296 45 74MB
English Pages 507 [499] Year 2014
The Chora of Metaponto 5
A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 1
5/30/14 7:59 AM
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 2
5/30/14 7:59 AM
The Chora of Metaponto 5
A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift Edited by Joseph Coleman Carter
Institute of Classical Archaeology Packard Humanities Institute
University of Texas Press, Austin
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 3
5/30/14 7:59 AM
Copyright © 2014 by the University of Texas Press All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America First edition, 2014 Requests for permission to reproduce material from this work should be sent to: Permissions University of Texas Press P.O. Box 7819 Austin, TX 78713-7819 http://utpress.utexas.edu/index.php/rp-form The paper used in this book meets the minimum requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (R1997) (Permanence of Paper).
Lanza Catti, Elisa. The chora of Metaponto 5 : a Greek farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio / Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift ; edited by Joseph Coleman Carter. — First edition. p. cm. “Institute of Classical Archaeology, Packard Humanities Institute.” Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-292-75864-3 (hardback) 1. Metapontum (Extinct city). 2. Metapontum (Extinct city)—Rural life and customs. 3. Farmhouses—Italy—Metapontum (Extinct city). 4. Agricultural colonies—Italy—Metapontum (Extinct city). 5. Excavations (Archaeology)—Italy—Metapontum (Extinct city). 6. Greeks—Italy— Metapontum (Extinct city). 7. Metaponto Region (Italy)—Antiquities. I. Swift, Keith, 1976– II. Carter, Joseph Coleman, editor. III. University of Texas at Austin. Institute of Classical Archaeology, issuing body. IV. Packard Humanities Institute, issuing body. V. Title. VI. Title: Chora of Metaponto five. DG70.M52L358 2014 937'.773—dc23 2013045076 doi:10.7560/758643
For reasons of economy and speed, this volume has been printed from camera-ready copy furnished by ICA, which assumes full responsibility for its contents. Title page illustration: Terracotta head of female figure from Fattoria Fabrizio. 4th century BC. (Ch. 23, Terracottas Cat. No. TC 08) Photo: C. Raho/ICA.
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 4
5/30/14 7:59 AM
Ai miei piccoli Livio e Guido nati durante la stesura di questo volume, illuminando la mia vita con la gioia più grande. Elisa Lanza Catti
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 5
5/30/14 7:59 AM
Special Acknowledgment
This volume and others in this series could not have been conceived,
much less carried through to publication, without the generous financial support of the Packard Humanities Institute.
The Director and staff of the Institute of Classical Archaeology and its collaborators express their profound gratitude.
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 6
5/30/14 7:59 AM
Contents Acknowledgments������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ xi Elisa Lanza Catti
Illustration Credits����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������xiv Preface������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������xv Joseph Coleman Carter Introduction��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������xix Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti Part I 1. Overview: Excavations, Chronology, and Site Phasing����������������������������������������������������� 3 Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti
2. The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages�������������������������� 15 Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift 3. Fattoria Fabrizio Site Assemblage����������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 69 Keith Swift 4. Farmhouse Structure and Plan���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 83 Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift Virtual Reconstruction of the Farmhouse������������������������������������������������������������������������� 94 Massimo Limoncelli Comparable Farmhouse Plans ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 100 Elisa Lanza Catti
5. Aspects of the Rural Economy��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 111 Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift 6. The Domestic Cult at Fattoria Fabrizio������������������������������������������������������������������������� 117 Elisa Lanza Catti and Joseph Coleman Carter Domestic Cult���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 117 Joseph Coleman Carter The Material Evidence���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 118 Elisa Lanza Catti The Nature of the Cult: Animal Sacrifice and Libation�������������������������������������������������� 122 Joseph Coleman Carter Domestic Cults Elsewhere in the Chora������������������������������������������������������������������������ 124 Joseph Coleman Carter Domestic Cults Elsewhere in the Greek and Indigenous Worlds����������������������������������� 129 Elisa Lanza Catti
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 7
5/30/14 7:59 AM
Part II 7. Archaeobotany at Fattoria Fabrizio������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 133 Assunta Florenzano 8. Animal Bones����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 139 Anna Zsófia Biller 9. Marine Shells����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 143 Cesare D’Annibale Part III 10. Archaeological Materials: Introduction to the Pottery and Finds������������������������������� 151 Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift 11. Pottery Fabrics������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 153 Keith Swift Fine Ware Fabrics from Fattoria Fabrizio��������������������������������������������������������������������� 158 Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti Plain and Banded Ware Fabrics from Fattoria Fabrizio����������������������������������������������� 164 Keith Swift with Anna Cavallo
12. Figured Wares�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 171 Francesca Silvestrelli 13. Archaic and Black-gloss Fine Wares���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 173 Elisa Lanza Catti 14. Miniatures�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 225 Anna Cavallo 15. Banded Ware���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 231 Anna Cavallo 16. Wheel-made Painted Ware������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 259 Elisa Lanza Catti 17. Plain and Coarse Wares����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 261 Anna Cavallo 18. Louteria������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 289 Anna Cavallo 19. Mortaria����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 291 Anna Cavallo 20. Cooking Ware�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 297 Maria Francesca Blotti
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 8
5/30/14 7:59 AM
21. Transport Amphorae���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 321 Oda Teresa Calvaruso 22. Opus Doliare���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 331 Anna Cavallo 23. Terracottas�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 335 Rebecca Miller Ammerman 24. Loom Weights�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 351 Lin Foxhall
25. Roof Tiles�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 353 Francesco Perugino and Eliana Vollaro Ab Laconian System����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 354 Francesco Perugino Ba Pan Tile System������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 355 Eliana Vollaro
26. Metal Objects��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 361 Lorena Trivigno and Marta Mazzoli 27. Coins���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 367 Anna Rita Parente 28. Lithic Material������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 369 Cesare D’Annibale Appendices Appendix A—Assemblage Tables��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 381 Keith Swift Appendix B—Quantification of the Site Assemblage��������������������������������������������������������������� 405 Keith Swift Appendix C—Census of Farmhouses��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 409 Elisa Lanza Catti Appendix D—Archaeobotanical Analyses: Pollen, NPPs, and Seeds/fruit������������������������������� 419 Assunta Florenzano Reference Materials References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 437 Index����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 465
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 9
5/30/14 7:59 AM
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 10
5/30/14 7:59 AM
Acknowledgments
«L’edizione di uno scavo è quanto di più arduo e sfiancante possa esistere, per la complicazione dell’operazione e per le difficoltà insite nella natura umana, per cui giungono all’edizione solo gli scavi realmente amati e in cui realmente si è creduto.» “There is nothing more arduous and exhausting than the publication of an excavation, because of the complexity of the task and the difficulties inherent in human nature. Consequently, only the excavations that were labors of love, in which the team truly believed, ever see publication.” A. Carandini (La fattoria, 23; Trans. E. Lanza Catti)
This publication of the Greek farmhouse at Fattoria Fabrizio was both arduous and exhausting. The labor of love in this case was made lighter by the many participants whom it is my pleasure to acknowledge here. In his Preface, Professor Joseph Carter has paid tribute to the original excavation team and the authorities who approved the research in 1980. I wish to offer my heartfelt thanks to my collaborator in this final publication, Keith Swift, who provided constant support both in the methodological approach and in the scientific interpretation of the archaeological evidence. Thanks also go to Francesca Silvestrelli for many perceptive suggestions. Massimo Limoncelli, an inspired practitioner of virtual archaeology, has taught me a great deal about architecture and the multiple possibilities for reconstructing an ancient dwelling from its sometimes mysterious surviving remains. Though I was not present when the site was excavated, I have learned much about the site from repeated visits to it, sometimes in the company of Giuseppe Di Taranto, the foreman of the crew of specialized Italian laborers who excavated it. His recall of events thirty years earlier is matched only by his understanding of the soil and what it can tell us. Keith Swift’s fundamental contributions, and Professor Carter’s and Lauren Jackson’s editing of text and illustrations have transformed a somewhat unwieldy first draft into a more complete, better organized, manageable and readable final product. This experience not only improved my English, it stimulated my scientific
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 11
growth. I am grateful to Keith Swift, Professor Carter and the whole ICA team, to Esmeralda Moscatelli for coordination, to Estéban Hinojosa, Karl Strasen, and Juan Carlo Fernandez for producing fine digital drawings and illustrations, to Chris Williams for the original photography together with Maria Luisa Giuliani. The drawings were made with great care by Massimo Barretta, with the earlier participation of Giovanni Nicolì and Cesare Raho. Restoration of the excavated objects was in the first instance done by the skilled hands of Francesca Quarato, and in recent years by the talented team of Vita Quattruomini, her sister Maria, Vitangela Giacovelli, and Antonietta Borné. I wish to express my gratitude to the Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeologici della Basilicata, especially the current Soprintendente and former Director of the National Museum of Metaponto, Antonio De Siena, who welcomed me to the Museum and offered me not only generous hospitality, but sound and stimulating advice. My greatest debt is to my family for their support and the joy they have brought me. While working on this publication, I gave birth to Livio (2008) and Guido (2010). To them, and to my husband who followed my progress with patience, participating in my research with penetrating questions, I wish to dedicate my work. Elisa Lanza Catti
5/30/14 7:59 AM
xii
Contributing Authors Rebecca Miller Ammerman Professor of the Classics Colgate University
Anna Zsófia Biller
Aquincum Museum of the Budapest History Museum, Hungary
Maria Francesca Blotti Archaeologist
Oda Teresa Calvaruso Archaeologist
Joseph Coleman Carter
Director of the Institute of Classical Archaeology University of Texas at Austin
Anna Cavallo Archaeologist
Cesare D’Annibale
Material Culture Researcher Parks Canada
Assunta Florenzano
Post-doctoral collaborator, Laboratorio di Palinologia e Paleobotanica Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia
Lin Foxhall
Professor of Greek Archaeology and History University of Leicester
Elisa Lanza Catti
Department of Humanities, Chair St. John International University (Vinovo, Torino, Italy)
Massimo Limoncelli Archaeologist
Marta Mazzoli Archaeologist
Anna Rita Parente Archaeologist
Francesco Perugino Archaeologist
Francesca Silvestrelli Ricercatore Università del Salento
Keith Swift
Institute of Classical Archaeology
Lorena Trivigno Archaeologist
Eliana Vollaro Archaeologist
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 12
5/30/14 7:59 AM
xiii
Contributors Object Documentation Massimo Barretta Anna Maria Maggio Federica Mauro Angelo Moro Giovanni Nicoli Cesare Raho
Site Documentation Michael Guarino
Cartography
Jessica Trelogan
Conservation
Antonietta Borné Vitangela Giacovelli Francesca Quarato Maria Quattruomini Vita Quattruomini
Site Photography
Joseph Coleman Carter Claire L. Lyons Chris Williams
Object Photography Maria Luisa Giuliani Cesare Raho Chris Williams
3-D Reconstruction Massimo Limoncelli
Translation
Francesca Marzilli Alberto Prieto
Editing
Joseph Coleman Carter Lauren M. Jackson Keith Swift
Print Production
Juan Carlo Fernández Estéban Hinojosa Lauren M. Jackson Karl Strasen
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 13
5/30/14 7:59 AM
Illustration Credits
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 14
AF
Assunta Florenzano
CLL
Claire L. Lyons
CR
Cesare Raho
CW
Chris Williams
EH
Estéban Hinojosa
ELC
Elisa Lanza Catti
JCC
Joseph Coleman Carter
JCF
Juan Carlo Fernández
JT
Jessica Trelogan
KJS
Karl Strasen
KPS
Keith Swift
MLG
Maria Luisa Giuliani
5/30/14 7:59 AM
Preface
The farmhouse known as Fattoria Fabrizio was excavated in the long-ago summer of 1980, as part of an ambitious program to explore as many aspects as possible of the chora of Metaponto. This initiative of the Institute of Classical Archaeology (ICA) employed methods such as intensive field survey,1 specialized studies of ancient plant and animal remains,2 which were relatively new in the field of classical archaeology, as well as the more traditional ones. These included the excavation of structures representative of the chora, among them the sanctuaries, necropoleis, and farmhouses of the period of the Greek poleis and subsequent occupation in the Roman period. Two rural sanctuaries (Pantanello and Incoronata), two necropoleis (Saldone and Sant’Angelo Vecchio), and two ceramic production centers (Sant’Angelo Vecchio and Pantanello) had been or were in the process of being excavated by 1980. At that point, however, the ICA team had excavated only one sizable farmhouse, the one that had been built over the sanctuary at Pantanello,3 and one single-room Archaic farmhouse (Sant’Angelo Vecchio). As earlier surveys and excavations begun by Dinu Adamesteanu and the Soprintendenza Archeologica della Basilicata had shown, farmhouses were by far the most numerous of the surviving rural structures. The systematic field survey, begun in 1981, revealed clearly the pattern of rural settlement of a large area of the chora. In approximately 30 km2 between the Bradano and Basento Rivers (the equivalent of about a sixth of the entire chora), 312 sites were identified as Greek farmhouses of the period of the polis (7th century to 3rd century BC). The thorough documentation of the abundant pottery from these sites made it possible to trace the changing pattern of settlement throughout the chora in successive 50-year periods.4 1 The
first half of the field survey results have been published in The Chora of Metaponto 3: Archaeological Field Survey—Bradano to Basento. 2 Bökönyi and Gál 2010 (The Chora of Metaponto 2: Archaeozoology at Pantanello and Five Other Sites). 3 The publication of this farmhouse will be part of the comprehensive study of the Greek sanctuary at Pantanello. 4 An equally large area between the Basento and Cavone Rivers on the south side of the chora was also surveyed, but the pottery from over 600
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 15
In the second half of the 6th century BC, when the site of Fattoria Fabrizio was first occupied, there were nine significant farmhouse sites in the middle course of the Venella.5 Fattoria Fabrizio’s nearest neighbors were a pair of farmhouses approximately 250 m to the north (sites 181 and 182) and two modest rural sanctuaries (sites 334 and 477). Small necropoleis, some 161 of which were identified (many in close proximity to farmhouses), were a ubiquitous feature of the Greek countryside. One, unfortunately not datable, was found 80 m away from Fattoria Fabrizio. By the mid-4th century BC, the heyday of the chora and of Fattoria Fabrizio, the number of neighbors had risen to 11 farmhouses and seven necropoleis.6 In the summer of 1980, firsthand knowledge of the farmhouses was limited to the two examples mentioned above. A number had been hurriedly excavated between 1966 and 1969, but regrettably none of these earlier investigations—apart from some very cursory notes and schematized floor plans—had ever been published.7 This void was rapidly filled that summer by excavations of two farmhouses: Fattoria Fabrizio in June, and the Late Roman farmhouse at San Biagio in July.8 The Fattoria Fabrizio excavation team was composed of skilled and seasoned Italian workmen from the nearby town of Bernalda who had worked together on ICA projects since 1974 at Pantanello, Saldone, and Incoronata. Foreman Giuseppe Di Taranto’s knowledge and skills made him an indispensable member of the ICA team from 1974 to the present. The excavation was supervised by the undersigned and by Claire Lyons,9 who was responsible for the meticulous field notes. Detailed drawings of the plan and
sites remains to be studied. 5 See Introduction, Figure vi; Carter in Survey, 685–87, fig. 21.7. 6 See Introduction, Figure v; Carter in Survey, 816–18, fig. 25.8. 7 Adamesteanu 1973. Cf. Amore 1992–1993: all students of the Metapontino are greatly indebted to her work. She gathered together the scarce documentation that exists on excavations prior to 1970. Cf. also Barberis’ useful study of terracotta figurines from the early excavations (Barberis 1995). 8 The Chora of Metaponto 4: The Late Roman Farmhouse at San Biagio. 9 Dr. Lyons is now Acting Senior Curator of Antiquities at the J. Paul Getty Museum.
5/30/14 7:59 AM
xvi
Joseph Coleman Carter
sections were executed by Michael Guarino between 1980 and 1981. Elisa Lanza Catti and Giuseppe Di Taranto returned to the site in 2010 and 2011 to clarify details of wall construction and floor levels. At the same time, Anna Maria Mercuri and Assunta Florenzano of the Istituto di Palinologia of the University of Modena conducted a very successful investigation of the palaeobotanical remains from the site, the results of which are published here. The site of this farmhouse was discovered in the dense vegetation of Mediterranean scrub (macchia) on a natural terrace along the eastern slope of the Venella, a tributary of the Basento River. All that was visible on the surface were some pottery fragments, exclusively of 6th-century BC date (or so it seemed), that had eroded out of this slope. The possibility that the site might be a rare example of an Archaic farmhouse dating to the first and most famous period of Metaponto’s prosperity in the 6th century BC was certainly a factor in the decision to excavate, and the discovery of a one-room Archaic rural building the previous year at Sant’Angelo Vecchio had whetted the appetite.10 As the excavation progressed, however, it soon became clear that though the site of Fattoria Fabrizio had indeed been occupied in the 6th century BC, the main period of the surviving structure was the 4th century BC. The largest part of the excavation was carried out in an intensive effort lasting just three weeks, though, as noted, subsequent work was done to clarify structural relationships and expand the range of evidence from the site. Fortunately, the site is exceptionally well preserved despite having been exposed to the elements for more than three decades. The macchia has reclaimed it, stabilized the hillside, and discouraged agricultural development. More than a quarter of a century elapsed between the excavation of Fattoria Fabrizio in 1980 and the beginning of work on the publication in 2007. Such a delay is generally unwelcome, but was unavoidable due to budget limitations and other commitments. It is very fortunate, in retrospect, that it was accomplished at all. This is largely due to the Packard Humanities Institute (PHI), which allowed Fattoria Fabrizio to be included in the multi-year program begun in 1999 for the publication of the results of ICA’s research in the chora of Metaponto. The fate of too many excavations is that their results are never made available to the scientific community or wider audiences. The excavated artifacts
end up in the basements of museums where they collect dust and are forgotten. The sites themselves are ignored or, worse, are considered inconvenient and are destroyed to facilitate agricultural or commercial development. It is very much to the credit of PHI that it recognized this acute need, and found a solution for another by making it possible to employ a highly trained work force of young archaeologists (mainly Italian), who because of economic conditions were terribly underutilized and needed rewarding work. The study program began in 2007 and continues to this day. Despite some disadvantages, this 30-year delay at Fattoria Fabrizio has had very positive aspects. This publication has been able to capitalize on the great advances that have been made in the intervening years in the various disciplines involved, such as ceramic studies and palaeobotany, but also in the technology, such as GIS (Geographic Information Systems) that are now indispensable tools of analysis and presentation. In the last three decades, the number of excavations of rural dwellings has grown exponentially. There is no lack of useful comparisons, many of which were utilized by Lanza Catti and are conveniently listed by her (Appendix C). This farmhouse publication is much more than the report on a single interesting but relatively unexceptional site. It includes basic new research on all the many classes of pottery from the site. This is part of the fundamental study of the pottery and other artifacts from dozens of sites scattered all over the chora. This is being accomplished because the continuous support provided by PHI has made it possible to keep a team of skilled and enthusiastic specialists working year round on these materials. These studies include a major reassessment of black-gloss pottery by Francesca Silvestrelli, Keith Swift, Elisa Lanza Catti, Sveva Savelli, and Amelia Tubelli that will affect the archaeological dating of sites throughout the Metapontino and southern Italy in general.11 At Fattoria Fabrizio, as at almost all sites in the chora, terracotta figurines were found. There were few from this farmhouse, but they are very revealing about the site and its inhabitants. The work of Rebecca Miller Ammerman embraces terracotta figurines from many sites (excavated and surveyed) not only in Metaponto, but also in closely-related Poseidonia-Paestum. Her masterful analysis of the unique votive plaque
10 Sant’Angelo Vecchio
11
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 16
will be the subject of a future volume in this series.
Lanza Catti et al. in Survey, ch. 6.
5/30/14 7:59 AM
P reface from Fattoria Fabrizio provides a key insight into domestic cult and the role of women in the religion of the countryside and polis. From the beginning of the study in 2007, Elisa Lanza Catti has given unstintingly of herself to the publication project, the study of the pottery, and the coordination of the other studies. In these efforts, and especially in establishing the fundamental facts of the excavation, she was joined by Keith Swift, who formulated the site phasing and interpreted the archaeology of the site and its stratigraphy. It has been a harmonious and fruitful collaboration between Lanza Catti and Swift and all of the contributors. At last, Fattoria Fabrizio can be seen in its archaeological-historical and natural contexts! It is clear from the survey and other excavations of farmhouse structures in the chora, and elsewhere in southern Italy and the wider Greek world, that Fattoria Fabrizio was a decidedly modest habitation even by Metapontine standards (the other end of the socioeconomic spec-
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 17
xvii
trum is represented by the largest and best preserved of all, Fattoria Stefan). The importance of Fattoria Fabrizio was that it was almost entirely ordinary— probably the dwelling place of a family of shepherds. It was a home and a place of work as well, illustrated by the meticulous studies presented here of the pottery and other artifacts. One unusual fact about it, derived from the terracotta study, was that a family member was perhaps a priestess at a local cult—possibly that of Artemis at San Biagio near the mouth of the Venella, a place of worship and congregation not only for the rural folk but also for those who dwelt in the asty. It is the Greek everyman and -woman, and the tiny details of their day-to-day existence, that we can glimpse here at Fattoria Fabrizio. Joseph Coleman Carter Austin, Texas August 2013
5/30/14 7:59 AM
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 18
5/30/14 7:59 AM
Introduction Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti
Figure i Excavation at Fattoria Fabrizio, 1980. (CLL/CW/ICA)
Discovery and Excavation During an initial field survey of the Metapontine chora in 1980, a scatter of Archaic material was identified on a mid-slope terrace on the flanks of the Venella valley. The area is known as “Ponte Fabrizio,” after the modern bridge across what is now, due to modern irrigation, a very small stream. Pottery and tile fragments extruding from a scarp were visible beneath a dense cover of macchia vegetation, and the presence of Archaic material—particularly Ionic-type cups belonging to the 6th century BC—was promising enough to warrant an excavation, which began promptly and continued for three weeks in the summer of 1980.1 Covered by a thin topsoil and capped by a thick tile fall, the site was divided into 5-m grid squares and, once the upper layers of the tile fall had been removed, much of the floor plan of a six-room structure was apparent from stone foundation walls. It quickly became 1 The excavations at Fattoria Fabrizio were carried out under the direction of Prof. Joseph C. Carter and formed part of the wider archaeological excavation and survey in the chora of Metaponto. Claire Lyons was site supervisor (see above, p. xv).
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 19
evident that, despite the high frequency of Archaicperiod pottery on the surface of the site and in the face of the scarp, the tile fall and underlying structure sealed beneath it belonged to a 4th-century BC farmhouse.2 Excavations proceeded room by room and extended into the extra-mural area to the northwest, at the southeastern side of the structure. Further away, soundings were made to the southeast and northeast to determine the limits of the structure and the nature of the archaeological stratigraphy beyond the confines of the building. Geography and Environment The Venella River, a tributary of the Basento River with a confluence about 8.5 km upstream from the modern coastline, cuts through the marine terraces of the Central Plateau of the chora between the Basen2 Carter
2006, 137. Archaic material continued to be relatively well represented in the excavated assemblages. Residual Archaic material was present to some extent in the majority of contexts (see Ch. 1). The Archaic material extruding from the scarp would, following excavation, later be seen to derive from thin Archaic contexts underlying the farmhouse structure, and from residual material in the makeup for the farmhouse.
5/30/14 7:59 AM
xx
Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti
Figure ii Panoramic view of the environs of Fattoria Fabrizio looking from the site out over the Venella valley. (ML/ICA)
to and Bradano Rivers in a northwesterly direction along its 13-km course. The Venella valley bisects the marine terraces and their plateaus, the large Central Plateau in the areas of Lago del Lupo immediately to the north, and Avinella on the opposite side of the Venella valley.3 Lago del Lupo forms part of the expansive Central Plateau that comprises the arable heart of the chora between the Basento and Bradano Rivers. The Central Plateau was demarcated and drained by division lines following the orientation of the marine terraces and running broadly parallel to this part of the Venella, as was the Avinella on the opposite side.4 Indeed, the agricultural landscape, settlement patterns, and division lines are particularly clear on the marine terraces in the areas of Avinella and Lago del Lupo.5 A prominent modern topographic feature, the bridge Ponte Fabrizio from which the site takes its name,6 crosses the Venella valley just below the site. A modern irrigation pipe runs across the valley near the bridge, and the course of the stream is barely visible (Fig. iii). Fattoria Fabrizio is situated on a mid-slope terrace formed from marine conglomerates, more or less equidistant from the floor and lip of the valley. Topographic constraints of the mid-slope terrace mean that the orientation of the farmhouse is at odds with the usual one of farmhouses in the chora. These are commonly aligned with the northwest-southeast orientation of the marine terraces and the division lines (for example, Fattoria Stefan),7 with a southeast-facing frontage, but Fattoria Fabrizio is oriented parallel to the valley flank and terrace, perpendicular to the division 3 The
localities in the Metapontine chora such as Venella, Lago del Lupo, and Avinella are discussed and described by Carter in Survey, 627–28, and Prieto in Survey, Vol. IV, 48–53. For the geological and geomorphological background of the Metapontine chora, see Folk in Survey, ch. 1, and Abbott in Survey, ch. 2. 4 Carter in Survey, 1027–51, fig. 25.19, and this volume, Figure v. 5 Carter in Survey, 814–16. 6 Lattanzi 1981, 339; D. Ridgway 1982, 75; Osanna 1992, 80. 7 Carter 2006, 143, fig. 4.13.
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 20
lines and the marine terraces of the Central Plateau above and beyond the site.8 Formed from a natural outcrop of marine conglomerate, the site was well suited to habitation. Along with local sandstone, the conglomerate rock underlying Fattoria Fabrizio and forming the midslope terrace outcrops along the slope was exploited for building material for the wall foundations. The Plio-Pleistocene marine clays capped by the conglomerates and gravels provided raw materials for the mudbrick superstructure of the farmhouse.9 The spring line occurring where the conglomerate meets the Pliocene marine clays toward the valley floor would have provided a ready source of water.10 The marine terraces that form much of the chora and extend ca. 16–20 km inland were particularly well suited to arable agriculture.11 The range of crops produced in the chora is the subject of a series of palaeobotanical studies in different areas of the chora.12 Pollen analyses from Fattoria Fabrizio extend this work and provide a more localized perspective on agricultural life in the chora (see Ch. 7). Cereals were no doubt a major crop on the marine terraces, but Fattoria Fabrizio was also well positioned for pastoral agriculture. Located between the marine terrace plateau and the Venella valley, the site had ready access to the well-watered pastures of the valley floor.13 Pastoral agriculture in the chora included the raising of sheep and goats, cattle, and pigs.14 8
Prieto and Carter in Survey, 595; for the geologic orientation of the division lines, see Folk in Survey, 17. 9 Prieto and Carter in Survey, 596; for the geological context of the chora, see Folk in Survey, ch. 1; for building materials used in the wall foundations, see p. 83 in Ch. 4, “Foundations: Construction materials and methods.” 10 Folk in Survey, 23. 11 For the location and extent of the marine terraces, see Abbott in Survey, 33, fig. 2.2. 12 For outline of the archaeobotanical studies in the chora and the range of crops that could have been grown locally, see Carter in Survey, 563, 624, fig. 16.6. 13 For characterization of the farmhouses along the edge of the valley in the Venella area, see Carter in Survey, 655. 14 Bökönyi and Gál 2010.
5/30/14 7:59 AM
I ntroduction
xxi
Figure iii General view of the environs of Fattoria Fabrizio from the opposite side of the Venella valley. (ML/ICA)
Environs: The Metaponto Survey Fattoria Fabrizio was part of a wider archaeological landscape elucidated by field survey in the chora of Metaponto (see Fig. iv). Initiated a year after the excavations at Fattoria Fabrizio, survey transects between the Bradano and Basento Rivers encompassed Fattoria Fabrizio and its environs, and resulted, ultimately, in the identification of 565 sites dating to the Greek period, including over three hundred sites identified as farmhouses (312). The broad scope of the survey provided a geographical context of long-term change in settlement in the chora. The results of the survey, presented in The Chora of Metaponto 3: Archaeological Field Survey—Bradano to Basento, provide extensive and unparalleled contextualization for the archaeology of Fattoria Fabrizio, one of a half-dozen excavated farmhouses to be presented in the Chora of Metaponto series. The Metapontine Chora, ca. 375–300 BC The site of Fattoria Fabrizio was first occupied in the 6th century BC (see below, p. xxv, “The Archaic Phase”). The main period of the farmhouse at Fattoria Fabrizio, in the 4th century BC, took place during what has been characterized as a refounding of the polis: a renewal of the urban center, the creation of its theater on the site of the former ekklesiasterion, and of a great stoa in the agora, paralleled by a more productive chora.15 The 15 Carter
in Survey, 809.
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 21
quarter-centuries on either side of 350 BC saw a degree of growth that has been described as “exceptional” in comparison to the late 5th and early 4th centuries BC. This growth culminated in the period 325–275 BC, when, after a half-century of relative prosperity in both the chora and the asty, the population of the chora reached its zenith.16 The extant farmhouse at Fattoria Fabrizio was established in the late 5th or early 4th century BC (for the dating evidence, see Ch. 1), and its occupation extends throughout the 4th century BC. Its abandonment, around or just after ca. 300 BC, may have been the result of very local factors, perhaps a landslip.17 Fattoria Fabrizio may not be representative of the chora as a whole during the second half of the period 325–275 BC; indeed, other farmhouses were established during the first quarter of the 3rd century BC— for example, the structure above the Pantanello sanctuary.18 The site of Fattoria Fabrizio was therefore out of use before the comparative general and widespread decline that characterized the chora from the middle 16 Carter
in Survey, 809. the archaeological evidence for the nature of the farmhouse’s abandonment, see p. 92 in Ch. 4, “Abandonment and Collapse of the Farmhouse.” 18 The sanctuary at Pantanello and its successive phases will be the subject of a future volume in this series. The rural sanctuary was in use until at least ca. 325 BC, with a farmhouse established above the Classical-period oikos post- ca. 300 BC and abandoned by or not long after ca. 275 BC; cf. Carter in Survey, 880. 17 For
5/30/14 7:59 AM
Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti
xxii
Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti
Figure iv Map of the Metapontine chora between the Bradano and Basento Rivers, showing the survey transects, areas, and survey sites. (JT/ICA)
parts of the 3rd century BC. By the middle of the 3rd century BC, only a portion of the farmhouses that had flourished a century earlier were still occupied.19
del Lupo) and to the south (Avinella), and throughout the wider Metapontine chora (Fig. v).
Survey and Sites in the Venella The survey evidence shows that the 4th-century BC occupation at Fattoria Fabrizio took place within the context of both very local and region-wide prosperity, reflecting and exceeding that evident from farmhouse sites in the immediate area of Fattoria Fabrizio (Venella), on the marine terraces to the north (Lago
The Venella area in the 4th century BC.At least a dozen other farmhouse sites along the middle course of the Venella valley were active in the middle quarters of the 4th century BC. Fattoria Fabrizio, moreover, is situated within an archaeological landscape that consists not only of other farmhouse sites but also of associated necropoleis and two rural sanctuary sites on opposite sides of the floor of the Venella valley.20
19 Carter
20 Carter
in Survey, 865, fig. 26.7, 869.
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 22
in Survey, 816, fig. 25.8.
5/30/14 7:59 AM
Introduction
xxiii
Figure v Map showing the Venella area with sites active between the late 5th and early 3rd c. BC (425–275 BC). (After Survey, fig. 25.8; JT/ICA)
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 23
5/30/14 7:59 AM
xxiv
Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti
Fattoria Fabrizio was established during the fifty year period 400 (ca. 425–375 BC).21 This was a high point in development of the Venella, with 13 significant farmhouse sites identified in the survey.22 When the extant post-Archaic phase of Fattoria Fabrizio was constructed, seven farmhouses appeared ex novo, on sites never before occupied. There was more new building in the Venella in this period than in any other part of the surveyed chora.23 Of these, two farmhouse sites in the immediate vicinity of Fattoria Fabrizio, both ca. 300 m distant and situated on the marine terrace to the north (sites 187 and 182), were active during the period 400. These ceased to be inhabited by the middle quarters of the 4th century BC. Slightly closer to Fattoria Fabrizio, a third farmhouse (site 183) was active in the late 5th or 4th century BC through to the late 4th or early 3rd century BC (active in the periods 400, 350, 300; Fig. iv). Further down the Venella valley, site 454 was an ex-novo site in 400, and ca. 300 m further on, site 288 had been established in 450. Both farmhouse sites occupy positions at the crest of the marine terrace plateau, the latter on a projecting spur.24 The proliferation of farmhouse sites, including Fattoria Fabrizio, in the area slowed in the late 5th and early 4th century BC (400). By the middle of the 4th century BC the farmhouses along the eastern flank of the Venella valley represented a “mature residential community.”25 During most of the 4th and the early 3rd century BC, the Venella area has been characterized as relatively static . . . it did not decline much in 350; it simply did not participate in the growth that is evident elsewhere. The great population boom in the chora in 300 seems to have passed the Venella by.26 Indeed, it was in the middle of the latter period (ca. 300 BC or just after) that Fattoria Fabrizio was abandoned. The Avinella and Lago del Lupo areas in the 4th century BC.The Venella locale was situated between two areas that saw marked growth and prosperity during 21
The 50-year “date bins” established in Survey are utilized also in this publication; see Carter in Survey, 631. The year 400 in bold font refers to the period 425–375 BC, 350 refers to 375–325 BC, and so on. 22 For discussion of the survey evidence for the Venella area in the 4th c. BC, see Carter in Survey, 816, fig. 25.8; see also Figure v, this volume. 23 Carter in Survey, 818, and n. 13. 24 Carter in Survey, 818. 25 Carter in Survey, 818. 26 Carter in Survey, 816.
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 24
Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti the course of the 4th century BC. On the marine terraces on either side of the Venella valley, to the north and south of Fattoria Fabrizio, the regions of Avinella and Lago del Lupo witnessed a greater percentage increase in rural population in the period 375–325 BC than did any other part of the chora.27 Lago del Lupo, the marine terrace above and behind Fattoria Fabrizio, was a “prime cereal producing area” in which the division lines and many farmhouses were established in the 5th or early 4th century BC (450 or 400).28 The area of Lago del Lupo “experienced sudden expansion in 350 . . .” 29 This area formed the southwestern margin of the extensive Central Plateau which was extremely amenable to arable agriculture.30 The farmhouses at the margins of the Venella valley, on the marine terrace opposite Fattoria Fabrizio, continued in use during the entire period that Fattoria Fabrizio was occupied.31 In contrast to the eastern edge of the Venella valley, the western margin remained almost unchanged during much of the 4th century BC (350 and 300, ca. 375–275 BC).32 The plateau of Avinella on the south side of the Venella valley, opposite Fattoria Fabrizio, saw expansion in 350—a “greater percentage increase in population” than that of Lago del Lupo.33 Half of the dozen farmhouses active in the period 350 were already established ex novo in 450 or 400. The new farmhouses were not in immediate proximity to Fattoria Fabrizio, but over 1 km away in the upper reaches of the Conca valley.34 The major changes in the area to the south of Fattoria Fabrizio seem to have taken place further afield. The overall impression is that Avinella, like Lago del Lupo, was “relatively prosperous” in 300, around the time that Fattoria Fabrizio was abandoned.35 Fattoria Fabrizio participated in an expansion where maximum use was made of the land in the area. The survey of the chora suggests that the middle part of the 4th century BC involved a fairly uniform distribution of the farmhouses in Avinella, following a 27 “In no part of the study area, except for Lago del Lupo, did the rural population record a greater percentage increase in 350 than it did in Avinella. Only one farmhouse was abandoned while six were added, of which four were ex novo . . .” (Carter in Survey, 814). 28 Carter in Survey, 814. 29 Carter in Survey, 814, fig. 25.10. 30 Carter in Survey, 819. 31 Carter in Survey, fig. 25.5; sites 320, 322, 326, and 327, all active in the periods 400, 350, and 300. 32 Carter in Survey, 818. 33 Carter in Survey, 814. 34 Carter in Survey, fig. 25.5; sites 343, 345, 350, and 506. 35 Carter in Survey, 815.
5/30/14 7:59 AM
Introduction scheme of division into approximately 10-ha plots, consistent with the idealized size of a plot or kleros.36 Necropoleis.The Metaponto survey identified three necropoleis in the immediate environs of Fattoria Fabrizio. Site 184 (active in 350 and 300) and site 188 (active in 350) were approximately 200–300 m distant, on the marine terrace known as Demanio Campagnolo. A closer necropolis, site 186, within 200 m of Fattoria Fabrizio is dated only very generally to the Greek period. Three more farmhouses, sites 182, 183, and 187, are also likely to have been associated with necropoleis.37 Necropolis site 189 is only 150 m away from Fattoria Fabrizio, and though closer still to farmhouse site 183, it may have served as a burial place for the occupants of Fabrizio.38 It was not unusual to find such a close juxtaposition of several farmhouses to a single necropolis. There were, after all, twice as many farmhouses (312) as necropoleis (161) in the chora. The sharing of a necropolis could indicate familial relationships. The Venella area saw an increase in necropoleis from three to seven in 350, resulting in a higher ratio of necropoleis to farmhouses than any other locality of the survey area.39 Rural sanctuaries in the Venella valley.Two sanctuaries in the Venella valley identified in survey, sites 334 and 477, were part of the cultural landscape characterized by rural sanctuaries placed at springs.40 These two sites close to Fattoria Fabrizio seem to form earlier foci and integral parts of settlement in the Venella, which extended along the margins of the valley and edge of the marine terrace.41 Both sanctuary sites, as important places of rural worship, antedate the 4th-century BC phase at Fattoria Fabrizio, but there are signs that they were frequented well beyond their heyday in the 6th century BC.42 36 For
discussion and the evidence for the Avinella area, see Carter in Survey, 814 and n. 3. 37 Carter in Survey, 816. 38 Carter in Survey, 818. 39 Carter in Survey, 816. 40 Site 477 was ca. 400 m lower down in the Venella valley, and site 334 was on the opposite side of the Venella valley, ca. 400 m to the southwest of site 477 (n. 47; see also Carter in Survey, 706–9). Other rural sanctuaries further afield include the Pantanello sanctuary, excavated by ICA; for the archaeology of sanctuary sites within the context of the survey see Prieto and Carter in Survey, 612. 41 Carter in Survey, 816. For discussion of the development of farmhouses in the Venella valley area relation to the two rural sanctuary sites: “The settlement of Venella extended from an original core formed by two early sanctuaries, sites 334S and 477S, along both sides of the valley . . .” (Carter in Survey, 687). 42 Site 477 was active in 400 and 350, and site 334, 400 and 300 (Carter in
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 25
xxv
The Sanctuary of Artemis, further downstream at the mouth of the Venella valley, about 2 km from Fattoria Fabrizio, is among the earliest sites in the chora, with architectural terracottas dating to the late 7th century BC.43 The Sanctuary of Artemis and the rural sanctuary site 477 on the floor of the Venella were already in existence by the time the first occupation at the site of Fattoria Fabrizio is evident archaeologically in the mid-to-late 6th century BC.44 The Archaic Phase The 6th-century BC phase of the site is attested by pottery and other finds in the site assemblage, and by thin Archaic levels found beneath two of the rooms of the farmhouse and in the areas to either side, along the terrace to the northwest and southeast.45 Like its 4th century BC successor, the Archaic farmhouse at Fattoria Fabrizio occupied a landscape replete with farmhouses, necropoleis, and rural sanctuaries (Fig. vi).46 In its earliest phase, Fattoria Fabrizio seems to have formed part of a cluster of farmhouses with associated sanctuaries—the aforementioned sites 334 and 477— as part of a continuum of sites and settlements following a general pattern, which appears to be repeated along the course of the Venella valley.47 Nearby farmhouse sites with 6th-century BC phases are sites 181, 182, and 183 on the plateau above and to the north, and site 454 ca. 500 m further down the valley.48 Like Fattoria Fabrizio, three of these nearby farmhouse sites were also active in the 4th century BC.49 Survey, 657, fig. 20.18, table 20.5). It is within the wider geographical and cultural context of rural sanctuaries at sacred springs that the evidence for domestic cult at Fattoria Fabrizio should be seen (Ch. 5). 43 For discussion of the Sanctuary of Artemis at San Biagio, see Carter in Survey, 662; De Siena 2007a, 12. For the dating of the earliest architectural element—the terracotta frieze that depicts a hero—see Mertens-Horn 1992. The earliest finds date to the last quarter of the 7th c. BC (Adamesteanu 1964; 1973, 54; Adamesteanu and Adornato 2001, 264). For the plan of the sanctuary, see Nava 2000, 690, fig. 5. Adamesteanu’s suggestion of a cult of Zeus Aglaios was rejected by Lo Porto (1988, 14), who proposed that the cippus mentioning Zeus Aglaios (first half of the 6th c. BC) might have been transferred to San Biagio from the urban area in antiquity, and more recently by Osanna (1992, 80). For the later Roman-period farmhouse excavated by ICA in the area of the Sanctuary of Artemis, see San Biagio. 44 Carter in Survey, 672, fig. 20.26. 45 For the nature of the Archaic-period evidence, see p. 7 in Ch. 1, “Chronology and Site Phasing.” 46 For developments in the chora during this period and comprehensive discussion of the Venella area, see Carter in Survey, 677–726, and esp. 685–87 for the Venella. 47 Carter in Survey, 685–87. 48 Carter in Survey, fig. 21.7. 49 Sites 182 (400), 183 (400, 350, 300), and 454 (400, 350, 300). Other excavated examples of 4th-c. BC farmhouses with Archaic phases are known
5/30/14 7:59 AM
xxvi
Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti
Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti
Figure vi Map showing the Venella area, sites active ca. 575–525 BC. (After Survey, fig. 21.7; JT/ICA)
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 26
5/30/14 7:59 AM
Introduction Necropoleis with an Archaic component are not represented in the immediate vicinity of Fattoria Fa brizio. An Archaic necropolis, site 289, was identified on the lip of the marine terrace about 1 km further down the valley, separated from the Archaic farmhouse site 454 by ca. 400 m. A second, site 635, was likewise ca. 400 m to the south of the 6th-century BC farmhouse site 372, in an apparently repeating pattern of site distribution.50 On the plateau further from the Venella valley, new settlement in Lago del Lupo formed part of the “momentous advance in the settlement of the chora in the second and third quarters of the 6th century BC . . .” 51 Established to exploit the Central Plateau for arable in the chora: see p. 100 in Ch. 4, “Comparable Farmhouse Plans.” 50 For discussion of necropoleis in the Venella, see Carter in Survey, 687, fig. 21.7. 51 Carter in Survey, 688.
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 27
xxvii
agriculture, the new farmhouses of the mid-6th century BC were concentrated in a series of three clusters extending northward across the Central Plateau from Fattoria Fabrizio and the cluster of farmhouse sites 181–183.52 On the terrace, the nearest farmhouses (sites 170 and 211) are more than 800 m from Fattoria Fabrizio and belong to a cluster centered about 1.5 km distant. Other farmhouses of the early period are evident opposite Fattoria Fabrizio on the right bank of the Venella: site 323 on the western margin of the Venella, site 336 on the floor of the Venella valley, and site 348 further afield in the Avinella area proper.53 52
For discussion of the clusters and distribution of the sites, see Carter in Survey, 689, fig. 21.9. Survey, fig. 21.12 shows a reconstruction of their alignment across the Central Plateau, terminating in the south with the Venella cluster of which Fattoria Fabrizio was a part. 53 Carter in Survey, 814, fig. 21.7.
5/30/14 7:59 AM
FF_00_frontmatter_30jan14.indd 28
5/30/14 7:59 AM
Part I
FF_01_overview_30jan14.indd 1
5/29/14 10:31 AM
FF_01_overview_30jan14.indd 2
5/29/14 10:31 AM
1
Overview: Excavations, Chronology, and Site Phasing Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti
Figure 1.1 View looking southwest down onto the natural terrace and the excavation of Fattoria Fabrizio in 1980. (CLL/CW/ICA)
Overview of the Site and Excavations Identified during the field survey of the Metapontine chora, the site above the Ponte Fabrizio bridge was covered by a dense growth of macchia and characterized by a heavy surface scatter of archaeological material, much of it Archaic in date, extruding from a scarp and on a terrace situated toward the lip of the Venella valley. Excavations in the summer of 1980 revealed a 4th-century BC farmhouse. The structure was capped by a tile fall with most of its basic floor plan still extant. In the underlying contexts beneath the Early Hellenistic floors of the farmhouse, a significant Late Archaic component was present along with pottery evidence for activity at the site during the 5th century BC. The topsoil and, where present, the upper parts of the tile fall, were removed and recorded using a 5-m grid laid out over the site. The tops of the cobble-and-conglomerate stone foundation walls were exposed (see p. 83 in Ch. 4, “Walls”), and excavation proceeded room
FF_01_overview_30jan14.indd 3
by room in areas defined by the configuration of the farmhouse structure. Traces of an original mudbrick superstructure within and beneath the tile fall delineated the footprint of the 4th-century BC farmhouse structure and the configuration of the rooms within: six rooms in two rows (Rooms 1–3 and 4–6). Rooms 1–3 The northeastern row of rooms (1–3) is better preserved than the southeastern row (4–6). Capped by the final-phase tile fall, Rooms 1–3 are characterized by a well-stratified sequence of contexts: (i) tile fall; (ii) occupation assemblages beneath, from the lower parts of the tile fall and on the surface of the farmhouse floors; and (iii) the makeup of the floors themselves. Rooms 1 and 2 appear to have been multifunctional storerooms, characterized by pithoi (large globular ceramic storage bins) found in situ in the floors. The pottery and finds from the smaller Room 3 in the northeastern corner
5/29/14 10:31 AM
Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti So N un E d 2 ing
4
Ro
So N un E d 1 ing
7 ea Ar om 3 l1 al W
W al l5
om
2 om Ro NE
Ro
7 ea Ar W al l6 a
3
W al l6 b
l1 al W
2 om Ro SE
om Ro NW 2
l2 al W om
Ro 4 W al l4
om
Ro E
W al l8
1
8 ea Ar
2 om Ro SW
1 l1 al W
om 1W
al W
W al
9 ea Ar
l2
l9
l3 a
Ro
om Ro 5
W al
l7 al W
om
Ro
0
5m
6
N
b l3 W al
ng di un 1 E
So
0
l1
al W
SE ding un 1
So
SE ding un 2
So
Figure 1.2 Site plan showing rooms and excavation areas. (KPS/ICA)
of the farmhouse suggest that it was associated with domestic cult. Room 1. Forming the southeastern corner of the farmhouse, Room 1 had a well-preserved tile fall with floor assemblage buried beneath. The major archaeological feature in Room 1 is a pithos in situ in the pebble-and-earth floor of the room, which consequently appears to have been a multifunctional storeroom. The floor assemblages from Room 1 date the final phase of occupation of the farmhouse to post- ca. 325 or 320 BC, and likely to not much after ca. 300 BC since they lack fine ware shapes typical of the early 3rd century BC. Excavated in two halves, Room 1 W gives a complete stratigraphic sequence through the floor and underlying contexts to natural deposits beneath. Together with Room 1 E, the makeup of the floor indicates some inclusion of material during the last quarter of
FF_01_overview_30jan14.indd 4
the 4th century BC, or alternatively some renovation or re-laying of the floor, with material from the floor makeup and below providing evidence for activity at the site during the late 5th to early 4th century BC, and the Archaic period. Room 2. Excavated in four quadrants at the intersection of the main baulks, the tile fall in Room 2 provides evidence for two episodes of collapse of the roof, with partial collapse of the stone foundations between these occurrences. Like Room 1, this also appears to have been a multifunctional storeroom—two pithoi were in the NE quadrant, a Corinthian pithos in situ on the floor with fragments of a second pithos, in a Calabrian fabric, from the lower parts of the tile fall. A mortarium and lekythos were found upside down beneath the tile fall, tumbled perhaps from now-lost shelves on the wall. A black-gloss bowl from the NW quadrant floor and
5/29/14 10:33 AM
Overview: Excavations, Chronology, and Site Phasing
5
Figure 1.3 The site of Fattoria Fabrizio in 1981, after a brief study campaign. General view across the main northwest-southeast baulk, the SE Soundings in the foreground. (CLL/CW/ICA)
makeup dates to ca. 300 BC and provides a secure terminus post quem for the destruction of the farmhouse. Room 3. A small room forming the northeastern corner of the farmhouse, Room 3 featured the partial erosion of the tile fall and the contents of the room downslope to the northwest into Area 7 following outward collapse of the northeastern wall of the farmhouse. This is particularly important given that Area 7 contains evidence for domestic cult that can be associated with Room 3. Rooms 4–6 In the southwestern corner of the farmhouse, Room 6 has a complete stratigraphic sequence down to natural (yellow sandy soil). Beneath the tile fall, a dark homogeneous brownish soil containing a lot of residual material represents the makeup for the floors (see p. 90 in Ch. 4, “Floor makeups”). A thin layer of Archaic gravel (breccia) like that underlying Room 1 W and the SE Soundings forms the base of the archaeological sequence, overlaying natural soils of the midslope terrace. Rooms 4 and 5 are better understood when related to the stratigraphy of Room 6. Room 5 was excavated
FF_01_overview_30jan14.indd 5
only as far as the tile fall; the presence of a floor beneath was confirmed during cleaning of the area in a 2011 revisit. Room 4 suffered from severe erosion in its upper levels: the tile fall and presumably also the final-phase floor were lost down the adjacent slope and scarp. Room 4. Forming the northwestern corner of the farmhouse, adjacent to the scarp, the tile fall and upper layers of Room 4 had eroded downslope. Makeup deposits for the farmhouse floor, similar to those in Room 6, were excavated in a series of three layers (battute), each approximately 10 cm thick. These uncovered the lowest courses of the foundation of the southwestern wall of the farmhouse (Wall 7), indicating its approximate level of construction. Within the room, cobblestone rubble was uncovered in the lower floor makeup, associated perhaps with the construction of the walls or laid as more robust packing to raise and stabilize this corner of the farmhouse. Excavation did not extend down to the level of Archaic breccia underlying the site in Room 6, but Archaic pottery makes up much of the assemblages from the floor makeup. Its origin is clearly the Archaic-period contexts disturbed by construction of the farmhouse.
5/29/14 10:33 AM
6
Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti
Room 5. Originally part of Room 6 but separated by the later addition of the internal Wall 9, Room 5 was a smaller room in the middle of the southwestern row of rooms. The southwestern part of the room, including the external wall, had eroded entirely down the adjacent scarp. Capped by a tile fall, excavations in the surviving part of Room 5 extended through a layer of collapse, primarily of the cobble-and-conglomerate foundations of Wall 2 (the central wall of the farmhouse), and at least part of its mudbrick superstructure. The layers of collapse covered the final-phase floor, which was at a similar elevation to the floor in Room 6. Room 6. Excavations in Room 6 provide a complete stratigraphic sequence from tile fall through the floor makeups to a thin Archaic layer above natural. Beneath the tile fall in Room 6, there is evidence for the partial collapse of Wall 2. The presence of the final-phase floor is inferred stratigraphically; unlike the other rooms of the farmhouse, the ephemeral surface was not recognized during excavation of the homogeneous deposits in Room 6. The foundations of Wall 9, an internal wall added after ca. 350 BC to subdivide Room 6 and create Room 5, mark the level of the subsequent accumulation of makeup for the final-phase farmhouse floor. Beneath this, the earlier, primary floor makeups antedating Wall 9 overlay Archaic breccia. Consisting of a thin layer above natural deposits, the Archaic breccia layer was like that underlying Room 1 W and the SE Soundings, and was concentrated in the center of the room, which suggests that it may have been disturbed during construction of the farmhouse. The Extra-mural Areas Excavations extended into three areas beyond the walls and adjacent to the farmhouse structure. Area 7 on the northwestern side of the farmhouse, adjacent to Rooms 3 and 4, was characterized by wall and tile collapse from Room 3. The debris from this area included material relating to domestic cult, almost certainly derived from Room 3. Area 8, also adjacent to the northwestern corner of the farmhouse, represents a continuation of excavations beyond Room 4 and seems to have been an outside activity area or courtyard. Close to the scarp, much of this part of the site had been lost to erosion. Area 9, to the southeast of Room 1, includes a covered area formed by two short walls projecting from the southeastern wall of the farmhouse.
FF_01_overview_30jan14.indd 6
Area 7.This sloping area is located immediately to the northwest of the farmhouse, and adjacent to Room 3. Area 7 is characterized by tile fall and the collapse on a breccia surface of the northwestern wall of Room 3. Interpreted clearly as a “wash area” by the excavators, with material having moved slightly eastward downslope from the area of Room 3 (Wall 6), much of the material found in Area 7 likely came from the adjacent Room 3 of the farmhouse. This is of particular importance since the terracotta figurines and other votive material widely distributed in this area (a miniature cup and blackgloss kantharoi) provide evidence for domestic cult (see Ch. 6). The farmhouse-phase breccia surface, extant in an area adjacent to the tile fall, is underlain by a level of breccia created in the Archaic period, probably the equivalent of that found in Room 1 W, Room 6, and SE Sounding 1. Area 8. An area to the southwest of Room 4, Area 8 was probably an activity area or courtyard outside the farmhouse, adjacent to Wall 6 but beyond Wall 7. It contained 4th-century BC pottery along with Late Archaic fine ware, though these may be secondary deposits post-dating the farmhouse. As in Rooms 4–6, the tile fall and any original occupation deposits have eroded away down the adjacent scarp. Area 9. Extra-mural and covered Area 9 was formed by two projecting walls extending to the southeast of Room 1, continuing the lines of the walls of the structure with a tile fall in between. Contexts beneath the tile fall contained substantial quantities of pottery that date it and the destruction of the farmhouse to ca. 300 BC. Archaic material is also present beneath the tile fall, relating perhaps to the Archaic layer identified in SE Sounding 2 nearby. The Soundings Peripheral soundings to the southeast and northeast of the farmhouse give a picture of the archaeological stratigraphy outside the footprint of the farmhouse and the extent of the debris from the collapse of the structure. These comprised (i) three soundings to the southeast of the farmhouse (Sounding E1, SE Sounding 1, and SE Sounding 2); (ii) two soundings to the northeast of the farmhouse (NE Soundings 1 and 2); and (iii) a sounding at the base of the slope at the margins of the floor of the Venella valley (W Sounding).
5/29/14 10:33 AM
Overview: Excavations, Chronology, and Site Phasing SE Soundings.To the southeast of the farmhouse, Sounding E1 relates to the farmhouse in the upper parts (with some material belonging to the 5th century BC) with an Archaic level beneath. SE Sounding 1 has a farmhouse layer with a seemingly distinct 5th-century BC layer beneath this. SE Sounding 2, downslope from Sounding E1, seems to have a shallower farmhouse-phase layer, probably underlain by an Archaic layer like that in Sounding E1. NE Soundings. More or less an extension of the excavations in the area of Room 2, NE Sounding 1 showed two basic stratigraphic layers, the base of the second layer containing material interpreted as rubble from the collapse of the farmhouse immediately to the southwest, in the area of Room 2. Further upslope, NE Sounding 2 demarcates the extent of debris from the collapse of the farmhouse; almost no archaeological material was present in this sounding. W Sounding. The W Sounding at the base of the slope and at the margin of the Venella valley floor was undertaken to attempt to locate tombs associated with the farmhouse, in what was thought to be a promising location. Although no burials came to light, the geomorphological perspective was widened. The W Sounding elucidated the nature of the archaeological stratigraphy at the base of the slope and was carried out with an awareness of the relationships between farmhouses, tombs, and roads in the Metapontine chora. It demonstrates how the objectives of the excavation were, already in 1980, viewing individual sites within a wider archaeological landscape. Chronology and Site Phasing The stratigraphy of the farmhouse—a basic sequence of tile fall, floors, and floor makeups—typifies the archaeological contexts in the rooms of the farmhouse and provides a basis for the phasing of the site.1 Three basic divisions—tile fall, deposits beneath, and natural—are of limited use, particularly as the variable stratigraphy and chronology of each of the rooms and soundings makes such a synthetic scheme problematic to apply across the site. The deposits beneath the tile fall vary significantly, and the third level was only reached in very limited places. Following the dating of 1
During the excavation, basic stratigraphic units were identified and differentiation was attempted by levels that could apply across the site. These were modified for the soundings.
FF_01_overview_30jan14.indd 7
7
the pottery and finds, the grouping of contexts by site phases has been preferred. The site has been phased in reverse from the tile fall and destruction of the farmhouse (Phase -1) to the earliest Archaic contexts (Phase -5) due to the nature of the excavation and the archaeological contexts. The true base of the stratigraphic sequences, natural deposits of sterile sandy soil underlying the site and above the conglomerate natural terrace on which the farmhouse was situated, were reached only in limited areas (Room 1 W, Room 6, and the SE Soundings). It was therefore not possible to determine accurately how many structural or occupation phases there might have been prior to the farmhouse. The intervening period between the Late Archaic breccia (the Archaic contexts) and the construction of the farmhouse in the late 5th or early 4th century BC is represented only by pottery. Phasing of this period is therefore based on pottery “periods,” discernible in the site assemblages and providing evidence for activity at the site in these rather broad spans of time— but no firm assessment of the nature nor number of actual phases of activity can be made for this period. Phasing of the farmhouse is based on archaeological contexts, usually consisting of a sequence of: (1) tile falls and wall collapse—structural collapse of the roof, the mudbrick superstructure, and the cobble-andconglomerate wall foundation courses; (2) contexts beneath the tile fall and above floor layers or, in the extra-mural areas, archaeological levels representing the ground surface during the farmhouse phase; and (3) floor makeup and, in a few places (Room 1 W, Room 6), Archaic layers beneath. Phase -1 Destruction and abandonment, tile falls, post- ca. 300 BC. A terminus post quem of ca. 300 BC for the final-phase occupation is provided by the material sealed beneath the tile fall and from datable sherds in the corpus of pottery from the site as a whole. Black-gloss bowls dated to post- ca. 300 BC, a new shape introduced into the black-gloss repertoire in the early 3rd century BC, are represented in these contexts and constitute a secure relative date. An example of this form came from beneath the tile fall in Area 9 (BG 61, a form dated ca. 300–260 BC) and another example from beneath the tile fall in Room 2 NW.
5/29/14 10:33 AM
Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti
8 Phase 0
-1
-2
Chronology
In Farmhouse and Extra-Mural Areas
Structural Phase
Post- ca. 300 BC– modern
Colluviated material overlying the tile fall, chronologically mixed, deposited after abandonment of farmhouse.
Post-farmhouse
-1.1
Post- ca. 300 BC
Upper part of tile fall, mixed with overlying material.
Farmhouse destruction, post-abandonment
-1.2
Post- ca. 300 BC
Lower tile fall in Level 2 above the rooms.
Farmhouse destruction, post-abandonment
-1.3
Post- ca. 300 BC
Episodes of collapse of walls prior to tile fall, stones and/or mudbrick, or interface of lower fall and floor material.
Farmhouse destruction, post-abandonment
Second half of the 4th c. BC
Occupation material, on floor surfaces in rooms, approx. level of farmhouse-phase ground surface in extra-mural areas.
Farmhouse occupation/floor assemblages
-3.1
Post- ca. 350 BC
Floor makeup, layer beneath final-phase occupation.
Farmhouse construction/ accumulation of floors
-3.2
4th c. BC, first half?
Late-5th or early-4th-c. BC construction of farmhouse, lower part of makeup for floors.
Farmhouse construction/ accumulation of floors
-4.1
Classical, Late 5th c. BC
Late-5th or early-4th-c. BC construction of farmhouse, level of the base of the foundation walls.
Pre-farmhouse/primary construction
-4.2
Early Classical, Early to mid-5th c. BC
Represented by residual material, no archaeological contexts or features
Pre-farmhouse
-5.1
Late Archaic, last quarter of the 6th or first quarter of the 5th c. BC
Archaic breccia contexts underlying the farmhouse and in the extra-mural areas.
Pre-farmhouse
-5.2
Archaic, from ca. mid-6th to early 5th c. BC
As above
0
-2
-3
-4
-5
Table 1.1 Fattoria Fabrizio site phases and chronology.
Late-4th-century BC pottery is present in the floor assemblages beneath the tile fall. C-type skyphos forms belonging to the late 4th century BC were also found in Room 2. From the floor surface of Room 1 W came a black-gloss bowl belonging to the late 4th century BC (BG 62, dated ca. 320–280 BC), with Room 1 E having a black-gloss cup/one-handler (BG 53) dating to the last quarter of the same century. While not dated as late as the black-gloss bowls, these appear in number and provide firm supporting evidence for the occupation of the farmhouse into the very late 4th century BC. Pottery evidence for a terminus ante quem comes from the corpus of black-gloss fine ware, both from well-stratified contexts and from the site as a whole. Apart from the bowl (a form that provides a relative terminus post quem of ca. 300 BC), there is an absence of pottery common in the first quarter of the 3rd century BC. Black-gloss fine-ware shapes typical of the 3rd century BC—such as the ring-handled cup, common at the Pantanello farmhouse in the first quarter of the
FF_01_overview_30jan14.indd 8
3rd century BC, and dishes and bowls with projecting rims in their 3rd-century BC forms—are not represented in the Fattoria Fabrizio assemblages.2 Black-gloss fine ware with overpainted decoration, Gnathia ware, is entirely absent from the Fattoria Fa brizio assemblages, in spite of its relatively wide diffusion in the area of Metaponto between ca. 320 and 270 BC, and presence in other farmhouses in the Metapontine chora with early-3rd-century BC activity.3 Most strikingly, there is an absence of the final stages of development of the long-lived black-gloss A- and C-type skyphos shapes. With their characteristic and distinctive narrow feet, a development of 2 Lanza Catti et al. in Survey: for black-gloss ring-handled cups see catalog
nos. 97–107; for dishes with projecting rims, see nos. 142–278; for bowls with protruding rims, nos. 176–80. 3 Silvestrelli in Survey, 309. Gnathia-style pottery is attested at farmhouses in the chora including those currently under study by ICA: Sant’Angelo Grieco; the farmhouse above the sanctuary at Pantanello; and Fattoria Stefan (Amore 1992–1993, pl. XXI, nos. 7–8; to which 30 unpublished sherds can be added, studied by ICA). Other published examples of Gnathia ware include the sites of Pacciano (Amore 1992–1993, pl. I, no. 3), Musillo (Amore 1992–1993, pl. IV, no. 3), Pascucci-Torraca (Amore 1992–1993, pl. VI, nos. 4 and 7), and Casamassima (Amore 1992–1993, pl. VII, nos. 5–6).
5/29/14 10:33 AM
Overview: Excavations, Chronology, and Site Phasing So N un E d 2 ing
9
Ro
So N un E d 1 ing
7 ea Ar om 3 l1 al W
W al l5
om
2 om Ro NE
Ro
7 ea Ar W al l6 a
3
W al l6 b
l1 al W
2 om Ro SE
om Ro NW 2
l2 al W om
Ro 4 W al l4
om
Ro E
W al l8
1
8 ea Ar
2 om Ro SW
1 l1 al W
om 1W
al W
W al
9 ea Ar
l2
l9
l3 a
Ro
om Ro 5
W al
l7 al W
om
Ro
0
5m
6
N
b l3 W al
ng di un 1 E
So
0
l1
al W
SE ding un 1
So
SE ding un 2
So
Figure 1.4 Site plan: Phase -2, showing locations of excavated floor within the farmhouse structure, with surfaces identified as belonging to this phase but not defined as discrete contexts indicated by square symbol. (KPS/ICA)
the 4th-century BC forms, these are the most common cup forms in the early 3rd century BC (as they were in the 5th and 4th centuries BC).4 Ubiquitous at sites in the chora dating to the first quarter of the 3rd century BC (for example the Pantanello farmhouse), the absence of these skyphos forms at Fattoria Fabrizio provides firm evidence for destruction and abandonment prior to the first quarter of the 3rd century BC. Combined with the black-gloss bowl, a 3rd-century BC shape, the dating of the black-gloss pottery suggests that the farmhouse was abandoned in the very early 3rd century BC, ca. 300 BC. Stratigraphically, three sub-phases can be identified based on the sequence of collapse of the farmhouse structure and the process of excavation: 4
Lanza Catti et al. in Survey, black-gloss nos. 41–45 for the A-type skyphoi and nos. 74–81 for the C-type.
FF_01_overview_30jan14.indd 9
Phase -1.1: Upper tile fall, excavated by 5-m grid squares, including the interface and admixture with the post-farmhouse overburden containing chronologically mixed material. Phase -1.2: Tile fall above the final-phase farmhouse occupation layers, excavated by room or area. Phase -1.3: Episode of collapse or erosion of the mudbrick superstructure and/or collapse of the stone foundations prior to the main tile fall. There is evidence for such a sequence of collapse in Room 2 (SW, NE, and SE quadrants), where stones from the foundation wall are present beneath the tile fall and above the floor.
5/29/14 10:33 AM
Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti
So N un E d 2 ing
10
Ro
So N un E d 1 ing
7 ea Ar om 3
W al l6 a
l1 al W
W al l5
3 2 om all W
2 om Ro NE
Ro
7 ea Ar W al l6 b
l1 al W
2 om Ro SE
om Ro NW 2
om
Ro E
W al l8
1
8 ea Ar
W al l4
4
2 om Ro SW
om
Ro 1 l1 al W
a
9 ea Ar
l2
al W
W al
l9
1W
l3
om
Ro
om Ro 5
W al
l7 al W
om
Ro
0
5m
6
N
b l3 W al
ng di un 1 E
So
0
l1
al W
SE ding un 1
So
SE ding un 2
So
Figure 1.5 Site plan: Phase -3, showing locations of floor makeups within the farmhouse structure, extra-mural contexts, and areas where key finds (triangle) belonging to this phase were found. (KPS/ICA)
Phase -2 Final-phase occupation and floor assemblages, ca. 300 BC.Floor assemblages, material on the final-phase ground surfaces at the time of the destruction and abandonment of the farmhouse, are dated by the destruction and sealed by tile fall (Fig. 1.4). Identified by an extremely hard, compact soil layer, the floor surface assemblages were excavated in Rooms 1 and 2. Pithoi were found in situ on the beaten-earth floor surfaces along with complete vessels. The assemblages in the western part of Room 3 were subject to significant disturbance following collapse of the exterior wall, the mudbrick, and the stone foundations into Area 7 along with parts of the tile fall and contents of the room. Identified in post-excavation in the eastern part of Room 3, the main excavations extended only as far as the tile fall in this part of the room.
FF_01_overview_30jan14.indd 10
The floor surface in Room 4 was eroded away entirely following loss of the protection afforded by the overlying tile fall. The floor surface in Room 5 was identified during post-excavation survey. The floor surface in Room 6 was identified stratigraphically, post-excavation. In the SE Soundings the ground surface was covered with debris from the destruction of the farmhouse, and in extra-mural Area 7 the gravel pavement surface was subsequently covered by collapse of the wall and tile fall from Room 3. Phase -3 Floor makeups and contexts of the 4th century BC, ca. 400–300 BC. Dated by pottery belonging to the 4th century BC, contexts dating to this phase are represented by floor makeups (see p. 90 in Ch. 4, “Floor makeups”) deposited prior to the destruction and
5/29/14 10:34 AM
Overview: Excavations, Chronology, and Site Phasing
So N un E d 2 ing
11
Ro
So N un E d 1 ing
7 ea Ar om 3 l1 al W
W al l5
om
2 om Ro NE
Ro
7 ea Ar W al l6 a
3
W al l6 b
l1 al W
2 om Ro SE
om Ro NW 2
l2 al W
2
om
Ro
om Ro W S
4
8 ea Ar
W al l4
om
Ro E
W al l8
1 1 l1 al W
1W
al W
W al
9 ea Ar
l2
l9
l3
om
a
Ro
om Ro 5
W al
l7 al W
om
Ro
0
5m
6
N
b l3 W al
ng di un 1 E
So
0
l1
al W
SE ding un 1
So
SE ding un 2
So
Figure 1.6 Site plan: Phase -4, showing locations of contexts containing significant material and area of key finds (triangle) dating to the 5th c. BC. (KPS/ICA)
abandonment of the farmhouse ca. 300 BC (Fig. 1.5). Stratigraphically, the subdivision of Room 6 with the construction of Wall 9 post- ca. 350 BC provides a marker for two phases or episodes of floor makeup: the deposits beneath Wall 9 and those above to the floor surface of Room 6. Although Wall 9 cannot be dated closely within this period, it allows for a broad chronological division into two phases that are likely to correspond, in general terms at least, with the stratigraphy of the continued development of the farmhouse. Phase -3.1, second half of the 4th century BC: The upper parts of the floor makeup. In Room 6, these are above the elevation of the sandstone and tile Wall 9, constructed post- ca. 350 BC. Phase -3.2, first half of the 4th century BC: Stratigraphically prior to the subdivision of
FF_01_overview_30jan14.indd 11
Room 6 and the construction of Wall 9, the contexts datable directly by this are in Room 6 only, but it shows the continued development of the basic farmhouse structure, and the likely date range of the floor makeup deposits in the other rooms of the farmhouse. Phase -4 The Early Classical period to the end of the 5th century BC, ca. 475–400 BC.Because the phases prior to the farmhouse are represented for the most part by pottery residual in later contexts rather than structures and features, it is not possible to determine whether these represent distinct phases sensu stricto or continuity of activity at Fattoria Fabrizio (Fig. 1.6). There are no archaeological contexts or features associated with this period, and if any were originally present, these have
5/29/14 10:35 AM
Keith Swift with Elisa Lanza Catti So N un E d 2 ing
12
Ro
So N un E d 1 ing
7 ea Ar om 3 l1 al W
W al l5
om
2 om Ro NE
Ro
7 ea Ar W al l6 b
l1 al W
2 om Ro SE
om Ro NW 2
W al l6 a
3 l2 al W om
Ro 4 W al l4
om
Ro E
W al l8
1
8 ea Ar
2 om Ro SW
1 l1 al W
om 1W
al W
W al
9 ea Ar
l2
l9
l3 a
Ro
om Ro 5
W al
l7 al W
om
Ro
0
5m
6
N
b l3 W al
ng di un 1 E
So
0
l1
al W
SE ding un 1
So
SE ding un 2
So
Figure 1.7 Site plan: Phase -5, showing locations of excavated contexts and areas containing finds (triangle) belonging to the Archaic period. (KPS/ICA)
been obliterated by the 4th-century BC farmhouse. On the basis of the pottery dating and its distribution in the site stratification, we are able to distinguish the following broad chronological phases of activity: Phase -4.1, late 5th century BC: This may cover the period of construction of Wall 4 between Rooms 1 and 2, and by implication the main components of the farmhouse structure, dated by a banded ware onehandler (BW 07). There is certainly pottery evidence for activity at Fattoria Fabrizio dating to the late 5th century BC, but no distinct contexts belonging to this period were identified. This period is relatively well represented in the SE Soundings (including a C-type skyphos, ca. 420–400 BC, from beneath the final-phase tile fall and ground
FF_01_overview_30jan14.indd 12
surface in Sounding E1 above breccia; and an A-type skyphos, ca. 460–400 BC, in SE Sounding 1), and a piece from this period is represented in the floor makeup from Room 1 E (a black-gloss mug, BG 66, late 5th or early 4th century BC). Phase -4.2, Early Classical, middle quarters of the 5th century BC: This period is characterized by early black-gloss forms, including shapes introduced in the very late Archaic period, the first quarter of the 5th century BC.5 Phase -5 The Archaic period, before ca. 475 BC.Archaic breccia (a pebble-rich layer) was reached at points across the 5
For the range of shapes common in the Metapontine chora during this period, see Silvestrelli in Survey, 178.
5/29/14 10:35 AM
Overview: Excavations, Chronology, and Site Phasing site from Area 7 in the northwest to the SE Soundings, and beneath the farmhouse in Room 1 W and Room 6 (Fig. 1.7). In the SE Soundings, a distinct Archaic level containing relatively large quantities of Archaic pottery was identified. This layer was similar to the thinner and more ephemeral Archaic breccia level at the base of Room 6 and in Area 7, suggesting a fairly broad spread of Archaic-period contexts underlying the later farmhouse. There is no direct evidence of Archaic structures at Fattoria Fabrizio. The lowest course of Wall 2 may represent reuse of Archaic-phase wall foundations (see p. 83 in Ch. 4, “Walls”). Some broad similarities in the configuration of the 4th-century BC farmhouse structure with Archaic examples could suggest that parts of it may reflect or follow an Archaic-period predecessor (for discussion of the farmhouse plan, see Ch. 2). Residual Archaic pottery is relatively well represented in the topsoil and colluviated layers overlying the farmhouse, in the upper tile fall, and in some cases also in the lower parts. It seems that the gaps in the tile fall allowed for chronologically mixed, colluviated material to trickle down into the tile fall and in some cases to interface with the floor assemblages in some of the rooms (Rooms 1–3, floors not distinguished in 4–6). Weathered material, scrappy and residual in some of the later contexts, is particularly evident in the farmhouse floor makeups (see p. 90 in Ch. 4, “Floor makeups”). This residual material was included in the soil used to renovate the beaten-earth floors where it appears in the floor makeup—Room 6 provides a good example—and potentially also in the material used for the mudbrick superstructure. This perhaps explains the occasional presence of Archaic sherds above the floor and beneath and in the lower tile falls of the farmhouse. The pottery and finds dating to the Archaic-period occupation at the site are consistent with a farmhouse; an Archaic millstone (Li 03) and a loom weight (LW 01) are indicative of a rural farmhouse, rather than a sanctuary or necropolis.6 By far the most frequent class 6
For identification of sites based on their surface-survey assemblages, see Swift in Survey, 129–42; and Prieto and Carter in Survey, 591–615. For further discussion on the millstone, see p. 370 in Ch. 28, “Grinding Stones.” For further discussion on the loom weight, see Ch. 24.
FF_01_overview_30jan14.indd 13
13
of evidence for the Archaic period is the pottery, consisting of Archaic cups—Ionic-type cups and Archaic skyphoi with offset rims—with a few other ancillary forms (see Ch. 13, and BG 01–BG 14, BG 16–BG 23). These belong almost entirely to types common in the second half of the 6th and very early 5th centuries BC. The other major component of Archaic-period assemblages elsewhere, the carinated lekanai, are much less common. They are represented at Fattoria Fabrizio by a single example (BG 19), though unlike the cups the shape can be difficult to recognize in fragments. The Archaic phase at Fattoria Fabrizio may be subdivided into two phases based on whether the pottery assemblages contain very Late Archaic fine ware: Phase -5.1: Attested by pottery dating to the very late 6th or early 5th century BC, “transitional” Archaic to black-gloss fine ware sensu stricto (one example, a black-gloss skyphos with offset rim, BG 13) and early black-gloss forms. They were part of a new repertoire of shapes introduced during this period and characterize the early to middle parts of the 5th century BC (see Ch. 13). These early black-gloss forms continued toward the middle of the 5th century BC and there is consequently some overlap of ceramic chronology with Phase -4. Phase -5.2: For Archaic-period material, fine ware, which dates to ca. mid-6th to early 5th centuries BC. Note that this might also date to the very Late Archaic, but not demonstrably so. There is no evidence for a preceding Archaic phase belonging to the first half of the 6th century BC or earlier in either the archaeological stratigraphy or among the pottery and finds. Although the Archaic contexts are far from extensive, there is a lot of Archaic material across the site as a whole, either residual in later farmhouse contexts or present in the post-abandonment overburden covering the site. In the corpus of ubiquitous Archaic cups, there is nothing necessarily earlier than the mid-6th century BC, such as the a filetti fine wares typical of the late 7th and early 6th centuries BC.
5/29/14 10:35 AM
FF_01_overview_30jan14.indd 14
5/29/14 10:35 AM
2
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift The previous chapter presented a brief overview of the principal results of the excavation, the chronology of the site, and its phasing. Those results are based on a detailed study of the documentation of the excavation, which is the subject of this chapter.1 The excavation was carried out over thirty years ago, using methods current at that time, which will be described here briefly. Excavation Methods After the hillside had been cleared of macchia in the summer of 1980, the site was excavated by a team of workmen that specialized in archaeological excavation, led by foreman Giuseppe Di Taranto, under the supervision of Carter and Lyons. The site was laid out on a Cartesian grid based on 5-m squares. The area of the hill that yielded the highest concentration of finds from surface survey was subdivided into 16 squares, identified by the letters A–D (from west to east) and the numbers 1–4 (from south to north) (Fig. 2.1). The operations began in the lower section of the slope and progressed northeast. The upper layers of soil were removed across a wide zone of 7 squares—B2, B3, C1, C2, C3, D1, and D2—exposing the top of the building’s walls.2 The excavation strategy adopted followed closely the model most famously practiced by Sir Mortimer Wheeler for extensive, essentially flat sites.3 (This was not entirely appropriate for a relatively small site on a terrace with a pronounced slope.) Baulks made it impossible to excavate rooms entirely, but were ad-
1 The details of the contexts and key finds are presented here by room and area. They repeat some of those discussed elsewhere so that this chapter constitutes a summary by location and may be used for standalone consultation of the archaeology site. 2 This description of the excavation is based mainly on the daily field notes by Claire Lyons, supplemented by her subsidiary documentation (such as the general record forms that illustrate the key contexts, general lists of pottery, and special finds), by the plans and sections drawn by Michael Guarino, and by the photographs taken by Chris Williams and Joseph Carter. Complementary study of the archaeological finds with the direct observations made in the field by Carter and Lyons was fundamental in the authors’ reconstruction of the entire operation. We are grateful to Dr. Lyons and Prof. Carter for reading the preliminary draft of this chapter and providing useful comments and suggestions. 3 Wheeler 1954.
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 15
vantageous later when it came to checking stratigraphy and taking stratified pollen samples. The soil was removed in stratigraphic levels defined by color and composition. Within levels, intermediate artificial layers known by the Italian term battute (singular battuta), a uniform pass with the pick, usually 10 to 15 cm thick, were also recorded. This subdivision permitted the vertical position of features and objects to be more precisely defined. The stratigraphic levels were labeled with Roman numerals, the battute with Arabic, beginning with Level I, Batt. 1. This method facilitated the subsequent subdivision of levels into “Levels IA, IB” when soil changes could be more accurately observed in section.4 Two 1-m-wide orthogonal baulks left during excavation served not only to preserve a record of the stratigraphy but also as access for wheelbarrows. One baulk ran approximately northwest-southeast across Area 7, Rooms 3, 2, and 1, and Area 9, parallel to the main long walls; the southwest-northeast baulk, across Rooms 5 and 2. Still in place in 2010, although weathered, these baulks proved to be very useful when new soil samples were taken for pollen analysis that could exploit techniques more advanced than those available in the 1980s. A negative consequence of using the baulks is that the finds assemblage from most of the contexts is incomplete. In addition, narrow strips of soil were left along the walls of the building to protect the structures. Once the rooms were clearly defined, each was excavated separately down to occupation levels in Rooms 2, 3, 4, 5, and Area 9, and ultimately to virgin soil (in Rooms 6 and 1, and in a small sector of Room 2). The provenance of the finds was recorded using the name of the square, if found above the fall, or the room number, if discovered within the tile fall or below. Groups of unexceptional pottery from excavated contexts were recorded as Pottery Lots (PLs), labeled with a progressive numbering system created from the initials of 4
In publication, we have elected to present levels with Arabic numerals rather than the Roman in which they were recorded (Level IA becomes Level 1A, and so on).
5/29/14 10:46 AM
D4
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
B
D1 98
Wall 3a
84
88 Wall 4
Area 9
Wall 2
Room 5
Room 6
B’
16 6
Wall 9
Wall 3b
18 0
Wall 10
A1
26 4
Wall 6b
Wall 11
Room 1 W
B1
Wall 8
7 17
A2 Wall 6a
26
0
Wall 7
Area 7
C1
1
Wall 5 B2
A3
A
Wall 2
Room 4
Room 1 E
Room 2 SW
Room 2 NW
Room 3
Wall 1
Room 2 SE
10
10
4
14
9
Room 2 NE
Room 3
Area 7
C
Wall 1
C2
B3
NE 21 Sounding 1
B4
C3
D2
E2
D3
NE Sounding 2
C4
+9
3
C’
16
Area 8
Room 3
A Figure 2.1 Site plan showing the 5-m excavation grid (used initially to remove the layers above the farmhouse, blue), the baulks left in situ during and after the excavation, the locations of the planned sections across the site (hatched lines, A-A’, B-B’, C-C’), the walls (red), and spot heights (green). (KJS/ICA)
Room 2 NW
Area 7
N
Wall 5
5m FF Section A-A’ Scale: 1/50 2.5 m
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 16
5/29/14 10:46 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
E1
E2
17
N
A’
5m
4
1:100
12
D1
Wall 11
0
SE Sounding 1
C’
9
Sounding E1
1A 1B
NE Sounding 2
98
12
Area 9
NE Sounding 1
C
3A
18 1
5m
Wall 10
SE Sounding 2
FF Section C-C’ Scale: 1/50 Room 2 SW 1A 1B
Room 5 Wall 2
B’
2A 2B
B
Room 2 SE NW-SE Baulk
Wall 1
16 6
2.5 m
Room 2 SW
Room 2 NW NE-SW Baulk
Wall 5
Area 9
Room 1 W 1A 1B
Wall 4
2A 2B
Wall 3a
FF Section B-B’ Wall 11 1/50 Scale:
Sounding E1
5m
SE Sounding 1
A’
3A 3B
Bedded pithos
2.5 m
2.5 m FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 17
5/29/14 10:47 AM
18
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
the site name and the year of excavation (e.g. FF80- numerous occasions between 2010 and 2012 to check 1PL and so on). Pottery or other objects of particular details of wall construction and to add to the photonote were considered “Special Finds” and appear with graphic documentation. A palynologic investigation a unique number and a letter suffix that indicates the was undertaken in 2010 (see Ch. 7). type of material, such as P for pottery, T for terracotta, Room 1 B for bone, Sh for shell, and so on (e.g. FF80-1P). Additional archaeological evidence was recovered Forming the northeastern corner of the farmhouse, by screening and water flotation. The second technique Room 1 had a well-preserved tile fall with floor aswas adopted for specific archaeological deposits record- semblage buried beneath. The major archaeological ed as “Soil Samples” (e.g. FF80-206SS), especially from feature in Room 1 is a pithos in situ on the pebble occupation levels, in order to recover even the smallest floor (Fig. 2.2). The floor assemblage from Room 1 remains, with special attention to the organic materi- dates the final phase of occupation of the farmhouse als, which unfortunately proved to be scarce. The tiles to post- ca. 325 or 320 BC and likely to not much affrom the collapsed roof were also collected and labeled according to the room of provenance. Well-preserved examples were considered speLoom weights cial finds. Charcoal samples for laboratory anal2 Pottery fragments C D1 ysis were taken from selected locations. Wall 11 Although the excavation was concentrated FF80-53PL Wall 1 in the area of the structure, five extra-mural FF80-185PL 88 soundings were made in areas adjacent to the Room 1 E 84 farmhouse structure. Three soundings were made to the southeast (Sounding E1 and SE Area 9 Soundings 1 and 2; see below, p. 58, “The SE Soundings”) and two to the northeast (see C1 Small 98 below, p. 66, “The NE Soundings”). A sixth bowl 189 sounding was also excavated much further Pithos on compacted pebble floor away and downslope in search of possible assoRoom 1 W Wall 10 ciated burials (see below, p. 68, “W Sounding”). Wall 2 The excavation was completed in three weeks, from June 13th to July 3rd, 1980. Ly180 ons’ record provided a continuous narrative and a framework for the evidence as it progressively came to light. The plan and sections of the structure were completed by M. Guarino shortly after the excavation was concluded. N 0 2m Pottery and finds were washed, inventoried, photographed, and drawn. A general finds list A) (both pottery and special finds) was created, giving provenance and date of excavation. Room 1 W Special Finds sheets provided short descrip1A 2A tions of the items. This system was simple and 1B 2B Wall 3a effective, with the original documentation Bedded Wall 4 providing a basis for detailed study of the potpithos tery and finds nearly 30 years later. A detailed architectural survey carried out B) in June 1981 was accompanied by site photography. The authors returned to the site on Figure 2.2 A) Plan and B) section A-A’ of Room 1. (KJS/ICA) Wall 3a
Wall 4
A’
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 18
Wall 3b
Wall 9
A
5/29/14 10:47 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages ter ca. 300 BC since they lack fine ware shapes typical of the early 3rd century BC (for discussion, see p. 7 in Ch. 1, “Chronology and Site Phasing”). Room 1 was excavated in two halves: the W gives a complete stratigraphic sequence through the floor and underlying contexts to natural deposits beneath. Together with Room 1 E, the makeup of the floor indicates some inclusion of material during the last quarter of the 4th century BC. Alternatively some renovation or re-laying of the floor may have happened, with material from the floor makeup and below providing evidence for activity at the site during the early 4th and late 5th centuries BC and the Archaic period. Location and Plan Internal room dimensions, beginning with Wall 1 on the northeast corner of the farmhouse and proceeding clockwise, are 4.03, 4.34, 3.98, and 4.40 m, giving Room 1 a surface area of ca. 18 m2. The slight incline of the floor level and overlying tile fall from northeast to southwest reflects that of the hillside itself. Room 1 is separated from Room 6 to the southwest by the central longitudinal wall of the farmhouse (Wall 2). Excavation and Stratigraphy Both the east and west halves of Room 1 show a similar stratigraphic sequence of tile fall, material on the floor beneath tile fall, floor makeup, and (in Room 1 W) archaeological contexts beneath the floor makeup. Excavation of Room 1 W continued through (i) the relatively thick tile fall, ca. 0.3 m; (ii) the material on top of the floor beneath; (iii) the floor makeup and (iv) beneath; to (v) natural deposits at a depth of about 1 m, giving a complete stratigraphic sequence. In Room 1 E, excavation proceeded through the tile fall, to and into the floor makeup but no further, resulting in a partial sequence. Tile Fall in Room 1 The tile fall in the area of this room was unusually thick, 0.3 m, and better preserved than in the other rooms in the farmhouse, particularly the southeastern row (Rooms 4–6), where the tile fall had eroded entirely downslope. The tile fall above Room 1 consisted of different types of tile; this may be the result of reuse of earlier tiles or later repairs to the roof. An opaion tile (RT 04) from the lowest part of the tile fall in Room 1 E suggests that the room had an
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 19
19
opening for ventilation and light. A parallel for Room 1 with its opaion is found in the fortified farmhouse at Marsico Vetere near Potenza, where the presence of a hearth was inferred on the basis of the opaion.5 Floor Assemblages from Room 1 Beneath the tile fall, an extremely hard pebble layer, deliberately compacted, was recognized as a floor. Besides the floor itself, the key archaeological feature was the base of a pithos in situ on the pebble layer in the northwestern part in Room 1 W, adjacent to the central baulk bisecting the room. Although relatively small, comparisons of the material assemblages from the eastern and western parts of the room allow us to assess whether there are discrete zones where particular types of vessels may have been stored. Connections between the assemblages from the two sectors are demonstrated by the conjoining parts of a plain-ware dinos (PCW 24) from the eastern and western floor assemblages. Sufficient differences exist between the assemblages from the eastern and western parts of the room, together with the pithos and transport amphora in situ, to suggest that the abandonment and subsequent collapse of the farmhouse sealed at least a partial use-life assemblage beneath the tile fall. Although they are relatively small, there do appear to be distinct differences between the material assemblages from the eastern and western parts of Room 1 in terms of the relative proportions of different pottery classes, which can be summarized as follows: The western part of the room has: (i) a higher frequency of cooking wares; (ii) no black-gloss cups, which are otherwise fairly ubiquitous across the site; (iii) more liquid containers than Room 2, perhaps associated with wine, including one black-gloss jug, one banded jug, and a plain lekythoid table amphora, along with a Greco-Italic amphora (a class associated primarily with wine); and (iv) a pithos in situ of the common globular type likely to be used for storage of solids (e.g. cereals). The eastern part has: (i) black-gloss cups; (ii) a bronze grater perhaps associated with wine consumption; (iii) fewer cooking wares; (iv) two dinoi (could these be used as kraters, for mixing wine?); but otherwise it has (v) no large storage containers and no amphorae. 5 Nava 2005, 322, room 4. A pithos was also found within the room of the farmhouse at Marsico Vetere. Activities associated with the room were thought to be food-processing, cooking, and weaving.
5/29/14 10:47 AM
20
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
A)
B)
Figure 2.3 A) General view of Room 1 E, the NW-SE baulk on the right showing tile fall and Wall 4, dividing Room 1 E from the southeastern quadrant of Room 2. B) General view of Room 1 W. The NW-SE baulk on the left with tile fall protruding from the section and pithos left in situ showing the level of the farmhouse floor. Excavated down to natural surface. In the foreground, Wall 4 dividing Room 1 W from the southwestern quadrant of Room 2. SE Soundings are visible in the background. (CLL/CW/ICA)
It is possible that the eastern part of the room was used predominantly for storage of drinking vessels and equipment, while the western part was used for the storage of liquid containers, including amphorae, as well as solids in the globular pithos. There is some archaeobotanical evidence for the storage of dried plants and cereals in Room 1. A soil sample taken from the baulk near the in situ pithos (Fig. 2.3b) contained a coleoptera larva, a species that typically infests a wide variety of dried plants and animal materials, especially cereals, and is taken as an indicator of the on-site presence of these crops. Floor Makeup and Contexts Beneath Room 1 Extending down to the natural deposits beneath the farmhouse, excavations in Room 1 W provide a complete stratigraphic sequence. Material from within the
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 20
upper part of the floor makeup dates to the last quarter of the 4th century BC, with some chronological overlap in the material from beneath the floor makeup. Archaic-period material is present in all excavated units. In Room 1 E, the floor makeup is dated by a blackgloss mug to the late 5th or early 4th century BC (BG 66, ca. 410–375 BC), which provides some important evidence for this otherwise relatively poorly attested phase of activity at Fattoria Fabrizio. Excavated Units and Assemblages from Room 1 W Tile Fall—Post- ca. 320 BC, before the 3rd century BC Phase -1.2 Level 2, Batt 1: FF80-128PL; Level 2, Batt. 2: FF80-160PL
5/29/14 10:47 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
21
Room 1 W Phase 0
Material Overlying Tile Fall Integration of overlying multiphase material deposited above tile fall, including residual Archaic
Upper Part of Tile Fall Level 1
-1 Tile Fall Level 2, Batt. 1–2
Level 2, Batt. 1 Level 2, Batt. 2
ca. 300 BC
-2
Floor Assemblage Level 2, Batt. 3
Floor Makeup Level 2, Batt. 4
-3
4th c. BC
Floor Makeup Level 2, Batt. 5
-4 5th c. BC
Beneath Floor Level 2, Batt. 6
Level 2, Batt. 3 Pithos OD 01 in situ Late 4th c. BC, post- ca. 320 BC Bowl, BG 62, ca. 320–280 BC Greco-Italic amphora, Amp 10, 4th c. BC Dinos, PCW 24, 4th c. BC Level 2, Batt. 4 Post- ca. 325 BC with first half of 4th c. BC and Archaic Cup/one-handler, BG 52, last quarter of the 4th c. BC C-type skyphos, BG 37, second half of the 4th c. BC C-type skyphos, ca. 380–350 BC Archaic Ionic cup Type B amphora, early 5th c. BC Level 2, Batt. 5 Post- ca. 325 BC with late 5th c. BC and Archaic C-type skyphoi, last quarter of the 4th c. BC Dish, BG 59, ca. 350–300 BC Olpe, BW 39, 4th c. BC C-type skyphos, BG 35, ca. 400–370 BC Cover tile type AC1, evidence for earlier 4th-c. BC phase of roof? Pan tile RT 07, evidence for an Archaic or Classical roof at FF Level 2, Batt. 6
-5
Late 5th/early 4th c. BC, post- ca. 375 BC? with Archaic Miniature carinated cup, ca. 375 BC? Dish, BG 34, ca. 410–360 BC
Archaic
Archaic Ionic Type B2 cup
Natural
Figure 2.4 Room 1 W phase diagram. (KPS/ICA)
Excavation and Stratigraphy: Tile fall above the W part of Room 1. Assemblage Summary: Very little material relative to both the tile fall in the eastern part of Room 1 and the quantities excavated from the floor surface beneath the tile fall: a casserole rim (CkW 02) with two plain ware body sherds (Appendix A, Table A1).
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 21
Floor Assemblage—Post- ca. 320 BC Phase -2, occupation Level 2, Batt. 3: FF09-1; FF80-161; FF80184PL; FF80-221 Excavation and Stratigraphy: Material from beneath the tile fall and above the floor layer in Room 1 W.
5/29/14 10:47 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
22
Assemblage Summary: Pithos (OD 01) in situ on the floor, the assemblage dated to postca. 320 BC by a black-gloss bowl (BG 62, ca. 320–280 BC). Liquid containers are relatively frequent and include black-gloss and banded jugs (BG 67 and BW 26) with a plain table amphora (PCW 31) and a Greco-Italic transport amphora (Amp 10). These may be associated with wine rather than olive oil (see p. 111 in Ch. 5, “The Rural Economy in Microcosm: Storage in Rooms 1 and 2”). There is a higher frequency of cooking wares than in Room 1 E. The rim of an Archaic skyphos with offset rim and a handle fragment from an Archaic lekane (BG 19) may come from intrusive material deposited over the tile fall, which contains Archaic material, or from mixture with the floor makeup, which also contains Archaic material—the floor assemblage is clearly not pristine (Appendix A, Table A2). Floor Makeup—Post- ca. 325 BC, with first half of the 4th century BC and Archaic material Phase -3.1, with material from Phases -3.2 and -5 Level 2, Batt. 4: FF80-162PL; FF80-184PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Floor characterized by extremely hard, compacted pebble-rich soil. Pithos base in situ on this surface. Observed to contain much pottery within this compact level and can be dated to the Early Hellenistic period by a cup/ one-handler and stratigraphically by material in the underlying context (Batt. 5). Residual Ionic-type B2 cup rim found within the layer. Assemblage Summary: A C-type skyphos rim (BG 37) was dated to the second half of the 4th century BC, and a second C-type skyphos rim was dated to the first half of the 4th century BC (ca. 380–350 BC). A black-gloss cup/one-handler (BG 52) dates to the last quarter of the 4th century BC and provides a terminus post quem for the construction of the overlying pebble floor (supported by another cup dating to the last quarter of the 4th century BC in Batt. 5 beneath this con-
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 22
text). An Ionic B2 cup rim attests to Archaic-period material under the floor surface. This is accompanied by a southern Italian (“Corinthian”) Type B amphora rim (Amp 06) dated to the early 5th century BC (Appendix A, Table A3). Floor Makeup—Post- ca. 325 BC with late 5th/early 4th and residual Archaic material Phase -3.1, with material from Phases -4.1 and -5 Level 2, Batt. 5: FF80-185PL, FF80-188P, FF80-189PL, FF80-190T, FF80-203SS Excavation and Stratigraphy: Below the floor layer in Batt. 4, it was observed during excavation that although there was generally less pottery than in the overlying two battute, there was still a large amount that was interpreted as having been incorporated within the floor level during occupation. The soil was not as compacted as in the floor level in Batt. 4, though described as hard and sandy (Munsell 10YR 4/4, dark yellowish brown). The pottery from this layer comes from very densely packed soil beneath a “stone feature” at the southern end of the room. Assemblage Summary: The most recent pieces are two C-type skyphos base fragments that may belong to the last quarter of the 4th century BC. If the dating and division of material between the two layers is correct, this indicates that the floor layer above accumulated at some point in the last quarter of the 4th century BC—perhaps during incorporation of occupation material into the floor as the excavators postulated. A black-gloss dish rim dating to the first half of the 4th century BC is of similar date to an example in the underlying Batt. 6, while a second dish dates to the second half of the 4th century BC (BG 59, dated ca. 350–300 BC). Seven C-type skyphoi are represented, four of which date to the late 5th or first quarter of the 4th century BC (including BG 35, dated 400–370 BC) similar to the material in Batt. 6. Two Archaic skyphoi with offset rims indicate a residual component in the layer beneath
5/29/14 10:47 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
23
Figure 2.5 Room 1 E showing tile fall in the southwestern section and floor makeup (Level 2, Batt. 4) at the base of the trench. (CLL/CW/ICA)
the floor, similar to the floor makeup in the southeastern row of rooms (Rooms 4–6). An overlapping pan tile (RT 07) provides some evidence for an earlier phase roof of the pan-and-cover tile system typical of the Archaic and Classical period, also evidenced elsewhere and apparent in the corpus of tile samples from the site as a whole (Ch. 25). A cover type of the Hellenistic system (AC1) is consistent with a date provided by the pottery from this context, the last quarter of the 4th century BC (Appendix A, Table A4). Floor Makeup—Late 5th/early 4th century BC, perhaps post- ca. 375 BC Phase -4.1 with material from Phase -5 Level 2, Batt. 6: FF80-191PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Layer beneath the floor characterized by hard soil with many stones and pebbles, lacking tiles or features. Five sherds of pottery collected during excavation. Very little pottery, the layer beneath the floor leading to natural deposits. Assemblage Summary: Contains material from the Archaic period and the late 5th or early 4th century BC. Although a very small as-
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 23
semblage, remarkably it is composed predominantly of fine wares, with a banded ware bowl and a miniature the only nonfine ware components. An Ionic type B2 cup rim is residual, with a black-gloss dish (BG 54) dated 410–360 BC, along with two body sherds of open forms. A banded ware bowl (BW 16) is only very generally datable. A terminus post quem may be provided by a miniature kylix dating to the 4th century BC (ca. 375–270 BC), or a more general one of the very late 5th c. BC by the black-gloss dish (Appendix A, Table A5). Excavated Units and Assemblages from Room 1 E Tile Fall Level 2, Batt. 1: FF80-157T; FF80-158PL; Level 2, Batt. 2: FF80-193PL; FF80-209PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Tile fall above Room 1 E. Assemblage Summary: An opaion fragment (RT 04) in the tile fall indicates that the roof originally had an opening for ventilation, perhaps for a hearth. The pottery assemblage is relatively small and contains Archaic-period material, which may come
5/29/14 10:47 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
24 from overlying deposits mixed in with the tile fall. This includes a rim fragment of a skyphos with offset rim, attesting to some residual material belonging to the Archaic phase within the lower (Batt. 2) part of the tile fall. Fragments of two black-gloss skyphoi dating to the late 5th or early 4th century BC may also be residual as they are significantly earlier than the date of the collapse. Fragments of two basins (PCW 15 and PCW 22) and a Greco-Italic amphora broadly dated to the last half of the 4th century BC are also represented (Appendix A, Table A6).
Room 1 E Phase 0
Material Overlying Tile Fall Upper Part of Tile Fall Level 1
-1 Tile Fall
Opaion tile, RT 04
Level 2, Batt. 1–2 ca. 300 BC
-2
Floor Assemblage Level 2, Batt. 3
Level 2, Batt. 3 Cup/one-handler, BG 53, last quarter of the 4th c. BC C-type skyphos, ca. 330–300 BC Bronze grater, M 01, 4th c. BC
-3
4th c. BC
Floor Makeup Level 2, Batt. 4
Level 2, Batt. 4 Late 5th/early 4th c. BC with Archaic Mug, BG 66, late 5th/early 4th c. BC
Floor Assemblage—Post- ca. Archaic lid, BG 20 -4 325 BC Level 2, Batt. 3: FF80-210P; 5th c. BC FF80-211M; FF80-221PL. Excavation and Stratigraphy: Material relating to the occupation of the farm-5 house, beneath the tile fall in Room 1 E and above the hard, pebble-rich floor layer Archaic in Batt. 4. Assemblage Summary: A relatively high frequency of Figure 2.6 Room 1 E phase diagram. (KPS/ICA) black-gloss fine ware comFragments of a bronze grater are of particpared to the western part of the room and ular interest in this assemblage, if it is assofewer cooking wares, though the latter was ciated with an assemblage with a relatively represented by a chytra (CkW 24) and a high frequency of drinking cups, given the lid. Two black-gloss C-type skyphoi dating connotations for the use of graters in drinkfrom the mid- to late 4th century BC (ca. ing practices. A black-gloss bottle (BG 78) 350 BC and 330–300 BC; not cataloged) and dated 340–330 BC is the only example of a cup/one-handler dated to the last quarthis type of container from Fattoria Fabter of the 4th century BC (BG 53), accomrizio, and is relatively unusual because it is panied by two banded ware one-handlers. in “plain” black gloss whereas examples from Within the context of Room 1, these drinkfunerary contexts in rural necropoleis are ing vessels were presumably stored here.
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 24
5/29/14 10:47 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages decorated in the Gnathia style. A miniature kylix (Min 05) is also of interest within this context, if it is indeed associated with the use assemblage of Room 1—other miniatures and votives are associated predominantly with Room 3 (and material from the collapse of Room 3 in Area 7). Unlike Room 3, however, there were no terracottas in the assemblages associated with Room 1 (Appendix A, Table A7). Floor Makeup with some material from Floor Assemblage—Late 5th/early 4th with Archaic material Level 2, Batt. 4: FF80-212PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: After excavation of Batt. 3 with its lacuna of tiles, the soil in Batt. 4 was observed to be exceptionally hard and recognized as the floor level. Here, this was composed of dark yellowish brown (Munsell 10YR 4/4), extremely dense soil with a slightly sandy texture, and it was observed that there was only a small amount of pottery. Although far from substantial, the assemblage in the floor makeup dates to the Archaic and Classical period—this presents a simpler sequence and clearer chronology than is apparent in the western part of Room 1. Excavations in this area were discontinued with this battuta and did not achieve a complete stratigraphic sequence to natural deposits. Assemblage Summary: Context dated to the late 5th or early 4th century BC by a blackgloss mug (BG 66). Earlier material is represented by the rim of an Archaic fineware lid (BG 20); this may indicate that the underlying deposits are of a similar date to those beneath the southeastern series of rooms (Rooms 4–6), where the floor makeup is Archaic in date (Appendix A, Table A8). Room 2 Room 2 is the largest room in the farmhouse, ca. 22 m2, defined by Walls 1, 2, 4, and 5 (4.85, 5.18, 4.43 and 4.40 m in length respectively). The central room in the northeastern row, Room 2 seems to have communicated with Rooms 1 and 3 on either side. Room
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 25
25
2 was excavated in four quadrants (NE, SE, NW, SW) separated by cross-baulks in the center of the room, with about half of the total area of the room excavated (ca. 12 m2). The other half remained beneath the baulks dividing the room and those left in situ at the margins to protect the walls.6 The tile fall in Room 2 provides evidence for two episodes of roof collapse, with partial collapse of the stone foundations between these episodes. A Corinthian pithos in situ on the floor in the NE quadrant (OD 03), along with fragments of a second pithos (OD 02) in a Calabrian fabric in the lower part of the tile fall indicate that Room 2 was a storeroom. A mortarium and lekythos were found upside down beneath the tile fall (see Fig. 4.6), tumbled perhaps from shelves on the wall. A black-gloss bowl from the NW quadrant floor and makeup dates to ca. 300 BC and provides a secure terminus post quem for the destruction of the farmhouse. Room 2 NE Quadrant Tile fall. Excavation of the tile fall in the NE quadrant of Room 2 suggested two episodes of collapse. The upper part of the tile fall composed of cover and pan tiles (Type AC1), with the rim and numerous fragments of a pithos (OD 02) mixed in. Fragments of the pithos were also found beyond the footprint of Room 2, suggesting that this upper part of the tile fall had probably been subjected to some post-depositional movement. Apart from the pithos, the upper part of the tile fall lacked pottery. The assemblage from the lower part of the tile fall contained likely residual black-gloss fine ware—all belonging to ubiquitous C-type skyphoi—dating to within the first half of the 4th century BC (e.g. BG 32), along with a rim dating to the second half of the 4th century BC, the latest piece within the assemblage from the tile fall. Floor assemblage. Beneath the tile fall, the main feature of the floor assemblage in the NE quadrant of Room 2 is a pithos found in situ, resting on the pebble-rich floor layer (OD 03, found in more than 90 fragments). A Corinthian import, identified by its distinctive fabric, it seems that it was sufficiently valuable to warrant repairing with lead clamps, examples 6
Designations for the quadrants were given at the time of excavation as NW, NE, SW, SE, but are actually closer to the cardinal points: “NW” = W, “NE” = N, “SE” = E, “SW” = S.
5/29/14 10:47 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
26
B C
Wall 1
FF80-139PL
Rm 2 NE
FF80-167PL
FF80-55PL FF80-115PL
Wall 2 Room 4
N
Wall 4
B2 NW-SE Baulk
Door
TC plaque FF80-76
FF80-91PL
Rm 2 NW 177
0
88
Rm 2 SE
Room 1
Possibly paving stones
NE-SW Baulk
Wall 5
A
Archaic cup Pottery frags Plaque Pithos Lekane vase FF80-48PL Salt cellar BG cups FF80-97P Mortar FF80-98P Pithoi Pot Pottery FF80-95
A’
FF80-117
Rm 2 SW
Room 5 B1
B’
Wall 9
104
Room 3
106
FF80-35PL
Wall 8
FF80-58PL
C2
2m
A)
Room 2 SW
Room 2 NW Wall 5
NE-SW Baulk
Room 2 SW 1A 1B
Wall 4
B)
Wall 2
2A 2B
Room 2 SE NW-SE Baulk
Wall 1
C)
Figure 2.7 A) Plan, B) section A-A’, and C) section B-B’ of Room 2. (KJS/ICA)
of which were also found on the floor level (M 02). As with Room 1, the installation of a pithos within this room provides the clearest evidence for its interpretation as a storeroom. A second pithos (OD 02) in a Calabrian fabric comes from the lower part of the tile fall. Near the pithos in Batt. 2, a mortarium (Mor 02) and a squat lekythos (BG 76, dated ca. 400–325 BC) were found upside-down; these may have come from collapse of shelves, which would suggest a rapid abandonment following a catastrophic event (see p. 92 in Ch. 4, “Abandonment and Collapse of the Farmhouse”). A chytra (CkW 31) was found on the floor surface in Batt. 4. Beneath this, in Batt. 3, the interface between the
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 26
surface of the floor and the floor itself is less than clear, with the pebble makeup for the floor being noticeably softer than the extremely compact pebble-rich floor contexts in Room 1. The pottery assemblage from the NE quadrant of Room 2 bears this out, suggesting that there is likely to be some degree of mixture of material from the floor surface (Batt. 3) and makeup (Batt. 4). The “floor surface” includes a residual Archaic-period Ionic-type B2 cup that should probably be associated with the floor makeup rather than final phase activity surface. Room 2 assemblage.There appears to be a relatively high frequency of cooking wares in the floor assemblage
5/29/14 10:48 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
27
Figure 2.8 General view of the NE quadrant of Room 2, excavated down to the level of the floor surface, with Corinthian pithos base in situ to the left. Note the two phases of tile fall visible in the southeast section, the lower behind and the upper slightly above the blackboard; looking southeast. (CLL/CW/ICA)
Figure 2.9 Room 2 NE quadrant, showing the floor level at the base of the trench, the tile fall in section, and a chytra (CkW 31) in situ beneath; looking southwest. (CLL/CW/ICA)
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 27
5/29/14 10:48 AM
28
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
from the NE quadrant of Room 2; they are the largest class by Estimated Vessels Represented (EVRep). Drinking cups (black-gloss and banded one-handlers) are well represented in the assemblage; it seems that these consumption vessels were stored in the room along with the cooking wares, transport amphorae, and the pithos. Two C-type skyphoi from Batt. 3 date to around the first quarter of the 4th century BC. If these are coeval with the floor assemblage, they would still have been in use more than three-quarters of a century after they were made. However, since there is clearly residual material in Batt. 3 (i.e., the Archaic Ionic-type B2 cup), these cups may belong to an earlier phase represented by the floor makeup. The pithos is not the only Corinthian import represented in the assemblage: a Corinthian Type A amphora body sherd was also present. This piece is of interest for the interpretation of the function of Room 2, as the type is usually associated with the maritime transport of olive oil,7 and contrasts the wine-bearing Greco-Italic amphorae found in Room 1. However, the distinction may not be clear-cut in terms of types of amphorae stored in these two rooms—as in Room 1, a Greco-Italic amphora, a type usually associated with the transport of wine, is also represented in the floor assemblage from Room 2. The floor makeup in the NE quadrant of Room 2, beneath the in-situ pithos base, was composed of pebble-rich, hard, compacted soil similar to the floor levels in Room 1. The earliest pottery from the floor makeup is a C-type skyphos (BG 34) and a banded one-handler dating to around the first half of the 4th century BC. Two C-type skyphoi from the floor level above (Batt. 3) date to around the first quarter of the 4th century BC, and may therefore be associated with the accumulation of material in the floor makeup. This would indicate that material accumulated from the first quarter of the 4th century BC, a date consistent with that proposed for the construction of the farmhouse walls (see p. 83 in Ch. 4, “Walls”). An inscribed loom weight comes from Batt. 4 (LW 01). The inscription dates it to the Archaic period. Found in the upper part of the makeup or on the floor surface (Batt. 4, a mix of surface material and floor makeup), the loom weight may be interpreted as an heirloom (the implications of which are discussed in Ch. 24). However, Archaic-period pottery is also pres7 Whitbread 1995. For discussion of this type from the Metapontine chora, see Swift in Survey, 457.
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 28
ent in the strata above associated with the floor (from Batt. 3, the floor surface), and so the loom weight is probably also residual. An illegible bronze coin, the only one from the entire site, comes from cleaning of the floor levels, and can only be dated in the broadest of terms (see Ch. 27). Room 2 SE Quadrant The SE quadrant of Room 2 is much less informative than the NE quadrant. Unlike the latter, there is no evidence for two layers of tile fall, the floor assemblage is very small, and excavation ceased, leaving the floor makeup unexcavated. The tile fall represented by Batt. 1–3 contains residual material belonging to the 5th century BC, with fine ware of this period outnumbering pieces of the 4th century BC. A mixture of residual material from the overlying layers penetrated into the tile fall at least as low as Batt. 2 (in this sense, intrusive). Tiles were abundant in the tile fall, ca. 0.4 m in thickness, with
Figure 2.10 General view of Room 2 SE, showing tile fall; looking north-northeast. (CLL/CW/ICA)
5/29/14 10:48 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
29
Figure 2.11 Room 2 SE quadrant showing tile fall; looking northeast. (CLL/CW/ICA)
complete examples of the pan and cover tile type roof (RT 01 and RT 03). The assemblage from the floor surface in the SE quadrant of Room 2 is small, fragmentary, and not particularly diagnostic. Perhaps the most interesting finds are the lead clamps associated (by type) with repair of the pithos, as was also found in the NE quadrant of Room 2. Repair involving the application of molten lead to form clamps evidently happened in situ since there are also lead drippings in this context (see M 03 and M 04). Excavation of the SE quadrant of Room 2, undertaken toward the end of the 1980 excavation season, ceased with Batt. 4 and did not extend into the floor makeup. Room 2 SW Quadrant Excavations in the SW quadrant of Room 2 uncovered a group of flat stones and a larger stone block within the tile fall above the floor layer. The collapse of the wall foundations in this part of the farmhouse evidently occurred between episodes of roof collapse, with joins in the pottery in the layers above and below the stones. C-type skyphoi from within the tile fall belong
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 29
to the late 4th century BC (e.g., BG 42, ca. 330–300 A banded one-handler from the cleaning of the wall foundation in the SW quadrant of Room 2 (BW 07) may be dated to around the middle of the 5th century BC (see p. 7 in Ch. 1, “Chronology and Site Phasing”), with a C-type skyphos dating to the late 5th century BC coming from the floor level. BC).
Room 2 NW Quadrant Consisting of two battute, one beneath the tile fall and one at floor level (including material on and in the floor), the assemblages of pottery and finds from the NW quadrant of Room 2 are relatively small (ca. 24 EVRep in total). Batt. 2 contains one of the latest pieces from Fattoria Fabrizio, a black-gloss bowl dated to the early 3rd century BC (BG 61), as well as one of the earliest, an Archaic skyphos with offset rim (BG 11). This is probably originally from the floor surface, but is mixed in with material from the floor makeup. The differentiation of actual stratigraphic layers is not clear here, but can be teased out from the variable dating of the pottery assemblage.
5/29/14 10:48 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
30
Figure 2.12 Room 2 SW quadrant showing the lower part of the tile fall; looking west. (CLL/CW/ICA)
Excavated Units and Assemblages from Room 2 NE Quadrant Tile Fall Phase -1.2 Level 2, Batt. 1: (“Fall”) FF80-92P; (“Fall, between two tile layers”) FF80-93PL, FF8093PLA, FF80-94P Excavation and Stratigraphy: Two distinct layers of tile fall covering Room 2 NE. Assemblage Summary: The upper part of the tile fall was composed of roof tiles, including cover tiles, and the rim and numerous body sherds of a pithos (OD 02). The fine ware assemblage from the lower part of the tile fall consisted of five black-gloss C-type skyphoi, the latest piece being a rim dating to the second half of the 4th century BC, but also included two handle fragments dating within the first half of the 4th century BC (BG 32 and an uncataloged fragment) (Appendix A, Table A9).
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 30
On Floor Phase -2 Level 2, Batt. 2: (“on floor level”) FF80-95PL, (“on floor level beside mortar,” a black-gloss squat lekythos, BG 76) FF80-97P, (“immediately below tile fall,” a mortarium, Mor 02) FF80-98P. Batt. 3: (“on floor level”) FF80-129P, FF80-130PL, FF80-130PLA, FF80-131PL, FF80-164PL. Excavation and Stratigraphy: Two battute excavated beneath the lower part of the tile fall (Batt. 1) in the NE quadrant of Room 2 and above the hard, compact pebble-rich soil comprising the makeup of the floor (Batt. 4). In the first battuta beneath the tile fall (Batt. 2), a Corinthian pithos base was found in situ, resting on the pebble floor level (see Fig. 2.6) in the NE corner of the quadrant. A mortarium and a squat lekythos were both found upside down near the pithos. The second battuta beneath the tile fall (Batt. 3) reached the interface with and upper part of the floor, and it is likely that
5/29/14 10:48 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
Figure 2.13 General view of Room 2 NW quadrant, beneath the tiles (Level 2, Batt. 2); looking northwest. (CLL/CW/ICA)
some material from the floor makeup was included in Batt. 3. Residual material is represented in the floor assemblage from Batt. 3, and this may indicate that there is some admixture with the material from the floor makeup beneath (Batt. 4). Level 2, Batt. 3 contained the Ionic type B2 cup while Batt. 3–4 contained the two C-type skyphoi dated to first quarter of the 4th century BC. Assemblage Summary: The pithos found in situ (OD 03) in more than 90 fragments, resting on the pebble-rich beaten earth floor, is a Corinthian import. Lead clamps, probably associated with repair of the pithos, were found on the floor nearby. In Batt. 2, a mortarium (Mor 02) and a squat lekythos (BG 76, dated ca. 400–325 BC) were found upside down near the pithos. A chytra rim and cooking ware body sherds round out
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 31
31
Figure 2.14 General view of Room 2 NW quadrant, showing tile fall and floor; looking northwest. (CLL/CW/ICA)
the assemblage. Together these represent a secure, discrete, and well-stratified floor assemblage. Fine-ware forms from Batt. 3 consist of two C-type skyphoi, both dated to the first quarter of the 4th century BC. If these relate to the floor assemblage rather than the floor makeup, they would have been in use for over three-quarters of a century. Four banded one-handlers round out the drinking assemblage. A single identifiable jug fragment (BW 32) was the only closed form in plain or banded wares (unusual, given the cups?), along with a dinos (BW 24). Cooking wares are the largest class by vessels represented (>13 EVRep, a chytra type P3 the only RBH, but 8 of 13 sherds from closed forms). Body sherds from two transport amphorae complete the assemblage, one from a Corinthian Type A
5/29/14 10:48 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
32 and the other from a Greco-Italic amphora (Appendix A, Table A10).
Room 2 NE Quadrant Phase 0
Level 1
Tile Fall and Overlying Floor Assemblage and Level 1 Makeup—Post- ca. 310 BC, with material from the first Level 2, Batt. 1 Tile Fall half of the 4th century BC Calabrian pithos, OD 02 -1 Level 2, Batt. 1 Phase -2 and -3, with material from Phase -4.1 Level 2, Batt. 2 On Floor Level 2, Batt. 4: FF80- ca. 300 BC Level 2, Batt. 2 Corinthian pithos in situ, OD 03 165PL, FF80-166P, FF80-195P, FF80-206SS, FF80-244PL. -2 Excavation and Stratigraphy: A combination of floor Floor Makeup Level 2 Batt 3 surface and floor makeup; Level 2, Batt. 3 C-type skyphos, post- ca. 310 BC this area was excavated C-type skyphos, BG 34, first half of 4th c. BC Postca. 310 with BC prior to recognition of the first half of the 4th c. BC Banded one-handler, first half of the 4th c. BC hard and pebble-rich layer -3 Inscribed Archaic loom weight, LW 01 as a floor (which was real ized during excavation of Room 1 W, carried out at 4th c. BC the same time as excava tion in Room 2). The floor -4 consisted of hard, com pact, pebble-rich soil lev 5th c. BC els extending across the excavated area in the NE quadrant of Room 2. The pithos base from Batt. 3 was excavated in situ rest -5 ing on this surface, but this battuta also included Archaic the chytra (CkW 31), also on the floor. Although there are no discrete strata Figure 2.15 Room 2 NE quadrant phase diagram. (KPS/ICA) within the floor makeup, the floor level may have accumulated mate to around the first half of the 4th century rial from the first half of the 4th century BC, BC. An inscribed loom weight comes from with the material from the late 4th century Batt. 4 (LW 01), and the inscription dates BC belonging to the floor surface. it to the Archaic period. Although the loom Assemblage Summary: A terminus post quem for weight may be interpreted as an heirloom the floor makeup is provided by a black-gloss (see Ch. 24), Archaic-period pottery is also skyphos handle of a type dating to the very represented in the strata associated with the late 4th or 3rd century BC. The earliest pottery floor (from Batt. 3, the floor surface, but likely from the floor makeup is a C-type skyphos to actually come from the floor makeup). The (BG 34) and a banded one-handler dating only coin from the entire site, an illegible
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 32
5/29/14 10:48 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages bronze, comes from cleaning of the floor levels, and can only be dated very generally to between the last quarter of the 5th and the end of the 3rd centuries BC (see Ch. 26) (Appendix A, Table A11).
33
Room 2 SE Quadrant Phase 0
Tile Fall and Overlying
Level 1
Level 1
Excavated Units and Assemblages from Level 2, Batt. 1–3 Room 2 SE Quadrant Tile Fall -1 C-type skyphos, BG 39, ca. Tile Fall Level 2, Batt. 1–3 340–300 BC Phase -1.2 Level 2, Batt. 1: FF80-118PL; Level 2 ca. 300 BC Batt. 2: FF80-119PL, FF80-127T; Level 2, Batt. 3: FF80-137T, FF80-138PL Level 2, Batt. 4 On Floor -2 Excavation and Stratigraphy: Final-phase Lead clamps and drippings, Level 2, Batt. 4 repair of pithos tile fall of the farmhouse covering the SE quadrant in Room 2. The soil within the tile fall described as yellowish brown (Munsell 10YR 5/4), still somewhat clay-like, with some white inclu-3 sions. Unlike the NE quadrant, there is no suggestion of two distinct layers within the tile fall. 4th c. BC Assemblage Summary: Dated to ca. 340– 300 BC by a C-type skyphos base (BG 39), fine ware dating to the period of the -4 farmhouse is outnumbered by residual 5th c. BC pieces, giving a chronologically mixed picture for the tile fall. A black-gloss kylix handle (from Batt. 2, dated ca. 500–440 BC), and perhaps also a handle of a 5th-century BC A-type skyphos -5 (from Batt. 3), and a banded one-handler (from Batt. 1) in the tile fall shows Archaic mixture of residual material from the overlying layers penetrating into and through the tile fall from Batt. 1–3. Figure 2.16 Room 2 SE quadrant phase diagram. (KPS/ICA) Tiles sampled from this layer included two pan tiles (e.g. RT 01) and three cover tiles (e.g. RT 03) (Appendix A, Table A12). Assemblage Summary: Small assemblage only very generally dated to the 4th century Floor Level BC by a handle fragment of a black-gloss Phase -2 C-type skyphos. Finds included pieces of a Level 2, Batt. 4: FF80-213M, FF80-214PL lead clamp (M 03) of the kind used to reExcavation and Stratigraphy: Material from pair pithoi, along with lead drippings (M above the pebble floor in the SE quadrant of 04) which are consistent with repair in situ Room 2. Excavated during the final days of through the application of molten lead into the 1980 season, the floor makeup beneath pre-drilled holes to create the clamps (see remained unexcavated. Ch. 26) (Appendix A, Table A13).
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 33
5/29/14 10:48 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
34
Excavated Units and Assemblages from Room 2 SW Quadrant Tile Fall on Floor Level—Post- ca. 330 BC Phase -1.2 with Phase -2 Level 2, Batt. 1: (“below fall, on floor level”) FF80-115PL; Batt. 2: (“on floor level”) FF80-117PLl; Batt. 3 FF80-132PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Beneath the tile fall in the SW quadrant of Room 2. Assemblage Summary: Small assemblage (7 EVRep) dated to ca. 330–300 BC by a black-gloss C-type skyphos rim (BG 42). An A-type skyphos rim dated to the second half of the 4th century BC is also represented (Appendix A, Table A14).
Room 2 SW Quadrant Phase 0
Tile Fall and Overlying Level 1
-1
Tile Fall on Floor Level Level 2, Batt. 1–3
Level 2, Batt. 1–3 C-type skyphos, BG 42, ca. 330–300 BC
ca. 300 BC
-2
Floor Level Under Collapse Level 2, Batt. 4
Level 2, Batt. 4 A-type skyphos, BG 26, first half of the 4th c. BC C-type skyphos, ca. 430–400 BC
Floor Level Under Stones—Post- ca. 330 One-handler, BW 07, BC with material from the first half of the mid-5th c. BC 4th century BC Phase -2 and -3.1, with material from -3 Phases -3.2 and -4.1 Level 2, Batt. 4: FF-80-133T, FF804th c. BC 134PL “floor level under stones.” Excavation and Stratigraphy: Floor level, beneath a layer of stones formed by col-4 lapse of the stone footing of the walls. It is likely that excavation extended at 5th c. BC least partially into the floor makeup. Assemblage Summary: A second example of a C-type skyphos of similar type and date to BG 42 in Batt. 1–3, ca. 330–300 BC. An A-type skyphos rim (BG 26) -5 dates to the first half of the 4th century BC and may indicate some degree of Archaic excavation into the floor makeup. An earlier C-type skyphos base dates to the late 5th century (ca. 430–400 BC) (Ap- Figure 2.17 Room 2 SW quadrant phase diagram. (KPS/ICA) pendix A, Table A15). Assemblage Summary: Small assemblage with less than ten vessels represented, dated by a Excavated Units and Assemblages from C-type skyphos rim (ca. 330–300 BC). ReRoom 2 NW Quadrant sidual material represented by an Archaic Below Fall—ca. 300 BC, post- ca. 330 BC with Ionic-type B2 cup rim and a chytra body Late Archaic and Classical material sherd of the type typical of the last quarter of Phase -2 the 5th century BC (CkW 27), together indiLevel 2, Batt. 1 “Below Fall”: FF80-91PL cating that the floor assemblage in this quadExcavation and Stratigraphy: Beneath the tile rant is not clean (Appendix A, Table A16). fall in the NW quadrant of Room 2, the first battuta above the level of the floor.
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 34
5/29/14 10:48 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
35
Room 2 NW Quadrant Phase 0
Tile Fall and Overlying Level 1
-1
ca. 300 BC
-2
Below Tile Fall, Floor Level 2, Batt. 1
Floor and Makeup Level 2, Batt. 2
Level 2, Batt. 1 C-type skyphos, BG 42, ca. 330–300 BC Level 2, Batt. 2 Black-gloss bowl, ca. 300 BC Skyphos with offset rim, BG 11, Archaic
-3
4th c. BC
-4 5th c. BC
-5
Archaic
Figure 2.18 Room 2 NW quadrant phase diagram. (KPS/ICA)
Floor and Makeup—ca. 300 BC, with Late Archaic material Phase -2 and -3?, with material from Phase -5 Level 2, Batt. 2: (“Floor Level”) FF80-112PL, FF80-114P. Excavation and Stratigraphy: Batt. 2 beneath the tile fall in the NW quadrant of Room 2, “floor level.” A black-gloss bowl, ca. 300 BC, indicates some material relating to and dating the floor surface assemblage, with
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 35
Archaic fine ware, perhaps coming from the floor. Assemblage Summary: Small assemblage (12 EVRep) dated to ca. 300–260 BC by a black-gloss bowl rim. Archaic fine ware is represented by a skyphos with offset rim (BG 11). A pithos fragment and a Corinthian Type A amphora body sherd are represented along with cooking, plain, and banded wares (Appendix A, Table A17).
5/29/14 10:48 AM
36
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
Room 3 A small room forming the northeastern corner of the farmhouse, a key feature of the archaeology of Room 3 is the partial erosion of the tile fall and the contents of the room downslope to the northwest into Area 7 following the outward collapse of the northeastern wall of the farmhouse. This is particularly important given that Area 7 contains evidence for domestic cult that can be associated with Room 3 (see Ch. 6). Location and Plan Situated in the northern corner of the farmhouse, Room 3 is rectangular, with a surface area of ca. 10.5 m2, and delineated by extant walls on three sides: the northeastern Wall 1 (2.4 m); the southwestern Wall 2 (2.7 m); and the southeastern Wall 5 (4.3 m). It probably communicated with Room 2 to the southeast via a doorway in Wall 5 (Fig. 2.20). The floor level of Room 4 to the southwest was ca. 0.4 m lower than the floor of Room 3, and consequently there was probably no direct access between the two rooms. Excavation and Stratigraphy To the west of Room 3, Wall 2 peters out at its northern terminus and there was no evidence for a wall at the northwest margin of Room 3 (connecting the junction of Walls 2 and 6 with main northeastern Wall 1). This seems to have collapsed and subsequently eroded outward and downslope to the north into Area 7, where the tile and stone collapse was interpreted as having derived from Room 3. That there are no traces of the wall foundation is not particularly surprising since the smaller stones forming the lowest course of the foundation socle were placed directly onto the ground surface, without the protection or archaeological visibility of a foundation trench. Although they are small, the chronology of the assemblages from Room 3 is consistent with the overall picture gained from the more substantial excavations and assemblages from Rooms 1 and 2. The tile fall and level beneath is dated directly to post- ca. 320 BC by a black-gloss dish (BG 60, ca. 320–290 BC), consistent with the chronology of the floor surface and tile fall contexts from other parts of the farmhouse. Tiles, pottery, and finds were concentrated almost entirely in the western corner of the room (downslope) in more compacted sediments, a result of post-depositional erosion of material from the eastern and northern
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 36
Figure 2.19 Working shot showing the northeastern part of Room 3 (beyond the foreground wall) and the extra-mural Area 7 (area of wheelbarrow). The absence of an external wall can clearly be seen, as can the slope into Area 7. In the foreground, the conglomerate used for construction on the internal walls can clearly be seen (here, Wall 5 between Rooms 2 and 3, and to the left the main longitudinal central wall of the farmhouse, Wall 2); looking northeast. (CLL/CW/ICA)
parts of the room. Cleaning of the walls and the baulks at the margins of the room indicated that the floor layer overlay natural yellow clay, though the room as a whole was not excavated down to this level. Excavated Units and Assemblages from Room 3 Tile Fall—Post- ca. 320 BC on stratigraphy Phase -1.2 Level 2, Batt. 1: FF80-120PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Tile fall above Room 3. Assemblage Summary: Small and fragmentary assemblage of ca. 6 EVRep. Of particular interest is a fragment of a red-figure bell
5/29/14 10:48 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
B3
Wall 1 FF80-58PL FF80-139PL
104 Charcoal
Room 3 FF80-70PL FF80-66PL FF80-68PL
Bowl FF80-75
Wall 6a
Pithoi
B2
Room 2
FF80-91PL
142
N
FF80-48PL
Door
FF TC 01 TC head FF80-167 BG chalice
A)
FF80-35PL
Wall 5
Aryballos
A
37
A’
FF80-55PL FF80-115PL
Wall 2 A2
0
Room 4
177
2m
Room 3 Area 7
Wall 5
B)
Figure 2.20 A) Plan and B) section A-A’ of Room 3. (KJS/ICA)
krater dated very generally from the second half of the 5th to the end of the 4th century BC: one of only five figured ware fragments from the farmhouse (see p. 171 in Ch. 12, “Metapontine Red-figure”). Coming from the tile fall, a direct association with the 4th-century BC farmhouse cannot be demonstrated conclusively, but there otherwise seems to be a lack of heavily residual (i.e., Archaic-phase) material in this area of the tile fall relative to other parts of the farmhouse (Appendix A, Table A18).
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 37
On Floor—Post- ca. 320 BC with material of the second half of the 5th century BC Phase -2, with material from Phase -4.1 Level 2, Batt. 2 “Below Tile Fall/On Floor Level”: FF80-139PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Beneath the tile fall and above the floor level in Room 3. The archaeological material came from the area nearest the cross wall. Assemblage Summary: Assemblage of < 20 EVRep, dated by a black-gloss dish to the late 4th or early 3rd century BC (BG 60, ca. 320–290 BC)—this piece joins sherds of the same vessel in the tile fall in Batt. 1.
5/29/14 10:48 AM
38
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
Figure 2.21 Tile fall in the eastern part of Room 3 under excavation. Wall 5, dividing Rooms 2 and 3, is immediately behind; looking southeast. (CLL/CW/ICA)
Figure 2.22 Looking southeast across the eastern part of Room 3 from Area 7. Line of tile fall above Room 3 can clearly be seen in the retained baulk (risega) against Wall 5, with Room 2 NE quadrant immediately beyond. In the foreground to the left, the terminus of Wall 1 representing the northeastern corner of the farmhouse. The trench from Room 3 continues toward the camera into Area 7, the external wall in this area having collapsed and eroded downslope. (CLL/CW/ICA)
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 38
5/29/14 10:48 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
Room 3 Phase 0
Tile Fall and Overlying Level 1
-1
Tile Fall Level 2, Batt. 1
-3
4th c. BC
-4 5th c. BC
-5
Level 2, Batt. 1 & 2 Black-gloss dish, ca. 320–290 BC Post-depositional erosion of material to W corner
ca. 300 BC
-2
Collapse and erosion of wall, tile fall and floor assemblage into Area 7
On Floor Level 2, Batt. 2
On Floor in W Corner Level 2, Batt. 2
39
On Floor in W Corner—Last quarter of the 4th century BC Phase -2 Level 2, Batt. 2 “Pottery concentrated near cross wall in W corner”: FF80-167PL, FF80-167P Excavation and Stratigraphy: Pottery and finds concentrated toward the western corner of Room 2. This is a consequence of the post-depositional erosion of material from the eastern parts of Room 2 rather than an anthropogenic feature connected with the occupation of the farmhouse. The floor level was clearly identified in this part of the room. Assemblage Summary: Although not substantial, a relatively high frequency of black-gloss within this assemblage. Two C-type skyphoi; a rim dating to around the middle of the 4th century BC and a handle of a type characteristic of the last quarter of the 4th century BC. There was a single piece of plain ware, with the remainder of the assemblage composed of cooking ware (Appendix A, Table A20).
Room 4 Forming the northwestern corner Cleaning of wall shows natural clay Natural of the farmhouse, adjacent to the beneath floor level. Not extensive scarp, the tile fall and upper layers excavation, possibly intervening layers. of Room 4 had eroded downslope. Makeup deposits for the farmhouse Figure 2.23 Room 3 phase diagram. (KPS/ICA) floor, similar to those in Room 6, were excavated in a series of three battute. These uncovA stemless kylix body sherd, tentatively ered the lowest courses of the foundation of the southidentified and likely to date to the second western wall of the farmhouse (Wall 7), indicating the half of the 5th century BC, indicates that approximate level of construction of the farmhouse. residual material is probably present in the Cobblestone rubble was found within the room at a assemblage either from the tile fall or from similar level, in the lower part of the homogeneous partial excavation into the floor layer (Apfloor-makeup contexts. It was associated perhaps with pendix A, Table A19). Archaic
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 39
5/29/14 10:48 AM
40
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
Figure 2.24 General view of Room 4 showing the slope to the southwest and northwest. To the left, Wall 7 at the junction with Wall 6, forming the northwestern corner of the farmhouse, the only extant part of the southwestern wall of the farmhouse. In the foreground, part of the cobble-and-conglomerate Wall 8, dividing Rooms 4 and 5; note the few fragments of tile within it. To the lower left, the terminus of Wall 8 where it has collapsed and eroded away downslope; looking northwest. (CLL/CW/ICA)
the construction of the walls or laid as more robust packing to raise and stabilize this corner of the farmhouse. Unlike in Room 6, excavation did not extend down to the level of Archaic breccia underlying the site, but significant quantities of Archaic pottery make up much of the assemblages from the floor makeup: material from Archaic-period contexts disturbed by construction of the farmhouse. Location and Plan Forming the western corner of the farmhouse, Room 4 is smaller than Rooms 1 and 2. It was delineated by Walls 6a, 2, and 8, the southwestern part of which had eroded downslope. Internal room dimensions for Room 4 are 4.78, 2.90, 4.72, and 3.04 m, for a surface area of ca. 14 m2. Room 4 was excavated to ca. 0.8 m beneath the elevation of Walls 2, 6, and 8, which were extant in Level 1. In the western corner, Wall 7 appeared lower down, in Level 2, extending for ca. 3.2 m east of the junction with Wall 6. Only the lowest
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 40
courses of Wall 7 are preserved due to the sharp slope immediately to the southwest in Area 8. Wall 7 was composed of small, rounded cobbles, like those used in the lower foundation courses of the walls elsewhere in the farmhouse (for example, in Room 2). Wall 6 (a and b), the external northwestern wall of the farmhouse, was constructed of similar small cobbles with the addition of chunks of conglomerate rock. At the time of excavation, Di Taranto suggested that the lowest courses of the walls were constructed of small rounded cobbles, with larger cobble-and-conglomerate construction used for the upper courses of the foundations. Excavation and Stratigraphy Adjacent to the scarp and lacking a tile fall (the upper levels having eroded downslope), the contexts in Room 4 make better sense when seen in relation to the stratigraphy of Room 6. Below the topsoil and upper layers of post-farmhouse material, excavation went down via three battute through dark brown soil, which
5/29/14 10:48 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages Room 3 Room FF80-55PL FF TC 01 FF80-115PL FF80-167 BG chalice TC head Votive cup FF80-65P Wall 2 Surface: FF80-2PL TC frag FF80-4PL 2 FF80-198PL
A
177
Wall 8
Wall 6a
Room 4 FF80-171 FF80-170PL
2
FF80-172PL
Wall 6b
Wall 7
Area 8 264
N
0
A1
2m
Figure 2.25 Plan of Room 4. (KJS/ICA)
is probably similar to the farmhouse floor-makeup layers in Room 6. Characterized by its homogeneity and lack of archaeological features, stones, or tile, this sediment underlies the floor surface. In Room 6, a buildup of the floor makeup could be seen during the second half of the 4th century BC between the construction of dividing Wall 9, post- ca. 350 BC, and the eventual level of the final-phase farmhouse floor. These layers contained weathered, residual Archaic fragments, suggesting that it included at least some soil component brought in from outside the room, to repair or renovate the floor surface. Similar deposits in Room 4 also contain a significant Archaic component in the lower two battute and in and around the rubble at the base of the excavated sequence in the third battuta. Here, a cluster of rounded stones across the northwestern quadrant of Room 4 was initially identified as a hearth, but this lacks a discernible structure or traces of burning and is more akin to collapse than to a feature—it may be deliberate rubble makeup for the floor in this area, to raise the lower part of the room and reinforce the corner of the farmhouse. Stratigraphically, it is at the level of the lowest small-stone course of Wall 7 (the main part of the stone foundations of this wall having eroded downslope), which would associate it more with the construction of the farmhouse than with the final-phase occupation. The Archaic material in this level is likely to derive from underlying Archaic contexts—these were
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 41
41
found at the base of the sequence in the center of Room 6, above natural, but seem to have been disturbed by construction of the walls. A similar level was not reached in Room 4, where excavation appears to have ceased toward the lower part of the farmhouse floor makeup, around or just above the approximate level of farmhouse construction indicated by the lowest foundation courses of Walls 7 and 8. Limited extension of excavations along the line of Wall 6, downslope beyond Wall 7 in the extra-mural Area 8, yielded a small assemblage of 4th-century BC pottery with Archaic material. Excavated Units and Assemblages from Room 4 Floor Makeup Phase -3 Level 2, Batt. 1: FF80-168PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: The first battuta of three, ca. 0.15 m deep, down through dark brown soil similar to the floor makeups in Room 6. The top of the foundation course of Wall 7 emerged in this battuta. Constructed solely of small rounded cobbles, this represents the lower course of the foundations for the mudbrick walls of the farmhouse; in contrast, Wall 6 is preserved to a greater height and has an upper course incorporating conglomerate blocks. Assemblage Summary: Small assemblage of coarse/plain ware. Like similar deposits in Room 6, this context contained little or no tile, the tile fall above Room 4 having eroded downslope, and this level probably originally beneath a floor surface. Floor Makeup—4th century BC with Late Archaic material Phase -3, with Phase -5.1 Level 2, Batt. 2 “Floor Level”: FF80-170PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: A continuation of Batt. 1, dark yellowish brown soil (Munsell 10YR 4/4) with some pebbles and small stones, lacking tile. Beneath this, changing to a lighter soil, yellowish brown (Munsell 10YR 5/4) with small stones and pebbles at a depth of around 0.6 m below the top of Wall 2. In the center of the room, ca. 1.5 m from the
5/29/14 10:49 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
42
Room 4 Phase 0
-1
Topsoil, postfarmhouse depositions
Erosion of tile fall downslope
Corinthian Type A amphora likely dating to the 5th century BC. The plain and banded wares include two plain-ware basins (PCW 17 and PCW 18), of a type (BA 4) only broadly attributable to the 5th to 3rd centuries BC. A chytra rim of a type common in the 6th and 5th centuries BC (CkW 19) is among the cooking wares from the floor of Room 4 (Appendix A, Table A21).
ca. 300 BC
Construction
Destruction
Floor Makeup—4th century BC, with Late Archaic material Erosion and loss of floor surface Phase -3, with -5 -2 and occupation material Level 2, Batt. 3: FF80-172PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Soil has Floor a very fine texture, dark yellowish Level 2, Batt. 1 Floor Makeup brown (Munsell 10YR 4/4), simLevel 2, Batt. 1 ilar to the floor makeup deposits in Room 6. At the southern end of -3 Level 2, Batt. 2 Floor Makeup Level 2, Batt. 2 the room, there were very few finds. Archaic fine ware Most of the pottery, including the Level 2, Batt. 3 4th c. BC Floor Makeup or Below rim of an Ionic cup, was found near Cooking ware, 4th c. BC Level 2, Batt. 3 the cobblestones in the center of the Archaic fine ware Cobblestone rubble room. Between the stone feature -4 bottom of Level 2, Batt. 3 and the northeastern extension wall Construction of Wall 7, is a patch of hardened pinkish earth. 5th c. BC farmhouse E corner A fragment of an Archaic Laconian krater from this context joins one from the surface survey of the scarp, Disturbance of Archaic contexts suggesting that this material was during construction of farmhouse, -5 severely disturbed, perhaps by the or inclusion of residual Archaic material in floor makeup. construction of the farmhouse. Assemblage Summary: The assemblage Archaic from Batt. 3 appears to be wholly Archaic in date with the exception Figure 2.26 Room 4 phase diagram. (KPS/ICA) of a 4th-century BC cooking ware lid. Fine ware consists of an Ionic northern end wall (Wall 6), the upper surfactype B2 cup fragment with an Archaic skyes of small rounded stones appeared. phos with offset rim (dated 525–475 BC) Assemblage Summary: The pottery assemblage and five Archaic fine-ware body sherds seems to belong to an earlier phase than the from an open form. A fragment of a Laco4th-century BC farmhouse: fragments from nian krater (BG 21) joins a fragment found four Ionic B2 cups with two fine-ware body in the surface survey (FF80-5PL, from the sherds belonging to open forms, which may nearby scarp). A miniature skyphos (Min also be Archaic, a fragment of Classical07) is of particular interest, dating to the 6th period black-gloss, and a body sherd from a century BC (Appendix A, Table A22).
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 42
5/29/14 10:49 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages Room 5 Room 5 is the smallest room in the farmhouse, in the center of the southwestern row of rooms between Rooms 4 and 6. It was originally part of Room 6 but divided off with the later addition of Wall 9. The southwestern part of the room, including the external wall, had eroded entirely down the adjacent scarp. Capped by a tile fall, excavations in the surviving part of Room 5 extended through a layer of collapse, primarily of the cobble-and-conglomerate foundations of Wall 2, and at least part of its mudbrick superstructure. The layers of collapse covered the final-phase floor, which was at a similar elevation to the floor in Room 6. Location and Plan Room 5 was separated from the northeastern row of Rooms 1–3 by Wall 2, from Room 4 to the northwest by Wall 8, and from Room 6 to the southeast by Wall 9. There was no extant wall in the southwestern part, having eroded away like the walls in the adjacent Rooms 4 and 6. Its dimensions are ca. 2.5 x 2.9 m, with a surface area of ca. 7 m2. Room 5 was created through modification of an earlier ground plan (dating from the late 5th/early 4th century BC construction?), with the subdivision by the internal Wall 9 of the large Room 6, which comprises the southwestern quadrant of the farmhouse. The construction technique of Wall 9 is different from other walls in the superstructure of the farmhouse: instead of using pieces of conglomerate rock and larger stones, Wall 9 was built out of small, flat sandstone and incorporated fragments of tile and pottery (see below, p. 45, “Room 6” and Ch. 4). Four courses are extant, with a preserved height of 0.25 m. Although following a similar line, it was not a single build with Wall 4 to the northeast. A mortarium rim dated to post- ca. 350 BC was incorporated into the structure of the wall, and the contexts in the room at about the same level as the base of the foundations of Wall 9 date to post- ca. 350 BC. Excavation and Stratigraphy The tile fall above Room 5 was excavated as part of 5-m grid squares C1 and B1, and was sufficiently thin and diffuse that it was not clearly identifiable. Although few tiles were evident during excavations in the center of the trench, subsequent re-examination of the unexcavated baulks adjacent to and protecting the
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 43
Wall 2 180
Wall 9
B
Toward surface: Terracotta fragments
B1 Stones
Wall 8
177 Room 4
43
Room 6
Room 5
B’ A)
N
0
2m
Room 5 Wall 2
B)
Figure 2.27 A) Plan, and B) section B-B’ of Room 5. (KJS/ICA)
walls of Room 5 showed the presence of fragments of tile confirming the presence of at least a partial tile fall. Beneath this, a collapse of the mudbrick superstructure was uncovered, indicated by a preserved fragment of mudbrick. The chronologically-mixed assemblage from this layer seems to confirm that material overlying the thin and scanty tile fall included post-abandonment, colluviated material deposited over the tile fall. Less than half of the room was excavated, partly because of the NE-SW baulk and partly because of the loss of the southwestern side of the room to the slope. The hill complicated the excavation and its interpretation considerably, reaching a depth of 0.3 m below the top of Wall 2 (the central wall of the farmhouse) in the northeast and 0.6 m in the southeast of Room 5. Excavations extended down to Level 2, Batt. 1, after which they were discontinued and not resumed before the end of the excavation season. Re-examination of the area confirmed the presence of a tile fall above Room 5 and a floor layer beneath the collapse. This was roughly at the same level as the final-phase floor in Room 6. Excavations did not extend beneath the final-phase floor surface in Room 5. The stratigraphic sequence is likely to be similar to that extant in Room 6 to the
5/29/14 10:49 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
44
southeast, where a layer of breccia was excavated in the lower parts—this Archaic layer, similar to that in Room 1 W and in the SE Soundings, is also likely to underlie Room 5.
Room 5 Phase Material overlying tile fall
0
Tile Fall
Excavated Units and Assemblages from Room 5
Tile Fall Phase -1 Part of Squares B1 and C1, Level 1, Batt. 1–5 Excavation and Stratigraphy: The tile fall above Room 5 was excavated as part of Squares B1 and C1, Level 1, Batt. 1–5. In 2011, Corinthian- and Laconian-type tiles were observed in the baulks preserving Walls 2 and 9, confirming the presence of a tile fall above Room 5, which was otherwise scant and not clearly defined during excavations in 1980. Assemblage Summary: Chronologically mixed assemblage indistinguishable from that of the topsoil; excavated by 5-m grid squares prior to uncovering the walls and configuration of the rooms, it is not possible to differentiate the material immediately above Room 5. Collapse Below Tile Fall Phase -1.3 Level 2, Batt. 1: FF-80-143PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Beneath the tile fall, the upper part of a relatively thick layer of wall collapse was composed of denuded mudbrick. A fragment of “undissolved” mudbrick was excavated from this layer from collapse of the mudbrick superstructure—such bits of mudbrick that were sufficiently well preserved to be recognizable during excavation are very rare at the site. Assemblage Summary: C-type skyphos handle dating to the first half of the 4th century BC with a 4th-century BC cooking ware base (CkW 30, 400–300 BC). An Archaic Laconian krater sherd (BG 21) dated to around the second half of the 6th century BC. Another fragment of this piece was found in the wash material from the surface scarp of the hill (FF80-5PL), while a third fragment from Room 4, Level 2, Batt. 3 (FF80-172PL),
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 44
Sq. B1 & C1; Level 1, Batt. 1–5
Collapse Below Tile Fall
-1
Level 2, Batt. 1
ca. 300 BC
Collapse Above Floor Level 2, Batt. 2
Collapse in NE Level 2, Batt. 3
-2 Floor
-3
4th c. BC
-4 5th c. BC
-5
Archaic
Figure 2.28 Room 5 phase diagram. (KPS/ICA)
indicates at the least some significant disturbance of likely Archaic-period layers. The piece from Room 4 may belong to a clean Archaic-period layer, while the piece here and from the scarp may represent disturbance of that layer. Since it is not downslope of Room 4, it would indicate a fair degree of scattering of fragments of this piece in the original Archaic layer, though it may be a miscollection (Appendix A, Table A23).
5/29/14 10:49 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
45
Collapse Above Floor Phase -1.3 Level 2, Batt. 2 Excavation and Stratigraphy: Part of a post excavation survey of the walls in the course of which the features were cleaned, uncovering a hard, compact layer representing the floor. In the southwest part, large chunks of conglomerate were observed, collapsed from Wall 2 and resting on the floor surface. This battuta represents the interface between the lower part of the wall collapse and the final-phase floor. Collapse Above Floor in NE Phase -1.3 and -2 Level 2, Batt. 3 Excavation and Stratigraphy: In the northeastern part of the trench in Room 5, between Wall 2 and the collapsed stones toward the center of the trench. Cobbles and stones were particularly in evidence closer to Wall 2, of which they were originally a part. At the northeastern margin was observed a sterile yellowish chalky layer that seemed to be part of the natural terrace of the hill, higher up in the northern part of the trench, underlying Wall 2 and the northeastern row of rooms (Rooms 1–3). Room 6 Excavations in Room 6 provided a complete stratigraphic sequence from tile fall through the floor makeups to a thin Archaic layer at the base above natural (see Fig. 2.32). Beneath the tile fall in Room 6, there is evidence for the partial collapse of the cobble-and-conglomerate Wall 2 at the center of the farmhouse. The presence of the final-phase floor is inferred stratigraphically; unlike the other rooms of the farmhouse, the ephemeral surface was not recognized during excavation of the rather homogeneous deposits in Room 6. The foundations of Wall 9, an internal wall added post- ca. 350 BC to subdivide Room 6 and create Room 5, mark the level of the subsequent accumulation of makeup for the final-phase farmhouse floor. Beneath this, the level of the primary construction of the farmhouse (the earlier floor makeup antedating Wall 9) overlies an Archaic breccia. Consisting of a
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 45
Figure 2.29 Upper part of the foundation of Wall 9 between Room 5 (left) and Room 6 (right), showing sandstone-and-tile construction. This contrasts with the cobble-and-conglomerate construction of the earlier wall foundations of the farmhouse, an example of which is just visible in Wall 2 (top); looking northeast. (CLL/CW/ICA)
thin layer above natural deposits, the Archaic breccia layer was like that underlying Room 1 W and the SE Soundings and was concentrated in the center of the room. This suggests that it may have been disturbed during construction of the farmhouse. Location and Plan Room 6 is a large room forming the southern corner of the farmhouse, separated from the northeastern series of rooms (Rooms 1–3) by Wall 2. After ca. 350 BC, Room 6 was subdivided in the northwestern part by Wall 9, to create Room 5 (see above, p. 43, “Room 5”). The excavators identified a gap in the foundation course of Wall 3, the external southeastern wall of the
5/29/14 10:49 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
46
Wall 9
B
Wall 3b
Wall 3a
Wall 9 was built out of small, flat stones and incorporated fragments of tile and pottery (Fig. 2.29), a technique typical of Frags 30, 31, 47 the Hellenistic period. Wall 9 is dated directly to after ca. 350 BC by a large morWall 10 180 Wall 2 tarium sherd incorporated within it (Mor Toward FF-80-13PL surface: 03; see p. 87 in Ch. 4, “Sandstone-and-tile 1 FF-80-8PL Terracotta B Stones fragments construction of Wall 9, post- ca. 350 BC”). Room 6 Room 5 This date is supported by sherds post-dating ca. 350 BC in Room 6 at a level just below the lowest course of Wall 9 (Level Lekane 2, Batt. 6, containing an A-type skyphos 166 base, BG 27, ca. 350 BC). Dividing Room 5 from Room 6, Wall 9 was a later addition to the farmhouse. Constructed after ca. 350 BC, its base sits ca. 0.2 m above the elevation of the lowN 0 2m est course of the cobble-and-conglomerate central Wall 2, which marks the level at which the farmhouse was originally constructed in the late 5th or early 4th Figure 2.30 Plan of Room 6. (KJS/ICA) century BC (see p. 7 in Ch. 1, “Chronology and Site Phasing”). Since, like all farmhouse, filled in by tile fall, suggesting a doorway to wall foundations of the farmhouse, no concrete evithe exterior. Three walls are extant (Walls 2, 3, and 9), dence of a foundation cut for Wall 9 was uncovered, the southwestern wall of the farmhouse having been its lowest course indicates the approximate level of lost downslope. Wall 2 runs for ca. 4.1 m, the cross walls the farmhouse floor at the time of its creation. It also having preserved lengths of ca. 1.7 m. The surface area shows the accumulation—above this level but below of Room 6 would have been ca. 12 m2—reconstructing the final-phase floor, ca. 300 BC—of material in the the line of the now-lost external southwestern wall, a second half of the 4th century BC (Level 2, Batt. 4 and continuation of Wall 7 in Room 4, suggests that al- 5) in the makeup below the final-phase floor surface (Level 2, Batt. 3). most half of Room 6 was eroded away downslope. These floor makeup layers contained very fragmentary and weathered Archaic-period material, which Excavation and Stratigraphy Room 6 is covered by a relatively thin and high tile fall tends to suggest that the floors were composed of alexcavated as part of the removal of topsoil and upper locthonous material from outside the room, laid down tile fall across the site, in square C1. The floor level of as makeup and floor repair or renovation, rather than the final phase of the farmhouse was present beneath soil layers formed by a steady accumulation of occupaa level of collapse of the foundations of Wall 2. The tion detritus. This has implications for the interpretathickness of the battuta indicates that at least part of tion of the pottery assemblage from within the floor the mudbrick superstructure came down during this makeup and the interpretation of the “function” of Room 6, since it raises sufficient doubt about whether episode of collapse, prior to being covered by tile fall. The floor assemblage in Room 6 is not a discrete it is directly associated with activities within the room. The function of Room 6 is difficult to determine or clean collection, and is likely to contain, or perhaps be composed entirely of, material from the tile fall and given the lack of a discrete final-phase floor assemcollapse of Wall 2 above and material from the make- blage and the possibility that the material for the floor makeup (ca. 350–300 BC), containing signifiup of the floor in the underlying battute. Rather than conglomerate rock and larger stones, cant residual material, was brought in from outside
B’
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 46
5/29/14 10:49 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
47
Figure 2.31 View upslope in Room 6 showing the Archaic breccia level (Level 2, Batt. 7) under excavation and natural deposits in the foreground. Note the featureless fill (Level 1 and Level 2, Batt. 1–5) above the Archaic level in the northeastern section of the baulk against Wall 2, lacking a tile fall or debris, deposited post-abandonment and after the erosion of the tile fall; looking northeast. (CLL/CW/ICA)
the room as part of upkeep or renovation of the floors during the second half of the 4th century BC. Some large, perhaps complete vessels, were found within the room, which may indicate that the circumstances of abandonment were rushed. Room 6 was one of the very few areas of the excavation that achieved a complete stratigraphic sequence down to natural deposits. As in Room 1 W, the only other area within the walls of the farmhouse in which natural levels were reached, the natural deposits were overlain by Archaic breccia. In Room 6, this was most pronounced and best preserved in the center of the room, which may indicate that (as may also have been the case in Room 4) Archaicperiod layers were disturbed for the construction of the farmhouse. In Room 6, at the lowest levels of the farmhouse, dark soil sits directly over the Archaic breccia, apparently with no real makeup level of gravel or similar preparation.
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 47
Excavated Units and Assemblages from Room 6 Tile Fall and Above Phase -1.1, -1.2 with material from Phase 0 Part of Level 1 in Square C1: FF80-30PL; FF80-31PL; FF80-32PL; FF80-59PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Relatively thin and quite high up relative to the other rooms, the tile fall above Room 6 was excavated as part of the removal of topsoil and upper parts of the tile fall overlying the farmhouse. Assemblage Summary: The assemblage from C1 (it is not possible to isolate the material from above Room 6) is chronologically mixed, typical of the material found over lying and penetrating into the upper parts of the farmhouse tile fall across much of the site. A basin of a type usually dating to the 2nd or 1st century BC (PCW 16) stands out in the surface assemblage and may provide some evidence for some sporadic activity at
5/29/14 10:49 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
48
Figure 2.32 View of the northwestern section in Room 6, showing post-abandonment fill deposited after the erosion of the tile fall that would have originally covered this room. Excavated to the Archaic breccia (Level 2, Batt. 7) on the right, and natural deposits on the left. In the upper right, part of Wall 9, subdividing Room 6 to create Room 5; note the tile and flat-stone construction, different from the earlier foundation walls of the farmhouse; looking northwest. (CLL/CW/ICA)
Fattoria Fabrizio in the Late Republican period (Appendix A, Table A24). Collapse Beneath Tile Fall Phase -1.3 Level 2, Batt. 1: FF80-146PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Beneath the tile fall, collapse of the mudbrick superstructure and part of the foundations of Wall 2, attested by small stones and cobbles in this battuta. Assemblage Summary: Small, chronologically mixed assemblage. Archaic material represented by a fragmentary and weathered Ionic cup base, and a C-type skyphos belonging to the second half of the 5th cen tury BC (Appendix A, Table A25).
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 48
Lower Collapse Beneath Tile Fall, Interface with Final-Phase Floor Level Phase -1.3 Level 2, Batt. 2 Excavation and Stratigraphy: Interface of collapse and floor level, the lower part of the collapse beneath the tile fall and above the final-phase floor layer. Assemblage Summary: The assemblage contains fragmented, extremely worn, and small pieces of Archaic material, including an Ionic cup (BG 04) and kotyle (BG 17) derived perhaps from material covering the thin tile fall. Like Batt. 1 above it, the assemblage contains material relating to the Archaic and to the late-5th-century BC phases, the latter attested by the base of a C-type skyphos (BG 29, ca. 425–390 BC) (Appendix A, Table A26).
5/29/14 10:50 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
Room 6 Phase 0
Tile Fall
Sq. C1, Level 1
-1
ca. 300 BC
-2
Wall Collapse Level 2, Batt. 1
Collapse Above Floor Level 2, Batt. 2
Floor Level
Level 2, Batt. 3
Level 2, Batt. 1 Archaic Ionic cup C-type skyphos, late 5th c. BC Cooking ware, 4th c. BC Mortarium, Mor 03, 4th c. BC Level 2, Batt. 2 Archaic Ionic cup, kotyle C-type skyphos, ca. 425–390 BC Greco-Italic amphora, 4th c. BC Basin, PCW 08, near complete, 4th c. BC Level 2, Batt. 3 Ionic cup
Floor Makeup Level 2, Batt. 4
-3
4th c. BC
Level 2, Batt. 4 Greco-Italic amphora, second half of 4th c. BC Construction of dividing Wall 9, postca. 350 BC
Primary Floor Makeup Level 2, Batt. 5 Level 2, Batt. 5 “Black-gloss” Ionic cup, first quarter of the 5th c. BC Classical BG closed form
-4 5th c. BC
Level 2, Batt. 6 Interface of Archaic breccia and overlying contexts in Batt. 1–5
-5
Archaic breccia Level 2, Batt. 7
Archaic
Level 2, Batt. 6 C-type skyphos base, ca. 350 BC Assemblage predominantly Archaic fine ware Level 2, Batt. 7 Ionic cups in a small assemblage, predominantly fine wares
Natural
Figure 2.33 Room 6 phase diagram. (KPS/ICA)
Final-Phase Floor Level—ca. 300 BC Phase 2, incorporating material from Phases -1.3 and -3 Level 2, Batt. 3 Excavation and Stratigraphy: Floor level at the time of the abandonment of the farmhouse,
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 49
49
ca. 300 BC. The floor surface was not extant or distinguishable during excavation of this battuta—the farmhouse floor surface in the adjacent Room 5 was found to be at a similar elevation. Sporadic tile fragments were noted during excavation. Assemblage Summary: Small assemblage likely composed of a mixture of material from the collapse and floor makeup. Residual fragments of Archaic fine ware attested by an Ionic type B2 cup (BG 03) (Appendix A, Table A27). Final-Phase Floor Makeup— Post- ca. 350 BC before ca. 300 BC Phase -3.1 Level 2, Batt. 4: FF80-177PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Beneath the final-phase floor surface, makeup for the floor representing an accumulation of material between the period of the construction of Wall 9, post- ca. 350 BC, in the underlying battuta, and the abandonment-phase floor surface in the overlying battuta. Assemblage Summary: Small assemblage with nothing particularly chronologically diagnostic except for a Greco-Italic amphora sherd, probably dating to the second half of the 4th century BC, consistent with the dating of the underlying levels and the construction of Wall 9 (Appendix A, Table A28).
Floor Construction Level—Post- ca. 350 BC Phase -3.2 Level 2, Batt. 5: FF80-198PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: The battuta at a similar level to the foundation of internal Wall 9, a later addition creating Room 5
5/29/14 10:50 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
50
from the originally larger Room 6, dated post- ca. 350 BC by a mortarium fragment (Mor 06) incorporated into the wall. Assemblage Summary: Small assemblage dated by the stratigraphic relationship with Wall 9. Residual material, ubiquitous in the contexts in Room 6, is represented by the rim fragment of an Ionic-type B2 cup. This is a rare example of an Ionic cup in black-gloss sensu stricto and probably dates to the period of transition from Archaic fine ware to black-gloss wares of the Classical period, in the first quarter of the 5th century BC (Appendix A, Table A29). Interface of Floor Makeup and Archaic Breccia—Mid-4th century BC with Archaic material Phase -3.2 and Phase -5.1 and -4.2 Level 2, Batt. 6: FF80-199PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Continuation of Batt. 5, composed of dense, sandy browndark brown (Munsell 7.5YR 4/4) soil. This level is likely to be close to the original floor or construction level of the farmhouse. Beneath the elevation of Wall 9 and the final phase floor, the material nevertheless dates to post- ca. 350 BC; this may be a result of disturbance in the room for the construction of Wall 9, a consequence of the slope combined with horizontal battute excavation, or mixed collection during quick excavation of this room. Most of the pottery in this battuta came from the southwest along the hill scarp. Quantities of pottery appeared to decrease into the room, where a heavy breccia level was encountered in Batt. 6, continuing into Batt. 7. The breccia is the same as that in the SE Soundings (SE Sounding 1, an Archaic level) and in Room 1 W. Pottery was noticeably less concentrated within the breccia level than in the overlying layer. Assemblage Summary: Although sparse within the context, a relatively large assemblage. Pottery indicates mostly Archaic with some 4th-century BC material, consistent with the interface level between the upper deposits and the breccia level (exactly as described in the excavation notes). Archaic
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 50
fine-ware cups include two Ionic-type B2 cups (BG 08) and a skyphos with offset rim. Early black-gloss includes a kylix dating to around the first half of the 5th century BC (BG 46). Later material is attested by an A-type skyphos base dating to around the middle of the 4th century BC (BG 27), providing a terminus post quem for the context (Appendix A, Table A30). Archaic Breccia Layer—Archaic Phase -5.1 Level 2, Batt. 7: FF80-201PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Archaic breccia above natural. Grayish sandy soil, concentrated in the center of the trench. Toward the margins of the room, the Archaic levels may have been disturbed during construction of the farmhouse wall foundations. Equivalent to the Archaic breccia level in Room 1 W and in the SE Soundings (SE Sounding 1, also Archaic in date). Assemblage Summary: Although there was “very little pottery at this level,” the small assemblage dates to the Archaic period. Small corpus of pottery consisting of two Ionic type B2 cups dating to the Archaic period and three black-gloss fragments from open forms, broadly and only generally datable to the Archaic or Classical period. A single plain-ware sherd completes the assemblage (Appendix A, Table A31). Area 7 A sloping area immediately to the north of the farmhouse and adjacent to Room 3, extra-mural Area 7 is characterized by tile fall and collapse of the northwestern wall of Room 3 into this area, above a pebble surface. Interpreted clearly as a “wash area” by the excavators, with material having moved slightly eastward downslope from the area of Room 3 (Wall 6), much of the material found in Area 7 probably came from the adjacent Room 3 of the farmhouse. This is of particular importance since the terracottas, votive material (a miniature cup), and black-gloss kantharoi from this area, widely distributed, provide evidence for domestic cult. The farmhouse-phase pebble surface, extant in an area adjacent to the tile fall, is underlain
5/29/14 10:50 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
B3
Wall 1 149
Area 7 A3
Aryballos Charcoal
Baulk
A
FF80-70PL FF80-66PL FF80-68PL
Room 3
A’
BG chalice This angle of structure Votive cup lower, possibly of FF80-65P Archaic period
260
A2 Wall 6a
FF BG 50
Area 7
Wall 6b
Wall 7
N
0
2m
Figure 2.34 Plan of Area 7. For section A-A’, see Figure 2.20. (KJS/ICA)
by Archaic breccia, probably the equivalent of that found in Rooms 1 W and 6 and SE Sounding 1. Location and Plan Excavations to the northwest of Room 3 extended to the northern side of grid square A3, beyond the line of Wall 6 and outside the farmhouse structure. It was bisected into two areas by the NW-SE baulk. The area to the northeast of the baulk, adjacent to Room 3 and Wall 1, was not excavated to any significant depth and comprised contexts associated with modern charcoal production. Downslope, the area southwest of the baulk was excavated in the areas adjacent to Rooms 3 and 4.
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 51
51
Excavation and Stratigraphy Excavation of the archaeological deposits in Area 7, the area between the northern side of grid square A3 and the building, was comprised of two battute that encompassed multiple stratigraphic contexts or layers, not distinguished by separate units but nevertheless with discrete collections of materials. In this area, the slope of the hill made it difficult to identify different layers on the basis of their elevation. Archaeological features in Area 7 included tile fall from the farmhouse (Level 1, Batt. 5; Level 2, Batt. 1). Cobble-and-conglomerate collapse from the wall originally separated this area from Room 3 and formed the northwestern external wall of the farmhouse, consisting of “tumbled” stones above the tile fall (in Level 2, Batt. 1), and “a small group of stones . . . just outside the end wall of the building . . . ,” an area that otherwise contained very little archaeological material. The foundation walls of the farmhouse were relatively ephemeral once the superstructure was stripped away—composed of smaller stones on the lower courses, placed directly on the ground surface rather than in any kind of foundation trench or cut for the lowest courses. Once collapsed, the walls eroded away leaving few traces. Pebble surface was extant in patches, particularly in the area adjacent to the cobble-and-conglomerate collapse and in the area between it and the farmhouse structure, the remains of the activity surface of the extra-mural area during the final phases of farmhouse occupation. Underlying all these features, breccia extended across the area following and defining the line of the hill slope, the same level as found under Rooms 1 W and 6, and in the SE Soundings. Excavated Units and Assemblages from Area 7 Tile Fall Phase 1 Parts of Level 1, Batt. 5 and parts of Level 2, Batt. 1: FF80-197PL, FF80-217PL, FF80218P, FF80-220T Excavation and Stratigraphy: Dense and sandy soil, dark yellowish brown Munsell 10YR 4/4 in and beneath the tile fall from the farmhouse in Level 1, Batt. 5 and in the center of the excavated area in Level 2, Batt. 1. During excavation, the tiles, pottery, and terracottas from this area were interpreted as part of a
5/29/14 10:50 AM
52
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
Figure 2.35 View across Room 3 from extra-mural Area 7. In the foreground, Area 7 under excavation, with stones from the collapse of the external wall of Room 3. In the upper left, Wall 1, at the northeastern corner. To the right, Wall 2, with Room 4 off to the right; the extant part of Wall 6 just visible on the extreme right. Between these, the main NW-SE baulk in the center of the photograph, continuing the line of Wall 6; the excavation clearly shows the loss of the external wall of Room 3; looking southeast. (CLL/CW/ICA)
Figure 2.36 Looking upslope and south/southeast across Area 7 to Rooms 3 and 4, showing excavation in the extra-mural Area 7 down to breccia. The SE-NW slope of the farmhouse can be seen clearly from this angle, as can the sharp increase in slope toward the southwest in the area of Room 4, Area 8, and the terminus of Wall 6 (visible just beyond the scale); looking east. (CLL/CW/ICA)
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 52
5/29/14 10:50 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages wash derived from Room 3 of the farmhouse structure to the southeast. Assemblage Summary: Relatively large assemblage dating to the second half of the 4th century BC. Of particular importance in the assemblage: fragments of two black-gloss kantharoi (BG 49 and BG 50) joining pieces from between the cobble-and-conglomerate collapse and the building, three miniature kylikes (Min 02 and Min 06), and an illegible fragment of terracotta (Appendix A, Table A32).
53
Area 7 Phase 0
Topsoil and Overlying Level 1, Batt. 1–4
Tile Fall Level 1, Batt. 5 & Level 2, Batt. 1
-1
Collapse and erosion from Room 3 Black-gloss kantharoi, BG 49 & 50
Wall Collapse
Terracotta plaque, TC 01
Level 2, Batt. 1 & 2
Miniature cups, Min 02 & 06 Miniature krateriskos, Min 08 Miniature banded lid, Min 09
ca. 300 BC
-2
-3
Pebble Surface Level 2, Batt. 1
4th c. BC Wall Collapse Level 2, Batt. 1 and 2: FF80229P; FF80-247PL -4 Excavation and Stratigraphy: An accumulation of 5th c. BC cobble and conglomerate rubble with tile fragments, just beneath the tile fall, deriving from the Archaic Breccia -5 collapse of the farmhouse Level 2, Batt. 1 structure in the area of Room 3. At the time of Archaic excavation it was thought plausible that the tile and Natural wall collapse was in fact an “L-shaped feature” consisting of a curved alignment of small stones Figure 2.37 Area 7 phase diagram. (KPS/ICA) and two parallel rows of tiles disappearing under courtyard pebble pavement, weathered and the NW-SE baulk, preserved length of ca. eroded to be extant only in patches. 1 m. A hard yellowish soil (Munsell 10YR Assemblage Summary: Two pieces of plain 5/4) with many pebbles and some tile ware, including a jug handle (Appendix A, fragments is especially visible around the Table A33). stone feature—this is probably part of the
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 53
5/29/14 10:50 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift NE Corner Phase -1 Level 2, Batt. 1: FF80-228T Excavation and Stratigraphy: Between the feature and the building. Assemblage Summary: Illegible terracotta fragment.
Pebble Surface Phase -3 Level 2, Batt. 1 Excavation and Stratigraphy: A preserved patch of the pebble surface of extra-mural Area 7, adjacent to the wall collapse. Assemblage Summary: A “cup base” recorded in field notes, lot unknown.
NW Corner Phase -1 Level 2, Batt. 1 Excavation and Stratigraphy: Dark brown stony soil in the lowest part of Level 2, Batt. 1. Assemblage Summary: No archaeological material.
A2
Surface: FF80-2PL FF80-198PL
TC frag FF80-4PL
177
Room 4
FF80-171 FF80-170PL
Wall 6a
Between Collapse and Building Phase -1 Level 2, Batt. 1: FF80-230PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: The lower parts of the battuta came down onto a layer of hard yellowish soil (Munsell 10YR 5/4; see above, “Wall Collapse”). Most pottery from the area in between the collapse and the farmhouse, almost none from the section to the northwest. Assemblage Summary: Assemblage includes a fragment of the same kantharos found in the tile fall (BG 50), illustrating the scattering of material in Area 7 and the lack of discrete archaeological contexts (Appendix A, Table A35).
Area 8 An extra-mural area to the southwest of Room 4, Area 8 was an activity area or courtyard outside the
FF80-172PL
Wall 7 Archaic rim FF80-173PL
Wall 6b
Adjacent to Wall Collapse Phase -1 Level 2, Batt. 1: FF80-219T Excavation and Stratigraphy: Adjacent to the wall collapse, just below its elevation, downslope, and beneath the tile fall. Assemblage Summary: Fragment of the terra cotta relief pinax (TC 01) joining other fragments from Area 7. The pinax is a key piece for the interpretation of domestic cult at Fattoria Fabrizio (see p. 335 in Ch. 23, “The Plaque”). It joins FF80-67, FF80-73, FF80-76, and perhaps 216, 219, 220, and 228 as well (Appendix A, Table A34).
Breccia Phase -5 Level 2, Batt. 1 and 2 Excavation and Stratigraphy: A heavy breccia layer encountered in the southwest part contains no material, and this level eventually extended across the entire excavated area: “Today the section nearest the building will be neatened and concluded. We have reached a breccia level in this wash area which contains practically no material . . .” This breccia level represents the base of the stratigraphic sequence in Area 7 and is probably equivalent to that found in Room 1 W, Room 6, and SE Sounding 1. Assemblage Summary: Four coarse ware sherds.
Wall 8
54
N
FF80-142PL
264
0
Area 8
A1
2m
Figure 2.38 Plan of Area 8. (KJS/ICA)
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 54
5/29/14 10:51 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
55
farmhouse, adjacent to Wall 6 but beyond Wall 7. The area contained 4th-century BC pottery along with Late Archaic fine ware. As in Rooms 4–6, the tile fall and any original occupation deposits have eroded away down the scarp. Location and Plan Area 8 lies immediately outside the farmhouse to the southwest and downslope from Room 4. Although outside the farmhouse, the area was demarcated on the northwestern side by a wall representing a continuation of the northwestern wall of the farmhouse (Wall 6), running for ca. 3.2 m. Situated close to the scarp, it is not clear how far this wall originally extended downslope. For an analogous extra-mural activity area, the early-3rd-century BC farmhouse at Pantanello provides a close parallel (see p. 101 in Ch. 4, “The Pantanello farmhouse”). Although the extant section of Wall 7 only runs for ca. 2.3 m, it provides crucial evidence for the fourth external wall of the farmhouse, allowing for the original extent and plan of the southwestern half of the farmhouse to be reconstructed. Excavation and Stratigraphy Area 8 was excavated as an extension of the excavations in Room 4, to the southwest along the line of Wall 6 beyond Wall 7 to the edge of the scarp. Excavated Units and Assemblages from Area 8 Along Wall 6—Late 4th century BC with Late Archaic material Phase 0, with material from Phase -3.1 and Phase -5 Level 2, Batt. 1: FF80-141PL, FF80-142PL. Excavation and Stratigraphy: Excavated from an area along Wall 6, beyond the confines of Room 4, equivalent laterally to Room 4, Level 2, Batt 1; redeposited wash material post-dating the erosion of the final-phase tile fall of the farmhouse. Assemblage Summary: Dated to the late 4th century BC by two plain ware jug rims (PCW 26, ca. 320–80 BC), a Late Corinthian Type A amphora, and Greco-Italic amphora body sherds dated broadly to the 4th or 3rd centuries BC. The rim of an Archaic skyphos (BG 16, dated ca. 550–500 BC) was consistent with the date of the assemblages from the
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 55
Figure 2.39 General view of Area 9 showing tile fall in situ and tile construction. (CLL/CW/ICA)
floor of Room 4 to the northeast (Level 2, Batt. 2 and 3) (Appendix A, Table A36). Area 9 Area 9 is an external roofed addition to the farmhouse, formed by two projecting walls extending from the southeast of Room 1, continuing the lines of the walls of the structure. A tile fall was evident between the two projecting walls, with a layer beneath dating it and the destruction of the farmhouse to ca. 300 BC. Archaic material is also present beneath the tile fall, relating perhaps to the Archaic layer identified in SE Sounding 2 to the southeast. Location and Plan Area 9 was formed by Walls 10 and 11, which project out from the rectangular floor plan of the farmhouse by 1.54 and 1.37 m respectively, at a distance of 4.28 m apart, forming an area of ca. 6.5 m2. Located outside
5/29/14 10:51 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
56
Vase neck
D1
Wall 1
Lekane rims
Room 1
Wall 3a
84
Pottery FF80-84PL
A’
Wall 10 emerged at a lower elevation than Wall 4. A large rectangular conglomerate block (0.80 x 0.35 m) was lying at the end of Wall 10 oriented perpendicular to it, forming an L-shaped terminus. Similar porches have been found at other farmhouses in southern Italy, at Monte Sannace, Minervino, Ascoli Satriano, and further afield in the Greek world at Megara Hyblaea.8
BG & orange w.
Wall 11
Area 9
Excavations and Stratigraphy Area 9 was excavated with the objective of clarifying this end of the building and reaching the Archaic layers identified in Sounding E1. Although no distinct Archaic layer was identified, the assemblage from beneath the tile fall contains Archaic-period pottery. The topsoil yielded an unusually high frequency of pottery above the tile fall (reached in Batt. 4 but excavated as Batt. 5), concentrated in the southern part, around Wall 10 and between Room 1 W and SE Sounding 2, following the slope. This is secondary material overlying the tile fall. Beneath the tile fall, the assemblage can be dated to at least ca. 300 BC by a black-gloss bowl of a type not attested before the 3rd century BC, providing key evidence for the date of destruction of the farmhouse.
98
A
Mortar
Room 1
Bowl
Wall 2 Wall 3b
Wall 10
A)
N
0
2m
Excavated Units and Assemblages from Area 9 Tile Fall Phase -1.2 Level 1, Batt. 5: FF80-233PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Tile fall in Area 9 (Fig. 2.40), with the material concentrated in the southwestern part, near SE Sounding 2, following the slope. Assemblage Summary: Relatively large assemblage, mix of material from Archaic (an Ionic-type B2 cup) to at least the early 4th century BC, with two black-gloss dishes (BG 56 and BG 57) (Appendix A, Table A37).
Area 9
Wall 11
B)
Figure 2.40 A) Plan and B) section A-A’ of Area 9. (KJS/ICA)
the structure to the southeast of Room 1, separated from it by Wall 3 and between the farmhouse and the SE Soundings, there were no traces of an enclosing wall to the southeast of Area 9, though the area had a tile fall; at the time of excavation it was plausibly interpreted as a covered projecting porch. Excavations in Area 9 were separated from those of Sounding E1 by an unexcavated baulk. Constructed of smaller stones, tile, and pithos fragments, the building technique for projecting Walls 10 and 11 is markedly different from that of the farmhouse superstructure. Wall 11 is wider than Wall 1 and abuts Wall 3a at the southeastern corner of the farmhouse.
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 56
Beneath Tile Fall—ca. 300 BC with Archaic Phase -1, with material from Phase -5 Level 1, Batt. 6: FF80-248PL, FF80-251P, FF80-253PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Beneath the tile fall in Area 9, a small battuta in the rectan8
A. Liseno 2007, 112.
5/29/14 10:51 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
57
Figure 2.41 General view of Area 9 looking downslope, showing part of the tile fall adjacent to Wall 11 in the extreme foreground, Wall 10 in the background with a view off the scarp behind; looking southsouthwest. (CLL/CW/ICA)
Figure 2.42 Area 9 showing mortarium in situ in the corner formed by Wall 3 and Wall 10. (CLL/CW/ICA)
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 57
5/29/14 10:51 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
58
Area 9 Phase 0
Tile Fall and Overlying Level 1, Batt. 1–4
Tile Fall
-1
Level 1, Batt. 5
ca. 300 BC
Beneath Tile Fall Level 1, Batt. 6
Level 1, Batt. 6 Bowl, BG 61, ca. 300–260 BC Ionic cup, BG 10; Archaic skyphos with offset rim, BG 13
-2
-3
4th c. BC
-4 5th c. BC
-5
Archaic
Figure 2.43 Area 9 phase diagram. (KPS/ICA)
gle formed by the baulks and the southeastern part of Wall 3 (in the area of Wall 10). The presence of Archaic-period pottery in the assemblage suggests that an underlying level, broadly equivalent to that found in SE Sounding 2 to the south, was at least partially reached in this battuta.
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 58
Assemblage Summary: Dated by a C-type skyphos to the late 4th or early 3rd century BC, and by a black-gloss bowl (BG 61, ca. 300–260 BC) of a type not produced before the early 3rd century BC, this piece is among the latest from Fattoria Fabrizio and suggests that the destruction of the farmhouse took place ca. 300 BC (for discussion of the chronology, see p. 7 in Ch. 1, “Chronology and Site Phasing”). Archaic material is well represented in this assemblage by an Ionic-type B2 cup and two Archaic skyphoi with offset rims (BG 10 and BG 13). A mortarium (Mor 01) was found in the risega of Wall 10 (the small baulk left up against the walls to protect and support them; Fig. 2.42) (Appendix A, Table A38). The SE Soundings Sounding E1 relates to the farmhouse in the upper parts (some material belonging to the 5th century BC), with an Archaic level beneath. SE Sounding 1 has a farmhouse layer and a seemingly distinct 5th-century BC layer beneath this. SE Sounding 2, downslope from Sounding E1, seems to have a shallower farmhouse-phase layer, probably underlain by an Archaic layer like that in Sounding E1.
The farmhouse layers. Relating to the use and/or the abandonment of the farmhouse—probably close to the ground surface level during the farmhouse phase of activity at the site—the tile and stone fragments above may relate to the occupation phase, accumulated during the use-life of the farmhouse, or its destruction and abandonment. Unfortunately, no quantification of pottery and debris was undertaken during the excavation, and tiles were sampled. Evidence for the 5th-century BC layer? SE Sounding 1 is of particular interest for the stratigraphy of the area outside the farmhouse. This sounding shows a tile layer consisting of the types used for the roof of the
5/29/14 10:51 AM
A
A’
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
124
Vase neck BG and orange w.
Archaic
Sounding E1
Area 9
Bowl
181
SE Sounding 2
Wall 10
SE Sounding 1 129
59
deep (Fig. 2.44). The Archaic layer of breccia was also apparent in Rooms 1 W and 6 of the farmhouse, and in the extra-mural Area 7 on the other side of the farmhouse. Sounding E1 Location and plan. A sounding in square E1 (Sounding E1) was undertaken to determine the nature of the stratigraphy to the southeast of the farmhouse. A 1-m-wide baulk running NE-SW was left between the sounding in E1 and excavation above the farmhouse in D1. The sounding was 2 m wide and 3.4 m long. Sounding E1 was excavated prior to both of the SE Soundings, which clarified the stratigraphic sequence in this area.
N
Excavation and stratigraphy. The stratigraphy consisted of two basic units, beginning with a layer with some tiles and stones toward the base of Level 2, Batt. 4, dating to the 4th century BC, and relating A) to the occupation and/or the abandonment of the farmhouse. Beneath this, an Archaic context (in 2m 0 Level 3) forms the base of the sequence, with a gradual decrease in pottery and few Sounding E1 SE Sounding 1 or no tiles in this layer. This breccia level begins in Level 2, following the slope 3A 3B and higher up in the northern part of the trench. The margins of this level and its B) slope can be seen in Figure 2.44—this Figure 2.44 A) Plan and B) section A-A’ of the SE Soundings. (KJS/ICA) accounts for admixture of Archaic and 4th-century BC phase material on either Hellenistic farmhouse, with Archaic and 5th-century side, in Level 2, Batt. 3 and Level 3, Batt. 1. This is the same Archaic layer encountered at the base of SE BC material mixed in (from the upper layers, in which Archaic-period material is ubiquitous), and beneath Sounding 1, underlying Rooms 1 W and 6 (the only places inside the footprint of the farmhouse where a this, a level dating to the 5th century BC. complete stratigraphic sequence was achieved), and in The Archaic layers.These layers in Sounding E1 and Area 7 to the northwest of the farmhouse. SE Sounding 2 are probably equivalent to the layers beneath the floor surface in Rooms 4, 5, and 6. This Excavated units and assemblages from Sounding E1. Level 2, Batt. 4—Late 4th century BC, post- ca. was likely a pre-existing level cut into for construc330 BC tion of the farmhouse floors, representing the makeup Phase -2 and/or -1 for the farmhouse-phase activity surfaces, both inside Level 2, Batt. 4: FF80-100PL and, as SE Sounding 1 suggests, outside the footprint of the farmhouse structure. SE Sounding 1 went quite A)
B)
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 59
5/29/14 10:51 AM
60
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
Figure 2.45 General view of Sounding E1 (foreground), with yellowish Archaic breccia at base; SE Sounding 1 (left) and SE Sounding 2 (downslope) with the edge of Area 9 and part of its tile fall visible to the lower right; looking south-southwest. (CLL/CW/ICA)
Figure 2.46 View looking northwest along the main baulk with Sounding E1 (right) and SE Sounding 2 (left) in the foreground. Note the clean sections, lacking tile fall typical of the sections in the rooms; looking northwest. (CLL/CW/ICA)
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 60
5/29/14 10:51 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
61
Sounding E1 Phase 0
Topsoil/Colluviation
-1
ca. 300 BC
-2
Tile fall and debris from farmhouse Tile Fall Ground surface and below
(No clean division of contexts) Level 2, Batt. 4 C-type skyphos, BG 40, ca. 330–300 BC Ionic cup, BG 05/06
Level 2, Batt. 4
-3
4th c. BC
Farmhouse construction? C-type skyphos, ca. 420–400 BC
-4
Level 3, Batt. 1
5th c. BC
Red-figure body sherd, second half of the 4th c. BC Black-figure lekythos, BF 01, ca. 520–470 BC
Archaic Breccia Part of Level 3, Batt. 1
Ionic B2 cup, BG 02; Archaic skyphos with offset rim, BG 22
-5
Archaic fine ware
Archaic
Figure 2.47 Sounding E1 phase diagram. (KPS/ICA)
Excavation and Stratigraphy: Soil color remained consistent with previous battute, and some small stones were mixed in. There were no tiles to speak of, but still a large quantity of pottery, including some Ionic cup rims. The depth of the trench at the end of this battuta was 0.9 m below topsoil. At the northeastern end of the trench, some larger rounded stones appeared and were left
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 61
in situ, with more small and rounded stones and some roof tiles mixed in. This material may represent a layer of debris marking the ground surface during the final stages of the farmhouse. This battuta inadvertently extended into the underlying layer, Archaic in date, which may account for the presence of Archaic fine ware in the assemblage.
5/29/14 10:51 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
62
Assemblage Summary: Fine ware dating to the late 4th century BC, with a C-type skyphos (BG 40, ca. 330–300 BC) providing a terminus post quem of ca. 330 BC for this context. This was accompanied by a black-gloss cup/ one-handler dated to around the third quarter of the 4th century BC. Another C-type skyphos dating to the late 5th century BC (ca. 420–400 BC) is of particular interest since it shows the presence of material of a Classical-period phase distinct from that of the 4th-century BC farmhouse and from the Archaic and early-5th-century BC phase. A single Ionic-type B2 cup (BG 05/BG 06) probably represents material from the underlying layer of Archaic date, which was dug into during excavation of this battuta (Appendix A, Table A39). Level 3, Batt. 1—Archaic, post- ca. 520 BC Phase -5.1 Level 3, Batt. 1: FF80-101P; FF80-102PL; FF80-103P Excavation and Stratigraphy: Archaic layer beneath the level of tile and stone debris in the battuta above. Change in level is denoted by a slightly brighter soil color (Munsell 10YR 3/6, dark yellowish brown), sandy in texture with some small stones. This new soil level was actually cut into during the last battuta. As this battuta proceeded to the northeast, a breccia layer containing a considerable quantity of pottery was encountered. The breccia level began ca. 0.15 m from the southwestern end of the trench. Except for the tile left in the rock group to the northeast, no other tiles were found. Assemblage Summary: Dated to post- ca. 520 BC by a black-figure lekythos (BF 01, ca. 520–470 BC), the fine ware is predominantly Archaic, with Ionic-type B2 cups (BG 02), a skyphos with offset rim, and a closed form (BG 22) along with banded, plain, and cooking ware. Because of the battuta method of excavation, some mixing of material with the overlying layer (relating to the farmhouse phase) seems to have occurred. This archaeological layer was not differen-
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 62
tiated precisely, some in the last battuta and likely some later material here too: a red figure body sherd from a closed form dated to the second half of the 4th century BC, a black-gloss jug (ca. 400–320 BC), a banded ware jug (BW 31, ca. 375–270 BC), and a 4th-century BC chytra (CkW 26) stand out in an otherwise Archaic assemblage. These clearly represent material from a 4th-century BC phase, and are likely to relate to the overlying context, though this cannot be demonstrated on the basis of the excavation documentation (Appendix A, Table A40). Level 3, Batt. 3*—Undated (*Level 3, Batt. 2 was inadvertently omitted) Excavation and Stratigraphy: A shallow battuta, continuation of the olive soil with pebbles in Batt. 1, but the frequency of pottery decreased drastically. This battuta was completed in half of the trench; only a few sherds were found (FF80-104PL) and the sounding was ended. Assemblage Summary: Small corpus of undateable plain- and cooking-ware sherds (Appendix A, Table A41). SE Sounding 1 Location and plan. SE Sounding 1 was ca. 2.0 x 3.4 m and located to the southeast of Sounding E1, separated from it by a 2-m-wide baulk. Excavation and stratigraphy. Excavated to a depth of ca. 1.2 m (Fig. 2.44), SE Sounding 1 provides a significantly deeper section than the farmhouse (3A and 3B beneath the level of the floor in the farmhouse shown in the section). During excavation it was observed that most of the pottery from this sounding came from the northern part of the trench nearest to Sounding E1. In contrast to Sounding E1, the stratification in the sounding consists of 5th-century BC layers beneath a tile fall or scatter of material relating to the occupation and/or destruction of the farmhouse. The level of deposit relating to the farmhouse is more apparent here than in Sounding E1, evidenced by tile in Level 3, Batt. 2 of the same type used in the farmhouse present in Level 3, Batt. 3. Associated with this (and perhaps antedating it), pottery of the 5th century BC provided
5/29/14 10:51 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
63
SE Sounding 1 Phase 0
-1
Topsoil/Colluviation
Debris from Farmhouse
Level 3, Batt. 2 Small bowl, BG 63, ca. 350–280 BC
Level 3, Batt. 2
ca. 300 BC
Tile fall and debris from farmhouse
-2
-3
Cup-skyphos, BG 43, ca. 500–450 BC Ionic cup
4th c. BC
-4
Level 3, Batt. 3
5th c. BC
Level 3, Batt. 3 Red-figure lekythos, RF 01, ca. 480–420 BC A-type skyphos, ca. 460–400 BC
-5
Archaic
Figure 2.48 SE Sounding 1 phase diagram. (KPS/ICA)
a terminus post quem of ca. 425 BC for this layer. In the battuta beneath this, the pottery also belongs to the 5th century BC, including a red-figure lekythos. SE Sounding 1 illustrates nicely the ubiquitous Archaic pottery present in the upper layers above the farmhouse layers across the site (down to the tile fall associated with the farmhouse). An Ionic cup fragment from the topsoil confirmed the presence of Archaic
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 63
period material on the surface. Another in Level 3, Batt. 2 (the same level as the tiles from the farmhouse?) tends to indicate that residual material in the general area, of Archaic date, was widely redeposited above the contexts formed out of the destruction of the farmhouse. Evidence for gravel pavement dating from the Archaic to Early Classical period extended at least this far to the southeast of the area of the later farmhouse.
5/29/14 10:51 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
64
Excavated units and assemblages from SE Sounding 1. Level 3, Batt. 2—Post- ca. 350 BC with Late Archaic and late 5th century BC material Phase -2 or -3, with material from Phase -4.1 Level 3, Batt. 2: FF80-124PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Munsell 10YR 3/6 dark yellowish brown soil with small rocks and pebbles. Assemblage Summary: Roof tile fragments of a similar type to those used for the roof of the farmhouse (AT1 or AC1, at least four in the sample), would indicate that at least some material from the destruction of the farmhouse was deposited as far southeast as this area, some 7 m or so beyond the southeastern wall of the farmhouse. This was supported by the fine ware: a blackgloss small bowl (BG 63, 350–280 BC) provides a terminus post quem of ca. 350 BC for the level of debris. Two Ionic cups and two black-gloss cup-skyphoi (BG 43) dating to around the first half of the 5th century BC are residual, and derive either from the overlying secondary material or from the underlying context. A C-type skyphos dating to the last quarter of the 5th century BC corresponds to a distinct period not otherwise represented—in this respect like the black-gloss from Sounding E1, Level 2, Batt. 4 (Appendix A, Table A42). Level 3, Batt. 3—5th century BC, post- ca. 460 BC
Phase -4 Level 3, Batt. 3: FF80-125PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: The lowermost context in SE Sounding 1 was described as containing much breccia but a decrease in pottery. Most of the pottery from this sounding came from the northern part of the trench nearest to Sounding E1. This is perhaps a discrete 5th-century BC context, beneath a level with tiles (Batt. 2). Assemblage Summary: An Attic red-figure lekythos (RF 01, ca. 480–420 BC) and an A-type skyphos (BG 25, ca. 460–400 BC, joining a sherd in Batt. 2), in a small corpus of plain, banded, coarse, and cooking wares,
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 64
only very generally dated. Body sherds of two Type B amphorae (although dated to the 4th century BC, these could be earlier, in the 5th century BC) (Appendix A, Table A43). SE Sounding 2 Location and plan. SE Sounding 2, 2 m in width and extending for 3.95 m, was located directly to the southwest of Sounding E1, separated by a 1-m-wide baulk. Excavation and stratigraphy. SE Sounding 2 had two general layers, with a soil color change to dark yellowish brown and more sandy consistency in Level 3. This may be an Archaic layer, to judge from Sounding E1 and SE Sounding 1, but the pottery is not particularly diagnostic chronologically. Downslope from Sounding E1, the upper layers relating to the farmhouse may be thinner here and represented only by the first battuta in Level 2. Excavated units and assemblages from SE Sounding 2. Level 2, Batt. 1, Beneath topsoil—ca. 300 BC Phase -2 or -1 Level 2, Batt. 1: FF80-147PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: Layer beneath topsoil, the soil dark yellowish brown (Munsell 10YR 3/4) with many stones and roots. The depth at this point is 35 cm. Assemblage Summary: Dated directly by an A-type skyphos belonging to the first half of the 4th century BC, the context is likely to post-date the farmhouse on the basis of the stratigraphy apparent in the adjacent soundings. A banded small bowl (BW 15) seems to date to the 3rd century BC and may belong to the very final phase of the farmhouse. An Archaic kotyle (BG 18) attests to the presence of residual material, as is found in upper layers across most of the site (Appendix A, Table A44). Level 2, Batt. 2—Archaic or early 5th century BC? Phase -5.1 Level 2, Batt. 2: FF80-148PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: The soil is still dark yellowish brown, but with fewer stones. There were no features, but an increase in the frequency of pottery compared to the over-
5/29/14 10:51 AM
The Rooms, Areas, and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
65
SE Sounding 2 Phase 0
-1
Topsoil/Colluviation
Tile fall absent (did not extend out this far) Banded small bowl, post- ca. 300 BC Kotyle, BG 18
Beneath Topsoil Level 2, Batt. 1
ca. 300 BC
-2
-3
Level 2, Batt. 2
4th c. BC
-4 5th c. BC
Archaic Breccia Level 3, Batt. 1
-5
Archaic Breccia Level 3, Batt. 2
Archaic
Figure 2.49 SE Sounding 2 phase diagram. (KPS/ICA)
lying Batt. 1. This battuta reached a depth of ca. 0.55 m from the surface of topsoil. Assemblage Summary: Archaic skyphos with offset rim with two sherds of 5th-century BC black-gloss from open forms. A banded one-handler and a chytra may belong to the 4th century BC, later material from the overlying layers, not differentiated (Appendix A, Table A45).
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 65
Level 3, Batt. 1—Undated Phase -5 Level 3, Batt. 1: FF80-149PL Excavation and Stratigraphy: By the end of Level 2, Batt. 2, the soil had changed to dark yellowish brown (Munsell 10YR 3/6), more sandy in texture, but still with many stones. As work progressed to the east, the sandy yellowish brown soil contained many
5/29/14 10:51 AM
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
66
Figure 2.50 General view of NE Soundings 1 and 2, down to natural deposits; looking upslope northwest. (CLL/CW/ICA)
pebbles. There appeared to be a decrease in pottery; depth 75 cm. Assemblage Summary: Small group of banded, plain, and cooking wares, only very broadly datable from the Archaic to Hellenistic periods (Appendix A, Table A46). Level 3, Batt. 2—Undated Phase -5 Excavation and Stratigraphy: Continuation of the sandy yellowish brown soil with pebbles. Proceeding to the east, the soil was thick with pebbles and stones. Assemblage Summary: No pottery or finds. The NE Soundings The NE soundings show the extent of material relating to the collapse of the farmhouse, extending ca. 5 m upslope and to the northeast of the farmhouse. The
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 66
two soundings were located along a line to the northwest of the lateral NE-SW baulk in squares C-3 and D-3 (Fig. 2.51). NE Sounding 1, more or less a northeastern continuation of the excavations in the area of Room 2, revealed two basic stratigraphic layers. The base of the second layer contained material that was interpreted as rubble from the collapse of the farmhouse immediately to the southwest, in the area of Room 2. NE Sounding 2, further to the northeast, indicates the limits of the collapse of the farmhouse. In contrast to NE Sounding 2, there was almost no material at all in a battuta beneath the topsoil. NE Sounding 1 Location and plan. NE Sounding 1 is located to the north of the main NE-SW baulk, upslope from Room 2, with dimensions 2.0 x 2.4 m and a maximum depth of 0.8 m at the northeastern end.
5/29/14 10:51 AM
The Rooms, Areas, D4 and Soundings: Excavated Units and Assemblages
67
C’ +93
D3
NE Sounding 2
C3 FF80-81PL sherds FF80-82PL sherds Bronze z sheet
21
NE Sounding 1
B
Mortar fragment plaque
Wall 1 A)
C
Room 2
N
0
1A 1B
C2
B’
2m
NE Sounding 2
NE Sounding 1 3A
B)
Figure 2.51 A) Plan and B) section C-C’ of the NE Soundings.
Excavation and stratigraphy.The stratification of the deposits in this area is relatively straightforward— topsoil with a layer of darker soil beneath, the lower parts of which contained significant quantities of archaeological material, interpreted as rubble from the collapse of the farmhouse (Fig. 2.51).
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 67
Assemblages. The concentration of material—tile, pottery, and a small piece of bronze sheet—at the base of the excavated sequence Level 2, Batt. 2, was interpreted as rubble from the collapse of the farmhouse. The only piece of fine ware from these contexts, the base of a stemless kylix (BG 47), dated ca. 430–350
5/29/14 10:51 AM
68
Elisa Lanza Catti and Keith Swift
BC,
relates chronologically to the earlier phase of the farmhouse, around or shortly after its construction. Two small bowls/ one-handlers are among the small corpus of plain and coarse ware. Tile fragments of the AT or AC1 type (see Ch. 25 and Table 25.1), of Hellenistic date, probably relate directly to the collapse of the roof of the farmhouse. NE Sounding 2 Location and plan. Located in square D-3, higher up the slope from the farmhouse and from NE Sounding 1, this sounding is of interest because it suggests the limits of the archaeological extent of the farmhouse. Excavated to a depth of ca. 0.5 m, it yielded no archaeological material save for a single sherd of cooking ware. Lying upslope from the structure, it was not subjected to post-depositional accumulation of material from the abandoned farmhouse. Excavation and stratigraphy. This second sounding was made after NE Sounding 1 with dimensions of 2.0 x 3.4 m, consisting of a single battuta beneath topsoil to assess the nature of the archaeological deposits in this area. Assemblage. The only find from this sounding was a single sherd of cooking ware, not chronologically diagnostic.
NE Sounding 1
NE Sounding 2
Topsoil/Colluviation
Topsoil/Colluviation
Beneath Topsoil Level 2, Batt. 1
Beneath Topsoil Level 2, Batt. 1
Phase 0
-1
ca. 300 BC
-2
-3
4th c. BC
-4 5th c. BC
-5
Archaic
W Sounding Widening the geomorphological scope of the excavations beyond the immediate Figure 2.52 NE Soundings 1 and 2 phase diagram. (KPS/ICA) area of the farmhouse, the W Sounding at the base of the slope and at the margin of the Venella was undertaken with an awareness of the relationships valley floor was undertaken to attempt to locate tombs between farmhouses, tombs, and roads in the Metaassociated with the farmhouse, in what was thought to pontine chora. This demonstrates how the objectives of be a promising location. Although no burials came to the excavation were, already in 1980, viewing individual light, the W Sounding elucidated the nature of the ar- sites within a wider archaeological landscape. chaeological stratigraphy at the base of the slope, and
FF_02_rooms_30jan14.indd 68
5/29/14 10:52 AM
3
Fattoria Fabrizio Site Assemblage Keith Swift
Class/Ware 01
Estimated Vessels Represented
% Estimated Vessels Represented
Count
%
Black-figure
1
0.10%
1
0.02%
Red-figure
4
0.30%
5
0.11%
336
23.80%
824
17.49%
02
Archaic and Black-gloss Fine Ware
03
Miniatures
04
Banded Ware
05
Wheel-made Painted Ware
06
Plain and Coarse Ware
07 08 09 10 11
Opus Doliare
12
Terracotta
13 14
9
0.60%
49
1.04%
176
12.50%
320
6.79%
2
0.10%
3
0.06%
333
23.60%
1580
33.55%
Louteria
2
0.10%
4
0.08%
Mortaria
15
1.10%
27
0.57%
Cooking Ware
346
24.50%
1180
25.05%
Transport Amphorae
103
7.30%
234
4.97%
8
0.60%
165
3.50%
10
0.70%
143
3.04%
Loom Weights
2
0.10%
2
0.04%
Roof Tiles
0
0.00%
88
1.87%
15
Metals
6
0.40%
24
0.51%
16
Coins
1
0.10%
1
0.02%
1354
100.00%
4652
100.00%
Table 3.1 Quantification of the Fattoria Fabrizio site assemblage by pottery and finds classes.
In terms of scope and variety, the site assemblage from Fattoria Fabrizio represents all of the major classes of pottery and finds of the period present in the Metaponto survey, and in the region generally. Black-gloss fine wares, ubiquitous on Classical to Early Hellenistic sites in the Metapontino (as in most areas of the Mediterranean), provide the main means of dating the contexts (see p. 7 in Ch. 1, “Chronology and Site Phasing”). The full range of common cup forms are represented, C-type and A-type skyphoi predominating. It is clear from their common presence at Fattoria Fabrizio that these wares, and cups in particular, were an integral part of the domestic repertoire even at economically quite modest farmhouses like Fattoria Fabrizio. A few fragments of black- and red-figure (Ch. 12), including Attic and southern Italian, are also repre-
FF_03_siteassemblage_31jan14.indd 69
sented in the site assemblage. These demonstrate that figured wares were a small but nonetheless significant component of the domestic repertoire from farm houses of the 4th century BC in the Metapontino. Archaic fine ware, which is banded or semi-slipped in contrast to almost entirely slipped black-gloss fine ware of the early 5th century BC and later, provides the major source of evidence for activity at the site in the 6th and early 5th centuries BC. As elsewhere in the region, the most common and recognizable forms are cups, the Ionic type B2 and Archaic skyphos with offset rim. As at most sites in the chora, partially slipped banded wares and plain wares (undecorated “common ware,” Ch. 15 and Ch. 17) were an integral part and the major component of the domestic repertoire, accounting for almost half of the pottery assemblage from Fattoria Fabrizio (Table 3.1). These occur in rela-
5/29/14 11:05 AM
Keith Swift
70
variant of banded ware associated with figured patterns (commonly known as stile 01 Figured Wares 5 0.4% 6 0.1% misto)—are very unusual. No 02 Archaic Cups 66 4.9% 143 3.1% comparable examples were 03 Archaic Other 5 0.4% 14 0.3% found in the survey of the 04 Black-gloss Cups 96 7.1% 300 6.6% chora. This ware was typical Fine Ware 05 Black-gloss Dishes and Bowls 16 1.2% 43 0.9% of indigenous pottery rep06 Black-gloss Open Forms 115 8.5% 272 6.0% ertoires, representing a different ceramic tradition and 07 Black-gloss Closed Forms 38 2.8% 52 1.1% technique, and the pieces All 341 25.2% 830 18.2% from Fattoria Fabrizio are 08 Miniatures 9 0.7% 49 1.1% extra-regional in origin (see 09 Small Bowls/One-handlers 100 7.4% 155 3.4% p. 114 in Ch. 5, “Non-Greek 10 Open Forms 109 8.1% 223 4.9% Interactions: Evidence of the Plain and 11 Closed Forms 135 10.0% 218 4.8% Banded Wheel-made Painted Ware”). 12 Lids 10 0.7% 18 0.4% Wares Substantial pithoi and ba13 Unidentified 172 7.4% 1317 28.9% sins of the opus doliare class, All 526 38.8% 1931 42.3% including the pithoi found 14 Wheel-made Painted Ware 2 0.1% 3 0.1% in situ at Fattoria Fabrizio, 15 Open Forms 38 2.8% 71 1.6% attest directly to the on16 Closed Forms 187 13.8% 683 15.0% site storage of foodstuffs in Cooking 17 Lids 21 1.6% 35 0.8% Rooms 1 and 2 of the farmWare 18 Unidentified 100 7.4% 391 8.6% house (see Ch. 5). All 346 25.7% 1180 25.9% Used primarily for the 19 Transport Amphorae 103 7.6% 234 5.1% inter- and intraregional distribution of wine and olive 20 Opus Doliare 8 0.6% 165 3.6% oil along with other com21 Terracottas 10 0.7% 143 3.1% modities, transport ampho22 Loom Weights 2 0.1% 2 0.0% rae represent a distinct class 5 0.4% 24 0.5% 23 Metal Finds of defined types (Ch. 21). In 24 Coins 1 0.1% 1 0.0% the contexts of Rooms 1 and Total 1354 100.0% 4652 100.0% 2, they probably represent Table 3.2 Quantification of the Fattoria Fabrizio site assemblage by pottery and finds classes. For secondary usage for wine and a detailed breakdown of these categories, see Appendix B, Table B1. olive oil storage. But they may also constitute direct tively fine fabrics that can approach the quality of the evidence for the importation of amphora-borne comfine wares, and include small bowls as well as closed modities to Fattoria Fabrizio via interregional trade jug-like vessels for containing liquids. Larger bowls networks, part of a broader economic system of disfor food preparation were produced in these wares, tribution that linked the Metapontine chora with the along with “specialized” forms such as mortaria, often wider Mediterranean world. mold-made (Ch. 19), and larger basins (louteria, Ch. Not part of the functional repertoire of vessels 18), which were probably used for washing rather than for the storage, preparation, and serving of food and cooking. The plain wares include non-cooking ware drink, the miniatures (Ch. 14) probably had a votive vessels in coarse fabrics typical of cooking ware forms, or sacred function and are of particular interest for the an occasional but consistent feature of Metapontine study of domestic cult at Fattoria Fabrizio (see Ch. 6). pottery assemblages in most periods. Archaeological finds other than pottery were relaTwo fragments of wheel-made painted ware—a tively rare at Fattoria Fabrizio. The site yielded terraEstimated Vessels Represented
FF_03_siteassemblage_31jan14.indd 70
% Estimated Vessels Represented
Count
%Count
5/29/14 11:05 AM
Fattoria Fabrizio Site Assemblage cotta figurines (Ch. 23), two loom weights (Ch. 24), a very restricted number of metal and stone objects (Ch. 26 and Ch. 28), and a single bronze Metapontine coin (Ch. 27). Although they do not occur in large numbers, the terracottas provide a key source of evidence for domestic cult at Fattoria Fabrizio (see Ch. 6 and Ch. 23). The small number of loom weights, and absence of lamps and nails (common finds in excavated farmhouses or dwellings in general) is unusual, suggesting a deliberate abandonment and intentional removal of these objects from the farmhouse (see p. 93 in Ch. 4, “Circumstances of Abandonment”).
tion of: (i) total count of sherds; (ii) count of rims, bases, handles, and body sherds (RBHS), quantified separately; (iii) conjoining as well as non-joining sherds which may nevertheless relate to the same vessel (the “sherd family”) and therefore allow the calculation of estimated vessels represented (EVRep).1 Estimated vessels represented (EVRep). As outlined by Orton, Tyers, and Vince, estimated vessels represented, or EVRep, is a suitable index for the quantification of the relatively small, discrete assemblages from closed and well-stratified contexts like those from Fattoria Fabrizio. EVRep is calculated by counting all sherds from the same sherd family as one, differentiating groups of sherds as far as possible and practical. It is therefore always lower than raw count of all sherds, but tends to be higher than a strict minimum number of individuals (MNI).
Quantification of the Pottery and Finds Quantification allows for characterization of the site assemblage not only in terms of the range of classes and types represented (see Ch. 12–Ch. 28), but also their relative frequencies. Quantification of the site assemblage of pottery and finds is shown in Appen- 1 Orton/Tyers/Vince 1993. dix B, Table B1. This gives a detailed breakdown of the forms and types identified in specialist study and presented in the catalogs, as well as the quantifiFunctional Group cation categories used for (i) comparisons of the Drinking assemblages from the room in the farmhouse, Drinking service (ii) quantification of the phases, and (iii) comTable Vessels Food service parisons with the survey assemblages (see below, Service p. 79, “Fattoria Fabrizio and the Survey AssemAll blages”). Preparation/cooking Twenty-three categories were used for the Food Preparation Preparation quantification of pottery and finds from FattoAll ria Fabrizio (Table 3.2), formulated to reflect the Domestic storage basic shapes and types as well as to allow for the Transport/storage inference of function from the assemblages. This Storage All formulation aims to strike a balance between detailed classifications, useful in the study and Personal Other interpretation of single classes of archaeologiVotive/ritual cal materials, and much larger and more gener- All attributed al groupings by class or function. Essentially, it Unidentified aims to present categories that can show details All pottery of forms and morphological groups, classes, and Coin wares, as well as basic functional groups in the Finds Metal objects same format and at a glance. Loom weights
Counts. Detailed, class-by-class quantification was undertaken with the individual class-specific studies. This was broadly consistent with the general methods proposed by Orton, Tyers, and Vince and involved the class-by-class quantifica-
FF_03_siteassemblage_31jan14.indd 71
71
Total Pottery and Finds
Count
%Count
443
15.2%
81
2.8%
55
1.9%
186
6.4%
765
26.3%
1179
40.5%
141
4.8%
1320
45.4%
350
12.0%
234
8.0%
584
20.1%
45
1.5%
196
6.7%
2910
100.0%
1624 4534 1 7 2 4544
Environmental (bones/shells)
60
Tile samples
88
Table 3.3 Site assemblage of pottery by functional groups.
5/29/14 11:05 AM
72
Keith Swift
Other quantification indices. EVRep approaches, but can never truly reach, a minimum number of individuals (MNI), an idealized index which it is only very rarely possible to calculate in large excavated assemblages composed of fragmentary pieces. Another method of quantification used for individual classes counted the number of rims, bases, and handles only (RBH), using these as an index like minimum number of individuals but not including body sherds. This can provide a useful index for certain classes (transport amphorae in particular), where rims, bases and handles are distinctive, but a high level of standardization means that body sherds cannot be differentiated with certainty. Typological number of individuals (TNI) was also calculated based on the detailed classifications of each class of pottery,2 but was found to be a much less useful index than EVRep for quantifying the pottery from the excavations. In general terms, each of these indices tended to show similar trends in the site assemblage, and the authors therefore decided to use EVRep and raw counts as the two main indices for presenting the quantification. Quantification of Pottery Shapes The major part of the finds yielded by the excavation consists of fragments of pottery, with over two thousand collected during the course of excavation. Some shapes were particularly common at Fattoria Fabrizio, as noted above: black-gloss skyphoi and dishes, banded and plain ware one-handlers, banded jugs, plain basins, mortaria, chytrai, and lids (Appendix B, Table B1). As at two other farmhouses excavated by ICA, Fattoria Stefan and Sant’Angelo Grieco, the most common shape was the small bowl/one-handler. Though they are in fact two distinct shapes, for practical purposes the small bowl and one-handler are combined since distinguishing them depends solely on the presence of a handle. Most were produced in banded ware and to a lesser extent plain ware, supplemented by a few black-gloss examples. These vessels could have been used for a range of activities, including food consumption, dipping, drinking, or simply as small multifunctional containers. They vary in size, which is consistent with different functions, though no clear correlation has as yet been identified.3 There are no 2 These
vary class by class due to differences in classification and categorization, and the degree to which the morphological variation results in the classification of distinct types. 3 The rims of small bowls/one-handlers range in diameter from 5.5 to
FF_03_siteassemblage_31jan14.indd 72
significant morphological differences between the plain ware and the banded ware examples. Black-gloss examples tend to be broader and deeper, and probably had ring feet rather than the flat or slightly concave undersides typical of the banded and plain ware forms. Drinking cups consist mostly of black-gloss skyphoi, with at least 24 examples of C-type and five of A-type (the type designations originally deriving from Archaic antecedents of the shapes in the Corinthian and Attic traditions, neither of which are represented at Fattoria Fabrizio). Two small kantharoi may have had a ritual function, suggested by their location near other objects with a possible ritual function (see p. 120 in Ch. 6, “Kantharoi and Domestic Cults”). Dishes are less common than cups, and are attested only in the black-gloss version. Banded bowls (e.g., BW 16) may have had an analogous function, considering their morphology, size, and internal black dipping.4 Three small black-gloss bowls with deeper bodies were probably also part of the food service equipment of the farmhouse. A banded lekane was perhaps used as a larger serving vessel. Among the vessels used for pouring, there was a banded olpe, a banded oinochoe, a plain amphoriskos, and three smaller black-gloss juglets. Two large pithoi were set in the floor in the northern corner of Room 2, while a third one stood in the western corner of Room 1. Three Greco-Italic amphorae were kept in Rooms 1 and 6. Rooms 1, 2, and 6 as well as Area 9 yielded a great number of pottery containers useful for storage and food preparation. In these spaces the plain ware was particularly abundant and consisted mostly of jugs and dinoi, large and deep containers likely used for short-term storage and preservation of liquids. The dinoi were produced in banded ware (BW 22–BW 24) and in plain ware (PCW 24) and examples were found in the two storerooms (Rooms 1 and 2). The shape might also have been used as a mixing bowl, as attested by analogous vessels discovered in some Apulian funerary contexts; dinoi also appear to have been used as kraters in funerary rituals.5 A very common vessel at Fattoria Fabrizio, as in the Metapontino in general, was the plain basin, a very large and deep handled container with an elongated lip. This broad container was probably multifunctional,
10.2 cm (banded ware), 7.0 to 13.0 cm (plain ware), and 10.2 to 13.0 cm (black-gloss). 4 The banded bowl from Room 1 W can be compared with the analogous black-gloss dish from the same area, BG 59. 5 See, for example, Antichi Peucezi, 58, fig. 37 (plain “krater” from Bitonto, T 4/1982, end of the 5th–early 4th c. BC).
5/29/14 11:05 AM
Fattoria Fabrizio Site Assemblage
73
and may have been used for food prepaRoom Phase Context Chronology ration, domestic short-term storage, and -1 Tile Fall (Level 2, Batt. 1–2) Final-phase tile fall, post- ca. 300 BC food service. Nearly a third of plain ware 1 W Floor Assemblage (Level 2, -2 Post- ca. 320 BC rims belong to basins: at least 40 individBatt. 3) ual vessels, among which two (BW 20 -1 Tile Fall (Level 2, Batt. 1–2) Final-phase tile fall, post- ca. 300 BC and BW 21) seem to have had banded 1 E Floor Assemblage (Level 2, -2 Post- ca. 325 BC Batt. 3) decoration. Five examples are clearly con-1 Tile Fall (Level 2, Batt. 1) Final-phase tile fall, post- ca. 300 BC temporary with the 4th-century BC occu2 NE -2 On Floor (Level 2, Batt. 2–3) Floor assemblage pation, and some of these are especially well preserved, particularly a basin from -1 Tile Fall (Level 2, Batt. 1–3) Final-phase tile fall, post- ca. 300 BC 2 SE Room 6 (PCW 08). -2 Floor Level (Level 2, Batt. 4) Floor assemblage The presence at the site of a dozen morTile Fall on Floor Level (Level -1/-2 Post- ca. 330 BC 2, Batt. 1–3) taria (Ch. 19) suggests an important func2 SW Floor Level Under Collapse Post- ca. 330 BC with first half of 4th c. tional differentiation of these vessels from -2 BC and late 5th c. BC (Level 2, Batt. 4) other large bowls. They were probably ca. 300 BC*, post- ca. 330 BC with Late used for food preparation and to perform -2 Below Fall (Level 2, Batt. 1) Archaic and Classical different operations mainly on the cereals, 2 NW -2/-3 Floor and Makeup (Level 2, such as crushing, soaking, washing, drying, to -5 Batt. 2) and the kneading of foodstuffs. Mortaria of the “Corinthian” type (Mor 01–Mor Table 3.4 List of contexts used for quantification of Rooms 1 and 2. 03) were perhaps used for cheese making, since they have spouts that may have served to drain (ii) Storage containers, including transport the whey. They were probably not suitable for grinding amphorae; cereals, since they are often too shallow with a relatively (iii) Vessels for food preparation, including thin floor. Fattoria Fabrizio yielded at least four quite cooking wares and large containers for mixwell-preserved Corinthian-type mortaria, respectively ing; and from Rooms 1, 2, and 6 and Area 9. A complete spec(iv) Vessels for other functions including those imen (Mor 01) was settled in a niche in the wall in for personal use (such as containers for costhe western corner of Area 9; its interior floor is exmetics or perfumes), those with a ritual tremely worn and testifies an intensive usage. A second function (notably miniatures), and vessels mortarium from Room 9 is instead characterized by a with undetermined functions. In general deep body and thinner wall, vaguely recalling the basin terms these follow the broad functional shapes, and may have served a similar function.6 groupings used for study of the survey assemblages.8 Vessel Functions Just over 2800 fragments could be attributed to one Although the modern scholarly literature is extremely of the large functional groups. Over a third (37%) of wide on this topic,7 the question of pottery functional pottery fragments from the site assemblage could not grouping is far from having reached any definite con- be attributed a function. clusion. The present study adopted four larger funcAlmost half of the fragments assigned to a functional groups that may best reflect the activities of the tional group fell into the food preparation category (infarmhouse (Table 3.3): cluding cooking wares). Table vessels, used for drinking (i) Table vessels, including drinking cups, closed and food consumption, represent just over a quarter containers for serving drinks, and bowls and of the attributed fragments. Storage vessels make up dishes for serving and consuming food; about one fifth of the attributed fragments, with the 6 The specimen from Room 9 (FF80-233PL) is not present in the catalog, largest group among these being the transport/storage but its type (“Mor 3”) is exemplified by the better-preserved fragment category, which includes transport amphorae. Mor 06. For example, Leroi-Gourhan 1971; Balfet/Fauvet-Berthelot/Monzon 1983; Ruby 1993; Lippolis 1994, 243; Piera Caggia and Melissano 1997; and Semeraro 2004, 167. 7
FF_03_siteassemblage_31jan14.indd 73
8
Vittoria in Survey, 338–54.
5/29/14 11:05 AM
Keith Swift
74
Room 1 Floor Surface and Lower Tile Fall
Fine Ware
1W
1E
0
0
0
02 Archaic Cups
1
1
2
03 Archaic Other
1
0
1
04 Black-gloss Cups
0
5
5
7.2%
05 Black-gloss Dishes and Bowls
0
0
0
06 Black-gloss Open Forms
2
5
7
07 Black-gloss Closed Forms
0
1
1
4
12
0
1
All
NE
SE
SW
NW
All
0
0
0
0
0
2.9%
1
0
0
2
3
1.4%
0
0
0
0
0
% 2.4%
8
4
5
1
18
14.6%
0
0
0
1
1
0.8%
10.1%
3
3
3
2
11
8.9%
1.4%
2
0
0
0
2
1.6%
16
23.2%
14
7
8
6
35
28.5%
1
1.4%
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
2.9%
4
3
2
1
10
8.1%
10 Open Forms
1
6
7
10.1%
7
0
0
0
7
5.7%
11 Closed Forms
3
4
7
10.1%
5.7%
12 Lids
0
0
0
All
1
2
1
3
7
0
0
0
0
0
4
4
8
11.6%
6
7
3
2
18
14.6%
8
16
24
34.8%
18
12
6
6
42
34.1%
14 Wheel-made Painted Ware
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15 Open Forms
4
0
4
5.8%
0
0
0
1
1
0.8%
16 Closed Forms
7
3
10
14.5%
9
8
0
4
21
17.1%
17 Lids
1
2
3
4.3%
0
1
0
0
1
0.8%
18 Unidentified All
3
4
7
10.1%
5
2
2
1
10
8.1%
15
9
24
34.8%
14
11
2
6
33
26.8%
19 Transport Amphorae
1
1
2
2.9%
3
1
0
2
6
4.9%
20 Opus Doliare
1
0
1
1.4%
2
0
0
1
3
2.4%
21 Terracottas
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
22 Loom Weights
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23 Metal Finds Total
%
09 Small Bowls/One-handlers
13 Unidentified
Cooking Wares
1
Room 2
01 Figured Wares
08 Miniatures
Plain and Banded Wares
Room 1
0
1
1
1.4%
1
3
0
0
4
3.3%
29
40
69
100.0%
52
34
16
21
123
100.0%
Table 3.5 Quantification of the lower tile fall and floor surface assemblages from Rooms 1 and 2 by Estimated Vessels Represented (EVRep).
Quantitative Comparisons of the Rooms Storerooms (Rooms 1 and 2) With relatively well-preserved floor assemblages and pithoi in situ, Rooms 1 and 2 provide a solid basis for the characterization of the final-phase farmhouse assemblage of pottery and finds (Table 3.4). Probably storerooms, the contents of the rooms provide evidence for domestic agrarian life and aspects of the rural economy in which Fattoria Fabrizio was involved (see Ch. 5). Quantification of the assemblages from the floor surfaces and from the lower parts of the tile falls in Rooms 1 and 2 are shown in Table 3.5. The domestic repertoire from within the storerooms consists of a wide range of classes and types: the pottery evidence includes pithoi for storage, transport
FF_03_siteassemblage_31jan14.indd 74
amphorae of types associated with the interregional distribution of wine, black-gloss fine wares which may have been stored within the room, as well as a range of domestic “common” or “utilitarian” pottery including plain, banded, and cooking wares. Although clearly domestic on the basis of context, certain key types of finds are absent—these include lamps for illumination and ceramic loom weights associated with domestic textile production. Both types of objects may have been removed during abandonment, leaving only the broken pottery on the storeroom floors.9 Figured wares are absent from the floor assemblages and lower tile fall of Rooms 1 and 2. 9
For abandonment processes, see p. 93 in Ch. 4, “Circumstances of Abandonment.”
5/29/14 11:05 AM
Fattoria Fabrizio Site Assemblage Room 3
Room 3 & Area 7 Floor and Tile Fall
Fine Ware
1
02 Archaic Cups
0
1
03 Archaic Other
0
0
4
10.3%
2
05 Black-gloss Dishes and Bowls
1
2.6%
0
1.6%
% 1
1.0%
1
1.0%
0 3.2%
6
5.9%
1
1.0%
06 Black-gloss Open Forms
3
7.7%
6
9.7%
9
8.9%
07 Black-gloss Closed Forms
3
7.7%
1
1.6%
4
4.0%
12
30.8%
10
16.1%
22
21.8%
3
4.8%
3
3.0%
08 Miniatures
0
09 Small Bowls/One-handlers
5
12.8%
4
6.5%
9
8.9%
10 Open Forms
2
5.1%
1
1.6%
3
3.0%
11 Closed Forms
4
10.3%
4
6.5%
8
7.9%
12 Lids
2
5.1%
0
2
2.0%
All
3
7.7%
8
12.9%
11
10.9%
16
41.0%
17
27.4%
33
32.7%
14 Wheel-made Painted Ware
0
15 Open Forms
1
2.6%
4
6.5%
5
5.0%
16 Closed Forms
7
17.9%
10
16.1%
17
16.8%
17 Lids
1
2.6%
1
1.6%
2
2.0%
18 Unidentified All
0
0
2
5.1%
9
14.5%
11
10.9%
11
28.2%
24
38.7%
35
34.7%
8.1%
5
5.0%
19 Transport Amphorae
0
5
20 Opus Doliare
0
0
21 Terracottas
0
3
22 Loom Weights
0
0
23 Metal Finds Total
0
04 Black-gloss Cups
13 Unidentified
Cooking Wares
Total
%
01 Figured Wares
All
Plain and Banded Wares
Area 7
% 2.6%
75
0 39
0 4.8%
0 100.0%
62
3
3.0%
0 0 100.0%
101
100.0%
Table 3.6 Quantification of the lower tile fall and floor surface assemblages from Room 3 and Area 7 by Estimated Vessels Represented (EVRep).
As elsewhere on the site, residual Archaic fine ware is present, though represented in slightly lesser frequency than in the site assemblage as a whole (< 2.5% in Rooms 1 and 2 versus ca. 5% in the site assemblage), derived perhaps from mudbrick collapse or from the upper part of the floor makeup.10 Black-gloss cups are very well represented in the floor assemblages from Room 2, where they are approximately twice as frequent as in Room 1 and in the site assemblage as a whole (ca. 14% versus ca. 7% EVRep). Like the black-gloss cups, plain and banded small bowls/one-handlers are also more common in Room 2, where they make up ca. 8% of the assemblage 10
For discussion of residual material in the farmhouse floor makeups and the mudbrick superstructure, see Ch. 4.
FF_03_siteassemblage_31jan14.indd 75
versus just under 3% in Room 1, much closer to the frequency in the site assemblage as a whole (ca. 7.5% EVRep). This would indicate that drinking vessels were probably stored mainly in Room 2. Open and closed shapes in plain and banded ware occur in equal proportions in Rooms 1 and 2, suggesting that there was no differentiation between the storerooms in terms of the kinds of basic shapes in each. Likewise, cooking wares occur with a similar frequency in Room 2 to the site assemblage as a whole, ca. 26%, and are only slightly more common in Room 1, ca. 35%. These do not therefore appear to be associated predominantly with either room. However, open forms—the pans and, predominantly, casseroles— seem to be less frequent in the cooking ware from
5/29/14 11:05 AM
Keith Swift
76 Room/ Area
Phase -1
3
Context
Chronology
Tile Fall (Level 2, Batt. 1)
Final-phase tile fall
-2 with -4.1
On Floor (Level 2, Batt. 2)
Post- ca. 320 BC with material of the second half of the 5th c. BC
-2
On Floor in W Corner (Level 2, Batt. 2)
Last quarter of the 4th c. BC
Tile Fall (Level 1, Batt. 5 & Level 2, Batt. 1) -1 7
Wall Collapse (Level 2, Batt. 1 & 2) NE Corner (Level 2, Batt. 1)
-3?
Pebble Surface (Level 2, Batt. 1)
Table 3.7 List of contexts used for quantification of Room 3 and Area 7.
Room 2 than in Room 1 and the site assemblage as a whole (0.8% open forms in Room 2 versus 17.1% for closed forms), which may point to some degree of differentiation in terms of which kinds of forms—open pans and casseroles or closed chytrai—were stored in each room. Evidence for Domestic Cult? Assemblages from Room 3 and Area 7 The assemblage from the lower tile fall and floor surface of Room 3 is similar to the consistent proportions elsewhere and in the site assemblage as a whole (Table 3.6). This includes material from the tile fall, which may be more generalized, with much of the original tile fall and wall foundations for Room 3 having eroded downslope into Area 7 (Table 3.7). Quantification of the pottery and finds generally seems to be consistent with this interpretation. In contrast to Room 3, the assemblage from the tile fall, wall collapse, and gravel pavement in Area 7 shows some significant variation from the site assemblage, and from the assemblages of Rooms 1–3. Although a small corpus of three pieces, the terracottas are more frequent in Area 7 than anywhere else in the farmhouse, ca. 5% of all pottery and finds from this area. Miniatures, the other major indicator of votive or cult activity, are also a feature, with three examples. Area 7 has fewer fine wares (16.1% EVRep) than the site assemblage as a whole. Open forms, including dishes and bowls, were more prevalent than cups, in
FF_03_siteassemblage_31jan14.indd 76
contrast to the site assemblage and those in Rooms 1 and 2. Black-gloss cups are less frequently represented in Area 7 than in Room 3, but among their number are two kantharoi (BG 49 and BG 50), which may be associated with domestic cult (see p. 206 in Ch. 13, “Kantharoi”). Black-gloss closed forms seem better represented in Room 3 than elsewhere, accounting for ca. 7.7% of the room assemblage versus less than 3% in the site assemblage and less than 2% in Rooms 1 and 2. Cooking wares appear slightly overrepresented compared to the whole site assemblage, but not by much, with open forms better represented in Area 7, where they comprise 6.5% of the total assemblage versus ca. 2.6% in Room 3 and 2.8% for the site as a whole. Quantification of the Floor Makeup Assemblages (Rooms 1–6) The floor makeup assemblages from Rooms 1–6, excluding Room 5 where the floor level was not reached, seem relatively homogeneous (Table 3.8). Quantification of the floor makeups from Rooms 1 to 6 suggests that these are consistent in terms of the frequencies of pottery and finds types, with few clear differences between the rooms. This may indicate that they represent generalized material introduced to the floor during re-laying or renovation, rather than the steady accumulation of detritus during use.11 This would also account for the residual material within the floor makeups. There are a few slight differences that may be significant. Excavation in Room 4, which lost its tile fall and floor surface to erosion, reached a greater depth than the other rooms, and produced a higher proportion of fine-ware cups, most of which are residual Archaic (9 EVRep, 19.6% of all pottery and finds from Room 4 floor makeups). Room 6 has transport amphorae in greater frequency (ca. 16.7%) than in the other rooms and the site assemblage as a whole, but these consist of earlier types and may derive from the interface with the Archaic-period context beneath. Quantification by Phase Quantification of the assemblages by phase serves to examine and define diachronic differences in the assemblages: those from the final-phase floor and tile fall, the material from within the floor makeups, and material from the Archaic contexts beneath the farmhouse. 11 For discussion of formation processes, see p. 90 in Ch. 4, “Floor makeups.”
5/29/14 11:05 AM
Fattoria Fabrizio Site Assemblage
Farmhouse Floor Makeup Assemblages
Fine Ware
EVRep
02 Archaic Cups
3
3.4%
1
03 Archaic Other
1
1.1%
0
04 Black-gloss Cups
%
0
Room 4 EVRep
1.9%
4
2.2%
0
6.5%
3
5
9.3%
3
3.4%
1
1.9%
0
06 Black-gloss Open Forms
4
4.5%
4
7.4%
1
07 Black-gloss Closed Forms
3
3.4%
0
25
28.1%
11
%
0 19.6%
12.4%
2.2%
All EVRep
%
0 9.5% 7.1%
0
0 20.4%
EVRep
1
3
0
Room 6
9
11
0
%
0
05 Black-gloss Dishes and Bowls
09 Small Bowls/One-handlers
17
7.4%
2
0.9%
22
9.5%
4
1.7%
3
7.1%
12
5.2%
1
2.4%
4
1.7%
26.2%
61
26.4%
1
0.4%
14
30.4%
11
1
2.2%
0
16
18.0%
9
16.7%
2
4.3%
2
4.8%
29
12.6%
10 Open Forms
3
3.4%
2
3.7%
5
10.9%
3
7.1%
13
5.6%
11 Closed Forms
6
6.7%
6
11.1%
1
2.2%
2
4.8%
15
6.5%
12 Lids
0
1
2.2%
0
1
0.4%
13 Unidentified All
0
8
9.0%
7
13.0%
5
10.9%
7
16.7%
27
11.7%
33
37.1%
24
44.4%
14
30.4%
14
33.3%
85
36.8%
14 Wheel-made Painted Ware
0
15 Open Forms
4
4.5%
4
7.4%
2
4.3%
1
2.4%
11
4.8%
16 Closed Forms
15
16.9%
5
9.3%
9
19.6%
7
16.7%
36
15.6%
1
1.1%
0
1
2.2%
0
2
0.9%
17 Lids 18 Unidentified
0
0
0
0
5
5.6%
7
13.0%
4
8.7%
2
4.8%
18
7.8%
25
28.1%
16
29.6%
16
34.8%
10
23.8%
67
29.0%
19 Transport Amphorae
6
6.7%
1
1.9%
1
2.2%
7
16.7%
15
6.5%
20 Opus Doliare
0
0
21 Terracottas
0
0
22 Loom Weights
0
1
All
23 Metal Finds Total
%
0
All
Cooking Wares
EVRep
Room 2
01 Figured Wares
08 Miniatures
Plain and Banded Wares
Room 1
77
0 89
100%
1.9%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1.9%
0
54
100%
46
0 100%
42
100%
0.4%
1
0.4%
231
100%
Table 3.8 Quantification of the floor makeup contexts in the rooms of Fattoria Fabrizio by Estimated Vessels Represented (EVRep).
Pottery and finds from phased contexts consist of ca. 775 EVRep, just under 60% of all archaeological material from the site as a whole. Of these, material associated with the final-phase occupation, Phase -2, consists of over 200 individual vessels, accounting for a little under a fifth (17% EVRep), with only slightly more from the Phase -3 and -4 assemblages associated primarily with farmhouse floor makeups. Archaic contexts are much less extensive in the excavations, their small assemblages accounting for under 5% of all pottery and finds from Fattoria Fabrizio. A striking feature of the phase assemblages is that the relative proportions of the major classes—fine, coarse (plain and banded), and cooking wares—are remarkably consistent between each phase.
FF_03_siteassemblage_31jan14.indd 77
Residual Material in the Assemblages The frequencies of residual material, however, do seem to vary between phases. Archaic materials were better represented in the floor makeup than in the final-phase assemblages (Phase -2, 2.0 mm); and inclu sion density (low, moderate, high). The color of the fabric as observed in section rang es from light to pinkish gray, from dark brownish red to dark brownish yellow; the Munsell Soil Color Chart was consulted for the definitions. Considering, however, that the original color of a fabric is modified during the course of repeated and prolonged exposure to fire, coloration is not a reliable feature of cooking ware fabrics. Samples were taken of ten types of fabric, includ ing the ceramic groups attested most frequently. Ini tial macroscopic analysis by Keith Swift was followed by archaeometric analysis to determine the chemical and mineralogical composition. The selection of the samples was performed after the establishment of the typology and the fabric groupings to ensure represen tation of the full range of cooking ware at Fattoria Fabrizio (see Ch. 11). Most of the fragments contain both black and white stone inclusions, with very rare mica inclusions and no grog. The surface condition of the cooking ware fragments—rough to the touch, smooth at the surface, and fairly porous—is very probably due to the evapo ration of water from the clay during the drying stage, before firing.10 Signs of smoothing are present on very few fragments, while interior polishing is entirely ab sent. Breaks are irregular, hard, and compact. Despite the use of the wheel, the throwing of the vessels was not careful, which results in irregular fabric thickness across the various parts. Very few fragments are com pletely blackened or bear any traces of burning on the surface, suggesting that most vessels were not placed in direct contact with fire. No fragments attributable to a supporting stand could be identified. Forms and Finishing A limited number of cooking ware forms were identi 9
Ricci 1985, 14. Cuomo di Caprio 1985, 84–85.
10
5/29/14 1:56 PM
Cooking Ware 250
15
200 150
299
12
204
14
9
169
6
100
6
85
50
65
49
49 6
0 Rm. 1
Rm. 2
Rm. 3
Rm. 4
Rm. 5
Rm. 6
40
fied at Fattoria Fabrizio.11 The most frequently attest ed were the cooking pots (chytrai) and the casseroles. There were few lids, and even fewer pans. A large quantity of fragments could not be identified because of their very poor state of preservation. Pans are distinguished by a small or medium-sized shallow body and a flat bottom, making them very sim ilar to modern metal baking/roasting and frying pans. They have a horizontal handle for gripping12 or a round vertical handle.13 They were used above all for frying (probably meat or fish), or for cooking flatbreads or toasting cereals, all uses that required a relatively short cooking time. There is never an internal ledge for a lid. The scarcity of pans at Fattoria Fabrizio (which was a common situation in Magna Grecia, with exceptions at Locri 14 and Kaulonia 15) suggests the limited use, if not utter absence, of frying there. There are two likely explanations for this. Either frying had a secondary role in Greek cooking compared to boiling, or Greek cooking ware was not well suited for frying because fried foods tended to stick to the bottom, prompt ing scholars to surmise the presence of metal pans in the Greek kitchen.16 Frying was probably not an im portant component of Greek cooking at Metaponto or elsewhere, and in fact the few literary sources that mention frying disparage it.17 In antiquity there were two types of container used For the evidence from the chora, see Carter in Survey, 849–52, and Ga brieli in Survey, 439–53, where the wide range of forms and their functions is discussed. 12 Agora XII, nos. 1991–1992. 13 Agora XII, no. 1987. 14 Conti 1989, 278–85. 15 Kaulonia I, 88, 90. 16 Bats 1988, 50–51. 17 Bettini and Pucci 1986, 153–62.
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 299
3 0
Area 7 Area 9
Figure 20.2 Counts of cooking ware fragments in the rooms and excavation areas.
11
5
3
Rm. 1
Rm. 2
Rm. 3
5 3
Rm. 4
Rm. 6
Area 7
4
Area 9
Figure 20.3 Counts of cooking ware (minimum number of individuals, MNI) in and beneath the tile falls (none in Room 5).
Area 9 10% Room 1 35%
Area 7 13%
Room 6 8%
Room 4 11% Room 3 7%
Room 2 15%
Figure 20.4 Proportions of cooking ware based on minimum number of individuals (MNI) in and beneath the tile falls.
for short cooking jobs: the taghenon (τάγηνον, a wide and low pan with a flat bottom and vertical handles), and the seison (σείσων) or frughetron (φρύγετρον), a low pan with a round base and knot-handle mounted on the rim, which allowed it to be shaken over the fire, a feature particularly useful in broiling.18 The pan proper appears in Athens in the second half of the 5th century BC and was widespread throughout the Greek world in the 4th century BC,19 when it is attested at Corinth.20 The variant with handles could be earlier.21 18
Bianco and Deodato 1997, 191. Agora XII, 228. 20 Corinth VII.3, no. 700. 21 Bats 1988, 50. 19
5/29/14 1:56 PM
Maria Francesca Blotti
300
FF80-166P+167P_CkW
Figure 20.5 Chytra from Room 2 (CkW 31), scale 1:3. (KJS/ICA)
Beginning in the 2nd century BC, pans are supplanted by baking/roasting pans with red-slipped interior. Casseroles were popular, perhaps because they are easier to handle than cooking pots. The bottom of a casserole is convex and carinated, the profile oblique, rounded, or curved; the rim is flat or rounded. The lip is vertical or oblique, and there is a ledge on the interi or for resting a lid. There are usually two handles with rounded section either mounted above the body or at tached to it. These vessels were used to make stews; in particular, the literary sources describe the casserole as being used to cook fish, while only one source men tions using a casserole to cook vegetables. Pieces of fish were first browned and then cooked, covered, with condiments or white wine, and finally garnished with aromatic herbs. Cooking might also have been accom plished with a casserole by placing hot coals on the lid, in which case the high lip of many casseroles would have served to keep the coals in place.22 Casseroles appear in the first half of the 5th cen tury BC in Athens 23 and Corinth, 24 and spread in the 4th century BC, reaching Italy and remaining popular through the Roman period.25 The earliest form has a rounded profile.26 Despite their versatility, they were outnumbered at Fattoria Fabrizio by the pots. The use of lids is clearly indicated by the presence of ledges on the interior of certain vessels, such as the casseroles.27 The lids are usually associated with 22
Bats 1988, 48–50. Agora XII, 227. 24 Corinth VII.3, 124. 25 Thompson 1934; Agora V; Agora XII, nos. 1964–1976. 26 Bats 1988, 165. 27 These pots are more articulated than the chytrai: they have a globular 23
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 300
lid-seated kakkabai, but the use of lids with the chytrai cannot be excluded since long cooking times would have required them.28 Chytrai covered by another vessel, a thin stone slab, or a terracotta disc fashioned from a broken vessel have been found among the grave goods of several Archaic tombs in the Athenian kera meikos.29 Cooking pots (P 1.1–7) were the type of vessel most commonly used for cooking because they were deep and held a large volume. They are globular in form with a narrow mouth, a flat or rounded rim turned toward the exterior, a short neck lacking a ledge for a lid, and a round bottom. They were probably equipped with two handles that served to facilitate gripping the vessel after it was placed on the fire; in the scholar ly literature the chytra is usually one-handled,30 but there are also examples with two handles.31 They were used on a daily basis, in particular to boil water and prepare soups, boiled meats, and stewed vegetables. The morphology of the chytra was very conservative: it is attested in Athens in the 8th century BC32 and at Corinth and Olympia in the 7th century BC,33 and it persisted into the 3rd century BC in both Greece and Magna Grecia.34 A nearly complete chytra was found in Room 2 (CkW 31, Fig. 20.5). The bases, made with the same refractory cooking ware fabric, are mostly flat and therefore attributable to casseroles and pans. The ring feet, however, can not be securely associated with a specific rim or form (except for the base FF80-161PL + FF80-162PL, which almost surely belongs to a vessel with the rim FF80-221PL; the fabric color is the same—Munsell 5YR 4/4, reddish brown). No fragments attributable to braziers or other types of supports to hold vessels over the fire were found at Fattoria Fabrizio. Not enough evidence survives to in dicate whether cooking was performed in direct con tact with the flame or over it. The very limited quantity of completely blackened ceramic suggests that some profile, a wider mouth with an internal ledge for a lid, and horizontal, rounded handles. They were used for foods that required long cooking times, such as boiled meats or vegetable soups, as well as for fish, meat stews, and sauces. They are attested beginning in the second half of the 6th c. BC (Agora XII, 225–26). 28 For lidded cooking pots in the Pantanello necropolis, see Carter and Parmly Toxey in Necropoleis, 727–28. 29 Agora XII, 228 n. 5. 30 Agora XII, fig. 28, no. 1922. 31 Agora XII, fig. 28, no. 1928. 32 Agora VIII, pl. 11, nos. 203–8. 33 Bats 1988, 45–46. 34 Sibari II, 325; Cotton 1977; Monte Sannace, 189.
5/29/14 1:56 PM
Cooking Ware Form Pan
Casserole
Type
Date 4th c. BC
2
2
2
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
1
C1
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
2
C 2.1
4th–3rd c. BC
2
2
3
C 2.2
5th–4th c. BC
1
1
1
C3
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
2
C 3.1
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
1
C 3.3a
Beginning of the 5th– end of the 4th c. BC
1
1
1
C 3.3b
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
2
C 3.4
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
1
C 11
5th–4th c. BC
1
1
2
1
4
13
Li 1
4th c. BC
3
3
6
Li 2
4th c. BC
4
4
12
Li 3.1
5th–3rd c. BC
6
6
6
Li 3.2
4th c. BC
3
3
3
Li K 1
4th–3rd c. BC
0
1
2
2
2
6
P 1.1
4th–3rd c. BC
3
3
7
P 1.2
End of the 6th–5th c. BC
1
1
2
P 1.5
6th–4th c. BC
9
10
29
P 1.6
4th c. BC
2
2
2
P 1.7a
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
1
P 1.7b
4th c. BC
1
1
1
P 1.8a
4th c. BC
5
5
26
P 1.8b
4th c. BC
1
1
1
P 2.1
5th–4th c. BC
1
1
1
P3
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
23
Unidentified Spout
Base
Casserole/ cooking pot
NFr
Pa 1
Unidentified
Cooking pot
TNI
Pa 2
Unidentified
Lid
MNI
301
S1
3
3
87
425–400 BC
1
1
1
B1
4th c. BC
0
0
1
B 1.2a
4th c. BC
0
0
4
B 1.2b
4th c. BC
0
0
1
B2
4th–3rd c. BC
0
0
17
5
6
13
Unidentified
Open form
0
2
43
Closed form
0
20
482
Unidentified Total
3
3
372
69
97
1180
Table 20.1 Quantification of the cooking ware from Fattoria Fabrizio by minimum number of individuals (MNI), typological number of individuals (TNI), and number of fragments (NFr).
vessels were placed directly on the hearth or balanced on stones, but this may not have been the general practice.35 Pot base Type B 2 bears traces of exposure to fire on both the bottom and the side. Obvi ous traces of smoke and flames from the hearth—dark gray discolorations or black spots that occasionally reach the rim— are also visible on several wall fragments. The handles, whether of the round ed section or ribbon type, are always attached to the body by pressing. The most commonly encountered type is the ribbed ribbon handle, found on the deep containers, the chytrai and kakkabai. They are followed by the horizontal type with rounded section, which belonged mostly to casseroles. Cooking ware vessels were finished with a simple polishing or smoothing. The occasional decoration consisted of simple indentations or parallel lines usu ally placed under the rim. Conclusions Among the very few precisely identifi able forms, the most commonly attested are the pots and lids (3% and 2% of the total of cooking ware fragments, respec tively), while the casseroles comprise slightly more than one percent (1.1%; Fig. 20.6). Cooking pots—specifically the chytrai—are the most frequently en countered type. Cooking pot Type P 1, with its 15 examples representing several variants (1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 1.6, and 1.7), is not only the most common but also the ear liest form. The total absence of kakkabai is surprising, as these vessels were wide ly used in the 4th century BC alongside, and not in lieu of, the chytrai to cook sauces and other foods requiring long cooking times. This absence is probably due to the specific dietary and culinary habits practiced in the farmhouse. Among the casseroles, type C 3.1, marked by a convex profile and deep 35
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 301
Bianco and Deodato 1997, 187.
5/29/14 1:56 PM
Maria Francesca Blotti
302 Casserole 1% Lid Pot 2% 3%
Unidentified 39%
Closed Form 50%
Open Form 5%
Figure 20.6 Proportions of cooking ware forms by minimum number of individuals (MNI) attested in the rooms of Fattoria Fabrizio.
body, is attested in contexts near Metaponto, such as Cozzo Presepe and Gravina di Puglia, where it is dated to the 4th century BC.36 Types C 3 and C 3.3a fit per fectly within the traditional production of Greece and Magna Grecia between the beginning of the 5th and the 3rd century BC, with precise parallels at Locri and Sybaris. Type C 2.2, distinguished by a curved profile and shallow body, has no parallels at other sites. This suggests that it was an original Metapontine product of the 4th century BC. The pans are represented by only three examples, with dates ranging between the 4th and the 3rd century BC. Lids, which are dealt with last here, may have be longed to a variety of shapes among the chytrai and casseroles, and in theory at least the kakkabai. The most commonly attested lid type, Li 3, is similar to examples from sites in Magna Grecia and the Italic world, such as Locri and Cozzo Presepe. The lids from both date to the same period as the farmhouse. Only a very few fragments of this conservative ceramic class can be dated independently, to the 4th century BC (Table 20.1), the period of the most intense occupation of Fattoria Fabrizio. In all of the other cas es, the chronology was determined from the context and from the morphological parallels found at other sites along the Ionian coast of southern Italy. 36
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 302
Cotton 1983, 377, fig. 147, no. 463; 1977, 130, nos. 304–5, fig. 54.
5/29/14 1:56 PM
Cooking Ware
303
Catalog of Cooking Wares The typology created for this study classifies individual forms by function according to morphological features, in cluding size, required for practical purposes (Conti 1989, 258). Because of the small size and poor general state of preservation of many of the fragments, the diameter was frequently impossible to measure. The forms are designated by capital letters: Pa, pan; C, casserole; Li, lid; LiK, lid knob; P, cooking pot; S, spout; and B, base. In the scholarly literature the cooking pots are typically divided into two categories, chytrai and kakkabai, but at Fattoria Fabrizio the only cooking pots present are chytrai. Within the functional forms, the individual types were distinguished by specific, recurring morphological features, such as the rim or exterior profile (Quercia 2003). The types are designated by Arabic numerals (e.g., Pa 1, Pa 2), in turn subdivided into variants on the basis of small but significant differences, indicated by a second Arabic numeral (e.g., C 2.1, C 2.2). Study of the cooking wares from Fattoria Fabrizio was undertaken alongside the study of cooking wares from Sant’Angelo Vecchio—the typology presented here was formulated on the basis of the material from both sites, and therefore not every type is represented in the corpus of cooking ware from Fattoria Fabrizio. For example, the
casserole Type C 3.2 occurs at Sant’Angelo Vecchio but not here, so the catalog skips from Type C 3.1 to C 3.3a. Pans The pans from Fattoria Fabrizio were divided into two types based on differences in the shape of the rim: Pa 1: forked flat, direct rim; and Pa 2: flat, direct rim. The high degree of fragmentation of the sherds made attri bution to one or the other type very difficult. The rim of Type Pa 1 varies in diameter between 24 and 30 cm. The base was probably concave in shape. Parallels for the type date to the 4th c. BC, but it is also attested in contexts dated to the 3rd (e.g., Locri, Valesio, Kaulonia, and Metaponto) and 1st c. BC (Pizzica Pantanello). The relatively small size of type Pa 2 makes it compa rable to plates, baking/roasting pans, and cooking pots. Its classification among the pans was based principally on the inclination (the diameter could not be measured), as well as on precise parallels among pans from other sites. The only fragment of Pa 2 has a smaller diameter than that of Pa 1. The best parallels date to the 2nd c. BC, but the context of the farmhouse points to a chronology of 375–270 BC.
Pans FF CkW 01 Pan Type Pa 1 Provenance: Area 7. Level 2, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80-217PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 1.86; rim not measur able; wall th 0.57; w 3.75. Clay type 6, Munsell 5YR 5/6 reddish yellow; irregular breaks; hard and compact with smoothed surface, rough to the touch. High density of very small to small white and black stone inclusions dis tributed uniformly across the surface. Very little mica. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the body wall. Description: Direct rim, forked at the top, inclined toward
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 303
1:2 the interior and mounted on a straight body wall. Local pro duction. FF80_217PL_CkW Comparisons and comment: Vegas 1973, 43–45, type 14, fig. 15, 2 (Late Republican, attested across the Mediterranean basin from Athens to Pompeii, Rome, and Gabii); Agora XXXIII, 192, fig. 89, no. 702 (AD 140). Date: 4th c. BC.
5/29/14 1:56 PM
304
Maria Francesca Blotti
Pans cont. FF CkW 02 Pan Type Pa 2 Provenance: Square A3. Level 1, Batt. 5. Lot: FF80-68PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 2.68; rim 24.00–25.00; wall th 0.50; w 7.27. Clay type 3, Munsell 5YR 5/8 yel lowish red; irregular breaks; hard and compact with smoothed surface, rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and medium-sized black and white stone inclu sions distributed uniformly across the surface. Surface marked by small vughs. Small quantity of mica. Condition: Fragmentary—part of the rim and body. Description: Direct rim, slightly inclined toward the inte rior and emphasized by a small indentation on the ex terior; shallow body with oblique walls. On the interior
the profile is slightly thickened, while on the exterior it is slightly concave. A carination terminating in a sharp edge emphasizes the attachment to the concave base. Lo cal production. Comparisons and comment: Conti 1989, 284, no. 325, pl. XXXVIII (4th–3rd c. BC, from Locri); Yntema 1990, 180, fig. 20.2 (3rd–beginning of the 2nd c. BC, from Valesio); Quercia 2003, 189, fig. 6 D1a (first half of the 4th c. BC, from Metaponto). Less precise parallels: Carter 1983a, 485, fig. 43, no. 137 (1st c. BC–1st c. AD, from Pizzica Pantanello, Metaponto); Kaulonia I, 90, fig. 60, nos. 431–33 (Hellenistic period). Date: 4th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_68PL_CkW
Casseroles After the cooking pots, the casseroles are the most com monly attested form at Fattoria Fabrizio. A total of 14 cas seroles were recovered, displaying an impressive morpho logical variety. Their diameters vary between 14.0 and 24.0 cm. The types are as follows: C 1, rounded rim on slightly curving wall; C 2.1, rounded rim on curved wall; C 2.2, rounded rim on convex wall; C 3, flat rim on wall with concave profile; C 3.1, flat rim on straight wall; C 3.3a, flat rim on convex wall; C 3.3b, flat rim on oblique wall C 3.4, rounded rim on straight wall; and C 11, rounded rim on wall with concave exterior profile The rim of Type C 1 is oblique and rounded at the top, at tached to a slightly curving wall, with a diameter of 19.3 cm. Precise parallels are found in contexts of the mid-4th and 3rd c. BC at Monte Sannace, Rutigliano, and Oppido Mamertina. Type C 2.1, of which two examples were found, is dis tinguished by its rounded rim attached to a curved wall. The base (not preserved) was probably convex. The diameter was larger with respect to Type C 1, and the depth was approx imately 10 cm. The closest parallels come from Gravina, Cozzo Presepe, and Metaponto, in contexts of the 4th–3rd c. BC, while at Kaulonia it is attested in the 6th–5th c. BC. On the lone example of Type C 2.2, the exterior profile of the body wall is very convex; the diameter is 22.8 cm. The comparanda suggest a date in the 5th–4th c. BC.
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 304
Type C 3 comprises the casseroles with a wall that is straight, carinated, and slightly concave. The diameter rang es between 14.0 and 20.0 cm. Type C 3, which has a body wall with concave profile and a shallow body, is a lower and more maneuverable casserole than C 3.1; it is dated to the 4th–3rd c. BC, although precise parallels come from con texts of the 6th and 5th c. BC. Other parallels put the date in the 3rd (Valesio) and 2nd c. BC (Monte Sannace). The variant C 3.1, dated to the 4th–3rd c. BC, has a flat rim mounted on a straight wall. The rim of Type C 3.3a is flat and mounted on a wall with an oblique and notably convex exterior profile. The type has a pronounced, oblique lid-resting ledge and a deep body; the base (not preserved) was probably flat. It dates to the 5th–3rd c. BC. It is found in 3rd-c. BC contexts at Sybaris, Cozzo Presepe, and Gravina di Puglia, where it is present also in 1st-c. BC contexts (Cotton 1992b, 181, fig. 71, no. 1368, second half of the 1st c. BC, from Gravina). At Monte Sannace, the type is attested also in the 2nd and 1st c. BC. It was common on Sicily (Meligunìs-Lipára II, 93, tomb 273, pl. g, 10, last 30 years of the 4th c. BC), too, and in southern Apulia (Semeraro 1983, 191, no. 250, pl. 93, Hel lenistic period, from Otranto), and it appears in other sites of the western Mediterranean, such as Olbia (Bats 1988, 165, no. 1119, pl. 39, 4th–2nd c. BC). The flat rim of variant C 3.3b is inclined toward the ex terior and has a pronounced, oblique lid-resting ledge. It is datable to the 4th–3rd c. BC, but it is also attested at Sybaris and Cozzo Presepe at the end of the 6th c. BC, and it is gen erally encountered in 3rd-c. BC contexts such as Valesio and
5/29/14 1:56 PM
Cooking Ware Gravina di Puglia. The example described in the catalog be low was associated with material dating to the 6th–3rd c. BC. Type C 3.4 is distinguished from C 3 by an exterior profile of the body wall that is straighter and inclined to ward the exterior. The recognized examples have diameters ranging from 18 to 20 cm. The type was very widespread in Magna Grecia (e.g., in Apulia—Semeraro 1983, 191, no. 250, pl. 93, Hellenistic period, from Otranto; Cotton 1992b, 181, fig. 71, no. 1368 from Gravina di Puglia, second half of the 1st c. BC) and Sicily (Meligunìs-Lipára II, 93, T 273, pl. g, 10, last 30 years of the 4th c. BC), and it appears in oth
305
er sites of the western Mediterranean, such as Olbia (Bats 1988, 165, no. 1119, pl. 39, 4th–2nd c. BC). Although it is first attested in the 5th c., the best examples date to the 4th c. BC. On Type C 11, the round-topped rim is attached to a wall with concave exterior profile. There is a lid-resting ledge, oblique and slightly hooked; the thickness of the body wall increases at the point where the ledge emerges. The diameter varies between 16 and 17 cm. This type of cas serole dates to the 5th and 4th c. BC, while the comparanda from Kaulonia place it in the 6th c. BC as well.
Casseroles FF CkW 03 Casserole Type C 1 Provenance: NE Sounding 1 and Squares C3–D3. Level 1, Batt. 2. Lots: FF80-89PL + FF80-19PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 2.14; rim 19.00; wall th 0.40; max w 9.70. Clay type 4, Munsell 5YR 6/6 reddish yellow; irregular breaks; hard, smoothed, and rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and medium-sized white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly. Condition: Rim and part of the body wall. Description: Vertical, oblique, round-topped rim with
oblique lid-resting ledge. An indentation at the base of the rim emphasizes the attachment to the rounded body. Comparisons and comment: Ciancio and Radina 1983, 13, pl. VI, 1 (4th–3rd c. BC, from Rutigliano); Lissi Caron na 1990–1991, 222, no. 5, fig. 44 (second half of the 4th c.–275 BC, from Oppido Lucano); Agora XXXIII, 173, fig. 76, no. 600. (5th–1st c. BC); Quercia 2003, 184, fig. 4 C1b (first half of the 4th c. BC, from Metaponto). Date: 4th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_89+19PL_CkW
FF CkW 04 Casserole Type C 2.1 Provenance: Squares C2–D2, E of Wall and S of room. Lev el 1, Batt. 3. Lot: FF80-37PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 5.70; rim 24.00; wall th 0.40; w 5.86. Clay type 5, Munsell 10YR 3/1 very dark gray; irregular breaks; hard and compact, smoothed at the surface and rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and medium-sized white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly across the surface. Very little mica. Surface marked by small vughs. Condition: Fragmentary—rim, handle, and part of the body preserved. Description: Rounded and direct rim, thinned at the top, on a pronounced and nearly horizontal lid-resting ledge; handle with rounded section rising over the rim and mounted on a deep body with curved profile. Comparisons and comment: Cotton 1992b, 180, fig. 70, no.
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 305
1:2
FF80_37PL_CkW 1359 (4th c. BC, from Gravina); Quercia 2003, 183, fig. 4, C1a (first half of the 4th c. BC, from Metaponto); less precise parallel: Cotton 1983, 378, fig. 147, no. 474 (end of the 4th–3rd c. BC, from Cozzo Presepe); Kaulonia I, 85, fig. 59, no. 417 (6th–5th c. BC). Date: 4th c. BC.
5/29/14 1:56 PM
306
Maria Francesca Blotti
Casseroles cont. FF CkW 05 Casserole Type C 2.2 Provenance: Squares B2–B3, East of baulk. Level 1, Batt. 3. Lot: FF80-56PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 2.87; rim 22.80; wall th 0.50; w 3.74. Clay type 4, Munsell 5YR 6/6 reddish yellow; irregular breaks; hard, smoothed, and rough to the touch. High density of very small to small white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly.
Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the body wall. Description: Thickened, round-topped rim on a horizontal lid-resting ledge; concave base seamlessly attached to a shallow body with curving profile. Local production. Comparisons and comment: Quercia 2003, 186, fig. 5, C4c (first half of the 4th c. BC, from Metaponto); Gabrieli in Survey, 445, no. 8. Date: 5th or 4th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_56PL_CkW
FF CkW 06 Casserole Type C 3 Provenance: Room 6. Level 2, Batt. 1. Lots: FF80-146.2PL + FF80-138PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 3.31; rim 18.00–20.00; wall th 0.55; w 5.59. Clay type 6, Munsell 5YR 5/6 red dish red; irregular breaks; hard, smoothed, rough and powdery to the touch. Low density of very small white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly. Very small micaceous inclusions. Condition: Fragmentary—part of the rim, part of the body wall, and part of the handle rising above it. Description: Flat-topped rim with a very slight rise at the edge of the exterior profile; oblique and pronounced lid-resting ledge; handle with rounded section pressed to
the body wall and mounted horizontally so as to rise over the rim. The attachment between the low body and the concave base is emphasized by a sharp-edged carination. Local production. Comparisons and comment: Conti 1989, 274, no. 312, pl. XXXVII (4th c. BC, from Locri, with more pronounced carination); Sibari V, 205, no. 88, fig. 215 (end of the 6th– beginning of the 5th c. BC), 486, no. 503, fig. 500 (end of the 5th c. BC); Rossi 1989, 189, no. 1a, pl. 331, no. 3 (second half of the 4th–2nd c. BC); Valesio I, 287 no. 492 (late 4th–beginning of the 3rd c. BC); Quercia 2003, 187, fig. 5, C3b (first half of the 4th c. BC, from Metaponto). Date: 4th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_138PL_CkW
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 306
5/29/14 1:56 PM
Cooking Ware FF CkW 07 Casserole Type C 3.1 Provenance: Squares B2–B3, C1–C3, D1–D2. Level 1, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80-10PLA. Dimensions and technical features: h 5.14; rim 16.00–20.00; wall th 0.50; w 6.36. Clay type 7, Munsell 10YR 5/6 yel lowish brown; irregular breaks; hard, compact, smoothed and rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and medium-sized white and black stone inclusions. Surface marked by small vughs. Small quantity of mica. Traces of burning on the bottom. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the body wall with the attachment of the base.
307
Description: Slightly flaring rim inclined toward the exte rior; oblique and pronounced lid-resting ledge mounted on straight walls. A double indentation on the exterior surface emphasizes the attachment to the carinated body, which has a straight profile and concave base. Local pro duction. Comparisons and comment: Scarfì 1961, 274, t. 6, fig. 106, no. 19 (4th c. BC, from Monte Sannace); Cotton 1983, 377, fig. 147, no. 463 (beginning of the 5th–end of the 4th c. BC, from Cozzo Presepe); Mozia, pl. no. 1 (end of the 5th–early 4th c. BC). Date: 4th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_10PLA_CkW
FF CkW 08 Casserole Type 3.3a Provenance: Area 9. Level 1, Batt. 4. Lot: FF80-231PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 3.10; rim unknown; wall th 0.50; w 3.80. Clay type 4, Munsell 5YR 7/8 reddish yellow; irregular breaks; hard, smoothed, and rough to the touch. Moderate density of medium-sized white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly across the surface. Traces of burning on the rim. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the body wall. Description: Flat-topped rim, slightly inclined toward the exterior, on a high lip; slight projection at the edge of the exterior profile; pronounced, oblique lid-resting ledge; deep body with oblique and notably convex profile. Local production. Comparisons and comment: Morel 1970, 104–5, fig. 28.1 (end of the 4th–beginning of the 3rd c. BC, from Coz
zo Presepe); Sibari IV, 255, no. 222, fig. 283 (3rd c. BC); Cotton 1983, 376–77, no. 462, 467, fig. 147 (end of the 4th–beginning of the 3rd c. BC, from Cozzo Presepe); Cotton 1977, 130, nos. 304–5, fig. 54 (end 4th–beginning 3rd c. BC, from Gravina di Puglia); Rossi 1989, 189, no. 1a, pl. 331, 7 (2nd–1st c. BC); Kaulonia I, 85–86, fig. 59, nos. 419–20 (5th–beginning of the 4th c. BC); Roccagloriosa I, 265, fig. 185, no. 245 (second half of the 4th c. BC); Conti 1992, 242–43, no. 235, pl. LXXVI rounded rim (3rd c. BC, from Locri); Barra Bagnasco 1992–1993, 198, no. 89, fig. 40 (end of the 4th–first half of the 3rd c., from Pomarico); Valesio I, 283, form N01a, no. 499; Casagrande 2002, 174, fig. 54, type 8, no. 223 (375–270 BC, from Herakleia); Quercia 2003, 185, fig. 5 C3a (first half of the 4th c. BC, from Metaponto). Date: Beginning of the 5th–end of the 4th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_231PL_CkW
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 307
5/29/14 1:56 PM
308
Maria Francesca Blotti
Casseroles cont. FF CkW 09 Casserole Type C 3.3b Provenance: Area 7. Level 2, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80-230PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 3.70; rim 18.00; wall th 0.40; w 6.46. Clay type 4, Munsell 5YR 6/8 reddish yel low; irregular breaks; hard, smoothed, rough and powdery to the touch. Moderate density of small white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly. Surface marked by small vughs. Traces of burning on the carination. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the body wall. Description: Flat rim inclined toward the exterior with pro nounced and oblique lid-resting ledge; deep, carinated
bowl with oblique exterior profile and concave base. Lo cal production. Comparisons and comment: Hänsel 1973, 451, fig. 31, no. 4 (433–432 BC, from Policoro); Cotton 1983, 377, fig. 147, no. 465 (end of the 6th–4th c. BC, from Cozzo Presepe); Sibari V, 205, no. 88, fig. 215 (end of the 6th–beginning of the 5th c. BC), 486, no. 503, fig. 500 (end of the 5th c. BC); Conti 1989, 274–75, no. 313, pl. XXXVII (with more pronounced carination; 5th–4th c. BC, from Locri); Valesio I, 287, no. 492 (late 4th–beginning of the 3rd c. BC). Date: 4th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_230PL_CkW
FF CkW 10 Casserole Type C 3.4 Provenance: Room 1 W. Level 2, Batt. 2. Lot: FF80-160PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 2.95; rim 18.00–20.00; wall th 0.42; w 5.08. Clay type 2, Munsell Gley 2 5/1 blu ish gray; irregular breaks; hard, smoothed, and rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and medium-sized white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly across the surface. Blackening all across the fragment. Surface marked by small vughs. Very little mica. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the body wall. Description: Round-topped rim on a high lip; pronounced, oblique lid-resting surface; deep body with straight pro file inclined toward the exterior. Comparisons and comment: Morel 1970, 104–5, fig. 28.1 (end of the 4th–beginning of the 3rd c. BC, from Cozzo
Presepe); Sibari IV, 255, no. 222, fig. 283 (3rd c.); Cotton 1983, 376–77, no. 462, 467, fig. 147 (end of the 4th–be ginning of the 3rd c. BC, from Cozzo Presepe); Cotton 1977, 130, nos. 304–5, fig. 54 (end of the 4th–beginning of the 3rd c. BC, from Gravina di Puglia); Rossi 1989, 189, no. 1a, pl. 331, 7 (2nd–1st c. BC); Kaulonia I, 85–86, fig. 59, nos. 419–20 (5th–beginning of the 4th c. BC); Roccagloriosa I, 265, fig. 185, no. 245 (second half of the 4th c. BC); Conti 1992, 242–43, no. 235, pl. LXXVI rounded rim (3rd c. BC, from Locri); Barra Bagnasco 1992–1993, 198, no. 89, fig. 40 (end of the 4th–first half of the 3rd c. BC, from Pomarico); Valesio I, 283, form N01a, no 499; Casagrande 2002, 174, fig. 54, type 8, no. 223 (375–270 BC, from Herakleia); Gabrieli in Survey, 448, no. 21. Date: 4th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_160PL_CkW
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 308
5/29/14 1:56 PM
Cooking Ware FF CkW 11 Casserole Type C 11 Provenance: Room 1 W. Level 2, Batt. 4. Lot: FF80162PLC. Dimensions and technical features: h 3.45; rim 16.60; wall th 0.50; w 14.40. Clay type 4, Munsell 5YR 7/8 reddish yel low; irregular breaks; hard, smoothed, and powdery to the touch. Moderate density of very small white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly. Small quantities of mica. Traces of burning on the rim and carination. Condition: Fragmentary—rim, handle, and part of the body wall.
309
Description: Round-topped rim with a small, oblique lid-resting surface; handle with rounded section rising above the rim and mounted horizontally on a low, carinat ed body with concave exterior profile. Local production. Comparisons and comment: Kaulonia I, 85, fig. 59, no. 422 (5th–4th c. BC); Mozia, 258, pl. LXXII, MD.04.1104/26 (mid-5th c. BC). The form is attested even later, with slightly different details of form, in Greece: see, e.g., Corinth VII.3, 124, pl. 29, no. 670 (4th–2nd c. BC). Date: 5th–4th c. BC. FF80_162PL-C_CkW
1:2
Lids Only fragmentary examples of lids were recovered at Fat toria Fabrizio. Of the total 21 fragments found, there are 18 rims, one handle, and two body wall sherds. The rims have diameters ranging from 12 to 22 cm. The presence of a ledge suggests that these pieces fit with casseroles or kakkabai, since both of these types of vessel had lid-resting ledges. Because of the highly fragmentary state of the piec es, however, none of the lids can be securely assigned to its matching vessel. The profiles of the cooking ware lids from Fattoria Fa brizio are very simple. They are distinguished by a direct rim or the presence of a small guide-notch for the ledge. None of the examples has either the more articulated rim or the molded rim found in other parts of Magna Grecia, such as Locri (Conti 1989, 291–92). The profiles seem to be purely functional: the profile of the body is either oblique or curved, and there is a centrally mounted knob. The three types (one with variants) presented in the catalog below were distinguished on the basis of the profiles of the bodies. The lone knob is also presented: Li 1, concave body; Li 2, convex body; Li 3.1, oblique profile with rounded rim;
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 309
Li 3.2, oblique profile with squared rim; and LiK 1, truncated conical knob. The interior profile of type Li 1 contains a small protruding notch. The type dates to the second half of the 4th c. BC, although it is attested at Athens beginning in the 5th c. BC. Similarly, Type Li 2 has a direct, inward-projecting ledge in the form of a quadrangular notch. The fragment described in the catalog below has a diameter of 22 cm. This type of lid dates to the 5th c. BC, but precise parallels place it also in the 4th and 3rd c. BC. Lid Type Li 3 comprises nine pieces with oblique pro files, subdivided into two variants: Li 3.1 with rounded rims, and Li 3.2 with squared rims. Variant Li 3.1 is represented by five fragments. The best-preserved example has a diame ter between 12 and 14 cm. The date provided by the compa randa for this type of lid, 5th–4th c. BC, matches the chrono logical context of the farmhouse. Variant Li 3.2, represented by two fragments, is distinguished by a quadrangular ledge and a less accentuated notch. Its diameter is larger than that of variant Li 3.1. It is attested in 4th-c. BC contexts. The lone knob found in the farmhouse, LiK 1, dates to the 5th–4th c. BC but also has close parallels in 3rd-c. BC contexts, such as Pomarico Vecchio and Roccagloriosa.
5/29/14 1:56 PM
310
Maria Francesca Blotti Lids
FF CkW 12 Lid Type Li 1 Provenance: Room 1 W. Level 2, Batt. 5. Lot: FF80-185PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 1.66; rim 18.00; wall th 0.44; w 1.80. Clay type 4, Munsell 5YR 6/6 reddish yellow; irregular breaks; hard, smoothed, and rough to the touch. Moderate density of medium-sized white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly. Condition: Fragmentary—part of the rim and body wall. Description: The profile of the bowl is flat at the bottom and concave at the top, with a slightly projecting and rounded edge. Local production. Comparisons and comment: Quercia 2003, 191, fig. 6, E1 b (first half of the 4th c. BC, from Metaponto); Torre di Satriano I, 228, pl. XXV, no. 84; Agora XII, fig. 18, no. 1953 (425–400 BC). Date: 4th c. BC.
1:3
FF80_185PL_CkW
FF CkW 13 Lid Type Li 2 Provenance: Room 1 W. Level 2, Batt. 3. Lot: FF80161PLA. Dimensions and technical features: h 1.94; rim 22.00; wall th 0.48; w 12.2. Clay type 4, Munsell 5YR 6/6 reddish yellow; irregular breaks; hard, smoothed, and rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and medium-sized white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly. Traces of burning at the center. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the body wall. Description: Bowl with convex exterior profile and direct, inward-projecting quadrangular ledge. Local production. Comparisons: Semeraro 1983, pl. 93; Conti 1989, 293, pl. XXXVIII, no. 343 (4th c. BC, from Locri); Valenza Mele 1991, no. 107; Oppido Mamertina, 324, fig. 318, no. 679; Quercia 2003, 192, fig. 7 E2c (first half of the 4th c. BC, from Metaponto). Date: 4th c. BC. FF CkW 14 Lid Type Li 3.1 Provenance: Squares B2–B3. Level 1, Batt. 3. Lot: FF8055PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 1.19; rim 12.00–14.00; wall th 0.44; w 3.20. Clay type 4, Munsell 5YR 6/6 reddish yellow; irregular breaks; hard, smoothed, and rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and me dium-sized white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly. Traces of burning on the rim. Condition: Rim and part of the body wall. Description: Bowl with oblique profile and rounded ledge;
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 310
1:3
FF80_161PLA_CkW
1:3
FF80_55PL_CkW
the body wall is raised above the resting surface. Local production. Comparisons and comment: Corinth VII.3, 131, fig. 697 (ca. 350 BC); Agora XXXIII, 196–97, fig. 90, no. 717 (P 2875), pl. 73 (3rd c. BC); Mozia, 222, pl. LVI, MD.03.1046/4 (5th c. BC). Date: 5th–3rd c. BC.
5/29/14 1:56 PM
Cooking Ware
311
FF CkW 15 Lid Type Li 3.2 Provenance: Room 1 E. Level 2, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80-158PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 1.54; rim 16.00; wall th 0.40; w 4.77. Clay type 4, Munsell 5YR 4/6 yellowish red; irregular breaks; hard, smoothed, and rough to the touch. Moderate density of very small to small white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly. Micaceous inclusions. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the body wall. Description: Bowl with oblique profile, quadrangular ledge raised above the resting surface, and thin vertical notch for positioning the lid. Local production.
Comparisons and comment: Morel 1970, 104–5, fig. 28.9 (320–270 BC, from Cozzo Presepe); Conti 1989, 293, no. 343, pl. XXXVIII (4th c. BC, from Locri); Oppido Mamertina, 324, no. 677, fig. 318 (3rd–1st c. BC); Quercia 2003, 190, fig. 7, E2b (first half of the 4th c. BC, from Metaponto). Date: 4th c. BC.
FF CkW 16 Lid Knob Type LiK 1 Provenance: Room 6. Level 2, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80-146PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 2.21; rim 2.46; wall th 0.81; w 2.94. Clay: interior—type 3, Munsell 5YR 4/6 yellowish red; exterior—type 4, Munsell 5YR 6/6 reddish yellow; irregular breaks; hard, compact, smoothed and rough to the touch. Very small to small black and white stone inclusions. “Sandwich” fabric. Micaceous inclusions. Surface marked by small vughs. Condition: Fragmentary—knob and attachment of the body wall. Description: Truncated conical knob inclined toward the
1:3 exterior at the top; the center of the underside is hollow, with semicircu lar section. Local production. Comparisons: Cotton 1983, 378, fig. 148, no. 479 (300 BC); Sorgenti Lao, 194, fig. 32, no. 270332 (from S. Evrasto, at the source of the River Lao); Roccagloriosa I, 272, fig. 187, no. 296 (sec ond half of the 4th–beginning of the 3rd c. BC); Bianco and Deodato 1997, pl. 82, no. 186 (second half of the 3rd c. and 330–300 BC, from Pomarico Vecchio); Mozia, pl. 11, no. 5 (4th–first half of the 3rd c. BC). Date: 4th–3rd c. BC.
Cooking Pots (Chytrai) The cooking pots are, alongside the casseroles, the most common forms at Fattoria Fabrizio. Only chytrai are attest ed; kakkabai are entirely absent. None of the types could be completely or even partially reconstructed, given that most of the rim fragments are small and rarely include significant portions of the shoulder, so that vessel depth and volume was estimated by comparisons of similar vessels from other sites. The diameters, however, can be approximated, and fall with in a range between 9.0 and 15.0 cm. The types are as follows: P 1.1, pendant rim; P 1.2, rounded rim with continuous profile; P 1.5, rounded, flaring rim slightly inclined toward the exterior; P 1.6, rounded, oblique rim; P 1.7a, offset rim on curved wall; P 1.7b, offset rim on straight body wall; P 1.8a, rounded, flaring rim; P 1.8b, forked rim; P 2.1, rim with triangular section; P 3, rim on high, oblique lip; and S 1, spout. Cooking pot Type P 1 comprises chytrai with globular pro files, everted rims continuing down to collared necks with or without rim-mounted handles, which do not usually ex
tend much above the line of the rim. Variants have been identified on the basis of key differences as follows. On Type P 1.1, the combination of flat-topped, pendant rim mounted on a short neck (with concave exterior profile) and oblique shoulder suggests a globular body with a diam eter of 14.0 cm. The type includes a total of three fragments. It is encountered in Basilicata at S. Evrasto and Pomarico Vecchio (second half of the 4th–3rd c. BC), while at Monte Sannace in Puglia it is attested from the 6th to the middle of the 4th c. BC. The life of the form therefore probably stretched from the 6th through the 3rd c. BC; in this study it is dated to the 4th–3rd c. BC. Type P 1.2 has a flat-topped, rounded rim mounted on a curved body wall with a continuous profile. The diameter could not be measured because of the small size of the frag ment. The parallels for the type date to the 6th and 5th c. BC, a chronology matching that of the pottery lot in which the type was found. Variant P 1.5 has a rim slightly inclined toward the ex terior, narrow mouth, wide shoulder, and short neck with concave exterior profile. The ribbon handles are mounted vertically on the rim. One of the recovered examples bears shallow grooves. The example described in the catalog has a diameter of 13.4 cm. The closest parallels, from Sybaris, Taranto, and Cozzo Presepe, date the type to the 6th–5th
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 311
1:3
FF80-158PL-CkW
FF80_146-1_CkW
5/29/14 1:56 PM
312
Maria Francesca Blotti
c. BC, while other comparanda from Monte Sannace and Rutigliano date it to the 4th–3rd c. BC. Only two examples of Type P 1.6 were found. The bet ter-preserved fragment has an oblique, rounded, flat-topped rim that is thinned at the tip. The exterior profile is continu ous. The diameter could not be calculated because of the very small size of the fragment, but the thickness of the wall is 0.39 cm. The other fragment has a diameter of 17.2 cm, and the wall thickness is greater. The comparanda assign this type to a wide chronological span—6th–3rd c. BC—that demonstrates the morphological conservatism of cooking ware forms. Type P 1.7 includes the cooking pots that have a round ed, offset rim. The variants are defined by the shape of the body wall on which the rim is mounted. The form is unusu al, but both of the variants are produced in the typical cook ing ware fabric. With Type P 1.7a, the rim is mounted on a curved body wall, and its diameter is larger. It has precise parallels in 2nd–1st-c. BC contexts at Gravina di Puglia, but at Fattoria Fabrizio it is dated (on site context) from the 6th to the end of the 4th c. BC. Type P 1.7b has a rounded, offset rim mounted on a straight body wall; the seam between the rim and body is emphasized by two obvious indentations. The diameter is 6.0 cm. This cooking pot appears in a con text dated 400–350 BC, but the comparanda from Corinth demonstrate its continued use through the 2nd c. BC. On Type P 1.8a, the diameter of the several examples var ies between 8.0 and 13.0 cm. The rim of Type P 1.8b is forked and flat-topped, mounted on a curved body wall. The diame ter is 14.0 cm. The parallels do not supply an exact chronolo gy, but the context gives an approximate date of 350–300 BC. Type P 2.1 has a round-topped, offset rim with triangu lar section mounted on a short neck with concave exterior profile. The seam between the neck and the shoulder is em
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 312
phasized by an obvious indentation, and the diameter is 20 cm. It is datable to the 4th c. BC, but the chronological span indicated by the parallels is much wider: 6th–5th c. BC at Kaulonia, 5th c. BC at Locri and also Athens. On Type P 3, the thin, flat-topped rim is mounted on a high, oblique lip. The lid-resting ledge is absent, but a lid could be rested on the inclined lip; the diameter is 14.2 cm. The find context at Fattoria Fabrizio yielded four datable fragments of Archaic fine ware, a banded jug (375–270 BC), and a blackgloss jug (4th c. BC). Precise parallels for the cooking pot come from contexts dated to the beginning of the 3rd c. BC, consistent with the terminal date for Fattoria Fabrizio. Spout S 1 is a unique find among the excavated ma terials. It is narrow but not pierced by a hole, and it was surely mounted on the carination of the shoulder. A precise parallel from Athens, similarly lacking a hole on the side of the body wall, dates 425–400 BC. Several uses for this non functional spout are conceivable. It could be a sort of handle designed to accommodate a stick or to allow the pot to be moved while on the fire. This would have been a difficult operation, however, given that the opening is too small and short to hold a stick. It would have been difficult to hold the pot when full or to allow the contents of the pot to be stirred (Agora XII, 226 n. 12). The original form of the “spout” could also have been a type of pressure valve that allowed steam to escape during cooking; perhaps with the passage of time this function was unnecessary and the vestigial valve was retained as a purely decorative element. The walls of the pot from which the spout emerges are oblique and slightly curved on the exterior, while on the interior they are convex, forming a conical hollow space. The lone example of a cook ing pot with a spout has walls 0.5 cm thick.
5/29/14 1:56 PM
Cooking Ware
313
Cooking Pots FF CkW 17 Chytra Type P 1.1 Provenance: Area 7. Level 2, Batt. 2. Lot: FF80-234PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 2.90; rim 14.00; wall th 0.30; w 12.30. Clay type 1, Munsell 7.5YR 2.5/1 black; irregular breaks; hard, compact, smoothed and rough to the touch. Moderate density of very small to small white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly across the surface. Very little mica. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the shoulder. Description: Flat-topped pendant rim on a short neck with concave exterior profile, mounted in turn on an oblique shoulder. Comparisons and comment: P. Bottini 1988, fig. 31, no. 270137 (4th c. BC, from S. Evrasto, at the source of the River Lao); Monte Sannace, 134, no. 2, pl. 231, no. 3 (6th–5th c. BC); Cotton 1992, 190, fig. 79, no. 1462 (3rd c. BC, from Gravina); Museo Taranto II.1, 69, fig. 31; Bar ra Bagnasco 1992–1993, 198, no. 85, fig. 40 (end of the 4th–first half of the 3rd c. BC, from Pomarico Vecchio); FF CkW 18 Chytra Type P 1.2 Provenance: Room 6. Level 2, Batt. 3. Lot: FF80-176PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 2.76; rim unknown; wall th 0.30 cm; w 3.03. Clay type 10, Munsell 7/5YR 6/8 red dish yellow; irregular breaks; hard, smoothed, and rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and medium-sized white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly across the surface. Surface marked by small vughs. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the body wall. Description: Rounded, flat-topped rim with continuous pro file mounted on a curved wall. Local production.
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 313
1:2
Bianco and Deodato 1997, 188, pl. 79, no. 161 (mid-3rd c. BC, from Pomarico Vecchio); Quercia 2003, 179, fig. 2, A1e (first half of the FF80_234PL_CkW 4th c. BC, from Metaponto). Date: 4th–3rd c. BC. FF80_176PL_CkW
1:2
Comparisons and comment: Sibari IV, 66, no. 91, figs. 66, 142 (6th c. BC, from Stombi); Cotton 1983, 375, fig. 145, no. 440 (6th c. BC, from Cozzo Presepe); Kaulonia I, 81–85, fig. 56, no. 378 (6th–5th c. BC); Incoronata 3, 101, fig. 107. Date: End of the 6th–5th c. BC.
5/29/14 1:56 PM
314
Maria Francesca Blotti
Cooking Pots cont. FF CkW 19 Chytra Type P 1.5 Provenance: Room 4. Level 2, Batt. 2. Lot: FF80-170PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 4.92; rim 16.00–17.00; wall th 0.30; w 7.30. Clay type 10, Munsell 7/5YR 4/6 strong brown; irregular breaks; hard, smoothed, and rough to the touch. Moderate densi ty of small and medium-sized white and black stone inclusions distributed uni formly across the surface. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the handle. Description: Rounded, flat-topped, flaring rim slightly inclined toward the exterior and slightly thickened; narrow mouth and wide shoulder; ribbon handle with shallow grooves mounted vertically on the rim; short neck with concave exterior profile. Lo cal production. Comparisons and comment: Sibari I, 89, fig. 75, no. 176.4 (6th c. BC); Sibari II, 325, no. 476, fig. 364, no. 23080 (rim 20.00; end of the 8th–end of the 6th c. BC); Sibari IV, 66, no. 91, fig. 66.142 (6th c. BC); Cotton 1983, 374, fig. 145, no. 445 (end of the 6th–beginning of the 5th c., and continuing through 330 BC); Cotton 1977, 130, no. 306, fig. 54 (4th–3rd c. BC, from Gravina di Puglia); Meligunìs-Lipára V, 165, T 2186, fig. 380, pl. CXL (end of the 3rd FF CkW 20 Chytra Type P 1.6 Provenance: Room 1 E. Level 2, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80-158PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 2.25; rim unknown; wall th 0.39; w 1.88. Clay type 6, Munsell 5YR 5/2 red dish gray; irregular breaks; hard, compact, smoothed and rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and me dium-sized white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly across the surface. Large quantity of mica pres ent. Surface marked by small vughs. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the body wall. Description: Flat-topped, rounded, and oblique rim; no lid-resting ledge. Comparisons and comment: Sibari IV, 66, no. 91, figs. 66, 142 (6th c. BC, from Stombi); Corinth VII.3, pl. 82, no. A291,
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 314
1:2
FF80_170PL_CkW c. BC, from Lipari); Ciancio and Radina 1983, pl. VI, 10 (second half of the 4th–beginning of the 3rd c. BC, from Rutigliano); Sibari V, 496, no. 532, fig. 501; Albanese and Procelli 1988–1989, 78, no. 152, fig. 81 (end of the 6th– beginning of the 5th c. BC, from Ramacca); Rossi 1989, 189, no. 2, pl. 330, 2, 3, 5 (second half of the 4th–2nd c. BC); Conti 1989, 265, no. 298, pl. XXXVI (5th–3rd c. BC, from Locri); Parmly Toxey and Carter in Necropoleis, 726, CD289-51 (7th–4th c. BC); Quercia 2003, 177, fig. 2 A1a (first half of the 4th c. BC, from Metaponto); Museo Taranto II.2, 335–36, pl. 8 a (last quarter of the 6th–5th c. BC). Date: 6th–5th c. BC.
1:2
303 (625–600 BC); FF80_158PL-2_CkW Cotton 1983, 375, fig. 145, no. 440 (6th c. BC, from Cozzo Presepe); Kaulonia I, 85, fig. 56, no. 383 (6th–5th c. BC); Cotton 1992, 184, fig. 75, no. 1403 (2nd–1st c. BC, from Gravina); Quercia 2003, 181, A1d (first half of the 4th c. BC, from Metaponto). Date: 4th c. BC.
5/29/14 1:56 PM
Cooking Ware FF CkW 21 Chytra Type P 1.7a Provenance: Room 6. Level 2, Batt. 5. Lot: FF80-198PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 2.54; rim 10.00–11.00; wall th 0.23; w 5.63. Clay type 2, Munsell Gley 2 3/1 very dark bluish gray; irregular breaks; hard, compact, smoothed and rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and medium-sized white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly across the surface. Surface marked by small vughs. The fragment is completely blackened. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the shoulder. Description: Rounded, offset rim mounted on a curved body wall; no lid-resting ledge. FF CkW 22 Chytra Type P 1.7b Provenance: SE Sounding 2. Level 2, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80147PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 3.02; rim unknown; wall th 0.28; w 4.89. Clay type 6, Munsell 7.5YR 3/2 dark brown; irregular breaks; hard, compact, smoothed and rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and me dium-sized white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly across the surface. Mica present. The fragment is completely blackened. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the shoulder. Description: Rounded, offset rim mounted on a straight FF CkW 23 Chytra Type P 1.8a Provenance: Squares B2+B3, E of baulk and Sounding E1. Level 1, Batt. 3 (B2+B3). Level 2, Batt. 4 (E1). Lots: FF80-56PL (B2+B3) + FF80-100PL (E1). Dimensions and technical features: h 2.12; rim 8.00; wall th 0.29; w 4.12. Clay type 10, Munsell 7/5YR 6/6 reddish yellow; irregular breaks; hard, smoothed, and rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and medium-sized white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly across the surface. Surface marked by small vughs. Traces of burning on the rim. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the body wall. Description: Rounded, flat-topped, flaring rim; narrow mouth and wide shoulder; short neck with concave exte rior profile. Local production. Comparisons and comment: Sibari II, 325, no. 476, fig. 364, no. 23080 (rim 20.00) (end of the 8th–end of the 6th c. BC); Agora XII, pl. 93, fig. 18 (575–500 BC); Cotton 1977, 130, no. 306, fig. 54 (4th–3rd c. BC, from Gravina di Puglia); Cotton 1983, 374, fig. 145, no. 445 (end of the 6th–beginning of the 5th c. and continuing until 330 BC); Meligunìs-Lipára V, 165, T 2186, fig. 380, pl. CXL
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 315
315 1:2
FF80_198PL_CkW
Comparisons and comment: Cotton 1992, 190, fig. 79, no. 1463 (2nd–1st c. BC, from Gravina). Date: 6th–end of the 4th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_147PL_CkW
body wall; no lid-resting ledge. Two obvious indentations emphasize the seam between the rim and the body wall. Comparisons and comment: Corinth VII.3, 141, pl. 34, no. 727 (5th–2nd c. BC). Date: 4th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_100PL+56PL_CkW
(end of the 3rd c. BC, from Lipari); Ciancio and Radina 1983, pl. VI, 10 (second half of the 4th–beginning of the 3rd c. BC, from Rutigliano); Sibari V, 496, no. 532, fig. 501; Rossi 1989, 189, no. 2, pl. 330, 2, 3, 5 (second half of the 4th–2nd c. BC); Conti 1989, 265, no. 298, pl. XXXVI (5th–3rd c. BC, from Locri); Museo Taranto II.1, 69, fig. 31 (last quarter of the 6th–end of the 5th c. BC); Bianco and Deodato 1997, 188, pl. 79, no. 161 (mid-3rd c. BC, from Pomarico Vecchio); Parmly Toxey and Carter in Necropoleis, 726, CD289-51 (7th–4th c. BC); Quercia 2003, 177 fig. 2 A1a (first half of the 4th c. BC, from Metapon to); Museo Taranto II.2, 335–36 pl. 8, a (last quarter of the 6th–end of the 5th c. BC). Date: Second half of the 4th c. BC.
5/29/14 1:56 PM
316
Maria Francesca Blotti
Cooking Pots cont. FF CkW 24 Chytra Type P 1.8b Provenance: Room 1 E. Level 2, Batt. 3. Lot: FF80-221 PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 1.77; rim 14.00; wall th 0.29; w 6.40. Clay type 7, Munsell 5YR 4/4 reddish brown; irregular breaks; hard, compact, smoothed and rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and me dium-sized white and black stone inclusions distribut ed uniformly across the surface. Mica present. Surface marked by small vughs. Traces of burning on the rim. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the shoulder. Description: Flat-topped, forked, and offset rim mounted on FF CkW 25 Chytra Type P 2.1 Provenance: Room 2 SE quadrant. Level 2, Batt. 3. Lot: FF80-138PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 2.01; rim int. 20.00; wall th 0.44; w 5.05. Clay type 7, Munsell 10YR 5/4 yel lowish brown; irregular breaks; hard, compact, smoothed and rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and medium-sized white and black stone inclusions distrib uted uniformly across the surface. Mica present. Traces of burning on the rim. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the shoulder. Description: Round-topped, offset rim with triangular sec tion mounted on a short neck with concave exterior pro
1:2
FF80_221PL_CkW
a curved wall; no lid-resting ledge. Local production. Comparisons and comment: Cotton 1992, 185–86, fig. 76, no. 1420 (from Gravina). Date: 4th c. BC. file; no lid-resting ledge. An obvious indentation empha sizes the seam between the neck and the shoulder. Comparisons and comment: Agora XII, 371, pl. 93, fig 18, no. 1928 (5th c. BC); Sorgenti Lao, 193, fig. 31, no. 270239 (4th c. BC, from S. Evrasto, at the source of the River Lao); Conti 1989, 265, pl. XXXVI, no. 298. (5th–3rd c. BC, from Locri); Kaulonia I, 81–85, fig. 56, no. 370 (6th– 5th c. BC); Fracchia and Keith 1990, 267, fig. 186, no. 248 (500 BC, from Roccagloriosa); Parmly Toxey and Carter in Necropoleis, 726, T 12-6 (300–275 BC); Mozia, 204, pl. XLVII, MD.03.1036/23 (end of the 5th–4th c. BC). Date: 5th–4th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_138PL-2_CkW
FF CkW 26 Chytra Type P 3 Provenance: Sounding E1. Level 3, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80102PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 2.30; rim 14.20; wall th 0.40; w 4.80. Clay type 4, Munsell 5YR 6/8 reddish yel low; irregular breaks; hard, compact, smoothed and rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and medium-sized white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly across the surface. Very small micaceous inclusions. Condition: Fragmentary—rim and part of the neck. Description: Round-topped, thinned rim mounted on an oblique lip, mounted in turn on an oblique shoulder; no lid-resting ledge.
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 316
1:2
FF80_102PL_CkW
Comparisons and comment: Cotton 1983, 376, fig. 146, no. 456 (ca. 300 BC, from Cozzo Presepe); Conti 1989, 272, pl. XXXVI, no. 310 (second half of the 3rd c. BC, from Locri); Torre di Satriano I, 226, pl. XXVI, no. 63 (4th–3rd c. BC). Date: 4th c. BC.
5/29/14 1:56 PM
Cooking Ware FF CkW 27 Spout Type S 1 Provenance: Room 2 NW quadrant, under tile fall. Level 2, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80-91PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 3.28; w 4.47; l 5.15; wall th 0.50. Clay type 3, Munsell 5YR 4/6 yellowish red (section) and Munsell 2.5YR 4/8 red (surface); irregular breaks; hard, compact, smoothed and rough to the touch. Moderate density of very small to small white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly across the surface. “Sandwich” fabric. Micaceous inclusions present. Traces of burning on the walls. Condition: Fragmentary—part of the body wall and the at tachment to the pot. Description: Spout with slightly oblique and curved walls on the exterior and convex walls on the interior, mounted on the high part of the shoulder. Local production. Comparisons and comment: Agora XII, 373, pl. 94, fig. 18, no. 1953 (425–400 BC). Date: 425–400 BC. Bases The catalog concludes with a selection of the bases produced in the typical cooking ware fabric. The examples recovered either are convex or have a small foot. As mentioned previ ously, none of the bases could be securely attributed to any of the attested types; not even the diameter proved to be a useful indicator. Nevertheless, the bases belonged to globu lar forms, such as the cooking pots. Type B 1 has a ring that is convex on the exterior, while the body wall rises obliquely. It is dated to the 5th c. BC. On Type B 1.2a, there is a small foot that is slightly concave on the exterior; the body wall rises in a curving line. The
317 1:2
FF80_91PL_CkW
diameter is smaller than that of B 1, and it dates to the 4th c. BC. Type B 1.2b has a small foot that is slightly concave on the exterior, with a wall that rises in a curving line. It is attested in contexts ranging from the 5th to the 3rd c. BC; at Fattoria Fabrizio, it is dated to the 4th c. BC. Type B 2 is convex and direct, features typical of deep cooking vessels that were placed on stands or portable ovens, such as the chytrai. The dimensions suggest that this base could belong to rim FF80-167P, classified as Type P 1.8a, which is made of a similar fabric and comes from the same context. It is dated to the 4th c. BC.
Bases FF CkW 28 Base Type B 1 Provenance: SE Sounding 1. Level 2, Batt. 3. Lot: FF80124PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 1.44; base 8.60; wall th 0.33; base th 0.38; w 3.38. Clay type 8, Munsell 2.5YR 4/8 red (section) and 10YR 5/3 brown (surface); irregular breaks; hard, compact, rough and powdery to the touch. High density of medium-sized and large white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly. Surface marked by small vughs. Condition: Fragmentary—part of the base and part of the body wall.
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 317
1:2
FF80_124PL_CkW
Description: Base with ring foot that is convex on the exte rior; oblique body wall; clearly defined division between the body wall and the base. Comparisons and comment: Quercia 2003, 193, fig. 7, F4 (first half of the 4th c. BC, from Metaponto). Date: 4th c. BC.
5/29/14 1:56 PM
318
Maria Francesca Blotti
Bases cont. FF CkW 29 Base Type B 1.2a Provenance: Room 1 W. Level 2, Batt. 3. Lots: FF80-161PL + FF80-162PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 1.63; base 7.80; wall th 0.30; base th 0.50; w 8.78. Clay type 8, Munsell 5YR 4/4 reddish brown; irregular breaks; hard, compact, rough and powdery to the touch. Moderate density of medi um-sized and large white and black stone inclusions dis tributed uniformly. Surface marked by small vughs. Large quantity of mica. Condition: Fragmentary—part of the base and part of the body wall. FF CkW 30 Base Type B 1.2b Provenance: Room 5. Level 2, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80-143PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 4.19; base 5.70; wall th 0.43; base th 0.35; w 9.70. Clay type 6, Munsell 5YR 5/3 reddish brown; irregular breaks; hard, compact, and rough to the touch. Moderate density of small and me dium-sized white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly across the surface. Very little mica present. Sur face marked by small vughs. Condition: Fragmentary—base and part of the body wall. Description: Base with small foot that is slightly concave on the exterior; curved body profile; clearly defined division between the body wall and the base.
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 318
1:2
FF80_161+162PL_CkW
Description: Base with small foot that is slightly concave on the exterior; curved body wall; clearly defined division be tween the body wall and the base. Date: 4th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_143PL_CkW
Comparisons and comment: Conti 1989, pl. XLV, fig. 394 (5th–3rd c. BC, from Locri). Date: ca. 300 BC, based on context.
5/29/14 1:56 PM
Cooking Ware FF CkW 31 Base Type B 2 Provenance: Room 2 NE quadrant. Level 2, Batt. 4. Lot: FF80-166P. Dimensions and technical features: h 14.84; max. body 23.50; wall th 0.40. Clay type 8, Munsell 2.5YR 5/8 red; irreg ular breaks; hard, compact, rough and powdery to the touch. Moderate density of medium-sized and large white and black stone inclusions distributed uniformly. Surface marked by small vughs. Traces of burning on the bottom and one side. Condition: Fragmentary—bottom and most of the body, in cluding the attachment of the handle to the wall. The rim
319
FF80-167P could belong to the same vessel, since it is made of the same fabric and comes from the same con text. The dimensions are also compatible (h 2.7; rim 13.2). Description: Convex, direct base. Comparisons and comment: Agora XII, fig. 18, no. 1928 (6th– 4th c. BC); Agora XXXIII, 305, no. 579 (P 14172), fig. 73, pl. 62 (3rd c. BC); Quercia 2003, 192–93, fig. 7, F1 (first half of the 4th c. BC, from Metaponto). Date: 4th–3rd c. BC.
1:3
FF80-166P+167P_CkW
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 319
5/29/14 1:56 PM
FF_20_cooking_04feb14.indd 320
5/29/14 1:56 PM
21
Transport Amphorae Oda Teresa Calvaruso Transport amphorae were the preferred means for the interregional circulation of foodstuffs in antiquity, and as such are particularly important in shedding light on a site’s economic and commercial relations. In the last few years, knowledge about amphorae has increased significantly, and a greater quantity of published material has become available from a variety of sites. The bibliography dedicated to specific types,1 as well as synthetic studies,2 has grown in recent years and is now quite large. The study of transport amphorae illustrates the importance of the agricultural activities with which they were associated, and the commercial exchanges both local and long-range in which they were a vital element.3 The frequencies of amphora types at individual sites both large and small, like Fattoria Fabrizio, is the principal ceramic evidence for agrarian regimes and networks of exchange, over short as well as long distances. Although less numerous than other materials, the fragmentary amphorae from Fattoria Fabrizio offer useful data for the reconstruction of several aspects of life in the ancient farmhouse. The classification of the amphorae types present was influenced by the state of the material. Of the total count of 234 amphora fragments recovered, 187 can be rejoined to one or more neighboring fragments. The majority (195) are body sherds that cannot be assigned to either a precise form or a known production; the rare diagnostic pieces suggest a minimum number of 19 individuals (MNI), consisting of eight distinct rims, eight handles, and four necks. Attempts to reconstruct complete forms and to match rims, handles, and toes, though of limited success, did enable the construction of a typology. The types presented in the catalog follow as closely as possible the previous studies of the transport amphorae from the field survey of the chora of Metapon1
Koehler 1979, 1981; Lyding Will 1982; Van der Mersch 1994.
2 Empereur and Garlan 1987; Amphores Romaines ; Lattara 6; Sciallano and
Sibella 1994; Caravale and Toffoletti 1997; Auriemma 2004. 3 Gras 1987; Olcese 2010.
FF_21_amphorae_04feb14.indd 321
to4 and the necropoleis at Pantanello and Saldone.5 It also refers to the published materials from other excavated sites in Magna Grecia. The highly fragmentary state of the materials from Fattoria Fabrizio meant that observations about form were based essentially on the rim fragments as the most indicative element. Only the rims have been described in this catalog.6 The numerous body sherds, as well as the rarer handles and toes, were certainly considered, since they are very useful for quantification. Quantification of Amphora Types Corinthian, Ionian, and Greco-Italic amphorae are all represented in the assemblages from Fattoria Fabrizio, with Corinthian and Greco-Italic amphorae being the most common (for quantification totals, see Table 21.1). The most common amphora type is the Corinthian A (52 fragments, six individuals),7 by far the most widespread container in southern Italy and Sicily from the 8th century BC, traditionally considered to have been used for the transport of oil.8 The second most common type is the Corinthian B (31 fragments, two individuals), which began to appear in the mid-6th century BC.9 Production was located principally on Corcyra,10 and the amphorae were probably used for wine. Numerous other containers are attested (57 fragments belonging to at least four vessels) that can be securely attributed on the basis of their fabrics to 4
Swift in Survey, 455–88. Morter and Leonard in Necropoleis, 731–47. 6 This situation has the potential to cause confusion in terms of the chronology of the farmhouse, since the most important fragments to be described in the catalog—namely, the rims—date to the end of the 6th and first half of the 5th c. BC, while the Late Classical and Early Hellenistic periods are represented only by body sherds, of which there are many, mostly very small. 7 Body sherds of this amphora type are relatively easy to recognize on the basis of their fabrics, which have been characterized by Whitbread (1995). For examples of fabrics found in the Metapontino, see Swift in Survey, 470, 477. 8 For Corinthian amphora production, see Koehler 1979; Whitbread 1995. 9 Gras 1987, 44 (at the oppidum of La Liquière, southern France, in contexts of the second quarter of the 6th c. BC); De Caro and Gialanella 1998 (mid-6th–c. BC domestic site at Punta Chiarito, Pithekoussai). 10 Koehler 1979, 1981; cf. Whitbread 1995. 5
5/29/14 1:59 PM
0
Form/Class
Cat. No.
Date
MNI
NFr
Eastern Greek
Greco-Italic
80 70
Amp 01
550–500 BC
1
1
Amp 02
520–500 BC
1
1
60
Amp 03
550–500 BC
1
1
50
Amp 04
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
40
600–500 BC
0
5
30
520–500 BC
1
1
20
500–400 BC
0
14
10
400–200 BC
1
28
0
Amp 05
550–500 BC
1
2
Amp 06
Beginning of the 5th c. BC
1
1
500–400 BC
0
5
4th–3rd c. BC
0
1
4th–3rd c. BC
0
1
4th–3rd c. BC
0
21
Corinthian B
Eastern Greek/Ionian
Corinthian B
Oda Teresa Calvaruso
322
Corinthian A
Corinthian A
78 57
52 31 14 Corinthian A Corinthian B
Eastern Greco-Italic Unidentified Greek/Ionian
Figure 21.1 Counts of amphora fragments (NFr) by type at Fattoria Fabrizio. 80
Amp 07
Second half of the 6th c. BC
1
1
Amp 08
Second half of the 6th c. BC
1
1
Amp 09
Second half of the 6th c. BC
1
1
5th c. BC
0
11
ters, but macroscopic analysis of the fabric of seversamples appears instead to indicate that they were produced in Calabria.14 60 The remaining 78 fragments belong to transport 50 vessels of the 4th and 3rd centuries BC that cannot be 40 identified by type or provenance (Fig. 21.1). 78
Amp 10
End of the 4th c. BC
1
21
30
Amp 11
Second half of the 4th c. BC
1
1
20
70 al
52
57
Amphora Fabrics 31 Several basic observations can be made on the basis 4th c. BC 1 2 10 of macroscopic analysis of14the fabrics.15 In the CoGreco-Italic 4th–3rd c. BC 1 2 rinthian A amphorae, the fabrics range in color from 0 4th c. BC 0 6 Corinthian A Corinthian B Eastern Unidentified light yellow-pink (Munsell 7.5YRGreco-Italic 7/4) to light yellow Greek/Ionian Second half of the 4th c. BC 0 7 (Munsell 10 YR 8/4) to a more intense red (Munsell 4th–3rd c. BC 0 18 2.5YR 5/8), with angular inclusions often semi-trian4th–3rd c. BC 1 3 gular in form.16 The fabrics of the Corinthian B am1 2 phorae are very different from those of Corinthian A: Unidentified 1 4 they are levigated and porous and contain small black and white inclusions. The Greco-Italic amphorae in1 1 clude a variety of fabrics, ranging from compact with 0 68 very small inclusions to porous and rough with small Total 19 234 white inclusions. The fabrics of the East Greek amTable 21.1 Quantification of the transport amphorae from Fattophorae contain abundant small flecks of gold mica, a ria Fabrizio by minimum number of individuals (MNI) and number typical feature of this particular production; however, of fragments (NFr). visual comparison with several examples found in the 11 early and late Greco-Italic forms, which are gener- Metapontino and identified as Calabrian suggests the ally considered containers for wine. Their production, latter area as the correct provenance.17 beginning in the middle of the 4th c. BC, increased rapidly.12 Lastly, a handful of sherds (14 fragments be- ly, given the relatively meager documentation available for the Archaic longing to three vessels) had initially been attributed phases of Phocaea. 14 For identification and characterization of Calabrian amphora fabrics, to East Greek—probably Ionian13—production cen11
The name, coined by Benoit (1957), includes amphorae with different features produced at several sites in Magna Grecia and Sicily from the end of the 4th to the end of the 2nd c. BC, for which Lyding Will (1982) created a typology. 12 Manacorda 1986; Olcese 2004, 173–92. 13 A Phocaean origin for these fragments was proposed, albeit cautious-
FF_21_amphorae_04feb14.indd 322
including examples of “Ionian” amphora forms and “Corinthian” type B amphora forms, see Swift in Survey, 459. 15 See Swift in Survey, 470–88. 16 Swift in Survey, 470, 477; for characterization of Corinthian fabrics, see Whitbread 1995. 17 For identification and characterization of Calabrian fabrics, see Swift in Survey, 459.
5/29/14 1:59 PM
Uniden
Transport Amphorae 120
323
100
100
80
80 60
Contexts Most of the amphorae found inside the farmhouse (111 fragments, 75%) date between the 4th and 3rd centuries BC (Fig. 21.2). (Since these are mainly body sherds, they appear only in the quantification table and not in the catalog.) Significant evidence for previous occupation of the site is provided by 15 fragments of Archaic and 31 of Classical amphorae, which were found both in the soundings excavated immediately around the
ce Su rfa
6
2
ng
12
di
8
5
So
Figure 21.2 Counts of amphora fragments (NFr) by chronological period at Fattoria Fabrizio.
om
Unidentified
1
Second half of the 4th c. BC
Ro
5th and first half of 4th c. BC
om
6th and early 5th c. BC
0
Ro
0
Ar ea 9
22 7
un
33
15
Ar ea 7
20
31
s
62
om
20
85
40
4
77
Ro
40
om
111
Ro
60
Figure 21.3 Distribution of amphora fragments (NFr) by location at Fattoria Fabrizio; none found in Rooms 3 or 5.
farmhouse (six Archaic and 17 Classical fragments; Fig. 21.4) and inside the building (nine Archaic and 14 Classical fragments; Fig. 21.5). Residual fragments from the Archaic occupation of the site were discovered in the surface layers as well as in the floor layers. The greatest number of amphorae was found in Room 1 (33 fragments, 14% of the total amphorae assemblage), Room 6 (22 fragments, 9%), and Area 9 (12 fragments, 5%; Fig. 21.3). The paucity of these re-
NE Sounding 1 3%
Area 9 18% Sounding E1 22% Area 7 4% Room 1 45% W Sounding 17%
SE Sounding 1 49%
SE Sounding 2 9%
Figure 21.4 Distribution of amphora fragments (NFr) in external excavations at Fattoria Fabrizio.
FF_21_amphorae_04feb14.indd 323
Room 6 14%
Room 4 11%
Room 2 9%
Figure 21.5 Distribution of amphora fragments (NFr) dated to the mid-4th and the first quarter of the 3rd c. BC by room.
5/29/14 1:59 PM
324
Oda Teresa Calvaruso
mains suggests that whole amphorae were not crushed at one time in situ. Additional fragments were found distributed homogeneously within the tile fall: seven fragments in Room 2, five fragments in Room 4, and eight fragments from Area 7. A high proportion of fragments (85, 36%) was recovered in the soundings excavated outside of the farmhouse proper. In order to obtain a more faithful picture of the last phase of life of the farmhouse (second half of the 4th–first quarter of the 3rd century BC), the amount
FF_21_amphorae_04feb14.indd 324
of amphora fragments yielded by each room must be considered, excluding the residual finds. This produces a total of 56 fragments, which again indicates a prevalence in Room 1 (Fig. 21.5). (For quantification of the transport amphorae in relation to the other classes of pottery and finds in the assemblage, i.e., their relative importance in the assemblages as a whole, and interpretations, see p. 79 in Ch. 3, “Transport Amphorae by Phase.”)
5/29/14 1:59 PM
Transport Amphorae
325
Catalog of Transport Amphorae Corinthian A Series The Corinthian A type was one of the most widely circulated amphorae in southern Italy and Sicily, beginning in the mid-8th c. BC. All of its main chronological phases of development have been documented in Magna Grecia and in the Metapontine chora (for the chronological spread of Corinthian amphorae, Types A and A′, in the Metapontine chora, see Swift in Survey, 457, nos. 3–6, Corinthian Type A, and 461, nos. 19–24, Corinthian Type A′): from the flatbrimmed rim (7th–6th c. BC) to the wide and oblique rim; from the triangular section (second quarter of the 5th c. BC) to the collar rim (second half of the 4th–3rd c. BC). At Fattoria Fabrizio, the Corinthian A amphorae are represented by 52 fragments, including two rims, one handle, one toe, and 48 wall sherds. In terms of chronology, the rims and the toe have morphological features typical of the Archaic phase of the shape (second half of the 6th c. BC); one of the rims (Amp 01) has a wide and horizontal, flat
brim, while the other rim (Amp 02) flares slightly, and the toe has a flat floor. The handle is vertical and has a section that changes from oval near the top to circular near the bottom, with the attachment immediately below the rim, typical of the Hellenistic period. From the evidence of amphorae above, the better-preserved Archaic amphorae, including the Corinthian A type, would create a misleading impression—that the farmhouse dates to the 6th or early 5th c. BC. The Hellenistic period, by contrast, is almost absent from the catalog because it is represented only by frequently very small wall sherds of Corinthian A type or other. Though they have limited morphological value, these sherds are chronologically indicative by virtue of their fabrics (some of which demonstrate variations in color and texture) and wall thickness. Though numerically inferior, they well document the latest occupation of the farmhouse in the 4th c. BC.
Corinthian A Amphorae FF Amp 01 Corinthian A Amphora Provenance: Square C1. Level 1, Batt. 3. Lot: FF80-30PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 5.6; rim int. 19.0. Fabric: Munsell 2.5YR 5/8; hard; small white and black inclusions; gray core. Wheel-thrown. Condition: Fragment of the rim and neck, with the handle attachment. Description: Horizontal rim with the top slightly inclined
toward the interior, and rounded edges; vertical neck with thick walls. Comparisons and comment: Koehler 1979, 92, pl. 13, no 8; Di Sandro 1986, 26, pl. 4, no. 54 (from Pithekoussai); Kaulonia I, 93, fig. 63, no. 470; Albanese Procelli 2003, 37, pl. I, fig. 1 (from Ramacca); Swift in Survey, 469, no. 3. Date: Late 6th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_A1.1a_AMP
FF_21_amphorae_04feb14.indd 325
5/29/14 1:59 PM
326
Oda Teresa Calvaruso
Corinthian A Amphorae cont. FF Amp 02 Corinthian A Amphora Provenance: Sounding E1. Level 2, Batt. 2–3. Lot: FF8099PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 6.1; rim int. 22.0. Fabric: Munsell 5YR 6/8; hard; many small and large black inclusions. Condition: Fragment of the rim and neck, with the handle attachment.
Description: Horizontal, brimmed rim with flat lip, slightly inclined toward the exterior. Comparisons and comment: Koehler 1979, 98, pl. 14, no. 21; Di Sandro 1986, 27, pl. 4, no. 55 (from Pithekoussai); Semeraro 1997, 57, no. 52 (from Cavallino); Swift in Survey, 469, no. 3. Date: End of the 6th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_A1-1b_AMP FF Amp 03 Corinthian A Amphora Provenance: On top of Wall 4 between Room 1 W and Room 2 SW. Dimensions and technical features: h 9.8. Fabric: Munsell 10YR 8/4; hard; many small gray and white inclusions; gray core. Condition: Fragment of the toe.
Description: Toe with flat floor. Comparisons and comment: Koehler 1979, 104, pl. 6, no. 35; Meligunìs Lipára II, 26–27, fig. 2, cat. 2 (from Lipari); Di Sandro 1986, 66ff., pl. 4, (from Pithekoussai); Kaulonia I, 92, fig. 63, no. 471; Semeraro 1997, 91, no. 170b (from Leuca). Date: End of the 6th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_A1-1c_AMP
FF_21_amphorae_04feb14.indd 326
5/29/14 1:59 PM
Transport Amphorae
327
FF Amp 04 Corinthian A Amphora Provenance: Square C. Level 1, Batt. 2. Lot FF80-51PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 8.2. Fabric: Munsell 7.5YR 6/6; compact; many dark and white inclusions. The fragment could not be illustrated because of its poor state of preservation.
Condition: Fragment of a handle. Description: Handle with circular section, thicker near the top. Comparisons and comment: Koehler 1979, no. 54 (from Gela); Locri IV, 230, no. 178. Date: 4th–3rd c. BC.
Corinthian Type B Production of the Corinthian B amphorae began in the middle of the 6th c. BC and continued through the second half of the 3rd c. BC, mainly at Corcyra. The clay was more thoroughly levigated, at times powdery and lacking the typical inclusions of the A series. The latest research identifies multiple production centers of the B series in the central and southern areas of the Adriatic Sea. It was widely distributed throughout Magna Grecia and Sicily (Swift in Survey, 461). The presence of a resinous coating on many specimens suggests that the type
was probably used in the wine trade. Archaic versions, when found in a highly fragmentary state, are difficult to distinguish from the contemporary “Ionian” production because of their many shared morphological features. A total of 31 fragments were assigned to the B series, including two important rims. One of them (Amp 05) has the rounded profile typical of the initial phase of production, indicating the most widely attested type in Archaic contexts. The other rim, slightly inclined toward the exterior at the top and having a triangular section, dates to the 5th c. BC.
Corinthian B Amphorae FF Amp 05 Corinthian B Amphora Provenance: Squares A2–B1. Level 1, Batt. 1. Lot: FF802PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 10.3; rim 15.8. Fabric: Munsell 10YR 8/4; clean breaks; hard fabric; sparse dark, angular inclusions that may be argillaceous rock fragments.
Condition: Fragment of the rim and neck, with the handle attachment. Description: Thickened rim with rounded exterior profile. Comparisons and comment: Koehler 1979, nos. 214 and 216; Di Sandro 1986, 34–35, pl. 7, no. 80 (from Pithekoussai); Swift in Survey, 473, no. 9 and 474, no. 14. Date: Second half of the 6th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_2PL_AMP
FF_21_amphorae_04feb14.indd 327
Rim: 16.25 cm.
5/29/14 1:59 PM
328
Oda Teresa Calvaruso
Corinthian B Amphorae cont. FF Amp 06 Corinthian B Amphora Provenance: Room 1 W. Level 2, Batt. 4. Lot: FF80-162PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 2.8; rim ext. 14.5. Fabric: Munsell 2.5YR 5/6; granular; reddish-gray core; small calcareous inclusions; off-white slip. Condition: Fragment of the rim. Description: Echinus rim with the upper part inclined slightly toward the interior. Comparisons and comment: Koehler 1979, 174, no. 221, pl. 29; Koehler 1981, pl. 99b; Kaulonia I, 99, fig. 65, no. 499;
Semeraro 1997, 63, no. 95 (from Cavallino), 154, no. 321 (from Oria); Swift in Survey, 478, no. 25. Date: Early 5th c. BC.
Eastern Greek Series Numerous production centers are attested among the Eastern Greek amphorae, including Miletos, Clazomenae, Lesbos, Chios, Samos, and those denominated “Ionian” for their supposed Phocaean origin. These last were widely imitated in the western Mediterranean, but only recently have they gained a specific place within the broader picture of Greek amphora production due to the definitive retirement of labels such as “Ionian-Massaliote” or “of the Ionian tradition” which, despite the quotation marks, created a distorted image of their real provenance and therefore hindered proper evaluation of their archaeological and historical significance. These containers were probably developed in the western Mediterranean but produced in widely dispersed areas, from Massalia to Poseidonia-Paestum and Elea-Velia,
Calabria, and Sicily. They are well attested in southern Italy and Sicily in the 6th and 5th c. BC. They share many morphological features with the contemporary Corinthian B series, with which they are easily confused if the fragments are poorly preserved. Compared to the Corinthian and Corcyrean containers, the Eastern Greek amphorae at Fattoria Fabrizio are poorly represented, with only 14 fragments, of which three are rims. The type has an inflated rim made by folding the upper edge toward the exterior, which often resulted in an air pocket visible in section. The seam between the rim and the neck is marked by a projection of variable size. The neck is generally straight, and the short ribbon handles are attached just below the rim. The abundance of small flakes of gold mica in the fabrics is a typical feature of Eastern Greek production.
1:2
FF80_A3-2a_AMP
Eastern Greek Amphorae FF Amp 07 Eastern Greek Amphora Provenance: W Sounding. Level 1, Batt. 2. Lot: FF80250PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 4.0; rim 13.5. Fabric: Munsell 7.5YR 8/4; hard; rare small black inclusions. Condition: Fragment of the rim and neck. Description: Inflated “cushion” rim with nearly flat top. Comparisons and comment: Locri IV, 230, no. 179 (local fabric); Semeraro 1997, 61, no. 80 (Clazomenaean amphora from Cavallino), 271, n. 994 (Eastern Greek amphora
FF_21_amphorae_04feb14.indd 328
1:2
from Ruffano). Swift in Survey, 474, no. 14. FF80_A2-1a_AMP Date: Second half of the 6th c. BC.
5/29/14 1:59 PM
Transport Amphorae FF Amp 08 Eastern Greek Amphora Provenance: Room 2. Level 1, Batt. 2. Lot: FF80-23PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 5.6; rim 14.8. Fabric: Munsell 5YR 6/8; porous; small white and black inclusions. Condition: Fragment of the rim and neck, with the handle attachment.
329
Description: Inflated “cushion” rim with less curving top; ribbon handle. Comparisons and comment: Locri IV, 231, no. 181 (local fabric); Swift in Survey, 472, no. 8 (Calabrian fabric, from Metapontine chora). Date: Second half of the 6th c. BC. 1:2
FF80_A2-1b_AMP
FF Amp 09 Chian-type Amphora Provenance: W Sounding. Level 1, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80249PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 5.4; rim 11.0. Fabric: Munsell 5YR 5/6; granular. Condition: Fragment of the rim and neck, with the handle attachment. Description: Rounded rim with upper part of bulging neck typical of early Chian amphorae. Comparisons and comment: Chian-type amphora; this piece is broadly consistent with Whitbread’s characterization of Chian fabrics (Whitbread 1995). An example similar in both form and fabric is present in the Pantanello sanctuary. Date: Second half of the 6th c. BC.
Greco-Italic Series Early Greco-Italic types are dated between the mid-4th and early 3rd c. BC, and are distinguished by a flat or slightly inclined rim with triangular section. The so-called late Greco-Italic amphorae date to the 3rd and 2nd c. BC, and are marked by an inclined rim with triangular section. The name for the series, believed to have been used primarily to transport wine, was coined by Lyding Will (1982) and pop-
FF_21_amphorae_04feb14.indd 329
1:2
FF80_249PL_A2.1C
Rim: 11.5 cm.
ularized by Empereur and Hesnard (1987). Its circulation along the coasts of the western Mediterranean at sites that were still strongly Hellenized suggests localized production, in which case the use of a single name, Greco-Italic, would be misleading (Van der Mersch 1994; Auriemma 2004, 152–56). Post-dating Fattoria Fabrizio, production continued with the so-called late Greco-Italic amphorae in the last quarter of the 3rd c. BC.
5/29/14 1:59 PM
330
Oda Teresa Calvaruso Greco-Italic Series
FF Amp 10 Greco-Italic Amphora Provenance: Room 1 E. Level 2, Batt. 4. Lots: FF80-161PL, FF80-162PL, FF80-183PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 22.7. Fabric: Munsell 2.5YR 5/6; hard; few calcareous and black inclusions; some vughs.
Condition: Fragments of the body wall. Description: Shoulder and curving body. Comparisons and comment: Auriemma 2004, 112, no. 324 (from Taranto) and 118, no. 354 (from Brindisi); Olcese 2004, 191, no. 2.4 (from Pithekoussai). Date: Second half of the 4th c. BC. 1:3
FF80_A4-1a_AMP
FF Amp 11 Greco-Italic Amphora Provenance: Squares C1–D1. Level 1, Batt. 5. Lot: FF8077PL. Dimensions and technical features: h 12.0. Fabric: Munsell 7.5YR 5/6; compact; small, dark inclusions. Condition: Handle. Description: Handle with oval section. Comparisons and comment: Pomarico Vecchio I, 92, no. 15 (MGS III). Date: Second half of the 4th c. BC.
FF_21_amphorae_04feb14.indd 330
1:3
5/29/14 1:59 PM
22
Opus Doliare Anna Cavallo At Fattoria Fabrizio there were at least three pithoi Form Type Date MNI TNI NFr in Rooms 1 and 2, associated with the 4th-century Pi 1 320–250 BC (?) 1 1 11 BC occupation levels. Forming an essential element Pi 2 300–50 BC (?) 1 1 91 of the Italiote ceramic repertoire beginning in the Pithos Pi 2 300–50 BC (?) 1 1 53 Archaic period, these vessels were often present in Pi 2 300–50 BC (?) 1 1 1 domestic contexts, where they were used for the longUnknown Unknown 0 0 6 term storage of foodstuffs such as oil and cereals. Lid 1 1 3 The original location of the pithos (OD 01) was Total 5 5 165 discovered in the western corner of Room 1 at the time of excavation. The base had in fact been in- Table 22.1 Quantification of the pithoi from Fattoria Fabrizio by serted deliberately into the floor—leaving a cavity number of fragments (NFr), typological number of individuals (TNI), of the right dimension—to secure and stabilize the and minimum number of individuals based on rims, bases, and handles (MNI). vessel. The base fragment was found partially encased in the baulk and was therefore left in situ, as were the fragments of the body wall. The rim was not rics from Fattoria Fabrizio”). The paucity of published recovered in the excavation, but it was later collected examples suggests that Corinthian pithoi were rathduring a surface reconnaissance of the site in 2009.1 er rare in the Metapontino, although one vessel was The other two pithoi (OD 02 and OD 03) were discovered at Incoronata.2 The example from Fattoria found in the NE quadrant of Room 2. The numerous Fabrizio was apparently considered very precious, to fragments collected belonged only to rims and walls; judge from the lead clamps found in the walls, used to the base fragment positioned near the wall was left repair the cracked vessel (M 02). in situ. The ceramic masses of these two containers The corpus of pithoi from Fattoria Fabrizio is provide precious information about their provenance: rounded out by several fragments discovered outside OD 02 was made with a fabric similar to that used in of their original contexts. Among these, a rim belongthe amphorae and mortaria of probable Calabrian ori- ing to a fourth pithos was found above the tile fall begin, while OD 03 was made with a Corinthian A type tween Squares B2 and B3 and a fragmentary lid found 1 fabric (see p. 157 in Ch. 11, “Extra-regional Fab- in Squares B2, B3, and D2. 1 The
author wishes to thank E. Lanza Catti for the report of the discovery and the count of fragments observed at the site that belong to the same pithos.
FF_22_opus-doliare_04feb14.indd 331
2
The vessel appears in Carter 2006, 71, fig. 2.23a, and is currently under study.
5/29/14 2:01 PM
Anna Cavallo
332
Catalog of Opus Doliare Pithos Rims Pithos Rim Type 1.The first type is characterized by an inward-curving, thickened rim with convex exterior profile and slightly inward-turned top surface, suitable for accommodating a lid. The shoulder has a markedly globular profile. The type is also attested in the Hellenistic farmhouse at Sant’Angelo Vecchio, at Fattoria Stefan, and among the materials collected during the ICA field survey between Bradano and Basento (Vittoria in Survey, 409, nos. 235 and 236). It is dated by the comparisons between the end of the 4th and the middle of the 1st century BC, with the example from Fattoria Fabrizio in use during the final phase of occupation ca. 300 BC. Pithos Rim Type 2. A rim with a trapezoidal section and a short neck connecting it to a markedly convex shoulder identify the second type. Despite the highly fragmentary condition of the three pithoi belonging to this type, part of
the profile was recovered as a result of restoration: it appears to be ovoid, narrowing in the lower section. All of the examples are well made: the rims are carefully finished, and the walls are smoothed on the exterior. OD 03 is nevertheless very rough and irregular to the touch because of the numerous large inclusions. The presence of lead clamps indicates a major repair in antiquity. Similar examples were found at Fattoria Stefan and at survey sites between the Bradano and Basento (Vittoria in Survey, 407, no. 224). With the most convincing published parallels dating the form to the first half of the 3rd c. BC, the example from Fattoria Fabrizio is clearly an early example, in use at the time of the abandonment of the farmhouse, ca. 300 BC. The same type of rim is attested even in the 5th–4th c. BC, although in such cases it has a neck with cylindrical section that is decidedly much higher than the examples presented here.
Pithos Rims FF OD 01 Pithos Rim Type 1 Provenance: Room 1 W. Level 2, Batt. 3. Lot: FF09-1P. (FF 230) Dimensions and technical features: h 8.6 (rim without wall); ext. rim 52.0. Clay type B. Local production with fine sand and argillaceous rock fragments. Condition: Fragment of the rim, ten fragments of the body (nine of which were left in situ). Description: Massive, thickened, inward protruding rim FF09_1_OD
FF_22_opus-doliare_04feb14.indd 332
Rim: 52 cm Height: 14.5 cm
with slightly inward turned top surface and rounded exterior profile; globular body. Comparisons and comment: Cotton 1992d, 201, no. 1577, fig. 88 (Gravina di Puglia, 200–50 BC); P. Bottini 1988, fig. 34, inv. 270173 (S. Evraso, 320–280 BC); Féret et al. 2008, 539, no. 1239, fig. 342 (Civita di Tricarico, 320–280 BC). Date: 320–50 BC based on comparisons; 400–280 BC based on context. 1:5
5/29/14 2:01 PM
Opus Doliare FF OD 02 Calabrian Pithos Rim Type 2 Provenance: Room 2 NE quadrant, Level 2, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80-92P. (FF 198) Dimensions and technical features: h 23.8; rim int. 39.5. Clay type: Calabrian, Munsell 2.5YR 7/3; hard and compact, with small stone and micaceous inclusions. Condition: One rim fragment, 52 body fragments.
333
Description: Rim with trapezoidal section and low neck mounted on a globular shoulder. Comparisons and comment: Peluso 1992, 261, no. 249, pl. LXXIX (Locri, 300–250 BC); Brizzi 1999b, 328, no. 688, fig. 319 (Oppido Mamertina). Date: ca. 300 BC. 1:5
FF80_92_OD
FF OD 03 Corinthian Pithos Rim Type 2 Provenance: Room 2 NE quadrant, Level 2, Batt. 3. Lots: FF80-92P, FF80-131P, and FF80-129P. (FF 199) Dimensions and technical features: h 13.6; rim int. 40.0 Clay type: Corinthian, Munsell 5YR 8/4; very hard, compact, and rich in medium and large clay concentrations and argillaceous rock fragments. Condition: Three rim fragments, 87 wall fragments, two wall
fragments containing lead clamps. Description: Rim with trapezoidal section and low, flaring neck mounted on a globular shoulder. Repair performed with lead clamps. Comparisons and comment: Peluso 1992, 261, no. 249, pl. LXXIX (Locri, 300–250 BC). Date: ca. 300 BC. 1:5
FF80_92PL+131P+129P_OD
Pithos Lid Three fragments belong to a large-diameter lid, probably for a pithos or other substantial container. Despite its fragmentary condition, there are traces of decoration consisting of parallel lines incised near the edge. Published examples of lids for large containers are very rare: several examples are known from Cozzo Presepe, the ICA field survey of the chora, and Gravina di Puglia, although they are generally
FF_22_opus-doliare_04feb14.indd 333
very different in profile from the examples presented here (Cotton 1983, 373, fig. 143; Cotton 1992d, 200, nos. 1564– 1566, fig. 87; Vittoria in Survey, 412). Other fragments in better condition were recovered at Sant’Angelo Vecchio (SA79-380P; SA79-600PL; SA79-538PL; SA79-322PL). In the absence of close parallels among the published materials, a reliable chronology for OD 04 cannot be proposed.
5/29/14 2:01 PM
334
Anna Cavallo Pithos Lid
FF OD 04 Pithos Lid Provenance: Squares B2–B3, Level 1, Batt. 1. Lots: FF809PL and FF80-42PL. (FF 71) Dimensions and technical features: h 2.1; rim ca. 38.0. Clay: Munsell 7.5YR 7/4; hard, heavy-grained, and compact, with many ceramic and light and dark stone inclusions, even on the surface. Condition: Three fragments of the brim and edge. Description: Massive lid with slightly convex brim and triangular edge. Two concentric, tool-formed incisions near the rim.
1:2
FF80_9_42_OD
FF_22_opus-doliare_04feb14.indd 334
5/29/14 2:01 PM
23
Terracottas Rebecca Miller Ammerman The excavators recovered from the farmhouse at Fattoria Fabrizio scores of molded terracotta fragments from which it has been possible to reconstruct a large relief plaque and identify several additional figurines. The fragments of the terracottas were concentrated around the northern external corner of Room 4, with many scattered to the northwest down the slope into the open Area 7. It seems therefore reasonable to suggest that the plaque and figurines stood originally near the corner, perhaps just inside Room 3 or, alternatively, along the outer wall of Room 4 facing the open area. Two black-gloss kantharoi and several miniature ceramic vessels were found, moreover, in association with the fragments of the terracottas. This intriguing complex of artifacts points to the performance of rite in this area of the farmhouse, a subject that is explored more fully in Chapter 6, which concerns religious activity within this domestic rural setting. Attention in this chapter will focus instead on the imagery presented by the terracottas and what they, as an assemblage, reveal about the visual language employed by the inhabitants of the farmhouse in the 4th century BC. The Plaque Identity of the Figures The large plaque (TC 01) portraying a standing female figure accompanied by a smaller female carrying a sheep across her shoulders presents a pictorial narrative that signals emphatically the sacred character of the votive image. The sheep underscores the central act of Greek religious ritual, blood sacrifice to a divine or heroic entity. The role that the sheep plays is unambiguously clear. This is not the case, however, for the two female figures. Their relationship is interdependent. Uncertainty about the identity, status, and agency of the two figures complicates a straightforward reading of the imagery. The kriophoros who carries the sacrificial animal stands only as high as the hip of the larger female figure. She wears a belted peplos with an overfold, or apoptygma. The rendering of the garment, with
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 335
deep v-shaped catenaries falling between her breasts and strong vertical folds echoing the tectonics of her weight-bearing right leg, is inspired by Attic styles of the last quarter of the 5th century BC that persisted well into the 4th.1 Although the facial features are indistinct, the rounded face surrounded by a softly undulating mass of hair is also at home in sculpture of the late 5th and 4th centuries BC and common among the local coroplastic products of the 4th century BC.2 Because she carries the animal to be sacrificed, the figure must represent a human worshiper. Her exact status within the world of mortals, however, is not so obvious. With respect to the larger female figure, her diminutive scale indicates a lower rank, but a more specific identity depends upon the identity of the larger figure, in relationship to whom she is portrayed. If the larger figure also depicts a mortal worshiper, the small kriophoros could represent a child, a slave, or other attendant who assists in the rite of sacrifice. The larger female would, in this case, represent the principal agent for the performance of the sacrifice. That the physique of the smaller female figure resembles that of a mature adult should not exclude the possibility that she might be intended as a representation of a child. In Greek votive reliefs in stone of the 5th and 4th centuries BC, it is common for children as well as slaves to be portrayed as miniature adults.3 1
Rolley 1999, 110–11, 115–17, figs. 98, 104–6; and also Stewart 1990, 165–68, 174, 198, figs. 417, 431–32, 490, 604, for respectively the frieze of Athena Nike Temple, Karyatids of the Erechtheion, a document relief of 375/374 BC, and a stone statuette from Kos showing that such a treatment of the peplos and stance persists from the later 5th into the early 3rd c. BC. 2 Rolley 1999, 163–65, figs. 147, 149, for head of Demeter on document relief concerning the construction of a bridge at Eleusis dated 422/21 BC, and head of nymph with Kephisos on votive relief of the end of 5th c. BC. Mitropoulou 1977, 56, fig. 146, no. 98, for relief depicting Leto of late 5th to 4th c. BC. For terracottas from Metaponto with similar treatments of the female head: M. Liseno 2004, 42–45, pls. 10a, 11a, 12a. For related terracottas from Taranto: Iacobone 1988, 83–84, 138, pls. 77c, 78b, 130d. 3 On the presence of children as well as servile attendants represented at a smaller scale in votive reliefs, see B. Ridgway 1997, 201–4, 226 n. 32. For votive relief to Artemis with small-scale children, see Rolley 1999, 219–20, fig. 212. For similar treatment of children in votive reliefs, see Mitropoulou 1977, 37, 60–64, 70, 72, figs. 71, 166, 171bis, 183, 200, 205; Kaltsas 2002, 210–12, 215, 220, 226–27, 229, 231, nos. 426–28, 432, 435, 442, 457, 475–76, 482, 487.
5/29/14 2:04 PM
336
Rebecca Miller Ammerman
Of great interest for the interpretation of the plaque from Fattoria Fabrizio is a handful of other mold series for terracottas with a similar composition that have been found at Metaponto and Taranto. These terracottas likewise portray a standing female accompanied by a smaller female figure who balances a basket or tray of fruit and cakes on her head and, in the case of the examples from Metaponto, also holds a sheep.4 Again the imagery points to the performance by female worshipers of rituals that include the offering of fruit and sacred cakes as well as the blood sacrifice of an animal. In the case of terracottas that were dedicated at the extramural sanctuary at Favale and Temple E in the urban center at Metaponto, one mold series depicts the larger figure holding an oinochoe in her left hand and an indistinct circular object (a phiale or blossom?) at the center of her torso in her right. She wears a low polos. Her mantle is drawn over the polos to veil her head and then falls over her shoulders and arms. The Tarantine terracottas portray a female figure also wearing a low polos who, in addition to an oinochoe, may carry a cross torch over her shoulder.5 The terracottas from Metaponto represent the small kriophoros standing directly in front of the larger figure. The terracotta statuette, a votive offering itself, thus presents the image of two female figures holding instruments and objects that signal the cultic rites of offerings of liquid libations and fruit as well as blood sacrifice. The terracottas at Taranto present a slightly different composition. In three mold series, the small kanepho ros stands not directly in front of the larger figure, but instead at her left side; in the fourth mold series she stands at her right. The oinochoe and basket of fruit and cakes that the female figures carry allude to rites of libation and bloodless sacrifice while the cross torch evokes nocturnal rites celebrated possibly in honor of Demeter and her daughter Persephone.6 It is worth making a further observation about the compositional arrangement of these terracotta groups. Whether the small kanephoros stands directly in front 4
From Metaponto: M. Liseno 2004, 42–45, pls. 10–12; Adamesteanu 1980, 267, 273, 275, figs. 283b, d, 285l, 289a–b; Postrioti 1996, 99–101, pl. 16d. For terracottas of four other such mold series from Taranto: Iacobone 1988, 27–28, 36, pls. 20b–c, 21a, c, 30a–b; Lippolis 1995, 58–59, pl. 18.4 = Abruzzese Calabrese 1996, 204–5, no. 156. 5 In one mold series, she holds an oinochoe in her right hand and the torch in her left; in another mold series the torch is in her right: Lippolis 1995, 58–59, pl. 18.4; Iacobone 1988, 27–28, pls. 20b-c, for the former; Iacobone 1988, 36, pl. 30b, for the latter. 6 For cross torch and worship of Demeter and Persephone, see Otto 2007, 24–42, figs. 22, 27, 29, 30, 40, 42, and 45; Lippolis 1995, 59, pls. 18.4–19.2.
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 336
Find
Date
Count
NFr
Plaque
4th c. BC
1
44
Figurine
Late 5th to 4th c. BC
1
1
Figurine
4th c. BC
Unknown
Unknown
Total
8
19
n. id.
79
10
143
Table 23.1 Quantification of terracottas from Fattoria Fabrizio by count of individuals and number of fragments.
or at the side of the taller figure, both females face directly forward. In other words, they share the same point of view. In this respect, the groups resemble those more monumental votive reliefs in stone that portray a woman accompanied by her children and household slaves in the procession that precedes a sacrifice to a given hero or deity.7 The composition of the terracottas thus stands in contrast to that of votive reliefs that portray a worshiper approaching a taller figure who represents the deity whom the smaller figure is propitiating. In these reliefs the worshiper directly faces the taller deity, saluting the divine presence with a hand raised in a gesture typical of prayer and address.8 In the terracotta groups, the smaller and larger scale figures do not confront one another, but instead share the same perspective. Such a compositional arrangement thus argues against identifying the taller female as a goddess. Instead, the larger figure of these terracotta groups is usually interpreted as a cult ministrant. This seems reasonable. The polos marks her elevated, but not necessarily divine, status. Cult instruments, such as the oinochoe, are proper for the execution of propitiatory rites. The smaller figure, though of a lower status, is certainly an attendant who assists in the performance of those rites. Does her smaller scale denote simply a lower position within the hierarchy of those invested with the performance of cult ritual? Or does it also reflect a lower social position due to her age? In other words, is she simply an adult assistant (of servile status or not) to the higher-ranking ministrant of the rituals? If the smaller figure is intended to represent a child, 7
See, for instance, Rolley 1999, 219–20, fig. 212; Mitropoulou 1977, 37, 63–64, 70, figs. 71, 183, 200; Kaltsas 2002, 210–12, 215, 220, 226–27, nos. 426–28, 432, 435, 442, 457, 475–76. For a particularly close parallel for the kanephoros who appears to be a servant in the 4th-c. BC votive relief to Artemis from Echinos: Dillon 2002, 231–33, fig. 7.4; for another from a 3rd-c. BC relief, ibid. 156, 158, fig. 5.6. 8 For examples, see Mitropoulou 1997, 52, 55–56, 58, 64, 67–68, 70, figs. 137, 141, 153, 184, 194, 200.
5/29/14 2:04 PM
Terracottas could she be seen perhaps as a blood relative (presumably a daughter) of the larger figure? The terracotta figurines from Metaponto and Taranto do not offer clear-cut answers to these questions, but do invite an interpretation of both figures as mortal worshipers engaged in the performance of ritual acts. The imagery of the terracottas, moreover, places emphasis on the larger figure, suggesting that she plays a more significant role in the performance of those rites that the dedication of the clay votive itself commemorates. Garments This survey of terracottas with imagery related to the plaque from Fattoria Fabrizio illustrates how the identity of the larger figure determines the range of possible identities of the smaller figure who carries the sacrificial sheep. Returning to the plaque, one sees, however, that the visual semantics of dress and gesture that might point clearly to the character and status of the dominant figure of the group instead present contradictions and ambiguities that make interpretation challenging. We shall begin with an examination of the figure’s clothing. She sports a rather elaborate outfit that consists of a sleeved chiton, under what appears to be a separate heavier garment that falls just above her ankles over which a transverse himation has, in turn, been draped. A veil that covered her head (now missing) falls behind her right arm while enveloping her left arm and hand completely. This combination of garments harks back to an Archaic manner of dress. The rendering of several details of the drapery folds, however, betrays a later date of composition. Before entering into a discussion of the date of the plaque, it is useful to explore what her costume may reveal about the sources that inspired the coroplast in his portrayal of this figure, as well as what her dress may indicate about her status and identity. A transverse himation is usually associated with the fashions of the 6th and early 5th centuries BC. The himation worn by the figure of the terracotta plaque is somewhat unusual in the arrangement of the drapery folds that rise to a central omega-fold of a swallowtail pattern under her right arm at the outer side of her right breast to then fall over the center of her torso, only to rise yet again in another stacked fold at the left side of her torso before the garment is pulled under her left arm. In the more common arrangement,
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 337
337
the fabric of the himation rises in a single peak of a swallowtail at the center of the torso and then falls back down in a second stacked fold as the himation runs under the left arm.9 The best parallel for the arrangement of the himation in the terracotta is a metope from the Heraion at Foce del Sele at Poseidonia that depicts a himation with two swallowtail folds at either side of the maiden’s torso.10 While a kore of Parian marble from the island of Delos displays this same elaborate arrangement of the himation, the garment is depicted in a more refined and linear fashion than in the metope from Poseidonia that instead shares with the plaque from Fattoria Fabrizio a rounded, more fully plastic rendering of the drapery folds.11 The garment that lies directly beneath the himation falls to the level of her ankles. Beneath its lower edge, the hem of a chiton spills generously over her feet to the ground. It is difficult to determine with certainty if the ankle-length edge represents the hem of a separate, sleeveless tunic, such as an ependytes, or the return of what would be an extraordinarily long kolpos of a belted chiton whose hem, on its returning fall from the belt, flows out from beneath the kolpos to the ground.12 Terracotta figurines from Metaponto, Taranto, and elsewhere in Magna Grecia often depict such ankle-length tunics as well as chitons with deep kolpoi.13 In some figurines, the kolpos of a chiton emerges beneath the hem of the separate ankle-length garment, showing that an ependytes could be worn in combination with a chiton drawn into a lengthy kol pos.14 In the narrative terracotta plaques from Locri, 9
For this more common arrangement from a wide geographical range, see Karakasi 2003, pls. 21, 57–59, 80, 118, 143–51, 174–81, 187–89. 10 Rolley 1994, 215, fig. 208. The metope is dated to the close of the 6th c. BC. It is worth noting somewhat similar pleating of the himation in a terracotta figurine from Medma: Archeologia di un sapere, 243, II77; Museo Reggio, 119. 11 The statue is dated to the end of the 6th c. BC: Karakasi 2003, 68–69, pls. 72, 226; see also pls. 67–69, for three other Parian korai from Delos with a related arrangement of the himation that is, however, shifted more toward the center and left side of the torso. 12 Although the short length of the heavier garment suggests that an epen dytes is represented, it is worth noting that the woolen peplos, which usually falls to the ground, could also be worn over the linen chiton as represented in the so-called Medici Athena type of the later 5th c. BC, attributed to Pheidias or one of his pupils: Kaltsas 2002, 110–11, nos. 198–99; Rolley 1999, 132–33, fig. 118. 13 For examples from Metaponto: M. Liseno 2004, pl. 19. From Taranto: Lippolis 1995, 58–59, pl. 18.2; Iacobone 1988, pls. 2c–3, 5b, 6b–c, 10b. From Medma: Museo Reggio, 119, 122; Bennett and Paul 2002, 190–91; Archeologia di un sapere, 243, II.78. From Locri: Museo Reggio, 57, 59; Bennett and Paul 2002, 204–5; Archeologia di un sapere, 223, II17. 14 From Metaponto: M. Liseno 2004, pl. 13. From Taranto: Lippolis 1995, 58–59, pls. 18.3–4, 19.1–2; Iacobone 1988, pls. 15–18, 21c, 28d. For enthroned figure: Lippolis 1995, 60, pl. 17.1–2; Bennett and Paul 2002, 144–45.
5/29/14 2:04 PM
338
Rebecca Miller Ammerman
tunics and kolpoi that fall below the knees have been viewed as markers of the higher status of the female figures so depicted: an enthroned goddess who is best identified as Persephone, a woman who has been convincingly identified as a priestess or ministrant of cult, and sometimes a figure representing a bride wear such distinctive garb.15 The ependytes appears again as a garment of luxury, and hence a sign that distinguishes its wearer in the well-known portrayal of a kanephoros in a sacrificial procession at Delphi on an Attic red-figure krater by the Kleophon Painter as well as in a Hellenistic marble portrait of a priestess from the Heraion at Samos.16 In sum, the elaborate dress of the larger figure of the plaque from Fattoria Fabrizio draws attention to her wealth and rank. A close look at the rendering of the drapery of the garments reveals a number of inconsistencies. The coroplast, as noted above, perhaps found inspiration for the unusual arrangement of the himation in sculptural models of Late Archaic date, possibly from Poseidonia, an Achaian city-state that had close ties to Metaponto in terms of coroplastic, sculptural, and architectural arts.17 The blocky vertical folds of the tunic and chiton that consist of two parallel ridges bordering a central depression belong, however, to a stylistic repertoire of the second half of the 5th century BC, and continue to be used by sculptors well into the next century.18 The flat U-shaped loop of fabric at the hem of the chiton next to the left foot of the standing figure is, on the other hand, most singular. The ribbon-like treatment of the fabric resembles an equally unusual contour fold that runs around the lower right leg of Procne in a statue portraying the ill-fated mother with her son Itys, a late-5th-century BC work that has been attributed to Alkamenes.19 While the use of such U-shaped folds to outline the shape of the low15
Torelli 1977, 161–62, pls. 1.1, 5.1, 6.2, 7.1, 14.1 for cult ministrant, pls. 6.1, 9.1, for bride, pl. 3.1 for Persephone wearing such garments. 16 Connelly 2007, 88–90, 138–39, figs. 2.2, 5.13. 17 For discussion of links in the Archaic period between the two Achaian city-states, see Ammerman 2002, 48. 18 Copies of the Athena Parthenos by Pheidias render, for instance, the folds of her peplos in this manner, while similar drapery occurs on the group of Procne and Itys, on the relief of Xenokrateia, and the group of Eirene and Ploutos: Stewart 1990, 157–58, 164, 167, 173, figs. 362, 399, 427, 485–86. See also the Eleusis relief, grave stele of Polyxena, and statue of Apollo Patroos: Rolley 1999, 157–58, 181, 284–85, figs. 141, 164, 290. Sculptors continue to fashion such folds for the hems of chitons in funerary reliefs throughout the 4th c. BC: B. Ridgway 1997, 160, 170, pls. 34, 44. 19 For the best photograph showing this detail, see Capuis 1968, pl. 7, fig. 15. For more recent discussion of the statue, with photos showing such details as the blocky folds with parallel ridges noted above, see Barringer 2005, figs. 14.1–2, 14.5.
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 338
er leg is found on numerous statues and reliefs of the later 5th and 4th centuries BC, few are treated as so flat a band.20 A more linear treatment of such contour folds at the hem of the chiton is, on the other hand, found on terracotta figurines from Timmari that belong to a mold series also attested at Taranto and Metaponto.21 But in no case does a sculptural or coroplastic work use such a fold to describe the drapery of a garment’s hem that falls between a figure’s feet. In this, the relief from Fattoria Fabrizio is exceptional. The plaque presents yet another stylistic peculiarity with regard to the zigzagging swallowtail folds of the himation, which fall from her right arm. The decorative folds do not cascade down to a point as is typical of all Archaic korai whether of stone, bronze, or terracotta. The zigzagging folds instead end in a pair of broad, blunt cusps that extend far beyond the right side of the standing figure. Such a cantilevered mass of drapery is, on the contrary, characteristic of terracotta figurines belonging to mold series generally dated to the 4th century BC that are well represented at Timmari, Taranto, and Metaponto.22 It is worth noting that these figurines all portray a standing female wearing the same ankle-length tunic over a chiton as the figure from Fabrizio, a circumstance that may well account for this departure from a more typical point-shaped rendering of the Archaic himation’s folds in favor of one used for the mantle and flaring ependytes of Classical models. In sum, what we see in the larger figure is the creation of a coroplast working within a craft tradition local to Taranto, Metaponto, and nearby centers at the close of the 5th or more likely in the middle of the 4th century BC. The artisan consciously looked back to Archaic korai of the late 6th century BC for his depiction of the transverse himation, but employed a stylistic language for his rendering of the drapery of other garments that derives from Classical sculpture of the last decades of the 5th century BC. Gesture In turning to the pose of the figure, we again face contradiction and ambiguity. While the gesture of holding an object, perhaps a blossom, against her chest in her right hand stems from Archaic models, the 20
See, for example, the more complex treatment of the peplos of Polyxena: Rolley 1999, 181, fig. 164. 21 Lo Porto 1991, 79, pl. 25, no. 11. 22 From Metaponto: M. Liseno 2004, 45–46, pl. 13a. From Timmari: Lo Porto 1991, 79–81, pls. 25–26, nos. 11, 15. From Taranto: Lippolis 1995, 58–59, pl. 18.3–4.
5/29/14 2:04 PM
Terracottas hip shot pose and the placement of the back of her left hand akimbo on her hip belong to the Classical world. As is often the case with an Archaic kore, her bare right forearm emerges from the looped opening of the sleeve of the chiton and crosses over her torso to clasp an object at her breast. Her left arm and hand are, on the contrary, swathed entirely in the fabric of her veil that bunches in a series of rounded modeling folds covering the entire limb. The gesture of placing the back of her left hand on her hip is a distinctive one. In the late 5th and 4th centuries BC, this akimbo pose characterizes portrayals of a range of deities and abstract personifications in both document and votive reliefs. In some cases, the figures depicted in the reliefs are thought to reflect the composition of a monumental statue on public display.23 The gesture is equally at home in the coroplastic arts of the 4th century BC in Magna Grecia. In particular, a mold series of Tarantine origin portrays a woman who stands at the end of a reclining banqueter’s couch holding an infant in her left arm while placing the back of her cloaked right hand akimbo on her hip.24 The interpretation of the banqueter plaques is complex, but it is fair to say that the standing woman holding an infant is intended to represent the spouse of the reclining male, whether he should be best identified as a divinity, hero, or mortal engaged in a ritual act. The same gesture is again seen in another series of terracotta figurines of a standing adolescent maiden, who cradles, instead of an infant, a cornucopia in her left arm. It has been suggested that the terracottas portray “Polyboia” who is associated with a cult of Hyakinthos as his mythical sister.25 Yet once again, the interpretation of the imagery of these figurines is not clear-cut and other interpretations that exclude a divine identity for the charming girl are possible. What this survey does show, however, is that the unusual gesture of placing the back of the hand on the 23
For Athena in decree relief of 362/61 BC and Demokratia in decree relief of 337/36 BC, see Stewart 1990, 173, 174, figs. 491, 523, respectively. For the personification of Kerkyra in decree relief of 375/354 BC, see Kaltsas 2002, 238–39, no. 503. For deities in votive reliefs of 4th c. BC: Kaltsas 2002, 210–11, 227–28, nos. 426, 428, 478 (Asklepios); 222–23, 226, nos. 465, 466, 475 (Hygieia); 218, nos. 452 (Nymph). Also, Stewart 1990, 192–93, fig. 581 (Nymph). For Demeter on a limestone relief of late 5th c. BC from Taranto, see Mitropoulou 1977, 48, fig. 112, no. 74. For Hermes in relief from column drum of Temple of Artemis at Ephesus, ca. 320 BC, Rolley 1999, 276, fig. 280. 24 Iacobone 1988, 77–78, pls. 69–71a; Lippolis 1995, 51–53, pl. 8.1 = Abruzzese Calabrese 1996, 202–3, no. 150. For a related standing female, Iacobone 1988, 135, pl. 128d; Levi 1926, 32–33, fig. 33. 25 Lippolis 1995, 61–62, pl. 20.5.
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 339
339
hip is one employed in the sculptural and coroplastic arts of the 4th century BC for figures of significant status. While an artist might choose to portray a deity or hero in such a pose, the stance may also be used for a mortal figure. In either case, the gesture appears to connote a position of authority. Interpretation and Comparanda What should be made then of the tensions observed in the larger figure’s dress and pose? Why do certain elements allude to Archaic models while others draw upon the vocabulary of Late Classical style? In other words, what might account for this desire of the coroplast to create an archaizing image? In Greek art, archaism is often introduced when an artist wishes to represent an image of a deity. The use of the archaizing style may attempt to reproduce the appearance of an ancient venerated statue in such scenes as Cassandra desperately grasping the Palladion while Troy falls.26 In votive reliefs, archaizing images of cult statues, in a far less dramatic manner, provide background elements that locate the main scene of the relief within the setting of a sanctuary.27 Or perhaps the representation of a deity in an archaizing style was thought to emit a greater aura of sanctity.28 Did the coroplast who fashioned the terracotta plaque found at the farmhouse similarly intend to represent a goddess, or perhaps a statue of a goddess, by introducing archaizing elements of dress and posture to his rendering of the larger female figure? Certainly, the larger scale, elaborate costume, and unusual gesture of the figure, as we have seen, emphasize her high status. Nothing in the representation points, however, to a specific divine personality.29 We are at a loss to name which goddess the coroplast might have sought to portray. If the intended identity of the larger female is indeed that of a divinity, then the smaller figure car26 See, for instance, a Tarantine relief dated to 330 BC: Carter 1975, 65, pl. 27b, no. 168, and others, 75–76, 78, pls. 40–41, 43d, nos. 222, 247. An archaizing statue of Athena likewise formed part of the pedimental sculpture of 370 BC from Epidauros that also depicted the Fall of Troy: Rolley 1999, 204, fig. 191. A Lapith woman similarly seeks the protection of an archaizing cult image in the frieze from the Temple of Apollo at Bassae: Stewart 1990, 169–70, fig. 451. 27 Palagia 2009, 28, 31–34, color pl. 2, figs. 6–8; Lawton 2009, 68, fig. 18. 28 Perhaps this is the reason why the deities portrayed on the city gates at Thasos during the last quarter of the 4th c. BC were executed in an archaizing style: Rolley 1999, 372, fig. 391. For more discussion of archaism in 4thc. BC sculpture: B. Ridgway 1997, 196, 202, 209–11, 216, 218, 221 n. 14. 29 The head (TC 08) that has often been illustrated as belonging to the plaque and led to suggestions that the figure may portray Artemis does not, however, pertain to the plaque.
5/29/14 2:04 PM
340
Rebecca Miller Ammerman
rying the sheep would be best interpreted as a mortal worshiper bringing a blood offering to sacrifice in the presence of the deity. The plaque would thus serve as a commemoration of a woman’s piety toward a goddess. Whether the plaque was fashioned intentionally as a generic portrait so that it could record an individual’s devotion to any one of several goddesses, or whether the coroplast had a specific deity or cult image in mind when he created the mold for the plaque remains unknown. The consumer of the plaque (in this case presumably a matron residing at the Fabrizio farmhouse) may have envisioned the larger figure of the votive plaque as a particular divine personality, but again whatever specific identity the owner of the plaque may have attributed to the archaizing figure, it eludes modern interpretation. There is, however, an important element in the design of the plaque that argues against identifying the larger female as a divine personality. The coroplast has rendered the smaller kriophoros standing along the left side of the more important female. Both figures look forward and thus share the same perspective. As discussed above regarding the interpretation of related terracotta plaques from Taranto and Metaponto that portray a larger and a smaller female figure engaged in religious rites, we have seen that in stone votive reliefs worshipers who approach a deity with sacrificial animals and other offerings conventionally face the image of the deity.30 Accordingly, they are rendered in profile or three-quarter view. They do not, in other words, share the same perspective as the deity whom they propitiate. The members of the ritual procession approaching the image of a deity, with few exceptions, instead all face the same direction. The smaller figures, who represent slaves or children, walk beside the larger worshipers who presumably portray the individuals who have elected to commemorate their piety in the dedication of the stone relief. In effect, the terracotta plaque from Fabrizio appears to portray two members of such a group who have been rotated from the profile view of such stone reliefs to face the viewer of the plaque directly. If this interpretation is correct, the plaque is simply a larger, more elaborate, and well-crafted version of the terracotta groups of a standing woman and smaller assistant from Metaponto and Taranto discussed above. Two stone votive reliefs merit special attention due 30
See n. 8 on p. 336.
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 340
to their striking similarity to the terracotta plaque from Fabrizio with regard to the emphasis that is placed on the close association between a taller veiled votary and a smaller female who carries an offering basket or tray. The well-known late-4th-century BC relief from Echinos that was dedicated in thanks for the successful birth of a child portrays a stately veiled woman who raises her right hand in prayer before the image of a goddess, best identified as Artemis.31 A small female, balancing a tray of offerings on her head with her left hand while holding a jug in her right, stands in front of the taller woman. There is no consensus as to whether the dignified veiled woman represents the mother who has commissioned the costly stone relief in thanks for the birth of a child or a priestess who oversees the sacrifice on behalf of the mother. Regardless of the intended identity of the taller distinguished woman, her proximity to the smaller female bearing the tray and jug recalls the composition of the plaque from Fabrizio as well as the related terracotta groups from Taranto and Metaponto that portray kanephoroi in a like fashion. The second relief, dating to the mid3rd century BC, represents cult statues of Cybele and Attis within a temple.32 Again a veiled woman with right hand raised toward the divine images in prayer has entered through the temple’s open door. A young female with short hair carrying an offering tray follows closely behind the taller veiled worshiper. The compositional coherence between these two reliefs and the terracotta groups from Taranto and Metaponto argues vividly for identifying both the taller female and her smaller companion as mortal devotees. The fact that in the terracotta plaque from Fabrizio, the larger female has veiled her head but the smaller female has not, lends additional support to her identification as a mortal worshiper accompanied by an assistant. A survey of Classical votive reliefs shows, for instance, that while sculptors working in the later 5th and 4th centuries BC did sometimes portray goddesses wearing a veil, particularly to indicate a conjugal status, more commonly, the goddesses do not veil their heads.33 On the other hand, female worshipers portrayed in votive reliefs are frequently veiled.34 This is especially true for 31
Dillon 2002, 231–33, fig. 7.4. Dillon 2002, 156–58, fig. 5.6. 33 Hygieia and the Nymphs are occasionally portrayed with a veil: Kaltsas 2002, 141, 212, nos. 269–70, 434. 34 Kaltsas 2002, 210–12, 214, 220–21, 224, 226–27, 229, 231, nos. 427, 428, 432, 435, 437, 458, 469, 475, 476, 482, 487; Dillon 2002, 156–58, 231–33, figs. 5.6, 7.4. 32
5/29/14 2:04 PM
Terracottas the woman who often accompanies the man leading a procession that approaches the shrine of a deity. Presumably the two figures represent a married couple responsible for making the sacrifice and dedicating the relief that commemorates their act of devotion. At the same time, the smaller female figures in the procession, notably those balancing a basket on their heads, are usually bareheaded and may even exhibit the short-cut hair associated with female slaves.35 Turning to the coroplastic traditions of Taranto and Metaponto and specifically the terracottas discussed above that portray a taller standing woman accompanied by the smaller female holding an offering tray and, in the Metapontine series, also a sheep for sacrifice, one sees that the larger figure not only wears a veil but she does so over a low polos. The polos is a marker of status and as such may be worn by a deity or even by a cult official.36 In one worn mold series from Taranto, it is difficult to determine whether or not the smaller kanephoros has veiled her head.37 In the other terracotta groups, her head is bare. If the terracotta plaque from Fabrizio then is intended to represent a matron and her assistant engaged in the rite of sacrifice, why did the coroplast portray the woman wearing archaizing garments? The answer may lie in recognizing the signals that point to the prominent status of the woman. Evidence from various sources suggests that women performed such rituals as mythic reenactments, processions, and communal meals, and imitated the goddess in whose honor these rites were being carried out. The imitation could include wearing a priestly costume that recalled the dress of the deity herself.38 Thus the tendency noted above to use archaism to portray deities or their cult images might well account for the presence of Archaic elements in the ritual garb of a priestess. In effect, the priestess assimilated characteristics of the goddess she served. By wearing archaizing apparel, a priestess would mirror a divine image and in doing so highlight her own position of prestige. As we have seen, the small stature of the kriophoros 35
Kaltsas 2002, 210, 226–27, 231, nos. 427, 475–76, 487. this context it is worth noting, for instance, an elaborate polos in silver with relief decoration from a 6th-c. BC tomb (no. 238) in the Crucinia necropolis at Metaponto. The polos was worn by a woman who may have served in life as a priestess: Nava 2003a, 712, pls. 54.2–55. 37 For the mold series in which the kanephoros may wear a veil, see Iacobone 1988, 27–28, pls. 21a, 20b = Lippolis 1995, 58–59, pl. 18.4 = Abruz zese Calabrese 1996, 204–5, no. 156. 38 Connelly 2007, 83. 36 In
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 341
341
emphasizes through contrast the dominant position of the taller female figure in the terracotta plaque. Similar visual cues were employed in funerary monuments commemorating women who served as priestesses in the cities of Asia Minor during the 2nd and 1st centuries BC.39 The deceased priestess is usually portrayed flanked by two diminutive female attendants who carry such instruments of cult as a torch or oinochoe. In other words, the figural group of a taller and shorter female employs visual shorthand to underscore the honored status of the taller figure as a priestess. Distinction in status is similarly marked by difference in scale between the veiled praying women and the ka nephoroi portrayed in the two votive reliefs (one dedicated to Artemis, the other to Cybele and Attis) discussed above. While, as was noted, the larger female in each relief may possibly be identified as a priestess, the evidence for such an identification is not conclusive. She may simply be the matron responsible for the votive relief that commemorates her pious sacrifice. If we turn, on the other hand, to the visual language employed by an Apulian vase-painter who worked not far from Metaponto in the middle of the 4th century BC, we find a striking correspondence with the coroplastic products we have been examining. Inscriptions identify the mythological characters portrayed. On a large volute krater attributed to the Ilioupersis Painter that was found in a tomb at Ruvo, the vase-painter depicted Iphigenia serving as a priestess to Artemis among the Taurians.40 Iphigenia’s name is written clearly beside her head. She wears an elaborate costume and carries a temple key that explicitly defines her status as priestess. At her left side stands a smaller female figure who holds an oinochoe in her right hand while balancing a broad circular offering tray on her head with her left hand. The attendant is shorter than the priestess Iphigenia. It is worth emphasizing that in the vase painting the inscription leaves no doubt that the woman with the temple key and elegant dress is Iphigenia, the priestess of Artemis among the Taurians. The presence of an attendant carrying an offering tray underscores the religious status of Iphigenia. In short, there is no ambiguity in interpreting the imagery. I would suggest 39
Connelly 2007, 246–53, figs. 8.19–21, 8.23. In these funerary monuments, the identification of the deceased as a priestess may be based on an inscription or by the presence of such symbols as a civic wreath, torch, and so on. 40 Hart 2010, 82, no. 35.
5/29/14 2:04 PM
342
Rebecca Miller Ammerman
that in the context of the Greek poleis of southern Italy in the 4th century BC, the figure of a well-dressed woman accompanied by a shorter attendant carrying an offering tray or sacrificial animal signaled not only the performance of religious rite, but also may have served to highlight the prominent status of the principal agent of the rite as a priestess.41 My view is that the terracotta plaque from Fattoria Fabrizio represents a priestess dressed in archaizing vestments engaged in the performance of a blood sacrifice. In considering the purpose of the terracotta relief within the context of the farmhouse, the distinctive character of the object calls attention to itself. When compared to the other terracottas from Metaponto and Taranto discussed above that portray a standing female with a smaller attendant, the plaque from Fa brizio stands out. None of the other terracottas matches the large scale or high quality of the plaque. Its clay fabric is more refined and seems not to be local;42 its artistry is far superior. I know of no exact parallel. One wonders if the plaque was perhaps specially commissioned. We shall never know. I would, however, assert that the plaque served as a focal point of the religious activities practiced within this domestic setting as has been fully discussed in Chapter 6. In addition, I would suggest that the plaque may reflect biographical information about the mistress of the household. Does the imagery of the plaque allude to her own identity as a priestess in one of the cults that dotted the Metapontine landscape? In other words, does this devotional object from a private domestic context celebrate the honored public position of a female member of the Fabrizio household? Does it memorialize, through its visual language, the unrecorded history of a woman’s civic achievement in life? I would like to think so. Additional Terracottas When we consider the other terracottas recovered from Fattoria Fabrizio, they in no way contradict this interpretation. In fact, several likewise emphasize feminine participation in cultic ritual. One fragmentary figurine (TC 02) portrays a standing female figure holding a sheep in her left arm. More complete figurines from this mold series found at the Metapontine sanctuary 41 The same pairing of Iphigenia as priestess at Aulis and a smaller assistant
holding a tray with lekythoi is found also on an Apulian amphora: LIMC 2 (1984), 729, no. 1377, s.v. Artemis (L. Kahil). 42 Dr. K. Swift has examined the terracotta visually and believes that the fabric is not local to Metaponto.
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 342
at Favale show that the figure holds in her right hand a handled pail filled with fruit and cakes.43 In effect, the mold series again alludes to rites of offering and blood sacrifice by a mortal woman. Two joined fragments (TC 03) preserve the veiled head and shoulder from the right side of a female figure. The fragments may belong to TC 02, but one cannot be certain of this. They do, however, represent once again a female figure who has veiled her head in a ritual context, as is the case with the larger figure portrayed in plaque TC 01. Reference to ritual action is likewise made by TC 04. This single fragment preserves the right hand of what was probably a standing female votary holding a vessel, such as an oinochoe, or, if the fragment belongs to the same figurine as TC 02, a pail of fruit and cakes. Although the object the hand grasped is regrettably missing, the fragment underscores ritual offering of either liquid libations or agricultural produce. A fragment of the drapery of an apoptygma (TC 05) worn by a female figure points to no specific ritual, but among the coroplastic products of Metaponto, the fragment finds close correspondence in the drapery of figurines that represent peplophoroi bearing offerings.44 Two other fragments of drapery (TC 06 and TC 07) and a third preserving the corner of a base of a figurine (TC 10) do not add significantly to our picture of the complex of terracottas that were clustered near one another near the external corner of Room 4, where the wall probably collapsed and they eroded out from their likely original location in Room 3. Due to its exquisite beauty, perhaps the most evocative terracotta after the large terracotta plaque is that which preserves the charming head of a female figure, TC 08. A long sash or kerchief binds the figure’s curled tresses into a highly set tuft or korymbos as it wraps around the head three times before being tied in a symmetrical knot at the front of the head. A fragment (TC 09) of the kerchief from a second head of the same mold series was likewise recovered from excavations at the farmhouse. A third head from this same mold series was also found at the Metapontine sanctuary at Favale.45 The clay fabric and delicate rendering of the well-preserved head led to it being mistakenly asso43
For a variant of the same mold series, see M. Liseno 2004, 49, pl. 18a. Lo Porto 1966, 161–62, fig. 22.2. 45 M. Liseno 2004, 62, pl. 27f. 44
5/29/14 2:04 PM
Terracottas ciated with the large terracotta plaque.46 It cannot, however, belong to the veiled head of the larger figure of the plaque and must therefore belong to another figurine or possibly even a bust. The arrangement of the hair bound by a kekry phalos 47 is popular among coroplastic products from southern Italy in the 4th century BC. Terracotta figurines and busts plausibly identified as Artemis 48 or Aphrodite 49 sport the style, but it is equally common
343
on terracottas that appear to represent mortal women.50 The absence of additional attributes thus prevents further identification of the two heads of this mold series that were found at Fattoria Fabrizio. Perhaps all that one can say is that it seems to be a hairstyle favored by younger, nubile females. That two such figurines were present in the farmhouse underscores the importance of this imagery within the household.
46
Carter 2006, 139–40, fig. 4.5; Carter 1987, 209, fig. 294; Carter 1980a, 2, 20, fig. 19. 47 For general discussion of headdress: DarSag 3.1 (1875), 812–16, s.v. Kekryphalos (L. Couve). 48 Artemis is depicted with such an arrangement in terracottas from Sicily: LIMC 2 (1984), 694–95, nos. 947, 953, 963; in South Italian vase-painting: 651, 722, 724, 730, nos. 357, 1287, 1318a, 1382, 1385; in marble votive reliefs: 658, 668, nos. 459, 621; and on the Parthenon frieze: 712, no. 1180, s.v. Artemis (L. Kahil). 49 For similar headdress of a kekryphalos or sphendone tying hair into a high-rising tuft or korymbos on a figure, possibly of Aphrodite, on oscillum
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 343
from Timmari: Lo Porto 1991, 83, pl. 27, no. 20. 50 On one variant of a mold series from Locri portraying a mortal votary who carries in religious procession a statue of Artemis on her head, the woman wears a kekryphalos that is knotted in a similar fashion to the heads from Fabrizio: Locri V, 372, pl. 34, no. 181. For the kekryphalos on seated females of the 4th c. BC found widely at Taranto, Metaponto, Herakleia, and throughout Lucania, including Accettura: D’Anisi 2005, 170, figs. 3–4 (with additional bibliography). Also from Timmari: Lo Porto 1991, pl. 46, nos. 71–72. On busts from Timmari: Lo Porto 1991, 94–95, pl. 32, nos. 36–37. From Locri: Arias 1947, 168, 179, fig. 5a.
5/29/14 2:04 PM
344
Rebecca Miller Ammerman
Catalog of Terracottas FF TC 01 Plaque Provenance: The 44 fragments that comprise the plaque come from at least three Pottery Lots: 67, 73, and 76. Fragments of figurine were probably also found in four additional Pottery Lots: 216, 219, 220, and 228. The excavation records are not explicit about the exact location of each fragment, but the field notes do indicate that certain fragments were found in PL73 “near corner of lower wall” (=Wall 2; field notes p. 57), in PL76 “near corner of wall” (=Wall 2; field notes p. 63), and in PL67 “from among or slightly lower than the [tile] fall in the center of A3” (field notes pp. 65–67). It is thus clear that the fragments were found in an area that extends northwest from the northern outer corner of Room 4 (formed by Walls 6 and 2) to the central area of Square A3. The plaque was thus most likely located just inside the western half of Room 3 or outside the external wall before it was smashed into fragments that were then scattered well into Area 7. (MM 321008; No. FF 80.067.01) Area 7. Square A3. Level 1, Batt. 5. Lot FF8067PL (possible minimum of 17, maximum of 42 fragments) Room 3 or Area 7. Square B3. Level 1, Batt. 3 Lot FF80-73PL (minimum of one, maximum of eight fragments) Room 3 or Area 7. Square B3. Level 1, Batt. 4, Lot FF80-76PL “near wall corner, between rooms III and IV” (one fragment of left leg of larger female) Probably two to as many as 18 or more fragments may have come from the following Pottery Lots: Area 7. Square B3. Level 2, Batt. 1, Lot FF80216PL (minimum of zero, maximum of eight fragments) Area 7. Square B3. Level 2, Batt. 1, Lot FF80219PL (probable maximum of one fragment) Area 7. Square A3. Level 2, Batt. 1, Lot FF80220PL (minimum of zero, maximum of eight fragments) Area 7. Probably Square B3. Level 2, Batt. 1, Lot FF80-228PL (probable minimum of one, unknown maximum number of fragments) Dimensions and technical features: h 36.0. Fabric Munsell 5YR 6-7/6. Finely levigated fabric with small biotite (?) and calcareous inclusions. Not local fabric. Condition: Plaque composed of 44 fragments. Larger figure lacks head, left shoulder, and chest. Small, scattered portions of drapery, especially lower portions of garments along the right side of the larger figure are missing. Head of sheep also missing.
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 344
Description: Plaque of standing female figure with smaller female figure holding sheep. Both figures stand on a low rectangular base. Larger figure stands with weight on right leg, placing left relaxed leg slightly forward. Right hand holds unidentified object between breasts. Left hand rests akimbo on left hip. Feet appear to be bare with toes clearly indicated. A soft mass of curls at right side of head peeks out from beneath a veil that falls behind figure’s right shoulder and arm in a stacked fold whose edge describes a rounded zigzag pattern that ends below her elbow at the level of the looped opening of the chiton sleeve. At left side of figure, veil falls in vertical folds that border torso while enveloping left arm and hand in rounded wedge-shaped modeling folds. Figure appears to be wearing a transverse himation over a heavier garment that falls just above ankles over a third garment, a chiton, that falls to feet. The himation is buttoned thrice over right upper arm. An indented line runs parallel to the openings between the buttons representing a border at the edge of the fabric. A scallop-shaped edge of the himation runs horizontally above elbow to either side of last button. The back of the himation falls from the lower button behind the right arm, beneath the veil, in a long stacked, zigzagging fold. This fold ends in a blunt scallop at far right side of figure at a level just above the ankle. This drapery swag of the back portion of the himation is rendered on a plane behind that of the loops that mark the end of the chiton’s sleeve and behind that of the front portion of the himation. The corresponding swag of the front end of the transverse himation runs along the left side of her right upper arm, beneath her right forearm, and then falls in a stacked, zigzagging fold to a scalloped hem next to the drapery swag of the back portion of the himation. Under forearm the zigzag fold becomes an omega fold that marks the lower edge of the central portion of the transverse himation as it falls in six softly stacked, tubular folds under the figure’s right hand to below the level of the hips in center of torso. Above arm the first three folds of the omega fold are caught up at wrist and thumb. They form soft rounded folds that fall like catenaries from breast curving toward center of figure at level of wrist before continuing as first three vertical folds under the wrist. The fourth and fifth vertical folds fall from upper band of the himation beneath the hand over center of torso. The sixth tubular fold describes at its lower edge a third half omega fold at center of figure at inner side of left thigh. Four broad, U-shaped folds fall in catenaries over left side of torso covering breast as they wrap under left arm around side of figure. The blousing edge of the chiton sleeve, as it falls from right elbow in two large loops, emerges from
5/29/14 2:04 PM
Terracottas
beneath the himation. Another garment beneath the himation falls in blocky pairs of vertical folds that end in small omegas at a calf-length hem. Three such folds fall over right leg between front himation swag and left leg. Volume of advanced left leg breaks the rows of blocky vertical folds. Instead, a single fold of fabric falls from either side of the knee creating contour lines along sides of lower leg. Longest garment appears to be a chiton that falls over feet to ground in four squared folds over right foot. A looping U-shaped fold falls between two feet while a contour fold curves over left foot. The smaller female stands with weight on right leg, placing relaxed left leg to front and side. Her rounded, somewhat blocky face is surrounded by undulating mass of hair. She carries a sheep over her shoulders grasping the front and back legs of the animal in her hands. Tufts of the animal’s fleece are deftly rendered by wispy lines. The smaller figure wears a belted peplos with an apoptygma. The pattern of the off-center, V-shaped neckline is echoed by two catenary folds that fall from her shoulders between her breasts to her waist. Parallel, rounded folds fall below and along sides of her breasts cascading along a diagonal line over her left hip. At the waist the gathered fabric swells slightly to describe the fullness of the kolpos. Below the waist, five softly squared folds fall vertically over right leg, slanting slightly to left side of figure. Indented contour fold runs behind left thigh of figure to knee. Figure wears pointed smooth shoes. Publication: Carter 2006, 139–40, fig. 4.5; Carter 1987, 209, fig. 294; Carter 1980a, 2, 20, fig. 19. Comparisons and comment: No exact parallel is known, but for terracottas with similar composition of larger standing female accompanied by smaller female who carries sheep and ritual basket from Metaponto: M. Liseno 2004, 42–45, pls. 10–12; Adamesteanu 1980, 267, 273, 275, figs. 283b, d, 285l, 289a–b; Postrioti 1996, 99–101, pl. 16d. For terracottas of two other such group compositions from Taranto: Iacobone 1988, 27–28, 36, pls. 20b–c, 21a, 30a–b. Date: 4th c. BC.
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 345
345
1:2
5/29/14 2:04 PM
346
Rebecca Miller Ammerman
FF TC 02 Figurine Provenance: The 11 fragments that comprise the figurine come from three Pottery Lots: 66, 67, and 69. Square A3 (over Area 7). Level 1, Batt. 3. Lot: FF80-66T (one fragment) Square A3 (over Area 7). Level 1, Batt. 5. Lot: FF80-67T (nine fragments) Square A3 (over Area 7). Level 1, Batt. 5. Lot: FF80-69T (one fragment) (MM 321008; No. FF 80.067.02) Dimensions and technical features: h 18.0. Fabric Munsell 5YR 6-7/6. Finely levigated fabric with small (1 mm) calcareous and biotite (?) inclusions. Condition: Eleven fragments from edge of figurine preserve left arm of female holding a sheep and drapery that falls beneath her left arm. Description: Figurine of standing female figure holding sheep in left arm. Sheep, rendered in profile, faces center crouching on raised left arm of female figure. Bent front legs rest on hand of female figure; back legs lie slightly lower over left forearm. Fluffy tail of sheep falls along side of upper arm of female figure. Female wears a himation over her upper left arm; mantle’s front edge wraps around her forearm falling below her wrist in a broad swag of drapery that ends in a horizontal edge at knee level. The drapery swag is rendered as a stacked omega fold with two pleats falling vertically at the side of the omega’s softly rounded zigzag fold. The back edge of the himation falls over elbow in a vertical fold with its edge folded back and forth in a softly zigzagging pleat that runs just behind the vertical folds of the front swag of drapery with its omega fold. Better-preserved figurines from this mold series portray a female wearing a himation that wraps across her back passing under her right arm from which it crosses diagonally over her lower body to be caught up by her left arm. Under the himation she wears a belted garment with an apoptygma. Below the level of the knee, the garment either ends in a hem that is marked by full swelling volumes at the end of its broad vertical folds or,
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 346
1:2
as is the case with a chiton, the garment is gathered back up to the waist only to fall a second time beneath this long kolpos to cover the ankles and feet in closely set, vertical pleats. In complete figurines, female holds a handled, probably metal, pail of fruit in her right hand. Comparisons and comment: From Metaponto: M. Liseno 2004, 49, pl. 18a, for a variant of same mold series. The drapery is almost the same, but the position of the legs and hooves of the sheep differs slightly. Also, from Timmari: Lo Porto 1991, 79, pl. 25, no. 10. For closely related figurines with slightly more flamboyant drapery: M. Liseno 2004, 49, pl. 18b; Adamesteanu 1980, 92–93, 270–73, figs. 82, 285a, e, 287. Date: 4th c. BC.
5/29/14 2:04 PM
Terracottas FF TC 03 Figurine Provenance: Square A3 (over Area 7). Level 1, Batt. 5. Lot: FF80-67T. (No. FF 80.067.03) Dimensions and technical features: h 10.1. Fabric Munsell 5YR 6-7/6. Finely levigated fabric with small (1 mm) calcareous and biotite (?) inclusions. Condition: Two fragments preserve veil and right shoulder along edge of figurine. Description: Back edge of figurine at neck and right shoulder of standing female. Veil falls from right side of head over shoulder and along upper arm. Wispy tresses of hair emerge from veil. Diagonal drapery folds over right shoulder probably belong to veil as it wraps around the female’s shoulder. Fragment is too small to determine the specific mold series to which it belongs, but several types of figurines to which the fragment may have pertained are attested at Metaponto. The fragment itself may belong to the same figurine as fragment TC 04 (FF80.067.04), or possibly even TC 02 (FF80.067.02). Unfortunately, there is insufficient evidence to assign the fragment to a given figurine with certainty. FF TC 04 Figurine Provenance: Square A3 (over Area 7). Level 1, Batt. 5. Lot: FF80-67PL. (No. FF 80.067.04) Dimensions and technical features: h 4.6. Fabric 5YR 6-7/6. Finely levigated fabric with small (1 mm) calcareous and biotite (?) inclusions. Condition: One fragment preserves right hand and edge of figurine. Description: Hand (probably of standing female figure) holding unknown object and back smooth edge of figurine. Thumb and fingers are clearly distinguished. Similar hands are rendered in numerous mold series depicting a standing female figure who usually holds a jug for pouring libations. The fragment itself may belong to the same figurine as fragment TC 03 (FF80.067.03), or possibly
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 347
347 1:2
Comparisons and comment: For figurines of standing females from Metaponto with similar rendering of veil: M. Liseno 2004, 41–46, pls. 8a, 9a, 11a, 13a–b; Edlund 1984, 287–88, fig. 7. From Taranto: Iacobone 1988, 24–25, pl. 14b; Lippolis 1995, 58–59, pl. 18c. From Timmari: Lo Porto 1991, 79–81, pls. 25, no. 11, 26, no. 15. Date: 4th c. BC. 1:2
even TC 02 (FF80.067.02), but such an attribution cannot be made with certainty. Comparisons and comment: For figurines of standing females from Metaponto with similar hand: M. Liseno 2004, 45– 48, pls. 13a–c, 16c, 17a–b, 18a–b; Edlund 1984, 287–88, fig. 7. From Taranto: Iacobone 1988, 17, 30, pls. 8b, 23c. From Timmari: Lo Porto 1991, 79, pl. 25, no. 11. Date: 4th c. BC.
5/29/14 2:04 PM
348
Rebecca Miller Ammerman
FF TC 05 Figurine Provenance: Square C3 (over Room 2). Level 1, Batt. 2. Lot: FF80-27PL. Pottery Finds list describes as found “in wall” (Wall 1). (No. FF 80.027.01) Dimensions and technical features: h 4.8. Fabric Munsell 7.5YR 7/6. Finely levigated fabric with small biotite (?) and calcareous inclusions. Condition: One fragment preserves drapery folds. Description: Drapery of apoptygma of peplos worn by female figure. Overfold of the peplos falls from right breast in omega fold with accentuated line marking lower edge of pleat. Softly undulating folds fall vertically along right side of torso. Similar renderings of the peplos are found on both standing and seated female figurines. The closest parallels for this fragment come from standing peplophoroi carrying offerings. Comparisons and comment: For close treatment (possibly from same mold series) of apoptygma of standing peplo phoros with fruit basket in left hand from production site FF TC 06 Figurine Provenance: Square C3 (over Room 2). Level 1, Batt. 2. Lot: FF80-25PL. Pottery Finds list describes as found “in wall” (Wall 1). (No. FF 80.025.01) Dimensions and technical features: h 6.8. Fabric Munsell 7.5YR 6/4. Finely levigated fabric with small biotite (?) and calcareous inclusions. Condition: One fragment preserves drapery. Description: Portion of drapery of female figure who appears to be wearing a heavier himation over a lighter chiton. Diagonal ridges mark folds of what seems to be a himation that falls over a chiton whose narrowly spaced rectangular folds run down vertically to lower hem of garment. Left side of fragment juts out on a slight angle with diagonal folds of drapery running in opposite direction from those on right side of fragment. Perhaps the fragment depicts the garments covering the right side of right calf that then spread out behind leg to side of figurine. Similar arrangements occur on seated female figures. The fragment is too small, however, to assign with certainty to either a seated or standing figure.
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 348
1:2
at Sansone within walls of Metaponto: Lo Porto 1966, 161–62, fig. 22.2. For similar treatment of drapery on standing female figure holding jug in right hand from Taranto: Iacobone 1988, 17, pl. 8b. For somewhat related treatments of apoptygma on enthroned figures from Favale: M. Liseno 2004, 53, pls. 21c, 22a. From Taranto: Lippolis 1995, 60, pl. 17.2; Iacobone 1988, 45, pl. 35b–c. Date: 4th c. BC. 1:2
Comparisons and comment: For somewhat similar arrangement on figurines depicting a seated female figure: Lo Porto 1991, 120–21, pls. 52–53, nos. 112, 115. For similar drapery on seated woman in banqueter group from Herakleia: Archeologia di un sapere, 399, fig. III.152. From Taranto: Iacobone 1988, 27, pl. 19b. Vaguely similar to retouched drapery on standing figure: Lo Porto 1991, 79, pl. 25, no. 10. Date: 4th c. BC.
5/29/14 2:04 PM
Terracottas FF TC 07 Figurine Provenance: Surface Find, Square B2 (over Room 4). Lot: FF80-4PL. (No. FF 80.004.01) A plan of the area indicates that the fragment was found near Wall 2 in the superficial area above Room 4. Dimensions and technical features: h 5.0. Fabric Munsell 7.5YR 6/4. Fabric has 1–2 mm biotite and calcareous inclusions. Condition: One fragment preserves drapery folds. Surface blackened from burning. Description: Fragment of drapery from a fairly thick-walled figurine. Plastically modeled zigzagging fold with rounded edges falls along right side of fragment. Narrow ridge borders edge of the zigzagging fold. Smooth drapery runs along other side of ridge. The fragment is too small to determine what garment is portrayed. It may be however the left side of mantle or himation that falls in a cascade of folds over left arm or along the side of a leg. Comparisons and comment: For zigzagging fold at edge of FF TC 08 Figurine Provenance: Square B3 (over Room 3). Level 1, Batt. 2. Lot: FF80-72T. (MM 321007; No. FF 80.072.01). The field notebook (p. 67) records that the head was found “at the corner of the wall in B3” and on a plan of the area with the superficial finds the words “terracotta head” have been written within the area of Room 3. This documentation suggests that the head was found within the area above Room 3, east of Wall 2, near the corner of its intersection with Wall 5. Photo FF 80.0240 (SBW80 40 Sheet A, #22–24) shows moreover the head in situ, but I am unable to determine where within the structure this detailed shot was taken. In addition, the photo record board indicates that the shot is of B3 Level 1, Batt. 5 while the inventory record indicates that the head was found in B3. Level 1, Batt. 2. Dimensions and technical features: h 11.2. Fabric Munsell 5YR 6-7/6. Finely levigated fabric with small (1 mm) calcareous and biotite (?) inclusions. Condition: One fragment preserves head and left side of neck of female figurine. Description: Head of female figure wearing kerchief, or kekryphalos, that binds hair into a torch-like lampadion knot at the top of head. The long kerchief or sash wraps first around the curled locks of the lampadion knot and then three times around the head before being tied in a central knot above the forehead. The three bands of the wrapped sash are indicated on either side of the head while the ends of the sash flare out in symmetrical triangles on either side of the knot. Circular bulbs render the curly ends of the locks of hair that are drawn up in a lam padion knot. The tresses emerging above the kerchief that
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 349
349 1:2
peplos running from belted apoptygma on terracotta figurine of standing female from Taranto, dated late 5th to early 4th c. BC: Herdejürgen 1971, 47–48, pl. 10, no. 28. For similar deeply cut drapery folds of himation on stone statue of youth from Rhamnous, ca. 420 BC: B. Ridgway 1981, 119, pl. 93. On himation draped over left arm of standing female figure portrayed by a stone statuette from Cos, 300–275 BC: Stewart 1990, 198, fig. 604 right. Date: Late 5th to 4th c. BC. 1:2
flow into the curls of the lampadion knot are indicated as small crinkled waves. The tresses emerging along sides of the face below the kerchief are full undulating masses with individual strands of hair rendered by incised lines. Full, rounded face exhibits strong nose, curved parallel lips, and prominent chin. Publication: Mistakenly published as belonging to large plaque TC 01 (FF 80.067.01): Carter 2006, 139–40, fig. 4.5; Carter 1987, 209, fig. 294; Carter 1980a, 2, 20, fig. 19. Comparisons and comment: TC 09 (FF80.028.01) below is from the same mold series. A fragment from the same mold series was also recovered at the sanctuary of Favale at Metaponto: M. Liseno 2004, 62, pl. 27f. For head from another mold series but with a similar headdress and coiffure from Favale at Metaponto: Adamesteanu 1980, 274–75, fig. 288c = M. Liseno 2004, 60, pl. 26d. Date: 4th c. BC.
5/29/14 2:05 PM
350
Rebecca Miller Ammerman
FF TC 09 Figurine Provenance: Square C3 (over Room 2). Level 1, Batt. 2. Lot: FF80-28PL. The field notebook (p. 15) describes as “found in wall, among stones” and Pottery Finds list repeats same information that refers to Wall 1. (No. FF 80.028.01) Dimensions and technical features: h 4.0. Fabric Munsell 7.5YR 7/6. Finely levigated fabric with small biotite (?) and calcareous inclusions. Condition: One fragment preserves back edge and portion of hair and kerchief from right side of female head. Description: Fragment of hair and kerchief, or kekryphalos, of head of female figurine. The smooth underlying bands and upper edge of the triangular bow formed by the end
1:2
of the knotted kerchief are indicated on the upper right side of the head. Soft waves of hair rise above the kerchief. Possible stippling marks one edge below band. Comparisons and comment: TC 08 (FF80.072.01) belongs to the same mold series. Date: 4th c. BC.
FF TC 10 Figurine Provenance: Square A3 (over Area 7). Level 1, Batt. 5. Lot: FF80-69T. (No. FF 80.069.01) Dimensions and technical features: w 3.1. Fabric Munsell 7.5YR 6/6. Finely levigated fabric with small (1 mm) calcareous and biotite (?) inclusions.
Condition: One fragment preserves corner of base of figurine. Description: Corner with carefully finished frame on underside of fragment, possibly belongs to base of figurine. Date: Probably 4th c. BC.
Terracotta Fragments with Indistinguishable Subjects Provenance: 78 nondescript fragments from following Pottery Lots: (Area 7). Square A3. Level 1, Batt. 5. Lot: FF8067T (33 fragments) (Area 7). Square A3. Level 1, Batt. 5. Lot: FF8069T (15 fragments) (Room 3 or Area 7). Square B3. Level 1, Batt. 4. Lot: FF80-76T “near corner of wall” (Wall 2; five fragments) (Room 4 and Area 7). Lot: FF80-174PL “Cleaning at end of wall between Room 4 and Area 7” (four fragments) Area 7. Square B3. Level 2, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80216T (four fragments) Area 7. Square A3. Level 2, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80220T (three fragments) Area 7. Probably Square B3. Level 2. Batt. 1, Lot: FF80-228T (12 fragments)
Terracotta Fragment Not Located in Recent Study Provenance: Square C3 (over Room 2). Level 1, Batt. 2. Lot: FF80-26PL. A fragment of a squared base of a terracotta figurine is sketched in field notebook (p. 14) and described (p. 15) as “found next to above example” (i.e., TC 09, FF 80.028.01, that was found in Wall 1). Comment: It was not included in the list of Special Finds, nor was there an inventory card for the fragment. Perhaps it was discarded.
FF_23_terracottas_04feb14.indd 350
5/29/14 2:05 PM
24
Loom Weights Lin Foxhall Only two loom weights were found during the excavations at Fattoria Fabrizio. Both seem to date to periods earlier than the 4th-century BC farmhouse. The first, a complete pyramidal weight (LW 01), was found inside the house in the NE quadrant of Room 2 in the upper part of the floor makeup, or possibly the floor surface itself, in a context dated to post- ca. 310 BC by black-gloss pottery. The loom weight, however, is certainly Archaic in date. Made of what is probably a fine-ware fabric, it was inscribed before firing on one side with ΙΝ in an Achaean alphabet of the mid- to late 6th century BC, and certainly no later than ca. 470 BC.1 The crooked iota is characteristic of the Achaean alphabets of this area, although this one is distinctly cursive in form, unlike most of the surviving examples in Achaean scripts, which are generally quite angular.2 The cursive form appears more often further south, for example in the Rhegion area and in Kroton (e.g., on a dedication to Zeus Melichios from Kroton).3 If the X on the top of the loom weight was intended to 1 A. W. Johnston, pers. comm.
2 An example of a broken iota, more angular than the cursive one depicted on the loom weight, is painted on a vase from the urban necropolis of Metaponto (in contrada Casa Ricotta), dated to the beginning of the 5th c. BC (Lo Porto 1966, 186–87, figs. 37–38). 3 For Rhegion, A. W. Johnston, pers. comm.; for Kroton, Jeffery with Johnston 1990, 261, pl. 50, no. 22.
FF_24_loom-weights_04feb14.indd 351
Type Pyramidal
MNI
NFr
Mid–late 6th c. to 470 BC
Date
1
1
Archaic–Classical period
1
1
Table 24.1 Quantification of the loom weights from Fattoria Fabrizio.
be read as a letter, in the Achaean alphabets this represented xi (ξ), not chi (χ).4 Since the context of this loom weight is the upper floor makeup (in the NE quadrant) of Room 2, and dated to the late 4th century BC, it is possible that this was an heirloom that was still in use at that time. The second loom weight (LW 02) was found outside the house, perhaps discarded because it had broken at the top. The fabric is coarser and the shape is squatter than the inscribed weight. However, it is also likely that this one belongs to the Archaic phase of the site, since at Metaponto pyramidal weights are most common in contexts of the 5th century BC and earlier. Although when complete LW 02 would probably have been slightly heavier than LW 01, the difference in weight would have been small and the two could have been used together as part of a set. 4
Jeffery with Johnston 1990, 248.
5/29/14 2:09 PM
352
Lin Foxhall
Catalog of Loom Weights FF LW 01 Pyramidal Loom Weight with inscription Provenance: Room 2 NE quadrant, Level 2, Batt. 4. Lot: FF80-195P. (MM 320997) Dimensions and technical features: h 6.6; base l 3; base w 3.3; max hole diam. 0.4. Weight: 57 g. Quite fine, brownish orange fabric, probably related to fine ware. Condition: Completely preserved; traces of wear. Description: Pyramidal loom weight. Inscribed with IN. Has X on top. Local fabric. Comparisons and comment: See introduction for further details. Date: Mid- to late 6th c.–470 BC.
1:2
FF LW 02 Pyramidal Loom Weight Provenance: Square D2 outside wall. Level 1, Batt. 3. Lot: FF80-41T. (MM 321006) Dimensions and technical features: Surviving h 5.4; base l 3.3; base w 3.2. Weight: 55 g. Beige, slightly sandy fabric. Condition: Broken at top. Smoothed on outside, traces of wear in surviving corners. Description: Pyramidal loom weight. Local fabric. Comparisons and comment: See introduction for further details. Date: Archaic–Classical.
1:2
FF_24_loom-weights_04feb14.indd 352
5/29/14 2:09 PM
25
Roof Tiles Francesco Perugino and Eliana Vollaro The excavation at Fattoria Fabrizio yielded considerable quantities of fragmented roof tiles that had once covered the structure.1 Morphological and technical analysis indicates that most of the fragments belong to two roofing systems: the first (A) follows the socalled Laconian model by employing only curved tiles for both the base and the cover levels, while the second system (B) uses flat pan tiles placed in overlapping layers. The latter system can probably be assigned to the earlier, 6th-century BC phase of the site. Although attested in earlier periods, the Laconian system in the form encountered at Fattoria Fabrizio dates to the 4th century BC. The typology of the roof tiles from Fattoria Fabrizio is based on a larger study, in progress, of tiles found at several sites in the Metapontine chora. The study divides the tiles into broad categories based on technical features and then subdivides them into types, which are distinguished by lowercase letters. The tiles from Fattoria Fabrizio represent only a part of this larger typological structure, which uses a three-character identification code: (1) letter indicating the type of roofing system (A = Laconian; B = pan tiles), (2) letter-abbreviation for the form (C = cover tile; T = curved or pan tile), and (3) number indicating the type (Table 25.1). In anticipation of a broader campaign of detailed scientific study, analysis of the clays was carried only as far as the creation of macro-groups and, in certain cases, observation under the microscope. Each group is represented by reference samples, which are described below. Within each macro-group subdivisions were noted, but these were too faint and uncertain to constitute a basis for empirical analysis. Fabric type T1: orange-pink clay; hard and compact; infrequent insertions; clay concentrations of lighter color; infrequent voids; grog; occasional large, porous, spongy, and 1
The authors wish to acknowledge the valuable help provided by Prof. Carlo Rescigno (Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli) for this study. During excavation in 1980, the architectural elements in terracotta were only sampled, rather than systematically collected. Most of the tile and cover tile fragments were found in the collapse of the roof and left in situ.
FF_25_roof-tiles_04feb14.indd 353
System A Aa Type AT0
Laconian Archaic system Tile with concave profile
Opaia
Tile with opaion
Ab
Hellenistic system
Type AT1 Opaia
Tile with concave profile Tile with opaion
Type AT2
Tile with concave-convex profile
Type AC1
Cover tile with depressed arch
System B
Pan tile system
Ba Type BT1
Archaic/Classical system Overlapping pan tile
Type BC1
Cover tile with horseshoe profile
Type BS1
Syma
Bb
Hellenistic/Roman system
Type BT2
Overlapping pan tile
Type BC2
Cover tile with depressed arch
Bc Type BT3
Roman system Pan tile with opening
Opaia 1
Tile with opaion
Opaia 2
Tile with opaion
Tubuli
Gutter tile
Table 25.1 Types of roof tiles from the Metapontino (types attested at Fattoria Fabrizio in italics).
yellow inclusions. There are two variants: (a) straw-yellow to greenish gray clay; especially compact; and (b) dark gray, vitrified core; very compact and sharp; orange-pink surface. Fabric type T2: yellow-beige; moderately compact and powdery to the touch; clean breaks; frequent and rather large inclusions of quartz-feldspar; infrequent biotite.
5/29/14 2:11 PM
354
Francesco Perugino and Eliana Vollaro
Figure 25.1 Reconstruction of the Laconian roofing system at Fattoria Fabrizio. (Paolino Forino)
Type T1, of local origin, is the most common type at Fattoria Fabrizio.2 The few fragments of type T2,3 a fabric circulated on a regional level, are distinguished by inclusions of quartz-feldspar and biotite, typical elements of Calabrian geological structures and indicative of their likely origin.4 Ab Laconian System Francesco Perugino The Laconian roofing system attested at Fattoria Fa brizio, dating to the 4th century BC, is of the Ab type (Fig. 25.1), which uses concave tiles and curving cover tiles. Both forms have a characteristic indentation on one end for the mosaicking of the individual pieces in the roof: on the curved tiles the indentation is at the front end, on the cover tiles at the rear end. Archaeological evidence of the Laconian system in southern Italy begins in the Archaic period, as illustrated by the 2
The sample analyzed under the microscope was taken from fragment FF80-221PL 3 a. 3 The sample analyzed under the microscope was taken from fragments FF80-133T and FF80-14PL. 4 The authors wish to thank K. Swift for the examination of the samples under the microscope. For the characterization of Calabrian fabrics, see Swift in Survey, 459.
FF_25_roof-tiles_04feb14.indd 354
finds from Torre di Satriano.5 In the 5th century BC, Laconian tiles were reused to make a cappuccina tombs at the Pantanello necropolis in the Metapontine chora.6 The archaeological evidence for the Hellenistic period is decidedly richer. Curved tiles and cover tiles are attested in domestic contexts and necropoleis of the 4th and 3rd centuries BC in Lucania, Daunia, and Messapia. Elements of Laconian roofing systems were recovered at Ascoli Satriano, where the ratio of Laconian to pan tile roofs was 10:1, and at an indigenous house of the second half of the 4th century BC excavated on the Collina del Serpente.7 The Laconian system is also well attested in domestic contexts of the second half of the 4th century BC at Oppido Lucano (Località Montrone),8 and in the 4th-century BC indigenous settlement at Pomarico Vecchio and Difesa S. Biagio.9 The terracotta elements recovered at Poma rico and Difesa S. Biagio in particular are morphologically very close to the examples from Fattoria Fabrizio and Sant’Angelo Vecchio. Other Laconian roofs were found in the Peucetian settlement at Monte Sannace dating to the second half of the 4th century BC.10 Laconian base tiles were also found during a field survey of Lucanian sites in the Sinni River valley.11 At Ordona, a Daunian settlement, excavations revealed domestic structures in mudbrick with stone socles sitting on top of tombs dated to the second half of the 4th century BC; the wooden frame of the roof was covered with Laconian base tiles.12 Laconian roofing 5
Lo spazio del potere, 127ff. Carter in Necropoleis, 97ff. The reconstruction proposed for that study shows the typical features of the Laconian base tile—the subrectangular shape and variable thickness (tapering toward center, thickened at the edges)—but does not show the mosaicking indentations on the exterior edges of the front end of the cover tile, as on the examples from Fattoria Fabrizio and Sant’Angelo Vecchio. 7 Ausculum I, 70, 78–79, and 302, pl. 81, nos. 3–7. 8 Lissi Caronna 1983–1984, 193ff. House A had a porch-roof made of tiles in front of the two excavated spaces. Terracotta fragments clearly belonging to a Laconian roof are visible in the images (Lissi Caronna 1983–1984, 195, fig. 1, pl. LXXXVII a), although it is difficult to determine whether they are base or cover tiles. 9 Pomarico Vecchio: Pomarico Vecchio I, 11, 105, pl. 97.1, and 126, fig. 12. Difesa S. Biagio: D’Andria and Roubis 1998–1999, 134, fig. 12, 152, fig. 22, and 153, fig. 24. The tiles were brought during the excavation of “House a.” They constituted a very homogeneous layer and were not related to the collapse of structures but were interpreted, together with other deposits, as subsequent work of leveling. The Laconian tiles were found associated with black-gloss pottery dated to the 4th c. BC. The length of the Laconian tiles is unclear, while the width is 38 cm, which is similar to the examples from Fattoria Fabrizio and Sant’Angelo Vecchio. 10 Scarfì 1962, 107, fig. 93. A base tile was found bearing the stamp ΣΥΡΙ on the concave side. 11 Rescigno 2001b, 211. 12 Ricerche sulla casa, 340ff. 6
5/29/14 2:11 PM
Roof Tiles
355
domestic structure.17 The tiles from Ascoli Satriano and Poma Fattoria Fabrizio 96.0 38.0–41.0 14.0 2.5 rico Vecchio are smaller than the Metapontine examples curAscoli Satriano 80.0 35.0 rently under analysis, although Pomarico Vecchio 49.0 24.5 1.5 it should be noted that only one Pantanello, T31 75.0 29.0–35.0 Metapontine example—from Pantanello, T227 85.0 29.0 Tiles Fattoria Fabrizio—is complete, Pantanello, T248 90.0 38.0–41.0 while a standard unit of length Pantanello, T307 88.0 39.0 has been proposed for the tiles Cozzo Presepe, tile wall 93.0 30.0–42.0 from the other sites only beAthens, stone mold 87.8 ca. 44.0 cause of their strong morphoMessene, stone mold max. pres. 113.0 65.0 logical similarities and common Fattoria Fabrizio max. pres. 86.0 24.0–28.0 4.0 thickness. The standard unit of Cover Metaponto asty 60.0 22.0 tiles length used in the roofing sysAthens, stone mold ca. 73.8 ca. 22.0 tem at Fattoria Fabrizio is probably the Doric foot (27.30 cm): Table 25.2 Summary of the most important examples of Laconian roof tiles. the length of a tile corresponds elements were also used at Torre del Mordillo 13 and to 3.50 feet (95.55 cm), and the width to 1.50 feet in the theater at Monte Iato, which was constructed (41.00 cm). The existence of standard units for roofca. 300 BC and underwent several renovations.14 La- ing systems is suggested also by a unique discovery at conian curved tiles and cover tiles were also reused to Athens, in a 2nd-century BC public building near the reinforce a defensive structure at Cozzo Presepe, built Acropolis: a mold carved from Pentelic marble bearin the second half of the 4th or early 3rd century BC.15 ing full-size reproductions of the shape of a Laconian The only fragment of Laconian tile with opaion at curved tile and cover tile, which doubtless served as Fattoria Fabrizio, found within the tile fall in Room models for the creation of standardized tiles.18 Other 1, is similar to a nearly complete specimen from stone models have been found at Messene, in Laconia, Sant’Angelo Vecchio (SAV36, inventory no. SA79- and at Assos.19 Table 25.2 compares the dimensions 666T). It is distinguished by an elongated oval shape of the tiles and cover tiles from Fattoria Fabrizio to and can be ascribed to Wikander’s type I B.16 Laconi- those of Laconian roofing elements and molds from an tiles with oval opening have been found at Nemea several other sites. near oikos 7, perhaps to be attributed to a renovation Ba Pan Tile System of this building; at Athens, near the Agora, attributEliana Vollaro able to the second phase of the Tholos (third quarter of the 4th century BC); and at Pella, in a Hellenistic A tiny number of fragments from Fattoria Fabrizio belong to a roofing system that used pan tiles and 13 Colburn 1977, 462, 464, 481, A 14, fig. 62. This Laconian tile with some low, squat, quarter-circle cover flaps. In this case, too, other examples comes from trench 17 and is not attributable to the building identified in the survey, probably a house. The Laconian tile in fig. 62, the form of the cover flaps and the technical features according to the scholars, belonged to another building of the town. It of the fabrics have close parallels in tiles attested at comes from layer 2, in mixed material of the 3rd c. BC and to a lesser exMetapontine necropoleis 20 and in the area of the tent of the 5th and 4th c. BC. This tile, partially reconstructed, shows only half of a long side with a swollen side edge and probably the back with a farmhouse at Sant’Angelo Vecchio.21 The highly fragSite
Length (cm)
Width (cm)
thickened edge. Isler 1975, 541, fig. 11; 1978, 9, fig. 2. Several stamped tiles were recovered in the excavations. One example bears the stamp ΙΕΡΑΙ, pressed into the convex part; the photograph does not show clearly whether it is a curved tile or a cover tile. The second example, a cover tile completely reconstructed from numerous fragments, is tapered and has the mosaicking indentations on the rear end; on the convex part appears the stamp ΨΕΑΤΡΟΥ inside a rectangular cartouche. 15 De Gennaro 2005, 47–49; Osanna 1992, 82, no. 11; Morel 1970, 81, figs. 7–8; Cozzo Presepe, 282, fig. 85. 16 Wikander 1983. 14
FF_25_roof-tiles_04feb14.indd 355
Weight (kg)
17
Thickness (cm)
Wikander 1983, 84, 6-7-9, figs. 9-7b (A428)-6.
18 Thompson and Wycherley 1972, 79–80, pl. 36b. Alongside the mold was
found a block of poros (conglomerate stone), reused as a pedestal, with a cut on the top surface into which the mold fits perfectly. 19 Orlandos 1966–1968, 22, fig. 63, and 93ff. 20 Inventory nos. SA-791074T, SA79-1028T (B), tomb; two examples lacking inventory numbers: SA79-981T (c), F6, Level 4, Batt. 1, 16 Jul. 1979, south tomb. See also Necropoleis. 21 The farmhouse at Sant’Angelo Vecchio will be the subject of a future volume in the Chora of Metaponto series.
5/29/14 2:11 PM
356
Francesco Perugino and Eliana Vollaro
mentary state of the finds is a disadvantage offset by the parallels, which demonstrate both the likely standard unit and the assembly method.22 The system consists of a tile and a low cover flap with a semicircular and squat profile that is not tapered along the length of its edges and was installed by overlap. The tiles have rectangular indentations on the lower surface to allow the overlap of the cover flaps on top of the corresponding parts of the tiles below. On several examples of tiles from Sant’Angelo Vecchio, there is a horizontal strip projecting a few millimeters above the surface between the cover flaps which perhaps served to prevent water infiltration, rather than to fit the tile carefully to the successive one.23 This strip is not a characteristic feature of the type; on similar tiles found at other sites it is either located in different positions, always near the upper
edge, or completely absent. The transverse strip is also found on tiles from Archaic and Hellenistic contexts in Greece and Asia Minor; 24 it appeared in Magna Grecia at approximately the same time. Because of the poor state of preservation of the finds, the exact morphology of the roof tiles at Fattoria Fabrizio cannot be established, but they clearly belonged to system B and type BT1. Finally, the fragments of pan tiles recovered in the area of Sounding E1 in association with Archaic materials probably belong to the first phase of the site’s occupation, in the course of the 6th century BC. However, the tiles cannot be securely ascribed to a true roof: considering the limited number of fragments recovered and their poor state of preservation, they may have been used as tomb covers.
22 Average dimensions (cm): l 81.0; w 53.4; lower cavity l 11.5; lower cavity
w 5.0; cover flap h 5.0; cover flap w 5.0; cover flap th 2.2. The length is approximately equal to 3.0 Doric feet of 27.3 cm. 23 SA79-550TA-TB; SA79-1028T (A), and two examples lacking inventory numbers.
FF_25_roof-tiles_04feb14.indd 356
24
Wikander 1988, 208–9, fig. 3, C2a.
5/29/14 2:11 PM
Roof Tiles RT 03
RT 02
357 RT 01
1:10
1:3
RT 04
Figure 25.2 Seam cover (03), pan tiles (01–02), and pan tile with opaion (04). (Paolino Forino)
FF_25_roof-tiles_04feb14.indd 357
5/29/14 2:11 PM
358
Francesco Perugino and Eliana Vollaro
Catalog of Roof Tiles Ab Laconian System Tiles (-AT1).The body is rectangular and accurately made, with thickened edges and a concave profile; it is tapered near the front end to accommodate the overlap of the next tile. Two oblique indentations used to position the cover tiles are present on the exterior edges of the front end, but they are not always identical in length (04, SA79-953T-B; 06, SA79-1051T; 09, SA79-186T; 25, SA79-318T; 11, SA79-186T; 12, SA79-708T). The long edges have a variable profile: offset and thickened (06, SA79-1051T); offset, pointed at the top, and thickened on the inner side (cf. 13,
SA79-556T); offset, rounded at the top, slightly concave, and thickened on the inner side (cf. 14, SA79-622T); offset and forked (cf. 15, SA79-622). On the base tiles the concave (upper) surface is smooth and the convex (lower) surface roughly finished, while on the cover tiles the situation is inverted. These constant relationships allow almost all fragments to be assigned to the correct form. Average dimensions (cm): l 96.0; w 38.0–41.0–42.0; th body (including edge) 2.5; l indentation 7.5–10.0; weight of complete example ca. 14.0 kg.
Ab Laconian Tiles (-AT1) FF RT 01 Laconian tile Provenance: Room 2 SE quadrant. Level 2, Batt. 2. Lot: FF80-127T. (No. FF80-127T-A) Dimensions and technical features: max pres. l 59.0; w 37.0; l front end 30.0; l indentation 7.0; th front end 1.9; th rear end 1.9. Condition: Partially reconstructed from six fragments, missing the rear section.
1:10
FF RT 02 Laconian tile Provenance: Room 1 E. Level 2, Batt. 3. Lot: FF80-226T. Dimensions and technical features: total l 93.0; total w 37.0– 41.0; w opening 29.0; l indentation 7.5–8.5; th 2.4–2.8; 14.0 kg. Condition: Completely reconstructed from seven fragments. 1:10
FF_25_roof-tiles_04feb14.indd 358
5/29/14 2:11 PM
Roof Tiles Cover tiles (-AC1).The base tile with concave profile is associated with a type of squat cover tile tapered toward the rear end, where there are two oblique indentations used to fit it over the base tile. The convex (upper) surface is smooth, while the concave (lower) surface is roughly finished. The front end is flat and barely thickened at the top, and the lateral edges are slightly beveled. On some examples, which
359
may be described as “forked,” the lateral edges are emphasized by a continuous groove running along the center. All of the fragments were produced in fabric type T1. Average dimensions (cm): reconstructed l ca. 96.0; w rear end 28.0; w front end 24.0; span 5.0–8.0 x 23.0; l indentation 5.5–7.5; th edge 1.7–2.5; weight ca. 4.0 kg.
Ab Laconian Cover Tiles (-AC1) FF RT 03 Cover tile Provenance: Room 2 SE quadrant, Level 2, Batt. 2. Lot: FF80-127T. (No. FF80-127T-B) Dimensions and technical features: max pres. l 86.0; w front end 28.0; w rear end 24.0; span 5.0–8.0 x 23.0; l indentation 5.5–7.5; th edge 1.7–2.5; ca. 4.0 kg.
Condition: Reconstructed from six fragments, missing the front section; repaired; rear end with raised upper edges; calcareous incrustations on all surfaces.
1:10
Opaion. The opaion on the Laconian base tile is oval and elongated in shape with a raised edge that has a rectangular profile and flattened upper surface, as the better preserved
example found at Sant’Angelo Vecchio (SAV 36, inventory no. SA79-666T). Average dimensions of the opening (cm): w 21.0; l 40.0; h raised edge (including tile body) 4.0.
Ab Opaion FF RT 04 Opaion Provenance: Room 1 E. Level 2, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80-158PL. Dimensions and technical features: th edge 1.6; th wall 1.7. Condition: Fragment of the edge and short section of the body.
1:3
Ba Pan Tiles (-BT1) FF RT 05 Pan tile Provenance: Square C1. Level 1, Batt. 1. Lot: FF80-14PL. Dimensions and technical features: h cover flap 5.2; w 7.2; th 3.0; clay type T2.
FF_25_roof-tiles_04feb14.indd 359
Condition: Fragment of the cover flap with small piece of the body.
5/29/14 2:11 PM
360
Francesco Perugino and Eliana Vollaro
Ba Pan Tiles (-BT1) cont. FF RT 06 Pan tile Provenance: Room 2 SW quadrant. Level 2, Batt. 4. Lot: FF80-133T. Dimensions and technical features: h cover flap 4.3; w 4.2; th 3.0; clay type T2.
Condition: Three adjoining fragments forming part of the cover flap and the body.
1:4
FF RT 07 Pan tile Provenance: Room 1 W. Level 2, Batt. 5. Lot: FF80-190T. Dimensions and technical features: h cover flap 3.8; w 5.0; th 1.8; clay type T2.
FF_25_roof-tiles_04feb14.indd 360
Condition: Fragment of the cover flap with small piece of the body.
5/29/14 2:11 PM
26
Metal Objects Lorena Trivigno and Marta Mazzoli The metal objects recovered at Fattoria Fabrizio all date to its occupation in the 4th century BC.1 Most of them come from Rooms 1 and 2, which were probably used for storage and domestic activities, as indicated by the related finds (Fig. 26.1).2 The bronze grater from Room 1 is of particular interest, as this kind of object is usually recovered from burials and sanctuary sites, seldom from domestic contexts. The grater comes from a floor level that was in use during the 4th century BC.3 Two fragments of a thin bronze lamina with worn surface from NE Sounding 1 cannot be attributed to any specific type due to their fragmentary condition.4 Lead clamps were the bulk of the finds in metal. For study purposes, the metal finds were grouped into two categories of functional classes, regardless of the type of metal used in their manufacture. The Bronze Grater A bronze grater (M 01), in 17 fragments, was the only object of domestic use recovered during the excavation. In antiquity graters were important accessories for drinking, as literary sources suggest they were used to grate cheese (usually goat cheese) to be mixed with wine, giving it a distinctive taste. In a passage from the Iliad, Nestor orders Hecamede to prepare a drink for the Achaeans: 5 . . . and beside it a beautifully wrought cup which the old man brought with him from home. It was set with golden nails, the eared handles upon it were four, and on either side there were fashioned two doves of gold, feeding, and there were double bases beneath it. Another man with great effort could lift 1 The authors wish to thank Prof. Alessandro Naso (Universität Innsbruck)
for his guidance and advice at an early stage in this study. 2 See p. 18 in Ch. 2, “Room 1,” p. 25 in Ch. 2, “Room 2,” and Ch. 5; c.f. Carter 2006, 138–39. 3 The date is suggested by a few black-gloss fragments dated to the first half of the 4th c. BC and by some amphora fragments (belonging to two vessels) dated to the second half of the 4th c. BC. 4 FF80-88M, from NE Sounding 1, Level 2, Batt. 2. 5 Zancani Montuoro 1983, no. 1, 147; 1987, 7–10, fig. 1, pl. III a–c, IV a–b, 8. Also West 1998.
FF_26_metals_04feb14.indd 361
it full from the table, but Nestor, aged as he was, lifted it without strain. In this the woman like the immortals mixed them a potion with Pramneian wine, and grated goat’s-milk cheese into it with a bronze grater, and scattered with her hand white barley into it. When she had got the potion ready, she told them to drink it . . . Iliad, XI.631–640 Trans. R. Lattimore, 1951 The cup described by Homer has been connected with a now-famous Rhodian kotyle discovered in the Lacco Ameno necropolis at Pithekoussai. The verse inscription on it proclaims that it is, in fact, the cup of Nestor. D. Ridgway, who published the kotyle, dates it to the 8th century BC.6 Following M. L. West,7 he proposes a new historical interpretation of the custom of grating cheese in ancient Greece. For Ridgway, cheese grating appeared in the Greek epic tradition already in the 9th century BC, when Euboea played an important role in the birth of Greek epic.8 This interpretation unites the arrival in the West of the Greek epic tradition and that of the artifacts and drinking customs related to it. The use of metallic graters at domestic sites is documented both in Greece and southern Italy from at least the end of the 11th century BC.9 Bronze examples were recovered from Azoria (eastern Crete, 6th–5th century BC)10 and Olynthos (late 5th–first half of the 4th century BC).11 In the 4th and 3rd centuries BC, 6
D. Ridgway 2009, 789. West 1998, 190. 8 D. Ridgway 2009, 789–90. 9 Examples known to the authors come from Malthi in Messenia (end of the 11th–beginning of the 10th c. BC, see Waldbaum 1978, 31) and from Punta Chiarito at Pithekoussai (7th c. BC). The first of the two bronze graters from Punta Chiarito was discovered inside a plain-ware bowl in the house’s pantry area; the second was in the central part of the same house, most likely the dining area (De Caro and Gialanella 1998, 343). An iron grater was also found in a pre-Classical domestic context at Pithekoussai (D. Ridgway 1995, 83; 1997, 331 n. 3, 340 n. 11, 341; 1998, 314). See also Gialanella 1996. 10 Whitley et al. 2006–2007, no. 158, 104. 11 Robinson 1941, 191. 7
5/29/14 2:13 PM
362
Lorena Trivigno and Marta Mazzoli
the evidence of bronze graters in southern Italy is wider. Examples come from indigenous contexts of Apulia (Monte Sannace, AsFF M 02 FF M 03 12 coli Satriano), Basilicata (CiviFF M 01 ta di Tricarico),13 and from Locri FF M 04 Epizephyrii.14 The domestic nature of these contexts and the association with artifacts intended Pithos for the preparation of foodstuffs Pithos Area 7 Rm. 3 Rm. 2 Area 9 Rm. 1 and banqueting are significant, since graters are most commonly Pithos found in graves and sanctuaries, where they were probably connected with ritual drinking. Rm. 4 Rm. 5 Rm. 6 In Basilicata, bronze graters Scale: 1:200 N have been found in a grave at 0m 3m Alianello-Cazzaiola and in the necropolis of Chiaromonte (Sotto la Croce). Graters have been Area 8 discovered in association with drinking vessels in burials from Guardia Perticara (tomb 210) and in the Matina Soprano necropolis Figure 26.1 Plan of Fattoria Fabrizio showing findspots of the metal objects. (JCF/KJS/ICA) at Pisticci (tomb 13), both dated to the 5th century BC.15 They have been found in and 60 in the necropolis of Latronico (Potenza),17 and 4th-century BC contexts, including the Pizzica-Panta- the princely necropolis of Timmari (Matera) dated to nello necropolis in the Metapontine chora,16 tombs 54 the third quarter of the 4th century BC. A very rich 12 Monte Sannace: A fragmentary bronze grater, of a similar type to that set of grave goods was discovered at Timmari in tomb from Fattoria Fabrizio and dated between the end of the 4th and the be33,18 including a fragmentary bronze grater with a ginning of the 3rd c. BC, was found on the acropolis of Monte Sannace ring for hanging, a mortarium, a pestle, a Griff-Phiale, (Riccardi 1989a, 70–72, pl. 283.13). The artifact was found near a Late and a series of ceramic and metal vessels.19 Archaic building (Excavation G, Sector 3, Layer 1, external area) used for about two centuries, until the second half of the 4th c. BC. It can be more The farmhouse at Fattoria Fabrizio was a small accurately dated on the basis of ceramic finds from the context and a silver settlement operating on a pastoral or agricultural ecocoin from Taranto dated between the end of the 4th and the beginning of the 3rd c. BC. Two graters are known also from Botromagno (Gravina in nomic model. Though not surprisingly no metal tools Puglia), dated between the 2nd and the 1st c. BC (Macnamara 1992, 234, related to agriculture were found—they rarely are— types no. 1873, 68.70, and no. 1874, 70.123, fig. 105, 363). The finds can the bronze grater recovered here was clearly used for be attributed to the occupation span of houses 1 and 3 of the settlement (period Gravina VIIIa, 2nd–1st c. BC). Ascoli Satriano: bronze grater (late practical, food-related purposes. At the same time, this 4th–early 3rd c. BC) from House 1 on the Collina del Serpente (Fabbri item also likely attests the spread and survival of cerand Osanna 2005, 218). 13 In Basilicata, graters were found at the Hellenistic farmhouse of Monte tain acculturating phenomena, such as the penetration Moltone at Tolve (Albero 1992, 54), as well as a fragment of a bronze gratof banqueting rituals in non-aristocratic communities. er at Civita di Tricarico. The bronze grater from the Maison du monolithe The exclusive association of graters with aristocracy is dated between the 4th and 3rd c. BC, as at Fattoria Fabrizio; cf. Bourdin 2008, 547, no. 1278 (CTri 4126.1), fig. 345, 634. should clearly be reevaluated. As Ridgway notes, the 14 Bronze fragments from layers III-II dated to the 4th c. BC (Barra Ba attraction of these tools, especially in earlier periods, gnasco 1989, 26, pl. VI no. 3). 15
On Chiaromonte: Armi, 77, T.170, no. 7. On the other finds from Lucania, cf. Bianco et al. 1996a, 152, type 2.11.59: bronze grater from tomb 500 at Alianello-Cazzaiola, dated around the mid-4th c. BC. On the grater from tomb contexts at Guardia Perticara and Pisticci, grave goods displayed in the Museo Archeologico Nazionale of Metaponto. On the grater from tomb 13 at Pisticci, cf. Cracolici and De Siena 2002, 70, no. 25, 97. 16 On the Pantanello necropolis: Prohászka in Necropoleis, 819, type H9
FF_26_metals_04feb14.indd 362
(end of the 4th c. BC). 17 Bianco et al. 1996b, 211. 18 Canosa 2007, 115–16, fig. 14, no. 119, 109. 19 For a detailed list of grave goods and their positions inside the grave, see Canosa 2007, 26ff. Two additional bronze graters from the sacred area of Lamia S. Francesco in Timmari have recently been dated to the 5th–4th c. BC (Vacca 2011, 83).
5/29/14 2:13 PM
Metal Objects
363
The date of these objects cannot be precisely specified, as lead clamps were Grater 1 Copper alloy First half of the 4th c. BC 17 1 employed constantly for a very long time; Clamp 1.1 Lead 2 2 comparisons come from chronologically Clamp 1.2 Lead 3 2 varied contexts ranging from the proto-hisDrippings 2 Lead 2 1 toric through the Roman periods.25 The Table 26.1 Quantification of the metal objects by number of fragments (NFr) clamps from Fattoria Fabrizio were found and minimum number of individuals (MNI). together with pithos fragments in Room 2, in association with the floor level. Since lay in their functional nature and heroic value; togeth- the floor belongs to the final phase of the farmhouse, er, these factors perhaps constituted a source of pride destroyed ca. 300 BC, this date therefore represents the for their owners.20 terminus ante quem for the clamps.26 The lead objects (M 02–M 04) and the pithos fragLead Clamps and Drippings ments recovered in Room 2 together delineate more Five fragments of lead clamps (M 02–M 03) and some precisely the function of the space, which can be idenresidual lead drippings (M 04) belong to the second tified as a storeroom for grain and cereals.27 functional class. Lead clamps have an exclusively utilThe drippings from Fattoria Fabrizio (M 04), also itarian function, especially in the context of Fattoria recovered in Room 2, are evidence of the optimization Fabrizio, where they were employed in the repair and/ of work within the farmhouse. They suggest the in situ or consolidation of large ceramic containers (pithoi). repair of the pithoi with lead clamps, as in a passage Although only one clamp (M 02) was found still at- of Cato’s De agri cultura, in which he lists activities tached to a pithos wall (OD 02), there is no doubt that to be performed on a farm during inclement weather, the other clamp (M 03) had the same function. including the repair of pithoi with lead: The low melting point of lead (327.4° C), which Ubi tempestates malae erunt, cum opus fi21 can be melted in a simple open pit, makes the metal eri non poterit, stercus in stercilinum egerito. easy to work and particularly useful for repairs. These Bubile, ovile, cohortem, villam bene purgato. characteristics account for the extreme simplicity of Dolia plumbo vincito vel materie quernea vere the entire repair process (melting and working). sicca alligato. Si bene sarseris aut bene alliIn technical terms, a lead clamp is produced by gaveris et in rimas medicamentum indideris pouring the molten metal directly into two holes crebeneque picaveris, quodvis dolium vinarium ated along the break in the damaged ceramic object. facere poteris. . . . Repair clamps therefore do not have a standard size, Cato, De agri cultura, XXXIX.128 as they depend directly on the dimensions of the break The passage indicates that this was one of the habititself, 22 but they can be typologically classified by their ual maintenance activities performed in a farmhouse form in evident relation to their mode of manufacture. to conserve the stores of foodstuffs contained in the The type of clamp documented at Fattoria Fabrizio dolia/pithoi. consists of two rods with flattened convex sections joined at the ends by two hooks with circular sections.23 In all of the attested clamps (M 02–M 03) the Sanna 2005, 171, fig. 54. The entire experimental process lasted no longer exterior parts of the rods bear longitudinal signs inter- than 10 minutes, “confirming that this type of repair was so simple that it was probably done at home” (Atzeni et al. 2003, 111). pretable as negative imprints left by the reeds used to 25 For a recent study on the use and metallurgy of lead, see Morell i Cortes mold and contain the lead along the break during the 2009. 26 The proposed chronology is nevertheless derived exclusively from the pouring phase.24 Shape
20
Type
Metal
Date
NFr
D. Ridgway 2009, 791. 21 Giumlia-Mair 2002. 22 Macnamara 1992, 246. 23 Although there are no doubts about the form and attested typology of M 02, in the case of M 03, the highly fragmentary state of preservation precludes precise identification of the original form of the clamp. 24 This production technique has been experimentally reproduced in a laboratory environment: Atzeni et al. 2003, 110–12, fig. 2; Atzeni/Massidda/
FF_26_metals_04feb14.indd 363
MNI
findspot (Room 2) and its association with the other classes of materials (see p. 25 in Ch. 2, “Room 2”). 27 On this aspect, see Ch. 22. 28 “When the weather is bad and no other work can be done, clear out manure for the compost heap; clean thoroughly the ox stalls, sheep pens, barnyard, and farmstead; and mend wine-jars with lead or hoop them with thoroughly dried oak wood. If you mend it carefully, or hoop it tightly, closing the cracks with cement and pitching it thoroughly, you can make any jar serve as a wine-jar.” (Latin and English from Hooper and Ash 1934)
5/29/14 2:13 PM
364
Lorena Trivigno and Marta Mazzoli
Catalog of Metal Objects Lorena Trivigno Bronze Grater FF M 01 Bronze Grater Provenance: Room 1 E. Level 2, Batt. 4. Lot: FF80-211M. Dimensions and technical features: l 6.02; w 3.0; th 0.01; 9.0 g. Metal: Copper alloy. Plate fashioned by mold-casting and hammering. Slightly inward-bent borders. Grating holes made by piercing the plate with a sharp object (squaretipped punch). Condition: Fragmentary, consisting of 17 fragments. Green patina with brownish patches. Description: Rectangular grater with holes (diam 0.01) divided by intersecting lines (max. w 0.03).
Comparisons and comment: Bourdin 2008, 547, Type no. 1278 (CTri 4126.1), fig. 345, 634 (Civita di Tricarico, 4th–3rd c. BC); Riccardi 1989a, 72, pl. 283.13 (Monte Sannace, settlement phase III, excavation G, Sector 3: mid-4th to 3rd c. BC); Macnamara 1992, 234, type no. 1873 (68.70), no. 1874 (70.123), fig. 105, 363 (230–55). The last parallel suggests a date in the 2nd or 1st c. BC (Gravina, site DA, phase DA V, area 4, period VIIIa). Date: 4th c. BC.
1:1
FF M 01
FF_26_metals_04feb14.indd 364
5/29/14 2:13 PM
Metal Objects
365
Lead Clamps FF M 02 Clamp 1.1 Provenance: Room 2 NE quadrant. Level 2, Batt. 3. Lot: FF80-129Pa-b-c. Dimensions and technical features: l 5.07; w 3.00; th 1.00 (base), 0.05 (head); 50.0 g. Metal: Lead. Clamps fashioned by pouring and shaping the material inside a hole cut into the damaged vessel, in this case two wall fragments of a large storage container (pithos). Condition: Two complete items. Grayish-white patina due to alteration of the surface.
Description: Circular pin with a perpendicular strip of lead at one end; one of the two clamps is still inside the original ceramic housing (wall fragment of pithos OD 02). Comparisons and comment: Visonà 1999, 371, type OM 87/3, no. 848, fig. 383 (Oppido Mamertina); Macnamara 1992, 247, type no. 1990 (67.105), fig. 119, 377 (Gravina). These comparisons suggest a broad chronology between the beginning of the 3rd and the 1st c. BC, since the morphological features of this type of object remained unchanged for a long period of time. Date: ca. 300 BC. 1:1
FF M 02
FF M 03 Clamp 1.2 Provenance: Room 2 SE quadrant. Level 2, Batt. 4. Lot: FF80-213M. Dimensions and technical features: l 3.05; w 1.05; th 0.05; 22.0 g. Metal: Lead. Clamps fashioned by pouring and shaping.
Condition: Two items in three fragments. Grayish-white patina due to alteration of the surface. Description: The shape of the clamp recovered in two fragments can be partially reconstructed. A third fragment belongs to a second clamp. Date: ca. 300 BC. 1:1
FF M 03
FF_26_metals_04feb14.indd 365
5/29/14 2:13 PM
366
Lorena Trivigno and Marta Mazzoli Dripping
FF M 04 Dripping Slag 2 Provenance: Room 2 SE quadrant. Level 2, Batt. 4. Lot: FF80-213M. Dimensions and technical features: l 9.00; w 4.05; th 0.01; 180.0 g. Metal: Lead. Residual dripping.
Condition: Two fragments, one item. Grayish-white patina due to alteration of the surface. Description: Shapeless residual element from assembling or mending household items. Date: ca. 300 BC. 1:1
FF M 04 FF_26_metals_04feb14.indd 366
5/29/14 2:13 PM
27
Coins Anna Rita Parente A single, very worn bronze coin was found during the excavation of Fattoria Fabrizio. It was recovered from cleaning of the floor of the NE quadrant of Room 2, dating to ca. 300 BC (see p. 25 in Ch. 2, “Room 2”).
Catalog of Coins FF C 01 Coin Provenance: Room 2 NE, cleaning. Level 2, Batt. 4. Lot: FF80-246M. Dimensions and technical features: 2.50 g; 14 mm; 180°. Metal: Bronze. Condition: Worn surfaces. Mint: Metapontum. Description: Obv., Head r. Rev., Barley ear. Comparisons and comment: Johnston 1989. Date: ca. 300 BC.
FF_27_coins_04feb14.indd 367
1:1
5/29/14 2:15 PM
FF_27_coins_04feb14.indd 368
5/29/14 2:15 PM
28
Lithic Material Cesare D’Annibale Lithic industries during the Greek period were essentially limited to the manufacture of a few standardized products and an even more exclusive use of specific materials. Product manufacture was directly tied to primary quarry sources, resulting in specialization and commercial distribution from these centers. Foremost among raw materials reaching the Metapontine basin was calcarenitic limestone from the Apulian region, utilized primarily for architectural elements. Volcanic stones, including dacite and andesite, were intended for the production of millstones that likely derived from Greece, particularly during the Archaic period. The three lithic artifacts linked to these industries from Fattoria Fabrizio include an architectural element and two grinding stones. Architectural Elements Architectural elements used in wall construction at Fattoria Fabrizio were made from stones available within the immediate vicinity of the site. The majority are unmodified rolled and rounded nodules and cobbles gathered from exposed banks and the Venella below the farmhouse. The others consist of sandstone and conglomerate rocks that occur as outcrops exposed all along the eastern bank of the Venella slope. Sandstone occurs in thin flattish beds virtually everywhere in the Pleistocene marine terraces in the Metapontino, and may be easily acquired and broken into desired fragments if needed. The location for the farmhouse may have been purposefully chosen because of the presence of a formation of a conglomerate rock bank at least 1 m in thickness.1 The construction on the steep valley slopes was otherwise somewhat problematic as the terrain was subject to slumping. The outcrop by Fattoria Fabrizio displays signs of having been modified to create an actual terrace by cutting blocks for use in wall construction. Although conglomerate rocks were utilized in major public works in Metaponto and its 1
These conglomerate rocks, referred to as puddinga, outcrop in several areas of the Metapontino, especially noticeable in exposed valley slopes of the Venella and at several other localities including that of San Marco and Cozzo Presepe.
FF_28_lithics_04feb14.indd 369
chora, those employed at Fattoria Fabrizio are roughly cut and broken, suggesting an informal quarrying activity that took advantage of the exposed rock. Only one specimen of calcarenitic limestone was recovered at Fattoria Fabrizio (Li 01). Limestone quarrying was done on a commercial scale in a wide regional network encompassing Apulia and Basilicata. Since this material is found only in formations to the east of the Bradano River, in the Apulian region, the nearest source would lie at a distance of some 30 km. Acquisition of calcarenitic limestone was destined primarily for monumental or specialized works within the chora. Quarries in the environs of Taranto and Montescaglioso were exploited for public works at Metaponto, such as the Archaic Temple of Hera on the Bradano River,2 other public buildings in the city itself,3 and for sarcophagi.4 The block from Fattoria Fabrizio probably also originates from the same sources. Although this block of calcarenitic stone was recovered as a constituent of a 4th-century BC wall, the material was of greater importance than the other locally available architectural elements used in wall construction. At other farmhouse sites in the Metapontine chora, calcarenitic stone is also a rarity. For specific architectural elements, such as thresholds, columns, or post supports, a commercial industry may have provided the specialized blocks. The projected diameter of this block, judging from its partial circular form, is approximately 46 cm—large enough for a possible support element. Its roughly hewn sides and underside were probably intended to aid in setting the block into the ground. The most plausible explanation, however, for the presence of these commercially quarried stones on farmhouse sites is that they were scavenged from decaying or abandoned public buildings. The practice of collecting and possessing remnants or spolia is apparent at other farmhouse sites in Metapontine chora.5 2
Baccelle Scudeler et al. 2010, 54–55. Baldassare and De Marco 1981; Maraudino 1995. 4 Folk in Necropoleis, 112. 5 Several farmhouse sites identified through ICA’s survey and excavations 3
5/29/14 2:16 PM
Cesare D’Annibale
370
Figure 28.1 Map of the Metapontino in the Neolithic period. (JT/ICA)
The presence of such a rare block at Fattoria Fabri zio may have yet another explanation. It may have had a ritual provenance, perhaps as the base for a dedicatory stone, boundary marker, or as an argos lithos, or aniconic image dedicated in a sanctuary. These argoi lithoi have a strong tradition in the Metapontino.6 It too may have been scavenged from some nearby rural sanctuary, such as site 477 in the valley below, or further down the Venella at the San Biagio sanctuary, or its original provenance may just be from the Archaic in the chora of Metaponto produced architectural elements of calcarenitic limestone: a Doric capital from Sant’Angelo Grieco (Carter 2006, fig. 4.17), a miniature Doric capital from site 42 in the Demanio locality, and a column drum from site 42 in the Appio locality. Still other examples come from other farmhouse excavations, specifically at Fattoria Pacciano in contrada Saldone (Adamesteanu 1974a, 85–87; Amore 1992–1993, 97 n. 6, photo 51). 6 The prolific use of such stones occurs in Archaic contexts at Temple B at Metaponto (Adamesteanu 1974a, 28–32; 1980, 112–21); in farmhouse contexts, an inscribed stone marker was recovered from Sant’Angelo Vecchio.
FF_28_lithics_04feb14.indd 370
phase of Fattoria Fabrizio itself, perhaps connected to a domestic cult. Grinding Stones The frequent recovery of grinding stones and querns on farmhouse sites from the chora of Metaponto demonstrates that grinding was one of the key activities on a Greek farmstead.7 The consistent presence of grinding stones attests to their role as basic household equipment most often associated with cereal process7
A total of 107 farmhouse sites identified during the ICA field survey of the chora of Metaponto had volcanic millstones or grinding stones in their assemblage (Prieto and Carter in Survey, 604–5; Carter in Survey, 630). In addition, several Greek farmhouse sites excavated by ICA—including Sant’Angelo Grieco and Sant’Angelo Vecchio—produced millstones. Other excavated farmhouse sites in the chora producing volcanic millstones include Fattoria Pacciano, Pascucci-Torraca, Risimini, Pagliarone 2, and Musillo (Amore 1992–1993, table 13). From the chora of Croton, ICA’s field survey identified 54 farmhouse sites with volcanic millstones.
5/29/14 2:16 PM
Lithic Material Shape
Material
Date
Count
Architectural element
Calcarenitic limestone
Likely Archaic
1
Quern stone
Andesite
Archaic to Classical
1
Grinder
Dacite
Archaic
1
Total
3
Table 28.1 Quantification of lithic materials from Fattoria Fabrizio.
ing for the production of flour. Many are representative of the simplest grinding system consisting of two elements, a flat, resting or immobilized saddle quern and an oval-shaped, flat-bottomed hand grinder that is pushed across the surface of the quern. The two recovered from Fattoria Fabrizio represent both elements of a saddle-type grinding mechanism. The quern is made from andesite and displays a classic roughly hewn underside, an irregular surface, possibly to provide better grip for stabilization of the quern if set into the ground or in a wooden box (Li 02). The sides are also roughly hewn and slant outward at 45°. They present a wedge-shaped section in profile, which would also have been an aid in stabilizing or immobilizing the quern. The overall shape would likely have been rectangular. Due to the constant backward and forward motion of the grinder over the quern, the midsection tends to wear thin toward the middle. This characteristic concavity is apparent on the Fattoria Fabrizio piece, as the outer edge is 2 cm higher than the section toward the center. The other grinding stone consists of an oval-shaped grinder made of dacite (Li 03). It displays a classic scalene triangular profile and a very distinctive eared end. The eared extension facilitates the grip and provides grinding pressure consistency. Standardization of this type of saddle quern and grinder has been documented in the Aegean as early as the 7th century BC and continues well into the Classical period.8 In Greece, similar examples attest to the popularity of this type in this period.9 The form was widespread in the Mediterranean and finds many parallels throughout southern Italy.10 It is particularly abundant in the Metapontino, 8
Amouretti 1986, 138.
9 For a discussion on the saddle quern during the Archaic and Classical pe-
riods in the Argolid, see Kardulias and Runnels 1995, 116, 123. At the tile works at Corinth, this type is given a probable Archaic date (Merker 2006, 119, n. 257). The eared extension is noted in Aegean contexts, notably from the Athenian Agora (Runnels 1981, 339, fig. 24). 10 For examples from Serra di Vaglio, see G. Greco 1991, 75, fig. 175; from Roccagloriosa, likely from the 5th c. BC, see Gualtieri 1990b, 309,
FF_28_lithics_04feb14.indd 371
371
occurring at Archaic- and Classical-period farmhouses in the survey of the chora of Metaponto,11 and from similar contexts at Incoronata.12 During the Greek Archaic period, the raw material used in the production of grinding stones is virtually without exception volcanic in origin, either dacite or andesite. Although these stone types occur in several locations around the Mediterranean basin, the raw materials used in the manufacture of the Fattoria Fabrizio examples likely derive from around the Saronic Gulf of Greece.13 The preferential use of volcanic stones for grinding to the virtual exclusion of others is indicative of a formalized and standardized commercial enterprise operating in Magna Grecia. The presence of these grinding stones at Fattoria Fabrizio is yet further evidence for the standardization of activities and equipment that characterizes farmhouse sites in the chora of Metaponto. The use of these volcanic stones imported from Greece in Archaic contexts suggests close ties to traditional Greek commercial activities during the early stages of the apoikiai or poleis in Magna Grecia. Later they were supplanted by other types of volcanic grinding stones derived from Italian sources. The two types of volcanic stones would indicate two different quarry sources. Were two different grinding mechanisms in use at Fattoria Fabrizio between the 6th and mid-5th century BC? The longevity of grinding stones is subject to a number of variables that determine its use-life. In general, the average lifespan for millstones may be a generation.14 The recovery of a snapped dacite grinder in nearly pristine condition is probably the result of accidental breakage. Its scrapping fig. 202, n. 590; from an Archaic house on the acropolis of Elea, see Bencivenga Trillmich 1983, 426, 443, fig. 11; from Francavilla Marittima, see Kleibrink 1970–1971, 78–80, tables 31–32; for Sybaris, see Guzzo et al. 1972, 116, fig. 124; for Morgantina in Archaic contexts, see White 1963, 201. A number of 6th- to 5th-c. BC farmhouse sites from ICA’s survey of the chora of Croton (including sites 186, 202, 209, 233, 246, 413, 416, and 449) also produced these millstones. 11 The form is found on 17 farmhouse sites from the Metaponto field survey, including sites 44, 58, 283, 549, 647, 850, 912, 927, 950, 961, 974, 977, 1051, 1061, 1077, and 1081. 12 See also examples from Incoronata (Castoldi 1995, 110, fig. 221; 2000, 47, fig. 50–51; Lambrugo 2003, 91, figs. 85, 156–57). 13 A preliminary analysis of volcanic grinding stones from the Metaponto field survey carried out by A. Maraudino and N. Palumbo indicated that some of the raw material does originate from the Aegean area. Other such studies have indicated a similar provenance for some Archaic and Classical saddle quern–type millstones from the Monte Castellazzo area in Sicily (Ferla et al. 1984); for a broader analysis of volcanic grinding stone provenance in Greece, see also Williams-Thorpe and Thorpe 1993 and Kardulias and Runnels 1995. 14 For discussion on the longevity of grinding stones, see Amouretti 1986, 217.
5/29/14 2:16 PM
372
Cesare D’Annibale
during the first phase of the operation of the farmhouse would explain its location in a fill or abandonment context prior to the establishment of the 4th-century BC farmhouse. It was subsequently replaced by a second grinding mechanism made of andesite, a fragment of which was eventually discarded and re-employed as building stone in a late 4th-century BC wall (Wall 9). The predominance of the saddle quern grinding mechanism is an Archaic- to Classical-period phenomenon. Its simplicity is responsible for its wide distribution, but also implies grinding on a small scale. With the switch to the large Olynthos-type milling mechanism sometime during the 5th century BC, milling became a more restricted activity reaching near industrial levels of productivity. This mechanism was capable of much greater efficiency and output.15 It is no coincidence that after the 5th century BC, the number of farmhouse sites employing this type of millstone decreased, but also that it was found at more dominant farmhouse sites. Those at which the Olynthos system was found could have produced flour on a commercial level or supplied the needs of a local district. This could suggest that during the latter phase of Fattoria Fabrizio, the farmhouse would have been operating in a different economic climate. Prehistoric Lithic Material Excavation of Greek and Roman farmhouse sites in the chora of Metaponto has consistently produced evidence of prehistoric occupation, primarily in the form of chipped stone. These excavations provide a window on traces of prehistoric activity that otherwise would have gone unrecognized.16 With the recovery of seven pieces of chipped stone, the site of Fattoria Fabrizio is yet another case of an unobtrusive small isolated camp or activity area. Although the lithic frequency is low, it nevertheless represents the location of some form of prehistoric activity in the immediate area, and another sign of the widespread utilization of the Metapontine basin by prehistoric populations. Finds of this type are well documented from the field survey of the Metapontine chora, where small collections of 15
For a general discussion on this type of milling system and its chronology, see Forbes 1956, 107–8; Amouretti 1986, 140–42. 16 Prehistoric material has been recovered from farmhouse sites excavated by ICA: Sant’Angelo Grieco, Sant’Angelo Vecchio, San Salvatore, Incoronata, and San Biagio (D’Annibale in San Biagio, 55–65). Other site excavations in the chora of Metaponto have also produced prehistoric material: Fattoria Stefan, Pacciano, Musillo, Pascucci-Torraca, Bufalara, and Pagliarone Fattoria 1 (Amore 1992–1993, table 14) and Cozzo Presepe (Macnamara 1983a).
FF_28_lithics_04feb14.indd 372
Shape
Material
Date
Count
Blade
Chert
Neolithic
1
Core
Chert
Neolithic
1
Utilized flake
Chert
Neolithic
1
Chert
Neolithic
2
Chalcedony
Neolithic
1
Chert
Neolithic
1
Flake Bipolar flake Total
7
Table 28.2 Quantification of prehistoric lithic materials from Fattoria Fabrizio.
chipped stone are a common occurrence.17 These lithic recoveries, either as isolated finds or as lithic scatters, are consistently indicative of Neolithic occupation of the territory. The Fattoria Fabrizio chipped stone assemblage can be safely linked to a broad Neolithic occupation. The lithic finds reflect general trends associated with prehistoric settlement models and lithic industry processes as identified in the intensive surface survey of the Metapontine chora and in the excavation of the major Neolithic/Eneolithic settlement at Pantanello.18 Raw material acquisition relied primarily on locally available pebble cherts as a source of tool stone. Pebbles were procured from exposed Pleistocene marine terrace banks or river channels and stream beds transporting cherts from inland regions. Pebble raw material rarely exceeds 100 g and seldom reaches 10 cm in size. Six of the seven lithic artifacts can be linked to the most common form of procurement: from exposed banks and field sources. Local pebble cherts consist of several varieties, overwhelmingly the most common of which is an olive gray-green variety, evident from the four examples representing its various tonalities (Li 05–Li 07, Li 10). Although not uncommon, white varieties rank among the lower frequencies in site assemblages from prehistoric sites in the Metapontine basin (Li 08–Li 09). The only possible exception to local procurement of materials, a blade segment, is an unusual chert type that may be an import acquired through trade networks (Li 04). It could, however, also have been derived from a major riverbed source, where a broader range of materials was transported downstream from the interior. Several technical aspects of the reduction methodol17
Well over 500 sites and findspots have been identified through ICA’s field survey of the chora of Metaponto since 1981. 18 The evidence of this settlement is under study by the author.
5/29/14 2:16 PM
Lithic Material ogies typical of the Metapontine chipped stone industry are reflected by these artifacts. The local lithic industry is distinguished by random flake production from unprepared pebble cores reduced by direct percussion. Core reduction initiates by choosing the most convenient natural ridge or edge from which flake removal follows with minimal platform preparation. Some edge grinding is noticeable along the working platforms but is not applied on a standard basis. Flakes will consistently display remnants of the pebble’s cortical surface on their dorsal face but will also present a cortical platform, an indication of the limitations of the local raw material but also of the adaption of an ad hoc technique to reduce cores (Li 06–Li 08). Another common element of the Metapontine chipped stone industry is the use of bipolar technology to reduce pebble cores (Li 10).19 The bipolar technique is employed primarily to maximize the use of exhausted cores or of pebble cores rendered unworkable after direct percussion flaking becomes inconvenient. Bipolar technology maximizes the use of pebble cores as viable flake producers. At Fattoria Fabrizio, pebble core reduction occurred on site primarily to provide a source of flakes destined to be utilized as simple tools for a variety of functions. The one core recovered substantiates its reduction for this purpose, two large flakes having been removed (Li 05). Such flakes were rarely modified to create working edges or formal tools; instead they served as expedient or on the spot disposable tools. Most flakes were discarded after a single or a few uses since there was no lack of readily available material. Only one flake displays use-wear in the form of invasive scarring, which occurs along the left lateral ventral edge. It may have resulted from a scraping or shaving action (Li 06). The linear splintered flakes produced by bipolar technology could be used as wedges or splitting tools (Li 10). The third aspect of the Metapontine chipped stone industry is represented by blade technology (Li 04).20 Blade technology is usually linked to a punch technique for the production of parallel-sided prismatic blades. Morphologically, the characteristic end products have a trapezoidal cross section, although variations such as triangular and multifaceted blade forms do occur occasionally. Blades constitute one of the 19
For a discussion of bipolar lithic technology—also referred to as the hammer and anvil technique—see Crabtree 1972, 10, and Odell 2004, 59. 20 For terminology and discussion of blade technology, see Inizan et al. 1999, 71–80.
FF_28_lithics_04feb14.indd 373
373
most common and valued tool forms and were utilized as blanks for a variety of tasks with or without further modification. The blade segment recovered from the site displays roughened lateral edges indicating repeated use. This technology relates to a specialized form of reduction linked to a broader Mediterranean industry representative of Neolithic trade in high quality raw materials such as obsidian and chalcedony. The technique, however, was sporadically applied to other chert materials, as the blade segment from Fattoria Fabrizio demonstrates. Being products of a specialized and standardized industry, blades are indicative of access to extensive regional networks. Neolithic Settlement Pattern Although the Fattoria Fabrizio chipped stone material lacks diagnostic traits, nevertheless the characteristics of the production techniques and consumption patterns exhibited by these artifacts can all be linked to a broad Neolithic presence in the Metapontino. The Neolithic evidence in this area indicates a great dispersal of settlement, especially during its latter stages, from the transition from Middle to Late Neolithic (mid-5th millennium BC), and into the Eneolithic period during the 3rd millennium BC.21 An apparent consequence of this influx was that larger settlements tend to be located along the major river valleys, the Basento and the Bradano. Settlements are normally found on low-lying terraces just above the river plain.22 Secondary or varied activity sites that supported the subsistence and economy of these large sites are found spreading into the interior terraces and higher plateau lying between the two major valleys. Access to the hinterland for these sites is most discernible along the Venella valley. The Venella valley was a major access route into the interior of the Metapontine plateau between the Basento and Bradano Rivers. A concentration of prehistoric activity sites has been documented on either 21
Evidence for this dispersal in the Metapontino from this span of time is to be found at Saldone (Di Fraia 1970), Pantanello (Ingravallo 1980), San Biagio (D’Annibale in San Biagio), the Temple of Hera at the Tavole Palatine (Lo Porto 1981, 25–26), and Incoronata (Chiartano 1983, 150). 22 This position is apparent at sites overlooking the Basento such as the Pantanello locality, site of a major Middle/Late Neolithic to Eneolithic settlement (Ingravallo 1980). At San Biagio a Late Neolithic presence is documented from the excavation of a Late Roman farmhouse (D’Annibale in San Biagio). At Sant’Angelo Vecchio and at Pizzica, large Late Neolithic sites were identified from the Metaponto field survey (site 7/8). On the Bradano side near the San Marco locality, another major Late Neolithic site was also identified during the Metaponto field survey (site 227).
5/29/14 2:16 PM
374
Cesare D’Annibale
side of the valley and along the terrace edge overlooking the valley. This indicates its importance as a local thoroughfare. The location of Fattoria Fabrizio may mark one of the points of descent from the plateau into the Venella valley below or vice versa. The occurrence of this activity area just below the lip of
FF_28_lithics_04feb14.indd 374
the plateau overlooking the large stream valley of the Venella is an ideal spot for a hunting camp or lookout outpost, perhaps situated on or near a game trail. The excavation of Fattoria Fabrizio has played a role, unexpected at the time, in increasing our knowledge of the Neolithic settlement pattern in the Metapontino.
5/29/14 2:16 PM
Lithic Material
375
Catalog of Lithic Material FF Li 01 Architectural Element; Support base? Provenance: Wall 3; FF11-30L. Material: Calcarenitic limestone. Dimensions and technical features: l 33 cm; remnant w 14.4 cm; t 11.5 cm; weight 5.5 kg; possible diam. of 46 cm. Condition: Incomplete; edge fragment representing possibly a third of original size; height intact. Description: Truncated circular form; one face smoothed flat; rough hewn marks on edge and underside, slightly slanting edge toward underside. Comparison and comment: Likely to sustain a column/support post; possibly associated with the support for the porch. Date: Likely Archaic since the block was reutilized in a 4thc. BC wall, the second phase of the farmhouse.
1:4
FF Li 02 Quern Stone Provenance: Wall 9; FF11-29L. Material: Volcanic; andesite. Dimensions and technical features: l 115 mm; w 123 mm; t 42–22 mm; weight 875 g. Condition: Incomplete; edge fragment from shorter side of lower stone. Description: Wedge-shaped profile; rough hewn marks on underside of resting surface and on side edge; side is diagonally angled at 45°; working surface thins from 45 mm at the outer edge to 22 mm in thickness approaching center of quern. Comparison and comment: Used in conjunction with ovaltype grinder (see Li 03); andesite saddle quern lower stone fragments are to be found on several Metaponto field survey sites (49, 54, 579C, 876, 937, 950, 961, 1011, 1072, 1083, 1092, 1101). The thinning of the center of
1:4
FF_28_lithics_04feb14.indd 375
the quern results from the greater pressure applied at that point from the backward and forward motion of the grinder, thereby thinning faster than the initial and final FF_Li_02 / FF11-29PL points of the motion at the edge of the stone. Date: Archaic or Classical, incorporated into Wall 9, constructed post- ca. 350 BC.
5/29/14 2:17 PM
376
Cesare D’Annibale
FF Li 03 Grinder Provenance: Room 5; collapse of Wall 2; FF11-35L. Material: Volcanic; dacite. Dimensions and technical features: remnant l 185 mm; w 127 mm; t 55 mm; weight 1303 g. Condition: Incomplete; nearly half of original size. Description: Oval type; scalene triangle cross-section; eared end; working surface enlarges from 100 mm to 127 mm at widest point. Comparison and comment: Eared examples from field survey sites 283, 549 and 1051; scalene profile from site 974; worn scalene example from site 977; see also example from Fattoria Musillo (Amore 1992–1993, photo 23). Although lacking the eared feature, the oval-shaped grinder is found on various farmhouses in the Metapontino such
1:4
as Sant’Angelo Vecchio and several Metaponto field survey sites (44, 58, 549, 647, 850, 1061, 1077). In terms of material, dacite grinding stones were found at the Pantanello sanctuary (PZ82-524G: M’5 on virgin soil on west bank of west channel) and in the Metaponto field survey (site 17, 103, 182, 577, 580, 769, 876, and 936). Date: Archaic, perhaps originally incorporated into Wall 2.
Prehistoric FF Li 04 Blade Provenance: Surface, east court; FF11-38L. Material: Chert. Dimensions and technical features: l 16 mm; w 15 mm; t 3 mm; weight 1.2 g. Color: Munsell 10R 5/1 (reddish gray) with lighter speckling; translucent. Condition: Incomplete; distal end segment; slightly worn with some patina. Description: Triangular blade cross-section; distal tip pre sents remnants of another blade scar; extensive dorsal left and right lateral utilization. Comment: Blade technology is generally a Neolithic occurrence. Although a third blade scar is visible at the distal FF Li 05 Core Provenance: Surface, east court; FF11-36L. Material: Chert. Dimensions and technical features: l 51 mm; w 43 mm; t 37 mm; weight 122.5 g. Color: Munsell 5Y 4/2 to 5/3 (olive gray to olive) to gley 1 4/1 (dark greenish gray); some translucency. Condition: Reduced by flake removals on two facets. Description: Pebble core; two facets, each with one large flake removed; two platforms displaying small shatter flakes scars. Comment: Olive/green chert variety ranks as the most common chert raw material. Date: Prehistoric.
FF_28_lithics_04feb14.indd 376
1:1
FF_Li_04 / FF11_38PL end, morphologically the blade is still triangular. This is a common occurrence toward the distal end of cores where blade scars tend to converge. Date: Prehistoric. 1:1
5/29/14 2:17 PM
Lithic Material
377
FF Li 06 Utilized Flake Provenance: Surface, east court; FF11-37L. Material: Chert. Dimensions and technical features: l 39 mm; w 28 mm; t 12 mm; weight 11.4 g. Color: Munsell 5Y 4/1 to 4/2 (dark gray to olive gray). Condition: Incomplete; lacks distal end. Description: Primary flake; dorsal face retains 75% of cortical surface; flat unprepared platform; impact flake scars on bulb of percussion on ventral surface. Comment: Ventral left lateral straight utilization resulting in invasive scarring. Date: Prehistoric.
1:1
FF Li 07 Flake Provenance: Surface; FF11-31L. Material: Chert. Dimensions and technical features: l 23 mm; w 28 mm; t 6 mm; weight 4.1 g. Color: Munsell Olive 5Y 4/3. Condition: Complete. Description: Secondary flake; cortical platform; 25% of cortical surface remaining on dorsal face. Date: Prehistoric.
1:1
FF_Li_06 / FF11_37L
FF Li 08 Flake Provenance: Surface, west of Room 5; FF11-33L. Material: Chert/chalcedony. Dimensions and technical features: l 17 mm; w 12 mm; t 4 mm; weight 0.8 g. Color: Munsell 2.5YR 8/2 (pinkish white).
Condition: Complete. Description: Secondary flake; cortical platform; 20% of dorsal face retains cortical surface. Date: Prehistoric.
FF Li 09 Flake Provenance: Surface; FF11-34L. Material: Chert. Dimensions and technical features: l 17 mm; w 12 mm; t 4 mm; weight 0.8 g. Color: Munsell 10YR 8/1-7/1 (white to light gray).
Condition: Complete. Description: Tertiary flake. Comment: Exposed to heat. Date: Prehistoric.
FF Li 10 Bipolar Flake; Wedge Provenance: Surface; FF11-32L. Material: Chert. Dimensions and technical features: l 22 mm; w 19 mm; t 6 mm; weight 2.9 g. Color: Munsell Gley 1 4/1 (dark greenish gray); translucent. Condition: Complete. Description: Tertiary flake. Date: Prehistoric.
FF_28_lithics_04feb14.indd 377
1:1
5/29/14 2:17 PM
FF_28_lithics_04feb14.indd 378
5/29/14 2:17 PM
Appendix A
Assemblage Tables Keith Swift Ware
Form
PCW
n. id.
CkW
Casserole
Cat. 10
Chronology 5th–4th c. BC
Pottery Total Fau
Marine shell
4th c. BC
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
2
2
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
3
4
1
1
Table A1 Assemblage table, Room 1 W Tile Fall (Level 2, Batt. 1–2). Phase -1.2.
Ware Arch. BG
BG
BW
Form
Cat.
Skyphos with offset rim
Chronology
CkW
R
B
H
S
550–475 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
19
600–550 BC
1
2
0
0
2
0
Bowl
62
320–280 BC
1
3
0
2
0
1
Classical
1
1
0
0
0
1
Open form
Hellenistic
1
1
0
0
0
1
Jug
67
350–320 BC
1
4
1
0
0
3
Jug
26
520–280 BC
1
4
2
0
1
1
1
8
0
8
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
2
1
16
5
0
0
11
Closed form Dinos
24
320–280 BC
Lekythoid amphora?
31
325–200 BC (?)
1
3
3
0
0
0
n. id.
1
29
0
0
0
29
Open form
3
6
0
0
0
6
Chytra
1
1
1
0
0
0
Closed form
6
10
0
0
2
8
2
12
1
0
0
11
n. id. Lid Amp
Greco-Italic
OD
Pithos
Pottery Total
Total
Archaic lekane
n. id. PCW
EVRep
29
600–300 BC
1
3
0
3
0
0
13
400–300 BC
1
8
8
0
0
0
400–300 BC
1
2
0
0
1
1
320–50 BC (?)
1
11
1
0
0
10
28
127
01
Table A2 Assemblage table, Room 1 W Floor (Level 2, Batt. 3). Phase -2, farmhouse occupation.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 381
5/30/14 7:33 AM
Appendix A
382 Ware Arch. BG
Form
Cat.
Ionic cup C-type skyphos Cup/one-handler
37 52
Dish BG
Open form Jug
BW
Chronology
H
S
1
3
1
0
1
1
350–300 BC
1
6
3
0
1
2
380–350 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
330–300 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
400–300 BC
1
2
0
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
0
1
Class.–Hell.
1
3
0
0
0
3
400–320 BC
1
2
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
5th–4th c. BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
Small bowl/one-handler
420–360 BC
2
4
2
0
0
2
2
3
0
0
3
0
Jug 25
2
7
0
0
0
7
320–50 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
320–80 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Closed form
1
1
0
1
0
0
Open form
1
1
0
1
0
0
n. id.
2
25
0
0
0
25
400–300 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
5th–4th c. BC
1
2
2
0
1
0
Pan 11
Chytra
1
5
0
0
0
5
Closed form
7
18
0
0
0
18
n. id. Corinthian Type A
2
5
1
0
0
4
15?
36
0
0
0
36
520–200 BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
Corinthian Type B
06
500–490 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Greco-Italic
10
350–300 BC
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Pottery Total Fau
B
360–340 BC
Casserole
Amp
R
Closed form
Jug
CkW
Total
550–500 BC
n. id.
PCW
EVRep
Bone
4th c. BC
0
21
51
154
0
3
Table A3 Assemblage table, Room 1 W Floor Makeup (Level 2, Batt. 4)—post- ca. 33 BC with first half of the 4th c. BC and Archaic. Phase -3.1.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 382
5/30/14 7:33 AM
Assemblage Tables Ware Arch. BG
Form
Cat.
Skyphos with offset rim
C-type skyphos
35
BG
Dish
59
BW
Olpe
2
0
0
2
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
400–380 BC
1
4
1
0
1
2
400–370 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
350 BC
1
4
4
0
0
0
400–370 BC
1
2
1
1
0
0
325–300 BC
1
1
0
1
0
0
330–300 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
410–390 BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
400–350 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
3
3
0
0
0
1
13
0
0
0
13
580–280 BC
1
4
2
0
0
2
550–380 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
580–280 BC
1
3
1
1
0
1
465–360 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
09
420–360 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
01
400–280 BC
3
15
4
1
0
10
39
575–280 BC
02
600–200 BC 20
460–440 BC
Fau
1
9
1
0
0
8
1
6
0
0
0
6
2
2
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
24
0
0
0
24
420–200 BC
1
9
3
2
0
4
Casserole
4th–3rd c. BC
1
2
1
1
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
2
1
2
1
0
0
1
Closed form
5
17
0
0
0
17
n. id.
1
8
0
0
0
8
Chytra
4th–3rd c. BC
400–300 BC
1
4
4
0
0
0
Corinthian Type A
12
520–200 BC
1
2
0
0
0
2
Greco-Italic
400–300 BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
n. id.
4th–3rd c. BC
1
3
0
0
2
1
40
151
Cover tile
4th c. BC
1
0
0
0
0
Pottery Total Tile
S
Mortarium
Lid Amp
H
1
Open form CkW
B
600–400 BC
n. id. Mor
R
Class.–Hell.
Small bowl/one-handler Basin
Total
525–475 BC
n. id.
PCW
EVRep
350–300 BC
Open form
Small bowl/one-handler
Chronology
383
Archaic
1
0
0
0
0
Bone
Overlapping pan tile
07
4th c. BC
7
0
0
0
0
Marine shell
4th c. BC
1
0
0
0
0
Table A4 Assemblage table, Room 1 W Floor Makeup (Level 2, Batt. 5)—post- ca. 325 BC with late 5th/ early 4th and Archaic. Phase -3.1 with -4.1.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 383
5/30/14 7:33 AM
Appendix A
384 Ware
Form
Arch. BG
Cat.
Chronology
54
Ionic cup Dish
BG
Open form
Min
Kylix
BW
Bowl
16
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
550–500 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
410–360 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Classical (?)
1
1
0
0
0
1
Arch.–Class.
1
1
0
0
0
1
375–270 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
500–280 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
6
6
Pottery Total
Table A5 Assemblage table, Room 1 W Beneath Floor (Level 2, Batt. 6)—late 5th/early 4th c. BC, Archaic, perhaps post- ca. 375 BC. Phase -4.1 with -5.
Ware Arch. BG BG BW
Total
R
B
H
S
Skyphos with offset rim
Form
550–475 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Open form
Archaic
2
2
0
0
0
2
A-type skyphos
410–370 BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
C-type skyphos
425–400 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Jug
520–280 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Chronology
n. id. Basin
PCW
Cat.
1
1
0
0
0
1
460–440 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
15
400–100 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
22
450–400 BC
1
2
1
0
0
1
320–50 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
2
4
1
0
0
3
Jug Closed form n. id. Chytra
CkW Amp
20
400–300 BC
15
400–300 BC
n. id. Lid Greco-Italic
350–300 BC
Pottery Total Tile
1
4
0
0
0
4
1
1
1
0
0
0
3
4
0
0
0
4
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
2
20
28
Pan tile
4th c. BC
2
2
0
0
0
0
Cover tile
4th c. BC
2
2
0
0
0
0
400–300 BC
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
Opaion Fau
EVRep
Shell
04
Table A6 Assemblage table, Room 1 E Tile Fall (Level 2, Batt. 1–2). Phase -1.2.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 384
5/30/14 7:33 AM
Assemblage Tables Ware
Form
Cat.
C-type skyphos Cup/one-handler
BG
53
Open form
Min
R
B
H
S
350 BC
1
2
2
0
0
0
1
2
2
0
0
0
325–300 BC
1
3
3
0
0
0
Hellenistic
2
5
0
0
0
5
Classical
1
3
0
0
0
3
78
340–300 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Kylix
05
375–270 BC
1
10
0
0
0
0
410–360 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
575–200 BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
4
3
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
0
2
1
7
3
0
0
4
1
2
0
2
0
0
1
21
0
0
0
21
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
14
0
0
0
14
1
1
1
0
0
0
19
81
3
3
0
0
0
0
n. id. Dinos
320–280 BC
Open form
53
n. id. Chytra CkW
Total
330–300 BC
Dinos
PCW
EVRep
Bottle
Small bowl/ one-handler
BW
Chronology
385
24
400–300 BC
Closed form n. id. Lid
400–300 BC
Pottery Total Tile
Tile
Met
Bronze grater
Fau
Shell
400–300 BC
1
1
0
0
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
0
Total
R
B
H
S
Table A7 Assemblage table, Room 1 E Floor (Level 2, Batt. 3). Phase -2.
Ware Arch. BG BG
BW
Form Archaic lid
Cat. 20
Open form
Chronology 575–500 BC (?)
1
4
4
0
0
0
Classical
1
4
0
0
0
4
Mug
66
410–375 BC
1
2
2
0
0
0
Small bowl/ one-handler
47
600–200 BC
1
4
0
3
0
1
400–280 BC
1
7
3
0
0
4
1
2
0
0
0
2
1
1
1
0
0
0
n. id. PCW
CkW Pottery Total
EVRep
Small bowl/ one-handler
600–200 BC
n. id.
1
8
0
0
0
8
Closed form
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
0
2
10
35
n. id.
Table A8 Assemblage table, Room 1 E Floor Makeup (Level 2, Batt. 4). Late 5th/early 4th with Archaic material. Phase -4.1 with -5.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 385
5/30/14 7:33 AM
Appendix A
386 Ware
Form
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
4th c. BC
2
22
0
0
0
22
400–360 BC
1
20
0
0
1
0
350–300 BC
1
2
2
0
0
0
400–380 BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
Open form
4th c. BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
Closed form
Hellenistic (?)
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
3
0
2
0
1
1
2
0
0
0
2
C-type skyphos
BG
PCW
Open form
CkW
n. id.
Amp
Greco-Italic
OD
Pithos
Cat. 32
Chronology
54
02
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
300–250 BC (?)
1
53
1
0
0
52
11
106
Pottery Total
Table A9 Assemblage table, Room 2 NE Quadrant Tile Fall (Level 2, Batt. 1). Phase -1.2.
Ware Arch. BG
Form
C-type skyphos BG
Cat.
Ionic cup 31
Open form Squat lekythos
76
Small bowl/ one-handler BW
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
550–500 BC
Chronology
1
1
1
0
0
0
400–370 BC
1
11
5
0
1
6
400–375 BC
1
12
3
0
3
6
Classical
1
1
0
0
1
0
550–500 BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
400–325 BC
1
1
0
1
0
0
575–200 BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
520–300 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
580–380 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
550–380 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Dinos
24
400–300 BC
1
2
2
0
0
0
Jug
32
500–50 BC
1
2
2
0
0
0
410–360 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
2
3
0
0
0
3
1
1
0
1
0
0
2
5
0
3
0
2
4
15
0
0
0
15
420–400 BC
1
2
0
0
0
2
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Closed form
8
16
0
0
0
16
n. id.
4
8
0
0
0
8
Open form n. id. PCW
Open form
51
n. id. Mor
Mortarium
02
Chytra CkW
Amp OD
Corinthian Type A
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
Greco-Italic
4th–3rd c. BC
1
2
0
0
0
2
3
0
0
89
0
0
0
0
Pithos
03
300–250 BC (?)
Pottery Total Met
Lead clamp
400–350 BC
1
91
39
181
1
2
Table A10 Assemblage table, Room 2 NE Quadrant On Floor (Level 2, Batt. 2–3). Phase -2.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 386
5/30/14 7:33 AM
Assemblage Tables Ware
Form C-type skyphos
BG
Cat. 34
Skyphos (?) Open form
Total
R
B
H
S
380–350 BC
1
33
0
0
0
0
310–200 BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
Hellenistic
1
2
0
0
0
2
Hellenistic (?)
1
6
0
0
0
5
575–200 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
410–360 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
520–300 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
550–380 BC
2
2
2
0
1
0
320–280 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
375–270 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
575–280 BC
1
1
0
1
0
0
n. id.
1
1
0
0
0
1
Small bowl/one-handler
1
1
1
0
1
0
Basin
1
8
0
0
0
8
Closed form
1
1
0
1
0
0
n. id.
4
11
0
0
0
11
Open form
3
4
0
1
0
3
BW Dinos
23
Jug Closed form
CkW
EVRep
580–280 BC Small bowl/one-handler
PCW
Chronology
387
Chytra
46
31
350–280 BC
1
57
0
0
2
55
1
17
0
0
0
17
Closed form
1
1
0
0
0
1
n. id.
5
18
1
0
0
17
Pottery Total
32
170
LW
Pyramidal loom weight
01
Mid-6th c.–470 BC
1
1
0
0
0
0
C
Bronze coin
01
425–200 BC
1
1
0
0
0
0
Fau
Bone
1
3
0
0
0
0
Table A11 Assemblage table, Room 2 NE Quadrant Floor Assemblage and Makeup (Level 2, Batt. 4). Postca. 310 BC with material of the first half of the 4th c. BC. Phase -3 with -4.1.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 387
5/30/14 7:33 AM
Appendix A
388 Ware
Form
Cat.
A-type skyphos C-type skyphos
39
Kylix
BG
B
H
S
5th c. BC (?)
1
1
0
0
1
0
340–300 BC
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
2
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
Classical (?)
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
5
18
0
0
0
17
1
1
1
0
0
0
Closed form
5
25
0
0
0
25
n. id.
1
2
0
0
0
2
20
55
440–400 BC 48
n. id. Chytra
25
5th–4th c. BC
Pottery Total Tile
R
1
Closed form
CkW
Total
Class.–Hell.
Small bowl/one-handler
PCW
EVRep
500–440 BC
Open form BW
Chronology
Cover tile AC 1
03
3
3
Pan tile AT 1
01
2
2
Table A12 Assemblage table, Room 2 SE Quadrant Tile Fall (Level 2, Batt. 1–3). Phase -1.2.
Ware BG BW
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
C-type skyphos
Form
Cat.
400–300 BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
Small bowl/one-handler
575–200 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
3
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
n. id. Small bowl/one-handler
PCW
CkW
Amp
Chronology
Closed form
600–200 BC 39
n. id.
1
5
0
0
0
5
Chytra
1
22
1
0
2
19
Closed form
1
3
0
0
0
3
n. id.
1
6
0
0
0
6
Lid
410–300 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Greco-Italic
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
Pottery Total Met Fau
Lead clamp
03
Lead drippings
04
Snail shell
11
45
400–350 BC
0
1
0
0
0
0
400–350 BC
0
1
0
0
0
0
4th c. BC
0
1
0
0
0
0
Table A13 Assemblage table, Room 2 SE Quadrant Floor Level (Level 2, Batt. 4). Phase -2.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 388
5/30/14 7:33 AM
Assemblage Tables Ware
Form
Cat.
Chronology
A-type skyphos BG
C-type skyphos
42
389
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
350–300 BC
1
1
1
0
1
0
330–300 BC
1
8
1
0
0
0
Open form
2
2
0
0
0
2
PCW
n. id.
2
4
0
0
0
4
CkW
n. id.
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
Pottery Total Fau
Snail shell
4th c. BC
1
3
7
18
0
1
Table A14 Assemblage table, Room 2 SW Quadrant Tile Fall on Floor Level (Level 2, Batt. 1–3). Post- ca. 330 BC. Phase -1.2, possibly with -2.
Ware
Form A-type skyphos
BG
PCW CkW
Chronology
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
1
1
1
0
1
0
400–350 BC
C-type skyphos
330–300 BC
1
3
0
3
0
0
Open form
Class.–Hell.
1
2
0
0
0
2
410–360 BC
1
2
1
0
0
1
440–400 BC
1
1
0
0
0
0
Closed form
1
1
0
1
0
0
n. id.
1
9
0
0
0
9
1
5
0
0
0
5
8
24
Small bowl/ one-handler
BW
Cat. 26
10
n. id.
Pottery Total Tile
Overlapping pan tile
Fau
Shells
06
Archaic
0
1
0
0
0
0
4th c. BC
0
3
0
0
0
0
Table A15 Assemblage table, Room 2 SW Quadrant Floor Level under Stones (Level 2, Batt. 4). Postca. 330 BC with first half of the 4th and late 5th c. BC. Phase -3.1, with -3.2 and -4.1.
Ware BG BW PCW CkW Amp Pottery Total
R
B
H
S
Ionic cup
Form
Cat.
550–500 BC
Chronology
1
1
1
0
0
0
C-type skyphos
330–300 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Open form
Classical
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
Jug Small bowl/one-handler
600–200 BC
n. id. Chytra
27
Total
1
4
0
0
0
4
425–400 BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
3
0
0
0
3
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
9
14
Closed form Greco-Italic
EVRep
Table A16 Assemblage table, Room 2 NW Quadrant Below Fall (Level 2, Batt. 1). Post- ca. 300 BC on stratigraphy, post- ca. 330 BC with Late Archaic and Classical. Phase -2.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 389
5/30/14 7:33 AM
Appendix A
390 Ware
Form Skyphos with offset rim
BG
BW PCW
Cat. 11
Chronology
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
550–500 BC
1
1
0
1
0
0
Bowl
300–260 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Open form
Class.–Hell.
1
1
0
0
0
1
Jug
1
1
0
0
1
0
Closed form
1
3
0
0
0
3
n. id.
1
16
0
0
0
16
Open form
1
1
0
0
0
1
CkW
Closed form
2
5
0
0
0
5
1
2
0
0
0
2
Amp
Corinthian Type A
1
1
0
0
0
1
OD
Pithos
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
n. id. 4th–3rd c. BC
Pottery Total Fau
Snail shell
1
4
12
36
0
1
4th c. BC
Table A17 Assemblage table, Room 2 NW Quadrant Floor and Makeup (Level 2, Batt. 2). Archaic (miscollected post- ca. 300 BC). Phase -2 with -5.
Ware
Form
FW
Bell-krater
BG
Open form
BW
Small bowl/one-handler
PCW
n. id.
CkW
Chytra
Pottery Total Fau
Shell
Cat.
Chronology
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
1
0
0
0
1
450–300 BC
1 1
1
0
0
0
1
575–200 BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
600–300 BC
2
2
1
0
1
0
6
6
3
3
0
0
0
0
Table A18 Assemblage table, Room 3 (Level 2, Batt. 1). Post- ca. 320 BC on stratigraphy. Phase -1.2.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 390
5/30/14 7:33 AM
Assemblage Tables Ware
Form
Cat.
Chronology
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
450–400 BC (?)
1
1
0
0
0
1
320–290 BC
1
6
2
1
0
3
Open form
Classical (?)
1
1
0
0
0
1
Closed form
Classical (?)
1
1
0
0
0
1
575–475 BC
1
2
0
0
2
0
550–380 BC
1
2
1
0
0
1
04
410–280 BC
1
10
6
0
0
4
29
320–300 BC
1
2
2
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
7
3
0
0
4
Stemless kylix Dish
BG
60
Small bowl/ one-handler BW
Jug
42
Lid BW
PCW
CkW
1
3
2
0
0
1
Open form
41
1
1
0
0
0
1
Small bowl/ one-handler
1
1
0
0
1
0
Jug
1
1
0
0
1
0
Closed form
1
1
0
1
0
0
Open form
1
1
0
1
0
0
n. id.
1
8
0
0
0
8
Casserole
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
33
0
0
0
33
1
1
1
0
0
0
Closed form Lid
400–300 BC
Pottery Total Fau
391
20
84
Bone
1
1
0
0
0
0
Shell
1
1
0
0
0
0
Table A19 Assemblage table, Room 3 E On Floor (Level 2, Batt. 2). Post- ca. 320 BC with material of the second half of the 5th c. BC. Phase -2 with -4.1.
Ware
Form
Cat.
C-type skyphos BG
Skyphos (?) Open form Lebes gamikos Closed form
PCW
n. id.
CkW
Closed form
Chytra n. id. Pottery Total
71
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
325–300 BC
Chronology
1
3
0
0
3
0
360–350 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Hellenistic (?)
1
1
0
0
1
0
Classical
1
2
0
0
0
2
400–325 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Classical
1
2
0
0
0
2
1
20
0
0
0
20
1
1
1
0
0
0
3
8
0
0
0
8
2
19
0
0
0
19
13
58
350–270 BC
Table A20 Assemblage table, Room 3 E On Floor in W Corner (Level 2, Batt. 2). Last quarter of the 4th c. BC. Phase -2.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 391
5/30/14 7:33 AM
Appendix A
392 Ware Arch. BG BG BW
Form
Cat.
Chronology
EVRep
R
B
H
S
550–500 BC
3
4
1
0
0
3
600–500 BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
Open form
Archaic (?)
2
2
0
0
0
2
Open form
Classical
1
2
0
0
0
2
Small bowl/one-handler
575–200 BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
Ionic cup
n. id. Basin
PCW
Total
17
500–200 BC
1
6
5
0
0
1
18
500–200 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Jug
1
1
0
0
1
0
n. id.
1
19
0
0
0
19
1
2
0
0
0
2
1
4
3
0
1
0
1
3
0
0
0
3
1
1
0
0
0
1
17
48
Open form CkW
Chytra
19
Amp
Corinthian Type A
600–400 BC
n. id. 5th c. BC
Pottery Total
Table A21 Assemblage table, Room 4 Floor Level (Level 2, Batt. 2).
Ware
Form
Cat.
Ionic cup Arch. BG
Skyphos with offset rim Laconian krater
21
Open form
R
B
H
S
550–500 BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
600–500 BC
3
5
0
0
0
5
525–475 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
550–500 BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
5
0
0
0
5
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
n. id.
1
19
0
0
0
19
Mortarium
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
2
1
4
1
0
0
3
Closed form
2
3
0
0
1
2
n. id.
2
6
0
0
0
6
1
1
1
0
0
0
19
52
07
Lid
37
PCW
Open form
Open form Chytra
Lid Pottery Total
Total
6th c. BC?
Skyphos
CkW
EVRep
600–500 BC
Min
Mor
Chronology
600–300 BC
400–300 BC
Table A22 Assemblage table, Room 4 Floor Makeup (Level 2, Batt. 3).
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 392
5/30/14 7:33 AM
Assemblage Tables Ware Arch. BG
Form
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
550–500 BC
1
1
0
0
0
0
400–350 BC
1
3
0
0
1
2
400–300 BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
Open form
1
1
0
1
0
0
n. id.
1
9
0
0
0
9
Laconian krater
Cat. 21
C-type skyphos
BG
Closed form
BW
Lid
Chronology
43
Jug Closed form
PCW
Closed form
CkW
393
550–200 BC
30
400–300 BC
n. id. Pottery Total
1
1
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
1
2
0
0
0
2
12
24
Table A23 Assemblage table, Room 5 Collapse Below Tile Fall (Level 2, Batt. 1). ca. 300 BC. Phase -1.3.
Ware Arch. BG BG
PCW
CkW
Form
Cat.
Chronology
R
B
H
S
Ionic cup
525–450 BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
Arch.–Class.?
1
1
0
0
0
1
n. id.
1
1
0
0
0
1
Small bowl/one-handler
1
1
0
0
1
0
500–300 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
200–50 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
n. id.
6
18
3
0
0
15
Casserole
1
1
0
0
0
1
Chytra
1
1
0
0
0
1
Closed form
1
2
0
0
0
2
Basin
16
Corinthian Type A
01
550–500 BC
Pottery Total Tile
Total
Open form
n. id. Amp
EVRep
Cover tile
4th c. BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
17
30
1
1
0
0
0
0
Table A24 Assemblage table, Room 6 Tile Fall (Square C1, Level 1). Phases -1.1–2.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 393
5/30/14 7:33 AM
Appendix A
394 Ware BG PCW
Form
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
Ionic cup
550–500 BC
1
1
0
1
0
0
450–400 BC
1
3
0
0
0
3
Closed form
1
1
0
1
0
0
n. id.
1
16
0
0
0
16
1
1
1
0
0
0
2
5
0
0
0
5
06
5th–4th c. BC
Closed form n. id. Lid
Amp
Chronology
C-type skyphos
Casserole CkW
Cat.
16
Corinthian Type B
1
1
0
0
0
1
4th–3rd c. BC
1
2
0
0
1
1
5th c. BC
1
3
0
0
0
3
1
1
0
0
0
1
11
34
n. id.
Pottery Total
Table A25 Assemblage table, Room 6 Collapse Beneath Tile Fall (Level 2, Batt. 1). Phase -1.3.
Ware
BG
Cat.
Chronology
B
H
S
Ionic cup
Form
04
550–500 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Kotyle
17
550–500 BC
1
3
3
0
0
0
C-type skyphos
29
425–390 BC
1
2
0
2
0
0
Hellenistic (?)
1
2
0
0
0
2
Classical (?)
1
1
0
0
0
1
Classical (?)
Skyphos (?) n. id.
EVRep
Total
R
1
1
0
0
0
1
BW
n. id.
1
1
0
0
0
1
PCW
n. id.
1
16
0
0
0
16
Open form
1
1
0
0
0
1
CkW Amp
Closed form Greco-Italic
Pottery Total Tile
Tile
4th–3rd c. BC
3
15
0
0
0
15
1
1
0
0
0
1
13
44
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
Table A26 Assemblage table, Room 6 Lower Collapse Beneath Tile Fall, Interface with Final-Phase Floor Level (Level 2, Batt. 2). Phase -1.3 with -2.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 394
5/30/14 7:33 AM
Assemblage Tables Ware
Form
Cat.
Ionic cup BG
Chronology
03
Open form Closed form
PCW CkW
18
R
B
H
S
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
3
Hellenistic (?)
1
1
0
0
0
1
550–200 BC
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
14
0
0
0
14
1
2
2
0
0
0
510–400 BC
1
3
0
0
0
3
Corinthian Type A
4th–3rd c. BC
1
2
0
0
0
2
Greco-Italic
4th–3rd c. BC
1
3
0
0
0
3
1
2
0
0
0
1
10
32
0
1
0
0
0
0
n. id. Pottery Total Tile
Total
550–500 BC
Closed form
Amp
EVRep
Classical (?)
n. id. Chytra
395
Pan tile
4th c. BC
Table A27 Assemblage table, Room 6 Final-Phase Floor Level (Level 2, Batt. 3). Ca. 300 BC. Phase -2, mix of -1.3 and -3.
Ware BW PCW CkW Amp
Form
Cat.
Chronology
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
Small bowl/one-handler
580–380 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Bowl/lekane
575–200 BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
600–200 BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
n. id.
Small bowl/one-handler
03
1
9
0
0
0
9
Closed form
1
3
0
0
0
3
n. id.
1
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
Greco-Italic
350–300 BC
Pottery Total Fau
Bone
4th c. BC
1
1
7
18
1
1
Table A28 Assemblage table, Room 6 Final-Phase Floor Makeup (Level 2, Batt. 4). Phase -3.1.
Ware BG BW PCW CkW Amp
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
Ionic cup
Form
525/500–475 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Closed form
Classical
1
1
0
0
0
1
Lekane
575–200 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Open form
Chronology
600–200 BC
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
Jug n. id. Chytra
21
4th–3rd c. BC
n. id. Corinthian Type A n. id.
Pottery Total Fau
Cat.
Bone
4th–3rd c. BC
3
22
0
0
1
21
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
12
32
1
1
Table A29 Assemblage table, Room 6 Floor Level (Level 2, Batt. 5). Post- ca. 350 BC (dated by the construction of Wall 9). Phase -3.2.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 395
5/30/14 7:34 AM
Appendix A
396 Ware
Form Ionic cup
Arch. BG
Cat. 08
Skyphos with offset rim
BG
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
525–500 BC
1
8
6
0
0
2
525–500 BC
1
2
2
0
0
0
560–500 BC
1
1
0
1
0
0
A-type skyphos
27
350 BC
1
1
0
1
0
0
Kylix
46
ca. 500–450 BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
Archaic (?)
1
5
0
0
0
5
Open form
Classical (?)
1
4
0
0
0
4
13
550–400 BC
1
2
1
0
1
1
14
520–300 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
3
1
2
2
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
Basin
1
1
0
0
1
0
Jug
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
Small bowl/one-handler
BW
Chronology
n. id. Small bowl/one-handler
PCW
Jar
1
1
0
1
0
0
n. id.
43
1
12
0
0
0
12
Closed form
3
7
0
0
0
7
n. id.
1
4
0
0
0
4
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
Corinthian Type A Amp
600–200 BC
34
Closed form
CkW
02
5th c. BC
Corinthian Type B Ionian
Pottery Total Fau
Shell
4th c. BC
1
4
25
66
1
1
Table A30 Assemblage table, Room 6 Interface of Floor Makeup and Archaic Breccia (Level 2, Batt. 6). Mid-4th c. BC (upper parts) with Archaic (associated with breccia?). Phase -3.2 with -4.2 and -5.1.
Ware Arch. BG
Form Ionic cup
BG
Open form
PCW
n. id.
Pottery Total
Cat.
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
550–500 BC
Chronology
1
1
1
0
0
0
550–500 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Archaic (?)
1
1
0
0
0
1
Arch.–Class?
2
2
0
0
1
1
1
5
0
0
0
5
6
10
Table A31 Assemblage table, Room 6 Archaic Breccia Layer (Level 2, Batt. 7). Archaic. Phase -5.1.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 396
5/30/14 7:34 AM
Assemblage Tables Ware Arch. BG
Form
Cat.
Ionic cup 49
Kantharos
EVRep
Kylix
Small bowl/one-handler
1
1
0
0
0
1
18
1
0
2
1
23
0
0
0
0
1
4
0
0
0
4
Classical
1
1
0
0
0
1
Class.–Hell.
1
1
0
0
0
1
5th–4th c. BC
1
2
0
0
0
2
375–270 BC
1
3
2
1
0
0
03
1
7
7
0
0
0
06
1
7
0
0
0
0
06
410–360 BC
1
2
2
0
0
0
08
465–360 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
3
5
0
0
0
5
1
1
1
0
0
0
400–225 BC
3
55
0
1
0
54
01
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
02
400–300 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Open form
1
1
0
0
0
1
Closed form
10
37
0
0
0
37
8
32
2
0
0
30
Lid Greco-Italic
1
2
0
0
0
2
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
350–300 BC
1
3
0
0
0
3
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
44
210
n. id. TC
S
1
n. id.
Amp
H
350–300 BC
n. id.
CkW
B
1
Jar
Pan
R
600–500 BC
n. id. PCW
Total
Classical (?) Open form
BW
Chronology
50
BG
Min
397
Illegible fragment
4th/early 3rd c. BC
Pottery Total
Table A32 Assemblage table, Area 7 Tile Fall (Level 1, Batt. 5; Level 2, Batt. 1). Phase -1.
Ware
Form
Cat.
Jug
PCW
Chronology
EVRep
Hellenistic
n. id.
Pottery Total
Total
R
B
H
S
1
9
0
0
2
8
1
2
0
0
0
2
2
11
Table A33 Assemblage table, Area 7 L-shaped Stone and Tile Feature (Level 2, Batt. 1–2). Phase -2.
Ware TC
Form Illegible fragment
Cat.
Chronology 4th/early 3rd c. BC
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
1
1
0
0
0
0
Table A34 Assemblage table, Area 7 NE Corner, adjacent to wall collapse (Level 2, Batt. 1). Phase -2.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 397
5/30/14 7:34 AM
Appendix A
398 Ware
Form
Cat.
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
350–300 BC
1
23
0
0
0
0
Classical (?)
1
3
0
0
0
3
Closed form
600–500 BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
Small bowl/one-handler
410–360 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Jug
1
1
0
0
1
0
n. id.
1
4
0
0
0
4
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
Kantharos BG
50
Open form
BW
Deep basin PCW
Chronology
23
Closed form n. id.
1
6
0
0
0
6
1
2
2
0
0
0
Closed form
1
5
0
0
0
5
n. id.
1
3
0
0
0
3
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
14
53
Casserole CkW
09
Corinthian Type A
Amp
5th–4th c. BC
4th–3rd c. BC
n. id.
Pottery Total
Table A35 Assemblage table, Area 7 Between Collapse and Building (Level 2, Batt. 1). Phase -2.
Ware BG
PCW
Form
Total
R
B
H
S
550–500 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Classical
1
1
0
0
0
1
320–80 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
320–80 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
6
0
0
0
6
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
Closed form
2
2
0
0
1
1
n. id.
1
2
0
0
0
2
Archaic skyphos
Cat. 16
Open form Jug
26
Chronology
n. id. Open form CkW
Amp
Chytra
600–300 BC
Corinthian Type A
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
Greco-Italic
4th–3rd c. BC
2
3
0
0
0
3
13
20
Pan tile
4th c. BC
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
Pottery Total Tile
EVRep
Tile
Table A36 Assemblage table, Area 8 Along Wall 6 (Level 2, Batt. 1). Late 4th c. BC with Late Archaic. Phase -3.1 with -5.1.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 398
5/30/14 7:34 AM
Assemblage Tables Ware Arch. BG
Form
BW
Chronology
57
Ionic cup Dish
BG
Cat.
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
500–450 BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
410–350 BC
1
8
6
0
0
2
1
2
0
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
2
56
Open form
5th c. BC
Mug
Classical (?)
1
1
0
0
1
0
Closed form
5th c. BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Small bowl/ one-handler
575–200 BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
580–380 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
320–280 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
Dinos
22
Oinochoe n. id. Basin Jug PCW
Closed form
14
1
3
0
0
0
3
400–50 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
300–280 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
34
0
0
0
34
550–200 BC
n. id. Mor CkW
Amp
Mortarium
350–50 BC
Closed form n. id. Corinthian Type A Corinthian Type B
Pottery Total
399
1
1
1
0
0
0
4
7
0
0
0
7
1
1
0
0
0
1
5th c. BC
1
3
0
0
0
3
4th–3rd c. BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
400–300 BC
3
7
0
0
0
7
28
80
Table A37 Assemblage table, Area 9 Tile Fall (Level 1, Batt. 5). Phase -1.2.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 399
5/30/14 7:34 AM
Appendix A
400 Ware
Form
Cat.
Chronology 525–500 BC
10
550–475 BC
13
Ionic cup Arch. BG
Skyphos with offset rim A-type skyphos C-type skyphos
BG
PCW
CkW Pottery Total
R
B
H
S
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
3
2
0
0
1
525–475 BC
1
2
1
1
0
0
400–350 BC
1
1
0
1
0
0
325–290 BC
1
7
0
0
0
0
61
300–260 BC
1
8
1
0
0
7
Cup/one-handler
51
350–325 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Arch.–Class.
2
4
0
0
0
4
Jug
34
Classical
1
1
0
0
0
1
4th c. BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
320–280 BC
1
2
2
0
0
0
n. id.
n. id.
1
1
0
0
0
1
Open form
n. id.
1
5
0
3
0
2
Closed form
n. id.
2
3
0
3
0
0
n. id.
2
28
0
0
0
28
420–200 BC
1
3
0
0
0
0
Closed form
n. id.
1
9
0
0
0
9
n. id.
n. id.
1
4
0
0
0
4
Lid
400–300 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
22
85
n. id. Mor
Total
Bowl
Open form
BW
EVRep
Mortarium
01
Table A38 Assemblage table, Area 9 Beneath Tile Fall (Level 1, Batt. 6). ca. 300 BC with Archaic. Phase -2 with -5.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 400
5/30/14 7:34 AM
Assemblage Tables Ware
Form
Arch. BG
Cat.
Ionic cup C-type skyphos
Lekane Small bowl/one-handler
PCW
H
S
1
8
2
1
0
5
1
1
0
1
0
0
420–400 BC
1
4
2
0
0
2
350–325 BC
1
3
1
0
0
2
500–400 BC
1
3
0
0
0
3
Classical
1
1
0
0
0
1
Hellenistic
1
1
0
0
0
1
19
575–300 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
06
550–440 BC
1
3
3
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
450–200 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
5th c. BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
n. id. 600–300 BC 23
Closed form n. id.
Amp
B
550–500 BC
Closed form
CkW
R
330–300 BC
Basin
Chytra
Total
05/06
Open form BW
EVRep
40
Cup/one-handler
BG
Chronology
401
n. id.
Pottery Total
1
1
0
1
0
0
56
56
0
0
0
56
1
12
1
0
0
11
1
13
2
0
0
11
3
11
0
1
1
9
17
17
0
0
0
17
3
11
0
0
0
11
94
149
Table A39 Assemblage table, Sounding E1 (Level 2, Batt. 4). Late 4th c. BC, post- ca. 330 BC. Phase -2 or -3.
Ware
Form
BF
Lekythos
RF
Closed form (amphora?) Ionic cup
Arch. BG
01 02
Skyphos with offset rim Archaic closed form
BG
Cat.
22
PCW Mor
R
B
H
S
520–470 BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
350–300 BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
560–500 BC
1
27
0
0
0
0
600–450 BC
1
4
1
0
0
3
550–450 BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
560–500 BC
1
2
0
0
2
0
Classical (?)
2
3
0
0
0
3
400–320 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
575–200 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
375–270 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
n. id.
2
4
1
0
0
3
Closed form
2
2
0
2
0
0
Jug
31
n. id. Mortarium Closed form n. id.
Pottery Total
Total
Jug
Chytra CkW
EVRep
Open form Lekane
BW
Chronology
26
34
34
0
0
0
34
520–50 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
4th–3rd c. BC
1
23
1
0
0
22
2
29
0
0
0
29
1
3
0
0
0
3
54
138
Table A40 Assemblage table, Sounding E1 (Level 3, Batt. 1). Archaic, post- ca. 520 BC. Phase -5.1.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 401
5/30/14 7:34 AM
Appendix A
402 Ware PCW CkW
Form
Cat.
Chronology
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
Jug
1
1
1
0
0
0
n. id.
1
1
0
0
0
1
n. id.
1
1
0
0
0
1
Lid
1
1
1
0
0
0
4
4
Pottery Total
Table A41 Assemblage table, Sounding E1 (Level 3, Batt. 3). Undated.
Ware Arch. BG
Form
Cat.
Ionic cup C-type skyphos Cup-skyphos
BG
Small bowl Open form
BW
CkW
Total
R
B
H
S
2
2
1
0
0
1
425–400 BC
1
1
0
1
0
0
500–450 BC
1
1
0
1
0
0
500–450 BC
1
1
0
1
0
0
350–280 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
410–300 BC
1
9
0
0
0
9
5th c. BC
1
2
0
0
0
2
600–400 BC (?)
1
2
0
0
0
2
440–400 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Jug
500–50 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
n. id.
1
1
0
0
0
1
Open form
1
4
0
4
0
0
Closed form
3
18
0
0
1
17
1
20
0
0
0
20
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
n. id. 400–300 BC
Corinthian Type A
5th c. BC
3
10
0
0
0
10
Corinthian Type B
400–300 BC
1
6
0
0
0
6
n. id.
n. id.
0
0
0
4
Pottery Total Tile
63
Chronology
Small bowl/one-handler
Lid
Amp
43
EVRep
500–450 BC
Tile AC 1 or AT 1
1
4
25
87
4
4
Table A42 Assemblage table, SE Sounding 1 (Level 3, Batt. 2). Post- ca. 350 BC with Late Archaic and late 5th c. BC. Phase -3 or -2 with -4.1.
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 402
5/30/14 7:34 AM
Assemblage Tables Ware
Form
RF BG
PCW
Chronology
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
Lekythos
01
480–420 BC
1
2
0
0
0
2
A-type skyphos
25
460–400 BC
1
6
1
5
0
0
Open form
0
3
0
0
0
0
Closed form
0
2
0
0
0
0
500–50 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
600–200 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
n. id.
2
2
1
0
0
1
Basin
1
1
1
0
0
0
Jug
BW
Cat.
403
38
n. id.
2
29
1
0
0
28
CkW
n. id.
1
5
0
0
0
5
Amp
Corinthian Type B
2
3
0
0
0
3
12
55
4th–3rd c. BC
Pottery Total
Table A43 Assemblage table, SE Sounding 1 (Level 3, Batt. 3). 5th c. BC, post- ca. 460 BC. Phase -4.
Ware Arch. BG BG BW PCW
Form Kotyle
Amp Pottery Total
18
Chronology
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
525–475 BC
1
1
1
0
1
0
400–350 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Arch.–Class.
2
2
0
0
0
2
300–200 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Jug
375–270 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
Small bowl/one-handler
600–200 BC
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
26
0
0
0
26
1
1
1
0
0
0
A-type skyphos Open form Small bowl/one-handler
15
n. id. Chytra
CkW
Cat.
22
400–300 BC
Closed form
2
3
0
0
1
2
n. id.
1
11
0
0
0
11
2
7
0
0
0
7
14
55
n. id.
Table A44 Assemblage table, SE Sounding 2 (Level 2, Batt. 1). Beneath topsoil, ca. 300 BC. Phase -2?
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 403
5/30/14 7:34 AM
Appendix A
404 Ware Arch. BG BG
Form
Cat.
Skyphos with offset rim Open form Small bowl/one-handler
BW
Chronology
R
B
H
S
550–480 BC
1
4
3
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
5th c. BC
1
3
3
0
0
0
410–280 BC
1
1
0
0
0
1
575–200 BC
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
3
0
0
0
3
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
Small bowl/one-handler PCW
Total
500–400 BC (?)
Closed form Basin
EVRep
500–200 BC
Closed form
1
1
0
1
0
0
n. id.
1
27
0
0
0
27
1
1
1
0
0
0
CkW
Chytra Closed form
400–300 BC
2
10
0
0
0
10
n. id.
2
17
1
0
0
16
Amp
n. id.
1
1
0
0
0
1
16
72
Pottery Total
Table A45 Assemblage table, SE Sounding 2 (Level 2, Batt. 2). Archaic or early 5th c. BC. Phase -5.1.
Ware
Form
Cat.
Chronology
EVRep
Total
R
B
H
S
1
2
2
0
0
0
BW
Small bowl/one-handler
520–300 BC
PCW
n. id.
n. id.
1
2
0
0
0
2
Chytra
600–300 BC
2
2
1
0
1
0
Closed form
n. id.
1
2
0
0
0
2
n. id.
n. id.
1
2
0
0
0
2
6
10
CkW Pottery Total
Table A46 Assemblage table, SE Sounding 2 (Level 3, Batt. 1). Undated. Phase -5?
FF_29_appendix-a_05feb14.indd 404
5/30/14 7:34 AM
Appendix B
Quantification of the Site Assemblage Keith Swift Ware
Figured Wares
Quantification Group
1
2
Figured Wares
Archaic Cups
Archaic Fine Ware 3
4
Black-gloss Fine Ware
Archaic Other
Cups
5
Dishes and Bowls
6
Open Forms
7
Closed Forms
EVRep
%EVRep
1
Black-figure Lekythoi
Quantification Subgroup/Forms
1
0.07%
Count 1
%Count 0.02%
2
Red-figure Lekythoi
1
0.07%
2
0.04%
3
Red-figure Skyphoi
1
0.07%
1
0.02%
4
Red-figure Bell-Kraters
1
0.07%
1
0.02%
5
Red-figure Closed Forms
1
0.07%
1
0.02%
1
Ionic Cups
42
3.10%
101
2.21%
2
Skyphoi with Offset Rims
21
1.55%
37
0.81%
3
Archaic Skyphoi
1
0.07%
1
0.02%
4
Kotylai
2
0.15%
4
0.09%
1
Archaic Lekanai
1
0.07%
2
0.04%
2
Archaic Lids
1
0.07%
4
0.09%
3
Laconian Kraters
1
0.07%
5
0.11%
4
Archaic Closed Forms
2
0.15%
3
0.07%
1
Skyphoi with Concave Rims
1
0.07%
1
0.02%
2
A-type Skyphoi
14
1.03%
20
0.44%
3
C-type Skyphoi
55
4.06%
206
4.52%
4
Skyphoi (?)
7
0.52%
8
0.18%
5
Cup-skyphoi
2
0.15%
2
0.04%
6
Kylikes
4
0.30%
5
0.11%
7
Stemless Kylikes
3
0.22%
3
0.07%
8
Kantharoi
3
0.22%
42
0.92%
9
Cups/One-handlers
4
0.30%
8
0.18%
10
Mugs
3
0.22%
5
0.11%
1
Dishes
11
0.81%
29
0.64%
2
Bowls
3
0.22%
12
0.26%
3
Small Bowls
1
Unidentified Open Forms
1 2
2
0.15%
2
0.04%
115
8.49%
272
5.96%
Lebetes Gamikoi
2
0.15%
2
0.04%
Gutti
3
0.22%
3
0.07%
3
Olpai
2
0.15%
2
0.04%
4
Squat Lekythoi
4
0.30%
9
0.20%
5
Bottles
1
0.07%
1
0.02%
6
Jugs
5
0.37%
9
0.20%
7
Hydriai
1
0.07%
2
0.04%
8
Unidentified Closed Forms
20
1.48%
24
0.53%
Table B1 Detailed quantification of the Fattoria Fabrizio site assemblage by ware and form classification.
FF_30_appendix-b_05feb14.indd 405
5/30/14 7:35 AM
Appendix B
406 Ware
Miniatures
Quantification Group
8
9
10
Miniatures
Small Bowls/One-handlers
Open Forms
Plain and Banded Wares
11
12
Lids
13
n. id.
14
Wheel-made Painted Ware
15 Cooking Wares
Closed Forms
16
Open Forms
Closed Forms
Quantification Subgroup/Forms
EVRep
%EVRep
Count
%Count
1
Kylikes
6
0.44%
31
0.68%
2
Skyphoi
1
0.07%
5
0.11%
3
Krateriskoi
1
0.07%
10
0.22%
4
Lids
1
0.07%
3
0.07%
1
Banded Small Bowls/One-handlers
65
4.80%
117
2.56%
2
Plain Small Bowls/One-handlers
35
2.58%
38
0.83%
1.1
Banded Bowls
2
0.15%
2
0.04%
1.2
Banded Bowls/Lekanai
2
0.15%
2
0.04%
1.3
Banded Lekanai
6
0.44%
7
0.15%
1.4
Banded Basins
2
0.15%
3
0.07%
1.5
Plain Basins
41
3.03%
92
2.02%
1.6
Plain Deep Basin
1
0.07%
1
0.02%
2.1
Banded Dinoi
4
0.30%
8
0.18%
2.2
Plain Dinoi
3
0.22%
24
0.53%
3
Mortaria
15
1.11%
27
0.59%
4
Louteria
2
0.15%
4
0.09%
5
Pyxides/Lekanides
1
0.07%
3
0.07%
6.1
Unidentified Banded Open Forms
4
0.30%
4
0.09%
6.2
Unidentified Plain Open Forms
26
1.92%
46
1.01%
1.1
Banded Jugs
37
2.73%
51
1.12%
1.2
Plain Jugs
29
2.14%
72
1.58%
1.3
Lekythoid Amphorae
1
0.07%
3
0.07%
1.4
Banded Oinochoai
1
0.07%
1
0.02%
1.5
Plain Oinochoai
1
0.07%
1
0.02%
1.6
Banded Olpai
1
0.07%
9
0.20%
2.1
Banded Jars
1
0.07%
1
0.02%
2.2
Plain Jars
4
0.30%
4
0.09%
2.3
Plain Large Jars
1
0.07%
1
0.02%
3.1
Banded Closed n. id.
3.2
Plain Closed n. id.
1 2 1
Banded n. id.
2
Plain n. id.
9
0.66%
22
0.48%
50
3.69%
53
1.16%
Banded Lids
3
0.22%
11
0.24%
Plain Lids
7
0.52%
7
0.15%
39
2.88%
82
1.80%
133
9.82%
1235
27.07%
Wheel-made Painted Ware
2
0.15%
3
0.07%
1
Pans
3
0.22%
3
0.07%
2
Casseroles
14
1.03%
25
0.55%
3
Open n. id.
21
1.55%
43
0.94%
1
Chytrai
2
Closed n. id.
17
Lids
Lids
18
Unidentified Cooking Wares
Unidentified Cooking Wares
37
2.73%
200
4.38%
150
11.08%
483
10.59%
21
1.55%
35
0.77%
100
7.39%
391
8.57%
Table B1 cont. Detailed quantification of the Fattoria Fabrizio site assemblage by ware and form classification.
FF_30_appendix-b_05feb14.indd 406
5/30/14 7:35 AM
Quantification of the Site Assemblage Ware
Amphorae
Opus Doliare
Finds
Quantification Group
19
20
Quantification Subgroup/Forms
Transport Amphorae
Opus Doliare
21
Terracottas
22
Loom Weights
23
Metal Finds
407 EVRep
%EVRep
Count
%Count
1
Corinthian Type A
26
1.92%
52
1.14%
2
Type B
14
1.03%
31
0.68%
3
Ionian
6
0.44%
14
0.31%
4
Greco-Italic
24
1.77%
57
1.25%
5
n. id.
33
2.44%
80
1.75%
1
Pithoi
5
0.37%
160
3.51%
2
Lids
1
0.07%
3
0.07%
3
n. id.
2
0.15%
2
0.04%
10
0.74%
143
3.13%
1
Terracottas Loom Weights
2
0.15%
2
0.04%
1
Metal Finds
6
0.44%
24
0.53%
2
Coins
1
0.07%
1
0.02%
1354
100.00%
4562
100.00%
Total
Table B1 cont. Detailed quantification of the Fattoria Fabrizio site assemblage by ware and form classification.
Fattoria Fabrizio Forms Red-figure Cups
EVRep 1
%EVRep
Count
%Count
0.1%
1
0.1%
Archaic Cups
66
9.3%
143
7.5%
Black-gloss Cups
96
13.6%
300
15.7%
163
23.1%
444
23.3%
Black-gloss Dishes
Fine Ware Cups
11
1.6%
29
1.5%
Black-gloss Bowls
3
0.4%
12
0.6%
Black-gloss Small Bowls
2
0.3%
2
0.1%
16
2.3%
43
2.3%
Red-figure Closed Forms
Fine Ware Bowls
1
0.1%
1
0.1%
Black-figure Lekythoi
1
0.1%
1
0.1%
Red-figure Lekythoi
1
0.1%
2
0.1%
Archaic Closed Forms
2
0.3%
3
0.2%
Black-gloss Olpai
2
0.3%
2
0.1%
Black-gloss Squat Lekythoi
4
0.6%
9
0.5%
Bottles
1
0.1%
1
0.1%
Black-gloss Jugs
5
0.7%
9
0.5%
Black-gloss Hydriai
1
0.1%
2
0.1%
20
2.8%
24
1.3%
2
0.3%
3
0.2%
Black-gloss Closed Forms n. id Wheel-made Painted Wares
40
5.7%
57
3.0%
Laconian Kraters
Fine Ware Closed Forms
1
0.1%
5
0.3%
Red-figure Bell-kraters
1
0.1%
1
0.1%
Black-gloss Lebetes Gamikoi
2
0.3%
2
0.1%
Black-gloss Gutti
3
0.4%
3
0.2%
Other Fine Ware Forms
7
1.0%
11
0.6%
Miniatures
9
1.3%
49
2.6%
Table B2 Fattoria Fabrizio site assemblage quantification categories and totals following the categories used in Survey.
FF_30_appendix-b_05feb14.indd 407
5/30/14 7:35 AM
Appendix B
408 Fattoria Fabrizio Forms
EVRep
Archaic Lekanai
%EVRep
Count
%Count
1
0.1%
2
0.1%
Banded Small Bowls/One-handlers
65
9.2%
117
6.1%
Plain Small Bowls/One-handlers
35
5.0%
38
2.0%
Banded Bowls
2
0.3%
2
0.1%
Banded Bowls/Lekanai
2
0.3%
2
0.1%
Banded Lekanai
6
0.8%
7
0.4%
Plain Deep Basin
1
0.1%
1
0.1%
Banded Dinoi
4
0.6%
8
0.4%
Plain Dinoi
3
0.4%
24
1.3%
Plain and Banded Bowls
119
16.8%
201
10.5%
Mortaria
15
2.1%
27
1.4%
2
0.3%
3
0.2%
41
5.8%
92
4.8%
43
6.1%
95
5.0%
Banded Basins Plain Basins Plain and Banded Basins
2
0.3%
4
0.2%
Banded Jugs
Louteria
37
5.2%
51
2.7%
Plain Jugs
29
4.1%
72
3.8%
Lekythoid Amphorae
1
0.1%
3
0.2%
Banded Oinochoai
1
0.1%
1
0.1%
Plain Oinochoai
1
0.1%
1
0.1%
Banded Olpai
1
0.1%
9
0.5%
Banded Jars
1
0.1%
1
0.1%
Plain Jars
4
0.6%
4
0.2%
Plain Large Jars
1
0.1%
1
0.1%
76
10.7%
143
7.5%
Archaic Lids
Plain and Banded Closed Forms
1
0.1%
4
0.2%
Banded Lids
3
0.4%
11
0.6%
Plain Lids
7
1.0%
7
0.4%
Plain/Banded Pyxides/Lekanides Other Plain and Banded Forms Pans
1
0.1%
3
0.2%
12
1.7%
25
1.3%
3
0.4%
3
0.2%
Casseroles
14
2.0%
25
1.3%
Chytrai
37
5.2%
200
10.5%
Lids
21
3.0%
35
1.8%
75
10.6%
263
13.8%
103
14.6%
234
12.3%
Cooking Ware Transport Amphorae
Grand Totals
Opus Doliare
8
1.1%
165
8.7%
Terracottas
17
2.4%
143
7.5%
Loom Weights
2
0.3%
2
0.1%
Lamps
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
707
1906
Table B2 cont. Fattoria Fabrizio site assemblage quantification categories and totals following the categories used in Survey.
FF_30_appendix-b_05feb14.indd 408
5/30/14 7:35 AM
Appendix C
Census of Farmhouses Elisa Lanza Catti Site
Date
Dimensions
Plan
Condition
Source Adamesteanu 1970a, 234; 1973; 1974a, 84. Giannotta 1980, 16. Osanna 1992, 60, 82–83. Amore 1992–1993, 79.
Second half of the 6th c. BC
14.2 x 15 m, ca. 225 m2
Rectangular plan, three rows of at least 8 rooms, likely without courtyard
Most of structure (incompletely excavated)
Second half of the 6th–first half of the 5th c. BC
1) 8 x 5 m, ca. 40 m2; 2) 7 x 4 m, ca. 28 m2; 3) 15 x 10 m; ca. 150 m2
3 rectangular buildings with at least 3 rooms each
Incomplete plan
Schojer 2001, 124–25; 2002, 82–83, fig. 2 (left).
4th c. BC; 2nd–1st c. BC
ca. 13 x 22 m
At least 11 rooms
Incomplete plan
Schojer 2001, 124–25; 2002, 82–83, fig. 2 (right); 2003, 242–43.
Mid-6th c. BC; 4th–3rd c. BC; Roman Age
>7x2m > 14 m2
Hellenistic tower
Incomplete plan
Uggeri 1969, 62 n. 36, 69 n. 83. Adamesteanu 1973, 56, n. 2. Amore 1992–1993, 63.
6th c. BC
Unknown
Unknown
Incomplete plan
Adamesteanu 1973, 55, fig. 1; 1974a, 86–87.
4th c. BC
ca. 14 x 39 m (?) + kiln
At least 9 rooms and separated external kiln
Incomplete plan
Adamesteanu 1973, 55, fig. 1; 1974a, 86–87.
6th c. BC; 4th–3rd c. BC
ca. 13 x 12 m
At least 4 rooms
Incomplete plan
Amore 1992–1993, 83.
Mid-6th c. BC (farmhouse on top of the hill)
3.9 x 5.0 (?) m, ca. 19.5 m2
At least 1 room
Incomplete plan
Carter 1980a; 2006. Edlund 1981; 1986. Silvestrelli forthcoming a.
350–280 BC (rural workshop)
ca. 16 x 10 m
Row of 3 rooms of different size (one with hearth) and canal
Incomplete plan
Amore 1992–1993, 87. Silvestrelli forthcoming a.
Arezzo, Lago del Lupo (excavated by the Universities of Bari and Lecce 1967)
4th c. BC with traces dating to the 5th c. BC
ca. 14 x 11 m, ca. 154 m2
Square plan with three rows of 8 rooms
Incomplete plan
Adamesteanu 1970a, pl. XLIII; 1973, 59, fig. 4. Amore 1992–1993, 77.
Venezia, Lago del Lupo (excavated by Schnapp, 1967)
4th c. BC
> ca. 11 x 12 m, > ca. 132 m2
Unknown plan
Incomplete plan
Adamesteanu 1973, 56–57, fig. 2. Amore 1992–1993, 75.
Pacciano, Saldone (excavated by Uggeri, 1967–69)
4th–3rd c. BC; Roman Age
19 x 20 m, 380 m2
Unknown plan; reused column in wall foundation
Incomplete plan
Uggeri 1969, 61–62. Adamesteanu 1973, 56 n. 2; 1974a, 85. Amore 1992–1993, 58.
Musillo, Saldone (excavated by Uggeri, 1967–69)
Mid-6th c. BC; 4th–early 3rd c. BC
18 x 23 m, 414 m2
Quadrangular plan, 3 wings of room around a courtyard
Complete plan
Uggeri 1969, 61. Adamesteanu 1973, 56 n. 2. Amore 1992–1993, 60. Notario 2001, 202.
Cugno del Pero, Bufalara (excavated by Adamesteanu, 1968)
Ginosa Marina, Pantano (TA), Archaic rural settlement and Hellenistic farmhouse (excavated by Schojer, 2000–2001) Pascucci-Torraca, Saldone (excavated by Uggeri, 1967–69)
Cappa d’Amore, Saldone (excavated by Uggeri, 1969)
La Cappella, L’Incoronata (excavated by Attolini, 1982)
Sant’Angelo Vecchio (excavated by Soprintendenza, 1979, and by ICA, 1980)
Table C1 Selected isolated rural dwellings, chora of Metaponto.
FF_31_appendix-c_05feb14.indd 409
5/30/14 7:36 AM
Appendix C
410 Site
Date
Dimensions
Plan
Condition
Source
Incomplete plan
Carter 1980a, 19–21; 1981; 1987, 208, fig. 293; 1990, 413–14, fig. 5; 1992, 109, figs. 11–12; 1996, 365–66; in Necropoleis, 16; 2006, 138–41, figs. 4.1–4.4. Lattanzi 1981. D. Ridgway 1982, 75–76, figs. 22–23. Osanna 1992, 80. Carter and Hall in Necropoleis, 242–43.
Fabrizio, Venella valley (excavated by ICA, 1980)
Early 4th– early 3rd c. BC, with previous mid-6th c. BC presence
13.50 x > 10.24 m + 10 m2 > 144 m2
Likely square plan, 3 rows of rooms with additional protruding room in eastern corner. External courtyard
Sant’Angelo Grieco (or Nuovo) (excavated by ICA, 1981)
4th c. BC, 2nd– 1st c. BC, with previous 6th c. BC presence
17.0 x 12.3 m, 222 m2
2 separate buildings with central courtyard
Most of structure
Carter 1983c, 16–18; 1990, 414; 2006, 145–39, fig. 4.15. Osanna 1992, 81. De Siena and Giardino 2001, 143, fig. 9.
Pantanello, Morlino (excavated by De Siena, 2001)
Second half of the 4th–mid-3rd c. BC, with previous presence in the 6th c. BC
ca. 16 m long
Central courtyard with long storeroom along western side. Sacred deposit
Incomplete plan
Nava 2002, 733–35.
Fattoria Stefan, Risimini, Campagnolo, Lago del Lupo, Pezze dei Cacciatori (excavated by Stefan, 1969)
Late 4th–3rd c. BC; 2nd c. BC with previous presence in the 6th c. BC
19 x 12 m + 5 x 15 m ca. 300 m2
10 rooms around internal courtyard with tower
Complete plan
Adamesteanu 1970a, 234–35, pl. XLII; 1973, 56, 58, fig. 3; 1974a, 83. Carter 1980a; 1980b, 28; 1992, 111, fig. 15; 1996, 365; in Necropoleis, 16, fig. 1.14; 2006, 143–46, figs. 4.11–4.14. Osanna 1992, 81. Barberis 1995, 15 n. 16.
Pantanello sanctuary farmhouse (excavated by ICA, 1975–1978, 1982, 1990, and 1991)
End of the 4th– early 3rd c. BC
ca. 18 x 11 m, 162 m2
Quadrangular plan with 6 rooms and 2 projecting rooms. External courtyard
Most of structure
Carter 1992, 110, figs. 13–14; 2006, 169–71, figs. 4.42–4.43; in Survey, 881, fig. 26.13.
Casa Ricotta (excavated by Uggeri, 1967)
End of the 4th– early 3rd c. BC
Incomplete plan
Adamesteanu 1973, 52.
San Biagio sanctuary farmhouse (excavated by De Siena, 2000)
3rd c. BC
10 rooms on 3 sides of internal courtyard
Almost complete plan
Nava 2001, 942–43. De Siena 2005, 446–48, fig. 1. A. Russo 2006b, 194, fig. 194.
Casamassima, Campagnolo (excavated by Uggeri, 1967–69)
3rd–2nd c. BC– Roman Age
Central rectangular tower
Incomplete plan
Adamesteanu 1973, 57; 1974a, 89.
19 x 13 m, 247 m2
2nd–1st c. BC
32.6 x 45.6 m, 806 m2
3 wings of rooms
Complete plan
Carter 1983a, fig. 5; 2006, 150–51.
1st c. AD
6 x 17 m, 102 m2
Rectangular plan
Complete plan
Carter 1983a, fig. 5; 2006, 150–51.
Contrada Casa Teresa, proprietà Durante (excavated by Lissi Caronna, 1960s)
Beginning of the 2nd c. BC– second half of the 2nd c. AD
ca. 1800 m2
Rectangular rooms around large courtyard
Incomplete plan
De Siena and Giardino 1994, 204–9. Lissi Caronna 1998–1999.
San Biagio (excavated by ICA, 1980)
4th c. AD
18 x 17 m, 306 m2
Square plan with 10 rooms and external porch
Complete plan
Carter 1980a, 22, fig. 22; 1990, 414–15; 2006, 140–44, fig. 4.8. Lapadula forthcoming a.
Pantanello Tile Factory (excavated by ICA, 1975–1991)
Table C1 cont. Selected isolated rural dwellings, chora of Metaponto.
FF_31_appendix-c_05feb14.indd 410
5/30/14 7:36 AM
Census of Farmhouses Site
Date
Dimensions
411 Plan
Condition
Source
Chora of Herakleia Scanzano Jonico, Termitito (MT)
Second half of the 7th c. BC
5 x 12.5 m, 62.5 m2
Quadrangular rooms perhaps with pastas
Incomplete plan
De Siena 1996, 172.
Scanzano Jonico, Termitito, Roman villa (MT)
2nd c. BC–2nd (4th?) c. AD
30 x 40 (?), ca. 1200 m2
About 30 rooms around 2 courts and 1 peristyle
Almost complete plan
De Siena and Giardino 1994, 204, fig. 7; 2001, 154, fig. 17.
Policoro, loc. Acenapura (MT)
6th c. BC, 4th c. BC
Long hall (stall?) with small residential area
Incomplete plan
Adamesteanu 1983, 184. Osanna 1992, 109.
Policoro (Siris), loc. CospitoCaserta (MT)
Second half of the 7th c. BC
115 m2
3 rooms with pastas on central courtyard
Complete plan
Barra Bagnasco 1996a, 45, 54–55.
Policoro, loc. Masseria del Concio (MT)
Late 4th–early 3rd c. BC
Diam. 9.6 m
House with circular pyrgos
Incomplete plan
Quilici 1967, 148–50, no. 89. Osanna 1992, 107. E. Greco 1995.
Montalbano Jonico, Bosco Demanio of Andriace (MT)
Central decades of the 3rd c. BC
26 x 34 m, ca. 803 m2
18 rooms around central peristyle
Complete plan
Nava 1998, 890–91, pl. XXVII,1; 2000, 692–94, fig. 6. De Siena and Giardino 2001, 152, fig. 16. De Siena 2005, 446–47, fig. 3. A. Russo 2006b, 172, fig. 164. Carter in Survey, 882, fig. 26.15.
Montalbano Jonico, loc. Olivastreto (MT)
4th–3rd c. BC
Unknown
Rural village
Discovered in field survey
Quilici 1967, 212, no. 118.
Montalbano Jonico, loc. Recoleta (MT)
4th–3rd c. BC
Unknown
Rural village
Discovered in field survey
Quilici 1967, 213, no. 122. Osanna 1992, 109, no. 9.
Tursi, Contrada Panevino (MT)
Early 3rd–end of the 2nd c. BC
“Small” structure
2 rectangular buildings with 3 rooms each
Incomplete plan
Bianco 2001, 814, fig. 1 (unknown scale).
Tursi, loc. Masseria Camerino (MT)
4th c. BC
Partially excavated
Bini 1989. Osanna 1992, 109, no. 7.
Nova Siri, Cugno dei Vagni (MT)
End of the 1st c. BC–4th c. AD
Incomplete plan
De Siena and Giardino 1994, 207, fig. 12.
19 x 27 m, ca. 513 m2
Large complex with baths
Native sites Montescaglioso, loc. Pagliarone (MT)
7th c. BC–Roman Age
Rectangular building with 7 rectangular rooms + second building with 3 trapezoidal rooms
Incomplete plan
Adamesteanu 1973, 61; 1974a, 88. Amore 1992–1993, 89–92.
Timmari, loc. Montagnola (MT)
Hellenistic period
5 rooms
Incomplete plan
Togninelli 2004, 70–71, fig. 2/4.
Grottole, loc. Monte San Vito (MT)
4th c. BC
Incomplete plan
Osanna 2008, 922.
Grottole, loc. Serre (MT)
3rd c. BC
One or more rural buildings with kiln
Incomplete plan
Tagliente 2006, 743.
Territory of Tricarico (PZ)
4th c. BC– 4th/5th c. AD
Farmhouses
Discovered in survey
A. Russo 1996b, 82. Canosa 1990, 115.
Tolve, loc. Magritiello, upper Bradano valley (PZ)
Second half of the 4th c. BC
Incomplete plan
Testimonianze, 76. Pica 1986, 486.
Tolve, loc. Chiaromonte, upper Bradano valley (PZ)
Beginning of the 3rd–first half of the 2nd c. BC
> 10 x 5 m > 50 m2
5 rooms, atrium with impluvium, porch with terracotta columns
Incomplete plan
Nava 2005, 356–58, fig. 12. Tagliente 2006, 741–42, fig. 8.
Tolve, loc. Valle di Chirico, upper Bradano valley (PZ)
End of the 4th–3rd c. BC
Around 200 m2
3 rectangular buildings (of 2 or 3 rooms) open on common central courtyard
Almost complete plan
Pica 1986, 486–87. Russo Tagliente 1992; 1999, pl. XVI, fig. 2.3. A. Russo 1996b, 85–87, fig. 12.
Table C2 Selected isolated rural dwellings, Basilicata.
FF_31_appendix-c_05feb14.indd 411
5/30/14 7:36 AM
Appendix C
412 Site
Date 4th c. BC
Rectangular plan with 4 quadrangular rooms on 2 sides of large central courtyard (100 m2)
Condition
Source
Complete plan
A. Russo 1996b, 85, fig. 14.
390 m2
Almost square plan, 16 rooms around central courtyard, with external tower in a corner
Complete plan
24.7 x 24.7 m (tower 6 x 6 m), 646 m2
20 rooms around central courtyard and square tower in a corner; more importance given to productive spaces
Complete plan
Tocco 1990, pl. I. A. Russo 1996b, 86, fig. 16.
End of the 4th– early 3rd c. BC
15 x 13 m, 170 m2, courtyard 13 x 6 m
Rectangular plan with 5 rooms open on one side of large courtyard destined to domestic cult
Complete plan
Tagliente 1990, 72, pl. III. Russo Tagliente 1992, 30–32, 156, fig. 93. Di Giuseppe 1996, 212–13. A. Russo 2006b, 172, 201, fig. 207.
2nd–early 1st c. BC
450 m2
13 rooms around 3 sides of courtyard
Complete plan
Tagliente 1990, 72, pl. III. Russo Tagliente 1992, 30–32, 156, fig. 93.
Discovered in survey
Lattanzi 1982, 280. Morel 1989, 550. Russo Tagliente 1992, 234.
End of the 3rd–2nd c. BC
Garaguso, contrada Sotto le Quote (MT)
12.6 x 24.7 m, 311 m2
Plan
Tocco 1990, pl. I. Testimonianze, 76. Soppelsa 1991. Russo Tagliente 1992, 269–70. Russo Tagliente and Tagliente 1993. A. Russo 1996b, 86, fig. 15; 2006a, 52, fig. 43.
Mid-4th–end of Tolve, loc. Moltone, upper Bradano the 3rd c. BC valley (PZ)
Banzi, Mancamasone, Montelupino, upper Bradano valley (PZ)
Dimensions
End of the 6th c. BC First half of the 3rd c. BC
3 rooms open on a large pastas
Complete plan
Tagliente 2006, 741–42, pl. XI,1.
Second half of the 3rd c. BC
2 separate buildings, Houses A and B. Oikos with sacred deposit and altar/hearth (cult of Herakles)
Complete plan
Tagliente 2006, 741–42, pls. XI,2 and XII,1.
Oliveto Lucano, near Monte La Croccia (MT)
4th c. BC
Farmhouses
Discovered in survey
Tramonti 1986, 470.
San Mauro Forte, loc. Monte Priato (MT)
Hellenistic age (?)
Farmhouses
Discovered in survey
Tramonti 1983, 89.
Corleto Perticara (PZ)
4th c. BC
Farmhouses
Discovered in survey
Tagliente 1987.
Guardia Perticara, loc. S. Oronzo (PZ)
End of the 4th– first half of the 3rd c. BC
21 x 11 m, 231 m2
3 adjacent rooms and paved courtyard
Incomplete plan
Nava 2003a, 678–80, fig. 8.
25 x 18 m, 450 m2
Fortified farmhouse: 7 rooms arranged in an L-shaped pattern around courtyard with separate wooden tower
Complete plan
Nava 2005, 321–24, fig. 4. A. Russo 2006a, 28–33, fig. 16.
Salandra, loc. Piana San Giovanni (MT)
Marsicovetere, loc. Valdemanna, upper Agri valley (PZ)
3rd c. BC–mid2nd c. BC
Table C2 cont. Selected isolated rural dwellings, Basilicata.
FF_31_appendix-c_05feb14.indd 412
5/30/14 7:36 AM
Census of Farmhouses Site
Viggiano, loc. Masseria Nigro, upper Agri valley (PZ)
Viggiano, loc. Serrone, upper Agri valley (PZ)
Viggiano, loc. Pozzo Monte S. Enoc, upper Agri valley (PZ)
Viggiano, loc. San Giovanni, upper Agri valley (PZ)
Date
Dimensions
Plan
Condition
Source
First half of the 4th c. BC
ca. 40 x 30 m, ca. 1200–1400 m2
Monumental house with elongated rooms and porch facing an open area
Complete plan
Nava 2002, 748–51, fig. 13; 2003a, 689–94, fig. 11. A. Russo 2006a, 33–42, fig. 18.
Second half of the 4th c. BC
1200 m2
Central paved peristyle and 16 rooms on its 3 sides. Kiln and well.
Complete plan
Nava 2002, 748–51, fig. 13; 2003a, 689–94, figs. 11–12. A. Russo 2006a, 33–42, fig. 21.
End of the 4th– first half of the 3rd c. BC
1200 m2
25 rooms with new courtyard
Complete plan
Nava 2002, 748–51, fig. 13; 2003a, 689–94, figs. 11 and 13. A. Russo 2006a, 33–42, fig. 27; 2006b, 170, fig. 161.
Mid-4th c. BC
100 m2
2 parallel buildings
Complete plan
Nava 2004, 947, fig. 6. A. Russo 2006a, 42–44, fig. 30 (blue).
End of the 4th– beginning of the 3rd c. BC
28 x 25 m, 700 m2
Several rooms on a pastas open on the courtyard
Complete plan
A. Russo 2006a, 42–44, fig. 30 (red).
2nd c. BC
24 x 18 m, 430 m2
New L shaped building. Kiln in the previous courtyard
Complete plan
A. Russo 2006a, 42–44, fig. 32.
3rd–2nd c. BC
240 m2
2 buildings
Complete plan
Nava 2004, 948–49.
Second half of the 4th c. BC
120 m2
Few rooms with pastas open on courtyard
Incomplete plan
Nava 2003a, 686–89, fig. 10. A. Russo 2006a, 47, fig. 35.
Late 3rd c. BC
24 x 19.5 m 460 m2 (or 430 m2)
Many rooms around central peristyle with monumental entrance
Complete plan
Nava 2003, 686–89, fig. 10. A. Russo 2006a, 47, fig. 36.
Advanced 2nd c. BC
24 x 19.5 m = 460 m2
Rearrangement of the building with covered rooms
Complete plan
Nava 2003a, 686–89, fig. 10. A. Russo 2006a, 49, fig. 38.
Second half of the 2nd–early 1st c. BC
24 x 19.5 m = 460 m2
Building for oil production and other agriculture activities; a bathroom is added
Complete plan
Nava 2003a, 686–89, fig. 10. A. Russo 2006a, 49, fig. 39.
One rectangular room
Incomplete plan
Nava 2002, 751–52, fig. 14. A. Russo 2006a, 55, fig. 45.
2 parallel rows of 7 rooms on courtyard provided with paved pastas
Complete plan
Nava 2002, 753, fig. 14. De Vincenzo 2003, 27, fig. 6. A. Russo 2006a, 55, fig. 45.
Complete plan
De Vincenzo 2003, 31–32, 57.
4th c. BC Viggiano, loc. Fosso Piano dei Valloni, upper Agri valley (PZ)
413
3rd–2nd c. BC (collapsed beginning of the 1st c. BC)
17.7 x 22 m = ca. 390 m2
End of the 1st c. BC–1st c. AD
Table C2 cont. Selected isolated rural dwellings, Basilicata.
FF_31_appendix-c_05feb14.indd 413
5/30/14 7:36 AM
Appendix C
414 Site
Date 400–350 BC
Montemurro, loc. Piani Parete, upper Agri valley (PZ)
End of the 4th– first half of the 3rd c. BC
Dimensions
Plan
> 1.5 x > 5.5 m = > 8.5 m2 (Hp 24 x 18 = 432 m2)
> 8 x > 24.5 m = > 196 m2 (Hp ca. 24 x 18 = 430 m2)
House A: perhaps rectangular plan; 4 contiguous rooms with pastas on L shaped paved courtyard with a room in a corner. House B: 2 rooms, 14 + 7 m2
3rd c. BC
Condition
Source
Incomplete plan
Distasi 2006a, 72–87, 74, fig. 62. Tagliente 2006, 746–47.
Incomplete plan
Distasi 2006a, 72–87, 75, fig. 65. Tagliente 2006, 746–47.
Incomplete plan
Distasi 2006a, 72–87, figs. 80 and 83. Tagliente 2006, 746–47.
Vietri, loc. Varco di pietra stretta (PZ)
4th–3rd c. BC; 1st–5th c. AD
At least 6 rooms
Incomplete plan
Capano 1986, pl. LXXXIII.c.
Armento, loc. San Giovanni and Camorda (PZ)
End of the 4th–3rd c. BC
Farmhouses
Discovered in inspection
A. Russo 1996a.
Missanello, Masseria Castiglione, Agri valley (PZ)
4th c. BC
Some quadrangular rooms
Incomplete plan
Nava 2002, 744–45; 2003a, 677–78.
Noepoli, Sinni valley (PZ)
Lucanian farmhouse
ca. 80 m2
3 rectangular rooms
Incomplete plan
Mancusi 2001, 230, fig. 3.
Manca Capillo, Collina de La Prastia, right side of Sarmento River (PZ)
Hellenistic farmhouse
21 x 22 + 21 x 28 462 m2 + 588 m2
2 rectangular buildings separated by an ambitus. The smaller building is divided in 3 rooms
Complete plan
Calastri and Quilici 2001, 80–89, 85, fig. 11.
Cersosimo, C.da Madarossa, right side of Sarmento River (PZ)
End of the 4th– first half of the 3rd c. BC
Almost square plan. Peristyle court
Complete plan
de La Genière 1972, 258, pl. XI,2; 1987, 250. Russo Tagliente 1992, 183.
Episcopia, Valle del Ponte, Sinni valley (PZ)
4th c. BC
Discovered in survey
Tagliente 1984, 51; 1989.
Castelluccio Superiore, loc. Nardiniello, Lagonegrese (PZ)
Late 4th–early 3rd c. BC
Complete plan
Nava 2001, 958–61, fig. 7.
2 buildings with numerous rooms and with open area between them; kiln
300 m2
Table C2 cont. Selected isolated rural dwellings, Basilicata.
Site
Date
Puglia, Taranto, industrial area (Agip), NW chora of Taranto
4th c. BC
Puglia, Grottaglie, Masseria Oliovitolo (TA), chora of Taranto
(1) End of the 5th–early 4th c. BC; (2) 4th–3rd c. BC; (3) 2nd–first half of the 1st c. BC
Puglia, Avetrana (TA), San Francesco
Early 2nd c. BC (with previous presence in 4th–3rd c. BC)
Dimensions
Plan
Condition
Source
At least 3 rectangular rooms
Incomplete plan
Mattioli 2002, 314, pl. IV,2.
24 x 16 m, 384 m2
At least 6 rectangular rooms of different size
Incomplete plan
Alessio 2001, 102–3, fig. 65, pl. VI,13.
ca. 30 x 40 m (?)
6 rectangular rooms on 2 sides of central paved court
Incomplete plan
Alessio 1996, 400–402, fig. 15.
Table C3 Selected isolated rural dwellings, southern Italy.
FF_31_appendix-c_05feb14.indd 414
5/30/14 7:36 AM
Census of Farmhouses Site
Date
Dimensions
415 Plan
4th c. BC
130 m2
Series of rooms open on eastern side (toward the town) without central courtyard
3rd c. BC
260 m2
2 rooms added on the front of previous building (likely fences for animals or tools).
Calabria, Montegiordano (CS), near Località Bagni-Menzinaro, Lucanian farmhouse
4th c. BC
21.5 x 21.5 + tower: 6.3 x 8, 462 m2
Calabria, Thurii, Stombi (CS), farmhouse below Edificio C
Second half of the 5th; 4th–3rd c. BC
Condition
Source
Complete plan
D’Andria 1996, 436–38.
Complete plan
Pagliara 1981. D’Andria 1996, 436–38. Burgers 1998, 236–38.
Square plan with 8 rooms around central courtyard, accessible from long L-shaped corridor. Square tower
Complete plan
Luppino 1981. Guzzo 1982, 325. A. Russo 1996b, 84, fig. 13. Falcone 2003, 306, figs. 9–10.
About 15 x 10 m
Rectangular plan with at least 4 trapezoidal rooms
Incomplete plan
E. Greco 2001, 189; 2003, fig. 3.
550–500 BC
63 m2
Rectangular plan
Complete plan
Osanna 2001a, 217. Ruga et al. 2005, 151.
500–450 BC; 350–early 3rd c. BC
10.5 x 9.5, ca. 100 m2
2 rooms added to previous plan, with courtyard
Complete plan
Osanna 2001a, 218. Ruga et al. 2005, pl. LX.
Calabria, S. Anna di Isola Capo Rizzuto (KR), farmhouse Site 1, casa Iedà
500–450 BC; 350–270 BC
4.60 x 2.10 m, ca. 10 m2
Several rooms, only 1 preserved
Incomplete plan
Ruga et al. 2005, 151, pl. LIX.
Campania, Mortelle (SA), Lucanian farmhouse
4th–3rd c. BC
ca. 400 m2
Incomplete plan
Roccagloriosa II, 167.
Campania, Pedale (SA), Lucanian farmhouse
4th–3rd c. BC
ca. 400 m2
Incomplete plan (Partially excavated in 1977)
Roccagloriosa II, 167.
Campania, Caselle in Pittari (SA), rectangular building
End of the 4th–3rd c. BC
> ca. 21 x 7, > 147 m2
Incomplete plan
Fiammenghi/Salomone/Serritella 1996, 323, fig. 3.
Complete plan
Pelagatti 1980–1981, 723–36. pl. 163. Di Stefano 2001, 693–94, fig. 4.
Puglia, Vaste (LE), fondo Lucernari
Calabria, S. Anna di Isola Capo Rizzuto (KR), Site 10, Quota Pullano
Sicily, Camarina (RG), Iurato
Mid-5th–end of the 4th c. BC
25.40 x 25.00, 635 m2
Rectangular plan, with 2 rows of 3 rooms and corridor on short side
14 rooms on 3 sides of central courtyard
Sicily, Camarina (RG), Fattoria Capodicasa
5th–4th c. BC
24.0 x 17.50, 350 m2
7 rooms on 3 sides of central courtyard
Complete plan
Pelagatti 1980–1981, 723–29, pl. 163. Di Stefano 2001, 694, fig. 5.
Sicily, Camarina (RG), Fattoria Menta
End of the 5th or first half of the 4th c. BC–late 4th c. BC
14.00 x 8.00, 112.00 m2 + 13 x 5, 65 m2
(1) Rectangular building with 3 rooms; (2) trapezoidal building with 4 rooms. External courtyard
Complete plan
Di Stefano 2001, 695–98, fig. 6.
20 x 15
Double L-shaped complex. Productive wing separated from residential area. Courtyard on eastern side with rural sanctuary
Incomplete plan
Di Stefano 2001, 698–99, fig. 7.
Sicily, Camarina (RG), Fattoria Cancellieri
4th–3rd c. BC
Table C3 cont. Selected isolated rural dwellings, southern Italy.
FF_31_appendix-c_05feb14.indd 415
5/30/14 7:36 AM
Appendix C
416 Site
Date
Dimensions
Plan
Condition
Source
Attica, Dema House
Late 5th c. BC
16 x 22 m, 352 m2
Rectangular plan, 7 rooms on 2 sides of courtyard with pastas
Complete plan
Jones/Sackett/Graham 1962, 76, fig. 1.
Attica, Grosses House (1 km from the Dema House, probably connected with it)
421–412 BC
10 x 20 m, 200 m2
Rectangular plan, 2 rooms
Complete plan
Jones/Sackett/Graham 1962, 82–87. Pesando 2006, 158.
Attica, Vari House, phase I
4th c. BC
17.60 x 13.70 m, ca. 205 m2
Rectangular plan, 6 main rooms on 2 sides of large courtyard with wooden columns, with tower
Complete plan
Jones/Sackett/Graham 1973, 362–63, figs. 2–3. Jones 1975b. Pesando 2006, 158.
Attica, small country house near Vari (farmhouse)
End of the 5th c. BC
13.07 x 9.65 + 4 x 5, 142.5 m2
3 rooms on 2 sides of large courtyard with external shed in a corner
Complete plan
Isager and Skydsgaard 1992, 74–75, fig. 4.2.
Attica, Legraina, Palaia Kopraisia, farm estate LE 16
400–350 BC
35 x 27, 945 m2
Trapezoidal plan, with perhaps 5 rooms and andron around large courtyard with tower
Incomplete plan
Lohmann 1992, 42, 47, fig. 22.
Attica, Legraina, Palaia Kopraisia, farm estate LE 17
Classical period
ca. 40 x 20 m
9 rooms around large courtyard with tower, 2 threshing floors and sheepfolds
Complete plan
Lohmann 1992, 42–49, fig. 24.
Attica, Thimare TH1
Classical period
11 x 28, 308 m2
Courtyard with tower, threshing floor Complete and outer buildings plan
Lohmann 1992, 41, fig. 15.
Mid-5th– end of the 4th c. BC
14 x 8 + 13 x 5, 112 m2 + 65 m2
2 separate buildings: the major one with 4 rooms, the other one with 2 or 3 rooms.
Complete plan
Ancient Greek Houses, 84–89.
End of the 4th c. BC
Round tower likely used as a silos
Complete plan
Ancient Greek Houses, 84–89.
Attica, Thorikos, farmhouses
4th–3rd c. BC
Large rooms located on the northern side, open on courtyard; one or two building units with rectangular plan and square or rounded towers
Attica, Ano Voula, farmhouse
Mid-5th–4th c. BC
Rectangular plan, central courtyard, 2 separate entrances, on opposite sides; pyrgos added in second phase
Complete plan
Ancient Greek Houses, 86–87.
Loosely connected buildings with enclosed gardens; large round tower in the center; bathroom; cult buildings; banquet hall perhaps a lesche (single room with 2 benches and central hearth; later added entrance hall)
Incomplete plan
Lohmann 1992, 35–36, fig. 7–13.
Attica, Thorikos
Ancient Greek Houses, 84–89.
Attica, Ano Voula, rural village of Kalabokas
Classical period
Banquet hall: 5.8 x 5.8 m, interior floor: 4.8 x 4.8 m, 23 m2
Euboea, Karystia C38 Palio Pithari
5th–4th c. BC
8.5 x 14.2, 121 m2
Rectangular plan with 3 rooms (3 x 4 m) on rectangular courtyard
Complete plan
Keller and Wallace 1988, 151–54, fig. 2.
Euboea, Karystia C54 Stravros
Classical period
17 x 18, ca. 306 m2
Rectangular plan with 4 or more rooms or enclosures
Most of plan. Unexcavated
Keller and Wallace 1988, fig. 3.
Southern Argolis, farmhouse B89
4th c. BC–1st c. AD
ca. 11 x 15, ca. 165 m2
Rectangular rooms
Complete plan
Runnels and van Andel 1987, 309. Foley 1988, 58–60. Jameson et al. 1994, 459–60.
Southern Argolis, farmhouse B94
4th c. BC– early 12th c. AD
ca. 142 m2
Rectangular plan
Incomplete plan
Jameson/Runnels/van Andel 1994, 461.
Southern Argolis, farmhouse F3
350 BC–1st c. AD
9 x 11, 99 m2
3 rooms, perhaps tower
Complete plan
Foley 1988, 89. Jameson/ Runnels/van Andel 1994, 506, 508 (plan).
Southern Argolis, farmhouse A61
Mid-5th–4th c. BC
Rectangular plan
Incomplete plan
Jameson/Runnels/van Andel 1994, 47, 434.
Megaris, farmhouse of Megalo Vathychori
Classical period
Large courtyard, 2 towers, large cistern
Complete plan
Lohmann 1992, 40–43, fig. 17.
Table C4 Selected isolated rural dwellings, mainland Greece.
FF_31_appendix-c_05feb14.indd 416
5/30/14 7:36 AM
Census of Farmhouses Site
Date
Dimensions
Plan
417 Condition
Source
4th–3rd c. BC
33 x 20 m, 660 m2
Rectangular plan
Complete plan
Strzheletskiy 1961.
3rd c. BC
33 x 35.8 m, 1,181.4 m2
Square plan
Complete plan
Strzheletskiy 1961.
2nd c. BC
22 x 26 m, ca. 480 m2, tower: 9.5 x 9.5 m
Rectangular plan, 10 rooms around elongated courtyard; square tower. Probable upper story
Complete plan
Strzheletskiy 1961. Dufková and Pečírka 1970, 167. Isager and Skydsgaard 1992, 77, fig. 4.3.
325–270 BC
20.5 x 24.0 m, 492 m2
Large courtyard with tower
Complete plan
Strzheletskiy 1961, 170. Saprykin 1994, 13–17, fig. 5. Nikolaenko 2001b, 140.
1st c. AD
35 x 30 m, 1050 m2
Large courtyard with tower
Complete plan
Strzheletskiy 1961, 170. Saprykin 1994, 13–17 (fig. 5). Nikolaenko 2001b, 140.
Late 4th–early 3rd c. BC
ca. 20 x 20 m, 400 m2
Large courtyard with central tower
Complete plan
Saprykin 1994, 65–72. Carter et al. 2000, fig. 12. Carter 2006, 151–55, figs. 4.26–4.28.
250–early 2nd c. BC
19.5 x 16, 117 m2 with tower
Large courtyard with central tower
Complete plan
Saprykin 1994, 65–72. Carter et al. 2000, fig. 12. Carter 2006, 151–55, figs. 4.26–4.28.
Uncertain
10.5 x 9.0 m, 94.50 m2
Courtyard
Complete plan
Saprykin 1994, 145. Nikolaenko 2001b, 179.
ca. 325–270 BC
17.0 x 9.30 m, 158.10 m2
Courtyard
Complete plan
Saprykin 1994, 145. Nikolaenko 2001b, 179.
250–beginning of the 2nd c. BC
17.0 x 9.30 m, 158.10 m2
Courtyard
Complete plan
Saprykin 1994, 145. Nikolaenko 2001b, 179.
Farmhouse 39 A
Late 4th c. BC
28 x 28 m, 784 m2
Square plan
Complete plan
Nikolaenko 2001b, fig. 17.
Farmhouse 93
Late 4th c. BC
437 m2
Irregular plan
Complete plan
Nikolaenko 2001b, fig. 12.
Farmhouse 2a Omega bay
1st–12th c. AD
40 x 40 m, 1600 m2
Square plan
Complete plan
Strzheletskiy 1961, 163. Nikolaenko 2001b, 134–35.
Farmhouse 3 Omega bay
1st–12th c. AD
35 x 35, 1225 m2 + tower 7 x 7, 49 m2
Square plan with tower
Complete plan
Strzheletskiy 1961, 163. Shcheglov 1967. Nikolaenko 2001b, 136.
Farmhouse 5 Omega bay
4th c. BC
Small structure
Square plan
Complete plan
Kac 1994, 52–55. Nikolaenko 2001b, 136.
Farmhouse 6 Omega bay
Mid-4th–2nd c. BC
55 x 35 m, 1925 m2
L shaped plan with central courtyard
Complete plan
Strzheletskiy 1961, 165. Kac 1994, 58. Nikolaenko 2001b, 140.
Farmhouse 7.1 Omega bay
3rd c. BC–5th c. AD
35 x 25, 875 m2 towers: ca. 10 x 8 m
Rectangular plan with 2 rectangular towers
Complete plan
Shcheglov 1967. Saprykin 1994, 145–48. Nikolaenko 2001b, 140.
Farmhouse 7.2 Omega bay
3rd c. BC–5th c. AD
80 x 50 m, 4000 m2, tower: 8 x 8
Rectangular plan with square tower
Incomplete plan
Shcheglov 1967, 290–91. Saprykin 1994, 145–48. Nikolaenko 2001b, 140.
Farmhouse 12.1 Omega bay
325 BC–4th/5th c. AD
35 x 35 m, 1225 m2
Square plan with tower
Complete plan
Strzheletskiy 1961, 166–67. Nikolaenko 2001b, 143.
Farmhouse 12.2 Omega bay
325 BC–4th/5th c. AD
40 x 40 m, 1600 m2
Square plan with tower
Incomplete plan
Strzheletskiy 1961, 166–67. Nikolaenko 2001b, 143.
Strzheletskiy 25
Strzheletskiy 26
Farmhouse 9
Farmhouse 151
Farmhouse 49
Table C5 Selected isolated rural dwellings, chora of Chersonesos.
FF_31_appendix-c_05feb14.indd 417
5/30/14 7:36 AM
FF_31_appendix-c_05feb14.indd 418
5/30/14 7:36 AM
Appendix D
Archaeobotanical Analyses: Pollen, NPPs, and Seeds/fruit Assunta Florenzano NE
II
C’ Archaeological Context
A
Sample Label
Position/Depth (cm)
I
Pollen samples NE
Modern sediments
C
B
Recent
P1
Surface (on site, under Pistacia lentiscus)
Recent
P2
Surface (valley bot tom, under a vineyard)
Second half of the 4th c. BC Room 1
P9-P12
P3-P8
N
70
P6
80
6th–end of the 5th c. BC
P7
85
P8
90
Room 2
5m
Kantharos
57
P5
EI
0
50
P4
4th c. BC
M15
B’
P3
4th c. BC
P9
60
P10
65
P11
72
P12
80
P13
Inside the filling
P14
At the bottom
SE
A’ samples Carpological
I
SE
The archaeobotanical investigation on selected samples of Fattoria Fabrizio was carried out with the primary aim of improving knowledge of the past flora of the area and focusing on plants growing in and around the site. It should allow us to infer which plants were probably used and cultivated in the area during the farmhouse’s occupation. Pollen data on plant cover and vegetation were enriched by those obtained from Non-Pollen Palynomorphs (NPPs), a set of other microscopic evidence, mainly including fungi and algae, which are commonly found in the same slides as those examined for pollen. Their importance in palaeoenvironmental studies has been increasingly recognized over the last three decades.1 As for the macrobotanical remains, seeds and fruits give details on local flora and can expand the ethnobotanical aspects of the research.2 The sampling strategy, laboratory treatments, 1 2
van Geel 1986; Carrión 2002; Riera et al. 2006; van Geel et al. 2003. Pearsall 2000.
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 419
II
Figure D1 Plan of the excavation showing the location of the pollen sampling from Room 1 (P3–P8) and from Room 2 (P9–P12).
Room 1—floor
6th–end of the 5th c. BC
M15
80–85
Table D1 List of archaeobotanical samples collected from inside Fattoria Fabrizio, and from recent surface sediments collected in the vicinity of the site.
and analytical tables resulting from analyses of pollen, NPPs, seeds, and fruits has enabled a reconstruction of the archaeoenvironment and the agrarian context of Fattoria Fabrizio. Sampling Archaeobotanical samples were taken inside the perimeter of the farm building (Fig. D1) in the summer of 2010, thirty years after the excavation, from unexcavated baulks left in situ. The set of 15 samples is listed in Table D1: 14 for pollen and NPPs and one for macrobotanical, specifically carpological remains (seeds, fruits). The samples for palynological analysis were taken in two sequences within the building, in Room 1 (six samples) and Room 2 (four samples) (Fig. D2).
5/30/14 7:40 AM
Appendix D
420
Room 2
Room 1
Wall 4
Carpological Sample Pollen Sequences
Figure D2 The archaeological sequences in Rooms 1 and 2 with location of the pollen and carpological samples. (AF/JCF/ICA)
A) P14
4.5 cm IN
B)
5 cm
P13
4 cm
Figure D3 (A) The kantharos from Room 3 (after restoration); and (B) its contents, from which pollen samples were taken. P13 was collected inside the block of soil, and P14, at its deep base. (CW/AF/JCF/ICA)
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 420
They were sediments collected at 5–10 cm intervals, extending from under the tile fall down to the floors, taking into account both the stratigraphy and archaeological phases. One carpological sample (of about 5 liters) was taken from the floor in Room 1 (Fig. D2). Two pollen samples were also collected from recent surface soils, a comparative methodology useful in checking the composition of modern pollen rain near the site. The first surface sample was taken on site while the second one was collected at the foot of the slope on which the site is located (Fig. D4). Samples for pollen analysis were
refrigerated, protected from contamination, before being submitted to laboratory treatments. In May 2011, the infilling of a kantharos from Room 3 (BG 49), collected in 1980 and kept in the deposits of the excavation, was sent to the laboratory of Modena. Two subsamples, about 4–5 g each, were collected from the center and from the bottom of the fill material (Fig. D3). Extraction and Counts Palynomorphs. Samples were treated according to the standard method for pollen analyses in use in Laboratory of Palynology and Palaeobotany of Modena.3 The method was imported and adapted from the Institute of Earth Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam in the 1990s. About 8 g of dry sediment for each sample was treated in 10% sodium pyrophosphate to deflocculate the sediment matrix. A Lycopodium tablet was added to each sample to calculate pollen concentration (expressed as pollen grains per gram = p/g). 10% HCl was added to remove calcareous material. The residues were subsequently washed through a nylon 7-μm sieve, dehydrated with glacial acetic acid and then subjected 3
Florenzano et al. 2012.
5/30/14 7:40 AM
Archaeobotanical Analyses: Pollen, NPPs, and Seeds/fruit
P1
421
Archaeological Site
P2
Figure D4 The hill (48 m above sea level) on which Fattoria Fabrizio stands with the location of the samples P1 and P2 collected from modern surface sediments. (AF/JCF/ICA)
to acetolysis.4 Heavy liquid separation was then introduced using a sodium metatungstate hydrate of 2.0 s.g. (specific gravity) and placed in a centrifuge at 2000 rpm for 20 minutes. Following this procedure, the retained fractions were treated with 40% hydrofluoric acid to remove silicates, washed in 98% ethanol, supplemented with glycerol, and finally stove-dried. The final residues were mounted on slides in glycerol jelly and the cover slips were sealed with paraffin. This method has provided sufficient amounts of pollen even when pollen concentrations were very low, and has proved to be very useful for extracting pollen from archaeological samples. Pollen and NPPs were identified in the same samples. Identification was made at 400x and at 1000x magnification with the help of keys, atlases,5 and the reference pollen collection of the laboratory of Modena. Pollen percentages are calculated on a Pollen Sum (number of counted pollen grains on which percentages are calculated) that includes all identified and not identified pollen grains. Seeds and fruits. The macrobotanical samples were floated and sieved using a set of three sieves of 10-, 0.5-, 4
Erdtman 1960. Beug 1964; Andersen 1979; Faegri/Kaland/Krzywinski 1989; Moore/ Webb/Collins 1991. 5
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 421
and 0.2-mm meshes in the laboratory (Fig. D5). The total residues were sorted under a stereomicroscope and the identification was made at 6x to 80x magnification with the help of keys, atlases, and the carpological reference collection.6 The physical character of plants, their habitus, and ecology follow the Flora d’Italia.7 Results A total of 7549 pollen grains, about 539 grains/sample, and 374 seeds/fruits were examined. Pollen. Concentration. Pollen was found in all samples (Table D2). Pollen concentrations were variable depending on the richness of organic matter and the conditions of preservation. Most of the archaeological samples (P3– P12) show quite high pollen concentrations, ranging from 1 to 35 x 103 p/g, and are sometimes even richer than the modern surface samples (P1–P2: up to 2 x 104 p/g). Only the two samples from the kantharos (P13–P14) were less rich in pollen (5 x 103 p/g). State of preservation. All pollen types in the same ar6
Beijerinck 1947; Kiffmann 1958; Berggren 1969, 1981; Delorit 1970; Renfrew 1973; Jacquat 1988; Anderberg 1994; Cappers/Bekker/Jans 2006. 7 Pignatti 1982.
5/30/14 7:40 AM
Appendix D
422
chaeological samples. This suggests that, in general, biodiversity in the past was clearly as rich as it is today. Floral composition of archaeological samples (P3–P14). In pollen spectra, pine and deciduous oak are the dominant trees (mean percentage of all samples = 5% and 3.5%, respectively). The wild grass group (17%) and Cichorioideae (13%) prevail among the herbaceous plants.
Tile fall 50 cm
P3
57 cm
P4
70 cm 80 cm
P5 P6
M15
Flora of samples from the rooms (P3–P12). The prevalent families are Poaceae 90 cm P8 (18%; mainly the wild grass group, 16%) and Asteraceae (18%; mainly the CichoFigure D5 Sampling from macroremains, clockwise from left the archaeological sequence of rioideae, 12%). Traces of Room 1 showing the carpological sample M15; the set of three sieves for floating and sieving the cereals are ubiquitous (see soil sample; and the residues of sample M15 after sieving. (AF/JCF/ICA) below), together with Braschaeological sample were recorded according to de- sicaceae (9%), Fabaceae (10%), Ranunculaceae (7%), grees of preservation, ranging from good to bad. Dete- the plantain family (Plantaginaceae; 2.5%), the rose rioration consisted mainly in the folding of the grains family (Rosaceae; 3%) and the figwort family (Scroand degradation that caused thinning of the pollen phulariaceae; 2%). Contrarily, Cyperaceae are almost wall (exine). Some more resistant and always recog- absent (0.8%). Besides pine (5%) and deciduous oak nizable pollen such as Cichorioideae might be over- (Quercus; 4%), holly oak (2%), rockrose (Heliantherepresented, and their percentages are actually slightly mum; 2.7%), and olive (2.6%) are inconsequential. higher in the samples from the kantharos (mean 18%) than in the others (11%). Nevertheless, floral diversi- Forest cover and environment from the rooms (P3–P12). ty is always very high and therefore we conclude that The mean percentage ratio of woodland/herbaceous selective degradation did not significantly affect the plants is 19/81 (Table D3). It corresponds to a very open reliability of the spectra, which can be considered rep- plant landscape with scattered trees and shrubs far from the site. The low degree of woodland cover may truly resentative of the past pollen rains. correspond to open areas surrounding the farmhouse. Pollen richness. The number of taxa is high consisting The typology of the samples collected can lead, howevof 117 different types. In archaeological samples (P3– er, to exaggerated estimation of open areas. They were P14), it varies from 57 to 69 taxa per sample (Fig. D6). in fact taken into rooms (i.e., places covered by roofs), Trees/shrubs are represented by 27 taxa, less than one and not freely exposed to air-transported pollen. third of the herbaceous plants. The highest number of Mediterranean evergreen woods and macchia are taxa was found in P7 while the lowest numbers were represented by lentisk/mastic tree (0.9%), holm oak found in P3 and P12. Interestingly, the 52 taxa of the (2%), myrtle (0.5%), olive (2.6%), and Phillyrea (0.7%). modern surface sample P1 are fewer than in the ar- Wet environments are represented by the hygrophi85 cm
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 422
Floor
P7
5/30/14 7:40 AM
Archaeobotanical Analyses: Pollen, NPPs, and Seeds/fruit lous alder (0.2%), and by hydrophytes Cyperaceae (0.8%) and the reedmace family (Typhaceae; 0.4%).
1
2
3
423
4
Human landscapes: cultivated and grazing areas (P3– 5 6 7 8 P12; and P1–P2).Cereals include oat/wheat (1.1%) and barley groups (1%), found in all samples (Table D3). This suggests that grain fields were not close Figure D6 Pollen and NPPs from Fattoria Fabrizio. (1) Avena/Triticum group (max. diam.: 65 μm; P3); to the site. Plants from (2) Olea cf. europaea (max. diam.: 26 μm; P12); (3) Prunus (max. diam.: 44 μm; P9); (4) Pistacia (max. grazing environments are diam.: 34 μm; P11); (5) Cichorioideae (max. diam.: 23.5 μm; P13); (6) Sordaria type (max. length: 23 μm; P14); (7) Valsaria variospora type (max. length: 49 μm; P1); (8) Hair of Trogoderma sp. (total length: 180 better represented. The Local Pastoral μm, terminal end 38 μm; P3). (AF/JCF/ICA) Pollen Indicators (LPPI) is the sum of pollen from plants strictly correlated to Comparison between Rooms 1 and 2.The pollen list and local pastoral activities. In these samples, they were spectra from Room 1 and Room 2 are very similar entomophilous Asteroideae including thistle, Cicho- (Table D2). Herbaceous plants prevailed in the polrioideae, bedstraw, Ranunculaceae, and cinquefoil, and len spectra from both rooms (81.4% and 75.3% on were found in all samples (19% on average). They are average, respectively), mainly with Poaceae (17% in better represented in the archaeological samples (P3– Room 1, and 17% in Room 2) and Asteraceae (19% P12; 20%) than in the modern surface samples (P1– and 16%). Brassicaceae and Fabaceae appear in similar P2; 13%). The Regional Human Activities Pollen In- percentages in both rooms. Similarly, the mixed oakdicators (RHAPI) is another index that is important wood (hazel, hornbeam, and deciduous oak) and the for describing human environments. It is correlated to plants of wet environment have the same percentage a wider set of regional activities and includes pollen in Rooms 1 and 2 (mixed oakwood comprises 5%; wet coming from a wider area, i.e. wormwood (Artemisia), environment plants, 0.9%; see Table D3). As for differences, Mediterranean plants (olive, Chenopodiaceae, cereals, ribbed plantain (Plantago lanceolata type), sorrel (Rumex sp.), and nettle. They myrtle, lentisk/mastic tree, holly oak, and Phillyrea) were ubiquitous (6% on average) and show higher per- are better represented in Room 2 (8%) than in Room centages in the archaeological samples (6%) than in 1 (5%). Cereals, though low, are present in the two rooms with inverted proportions: oat/wheat group is the modern surface samples (3%). The wild plants correlated to human presence are 1.4% in Room 1, and 0.6% in Room 2; barley group grouped into the category of wild Anthropogenic is 1.2% in Room 2 and 0.8% in Room 1. The presence Indicators (wAI). The sum includes several taxa (see of plum pollen in Room 2 (P9) is significant, because Table D3; the sum excludes the Cichorioideae) in the plum tree is a low pollen producer, which strongly different quantities for each sample (mean 6%; max. suggests that it was growing in the vicinity of Room 2. The chi-square test, applied to the mean percent10% in P12, min. 3% in P1). As well as the two previous indices, the wAI percentages are higher in the age values of the two rooms, showed that there are no archaeological samples (6%) than in the modern sur- significant differences between them. Their similarity can be reasonably explained by a wholly similar use face samples (4%). Based on the examination of these sums, it seems and occupation, in accordance with general archaeoreasonable to conclude that there were more agrarian logical interpretations. activities at Fattoria Fabrizio in the 6th–4th centuries BC than in modern times in the same place.
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 423
5/30/14 7:40 AM
424
Appendix D
Pollen from the kantharos (P13–P14).Consistent with the other archaeological samples, these two subsamples have high pollen richness (total 80 taxa; 61 taxa/ sample, on average), with the predominance of herbaceous plants (mean = 89%). Though the prevalent families are the same, Asteraceae (24%), including Cichorioideae (18%), Aster type, and lesser knapweed type (Centaurea nigra), prevail over Poaceae (21%). The oat/wheat group is present only in traces (0.6% in P13). Fabaceae (5%), Cyperaceae (5%), Ranunculaceae (4%), the nettle family (Urticaceae; 4%), the lily family (Liliaceae; 3%), Scrophulariaceae (3%), Chenopodiaceae (2%) and Rosaceae (2%) are common. Among the trees, deciduous oak (2%) is present with pine (2%), and olive (1%). Capers, rockrose, juniper, holly oak, and the buckthorn family (Rhamnaceae) are present in low percentages (< 1%). Although there is a general similarity between these spectra and those from the rooms, the kantharos was filled with a different sediment. It probably contained fewer plant parts than the surrounding sediments. Interestingly, plants from wet environments, including cattail (Typha; 1.4%), the water lily (Nymphaea; 0.6%), and duckweed (Lemna; 0.2%), as well as the hygrophilous willow (Salix; 0.9%) and alder (0.5%), are seven times more frequent in samples P13–P14 than in the other samples. This suggests that some water, or sediments from wet environments, could have been part of the fill. There is no evidence to indicate its use as a container of some specifically selected plants. Surface samples (P1–P2).The two surface soil samples have well-preserved pollen but the number of taxa (55 taxa/sample, on average) is quite similar to that from the archaeological samples (61 taxa/sample, on average). There are, however, differences in the data. Pollen spectra are still dominated by herbaceous plants (82%, on average), with wild grass group (32%), Brassicaceae, Fabaceae and Asteraceae (7% each), Ranunculaceae (6%), Chenopodiaceae (2.3%), Plantaginaceae (1.6%), and Cistaceae, the rockrose family (1.2%). Woodland plants are relatively low (mean 18%; about 2870 p/g), with lentisk/mastic tree (3%), pine (3%), holly oak (2%), rockrose (2%), cypress (Cupressus; 2%) and deciduous trees poorly represented (oak 3%, plus low hornbeam, hazel, and hophornbeam). Myrtle, olive, and Phillyrea are present. Cereals (oat/wheat group, 1%; barley group, 0.3%) and a low percentage of Cichorioideae (3%) were recorded.
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 424
Non-Pollen Palynomorphs The NPPs were prevalently algae and spores of fungi, and altogether 21 types were identified (Table D4). Concentricystes is a common and easily recognizable spore of algae 8 that may reflect anthropogenic soil erosion or presence of fresh water, free in wet environments or collected in cisterns. This alga was found in the samples taken from the kantharos as well as in the surface soil sample P2. Among fungi, Glomus, found in all samples, is indicative of soil erosion as well, while others are carbonicolous or coal-inhabiting (Gelasinospora sp.), coprophilous fungi (Sordaria type, Cercophora type, Sporormiella type, Podospora type) or cellulose decomposing fungi (Chaetomium sp.). Other Non-Pollen Palynomorphs, which were found in almost all samples, occur in deposits formed under eutrophic wet conditions (Valsaria variospora type) or in stagnant shallow open water (HdV 181). A significant amount of coprophilous fungi were observed in the kantharos (P13 and P14). Very low amounts of NPPs were observed in samples from the rooms. A very interesting record is cf. Trogoderma sp. found in P3 from Room 1 (Fig. D6). It consists of one hair of the abdominal fragment of the larva of this genus, belonging to the family Dermestidae.9 A beetle that infests a wide variety of dried plant and animal materials, especially stored seeds of cereals,10 its recovery is indicative of the on-site presence of cereals. In the surface soil sample P2, and in the samples P6–P7 (Room 1, floor level) and P10 (Room 2, tile fall) the presence of Testate amoebae, a shelled protozoan living in aquatic to moist habitats,11 is yet another indicator of the presence of water. Seeds and Fruits Seed and fruit concentrations were ca. 75 sf/l. Also fragments of leaves and one bud were present (Table D5). The state of preservation of the remains was generally good. Three types of preservation were observed: waterlogged, partially mineralized, and charred. The last two types consisted only of small, unidentifiable fragments. The samples included seeds and fruits of medium and small size. They belong to 18 prevalently herbaceous taxa (Fig. D7). Among the medium size, Onopordum was found with 7.4 sf/l. Though not high, 8
Zygnemataceae (Grenfell 1995). Valentini et al. 2006. 10 French and Venette 2005. 11 Mitchell/Charman/Warner 2008. 9
5/30/14 7:40 AM
Archaeobotanical Analyses: Pollen, NPPs, and Seeds/fruit
1
2
3
425
4
6
5
7
1 mm
9
10
11
8
a
b
c
Figure D7 Seeds and fruits from Fattoria Fabrizio. (1) Onopordum sp. (l 4.7 mm); (2) Anagallis arvensis (l 1.2 mm); (3) Mentha cf. suave olens/longifolia (l 0.8 mm); (4) Silene gallica (l 0.9 mm); (5) Calendula cf. arvensis (l 3.6 mm); (6) Morus nigra (l cf. 1.8 mm); (7) Ficus carica (l 1.2 mm); (8) cf. Lotus (a. 1.5 mm; b. 1.8 mm; c. 1.7 mm); (9) Solanum nigrum (l 1.8 mm); (10) Euphorbia peplus (l 1 mm); (11) Euphorbia helioscopia (l 2 mm). (AF/JCF/ICA)
the presence of this plant is of interest because it is known that thistle has some medicinal effects. Therefore, these herbs may have been among the different plants introduced in Room 1. Seeds and fruits of small size belong to weeds: Primulaceae (Anagallis arvensis), Euphorbiaceae (Euphorbia helioscopia and Euphorbia peplus), and Fabaceae (Genista sp.) are prevalent, while all the other taxa are in traces. Seeds of cf. Lotus (30 sf/l) were found in an excellent state of preservation, and seem not to be dehy-
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 425
drated with a brilliant color. Though this genus was observed in the area surrounding the site during the sampling collection, it may be that the seeds had arrived from a more recent context in the layer. Therefore, cautiously, these remains must not be considered in the interpretation. It is noteworthy that cultivated plants, such as cereals, pips, and pulses, are absent.
5/30/14 7:40 AM
Appendix D
426 Sample no. Archaeological context
P1
P2
P4
SURFACE SEDIMENTS
Depth (cm) Concentration (p/g)
P3
P5
P6
P7
P8
P9
ROOM 1
P10
P11
P12
ROOM 2
P13
P14
KANTHAROS
50
57
70
80
85
90
60
65
72
80
13549
22029
10267
11360
20129
19932
25661
16087
12208
34478
16446
23334
5449
5535
Trees+shrubs %
25.0
10.6
20.5
18.1
19.0
17.4
19.0
18.4
24.1
26.5
27.7
20.4
11.6
10.1
Herbaceous plants %
75.0
89.4
79.5
81.9
81.0
82.6
81.0
81.6
75.9
73.5
72.3
79.6
88.4
89.9
5.5
0.2
1.5
0.4
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.5
1.2
1.3
2.1
0.4
TREES and SHRUBS ANACARDIA CEAE
Pistacia cf. lentiscus
ARALIACEAE
Hedera helix
BETULACEAE
Alnus
CAPPARA CEAE
Capparis
CAPRIFOLIA CEAE
Sambucus nigra
CISTACEAE
Helianthe mum
CORNACEAE
CORYLACEAE
CUPRESSA CEAE EPHEDRA CEAE
0.4 0.3
MYRTACEAE OLEACEAE PINACEAE
0.2
0.6
0.4
1.3
0.2
0.4 4.3
2.5
2.1
1.6
2.0
Cornus mas Carpinus betulus
0.4
Corylus
0.6
Ostrya/ carp or. type
0.4
Cupressus
2.0
0.2
1.7
4.2
4.3
3.8
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
1.6
1.1
1.2
0.9
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.7
1.1
0.6
0.6
0.8
0.3
1.1
0.9
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.5
0.2 2.4
2.5
0.6
0.8
0.2
0.2 1.2
0.2
0.9
0.7
2.0
1.1
Juniperus type
0.5
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.7
0.4 0.9
0.4
Ephedra
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.2
Quercus deciduous
4.5
1.2
3.8
3.5
5.1
3.1
2.8
3.5
3.8
4.5
3.8
4.0
Q. ilex type
3.6
1.0
0.2
2.6
2.2
1.1
2.3
1.7
2.6
2.2
3.8
2.7
2.4
0.2
Morus
0.4 0.8
Olea Phillyrea
1.0
0.4
0.2
1.0
4.6
0.4
0.8 0.4
Abies Pinus
RHAMNA CEAE
Rhamnus type
ROSACEAE
Prunus
SALICACEAE
Salix
2.0
3.5
4.0
2.3
4.7
0.2
0.7
0.2
0.2
0.2
1.9
0.5
1.8
2.8
1.7
1.6
1.6
2.7
4.3
3.1
0.4
0.8
1.2
0.9
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.2 6.8
7.9
4.8
4.9
4.7
5.3
6.4
6.0
0.2
0.2
0.2
1.3 0.2
Ficus Myrtus
0.7
0.2
Fagus
MORACEAE
0.2
0.2
Castanea FAGACEAE
0.2
0.2
1.7
0.2
0.9 0.4
1.5
1.8
0.7
0.8
0.2
1.6
0.2
Table D2 Pollen spectra of samples collected from the different contexts of Fattoria Fabrizio.
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 426
5/30/14 7:40 AM
Archaeobotanical Analyses: Pollen, NPPs, and Seeds/fruit Sample no. Archaeological context
P1
P2
P3
P4
SURFACE SEDIMENTS
P5
P6
P7
P8
P9
ROOM 1
427
P10
P11
P12
ROOM 2
P13
P14
KANTHAROS
HERBACEOUS PLANTS
APIACEAE
Apiaceae undiff.
0.2
Apium
0.2
0.2
0.4 0.2
0.5
Bupleurum
0.6
0.2
0.4 0.2
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.3
0.4
0.4
Daucus type 0.4
0.2
0.4
0.7
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.8
1.5
1.4
0.2
0.7
0.8
1.4
0.4
1.3
1.7
1.5
2.8
2.2
Asteroi deae undiff.
0.4
2.8
2.5
4.6
2.2
3.9
3.7
2.7
4.0
4.3
3.8
2.6
2.4
3.5
0.2
Carduus ASTERACEAE
Centaurea nigra type
1.2
0.2
1.0
0.4
0.8
0.9
1.4
0.8
0.2
0.9
1.5
0.9
0.2
0.4
Cichori oideae
2.2
4.5
15.3
14.4
10.9
15,0
11.2
14.9
10.1
6.8
12.5
7.5
20.2
15.0
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.8
0.6
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.2
Cirsium Matricaria type
0.2
Boragi naceae undiff. BORAGI NACEAE
0.5
0.6
0.4
0.4 0.2
Cerinthe Echium
0.2
Symphy tum
0.2 0.3
Brassica type
1.0
0.4
3.3
4.0
2.6
4.0
3.0
5.8
1.2
1.6
2.6
1.1
Brassica ceae undiff.
5.3
5.3
3.1
2.5
3.0
8.8
5.1
5.2
3.2
3.9
4.3
4.0
0.9
1.3
Hornungia type
0.8
1.2
2.9
2.1
0.8
2.8
1.4
1.9
2.2
0.4
0.7
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.8
0.5
1.3
0.4
Caryo phyllaceae undiff. CARYOPHYL LACEAE
0.4
0.3
Biscutella
BRASSICA CEAE
0.2
Aster type
Artemisia
0.2
0.6
Herniaria glabra type
0.2 0.4
Paronychia Silene type
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.6
Table D2 cont. Pollen spectra of samples collected from the different contexts of Fattoria Fabrizio.
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 427
5/30/14 7:40 AM
Appendix D
428 Sample no. Archaeological context
CHENOPODI ACEAE
CISTACEAE
P2
P3
P4
SURFACE SEDIMENTS
Beta type
0.4
Chenopodi um type
0.4 1.0
P5
P6
P7
P8
P9
ROOM 1 0.4
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.8
0.5
1.4
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1
0.6
1.2
0.3
0.2
2.0
Cistaceae undiff.
0.8
1.0
0.5
0.4
Cistus
0.4
1.7
0.9
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
Convol vulus
CRASSULA CEAE
Sedum
CUCURBITA CEAE
Cucurbita ceae
CYPERACEAE
Cypera ceae
0.2
0.6
1.6
0.6
0.2
1.4
0.6
0.6
0.9
0.8
0.3
1.5
0.4
1.5
0.9
0.2
1.0
1.5
0.2
0.7
0.2
1.3
0.5
1.3 0.2
1.0
1.1
0.8
0.6
1.9
1.0
0.4
6.5
4.2
0.2 0.2 0.2
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.5
1.8
2.7
2.4
2.6
0.9
1.5
0.2
0.5
0.2
0.8
0.4
0.7
1.5
0.9
0.7
0.2
0.2
Fabaceae undiff.
2.8
0.2
1.1
1.8
Lathyrus type
0.4
0.2
0.6
0.4
Lotus
0.6
1.8
0.8
1.4
Medicago cf.
3.0
0.6
0.2
0.9
1.7
2.6
1.1
0.8
0.7
0.2
Trifolium undiff.
2.2
Trifolium pratense type
1.4
Hypericum
0.2
Lamiaceae undiff.
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.4
0.2
Mentha type
0.4
0.8
0.6
0.5
0.4
1.9
1.2
0.8
0.2 0.6
1.3
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.2
0.6
0.5
0.7
0.4
2.0
1.6
2.2
2.7
2.6
2.9
1.9
2.2
0.8
1.7
1.2
2.0
1.4
1.3
1.1
0.7
0.3
0.2 1.7
2.0
0.2
Ononis type
1.2
1.9
0.2
0.2
Onobrychis
LAMIACEAE
P14
0.2
0.2
Dorycnium type
HYPERICA CEAE
P13
KANTHAROS
0.4
0.8
Anthyllis
Melilotus
P12
0.2
0.2
Mercurialis
FABACEAE
P11
1.4
Euphor biaceae undiff.
Astragalus
P10
ROOM 2
Chenopo diaceae undiff.
CONVULVU LACEAE
EUPHORBIA CEAE
P1
0.2
0.2
2.4
2.4
0.8
0.2 0.6
0.2
0.6
0.3
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.4
0.2 0.2
1.1 0.4
0.5
Table D2 cont. Pollen spectra of samples collected from the different contexts of Fattoria Fabrizio.
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 428
5/30/14 7:40 AM
Archaeobotanical Analyses: Pollen, NPPs, and Seeds/fruit Sample no. Archaeological context LEMNACEAE
P1
P3
P4
SURFACE SEDIMENTS
P5
P6
P7
P8
P9
ROOM 1
P10
P11
P12
ROOM 2
1.2
Asparagus cf.
2.2
0.4
0.2
1.2
0.6
Asphodelus
0.2
Liliaceae undiff.
2.0
0.2
0.2
0.8
0.2
P13
0.2
0.7
0.2
0.2
1.5
0.7
0.9
1.1
0.2 0.4
2.4
0.7
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.2
0.2 0.5
0.3
0.8
0.5
0.2
0.7
1.1 0.2
Muscari Scilla cf. LYTHRACEAE
Lythrum
NYMPHAEA CEAE
Nymphaea
PAPAVERA CEAE
Papaver rhoeas type
PLANTAGI NACEAE
POACEAE
POLYGON ACEAE
0.3 0.2
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.2
0.5
1.3
1.0
2.2
1.1
0.7
1.5
2.0
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.8
1.8
0.5
0.3
0.4
Plantago lanceolata type
0.6
1.0
0.6
1.9
0.8
2.0
3.3
2.0
1.4
Avena/ Triticum group
0.8
1.4
3.1
1.4
1.8
0.9
1.1
0.2
0.6
0.5
0.7
0.5
Hordeum group
0.4
0.2
1.0
0.5
1.0
0.9
0.6
0.8
1.4
1.3
1.4
0.7
0.4 23.7
39.7
0.5 16.1
15.4
20.9
15.6
16.4
14.9
14.1
Polygonum persicaria cf.
Potamoge ton
PRIMULA CEAE
Anagallis
16.1
12.4
0.4 0.2
Rumex
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.2
19.7
19.6
20.9
0.2
0.2
0.2 0.4
0.2
0.2 0.2
Adonis
0.2
Helleborus RANUNCULA CEAE
1.1
1.4
POTA MOGETO NACEAE
0.9
0.3
0.2
Phragmites australis cf.
0.2 0.2
Plantago undiff.
Poaceae wild grass group
P14
KANTHAROS
Lemna Allium type
LILIACEAE
P2
429
Ranun culaceae undiff.
5.9
2.6
2.7
3.2
3.4
2.8
3.1
3.1
2.8
6.3
Ranunculus type
2.0
1.8
1.7
0.5
2.0
0.9
0.6
0.5
1.0
1.3
3.1
3.1
3.2
3.3
0.2
0.6
0.4
Table D2 cont. Pollen spectra of samples collected from the different contexts of Fattoria Fabrizio.
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 429
5/30/14 7:40 AM
Appendix D
430 Sample no. Archaeological context
P1
P2
Filipendula
0.2
0.2
Potentilla
1.0
0.2
Rosaceae undiff.
1.6
1.4
0.4
2.8
1.8
0.7
1.1
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.6
0.4
Saxifraga cf.
1.0
0.4
URTICACEAE
Euphrasia type
0.4
Linaria type
0.2
Scrophu lariaceae undiff.
2.8
Verbascum cf.
0.6
0.8
Solanum
0.2
Typha/ Spar ganium
0.6
0.8
1.3
1.3
1.1
0.2
P10
P11
P12
P13
0.3
0.2
P14
KANTHAROS
0.2 0.4
SAXIFRAGA CEAE
P9
ROOM 2
0.2
0.4
P8
ROOM 1
0.4
0.4
0.4 0.4
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.4
1.4
2.2
1.4
1.2
1.5
0.6
0.5
0.8
0.5
0.4
0.7
0.3
0.7
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.9
0.8
0.6
0.5
0.7
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.4
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.9
0.2
0.4
1.3
3.1
1.6
0.2
1.5
1.9
2.5
1.4
0.9
0.5
1.6
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.8
0.6
0.8
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.2 0.3
Typha latifolia type Urtica dioi ca type
P7
0.9
Galium type
TYPHACEAE
P6
0.4
RUBIACEAE
SOLANACEAE
P5
0.2
Sanguisor ba minor cf.
SCROPHULA RIACEAE
P4
SURFACE SEDIMENTS
Alchemilla/ Aphanes type
ROSACEAE
P3
0.2 0.2
0.4
2.4
2.2
1.5
0.2 0.4
Urtica cf. pilulifera
1.4
1.2
0.8
0.2
0.2
1.0
0.7
1.2
0.9
0.6
0.7
0.7
2.2
0.6
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.9
0.7
2.0
Unknown
1.2
0.4
0.6
0.9
1.4
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.6
1.8
1.4
1.1
1.3
1.5
Undetermin able pollen
5.3
2.8
3.1
2.8
3.4
2.6
2.8
3.6
8.0
4.7
4.3
5.3
8.4
6.8
Pollen Sum
507
509
523
570
506
545
641
637
503
558
582
548
465
455
Number of taxa
52
57
57
66
61
58
69
61
62
61
58
57
61
62
Table D2 cont. Pollen spectra of samples collected from the different contexts of Fattoria Fabrizio.
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 430
5/30/14 7:40 AM
Archaeobotanical Analyses: Pollen, NPPs, and Seeds/fruit Sample no. Archaeological context
P1
P2
P4
SURFACE SEDIMENTS
Depth (cm) Concentration (p/g)
P3
P5
P6
P7
P8
431 P9
ROOM 1
P10
P11
P12
ROOM 2
50
57
70
80
85
90
60
65
72
80
13549
22029
10267
11360
20129
19932
25661
16087
12208
34478
16446
23334
Trees %
12.8
9.0
14.4
14.7
15.6
13.2
15.0
14.5
15.6
18.4
17.8
16.1
Shrubs + lianas %
12.2
1.6
6.1
3.4
3.4
4.2
4.0
3.9
8.5
8.1
9.9
4.3
Herbaceous plants %
75.0
89.4
79.5
81.9
81.0
82.6
81.0
81.6
75.9
73.5
72.3
79.6
Pollen Sum
507
509
523
570
506
545
641
637
503
558
582
548
52
57
57
66
61
58
69
61
62
61
58
57
5.9
1.4
5.5
5.6
6.5
4.0
4.1
4.2
5.8
5.9
5.2
5.1
Number of taxa Mixed oakwood
Carpinus betulus, Cory lus, Ostrya/carp or. type, Quercus deciduous
Mediter ranean plants
Pistacia cf. lentiscus, Q. ilex type, Myrtus, Olea, Phillyrea
10.8
2.9
7.2
5.3
4.7
5.7
5.0
4.7
6.7
7.0
12.4
7.1
Juniperus + Che nopodia ceae
Juniperus type, Beta type, Chenopodium type, Chenopodiaceae undiff.
0.2
1.8
1.1
1.0
1.4
1.1
1.7
1.6
1.8
0.3
1.0
1.8
Wet environ ments
Alnus, Salix, Cyperaceae, Lemna, Nymphaea, Phragmites australis cf., Potamogeton, Typha/ Sparganium, Typha latifolia type
0.6
2.5
0.6
0.2
1.4
0.5
1.7
0.8
1.0
0.2
1.2
1.1
LPPI Local Pastoral Pollen Indicators
Asteroideae undiff., Aster type, Matricaria type, Cichorioideae, Cirsium type, Galium type, Potentilla type, Ranunculaceae
12.2
13.8
24.7
25.8
2.8
25.3
20.7
23.5
20.1
21.1
21.6
16.1
Cereals
Avena/Triticum group, Hordeum group
1.2
1.6
4.0
1.9
2.8
1.8
1.7
0.9
2.0
1.8
2.1
1.3
wAI - wild Anthro pogenic Indicators
Artemisia, Centaurea nigra type, Chenopodi um type, Convolvulus, Mercurialis, Papaver rhoeas type, Planta go lanceolata type, Plantago undiff., Rumex, Anagallis, Alchemilla/ Aphanes type, Galium type, Urtica dioica type
2.8
4.9
3.8
6.0
5.1
7.5
8.4
5.3
3.6
4.1
5.5
9.7
RHAPI Regional Human Activities Pollen Indicators
Artemisia, Avena/Triti cum group, Hordeum group, Chenopodiace ae, Plantago lanceolata type, Rumex sp., Urtica dioica type
2.4
4.1
6.3
6.8
6.7
6.4
8.4
6.0
6.0
3.2
5.3
7.3
Table D3 Main pollen sums useful for environmental and past economy reconstructions at Fattoria Fabrizio. Samples P13–P14 from the kantharos were excluded because they are not suitable for palaeoenvironmental reconstructions.
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 431
5/30/14 7:40 AM
Appendix D
432 Taxa
Types Fungal spores
P1
P2
P3
P4
SURFACE SEDIMENTS
Cercophora type
HdV-112
Chaetomium
HdV-7A
Coniochaeta cf. C. lignaria
HdV-172
Diporotheca
HdV-143
Gelasinospora
HdV-1
Glomus cf. fasciculatum
HdV-207
Pleospora
HdV-3
Podospora type
HdV-368
Sporomiella type
HdV-113
Sordaria type
HdV-55A and 55B
Ustulina deusta
HdV-44
Valsaria variospora type
HdV-140
x
x
HdV-18
x
x
HdV-20
x
P5
P6
P7
P8
P9
ROOM 1
x
P10
P11
ROOM 2 x
P12
P13
KANTHAROS
x
x
x
x x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x x
x
x
x x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x x
x x
x
x
x
x
x
HdV-201 (fragment)
x
P14
x x x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Algae Botryococcus sp.
HdV-901
x x
Concentricystis Spirogyra sp.
x HdV-181
Testate amoebae
x
x
x
x
x x
x
x x
x x
x
x
x
x
x
Zoomicroremains Trogoderma sp.
x
Table D4 Main NPPs found in the pollen samples from Fattoria Fabrizio (HdV = Hugo-de-Vries Laboratory, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands).
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 432
5/30/14 7:40 AM
Archaeobotanical Analyses: Pollen, NPPs, and Seeds/fruit
Taxa
Type of remains
Preservation
Measurement (mm)
433
Number of remains
Concentration (sf/l)
Calendula cf. arvensis L.
Fruit
u
3.7
5
1
Onopordum sp.
Fruit
u
4.7
37
7.4
BRASSICACEAE
Reseda lutea L.
Seed
u
1.5
4
0.8
CARYOPHYLLACEAE
Silene gallica L.
Seed
u
0.9
1
0.2
CHENOPODIACEAE
Chenopodiaceae
Fruit
u
1.1
2
0.4
Euphorbia helioscopia L.
Seed
u
2.0
25
5
Euphorbia peplus L.
Seed
u
1.1
2
0.4
Fabaceae undiff.
Seed
u
1.9
8
1.6
Genista sp. cf.
Seed
u
1.8
9
1.8
ASTERACEAE
EUPHORBIACEAE
FABACEAE
cf. Lotus (◊)
Seed
u
1.6
150
30.0
Lamiaceae undiff.
Seed
u
1.2
2
0.4
Mentha cf. suavolens/ longifolia
Fruit
u
0.8
5
1.0
Ficus carica L.
Fruit
u
1.2
2
0.4
Morus nigra L. cf.
Fruit
u
1.7
1
0.2
PAPAVERACEAE
Fumaria sp.
Fruit
u
1.7
1
0.2
POACEAE
Poaceae
Fruit
u
1.7
12
2.4
PRIMULACEAE
Anagallis arvensis L.
Seed
u
1.2
95
19.0
SOLANACEAE
Solanum nigrum L.
Seed
u
1.8
1
0.2
12
2.4
374
74.8
28
5.6
LAMIACEAE
MORACEAE
Not determined
u, pm
Total Undeterminable
c, pm
Table D5 Seeds and fruits from the sample M15 collected from the floor of Room 1. State of preservation: c = charred; u = uncharred; pm = partially mineralized. ◊ = very well preserved, possible contamination?
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 433
5/30/14 7:40 AM
FF_32_appendix-d_05feb14.indd 434
5/30/14 7:40 AM
References
AA AION
Periodicals/Series/Compendia
AJA ASAA AttiMGrecia Atti Taranto BAR-IS BdA BBasil BICS BSA CRAI CVA DialArch JAS JHS LibyaAnt LIMC MAAR MEFRA NSc OJA PBSR PP RA RIN RivFil RM SicArch Siris StAnt StEtr Taras ThesCRA
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 437
Archäologischer Anzeiger Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli, Sezione Filologico-Letteraria American Journal of Archaeology Annuario della Scuola Archeologica di Atene Atti e Memorie della Società Magna Grecia Atti del Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia (Taranto) British Archaeological Reports – International Series Bollettino d’Arte del Ministero per i Beni Culturali e Ambientali Bollettino Storico della Basilicata Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies, University of London Annual of the British School at Athens Comptes rendus des séances de l’Academie des inscriptions et belles-lettres Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum Dialoghi di Archeologia Journal of Archaeological Science Journal of Hellenic Studies Libya Antiqua Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome Mélanges d’École française de Rome, Antiquité Notizie degli Scavi di Antichità Oxford Journal of Archaeology Papers of the British School at Rome La Parola del Passato Revue Archéologique Rivista Italiana di Numismatica e Scienze Affini Rivista di Filologia e di Istruzione Classica Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Römische Abteilung Sicilia Archeologia Studi e ricerche della Scuola di Specializzazione in Archeologia di Matera Studi di Antichità Studi Etruschi Taras. Rivista di archeologia Thesaurus Cultus et Rituum Antiquorum
Short Title Abbreviations
2006–2007 Annual Report Institute of Classical Archaeology, The University of Texas at Austin, ed. 2008. The Study of Ancient Territories. Chersonesos & South Italy, Report for 2006–2007. Austin: ICA. 2008–2011 Annual Report Institute of Classical Archaeology, The University of Texas at Austin, ed. 2011. The Study of Ancient Territories. Chersonesos & South Italy. Report for 2008–2011. Austin: ICA. ABV Beazley, J. D. 1956. Attic Black-Figure Vase-Painters. Ox ford: Clarendon Press. Agora V Robinson, H. S. 1959. Pottery of the Roman Period: Chronology. Athenian Agora 5. Princeton: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Agora VIII Brann, E. T. H. 1962. Late Geometric and Protoattic Pottery: Mid 8th to Late 7th Century B.C. Athenian Agora 8. Princeton: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Agora XII Sparkes, B. A., and L. Talcott. 1970. Black and Plain Pottery of the 6th, 5th, and 4th Centuries B.C. Athenian Agora 12. Princeton: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Agora XXIX Rotroff, S. I. 1997. Hellenistic Pottery. Athenian and Imported Wheelmade Table Ware and Related Material. Athenian Agora 29. Princeton: The American School of Clas sical Studies at Athens. Agora XXXIII Rotroff, S. I. 2006. Hellenistic Pottery, the Plain Wares. Athenian Agora 33. Princeton: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Agriculture in Ancient Greece Wells, B., ed. 1992. Agriculture in Ancient Greece. Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens, 16-17 May, 1990. Acta Instituti Atheniensis Regni Sueciae Ser. 4, No. 42. Stockholm: Swedish Institute of Athens. Aitna 2 AA. VV. 1996. Aitna. Atti delle Giornate di Studio su gli Insediamenti Rurali nella Sicilia Antica. Quaderni di Topografia Antica 2. Caltagirone 1992. Catania: Greco.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
438
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
Amphores Romaines Università degli Studi di Siena, ed. 1989. Amphores Romaines et histoire économique: dix ans de recherche. Actes du Colloque (Sienne 22–24 mai 1986). Collection de l’École française, 114. Rome: L’École Française de Rome. Paris: Diffusion de Boccard. Ancient Greek Houses Ault, B. A., and L. C. Nevett, eds. 2005. Ancient Greek Houses and Households: Chronological, Regional, and Social Diversity. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Antichi Peucezi Riccardi, A., ed. 2003. Gli antichi Peucezi a Bitonto. Docu menti ed immagini dalla necropoli di via Traiana. Bari: Edipuglia. Archeologia dei Messapi D’Andria, F., ed. 1990. Archeologia dei Messapi. Le mostre, i cataloghi 1. Bari: Edipuglia. Archeologia del Mediterraneo Fiorentini, G., M. Caltabiano, and A. Calderone, eds. 2003. Archeologia del Mediterraneo. Studi in onore di Ernesto De Miro. Bibliotheca Archaeologica 35. Rome: L’Er ma di Bretschneider. Archeologia di una città Andreassi, G., and F. Radina, eds. 1988. Archeologia di una città: Bari dalle origini al X secolo. Bari: Edipuglia. Archeologia di un sapere Settis, S., and M. C. Parra, eds. 2005. Magna Graecia. Archeologia di un sapere. Milan: Electa. Armi Bottini, A., ed. 1994. Armi. Gli strumenti della guerra in Lucania. Bari: Edipuglia. Arte e artigianato Lippolis, E., ed. 1996. Arte e artigianato in Magna Grecia. Naples: Electa. ARV Beazley, J. D. 1963. Attic Red-Figure Vase-Painters. Ox ford: Clarendon Press. Attività archeologica Lattanzi, E. ed. 1980. Attività archeologica in Basilicata 1964–1977. Scritti in onore di Dinu Adamesteanu. Matera: Meta. Ausculum I Fabbri, M., and M. Osanna. eds. 2003. Ausculum I. L’a bitato sulla collina del Serpente di Ascoli Satriano. Foggia: Claudio Grenzi. Cairano Bailo Modesti, G. 1980. Cairano nell’età arcaica. L’abitato e la necropoli. AION 1. Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli. Caracausi Grasso, L. 1989. Caracausi. Un insediamento rupestre nel territorio di Lentini. Cronache di Archeologia 28: 3–172.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 438
Carta archeologica Sinni 2 Quilici, L., and S. Quilici Gigli, eds. 2002. Carta archeo logica della valle del Sinni 2. Da Valsinni a San Giorgio Lucano e Cersosimo. Atlante Tematico di Topografia Antica Suppl. X/2000–2002. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Carta archeologica Sinni 3 Quilici, L., and S. Quilici Gigli, eds. 2001. Carta archeologica della valle del Sinni 3. Dalle colline di Noepoli ai Monti di Colobraro. Atlante Tematico di Topografia Antica Suppl. X/2000–2002. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Carta archeologica Sinni 4 Quilici, L., and S. Quilici Gigli, eds. 2001. Carta archeologica della valle del Sinni 4. Zona di Senise. Atlante Te matico di Topografia Antica Suppl. X/2000–2002. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Carta archeologica Sinni 5 Quilici, L., and S. Quilici Gigli, eds. 2001. Carta archeologica della valle del Sinni 5. Da Castronuovo di S. Andrea a Chiaromonte, Caldera, Teana e Fardella. Atlante Tematico di Topografia Antica Suppl. X/2000–2002. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Carta archeologica Sinni 6 Quilici, L., and S. Quilici Gigli, eds. 2001. Carta archeo logica della valle del Sinni 6. Il Massiccio del Pollino e le colline di Francavilla in Sinni, San Costantino Albanese, San Severino Lucano, Agromonte Magnano e Mileo. Atlante Tematico di Topografia Antica Suppl. X/2000–2002. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Ceglie Peuceta I Miroslav Marin, M., R. Moreno Cassano, A. Fornaro, and M. Chelotti. 1982. Ceglie Peuceta I. Bari: Dedalo. Ceramiche attiche Sena Chiesa, G., ed. 2006. Ceramiche attiche e magnogreche: Collezione Banca Intesa. Catalogo ragionato, I–III. Mi lan: Electa Mondadori. Ceramiche fini Frère, D., ed. 2007. Ceramiche fini a decoro subgeometrico nel VI sec. A.C. in Etruria meridionale e in Campania. Collection de l’École Française de Rome 389. Rome: L’École Française de Rome. Civiltà antiche Tocco, G. ed. 1976. Civiltà antiche del Medio Ofanto. Na ples: La Buona Stampa. Civita di Tricarico de Cazanove, O. 2008. Civita di Tricarico 1. Quartier de la maison du monolithe et l’enceinte intermédiaire. Collection de l’École Française de Rome 409. Rome: École Française de Rome. Con il fuso Russo, A., ed. 2006. Con il fuso e la conocchia: la fattoria lucana di Montemurro e l’edilizia domestica nel IV secolo a.C. Potenza: Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeologici della Basilicata.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
References Corinth VII.3 Edwards, G. R. 1975. Corinthian Hellenistic Pottery. Corinth 7.3. Princeton: The American School of Classi cal Studies at Athens. Corinth XVIII.1 Pemberton, G. E., with K. Warner Slane. 1989. The Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore. The Greek Pottery. Corinth 18.1. Princeton: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Cozzo Presepe du Plat Taylor, J. et al. 1983. The Excavations at Cozzo Presepe (1969–72). In Metaponto II, 191–406. Cuma Cozzo, M., B. D’Agostino, and L. Del Verme. 2006. Cuma. Le fortificazioni. 2. I materiali dai terrapieni arcaici. Quaderni di AION. Archeologia e Storia Antica 16. Naples: Soprintendenza Napoli e Caserta; Università di Napoli L’Orientale. Da Leukania a Lucania Torelli, M., and L. de Lachenal, eds. 1993. Da Leukania a Lucania. La Lucania centro-orientale fra Pirro e i GiulioClaudii. Venosa: Osanna. Da Zancle 1 Bacci, G. M., and G. Tigano, eds. 2000. Da Zancle a Messina, un percorso archeologico attraverso gli scavi. 1. Messina: Sicania. Da Zancle 2 Bacci, G. M., and G. Tigano, eds. 2002. Da Zancle a Messina, un percorso archeologico attraverso gli scavi. 2. Messina: Sicania. DarSag Daremberg, C., and E. Saglio. 1875. Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines. Paris: Hachette Livre. Demokratie Schuller, W., W. Hoepfner, and E. L. Schwandner, eds. 1989. Demokratie und Architektur: der hippodamische Städtebau und die Entstehung der Demokratie: Konstanzer Symposion vom 17. bis 19. Wohnen in der klassischen Polis 2. München: Deutscher Kunstverlag. De re aedificatoria Alberti, L. B. 1452. De re aedificatoria. In L’architettura. De re aedificatoria di Leon Battista Alberti. Trans. and ed. G. Orlandi. Ed. P. Portoghesi. Reprinted in 1966. Milan: Il Polifilo. Domestic Architecture Kent, S., ed. 1990. Domestic Architecture and the Use of Space: an Interdisciplinary Cross-cultural Study. Cam bridge: University Press. Excavations at Otranto D’Andria, F., and D. Whitehouse, eds. 1992. The Excavation at Otranto. II. The Finds, Galatina: Congedo. Forentum I Giorgi, M., S. Martinelli, M. Osanna, and A. Russo. 1988. Forentum I. Le necropoli di Lavello. Venosa: Osanna.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 439
439
Forentum II Bottini, A., and M. P. Fresa. 1991. Forentum II. L’acropoli in età classica. Venosa: Osanna. Fourth Century Gualtieri, M., ed. 1993. Fourth Century B.C. Magna Graecia. Jonsered: Paul Åströms förlag. Fratte Greco, G., and A. Pontrandolfo, eds. 1990. Fratte. Un insediamento etrusco-campano. Modena: Panini. Gli ori De Juliis, E. M., A. Alessio, A. D’Amicis, A. Dell’Aglio, D. Graepler, E. Lippolis, L. Masiello, and T. Schojer, eds. 1986. Gli ori di Taranto in età ellenistica. Taranto: Scorpione. Grammichele Barra Bagnasco, M., ed. 2006. Da Terravecchia di Grammichele a Occhiolà: archeologia di un insediamento della Sicilia centro-orientale: campagne di scavo 2000–2001. Ales sandria: Dell’Orso. Gravina I Small, A. M., ed. 1992. An Iron Age and Roman Republican Settlement on Botromagno, Gravina di Puglia. Excavations of 1965–1974. Vol. I: The Site. Archaeological Monographs of the British School at Rome 5. London: British School at Rome. Gravina II Small, A. M., ed. 1992. An Iron Age and Roman Republican Settlement on Botromagno, Gravina di Puglia. Excavations of 1965–1974. Vol. II: Artifacts. Archaeological Monographs of the British School at Rome 5. London: Brit ish School at Rome. Gravina III du Plat Taylor, J., P. G. Dorrell, and A. M. Small. 1977. Gravina di Puglia III: Houses and a Cemetery of the Iron Age and Classical Periods. Part Two. PBSR 45: 69–137. Gravisca 4 Boldrini, S. 1994. Gravisca. Scavi nel santuario greco 4. Le ceramiche ioniche. Bari: Edipuglia. Gravisca 9 Valentini, V. 1993. Le ceramiche a vernice nera. Gravisca. Scavi nel santuario greco 9. Bari: Edipuglia. Greci e Indigeni Bottini, P., ed. 1998. Greci e Indigeni tra Noce e Lao. Lavel lo: Alfagrafica Volonnino. Greci, Enotri e Lucani Bianco, S., A. Bottini, A. Pontrandolfo, A. Russo Ta gliente, and E. Setari, eds. 1996. I Greci in Occidente. Greci, Enotri e Lucani nella Basilicata meridionale. Naples: Electa. Himera II Allegro, N. 1976. Himera, II: Campagne di scavo 19661973. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Himera III Alliata, V., O. Belvedere, et al. 1988. Himera, III: Prospezione archeologica nel territorio. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
440
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
Incoronata 3 1995. Ricerche archeologiche all’Incoronata di Metaponto. 3, L’oikos greco del saggio S: Lo scavo e i reperti. Milan: Co mune di Milano, Settore cultura e spettacolo. Incoronata 5 1997. Ricerche archeologiche all’Incoronata di Metaponto. 5, L’oikos greco del saggio H: Lo scavo e i reperti. Milan: Co mune di Milano, Settore cultura e spettacolo. Kaulonía Parra, M. C., ed. 2001. Kaulonía, Caulonia, Stilida (e oltre). Contributi storici, archeologici e topografici, I (I.1; I.2). Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa. Classe di Lettere e Filosofia. 4th series. Quaderni 11. Pisa: Stam peria e Legatoria Pisana. Kaulonia I Tréziny, H., ed. 1989. Kaulonia I. Sondages sur la fortification nord (1982–1985). Cahiers du Centre Jean Bérard 13. Naples: Centre Jean Bérard. La fattoria Carandini, A., ed. 2006. La fattoria e la villa dell’Auditorium nel quartiere Flaminio di Roma. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Lakonikà Pelagatti, P., and C. M. Stibbe, eds. 1992. Lakonikà: ricerche e nuovi materiali di ceramica laconica. Bollettino d’Arte. Suppl. 64. Rome: Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato. Laos 1 Greco, E., S. Luppino, and A. Schnapp, eds. 1989. Laos I: Scavi a Marcellina 1973–1985. Taranto: Istituto per la storia e l’archeologia della Magna Grecia. Lattara 4 Py, M., ed. 1991. Lattara. Mélanges d’Histoire et d’Archéo logie de Lattes 4. Lattes: Associacion pour la Recherche Archéologique en Languedoc Oriental. Lattara 6 Py, M., ed. 1993. Dictionnaire des céramiques antiques (VII s. av. n. è.- VII s. de n. n. è.) en Méditerranée nord-occidentale (Provence, Languedoc, Ampurdan). Lattes: Associacion pour la Recherche Archéologique en Languedoc Oriental. Les Céramiques communes Bats, M., ed. 1996. Les Céramiques communes de Campanie et de Narbonnaise (I s. av. J.-C.-II s. ap. J.C.). La vaissselle de cuisine et de table. Actes des Journées d’étude organisées par le Centre Jean Bérard et la Soprintendenza Archeologica per le Province di Napoli e Caserta, Napoli 1994. Naples: Centre Jean Bérard. Les Céramiques de la Grèce Centre Jean Berard, Institut Français de Naples, Cen tre National de la Recherche Scientifique (France), eds. 1978. Les Céramiques de la Grèce de l’Est et leur diffusion en Occident (Centre Jean Bérard. Institut Français de Naples 6–9 Juillet 1976). Naples: Centre Jean Bérard.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 440
Living off the Chora Carter, J. C., ed. 2003. Living off the Chora: Diet and Nutrition at Metaponto. Austin: Institute of Classical Ar chaeology. Lo spazio del potere Osanna M., L. Colangelo, and G. Carollo, eds. 2009. Lo spazio del potere. La residenza ad abside, l’anaktoron, l’epi scopio a Torre di Satriano. Venosa: Osanna. Lo spazio del rito Nava, M. L., and M. Osanna, eds. 2005. Lo spazio del rito: santuari e culti in Italia meridionale tra indigeni e Greci. Atti delle giornate di studio, Matera, 28 e 29 giugno 2002. Bari: Edipuglia. Locri II Barra Bagnasco, M., ed. 1989. Locri Epizefiri II. Gli isolati I2 e I3 dell’area di Centocamere. Florence: Le Lettere. Locri III Barra Bagnasco, M., ed. 1989. Locri Epizefiri III. Cultura Materiale e vita quotidiana. Florence: Le Lettere. Locri IV Barra Bagnasco, M., ed. 1992. Locri Epizefiri IV. Lo scavo di Marasà sud. Il sacello tardo arcaico e la “casa dei leoni.” Florence: Le Lettere. Locri V Barra Bagnasco, M. 2009. Locri Epizefiri 5. Terrecotte fi gurate dall’abitato. Alessandria: Dell’Orso. Magna Grecia e Sicilia Barra Bagnasco, M., E. De Miro, and A. Pinzone, eds. 1999. Magna Grecia e Sicilia. Stato degli studi e prospettive di ricerca. Atti dell’incontro di studi. Messina 2–4 dicembre 1996. Pelorias 4. Messina: Dipartimento di Scienze Dell’Antichità dell’Università di Messina. Megale Hellas Pugliese Carratelli, G., ed. 1983. Megale Hellas. Storia e civiltà della Magna Grecia. Antica Madre 6. Milan: Scheiwiller. Megara Hyblaea 2 Vallet, G., ed. 1978. Megara Hyblaea, 2. La ceramique archaique. Paris: Boccard. Meligunìs Lipára II Bernabò Brea, L., and M. Cavalier. 1965. Meligunìs Lipára 2. Palermo: Flaccovio. Meligunìs Lipára IV Bernabò Brea, L., and M. Cavalier. 1980. Meligunìs Lipára 4. L’acropoli di Lipari nella preistoria. 3 vols. Pa lermo: Flaccovio. Meligunìs Lipára V Bernabò Brea, L., and M. Cavalier. 1980. Meligunìs Lipára 5. L’acropoli di Lipari nella preistoria. 3 vols. Pa lermo: Flaccovio. Meligunìs Lipára IX Bernabò Brea, L., M. Cavalier, and F. Villard. 1998. Meligunìs Lipára 9. Topografia di Lipari in età greca e romana.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
References 2 vols. Palermo: Regione Siciliana, Assessorato ai beni culturali ed ambientali e della pubblica istruzione. Meligunìs Lipára XI Bernabò Brea, L., M. Cavalier, and F. Villard. 2001. Meligunìs Lipára 11. Gli scavi nella necropoli greca e romana di Lipari nell’area del terreno vescovile. Palermo: Flaccovio. Metaponto/Archeologia De Siena, A., ed. 2001. Metaponto. Archeologia di una colonia greca. Taranto: Scorpione. Metaponto I Adamesteanu, D., D. Mertens, and F. D’Andria. 1980. Metaponto I. NSc, 8th series, 29 (1975), Suppl. Rome: Ac cademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Metaponto II Adamesteanu, D., B. Chiartano, J. C. Carter, and E. Macnamara. 1983. Metaponto II. Notizie degli Scavi di Antichità, 8th series, 31 (1977). Rome: Accademia Na zionale dei Lincei. Mille Anni De Juliis, E. M., ed. 1997. Mille anni di ceramica in Pu glia. Bari: Edipuglia. Modalità insediative Lo Cascio, E., and A. Storchi Marino, eds. 2001. Moda lità insediative e strutture agrarie nell’Italia meridionale in età romana. Pragmateiai 7. Bari: Edipuglia. Monte Irsi Small, A., ed. 1977. Monte Irsi, Southern Italy: The Canadian Excavations in the Iron Age and Roman Sites, 1971– 1972. BAR Supplementary Series 20. Oxford: BAR. Monte Sannace Ciancio, A., E. M. De Juliis, A. Riccardi, and F. Rossi, eds. 1989. Monte Sannace: Gli scavi dell’acropoli (1978– 1983). Galatina: Congedo. Mozia Famà, M. L., ed. 2002. Mozia: gli scavi nella “zona A” dell’abitato. Bari: Edipuglia. Museo Reggio Lattanzi, E., ed. 1987. Il Museo Nazionale di Reggio Ca labria. Rome/Reggio Calabria: Gangemi. Museo di Taranto Alessio, A., ed. 1988. Museo di Taranto: Cento anni di archeologia. Taranto: Scorpione. Museo Taranto I.3 Dell’Aglio, A., ed. 1997. Catalogo del Museo Nazionale Archeologico di Taranto. I:3. Atleti e guerrieri. Tradizioni aristocratiche a Taranto tra VI e V sec. a.C. Catalogo della mostra, Taranto 1994. Taranto: Scorpione. Museo Taranto II.1 Dell’Aglio, A., and E. Lippolis. 1992. Catalogo del Museo Nazionale Archeologico di Taranto. II:1, Ginosa e Laterza: La documentazione archeologica dal VII al III sec. a.C. Scavi 1900–1980. Taranto: Scorpione.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 441
441
Museo Taranto II.2 De Juliis, E. M., ed. 2006. Catalogo del Museo Nazionale Archeologico di Taranto II:2, Rutigliano I: la necropoli di contrada Purgatorio, scavo 1978. Taranto: Scorpione. Museo Taranto III.1 Lippolis, E., ed. 1994. Catalogo del Museo Nazionale Archeologico di Taranto III:1. Taranto. La Necropoli: aspetti e problemi della documentazione archeologica tra VII e I secolo a.C. Taranto: Scorpione. Mutual Interaction Rapaport, A., ed. 1976. The Mutual Interaction of People and their Build Environment. A Cross-Cultural Perspective. The Hague/Paris: Mouton. Necropoleis Carter, J. C., ed. 1998. The Chora of Metaponto: The Necropoleis. 2 vols. Austin: University of Texas Press. Nella terra degli Enotri La Torre, G. F., and A. Colicelli, eds. 1999. Nella terra degli Enotri. Atti del Convegno di studi, Tortona, 18–19 aprile 1998. Paestum: Pandemos. Olynthus VIII Robinson, D. M., and J. W. Graham. 1938. Excavations at Olynthus VIII. The Hellenic House: a Study of the Houses Found at Olynthus with a Detailed Account of Those Excavated in 1931 and 1934. Johns Hopkins University Studies in Archaeology 25. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins. Olynthus XIII Robinson, D. M. 1950. Excavations at Olynthus XIII. Vases Found in 1934 and 1938. Johns Hopkins University Studies in Archaeology 38. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins. Oppido Mamertina Costamagna, L., and P. Visonà, eds. 1999. Oppido Mamertina: Ricerche archeologiche nel territorio e in contrada Mella. Rome: Gangemi. Ordona VII/2 Iker, R., 1986. Ordona VII/2. Les tombes dauniennes. Etudes de philologie, d’archéologie et d’histoire anciennes 24. Brussels/Rome: Academia Belgica. Palinuro II Naumann, R., B. Neutsch, F. Hiller and E. Naumann, eds. 1960. Palinuro: Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen, II. RM 3-4. Heidelberg: F. H. Kerle. Paralipomena Beazley, J. D. 1971. Paralipomena. Additions to Attic Black-Figure Vase-Painters and to Attic Red-Figure VasePainters. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Pomarico Vecchio I Barra Bagnasco, M., ed. 1997. Pomarico Vecchio I. Abitato, mura, necropoli, materiali. Galatina: Congedo. Popoli anellenici Adamesteanu, D., E. Lissi Caronna, R. R. Holloway, J.-P. Morel, and G. Tocco. 1971. Popoli anellenici in Basilicata. Soprintendenza alle Antichità della Basilicata – Potenza. Naples: La Buona Stampa.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
442
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
Poseidonia-Paestum II Greco, E., and D. Theodorescu. 1983. Poseidonia-Paestum II. L’Agora. Rome: École Française de Rome. Problèmes de la terre Finley, M. I., ed. 1973. Problèmes de la terre en Grèce an cienne. Civilisations et sociétés 33. Paris/La Haye: Mouton De Gruyter. Ricerche sulla casa D’Andria, F., and K. Mannino, eds. 1996. Ricerche sulla casa in Magna Grecia e in Sicilia. Atti del Colloquio – Lecce, 23–24 giugno 1992. Università di Lecce, Scuola di Specializzazione in Archeologia Classica e Medioevale. Archeologia e Storia 5. Galatina: Congedo. Rituali Nava, M. L., and M. Osanna, eds. 2001. Rituali per una dea lucana. Il santuario di Torre di Satriano. Potenza: So printendenza Archeologica della Basilicata. Roccagloriosa I Gualtieri, M., and H. Fracchia, eds. 1990. Roccagloriosa I. L’abitato: scavo e ricognizione topografica (1976–1986). Bibliothèque de l’Institut Français de Naples. Série 2.8. Naples: Centre Jean Bérard. Roccagloriosa II Gualtieri, M., and H. Fracchia, eds. 2002. Roccagloriosa II. L’oppidum lucano e il territorio. Collection du Centre Jean Bérard 20. Naples: Centre Jean Bérard. Samos III Furtwängler, A., and H. J. Kienast. 1989. Samos III. Der Nordbau im Heraion von Samos. Bonn: Habelt. Samos IV Isler, H. P. 1978. Samos IV. Das Archaische Nordtor und seine Umgebung im Heraion von Samos. Bonn: Habelt. San Biagio Lapadula, E., and J. C. Carter, ed. 2012. The Chora of Metaponto 4: The Late Roman Farmhouse at San Biagio. Austin: University of Texas Press. Sibari I Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. 1969. Sibari I. Saggi di scavo al Parco del Cavallo (1969). NSc 8th series, 23, Suppl. 3. Rome: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Sibari II Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. 1970. Sibari II. Scavi al Parco del Cavallo (1960–62; 1969–70) e agli Stombi (1969–70). NSc 8th series, 24, Suppl. 3. Rome: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Sibari III Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. 1972. Sibari III. Rapporto preliminare della campagna di scavo: Stombi, Casa Bianca, Parco del Cavallo, San Mauro (1971). NSc 8th series, 26, Suppl. 3. Rome: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Sibari IV Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. 1974. Sibari IV. Relazione preliminare della campagna di scavo: Stombi,
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 442
Parco del Cavallo, Prolungamento Strada, Casa Bianca (1972). NSc 8th series, 28, Suppl. 3. Rome: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Sibari V Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. 1988–1989. Sibari V. Relazione preliminare delle campagne di scavo 1973 (Parco del Cavallo; Casa Bianca) e 1974 (Stombi; Incrocio; Parco del Cavallo; Prolungamento Strada; Casa Bianca). NSc, III suppl. (1988–1989). Rome: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Siris-Polieion De Siena, A., and M. Tagliente, eds. 1986. Siris-Polieion. Fonti letterarie e nuova documentazione archeologica. Incontro di studi, Policoro 8–10 giugno 1984. Galatina: Congedo. Sorgenti Lao Bottini, P. 1988. Archeologia, arte e storia alle sorgenti del Lao: catalogo della mostra. Castelluccio: un centro minore tra beni culturali e memoria storica. Matera: BMG. Storia della Basilicata 1 Adamesteanu, D., ed. 1999. Storia della Basilicata 1. L’Antichità. Bari: Laterza. Studi Adamesteanu AA. VV. 1983. Studi in onore di Dinu Adamesteanu. Ga latina: Congedo. Survey Carter, J. C., and A. Prieto, eds. 2011. The Chora of Metaponto 3: Archaeological Field Survey—Bradano to Basento. Vols. I–IV. Austin: University of Texas Press. Tarchna 2 Chiaromonte Treré C., ed. 1997. Tarquinia, Scavi sistematici nell’abitato. Campagne 1982–1988. I materiali, 1. Tarchna II. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Testimonianze Tocco, G., P. Bottini, E. Pica, and P. G. Moles, eds. 1982. Testimonianze archeologiche nel territorio di Tolve. Ma tera: BMG. Tocra Boardman, J., and J. Hayes. 1966. Excavations at Tocra, 1963–1965, The Archaic Deposits I. British School of Archaeology at Athens. Suppl. 4. Oxford: Thames and Hudson. Torre di Satriano I Osanna, M., and M. M. Sica. 2005. Torre di Satriano I: Il santuario lucano. Venosa: Osanna. Valesio I Yntema, D. 2001. Pre-Roman Valesio. Excavations of the Amsterdam Free University at Valesio, Province of Brindisi, Southern Italy. 1. The Pottery. Amsterdam: Institute of Archaeology, Free University. Verso la città Osanna, M., ed. 2009. Verso la città. Forme insediative in Lucania e nel mondo italico fra IV e III sec. a.C. Atti delle Giornate di Studio, Venosa, 13–14 maggio 2006. Venosa: Osanna.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
References Individual Works Cited
Abbott, J. T. 1997. Late Quaternary Alluviation and Soil Erosion in Southern Italy. Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin. ———. 2011. “Geomorphology and Geoarchaeology of the Metapontino.” In Survey, 31–70. Abruzzese Calabrese, G. 1996. “Taranto. La coroplastica votiva.” In Arte e artigianato, 188–205. Adamesteanu, D. 1964. “Santuario di San Biagio alla Venel la.” BdA 49: 360–61. ———. 1965. “Metaponto (Matera). Appunti fotointerpre tativi.” NSc 19, Suppl.: 179–84. ———. 1967a. “Attività delle Soprintendenze–Basilicata.” BdA 52.1: 44–50. ———. 1967b. “La documentazione archeologica in Basili cata.” Atti Taranto 7: 243–63. ———. 1967c. “Problèmes de la zone archéologique de Métaponte.” RA n.s.: 3–38. ———. 1970a. “L’attività archeologica in Basilicata.” Atti Taranto 9: 215–38. ———. 1970b. “L’agorà di Metaponto.” In Scritti di archeologia ed arte minore in onore di Carlo Maurilio Lerici. Eds. L. Cavagnaro Vanoni and S. Ponzanelli. 39–43. Milan: Fondazione Lerici. ———. 1971. “Timmari.” In Popoli anellenici, 39–44. ———. 1973. “Le suddivisioni di terra nel Metapontino.” In Problèmes de la terre, 49–61. ———. 1974a. La Basilicata antica. Cava dei Tirreni: Di Mauro. ———. 1974b. “Problemi topografici ed urbanistici meta pontini.” Atti Taranto 13: 153–86. ———. 1980. “Il santuario di Apollo e urbanistica gene rale.” In Metaponto I, 15–311. ———. 1983. “Topografia e viabilità.” In Megale Hellas, 177–84. ———. 1984. “Sofiana. Scavi 1954 e 1961.” Cronache di Archeologia 23: 74–83. ———. 1992. “Metaponto.” In Bibliografia Topografica della Colonizzazione Greca in Italia 10. Eds. G. Nenci and G. Vallet. 65–81. Pisa/Rome/Naples: Scuola Superiore Normale di Pisa, L’École Française de Rome, Centre J. Bérard Naples. Adamesteanu, D., and G. Adornato. 2001. “San Biagio della Venella.” In Bibliografia Topografica della Colonizzazione Greca in Italia 17. Eds. G. Nenci and G. Vallet. 263–67. Pisa/Rome/Naples: Scuola Superiore Normale di Pisa, L’École Française de Rome, Centre J. Bérard Naples. Adamesteanu, D., and C. Vatin. 1976. “L’arrière-pays de Métaponte.” CRAI 120.1: 110–23. Adamesteanu, D., and P. Orlandini. 1956. Gela. Scavi e sco perte 1951-6. Rome: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Albanese Procelli, R. M. 2003. “Anfore commerciali dal centro indigeno della Montagna di Ramacca (Catania).” In Archeologia del Mediterraneo, 37–50.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 443
443
Albanese, R. M., and E. Procelli. 1988–1989. “Ramac ca (Catania). Saggi di scavo nelle contrade Castellito e Montagna negli anni 1978, 1981 e 1982.” NSc 8th ser. XLII–XLIII, 1st Suppl.: 7–159. Albero, A. 1992. “Cultura materiale della villa del Moltone.” In Testimonianze archeologiche nel territorio di Tolve. So printendenza Archeologica della Basilicata. Tracce per la memoria 3. 49–58. Matera: Edizioni La Butta. Alessio, A. 1988. “La necropoli di piazza d’Armi. Lo scavo del 1911–1914.” In Museo di Taranto, 325–55. ———. 1996. “Il territorio ad oriente di Taranto: tra la cho ra greca e la Messapia settentrionale.” In Ricerche sulla casa, 379–402. ———. 2001. “Grottaglie (Taranto), Oliovitolo.” Taras 21.1: 102–3. Allinson, F. G., trans. 1959. Menander: The Principal Fragments. Ed. T. E. Page. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Ammerman, R. M. 2002. The Sanctuary of Santa Venera at Paestum II. The Votive Terracottas. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. ———. 2011. “Terracotta Objects.” In Survey, 489–537. Amore, M. G. 1992–1993. Aspetti di vita quotidiana nella chora metapontina. La documentazione delle fattorie. Tesi di laurea, University of Turin. Amouretti, M. C. 1986. Le pain et l’huile dans la Grèce antique: de l’araire au moulin. Annales Litteraires de l’Université de Bésançon, 328. Paris: Les Belles Lettres. Amyx, D. A. 1958. “The Attic Stelai: Part III. Vases and Other Containers.” Hesperia 27.3–4: 163–310. Anderberg, A. L. 1994. Atlas of Seeds. Part 4. ResedaceaeUmbelliferae. Stockholm: Swedish Museum of Natural History. Andersen, S. T. 1979. “Identification of Wild Grasses and Cereal Pollen.” Danmarks Geologiske Undersøgelse, Årbog : 69–92. Andreassi, G. 1979. “Scavi a Gravina, Salentino ed Egna zia.” Atti Taranto 18: 437–43. ———. 2002. “L’attività archeologica in Puglia nel 2001.” Atti Taranto 41: 791–809. Andreassi, G., and A. Cocchiaro. 1988. La necropoli di via Cappuccini a Brindisi. Brindisi: Schena. Angioni, G. 1984. “Tecnica e sapere tecnico nel lavoro pre industriale.” La ricerca folkloristica 9: 61–70. Antinucci, F. 1993. “Dalla mente simbolica a quella senso motoria.” Realtà Virtuale 9: 1–6. Arias, P. E. 1947. “Locri. (Piani Caruso). Scavi di case an tiche.” NSc Vol. 1, 165–71. Armignacco Alidori, V., and S. Panciera. 1990–1991. “Oppi do Lucano. Appendice. Materiale archeologico rinvenuto nel territorio del Comune.” NSc 9th ser., I–II: 345–488. Atzeni, C., A. Cincotti, L. Massidda, and U. Sanna. 2003. “Experimental lead ‘old metallurgy’.” In International Conference of Archaeometallurgy in Europe (Milan, 24–26
5/30/14 7:43 AM
444
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
September 2003), Proceedings, Vol. 2. 107–16. Milan: As sociazione italiana metallurgia. Atzeni, C., L. Massidda, and U. Sanna. 2005. “Part III— Archaeometric data.” In Archaeometallurgy in Sardinia. From the origin to the Early Iron Age. Eds. F. Lo Schiavo, A. Giumlia-Mair, U. Sanna, and R. Valera. Monogra phies Instrumentum 30. 109–248. Montagnac: Éditions Monique Mergoil. Auriemma, R. 2004. Salentum a Salo. Forma maris antiqui. 2 vols. Galatina: Congedo. Baatz, D. 1977. “Reibschale und Romanisierung.” Rei Cretariae Romanae Fautorum Acta 17/18: 147–58. Baccelle Scudeler, L., L. Lazzarini, F. Antonelli, S. Cancel liere, and D. Dessandier. 2010. “La pietra dell Tempio: caratterizzazione minero-petrografica e geochimica e determinazione delle cave di origine.” In Il tempio di Hera (Tavole Palatine) di Metaponto. Archeologia, archeometria, conservazione. Ed. L. Lazzarini. Marmora 5/2009 Suppl. 2. 37–78. Pisa/Rome: Fabrizio Serra. Bagnasco Gianni, G. 1997. “La ceramica etrusca depurata acroma e a bande.” In Tarchna 2, 99–176. ———. 2001. “Coppe ioniche.” In Tarquinia: scavi sistematici nell’abitato, campagne 1982–1988: i materiali. Eds. C. Chia ramonte Treré, M. Bonghi Jovino, and G. Bagnasco Gian ni. 391–96. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. ———. 2007. “Le ricerche sulle ceramiche depurate a Tarquinia: tra importazioni e produzioni locali.” In Ceramiche fini, 93–99. Baldassare, G., and A. De Marco. 1981. “Probabili luoghi di provenienza delle calcareniti adoperate per la costru zione dei monumenti di Metaponto (Basilicata).” Atti e Relazioni dell’Accademia Pugliese delle Scienze, n.s. XXXIX (Parte II): 3–18. Balfet, H., M. F. Fauvet-Berthelot, and S. Monzon. 1983. Lexique et typologie des poteries. Pour la normalisation de la descriptions des poteries. Paris: CNRS. Barberis, V. 1995. “Le fattorie della chora metapontina. Note sui culti.” BBasil 11: 11–40. ———. 1997. “La ceramica arcaica.” In Pomarico Vecchio I, 55–62. ———. 1999. “I siti tra Sinni e Bradano dall’età arcaica all’età ellenistica: schede.” In Magna Grecia e Sicilia, 59–105. Barberis, V., and V. Meirano. 1997. “La ceramica a vernice nera dalle fortificazioni.” In Pomarico Vecchio I, 92–97. Barcelò, J. 2001. “Archaeology for Archaeological Explana tion beyond ‘Picturesque’ Reconstructions.” Archeologia e Calcolatori 12: 221–44. Barra Bagnasco, M. 1984. Locri Epizefiri. Organizzazione dello spazio urbano e del territorio nel quadro della cultura della Grecia di Occidente. Chiaravalle Centrale (CZ): Rotary. ———. 1989. “Aspetti di vita quotidiana a Locri Epizefiri.” In Locri III, 5–40.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 444
———. 1990. “Edilizia privata in Magna Grecia: modelli abitativi dall’età arcaica all’ellenismo.” In Magna Grecia. Arte e artigianato. Ed. G. Pugliese Carratelli. 49–79. Mi lan: Electa. ———. 1992–1993. “Pomarico Vecchio (Matera). Scavi di un abitato indigeno (1989-1991).” NSc : 147–231. ———. 1996a. “La casa in Magna Grecia.” In Ricerche sulla casa, 41–66. ———. 1996b. “Strutture abitative a Pomarico Vecchio.” In Ricerche sulla casa, 221–34. ———. 1996c. “Edilizia privata ed impianti produttivi ur bani.” In I Greci in Occidente. Ed. G. Pugliese Caratelli. 353–60. Milan: Bompiani. ———. 1999a. “Sistemi insediativi nella Basilicata dal Sin ni al Bradano, tra il IV e il III sec. a.C.” In Magna Grecia e Sicilia, 39–58. ———. 1999b. “Contributo alla lettura dei sistemi insedia tivi della Basilicata. Il caso di Pomarico Vecchio.” In La forma della città e del territorio. Esperienze metodologiche e risultati a confronto. Atti dell’Incontro di studio, Santa Maria Capua Vetere, 27–28 novembre 1998. Eds. L. Quilici and S. Quilici Gigli. 119–30. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. ———. 2001. “Terravecchia di Grammichele: rapporto preliminare sulla campagna di scavo 2000.” Orizzonti. Rassegna di archeologia 2: 21–50. ———. 2003. “Note sulla coroplastica rinvenuta nell’area indigena dell’antica Basilicata (VI-III sec. A.C.)” In Archeologia del Mediterraneo, 69–80. ———. 2009. “Le terracotte come testimonianza di culti privati.” In Locri V, 307–26. Barringer, J. 2005. “Alkamenes’ Prokne and Itys in Context.” In Periklean Athens and its Legacy. Eds. J. M. Barringer and J. M. Hurwit. 163–76. Austin: University of Texas Press. Bartoloni, G. 1972. Le Tombe da Poggio Buco nel Museo Archeologico di Firenze. Florence: Olschki. Bartoloni, G. 2006. “Vino Fenicio in Coppe Greche?” In Across Frontiers. Etruscans, Greeks, Phoenicians & Cypriots. Ed. E. Herring, 375–82. London: Accordia Research Institute University of London. Bartosiewicz, L. 2002. “Dogs from the Ig pile dwellings in the National Museum of Slovenia.” Arheološki Vestnik 53: 77–89. Bats, M. 1988. Vaisselle et alimentation à Olbia de Provence (v. 350- v. 50 av. J.-C.). Modèles culturels et catégories céramiques. Revue archéologique de Narbonnaise. Supplément 18. Paris: Editions du Centre national de la recher che scientifique. ———. 1996. “Remarques finales.” In Les Céramiques communes, 481–84. Battiloro, I., and M. Osanna, eds. 2011. Brateís datas. Pratiche rituali, votivi e strumenti del culto dai santuari della Lucania antica. Atti delle giornate di studio sui santuari Lucani (Matera, 19–20 febbraio 2010). Lavello: Edizioni Osanna.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
References Behre, K. E., ed. 1986. Anthropogenic indicators in pollen diagrams. Rotterdam: A. A. Balkema. Beijerinck, W. 1947. Zadenatlas der Nederlandsche Flora. Wageningen: H. Veenman & Zonen. Bekakos, S. 2008. “Aliba e Metaponto: antichi idronimi gre ci della Lucania.” Thalassa Salentina 31: 35–51. Bencivenga Trillmich, C. 1983. “Resti di casa greca di età arcaica sull’acropoli di Elea.” MEFRA 95: 417–88. Bennardi, D., and R. Furferi. 2007. Restauro Virtuale: Tra ideologia e metodologia. Florence: Edifir. Bennett, M., and A. Paul. 2002. Magna Graecia. Greek Art from South Italy and Sicily. New York and Manchester: Hudson Hills Press. Benoit, F. 1957. “Typologie et epigraphie amphorique. Les marques de Sestius.” Rivista di Studi Liguri 23: 251–56. Berggren, G. 1969. Atlas of Seeds. Part 2. Cyperaceae. Stock holm: Swedish Museum of Natural History. ———. 1981. Atlas of Seeds. Part 3. Salicaceae – Cruciferae. Stockholm: Swedish Museum of Natural History. Bernardini, M. 1961. Vasi dello stile di Gnathia, vasi a vernice nera (Museo Provinciale “S. Castromediano” di Lecce). Bari: Adriatica. Bernasconi, M. P. 2010. “Kaulonia – Casa nei pressi della casamatta: studio dei molluschi.” In Caulonia tra Crotone e Locri : Atti del Convegno Internazionale, Firenze, 30 maggio – 1 giugno 2007. Eds. L. Lepore and P. Turi. 153–54. Florence: Florence University Press. Bettini, M., and G. Pucci. 1986. “Del fritto e dell’altro.” Opus 5: 153–65. Beug, H. J. 1964. “Untersuchungen zur spät- und postgla zialen Vegetationsgeschichte im Gardaseegebiet unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der mediterranen Arten.” Flora 154: 401–44. Bianchi, G. 1996. “Trasmissione dei saperi tecnici e analisi dei procedimenti costruttivi.” Archeologia dell’Architettura 1: 52–60. Bianco, O., and A. Deodato. 1997. “La ceramica comune.” In Pomarico Vecchio I, 175–93. Bianco, S. 1993. “La chora di Herakleia: Tursi, S. Maria d’Anglona.” In Da Leukania a Lucania, 197–207. ———. 1994. “La necropoli di contr. S. Brancato di S. Ar cangelo (PZ).” StAnt 7: 111–36. ———. 2001. “La chora di Siris-Herakleia.” Atti Taranto 40: 807–18. ———. 2006. Il Museo Nazionale Archeologico della Siritide. Il territorio di Policoro. Taranto: Scorpione. Bianco, S., A. Bottini, A. Pontrandolfo, A. Russo Tagliente, and E. Setari. 1996a. “L’età Arcaica e Classica. I siti.” In Greci, Enotri e Lucani, 133–68. ———. 1996b. “La ceramica lucana a figure rosse.” In Greci, Enotri e Lucani, 206–14. Bini, M. P. 1989. “Il territorio di Eraclea nel IV-III sec. a. C.” In Studi su Siris-Eraclea. Ed. Istituto di archeologia
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 445
445
dell’Università di Perugia. Archaeologia Perusina 8. 15–21. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider. Bitti, M. C. 1989. “La ceramica a vernice nera. Il vasellame del II strato: vasi da mensa.” In Locri II, 141–88. Bloesch, H. 1940. Formen attischer Schalen von Exekias bis zum Ende des strengen Stils. Bern: Benteli. Boedeker, D. 2008. “Family Matters: Domestic Religion in Classical Greece.” In Household and Family Religion in Antiquity. Eds. J. Bodel and S. M. Olyan. 229–47. Mal den/Oxford: Blackwell. Boersma, J., and D. Yntema, 1987. Valesio. Storia di un insediamento apulo dall’Età del Ferro all’epoca tardoromana. Bilancio delle ricerche dopo tre campagne di scavo. Brindisi: Montedipe. Boitani, F. 1992. “Le ceramiche laconiche a Gravisca.” In Lakonikà, 19–67. Bökönyi, S. 1984. Animal Husbandry and Hunting in Tác-Gorsium. The vertebrate fauna of a Roman town. Bu dapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. Bökönyi, S., and E. Gál. 2010. The Chora of Metaponto 2: Archaeozoology at Pantanello and Five Other Sites. Ed. L. Bartosiewicz. Austin: University of Texas Press. Borra, D. 2000. “La modellazione virtuale per l’architettura antica. Un metodo verso l’isoformismo percettivo.” Archeologia e Calcolatori 9: 259–72. Bottema, S. 1975. “The interpretation of pollen spectra from prehistoric settlements (with special attention to Liguli florae).” Palaeohistoria 17: 17–35. Bottini, A. 1987. “Ambre a protome umana dal Melfese.” BdA 41: 1–16. Bottini, A., and E. Setari. 2003. “La Necropoli Italica di Braida di Vaglio in Basilicata. Materiali dallo Scavo del 1994.” Monumenti Antichi. Serie Miscellanea. III (LX del la serie generale). Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider. Bottini, A., M. P. Fresa, and M. Tagliente. 1990. “L’evolu zione della struttura di un centro daunio fra VII e III secolo: l’esempio di Forentum.” In Italici in Magna Grecia. Lingua, insediamenti e strutture. Leukania 3. Ed. M. Tagliente. 233–55. Venosa: Osanna. Bottini, P. 1986. “Il Lagonegrese in età arcaica.” In SirisPolieion, 199–203. ———. 1988. “Uno scavo d’abitato: S. Evraso.” In Sorgenti Lao, 112–36. ———. 1997a. “I materiali della tomba 8 di Montemurro (vetrina 5).” In Il Museo Archeologico Nazionale dell’Alta Val d’Agri. Ed. P. Bottini, 97–109. Lavello: Alfagrafica Volonnino. ———. 1997b. “Materiali dalle tombe 8 e 9 di Montemurro (vetrina 6).” In Il Museo Archeologico Nazionale dell’Alta Val d’Agri. Ed. P. Bottini. 110–14. Lavello: Alfagrafica Volonnino. ———. 1999. “La documentazione archeologica del Lago negrese.” In Nella Terra degli Enotri, 9–86.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
446
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
Bouloumié, B. 1982. L’épave etrusque d’Antibes et le commerce en Méditerranée occidentale au VIe siècle av. J.C. Marburg: Philipps Universität. Bourdin, S. 2008. “Le Mobilier Méallique.” In Civita di Tricarico, 543–54. Boyd, T. D., and M. H. Jameson. 1981. “Urban and Rural Land Division in Ancient Greece.” Hesperia 50: 327–42. Brizzi, M. 1999a. “La ceramica comune.” In Oppido Mamertina, 310–27. ———. 1999b. “Opus doliare.” In Oppido Mamertina, 328–31. Brogiolo, G. P. 1988. Archeologia dell’edilizia storica, documenti e metodi. Como: New Press. Bruneau, P., C. Vatin, and U. Bezerra de Meneses. 1970. Exploration archéologique de Délos. XXVIII. L’Ìlot de la Maison des Comédiens. Paris: Fontemoing et Cie. Bruscella, A., and T. Virtuoso. 2005. “Ceramica a vernice nera.” In Torre di Satriano I, 261–98. Burford Cooper, A. 1977. “The Family Farm in Greece.” The Classical Journal 73.1: 162–75. Burgers, G.-J. L. M. 1998. Constructing Messapian Landscapes. Amsterdam: Gieben. Burn, L. 1998. “Figured Vases.” In Necropoleis, 593–640. Burrows, R. M., and P. N. Ure. 1907/1908. “Excavations at Rhitsóna in Boeotia.” BSA 14: 225–318. Cagnana, A. 2000. Archeologia dei materiali da costruzione. Florence: Insegna del Giglio. Cahill, N. 2002. Household and City Organization at Olynthus. New Haven: Yale University Press. Calastri, C., and L. Quilici 2001. “Le montagne tra S. Paolo Albanese e Terranova di Pollino.” In Carta archeologica Sinni 6, 73–96. Calastri, C., E. Giorgi, L. Quilici, and M. E. Settembrino. 2001. “I monti di Colobraro.” In Carta archeologica Sinni 3, 135–94. Califano Ascenti, C. 1998. “I materiali rinvenuti in Basili cata al Museo di Reggio Calabria.” BBasil 14: 79–114. Calzecchi Onesti, R. (Taduzione ed.). 1963. Iliade. Milan: Einaudi. Cambitoglou, A. 1951. “The Lampas Painter.” PBSR 19: 39–42. Campenon, C. 1994. La céramique attique à figures rouges autour de 400 avant J.-C. Les principales formes, évolution et production. Paris: De Boccard. Camporeale, G. 1997. L’abitato etrusco del’Accesa: il quartiere B. Archaeologica 122. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider. Canosa, M. G. 1990. “Tricarico.” In Basilicata. L’espansio nismo romano nel sud-est d’Italia. Il quadro archeologico, Atti del Convegno Venosa 23–25 aprile 1987. Ed. M. Sal vatore. Leukania 2. 111–23. Venosa: Osanna. ———. 2007. Una tomba principesca da Timmari. Monumenti Antichi, Serie Miscellanea 11. Rome: Giorgio Bret schneider.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 446
Capano, A. 1986. “Vietri di Potenza (Potenza).” StEtr 52: 489–90. Cappers, R. T. J., R. M. Bekker, and J. E. A. Jans. 2006. Digi tale Zadenatlas Van Nederland – Digital seed Atlas of The Netherlands. Groningen: Barkhuis Publishing & Gro ningen University Library. Capuis, L. 1968. Alkamenes. Fonti storiche e archeologiche. Florence: Olschki. Carando, E. 1997. “La necropoli sud orientale.” In Pomarico Vecchio I, 277–306. Caravale A., and I. Toffoletti. 1997. Anfore antiche. Conoscerle e identificarle. Rome: Ireco. Caravelli, A. M. 2008. “Vasellame da mensa e da dispensa in ceramica comune.” In Civita di Tricarico, 451–82. Carbè, A., P. Coppolino, A. Ollà, and G. Tigano. 2000. “La necropoli meridionale. Catalogo dei reperti.” In Le necropoli di Mylai (VIII-I sec. a.C.). Ed. G. Tigano. 49–94. Milazzo: Rebus. Carè, B., and A. Cavallo. 2006. “Ceramica comune (CC).” In Grammichele, 297–98. Carrión, J. S. 2002. “Patterns and Processes of Late Qua ternary Environmental Change in a Montane Region of Southwestern Europe.” Quaternary Science Reviews 21: 2047–66. Carter, J. C. 1975. The Sculpture of Taras. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. ———. 1980a. Excavations in the Territory, Metaponto, 1980. Austin: ICA. ———. 1980b. “A Classical Landscape. Rural Archaeology at Metaponto.” Archaeology 33: 23–32. ———. 1981. “Rural Settlement at Metaponto.” In Papers in Italian Archaeology II. Archaeology and Italian Society. Eds. G. Barker and R. Hodges. BAR-IS 102. 167–78. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. ———. 1982. “Ricerca archeologica nel territorio di Meta ponto: nuovi risultati.” Atti Taranto 22: 476–87. ———. 1983a. “Preliminary Report on the Excavation at Pizzica Pantanello (1974–1976).” In Metaponto II, 407– 90. ———. 1983b. “Ricerca archeologica nel territorio di Metaponto: nuovi risultati.” Atti Taranto 22: 476–87. ———. 1983c. The Territory of Metaponto 1981–1982. Aus tin: Institute of Classical Archaeology. ———. 1983d. “Excavation in the Sanctuary Area, Pizzi ca-Pantanello, 1982.” In Territory of Metaponto, 19–28. ———. 1987. “Agricoltura e pastorizia in Magna Grecia (tra Bradano e Basento).” In Magna Grecia II: Lo sviluppo politico, sociale ed economico. Ed. G. Pugliese Carratelli. 173–212. Milan: Electa. ———. 1990. “Metapontum: Land, Wealth, and Popula tion.” In Greek Colonists and Native Populations, 405–41. ———. 1992. “The Decline of Magna Graecia in the Age of Pyrrhos? New Evidence from the Chora.” In The Age of
5/30/14 7:43 AM
References Pyrrhus: Papers Delivered at the International Conference, Brown University, 8–10 April, 1988. Eds. T. Hackens, N. D. Holloway, R. R. Holloway, and G. Moucharte. Archaeologia Transatlantica 11. 97–145. Louvain-la-Neuve: Departement d’Archeologie et d’Histoire de l’Art, Col lege Erasme; Providence, RI: Center for Old World, Ar chaeology and Art, Brown University. ———. 1996. “Insediamenti agricoli.” In I Greci in Occidente. Ed. G. Pugliese Carratelli. 361–68. Milan: Bompiani. ———. 1998a. “Vent’anni di ricerca nel territorio di Meta ponto.” In Siritide e Metapontino, 237–59. ———. 1998b. “Topography.” In Necropoleis, 25–55. ———. 1998c. “Burial Rites and Tomb Types.” In Necropoleis, 57–111. ———. 1998d. “Rites at the Tomb and Grave Markers.” In Necropoleis, 114–40. ———. 1998e. “Family Groups.” In Necropoleis, 142–62. ———. 1998f. “Historical Development.” In Necropoleis, 167–236. ———. 1998g. “Miniatures.” In Necropoleis, 691. ———. 2001. “La chora di Metaponto. Risultati degli ul timi 25 anni di ricerca archeologica.” Atti Taranto 40: 771–92. ———. 2003. “Ambiente e paesaggio del Metapontino.” Atti Taranto 42: 491–509. ———. 2006. Discovering the Greek Countryside at Metaponto. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. ———. 2008. La scoperta del territorio rurale greco di Metaponto. (Discovering the Greek Countryside at Metaponto). 2nd ed. Trans. E. Lanza Catti. Venosa: Osanna. ———. 2011a. “Introduction.” In Survey, 559–68. ———. 2011b. “The Prehistory of the Chora.” In Survey, 569–90. ———. 2011c. “An Approach to the Chora.” In Survey, 617–39. ———. 2011d. “The Pioneers: Historical Development of the Chora, 600.” In Survey, 641–76. ———. 2011e. “Golden Harvests: The Expansion of the Mid-6th Century BC.” In Survey, 677–726. ———. 2011f. “Crisis in the Chora, 500.” In Survey, 727–44. ———. 2011g. “Reform and Rebirth: The Mid-5th Centu ry BC.” In Survey, 745–84. ———. 2011h. “The Chora in 400.” In Survey, 785–808. ———. 2011i. “The Refounding of Metaponto.” In Survey, 809–68. ———. 2011j. “A Century of Decline.” In Survey, 869–92. ———. 2011k. “The Last Two Centuries BC.” In Survey, 893–922. ———. 2011l. “Appendix C: Basic Graphs and Tables.” In Survey, 963–1006. ———. 2011m. “The 1999 Pizzica Excavations: The Divi sion Lines Reconsidered.” In Survey, 1027–52.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 447
447
———. 2012. “The Archaeozoological Data.” In San Bia gio, 191–93. Carter, J. C., and A. Parmly Toxey. 1998. “Banded-ware and Dipped Pottery.” In Necropoleis, 695–717. Carter, J. C., and J. Hall. 1998. “Burial Descriptions.” In Necropoleis, 237–447. Carter, J. C., L. Costantini, C. D’Annibale, J. R. Jones, R. L. Folk, and D. Sullivan. 1985. “Population and Ag riculture: Magna Grecia in the Fourth Century B.C.” In Papers in Italian Archaeology IV.1. The Human Landscape. Eds. C. Malone and S. Stoddart. BAR-IS 243. 281–312. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. Carter, J. C., M. Crawford, P. Lehman, G. Nikolaenko, and J. Trelogan. 2000. “The Chora of Chersonesos in Crimea, Ukraine.” AJA 104.4: 707–41. Carter, J. C., L. Burn, A. R. Parente, F. Silvestrelli, K. Swift, and E. Vittoria. 2011. “Catalog of Objects from the 1999 Pizzica Excavations.” In Survey, 1053–1106. Casagrande, M. 2002. “I materiali.” In L’agorà di Eraclea Lucana. Ed. G. Pianu. 113–224. Rome: Carocci. Castagnoli, F. 1964. Saggi di fotointerpretazione archeologica. Rome: De Luca. Castoldi, M. 1995. Oggetti diversi. In Incoronata 3, 109–13. ———. 2000. “Macine dell’area dell’oikos.” In Incoronata 4, 47–48. Ceci, F. 1994. “Casa. Grecia.” In Enciclopedia dell’Arte Antica, II Suppl. 19–20. Rome: Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana. Cerchiai, L. 2007. “Introduzione.” In Ceramiche fini, 1–5. Chiartano, B. 1983. “La necropolis dell’età ferro dell’Inco ronata e di S. Teodoro (scavi 1970–1974).” In Metaponto II, 9–190. Chieco Bianchi Martini, A. M. 1964. “Conversano (Bari). Scavi in via T. Pantaleo.” NSc, 8th ser., Vol. 18: 100–176. Ciancio, A. 1985. “Tombe arcaico-classiche nei territori di Noicattaro e Valenzano (Bari). Scavi 1979–1981.” Taras 5: 45–107. ———. 1997. Silbíon: Una città tra Greci e indigeni; La documentazione archeologica dal territorio di Gravina in Puglia dall’ottavo al quinto secolo a.C. Bari: Levante. Ciancio, A., and F. Radina 1983. “Madonna delle Grazie (Rutigliano-Bari): campagna di scavo 1979.” Taras 3: 7–61. Cicala, L. 2002. L’edilizia domestica tardo arcaica di Elea. Pozzuoli: Naus Editoria. Cinaglia, N. 2011. Ceramica miniaturistica. In Brateís datas. Pratiche rituali, votivi e strumenti del culto dai santuari della Lucania antica. Atti delle giornate di studio sui santuari Lucani (Matera, 19–20 febbraio 2010). Eds. I. Battiloro and M. Osanna. 251–56. Lavello: Edizioni Osanna. Clarke, D. L., ed. 1977. Spatial Archaeology. London: Acad Press.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
448
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
Cocchiaro, A. 2010. “Egnazia. Necropoli meridionale.” Taras n.s. I, 1–2: 140–43. Colangelo, L. 2001. “Ceramica comune.” In Rituali, 63–76. ———. 2005. “Ceramica a bande.” In Torre di Satriano I, 251–60. Colburn, O. C. 1977. “Torre del Mordillo. Scavi degli anni 1963, 1966 e 1967.” NSc 31: 423–526. Connelly, J. B. 2007. Portrait of a Priestess. Women and Ritual in Ancient Greece. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Conti, M. C. 1989. “La ceramica comune.” In Locri II, 257–346. ———. 1992. “La ceramica comune.” In Locri IV, 241–56. Coppola, D., M. Denoyelle, M. Dewailly, I. Fusco, S. Lep etz, A. Quercia, W. Van Andringa, T. van Compernolle, and S. Verger. 2008. “La grotte de Santa Maria di Agna no (Ostuni) et ses abords: à propos des critères d’iden tification d’un sanctuaire messapien.” In Saturnia Tellus. Definizione dello spazio consacrato in ambiente etrusco, ita lico, fenicio-punico, iberico e celtico. Atti del Convegno Internazionale svoltosi a Roma dal 10 al 12 novembre 2004. X. Eds. D. Raventos, S. Ribichini, and S. Verger. 201–32. Rome: CNR. Coralini, A., and D. Scagliarini Corlàita, eds. 2007. Ut natura ars: Virtual Reality e archeologia. Atti della giornata di studi, Bologna, 22 aprile 2002. Bologna: Imola. Corbett, P. E. 1949. Attic Pottery of the Later Fifth Cen tury, from the Athenian Agora. Hesperia 18: 298–351. Cordsen, A. 1995. “The Pastas House in Archaic Greek Sic ily.” Acta Hyperborea 6: 103–21. Costantini, L., and L. Biasini Costantini. 2001. “La ricerca archeobotanica nella chora di Metaponto: quadro storico e prospettive future.” Atti Taranto 40: 423–34. ———. 2003. “Agriculture and Diet in the Chora of Meta ponto: the Paleobotanical Evidence from Pantanello.” In Living off the Chora, 3–12. Cotton, M. A. 1977. “Plain and Cooking Ware.” In Gravina III, 125–32. ———. 1983. “Coarse Ware.” In Cozzo Presepe, 364–79. ———. 1992a. “Plain light-surfaced wares.” In Gravina II, 162–79. ———. 1992b. “Dark-Surfaced or Cooking Ware.” In Gravina II, 179–94. ———. 1992c. “Mortaria.” In Gravina II, 194–97. ———. 1992d. “Pithoi and dolia.” In Gravina II, 200–202. Coudin, F. 2009. Les Laconiens et la Méditerranée à l’époque archaique. Collection du Centre Jean Bérard 33. Naples: Centre Jean Bérard. Crabtree, D. E. 1972. An Introduction to Flintworking. Occasional Papers of the Idaho State Museum 28. Pocatello: Idaho State University Museum. Cracolici, V. 2001. “Le ceramiche. Tecniche e modi di pro duzione.” In Metaponto/Archeologia, 103–14.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 448
———. 2003. I sostegni di fornace dal Kerameikos di Metaponto. Beni Archeologici - Conoscenza e Tecnologie. Quaderno 3. Bari: Edipuglia. ———. 2004a. “Il sito in Località Casalini Sottana.” In Nobili e guerrieri, 7–12. ———. 2004b. “Catalogo.” In Nobili e guerrieri, 45–60. Cracolici, V., and A. De Siena. 2002. “Gli strumenti per il banchetto e il simposio.” In Il Vino di Dioniso. Dei e Uomini a Banchetto. Catalogo della mostra. Ed. A. De Siena. 68–72. Siena: AL.SA.BA.Grafiche. Cracolici, V., and L. Padalino. 2004. “La necropoli.” In Nobili e guerrieri, 13–30. Cristofani, F. 1996. Etruschi e altre genti nell’Italia preromana. Mobilità in età arcaica. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider. Cuomo di Caprio, N. 1985. La ceramica in archeologia.Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. ———. 2007. Ceramica in archeologia 2. Antiche tecniche di lavorazione e moderni metodi di indagine. Studia Archaeologica 144. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Cuozzo, M. 2006. “La ceramica in argilla depurata a deco razione lineare.” In Cuma 2, 88–91. Cuozzo, M., and A. D’Andrea. 1991. “Proposta di periodiz zazione del repertorio locale di Pontecagnano tra la fine del VII e la metà del V sec. a.C. alla luce della stratigrafia della necropoli.” Annali dell’Istituto Orientale di Napoli 13: 47–114. d’Agostino, B. 1968. “Marcina?” DialArch 2: 139–51. D’Amicis, A., G. Giboni, E. Lippolis, G. Maruggi, and L. Masiello. 1997. “Catalogo.” In Museo Taranto I.3, 140– 420. D’Andria, F. 1976. “Metaponto romana.” Atti Taranto 15: 539–44. ———. 1980a. “Scavi nella zona del kerameikos (1973).” In Metaponto I, 355–452. ———. 1980b. “I materiali del V secolo a.C. nel ceramico di Metaponto e alcuni risultati delle analisi sulle argille.” In Attività archeologica, 117–45. ———. 1996. “La casa in Messapia.” In Ricerche sulla casa, 403–38. D’Andria, F., and D. Roubis. 1998–1999. “L’insediamento indigeno di Difesa S. Biagio a Montescaglioso. Seconda campagna di scavo 1996.” Siris: Studi e ricerche della scuola di specializzazione in archeologia di Matera 1: 123–69. D’Andria, F., and G. Semeraro. 2000. “Le ceramiche grecoorientali in Italia meridionale. Appunti sulla distribuzi one.” Atti Taranto 29: 457–501. D’Anisi, M. C. 2005. “Nuovi dati sui culti lucani: un de posito votivo inedito da Accettura.” In Lo spazio del rito, 166–78. D’Annibale, C. 2012. “Pottery and Other Neolithic Arti facts.” In San Biagio, 55–65. Dal Sasso, C. 1995. “Reperti faunistici.” In Incoronata 3, 129–39.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
References ———. 1997. “Reperti faunistici.” In Incoronata 5, 133–39. Davis, O. K. 1987. “Spores of the dung fungus Sporomiel la: increased abundance in historic sediments and before Pleistocene megafaunal extinction.” Quaternary Research 28.2: 290–94. De Caro, S., and C. Gialanella. 1998. “Novità pitecusane. L’insediamento di Punta Chiarita a Forio d’Ischia.” In Euboica: l’Eubea e la presenza euboica in Calcidica e in Occidente. Napoli, 13–16 novembre 1996. Eds. M. Bats and B. d’Agostino. 337–53. Naples: Centre Jean Bérard. de Cazanove, O. 2005. “Le aree interne dal III al I sec. Il quadro archeologico.” Atti Taranto 44: 763–99. De Gennaro, R. 2005. I circuiti murari della Lucania antica (IV-III sec. a.C.). Paestum: Pandemos. De Juliis, E. M. 1977. La ceramica geometrica della Daunia. Studi e materiali di etruscologia e antichità italiche 16. Flor ence: Sansoni. ———. 1981. “Conversano (Bari).” StEtr XLIX: 459–60. ———. 1988. Gli Iapigi. Storia e civiltà della Puglia preromana. Biblioteca di Archeologia 8. Milan: Longanesi. ———. 1990. L’ipogeo dei vimini di Canosa. Bari: Edipuglia. ———. 1995. La ceramica geometrica della Peucezia. Rome: GEI Gruppo Editoriale Internazionale. ———. 2002. La ceramica sovraddipinta apulia. Bari: Edi puglia. de La Genière, J. 1968. Recherches sur l’age du fer en Italie Méridionale. Sala Consilina. Bibliothèque de l’Institut Français de Naples. Série 2.1,1. Naples: Institut Français de Naples. ———. 1971. “Amendolara (Cosenza). Campagne del 1967 e 1968. Relazione preliminare.” NSc 25: 439–75. ———. 1972. “Aspetti e problemi dell’archeologia del mondo indigeno.” Atti Taranto 11: 225–72. ———. 1987. “Cersosimo.” In Bibliografia topografica della colonizzazione greca in Italia 5. Eds. G. Nenci and G. Val let. 248–50. Pisa/Rome/Naples: Scuola Normale Superi ore, L’École Française de Rome, Centre J. Bérard Naples. de La Genière, J., A. Waiblinger, M. Gualtieri, and R. Pierobon. 1980. “Amendolara (Cosenza). La necropoli di Mangosa.” NSc, 8th ser. 34: 305–93. De Miro, E. 1989. Agrigento. La necropoli greca di Pezzino. Messina: Sicania. De Siena, A. 1980. “Note stratigrafiche sul santuario di Apol lo Licio a Metaponto.” In Attività archeologica, 83–116. ———. 1990. “Il castro romano di Metaponto.” In Basilicata. L’espansionismo romano nel sud-est d’Italia. Il quadro archeologico, Atti del Convegno Venosa 23–25 aprile 1987. Ed. M. Salvatore. 301–14. Venosa: Osanna. ———. 1996. “Metapontino: strutture abitative ed organiz zazione territoriale prima della fondazione della colonia achea.” In Ricerche sulla casa, 161–95. ———. 2001a. “Il territorio di Metaponto.” Atti Taranto 40: 757–69.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 449
449
———. 2001b. “Profilo storico archeologico.” In Metaponto/Archeologia, 7–44. ———. 2003. “Ambiente e paesaggio nella Magna Grecia: Metaponto.” Atti Taranto 42: 511–13. ———. 2005. “Tramonto della Magna Grecia: la documen tazione archeologica dai territori delle colonie greche di Metaponto e Herakleia.” Atti Taranto 44: 433–58. ———. 2007a. “Il santuario extraurbano di S. Biagio alla Venella nel territorio di Metaponto.” In Il santuario extraurbano di San Biagio alla Venella. Ed. J. Carella. 9–17. Bernalda: La Spiga d’Oro. ———. 2007b. “L’attività archeologica in Basilicata nel 2006.” Atti Taranto 46: 407–63. ———. 2010. “Il santuario extraurbano delle Tavole Pal atine: ruolo e tradizione.” In Il tempio di Hera (Tavole latine) di Metaponto. Archeologia, archeometria, conPa servazione. Ed. L. Lazzarini. Marmora 5/2009 Suppl. 2. 13–15. Pisa/Rome: Fabrizio Serra. De Siena, A., and L. Giardino. 1994. “Herakleia e Metaponto. Trasformazioni urbanistiche e produzione agricola tra tarda repubblica a primo impero: i nuovi dati archeologici.” In Le ravitaillement en blé de Rome et des centres urbains des débuts de la République jusqu’au haut empire. (Actes du colloque international, Naples, 14-16 février 1991.) 197–211. Naples/ Rome: Centre Jean Bérard/L’École française de Rome. ———. 2001. “Trasformazioni delle aree urbane e del pae saggio agrario in età romana nella Basilicata Sudorien tale.” In Modalità insediative, 129–67. De Vincenzo, S. 2003. “Un complesso rurale di età repub blicana nel territorio di Grumentum: la fattoria in loca lità Valloni.” Siris 4: 23–62. Dell’Aglio, A. 1996. “La ceramica a vernice nera. Taranto.” In Arte e artigianato, 323–32. Delli Ponti, G. 1996. “Vaste – Poggiardo (LE). La necropoli di Fondo Aia.” StAnt 9: 99–214. Delorit, R. J. 1970. An Illustrated Taxonomy Manual of Weed Seeds. Wisconsin: Agronomy Publications. Depalo, M. R. 1997. La Collezione Loiudice. Bari: Edipuglia. Di Fraia, T. 1970. “Resti di un villaggio della cultura tipo Serra d’Alto a Saldone presso Metaponto (Lucania).” Atti Società Toscana Scienze Naturali, Memorie A77: 54–74. Di Giuseppe, H. 1996. “Insediamenti rurali della Basilicata interna tra la romanizzazione e l’età tardoantica: mate riali per una tipologia.” In Epigrafia e territorio, politica e società. Ed. M. Pani. Temi di antichità romane 4. 189–252. Bari: Edipuglia. ———. 2012. Black-gloss Ware in Italy. Production Management and Local Histories. BAR-IS 2335. Oxford. Di Rita, F., and D. Magri. 2009. “Holocene drought, de forestation, and evergreen vegetation development in the central Mediterranean: a 5500 year record from Lago Alimini Piccolo, Apulia, southeast Italy.” The Holocene 19.2: 295–306.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
450
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
Di Sandro, N. 1986. Le anfore arcaiche dello scarico Gosetti, Pithecusa. Cahiers du Centre Jean Bérard 13. Naples: Cen tre Jean Bérard. Di Stefano, G. 2001. “La chora di Camarina.” Atti Taranto 40: 689–705. Dillon, M. 2002. Girls and Women in Classical Greek Religion. London and New York: Routledge Chapman & Ha. Dilthey, H. 1980. “Sorgenti, acque, luoghi sacri in Basilica ta.” In Attività archeologica, 539–60. Distasi, V. 2006a. “La fattoria lucana di Montemurro.” In Con il fuso, 71–87. ———. 2006b. “Il sistema di copertura dei tetti.” In Con il fuso, 89–101. Donati, L. 1994. La casa dell’Impluvium: architettura etrusca a Roselle. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider. Donnarumma, R., and L. Tomay. 1999. “La necropoli di San Brancato di Tortora.” In Nella Terra degli Enotri, 49–59. Drerup, H. 1967. “Prosthashaus und Pastashaus. Zur Ty pologie des griechischen Hauses.” Marburger Winckelmann Programm 1967: 6–17. ———. 1969. Griechische Baukunst in geometrischer Zeit. Zur Typologie des griechischen Hauses. Göttingen: Vanden hoeck & Ruprecht. du Plat Taylor, J. 1983. “Wheelmade Painted Pottery.” In Cozzo Presepe, 331–46. Dufková, M., and J. Pečírka. 1970. “Excavations of Farms and Farmhouses in the Chora of Chersonesos in the Crimea.” Eirene. Studia Graeca et Latina 8: 123–74. Dyson S. L. 1976. Cosa: The Utilitarian Pottery. Rome: American Academy in Rome. Edlund, I. E. M. 1981. Excavations at Sant’Angelo Vecchio, 1979–1981. Unpublished report, Department of Clas sics, University of Texas at Austin. ———. 1984. “Sacred and Secular: evidence of rural shrines and industry among Greeks and Etruscans.” In Crossroads of the Mediterranean, Archaeologica Transatlantica II: Papers delivered at the International Conference held at Brown University. Eds. T. Hackens, N. D. Holloway, and R. R. Holloway. 277–90. Providence: Brown University Press. ———. 1986. “Scavi nella zona di Metaponto: Sant’Angelo Vecchio.” BdA 71, Ser. 6, Vols. 39–40: 119–22. Elia, D. 2010. Locri Epizefiri VI. Nelle case di Ade. La necropoli in contrada Lucifero. Nuovi documenti. Alessandria: Dell’Orso. Elliott, M. 1998. “Black-Glazed Pottery.” In Necropoleis, 643–93. Empereur, J.-Y., and Y. Garlan, eds. 1986. Recherches sur les amphores grecques. Bulletin de Correspondance Hèllènique Suppl. 13. Paris: Diffusion de Boccard. ———. 1987. “Bulletin archéologique: amphores et tim bres amphoriques (1980–1986).” Revue des études grecques 100: 58–109. Empereur, J.-Y., and A. Hesnard. 1987. “Les amphores hellé nistiques.” In Céramiques hellénistiques et romaines. Eds. P. Lévêque and J. P. Morel. 9–54. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 450
Erdtman, G. 1960. “The Acetolysis Method, A Revised De scription.” Svenk Botanisk Tidskrift 54: 561–64. Etienne, R. 1991. “Architecture et démocratie.” Topoi 1: 39–47. Fabbri, M. and M. Osanna 2005. “Aspetti del sacro nel modo apulo: rituali di abbandono tra area sacra e abitato nell’antica Ausculum.” In Lo spazio del rito, 215–33. Faegri, K., P. E. Kaland, and K. Krzywinski. 1989. Textbook of Pollen Analysis. 4th ed., London: Wyley & Son. Fagerström, K. 1988. Greek Iron Age Architecture: Developments through Changing Times. Göteborg: Paul Åströms förlag. Falcone, D. 2003. “Architettura domestica d’età ellenistica in Calabria. Elementi tecnici e strutturali.” In Archeologia del Mediterraneo, 301–19. Faraone, C. 2008. “Household Religion in Ancient Greece.” In Household and Family Religion in Antiquity. Eds. J. Bodel and S. M. Olyan. 210–28. Malden/Oxford: Blackwell. Fedele, B. 1984. Antichità della collezione Guarini. Galatina: Congedo Editore. Féret, S., A. Pallud, O. de Cazanove, and A. M. Caravelli. 2008. “Terres cuites figurées, vases miniatures, thymiateria, pesons, opus doliare.” In Civita di Tricarico, 521–42. Ferla, P., R. Alaimo, G. Falsone, and F. Spatafora. 1984. “Studio petrografico delle macine di età arcaica e classica da Monte Castellazzo di Poggioreale (Sicilia Occiden tale). Rinvenimento di materiale vulcanico in gran parte estraneo alla Sicilia ed implicazioni storico-archeolo giche.” SicArch 56 (17): 25–52. Ferrucci, S. 1996. “Belle case private e case tutte uguali nell’Atene di V secolo a.C.” RivFil 124.4: 408–34. Fiammenghi, C. A., F. Salomone, and A. Serritella 1996. “Caselle in Pittari.” In Ricerche sulla casa, 321–34. Florenzano, A., A. M. Mercuri, A. Pederzoli, P. Torri, G. Bosi, L. Olmi, R. Rinaldi, and M. Bandini Mazzanti. 2012. “The Significance of Intestinal Parasite Remains in Pollen Samples from Mediaeval Pits in the Piazza Garibaldi of Parma, Emilia Romagna, Northern Italy.” Geoarchaeology: An International Journal 27: 34–47. Foley, A. 1988. The Argolid, 800-600 B.C.: an archaeological survey, together with an index of sites from the Neolithic to the Roman period. Studies in Mediterranean archaeology 80. Göteborg: P. Åstroms förlag. Folk, R. L. 1992. “Geologic Controls on Aspects of the Ar chaeology of Metaponto (Magna Graecia), Basilicata, Southern Italy.” Rev. 3rd ed. Unpublished report, Insti tute of Classical Archaeology. ———. 1998. “Appendix 3A.1. Stones in Use.” In Necropoleis, 112–13. ———. 2011. “Geologic Background of the Metapontino.” In Survey, 3–30. Folk, R. L., and J. C. Carter. 1981. “Geological Factors Controlling Settlement Patterns of the Ionian Coast of
5/30/14 7:43 AM
References Basilicata, Italy.” Abstracts of the Annual Meeting of the Geological Society of America. 453. Cincinnati. Forbes, R. J. 1956. “Food and Drink.” In A History of Technology, Vol. II. Eds. C. Singer, E. J. Holmyard, A. R. Hall, and T. I. Williams. 103–233. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Forti, L., and A. Stazio. 1983. “Vita quotidiana dei Greci d’Italia. La fattoria.” In Megale Hellas, 660–73. Fortunelli, S. 2007. Gravisca. Scavi nel santuario greco. Il deposito votivo del santuario settentrionale. Bari: Edipuglia. Foxhall, L. 2011. “Loom Weights.” In Survey, 539–54. Fracchia, H., and D. Girardot. 1986. “Roccagloriosa (SA): materiali da un pozzo sigillato.” Klearchos 109–12: 127–77. Fracchia, H., and G. Gualtieri. 1989. “The Social Context of Cult Practices in Pre-Roman Lucania.” AJA 92: 217–32. Fracchia, H., and A. Keith. 1990. “Coarse Ware.” In Roccagloriosa I, 262–73. French, S., and R. C. Venette. 2005. “Mini Risk Assess ment. Khapra Beetle, Trogoderma granarium (Everts) [Coleoptera: Dermestidae].” Published 29 Sep. 2005, . Fulford, M.G., and K. Huddleston. 1991. The Current State of Romano-British Pottery Studies: A Review for English Heritage. English Heritage Occasional Paper No. 1. Lon don: English Heritage. Fusaro, D. 1982. “Note di architettura domestica del pe riodo tardo-geometrico e arcaico.” DialArch n.s. 1: 5–30. Gabellone, F. 2007. “La ricostruzione virtuale di contesti antichi in archeologia. Un’esperienza di studio condotta sul sito di Jure Vetere.” In Jure Vetere. Ricerche archeolo giche nella prima fondazione monastica di Gioacchino da Fiore (scavi 2001-2005). Eds. D. Fonseca, D. Roubis, and F. Sogliani. 417–26. Soveria Mannelli: Rubbettino. Gabrieli, S. 2003. “Ancient Tastes.” In Living off the Chora, 23–28. ———. 2011. “Greek and Roman Republican Cooking Wares.” In Survey, 439–54. Gagliardi, V. 2001. “Ceramica a vernice nera dal santuario di Punta Stilo: Contributi all’analisi delle produzioni.” In Kaulonía, 279–318. Gál, E. 2010. “Taphonomic Analysis of Bone Remains from the Chora of Metaponto.” In S. Bökönyi and E. Gál. The Chora of Metaponto 2: Archaeozoology at Pantanello and Five Other Sites. Ed. L. Bartosiewicz. 41–59. Austin: University of Texas Press. Gallo, L. 1997. “Lo sfruttamento delle risorse.” In I Greci. Storia Cultura Arte Società. 2.II. Una storia greca. II. Definizione. Ed. S. Settis. 423–52. Turin: Einaudi. ———. 1999. “La polis e lo sfruttamento della terra.” In La città greca antica. Ed. E. Greco. 37–54. Rome: Donzelli. Gargano, M. P. 2001. “Catalogo.” In Un luogo della Peucezia. Le scoperte archeologiche in contrada Bigetti. Ed. A. Dama to. 65–121. Palo del Colle: Liantonio.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 451
451
Gassner, V. 2003. Materielle Kultur und kulturelle Identität in Elea in spätarchaisch-frühklassischer Zeit. Untersuchungen zur Gefäß- und Baukeramik aus Unterstadt (Grabungen 1987-1994). Velia-Studien II. Wien: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Gervasio, M. 1930. “Scavi di Ceglie.” Japigia 1: 241–72. Ghinatti, F. 1982. “Strutture istituzionali dell’economia ar caica in Magna Grecia.” RIN 84: 1–94. Gialanella, C. 1996. “Pithecusae: le nuove evidenze da Pun ta Chiarito.” In La Magna Grecia nelle collezioni del Museo archeologico di Napoli. Eds. S. De Caro and M. Borriello. 259–74. Naples: Electa. Giannotta, M. T. 1980. Metaponto ellenistico-romana. Gala tina: Congedo. ———. 1995. “Rinvenimenti tombali da Rocavecchia (1934) al Museo Nazionale di Taranto.” StAnt 8,2: 39–74. ———. 1996. “Rinvenimenti tombali da Rocavecchia (1934) al Museo Provinciale di Lecce: materiali di corre do e produzioni.” StAnt 9: 37–98. Giardino, L. 1996. “Architettura domestica a Herakleia. Considerazioni preliminari.” In Ricerche sulla casa, 133–59. ———. 2005. Herakleia e Metaponto: dalla polis italiota all’abitato proto-imperiale. Atti Taranto 44: 387–432. Giardino, L. and A. De Siena. 1999. “Metaponto.” In La città greca antica. Ed. E. Greco. 329–63. Rome: Donzelli. Gilotta, F. 1985. Gutti e askoi a rilievo italioti ed etruschi: teste isolate. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Giovannoni, G. 1958. “Architettura.” In Enciclopedia Universale dell’Arte, I. 621–72. Rome: Poligrafico di Stato. Giuliani, C. F. 1989. L’edilizia nell’antichità. Rome: Carocci. Giuliani, C. F., and P. Sommella. 1977. “Lavinium: com pendio dei documenti archeologici.” PP 32: 356–72. Giumlia-Mair, A. 2002. “Piombo: il metallo velenoso.” In Le arti di Efesto: Capolavori in metallo dalla Magna Grecia. Catalogo della Mostra, Scuderie del Castello di Miramare (Trieste, 8 marzo-28 luglio 2002). Eds. A. Giumlia-Mair and M. Rubinich. 108–9. Trieste: Silvana Editoriale. Gori, B. and T. Pierini. 2001. Gravisca. Scavi nel santuario greco. La ceramica comune. Bari: Edipuglia. Graepler, D. 1994. “Corredi funerari con terrecotte figu rate.” In Museo Taranto III.1, 283–99. ———. 1997. Tonfiguren im Grab. Munich: Biering und Brinkmann. Graham, J. W. 1958. “Light-wells in Classical Greek Hous es?” Hesperia 27: 318–23. Gras, M. 1987. “Amphores commerciales et histoire archaïques.” DialArch 5.3: 41–50. Grassi, B. 2000. “Vasellame e oggetti in bronzo. Artigiani e committenza.” In Capua preromana, VIII. Collana a cura dell’Istituto Nazionale di Studi Etruschi ed Italici di Firenze. 75–78. Pisa-Rome: Istituti editoriali e poligrafici internazionali. Grassi, M. T. 2006. “La ceramica a vernice nera: una pro duzione ad ampio spettro.” In Ceramiche attiche, 756–893.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
452
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
Grasso, L. 2005. “La ceramica miniaturistica votivi di Pom peii.” In Depositi votivi e culti dell’Italia antica dell’età arcaica a quello tardo-repubblicana. Eds. A. Comella and S. Mele. 545–54. Bari. Greco, C. 2010. “Attività della Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeologici della Basilicata.” Atti Taranto 48: 787–824. Greco, E. 1978. “S. Maria del Cedro. Fraz. Marcellina. Lo calità S. Bartolo (Cosenza). Scavi di un centro abitato di epoca ellenistica (1973; 1975).” NSc 32: 429–59. ———. 1995. “Nella chora di Eraclea di Lucania. I monu menti della Masseria del Concio riconsiderati.” In Sur les pas des Grecs en Occident. Hommages à André Nickel. Eds. P. Arcelin, M. Bats, D. Garcia, G. Marchand, and M. Schwaller. Études Massaliètes 4. 459–65. Paris: Er rance-Adam. ———. 1996. “Laos, colonia di Sibari.” In Ricerche sulla casa, 130–31. ———. 2001. “Abitare in campagna.” Atti Taranto 40: 171–201. ———. 2003. “Tra Sibari, Thurii e Copiae: qualche ipotesi di lavoro.” In Archeologia del Mediterraneo, 369–74. Greco, G. 1980. “Le fasi cronologiche dell’abitato di Serra di Vaglio.” In Attività archeologica, 367–88. ———. 1991. Serra di Vaglio. La “casa dei pithoi.” Modena: Panini. ———. 1996. “Per una definizione dell’architettura domes tica di Serra di Vaglio.” In Ricerche sulla casa, 255–300. Green, J. R. 1972. “Oinochoe.” BICS 19: 1–16. Greenewalt, C. H. 1978. Ritual dinners in early historic Sardis. Berkeley: University of California Press. Grenfell, H. R. 1995. “Probable Fossil Zygnemataceaen Al gal Spore Genera.” Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 84: 201–20. Gualtieri, M. 1978. “Roccagloriosa (Salerno). Relazione preliminare sulla campagna di scavo 1976–1977.” NSc 32: 383–421. ———. 1990a. “Il deposito votivo.” In Roccagloriosa I, 101–8. ———. 1990b. “Terrecotte architettoniche, louteria, ele menti architettonici in pietra, macine, vetro.” In Roccagloriosa I, 300–310. ———. 1996. “Residenze gentilizie di IV secolo a.C. a Roccagloriosa.” In Ricerche sulla casa, 301–20. Guarneri, F. 2006. “La donna custode dell’oikos.” In Con il fuso, 118–45. Guidazzoli, A., and M. Forte. 2001. “Archeologia e tecniche di eidologia informatica. Visualizzazione Scientifica, Computer Vision e Realtà Virtuale.” Archeologia e Calcolatori 12: 202–20. Guzzo, P. G. 1978. “Acquappesa. Loc. Aria del Vento (Cosenza). Scavo di una struttura di epoca ellenistica.” NSc 32: 465–79.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 452
———. 1982. “Modificazioni dell’ambiente e della cultura tra VIII e VII secolo a.C. sulla costa ionica dell’Italia.” DialArch n.s. 2: 146–51. ———. 1996. “Case a Sibari.” In Ricerche sulla casa, 123–26. Guzzo, P. G., and P. Liverani. 2007. “La Virtual Archae ology e le istituzioni per la tutela e la fruizione.” In Ut natura ars: Virtual Reality e archeologia. Atti della giornata di studi, Bologna, 22 aprile 2002. Eds. A. Coralini and D. Scagliarini Corlàita. 11–15. Bologna: Imola. Guzzo, P. G., A. Bedini, R. Spadea, and L. Rota. 1970. “Cam pagna di scavo 1970: Stombi.” In Sibari II, 216–366. Guzzo, P. G., M. N. Pagliardi, U. Spigo, and L. Rota. 1972. “Descrizione dei materiali.” In Sibari III, 48–156. Hänsel, B. 1973. “Policoro (Matera). Scavi eseguiti nell’ar ea dell’acropoli di Heraclea negli anni 1965–1967.” NSc, 8th series, Vol. 27: 400–492. Hart, M. L. 2010. The Art of Ancient Greek Theater. Los An geles: J. Paul Getty Museum. Haspels, C. H. E. 1936. Attic Black-figured Lekythoi. Paris: de Boccard. Hayes, J. W. 1984. Greek and Italian Black-Gloss Wares and Related Wares in the Royal Ontario Museum. Toronto: Royal Ontario Museum. Hempel, G. H. and B. Mattioli. 1994. “Contesti tombali di età ellenistica con monete: elementi per una cronologia assoluta.” In Museo Taranto III.1, 355–90. Hendon, J. A. 2004. “Living and Working at Home: The Social Archaeology of Household Production and Social Relations.” In A Companion to Social Archaeology. Eds. L. Meskell and R. W. Preucel. 272–86. Malden/Oxford/ Carlton: Blackwell. Henneberg, R., and M. Henneberg. 2003. “The Diet of the Metapontine Population as Reconstructed from the Physical Remains.” In Living off the Chora, 29–36. Herdejürgen, H. 1971. Die tarentinischen Terrakotten des 6. bis 4. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. im Antikenmuseum Basel. Basel: Archaologischer Verlag. Hodder, I. 1977. “Some New Directions in the Spatial Analysis of Archaeological Data at the Regional Scale (Macro).” In Spatial Archaeology. Ed. D. L. Clarke. 223– 350. London: Academic Press. Hodder, I., and C. Orton. 1976. Spatial Analysis in Archaeology. New Studies in Archaeology 1. Cambridge (u.a.): University Press. Hoffmann, A. 2002. Grabritual und Gesellschaft: Gefäßformen, Bildthemen und Funktionen unteritalisch-rotfiguriger Keramik aus der Nekropole von Tarent. Internationale Archäologie 76. Rahden/Westf.: Leidorf. Hoffmann, H. 1989, “Rhyta and Kantharoi in Greek Rit ual.” In Greek Vases in the J. Paul Getty Museum 4. Ed. J. Frel. Occasional Papers on Antiquities 5. 131–66. Los An geles: J. Paul Getty Museum.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
References Holloway, R. R. 1970. Satrianum. The Archaeological Investigations Conducted by Brown University in 1966 and 1967. Providence: Brown University Press. Hooper, W. D., and H. B. Ash, trans. 1934. Cato and Varro: On Agriculture. Ed. T. E. Page. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Huber, S. 2003. L’Aire Sacrificielle Au Nord du Sanctuaire d’Apollon Daphnephoros. Eretria. Fouilles et Recherches 14.1-2. Gollion: Infolio. Humphreys, S. C. 1967. “Archaeology and the Economic and Social History of Classical Greece.” PP 116: 374–400. Hunter-Anderson, R. L. 1977. “A Theoretical Approach to the Study of House Form.” In For Theory Building in Archaeology. Essays on Faunal Remains, Aquatic Resources, Spatial Analysis, and Systemic Modeling. Ed. L. R. Bin ford. 287–315. New York: Academic Press. Iacobone, C. 1988. Le stipi votive di Taranto (scavi 18851934). Corpus delle stipi votive in Italia. II, Regio II;1. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider. Iannelli, M. T. 2001. “Nuove acquisizioni a proposito della presenza dei Brettii a Caulonia.” In Kaulonía, 319–35. Ingravallo, E. 1980. “L’insediamento eneolitico di Pizzica Pantanello presso Metaponto (Basilicata).” Atti Società Toscana Scienze Naturali, Memorie A87: 317–27. Inizan, M. L., M. Reduron-Ballinger, H. Roche, and J. Tixier. 1999. Technology and Terminology of Knapped Stone. Nanterre: Cercle de Recherces et d’Etudes Pre historiques. Isager, S. and J. E. Skydsgaard. 1992. Ancient Greek Agriculture: An Introduction. London and New York: Routledge. Isler, H. P. 1975. “Monte Iato (Palermo). Scavi 1972–1974.” NSc Ser. 8, Vol. 29: 531–56. ———. 1978. “Monte Iato: l’ottava campagna di scavo.” SicArch XI, 38: 7–29. Jacquat, C. 1988. Hauterive-Champrèveyres. 1. Les Plantes de l’age du Bronze. Catalogue des fruits et graines. Archèologie Neuchateloise 7. Saint-Blaise: Edition du Ruau. Jameson, M. H. 1990. “Domestic Space in the Greek Citystate.” In Domestic Architecture, 92–113. Jameson, M. H., C. N. Runnels, and T. H. van Andel. 1994. A Greek Countryside: The Southern Argolid from Prehistory to the Present Day. Stanford: University Press. Jeffery, L. H. 1990. The Local Scripts of Archaic Greece. Rev. ed. with suppl. by A. W. Johnston. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Jentel, M. O. 1976. Les gutti et les askoi à relief étrusques et apuliens. Essai de classification et de typologie. Leiden: Les Presses de l’Université Laval. Johannowsky, W. 1990. “Il Sannio.” In Italici in Magna Grecia. Lingua, insediamenti e strutture. Ed. M. Tagliente. 13–21. Leukania 3. Venosa: Osanna. Johnston, A. 1989. “The Bronze Coinage of Metapontum.” In Kraay-Mørkholm Essays. Numismatic Studies in Mem-
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 453
453
ory of C.M. Kraay and O. Mørkholm. Ed. G. Le Rider, K. Jenkins, N. Waggoner, and U. Westermark. 121–36. Lou vain-la-Neuve: Institut supérieur d’archéologie et d’his toire de l’art, séminaire de numismatique Marcel Hoc. Jones, J. E. 1975a. “Town and Country Houses of Attica in Classical Times.” In Thorikos and the Laurion in Archaic and Classical Times. Papers and Contributions of the Colloquium held in March 1973 at the State University of Ghent. Ed. H. F. Mussche, P. Spitaels, and F. GoemareDe Poerck. Miscellanea Graeca 1. 63–136. Ghent: Belgian Archaeological Mission in Greece. ———. 1975b. “Another Country House in Attica.” Archaeology 28: 6–15. Jones, J. E., L. H. Sackett, and A. J. Graham. 1962. “The Dema House in Attica.” BSA 57: 75–114. ———. 1973. “An Attic Country House below the Cave of Pan at Vari.” BSA 68: 355–452. Jozzo, M. 1981. “Louteria fittili in Calabria: analisi e classi ficazione preliminare.” Archeologia Classica 33: 143–202. Kac, V. I. 1994. Keramiceskie klejma Chersonesa Tavriceskogo: Katalog-opredelitel. Ceramic Stamps of Tauric Chersonesus (the Determinant Catalogue). Saratov: Saratovskij Univ. Kaltsas, N. 2002. Sculpture in the National Archaeological Museum, Athens. Trans. D. Hardy. Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum. Kanowski, M. G. 1984. Containers of Classical Greece: A Handbook of Shapes. St. Lucia/New York/London: Uni versity of Queensland Press. Karakasi, K. 2003. Archaic Korai. Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum. Kardulias, P. N., and C. Runnels. 1995. “The Lithic Arti facts: Flaked Stone and Other Nonflaked Lithics.” In Artifact and Assemblage: The Finds from a Regional Survey of the Southern Argolid, Greece. Vol. I: The Prehistoric and Early Iron Age Pottery and the Lithic Artifacts. Eds. C. Runnels, D. Pullen, and S. Langdon. 74–139. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Kayser, B. 1961. Recherches sur les sols et l’erosion en Italie Méridionale – Lucanie. Paris: Sedes. Keller, D. R., and M. B. Wallace. 1988. “The Canadian Karystia Project: Two Classical Farmsteads.” Echos du Monde Classique/Classical Views 32, n.s. 7.2: 151–57. Kent, S., 1990. “Activity Areas and Architecture: An Inter disciplinary View of the Relationship between Use of Space and Domestic Built Environments.” In Domestic Architecture, 1–8. Kiffmann, R. 1958. Bestimmungsatlas für Sämereien der Wie sen- und Weidepflanzen des mitteleuropäischen Flachlandes, Kräuter – Teil D, E, F. Freising: Weihenstephan. Kleibrink, M. 1970–1971. “Anfora attica a figure nere e ma cine per grano.” AttiMGrecia, n.s. 11–12: 75–80. Koehler, C. G. 1979. Corinthian A and B Transport Amphoras. Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
454
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
———. 1981. “Corinthian Developments in the Study of Trade in the Fifth Century.” Hesperia 50: 449–58. Koudelka, F. 1885. “Das Verhältniss der Ossa longa zur Skeletthöhe bei den Säugertieren.” Verhandlungen des naturforschenden Vereines in Brünn 24: 127–53. Krause, C. 1977. “Grundformen des griechischen Pastashauses.” AA: 164–79. Kustermann Graf, A. 2002. Selinunte: necropoli di Manicalunga: le tombe della contrada Gaggera. Soveria Mannel li: Rubbettino. La Motta, V. M., and M. B. Schiffer. 1999. “Formation Pro cesses of House Floor Assemblages.” In The Archaeology of Household Activities. Ed. P. M. Allison. 19–29. Lon don/New York: Routledge. La Torre, G. F. 1999. “Enotri e lucani nel territorio di Laos.” In Magna Grecia e Sicilia, 131–43. ———. 2002. Un tempio arcaico nel territorio dell’antica Temesa. L’edificio sacro in località Imbelli di Campora S. Giovanni, Corpus delle stipi votive in Italia 14: Regio 3,4. Archaeologica 133. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider. Labellarte, M. 1990. “La ceramica greca a vernice nera.” In Ceramica greca della Collezione Chini nel Museo Civico di Bassano del Grappa. Eds. G. Andreassi, M. Labellarte, G. A. Maruggi, and A. Patera. Collezioni e Musei archeologici del Veneto 34. 102–7. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider. ———. 1995. “La ceramica a vernice nera.” In G. An dreassi, E. Bianchin Citton, S. Bonomi, A. D’Amicis, A. Dell’Aglio, S. Fozzer, G. Gorini et al. Ceramica sovraddi pinta, ori, bronzi, monete della Collezione Chini nel Museo Civico di Bassano del Grappa. Collezioni e Musei archeologici del Veneto 39. 93–142. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider. Lacava, D. 1923. Metaponto nel passato, nella vita contemporanea, nell’avvenire. Rome: Luzzatti. Lacava, M. 1891. Topografia e storia di Metaponto. Naples. Ristampa Anastatica Matera: BMG srl Editrice. Lacerra, C., A. De Siena, and A. L. Tempesta. 1994. “Corre do tombale da Pisticci. Matina Soprano, tomba 11.” In Armi, 135–49. Lamboley, J. L. 1999. Mur Leccese. Sondages sur la fortification nord. Rome: L’École Française de Rome. Lambrinoudakis, V. 2012. “Hauskulte: Hauskulte in der griechischen Welt.” In ThesCRA Vol. VIII. 17–25. Los Angeles: The J. Paul Getty Museum. Lambrugo, C. 2003. “Oggetti diversi.” In Incoronata 6, 91–92. Lanza, E. 2005. Ceramica di Gnathia al Museo di Antichità di Torino. Documenti di Archeologia 41. Mantova: SAP. Lanza Catti, E. 2008. La ceramica “di Gnathia” al Museo Nazionale Jatta. Ipotesi di ricontestualizzazione. Antenor Quaderni 12. Rome: Quasar. Lanza Catti, E., F. Silvestrelli, K. Swift, A. Tubelli, and E. Vittoria. 2011. “Archaic and Black-Gloss Fine Ware.” In Survey, 143–270. Lattanzi, E. 1981. “L’attività archeologica in Basilicata.” Atti Taranto 20: 331–39.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 454
———. 1982. “L’attività archeologica in Basilicata nel 1981.” Atti Taranto 21: 259–83. Lattimore, R., trans. 1951. The Iliad of Homer. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ———., trans. 1991. The Odyssey of Homer. New York: Harper Perennial. Lawton, C. 2009. “Attic Votive Reliefs and the Pelopon nesian War.” In Art in Athens during the Peloponnesian War. Ed. O. Palagia. 66–93. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lejsgaard Christensen, J. 2010. “The Black Glossed Pot tery.” In J. K. Jacobsen and S. Handberg. Excavation on the Timpone della Motta Francavilla Marittima (1992– 2004). I. The Greek Pottery. Bibliotheca Archaeologica 21. 334–57. Bari: Edipuglia. Lepore, E. 1974. “Problemi di storia metapontina.” Atti Taranto 13: 319. Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1971. L’homme et la Matière. Paris: Éd. Albin Michel. Letta, C. 1971. Piccola coroplastica metapontina nel Museo Archeologico Provinciale di Potenza. Naples: Libreria Scien tifica Editrice. Levi, A. 1926. Le terrecotte figurate del Museo Nazionale di Napoli. Florence: Vallecchi. Limoncelli, M. 2009. “Virtual Archaeology a Hierapolis di Frigia: restauro virtuale e restituzione 3d degli edifici di ordine dorico.” In Hierapolis III. Ed. T. Ismaelli. 493–503. Istanbul: Yanilari. ———. 2012a. Il restauro virtuale in archeologia. Rome: Ca rocci Editore. ———. 2012b. “Virtual Archaeology: A Proposed Recon struction.” In San Biagio, 47–53. Lippolis, E. 1994. “La necropoli ellenistica: problemi di classificazione e cronologia dei materiali.” In Museo Taranto III.1, 238–81. ———. 1995. “La documentazione archeologica,” In E. Lippolis, S. Garraffo, and M. Nafissi. Culti Greci in Occidente I. Taranto. 29–129. Taranto: Scorpione. ———. 2001. “Culto e iconografie della coroplastica voti va. Problemi interpretativi a Taranto e nel mondo greco.” MEFRA 113: 225–55. Lippolis, E., S. Garraffo, and M. Nafissi. 1995. Culti Greci in Occidente I. Taranto. Taranto: Scorpione. Liseno, A. 2001. “L’abitato in pianura. I dati della campagna di scavo 1977.” In Monte Sannace. Città dei Peuceti. Ed. A. Ciancio. 85–112. Bari: Progedit. ———. 2007. Dalla capanna alla casa: dinamiche di trasformazione nell’Italia sud-orientale (VIII-V sec. a. C.). Bari: Progedit. Liseno, M. G. 2004. Metaponto. Il deposito votivo Favale. Corpus delle stipi votive in Italia 12. Regio III, 5. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
References Lissi Caronna, E. 1972. “Oppido Lucano (Potenza): Rap porto preliminare sulla prima campagna di scavo (1967).” NSc 8th ser., 26: 488–534. ———. 1980. “Oppido Lucano (Potenza): Rapporto pre liminare sulla seconda campagna di scavo (1968).” NSc 8th ser., 34: 119–297. ———. 1983. “Oppido Lucano (Potenza): Rapporto pre liminare sulla terza campagna di scavo (1969).” NSc 8th ser., 36: 215–352. ———. 1983–1984. “Oppido Lucano: quattro case di IVIII sec. a.C.” AttiMGrecia, n.s. 24–25: 193–212. ———. 1990–1991. “Oppido Lucano (Potenza). Rapporto preliminare sulla quarta campagna di scavo (1970). Ma teriale archeologico rinvenuto nel territorio del comune.” NSc 9th ser., 1–2: 185–488. ———. 1998–1999. “Metaponto (Matera). Scavo di parte di una fattoria in contrada Casa Teresa, proprietà Duran te.” NSc 9th ser., 9–10: 177–205. Lo Porto, F. G. 1955–1956. “Ceramica arcaica dalla necro poli di Taranto.” ASAA XXI–XXII: 7–230. ———. 1966. “Metaponto. Scavi e ricerche archeologiche.” NSc 8th ser., 20: 136–231. ———. 1973. Civiltà indigena e penetrazione greca nella Lucania orientale. Monumenti Antichi 48. Serie Miscellanea I-3. 149–250. Rome. ———. 1981. “Ricerche e scoperte nell’Heraion di Meta ponto.” Xenia 1: 25–44. ———. 1982. “Metaponto (Matera). Nuovi scavi nella città e nella sua necropoli.” NSc 8th ser., 35: 289–391. ———. 1988.“Testimonianze archeologiche di culti meta pontini.” Xenia 16: 5–28. ———. 1988–1989. “Metaponto (Matera): Rinvenimenti nella città antica e nel suo retroterra ellenizzato.” NSc 8th ser., 42–43: 299–441. ———. 1990. “Oria I. Ritrovamenti di tombe nel Rione Maddalena.” StAnt 6: 101–17. ———. 1991. Timmari. L’abitato, le necropoli, la stipe votiva. Archaeologica 98. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider. ———. 1999. I vasi italioti della Collezione Ragusa di Taranto. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider. ———. 2005. Taranto e dintorni. Ritrovamenti tombali di età arcaica. NSc 9th ser. 13/14. Rome: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Lohmann, H. 1992. “Agriculture and Country Life in Clas sical Attica.” In Agriculture in Ancient Greece, 29–60. Long, L., J. Miro, and G. Volpe. 1992. “Les èpaves archaiques de la pointe Lequin (Porquerolles, Hyères, Var). Des don nées nouvelles sur le commerce de Marseille à la fin du VIe et dans la première moitié du Ve s. Av. J.C.” In Marseille grecque et la Gaule. Actes du Colloque, Marseille 18–23 novembre 1990. Ed. M. Bats. 199–234. Lattes: A.D.A.M. Luppino, S. 1981. “Calabria. Montegiordano. Cosenza.” StEtr 49: 495–96.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 455
455
Lyding Will, E. 1982. “Greco-Italic amphorae”. Hesperia 51: 338–56. Macchioro, S. 1981. “Il territorio di Pomarico in età prero mana.” Acme Sept.–Dec.: 513–33. Macnamara, E. 1983a. “Greek type Cups and Skyphoi.” In Cozzo Presepe, 321–31. ———. 1983b. “One-handlers.” In Cozzo Presepe, 333–37. ———. 1992. “The Metalwork.” In Gravina II, 230–55. Maffettone, R. 1992. “Il territorio di Elea. Nuovi dati su insediamento e viabilità.” In Archeologia e Territorio. Rico gnizioni, scavi e ricerche nel Cilento, Quaderni di documentazione 3. Ed. G. Greco. 167–82. Laureana Cilento: Regi one Campania – Centro Servizi Culturali per il Cilento. Magny, M., O. Peyron, E. Gauthier, Y. Rouèche, A. Bordon, Y. Billaud, E. Chapron, A. Marguet, P. Pétrequin, and B. Vannière. 2009. “Quantitative reconstruction of climatic variations during the Bronze and early Iron ages based on pollen and lake-level data in the NW Alps, France.” Quaternary International 200: 102–10. Malone, M. L. 1998. “Terracotta Figurines.” In Necropoleis, 771–85. Manacorda, D. 1986. “A proposito delle anfore cosidette ‘greco-italiche’: una breve nota.” In Recherches sur les amphores grecques. Eds. J.-Y. Empereur and Y. Garlan. Bulletin de Correspondance Hèllènique Suppl. 13. 581–86. Paris: Diffusion de Boccard. Mancusi, M. 2001. “L’esplorazione archeologica a Noepoli dagli anni ’60 al 1989.” In Carta archeologica Sinni 3, 227–82. Mandíc, J. 2011. “Ceramica a figure rosse, sovraddipinta e miniaturistica.” In Brateís datas. Pratiche rituali, votivi e strumenti del culto dai santuari della Lucania antica. Atti delle giornate di studio sui santuari Lucani (Matera, 19–20 febbraio 2010). Eds. I. Battiloro and M. Osanna. 99–111. Lavello: Edizioni Osanna. Mannoni, T. 2000. “Introduzione.” In Archeologia dei materiali da costruzione. Ed. A. Cagnana. 9–15. Florence: In segna del Giglio. Maraudino, A. 1995. Studio petro-archeometrico di alcuni templi e altari dell’area sacra di Metapontum. Tesi di laurea, Università degli Studi di Bari, Facoltà di Scienze, Dipar timento Geomineralogico. Marchegiani, M. 1997. “La ceramica tornita matt painted.” In Pomarico Vecchio I, 161–74. Martelli, M. 1984. “Per il Dossier dei nomi Etruschi di Vasi: Una Nuova Iscrizione Ceretana del VII sec. a.C.” BdA, fasc. 27: 49–54. Maruggi, G. A. 1996. “Le produzioni ceramiche arcaiche.” In Arte e artigianato, 247–61. ———. 2002. “Il territorio a Nord di Taranto.” Atti Taranto 41: 43–63. Masiello, L. 2006a. “Ceramica acroma.” In Museo Taranto II.2, 317–34.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
456
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
———. 2006b. “Ceramica da fuoco.” In Museo Taranto II.2, 335–42. Mastronuzzi, G., V. Melissano, and D. Spano. 2008. “Ricer che sulla fase arcaica ad Otranto (LE): il cantiere Mitel lo.” StAnt 12: 97–149. Matteucci, P. 1986. “L’uso dei mortai in terracotta nell’ali mentazione antica.” Studi Classici e Orientali 36: 239–77. Mattioli, B. 2002. “Dibattito.” Atti Taranto 41: 312–14. Maturo, C. 1997. “Varia.” In Pomarico Vecchio I, 249–52. Mazarakis Anian, A. 1998. “Oropos in the Early Iron Age.” In Euboica. L’Eubea e la Presenza Euboica in Calcidica e in Occidente. Atti del convegno Internazionale di Napoli 13–16 novembre 1996. Eds. M. Bats and B. d’Agostino. 179–215. Naples: Centre Jean Bérard. Mazier, F., A. Brostöm, M.-J. Gaillard, S. Sugita, P. Vittoz, and A. Buttler. 2008. “Pollen productivity estimates and Relevant Source Area for major taxa in a pasture wood land ( Jura mountains, Switzerland).” Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 17: 479–95. Mazzei, M. 1996. “Le armi.” In Arte e artigianato, 119–28. McPhee, I. 2000. “Falaieff Bell-Kraters from Ancient Corinth.” Hesperia 69: 453–86. Meirano, V. 1996. “Frutti, dolci e focacce in area metapon tina: la documentazione coroplastica.” BBasil 12: 68–101. ———. 1997. “I reperti metallici.” In Pomarico Vecchio I, 235–46. Mele, A. 1998. “Discussione.” In Euboica. L’Eubea e la Presenza Euboica in Calcidica e in Occidente. Atti del convegno Internazionale di Napoli 13–16 novembre 1996. Eds. M. Bats and B. d’Agostino. 408. Naples: Centre Jean Bérard. Mele, E. 1933. “Bernalda. Sepolcro in contrada Avinella.” NSc 58: 195–97. Melis, F., and A. Rathje. 1984. “Considerazioni sullo studio dell’architettura domestica arcaica.” Quaderni del Centro di Studio per l’Archeologia etrusca e italica 8: 382–95. Mercuri, A. M. 2008. “Plant exploitation and ethnopalyno logical evidence from the Wadi Teshuinat area (Tadrat Acacus, Libyan Sahara).” JAS 35 (6): 1619–42. Mercuri, A. M., C. A. Accorsi, and M. Bandini Mazzanti. 2002. “The long history of Cannabis and its cultivation by the Romans in central Italy, shown by pollen records from Lago Albano and Lago di Nemi.” Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 11: 263–76. Mercuri, A. M., L. Sadori, and C. Blasi. 2010. “Editorial: Archaeobotany for cultural landscape and human impact reconstructions.” Plant Biosystems 144 (4): 860–64. Mercuri, A. M., L. Sadori, and P. Uzquiano Ollero. 2011. “Mediterranean and north-African cultural adaptations to mid-Holocene environmental and climatic change.” The Holocene 21: 189–206. Mercuri, A. M., L. Venturi, and C. A. Accorsi. 1992. “Aeroand bryopalynological evidence of widespread Prunoi deae and Maloideae orchards in Vignola (Modena, Northern Italy).” Aerobiologia 8 (1): 109–14.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 456
Mercuri, A. M., C. A. Accorsi, M. Bandini Mazzanti, G. Bosi, A. Cardarelli, D. Labate, M. Marchesini, and G. Trevisan Grandi. 2006. “Economy and environment of Bronze Age settlements – Terramaras – on the Po Plain (Northern Italy): first results from the archaeobotanical research at the Terramara di Montale.” Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 16: 43–60. Mercuri, A. M., A. Florenzano, I. Massamba N’siala, L. Olmi, D. Roubis, and F. Sogliani. 2010. “Pollen from archaeological layers and cultural landscape reconstruc tion: case studies from the Bradano Valley (Basilicata, southern Italy).” Plant Biosystems 144 (4): 888–901. Mercuri, A. M., M. Bandini Mazzanti, P. Torri, L. Vigliotti, G. Bosi, A. Florenzano, L. Olmi, and I. Massamba N’si ala. 2012. “A marine/terrestrial integration for mid-late Holocene vegetation history and the development of the cultural landscape in the Po Valley as a result of human impact and climate change.” Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 21 (4–5): 353–72. Merker, G. S. 2006. The Greek Tile Works at Corinth: The Site and the Finds. Hesperia Suppl. 35. Athens: American School of Classical Studies. Mertens, D. 1999. “Metaponto: l’evoluzione del centro ur bano.” In Storia della Basilicata 1, 247–94. ———. 2001. “L’architettura.” In Metaponto/Archeologia, 45–70. Mertens-Horn, M. 1992. “Die archaischen Baufriese aus Metapont.” RM 99: 1–122. Merzagora, L. 1971. I vasi a vernice nera della collezione H.A. di Milano. Cinisiello Balsamo: Pizzi. Michelini, C. 2002. “Coppe di tipo ionico, laconico e Iato K 480.” In Mozia, 157–64. Millet, M. 1979. “How Much Pottery?” In Pottery and the Archaeologist. Ed. M. Millet. Institute of Archaeology Occasional Publications 4. 77–80. London: University of Lon don Institute of Archaeology. Mitchell, E. A. D., D. J. Charman, and B. G. Warner. 2008. “Testate Amoebae Analysis in Ecological and Paleoeco logical Studies of Wetlands: Past, Present and Future.” Biodiversity and Conservation 17: 2115–37. Mitropoulou, E. 1977. Corpus I. Attic Votive Reliefs of the 6th and 5th centuries B.C. Athens: Pyli. Montanaro, A. C. 2007. Ruvo di Puglia e il suo territorio. Le necropoli. I corredi funerari tra la documentazione del XIX secolo e gli scavi moderni. Studia Archaeologica 160. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Moore, P. D., J. A. Webb, and M. E. Collins. 1991. Pollen Analysis. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Sc. Publ. Morel, J.-P. 1965. Céramique à vernis noir du Forum Romain et du Palatin. Paris: de Boccard. ———. 1970. “Fouilles à Cozzo Presepe prés de Metapon to.” MEFRA 82: 73–116.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
References ———. 1981. Céramique campanienne: les formes. Bibliotheque des Écoles Françaises d’Athenes et de Rome 244. Rome: L’École Française de Rome. ———. 1989. “Garaguso.” In Bibliografia Topografica della Colonizzazione Greca in Italia. 549–52. Pisa/Rome/Na ples: Scuola Superiore Normale di Pisa. Morell i Cortes, N. 2009. La metallurgia del plom durant el periode iberic: treball i us del plom entre els ibers del nord. Doctoral dissertation, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarra gona, Spain. Moretti Sgubini, A. M. 2003. “Ultime scoperte a Vulci.” In Tra Orvieto e Vulci. Atti del X Convegno Internazionale di Studi sulla storia e l’Archeologia dell’Etruria. Annali Fondazione Faina 10. 9–53. Orvieto: La Fondazione. Rome: Quasar. ———. 2004. “Vulci: la Tomba del Guerriero della Polle drara.” In Scavo nello Scavo: gli Etruschi non visti. ricerche e “riscoperte” nei depositi dei musei archeologici dell’Etruria meridionale. Catalogo della Mostra. Ed. A. M. Moretti Sgubini. 150–65. Rome: Ministero per i Beni e le Attiv ità Culturali Morgan, J. 2007a. “Women, Religion, and the Home.” In A Companion to Greek Religion. Ed. D. Odgen. 297–310. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. ———. 2007b. “Space and the Notion of Final Frontier: Searching for Ritual Boundaries in the Athenian Home.” Kernos 20: 113–29. ———. 2010. The Classical Greek House. Exeter: Bristol Phoenix Press. Morter, J., and R. Leonard. 1998. “Storage Amphorae.” In Necropoleis, 731–47. Munzi, P. 1999. “Laos: aspetti di vita quotidiana attraverso lo studio del materiale ceramico.” In Nella terra degli Enotri, 91–97. Musumeci, A. 1989a. “Vasellame di uso domestico.” In Caracausi, 73–115. ———. 1989b. “Vasellame di destinazione varia.” In Caracausi, 117–29. Nafissi, M. 1989. “Distribution and Trade.” In C. M. Stibbe. Laconian Mixing Bowls. A History of the Krater Lakonikos from the Seventh to the Fifth Century BC. 68–88. Amster dam: Pierson Museum. Naso, A. 2000. “Le Aristocrazie Etrusche in Periodo Orien talizzante: Cultura, Economia, Relazioni.” In Gli Etru schi, catalogo della mostra. Ed. M. Torelli. 111–30. Milan: Bompiani. Nava, M. L. 1998. “L’attività archeologica in Basilicata nel 1997.” Atti Taranto 37: 871–905. ———. 1999. “L’attività archeologica in Basilicata nel 1998.” Atti Taranto 38: 689–732. ———. 2000. “L’attività archeologica in Basilicata nel 1999.” Atti Taranto 39: 675–726. ———. 2001. “L’attività archeologica in Basilicata nel 2000.” Atti Taranto 40: 939–80.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 457
457
———. 2002. “L’attività archeologica in Basilicata nel 2001.” Atti Taranto 41: 719–65. ———. 2003a. “L’attività archeologica in Basilicata nel 2002.” Atti Taranto 42: 653–717. ———. 2003b. “Metodologie integrate di tutela archeo logica. Il caso della Basilicata.” In Lo sguardo di Icaro. Le collezioni dell’Aerofototeca Nazionale per la conoscenza del territorio. Ed. M. Guaitoli. 130–41. Rome: Campisano. ———. 2004. “L’attività archeologica in Basilicata nel 2003.” Atti Taranto 43: 935–1000. ———. 2005. “L’attività archeologica in Basilicata nel 2004.” Atti Taranto 44: 313–86. Nevett, L. C. 1994. “Separation or Seclusion? Towards an Archaeological Approach to Investigating Women in the Greek Household in the Fifth to Third Centuries BC.” In Architecture and Order: Approaches to Social Space. Eds. M. P. Pearson and C. Richards. 89–101. London: Routledge. ———. 1999. Houses and Society in the Ancient Greek World. Cambridge. Nicholas, K. L. 1999. Interpreting Religious Ritual in Magna Graecia: an Analysis of the Archaic and Classical BlackGlaze Ceramics from the Rural Sanctuary at Pantanello (Metaponto). Doctoral dissertation, University of Cali fornia, Los Angeles. Nigro, M. 2006. “La ceramica in argilla depurata acroma.” In Cuma 2, 81–88. Nikolaenko, G. M. 2001a. “The Adjacent Chora of Tauric Chersonesos in the 4th Century BC.” Colloquia Pontica 6: 177–204. ———. 2001b. Chora Khersonesa Tavričeskogo. Zemelniy Kadastr, IV-III do n.e. Chast II. Sevastopol: National Pre serve of “Tauric Chersonesos.” Nilsson, M. 1972. Greek Folk Religion. 2nd ed. Philadelphia. Nordstrom, H. A. 1992. “The Crooked Little House of Pot tery Classification.” Journal of the European Study Group on Physical, Chemical and Mathematical Techniques Applied to Archaeology 38: 239–44. Notario, C. 2001. “Saldone di Metaponto.” In Bibliografia Topografica della Colonizzazione Greca in Italia 17. 201–5. Pisa-Rome-Naples: Scuola Superiore Normale di Pisa. Oakley, J. H. 1988. “Attic Red-Figured Skyphoi of Corin thian Shape.” Hesperia 57: 165–91. Odell, G. H. 2004. Lithic Analysis: Manuals in Archaeological Method, Theory, and Technique. New York: Kluwer Aca demic/Plenum Publishers. Olbrich, G. 1976. “Ein Heiligtum der Artemis Metapon tina? Zur Ikonographie der Terrakotta-Figuren von S. Biagio bei Metapont.” PP 31: 376–408. ———. 1979. Archaische Statuetten eines metapontiner Heiligtums. Studia Archaeologica 23. Rome: L’Erma di Bret schneider.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
458
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
Olcese, G. 1993. Le ceramiche comuni di Albintimilium. Inda gini archeologica e archeometriche sui materiali dell’area del Cardine. Florence: All’insegna del Giglio. ———. 2004. “Anfore Greco-italiche: alcune osservazioni sull’origine e sulla circolazione alla luce di recenti ricer che archeologiche ed archeometriche.” In Archaeological Methods and Approaches: Industry and Commerce in Ancient Italy. Eds. E. C. De Sena and H. Dessales. BAR-IS 1262. 173–92. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. ———. 2010. Le anfore greco italiche di Ischia: archeologia e archeometria. Artigianato ed economia nel Golfo di Napoli. Rome: Edizioni Quasar. Olivero Ferrero, G. 1989. “La ceramica a vernice nera. Il vasellame di IV e III strato.” In Locri II, 71–106. Orlandos, A. K. 1966–1968. Les matériaux de construction et la technique architecturale des anciens Grecs. Trans. V. Had jimichali and K. Laumonier. Travaux et mémoires (École Française d’Athènes) 16. Paris: E. de Boccard. Orsi, P. 1898. “Le necropoli di Licodia Eubea e i vasi geo metrici del quarto periodo siculo.” RM 13: 361–63. Orton, C. 1992. “Quantitative Methods in the 1990’s.” In Proceedings of the 19th CAA Conference, Oxford, 25th–27th March 1991. Ed. G. Lock and J. Moffett. BAR-IS S577. 137–40. Oxford: British Archaeological Review. ———. 1993. “How Many Pots make Five? An Historical Review of Pottery Quantification.” Archaeometry 35.2: 169–84. Orton, C. and Tyers, P. 1990. “Statistical Analysis of Ce ramic Assemblages.” Archeologia e Calcolatori 1: 81–110. Orton, C., P. Tyers, and A. Vince, 1993. Pottery in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Osanna, M., ed. 1992. Chorai coloniali da Taranto a Locri. Docu mentazione archeologica e ricostruzione storica. Rome: Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato. Libreria dello Stato. ———. 2001a. “Fattorie e villaggi in Magna Grecia.” Atti Taranto 40: 203–20. ———. 2001b. “Azioni rituali e offerte votive.” In Rituali, 107–15. ———. 2008. “L’attività archeologica in Basilicata nel 2007.” Atti Taranto 47: 911–44. ———. 2010. “Greci ed indigeni nei santuari della Ma gna Grecia.” In Grecs et indigènes de la Catalogne à la Mer Noire. Actes des rencontres du programme européen Ramses (2006-2008). Ed. H. Tréziny. Bibliothèque d’archéologie méditerranéenne et africaine 3. 605–12. Paris: Errance, Centre Camille Jullian. Osanna, M., I. Battiloro, and C. Trombetti. 2011. “Ceram ica attica nei santuari della costa ionica dell’Italia meri dionale: colonie achee e indigeni tra paradia e mesogaia.” In Ceramica attica da santuari della Grecia, della Ionia e dell’Italia. Atti convegno Perugia 14–17 marzo 2007. Eds. S. Fortunelli and C. Masseria. 455–94. Venosa: Osanna.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 458
Osborne, R. 1985a. “Buildings and Residence on the Land in Classical and Hellenistic Greece: The Contribution of Epigraphy.” BSA 80: 119–28. ———. 1985b. Demos: The Discovery of Classical Attika. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ———. 1987. Classical Landscape with Figures. The Ancient Greek City and its Countryside. London: George Philip. ———. 1992. “Is It a Farm?” The Definition of Agricultural Sites and Settlements in Ancient Greece. In Agriculture in Ancient Greece, 21–27. ———. 1996. “Classical Landscape Revisited.” Topoi 6.1: 49–64. Östenberg, C. E. 1975. Case etrusche di Acquarossa. Rome: Multigrafica. Otto, B. 2005. Il santuario sorgivo di Siris-Herakleia nell’odierno Comune di Policoro. In Lo spazio del rito, 5–18. ———. 2007. Il Santuario di Demetra a Policoro. Gli spazi del culto, le divinità e i rituali. Taranto: Scorpione Editrice. Pagliara, C. 1981. “Vaste, fondo Lucernara.” StAnt 2: 169–71. Palagia, O. 2009. “Archaism and the Quest for Immortality in Attic Sculpture during the Peloponnesian War.” In Art in Athens during the Peloponnesian War. Ed. O. Palagia. 24–51. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Palmentola, P. 2006. “Ceramica a vernice nera – coppe io niche.” In Museo Taranto II.2, 463–523. Panella, C. 1996. “Lo studio delle ceramiche comuni in età romana: qualche riflessione.” In Les Céramiques communes, 9–15. Parente, A. R. 2009. “Per un’economia del territorio in Lu cania di IV e III a.C.: la documentazione numismatica.” In Verso la città, 45–51. Parmly Toxey, A., and J. C. Carter. 1998. “Unglazed Pot tery.” In Necropoleis, 721–30. Patera, A. 1986. “Tomba a camera tarantina.” Taras 6: 31–64. Paul, R. 1959. Antike Welt in Ton. Griechische und römische Terrakotten des archäologischen Institutes in Leipzig. Leipzig: Seemann. Pearsall, D. M. 2000. Palaeoethnobotany: A Handbook of Procedures. 2nd ed. London: Academic Press. Pečírka, J. 1973. “Homestead Farms in Classical and Helle nistic Hellas.” In Problèmes de la terre, 113–47. Pelagatti, P. 1980–1981. “L’attività della Soprintendenza alle Antichità della Sicilia Orientale, Part II.” Kokalos 26–27: 694–735. ———. 1989. “Ceramica laconica in Sicilia e a Lipari. Ma teriali per una carta di distribuzione.” BdA 74: 1–62. ———. 1992. “Ceramica laconica in Sicilia e a Lipari. Materiali per una carta di distribuzione.” In Lakonikà, 123–92. ———. 2002. “La ceramica laconica a Taranto e nella Pu glia.” Atti Taranto 41: 365–403. Peluso, P. 1992. “L’opus doliare.” In Locri IV, 257–62.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
References Peroni, R. 1967. “Tipologia e analisi stilistica nei materiali della preistoria: breve messa a punto.” DialArch 1: 155–58. Pesando, F. 2006. La casa dei Greci. 2nd ed. Biblioteca di archeologia 11. Milan: Longanesi. Pianu, G. 1990. La necropoli meridionale di Eraclea. Rome: Quasar. ———. 2002. L’agorà di Eraclea Lucana. Collana del Dipartimento di storia dell’Università degli studi di Sassari 12. Rome: Carocci. Pica, E. 1986. “Tolve (Potenza).” StEtr 52: 485–87. Picon M., and Olcese G. 1994. “Per una classificazione in laboratorio delle ceramiche comuni.” In Ceramica romana e archeometria: lo stato degli studi. Atti delle Giornate Internazionali di Studio, Castello di Montegufoni (Firenze) 1993. Ed. G. Olcese. Quaderni del Dipartimento di ar cheologia e storia delle arti. Sezione archeologica 37. 105–14. Florence: All’insegna del Giglio. Piera Caggia, M., and V. Melissano. 1997. “Il sistema per la gestione dei dati di scavo. Normalizzazione dei dati e vocabolari.” In Metodologie di catalogazione per i Beni Culturali. BACT 1.1. Ed. F. D’Andria. 97–116. Lecce-Bari: Martano. Pierro, E. 1984. Ceramica “ionica” non figurata e coppe attiche a figure nere. Materiali del Museo archeologico nazionale di Tarquinia 6. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider. Pignatti, S. 1982. Flora d’Italia. Bologna: Edagricole. Pizzo, M. 1955a. “Bacini fittili.” In Incoronata 3, 93–95. ———. 1955b. “Ceramica comune.” In Incoronata 3, 97–100. ———. 1995c. “Ceramica da fuoco.” In Incoronata 3, 101–4. Poli, N. 2006. “A proposito del vasellame miniaturistico nei contesti cultuali dell’Italia meridionale. Quaderni Friu lani di Archeologia 16: 239–46. Pomeroy, S. B. 1994. Xenophon Oeconomicus: a social and historical commentary, with a new English Translation. New York: Oxford University Press. Pontrandolfo, A. 1979. “Segni di trasformazioni sociale a Poseidonia tra la fine del V e gli inizi del III sec. a.C.” DialArch n.s. 1.2: 27–50. ———. 2000. “La ceramica attica di IV secolo in area tir renica.” In La céramique attique du IVe siècle en Méditerranée occidentale. Actes du colloque international organisé par le Centre Camille Jullien, Arles, 7–9 décembre 1995. Ed. B. Sabattini. 121–30. Naples: Centre Jean Bérard. Poppe, G. T., and Y. Goto. 1993. European Seashells Vol. 2 (Scaphopoda, Bivalvia, Cephalopoda). Weisbaden: Verlag Christa Hemmen. Postrioti, G. 1996. La stipe votiva del tempio «E» di Metaponto, Corpus delle stipi votive in Italia IX, Regio III.2. Archeo logica 117. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider. Prag, A. J. N. 1983. “Black-glazed Ware.” In Cozzo Presepe, 351–64. ———. 1992. “Black Glaze Ware.” In Gravina II, 67–131.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 459
459
Preacco, M. C. 1996. “La ceramica a vernice nera. La Cala bria.” In Arte e artigianato, 346–53. Preacco Ancona, M. C. 1997. “La ceramica a rilievo.” In Pomarico Vecchio I, 139–46. Prieto, A., with J. C. Carter. 2011. “Types of Structures in the Chora.” In Survey, 591–616. Prohászka, M. 1998. “Metal Objects and Coins.” In Necropoleis, 787–835. Py, M. 1993. “Céramique grecque orientale.” Lattara 6: 435–44. Py, M., and A. M. Adroher Auroux. 1991. “Principes d’enre gistrement du mobilier archéologique.” Lattara 4: 83–100. Quercia, A. 2003. “La ceramica da fuoco dello scarico 1 dal Kerameikos di Metaponto.” In V. Cracolici, I sostegni di fornace dal Kerameikos di Metaponto. Beni Archeologici – Conoscenza e Tecnologie. Quaderno 3. 175–199. Bari: Edi puglia. Quilici, L. 1967. Siris-Heraclea. Forma Italiae. Regio III, 1. Rome: De Luca. Racheli, A. 1993. “Lo scavo nell’area della Banca Popolare Cooperativa.” In Crotone e la sua storia tra IV e III sec. a.C. Ed. M. L. Napoletano. 51–60. Naples: Arte Tipografica. Reber, K. 1998. Die klassischen und hellenistischen Wohnhäuser im Westquartier. Eretria. Ausgrabungen und Forschungen X. Lausanne: Payot. Renfrew, J. M. 1973. Paleoethnobotany. London: Methuen & Co. Rescigno, C. 2001a. “Le colline di Senise. Il territorio tra la Fiumarella S. Arcangelo e il fosso Bomberto.” In Carta archeologica Sinni 4, 11–156. ———. 2001b. “Osservazioni sui materiali.” In Carta ar cheologica Sinni 4, 157–258. Riccardi, A. 1989a. “Scavo G –settore 3.” In Monte Sannace, 65–78. ———. 1989b. “Fase IIb. L’edificio tardo acaico (seconda metà VI-metà IV secolo a.C.).” In Monte Sannace, 132–54. ———. 1998. “Ruvo di Puglia (Bari), via Oberdan.” Taras 18.1: 47–48. ———. 2003. “La documentazione archeologica.” In Antichi Peucezi, 51–88. ———. 2006. “Ceramica a fasce e di stile misto.” In Museo Taranto II.2, 351–88. ———. 2008. Donne e guerrieri da Ruvo e Bitonto. Le sco perte del III millennio. Catalogo del Museo Archeologico della Fondazione De Palo – Ungaro II. Bari: Edipuglia. Ricci, A. 1985. Settefinestre. Una villa schiavistica nell’Etruria romana III. La villa e i suoi reperti. Modena: Panini. Ridgway, B. S. 1981. Fifth Century Styles in Greek Sculpture. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ———. 1997. Fourth Century Styles in Greek Sculpture. Lon don: Duckworth. Ridgway, D. 1982. “Archaeology in South Italy, 1977–81.” Archaeological Reports 28: 63–83.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
460
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
———. 1995. “Archaeology in Sardinia and South Italy 1989–94.” Archaeological Reports 41: 75–96. ———. 1997. “Nestor’s cup and the Etruscans.” OJA 16 (N°3): 325–44. ———. 1998. “L’Eubea e l’Occidente: nuovi spunti sulle rotte dei metalli.” In Euboica. L’Eubea e la Presenza euboica in Calcidica e in Occidente. Atti del convegno Internazionale di Napoli 13–16 Novembre 1996. Eds. M. Bats and B. d’Agostino. 311–22. Naples: Centre Jean Bérard. ———. 2009. “La Coppa di Nestore e una Grattugia da Vulci.” In Etruria e Italia Preromana- Studi in onore di Giovannangelo Camporeale, II (I-II). Ed. S. Bruni. 789– 91. Pise-Rome: Fabrizio Serra. Riera, S., J. A. López-Sáez, and R. Julià. 2006. “Lake Re sponses to Historical Land Use Changes in Northern Spain: The Contribution of Non-Pollen Palynomorphs in a Multiproxy Study.” Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 141: 127–37. Rinaldi, M. 2005. “Ceramica comune.” In Torre di Satriano I, 222–39. Robinson, D. M. 1941. “Metal and Minor Miscellaneous Finds: an Original Contribution to Greek Life.” In Excavations at Olynthus X. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press. ———. 1946. Excavations at Olynthus XII. Domestic and Public Architecture. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press. Rocchietti, D. 2002. Aree sepolcrali a Metaponto. Corredi ed ideologia funeraria fra VI e III secolo a.C. Potenza: Consi glio Regionale della Basilicata. ———. 2002–2003. Reperti vascolari della necropoli di Metaponto già conservati al Museo di Reggio Calabria. Tesi di Specializzazione, University of Turin. Rolley, C. 1994. La Sculpture Grecque 1. Des origins au milieu du Ve siècle. Paris: Picard. ———. 1999. La Sculpture Grecque 2. La période classique. Paris: Picard. Romualdi, A. 1977. “Impasto Locale.” In Sibari IV, 66. Rossi, F. 1989. “Fase III. Dall’ellenismo alla romanizzazione (seconda metà del IV secolo a.C.-I sec. d.C.).” In Monte Sannace, 155–210. Rota, L. 1977. “Ceramica Comune.” In Sibari IV, 255. Roubis, D. 1996. “Ricerche archeologiche nell’abitato in digeno di Difesa San Biagio (Montescaglioso).” In Ricerche sulla casa, 235–53. Rubinich, M., and V. Origlia. 1989. “Le arule a Locri Epize firi. I. Problemi generali.” In Locri III, 41–52. Ruby, P. 1993. “Types et fonctions dans les typologies céramiques archéologiques. Quelques problèmes et quelques propositions.” AION 15: 289–320. Ruga, A. 2010. “Espressioni di eusebeia domestica a Cro tone.” In Caulonia tra Crotone e Locri : Atti del Convegno Internazionale, Firenze, 30 maggio – 1 giugno 2007. Eds. L. Lepore and P. Turi. 209–26. Florence: Florence Uni versity Press.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 460
Ruga, A., D. Roubis, C. Rescigno, and R. Fiorillo. 2005. “Ricerche nella chora meridionale di Crotone: prospe zioni e scavi (1990–1991).” In Kroton e il suo territorio tra VI e V secolo a.C.: Aggiornamenti e nuove ricerche, Atti del Convegno di Studi, Crotone 3–5 marzo 2000. Ed. R. Belli Pasqua and R. Spadea. 149–206. Crotone: Grafica Seriart. Runnels, C. N. 1981. A Diachronic Study and Economic Analysis of Millstones from the Argolid. Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University. Runnels, C., and T. H. van Andel. 1987. Beyond the Acropolis: a Rural Greek Past. Stanford: Stanford University. Russo, A. 1996a. “Armento.” In Greci, Enotri e Lucani, 238. ———. 1996b. “Le abitazioni degli indigeni: problema tiche generali.” In Ricerche sulla casa, 67–87. ———. 2006a. “Organizzazione insediativa ed edilizia do mestica indigena nell’alta valle dell’Agri tra il IV e il II secolo a.C.” In Con il fuso, 19–57. ———. 2006b. “L’edilizia domestica in Lucania tra il IV e il II secolo a.C. Nuove considerazioni sulla casa e sui culti domestici.” In Con il fuso, 169–203. ———. 2010a. “Modalità insediative in alta Val d’Agri tra IV e III secolo a.C.” In Il territorio grumentino e la valle dell’Agri nell’antichità. Atti della Giornata di Studi (Grumento Nova, Potenza, 25 aprile 2009). Ed. F. Tarlano. 45–48. Bologna: BraDypUS. ———. 2010b. “Cerimonie rituali e offerte votive nello spazio domestico dei centri della Lucania settentrio nale.” In Grecs et indigènes de la Catalogne à la Mer Noire. Actes des rencontres du programme européen Ramses (2006– 2008). Ed. H. Tréziny. Bibliothèque d’archéologie méditerranéenne et africaine 3. 613–25. Paris: Errance, Centre Camille Jullian. Russo, A., V. Distasi, T. Perretti, and F. Guarneri. 2006. “La ceramica nella vita quotidiana.” In Con il fuso, 146–67. Russo, G. 1996. “La ceramica a vernice nera. Taranto. Cata logo.” In Arte e artigianato, 329–32. Russo Tagliente, A. 1992. Edilizia domestica in Apulia e Lucania. Ellenizzazione e società nella tipologia abitativa indigena tra VIII e III sec. a.C. Galatina: Congedo. ———. 1999. “Processi di trasformazione nell’edilizia do mestica della Basilicata centro-settentrionale tra V e III sec. a.C.” In Magna Grecia e Sicilia, 107–16. Russo Tagliente, A., and M. Tagliente. 1993. “Moltone di Tolve – complesso residenziale.” In Da Leukania a Lucania, 39–47. Sabbione, C. 1977a. “La ceramica. Problemi di interpreta zione dei materiali ceramici.” In Locri I, 51–72. ———. 1977b. “La ceramica a vernice nera dalla metà del V al III secolo a.C.” In Locri I, 97–127. Sadori, L., and M. Giardini. 2008. “Environmental histo ry in the Mediterranean basin: microcharcoal as a tool to disentangle human impact and climate change.” In Charcoals from the Past: Cultural and Palaeoenvironmental
5/30/14 7:43 AM
References Implications. Proceedings of the Third International Meeting of Anthracology, Cavallino – Lecce (Italy), June 28th – July 1st 2004. Eds. G. Fiorentino and D. Magri. BAR-IS 1807. 229–36. Oxford: Archaeopress. Sadori, L., and B. Narcisi. 2001. “The postglacial record of environmental history from Lago di Pergusa, Sicily.” The Holocene 11 (6): 655–70. Sanpietro, A. 1991. La ceramica a figure nere di San Biagio (Metaponto). Quaderni di archeologia e storia antica 2. Ga latina: Congedo. Saprykin, S. 1994. Ancient Farms and Land-plots on the Khora of Khersonesos Taurike. McGill University Monographs in Classical Archaeology and History 16. Amsterdam: Gieben. ———. 2001. “Polis Chora in the Kingdom of Bosporus.” Atti Taranto 40: 635–65. Saunders, S. L., and J. du Plat Taylor. 1992. “Wheel-made Painted Ware.” In Gravina, 13–41. Scarano, G. 1992. “La necropoli di Metaponto in età elle nistica.” BBasil 8: 17–24. Scarfì, B. M. 1961. “Gioia del Colle (Bari). Scavi nella zona di Monte Sannace. Le tombe rinvenute nel 1957.” Monumenti Antichi dei Lincei 45: 145–332. ———. 1962. “Gioia del Colle (Bari). L’abitato peucetico di Monte Sannace.” NSc 16: 1–283. Schmid, E. 1972. Atlas of Animal Bones/Knochenatlas. Am sterdam/London/New York: Elsevier Publishing Co. Schmiedt, G., and R. Chevallier. 1959. “Caulonia e Meta ponto. Applicazioni della fotografia aerea in ricerche di topografia antica nella Magna Grecia.” L’Universo 39: 27–36 and 993–1032. Schojer, T. 2001. “Ginosa Marina (Taranto).” Taras 21.1: 124–26. ———. 2002. “Il N.W. tarantino.” Atti Taranto 41.3 (Tavola Rotonda): 65-86. ———. 2003. “Ginosa Marina (Taranto), Pantano.” Taras 23.1–2: 242–244. Sciallano, M., and P. Sibella. 1994. Amphores. Comment les identifier? Aix-en-Provence: Edisud. Semeraro, G. 1983. “Otranto dal VI sec. a.C. all’età ellenis tica (Scavi 1977–1979).” StAnt 4: 125–212. ———. 1992. “La ceramica pre-romana e romana.” In Excavations at Otranto, 13–44. ———. 1997. En neusì. Ceramica greca e società nel Salento arcaico. Lecce-Bari: Martano. ———. 2004. “Forma e funzione. Osservazioni sul rappor to fra nuovi sviluppi dell’archeologia e il linguaggio de scrittivo.” Archeologia e Calcolatori 15: 161–83. Sestieri, P. C. 1940. “Metaponto. Campagna di scavi (mar zo–aprile 1939).” NSc, 7th ser., Vol. 1: 51–122. Shcheglov, A. N. 1967. “Issledovanie sel’skoj okrugi Kalos Limena (Russ.) L’exploration des environs ruraux de Ka los Limen.” Sovetskaja Archeologija 1967.3: 234–56.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 461
461
Shorey, P., trans. 1963. Plato’s Republic. Ed. T. E. Page. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Sica, M. M. 2000–2001. “Eusèbeia domestica. Attestazioni di culto nelle case di Olinto.” Siris 3: 107–77. Signore, M. G. 1996. “Rilievi fittili con recumbente dal ce ramico di Metaponto.” StAnt 9: 299–359. Silvestrelli, F. 2011a. “Black Gloss of the Late Archaic and Classical Periods.” In Survey, 178–79. ———. 2011b. “Figured Ware.” In Survey, 303–36. ———. Forthcoming a. “Il kerameikos di Metaponto.” In Contestualizzare la ceramica greca. Atti della Summer School, Università di Lecce in collaborazione con il King’s College di Londra, Cavallino (LE), 28 giugno – 7 luglio 2001. Eds. F. D’Andria and G. Semeraro. ———. Forthcoming b. “Red-figured Vases from Meta pontion. New Evidence from the Necropoleis.” In Atti Convegno Cincinnati. Silvestrelli, F., and K. Swift. 2011. “I. Evidence for BlackGloss Fine-Ware Production in the Chora.” In Survey, 143–45. Simonetti, M. 2001. “Le arulae da Caulonia.” In Kaulonía I, 337–415. Sinos, S. 1971. Die vorklassischen Hausformen in der Ägäis. Mainz: von Zabern. Small, A., and C. Small. 2010. “The Black-gloss Pottery from the Iron Age Site of San Felice, South Italy.” Mouseion III.10: 243–80. Smith, C. F., trans. 1991. Thucydides I. Ed. G. P. Goold. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Uni versity Press. Sofia, G. 2009. “Cultura materiale nei contesti sepolcrali.” In La necropoli di Abakainon. Eds. G. M. Bacci and P. Coppolino. 75–106. Messina: Sfameni. Soppelsa, G. 1991. “Tolve (Potenza). Monte Moltone.” BdA 9: 89–94. Spadea, R. 1987. “Il santuario nel fondo Griso-Labocetta.” In Museo Reggio, 90–91. Sparkes, B. A. 1962. The Greek Kitchen. JHS 82: 121–37. Stazio, A. 1974. “Osservazioni sulla moneta di Metaponto.” Atti Taranto 13: 67–106. Stea, G. 1997. “Ceramica comune.” In Incoronata 5, 75–86. Stewart, A. 1990. Greek Sculpture. An Exploration. New Ha ven: Yale University Press. Stibbe, C. M. 1986. “Il cratere laconico.” In Studi sulla ceramica laconica. Atti del Seminario, Perugia 23–24 febbraio 1981. Ed. F. Pompili. Archaeologia Perugina 3. 75–89. Rome: G. Bretschneider. ———. 1989. Laconian Mixing Bowls. A History of the Krater Lakonikos from the Seventh to the Fifth Century BC. Amsterdam: Pierson Museum. Strzheletskiy, S. F. 1961. Klery Khersonesa Tavricheskogo. Khersonesski Sbornik 6. Simferopol’: Krymizdat.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
462
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
Sullivan, D. G. 1983. Pollen Evidence for Land Use and Vegetation Change at Pizzica-Pantanello. Unpublished report, Institute of Classical Archaeology, University of Texas at Austin. Surra, A., and M. C. Preacco Ancona. 1997. “La ceramica a vernice nera: forme aperte.” In Pomarico Vecchio I, 65–82. Svoronos-Hadjimichalis, V. 1956. “L’évacuation de la fumée dans les maisons grecques des Ve et IVe siècles.” Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique 80: 483–506. Swift, K. 2011a. “The Survey Assemblages.” In Survey, 129–42. ———. 2011b. “Archaic to Late-Republican Transport Amphorae.” In Survey, 455–88. Tagliente, M. 1984. “Il territorio di Latronico e la Valle del Sinni dall’VIII al III secolo a.C.” In Testimonianze archeologiche del territorio di Latronico. Mostra documentaria. Ed. S. Bianco. 51. Galatina: Congedo. ———. 1986. “Policoro: nuovi scavi nell’area di Siris.” In Siris-Polieion, 129–33. ———. 1987. “Corleto Perticara.” In Bibliografia Topografica della Colonizzazione Greca in Italia, 5. Eds. G. Nenci and G. Vallet. 420–21. Pisa-Rome-Naples: Scuola Supe riore Normale di Pisa, L’École Française de Rome, Cen tre J. Bérard Naples. ———. 1989. “Episcopia.” In Bibliografia Topografica della Colonizzazione Greca in Italia. Eds. G. Nenci and G. Vallet. 196–97. Pisa-Rome-Naples: Scuola Superiore Normale di Pisa, L’École Française de Rome, Centre J. Bérard Naples. ———. 1990. “Banzi.” In Basilicata. L’espansionismo romano nel sud-est d’Italia. Il quadro archeologico, Atti del Conve gno Venosa 23–25 aprile 1987. Ed. M. Salvatore. Leukania 2. 71–77. Venosa: Osanna. ———. 2002. “Strumenti e Iconografia del Simposio.” In Catalogo della mostra. Il Vino di Dioniso Dei e Uomini a Banchetto. Ed. A. De Siena. 25–30. Siena: AL.SA. BA.Grafiche. ———. 2006. “L’attività archeologica in Basilicata nel 2005.” Atti Taranto 45: 725–54. Tang, B. 2005. Delos, Carthage, Ampurias. The Housing of Three Mediterranean Trading Centres. Analecta Romana Instituti Danici 36. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Tardo, V. 2004. “Le coppe ioniche dalla stipe del tempio A di Himera. Note in margine ad una produzione colo niale.” Kokalos 46,1: 381–415. Tempesta, A. 2002. “La casa.” In I Greci. Atlante II. Ed. S. Settis. 1125–227. Turin: Einaudi. Thompson, H. A. 1934. “Two Centuries of Hellenistic Pot tery.” Hesperia 3: 311–480. Thompson, H. A., and R. E. Wycherley. 1972. The Athenian Agora, XIV. The Agora of Athens: The History, Shape, and Uses of an Ancient City Center. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 462
Threipland, L. M., and M. Torelli. 1970. “A Semi-Subterra nean Etruscan Building in the Casale Pian Roseto (Veii) area.” PBSR 38: 62–121. Tocco, G. 1990. “La villa di Moltone (Tolve).” In Basilicata. L’espansionismo romano nel sud-est d’Italia. Il quadro archeologico, Atti del Convegno Venosa 23–25 aprile 1987. Ed. M. Salvatore. Leukania 2. 95–99. Venosa: Osanna. Togninelli, P. 2004. “La necropoli arcaica di Timmari.” Siris 5: 69–157. Tomei, D. 2008. “I kantharoi greci a figure nere e rosse.” Ostraka 17: 111–80. Torelli, M. 1977. “I culti di Locri.” Atti Taranto 16: 147–84. Toynbee, A. J. 1965. Hannibal’s Legacy. The Hannibalic War’s Effects on Roman Life. London: Oxford University Press. Tramonti, A. 1983. “Note per la carta archeologica di San Mauro Forte.” In Studi Adamesteanu, 87–95. Tschurtschenthaler, M., and V. Gertl. 2012. “Siris Hera kleia 2011.” FASTI Online. . ———. 1986. “Croccia Cognato (MT).” StEtr 52: 469–71. Tubelli, A. 2006. “Coppe ioniche.” In Cuma, 43–50. ———. 2007. “Le coppe ioniche dalle fortificazioni setten trionali di Cuma.” In Ceramiche fini, 35–39. ———. 2011. “Archaic Fine Ware.” In Survey, 145. Uggeri, G. 1969. “Kleroi arcaici e bonifica classica nella chora di Metaponto.” PP 24: 51–71. Uguzzone, A. and F. Ghinatti. 1968. Le Tavole greche di Eraclea. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Vacca, L. 2011. “Armi e strumenti, oggetti di ornamen to personale.” In Brateís datas. Pratiche rituali, votivi e strumenti del culto dai santuari della Lucania antica. Atti delle giornate di studio sui santuari Lucani (Matera, 19–20 febbraio 2010). Eds. I. Battiloro and M. Osanna. 81–94. Lavello: Edizioni Osanna. Valentini, G., S. Favaretto, A. Miola, and I. Sostizzo. 2006. “Unknown and Known Quaternary non Pollen Palyno morphs from Sediments Analysed in the Laboratory of Palynology, University of Padua – Italy.” Palyno-Bulletin 2 (1–4): 65–66. Valenza Mele, N. 1991. Ricerche nella Brettia. Nocera Terinese. Naples: Liguori. Vallet, G. 1976. Mégara Hyblaea, 1. Le quartier de l’agora archaïque, L’École Française de Rome. Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire. Suppléments 1. Paris: L’École Française de Rome. van Compernolle, T. 1994. “Primo contributo alla carta ar cheologica di Soleto (Lecce).” StAnt 7: 327–54. ———. 1996. “Coppe di tipo ionico.” In Arte e artigianato, 299–306. ———. 2000. “Les céramiques ioniennes en Méditerranée centrale.” In Cerámiques jònies d’època arcaica: centres de producció i comercialització al Mediterráni occidental. Actes
5/30/14 7:43 AM
References de la taula rodonda celebrada a Empùries, 26–28 de maig 1999. Eds. P. Cabrera Bonet and M. Santos Retolaza. Monografies Emporitanes 11. 89–100. Barcelona: Museu d’Arqueologia de Catalunya. ———. 2007. “Importations, imitations, adaptations: les coupes ioniennes dans le monde étrusque.” In Ceramiche fini, 27–34. Van der Mersch, C. 1989. “Le material amphorique.” In Kaulonia I, 90–109. ———. 1994. Vins et amphores de Grande Grèce et de Sicilie, IVe-IIIe s. avnt J.-C. Centre Jean Bérard, Etudes I. Naples: Centre Jean Bérard. van Geel, B. 1986. “Application of Fungal and Algal Re mains and Other Microfossils in Palynological Analy ses.” In Handbook of Holocene Palaeoecology and Palaeohydrology. Ed. B. E. Berglund. 497–505, Chichester: Wiley. van Geel, B., J. Buurman, O. Brinkkemper, J. Schelvis, A. Aptroot, G. van Reenen, and T. Hakbijl. 2003. “Environ mental Reconstruction of a Roman Period Settlement Site in Uitgeest (The Netherlands), with Special Refer ence to Coprophilous Fungi.” JAS 30: 873–83. Vatin, C. 1974. “Il Dibattito.” Atti Taranto 13: 276–78. Vecchio, P. 2002, “Ceramica comune.” In Mozia, 203–73. Vegas, M. 1973. Cerámica común romana del Mediterráneo occidental, Publicaciones eventuales 22. Barcelona: Univer sidad. Instituto de Arqueología y Prehistoria. Verbicaro, G., A. Racheli, and R. Spadea. 2005. “Ricerche sull’edilizia domestica in Magna Grecia.” Siris 6: 5–26. Villard, F. 1960. La céramique grecque de Marseille VIe-IVe siècle: essai d’histoire économique, Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises d’Athènes et de Rome 195. Paris: de Boccard. Villard, F., and G. Vallet. 1955. “Megara Hyblaea. V. Lam pes du VII siècle et chronologie des coupes ioniènnes.” MEFRA 66: 7–34. Visonà, P. 1999. “Gli oggetti in metallo.” In Oppido Mamertina, 363–71. Vittoria, E. 2011. “Plain and Banded Ware.” In Survey, 337–424. ———. 2012. “Black Gloss and Grey Ware.” In San Biagio, 67–77. Volpe, G. 1992. “Gutti e askoi decorati a rilievo.” In Introduzione all’artigianato della Puglia Antica. Ed. L. Todisco. 38–41. Bari: Edipuglia. Voultsiadou, E., and D. Vafidis. 2007. “Marine Invertebrate Diversity in Aristotle’s Zoology.” Contributions to Zoology 76 (2): 103–20. Voultsiadou, E., D. Koutsoubas, and M. Achparaki. 2009. “Bivalve Mollusc Exploitation in Mediterranean Coastal Communities: An Historical Approach.” Journal of Biological Research-Thessaloniki 12: 1–11.
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 463
463
Waldbaum, J. C. 1978. From Bronze to Iron: the Transition from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age in the Eastern Mediterranean. Göteborg: Paul Åströms förlag. Walter-Karydi, E. 1994. Die Nobilitierung des Wohnhauses. Lebensform und Architektur im spätklassisclen Griechenland. Xenia: Konstanzer althistorische Vorträge und Forschungen 35. Konstanz: UVK, Universitätsverlag Konstanz. Ward-Perkins, J. B., M. A. Cotton, and H. B. Vander Poel. 1969. “Excavations at Botromagno, Gravina di Puglia. Second Interim Report, 1967–68.” PBSR 37: 100–157. West, M. L. 1998. “Grated Cheese fit for Heroes.” JHS 118: 190–91. Wheeler, R. E. M. 1954. Archaeology from the Earth. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Whitbread, I. 1995. Greek Transport Amphorae: A Petrological and Archaeological Study. Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper 4. Athens: British School at Athens. White, K. D. 1963. “A Survey of Millstones from Morgan tina.” AJA 67 (2): 199–206. Whitley, J., S. Germanidou, D. Urem-Kotsou, A. Dimoula, I. Nikolaopoulou, A. Karnava, and D. Evely. 2006–2007. “Archaeology in Greece 2005–2006.” Archaeological Reports 53: 1–112. Wikander, Ö. 1983. “OPAIA KERAMIS. Skylight-tiles in the Ancient World.” Opuscula Romana XIV: 81–99. ———. 1988. “Ancient Roof Tiles. Use and Function.” Opuscula Atheniensia. Annual of the Swedish Institute at Athens 17: 203–16. Williams II, C. K. 1979. “Corinth 1978: Forum Southwest.” Hesperia 48,2: 105–44. Williams-Thorpe, O., and R. S. Thorpe. 1993. “Geochemis try and Trade of Eastern Mediterranean Millstones from the Neolithic to Roman Periods.” JAS 20: 263–320. Yntema, D. 1990. Le ceramiche e l’artigianato del Salento tra l’età del Ferro e la romanizzazione. Atti Taranto 30: 139–84. Young, J. H. 1956. “Studies in South Attica. Country Es tates at Sounion.” Hesperia 25: 122–46. Zancani Montuoro, P. 1983. “Resti di tombe del VI sec. a.C. presso Sorrento.” Atti dell’Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Rendiconti 38: 143–50. ———. 1987. “Resti di tombe del VI sec. a.C. presso Sor rento.” Atti dell’Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Rendiconti 42: 7–11.
5/30/14 7:43 AM
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 464
5/30/14 7:43 AM
Index Page numbers in italics refer to tables or illustrations.
A
a cappuccina tombs. See necropoleis abandonment 122, 130. See also Fattoria Fabrizio: aban donment of Achaean alphabet 351 additions. See Fattoria Fabrizio Adriatic Sea 136, 327 agora. See Athenian Agora; Herakleia; Metaponto agriculture xx, xxiv, xxvii, 133, 136, 362, 413. See also cereal crops; pastoralism; viticulture akimbo pose 339, 344 algae. See archaeobotany alluvial clay. See pottery: fabrics altars 104, 117, 129–30, 145, 412. See also cult; domestic cult amphorae. See pottery amphoriskoi. See pottery andesite. See lithics andron 129, 416 animal husbandry. See pastoralism animal remains. See bones antefixes. See roof tiles Anthesteria festival 127 aparchai 126. See also cult: rituals: offerings; domestic cult: rituals: offerings apoikiai 129, 371 apoptygma. See garments appliqués. See pottery Apulia 83, 121, 129, 208, 210, 215, 219, 236, 247, 259, 298, 304, 305, 362, 369. See also necropo leis; pottery: fabrics Arca noae 143, 144. See also shells archaeobotany 133–38, 419–34. See also palynology algae 135, 419, 424, 432 fruits 133, 136, 138, 419, 421, 424–25, 425, 433. See also grapes; olives fungi 137, 419, 424, 432 herbaceous plants 134, 422, 423, 424, 426–30, 431 seeds 123, 133, 136, 137, 419, 421, 424–25, 425, 433 trees 134–36, 134, 138, 422, 423, 424, 426, 431 archaizing style 119, 219
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 465
depictions of cult statues 339–40 depictions of deities 119, 339–40 depictions of priestesses 341–42 Architectural Complex (AC). See virtual archaeology areas. See Fattoria Fabrizio argos lithos. See lithics Artemis. See also cult; sanctuaries depictions of 335, 339, 340, 341, 343 artifact pairs 122, 123, 124, 177. See also domestic cult Ascoli Satriano 56, 90, 112, 122, 124, 354, 355, 362 assemblages. See pottery asty. See Metaponto: asty Athenian Agora 179, 355, 371 Avinella xx, xxii, xxiv–xxv, xxvii, 126, 128
B
banded ware. See pottery banqueting 112, 362, 416. See also symposia depictions of 121, 339, 348 barley. See cereal crops Basento River. See rivers Basento valley. See valleys bases. See loom weights; pottery; terracottas Basilicata 83, 88, 120, 121, 123, 136, 215, 231, 311, 362, 369, 411–14. See also Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeologici della Basilicata basins. See pottery battute 5, 15, 46, 62, 151 bedrock 83 beetles 135, 424 coleoptera 20 khapra 135 biodiversity 133, 422 black-figure ware. See pottery black-gloss fine ware. See pottery bombylioi. See pottery bones 18, 71, 139, 144, 382, 383, 387, 395. See also domes tic cult: evidence for cattle 122, 123, 139, 140, 141 dogs 122, 123, 139, 140, 141 epiphyseal fusion 141
5/30/14 7:43 AM
466
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
as food refuse 139, 141 goats 122, 139, 140, 140–41, 141 preservation of 139 sheep 118, 122–124, 139, 140, 140–41, 141 bothros 102, 145 Botromagno 114, 179, 259, 280, 362 bottles. See pottery bowls. See pottery Bradano River. See rivers Bradano Trough 159 Bradano valley. See valleys Bradano watershed 231, 235, 236, 244, 249, 262, 265 breccia 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 40, 44, 45, 47, 48, 50, 51, 52, 54, 59, 60, 62, 64, 90, 91, 176, 396. See also gravel bronze 338. See also metal objects coin 28, 33, 71, 151, 367, 387. See also coins grater 19, 24, 112, 123, 361–63, 363, 364, 385 sheet 67, 361 Bufalara. See farmhouses Building Unit (BU). See virtual archaeology burials 7, 18, 68, 112, 121, 124, 125, 127, 227, 236, 262, 361, 362. See also necropoleis
C
Calabria 113, 292, 328, 354, 415. See also pottery: ampho rae; pottery: fabrics calcarenitic limestone. See lithics Campania 194, 215, 219, 415 Cancellara 104 Cardiidae 143, 144–45, 147. See also shells carparo limestone. See construction: materials Carter, J. C. xix, 15, 102 Cartesian grid 15 casseroles. See pottery Castiglione di Conversano 83, 129 catalog numbers 152. See also lot numbers; site code Cato 363 cattle xx, 112, 122, 123, 129, 137, 139, 140, 141. See also bones Caulonia. See Kaulonia Caulonia Casamatta 147. See also Kaulonia Cavone River. See rivers Centocamere 129 Central Plateau xix, xx, xxiv, xxvii, 100, 128 ceramics. See loom weights; pottery; production; roof tiles cereal crops xx, xxiv, 19, 20, 73, 111, 112, 135, 136, 138, 291, 292, 299, 331, 363, 370, 422, 423, 424, 425, 431. See also agriculture
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 466
barley 135, 361, 367, 423, 424, 429 oat/wheat 135, 138, 423, 424, 429, 431 cheironiptron. See pottery: louteria Chersonesos chora 417 chert. See lithics Chiaromonte 187, 411. See also necropoleis chiton. See garments Chlamys glabra 143, 145–46. See also shells chora. See Chersonesos; Herakleia; Metaponto chytrai. See pottery Civita di Tricarico 86, 112, 233, 362, 411 clamps. See lead; metal objects clay matrix. See pottery: fabrics clay sources. See production: ceramic closed forms. See pottery coarse ware. See pottery cobble-and-conglomerate. See construction: techniques cobblestones. See construction: materials cockles. See Cardiidae coins 28, 33, 69, 70, 71, 151, 152, 219, 367, 387, 407 coleoptera. See beetles collapse. See Fattoria Fabrizio column drums 104, 370 conglomerate. See construction: materials construction 5, 6, 7, 8, 22, 28, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 45, 47, 50, 59, 68, 79, 83–93, 95, 96, 98, 100, 103, 130, 369. See also renovation; repair; reuse of materials foundations xix, xx, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 25, 29, 36, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 46, 48, 49, 50, 51, 76, 83, 83–85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95, 97, 101, 103, 105, 107, 109, 118, 409 materials calcarenitic limestone 106 carparo limestone 103 cobblestones 5, 39, 40, 41, 42, 45, 48, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 105, 107, 369 conglomerate xx, 7, 36, 40, 41, 43, 45, 46, 53, 56, 83, 87, 157, 369 mudbrick xx, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 41, 43, 44, 46, 48, 75, 77, 88–89, 90, 93, 96, 101, 103, 354 plaster 103 sandstone xx, 43, 83, 84, 87, 88, 105, 108, 110, 369 techniques cobble-and-conglomerate 3, 6, 7, 40, 43, 45, 46, 51, 53, 83, 84, 86, 87, 102, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
5/30/14 7:43 AM
Index
467
pisé 88 sandstone-and-tile 11, 45, 84, 85, 87–88, 88, 109 of walls xx, 5, 11, 12, 18, 40, 41, 43, 49, 50, 83–88, 87, 99, 102, 291, 369 cooking ware. See pottery coroplast. See terracottas courtyards 6, 53, 54, 86, 101, 102, 103, 104, 117, 118, 129, 130, 409–10, 411–14, 415, 416, 417 cover tiles. See roof tiles cows. See cattle Cozzo Presepe 177, 178, 237, 244, 262, 265, 302, 304, 311, 333, 355, 369, 372 Croton 129, 145, 146, 147, 370, 371 Crucinia. See necropoleis cult. See also altars; domestic cult; priestesses; votive objects Artemis 341. See also sanctuaries Cybele 341 Demeter 336. See also sanctuaries Dionysos 121, 130 Hera. See temples Hyakinthos 339. See also Polyboia: depictions of instruments 336, 341 Persephone 336 rituals 144, 145, 147, 148, 225, 335, 336, 337, 339, 340, 341, 342, 362, 370 bathing 120 funerary 72 libations 127, 336, 342 offerings 336, 342 sacrifice 118, 119–20, 122–24, 129, 289, 335–36, 340, 341, 342 cups. See pottery cups/one-handlers. See pottery Cybele. See also cult depictions of 340
division lines. See Metaponto: chora: division of dogs 122, 123, 139, 140, 141. See also bones domestic cult xxv, 4, 5, 6, 112, 117–30, 370, 412. See also altars; cult in Area 7 50, 76, 118–19, 120–21, 225 in courtyards 117 evidence for 187. See also votive objects bones 118, 122–24 kantharoi 50, 72, 76, 118, 119, 120–22, 121, 122, 124, 128–29, 133, 177, 206–8 louteria 117, 120, 124, 125, 128–29 miniatures 50, 70, 76, 81, 118, 119, 120, 123, 124, 125, 126, 126–27, 127, 128, 225–30 shells 143, 145 terracottas 50, 54, 71, 76, 81, 112, 118–20, 122–23, 124–26, 342 thymiateria 117, 124, 128, 129 at Fattoria Stefan 103 indigenous practices 130 at Locri 129 in Lucania 124, 129–30 at Pantanello 101–2 at Pomarico Vecchio 145 rituals 117, 118, 124, 129, 130, 141 libations 117, 119, 121, 123–25, 206 offerings 117, 119, 120, 121, 130 sacrifice 118, 119–20, 122–24, 129, 130 in Room 1 123 in Room 3 36, 76, 118–19, 120, 123, 171 in Room 4 123 in Room 6 123 temporary spaces 129 Donax trunculus 143, 147. See also shells Doric capital 104, 370 drippings. See lead; metal objects
D
E
dacite. See lithics Daunia 90, 114, 122, 206, 215, 259, 354 De agri cultura. See Cato deep basins. See pottery Demeter. See also cult; fiaccola; sanctuaries depictions of 335, 339 Dentalium sp. 143, 145, 146. See also shells Di Taranto, G. 15, 40, 85 Difesa San Biagio 136, 178, 354 dinoi. See pottery Dionysos. See cult dishes. See pottery
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 467
Economics. See Xenophon economy 70, 74, 111–16, 133, 141, 321, 362, 372, 373, 431. See also pottery: amphorae; trade networks elutriation. See production: ceramic entrance. See Fattoria Fabrizio environments xix–xxi, xx, xxi, 112–13 human 133, 137, 137–38, 431. See also agriculture; pastoralism cultivation 133, 423 fields 135–36 grazing 112, 133, 136–37, 138, 423 natural 133, 135, 138
5/30/14 7:43 AM
468
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
wet 121, 134–35, 135, 138, 422–23, 424, 431 woodland 133, 134, 136, 422–23, 424 ependytes. See garments epigraphy. See inscriptions erosion. See geomorphology Estimated Vessels Represented (EVRep). See pottery: quantification of excavation methodology 3–7, 15–18 exchange 114–15, 321 extra-local pollen rain. See palynology
F
farmhouses 100–110, 409–18 in Attica 104, 416 Bufalara 86, 372, 409 in the chora xxi–xxviii, xxiii, xxvi, 80, 80–81, 95, 99, 100, 104, 119, 120, 122, 124–29, 125, 126, 128, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 164, 165, 176, 217, 221, 225, 226, 229, 233–35, 236, 243, 244, 246, 247, 248–49, 253, 256, 262, 267, 268, 274, 275, 277, 280, 283, 289, 291, 292, 369–70, 371, 372 Fattoria Arezzo 100 Fattoria Menta 129, 415 Fattoria Stefan xx, 8, 72, 102–3, 103, 153, 164, 165, 179, 221, 225, 226, 235, 244, 262, 264, 268, 279, 280, 289, 292, 332, 372, 410 indigenous 86, 90, 104, 118, 354 Lucanian 104, 123, 124, 414, 415 Marsico Vetere 19 Pantanello 8, 9, 55, 87, 101–2, 102, 157, 206, 410 Saldone 86 San Biagio xxv, 100, 101, 122, 164, 213, 225, 235, 262, 372, 373, 410 Sant’Angelo Grieco 8, 72, 103, 104, 124, 147, 148, 153, 156, 157, 164, 165, 178, 189, 225, 235, 244, 262, 264, 280, 289, 370, 372, 410 Sant’Angelo Vecchio 147, 153, 156, 157, 164, 165, 178, 179, 225, 226, 235, 243, 244, 262, 264, 268, 279, 280, 289, 303, 332, 333, 354, 355, 356, 359, 370, 372, 373, 410 Fattoria Arezzo. See farmhouses Fattoria Fabrizio abandonment of xxi, xxiv, 7–9, 8, 10, 19, 26, 47, 49, 58, 59, 68, 71, 74, 81, 87, 92–94, 101, 112, 123–24, 176, 291, 332 additions to 6, 43, 46, 49, 55, 84, 85, 87
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 468
areas Area 7 5, 6, 10, 13, 15, 25, 36, 38, 50–54, 51, 52, 53, 59, 75, 76, 79, 83, 84, 85, 86, 90, 93, 94, 96, 108, 118, 119, 120, 122–23, 133, 174, 206–8, 225, 228, 234, 239, 240, 263, 275, 299, 303, 308, 313, 323, 324, 335, 344–45, 346, 347, 350, 397–98. See also domestic cult: in Area 7 Area 8 6, 40, 41, 52, 54, 54–55, 85, 86, 96, 97, 99, 102, 144, 188, 278, 398 Area 9 6, 7, 15, 55, 55–58, 56, 57, 58, 60, 72, 73, 73, 84, 85, 87, 90, 93, 96, 97, 100, 106, 110, 174, 185, 186, 201, 209, 211, 213, 234, 235, 247, 252, 253, 263, 271, 274, 288, 291, 293, 299, 307, 323, 399–400 collapse of 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 18, 19, 24, 25, 26, 29, 34, 36, 38, 40, 41, 43, 44, 44–45, 46, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 66, 67, 68, 75, 76, 77, 83, 84, 85, 87, 90, 92, 92–94, 108, 109, 110, 118, 119, 120, 291, 342, 353, 354, 393, 394 doorways of 36, 46, 89, 89–90, 96 entrance to 46, 89, 96 floor makeups 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 10–11, 12, 13, 19, 20, 22–23, 25, 26, 28, 29, 31, 32–33, 34, 35, 39, 40, 41–42, 45, 46, 49–50, 73, 75, 76, 77, 79, 83, 85, 87, 90–92, 91, 112, 119, 123, 139, 140, 176, 190, 351, 382–83, 385, 387, 390, 392, 395, 396 floor plan xix, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 18, 26, 37, 41, 43, 46, 51, 54, 55, 59, 84, 89, 94, 139, 362, 419 floors 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 18, 19–20, 21, 22, 24–26, 27, 28, 29, 30–33, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37–39, 41, 42, 43, 45, 46, 47, 48–49, 50, 55, 59, 62, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 79, 83, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90–92, 91, 92–93, 96, 100, 111, 112, 113, 114, 119, 123, 139, 140, 144, 323, 331, 351, 361, 363, 367, 381, 385, 386–87, 388, 389, 390, 391–92, 394–95, 419, 420, 422, 424, 433 hearth 23, 41, 111, 123, 301 porch. See Fattoria Fabrizio: areas: Area 9 rooms Room 1 3–4, 6, 10, 12, 13, 15, 18, 18–25, 26, 28, 36, 40, 43, 45, 55, 56, 70, 72, 73, 74, 74–76, 77, 83, 85, 89, 90, 92, 93, 96, 98, 100, 102, 105, 106, 107, 111–12, 123, 133, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141,
5/30/14 7:43 AM
Index 174, 189, 194, 225, 234, 235, 262, 263, 291, 299, 323, 324, 331, 355, 361, 362, 419, 420, 423, 424, 425, 426–32 Room 1 E 4, 8, 12, 19, 20, 23, 23–25, 24, 73, 74, 92, 112, 113, 119, 190, 209, 215, 216, 222, 228, 257, 272, 274, 287, 311, 314, 316, 330, 358, 359, 364, 384–85 Room 1 W 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 13, 19, 20, 20–23, 21, 32, 44, 45, 47, 50, 51, 54, 56, 59, 72, 73, 74, 83, 86, 87, 90, 106, 120, 140, 145, 189, 200, 201, 209, 210, 212, 213, 216, 228, 238, 240, 243, 250, 254, 257, 273, 276, 277, 280, 289, 290, 308, 309, 310, 318, 326, 328, 332, 360, 381–84 Room 2 3–5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 15, 19, 20, 25–35, 26, 36, 39, 40, 43, 45, 66, 70, 72, 73, 74, 74–76, 77, 83, 85, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 96, 98, 100, 102, 105, 107, 111, 111–12, 114, 122, 133, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 141, 145, 158, 168, 174, 180, 194, 221, 234, 235, 262, 263, 291, 294, 299, 300, 323, 324, 329, 331, 348, 350, 361, 362, 363, 419, 420, 423, 424, 426–32 Room 2 NE 4, 9, 25–28, 27, 30–33, 32, 38, 73, 74, 93, 140, 197, 198, 199, 200, 221, 247, 248, 251, 257, 287, 319, 331, 333, 351, 352, 365, 367, 386–87 Room 2 NW 4, 7, 25, 29, 31, 34–35, 35, 73, 74, 146, 185, 317, 389–90 Room 2 SE 9, 20, 25, 28, 28–29, 29, 33, 73, 74, 202, 284, 286, 316, 358, 359, 365, 366, 388 Room 2 SW 9, 20, 25, 29, 30, 34, 34–35, 73, 74, 105, 107, 194, 203, 240, 241, 326, 360, 389 Room 3 3–5, 6, 10, 13, 15, 25, 36–39, 37, 38, 39, 43, 45, 50, 52, 53, 75, 76, 79, 83, 84, 85, 89, 90, 92, 93, 94, 96, 98, 100, 102, 105, 107, 108, 118, 120, 122, 123, 139, 140, 141, 143, 145, 146, 171, 174, 177, 212, 218, 234, 235, 239, 251, 255, 262, 263, 299, 335, 342, 344–45, 349, 350, 390–91, 420. See also domestic cult: in Room 3 Room 4 3, 5, 6, 10, 13, 15, 19, 23, 25, 36, 39–42, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 51, 52, 54, 55, 59, 76, 77, 83, 85, 86, 89, 90, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 98, 100, 105, 109, 119, 120, 123, 139, 140, 141, 144, 176, 190, 191, 225,
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 469
469 229, 234, 262, 263, 272, 273, 282, 299, 314, 323, 324, 335, 342, 344–45, 349, 350, 392 Room 5 3, 5–6, 10, 13, 15, 19, 23, 25, 40, 43, 43–45, 44, 45, 46, 49, 55, 59, 76, 83, 85, 87, 89, 92, 95, 96, 98, 100, 105, 109, 147, 174, 190, 191, 234, 235, 256, 262, 263, 291, 296, 299, 318, 376, 377, 393 Room 6 3, 5–6, 7, 10, 11, 13, 15, 19, 23, 25, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 45, 45–50, 46, 47, 48, 49, 51, 54, 55, 59, 72, 73, 77, 83, 85, 86, 87, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 95, 96, 98, 100, 102, 105, 106, 109, 120, 123, 139, 140, 141, 147, 174, 176, 180, 182, 183, 184, 188, 194, 196, 201, 204, 234, 242, 262, 263, 265, 266, 279, 281, 285, 289, 290, 291, 295, 296, 299, 306, 311, 313, 315, 323, 393–96 site phasing xxv–xxvii, 7–14, 76–79 soundings xix, 5, 6–7, 10, 12, 13, 18, 44, 45, 50, 51, 56, 58–68, 83, 151, 297, 323, 324 NE Sounding 1 6, 7, 18, 66, 66–68, 67, 68, 92, 288, 305, 323, 361 NE Sounding 2 6, 7, 18, 66, 67, 68, 92 SE Sounding 1 6, 7, 12, 18, 50, 51, 54, 58, 59, 60, 62–64, 63, 83, 171, 172, 193, 203, 214, 253, 317, 323, 402–3 SE Sounding 2 6, 7, 18, 55, 56, 58, 59, 60, 64–66, 65, 86, 242, 315, 323, 403, 404 Sounding E1 6, 7, 12, 18, 56, 58, 59, 59–62, 60, 61, 64, 83, 86, 171, 172, 176, 182, 183, 189, 192, 196, 202, 222, 245, 251, 266, 267, 282, 288, 315, 316, 323, 326, 356, 401–2 W Sounding 6, 7, 18, 68, 214, 217, 270, 281, 286, 291, 295, 323, 328, 329 tile fall 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 18, 19–21, 20, 23, 23–24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 28–29, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36–37, 38, 39, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47–48, 50, 51–53, 55, 56, 57, 60, 62, 63, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 79, 83, 85, 88, 89, 90, 92, 92–93, 94, 118, 119, 120, 123, 133, 136, 151, 171, 190, 215, 221, 235, 291, 324, 331, 381, 384, 386, 388, 389, 393, 397, 399, 420, 422, 424 walls 4, 15, 16, 25, 50, 53, 54, 73, 76, 83–89, 95, 96, 99, 100, 291, 342, 369 Wall 1 19, 25, 36, 38, 51, 52, 56, 84, 85, 86, 88, 90, 92, 105, 106, 107, 110, 120, 348, 350
5/30/14 7:43 AM
470
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
Wall 2 6, 13, 19, 25, 36, 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 52, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 89, 90, 98, 105, 106, 107, 109, 110, 120, 207, 208, 344, 349, 350, 376 Wall 3 45, 46, 56, 57, 58, 84, 85, 87, 90, 110, 375 Wall 3a 56, 85, 86, 90, 105, 106, 110 Wall 3b 85, 90, 106 Wall 4 12, 20, 25, 43, 56, 84, 85, 87, 90, 105, 107, 326, 420 Wall 5 25, 36, 38, 84, 85, 90, 105, 107, 349 Wall 6 6, 36, 40, 41, 42, 50, 51, 52, 55, 84, 85, 90, 188, 278, 344, 398 Wall 6a 40, 85, 108 Wall 6b 40, 108 Wall 7 5, 6, 39, 40, 41, 46, 55, 84, 85, 108 Wall 8 40, 41, 43, 84, 85, 105, 109 Wall 9 6, 11, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 48, 49, 50, 84, 85, 87, 88, 90, 92, 101, 102, 105, 109, 372, 375, 395 Wall 10 55, 56, 57, 58, 84, 85, 87, 110 Wall 11 55, 56, 57, 84, 85, 87, 106, 110 windows 89, 96 Fattoria Menta. See farmhouses Fattoria Stefan. See farmhouses Favale 178, 190, 262, 336, 342 feet. See pottery fiaccola 247, 257, 336, 341 field survey. See Metaponto: chora: survey of firing. See production: ceramic first fruits. See aparchai floor makeups. See Fattoria Fabrizio floor plan. See Fattoria Fabrizio floors. See Fattoria Fabrizio food preparation. See pottery: functions forests. See environments: natural: woodland foundations. See construction fruits. See aparchai; archaeobotany: fruits Functional Unit. See virtual archaeology funerary monuments 338, 341 funerary rituals. See cult: rituals fungi. See archaeobotany
G
garments apoptygma 335, 342, 345, 346, 348, 349 chiton 119, 337, 338, 339, 344–45, 346, 348 ependytes 337, 338 himation 119, 337, 338, 344–45, 346, 348, 349 kekryphalos 343, 349, 350
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 470
kolpos 337, 345, 346 peplos 119, 335, 337, 338, 345, 348, 349 polos 336, 341 geomorphology 93, 138, 153, 159 erosion 5, 6, 9, 10, 19, 36, 39, 40, 41, 43, 46, 51, 53, 55, 76, 84, 85, 90, 93, 94, 118, 146, 157, 342, 424 landslip xxi, 93 marine terraces xix, xx, xxii, xxiv, xxv, xxvii, 3, 5, 7, 15, 45, 83, 133, 155, 156, 157, 159, 162, 369, 372, 373, 374 site formation xix–xx Ginosa Marina 121, 409 Glycymeris sp. 143, 147. See also shells Gnathia ware. See pottery goats xx, 112, 122, 130, 137, 139, 140, 140–41, 141. See also bones grapes 136. See also viticulture; wine gravel 5, 10, 47, 63, 76, 96, 102 Gravina 112, 237, 249, 262, 265, 302, 304–5, 312, 333, 362 grazing. See environments: human; pastoralism Guarino, M. 15, 18 gutti. See pottery
H
hairstyles korymbos 342, 343 lampadion knot 118, 119, 349 sphendone 118, 119, 122, 343 handles. See pottery hearth. See Fattoria Fabrizio Hera. See cult; temples Heraion. See temples Herakleia 118, 129, 144, 145, 147, 148, 174, 221, 237, 262, 280, 343 agora 213 chora 411 herbaceous plants. See archaeobotany himation. See garments Homer 361 Hyakinthos. See cult hydriai. See pottery
I
Iliad. See Homer Incoronata 83, 114, 144, 147, 159, 331, 371, 372, 373 indigenous. See also farmhouses; pottery domestic cults 130
5/30/14 7:43 AM
Index interactions with Greeks 114, 124 Lucanians 104, 114, 123, 124, 221, 354. See also Lucania peoples 121, 129, 236, 259 sites 90, 104, 114, 118, 121, 122, 124, 129–30, 144, 174, 181, 219, 231, 248, 249, 259, 268, 280, 354, 362 inscriptions 215, 341, 361, 370 on loom weights 28, 32, 112, 351, 352 Institute of Classical Archaeology (ICA) xxv, 8, 72, 79, 102, 121, 173, 189, 217, 225, 226, 229, 233, 236, 262, 280, 289, 291, 332, 333, 369, 370, 371, 372, 409–10 Ionian coast 114, 143, 178, 231, 259, 302 jars. See pottery juglets. See pottery jugs. See pottery
J
K
kanephoroi depictions of 336, 338, 340, 341 kantharoi. See domestic cult: evidence for; pottery; votive objects Kaulonia 129, 178, 262, 299, 303, 304, 305, 312. See also Caulonia Casamatta kekryphalos. See garments kerameikos. See Metaponto kilns. See production: ceramic kitchens 102, 103, 117, 123, 129, 136, 261, 291, 297, 299 kleros xxv. See also Metaponto: chora: division of koiné 122. See also exchange kolpos. See garments korai 337, 338, 339 korymbos. See hairstyles kotylai. See pottery krateriskoi. See pottery; votive objects kraters. See pottery kriophoroi depictions of 335, 336, 340, 341 kylikes. See pottery
L
Lago del Lupo xx, xxii, xxiv–xxv, xxvii, 100, 102, 409–10 lampadion knot. See hairstyles landscape. See environments; Metaponto: chora landslip. See geomorphology Latronico. See necropoleis
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 471
471
lead 33, 363. See also metal objects; production: lead-working clamps 25, 29, 31, 33, 111, 331, 332, 333, 361, 363, 365, 386, 388 drippings 29, 33, 111, 363, 366, 388 lebetes gamikoi. See pottery lekanai. See pottery lekythoi. See pottery levigation. See production: ceramic libations. See cult: rituals; domestic cult: rituals lids. See pottery limestone. See construction: materials Lipari. See necropoleis lithics 71, 369–78. See also construction: materials andesite 369, 371, 372, 375 argos lithos 370 calcarenitic limestone 369, 370 chert 154, 372, 373, 376–77 dacite 369, 371, 376 grinding stones 13, 105, 369, 370–72, 371, 376. See also lithics: querns millstones. See lithics: grinding stones; lithics: querns querns 370–72, 371, 375. See also lithics: grinding stones volcanic stone 369, 370, 371, 376 Local Pastoral Pollen Indicators (LPPI). See palynology Locri 112, 118, 129, 178, 261, 262, 299, 302, 303, 309, 312, 337–38, 343, 362 loom weights 13, 28, 32, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 77, 78, 80, 81, 93, 112–13, 124, 151, 152, 157, 351–52, 387, 407, 408 bases 352 lot numbers 151. See also catalog numbers; site code louteria. See domestic cult: evidence for; pottery Lucania 104, 123, 129, 130, 190, 208, 210, 215, 219, 231, 247, 298, 343, 354, 362. See also indigenous Lucanians. See indigenous Lyons, C. L. xix, 15, 18
M
marine terraces. See geomorphology Marsico Vetere. See farmhouses Matera 178 matt-painted wares. See pottery Messapia 114, 178, 190, 259, 354 metal objects 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 77, 78, 151, 152, 361–66, 407. See also bronze; lead clamps 25, 29, 31, 33, 111, 331, 332, 333, 361, 363, 365, 386, 388
5/30/14 7:43 AM
472
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
drippings 29, 33, 111, 363, 366, 388 grater 19, 24, 112, 123, 361–63, 363, 364, 385 as an accessory to wine drinking 361. See also Nestor’s cup in funerary contexts 362 in ritual contexts 361, 362 Metaponto 335, 336, 337, 338, 340, 341, 342, 343, 351 agora xxi, 103 asty xxi, xxv, 93, 103–4, 121, 124, 128, 129, 145, 156, 162, 174, 181, 206, 265, 336, 355, 369 chora xix, xx, xxi–xxvii, xxii, 7, 8, 9, 12, 28, 68, 69, 70, 72–73, 83, 85, 86, 93, 94, 100–103, 104, 112, 113, 114, 115, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124–29, 143, 144, 146, 153–57, 158, 159, 163, 164–66, 165, 169, 170, 171, 173–76, 178, 179, 180, 181, 187, 190, 192, 195, 203, 206, 208, 218, 221, 225, 226, 227, 229, 231, 233, 235, 236, 243, 248, 253, 256, 261, 262, 265, 267, 268, 274, 279, 280, 283, 289, 291, 292, 297, 299, 303, 304, 321, 322, 325, 331, 353, 354, 362, 369, 370, 371, 372, 373, 374, 409–10. See also farmhouses; necropoleis; sanctuaries survey of xix, xxi–xxvii, 3, 69, 70, 79–81, 80, 100, 113, 119, 120, 126, 158, 173, 174, 176, 190, 208, 216, 217, 225, 229, 235, 244, 253, 262, 289, 321, 333, 369–70, 371, 372, 373 division of xx, xxiv, xxv kerameikos 121, 122, 156, 158, 159, 174, 178, 179, 181, 205, 215, 216, 218, 219, 233, 244, 253, 262, 266, 268, 297 polis xxi, 122 millstones. See lithics miniatures. See domestic cult: evidence for; pottery; votive objects mold-formed pottery. See production: ceramic Monte Irsi 114, 259 Monte Sannace 56, 83, 86, 112, 130, 304, 311–12, 354, 362 Montemurro 118, 206, 414 Montescaglioso 121, 178, 179, 369, 411 mortaria. See pottery mudbrick. See construction: materials mugs. See pottery necropoleis. See also burials a cappuccina tombs 354
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 472
N
Apulian 72, 219, 221 Chiaromonte 362 in the chora xxii, xxiii, xxv, xxvi, xxvii, 24, 80, 81, 113, 124, 125, 126, 173, 177, 213, 218, 221, 222, 225, 248, 253, 275, 280, 355 Crucinia 341 Hellenistic necropolis of Lipari 279 Herakleia 221 Lacco Ameno necropolis at Pithekoussai 361 Latronico necropolis at Potenza 362 Matina Soprano necropolis at Pisticci 362 Pantanello 112, 113, 121, 124, 125, 127, 145, 158, 174, 177, 178, 179, 192–93, 194–95, 195, 203, 204, 205, 208, 210, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 219, 222, 227, 229, 235, 236, 237, 244, 247, 262, 265, 266, 268, 275, 279, 300, 321, 354, 355, 362 Saldone 145, 179, 321 Sant’Angelo Vecchio 145, 227 Taranto 145, 147, 148, 194, 215, 221 Timmari 362 urban necropolis at Metaponto 206, 351 Neolithic activity 144, 146, 147, 370, 372, 372–74 Nestor’s cup 361 Non-Pollen Palynomorphs (NPPs). See palynology
O
oat. See cereal crops offerants 122 depictions of 112, 119 oikos xxi, 86, 101–2, 117, 129, 130, 355, 412 oinochoai. See pottery olive oil 28, 70, 113 olives 136, 422, 423, 424 processing of 136 trees 134, 136 Olynthos 104, 117, 120, 361, 372 one-handlers. See pottery opaia. See roof tiles open forms. See pottery Oppido Lucano 104, 130, 262, 265, 280, 354 opus doliare. See pottery Ordona 195, 354 ovicaprines. See goats; sheep
P
Paestum. See Poseidonia pairs. See artifact pairs palaeobotany. See archaeobotany; palynology
5/30/14 7:43 AM
Index palynology xx extra-local pollen rain 133 Local Pastoral Pollen Indicators (LPPI) 136, 137, 423, 431 Non-Pollen Palynomorphs (NPPs) 133, 419, 421, 423, 424, 432 pollen 15, 133, 135, 136, 137, 138, 419, 420, 421–24, 423 pollen samples 15, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 419, 420, 421, 422, 432 pollen spectra 133, 134, 135, 137, 138, 422, 423, 424, 426–30 Regional Human Activities Pollen Indicators (RHAPI) 137, 423, 431 wild Anthropogenic Indicators (wAI) 423, 431 pan tiles. See roof tiles pans. See pottery Pantanello xxi, 8, 9, 55, 81, 86, 87, 101–2, 102, 112, 113, 114, 120, 121, 124, 125, 126, 127, 135, 138, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 157, 158, 159, 173, 178, 179, 192, 194, 195, 203, 204, 205, 206, 208, 210, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 219, 222, 226, 227, 229, 235, 236, 237, 244, 247, 262, 265, 266, 268, 275, 279, 300, 303, 321, 354, 355, 362, 372, 373, 410. See also farmhouses; ne cropoleis; sanctuaries pastas house 86, 129, 411, 412, 413, 414, 416 pastoralism xx, 112–13, 133, 136–38, 362, 423. See also en vironments: human Pectinidae 145, 147. See also shells peplophoroi depictions of 342, 348 peplos. See garments perirrhanterion. See pottery: louteria Persephone. See cult; fiaccola Peucetia 86, 114, 130, 178, 179, 190, 215, 259, 354 phasing. See Fattoria Fabrizio phialai. See pottery pigs xx, 129 pisé. See construction: techniques Pisticci 146, 178, 179, 190, 362. See also necropoleis: Mati na Soprano necropolis at Pisticci Pithekoussai 321, 361. See also necropoleis: Lacco Ameno necropolis at Pithekoussai pithoi. See pottery plain wares. See pottery plaster. See construction: materials podanipterion. See pottery: louteria
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 473
473
poleis 114, 117, 122, 130, 174, 181, 231, 236, 259, 262, 265, 342, 371. See also Metaponto pollen. See palynology polos. See garments Polyboia depictions of 339 Pomarico Vecchio 104, 112, 114, 130, 145, 178, 219, 237, 259, 262, 265, 279, 309, 311, 354, 355 Ponte Fabrizio xix, xx, 3, 118 Poseidonia 328, 337, 338. See also temples: Heraion at Foce del Sele pottery amphorae 20, 88, 112, 123, 136, 157, 171, 262, 279–80, 342, 361, 401. See also economy; ex change; olive oil; trade networks; wine Calabrian 157, 168, 292, 322, 331 Chian-type 113, 329 Corinthian Type A 28, 35, 42, 55, 113, 322, 325–27, 382, 383, 386, 390, 392, 393, 395, 396, 398, 399, 402, 407 Corinthian Type A′ 113, 127, 158, 325 Corinthian Type B 21, 22, 64, 113, 321, 322, 327–28, 382, 394, 396, 399, 402, 403, 407 East Greek 113, 322, 328–29 Greco-Italic 19, 21, 22, 24, 28, 32, 49, 55, 72, 112, 113, 321, 322, 329–30, 381, 382, 383, 384, 386, 388, 389, 394, 395, 397, 398, 407 Ionian 113, 321, 322, 327–28, 396, 407 lekythoid 233, 381, 406, 408 Metapontine 114, 153, 157, 222 table 19, 22, 235, 248–52, 277–78, 279, 280, 283–86 transport 19, 22, 28, 31, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 113, 114, 152, 153, 157, 158, 168, 292, 321–30, 407, 408 amphoriskoi 72, 176, 222–23, 263 appliqués 191 Archaic xix, xxv–xxvii, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12, 13, 19, 20, 21, 22–24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 32, 34–35, 37, 40, 41–42, 42, 44, 46, 48, 49, 50, 55, 56, 58, 59, 61, 69, 70, 72, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 83, 85, 88, 90, 91–92, 113, 114, 119, 123, 153, 158, 159, 171, 173–224, 275, 312, 323, 325, 327, 356, 381, 382, 383, 384, 385, 386, 392, 393, 396, 397, 399, 400, 401, 402, 403, 404, 405, 407–8 assemblages 15–68, 69–82, 381–404, 405–8
5/30/14 7:43 AM
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
474
banded ware 12, 19, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 42, 62, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 80, 85, 87, 90, 107, 120, 125, 127, 144, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 159, 164–70, 173, 194, 208, 214, 216, 218, 222, 225, 227, 228, 229, 231– 58, 259, 260, 262, 263, 265, 267, 268, 275, 277, 279, 280, 283, 312, 406, 408 bases 19, 22, 28, 30, 32, 33, 34, 44, 46, 48, 50, 54, 67, 71, 72, 87, 120, 151, 174, 176, 177, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185–86, 187, 188, 192, 193, 194–97, 200–201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206–07, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 217, 221, 222, 223, 227, 228, 229–30, 232, 233, 235, 236, 238, 239, 240, 244, 247, 248, 253, 256–57, 263, 265, 267, 275, 280, 283–88, 290, 292, 293, 294, 295, 297, 299, 300, 301, 303, 307, 317–19, 331, 350, 420. See also pottery: feet basins 24, 42, 47, 49, 72, 73, 80, 153, 163, 165, 167, 168, 231, 232, 246, 262, 263, 264, 267–74, 275, 277, 283, 288, 383, 384, 387, 392, 393, 396, 399, 401, 403, 404, 406, 408. See also pottery: louteria black-figure ware 61, 62, 69, 113, 152, 171, 171–72, 405, 407 black-gloss fine ware 4, 6, 7–9, 12, 13, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 42, 49, 50, 53, 56, 58, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 69, 70, 72, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 87, 93, 101, 112, 114, 118, 119, 120, 121, 123, 124, 125, 127, 130, 133, 152, 153, 155, 157, 158, 159, 162, 173–224, 222, 225, 227, 232, 233, 236, 253, 263, 279, 298, 312, 335, 351, 354, 361, 405, 407 bombylioi 222. See also pottery: bottles bottles 24, 119, 174, 175, 176, 177, 222–23, 385, 405, 407. See also pottery: bombylioi bowls 4, 7, 8, 9, 21, 22, 23, 25, 29, 35, 56, 58, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 80, 81, 126, 127, 164, 174, 175, 177, 208, 213, 225, 231, 232, 234, 235, 243, 255, 262, 267, 283, 287, 361, 381, 384, 390, 395, 400, 405–6, 407–8 casseroles 21, 75, 76, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304–9, 311, 381, 382, 383, 391, 393, 394, 398, 406, 408 chytrai 24, 26, 27, 31, 32, 34, 42, 62, 65, 72, 76,
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 474
126, 127, 297, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 311–17, 381, 382, 383, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 393, 395, 398, 401, 403, 404, 406, 408 closed forms 31, 62, 70, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 126, 171, 175–76, 176, 191–92, 222–23, 232, 233, 234, 256–57, 259, 260, 262, 263, 264, 277, 283–86, 298, 301, 302, 381, 382, 383, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400, 401, 402, 403, 404, 405–6, 407–8 coarse ware 41, 54, 64, 68, 69, 77, 152, 154, 157, 158, 232, 261–88. See also pottery: plain ware cooking ware 19, 22, 24, 26, 28, 31, 35, 39, 42, 44, 49, 62, 64, 66, 68, 69, 70, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 112, 152, 153, 154, 156, 157, 163, 165, 166, 169, 263, 264, 277, 297–320, 406, 408 cup-skyphoi 63, 64, 174, 175, 176, 203, 402, 405 cups 6, 8, 9, 13, 19, 21, 24, 28, 31, 50, 53, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 93, 112, 120, 121, 122, 126, 188, 204, 208, 226, 233, 235, 236, 244, 253, 256–57, 263, 265, 283, 286–87, 361, 405, 407. See also Nestor’s cup Ionic xix, 13, 21, 22, 23, 26, 28, 31, 34, 42, 48, 49, 50, 56, 58, 61, 62, 63, 64, 69, 85, 127, 160, 173, 175, 176, 177, 179, 180, 181–84, 231, 382, 384, 386, 389, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 399, 400, 401, 402, 405 cups/one-handlers 8, 21, 22, 24, 62, 174, 175, 208–9, 382, 385, 400, 401, 405 deep basins 165, 170, 262, 274–75, 283, 398, 406, 408 dinoi 19, 21, 31, 72, 121, 126, 231, 232, 234, 235, 247–48, 262, 263, 275–76, 381, 385, 386, 387, 399, 406, 408 dishes 8, 21, 22, 23, 36, 37, 39, 56, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 103, 126, 130, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 210–12, 213, 382, 383, 384, 391, 399, 405, 407 fabrics alluvial clay 155–57, 162 Apulian 114, 260 Calabrian 4, 25, 26, 114, 157, 165, 166, 168, 293, 295, 329, 331, 333, 354 clay matrix 154, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 167, 168, 169, 170
5/30/14 7:43 AM
Index textural concentration features (TCFs) 155, 159, 160, 161 feet 8, 72, 178, 180, 181, 187, 188, 192, 193, 194, 195, 206, 208, 215, 217, 221, 227, 229, 233, 236, 243, 244, 247, 248, 256–57, 262, 263, 264, 268, 274, 275, 277, 279, 280, 283–88, 300, 317. See also pottery: bases functions, 73. See also votive objects food preparation 19, 70, 71, 72, 73, 112, 215, 233, 263, 267, 291, 292, 298, 362 personal use 71, 73, 177, 181, 218, 233, 235 storage 3, 19, 20, 70, 71, 72, 73, 111–12, 135–36, 235, 247, 263, 267, 274, 275, 277, 280, 291, 331, 361, 363 table 19, 70, 71, 72, 73, 112, 121, 176, 208, 215, 236, 243, 263, 266, 267, 291 Gnathia ware 8, 25, 101, 194, 213, 218, 221, 222 gutti 174, 175, 176, 219–20, 233, 405, 407 handles 71, 72, 113, 124, 174, 177, 179, 181, 188, 189, 194, 195, 205, 206, 218, 226, 227, 229, 232, 233, 235, 236, 237, 247, 248, 249, 257, 262, 265, 267, 268, 275, 277, 279, 288, 292, 297, 299, 300, 301, 309, 311, 312, 321, 325, 328 hydriai 175, 192, 217, 248–53, 256–57, 277–78, 283–86, 405, 407 indigenous 70, 114, 121, 231, 232, 236, 259 jars 231, 232, 254, 256–57, 262, 263, 275, 280–82, 283–86, 396, 397, 406, 408 juglets 72 jugs 19, 22, 31, 53, 55, 62, 70, 72, 126, 127, 165, 166, 167, 174, 175, 176, 177, 215–16, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 248–53, 256–57, 262, 263, 264, 277–79, 283–86, 288, 312, 340, 381, 382, 384, 386, 387, 389, 390, 391, 392, 393, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400, 401, 402, 403, 405–6, 407–8 kantharoi 6, 50, 53, 54, 72, 76, 118, 119, 120–22, 121, 122, 123, 124, 128, 129, 133, 134, 174, 175, 177, 206, 206–8, 225, 259, 280, 335, 397, 398, 405, 419, 420, 421, 422, 424, 426–30, 432. See also domestic cult: evidence for; votive objects kotylai 48, 49, 64, 65, 175, 176, 177, 188–89, 361, 394, 403, 405 krateriskoi 53, 119, 120, 123, 126, 126–27, 127, 225, 226, 229–30, 406 kraters 19, 37, 42, 44, 72, 114, 121, 171, 174, 175, 176, 180, 189, 190–91, 218, 229, 259, 275,
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 475
475 280, 338, 341, 390, 392, 393, 405, 407 kylikes 23, 25, 33, 39, 50, 53, 67, 114, 119, 120, 122, 123, 124, 126, 127, 174, 175–76, 176, 180, 204–5, 225, 226, 227–29, 384, 385, 388, 391, 396, 397, 405–6 lebetes gamikoi 127, 174, 175, 177, 218, 219, 225, 226, 230, 233, 259, 391, 405, 407 lekanai 13, 22, 72, 165, 167, 168, 174, 175, 176, 189, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 244–45, 255, 257, 262, 263, 264, 267–74, 275, 283, 287–88, 381, 395, 401, 405–6 lekythoi 4, 25, 26, 30, 31, 61, 62, 63, 64, 91, 93, 113, 119, 171, 172, 174, 175–76, 176, 177, 221–23, 233, 279, 342, 386, 401, 403, 405, 407 lids 24, 25, 42, 53, 70, 72, 74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 119, 120, 126, 127, 144, 174, 175, 176, 189–90, 219, 225, 226, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 255–56, 262, 263, 267, 281, 282, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 309–11, 312, 331, 332, 333–34, 381, 383, 384, 385, 388, 391, 392, 393, 394, 397, 400, 402, 405–6, 407–8 louteria 69, 70, 80, 114, 117, 120, 124, 125, 128, 129, 130, 152, 153, 225, 289–90, 292, 406, 408 cheironiptron 289 perirrhanterion 289 podanipterion 289 matt-painted wares 121–22, 231, 236, 259 miniatures 6, 21, 23, 25, 42, 50, 53, 69, 70, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 80, 81, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 126–27, 127, 128, 144, 152, 219, 225, 225–30, 226, 335, 406, 407. See also domestic cult: evidence for; votive objects in funerary contexts 121, 125, 222 mortaria 4, 25, 26, 30, 31, 43, 46, 49, 50, 57, 58, 69, 70, 72, 73, 80, 87, 90, 91, 93, 106, 109, 114, 123, 152, 153, 154, 157, 165, 166, 168, 170, 263, 264, 291–96, 331, 362, 383, 386, 392, 399, 400, 401, 406, 408 mugs 12, 20, 24, 25, 174, 175, 176, 215, 385, 399, 405 oinochoai 72, 126, 127, 215, 231, 232, 248, 253, 256–57, 259, 262, 277, 280, 336, 341, 342, 399, 406, 408 olpai 21, 72, 122, 174, 175, 176, 215, 216–17, 231, 232, 234, 253–54, 256–57, 262, 263, 283, 383, 405–6, 407–8
5/30/14 7:43 AM
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
476
one-handlers 12, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 65, 72, 79, 85, 87, 90, 122, 126, 127, 174, 177, 208, 232, 233, 234, 236, 256, 257, 263, 265 open forms 23, 42, 50, 65, 70, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 126, 161, 163, 176, 181, 214, 233, 234, 236, 256, 282, 283, 288, 298, 301, 302, 381, 382, 383, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400, 401, 402, 403, 404, 405–6 opus doliare 21, 32, 69, 70, 74, 75, 77, 78, 80, 152, 165, 170, 225, 263, 264, 331–34, 381, 386, 390, 407, 408. See also pottery: pithoi pans 75, 76, 297, 299–300, 302, 303–4, 382, 397, 406, 408 phialai 126, 127, 336, 362 pithoi 3, 4, 10, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 56, 70, 72, 74, 80, 81, 90, 91, 92, 94, 104, 111, 112, 113, 114, 126, 136, 153, 157–58, 163, 165, 168, 170, 331–34, 363, 365, 381, 386, 390, 407. See also pottery: opus doliare plain ware 19, 21, 22, 31, 35, 39, 41, 42, 49, 50, 53, 55, 62, 64, 66, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 80, 112, 122, 127, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 164–70, 194, 206, 214, 215, 221, 225, 227, 231, 232, 233, 235, 236, 242, 244, 246, 247, 248, 253, 256, 261–88, 291, 297, 361, 406, 408. See also pottery: coarse ware pyxides 218, 233, 262, 267, 406, 408 quantification of 71–73 Estimated Vessels Represented (EVRep) 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 81, 113, 381–404, 405–8 Minimum Number of Individuals (MNI) 71, 72, 113, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 181, 226, 231, 232, 234, 259, 261, 262, 263, 291, 298, 299, 301, 302, 321, 322, 331, 351, 363 Typological Number of Individuals (TNI) 72, 171, 173, 175, 176, 259, 301, 331 red-figure ware 36, 61, 63, 64, 69, 113, 114, 121, 122, 152, 171, 171–72, 194, 195, 206, 215, 217, 218, 219, 222, 338, 341, 405, 407 skyphoi 13, 22, 24, 29, 32, 35, 42, 50, 55, 58, 62, 65, 69, 72, 119, 120, 126, 127, 161, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 177–79, 178, 179, 180, 181, 184–88, 225, 226, 229, 381, 383, 384, 387, 390, 391, 392, 394,
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 476
396, 400, 401, 404, 405–6 Attic (A-type) 8–9, 12, 33, 34, 46, 50, 63, 64, 69, 87, 90, 101, 173, 174, 175, 176, 178, 179, 192–94, 384, 388, 389, 396, 398, 400, 403, 405 Corinthian (C-type) 8–9, 12, 21, 22, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 39, 44, 48, 49, 58, 61, 62, 64, 69, 90, 101, 162, 171, 172, 174, 175, 176, 180, 194–203, 382, 383, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 391, 393, 394, 400, 401, 402, 405 small bowls 63, 64, 65, 70, 72, 174, 175, 214, 231, 232, 262, 266–67, 288, 402, 405, 407. See also pottery: small bowls/one-handlers small bowls/one-handlers 68, 70, 72, 74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 107, 165, 166, 167, 231, 232, 233, 236–42, 256, 257, 262, 263, 265–66, 283, 286–87, 382, 383, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 393, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 401, 402, 403, 404, 406, 408 stamnoi 114, 122, 259 stile misto 70, 259 wheel-made painted ware 69, 70, 74, 75, 77, 78, 114–15, 152, 259–60, 406, 407 Xenon Group 129, 215 priestesses 341, 342 depictions of 119, 338, 340, 341–42 production 369, 371, 373 ceramic 153–59, 163, 164–66, 167, 173, 176, 178, 179–80, 226, 231–32, 235, 236, 244, 253, 259, 261, 263–64, 268, 277, 283, 292, 297, 298–301, 302, 321, 322, 327, 328, 329. See also pottery: fabrics centers 120, 129, 162, 173, 226, 235, 322, 327, 328 clay sources 153, 154, 155, 156, 159, 162, 164, 166, 167, 168, 169 elutriation 163 firing 153, 154, 156, 158, 159, 162, 163, 167, 179–80, 184, 206, 298, 351 kilns 80, 104, 158, 159, 180, 184, 409, 411, 413, 414 levigation 96, 163, 225, 232, 277, 322, 327 mold-formed 70, 120, 154, 157, 166, 168, 292 wheel-thrown 154, 168, 325 lead-working 363 textile 74, 112–13 of tiles 156 pyxides. See pottery
5/30/14 7:43 AM
Index
quarries 83, 369, 371 querns. See lithics
Q
Rutigliano 179, 304, 312
S
R
red-figure ware. See pottery Regional Human Activities Pollen Indicators (RHAPI). See palynology renovation 4, 13, 19, 41, 46, 47, 76, 86, 91, 92, 355 repair 19, 25, 29, 31, 33, 41, 46, 86, 92, 111, 112, 331, 332, 333, 363. See also lead: clamps; pottery: pithoi residual material xix, 5, 8, 11, 13, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 31, 33, 34, 37, 39, 41, 46, 49, 50, 63, 64, 75, 76, 77–79, 83, 85, 88, 91, 123, 176, 262, 323, 324, 363. See also pottery: Archaic reuse of materials 13, 19, 85, 86–87, 92, 101, 103, 113, 123, 354, 355, 409 rituals. See cult; domestic cult rivers as access routes 373–74 Agri River 124 Basento River xix–xx, xxii, 100, 102, 103, 135, 146, 153, 373. See also valleys: Basento valley Bradano River xx, xxii, 102, 153, 369, 373. See also Bradano Trough; Bradano water shed; valleys: Bradano valley Cavone River 146 Sinni River 354 Venella River xix, xx, 100, 112, 135, 159, 369, 370 roads 206 Roccagloriosa 117, 123, 129, 130, 262, 309, 371 roofing systems 96, 97–100, 98 Corinthian 104 Laconian 96, 104, 353, 354, 354–55, 358–59 pan-and-cover 23, 29 overlapping pan tiles 353, 355–56, 359–60 standard units in 355 roof tiles xix, 40, 49, 53, 58–59, 61, 62, 64, 67, 68, 69, 71, 83, 88–89, 90, 93–94, 123, 124, 151, 152, 156, 157, 170, 353–60, 385, 394, 398, 402. See also Fattoria Fabrizio: tile fall; production antefixes 93, 104 cover tiles 21, 23, 25, 29, 30, 33, 99, 355, 357, 359, 383, 384, 388, 393 opaia 19, 23, 24, 89, 111, 123, 353, 355, 357, 359, 384 pan tiles 21, 23, 25, 29, 33, 99, 355, 357, 359–60, 384, 388, 389, 395, 398 rooms. See Fattoria Fabrizio
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 477
477
sacrifice. See cult: rituals; domestic cult: rituals Saldone 370, 373, 409. See also farmhouses; necropoleis Salentine peninsula 114, 231 San Biagio. See also Difesa San Biagio; farmhouses; sanctuaries sanctuaries 81, 93, 103, 104, 117, 120, 121, 227, 229, 339, 362, 370, 415 Apollo at Metaponto 145, 178 Artemis at San Biagio xxv, 101, 126, 128, 370, 410 in the chora xxii, xxiii, xxv, xxvi, 80, 81, 114, 119, 120, 125, 125–26, 128–29, 130, 225, 229, 289, 361, 370 Demeter at Siris Herakleia 144, 145 extramural sanctuary at Favale 336, 342 Pantanello xxi, xxv, 8, 81, 86, 87, 101, 114, 120, 126, 127, 135, 138, 145, 159, 195, 206, 226, 227, 229, 410 at Timmari 227 sandstone. See construction: materials sandstone-and-tile. See construction: techniques Sant’Angelo Grieco. See farmhouses Sant’Angelo Vecchio. See farmhouses; necropoleis Santa Maria d’Anglona 145 seeds. See archaeobotany Serra di Vaglio 88, 104, 371 serving. See pottery: functions sheep xx, 112, 118, 122–24, 137, 139, 140, 140–41, 141, 363, 416. See also bones; domestic cult: rituals: sacrifice depictions of 112, 118, 119, 122, 123, 124, 141, 335–37, 340, 341, 342, 344–45, 346 shells 18, 71, 143–48, 381, 383, 384, 385, 388, 389, 390, 391, 396. See also domestic cult: evidence for; votive objects as beads 146 in burial contexts 145, 147, 148 as cosmetic containers 145, 147 as diuretics 144 as food refuse 143, 144, 145, 147 as ornaments 143, 144, 146, 147 as pigment containers 147 Sicily 86, 88, 113, 118, 126, 129, 190, 204, 214, 229, 231, 261, 279, 291, 304, 305, 321, 322, 325, 327, 328, 343, 371, 415 site code 151. See also catalog numbers; lot numbers site phasing. See Fattoria Fabrizio
5/30/14 7:43 AM
478
The Chora of Metaponto 5: A Greek Farmhouse at Ponte Fabrizio
site plan. See Fattoria Fabrizio: floor plan skyphoi. See pottery small bowls. See pottery small bowls/one-handlers. See pottery Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeologici della Basilicata 101, 103, 206, 409 soundings. See Fattoria Fabrizio sphendone. See hairstyles stamnoi. See pottery stile misto. See pottery storage. See pottery: functions storerooms 3, 4, 25, 26, 72, 74–76, 90, 93, 103, 104, 111, 111–12, 133, 135, 141, 248, 363, 410 survey. See Metaponto: chora Sybaris 129, 178, 262, 302, 304, 311, 371 symposia 112, 279. See also banqueting
T
Tác-Gorsium 140 Taranto 174, 178, 222, 236, 262, 280, 311, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 341, 342, 343, 362, 369, 414. See also necropoleis Tavole Palatine. See temples temples 130 Heraion at Foce del Sele 337 Heraion at Samos 338 Tavole Palatine 369, 373 Temple B at Metaponto 370 Temple E at Metaponto 145, 336 Temple of Hera on the Bradano. See temples: Tavole Palatine terracottas 6, 18, 50, 51, 53, 54, 69, 70, 70–71, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 103, 112, 117, 118, 119–20, 121, 122, 123, 124–26, 125, 127–28, 129, 141, 151, 152, 157, 163, 225, 335–50, 407, 408. See also domestic cult: evidence for; votive objects bases 119, 342, 344 coroplast 337, 338, 339, 340, 341 from Locri 337–38 mold series 336, 338, 339, 340, 341, 342, 343 Testate amoebae 424, 432 textile production. See production textural concentration features (TCFs). See pottery: fabrics three-dimensional modeling. See virtual archaeology thymiateria. See altars; domestic cult: evidence for tile fall. See Fattoria Fabrizio
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 478
Timmari 114, 178, 338, 343, 411. See also necropoleis; sanctuaries Tolve 118, 130, 362, 411–12 tombs. See necropoleis torch of Demeter. See fiaccola torch of Persephone. See fiaccola Torre del Mordillo 355 Torre di Satriano 237, 277, 354 Torretta di Pisticci 173 trade networks 70, 74, 114–15, 158, 174, 321, 327, 369, 372, 373 trees. See archaeobotany Typological Number of Individuals (TNI). See pottery: quantification of
V
Valesio 277, 303, 304 valleys Agri valley 100, 123, 124, 130, 412–14 Basento valley 98, 104, 128, 130, 156, 157, 158, 159, 162, 173, 373 Bradano valley 100, 104, 114, 128, 129, 130, 156, 249, 373, 411–12 Sinni valley 414 Venella valley xix, xx, xxii–xxvii, xxiii, xxvi, 3, 6, 7, 68, 81, 128, 129, 135, 156, 373–74, 410 veiled figure depictions of 118, 119, 336, 337, 339, 340–41, 342, 343, 344–45, 347 Venella River. See rivers Venella valley. See valleys Venus sp. 143, 148. See also shells virtual archaeology Architectural Complex (AC) 95 Building Unit (BU) 95, 96, 98, 100 Functional Unit 96 three-dimensional modeling 95, 111 virtual reconstruction 94–100, 95, 96, 97, 98 virtual reconstruction. See virtual archaeology viticulture 102, 113, 136. See also agriculture; grapes; pot tery: amphorae; wine volcanic stones. See lithics votive objects 71, 141. See also cult; domestic cult kantharoi 6, 50, 72, 76, 118, 119, 120–22, 121, 123, 124, 128, 177, 206, 206–8, 225, 335. See also domestic cult: evidence for; pottery miniatures 6, 25, 50, 70, 73, 76, 81, 118, 119, 120, 121,
5/30/14 7:43 AM
Index 122, 123, 124, 125, 128, 225–30, 335. See also domestic cult: evidence for; pottery reliefs 335, 336, 339, 340 shells 143, 144, 145, 147, 148. See also domestic cult: evidence for; shells terracottas 6, 50, 54, 71, 76, 81, 103, 112, 117, 118, 119–20, 123, 124, 125–26, 127–28, 129, 225, 335, 336, 337, 340, 342. See also do mestic cult: evidence for; terracottas
W
walls. See construction; Fattoria Fabrizio; foundations wet environments. See environments: natural wheat. See cereal crops wheel-made painted ware. See pottery Wheeler, Sir Mortimer 15
FF_99_references_05feb14.indd 479
479
wild Anthropogenic Indicators (wAI). See palynology windows 93. See also Fattoria Fabrizio wine 19, 22, 28, 70, 74, 103, 111, 112, 113, 117, 120, 121, 126, 136, 216, 300, 321, 322, 327, 329, 361. See also banqueting; grapes; pottery: amphorae; symposia; viticulture women 117, 341, 343 woodland. See environments: natural wool. See production: textile worshipers depictions of 119, 335, 336, 337, 340 Xenon Group. See pottery Xenophon 111
X
5/30/14 7:43 AM