Читать книгу The Extramural Sanctuary of Demeter and Persephone at Cyrene, Libya, Final Reports, Volume VIII - Donald O. White - Страница 15
ОглавлениеI: PART 2
The Early Imperial Walled Remains, 31 B.C.–A.D. 115
Based on our currently available information, it is the century or so prior to the Jewish Rebellion which marks the sanctuary’s initial expansion down the wadi slope to the level of what eventually evolved into the Lower Sanctuary terrace. It is also when the first stone and wood bridge was constructed in order to connect the lower grounds with the walled city and the agora zone north of the wadi bed. While this may have been preceded by some earlier form of spanning arrangement now lost, it provides us with the first recorded effort to unite the intramural urban core with a site whose deliberate isolation from the city had been, in an earlier age, one of its cardinal characteristics.49 Finally, this is also the first time that the Upper Sanctuary grounds take on the appearance of a semi-independent architectural climax through the device of the large colonnaded structure (S17) erected across its western half.
On a more prosaic level, the century and a quarter preceding the Jewish Rebellion saw a significant increase in the amount of space incorporated into the overall sanctuary domain. On the other hand, this should be tempered by the realization that the University of Pennsylvania team was unable to conduct any real excavation of the Lower Sanctuary grounds apart from a surface cleaning of its already visible, above-ground elements. We therefore cannot be sure what preceded these visible remains. Of equal, if not greater significance is that we were unable to explore the terraced grounds that lie immediately to the east and southeast of the Middle Sanctuary.50 This means, inter alia, that the eastern terraces, the monumental stairs, and the hilltop complex first discovered by Applebaum, grouped under the heading of “The Larger Setting” in the introductory volume to this series,51 could provide in the future a quite different developmental history than what is offered here.
In another vein, trends in votive presentation appear to remain fairly static throughout this period. The mass-produced votives of earlier years, whose gradual replacement by individualized and relatively more costly dedications was already a noticeable trend in the Hellenistic period,52 predictably fail to stage a return during the Imperial period. Instead, the tendency seems to have been to lean increasingly toward the dedication of large and expensive marble statues to the exclusion of much else. As was typical for the period, such dedications were more often than not intended to shed as much, if not more, honor on their donors as on the resident deities. The mass of locally produced cooking and eating wares that signaled the practice of ritual dining ceremonies during the 2nd and 1st century B.C. 53 finds no exact equivalent in the site’s relatively few specimens of 1st century A.D. imported plates, bowls, and cups. The locally manufactured coarse ware vessels used for preparing as well as perhaps serving food seem to continue, however, right on down to the end of the sanctuary’s active life. On the other hand, in the opening years of the Imperial phase the construction of a sprawling wall-enclosed dump (S18) to contain large numbers of bones, 2nd and 1st century B.C. dining wares, and pre-Hellenistic and Hellenistic lamps should perhaps serve as a warning of how the discovery of a similar dump servicing the later period could alter significantly the currently proposed reconstruction.
Figure 1. Plan of the early Imperial sanctuary. Features in solid black represent post-Hellenistic and early Roman features.
The main alterations to already existing structures notably affected the main north or forward wall of the Middle Sanctuary, which received a new facing (Walls T10, T11, T12), and Sacred House S6, which underwent a major rebuilding across its northeast half.
Bridge foundations (S28) across the wadi and sections of retaining wall (T21, T22, T23) at the level of the wadi drain make up what is known of the new Lower Sanctuary. The Middle Sanctuary received the last in its series of independent sacred houses, here designated S8, as well as a poorly understood rectangular enclosure (S9) set between the two Sacred Houses (S6 and S5). A stepped entrance (G2) was inserted, apparently for the first time, into the western half of the forward wall of the Middle Sanctuary, linking the latter with the Lower Sanctuary grounds.
Additions to the Upper Sanctuary include a colonnaded chamber (S10) floored with a mosaic directly north of the F2 fountain house. Access from the lower level of the Middle Sanctuary to the Upper Sanctuary was provided by a doorway (G6) set directly north of a patch of poorly preserved mosaic that once served as part of the corridor’s pavement. A large colonnaded building of unidentified character known as the Southwest Building (S17) was added to the Upper Sanctuary’s western quarter. An open-air access corridor (S22) was run south of the rear peribolos wall of the Middle Sanctuary to give access to the Southwest Building. An extramural dump (S18) for discarded bones, pottery, and lamps was established west of the F2 fountain house, making use of the earlier S19 structure’s east wall.
Lower Sanctuary Additions
Terrace Walls T21, T22, and T23 (Pls. 2, 3) 54
Lining the south face of the wadi drain55 are sections of what was probably some kind of continuous ashlar masonry retaining wall system that established the forward edge of the Lower Sanctuary. Where possible to observe their outer faces, the sections seem to follow the alignment of the bedrock outcroppings that define the drain; they do not, in other words, collectively form a uniformly straight terrace similar to the massive bulwark that separates the Lower from the Middle Sanctuary. The lack of excavation along their line impedes any detailed understanding of how these sections were engineered to augment the face of the wadi drain. It seems probable that in places the wall was assembled on top of the drain’s lip; in other places, however, it rose as a supplementary barrier where the lip was interrupted by dips or natural crevices.
The most easterly section, T2l, runs for about 10 m. (Fig. 1) where up to seven predominantly low courses of headers and stretchers project from under the earth cover spilling over the forward edge of the Lower Sanctuary.56 These range in height from 0.15 to 0.25 m., with one ca. 0.65 m. high course topping the series. After a gap of ca. 6m., the line of T21 is continued west for another ca. 5.50 m. by Wall T22, which survives as three courses of mixed headers and stretchers averaging ca. 0.50 by 0.50 by 1.00 m.57 The difference in course heights between T21 and T22 may be a result of different building or repair phases. On the other hand, future excavation could indicate that, rather than representing disconnected parts of a single retaining wall system facing the forward edge of the Lower Sanctuary, T21 and T22 may have been part of the forward walls of separate, independent buildings.
Plate 2. The cleared sanctuary from the northeast at the end of 1979 season.
The same may be true of the third segment of wall which emerges from under the cover of earth strewn over the drain lip west of T22 after a gap of ca. 3 m. The least visible of the three, T23 appears to be made up of perhaps two courses of ashlars, supplemented by a single displaced limestone fluted column shaft fragment (Pl. 3). While its line has been merged with T22 for purposes of simplification on Fig. 1, it is drawn as a separate entity on the fold-out evidential reproduced at the back of volume V of this series.58 Bending away to the north from the line of T22 and T21, it is detectable for about 6.50 m. before breaking off at a point where Ghislanzoni’s pre-1915 excavation may have interrupted its line unintentionally.59 The unexpected appearance of a column shaft in its facing is presumably a sign of T23’s relative lateness within the development of the overall sanctuary, but without any corroborative evidence from excavation, both it and Walls T22 and T21 should be regarded as essentially undated.
Plate 3. Column reused in the face of wall T23.
Whether parts of a single retaining wall or simply the forward edges of independent structures, the three sections give a good indication of the overall spatial size of the Lower Sanctuary. Its eastern extent cannot be determined precisely since no trace of an outer wall has been brought to light at this end of the sanctuary grounds, but it may be assumed that it was terminated either north of the northeast corner of the Middle Sanctuary proper or north of the outer edge of the Eastern Annex (S26). The western limits are fixed by W14. The resulting area was irregularly rectangular in layout. Its north-south depth varies between ca. 15 and 20 m. The total falloff in ground level from the base of the Middle Sanctuary’s retaining wall (T20) to the top of Wall T22 is 5.50 m. (32% grade) and ca. 7.00 m. to the top of T21 (46% grade). The total surface area enclosed by the Lower Sanctuary may be estimated between ca. 1,070 and 1,260 sq. m. When cleared of its surface growth in 1978, much of the surface proved to be largely free of remains of building blocks except in the zone directly beneath Wall T20. A heavier scatter of blocks turned up north of the Eastern Annex (S26), but no trace of internal walls was visible anywhere east of Wall W14 and its associated compartments (S27). The bulk of the surface, moreover, lacked any traces of fallen sculptures, with again the exception of the compartment south of Wall W14. Perhaps the Italian Mission active in this part of the sanctuary before 1915 cleared away the bulk of the sculptural fragments.60 On the other hand, the area probably remains a fruitful ground for future discoveries of sculptures originally set up along the lower edge of the Middle Sanctuary, particularly heads which may have rolled a considerable distance after being detached from their bodies.
Plate 4. Wadi drain and S28 bridge abutment cleared by Ghislanzoni from the southeast. Courtesy of the Department of Antiquities.
S28 Bridge Abutment (Pl. 4)
The wadi drain north of the west end of the Middle Sanctuary spreads to a width of more than 14 m. Its north or city side embankment61 is faced with a 10.25 m. wide ashlar masonry retaining wall (S28), built of carefully prepared limestone headers and stretchers that average ca.1.10 long by 0.60 m. deep; their heights vary from ca. 0.30 to 0.40 m.62 A maximum of twelve courses survive intact, with stones from a possible thirteenth course lying toppled to their rear. The rise in the soil lying behind S28 indicates that its original elevation might have extended up another six courses. A Department of Antiquities photograph (Pl. 4) dating from the 1915 work of Ghislanzoni63 indicates that S28’s east wall returned at least 4 m. into the wadi bank; much of the return is covered over today with fallen soil and vegetation.
From its alignment along the wadi bank and position diagonally opposite the northwest corner of the Middle Sanctuary, it appears likely that S28 served as part of a bridge. Ghislanzoni’s clearance of its southern face is, however, unpublished, and no excavated evidence is available for its date. Its block dimensions are, however, strikingly close to those of the “Thirty-two Centimeter Wall” (T10) erected across the eastern half of the Middle Sanctuary in the late 1st century B.C. It therefore seems at least possible that the S28 abutment belongs to approximately the same time.
If that is the case, then the W14 wall, which today survives to a height of eight courses or ca. 3.50 m. across the wadi drain, is probably later and not associated with the bridge since W14’s block dimensions differ from those of S28, particularly in regard to block height.64 More significantly, S28’s west end overshoots the corresponding corner of S27 by ca. 3.50 m., which surely would have created gratuitous problems in decking over any timber bridgework between abutments. In addition, if S28 had belonged to the same construction phase as W14, it should have been laid out parallel as well as directly opposite W14. Instead, the alignment of the two elements diverges by approximately 22°. On the other hand, it has been observed already how S28 does lie more or less parallel to the line of the early Imperial T11/T12 facing of the Middle Sanctuary as well as sharing the dimensions of T10. For these various reasons, it seems likely that S28 is all that survives of a bridge arrangement connecting the lowest level of the sanctuary with the north slope of Wadi Bel Gadir before the post-Jewish Rebellion construction of the Lower Sanctuary’s northwest corner that seems effectively to block passage across the wadi at this point. If this hypothesis is correct, whatever parts of the original southern bridge abutment not dismantled at the time of the construction of S27 must be trapped in the fabric of its front wall, a proposition that can be tested only by more thoroughly excavating Wall W14.
Commentary
So far as I know, the ancient bridges scattered throughout the settled region of the Cyrenaican plateau have yet to be surveyed and properly studied. A good place to start might be with the gasr system, since the El-Heneia fortress has, for one, left rather well preserved evidence for a wooden bridge supported on twin stone arches.65 Another productive area for study would be the region’s aqueducts whose bridging devices already have been worked on at Ptolemais.66 Most of the major Pentapolis settlements must have used bridges as part of their extramural road systems, but evidence for such appears to be lacking in the case of every city with the exception of, once again, Ptolemais.67 These few examples indicate that cut-stone and concrete vaulted bridge abutments and decks, stone support piers or stanchions, and timber decking were all in general use by Roman times. If piers and timber decking were used in the case of the present sanctuary as seems likely, weathering and flooding have long since destroyed any trace of their previous existence.
Middle Sanctuary Alterations and Renovations
Terrace Walls T10, T11, and T12 68
The early Imperial period called for the first renovations to the forward, north wall of the Middle Sanctuary peribolos recorded since later Archaic times. While the massive T20 facing added after the A.D. 115 Jewish Rebellion conceals whatever early Imperial modifications were carried out on the middle stretch of the late Archaic T3-T4 pseudoisodomic peribolos, the remainder of the 1st century A.D. additions are fairly well known, either from excavated tests carried out on their backs (T10) or because their northern, outer faces remain exposed for direct inspection (T10 in part, T11 and T12 in their entirety).
Wall T10
The eastern line of the wall labeled T10 and otherwise known as the “Thirty-two Centimeter Wall” is restored supporting the entire eastern half of the Middle Sanctuary (Fig. 1). Actual firsthand observation of its elevation, however, is limited to where the top courses of its southern face are visible in grid squares G10, G11, and G13,69 as well as to the interior of the later Imperial vault V1/V2, which provides a clear view of both its northern face and cross-section.70 Where observable, the masonry consists of precisely shaped ashlars averaging 0.95/1.00 by 0.50 by 0.32 m., and it is indeed the unusual regularity of its course heights that gave rise to T10’s being locally nicknamed the “Thirty-two Centimeter Wall.” The resulting block height-to-length ratio works out to 1:3 to 1:3.3 Its courses rise in alternating headers and stretchers with apparently no additional backing. Thus, the total wall thickness seems to be roughly a meter.
Context and Date of Wall T10, Its Early Imperial Backfill
The superficial clearing operations carried out on the south face of the upper courses of T10 in grid squares G10 and G11 provided no chronological information for the wall’s construction date. The University of Pennsylvania Museum expedition, however, encountered a massive backfill south of T10’s western end in grid square G13.71 The fill’s physical configuration and general contents have been described previously,72 and the reader already will be aware that the fill’s presence is tied to the activities of the builders of the T10 wall. To judge from the two tests opened against T0’s inner face in G13,73 the bedrock slope against which the wall builders erected their footings sloped back at a steep angle to create an irregular V-shaped gap between wall and wadi shoulder. After the line of T10 had been set in place, the gap was backfilled with a deep mixture of earth, broken building debris, and massive quantities of discarded artifacts (G13/F13, St. 2).74 As has been previously stated, the overwhelming majority of the dateable artifacts were manufactured during the 6th and 5th century B.C. and were presumably stored in underground dumps spread throughout the Middle and Upper Sanctuary grounds until their reuse as fill behind Wall T10. Nevertheless, a number of St. 2 stone sculptures post-date Classical times. Moreover, while strikingly sparse in number, the latest artifacts and those which actually date the St. 2 fill (and hence the wall)75 provide a consistent pattern, largely falling into the first half of the 1st century A.D.
F13/G13, Tr. 1, St. 2 contained a single Italian Sigillata sherd, dated to the Augustan period.76 F13/G13, Tr. 2, St. 2 produced a locally made terracotta bowl assigned to the 2nd–1st century B.C.77 and a mid-1st century A.D. blown glass sherd from F13/G13, Tr. 2.78 Excavation 6 m. west of trench 2 in grid square G14/F14 brought to light the continuation of the same St. 2 backfill south of Wall T4.79 Its latest object was a bronze coin of the 2nd/1st century B.C.80 These collectively indicate a date of the first half of the 1st century A.D. for the backfill as well as for the construction of Wall T10.
Wall T11
Just where the T10 terminates at its western end cannot be pin-pointed, but somewhere toward the approximate center of the Middle Sanctuary it must have merged with the line of the old late Archaic pseudoisodomic terrace wall, T4.81 We likewise cannot be totally certain how far west T4 extended in this period before linking with the ca. 5.5 m. long stretch of ashlar masonry designated T11 (Figs. 1, 35, Pl. 5). This is because the zone of contact between Walls T4, T11, and the later T20 wall facing has never been excavated and remains difficult to interpret. From what can be determined, however, from observation of their respective wall tops, Wall T20 overlaps the north face of the east end of T11 for perhaps a meter’s distance. In addition, the plane of its northern face is set 1.20 m. in front (i.e., north) of Wall T11, and although T11 is aligned directly with T4, the T20 facade establishes a quite separate and apparently new orientation. For these reasons, we are inclined to regard the original building phase of Wall T11 as earlier than T20’s and at the same time contemporary with T10. No proof for this sequence has been provided by excavation, and future clearance of the rear (south) faces of the three walls might indicate a quite different arrangement.
Plate 5. Wall T11 from the south, overlapped to the left by wall T20. The G2 doorway and collapsed stairs occupy the center of the picture.
To judge from the evidence of its block heights, Wall T11, with a maximum preserved total height of 2.70 m., in fact underwent two phases of construction. Phase one (T11a) survives only in the bottom three stretcher courses where the heights average 0.34 m., which is in turn nearly equal to those of Wall T10, the “Thirty-two Centimeter Wall.” Their lengths average 1.10 to 1.20 m. A change of construction then occurs at the level of the fourth course that consists of a series of low leveling blocks, apparently designed to level the upper four phase two (T11b) courses with the courses of the later wall facing T20, whose block heights (0.45 m.) they share. The upper four courses alternate headers and stretchers. Their block lengths average 1.10 m. Consequently, the phase two upper half seems to represent a reconstruction contemporary with the post A.D. 115 construction of Wall T20, while the lower phase one half should date to the first half of the 1st century A.D.
Block height-to-length ratios are of some interest in this context. As already noted the T10 has a ratio of 1:3 to 1:3.3. T11a has a ratio of 1:3.24 to 1:3.53. T11b is 1:3.7, which virtually duplicates the height-to-length ratio of a large percentage of the blocks of Wall T20. In other words, the early Imperial walls share average ratios of 1:3.25, while the post-A.D. 115 T20 wall and the T11b phase two wall revert to the typically squarish, later Archaic and Classical proportions of around 1:2.5.
Wall T12
The 8.80 m. long T12 continuation west (P1. 6) of the early Imperial retaining wall system links Wall T11, and the attached G2 doorway described below, with the Hellenistic period Wall T13 that continues to serve as the corner for the Middle Sanctuary. With a total preserved height of 2.25 m., Wall T12 again reflects two building phases. Its lower four alternating header and stretcher courses (T12a) are 0.36 m. high and average 1.10 to 1.15 m. in length. The top two T12b courses82 are made up of 0.50 m. high headers, whose original lengths may been cut back to 0.85 m. as part of their secondary use here in the post-A.D. 115 rebuilding. The T12a stretchers have a height-to-length ratio of 1:3.2, and the presumably later T12b headers have a reduced ratio of only 1:1.7. The latter figure is probably without much significance because of the headers’ secondary usage in this context. T12a, on the other hand, appears to conform rather closely to the proportions adopted for its proposed contemporaries, Walls T10 and T11.
The only exceptional feature of T12a’s masonry worth noting is the use of interlocking L-shaped headers that occur in its third course above bedrock at the point of juncture between the wall’s west end and Wall T13 at the northwest corner of the Middle Sanctuary. The technique, already encountered in the walls of the later Archaic Sacred House S5, involves three separate headers. The way in which the westernmost block in the series is keyed to bond with its adjacent T13 stretcher provides a fairly secure indication that T13 preceded T12.
Sacred House (S6a)
The later Archaic Sacred House S6 (Fig. 2)83 underwent a major reconstruction of its north and east walls during this period; this evidently necessitated the near total rebuilding of its superstructure over the line of the old walls. The rebuilt version, measuring 5.20 m. north-to-south by 6.80 m. east-towest, is designated S6a. Supported by a low podium-like series of four steps along its north wall, S6a was entered through a door in its east wall. Its closest neighbor was the S9 building described below.84
North Wall
Apart from the podium steps, two complete courses of elevation survive, namely a single course of limestone foundations surmounted by a course of well-cut stretchers. Two poorly preserved small blocks from a second course survive at the wall’s east end.
The foundations are built directly on bedrock and protrude south to form an irregular shelf, 0.20 to 0.25 m. wide, on the inner face of the first course of stretchers of the wall proper. They consist of low ashlars of various lengths, as opposed to the more usual rubble fill used for foundations. Where the foundation level reappears to the north at the top of the “podium” step series, it has been faced with a normal line of stretchers ca. 1.70 m. long and 0.35 m. high. The join between “foundation” and “step” is concealed beneath the wall’s superstructure.
Plate 6. Section of wall T12 from the south; Jeffrey Cohen is crouching in foreground.
The first course of the wall proper is made up of a line of three well-cut stretchers, ca. 1.85 m. long, 0.60 m. thick, and 0.35 m. high. The two surviving blocks of the second “course” at the wall’s east end average only 0.50 m. long, 0.60 m. thick, and 0.18 m. high. A possibility exists that both were placed here after S6a had collapsed and were part of the general cleanup of the site associated with the late wall ringing the southern edge of the post-A.D. 262 E14 Mound (S29).85
The stepped-out courses north of the building proper consist of two narrowly projecting courses of stretchers, which, together with the foundation level already mentioned, make up a three-step podium. Their block lengths run from ca. 0.90 to 1.60 m. with heights of 0.35 m. The width of their treads amounts to only ca. 0.30 m.
Owing either to the effects of time and earthquakes or to some otherwise undocumentable phase in the structure’s later history, a ca. 0.30 m. wide gap has been left between the later Archaic west wall of S6 and the west end of the north wall of S6a.
East Wall
By way of contrast, the east and north walls form a proper junction and appear in this and other respects to be contemporary additions. The north wall’s end stretcher forms the actual corner at foundation level; a reused threshold block is shoved against its inner face to establish a line of well-cut foundations for the east wall. The latter is made recognizable as a reused block by a 0.28 by 0.94 by 0.02 m. deep cutting visible on its upper surface. It and the remainder of the foundation blocks of the east wall are laid directly over bedrock. They average ca. 0.35 m. in height and are made up of short, irregular headers slightly more than 1 m. long and 0.40 to 0.60 m. wide. These project ca. 0.30 m. in front of the line of the wall’s first course proper and, if originally left exposed, may have served as a low step.
Figure 2. Plan of the early Imperial S6a Sacred House.
What survives of the first course proper consists of two abraded but otherwise carefully cut low threshold blocks, measuring ca. 0.80/90 by 0.60 by 0.30 m. South of these is a slightly higher and deeper block, 0.90 by 0.70 by 0.35 m., whose forward edge projects east of the line of the threshold. This carried the missing door’s south jamb. A narrow filler block, 0.40 m. wide, was then used to fill the interval between the jamb block and the pre-existent S6 south wall without any attempt to bond the two. The level of the east wall blocks south of the door matches the top of the first course of stretchers of the north wall, which may be taken as another sign that the two were made contemporaneously. The actual position of the door’s north jamb is impossible to determine exactly because of the broken-down upper surface of the relevant threshold block, but if the door were centered, as seems likely, it should have overlapped the former by ca. 0.35 m., giving a restored door width of 1.35 m.
Interior of S6a, Its Context and Date
The red earth fill overlying bedrock inside the house has been described already in connection with the latter’s earlier phase.86 Containing a cache of 6th and 5th century Cyrenean silver coins along with examples of early personal jewelry, this ca. 0.30 m. deep fill (E15, 2, 4; D15/16, 1, 3) is interpreted as the structure’s original floor retained in use until its reconstruction as S6a. Its continuation as a post-Classical floor is indicated by the presence of eleven bronze coins dating between the end of the 4th century and mid-2nd century B.C. When S6 was rebuilt on its north and east sides, the red earth floor evidently was repacked with a ca. 0.50 m. thick layer of dense reddish–brown earth backed against the inner faces of the east and north walls to the height of the tops of their second courses. With the exception of two possibly Roman period sherds, it once again contained early pottery and other discarded artifacts including three silver coins87 mixed in with two late locally issued bronze coins of the second half of the 2nd century B.C.88 In other words, nothing in the way of stratified information reliably places S6a’s construction later than the later 2nd century B.C. On the other hand, those few architectural members for which a case can be made for associating them with the building appear to date to the 1st or possibly 2nd century A.D.
Elevation
Few architectural fragments survive from which to find clues for the building’s elevation from S6a’s interior and immediate vicinity by which is meant all the space directly to its east and west as well as farther down the hill to the north.
Sacred House S6a, Associated Architectural Frusta
Arch. Cat. B:18 (no assigned field no.). Column drum frag.
Limestone
E15, 3, 2, immediately north of S29 Mound
Mpl. 0.54 m. Diam. ca. 0.38 m.
No trace of flutes.
Arch. Cat. B:19 (field no. 118). Frag. of partly fluted column drum
Limestone
E15, 3, 2, tumbled down from S6a
Mp1. 0.68 m. Max. measurable diam. 0.42 m.
One finished end preserved. Surface fluted on two-thirds of shaft, remainder left plain. Broad, shallow flutes meet in wide fillets, whose surfaces are dressed with X-shaped chisel cuts in preparation for stucco. Hole, 0.035 m. across and 0.09m. deep, let into surface 0.56 m. from shaft’s finished end.
Arch. Cat. B:22 (field no. 60). Frag. of partly fluted column drum
Limestone
North of S6a’s northeast corner, inserted into hole in bedrock terrace
L. at least 0.30 m. Diam. 0.45 m.
Figure 3. Plan of the early Imperial S8 Sacred House.
Arch. Cat. B:34 (field no. 58). Frag. of column drum
Limestone
E15, 3, 2, north of northeast corner of S6a’s stepped podium
Mpl. 0.95. Upper diam. 0.465 m. Lower diam. 0.482 m. Upper end preserved intact. Degree of augmentation 2%.
Arch. Cat. J:3 (field no. 59). Frag. of anta base
Limestone
E15, 3, 2, from over stepped podium at S6a’s northeast corner
Mpw. of molded face 0.74 m. H. 0.22 m. Th. 0.60 m. As preserved, base consists of plain torus above low plinth.
The difficulty with associating the column shaft fragments with the S6a house is that, despite their proximity, nothing survives to suggest it possessed an in-antis arrangement. Instead, the pieces are probably better thought of as having something to do with construction located farther back up the hill in the area of the Portico chamber (S10) and the colonnaded Southwest Building (S17). The J:3 anta base is perhaps more promising. Its lower surface (0.74 by 0.60 m.) is the right size to fit on the wall block (0.90 by 0.60 m.) that supports the east wall’s missing south door jamb. Projecting antae flanking doors, as distinguished from molded, recessed door jambs, appear to have been employed on several not fully peripteral sacred buildings at Cyrene, including the Temple of Zeus in the Agora,89 the Temple from the Caesareum,90 and the Temple with Octagonal Bases (E6) southeast of the Agora.91 Since all three occur behind the line of prostyle porches and not, as here, where the door forms part of the main facade of a porchless structure, one might have expected that the front of S6a would have been further treated with corner pilasters, similar to those applied to the front of Cyrene’s so-called Strategheion.92 Nothing in what survives of its east wall suggests that it ever was, and the possibility has to be retained that the anta base in fact stemmed from a more conventional application farther back up the hill to the south.
Figure 4. North-south section of fills in S8 Sacred House and continuing south to rear of Middle Sanctuary.
Middle Sanctuary Additions
Sacred House S8
During this period, the fifth in the sanctuary’s series of independently sited shrine houses, S8 (Pl. 7, Figs. 3, 4),93 was constructed directly behind the north-south line of the F1 Fountain and S1 and S7 Sacred Houses. Opening north, down the Middle Sanctuary slope, the S8 house must have made use of the R3 steps94 for access to its interior through a secondary door set off-center in its north wall. The main door, of which no traces survive, probably was located at the east end.
Its exterior wall measurements are 6.5 m. east-towest by 4.4 m. north-to-south. While various combinations of ashlar headers and stretchers make up each of its four walls, the south wall was built roughly twice as thick above the foundation level as the remaining three walls, presumably in order to hold back the weight of the St. 3 fill (Fig. 4) piled against its outer face. Measured from their lowest point on bedrock (under the north wall) to their highest elevation (along the eastern third of the south wall), the walls are preserved to a maximum height of just under 2 m. but rise to no more than four courses in any one place.
As was already the case with the other independent shrine houses previously described, no traces of a permanent floor were found internally. Instead, at least in the period immediately prior to the structure’s final destruction, S8’s interior appears to have been left partially stripped to bedrock. The uneven stone surface is broken into a series of natural pits or sinkholes; the largest of these occupies the entire northwestern third of the interior. Patches of sterile St. 4 terra rossa fill cover low spots in the bedrock, including the bottoms of the pits, to depths occasionally reaching 0.20 m. Otherwise the bedrock was left bare. If the shrine building possessed a paved floor at the time of its original construction—which would seem to have been a necessity if much interior movement was ever intended—no evidence was recovered for either its character or presence.
Plate 7. S8 Sacred House from the southwest.
In addition to the absence of a floor, the interior walls of S8 preserve no traces of stucco or painted decoration. If it were originally equipped with an interior bench similar to those discovered in Sacred Houses S5 and S7, it was removed before the final destruction.
As a consequence of these facts, virtually nothing can be inferred of S8’s original interior appearance and function. On the other hand, its final days perhaps do supply some clues, discussed below, as to use.
North Wall
In largely ruined condition, the north wall survives as a single course of foundation headers, ca. 1.30 m. long, 0.43 to 0.50 m. wide, and 0.25 m. high, set directly on bedrock. A roughly 2 m. wide gap in its western half may mark the position of a now missing secondary door; if an entry existed, it could not have been centered unless its threshold originally was inserted above foundation level, as seems more likely. The sinkhole occupying the northwestern third of S8’s interior extends through the wall gap and down the slope to the north. It was left plugged in antiquity with sterile St. 4 terra rossa fill and then leveled off with the bedrock pavement to either side by small flattish stones intended to carry the missing foundation headers.
A single broken stretcher block at the northwest corner is all that survives of the wall’s second course.
East Wall
The bedrock steps down to the north in three stages. A combination of header and stretcher blocks is used to build up the lowest two stages to the level of the bedrock lip across the rear of the building. The remainder of the east wall’s elevation is composed of a single thickness of stretchers.
Two stretchers (ca. 1.15 by 0.55 by 0.30 m.) level off the topmost rise in bedrock to bring the combined total height of the east wall’s three courses to ca. 0.90 m. All three constitute foundation courses that present today a ragged profile when viewed from outside the building. A 0.60 m. thick earth fill (E11, Tr. 1, St. 3), containing largely pre-Hellenistic artifacts, prevented their being seen prior to the earthquake.
West Wall
The southern two-thirds of the west wall’s outer face and upper surface today is partially masked by a late wall, W8, which turned west to form a retaining wall west of S8 sometime after A.D. 262. The thickness of the west wall at its base is roughly a meter. It steps down the slope in two stages. Only two courses survive of its original elevation; these are distinguished by carefully smoothed exterior block faces that contrast with the ragged outer block faces of the east wall.
The northwest corner is bonded to the north wall by a pair of parallel stretcher foundation blocks, ca. l.10 m. long, 0.50 m. wide, and 0.30 m. high, set directly on bedrock. The join at the southwest corner with the south wall is concealed by Wall W8. A single exterior line of stretchers carried by the first course makes up what remains of the west wall’s second course. In other words, the west wall mirrors its eastern counterpart by reducing to the thickness of a single stretcher course (ca. 0.50 to 0.55 m. wide) above the level of its foundation.
South Wall
Four courses of irregularly mixed headers and stretchers remain standing to a combined height of ca. l.30 m. Their foundations are set directly over bedrock except at the southeast corner where they rest on a shallow deposit of St. 4 sterile terra rossa filling a natural depression in the bedrock. As previously stated, the south wall was built to its full height at the width of two stretchers or ca. 1.10 m. to resist the weight of the earth fill piled against its rear. S8’s remaining three walls appear to have risen above their respective foundations at a thickness of a single stretcher course or ca. 0.60 m.
The average block proportions of S8 are 1:3.7.
Elevation
A number of fragmentary architectural blocks were excavated in the general vicinity of S8. None were found directly associated with it, i.e., inside or part of its walls. Two of the potentially most interesting (Arch. Cat. I:3; I:6) came to light down the slope of the Middle Sanctuary in the earthquake-strewn zone between the expedition’s Decauville railway line and the main retaining wall, T20. Assuming that the latter pieces rolled to their final destinations during one of the two earthquakes responsible for wrecking the sanctuary, they may have been part of any number of structures, although the S8 Sacred House is perhaps their closest plausible source. Both are part of separate doors and, if stemming from S8, could have belonged to its north and east walls.
Architectural Frusta Associated with S8
Arch. Cat. I:3 (field no. 146, Pl. 8). Frag. of jamb and lintel molding
Limestone
F12/G12, 2. Earthquake debris on top of T20 wall
Plate 8. Arch. Cat. I:3.
Figure 5. Arch. Cat. I:6.
Figure 6. Arch. Cat. J:6.
Mph. 0.33 m. Mpw. 0.35 m. Th. 0.31 m.
Upper lefthand corner of jamb and lintel molding. A standard type of doorway of regional tombs
Compare Pacho 1827:pl. XXXVI; J. Cassels 1955:15; Stucchi 1975:178, 186, fig. 181. Compare also the door jamb of the Temple of Hermes associated with the House of Jason Magnus: Mingazzini 1966:10, fig. 8.
Arch. Cat. I:6 (field no. 121, Fig. 5). Frag. of engaged jamb pilaster
Limestone
F12, 2, 1
Mph. 0.395 m. W. 0.5l m. Mpth. 0.75 m.
Lewis hole or worn mortise in upper surface. Upper lefthand corner of engaged jamb pilaster in which pilaster terminates in plain cyma reversa molding facing on door; pilaster top (capital?) decorated with opposing pair of anchor-shaped features, righthand side of which is largely worn away. A number of doorways of Cyrenaican sacred edifices and tombs are decorated with engaged pilasters: Stucchi 1975:figs. 87, 216, 234–36; Stucchi 1965:266, ill.; W. Bacchielli 1980: figs. 2, 5–12. Unable to parallel “anchor” motif.
Arch. Cat. J:2 (field no. 152). Tapered door jamb block
Limestone
E11/12, 1, 2 between F1 Fountain and S8 Sacred House
Mpl. 1.00 m. Lower end measures 0.54 by 0.50 by 0.46 by 0.39 m.
Trapezoidal in section. Upper end badly broken but clearly tapered. Molded face consists of four plain fascias, separated by three raised fillets, with a much worn astragal along outer edge. Joins with no other known frags.
Arch. Cat. J:6 (field no. 4, Fig. 6). Molded block frag.
Limestone
E12/D12, D off surface of squatter Wall W8.
Mpl. 0.76 m. W. 0.28 m. Mph. 0.18 m.
Cyma reversa moldings on opposing long sides, indicating that block was visible from both directions. May have served as a lintel over doorway set in a narrow free-standing wall or, inverted, as the base for a stele. Despite close proximity, appears unlikely that frag. was incorporated into the S8 building.
Context and Date of S8
At the time of its final destruction, the pitted interior of S8 was filled with four separate strata (Fig. 4). St. 1 from E11, Tr. 2, and E11/12, Tr. 1, was a ca. 0.30 m. thick layer of topsoil, mixed with some earthquake debris. St. 2 represents a ca. 0.50 thick earthquake debris layer, composed of smashed limestone building blocks and various fragments of marble and limestone statuary, including the lower left half of a pieced-together seated draped goddess statue in limestone (Kane no. 14). It also contained four Ptolemaic period bronze coins95 and a red clay coarse ware “frying pan handle.”
St. 3, over 1.20 m. thick where it fills the natural pits that cross S8’s interior, is a loose, dry earth fill that again contained some broken building blocks together with marble and limestone statue fragments, including the lower right half (Kane no. 15) of the same pieced-together limestone seated goddess statue found in St. 2. St. 3 contains one red clay coarse ware pithos rim fragment with “piecrust” edging that dates St. 3 to anywhere from the 1st to 3rd century A.D., 96 and it is our view that St. 2 and St. 3 are here both expressions of the same A.D. 262 earthquake disaster.
Finally, patches of bedrock across parts of the interior are covered with a thin layer of sterile St. 4 terra rossa fill that contributes nothing by which to date either the building’s construction or its period of use. In this regard, it is noteworthy that neither St. 2 or St. 3 contained any appreciable remains of a collapsed roof, and, indeed, the stratigraphy of its interior produces the strong impression that the S8 Sacred House had been abandoned and emptied of contents before the final destruction of the surrounding sanctuary.
The fill associated with the structure’s exterior is scarcely more helpful. E11, 3, 3 fill piled against the second course of S8’s south wall (Fig. 4) has the appearance of a leftover Archaic period occupation stratum associated with the line of the pseudoisodomic peribolos (T1) to the south. The S8 builders must have cut into the dense, heavy St. 3 fill here as well as the sterile St. 4 beneath it in order to back the lowest two courses of their building and proceeded to double the thickness of their wall to compensate for the weight of the earth fill left pressing against it. In addition to the layer’s Archaic period pottery and other early objects, St. 3 contained a bronze coin assigned to the Hellenistic period97 together with a vertically ribbed black glazed sherd.
St. 3 fill against the outer face of the building’s west wall (E12, 1, 3) does not appear in the drawn cross-section98 but once again is a pre-existent fill used by S8’s builders as a backing for their structure. In this case, a significant number of 2nd and 1st century B.C. sherds were mixed with its predominantly early (6th and 5th century B.C.) contents.
The problem is, of course, that S8 is not directly tied to either exterior St. 3 fill. Our feeling is that the structure is slightly later than its latest exterior St. 3 objects which belong to the 1st century B.C. Such a view is, for whatever it is worth, corroborated by the approximately 1:3.65 height-to-length proportions of its blocks, which more or less conform to those of the early Imperial Walls T10 (1:3) and T11a (1:3.25). On the other hand, it could be earlier. If the later objects found in E11, 3, 3 and E12, 1, 3 were in fact contaminations from the St. 2 earthquake layers directly above them, it then becomes possible that the S8 Building might have been introduced into the Middle Sanctuary as early as the Archaic period. As unsatisfactory as it may seem, no clear-cut proof for its date is presently available.
S9 Enclosure
A thin, elongated structure running east to west, the S9 Enclosure is positioned more or less equidistant between Sacred Houses S5 and S6 in approximate alignment with the rear wall of the former (Fig. 1).99 Its total width measures ca. 3.50 m., and its length appears to have extended at least 8.50 m. Because most of its recovery occurred toward the end of the Expedition’s last season of excavation, we were unable to excavate more than two-thirds of its interior below the level of a thick layer of St. 2 earthquake debris.100 Some deeper testing was undertaken at its east end where the line of its east wall was interrupted by the S23 Late Structure (P1. 9). The results of this investigation are somewhat inconclusive but point to a construction date in the 1st century B.C. or later. How far S9 extended west is unknown, as is virtually everything else that has to do with its appearance and use, including whether or not it was ever roofed.
Plate 9. Lower right-hand corner of photo is occupied by eastern half of the S9 Enclosure where it is interrupted by the northwest corner of the S23/S24 Late Structure.
Northeast Corner
The best preserved section of S9 belongs to its northeast corner (P1. 9). As already noted, the east wall was interrupted by the outer corner of the S23 Late Building and only survives as a short, 1.40 m. long stump before turning at right-angles to the west to form the structure’s north wall, of which 3.60 m. survives today.
The north wall consists of three ashlars laid end to end over a hard St. 3 fill that covers the bedrock. Their foundation on dirt, as opposed to bedrock, permitted the two westernmost blocks, originally set on edge, to tip forward under the pressure of the earth to their south. The corner block at the east end remains in its proper upright position. The blocks average 1.15 m. long, 0.60 m. high, and 0.40 m. thick. Their interior southern faces are smoothed carefully, and marked with faint traces of broad, flat chisel strokes that recall the treatment of the vertical courses of the later Archaic pseudoisodomic peribolos (T1), as do their dimensions and stone type.101 The outer faces and upper surfaces, by way of contrast, were left roughly finished.
The two surviving elements of the east wall were probably once formed from a single block, 0.80 m. long, 0.40 m. thick, and 0.60 m. high, that has shattered. The east wall butts up against the north with no visible attempt at bonding.
South Wall
Excavation of the south wall occurred in two phases. For reasons of economy, the grounds containing its western two-thirds in D14/E14, 2 were stripped of surface debris but otherwise not dug during the excavation’s final 1978 season. This has meant that, while roughly a meter’s length of the wall’s east end was dug down to its foundation level, approximately 5 m. of what is taken to be its continuation west represents only portions of the south wall’s upper level trapped in St. 2 earthquake demolition fill under conditions that make difficult any real analysis.
The eastern end consists of a layer of low rubble foundations on which rise a course of four squared-off blocks, measuring up to 0.40 m. long, 0.50 m. thick, and 0.50 m. high. The second course is represented by a single block of roughly similar size, pushed out of alignment to the south. Partially obscured by earthquake collapse material, the blocks of the wall’s extension west appear to lengthen out to ca. 1.30 m. and thereby resemble more closely the appearance of S9’s north wall. Two of these preserve recessed margins along their southern edges and seem to be reused leftovers (door jambs?) from previous structures.
Context and Date of S9
Since the investigations of the western two-thirds of the structure are clearly useless for establishing a date, the eastern end, in time partially demolished to make way for the S23 Late Building, provides what evidence can be gleaned for S9’s construction date. The bulk of the fill west of the S23 Late Building overriding S9 consists of a thick layer of St. 2 earthquake demolition fill, a very hard-packed reddish-brown argillaceous soil, containing a heavy concentration of smashed building materials as well as discarded artifacts dating as late as the 3rd century A.D. This rests on a thin (ca. 0.25 m. thick) layer of moist red argillaceous St. 3 on top of which rest S9’s south wall and northeast corner walls. D14/E14, 1, 3 here produced black glaze ceramics mixed with considerably later sherds, including locally manufactured wares dating to the 2nd and 1st century B.C. and some Eastern Sigillata A wares assigned to the same period. Based on this evidence, the S9 Enclosure probably dates no earlier than the century B.C. It may in fact be slightly later to judge from its apparent use of blocks once part of the later Archaic peribolos which was, as we have seen, superseded during the early Imperial period by Wall T10.
Plate 10. G2 entranceway from the west.
Stepped Entrance (G2) to Middle Sanctuary
The last addition to the Middle Sanctuary attributable to this period is the stepped entrance (G2) providing communication between the western half of the Lower Sanctuary and the Middle Sanctuary. The entrance is located in grid square Gl5/F15 15 m. east of the Middle Sanctuary’s northwest corner (Fig. 1 and Pls. 6, 10).102
Based on what we currently know, the G2 entrance provided the only internal access route between the sanctuary’s two levels, and persons who wished to circulate otherwise between levels would have been forced to go outside the sanctuary’s east and west peribolos walls. The entrance was ruined by an earthquake and was found at the time of its partial clearance to be totally plugged with fallen blocks. A number of broken roof tiles lay scattered over the east corner of its top step, directly in contact with its stone tread, which would seem to indicate that the entrance remained in effective use down to the A.D. 262 earthquake.
Discovery of its existence occurred late in the sanctuary’s excavation (1977), and for this reason, only those parts associated with the core of the retaining wall system (T11/T12) separating the two levels of the sanctuary were cleared. G2’s extension north down onto the floor of the Lower Sanctuary and south beyond the inner faces of the retaining walls must await future investigation. While accurate in what it represents, the entrance plan should therefore be regarded as incomplete.
The door’s width from jamb to jamb measures 2.30 m.; including the jambs, 3.40 m. The upper step, best interpreted as a threshold, was made from three separate blocks, ca. 0.20 m. high. A packing of earth and rubble raised its overall height to ca. 0.40 m. The original depth cannot be determined. Rectangular cuttings, ca. 0.10 m. deep, at either end secured wooden uprights used to carry the missing door or doors. A low pad of stone at the west end, 0.06 m. above the level of the surrounding step, bore the weight of the corner of the door when swung shut. The door would have opened south, swinging beyond the inner faces of the T11 and T12 retaining walls.
The lower step was aligned with the outer faces of the retaining wall. Its western two-thirds was badly damaged by the earthquake, but enough of the block at its eastern end survives to indicate its existence. It height was again ca. 0.40 m. More steps must have continued the line of the stairs north.
A small block set against its southeast corner may be part of a late repair.
Two headers were used to line the edges of the door and originally may have carried what were its actual jambs. The western header, 0.90 by 0.50 m., has slipped forward and lies partially buried in earthquake topple north of Wall T12. The eastern header, 1.03 by 0.45 by 0.36 m., survives more or less in situ undisturbed.
No convincing evidence survives for how the entrance was covered. Some form of arch would have been appropriate; a single corbel stone found nearby on the Lower Sanctuary’s surface may have had something to do with the otherwise lost arrangement. No stratigraphical evidence was recovered for G2’s construction period, which must, in the absence of anything more conclusive, therefore be associated with the erection of the two flanking retaining walls.
Figure 7. Plan of the S10 Portico Chamber.
Upper Sanctuary Additions
It is during the early Imperial period that we first become aware of the dominant character that the Upper Sanctuary (Fig. 1)103 is to assume within the design of the total sanctuary, thanks mainly to the construction of the large colonnaded Southwest Building (S17) across its western half. Other elements added during the same period include an open-air access corridor paved with mosaic (S22) laid out in front of the Southwest Building, and a Portico Chamber (S10), also furnished with a mosaic floor, set up directly north of the F2 Fountain House. A doorway (G6) through the rear wall (T1/ T8) of the Middle Sanctuary provided entry from the lower level to the open-air access corridor.
Over in the eastern half of the Upper Sanctuary, the east-west wall (W3), tentatively associated with some form of Hellenistic entry to the eastern half of the sanctuary’s upper level, appears to have undergone no alteration and otherwise continues to display a somewhat puzzling identity. Its eventual replacement by a colonnaded propylaeum (S20) took place after A.D. 115 when the sanctuary underwent a new phase of development.
Finally, a substantial votive dump (S18) contained by rubble walls was established in the upper southwest corner immediately outside the walled confines of the sanctuary proper. The rubble Wall W28 may mark its northern extension.
S10 Portico Chamber
Occupying what appears to be the upper southwest corner of the Middle Sanctuary, the S10 Portico Chamber (Figs. 1, 7, 8) is in actuality part of the Upper Sanctuary.104 Its poorly preserved penta-style Ionic colonnade faced south in the direction of the S17 Southwest Building. Our understanding of certain details of its plan is hampered by the lack of excavation across most of the eastern two-thirds of its interior. The situation is complicated further by its northeast and east walls having been pushed out of alignment, presumably by earthquakes, leaving the original position of the southeast corner as well as its relationship to the pre-existent F2 Fountain House difficult to determine. It seems probable, but not certain, that the latter had fallen out of active use by the time the Portico Chamber came into use. Moreover, the eastern half of the structure’s north wall is hidden behind a later terracing (S25)105 that effectively impedes any direct observation of its outer face.
Figure 8. Elevation of the S10 Portico Chamber’s southern colonnade looking north.
If we can assume that S10’s east wall (T16), built on top of the Classical period peribolos W8 without benefit of clamps, originally lay parallel to the west wall, the resulting structure would have had a rectangular plan, ca. 9.80 m. east-west by 5.60 m. north-south (Fig. 7). It opened onto the open-air walkway (S22) in front of the Southwest Building (S17) through the aforementioned Ionic colonnade. Its north, rear wall (W31) was kept blank and was therefore intended to remain, so far as can be presently determined, inaccessible to the Middle Sanctuary where the ground level outside Sacred House S6 is ca. 2.5 m. lower than S10’s mosaic floor. Despite the fact that S10 appears from the site plan to occupy the same hillside elevation as the Middle Sanctuary, it is in fact insulated from the lower level by a dogleg in the peribolos walls (T8 and W29) previously observed in connection with the sanctuary’s Classical and Hellenistic periods. Instead, it shares a more or less common ground level with the rest of the Upper Sanctuary features in its immediate vicinity.
South Wall (W29) and the Colonnade
The Portico Chamber’s south wall (W29a) uses for its foundation a pre-existent wall (W29) associated with the Hellenistic F2 fountain house106; the earlier wall consists of three courses of limestone stretchers, ca. 0.75 m. wide, over which then rise two low courses of stretchers (0.30 and 0.20 m. high respectively) constituting W29a proper. Wall W29a is not precisely coaxial with Wall W29 but instead deviates 4° to its north-northwest. The top course, which serves as the colonnade’s stylobate, consists of four blocks, each measuring ca. 2.00 to 2.15 m. long. The westernmost block, framing the surviving south edge of the chamber’s mosaic, is covered with a late squatter’s period wall (W29b) that in time came to block the space between the first and second of the Ionic columns in S10’s southwest corner with a series of small, square headers and reused architectural frusta.107
While no trace of the actual columns survive in situ, the outline of the missing three central bases are marked by faint impressions on the stylobate surface in the case of the western two columns and by a low circular pad that carried the eastern column. Each was erected over the joints between the individual stretchers at an interaxial distance of 2.00 m. Their base diameters work out to approximately 0.60 m. On the evidence of base fragments found in association with S10, the two corner columns can be restored as engaged half-columns attached to pilasters (Fig 8).108
Architectural Frusta Associated with S10 Portico Chamber
A total of twenty miscellaneous stone architectural fragments were found either inside or directly south of S10. This makes trenches C14/D14, 1 and 2, along with trenches C15/D15, 1B, and C14, the sanctuary’s most prolific sources of broken architectural members.
The pieces found to the south might have been associated with the Southwest Building (S17), the nearby F2 Fountain House, or with the open-air access route (S22), as well as S10. Admittedly, architectural fragments found inside the S10 walls also could have been introduced from other buildings by the earthquake but nevertheless seem to stand a better chance of originally having been part of the structure in which they were found. In any case, at least six of these appear potentially relevant to S10 and may be used for a tentative restoration of its colonnaded facade (Fig. 8).
Figure 9. Arch. Cat. C:5
Arch. Cat. C:5 (field no. 79, Fig. 9). Half-column and engaged pilaster base
Limestone
D15, 1, 1, east of mosaic. W. 0.72 m. T. 0.55 m. Mph. 0.27 m. Half-column’s base diam. 0.57 m.
No trace of fluting preserved. Base consists of three elements: a plain circular disk 0.08 m. high; a second disk with rounded shoulder 0.05 m. high; a straight beveled return, 0.02 m. high.
Arch. Cat. F:7 (field no. 13). Column base
Limestone
C14, 1, 1 surface fill over open-air corridor S22 Diam. of circular plinth 0.60 m (matching outline of columns on S10’s stylobate). Total h. 0.16 m. H. of two-stepped molding 0.10 m. Bottom surface not preserved. Est. total h. of base ca. 014 m. Diam. of column shaft: Section of mortise preserved on bottom measures 0.065 by 0.065 m. with a min. dpth of 0.11 m.
Figure 10. Arch. Cat. E:2.
A narrow groove separating plinth from scotia here is reduced virtually to a straight line. Column shaft badly eroded, but can be estimated. to be ca. 0.45 m.
Two molded column bases were recovered from inside the walls of S10, but both (F:25, F:26) rose on square plinths and must have come from other structures since the stylobate outlines call for circular bases.
Arch. Cat. B:28 (field no. 80). Column shaft or drum frag., broken off at lower end
Limestone
C15/D15, 1, 2, southeast quadrant of S10
Mpl. 0.79 m. Upper diam. 0.41; lower diam. 0.44 m. Rectangular mortise let into upper surface, 0.06 by 0.034 by 0.01 m.
Surface prepared for plaster dressing by broad, shallow grooves that meet in wide, flat fillets covering roughly two-thirds of the shaft’s circumference; a similar surface preparation for stucco is observable on shaft fragments from other parts of the sanctuary where patches of stucco still cling to the surface.
Arch. Cat. B:10 (field 85). Column shaft or drum frag.
Limestone
C15/D15, 1, 2 (close to B:28)
Mpl. 1.06 m. Mpd. 0.46 m.
Represents the split-off half of a column shaft; its (earthquake-shattered?) surface chiseled flat to serve secondary purpose. Small hole bored into curved surface (to fix railing?). Abraded traces of shallow channel-like depressions indicate that original surface was prepared for plaster flutes.
Three additional lengths of similarly prepared column drums or shafts (B:29, B:30, B:31) were recovered from C15/D15, 1, 1, either inside S10 or directly to its south; two had diameters of ca. 0.48 m., and the third tapered from 0.46 to 0.44 m. One fragment possessed a bored (rail) hole in its surface; a second had two small tapered holes bored opposite one another.
Arch. Cat. E:2 (field no. 158a and b, Fig. 10). Ionic capital frag.
Limestone
D15, 1, 2 (S10’s southeast corner)
Mpl. 0.285. Mph. 0.163 m. Mpth. 0.22.7 m.
Missing back and righthand side. A local hybrid, in which the normal girdle of eggs and darts decorating the echinus is reduced to a single large egg set between a pair of darts and flanked by double series of half-palmettes springing from clusters of leaves, here run horizontally across the face of the echinus. The arrangement produces a broad, flat impression, further exaggerated by the fact that the volutes, here raised (i.e., convex) fillet-like bands, barely drop below the plane of the egg and dart register, contrary to conventional practice. A tapering element is inserted below the echinus, allowing the estimated upper diameter of the column shaft attached to the capital to be 0.48 m. Ionic capitals associated with local tombs occasionally possess a tapered necking element between the echinus and the top of their column shaft. See Stucchi 1975:l70–71, figs. 150, 153, 154. By restoring something like this here, the E:2 capital can be made to fit the upper diameter of shaft B:28 while at the same time regaining a more normal height-tolength ratio.
Arch. Cat. E:3 (no assigned field no.). Badly mutilated frag. of the righthand side of Ionic capital
Limestone
C14 surface debris over the open-air corridor (S22). Mph. 0.155 m. Mpl. 0.32 m. Mpth. 0.262 m.
This frag. could belong to E:2 or a companion capital from the same portico.
West Wall
Whatever constituted S10’s original west wall today lies concealed on its exterior by the unexcavated D15/l6, 2 balk, while its interior face is covered over by a floor mosaic. A squatter wall (W30) crosses its upper surface. In other words, any further revelation of its character must await future excavation.
North Wall (W31)
Roughly 4.80 m. of the north face of W31 is exposed before its line is masked over by the later terracing, S25. Its 2.40 m. high elevation consists of five standing courses of limestone headers and stretchers which, at least in the case of several blocks, appear to have been salvaged from earlier buildings. This is especially evident in the case of the third course from the top, made up of headers dressed with diagonal slashes otherwise unrepresented by the remainder of the wall’s elevation; one block preserves an L-shaped cutting in its lower righthand corner that seems to have been left over from some earlier function. The upper two courses measure 0.40 m. in height; the third course from the top is 0.55 m. high, and the fourth and the fifth are 0.50 and 0.45 m. high, respectively. Block lengths from upper to lower course average 0.72, 1.15, 0.70, 1.20, and 0.90 m. The total thickness of W31, which is here doubling as a retaining wall for the earth beneath S10’s mosaic floor, is a respectable 1.00 m.
The height-to-length ratios of the wall’s two stretcher courses work out to 1:2.88 and 1:2.18.
Only the upper surface of the eastern 4.5 m. of W31’s top course is visible where the wall runs to join with Wall T16 to form S10’s northeast corner. Here the inner face appears to have been moved 0.35 to 0.40 m. south, but because of a lack of excavation across most of the eastern two-thirds of the chamber’s interior, it is impossible to determine whether the shift has been caused by earthquake activity or, in fact, represents an intentional dogleg in the line of the wall.
East Wall (T16)
What is taken to be S10’s eastern limit consists of a single course of stretchers, ca. 0.55 m. wide, 0.45 m. high, and 1.25 m. long (in the case of its single complete example), giving a height-to-length ratio of 1:2.8 that is comparable with Wall W31. As already mentioned, this segment of wall was laid obliquely over the earlier line of Wall T8 without benefit of dowels or cement. In its present position, T16 fails to form a proper right angle with any of S10’s other three walls and, as a result, has the appearance of having been pushed out of alignment by earthquake action.
Mosaic Floor (Fig. 11, Pl. 11)
The floor’s remains are restricted entirely to the western end of S10 and are broken off in a ragged line that provides little hope for the future discovery of intact sections under the unexcavated fill farther east.109 The surviving section measures ca. 3.80 m. north-south by 2.60 m. east-west. Its tesserae are set in a plaster grout ca. 0.10 m. thick covering an earth fill mixed with scattered masonry blocks and broken roof tiles that must be associated with whatever construction originally lay north of Wall W29. There are an average of only 35 tesserae per 10 sq. cm., with traces of some repair in slightly larger, coarser units along the south side of the central panel.110
The central rectangular panel, 2.25 m. wide from north to south, consists of a 0.04 m. wide outer black band enclosing a 0.22 m. wide black frame decorated with white beads and reels; a lozenge design occupies the bead-and-reed band’s southwest corner. The central panel is occupied by a trellis with stepped diamond centers in red and black. Thin black vine tendrils cover the outer field west and north of the central panel.
Figure 11. S10 mosaic floor.
For most of the preserved length of its south side, the mosaic was laid close to the face of the late squatter Wall W29b but nowhere extended under its blocks; it moreover shows no evidence of overlapping the portico’s stylobate course, W29a. On the other hand, a limited test conducted during the 1979 study season brought to light the surprising fact that the stylobate block supporting the west half of the second column on the west of S10’s portico was trimmed back nearly 0.10 m. The effect of this apparently was to allow the mosaic’s grout bedding (but not, so far as one can tell, an actual extension of its tesserae) to continue under a section of the column base. This could mean that either the preparation of the chamber’s floor preceded the erection of the colonnade or the colonnade had been removed before the mosaic was laid. The likelihood is that a weakness was discovered in the stylobate block prior to the erection of the colonnade, requiring a section to be cut away and then filled, but more excavation would have to be carried out in order to determine with complete certainty the actual sequence.
Context and Date of the S10 Portico Chamber
Stratified evidence for the chamber’s construction is sparse. The fill south of the colonnade against the outer face of Wall W29a (Fig. 12) consists of mainly (C15/D15, 1) St. 2 earthquake debris. St. 3 is a homogeneous dry, brownish-gray soil buildup, largely empty of sherds and other dateable material. It appears to have been cut into by the builders of W29a to make way for their colonnade’s stylobate, which therefore should theoretically postdate anything found in St. 3. Apart from a reported 2nd/3rd century A.D. corrugated ware sherd, which probably was mixed into C15/D15, 1, 3 from the St. 2 earthquake layer immediately overriding it, the latest dateable find is a small marble head of a child, Kane no. 99, attributed by Kane to the Hellenistic-Roman period. Wall W29, which supports W29a, already has been assigned a tentative late Hellenistic date, with the possibility of its being raised to early Imperial.
Plate 11. S10 mosaic floor from the east.
Commentary
