge from the excavated remains on the Vrina Plain, were soon restored. Excavations in the Roman suburb brought to light the

successor to the two tower-houses (Fig. 1.12). Here, in the burnt ruins of the 5th-century basilica (being adjacent to the old road running eastwards, now apparently a sunken trackway, as well as to the embarkation point for Butrint, was the church also destroyed in the attack of c. AD 800?), the aristocratic oikos of the probable commander of Butrint was discovered.55 An arrangement of post-holes fire-blasted through the paved narthex of the 5th-century basilica shows that its upper floor was crudely reinforced to take a new residence. A pottery kiln was found close to this building, as were traces of post-built structures. The old nave had been used as a cemetery. Associated with these buildings was a thick deposit of black earth in which 48 bronze coins, Byzantine folles spanning c. 840–950, were found as well as 5 Byzantine lead seals belonging to the same period. The ceramics, like the prolific coins, appear to distinguish the daily culture of this household from that found in the towers. This was a family with administrative connections to Byzantium. Moreover, traded goods were now much in evidence, indicating southern Adriatic Sea connections. Amphorae of a distinctive south Italian Otranto type make up about 50% of the pottery, while, local kitchen wares almost certainly made here amount to most of the rest. The first-floor dwelling with the associated high-status burials, occupying the entrance to the church, judging from the coins and seals, dates to approximately the mid 9th to

1.  Excavating away the ‘poison’

15

Lake Gate

Lion Gate

Northern citadel Chapel

Gate

Gate

Gate North Gate

West Gate

Gate Great Basilica

Acropolis

Gate Water Gate Marsh

Lower town

Chapel

Western Defences

Gate Gate?

Gate

Chapel

Vivari Channel

0

200 m

Figure 1.13. The topography of the 11th-century town

mid 10th centuries. The coins and seals, lost in profligate numbers, distinguish the household from anything yet found inside the old late antique fortifications of Butrint. In effect, for a century or more in the 9th and 10th centuries Butrint as a place had become, in administrative terms, a household located in what had been a suburb. Occasional bronze coins and potsherds show that intramural Butrint was of course, never entirely abandoned. Almost certainly, fishermen and farmers were living in old Roman buildings, much as their officials occupied first the towers in the Western Defences and then the Vrina Plain basilica. But this was not a town so much as the memory of a town. This seems to have changed over the span of 50 years during the last quarter of the 10th century and early 11th century when the first medieval town was established. The first medieval town was made with many references to the earlier topography (Fig. 1.13). The Triconch Palace excavations provided an important snapshot of the transition towards a new urbanism, spanning two or three generations either side of the millennium. A phase marked first by prolific amounts of imported Otranto wares as well as a small, family cemetery then preceded a distinctly different phase during which tips of rubbish and soil were deployed to raise the ground level.56 The late antique wall circuit was rebuilt during this time as well. The new defences

were constructed mostly using hewn Hellenistic blocks (presumably prised from the Hellenistic fortifications). A study of these walls, though, points to gangs of workmen repairing and raising sections of the circuit as opposed to one team working to one construction standard. The new wall contained a significant new element: for the first time the acropolis was fortified, suggesting that this was now the kastron, the Byzantine administrative centre of the town, replacing the aristocratic oikos on the Vrina Plain. The West Gate, though, remained the principal access point from the west, while the Roman bridge no longer existed. Close by, however, the Water Gate proffering access to the Vrina Plain and beyond was almost certainly restored. Possibly the most important relic from this era was found in the Forum excavations. Here were found the evidence of a new terrace that in turn overlay late antique levels directly on top of the Roman forum pavement. Running east–west over this new terrace was an orthostat wall in which a folles of Basil II/Constantine VIII (1020–28) was found. As in the new defences, the orthostats appear to be reused Hellenistic blocks that have been roughly hewn or split to make powerful walls. Sections of this particular orthostat wall were found by Ugolini running across the area of the orchestra in the Theatre; other sections were found to the east running along the lower contours of the hillslope towards the northwest corner of the Great Basilica.

16

Richard Hodges

Putting the three sections of this undistinguished monument together, it appears to be a boundary wall running from the Great Basilica to the Western Defences.57 Two tracts of similar walling were discovered either side of the Great Basilica. One short tract, associated with a folles of John I Syzmites (969–76), appears to run from the Hellenistic fortifications eastwards to form a north boundary to an enclosure around the Great Basilica. A second tract forming an east side, still standing 1 m high, conspicuously runs across the top of the Roman bridge over the Vivari Channel which presumably no longer functioned. Hardly prepossessing, these walls, to judge from the written sources and excavated urban lots in other parts of Europe, divided up the new town into the property parcels of Butrint’s new elite.58 The enclosure around the Great Basilica was perhaps erected by the bishop; the long axial walls traversing the old sanctuary were probably defining the strip-like properties running from the western defences parallel to the Vivari Channel. Belonging to this period are several small chapels, judging from the Triconch Palace excavations, each associated with a family.59 Quite probably, it was a family that re-appropriated the well previously dedicated by a 2nd-century matron, Junia Rufina, as well as the little church beside it.60 The churches of this period – at the Triconch Palace, the Well of Junia Rufina and the Vrina Plain – were miniatures by comparison with the local late antique basilicas. Effectively these were shrines belonging, we might surmise, to the ‘architects’, merchants and landowners, who made the new medieval town of Butrint. Finally, it is worth noting that renewed activity all over Butrint (except on the Vrina Plain) is attested by a consistent sprinkling of later 10th- to 11th-century coins and associated Otranto 2 amphorae sherds. The architects of high medieval Butrint, then, appear to have ignored the ground-water in those parts alongside the Vivari Channel, and made a new town that now had four sectors: (i) the acropolis; (ii) the northern citadel; (iii) the raised and enclosed area occupied by the Great Basilica; (iv) the lower town. The topography of the 11th-century town undoubtedly shaped a new iteration of Butrint. Over the course of the 13th and 14th centuries first the Epirote Despots, then the Angevins, and finally the Venetians strengthened the town’s defences, but did little to alter the pre-existing topographical elements (Fig. 1.14). As a result, the two principal access points remained the same: the West Gate was ultimately massively strengthened with a barbican during the 14th century, and the width of the Water Gate was narrowed, restricting entry from the recessed mooring area beside the Vivari Channel. The eventual desertion of the Vrina Plain church and community by the 13th century is probably testament to the increased waterlogging that made access from the east of Butrint increasingly harder. However, the old road to Xarra and Çuka e Ajtoit, as well as the embarkation point to the town, we may surmise, never entirely disappeared. Nonetheless, Butrint’s castellan

placed exaggerated emphasis upon a show of defensive force to those approaching from the west. This emphasis was extended to include a new seaward wall, replacing the old Western Defences, on the western side of the lower town, and a high closure wall running down the western side of the northern citadel.61 The archaeology, however, reveals more about the changes to Butrint’s layout. With increased waterlogging now being much more evident, tracts of the lower town, especially along the Vivari Channel were largely abandoned to fishermen or, indeed, allotments. Two small churches, in the so-called Gymnasium and north of the Baptistery, demark the southernmost extent of any settlement here, much of it necessarily occupying the south-facing acropolis slope. These circumstances explain the closure of the small gates along the Vivari Channel. The remaining gates, however, associated with the elevated easternmost sector of the lower town, occupied by the Great Basilica, show that this section of the town – as the written sources confirm – continued to be an important if separate entity. Finally, it is clear that the castle and the associated bailiwick on the acropolis were strengthened in stages with the single tower, a characteristic of castles in Epirus, being enclosed within a powerful enceinte by the 14th century.62 The episodic investment in defending Butrint as a town in the 13th and 14th centuries shows that it still possessed an active urban population. Paradoxically not one urban dwelling has yet been identified. These, we may surmise, were concentrated on the slopes of the northern citadel, and perhaps on the steep south-facing lower slopes of the acropolis. Their numbers, though, should not be exaggerated as the excavations at the Well of Junia Rufina produced only small amounts of late medieval pottery – a mere 1% – in the overburden that had slipped down the steep north-facing hillside.63 This 500-year-old urban history ended, supposedly in 1572 when the acropolis was abandoned following the battle of Lepanto.64 In all probability the town had been dwindling in size since the tumultuous unrest in the region during the later 14th century. Moving the bishopric to Glyki in 1337/38, however, removed a powerful urban institution, and with increasing Ottoman pressure to capture the important fishing here, the Venetians reduced their presence dramatically and concentrated their efforts in new military works.65 The castle occupying the western end of the acropolis was by the 16th century a formidable presence, but it was far from the fish-traps in the Vivari Channel. This caused a new tower to be built beside the channel close to the western terminus of the western defences, and the reinforcing of a tower close to the Merchant’s House.66 Soon afterwards, the more extensive triangular castle was constructed on the islet where the Pavllas River met the Vivari Channel, leading directly to the desertion of the acropolis castle. Butrint as a place from this moment became centred upon the channel as its main axis, and on protection and exploitation of its fishing. Venetian fishing houses were constructed at the

1.  Excavating away the ‘poison’

17

Lake Gate Lion Gate Northern citadel Chapel

Gate blocked

Gate

North Gate

Gate blocked

Gate

Gate

Great Basilica

Acropolis Gate

West Gate

Castle Church

Gate blocked

Water Gate

Castle

Gate

Gate

Gate Church Marsh Church old road line

Lower town Marsh Western Defences

Vivari Channel

Gate blocked

Gate?

Gate blocked

13th and 14th-century walls Pre-existing walls Projected wall lines

0

200 m

Figure 1.14. The topography of the 13th- to 14th-century town

entrance to the Vivari Channel and, behind the makeshift lower town fortifications, close to the Triconch Palace. In the Ottoman era, these Venetian dwellings were deserted in favour of a ribbon of dwellings along the south shore of the channel directly in front of the triangular castle, and the area defended by a castle at the entrance to the Vivari Channel (cf. Fig. 1.2).67 It was the ruins of these Venetian properties, the new Ottoman age houses, the strongholds and the dilapidated defences that greeted Leake when he arrived by boat in 1805. Luigi Maria Ugolini defined Butrint as essentially an urban continuum with its defensive nucleus occupying the acropolis, and the lower town being its main civic component. Understandably, as Ugolini arrived here by boat, he saw the Vivari Channel as the main axis of this continuum from Archaic to Ottoman times. This in turn conjured up a place that was essentially dependent upon seaborne connections. Post-war Albanian archaeologists, without making any new discoveries of import, reversed Ugolini’s interpretation of the continuum for nationalist purposes, identifying the town’s sequence of defences as indices of resistance to seaborne invaders. The Butrint Foundation’s project shows that the continuum was a chimera. As we have shown, Butrint as a community grew and failed more than once, but the bases of this, invariably determined to some extent by the environmental conditions, oscillated between two very different rhythms.

For example, the absence of (seaborne) imported wares in the Bronze Age nucleus on the acropolis shows a connection to inland Epirote political economies rather than Adriatic Sea ones. This, of course, was the same in the Ottoman age, when Butrint looked to Epirus, and indeed its fish were transported to Ioannina. The first sanctuary of Asclepius may well have functioned for the immediate Epirote communities occupying the valleys to Konispol and beyond. So, too, judging from the pronounced importance of the Tower Gate, did the first Hellenistic walled community. Its koinon, as contended on the bases of Butrint’s 206 manumission inscriptions, extended eastwards up the valley as far as Çuka e Ajtoit.68 The Roman colony altered the emphasis of Butrint. It looked westwards as well as eastwards now, although with its centuriated landscape stretching almost to Çuka e Ajtoit, we should not understate the importance of agrarian and fishing products to the livelihood of the town. Indeed, this is a quintessential example of a ‘ruralized’ Mediterranean town.69 A place that is a microregion encompassing residential, man-made and lagoon landscapes rather than an urban place within marked confines. Even in late antiquity, it was to those lands to the east rather than the west that the new churches sought to impose a commanding presence. Only in the Middle Ages did this emphasis change. Now, its perspective was to look westwards, exploiting not its lands lost to marshes, but its fishing grounds, to furnish the ships and properties

18

Richard Hodges

of a sequence of colonisers. Ironically, we know almost nothing of the nature of this late medieval town, largely concentrated in the northern citadel. The Butrint Foundation project, like the Albanian archaeologists who worked here between 1959–92, was seduced by Luigi Maria Ugolini’s richly embroidered history of the lower town on the south side, and failed to grasp the importance of this unexplored northern sector of Butrint. In summary, then, the Butrint Foundation’s campaigns – with less than 5% of the city examined – indicate the following history and intermittent urban sequence: • A mid to late Bronze Age homestead occupied the centre and probably the western reaches (now occupied by the Acropolis castle). Judging from the ceramics and the analogous excavated site at Cape Stillo, this was a small, enclosed hilltop refuge. The ceramic assemblage contains no obvious evidence of connections with the Mycenaean world; instead, they indicate strong synergies with inland Epirote wares. • In the 8th to 6th centuries BC the hilltop was reoccupied. The ceramics suggest the site was occupied with connections to the Corinthian colonists of Corfu. The remains of a major Archaic terrace wall on the south side of the hill, as well as an enclosure occupying the saddle of the acropolis and the Lion Gate sculpture suggest this was a modest sanctuary. • No evidence of the 6th to 4th centuries BC has yet been discovered, though we may surmise that the putative sanctuary on the acropolis survived throughout this period and indeed into the Hellenistic and Roman periods. • The sanctuary of Asclepius appears to date from the era of King Pyrrhus. Judging from the manumission inscriptions as well as the excavations in the agora/ forum area in 2006, the sanctuary became a significant walled town incorporating the northern citadel by the 2nd century BC. It prospered under Roman republic hegemony. • Roman Butrint prospered from the Augustan age until the 3rd century. Investment in this era included a new civic centre as well as the creation of the Vrina Plain suburb, connected by a road bridge to the old town, and an associated centuriated landscape extending out as far as the old Hellenistic hilltop fortress of Çuka e Ajtoit. • After a major seismic event in the 4th century Butrint enjoyed an economic revival based upon west Mediterranean connections until c. 470, and with east Mediterranean connections from c. AD 470–550. Before c. 470 major town houses were erected alongside both sides of the Vivari Channel; then about AD 525 the town was refortified. At about the same time, a major triconch church was built on the eastern summit of the acropolis, and below it, a new cathedral was erected with an associated major baptistery. By AD 550, however, Butrint was in decline and little remained by the first quarter of the 7th century. • The Byzantine kastron occupied two or more towers

•

•

•

•

•

in the Western Defences that were destroyed by fire around AD 800. The attackers may also have sacked the basilica on the Vrina Plain beside the embarkation point to Butrint. The archon of Butrint appears to have transferred from the old town to occupy a household made with the Vrina Plain basilica in the period c. 840–950. From here, fishing and farming was probably managed on a limited scale, and embryonic trade with Byzantium and south Italy was administered. Butrint was reoccupied in the last quarter of the 10th century, with new defences defining the acropolis for the first time. The new defences refurbished the line of the earlier late antique walls. Evidence of landscaping and tenemental divisions occurs in this period, as well as ubiquitous remains of urban revival instituted by families each with small chapels. The defences of Butrint were repeatedly strengthened in the 13th and 14th centuries. New emphasis was placed upon an acropolis castle, as well as defending the northern citadel as waterlogging in the lower town made permanent occupation increasingly difficult. Butrint suffered terminal economic decline as an urban centre from the later 14th century, eclipsed as Corfu prospered. Under the Venetians the old town was deserted, and all efforts were invested in defending the fish traps in the Vivari Channel (with the new Triangular Fortress and a major tower). The fishery supplied the needs of the Venetian fleet. Ali Pasha strengthened the defensive elements of Butrint by building a new castle at the entrance of the Vivari Channel. Maintaining the fishing, focussed upon the triangular castle, the main market for these products was in Epirus, as this frontier area became separated from Adriatic Sea contacts.

Two conclusions Butrint, pace Unesco’s 1992 inscription, was never a ‘Greek colony’, but it was a Roman colony (and judging from its political infrastructure, emulating Rome, it was a city); it was an undistinguished bishopric; it failed to prosper as a town in Byzantine and medieval times, although being in Venetian hands for four hundred years, it was evidently considered a resource well worth defending. UNESCO self-evidently adopted a Greek nationalist rationale for the inscription of the site as communism in Albania collapsed (in 1990 when the inscription as a World Heritage Site was proposed, Greek nationalist interests in neighbouring Saranda revived with the prospect of the fall of the Tiranabased government). This was perhaps easy to comprehend as an alternative to the Illyrian nationalism expressed in the old Butrint Museum and indeed the recent Albanian literature tacitly inferring it had been a bulwark against imperialists through the ages.70 The topographical history of this place would appear to offer an entirely different interpretation. For much of its history Butrint as a town belonged to the Mediterranean Sea, a maritime place

1.  Excavating away the ‘poison’ imbued with a palimpsest of memories, which necessarily engaged in an essential dialogue with its hinterland and/or other Adriatic Sea communities. The history and scale of these changing rhythms is the essence of this place, its monuments, its art and its material culture. Located in a lagoon, these rhythms, as today, were to some degree shaped by the history of the marshes, often inhospitable and intractable, and their seemingly infinite economic properties. In sum, its topographic history traces the struggle to manage, exploit and defend this often volatile environment. There is, however, arguably a wider methodological lesson that can be learned from the Butrint Project. Butrint, in many ways, was a very old fashioned project funded by private individuals and charitable foundations to an extent and for a duration that would not be contemplated by Research Councils. The excavations produced colossal quantities of material, creating issues of post-excavation management, publication and long-term finds and archive curation, and we shall be judged on our success or failure in these areas as well as by the results of the excavations.71 We found, for example, the Byzantine Dark Age by digging for 14 years, seven of which saw excavation on a very substantial scale rather than cheaper non-intrusive methods such as field survey or geophysics. While both of the latter techniques were employed within the project, they would not have located the key deposits that we eventually found. We must conclude that although long-term large-scale excavation is by far the most costly and unfashionable of archaeological techniques, the results of the Butrint Project suggest that it remains an essential element of the study of abandoned towns. Only by such methods is ethnic nationalism challenged.

References Andrews, R., Bowden, W., Gilkes, O. and Martin, S. (2004) The late antique and medieval fortifications of Butrint. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Survey 1994–1999: 126–50. Oxford, Oxbow. Baçe, A. (1976) Fortifikimet e antiketit të vonë në vendin tonë. Monumentet 11: 45–74. Bescoby, D. J. (2007) Geoarchaeological investigation at Roman Butrint. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint. An Assessment: 95–118. Oxford, Oxbow. Bogdani, J. (2008) Note su alcuni siti fortificati d’etá ellenistica della media valle del Pavla, Epiro, Ocnus 16: 43–57. Bogdani, J and Giorgi, E. (2007) Ricerche, ricognizioni e saggi stratigrafici nella città alta. In S. De Maria and Sh. Gjongecaj (eds), Phoiniki IV. Rapporto preliminare sulla campagna di scavi e ricerche 2004–2006: 13–30. Bologna, Ante Quem. Bowden, W. (2003) Epirus Vetus: The Archaeology of a Late Antique Province. London, Duckworth. Bowden, W. and Hodges, R. (2004) Balkan Ghosts? Nationalism and the question of rural continuity in Albania. In N. Christie (ed.), Landscapes of Change: Rural Evolutions in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages: 195–222. Aldershot, Ashgate. Bowden, W. and Hodges, R. (2011) (eds) Butrint 3. Excavations at the Triconch Palace. Oxford, Oxbow. Bowden, W. and Hodges, R. (forthcoming) An ‘Ice Age settling

19

on the Roman Empire’: post-Roman Butrint between strategy and serendipity. In N. Christie and A. Augenti (eds), Urbes Extinctae: Archaeologies of Abandoned Classical Sites. Aldershot, Scolar Press. Bowden, W. and Mitchell, J. (2007) The Triconch Palace at Butrint: the life and death of a late Roman domus. In L. Lavan, L. Özgenel and A. Sarantis (eds), Housing in Late Antiquity: 455–574. Leiden, Brill. Bowden, W. and Përzhita, L. (2004) Archaeology in the landscape of Roman Epirus: preliminary report on the Diaporit excavations, 2002–3. Journal of Roman Archaeology 17: 413–33. Bowden, W., Hodges, R. and Lako, K. (2002) Roman and late antique Butrint: excavations and survey 2000–2001. Journal of Roman Archaeology 15: 199–209. Budina, D. (1971) Harta Akeologjike e bregdetit Jon dhe e pellgut të Delvinës. Iliria 1: 275–342. Budina, Dh. (1988) Butrinti Pararomak. In N. Ceka (ed.), Butroti: Përmbledhje Studimesh: 6–107. Tirana, Akademia e Shkencave e RPSSH Qendra e Kërkimeve Arkeologjike. Cabanes, P., Drini, F. and Hatzopoulos, M. (2007) Corpus des inscriptions grecques d’Illyrie méridionale et d’Épire (2 Inscriptions de Bouthrôtos). Athens, Fondation Botzaris/École française d’Athenes. Carver, M. (1993) Arguments in Stone. Archaeological Research and the European Town in the First Millennium. Oxford, Oxbow. Ceka, N. (1976) Fortifikimi antik i Butrintit. Monumentet 12: 27–48. Ceka, N. (1988) Fortifikimi antik i Butrintit. In N. Ceka (ed.), Butroti: Përmbledhje Studimesh: 115–32. Tirana, Akademia e Shkencave e RPSSH Qendra e Kërkimeve Arkeologjike. Coates-Stephens, R. (1995) Quattro torri altomedievali delle Mura Aureliane. Archeologia Medievale 22: 501–17. Crowson, A. and Gilkes, O. J. (2007) The archaeology of the Vrina Plain: an assessment. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint. An Assessment: 119–64. Oxford, Oxbow. De Maria, S. (2007) Butrinto e Fenice: a confronto. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds.), Roman Butrint. An assessment: 175–88. Oxford, Oxbow. De Maria, S. and Gjongecaj, Sh. (2002) Phoiniki I. Rapporto preliminare sulla campagna di scavi e ricerche 2000. Florence, All’Insegna del Giglio. De Maria, S. and Gjongecaj, Sh. (2003) Phoiniki II. Rapporto preliminare sulla campagna di scavi e ricerche 2001. Bologna, Ante Quem. De Maria, S. and Gjongecaj, Sh. (2005) Phoiniki III. Rapporto preliminare sulla campagna di scavi e ricerche 2002–2003. Bologna, Ante Quem. De Maria, S. and Gjongecaj, Sh. (2007) Phoiniki IV. Rapporto preliminare sulla campagna di scavi e ricerche 2004–2006. Bologna, Ante Quem. Francis, K. (2005) (ed.) Explorations in Albania, 1930–39: The Notebooks of Luigi Cardini, Prehistorian with the Italian Archaeological Mission (BSA Suppl. 37). London, British School at Athens. Geary, P (2002) The Myth of Nations: the Medieval Origins of Europe. Princeton, Princeton University Press. Gilkes, O. J. (2003) (ed.) The Theatre at Butrint. Luigi Maria Ugolini’s Excavations at Butrint 1928–1932 (Albania antica 4). London, British School at Athens. Gilkes, O. J. (2005) The history of archaeological investigations at Kalivo and Çuka e Aitoit. In I. L. Hansen, O. J. Gilkes and

20

Richard Hodges

A. Crowson (eds), Kalivo and Çuka e Aitoit, Albania. Interim Report on Surveys and Excavations 1928–2004: chapter 1. London, Butrint Foundation, www.butrintfoundation.co.uk (accessed 2011). Gilkes, O. J. and Miraj, L. (2000) The myth of Aeneas, the Italian archaeological mission in Albania 1924– 43. Public Archaeology 1: 109–24. Gilkes, O. J., Crowson, A., Hodges, R., Lako, K. and Vroom, J. (2002) Medieval Butrint: excavations at the Triconch Palace 2000 and 2001. Archeologia Medievale 29: 7–12. Greenslade, S. and Çondi, Dh. (2011) Recent Excavations on the Vrina Plain, Butrint: A preliminary report on the archaeological sequence from the 1st to 6th century AD. In P. Cabanes and J.-L. Lamboley (eds), Illyrie méridionale et l’Epire dans l’antiquité (Actes du Veme colloque): 265–77. Paris, De Boccard. Greenslade, S., Hodges, R., Leppard, S. and Mitchell, J. (2006) Preliminary report on the early Christian basilica on the Vrina Plain, Albania. Archeologia Medievale 33: 397–408. Hammond, N. G. L. (1967) Epirus. Oxford, Clarendon Press. Hansen, I. L. (2007) The Trojan connection: Butrint and Rome. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint. An Assessment: 44–61. Oxford, Oxbow. Hansen, I. L. (2009) Hellenistic and Roman Butrint (Butrinti Helenistik dhe Romak). London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Hansen, I. L. (2011) Between Atticus and Aeneas: the making of a colonial elite at Roman Butrint. In R. J. Sweetman (ed.), Roman Colonies in the First Century of their Foundation: 85–100. Oxford, Oxbow. Hansen, I. L. and Hodges, R. (2007) (eds) Roman Butrint. An Assessment. Oxford, Oxbow. Hernandez, D. R. and Çondi, Dh. (2008) The Roman forum at Butrint (Epirus) and its development from Hellenistic to mediaeval times. Journal of Roman Archaeology 21: 275–92. Hodder, I. (2009) Mavili’s voice. In L. Meskell (ed.), Cosmopolitan Archaeologies: 184–204. Durham, Duke University Press. Hodges, R. (2008) The Rise and Fall of Byzantine Butrint (Shkëlqimi dhe rënia e Butrintit bizantin). London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Hodges, R. (2009) Nikita Khrushchev’s visit to Butrint. May 1959. Expedition 51.3: 24– 26. Hodges, R. (forthcoming) S. S. Clarke’s abortive visit to Butrint, 1923. Hodges, R., Bowden, W. and Lako, K. (2004) (eds) Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Survey 1994–1999. Oxford, Oxbow. Hodges, R., Bowden, W., Gilkes, O. and Lako, K. (2004) Introduction. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Survey 1994–1999: 1–19. Oxford, Oxbow. Hodges, R., Kamani, S., Logue, M. and Vroom, J. (2009) The sack of Butrint, c. AD 800. Antiquity 83. 320. http://antiquity. ac.uk/projgall/Hodges (accessed 2011). Hordern, P. and Purcell, N. (2000) The Corrupting Sea: a Study of Mediterranean History. Oxford, Blackwell. Hoxha, E. (1985) Enver Hoxha mbi arkeologjinë e historinë e lashtë të Shqipërisë. Iliria 15.1: 29–47. Karaiskaj, G. (1984) Butrinti dhe fortifikimet e tij. Tirana, 8 Nëntori. Karaiskaj, G. (2009) The Fortifications of Butrint. London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Kondis, B. (1976) Greece and Albania 1908–1914. Thessalonika, Institute of Balkan Studies.

Korkuti, M. (1971) Shqipëria Arkeologjike. Tirana, Universiteti Shtetëror i Tiranës. Lako, K. (1981) Rezultatet të gërmimeve arkeologjike në Butrint në vitet 1975–76. Iliria 11.1: 93–154. Lane, A. et al. (2004) The environs of Butrint 1: the 1995–96 environmental survey. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Survey 1994–1999: 27–46. Oxford, Oxbow. Leake, W. M. (1835) Travels in Northern Greece. London, J. Rodwell. Martin, S. (2004) The topography of Butrint. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Survey 1994–1999: 76–103. Oxford, Oxbow. Meksi, A. (1983) Bazilika e madhe dhe baptisteri i Butrintit. Monumentet 25: 47–75. Melfi, M. (2007) The sanctuary of Asclepius. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint: An Assessment: 17–32. Oxford, Oxbow. Neville, L. (2004), Authority in Byzantine Provincial Society, 950–1100, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Pavlides, S. and Caputo, R. (2004) Magnitude versus faults’ surface parameters: quantitative relationships from the Aegean region. Tectonophysics 380: 159–88. Petricoli, M. (1990) Archeologia e Mare Nostrum: le missioni archeoloiche nella politica mediterranea dell’Italia 1898/1943. Rome, Valerio Levi. Pirazzoli, P. A., Laboral, J. and Stiros, S. C. (1996) Earthquake clustering in the eastern Mediterranean during historical times. Journal of Geophysical Research 101: B3, 6083–98. Romano, D. G. (2003) City planning, centuriation and land division in Roman Corinth. In C. K. Williams and N. Bookidis (eds), Corinth. The Centenary 1896–1996: 279–301. Athens, American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Soustal, P. (2004) The historical sources for Butrint in the Middle Ages. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Survey 1994–1999: 20–26. Oxford, Oxbow. Tartaron, T. (2004) Bronze Age Landscape and Society in Southern Epirus, Greece (BAR International Series 1290). Oxford, Archaeopress. Ugolini, L. M. (1937) Butrinto. Il mito d’Enea, gli scavi. Rome, Istituto Grafico Tiberino. Ugolini, L. M. (1942) L’acropoli di Butrinto (Albania antica 3). Rome, Scalia. Ugolini, L. M. (2003) Gli scavi del teatro. In O. J. Gilkes (ed.), The Theatre at Butrint. Luigi Maria Ugolini’s Excavations at Butrint 1928–1932 (Albania antica 4): 75–106. London, British School at Athens. Wilkes, J. (2003) The Greek and Roman theatres of Butrint: a commentary and reassessment. In O. J. Gilkes (ed.), The Theatre at Butrint. Luigi Maria Ugolini’s Excavations at Butrint 1928–1932 (Albania antica 4): 107–80. London, British School at Athens. Winnifrith, T. (2004) S. S. Clarke in Albania. In D. Shankland (ed.), Archaeology, Anthropology and Heritage in the Balkans and Anatolia: the Life of F. W. Hasluck, 1878–1920: 191–201. Istanbul, The Isis Press. Wiseman, J. and Zachos, K. (2003) (eds) Landscape archaeology in southern Epirus, Greece, Princeton, American School of Classical Studies at Athens.

1.  Excavating away the ‘poison’

Notes 1 Geary 2002: 15. 2 http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/570. 3 The interpretation presented here owes much to many discussions with my principal collaborators, David Bescoby, William Bowden, Oliver Gilkes, Simon Greenslade, David Hernandez, Sarah Leppard, John Mitchell, Nevila Molla and, above all, Inge Lyse Hansen. My special thanks to Sarah Leppard for the splendid drawings used in this chapter. 4 cf. Hodder 2009: 202–3. 5 Kondis 1976. 6 cf. Francis 2005; Gilkes 2003. 7 Carver 1993. 8 Bowden and Hodges 2004. 9 Hodges, Bowden and Lako 2004. 10 On the Triconch Palace excavations see, Bowden and Hodges 2011; Bowden and Mitchell 2007; Bowden, Hodges and Lako 2002; Gilkes et al. 2002. On the excavation at Diaporit see Bowden and Përzhita 2004; Bowden, Hodges and Lako 2002. 11 Bescoby 2007; Crowson and Gilkes 2007; Greenslade et al. 2006; Greenslade 2011; Greenslade in this volume. 12 Hodges 2008; Hodges et al. 2009; Kamani in this volume. 13 For details of these excavations see respectively Greenslade, Leppard and Logue; Kamani; and Sebastiani et al. in this volume. 14 This work is detailed in this volume in respectively Molla, Paris and Venturini; Molla; Wilson; and Leppard. 15 Leake 1835; see also Karaskaj 2009: 17. 16 Gilkes and Miraj 2000; Petricioli 1990. 17 Ugolini 1937: 11–12. 18 cf. Hansen 2009: 63; Hansen 2011. 19 Hodges 2009. 20 cf. Budina 1971; 1988. 21 Gilkes 2005. 22 Korkuti 1971: 1. 23 Baçe 1976; Ceka 1976; 1988; Karaiskaj 1984; 2009. 24 Lako 1981; Meksi 1983. 25 Hoxha 1985: 40. 26 Lane et al. 2004; Bescoby in this volume. 27 Francis 2005. 28 Cf. Tartaron 2004: 178–212; Lima this volume. 29 Pavlides and Caputo, 2004; Pirazzoli, Laborel and Stiros 1996; cf. Bescoby in this volume. 30 See Bescoby this volume; Hernandez and Çondi 2008: 290. 31 Leake 1835: 95; Ugolini 1937: figs 4, 11, 120, 121, 138. Similar circumstances have been noted further in south Epirus: Tartaron 2004: 178–212; Wiseman and Zachos 2003: 221–22. 32 See Davis in this volume. 33 See Hodges, Bowden, Gilkes and Lako 2004: fig. 1.10. 34 Cf. Martin 2004: fig. 6.24. 35 N. G. L. Hammond crossed by boat from a point near Xarra, cf. Hammond 1967: 95, whereas we surmise that

36 37 38 39

40

41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71

21

R. R. Clarke in the 1920s was advised to cross at a point immediately in front of Butrint; Hodges forthcoming, Winifrith 2004. For details of the excavation results see Greenslade, Leppard and Logue in this volume. Ceka 1988; and Ugolini 1942: 44; cf. Martin 2004: fig. 6.2. Hammond 1967: 109. For a discussion of the development of the sanctuary see Melfi 2007 and Wilkes 2003; the date of the refurbishment of the theatre of around 232–168 BC is based on the dedicatory inscription in the theatre itself, cf Cabanes, Drini and Hatzopoulos 2007: 71–72. The walls have traditionally been dated to the 4th–3rd century BC; however, the imposing walls at the Chaeonian capital of Phoenice have recently been dated to the first half of the 3rd century BC (see Bogdani and Giorgi 2007) and it is unlikely that those of Butrint should be earlier. Cf. Cabanes, Drini and Hatzopoulos 2007: 243. Bogdani 2008; Cabanes, Drini and Hatzopoulos 2007: 242–8; De Maria 2007. For details of the development of Phoenice see De Maria and Gjongecaj 2002; 2003; 2005; 2007. See Hansen 2007; 2009; 2011; and Hansen and Hodges 2007. On the relationship between Butrint and Phoenice see also Hansen in this volume. See the contributions by respectively Wilson and Leppard in this volume. Romano 2003. Cf. Gilkes, Hysa and Çondi in this volume; Hernandez and Mitchell in this volume. Cf. Bescoby in this volume. Molla, Paris and Venturini in this volume. Greenslade et al. 2006; Greenslade 2010; Greenslade in this volume. This is eloquently discussed in Bowden 2003. Coates Stevens (1995) discusses an analogues situation for early medieval occupation of Rome’s towered defences. Hodges 2008; Hodges et al. 2009; Kamani in this volume. Greenslade in this volume. Bowden and Hodges 2011. Hodges 2008: 83; Ugolini 2003: 78. For an example from Thebes see Neville 2004: 123–24. Bowden and Hodges forthcoming. Sebastiani et al. in this volume. See Andrews et al. 2004: fig. 8.17f and fig. 8.25c respectively. See Molla, Paris and Venturini in this volume. Cf. Sebastiani et al. in this volume. See Davis in this volume. For the move of the bishopric see Soustal 2004: 24. Bowden and Hodges forthcoming. Cf. Carvajal and Palanco in this volume. Cabanes, Drini and Hatzopoulos 2007: 243. As described by Horden and Purcell 2000: 100–101. Cf. Budina 1988. See the concluding chapter in this volume.

2  Landscape and environmental change: new perspectives David Bescoby

Introduction Over the past decade, our knowledge of the Butrint landscape has grown in step with our increasing understanding of the town in its many phases. The two are, of course, inextricably linked and form a dynamic relationship of complex interactions. This natural interplay is found to shape many of the patterns of settlement observed in the archaeological record, and our understanding of these patterns is largely conditional on comprehending wider environmental dynamics. The environmental and landscape studies described below in many cases set out to explore these interactions, and their significance for both the town and its surrounding environs through the centuries. The environmental backdrop to settlement at Butrint is fairly typical of the Mediterranean, being dominated over three millennia by ongoing alluvial sedimentation. The result has been the formation of a large coastal plain to the south of the town, and the progradation of the coastline westwards by over 2 km. It has been shown that nearly eight millennia ago, an extensive estuary extended inland along the fault-bound valleys to the north and south of Butrint.1 But as sea-level rise slowed, accumulating sediments brought in from the large mountainous catchment began to infill the valleys, the extremities of the estuary slowly becoming cut off from sea’s influence. This process is likely to have accelerated from the Middle Bronze Age, as large areas of the territory underwent extensive vegetation clearance.2 Lake Butrint survives as testimony to this once extensive coastal embayment, while the accumulated expanse of coastal floodplain today bears witness to agricultural intensification during the last century, crisscrossed with a dense network of derelict irrigation and drainage channels from the communist era. The once reclaimed seaward margins of the coastal plain have now begun to revert back to a wetland environment. The degree to which this dominant regime of large-scale sedimentary deposition and floodplain growth impedes archaeological visibility has been amply demonstrated by the results of past geophysical survey of the alluvial plain adjacent to Butrint, leading to the discovery and subsequent excavation of the extensive Vrina Plain settlement.3 Palaeo-

environmental studies at Butrint have since focussed on reconstructing snapshots of this changing landscape at key moments in the town’s history and on assessing the consequences of living within an often fast changing and unpredictable environment. One of the great challenges has been sufficiently resolving temporal connections between the town and its immediate environment, since disparity in chronological resolutions prevents anything more than very broad correlations to be made. The establishment of a high-resolution chronology for the sedimentary sequence of the Vrina Plain has allowed cultural and environmental sequences to be tied closely together, enabling a detailed landscape reconstruction for the Roman period to be attempted. One aspect of the changing natural environment whose impact has become apparent in recent years is that of localised tectonic activity, resulting in often detrimental changes in relative sea-level. This has at times had dramatic effects upon the town and dictated subsequent settlement patterns as well as measures to mitigate against seasonal flooding. While this is currently the least well studied aspect of environmental change at Butrint, a future detailed study of local sea-level change during the late Holocene might well prove valuable. 4 Water levels at Butrint continue to follow an upward trend and pose significant challenges in the long-term management and preservation of archaeological remains in many parts of the town.

Roman Butrint: A palaeo-geographical reconstruction The discovery of substantial Roman settlement beneath the alluvial floodplain south of the Vivari Channel focused environmental research to consider the formation and timing of infilling deposits and the extent of the intervening waterway that divides the town. Accurately reconstructing the palaeo-geography of this location was considered particularly important since extant evidence for both bridge and aqueduct structures known to link these two elements of Roman Butrint is limited.5 Here the challenge was the establishment of a chronological framework for landscape

2  Landscape and environmental change: new perspectives

23

Figure 2.1. Sedimentary sequence recorded along the eastern margins of the Vrina Plain

change at a resolution relevant to the timescales of existing archaeological data (i.e. a timeframe of decades rather than centuries). Only then is it really possible to compare environmental data with that from the archaeological record in a way that avoids circumstantial assumptions. A greater level of dating precision was achieved at Butrint by exploiting the volcanological history of the central Mediterranean region and establishing a chronology based on volcanic ash (tephra) fallout. Deposited tephra fragments, forming stratigraphic isochronous markers within deposited sediments, can be characterised geochemically and correlated with their eruptive source.6 In the central Mediterranean, many volcanic eruptions occurring during the past three millennia are well documented in historical sources and can be accurately dated. Well provenanced tephra horizons can therefore provide near absolute dates within stratified sedimentary sequences over large geographical area. A number of hand-augered transects were undertaken through sediments forming the distal margins of the Vrina Plain south of the Vivari Channel. A typical section through the plain sediments is shown in Figure 2.1, revealing the underlying sequence of environmental change from an open-water, marine dominated environment, followed by a transitionary period to a more stable wetland environment before the extensive deposition of terrestrially-derived alluvium. To help initially constrain the chronology of the sequence, suitable organic material from the main horizon of phragmites peat (see Fig. 2.1) was radiocarbon dated, giving a calibrated age of AD 1270–1320 or AD 1350–1390 (OxA-15101); the two possible dates resulting from marked oscillations in the calibration curve. These dates provide a useful chronological reference, although the variance in age ranges illustrates the problems of using this technique to derive high-resolution chronologies.

The sequence of recovered sediments was examined for micro (crypto) tephra fragments following a sequence of analytical procedures outlined in Bescoby, Barclay and Andrews 2008. Two horizons of tephra were identified within the sequence, their positions indicated in Figure 2.1. The uppermost sample (sample 29) contained a large quantity of angular and highly vesicular tephra shards. A Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) image of a typical shard of volcanic glass from this layer is shown in Figure 2.2. To attempt to provenance the discovered glass, the major element geochemistry of a number of shards was determined using an electron microprobe and found to be distinctive, containing high levels of silica and low levels of calcium.7 This immediately excluded the possibility of the tephra being derived from one of the large Italian volcanic centres such as Vesuvius and the Phlegraean fields, since their geochemistries are distinctly more alkaline in character. Similarly, pyroclastic products derived from Mount Etna, which are generally basaltic (low silica), could also be discounted. However, a close match for the Butrint tephra was found with material from historical eruptions on the island of Lipari within the Aeolian Archipelago, the tephra being within one weight percent of concentrations from the Forgia Vecchia crater that flanks Mount Pilato on Lipari. Archaeological data from the island indicate that renewed volcanic activity on Mount Pilato and the Forgia Vecchia crater began during the 6th century. The primary evidence is the sealing with an ash layer of 4th- and 5th-century deposits recorded principally at the GraecoRoman necropolis of Contra Diana near the town of Lipari, excavated from the 1940s.8 In addition, a number of hagiographical sources allude to volcanic activity within

24

David Bescoby

Figure 2.2. Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) image of a shard of tephra recovered from Butrint

the Aeolian Island Chain at this time, the best known being the Dialogues of Gregory the Great concerning the damnation of Theodoric (c. AD 526).9 While considerable caution is needed when assessing such texts in terms of their authorship, chronology and authenticity, useful indirect evidence can nonetheless be gleaned. Book four of the Dialogues is thought to have been written in AD 593.10 Taking the dates for Theodoric’s death and for the writing of the Dialogues at face value, it would not be too unrealistic to suggest that the Forgia Vecchia eruption took place within the 67 years between AD 526 and AD 593. The 6th-century tephra date provides a valuable chronological marker during a period of marked urban transformation and general decline. One of the questions often asked of this period, and the decline of the Western Roman Empire in general, concerns the potential effects of abandonment on the surrounding landscape. The widely accepted consequences of post-Roman decline involving widespread episodes of soil erosion, floodplain growth and the silting of harbours still persist, despite the discounting of synchronous alluvial events by several researchers and the highlighted importance of regional dynamics. Conversely, questions also remain as to the extent to which perceived post-classical environmental (climatic) change became a tipping factor for contracting settlements. At Butrint, against a backdrop of general urban decline, the resulting chronology for sedimentary deposition in the vicinity of the settlement appears to suggest the continuance of a marine/estuarine environment, persisting into the medieval period, with open water extending to the south and east of the town. Furthermore, the recorded sequence indicates the average rate of sedimentation from the 6th century to the onset of the stable phragmites-dominated wetland (dated to the 13th/14th century AD), is between 1.6 and 2 mm/year; fairly typical for late Holocene deposition in the region.11

Using this chronology, and assuming the phragmites reed swamp phase was fairly synchronous, a reconstruction of Roman shorelines was undertaken, using data interpolated from a large number of auger holes sunk in the vicinity. The GIS-based reconstruction is shown in Figure 2.3, in which a hypothetical landscape extending away from the Vrina Plain settlement is constructed using hypothetical water levels extrapolated from a range of archaeological deposits and topographic maps predating the agricultural engineering programmes of the 1960s. The reconstruction shows the Vrina Plain settlement flanked on the northwest and southwest by a short gravel foreshore, similar to that observed along the eastern margins of Lake Butrint today, with a wide body of water separating it from the walled town to the west. A series of shallow gravel banks existed within this wide channel, with at least one being exploited for the construction of a header tank for the aqueduct. Although no longer visible, much of the Vrina Plain complex has be shown to overlie extensive gravel formations, the remnants of a fluvially dynamic era marking the end of the Pleistocene where the confluence of major flows entering the embayment formed a series of gravel ridges and bars. It appears that the siting of the Vrina Plain complex exploited these formations, placing the settlement as close to the walled town as was possible, in a position that provided potentially deep moorings along the northwest corner.12 The triangular gravel formation in the mouth of the ancient Pavllas River is more speculative, although in keeping with the overall fluvial regime.

Post-Roman landscape change Historically, palaeo-environmental research has attempted to disentangle the anthropogenic causes of landscape change from natural processes such as climatic change, tectonic activity and relative changes in sea-level.13 As noted above, the dramatic contraction of urban life from the mid 6th century appeared to have little effect on the immediate environment. However, the establishment of the first medieval town in the early 11th century and renewed agrarian activity within the hinterland may well have begun to tip the ecological balance. By the late 13th and 14th centuries, significant changes in the surrounding landscape are recorded, the immediate area becoming dominated by reed swamp and marsh formations as channels contracted and shallowed (see Fig. 2.1).14 It is possible that the emergence of swamp and wetland formations around the margins of Butrint during the later Middle Ages represents a natural environmental succession, seen against an ongoing trend of sedimentary deposition and the continued growth of the surrounding floodplain. However, it is interesting to speculate that this period of urban revival led to renewed or increased clearance and agricultural production within the surrounding hinterland, or to the adoption of different agricultural strategies resulting in the increased sediment loading of inflowing rivers that tipped the environmental balance. Environmental systems often exhibit a threshold

2  Landscape and environmental change: new perspectives

25

Figure 2.3. Reconstruction of Roman shorelines showing key topographic features

effect and the sensitivity of the landscape is certainly likely to vary both in time and space.15 However, correlation does not necessarily infer causation and attempts to identify causality from the complexity of natural and cultural processes remain fraught with problems.16

Evidence for the impact of regional seismicity One of the essential variables to be assessed when quantifying landscape change in the central Mediterranean is that of regional seismicity. The bordering Ionian coastline forms something of a focal zone of neotectonic activity, resulting in a number of observable geoseismic phenomena and periodically more drastic seismic events. This is an innate feature of the region, imparting characteristics that were accepted, understood and even utilised by those who inhabited and settled the protracted landscape that typifies the Ionian coastal zone. The associations of Butrint with the cult of Asclepius and healing might well be connected to the presence of an inactive fault line running through the southern portion of walled town behind the forum and theatre complex that gives rise to a number of associated springs. However, evidence for earthquake damage at Butrint is also visible in the surface ruptures recorded in the theatre and at the Tower Gate.17 Spyros Pavlides and Riccardo Caputo consider Butrint as the macroseismic epicentre of a strong earthquake in AD 358 as well as

the probable epicentre for a lesser-known seismic event in AD 1153.18

Neotectonic background The main continental plate boundary runs parallel to the coastline west of Corfu, where the Adriatic microplate and Eurasian plate meet. Locally, the valley to the south of Butrint has formed within a tectonically controlled basin, or graben, bounded on both sides by normal faults running along the edge of the Mount Mile range and along the north eastern edge of the Korafi Hills. The location of the main local active fault line at Butrint is shown in Figure 2.4, along with a number of smaller, inactive fault structures. The current valley formation is the result of lateral extension; the high standing horst forming the Korafi Hills is now moving southwards, leading to the gradual downlift and subsidence of the unconsolidated valley sediments. The formation of large denuded scree fans along the base of the Mount Mile range suggests that the fault here is stable, possibly acting as a hinge point for the subsiding basin. The faults seen bounding Lake Butrint appear to be largely inactive today, having their origins in the early Quaternary. Active fault zones are often the causal locations of localised, shallow earthquakes and stresses building along this fault might be capable of reactivating smaller, interconnected faults within the locality.19

26

David Bescoby

Figure 2.4. Map of principle fault lines surrounding Butrint

Long-term trends The gradual downlift and subsidence of unconsolidated sediments at Butrint, including the areas south of the acropolis and the distal portions of the Vrina Plain have a number of important consequences, both for settlement in antiquity and for present-day conservation and management. Most importantly, the subsidence of valley sediments has led to a continued rise in relative water levels against a background of minor eustatic fluctuations in absolute sea levels.20 A recent study of coastal areas in northwest Greece found that in general terms, the mean trend in relative sealevel of the whole area can be approximated by a strongly linear trend with an average rate of sea-level rise of 1.0 m/ka.21 However, local sea-level evolution is likely to show a sequence of up and down movements within the rising trend. This seems to be borne out at Butrint, both in the observed submergence of Hellenistic and Roman levels within the walled town and also from environmental cores from the Vrina Plain, which indicate several phases of minor marine incursions. A comprehensive survey of archaeological levels at Butrint undertaken in 2007 allowed accurate comparison of excavated surfaces across the town, as they are today. Figure 2.5 shows a diagrammatic illustration of levels from key buildings where heights are expressed as relative to mean contemporary levels in the Vivari Channel (2007/8). It can be seen that the overall levels are significantly lower within

the western portion of the town (theatre and forum area), compared with chronologically contemporary horizons to the east. The elevated levels within this portion of the town may well have influenced post-Roman settlement, which appears to concentrate around areas such as the Great Basilica. The problem of rising water-levels during the late 4th century appears to have led to the construction of levelling-up deposits, recorded in the remodelled 4thcentury domus (preceding the Triconch Palace) along with a network of drains.22 The reoccupation of the Vrina Plain complex in the early 5th century is also accompanied by a raising up of ground levels by c. 0.5 m.23 It is quite possible this represents an attempt to mitigate the effects of seasonal flooding. Interestingly, the process appears to have been repeated during the 11th century, where the importation of significant levelling-up deposits is recorded at the forum and the Triconch Palace.

The impact of seismic activity at Butrint The level of seismic damage inflicted on standing buildings is largely a function of the construction methods employed, the quality of materials used and their response to physical tilting and shaking of the ground.24 However, the destructive effects of earthquakes are not usually the result of a single shock, but to the accumulative effect of the strongest shocks of a seismic sequence.25

2  Landscape and environmental change: new perspectives

27

Figure 2.5. Comparison of chronologically contemporaneous levels at a number of locations across the town

During the excavation of the southern sections of the forum in 2007, the impact of an earth shaking event was revealed in the apparent subsidence of the pavement, which was declined c. 2 degrees to the south. The southern section of the pavement, extending away from the bedrock of the acropolis, is constructed over unconsolidated sediments and so a degree of subsidence might be expected.26 However, the pavement was also found to be overlain by a 0.20 m thick deposit of alluvially-derived silts, suggestive of a more sudden downward movement of the pavement; the changing levels leading to an inundation of water.27 The northern sections of the pavement, constructed over a dipping apron of limestone bedrock effectively allowed the southern portion to hinge downwards as the sediment below gave way. The forum pavement and silts are sealed by destruction layer deposits that represent the widespread spoliation of surrounding buildings, within which the latest ceramics date to the 4th century AD.28 Here, the uppermost layer of compact demolition debris appears to represent a deliberate attempt to raise the ground level (most likely to combat rising water levels) and during the 5th century AD, water-resistant cocciopesto floors had been laid over what had been the forum area.29 Accurately dating the seismic event indicated by the structural deformation of the forum pavement remains difficult. Traditionally, incidents of earthquakes and tsunamis have been short in historical records and here it would be tempting to refer to Libanius’ reports of the earthquake that devastated much of Greece during the reign of Julian (AD 361–362) or the ‘sea wave’ reported by Cedrenus to have hit Epirus during the reign of Galatian (AD 375–382) (cf. Table 2.1). However, as Emanuela Guidoboni has pointed out, there exists no real relationship between seismic activity mentioned in surviving sources and real seismicity, in the sense that the written sources will only ever refer to a fraction of actual earthquakes.30

Instead, as Guidoboni suggests, the focus should be upon the long-term history of earthquakes within a region and archaeologically derived chronologies.31 Accurately determining the timing of destruction at a resolution capable of pinpointing individual seismic events is, however, often problematic and less well-resolved chronologies can only be suggestive, perhaps indicating a longer cycle of events involving anthropogenic and/or natural processes, such as abandonment and natural decay – possibly rendering structure more susceptible to final destruction by earthquakes. In common with most regions, there is a general lack of historical data during the late Roman/late antique periods giving explicit reference to earthquake destruction and repairs or the remission of tribute and taxes. The adoption of an integrated database recording system at Butrint facilitates an examination of individual records for the possible occurrence of similar structural failures recorded during the various excavations across the town. The records encompass a large spatial area and include the villa site of Diaporit on the eastern shores of Lake Butrint, the Vrina Plain and the Triconch Palace within the walled town. However, a critical assessment of excavation records and standing monuments is required to fully understand the evidence.32 In particular, care is needed in distinguishing between natural and human actions in deposit formation.33 Typical indicators associated with structures include framatic failure, seen as wall collapse, fissuring of walls and floors, evidence of ground movement and displacement and the deformation and disintegration of archaeological layers. Interrogating the database identified 13 contexts describing the collapse of large, bonded sections of wall that had apparently been toppled from their foundation and remained in situ. A chronology for these collapsed sections was derived from their relative position in the overall stratigraphic sequence, providing bracketed ante and post

28

David Bescoby yielded the tightest date range, bracketing AD 480–520, while at Diaporit the spread is largest, covering AD 451–582. It can be seen that while there is no precise correlation between the locations analysed, which might indicate that the town suffered extensive damage during a single, synchronous event, the data do seem to suggest a sitewide trend focussed upon the 6th century.35 This appears to precede a phase of abandonment recorded at the Triconch Palace and also on the Vrina Plain from the mid 6th century.36 While this is possibly indicative of the effects of a seismic event, it may well be that the data reflect a more natural demise of individual buildings and highlights the difficulties of interpreting toppled wall sections recorded in the archaeological record. Buildings are sensitive to cumulative, irreparable damage caused by alterations, neglect, floods, acts of warfare, deliberate damage and, in seismic areas, by the cumulative damage from previous shocks.37 By the early to mid 6th century, many of the buildings in the Triconch complex appear to have lost their roofs. In this state these structures are likely to eventually fail, without the help of earthquakes, during storm and seasonal flooding events and as a result of rising groundwater undermining footings and foundations.38 Interestingly, there is no apparent trace of structural collapse pertaining to the late 4th century, a period more strongly associated with seismic activity, as recorded at the Roman forum. Mid to late 4th century abandonment is evident from deposits recorded at the Triconch Palace and the Vrina Plain, yet it is perhaps the quick re-occupation of these areas in the early 5th century and the subsequence phase of intense church-building that leads to a more prompt and complete recycling of materials. Table 2.1 provides a chronological summary of the possible seismic events discussed above.

Conclusions Figure 2.6. Box plot of wall collapse dates for three locations at Butrint. Box extents indicate 95% confidence interval; centre is mean average

quem dates for their deposition. Archaeoseismologists often place a strong emphases on the direction of wall topple being indicative of the direction of seismic waves and used to locate the direction of the epicentre. In this study, no correlation was found to exist amongst the toppled wall structures and a large sample of buildings showing wall collapse along a particular axis would be required to draw meaningful results.34 Figure 2.6 shows a box plot of the average dates of collapsed wall sections from three locations at Butrint, along with the standard error at 95% confidence interval. In most cases, resolving an accurate date of destruction proved difficult since intervening layers rarely contained well-dated artefacts. The Vrina Plain

Environmental and landscape studies at Butrint have provided significant insight into how the contemporary landscape has evolved and the way historical landscapes are likely to have appeared at certain times in the past. Of principal importance is the establishment of sufficiently well-resolved chronologies to allow landscape conditions to be related to the archaeological record. At Butrint, this has been achieved through a combination of radiocarbon and tephrochronological dating techniques. The discovery of a clear tephrochronological marker dating to the mid 6th century was particularly significant (and fortuitous) and likely to prove useful as a wider geosynchronous marker for the Epirote region, potentially allowing spatially distant landscape chronologies to be tied together. Studies have also been able to assess the local impact and effects of seismically- driven subsidence as well as movement during earthquake events. Much of the research has been reflexive, seeking to understand and relate observations within the archaeological record to landscapewide tectonic regimes. The precise role of seismic events in

2  Landscape and environmental change: new perspectives

29

Table 2.1. Summary of possible seismic and global events impacting upon settlement at Butrint Event Seismic event Large earthquake(s) (Greece)

Date AD 358

Source Pavlides and Caputo 2004. Butrint thought to be the macroseismic epicentre of a strong earthquake AD 361–362 Libanius Orationes 18.292

Sea wave (Epirus)

AD 375–382 Cedrenus (cited in Guidoboni, Comastri and Traina 1994).

Possible seismic event

AD 500 ±20 See text. Toppled structures recorded at the Vrina Plain complex. AD 517 ±34 See text. Toppled structures recorded in the Triconch Palace area. AD 536 Hodges 2010. Dendrochronological and ice core evidence. Potential global cooling between 536 and 550. AD 1153 Pavlides and Caputo 2004. Butrint thought to be probable epicentre.

Possible seismic event Global volcanic event Seismic event Possible seismic event

Late 14th century

See text, and Bescoby, Barclay and Andrews 2008. Vrina Plain sediments indicate rapid rise in water level/marine incursion.

the history of Butrint remains largely unresolved, although it appears that no single event led to widespread destruction; at least none that is clearly detectable within the surviving archaeological deposits. Instead, it is likely that earthquakes contributed to the complex pattern of socio-political and economic processes defining the life of the settlement. Untangling these processes, particularly against the wider backdrop of urban decline and abandonment from the mid 6th century, remains a major challenge. It is clear that large-scale tectonically derived subsidence have led to a systematic raising of ground levels to escape seasonal flooding in many parts of the town during the 4th and 11th centuries. A detailed study of the trajectory of local sea-level rise would make an important contribution to understanding the spatial evolution of the town.

References Ambraseys, N. N. (2006). Earthquakes and archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Science 33, 1008–16. Bernabò Brea, L., Cavalier, M., Agnello, S. L. and Villard, F. (1994) Lipari. Contrada Diana. Scavo XXXVI in proprietà Zagami (1975–1984). Meligunìs Lipára, vol. 7. Palermo, Flaccovio Bernabò Brea, L., Cavalier, M. and Villard, F. (1991). Topografia di Lipari in età greca e romana. Parte I, L’Acropoli. Meligunìs Lipára, vol. 9. Palermo, Flaccovio. Bescoby, D. J. (2006) Detecting Roman land boundaries in aerial photographs using Radon transforms. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 735–43. Bescoby, D. J., Barclay, J. and Andrews, J. (2008) Saints and sinners: a tephrochronology for late antique landscape change in Epirus from the eruptive history of Lipari, Aeolian Islands. Journal of Archaeological Science 35: 2574–79.

Notes Late 4th-century levelling-up deposits recorded overlying the subsided Roman forum. Similar late 4th-century and early 5th-century raising of levels within the Triconch Palace complex and on the Vrina Plain.

Apparent 11th-centuty levelling-up deposits recorded in the forum and Triconch Palace area.

Bescoby, D. J., Cawley, G. C. and Chroston P. N. (2004) Enhanced interpretation of magnetic survey data using artificial neural networks: A case study from Butrint, Southern Albania. Archaeological Prospection 11: 189–99. Bintliff, J. (1998) Landscape change in classical Greece: A review. In F. Vermeulen and M. De Dapper (eds), Geoarchaeology of the Landscapes of Classical Antiquity (International Colloquium Ghent): 49–70. Peeters, Leuven. Bowden, W. and Hodges, R. (2011) (eds) Butrint 3: Excavations at the Triconch Palace, Oxford, Oxbow. Buckland, P. C., Dugmore, A. J. and Edwards, K. J. (1997) Bronze Age myths? Volcanic activity and human response in the Mediterranean and North Atlantic regions. Antiquity 71: 581–93. Chroston, N. and Hounslow, M. (2004) The geophysical survey: the extent and structural layout of the suburbs of Butrint on the Vrina Plain. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Survey 1994–1999: 64–76. Oxford, Oxbow. de Vogüé, A. (1978–80) (ed.) Grégoire le grand, Dialogues. Texte, critique et notes par Adalbert de Vogüé. Paris, Cerf. Frederick, C. (2000) Evaluating causality of landscape change: examples from alluviation. In P. Goldberg, V. Holliday and R. Ferring (eds), Earth Sciences and Archaeology: 55–76. New York, Plenum. Guidoboni, E. (1996) Archaeology and Historical Seismology: the need for collaboration in the Mediterranean area. In S. Stiros and R. E. Jones (eds), Archaeoseismology (Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper 7): 7–13. London, British School at Athens. Guidoboni, E., Comastri, A. and Traina, G. (1994) Catalogue of Ancient Earthquakes in the Mediterranean Area up to the 10th century. Rome, Istituto nazionale di geofisica. Guidoboni, E., Muggia, E. and Valensise, G. (2000) Aims and methods in territorial archaeology: possible clues to

30

David Bescoby

a strong fourth-century AD earthquake in the Straits of Messina (southern Italy). In W. J. McGuire, D. R. Griffiths, P. L. Hancock and I. S. Stewart (eds), The Archaeology of Geological Catastrophes (Special Publications 171): 45–70. London, Geological Society. Halstead, P. (2000) Land use in postglacial Greece: Cultural causes and environmental effects. In P. Halstead and C. Frederick (eds), Landscape and Land Use in Postglacial Greece (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 3): 110–28. Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press. Hasani, Xh. (1989) Sur les conséquences des tremblements de terre dans la ville de Butrint. Monumentet 2: 125–33. Hernandez, D. R. and Çondi, Dh. (2008) The Roman forum at Butrint (Epirus) and its development from Hellenistic to mediaeval times. Journal of Roman Archaeology 21: 275–92. Hodges, R. (2010) AD 536: The year Merlin (supposedly) died. In A. B. Mainwaring, R. Giegengack and C. Vita-Finzi (eds), Climate Crisis in Human History: 71–82. Philadelphia, American Philosophical Society. Lane, A. et al. (2004) The environs of Butrint 1: the 1995–96 environmental survey. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Survey 1994–1999: 27–46. Oxford, Oxbow. Narcisi, B. and Vezzoli, L. (1999) Quaternary stratigraphy of distal tephra layers in the Mediterranean – an overview. Global and Planetary Change 21: 31–50. Pavlides, S. and Caputo, R. (2004) Magnitude versus faults’ surface parameters: quantitative relationships from the Aegean region. Tectonophysics 380: 159–88. Pavlides, S., Koçiu, S., Mukelli, P., Hyseni, A. and Zouros, N. (2001) Neotectonics of southwestern Albania and archaeological evidence for seismic activity in Butrint. Bulletin of the Geological Society of Greece 34.1: 85–96. (In Greek with English abstract). Pirazzoli, P. A., Laboral, J. and Stiros, S. C. (1996) Earthquake clustering in the eastern Mediterranean during historical times. Journal of Geophysical Research 101: B3, 6083–98. Stiros, S. (1996) Identification of earthquakes from archaeological data: methodology, criteria and limitations. In S. Stiros and R. E. Jones (eds), Archaeoseismology (Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper 7): 129–52. London, British School at Athens. Vött, A., Bruckner, H., May, M., Lang, F., Herd, R. and Brockmuller, S. (2008) Strong tsunami impact on the Bay of Aghios Nikolaos and its environs (NW Greece) during Classical-Hellenistic times. Quaternary International 181: 105–22.

Notes 1 See Lane et al. 2004. 2 See Lima, this volume. 3 Bescoby, Cawley and Chroston 2004; Chroston and Hounslow 2004. See Greenslade in this volume for the Vrina Plain excavations. 4 Similar studies along the northwestern coast of Greece have found considerable intra-regional differences in sea level evolution, mainly as a result of localised tectonic factors, see Vött et al. 2008. 5 See the contributions by Wilson and by Leppard in this volume 6 See Narcisi and Vezzoli 1999. 7 See analytical results in Bescoby, Barclay and Andrews 2008.

8 See Bernabó Brea, Cavalier and Villard 1991; Bernabó Brea et al. 1994. 9 Dialogues of Gregory the Great 4.31. 10 de Vogüé, 1978–80 [Sources chrétiennes no. 251, 260, 265]. 11 Sedimentary deposition is usually punctuated, occurring during storm events or vertical tectonic movement. 12 Auger sections revealed a steeply sloping channel edge at this point. 13 See Halstead 2000. 14 The ubiquitous organic-rich ‘dark earth’ layers encountered within the town at this time may well reflect this environmental change and the utilisation of reeds for thatching etc. 15 Frederick 2000. 16 Cf. Buckland, Dugmore and Edwards 1997. 17 See Hasani 1989; Pavlides et al. 2001. 18 Pavlides and Caputo 2004: 159–88. It is also interesting to note the apparent period of inundation post-AD 1390 recorded in the sedimentary sequence (Fig. 2.1) that may conceivably be linked to sudden, seismically induced rise in relative water level. 19 It has been suggested that the post-Roman period, from the middle 4th century AD to middle 6th century AD, was subject to an increased intensity in seismic activity along the Hellenic Arc, affecting sites within the Peloponnese as well as the many Aegean island chains. To what extent this apparent increase in seismicity, which has become known as the Early Byzantine Tectonic Paroxysm (EBTP) (see Pirazzoli, Laboral and Stiros 1996), impacts on areas along the northwestern extent of the arc is unclear. 20 See Bintliff 1998. 21 See Vött et al. 2008. 22 See Bowden and Hodges 2011. 23 See Greenslade in this volume for details of the Vrina Plain excavations. 24 Stiros 1996. 25 See Stiros 1996. 26 Several hand augered south of the pavement revealed a sequence of over 2.5 m of marine silts and clays. 27 The mechanism by which structures over unconsolidated sediments subside is understood through the theory of liquefaction, in which high water content sediments effectively liquefy as water pore pressure rises during shaking, causing the heavy overlying structure to sink downwards. 28 Hernandez and Çondi 2008: 23. 29 Hernandez and Çondi 2008: 23–24. 30 Guidoboni 1996: 8. 31 Guidoboni 1996: 9. 32 Cf. Ambraseys 2006. 33 See Guidoboni, Muggia and Valensise 2000. 34 Failure under seismic load is also a complicated process and large earthquakes contain a number of different types of damaging waves, affecting different weak areas of the structure. 35 Although data from both the Triconch Palace and Diaporit appear to indicate an average date of AD 516, the wide error range of the Diaporit data makes it hard to read too much into this correlation. 36 For the Triconch Palace see Bowden and Hodges 2011; for the Vrina Plain see Greenslade, this volume. 37 Ambraseys 2006. 38 See Ambraseys 2006.

3  Butrint and the Pavllas River Valley in the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age Sarah Lima

Introduction Evidence for the earliest history of Butrint, in particular for a prehistoric settlement at the site, has eluded excavators for decades. Despite a long tradition of research concerning Butrint’s prehistory, fragmentary late Bronze Age (lBA) and early Iron Age (eIA) ceramics have been the only prehistoric remains discovered at the site.1 Buried below deep deposits of medieval re-deposited material, or sealed below structures of later ages, earlier material from Butrint has been scarce. Nevertheless, numerous ancient sources link the foundation of Butrint to the epic tradition, and specifically to a Trojan heritage. Virgil’s Aeneid describes Butrint as founded by the Trojan prince Helenus and as appearing, with its gates, walls and rivers, as ‘a Troy in miniature’; Dionysius of Halicarnassus relates that Helenus inherited Butrint after being taken to Epirus with Andromache as a slave of Pyrrhus, the son of Achilles; Teucer of Cyzicus (via Stephenus Byzantinus) cites an alternate tradition that Helenus was Butrint’s original founder, sacrificing a bull under the divine command that he establish a new city where it fell; and Euripides’s tragedy Andromache depicts Andromache and Helenus as ruling the Molossians, a native Epirote tribe that occupied the region south of Butrint.2 In fact, early explorations of prehistoric Butrint conducted by Luigi Maria Ugolini between 1928 and 1936 investigated the city’s Trojan heritage in search of ideological underpinnings for fascist Italian action in Albania.3 In 2006, the Origins of Butrint Project was created to further examine the prehistoric archaeology of Butrint, and to address questions about the conditions that may have led to the development of the site’s earliest settlement.4 The specific objectives were to investigate 1) the earliest observable phases of occupation on Butrint’s acropolis; 2) the environmental and regional conditions that affected the development of the site; and 3) more broadly, whether Butrint’s Trojan myth histories could have preserved memory of how communities of southwestern Albania identified and oriented themselves during the late Bronze and early Iron Ages, both with each other and within the greater region of ancient Epirus.

The question of the earliest observable phases at Butrint is complicated by the method applied to dating prehistoric ceramics from southwestern Albania, which consists primarily of making stylistic comparisons with pottery from south-eastern Albania and northern Greece.5 This is because the district of Saranda lacks well-stratified, precisely dated late prehistoric sites.6 The absence of prehistoric settlement architecture at Butrint echoes the archaeological record of southwestern Albania, in which excavated tombs and tumuli far outnumber settlements (e.g., the burial sites of Vajza, Vodhina, Pogona, and Bajkaj).7 This may be partly due to artefact collection and research preferences, since general expectations dictate that tomb contexts yield closed deposits and rich finds, in contrast with the eroded and modest assemblages that characterize continuously inhabited settlements. A primary aim of the Origins of Butrint Project was hence to examine settlement assemblages from Butrint and its surroundings, and to considerably extend the range of comparanda for this material. Regarding the third question, it is necessary to bear in mind both how different categories of evidence and tendencies toward selective reading of the written and archaeological material have influenced modern perspectives of Epirus, a region that Nicholas Hammond defined as bounded by the Ionian and Adriatic seas to the west, the northern part of the Llogara Mountains to the north, the Pindus Mountains to the east, and the Ambracian Gulf in the modern Greek prefecture of Arta to the south.8 An Iron Age Greek awareness of Epirus is demonstrated by references to the region in the Iliad and the Odyssey.9 Euripides’s poetic assertion of Epirus’s Trojan links, on the other hand, highlights how that particular tradition appears to have its genesis in 5th-century BC Greek conceptualizations of the region. Interpretation of the complete body of evidence has been influenced by the political border between Greece and Albania, which now divides the territory of ancient Epirus. For example, in studies of ancient Greek Epirus, Mycenaean and Iron Age Greek peoples have been afforded considerable importance as bearers of cultural development

32

Sarah Lima

(that is to say, the construction of large-scale fortifications, the adoption of craft techniques such as metallurgy, the production of ceramic fine wares, and the adoption of social rituals such as feasting).10 Conversely, in southern Albania, growth and formal organization of ancient settlements have been perceived as motivated almost exclusively by indigenous Illyrian populations.11 Under the long-standing communist regime of Enver Hoxha, scholars like Hasan Ceka, and Astrid Nanaj sought to uncover prehistoric periods at Butrint and surrounding hilltop sites. These excavations focused not on seeking out signs of Trojans or ties to Mycenaeans, but on identifying early phases of Illyrian (i.e., proto-Albanian) settlements in the landscape around modern Saranda.12

The sites investigated Three fortified hilltop sites were excavated during the 2006 and 2007 field seasons, and a fourth was mapped. The project compared evidence for early human activity at Butrint with indications of early activity at nearby hilltop sites, including Kalivo, Cape Stillo, and Vagalat (Fig. 3.1). This study sought to identify and characterize masonry and construction techniques at hilltop sites where there was evidence for prehistoric activity, in order to consider whether any of the fortifications now standing at Butrint date to periods preceding their proposed 5th-century BC date. A second objective was to understand how this subregion of southern Albania interacted with other parts of the greater Mediterranean during the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age, and how those relationships and dynamics shifted through time.

The acropolis at Butrint The fortifications of Butrint have sparked disagreement among scholars who research the earliest phases of development of Illyrian settlements and later processes of urbanization in prehistoric Albanian Epirus. Within the context of these debates, the term urbanization refers primarily to constructing civic and settlement space using large-scale architecture, not only in the creation of circuit walls, but also in the establishment of specialized spaces, such as areas of residence, sacred spaces (e.g., sanctuary boundaries), and public spaces (e.g., markets, theatres). These debates have implications for the social development of Butrint, since processes of defining settlement and civic space would require the mobilization of significant resources, the cooperation of labourers, leadership, and a sense of group identity and communal practices, in order to see construction through. Luigi Maria Ugolini suggested that the so-called Cyclopean walls on the acropolis of Butrint belong to a period much earlier than the 6th/5th century BC, with the polygonal walls forming a second larger circuit. He proposed that the city was of a certain importance by that period because of its mention by Hecateus of Miletus

(Fragmenta 73).13 Still later, he argued, a final 5th-/4thcentury BC circuit of the lower town was constructed in order to enclose an agora and a sacred area.14 Alternatively, Nicholas Hammond proposed that the topmost and midslope circuits were instead terrace walls, created in order to facilitate a single-phase 5th-/4th-century BC construction that was stimulated by civil war with Corfiote Greeks.15 In general, Ugolini’s gradualist model has been favoured over Hammond’s idea that the fortifications were built as a large-scale response to a dramatic event. Building on this gradualist idea is the additional hypothesis of an open “protourban” activity or settlement phase preceding the development of large-scale fortifications.16 Excavations in the 1990s sought to discover the earliest phases of habitation and human activity on Butrint’s acropolis, but a lack of well-stratified deposits prevented definitive answers. Catherine Morgan and Karim Arafat excavated deposits that dated as early as the 8th century BC, but they lay directly above bedrock in small, isolated pockets, with no associated architectural features.17 The same was true in the case of 88 Bronze Age and Iron Age sherds excavated on the acropolis between 1993 and 1995, dated by Astrid Nanaj and Katerina Hadzis on the basis of their fabric and decoration.18 The friable, low-fired fabric of these sherds is comparable to that of the prehistoric sherds from the site of Cape Stillo (see below). In 2006, excavations were conducted on the southeastern slope of the acropolis, in an area adjoining the trenches excavated by Hadzis and Nanaj (Fig. 3.2). It was our intention to excavate several test trenches in order to reevaluate the available results from earlier excavations and to determine if prehistoric ceramics could be connected to architectural features or to closed deposits.19 Our excavation of a 4 × 4 m sounding to a depth of 2.5 m uncovered a medieval terrace above a late Roman dining room built directly above bedrock, with stratified deposits of late Roman ceramics and wall plaster. Only a few fragments of prehistoric pottery were uncovered as survivors in these later deposits. The presence of late Roman levels directly above bedrock suggests that if prehistoric architecture and features existed on the acropolis, they would have been demolished by later building activities. Excavations at the nearby sites of Cape Stillo and Kalivo were also focused on identifying early phases of human activity, but these excavations also failed to yield ceramic deposits that could be linked to early architectural features.

Kalivo Kalivo is located 2 km east of Butrint, a densely vegetated hill partially bounded by Lake Butrint and overlooking the Vrina Plain (Fig. 3.1). The summit is enclosed by largescale limestone walls, which are still easily visible in late summer when the vegetation is low. The construction of the circuit wall would have been a considerable undertaking: its fortifications run for over 1300 m in length and are preserved up to 3 m high.20 The walls enclose the entire

3  Butrint and the Pavllas River Valley in the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age

33

Çuka

Lake Butrint

Kalivo Butrint

Vrina Plain

Vagalat

Cape Stillo

Çuka e Aitoit 0

5 km

Figure 3.1. Butrint and surrounding sites discussed in this study

hilltop with the exception of the side bordering the lake, where the steep slope would have precluded the need for a wall.21 There is a large gate on the site’s eastern side with a second, smaller entrance nearby, and a third gate on the southern side. Some of the blocks have squared faces and are laid in regular coursing, others are irregularly worked and laid in random coursing, and some sections are uncoursed. No bonding agent was detected during the course of the electronic survey, but the stones at Kalivo are more tightly fitted than the stones at Cape Stillo, where small stones fill in gaps between larger stones. Ugolini noticed Kalivo’s substantial walls while he was excavating at Butrint, and he speculated that the megalithic, ashlarstyle stones of the main gate were Mycenaean.22 In 2004, Kalivo was studied by the Butrint Foundation as part of a project led by Andrew Crowson and Ilir Gjipali to map the walls and visible features at Kalivo, and to identify the site’s phases of construction and human activity.23 Contrary to Ugolini, it was suggested that the stylistic

characteristics of the fortifications reflect Hellenistic phases of construction, based on comparisons with typologies of walls from nearby Kephallonia and Ithaca.24 Excavation did yield small deposits of prehistoric pottery beneath the walls near the southern gate and in a rectangular 8 × 5 m structure enclosed by the acropolis circuit wall, indicating phases that either related to or preceded the construction of the settlement’s fortifications.25 In 2007, five 2 × 1 m sounding trenches were excavated on the hilltop of Kalivo (Fig. 3.3): one immediately abutting the interior of the standing southeastern fortification wall (Trench 1, excavated to a depth of 1.5 m), two on a terrace approximately 50 m north of the southern wall of the hilltop (Trenches 2 and 3, both approximately 0.5 m in depth), one on top of the hill, bounded by a circular rock arrangement of indeterminate origin (Trench 4, 0.5 m in depth); and one just west of the 8 × 5 m structure discovered in 2004 (Trench 5, 1 m in depth). Trench 1 revealed no foundation trench for the Kalivo fortification.

Hadzis and Nanaj excavation

2006 excavation

Acropolis wall survey Castle

0

Figure 3.2. Hadzis and Nanaj excavations and 2006 acropolis excavations

Kalivo

0

200 m

Trench 5

Trench 4

Trench 3

Trench 2

Trench 1 0

50 m

Figure 3.3. Plan of the trenches excavated at Kalivo

50 m

3  Butrint and the Pavllas River Valley in the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age

35

Figure 3.4. Closed form with plastic lump decoration in strong brown fabric, Kalivo Table 3.1. Fabric study categories (based on 2006 Cape Stillo pottery study and 2009 re-study) Fabric type type 1

Characteristics Dense red, black, or brown coarse fabric with chert inclusions and occasional polishing or plastic decoration Orange, grey, or buff fine fabric with occasional buff paint

Associated categories Semifine; coarse

Comparable Epirote categories KIII; KII/III

Fine; semifine

KIV

type 3

Orange-red fine fabric without slip or burnish and with a powdery surface

Fine; semifine (rare)

Orange-Red Ware

type 4

Pink and light green coarse fabric with chert, lime, and botanical inclusions (no surface treatment)

Cook

KII/KIII

type 5

Brown or orange-red coarse fabric with friable, unoxidized centres and very occasional instances of polishing

Semifine (rare); coarse, KII/KIII cook

type 2

Pottery deposits recovered during these excavations were collected approximately 0.5 m from the surface and contained material of mixed date. Nevertheless, of the approximately 200 ceramics collected from these trenches, approximately half of them were made of coarse ware fabrics comparable to diagnostic prehistoric fragments excavated at Kalivo in 2004. The Kalivo coarse wares were also comparable to some of the earliest Cape Stillo wares, though the Kalivo fabric had slightly different colour and a sandy fabric composition, possibly a result of the clay recipe used on site. A closed form from Kalivo with applied plastic lump decoration demonstrates the fabric was used in prehistoric periods (Fig 3.4 and Table 3.1).26 Semi-fine vessels were made in the same fabric.27 The ceramics

were not associated with architectural features (e.g. a foundation trench or the stones of the wall). However, the stratigraphy on top of the hill is deeper and more intact, and may eventually yield more specific information about prehistoric phases at Kalivo.28

Cape Stillo Approximately 5 km southwest of Butrint, positioned on the coast of the Ionian Sea and within the gradually sloping chain of the Korafi Hills, is the fortified hilltop site known as Cape Stillo (Fig. 3.1). A catchment on the southern side of the hill would have provided good, if limited, arable land; views of the sea from the northern and western limits of

Sarah Lima

36

Possible entrance

STL-A

STL-C

Ci

Test trench

d

ise

0

m pr

co

STL-2-B-2

-1

-2-B

STL

rc ui t

STL-7

Cape Stillo

of

lim es to ne ou tcr op s

Extent of plateau

20 m

STL-4 STL-3

STL-2

Ro bbe

Entrance

dw

a ll

Scarp face

Vagalat 0

20 m

Figure 3.5. Plans of the prehistoric enclosures at Cape Stillo and Vagalat

the hilltop would have facilitated visual contact between Cape Stillo and the Straits of Corfu; and the northern and eastern edge would have allowed a vantage point over the Vrina Plain and Butrint. First identified as a place of interest in a 1995–96 Butrint Foundation survey, Cape Stillo had never been excavated prior to 2006.29 One component of our work at Cape Stillo was to map the site’s hilltop enclosure (Fig. 3.5). Built in a crude Cyclopean masonry style, the wall is constructed from unbonded sub-rectangular, rough-faced stones ranging from cobble to boulder size (greater than 0.20 m long). Smaller stones fill the spaces between the boulders and

form the centre of the wall (Fig. 3.6). In some places (e.g. on the southwestern side), the circuit is completed by the natural steep slope of the hill, often facing directly onto the Straits of Corfu, rather than by a continuous section of wall. A configuration of stones on the northern side of the fortifications forms a gate, the identification of which is based on a similar construction at the site of Vagalat further inland (description below). Between two excavation seasons in 2006 and 2007, eleven test trenches ranging between 1 × 1 m and 2 × 2 m in size were excavated within the Stillo enclosure, and on the slopes of the hill (Fig. 3.5). The hill of Cape

3  Butrint and the Pavllas River Valley in the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age

37

Figure 3.6. East-facing wall section of Cape Stillo fortifications

Stillo is predominantly limestone, shallowly covered by a reddish colluvial stratum that rarely exceeds a depth of 1 m. Faced with what appeared to be an eroded and mixed soil profile, we used 0.10 m arbitrary levels for the collection of artefacts. However, our deepest trenches located just inside of the southern edge of the circuit (STL areas B-2–2 and STL-7) did appear to show some limited preservation of a stratigraphic sequence. This observation is based on the relative vertical and horizontal distributions of different ceramic ware categories, identified based on the appearance of their cores, their surface treatments, and how they appeared to have been used (these ware categories and their distributions will be discussed in detail below, and in Tables 3.1–2).30 However, erosion has figured prominently in the site formation processes of Cape Stillo, and the ceramics collected from the site are not primary deposits. Collected ceramics were compared with classification schemes developed for ceramics from Tren and Maliq in Korça (southeastern Albania), as well as with Greek Epirote pottery assemblages; the results are outlined below. Because we were not able to obtain permissions to excavate walls at Cape Stillo, it was not possible to confirm their date range. Likewise, since there were no demonstrable features preserved, the function of the area enclosed by Cape Stillo’s walls (c. 0.4 ha) remains unknown. Nevertheless,

the style of the wall construction, the location and form of the site, and the types and concentrations of diagnostic ceramics found in the area suggest that the site was occupied in prehistoric periods. The form of the wall compares with other Epirote prehistoric fortified sites confirmed through excavation (e.g. Kastriza in northwestern Greece).31 Based on its location close to the sea and the Vrina Plain, it perhaps functioned as a settlement or lookout post.

Vagalat The Origins of Butrint Project also mapped fortifications from Vagalat, a hilltop site with an impressive circuit wall, located approximately 15 km east of the circumscribed area of Butrint, Kalivo, and Cape Stillo (Fig. 3.1). Vagalat overlooks the Pavllas River Valley from the southeastern slopes of Mount Mile. The fortified area is approximately 0.1 ha, with walls up to 1 m high and 2 m wide (Figs 3.5 and 3.7). The masonry consists of random-coursed, roughfaced boulders with small stones filling the spaces between them. The limestone is presumably local, because quarrying marks were noticed in bedding plains on the hilltop. The sheer southern slopes of the hilltop were unfortified, and an entrance was constructed on the northwestern side of the enclosure (Figs. 3.5 and 3.7). In addition to these earlier features, a Hellenistic tower is situated c. 80 m below,

38

Sarah Lima

Figure 3.7. Two views of the north-facing gate (A) and section of the gate (B) of Vagalat

3  Butrint and the Pavllas River Valley in the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age on the hill’s lower slopes. The construction of the latter may explain the robbed stones from the upper enclosure’s northeastern face. A shallow ring of stones, ostensibly the lower foundations of a tumulus, was also noticed about 150 m outside of the circuit. No other architectural features were noticed within the Vagalat circuit, and no ceramic material was collected. However, the mapping of the site’s fortifications provided data for comparisons with the sites along the coastal plain that were excavated during the 2006 and 2007 seasons, as discussed below.

Discussion In general, the hilltop sites discussed above have similar types of locations and formal qualities, and they have yielded comparable bodies of archaeological material. They are (with the exception of Vagalat) located less than 5 km apart, each capable of being reached by foot in half a day or less. They are located on the Epirote Coastal Plain – an indented rocky fault-bound coastline of Triassic limestone hills east of the Straits of Corfu. Butrint, Kalivo and Cape Stillo would have all been approachable by sea; high elevations would have allowed expansive views over the surrounding sea and plain; and they were located near arable land. Vagalat, which overlooks the Pavllas River Valley, is not a part of the Epirote Coastal Plain in the manner of the three aforementioned sites, and its elevation is higher than these. Further, its location on the southern stretch of Mount Mile means that it effectively controlled the mountain pass. In spite of its more defensive position and remote location, however, Vagalat shares architectural qualities with these sites, making it a good comparative site for this region. The fortifications of hilltop sites within this region share similar construction techniques. Cape Stillo and Vagalat typify the Cyclopean masonry that was characteristic of late prehistoric sites of this region: large, unbonded, roughly faced boulders with a rubble core. The northern sections of both of these enclosures also featured gateways accentuated by large boulders (Figs. 3.5 and 3.7). Neither were complete circuits since the slope of the hilltop afforded some natural protection. In light of the intervisibility, close proximity, and formal similarities of Kalivo, Cape Stillo, and Vagalat, it appears that these sites engaged in transferences of ideas and goods.32 Unfortunately, lack of visibility and a poor state of preservation have hindered identification of additional internal features that may have shown how these sites functioned and were related. As noted, there is no similar architectural evidence for prehistoric phases at Butrint. A site located approximately 8 km north of Butrint, on the northwestern edge of Lake Butrint has also yielded evidence of Bronze Age activity. Çuka, a large hilltop settlement, boasts the only example of prehistoric metalwork from this area: a bronze dagger identified as Middle Bronze Age Aegean (Fig. 3.1).33 The dagger was found together with a deposit of 18 pots and four projectile points; however, the deposit was found at a shallow depth

39

(c. 0.30 m), and its relationship to the architecture of Çuka was not described when the finds were published.34 The role that Çuka played in this region during late prehistory is a question that warrants further consideration through a re-examination of the site’s stratigraphic sequencing in relation to its architectural features and archaeological material, perhaps via further excavation. Having proposed a series of local networks for Butrint and other nearby sites, the question is how this complex should be considered in relation to networks in Greek Epirus, the Ionian Islands, and western Macedonia. Several excavations, surveys and ceramic studies have been done in Greek Epirus during the last decade, which provide comparanda for the ceramics from Cape Stillo and Kalivo.35 The interpretive potential of the Cape Stillo assemblage is limited by the poor stratigraphy and its fragmentary condition, but of the c. 3000 sherds collected approximately 285 are prehistoric diagnostic fragments, including examples of possible imports and of imitative traditions of materials from the south and east. In 2009, the ceramics excavated from Cape Stillo and Kalivo were re-examined to reevaluate the original 2006 fabric study.36 The 2006 fabric study created a five-class fabric typology based on inclusions (ratio, shape, and size), levigation, colour, surface treatment, and sherd wall thickness (Table 3.1). Sherds and fabric categories were also classified and quantified according to four ware categories: fine, semifine, coarse and cook. This treatment of the pottery allowed for general connections to be made between diagnostic forms and fabrics. The diagnostic fragments were further compared to chronotypes from other sites. Excavations in the Korça basin (e.g., Maliq and Tren) yielded early type-sites that suggested a continuous prehistoric Illyrian ceramic sequence during the 1960s, but few comparisons were made with ceramic classification-schemes outside of Albania. Therefore, the Cape Stillo ceramics were compared with examples and typologies from Greek Epirus in order to generate a more robust characterization and categorization of late prehistoric ceramics in the environs of Butrint (Table 3.2).37 The 2009 re-examination revealed the following: a) there are many more prehistoric diagnostics from Cape Stillo and Kalivo than originally estimated; b) these ceramics have greater chronological resolution than previously acknowledged; c) there was correspondence between the fabric categories defined in 2006 and the ware categories defined in 2009; and d) there were noteworthy similarities between the pottery from Cape Stillo and settlements discovered within the municipalities of Ioannina and Preveza in Greece, suggesting that similar ceramic styles and traditions were in circulation among these prehistoric communities. For example, Cape Stillo type 3 fine and semifine wares, characterized by their bright orange-red colour and porous, powdery surfaces, may correspond to Epirote Orange-Red Ware, dated to c. 1100/1000–700 BC based on its stratigraphic occurrence together with KIVa Matt-

Sarah Lima

40

Table 3.2. Quantification of diagnostic Cape Stillo ceramics collected in 2006 and 2007   Butrint Project fabric type Type 1 handle Type 1 rim Type 1 base Type 1 body TYPE 1 TOTAL Type 2 handle Type 2 rim Type 2 base Type 2 body TYPE 2 TOTAL Type 3 handle Type 3 rim Type 3 base Type 3 body TYPE 3 TOTAL Type 4 handle Type 4 rim Type 4 base Type 4 body TYPE 4 TOTAL Type 5 handle Type 5 rim Type 5 base Type 5 body TYPE 5 TOTAL Totals of Epirote ware categories Total number of diagnostics identified Percentages of Epirote wares

Epirote ware classification categories KII/III ware KIII/imitation Minyan ware 24 35 3 30 92 4 2 0 1 7 0 2 0 1 3 6 6 1 2 15 29 18 12 20 79 196

11 16 0 10 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 39

 

KIV Matt-painted ware?

Orange-red ware

0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 6

0 0 0 0 0 1 7 0 0 8 1 7 4 2 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 24

Classicalbyzantine (post-prehistoric) wares 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 20 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22

8.36%

7.67%

287* 68.29%

13.59%

2.09%

* Diagnostic fragments represent 8.82% (287/3254) of the total number of collected sherds from Cape Stillo in 2006 and 2007, and have been designated as diagnostic based on their forms and/or decorative styles.

Painted Ware. 38 Sotirios Dakaris defined KIV wares by their thin walls, well-levigated clay, even firing and occasional examples of linear decorations in dark paint; Kenneth Wardle observed similar qualities of manufacture in Orange-Red Ware.39 The fine and semifine buff-coloured vessels that had previously been classified as Cape Stillo type 2 fabric may be additional varieties of Orange-Red Ware described above, or imitations of KIVa Ware. While there are no painted examples that definitively confirm this identification, evidence for type 2’s prehistoric date, was discovered during the 2009 study season in the form of several prehistoric buff-coloured, semifine sherds. One is a triangular horizontal handle of a large open basin form with punctate decoration (Fig. 3.8); the second is a pointed

lug handle from a hemispherical bowl form that matches examples of KIVa Ware (Fig. 3.9).40 In light of similarities observed between Cape Stillo types 2 and 3 and Epirote KIVa and Orange-Red Wares, this study has identified ceramic styles that appear to have been circulating not only between Greek and Albanian Epirus, but between Albania and western Macedonia as well.41 It also appears that ceramic manufacturing techniques and decorative styles were circulating among Greek and Albanian Epirote communities during the late Bronze and early Iron Ages. Many sherds in Cape Stillo type 1 fabric show evidence for polishing, plastic decoration, internal or external treatment with bitumen, and a colour range that corresponds to categorizations of KII/KIII Epirote coarse wares.42 Several finely burnished and formed type 1

3  Butrint and the Pavllas River Valley in the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age

41

Figure 3.9. Pointed lug handle from deep bowl form in semifine buff fabric from Cape Stillo

Figure 3.10. Imitation Minyan wishbone handle with polishing and orange gloss, Cape Stillo

Figure 3.8. Horizontal handle with punctate decoration in semifine buff fabric from Cape Stillo

Figure 3.11. KIII horizontal trianguloid handle with polishing and brown gloss, Cape Stillo

Figure 3.12. KII/III sherd with plastic finger-impressed decoration, Cape Stillo

handles may be fragments of Epirote KIII semifine wares, which are characterized by medium to small-sized vessels with handles that are triangular, horizontal, high-swung, wishbone or forked in form (Figs 3.10–11).43 Epirote KIII wares are open, thin-walled vessels, sometimes with carination and frequently with polished surface treatment, similar in their date range to Imitation Minyan wares (in circulation between c. 1700–900 BC).44 Although they are probably table wares, they are classified as semifine because

they are handmade, contain inclusions, and have walls of uneven thickness.45 Both types 1 and 5 coarse and cook wares at Cape Stillo bear resemblance to KII/KIII Epirote prehistoric wares. They appear at both Cape Stillo and Kalivo as thick-walled vessels with many chert inclusions, occasional interior polishing, and sometimes with plastic or incised decoration (cf. Fig. 3.12).46 Uniform distributions of inclusions in type 1 and 5 cook wares suggest that chert

42

Sarah Lima

temper was employed to strengthen these vessels against repeated heating. Likewise, the light and pumice-like texture of Cape Stillo type 4 fabric may also be explained by its use as a cook ware. The chronological range for KII/KIII divisions is long, dating at least to the beginning of the late Bronze Age and possibly earlier, giving it a span from c. 1700 to 900 BC.47 Deposits of Cape Stillo type 5 were commonly found in the lowest stratum of the test pits conducted at Cape Stillo, supporting the idea that this was an early style that preceded types 2 and 3, which were more commonly present in mixed upper strata. The comparability of Cape Stillo types 1 and 5 to the KII/KIII Epirote ware category, and the prevalence of these coarse and cook wares in comparison with types 2 and 3 may indicate that, in addition to ceramics and styles circulating, it is likely that traditions of manufacture were also shared among late Bronze Age and early Iron Age communities in Greek and Albanian Epirus. In addition to these proposed ceramic parallels, another consideration is how site locations, layouts, and architectural styles in northwestern Greece and the Ionian Islands compare to the hilltop sites near Butrint. Two examples of fortified hilltop sites in Greek Epirus that are similar to the partial circuits from Vagalat and Cape Stillo are Ephyra-Xylokastro and Kastriza, located in the municipality of Preveza on the coastal plain of what was once the deep harbour of the Glykys Limen.48 Similarities include the use of Cyclopean-style masonry, the presence of a north-facing gate, and use of the natural shape of the hilltop in order to obviate the need for the construction of a full circuit.49 Moreover, the fortifications at Kastriza and Ephyra-Xylokastro, like the partial circuits at Vagalat and Cape Stillo, consist of roughly hewn, irregularly shaped boulders with small stones to fill in the gaps, and rubble packing between the two worked faces.50 The proximity of Kastriza and Ephyra to several other sites near the Glykys Limen (e.g., Spilaion and Koumasaki) also compares with the arrangement of water-oriented sites near Butrint.

Conclusions Comparable ceramic technologies and fortification construction techniques are present in Greek and Albanian Epirus during the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age. Based on the sites where commonalities have been observed, the river valleys of the Kalamas and Aoös (in Albania, the Vijosa) were probably well-frequented paths for the circulation of people, ideas, and goods throughout late prehistoric Epirus.51 How the intensity and nature of these interactions differed from those based on coastal contacts and sea routes (e.g., Mycenaean traffic through the Ionian Islands) warrants more attention.52 Comparisons between Epirote classification schemes and the Cape Stillo and Kalivo ceramic material suggest the possibility that land contacts played a bigger role in the circulation of ceramics and ceramic traditions within this region than previously supposed.53 Ethnographic studies of pastoral

groups and transhumance routes along the Greek-Albanian border might shed light on paths also accessible during antiquity; the appearance and form of these routes, and the ease or difficulty of travelling them, have yet to be extensively and accurately studied.54 Further considerations of variant and comparable formal qualities of southwestern Albanian and north-western Greek sites will clarify how Epirote architectural traditions, site locations, and settlement patterns may have been contingent upon environmental, functional or communication-based factors. For example, at Preveza, the Cyclopean masonry and intensive settlement pattern around the Glykys Limen may well have been the result of coastal contact between local Epirote communities and Mycenaean seafaring traders.55 That argument receives support from the fact that surveyed sites around the Glykys Limen have yielded examples of imported Mycenaean pottery (e.g., EphyraXylokastro, Kastriza, Koumasaki and Spilaion). 56 In proposing that there were Mycenaean settlements in Greek Epirus, Tartaron makes the point that Mycenaean palaces (and ports of trade) are naturally more discontinuous than continuous.57 Hence, the Glykys Limen represents not some far off corner of a continuously connected Mycenaean colonial periphery, but a ‘point’ community set up to access raw or manufactured materials from Epirus.58 This discontinuity and variability of settlement patterns necessitates the examination of cross-cultural interactions on a local level before assessing them on a larger, interregional level.59 In examining the construction of fortified hilltops near Butrint, attempts have been made to interpret their style of construction and location along the Epirote coastal plain as centred on Mycenaean sea trade routes to southwestern Albania. However, the Albanian fortified hilltop sites that the Origins of Butrint Project examined did not have associated imported Mycenaean pottery.60 This difference in the Greek and Albanian bodies of material indicates certain markers that Aegean prehistorians have identified as signs of Mycenaean influence (e.g., hilltop sites arranged intervisibly, or fortifications built in the Cyclopean style) can also occur as Epirote settlement developments without a Mycenaean presence. This observation invites re-examination of other markers of Epirote “development” that have been credited to Mycenaean influence, including behaviours (e.g., signs of feasting), stylistic choices (e.g., use of the kylix ceramic form), and manufacturing techniques (e.g., metal working). Likewise, in the study of early Iron Age periods, colonizing Greeks have often been credited as the catalysts of Epirote processes of urbanization, whereas it is less usual to regard native Epirote populations as active creators and manipulators of their material culture. If it is possible to identify Albanian Epirote peoples enacting large-scale landscape changes during the late Bronze Age, perhaps it is also possible that native Epirotes played active roles in urbanization during the 8th century BC and after. A broader examination of Epirote archaeological

3  Butrint and the Pavllas River Valley in the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age evidence, integrating a range of material from various late Bronze Age/early Iron Age site types (especially settlements), would contribute to a more balanced impression of Albanian Epirote cultural development. There has been a tendency to focus on identifying cultural markers from the southern Greek mainland in the prehistoric Epirote archaeological record. Emphasis, therefore, has been placed on Mycenaean-style burials, bronze artefacts and ceramic styles. This approach is less useful in Albanian Epirote settlement contexts, where Mycenaean imports appear in scant quantities, if at all. The prehistory of Epirus has regularly been discussed in terms of divisions that correspond to modern Balkan political boundaries and reflect contemporary ethnic identities more than ancient realities; neither the “Illyrian world” nor the “Mycenaean world” were bounded by the borders that now define Greece and Albania.61 However, the use of labels that originally described stylistic qualities of artefacts within narratives of state, national and communal identity has afforded them considerable prominence. By studying circulations of ideas and traditions within Epirus and between Epirus and other places, the cultural value of imports (Mycenaean, Greek and otherwise), and the contexts in which they were valued, will also become more distinctly defined. These processes of re-evaluation will make it increasingly possible to consider the region of ancient Epirus on its own terms, identifying trajectories of change that account for both local and extra-local interactions among the settlements surrounding Butrint in late prehistory. It is in these interactions that we may be able to reconstruct the environs and conditions that prompted the eventual emergence of sites like Butrint itself.

References

Arafat, K. W. and Morgan, C. (1995) In the footsteps of Aeneas: excavations at Butrint, Albania 1991–2. Dialogos. Hellenic Studies Review 2: 25–40. Bodinaku, N. (1973) Fouilles Archéologiques 1973, Pazhok (Elbasan). Iliria 3: 407–12. Campbell, J. K. (1964) Honour, Family and Patronage: A Study of Institutions and Moral Values in a Greek Mountain Community. Oxford, Clarendon Press. Ceka, N. (1988) Fortifikimi antic i Butrintit. In N. Ceka (ed.), Butroti: Permbledhje Studimesh: 115–32. Tirana, Akademia e Shkencave e RPSSH, Qëndra e Kërkimeve Arkeologjike. Ceka, N. (1999) Butrint: A Guide to the City and Its Monuments. London, Butrint Foundation. Crowson, A. (2005a) The perimeter walls of Kalivo: electronic survey 2001. In I. L. Hansen, O. J. Gilkes and A. Crowson

(eds), Kalivo and Çuka e Aitoit, Albania. Interim Report on Surveys and Excavations 1928–2004: chapter 4. www.

butrintfoundation.co.uk (accessed 2011). Crowson, A. (2005b) Excavations at Kalivo 2004. In I. L.

Hansen, O. J. Gilkes and A. Crowson (eds), Kalivo and Çuka e Aitoit, Albania. Interim Report on Surveys and Excavations 1928–2004: chapter 5. www.butrintfoundation.

co.uk (accessed 2011). Dakaris, S. I. (1951) Ανασκαφή εις Καστρίτσαν Ιωαννίνων. Πρακτικά: 173–83.

43

Dakaris, S. I. (1952) Ανασκαφή εις Καστρίτσαν Ιωαννίνων. Πρακτικά: 362–86. Damiata, B. N., Papadopoulos, J. K., Amore, M. G., Morris, S. P., Bejko, L. Marston, J. M., and Southon, J. (2008) Të dhëna mbi kronologjinë absolute të arkeologjisë shqiptare: datime radiokarboni AMS nga Apollonia dhe Lofkëndi (Towards an Absolute Chronology of Albanian Archaeology: AMS Radiocarbon Dates from Apollonia and Lofkënd). Iliria 2007–2008: 135–86. Douzougli, A. (1996) Κοιλάδα Αώου. Αρχαιολογικές μαρτυρίες για την ανθρώπινη δραστηριότητα από τους προϊστορικούς χρόνους ως την ύστερη αρχαιότητα. In B. Nitsiakos (ed.), Α᾿ Eπιστημονικό Συμπόσιο Ἡ επαρχία Κόνιτσας στο χώρο και στο χρόνο᾽, Κόνιτσα 12–14 Μαΐου 1995: 11–61. Patras, Ιδιωτική Έκδοση. Douzougli, A. and Zachos, K. (1994) Αρχαιολογικές έρευνες στην Ήπειρο και τη Λευκάδα, 1989–1990. Ηπειρωτικά Χρονικά 31: 11–50. Douzougli, A. and Zachos, K. (2002) L’archéologie des zones montagneuses: modèles et interconnexion dans le Néolithique de l’Épire et de l’Albanie méridionale. In G. Touchais and J. Renard (eds), L’Albanie dans l’Europe préhistorique (BCH Suppl. 42): 111–45. Paris, École Française d’Athènes. Evangelides, D. E. (1935) Η Ανασκαφή της Δωδώνης. Ηπειρωτικά Χρονικά 10: 192–260. Forsén, B. (2009a) (ed.) Thesprotia Expedition I: Towards a Regional History. Helsinki, Foundation of the Finnish Institute at Athens. Forsén, J. (2009b) The ‘Dark Age’ in the Kokytos Valley – not so dark after all. In B. Forsén (ed.), Thesprotia Expedition I: Towards a Regional History: 55–70. Helsinki, Foundation of the Finnish Institute at Athens. Galaty, M. and Watkinson, C. (2004) The practice of archaeology under dictatorship. In M. Galaty and C. Watkinson (eds), Archaeology under Dictatorship: 1–14. New York/Boston, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Gilkes, O. J. (2005) The history of archaeological investigations at Kalivo and Çuka e Aitoit. In I. L. Hansen, O. J. Gilkes and A. Crowson (eds), Kalivo and Çuka e Aitoit, Albania. Interim Report on Surveys and Excavations 1928–2004: chapter 1. www.butrintfoundation.co.uk (accessed 2011). Hammond, N. G. L. (1967) Epirus. Oxford, Clarendon Press. Hammond, N. G. L. (1997) Γεωφυσικοί χαρακτήρες και ιστορική γεωγραφία. In M. B. Sakellariou (ed.), Ήπειρος: 12–31. Athens, Ekdotike Athenon. Hansen, I. L., Gilkes, O. J. and Crowson, A. (2005) (eds) Kalivo and Çuka e Aitoit, Albania. Interim Report on Surveys and Excavations 1928–2004. www.butrintfoundation.co.uk (accessed 2011). Haxhis, K. (1998). Preliminary report on the study of pottery on the acropolis of Bouthrotos. Iliria 1–2: 223–30. Hochstetter, A. (1984) Kastanas. Ausgrabungen in einem Siedlugs­ heugel der Bronze- und Eisenzeit Makedoniens 1975–1979. Die handgemechte Keramik (Praehistorische Archaeologie in Suedosteuropa 3). Berlin, Wissenschaftsverlag. Islami, S. and Ceka, H. (1964) Nouvelles données sur l’antiquité illyrienne dans le territoire de l’Albanie. Studia Albanica I: 91–137. Jacoby, F. (1943) Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker (=FGrH), vol. 3A.a. Leiden, Brill. Jung, R. (2002) Kastanas. Ausgrabungen in einem Siedlugsheugel der Bronze- und Eisenzeit Makedoniens 1975–1979. Die Drehscheibenkeramik der Schichten 19 Bis 11, 1–2

44

Sarah Lima

(Praehistorische Archaeologie in Suedosteuropa 18). Keil, Verlag Oetker/Voges. Kamberi, Z. (1993) Archaeological research and researchers in Albania. Institute of Archaeology Bulletin 30: 1–27. Kilian-Dirlmeier, I. (1984) Die Nadeln der Eisenzeit in Albanien. Iliria 14: 85–109. Korkuti, M. (1973) À propos des agglomérations fortifieés illyriennes de la première période du fer dans le territoire de l’Albanie. Studia Albanica 10: 91–104. Korkuti, M. (1990) Një kushtim i epokës së bronzit në Çukë (Sarande). Iliria 1: 75–83. Korkuti, M. (1998) 50 Vjet Arkeologi Shqiptare. Iliria 1–2: 19–47. Korkuti, M., Petruso, K. M., Bejko, L., Ellwood, B., Hansen, J., Harrold, N. R., and Bottema, S. (1994) Konispol Cave: Preliminary Report on Excavations 1992–1994. Iliria 26.1–2: 183–224 Lera, P., Touchais, G., and Oberweiler, C. (2007–2008) Ndihmesa e gërmimeve të Sovjanit për kronologjinë absolute të prehistorisë shqiptare (La contribution des fouilles de Sovjan à la chronologie absolue de la préhistoire albanaise). Iliria 33: 39–50. Martin, S. (2004) The topography of Butrint. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Survey 1994–1999: 76–103. Oxford, Oxbow. Mustilli, D. (1941) Relazione preliminare sugli scavi archeologici in Albania (1937–40). Atti della Reale Accademia d’Italia 2: 677–704. Nanaj, A. (1985). Butroti protourban. Iliria 15.2: 303–12. Papadopoulos, T. I. (1995) A late Mycenaean koine in western Greece and the adjacent Ionian Islands. In C. Morris (ed.), Klados: Essays in Honor of J. N. Coldstream (University of London Institute of Classical Studies 63): 201–8. London, University of London. Papaioannou, G. (2005) The Late Prehistory of the Nomos of Ioannina, Greece: New Approaches to the Analysis of Ceramic Typology and Site Distribution. King’s College London, Ph.D. thesis. Pluciennik, M., Lako, K., Përzhita, L. and Williams, D. (2004) The environs of Butrint 2: the 1995–1996 field survey. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 47–63. Oxford, Oxbow. Poursat, J.-C. (1987) L’Épire et le monde mycénien. In P. Cabanes (ed.), L’Illyrie Méridionale et l’Épire dans l’Antiquité: 31–33. Adosa, Clermont-Ferrand. Prendi, F. (1957) Report on excavations at Vajzë. Bulletin për shkencat shoqërore 2: 76–110. Prendi, F. (1977) L’Age du Bronze en Albanie. Iliria 7–8: 30–33. Prendi, F. (1978) Vështrim mbi kulturat neolitike dhe të epokës së Bronzit në Shqipëri. Studime Historike 4: 127–49. Prendi, F. (1982) The Prehistory of Albania. In J. Boardman, I. E. S. Edwards, N. G. L. Hammond, and E. Sollberger (eds), The Prehistory of the Balkans; and the Middle East and the Aegean World, Tenth to Eighth Centuries BC (CAH 3.1): 187–231. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Randsborg, K. (2002) Kephallénia. Archaeology and History (Acta Archeologica, suppl. 4). London/Copenhagen, Blackwell/ Munksgaard. Soueref, K. (2002) Micenei nell’Epiro, nelo quadro dei traffici nello Ionio e nell’Adriatico. In E. De Miro, L. Godart, and A. Sacconi (eds), Atti e Memorie del Secondo Congresso

Internazionale di Micenologia (Rome 1996), 3: 1311–17. Rome, Gruppo editoriale internazionale. Stephani, L. and Meroussis, N. (1997) Incised and mattpainted pottery from late Bronze Age settlements in western Macedonia: technique, shapes, and decoration. In R. Laffineur and P. Betancour (eds), ΤΕΧΝΗ. Craftsmen, Craftswomen and Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 6th International Aegean Conference/6e Rencontre égéenne internationale, Philadelphia 1996 (Aegaeum 16), vol. 2: 353–8. Liège, Université de Liège Tartaron, T. (2004) Bronze Age Landscape and Society in Southern Epirus, Greece (BAR International Series 1290). Oxford, Archaeopress. Tartaron, T. (2005) Glykys Limin and the discontinuous Mycenaean periphery. In R. Laffineur and E. Greco (eds), ΕΜΠΟΡΙΑ: Aegeans in the Central and Eastern Mediterranean. Proceedings of the 10th International Aegean Conference/10e Recontre égéenne internationale. Athens 2004 (Aegaeum 25): 153–60, pls 34a–35d. Liège, Université de Liège and University of Texas at Austin. Tartaron, T. (forthcoming) Maritime Networks in the Mycenaean World. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Tartaron, T. F. and Zachos, K. L. (1999) The Mycenaeans and Epirus. In Η Περιφέρεια του Μυκηναϊκού Κόσμου I: 57–76. Lamia, Υπουργείο Πολιτισμού, ΙΔ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών και Κλασσικών Αρχαιοτήτων. Touchais, G. (2002) Les rapports entre le monde mycénien et ses marges Nord-Ouest (Épire, Albanie, Macédoine). In G. Touchais and J. Renard (eds), L’Albanie dans l’Europe préhistorique (BCH Suppl. 42): 199–215. Paris, École Française d’Athènes. Ugolini, L. M. (1937) Butrinto. Il mito d’Enea, gli scavi. Rome, Istituto Grafico Tiberino. Ugolini, L. M. (2005) Kalivo: introduzione (preliminary notes). In I. L. Hansen, O. J. Gilkes and A. Crowson (2005) Kalivo and Çuka e Aitoit, Albania. Interim Report on Surveys and Excavations 1928–2004: chapter 2. www.butrintfoundation. co.uk (accessed 2011). Vokotopoulou, I. (1986) Βίτσα. Τα νεκροταφεία μιας μολοσσικής κώμης (3 vols.). Athens, Εκδόσεις ΤΑΠΑ. Wardle, K. A. (1972) The Greek Bronze Age West of the Pindus. University of London, Ph.D. thesis. Wardle, K. A. (1977) Cultural groups of the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age in north-west Greece. Godisnjak 15: 153–99. Wardle, K. A. and Wardle, D. (2003) Prehistoric Thermon: pottery of the late Bronze and Early Iron Age. In N. KyparissiApostolika and M. Papakonstantinou (eds), Η Περιφέρεια του Μυκηναϊκού Κόσμου II: 147–56. Lamia, Υπουργείο Πολιτισμού, ΙΔ Εφορεία Προϊστορικών και Κλασικών Αρχαιοτήτων. Wardle, K. A. and Wardle, D. (2007) Assiros Toumba in the 8th and 7th centuries BC: The apsidal structures of Phase 1 and their function. http://artsweb.bham.ac.uk/aha/kaw/Assiros/ assirosphase1.htm (accessed 2011).

Notes 1 Several mBA and lBA pots in the Butrint museum were collected outside of the site as surface finds (Korkuti 1990: 80–82, pls I, II, and III). The ceramics from the Butrint acropolis identified as prehistoric will be discussed, but no architectural features from the site have been identified as prehistoric. Frano Prendi (1982) assigned prehistoric dates to

3  Butrint and the Pavllas River Valley in the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age

2

3 4

5

6

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

the Butrint ceramics based on comparisons that he made with ceramics from Maliq and Tren, two deeply stratified sites in east-central Albania, and Gajtan, located near Shkodra in northwestern Albania. Virgil Aeneid 3.291–505; Dionysius of Halicanassus Antiquitates Romanae 1.51.1; Teucer of Cyzicus is cited in Stephenus Byzantinus Ethnika s.v. Troia (cf. Jacoby 1943 vol. 3A.a: 316, no. 274, section F); Euripedes Andromache 1243–51. Ugolini 1937: 183–4, figs 136–9; Hansen, Gilkes and Crowson 2005. The Origins of Butrint Project undertook field seasons at Butrint in 2006 and 2007. The project was initiated by Richard Hodges, Ilir Gjipali, and David Bescoby, and project managed by Andrew Crowson; the team members were Ilir Gjipali, Rovena Kurti, Rudenc Ruka and the author. I am grateful to Professors Hodges and Gjipali for the opportunity to take part in this project, to Jack Davies, Inge Lyse Hansen, Eleni Hatzaki, Sarah Leppard and Tom Tartaron for offering comments and feedback, and to all of those, too numerous to name individually, who have discussed their work with me and have helped me to refine my ideas on this subject, which will form a component of my Ph.D. dissertation. The sites of Vitsa (Vokotopoulou 1986) and Kastanas (Hochstetter 1984; Jung 2002) are two well-stratified sites in northern Greece that provide some footing for partially published, comparative material from Greek sites such as Krya and Kastritsa (Douzougli 1996; Douzougli and Zachos 1994).The sites of Vitsa (Vokotopoulou 1986) and Kastanas (Hochstetter 1984; Jung 2002) are two well-stratified sites in northern Greece that provide some footing for partially published, comparative material from Greek sites such as Krya and Kastritsa (Douzougli 1996; Douzougli and Zachos 1994). Even the nearby site of Konispol Cave, in spite of having good stratigraphy for earlier periods, has failed to yield undisturbed Bronze Age levels (Korkuti et al. 1994: 200–10). The site of Mursia, excavated in 2010 by an AlbanianAmerican team, did contain a few well-stratified levels that will allow for further information about Bronze Age and Iron Age ceramic traditions within this region. For Vajza see Prendi 1957; for Vodhina, Pogona, and Bajkaj see Prendi 1982: 211, 216–9, 230–5. Hammond 1967: 7. Homer Iliad 16.233–35; Odyssey 14.327–30 = 19.296–9. Titles exemplifying Mycenocentric approaches to the Balkans and Italy include Papadopoulos 1995; Poursat 1987; Soueref 2002; and Touchais 2002. Titles exemplifying Illyrian-centred approaches to sites from Albanian Epirus include Islami and Ceka 1964; KilianDirlmeier 1984; Korkuti 1973. Galaty and Watkinson 2004: 8–12; Islami and Ceka 1964; Nanaj 1985. Ugolini 1937: 86 and 116–17. Ugolini 1937: 86 and 116–17; Mustilli 1941: 691. Hammond 1967: 109. E.g. Kamberi 1993: 14–17. See also Ceka 1988 (proposing that the acropolis of Butrint first served as an unfortified seasonal site); Mustilli 1941: 686–8 (proposing that the acropolis of Butrint was originally an open-air sanctuary of Athena based on a bothros containing an inscribed Corinthian sherd); Nanaj 1985: 304 n. 2 (suggesting an initial, limited fortification phase at Butrint in the 7th/6th

17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24

25 26 27 28 29 30

31 32

33 34 35

36 37

45

century BC). See Martin 2004: 70–80 for a summary of this, as well as Hodges (Chapter 1) in this volume. Arafat and Morgan 1995: 29; pers. comm., C. Morgan. Haxhis 1998: 223. For a discussion of the excavation on the acropolis of Butrint see Greenslade, Leppard and Logue in this volume. Crowson 2005a: 1–3, 5. Crowson 2005a: 7. Ugolini 2005: 1–2. Several additional surveys were conducted of the region around Kalivo in the 1920s, 1950s, and 1960s; see Crowson 2005a: 1, 14; and Gilkes 2005: 8–10. As in the case of Butrint, the date and form of the site’s fortifications and its history of occupation is subject to much conjecture. Crowson 2005b. Crowson (2005b: 7) compares the style of construction of the southern gate to the type 7 and type 8 wall classifications at Kephallonia, cf. Randsborg 2002: 216–21. The identification of Hellenistic walls garners further support from the fact that ashlar masonry is rather uncommon in Bronze Age fortifications and is only used sparingly at major entrances and approaches at “type sites” in Greece, such as Pylos and Mycenae. Crowson 2005b: 7–9. Crowson 2005b: 3, fig. 5.4. Cf. Tartaron 2004: fig. 5.13h. Crowson 2005b: 9. Pluciennik et al. 2004: 53, site A3. Of 3254 sherds collected, 287 diagnostic prehistoric fragments were identified, and more than 2000 nondiagnostic fragments appeared to be made from prehistoric fabric. For Kastriza see Tartaron 2004: figs 4.8–4.11. Recent results of ICP-MS analysis of ceramics from Cape Stillo and Kalivo confirms this picture, and full results will be published in a future study by the author, Jiyan Gu and Michael Galaty of the W.M. Keck Center for Instrumental and Biochemical Archaeology. Korkuti (1990: 78–79, 83, pl. IV.1) compares the point to a dagger found from tumulus 16 at the central Albanian site of Vodhina. Korkuti 1990: 76–79, 80–81, pls. II and III. E.g. Forsén 2009a and 2009b (ongoing regional survey of Thesprotia); Papaioannou 2005 (ceramics and site analysis of the nomos of Ioannina); Tartaron 2004 (ceramics and site analysis of Greek Epirus, particularly the coastal zone near Ephyra); Wardle and Wardle 2003 (ceramics analysis from Thermon); Wardle and Wardle 2007 (ongoing ceramics analysis from Assyrios Toumba). The project owes a debt of gratitude to Lorenc Bejko and David Bescoby for their observations about fabric characteristics of the Cape Stillo ceramics. The principal comparative classification schemes referenced were Dakaris 1951; 1952 (Kastritsa); Prendi 1977; 1978; 1982 (Korçe Basin); Tartaron 2004 (Lower Acheron Valley, Preveza survey ceramics); and Wardle 1972; 1977 (Aetolia, Dodona, and comparanda from Northern Greece). Unpublished reports by Karen Francis, David Bescoby, and Ilir Gjipali on ceramics from Himara Cave, located 50 km north of Butrint and excavated in 2003, were also consulted. The continuous stratigraphic sequence of Himara provided chronotypes for comparison with the Cape Stillo and Kalivo ceramics.

46

Sarah Lima

38 The sites of Dodona, Krya and Vitsa in Greece yielded examples of Orange-Red Ware that appeared in the same contexts as KIV wares; cf. Tartaron 2004: 85, 88; Tartaron and Zachos 1999: 70–71; Vokotopoulou 1986: 362 and 365 (fig. 22, listed as “Class I,” “Class II,” and “Class III”). 39 Dakaris 1951: 180–2; Wardle 1972: 204–7; Wardle 1977: 180–1. 40 Cf. Tartaron 2004: figs 5.28, 5.6g. 41 Vokotopoulou (1986: 255–8) has observed ceramic similarities between eastern Albanian and western Macedonian lBA ceramics, noting the presence of Walter Abel Heurtley’s “Boubousti Ware” (his terminology for a ware now posited as a prototype for KIVa ware) in the Greek periphery of western Macedonia and in Albania. Stephani and Meroussis (1997: 357–8) have noted the need for further study of Matt-painted and incised ceramic wares west of Angelochori, Archodonico, and the Kozani Basin in western Macedonia. 42 Tartaron 2004: 77; Wardle 1972: 208–9. 43 Evangelides 1935: 196–8; Tartaron 2004: 77–79, 83, figs 5.5, 5.28. 44 Tartaron 2004: 83, cf. fig. 5.5. 45 Tartaron 2004: 81–82. 46 Cf. Dakaris 1951: 179–80. 47 Tartaron 2004: 77. 48 Tartaron 2004: 39–47. 49 Tartaron 2004: figs 4.5–6 (Ephyra-Xylokastro), figs 4.9–11 (Kastriza). 50 Tartaron 2004: 46 (Kastriza).

51 Cf. Hammond 1967: 33–37; Hammond 1997: 12; Papaioannou 2005: 32–35. 52 Cf. Papadopoulos 1995: 208. 53 Douzougli 1996: 43, fig. 2; Douzougli and Zachos 2002: 112–13 (who comment on the Aoös and Kalamas rivers as probable north–south routes between Epirote prehistoric communities as early as the Neolithic); Tartaron 2004: 154, 171, 206, 210. 54 As pointed out by Tartaron 2004: 157; and Tartaron and Zachos 1999: 63, 71–72. Campbell (1964: 7–10) notes that the Aoös River valley functioned as a thoroughfare for Sarakatsani shepherds travelling from the western Pindus Mountain village of Zagori, and suggests that this route may have been the most geographically convenient, if not the easiest, way to travel. 55 Tartaron 2004: 39–47, 145–8 and 169–72. 56 Tartaron 2004: 145–8. 57 Tartaron 2005: 154. 58 Tartaron 2005: 154. 59 Tartaron 2005: 153. 60 However, a bronze dagger from Çuka, discussed above, was identified as Aegean (cf. Korkuti 1990: 77–79, 83, pl. IV.). 61 As pointed out by Hammond 1967: 3, 25–33. Tartaron (2005: 158) notes the problem of identifying the Glykys Limen as simply “Mycenaean” or “Epirote” and points out that a hybridization of forms is in play in this case. Cf. also Tartaron forthcoming, which will examine these kinds of interactions from a number of theoretical perspectives.

4  The acropolis of Butrint reassessed Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue

The acropolis of Butrint is a long narrow rocky outcrop, roughly 200 m long by 60 m at its widest point. Rising up to 42 m above sea level, the topography of the summit can be divided into three distinct areas: The flat and narrow western terrace upon which the present day reconstructed castle stands; the gently sloping central terrace from which one can look directly over the lower city, theatre and forum; and the steep-sided sub-square eastern terrace that provides clear views down the Pavllas Valley and northwards into Lake Butrint (Fig. 4.1). Due to its prominent position within the city, the acropolis’s summit has been subject to a series of excavations since the 1920s, including a major investigation by a Greek Archaeological Mission led by Katerina Hadzis between 1989–94 (see Table 4.1 for a summary of these excavations). These excavations have largely focussed on the earliest occupation of Butrint, which is thought to have been located on the acropolis. In the process of unravelling these early phases tantalising remains of the later occupation of the site have been discovered (Fig. 4.2). In light of this, during the Butrint Foundation’s 2006 season a new investigation of the acropolis was undertaken; this was followed in 2009 by a detailed re-excavation of the eastern knoll of the hill (where Ugolini had uncovered

a major basilica).1 These new investigations also included a re-evaluation of the results of all the earlier excavations.2 The successive campaigns of excavations, first by the Italian mission then more recently by the Greek mission on the eastern knoll and in the central part of the acropolis, have revealed a palimpsest of walls; however, in the effort to get to the earlier phases, sometimes in deep deposits, much of the associated occupation layers had been removed. Therefore, it was necessary to determine how these walls related to each other and, where possible, to categorise them within distinct phases of activity. Through a combination of physical and stratigraphic relationships, comparisons of wall masonry and informed conjecture based upon the Butrint Foundation’s work elsewhere in the city, it was possible to identify a sequence of distinct phases of construction upon the acropolis (Plate 4.1). A summary of the phasing is given in Table 4.2. Combined with a recent survey of the fortifications as well as the acropolis castle of Butrint, the aim of this chapter is to summarize all the investigations on the acropolis.3

The early history Recent environmental research indicates that the lower

Figure 4.1. Aerial view of excavated areas on the acropolis

48

Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue Table 4.1. Summary of projects undertaken on the acropolis of Butrint

Date 1928

1938–1939

1982–1986

1989–1994

2006

2008

2009

Project The Italian Archaeological Mission at Butrint, under the direction of Luigi Maria Ugolini.

Description On the southern flanks of the acropolis Ugolini located four sections of Archaic polygonal walls, which he dated to the 6th century BC. He speculated that these defensive walls fortified the earliest settlement at Butrint, which he believed was located on the acropolis. His recovery of a large relief depicting a lion devouring a bull, now preserved in a late antique gateway (Lion Gate), led him to speculate that an Ionic temple existed at Butrint. He undertook a large-scale excavation of the dominant eastern summit of the acropolis uncovering a late antique basilica, the Acropolis Basilica, which he dated to the 4th century AD. The Italian Archaeological Mustilli uncovered what was interpreted as a sacred pit, or Mission at Butrint, under bothros, on the central terrace. A substantial amount of protothe direction of Domenico Corinthian and Corinthian fine wares of the 7th century and Mustilli. Attic pottery of the 6th century BC was recovered close by. Numerous votive offerings were also recovered that further suggested the presence of a cult site. Astrit Nanaj of the Nanaj confirmed the line of the polygonal wall and began Centre for Archaeological excavation of the western section of part of the wall. By Research (Institute of linking it to a mass of un-stratified Archaic pottery, he dated Archaeology). its construction to the late 7th or early 6th centuries BC and suggested a contemporary link with the roughly constructed wall circuit on the nearby hilltop of Kalivo. The excavation was halted for technical reasons and remains unpublished though a schematic plan records a plethora of Roman and medieval walls in this trench Greek-Albanian Contextualised within the still persuasive political ideology programme under the of previous decades, these large-scale scientific excavations direction of Kathy Hadzis. produced substantial new evidence illuminating the nature of the Archaic occupation on the acropolis. Excavation of the polygonal wall excavated by Nanaj revealed a terminus post quem of c. 500 BC for its construction. Evidence of the sanctuary site first postulated by Ugolini was also uncovered: sling shots with 6th century archaic Corinthian script and roof tiles in a yellow Corinthian fabric, similar to examples from 6th-century Corinth, suggested a cult site and possible an associated building; while quantities of 7th-century wares attested to the early origins of this site. A concise overview of this excavation was published, as was a preliminary review of the recovered ceramics, though the latter focused primarily upon the Archaic material. Butrint Foundation A new survey of the structural remains was undertaken along with a re-evaluation of the results of the earlier excavations: the Hadzis trenches were cleaned and re-recorded; a new trench was excavated close to the fortification walls to the east; and the walls on the southern face of the acropolis were resurveyed. Butrint Foundation Cleaning of the eastern end of the Acropolis Basilica uncovered the partial remains of a triconch apse. A photogrammetrical record of the walls of the basilica was undertaken by the University of Siena. Butrint Foundation A complete drawn record of the Acropolis Basilica was undertaken. A number of trenches were excavated aimed at dating the basilica and the subsequent alterations that it underwent.

Reference Ugolini 1937 Ugolini 1942

Mustilli 1941

Nanaj 1985

Arafat and Morgan 1995 Hadzis 1998

4  The acropolis of Butrint reassessed

49

Table 4.2. Phases of occupation on the acropolis of Butrint Phase 1

Period Prehistoric

Date 12th–9th cent. BC

2

Archaic

8th–6th cent. BC

3

Classical

5th–4th cent. BC

4

Hellenistic

3rd–2nd cent. BC

5a 5b

Roman Roman

Mid 1st cent. BC Mid 1st–3rd cent. AD

6 7

Late Roman Late Antiquity

3rd–5th cent. AD 5th–6th cent. AD

8

Early medieval

7th–mid 9th cent. AD

9

High medieval to late Late 10th/Early 11th–12th medieval 1 cent. AD

10

Late medieval 2

13th–14th cent.

11

Venetian

15th cent.

12

Late 15th–18th cent.

Characteristics Limited ceramic evidence indicating periodic occupation at western area of acropolis summit Ceramic, artefactual and structural evidence for seasonal refuge focused upon modest sanctuary complex. Substantial retaining wall built along the central southern edge of the acropolis to create a terrace/platform on which a large hearth located. A second retaining wall is built soon after. The wall does not go around the entire hilltop but is limited to the southern side of the eastern summit thereby forming a temenos to the sanctuary. Ceramic evidence indicating continued occupation Focus shifts from the top to the base of the southern slope of the acropolis with the construction of a new sanctuary to Asclepius. Ceramics indicate continued use of the hilltop while a new hearth and repairs to the temenos wall indicate continued use of the earlier sanctuary site. Small building built close to the Hellenistic altar Construction of a series of rooms and courtyards of a large imposing house along the southern ridge of the acropolis. Partially incorporating the earlier archaic terrace walls, this complex underwent a number of alterations formalising its dominant position on the Butrint skyline. Site abandoned and buildings partially collapsing. Area re-occupied and a number of alterations made to the eastern area of the central terrace: a number of the rooms were completely demolished and levelled over to create a new terrace, while one was converted into a two- or three-story tower house. A triconch basilica was built at the eastern end of the acropolis, possibly funded by the owner of the tower house. Over time the basilica underwent a number of alterations due to fire damage and inherent structural problems. Virtual abandonment of acropolis. Central and southern apse of the Acropolis Basilica collapse. Reorganisation and re-building programme: new circuit wall enclosing the entire acropolis hilltop; castle built at western end of the hill with other residential buildings constructed in the centre over the earlier Roman buildings. Castle and associated fortifications strengthened: castle altered with the construction of a second tower; triple-apsed basilica built; western approach re-modelled and strengthened by the addition of an outer bailey; late antique tower house re-occupied. Acropolis Basilica used as a cemetery. Castle and associated fortifications further strengthened: western gate strengthened and a new wall built down to the lake shore; a new defensive tower and barrack built in the western courtyard; the castle keep was refurbished and a new casement wall built. The late antique tower house was abandoned and demolished. On the eastern ridge a new building was constructed within the shell of the late antique basilica. The upkeep of the castle and the defences declined and apart from some limited repairs to the castle the acropolis is virtually abandoned.

Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue

50

Lake Gate Lion Gate

North Gate Acropolis

West Gate

Ugolini/Mustilli (1928-36) Nanaj (1982-86)

Castle

Hadzis (1989-94) Butrint Foundation (1994 - 2009) 0

100 m

Figure 4.2. Plan of all excavations undertaken on the acropolis

slopes were surrounded by water making the hilltop the only suitable settlement area (cf. Fig. 1.6).4 The deep deposits found in the excavations by the Greek Archaeological Mission on the central area of the acropolis show without doubt that there was a 7th- to 5th-century BC presence on the hilltop, overlying the earlier Bronze Age strata. One hypothesis is that in the early 7th century BC a simple sanctuary site was established on the eastern saddle of the acropolis. The Greek Archaeological Mission identified more permanent structures towards the centre of the hilltop, approximately dating to the 6th century BC.5 The principal feature is a substantial south-facing retaining wall of roughly shaped polygonal stones constructed towards the centre of the east side of the acropolis, creating an extended terrace or platform area. On this newly created terrace a large hearth was enclosed by an earth bonded stone wall (Plate 4.2).6 One interpretation is that this hearth, with a thick compacted ash deposit sealing the feature as well as partially spilling over it, was an ash altar. Although no associated buildings of this date have so far been found, a layer of yellow roof tiles were discovered close to the retaining wall indicating

the presence of a nearby building, or monumental structure, constructed with low rubble or pisé walls.7 The fine imported ceramics accompanying these features tentatively suggest that this was a sanctuary of some kind. A second polygonal wall was constructed a little after the first, although its dating is not known (Fig. 4.3).8 Abutting the pre-existing retaining wall, the new wall extended the terrace to the west. The wall also delineated the entire southern side of the acropolis’s eastern summit, demarcating the small hilltop settlement’s physical extent on this side. Its dominant position would have made it a highly visible structure within the landscape, particularly to those accessing the site from the postulated roadway along the southern slopes of the acropolis.9 No other similar sections of walling have so far been located on the acropolis implying that rather than being defensive, this wall might have marked the boundary or temenos of a sacred place, perhaps a sanctuary.10 Excavations made by Ugolini in the 1930s offer a tantalising hint that further occupation existed towards the prominent western end of the hill (not the eastern end of

4  The acropolis of Butrint reassessed

51

Figure 4.3. The second polygonal terrace wall

the acropolis, as some have supposed).11 Here, he found a bothros, a sacred pit containing ceramics of the 7th and 6th centuries BC, now believed to have been located east of the later 13th-century AD church immediately outside the modern castle.12 Together with numerous votive offerings these finds certainly indicate some form of cult worship from this date. Sacred pits were normally located in areas close to altars to take the residues of sacrifices, or by temples into which votive offerings left by worshippers were deposited when they were periodically cleaned out.13 The recovery of 5th- and 4th-century BC Attic fine wares and a predominance of Corfiot wares indicate occupation of the hilltop over several centuries as well as prominent connections with Corfu.14 Other material of the Archaic Greek period is rare at Butrint. Potsherds of this date are largely absent from the excavations in the area of the forum, the Triconch Palace and the Vrina Plain. The only Archaic sculpture is the lion relief, now preserved within the late antique Lion Gate, which probably dates to the last quarter of the 6th century BC.15 Originally this relief, depicting a lion devouring a bull’s head, a common subject in Archaic Greek art, was thought to be an architrave from a temple, believed to be located on the dominant eastern summit of the acropolis.16 A recent study of the relief now seems to suggest it was a lintel to a monumental entranceway.17 If so, it may have been a conversion of an existing wooden structure, consolidated in stone. Whether this was originally located in the vicinity of the later Lion Gate or closer to the acropolis sanctuary is unknown. The historical context for these discoveries has been the subject of some debate.18 Unlike Corcyra (modern Corfu),

which was established as a major Corinthian colony in 733 BC, there is no mention of the foundation of Butrint in the historical sources. The Greek Archaeological Mission contended, though, that the area of Butrint and the Ksamil peninsula as the closest point of contact was linked to Corcyra and formed part of its domain.19 The presence of Corinthian ceramics in the Greek excavations led the excavators to associate the hilltop with a reference in Thucydides. In his account of the factional infighting at Corcyra in 427 BC, Thucydides (3.85.2) refers to certain factions escaping to ‘Corcyrean territory across the channel.’ Apart from its strategic value, Butrint certainly offered fertile lands in an area surrounded by rocky terrain but the archaeology is too limited to determine definitively that Butrint was a ‘Corcyrean’ territory. In the early 3rd century BC Butrint was transformed when its first urban settlement was focused around a new sanctuary dedicated to Asclepius located at the foot of the south-facing slope of the acropolis (Fig. 4.4).20 At this time or shortly afterwards a fortified wall was constructed along the northern base of the acropolis continuing as a low terraced wall along the mid-slope of its southern side. This southern wall may have supported a roadway up to the acropolis. A second roadway, perhaps joining the latter, also ascended the acropolis slopes from the Lake Gate.21 Although neither Ugolini’s excavations nor those by the Greek Archaeological Mission brought to light any evidence of new buildings upon the acropolis related to the Hellenistic period, there are signs that the earlier sacred places on the hilltop continued to be used in some form at this time.22 A new altar was constructed c. 5 m

Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue

52

Lake Gate

Lion Gate

Northern citadel

North Gate

Acropolis Archaic sanctuary

West Gate

Gate

Archaic wall Tower Gate

Temple

Theatre Agora?

Proposed ArchaicHellenistic shoreline

Treasury Asclepieion Gate

0

100 m

Figure 4.4. The Hellenistic acropolis

east of the earlier altar, again set within a large open area, indicating the continuity and importance of the cult. While the northern section of the earlier Archaic wall also appears to have been rebuilt at this time (Fig. 4.5). Making use of immense trapezoidal and polygonal stones tightly fitted together and with pronounced punch dressing on their faces, this construction technique was very different in style from the earlier Archaic wall. However, it does bear some similarity to the terrace wall that encompassed the southern base of the acropolis hill and the temenos boundary wall of the sanctuary of Asclepius.

The Roman period At the beginning of the Roman period the earlier structures on the central terrace of the acropolis appear to have been retained. A new small building seems to have been built in the vicinity of the altar, partially built over the core of the first Archaic retaining wall. Very little of this structure survives, though it may have been connected to the altar that seems to have still been in use at this time. On the edge of the terrace immediately east of the Greek mission’s excavations a new trench, Trench 2, excavated

by the Butrint Foundation in 2006 identified a room (Room I) that, judging from the ceramics, belongs to the early to mid 1st century AD. The excavation was too limited to establish the function of this room, but it appears to have been situated on the elevated south-facing edge of the acropolis, and in all likelihood formed part of a complex that extended westwards into the centre of the hilltop, overlying the earlier buildings (Plate 4.3). This complex appears to have occupied a terrace revetted by the earlier polygonal wall that was probably restored in this period and reinforced by a substantial buttress. Although the polygonal stones were placed in a more haphazard form in the refurbished terrace wall, the attempt to emulate an earlier Archaic construction style is evident (Fig. 4.6). Where early Roman construction techniques were used, these were reserved for the less visible interior face of the wall. The desire to minimise the distinction of these phases can also be seen in the construction of a buttress to the exterior of this polygonal wall built to obscure the vertical join between the two builds (Fig. 4.7). Elsewhere, in the excavated area on the central area of the hill, earlier walls appear to have been largely retained in the Roman period.23 The earlier walls inevitably, therefore, influenced

4  The acropolis of Butrint reassessed

53

Figure 4.5. Section of the re-built Archaic wall (Butrint Foundation)

Figure 4.6. Roman repair of the Archaic wall

Figure 4.7. The Roman buttress built on the exterior of the polygonal wall

54

Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue

Acropolis

Porch

Steps

Forum d Roa

0

50 m

Figure 4.8. The porch entrance to the acropolis complex in relation to the lower city

the layout and extent of this new complex. The original ground surface was maintained creating a small terraced area, the western end of which had direct access to a set of new rooms, IV and V, the southern of which (Room V) had been constructed around the earlier altar. It is not clear, though, whether this was still in use in the Roman period. A further large room, Room II, was located east of these rooms, built up against the inner face of the Archaic wall. North of these rooms there was what appears to have been a courtyard, Room VI. This area was accessed through Room IV as well as by two further doors located along the southern and western side of the courtyard. The western door accessed a further courtyard, Room VII. The main entrance of this was through a gateway consisting of a central projecting porch flanked by wide entrances on either side. Immediately within, four equidistant columns were located. This monumental gateway formed the main entrance into the complex and, facing the lower city, must have formed the terminus for the principal thoroughfare ascending the southern slopes of the acropolis. The alignment of this thoroughfare has not yet been identified but a connecting staircase may be that found in the forum area at the foot of the acropolis (Fig. 4.8).24

In the later 1st or earlier 2nd century, judging from the ceramics, the buildings identified along the eastern end of the terrace complex, appear to have been renovated (Plate 4.4). Room I was realigned with the construction of a new northwest-southeast aligned wall built along the northern side of the room, the construction of which resulted in the removal of the western part of the earlier room; while the formerly open terrace to the east of Rooms IV and V was now occupied by three new rooms (VIII–X). In addition, a new wall was built across the western end of Room II. A square room (Room III) located to the west of Rooms IV and V appears to relate to these changes. Internally plastered and with a cocciopesto floor, the lack of any openings suggests it functioned as a cistern (Fig. 4.9). The role of this new eastern complex is unclear though fragments of painted wall plaster and fragments of marble paving recovered from Room I, indicate that this complex had a certain importance (Plate 4.5). Access to these rooms seems to have been restricted to the south terrace of the courtyard [Room VI] belonging to the earlier Roman phase.25 Its prominent position along the southern ridge of the acropolis, set upon a sequence of elevated, stepped terraces would certainly have marked it out and created a

4  The acropolis of Butrint reassessed

55

Figure 4.9. The cistern

striking impression, eminently visible from the city below, the suburbs on the Vrina Plain and from Butrint’s land and sea approaches beyond. A second stage of expansion occurred in the mid Roman period, approximately during the 2nd or earlier 3rd centuries AD, centred on the western area, significantly altering the access routes controlled by courtyard (Room VII) (Plate 4.6).26 The internal, and to a certain extent external, access routes to this courtyard were completely altered, moving the central focus from courtyard VII to a new group of rooms, Rooms XIX, XI and XII, to the south. Internally, Room XIX was the first point of entry and it provided access to the eastern and western spaces along the Archaic terraces (Rooms XII and XI respectively). Room XII was an L-shaped space that contained a small rectangular structure. A tile-and-stone capped drain was found at its base indicating that a fountain or basin was originally located here. Room XI provided the only access to the courtyard (Room VI) from the south by way of a staircase comprising at least six steps. The role of the courtyard (Room VII) was altered with the insertion of three new rooms along its southern side, Rooms XIII, XIV and XV. The eastern courtyard (Room VI) was still accessible through the eastern Room XV. Whether the creation of this labyrinthine means of access reflects a desire to create a highly formalised and structured route, or indicates that there was now a new focus within the complex, perhaps within the unexcavated ground to the west to where Room XIX and corridor XII derive, is unknown. No evidence exists for occupation on the acropolis from the 3rd century until the late 5th century AD. Whether the complex gathered around the courtyard was abandoned is

simply not known; certainly, there are no obvious signs of new buildings or repairs to existing structures. The recovery of large amounts of roof tile and building debris overlying the floor of Room XI may indicate that some of the buildings were abandoned and partially collapsing.27 This lack of investment in the buildings of the acropolis seems to mirror the situation seen across Butrint at this time.28

The late antique period In the late 5th century the eastern area of the elevated terrace underwent significant alterations (Plate 4.7). Room I appears to have been demolished and levelled up to create a new terrace almost 2 m above the original ground surface. To the west Rooms III, IV, V and XI were also demolished and levelled over to the same depth. To contain this demolition material, a new retaining wall was constructed over the line of the earlier Archaic wall. These alterations do not seem to have affected the western area of the ridge. The courtyard (Room VII) along with its interior rooms XIII–XIV and the adjacent rooms XII and XIX seem to have remained open at this time and may have continued to be the access point to the eastern area. One prominent building from this period was found, however, located towards the eastern end of the earlier complex. Room II was retained and transformed into a tower house almost certainly comprising at least two or three floors (Fig. 4.10).29 To accommodate this new structure the west wall of Room II appears to have been rebuilt and the interior floor level raised to take account of the new level of the exterior terrace. The lack of openings within the groundfloor chamber suggests it functioned as a cellar, accessed by

Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue

56

Figure 4.10. View of the tower house, showing the south wall overlying the Roman wall

a stair or ladder from the first-floor room above.30 There is no evidence in the surviving fabric that either the groundfloor or first-floor rooms were vaulted; instead, the narrow plinth of the west wall of the tower suggests the presence of a simple wooden floor to support the first-floor chamber. Due to the almost complete destruction of the upper chamber the existence of second and third floors, made either of masonry or of wooden construction, remains conjectural. However, even a two-storey tower would have dominated the new terraced landscape and been a prominent feature on the skyline when viewed from the city below. To the west of the tower house the remains of a roughly built wall were located that appears to be contemporary. Divided by a central doorway and with a rough stone pavement, this building seems to have formed an ancillary structure to the tower house, perhaps an outside yard or working surface.

The Acropolis Basilica The most obvious and enduring structural alteration of this period, though, was located on the eastern knoll of the acropolis, where a large triconch basilica was constructed (Fig. 4.11, Plate 4.8).31 Measuring 33.65 × 22.31 m the basilica was orientated east–west, and consisted of a northern and southern aisle flanking a central nave.32 A narthex at

the western end of the building accessed both aisles and the nave. The triconch was located at the eastern end of the building. The central apse extended beyond the natural slope of the summit. To accommodate its construction the outer wall of the apse was built on a sloping outcrop of bedrock, the area then infilled to level up the interior surface. Part of the material used to backfill this space included large lumps of compacted white mortar, indicating that a building close by had been dismantled, the mortar being the waste removed from the stones. The triconch was accessed from the nave, while doors at the eastern end of the aisles allowed access to and from the side apses too. A further room was attached to the southern lateral wall of the basilica, built partially into the natural bedrock along its southern edge. Accessed from the narthex, it is thought that this room may have been a diaconicon, a room where vestments and sacred objects were stored.33 It is also possible that it may have been a small side chapel. A niche, located in the southern wall of the room, just inside the doorway, may once have held a statue. Due to the uneven ground of the summit, the bedrock was partially quarried prior to the construction of the basilica. This can clearly be seen to the west of the building where the quarried face of the bedrock formed the lower part of the western wall of the narthex (Fig. 4.12). The northern side of the basilica on the other hand appears

4  The acropolis of Butrint reassessed

57

Figure 4.11. The acropolis basilica

Figure 4.12. Western wall of the narthex showing the cut bedrock

to have been levelled up. A line of large, roughly shaped blocks were laid to create a terrace upon which the northern wall of the basilica was constructed. The size and roughness of these blocks, along with many of the blocks used in the walls of the basilica, suggests that these derived from the quarrying of the basilica’s platform (Fig. 4.13). Internally a series of five piers divided the aisles from the nave. The western-most piers were built as part of the aisle/nave/narthex wall while the eastern piers were part of the wall that divided the aisles from the lateral apses. The central piers formed two roughly cruciform piers. Although not directly central to the building it was suggested that these and the western most piers formed the supports for a dome.34 Originally the basilica was floored with a mortar surface. Traces of this floor were located in the nave and triconch. In the aisles, although no evidence of a floor for this date was located, outcrops of bedrock where noticed towards the eastern end of both aisles suggesting that the floor must have partially utilised the bedrock. At the western end of the northern aisle, three stone-built tombs were located that seem to relate to the first phase of the basilica. A further stone-lined tomb was found outside the northern aisle, towards its eastern end, built up against the outer face of the northern terracing wall of the basilica. Built directly on to the bedrock the base of the tomb was

lined with marble slabs.35 The main access into the basilica appears to have been from the southwest, where a small porch-like structure was located.36 This led directly into a small rectangular room that provided access into the southern end of the narthex (Fig. 4.14). A large east–west aligned tomb, partially cut through the underlying bedrock, was located within this room, directly in front of the main entrance. Its prominent position may indicate that this tomb was the resting place of the basilica’s principal benefactor. Conceivably the benefactor may have lived in the tower house, located just to the southwest of the basilica. The main route to the basilica would almost certainly have passed by the tower house; in other words, it would have accentuated the power and importance of the benefactor in both his political and spiritual sphere. The construction of the Acropolis Basilica by a private patron reflects a growing trend seen throughout the Mediterranean from the second half of the 5th century in which new churches were often paid for by private individuals. From the monumental public buildings of the 1st and 2nd century to the grandiose private dwellings of the 3rd and 4th centuries, the new Christian cityscape from the middle of the 5th century reflected yet another change in the way in which the local elites displayed their power and status.

58

Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue

Figure 4.13. The northern terrace of the basilica

Figure 4.14. The southwestern entrance of the basilica with the central burial

4  The acropolis of Butrint reassessed

Acropolis Basilica

Great Basilica

Vrina Plain basilica

0

10 m

'Gymnasium' church

0

10 m

Diaporit basilica

0

10 m

Vrina Plain chapel

59

0

10 m

0

10 m

0

10 m

Figure 4.15. Plan of 5th-/6th-century churches from Butrint

Located on the highest point of the acropolis, the basilica would have been a highly visible statement of the patron’s aspirations when viewed from the lower city. At the end of the 5th and into the 6th century a series of new Christian monuments were constructed around the eastern slopes of the acropolis; for example, the Great Basilica, the church at the Well of Junia Rufina, as well as the ‘Gymnasium’ church.37 In the hinterland too, at the former villa sites at Diaporit and on the Vrina Plain, Christian basilicas were established.38 All of these may have been privately financed.39 Of these the Acropolis Basilica would have

been the most prominent, being visible from all the other structures (Fig. 4.15). In time the building underwent a number of alterations (Fig. 4.16). These may have been necessary as there are indications that the building was damaged by fire. Fragments of the mortar floor found at the eastern end of the basilica and in the nave have a distinct dark reddish hue suggestive of having been burnt. To compensate for this the floor levels of the triconch, the nave and the southern aisle were raised.40 A new mortar floor was added in the aisles; while in the nave and triconch a mosaic floor was

Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue

60

Phase 1

Phase 2 0

10 m

Phase 3

0

10 m

0

10 m

Phase 4/5 0

10 m

Phase 6/7 0

10 m

Figure 4.16. The basilica phases

laid. Stylistically dated to the early 6th century the floor depicted a range of marine and land animals, including birds, fishes, a dolphin, a large feline – possibly a lion – as well as plant life and geometric patterns (Fig. 4.17).41 The narthex also appears to have been floored with a mosaic at this time (Fig. 4.18).42 These new floors do not seem to have been level throughout the building: the floors of the nave and southern aisle were higher than the narthex; the floor of the northern aisle was lower; the nave was higher than both aisles; while the floor of the triconch was slightly higher than the nave.43 The particular difference in the height of the floor levels may represent an internal relational hierarchy, distinguishing the symbolic and social importance of the various spaces. New structural elements were also added at the eastern

end of the building; an altar was placed directly in front of the central apse while division walls were placed across the northern and southern apses, partially dividing these spaces off. These walls did not go across the entire width of the apse but were roughly central with gaps either side of the walls allowing access to the spaces beyond.44 A chancel screen, utilising an earlier limestone column, may also have divided the nave from the triapsidal sanctuary.45 There are signs that, subsequent to the re-flooring, the building suffered structural problems. To rectify this, the eastern arcades dividing the aisles and nave were blocked in, while the western piers seem to have been dismantled and rebuilt on a wider footing. These blockings incorporated a large amount of spolia within their construction, including a number of Roman imposts, as well as a well-worked

4  The acropolis of Butrint reassessed

Figure 4.17. Examples of the mosaic pavements from the basilica (Courtesy of the Taddei family archive and Instituti i Arkeologjisë)

Figure 4.18. Fragments of the narthex mosaic found in the 2009 excavations

61

62

Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue

Figure 4.20. Silver ring from the grave in front of the arcade

Figure 4.19. View of the grave inserted in front of the arcade along the southern edge of the nave

Corinthian capital.46 Combined with these alterations, the doors that had originally provided access from the aisles into the northern and southern apses of the triconch were blocked. There is no evidence that a new floor was laid within the nave, triconch or narthex where the earlier mosaic floor remained. In both aisles though, a new tile floor was laid, the edging imprints of which could be seen in the mortar of blockings. Along the southern edge of the nave a grave was inserted in front of the arcade (Fig. 4.19). Cut through the earlier mosaic, the grave was capped by a number of large limestone slabs. Little survives from this burial, excavated by Ugolini in the 1930s, but during the 2009 excavations a silver ring was recovered from the backfill of the grave (Fig. 4.20). Another burial was found outside the northern aisle, placed up against the earlier marble floored, stone-lined tomb. This later burial, which appears to have partially utilised a fissure in the natural bedrock, truncated the northern edge of the earlier burial.47

Early to high medieval period The 6th-century occupation of the eastern area of the acropolis does not seem to have lasted beyond the end of the century. Occupation debris located above the raised terrace in the central part of the acropolis indicates that activity within this area stopped sometime after the mid 6th

century. Following this, the tower house on the south side appears to have been abandoned and may have partially collapsed. An infant burial placed in a 5th-century AD amphora was found cut through the abandoned terrace. Similar to those found in the forum and Triconch Palace excavations in the town below, such inhumations indicate minimal activity after this date.48 The Acropolis Basilica was abandoned too.49 It is possible that this may have been accelerated by the destruction of its eastern triconch, the central and southern apses of which collapsed down the edge of the acropolis slope. From this period until the mid 9th century AD there is no structural evidence of occupation of the central and eastern parts of the acropolis. A few potsherds of 8th- to 9thcentury date were found in the excavations made here by the Greek Archaeological Mission indicating some continued presence hereabouts as in other parts of Butrint.50 However, if there was any occupation on the prominent western end of the hilltop, as has been suggested, it was destroyed when the later castle was constructed (see below).51 In sum, the hypothesis that the Byzantine kastron dating to the 7th- to 9th-centuries was located on the acropolis now appears unlikely, especially with the discovery of the later 8thcentury nucleus found below in the town in the Western Defences.52

High to late medieval 1 periods From the later 10th or early 11th centuries a significant reorganisation and rebuilding programme took place on the acropolis, reflecting a period of urban renewal found across Butrint (Fig. 4.21).53 With the construction of three defensive circuit walls, Butrint was now divided into three distinct areas: the acropolis, the lower city and the northern citadel.54 The new wall circuit enclosing the acropolis, standing c. 4 m in height, encompassed the entire summit. 55 Distinctively made with reused blocks from Butrint’s Hellenistic defences, this powerful wall was the first time the hilltop had been enclosed. At several points fighting platforms and crenulations can still be seen that once ran

4  The acropolis of Butrint reassessed

Northern citadel

63

Gate

Gate Gate

Acropolis Gate

West Gate

Gate Tower Medieval 1 structures Pre medieval 1 structures Projected wall lines

Lower town 0

100 m

Figure 4.21. The high- to late-medieval 1 period acropolis

around the circuit. Six gateways provided access into this area: four providing access from the northern quarter of the town; one from the southern lower town; and one from the western area, a renovation of the earlier Hellenistic West Gate.56 The northern gateways along with the western gate were flanked by towers, while the southern approach was protected by an outer wall. The principal approach to the acropolis appears to have been the western entrance, the (earlier Hellenistic) West Gate. Immediately above this, we now hypothesize, was situated the later 10th- to 11th-century castle, almost certainly a dwelling or small tower that replaced the oikos of 9th- to 10th-century date on the Vrina Plain.57 Located on the western end of the acropolis, it commanded access along the Vivari Channel and was visible from the Straits of Corfu beyond. Traces of the distinctive medieval 1 walls can be seen in one of Luigi Ugolini’s photographs taken in the 1930s during the construction of the new castle-museum (see Fig. 14.10). The photograph shows existence of deep deposits, but unfortunately no obvious structures can be made out. Having discovered the reuse of

the earlier basilica on the Vrina Plain as the nucleus of the 9th-century commander’s habitation, it would have been interesting to know if the new hilltop dwelling was also made in an earlier structure or was a new building such as a tower, emulating perhaps the flanking towers around the defensive circuit. The two-storey tower with cellar photographed (but not recorded) by Ugolini conceivably could date from this period, although it is more likely to have been built in the 13th-century as a keep.58 Did the inner ward or enclosure exist at this time too? Beyond the castle, towards the centre of the acropolis, lay the remains of other residential buildings, each making expedient use of the earlier remains here. In the northeastern corner of the old Roman courtyard (Room VII), the rubble footings of a small, but substantially built structure were located, Room XVIII (Fig. 4.23, Plate 4.9).59 Its 1.2 m wide walls were constructed from orthostatic stones laid on edge, infilled with a rubble core. The building was divided internally by a stout wall built diagonally from the western end of the north wall, to the mid point of the south wall. The exact reason for this odd internal division is unknown,

64

Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue

Figure 4.22. The remains of the outer ward wall, photographed by L.M. Ugolini in the 1930’s (Instituti i Arkeologjisë)

Figure 4.23. View of Room XVIII

4  The acropolis of Butrint reassessed

65

Northern citadel

Cemetery Acropolis

West Gate

Buttress Castle

Gate

Tower house

Church

Medieval 2 structures Pre medieval 2 structures Projected wall lines

Lower town 0

100 m

Figure 4.24. The late medieval 2 period acropolis (Butrint Foundation)

though it represents an original feature of the structure. No entranceway can be located; it was most likely situated along its southern wall that was significantly robbed out, perhaps used as a quarry during the construction of the later fortified acropolis wall. In the southwest area of the courtyard (Room VII), two fragments of a rough stone paved surface appear to be associated with this structure, indicating the presence of an exterior yard. The location of the dwelling and possible yard within the area of the earlier courtyard suggests that the, still visible, exterior walls of the courtyard, acted as a boundary for this construction. The presence of habitation set within a clearly defined boundary suggests that the settlement on the acropolis may have been arranged into a number of house plots. Indeed, a 13th-century foundation cut filled with immense orthostatic stones, identical to those seen in Room XVIII, indicates that at least one other such house existed on the acropolis during this period.60 The substantial construction of these dwellings, using trimmed orthostats plundered from Hellenistic walls and rubble, show that these were major dwellings resembling town houses known, for example, from Athens and Corinth, unlike the

more modest post-built structures found in the Triconch Palace excavations.61 Associated with imported Byzantine White Wares and Sgraffito Wares, these stone structures within the fortified ring of the hilltop, close to the likely kastron, belonged, we may surmise, to one or more major families.62 Strangely, the Acropolis Basilica occupying the prominent eastern end of the hill appears not to have been in use in this period.63 Traces of a plastered surface in its apsidal area might suggest that a small shrine was made here as in the apse of the Vrina Plain basilica at this time.

The late medieval 2 period During the 13th to 14th centuries the castle and associated fortifications of the acropolis were significantly strengthened (Fig. 4.24).64 The acropolis castle was altered with the construction of the keep along with the addition of a second tower within its enclosure, which may have been the castellan’s residence described in the written sources, although a recent study suggests that this second tower may

66

Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue

Figure 4.25. A 13th-/14th-century southern Italian lamp recovered from the backfill of the medieval period 2 terrace wall

now date to the Venetian period.65 To the east of this tower, a modest triple-apsed church, c. 11.74 m in width, was located presumably forming the private place of worship for the permanent occupants of the acropolis castle.66 The church was set within a new outer ward or courtyard that was constructed at this time, extending almost 40 m eastwards towards the centre of the hilltop. Part of this wall can be seen in a series of photographs taken by Ugolini in the 1930s (Fig. 4.22). At this time the principle western approach to the acropolis was remodelled and strengthened with the construction of an additional outer bailey created by the construction of a new wall built from the medieval tower that overlooked the West Gate, down to the foot of the acropolis. This wall was strengthened with the addition of a substantial triangular bastion on its external face.67 The new approach now funnelled visitors between two high walls, confining access to a ‘murderously narrow passage’.68 The defensive nature of this new entrance was further defined by arrow slits piercing the wall near the West Gate, angled to point down the approach road. The shrine immediately beside the West Gate was re-painted at this time with depictions of four figures placed side-byside: Christ, the Virgin Mary with the Christ child, Virgin Mary at the annunciation and, possibly, Saint Nicholas.69 Beyond this, a new defensive wall was extended northwards down the steep slope from the West Gate to the lakeshore. Along with a new towered gateway built within it, this wall restricted access from the isthmus to the northern citadel.70 As part of the refurbishment of the acropolis wall, the four gates along the northern side of the earlier medieval fortification were blocked thereby preventing access to the northern citadel, perhaps suggesting a shift in emphasis in the town to the acropolis and lower city. To the south the

Figure 4.26. Semi-circular buttress built against the repaired terrace wall

collapsed wall, instead of being rebuilt in its original form, was repaired in a series of terraces progressively stepped back towards the interior, so as to relieve the pressure of the retained soils. The terrace walls were strongly built abutting the earlier middle Byzantine circuit wall. The foundations of these new walls were almost 2 m deep and partially exposed the core of the Archaic temenos wall below. Large polygonal blocks, possibly from earlier dwellings located within the area, were used to backfill the trench. A wellpreserved lamp of south Italian origin from the polygonal stone backfill dates this work generally to the 13th–14th century (Fig. 4.25). The construction site upon the terrace was sealed by a new and higher terraced surface composed of black soils, an indication of the continued deposition of domestic refuse in the preceding two centuries. A semi-circular solid buttress was built against the external east face of the repaired wall (Fig. 4.26). Located along the southern approach road to the acropolis from the lower city this structure would have been a visual statement of the new authority on the acropolis and of the increased

4  The acropolis of Butrint reassessed

67

Figure 4.27. The late 13th-/early 14th-century AD burials within the acropolis basilica

defence of the southern approach. Contemporary with these alterations the late antique tower house described above appears to have been reoccupied (Plate 4.10). The southern wall of the building was removed and replaced with the new defensive wall circuit around the acropolis, while the earlier ground-floor cellar was filled in, and a mortar surface was laid over it. This two-storey building seems to have been entered from an exterior terrace, through a door possibly located at the western end of the north wall where the interior mortar floor was found to be thicker, presumably to withstand the increased wear and tear. Located close to the main gate to the lower city, the refurbished tower house, as in late antiquity, would have held a dominant position on the acropolis skyline when viewed from below. The fact that its dimensions are virtually identical to that of the surviving tower of the acropolis castle to the west, along with its adjacent ancillary buildings, may suggest that this tower was of similar importance to the residential accommodation provided for the castle’s principal occupant.71 To the west of this tower the remains of at least two further buildings were located (Rooms XVI–XVII) built up against the northern face of the new acropolis wall. A third contemporary building, XXI, was evident to the northwest, partially built over the earlier orthostat wall of Room XVIII. Late in the 13th century, judging from the RMR ware sherds found in the 2009 excavations of the Acropolis Basilica, this part of the acropolis was once again being used. The erstwhile late antique basilica, it now appears, was largely transformed into an enclosed cemetery (Fig. 4.27). In addition, mortar remains located in the central area of the earlier triconch may indicate the presence of a small apsed chapel here at this time. Inhumation burials, in some cases associated with RMR

vessels imported from southern Italy, dated to the late 13th/ early 14th century, were located within the narthex, aisles and nave of the ruined structure, cut through the earlier floors.72 Some graves were re-used more than once and contained multiple internments, the remains of the earlier individuals being collected up and placed around the feet of the later individual.73 In one case, an infant, buried just inside the main door of the southern aisle, had been interred with a fine lead glazed polychrome RMR ware dish (Fig. 4.28, Plate 4.11). Beneath this dish the remains of a second infant were located. To the north of this, a burial of a male adult included the base of a jar, placed upside down above the neck of the person (Fig. 4.29). These burials may have been of individuals connected with the household who lived in the castle at the western end of the acropolis.74 As in the case of the basilica on the Vrina Plain these burials may have been interred here due to the memory of the sanctity of the former religious space.75

The Venetian period The subsequent defence of the acropolis focused upon increasing the strength of the West Gate (Fig. 4.30).76 A new door was inserted into the medieval period 2 triangular bastion-wall by the West Gate. This gate had an inner portal and an exterior portcullis. The exact date of this new gate is not known, but probably belongs to the later 14th century or later.77 The western courtyard was further defended with the construction of a new tower and a long rectangular building, possibly a barrack block. The keep in the castle was now refurbished and the western complex was further defended.78 A massive Venetian casement with a glacis slope was constructed along the northern approach to protect the castle against cannon fire. Along the eastern side too, a new curtain wall was built abutting the northeast corner of the keep,

68

Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue

Figure 4.28. Infant burial in the south aisle with the lead glazed polychrome RMR ware dish in situ

Figure 4.29. Burial of an adult male with the base of a jar, placed upside down, over his neck

the eastern limit of which was built over the ruins of the earlier medieval church. The second southern tower, as suggested by the recent survey may also have been built at this time, along with the gateways by which the castle is still accessed today.79 Conceivably these alterations were part of the repairs made in 1387 by the castellanus of Butrint to his palace and house, which according to the Venetian sources recorded by Siriol Davis cost 50 hyperprya.80 To the east the 13th-century tower house located towards the centre of the southern line of fortifications around the hill was now in complete ruin. A northeast–southwest aligned wall located above the ruined eastern wall of the tower along with a number of other ill-defined walls do, however, suggest that other buildings existed within this area, possibly replacing the functions of the earlier tower. During this period a new building appears to have been built within the shell of the late antique basilica on the eastern ridge (Figs 4.31–32).81 Although on a slightly different alignment to the earlier basilica, it still partially utilised the visible walls of the basilica as its foundations. Measuring roughly 16.78 × 16.73 m the new building was constructed over the nave and aisles of the former building. The western wall of the building was built across the door of the northern aisle and the central nave thereby restricting

access to the door of the southern aisle. Presumably the earlier narthex was in partial ruin at this time; while the triconch had almost certainly been covered over by accumulated soil deposits. Within the nave two piers are located. The western pier is constructed from re-used capitals, whilst the central pier re-used a column. A linear socket in the side of the latter indicates that it was part of the chancel screen of the earlier church.82 These piers would have formed the support for an upper floor accessed from the southern room where the remains of a stair block are located up against the southern wall. Across the site numerous ‘T’ shaped iron nails of various sizes have been found. These would presumably have secured the thick wooden planks that would have formed the floor of this upper room.83 To the north, a rectangular room was built directly onto the natural; the sloping nature of the bedrock seems to suggest a raised floor was added. Two large rectangular socket holes in the inner northern face presumably held large timber supports for the floor. The dating of this structure is far from certain. It has been named “a palace” dated to the 11th century, a possible successor to the 9th-century commander’s house built within the ruins of the late antique basilica on the Vrina Plain.84 However, excavations in 2009 have shown that the

4  The acropolis of Butrint reassessed

69

Northern citadel

Acropolis

West Gate Gate

Barracks

Castle

Venetian structures Pre Venetian structures Projected wall lines

Lower town 0

100 m

Figure 4.30. The Venetian acropolis

foundation of the western wall of the ‘palace’ had been built directly over the legs of one of the late13th-/early 14thcentury Angevin burials (Fig. 4.33).85 The construction of this building is also unusual by its walls being earth bonded; a characteristic at odds with the heavily mortared 11th-century medieval 1 walls. The only other building within Butrint with a similar construction type seems to be the church built to the northwest of the Baptistery; a building dated to the 14th or 15th century.86 By 1470 with the threat of Ottoman attacks on Butrint and Corfu the walls around the acropolis and lower city were refortified. Only 12 miles divided Butrint from Corfu, a situation recognised by the Venetians who allegedly spent 1,300 ducats per annum on the upkeep of the Castel de Butrinto that they described as Corfu’s “protector and right eye”.87 Despite this, in 1498 the castle appears to have still been in a poor condition with only 12 guards defending it.88 The reason for this may in part be due to the construction of a new fortress built on an island on the southern shore of the Vivari Channel, the Triangular Fortress. Dated to the late 15th/early 16th century the Triangular Fortress was

built to reinforce Butrint’s seaward defences as well as to protect its important fisheries.89 This was supplemented with the construction of a defensive tower, thought to date to the middle of the 16th century, on the northern shore, directly opposite the Triangular Fortress. The Venetian Tower is thought to have worked in tandem with the earlier fortress to protect the fish weirs.90 Despite the continuing wealth of the fisheries and the financial gains that it brought to some, indicated by the appearance of imported ceramics from Northern Italy, throughout the 15th and 16th centuries, the medieval town appears to have been retracting in size.91 Along with the risk of attack by Ottoman forces, seasonal flooding and malarial infection seems to have played a part in this abandonment. In 1453 the antiquarian Cyriacus of Ancona had noted while on a visit to Butrint that the Venetian town occupied only a small area of the original city; while by the end of the century, soldiers protecting the castle and fisheries complained that disease was rampant in the city, a situation partially blamed for the high deaths rate of the inhabitants.92 By the end of the 16th century the state of the

70

Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue

Figure 4.31. Aerial view of the 14th-/15th-century building built over the acropolis basilica

14th-/15th-century building Earlier walls Bedrock

0

Figure 4.32. Plan of the 14th-/15th-century building

10 m

4  The acropolis of Butrint reassessed

71

defensive walls and the castel on the acropolis had declined to such an extent that following the naval victory by the Venetian alliance over the Ottomans at Lepanto, the Prefect of Dalmatia on a visit to Butrint in 1572 advised that the ruined city and castel be abandoned, almost certainly in

favour of the Triangular Fortress close to the fisheries.93 With this shift in the focal point of the settlement the acropolis appears to have become peripheral. During the following centuries, the acropolis castle underwent limited repairs; one of Ugolini’s photographs, for example, shows a fine 17th- to 18th-century window in the south-facing first floor of the castle, probably inserted by the Venetian commandant (Fig. 4.34). Nevertheless, after the 16th century, occupation of the acropolis appears to have been minimal and by February 1928, when Luigi Maria Ugolini erected his tents on the acropolis, the hill that had for almost three millennia encapsulated the story and history of Butrint was a grassy rise (Fig. 4.35), populated by sparse trees and Vlach shepherds huts, with only a few crumbling edifices remaining as markers of the once ‘lofty city’.94

Figure 4.33. Burial discovered beneath the foundations of the 14th-/15th-century building

Figure 4.34. The south facing Venetian trifora window at the first floor of the acropolis castle, photographed by L.M. Ugolini (Instituti i Arkeologjisë)

Figure 4.35. L.M. Ugolini’s excavation camp on the acropolis in 1928 (Instituti i Arkeologjisë)

72

Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue

References Anamali, S. (1993) Architettura e decorazione tardoantica. XL corso di cultura sull’arte ravennate e bizantina: colloquio dell’Associazione Italiana per lo Studio e la Conservazione del Mosaico e seminario internzionale di studi su l’Albania dal tardoantico al medioevo, aspetti e problemi di archaeologia e storia dell’ arte: 447–75. Ravenna, Edizioni del Girasole. Andrews, R., Bowden, W., Gilkes, O. and Martin, S. (2004) The late antique and medieval fortifications of Butrint. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 126–50. Oxford, Oxbow. Arafat, K. W. and Morgan, C. (1995) In the footsteps of Aeneas: excavations at Butrint, Albania 1991–2. Diallogos Hellenic Studies Review 2: 25–40. Bowden, W and Mitchell, J. (2007) The Triconch Palace at Butrint: the life and death of a late Roman domus. In L. Lavan, L Özgenel and A. Sarantis (eds), Housing in Late Antiquity from Palaces to Shops: 455–74. Leiden, Brill. Bowden, W, Francis, K., Gilkes, O. and Lako, K. (2011) The 5th- to mid 7th-century occupation of the triconch area. In W. Bowden and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 3. Excavations at the Triconch Palace: 56–117. Oxford, Oxbow. Bowden, W. (2007) Butrint and Nicopolis: urban planning and the ‘Romanization’ of Greece and Epirus. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint: An Assessment: 189–209. Oxford, Oxbow. Bowden, W. (2008) Cristianizzazione e status sociale nell’Epirus Vetus tardo antico: le evidenze archeologiche. Antichitá Altoadriatiche 66: 301–32. Bowden, W. and Hodges, R. (forthcoming) An ‘Ice Age settling on the Roman Empire’: post-Roman Butrint between strategy and serendipity. In N. Christie and A. Augenti (eds), Urbes Extinctae: Archaeologies of Abandoned Classical Sites. Aldershot, Scolar Press. Bowden, W. and Mitchell, J. (2004) The Christian topography of Butrint. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 104–25. Oxford, Oxbow. Bowden, W. and Përzhita, L. (2004a) The Baptistery. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 176–201. Oxford, Oxbow. Bowden, W. and Përzhita, L. (2004b) Archaeology in the landscape of Roman Epirus: preliminary report on the Diaporit excavations, 2002–3. Journal of Roman Archaeology 17: 413–33. Bowden, W., Crowson, A., Logue, M,. Sebastiani, A. (2011) The medieval occupation of the Merchant’s House. In W. Bowden and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 3. Excavations at the Triconch Palace: 203–28. Oxford, Oxbow. Bowden, W., Culwick, A., Francis, K., Gilkes, O. and Price, J. (2011) The medieval occupation of the triconch area. In W. Bowden and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 3. Excavations at the Triconch Palace: 118–51. Oxford, Oxbow. Ceka, N. (2005) The Illyrians to the Albanians. Tirana, Migjeni. Crowson, A. (2007) Venetian Butrint (Butrinti Venecian). London/ Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Greenslade, S., Hodges, R., Leppard, S. and Mitchell, J. (2006) Preliminary report on the early Christian basilica on the Vrina Plain. Albania. Archeologia Medievale 33: 397–408. Hadzis, K. (1998) Preliminary report on the study of pottery on the acropolis of Bouthrotos. Iliria 28.1–2: 223–7.

Hansen, I. L. (2009) Hellenistic and Roman Butrint (Butrinti Helenistik dhe Romak). London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Hernandez, D. R. and Çondi, Dh. (2008) The Roman forum at Butrint (Epirus) and its development from Hellenistic to mediaeval times. Journal of Roman Archaeology 21: 275–92. Hodges, R. (2004) Byzantine Butrint: concluding remarks. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 321–26. Oxford, Oxbow. Hodges, R. (2006) Eternal Butrint: A UNESCO World Heritage Site in Albania. London, General Penne Publishing. Hodges, R. (2008a) The Rise and Fall of Byzantine Butrint (Shkëlqimi dhe rënia e Butrintit bizantin). London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Hodges, R. (2008b) Aistulf and the Adriatic Sea. Acta Archaeologica 79: 274–81. Hodges, R. (2011) Conclusion. In W. Bowden and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 3. Excavations at the Triconch Palace: 327–38. Oxford, Oxbow. Hodges, R. and Bowden, W. (2005) Butrinto nell’età tardo antica. In G.-P. Brogiolo and P. Delogu (eds), L’Adriatico dalla tarda antichità all’età carolingia: 7–47. Rome, All’Insegna del Giglio. Hodges, R. and Logue, M. (2007) The mid-Byzantine re-birth of Butrint. Minerva 18.3: 39–41. Hodges, R. and Vroom, J. (2007) Late antique and early medieval ceramics from Butrint, Albania. In S. Gelichi and C. Negrelli (eds), La circolazione delle ceramiche nell’Adriatico tra tarda antichità ed altomedieovo (III Incontro di studio CER.AM.IS): 375–88. Mantua, SAP. Kamberi, Z. (1993) Archaeological research and researchers in Albania. Institute of Archaeology Bulletin 30: 99–119. Karaiskaj, G. (2009) The Fortifications of Butrint. London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Krautheimer, R. (1986) Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture. Harmondsworth, Penguin. Martin, S. (2004) The topography of Butrint. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 76–103. Oxford, Oxbow. Meksi, A (1988) Ndërtimet e kultit në Butrint. In N. Ceka (ed), Butroti: Permbledhje Studimesh: 199–210. Tirana, Akademia e Shkencave e RPSSH, Qëndra e Kërkimeve Arkeologjike. Meksi, A. (1985) Arkitektura paleokristiane në Shqiperi. Monumentet 30: 14–44. Mustilli, D. (1941) Relazione preliminare sugli scavi archaeologici in Albania (1937–40). Atti della Reale Accademia d’Italia 2: 677–704. Nanaj, A. (1985) Butroti protourban. Illiria 15.2: 303–12. Pedley, J. (2005) Sanctuaries and the Sacred in the Ancient Greek World. Cambridge University Press. Pojani, I. (2007) The monumental togate statue from Butrint. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint: An Assessment: 62–77. Oxford, Oxbow. Polci, B. (2003) Some aspects of the transformation of the Roman domus between Late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages. In L. Lavan and W. Bowden (eds), Theory and Practice in Late Antique Archaeology: 79–109. Leiden. Brill. Soustal, P. (2004) The historical sources of Butrint in the Middle Ages. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 20–26. Oxford, Oxbow. Ugolini, L. M. (1937) Butrinto. Il mito d’Enea, gli scavi. Rome, Istituto Grafico Tiberino.

4  The acropolis of Butrint reassessed Ugolini, L. M. (1942) L’acropoli di Butrinto (Albania antica 3). Rome, Scalia. Vroom, J. (2004) The medieval and post-medieval fine wares and cooking wares from the Triconch Palace and the Baptistery. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 278–92. Oxford, Oxbow. Zamputi, I. (1967) (ed.) Dokumente te shek.XV për historinë e Shqipërisë 1479–1509. Tirana, n.n.

Notes 1 Due to the untimely death of Ugolini these excavations were never properly published and survive only as notes and summaries within in his archive of eight folders held at the Museo della Civiltá Romana in Rome. A sense of the excavations can be gained from a brief description he wrote as a draft for either Butrinto: il mito d’Enea. Gli scavi (1937), or for L’acropoli di Butrinto (1942): ‘…we started to outline huge trenches on the acropolis summit, both on top and the plain. Soon we realised that the classical vestiges had been destroyed in the Byzantine time and that on them, in the medieval period, humble structures were raised. On the top of the acropolis, a medieval church was built. There was no other way but going along the sides and attack the plain below, together with the southern side of the hill.’ 2 The trenches from the earlier excavations were cleaned and re-recorded and in places some limited excavation was undertaken to locate stratified deposits that would clarify wall relationships and retrieve dating evidence for their construction. This work was supplemented by the excavation of a new trench, c. 17 m to the east. This provided a complete sequence of occupation deposits from the modern ground surface to the acropolis bedrock, over 4.5 m below. The secure dating evidence from these deposits was then linked, where possible, to the limited number of sections visible in the older excavations to the west. 3 See Molla, Paris and Venturini this volume 4 See Hodges (Chapter 1) in this volume; Hansen 2009: 15. The settlement may have been located on the flat western spur; however, the presence of the Venetian castle, and the reconstruction of this by Ugolini, makes the nature of any urban settlement at this time impossible to assess. 5 Arafat and Morgan 1995: 37; Hadzis 1998. 6 Arafat and Morgan 1995: 36. 7 Arafat and Morgan 1995: 37. The earliest recorded stonebuilt (Doric) temple is the Temple of Artemis in Corfu c. 590 BC. 8 When Ugolini first discovered these walls he dated them to the 6th century BC. Under the post war communist regime of Albania, and without supporting evidence, these walls were presented as proof undeniable that Butrint, specifically the acropolis, was fortified as a proto-urban settlement during the Archaic period, cf. Hodges and Bowden 2005. Between 1982–6, Astrit Nanaj of the Centre for Archaeological Research confirmed the line of the polygonal wall and began excavation of one section. By linking it to a mass of unstratified Archaic pottery, he dated its construction to the late 7th or early 6th centuries BC and suggested a contemporary link with the roughly constructed wall circuit on the nearby hilltop of Kalivo, Nanaj 1985; cf. also Arafat and Morgan 1995: 34; Kamberi 1993: 17. In the 1990s the Hadzis excavations claimed to have produced datable material from

9 10

11 12

13 14 15 16

17 18 19 20 21 22 23

24 25 26

27 28

29

73

a deep section excavated up against the interior face of the wall. The terminus post quem date of c. 500 BC makes these walls the earliest found from any site by almost a century within southern Epirus, Arafat and Morgan 1995: 35–6. Arafat and Morgan 1995: 36. Hansen 2009: 9. Measuring c. 60 m in length its western limit terminated in a well-constructed right-angled corner, exactly in line with the western limit of the acropolis’s eastern peak while its eastern extent descended its southern slopes. Hansen 2009: 9; Hodges 2006: 59; Martin 2004: 80–81. Mustilli 1941: 686, 688; cf. Martin 2004: 80. The bothros was thought to be located to the east of the basilica Ugolini excavated at the eastern end of the acropolis, Hansen 2009: 9; Hodges 2006: 59; Martin 2004: 80–1. However, directly east of the basilica the natural bedrock falls steeply away. It seems more likely that the bothros is actually located east of the later 13th-century church that the modern castle has partially been built over. This would place it to the west of the Acropolis Basilica within the eastern saddle of the hill cf. Martin 2004: 78, fig 6.3. Pedley 2005: 172. Hadzis 1998. Pojani 2007: 63. Ugolini 1942: 61–3. Beneath a late antique basilica a platform and a series of rock cut steps seemed to support this theory, Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 111; Hodges 2006: 138; Martin 2004: 81; Ugolini 1942: 61–3. A new survey of the Acropolis Basilica along with some small excavations has, however, produced no evidence of this temple. Pojani 2007: 63. Arafat and Morgan 1995; Ceka 2005: 60–1; Hadzis 1998 Cf. Arafat and Morgan 1995: 28; Hodges 2006: 57 Hansen 2009: 19–29; Hernandez and Çondi 2008. Martin 2004: 83. The Hadzis excavations did though ‘yield great quantities of Hellenistic pottery’, primarily of Corfiot origin, Hadzis 1998: 225. Cf. Bowden 2007: 203 ‘The city wall at Butrint...continued to serve a symbolic function … it served both to define sections of the urban area…and also perhaps to demonstrate the relationship between the Roman town and that which had preceded it.’ Hernandez and Çondi 2008: fig.8. See Hodges (Chapter 1) in this volume for a discussion of access routes and gates in Butrint in general. Evidently, the restrictions imposed by the awkward topography, which dictated so much of the original construction, resulted in this haphazard construction It should be noted that these alterations are characterised by a markedly inferior quality of construction in all the six new rooms compared to the earlier alterations. For example, the eastern and western walls of Room XI are built of an un-bonded rubble core roughly faced in various sized stone and covered liberally in plaster above a rough plinth Arafat and Morgan 1995: 36. Cf. Hernandez and Çondi 2008 on the changes that the forum under went at this time. Local elite investment appears to have been moving away from displays of public munificence with a greater reliance on displaying social and political ambitions through private architecture. For a discussion of this see Greenslade this volume. Polci 2003: 89, 101–6. The acropolis tower represents a small, simple example of houses of this type, which

74

30 31

32 33

34 35

36

37 38 39

Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue are found across a wide geographical area with a great variety of forms and sizes. Two-storey dwellings were also constructed within the ruins of the former Triconch Palace, cf. Bowden and Hodges forthcoming; Bowden and Mitchell 2007: 470–2. Measuring 6 m north–south by 6.5 m east–west the room appears to have been c. 1.80 m in height. On the basis of its architecture and its mosaic pavement Ugolini (1937:17), who first excavated the basilica, dated the building to the 4th century, a date subsequently followed by a number of later scholars discussing the building, cf. Anamali 1993: 460; Meksi 1985: 16; Meksi 1988: 199–200. More recently Bowden and Mitchell (2004: 111), who note that the build of the basilica is like no other late antique building in Butrint or Epirus as a whole, suggested that the building was much later in date. A small trench, dug in 2009 at the eastern end of the building, produced finds, including a Samian amphora base, that suggests a late 5thor 6th-century construction date. The 22.31 m measurement refers to the width of the narthex. The width of the aisles and nave combined is c. 16.76 m. Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 111; Hodges 2008a: 51. Such rooms ‘located just out from the end of the narthex’ were a common feature of the Balkan church architecture from the 4th into the 6th century, Krautheimer 1986: 121. Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 111. These tombs were revealed by Ugolini in the 1930s, but of the tombs at the western end of the northern aisle only the central one was excavated since the two outer tombs were partially covered by the later walls of the possible 14th/15th-century building built in the shell of the basilica. There is the possibility that a second entrance may have existed at the northwest corner of the narthex. The outcrop of natural rock, which partially formed the western wall of the narthex, appears to end in a slight vertical edge. Beyond this the lower bedrock forms a gentle smooth slope suggestive of an entrance. It should be noted though that much of the northern wall of the narthex has been robbed/collapsed along with the northwestern corner of the narthex and that this may have happened to the rest of the western wall. If so the gap may just be coincidental. Bowden and Mitchell 2004; 104–18. For a discussion of the Great Basilica see Molla this volume; for the Well of Junia Rufina see Sebastiani et al. in this volume. For Diaporit see Bowden and Perzhita, 2004b; for the Vrina Plain see Greenslade et al. 2006: 401–4; Greenslade in this volume. In the case of the churches built within Butrint this is difficult to verify with any certainty: the Great Basilica has only partially been excavated, while the floors of both the churches at the Well of Junia Rufina and the ‘Gymnasium’ were removed to get to the earlier phases. On the other hand, a dedicatory inscription in the mosaic pavement in the church on the Vrina Plain clearly shows that a number of private donors paid for the refurbishment of the church and mosaic on this site. Although the benefactors did not name themselves, the inscription was an effective means of social display within a community who would have known who the individuals were, Greenslade et al. 2006: 401; Greenslade this volume. At Diaporit although there is no direct evidence that the church was a private construction it is one of the most closely dated of the Epirote churches and the circumstances and location of its construction (built

40 41

42

43

44 45

46

close to the ruins of an earlier Roman villa) suggest that it could be considered in this context. Although the villa was abandoned by c. 250 AD it may ‘have remained in the hands of private landowners (whether or not they were the descendents of the original villa owners) who were consequently able to use the site for the new complex and quarry the original buildings for materials’, Bowden 2008: 327. The floor of the nave and triconch was raised by almost 0.40 m. Today very little of this mosaic survives, seen only in patches around the edges of the floor. Following the excavation of the basilica in the 1930s the fragmentary mosaics were lifted. Unfortunately they have now disappeared. A number of black and white photographs of the mosaics in situ and a series of colourful stone-by-stone paintings by Igenio Epicocco provide an evocative testament of the intensity of the design. From Ugolini’s preliminary description of the mosaic it appears that the sequence of animals set within a colonnade, including the large feline, was located directly in front of the apses at the eastern end of the building. However, photographs of the basilica taken from the southern end of the narthex would seem to show the dolphin mosaic in situ located just to the east of the later square pier base at the western end of the nave. Originally it was thought that only the nave and triconch had been paved with mosaic. However, excavations in the narthex at the northern end – and directly in front of the western door of the nave – in 2009 uncovered the fragmentary remains of a mosaic floor that appears to be contemporary with those in the nave and the triconch. Although severely damaged due to the insertion of a number of later 13th-/early 14th-century burials, an image of a bird, possibly a peacock, symbolising Paradise and ever lasting life, was located just to the north of the door into the nave (identified by John Mitchell, University of East Anglia). The level of the western door of the northern aisle suggests that initially one stepped up, presumably to keep the architectural form of the other two doors, before stepping down into the aisle on the other side of the door. Similar dividing walls, built across the lateral apses, can be seen at the Church of the Forty Martyrs, located above Saranda. Across the site a large amount of architectural sculpture has been found including fragments of a fine Proconnesian marble lattice-work chancel screen, window colonnettes as well as screen and column fragments of a possible ambo from which the priest would have delivered his sermon. A number of crutch capitals have also been found, including one recently discovered in the backfill of a trench presumably dug by Ugolini in front of the central apse of the triconch. Two different cross designs have been noticed carved into a number of these capitals. The apparent simplicity and crudeness of the basilica initially seemed at odds with the diversity and quality of the architectural elements found and led to the suggestion that this material originated from a church elsewhere in Butrint and re-used here, cf. Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 111. However with the discovery of the triapsidal end, the quality of these architectural elements make sense. This material is being studied by Elio Hobdari (Institute of Archaeology, Tirana). These fragments almost certainly come from a Roman monumental building on the acropolis, though no other

4  The acropolis of Butrint reassessed

47 48 49

50 51 52

53

54 55

56 57 58 59

evidence of this was found on the eastern summit; the building may hence have been located on the western part of the summit, or possibly in the saddle of the hill. This burial was excavated by Ugolini in the 1930s so its true dating is unclear. For the Triconch Palace see Bowden, Francis, et al. 2011. See also Hodges 2008a: 37–41. With a loss of its commercial East Mediterranean connections Butrint, like many other central Mediterranean ports, is thought to have declined. Although investment in some pre-eminent religious structures occurred, such as the construction of The Baptistery thought to date to the last quarter of the 6th century (Bowden and Perzhita 2004a: 190), others, such as the possible chapel built by the Well of Junia Rufina, were abandoned at this time (Sebastiani et al. in this volume). These changes also affected the wider region beyond the late antique city walls as both the monastic site at Diaporit (Bowden and Perzhita 2004b: 430–1), as well as the basilica on the Vrina Plain (Greenslade this volume), were abandoned too. Pers. comm. J. Vroom; cf. Bowden and Hodges forthcoming Martin 2004: 96. For the kastron suggestion see Hodges 2004: 323–4; Hodges and Bowden forthcoming. For a discussion of the Western Defences see Hodges 2008a: 65–71; 2008b: 277–8; Hodges and Logue 2007: 39–40; Kamani this volume. Evidence of this urban renewal was clearly seen in the Triconch Palace and Merchant house excavations: For the Triconch Palace see Bowden, Culwick, et al. 2011; Hodges 2011; for the Merchant’s Houses see Bowden, Crowson. et al. 2011. It was also seen at the Well of Junia Rufina (Sebastiani et al. this volume); at the Great Basilica (Molla this volume); and at the Western Defences (Kamani this volume). See also Hodges 2008a: 79–91 who gives an overall summary of this renewal. The only site apparently not affected by this renewal was the Vrina plain oikos, see Greenslade this volume. This is not to say that the Vrina Plain was completely abandoned at this time as excavations 400m to the east of the oikos has found 11th-/13th-century ceramics indicating some form of occupation at this time, Gilkes, Hysa and Çondi this volume. Karaiskaj 2009: 69–82; Martin 2004; 96–9. Regularly coursed with two sets of three stones laid diagonally, tile stringcourses and square putlog holes, these walls are characteristic of medieval 1 construction technique seen throughout Butrint. This technique had provisionally been dated to the latter half of the 13th century (cf. Andrews et al. 2004: 133–7; Crowson 2007: 23; Soustal 2004; 23); however, a recent survey by the University of Siena suggests an earlier date for this technique, based on a redating of the medieval 2 technique to the late12th to mid 13th century, cf. Molla, Paris and Venturini this volume. No stratigraphic evidence has as yet confirmed this new dating. Andrews et al. 2004: 133–7, fig. 8.8. See Greenslade in this volume. For a discussion of the dating of this tower see Molla, Paris and Venturini in this volume. Dating this structure is complicated by the removal of the interior and exterior deposits associated within this house when it was excavated in the 1990s. The ceramics recovered appear to show a slight increase in imports, primarily from the eastern Mediterranean, from the late 9th and into the

60 61 62 63 64

65

66

67 68

69 70 71

72

75

12th century compared to the early medieval period, cf. Hodges and Vroom 2007, suggesting that Room XVIII dates from the mid to late high medieval period when Butrint was experiencing a revival in its commercial ambitions. Unfortunately, deep excavations of the past have removed much of the evidence and hence the size of the settlement remains speculation. Bowden, Culwick, et al. 2011. The ceramics were dated by Joanita Vroom (University of Amsterdam). Cf. Hodges 2008a: 81. The repairs of the acropolis castle and fortifications may have been necessary following the recent suggestion that the maintenance and upkeep of the fortifications declined following the expulsion of the Byzantine authority in the wake of the Norman invasion in 1080s. Although it is difficult to confirm due to later alterations around the castle it may explain why, in 1191, Benedict of Peterborough described Butrint as a castellum desertum, cf. Hodges 2011. In scale and build the castle at Butrint has been compared to the Corfiote fortress at Gardiki, built by Despot Michael II, and perhaps the Angevin fort of Kassiope, see Crowson 2007: 21; Hodges 2006: 162; cf. Karaiskaj 2009: 89 and Soustal 2004: 23. Molla, Paris and Venturini this volume. Unlike the tower of the proposed keep this second tower does not survive as it was removed following Ugolini’s reconstruction of the castle in the 1930s. A photograph taken during the reconstruction (Andrews et al. 2004: fig. 8.10; IA 545) along with a ground plan by Igenio Epicocco (Ugolini 1937: fig. 36) identify its location directly south of the keep. Although largely obscured by the reconstruction of the acropolis castle in the 1930s, which was partially built over the western end of the church, the plan of the church suggests a domed cross-in-square structure, a form that recalls a number of later medieval churches within the immediate region, for example Mesopotam, Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 119. In regards to the dating of the wall overlying the church see Molla, Paris and Venturini, this volume, who suggest that this wall, rather than being a new construction in the 1930s, was actually a consolidation of an earlier wall built as part of the alterations undertaken during the Venetian rule. Andrews et al. 2004: 144, figs 8.23, 8.24. Crowson 2007: 27. The defensive nature of the new access and the control imposed on visitors is strikingly similar to the crusader military architecture of the era as suggested by Hodges 2006: 162. Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 120–2. For the significance of the position of the shrine by the western gate see Molla, Paris and Venturini this volume. It had previously been thought that this wall was Venetian in date, Andrews et al. 2004: 145; Crowson 2007: 33. For the re-dating see Molla, Paris and Venturini in this volume. There are indications that the tower was repaired during this period: a new lower quality mortar floor was laid above the earlier floor, while a masonry skin was constructed infilling an interior recess of the southern wall. This wall was subsequently covered by a liberally and roughly applied plaster layer. The burials in the narthex were cut through a soil deposit that had built up over the floor of the narthex after the basilica had been abandoned. The remains of five individuals were

76

73

74

75 76

77

78

Simon Greenslade, Sarah Leppard and Matthew Logue located in a trench dug in front of the main entrance into the nave of the earlier basilica. At least four other cuts could be seen in this area but these were not excavated. A second trench dug to the north, in front of the doorway of the northern aisle, exposed two further burials. In the aisles and nave it was unclear where these burials had been cut from as the excavations in the 1920s and 30s had removed the overlying deposits to expose the floor surfaces. Due to time constraints, and the fact that most of the burials in the narthex continued beyond the trench edges, the burials were not removed but were recorded in situ and then backfilled. The remains of at least four different individuals along with two skulls were found in a shallow grave excavated up against the northern wall of the northern aisle. The human osteological material is being studied by Todd Fenton (Michigan State University). The true extent of the cemetery is unclear as it is difficult to see how much the earlier excavations may have truncated the internal space in their pursuit of the temple they thought would be below the basilica. A picture taken of the basilica excavations in the 1930s shows a number of large piles of bone within the western area of the nave, cf. Bowden and Mitchell 2004: fig. 7.10; Hodges 2008a: 48. Prior to the 2009 season a slot could be seen to have been dug across this end and when this was cleaned and re-cut a large amount of disarticulated human bone was uncovered in the material used to backfill this area. Greenslade et al. 2006: 406–407; Greenslade this volume. Expenditure on fortifications is frequently recorded in documents relating to the period of Venetian control (1386–1797) at Butrint, and the latest defensive alterations and additions to the city’s walls probably date from the late 15th century, cf. Davies in this volume. An alternative date has been suggested by Molla, Paris and Venturini this volume. They suggest the gate was constructed in the period between the late 13th century and the year 1386, as part of ‘a small-scale refurbishment programme aimed at further strengthening the landward defences…’ Molla, Paris and Venturini (this volume) suggest that the still standing tower of the keep is largely a Venetian construction that was built over the earlier footprint of the 13th-century tower, Ugolini having only consolidated what was already there.

79 Molla, Paris and Venturini in this volume. 80 Acta Albaniae Veneta 2: 40 (no.322) noted in Soustal 2004: 25; see Davies in this volume. 81 This may be the building that can be seen at the eastern end of the acropolis in Edward Lear’s painting of Butrint from the Korafit Hills, and his sketch from Mount Sotira of 1857. The latter also shows a wall on the summit located between the ruined castle and the eastern building, which may have divided the two areas; see Hodges 2006: 10–11 and 34 for a reproduction of these images. 82 We are grateful to John Mitchell (University of East Anglia) for this observation. It must be assumed that a third pier would have been located to the east of the central one to support the upper floor. No evidence of this was located due to the truncation of this area. 83 Unpublished notes from Ugolini’s excavations of the Acropolis Basilica held at the Museo della Civiltá Romana in Rome also mention finding numerous similar nails; the notes also mention finding large numbers of door fittings too. 84 Hodges 2008a: 81. For a discussion of the Vrina Plain commander’s house see Greenslade this volume. 85 At the point where the walls are not built over the remains of the earlier basilica, a narrow offset was observed along the outer face. For example: the western wall of the building where it is built across the former entrance to the nave; the eastern wall built across the nave; and the western end of the southern inner wall. The foundations of the western wall did not cut the skeleton but were built directly over it. The inner face of the wall appeared to have no obvious offset and was built directly on to the bedrock. A number of human bones from another individual were recovered from a hollow in the natural below the wall. 86 Bowden and Përzhita 2004a: 196–7, fig. 10.25. 87 Soustal 2004: 26. 88 Zamputi 1967: vol 4: doc.265, noted in Karaiskaj 2009: 92. 89 Crowson 2007: 47–49. 90 Crowson 2007: 59. 91 For a discussion of the ceramics see Vroom 2004: 278– 92. 92 Karaiskaj 2009: 93. 93 Hodges 2006: 188. 94 Virgil, Aeneid 3.349–51.

5  The aqueduct of Butrint Andrew Wilson

Introduction Like the great majority of Roman cities in the Mediterranean world, Butrint had an aqueduct feeding public fountains and baths, and probably also selected private houses as well.1 The aqueduct, 4 km long, seems to have tapped springs near the modern village of Xarra, and led the water on an arcade across the Vrina Plain and over the Vivari Channel to a nymphaeum that acted both as a public fountain and as a distribution tank to other branches of the city’s piping network (Fig. 5.2, cf. Fig. 6.9). The construction of the aqueduct dates from the Augustan period, and it functioned until the late 4th or early 5th century AD. The evidence for Butrint’s aqueduct and waterdistribution system consists of the remains of piers of an arcade at several points in the Vrina Plain to the south of the city, a cistern or tank just south of the Vivari Channel, and, within the site of Butrint itself, a nymphaeum and several aqueduct piers, a monumental fountain, and at least six bath complexes. In addition, coin issues of Augustus and Nero from the Buthrotum mint show an arcade, with some kind of superstructure, which has been interpreted either as an aqueduct, or a bridge over the Vivari Channel, or a bridge carrying an aqueduct. This brief study builds on an earlier article by Dhimitër Çondi, in an attempt to address questions of the aqueduct’s source, route (and in particular the means by which it crossed the Vivari Channel), urban distribution, and date.2

The numismatic evidence Augustan and Neronian issues from the mint of Buthrotum show a triple-arched structure carrying either a balustrade or a course of much smaller arches (Fig. 5.1). The outermost piers of the three arches shown have partial springings of further arches to the side, indicating that the arcade shown is not complete but is an excerpt from a larger structure. It could depict either the road bridge (with a balustrade, or, less probably, a second arcade on top), or the aqueduct arcade in the Vrina Plain, in which case the motif above the arches might be interpreted as decorative treatment of the exterior of the channel walls.3 Some Neronian issues have

a possible motif, to the left, of water cascading from the structure. If this interpretation is correct, it would suggest that the structure is intended to represent the aqueduct rather than the road bridge over the Vivari Channel.

The source of the aqueduct The source of the aqueduct must lie above the level of the highest surviving remains of the aqueduct, established as c. 5.5–5.6 m above sea level (asl) for parts of the arcade in the Vrina Plain. The arcade is traceable from the Vivari Channel for nearly 4 km towards the hill on which the small village of Xarra stands, and is evidently making for this hill. Two springs are known at Xarra, one on the west side of the hill and the other on the south side (Fig. 5.2). No ancient remains are now visible at either spring, but they are the best candidates for the source of the aqueduct, and local oral tradition recalls a ‘Roman fountain’ at the eastern spring before the construction of the modern springhouse there.4 The remains of four aqueduct piers, which were discovered in survey work in 2008 close to but to the west of the western spring (no longer in situ as they were disturbed by the cutting of a modern agricultural channel), may suggest that the aqueduct rounded the southern end of the Xarra hill to tap the eastern spring, although it remains possible that a branch also tapped the western spring (cf. Fig. 5.2).5 The western spring is now no more than a muddy seep as its modern collection tank has fallen into disrepair and has been allowed to silt up and become choked with vegetation, but its discharge was greater in the past. Although its elevation was not measured, it is estimated from map contours to lie at 25 m asl, and by GPS at 19 m asl. The southern spring is somewhat more copious, and emerges from a modern springhouse (Fig. 5.3); this is estimated to lie at between 14 m (from contours) and 15 m asl (GPS). Despite uncertainty over the precise elevation of each, it is clear that both could supply the known remains in the plain. Whilst today neither spring is abundant, it is possible that both in combination may have provided sufficient water for the aqueduct in the past. Conceivably also their discharge may have reduced since antiquity as a result of

78

Andrew Wilson

Figure 5.1. Neronian coin issues of the Buthrotum mint, showing an arcaded structure

Figure 5.2. Plan of the aqueduct remains in the Vrina Plain, and the springs at Xarra

5  The aqueduct of Butrint

79

Figure 5.3. The modern springhouse at the southern spring at Xarra (A. Wilson)

Figure 5.4. Remains of the aqueduct arcade on the Vrina Plain (A. Wilson) seismic movements. The only other possible candidate for a source is a spring some 4 km further on towards Mursia, but this would mean doubling the known length of the aqueduct and no remains whatever that might belong to an aqueduct were found in the course of survey between Xarra and Mursia.6

The arcade in the Vrina Plain From the closest spring at Xarra to the terminal nymphaeum at Butrint is a distance of 4.0 km as measured along the traceable line of the aqueduct (Fig. 5.2). For most of this

distance – 3.1 km – the aqueduct ran on an arcade to maintain elevation and a steady but gentle gradient as a gravity-flow conduit. Traces of this arcade are visible in the Vrina Plain as alignments of upstanding piers (Fig. 5.4), and bases of further piers can be seen in the winter when the vegetation is sparse.7 The pier bases are square or rectangular, with varying dimensions – e.g. 1.25 × 1.25 m; 1.47 × 1.22 m; 1.25 × 1.50 m. Spacing varies from 3.35 m to 3.50 m (Fig. 5.5). The bases of the piers are in masonry of white limestone split blocks (40–90 mm thick, 170–450 mm long) with mortar joints 25–50 mm thick (Fig. 5.6). In the middle of the plain the piers are visible some 1.20 m

Andrew Wilson

80

Pier Group 2

Pier Group 3

P1 3.50 m

Reconstructed wall P2

3.50 m P3 3.50 m P1 3.50 m P2 3.50 m P3

P4

0

10 m

Figure 5.5. Diagram showing pier numbering and spacing of pier Groups 2 and 3 on the Vrina Plain

Table 5.1. Elevation above datum (water in the Vivari Channel) of selected structures Description Nymphaeum window (bottom) Nymphaeum spout Nymphaeum pool Nymphaeum tank cocciopesto 1 Nymphaeum tank cocciopesto 2 Nymphaeum tank reconstruction Nymphaeum drain 1 Nymphaeum drain 2 Bridge road surface Vrina Plain header tank Aqueduct Piers, Group 2: Pier 1 Aqueduct Piers, Group 2: Pier 2 Aqueduct Piers, Group 2: Pier 3 Aqueduct Piers, Group 2: Pier 4 Aqueduct Piers, Group 3: Pier 1 Aqueduct Piers, Group 2: Pier 2 Aqueduct Piers, Group 2: Pier 3

Height above channel water level (metres) 2.18 1.92 1.48 4.11 3.96 4.34 0.29 0.18 1.84 3.87 3.30 3.32 3.40 3.37 3.34 3.30 3.10

5  The aqueduct of Butrint

Figure 5.6. Detail of pier construction of the aqueduct arcade (A. Wilson)

81

above the present ground level. Brick arches sprang directly from the stone piers; the brickwork is regular (modulus, or height of 5 brick courses plus 5 mortar courses, 305–320 mm) with bricks 30–40 mm thick and mortar joints 20–35 mm thick, with a very shelly yellow-brown sandy lime mortar with abundant shell inclusions. The mortared rubble core has fist-sized aggregate set in grey-brown mortar with frequent gravel inclusions. The height of the springing of the arches of the best preserved aqueduct piers (Groups 2 and 3, cf. Fig. 5.2) was surveyed as between 3.10 and 3.40 m above datum, taken as the level of the Vivari Channel, which must closely approximate sea level. Adding 1.75 m for the radius of the arch (half the pier spacing, at 3.50 m) and 0.5 m for the thickness of the channel floor, we obtain a minimum height of the channel on the arcades in the plain at c. 5.5–5.6 m above datum. Some groups of piers in the southern part of the plain, towards Xarra, show a later phase of repair or stabilisation, presumably after the arches threatened to collapse (Fig. 5.7). The 3.64 m gap between a pair of piers has been infilled with concrete faced in a kind of opus incertum with a band of five courses of brick each 30–50 mm thick with mortar joints 20–30 mm thick, pointed in a characteristically local technique, with a diagonal indentation made by a board or ruler at the lower edge of each course (modulus 320 mm). Immediately to the south, a stretch of walling in the same technique infills at least two gaps, and may even have replaced the intervening pier. These stretches of walling and infill are evidence of a later phase of repair, when parts of the arcade were either becoming unstable or the arches

Figure 5.7. Infilling between piers of the arcade, for stabilisation in a later phase (A. Wilson)

Andrew Wilson

82

Figure 5.8. Vaulted cistern at the settlement on the Vrina Plain (A. Wilson)

were sagging. Similar solutions to countering incipient structural collapse may be seen on arcades of the Aqua Claudia to the south of Rome, or the arcade of the Nîmes aqueduct shortly upstream from the Pont du Gard. Field survey in the Vrina Plain has discovered at least five pottery scatters of Roman date, one of which includes masonry remains suggestive of a villa, along the line of the aqueduct, in addition to the large known settlement in the north of the plain.8 The apparent clustering of settlement here along the course of the aqueduct suggests that these villas or settlements may have drawn water from it, corresponding to a pattern of suburban supply from aqueducts noted elsewhere.9 The arcade crosses the Vrina Plain towards the remains of a tank close to the southern shore of the Vivari Channel. Before it reaches the tank, though, there is evidence for a derivation to the west, to supply the settlement on the south side of the Vivari Channel.

(Fig. 5.8, cf. Fig. 8.23). The southern side of this cistern is flanked by the piers of an arcade that must have supplied it, and which evidently must have been fed by an arcaded derivation from the main aqueduct arcade some distance to the northeast (Fig. 5.9, cf. Fig. 8.5). This cistern may have acted as a distribution node for the settlement or villa, but was not the only distribution point, as the arcade continued past it towards the southwest. Here running water usage is confirmed by the remains of a terracotta pipeline (cut by a later wall) that could belong to the settlement phase (Fig. 5.10). In the villa phase of the settlement, the running water from the aqueduct must have supplied the villa’s large ornamental fountain (later altered in a subsequent phase) and a set of baths (Fig. 5.11).

Supply to the Vrina settlement and suburban villa

The main aqueduct arcade across the Vrina Plain terminated in a large concrete tank or cistern, originally supported on a vaulted substructure (Fig. 5.12). This is now tilted sharply down towards its western corner, as a result either of massive subsidence or (more likely) of earthquake action. Geomorphological studies by David Bescoby, as a result of coring in the vicinity, suggest that the structure stood on a gravel bank at the edge of the Vivari Channel in antiquity, although it now lies some distance from the water.11 Originally the structure measured some 6.29 × 6.21 m

To the west of the aqueduct arcade in the northern part of the Vrina Plain, the Butrint Foundation has partially excavated a settlement to the south of the Vivari Channel, which seems to have become a suburban house in a later phase.10 On the eastern side of this complex are the remains of an aboveground double chambered cistern, one of whose chambers has a double barrel-vaulted roof carried on internal arches

The tank or cistern at the northern end of the arcade, and the crossing of the Vivari Channel

5  The aqueduct of Butrint externally; remains of the cocciopesto floor of the tank now measure c. 4.15 × 4.03 m but these are very approximate measurements given the damaged state of the tank. The structure is in concrete faced with coursed rectangular split limestone blocks 50–110 mm thick and up to 0.26 m, or occasionally even 0.80 m long, with mortar courses 30–50 mm thick – very similar to the masonry of the stone pier bases of the arcade.

Figure 5.9. Remains of piers against the cistern on the Vrina Plain

83

The upper part of the surviving structure has a cocciopesto floor, evidently the floor of a tank or cistern as at the edges is the characteristic thickening of the waterproofing at the join between floor and wall – in this case from the 0.24 m thickness of the floor to a thickness of 0.32 m at the edge. The walls of the tank are now gone, but their emplacement is visible as the cocciopesto does not extend to the outer face of the structure. The highest point of the now tilted structure has an elevation of 3.87 m above datum, to which some 0.25 m needs to be added for the thickness of the cocciopesto floor, giving 4.12 m. While approximate, since the tank has shifted, this gives a close enough fix for the bottom of the tank as c. 4.12–4.20 m above datum. We might reconstruct the height of the walls of the tank perhaps 2 m above this. The estimated level of the base of the tank is compatible with the estimate of c. 5.5–5.6 m above datum as a minimum level for the base of the aqueduct channel on arcades further to the south, and would allow a water depth of at least 1.30 m in the tank (c. 4 Roman feet). The final arch of the arcade was supported on a buttress or pier 1.46 m wide projecting from the centre of the south side of the tank (Fig. 5.13). On the north side of the tank are the remains of a pier just over half this width, 0.78 m (Fig. 5.14). Towards the southern end of the western wall a deposit of sinter (limescale) on the exterior of the masonry of the tank substructure indicates that at some point water either overflowed or leaked here (Fig. 5.15). Three possible functions need to be considered: a settling

Figure 5.10. Terracotta pipeline cut and surmounted by a later wall, Vrina Plain (A. Wilson)

84

Andrew Wilson

Figure 5.11. Ornamental fountain of the domus on the Vrina Plain

Figure 5.12. The remains of the tank south of the Vivari Channel, now sharply tilted (A. Wilson)

Figure 5.13. The final pier of the aqueduct arcade, abutting the tank south of the Vivari Channel (A. Wilson)

5  The aqueduct of Butrint

85

Figure 5.14. Thin buttress on the north side of the tank, possibly supporting the beginning of the ramp for an inverted siphon (A. Wilson) tank, a distribution tank, or the header tank for a pipeline system (‘inverted siphon’). Against the interpretation of the cistern as a settling tank is its position in the system: although there are examples of settling tanks along the course of an aqueduct (as on the Aqua Virgo at Rome), they would more normally be expected at either the start, by the spring(s), or the end, just before a terminal fountain or reservoir. If the function of the cistern was to act as a distribution tank, we could expect to find it not where it is, but some 50 or 100 m further south, where the branch to the suburban settlement on the Vrina Plain should have left the main arcade. This leaves an interpretation as a header tank as the most probable function, for an inverted siphon that took the aqueduct across the Vivari Channel in a pipeline, laid either along the bed of the Vivari Channel, or along one side of the road bridge near this point. The former arrangement can be paralleled at Arles, where a branch of the aqueduct was taken across the bed of the Rhône in large lead pipes to supply the suburb at Trinquetaille, and at Rome in the supply for the villa of Manlius Vopiscus celebrated by Statius.12 The latter arrangement, with aqueduct pipelines sharing a road bridge, was used at Rome, where the bridges across the Tiber also carried pipelines of the Aqua Traiana from Trastevere to the main part of the city, and of the Aqua Appia, Anio Vetus, Aqua Marcia and Aqua Virgo in the opposite direction.13 An inverted siphon pipeline avoided the construction of a tall arcade across the Vivari Channel, and would enable the aqueduct to be taken across the road bridge without having to construct an

Figure 5.15. Limescale deposit on the exterior west face of the tank (centre of image) (A. Wilson)

Andrew Wilson

86

Hydraulic gradient

Header tank

h

Head Receiving tank Venter

Geniculus

Figure 5.16. Diagram of an inverted siphon (after Hodge 1992)

Figure 5.17. Wall in limestone blocks close to the Water Gate at Butrint, possibly part of a receiving tank (A. Wilson)

arcade on top of the road bridge, thus constricting space for traffic further, or alternatively across the bed of the river, without interfering with the road bridge at all. The 0.78 m wide buttress on the north side of the tank could thus be interpreted as part of the start of the inclined downward ramp that carried the pipeline down to the level at which it crossed the Vivari Channel, possibly on the road bridge (see Fig. 5.13). The north end of the road bridge across the Vivari Channel survives, by the so-called medieval Water Gate of Butrint.14 No trace remains of a pipeline at this point, but is not to be expected if the pipes were of lead and subsequently recuperated. Equally there is no reported evidence of a separate crossing of the Vivari Channel by an aqueduct bridge. If the crossing of the Vivari Channel was effected by means of an inverted siphon, there should have been a receiving tank, set a little lower than the level of the header tank, into which the water emerged from the pipeline, and from which the aqueduct continued on again as an open channel on arcades (Fig. 5.16). A possible candidate for the foundations of such a tank is part of a wall in limestone masonry, exposed by the edge of a dump of stones among the trees close to the north end of the road bridge (Fig. 5.17). Five courses of limestone blocks, totalling a height of 0.60 m, are visible; the masonry technique looks identical to that of the aqueduct piers and the header tank in the Vrina Plain, with blocks 70–110 mm thick and 340–420 mm long, with mortar joints 20–50 mm thick and pointed with the characteristic diagonal. Only one face is visible, and the hypothesis that this might be the foundation of a tank, rather than simply one side of a wall, remains to be tested by excavation.

5  The aqueduct of Butrint

87

Great Basilica

City wall Tower Gate

Possible receiving tank

Arcade piers Nymphaeum

Bridge remains

Hellenistic Roman Later remains

0

30 m

Figure 5.18. Plan of the nymphaeum and immediate surroundings, showing the adjacent arcades

The nymphaeum Between the Vivari Channel and the nymphaeum Dhimitër Çondi traced the bases of four aqueduct piers, two of which remain visible. These describe a slight arc towards the rear of the terminal fountain or nymphaeum, which served simultaneously as a public fountain and water display, and as a prime distribution node in the urban water network (Fig. 5.18). The nymphaeum stands in a paved area, now defined to the north by the Great Basilica but originally limited by a Roman building, possibly a bathhouse. It is a brick-faced concrete structure consisting of a semicircular basin with a cistern to the rear (Figs 5.19–20). It was excavated by Luigi Maria Ugolini and partially consolidated and restored by him, with further reconstruction in the Communist period. Some elements of the brickwork are therefore not original, and the upper parts of all three niches at the rear of the fountain basin are reconstructed. Possibly the apparent springing of an arch at the southwest corner, which does not properly align with the nearest pier base, might be the result of fitting a chunk of fallen brickwork erroneously back into position during reconstruction by Ugolini, in one of whose photographs it appears (Fig. 5.21). Three niches in the rear wall of the semicircular basin originally held statues; two of these, of Apollo and Dionysus, in marble, were found in the basin during

Ugolini’s excavations (Fig 5.22). Water entered the basin through pipes emerging at 1.92 m above datum at the base of the niches, and must therefore have flowed out around the feet of the statues (Fig. 5.23). From the basin, water overflowed into a stone gutter around the front of the nymphaeum (0.30 m wide and c. 0.20 m deep); and at this point people could fill jars of water, perhaps from spouts that are now lost (the upper part of the front wall of the basin has been reconstructed). The nymphaeum was faced in slabs of marble veneer, one of which survives on the north side below the window of the cistern, where it has been sealed by a calcareous deposit left by water overflowing from the cistern window (Fig. 5.24). This is set against a cocciopesto backing 50 mm thick (white mortar with crushed terracotta and terracotta fragments 2–15 mm across) and held in place by bronze clamps. Parts of this survive also on the front wall of the basin, but Ugolini’s photographs show much more of this cocciopesto visible immediately after excavation (see Fig. 5.19). The veneer sat on a stone moulding just above the gutter (Fig. 5.25). The structure of the nymphaeum is in brick-faced concrete, originally clad in marble veneer. The bricks are 30–39 mm thick, and the mortar courses 15–21 mm thick, fairly regular (the modulus varies from 0.29–0.32 m). The mortar is pointed in the local diagonally undercut fashion. The concrete core has rubble aggregate in fist-sized or

88

Andrew Wilson

Figure 5.19. The nymphaeum and its cistern, in the 1940s (Museo della Civiltà Romana)

Figure 5.20. The nymphaeum, current state

Figure 5.21. The nymphaeum reservoir, in the 1940s (Instituti i Arkeologjisë)

Figure 5.22. Marble statues of Apollo and Dionysus from the nymphaeum (Instituti i Arkeologjisë)

5  The aqueduct of Butrint

Figure 5.23. Water inlet in statue niche of the nymphaeum (A. Wilson)

Figure 5.24. Detail of nymphaeum marble revetment sealed by calcareous concretions beneath the overflow window from the cistern (A. Wilson)

Figure 5.25. Stone moulding and gutter of the nymphaeum

89

90

Andrew Wilson

Figure 5.26. The nymphaeum and the cistern window (A. Wilson)

Figure 5.27. Interior of the nymphaeum cistern, with blocked window, and curve of the back of the nymphaeum wall visible to the right (A. Wilson)

double fist-sized limestone chunks set in a yellowish-brown mortar. Behind the fountain basin is a single-chambered cistern roofed with a barrel vault; this is of one build with the nymphaeum. There is an arched window 1.05 m wide in the north wall, later blocked (Fig. 5.26). The south wall is broken open, affording a view of the interior. It is approximately rectangular, although the curve of the semicircle of the fountain basin wall is visible inside the cistern too (Fig. 5.27). The interior is lined with cocciopesto, and calcareous deposits on this show a water level at the level of the sill of the window in the north wall, at 2.18 m above datum. An inlet is visible in the upper part of the vault, towards the fountain side, but there is no visible connection through the wall to the three pipes in the niches that fed the fountain basin, and the wall and its water-proofing have not been reconstructed at this point. These pipes must therefore come from above, although reconstruction of the upper part of the nymphaeum means that their origin is no longer visible. On top of the cistern an area of cocciopesto c. 4 × 2.40 m and up to 130 mm thick must represent the floor of a tank into which the aqueduct must have discharged, and from

which it continued in phase 2; this must also have fed the pipes supplying the fountain basin. The elevation of this cocciopesto surface was measured at two separate points as 3.96 and 4.11 m above datum, so could indeed have been fed from the header tank whose base we estimated above at c. 4.12–4.20 m above datum. The cocciopesto consists of a whitish mortar with crushed terracotta and fragments of ceramic 5–30 mm across. The cistern beneath the tank, at the back of the nymphaeum, did not directly feed the fountain basin, but was fed separately by the aqueduct from above; the overflow window at the north end determined the maximum level in the cistern. Its function appears to have been to act as a regulation tank for a pipeline system that presumably exited the cistern just below ground level (at 0.29 m above datum), at the base of a small recess in the brickwork 0.32 m wide and 0.10 m deep (Fig. 5.28). A similar recess in the rear wall of the fountain basin seems also to have housed a pipe outlet from the base of the fountain basin (Fig. 5.29; 0.18 m above datum). The nymphaeum would therefore have acted as the terminal point of the aqueduct channel, at which the supply was converted from open-channel flow

5  The aqueduct of Butrint

91

into a pressure pipeline system (albeit at a fairly low head of pressure, in the order of c. 2 m), while the fountain in front of the cistern both provided a much-appreciated public amenity and screened the waterworks from view.

Piers of an arcade to the north of the nymphaeum Subsequent to the original construction of the nymphaeum, the overflow window of the cistern was blocked by a brick arch springing towards the north. The arch pier was 0.86 m wide and the remainder of the 1.05 m width of the window was blocked by crude mortar and brick (Fig. 5.30). To the north of the nymphaeum, between it and the Hellenistic Tower Gate, are the bases of four piers and the arch springing from the blocked cistern window clearly connected the top of the nymphaeum with the first of these piers (Fig. 5.31). This arcade to the north of the nymphaeum is therefore clearly secondary, and this is confirmed by the different (and cruder) technique of its construction. The spacing between the piers is quite variable (3.07, 2.88, 3.18 and 2.67 m), and the piers differ in the number and alternation of stone and brick courses. The first pier measures 1.20 m N–S by 0.98 m E–W; and consists of brickwork above a stone foundation (of which only the uppermost course is visible). The bricks are 30–50 mm thick with white mortar joints 30–35 mm thick, and the irregular nature of the coursing is shown by the very variable modulus, which ranges from 0.35 to 0.42 m. The second pier measures 1.16 m N–S by 0.98 m E–W, and consists of (from bottom to surviving top) four courses

Figure 5.28. Nymphaeum, cistern and outlet from cistern (A. Wilson)

Figure 5.29. Nymphaeum, outlet at rear of fountain basin, and outlet from cistern to the left (A. Wilson)

92

Andrew Wilson

Figure 5.30. Upper part of the nymphaeum, with the blocking of the cistern window showing the spring of the first arch of the secondary arcade (A. Wilson)

Figure 5.31. Piers of a secondary arcade to the north of the nymphaeum, seen from the Hellenistic Tower Gate looking back towards the nymphaeum (A. Wilson) of brick, one of stone, three of brick, one of stone, two of brick, one of stone. The mortar courses are 35–50 mm thick.

The third pier (0.93 by 1.09 m) has a stone base, then two courses of brick, two of stones, two of brick, two of stone and then eight of brick.

5  The aqueduct of Butrint

93

Figure 5.32. Aqueduct pier of the secondary arcade, abutting the Hellenistic Tower Gate (A. Wilson)

The fourth pier, against the Hellenistic tower (and blocking its arrow slit) measures 1.75 m E–W and 1.42 m N–S; its lower part is built in alternating double courses of stone and brick, with brickwork above (Fig. 5.32). At the Tower Gate the arcade turns to the left (west) and is traceable for another 5 piers, and then turns a right-angle to another pier flush against the face of the Hellenistic wall. Beyond this point the arcade becomes untraceable until the so-called Tower of Inscriptions, where a pier is visible abutting the wall (Fig. 5.33), and a further three piers, not now visible as under water) are reported by Çondi from his excavations there. Further to the west no trace of the aqueduct can be followed.

Intra-urban distribution The nymphaeum was a major water-drawing point as well as a vehicle for the public display of the city’s water supply; but the cistern to its rear and the outlet arrangements at the base of the cistern suggest that a network of pipes, probably in lead and since robbed out, led from it to other low-lying parts of the city. If the cistern were kept full, it would have created a head of pressure in the pipeline system of some 2 m, allowing supply to those parts of the city below the 2 m contour. In the second phase, with the construction of the arcade to the north of the nymphaeum, with a channel continuing at about the same level as the floor of the tank on top of the nymphaeum – 4.1 m above datum – water could be supplied at a higher level to more of the city. Destinations thus served must have included

Figure 5.33. Dh. Çondi by the aqueduct pier of the secondary arcade abutting the Hellenistic wall by the Tower of Inscriptions (A. Wilson)

94

Andrew Wilson

Figure 5.34. Large fountain at the so-called Gymnasium

Figure 5.35. Niched fountain to the west of the theatre (A. Wilson)

the large fountain at the so-called Gymnasium (Fig. 5.34), and a small fountain in the piazza beside the theatre, in the form of a single-niched aedicula served by a lead pipe entering the niche at the back (Fig. 5.35). In addition, the aqueduct network is likely to have supplied most, if not all, of the city’s six bath-houses, since there is no evidence

for their supply from wells. These are all located in the low-lying parts of the city between the Vivari Channel and the foot of the acropolis hill. It is likely that a number of the richer private houses were also served by the aqueduct, as in other Roman cities. The main constraint on which parts of the city could

5  The aqueduct of Butrint be supplied by the aqueduct was the height of the arcade across the Vrina Plain and the need to maintain an adequate gradient in this section of the channel. This determined the elevation of the base of the header tank, at c. 4.1–4.2 m above datum; and this in turn determined the height of the distribution tank on the top of the nymphaeum within the city, at c. 4.1 m. Water could thus be supplied to most of the flatter, lower-lying areas of the city; higher up the slopes of the hill, groundwater accessible in clefts in the rock was developed by means of wells, one above the forum area and a second in the so-called Well of Junia Rufina. The medieval city, by contrast, was entirely dependent on these natural sources and on wells, as the aqueduct had fallen out of use some time in the late Roman period.

The date of the aqueduct Some datable ceramic material from the excavation of one of the piers of the aqueduct arcade close to the Temple mausoleum on the Vrina Plain may suggest an approximate construction date for the aqueduct. A stratum (context 5105) cut by the aqueduct pier produced late Republican material including Republican amphorae and a base of Eastern Sigillata B, giving a late 1st-century BC terminus post quem for the aqueduct’s construction.15 This would be consistent with the apparent commemoration of the aqueduct on Augustan coinage, if the arcaded structure on the Augustan issues does represent the aqueduct and not simply a road bridge, and also with the public bath buildings of the Roman imperial period, which would have required the aqueduct in order to function.

The end of the aqueduct When and why the aqueduct went out of use is currently unclear, but a combination of evidence perhaps points to an earthquake in the late 4th or early 5th century AD as the cause.16 It is very likely that the severe tilting of the massive header tank was caused by seismic activity. Arcades would have been vulnerable to earthquakes too, and at least one pier is known to have fallen. With the arcade interrupted or the header tank out of action, the aqueduct would have ceased to supply water to Butrint. Between the Temple mausoleum and the header tank, a collapsed aqueduct pier was exposed in the digging of an irrigation ditch in 2002, and excavated by the Butrint Foundation. Material from context 1079, which was sealed by the collapsed masonry, suggests a late 4th-/early 5thcentury terminus post quem for the fall of this aqueduct pier; the datable pottery consisted of an amphora handle of LRA 1, dated by Paul Reynolds to the late 4th or first half of the 5th century, and the handle of a North Palestinian amphora (Agora M334 type), again of the late 4th or 5th century. The pier fell towards the west; we do not know the cause of its collapse, but it is tempting to wonder if it might have been a seismic event.17 Since the city’s main bath-houses must have been

95

supplied by the aqueduct, the failure of the aqueduct should also have entailed their abandonment. Çondi suggests that the baths were abandoned in the later 4th century AD, which might therefore suggest a date for the end of the aqueduct’s life, and would fit with the dating proposed for the collapse of part of the arcade in the Vrina Plain.18 So far, however, independent data from controlled excavation on the abandonment of the bath buildings are lacking. However, in the present state of knowledge the evidence points towards the conclusion that the aqueduct and the public baths appear to have ceased functioning in the later 4th or the early 5th century AD, possibly as a result of an earthquake after which the aqueduct could not be repaired. In contrast to the settlements of the Roman period on the Vrina Plain, the late Roman settlements here are not concentrated along the line of the aqueduct, and it thus appears that, if the aqueduct had helped determine the location of Roman settlements in the Vrina Plain by supplying water to them, its breakdown in the 4th or 5th century AD had a corresponding effect on the late Roman settlement pattern.19

References Bescoby, D. J. (2007) Geoarchaeological investigation at Roman Butrint. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint. An Assessment: 95–118. Oxford, Oxbow. Cochet, A. (1993) La canalisation sous-fluviale d’Arles à Trinquetaille. Gallia 50: 205–22. Çondi, Dh. (1999–2000) Ujësjellësi i Butrintit. Iliria 1–2: 211–22. De Villeneuve-Bargemont, M. (1823) Notice sur d’anciens tuyaux de plomb trouvés à Arles. Mémoires de la Société royale des antiquaires de France 5: 232–46. Evans, H. B. (1994) Water Distribution in Ancient Rome. The evidence of Frontinus. Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press. Hodge, A. T. (1992) Roman Aqueducts and Water Supply. London, Duckworth. Pluciennik, M., Lako, K., Përzhita, L. and Williams, D. (2004) The environs of Butrint 2: the 1995–1996 field survey. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 47–63. Oxford, Oxbow. Sebastiani, A. and Vaccaro, E. (2009) Preliminary Report of the Diaporit–Mursia Survey, 2008. Unpublished archaeological report, Butrint Foundation. Wilson, A. I. (1999) Deliveries extra urbem: aqueducts and the countryside. Journal of Roman Archaeology 12.1: 314–31.

Notes 1 I would like to express my gratitude to numerous members of the Butrint team for facilitating my study visit in July 2008, and in particular to Inge Lyse Hansen for the initial invitation to study the aqueduct and for arranging logistics with admirable efficiency, to David Bescoby and David Hernandez for undertaking a topographic survey of selected

96

2 3 4 5 6 7

Andrew Wilson features of the aqueduct, and to Richard Hodges and Brian Ayers for their hospitality. Paul Reynolds kindly provided the ceramic dating for key contexts having a bearing on the aqueduct’s construction and abandonment, and Richard Abdy and Sam Moorehead provided expert advice on the relevant coin issues. Sarah Leppard and Simon Greenslade devoted considerable time to showing me around and discussing the excavations of the settlement to the south of the Vivari Channel. Ermira Rama assisted with measurement and description of the nymphaeum and associated arcade piers. Last but certainly not least, I owe a particular debt of thanks to Dhimitër Çondi for sharing his detailed knowledge of the remains of Roman Butrint and its aqueduct, and for on-site discussions in Butrint and in the Vrina Plain. Çondi 1999–2000. As reconstructed by Çondi 1999–2000: 219, fig. 8. Sebastiani and Vaccaro 2008: 9. Sebastiani and Vaccaro 2008: 9; but their fig. 8 mislocates the western spring some 400 m too far to the northwest. Sebastiani and Vaccaro 2008: 9. Pers. comm., Dh. Çondi.

8 Pluciennik et al. 2004: 51, 56, fig. 4.9; cf. Sebastiani and Vaccaro 2008: figs 2 and 8. 9 Wilson 1999. 10 See Greenslade in this volume. 11 Bescoby 2007: 95–96; see also Bescoby in this volume. 12 For details on Arles/Trinquetaille see Cochet 1993; De Villeneuve-Bargemont 1823. On the villa of Manlius Vopiscus, see Statius, Silvae 1.3.66–9. 13 Frontinus, de Aquis 11, on use of the Alsietina to supply the Transtiberim region whenever work on the road bridges over the Tiber interrupted supply from aqueducts on the left bank of the Tiber; cf. Evans 1994: 71 and 107. 14 See Leppard in this volume. 15 Context 5105. I am grateful to Paul Reynolds for this information. 16 See Bescoby in this volume. 17 Cf. Bescoby; and Gilkes, Hysa and Çondi in this volume. 18 Çondi 1999–2000. 19 Note the difference between Pluciennik et al. 2004: 56, figs 4.9 and 4.10 (cf. Sebastiani and Vaccaro 2009: figs 2 and 3).

6  The Roman Bridge of Butrint Sarah Leppard

Located on the southern bank of Butrint are the remains of the Roman bridge that would have connected the city to the suburbs on the Vrina Plain, across the Vivari Channel (see Fig. 5.18). A small vegetation clearance project in the summer of 2007 uncovered the full extent of the remains. In the 1920s Luigi Maria Ugolini first believed that Butrint may have had a Roman bridge due to the discovery of an Augustan issue Buthrotum mint coin, depicting three arches of a larger structure (cf. Fig. 5.1).1 An underwater survey project in 1998 by a team from the University of Texas also noted large masonry remains in the silts at the bottom of the Vivari Channel: remains of piers and possibly large sections of the bridge structure.

The structural remains The remains uncovered in 2007 revealed a 6 m long section of the bridge, and the top of probably the first arch (Fig. 6.1). The channel silts had covered the remains up to

nearly the very top of this arch. This section of the bridge was in the main badly preserved, with little remaining beyond the core of the structure; however, there was a short stretch of the road surface left in situ at the western end of the structure and a small part of the northern face remained intact. These small but significant remains are invaluable for reconstructing the form of this bridge; for example, the surviving first arch can be used to reconstruct the potential rise/span ratio of the arch and therefore give an idea of how many arches may have been used in the complete construction. The structural remains consisted of a limestone rubble core bonded with a yellow-white hard gritty mortar; the full width of this was 4.8 m (Fig. 6.2). On both the north and south face of the bridge the core make-up of the top of the first arch was revealed (Fig. 6.3). The arch itself was created using similarly sized slim rectangular limestone voussoirs bonded with an off-white gritty mortar, showing the characteristic geometric perfection used in Roman

Figure 6.1. The remains of the bridge uncovered in 2007, showing the south face

Sarah Leppard

98

Original facing stones

10th/11th-century orthostat wall

Rubble core

Collapsed remains

Late antique city wall

Modern shoreline

tree root Road surface

0

5m

Figure 6.2. Plan of the bridge remains

Road surface tree root

Facing stones

A

Road surface tree root

B

0

Figure 6.3. Elevations of the north (A) and south (B) faces

2m

6  The Roman Bridge of Butrint

99

Figure 6.4. Detail of the facing stones on the north face of the arch

bridge architecture.2 On the northern side a small stretch of the original face of the arch and spandrel still remained, bonded to the core of the bridge (Fig. 6.4). The face of the arch was constructed with long well-formed rectangular limestone voussoirs while the face of the spandrel was built with shorter rectangular limestone blocks, three courses of which remained. The depth of this face was 0.8 m, assuming the southern face was the same this creates an overall width of 6.4 m for the bridge. On the top of the core a small expanse of flat limestone slabs formed what could be the original road surface of the bridge (Fig. 6.5). Covering an area of 2.8 m by 1.9 m and situated at the western end of the remains of the bridge, this surface continued under the medieval wall built across the width of the bridge remains. The majority of the limestone slabs laid for the surface were well formed, angular white limestone, while a few slabs were rougher with yellow coloured inclusions. These coloured inclusions in the limestone are seen regularly in walls around Butrint and the outlying areas; some are also noticeable in the core material of the bridge and appear to be simply a common defect in the limestone formation. Initially it was thought that these coloured stones may have been a sign of repair to the pavement; however, closer investigation showed that there were no joins or alterations to the mortar surrounding the stone slabs, all the slabs of the pavement were within the same layer of mortar and must have been laid at the same time. Also, this layer of pavement slabs was set directly on what appeared to be the rough core of the bridge itself with no signs of earlier pavement layers beneath. Either this represents the one and only pavement of the bridge, or, if it was re-paved, the earlier pavement was removed completely beforehand and the whole area

was re-paved. The remaining bridge structure itself shows no signs of repairs or rebuilds on this section.

Reconstruction and alignment Despite the small amount of the arch being visible it is nevertheless possible to propose a reconstruction of it. Using a semi-circular arc with a best fit to the remains, the curve from the springing of the arch may be extrapolated. Assuming this arch was a plain semi-circular arch, with a 1/2 rise/span ratio, the entire arch would have a width of 5.8 m (Fig. 6.6). This barrel or tunnel type of arch was used in the majority of Roman bridges, while a low rise/span ratio arch, such as those in the Alconétar bridge that used to span the River Tagus, was exceptional.3 Further evidence to help realise the shape of the arch used for the Butrint bridge is the fact that the ratio of the rib thickness to span width was one of the most important parameters in the design of a stone arch.4 A span width to rib thickness ratio of at least 1/10 was used across all forms of arches in the Roman world. The rib thickness of the remains of the Butrint bridge is 0.58 m, matching exactly the extrapolated reconstructed arch width of 5.8 m. Roman engineers specialised in building bridges without the need for a false framework for construction. The imposing pier width on many Roman bridges illustrates this; the bridges were built one pier at a time with each pier acting as an abutment to the arch until the next pier was constructed.5 So long as the pier width was between one fifth and one half of the arch span, the pier could carry the horizontal thrust of the arch during its construction. The pier width to arch span ratio of Roman bridges gradually narrowed over time as they evolved with

Sarah Leppard

100

Figure 6.5. Remains of the road surface on the bridge

tree root

Road level

Abutment

Remaining facing stones Remains of rubble core

0

5m

Figure 6.6. Reconstruction elevation of the first arch and abutment of the bridge the experience gained by extensive bridge building. The very earliest surviving stone bridges known, from the 1st century BC, were built with very heavy piers at a ratio of nearly 1, as can be seen at the Andújar bridge in Spain.6 By the time the bridge at Butrint would have been built,

perhaps around the late 1st century BC/early 1st century AD, the pier widths were evolving to a slightly narrower ratio of 1/2 or 1/3, as can be seen on the bridge crossing Marachia at Rimini, built during the reign of Augustus, and on the bridge at Mérida in Spain built in the early 1st

6  The Roman Bridge of Butrint

101

Figure 6.7. The bridge at Mérida across the Guadiana River, and detail of bridge arch (L. Mattei and M. T. Bonet García)

century AD, where some of the thickest piers have a ratio of 1/2 (Fig. 6.7).7 A further element of the Roman bridge to be considered is the inclusion of small flood-relieving arches, which, on the earlier bridges with wide pier widths, were built into the spandrel at the height of the arch springing. Later bridges were built with narrower piers, meaning the flood-releiving arches had to be inserted higher up on the spandrel.8 At Butrint the higher part of the spandrel is all that can now be seen of the bridge, and here it is blank, with no flood-relieving arch. If this was the case for all piers, and not just for the first landward one, it can be assumed that the bridge at Butrint was constructed with the same technique as other late 1st-century BC/early 1st-century AD Roman examples with a pier width/arch span ratio of 1/2, possibly with the small flood-relieving arches inserted lower down in the spandrel. Taking this ratio into account and running a direct line to the closest land point on the other side of the Vivari Channel in the Roman period, the bridge can be calculated to a length of c. 400 m between abutments, with perhaps 45 or 46 piers (Fig. 6.8).9 In a similar style to the

bridge spanning the Guadiana River at Mérida and with an arch span of nearly 6 m wide this bridge would have provided enough space for general smaller fishing vessels, which may have sailed up the Vivari Channel, to pass through.10 There is, however, the possibility that a section of the bridge was wooden, that could be drawn up, or the central section of the bridge could have been constructed with wider spanned arches, to allow for larger vessels to pass through. The construction of the large piers to support the bridge load would have restricted the channel space and therefore increased the flow of the water around the piers. To prevent the increased flow of water scouring away the foundations of the piers most were built with cutwaters and it is quite likely that the Butrint bridge was the same; only further excavation will reveal if this is the case.11 The alignment of the bridge to the Vrina Plain is interesting and reveals the possible relationship of the bridge with the aqueduct that continued on down the valley across the plain. The easiest construction form for the bridge to take would be to build straight across the

Sarah Leppard

102

Butrint

Vrina Plain

Gravel bank

Vivari Channel

0

100 m

Figure 6.8. Reconstruction of the full length of the bridge across the Vivari Channel

Receiving tank? Header tank Bridge

Vrina Plain

Gravel bank Butrint

Line of Aqueduct Vivari Channel Proposed roads 0

200 m

Figure 6.9. Plan of the bridge alignment and its connection to the road on the Vrina Plain

Figure 6.10. View from the bridge towards the Vrina Plain

6  The Roman Bridge of Butrint Vivari Channel, running over the possible gravel bank in the channel, then on to the closest shore line of the Vrina Plain (Fig. 6.9). The orientation of the remaining structure of the bridge points a direct line across to the Vrina Plain shoreline that leads directly to the line of the road uncovered on the southwest side of the Temple mausoleum (Fig. 6.10). This means the bridge would pass roughly 75 m to the southwest of the aqueduct header tank situated on the possible gravel bank, suggesting therefore that the bridge and the aqueduct were separate structures and the aqueduct did not run across the bridge in any form.12

Discussion The construction date of the bridge could not be confirmed through excavation and can only be estimated using related historical and archaeological evidence. It may well have been constructed in the late 1st century BC/early 1st century AD when Butrint was refounded as a Roman colony after the Battle of Actium in 31 BC.13 The Augustan issue coins from the Butrint mint depicting an arched structure, possibly the bridge or the aqueduct, may suggest this date for its construction. The early Roman city expanded using elements of the former Hellenistic city, and enlarged to include a forum and further residential areas, within the city and across the Vivari Channel on the Vrina Plain.14 The bridge and aqueduct would have been constructed to supply the growing city in Butrint with water and a better connection to the Vrina Plain. This period also saw an expansion of settlements on the Vrina Plain and along the Pavllas Valley. The area to the south of Butrint is proposed to have formed part of the territory of the late Hellenistic Prasaebian koinon and for the city to make such a large investment in constructing a bridge connecting it to the southern regions, and to then advertise the construction on their own minted coins, suggests this area still held great importance in the Augustan period.15 The study of the possible centuriation system on the Vrina Plain revealed the alignments of the land organisation that may date to the late Republican era.16 While no archaeological evidence has been found for any roads of this date, the survey of the landscape suggests a crossroads of the actus grid was situated in line with where the proposed bridgehead may be on the Vrina Plain.17 If the centuriated landscape can be associated with the late Republican period this would again back up the idea of the bridge being constructed in this time period to link these new road systems coming up the Pavllas Valley to the city of Butrint.18 Excavation revealed a 3rd-century AD dated road surface on the western side of the Temple mausoleum that may well be a later surface of one of these earlier roads heading towards the bridgehead.19 This road was re-surfaced in the 5th/6th century AD. The addition of a new city wall around Butrint dated to the first half of the 6th century AD also appears to respect the bridge access, as the clearance work around the bridge remains showed clearly that the city wall abutted the

103

sides of the bridge leaving a gap for the bridge access to remain open. This could suggest that the bridge was also in use into the late antique period. Alternatively, evidence from the excavations in the Vrina Plain revealed one of the aqueduct piers fell sometime during or after the 5th century; a similar fate may have occurred to the bridge around the same time, but there is no other direct evidence to date when the bridge fell out of use.20 By the late 10th/early 11th century the area around the bridgehead in the city had changed dramatically and an orthostat boundary wall, part of an enclosure around the Great Basilica, was constructed across the road surface of the bridge, showing that certainly by this time the bridge was no longer an important access route into the city.21

References Álvarez Martínez, J. M. (1984) El peunte Romana de Mérida. Badajoz, Consejo Provincial de Bellas Atres. Bescoby, D. J. (2006) Detecting Roman land boundaries in aerial photographs using Radon transforms. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 735–43. Bescoby, D. J. (forthcoming) Roman land organisation of the Butrint hinterland. In S. Greenslade and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 5. Excavations on the Vrina Plain. The Roman and Byzantine Suburb. Oxford, Oxbow. Favre, R. and De Castro San Romàn, J. (2001) The arch: enduring and endearing. In C. Abdunur (ed.), Arch ’01. Third International arch bridges conference: 3–16. Paris, Presses de l’Ecole Nationale des Ponts and Chaussées. Ceka, N. (2006) Recent excavations in Butrint (2004–5): Notes on the growth of the ancient city centre. In L. Bejko and R. Hodges (eds), New directions in Albanian archaeology. Studies presented to Muzafer Korkuti: 177–85. Tirana, ICAA. Crowson, A. and Gilkes, O. J. (2007) The archaeology of the Vrina Plain: an assessment. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint. An Assessment: 119–64. Oxford, Oxbow. Greenslade, S. and Hodges, R. (forthcoming) (eds) The Roman suburb on the Vrina Plain from the 1st to 3rd centuries. In S. Greenslade and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 5. Excavations on the Vrina Plain. The Roman and Byzantine Suburb. Oxford, Oxbow. Greenslade, S. and Leppard, S. (forthcoming) The Temple mausoleum. In S. Greenslade and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 5. Excavations on the Vrina Plain. The Roman and Byzantine Suburb. Oxford, Oxbow. Hansen, I. L. (2009) Hellenistic and Roman Butrint (Butrinti Helenistik dhe Romak). London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. O’Connor, C. and Shaw, P. A. (2000) Bridge loads: an international perspective. London, Routledge. O’Connor, C. (1993) Roman Bridges. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Ryall, M. J., Parke, G. A. R. and Harding, J. E. (2003) Manual of Bridge Engineering. London, Thomas Telford Publishing. Troyano, L. F. (2003) Bridge Engineering. London, Thomas Telford Publishing. Tyrell, H. G. (1911) History of Bridge Engineering. Chicago, the Author. Ugolini, L. M. (1937) Butrinto. Il mito d’Enea, gli scavi. Rome, Istituto Grafico Tiberino.

Sarah Leppard

104

Notes 1 Ugolini 1937: 85. Ugolini suggested that this structure,

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

depicted on the coins, may have indicated the aqueduct or a bridge; whether Ugolini actually uncovered the remains of this bridge is unclear. My thanks go to Andrew Crowson, Inge Lyse Hansen, Richard Hodges and Oliver Gilkes for their helpful comments, suggestions and information, as well as to Luca Mattei and Maria Teresa Bonet García for taking the photographs reproduced in Fig. 6.7. Troyano 2003: 100. O’Connor 1993: 171; Troyano 2003: 100–1. O’Connor 1993: 164. Favre and De Castro San Romàn 2001. Troyano 2003: 106. Álvarez Martínez 1984: 15, fig. 9; O’Connor 1993: 164; Troyano 2003: 107, fig. 3.38; Tyrell 1911: 34, fig. 9. Troyano 2003: 107. Pers. comm., D. Bescoby regarding the position of the water’s edge on the Vrina Plain in this period. This reconstruction of the bridge is purely theoretical. Álvarez Martínez 1984: 10, fig. 3; O’Connor and Shaw 2000: 259–60.

11 Ryall, Parke and Harding 2003: 3–5; Troyano 2003: 107. 12 No excavation was undertaken on the Vrina Plain to locate the bridge abutment on this side of the Vivari Channel, hence at the present time the location of this can only be an assumption. 13 Earlier research at Butrint gave rise to the idea that the bridge was built in the Hadrianic period, though there is no evidence given to back this up, cf. Ceka 2006: 184–5. 14 Greenslade in this volume; Greenslade and Hodges forthcoming; Hansen 2009: 35–9. 15 Hansen 2009: 29. 16 Bescoby 2006 and forthcoming. 17 Bescoby 2006: 113 and Bescoby forthcoming. 18 Greenslade and Hodges forthcoming. 19 Greenslade and Leppard forthcoming. 20 Excavations on the Vrina Plain in 2003 revealed a collapsed arch of the aqueduct that lay directly on top of a deposit with late 4th- and early 5th-century material, suggesting the collapse of this particular pier happened probably later in the 5th century, contra Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 122, who put its collapse by the end of the 4th century. 21 Hodges (Chapter 1) in this volume.

7  Roman sculpture from Butrint: a review of recent finds Inge Lyse Hansen

When the Italian archaeologist, Luigi Maria Ugolini, started the first large-scale excavations at Butrint in 1928 he claimed, like so many of the earlier visitors to this region, to have been attracted by the city’s Virgilian heritage and its association with Rome through foundation myths linked with Aeneas.1 Though in fact Ugolini adopted a methodological approach that included investigations of all periods of the site’s archaeological history, the stated focus on the early imperial period served him well to promote the site and his excavations. Certainly, what caught the public imagination was the many sculptural finds made in the area around the Theatre, in particular the series of wellpreserved statues and the imperial portraits of Augustus, Livia and Agrippa.2 One of these finds, a head of Apollo (at the time combined by Ugolini with a female figure in the style of the Nemesis of Rhamnous) quickly became the symbol of the excavations as the ‘Goddess of Butrint.’ It remains to this day the symbol of the Butrint Museum – as well as of a great many other commercial and cultural institutions in the area – and the imperial portraits, together with the Baptistery mosaics, are some of the most iconic images of Butrint. The finds made in the theatre are still the most extensive corpus of sculpture from Butrint and provide important evidence for the character and artistic quality of the sculpture displayed in the city. Ugolini may have highlighted the Augustan-period works but his discoveries were by no means limited to this period and the excavations brought to light finds datable throughout the Roman imperial period. This is the case also for the finds made in the excavations by the Albanian Institute of Archaeology in the 1970s–90s.3 Less extensive in scope and less focussed on the Greco-Roman centre of Butrint than the excavations by Ugolini, the quantity of finds made in this period was naturally less numerous. However, the discovery of two portraits: a second portrait of Agrippa and a Hadrianic bust of a young man resembling Antinous (both used as spolia in medieval walls) exemplify the trends evident in the sculptures excavated previously.4 The following is a discussion of the sculptural finds

made since 1994 and the start of the Butrint Foundation’s excavations at Butrint.5 The intention is to provide an overview of the recently excavated works and a preliminary contextualization of these with finds from previous periods.6 The permission granted by Dhimitër Çondi to examine hitherto unpublished pieces from excavations by the Institute of Archaeology, at Butrint and on the Vrina Plain, has added considerably to the understanding of the new finds.7 The present survey will consider the types and find spots of the sculptural pieces, and offer a preliminary analysis of the individual works. As will be discussed below, the distribution of finds is by no means even, and only two areas have produced any significant amount of sculpture: the forum area within Butrint and the Temple mausoleum on the Vrina Plain.8 Since a summary of the sarcophagus finds from the latter is included elsewhere in this volume, these finds are not included in the present discussion. The finds from the forum represent the most diverse group of sculpture and with their relative numerical abundance effectively exemplify the range of works displayed and dedicated at Butrint in the imperial period. The following will consider the character and regional context of the works, the particulars of their archaeological distribution within Butrint, as well as a discussion of the typological composition of the assemblage centred on three themes: portrait sculpture and honorific dedications; statues of deities; and other types of works.

Characteristics and regional context The formal characteristics of the sculptures from Butrint represent examples of provincial art of an extremely good quality. Most are carved in marble – with Pentelic and Greek islands marble predominating – with very few works in limestone.9 Works of the imperial period are numerous and represent examples from all periods, with a particular predominance of Julio-Claudian and Hadrianic/Antonine sculpture. Contrary, works of the Hellenistic period are rare. Given the refurbishment and increased monumentalization of the sanctuary area in the 2nd century BC, following

106

Inge Lyse Hansen

Butrint’s status as the head of a local koinon, it is surprising that so few works datable prior to the Augustan period survive.10 The Roman period sculptures represent portraits, busts, statues and statuettes. Among these, life-sized, or larger, figures are more numerous than statuettes or figures under life-size, testifying to the significant investment in sculpture dedications at Butrint in the Roman period. Of reliefs only few examples – other than sarcophagi – have been found. In the overall choice of forms, the sculptures from Butrint find parallels – and significant differences – with those from its closest mainland neighbour, Phoenice.11 Here too, life-size sculptures are well represented, while reliefs are virtually absent. However, Phoenice, with its important regional status during the 3rd and 2nd centuries BC, had a vibrant tradition for public dedications already in the Hellenistic period. Most common are representations of deities, attested throughout the history of the city; those of Artemis/Diana predominate, and her cult must have been of particular significance for the city.12 No such similar religious focus, or similar sustained investment in depictions of deities, can be established among the finds from Butrint. Here instead investment in honorific statuary is particularly significant, and portrait busts and statues – dedicated to the imperial family as well as to local dignitaries – form a significant portion of the assemblage. Conversely, at Phoenice only few portraits or statue-types associated with honorific dedications have been found. Where the sculptural works from the two cities appear to differ most substantially is in choice of workshops. As far as workshop productions may be established on stylistic evidence alone, Phoenice appears to have had access to local workshops that both produced new material and finished works imported in a raw or semi-prepared state.13 Luca Mercuri makes a convincing case for the presence, at Phoenice itself, of sculpture workshops that were particularly active during the Hellenistic period, with workshop traditions continuing through the Roman imperial period.14 The evidence for local workshops is found in the stylistic similarities between the works themselves and in their dissimilarity to works found at Butrint: especially in the greater use of local limestone, at least for smaller pieces, and in the stylistic differences (despite their typological similarities) from those found at Butrint. The Hellenistic pieces from Butrint are too few to establish if the Phoenice workshops exerted an influence on Butrint, but it is certain that in the Republican and imperial periods it was not to Phoenice that Butrint looked for inspiration.15 Rather, during the Roman imperial period, Phoenice appears influenced in its iconographic choices by Butrint and by the works displayed here; interestingly, its production centre appears to remain local. This is not the case for Butrint. Here there is little evidence that the city was the centre for marble workshops at all: it appears to have been an avid commissioner of sculpture but not a producer. It is possible that the uncertainty noticed by Ugolini in the carving of the portrait of Augustus represents

local artists finishing an imported piece, and, certainly, the singularly idealised style adopted for both portraits of Agrippa (carved by different hands) must represent the wishes of Butrint patrons.16 However, the reworking attempts of the over life-size togate statue is the only unequivocal example of local production, and no evidence for a local style can be detected in the Butrint works (cf. Fig. 7.6). Instead, most of the works displayed at Butrint appear to have been imported. Some sculptures may have been imports from Italy, but most probably originated from workshops in Attica or elsewhere in Achaea.17 Athenian or Corinthian workshops have been proposed for the Augustan statues found in the Theatre, and the widespread use of Pentelic marble may similarly point to strong links with Attica.18 Iconographically, the city drew heavily and explicitly on Roman metropolitan forms. In other words, in the imaging of the city through its dedications and adornment of public spaces, Butrint wished clearly to articulate its Roman status and it links with powerful patrons in Rome.19 Not making use of local craftsmen or in any way looking to the sculptural traditions at Phoenice for inspiration was clearly entirely deliberate: Butrint had no use for postulating a relationship with the old Chaeonian capital (beyond illustrating its lack of influence by disregarding it), since its Roman links allowed it to present itself as the new primary city in the region. Aside from practicalities of workshop practises and accessibility, by drawing on Achaean workshops the city highlighted its participation in the culture of Mainland Greece, and established a thoroughly cosmopolitan image for Butrint that situated it artistically, as it was economically, between Rome and Achaea.

Finds spots and archaeological context Across Butrint, the distribution of new finds of marble or stone sculpture is surprisingly uneven, despite the fact that all the major excavations undertaken since 1994 concern areas that in the Roman period can be presumed to have been adorned with sculpture. Other than the forum area, several prestigious residential sites have been excavated by the Butrint Foundation: the domus and later Triconch Palace at the channel-side of Butrint, the Hellenistic and Roman villa at Diaporit on the eastern shore of Lake Butrint and the mixed residential area on the Vrina Plain, later occupied by a large and handsome townhouse (cf. Fig. 1.2 for locations).20 Next to no Roman period sculpture has been found at any of the residential sites, despite their otherwise large scales and well-appointed aspects. Marble for veneers and opus sectile floors survive in varying amounts from all of these sites, as does evidence for the presence of handsome floor mosaics, and the layout of each of the townhouses and villas display an interest in framed views and in associations with cultured leisure. However, remains of sculpture that may have articulated these concerns are

7  Roman sculpture from Butrint: a review of recent finds ephemeral. Only two sculptural fragments were found in the post-1994 excavations at the Triconch Palace site: a leg of an under life-size draped figure and a fragment of what appears to be an arm of a statuette (cat. 8 and 13, Fig. 7.12).21 The latter is too fragmentary to provide indications on its original aspect, but the leg fragment appears to be of the thigh and upper shin of a figure dressed in a roughly knee-length chiton of fine fabric; the drapery folds are relatively shallow and flat, but arranged with an eye for variation and texture. The impression of movement conveyed in the drapery and the apparently short chiton may associate the figure with Artemis/Diana. The piece is associated with stones possibly from a wall and the figure was undoubtedly broken up and its larger pieces used as spolia in wall constructions. This is undoubtedly also the case for the single sculptural fragment that has come to light in the excavations at Diaporit, representing the waist part of a draped female figure of Hellenistic date (cat. 7, Fig. 7.11).22 She wears a dress gathered at the waist by a belt, hidden under an overfold fabric, and the drapery folds below this fall in vivacious sweeping diagonals and counterpoised hooks, with parts clinging to the forms of the underlying body – all evident of rapid movement. This ‘running maiden’ may conceivably have depicted a Nike, though more likely a Nymph, Artemis/Diana or a Niobid, all subjects suitable for a villa setting. From the Vrina Plain the only evidence for sculpture and relief work come from the Temple mausoleum that faced the north–south road leading to the bridge. The finds included a fine portrait of a bearded man of the late 2nd century AD, but most are fragments of Attic sarcophagi, and overall the assemblage appears funerary in character.23 Despite their fragmentary state, several joining pieces have been found; hence, the works undoubtedly pertain to the mausoleum, the sarcophagi having been broken up in situ, rather than representing a more casual collection of objects moved here from elsewhere. Only from the excavations in the forum area have sculpture been found consistently and in any quantity. However, the characteristics of the finds from this area are significantly different from those from the Temple mausoleum. The finds from the forum are, apart from two notable exceptions, fragmentary, and, with a single exception, no joins have been found between excavated pieces. In other words, the finds here are more numerous but their deposition is more random. Overall, the material appears most often as being rubbish used for infill, and to have been deposited, or even re-deposited, here as part of this process. The uneven distribution and character of sculptural finds across Butrint can only be explained by particular archaeological and environmental factors affecting different parts of Butrint in different ways. In this regard it is worth bearing in mind that only in very rare instances has the modern-day high water table permitted early Imperial or Republican levels to be reached. Hence, further sculptural material undoubtedly remains in certain areas. More

107

importantly, the Triconch Palace area, Diaporit and the Vrina Plain were all abandoned as single-family residences and the areas subsequently utilized for other purposes, often over a very long period. The villa site at Diaporit and the domus on the Vrina Plain were both transformed into ecclesiastic complexes in the 5th century.24 The imperial period domus on the Triconch Palace site was temporarily abandoned, then incorporated into a more grandiose structure (the Triconch Palace) around AD 400; this in turn appears to have been abandoned, still incomplete, and its shell was used for a series of modest buildings and workshops.25 Whatever sculpture adorned these elite residences appear to have been comprehensively removed or destroyed as they were abandoned: the villa at Diaporit in the late 3rd century, the townhouses in Butrint and on the Vrina Plain in the mid 4th century AD. Certainly, though no limekilns have been identified at Butrint, strikingly few fragments appear at these sites as spolia material in later constructions. The forum area too was subject to significant change, but in this case the alterations wrought often served to seal materials and leave them undisturbed in later transformations of the area. Two different events had an impact on the deposition and distribution of sculpture: firstly, new building programmes that necessitated infilling of areas no longer in use, evidence for which is particularly clear in the deposition of the life-size togate statue (cat. 2).26 Secondly, the consequences of earthquakes that, as shown by recent environmental studies, appear to have affected Butrint in the mid to late 4th century.27 The earthquake damage appears to have been particularly severe in the forum area, causing the paved piazza to slope by c. 2° to the south, leaving it inundated by water and requiring a rapid infilling in order to raise the level of the area (cf. Fig. 2.5). Damaged or already broken up sculpture was used as part of this and fragments were found in a rubble deposit sealing the forum pavement, which in turn was covered by a compact demolition deposit, neither containing pottery later than the 4th century, and sealed by a 5th-century cocciopesto floor.28 This explains the fragmentary nature of the forum finds, and, in particular, their disjointed aspect and the lack of firm archaeological indications for their original location of display. Evidence for similar severe damage and subsequent infilling can also be found in the Theatre area (cf. Fig. 7.1). Ugolini reports that the statues and sculptural fragments were all found within a layer c. 0.80 m thick, which was in turn covered by 4 m of soil and rocks.29 As Oliver Gilkes has pointed out, the depth of the infilling of the cavea can not only be gauged by the relatively good preservation of the lower ten rows of seating compared to the almost complete robbing out of the upper sections, but this later fill included at least one stratum of large stones fallen from the slopes of the acropolis above.30 In other words, the Theatre, like the forum area, was covered in progressive phases before the lower city was reorganised in the 10th–11th centuries. The presence of the many

108

Inge Lyse Hansen

well-preserved statues discovered by Ugolini in theatre area is undoubtedly related to a change in use of this area in this period. Together with the impressive count of 22 statues that Ugolini reports having found, he also notes the presence of 19 fragments of heads, none of which he could link to the excavated figures.31 In other words, the assemblage was less cohesive than the official promotion of their finds suggested. The various pieces were also found across a wider area than the focus on the statues might suggest. Statuary fragments were found across the area of the theatre and associated buildings, with a clustering in two areas: large statues in a line close to the scaenae frons interspersed with detached heads and sculpture fragments, smaller statues at quite some distance from the former; all, to greater or lesser extent show signs of deliberate damage.32 The assemblage undoubtedly represents works not just from the Theatre but also from the sanctuary area in general, possibly even beyond, that were assembled at various points on the theatre stage in preparation for being broken up.33 The Theatre itself must have been substantially damaged, undoubtedly in the same seismic event that destroyed the forum, to explain the change of use; however, the process of gathering and reducing the statues suggests that the area was not initially affected by water infiltration, but represented a stable and dry work area.34 This may not have lasted long, as indicated by the abandonment of the sculptures, sealed beneath the collapsed walls from the acropolis and the heavy infilling of the area that appear to have interrupted the breaking up of the figures.35 The reworking, and subsequent abandonment, of the over life-size togate statue (cat. 3) found in the northern part of the forum area in 2002 may be part of this same, or an associated, sequence of events (see below).36 As the southern part of the forum area – and, it must be presumed, other areas of the lower city – was being infilled and levelled, the Theatre and the northern part of the forum piazza may (at least for a while) have represented defunct but stable and dry areas of the city centre that could be used as temporary areas for working or breaking up sculpture, before they in turn were abandoned and terraced over.37

The togate statues The find spots of the two togate statues and associated finds highlight the complex depositional histories of the forum area (Fig. 7.1). The life-size togate statue (cat. 2) was discovered lying on its right side within a relatively narrow drain, which fronted a path at the western end of the forum piazza. It was placed level, directly on top of the flagstones of the drain, with its back resting against the wall that formed the division between the drain and the building to the west, the so-called Peristyle House, suggesting that it was placed there deliberately (Fig. 7.2). In other words, it was removed from display but not deliberately destroyed. The associated ceramic material indicates a depositional date around the middle of the 3rd century AD. The pottery

covering the statue and filling in the drain forms a uniform group of ceramics, mainly amphorae but also fine wares and kitchen wares, datable to c. 230–250 AD; significantly, the sherds are described as ‘fresh’ and in good condition with several joins.38 In other words, the abolition of the drain was a deliberate, planned undertaking for which expedient material was sourced. Other finds in this same context (98, and the associated context 99) include bone pins, personal ornaments in copper alloy, various metal objects, a rim fragment of a large white marble bowl and two small fragments of inscriptions. Two marble sculptural pieces, both very fragmentary, were also found: a fragment of a lower leg of a nude male figure, and a fragmentary piece with a left hand resting on a rock (cat. 15).39 Unlike the statue, all of these finds appear much more explicitly to be rubbish: broken and discarded objects used as fill. The reason for the infilling of the drain can be linked to the construction of a new building, built up against the western portico of the piazza and over the pathway to the well and buildings associated with the cult of Asclepius. It seems clear that the construction of the building and the blocking of the drain formed part of the same building programme.40 Subsequently, and at a much later date, the area of the pathway was completely filled in. The deposit (26) representing this event included the shoulder fragment (cat. 4) and a wealth of marble chippings associated with the reworking of the over life-size togate statue discovered in this area in 2002 by the Butrint National Park (cat. 3). The ceramics contained in this context (26) are of the same date as those filling the drain and covering the statue, but the sherds are smaller, more abraded and only very few joins could be found. Hence, this suggests that they were redeposited material dumped here at a later date, possibly as part of the last infilling of the area of the forum piazza where otherwise the rubble deposits contained ceramics dated to the late 4th century.41 The marble fragments from the recutting of the statue undoubtedly belong in this general area, given their concentration here and the proximity to the statue. In other words, the attempts at refashioning the figure appear to have taken place in this area, suggesting that this area close to the acropolis hill (like the Theatre) was accessible and could be utilised, despite the infilling necessitated elsewhere. The statue itself was found a few meters south of where the marble chippings were unearthed (cf. Fig. 7.1). It was reported to have been discovered with very few finds indeed: a few undated ceramic sherds, a finger from a life-size bronze figure, and a fragment of a female head from a marble relief of Antonine date, but no off-cuts or marble fragments from the statue itself.42 The level in which the statue was found has subsequently been proposed as dating to the later 10th/11th century.43 Certainly, if the statue was moved in the medieval period and used as bulky infill for the terracing of this area this would explain the paucity of finds and the complete absence of off-cut fragments around it.44

7  Roman sculpture from Butrint: a review of recent finds

Peristyle building

Temple Fountain

109

Shrines

Shrine/ Treasury

Prytaneum

Forum

Hellenistic city wall

Life-size togate statue

Road

Bath house

0

50 m

Statue base? Over life-size togate statue

Life-size togate statue

Over life-size togate statue

0

10 m

0

Figure 7.1. Sanctuary and forum area with find spots of the two togate statues

5m

Inge Lyse Hansen

110

this respect with the body of works excavated in previous periods. For greater contextualization, the discussion will include also the finds made in the 1980s, though more attention is given to those come to light since 1994; to support the discussion, a summary catalogue of the latter pieces are included at the end.45

Portrait sculpture and honorific dedications

Figure 7.2. The life-size togate statue in situ

Typological characteristics The assemblage of recent finds from Butrint represents principally statues, many life-size or larger in scale, with only few statuettes or figurines. All are carved in marble and the quality of the carving is uniformly high – exceptional in one case. Given the predominance of finds from the forum area, and the civic function served by this and by the nearby sanctuary, honorific statues, unsurprisingly, appear to form a large part of the assemblage; pieces attributable to depictions of deities are less substantial. The excavated pieces are very fragmentary – with the notable exception of the togate statue in near-perfect condition (cat. 2) – and though dating in certain cases must necessarily be approximate, the works appear mainly to be Augustan to Neronian, and Hadrianic to Marcus Aurelius in date. Hence the assemblage of recent finds corresponds well in

As noted above, the most significant element of the finds from the forum is represented by the high number of pieces that on typological grounds may be interpreted as honorific dedications and associated with portrait representations of individuals. These works are life-size or larger in format, and all appear to have been, or been designed for, freestanding sculptures, though a early 2nd-century bust of a young man in chlamys found in earlier excavations highlight the presence also of this type.46 They include dedications to the imperial family, as proposed for the over life-size togate statue (cat. 3–4), and to local dignitaries or members of elite families at Butrint, as may have been the case for life-size togate statue and the head of the boy (cat. 1 and 2), as well as the figure in heroic nudity (cat. 5).47 Most clearly a portrait is a fragmentary life-size head of a boy that can be dated to the Julio-Claudian period on basis of the carving of the hair (cat. 1, Fig. 7.9). Only the crown of the head with the central rear whirl of hair survives. It is broken at the line of the brow and ears, with the entire face missing in a clean-looking vertical break that looks entirely deliberate. At the base of the head are the remains of a sub-rectangular mortise. Unusually, the head was joined to the top of the neck of the figure, rather than being designed with a neck for insertion into a statue. The hair at the rear of the head is carved in low relief with little volume, but with some evidence of more variation at the top of the head where the locks of hair would have been more visible. Long, spatula-like grooves define the individual locks rather than any volumetric articulation of these as is characteristic of the more summary parts of male hairstyles in the Julio-Claudian period. The styling of the hair in the manner of the coiffure current in imperial images supports the identification of it as a portrait and, hence, a life-size dedication to a boy or young man. It is possible that it reflects an influence from depictions of the young Nero, in which case it would be the first male portrait head of the late Julio-Claudian period found at Butrint.48 The life-size togate statue in Pentelic marble, represents a work of outstanding quality of carving, a prestige dedication drawing on the very best workshops and craftsmen (cat. 2, Figs 7.3, 7.5).49 The figure wears an imperial-style toga, short-sleeved tunic and patrician shoes, drawing attention to the Roman citizen-status of the person depicted. It was designed with an inset head (this and the inset left hand are both now missing) and the head was undoubtedly a portrait. The figure is depicted standing with his weight on the left leg, the foot of which is placed at the very front edge of the base. The right leg is bent

7  Roman sculpture from Butrint: a review of recent finds

111

Figure 7.3. The life-size togate statue

Figure 7.4. Togate statue from Narona, Croatia (Archaeological Museum of Narona)

and set back with the heel of the foot slightly raised as if in a walking pose. The ensuing contraposto enlivens the stance with a subtle internal vigour despite the standing, frontal posture. The left hand may possibly have held a patera or more likely a book scroll, given the presence of a plain, round capsa or scrinium by the figure’s left foot. The position of the right arm, broken just below the elbow, is unusual. It is bent sharply at the elbow and held against the chest, possibly with the hand resting on the edge of the sinus/balteus. The gesture is common for figures wearing the visually simpler toga types (like the pallium type), but highly unusual in conjunction with elaborate toga types arranged with balteus and umbo like that worn by the figure here. Statues of this type are most commonly shown with their right arm extended along the side, or holding the lower outer edge of the sinus, in order to accentuate the richness of the drapery folds. Other examples of statues combining an imperial type toga with the arm held against the chest may be found in the statue of M. Nonius Balbus from

Herculaneum, one of the statues of M. Ulpius Crotonensis from a tomb on the Via Appia in Rome and, most closely, in a statue recently excavated at Narona (Croatia) that has been linked to a portrait of Vespasian (Fig. 7.4).50 In form and composition the arrangement of the toga, too, presents a series of adaptations of standard models. Firstly, the balteus is placed high on the left shoulder and drawn in a rather tight diagonal across the chest to just below the right arm/elbow. This not only blurs the distinction between the folds of the balteus and those of the umbo, to a point of rendering them indistinguishable, it also limits the space on the right side of the chest of the figure giving the impression of only half the folds around the neckline of the tunic being visible. Neither motif is commonly combined with a U-shaped umbo in the manner of the Butrint figure.51 Unusual too is the shallowness of the sinus.52 Whereas all of these elements point to a Hadrianic-early Antonine date for the work, the use of the emphatically U-shaped umbo finds its best

112

Inge Lyse Hansen

Figure 7.5. The life-size togate statue

parallels in togate statues from the nymphaeum of Annia Regilla and Herodes Atticus at Olympia (in particular in two life-size togate figures dated to c. AD 150 and in an over life-size statue dated to c. AD 169–177), as well as in a late Hadrianic/early Antonine statue from Corinth.53 The overall visual effect of the figure is of affinities with the Roman Republican toga-style and with the Greek himation. The gesture of the right arm, the lack of emphatic volume of the toga, and the tight, sling-like aspect of the balteus all recall the aspect not just of a Roman pallium-type toga but in particular of a Greek himation and may indicate an origin in an eastern workshop. The over life-size statue, which originally also depicted a togate male, may similarly confidently be presumed to have been a portrait dedication (cat. 3, Fig. 7.6).54 The statue has been recently published by Iris Pojani, but the salient points are worth repeating. Its present aspect represents the lower torso (from approximately the middle of the chest), the legs and the feet of a standing figure wearing a Republican style toga exigua without sinus, and patrician shoes; the head would originally have been inset as evidenced by the shallow remains of the mortise at what is now the very top of the figure. Its original height,

including the head, would hence have been around 2.7 m. Two separate attempts – both abandoned in their initial stages – were made at reworking it. The first appears to have been intended to transform it into a smaller, life-size figure by reducing it in size. Hence, drapery folds were smoothed down and cut away, and the overall volume of the figure reduced in size, including the feet. The second attempt appears to have been to refashion the statue as a bust: the shoulders of the original statue were cut away, the central chest area of the statue was prepared for use as the head, and a deep, broad groove was cut in order to detach it. Both attempts are singularly inept in execution, an aspect difficult to explain given the otherwise artistic accomplishment of Butrint, though it would explain why it should have been so summarily abandoned. The efforts are undoubtedly contemporary with the breaking up of the statues evidenced in the excavations by Ugolini in the Theatre. The attempt here at reworking – rather than deliberate breaking up – is the only example of reuse through refashioning found at Butrint. The original aspect of the toga may, despite the heavy reworking, still be gleaned from the overall form of the surviving lower part of the figure, as well as in surviving

7  Roman sculpture from Butrint: a review of recent finds

113

Figure 7.6. The over life-sized togate statue

Figure 7.7. The over life-sized togate statue; reconstruction of original aspect

parts of original drapery folds. The form and pattern of the folds indicate that the standing figure was depicted with the left arm bent at the elbow over which cascaded the folds of its outer edge. The toga itself was tightly wrapped around the right side of the figure, in the manner characteristic of a Republican toga. This is evident in the repeated horizontal folds along the right leg and waist of the figure, which follow the curvature of the body and evidence the slight walking pose. The tunic would have been visible on the upper part of the chest, and the lower point of the neckline folds still survive at what is now the uppermost edge of the figure. So far the reconstruction of the toga conforms closely the style of the very late Republic and early Augustan period, and the erection of this much over life-size statue must surely be connected to the colonial history of Butrint, in particular to Augustus and to the re-foundation of the city in his name in the years immediately after Actium. Not only was the battle fought geographically close to Butrint, but, more importantly, its

political implications were keenly felt in the city’s internal politics and in its access to patronage from Rome.55 The suggestion, based on the sheer size of the figure, that it originally depicted Octavian/Augustus, finds good support in the historical record, as well as in the discovery of the right shoulder of the figure (cat. 4, Fig. 7.8). This is composed of two joining pieces found among the many offcuts from of drapery folds; in detail it survives remarkably well and must have been detached early on in the reworking process. The most extraordinary aspect of it, though, is that it shows the right arm to have been raised up above shoulderlevel in a gesture of public address (Fig. 7.7). Whereas this gesture is common in cuirassed and equestrian statues it is highly unusual in togate figures and may be found only in very few figures of the late Republic and early Empire. As well as the famous late Republican bronze statue of the so-called Arringatore in Florence, a marble statue of Claudian date from Otricoli, now in the Vatican, and a mid 1st-century AD marble statue in Mérida also combine this

114

Inge Lyse Hansen

Figure 7.9. Rear part of a head of a boy

Figure 7.8. Shoulder fragment from the over life-size togate statue

Figure 7.10. Shoulder fragment with drapery

gesture with Roman citizen dress.56 The latter two statues appear to have been erected in honour of the imperial family. The gesture, where it is described in the imperial period, is linked not simply to public address but to the act of establishing peace, a message intimately linked to the official imaging of Augustus post-Actium as well as being of the outmost urgency as an invocation by Butrint to the victor.57 Combining these associations with those of civic and magisterial leadership would have stressed the type of peace Butrint was looking for and have emphasised its loyalty to the princeps. In other words, the event occasioning the dedication was undoubtedly the formal celebration of the refoundation of the city in or shortly after 27 BC. A single fragment may indicate the presence of a further honorific statue of quite different form (cat. 5, Fig. 7.10). It is a fragment of the left shoulder and immediate chest area of a life-size male figure. A series of long, well-formed drapery folds cover most of the piece; however, just visible behind them is part of the nude torso and axilla of the figure. The drapery folds, in other words, cannot have depicted a toga or himation but appears to be the edge of a chlamys, thrown over the shoulder.58 The figure would thus have been shown

in heroic nudity and may have represented an individual in the guise of Diomedes or Jupiter, or a person associated with heroized, ideal manhood.59 It is possible that it depicted a deity and did not represent an individualized depiction. However, the statue type is used as honorific dedications to members of the imperial family as well as to patrons of particular civic standing and public devotion, and, given the interest in honorific statuary at Butrint, the possibility that it was used in this manner is tempting. The use of the heroic nude type was chosen for two bust portraits of young men and is hence not undocumented at Butrint: a bust portrait of a young man styled in the manner of Antinous discovered in the area to the west of the Theatre in 1970, and a bare-chested figure with chlamys and shoulder-brooch, but unfortunately with the head missing, was found in the forum area in the mid 1980s.60

Statues of deities Among the finds from the recent excavations, images of deities are somewhat ephemeral and difficult to establish given the extremely fragmentary nature of the pieces.

7  Roman sculpture from Butrint: a review of recent finds

115

Figure 7.11. Fragment of draped female figure

Figure 7.13. Fragment of upper arm with sleeve

Certain fragments from works of smaller size may be interpreted as votives: a couple of fragments are from figures of under life-size; a couple of pieces appear to be from statuettes; and a single example was clearly a figurine (cat. 14). However, large-scale sculptures that may be associated with divine representations were present. An over life-sized marble (right) hand, found in the 1980s, may pertain to a standing deity holding a spear; the detailing of the hand is summary but from the carving it is clear that the arm was extended along the side of the figure with the hand designed to be seen in three-quarter view.61 Among the recent finds, such as the fragment of upper arm with sleeve and the drapery fragment, their size as well as the style of the clothing suggests that these are of divine rather than individualized figures (cat. 7–10). The partial and broken character is particularly frustrating in the cases were nothing beyond part of a nude leg or arm survives, making any attribution vague in the extreme (cat. 11–13). However, the broad range of sizes of figures highlights the religious landscape of the forum/sanctuary area, and illustrates how the dedications were clearly well articulated and diverse in character. The slightly under life-size fragment of an upper arm appears to have been carved separately and intended for insertion into a statue, as suggested by remains of a flat, smooth surface at the uppermost edge of the piece (cat. 9, Fig. 7.13). The arm is covered by a sleeve in heavy fabric, which opens in an elegant V-shape and appears to have been decorated with a band or fold along the opening. The thick material and absence of buttons suggest it belonged to a male figure. Instead, the lighter material

and movement of the fragment with drapery folds may well denote that it originally belonged to a female figure (cat. 10, Fig. 7.14). Too little survives to provide any indications of the arrangement of the dress, but the piece is undoubtedly formed part of the skirt. The indication of movement, evident in the delicate arrangement of curves and counter-curves of the folds, is noteworthy. For the two leg fragments no attribution beyond belonging to male figures can be made and they may pertain to any number of youthful deities and heroes for whom whole or partial nudity was appropriate (cat. 11–12). For the fragment of the figurine, the hairstyle provides better indications (cat. 14, Fig. 7.15). The piece is worn, and the small size means that the coiffure is rendered somewhat schematically, but it still contains enough detail to show that the hair above the forehead and temples was pulled up, held with a band and then gathered in a simplified top-knot. Above the ears the hair was combed back in long strands, presumably to be gathered in a bun at the back. The hairstyle was used by various female deities but most commonly by Venus, to whom the figurine may have been a dedication. Of finds from excavations in the 1980s, the lower part of a statuette of a Venus figure, depicted in the manner of Venus Knidia with a dolphin support, attest to her cult at Butrint.62 So may a fragment of a life-size female figure of which only the very rear of the head with hair gathered a bun survives.63 The hair is held in place by a band and gathered into a simple looped bun at the nape of the neck; a style that finds parallels among depictions of Venus, Muses or Diana. Of particular interest is its ideal three-quarter viewpoint from the rear, which may suggest that the figure formed part of

Inge Lyse Hansen

116

The marble base with its triangular mortise was clearly intended for a statue (cat. 16, Fig. 7.17). The shape of the mortise suggests that it was intended for a standing figure placed close to the front edge of the base, parts of the banded upper border of which still remains. At the rear of the mortise, a combination of tenon and ‘dowel’ hole indicates that the point of fixture of the figure was relatively small and needed securing carefully. It is hence tempting to suggest that the base may have been designed for a figure in bronze, though no other indication, beyond faint specks of green oxidized metal, survive. That bronze statues of a certain size were displayed at Butrint is evidenced by a single find: a life-size finger preserved only by its first two digits, which was discovered with the over life-size togate statue in 2002.66

Discussion

Figure 7.12. Fragment of leg of draped figure

a sculpture group rather than being a single dedication. Lastly, a handsome and graceful female statuette wearing a double-belted chiton highlights the quality and elegance of the marble figures from Butrint.64

Other types of works Two fragmentary pieces provide suggestive indications of two forms of sculpture otherwise highly ephemeral in the assemblages from Butrint: architectural sculpture and figures in bronze. A fragment, found with the life-size togate statue in the infill of the drain, represents the front edge of a plinth, on top of which a hand rests on a small, stylized rock (cat. 15, Fig. 7.16). The gesture may be linked to a depiction of a fallen warrior or hero, but it is uncertain how this would have been displayed. The subject matter and the small size of the figure could conceivably make it appropriate as pedimental sculpture, rather than as a single, freestanding piece. More clearly a fragment from a relief is part of a female head found with the over life-size togate figure.65 It was designed to be seen only in three-quarter view, and though it may be a stray fragment from a sarcophagus, a series of deep attachment holes at the top of the head suggests a more public setting in which elaborate added details were used.

The extremely fragmentary nature of the sculptural finds combined with their often complex depositional histories naturally complicates assessments of their original place of display. However, apart from a few possible cases, no finds from the forum area, representing the bulk of the material, look intrusive. Nor indeed do the sculptural pieces from Diaporit and the Triconch Palace look out of place in those contexts, though they are too few to judge. In other words, it seems likely that despite the systematic breaking up of the sculptures, the pieces were not moved far. This is supported by the reworking history of the over life-size togate statue (cat. 3). Its likely imperial depiction and extrovert gesture would make it eminently suitable as a dedication in the main civic area of the city where it was found. Indeed, the remains of what may well be a substantial statue base was discovered in situ fronting the forum piazza close to were the statue was discovered. After its removal, the attempts at reconfiguring the statue clearly took place in this area and hence it seems likely that it was not moved far. Similarly, once entirely abandoned, not even the later, presumed medieval, repositioning of the figure moved it far, but left it close to where it had been worked. Other statues were gathered in the Theatre, which presumably acted as a ‘collection point’ for works from the immediate area. The process of breaking up the sculptures that is evident in this assemblage too, suggests that the Theatre, like the northern-most part of the forum piazza remained accessible at least for a while after the earthquake damage visible elsewhere. The size and typological range of the works discovered is good and from the forum area there is evidence for a range of works from over life-size figures to figurines. Numerically, statues interpreted as representing deities outweigh any other category; significant, though, is the evidence for the number and diversity of those classified as dedications to individuals. Other than affirming an undoubted pertinence to the forum area in general, it highlights the investment in honorific statue dedications and the aspirations of the city and its elite. One objective

7  Roman sculpture from Butrint: a review of recent finds

117

Figure 7.14. Fragment with drapery folds

Figure 7.15. Brow and hair of a Venus(?) figurine

Figure 7.16. Fragment with remains of a hand resting on a rock

Figure 7.17. Fragment of a statue base

was clearly to highlight Butrint’s Roman status and its links to Rome, through dedications to the imperial family and by displaying an awareness of Roman metropolitan styles and iconographic forms. Indeed, the statue dedications are numerous in the period when this new Roman identity was created and developed, that is, in the Augustan and late Julio-Claudian periods and in the early 2nd century AD when provincial boundaries were again redrawn, now making Butrint part of the province of Epirus. Comparing the sculptural finds with those from Phoenice, it is evident that Butrint not only adopted metropolitan Roman forms but chose to distance itself from the styles associated with the former Chaeonian capital. Instead of drawing on local workshops Butrint appears to have looked to workshops in mainland Achaea for its commissions. That neighbouring Phoenice chose not to do the same highlights the use of sculptural dedications to image civic status, as well as the regional competition between the

two cities. During the imperial period Phoenice may have been inspired in its iconographic choices by the works displayed at Butrint, but its workshop tradition, as well as elements of its local style, continued: an attempt no doubt at emphasising its long traditions and ancient status. By drawing on non-local workshops, Butrint instead sought to project a more cosmopolitan image of itself, as a city with empire-wide links, and as a city of primary standing in the immediate region.

Catalogue 1. Head of boy, two joining fragments forming crown of head (Fig. 7.9) Provenance: FOR 866 (2007). SF 1038 Dimensions: 165 × 150 × 120 mm and 85 × 69 × 39 mm (mortise 25 × 26 mm, 39 mm deep). Medium-grained, snowwhite marble. Date: First half of 1st century AD (probably Neronian)

118

Inge Lyse Hansen

Rear and crown of a head of a life-size portrait of a boy. Face, ears and brow entirely missing in what appears as deliberate damage. Rear central whirl of hair with good rhythmical arrangement of the locks, but only minimal articulation of texture and volume as may be expected from a piece from the top rear part of a head. Central square mortise hole at the base of the head. 2. Life-size togate statue (Figs 7.3 and 7.5) Provenance: Forum, context 98, SF 0300; currently Butrint Museum inv. 538 Dimensions: c. 1.65 m; height of base: 70 mm; original height: c. 1.90 m. Pentelic marble. Date: mid 2nd century AD Attachments: head and left hand, both of which were carved separately. Mortise for the head: diameter at shoulder level, 180 mm; max. depth, 230 mm. Left hand added at wrist with shallow, flat butt-join and held in place by pin set in dowel-hole 7 mm in diameter. A life-size standing figure wearing an imperial-style toga and patrician shoes; the roughly triangular shape of the base suggests that it was designed to be displayed in a niche. The head and left hand were carved separately and attached, now both missing. The statue is carved with great skill and an eye for underlying form, which nevertheless achieves a vivid play of chiaroscuro in the handling of the folds. Unusually, the right arm is held against the chest rather than along the side. 3. Over life-size togate statue, reworked and unfinished (Fig. 7.6) Provenance: Forum area, found within a small alley by the northeast corner of the forum piazza; Butrint Museum inv. 539 Dimensions: 1.98 m; original height c. 2.70 m. Pentelic marble. Date: Augustan Over life-size standing figure originally wearing a Republican toga without sinus and patrician shoes. Remains of original drapery folds still survive along the lower hem at the front; in the fan-like arrangement of folds from the left hip and across the lower legs; in a shallow V-shape at the top representing the lower neckline folds of the tunic; and, in particular, along the side and rear of the right leg. These last run in an uninterrupted series of broad folds pointing to a single layer of fabric without the additional folds of the sinus. Two reworking attempts are visible: firstly, an attempt at reducing it in size and overall volume, secondly, preparation of the chest and hip area for use as a bust; both attempts were abandoned. 4. Two joining fragments forming right shoulder of over life-size togate statue (Fig. 7.8) Provenance: Forum, context 26, SF 0007 Dimensions: 460 × 290 mm. Square mortise 45 × 45 × 120 mm; trapezoidal mortise on top of shoulder 40 × 45–60 × 90 mm; five dowel, or attachment, holes along the edge of the sleeve 8 mm diam. Pentelic marble. Date: Augustan Two joining fragments that together make up a right shoulder with sleeve of a tunic. The arm was attached separately with substantial tenons but enough survives of the axilla to show that the arm was raised up in an adlocutio-style gesture. The pieces match the over life-size togate statue in material, measurements and style and, in the absence of other suitable statues, it seems likely that they originate from this. Found with a large quantity of marble chips (c. 21 kg) and fragments (27.5 kg) that similarly appear to originate from the reworking of the togate statue.

5. Shoulder fragment with drapery (Fig. 7.10) Provenance: Forum (area 15), context 883, SF 0980 Dimensions: 190 × 110 mm. White marble with veins of mica Date: 2nd century AD (Hadrianic?) Fragment of left shoulder of life-size male figure. The piece represents the upper front (chest) part of a shoulder with drapery cascading over it. Behind the drapery folds is visible the remains of the nude arm and chest of the figure, and it may have depicted a figure in heroic nudity with a mantle over his left arm and shoulder in the manner of Diomedes. The evenly spaced, thick drapery folds are deeply drilled with good sense of three-dimensionality but without dramatic chiaroscuro. 6. Two drapery fragments Provenance: Forum (area 15), context 873, SF 0994 Dimensions: 100 × 105 × 45 mm; 98 × 30 × 25 mm. Mediumgrained, snow-white marble. Date: 2nd century AD? Two fragments of drapery, possibly part of the same statue as cat. 5. Larger fragment with three thick, evenly sized folds falling straight; rear smooth and flat suggested piece was attached separately. 7. Fragment of draped female figure (Fig. 7.11) Provenance: Diaporit, context 1044, SF 0532 Dimensions: c. 265 × 235 mm (mortise c. 35 × 35 mm); slightly under life-size. Medium-grained, white marble; possibly Pentelic. Date: late 2nd century BC? Fragment of waist and upper thigh part of a draped female figure. The upper part is smoothed flat and includes a large square mortise for joining it to the torso; the lower part is broken and no further attachment features are visible. The figure wears a chiton belted at the waist with an overhang hiding the belt itself. The folds of the skirt are broad and well articulated, and arranged in vivacious diagonals interspersed with folds terminating in curling hooks of different direction. The movement of the folds are complemented by an area of clinging fabric, presumably against the thigh of the figure. The energy and movement of the drapery suggest the figure may have depicted Diana, a Niobid, a Nymph or even Nike. 8. Fragment of upper leg of a draped figure (Fig. 7.12) Provenance: Triconch Palace area, context 5343, SF 3101 Dimensions: c. 250 mm. White marble with veins of mica. Date: late 1st/early 2nd century AD. Fragment of thigh and upper shin of a draped figure. The drapery folds are shallow and flat but arranged with fluid movement. A plain area on the lower part of the piece suggests the dress was rather short, probably knee-length. 9. Fragment of upper (right?) arm with sleeve (Fig. 7.13) Provenance: Forum, context 834, SF 0800 Dimensions: 190 × 95 mm; slightly under life-size. White marble with veins of mica. Date: 2nd century AD? Fragment of an upper arm with sleeve. The edge of the sleeve is articulated with a neat fold that highlights the elegant sweeping curve of its V-shaped opening around the arm. The fabric overlaps slightly, but there is no evidence of buttons. The right edge of the fabric is carved with more detail, suggesting that the fragment is of a right arm viewed in three-quarter from the

7  Roman sculpture from Butrint: a review of recent finds front. An area of flat, smooth surface along upper part suggests that the arm was fashioned to be attached separately. The lack of buttons and the ‘heavy’ fabric used suggests it belonged to a male figure, like Dionysus or Apollo, rather than forming part of a female chiton. 10. Fragment with drapery folds (Fig. 7.14) Provenance: Forum, context 94 Dimensions: 100 × 245 × 68 mm. White, crystalline marble Date: Classicizing work of the 2nd century AD? Fragment with a series of shallow drapery folds. The folds do not overlap but fall in long, elegant curves suggesting light movement; probably from a draped female figure. The fragment is difficult to date but may be a classicizing work of the Roman imperial period. 11. Fragment of lower thigh of an under life-size male figure Provenance: Forum (area 15), context 866, SF 0963 Dimensions: 200 × 114–65 × 95–90 mm. Medium-grained, snow-white marble. Date: Roman imperial Fragment of lower thigh of a nude male figure. Piece broken above knee and at level of mid thigh. Little detail but good sense of volume and subtle muscle articulation; rasp marks across surface. 12. Lower left leg of a statuette of a nude male figure Provenance: Forum (area 6), context 839, SF 0992 Dimensions: 235 mm, 72 mm diam. Pentelic marble? Date: Roman imperial Lower left leg of standing nude male figure. Piece broken at level of ankle and above the knee. Good articulation of musculature and overall volume; form of knee not detailed. 13. Fragment of an arm of a statuette Provenance: Triconch Palace area, context 2084, SF 1168 Dimensions: c. 63 mm, 78 mm diameter. White marble. Date: unknown Fragment of nude upper arm or lower leg of a figure; the lack of muscular detailing suggests it was an arm. 14. Brow and hair of a Venus(?) figurine (Fig. 7.15) Provenance: Forum, context 829 Dimensions: 52 × 58 × 46 mm. Medium-grained white marble. Date: Roman imperial Worn fragment of a female face and front part of hair above forehead; broken below eyebrows. From the forehead the hair is pulled up, held with a band and gathered in what resembles a topknot; above the ears it is combed back – possibly to be gathered in a bun at the back. Remains of mortise at base of head. 15. Fragment with remains of a hand resting on a rock (Fig. 7.16) Provenance: Forum, context 99, SF 0132 Dimensions: 270 × 180 × 160 mm. White marble, Pentelic? Date: Roman imperial Fragment of front edge of the plinth for an under life-size figure. On an irregularly shaped and stylized rock rests the left hand of a figure, broken at the level of the wrist; the thumb, ring finger and little finger survives. It is not clear if the piece was intended as a freestanding work or as pedimental sculpture; the subject matter is undoubtedly that of a fallen warrior or hero.

119

16. Fragment of a statue base (Fig. 7.17) Provenance: Forum, context 166, SF 0852 Dimensions: 145 × 260 × 135–110 mm. Triangular shaped mortise 151–87 × 120 mm, 14 mm in depth; deeper oval-shaped area 46 × 20 mm, 16 mm in depth; tenon 26 × 20 mm. Pentelic marble. Date: Roman imperial Fragment from upper part of a statue base with flat band bordered by semi-circular mouldings at front. In centre of upper surface are the remains of a roughly triangular mortise, the rear point of which forms a deeper, roughly oval-shaped, area; immediately in front of this is round tenon, the top of which is level with the surface of the base. The marble of the upper face is pitted and bubbly as if subjected to heat; faint green traces may suggest the use of bronze.

References Bergemann, J. (1998) Die römische Kolonie von Butrint und die Romaniserung Griechenlands. Munich, Verlag Dr. friedrich Pfeil. Bol, R. (1984) Das Statuenprogramm des Herodes-AtticusNymphaeum (Olympische Forschungen 15). Berlin, Walter de Gruyter. Bowden, W. and Përzhita, L. (2004) Archaeology in the landscape of Roman Epirus: preliminary report on the Diaporit excavations, 2002–3. Journal of Roman Archaeology 17: 413–33. Bowden, W. and Hodges, R. (2011) (eds) Butrint 3. Excavations at the Triconch Palace. Oxford, Oxbow. Brilliant, R. (1963) Gesture and Rank in Roman art (Memoirs of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences 14). New Haven, Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences. Budina, D. (1971) Harta Akeologjike e bregdetit Jon dhe e pellgut të Delvinës. Iliria 1: 275–342. Burnett, A., Amandry, M. and Ripollès, P. (1992) Roman Provincial Coinage. Vol 1: From the Death of Caesar to the Death of Vitellius (44 BC–AD 69). London/Paris, British Museum Press/Bibliothèque Nationale. Çondi, Dh. (1988) Gjetje arkeologjike nga rrethina e Butrinti. In N. Ceka (ed.), Butroti:Permbledhje Studimesh: 237–48. Tirana, 8 Nentori. Çondi, Dh. and Hansen, I. L. (2007) The marble finds from the Temple, in Crowson, A. and Gilkes, O. J., The archaeology of the Vrina Plain: an assessment: 128–31. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint: An Assessment: 119–64. Oxford, Oxbow. de Grazia Vanderpool, C. (2003) Roman portraiture. The many faces of Corinth. In C. K. Williams and N. Bookidis (eds), Corinth. The Centenary 1896–1996: 369–84. Athens, American School of Classical Studies at Athens. De Maria, S. and Mercuri, L. (2007) Testimonianze e riflessioni sul culto di Artemide a Phoinike. In D. Berranger-Auserve (ed.), Epire, Illyrie, Maceédonie...: 147–74. Clermont-Ferrand, Centre de Recherches sur les Civilisations Antiques (CRCA). Deniaux, É. (2007) La structure politique de la colonie romaine de Buthrotum. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint. An Assessment: 33–39. Oxford, Oxbow. Fejfer, J. (2008) Roman Portraits in Context. Berlin/New York, Walter de Gruyter. Garcìa y Bellido, A. (1949) Esculturas romanas de España y Portugal. Madrid, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientìficas.

120

Inge Lyse Hansen

Gilkes, O. J. (2003) (ed.) The Theatre at Butrint. Luigi Maria Ugolini’s Excavations at Butrint 1928–1932 (Albania antica 4). London, British School at Athens. Goette, H. R. (1990) Studien zur römischen Togadarstellungen. Mainz am Rhein, Philipp von Zabern. Greenslade, S. and Hodges, R. (forthcoming) (eds) Butrint 5. Excavations on the Vrina Plain. The Roman and Byzantine Suburb. Oxford, Oxbow. Hallett, C. H. (2005) The Roman Nude. Heroic Portrait Statuary 200 BC–AD 300. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Hansen, I. L. (2007) The Trojan connection: Butrint and Rome. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint: An Assessment: 44–61. Oxford, Oxbow. Hansen, I. L. (2009) Hellenistic and Roman Butrint (Butrinti Helenistik dhe Romak). London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Hansen, I. L. (2011) Between Atticus and Aeneas: the making of a colonial elite at Roman Butrint. In R. J. Sweetman (ed.), Roman Colonies in the First Century of their Foundation: 85–100. Oxford, Oxbow. Hansen, I. L. (2012) Një statujë togati e kohës së Antoninit nga forumi i Butrintit. In S. Kamana (ed.), Butrinti në shekuj: 91–106. Tirana, Albanian Heritage Foundation. Hansen, I. L. (forthcoming) Elite living in death. The sarcophagi from the Temple mausoleum. In S. Greenslade and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 5. Excavations on the Vrina Plain. The Roman and Byzantine Suburb. Oxford, Oxbow. Havé-Nikolaus, F. (1998) Untersuchen zu den kaiserzeitlichen Togastatuen griechischer Provenienz. Mainz am Rhein, Philipp von Zabern. Hernandez, D. R. and Çondi, Dh. (2008) The Roman forum at Butrint (Epirus) and its development from Hellenistic to mediaeval times. Journal of Roman Archaeology 21: 275–92. Hodges, R. (2008) The Rise and Fall of Byzantine Butrint (Shkëlqimi dhe rënia e Butrintit bizantin). London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Kleiner, D. E. E. (1992) Roman Sculpture. New Haven/London, Yale University Press. Koch, G. (1988) Sarkophage der römischen Kaiserzeit in Albanien. Mitteilungen des deutschen Archäologischen Instituts (Römische Abteilung) 95: 235–56. Lippold, G. (1936) Die Skulpturen des Vaticanischen Museums III.1. Berlin, Walter de Gruyter. Maderna, C. (1988) Iuppiter, Diomedes und Merkur als Vorbilder für römische Bildnisstatuen. Heidelberg, Verlag Archäologie und Geschichte. Marin, E. and Vickers, M. (eds) (2004) The Rise and Fall of an Imperial Shrine. Roman Sculpture from the Augusteum at Narona. Split, Arheoloski Muzej. Mercuri, L. (2005a) Nuove sculture di Phoinike. In S. De Maria and Sh. Gjongecaj (eds), Phoiniki III. Rapporto preliminare sulla campagna di scavi e ricerche 2002–2003: 187–94. Bologna, Ante Quem. Mercuri, L. (2005b) Sculture e scultori a Phoinike tra età ellenistica ed epoca romana. Ocnus 13: 229–49. Palagia, O. (2010) Sculptures from the Peloponnese in the Roman imperial period. In A. D. Rizakis and Cl. E. Lepenioti (eds), Roman Peloponnese III. Society, Economy and Culture under the Roman Empire: Continuity and Innovation (Meletemata 63): 431–45. Athens/Paris, Centre de recherches de l’Antiquité grecque et romaine/De Boccard. Pojani, I. (2007) The monumental togate statue from Butrint. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint: An Assessment: 62–77. Oxford, Oxbow.

Pollo, C. (1990) Die Germanicus-Inschrift aus Buthrotum. Tyche 5: 105–8. Reynolds, P., Hernandez, D. R. and Çondi, Dh. (2007) Excavations in the Roman forum of Buthrotum (Butrint): first to third century pottery assemblages and trade. Acta Rei Cretariae Romanae Fautorum 40: 71–88. Ugolini, L. M. (1937) Butrinto. Il mito d’Enea, gli scavi. Rome, Istituto Grafico Tiberino. Ugolini, L. M. (1942) L’acropoli di Butrinto (Albania antica 3). Rome, Scalia. Ugolini, L. M. (2003) Gli scavi del teatro. In O. J. Gilkes (ed.), The Theatre at Butrint. Luigi Maria Ugolini’s Excavations at Butrint 1928–1932 (Albania antica 4): 75–106. London, British School at Athens. Ugolini, L. M. and Pojani, I. (2003) The sculpture from the theatre. In O. J. Gilkes (ed.), The Theatre at Butrint. Luigi Maria Ugolini’s Excavations at Butrint 1928–1932 (Albania antica 4): 191–247. London, British School at Athens. Vermeule, C. C. (1959) Hellenistic and Roman Cuirassed Statues. Berytus 13: 1–82. Vermeule, C. C. (1968) Roman Imperial Art in Greece and Asia Minor. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press.

Notes 1 See Ugolini’s preface to Butrinto. Il mito d’Enea. Gli Scavi, written in 1936 and published posthumously the year after: Con una commozione più intense di quella provata commentando Omero sulle rovine di Micene, ora, io, sull’acropoli di Butrinto, da me scoperta e scavata, leggo Virgilio. I vincoli spirituali tra Roma e Butrinto e tra queste città e Troia diventa ancora più stretti (It is with more intense emotion than that experienced reading Homer among the ruins of Mycenae that now, on the acropolis of Butrint – discovered and excavated by me – I am reading Virgil. The spiritual links between Rome and Butrint, and between this city and Troy, are getting stronger and stronger); Ugolini 1937: 12, cf. 15–18. 2 Bergemann 1998: 125–61; Ugolini 1937: 135–48; Ugolini 1942: 169–77; Ugolini and Pojani 2003. 3 Budina 1971; Çondi 1988; Pojani 2007: 62–64; Pollo 1990. 4 Budina 1971; Pollo 1990. Both are displayed in the Butrint Museum inv. 503 and 505. 5 I am grateful to Dhimitër Çondi for the permission to examine hitherto unpublished material from excavations undertaken by him at Butrint and the Vrina Plain, and to undertake a detailed study of the over life-size statue from the forum area. My warm thanks also to Iris Pojani for permitting me to reproduce parts of the study of this statue published in Pojani 2007, to Elizabeth Bartman, Barbara Borg, Amanda Claridge, Eve D’Ambra and Susan Walker who all offered advice on the two togate statues; and to David Bescoby and Jane Fejfer for their helpful comments on this paper. 6 Preliminary studies of certain finds have been published in Hansen 2009; Hansen 2012; Pojani 2007. 7 Cf. the discussion of the sarcophagus finds from the Vrina Plain in Gilkes, Hysa and Çondi in this volume. Detailed discussion of the sculptural finds will be included with the final archaeological analysis of the relevant finds areas, cf. Hansen forthcoming. 8 For an overview of the Vrina Plain finds see Gilkes, Hysa and Çondi in this volume; see also Çondi and Hansen 2007.

7  Roman sculpture from Butrint: a review of recent finds 9 For an overview of this material see Pojani 2007. 10 For examples see the statuettes of a Muse and of Artemis, and the life-size statue of a man in himation, all found within the treasury building next to the theatre, as well as the head of Asclepius found in the theatre; Bergemann 1998: 145, 148, 154, figs 16, 86, 88; Ugolini 1942: 108–9, 172, figs 108–9, 170–1; Ugolini and Pojani 2003: 219–21, figs 8.22–24. 11 For details of the sculpture finds from Phoenice see Mercuri 2005a; Mercuri 2005b. 12 De Maria and Mercuri 2007. 13 Mercuri 2005b. 14 Mercuri 2005b: 233–8. 15 In the Hellenistic period, a stronger link with Phoenice is plausible. Artistically, the abundant use of parts worked separately and attached, which is one of the Phoenice characteristics identified by Mercuri (2005: 234), is evident in the manufacture of the statue of a man in himation from Butrint. 16 Cf. Hansen 2007: 48–50. Ugolini suggested that the portrait of Augustus may have been fashioned from an earlier portrait, cf. Ugolini and Pojani 2003, 224–5 17 Certain of the Attic sarcophagi fragments found on the Vrina Plain find parallels in works from Tyros, see Çondi and Hansen 2007, though the use – as in several of the sculptures from Butrint – of Pentelic marble may point to an Attic workshop, cf. Palagia 2010. 18 Bergemann 1998: 133–4; Ugolini and Pojani 2003: 226–7, 233–5, 250; Vermeule 1959: 40, no 49; Vermeule 1968: 175–177. See also de Grazia Vanderpool 2003: 374 and Hansen 2007: 48–49 for Roman iconographic influences mixed with classicizing (Attic?) forms at Corinth and Butrint; and Palagia 2010 for the use of Pentelic marble as indicative of Attic workshops. 19 For the articulation of the city’s Roman status and links of patronage to Rome, see Hansen 2007; Hansen 2011. 20 For these excavations see, Bowden and Hodges 2011 (Triconch Palace); Bowden and Përzhita 2004 (Diaporit); Greenslade and Hodges forthcoming and Greenslade in this volume (Vrina Plain settlement). 21 Triconch context 5343, SF 3101 (stone rubble layer, possible from a wall) and context 2084, SF 1168 (medieval refuse dump in the Merchant’s House). 22 Diaporit context 1044, SF 0532 (late antique fill, naturally formed after collapse of a wall). 23 See Gilkes, Hysa and Çondi in this volume; as well as Çondi 1988; Çondi and Hansen 2007; Koch 1988: 255. 24 Cf. Bowden and Përzhita 2004; Greenslade in this volume. 25 Bowden and Hodges 2011. 26 Hernandez and Çondi 2008: 288–90. 27 See Bescoby in this volume. 28 Hernandez and Çondi 2008: 289–90. 29 Ugolini and Pojani 2003: 204, 211; cf. Gilkes 2003: figs 6.4–5 30 Gilkes 2003: 177–8, cf. figs 6.7–8. 31 Ugolini and Pojani 2003: 211–12; unfortunately, Ugolini does not itemize the works from the theatre, but identifies two groups of figures: those slightly over life-size of around 2.20 m in height, and smaller ones of up to 1.50 m in height. 32 Ugolini and Pojani 2003: 204, 206, 211. See, for instance, the draped female figure of which only the lower half survives or the portrait of a young boy found in several fragments,

33 34 35

36 37

38 39

40 41 42 43 44 45

46 47 48

49 50

51

52

121

Bergemann 1998: 141, fig. 83; Ugolini and Pojani 2003: 213, 228–30, 248 250 (Butrint Museum inv 299 and 533). See Gilkes 2003: 177–8. On the damage of the Theatre see Gilkes 2003: 178, who notes that the stairs had been robbed of their limestone block threads prior to the infilling of the area. Cf. Gilkes 2003: 178. Ugolini suggests that certain pieces remained partially visible and that the reduction of accessible parts continued over a long period; Ugolini and Pojani 2003: 211. Pojani 2007: 65–68. The levels of the Theatre and the northern part of the forum are roughly equal, while the southern part of the forum is lower, pers. comm., D. Bescoby. See also Bescoby in this volume on the effect of the earthquake on the forum piazza. Reynolds, Hernandez and Çondi 2007: 5. Leg fragment: FOR context 99, SF 0133 (92 mm, 85 mm diam., identified at the time of excavation as a sarcophagus fragment); fragment with hand: FOR context 99, SF 0132. Hernandez and Çondi 2008: 291; Reynolds, Hernandez and Çondi 2007: 5. Hernandez and Çondi 2008: 289; Reynolds, Hernandez and Çondi 2007: 5. Pojani 2007: 66. Bronze finger (55 mm, 19 mm diam.): Butrint Museum inv 292; marble head fragment (13 × 10 mm): Butrint stores inv 230. Hernandez and Çondi 2008: 289 who conflate the reworking and the final deposition of the statue. See Hodges (Chapter 1) in this volume; and Hodges 2008: 78–94 for a discussion of the 10th/11th-century revival of Butrint and associated changes to the urban fabric. The aim is to publish the sculptural pieces excavated by the Dh. Çondi and the Institute of Archaeology in the forum area together with those made by the Butrint Foundation as part of the final publication of the finds from this area. Butrint Stores inv. 42. Epigraphic evidence for elite families and local dignitaries at butrint is scant but see Deniaux 2007; Hansen 2011, for discussions of the evidence. Two female portraits from the Theatre area can be dated to the Claudian-Neronian period, Bergemann 1998: 64, 150–1, figs 38–40. Note also the output of coinage from the Butrint mint in this period, after a complete hiatus under Tiberius and Gaius. Cf. Burnett, Amandry and Ripollès 1992: nos 1395–1410, cf. Hansen 2007. Preliminary discussion of this piece have appeared in Hansen 2009: 75–77; Pojani 2007: 64. A detailed account (in Albanian) has appeared in Hansen 2012. Nonius Balbus: Fejfer 2008: 219–23, fig. 140; Goette 1990: 118, Ba91. My thanks go to Jane Fejfer for drawing my attention to this. Ulpius Crotonensis: Goette 1990: 141 no. Ca2. Narona Vespasian: Marin and Vickers 2004: 94–102. See also Goette 1990: nos. Ba249 and Bb93 for statues holding the edge of the sinus and wearing (variant) types of the toga with overhanging umbo. For examples of types with parallel balteus and umbo folds, see Goette 1990: 49–50 and pls 20.3–5, 21.1–6 as well as page 135, no. Bb101, pl. 22.2 for an example of high balteus combined with U-shaped umbo. See Goette 1990: 135, nos Bb87, Bb89 and Bb91 for parallels.

122

Inge Lyse Hansen

53 Olympia: Life-size figures: Bol 1984: 164–5, nos 32–33, and 193–4, no. 50; Goette 1990: 136, nos 106–108 and 121. Over life-size figure: Bol 1984: 46–49, 193–94; see also Goette 1990: 50 note 265 and 136, no. Bb121 and text as part of Bb106–108. Corinth: Havé-Nikolas 1998: 127–8, cat 20, pl. 14.2. 54 Pojani 2007. 55 Hansen 2011. 56 Florence (Museo Archeologico): Goette 1990: 106, no. Aa2; Kleiner 1992: 33–34. Vatican (Sala a Croce Greca, inv. 592): Goette 1990: 123, no. Ba188; Lippold 1936: 206–7, pl. 56; Mérida (Museum Inv 94): Garcìa y Bellido 1949: 184, no. 207; Goette 1990: 128, no. Ba 304. The arm of the Vatican statue is a later restoration, and appears set too low, but the gesture is accepted by Lippold as original. I am grateful to Amanda Claridge and Glenys Davies for drawing my attention to the two Julio-Claudian statues.

57 Cf. the descriptions of the equestrian statues of Domitian and Justinian, Statius Silvae 1.1.37; Procopius Buildings 1.2.11–12. 58 They could conceivably pertain to a bare-chested figure in himation, though the contained, bunched aspect of the folds make it more likely that they belong to a smaller garment, like a chlamys. 59 Hallett 2005: passim; Maderna 1988. 60 Bust found west of the theatre: Budina 1971; Pojani 2007: 64, fig. 5.8. Butrint Museum inv. 505. The bust found in the forum is unpublished, Butrint Stores inv. 42. 61 Butrint Museum inv. 298. 62 Butrint Stores inv. 18. 63 Butrint Stores inv. 367. 64 Butrint Stores inv. 23. 65 Butrint Stores inv. 230. 66 Butrint Museum inv. 292.

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between   the 1st–13th centuries Simon Greenslade

Background The Vrina Plain lies to the south of the city of Butrint, across the Vivari Channel that links Lake Butrint to the Ionian Sea (Fig. 8.1).1 The pastoral aspect of this low-lying area visible today is largely a result of the implementation of a state-run collective agricultural policy by the communist government of the 1960s and 1970s. With the institution of state farms at the villages of Xarra and Vrina, woodland that had covered much of the area was removed and a grid of large irrigation channels was dug across the plain in order to drain the marshy area, thereby creating a usable space for crops and animal grazing. Until recently, archaeological investigation of the

plain had been limited. The first scientific exploration of the classical Greek and Roman remains in the environs of Butrint was undertaken by the Italian inter-war archaeological mission to Albania led by Luigi Maria Ugolini.2 This mission noted the presence of a number of extant Roman ruins on the plain but, because of the dense woodland and marshy conditions, made no attempt to clear or record them in any detail (Fig. 8.2). Subsequent work in the 1960s and the 1990s was largely restricted to a number of investigations focused around the standing remains, along with some surface survey, some smallscale excavation trenches and the recording of finds made during further land improvement.3 However, since 1995

Figure 8.1. Aerial view of the Vrina Plain excavations with Butrint beyond

124

Simon Greenslade

Figure 8.2. The Vrina Plain from Mount Sotira, 1920s (Instituti i Arkeologjisë)

the Butrint Foundation has conducted an extensive field survey programme across this area. Through a combination of field-walking and geophysical survey, extensive remains of destroyed masonry structures and associated ceramics were identified.4 This led to the conclusion that this may have been a suburb of Roman Butrint and if this was so that it could be evidence of the colony created by Julius Caesar in 44 BC and re-established by Augustus after his victory at Actium in 31 BC. As a result, since 2002 a major archaeological assessment has been undertaken on the Vrina Plain in order to test this theory and to understand the extent and character of the archaeological remains.5 Initially the excavations were centred on one of the large drainage ditches that criss-cross the plain. The course of the ditch chosen had been deliberately diverted around a series of upstanding remains, consisting of a number of buildings in varying states of preservation. These included a large semi-circular building of tile and masonry, a tworoomed structure just to the east with walls standing to a height of 2.60 m from the modern ground-surface, and the corner of a building that could be tied into a potentially large courtyard-house, which had been identified during the geophysical survey. The ditch was treated as a modern evaluation trench: the sides and base were cut back and cleaned, and all exposed features fully recorded. In all, an area roughly 250 m in length was investigated. Following on from these trial excavations, a number of areas were looked at in greater detail (Fig. 8.3). One of

these was centred on an area defined by what appears to be a series of column monuments; another was focused on a rectangular structure, located to the southeast of these.6 The largest and most intense area of excavation, however, was centred on the upstanding buildings. Covering an area roughly 65 × 45 m the excavations have been carried out using modern stratigraphic techniques, and have produced over a thousand contexts and over six hundred small finds, including almost five hundred coins. Large quantities of Roman and medieval pottery have also been collected from the excavations. Together this has enabled the creation of an important picture of a changing landscape from the 1st century AD to the 13th century AD (Table 8.1, Plate 8.1).

The early history: 1st–2nd century AD Like many coastal locations within the Mediterranean Basin, the Vrina Plain is a dynamic and continually evolving landscape, involving a complex interaction of natural and human processes over the last 15,000 years. Changes in the sea levels and the climate, as well as tectonic movements, have all had a pronounced effect on the plain’s evolution.7 Analysis of core samples taken across the area indicate that the entire plain once formed part of a large coastal bay of the Ionian Sea stretching potentially as far as Phoenice to the north and Mursia to the southeast.8 From around 3000 BC, the bay appears to have begun to silt up with alluvial

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

125

Figure 8.3. The Vrina Plain excavations

material brought down by the Pavllas and Bistrica Rivers, the two main rivers of the area. This created a mixture of marsh and wetland areas along with small, dispersed islands separated by small channels. From around 500 BC, this appears to have become more pronounced, with the growth of large deltas to the seaward side of Butrint. By the Roman period, continued silting and a falling water table left a number of topographical highpoints along with well-drained alluvial soils dissected by water channels. These higher areas were ideal for cultivation and the evidence from the excavations would seem to indicate that the advantages were soon recognised with settlement spreading beyond the confines of the earlier city. The earliest evidence for occupation appears to date to the mid 1st century AD when a series of buildings of varying sizes were constructed across the site, some of which fronted onto a road (Fig. 8.4). To the west of the site, the remains of a large structure have been found,

fronting onto the channel. Due to the soft nature of the underlying deposits the floor of the western room had been laid over a layer of compacted limestone pieces. Two rooms located along the southern edge of the structure were partially excavated and, although no floor levels were found, fragments of painted wall plaster were noticed still adhering to the walls. The remains of a similarly aligned building with at least three rooms, was also located in the trial excavations carried out in the drainage ditch to the north. These two buildings appear to have been separated by an east-west aligned wall that from its position appears to have defined a boundary, implying this area was divided into two plots both of which could be accessed from the eastern roads by two separate entrances. To the east of the site, the remains of at least five rooms of a more substantial building have been found. Unlike the western structures, this building survived by being incorporated into the later sequence of buildings that were

126

Simon Greenslade Table 8.1. Overview of the development of the Vrina Plain settlement

Date Mid 1st century AD

VP area Initial occupation: Road system and a number of large well-appointed houses constructed. Some of these houses incorporate a number of shops fronting the roads. 2nd to early 3rd century AD Development expands: A large cistern and a series of new houses built. Mid 3rd to early 4th century AD Occupation changes: Site taken over by a single individual who constructs a large double peristyle domus. Public side of the house focused on a large apsidal hall in which the owner would have greeted his clients. The southern area was the private domain of the owner. Mid 4th century AD Domus remains occupied with some additions: An encasing wall built behind the apse of the hall and a new bath-house built to the east of this. An octagonal tower added to western bathhouse. Late 4th century AD Villa abandoned as a result of an earthquake. Early 5th century AD Site reoccupied: The apse of the apsidal hall is repaired and two buttress walls built either side of the apse to support the new build. The southern courtyard partially levelled over leaving only the inner pool of the central feature in use. The large eastern cistern is altered. Mid 5th century AD Possible abandonment (?) due to environmental changes: Rising water table. Similar situation suggested as a reason for the abandonment of the unfinished Triconch palace, c. AD 420–5. The collapse of the aqueduct may also have affected the occupation. Late 5th/early 6th century AD Site reoccupied: Becomes a religious centre focused on a new basilica built out from the southern wall of the apsidal hall. The basilica partially covered the northern peristyle and courtyard of the earlier domus. Mosaic floor laid in central space of southern basilica. Along with the construction of a number of new buildings, rooms of the domus still in use either for residential and official purposes or to accommodate visitors/pilgrims. The reconstruction was financed by private benefactors. Early to mid 6th century Number of alterations undertaken due to the instability of the building as a result of changing environmental conditions. Mid 6th century AD Church abandoned: Building partially destroyed by fire. 7th and 8th century AD Abandoned. Mid 9th to mid 10th century AD Site re-occupied: Becomes the residence of a Byzantine official. The material culture along with the coins and the discovery of five lead seals show that the site had become a centre of administration; may also have had a manufactural role as indicated by a number of kilns built in various rooms of the earlier building. Late 10th century AD Building abandoned and robbed due to a rise in the water-level. The southern end of the basilica remained in use: small chapel centred on the bema and apse. Three child burials interred within the bema. 11th century AD Abandoned: The wall of the apse collapsed and the site plundered for any usable stone. Dark soils build up across the site. 12th to 13th century AD Small-scale seasonal activity outside the ruins: series of post holes cut through the black soils suggestive of animal pens. The memory of the sanctity of the site remains as a series of burials are interred within the ruins. Rock pile accumulated at edge of field, dumped over ruins where land was unworkable. 13th century AD onwards. Ecological changes as a result of agricultural intensification from the mid 11th century AD led to the emergence of swamp and wetland conditions and the virtual abandonment of the area till the reclamation of the plain in the 1960s.

constructed on the site. Only the north-western corner of this building has so far been excavated; however, it would appear that it had been built around a courtyard. This building is interesting since to the north it appears to front onto a possible road.9 Measuring c. 3.57 m wide, the road surface was made up of a compacted gritty deposit mixed with crushed shell fragments.10 Ceramics of the mid 1st century AD were recovered pressed into the surface. A series of pier bases, which appear to have formed a possible offshoot of the aqueduct, defined the northern edge of the road. The exposed section measures c. 16.30 m in length; the western end of the road appears to have turned

to the south and run along the western edge of the eastern building. To the east of this junction a third possible road has been located; it is aligned north–south, fronted by various buildings and seems to give access to the channel edge.11 The urban nature of this new occupation is inferred by the size and location of the doorways of the eastern building: its northwestern room, for example, has two large doorways along its northern and western walls, the northern door is roughly 5 m wide, and the building may hence have accommodated shops fronting the two roads. Along the western side of the north–south aligned road that ran alongside the eastern building, another structure

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

127

Aqueduct piers Road Road Shops

Courtyard

Shops Road

Boundary wall

0

Projected wall line

20 m

Figure 8.4. The mid 1st-century AD settlement

has been located. At roughly 1.50 m below the present ground level, were the remains of a rectangular structure. Comprising one room, it had an earth floor and a rough cobbled outer surface to the west. In time, the building appears to have been extended to the south. The walls of this extension were built directly onto the contemporary ground surface unlike the earlier build, which had been constructed in a foundation trench, suggesting this may have been some form of lean-to structure. Initially, this apparently humble dwelling was interpreted as a small farmhouse, built by the first settlers who established themselves on the Vrina Plain, which was in turn levelled over by the construction of the roads.12 However, new studies indicate that the level of the building is higher in places than the road, and that

their construction, according to the ceramic evidence, may be contemporary. In other words, the building fronting onto the road was part of the general urban transformation of the Vrina Plain from the mid 1st century AD. Further evidence of occupation thought to date to this period was also found to the south of the main site where a trial excavation exposed the southwest corner of a building with a very fine mosaic floor. The fragmentary remains of a second mosaic were found outside the building. The tesserae used in this floor were fairly large, c. 20 mm², suggesting that this may have been an outside surface. A partial geometric design picked out in black was noticed along the southern edge of the floor presumably forming the border to a central motif. The northern edge of the floor

Simon Greenslade

128

Road

Cistern Road Shops

Shops Road

Boundary wall

0

Projected wall line

20 m

Figure 8.5. The 2nd-century AD settlement

appears to have been formed by a wall built up against the corner of the fine mosaic room; while the footings of a pier at the western edge of the mosaic suggests that a colonnade surrounded this side of the mosaic. By the 2nd century AD, occupation of the site appears to have expanded (Fig. 8.5).13 To supply the needs for this expanding population, a new three-chambered cistern was constructed at the junction of the channel road and the main east–west road. The cistern received its water via the offshoot of the main aqueduct, the pier arcades of which ran along the southern face of the building.14 To the west of the cistern, a large rectangular structure was constructed. Accessed via a doorway located between

the western-most piers of the offshoot of the aqueduct, this new building utilised the boundary wall between the plots as its southern limit and an earlier north–south wall as its western limit. In order to fit the new dimensions of the building, the internal eastern face of this western wall was widened. A small courtyard may have fronted this end of the building as the foundations of a wide wall, possibly for a stylobate, were located up against the western exterior wall face. Along with the addition of new buildings, there are also indications that earlier buildings were altered during this period. A number of the doorways within the eastern shops were narrowed; while the internal arrangement of the

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

129

Bridge 'Baptistery' bath house

Vrina Plain suburb

Hellenistic city walls Triconch domus

0

200 m

Line of Aqueduct

Vivari Channel

Proposed roads

Figure 8.6. Reconstruction of the Vrina Plain and Butrint in the 2nd century AD

building to the west of the shops was changed following the dismantling of the original buildings northern wall. The building revealed in the trial excavations to the south of the site also appears to have been altered at this time with the colonnade surrounding the external mosaic being blocked-in and a new surface laid to the west of it. These glimpses of occupation across the site show that by the 2nd century AD a small urban community appears to have been thriving on the Vrina Plain.15 When viewed alongside evidence recovered from the excavations at the Triconch Palace and the Baptistery, which have both shown contemporary activity, it is clear that Butrint had expanded well beyond the line of the Hellenistic wall, which had originally defined the limits of the city, and that the Vrina Plain settlement formed a suburban addition to the main site (Fig. 8.6).

The 3rd century AD By the mid 3rd century, the nature of the occupation changed and the area seems to have come under the control of one individual, who constructed a large and spacious peristyle house across the site (Fig. 8.7). To allow for the construction of this large structure the earlier buildings were either demolished, as in the case of the buildings found to the west of the site, or they were integrated into the new build, as seems to be the case for the eastern shops. The road layout was also altered; with the construction of the house across the western part of the settlement a new approach-road to the bridgehead was created. 16 Central to the new complex was a large open courtyard (Fig. 8.8). Measuring c. 26 m east–west by c. 16.50 m

north–south, the courtyard contained an ornamental water feature comprising two pools, one built inside the other. The outer pool was rectangular with concave sides, meeting in points at each corner. A slight cut between the inner face of the wall and the base of the pool suggests that the internal sides of the pool were originally faced with marble. The inner pool was rectangular in shape with double apses at the eastern and western ends and niches in the centre of the north and south sides. The pool was probably fed with water from the off-shoot of the aqueduct; the water was probably piped across the rooftops, as no obvious cistern has so far been located near the fountain.17 An outlet drain was found at the north-western corner of the pool. The line of the drain ran under the western wing of the house before draining into the channel. There was no evidence that the courtyard had ever been paved, but patches of loose gravel may indicate that small paths may have surrounded the pool. To the west of the pool a square tile foundation was located that may have been a podium for a statue. The courtyard was surrounded on all four sides by a portico, originally floored with a series of mosaic pavements of geometric design. The level of the floors appears to have been raised above that of the courtyard, presumably to allow a view into the pool from the portico. Based on the remains of three tile-built columns, which survived in-situ at the western end of the northern stylobate, the peristyle appears to have had ten columns along the northern and southern porticos and seven along the eastern and western porticos. The house appears to have had two opposing entrances, both leading directly into the northern portico. The eastern door fronted the earlier road, which had been levelled up

Simon Greenslade

130

Bath house

Apsidal hall

Cistern

Eastern entrance

Eastern wing Bath house

Octagonal tower

Doors to southern area of the house

Marine entrance

Ornamental pool

Projected wall line 4th-century additions

0

20 m

Figure 8.7. The mid 3rd- to mid 4th-century domus

and resurfaced with a new flagstone pavement (Fig. 8.9). Originally this door seems to have had an ornamental lintel, as a number of tiles, with decorative egg and dart and denticulated mouldings, were found in and around this area. Flanking the outside of the doorway were two benches built presumably for the accommodation of the attendants and slaves of visiting clients. Once inside, a small room was located to the north of the entrance that incorporated the offshoot of the aqueduct in its southern wall. Although this room subsequently underwent a number of changes, it is tempting to suggest that this could have been the room of the hall-porter, the cella ianitoris, similar to the ‘cubby hole’ described by

Petronius in the Satyricon, his satire of the self-made millionaire Trimalchio.18 To the west, a second entrance was found (cf. Fig. 8.7). This entrance building, which was constructed on well-built foundations roughly 0.90 m wide, comprised two rooms. The eastern room, which led into the portico via a doorway in its south-eastern corner, had a well-made geometric mosaic pavement and was originally faced in marble, fragments of which were found still adhering to the walls.19 Beyond this was a larger space with a cocciopesto floor.20 The full western extent of this building was not located since it continued beyond the limit of the excavation.21 However, there can be little doubt that this formed an

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

131

imposing entrance portal. Recent environmental work shows that the shoreline of the Vivari Channel at this point formed a broad subsidiary channel that extended to the south; the entrance building fronted directly on to this open waterway (Fig. 8.10).22 The channel defined the western limit of the domus complex and the earlier occupation area too. If this

entrance building extended into the open water, which would explain the wide and very well built foundations, then it would have formed a marine entrance extending into the deeper water to allow for boats to moor up against it.23 Both the marine and landward entrances led directly into the northern portico of the peristyle, a layout characteristic of the late imperial period, as evident in the contemporary domus and later Triconch Palace at Butrint. A measure of control was imposed on access from these entrances. Guests using the marine entrance would have accessed a small vestibule located at the western end of the north portico;

Figure 8.8. View of the courtyard and pool

Figure 8.9. The eastern entrance

Tomb

Bridge Vrina Plain suburb

Butrint

domus

Triconch domus

Vivari Channel

Line of aqueduct

Road

Gravel bank

50 m

0

Geophysical survey area

0

500 m

Figure 8.10. Reconstruction of the 3rd-century shoreline

132

Simon Greenslade

Figure 8.11. The apsidal hall

while in time a wall was built across the northern end of the east portico creating a physical barrier counter to the normal open aspect that a peristyle provided.24 This division of spaces and control applied to movement and access may be related to the dual role of a large 3rd-century domus at a time when the political life of the city appears to have moved away from the monumental centres that had been the heart of a Roman city in the early empire.25 Due to the political and economic instability of the empire, local elites no longer saw civic public office as desirable and shifted their interest to new rural settings, diverting their surplus resources into constructing large private residential buildings that became the stages on which the social and political order would be played out.26 In this process the house became not only a private domestic space for the owner and his family to enjoy but also a public space in which business had to be accommodated in a setting fitting to the owners standing in society.27 In the Vrina Plain townhouse the primary public space seems to have been the northern area of the house centred on a large apsidal hall like structure (Fig. 8.11).28 This appears very similar to later, 4th-century, audience chambers where the owner, seated in the apse, would have received his clients as well as his business associates.29 Measuring 25.30 × 13.50 m, the room was orientated east to west with the apse at the eastern end of the structure.30 Assuming that windows would have been located along its northwestern side, this chamber would have been cool and bright in the early part of the day and benefited from the late evening light from the setting sun, making it an ideal setting for the owner to welcome and impress his visitors.31

The hall was entered from the west. To reach this entrance from the peristyle, guests would have first entered the room at the western end of the north portico. From here, a door in the northern wall of the room provided access to a corridor that led out onto an open courtyard directly in front of the main door of the hall (Fig. 8.12). In order to reach this room, guests arriving by the eastern entrance would have walked along the entire length of the north portico thereby allowing them a view across the pools to the private area of the house beyond the peristyle. Such a partial glimpse into the owner’s private space was deliberately managed and must have heightened the visitor’s impression of the owner’s bearing in society even before they were admitted to an audience with him. The opulence of the marine entrance and the glimpsed eastern and western wings of the house would undoubtedly have had a similar effect on those arriving by the western entrance. After the official business had been completed, the visitor, rather than going back the way he had come, seems to have left the hall by a door located in the south-eastern corner of the room. Beyond this was a small room, one of a series located to the north of the portico. This room led back to the eastern end of the north portico and then on to the main door, with the visitors using the western entrance now having to walk back along the north portico. Prior to an official visit the visitor would presumably have gone to the baths to wash before presenting themselves to their host.32 Business may also have been discussed there as bathing remained an important social as well as leisure activity. In order to accommodate his guests, the owner constructed a bath-house to the northwest of the house; a

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

133

Bath house

Apsidal hall

Cistern

Eastern entrance

Eastern wing Bath house

Octagonal tower

Marine entrance

Ornamental pool

Access routes

Projected wall line

0

4th-century additions

20 m

Figure 8.12. The access routes to the apsidal hall

wall running from the northeastern corner of the building parallel to the audience hall seems to demarcate the channel edge and suggests that it was constructed on the edge of the Vivari Channel (Fig. 8.13).33 The bath-house was accessed from the room at the western end of the north portico. A second door to the west of the one that accessed the apsidal hall, led into a corridor that was aligned with the outer wall of the western entrance chamber.34 This corridor opened out into a series of rooms, possibly changing rooms, connected with the bath-house. The eastern area of the building appears to have been the private part of the house, restricted to the owner’s most trusted friends and confidantes. The eastern portico gave access to a series of elaborately furnished rooms that utilised the earlier buildings located here (Fig. 8.14). This seems to have involved blocking in a number of doorways as well as laying a sequence of new mosaic floors. In the process, a

Figure 8.13. The western bath-house

134

Simon Greenslade

Figure 8.14. The eastern wing with mosaic pavements

Figure 8.15. Amphorae used as make-up for the floor of the eastern room

number of large intact amphorae, including wine amphorae from southern Italy and one from Portugal that would have contained garum, were found in the northwestern room of this eastern wing (Fig. 8.15). These appear to have been

used as a levelling make-up for the new floor; the amphorae lay tightly together, packed in with large rounded pebbles. Connected with these changes, in the most southern of the excavated rooms of this range, a hypocaust appears to have

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

135

Figure 8.16. Geophysical plot overlaid on excavated area, with detail of possible second, southern courtyard and triclinium

been added with the praefurnium cut through the eastern wall. The floor of this room is roughly 0.70 m higher than the eastern peristyle suggesting that it would have to have been entered by a series of steps. Very little of the southern portico has been uncovered. However, where it has been picked up it is clear that doorways were located in its southern wall opening on to a series of rooms or corridors, which would have allowed access to the area beyond. Unlike the northern, eastern and southern porticos, all of which gave access to various rooms of the villa, the western portico seems to have formed an open gallery that would have afforded views to the Straits of Corfu and Cape Stillo beyond. It would also have provided a contrast between the natural landscape on the one side and the man-made pool on the other; this would have been even more accentuated when viewed from the eastern portico where the view would have been framed by the architectural elements of the peristyle. The full extent of this townhouse is unclear. From the geophysical survey it would appear that it could potentially continue to the south where a further, much larger, courtyard has been identified, surrounded by a portico and various ranges of rooms, including what appears to be another apsidal hall and a triple apsed triclinium (Fig. 8.16).35 If this is so, the house would have covered an area roughly 11,400 m2 or 2.82 acres.36 By comparison the contemporary townhouse that occupied the central area of the later Triconch Palace covered an area roughly 1,372 m² or 0.34 acres (Fig. 8.17).37 At Nicopolis, the city founded by Octavian after his victory at Actium, the on-going excavations of the Villa of Manius Antoninus have uncovered almost 3,384 m² or 0.84 acres of a similar dated private luxury residence in the heart

of the city; the house thought to cover an entire block of the urban grid of the ancient city.38 The position of the owner may have been further accentuated by the construction of the Temple mausoleum located to the southeast, fronting the new road to the bridge.40 Not only would this structure have formed a suitable monumental resting places for the owner and his family, its dominant position adjacent to the new main road also demarcated the main access point to the house.40

The 4th century AD During the first half of the 4th century a number of alterations were made to the house (cf. Fig. 8.7). The external appearance of the eastern end of the apsidal hall was altered following the construction of a new wall that was built around the apse apparently to encase it. With the construction of this wall, which ran parallel with the outer wall of the cistern to the east, an alleyway was created between the two. At the northern end of the wall was a doorway. This allowed access into a newly created space (directly to the north of the apse) that provided access to the eastern rooms along the northern side of the apsidal hall. Beyond this, the northern end of the earlier eastern wall, which had defined the road leading to the channel edge, was demolished. The area was then levelled over, before a new building was constructed in the northeast corner of the area. So far, only four rooms of this building have been uncovered but they all appear to have been equipped with some form of under-floor heating suggesting that it may have been a bath-house.41 Originally these rooms seem to have been elaborately decorated, as numerous fragments

Simon Greenslade

136

0

20 m

Vrina Plain, Butrint

0

20 m

Triconch Palace, Butrint

0

20 m

The Villa of Manius Antoninus, Nicopolis

Figure 8.17. The 3rd-/4th-century Vrina Plain domus, the triconch domus and the villa of Manius Antoninus at Nicopolis. (the latter after Tsakoumis 2006)

of mouldings and veneers in grey marble and painted plaster in blues, reds, greens and yellow on white and yellow backgrounds were found in the demolition levels infilling the rooms. It may also have been at this time that the layout of the earlier bath to the northwest of the apsidal hall was changed: a large octagonal structure was built over the western changing room, and a new mosaic was laid in the room to the east, the design of which was carefully made to fit the awkward space of the room (Fig. 8.18).42 The structure is difficult to identify, but if it was of any height, or indeed a tower, it would have formed a prominent marker on the Vrina Plain and would have been clearly visible from the city of Butrint as well as to anyone sailing up the channel,

denoting the presence as well as the ambitions of the house owner. The house appears to have been temporarily abandoned in the late 4th century AD when the building suffered significant structural damage, and a number of walls, including the apse of the apsidal hall, collapsed. The reason for this damage is unclear, though it is possible that it may have been as a result of an earthquake.43 Sources indicate that an earthquake caused considerable damage throughout the Balkans in AD 365 whilst Butrint itself may have been the epicentre of a major earthquake in AD 358.44 A major seismic event would have brought about a dramatic tectonic shift that would have resulted in subsidence, building collapse and localised flooding.

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

137

Mosaic

Octagonal tower Mosaic

Projected wall line Earlier construction

0

0

5m

5m

Figure 8.18. The octagonal tower Evidence for this can be seen across Butrint; the excavations at the Triconch Palace indicate that in the second half of the 4th century AD the domus was abandoned for a short time and partially collapsed, with the former grand rooms fronting the channel becoming water-logged as a result of the rising water table; while the excavations in the forum found that its pavement had slumped from north to south due to liquefaction of the softer sediments that the forum had partially been built over; it was then covered by a layer of alluvial sediments.45 Similar indications of a catastrophic event can also be seen in relation to the aqueduct on the Vrina Plain where a number of piers seem to have collapsed towards the end of the 4th century AD and the settling tank had slumped as a result of the liquefaction of the underlying sediments similar to that which occurred in the forum.

Despite the apparent abandonment of the house there does seem to have been some activity on the site, as a very unusual double burial was found to the west of the apsidal hall (Figs 8.19–20). The grave contained the remains of two adult males, one thought to be in his late 40s the other in his mid 30s, who appear to have been interred together. The older of the two was buried on his back, with his left arm bent over his chest and his right arm placed over his pelvis. A bronze ring was found on his right finger with a stylised depiction of a leaping horse. The second individual had been placed face down, with his arms bent in front of him and his hands under his head. His spine was slightly twisted and his knees were bent. The positioning of his hands and legs may suggest that they had been bound. At the base of his spine a small iron object, possibly a spear

Simon Greenslade

138

Figure 8.20. Detail of the two rings found in the double burial

Figure 8.19. The double burial

point, was noticed; this presumably contributed to his death. A fragment of a jet ring was found by his right knee. The burial was covered by a series of large broken roof tiles that appear to have been haphazardly placed directly over the bodies. Recent Carbon 14 dating carried out on the younger individual indicates that he was buried between AD 230–410. This date range corroborates the glass and ceramics recovered from the backfill of the grave that dates to the mid 4th century.46

The early 5th century AD The period of abandonment appears to have been short lived. By the first half of the 5th century AD the site was reoccupied and a number of alterations made to the surviving structures (Fig. 8.21).47 The central part of the apse of the apsidal hall, which may have collapsed due to the earthquake, was rebuilt. To support the new structure, two triangular buttresses were incorporated into the build, placed in the angles between the apse wall and the western face of the wall behind the apse. Externally the eastern area of the courtyard seems to have been levelled over at this time to compensate for the slumping of the underlying deposits. This levelling partially sealed the eastern wall of the outer pool of the ornamental water feature. However, the inner pool still seems to have been in use as the floor of the pool was resurfaced and a new outlet drain was built, cut through the northwest corner of the

outer pool, in order to connect it to the earlier outlet drain. A second, smaller interconnected drain was also constructed up against the western edge of the outer pool. This drain, which to the south cut across the western corner of the outer pool before truncating the floor of the pool, seems to have drained an unknown feature located beyond the southern edge of the excavations. The walls of the outer pool were dismantled so that only a low retaining wall survived. The space was then infilled, possibly to allow for the planting of shrubs and flowers around the inner pool. Evidence of further alterations and repairs can be seen in the northern portico, too, where a series of blocking walls were built between the columns of the colonnade. Only the footings of these walls survive at the western end of the portico but they seem to have completely surrounded the columns, probably forming a low waist-high balustrade wall with the column extending out of the top. To the east, possibly due to damage in the intervening period, the three-chambered cistern was also altered: the southern chamber was partially dismantled and only the two northern chambers remained. The western chamber continued in use as a cistern, while the eastern chamber, the size of which was reduced following the re-building of its eastern wall, served as an access room from which to draw water. How long this new Vrina household was occupied for is difficult to estimate but the indications are that it may not have been for very long. Archaeologically, little occupation evidence covering the middle part of the 5th century has been recovered from the site apart from residual material mixed in with levelling deposits associated with the later uses of the house. Evidence from the Triconch Palace indicates that it was abandoned from about AD 420 due to financial issues, death, lack of interest or problems caused by a rising water table.48 It is possible that any one of these problems may have affected the Vrina household too.49 A greater issue to affect the Vrina household may have been lack of a fresh, clean water supply, as it appears that the abandonment of the house coincided with the collapse of the aqueduct. Previously the aqueduct was thought to have collapsed towards the end of the 4th century.50

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

139

Bath house

Cistern

Eastern entrance

Apsidal hall

Eastern wing

Bath house

Octagonal tower

Marine entrance

Ruined walls still visible

Ornamental pool

Projected wall line

0

Figure 8.21. The 5th-century building

Figure 8.22. The entrance vestibule of the late 5th-/early 6th-century church

20 m

Simon Greenslade

140

Figure 8.23. View of the cistern converted into a bath-house

However, excavations of a ground surface sealed beneath a fallen pier at the eastern end of the 2002 drainage ditch excavations produced fragments of late 4th-early 5th century AD pottery. As this material was heavily worn these dates provide a terminus ante quem for the structures collapse.51 Why the aqueduct collapsed is unclear, but a further seismic shock may finally have weakened the already partially damaged structure. A second shock may also have caused the road bridge to partially collapse and it maybe that these two combined events forced the owner to temporarily abandon the house.52 This period of abandonment appears to have been only temporary and by the end of the century the house was re-occupied.

The late 5th–mid 6th century AD Because of its location, at the key crossing point into Butrint from its southern hinterland, the Vrina Plain remained a natural centre of activity. By the late 5th century the area was re-occupied, although the focus of the new occupation was religious rather than residential, as indicated by the construction of a north–south aligned apsidal basilica, floored with a series of highly intricate mosaics (Fig. 8.24).53 The basilica, measuring c. 19.21 m by c. 15.85 m, was built out from the southern wall of the apsidal chamber,

which necessitated the removal of part of this wall.54 Cut through a levelling deposit, which had been spread across the central area, the new structure was built partially over the northern and eastern portico of the late Roman house and extended into the courtyard, with its apse built over the northern niche of the inner pool (Fig. 8.25). Spreads of mortar matching that used in the new construction were found across the base of the pool, indicating that this space had become a preparation area for mixing mortar. Internally, the space was divided into a central area and two flanking aisles defined by a series of seven piers on either side of the central space, with a low stylobate wall visible at floor level connecting these. Although no floor layers were located, the excavations in both the eastern and western aisles of the new structure indicate that the stylobate walls of the portico of the earlier townhouse remained partially visible, dividing the space in two. The central space was divided by a screen at the southern end of the building, the foundation of which remained in-situ. The northern end became the nave whilst the southern end became the sanctuary/bema. Both areas were floored with intricate mosaics.55 The pavement of the nave consists of a single composition, which stretches from the entrance to the sanctuary screen (Plate 8.2). Surrounded by three complex borders, the central motif depicts a variety of sea-creatures, birds, and animals,

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

141

These rooms remain in use

Bath house Entrance

Two-storey building

Basilica

Ruined walls still visible

Projected wall line

0

20 m

Figure 8.24. The late 5th-/early 6th-century settlement

along with images of fruits, flowers, trees and abstract motifs to form a stylised representation of the terrestrial paradise of God’s creation on Earth (Plate 8.3). Set within the floor were two tablets, tabulae ansatae carrying Greek inscriptions. The first inscription was located just inside the entrance to the nave (Plate 8.4). ΥΠΕΡΕΥ[XHC] ΝΟΙΔΕ[N] ΟΘΕΟCΤΑ ΟΝΟΜΑΤΑ+

ω

(ὑπὲρ εὐχῆς ὧν οἶδεν ὁ θεὸς τὰ ὀνόματα) “In fulfilment of the vow (prayer) of those whose names God knows”. This is an anonymous dedicatory inscription of a type that appears in a number of alternative forms in other

Christian buildings in the Balkan provinces in the late antique period.56 The benefactors conceal their names and identities, both as a public demonstration of their humility in accordance with Christ’s own rule not to flaunt one’s own good works and virtues, and presumably in acknowledgement of God’s infinite wisdom, as he would know who the benefactors were without them having to spell it out to him.57 The second inscription is located just beyond the first. Although now largely destroyed this inscription, due to its size, was probably the more important of the two (Plate 8.5): [……]KAIAN[A]ΠAYC [……]YΛHCCOY […… ]..H....Λ […… ].......M [...... ] […… ]

142

Simon Greenslade

Figure 8.25. Aerial view showing the basilica built over the earlier domus

This can be reconstructed as […] καὶ ἀν[α]παύ[σεως τῆς δο]ύλης σου meaning ‘…and rest of Thy servant …’ From its ending it would seem that the “servant”, and therefore one of the donors, may have been female.58 Although the inscriptions are original features of the floor, the northern inscription has not been fully incorporated into the main design, but has been placed slightly off the central axis of the pavement and appears to overlap the surrounding motives (Fig. 8.26). This apparently casual placing and its informal inscription attracts the attention of the visitor far more effectively, though, than if it had been worked seamlessly into the overall framework of the floor-design. The pavement in the sanctuary, or bema, is similar to that of the nave in meaning and colour, but richer and more varied in design (Plate 8.6). The central feature, directly in front of the altar is an archway surmounted by two small birds and flanked by two brightly coloured trees resembling cypresses (Plate 8.7). Growing within the arch is a bright red flower over which a lamp burns, suspended from the apex of the arch. Trees, plants, birds, fish and ornamental devices surround the image, arranged in more or less symmetrical order, fronting and framing the altar. In its form and structure, the mosaic is typical of an extended group of pavements in northern Greece and southern Albania, from the later 5th and the first half of the

6th century AD.59 The presence of somewhat worn bronze nummi of the eastern emperor Leo I (457–474) and the western emperor Libius Severus (461–465) in the make-up layer of the pavement, and the conventions used for the animals represented in the mosaic, together indicate that the floor was probably laid in the last quarter of the fifth or the first years of the 6th century AD; this would pre-date the Baptistery, the original church on the site of the later 13th-century AD Great Basilica and the second phase of the Triconch basilica at the eastern end of the acropolis by almost a generation. Set into the mosaic pavement of the bema, directly in front of the apse, was the foundation stone of the altar. Measuring 1.44 × 0.89 m, six sub-square sockets had been cut into its surface to receive the upright posts that once supported the altar above, one at the centre point, one at each of the four corners, and a sixth cut into the middle of the rear edge. The apse was raised up above the level of the mosaic and was entered via a step. Unlike the nave and the bema, the apse had a flagstoned floor. A large robber-cut in the centre of the apse indicated that originally something of importance had been placed here, possibly a confessio or relic-deposit of some kind. As part of the construction of the basilica, the layout of the apsidal hall was altered. This space now became the entrance vestibule of the church (Fig. 8.22): two east–west

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

Figure 8.26. Detail of the nave mosaic showing the positioning of the dedications

143

144

Simon Greenslade

walls and a north–south wall were constructed across the length and width of the building, dividing the hall into three separate chambers. The central area became the narthex that led into the nave and aisles, while the northern room became the exonarthex, which was entered via a triple doorway from an open courtyard.60 This doorway now appears to have been the main access point into the building: the former western entrance of the apsidal hall was blocked in, suggesting that the building was approached from the channel (Fig. 8.27). Within the narthex was a flagstone pavement, made up of a mixture of rectangular and square limestone slabs, apparently utilising spolia from a substantial Roman building somewhere close by, as evidenced by a slab with the settings for letters of a monumental bronze inscription. The size of the slabs varied, with the largest and most complete reserved for the central area immediately in front of the main door into the nave. To the west, the slabs were slightly smaller in size, while to the east the floor was made up of broken and irregular sections of paving. This distinction in the flooring appears to have been deliberate and indicates the relative value and status associated with the various parts of the basilica and its users: regular slabs laid in front of the nave and used by the clergy, smaller, irregular fragments flanking the areas giving access to the two side-aisles used by the congregation.61 Incorporated into the floor just in front of the main doorway into the nave was a large tomb. Although the grave had been robbed in antiquity, the significance of its position, directly in front of the principal entrance to the basilica, suggests that this had been the resting place of the principal benefactor of the church (Fig. 8.28).62 The paving did not extend into the apse of the earlier hall as this space was completely closed off by the construction of a well-built wall, the western side of which was constructed of large limestone blocks while the eastern inner edge was of tile. Covering the tile was a thick layer of hydraulic plaster implying that the apse was now used as a tank to hold water. Soon after the floor was laid a second storey, possibly a gallery, was inserted as indicated by six piers built across the width of the narthex. This second storey, which may have extended over the exonarthex as well as the narthex, was accessed from the western chamber of the divided building. Here a staircase, partially screened by a wall built directly behind the stair-block, was constructed in the south-west corner of the room. The western chamber could be accessed from both the exonarthex and the narthex via the earlier doorway at the western end of the room. The small room to the north of the eastern entrance, which originally had been the room of the hall porter, was also altered at this time by the construction of a new eastern wall. Incorporated into this eastern wall was a small niche. Positioned directly opposite the doorway from the eastern aisle, this niche may either have formed a sill for a window to light the room or a cupboard into which liturgical vestments could have been placed.63

Another similar room was found opposite, on the western side of the building. It appears that this room could not be entered via the western aisle but only from the long north–south room west of the narthex where a door had been deliberately smashed through the southern wall of the apsidal chamber. Although finds associated with the establishment of the church were limited, a large amount of window glass was recovered from the deposits that built up after the church was abandoned. Along with natural light, the interior of the church was also illuminated by lamps and fragments of a number of small glass hanging lamps were found in the aisles. A complete copper alloy suspension chain for one of these lamps was also found (Fig. 8.29). The foundation of the church does not seem to have been an isolated venture; rather, the entire area surrounding the basilica underwent a form of regeneration in this period.64 To the west, a new series of rooms were built against the western side of the apsidal hall. A staircase, the foundation of which abutted the western façade, would have allowed access to a second floor that presumably formed the principal living space and reception area. No doorways were found at the level of the surviving walls, thus suggesting that the lower area was used as a storeroom/cellar only accessible from the upper floor.65 The western bath-house, which by this time had been robbed down to the level visible today, also seems to have been re-used as a post-built structure was built within its ruins.66 Parts of the eastern wing of the townhouse also seem to have been re-occupied as indicated by various post-holes cut through the mosaic floors. As part of this re-occupation the northwest corner of the east wing was repaired having presumably been damaged when the porticoes surrounding the courtyard were removed prior to the construction of the basilica. A drain, made from a series of early 5th-century AD Tunisian spatheion amphorae, was also added. Running across the former east portico, its outlet had been cut through the southern bench. Beyond this, a further smaller chapel appears to have been built in the area of the Monuments; this building was accessible from the east– west branch road that led to the main basilica to the west.67 Connected with these alterations, the cistern of the earlier eastern bath-house seems to have been converted into a small bath-house complex at this time (Fig. 8.23). From its size it appears intended for one individual to bathe at a time, in privacy, unlike the communal bath-houses of the early empire.68 The southern chamber became the entrance to the bath, accessed via a doorway that had been cut through the western wall. The northwest chamber became the cold room. A further small, square cold plunge bath was constructed to the north against the earlier perimeter (alley-side) wall. The eastern chamber became the hot room. To heat this room a crude praefurnium, which would have provided the main heating for the complex, was cut through the northern wall. A complete spatheion amphora from Tunisia, which had had its end broken, was found inserted at the base of the rough vault, to provide sufficient draught to circulate the air. Along the eastern

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

145

Figure 8.27. The late 5th-/early 6th-century basilica, looking south into the valley

edge of this room a further apsidal hot plunge bath was added.69 Water for the bath may have been supplied from the cistern now located in the apse of the earlier hall. Overall these buildings suggest that an organised religious community may have been located on the Vrina Plain at this time, with the buildings utilised by the priest and his assistants for both residential and official use. They could also have served as places to receive and accommodate visitors and pilgrims, if the church contained a shrine or other sacred focus, which was the subject of particular devotion and pilgrimage.70 In general, the private financing of church construction formed part of a development that can be traced throughout the Mediterranean world, including the provinces of Epirus Vetus and Nova, throughout the 6th century AD, in which numerous churches were founded by local private patrons aiming to rival the great basilicas of episcopal centres such as Nicopolis.71 In so doing, the benefactions reflected a public demonstration of elite status in much the same way the luxurious private residences had done in the centuries before.72 The incomplete state of the southern dedication makes is difficult to gauge the relationship of the donors, though it is possible that they were part of the family that had originally owned the domus. A reoccupation and establishment of a church on a ruined and abandoned site was a frequent phenomenon in Late Antiquity.73 A similar situation has been observed at nearby Diaporit, where a large triple-aisled basilica was built over the ruins of the former luxury residence (Fig. 8.30).74 This building, which appears to be contemporary with the Vrina Plain basilica, was also accompanied by residential buildings, a separate small chapel, a small private bath-house and a tower.

Figure 8.28. The tomb in the narthex located directly in front of the door to the nave

The similarities in form and construction dates of these two extra mural establishments may suggest that the buildings were connected. Unlike the churches within

Simon Greenslade

146

the forms. In the narthex the door to the western chamber was narrowed, while the two doors either side of the central door from the exonarthex were blocked. The Vrina Plain basilica was occupied until the middle of the 6th century AD at which point it appears to have been abandoned.77 The reason for this abandonment is unclear though there are indications that the basilica was partially destroyed by fire; the large flagstones in the western part of the narthex are criss-crossed by fractures that appear to have been caused by intense heat, the surrounding walls are also heavily cracked in a manner indicating fire damage. From this time the area was abandoned and it may be that ultimately the changes brought about by Justinian’s attempt to unify a divided empire may have caused insecurity for a port town marginalised with changes in the economic shift following the re-conquest of North Africa.78 However, this was not the end of occupation on the site. In the middle of the 9th century AD the settlement was re-occupied.

The 9th–12th century AD

Figure 8.29. Bronze lamp chain

the city of Butrint, which appear to have been singular structures built for the inhabitants of the city, the additional domestic buildings around both the Vrina Basilica and Diaporit suggest that these were centres that formed part of a pilgrimage route. Such a route may have centred on the large contemporary religious complex, the Church of the Forty Martyrs, built over-looking the ancient port of Onchesmos, present day Saranda.75 Both the Vrina Plain and Diaporit basilicas appear to have had a devotional focus: in the case of Diaporit this was centred on three graves, thought to have held the remains of saints, found in the apse of the church; while in the Vrina Plain basilica the focus of the cult would presumably have been the object located in the apse, which was subsequently removed.76 Over time the basilica appears to have become unstable. A series of posts were set up to support the roof in the bema to the south of the chancel screen. The supports were only temporary, as once these were removed the holes in the mosaic were repaired. These patches generally used smaller tesserae than the original pavement, and although they attempted to recreate the original design, they were much more simplistic in composition, sometimes altering

The focus of the new activity was centred once more on the area of the basilica and the surrounding buildings when the site appears to have become the centre of a manorial house or oikos (Fig. 8.31).79 The deposits that must have filled the abandoned building were cleaned out and the building repaired. The arcades of the southern extension, which had collapsed, were patched up and the openings in the nave-arcades blocked in using a mix of tile and limestone rubble bonded by green clay (Fig. 8.32), the step in front of the main north entrance into the nave was extended over the mosaic and, due to an enduring weakness in the area of the bema, a second set of supporting posts were added, driven through the mosaic once more. The original chancel screen was replaced by a more robust barrier made out of a mix of large stone blocks, scavenged from the surrounding ruinous buildings, to form a diaphragm-wall to support the roof. As before, with the removal of the posts, the holes in the pavement were repaired. However, this time no attempt was made to recreate the original configurations of the mosaic as white tesserae were used. Access into the building seems to have been via the triple doorway that also formed the main entrance of the late 5th-century basilica. The doorway between the former exonarthex and narthex also remained accessible, although this door was slightly narrowed along its eastern side. Along the western side of this doorway, were placed two columns, presumably robbed from one of the surrounding buildings. One of the columns had a circular shaft terminating in a decorated capital, while the other was octagonal in shape. Both had been rammed into the floor of the former exonarthex and may have been used as tying posts for animals as they both terminated c. 1 m above the earlier floor. In the former narthex, the area damaged by fire was repaired and a new second floor laid over the space, partially supported by a series of large posts cut through the flagstone

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

147

These rooms remain in use

Vrina Plain

Bath house Entrance

Two-storey building

Ruined walls still visible

Basilica

Projected wall line

20 m

0

Tile kiln Basilica

Diaporit Chapel Tower

Bath house

Early villa complex

0

20 m

Figure 8.30. Plans of the late 5th-/early 6th-century AD basilicas and surrounding buildings on the Vrina Plain and at Diaporit

148

Simon Greenslade

Figure 8.31. The 9th-/10th-century aristocratic oikos

floor (Fig. 8.33). To create the holes for the posts, small fires had been set directly on the flagstones, which were then doused with water to crack the 0.12 m thick stones. The western and eastern spaces of the new lower floor appear to have been deliberately separated from the central area: the southwestern and northeastern gaps between the piers were blocked whilst the northwestern gap was narrowed. Within the apse, a mortar floor was laid. Sealing debris collapsed from the 6th-century blocking wall that had closed off the apse, the new floor was c. 0.20 m above that of the narthex. Subsequently, a north–south cross wall was built across the apse, cutting the floor. Incorporated within this wall was a centrally positioned pier The western chamber of the basilica was altered with the addition of a blocking wall dividing the space in two. The smaller northern chamber appears to have been accessible from the former exonarthex and may have had a domestic

use, as a small tile built kiln/hearth was located in the northeastern corner of the room. In the larger southern chamber, the staircase located in the southwestern corner of the room appears to have been repaired indicating that this room, too, had a second floor; part of a large grey marble column was placed at the northern end of the stair block to support the new staircase that would have allowed access to and from the re-floored area over the chamber. The religious nature of the site seems to have remained focused on the nave and the bema. The altar, which seems to have been removed after the abandonment of the church, was replaced. The remains of a pink-white marble column, which formed the support of the new altar, were found sitting centrally over the foundation stone of the earlier altar. As a result of the blocking in of the arcades, the aisles seem to have become more utilitarian. The original floors of

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

Figure 8.32. The blocked arcades of the nave

Figure 8.33. The fire-cracked post-holes cut through the flagstone floor of the former narthex

149

150

Simon Greenslade

Figure 8.34. Excavating the steelyard chains

Figure 8.35. The steelyard chains following conservation

these spaces were robbed and a rough tile floor surface laid in both. The role of the western aisle is unclear; no obvious indications of use were found, although two very well preserved bronze chains were found lying on this floor at the southern end of the room. These seem to have been part of a steelyard balance mechanism (Figs 8.34–35). The last phase of activity in this room is associated with the burial of a 25–30 year old male located at the southern end of the room, against the eastern blocking wall. Around his head four stones had been placed, with a fifth below it, to form a pillow. Following his internment the door that led from the nave at the northern end of the room was deliberately blocked in. The eastern aisle became a workshop associated with a large pottery kiln, which was built in the small room that opened off this aisle (Fig. 8.36).80 As in the western aisle, a burial of a male in his early 20s was cut through the tile floor up against the eastern wall. This burial, lined with a mix of tile and stone, was capped by eight large limestone slabs. Mortar patches found on some of the slabs suggests that these had been removed from the stylobate of the southern wall of the earlier domus portico, located just to the south of the grave, indicating that this wall was still visible at this time. Subsequently a large hearth was constructed over the grave. It is unclear what the hearth would have been used for, but the heat generated from it had discoloured the inner face of the eastern wall of the aisle indicating it was used a number of times. In the southeast corner of the aisle, another burial, this time of an infant placed in a rectangular box-like structure formed of roof tiles, was found. Across the site 49 Byzantine coins spanning the period c. 820–950 AD, including an exceptional silver miliaresion of Leo VI (886–912) (Fig. 8.37), have been found in post occupation deposits. The vast majority of these coins are Leo VI folles. From their appearance these coins do not

seem to have been in circulation for very long as they all show little sign of wear suggesting that they arrived here soon after they were minted.81 The site has also produced five lead seals (Fig. 8.38). Three of the seals, which would have accompanied official documents, had a depiction of a patriarchal cross set on steps, with an entwined plant at its base on the obverse. These were issued by local governors, strategoi: one was issued by John, strategos of Sicily (A), another by Constantine, strategos of Dyrrhachium (B); the third was damaged and only the first two letters of the strategos’s name, Pi, were visible, suggesting the name Petros (C). The fourth seal depicted only the cross on the steps (D). It was issued by Kallonas, who appears from his titles to have been connected to the central Imperial administration. The fifth seal, which was found on top of the tile surface in the eastern aisle, differed from the others and depicted a peacock holding a stem in its beak (E). It was issued by Constantine, a eunuch courtier in charge of the imperial banquets from Constantinople. Although these types of seals are fairly common, the fact that such a number have been found on one single excavation is rare.82 Almost 50% of the ceramic assemblage recovered is made up of wine amphora from Otranto in Puglia, indicating a revival in trade with southern Italy, with the rest made up of kitchen wares, possibly locally made, which may have been exported. Fine wares on the other hand were minimal, which may suggest that such items would have been made out of perishable material such as wood, or that they were made out of more prized materials, such as metal or silver, that would have been removed when the site was abandoned. However, a number of fragments of a 9th/10th-century Byzantine White Ware lamp or chalice have been recovered. This ware is rare for Butrint and the region as a whole; indeed, this particular variant has

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

151

Figure 8.36. The 9th-/10th-century pottery kiln built in the small room off the eastern aisle

never been found even in Italy.83 The rarity of the piece, and the fact that the date of it coincides with the seal from Constantinople, may suggest that the chalice arrived as a gift to the owner of the Vrina Plain house. The material culture, the coins and the seals clearly indicate that by the 10th century AD the basilica had become a centre of regional, as well as international, administration with an important local official, archon, living and working there, possibly using the nave and the bema of the former church as his private chapel.84 The need for such a centralised figure in this region at this time may have been to exploit the area’s rich agricultural and marine produce, needed by the Byzantines to support their re-established political and military base in neighbouring Corfu.85 An 8th-/9th-century AD seal recovered from excavations in Bulgaria refers to Theodore, an archon of Vagenetia, the early medieval place name for the region that includes Butrint, and it has been suggested that the rural aristocratic household, oikos, on the Vrina Plain may have been his residence. It has also been suggested that this household may have been the house where St Elias the Younger and Daniel, his companion, were reportedly held prisoner by the local commander, who accused them of being Arab spies after they landed at Butrint in 881; they were freed a year later on the local commander’s death.86 Around this new centre a small cemetery, possibly for

the community/retainers under the official’s jurisdiction, sprung up in the area of the in-filled Roman pools. Orientated east–west the burials were stone lined and capped. In one a young female had been interred with bronze earrings in her ears and two silver earrings tied by cord around her neck (Figs 8.39–40). Recent Carbon 14 dating has produced a date range of AD 870–1010 for this burial. While another burial of an adult male, Carbon 14 dated AD 770–980, was found on the base of the outer pool of the fountain to the south of the apse; the man was apparently buried with a coin of Leo VI (886–912) in his pocket (Figs 8.41–42). From the position of a number of nails found around the top of the grave it seems that a wooden board, possibly a door, was laid over the top. In the eastern wing two more contemporary burials were located while a third individual was interred to the east of the western entrance, cut through the cocciopesto floor of the corridor that had surrounded this space. Apart from the individual buried with the coin, who is thought to have been aged between 40–50 at the time of his death, all the others appear to have been fairly young. These individuals also all display early signs of arthritis indicative of performing hard physical labour from an early age. Three of the individuals moreover showed traces of having suffered from scurvy.87 Although the older man with the coin also had arthritis, his was less severe, suggesting that he had a different lifestyle to the others represented. Considering his age, better health

152

Simon Greenslade

Figure 8.38. Five lead seals

Figure 8.37. Silver miliaresion coin of Leo VI (886–912) and apparent distinction in burial rites it is possible that this man had a closer connection to the household and that, rather than being a tenant, he may have been part of the official’s family. Two further burials may also date to this period. One, of a young male aged between 16 to 24, was found cutting through the mosaic in the nave of the church, marked by a footstone at the southern end (Fig. 8.43). An ornate bronze belt buckle and strap end were found above his pelvis (Fig. 8.44).88 A second was found cut through the mosaic along the eastern side of the nave. As with the northern burial it too was cut through the border of the mosaic. This grave may have contained the body of small child.89 The location and the care with which both of these individuals were treated in death clearly shows they were well respected and

Figure 8.39. Burial of young female interred with the bronze and silver earrings

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

153

Figure 8.40. Bronze and silver earrings from female burial

Figure 8.41. Burial of the middle aged male interred with a coin in his pocket

Figure 8.42. Follis of Leo VI (886–912) from burial of middle aged male

may suggest that they belonged to the official’s family. The administrative role of the building seems to have been maintained up to the mid 10th century AD after which it appears to have been abandoned, seemingly due to a rise in the water level.90 With the abandonment, much of the superstructure of the building appears to have collapsed and any usable material removed, possibly to be re-used in the construction of the new fortifications being undertaken within Butrint at this time.91 Overlying the eastern and western edges of the mosaic of the basilica and extending into the aisles, the green clay bonded material that had been used to infill the arcades, was found to have slumped in, presumably due to the weathering of the collapsed blocking following the removal of the roof. Despite this, there are indications that some small scale industrial activity was carried out within the ruins as two kilns, one of which seems to have been a pottery kiln, were built in the apse of the earlier domus (Fig. 8.45).

154

Simon Greenslade

Figure 8.43. Burial cut through the western side of the nave mosaic pavement

Residue from these kilns was found spreading out across the apse and spilling into the eastern end of the narthex where it overlaid a dark silt deposit that had built up over the flagstone floor. This silt also sealed the cuts of the posts used to support the first floor hall, indicating that these posts had been removed prior to this silting. The eastern end of the basilica also seems to have remained a focal point at this time, with a devotional element centred on the bema and apse of the earlier building (Fig. 8.46). Defined by the diaphragm wall to the north, which seems to have remained partially standing, the bema was infilled to raise the level to that of the floor of the apse. This deposit, dated to the 11th–12th century, covered the foundation of the altar suggesting that the focus of this new space was now the apse alone.92 Within the bema, and facing the apse, three child burials were found cut through the levelling deposit.93 Two of these burials were laid directly on top of the mosaic. One was of a young child aged between 7–9 years old; while the second was of a neonate infant who had been placed in a cappuccino style grave, located up against the southern pier of the western arcade.94 The third burial of another neonate infant aged ±2 months, who had been laid in a well-built tile lined and capped grave, differed from the two others by being cut through the mortar of the mosaic, the mosaic having been damaged prior to this. Access to this area seems to have been via the former nave. Within this space, and abutting the diaphragm wall, a new rough tile surface was laid, partially sealing the collapse from the arcades (Fig. 8.47). This new floor may have been necessary as iron pan staining of the material slumped from the arcade blocking indicates that the mosaic was covered by water. Cut through this layer, a small ossuary box containing the skull and parts of the vertebrae, sacrum and scapula of a 20–30 year old male, was located.95

Figure 8.44. Ornamental bronze buckle

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

155

Figure 8.45. The 10th-/11th-century pottery kiln in the apse of the former apsidal hall

The devotional use of the southern apse appears to have been short lived. The reason is unclear; though, the central step into the apse is severely fire cracked and a fire in this central space may once more have caused the abandonment of the area. Subsequently the central feature in the apse was removed and an attempt appears to have been made to remove the stone slab flooring of the apse too. Soon

after, the apse wall collapsed, infilling the apse and bema and sealing the infant burials. Fragments of a Brown and Green Painted Ware bowl dated to the second half of the 12th century, found lying on the flagstones of the apse directly below the apse collapse, provides a terminus post quem for this occurrence. Subsequently, a ‘black earth’ deposit appears to have

Simon Greenslade

156

Kilns

Chapel Burials Ossuary

Burial Tile spread Kiln Ruined walls still visible Wall collapse

0

20 m

Figure 8.46. Location of the 11th-/12th-century kilns and child burials

Figure 8.47. Tile surface within the former nave

built up over the remains. This post abandonment deposit, varying in depth from between c. 0.35 m to 0.60 m, contains a mixed ceramic assemblage including 2nd-, 3rd-, 5th- and 6th-century material, as well as ceramics covering the period from the 9th to 13th centuries. The coin finds also cover a similar wide range. Among the latest coins are three of Manuel Comnenus I (1143–1180).96 A fragment of a silver plated horse bit, thought to date to the late 8th century, was also recovered from this layer. There are limited signs of periodic use during this time (Fig. 8.48). To the west of the basilica the remains of a post-built structure were found cut through the black soils, indicating some small-scale re-use of the area, possibly by local shepherds. The knowledge and sanctity of the site also seems to have remained, as a number of later burials, datable to the 12th–13th century AD, were found cut through the upper demolition layers over the basilica. These individuals, interred within the ruins, may not have been baptised, or have been from poor families, who could not afford a proper Christian burial. The final visible activity on the site appears to be a

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

157

Figure 8.48. Post-holes and 12th-/13th-century burials

deliberate rock pile dump, located to the south of the southern wall of the eastern aisle. The eastern extent of the pile is defined by a rough wall, made up of blocks of masonry that appears to have been removed from the eastern range of the buildings and then placed in a trench dug through the ‘black earth’. The western edge of the pile partially covers the apse of the southern extension, indicating that by this time the walls of the buildings were at the level that they are seen at today. This pile may represent material stockpiled from the quarrying of the decaying building. Equally it may represent a random pile of rubble collected up by a farmer following the ploughing of his fields and deliberately dumped at the edge of his field. From this time onwards, apart from a few Venetian stray finds the site appears to have been largely deserted.97 For the workers involved in the 1960s land reclamation the uncovering of the few standing remains and the glimpses of floors and walls during the cutting of the drainage channels must have been an unexpected sight. How much information was lost at this time is difficult to determine. Fragments of machinery as well pick heads have

been found across the site, some even on top of the earlier floors mixed in with the thick green alluvial clay that was spread across the area. Despite this though, the discoveries that have been made since the initial trial excavations in 2002, have created an archaeological sequence as impressive and as important as any recovered in Butrint and in some aspects anywhere in the Mediterranean. By combining these results, the Vrina Plain excavations are creating a new understanding of the development and organisation of the city, shedding new light on how the city and its hinterland interacted, and in the process determining the evolution of an urban landscape.

References Agallopoulou, P. (1973) Palaiokastritsa. Arkhaiologikon Deltion 28: 423–24. Andrews, R., Bowden, W., Gilkes, O. and Martin, S. (2004) The late antique and medieval fortifications of Butrint. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 126–50. Oxford, Oxbow.

158

Simon Greenslade

Bescoby, D. J. (2003) Roman Butrint: An enhanced geophysical interpretation using artificial neural networks University of East Anglia, PhD thesis. Bescoby, D. J. (2006) Detecting Roman land boundaries in aerial photographs using Radon transforms. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 735–43. Bescoby, D. J. (2007) Geoarchaeological investigation at Roman Butrint. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint: An Assessment: 95–118. Oxford, Oxbow. Bescoby D. J. (forthcoming) Roman land organisation of the Butrint hinterland. In S. Greenslade and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 5. Excavations of the Vrina Plain. The Roman and Byzantine Suburb. Oxford, Oxbow. Bowden, W, (2003) Epirus Vetus: The Archaeology of a Late Antique Province. London, Duckworth. Bowden, W. (2008) Cristianizzazione e status sociale nell’Epirus Vetus tardo antico: le evidenze archeologiche. Antichitá Altoadriatiche 66: 301–32 Bowden, W. (2011) The domus and Triconch Palace as aristocratic residences. In W. Bowden and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 3. Excavations at the Triconch Palace: 277–302. Oxford, Oxbow. Bowden, W. and Hodges, R. (forthcoming) An ‘Ice Age settling on the Roman Empire’: post-Roman Butrint between strategy and serendipity. In N. Christie and A. Augenti (eds), Urbes Extinctae: Archaeologies of Abandoned Classical Sites. Aldershot, Scolar Press. Bowden, W. and Mitchell, J. (2004) The Christian topography of Butrint. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 104–25. Oxford, Oxbow. Bowden, W. and Përzhita, L. (2004) Archaeology in the landscape of Roman Epirus: preliminary report on the Diaporit excavations, 2002–3. Journal of Roman Archaeology 17: 413–33. Bowden, W., Cerova, Y., Crowson, A. and Vaccaro, E. (2011) The Merchant’s House and the city wall (5th–7th centuries). In W. Bowden and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 3. Excavations at the Triconch Palace: 152–202. Oxford, Oxbow. Bowden, W., Francis, K., Gilkes, O. J. and Lako, K. (2011) The domus and the Triconch Palace. In W. Bowden and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 3. Excavations at the Triconch Palace: 11–55. Oxford, Oxbow. Budina, D. (1971) Harta Akeologjike e bregdetit Jon dhe e pellgut të Delvinës. Iliria 1: 275–342. Caraher, W. R. (2003) Church, Society and the Sacred in Early Christian Greece. Ohio State University, PhD thesis. Carucci, M. (2007) The Romano-African Domus: Studies in Space, Function and Decoration (BAR International Series 1731). Oxford, Archaeopress. Chroston, N. and Hounslow, M. (2004) The geophysical survey: the extent and structural layout of the suburbs of Butrint on the Vrina Plain. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Survey 1994–1999: 64–76. Oxford, Oxbow. Çondi, Dh. (1988) Gjetje arkeologjike nga rrethina e Butrinti. In N. Ceka (ed.), Butroti: Permbledhje Studimesh: 237– 48. Tirana, Akademia e Shkencave e RPSSH Quendra e Kerkimeve Arkeologjike. Crowson, A. and Gilkes, O. J. (2007) The archaeology of the Vrina Plain: an assessment. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint. An Assessment: 119–64. Oxford, Oxbow. Curta, F. (2006) Southeastern Europe in the Middle Ages, 500– 1250. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Dode, B. (2004) Mosaic Pavements in Epirus Vetus in Late Antiquity. University of East Anglia, MA by Research thesis. Ellis, S. (1985) The Palace of the Dux at Apollonia and related houses. In G. Barker, J. Lloyd and J. Reynolds (eds), Cyrenaica in Antiquity (BAR International Series 236): 15–25. Oxford, Archaeopress. Ellis, S. (1988) The end of the Roman house. American Journal of Archaeology 92: 565–76. Ellis, S. (1991) Power and décor; how the late antique aristocrat received his guest. In E. Gazda (ed.), Roman Art in The Private Sphere: 117–34. Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press. Ellis, S. (2000) Roman Housing. London, Duckworth. Ellis, S. (2004) Early Byzantine housing. In K. Dark (ed.), Secular Buildings and the Archaeology of Everyday Life in the Byzantine Empire: 37–52. Oxford, Oxbow. Fenton, T., Soler, A., Hurst, C. and Beatrice, J. (forthcoming) The human skeletons from the Vrina Plain. In S. Greenslade and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 5. Excavations on the Vrina Plain. The Roman and Byzantine Suburb. Oxford, Oxbow. Gilkes, O. J. and Lako, K. (2004) Excavations at the Triconch Palace. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavation and Surveys 1994–1999: 151–75. Oxford, Oxbow. Greenslade, S. (forthcoming a) The channel side domus. In S. Greenslde and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 5. Excavations on the Vrina Plain. The Roman and Byzantine Suburb. Oxford, Oxbow. Greenslade, S. (forthcoming b) The basilica. In S. Greenslde and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 5. Excavations on the Vrina Plain. The Roman and Byzantine Suburb. Oxford, Oxbow. Greenslade, S. and Çondi, Dh. (2011) Recent Excavations on the Vrina Plain, Butrint: A preliminary report on the archaeological sequence from the 1st to 6th century AD. In P. Cabanes and J.-L. Lamboley (eds), Illyrie méridionale et l’Epire dans l’antiquité (Actes du Veme colloque): 265–77. Paris, De Boccard. Greenslade, S. and Hodges, R. (forthcoming) (eds) Butrint 5. Excavations on the Vrina Plain. The Roman and Byzantine Suburb. Oxford, Oxbow. Greenslade, S., Hodges, R., Leppard, S. and Mitchell, J. (2006) Preliminary report on the early Christian basilica on the Vrina Plain. Albania. Archeologia Medievale 33: 397–408. Greenslade, S. and Leppard, S. (forthcoming) The Temple mausoleum. In S. Greenslade and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 5. Excavations on the Vrina Plain. The Roman and Byzantine Suburb. Oxford, Oxbow. Guidoboni, E. (1994) Catalogue of Ancient Earthquakes in the Mediterranean Area up to the 10th century. Rome, Instituto nazionale di geofisica. Hansen, I. L. (2009) Hellenistic and Roman Butrint (Butrinti Helenistik dhe Romak). London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Harris, A. (2004) Shops, retailing and the local economy in the Byzantine world: the example of Sardis. In K. Dark (ed.), Secular Buildings and the Archaeology of Everyday Life in the Byzantine Empire: 82–122. Oxford, Oxbow. Hernandez, D. R. and Çondi, Dh. (2008) The Roman forum at Butrint (Epirus) and its development from Hellenistic to mediaeval times. Journal of Roman Archaeology 21: 275–92. Hodges, R. (2008a) The Rise and Fall of Byzantine Butrint (Shkëlqimi dhe rënia e Butrintit bizantin). London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Hodges, R. (2008b) Aistulf and the Adriatic Sea. Acta Archaeologica 79: 274–81.

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries Hodges, R. and Logue, M. (2007) The mid-Byzantine re-birth of Butrint. Minerva 18.3: 39–41. Hodges, R., Saraci, G. and Bowden, W. (1997) Late antique and Byzantine Butrint: interim report on the port and its hinterland (1994–95). Journal of Roman Archaeology 10: 207–34. James, L. (2006) Byzantine glass mosaic tesserae: some material considerations. Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 30.1: 29–47. Karaiskaj, G. (2009) The Fortifications of Butrint. London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Katsadima, I. and Angeli, A. (2001) Riza and Agia Pelagia: two architectural assemblages of the Roman era along the coast of southern Epirus. In J. Isager (ed.), Foundation and Destruction. Nikopolis and North-western Greece: 91–107. Athens, the Danish Institute at Athens. Kyrkou, T. (2006) The Villa of Manius Antoninus: A Private Luxury residence at Roman Nicopolis. Athens, Greek Ministry of Culture. Lane, A. et al. (2004) The environs of Butrint 1: the 1995–96 environmental survey. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Survey 1994–1999: 27–46. Oxford, Oxbow. Martin, S. (2004) The topography of Butrint. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 76–103. Oxford, Oxbow. Michel, V. (2007) Furniture, fixtures and fittings in churches: archaeological evidence from Palestine (4th–8th C.) and the role of the Diakonikon. In L. Lavan, E. Swift and T. Putzeys (eds), Objects in Context, Objects in Use: 581–606. Leiden, Brill. Mitchell, J. (2004) The Archaeology of Pilgrimage in Late Antique Albania: The Basilica of the Forty Martyrs. In W. Bowden, L. Lavan and C. Machado (eds), Recent Research on the Lat Antique Countryside: 145–88. Leiden, Brill Mitchell, J. (2008) The Butrint Baptistery and its Mosaics (Pagëzimorja e Butrintit dhe mozaikët e saj). London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Mitchell, J., Gilkes, O. and Çondi, Dh. (2005) A New Christian Basilica at Butrint Candavia 2: 107–28. Mulvin, L. (2002) Late Roman Villas in the Danube-Balkan Region (BAR International Series 1064). Oxford, Archaeopress. Özgenel, L. (2005) Public use and privacy in late antique houses in Asia Minor: the architecture of spatial control. In L. Lavan, L.Özgenel and A. Sarantis (eds), Housing in Late Antiquity: From Palaces to Shops: 239–82. Leiden, Brill. Papadopoulou, P. (2005) Un trésor monétaire de trachéa de billon du XII s. provenant de Butrint (Albanie). In C. Alfaro, C. Marcos and P. Otero (eds), XIII Congreso Internacional de Numismatica, Madrid 2003 (Actas-Proceedings-Actes I): 1231–6. Madrid, Ministerio de Cultura/Secretaría General Técnica. Papadopoulou, P. (forthcoming a) The numismatic evidence from Southern Adriatic (V- XI centuries): some preliminary thoughts. In R. Hodges and S. Gelichi (eds), Between Two Seas. Turnhout, Brepols. Papadopoulou, P. (forthcoming b) Five lead seals from Byzantine Butrint (Albania). Studies in Byzantine Sigillography 11. Pavlides, S and Caputo, R (2004) Magnitude versus faults’ surface parameters: quantitative relationships from the Aegean region. Tectonophysics 380: 159–88. Percival, J. (1976) The Roman Villa: A Historical Introduction. London, Batsford. Pluciennik, M., Lako, K., Përzhita, L. and Williams, D. (2004)

159

The environs of Butrint 2: the 1995–1996 field survey. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 47–63. Oxford, Oxbow. Polci, B. (2003) Some aspects of the transformation of the Roman domus between Late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages. In L. Lavan and W. Bowden (eds), Theory and Practice in Late Antique Archaeology: 79–109. Leiden. Brill. Reynolds, P (2004) The Roman pottery from the Triconch Palace. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 224–69. Oxford, Oxbow. Ricciardi, R. (2007) Two Roman monuments: proposals for function and context. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint: An Assessment: 165–74. Oxford, Oxbow. Ripoll, G. and Arce, J. (2000) The transformation and the end of the Roman villae in the west (fourth-seventh centuries): problems and perspectives. In G. P. Brogiolo, N. Gauthier and N. Christie (eds), Towns and their Territories between Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages: 63–114. Leiden, Brill. Scott, S. (2000) Art and Society in Fourth-Century Britain: Villa Mosaics in Context (Monograph 53). Oxford, Oxford University School of Archaeology. Soustal, P. (2004) The historical sources for Butrint in the Middle Ages. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Survey 1994–1999: 20–26. Oxford, Oxbow. Taylor, A. (2008) Aspects of deviant burial in Roman Britain. In E. M. Murphy (ed), Deviant Burial in the Archaeological Record: 91–114. Oxford, Oxbow. Ugolini, L. M. (1927) Ricerche archeologiche (Albania antica 1). Rome/Milan, Società editrice d’arte illustrata. Ugolini, L. M. (1937) Butrinto. Il mito d’Enea, gli scavi. Rome, Istituto Grafico Tiberino. Ugolini, L. M. (1942) L’acropoli di Butrinto (Albania antica 3). Rome, Scalia. Yegül, F. (1995) Baths and Bathing in Classical Antiquity. New York/London, Architectural History Foundation/MIT Press.

Notes 1 The present is an interim report discussing the archaeological

sequence of the Vrina Plain in light of the most recent results. The final publication is in preparation. I would like to thank the editors for helpful comments in writing this report; Kim Bowes and Cam Grey for their suggestions on the text; the Instituti i Arkeologjisë and Ilir Gjipali for their help and assistance; and the specialists who have given invaluable information to make this report possible. For the description and interpretation of the basilica mosaic I am indebted to John Mitchell. Also thank you to Peter Crawley, Sarah Leppard, Riley Thorne and the rest of the international team of professional archaeologists who worked on the excavations during the searing Albanian summer, as well to the many students who took part in the training excavations directed by Oliver Gilkes. I would also like to thank the workmen and ladies of Shën Dëlli for their hard work and hospitality throughout the seasons. 2 Ugolini 1927. 3 Budina 1971. 4 Bescoby 2003; 2007: 95–118; Chroston and Hounslow 2004: 64–75; Hodges et al. 1997: 211–14; Pluciennik et al. 2004: 47–63.

160

Simon Greenslade

5 Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 119–64; Greenslade and Çondi 2011: 265–77; Greenslade and Hodges forthcoming; Greenslade et al. 2006: 397–408. 6 The rectangular structure was excavated by the Albanian Institute of Archaeology in the 1980s, and was initially interpreted as a bath-house or cistern due to its proximity to the aqueduct, the piers of which are located c. 3.30 m to the east of it (Çondi 1988). The recent excavations, which uncovered the complete ground plan, has now reinterpreted the building and identified it as a mausoleum, see Gilkes, Hysa and Çondi in this volume; Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 126–31. For a discussion of the column monuments see Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 131–5, and for an interpretation see Riccardi 2007: 165–74. It should be noted that the dating of the mausoleum has recently been revised and is now thought to be later than previously assumed (see note 39). 7 Lane et al. 2004: 27–46. 8 Bescoby in this volume; Bescoby 2007: 95–96. 9 The location of the roads has been an important aspect throughout the work carried out in Butrint. For the Vrina Plain this has been discussed in Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 123–6, who provide an explanation and account of the hypothesised actus grid formation that may have been applied to the settlement. See also Hansen 2009: 41–43, and 48 for a plan of the two possible land division schemes in the Pavllas Valley. Work is in progress to determine if these roads conform to the system of centuriation found through the valley to the south; cf. Bescoby 2006: 741–2; 2007: 112–3. 10 Along the southern edge of the road, directly up against the façade of the buildings, a mortar feature was noticed that measured c. 1 m in width. At the time of the excavation it was thought to be a wall line of an earlier building located below the eastern buildings. However, recent excavations have shown that it is only a mortar raft and as such it may be the foundation of a pavement that may have run along the southern edge of the road. If so, the width of the road at this point would have been c. 2.57 m. 11 The western road may have formed the main approachroad to the settlement and bridgehead through the valley, branching from a Hellenistic road system thought to be located just north of Xarra; Bescoby forthcoming. 12 Greenslade and Çondi 2011: 266. 13 This corresponds to a similar expansion in Butrint: The forum was remodelled/aggrandised at the beginning of the 2nd century AD (Hernandez and Çondi 2008: 286, figs 8, 11); and the ‘Gymnasium’, the Well of Junia Rufina and the bath-house and Peristyle building next to the Forum are all traditionally dated to this century (Karaiskaj 2009: 53; Ugolini 1937: 148–52, 158; Ugolini 1942: 73). See also Hansen 2009: 69–79. The buildings on the southern edge of the acropolis also seem to have been altered at this time, cf. Greenslade, Leppard and Logue in this volume. 14 For a description of the cistern and the earlier building that it was built over see Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 144–6; on the aqueduct see Wilson this volume. 15 Further evidence for this expansion was revealed in the drainage ditch excavations to the east of the aqueduct where a series of 2nd-century mercantile buildings were located that encroached on what had been a 1st-century cemetery; Crowson and Gikes 2007: 136–7. Beyond this, a new bathhouse and associated villa are also though to date to this period of expansion; Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 138–40.

16

17 18 19

20

21 22 23

24

Since 2008 the area to the south of this bath-house has been the focus of the Butrint Training School. See Gilkes, Hysa and Çondi in this volume for a discussion of the recent findings from this excavation. See also Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 140–59 who provide an overview of the 2nd-century tomb structures upon the Vrina Plain, associated with the expanding population. The so-called Monuments are also thought to date to this period. This road was previously thought to form the main road from Butrint to Mursia (cf. Hansen 2009: 45). However, the alignment of the road does not match those of the other early roads associated with the 1st-century settlement, being roughly 16° to the east of these. Instead the level of the road matches that of the approach-road to the house; combined with finds of 1st- to 3rd-century pottery in the road makeup, it is now suggested that the road is contemporary with the peristyle house and that it presumably formed the new northern route of the north–south road referred to in note 11; Greenslade and Leppard forthcoming. Pers. comm. A. Wilson. Petronius, Satyricon 15.28–29. It is possible that a central motive in the mosaic may have utilised glass tesserae within its design. Along with a number of glass tesserae found across the site, a large dump of glass cakes or ingots of green, blue, yellow and purple coloured glass, were located to the east of the western entrance. These cakes would have formed the raw material for the tesserae that would have been cut from the cakes by the mosaicist on site. The proximity of the dump to what appears to have been one of the most lavishly decorated rooms in the complex does not seem to have been accidental and one can imagine the mosaicist leaving the materials for his work close to were he was working with it. The glass cakes were pressed into a deposit containing ceramics that appear to date to the mid 3rd century AD, while the overlying deposit has been dated to the 4th/5th-6th century AD. At the moment this date is provisional and further study is required to define this important find. This will include chemical analysis of the cakes themselves in order to date and identify the source of the glass. For a discussion of this and implications of glass mosaic tesserae see James 2006: 29–47. This building was integral to the construction of the peristyle house: not only was the northern portico built up against this building, but its eastern foundation was extended to form the western outer foundation wall of the western portico. The area uncovered of this room was roughly 11.40 m in length. Pers. comm., D. Bescoby. It should be noted that a similar well-built foundation wall has been identified at the western end of a room roughly 65 m to the south of these foundations; this, too, is thought to demarcate the limit of the structure and the lagoon beyond. A similar restriction to the access of the house has been observed in the contemporary phase 2 domus predating the Triconch Palace within Butrint. Here the visitor is thought to have entered the house from the southeast, where a small door accessed a highly decorated vestibule. The visitor would then have walked to the public reception room, to the west, via a colonnaded gallery that provided views over a garden and the Vivari Channel to the south. Access to the main house to the north, though, was restricted. A door located half way along the gallery provided the only

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

25

26 27 28

29

link between the ‘public’ and ‘private’ part of the house. This door, which may have been closed at times, provided a glimpse of the private area, limited to the central room of the southern wing and, through this room, of the central garden or courtyard beyond. In the later phase 4, too, the main Triconch Palace phase, new entrances were built to the north and south of the triconch. From these, visitors accessed the eastern portico directly in front of the triconch. As on the Vrina Plain, walls across the southern and northern porticos restricted the visitor’s view of the main house to a glimpse across the peristyle, cf. Bowden 2011 and Bowden et al. 2011. See also note 29 for a discussion of the private/public role of the late antique house. Recent excavations in the forum would seem to indicate that during the mid 3rd century AD the plan of the forum was altered. Some of the buildings that surrounded the forum were demolished, and statuary, which may have once been displayed in the forum, appears to have been destroyed and discarded to create levelling for new buildings that now partially encroached on to the forum, Hansen 2009: 79; Hernandez and Çondi 2008: 288–9. The buildings excavated on the southern edge of the acropolis seem to have been abandoned at this time, cf. Greenslade, Leppard and Logue in this volume. Bowden 2003: 37–58. Ellis 1988; 1991; 2000; 2004. This building was formed by the insertion of the apse onto the eastern end of the large 2nd-century building previously mentioned. The apse appears to have been partially built over the line of the earlier north–south road that was located between the rectangular building and the eastern bath-house. The addition of an apse to create a more formalised space can also be seen in the triconch domus where the reception room at the western end of the southern gallery was aggrandised with the addition of an apse, Bowden 2011; Bowden et al. 2011. Carucci 2007: 8–9; Özgenel 2007: 265–9; Scott 2000: 108. The possible identification of this apsidal building as a private audience chamber is important as similar structures have been found at a number of late Roman provincial houses, for example at the ‘palace’ above the theatre at Ephesus in Turkey, the ‘palace’ of the governor or bishop at Aphrodosias in Asia Minor and the ‘Palace of the Dux’ at Apollonia in Libya; for a discussion of these buildings see Ellis 1985: 15–25. These 4th-century AD houses, as Ellis (1991: 120) notes, appear to have been the largest and richest in each town or district and although they are referred to as ‘palaces’ due to their exceptional size, which he points out is difficult to verify, he does suggest that they would almost certainly have been owned by a high-ranking provincial aristocrat. As with the structure from the Vrina Plain, these large single-apsed structures were located near to an entrance way and were entered via a set route that stopped the visitor from entering the entire house, ensuring a degree of separation between the owners’ private and public life as well as that of his household. Ellis (1991: 122–3) suggests these structures were needed as the late Roman aristocrat increasingly had to differentiate between the various social classes of guests that arrived at his house. The house of the late Roman period appears to have had a “strong hierarchy of access” in which reception facilities played a strong part in the manipulation of social encounters as well as social relations (Ellis 1991: 123). In the early

30

31 32 33 34 35

36

37 38 39

40

161

Roman period the triclinium, the main large central room of the house, might have been both dining hall and audience chamber. However, in the later house guests were received in more specialised rooms in which “the audience hall was provided to overawe lowly clients, the formal dining room for important individuals and the main triclinium for more intimate friends” (Ellis 1988: 572). As noted above the majority of these grand formal rooms are normally thought to date to the late 3rd century, becoming the major architectural feature of the large private residences of the 4th and 5th century across the Empire. In Italy such large apsidal rooms are known from an early date, and by the 3rd century AD they are normally associated with estates connected to the emperor. The early date of the Vrina apsidal structure is based on a series of dates produced from excavations undertaken to the north and south of the apse. To the north, the apse was found to have been built over a large circular clay-lined kiln structure. Only a small part of this feature was excavated; however, a large amount of charcoal was recovered, which is thought to be the residue of its final firing. Recent Carbon 14 dating undertaken by the Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory of the University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand, has produced a calibrated age of AD 130–225 (Wk-25585). This feature along with the foundation of the apse was subsequently sealed by a levelling deposit dated to the mid 4th century AD. To the south, a deposit dated to the 1st/3rd century AD was found to have built up against the foundation of the apse. As with the northern slot, this deposit was also sealed by a levelling deposit dated to the mid 4th century AD. For a discussion of the orientation of villas and the positioning of reception/audience chambers see Mulvin 2002. Ellis 2000: 160–3. For a full description of this building see Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 142–3. The eastern wall of this corridor is built into the outer wall of the northern portico indicating that both walls are contemporary. See Bescoby 2007: 115–16 for a discussion of these geophysical anomalies. In 2007 a trial trench was excavated within this space. Although the geophysics of this area appeared to be blank, c. 1 m below the ground surface indications of a well-appointed building were located. This building, which has been discussed above in regards to the 2nd-century expansion on the Vrina Plain, was deliberately demolished and sealed by makeup/levelling layers spread across the area to create the new courtyard. The figure is a rough estimate based on the suggestion that the structure measures c. 150 m north to south by 76 m east to west. The true southern extent of the structure is still uncertain; the magnetic responses are not clear and further excavation is required to truly define it. This is based on the town house covering an area roughly 34.75 m north to south by 39.47 m east to west. Kyrkou 2006. Limestone chippings, associated with the construction of the Temple mausoleum, where found in the fill of the drain that ran parallel to the eastern side of the road. Pottery recovered from this layer was dated to the 3rd century AD; see Gilkes, Hysa and Çondi in this volume. The mausoleum was built directly in front of the aqueduct and it is possible that this connection was a deliberate means

162

41

42

43 44

45

46

47

48 49

50 51

Simon Greenslade of further accentuating the owner and his family’s role in society as the owner may have provided necessary funds for the upkeep of the aqueduct. For a description of the rooms of the bath-house see Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 146–7. It should be noted that the dating of this building has been revised. Rather than being a 2nd-century public bath built for the expanding suburban settlement (cf Crowson and Gilkes 2007; Greenslade and Çondi 2011; Hansen 2009) a recent new study has shown that the foundations of the southern wall of the building were cut through the levelling deposits that were spread across this area following the removal of the eastern wall of the channel road, cf. Greenslade forthcoming a. Similar structures are known from a number of coastal villa sites along the Epirote coast: for example, at Diaporit, Frangoklisia/Riza, Strongyli and Phoenice. Connected with bath-houses these buildings, which vary from hexagonal, octagonal or decagonal in shape, have been identified as frigidarii and were often the most elaborately decorated spaces in the baths, Bowden 2003: 60–67; Katsadima and Angeli 2001: 93–94. Guidoboni 1994: 261–7; Hernandez and Çondi 2008: 289–9; Hodges, Saraci and Bowden 1997: 217; Martin 2004: 92. The possibility that Butrint may have been the epicentre of an earthquake is suggested by Pavlides and Caputo (2004: 163), who suggest that seismic fault damage of the floor of the terraced seating of the theatre indicates the destructive nature of this earthquake. For the excavations of the Triconch Palace see Bowden et al. 2011. For the forum see Hernandez and Condi, 2008: 290. Liquefaction is a common phenomenon on silts and sands with a high water content during earthquake, see Bescoby in this volume. For a discussion of the significance of prone burials see Taylor 2008: 91–114 who suggests that rather than being accidental, prone burials were a deliberate means of constraining the spirit of the dead so that they could not rise and walk among the living. As in the case of the Vrina burials, further constraints, such as binding the hands and legs of the individual and placing stones or tiles over the burial to weigh the body down, appear to have been a common feature of these burials. A similar situation has been observed in the Triconch were the 3rd-entury Roman domus was also re-occupied around AD 400 following the abandonment of the site in the mid 4th century. Over the next twenty years the house underwent a series of major alterations that greatly enlarged the earlier domus, culminating with the construction of the Triconch triclinium and a large peristyle courtyard, cf. Bowden 2011; Bowden et al. 2011; Gilkes and Lako 2004: 167. Bowden 2011; Bowden et al. 2011. The condition of the Temple mausoleum and the area around the Monuments, where a series of buildings were built at the beginning of the century, seems to indicate that the upkeep of these structures was waning during this period too. Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 122; see now Wilson in this volume. The construction of a new nymphaeum within Butrint at the beginning of the 5th century seems to confirm that the water supply to the town was still functioning into the early 5th century (Martin 2004: 92–3; Bowden and Martin 2004: 219). This can be indicated by a build up of limescale along the southern end of the western exterior wall of the header

52

53

54

55 56 57

58 59

tank. Formed by water either leaking or overflowing from the tank, the residue cuts across the once horizontal coursing of the structure, especially towards its base, following the slope of the tilting structure indicating this happened while the structure was still in use (Martin 2004: 91). The closure of the bridge is assumed to have only been for a short time as it seems to have been functioning again by the end of the century as indications are that the road located fronting the Temple Mausoleum was resurfaced in the late 5th/early 6th century (See Gilkes, Hysa and Çondi this volume). Also the new 6th century city wall, built along the shoreline of Butrint, appears to have respected the bridge implying that it remained standing and continued to be a means of access into the city from the valley beyond (See Leppard this volume). Greenslade et al 2006; Hodges 2008a: 53–57. At this time a number of other Christian buildings were constructed within Butrint; for example, the Acropolis Basilica, the Baptistery, the Great Basilica, the church at the Well of Junia Rufina, as well as the church in the ‘Gymnasium’. At Diaporit, too, a Christian basilica was established in the ruins of the abandoned villa. Church construction was ‘… the major architectural investment in 6th-century Butrint’ (Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 122). The Christianisation of the urban topography of Butrint from the 6th century reflects a situation seen in other late antique towns within Epirus and the Mediterranean as a whole, cf. Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 122–4. For a discussion of the Acropolis Basilica, the Great Basilica, and the Well of Junia Rufina see respectively Greenslade, Leppard and Logue; Molla; and Sebastiani et al. in this volume; for Diaporit see Bowden and Perzhita 2004. It had been proposed that the southern extension may have been constructed earlier and that it had been converted into a church in the late 5th century. Rather than being a private residence it was suggested that the building had a public role. The division of the space, the paved areas and the insertion of the tank were interpreted as having been used for storage of agricultural products that were then distributed from this central structure. It was also suggested that the building had a manufacturing role, since an olive press, found in the 2002 ditch/evaluation trench, was located just to the north of this building; it was proposed that it was originally utilised in this space, the oil being stored in the apsidal tank, Greenslade et al 2006: 399–400. Subsequent excavations of the surrounding area and the aisles in 2006 and 2007, however, have revised this dating. Mitchell 2008: 87–89; Mitchell, Gilkes and Çondi 2005. Caraher 2003: 224, 228–37. See Mitchell, Gilkes and Çondi 2005 for further references. As church building sponsored by private donors became a major focus of elite expenditure in the late 5th century, the apparent humility may therefore be seen as a new form of social display for competing elites, cf. Bowden 2008. I am grateful to P. Papadopoulou for this translation. For a discussion of the imagery and the implications of the Vrina Plain mosaic see Mitchell 2008: 87–9; Mitchell, Gilkes and Çondi 2005: 120–5. Other mosaics in this group are to be found in the little triconch church at Antigoneia, in the Baptistery, the Great Basilica, the Acropolis Basilica and the Triconch Palace at Butrint, in the basilica of Bishop Jovianus at Palaeopolis at old Corfu, in Basilicas Alpha and Beta on the island of Kephalos in the Gulf of Arta, in the

8  The Vrina Plain settlement between the 1st–13th centuries

60

61

62

63 64

65

66 67 68

69

70

basilica at Mesaplik near Vlora, in Basilicas Alpha, Beta, Delta, Epsilon and the secular building at Nicopolis, in the pavements at the 1 Maj Road site, at the Post Office site and in the Synagogue Basilica in Saranda. For the identification, description and discussion of these mosaics, see Dode 2004. A further door into the basilica was located at the southwest corner of the western aisle. Giving access to the courtyard of the earlier peristyle house, which was maintained as an open space, this door may have been used by the builders of the southern extension to gain access to the mortar being mixed in the inner pool. Subsequently, it may have been used by the clergy, or by the donors, to enter the basilica in order to separate themselves from the general congregation. The exonarthex and the courtyard to the north of the building were also paved. The paving in the courtyard may have sealed a well/cistern head associated with the early 5thcentury building. A similar prominent burial was located in the entrance of the Acropolis Basilica which has also been attributed to the principal benefactor of the church, see Greenslade, Leppard and Logue this volume Michel 2007: 590–3. To the east, the area opposite the Temple mausoleum shows signs of re-occupation at this time, with a series of roughly built walls constructed partially over the line of the road, see Gilkes, Hysa and Çondi in this volume. For a discussion of two-storey dwellings on Episcopal residences see Polci 2003: 90–1. A similar 6th-century two-storey building in which the lower floor was thought to have been a storeroom and the upper floor the residential area accessed by an exterior staircase was excavated in the Merchant’s House next to the Triconch Palace in Butrint, Bowden, Crowson and Vaccaro 2011. For a description and plan of these post-holes see Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 160, figs 8.21 and 8.22. cf. Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 136. By the late 5th century the design of bath-houses appear to have changed, with a movement away from the large communal baths, to smaller more private buildings in which one bathed alone. This seems to have been partially due to the upkeep of the larger baths and the constant demands on the water supply made by these often vast structures. It would also seem to have been as a result of the growing influence of Christian thought, which disapproved of the lascivious excesses reported to have taken place in the baths, cf. F. Yegül (1995: 317): “… the Church was ready to accept bathing if the component of pleasure was taken out of it – that is, if bathing was reduced to a functional, hygienic and medicinal activity.” For a full description of the bath-house see Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 146–8, who date the bath-house to the late 4th or early 5th century. However, this date relates to the transformation of the cistern, when only the two northern chambers were used, rather than the construction of the bath-house. The new dating for the bath-house relies upon the levelling surrounding the plunge pool and western cold plunge bath. As well as late 4th- and early 5th-century pottery, these deposits contained late 5th- to early 6thcentury pottery; see Greenslade forthcoming b; Greenslade and Hodges forthcoming. There are also indications that the community may have been involved in agricultural production. Trial excavations in the area to the south of the main excavations found

71 72 73 74 75 76 77

78

79

80

81 82 83 84

163

a series of linear cuts truncating a homogenous alluvial deposit that seems to have built up over the surface of the second courtyard. Running north–south these cuts have been interpreted as possible vine trenches. Bowden 2003. Bowden 2008: 175; Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 122–5. Mitchell, Gilkes and Çondi 2005: 111; Percival 1976: 183–201; Ripoll and Arce 2000: 63–114. Bowden and Perzhita 2004. As for the church on the Vrina Plain, it has been suggested that the church at Diaporit may also have been privately financed, Bowden 2008: 327. Mitchell 2004. For Diaporit see Bowden 2008; Bowden and Perzhita, 2004. This period of abandonment is mirrored in Butrint, which appears to have contracted in size from the mid 6th century AD, cf. Hodges 2008a: 62–3. The monastic site at Diaporit was also abandoned around this date, Bowden and Perzhita, 2004: 430–1. By this time the basilica would have been outside the circuit of the newly constructed city defences. Rather than being late 5th century in date, almost contemporary with the foundation of the Vrina Plain basilica (cf. Andrews et al. 2004: 128–32; Martin 2004: 93–5) the construction date of the defences has recently been revised to around 525 AD, Bowden, Crowson and Vaccaro 2011. This suggests that from this time the way in which the city and its hinterland interacted changed and that such a highly visible re-organisation and re-structuring of this new relationship had a major impact upon a community now seen as physically outside the city for the first time. Reynolds 2004: 240–2. This period of discontinuity is also discussed by Bowden (2003: 231–4), who points out that the changes may not be due to a single cause but rather a “combination of factors.” Hodges (2008a: 62–3) suggests that along with political instability, demographic change, pestilence and barbarian invasion all played a part in the downturn of Butrint’s fortunes. Recent excavations in Butrint seem to have found the precursor of this household, located in two towers in the lower city’s western seaward defences. A rich assemblage of glass as well imported ceramics from around the Aegean and the Crimea has been discovered at the base of two towers as a result of catastrophic fires that destroyed both, cf. Kamani this volume; Hodges 2008a: 65–71; 2008b: 277–8; Hodges and Logue 2007: 39–40. The fire damage and abandonment of the 6th-century basilica on the Vrina Plain may conceivably be contemporary with the destruction of the Western Defences. If the latter was due to attack it suggests that the Vrina Plain complex, too, was seen as a stronghold controlling access to the city. Three other kilns dating to this period have been located across the site: two of these were located in the eastern wing of the former suburban domus, whilst the third was constructed in the abandoned eastern bath-house. Papadopoulou (forthcoming a). In all 19 Leo VI coins were recovered. Papadopoulou (forthcoming b). Pers. comm., J. Vroom. The large number of coins and the discovery of a possible steelyard balance may find analogies in excavations of a series of Byzantine shops in Sardis dated to the 7th century. Harris (2004: 114–5) suggests the balances may have been ‘work-a-day tools’ of officials involved in collecting tolls and taxes, and used to check the weight value of the currency.

164

Simon Greenslade

85 Why the new commander decided to occupy an area outside the old fortified urban area in this second incarnation is unclear. Bowden and Hodges (forthcoming) suggest that it may have been a way to differentiate old from new: the new regime wishing to exercise a new administrative and economic authority, in order to define, between c. AD 840–950/1000, “a new Butrint.” 86 Both suggestions are made in Hodges 2008a: 77; 2008b: 279; Hodges and Logue 2007: 40. The reference to the seal of Theodore comes from Curta 2006: 103; see also Soustal 2004: 22. 87 The pathology information on the burials from the Vrina Plain has been provided by Todd Fenton (Michigan State University), cf. Fenton et al. forthcoming. 88 A closely related openwork buckle is known from Palaiokastritsa on Corfu, Agallopoulou 1973: 423–4. This example has been dated to the late 8th century AD; however, the new example from the Vrina Plain was found in a controlled stratigraphic context, pers. comm., J. Mitchell. 89 This grave was not fully excavated due to the high water table during the 2005 season. In 2006, when the water level was much lower, conservation on the mosaic meant the grave was in-filled before it could be fully investigated. 90 As with the Vrina basilica, it was thought that a new ‘palace’ was built within the ruins of the earlier Acropolis Basilica, cf. Hodges 2008a: 81. Recent work on the acropolis, however, now suggests that the focus of activity was centred on the western part of the acropolis, under the present castle, rather than the basilica, see Greenslade, Leppard and Logue in this volume.

91 Molla, Paris and Venturini in this volume. 92 The former bema was undoubtedly an open un-roofed space. The blocking walls of the arcade had slumped directly onto the mosaic, with the levelling deposit overlying this, and the slumping appears contemporary with that seen in the nave after the removal of the roof of the basilica. The wall of the apse appears to have been standing, presumably to its full domed height. 93 At the Well of Junia Rufina at least five children were interred between the mid 11th to 13th centuries around a small chapel, see Sebastiani et al. in this volume. 94 At the time of death the 7–9 year-old was suffering severe scurvy; Fenton et al. forthcoming. 95 This burial cuts the top of the backfill of the (earlier) burial of the individual interred with the bronze belt buckle. At the time it was thought that this was a secondary burial deliberately placed on top of the earlier burial as the lid of the box was missing when it was excavated. However, in photos of the tile layer a squarish stone can be seen sticking out of the tiles over the area of the ossuary. 96 A similar number of coins of Manuel Comnenus I were also found in a hoard of 97 Byzantine coins found close to a small gate leading to the Vivari Channel from the Triconch Palace, Hodges 2008: 91; Papadopoulou 2005. 97 Attempts to support an expanding town from the mid 11th century through agricultural intensification may have caused an ecological change to the surrounding environment and ensuing emergence of swamp and wetlands. This issue is discussed by Bescoby in this volume.

9  Two Roman mausolea on the Vrina Plain Oliver Gilkes, Valbona Hysa and Dhimitër Çondi with a contribution by Inge Lyse Hansen

Ancient Butrint had two significant cemeteries. A major necropolis of all periods from Hellenistic to medieval extended across the isthmus to the west of Butrint, along the lakeshore and following the side of the Vivari Channel in a series of grand masonry tombs of various type that provided a monumental maritime approach from the sea.1 Extensive excavations were undertaken here in the 1930s and also in the 1980s. The necropolis of the Vrina Plain was the second major cemetery in the immediate environs of Butrint. A number of tombs here have already been studied and reported on.2 This was an extensive cemetery stretching eastwards across the plain from the general line of the road and the aqueduct, which appears to demarcate its western boundary.3 It developed in tandem with a series of villas and farms that form an extension to the more focussed settlement, which clustered around the bridgehead on the southern side of the Vivari Channel (Fig. 9.1). Recently, two substantial Roman mausolea have been excavated, which materially add to our understanding of the nature of this particular cemetery and also to the detail of tomb types that are now known from Butrint. These two monuments are presented here together with some comment on their significance.

The Temple mausoleum The remains of what is now referred to as the Temple mausoleum has been a prominent feature on the Vrina Plain for many years.4 It was first excavated in the late 1980s by the Albanian Institute of Archaeology. At the time, due to the presence of a thick mortar surface on the building’s floor and walls, as well as its proximity to the aqueduct (located c. 3.30 m to the east of it), this rectangular building was interpreted as a cistern.5 During 2004 the building was once again examined as part of the major excavations carried out by the Butrint Foundation on the Vrina Plain. Cleaning of the building revealed its form in more detail and cast doubts on the original interpretation: the building was built on a podium with a door located at the western end, where the robbed-out impressions of a

staircase were found fronting the building. Internally the impressions of five rectangular structures were found on the pavement at the eastern end of the building, which again seemed at odds with the original interpretation. The earlier excavations had recovered various sculptural pieces across the site, including a portrait head, as well as reliefs and architectural fragments that appeared to be funerary in nature.6 As fragments of human bones were also found within the backfill from the 1980s excavations, the building was reinterpreted as a mausoleum, possibly a heroon, the focus of a funerary cult of a prestigious individual.7 In 2005, excavations around the sides of the building uncovered further traces of broken sculptural pieces (see below). They also revealed the in situ fragments of the lower stone facing and surrounding mouldings of the building indicating that this was an imposing structure. This is the largest and most elaborate mausoleum found at Butrint so far (Fig. 9.2). The mausoleum is rectangular, and measures 16.17 × 8.67 m (Fig. 9.3). Orientated east–west, the core of the building’s podium was constructed of opus caementicium poured into shuttering in lifts of roughly 0.60 m high, with a total height of the podium of between 1.50–1.80 m. The marks of the shuttering can still be seen on the cement and rubble core along the southern face of the cella (Fig. 9.4). The principal stone elements, plinth, steps and mouldings, were inserted as required during this process. It is apparent that the eastern, cella, section of the structure was erected first with the steps and pronaos being added to the west at a slightly later stage of the same construction process. The sides of the cella, steps and antes were clad in blocks and slabs of fine grey limestone, up to 0.20 m thick. Most of the side slabs were missing, having been robbed away as spolia, but the iron grapples and clamps that fixed them into position are visible in the upper surface of the moulding (Fig. 9.5). This moulding ran all around the sides, the rear and the antes above the two steps of the plinth. The moulding is comprised a simple and elegant cyma recta whose proportions varied slightly from area to area. An unusual element was the offsetting of the moulding around the western, front section of the building (Fig. 9.5).

Oliver Gilkes, Valbona Hysa and Dhimitër Çondi

166

Bath house Family tomb Tomb Villa complex

Drainage ditch

Header tank Tomb

Monument

Temple mausoleum

Peristyle house and basilica area 0

Figure 9.1. Location plan of the main sites on the Vrina Plain

Figure 9.2. Aerial view of the Temple mausoleum

100 m

9  Two Roman mausolea on the Vrina Plain

167

Aqueduct pier Road Tombs

Later buildings 0 Figure 9.3. The Temple mausoleum after excavation

Figure 9.4. Shuttering on the cement and rubble core of the Temple mausoleum

20 m

168

Oliver Gilkes, Valbona Hysa and Dhimitër Çondi

Figure 9.5. The Temple mausoleum: offset moulding with remains of the iron clamps This lay c. 0.45 m lower than the moulding of the rest of the building. In part this was due to the lack of an upper step to the plinth in this area, though normally such a moulding continues around the entire structure. The slightly later addition of the steps, and the offset moulding, may have been part of some alteration to the original scheme. An upper opposed moulding of the same design was also included at the top of the podium, below the wall of the cella. Most of this had been smashed and broken during the demolition process, though substantial elements were discovered during the excavation, especially where they had been tipped over as part of the slighting of all but the southern wall. The cella had been badly damaged, but sufficient remained of its southern wall and internal space to clarify its arrangement (Fig. 9.6). Internally, it measured 8 × 5.45 m. The walls were of mortared bricks, resting on a foundation of stone blocks and substantial bipedales tiles. The particular type of brickwork was a fine opus listatum with triangular cut bricks (the original sesquipedalis tiles had diagonal scoring to facilitate this process) set into the mortared rubble core of the wall. The mortar interstices were about 5 mm thick underlining the quality of the technique. The floor of the cella was of cocciopesto mortar, and, in places where it had not been exposed to the elements since the excavations of the 1980s, it was finely laid and finished. The interior walls had clearly been veneered in stone and marble, at least up to a certain height. On the interior of the surviving southern wall there was a deposit of mortar, up to 20 mm thick, and insert ceramic spacers and the shafts of iron clamps were spaced regularly across the

wall face. Only one piece of veneer remains in position. On the interior of the southern door jamb a small fragment of grey-white marble veneer is still set against a thick mortar backing. Fragments of veneer that may well have adorned this building were found throughout the excavations. This included various grey and white marbles as well as some slabs of verde antico. There were a number of internal rectangular structures of varying sizes, constructed from mortared tiles, built upon the cocciopesto floor. Four of these remained partly intact. The presence of human bones and fragments of marble sarcophagi of the later 2nd and 3rd centuries suggests that these were tombs, or the supports for sarcophagi. The exterior of the cella appears to have been simply finished. Either the brickwork was left exposed, or a thin plain render was applied to the surface. Some evidence for rendering was also found on a section of fallen wall to the rear of the building. The exterior of the still standing southern wall has been heavily damaged during medieval robbing and thus nothing of its outer face is to be seen. An axial doorway, some 3.30 m wide led through the western wall of the cella into the area of the pronaos. Here there are still some surviving fragments of stone paving slabs, now much degraded. Originally the pronaos area was likely to have been 2.35 m wide, the full width of the temple. At the sides of this area the stone blocks of the cladding are far more substantial, extending up to 1.20 m into the pronaos below its pavement. This is certainly to provide a solid foundation to bear the load of the colonnade at this point. Beyond the pronaos are the antes and the stairway (Fig.

9  Two Roman mausolea on the Vrina Plain

169

Figure 9.6. The cella of the Temple mausoleum (I. Gjipali)

9.7). The antes were also constructed in opus caementicium, faced with stone slabs, and together these projections on the north and south framed the stairs. The latter were 5.73 m wide and fortunately the lowest step survives in position, the others had been robbed away. The surviving step was 0.31 m in height and 0.30 m deep at its narrowest point. Given that the other blocks would rest above this, these measurements provide an estimate of the dimensions of the missing blocks, the settings for which were, in any case, visible in the varying slopes of the opus caementicium core of the stairs. Permitting for some minor variation, this would suggest that seven steps existed up to the level of the pronaos pavement.

Reconstruction Fragments were recovered of an Ionic capital and part of the denticulated cornice and frieze with some of the denticulations intact (Fig. 9.8). Other elements of the denticulation were found as fragments, having been broken off during the demolition of the building. No column shafts were found, though one curved section of marble was recovered that might belong to a column. All the architectural elements seem to have been cut from a white, medium grained marble with prominent grey-green veining characteristic of Pentelic marble.8 It is not entirely certain whether the Ionic element

forms the principal order of the mausoleums façade though our reconstruction assumes this. While this order was to some degree characteristic of the pre-Roman temples of Epirus, it had rather become an archaic style by the time the mausoleum was built. It is possible that the capital fragments come from another building entirely, or are part of a secondary order. However, it is worth considering how these few finds make it possible to provide a tentative reconstruction based on the Vitruvian rules for the Ionic order. Certain assumptions have been made here: essentially that the temple was prostyle, with a eustyle intercolumnation.9 Using the rules outlined by Vitruvius for the Ionic order, the 0.26 m height of the capital permits the following calculation: a diameter of the column of 0.42 m; which in turn would suggest a shaft of c. 3.99 m high; and, hence, a colonnade of six shafts. The remainder of the dimensions of the façade, the cornice, architrave and tympanum can be calculated from these basic dimensions.10 While these figures are no more than suggestive given the minimal remains, the dimensions thus extrapolated do fit the size of the building (Figs 9.9–11). As noted above, the outside of the cella was seemingly undecorated except perhaps for a rendering of mortar. There are no traces of an engaged colonnade or any other elaboration. A further problem with this suggested reconstruction is the seating of the colonnade. The enlarged facing blocks

170

Oliver Gilkes, Valbona Hysa and Dhimitër Çondi

Figure 9.7. Stairway of the Temple mausoleum

Figure 9.8. Fragment of Ionic capital found in the Temple mausoleum excavations

set just before the antes would provide an ideal foundation for two columns flanking the entrance, taking the principal weight of the architrave and tympanum, with a lighter or no incolumnation in the centre.11 The lack of a solid foundation right across the pronaos might suggest that this was in fact the arrangement, though of course other evidence for these columns is lacking. This is a building seemingly modelled on Italic style temples, though here with a much lower podium more reminiscent of local Epirote styles. Only two other temples

of Italic style are known from Albania, both from Apollonia: the 1st-century AD building recently excavated in the upper agora or forum, and the so-called temple of Artemis in the lower agora found in the 1920s, an Ionic building dated to the 2nd second century AD.12 The upper agora building, of which only the foundations survive, was much larger than the Vrina Plain structure as befits a major public religious building. Most temple architecture thus far identified in Albania was heavily influenced by Hellenistic ideas.13 The largest temples were variations on the Doric form. The temple of Shtyllas at Apollonia, a substantial peripteral building, and the substantial, pseudo-peripteral ‘temple of Venus’ at Amantia were both influenced by contact with Greek colonies.14 However, it is apparent that there was also an indigenous ‘Epirot’ style of prostyle temples of smaller dimensions typified by the temple of Zeus at Dodona and, locally, by the temple above the theatre at Butrint, probably to be identified with the shrine of Asclepius.15 A group of tombs in the northwestern cemetery at Nicopolis also provide very close architectural and structural parallels for the Temple mausoleum. This series of substantial buildings are dated rather uncertainly to the 1st century AD though it is apparent that a number of subsequent phases of building also occurred. All possess the characteristics of the Italic/ Epirote style, prostyle design and low podia, and some may have displayed an Ionic order.16

Date and topographical context The Temple mausoleum was not an isolated structure but rather was erected in an already built environment. To the east of the structure passed the aqueduct and to the west the mausoleum fronted onto a roadway. Excavations to the

9  Two Roman mausolea on the Vrina Plain

171

0

5m

Figure 9.9. Reconstructed plan of the Temple mausoleum

Figure 9.10. Reconstructed façade of the Temple mausoleum

Figure 9.11. Reconstructed side view with facing blocks

0

0

5m

5m

172

Oliver Gilkes, Valbona Hysa and Dhimitër Çondi

west of the mausoleums steps, revealed that the road was built with a foundation of closely laid stones overlaid by a cobbled surface, and with drains on either side; this road is thought to have been the principal access route through the Pavllas Valley, connecting Butrint to the main road between Nicopolis and Aulon (Fig. 9.12, cf. Fig. 6.10).17 Ceramics from the foundation of the road appear to date its construction to the mid 1st century AD.18 Both sides of the road were originally lined with buildings. Along the western side of the road and slightly set back from it, were a series of piers forming a colonnade. These ran parallel with the road and fronted a portico 2.30 m deep with a well-built wall forming the western side. A doorway at the southern end of this wall allowed access into the space beyond. Due to time constraints, this building was not excavated, so it is difficult to interpret its role. However, it seems to have been located at the intersection of the main road and a side road thought to be located just to the north of the excavations, which gave access to the western quarter of the Vrina Plain settlement that grew up around the bridgehead from the mid 1st century AD.19 To the east of the road was situated a building with at least two interconnected rooms. Only the internal division wall and part of the southern end of the west wall of the building survived, fronting the road, as, with the construction of the mausoleum, the northern room had been demolished and the doorway between the two rooms blocked. In regards to the location of the mausoleum it is interesting to note that the position of the structure does not appear to align to the earlier buildings or roads: at its northwestern corner the mausoleum is almost 5° east of the road. It had been tentatively suggested that this reorientation reflected a second and slightly later phase of the settlement, in which the axis of the settlements grid plan had shifted and been re-organised following the imposition of a new centuriation plan.20 However, this change was not reflected in the wider landscape and rather than being representative of a wholesale re-organisation of the settlement this alignment seems to have been restricted to the mausoleum alone. As the building is aligned almost true east–west the west-facing aspect of the structure may have been the main governing principle for its orientation. Dating the building is difficult. Due to the high water table the excavations did not penetrate below the level of the ancient ground surface associated with the temple, and thus no dating evidence was taken from earlier horizons. To the east it cuts the levelling layer 5105 dated to the Augustan period by fragmentary amphorae, but as the aqueduct, which on historical data is almost certainly earlier than the Temple mausoleum, also cuts the same level, this is not conclusive. Despite this, a possible date for the construction of the mausoleum may come from sediments found infilling the eastern drain of the road, the mausoleum having been built up against the western side of this drain. Within the primary fill of the drain, fragments of limestone chippings, thought to have been from the working of the stones used

in the construction of the mausoleum, were found mixed with ceramics dating to the 3rd century. This dating is significant since the nature of the occupation of the Vrina Plain seems to have changed during the 3rd century. The recent excavations on the western suburb have shown that during this century the urban fabric of the Vrina settlement was altered with the construction of a large, opulent and spacious domus over this area.21 Covering an area almost eight times the size of the contemporary domus of the Triconch Palace, this suburban residence was built to impress. The possible 3rd-century dating of the Temple mausoleum may therefore suggest that this structure was built as part of this new complex, forming a highly visible and prestigious final resting place for the owner and his family.22

The marble sarcophagus finds (ILH) Funerary material was first identified in this area with the 1987 excavations; unfortunately none were recorded as part of stratigraphic excavations. Ten fragments identifiable as various parts of sarcophagi have been published from this assembly with more awaiting publication; all are of Attic type, two from kline sarcophagi.23 A further 48 fragments, of various sizes and character, have been found during the 2004–5 excavations undertaken by the Butrint Foundation.24 Approximately half were discovered in contexts of little archaeological value (topsoil or backfill/spoil layers from the 1987 excavations), but the rest are associated with respectively rubble collapse or silty clay layers (contexts 5002, 5007, 5009, 5029) that locate the destruction of the sarcophagi in a temporal arc contemporary with the destruction and abandonment of the Temple mausoleum. Overall the recent body of finds from this area appears more cohesive than the finds from previous excavations, which were clearly influenced by the complex postdepositional history in this area; however, certain pieces found in the 2004–5 excavations join with fragments from the 1987 excavations, while many others correspond in form, style and decoration. A striking example is two joining pieces from the short, left-hand end of a lid of a large kline sarcophagus (Fig. 9.13).25 In other words, the marble finds can now safely be attributed to the Temple mausoleum supporting the current attribution of the monument.26 The finds from the 2004–5 excavations are generally rather fragmentary in nature, and most often of very small size; hence the sarcophagi must have been destroyed in situ, in preparation, undoubtedly, for a nearby limekiln. Despite the fragmentary character of the material it is nevertheless possible to make some preliminary observations. Firstly, the vast majority of the new finds are fragments of Attic style sarcophagi of Pentelic marble of high quality. Their form and style suggest that they were imported from Greece or Asia Minor, and to have been brought to Butrint in a finished state with no evidence of work by local workshops. The style of the pieces in the main suggests a date of the late 2nd/early 3rd century AD,

9  Two Roman mausolea on the Vrina Plain

173

Figure 9.12. The road in front of the Temple mausoleum looking south. Three phases of metalling: later 1st century AD, late antique, medieval embankment on the western side

Figure 9.13. Two joining fragments of a lid of a kline sarcophagus

though pieces of the mid 3rd century are represented too. Secondly, many of the finds further indicate that these sarcophagi were of very large size, originally up to 1.15 × 2.30 m in size and around 1.00–1.20 m in height (cf. Fig. 9.13). The decorative schemes can only be guessed at but fragments of (hunting) dogs, figures in rapid movement or heroic (semi)nudity suggests that themes of hunting or battle, or Dionysiac scenes were depicted; though fragments of a garland sarcophagus may also be

represented. Thirdly, a preliminary estimate of the number of sarcophagi represented in the assemblage suggests that it comprises certainly two, possibly three, sarcophagi. This appears coherent with the remains of four proposed supports found within the Temple mausoleum. Overall the fragments found on the Vrina Plain provide evidence for a conspicuous investment in high-quality imported marble for display in what was presumably a family tomb. The monumental size, decoration and the kline

Oliver Gilkes, Valbona Hysa and Dhimitër Çondi

174

Southwest

Northeast 5040

5040

5041 5041 5081

5073 Pavement

Wall

5056

5070 West wall of drain

5074 East wall of drain

5084

Medieval embankment

5042 5047

5048

Late antique metalling

Late 1st century AD metalling

5007 5047 5051 5049 West wall 5052 of drain 5058 0

Tile

4028 5050 East wall of drain

2m

Figure 9.14. Southeast facing section across the roadway format of these would have presented a powerful visual statement of status through association with learning and cultured leisure, a display of elite ideals that provided an eloquent display of family ideals.

Change During the 4th and 5th centuries the Temple mausoleum would have remained a conspicuous feature on the plain, though its state of repair may have been waning. With its close connection to the Vrina domus the changing fortunes that this household underwent during these centuries would equally have been felt upon this building.27 By the beginning of the 6th century the Temple mausoleum and the general area surrounding it appears to have been transformed. To the west, the arcades of the porticoed building were blocked, as was the door in the western wall. The portico was levelled up and a small crudely formed apsidal structure was built over it. To the east of the blocked portico a further building was found built over a similar levelling deposit containing a mix of 3rd- as well as 5th- to 6th-century ceramics. A new wall was also built overlying the western edge of the earlier Roman road surface. Fragments of a section of the cyma recta moulding from the podium of the mausoleum were found reused as spolia within this wall. At this time the road in front of the mausoleum appears to have been re-surfaced. Comprising a mix of tile and limestone rubble (Fig. 9.17, context 5074) it extended from the eastern face of the new western wall and sealed the eastern road drain, abutting the lower step of the mausoleum.28 Although the Temple mausoleum would appear to have been in a state of disrepair at this time it nevertheless appears to have remained in use, though internally changes were made: the tombs in the cella were partly removed and a thin occupation horizon, containing 6th-century ceramics, built up over the floor and tomb imprints. Above this level, patches of a rough paving of broken tiles, set within a greenish-grey clay, were found, the clay matrix containing a number of late 4th-/early 5thcentury coins.29 Cutting the cella floor and the overlying

occupation horizon were a series of post-holes, thought to be associated with this tile floor.30 These changes may once again find direct relations to events to the west where, at the end of the 5th century, a Christian basilica was built on the remains of the Roman domus.31 This new Christian building would have formed an imposing feature upon the plain and have provided a highly visible statement of the new Episcopal presence in late antique Butrint. The possible east–west branch road that may have been located just north of the western porticoed building was probably still in use and the access it provided to the religious centre may explain why the area surrounding the mausoleum underwent a revival at this time.32

Abandonment and demolition This revival appears to have been short lived though. By the end of the 6th century the area appears to have been in decline and the buildings abandoned.33 Over the next few centuries the walls of the buildings collapsed and a series of rubble and silt deposits began building up around the sides of the Temple mausoleum (contexts 5026 and 5007). These deposits partially spread out over the road. With low banks on either side, the road at this time would have presented an aspect of a small hollow way (Figs 9.12 and 9.14). As far as can be determined, though, this hollow way seems to have remained the principal approach to Butrint from the south and hence may have been used by those visiting the owner of the manor house that was constructed in the ruins of the basilica to the west during the 9th and 10th centuries.34 Further silting occurred outside the Temple mausoleum (context 5006, 5009 and 5010) before the next major event. This comprised the systematic demolition of the building, seemingly to recover as much of its valuable marble decoration as possible, which was broken up on the site and taken away, most likely to be burnt into lime.35 The demolition method can be gauged from the northern and eastern sides of the building where the walls were initially undermined by the removal of the facing slabs

9  Two Roman mausolea on the Vrina Plain of the podium before the opus caementicium core was cut away so as to allow the wall to collapse. The undermining of ancient structures in this fashion seems to have been a standard way of demolishing them for their materials. It was widely used in Rome in the Middle Ages as well as elsewhere in Albania. For instance, the still standing column of the temple of Shtyllas at Apollonia shows the clear traces of at least three rings of chisel marks around its circumference at different heights (Fig. 9.15). These have not penetrated far, but would have eventually prepared the column for demolition with ropes. The northern wall was found still lying where it fell (context 5005), with the coursing of the wall still intact. As the objective of the robbing had been to gain the prize of the architectural marble, no attempt was made to carry away the bricks or other stones. Along the eastern side, the upper moulding had fallen as part of this collapse. The fall of this wall also seems to have smashed the still standing adjacent arch of the aqueduct, the remains of which were found stratified below the largely intact rubble of the wall (Fig. 9.16). On the southern side a different approach to the robbing was undertaken. Here, due to the presence of a pre-existing building, the podium could not be reached with any ease. As a consequence, though the facing slabs were removed, the undermining occurred at a higher level, and the cut

Figure 9.15. Column of the temple of Shtyllas (Apollonia) showing demolition technique

5000

Northeast

Northeast

5097

5000

5093

5097

5097

5029

Southwest 5003

5029 5000

Northeast

175

5003

5029

5093

5003 5093 5094 5102 5105

5102

0

Tile Mortar inclusions Wall mortar Tile Stone Mortar inclusions Wall mortar Stone

5094 5102 5105

2m

0

0

Tile Mortar inclusions Wall mortar Stone

2m

2m

Interpretation

Interpretation

Aqueduct pier

5093

5094

5105

Aqueduct pier

Southwest

5093

5093

Interpretation

Southwest

Aqueduct pier

Aluvium deposits and features related to the Aluvium deposits and features related to the state farm use of the area state related farm use Aluvium deposits and features to of thethe area state farm use of the area Demolition of the Temple mausoleum Demolition of the Temple mausoleum Demolition of the Temple mausoleum Demolition of the Temple mausoleum Demolition of the Temple mausoleum Demolition of the Temple mausoleum Construction of the Temple mausoleum Construction of the Temple mausoleum Aluvium levelling layer Construction of the Temple mausoleum Aluvium levelling layer Aluvium levelling layer

Construction cut for the Temple mausoleum Construction cut for the Temple mausoleum

Figure 9.16. Northwest facing section between the Temple mausoleum and the aqueduct, fallen masonry Constructionshowing cut for thethe Temple mausoleum

176

Oliver Gilkes, Valbona Hysa and Dhimitër Çondi

Figure 9.17. The family mausoleum, bathhouse and villa complex

was made into the brick face of the cella wall. This had the desired effect but left the building far better preserved on this side than elsewhere. The layers associated with the robbing of the southern wall were full of smashed and broken fragments of marble. Amongst the marbles recovered were a number of fragments of verde antico veneer that would have formed part of the decorative scheme of the interior. This Grecian stone does not seem to have been used as a building material until the 2nd century AD.36 As well as containing 5th/6th-century coins these deposits included an interesting assemblage of early-mid 3rd-century ceramics, including a number of Corinthian relief moulded vessels, Pompeian red wares and eastern sigilata, a fairly high-quality collection, and certainly not typical of, for example, a domestic deposit.37 Despite the destruction and spoliation of the Temple mausoleum, the memory of its sanctity appears to have remained. A small tomb a cappuccino was found placed against the robbed out southern wall of the building, cut through the deposits infilling the alleyway. A final robbing event can be seen inside the cella where a deep and narrow hole (feature 5037) was cut for 1.60 m through the solid mortar core of the temple podium. The reason for this thankless task is unclear, but it is likely that looters, or the demolition team, were seeking treasure. Even today in southern Albania a belief in the existence of treasure in old ruins is widespread amongst country people. During the civil unrest of 1997 a large hole was dug into the solid masonry foundation of the 16th-century Venetian tower for similar reasons, and another was cut through the modern concrete foundation of a restored mosaic at Antigoneia near Gjirokastra (carefully avoiding the actual pavement).38 Following the robbing of the Temple mausoleum the general area appears to have been left. The ‘hollow way’ silted in and the robbed walls were covered over, with only the plinth and part of the southern wall still standing as a testament to the structure. Venetian pottery recovered from layer 5004 was dated to the 14th century and was found to seal the wall collapse and the infill of the hollow

way thereby providing a terminus ante quem for this final episode.39

The family tomb The second mausoleum was located almost 325 m to the northeast of the Temple mausoleum. It was initially revealed during the geophysical survey undertaken across the Vrina Plain between 1998–1999 but was not recognised until the area was excavated as part of the summer training school initiative undertaken by the Albanian Heritage Foundation from 2008.40 The tomb is connected to a villa complex originally laid out in the mid to later 1st century AD, but extensively reconstructed during the early 3rd century AD (Fig. 9.17).41 The mausoleum is, in fact, constructed precisely through the middle of a small rectangular building of the earlier complex. There is no obvious structural explanation for this as the rectangular building and its foundations were largely removed to accommodate the new tomb. It may be that there was some other practical reason for its location at this point. The structural style is similar to that of the 3rd-century refurbished villa, to which it may be connected, by proximity if nothing else, and very different from that of the earlier, demolished complex. The family tomb was constructed above a substantial foundation trench measuring c. 6 × 4.25 m and a massive raft of opus caementicium mortared rubble. All the masonry consisted of well coursed, shaped limestone blocks bonded with a hard grey mortar. The plan of the building consists of a small rectangular chamber, 8.5 × 5.75 m, fronted with a small portico (Fig. 9.18). The northwest and southeastern walls were further sustained by double buttresses bonded into the masonry. The main entrance, 1.50 m wide, is situated on the southwest and a substantial stone threshold block for a double leaf door still remains in situ. The interior seems to have had a floor of beaten earth mixed with fragments of mortar and well-graded building rubble, possibly from the demolition of the earlier buildings. There were three principal placements for tombs in the interior, all set into the rubble core of the foundation.

9  Two Roman mausolea on the Vrina Plain

177

Platforms

Buttresses

Tomb Portico

0

5m

Figure 9.18. Plan of the family mausoleum (Albanian Heritage Foundation)

Close to the northeastern and southeastern walls were two solid masonry platforms constructed of limestone rubble edged with large flat slabs of stone all bonded by mortar. These were undoubtedly intended as platforms to hold sarcophagi, probably of stone or marble, but no fragments of such were discovered in the excavations. Hard in the angle against the northwestern and southwestern walls a masonry tomb was built with a base of well-placed tiles and a superstructure of well-cut and coursed stone and tile. Both the exterior and interior, including the floor, of this tomb were lined with slabs of rectangular grey-white marble veneer, and a small ‘cushion’ of mortar was placed at its eastern end (Fig. 9.19). A dozen other graves were later added, mostly of juveniles, set around the main tombs, in the corners of the tomb chamber and at the sides of the portico, as well as outside the family tomb between the buttresses and in a series of masonry tombs against the southern walls. These graves outside the family tomb reused the remains of the earlier building as an impromptu funerary garden. While analysis of the skeletal material is still in progress the impression given by the tight arrangement of burials and the location of the tomb is that of a fairly close-knit social group, perhaps a single family and its retainers.42

At the front of the mausoleum was a narrow portico 4.50 × 1.50 m. Short antes projected from the front and stylobate walls of the building and comprised substantial slabs of limestone on masonry foundations. These antes, which continued the line of the portico, were themselves built on the raft of mortared rubble. From impressions left on the surface of the slabs of the portico, as well as from tiles discovered here, it is clear that the colonnade comprised brick-built columns with a mortar render. There were four of these, each c. 0.50 m in diameter, spaced about 1.10 m apart. The portico appears to have a beaten earth surface that had later been largely removed by ploughing. This surface sealed a levelling deposit (context 51) that was substantially undisturbed and contained an important group of ceramics dating to the early 3rd century AD. This provides the clearest data for the dating of the mausoleum’s construction. The presence of the side buttresses implies that this was a substantial building with a high central chamber (Fig. 9.20). Since the portico was undoubtedly topped by a tympanum and pitched roof it seems likely that the whole of the roof was pitched with a timber frame. Certainly, no fragments that might have constituted a vault were found during the excavation.

178

Oliver Gilkes, Valbona Hysa and Dhimitër Çondi

Figure 9.20. Reconstruction of the family mausoleum (Albanian Heritage Foundation, drawing by E. Lamce)

Figure 9.19. Built grave in the family mausoleum (Albanian Heritage Foundation)

Like the Temple mausoleum, this smaller tomb falls into the category of temple tombs well known from the Roman world from the Flavian period into the middle of the 3rd century.43 The Butrint mausolea seem to establish a local variant of this form of tomb that, while generally similar to other examples in Greece or Italy, have a lower podium and differ to some degree from Italian examples in having an open portico.44 This style seems to copy the local tradition of temple building where peripteral style temples are in a distinct minority, and shrines consisting of a cella fronted by a prostyle pronaos and with a low stepped podium are the norm.45 Further, it is possible to see this form as a development from other local traditions. The tombs excavated at Selce in eastern Albania are clearly derived from Macedonian tombs forms: rock cut, though generally without a dromos, with a fronting ceremonial area and, significantly, the façade is given an elaborate colonnaded appearance suggestive of a temple.46 Add to these traditions ideas imported from Italy, either through the gradual acculturation to which the Epirote seaboard in particular was exposed, or via incoming colonists as in the case of Butrint, and we may infer the foundations for the emergence of a composite style. The excavated mausoleum is a much simplified version of this style, lacking the marble and stone fittings of these larger structures; rather, it comprises a rectangular chamber,

fronted by a narrow pronaos with a prostyle colonnade. The buttresses built into the side of the chamber walls suggest a structure of some height. The provision of a vaulted roof is a possibility, but it seems far simpler, and easier to correlate with the portico, to assume a simple pitched timber roof. There is no podium to speak of and the tomb rises from the ground surface with only a modest step up into the porch. The interior is simple; there is no surviving evidence of any architectural detailing, and the floor was of beaten earth. The arrangement of the principal burials in the form of a triclinium finds parallels at numerous sites, including Butrint. At Butrint the Italian Archaeological Mission of the 1930s excavated a tomb in the western cemetery where stone burial cists were arranged the same fashion (Fig. 9.21).47 Though it is also seen at the earlier rock-cut tomb, burial 1, at Selce.48 A certain continuity of use is suggested in the burial sequence in and around the mausoleum. The three principal tombs were presumably occupied first, after which two infant burials were inserted into odd corners of the building. The skeletal remains, however, have identified a total of some five burials, almost all generally infants, and hence a number of other tombs must have been destroyed during the demolition of the building. Two other graves were built into the side spaces of the portico, after which spaces on the exterior were employed for the insertion of brick and stone built graves, exploiting the niches created by the buttresses, even reusing the walls of the earlier rectangular building as the delineation of an ad hoc funerary plot to demarcate this external cemetery. It is possible that all this burial activity represents the funerary practices of a single extended family group, most likely the owners of the nearby villa complex and their dependants.

9  Two Roman mausolea on the Vrina Plain

179

Stone-slab sepulchres

Threshold

0

Figure 9.21. Tomb from the western cemetery excavated in the 1930s

2m

180

Oliver Gilkes, Valbona Hysa and Dhimitër Çondi

Abandonment and demolition At the family mausoleum it is clear that some form of activity continued beyond the 3rd century; the deposition of material of the 5th and 6th centuries is evident, though whether the mausoleum was still in use at this time is uncertain. Its main structure, however, was certainly still standing, as there is no building debris dating to this time. An adjacent bathhouse revealed distinct evidence of having been put to a secondary use at this time. A partial re-flooring with spolia of one of the non-heated rooms, as well as a small assemblage of ceramics found within it, indicate that it may have formed the focus of whatever occupation continued at the site. It had clearly long been out of use as a bath and the heated rooms were stripped of reusable materials. A dump of ceramics and other material of 13th-century date was found to the west of the tomb suggesting a medieval settlement in the vicinity, though this has yet to be identified. The soil matricies associated with the dump were thick dark grey and black silts that usually appear to denote activity of this date. The pronaos and demolished walls of the tomb were covered with this same material and a fair amount of rubble that clearly originated in its structure. It seems possible then that demolition occurred, as with the Temple mausoleum, at this time.

References Baçe, A. (1984) Vështrim mbi besimin dhe arkitekturën e kultit tek ilirët. Monumentet 28.2: 5–32. Bescoby, D. J. (2007) Geoarchaeological investigation at Roman Butrint. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint: An Assessment: 98–118. Oxford, Oxbow. Borghini, G. (2004) (ed.) Marmi antichi. Rome, De Luca Editore. Ceka, N. (1985) Qyteti ilir pranë Selces së Poshtme. Tirana, Akademia e Shkencave e RPS shqiperise. Chroston, N. and Hounslow, M. (2004) The geophysical survey: the extent and structural layout of the suburbs of Butrint on the Vrina Plain. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Survey 1994–1999: 64–76. Oxford, Oxbow. Çondi, Dh. (1988) Gjetje arkeologjike nga rrethina e Butrinti. In N. Ceka (ed.), Butroti: Permbledhje Studimesh: 237– 48. Tirana, Akademia e Shkencave e RPSSH Quendra e Kerkimeve Arkeologjike. Çondi, Dh. and Hansen, I. L. (2007) The marble finds from the Temple, in A. Crowson and O. J. Gilkes, The Archaeology of the Vrina Plain: An Assessment: 128–31. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint: An Assessment: 119–64. Oxford, Oxbow. Crowson, A. and Gilkes, O. J. (2007) The archaeology of the Vrina Plain: an assessment. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint: An Assessment: 119–64. Oxford, Oxbow. DeLaine, J. (1997) The temple-tomb or mausoleum, in, The early imperial complex (phases 1–2): 42–44. In T. W. Potter and A. C. King (eds), Excavations at the Mola di Monte Gelato: A Roman and Medieval Settlement in South Etruria: 17–45. Rome, British School at Rome.

Georgiou, A. (2007) The north west necropolis of Nicopolis. In K. L. Zachos (ed.), Nicopolis B: proceedings of the Second International Nicopolis Symposium I: 307–23. Preveza, Actia Nicopolis Foundation. Gilkes, O. J. and Hysa, V. (forthcoming) Excavations at the Temple mausoleum and roadway. In Greenslade, S. and Hodges, R. (eds), Butrint 5. Excavations on the Vrina Plain. The Roman and Byzantine Suburb. Oxford, Oxbow. Greenslade, S. and Leppard, S. (forthcoming) The Temple mausoleum. In S. Greenslade and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 5. Excavations on the Vrina Plain. The Roman and Byzantine Suburb. Oxford, Oxbow. Hansen, I. L. (2009) Hellenistic and Roman Butrint (Butrinti Helenistik dhe Romak). London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Hansen, I. L. (forthcoming) Elite living in death. The sarcophagi from the Temple mausoleum. In S. Greenslade and R. Hodges (eds), Butrint 5. Excavations on the Vrina Plain. The Roman and Byzantine Suburb. Oxford, Oxbow. Hodges, R. (2008) The Rise and Fall of Byzantine Butrint (Shkëlqimi dhe rënia e Butrintit bizantin). London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Koch, G. (1988) Sarkophage der römischen Kaiserzeit in Albanien. Mitteilungen des deutschen Archäologischen Instituts (Römische Abteilung) 95: 235–56. Lamboley, J. L. and Vrekaj, B. (2003–2004) Les fouilles francoalbanaises d’Apollonia: 1994–2004. Iliria 31.1–2: 163–206. Lamboley, J. L. and Vrekaj, B. (2007) Apollonia D’Illyrie 1: Atlas Archéologique et Historique. Rome, École française de Rome. Lazzarini, L. (2004) Pietre e Marmi Antichi. Milan, CEDAM. Melfi, M. (2007) The sanctuary of Asclepius. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint: An Assessment: 17–32. Oxford, Oxbow. Mertens, D. (1985) Magna Grecia, Epiro e Macedonia. Nota introduttiva per l’architettura. In Magna Grecia, Epiro e Macedonia. Atti del Ventiquattresimo Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia: 431–46. Taranto, Istituto per la Storia e l’Archeologia della Magna Grecia. Mielsch, H. (1985) Buntmarmore aus Rom in Antikenmuseum Berlin. Berlin, Staatliche Museum Preussischer Kulturbesitz. Mustilli, D. (1941) Relazione preliminare sugli scavi archeologici in Albania (1937–40). Atti della Reale Accademia d’Italia 2: 677–704. Pani, G (1985) Tempulli në Shtyllas: Pëpjeke për formalimin arketektonik. In Monumentet 29.1: 79–85. Ricciardi, R. (2007) Two Roman monuments: proposals for function and context. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint: An Assessment: 165–74. Oxford, Oxbow. Toynbee, J. M. C. (1971) Death and Burial in the Roman World. London, Thames and Hudson. von Hesberg, H. (1992) Römische Grabbauten. Darmstadt, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. von Hesberg, H. (1994) Monumenta. Milan, Longanesi.

Notes 1 2 3 4

See Hernandez and Mitchell in this volume. Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 148–55. Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 126. A preliminary assessment of the monument was presented in Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 126–8, where it was simply called ‘the Temple’. 5 Çondi 1988.

9  Two Roman mausolea on the Vrina Plain 6 Çondi and Hansen 2007: 128–31 with further biblio­ graphy. 7 We are indebted to Konstantinos Zachos for this sug­ gestion. 8 Borghini 2004: 251. 9 Vitruvius De Architectura 3.3.6. 10 Vitruvius De Architectura 3.5. 11 von Hesberg 1992: 218–9. 12 Lamboley and Vrekaj 2003–2004: 167–9; Lamboley and Vrekaj 2007: 207–8, 221–4. 13 Mertens 1985: 437–8. 14 Baçe 1984; Pani 1985. 15 Melfi 2007; Mertens 1985. 16 Georgiu 2007: 307–23, esp 319. 17 Bescoby 2007: 112–3, fig. 7.6; Hansen 2009: 45. The line of the road had been traced during the geophysical surveys of the area undertaken during the 1990s for just under a 100 m (cf. Bescoby 2007: fig. 7.3); beyond this point it does not appear and it may be that the paving is restricted to only a small part of the road. To the northwest, the road would have terminated at the bridge, forming the crossing point over the Vivari Channel and linking Butrint to its hinterland, see the contribution by Leppard in this volume. 18 The dating and sequence of the road and surrounding buildings are currently being revised (Greenslade and Leppard forthcoming). See also Greenslade in this volume: note 16, Leppard in this volume. 19 Greenslade in this volume. 20 Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 123–6. 21 Greenslade in this volume. 22 The desire of the owner to promote his and his family’s position in society may also have been demonstrated by the construction of ‘the monuments’, excavated in 2002–2003, similarly located along the roadside, cf. Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 131–5; Ricciardi 2007. Cut through a deposit dating to the late 2nd/early 3rd century the first of these, a finely made stone base, was probably intended as the monumental foundations either of a funerary column or altars. A second monument now seems to be the stone slab seating for a sarcophagus or other funerary monument. 23 Parts of these finds were published in Çondi 1988 with more published in Çondi and Hansen 2007. Cf. Koch 1988: 255. 24 These will be published in full in Hansen forthcoming. 25 The fragment of the lid discovered in 1987 (on the right in Fig. 9.13) is currently on display in the Butrint Museum (inv 432); I am grateful to Dh. Çondi for the permission to reproduce the image of this unpublished piece. The fragment on the left was discovered in a rubble layer (5029) at the rear of the Temple mausoleum. 26 The lack of overall cohesion in the 1987 material originally made their pertinence to the monument uncertain. 27 For a discussion of the Vrina domus during the 4th and 5th centuries see Greenslade this volume. 28 Part of the capping over the drain was deliberately left

29 30

31 32

33

34 35

36 37 38 39 40

41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

181

abutting the mausoleum steps. Located roughly central to the building it would seem that this slab was deliberately left so as to form a point of access to the building. The true extent of this surface, though, is difficult to gauge as the majority of it had been removed by the clearance of the 1980s. It should be noted that within the make-up of the tile floor two fragments of an Apulian painted, ribbed amphora were recovered, thought to be medieval in date. These fragments may have become accidentally mixed in with this layer following the 1980s excavations. However if they are from the make-up it could suggest that this floor surface is much later in date and may relate to the changes that this area would undergo in the proceeding centuries. See Greenslade in this volume. As part of this revival, a small church or chapel was built to the northwest of the monument, cf. Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 136. Similarly accessed from the east–west branch road this apsidal structure was the latest building encountered within this area, built over a series of demolition horizons, and situated close to the bridging point into Butrint. The Vrina plain basilica appears to have been abandoned by the middle of the 6th century and the decline of the area around the Temple mausoleum may have been a direct consequence of this, cf. Greenslade in this volume. Within Butrint, too, there appears to have been a noticeable contraction in the size of the habitable area from this period onwards, cf. Hodges 2008: 61–63. For a description of this new manor house, or oikos, possibly built for the commander of Butrint, see Greenslade in this volume; Hodges 2008: 73–77. It is interesting to note that throughout the robbing there was no trace of the columns of the pronaos and it is likely that some care was taken to remove these intact for use elsewhere. Borghini 2004: 292–3; Lazzarini 2004: 95; Mielsch 1985: 207. The ceramics are being studied by Paul Reynolds (ICREA, University of Barcelona). Pers. comm., A. Islami. Identified by Joanita Vroom (University of Amsterdam). The tomb and associated villa can be seen in the gradiometer plot below the bath-house in Chroston and Hounslow 2004: fig. 5.9. See also Bescoby 2007: fig. 7.4, where the tomb can be seen at the top right-hand corner of the magnetic survey plot. Gilkes and Hysa forthcoming. Examination of the skeletal remains is being undertaken by Tom Crist (Utica College New York). Toynbee 1971: 130–2; Von Hesberg 1994: 209–30. Delaine 1997: 42–46. Mertens 1985: 437. Ceka 1985: 37–38, tab. 19–20; 42–46, tab. 29–30. Mustilli 1941: 703–4, fig. 21. Ceka 1985: 39, tab. 26.

10  The western cemetery: archaeological survey   of Roman tombs along the Vivari Channel David R. Hernandez and John Mitchell

The ancient Greek and Roman city of Butrint (Buthrotum) was a seaport occupying a fortified headland on the coast of Epirus.1 Naturally oriented toward the Ionian Sea by a navigable waterway (Vivari Channel), Butrint benefited from maritime trade across the Strait of Otranto, the primary Hellenistic and Roman trade route between Italy and the East on the northern Mediterranean coastline. The city expanded substantially during the 2nd century BC and the 2nd century AD, with the establishment, first, of a lower city at the foot of the acropolis hill, and, then, with widespread development across the Butrint peninsula and beyond onto the Vrina Plain.2 West of the city, beyond the narrow isthmus, which connects the Butrint headland to the Ksamil peninsula, the southern slopes of Mount Sotira became the city’s main necropolis throughout the Hellenistic and Roman periods (cf. Figs 1.2 and 1.9). With a number of monumental tombs and burials having been discovered on the lower slopes of the hill near Butrint, the investigation in 2004 explored the western limits of the cemetery. A six-week archaeological survey was undertaken to examine an area of almost 11,000 m2 located c. 1 km west of the ancient city; this focused exclusively on the cemetery occupying a concave hollow on the lowest slope of Mount Sotira (Fig. 10.1). The area was bound on the north by the original Saranda–Butrint road and on the south by a marsh, which runs from the base of the hill to the Vivari Channel. The eastern and western limits of the area extended up to two military bunkers, built adjacent to the road and connected by a long ditch, fortified by concrete. The survey discovered substantial remains of tombs in six general areas, and in all identified 23 funerary structures, four of which were freestanding monumental Roman tombs. The area along the entire lower slopes of Mount Sotira is now heavily overgrown; however, the tombs documented in the survey represent a good sample of the character and density of funerary structures in this area. This chapter presents the results of the survey, contextualised by a review of prior research undertaken in this necropolis. What became clear from the survey is that the most prominent

Roman memorials fronted the Vivari Channel, the maritime route of entry into the city.

Previous research on the ancient cemeteries at Butrint Archaeological research in the western cemetery first began with the Italian Archaeological Mission in 1928 under the direction of Luigi Maria Ugolini. Ugolini investigated cemetery sites on the northern side of Butrint, outside the Lion Gate, and on the Vrina Plain. The greater focus of his efforts was directed towards the area beyond the western fortification walls of Butrint, on the isthmus between Lake Butrint and the Vivari Channel.3 Here he excavated 56 tombs, though he published only 14 of these as a representative sample.4 According to Ugolini, the chronology of interments ranged from the 4th century BC to the 3rd century AD, and the excavated tombs revealed a greater number of inhumation than cremation burials.5 He classified the simple inhumation burials according to five general types: well-made burials lined by four limestone slabs and sealed by a fifth slab; pits lined with several smaller limestone slabs; pits lined with rough, unworked stones; burials in which tile and imbrices were used to cover the body; tile-lined pits sealed with unworked stones.6 The most elaborate tomb excavated by Ugolini on the isthmus was a tower-type tomb for cremation burials (Fig. 10.1 (A)).7 The lower level of this consisted of a barrel-vaulted cella with five niches, two on each lateral wall and one opposite the entrance (average dimensions: 0.40 × 0.42 × 0.45 m). Funerary artefacts, such as terracotta and glass cinerary urns, were discovered in situ within the niches. An external niche (0.55 × 0.42 × 0.95 m), located above the entrance of the cella, may originally have featured a bust or inscription honouring the deceased. Ugolini described the tomb as an edicola funeraria, because the original façade consisted of a two-storey colonnaded aedicule, and dated it to the 2nd century AD.8 Although it is located near Lake Butrint, on the northern side of the isthmus, the tomb turns it back on the lake, facing southeast. Its orientation suggests that the

10  The western cemetery: archaeological survey of Roman tombs along the Vivari Channel

183

Figure 10.1. Area of the western cemetery surveyed

tomb looked across the ancient harbour, which may have occupied the southern bank of the isthmus.9 Outside the Lion Gate, Ugolini excavated the largest tomb presently known at Butrint (c. 15 × 9.5 × 9 m) (Fig. 10.1 (B)).10 Originally supporting a vaulted roof, the central cella is divided into two corridors, which flank more than 25 stone-built sepulchres for inhumation burials and two rows of square niches (0.55 × 0.55 m) for cremation urns. The size of the tomb suggests that it belonged to a burial club, or a collegium, if the structure dates to the early Roman period. However, both the chronology and phasing of the tomb are uncertain.11 After Ugolini’s death in 1936, Domenico Mustilli, the last director of the Italian Archaeological Mission, resumed the investigation of the necropolis. He excavated at least one large tomb in the western cemetery, as well as nine simple pit burials near it (Fig. 10.1 (C)).12 He found the

tomb completely robbed of materials, but on the evidence of the grave goods recovered from the nine simple burials, Mustilli proposed a date in the 2nd or 3rd century AD for these. The large tomb is located on Mount Sotira; it overlooks the isthmus and faces southward toward the Vivari Channel (cf. Fig. 9.21). Mustilli describes it as an aedicule type, following Ugolini’s nomenclature. The tomb is elevated on a small square podium, and an external step leads up to a door (1.2 m wide). Three stone sarcophagi are arranged against the rear wall to give the tomb the appearance of a triclinium. An arched niche, perhaps for a shrine, flanked by two smaller rectangular niches for cremation burials (0.40 × 0.56 m; 0.34 × 0.54 m), occupies the central position of the rear wall above the sarcophagi. In 1938, Mustilli excavated a monumental tomb within the walled city (Fig. 10.1 (D)).13 The monument has a square

184

David R. Hernandez and John Mitchell

base (3.60 × 3.68 m) formed from limestone ashlar blocks. A base moulding above this features a repetitive three-fold cyma reversa. Above the moulding and recessed 0.55 m around it rise eight regular courses of white limestone blocks bonded by mortar. Remnants of the original barrel vault survive. The existing height of the monument is over two meters, and four columns or pilasters originally framed the four corners of the monument. The tomb is located approximately 16 m south of the Tower of Inscriptions, adjacent to the so-called Gymnasium, and appears to have been a roadside monument built outside the fortification walls during the late Hellenistic period.14 The tomb is the only known funerary structure to have been preserved and incorporated into the urban fabric of the Roman city of Butrint itself. After the Second World War, work on the necropolis continued under the Albanian Institute of Archaeology. In 1956, Dhimosten Budina, director of archaeological research at Butrint, discovered a previously unknown cemetery, located on the southern slopes of Mount Kepin, opposite the northern side of the Butrint headland (cf. Fig. 10.1).15 The excavation uncovered 10 simple graves, which were of two general types. Seven graves contained cremation burials. Budina dates most of them to the Hellenistic period, on the evidence of the grave goods, which include ceramic and glass vessels, lamps, fishing hooks, a knife, and an engraved bone object. He assigned one cremation burial to the 1st century AD and three inhumation burials to the early Roman period.16 The arrangement of nails found in one inhumation burial suggests that the body was placed in a wooden coffin (1.20 × 0.50 m).17 According to Budina, many of the interred were fishermen, and he posits a thriving fishing industry in Hellenistic and early Roman times. Budina’s plan of Butrint, published in 1971, includes many tombs from the isthmus region of the necropolis.18 Two excavation campaigns were later undertaken in 1980 and 1982 in an area of the western cemetery near the city’s western fortification walls, which was previously unexplored.19 Of the 41 burials excavated, Budina only discusses one in any detail, dating it to the Hellenistic period, between the 3rd and 2nd centuries BC; the other 40 he believed to be Roman, from the 1st to 3rd centuries AD.20 A complete two-handled ceramic cinerary urn was found in the Hellenistic tomb, together with a strigil, flasks, lamps, cups, and a squat lekythos.21 In 2001 an assessment was made of the western cemetery by the Butrint Foundation as part of a management and conservation plan for the Butrint National Park.22 Three large monumental masonry-built tombs and numerous simple burials were found concentrated near the western side of the isthmus. One tomb, oriented toward the Vivari Channel, in opus mixtum, is c. 6 m wide (Fig. 10.1 (E)). The preserved eastern and western walls, which are c. 1 m thick, supported a vaulted ceiling almost 6 m high. Near this structure, a ruined wall, now nestled in overgrown vegetation, belonged to another ancient tomb. The wall,

which stands to a height of 1.25 m and is 0.70 m thick, has a curvature that generates a 6 m diameter if extended (Fig. 10.1 (F)). The tomb may have had the appearance of a semi-circular exedra tomb, similar in form to the wellknown exedra tombs at Pompeii.23 Above this tomb, on the upper slopes of Mount Sotira, another tomb (c. 5 m2) contains at least two internal sepulchres for inhumation burials (Fig. 10.1 (G)). Complementary to the western cemetery, on the northern bank of the Vivari Channel, is the cemetery on the Vrina Plain, on the channel’s southern bank opposite Butrint (cf. Fig. 1.9). Geomorphological studies and large-scale excavations from 2002–2008 have shown that the Vrina Plain cemetery was situated right on the Roman-era shore line, with tombs fronting the water (cf. Figs 1.9 and 2.3).24 The excavators encountered a boundary wall that separated the cemetery from the residential area of the settlement. Such walled cemeteries are not uncommon in Italy and the provinces of the Roman Empire.25 Inscriptions discovered in the excavations demonstrate that the area was divided into funerary plots, which were sold according to frontal lengths.26 One two-storey tomb on the Vrina Plain is typologically similar to the “edicola funeraria” excavated by Ugolini.27 The first storey contains a barrel-vaulted chamber with two internal niches for cremation burials. The two arched niches (0.44 × 0.43 × 0.56 m) are situated centrally in the eastern and western walls of the cella. The second storey, at present, is a solid rubble core resting above the vaulted chamber. Judging from similar tombs in Italy, this upper storey of the tomb may originally have had the form of a column drum or altar.28 Entrance to the cella was from the north, with the tomb facing the Vivari Channel. The same is the case for a large vaulted tomb dating to the 2nd century AD.29 This tomb, which contained a single sepulchre for an inhumation burial, is flanked by a series of buildings and small open-air spaces, which served as funerary enclosures. Two infant burials, dated to the 2nd century AD, were discovered in these structures. Given the context of the area, it is likely that the prominent 2ndcentury AD column monument excavated close to the ancient shoreline also functioned as a Roman tomb.30

The 2004 survey of the western cemetery The survey identified 23 tombs in six general areas. The tombs are numbered sequentially below, and their area location is indicated on Figure 10.1.

Tomb 1: The Painted Tomb (Area 1) The tomb is located at the base of a steep slope at the eastern end of the surveyed area (Area 1), which is c. 600 m east of Butrint’s modern entrance. Although the tomb is situated on the northern bank of the Vivari Channel, it now remains hidden from view, obscured by the dense vegetation that has enveloped the monument in modern times. In antiquity the

10  The western cemetery: archaeological survey of Roman tombs along the Vivari Channel

Western sepulchre

185

Eastern sepulchre

Base

Phase 1 (AD 150-250)

Threshold Stones (Phase 1)

Phase 2 (Venetian?)

Brick Mortar 0

5m

Worked bedrock

Figure 10.2. Plan of Tomb 1 tomb would have been visible along the Vivari Channel, as well as from the city’s acropolis and the Vrina Plain. The present structure was built in two phases. In its first phase, the monument was a shallow rectangular building, 4.92 m wide and 2.90 m deep, with a barrel-vaulted ceiling (Figs 10.2–8). The walls (0.65 m thick) were constructed in opus mixtum. The vault was constructed in a similar manner, though with a higher proportion of brick to stone. Fragments of the collapsed vaulting were found inside the tomb, together with two large boulders. Most of the vault appears to have been destroyed by boulders of dislodged bedrock, which were probably thrown downhill during the original construction of the Saranda–Butrint road in 1959. The monument with its vaulting still intact is depicted in a lithograph by Henry Cook entitled The Robbers’ Castle, Albania published in 1853.31 This shows the ruins of a vaulted building, undoubtedly Tomb 1, on the north bank of the Vivari Channel lying below the Venetian watchtower, which is still a prominent landmark near Butrint today.

The finished state of the southern ends of the eastern and western walls shows that the tomb in its original state did not have a front wall. The interior appears to have been open to the gaze of travellers along the Vivari Channel. However, a central threshold (1.73 × 0.33 m), made of three finely levelled stones, marks the entrance of the building on the south side. The three interior walls were articulated with a projecting horizontal cornice, which ran across the rear wall c. 1.90 m above the floor. On this rear wall, the cornice divided a lower rectangular field from an arched upper field defined by the vault. The upper moulding of the cornice projected in marked relief, formed on an armature of bricks set into the wall, covered with moulded plaster. The tomb’s interior contained two rectangular chambers for inhumation burials (Fig. 10.2). The exterior measurements of the eastern and western sepulchres are 0.88 × 2.05 m and 0.81 × 2.10 m, respectively (Figs 10.6, 10.8). The bases of the sepulchres consisted of truncated bedrock and levelled mortar floors. Their walls were

186

David R. Hernandez and John Mitchell

Figure 10.3. Western wall (east-facing elevation) of Tomb 1

Figure 10.4. Northern wall (south-facing elevation) of Tomb 1

10  The western cemetery: archaeological survey of Roman tombs along the Vivari Channel

187

Figure 10.5. Eastern wall (west-facing elevation) of Tomb 1

Figure 10.6. Western wall of Tomb 1, showing Phase III wall paintings and western sepulchre (below)

constructed of regular courses of limestone blocks and bricks, which were plastered and painted. An area on the exterior of the western structure was painted ochre. Originally, each sepulchre was sealed by a thick limestone slab, a corner fragment of which remains in situ in the eastern structure, imbedded in the northeastern corner of the northern wall. The fragment was not dislodged when the tomb was robbed of its materials. The profile of the lid fragment shows that a semi-elliptical moulding in the form of a ‘pillow’ rested above the eastern end, the ‘head’

of the lid. Both sepulchres were shaped as couches, with their upper surfaces sloping up to where the head-end abutted the wall of the tomb. A rectangular base (0.94 × 0.58 m), composed of tiles bonded by a dark yellow mortar, was found abutting the tomb’s eastern wall and the eastern sepulchre (Fig. 10.8). Judging from other Roman tombs, this structure may have originally served as a base for a funerary shrine that housed a cremation burial.32 In a second construction phase, the building was

188

David R. Hernandez and John Mitchell

Figure 10.7. Northern wall of Tomb 1

Figure 10.8. Northern and eastern walls of Tomb 1, showing phase I wall paintings, eastern sepulchre and brick base (lower right)

10  The western cemetery: archaeological survey of Roman tombs along the Vivari Channel

189

Figure 10.9. Phase I paintings on eastern wall of Tomb 1, with a reconstruction of the decorative scheme

extended (2.52 m) on its southern side, towards the Vivari Channel, more than doubling its size – to 5.42 m (cf. Fig. 10.2). The walls of the new structure were constructed of roughly drafted blocks of local limestone, without any regular coursing or the use of bricks as in the first phase. The mortar, which covered the interior walls in this second phase, is noticeably different from the whiter and harder mortar used in the building’s first phase. The many fallen roof-tiles (curved imbrices) in and around the building suggest that it was covered by a hipped roof in its second phase. A hole, which punctures the painted plaster of the tomb’s first phase, is located centrally near the top of the interior northern wall of the building, demonstrating that a timber beam supported the roof. A comparable tomb exists outside the lion gate, located immediately east of the large tomb excavated by Ugolini (Fig. 10.1 (I)). It is of the same masonry construction in opus mixtum as the first phase of Tomb 1. The remains preserve a wall, over 4 m long, with painted plaster in situ and the bottom of the tomb’s vaulting. The existence of this tomb suggests that the cemeteries outside the Lion Gate and west of the city were both in use in the late 2nd or early 3rd century AD.

Painted decoration Three successive phases of wall-plaster carrying painted decoration can be identified on the interior walls of the

building (Fig. 10.9 and Plates 10.1–4). The first two of these belong to the original structure, while the third was added subsequent to the enlargement of the building. The first phase of wall-plaster and painted decoration is readily identifiable on the northern and eastern walls. It may also survive on the western wall under the plaster of the subsequent two phases. The surfaces of the walls were first levelled with an aricchio layer of plaster laid onto the masonry and trowelled to a smooth finish. This was covered by an intonaco to carry the paint-surface. The decorative scheme of this initial phase is best preserved on the eastern wall, although the surface is extremely worn and faded, and the design is preserved only in disjointed and often indistinct fragments (Fig. 10.9). The pattern consisted of a rectangular grid in red and sometimes yellow, describing squares with sides of roughly 0.15 m (the observable variation in the length of these sides is 0.14–0.16 m). The intersections of the grid were marked by red discs, apparently contoured in green or girt by green accents. A motif in red was set at the centre of each square, a design that looks like some kind of exploded star or stylized flower petal. The northern wall contains a relatively well-preserved example of this ‘flowerpetal’ motif in red. The overall design of the pattern does not survive in a condition to make a full reconstruction possible. In the lunette above the cornice, on the rear wall, a field is framed by a deep red border (45–50 mm wide).

190

David R. Hernandez and John Mitchell

Below the cornice, between the two sepulchres, where the natural rock-face had been cut back to shape the space, the surface was plastered and painted red down to the floor. This painted plaster surface runs uninterrupted onto the outer face of the western sepulchre. The southern end of the eastern wall is covered with a thick plaster (c. 25 mm), painted ochre, which probably also belonged to phase I. A second phase of decoration, painted onto a skim of plaster laid thinly over the original intonaco (phase I), is preserved only in disjointed fragments. It has not been possible to reconstruct its original extent and design. This layer survives most extensively in the lunette above the cornice on the rear wall, where a field is framed by a second deep red border (85–90 mm wide over the cornice; c. 60–70 mm wide along the curve of the vault). The ground within this frame is a pinkish cream in the far right half of the lunette. On the left-hand side of the rear wall, both above and below the cornice, traces of green accents on a creamyochre ground, seemingly the stems of plants and leaves, are preserved from this phase. Higher on this rear wall is an area of pinkish colour with green above it and to the right a passage of configurations in red, which may represent drapery. It would appear that the overall composition contained elements of green plants both below and above the cornice, and possibly a figural image in the lunette. The most coherent surviving painted surfaces belong to the third phase. The best preserved remains are on the western wall and on the adjacent western end of the northern wall (Plate 10.1). The scheme is composed of a sequence of panels, some of which carry figural imagery. These are set in narrow red frames (20 mm wide), bordered by exiguous white contouring lines. The surviving panels are of various sizes, with the framing bands dividing the walls in irregular sequence, one of which accommodates the irregular outline of the old western sepulchre. Two fragmentary figural panels are preserved on the western wall. The panel on the left extends lower than its neighbouring panel and is preserved to a height of 0.81 m (originally c. 1 m) and a width of 0.5 m (Plates 10.2 and 10.3). The left panel, of which perhaps half is preserved, displays the lower three-quarters of two standing male figures. In both cases the shoulders and heads are lost. The left-hand figure, which is missing its left side, is posed frontally, with the right foot pointing down. The lower garment seems to consist of a long tunic extending down to the ankles, light blue-grey in colour, with an orange-red band, a clavus, running diagonally down through it from the left shoulder to the right ankle. An upper garment forms a long angular sleeve over the right arm. A peculiar characteristic of this figure is the way the front and rear lower hems of the tunic appear to be distinguished and separated, with a sequence of little white brush-strokes articulating the intervening deep red inner surface of the material, a formula quite commonly employed by painters in Italy in the later 8th and 9th centuries. The artist has drawn the ankle and foot as if emerging from behind the rear hem rather than from the interior of the tunic between the two hems.

The right-hand figure of the same panel is shown in three-quarter stance, turning in towards his companion. He also wears a long lower garment, a tunic of sorts, brownish-red in colour, which reaches the lower calf, ending somewhat strangely in a rolled-up hem. The cloth falls in prominent V-folds beneath the abdomen, between the legs. Over this he wears a deeper brownish-red upper garment, which falls neatly down across the lower body in a curving contour and forms a long triangular sleeve over the shoulder and arm. Little curving white lines model the lower legs and feet of this figure. A telling characteristic of the image is the way in which the feet overlap the frame, projecting the two figures into the visual space of the viewer. The background is red below and green above, with the divide at mid-thigh level. The missing left side of the composition may well have included a third figure, pendant to the one on the right, turning in to address the frontal figure in the centre. The right panel (0.82 m high × 0.77 m wide) on the western wall is very different. The lower horizontal red border is defined by two horizontal string lines, which were snapped into the plaster while it was still damp. The paintings of this third phase clearly were executed by an artist who prepared and drafted his surfaces with professional expertise. The panel shows a figure with naked upper body, who wears a loin-cloth about the waist (Plate 10.3). The figure, cut off horizontally at the top of the thighs, as if standing in water or behind a parapet, is posed more or less frontally, with head, shoulders, and arms gently inclined to the left. Much of the top of the image, including the upper part of the head has been destroyed. The body is coloured a tanned yellow ochre with the contours, ribs, and muscles defined in dark red. The loincloth, which is gathered up at the front in a large knot, is a creamy white, with the folds also described in red. The left arm is halfbent at the elbow, with the hand just below the knot of the loincloth. Arm and hand, like the body, are painted in a rich ochre with little curving white highlights on the palm of the hand. The left arm, which is almost indiscernible now, is gently inflected, with the hand extended towards the lower-left corner of the framed space; the hand appears to be open with the palm displayed. There is a broken area of dark red in the area of the left shoulder. A red rod or staff of some kind emerges from behind the right shoulder, sloping up to the right of the head. There may be a corresponding feature on the left. To the right of the head, above the staff, is a substantial horizontal feature, like a beam, in light ochre, contoured in a richer mix of the same colour. The background is grey-blue below and deep green above, with the divide at waist-level, indicating possibly water, possibly a stone feature below and an abstracted verdant landscape above. A salient feature of this figure is a deep red halo (0.23 m diam.), rimmed in white, framing the head. This identifies the figure unambiguously as Christ or a Christian saint. This image recalls the common late Byzantine com­ positional type of the Akra Tapeinosis, the Utmost Humiliation, the western imago pietatis, Christ as Man of

10  The western cemetery: archaeological survey of Roman tombs along the Vivari Channel Sorrows, naked except for a cloth about his loins, standing in his tomb, a box-like sarcophagus, the cross rising up behind his head, flanked by the spear and hyssop with which he was tormented – all features which are possibly represented on this panel. This is a pictorial subject that seems to have been first deployed by artists in the Byzantine cultural sphere in the 11th century.33 At Butrint there is a painting of this type of indeterminate date (possibly 15th century), on a wall below the castle, just inside the West Gate of the medieval wall-circuit.34 The composition is a common one in churches of the region, the closest being a version of possible 17th/18th-century date in the monastic church at Mesopotam.35 However, in these compositions, Christ is typically represented with his upper arms hanging down vertically while his forearms turn in and arms cross at the wrists before his abdomen, whereas in the image in the mausoleum the man extends his right arm with open palm. This could be a variant of a western type, in which Christ displays his palms to show his wounds; however, in most versions of this iconography, both hands are presented in symmetrical fashion, rather than just one, as is the case here.36 On balance of probability, it is likely that this barely legible image does represents Christ in his tomb as Man of Sorrows – an iconography that would be eminently suited to a funerary context; however, the possibility remains that another subject is represented here, either Christ or a saint in another action. On the northern wall, in this third phase, red frames divide the surface up into a series of small fields, coloured a murky blackish-green (Plate 10.4). A substantial passage of red drapery is preserved, left of centre, running up over the line of the old cornice into the lunette above, within a large framed area again contoured in red. The ground behind this drapery, presumably a clothed figure, was divided into deep green below and grey-blue above. It is clear that the interior of the entire building in its final enlarged state was replastered and repainted. The sequence of plastering in this phase was executed in horizontal pontata, as follows: first the western, northern, and eastern walls above the level of the cornice; then the lower walls on all three sides. On the northern wall, the lower pontata was carried right down to floor-level, while on the western wall, it terminated short of the bottom and a third skim of roughly surfaced plaster was trowelled up from the floor to lap over the lower edge of the median pontata with its figural panels. Although the masonry of the vault does not survive, a fallen fragment of painted plaster with a concave formation shows that the upper vaulted surfaces of the interior were painted in the same way as the vertical walls. The surviving piece shows a dark red border with an inner 3 mm band of black framing what seems to have been a blue field.

Chronology The date of the tomb’s construction and of the first phase of painted decoration can be determined by the presence of ceramic sherds embedded in the mortar of the tomb’s

191

Figure 10.10. Cooking pot lid (top) and rim (bottom) from Tomb 1

masonry in the northern wall (cf. Fig. 10.4). Paul Reynolds identified rim and body sherds from one or more cooking pots with a characteristic grooved rim, of local manufacture dating to the late 2nd or early 3rd century AD (Fig. 10.10). This common type of domestic pottery, found in the excavated deposits at Diaporit and exported to Corfu in antiquity, suggests that the tomb and its first phase of wall painting can be dated to the same period. Fragments of a Roman ceramic lamp were also recovered from this same context. The remains of the second phase of painting are too vestigial to afford any secure index for dating; however, the plaster of this phase, associated with the original building, predates the building’s extension and restructuring. The poor condition of the third phase painted decoration and the lack of relevant comparative material in the region makes an assessment of the formal affiliations of style and iconography and its date a perilous undertaking. Some features could be taken to indicate a date in the early Middle Ages, while others point to an early modern context. A date in the early Middle Ages might be supported by: 1) the way the walls are partitioned off into panels, framed by narrow red bands. These recall late Roman variants of the old Pompeian Third Style. 2) The design and clothes of the two standing figures. Long tunics enveloping the torso and legs with some kind of wrap or cape around the shoulders and upper body are more consistent with a late Roman or early medieval context than with a date after the millennium. They show no obvious marks of the conventions of Byzantine figural design and embellishment, which were widely adopted in the Balkans after the 10th century. The clavus running down the full length of the tunic, as it does on one of the two surviving figures in one of the panels on the west wall, is also predominantly a motif of Roman and post-Roman Mediterranean culture of the first millennium, rarely met with in later periods. Another feature pointing in the same direction is the

192

David R. Hernandez and John Mitchell

Figure 10.11. Map of Butrint by Vincenzo Coronelli,1688 (Instituti i Arkeologjisë)

rendition of the lower edge of the long clavate tunic worn by this figure, where the front and back hems are clearly distinguished, one above the other, creating a long drawnout point ellipse. This is one of the characteristic features of the practice of artists working for Lombard and later for Frankish patrons in Italy in the late 8th and 9th centuries. Good examples are the angel addressing Zachariah, of the 750s, in S. Sofia in Benevento, and the figures of SS. Peter and Paul in a compendium of Canon Law of the first half of the 9th century from Pavia.37 3) The feet of the two standing figures overlap the frame of the panel. This is a convention commonly employed in Late Antiquity and the early medieval period, but less often in later centuries. On the other hand, several features suggest a much later date, at some point between the 15th and 18th centuries. The principal factor that might indicate a later date is the composition of the naked torso of the haloed figure cut off at the waist, as if emerging from water or from behind a parapet. This shows an undeniable likeness to late Byzantine and late medieval Italian images of the Man of Sorrows, of Christ as Akra Tapeinosis, emerging from his tomb, beneath the Cross and flanked by other instruments of his Passion. The likeness in style and composition, particularly in respect to the figure’s abdomen and loincloth, between this image and the painting at the monastic church at Mesopotam, dating to the 17th/18th-century, suggests a date in this later period. While a date for the painted scheme in the early Middle Ages cannot be discounted, it is perhaps more likely that the final phase of the building and its painted decoration date to a much later time, between the 15th and 17th centuries. In this context, the evidence of three Venetian cadastral maps, which identify the building, should be noted. Two 18th-century maps label the building as S. Dimitri and as a chiesa dirocata, respectively.38 The former identifies the building as a church of Saint Demetrius (cf. Fig. 16.17). The label on the second map suggests that the church was

in ruins by the early 18th century (cf. Fig. 15.2). The third map, dated to 1688 and made by Vincenzo Coronelli, also contains the label “S. Dimitri” and features a tiny sketch of the tomb facing the Vivari Channel (Fig. 10.11).39 It is clear that by the early modern period the tomb had become a chapel, dedicated to Saint Demetrius, and that it had been abandoned by the early 18th century.

Human skeletal remains Removal of the topsoil inside the tomb revealed human skeletal remains scattered both inside and adjacent to the western sepulchre. The distribution and fragmentary condition of the bones indicate that the skeletons had been disturbed, probably during the robbing of the tomb. No grave goods or other ancient funerary artefacts were discovered. The human skeletal remains were analyzed by Todd Fenton and Jared Beatrice.40 The skeletal remains belong to a minimum of four individuals: three adult males and one adolescent of indeterminate sex, to judge from the robusticity of four left proximal femur fragments, among other indicators. One adult male was aged between 30–45 at the time of death, on the evidence of an auricular surface fragment, which exhibited uniform granularity and no obvious billowing or striae.41 A second older adult male was identified from a mandible fragment with marked alveolar resorption. The age of the third adult male was indeterminate. The adolescent was identified as c. 12 years of age, from a right maxillary first molar with open root apices. The skeletal remains exhibit minimal evidence of pathological conditions. Some of the cranial fragments (parietal bones) show an expansion of the diploë. The odontoid process of one complete second cervical vertebra demonstrates arthritic lipping and eburnation. Mild arthritis is also present in the form of pinpoint surface porosity on the right superior articular process of an upper thoracic vertebra. Mitochondrial DNA analysis performed at

10  The western cemetery: archaeological survey of Roman tombs along the Vivari Channel

193

Figure 10.12. Plan of Tomb 4 (Area 3) Michigan State University Forensic Biology Laboratory determined that the three adult males were maternally related. The DNA results represent strong evidence that the male individuals belong to a single family interred when the building functioned as a tomb during the mid Roman period.

Tomb 2 (Area 2) Tomb 2 is a rectangular structure (3.26 × 1.5 m) located c. 90 m northwest of Tomb 1. Remains of the four walls of the building survive, up to five courses high (0.7 m) at its eastern end. The masonry consists of two types of limestone blocks (white and grey) bonded by gritty yellow mortar. The white limestone blocks are well faced, while the grey blocks are roughly worked. The building rests on truncated bedrock, parts of which are integrated into the structure on the western side. The grey blocks probably derive from quarrying of the local bedrock during the

tomb’s construction. The eastern wall is almost twice as thick (0.46 m) as the southern wall (0.25 m), which faces the Vivari Channel. The northern wall is the best preserved and features a trowelled score mark produced during the tomb’s construction.

Tomb 3 (Area 2) About 5 meters southeast of Tomb 2, a single course of white limestone blocks represents the remains of a wall, preserved to a length of 3.10 m, made of well-faced white limestone blocks. This appears to belong to the southern side of a building, probably a sepulchral structure. Most of the building is buried in the hillside.

Tomb 4 (Area 3) A large tomb (6 × 5 m) was discovered c. 74 m northwest of Tomb 2 (Figs 10.12–13). Four walls of the building

194

David R. Hernandez and John Mitchell

Figure 10.13. Tomb 4 (Area 3)

survive, up to 1.2 m high along the northern wall, which is the tomb’s best-preserved wall. The walls are well faced and composed of irregularly shaped greyish-pink limestone blocks. The inner core of the walls is composed of the same stones bonded by strong grey mortar. No bricks or tiles were used as masonry in the side-walls of the tomb. However, two internal walls, made of brick and stone masonry, are keyed into the northern and eastern walls of the tomb. These internal walls defined sepulchres for interment. The interior of the tomb, including its inner sepulchres, is thickly plastered and painted in a seemingly uniform reddish-orange paint. No distinct images or designs are evident on the painted surfaces. No evidence for the roofing system of the tomb was found, but it is likely that the building was vaulted. The thickness of the eastern and western walls of the tomb appears to relate to their weightbearing function. The ratio between wall thickness (0.9 m) and length (6 m) equals 0.15, which is the precise ratio of Tomb 7 (wall thickness of 1.2 m and length of 8 m). Both tombs appear to have employed the same proportion of wall thickness to vaulting length to support the weight of the roof. The tomb’s façade, facing the Vivari Channel, consisted of a low wall (0.45 m thick), which appears to have functioned as a parapet. Part of the threshold stone of the tomb was found in situ.

Tomb 5 (Area 3) A single wall of roughly worked white limestone blocks was found c. 8 m west of Tomb 4. The wall (1.30 × 0.45 m) is earth-bonded and appears to represent the southern side of a simple rectangular tomb.

Tomb 6 (Area 4) A small rectangular tomb (1.6 × 2.1 m) in opus incertum was found c. 42 m west of tomb 4. The bases of all four walls are well preserved, up to 0.5 m on the northern side. The interior of the tomb was empty, and it appears to have been robbed.

Tomb 7 (Area 5) The largest tomb (8 × 6.1 m) discovered in the survey is located c. 104 m west of Tomb 4, facing the Vivari Channel (Figs 10.14–16). Most of the building is buried into the hillside; however, substantial portions remain visible. The tomb has thick walls (1.2 m wide), which originally supported a vaulted roof. The western wall, preserved to a height of 2.8 m, shows that the tomb was built in opus vittatum, in which a single course of bricks was laid after every three or four regular courses of white limestone blocks. The interior of the walls consists of a hard mortar-bonded rubble core. At 1.8 m above the base of the tomb, the stone coursing projects internally 0.7 cm from the wall. This served as a weight-bearing support for the rafters of a second floor. Above this stone projection, the top of the western wall preserves a portion of the vaulting, which begins with regular courses of brick at 2.2 m from the base of the tomb. Large fragments of the rubble core of the vaulted roof were found inside the building (Fig. 10.15). The vaulting served as the ceiling of a second storey, which was supported by the wooden rafters. Two symmetrical square niches are preserved on the western and eastern walls of the tomb, near the entrance, located 1.07 m from the floor of the tomb; the western and eastern

10  The western cemetery: archaeological survey of Roman tombs along the Vivari Channel

Figure 10.14. Plan of Tomb 7 (Area 5)

Figure 10.15. Western wall of Tomb 7 (Area 5)

195

196

David R. Hernandez and John Mitchell

Figure 10.16. East-facing elevation of Tomb 7 (Area 5)

niches measure 0.43 × 0.32 × 0.50 m and 0.46 × 0.40 × 0.46 m (width; height; depth), respectively (Fig. 10.16). The niches possibly served as repositories for cremation urns. They are comparable in size and form to the niches found in the two-storey cremation tomb excavated by Ugolini.42 The interiors of the niches were plastered and painted in a pinkish-orange colour. The finished state of the southern ends of the western and eastern walls suggests that the tomb did not have a substantial front (southern) wall, which perhaps consisted of a low parapet.

Tombs 8–21 (Area 6) Area 6 is located c. 140 m southwest of Tomb 7 and represents the western end of the survey. Situated near the base of the hill, the area consists of at least five ancient terraces on which 16 tombs were identified (Fig. 10.17). Most of the tombs were built against scarped and reworked bedrock. This pattern is clearly evident on the plan, which shows a series of tombs (14–20) built against the rock. There is considerable variation in the size and grandeur of the tombs in this area. Many are small and simple burials, while others form proper buildings. Tombs 8–13 form a tight cluster of masonry tombs, built on four distinct terraces. The plan of the remains shows a regular pattern of development, which began with the construction of two robust north–south walls (0.54 m thick). The two walls, which stand 2.2 m apart, are made

of grey and white limestone blocks bonded by mortar. The surviving lengths of the eastern and western walls are 3.7 m and 5 m, respectively. Tombs were constructed abutting these north–south walls, which served as the basis for the allotment of plots. Tomb 8 is contemporary with the original construction of its north–south wall, as is evident from the southern wall (0.34 m thick) of the tomb being keyed into it. Tomb 9, however, is a later build, with its northern and eastern walls abutting the same north–south wall. A single course of mortar-bonded stones (0.20 m thick) was built between the two north–south walls and appears to have served as the southern wall of Tomb 10, which was on the same terrace as Tomb 9. A similar wall (0.20 m thick) was built immediately below on a lower terrace and appears to have served as the northern wall of Tomb 11. Sharing the same north–south wall, Tomb 12 was constructed on the same terrace as Tomb 11 and was apparently the largest of the cluster with walls 0.46 m thick. Tomb 13 was situated on the next terrace below and had a thin southern wall (0.17 m thick). On the basis of their masonry construction, Tombs 8–13 are likely to date between the 1st and 3rd centuries AD. Tombs 14–20 are a series of smaller and simpler structures built against worked bedrock. None of the walls in this series contain mortar bonding. Generally, these tombs are rectangular in shape and appear to be filled with rubble. The walls of Tomb 14 consist of scarped bedrock, except the southern wall, which is constructed

10  The western cemetery: archaeological survey of Roman tombs along the Vivari Channel

197

Figure 10.17. Plan of tombs in Area 6

with a short segment (1.07 m long) of well-faced white limestone blocks. Tomb 15 is a rectangular structure (0.9 × 0.8 m) outlined by walls made of both large and small greyish pink limestone blocks. Short segments of walls suggest the presence of at least three other small tombs (16–18). Tomb 19 occupies a slightly larger area (1.88 × 1.71 m) than Tomb 20 (1.38 × 0.83 m). Tombs 14–20 are likely to be Hellenistic in date, from the 3rd to 1st centuries BC, to judge from their surface features. The rectangular shaped plots, filled with irregular stones without the use of mortar, are characteristic of Hellenistic tombs, such as those recently excavated at the ancient city of Phoenice.43 The smaller, almost square-shaped tombs (e.g., 14, 15, 17, 20) may represent cremation burials. Tomb 21 is unusual in its construction. It consists of two courses of large, flat white and greyish pink limestone blocks, which are not bonded with mortar. Most of the structure is buried in the hillside; however, a fair portion (0.47 × 1.87 m) remains visible. Unlike Tombs 14–20, however, the observed masonry very likely represents the foundations of a large funerary structure, similar to those discovered in the necropolis at nearby Phoenice.44

Tombs 22, 23 (Area 7) Tombs 22 and 23 were built at the foot of the hill, on the lowest (fifth) ancient terrace identified in this area. Tomb 22 is of well-coursed limestone masonry built on bedrock (Figs 10.18–19). Erosion of the hillside has buried the entire tomb except for its southern wall, which still

stands to a height of 2.5 m. The exposed southern side of the structure is remarkably well preserved, owing to a large tree that grew from its centre and has protected the monument from sunlight and rain. Mortar impressions on the masonry, created by levelling strings during the tomb’s construction, are preserved along several courses. Other marks made during trowelling are also visible, one being an unusual triple score-mark. The monument consists of three distinct parts (Fig. 10.18). The foundation of the tomb is made of five courses of large limestone blocks built directly on bedrock. Two putlog holes, located only 0.4 m above the top of the foundations, and the smooth facing of the masonry courses show that the foundations were built freestanding. Three courses of greyish white limestone blocks in opus vittatum served as a base or pedestal (0.4 m high and 3 m wide) above the foundations. The rectangular superstructure, built in the same opus vittatum masonry, rested above this base and was recessed from it, 15 cm on its western side and 5 cm on its southern side. The monument may originally have had the form of an altar-tomb or similar enclosed funerary monument, to judge from its solid shape and lack of an accessible interior. The distinct masonry type of the superstructure is the same as the opus vittatum of the scaenae frons of the Theatre at Butrint, the inhumation tomb on the Vrina Plain and the two-storey building in the forum.45 From its similarity to the latter two monuments, this tomb may be assigned approximately to the early 2nd century AD. A large fragment of a fallen wall was found adjacent to

198

David R. Hernandez and John Mitchell

Figure 10.18. Tomb 22 (Area 6)

Figure 10.19. South-facing elevation of Tomb 22 (Area 6)

10  The western cemetery: archaeological survey of Roman tombs along the Vivari Channel Tomb 22 on its eastern side. This wall, which belonged to another large funerary monument, Tomb 23, was originally built against the eastern side of Tomb 22. A portion of the rear wall of Tomb 23, built similarly in opus vittatum, remains standing; however, besides a small portion of the back wall and the fallen southern wall, there are few visible remains of the monument.

Discussion The importance of the sea to the ancient Roman inhabitants of Butrint is illustrated by the city’s cemeteries. Monumental tombs built on the banks of the Vivari Channel confronted the seafarers who approached the city and its harbour.46 Indeed, the most prominent memorials to the deceased in this location vividly display how the water channel served as the primary route of entry into the city. It is now clear that a substantial portion of the western cemetery extended further west from the ancient city than was previously thought. In the course of the survey, 23 tombs were discovered facing the Vivari Channel. Owing to the present dense overgrowth, the tombs discovered in the survey should be considered a representative sample, rather than a complete list of the number and types of tombs in this area of the necropolis. The location of the four largest monumental tombs (Tombs 1, 4, 7, 22) shows that the layout of the cemetery was carefully planned (cf. Fig. 10.1). These tombs occupy an ideal location, chosen to maximize their appearance to observers travelling along the channel. They seem to have been deployed symmetrically: Tombs 1 and 22 are located at each edge of the prominent concavity of the hill, while Tombs 4 and 7 are positioned half way up the hill near the centre of the hollow. The two north–south walls, which form the basis of the cluster of Roman tombs (8–13) in Area 6, suggest that funerary plots were pre-planned in this area of the necropolis. Tombs 14–20, which appear to date to the Hellenistic period, and other Hellenistic graves excavated in the western cemetery by Ugolini and Budina, show that a similar sepulchral landscape existed before the Roman colonization of Butrint in 44 BC. It is important to recognize that the area surveyed only constitutes a fraction of the total extent of Butrint’s western cemetery. The tombs documented by Ugolini and subsequent archaeologists, as well as the numerous sepulchral ruins that remain unpublished, show that the cemetery as a whole was rich in funerary monuments. This is reflected also in the legendary representation of Butrint in Virgil’s Aeneid: after disembarking at Buthrotum, Aeneas first comes upon Andromache who weeps at the tomb of Hector in front of the city.47 Developments over the past 50 years has damaged several tombs in the ancient cemetery. The vaulting of Tomb 1 appears to have been destroyed by a boulder, the fall of which may be linked to the original construction of the Saranda–Butrint road. This road construction was prompted by the official visit of the Russian Premier, Nikita Khrushchev, in May 1959, and involved the cutting

199

of terraces into the limestone slopes of Mount Sotira.48 The rubble debris and large boulders produced from the roadwork can still be seen today scattered on the northern bank of the Vivari Channel. Another phase of modern destruction in the area is evident from the concrete-lined trenches and pillbox bunkers that were constructed as part of the national defence programme of the Communist regime. Recent road construction in 2010 represents yet another phase of archaeological destruction of the funerary monuments. The new and widened Saranda-Butrint road has been constructed without proper regard for the underlying archaeology within the Butrint National Park.49 Tomb 4 is now severely damaged and lies buried under a heap of boulders from these roadworks. Such is the current fate of this important historical landscape.

References Belting, H. (1968) Studien zur beneventanischen Malerei. Wiesbaden, Franz Steiner Verlag GMBH. Belting, H. (1981) Das Bild und sein Publikum im Mittelalter. Form und Funktion früher Bildtafeln der Passion. Berlin, Gebr. Mann Verlag. Bescoby, D. J. (2007) Geoarchaeological investigation at Roman Butrint. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint: An Assessment: 95–118. Oxford, Oxbow. Bitelli, G., Girelli, V. A. and Vittuari, L. (2005) Il rilievo del monastero di Mesopotam con tecniche geomatiche integrate. In S. De Maria and Sh. Gjongecaj (eds), Phoinike III: Rapporto preliminare sulle campagne di scavi e ricerche 2002–2003: 211–18. Bologna, Ante Quem. Bowden, W. (2003) Epirus Vetus: The Archaeology of a Late Antique Province. London, Duckworth. Bowden, W. and Martin, S. (2004) Trial excavations within the city. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden, and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–99: 219–23. Oxford, Oxbow. Bowden, W. and Mitchell, J. (2004) The Christian topography of Butrint. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 104–25. Oxford, Oxbow. Budina, Dh. (1959) Nekropoli i Butrintit. Buletin i Universitetit Shtetëror të Tirana 1959.2: 246–55. Budina, Dh. (1971) Harta arkeologjike e bregdetit jon dhe e pellgut të Delvinës. Iliria 1: 275–342. Budina, Dh. (1988) Butrinti pararomak. In N. Ceka (ed.), Butroti: Përmbledhje Studimesh: 6–107. Tirana, Akademia e Shkencave e RPSSH Qendra e Kërkimeve Arkeologjike. Cormack, R. and Vassilaki, M. (2008) (eds) Byzantium 330–1453. London, Royal Academy of Arts. Crivello, F. (2005) Le “omelie sui vangeli” di Gregorio Magno a Vercelli. Le miniature del ms. CXLVIII/8 della Biblioteca Capitolare. Florence, Sismel, Edizioni del Galluzzo. Crowson, A. and Gilkes, O. J. (2007) The archaeology of the Vrina Plain: an assessment. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint. An Assessment: 119–64. Oxford, Oxbow. Giakoumis, K. and Karaiskaj, G. (2004) Të dhëna të reja arkitekturore dhe epigrafike për vendndodhjen dhe katolikonin e manastirit të Shën Nikollës në Mesopotam (Shqipëri e Jugut). Monumentet 2004: 77–85. Hansen, I. L. (2009) Hellenistic and Roman Butrint (Butrinti Helenistik dhe Romak). London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation.

200

David R. Hernandez and John Mitchell

Hernandez, D. R. and Çondi, Dh. (2008) The Roman forum at Butrint (Epirus) and its development from Hellenistic to mediaeval times. Journal of Roman Archaeology 21: 275–92. Hodges, R. (2004) Introduction. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden, and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Surveys 1994–99: 1–19. Oxford, Oxbow. Hodges, R. (2006) Eternal Butrint. An UNESCO World Heritage Site in Albania. London, General Penne Publishing. Hodges, R. (2009) Nikita Khruschchev’s visit to Butrint, May 1959. Expedition 51.3: 24–26. Hubert, J., Porcher, J. and Volbach, W. F. (1969) Europe of the Invasions. New York, George Brazilier. Karaiskaj, G. (1976) Fortifikimet mesjetare pranë kanalit të vivarit në Butrint dhe restaurimi i tyre. Monumentet 11: 147–58. Koch, G. (1988) Sarkophage der römischen Kaiserzeit in Albanien. Mitteilungen des deutschen Archäologischen Instituts (Römische Abteilung) 95: 235–56. Koch, G. (1989) Grabdenkmäler der römischen Kaiserzeit in Albanien. Iliria 2: 151–9. Lane, A. et al. (2004) The environs of Butrint 1: the 1995–96 environmental survey. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Survey 1994–1999: 27–46. Oxford, Oxbow. Lepore, G. (2005a) Le altre tombe di età ellenistica, in, La necropolis meridionale: 120–5. In S. De Maria and Sh. Gjongecaj (eds), Phoinike III: Rapporto preliminare sulle campagne di scavi e ricerche 2002–3: 101–51. Bologna, Ante Quem. Lepore, G. (2005b) Le altri siti della necropolis, in, La necropolis meridionale: 144–8. In S. De Maria and Sh. Gjongecaj (eds), Phoinike III: Rapporto preliminare sulle campagne di scavi e ricerche 2002–3: 101–51. Bologna, Ante Quem. Lepore, G. (2007) La necropoli e le aree limitrofe. In S. De Maria and Sh. Gjongecaj (eds), Phoinike IV: Rapporto preliminare sulle campagne di scavi e ricerche 2004–2006: 89–102. Bologna, Ante Quem. Lovejoy, C. O., Meindl, R. S., Pryzbeck T. R. and Mensforth R. P. (1985) Chronological metamorphosis of the auricular surface of the ilium: a new method for the determination of adult skeletal age at death. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 68: 15–28. Martin, S. (2001) The Butrint Management Plan. London, Butrint Foundation. Martin, S. (2004) The topography of Butrint. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavations and Survey 1994–1999: 76–103. Oxford, Oxbow. Muka, B. (2005) Le sepulture di età ellenistica: i circoli funerary, in, La necropoli meridionale: 114–20. In S. De Maria and Sh. Gjongecaj (eds), Phoinike III: Rapporto preliminare sulle campagne di scavi e ricerche 2002–3: 101–51. Bologna, Ante Quem. Muka, B. (2007) Ricerche nel settore sud-orientale della necropoli: le tombe ellenistiche dell’area S 16 e i percorsi interni, in, La necropoli e le aree limitrofe: 102–6. In S. De Maria and Sh. Gjongecaj (eds), Phoinike IV: Rapporto preliminare sulle campagne di scavi e ricerche 2004–2006: 89–120. Bologna, Ante Quem. Mustilli, D. (1941) Relazione preliminare sugli scavi archeologici in Albania (1937–40). Atti della Reale Accademia d’Italia 2: 677–704. Pallas, D. (1965) Die Passion und die Bestattung Christi in Byzanz. Der Ritus das Bild (Miscellanea Byzantina Monacensia

2). Munich, Institut für Byzantinistik und neugriechische Philologie der Unversität München. Ricciardi, R. (2007) Two Roman monuments: proposals for function and context. In I. L. Hansen and R. Hodges (eds), Roman Butrint: An Assessment: 165–74. Oxford, Oxbow. Rotili, M. (1986) Benevento romana e longobarda. L’immagine urbana. Naples, Banca Sannitica. Toynbee, J. M. C. (1971) Death and Burial in the Roman World. London, Thames and Hudson. Ugolini, L. M. (1927) Ricerche archeologiche (Albania antica 1). Rome/Milan, Società editrice d’arte illustrata. Ugolini, L. M. (1937) Butrinto. Il mito d’Enea, gli scavi, Rome, Instituto Grafico Tiberino. Ugolini, L. M. (1942) L’acropoli di Butrinto (Albania antica 3). Rome, Scalia. von Hesberg, H. (1992) Römische Grabbauten. Darmstadt, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

Notes 1 We would like to thank Richard Hodges for his support, as well as José Cristobal Carvajal López and Benen Hayden for their assistance in the fieldwork. We also thank other members of the team for their contributions, especially Jared Beatrice, David Bescoby, David Boschi, Todd Fenton, Oliver Gilkes, Charlotte Hodges, Nevila Molla and Paul Reynolds. 2 For the urban phases of Hellenistic and Roman Butrint, see Hodges (Chapter 1) in this volume; as well as Hansen 2009; Hernandez and Çondi 2008; Hodges 2006; Martin 2004. 3 Ugolini 1927: 153–7; Ugolini 1937: 43, 158–9, 174; Ugolini 1942: 13, 147–63. 4 Ugolini 1942: 147. Ugolini did not publish tombs that were poorly preserved or similar in type. He might have intended to publish the Byzantine and medieval tombs elsewhere. 5 Ugolini 1937: 174; Ugolini 1942: 152. 6 Ugolini 1937: 174; Ugolini 1942: 152–3, 159, 210. The first two types generally contained grave goods, especially the first, which Ugolini dates to the 3rd century BC. The second type is described as poor in grave goods, although they commonly contain ceramic and glass vessels; he dates this type to the early Roman period. Ugolini’s excavations yielded lamps; glass vials; complete ceramic vessels; bronze coins; bronze objects, such as buckles; and in one tomb, a gold earring featuring a nude satyr and a ceramic plate laminated with a thin sheet of gold. One inhumation tomb (tomb VIII) contained a marble inscription in Greek with the name of the deceased, Titus Pomponius: a member of the household of Titus Pomponius Atticus at Butrint. 7 Ugolini 1937: 174, fig. 125; Ugolini 1942: 147–51, fig. 149. Ugolini mentions that the foundations of other tombs similar to this one were found in this area of the necropolis, as well as in the cemetery near Xarra. 8 The architectural drawings (elevations, plans, and reconstructions) of the tomb made by Carlo Ceschi, Ugolini’s architect, are unpublished. They form part of the Ugolini archive at the Museo della Civiltà Romana in Rome. 9 For the position of the harbour, see Hodges 2004: 17, fig. 1.10. 10 Ugolini 1937: 158–9; 162, fig. 110. 11 According to Ugolini, the tomb was built in the 5th century AD, on the site of a Roman bathhouse. However, William Bowden argues that the original building may have been

10  The western cemetery: archaeological survey of Roman tombs along the Vivari Channel

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

25 26

27 28 29 30 31

funerary, and not a bathhouse, based on a similar tomb dated to the early-mid Roman period discovered at Butrint: Bowden 2003: 46 n. 24, 170–1 n. 23, n. 24; Bowden and Martin 1994: 221. Mustilli 1941: 703–4. Mustilli 1941: 694–5. Hernandez and Çondi 2008: 280–4 (referred to as the Fountain Complex). Budina 1959: 246–55. Budina 1959: 246–55, the proposed 1st-century AD date concerns inhumation burial 2. Budina 1959: 246–55, inhumation burial 6. Budina 1971: 326, 335–6, fig. 36, tav. XXXI. Budina 1988: 27, 77–82. Budina 1988: 80–82 (no. 7). Budina 1988: tav. X.5. For a published summary of the management plan, see Martin 2001. Toynbee 1971: 122–3; von Hesberg 1992: 164–70. See Bescoby in this volume; Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 126–59, as well as Bescoby 2007: 95–96; Lane et al. 2004: 27–46; Koch 1988; 1989. See the contribution by Gilkes, Hysa and Çondi in this volume for two further funerary structures. Toynbee 1971: 91–4. Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 157. Many inscriptions from pre-planned funerary plots contain a measure in Roman feet followed by the words in fronte, which denotes the frontal distance or frontage of funerary plots purchased from Roman speculators, see Toynbee 1971: 79–91. Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 149–51, figs 8.28, 8.29 (the cremation tomb); Ugolini 1927: 157. As suggested in Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 151, n. 76. Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 119–26, 151–6 (the inhumation tomb). For a discussion of the possible funerary function of the monument, see Ricciardi 2007: 171–2. See also Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 131–5, figs 8.12–8.16. Cf. Hodges 2004: 4, fig. 1.5. The lithograph forms part of a series entitled “Recollections of a Tour in the Ionian Islands, Greece and Constantinople” published by Thomas M’Lean

32 33 34 35 36 37

38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45

46 47 48 49

201

(London) in 1853. Since the ruin depicted is undoubtedly Tomb 1, Cook’s drawing represents also the earliest known image of a funerary monument from Butrint. As, for example, the tomb of Sabinus Taurius at Isola Sacra, cf. Toynbee 1971: 103, plate 26. Belting 1981: 53–68; Cormack and Vassilaki 2008: cats 228, 246 and 247; Pallas 1965: 201. Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 120, fig. 7:20. For an overview of Mesopotam, see Bitelli, Girelli, and Vittuari 2005; Giakoumis and Karaiskaj 2004. Belting 1981: 118–26, abb. 36, 39–41. For the angel addressing Zachariah, see Belting 1968: ill. 63; Rotili 1986: pl. XLIV. For the figures of SS. Peter and Paul in the compendium of Canon Law from Pavia, Vercelli, Biblioteca Capitolare Cod. 165, fol. 3r, see Crivello 2005: 82–6, fig. 46; Hubert, Porcher, and Volbach 1969: fig. 159. For the two 18th-century cadastral maps as well as discussion of their date, see Carvajal and Palanco in this volume, and Davies in this volume. Karaiskaj 1976: 151. The information presented here on the human skeletal remains derives from an unpublished report written by Todd Fenton and Jared Beatrice (Michigan State University). Lovejoy et al. 1985. Ugolini 1937: 174, fig. 125; Ugolini 1942: 147–51, fig. 149. Muka 2005: 115–16, fig. 8.16, 8.17 (Tomba 19); Muka 2007: 102–6, figs 5.21, 5.25. See also Lepore 2005a. Lepore 2005b: 147–8 (sito 18); Lepore 2007: 100–2, fig. 5.17 (edificio 16). Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 151–5; Hernandez and Çondi 2008: 288, n. 57. The masonry type is used also in a tomb on the lower slopes of Kalivo; see Crowson and Gilkes 2007: 154–5. Strabo (7.7.5) calls the harbour of Butrint pelodes, or muddy; the appellation might reflect the process of alluvial build-up in the Vivari Channel. Virgil, Aeneid 3.299–305. Hodges 2009. See Hodges in this volume (Chapter 16).

11  The Great Basilica: a reassessment Nevila Molla

Introduction The so-called ‘Great Basilica’ is one of a number of religious structures built in and around Butrint, the stature and state of preservation of which reflect the complex history of the site during Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages. It is located in the northeast of the peninsula, close to the bridge across the Vivari Channel connecting the town to the Vrina Plain settlement (cf. Fig. 1.11). At this location in the Hellenistic period, a monumental gate flanked by two towers opened towards the east, providing access for those arriving through the channel.1 The city’s aqueduct, probably built during the creation of the Augustan colony, entered Butrint at this same point.2 The importance of this part of the peninsula as a traditional access point into the city persisted in Late Antiquity. The late antique city wall was pierced by a gate only a few metres to the south of the church, the so-called Water Gate, which, though gradually reduced in width, remained functional until the city was abandoned.3 Furthermore, the area directly overlooked the Vrina Plain, where a religious complex had been constructed on the remains of the former Roman settlement.4 These are some of the reasons that explain the location chosen for the construction of what would become Butrint’s main church. The implications of these choices, however, seem partly to have determined the peculiarities that characterise the building (Fig. 11.1). A detailed survey based on stratigraphic analysis constitutes a prerequisite to understanding the chronological and historical development of the church, albeit in relative terms, given the absence of absolute dating evidence. Undertaken as a reassessment of previously proposed interpretations (see below), this survey of the church aimed to identify all the interventions of construction, destruction, reconstruction or repairs that have left their marks in its fabric.5 The methodology adopted follows the principles of archaeological stratigraphy, in which analysis of wall relationships and documentation is carried out following the same procedure as in an archaeological excavation. Thus, the counterpart of archaeological deposits typical of

an excavation, in the case of above-ground architectural evidence, are the built ‘deposits’ distinguished, as in an excavation, by a series of elements, among which the archaeological interface is one of the most important.6 This procedure allows for the so-called ‘standing stratigraphy’ of architectural evidence to be ‘excavated on paper’ and examined and recorded in its entirety in order to establish a complete construction sequence.7 It is important to note that, as with archaeological deposits, the physical relationship between construction interventions is not always clear and diagnostic features, such as interfaces that might enable the identification of each intervention, are often blurred or entirely concealed. In the case of the Great Basilica, the ‘standing stratigraphy’ and the variety of building techniques employed in the structure, which allow comparison with building practices elsewhere in the region, have greatly impacted the interpretations described below.

Previous studies Although the focus of Luigi Maria Ugolini’s research was on the classical ruins of the town, he was the first to study the Great Basilica, deeming Butrint’s Christian monuments worthy of attention. Of critical importance are his photographs of the church, from which we can observe the basilica’s state of conservation in the 1930s and gain some understanding of later interventions.8 One of these photographs (Fig. 11.2) not only shows the blocking of the window on the south façade of the transept, but also the presence of a second brick band situated just below the roof level, which is no longer conserved. Also noteworthy is his excavation of the monumental fountain to the south of the basilica, which revealed a paved Roman street at a depth of c. 2 m below the floor level of the basilica. The first thorough examination of the building was undertaken by the architect Aleksander Meksi in 1974–1975 as part of a restoration project, in the course of which the rubble and earth deposits that buried the floor of the basilica were removed. Meksi’s clearance revealed fragments of a mosaic floor in the bema, flagstone pavements in the

11  The Great Basilica: a reassessment

203

Figure 11.1. The Great Basilica

Figure 11.2. Photograph from the 1930’s showing the blocked window on the south elevation of the south transept bay. Note the difference in levels between the basilica and the paved Roman road (Instituti i Arkeologjisë)

204

Nevila Molla

Figure 11.3. Plan of the late antique basilica church naves and a small chapel inserted into the south bay of the transept. He also excavated two test trenches: one in the bema and the other next to one of the piers in the south nave. His graphic documentation shows that at least one grave was uncovered in the central nave, near the main entrance. Meksi published a detailed interpretation of the architectural evidence in 1983, but unfortunately did not include any accompanying information on the deposits he had removed or the burials he had uncovered.9 According to his interpretation, the building’s chronological sequence consisted of two main construction periods: one in Late Antiquity and the other in the early Middle Ages. The aisles of the late antique basilica church were separated from the nave by arcades consisting of stylobate walls mounted by columns and arches that support clerestory walls. In the 9th century, the columns were replaced by masonry piers and the upper part of the apse was rebuilt in a hemispherical form. Meksi proposed that the church was abandoned in the 18th century, and that it was at this time that the construction of the chapel and the two tombs took place. The large-scale surveys carried out in and around Butrint in 1994–1996 were only marginally focused on the Great Basilica. A general periodisation of the construction phases, largely concurring with Meksi’s interpretation, was proposed but Meksi’s dating of the reconstruction

period was challenged.10 The analysis of the mosaic fragments belonging to the basilica pavement suggests its contemporaneity with the nearby Baptistery, which can be securely dated to the second quarter of the 6th century.11 It was proposed that the replacement of the columnar arcade with masonry piers occurred in the 13th century. The reconstruction of the apse was also placed at this date and a section of brick-decorated masonry in its exterior, common in the 13th century churches in the region, was considered as an indication of date. This reconstruction date was also suggested because the 13th century was considered to be the period of Butrint’s first revival in the Middle Ages.12 The addition of the chapel and the wall blockings between the piers were thought to belong to a later period. More importantly, the modification of the apse’s window into a smaller, more articulated version was also associated with this group of modifications.

Stratigraphic analyses and periodisation The late antique basilica The original construction programme implemented in Late Antiquity produced an east-west oriented basilica church (Fig. 11.3). The church consists of two aisles and a central nave to the west and a tripartite transept and an apse to the

11  The Great Basilica: a reassessment

205

Figure 11.4. The central aisle, looking west towards the main entrance into the church

east, much of which is still preserved. From the exterior of the façade to the apse, the building measures 31.07 m, while the transept, oriented north-south, has a width of 23.07 m, exceeding the combined width of the nave and aisles (18.20 m) and forming a T shaped plan.13 The foundation wall of what could represent an axially positioned ambo is preserved in the nave close to the bema area. Access is provided through three doors at the western ends of the central nave and the two flanking aisles, while the east wall of the south transept and the south wall of the south aisle are also pierced by doorways. The lateral walls of the aisles have been especially affected by the process of degradation. These survive to a height of c. 1 m above ground, insufficient to indicate the number and type of the windows; however, the façade is relatively well-preserved. By contrast, the east part of the building, the transept walls and apse, are almost entirely preserved. The interior arrangement – nave, aisles, and transept bays – was created through the use of arcades (Fig. 11.4). Two arcades running on a longitudinal axis divide the bema from the transept bays and the nave from the aisles. These arcades consist of six masonry piers measuring c. 1.50 m in width and 0.70 m in thickness, surmounted by brick arches, above which rise the clerestory walls. Only one section of an original clerestory wall, along with the jamb of an original window, survives, at a point above the eastern end of the north arcade. It is difficult to reconstruct the number and type of the original windows at this level, although the surviving jamb does suggest that they were taller than the current openings (see below). The piers at the east end of the nave are T-shaped, allowing for semipiers to support arches separating the transept bays from the

aisles, of which only fragments survive. Also, the section of the arcade between the bema and the transept bays is not preserved. Fragments of arches survive above the T shaped piers (in the east end of the nave) and above the semi-piers bonded to the apse wall, their springing marked by limestone voussoirs. These, as well as the double arches between transept bays and aisles, are constructed of two radial rows of brick and are larger in dimension than those of the arcades in the nave area. The base of a column preserved in situ between the south transept bay and the south aisle provides convincing evidence that the arches between the bays and the aisles were supported by columns. The arches between the transept bays and the bema were reconstructed by the Albanian Institute of Monuments, with a square-profiled pilaster that is currently the arches’ central support. However, it is possible that here too the arches were originally supported by columns. A dislocated capital, now lying on the floor of the apse, may derive from one of two transept columns in this position. These elements would have been looted when the church was abandoned, causing the collapse of the arches that they supported. The walls of each transept bay are pierced by large two-light windows, with arches formed of two concentric radial rows of brick. However, here the inner row of bricks is half the width of the outer row and the arches are contoured further by a thin outline of tile fragments. The best preserved window is that in the south wall of the south transept bay (see Fig. 11.2). In none of these windows, however, is the shaft that supported the arches preserved; they have been reconstructed with square-sectioned piers. The double arches in each window were probably originally supported by small columns, the removal of which led

Nevila Molla

206

Late antique construction 0

Mid Byzantine reconstruction

2m

Modern reconstruction

Figure 11.5. Phased drawing of the interior face of the apse

to their collapse. The double arch of the window in the south bay has survived thanks to a blocking wall, which must have been constructed soon after the removal of the column. The apse has a peculiar form for which there are no parallels in the region: semi-circular in the interior and semi-octagonal with curving shoulders on the exterior. The outer face of the apse is also marked by a step, a kind of plinth, at its foot, made of large re-used ashlar blocks. Though considerably modified at a later stage, the form of the original apse window can be determined from its large opening and from remaining sections of the original lateral arches (Fig. 11.5). It is clear that the window consisted of three arches, of which the central arch was somewhat taller and wider than the lateral ones, constructed as part of the curved inner profile of the apse. The arches were built in the same style as those of the transept windows and it is tempting to speculate that they too were supported by colonettes, though no evidence survives to suggest this. The use of voussoirs is clearly noticeable on the interior and exterior, marking the points from which the surviving arches spring. On the exterior, the section of the masonry above the north arch is from the original phase

of construction, while the section of masonry over the south arch is a later repair (see below). The upper semicircular part of the exterior has been interpreted as later reconstruction, perhaps influenced by the irregular crest of the semi-octagonal façade, which gives the impression of a destruction interface that could have caused the need for reconstruction of the apse at this level. However, the crest of the enveloping semi-octagonal façade stops at the window arches, which were built into the inner semicircular façade (Fig. 11.6). Since the curved shape of the window arches is determined by the curved interior façade of the apse it would have been impossible to construct their curved form, if the semi-octagonal shape of the outer façade continued above their level. It is clear that the inner and outer faces of the apse belong to the same build and that the outer semi-octagonal façade was intentionally built in zigzag form, descending from the sides toward the centre, in such a way as to reveal the large window opening. A particular characteristic observed throughout the building, especially on the outer façade of the apse and the east walls of the transept, is the presence of incised lines on the mortar of the pointing around the stones (Fig. 11.7). These lines were created by using the tip of sharp

11  The Great Basilica: a reassessment

207

Figure 11.6. View of the apse’s exterior façade from the north

double pointed instrument while the mortar was still fresh. For the most part they are random in form, but in the case of the apse’s exterior, the designs consist of undulating shapes, zigzag lines and rhombuses, within one of which a cross is incised. The seemingly decorative and religious character of these incisions has led to the suggestion that they were meant to be visible, implying that they formed part of the finished appearance of the façade. Although it is possible that the builder, encouraged by the function of the structure, deliberately incised marks and symbols of religious character, they could not have been seen on the finished building, as the exterior of the church would have been plastered. The purpose of such incisions is to serve as a key for an overlying surface of wall-plaster, a practice that is still common today. As mentioned above, the nave and aisles were accessed from the west through individual doorways, the one into the nave being the main entrance (see Fig. 11.4). It is difficult to determine whether the entrances into the aisles, which measure 1.40 m in width, were arched, as only their lower parts survive. The entrance into the nave is 3.13 m wide and was probably crowned by a large arch with two concentric rows of radial bricks, to judge from the width of the slots on the crests of the door jams from which the arch would have sprung, and as re-proposed in the modern reconstruction. Particularly significant is the fact that those parts of the structure that face south and east (i.e., towards

Figure 11.7. Incisions in the mortar on the exterior façade of the apse, showing the detail of the small incised cross

208

Nevila Molla

the Baptistery and the Water Gate area) were provided with further access points. Thus, there is a doorway 1.50 m wide in the south wall at the east end of the south aisle. Another, measuring 0.92 m in width and 2.15 m in height, pierces the east wall of the south transept bay and is crowned by an arch with a single row of radiating bricks, below which a stone or wood lintel was probably placed. It is curious that no evidence for a narthex or atrium, features that are commonly observed in contemporary religious buildings, has come to light at the west of the current façade.14 However, the building’s proximity to the remains of the Hellenistic city wall, which also coincides with the foot of the hill, is an obvious explanation for the absence of these features. The presence of a poorly preserved mosaic floor was revealed in the bema during Meksi’s clearance of the building.15 Meksi also recorded a slab found in situ in the apse, although he does not specify the material. Whatever type of material was employed for the apse floor, it was certainly distinguished by its higher level. The bema may well have been the only part of the church paved with mosaic. As no traces of mosaic pavement have been observed in the transept bays, nave or aisles, it is probable that the floor in these areas consisted of large flag stones similar to the ones currently in place, which date from a later repair. The mosaic floor is particularly significant in providing typological evidence for the construction date of the basilica. Both the polychrome motifs consisting of ivy leafs and scrolling guilloche and the construction technique of the mosaic are similar to those on the pavement of the Baptistery at Butrint, which has been dated to the second quarter of the 6th century through comparison with mosaics in Basilica A at Nicopolis.16 Detailed analysis shows that there is a clear distinction in structural features between the tripartite sanctuary and the nave, aisles and façade. Although the construction is modest, consisting of roughly worked blocks of limestone of varying dimensions, interspersed with brick and tile fragments, effort was made to refine the interior of the sanctuary with columns and sculptural elements. Also, the very limited amount of available brick is employed in a way that further emphasises this attempt at refinement. Thus, although the available bricks seem to have been reserved mostly for the arches of the sanctuary arcade and for windows, the lower part of the transept walls is also marked by a band of five to six brick courses and, in the case of the south wall of the south transept bay, these brick courses are repeated just below the roof level. However, the apse is the feature on which the brick bands are most concentrated, appearing at three intervals on the exterior. On the interior, bricks form bands at the bottom and middle levels, while the upper part is faced entirely with brick from the level at which the window arches spring. The lower and middle brick bands here extend onto the adjacent semipilasters, which form part of the central arcades that define the bema and nave. A brick band also appears on the lower part of the main T-shaped piers located between the bema and the nave. The use of brick bands is absent in the rest

of the structure: that is, the nave piers, the lateral walls of the aisles and the façade of the building. The occurrence of brick only on the T-shaped piers, especially in the different types of arches in the areas between the sanctuary and the nave, has led former interpreters to attribute the arcades in the nave to a subsequent phase of construction. This interpretation has received support from the fact that the first arches between the T-shaped piers and the piers in the nave appear to have been laid with two superimposed radial rows of brick, the outer of which is incomplete. On the north arcade, the point at which the arch’s outer radial row of bricks stops is almost in line with the interface of the later repair of the clerestory. In the light of this association and near-alignment, the break in the outer arch of bricks has been associated with a later rebuild of the arcades and upper wall from this point to the west façade. The problems with this interpretation are several. First, the interface that indicates the clerestory rebuild does not reach the break in the outer row of radial bricks of the arch (Fig. 11.8). It stops on the late antique window ledge above the arch, which is abutted by the jam of the present clerestory windows. Also, no reparatory intervention is apparent at the other end of the arcade, near the façade where the bonded semi-piers are contemporary with the arches. Second, rebuilding one half of the arch with single radial bricks would have been a technically problematic solution, since it is the arch that provides support for the masonry above, and a fractured single brick arch would have rendered the structure fragile. Thus, it would appear that the incomplete outer brick row of the first nave arch was part of the original design, in which the use of brick seems to have been restricted to the area between the apse and the T-shaped piers. The clearest indication of this is the doorway at the east end of the south aisle, where the surviving jambs are both from the original, late antique phase (Fig. 11.9). Here while the brick band of the transept continues to run through the east jamb of the doorway, which is bonded to the transept wall (in line with the T-shaped piers), the band is not picked up in the doorway’s west jamb. The way the brick is used suggests a desire to economise, perhaps due to limited availability. Thus, priority was given to the sanctuary area, where brick was used to articulate a so-called Justinianic manner of construction, typical for the late antique period. Elsewhere, brick was employed only where strictly necessary in building the single brick arches of the nave arcade.

The Great Basilica in the mid and late Middle Ages During the mid and late Middle Ages, the structural character of the basilica was modified and later transformed entirely. The first phase of interventions, apparently designed simply to restore the existing late antique structure, consisted of a series of repairs (Fig. 11.10). While the sections above the sanctuary would have preserved their original form, those above the nave were in need of reconstruction. The

11  The Great Basilica: a reassessment

Figure 11.8. Rebuilt clerestory window on the north arcade of the central aisle

Figure 11.9. Second original doorway located in the east end of the south aisle

209

Nevila Molla

210

Late antique construction

Late medieval additions

Mid Byzantine reconstruction

Modern reconstruction 0

13th-century repairs

5m

Figure 11.10. The church in the mid and late Middle Ages

intervention is difficult to trace as no clear interface or difference in building technique has been observed between the clerestory level and the arcades below. As mentioned above, however, there is a break between what seems to have been the jamb of an original window and the jamb of a subsequent replacement window (Fig. 11.11, see also Fig. 11.8). The interface between these indicates that the intervention included the reconstruction of six windows to reduced dimensions, with single brick arches. Unlike the arches of the arcade below, the clerestory window-arches are contoured by a thin line of tile fragments. Only five of the windows survive on the south arcade, and the upper walls that once rose above the arches in the bema area are not preserved. The original large square putlog-holes for the beams that supported the late antique roof appear intact and continued to be used in this phase. Thus, we would propose that the reconstruction interface extended horizontally at the level of the window ledges above these putlog holes. It continued at this level across the building’s façade wall, where the upper part was rebuilt with a new window opening at the top.

In the eastern part of the building, the modification of the large late antique window in the apse is the main intervention. The central arch and part of the lateral arches of the three-light window collapsed and were blocked in, and a new, smaller window was inserted. This consisted of three small openings crowned by brick arches and topped by a fourth slightly larger opening, from which only the lower parts of the jambs survive (see Fig. 11.5). Of the three small arches of this second-phase window, only the lateral ones are fully preserved. These are built in the same style as the new windows in the clerestory and are supported by two small brick piers. The fourth opening, above, was probably crowned by an arch of the type used in the modern reconstruction. On the exterior, this intervention respected the semi-octagonal shape of the original window and the enveloping second-phase façade stops at the level where the three lower arches of the new window begin, for the same technical reason that impeded the late antique builders to continue building the semi-octagonal shape from the level of window arches upwards. A new flagstone pavement in the nave and aisles formed part of this stage of repairs. In

11  The Great Basilica: a reassessment

211

1932

1930

1931

Late antique construction

0

5m

Mid Byzantine reconstruction Modern reconstruction

Figure 11.11. Phased drawing of the south-facing elevation of the north arcade

the area between the nave and bema, this new pavement partially overlaps the late antique mosaic floor, but it is probable that the rest of the mosaic was left exposed. Fragments of the earliest layer of wall plaster are also preserved below later layers on the interior of the façade, on the arcades and in the south bay of the transept. The masonry of the reconstruction in the clerestory does not differ in quality of material or in building technique from the late antique construction, though slightly more tile fragments and pieces of limestone of smaller dimensions than in the early phase were observed. The masonry of the newly inserted window in the apse is particularly irregular and bonded with lime mortar. Sections of collapsed brick arches were included in the masonry in this area. Two interventions can be grouped into another stage during which the structure still functioned in its original form as a basilica church. The south side of the apse and the adjacent wall of the south transept bay were repaired in a style readily distinguishable from the blocking of the window in the apse and the reconstruction of the clerestory. This repair used brick in a typically decorative style that is characteristic of late medieval construction in the region (Fig. 11.12). Fish-scale patterns of small brick fragments in limestone masonry are used in the upper part of the apse, while the section of the adjacent transept wall is executed with a combination of equally wide bands of brick and limestone. Signs of repair are also evident on the western end of the south aisle. Although almost completely destroyed, the repair can be traced on the remaining section of the façade above the jamb of the original south doorway, and on the west end of the south aisle wall. The final stage of interventions consisted of a number of modifications and newly inserted features that transformed the character of the building. First, the arched spaces

between the masonry piers were blocked. Of the wall blockings, only a section between the first two piers in the north arcade of the nave and a smaller section in the south arcade of the bema survive. Although Ugolini’s photograph shows that the south window of the south transept bay was blocked, suggesting that this space was probably out of use in the later phases of the church, Meksi’s plan shows that the space between the piers of both arcades of the bema area was not entirely blocked; rather they were reduced to allow for small access-ways between the bema and the transept bays (see Fig. 11.2).17 A small chapel oriented east–west was inserted in the northwest corner of the south transept bay. Although its walls only stand to about 0.40 m above ground, the chapel preserves its complete original shape. Consisting of a square room of 1.45 by 1.93 m and a small semi-circular apse, it was accessed from the west through a small entrance measuring 0.72 m. The poor state of preservation of this structure is mainly due to the poor quality of its construction, consisting of mud-bonded rubble masonry. This characteristic distinguishes the wall, the chapel and the wall-blockings between piers from the blocking of the apse window mentioned above, where lime mortar is used in abundance. Poorly preserved wall fragments can be made out at the same point in the north transept bay. Their state of preservation makes it difficult to determine whether they belong to another small chapel, mirroring that in the southern transept, or are simply walls intended to reduce the area between this bay and the north aisle. However, it is clear that another small entrance and two square windows were cut into the north wall of this aisle, an event contemporary with the insertion of the chapel in the south transept bay and wall blockings between piers. This entrance was clearly intended to facilitate access into the aisle, as access from the nave was now blocked. This

212

Nevila Molla

Figure 11.12. View of the apse’s exterior façade from the south. Note the 13th-century repair on the upper part of the elevation

entrance was located opposite the corresponding doorway in the south aisle wall, indicating an attempt to establish symmetry of passage within the building. The two masonry tombs located along the south wall of the south aisle were probably built during the same period. Their mud-bonded rubble masonry is similar to that of the chapel in the transept bay. In this phase, the church seems to have functioned as several units with independent access-ways, ultimately surrendering to a medieval standard of design in religious architecture.

Conclusion The survey of the Great Basilica presented here shows that its construction sequence is more complex than previously believed. The late antique church, divided by masonry piers rather than columnar arcades and stylobate walls, though not in compliance with the general pattern of architecture in Epirus and Greece, is not an uncommon type in and around Butrint.18 A number of late antique churches, such as the Acropolis Basilica, the basilica on the Vrina Plain and the basilica synagogue in the nearby town of Saranda, also used this system of division between

aisles and nave.19 The basilica at Phoenice may be another example, although the evidence in this case is uncertain.20 It is likely that the church functioned in conjunction with the nearby Baptistery, and was equipped with two access points on the side facing the Baptistery in order to facilitate ceremonial passage between the two. As with all late antique constructions at Butrint and the surrounding region, the fabric is of modest quality, despite the fact that, as has been argued before, the Great Basilica along with the Baptistery and a series of other major churches, were the only major public constructions in the city in the later 5th and early 6th centuries.21 The limestone does not seem to have been freshly quarried and probably derives from rubble available close to the site. The presence of brick is very limited and so are spolia, which do not feature extensively in any of the religious monuments, with the exception of the Baptistery, which represents the only truly lavish building in the city. Nevertheless, the Great Basilica would have been the main church in late antique Butrint; this is indicated by its scale, its location beside the bridge and Water Gate, as well as by its proximity to the Baptistery.22 While other constructions in the city, such as the basilicas on the acropolis and on the Vrina Plain, were probably built by private benefactors, the Great Basilica and the Baptistery may well have been investments made by Butrint’s episcopacy, first documented in 484.23 The first stage of the building’s reconstruction is difficult to situate in time, as the building technique is not chronologically indicative and other dating indications are non-existent. It is possible, however, that the need to rehabilitate the basilica arose during the town’s revival in the mid-medieval period. With the reconstruction of the nearby Water Gate as part of the re-fortification of the medieval town, it is hard to imagine that the Great Basilica, largely still standing, would not have been seen as an obvious and convenient structure to bring back into full use.24 As Butrint re-emerges in the ecclesiastic records of the 10th and 11th centuries as a bishopric, its dependency shifting between the Metropolis of Naupaktos and Ochrid, the basilica would have been the only surviving major religious building, as the Baptistery, the Acropolis Basilica and the Vrina Plain complex had all fallen out of use by this time.25 The reconstruction respected the original plan of the late antique church and there were only minor modifications, such as the reduction of the windows in the apse and the clerestory, reflecting new concepts of religious Byzantine architecture in this period. This stage was part of a widespread phenomenon of reconstruction in the 9th-11th centuries, when the re-emergence of basilica churches is recorded not only in the region of Epirus, but throughout the Balkans.26 Subsequent interventions and modifications testify to the continued use of the church in the late Byzantine and Venetian periods. Although in itself a minor repair, the reconstruction of the upper south corner of the apse and the adjacent transept wall, in a style of masonry that is typical of 13th-century Epirote churches, is indicative

11  The Great Basilica: a reassessment of the new building tradition of this period. Again, the church preserved its original plan and remained the town’s main religious monument. It is significant that access to the area was increased with the addition of another gate in the city wall, just to the north of the church, while the Water Gate was also reconstructed as part of a second stage of re-enforcement of the city walls. The relatively stable period under the rule of the Despotate of Epirus marked a period of growth for Butrint and the region and saw increasing activity in church construction, although the major buildings of this period were mostly in Butrint’s surroundings and not within the town. The written sources regarding ecclesiastical activity in the region confirm this picture. Butrint continued to be the location of a Bishopric into the 14th century27 and the last stage of structural interventions at the Great Basilica may have occurred in the period between the 14th century and the early Venetian period as the town declined. The way in which the church functioned changed considerably, with the creation of separated spaces, which served almost as independent units, perhaps for multiple patrons. It is the latter who were probably buried in the masonry tombs in the south aisle. Small single aisle chapels seems to have become the predominant feature at this time, as is testified by a number of such structures in various parts of the late medieval town.28 Despite the small scale of urban activity at Butrint, the Great Basilica was probably not abandoned until the end of the Venetian period with only the onset of the Ottoman invasion bringing about the end of its long history.

References Bowden, W. (2003) Epirus Vetus. The Archaeology of a Late Antique Province. London, Duckworth. Bowden, W. and Mitchell, J. (2004) The Christian Topography of Butrint. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint. Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 104–25. Oxford, Oxbow. Bowden, W. and Përzhita, L. (2004) The Baptistery. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint. Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 176–201. Oxford, Oxbow. Caraher, W. R. (2003) Church, Society and the Sacred in early Christian Greece. Ohio State University, PhD thesis. De Maria, S. and Zaccaria, M. (2005) Le nuove ricerche, in Saggi di scavo nell’area della basilica bizantina. In S. De Maria and Sh. Gjongecaj (eds), Phoinike III. Raporto preliminare sulle champagne di scavi e ricerche 2002–2003: 89–96. Bologna, Ante Quem. Greenslade, S., Hodges, R., Leppard, S. and Mitchell, J. (2006) Preliminary report on the early Christian basilica on the Vrina Plain, Albania. Archeologia Medievale 33: 397–408. Harris, E. C. (2003) The stratigraphy of standing structures (con alcune considerazioni in nota di R. Parenti). Archeologia dell’Architettura 8: 9–14. Retrieved on http://www.bibar.unisi. it/node/248 (accessed 2006). Hobdari, E. and Podini, M. (2008) Edilizia ecclesistica e reimpiego nelle chiese di V–VI e XI–XII secolo nell territorio di Phoinike e Butrinto. Ocnus 16: 1–26. Kitzinger, E. (1951) Mosaic pavements in the Greek East and

213

the question of ‘Renaissance’ under Justinian, Actes du VIe congrés internationele d’études byzantines 2: 209–23. Paris, Ecole des Hautes Etudes. Krautheimer, R. (1969) The transept in the early Christian basilica. In R. Krautheimer Studies in Early Christian, Medieval and Renaissance Art: 59–68. New York, New York University. Lako, K. (1991) Bazilika paleokristiane e Onhezmit. Iliria 1–2: 123–86. Martin, S. (2004) The topography of Butrint. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint. Excavations and Surveys 1994–1999: 76–103. Oxford, Oxbow. Meksi, A. (1983) Bazilika e madhe dhe baptisteri i Butrintit. Monumentet 25: 47–75. Mitchell, J. (2004) The mosaic pavements of the Baptistery. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavation and Surveys 1994–99: 202–18. Oxford, Oxbow. Mitchell, J. (2008) The Butrint Baptistery and its Mosaics (Pagëzimorja e Butrintit dhe mozaikët e saj). London/Tirana, Butrint Foundation. Muçaj, S. (1993) Les basiliques paléochrétiennes de Bylis et leur architecture. XI Corso di cultura ravennate et bizantina. Seminario internazionale su: l’Albania dal tardoantico al medioevo, aspetti e problem di archaeologia e storia dell’arte: 569–84. Mustilli, D. (1941) Relazione preliminare sugli scavi archeologici in Albania (1937–40). Atti della Reale Accademia d’Italia 2: 677–704. Netzer, E. (2005) The synagogue of Saranda (Albania), Qadmoniot 129: 145–53 (in Hebrew). Podini, M., Meta, A. and Silani, M. (2007) La basilica paleocristiana. In S. De Maria and Sh. Gjongecaj (eds), Phoinike IV. Rapporto preliminare sulle campagne di scavi e ricerche 2004–2006: 31–58. Bologna, Ante Quem. Soustal, P. (2004) The historical sources for Butrint in the Middle Ages. In R. Hodges, W. Bowden and K. Lako (eds), Byzantine Butrint: Excavation and Surveys 1994–99: 20–26. Oxford, Oxbow. Stričević, D. (1963) La renovation du type basilical dans l’architecture ecclesiastique des pays centrales des Balkans au IX–XI siecles. Actes du XII Congres International d’Etudes Byzantines 1: 165–211. Belgrade, International Congress of Byzantine Studies. Ugolini, L. M. (1937) Butrinto. Il mito d’Enea, gli scavi. Rome, Istituto Grafico Tiberino. Ugolini, L. M. (1942) L’acropoli di Butrinto (Albania Antica 3). Rome, Scalia.

Notes 1 Mustilli 1941, quoted in Martin 2004: 83; see also Hodges (Chapter 1) in this volume. 2 Wilson in this volume. 3 See Molla, Paris and Venturini in this volume. 4 Greenslade in this volume. 5 The study of the Great Basilica was undertaken as part of my MA thesis entitled, ‘La Grande Basilica di Butrint Attraverso L’Archeologia dell’ Architettura’ under the supervision of Giovanna Bianchi (University of Siena), to whom I am much indebted for advice and guidance. Thanks are also owed to Alessandro Fichera, Lia Gaetano and Erika Vecchietti for assistance with converting the text from Italian into English.

214

Nevila Molla

6 In the case of built ‘deposits’, the role of the interface is of particular significance. The difference between this and archaeological deposits lies in the fact that, while the artifacts inside a deposit are in a condition of waste/ abandonment, the material that makes up wall stratigraphy has been intentionally used. This suggests that not only the interface (which marks intervention), but also the material constituting the built ‘layer’, are intentional results, leaving only degradation as an unintended factor identifiable in the structures. Such intentional features make construction material not always reliable (in virtue of its repeated use over time), and the interface the only means by which the same building material can be assigned to one built ‘layer’ or to another. 7 Harris 2003: 9–14. 8 Ugolini, prompted by the stylistic differences in the masonry, suggested that a Byzantine church consisting of the transept area was enlarged with the addition of the nave and aisles during the Venetian period, Ugolini 1937: 172; see also Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 106. 9 Meksi 1983: 47–51. 10 Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 106–11. 11 Mitchell 2004: 202–18. 12 Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 110. 13 On the dimensions of the building see Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 107. 14 Bowden 2003: 121–7; De Maria and Zaccaria 2005: 89–94; Hobdari and Podini 2008: 1–26; Podini, Meta and Silani 2007: 31–58; Muçaj 1993: 569–84; see also Krautheimer 1969: 59–68 15 Meksi 1983: 50. 16 For the Baptistery at Butrint, see Bowden and Mitchell 2004:

17 18 19

20 21 22

23 24 25 26 27 28

107; Bowden and Përzhita 2004: 176–201; Mitchell 2008: 30–33. Kitzinger (1951: 209–23) dated a closely related mosaic in the basilica A of Nicopolis to the second quarter of the 6th century based on an inscription on the mosaic floor of the transept, which refers to Archbishop Demetrios, in office during this period, as the patron of the building. Meksi 1983: 64. Contra Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 107. On the Acropolis Basilica, see Greenslade, Leppard and Logue in this volume; Bowden and Mitchel 2004: 111–13; Ugolini 1942. On the basilica on the Vrina Plain, see Greenslade in this volume; Greenslade et al. 2006: 397–408. On the synagogue at Saranda, see Lako 1991: 123–86; Netzer 2005: 145–53. De Maria and Zaccaria 2005: 89–94; Hobdari and Podini 2008: 4; Podini, Meta and Silani 2007. Bowden 2003: 105–60. Though only c. 31 m long, the church is not considered small when compared to other basilica churches in Late Antiquity. According to Caraher (2003:18) the majority of the early Christian churches throughout Greece are less than 50 m long. Mitchell 2008: 52–55; Soustal 2004: 20. For the archaeological and architectural evidence attesting to Butrint’s medieval revival see Bowden and Hodges 2011 as well as the various relevent contributions in this volume. Soustal 2004: 22. Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 108; Stričević 1963: 165– 211. Soustal 2004: 23–24. Bowden and Mitchell 2004: 114–22.

12  The medieval church and cemetery   at the Well of Junia Rufina Alessandro Sebastiani, Dawn Gooney, John Mitchell, Pagona Papadopoulou, Paul Reynolds, Emanuele Vaccaro and Joanita Vroom Un pozzo di singolare fattura fu scoperto, dentro la cinta di mura greche, a pochi metri di distanza da esse, in corrispondenza della Porta del Leone. Diede motivo allo scavo l’affiorare di pochi centimetri di muro romano provveduto di volta. Luigi Maria Ugolini1

Introduction (AS)

The 2007 excavations (AS)

The Well of Junia Rufina is located just inside the Lion Gate in Butrint (Fig. 12.1).2 It takes its name from the 2nd-century refurbishments of the well by the Roman woman, Junia Rufina, to celebrate the nymphs. The Well of Junia Rufina is the only natural well on the north side of Butrint, the only other natural well so far identified at Butrint being located on the south side next to the stoa by the theatre. The Roman well exploits a natural cave some 4.20 m in depth, which was contained by a wall made of simple coursed limestone surmounted by a tile arch. Three white limestone slabs make up the wellhead along which is a Greek inscription stating ΙΟΥΝΙΑ ΡΟΥΦΕΙΝΑ ΝΥΜΦΩΝ ΦΙΛΗ (Junia Rufina beloved of the nymphs). On the southern wall of the well, just below the tile vault that covers it, two peacocks and a kantharos are portrayed in a 5th- to 6th-century fresco. The vault itself was pierced by a squared hole, which shows that access to the well was blocked, probably during the 17th century AD when the little church beside it was abandoned. The reconstruction of a retaining wall immediately to the west of the well provided the context for a small excavation, and an opportunity to re-examine Luigi Maria Ugolini’s interpretation of the history of this well during his campaigns between 1928–1934 and as presented in later studies.3 A preliminary report of the excavations has already been published; here the focus, after a summary of history of the well’s use, is the period between Late Antiquity and the late Middle Ages.4 Table 12.1 illustrates the sequence of use of the well, thanks to information obtained during the Italian Archaeological Mission’s excavations and the Butrint Foundation’s appraisal in 2007.

The 2007 excavations included an area 7.8 m (east–west) by 4.0 m (north–south) where an east–west retaining wall was removed in 2006 and subsequently rebuilt in 2007. This allowed for a modern examination of the archaeological sequence immediately to the west of the Well of Junia Rufina (Fig. 12.2). It should be noted, however, that the excavation was only pursued to a depth of 2.5 m. Proceeding any deeper would have gravely destabilized the remainder of the structure, and as a result, no evidence of any Hellenistic or early Imperial Roman phase of activity was found, which, if such activity had existed, would lie at a lower, unpenetrated level. Due to the aforementioned limits of the 2007 excavation, this report is primarily concerned with the period between the 5th and 17th centuries. After the construction of the well by Junia Rufina in the 2nd century AD, the Lion Gate area seems to have remained unmodified until Late Antiquity when a new rectangular building was constructed surrounding the Well of Junia Rufina. This new rectangular building, abutting the western side of the Roman structure, measuring at least 4 m in width, was built of coursed limestone walls, two of which were preserved to a height of 5 m. The excavation did not reach the original floor or pavement levels in this building, but two layers of rubble were found filling its interior with sherds of 6th-century pottery that provides a terminus post quem for its abandonment. Little can be said about the building’s function. Although, given the prominent re-decoration of the wellhead with a depiction of two peacocks surrounding a kantharos – stylistically similar to the motifs in the Baptistery at Butrint – there is some likelihood that this small building was a chapel located

Alessandro Sebastiani et al.

216

Lake Gate

Lion Gate Cemetery

The Well of Junia Rufina

Acropolis

Great Basilica Tower Gate

Castle

Theatre

Forum Baptistery

Marsh

Triconch Palace

Western Defences Merchant's House

0

200 m

Figure 12.1. The location of the Well of Junia Rufina Butrint

directly inside the Lion Gate through the newly refurbished fortifications. In comparison to the triconch church on the acropolis and the churches found on the Vrina Plain and at Diaporit, the chapel abutting the Well of Junia Rufina was a modest structure. No evidence for the use of the area during the later 6th and later 10th/early 11th centuries was found. At some time around the turn of the millennium, however, the late antique chapel was sealed by a levelling layer containing sherds of distinctive late antique and 10th- to 11th-century pottery, including Otranto 1 amphorae; 6th-century wares included in this layer were residual.5 The excavations identified a foundation trench created soon after the deposition of this 11th-century levelling layer. The foundation trench was 1 m wide, dug to accommodate the well and the north wall of a new building with a door 2.45 m wide. The new building measured approximately 10 × 4 m and in association with this new building was a cemetery delimited on its north side by a possible enclosure wall made of coursed rubble (Fig. 12.3). The presence of a cemetery suggests that the small

stone building was a church, a successor to the late antique chapel that had previously occupied the area due west of the well. Constructed upon a modest terrace, the church, like its forebear lay just inside the Lion Gate and, judging from the associated pottery, belonged to the general revival of Butrint as a town from the last quarter of the 10th century and early 11th century.6 The refurbishment of the fortifications, as in Late Antiquity, perhaps provided an impetus for the re-establishment of the well as a sacred spot within the town.7 The small church resembled the socalled northeast church and West Gate shrine or church in its scale and in its proximity to an entrance of the walled circuit.8 The cemetery contained at least three burials (Fig. 12.3). One of these, found below the southeast edge of the area of excavation, has not been excavated, but only recorded in plan; the other two were completely investigated. The first of these excavated burials was 2.38 × 0.77 m, orientated east–west, and contained a male skeleton 1.69/1.74 m tall (context 73). The second burial contained a female skeleton, 1.50/1.54 m tall (context 53); this burial had well-defined,

12  The medieval church and cemetery at the Well of Junia Rufina

217

Table 12.1. Overview of the occupation sequence of the Well of Junia Rufina Sequence Natural spring

Chronology 8th century BC

Construction of the city walls and possible first construction of a well

170–156 BC

Project IAP (Italian Archaeological Project) IAP/2007

Construction of the well by Junia Rufina

2nd century AD

IAP/2007

Placing of a Christian fresco picturing two peacocks and a kantharos at the top of the well

5th–6th century AD

IAP/2007

Construction of a rectangular building abutting the Roman well

3rd–6th century AD 6th–late 10th century AD Late 10th–11th century AD mid 11th–13th century AD 13th–14th century AD 14th–16th century AD 17th century

2007

Hansen 2009 Hernandez, çondi 2008 Sebastiani 2008 Ugolini 1942 Martin 2004 Hansen 2009 Sebastiani 2008 Ugolini 1942 Bowden, Mitchell 2004 Sebastiani 2008 Ugolini 1942 Sebastiani 2008

2007

Sebastiani 2008

2007 2007

Bowden, Mitchell 2004 Sebastiani 2008 Sebastiani 2008

2007

Sebastiani 2008

IAP/2007

Sebastiani 2008 Ugolini 1942 Sebastiani 2008 Ugolini 1942

Abandonment of the area Construction of a church and of a cemetery Second phase of cemetery Last inhumation Reconstruction or re-modelling of the church Blocking of the well and subsequent abandonment of the area

stone-built limits formed by limestone coursed blocks and was covered by heavy and defined limestone slabs (Fig. 12.4). This burial is of particular interest because two silver earrings were found on either side of the skull, showing that this was a high status burial (cf. Figs 12.8–9). It suggests that this church belonged to a modestly wealthy family who lived hereabouts on the north side of Butrint during the early 11th century. In many respects, it resembles the small cemetery group from the same period found on the north side of the Triconch Palace area, and shown by DNA to be associated by maternal connections.9 The cemetery was delimited to the north by a dry-stone wall, the function of which is uncertain. It may be a terrace wall or have served to divide the church from its cemetery. The 11th-century church was built abutting the 6th-century walls described above, and contained the well of Junia Rufina. The main access was through the northern wall, destroyed during Ugolini’s excavations and now no longer extant. Two further phases of burials were found in the cemetery: the first, separated by a thick layer of deposit from the earliest graves, can be dated by ceramics to the mid 11th to 13th centuries; the second is dated to the 13th to 14th centuries. Seven burials were found in the first phase, all of them cut into the sealing deposit and associated with a roughly square pit with a 0.7 × 0.7 m opening, delimited by earth-

IAP/2007

Reference Martin 2004 Ugolini 1942

Figure 12.2. Plan of the area of excavation in relation to areas excavated by Ugolini

218

Alessandro Sebastiani et al.

Figure 12.3. The 11th-century cemetery

Figure 12.4. Stone lined grave of a female buried with two silver earrings

12  The medieval church and cemetery at the Well of Junia Rufina

219

Figure 12.5. First-phase burials and associated pit, 11th to 13th centuries

bonded masonry of small to medium blocks of limestone (Fig. 12.5). All the burials were oriented east–west; two of them contained adult skeletons, the remaining five were infant skeletons. One infant grave was a cappuccina burial, made by reusing late antique tiles (Fig. 12.6). A particularly interesting discovery from the rubble layer was a rare but distinctive Benno brooch portraying the German Holy Roman Emperor Henry III (1046–1056), and almost certainly lost by a pilgrim journeying from northern Europe (cf. Fig. 12.12).10 Only one of the seven burials seems to show particular and distinctive elements in contrast with the rest of the burials. The head of the skeleton in the tile grave rested on a kind of pillow made up of reused stones, with tiles used to cover parts of the skeleton’s arms and hands. This burial has a precise parallel in the late 13th- to

14th-century burial in the Merchant’s House area of the Triconch Palace and contemporaneous burials associated with the Acropolis Basilica.11 Similar burials were found at Corinth associated with ‘RMR Wares’, and ascribed to an Angevin influence in burial customs.12 The second phase of inhumation, dating from the 13th to the 14th century, was discovered at the bottom of the first layer of rubble, cut straight into the deposit. One grave from this period contained an adult buried with a small projectile lying close to its head; if this is a head of an arrow it may have been the cause of death (Fig. 12.7, cf. Fig. 12.10). Although only partially excavated, it is tempting to suggest that the cemetery was originally a family plot, which was subsequently used to hold infant burials. This

220

Alessandro Sebastiani et al.

Figure 12.6. Infant burial a cappuccina

appears to have been the case of the Vrina Plain basilica, where infants were inhumed in the apse during its final 12th- to 13th-century phase.13 A large amount of pottery was found in association with the cemetery, collected in the overburden above the graves. A preliminary study of this pottery assemblage at the Well of Junia Rufina has shown fascinating new data supporting the late Byzantine urban revival of Butrint.14 Early medieval pottery (late 7th to early 10th century AD), represents only 3% of the total pottery found at the site, while 10th- to 12th-century pottery makes up 94%, 13thto 14th-century ceramics represents only 2%, and only 1% of the assemblage can be dated to the 14th to 18th century (Fig. 12.21). Belonging to the medieval period, some 440 pieces are of so-called Otranto 1 and 2 amphorae from Apulia. This distribution resembles pottery assemblages found throughout Butrint, particularly those associated with the latest phase of the oikos on the Vrina Plain and the levels discovered in the area beside the Vivari Channel in the area occupied by the Triconch Palace. Some 75% of the total assemblage of pottery recovered consists of amphorae, 23% are coarse wares, while other vessels and tablewares together make up only 1%, as shown in Figure 12.19. Given the ceramic evidence and given that the pottery came from the terraces immediately above, that is, the acropolis, the urban revival was short-lived, peaking in the 11th to 12th centuries, as in the Triconch Palace area, and quickly declined between the 14th and 17th centuries.15 The church at the Well of Junia Rufina was remodelled one last time between the 14th and the 16th centuries AD. The southern wall seems to have been raised with at least three courses of limestone blocks and tile, a little window was constructed to allow light to enter into the church

and a new access was created in the eastern wall. This last access led to a badly preserved staircase, consisting of at least four steps. The previous access to the church was blocked by the construction of a second wall, which was recorded and then demolished by Ugolini.16 According to Ugolini, the Well of Junia Rufina may also have been partially blocked by this wall at this time.17 Finally, on the internal side of the church’s southern wall, a small buttress was built to support the wall, which had been constructed without foundation bases. To define the final chronology of the use of the church, a small sondage was undertaken outside the later access to the building. Here, an occupation surface, composed of greenish clay with little stones and tiles, was found to be levelled at the height of the church threshold. The layer just above this surface contained only 17th-century pottery, suggesting that this occupation surface represents the final period of use of the area. Associated with this is the final blocking of access to the well and the construction, as identified by Ugolini, of the little square feature that pierced the top of the Roman vault and provided access to the water of the well from above. A series of abandonment layers associated with this period were recorded across the entire area, which were subsequently covered by rubble and earth from the slope of the acropolis hill above leading to the last sealing of the area.

The human remains (DG) A total of nine skeletons were recovered from the site at the Well of Junia Rufina and a basic osteological examination was carried out soon after excavation. The analysis was confined to a simple assessment of sex, age and stature

12  The medieval church and cemetery at the Well of Junia Rufina

221

Figure 12.7. Adult male buried with an iron projectile

for each individual. While a full pathological examination was not possible at the time, the presence of any obvious trauma or disease on the bones was noted. An assessment of sex was carried out for each of the adult skeletons based on a visual assessment of the more sexually dimorphic elements of the skeleton, the skull and pelvis in particular, and on a number of measurements taken on the long bones. As the sexing of immature remains is almost impossible, especially using these methods, it was not attempted for the immature remains from this site. Unlike sexing, ageing immature remains can be more accurate than for adult remains. The estimation of age for these skeletons was based on dental development and on the epiphyseal fusion of skeletal elements which occurs at particular stages of development. The length of long bones of some of the immature remains was also used in estimating age. Immature age ranges used here are foetus (before birth), infant (0–3yrs), child (3–12yrs) and adolescent (12–20yrs).18 Once mature, the ageing of skeletons becomes more problematic and in this collection was based on dental attrition and the degree of degeneration of the joints and spine. As these factors can be affected by such outside influences as diet, disease and occupation, adult age ranges are quite broad; young adult (20–35yrs), middle adult (35–50yrs) and older adult (50yrs+).19 An estimation of stature was calculated for the adults, where possible, using tables for males and females provided in Human Osteology: A laboratory and field guide.20

Results The bones were in good condition apart from a certain amount of broken bone, which is to be expected from archaeological samples; unfortunately much of the broken elements were in the skull and pelvic areas that are important for both ageing and sexing purposes. Of the nine sets of human remains recovered from the site at the Well of Junia Rufina, five were adult and four immature. The immature remains The skeletons were in varying degrees of preservation and completeness but an approximate age was estimated for each individual. Context 28 was the skeleton of a child most likely under 6 years. The long bones and skull were fragmented but the mandible was in good condition. Age was determined from the unfused elements of the vertebrae, and from the fact that the first mandibular molar was unerupted; this usually takes place at around age 6. The metopic suture of the skull was visible but in advanced state of closure; this is usually complete by age 6–8 years or younger. No obvious signs of trauma or disease were evident. Context 32 was the skeleton of a child aged approximately 4 to 6 years. Age was estimated from the degree of fusion of the vertebral segments; the neural arches were fused but fusion of the neural arches to the vertebral bodies was just commencing, this being usually complete by age 5.21 The permanent first molars were unerupted suggesting an age

222

Alessandro Sebastiani et al.

of less than 6 years. The acromion and coracoid process of the scapula were unfused. There were no signs of injury or disease on the bones. Context 38 was the almost complete skeleton of a child. Age was determined to be around 4 years from dental development and the state of fusion of the vertebrae. The neural arches were fused; however, the dens of the second cervical vertebra, the axis, was not fused to the body, this being usually complete by age 6. The length of the femur was 110mm suggesting an age of 3–4 years. Again, no evidence of disease or trauma was evident. Context 48 was the incomplete set of remains of a child under 5 years of age. The skull, pelvis and long bones were fragmented and a number of elements were not present. Age was determined from the state of fusion of the vertebrae. The acromion and coracoid processes of the left scapula were also unfused. No signs of injury or disease were observed. The mature remains Context 16 was the skeleton of a young adult female. Though the skull was fragmented, there was sufficient dentition in place to assess age from the amount of wear on the teeth. Both upper and lower molars show much the same wear pattern, the cusps of the first molars were worn flat but with no dentine exposure, the second molars showed slight flattening of the cusps and the third molars had no wear. Visible lines of fusion of the epiphyses the ischial tuberosity on the pelvis suggest an age in the 20 to 35 year age group as these are among the latest epiphyses in the body to fuse, usually in the mid to late twenties. The pelvis in this case was too badly fragmented to use in assessing sex. Sex was attributed as female through the assessment of sexually dimorphic elements of the skull and from long bone measurements. An accurate estimation of stature was not possible due to the fragmented condition of the long bones. This individual had a considerable degree of antemortem tooth loss and infection in the alveolar bone of the mandible. Both right and left mandibular first incisors were missing antemortem and there was a large abscess in the bone at this location. There was slight pitting on the parietals and healing cribra orbitalia in the eye sockets indicative of anaemia associated conditions.22 Context 20 was the skeleton of an adult. The pelvis was too badly damaged to assess sex, although those elements of the skull and measurements taken from the long bones, which were also fragmented, suggest that this individual was possibly male. All epiphyses were fused and the vertebrae showed just slight degeneration, suggesting that this was most likely a young adult. The long bones were fragmented and therefore an accurate estimation of stature could not be calculated. The skull was badly fragmented and the maxilla consisted of just fragments and loose teeth. The mandible was in better condition and the teeth showed wear with dentine exposure on the first molars. The mandibular third molars were absent. The presence of a

third maxillary molar amongst some loose teeth suggests that their absence in the mandible may either be genetic or the result of impaction in the jaw. As there is no sign of any infection or repair in the bone at this location, antemortem loss is unlikely. Context 30 was the skeleton of an adult female. Visual assessment of the sexually dimorphic elements of the skull and pelvis, and measurements taken on the long bones all suggested that this was a female individual. All of the epiphyses were fused and the vertebrae showed slight degeneration, suggesting that this individual was possibly in the middle adult age range, 35 to 50 years. Dentition could not be used in the estimation of age due to the tooth loss described below. Measurements taken from the long bones allowed stature to be calculated at between 1.54 m and 1.60 m. Though the skull was fragmented, the mandible was in good condition and showed a massive amount of antemortem tooth loss. All of the mandibular molars were lost during life. It is possible that the incisors were also lost but as the bone in this area showed some post mortem damage a positive identification was not possible. The bone in the area of the molars was well healed indicating that loss of the teeth was not recent though the bone of the jaw itself appeared thinned and weak, often a result of excessive tooth loss. Active cribra orbitalia was present in both orbits, indicative of prolonged anaemia associated conditions.23 Context 53 was the skeleton of a young adult female. The bones of this skeleton were in good condition and though the pelvis was fragmented, the skull and long bones allowed for a confident assessment of sex. Age was estimated from the teeth and the minimal amount of wear on the molars. The right third molar of the mandible was absent, possibly a genetic anomaly, or the result of impaction in the jaw. Some slight calculus was visible on the right mandibular canine and first premolar. There was very slight degeneration of the vertebrae. Measurements from the long bones allowed stature to be calculated between 1.50 m and 1.54 m. Small extra bones, known as ossicles, were present in the lambdoid suture of the skull. These are a discrete, possibly genetic, trait and have no effect on the individual during life. Context 73 was the skeleton of a young to middle adult male. The rugose appearance of the sexually dimorphic elements of the skull, the pelvis and measurements from the long bones allowed for a confident assessment of sex in this case. Age was estimated from the rate of vertebral degeneration and dental attrition. The vertebrae show slight degeneration on the cervical vertebra, progressing downwards to slightly more pronounced degeneration on the lumbar vertebrae. All of the molars show a degree of wear with dentine exposure on the first and second molars of the mandible. Measurements from the long bones allowed an estimation of stature between 1.69 m and 1.74 m. The right ribs of this individual showed a proliferation of bony growth, or periostitis, on the external surface, which maybe the result of an injury or infection on this side of the body.

12  The medieval church and cemetery at the Well of Junia Rufina Discussion As many of the illnesses that killed in the past were acute and virulent, they caused little change on the skeleton and so there is little chance of accurately identifying cause of death for the majority of individuals. This was the case for this collection. Though the degree of antemortem tooth loss in context 30 was advanced, the well-healed appearance of the bone suggested that this individual was strong and otherwise healthy enough to withstand prolonged discomfort. Cribra orbitalia, present on the adults, contexts 16 and 30, is a skeletal reaction to prolonged anaemic conditions that often begin in early childhood as a result of poor diet or illness. The presence of periostitis on the external surface of the right ribs of the adult male, context 73 may indicate the presence of infection or injury at this location on the upper body of this individual. These are results of a brief examination of the remains and further analysis may yield more information. However, in general, these individuals appear from their skeletons to have been healthy in life with little evidence of protracted illness, no traumas and little spinal degeneration or arthritic conditions. An interesting aspect of this collection is the age profile, five young or young-middle age adults and four children under ten years. The lack of infants and adolescents in the group indicate that this sample is unrepresentative and may be a result of the small number of individuals in this collection, the small size of the excavation area, or indeed the segregation of these age groups within a cemetery.

The small finds (JM) The small finds from the site of the Well of Junia Rufina are for the most part quite modest.24 This is not surprising given the nature of the site and the limited extent of the excavation. However, alongside an assemblage that includes a fragment of Roman-period limestone cornice-moulding, a few somewhat nondescript fragments of copper rod, strip and sheet and a few copper and iron nails, there are three exceptional items that call for some comment. The first of these is a pair of silver earrings, found in an exceptionally good state of preservation in situ by the head of a female skeleton (cat. 1, Figs 12.8–9). The elements of design of these are typical of central southern European production in the early Middle Ages. Although it is hard to cite exact parallels for their form there is little doubt that they date from the 10th century and there is no reason to think that they were not made in the region. Precise parallels for these earrings are difficult to locate. However, earrings usually with three beads, with lower display hoops of this pattern, made of square-sectioned wire or rod with a twist of fine wire running the length of each face, and similarly issuing from median elliptical beads or collars, are a common feature of earrings from central southern Europe of the early medieval period and have been found in Albania at Rehova and Dukat.25 They are also found at numerous sites in Croatia and Slovakia

223

where they are commonly assigned to the 9th and early 10th century.26 Earrings generically quite closely related to the ones from Butrint are common in central Dalmatia (Biskupija-Crkvina, Trilj and Petosevci), and in Istria (Zminj), where they have been dated to the 10th century.27 It is likely that the earrings from context 53 date from the same period The second item is the head of a projectile, a slender pyramidal point with uniform tang for attachment to a shaft, shaped and crafted with care (cat. 13, Fig. 12.10). This may have been the head of an arrow, designed to have particular penetrative qualities. It was found in association with a male skeleton and may have been the cause of the death of the individual. The third exceptional object from the excavation is a small copper brooch of a particular type known as a Benno brooch (Fig. 12.12). This will be discussed below.

Catalogue Silver

1. Pair of Earrings (Figs 12.8–9) Context: 53 (2007); in situ in grave context 49. SF 0024 and 0025. Dimensions: a) outer diameter of hoop: 34–37 mm; thickness of wire: 1.5–less than 1 mm; thickness of ornamented section of hoop: 3 mm; diameter of knops: c. 8 mm. b) outer diameter of hoop: 34–38 mm; thickness of wire: 1.5–less than 1 mm; thickness of ornamented section of hoop: 3 mm; diameter of knops: c. 7–8 mm. Material: silver. A pair of silver earrings, each consisting of two half-hoops of wire separated by sub-spherical hollow silver lateral beads. The upper hoop is a simple sub-round-sectioned length of silver wire, which emerges from the median bead and tapers at its other end to terminate in a little curling hoop that engages with a corresponding loop on other terminal bead. The lower display hoop of wire is more ornate, consisting of a length of square-sectioned wire/rod with a fine spirally twisted strip soldered to each of its four faces. The knops are fitted with collars of similar fine twisted wire. Comment: This is a remarkably well-preserved set of earrings found in situ, a) by the body’s left ear, b) by her right ear. Both show signs of wear on one face, showing that they had been worn for a considerable period of time without being removed. Date: 10th century.

Copper alloy 2. Fitting. Context: JRW 1 (2007). SF 0001. Dimensions: 44 × 18 × 4 mm; diameter of perforation: 8 mm. A fitting consisting of a strip with serrated edges, expanding at one point to a sub-elipse that is perforated by a circular hole. The upper surface is gilded, or faux-gilded. The strip is broken at both ends. Date: modern? 3. Small copper ring. Context: JRW 3 (2007). SF 0007. Dimensions: outer diameter: 17 mm; inner diameter: 10.5 mm; thickness: 1 mm. A small flat-sectioned copper washer-like ring.

224

Alessandro Sebastiani et al.

Figure 12.8. Silver earrings from female burial

4. Short length of rod, fish hook(?). Context: JRW 6 (2007), a 6th-century rubble layer. SF 0028. Dimensions: length: 19 mm; thickness of wire: 2 × 1.5 mm. A short length of round-sectioned wire bent to a regular curve and tapering at one end; possibly a fish-hook. 5. Short length of rod. Context: JRW 3 (2007). SF 0002. Dimensions: 43 × 3–4 × 3–