Continuity and Change in a Greek Rural Landscape: The Laconia Survey, Volume 1: Methodology and Interpretation (Annual of the British School at Athens, Supplementary Volume 26)

CONTINUITY AND CHANGE IN A GREEK RURAL LANDSCAPE

THE

LACONIA

SURVEY

VOLUMEI METHODOLOGY

AND INTERPRETATION

AnnualoftheBritishSchoolat Athens Volume26 Supplementary William Cavanagh Joost Crouwel R. W. V Catling Graham Shipley withcontributions by

PAMELA ARMSTRONG JASPER FISELIER OLIVER RACKHAM

JAN-WILLEM VAN BERGHEM MALCOLM WAGSTAFF

andmapsby

DEBORAH MILES-WILLIAMS DAVID TAYLOR

with LUCY FARR ANNE SACKETT GUY SANDERS

LONDON · BRITISH SCHOOL AT ATHENS · 2002

PublishedbytheBritishSchoolat Athens,SenateHouse,Malet Street,London,WCiE7HU © The Council,BritishSchoolat Athens,2002 ISBN (thisvolume):0-904887-22-7 ISBN (setoftwovolumes):0-904887-21-9

ProducedbySuttonPublishing,Stroud,Glos. GLj 2BU Printedin GreatBritainon acid-free paper by J.H. Haynes & Co. Ltd, Sparkford

In memory of ElizabethCatling and DavidSmyth

PREFACE This VOLUME Data (publishedin 1996),presentthe and itscompanion,subtitled Archaeological was led a jointBritish-Dutch resultsoftheLaconia Survey(1983-9).The survey, undertaking, in the fieldby WilliamCavanagh and JoostCrouwel under the supervisionof Dr H. W. Catling,CBE,at thattimeDirectoroftheBritishSchool at Athens.The projectgrewout ofDr and the Iron Age sanctuaryat the Catling'sown excavationsof the BronzeAge settlement Menelaion(1972-82),and itwas he who originally suggestedtheidea ofa survey. the seven and surveycampaigns studyseasons in Laconia and the subsequent During of the we incurred manyotherobligations.In the firstplace, many preparation publication, ofCulture,and to Dr Th. thanksare due to theArchaeologicalServiceoftheGreekMinistry and for theirpermissionsand of for Lakonia Arkadia), Spyropoulos(Ephor Antiquities in Dr Eleni Kourinouand Mrs Voula Rozaki,thenEpimelitries assistanceduringthe survey. the Lakonia Ephoreia, were especiallyhelpful.IGME (the InstituteforGeological and MineralResearch)kindlysupportedour applicationto carryoutthegeomorphological survey. The HellenicArmyGeographicalServicesuppliedtherelevantsheetsofits 1 : 50,000and 1 : 5,000map series,and withaerialphotographs. The successiveofficersand staffof the BritishSchool at Athenswere helpfulin every of theirtimeand advice duringand between possibleway.Variousexpertsgave generously Chris Mee, Jim Roy,and Kathleen Slane. In the preparatory surveyseasons,particularly Mr voor Prae- en Protohistorie, Albert Visser of this volume, Amsterdam) (Instituut stages are to thestaffofSuttonPublishing with electronic mail. We valuable assistance grateful gave Anne Bennett,ChristopherFeeney,and (for fortheirpatienceand guidance,particularly Fiona Thornton. VolumeII) Richard Catling,who directedthe thirdfieldThe two directorsalso thankparticularly sections of Volume Two dealing withthe hellenistic, walkingteam and later revisedthe Roman,and Byzantinepotteryin additionto writinghis own section;and GrahamShipley, whoeditedtheentiretextofbothvolumesforpublication. the financialsupportreceivedfromthe following We also wishto acknowledgegratefully bodies:the ManagingCommittee(now Council)of the BritishSchool at Athens,the British Academy,the Societyof Antiquariesof London, the Universityof Nottingham,the UK Science and EngineeringResearchCouncil (projectgrantGB/E/30263),the Universityof Amsterdam FacultyofArts,theAllardPiersonFoundation,the Dutch PhilologicalResearch Fund, the Dutch Organizationforthe Advance of Pure Research(NWO), the Amsterdam University Society,and theDutchPhilologicalResearchFund. PARTICIPANTS IN THE SURVEY

and dedicationofourmany The presentstudycouldnothavebeen written withouttheefforts colleaguesand collaborators,severalof whom have also contributedchaptersor partsof a composite,year-by-year list,whichwe hope is complete,represents chapters.The following listofpersonnel(manyofwhomalso tookpartin thestudyseasons).

viii Preface Apothikiassistants

Neil Brodie(1989) HayleyHodges(1988) WendyKnowles(1985) PamelaMarshall(1988-9) Marco Overbeek(1989) Chemists

AndrewFricker(1988) SimonHirst(1984) JillSymes(1988) Draughtspersons

|ElizabethCatling LucyFarr(maps)(2001-2) Deborah Miles-Williams (1995-6,2001-2) David Taylor(1995-2002) CatrionaTurner(1988-9) Sara Wild(1988-9)

Field teamleaders

RichardCatling WilliamCavanagh JoostCrouwel Field-walkers

PamelaArmstrong (1983-5,1987-8) Ros Bailey(1984) LesleyBeaumont(1985) Laura Bloemendaal(1983-4) Neil Brodie(1988) TristanCarter(1988) SaskiaDeluy(1984) Liesbethden Boer (1985) MarionDijkman-Dulkes (1988) Roald Docter(1987) CallyFord(1985) DirkGielen(1983) GordonHamilton(1983) RobinHanley(1983) StephenHarrison(1984-6) David Hibler(1983-5) ChristineKoch (1987) Ab Koelman(1983) Ron Leenheer(1984) Sarah Lucy(1984)

Neil McLynn(1985) MiekePrent(1985) RichardRussell(1985) GrahamShipley(1983-5,1987-8) NathanTravers(1985) van derPut(1985) Winfred Heleen Visscher(1983-5,1987) Sean Wakeman(1984) MarkYdo (1983-8) Geomorphologists

JasperFiselier(1988) van Berghem(1986) Jan-Willem Henkvan Bremen(1986) Geophysicists

RichardJones(1989-90) JohnMitchell(1990) Lia Sarri(1990) ApóstolosSarris(1990) Historicalgeographer

MalcolmWagstaff(1986) Historicalgeographer's assistants

RosemaryBraithwaite ElizabethDouglas RuthMcCarthy SimonCapper SimonLee

Housekeepers

BrendaHampton(1987) PamelaMarshall(1989) RhiannonRoberts(1985) JanMotykaSanders(1986,1988) Paula Suttle(1983-4) Palaeobotanist

OliverRackham(1984)

computer operator Photographer,

Ron Leenheer(1984,1986-9) Potterysamplingadviser

ChrisMee (1983)

Preface ix Publicationassistants

Statisticians

OdetteHaex (drawings) Ron Leenheer(photographs) AnneSackett(maps,slides)

CaitlinBuck CliffLitton

Romanpotterystudy

Guy Sanders(1983-9) fDavid Smyth(1983)

Jo Lawson(1988-9)

Surveyors

Mr Finally,we are deeplyindebtedto Mr PanagiotisTragas and Drs Anna Poelstra-Traga, and manyotherpeople in Aphysou,thevillagewherewe livedduring IoannisKonstantelos, and forhelpofmanydifferent our sevencampaignsin Laconia,fortheirunstinting hospitality kinds. 1 May 2002 Nottingham Amsterdam Oxford Leicester

W.G.C. J.H.C. R.W.VC. D.GJ.S.

CONTENTS VOLUME I PREFACE

VÜ

LIST OF TABLES

XIV

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ABBREVIATIONS MODERN PLACE-NAMES A NOTE ON SITE NUMBERS SELECTED ADDENDA AND CORRIGENDA TO VOLUME II

1.

THE LACONIA SURVEY: BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY

WilliamCavanagh,GrahamShipley, andjoost Crouwel(witha notebyMalcolmWagstaff)

The surveyarea, ι Sourcesand previousresearch,15 The progressofthesurvey, 1983-9,34 and samplingprocedures, 38 Field-walking Conclusion,54

2.

OliverRackham

THE SURVEY AREA IN THE PREHISTORIC PERIODS

57

73

WilliamCavanaghandjoost Crouwel

121

THE SURVEY AREA FROM THE EARLY IRON AGE TO THE CLASSICAL PERIOD ^.1050-^.300bg) R. WV Catling

151

The Neolithicperiod,121 The EarlyHelladicperiod,128 The MiddleBronzeAge,135 The Late BronzeAge,142

5.

ι

OBSERVATIONS ON THE HISTORICAL ECOLOGY OF LACONIA The land ofLaconia,73 Modernplantcommunities, 77 Relictwildtrees,97 Written sources,99 111 Picturesand photographs, Conclusions,112

4.

XXIV XXVÜi xxix

SOILS AND LAND USE POTENTIAL

andJasperFiselier Jan-WillemvanBerghem

methodsand tools,57 Landscapereconstruction: The landscapehistory ofthesurveyarea, 60 Land evaluationand soilsuitability history, 65 sitepatterns, 69 Interpreting Discussionand conclusions, 71

3.

XVI xviii

The Early Iron Age (i-.1050-c.700BC), 153 The early archaic period (C.700-C.600BC), 155 The later archaic and early classical period (C.600-C.450BC), 157

xii Contents The classicalperiod(C.450-C.300 BC),175 Evidenceforsitecontinuity and discontinuity, 185 Siteclassification and function, 187 Evidencefordifferential 193 prosperity, Evidenceforstorage,195 The ruraleconomy,196 Distribution and interpretation oflow-density 200 scatters, Populationestimates, 205 211 Communications, The religiouslandscape:sanctuaries, 218 Summaryand discussion,224 Epilogue,255

6. THE SURVEYAREAIN THE HELLENISTIC AND ROMANPERIODS GrahamShipley

257 Methodology, The hellenistic data,274 The Romandata,288 Furtherinterpretation ofsitedata,298 data,and conclusions:hellenistic, Summary, 310 comparative data,and conclusions:Roman,326 Summary, comparative Epilogue,336

7. THE SURVEYAREAIN THE BYZANTINEAND OTTOMAN PERIODS PamelaArmstrong

Introduction, 339 Late Romanto earlyByzantine(sixthto eighthcenturies AD),350 MiddleByzantineI (ninthto earlyeleventhcenturies AD),353 MiddleByzantineII (eleventhcentury AD),358 MiddleByzantineIII (AD1081-1204):theKomnenoiand Angeloi,361 Late Byzantineor Palaiologan(AD1204-1460),368 FromtheOttomanconquestto thenineteenth century, 372 Discussion,380 Conclusions,398

257

339

8. THE FORMATIONOF THE MODERN LANDSCAPEOF THE SURVEYAREA MalcolmWagstqff

403

Historicalintroduction, 403 Settlements, 405 Population,412 land use,415 Agricultural Conclusion,418

9.

THE LACONIA SURVEY: AN OVERVIEW Parallelcommunities and paralleleconomies,422 Settlement 423 hierarchy, Centralplaces,428 Siteabandonmentand siteduration,430 Technology, 432 434 Marginality, 435 Concludingremarks,

William Cavanagh

421

Contents xiii INDEXEScompiled byGrahamShipley

5. SelectindexofGreekwords,460 6. Listofsitesand findspots, 461 7. Addendato indexin VolumeII, 465

ι. Generalindex,439 2. Selectbotanicalindex,458 3. Ancientand medievalsources,459 460 4. Selectepigraphicreferences,

439

inpocket

soil map VOLUME II 10. THE NEOLITHIC

POTTERY

11. THE EARLY HELLADIC

WilliamCavanaghandjoost Crouwel

POTTERY

12. THE MIDDLE HELLADIC AND LATE HELLADIC WilliamCavanaghandjoost Crouwel 13. THE MYCENAEAN (LATE HELLADIC 14. THE ARCHAIC AND CLASSICAL 15. THE HELLENISTIC

POTTERY

16. THE ROMAN POTTERY

21. THE EPIGRAPHIC

17 JoostCrouwel

RichardCatling

Heben Visscher

MATERIAL

24. SITE CATALOGUE

33

in POTTERY

PamelaArmstrong

TristanCarterandMark Tdo

STONE

125 141 183

AND SCULPTURAL

FRAGMENTS 199

GrahamShipley

213

22. PHOSPHATE AND GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS Richard Sarris WilliamCavanagh, Jones,andApóstolos 23. ARCHAEOLOGICAL GrahamShipley

27

91

Marco Overbeek

20. THE STONE ARCHITECTURAL David Hibler

5

POTTERY

Jo Lawson

AND GROUND

19. THE SMALL FINDS

III

III) POTTERY

POTTERY

17. THE BYZANTINE AND OTTOMAN 18. THE CHIPPED

1

WilliamCavanagh

235

SITES IN LACONIA AND THE THYREATIS 263 OF THE SURVEY

INDEXEScompiled byGrahamShipley

GrahamShipley

1. Generalindex,439 2. SelectindexofGreekwords,456 3. Indexofsitenumberswithzonesand subzones,456

FIGURES PLATES MAPOF THE SURVEYAREA

315 439

following page460 II at endof Volume II inpocketat endof Volume

TABLES Table ι.ι Table 1.2 Table 1.3

Average of potteryand tile counts per sq m fromsingle-periodsites. Data fromrewalked areas. Site U490: resultsof 'clickercounts' and 'hands and knees' counts.

TABLE2.1 TABLE2.2 Table 2.3 Table 2.4

Diagnostic soil units. Land-formsin chronological order. Land use requirementsand agro-ecological zones. Numbers of findspotson stable soil units.

61 63 68 70

TABLE3.1

Comparative figuresforthe extentof woodland in Lakonia, Messinia, and Arkadia.

117

Table Table Table Table

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4

Late-Final Neolithic sites. Main Early Bronze Age sitesin seriated order. Possible multi-phaseEarly Bronze Age sites. Middle and Late Bronze Age sites.

123 132 134 136

Table Table Table Table Table Table

5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6

Late archaic-early classical sites. Classical sites. Archaic and classical siteswith functionalcategories of artefacts. Archaic and classical non-sitefindspots. Population estimatesforthe archaic and classical periods. Archaic and classical cult sites.

TABLE6.1 TABLE6.2 Table 6.3 Table 6.4 Table 6.5 Table 6.6 Table 6.7 TABLE6.8 Table 6.9 Table 6.10 TABLE6. 11 Table 6.12 TABLE6.13

Numbers of hellenisticand Roman sherds. Numbers of hellenisticand Roman findspots. Hellenistic non-settlementsites. Roman non-settlementsites. size categories. Numbers of hellenisticand Roman sitesin different Hellenistic settlementdata: SE sector. Hellenistic settlementdata: W sector. Hellenistic settlementdata: Ν sector. Roman settlementdata: SE sector. Roman settlementdata: w sector. Roman settlementdata: Ν sector. Hellenistic non-sitefindspots. Roman non-sitefindspots.

Table 7.1 Table 7.2 TABLE7.3 TABLE7.4 Table 7.5 Table 7.6 Table 7.7 TABLE7.8 Table 7.9

Definitionsof site categories in Byzantine and Ottoman periods. Medieval locations other than churches. Comparison of sherd counts on K247 and P284. Probable or possible Middle Byzantine churches. Post-Byzantinechurches. Settlementsrecorded by Grimani. Settlementsnoted by the Commission Scientifique. Comparative population statistics. Type (i) sites.

42 45 52~4

159-60 176 188-90 201-3 205 219 260 260 262 262 264 274~5 280 284 290 292 295 3°3~4 3°5~6 347 348-50 3^5 367 378 378 379 382 395~6

Tables xv Table 7.10 Table 7.ιι Table 7.12

Type (ii) sites. Type (iii) sites. Type (iv) sites.

396 397 398

Table 8.1 TABLE8.2 Table 8.3 TABLE8.4 Table 8.5

Modern and historicalsettlementnames. Number of familiesin settlementsin the studyarea, £.1830. Number of familiesin settlementsin the studyarea, 1700. Settlementsshowingpopulation growth,1940-51. Agriculturalland use data foreparchiaof Lakedaimon and the studyarea, 1911-71.

408 409 410 414 417

TABLE9.1

Size ranges of levels of the settlementhierarchy:Neolithic to modern.

424

ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT Map of Laconia and periphery,showing ancient settlements (various periods) and principal routes. Map showingthe surveyarea in relation to Laconia. Map showingtoponymsin the surveyarea. Taygetos at sunrise,fromAphysou. The riverEvrotas in spring. A burntlandscape the day aftera fire. A burntolive-treeeightmonthsafterthe fire. Graphs of mean monthlytemperatureand precipitationat Sparta. Graph of interannualvariabilityof precipitationat Sparta. Simplifiedmap of surveyarea showingsoils and base rocks. Map showingsites in Laconia mentioned by Strabo and Pausanias. deMorée. scientifique Map of part of the surveyarea afterpl. 45 in Expédition area. of the zones survey Map showing Map showingsectorsof the surveyarea. Map of the surveyarea showingre-walkingtractsLAR01-LAR08. Plan of change-pointanalysis of artefactdensitiesin tractLAR01. Plan of change-pointanalysis of artefactdensitiesin tractLAR02. Plan of change-pointanalysis of artefactdensitiesin tractLAR03. Diagram of artefactdensitiesin tractLAR04. Diagram of artefactdensitiesin tractLAR05. Plan of change-pointanalysis of artefactdensitiesin tractLAR06. Diagram of artefactdensitiesin tractLAR07. Diagram of artefactdensitiesin tractLAR08. Contour map of clickercounts at U490. Contour map of total tile and sherd counts at U490.

2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 14 23 30 37 39 46 47 48 48 48 49 49 49 50 55 55

III. 2.1 III. 2.2

Examples of a chronosequence and toposequence fromthe field. A palaeosol on a terracewithpotteryfragments.

58 60

III. 3.1 III. 3.2 III. 3.3 ILL. 3.4 III. 3.5 III. 3.6 III. 3.7 III. 3.8 III. 3.9 III. 3.10 III. 3. ιι III. 3.12 III. 3.13 III. 3.14 III. 3.15

Map showingplaces mentioned in Chapter 3. Desert of crumblyschist,Vervena. unedoand Quercuscoccifera. Maquis of co-dominantArbutus A prickly-oakturningfroma shrub into a tree. Deciduous oak {Quercusbrachyphylla) invadingex-cultivatedland. Valonia oak {Quercusmacro lepis). Interiorof the Skotitasoakwood. Old black pine {Pinusnigra)hemmed in by youngertrees. Black pine invadingformerpasture. Area of youngishblack pines killed by a fire. The southernmostalder in Europe. Patch of maquis or woodland isolated on a huge boulder. Ancient lime-tree,the southernmostin Europe. View of Taygetos fromthe kástroat Sparta, £.1908. Similar view of Taygetos in 1984.

74 77 79 81 83 84 86 89 90 91 93 94 97 112 113

III. 4.1

Map showingNeolithic sitesin the surveyarea.

124

III. i.i III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III. III.

1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 ι.ιο i.i 1 ι.ι2 ι.ι3 1.14 1.15 ι.ι6 ι.ι7 1.18 1.19 1.20 1.2 1 1.22 1.23 1.24 1.25

Illustrations in the text xvii III. 4.2 III. 4.3

Map showingEarly Bronze Age sites in the surveyarea. Map showingMiddle and Late Bronze Age sites in the surveyarea.

III. 5.1

Map showingtoponyms,main arterialroutes,and hypotheticalterritorial boundaries in central Laconia. Map showinglate archaic-early classical sites in the surveyarea. Map showingclassical sitesin the surveyarea. Map showingroutes in the surveyarea. Map showingprime arable land, secondary arable land, and pasture in central Laconia.

III. III. III. III.

5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5

III. 6.1 III. 6.2 III. 6.3 III. 6.4 III. 6.5 III. 6.6 III. 6.7 III. 6.8 III. 6.9

Graphs showingnumbersof sitesby size and sector: (a) hellenistic,(b) Roman. Graphs showingmedian and quartile measures of site size by sector: (a) hellenistic,(b) Roman. Bar chartsof total settledarea by sector: (a) hellenistic,(b) Roman. Map showinghellenisticsitesin the surveyarea. Bar chart representingtotal settledarea by geological zone and period (late archaic to Roman). Map showingRoman sitesin the surveyarea. Pie chartsshowingproportionsof potteryuse-typesby sector: (upper) hellenistic,(lower)Roman. Pie chartsshowingnumbers of siteswith each use-typeof pottery,by sector: (a) hellenistic,(b) Roman. Combined histogramsof notional population by sector: hellenisticand Roman.

131 138 152 158 177 212 245 265 267 268 276 287 289 299 300 307

III. III. III. III. III. III.

7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.10 7.ιι

Map of central Laconia in medieval times,showingthe area of the survey. Map showingMiddle Byzantine I (gth-earlynth-cent.) settlementsin the surveyarea. Map showingMiddle Byzantine II (nth-cent.) settlementsin the surveyarea. Diagram of nth-cent,site hierarchy. (a) Map showingMiddle Byzantine III (Komnenian) sitesin the surveyarea. (b) Detail of south-eastof surveyarea. Map showingLate Byzantine (Palaiologan) settlementsin the surveyarea. Map showingearly i8th-cent.settlementsin the surveyarea. Map showingearly igth-cent.settlementsin the surveyarea. Map showingmodern settlementsin the surveyarea. Old olive-treenear Voutianoi. Plan and elevation of wine-pressat Sto Lino.

III. III. III. III. III.

8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5

Map showingthe administrativestructureof the studyarea in the 1980s. Plan and elevation of house and mándraat Morou. Graph of population change in the eparchiaof Lakedaimon, 1848-1981. Graph of population change in the studyarea, 1879-1981. Map of agriculturalland use in the surveyarea, 1986.

406 411 413 413 419

III. III. III. III. III. III. III.

9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7

EBA sitesof the Laconia Survey: site area versus site rank. MBA-LBA sitesof the Laconia Survey: site area versus site rank. Archaic-earlyclassical sitesof the Laconia Survey:site area versus site rank. Classical sitesof the Laconia Survey:site area versus site rank. Hellenistic sitesof the Laconia Survey: site area versus site rank. Roman sitesof the Laconia Survey:site area versus site rank. Byzantine (Komnenian) sitesof the Laconia Survey:site area versus site rank.

427 427 427 427 428 428 429

III. 7.1 III. 7.2 III. 7.3 III. 7.4 III. 7.5

343 354 359 361 362-3 370 375 376 381 383 384

ABBREVIATIONS See also, forvol. ii, the listsof generaland bibliographical abbreviations at LS ii, pp. xix-xxx.Abbreviations of ancientauthorsand theirworksfollowOxford Classical Dictionary. #

ist LaconianStudiesCongress ist LaconianTreatises Congress

ist Peloponnesian Congress 2ndPeloponnesian Congress jrd MessenianCongress 3rd Peloponnesian Congress 4thPeloponnesian Congress jth Peloponnesian Congress 6thPeloponnesian Congress 12thClassicalArchaeology Congress AA AAA A. Delt. AgAJA AM Ar AR Arch.Eph.

etal., 'Crossingtheriver' Armstrong

andAssemblage Artifact Avraméa, Péloponnèse

to number)'zembil',a groupoffindsfromone location (prefixed Πρακτικά του Α' Συνεδρίου Λακωνικών Σπουδών (Σπάρτη-Γνθείονy-ii 'Οκτωβρίου igyj) (Athens,1979)52 v°ls = Λακ. σπουδ. 4-5 (!979) Πρακτικά του Α' ΤοπικούΣυνεδρίου ΛακωνικώνΜελετών (Μολάοι$-y 'Ιουνίουig82) (Πελ. suppl.9; Athens,1982-3) Πρακτικά του Α' ΔιεθνούςΣυνεδρίου Πελοποννησιακών Σπουδών (Σπάρτη, 7-14 Σεπτεμβρίου igyj) (Πελ. suppl. 6; Athens,1976-8),3 v°ls Πρακτικά τού Β' ΔιεθνούςΣυνεδρίου Πελοποννησιακών Σπουδών (Πάτραι, 25-31 Μαΐου ig8o) (Πελ. suppl.8; Athens, 1981-2),3 vols Πρακτικά τού Γ' ΤοπικούΣυνεδρίουΜεσσηνιακώνΣπουδών (Φιλιατρά-Γαργαλιανοι 24-26 Νοεμβρίου ig8g) (Πελ. suppl. 18;Athens,iggi) Πρακτικά τού Τ' ΔιεθνούςΣυνεδρίου Πελοποννησιακών Σπουδών(Καλαμάτα,8-ij Σεπτεμβρίουig8$) (Πελ. suppl.13; Athens,1987-8),3 vols Πρακτικά τού Δ' ΔιεθνεούςΣυνεδρίου Πελοποννησιακών Σπουδών(Κόρινθος,g-i6 Σεπτεμβρίουiggo) (Πελ. suppl. 19; Athens,igg2),3 vols Πρακτικά τού Ε' Διεθούς Συνεδρίου Πελοποννησιακών Σπουδών ("Αργος-Νανπλιον,6-ΐο Σεπτεμβρίουiggj) (Πελ. suppl.22; Athens,1996-7),4 vols Πρακτικά τού Στ' ΔιεθνούςΣυνεδρίου Πελοποννησιακών Σπουδών(Τρίπολις, j-14 'Οκτωβρίου2οοο)(Athens, forthcoming) Πρακτικά τού XII Διεθνούς Συνεδρίου Κλασικής 'Αρχαιολογίας('Αθήνα, 4~10 Σεπτεμβρίου ig8j), 4 vols (Athens,1988)

Archäologische Anzeiger

'Αρχαιολογικά ανάλεκτα εξ

Archaeology '

Annals of 'Αθηνών /Athens

ν δελτίον Αρχαιολογικό Agia,Agioi,or Agios

American JournalofArchaeology desDeutschen athenische Instituts, Mitteilungen Archäologischen Abteilung

archaic

Archaeological Reports(supplement to JHS)

'Αρχαιολογική εφημερίς P. Armstrong, W. G. Cavanagh, and G. Shipley,'Crossingthe river:reflectionson routesand bridgesin Laconia fromthe archaicto Byzantineperiods',BSA 87 (1992),293-310 C. Runnels,D. J. Pullen,and S. Langdon,Artifact andAssemblage: The Finds from a Regional Surveyof the SouthernArgolid, Greece

Calif, 1995) (Stanford,

A. Avraméa, Le Péloponnèsedu IVe au Ville siècle: changements et

de la Sorbonne:ByzantinaSorbonensia, (Publications persistances 15;Paris,1997)

Abbreviationsxix ΒΑ Besch. BAR BCH

BeyondtheAcropolis BG NaturalEnvironment Bintliff, RecentDevelopments Bintliff,

Bintliff, 'Regionalsurvey' and Snodgrass,'BoeotianExpedition' Bintliff Blouet, Architectures BMGS

Boblaye, Recherches

Bölte,'Geographie' Bonias,Αιγιές BSA Byz CAH2iii. 3

Bulletinvan de Vereeniging totBevordering der Kennisvan de Antieke Beschaving

British Archaeological Reports (Oxford); int. ser. = International Series(formerly Series) Supplementary

Bulletinde correspondance hellénique

A Rural T. H. van Andel and C. Runnels,Beyond theAcropolis: Greek Past(Stanford, Calif.,1987) black-glazed

and Human Settlement in Prehistoric NaturalEnvironment J. L. Bintliff, Greece:Based on OriginalFieldwork (BAR int. ser. 28; Oxford, 1977) in theHistoryand Archaeology of J. L. Bintliff,RecentDevelopments CentralGreece:Proceedings BoeotianConference of the6th International

(BAR int.ser.666; Oxford,1997) J. L. Bintliff, 'Regional survey,demography,and the rise of in the ancientAegean: core-periphery, societies neocomplex Malthusian,and otherinterpretive models',JFA24 (1997),1-38 and A. M. Snodgrass,'The Cambridge/Bradford J. L. Bintliff Boeotian Expedition: the firstfour years', JFA 12 (1985), 123-61 et vuesdu G. A. Blouet, Architectures, sculptures, inscriptions des Cycladeset de l'Atlantique, 3 vols (Expédition Péloponnèse, de Morée; Paris,1831-8) scientifique ByzantineandModem GreekStudies sur les ruinesde la Ε. le Puillon de Boblaye, Recherches géographiques

Morée(Expéditionscientifique de Morée; Paris,1835) F. Bölte, 'Sparta: Geographie', RE 2nd ser., iii (1929), cols 1294-373 Ζ. Bonias, Ένα αγροτικό ιερό στις Αιγιές Λακωνίας του αρχαιολογικού δελτίου,62; Athens,1998) (Δημοσιεύματα

AnnualoftheBritishSchoolat Athens

Byzantine Ancient J. Boardmanand N. G. L. Hammond(eds),TheCambridge History(2nd edition), iii. 3: The ExpansionoftheGreekWorld,Eighth

CAH2 xiv

toSixthCenturies DC(Cambridge,London,etc.,1982) F. W. Walbank, A. E. Astin,M. W. Frederiksen,and R. M. Ancient (2nd edition),vii. 1: Ogilvie (eds), The Cambridge History TheHellenistic World (Cambridge,London,etc.,1984) A. Cameronand P. Garnsey(eds), The Cambridge Ancient History (2nd edition),xiii: The Late Empire,AD337-425 (Cambridge, London,etc.,1998) A. Cameron, B. Ward-Perkins,and M. Whitby(eds), The

CAWi. 2

I. E. S. Edwards,C. J. Gadd, and N. G. L. Hammond(eds),The

CAR1vii. ι CAH2xiii

Cartledge,SL Cartledgeand Spawforth Catling,'Menelaion' Catling,'AlessapianZeus' Cavanaghand Walker

AncientHistory(2nd edition), xiv: Late Antiquity: Cambridge Empire and Successors, AD425-600 (Cambridge, 2000) AncientHistory(3rd edition), i. 2: The EarlyHistoryofthe Cambridge

MiddleEast(Cambridge,1971)

P. Cartledge, Sparta and Lakonia: A RegionalHistory1300-362 BC

(Statesand CitiesofAncientGreece;London,1979) P. Cartledgeand A. Spawforth,Hellenistic andRomanSparta:A TaleofTwoCities(London,1989) H. W Catling,'Excavationsat theMenelaion,Sparta,1973-76', AR 23 (1976-7),24-42 H. W Catling,Ά sanctuaryof Messapian Zeus: excavationsat Aphyssou,Tsakona,1989',BSA 85 (1990),15-35 W. G. Cavanaghand S. E. C. Walker(eds),SpartainLaconia:The

ofa Cityand its Countryside Archaeology (Proceedings oftheigthBritish

xx Abbreviations MuseumClassical ColloquiumheldwiththeBritishSchoolat Athensand King's and University Colleges,London, 6-8 Decemberiggj) (BSA

Cl CMS CPCActs4 CPCAds6 CPC Papers 2 CPC Papers 3 CPC Papers 4 CPC Papers 5 Cd CR

Davis etal., 'Pylos Γ

Dawkins, AO Ε EH FGH Forsén etai, 'Asea valley' G GAC

'Geraki1' 'Geraki2'

'Geraki3' 'Geraki4'

Studies,4; London,1998) classical

undmykenischen Siegel(Berlin, 1964- ) Corpusderminoischen M. H. Hansen (ed.), The Polis as an UrbanCentreand as a Political

(Actsof the Copenhagen Polis Centre,4/HistoriskCommunity filosofiske Meddelelser, 75; Copenhagen,1997)

Arkadia:Symposium,■ Ancient T. H. Nielsen andj. Roy (eds), Defining

April, 1-4 igg8 (Acts of the Copenhagen Polis Centre, 6/Historisk-filosofiske Meddelelser, 78; Copenhagen,1999) Greek in theAncient M. H. Hansen and K. Raaflaub(eds),Studies Polis (Papers fromthe Copenhagen Polis Centre,2/Historia Einzelschriften, 95; Stuttgart, 1995) in theAncient M. H. Hansen and K. Raaflaub (eds),MoreStudies GreekPolis (Papers from the Copenhagen Polis Centre, 108;Stuttgart, 1996) 3/HistoriaEinzelschriften, T. H. Nielsen (ed.), YetMoreStudiesin theAncientGreekPolis (Papers

fromthe CopenhagenPolis Centre,4/HistoriaEinzelschriften, 117;Stuttgart, 1997) P. Flensted-Jensen (ed.), FurtherStudiesin theAncientGreekPolis

(Papers from the Copenhagen Polis Centre, 5/Historia Einzelschriften, 2000) 138;Stuttgart, Classical(Quarterly ClassicalReview

J. L. Davis, S. E. Alcock,J. Bennet,Y. G. Lolos, and C. W. 'The PylosRegionalArchaeologicalProject,part Shelmerdine, I: overviewand the archaeological survey',Hesp. 66 (1997), 39!-494R. M. Dawkins (ed.), The Sanctuaryof ArtemisOrthiaat Sparta

(Societyforthe Promotionof Hellenic StudiesSupplementary Papers,5; London,1929) to date codes) early(prefixed EarlyHelladic Historiker dergriechischen F.Jacoby etal, Die Fragmente (Berlin, etc.,

!923- ) J. Forsén,Β. Forsén,and M. Lavento,'The Asea valleysurvey:a 21 Atheniensia, reportof the 1994 season', Opuscula preliminary (!996)>73-97 Geometric R. Hope Simpson and O. T. P. K. Dickinson,A Gazetteer of in theBronzeAge I: The Mainland and theIslands AegeanCivilisation

(SIMA 52; Göteborg,1979) J. H. Crouwel,M. Prent,S. M. Thorne,G.-J.Wijngaarden,and D. Sueur, 'Geraki: an acropolis site in Lakonia. Preliminary season(1995)',Pharos, 3 (1995),41-65 reporton thefirst J. H. Crouwel, M. Prent, S. M. Thorne, N. Brodie, G.-J. Wijngaarden,and J. A. K. E. de Waele, 'Geraki: an acropolis sitein Lakonia.Preliminary reporton thesecondseason(1996)', Pharos, 4 (1996),89-120 J. H. Crouwel,M. Prent,J. Fiselier,andj. A. K. E. de Waele, 'Geraki:an acropolissitein Laconia. Preliminary reporton the thirdseason(1997)',Pharos, 5 (1997),49-83 J. H. Crouwel, M. Prent,R. Cappers, and T. Carter (1998), 'Geraki:an acropolissitein Laconia. Preliminary reporton the 6 (1998),93-118 fourth season(1998)',Pharos,

Abbreviations xxi 'Geraki5'

Kourinou, Σπάρτη

J. H. Crouwel, M. Prent,J. van der Vin, P. Lulof, and R. Dooijes, 'Geraki: an acropolis site in Laconia. Preliminary season(1999)',Pharos, reporton thefifth 7 (1999),21-49 J. H. Crouwel,M. Prent,S. M. Thorne, and J. van der Vin, 'Geraki:an acropolissitein Laconia. Preliminary reporton the sixthseason(2000)',Pharos, 8 (2000),41-76 M. H.Jameson, C. N. Runnels,and T. H. van Andel,A Greek theSouthern lidfromPrehistory to thePresent Countryside: Argo Day Calif.,1994) (Stanford, Hesperia hellenistic S. Hodkinson,'Land tenureand inheritance in classicalSparta', ClassicalQuarterly, 80 [n.s.36] (1986),378-406 S. Hodkinson,Property and Wealth in ClassicalSparta(Londonand Swansea,2000) C. Renfrewandj. M. Wagstaff, AnIslandPolity: TheArchaeology of inMelos(Cambridge,1982) Exploitation Science Journal ofArchaeological desDeutschen Instituts Jahrbuch Archäologischen Journal ofFieldArchaeology Studies Journal ofHellenic Journal ofMediterranean Archaeology A. Jochmus, 'On the battle of Sellasia, and the strategic movements ofthegeneralsof antiquitybetweenTegea, Caryae, and Sparta' in id., 'Commentaries', Journalof the Royal Geographical 27 (1857),1-53,at 34-53 Society, Journal ofRoman Archaeology desRömisch-germanischen Mainz Jahrbuch Zentralmuseums Journal ofRomanStudies D. R. Keller and D. W. Rupp (eds), Archaeological in the Survey Mediterranean Area(BAR int.ser.155;Oxford,1983) E. Kourinou,Σπάρτη: συμβολή στη μνημειακήτοπογραφία

L

late (prefixed to date codes)

'Geraki6' Greek Countryside Hesp. HI Hodkinson,'Land tenure' Hodkinson,Property IslandPolity JAS Jdl JFA JHS JMA 'Sellasia' Jochmus,

JRA JRGZM JRS Kellerand Rupp,Archaeological Survey

Λακ. σπουδ. Landscape Archaeology

Leake,Peloponnesiaca Leake, Travels LH Lohmann,Atene Loring,'Routes' LS LS

LSÚ

M

της (διδακτορική διατριβή) (Athens,2000)

ΛακωνικαΙ σπουδαί J. F. Cherry, J. L. Davis, and E. Mantzourani,Landscape

as Long-term Keosin theCycladic Northern Islands Archaeology History: until Modern Times (Monumenta from Earliest Settlement Archaeologica,16;Los Angeles,1991) W. M. Leake, Peloponnesiaca: A Supplement to Travels in theMorea (London,1846) W. M. Leake, Travelsin theMorea,3 vols (London, 1830; repr. Amsterdam, 1968) Late Helladic H. Lohmann, Atene-Ατήνη: Forschungen zu Siedlungs-und desklassischen Attika(Cologne, Weimar,and Wirtschaftstruktur Vienna,1993) W. Loring,'Some ancientroutesin the Péloponnèse',JHS 15 (1895),25-89 Laconia Survey to 5-figure (prefixed number)non-sitefindspot W. Cavanagh,J. Crouwel, R. W. V Catling,and G. Shipley, andChange ina Greek RuralLandscape: TheLaconiaSurvey, Continuity ii: Archaeological Data (Annualof the BritishSchool at Athens, supp.vol. 27; London,1996) middle(prefixed to date codes)

xxii Abbreviations McDonald and Rapp,MME Law MacDowell,Spartan Macreadyand Thompson,FieldSurvey MH MME mod. MystrasCongress Nl

OJA Ott Πληθυσμός Panagiotopoulos, Pauly-Wissowa PCPS Πελ. Πελ. suppl. PH Phaklaris, Κυνουρία2

Φιλολήκων Pikoulas,NMX Pikoulas,'Skiritis' PLi PLÛ R r. RE RG

Roughand RockyPlace

SAGT

SandyPylos

McDonald, W. Α., and Rapp, G. R., jun. (eds), TheMinnesota

a BronzeAge RegionalEnvironment MesseniaExpedition:Reconstructing

(Minneapolis,1972) D. M. MacDowell, SpartanLaw (Scottish Classical Studies; Edinburgh,1986) FieldSurvey S. Macreadyand F. H. Thompson(eds),Archaeological in BritainandAbroad(Societyof AntiquariesOccasional Papers, n.s.6; London,1985) MiddleHelladic W. A. McDonald and G. R. Rapp jun. (eds), The Minnesota

Messenia Expedition: Reconstructinga Bronze Age Environment

(Minneapolis,1972) modern(place-name) Πρακτικά του εκτάκτουΠνευματικούΣυμποσίου (ΣπάρτηΜυστρας2J-29Μαου ig88):από την φωτεινήκληρονομιάτου Μυστραστην Τουρκοκρατία(Πελ.suppl.16;Athens,199o) Neolithic Oxford JournalofArchaeology

Ottoman V. Panagiotopoulos, Πληθυσμός και οικισμοί της Πελοποννήσου: ΐ^ος-ΐ8ος αιώνας (Ιστορικό αρχείο ΕμπορικήΤράπεζατης Ελλάδος;Athens,1985) see RE oftheCambridge Philological Society Proceedings Πελοποννησιακά Πελοποννησιακά,παραρτήματα prehistoric P. V. Phaklaris, Αρχαία Κυνουρία: ανθρωπινή δραστηριότητα και περιβάλλον (Δημοσιεύματα του αρχαιολογικού δελτίου, 43; Athens, 199°) (revision of publishedPh.D. thesis,Thessaloniki,1985) J. M. Sanders (ed.), Φιλολάκων:LakonianStudiesin Honourof HectorCatling(Oxford, 1992)

G. A. Pikoulas,Ή νότια μεγαλοπολιτική χώρα από τον 8° π.Χ. ώς τον 4° μΧ- αιώνα(Athens,1988) G. Α. Pikoulas,'Συμβολή στην τοπογραφίατης Σκιρίτιδος', Hows,5 (1987)5121-48 Η. Waterhouseand R. Hope Simpson,'PrehistoricLaconia: partΓ, BSA55 (i960), 67-107 H. Waterhouseand R. Hope Simpson,'PrehistoricLaconia: partIF, BSA56 (1961),114-75 Roman reigned

Wissowa, G., et al. (eds), Paulys Real-ency clopädie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft (Stuttgart,1893-1 981) red-glazed C. Mee and H. Forbes (eds), A Rough and Rocky Place: The Historyof theMethana Peninsula, Greece Landscape and Settlement bytheBritishSchoolat (ResultsoftheMethanaSurveyProjectSponsored Athensand theUniversity ofLiverpool)(Liverpool, 1997) i-vi (University W. K. Pritchett,StudiesinAncientGreekTopography,

of California Publications: Classical Studies; Berkeley,Los Angeles,and (iv-vi) London, 1965-89), vii-viii (Amsterdam, 1991,!992)

fromNestorto History J. L. Davis (ed.), SandyPylos:An Archaeological Navarino(Austin,Tex., 1998)

Abbreviations xxiii SF

'Laconia' Shipley, '"OtherLakedaimonians'" Shipley, 'Perioikos' Shipley, 'Territory' Shipley, Shipleyand Salmon,HumanLandscapes

Ven Wells,Agriculture WellswithRunnels,Berbati-Limnes Wrightetai, 'Nemea'

smallfind G. Shipley,'Laconia', in M. H. Hansen and T. H. Nielsen(eds), An Inventory (Oxford, ofPoleisin theArchaicand ClassicalPeriods forthcoming) G. Shipley,'"The other Lakedaimonians": the dependent perioikic poleis of Laconia and Messenia', in CPC Acts4, 189-281 G. Shipley,'Perioikos:the discoveryof classical Lakonia', in Φίλολάκων,2ΙΙ-26 in thelate classical G. Shipley,'The extentof Spartanterritory and hellenistic periods',BSA 95 (2000),367-90 in Classical G. Shipleyand J. Salmon (eds), HumanLandscapes Studies Environment and Culture (Leicester-Nottingham Antiquity: in AncientSociety,6; Londonand New York,1996) Venetian(date) in Ancient Greece: B. Wells (ed.), Agriculture oftheyth Proceedings Institute at Athens at theSwedish International (16-iy May, Symposium iggo) (Stockholm, 1992) B. WellswithC. Runnels(eds), TheBerbati-Limnes Archaeological i Athen, ig88-iggo(Skrifter Survey utgivnaav SvenskaInstitutet seriesin 40,44; Stockholm,1996) J. C. Wright, J. F. Cherry, J. L. Davis, E. Mantzourani,S. B. Sutton, and R. F. Sutton, jun., 'The Nemea Valley ArchaeologicalProject:a preliminary report',Hesp.59 (1990), 579"659

MODERN PLACE-NAMES Forancientplace-names,wherea well-established Englishformexistsit is generallyused (e.g. form is preferred whereit willnotgiverise a Greek-like Otherwise Athens,Corinth,Sparta). to ambiguity(Achaia, Arkadia,Aigina, Keos, Lakedaimon, Lakonike). The use of khis avoided,as chis a familiaraspirateto mostreadersof English.Hybridssuch as Attikaand Korinthare eschewed.For reasonsbehindthe use of Laconia ratherthan Lakonia forthe indicatedbyê regionin theancientperiods,see Chapterι, η. ι. Eta and omegaare sometimes and o. For modernplace-names,as the surveycoveredthewholetime-spanof Greekculture,we wishedto retainindicatorsof linguisticcontinuity(such as in Panagia) and etymological We have accordingly developeda systemclose to that (as in Geronthrai-Geraki). continuity of modernGreek',BSA 15 (1908-9), recommendedby R. M. Dawkins('The transliteration 214-22).We retaing forgamma,d fordelta,phforphi,and chforchi; thesehave thevirtueof We links(as in Chrysapha,Kephalas,Anthochóri). familiaretymological generallypreserving and for most double vowels and medieval the ancient (e.g.ai, oi diphthongs digraphs preserve has changedat least once since the forαι, 01) even where,as is usual, theirpronunciation eta by i (ratherthan e, classical period. We followDawkins'spreferenceforrepresenting BSA minded the recommendedby Managing Committeeof those presumablyclassically and have different resonances,we havebuiltin additional origins days).Because place-names ratherthan with Greek to preservesimilarities forms,permitting e.g. Konstantinos flexibility Δ Ντ or a name with When the phoneticallycorrectKonstandinos. (e.g. Δίχοβα, begins transliteration. Ντουφέκια),we sometimes givean explanatory For α, ε, ζ, θ, ι, κ, λ, μ, ν, ξ, ο, π, ρ, σ/ς, τ, ψ, and ω we use their'natural' roman as equivalentsa, e, z, th,i, k, /,m,n, x, 0,p, r,s, t,ps, and 0. Otherlettersare transliterated in a judgementhas been made each case. below;ifthereare alternatives, Greek

transcription

(ifdifferent) pronunciation approx.

αι αυ

ai

e as in get

Y

g (Ágios) ng

ß

γγ Γκ (initial) γκ (medial)

ΥΧ

δ ει ευ η Μπ (initial) μπ (medial) νδ

af or αν ν

G (Goritsá) ngovg nch d ei efor ev(Efstrátios,Evrótas) i (Kokkinórachi,Prophítis) Β (Bakáli) mb,mp,or b (Roubaíika) nd

ν

ghbeforea/o/u; y beforee/i g as in got nkh thas in the eeas in meet ee as in meet η + thãs in the

Modern place-names xxv Ντ (initial) ντ (medial) OL

ου φ χ υ (alone) vi

D (Douphekiá) ndor nt(Konstantínos) oi (Ágioi Anárgyroi) ou

eeas in meet oo as in hoot

ph

chas in loch ee as in meet ee as in meet

ch(Chrysapha,Ochtaïmero) y yi

Stress is indicated by an acute accent, normallyonly at the firstmention of a name in the main text of a chapter (and at firstmention in the notes if it is also the firstmention in the chapter) or in special contexts such as specific discussions or catalogue entries. Where a diaeresis would coincide with the stress,the diaeresis is retained in all contextsand the stress accent is not marked (e.g. Taygetos). The followingselectionof alternativesexemplifiesthe systemof transliterationin actual use.

ALTERNATIVE

FORMS

OF PLACE-NAMES

We give here a selection of alternativetoponymsfor places in Lakonia and the surrounding areas. In general,we have preferredthe formscommon in everydayspeech, while recognizing that these oftendifferfromformsused in maps and officialtexts,and that both popular and officialnames may well change in future.Alternativespellingsof names listed below can be found in earlier works, such as those of Leake. For other names recorded by the Venetian censuses and the French Expédition de Morée, see Chapters 7-8 and TABLES7.6-7, 8.1. For extensiveinformationabout changes in modern place-names, see G. A. Pikoulas, Λεξικό rcw οίκισμών της Πελοποννήσου: παλαιά καΐ νέα τοπωνύμια (Athens,2001). With the aid of thatinvaluable referencework,we take thisopportunityto correctsome equivalences given or implied in Chapters 23-4. official

colloquial (if different)

Ágioi Anárgyroi Agios Phokás Agrapidoúla (also Agrapidiá) Aigiés Aigíai Alesía Ambelochórion Ambelochóri Amyklai Amykles Ano Glykóvrisi Anthochórion Anthochóri Aphisión Aphysoú (also Aphisioú) Areópolis Areópoli Asopós Astéri

formermodernname

Zoúpena Voútama Mitátova Chánia Koutoumoús Léle Grámousa Sklavochóri Vezáni Katsouléika Tsímova Kondeviánika Bríniko{Leake:Príniko)

xxvi Modern place-names official

Astros Cháradros Gytheion Dáphni Drymós Elaphónisos Ellinikón Ellinikón Elos Éxo Nymphion Glyppía Kallithéa Kalloní KalyviaTheológou Kamára Karyaí KastríTyroú Káto Glykóvrysi Keraséa Kokkinórrachi Koutrí Krokéai Kryonérion Latomeíon Lefkóchoma Mavrovoúni Metamorphosis Moní Agíon Tessarákonta Martyron Neápolis;Neápolis Voión Oítylon Panigyrístra Pellána Pentauloí Peristérion Pháros PlákaLeonidíou Plátanos Plytra Polydroson Prosílion

colloquial (if different)

Gytheio (E)laphonísi;Nisi Ellinikó(inThyreatis) Ellinikó(inMaléa) Lymbiáda

Karyés Kerasiá Krokées Kryonéri Latomí Metamórphosi ÁgioiSaránda

formermodernname

Agiannítika Kalyvia Trestená Marathonísi Kamínia Drialí Cervi;Tsirigo Teichío Kouléndia Douralí (Δ-or Ντ-) Éxo Nyphi;Níphi Kástro;Palaióchora Zaraphóna Pérpeni KalyviaServéika;Kalyvia Serviánika Giannaíoi Aráchova Lygariás Káto Vezáni Arvanitokerasiá Tsoúni Kokóretsa Levétsova Poliána Vigláphia Karáspai" Melíssi Katávothra

Neápoli

Vátika

Oítylo

Vítylo Alaibeï(ratherthanSaidali) Kalyvia;Kalyvia Georgitsánika Georgítsiou Koumoustá Tsási Alaibeï Nisi Límberdo (medieval)Asópolis Tzí(n)tzina Strotzá

Peristéri

Polydroso

Modern place-names xxvii official

PyrgosDiroú Pyrrichos Sellasía Synora Thalámai Timénion Tripolis Vapheió

colloquial (if different)

Timénio

formermodernname

Pyrgos Kávalos Vrouliá;Vourliá Koutoumoú Koutíphari Káto Vérvena;Tseréni Tripolitsá Barbali D.G.J.S.

A NOTE ON SITE NUMBERS is explainedin fullat pp. 34-8 below The systemof numberingof sitesand otherfmdspots and at LS ii. 315-16.Beloware examplesoftypesofserialnumbersused in thesurvey. M348

sitenumber,i.e. sampledfindspot designatedas 'site'(numbersin range1-534; see surveysitecatalogue,Chapter24); letterprefixindicatesgeographicalzone

Π1384 *P284 ?R42I ??Fi43 Ã34

non-sitefindspot probablesite(inChapter6 only) possiblesite(in Chapter6 only) site(in Chapter6 only) doubtful findspotdesignatedas a sitein a periodotherthan thatunderdiscussion(in Chapter6 only) site(i.e. withinsurveypermitarea butoutsideintensively sampledOut-of-area' in range3000-26) numbers area; surveyed site known prior to survey(withinpermit area; either inside or outside surveyedarea) but not located or not sampled;numbersin range intensively 4000-8) site reportedby earlier sources but with unknownlocation or uncertain existence(numbersin range5000-10) site in all-Laconia catalogue (Chapter 23); double-letterprefixindicates geographicalzone (see ILLS23.1-10) series zembil(groupoffinds)in originalfieldwork non-sitezembil(e.g.zembil#36with10,000added to serialnumber,indicating also citedwithlower-casezone letterprefix(e.g.1110036) an off-site findspot); see previousentry sherdor lithicitemfromLS site(see artefact studies,Chapters10-18) smallfindfromsite(see Chapter19) or epigraphic sculptural, potteryor artefacttype,or individualarchitectural, artefact (see Chapters10-20)

A3018 L4001 A5001 AA296

#36

LS IOO36

hioo36 M348/64 SF2 14 a

(see ILL. 1.13)

Fora tableofsiteand findspot numbers,see Indexes6 and 7 below,and LSii. 456-9.

1 THE LACONIA SURVEY: BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY GrahamShipley, WilliamCavanagh, andjoostCrouwel The Laconia SURVEY,1 a multi-disciplinary carriedout between projectbased on fieldwork a an area near Sparta in the 1983 and 1989,combines systematic archaeologicalsurveyof in and south-easternPéloponnèsewithrelatedstudies historicalsources,sedimentology, historical settlement Laconia ecology.Itsprincipalaim was to clarify changesin north-central ofthemodernGreekstatein theearly betweenthelateprehistoric periodsand thefoundation nineteenthcentury;in particular,the relationshipbetweenthe traditionalheartland(the Evrótasvalley,or Spartaplain)and theneighbouring rurallandscapes,bothin theplain and in the neighbouringhills. The project was designed to set in a regional context the programmeof excavationsby the BritishSchool at Athens:both those at Sparta and the and historicalsitesin and aroundthe Menelaion,and theSchool'searlierworkat prehistoric the surveywas also intendedto further the long traditionof topographic plain. Indirectly, researchin Laconia. It was also our hope that ultimatelythe surveymightlead to the excavationof one or moreruralsitesin Laconia to shed further lighton the issuesoutlined above. The information illuminatetheinterplay between presentedin thesevolumeswilltherefore cultural and human over a of Laconian circumstances, society physicallandscape, long span history. The Survey Area description of the survey area in thecentreoftheterritory The surveyarea is situatedapproximately ofancientSparta,and thus in the centralpart of the modern nomós(province)of Lakonia (ill. 1.1). The area examinedby thesurveyconsistsofa roughlyrectangular blockofland about twiceas longas itis wide,withitslongaxis orientedfromnorth-west to south-east (ILL.1.2).It generallyslopes 1 The name 'Laconia' is the regularancient post-classical; name forSparta'sterritory, whetherΕ or W of Taygetos,was Lakônikê, ή Λακωνική(firstin Herodotos,i. 69. 4; also e.g. iv.53. 2; Aristophanes, Peace,245; Strabo,v. 1. 1. Thucydides, 363; Pausanias,iii. 1. 1).The LatinneologismLaconiaseemsto vi. 34. 39. 214, occurfirstin Plinythe Elder {Natural History, here;xvii.18. 30. 133),yetevenhe thoughsomeread Lacónica also uses Lacónica(e.g. xxv.8. 53. 94). The Greek-likeform Laconice occurse.g.in Nepos (Timoleon, 2. 1) and Mela (ii. 3. 4). the officialmodernname of the province{nomós), is Lakonia,

thusa post-classical ofa Romanname.We adopt readaptation theanglicized(orlatinate)spelling'Laconia' as a neutralterm to avoid prioritizing any period- especiallythosewhen the area had quitedifferent namesor nonethatwe knowof. We are grateful to Dr Yanis Pikoulasforadviceabout the In thelightofhisinformation, ofmodernplace-names. spelling we havereadoptedtheformAphysoú'forthevillagewherethe Surveywas based,ratherthanAphisioú',used in LS ii. GS is gratefulto Graeme Barkerand the late Donald Shipleyfor comments on an earlierdraftofthischapter.

2 Chapter ι

from fromvariousperiodsand principalroutes(D. Miles-Williams, III. i.i. Laconia and periphery, showingancientsettlements an originalbyA. Sackettand D. Taylor,withadditionsbyRWVC and DGJS).

Backgroundand methodology3

'

'-^

,^i

^^i

τ r--^

rii.

GYTHEIQ

|

::

γ

WIlJ^ -

*"'_/^- *^'

Main roads

^ - *"""*^-

Rivers

.

J

1

Hs **'

'

J

vV

600m

. :'.V"V/^ '"'^Sv r^

0

II

DRS

'^

Land above 1000m do

monemvasia

kJ^x

LACONIASURVEYAREA : "

^*'

II

il

li

li

20

« Kms

I

III. 1.2.The surveyarea in relationto Laconia (G. D. R. Sanders).

'

s

4

Chapterι

III. 1.3.Toponymsin thesurveyarea (D. Taylor).

Backgroundand methodology 5

to south-west and is situatednorthand east of Spárti,the siteof the down fromnorth-east ancientand moderntownof Sparta.That has not alwaysbeen thelocationforthecapitalof theregion;forseveralcenturiesthatrolebelongedto theFrankishand Byzantineacropolisof of Mystrásat thewesternedge oftheplain,untilin thenineteenth centurythetown-planners laid out an urban on the ancient of new Greek site The modern the kingdom grid Sparta. townadjoinsthewest(right)bankoftheriverEvrotas(theclassicalEurôtas);acrosstheriver, almostwithintouchingdistanceof the town,the surveyarea beginsfromthe east (left)bank and stretches up intothehillsbeyond.2(Forplace-namesin thesurveyarea, see ILL.1.3.) The area presentsa variedtopography, geology,and vegetation,owingto the varietyof Withinthelargerarea enclosedby theboundariesofa land-forms and elevationsit contains.3 (communes)specifiedin the surveypermit (see ILL. 8.1), a group of adjacent koinótites was studiedintensively between1983and 1989.4 contiguoustractofsome70 squarekilometres The northernmostpoint of this tract lies not far beyond the limestone hill of Agios thisis the highpointof the Konstantinos (818 m; ILLS24.4-7)wl^ ^tsclassicalfortifications; To thesouththearea endsat theplace wherea long,erodedridge,bearingtheBronze survey. Age mansionknownas Dawkins'House and the classicalsanctuaryof Menelaos and Helen, runsout intothe Sparta plain. Here, wherethe Evrotasrunsclose up againstthe hills,the surveyarea reachesitslowestpointat around170m above sea level.Turningback northwards along the river,we can tracethewesternboundaryof the surveyupstreamthroughthelowlyingfieldsnorthof Sparta,includingthe area of Geladári (LS siteH45),siteof a probable of the Evrotasvalleyfloorat this ancientvillage;it thusincludesseveralsquare kilometres At the north-western limit the river and cold (ILLS24.15-16),fromthe point. emerges,deep limestonefoothillsborderingthe Sparta plain on the north.Finally,in the east the survey climbsthewesternoutliersofthePárnonrange,embracingthelowerslopesofKoutsovition the roundhillof Phagiá to its south,and comprisesmuchof the dry the northand skirting basin overlooked bythevillageofChrysapha(ILL.24.56). upland The twogreatmountainrangesofLaconia, Mt Taygetosto thewestand Mt Parnonon the east,dominate(at a distance)the landscapeof all thispartof Laconia, and providethe first foranycontextualization elementofa framework ofthesurvey. To talkfora momentonlyof it was how the of visibility: striking highestpeaks Taygetos,notablythe pyramidalProphitis Ilias (2,404m), werevisiblefromalmosteverypartof the surveyarea (ILL. 1.4). In termsof mobilityand resources,the mountainsare farfromthe least importantamong economic thesettlement factorsinfluencing ofthestudyarea. history Two riversalso dominatethearea. The Evrotasformsthewesternmargin,whileitstributary theKelephina(theancientOinous)flowssouthalongsideourarea,thensouth-west it,to through with the Evrotas a few kilometres north of in Both are their converge Sparta. perennial, though lowercoursestheydivideintobraidedrivulets beds,and can shrinkto spreadingovergravelly in late summer(ILL.1.5).Otherwaterresourcesare numerouscomparedto many meretrickles Greeklandscapes;oftenthe visitor'sfirstimpressionof Laconia is thatit is surprisingly un2 For an excellent general geographical descriptionof Laconia see AdmiraltyNaval IntelligenceDivision, Greece (Geographical Handbooks, BR 516, 516 ab; London, 1944-5),iü-177-86. 3 A fullzone-by-zonedescriptioncan be found in the surveysitecatalogue(Chapter24),whilethegeomorphology and naturalecologyare discussedfullyin Chapters2-3.

4 Some 1.65sq kmwas coveredby recentpine plantations and provedcompletely barrenofarchaeologicalremains(see below);modernvillagescoveredc.0.5sq km;fencedorchards and other inaccessible areas would have brought the unsurveyed portionto r.2.5sq km. Thus the surveyedarea, havingtakenaccountoftheseinaccessibleportions,amounts to c.68 sq km.

6

Chapterι

III. 1.4.The southernpartofMt Taygetosat sunrise,lookingSWfromAphysoú(G. Shipley).

ofthevalleyfloorare so greenand becausesprings 'Spartan',becausetheolive-and citrus-groves and fountains abound.Thisis particularly trueofthewestoftheplainat thefootofTaygetos.On theeast,however, and in thefoothills ofParnonwhereour surveytookplace,springsare more The whole area is in somethingof a rain-shadowresultingfromthe widelyspaced. survey of which the winds.The geologyofmuchof presence Taygetos, intercepts prevailing rain-bearing thecentraland southern is less conducive to the formation ofspring-lines. area,too, survey Various'natural'routescrossour surveyarea. One is the valleyleadingENEfromSparta acrossdry,erodedhillsto theChrysaphabasin;fromthereit ascendsto theuplandvillageson thecrestofParnon,and beyondto theKynouriaor Thyreatis, a coastalshelfanciently disputed betweentheSpartansand Argivesbutnowassignedto thesprawling nomos ofArkadia.Southof some40 kmaway,has usuallyfollowedthewest Sparta,theland routeto thesea at Gytheion, bank the of across the river from thesurveyarea,downto theVardouniahillsat Evrotas, (right) thelowerend oftheSpartaplainand onward.On theeast (left)bank,withinour surveyarea, themain route(likethemodernmotorroad) has traditionally turnedeast,firstwiththe river and thenawayfromit,pasttheByzantineacropolisofGerákito Monemvasiaon theeastcoast and into Maléa, the remotesouth-easternpromontoryof the Péloponnèse.Less easy to determine forsomeperiodsis whichwas thenormalrouteto and fromeasternArkadia,northof a main Laconia.The Kelephinavalleyis difficult to pass at certainpoints.Morelikely, therefore, land traffic to routeskirting Konstantinos and to the Evrotas carried Agios descending valley and fromArkadia,as itdid untilrecently whenitwas supersededbya moredirectmotorroute in different fromTripolis(modernTripoli).The place whereit met the plain was different sometimes at the north-western remains of our where there are periods: extremity surveyarea,

Backgroundand methodology 7

III. 1.5.The riverEvrotasin April1989,lookingnnwfromtheMenalaion(G. Shipley).

in thecentreofthesurveyarea nearthe ofRomanand Ottoman-period and sometimes bridges, modernroadbridge.Forperiodswithoutbridges,eitheris possible.Anotherroad,againoutside oursurvey thewest(right) bankoftheEvrotasto Megalopolis(modernMegalópoli) area,follows and western Arkadia.Whileroutesto thenorth,to south-eastern of Laconia,and to theinterior Parnonall pass through thesurveyarea today,theywereprobablynotas important in thepast southcorridor thatpassedthrough as thisnorthbankoftheEvrotas. Spartaon thewest(right) The surveyarea,sensu was sparselysettledin the1980swhenourfieldwork was carried stricto, out,and remainsso today.Mostpeoplelivedin a villagewitha populationofup to a thousand or two,forming thecentreofa koino'tis and administering a definedterritory which (commune)5 contain a few smaller settlements or of isolated might outlyinggroups houses; permanent dwellingswere,and are, rare.In the north,our area stoppedshortof the koinoticcentreof Sellasia(formerly Vourliáor Vrouliá),butwithinitwas thesizeablevillageofVoutiánoiastride the Sparta-Tripolisroad and, furtherinto the hills,the koinoticcentreof Agios Ioánnis and east-central Theológosand itsdependency KalyviaTheológou.The north-east partofthe where are contained no settlement. The west-central area, slopes mainlyverysteep, large part, in theEvrotasplain,containedthe'commuter villages'ofKladás and Aphysou(in thelatterof whichthe surveywas based), as well as the ribbon-development settlement of Kokkinórachi and above the main In road. the south-east we are Tsouni)along (formerly again in almost unihabitedhill-land;the substantial of with its smaller village Skoura, neighboursof Zagáno, 5 In the late 1990s, afterthis volume was drafted,a ofkoinótites intodimoitookplace. We have not reorganization

to adjustthetextsystematically to reflect this. attempted

8

Chapterι

III. 1.6.BurntlandscapenearVoutianoi,theday aftera majorbushfirein August1988, lookingSSW(G. Shipley).

Platána,and KephalásdottedalongtheGerakiroad,lieswellto thesouthofthatbroadofarea ofdissected hillsand valleyswhosenorthern as edgeformsthesouthern partofourarea. Finally, ofthesurvey reachesto theuplandvillageofChrysapha. alreadynoted,theeasternextension Land use in the surveyarea covers a wide range.6Agriculturein rural Laconia has and muchof undergonea patchyrecessionsincethehighpointofthemid-twentieth century, the landscapeis no longeras intensively farmedas before.7Possiblesignsof older farming fashionsabound, such as an apparentvogue at some timein the past forpear-trees(now mostlygone wild)or,aroundVoutianoi,forhedgesof the Americanprickly-pear plantthat bearssuchsucculentbut fearsomely fruit. The of cereals with olives protected inter-cropping is rarelypractisednow,thoughin thenorthernSpartaplain and aroundthelowlandvillages the olive-groves are stillcarefullytendedand the fieldsploughedto assistwater-retention.8 of Manyfig-trees venerableage are stillcropped,notablyon thespursbelowVoutianoi,where theyare sometimes grownin largenumbersratherthansinglyas is theruleelsewherein the in late summer, whilefield-walking we would come acrosspeople from Often, Péloponnèse. Athenswho had returnedto theirancestralvillagesto collectthe familyharvestof figsor walnuts.We recallwithgratitude and spontaneous towardstheteams. theirfrequent generosity The othermainaspectofland use is pastoral.Most ofour encounters withlocalsout in 'the field'werewithherdsmentakingtheirsheepor goatsto browsethehills.Generallytheflocks returned to thevicinity ofvillageslikeAphysouor Chrysaphaat night;but some,as could be () See also Chapter8. Furtherdetailsin the introductions to individualzonesin thesurveysitecatalogue(Chapter24).

7 See Chapter8. 0 See Chapter3.

Backgroundand methodology 9

inferredfrompens of brushwoodor more remainedon the hills permanentstructures, forprolongedperiods.Some herdsmenwere membersof local communities,but one educated who repeatedly individual, friendly us in local toponymy guided (and incidentally us to several findspotsof archaeological we had notyetsurveyed), materialin localities came downon horsebackfromArkadiaeach summerto graze his animals on the late summer steppe plants and garigue of Geladariand on thelimestonespurs.In formertimes,perhaps,he wouldhaveexploited thestubbleleftbythecerealharvest. Duringour workwe weremade aware of the various importantroles played by the uncultivatedcountryside,apart fromits contributionto agriculturaland pastoral production.9The dexterous weaving of spinybroomand otherbrushwoodto plug gaps in hedgesand thussave livestockfrom as it fallsprovedas ethnologically impressive Over the inconvenient. was archaeologically years of the survey,several countrymen demonstratedtheirskillat makingherdsand crooksfromshoots man'swalking-sticks nearVoutianoi,eightmonthsafter III. 1.7.Burntolive-tree of wild olive. Much of the landscape is ofthetreeand thesamefire,showingregeneration dottedwithdisusedlime-kilns. surrounding vegetation(G. Shipley). But we werealso aware of changein the Farmingpracticeshavechanged, countryside. effects offire(ILLS and a possibleconsequenceis whatappearto be theincreasingly devastating butthe scrub to controlled of the no burning promotegrazingresources, 1.6-7): longer periodic, hillsides. This is theresultofa declinein grazing acrossproductive uncheckedspreadofwildfire of wild grassesand gariguethatallowsfireto whichhas led to a re-growth and ploughing, oftheruralproductive also aware that facets We were economyconcern many spreadrapidly. their more now earn a of livingin offices, Aphysiots shops, only minority peopletoday:probably to assume is without land. While economic from the or garagesthan precedent, system today's that 'agriculture'was the universalpreoccupationin everypast period would be to beg questions. important A NOTE ON CLIMATIC DATA (BY MALCOLM WAGSTAFF)

about the climateof the surveyarea is derivedfromthe meteorologicalseries Information maintainedat Sparta and kindlymade availableby the GreekMeteorologicalService.This 9 Cf. H. Forbes,'The uses of the uncultivatedlandscape in modernGreece: a pointerto the value of the wilderness

in antiquity?',in Shipley and Salmon, HumanLandscapes, 68-97.

ίο

Chapterι

III. 1.8.Mean monthly and precipitation at Sparta(datasuppliedbyGreekMeteorologicalService). temperature

allows the area to be classified as having a warm sub-humid climate of the classic Mediterranean type. exceed20 °C from The meanannualtemperature is 17.7°C, butmeanmonthly temperatures Theyfall Juneto September(ILL.1.8),and Spartais one ofthehottest placesin GreeceinJuly.10 to 9 °C inJanuary. FrostoccursfromNovemberto March,butthemeannumberoffrost daysis greatestinJanuary(2.8) and February(2.4). Severedamage can resultto citrusand, if the The economicconsequencesare serious. fallsbelow-13 °C, evento olive-trees. temperature 10B. Kayser and K. Thompson (eds), Economicand SocialAtlas ofGreece(Athens, 1964), 104.

Backgroundand methodology n π π

1000-

-

800

4^-Μ-^Η-·.

600 - i;

:

400 - ;;

;

;

2 0 0 - ;!

Ι;

j:

Γ

ΜΜ4Η».

:

**

MEAN

:

: .

·; ; ; ;

'' '

ο oï

ο ιg>

ο cm ο

:

i:

;

ο oo ο

ο ^f ο)

ο un Ο}

[iilij

ο to ο

i ■

;

;

o '' 1111Π If l,li.l.l.l.lJ.llll.l.l.l.l.f.lH.l.i[,Μ,,Ι rro en co

-■-=

η

'■ :_

mm

Π

i

: :

[J.J.U.U.M.i.l.

ο r^ σ>

ο oo ο)

ο σι ο^

III.. i.(). Intcraiiinial variabilityolprccipitatimi at Sparia.

Mean annual precipitationis 801.6 mm (ill. 1.9). Most of it arrivesas rain duringthe butsnowalso fallsin DecemberandJanuaryand lies forseveralmonthson thepeaks winter, in precipitation. The of Taygetosand Parnon.There is considerableinterannualvariability historical series,suggeststhatit does notfallbelowthe 240 evidence,thougha discontinuous mm whichis criticalto a successfulcereal harvestin much of the Near East,11thoughthe existenceof a graincommissionat ancientSparta suggeststhatfoodsupplywas a recurrent worryin the past.12The Taygetosmountainrange to the westof Sparta (summit2,407m) createsa crainshadow'ofsucha sortthat,as Rackhamobservesin Chapter3, thesurveyarea 'drier'thanthezone on thewesternsideoftheEurotas. is noticeably fallsbetweenOctoberand March (inclusive), No less than78 per centof theprecipitation with16.7percentin Decemberand 15.6per centinJanuary(ill. 1.9).In someyears,however, stormshave raised the precipitationvalues well above the means forparticularsummer months;forexample,over62 mmwas recordedin August1915and inJune1921. effects oftheEvrotas windsprevailat Sparta,partlyas a resultofthechannelling Northerly in winds onto the Gulf of Laconia. These are which out summer, drying chilling opens trough in winter.

J.M.W.

SELECTION

OF THE STUDY AREA

The relationshipbetweenpeople and the land theyoccupyis once more an issue,raising to land,nationality, and statehood. Overthelastcentury, withinthe oflegitimacy, questions rights 11C. C. Wallen,Arid zone methodology',in E. S. Hills (ed.),AridLands(London,1969),31-51.

12P.

Garnsey, Famine and Food Supply in the Graeco-Roman

World (Cambridge,1988),15.

12

Chapter ι

ofarchaeology, theissuesofrace,ethnicity, imperialism, religion, language,and culture discipline timesto be itsproperstudy,an unachievableaim, or an anathema. have seemedat different These concernsof territory, or more broadlythe relationshipof people to landscape,are have turnedin conductingregionalsurveys. By classicallythe themesto whicharchaeologists in thepoliticsofcomplexsocieties;and themesno less theirnaturetheseissuesariseas conflicts or 'populationhistory, and declineofcivilizations,13 economyand the grandthantheemergence in haveprovidedtheimpetusand targetofsurveys ofpastsocieties',14 development socio-political betweenperiodsofdispersed Greece.Not infrequently thedebatehas focusedon thealternation ofsurvey to analysisin such and ofnucleatedsettlement, and theresults lendthemselves certainly terms.Nevertheless, to expressthe analysismerelyin termsof thisdichotomywould be to The modelneedstobe mademorespecific to thehistory ofLaconia. oversimplify hopelessly. It would be redundantto tryto listbaldlythe historicalissueswhichconnectLaconian withthe historyof itslandscape;thesewillformthe contentof some of the politicalhistory following chapters.All thesame,therewereproblemsthatinspiredtheprojectof theLaconia than,and in additionto, the contextof intensivesurveyresearch Surveymoreimmediately and historical describedabove. Each of the prehistoric periodsdetailedin laterchaptershad address:thehistory ofNeolithic that evidence might alreadypresented properly questions survey the Early-Middle colonizationin Laconia, the natureof EarlyBronzeAge 'proto-urbanism', theMycenaeanstateand therelationship of and therootsofcivicculture, BronzeAge transition of and the crisis the thesurveyarea to theMenelaionexcavations, Laconia, perioikic Spartiate hinterland of Roman Sparta,ByzantineLaconia beforeand thirdcentury BC,theagricultural thatmulti-period underthePalaeologues,and theTurkishoccupation.In thelongperspective when the there are contrasts and allows, challenges:periods Spartan statewas an survey of colonial and colonial of and obscurity; phases supremacy power, periods provincial important the last the effect of the for considerable 2,500years, 'Spartan subjection;and, spellsduring and victimofitsownmythology. mirage',or Spartaas bothbeneficiary in theplanningofthesurvey, overand above the These veryquestionsmade fordifficulties venture of limited resources and remit. encountered on anyarchaeological practicalproblems In the theoryof surveya strongemphasishas veryproperlybeen placed on the ideal of so that a proper sampling strategycan underlie selecting a representativeterritory, to meetin the data.15In practicethisideal was difficult inferences drawn from archaeological our case, notleastbecause thesize and boundariesof theLaconian 'state'at variousperiods and indeedoftenlackcleardefinition. havevariedconsiderably, To take one periodas an example:the classicalcity-state (polis)of Sparta consistedof an ruled a few thousand of by two kingswho were tightly Spartiatai,notionally assembly councilof elders,the Gerousia.The monitoredby fiveelected'ephors' and an aristocratic to military devotingthemselves 'Spartiates'played(in theory)no partin primaryproduction, and politicallife.They ruled over a much largerpopulationof 'helots' (είλώται,roughly Sparta had equivalentto stateserfs),mainlydescendantsof the Messenianswhose territory much of the in BC. This helot cultivated the agricultural population conquered eighthcentury ofMesseniaas wellas partsofLaconia. territory 13See e.g.C. Renfrew, in IslandPolity, i- 8; J. 'Introduction', F. Cherry, J. L. Davis, and E. Mantzourani,'Patternsin the 457-79. Archaeology, landscapeofKeos', in Landscape 14J. L. Bintliff, 'Greece: theBoeotia Survey',in Macready and Thompson,FieldSurvey, 196-216,at 196.

15J. F. Cherry,'Frogsaround the pond: perspectiveson currentarchaeologicalsurveyprojectsin the Mediterranean Survey, 375-416. region',in Kellerand Rupp,Archaeological

Backgroundand methodology 13

ofLaconia, In addition,theSpartansexercisedmoreindirect poweroverthefreeinhabitants in in who lived thepenoikoi (poleis) human-geographical ('dwellersaround'), separatecity-states smalltownsand villages-whichwerepolitically terms, organizedas poleisto somedegree mostly made up the butwerecloselydependentupon Sparta.16Togetherthe Spartiatesand penoikoi or Lakedaimon;17 but onlySpartiates (Lakedaimones) 'polisof the Lakedaimonians5 over-arching whichmade all important decisionssuch as about war, had a voice in the Spartanassembly, name forthe centralsettlement of Sparta peace, and treaties.Lakedaimonwas an alternative inwhichitlay,theEurotasvalley. district and couldalso be appliedto thegeographical (Sparte), and helots(whowerenot)formed The penoikoi (whowereincludedamongLakedaimonians) calledtheLakedaimonian,armythatdominated a majorpartoftheSpartan,morecommonly - a situationthatmayhaveinfluenced settlement mostofthePéloponnèseforseveralcenturies areas such as Arkadia.In a strictsensethe Lakedaimonians'ruled' patternsin neighbouring the namewas Lakônikê, onlyLakedaimonand Messenia,a regionwhosepolitical-geographical WithinLakoniketherewill have been a land of the Lakones(a shortformof Lakedaimones). centralcoreofSparta'sownpolisterritory, thoughtheterm'Spartiateland',Σπαρτιατικήγη, a invention.18 This centredon theupperEvrotasvalley to be modern chora, naturally, appears and extendedsouth-east perhapsas faras the choraof perioikicGeronthrai(wherethe kings of Spartawouldhelpto had therevenuesfromcertainland). The existenceofa definedchora in of communities the of the the absence vicinity city,thoughtheremayhave perioikic explain frontier. been no hard-and-fast ofSparta,evenin a periodas welldocumentedas theclassical,thus Defining'theterritory' matter. to be no simple Quite what,then,would we be sampling?Elsewherevarious proves sometimesbecause the solutionshave been foundto the problemof defininga territory, on a historical with the was based Megalopolis Survey)or specific question (as strategy because it has been possible to sample a natural 'Siedlungskammer'(Boiotia) or a clear entity(Methana,Melos).None oftheseoptionsseemedappropriateor feasiblein geographical Laconia, giventhatwe wishedto coverall periodsand giventhattherewas no naturalor stablepoliticalboundaryto definean area forus. Laconia is not a naturalcatchmentin the in have changedconsiderably way that,say,Atticacan be viewed,and itspoliticalfrontiers recent work has the not to mention times. Furthermore, historical, emphasized prehistoric, importanceof samplinglargesitesin orderto put the ruralpatternin itscontext.Here, too, of whatwas practicablepreventedus frommeetingthe theoreticaldemand the constraints in our region,Sparta,liesunderthemoderntownofSpartiand onlya few The chief site fully. monumental major complexeshave been fullyexcavated.Whileit is reasonableto hope that useful data will be derivedfromrecordsof emergencyexcavations,the townwas not many forpracticalreasons. to open archaeologicalsurvey;norwas Mystras, indicatedclearlyhow we should these certain considerations factors, Despite complicating defineour area. The centralaim was to locatesitesofall periodsin an area thatwas relatively l() Shipley,'Perioikos'; id., '"Other Lakedaimonians'"; amongearlierworks,B. Niese,'Neue Beiträgezur Geschichte

und Landeskunde Lakedämons', Göttingische Nachrichten, gelehrte 1906, 101-42; F. Gschnitzer, AbhängigeOrte im griechischen

Altertum (Zetemata,17; Munich,1958),esp. 61-7; F. Hampl, 'Die lakedaimonische Periöken',Hermes, 72 (1937),1-49· On a thecategoryof 'dependentpolis',see M. H. Hansen,'Korne: settlements studyin howtheGreeksdesignatedand classified which were not poleis',CPC Papers2, 45-81.

17On thebinarystructure ofLakedaimon,a poliscontaining otherpoleis,see J. M. Hall, 'Sparta, Lakedaimon and the in CPC Papers natureofperioikic 5, 73-89. dependency', 18Bölte, 'Geographie', 1321-40.Post-Clauthorsreferto 'the land belongingto the astu1(Plut.Lyc.8. 5) or 'the civic land', πολιτικήχώρα (Polyb.vi. 45. 3); see MacDowell, Law,91-2; Hodkinson,'Land tenure',385. Spartan

14

Chapterι

III. ι.ιο. Soils and base rocksin thesurveyarea (D. Miles-Williams and L. Farr,fromoriginalsbyA. Sackettand D. Taylor).

Backgroundand methodology 15

To this end, the complete unknownfromboth ancient sourcesand recentinvestigation. and the of an area was our integrated guidingprinciple, techniquesof intensive coverage The of other have shown that there are real were projects applied. experiences survey was designedas in a and the accordingly surveyterritory advantages working contiguousarea, and that we wanted to the overall aims of the an unbrokenunit.19Given survey, given in it was to the major knownsites a widerruralsetting, contextualize logical includesome land close to ancientSparta.The densityofmodernsettlement, however,combinedwiththe in the plain aroundthe townand the use of irrigation for of recentconstruction frequency citrusgroveson extensiveareas of heavilytilledalluvium,made thatarea problematicand to survey(thoughnot withoutinterest, particularly regardingabovepossiblyunrewarding to make the Evrotasour boundaryand to groundremains).It was reasonable,therefore, thisarea was one of the less kindsof landscapebeyondit. Archaeologically sampledifferent in Laconia,butit enjoyedthedistinction ofhavingtheimportant excavatedsite well-explored oftheMenelaionwithinit. The surveywas designed to include lowland, hill, and at least the lower mountain a range of vegetativecoverand land use and a It contains,correspondingly, environments. range of geologiesincludinglimestone,schist,Neogene (the Miocene-Pliocene marl-andseries),and colluvialslopesas wellas alluvialvalleyfloors(ILL.1.10;see also the conglomerate SOIL MAPat the end of the volume). It included knownor likelynucleated settlements, includingmodernvillagesand whatprovedto be an ancientVillage' at Geladari; religious complexes,such as the Menelaion and the workingmonasteryof Agioi Saránda; major 'natural' routesand rivervalleys;and, in termsof political and economic geography,a via of an ancientand modernurban settlement spectrumof situationsfromthe outskirts extensionof the area was designedto farmedslopesto uplandpasture.The south-eastward of Chrysaphain its enclosedbasin, fascinating territory incorporatesome of the potentially whetherSpartan or perioikic,was knownto lie, but whereno named classicalsettlement, thatwe mightfinda nucleatedcomplex.As it turnedout, thereseemeda strongprobability we foundmajorsitesin theChrysaphabasinnotonlyofthearchaicand classicalperiodsbut also ofprehistoric and post-Romandates. Sources

and Previous

Research

fromsome otherruralsurveyprojectsin thatwe began The Laconia Surveyis distinguished witha relativelyhigh degree of knowledgeof the historyand archaeology.We were not samplingan unknownpopulation. This prior knowledgeconsistedof the productof an understandingof three things:the historyof Sparta and Laconia, the geographyand of thisparticularpart of Laconia, and earlierresearchinto its archaeology. environment muchoftheevidenceconcernsspecifically ancientSpartaand ByzantineMystras, Admittedly, about ruralsettlement, but theimplications and tellsus littledirectly ofthosesystems require ofthearchaeology. It was recognizedfromtheoutsetthat to be workedintoanyinterpretation thispriorexperiencecould,and should,informour understanding and interpretation of the of the past. In all parts of this report, surveydata and hence the furtherinterpretation we attemptto bringtogetherinformation therefore, gatheredbypreviousresearch.This both demonstrates thelimitsof our knowledgeand providesthe necessarytoolsforan integration ofall availablesourcesofevidencewiththeresultsofthefieldsurvey. 19BintlifT(n. 14),195-200.

i6

Chapterι

In thischapterwe briefly outlinethehistoryof Laconia, and withinit the surveyarea, for each period,and summarizethe evidenceforhumangeography. It mightbe thoughtstrictly correctto restrict thispart of the enquiryto the 'scientific'researchof the nineteenthand twentiethcenturies.In the firstplace, however,the scholarsof thatperiod did not come innocentto the subject- theirview of the landscape was formedin the lightof whatwas - and, in the second already written,includingancient literature place, there may be in close that critical which makes to gulf advantages attempting past writingan object of discoursebut not part of that discourse.Rather,therefore, than produce a compositeof settlement foreach periodwhichconcealstheweavingofancientevidenceand modernfinds an into illusory seamlessrobe,we attemptto showhowLaconia was represented, described,or in (sometimes)explored each period, and how we believe the landscape to have been administered. This allowsus to place theregionalgeographyofLaconia in a longerhistorical and incidentally perspective, providesan outlinehistoryof all thethingsthatmaybe termed will 'landscaperesearch'whichhavegoneon in thestudyarea. At thesametimethesummary in raiseissuesaboutthenatureoflandscapecontrol,includingcontrolthroughrepresentation; thisrespectwe are dealingpartlywithmapsnoton paper. CATALOGUES AND EPITHETS:

THE EARLIEST PERIODS

to the topographyof Laconia,20but no Ancientliterature containsmanypassingreferences survive.In additionthereis the 'problem'of Sparta:not onlywas Spartan systematic surveys historical about written it also tendsto dominateand overshadow writings history byoutsiders, thatare specifically focusedon Laconia Lakedaimon;and the fewwritings Sparta'sterritory, outsideSparta(allfromlaterthantheclassicalperiod)are notas helpfulas theymightseem. To beginwiththe BronzeAge: it is generallybelievedthatthe Pyliankingdomdid not extendevenintothewesternmost thoughGerenianear Kalamáta was partof theprovince,21 identified as theplace wherekingNestorgrewup or tookrefugelater(Pausanias,iii. 26. 8). AlthoughLinearΒ archivesmusthaveexistedin Laconia,nonehas been found.22 For writtenrecordsof Sparta and Laconia we muststartaround 700 BC withHomer, has an thoughitwouldbe a mistaketo suggestthathisgeographyofLakedaimonnecessarily of the formation The ninth to seventh centuries were the historical referent.23 period objective ofthecitizencommunities or poleisof Greece;in Laconia theyculminatedin theconquestof ofcoloniesoverseas,and thegrowthofa disciplinedmilitary Messenia,thefoundation society. an earlierworld,thenamesin theCatalogue seems to be reimagining Homer Though chiefly of Ships- Pharis,Sparta,Messe ofmanydoves,Bryseai,lovelyAugeiai,Amyklai,thecoastal city(εφαλον πτολίεθρον)of Helos, Laas, and Oitylos(Iliad,ii. 581-5) and the sevencities offered by Agamemnonto Achilles Kardamyle,Enope, grassyHire,24sacredPherai,deepmeadowedAntheia,fineAipeia,and vineyPedasos(ix. 150-2,292-4)^- do suggesta political 20See thefundamental surveyin Bölte,'Geographie'. 21See convenientlyJ. Chadwick, The MycenaeanWorld (Cambridge,1976),ch. 3. 22ForLakedaimonios in LinearΒ tablets as a possibleethnikon from Thebes, see J. M. Hall (n. 17), 85-6, citing V. L. Godart,and A. Sacconi, 'Sui nuovitestidel Aravantinos, palazzo di Cadmo a Tebe: note preliminari',Rendiconti deWAccademia Nazionale dei Lincei: Classe dei ScienceMorali, 9th ser., 6 (1995), 809-45. 23 Significantly,it has been observed that, for example,

Pausanias 'uses no less than four Homeric passages ... for a conclusive demonstration that at the time of [the] poems there was no city,only a region, called Messene'. C. Habicht, Pausanias' Guide to AncientGreece(Berkeley, Los Angeles, and

London,1985),143. 24eIpT]vποιήεσσαν,also understoodas 'holyPoieëssa'by someancientreaders. 25 R. Hope Simpson, The seven cities offered by Agamemnonto Achilles(Iliad ix. 149 ff.,291 ff.)',BSA 61 to earlierliterature. (1967),113-31,withreferences

Backgroundand methodology 17

worldwherethe stateis defined,ifnot by terrainand boundaries,at leastby the controlof townsand henceoftheirpeople and lands.26Telemachos'svisitto Spartain Odyssey iv cannot be construedinto a map of ancientLaconia. Rather,the impactin Homericpassageswas fromthedescriptive intendedto comefromtheirsensibility, poweroftheepithetsused:κοιλή of Lakedaimon(κοιλην (hollow)and κητώεσσα (fullof gorges?)are both used specifically Λακεδαίμονακητώεσσαν).27Pedasos, as we saw, is άμπελόεις(rich in vines),Antheia Hire ποιήεσσα(grassy).Epithetsare also drawnfrom βαθύλειμος(deep in water-meadows), the religiouslandscape: Pherai is ζαθέαι (extremelysacred),Sparta is one of threecities ofagricultural and wellfertility 'especiallydear' to Hera.28Otherscomefromtheobservation wateredland,as in Telemachos'sadmiringsketchdeliveredto Menelaos:

. . . σύ γαρπεδίοιοάνάσσεις εύρέος,ή ενιμενλωτόςπολύς,ενδε κύπειρον, πυροίτεζειαίτείδ'εύρυφυέςκρϊλευκόν.

Foryoulorditovera broadplain, in whichthereis muchclover,thereis galingale, and wheatsand one-seededwheatsand wide-growing whitebarley. {Od.iv.602-4) The powerof Homericprecedent,the shieldofAchilles,and the ethnography of the Odyssey a programme established forscholarly Nevertheless the geography. beyond earlygeographers, theirliterary the limits,size,and aims,seem to have been moreconcernedwithestablishing and withgraphicaccountsof the ethnography of the shape of the world,withexploration, theirown landscape,the Spartansseem to have had neither barbarians.But in constructing theseaims nor the listsof towns(whichdo not make the mostrivetingreading)foremost in theirminds;insteaditis Homer'sexamplethatloomslargest,in termsofbothdescription and - lands are usually scattersconventionalepithets religion.Tyrtaios,in the seventhcentury, his themeof conquestin a broad,Spartais ίμερόεσσα(delightful)thoughhe can reinforce bluntvocabulary: Μεσσήνην, αγαθόνμενάρουν,αγαθόνδε φυτεύειν. . . ήμισυπαντόςόσον κάρποναρουρα φέρει Messene,bothgood to ploughand good to plant. . . Halfofall thecropthattheploughbringsforth

(frs3-4 Gentili-Prato)

Notethatliterally Messeneis not'good' (άγαθήν),itis a good (αγαθόν),as itwerea benefitor evena merepossession.The landscapeis notmerelyconqueredbutdenatured.In therhetoric ofwarfaretheSpartiatesare fighting forthecityand itsfields,and thereis a hardmaterialism in theimageof thewarriorlyingdead in the dust,blood runningfromhis genitals(fr.7), or thatofthehoplitefirmly treadingtheearth(fr.9). A) On these reputed earlypoleis,see Shipley,'"Other Lakedaimonians"', esp. 2^1-8. 27Od. iv. 1; //.ii. 581. Both of thesehave been thoughtto

be linkedwiththe sea: S. P. Morris,'Hollow Lakedaimon', HarvardStudiesin ClassicalPhilology, 88 (1984), 1-11.

aH φιλταται. . . πολήες,//.iv.51-2.

i8

Chapterι

A richerand more specificsense of place and natureis to be foundin anotherseventhSerapna (Therapne),thewine of centurypoet. Alkmangivesus the templeat 'well-towered' the sanctuaryof the Graces by the river and (probably)the Dentheliatis, the Oinous district sense and a graphic,ifoftenunspecific, Tiasa, and thenightingale bytheEurotasat Amyklai, ofplace and natureis evidentin manyofhissongs.29 LAND, COMMUNITIES,

AND BOUNDARIES IN CLASSICAL AND HELLENISTIC

LAKONIKE

The contributionof classical writersto our knowledgeof Lakonike is mainlylimitedto by particularly passingmentionsoftownsand harboursin the courseofmilitarynarratives, Thucydidesand Xenophon. Epigraphymakeslittleimpactin thisrespect,eitherin Sparta beforethehellenistic or in theperioikicterritories, period.Spartawas apparentlynotwholly passed by in the developmentof classicalGreekgeography:Anaximander(c.610-540 BC) is - evidence of an awareness of said to have set up a sundial in or near the town30 fora citythatwas a colonizingstatebothwithinGreece geographicalissues,appropriately and a reminderthatthepolisat thisdate was not so cut offfrommainstream and overseas,31 Greek culturaldevelopmentsas it later became. In the classical period we begin to have about administrative more information geography,thoughwe are heavilydependenton post-classicalsources(and, as has oftenbeen observed,none of the survivinghistoryof bya Spartan). Spartawas written In archaic and classical Sparta it appears that real propertywas adjudicated through traditionallaw,32and scholarlyopinion suggeststherewas no centralregistryof land.33 - the conquestof new territory, Occasions forcompilingcadasterswere not lacking treaty of and of the redistributions with allied land, states, redrawing drawing possible arrangements and the disposalof the propertyof political the boundariesof Spartanterritory, mortgages, exiles- but no suchdocumentssurvive.In the eighthand seventhcenturieswe maysuppose land.34The notionof thatthe Greekcolonial experienceprovidedmodelsfordistributing BC a fiction of third-century attack as has come under inalienable plots 'Lykourgan' core or all of the that some it seems view but whatever Spartan likely prevails propaganda;35 and therefore some or all of the surveyarea, was dividedintocitizens'plotsat the territory, and Roman periodsthese In the classical,hellenistic, timeof the Messenianwars or later.36 thepolis;there level of the at the control to were politicalcommunity, subject socio-legal plots was no feudalpyramidto negotiatetheparcellingof land. Althoughthe exact denotationof of 242 BC is unclear as far as it concernsthe redivisionof land 'in the Lysander'srhetra directionfrom(την από) the ravineat Pellana towardsTaygeton(sic),Malea, and Sellasia' Agis,8. 1),the textmakesit likelythatsome land withinthe surveyarea willhave (Plutarch, formedSpartiateplots.37It is possiblethatthe klaria(ibid. 13) delimited,or even mapped, of the mechanicsof the land distributions mortgagedland. All the same,our understanding 29'Serapna',fr.14(Page/Campbell);wine,fr.92; Graces,fr. testimonium 62 (Paus.iii. 18. 6); nightingales, 9; senseofnature, and esp.89 (a landscapeall asleep). e.g.frr.26 (thekêrylos) 3°O. A. W. Dilke,Greek andRoman Maps(London,1985),23.

34A.J. Graham,'The colonialexpansionofGreece',CAH2 iii. 3, ch. 37 (pp. 83-162),at 151-2. 35Hodkinson,'Land tenure',382. 36Cartledge, SL 135, contraΚ. Μ. Τ. Chrimes,Ancient

(Cambridge,1994). 32Hodkinson,'Land tenure'; MacDowell, SpartanLaw. Hodkinson, Property, appeared too late to be taken into accountsystematically. 33Cartledge,SL 168.

37Malea maydenotetheParnonridge(Bölte,'Geographie', polisin 1322),ratherthaneithertheformerSpartanperioikic sectionofParnonthat SW Arkadiaor thesouthern, peninsular formsCape Malea. Taken in thisway,the textcould denote orpossibly ofSpartaitself, thecoreterritory onlyitsΝpart.

31 I. Malkin, Mythand Territory in theSpartanMediterranean

oftheEvidence(Manchester, 1949), 424. Sparta:A Reexamination

Backgroundand methodology 19

proposedbyAgisIV and carriedout by KleomenesIII and Nabis38is so nugatoryas to make Recordstheremusthave been, but no ancientauthority seemsto have speculationfruitless. referred to them. In general,it seemspossiblethatperioikictownswere firstdemonstrably founded,or at no earlier than the sixth The leastbecomearchaeologically recognizable, century. mid-fourthattributed to of or Circumnavigation, calls falsely Skylax Karyanda explicitly centuryPeriplous, eightplaces in Lakedaimonpoleis(ch. 46 Müller)39and names a furtherthreesettlements, the authoralso besidesSparta itself,thatwe knowor believeto have been perioikicpoleis'^0 aversthatthereare 'manyother'poleisin the interiorofLakedaimon.41 It is uncertainwhen the traditionof one hundredLakedaimoniancitiesfirstsurfaced.Strabo (viii. 4. 11. 362) 'townships'(πολίχναι)in his own day and notesthatLakonikeis said speaksofabout thirty in olden times.Froma combinationof to have been called 'hundred-citied' (έκατόμττολις) archaic or classical sourcesand archaeology,we can identifyat most twenty-three places (besidesSparta)thatweredefinitely, probably,or possiblypoleisbeforethehellenistic period. A further settlements existedbeforehellenistictimesbutmaynothave beenpoleis. thirty-two namesfromarchaicto Roman times,the Even ifwe includeall knownor allegedsettlement Of these,nine are probablyspurious,whileanothernine totaldoes not exceed eighty-four. were probablygeographicallocationsor cult places ratherthan nucleated settlements.42 we have onlyan imperfect JacobyconsidersthatStephanosof Byzantion,of whose Ethnika and who several times describes a Laconian as 'one of the hundred',43 polis may epitome fromAndrotion,who wrotein thefourthcenturyBC,44though have derivedhis information The figureofone Stephanosalso uses otherauthorsof similardate,such as Theopompos.45 hundredis certainlynotional,not to say bookish,but listsof perioikicpoleisdo appear to havecirculated. The loss of individualpoleisafterthe battleof Leuktrain 371, and theirincorporation, (Paus. viii. 27. 4) and into the Arkadian presumablyby name,intoMegalopolitanterritory broke down their as apparenthomogeneity a unitedmassunderSpartanhegemony, league,46 and preparedthegroundforPhilipII ofMacedonia'sfurther oftheboundariesof redrawing theSpartanstatein 338.47 Traditionalterritories, were probablydistinguished earlier: especiallyin the borderlands, and Belbinatis52 and Skiritis,48 certainly Kynouria,49 Thyreatis,5° Maleatis;51 probably Aigytis;53 38Fordiscussionsee Cartledgeand Spawforth, chs4-5. 39 Las, Boia, Kythera on its island, Side, Epidauros (Limera),Prasia,Methana(i.e. Anthana?),and Sparte. 40MessenianAsine,Mothone,and Gytheion. 41See P. Flensted-Jensen and M. H. Hansen, 'Pseudoj, 137-67. Skylax'use ofthetermpolis' in CPC Papers 42Data in Shipley,'Laconia'. 43This or a similarphraseis used ofthefollowing poleisin Lakonike(somein theMessenianpartthereof): Aithaia(from Philochoros), Amyklai, Anthana (perhaps from Philostephanos),Aulon, Aphrodisias,Epidauros Limera, Krokeai,and Tenos(possiblyspurious). 44FGH 324 F 49. Androtionis citedbyStephanosforthree Laconianpoleisor allegedpoleis:Aitolia(existencedoubtful), Oinous,and possiblyThyrea. 45Theopompos(4thcent,bc) is citedbyStephanosforthe Laconianplaces (notall necessarily poleis),and may following have listed many more: Aigys, Eua, Karya(i), Helos, Messapeai,Sellasia,and Thalamai.

4<)J.Roy,'Arcadiaand Boeotia in Peloponnesianaffairs, 20 (1971),569-99, esp. 576. 370-362BC',Historia, 47Cartledge,SL 319;Shipley,Territory . 48e.g.Thuc. v.33. 1;Xen. Hell.vi.5. 24; Pikoulas,'Skiritis'. 49e.g. Thuc. v. 14. 4; cf. Κ. A. Romaios,'Κυνουρία και Κυνούριοι', Πελ. ι (1956), 1-22 (Englishsummary, 470~I)î Phaklaris,Κυνουρία:2 32. 5°e.g.Thuc. ii. 27. 2. Cf. Phaklaris,Κυνουρία2ΐ8, 88. For the issue of whetherKynouria extended furtherS than Thyreatis,see Bölte, 'Geographie', 1304, 1307; Shipley, 'Laconia'. 51Xen. Hell.vi. 5. 24. •r>a Or Belminatis,Polyb.ii. 54. 3 (224 bc); Belbinates, Livy, xxxviii.34. 8 (189 bc). ForBelbina(or Belemina),see Shipley, '"OtherLakedaimonians'",237no. 22; Shipley,'Laconia'. 53Polyb.ii. 54. 3.

20

Chapterι

lesscertainly Dentheliatis54 These are sometimes, notnecessarily (butprobablynotKaryatis).55 If territories of the for the annexation of always, arguments perioikicpoleis. Aigytisin the hold the the good,56 territory probablypreceded Spartanpoliticalconstitution, eighthcentury whilethe mainpolisin the Skiritiswas Oion (not Skiros,if any such townexisted).57 It may evenbe thatlaterin theirhistory theSpartansfoundit convenient notto identify suchregions witha singlecity,as in the case of the Skiritanhoplites,58 who mightbecome a dangerif with one The identified obscure of Pellana59likewisefalls tripolis specifically perioikicpolis. mosteasilyintothisgroupofgeographicalunitswhich,at leastbeforethefourth need century, nothavecorresponded to anypoliticalunit. Boundary-stones maywellhave markedsanctuariesand agricultural holdings,but it is not if a clearwhen, ever, preciseline came to be used to delimitthestate'sterritory; thisis all the moreproblematic since'wildland' and commonpastureprevailedin the maquis-dominated eschatiai thatoftenmarkedthe boundaryareas betweenGreekcity-states. In the (outfields) ofthepolisthesacredlandscapeseemsto havebeen important in thisconnection; earlyhistory hence, no doubt, the existenceof the archaic and later sanctuaryof the Hermai on the northern borderof Lakedaimon,6° thoughin Pausanias'sday the riverAlpheioswas also the border(viii.54. 1).LikewisethesanctuaryofArtemisLimnatis,at leastin latertradition,61 was the focusforthe disputebetweenSparta and Messenia.In a somewhatparallelfashionthe sanctuaryof Poseidonat Tainaronservedas a liminalsanctuaryat the southernend of the notleastin itsroleas an asylumforfugitive helotsand slaves.62 territory, IMPERIAL ADMINISTRATION

AND IMPERIAL GEOGRAPHY: LAKONIKE IN ROMAN TIMES

SpartalostMesseniaand mostof the helotpopulationin 369 and 338 BC,and manyof the The perioikictownsat thesedates and at variousjuncturesduringthe nexttwo centuries.63 was to an end in the Macedonians and the 222, independent monarchy effectively brought by Romans enrolledSparta in the Achaean league in 192. Some fifty later the whole years Péloponnèsecame under Roman sway,thoughthe provinceof Achaia was not formally created until the end of the firstcenturyBC. From this period we have only scattered information about Spartanterritory,64 such as the townsmentionedin Polybios'snarrative, and are again relianton laterauthors.There are more epigraphicdata fromthe formerly perioikictowns,manyofwhichwerenow enrolledin a Lakedaimonianleague.This endured intoRoman timesand was reorganizedas the Eleutherolaconian (FreeLaconian) league by Augustus.65 Sparta itselfbecame more integratedinto the empire-wideélite networkthat formedthe skeletonof Roman rule,exemplified by contactswiththe philhellenicemperor 54 Tac. Ann. iv. 43 (ager Dentheliates),referringto

in thetimeofPhilipII ofMacedonia.Steph. arbitration Byz. has an entryon Denthalioi.See furtherG. A. και το οδικό της δίκτυο: Pikoulas,'Ή Δενθελιατις Messenian σχόλιαστηνIG Vl5Ι431''3r
5Γ)Karyatis is not attested as a toponym,despite its occurrencein modern scholarship;referencesin Shipley, '"Other Lakedaimonians'', 238 no. 24; Shipley,'Laconia'. 5<)Cartledge,SL 99-100,103. 57Skirosas a κατοικίαis attestedbySteph.Byz.575. 7-8. On Oion as the onlydefinitesettlement withinSkiritis, see Pikoulas,'Skiritis',135. "lM Skintai:lhuc. v. 07, 08, 71;Xen. Hell.v. 2. 24.

59Polyb.iv.81; see Bölte,'Geographie',131Q. (K)Paus. ii. 38. 7; see LS ii. 280, siteAA24. 01Paus. iv. Tac. Ann.iv. 4; 43; W. Kolbe, 'Die Grenzen Messeniensin der erstenKaiserzeit',Ath.Mitt.29 (1904), 364-78; Cartledgeand Spawforth, 138-9;Pikoulas(n. 54). 02 IG v. 1. 1227-34; Thuc. i. 128; N. Papachatzis,

ii (Athens, ΠαυσανίουΕλλάδος περιήγησις, 1976), 443. ('3Shipley,'Territory'. <»4 Furtherdetailsin Chapters5-6.

■» Ν. Μ. Kennell, rrom penoikoito poleis:the Laconian cities in the late hellenisticperiod', in S. Hodkinson and A. Powell (eds), Sparta:New Perspectives (London, 1999), eh. 7 (pp. 189-210).

Backgroundand methodology 21

and withAntoninusPius on an occasionwhich Hadrianand hispanhelleniccultorganization, of 11, 15 y).66 (see inscriptions promptedmanyexpressions gratitude at the timeof The geographicalcontrolexercisedby the Roman imperialadministration is scattered and Nicolet.67 The evidence Augustus has recentlybeen scrutinizedby in one area were the methods found to be surehow universally and it is difficult fragmentary, soli,tributum capitis, appliedin others.Brunthas summarizedthe sourcesof revenue:tributum leviesand cash.68The census as wellas extraordinary and vicesima vicesima libertatis, hereditatum, aimed at harvesting has been characterizedas 'the keystoneof the Roman civic system',69 itslowesttierformedofthosecitiesthat a civicsystem, Yetthiswas necessarily theseresources. censusreturnswillnothave coincidedin detailwiththe supporteda municipalorganization; of the populationoverthe landscape.Moreover,in the famousdescriptionof a distribution censusinJudaeaby St Luke,7°thetribalmodelis notreplacedby one ofresidence,evenifin the mobilityof documentsforthe mobilityof Italyone ofAugustus'saimswas to 'substitute in the κατ' οίκίαν Even άπογραφαί (censusesby household)in factmixed Egypt people'.71 domicileand residencein a way whichwould not,even if the censusresults administrative ofan archaeologicalsurvey. be reconcilablewiththefindings survived, The Peutinger Table,a Byzantineroad map oftheRoman empirederivingfromtheperiod in effect showsroadsand stationsusedbytheimperialpost,butis probably oftheprincipate,72 its oftheAugustanideologicalprogramme. a reflection Imperialpropagandathusunderwrites to knowwhetherthetownsselectedforinclusion(Sparta,Gythion, visualimpact.It is difficult Asopos, and Boiai) were the mostpopulous.73Some geographicalwritersmay have seen as servingthe empire(Strabo,forexample),but some had theirown concerns. themselves was Ptolemy's large-scale nothingless than mappingthe world and his sourcea periplous coastalplaces (iii. 14. 31-2, 14.43). He hencehe listsalmostexclusively usingdead-reckoning; thusgivesno realaccountofLaconia as a whole. ofthefirstcenturyBCand first ofthemore'academic'geographers The extantdescriptions is not too helpfulto our purposes. than exhaustive. Strabo AD anecdotal rather are century His pageson Laconia (viii.4. 11.362 to 6. 1. 368; cf.ILL. 1.11)read somewhatlikea draft;they but leave gaps, much of the interiorhardlybeing mentioned. lay down a basic framework ofa lack ofothersources,74 Thereare extensive givingtheimpression quotationsor summaries His workincludesthe unexpected,such as the strangelinguistic of concernforchronology. excursuson apocope(5. 3. 364), and thereare small asides which sometimesseem to be is notan artificial creationbuta regionwitha inaccurate.75 If,forPausanias,'a Greekdistrict a and with distinct ethnic in as well as element,oftenwitha particular history, past, myth dialect . . . and specificformsof religion,cult and patternsof life',76some of the same m LS'û. 218, 221-2. ('7 C. Nicolet, Space, Geography and Politicsin theEarly Roman

Lectures,19;AnnArbor,Mich.,1991). Empire (Jerome t)HP. A. Brunt,The revenuesol Rome', JMS 71 (1981), 161-77,at 161. 69Nicolet (n. 67), 126.

70Luke2: ι, καιεπορευοντοπάντεςαπογραφεσθαι έκαστοςειςτηνεαυτούπόλιν. "' Nicolet

(n. 07), 202.

72Κ. Miller,Itinerária Romana(Stuttgart, 1916); Pritchett, SAGTin (1980),eh. 6 (pp. 197-288);G. D. R. Sandersand I. Κ. Whitbread, 'Central places and major roads in the Péloponnèse',BSA 85 (1990), 333 62; G. A. Pikoulas, "H

Tabula Peutingerianaκαι ή χερσόνησος του Μαλέα', Hows, 2 (1984)5 ιΊ$~&&'

ΤλPaus,emphasizesthehighpopulationS ofBoiai (iii.23. 2). 74The principalsourcesforthe geographicalsectionsof Strabo's chapters on Greece were Apollodoros and v: LivreVIII Artemidoros:R. Baladié, Strabon:Géographie, (CollectionBudé; Paris,1978),13. 75 Baladié (n. 74), 231, writes of the 'style de notes élaboréesdonton trouvedans le livreVIII incomplètement to de nombreuxexemples',and indicatesthatthe reference the sanctuary of Διόνυσος εν Λίμναις (5. ι. 363) is a confusion. /wHabicht (n. 23), 20.

22

Chapter ι

can be recognizedin Strabo,thoughnotthereligiousaspect.Hence theproblems programme of anachronism:the textis pepperedwithHomeric asides. He mentionspopulation(4. 11. 362), but it is not clear thathis figureof about thirtyπολίχναι,'townships'(ratherthan thatmightcorrespondto theirpoliticalstatus is a precisecategorization πόλεις,city-states), of the Lakedaimonian league?).77A physicaldescriptionof Laconia follows, (members and themajorpeninsulasofTainaronand Maleai and the Taygetos Spartafurrow mentioning in Parnon but not onlybyPausanias).The regionis measuredin (named antiquity (i.e. Malea) relationto therestoftheworld,distancesbeinggivenfromTainaronto Cyrenaicaand Sicily. Strabo'spurpose in describingthe coastlineis to establishthe bounds and outlineof the For the historyand mythologyof district,and forthis he has used an earlierperiplous. Lakonike,Strabo(at 5. 4-5. 364-6) quotesEphorosto explainthe ethniccompositionof the and helots (the Dorian-Achaean-Ionian state: Dorian Spartiates,non-Dorian perioikoi of later,or different, divisionsof classicaland laterwritersmay of coursebe a retrojection It appears thatforStrabo thisethnictensionunderliesthe strugglesfor social divisions).78 he seemsto be autonomythatfollowedthe settingup of the Spartanstate.As a geographer, concernedwiththepeoplingand theboundariesofthestate,thoughhis aimsare notentirely clear since the textdoes not seem to have been workedup. It has been observedthatthe in thispartofthebook (in spiteoftheAugustanprogramme) ofeconomicobservation poverty His mostspecific maybe a consequenceofitsbeingdraftedearlyin thework'sdevelopment.79 theland ofLaconia withthatofMessenia,turnson a economicjudgement(5. 6), contrasting thequarriesof quotationfromEuripides.The importanceoftheRoman marketin exploiting shouldnot whose it is an isolated remark aside but is an 7), significance (5. interesting Taygetos The finalsections(5. 7-8) returnto Homericquestions,whichseemimportant be overstated.80 intohis overallplan. We mayconcurwith to Strabo'sconceptionbut are notwellintegrated Leake's judgement: 'The descriptionof Greece ... by Strabo, althoughluminousand when comparedwiththatwhich accuratein particularinstances,is extremelyimperfect, Pausaniashas leftus'.81 withsayingthatat Cape Taenarumbeginsthe 5. 16)contentshimself PlinytheElder(jV7/iv. Eleutherolaconian of the of the libera the Laconicus league- and thenmerely territory gens ager beginningwithwhat givesus thedimensionsoftheLaconian gulfand a listoftowns(oppida), tradition ofa periplous: takesforcoastalones,perhapsin thetime-honoured he evidently ofthefreepeople,and the(Laconic)gulf,106milesroundand 38 Thence fromTaenarum(is)theLaconic territory across.The towns(are) Taenarum,Amyclae,Pherae, Leuctra,and inland Sparta, Therapne,and (the places) the place Thyrea,Gerania,Mount Taygetus,the river wherewere Cardamyle,Pitane,and Anthea [sc.Anthene], fromthetownout ofwhichis Eurotas,thegulfofAegila,thetownofPsamathus,(and) theGytheategulf(starting) thesurestvoyageto theislandofCrete.And all are enclosedbyMaleus promontory. The gulfthatfollows,to (Cape) Scyllaeus,is called theArgolic,50 milesacrossand 162 round.The townsare Boea, EpidaurussurnamedLimera,Zarax, and Cyphansharbour. (iv.5. 16-17)

to be muchhelp, and topologically toojumbledchronologically His trulylaconicdescription, and Romanimperialcompendiums. a blendofclassicalantiquarianism reflects 77Cartledçeand Spawforth, 141. 78Later,as suggestedby P. Levi, Pausanias:Guideto Greece 1971),ii. 14 n. 14 (on Paus. iii. 2. 6); cf.J. (Harmondsworth, H. M. Alty,'Doriansand Ionians',JHS 102(1982),1-14.

79R. Baladié, L· Péloponnèse de Strabon (Paris,1980),173-4; cf.id. (n. 74),232. 80C artledere i6o. and Spawforth, 81W. M. Leake, The (London,1841),32. Topography ofAthens

Backgroundand methodology 23

<-$

^^

' (_Λ

'

ΓJ

(

^ Λ sw/ûS''" ^? ^λ C/wrütomA_ Τ Λ-ν ^^

r Si )

} (

n

^-^

ν ζ7 PGlyppia

'

ολ ' fv rO ^Γ^

/ f

.--κΧλ äf^,ClC,

Ä' λΡ

>

/

' d?*'- Sam

<' '

Vs Wir Vi^ ^««»»i^>

rato«,S)

■iw X

V' Jl^ k. '' X ^.-V,^ )/) r4 I S <Λ><*"»«? '.

ht11"'"" ^Ía.«·!.»»«^«-.)

rJ/)

»>«<.<.'

1V

V

' '

y '

¥Ä*

ΓV (cJ/ /fn '

_ f^~'

^

^^

<^ ^

1_ ,

O'tvlos •Amino.s? PyrrhichosR SkyrflsAsjne?

-WA

S'

Helos?

^~n

'S^

'Λ''

■" ""

*^^

'' W /^C'/ S ' IMlamai J^

c?.

ü^ Kyparissia

I

JkTeuthrone

? Zarax ' Limera

f

>

Asopos Jf '

Minoa

y* /Irfem/s Limnatis

^'

ν ^

Messa^Á (Ù j ThyridesK ^/

V

'

^^ ' ^Vf

' )

^>

S

V.

V

γ V

X^i

^

S

^-^

Achilleios^p ^ Psamathous Plutunistous

iP^Tainaron

'

Kythera

ç

0

10

^_______^

^~X

50 Kms

S

^

Skandeia

S

or botli(Underlined) III. i.ii. SitesmentionedbyStrabo,Pausanias(italics) (I). Taylor).

Malea

24 Chapterι

Pausanias'sdescriptionof Laconia occupieshis thirdbook. (The places he mentionsare in ILL.i.n.) As suggestedabove,thereare pointsofcontactbetweenhisprogramme illustrated and that of earlierwriterssuch as Strabo and Pliny.The culturalworld of the Second Sophistic,however,was consciouslyarchaizing,even escapist,82and sets the contextfor Pausanias's rejectionof the contemporaryworld.83In politics this cultural settingwas important: of the Panhellenionlay chieflyin itsprovisionof a new It was suggestedin PanhellenionI thatthe significance outletforthe social and politicalambitionsof upper-classGreeks.. . . the league's importanceshouldalso be tiesof soughtin the 'ideological'plane. Its termsof reference emphasizedthe recollectionof foundation-legends, and thehistorical kinship, primacyofcertaincentresin old Greece.84

Nevertheless,althoughPausanias mentionsGreek colonial foundationsin his historical to Book iii, the likesof the Synnadansand Alabandanscertainlyfindno place introduction of Lakonikethroughthe separate there.85 He adoptstheliterary deviceof relatingthehistory storiesof the Agiad and Eurypontidroyaldynasties.Their extinctionbeforethe Roman givenhis literaryaims,manydetailsof the conquestallowshim to glossover,appropriately ofthelandscapedescriptions byPausanias, periodbetweenthenand hisownday.The contents and theirhistory, worksofart, embracedtopography, monuments and indeedotherperiegetes, Pausanias'sreligious votiveofferings, and anthropological characteristics.86 landscapeis rootedin and heroeswhoseveryrepresentation thepast;87 itis inhabitedbygods,goddesses, posesto him, in theage oftheSecondSophistic, a cruxofbelief.88 This criticaldistance,increasedbyhisrole eventhough as a 'tourist', to ascribea senseofreligiousspace to hiswritings; makesit difficult in the text,89 thereare cross-references the progressis linearas each monumentis met.His thegreatmajority is in markedcontrast withthatofStrabo;nonetheless, coverageoftheinterior of his sites are in townsand the coverage of the countrysideis sporadic, with marked ofthe concentrations aroundSpartaand to a degreearoundLas.9°At theend ofhisdescription in of the and the cities each he 'those are the divisions division, Péloponnèse, Péloponnèse, says and the mostmemorableand interesting thingsin everycity'(viii.54. 7). He describesthe While agreeingwithLeake that outsidethe cities,but sees it as less important. countryside 82See E. L. Bowie,'Greeksand their past in the Second Sophistic', in M. I. Finley (ed.), Studiesin AncientSociety 46 (London,1974),166-209(earlierversionin PastandPresent, B. suggests(pp. 173-4= (1970),3-41),forthegeneralsetting. werealtered:'Longus's to thecountryside p. 9) thatattitudes DaphnisandChloe(? late secondcenturyAD) showsthe same fortheprimitive and "unspoilt"lifeof the Greek hankering countryside (now considerablyaffectedby imperialestates) thatwe findin Dio of Prusa'sEuboeanTaleand in Herodes Atticus'scultivation oftherusticAgathion'(cf.p. 197= p. 30, ii. 1,pp. 552-3). to Philostratos, LivesoftheSophists, referring 83See Habicht (η. 23), eh. 5 and passim:'He is almost in the historyof independent Greece' (p. interested exclusively 102;cf.Bowie(n. 82), 188-90 = 22-4). 84See A. J. Spawforthand S. Walker,'The worldof the Panhellenion,I: Athensand Eleusis',JRS 85 (1985),78-104; 'The worldofthePanhellenion,II: threeDorian cities',JRS 86 (1986),88-105 (quotationfromp. 104).They also observe that'admissionto thePanhellenionwas based on theability of member-communities to provetheirGreeknessin terms, not only of culture,but also of race' ('Panhellenion,Γ, p.

82); see also 'Panhellenion,ΙΓ, 88-92, on kinship;92-4, on cultural ties. Note also Polyb.'s referenceto works on of cities,and tiesof kinship'(ix. 1. 4, 'colonies,foundations 2. 1-2).

85Cartledge and Spawforth, 114. 86Habicht (n. 23), 2-3. 87Κ. W. Arafat, 'Pausanias' attitude to antiquities', BSA 87 ^992), 387-4!0· 88 See Habicht (η. 23), 158, on Paus. vii. 23. 7-8: 'In this passage Pausanias seems not to conceive of the gods ... as divine beings with distinctpersonalities ... as ... in the old myths.They exist, they are venerated, but their true nature is beyond human comprehension.' For Marcus Aurelius and his view of the supernatural, see R. B. Rutherford, The MeditationsofMarcusAurelius:A Study(Oxford, 1989), 178-220.

09e.g. the linkbetweenthe rhoibaionand rlatamstas(111. 14.8-10),or theChitonand Amyklai(iii. 16. 2). 90ImpressiveR remainshave been foundin the area of Las; could it be thatPaus, was entertainedat a villa in the vicinity?His account containsa good deal of hearsayand observation (iii.24. 6-25. 10).

Backgroundand methodology 25

to us is farsuperiorto thatofStrabo,we mustrecognizethathisvaluefor Pausanias'susefulness ofplace-namesand cults. as a recorder an analysisoftheLaconianlandscapeis chiefly POST-ROMAN LACONIA

The Eleutherolaconian league endureduntilthe laterthirdcenturyAD,by whichtimethe Péloponnèsehad been invadedby the Gothsand Heruli.91The need fortaxesto defendthe in thecountryside, empireproveda heavyburdenupon thegeneralpopulation,particularly oftheplague thatassailed tiedto theland.92The effects wereincreasingly wherecultivators Corinthin the early540s may have been feltin Laconia.93The easternemperorJustinian (525-65)recapturedItalyand NorthAfricaforthe empire,but the 'barbarians'overranthe Greek peninsula. Ultimatelythe imperial economy systemcould not save itself,for Justinian'sgains were soon lost. By 590 the Avars had separated the Péloponnèse from and itwouldremainseparateformorethantwohundredyears,beingviewedas Byzantium, Slav land.94 can be foundin Chapter7. Here the aim is to A fullaccountof Byzantineadministration setthesceneforthesurveyin termsof changingperceptionsofthelandscapeof Laconia. In theanarchicyearsofthelate sixthand seventhcenturiesAD,Byzantinesourcesperceivedthe and the empire.It was Péloponnèse,and indeedmuchof the Balkans,as lostto Christianity of Leon the of civilization. Skleros, appointedgovernor the Péloponnèseby beyond pale controland ecclesiastical I started the processwherebygovernmental Nikephoros (802-11), were reimposed;the two wenttogether.Sparta appears once more to have administration operatedas the bishopricof Lakedaimonfrom£.810.A vague and incompletepictureof saints'lives,95 and listsof sees. In time,however,it is Laconia emergesfromthe chronicles, and ecclesiastical and the variouslandholders, machine of that the fiscal Constantinople plain of the land and the of a close and had throughout quality lay, preciseknowledge landholdings in its fullestdetail fromthe the empire.A pictureof thisapparatuscan be reconstructed archivesof the variousmonasteriesof Athos in northernGreece,96thoughotherarchives tax containrelevantpapers.The documentsincludeedicts(chrysobulls), probates(diathekai), records(such as the 'Cadaster of Thebes'), legal judgements,and contractssuch as those Such documentscan listthe listingthe obligationsof peasantsto theirlandlords(praktika). to in modii of £.0.08-0.10 extentoflandholdings ha), varyingfromestates(proasteid) (measured More are and sometimes these defined (periorismoi). by perambulations (staseis), smallholdings theByzantinestate'srevenues as putbyHarvey,97 generally, were largelybased on a verycomprehensivesystemof land taxation,whereland was graded accordingto its of everyfiscal unit were revised qualityand use and the tax paymentfixedaccordingly.The tax-registers regularly. . .

was used in officialdocumentsto mean 'fiscalunit' as well as 'village', The word chorion of the whole structure, that the though building-block villagewas a fundamental indicating 91See further Chapter6.

92 See C. M. Woodhouse, Modern Greece:A ShortHistory*

(London and Boston,Mass., 1984),36, and workscited in Chapter6, n. 183. 93Corinth:Avraméa,Péloponnèse, 46. 94Woodhouse(η. 92), 37-8. For the Péloponnèsein this M. Whitby, 'The period,see generallyAvraméa,Péloponnèse;

Balkansand Greece,420-602',in CAHZxiv,ch. 23 (pp.701-30). 9">Though note the usefuldetail in the Vitaof St Nikon, outlinedin Chapter7. 9<)For a recentaccountand interpretation, see A. Harvey, EconomicExpansion in the ByzantineEmpire goo-1200 (Cambridge,iq8q). 97Harvey(n. 96), 2.

26

Chapterι

and theidiosystaton, forexample)whichseemto relateto therewereotherfiscalunits(thektesis The hearthtax (kapnikon) scatteredratherthan nucleatedsettlements. impliesthatlistsof households were maintained.Althoughthis wealth of detail has now been lost forthe it servesto illustratean agriculturallandscape mediatedthroughvillages, Péloponnèse,98 tax documentswill concernthemselves estates,and ecclesiasticalestablishments. Inevitably, All withthe economicstatusof the taxpayers. the same, it is clear thatlandholdingswere wovenintothe social fabric.The richlandowners{archontes), peasantsworkingquite a large 'with a plot 'withtwo oxen3)or a smallerholding(boidatoi, or zeugalateion, holding(zeugêlateion and thelandless(ateleis) are enumerated. one ox'),impoverished peasants(aporoî), This is thereal inhabitedlandscape;but otherfactorsaffected perceptionsat thetimeand today.Religious ideals perhaps influencedthe formationof the inhabitedlandscape in differentways. The Christian ideal of the eremite,living in the wildernessfar from suchas the civilizationand close to God, maywellhave influencedthe sitingofmonasteries earlyrock-cutcellsof Agioi Saránda Palaiomonástiro(L4001)in the surveyarea. Ultimately these 'uneconomic'locationswere to make themselvesfeltin the patternof occupation. the Iconoclastcontroversy ultimately inspireda cosmicview of churchdecoration Similarly, in the dome at the centreof the Pantokrator and theplace ofthechurchin the community: betweenmankindand God, thecommunionofsaints theuniverse,thePanagia as intercessor clusteredon the walls of the church,the congregationassembled within.The symbol extendedto the houses around the church,and thisvision in turnwould encourage the and St The villageand the churchwenttogether, nucleationof housesintothe settlement. foundednew churchesin Nikonknewexactlywhathe was doingwhen he so energetically and aroundSparta. There is, finally,anothergeographyof settlementwhich can be distinguishedin the ofethnicgroups.It is harderto analyse:thegeography Byzantinesources,butwhoseinfluence whichled to flight, to pointto the numerousfailuresof centralgovernment is not difficult ofpopulations:theMilengoiand Ezerites,theTzakones, migration, conquest,or thetransfer theJews,theplantationsunderNikephorosI of settlersfromAsia Minor and Armenia,and latertheFranks,Venetians, Albanians,and Turks. notedthatthe Máni (Maina) remained In the tenthcenturyConstantinePorphyrogenitus as a whole had been restoredto Byzantine the but now by Péloponnèse independent;" fromtheFourthCrusadeand the the Frankish which lasted until control, conquestsfollowing Laconia was At this sackofConstantinople powers.The splitbetweencompeting (1204). point Laconia (siteNN237),but the Venetiansmaintaineda fortat Monemvasiain south-eastern centredon the de Villehardouinmade Laconia into a principality Frankishbaron Geoffrey in at Passava but hemmed his fort Mani was the (ancientLas, by independent, Spartaplain; siteLL153). Laconian societyin detail,but one overriding In thisperiod it is difficult to reconstruct trendin the early and middle Byzantineperiods is the rise of local large landowners, eitheron behalfoftheremote baronsofa particulardistrict exercising jurisdiction essentially In of the second or system period Byzantinerule theprónoia emperor purelyindependently. to seniorofficerson conditionthatthey lands were arose,whereby grantedquasi-feudally 98The sourcesforthe Péloponnèseat thistimehave been characterized as poor in statisticaldata, scattered,and uneven.See Panagiotopoulos, Πληθυσμός, 14.

99P. Greenhalghand E. Eliopoulos,DeepintoMani:Journey

totheSouthern Tip ofGreece(London, 1985), 22.

Backgroundand methodology 27

Ethnicdivisionsalso became a factor: suppliedthe imperialarmywithtroopsas needed.100 some of the Slavs expelledfromthe lowlandsby the Frankshad takenrefugein Taygetos, while the Tzakonianswiththeirhalf-Greek,half-Slavdialect were now a presencein the oftheplain.We mightexpectto see boththesemajor Parnonrange,hostileto theprincipality in patternofour area. changesreflected thesettlement In the1240sthefourth Monemvasia,CastleMaina in princeofAchaea,WilliamII, fortified the westernMani (probablyat Tigáni), and mostimportantly Mystrasas defencesagainst and withthemtheMani, reverted Laconia and theFrankishforts, thesevariousneighbours.101 to theeasternRomanempirein thepersonoftheemperorMichaelPalaiologosin 1261.While remained muchofthePéloponnèsewas in Latinhands,thesouth-east including'Lakedaimon5 as a culturalcentre,and was noted one of thelastByzantinestrongholds. Mystrasflourished radicalschemes above all fortheworkofthephilosopherGemistosPlethon,who formulated As Woodhouse and Platonism.102 forrejuvenating Byzantinesocietyby fusingChristianity thePeloponnesianprovinceoftheempire,whileat mosttimesrulednominallyby a remarks, son oftheemperoras Despot,was takingon a politicaland culturallifeofitsown.103 in Lakedaimonremainedin the empirerightup to thefallof Constantinople Nevertheless 104 in rebellious Mani Then even the until the Turks reached and indeed 1460. Mystras 1453, Veniceheldon to itsstrong-points, was sooncrushedbythesultan;and thoughat first by 1540 ithad lostMonemvasia. As notedlaterin thisvolume,we do notyethavedetailsofthelocal Ottomanadministration in our part of Laconia forthe sixteenthand seventeenthcenturies,but it is likelyto have of largelanded withinthe framework followedthe normalpatternof devolvedtax-collecting individuals or bythelargelyautonomousOrthodoxchurch.105 estatesownedbypowerful Turkishpowerin Greeceexpandedinexorably. Doge Morosini DespiteVenetianresistance, at the briefinterlude. Resentment seizedthePéloponnèsein 1684,butitwas to be a relatively the to theTurks'successin recapturing Venetians'stricttaxationregimemayhavecontributed Maniats to In the Orthodox Russia later.106 1770 encouraged years Péloponnèsethirty-one in to the sultan force achieved little but Orlov's rebel, bring beyond provoking meagre even the Albanian troops,some of whom settledin the southernPéloponnèse.Ultimately, rebelliousManiats founda sortof accommodationwiththe Turks,thoughtheyremained in Laconia's incorporation turbulent. Finallythewar ofindependencebegan in 1821,resulting into the kingdomof Greece, thoughit took severalgovernmentexpeditionsto pacifythe settlement Mani.107The biggestsinglechange indirectlyaffectingthe nineteenth-century in the refoundation of of our area was Sparta 1834.108 probably pattern ANTIQUARIANISM:

FROM CYRIAC TO THE BEGINNINGS OF ARCHAEOLOGY

Withthe workof Cyriac of Ancona, friendof the sultanwho took Constantinopleandof the idea of a freeGreece,we enterthe secondgreatage of withoutparadox- progenitor I()O Woodhouse(n. 92), 67. "" Greenhalghand Eliopoulos(n. 99), 24. 102R. ofModernGreece Clogg,A ShortHistory (Cambridge, 1979),10,11. 103 Woodhouse(n. 92),89. 104See map in Woodhouse(n. 92),71. 105Furtherdetails of the Ottoman fiscalsystemcan be

foundin Chapter7. See also Chapter8, p. 405. Iu() Greenhalghand Eliopoulos(n. 99), 29; thoughin the view of Clogg (n. 102), 16-17,Venetianrule was relatively henicm. 107All the above summarized from Greenhalgh and Eliopoulos(n. 99), ch. 1. 108 Chapter8, pp. 404-5.

28

Chapterι

writingsabout Laconia. The classical cityof Sparta now lay deserted,thoughits site was have been vindicatedin visitwas to show).Cyriac'sobservations remembered (as Fourmont's in thatthe manuscript accountof his visitto Sparta in recentjudgements.We are fortunate buthis remarkson thearchaeologyofancientSparta(inscriptions aside) 1447has survived,109 are ratherbriefand he devotesmore attentionto his tripto Messenia and around Cape Tainaron.Perhapstherewas littlehe could add to his previousvisitin 1437,the accountof was drawn or perhapshis attention whichis lost(he recopiedsome of thesame inscriptions); ofwhosebookwas to thecoastbytheemphasisplaced upon itby Strabo,a prizedmanuscript in thepossessionofGemistosPlethon. Sir Thomas Roe, the Earl of Buckingham'sagent at the Sublime Porte,took marbles fromSparta in 1627-8.II0Randolph'swork,publishedhalfa centurylater,is mostlya brief portolanwith interestingethnographicsketches;Mystras('Misithra') and the supposed The nextlandmarkin the antiquarianrecordingof ruinsof Sparta occupybarelya page.111 Sparta comes withthe Abbé Michel Fourmont(1729),who was takenfromMystrasto see the ancient city.His excavations were concentrated in Sparta, but he also recorded (Omont mentionsexamples from inscriptionsfromAmyklai,Bryseai,and Gytheion.112 Fourmontseemsto if have come from our which, surveyarea.)113 may genuine, 'Therapnai' have followedCyriac in his concern for inscriptions:he did his utmostnot merelyto transcribethembut also to representthe stonesaccurately.He also has a reputationfor inventing some texts and destroyingothers, allegedly to prevent future scholars Perhaps urged on by nationalistrivalry,however,he was contradictinghis readings.114 as is indicatedin the memorandumpresentedto Maurepas ambitions, inspiredby larger forthepublicationofhis researches:'un voyageutile,on peut direillustre,si conformeaux idées du grand ministrequi l'a procuréet si propre à mettreles Anglois,envieuxde la France,dans la nécessitéd'avouerqu'ils ne sontpas aussi heureuxdans leursrecherches'.115 enGrèceis certainlybroaderin scope than Fourmont'splan forthepublicationof his Voyage It was to include 'Produitdes terresdu Péloponnèse, an account of the antiquities. simply ou abandonez,combienil y a de monde,ce qu'il le commercede ce pais,ses portsfréquentez de soldatset combien donne au Turc, combienle Grand Seigneury laissa véritablement il rester'.116 peut Sparta does not featuremuchin the rivalrybetween,on the one side,Stuartand Revett not of antiquities,"7 and, on the other, J. D. Le Roy overthepicturesqueand the illustration least because the formerdid not visitSparta. Le Roy seems to have made more than one in a map of the Sparta area, a view of the theatre,and some drawingsof journey,resulting in thetopography ofancientSparta,and in particular inscribedpedestals."8He was interested was concernedto establishPlatanistason theleftbankoftheEvrotas.

109R. Sabbadini,'Ciriaco di Ancona e la sua descrizione autografadel Peloponnesotrasmessada Leonardo Botta', Miscellanea Ceriani (Milan,1910),183-243. IIÜR. Stoneman, Land of Lost Gods: The Searchfor Classical

Greece (London,Melbourne,etc.,1987),49.

111B. Randolph, The PresentStateoftheMorea, CalledAnciently

. . . (London,3i68g;repr.Athens,1966),8. Peloponnesus 112Part of Fourmont's descriptionof his visitto Mystras and Sparta is translatedin R. Stoneman (ed.), A Literary inGreece toTravel (Harmondsworth, 1984),66-7. Companion

113H. Omont, Missions archéologiques françaisesen Orientaux X Vile etX Ville siècles(Paris, 1902), 647.

114On Fourmont'sdepredationsand inventions see e.g. A. 'Fourmontiana:IG v1.515,anotherforgery J. S. Spawforth, "fromAmyklai"',BSA 71 (1976),139-45,and refsin hisn. 1. "ί Omont(n. 113),653. 116 Ibid. 658-61. 117 Stoneman,LandofLostGods(n. no), chs 6-7. 1

de la Grèce,ii J. D. Le Roy, Ruinesdesplus beauxmonuments

(Paris,1770),ii. 29-34,pls 12-14.

Backgroundand methodology 29

ofthe The firststageofthemovetowardsmodernsurveycan be discernedin thetravellers William As Sir Gell century. putsit, earlynineteenth whilethe tilesare sometimesthe only Blocksof stonealwaysindicatethe site of a temple,a cityor a fortress; memorialsof a moderntownimportantto the historyof the lowerages, or of the wars betweenthe Turksand have suffered to existon the Venetians,whichtheperishablenatureof thematerialsemployedin itsconstruction spot. serveto pointout thesitesoffortresses ofthemostremoteages,fromwhich Brokenpottery mayalso sometimes theblockshavebeen removedfortheerectionofcitiesofa lessancientdate."9

This is interestingforits assumptionsthat the travellersprimarilyobserved cities,that ancientones werealwaysbuiltofstone,and thattilebyitselfis usuallya signoftownsofthe 'lowerages'. Unlikethe otherDilettanti,it appears,Gell was not a collectorbut aimed to in his drawings120 In thelatterrespecthe uses travel and itineraries. recordhis observations to locate findsreasonablypreciselyin the absence of timesin the same way as Leake,121 usefulmaps. But it was William Martin Leake's workthat was to have the greaterimpact on the and intelligence.122 ofscholars,because ofitsthoroughness Althoughhe following generations oftheMenelaionwithreference to Polybios'saccount,he seemsnot discussesthetopography on Agios to have visitedthe site, and neitherhe nor Gell was shown the fortification in thathe site It was on Leake's second 1806 Konstantinos (Laconia Survey Bin).123 journey recordedancientremainson his way throughChrysaphaand Agioi Saranda, addingsome The politicalpurposeof hisjourney detailwithinthe narrowconfinesof our surveyarea.124 as Such nationalist has recently been explored.125 rivalries, has been seen,could be called on for his work. Fourmont as some justification by de Morée of 1829(ILL·I·12)· Similarculturalpoliticslie behindtheExpéditionScientifique and Lt.-Gen. Pelet The map of the Morea was commissioned by producedby Boblaye.The there are detailed drawingsof itself and of Sparta (pl. 46) plots standingremains, plan The smaller-scale of and architectural fragments. map the Sparta area (pl. 45) buildings in few monuments the records relatively surveyarea, amongthemsomeruinsin unfortunately thebankoftheEvrotaswhichwe wereunableto locate:thechapelat 'Pavleika',perhapsto be and thetracesofa temple,notpreciselyindicated equatedwiththechurchat Kokkinorachi,126 butpossiblyto be associatedwiththetempleofZeus Messapeus(LS siteN415).127 to explorethe area when he was laying Lt.-Gen.Jochmusplainlytook the opportunity out thegridforthe townof Sparta,and mentionsa numberof siteswithinand adjacentto the surveyarea in connectionwithhis thoughtson the battleof Sellasia and Pausanias's

119W. Gell, Itinerary oftheMorea (London, 1817). 120At least, by the time he was in Italy he saw these as a record of antiquities which would otherwise be lost. Cf. Dictionary ofNationalBiography (10,21edn), vii. 044-6.

121See M. J. Wagstaff,'Colonel Leake in Laconia', in Φιλολάκων,277-83.

122 Leake, Travels,esp. i. 120-326, ii. 511-34, iii. 1- 31; id., Peloponnesiaca:A Supplementto Travelsin theMorea (London, 1846; repr.Amsterdam, 1967). Stoneman, Land ofLost Gods(n. no), 255, mentions that Carl OttfriedMüller wrote to Ernst Curtius 'that he would be glad to find an abridged version of Leake's eight or nine volumes'.

12:5 Gell (η. ιig), 226-7; L·ake, Travels,i. 125-6. 124And, alas, one of his less successful attempts at 'confrontingthe text of the ancient authors with the actual locality to which they relate', his identification of Sellasia with the monastery of Agioi Saranda: ibid. ii. 526; Leake, Pplnbnnnpsinrnqaq- 8

125WaffstafT (n. 121). I2() Boblaye, Recherches,75; for the identification with Kokkinorachi see Armstrongetai, 'Crossing the river', 310. 127Blouet, Architectures, ii. 62; for the link see Armstrong et ai, 'Crossing the river', 310.

30

Chapter ι

' L·'//

Mali C/~^ Kok^no

y IJj^Jv

Pavleika^"

NNV^XNr

'

Church

/Tsouni towerhouseΤ *yC^'^ -
^^> ::%>

α^ __ I-l'WAncient

k s^

bridge

~ ^_ Marsh ^^*

*<^^

*-

-'

0 i

y

'

inbank Foundations

Z~Z~>^

i

'

^

1 i

^

'

j

/^^

ν V

'^__-« ^7^·^

J_

jm

2 I kms

ILL. ι.ι2. Partofthesurveyarea, afterplate45 in Expédition deMorée(D. Taylor). scientifique

Backgroundand methodology 31

Much the same groundis coveredin the relevantpart of LudwigRoss's routeto Sparta.128 ReisenimPeloponnes;129 indeed,thereare indicationsthatJochmusfeltthatRoss had stolen histhunder. accounts followthe patternset by Leake (not to say These earliernineteenth-century and discussmonuments, a route sites,or battlesas theyarise, Pausanias)in thattheyfollow Curtius was able to marshalall and withasideson presentland use, topography, population. The traditionof the pre'LacedaemonV30 these sources into a historicalgeographyof the likes of to mention revolutionarytravellerssuch as Dodwell·31and Gell·32 (not and Clark,136 Vischer,134 Wyse,135 Chateaubriand)continuedin accountslikethoseof Mure,133 his travelsin 1865,overtwenty Welcker, yearsafterhe had visited thoughthelast,publishing to Greece,plainlyfeltthe need tojustifya book which,thougherudite,had fewpretensions academicoriginality.137 a Lakonianmember Professional archaeologyin Laconia was seton itsfeetby Stamatakis, of theArchaeologicalService,who assembledthe core of the SpartaMuseum'scollection.138 Fieldworkreceiveda major impetusfromTsountasthroughhis campaignsat the Vapheio laid the foundationsforthe excavationsthat effectively and Amyklai,140 tholos tomb139 Tsountas thereextendsa long line of Laconia. From of and classical archaeology prehistoric of Sotiriadis, Karachalios, Orlandos, Romaios, Skias, including antiquities, ephors whom excavationhas extended under and Steinhauer, Christou, Spyropoulos, Stavropoulos, overthewholeofLaconia as wellas, at varioustimes,Messeniaand Arkadia. LANDSCAPE ARCHAEOLOGY: THE TWENTIETH

CENTURY

Withthe twentieth centurycame a renewedBritishSchool interestin the Greeklandscape Laconia. Britishworkseemsto have startedwithtopographicalresearchin and specifically one aim ofwhichseemsto havebeen to findinscriptions.141 Laconia byForster, south-western In tandemwiththiswentWace's workon sculpturesin the museumat Sparta and Tod's mainlyepigraphicstudies,publishedtogetherin 1906.142By 1904 theseoperationshad been 128 but to givea sketch or epigraphy, architecture, numismatics, Jochmus,'Sellasia', publishedin 1857 but writtenin ofGreecein themannerofDodwell. 1830and 1834. 130S. Raftopoulou,New findsiromSparta, in Cavanagh 129L. Ross, Reisenim Peloponnes, i: Der AgerDentheliates, and Walker,125-40,at 140;V. Ch. Petrakos,Ό Παναγιώτης Theilevon TheilevonArgolis, Arkadien, Phliasia, Thyreatis, Sikyonia, Lakonikae Σταματάκης, ιδρυτής του Μουσείου Σπάρτης', Λακ. (sir,Berlin,1841),173-90;firstpublishedin Annal. σπονδ. 11 (ΐ992)> 642-50; G. S. Korres, 'Παναγιώτης Inst.Arch.8 (1836),1^-21(whichwe havenotseen). 130E. Curtius, Peloponnesos: eine historisch-geographischeΣταματάκης, απόστολος εις Σπάρτην (1875)', derHalbinsel 'Επιστημονική επετηριςτης ΦιλοσοφικήςΣχολήςτον (Gotha,1851-2),ii. 203-332. Beschreibung 131W. Dodwell, A Classicaland Topographical Tourthrough Άθηνα/ν Πανεπιστημίου 495~5°8· (ΐ992~5)> Ι39Ch. Tsountas,'Έρευναιεν τί] Λακωνικήκαιό τάφος 2 vols(London,1819). Greece, 132Gell (η. ιig); id., Narrativeof a Journey in theMorea του Βαφείου',Έφ. αρχ. 1889,129-72· Ι4°Id., "Εκ τοΰ Άμυκλαιου','Εφ αρχ. ΐ8ο2,1-26. (London,1823). 141Ε. S. Forster,'South-westernLaconia: sites',BSA 10 '33w. Mure,Journal in Greece and the Ionian Islands a Tour of Laconia: inscriptions', (Edinburgh, 184.2). (1903-4),158-66; id., 'South-western '34w. Vischer,Erinnerungen aus Griechenland ibid. 167-89.These werethefirstpaperson Laconian topics undEindrücke in the Annual.For a fullaccount of the School's workin (Basel,1857). 135T. (Sir Thomas) Wyse,ed. W. M. Wyse,AnExcursion in Laconia, see H. W. Catling,'Ή 'ΑγγλικήΑρχαιολογική thePeloponnesos intheTear1858(London,1865). Σχολή Αθηνών στην Σπάρτη'. Λακ. σπουδ. 8 (1986), 136W. G. Clark, Peloponnesus: in section G. Notesof Studyand Travel 189-204; Shipley, Laconia In the followingnotes,references (London,18^8). http://www.bsa.gla.ac.uk. 137F. G. Welcker,Tagebuch Reise(Berlin, to someBSApapersare in abbreviatedform. einergriechischen '*a M. N. Tod and A. J. B. Wace, A Catalogue in hisforeword oftheSparta (v-ix)thathe is notsettingout 1865),Stresses Museum to rival,forexample,Curtiusor presentan expertstudyon (Oxford,1906).

32

Chapterι

whichwenton to coversystematically theMani,144 concertedinto'The SurveyofLaconia',143 and eastern Laconia.147 Excavation south-eastern took Laconia,145 Vardounia,146 place in eastand Geraki.149 centralLaconia at Angelóna148 OtherepigraphicworkcoveredGeraki150 as well as Thalamai in the Mani/51and culminatedin a magisterialseriesof publicationsfromthe These excavationshad started Spartaexcavationsand elsewherebyWoodwardand others.152 in 1906 under Bosanquet,153 withthe firstof fiveseasons' workat ArtemisOrthia, a dig An interestin medievalLaconia, already regardedas technicallyadvanced forits time.154 in a on Frankish was signalled paper sculptures,155 developedby Traquair'sstudyofLaconian conducted the firstmodernexcavationsat the Menelaion,discovering fortresses.156 Dawkins theMycenaeanmansionthatnowcolloquiallybearshisname.157 Activitiesin Laconia by the DeutschesArchäologisches Institutin the earlyyearsof the twentiethcenturywere focusedon the site of Amyklai(thennamed Sklavochóri),where Fiechter,and laterBuschorand von Massow workedin associationwiththe Furtwängler, GreekEphoreiaunderSkias.158 Later,duringthesecondworldwar,von Vacano notonlydug Kouphóvounobut also reportedthe Late NeolithicfindsfromPapagiannákouSpílaia, south of Goritsá.159 At thesame timetherewas a growingtraditionoflocal topographical research, in different fromwhoseoutputwe havebenefited The antiquarianand archaeological ways.100 in the distinguished traditions have intertwined periodicalΛακωνικούσπονδαί,and in the proceedings of Laconian and Peloponnesian conferencesorganized by the Etaireia to Πελοποννησιακά.161 Peloponnisiakon Spoudonsince1975and publishedas supplements Wace was instrumental in encouragingboth Waterhouse(mainlyin 1936-9) and Hope Simpson (in 1956-8) in theirexplorationsof prehistoricLaconia. The Homeric problem formed one incentive,but the broader aims saw prehistoricsettlementagainst its environmentalsetting.They comment,forexample, on geology and land use, notinga 143See BSA n (1904-5),309, 311-12. 144Forster,BSA 13 (1906-7), 219-37; A. M. Woodward, ibid.238-67. !« Wace and F. W. Hasluck,BSA 14 1907-8, ibi-82. 14(1 H. A. Ormerod,BSA 16 (1909-10),62-71. '4?Wace and Hasluck,BSA 15(1908-9),158-76;cf.Forster, A geographicalnote on Thucydidesiv. 54', CR 23 (1909), 221-2;J.J. E. Hondius and M. A. Hondius-vanHaeften, 'Laconia, II: notes on topography',BSA 24-5 (1919-21), 144-50. 148 Wace and Hasluck,BSA 11:81-00. 149Wace and Hasluck,BSA 11: 91-9; Wace, ibid. 99-104 (sculnturesV '5°H. J.W Tillyard,BSA 11:104-12. '5' G. Dickins,BSA 11:131-6. 152Wace, BSA 12 (1906-7),344-50 and BSA 13 (1907-8), 17-43 (stamped tiles); Tillyard, BSA 12: 351-93, 440-79; Tillyard,Woodward,and Tod, BSA 13: 174-218;Woodward, BSA 14: 74-141;15:40-106; 16: 54-61; 26 (1923-5),159-239; 27 (1925-6),210-54;29 (1927-8),2-56, and (withL. Robert) 57-74; 30 (1928-30), 241-54. Note also Tod, A surveyof Laconianepigraphy, 1913-1925',BSA 26: 106-15. 153BSA 12: 277-83, and thirteen articles by R. C. Bosanquet,R. M. Dawkins,Dickins,Tillyard,R. Traquair, and Wace,ibid.284-479. 154R. J. H. Jenkins, Richard MacGilhvray Dawkins 1871 1955', Proceedings oftheBritishAcademy,41 (1955), 373-88,

at 376-7,citedby P. Mackridge,'"Some pamphletson dead Greek dialects": R. M. Dawkins and modern Greek BSA 85 (1990),201-12,at 204 and n. 22. Final dialectology', publicationcame in 1929:Dawkins,AO. 30vvace,ώοά 11:iqq-4-^. 156 Traquair,BSA 12:2^8-76. '57Dawkins,BSA 16:4-11. 158Tsountas(n. 140);E. Fiechter,Amyklae:der Throndes Apollon', Jdl 33 (1918), 107-245; E. Buschor and W. von Massow, 'Vom Amyklaion',AM 52 (1927), 1-85; P. G. in Φιλολάκων,31-48. Calligas,'FromtheAmyklaion', ■59 A4 IQ4.2.1*6:PLI 8*. Ibo P. Doukas,Ή Σπάρτη διαμέσον τον αιώνων(New e.g. York,1922;repr.Sparti,<:.1985);Ph. I. Koukoules,Πέρα κει στο Βασαρα- ηθογραφία (Athens,1954)5Ι· Κ. Tzannetos, Οί Βουτιανοι της Σπάρτης (Voutianoi, 1968); Τ. Ρ. Tzortzakis, Ή πρωτεύουσα της Μάνης: ΓύθειονΜαραθωνησι (Athens,198 1); T. A. Gritsopoulos,'Ιστορία του Γερακίου (Athens, 1982); P. G. Roumeliotis, H Μπαρπίτσα και η Σκούρα: ιστορία και λαογραφία (Athens,1983)5Ρ· Ε. Giannakopoulos,Tò Γύθειον (Athens, 21 987); Ν. D. Karavias,Λακωνικήβιβλιογραφία:συμβολή πρώτη (içqq-iq87) (Athens,iq88). 161Besidesthe International Congressesof Peloponnesian Studies,thesixthofwhichwas heldin 2000,noteistLaconian irr

TAT

Γ*

/"* A

TreatisesCongress(1979); ist Laconian StudiesCongress(1982-3); MystrasCongress (1990).

Backgroundand methodology 33

formarlin thelocationofprehistoric settlements.162 The researchesby Cook and preference Nichollsin 1949,afterthecivilwar,werepromptedpartlyby theneed forrescueexcavations Three articlesbyWaterhouseand at theEleusinionat KalyviaSochás as wellas at Sparta.163 Laconia, based on non-intensive surveyof mostof the region, Hope Simpsonon prehistoric of ruralLaconia- of all periods,indeed.164 were a huge step forwardin the understanding andAtlasof data fromtheirworkwerecataloguedin Hope Simpson'sGazetteer The prehistoric Greece Sites(1965) and Mycenaean (1981)and, withDickinson,in the authoritative Mycenaean GazetteerofAegean Civilisation(1979).

Topographicresearchhas receiveda boost in the last two decades witha shortprojectin ofUtrecht,105 a seriesofarticlesbyChristien,166 and Phaklaris's theThyreatis bytheUniversity The long-term solo explorations of Pritchett have vastlyenhanced workon the Kynouria.167 in theThyreatisand Kynouria.168 In the our knowledgeofLaconian topography, particularly of work Pikoulas to have settled the extensive decade, by body appears important past The publicationof Bintliff 's surveyworkbrought problemsin Laconian topography.169 and twentieth-century at the same time theprevioustraditionof nineteenthsurvey, together the for surface His concerns were environmental forward to survey.170 agenda change looking and settlement, inspiredby Vita-Finzi'sworkon sedimentation,171 geographicaltheoryon and its applicationin site-catchment locationalanalysisand ruralsettlement/72 analysis.173 researches have been carriedout by Moschou-Tsiomi,174 whileother Importanttopographical the resultsof membersof the Classicaland ByzantineEphoreiasat Sparta have synthesized in and undertaken researches the and at excavationsin thetown175 topographic Spartanchora I(" PL i. 69.

I(':*R. M. Cook, 'Kalyvia Sochás', BSA 45 (1950),261-81; R. V. Nicholls,'Sparta', ibid. 282-98. Cf. Dawkins,BSA 16: 12-14;Tod, BSA47 (1952),118 22 (inscriptions). I(>4H. Waterhouse,'PrehistoricLaconia: a note', BSA 51 (1956), 168-71; followed up by Waterhouse and Hope Simpsonin PL i-ii. Ι(>Γ) Υ. C. Goester,'The plain ofAstros:a survey',Pharos,1 (1993),39-112(including pp. 97-106,'Surfacefinds',byC. T. F. VermeulenWindsant). 'Eua et la Thyréatide: J. Christienand T. Spyropoulos, topographie et histoire', BCH 109 (1985), 455-66; J. Christien,'Promenades en Laconie', Dialoguesd'histoire ancienne, 15 (1989), 79-105; ead., 'L'invasionde la Laconie in 3rd (370/69a.C.) et les routesdu nordde l'étatSpartiate', Pelnbonnesian Conpress. ii. Q2^-q6: and otherworks. I()7Phaklaris, Κυνουρία*. I()H See thereviewofPritchett, CR SAGTv'iWû, byG. Shipley, thevariousLaconianpapers. 107[η.s. 43] (1993),I3I^4, listing I()()Amongmanyrelevantworks,see esp. G. A. Pikoulas, 'ΤοπογραφικάΑϊγυοςκαι Αίγύτιδος',ist LaconianTreatises . . .' (η. 72); Pikoulas, Congress, 257-67;'Tabula Peutingeriana

Ή νότιαμεγαλοπολιτική 'Skiritis'; χώρααπότον 8° π.Χ. ώς τον4° μ.Χ. αιώνα(Athens, 1988);'Ή ανατολική ακτή Λακ.σπουδ.g (1988), τουΜαλέα:κόλποςΜονεμβασίας',

has developedthisworkin new 36 (1970),1-37.Bintliff Society, and directions: e.g. Bintliff, 'Regionalsurvey';id., 'Settlement of territory',in G. Barker (ed.), Companion Encyclopedia (Londonand New York,1999),i. 505-45. Archaeology 174See interalia L. Moschou, 'Τοπογραφικά Μάνης: ή πόλις Ταίναρον', ΑΑΑ 8 (ΐ975)> 160-77; L. Moskou, 'Topographiedu Magne: à proposde la régiondu Ténare ii. Κιστέρνες-ΆγιοιΑσώματοι', ist Peloponnesian Congress, 45-54; L. Moschou and T. Moschos, 'Κιόνια Α': μια τοπογραφική και αρχιτεκτονική ερευνά', Πελ. 13 (1978-9)5 72 U4; iid., 'Το αρχαίο φρούριο της Τευθρώνης', Arch.Eph. (1981), 10-22; L. Moschou, 'Μια αγροτική περιοχή της ανατολικήςλακωνικής Μάνης στην κώδικα AmbrosianusTrotti373%XVI- Internationaler

(Wien, 4.-9. Oktober1981): Akten,ii. 4 ( = Byzantinistenkongress Jahrbuchder Österreichischen Byzantinistik, 32.4; Vienna, 1982),

and P. N. Moschos,'The 639-56; L. Moschou-Tsiomi Palaeomaniatika:the transition fromancientpolis to chora',Ekistics, Byzantine 295 (1982),261-71;L. MoschouTsiomiand T. N. Moschos,'ΚιόνιαΒ': προβληματική κατασκευής τηςύστερηςελληνιστικής δωρικών κτιρίων περιόδουκαιτωνπρώτωναυτοκρατορικών χρόνων.Ή περίπτωσητων δύο ναών στα Κιόνια της νοτίας Λακωνικής', 12th Classical Archaeology Congress,iv. 140-7; L.

'Οικιστικά τωνπεριοικίδων Moschou-Tsiomi, συστήματα καιτωνέλευθερολακωνικών πόλεωνστηνχερσόνησο '7° Bintliff, του Ταινάρου',ibid.148-54;eacU 'Πόλειςκαι μνημεία NaturalEnvironment. 171 C. Vita-Finzi, TheMediterranean της αρχαιότηταςστην λακωνικήΜάνη',Αδούλωτη 1969). Valleys (Cambridge, 172 M. Chisholm, RuralSettlement andLandUse(London,1062). Μάνη,ΐ9 [1997-3] (July-Aug. 1997),17-32. I7:ie.g. E. S. Higgs and C. Vita-Finzi,'The prehistoric 1/;) Kounnou, e.g.Kaítopoulou (n. 130);mostimportantly ofthePrehistoric Σπάρτη. economyof the Mt Carmel area', Proceedings 277-8^

34

Chapterι

In thelast thirdof the twentieth centurythe BSA resumedexcavationat perioikiccentres.176 in personnelbetween whilethereis a continuity theMenelaionand the Spartanacropolis,177 our survey,the Dutch excavations at Geraki, and the British-French collaboration at Kouphovouno.178 CONCLUSIONS

REGARDING SOURCES AND PREVIOUS RESEARCH

Certainlythe body of historicaland archaeologicalevidence summarizedabove, though and in somerespectsextensive, givesneithera completepictureofland use in past impressive historyof the surveyarea. We are not,forthe mostpart,told periodsnor a fullsettlement about the 'silentmajority'of Laconia throughthe ages, but about the top of the social architecture behind,or whosenames pyramid:thosewho livedin townsand leftmonumental that are recordedin historical annals.Our multi-disciplinary projectaimedpartlyat rectifying imbalance. above a history ofstudyoftheLaconianlandscapein thepast.There We havesummarized is an obviouspointin recordingthehugegaps in our understanding caused,notleast,by the destructionand loss of historicalarchivesover the centuries.One hope in settingup the Laconia Surveywas thatarchaeologycould in some degreemake good thoselosses,indeed supplyforthe prehistoricperiod the data that were never recorded. There is another and echoes of thisliterarypast have struckchordsdown the motivation: the reverberations corridorof time.The westerntraditionof antiquarianresearchwas largelypredicatedon of Roman writings, and thosesourcesthemselvesechoed the earlierwritingand re-writing the constant reinventions of the state the from Homer, during through Spartan Sparta'spast of Roman classicaland hellenistic periods.Spawforthhas shownhow the heritageindustry with serious for the nurtured this Sparta myth, consequences Spartan economythrough Nicol has givenus a timelyreminderthatthistraditiondid not patronageand tourism.179 flockedto Sparta,'not to rub shoulderswiththe alwaysdominate,and thatmedievaltourists shadesof Lykourgosor Leonidas but to sniffthe odour of sanctityof the greatSt Nikon'.l8° The attitudesof sentiment,religiousawe, or antiquarianreconstruction not only have a of the but could be forces whichin part for the scholarly interpretation landscape, significance that shaped landscape. The Progress

of the Survey, 1983-9

field-walking and study seasons took place in 1983-5 and 1987-8. Seasons usuallylasted five Explorationof new territory it was usuallyearlier.A weeks.In 1983the seasonwas in Augustand September;thereafter of a the identification task was the creation of existingtrigonometric surveygrid, preliminary 176e.g. E. Zawou, 'Ή χώρα της Επιδαύρου Λιμηρας', ii. 497-508; Α. Α. Themos, 'Tò ßthPeloponnesian Congress, ρωμαϊκό υδραγωγείο του Γυθείου: μία πρώτη επανεξέταση των στοιχείων', ibid. i. 4ΟΟ~9· See ^so see Bonias,Αιγιές.For otherworkon Laconian settlements, Shipley,'"OtherLakedaimonians'";Shipley,'Territory'. 177H. W. Catling,'Excavationsat the Menelaion,Sparta, 1973-76',AR 23 (1976-7),24-42; id., 'Excavationand study at the Menelaion,Sparta 1978-1981',Λακ. σπονδ. 6 (1982),

28-43; G· Β· Waywellandj. J.Wilkes,BSA 88 (1993),219-86; 89 (i994)>377-432;9° (i995)>435"6°; 92 (i997)>4OI~34; 94 (1999), 437-55; iid., 'The ancient theatre at Sparta', in Cavanaghand Walker,97-111. 170 Preliminary reportsin Pharos:}.H. Crouwel,M. Prent,et al, 'Geraki1' to 'Geraki6'; BSAAnnual Report, 2000-1,28-q. 179 Cartledçeand Spawforth, esp. ch. 8 (pp. 10^-26). 180D. M. Nicol, 'ByzantineMistra:Spartain themind',in Cavanaghand Walker,157-9.

Backgroundand methodology 35

and themarkingup of the Greek1 : 5,000 map seriesforuse in pointsusingthe theodolyte, thefieldand in the apothiki (the'store'of the dig-house,wherethe surveyarchivesand finds weretemporarily housed).181 in threelocalities.The three Aftertrainingexercises,field-walking began simultaneously teamsoffour(from1984five)memberseach, designatedRed, Blue, and Yellow,wereled by Cavanagh, Crouwel, and Catling respectively.The Red Team startedin the northern (Am)- bothamongthesites includingPalaiogoulás(Ai18) and AgiosKonstantinos highlands, designatedas Large Sites, to which special samplingstrategieswere applied and then The Blue Team workedsouth,laterroundingoffthe southernlimitof the surveyterritory. coveredtheriverplainand theadjoiningspurs,pausingto carryout severaldays'samplingof acrosstheNeogeneplateau.The YellowTeam theGeladariLargeSite(H45)and laterworking in around Kokkinorachi and workedeast,eventually the lowlands coveringtheeastern began and the basin. The rate of varied Neogene plateau Chrysapha coverage greatly;a typical a team was hectares took on for 5-10 per day.Field-walking place Monday to Friday range 1 from sunrise to when the teams returned to Aphysouto and partofSaturday, p.m. generally was usuallyoccupiedin completingthe notebookforthatday from rest.The late afternoon in themorning, an area surveyed thefinds,or revisiting or on themorning's notes,processing a previousday,in orderto examinespecificsites. in separate Sherdspickedup werebagged and labelledwitha unique 'zembil' number,182 seriesof one hundredeach. Zembil numbers,in fact,formthe primarydata seriesof the survey, beingused to allow the separatelabellingofpotterycollectedin areas provisionally of deemedto be Όη-site'and 'background'withina singlesequence,and thedistinguishing areas of a site. Zembil numberswere also used forspecial groupsof findsfromdifferent finds,certain small finds or other non-ceramic material such as chipped stone and obsidian,and so on. Any noteworthy 'stray'artefactsor groups of findsfromareas not sites were collected and as broughtback foranalysis.Findspotsprovisionally designated deemed to be 'sites'were numberedin separateseriesof one hundredeach.183Small finds were recordedin separate series,and 'sample' numberswere created formiscellaneous materialsuch as ore or plaster.A continuousnotebookwas keptby each team as it moved across the landscape; thesehandwritten records,as well as being the primarydata set of the survey, containa sketchplan of each 'site' as well as outlineplans of standingremains Material collected was transferredto Sparta such as rural stores and folds (mandres). Museumat theend ofeach season. In orderto understandthe 'given' landscape, it was decided to investigatethe surface sediments,vegetationhistory,and recent population and land use of the surveyarea. Rackham'ssurveyof thehistoricalecologyof Laconia (1984),and the soilssurveyby Fiselier and van Berghem(1986),werecarriedout duringfield-walking seasons,muchto our mutual In addition,thecollectionofsamplesforthesoilphosphatetestingexercisetookplace benefit. in 1984-7.The soil sampleswereprocessedin thedig-houseand duringnormalfield-walking theresultsprocessedin theUK.184WagstafT's surveyofthevillagesin thesurveyarea, usinga

181These taskswere performedby the late David Smyth and byGuy Sanders. 182 'basket'. ζεμπιλι, 183Site numbers1-99 and 300-369 wereused by theBlue Team, 100-194bytheRed Team, and 200-299 and 400-534

by the Yellow Team. During subsequent study and the creationof a computerdatabase,zembilsof 'off-site' pottery had 10,000added to theirserialnumbersto forma nominal continuation ofthesitenumberseries. 184See Chapter22 forresults.

36

Chapterι

of Southampton,tookplace duringthe Eastervacationof 1985. team fromthe University in carried outtheresistivity surveyon selectedsites.185 Finally, 1988-9,Jones one thatdifferentiates itfromsomeearlierprojects, ofthesurvey, It was alwaysan intention to and otherfindsin fullin orderto allowfutureresearchers thatwe wouldpublishthepottery criticizeand reevaluateour conclusionsas necessary.In 1986, therefore,we suspended of the finds,so thatthe final to beginthe long processof studyand interpretation fieldwork in information directed the of the generated.The light mightbe best stagesof field-walking in in and was concluded firststudyseasontookplace 1986;'on-the-spot' studycontinued 1988 in 1989. had alreadybeen recordedbyteammembersin The potterycollectedduringfield-walking a preliminary fashion,usingworksheets('pot sheets')to recordsherdnumbers,formand searchesweremade beforethe and provisionaldates.Extensiveliterature fabricdescriptions, studyproperbegan, to establisha workingcorpus of comparanda. In the studyseasons themselvesthe potteryspecialists,startingfromthe 'pot sheets',studiedmaterialof their period,comparingnoteswithone anotherand, in particular,discussingthe assignmentof betweenadjacentperiods.Preliminary materialthatseemed transitional 'studytypes'were created(theseare theST numbersappendedto thefinalpottery typesin Chapters11-18). collectedfromthe and sculpturalfragments The studyand cataloguingofthearchitectural field,and of the chipped and ground stone (includingthe large collection of obsidian fragments), began in 1986. So did the studyof the epigraphicmaterial,some of whichhad been recoveredfromthefieldand someofwhichhad to be studiedwhereitwas found(in the We also undertookat thistimea major case of inscriptions builtinto standingstructures). a selectionof all classesof finds, of and programme drawing photographing representative Betweenstudyseasons, whichwenton throughout the remainingstudyand fieldseasons.186 workalso wentahead on a summarycatalogueofknownsitesthroughout Laconia, designed to providethenecessaryregionalcontextforthesurvey'sown sites(a revisedformappearsas Chapter23). Duringthelastfewseasons,plansor elevationsofa selectionofstandingremains weredrawnand finalplansofseveralLarge Sitesdrawn. a BBC Acorncomputerwas To assistin theanalysisof thefinds,bothon-siteand off-site, used to beginassemblinga detaileddatabaseof siterecords.Map coordinatesand toponyms werechecked,zembilnumbersand potterydata enteredundersites,selecteddata fromthe extendedand continually and so on. The databasewas subsequently notebookssummarized, in the UK between and research 1987 1994;thisprocessinvolved, updatedduringfollow-up sherd information about other everysingle keptfromthesurvey(some among things, entering in thousand all). twenty To facilitatethe studyof the survey'sown sites,the area was dividedat thisstage into topographiczones, letteredfromA to U (omittingI and O), beginningin the northand endingin the south-east(ILL. 1.13).A choice had to be made betweendividingzones at sitesin watershedsor at watercourses.Eitherchoice would have placed some neighbouring remata at the bottom of were often the watercourses but since different zones, steep-sided valleys,and were hard to cross,whereaswatershedswere oftenflat-toppedridges,it was feltthatto dividezones at watercourseswould createfeweranomalies.(Zone K, however, 185See Chapter22. The Laconia RuralSitesProjectled by fromtheseexercises. Gavanaghand Mee developeddirectly 186Also in exercisein collectionof 1986,an experimental

dendrochronologicaldata was carried out on standing the resultswere buildingsin the surveyarea. Unfortunately, negativeand are notpresentedhere.

Backgroundand methodology 37

III. ι.13.Zones and subzonesofthesurveyarea (D. Miles-Williams).

38

Chapterι

straddlesthe Kelephina.) At a later stage in the preparationof the Site Catalogue, each relatedsites zone was further subdividedinto numberedsubzonesso thattopographically would be presentedas groups in the Catalogue. During furtherstudy,the zones were amalgamatedintothree'sectors'to facilitatebroaderanalysis(ILL. 1.14). in the 1988 season we combinedstudyand fieldwork. In 1987we resumedfield-walking; WhiletheYellowTeam concludeditsfield-walking, forthesetwoyearsmembersoftheRed and a selectedtractsof Blue Teamswerecombinedinto PurpleTeam forthepurposesofrewalking land,samplingthetworemaining 'LargeSites'(Menelaionridge,Q360; PanagíaChrysaphítissa, sites.(Further detailsoftheseexercises are givenbelow.) 'out-of-area' U490),and recording Followingthefinalstudyseason in 1989,researchworkcontinuedat home in theUK and the Netherlands.Given the constraints on researchtimeforthosein academic postsor in thatprogresshas been slow; but it may be otherfull-time it is not surprising employment, and a usefullessonforfuturesurveyors, to realizethatmanydaysofstudyhavebeen sobering, generatedbyeach dayoffieldwork. 'OUT-OF-AREA'

EXPLORATION

In 1988,withthe aim of settingthe findingsof the intensivesurveyin a somewhatwider sitesand localities immediatecontext,we selectedforspecialexaminationsome twenty-seven walked,but stillwithinthe area alreadyintensively beyondthe boundariesof the territory coveredby the surveypermit(see ILL. 24.1). We referto these as 'out-of-area'sites.To from themfromsitesin the core territory we gave themserialnumbersstarting distinguish 3000. Theyare listedin thesitecatalogueofthesurvey(Chapter24),wheretheyare giventhe prefixletterofthesurveyzone closestto them(e.g.U3005,just outsidezone U). The treatment of these'out-of-area' siteswas morecursorythanin themain survey:there We are nevertheless was, forexample,no attemptto record sherd densitiesstatistically. satisfied thatthenatureand extentsof the sitesare recordedwithsufficient accuracyforour in Our out this exercise included whether aims purposes. carrying testing regularpatternsof As it turnedout, the distribution could be predictedfromsiteswithinthe main territory. and the numberofsitessampledwas probablytoo smallto formthebasisforreliablestatistics, list of twenty-seven sites (two of which were later demoted fromsite status)was overofsitesat the'upper'end ofthegeneralspectrum. representative The majorityof thesesitesare attachedto zones A and U, at the northernand southwalked area. Amongpreviouslyunknownsitesare several easternlimitsof the intensively substantialones of prehistoricdate (e.g. U3005-6,A3018-19)and the potentiallyimportant archaic hilltop site of Phagia (U3002).187We also took the opportunityto examine sites noted during earlier work, including Hope Simpson's classical hilltop site of Palaiókastro(U3001). Field-walking

and Sampling

Procedures

The aims of thesurveyhave grownout of thehistoryofpreviousresearch.The collectionof the identification of major sitesfromhistoricalsourcesand throughextensive inscriptions, The and research excavationhad provideda base map of settlement. and survey, emergency in the work in a next Within Greece of detail was clearly stage. pioneering systematic filling 187 See also inscription i, LS'n. 214.

Backgroundand methodology 39

III. ι.14.Sectorsofthesurveyarea (D. Miles-Williams, L. Farr).

40

Chapterι

thesouthernArgolid,188 on Melos,189 and in BoiotiaI9°providedmodels.There has developed an extensiveliterature on all aspectsoffieldprocedure,fromtheselectionoftheregionto be and thesamplingofthatregion,to thedetailsoffield-walking surveyed, methodology. SITE

PROSPECTION

Withintheboundsof the surveyarea, our methodwas guidedby the aim of locating'sites'. Even in 1983,and perhapsmore so in the lightof recentprogress,thisaim was possibly and theterm'site'mayappear to need further definition.191 These pointswillbe contentious, in whatfollows. discussedfurther Our procedurein thefieldwas to coverthecountryside and as completely as systematically torrentbeds frequentthroughout possible.In the eventcertainareas,such as the overgrown the area and some tractsof impenetrablemaquis, were not walked. Even where brave was so low as to attemptswere made to fightthroughthe vegetation,the groundvisibility make the attemptseem pointless.Part of the northernmost tractof the area had in recent yearshad been bulldozedintoterracesand plantedwithpines:it,too,was eventually givenup it was concludedthatthe surfacewas so when,aftersome daysof unproductive exploration, disturbed thatno remainswouldsurvive. hopelessly The pathfollowedbya teamoffouror fivewalkerswas rarelya straight one. In viewofthe in theseplaces to adjust highlydissectednatureofmuchofthearea, it was farmoreefficient theline of travelaccordingto the contours,oftenproducingcurvingtransects whilekeeping the spacingbetweenwalkerseven,ratherthan to tryto imposerectilinear movementon a oftensteep,and highlycomplexland surface. recalcitrant, The backgroundscatterof materialwas registeredby team memberscallingout when and a roughscale of backgrounddensitywas measuredon every theyobservedartefacts, transect.Other relevantfeaturessuch as land use, visibility,and angle of slope were recorded.An increasein the frequencyof calls was takenas a possiblewarningsignalof a concentration offinds. In prospecting,the success of field-walking and recordingprocedureswill relate to a numberof considerations.Spacing the field-walkers every20 metres,as we did, oughtin m a of or moreare pickedup, three-quarters of to ensure that all sites with diameter 20 theory thosewitha diameterof 15 m, halfof thosewitha diameterof 10 m, and so on. Indeed, allowinga range of good visionof,say,3 m on eitherside of each walker,thesenotional diametersbecome 14, 10.5,and 7 m. Giventhata halo of findsnormallyencirclesthe main concentration ofa site,thisspacingshouldhavebeen stillmoreadequate. takenacrossareas designatedas When we look at the 956 artefactdensitymeasurements falls at 16 and the lower of site diameters m, 'sites',192 only10per centofsitesare less quartile than 14 m acrossin both directions.This 10 per cent can be explainedin fourways.(1) It sitessuchas sanctuaries, (2) bridges,and isolatedtile-graves. partlyrepresents special-function 188See van Andel and Runnels, BeyondtheAcropolis]see also GreekCnuntrvsidc

189IslandPolity. definition NoteJ.F. Cherry,Ά preliminary of site distribution on Melos', ibid. 10-23, esP· ϊ6-ι9>w^tn references to earlierliterature J. W. Mueller(ed.), including inArchaeology (Tucson,1975);S. Plog,F. Plog,and W. Sampling in M. B. Schiffer Wait,'Decisionmakingin modernsurveys', Methodand Theory,i (New York, (ed.), Advancesin Archaeological

1978),383-421.

190Bintliffand Snodgrass,'BoeotianExpedition'. 191V. L. Gaffneyand M. Tingle,'The tyranny of the site: method and theoryin field survey',Scottish Archaeological Review, 3 (1984),134-40;R. C. Dunnelland W. Dancey,'The sitelesssurvey:a regionalscale data collectionstrategy',in Methodand Theory, M. Schiffer(ed.), Advancesin Archaeological

vi (NewYork,1983),267-87. 192i.e. 428 locationswithtwodiameters.Note thatnot all werejudged to be truesitesin thefinalanalysis.

Backgroundand methodology 41

In othercases, vegetationcoverand artefactvisibility may explainthe limitedextentof the and (4) the burialof sites.The last threefactorsin measurescatter,as may (3) the erosion discussion. meritfurther particular Visibility

can be affected It has been pointedout thatvisibility by weatherconditionsand the timeof in Our surveyseasonwas always the summer(theonlytimeavailableto us), so these year.193 factorsoughtto be broadlyconstantfromyearto year,ifimpossibleto calculateon present evidence.Some variationwas notedfromyearto yearin how advancedthe cropsor steppe plantswere at the startof our season. Otherwise,apart froma possiblegradual trendto cultivatedland (see next paragraph),therewas no increasinggroundcover on formerly coverin anygivenarea. The weather, too,was reliablysunny changein vegetation perceptible almostall our seasons;therewere onlya fewcloudydays and veryinfrequent throughout thunderstorms. smallsiteswerelocatedin a small,clearpatchofland thatwas otherwise Some apparently (e.g.G160,E308); theywerefoundthroughaccidentsof disturbance.It was noted overgrown thatthe neglectof cultivationis leadingto the colonizationof manyfieldsby a wild flora, of are no longerploughedand are thusleftwithan undergrowth whilemanyolive-groves be would otherwise which the surface (and incidentally high visibility grasses,reducing fire:cf.p. 9 above).It was also foundthat a readysupplyoftinderforuncontrolled providing citrusorchards,forsome reason,tendedto be sterileof finds.194 Unfortunately, vineyards, have been whichare normallyverycarefullytendedand hence give highsurfacevisibility, almostentirelygrubbedup in the surveyarea.195The naturalvegetationis a mosaic of the typesdescribedbelow by Rackham,even thoughon the 'dryside' of the Péloponnèsethe maquis can be dense. In short,the numberof sitesmustin generalbe under-represented. is anotheraspectof thisproblem:obsidianwas of certainkindsof artefacts The recognition to distinguishfrom foundonly rarelyin schistareas, perhaps because it can be difficult of schist. splinters Erosion

fromerosion.Certainly severely periods,havesuffered Manysites,especiallyoftheprehistoric excavationhas shownthatlargepartsofmansionI at theMenelaion(siteQ360) havebeen lost to erosion.196 Among sites found by the survey,clear cases of the movementof sherds include hilltopproducedjust a fewEarlyHelladic G154,wherethe (overgrown) downslope The majority LS the on the 'non-site' while sherds, 10170 steepslopebelowwas richin pottery. have washed downfrom to fromsiteM322was likewise oftheMiddleHelladicpottery judged an originallocation.A less certaincase was thatof M349,whereit was thoughtthatthe was Middleto Late Helladicsitehad once crownedtheridge,eventhoughmostofthepottery foundon the terracesbelow.The EH site C126 measuredjust 4 X 8 m, yetit was richin 193A. J. Ammermanand M. W. Feldman, 'Replicated collection of site artefacts',American 43 (1978), Antiquity, 734-40. 194This may also be due to methodsof cultivation. Ν. Τ. W. Mills,'Surveyin Provenceand Languedoc',in Kellerand 165 7, at 166,has notedhow the Survey, Rupp,Archaeological ploughingregimein vineyardshas affectedartefactvisibility in S. France.

195Soteriadesmentionsthevineyards whichexistedbefore the firstworldwar in the Ν sectorof the surveyarea: G. Soteriadis,'To πεδίοντης εν Σελλασία μάχης (222 προ Χριστού)', BCH 34 (iQio), 5-57,at 8-9. It)(> It has been observedofmansionI at theMenelaionthat the detailof the southfacadeand the 'erosionhas destroyed havefaced'. courtyard(s) uponwhichit mustin all probability H. W. Catling,'Excavationsat theMenelaion'(n. 177),29.

42

Chapterι penod Byz

R Hl Ar + Cl MBA + LBA EBA

count 1,187

^050 I,Ö54 1,829 297 211

average 5-41

3-02 3-03 2.66 0.99 1.55

Table i.i. Countand averageofpottery and tileper sq m fromsingle-period sites.

thatit was not a 'non-site'but the vestigesof a pottery;thissuggestedto the field-walkers eroded settlement. Severe erosion also affected theEH sitesC126,P263,P265(possibly severely not a 'site'),R280,and 8448,and theMH and LH sitesR424,R457,and R525.In thesecases we imaginenot onlythe loss,throughdeflation,of the soil matrix,but also a breakdownof surfaceartefacts, especiallypottery.197 For the earlierprehistoric period,it was clear thatthe Late Neolithicsite E48 was also and it is doubtful whether thereare anyarchaeologicalcontextsintacton thesite,let eroded, alone architectural remains.SitesBin and B116produceda greatdensityand varietyofLate Neolithicchippedstonetools,butno potterythatwas diagnostically unlikeE48. It prehistoric, in be that the difference is due to differences but erosion and the total function, may destruction of the evidentlyfriableLate Neolithicpotteryis not improbable.198 These cases make findssuch as LS 10496,an isolatedcache of Neolithicpottery, perhapsrathermore than isolated concentrations of classical and later finds.A similar similarly significant EH of finds seems to be the case at the site and it is R289, depletion possiblethatsomeofthe obsidianscatters notedelsewhereare all thatremainfromoriginalsites. The sherdcountsalso supportthe idea thattherehas been a gradualerosionof pottery. The table (TABLEi.i) showsthe averageof potteryand tile countsper square metrefrom single-periodsites(Middle and Late Bronze Age figuresare combined).There is a clear decreasingtrend,as one goes back in time,in the numbersof ceramicfinds.Makingevery allowance forpossible complicatingfactorssuch as different durationsof occupation in different phases,degradationof findsstillseems periodsor the absence of tilein prehistoric the best generalexplanation.The low counts on Middle and Late Bronze Age sites are it appearsthatpotteryis especiallysparseat thesesites,forreasonsthat especiallynoteworthy; are notyetclear. Burial ofsites

to instance,thoughthe geomorphologicalstudyhas The burial of sitesis more difficult in the Aphysoubasin thatmust and glacisd'accumulation revealeda patternofglacisd'érosion involvesiteburial.At M194the siteitselfwas onlyrecognizedwhena mechanicalexcavator of findshad earlierbeen notedbut recordedas exposedthe subsoil;a smallconcentration Likewisetrenchesin the glacisarea, excavatedto lay water-pipes,revealeda insignificant.

197See T. M. Whitelaw, at theNeolithic 'Investigations sitesof Kephala and Paoura', in Landscape Archaeology, 199-216, esp.204-6. 198Note the carefullydocumentedcase recently E. discussedbyJ. F. Cherry, J. L. Davis,A. Demitrack,

Mantzourani,T. F. Strasser,and L. E. Talalay, 'Archaeological surveyin an artifact-rich landscape:a MiddleNeolithicexamplefromNemea,Greece',AJA92 (1988),159-76.

Backgroundand methodology 43

forburiedsiteswouldbe by clusterofsitesaroundM325.The onlyeffective wayofprospecting shoveltestsor trialtrenches.1" SITE SAMPLING AND AUTHENTICATION

The main effortof registrationwas concentratedon the sites themselves.The normal procedurewas to make a sketchof the extentof the main site,beingguidednot onlyby the on the sherdscatterbut also by any otherindicationjudged reasonableby the archaeologist of the densityof sherdson the sitewas takenby countingall spot.A reliablemeasurement sherdswithin1 sq m at 2 m intervalsalong fourtransectsat rightangles to one another, The limitsofthesitewere usuallydirectedtowardsthefourcardinalpointsofthecompass.200 butwhenthereadingswerelaterenteredontoa databasea cutdecidedby thefield-walkers, offpointwas selectedwhen a continuousseriesof zero readingswas found:wherethree cells contiguouscellshad zero and therewas no indicationthatthesitecontinued,all further on thebasis of artefactcountsand the siteplan, thesize of wereomitted.Duringlaterstudy, thesitewas calculatedby assumingthatit was an ellipsebased on thelengthand breadthof thescatter(usingtheformulaπ X ab,wherea and b denotethesemi-majorand semi-minor axes respectively). a generousselectionofthemostdiagnosticbeing The siteswerethensampledforartefacts, and (where tilefragments, were made ofpotsherds, counts later for analysis.Separate bagged In the the site. A was also made of sketch stone tools. 1984 samplesofsoil plan found)chipped forphosphateanalysiswerecollectedat thesame timeas the1 sq m sherdcountsweremade. Mediumto largesitesweresubdividedintosmallerareas accordingto thejudgementofthe field-walkers.Each of these areas was then treated in the same fashion as the 'sites' Each 'area' ofa sitewas denoted and sherdedseparately. themselves: thatis,itwas transected In it was in a few cases A118 a letter judged expedientto separateoffthe pottery (as B). by numberdenotesthesub-area(e.g.U500B4). intolocalities,in whichcase a suffix further The fieldproceduresput at our disposala numberofcriteriathatcan be used to recognize a site as 'authentic'.First,and in particular,the orthogonaltransectcountsindicatethe densityof sherds,whichis recordedin the Site Catalogue as the averagenumberof sherds plus or minusthestandarddeviation.Some 329 sites(countedby theoriginalserialnumbers; themeansherdcountwas 2.8 sherdsper somehavesincebeen amalgamated)weretransected; a to It is difficult the median 2.1. pointbelowwhichsitesbecome suggest singlecut-off sq m, in sitesthe the case of prehistoric and of are discussed Problems above; visibility 'suspect'. countsseemlow,notleastbecause oftheabsenceoftile.The Menelaionridge(siteQ360),for occupationsite(withtile),yetit example,had been provenby excavationto be a multi-period scoredonly1.14overall,the densitiesrangingfrom0.4 to 1.8 per sq m in the variousareas counted(somewereheavilygrassedoverwhensampled).The MH-LH siteN410-13had very low densities(0.63,0.68, and 0.45),yetsuch a richassemblageofpotterywas recoveredthat LikewiseEH siteswerenotabundant therecan hardlybe anydoubtthatit was a settlement. 199K. W. Kintigh,'The effectiveness ofsubsurfacetesting: a simulation Antiquity, 53 (1988),686-707; approach',Amencan M. J. Shott,'Shovel-test samplingin archaeologicalsurvey', ibid.54 (1989),396-404; N. Terrenatoand A.J. Ammerman, Cecina valleysurvey, and siterecovery: 'Visibility Italy',JFA 23 (1996),91-109;J. M. Steinberg,'Ploughzonesamplingin site signaturesfrom Denmark: isolatingand interpreting disturbed contexts', 70 (1996),368-90. Antiquity,

200 Orthogonaltransectsare less accurate than grids;in particular,theyare sensitiveto an incorrectplacingof the site centre. However,theyare more rapid. The Boeotia transected sitesat 2.5 Survey,usingclickercounts,effectively m intervals:Bintliff and Snodgrass,'Boeotian Expedition', and gridshavebeen used at 134-5.Bothorthogonaltransects Nemea: Cherryetal. (n. 198),163.

Chapterι

44

in pottery, siteshavingdensitymeasuresrangingfrom1.23to 2.27.But siteswith single-period or ofprehistoric date are plainlyspecialcases. For theremainderof sparsesites low visibility the with fewerthan 1.25 sherds per sq m) we are leftwith rival lower (say quartile, The of sherds humanactivity other maybe theresultofsomeintensive explanations. presence than permanentsettlement,such as manuring,201 or storagehuts,202 seasonallyoccupied of animalshelters.Alternative explanationshave been advancedin termsof the destruction habitationremainsthrougherosionand potterybreakdown.203 Althoughrecentresearchhas advancedour understanding of thesefactors,204 it is stillfarfromclear how to discriminate betweendifferent The statistical analysisdiscussedbelowwas unableto separate hypotheses. M356,witha countof 1.03,fromthebackground.In thecase ofsiteswithlow densities(notto mentionsiteswhere,fora varietyofreasons,it was decidednotto recordsherdcounts),their statusas permanent habitations mustbe in doubtunlesssupporting evidenceis available. Second,as an indicatorofthespreadofsherdsthereis thearea ofthesite,as calculatedon in thefield.Third, thebasisofthetransectcountsand, whereappropriate, otherobservations ofsherddistribution, calculatedas theindexofcellswithzerocountsas thereis thecontinuity a proportion ofthetotalnumberofcells.205 thereare theconsistency and thevarietyof Finally, the potterycollected:the more consistently the potterybelongsto a givenperiod,and the greaterthenumberoftypesofthatperiodthatoccur,thegreaterthechancethata truesiteis represented.Thus it was the experienceof the NorthernKeos surveythat amphorae of and wereoftenthe onlypotteryat locationsthat Saraçhanetype61 werewidelydistributed, in suchcases thesupporting werenotsites;206 evidenceofotherpottery typesand tilewouldbe to confirm a site's status. required Where all four criteria are met we can be very confidentthat a habitation site is however,giventhe problemsof visibility, erosion,and burialoutlinedabove, a represented; a score on even one criterion is indicator that thesiteis authentic. high good The essentialproblemfacedin the interpretation of the resultsof fieldsurveyis how well whatis observedreflects the'true'archaeologicalpicture.Forconveniencetwoaspectscan be how well whatis on thesurfacerepresents thearchaeologyofwhatis buried (1) distinguished: - and (2) how well whatis recordedin the fieldreflects below- the problemof representation - theproblemof visibility. since whatis presenton thesurface (In fact,thedivisionis artificial thetwointerconnect; butitaids discussion.) The problemofrepresentation can onlybe fullyaddressedby a programmeofexcavation, in sites different whereby physicalsettingsand of variousperiodsare excavatedand their with surface counts.Even thenit mustbe conceded thatmanysitesare findings compared As the nowcompletely erodedor ploughedout,and thedesiredinformation beyondrecovery. 201S. E. Alcock, F. J. Cherry,and J. L Davis, 'Intensive survey,agriculturalpracticeand the classical landscape of Greece', in I. Morris (ed.), Classical Greece:AncientHistoriesand

ModernArchaeologies (New Directions in Archaeology; Cambridge,1994),137-70,withA. Snodgrass,'Response:the archaeologicalaspect',ibid. 107-200. 202R. G. Osborne, 'Buildingsand residenceon theland in classical and hellenistic Greece: the contribution of BSA80 (1985),119-28. epigraphy', 203Bintliffand Snodgrass,'BoeotianExpedition',137-8. '"* Whitelaw(n. 197); r. A.James, U. 15.Mee, and U. J. Taylor,'Soil erosion and the archaeologicallandscape of ...

.

t

ι τι

·

1

/

'

-w-v

L·

-w

*~ **

t~±

■»

m-

1

s~*

-w

Methana,Greece',JFA21 (1994),395-416;A. M. Snodgrass a regional and J. L. Bintliff, 'Off-sitepotterydistributions: and interregional Anthropology, 29 (1988), perspective',Current 506-13. 205The ideas of densityand continuity in relationto Όηsite' and background are discussed by T. W. Gallant, 'Background noise and site definition:a contributionto surveymethodology', JFA 13 (1986),403-18. His continuity indicesare calculatedon the basis of 25 sq m, not 1 sq m, cells(p. 416). 206 LandscapeArchaeology, 356-7: they may have been beehives.

Backgroundand methodology 45

accountof our morespecializedstudieswillhelp to illustrate(Chapter22), geophysicaland thepicture. conditions, helpto clarify geochemicaltechniquescan, in favourable In above. orderto correctforthe some consideration has received The problemofvisibility wouldbe processesofburialand erosion,an extensiveresearchprogramme geomorphological necessary.Not only would the broad factorsof soil type and angle of slope need to be would need to be taken calculated,butverylocal details,forexampleof reliefand terracing, intoaccount.As faras densityofvegetationand relatedfactorsare concerned,mostsurveys on a to assess visibility have attemptedto cut the Gordianknotby requiringfield-walkers simplescale, say from1 to 10. Again, ideallymore researchis needed, essentiallyinto the scoreis,say,2, 5, or thatthevisibility howdoes an assessment ofsuchobservations: psychology on into20, 50, and 70 per cent)correspondto whatis objectively 7 (whichmightbe translated the ground?Equally,it is clear that methodsof recordingaffectsherd count totals:our at siteU490,in comparingcountsmade on handsand kneeswithinan area of 1 sq experiment while walking30 X 15 m transects,showed a m with those taken using event-counters in The visibility issuewas also confronted the former case. by the considerably higherdensity exercisedescribedin thenextsubsection. area rewalking EXTENDED

AREA SHERD COUNTS AND BACKGROUND DENSITIES

To givesome controloverour field-walking, quite eighttractsofland (TABLE1.2),distributed of different and land-forms,land uses, and archaeological widely representative were chosenforrewalkingin a season subsequentto theirinitialrecording. characteristics, to recordtheartefacts and used event-counters Walkerswerespacedat 15m intervals (pottery and tile)observedovereach stretchof 30 m walked.A totalof twelvepasses (actuallythree passes by a team of four,the fifthmemberkeepinga record)were made along parallel transects600 m in lengthand 15 m apart,so thatin ideal conditions240 countswould be tract

lar 01

background density 7.0

on-site

sites

date

size (ha)

326 327 328 356

H cHb CrB b

0.30 0.45 0.28 0.05

4.22 1.03

density 44

density

continuity index

2.28 0.33

LAR02

0.5

52

230 367

c Cb

0.08 0.22

1.67 3.63

0.35

LAR04

0.2

16

142

H

0.03

1.77

0.36

lar 05

0.2

433 443

C Cb

2.12

444

C

0.18 0.02

0.32

6.40 2.03

0.20

2.6

LAR06

1.9

113

29O

Β

0. 20

LAR07

0.4

13

184 186 188

C H C

0.05 0.03 0.06

LAR08

0.6

0.13

II

R = Roman,Β = Byzantine. Lower-caseletterindicatesminimalpresence. TABLE1.2.Rewalkedareas.C = classical,H = hellenistic,

46

Chapterι

/

LAR4 !^ ρ

/^Tlar3'ΙΊν

^"Λ '

LAR2 <'

rJ L

J367

'

*z )

"fh

?

^T

j

0 ■

■

j^V

»

y

II

)

<έγ fT

^-^

(

L

'

Jr?LAR7

^''

Ν1β4 4t^N18é/o^>

''

LARS( '

Γ^

)

^y

ι

/ ^ ι

/^

<έ

Γ

sí^^^

<j-*CfZry '^

LARl/

'

l

V^

'^

1

'

LAR6

5000 > Metres

I

^v^

III. 1.15.TractsLARoi-LAR08 (D. Taylor).

S433''^"^

S443WVy?>'^

^'^^

/ /

/';-=09

)(8*=-0/']

/';-=09

)(8*=-0/']

SOIL MAP OF LACONIA SURVEY AREA (Laconia Survey,vol. i, annexeto Chapter2). D. Miles-Williams,froi

r 2). D. Miles-Williams,froman originalby J.-W.van Berghemand J.Fiselier.

Backgroundand methodology 47

recordedwithinan area a fractionunder10 hectares(0.1 sq km).In additionto makingthe on a five-point scale (o, 25, 50, 75, artefactcountsthewalkerswereasked to assessvisibility such as fenced-inareas or buildingspreventedsome and 100per cent).Variousimpediments countsfrombeingtaken;thesewerenotedas missingvalues. thereis no standard,accepted correctionfactorforvisibility, and further Unfortunately, workneeds to be carriedout. Reluctantly, we concludedthatit was wiserto experimental sherddata. Wherethedata are complexwe haveproduced publishanalysisoftheuncorrected change-point analysesoftheartefactcounts;but,especiallywherethebackgroundis close to and a simpletableofthecountsis presentedhere. zero,sophisticated analysisis notjustified, The eighttractsare shownon themap (ILL.1.15),and are discussedin turn. LAR01 (ILL.ι.ι6). Close to Aphysou,thistractis located on the marlglacis,in one of the most area.A group usedpartsofthesurvey intensively in the of threesites(M326-8) was distinguished ofthearea; theircentresall lie originaltreatment In addition,M365 within30-50m ofone another. lies at theNE cornerof thearea, M356near the centre.On analysingthe sherdcountsthrough analysis, M326-8arepickedup as a change-point single block, as is M365, but M356 is not itsstatusas a sitemaybe therefore distinguished; be questioned.The statistics suggestcountsof44 (+ 17) sightingsper 30 m as indicatingthe presenceofsites,7 (± 6) as background. LAR02 (ill. 1.17)again agreeswiththeprevious J230,a small, not veryprolific field-walking. classicalsite,is pickedup;J367andj36g are not on sherdcountsbutin factbelong distinguished to two different periods, classical and Byzantine.Sites are indicatedby countsof 52 (± 31),thebackground by5 (± 5). LAR 03 (ill. i. 18) is a special case. H45 is confirmed as a contiguousLarge Site (Geladari) with some very high and some very low it has highand low concentrations of visibility; sherdwithinit. LAR04 (ILL. ι.ι9) is situatedon a spurrunning N-S in an area ofverylow background. The site in is SE the with counts corner, F142 pickedup of30 artefacts. There is an anomalouscountof 16 close to a modernhut,and in the western halfthebackground is as low as 0.21. LAR05 (ILL.1.20)is on thelimestonefoothills of Koutsoviti.The backgroundsherd densityis

III. i. 16.Change-pointanalysisofartefact densitiesin tract LAR01. Uncorrectedforvisibility.

48

Chapterι

000020000000 000000001

000

10000000*

000

00

oooooooo* 00000000000* 16

1000000

o*

0*

122000001322 000000010001 00000000000* 0*·

0*

00

00*

0*

000*'

0*

000000000000 010010002000 040010000000 000000000000 000000000000 000000000000 0*

0000000100

1

III. ι.17.Change-point analysisof artefact densitiesin tractLAR02. forvisibility. Uncorrected

III. ι.ι8. Change-pointanalysisof artefact densitiesin tractLAR03. Uncorrectedforvisibility.

1

31

104

000021 1

0

2

0

1

7

12

1 28 28

9

III. 1.19.Artefact densitiesrecordedin tractLAR04.

3), while those units includingR290 have an averageof66 sherds.

verylow (0.2). Disregardingthe high counts associatedwitha modernbuilding(45 and 95), concentrationscan be linked with sites S433, T443, and T444, respectivelyat the NWend, centre, and SE end of the tract. T444 in particular is not well supported, though conditionsof severe erosion in this area may explaintheverylow backgroundand low on-site density.

LAR07 (ill. 1.22)includesN184,N186,and N188. The firstand second have counts ranging between16 and 24 in areas of low to medium whereasN188has some highercounts. visibility, The averageof unitsincludingsitesis 25. The backgroundis low,about0.3 on average.

LAR06 (ILL.1.21) includesR294,centredupon a ruined building in the SW corner, with archaic-classicalpotterynot directlyassociated withtheruin;and R290,a Middle Helladic site, whichshowswell in the NWcorner.There are due to modern highcountsin the centre-west, material.Backgroundnoise in thistractis 2 (±

LAR08 (ILL.1.23)is setin an area wherewe had judged thereto be no sites.The highestreadings, 30 and 63, are anomalous.The averageoverthe whole tractis 2 sherdsper unit. Some of the highercounts are to be explained by modern features:forexample,the stringin the second rowindicatesthelineofa moderntrack.

Backgroundand methodology 49 3^

2

50

4|

1|

5

18 2

16 21

2600000

0030001

1

1

0

24

1000000

1

20000000000

21

0001

000000000000

000000000000

000000001

3:

0

0

0

000000000

39 1 1

1

1

'

000

101

1

0! *

1 45

00040002

101

95

II. I., i.jo.

31 0

1

101

1

Oj 0

0

0

0

oj

ojo

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

00000000 420

1

0000

0001

Artefact densities recorded tract '..''' o").

000

10

0

2

014

1

0

0

1

0000

21 10

4

0

4

0

63

13

0

25

0070406

17

050:'

0011000

13

061!'

0

00

003042200000 211001*'

1

0000

30

1

0Î00000000200 1

Oj

000092001100

0000300001

1!

0

000000041

2000000

Õ" 0200000

0

0001

0000

1030000020

•JO

o|

4

0

004004

000000000000

125200000000

0

430002000100

0000000000

01 r- -

4

0000

030002300000

00000

000000100100 1Í0000

5

701

14020000

1

' ; *

0

0

0

0

0

0

12

12

0

3

1

2

1

1

4

15

19

4

6

2

0

6

1

2

8

26

1

2

2

0

1

1

'

2|

9 j

4

Il.l.. i.'j'j. Artefactdensities recorded in tract l.AR07.

in

ι. ( lliante -point analysis of III., ι.·_> artefact densities in tract Ι.ΛΚ o(». I nc< »rrected l<»r visibility.

A numberofpointsemergefromthisexercise.The firstis thelow levelofbackgroundnoise withinthesurveyarea,from0.2 to a maximumof7 (± 6) in transects 30 m in lengthand with an estimatedarea (assuminga walker'sview of 3 m eitherside) of 180 sq m. The resulting densityis from11 to 400 artefactsper hectare. Units with sites withinthem vary in concentration from20 to 70, or 1,100to 4,000artefacts per hectare.207 It shouldbe stressedthatthe Laconia Surveydid not set out to investigate the causes of sherd at the time when the started it was that thisproblem scatter; background survey judged stillrequiredmuch basic researchand would demand a methodologydifferent fromthat directedsimplyat locatingsites.Indeed, various explanationshave been put forwardto accountforthebackgroundscatter:manuringoffields,208 erosionand othergeomorphological 207Cf.Snodgrassand BintlifTfn. 204). 2(>HBintliffand Snodgrass, 'Boeotian Expedition'; Gallant (n. 205); P. Murrayand N. Kardulias,Ά modern-

sitesurveyin the southernArgolid,Greece',JFA 13 (1986), 21-41.

50

Chapter ι

000000000100000000000002 00000000001010000020062 24 1111

1000002011

00000000001 000001000001021 1

1

1

00003001

4 16

4

0

3

0000000001 0

0

0

0

1

00001 000001

11

10320105

7 10 10

0

0

0

0

4

33

23

9 20 166

0

23 64 18

7

21 21

02054

001

000000011200024*

2

12 16

20570

40023001 9000001

0

2 12

124

22 14

11307200112

0112****·***·

III. 1.23.Artefact densitiesrecordedin tractlar 08.

and otherhumanactivities.210 As the complexity of the problemis processes,209 agriculture, it has increasingly appreciated,so theneed fora specificresearchdesignaimed at unravelling becomeevermoreapparent.Thus thoseworkingin thisarea have underlinedthedesirability of distinguishing artefacts of different dateswithinthe background.211 Surveypracticevaries in decidingthesize and intervals ofsamplingunits;ourfield-walker spacingof 15 considerably m, withcountstotalledevery30 m as describedabove, is towardsthe lower end of the on sitesare a different for'background'counts(samplingstrategies matter).Even so, spectrum thatin the mostdenselyoccupied tractsit was notjudicious to our exercisedemonstrated concentrationsmerelyby inspection.In this context, distinguishΌη-site' fromcoff-site' changing the sampling intervalsbetween off-siteand on-site areas would have been unsound.212 methodologically LARGE SITES

The treatment of sitesdesignatedas Large Sites developedpragmaticallyand adapted to conditionsin the field.In 1983,when the surveystarted,a numberof projectsfacedsimilar problemsbutno standardprocedurehad been established.Our initialplan was to dividethe sitesintoareas accordingto the lie of the land and thejudgementof the team,and sample each of theseareas as if it were a site:by transecting it, recordingfeatures,and collecting In Sites the first three sherds. (3-12 ha) were treated;two morewere year Large diagnostic 2°9T. van Andel, C. Runnels and K. O. Pope, 'Five thousand years of land use and abuse in the southern Argolid,Greece',Hesp.55 (1986),103-28. 210 Cherryet al. (n. 198); B. Wells, C. Runnels,and Ε. Zangger,'The Berbati-Limnesarchaeologicalsurvey:the 18 (iQQo),207-38. iq88 season',Opuscula Atheniensia, 211 F. J. Cherry and J. L. Bintliff,unpublished papers of Bradford, deliveredat 'GreekSurvey'meeting,University 24-5>ne 1989.

212Statistical analysis is still at an early stage, but the image processingtechniquesdevelopedforphosphateand othersuchdata have herebeen successfully appliedto sherd countdata, wherethe data warranttheiruse. Plainly,where the backgroundis close to zero,image processingis simply C. E. Buck,W. G. Cavanagh,and C. D. Litton, unnecessary.

Data (Chichester, Archaeological BayesianApproachto Interpreting

i996)>253-92.

Backgroundand methodology 51

as meriting at an early dealtwithin 1988,thoughtheyhad been identified specialtreatment in the Site the results are set out outline the We here only samplingproceduresused; stage. Catalogue. is a special case, clearlydelimitedby its fortification (Bin),2'3a hilltopfortification, AgiosKonstantinos LN1-EBA and classical-hellenistic. The samplingareaswere wallsand occupiedin twodistinct periods, ratherlarge,but sincethematerialfrombothoccupationperiodsis spreadoverthewholesite,notto itis notclear mentionthatlargepartsofthesurfaceoftheuppercitadelhavebeen gradedbybulldozer, ofthesite. thatfinerprecisionwouldhaveyieldedmoreaboutthehistory (A118),214 Palaiogoulas probablyancientSellasia,was dividedintofiveseparateareas. This was the first Whilewe are confident thatwe have a reasonableoverviewofthe largesiteto be treatedbythesurvey. site,itis plainthata moredetailedsurveywouldyieldusefulresults. Geladari (Η45),2Ι·Γ) possiblyancientThornax,is an altogethermorecomplexsite:largerin extent(some The extremely variable 12 ha), witha numberof standingmonumentsand architectural fragments. visibility, largelydue to the lush grass cover when surveyed,in some ways lent itselfto the 'area' different and sherdswerecollectedfromsometwenty-nine locations,thoughsome approachto sampling, of thesampleswereverysmallbecause of thepaucityof the material.In a subsequentseason,clicker countsweremade overthemainarea ofthesite(see LAR03 above),butit is notclearthattheycan be thanthatthevisibility is patchy.This problemis compoundedby made to conveyanymoreinformation In particular, therarityofcertainclassesofpottery. diagnosticLate Helladicsherdswererecoveredin a and thecentralpartsofthesite.Elsewherein thesurveyarea LH smallnumberfromboththenorthern siteslikeH45. materialtendsto be verysparse,and maywellbe swampedin largemulti-period TheMenelaion withmore intractable ridge(036o).210In treatingthissite in 1987,we were confronted nature.The siteis a narrowN-S ridgeabout terrainthanat Bin or A118,mainlybecauseofitsirregular 1 kmlong,frequently in manyplaces,either interrupted bygullies.The groundwas denselyovergrown withtallgrasseson theupperterracesor withgarigueand maquison slopes.It was, however, possible to walka seriesoftransects coveringthespineofthehillfromsouthto north.Countsweretakenofthe sherd densitiesin each 30 m transectby fourwalkersspaced at 15 metres,each grid-blockthus measuring30 m S-N by 60 m W-E. The resultsare illustratedin ILL. 24.51 and indicatethe very in blocks1,3, 11-13,16,23-5,31-5,and distribution ofthesherds,withmarkedconcentrations irregular however,thatformanytransectsthe countsare verylow indeed:valuesof o or 1 43. It is noteworthy, occur,low even for'background'.It mustbe concluded that,because of the poor and extremely variablevisibility, as wellas otherfactors,thisprehistoric and archaic-classicalsitedoes notlend itself method. to investigation this by The site was next sampledfordatingevidenceusing the methodapplied to medium-sizedsites elsewhereon the survey:it was subdividedinto 'areas' suggestedby the contoursor vegetationcover. excavatedMenelaionsanctuaryand theMycenaean (Samplingdid nottakeplace withinthepreviously A reasonable of material was recoveredfromthese areas, allowing a mansion.) sample dating oftheridge'ssettlement reconstruction history. At thissitethe terrainis even and the visibility was extremely PanagiaChrysaphitissa (U490).217 good in X A m of 60 was set as at and walkers 1987. grid sixty-five 30 rectangles Q360, up, sampledby spacedat

*KiLS'n. 32^ 8 (plan, ILL. 24.4 on p. 326). 214LS'û. 321-3. **■> LS 11.352, 355-7 (plan, ill. 24.23 on p. 354).

2I()LS'û. 4.01-^ (plan, ill. 24.^1 on pp. 4.02-3). 217LSû. 428-9 (plan, ILL. 24.58 on pp. 430-1).

52

Chapterι easting 1578 1578 1578 1578 1578 1578 1578 1578 1578 1578 1578 1578 1578 1578 1581 1581 1581 1581 1581 1581 1581 1581 1581 1581 1581 1581 1581 1581 1584 1584 1584 1584 1584 1584 1584 1584 1584 1584 1584 1584 1584 1584 1587 1587 1587 1587 1587 1587 1587 1587 1587 1587 1587 1587 1587 1587 !59O !59O 1590 !59O

northing

1258 1261 1264 1267 1270 1273 1276 1279 1282

clicks

tHein 2 sqm

sherdin 2 sqm

ιHie+ sherdin 2 sqm

ο ο ι

ο ο ο

ο ο ο

2

I

2 I

I

ο ο ο ο ο ο ο ο ο ο ο ο ο *

ο

1285 1288 1291 1294 !255 1258 I26I 1264 1267 1270 1273 1276 1279 1282 1285 1288 I29I 1294 !255 1258 I26I 1264 1267 1270 1273 1276 1279 1282 1285 1288 I29I 1294 !255 1258 I26I 1264 1267 1270 1273 1276 1279 1282 1285 1288 I29I 1294 1255 1258 I26I 1264

ο ο ο ο ο ο Ι

12

7 * 2

3 22

67 98 93 35 3' 46 II

8 5 ι 3 5 7 194 35 ! 88

ο * ο ο Ι

ο 4 4 Ι

ο 3 Ι

ο ο Ι

*

ο 2 Ο 2

5

II

4

50

2

131 112

3 3 4 ι

37 9 6

Ι *

4 ο

ο

2

2

27

Ι

58 !53

149 164

64

223

98

Ι

3 5 7 4 4

2

5

ο ο

ο ο ο ο ο 2 Ι

3 4 ο ο ο ο *

4 4 Ι

Ι

ο Ι

*

ο 2 Ο 2

5 ΐ3 5 5 7 3 4 ι Ι *

ο

5 ο 8

ΙΟ

13

ι7 4 ο

ο

Ι

3

3 5 i8 60

Ο Ι

Ι

ο

ο ο ο ο ο

Ο

3

ο ο

Ι

ο *

19 32 27

Ο

Ι

ο *

ο

2

12

Ι

ο ο ο ο ο ο

ο ο ο ο ο ο ο ο

2

2 *

Ι

Ι

*

ο ο ο ο

2 Ι Ι

3 7

12

4 3 * ο ο Ι

3

Backgroundand methodology 53 easting !59O 1590 !59O

!59° !59O

!59° 1590 !59O !59O 1590 1593 1593 1593 1593 1593 1593 1593 1593 !593 1593 1593 1593 1593 1593 1596 1596 1596 1596 !596 1596 !596 1596 1596 1596 1596 1596

ι$Φ '596 !599 1599 !599 1599 !599 1599 1599 *599 !599 1599 1599 *599 1599 1599 1602 1602 1602 1602 1602 1602 1602 1602

northing 1267 1270 1273 1276 1279 1282 1285 1288 1291 1294 1255 1258 1261 1264 1267 1270 1273 1276 1279 1282 1285 1288 1291 1294 1255 1258 1261 1264 1267 1270 1273 1276 1279 1282 1285 1288 1291 1294 !255 1258 I26I 1264 1267 1270 1273 1276 1279 1282 1285 1288 I29I 1294

I255

1258 1261

1264 1267 1270 1273 1276

clicks »5 166 371 348 524 212

158 154 67 77 6

tilein 2 sq m

sherdin 2 sq m

tile+ sherdin 2 sq m

6

ο ο ι

6

5 6 4

5 3 3 1 * I

4 60

I

85 5!5 342 454 631 695 381 239 278 70 61

I

7 24 16 40 181 169 293 340 773 291 500 154 106

33 5 5

32 7 47 129 169 307 434 531 386 343 42 l9

I

5 6 2 12

6 2

4 ο 2 * I Ο

5 ο

5 3 3 11

3 ο *

ο ο ο ο ο 8 8 5 5

2Ο

4

II Ι *

ο ο ο ο

8

14 6 ι * I I I I

5

14 10 l7 II 22

8

II

3 * 1

ο 5 ο

I

Ι

2

2

3 2

5 8

3 3 4

i4 ίο

6 6 II 6

9

I

7

4 8

I *

2 *

3 *

2

2

2

Ο

2

Ο

Ο

Ο

2 Ο

ο ο

Ο

Ο

Ι

Ι

ο ο

Ι

Ι

Ι

Ι

5 5 3 5 4

Ι

6

2

7 3 7 5 4 * * *

ο 2 Ι

1

*

3 3 8

*

2 * * *

39 13 45 74

5 7 9 14

2 *

Ι

Ο

Ο

Ο

3 ο ο

Ο

Ι

2

ι ο

ο

3 ο

3 3

3 4

54

Chapterι easting 1602 1602 1602 1602 1602 1602 1605 1605 1605 1605 1605 1605 1605 1605 1605 1605 1605 1605 1605 1605

northing 1279 1282 1285 1288 1291 1294 1258 I26I 1264 1267 1270 1273 1276 1279 1282 1285 1288 I29I 1294

clicks 234 462 288 187 22

7 5 ο 2

ϊ3 5 36 27

59 170 490 625 i38 80 II

tilein 2 sq m 3 4 8 6 2 * *

sherdin 2 sq m 11 2

6 1

ο *

tile+ sherdin 2 sq m 14 6 14 7 2 * *

ι ο

I

ο ο ο ο

4 4

3 5

1

2

3

7 9 3

7 5 ι ο

1

ο I

2 1

ο *

I I

10

7

2

ο *

Table 1.3. Site U490: comparisonof resultsof 'clickercounts'and 'hands and knees'countsfor140 squares,each 30 X 30 m. Coordinatesreferto S'v cornerofeach square(cf.ILL.24.58).

thenumberofsherdsseen every30 m. These countswererecordedusingevent 15m intervals, totalling countersand are referred to, in whatfollows,as clickercounts.At the same time'hands and knees' countsweretakenovera gridin samplingpointsmeasuring1 sq m in area; thegridcovered260 (26 X 10) samplingpoints,though8 could not be sampled,leavinga totalof 252. Tile and potsherdswere countedseparatelyat each samplingpoint.In whatfollows, pairsof clickercountshave been summed forsquaresmeasuring30 X 30 m, and thetwo1 sq m samplesare also summedforthesame squares(as in both cases, of averagingout the sampleswere countedby different individualsthishas the effect, The data are givenin TABLE1.3. variations betweenindividualrecorders). In a statistical sensethereis no close correlationbetweentheclickercountsand thosetaken,in the same squares,by collectingand countingthe artefactsat 1 sq m samplingpoints.In thiscrudesense the two methodsof recordingsite densitiesare not comparable.Whythisshouldbe so is not clear, moreresearchis requiredon thisproblem. but it is probablybound up withtheproblemofvisibility; Such a crudecorrelationtest,however,takesno accountof the spatialdimension.In ILLS 1.24-5we illustrate contourplotsfortheclickercounts(column3 in the table,TABLE1.3)on theone hand, and forthetotaltileand sherdcountsmade in thesamplingpoints(column6 in thetable).The contours are plottedin the formerat 90, 250, and 500 artefactsper 900 sq m, and in the latterat one, four, and eightcountsper 2 sq m. The maps of siteU490 are broadlysimilar,thoughthe samplingpoints technique probablyunderestimatesthe extentof the site. We are thereforeencouraged by this in thebeliefthat1 sq m spotsamplesgivea reasonablerepresentation of surfaceartefact experiment concentration. in was collected,and thedensitiesaccordingto thedifferent periodsare illustrated Diagnosticpottery foreach rectanglegive ill. 24.58.Totalsofpotterydatableto thevariousperiods(Neolithic-Byzantine) an indicationoftheintensity ofoccupationduringtherelevantperiods.

Conclusion offieldsurveyhas advancedrapidlyin thelastfifteen The methodology years.In particular, and sherd of distributions has been laid on the recording background increasingemphasis

III. 1.24.Contourmap ofclickercountsat U490.

III. 1.25.Contourmap oftotaltileand sherdcountsat U490.

densitiesovertheentirelandscape.The aim has been twofold:firstto definemorerigorously and second(or,perhapsmore themfrom'non-sites', theoccurrenceof 'sites'and distinguish the first to human what is intended by activityoverthe whole strictly, approach) investigate The intensive of artefacts has the artefact concentrations. analysis 'off-site' landscapethrough withtheirsystematic collectionand dating.On theLaconia Survey, moveda stepfurther only highlyselectivecollectionsof 'non-site'materialwere made. Though thesehave produced - forexamplea fewMycenaeansherdsfroman ill-defined collectionin occasionalsurprises - theΌη-site'materialseemsto reflectreasonablythedistribution sector of thenorthernmost areas more intensive described above. as was borne out the of sites, by sample investigation has focusedon theissuesofthedispersion ofsherdsand howeffectively the attention Recently In theirrecentreviewof artefact surfacematerialcan reflectthe archaeologyunderground. Yorstonand othershave suggestedthatthereis no room for movementdue to cultivation, considerations havebeendiscussedbyWhitelawin hisimportant Further analysis complacency.218 of the sitesof Kephala and Paoura on Kea:219he focuseson the destructionof potteryby and abrasion,thedeflation of soil througherosion,and theproblemsofvisibility comminution discussedabove. In the currentstateof knowledgeit seems unwiseto claim over-refined withinsites.We hopenevertheless thattheLaconia conclusions on thebasisofartefact dispersion will both its and as a be valued for and indication Survey findings methodological technological forfuturework.As in all surveyprojects,the definitionof any one site is a judgementof in thesitecatalogue(Chapter and theevidenceforourjudgements is summarized probabilities, and of the Laconia The 24). samplingstrategy Surveywerea carefulcompromise projectdesign betweentheneedtomaximizearea coverage(inpursuitoftheoverallaims)and therequirements whiletakingaccountofpracticalconstraints. of investigative We are confident thatthe rigour, in and broader set will essential conclusions out the robust. findings following chapters prove 218R. M. Yorston,V. L. Gaffney,and P. J. Reynolds, 'Simulationof artifactmovementdue to cultivation', JAS 17 (ϊ99°)>67-83.

219Whitelaw(η. 197).

2 SOILS AND LAND USE POTENTIAL vanBerghem andJasperFiselier Jan-Willem The LANDSCAPE as perceived today is not what early settlerspenetrated in search of as a resultof naturalprocesses,in which land; it has been changedcontinuously agricultural humansplayeda roleas well.Whichsitesfarmers and occupiedthroughout theages preferred was largelyinfluencedby theirown agriculturalactivities.Erosion may have sweptaway fertilesoils,leavinghillsbare and dissected;terraces,arduouslyconstructedand formerly maintained, mayhave accumulatedenoughsoil to makeagriculture possibleon slopeswhere flourished before. onlywildvegetation Ruined houses or shatteredpotteryare not the only marksleftby human occupation. Truncatedsoils,colluviallayers,and alluvialdepositsare man-inducedhistoricalevidenceas well. These marks,thoughoftenbarelynoticeableand difficult to interpret, may help to ofsherdsand ruinedfarmsteads. A landscapeanalysismayevenallow explainthedistribution foran estimationof the capabilityand importanceof the ruralareas in sustaininglarger settlements suchas Sparta. The mainpurposeofthesoilsurveyconductedwithintheframework oftheLaconia Survey was to studythe suitability, and of the soils within which artefactsare stability, history embedded, in order to facilitatethe interpretationof site patterns. In the following paragraphs, methods of landscape reconstructionand land evaluation will be briefly described,and thentheiruse in analysingsitepatterns. Landscape

Reconstruction:

Methods

and Tools

general method of soil mapping The entireLaconia Surveyarea was mapped,usingair photointerpretation (at ι : 25,000)and fieldsurveys,in the summersof 1986 and 1988. A physiographicsoil map at a scale of 1 : 20,000was made,witha legendadaptedin sucha way that,in additionto soil suitability, soil age and soil stability werealso differentiating Since differences of parent characteristics. in land-formsand soil types,severalland-systems materialgeneratedifferences have been on the basis of theirgeology.For the land-system distinguished designated'hills,ridges,and have been combinedinto one footslopesin limestone',two different geologicalformations - a hard crystalline - forthepragmatic limestoneand a softerlayeredlimestone land-system reasonthatsimilarunits(e.g. steep slopes) show similarcharacteristics withrespectto soil and slopestability. The SOILMAPand legendare presentedat theend ofthevolume, suitability and represent an annexeto thischapter. Soil profiles,mostlyexposed along road cuts, eroded terraces,incisions,and recently bulldozedterraces,were describedin more detail,while auger bores were set to map the

58

Chapter2

coverage of the importantsoil units. Detailed soil descriptionscovered (among other colour,texture,structure,and carbonate content.In manyplaces, multicharacteristics) ofseverallayers,eithercolluvial so-called layeredprofiles, 'palaeosols'- consisting (depositedby erosion on slopes) or alluvial(deposited by rivers),representingdistinctphases in soil - wereencountered.Profileexposurewas, however,erratic,and development auger samples do not allow detailedanalyses;coverageof soil chronosequences,therefore, was farfrom In the distribution of older covered is still unknown. However, complete. particular, sequences theexposedprofiles theidentification ofdifferent permitted phasesin landscapedevelopment, ofdifferent periodsoferosionand stability. INTERPRETING

SOIL

PROFILES

Theformation ofsoilprofiles

Recordingthe featuresof ancientlandscapesis subjectto muchspeculation;the land-forms and soils found today functionmerelyas starting-points for reconstruction.The most reveal of soil indicators are soil important profiles.They stages developmentduringperiods of stability, erosion,and subsequentsedimentation. Stages of soil developmentare mainly recognized by soil colour, texture,structure,and the presence of calcite, CaCO3. In Mediterranean climates,soil developmentstartswith the leaching of CaCO3 and the formationof a soil structure.Gradually the soil becomes more reddish owing to the caused by the oxidationof clay-minerals, and clay is washed out formationof ferro-oxides in in of soil. soil accumulated distinct lower the After due timedifferent and layers parts Ά and the an characterized humus formation horizon', by layerscan be distinguished: in 'B of eluviationofclayand minerals;a horizon',eitherreddish colourbecause weathering or ofheaviertextureand distinctstructure as a resultofclayaccumulation;and a 'C horizon' of largelyunweatheredparentmaterial.Soil developmentis fasteron easilyweatherable parent materials,in stable positions where natural erosion is limited,and under high (ILL.2.1). precipitation Acceleratedsoil erosion

can mature,non-eroded, deep Only on flatsurfacessuchas terracesand broadwater-divides soilsbe encountered.Owing to erosionon mostslopes,formerly completeABC profilesare nowadaystruncated, exposingtheΒ horizon;in thecase ofsevereerosioneventheΒ horizon U-shapedval ey (N4c) Steep transportation slopes (N2d) Plateau remnants Colluvial footslope (N4b) ^* A> Middle glacis level(N3b) Upperglacis level(N4d) Middle glacis level(N3b) y τ gr Youngerlowerterraces(A2a) V-shapedsteep /Γ^ΑίΜΕ U-shapedvalley valley(N2d) 4//'^^^^^^ EvrotasyoungestAlluvialfandeposits(N3c) , . (?4c) level , , ' Α οφβκΚ^^^^ Upperglacis riverbed(Ala) O|(jer higher ν _^-«^^^^^^^^^

Il.I.. 'j.i. Examples

ni a elironoseíjuenee

and toposequenee

from the field.

Soils and land use potential 59

may have been washed away. Erosion is most intenseon steeperslopes withtheireasily soilswhichhaveonlya limitedinfiltration erodible,oftenfiner-textured capacity. As a resultof the impactof raindrops, Different kindsof erosioncan be distinguished. smallersoil particlesin particularare slowlyand graduallycarrieddownslope,forminga homogeneouscolluviallayer;thisprocessis generallycalled 'rain-splasherosion'.When the exceedstheinfiltration soil is saturatedor rainfallintensity capacityofthesoil,overlandflow will transportsoil particlesin a sheet of water; this is 'sheet-washerosion'. In thiscase, tonnesof soilsper velocitiesallow the transportation onlyof smallerparticles;nevertheless, hectaremaybe displacedannually.In thiscase also, thetransported particlesare depositedin texture.When overlandflowconcentratesin one place, rillsform, finelayersof different whichmay deepen into gullies.The flowvelocitiesin rilland gullyerosionalso allow the of largersoil particles,whichare normallywashed directlyinto streamsand transportation rivers.Each kind of erosionresultsin a different typeof sediment(colluvium):fineand formsof homogeneous,layered,or largelywithoutany sorting.Besidesthe aforementioned soilsmaybe transported forceswithoutthehelpofflowing erosion,(saturated) bygravitational water,whichalso leads to unsortedand unlayeredtypesof colluviumin whichlargerstones and boulderscan evenbe embedded. Undervegetation, onlylimitedformsof rain-splasherosionoccur,and erosionis normally theresultof accelerated The exposureof a B horizonis therefore slowerthansoil formation. soil erosion,oftentriggeredby sparse vegetationcover resultingfrom(over)-grazingby or ploughingby man. Agricultural domesticanimals,deforestation, expansionhas resultedin in erraticbutintense basin.An increase,however, intenseerosionall overtheMediterranean in otherwise rain-showers semi-aridconditionswillalso lead to an increasein erosion.Intense neverbe ruledoutcompletely. erosionofclimaticorigincan therefore Theformationofpalaeosols

Eroded materialmay be depositeddownslope,coveringformersoil profiles.In thisnewly severalcolluviallayers depositedcolluviuma newABC profilewillform.On somefootslopes someoftheformercharacteristics oftheerodedsoilssuch havebeen deposited,stillretaining as theircolourand theabsenceofcalciumcarbonates.The repeatedcoveringofsoilsleads to ofcomplex,multi-layered theformation palaeosols.In placeswithintheLaconia Surveyarea, colluvial especiallyon gentlyslopingfootslopesand old terraces,more than threedifferent Some ofthemmaybe datedbypotteryand maybe attributed layershavebeen distinguished. to human activitiessuch as wood-clearingand ploughing.Others, especiallythe oldest colluviallayers,mayreflectclimaticchanges.Superimposedalluvialsoilsare presentin some smallervalleys,and appear to coverlargeareas in the Evrótasvalleyand the intermontane alluviallayerscan be distinguished. basinsouthofChrysapha.Oftentwodistinct Soils may show characteristics thatreflectformerclimaticconditionsor ground-water levels.Soilswithan intensered colourwereoftenformedduringperiodsofhightemperature and excessiveprecipitation.Higher ground-waterlevels resultin continuousor seasonal saturationof the soil; thistriggerspedogeneticprocessesresultingin greyishhues and the ofsmallconcretions ofmanganeseand iron.Examplesoftheseindicatorsofformer formation are presentin a coveredpalaeosol near the Evrotasriver.Ground-water levels soil saturation also determinethe flowand depositionof dissolvedmineralssuch as calcium carbonate. Layersof precipitatedcalciumcarbonatehardenupon exposureto the air intopetrocalcic ('carbonate-rock') layersthatlook likelimestone.On the Neogene plateau withinthe survey levels.Today in area, severalpetrocalcichorizonsindicateformerly higherground-water

6o

Chapter2

soil has been eroded,exposingthepetrocalcicwithlargerstones severalplaces the overlying on top. and artefacts The aforementionedpedological indications,however,do not allow accurate dating. studies,usingpollen and wood as datingindicators, Palynologicaland dendrochronological have not been carriedout in thisarea forlack of suitablesitesand materials;neitherhas encountered radiocarbondating.Only in a veryfewplaces were datable potteryfragments more withinexposedsoilprofiles, precisedating(ILL.2.2). permitting INTERPRETING

LAND-FORMS:

THE FORMATION

OF GLACIS

Severalgeomorphological processeshave playedan importantrole in formingthe Laconia creation of 'glacis'- flatland-formswithverysmall angles of slope- is area. The Survey erosional processes.These glacis, therefore,normallyslope largelydue to retrogressive towardsthe river,whereasalluvial terracesslope in a downstreamdirection.Glacis can fromolderalluvialterraces.Usuallytwotypesofglaciscan be therefore easilybe distinguished is characterized The so-calledglacisd'érosion byshallowsoilsand occasionalrock distinguished. directions. The glacisd'accumulation generallyhas outcrops,and sometimesslopesin different ofa glacismayhavebeen deepersoils,and slopestowardstheriver.Sometimestheformation influencedby a harder,nearlyhorizontalgeologicallayeror petrocalciclayer.Examplesof determined thesestructurally glacisare presentneartheMenelaion(Q360). in the Laconia studyarea. The A minimumof threeglacis levels can be distinguished the smoothing Neogeneplateauis in facta glacisformedin alluvialfandeposits,thusfurther Alongthe easternside of the Evrotastwomoreglaciswere originalgentlyslopingfan-form. formedand then largelyeroded, leaving only relativelysmall remnantslike secondary watersheds pointingtowardstheEvrotas. The Landscape

History

of the Survey Area

geological history a chronological For thepurposeoflandscapereconstruction, sequenceof severaldistinctsoil profilesof differentage has firstbeen established (TABLE2.1). Soil units have been whilethepresenceofartefacts and land-form, on thebasisofsoilcharacteristics differentiated indicatestheirpossibleage.

Section J

J

Originalsurface

*L^^

/^S^^^^^^^^^^^^^SC^i^

II.I.. -2.2.Λ palaeosolon a terracewithpotteryfragments.

Soils and land use potential soil colour(B horizon)

soil unit

limestone(Lia, Lib) Neogene(Nia, Nib) schists(Sia, Sib) glacisι (N3a/S3a) glacis2 (N3b/S3b) alluvialfanlower1 alluvialfanupper(N3b/S3b) basinfilllower1 basinfillupper(L4a)2 colluviumι (N4.C/S4.C)2 colluvium2 (N4.b/S4.b)2 colluvium3 (various)2 colluvium4 (various) riverterrace1 (A2b) riverterrace2 (A2a) riverterrace3 (Aia)

2.5 YR 2.5 YR 2.5 YR 5YR 5 YR-2.5 YR 5 YR-2.5 YR 7-5 YR 2.5 YR 5 YR 2.5 YR 7.5 YR-5 YR 10 YR 10 Y 10 YR 10 Y 10 Y

struc. Ca content

ontop) (oldest artefacts

Bt Bt,slsi Bt Bt,pris. Bt Bt,ang. Bw Ca-, platey Ca+ Ca-, ang. cc, CaCa+, Bw Ca+ Bw,Ca+ Bw,Ga+ none,Ca+

Nl Nl Nl EH LH notfound Cl notfound
61

est.age

pre-Pliocene Pliocene pre-Pliocene Pleistocene Pleistocene
1 Onlypresentas coveredpaleosol. 2These unitsare representative. 3 Older artefacts encountered on theseunitsmaybe ofallochthonous origin. Basinfillsare twodistinct layersofalluviumfoundS ofChrysaphain a nearlyflatbasin. Key Bt Bw slsi pris. ang. Ca+ Ca< >

textureΒ colourΒ slickensides (shinysoilsurfacesformedbyfrequent rubbing,caused byswelling) structure prismatic angularstructure withCaCO, withoutCaCO, earlierthan laterthan

Table 2.1.The mostimportant diagnosticsoilunits.

The limestone hills,schisthills,and Neogeneplateau

The Laconia studyarea is partoftheSpartavalley,whichhas a complexgeologicalhistory. As Bachmannand Rischassume,1thevalleywas formedby important tectonicsubsidenceofthe pre-Pliocenelandscape.The loweringof the valleybottomwas accompaniedby the heavy erosionof the adjacentslopesand the depositionof slope materialin thevalley.Duringthis tectonicsubsidencea marinetransgression tookplace,inundating thevalley;consequently, the base oftheMenelaionconsistsofmarinedepositsofPlioceneage. These marinedepositswere coveredbyalluvialfandepositsofvarioussourcesduringat leastthreesuccessivephases.2This complexofveryold alluvialfansis called the'Neogene'. Some ofthewater-divides presentin thelimestone(Li units)and theschists(Si units)are consequently olderthantheNeogene. 1 G.-H. Bachmann and H. Risch, Die geologische Entwicklung der Argolis-H albinsel (Peloponnes,Griechenland)(Geologisches

B 32; Stuttgart, Jahrbuch, 1979). 2 A. Panagos,G. Pe, and N. Kontopoulos,Analysisof the

sedimentsofAfissos,Sparta',Bulletin oftheGeological Society of Greece (Δελτίοτης 'ΕλληνικήςΓεωλογικήςΕταιρείας),12.2 (1976),3-28.

62

Chapter2

LANDSCAPE HISTORY Glacis of theEvrotasvalley

Afterthe formationof a large alluvial fan (the Neogene), threesuccessivestagesof glacis occurred.The oldestlevelledtheNeogenealluvialfan;duringit,variouspetrocalcic formation wereformedon were formed.At the same time,or afterwards, U-shapedvalley-heads layers similarto theoriginalfan-shapeoftheNeogene. theNeogeneplateau,withan orientation be The latertwoglacislevelsmaycoincidewithVita-Finzi's'olderfill',and maytherefore datedto theend ofthePleistocene.These glacisare situatedwellbelowtheNeogeneplateau, Bintliff and are separatedfromit by a steepcliff, probablyformedby recenttectonicactivity. in theSpartavalleywererestricted to moundsofNeogene settlements noticedthatprehistoric parentmaterialsurroundedby 'youngerfill',dated by Vita-Finzito AD 400.3 These mounds in Neogenematerial,and are appear to coincidewiththelatterstagesof glacisdevelopment the date than the formation of of a much later Neogeneitself. consequently Alluvialfans and terraces

intothevalleyoftheEvrotas,whichoriginates There is a complexofalluvialfans,protruding Its formationhas at least two distinctphases,as can be fromvarioussmallerriver-valleys. earlierthan froman olderpalaeosol. Its surfaceis nowherestrewnwithartefacts interpreted and maycoincidewithVita-Finzi's theBronzeAge. It maybe the resultofhumanactivities, youngerfill(above). Vita-Finzi'sfillshave been stronglydisputedby severalauthors,who The youngeralluvial indicatethatan anthropogenic origincannotbe ruledout completely.4 as a similar to the Lower be of date Flamboura, distinguished by van Andel and phase may othersand dated300-50 BC. basin southof Chrysapha,which A similaralluvialdepositis presentin the intermontane was also formedduringat least two phases. The two deposits,however,need not be of a similarage. This meansthatmostoftheflat,lowerpartsofthemainvalleyand basin,where alluviumcould have been deposited,have been coveredtwiceduringthe period of human occupation. riverterraceshavebeen formedalongtheEvrotas.The youngest Threedifferent maybe no to morethan 200 yearsold, the oldestno morethan500-700 years,according pedogenetic characteristics.In places, ancient artefactshave been found on the upper terrace; it is thattheywerepartofsoilbroughtin fromelsewhereand used forlevelling probable,however, up and soilimprovement. The presenceofcolluvium

An old, reddish,weatheredcolluvium(colluvium1) is presenton someofthelesssteepslopes; its highcontentof stonesand gravelpointstowardsa periodof severeerosion,probablyof soil structure climaticorigin.The red colour(2.5 YR) and well-developed implya date much older than the Neolithic.Its thicknessin generalexceeds50 cm, and can exceed 1 m. It is butnotin a positionbelow foundmainlyas a palaeosolin theNeogeneand schistformations, theglacislevels. 3 BintlifT, NaturalEnvironment.

4 e.g. T. H. van Andel,C. N. Runnels,and K. O. Pope, 'Five thousandyearsof land use and abuse in the southern Argolid,Greece', Hesp.55 (1986), 103-28;J. M. Wagstaff,

of some problemsin the interpretation 'Buriedassumptions: the "youngerfill"raisedby recentdata fromGreece',JAS 8 (1981),247-64.

Soils and land use potential 63

At least two, sometimesthree,later colluvial layers have been formedthat may be attributedto human activities.Oftenseverallayersare presenton older terracedslopes. Van Andel and othersarguethatin recenthistorythereis no evidenceforclimaticchanges in Greece thatcould account forstrongerosionand colluviation.The thicknessof these youngercolluviallayersin the Laconia Surveyarea rangesbetween20 and 50 cm. The presenceoflayersofveryfinegravelindicatesthatsome colluviumhas been depositedby a Some showtracesofRoman potteryofAD 200-300, whileothers successionofsheet-floods. are probablynot olderthan300 BC (see TABLE2.1). Only a limitednumberof exposuresof earliercolluviallayershave been found,so no coherentpicturecan be the aforementioned drawnoftheirfullcoveragein the area. The youngestcolluvium(colluvium4) coverslarge areas ofthefootslopesand valleysbetweentheglacisin theEvrotasvalley,and is stillin the processof formation.It may be expectedthat earliersites,such as those of Bronze Age date, could have been buried by one or even several colluvial phases, especially on to explainthe absence of footslopesand in colluvialvalleys.This, however,is not sufficient whichare mucholder.Erosionmayhave taken BronzeAge sitesfromtheglacisthemselves, away sites fromthe smallerremnants,but not fromthe veryflatbroader glacis in the Evrotasvalley(TABLE2.2). The chronological and geomorphological levels found correspond with the levels by Bachmannand Risch. The middleglacis level correspondsin heightand distinguished withtheleveloftheacropolisofSparta. formation THE ROLE OF HUMANS IN LANDSCAPE HISTORY Landscape historybeforetheappearanceofhumans

date fromthe Pliocene(Neogene As can be deducedfromtheabove,mostof theland-forms to Pleistocene and (lowerglacislevels)periods.The alluvialfandepositsin the glacis) plateau Evrotasvalleyand the riverterracesare exceptions.In termsof allocatedvolume,the oldest a fargreatermass of erodedmaterialthanthe more colluvium(layer1) probablyrepresents colluvium. of recentand thinner layers Erosionand depositioncaused byhumans

Some yearsago, extensivestudieswere carriedout in the southernArgolidin the northa chronologyof easternPéloponnèse.Using moderndatingtechniquesand detailedsurvey,

Bachmannand Risch

estimated age

Laconia soil units

upperglacissystem

Quaternary upperPliocene/early

Neogeneplateau(Nia-b; N2a-b); corresponding (Sia-b; Lia-b)

erosionaldepositsand structural terraces

latePleistocene

(Sßa; Lßa) upperglacis(Nßa); corresponding

terraces erosionalfoothill

late Pleistocene

middleglacis(Nßb; S3D)

terraces intruding

LH/C1

alluvialfandeposits(N3C)and basinfill(L4a)

alluvialterraces

Ott/recent

alluvialterraces(A2a-b)

in chronological Table 2.2. Different land-forms order,accordingto Bachmannand Risch(1979)and in theLaconia Survey.

64

Chapter2

an analogouschronology datableeventswas established.5 However,establishing solelyon the basis ofB-horizoncharacteristics wouldbe speculativeand bound to fail:precipitation varies, and parentmaterialsdiffer withrespectto weatherability and ironcontent.Furthermore, the in in the is based on alluvial which are absent the Argolid entirely layers, chronology largely Laconia Surveyarea. two different to sheet-flood typesof alluvium,attributed Pope and van Andel distinguish and gullyerosion respectively.These are thoughtto be representativeof overgrazing, and the total collapse of terracesystemsbecause of land abandonmentor deforestation, neglectin periodsofpoliticalunrestor economicdecline.Bothtypeshave also been observed withincolluviallayersin the Laconia Surveyarea. Erosional eventsattributedto human activityand distinguishedby Pope and Van Andel are (1) the seventeenthto twentieth centuriesAD (Kranidhi),(2) the Middle Byzantine(upperFlamboura),(3) 300-50 BC (lower The last is thoughtto represent the result Flamboura),and (4) £.2500-2000BC (Pikrodhafni). ofthefirst majoragricultural expansionin thearea. A comparisonbetween the Argolidand the Laconia Surveyarea on the basis of soil in parentmaterialand climate.Most is notpossible;theareas are too different characteristics of the man-influenced alluvial events,however,have causes of regionalorigin.Declining Mediterraneaneconomiesand politicaldisturbances may also have influencedland use and erosionin thecentralpartofthePéloponnèse. The possibleimpactoftheEarly Helladic agriculturalexpansion

Some of the alluvialfansand colluviallayerspresentin the Laconia Surveymay therefore have similarcauses and dates of origin.The loweralluvialfan,now covered,as well as the loweralluviallayerof the basin fill,may have been formedduringthe same period as the Pikrodhafni. Some of the older colluvium(layer2) may have been formedduringthe same in As the Argolidduringthisperiod,a fairnumberof Early Helladic sitesin the period. Laconia Surveyarea may indicatean agricultural expansion,followedby a reductionin the numberofsitesin theMiddleHelladicperiod.MostoftheBronzeAge sitesfoundare situated in a positionupstreamof the alluvialfancomplex,in an area of whatare nowadayseroded and truncatedsoilprofiles. of EH siteshave notbeen occupiedsince,which Nearlyone-third as a resultoferosion. indicate that these sites have become unsuitable may The possibleimpactoftheclassical agriculturalexpansion

The upper alluvial fan and upper basin fillmay have been formedduringand afterthe similarto the formation of the lowerFlamboura,a period classicalperiodin circumstances thatsaw a rapidincreasein the numberof sites.Moreover,a declinein sitesduringthe late hellenisticto Roman period can be seen in the Laconia Surveyarea (Chapter 6), and, a large numberof the archaic and classical siteson the Neogene were not furthermore, afterwards (c.50 per cent).The drawingof parallelswiththe southernArgolid, reoccupied remains however, speculative,since an accuratedatingof sedimentsin the Laconia area is lacking. Besides provokingerosion, humans have also built terraces; some are doubtless of considerable age. The oldest are on the footslopesof the limestonehills and south of 5 K. O. Pope and T. H. van Andel, 'Late Quaternary alluvial and soil formationin the southernArgolid: its

history,causes and archaeological implications',JAS 11 (1984),281-306.

Soils and land use potential 65

of the land foragriculture mayhave gradually Chrysapha.On the schisthills,the suitability more colluvium. accumulation of with the improved The impactofhumansin recenttimes

Human influence,however,has been verylarge in recentyears.Many slopes,especiallyin the Evrotasvalley,have recentlybeen bulldozedintonew terracesto permitthe expansion of irrigated olive and citrus cultivation. The impact of this bulldozing in terms of landscapingis probablymore extensivethan any impacthuman societieshave had in the lasttwothousandyears. Land Evaluation

and Soil

Suitability

History

land qualities and land use requirements of an area fora given and soil qualitiesdeterminethe suitability Bothland use requirements water of the land is determined The of (a function availability by type agriculture. suitability and soil of climate,soil textureand depth, and sometimesgroundwater),soil fertility, and sometimes content, stoniness, plotsize). (controlled byclay slope, workability and evaporation Precipitation

is crucial. In Mediterranean climateswitha pronounceddryseason,soil moistureavailability mm with less than in to c.8oo is 630 mm in per year, Precipitation Sparta reported average one in fouryears.The averageannualrainfallforAphysou,whichis only2 or 3 kmnorth-east betweenOctober of Sparta,is only£.550mm (c.30per centless),and occursdiscontinuously and March. Movingeastwards,precipitation may again increase,thoughdata are lacking. is verysteep,and slightchangesin climaticconditionsmay This gradientin precipitation resultin large changesin agriculturalproduction,renderingvariousrain-dependent crops unreliableand unsuitable. radiation,and wind.Temperatures vary Evaporationis largelycontrolledby temperature, of 300-400 m mayaccountfora temperature withexposureand height.A heightdifference in averagedailywind fallof 1-3 °C and a drop of 6-8 per centin evaporation.Differences in classesbetween0-2 and 2-5 metresper secondmay also accountfora similardifference between and sites. Maximum differences between sheltered exposed exposed evaporation where difference valleysand sheltered plateauxare expectedto be £.20per cent,an important in the area. is as study precipitation low, therefore varywithinthestudyarea. Althoughclimatological Evaporationand precipitation lower data are lacking,thehigher,easternpartsof the area maybe expectedto have slightly than the lower and are therefore less and 'dry' temperatures probablyhigherprecipitation, are forests to the Evrotas. Several zones near up 400 m, agro-climatic present:evergreen parts semi-deciduousat 400-550 m, and deciduous forestsat 550-850 m. These zones largely activities. coincidewithdifferent agricultural Wateravailabilityand soil water-retention capacity

and The amountofwateravailableforplantgrowthdependslargelyupon rainfalldistribution of most shallow soils is less than The water-retention soil water-retention capacity. capacity deep soilsitrangesfrom 50 mm,or at most100mm,forloamycolluvium.Amongmoderately mm mm and coarser soils to for soils. for 150 50 sandy stony loamy Deep, loamysoilsmay

66

Chapter2

have a water-retention capacity of more than 300 mm. With discontinuous rains, and precipitationvaryingbetween 400 and 800 mm, and with the water requirementsof many agriculturalcrops exceeding 300-450 mm, soil water-retentioncapacity is a very important factor,more so than differencesin evaporation. Most shallow soils, especially in exposed positions,are thereforeunsuitable for agriculture and are covered with shrubs and patchy grasses. With respect to agriculture the most favourablesoils are: (1) Fine-texturedcolluvial footslopesand older terracesin the limestonearea, and colluvial soils in between the glacis of the Neogene and schist area; also some of the U-shaped valleysin the Neogene plateau. (2) Un-eroded, deeper soils on the broader water-dividesand on slightlysloping terrain, especiallyon schistsand Neogene. The (3) easily rootable, but less loamy and nutritious,soils of the siltstonesand alluvial terraces.These are suitable fortree crops. (4) Soils within reach of ground water, such as the lower alluvial terraces, the fringesof alluvial valleys,and soils near seepage zones. These are suitable fordeep-rootingtrees. of many upper and steeper slopes has oftendeterioratedas a result of erosion. The fertility The impact of erosion is mainly feltas a decline in the water-retentioncapacity of the soil, since usually the weathered,loamy,upper soil has been lost. Land use requirements (TABLE 2.3)

The erraticrainfallrepresentsa seriousconstrainton manyformsof rain-fedagriculture, rainfall. ofwheat,whichrequiresat least250 mmofwell-distributed exceptforthecultivation it be limited because of more than have a of cereals 150days; may growing-season Manytypes temperaturesare too low (below 6-10 °C) or too high (above 25-30 °C), or because of moisture. insufficient Olive grovesmay be presentat less than 200 mm of The olive is verydrought-resistant. and are mostlyfoundat 400-600 mm. The optimumis £.800mm,and annualprecipitation, and frost rainfall.Olive-treesare sensitiveto waterlogging productionfallswithdiminishing are with olive-trees frost increases incidence of Since the height, during flowering. at altitudesofup to 850 m in thispartofGreece(see Chapter3). Wheat,barley, encountered as determinedby tables.Workability, to higherground-water and oats are medium-tolerant in thepastthanit is stoniness and plotsize,maybe expectedto havebeen lessofa constraint todayformechanizedagriculture. GENERAL LAND SUITABILITY OF THE SURVEY AREA

is present,rangingfrom Withinthe Laconia Surveyarea, a steep gradientin precipitation rainfallamountstoo smallformanyrain-fedcrops(< 400 mm) to sufficient (> 750 mm).In withinthe in therain-shadows addition,a slightchangein climaticconditions maylead to a shift allow and thereby Spartavalley.This willlead to an enormouslocal increasein precipitation, withlimitedriskof crop failure.These climaticchanges, mosttypesof rain-fedagriculture, in cannotbe recognized however, maynotbe noticeableon a widerregionalscale,and therefore to make.The difficult are therefore pollendiagrams.Estimatesof the generalland suitability willbe based upon of the land foragriculture of the generalsuitability following description and agricultural and uponpresentvegetation actualamountsofprecipitation practices.

Soils and land use potential

67

in limestone Hills,ridges, andfootslopes

Isolated hillsof massivelimestoneare foundin the northernpart of the studyarea. They and steep to moderatelysteepslopes thatoftencurve normallyfeaturebroad water-divides and in pocketson thewater-divides, are The soilson thesefootslopes, intocolluvialfootslopes. In in viewoftheirhighwateravailability and nutrient content. many excellentforagriculture have been laid out in terraces,probablymanycenturiesago. In places places thesefoothills whereterracewalls have been eroded away recently,palaeosols of considerableage are In thesepositions,erodedsoil materialis easilytrappedand manyerosion-cumencountered. sedimentation incisions,steepto verysteepslopes phasescan be observed.Near fault-induced wereformed,onlythinlycoveredwithsoil. The scatteredlimestoneunitsare underlainby schistformations, renderingthemunstablenear the edges and eventuallycreatingsmall, All suitablesoilsare coveredwitholive-trees. water-sources. temporary moreeasilyweatherable, and consequently ofChrysaphaa lessconsolidated, To thesouth-west and marls.Broad is found,showingalternating formation lessstablelimestone layersoflimestone withgood deep soilsdo but colluvialvalleysand footslopes are less prominent, water-divides flatintermontane basinis found, southofthesurvey area an almosttotally occur.In theextreme because colluvialand alluviallayers.In placesthesoilsaremoderately filledwithdifferent suitable, on betterarablepalaeosols.In thisarea, too, of stonyalluviumnear the surfacesuperimposed Withintheintermontane olive-trees basin,cerealsmaybe growninwetter years. predominate. limestonemountainsnot farto the east generatesemi-perennial The massivecrystalline bodies wheretheytouchupon less permeablemarlsand schists; streamsand ground-water these water resourcesmay help to extend the growingseason. The mountainsare also responsibleforslightlyhigherprecipitationand lowerevaporation,makingconditionsfor lessharshnearChrysapha. agriculture The land systemoftheschistsand quartzites

of easilyweatheredlayersof schist, Almosthalfof the studyarea consistspredominantly and quartzites.These soils are oftenunstable,young,and stony,witha limited siltstones, In steeper suitableforagriculture. water-retention capacitythatrendersthemonlymoderately weathered On water-divides and erode surfaces, deeply gentlysloping easily. positionsthey moreclayeyand moresuitable oldersoilswithreddishhuescan be found,whichare generally Small patchesof limestonealso occur,whichgive rise to more clayeysoils. foragriculture. recentdate. Mostterracesappearto be ofrelatively As a resultof erosion,the suitabilityof the deeper,well-developedsoils more suitedto throughtheages. Treescan easilydevelopan extensiverootmayhavediminished agriculture on these weatherable soils,and are thedominantvegetation.Olive-trees growon most system terraces. Plateau remnants;valleysin JVeogene deposits

The Neogeneconsistsof interlayered sands,and siltsand is heavilydissected, conglomerates, In manyplaces soilformation and water-divides. has remnants leavingonlysmallplateau-like ofpetrocalcichorizonswhichoftenfunctionas cap-rocks(harder givenriseto theformation easilyerodiblestrata)afterthe originaltopsoilhas underlying, layerscoveringand protecting been erodedaway.This impliesthatin placessoilsweremoresuitablein thepast. Soil suitabilitydepends upon the typeof parent material,whichvaries greatlyin the Neogene. In places, clayeysoils suitableforagriculturehave developed,especiallyon the water-divides and the broad valley-headswithcolluvialfills.In the Neogene landscape,the

68

Chapter2 (mm)1 requirements

Naturalvegetation

suitablesoil units2

700-1,050

all exceptshallowsoils(< 300 mm)

barley wheat

300-450 300-450

oats vegetables vineyards

300-450 250-600 450-900

nearlyall soils,butcoarserand shallow soils in units Sia-b, S2a-b, S3a-c, and 84b are less suitableto unsuitable; neitherare youngriverterraces(A2a-b) withlow loam content;withless than 400 mm of precipitationonly deep loamy soils are suitable enough (see vineyards);the same holds for the Neogene plateau, where shallow (on soilsoccuras resultoferosion petrocalcic)and coarse(on conglomerate)

deciduoustrees

Rain-fedcrops

Rain-fedtreecrops

onlydeeper,loamysoilsare suitablesuchas 84b, N4b,I4.b-c and olderterraces

olive

200-1,000

walnuts citrus

700-1,000 600-1,000

nearlyall unitshave potential,exceptforverystonyand shallowsoils in the schistarea, thelowerriverterracesand erodedpartsoftheNeogeneplateau nonewithoutirrigation, exceptwherein reachofground-water nonewithoutirrigation, exceptwherein reachofground-water

800-1,000 600-1,000

notrelevant notrelevant

crops Irrigated

olive citrus

1 forsoils withsmallwaterretentioncapacityand are givenas wateravailabilityforplantgrowth.Particularly Requirements can onlybe metbylargeramountsofrainfall. theserequirements rainfall, irregular 2 Soil at Aphysou.Soils on steepand verysteepslopesand the present is givenat the averageannual precipitation suitability Fromtheviewpointofworkability, river-beds are notconsideredforcerealsand tree-crops. steep strongly slopingto moderately and terracedslopes(unitsS2C,L2C,N2c) are also notconsidered. zonesin thesurveyarea. Table 2.3. Land use requirements and agro-ecological

was probablydeeperthantoday,but it has soil thatcoveredthe higherbroad water-divides eroded gradually,leavingthe heavierstonesand human artefactsbehind.The uppermost partsofthevalleysin theNeogeneare U-shapedcolluvialvalleys.Some ofthesehave loamy, themmoresuitableforagriculture. deepersoilsand are lessexposedto thewind,rendering Glacis and alluvial terracesof thevalleyof theEvrotas

Near the Evrotasvalley,glacishave formedin both the schistand the Neogene formations. The soils are usuallydeep and suitableforagriculture.The alluvial fansmay have been for formedin two main phases,the Early Helladic and classicalperiods.Their suitability At their formation. limited after been soil development has improved, just having agriculture tree for and are suitable for suitable the momentthesesoilsare moderately wheat, cropsin in the have been the Evrotas viewoftheirdepth.This area near past;evidence, irrigated may to speculateaboutthephysicalconditionsoftheformer is lacking.It is difficult valley however, floor,nowcoveredand partiallyeroded. These are Alongthe major river,the Evrotas,severalriverterracescan be distinguished. The sedimentation. dominant a of formed during period newlyincisedformervalleyfloors, The soils of well but are their soils relatively developed. young upperterracesare the oldest; terraces the whereas at suitable theseupper terracesare moderately are, younger present, suitableonlyfortreecrops. withoutanyformofirrigation,

Soils and land use potential 69 Summary

As can be seenfromTABLE 2.3,mostcerealsare criticalcropsin thestudyarea. Shallow,stony, at foragriculture capacitieshaveonlya limitedsuitability youngsoilswithlowwater-retention and are not suitableat less than400 mmper year,which 550 mmper yearoferraticrainfall, mayoccurin largepartsofthestudyarea and in drieryears.The averageannualproduction be expectedto be low,perhapsoftheorderof400-600 kilograms ofwheatcan therefore per hectare.This is lessthanhas been estimatedforBoiotia,whereproductionis assumedto have reachedas muchas 800-1,000kg/ha.6Consequentlythe averagesize of a farmin the study area,withfivepersonsand 50 per centfallow,musthavebeen in theorderof4 ha or morein historical periods,in orderto producea surplusfortheurbanpopulation. Vineyardscan also be consideredmarginaland willbe confinedto deep and loamysoils, can extendtherangeofvines suchas trenching and terracing thoughtechniquesofviticulture to less suitableareas. Olive cultivationwill have to endurereducedproductionwhenever is lessthan400 mm,and especiallyon shallowerand coarsersoils. precipitation is verylimited.Arableland is concentrated The surfacearea ofsoilssuitableforcultivation in thevalleyoftheEvrotasnearAphysou(lessthan500 ha), on theNeogeneplateau(lessthan 500 ha), and near Chrysapha(200 ha). The last area, however,formspart of a largerbasin withmoresuitablesoils.The Neogeneplateau(especiallythesteeperslopesand valleys)and a largepartoftheschisthillsare coveredby shrubsand wildoats,and maybe suitableonlyas Grazinghappenedto be an importantactivityseveraldecades ago, involving grazing-land. areas. betweenvalleysand mountainous seasonalmigration on rainfall distribution is information lacking.There are indicationsthatin the Adequate rainfall increases withaltitude.The actual land use the amount of mountains surrounding treeson schistsin thenorthern showsthepresenceofmulberry partofthesurveyarea. Some cereals and vegetablescan be foundon well-developedschistsoils throughoutthe area. Agriculturalproductionin the past was probablylow and unreliable.The agricultural potentialof the easternpart of the Evrotasvalley,and on similarsoils near Sparta,can be to be twicethatofthesurveyarea. estimated Interpreting

Site Patterns

the presence of artefacts and sites whichyieldeda The studyarea has been surveyedforartefactsby intensivefield-walking, of When no artefacts were of sites different found,theymayneverhavebeen periods. pattern the land has been because unsuitable;however,artefacts mayonce have been always present or over. but afterwards eroded covered present Erosionmayhave occurredon steepand moderately steepslopes;it is notverylikelythat from the flat water-divides and broaderglaciswithout sites have been washed away complete trace. The of artefacts found on pattern steeperslopesmostlyhad an elongated leavingany sitestheelongationmaybe oftheorder forolderhistorical formwitha downslopeorientation; thatlargerartefacts are farlessmobilethansoilparticles.However,very of20-40 m,indicating old sites,notablyof Neolithicor BronzeAge date,mayhave been erodedaway fromsteeper Fragments maybe presentonlyin remaining patchesofold slopes,leavingno tracesofpottery. (>Bintliffand Snodgrass,'BoeotianExpedition'.

70

Chapter2 Ml

EH

MH

LH

Cl

HI

Schists

waterdivide mod. slopes

2

2

6

l9

25

■φ*

5 31

0«

I

1

18

4

1

Limestone

waterdivide mod.slopes coll + terr.

1

Neogene

waterdivide mod.slopes

1

3

1

Glacisand alluvialfans waterdivides alluvial fans basin fill

3

1

1

21

8

3

2

1

1

1

3

2

1

!5 8

12

II

2

4

5

38

18

13

!3

*5

1

9 7

2

14

16 8 4

*9 5

8

1?

1?

104

103

1

!9

I

8

I

7

11

2

4

I

Alluvialterraces

upperterrace middleterr. lowerterr.

Totalsites

2

33

18

*3

132

66

7

Tablk 2.4. Approximate numbersoffindspots on themorestablesoilunits.

soils.7In fact,on somevalleyspursoftheNeogenetheoriginalsoilhas probablybeen washed ofartefacts ofpottery remain.The covering whilelargerfragments byalluvium awaycompletely or colluvium mayhavehappenedon colluvialslopes,on terracedslopes,and underalluvialfans area.The numberof Withinthesurvey thesesoilunitscovera substantial and basinfills. territory havebeenunderestimated. and on valleyterraces oldersiteson footslopes maytherefore LAND SUITABILITY

AND ARTEFACT

PATTERNS

(TABLE

2.4)

Generally,with increasingdemographic pressureless suitable siteswill be occupied. The areal distribution, especiallyon marginalsoil units,thereforegivesa strongindicationof demographic on natural resources.About the surveyarea the followingremarkscan be made. pressure are found on the Neogene plateau and, in places, in the limestone Neolithic artefacts (1) area. The number of sites,however,is too small to justifyany statementsabout occupational preferences.Similarlylow densitiesof Neolithic siteshave been encounteredby others.8 (2) A firstpeak in the number of sites occurs during the Early Helladic period, with the emphasis upon the Neogene water-divides(Nia, Nib). The occupation of the schistarea and glacis near the Evrotas valley duringthe Neolithic and the Early,Middle, and Late Helladic is stillvery limited compared with later periods of occupation. The Evrotas valley during the Early Helladic period may have been either too wet and thereforeconducive to diseases, or too dry for most crops, while the Neogene plateau offeredbetter conditions. Some Early 7 See e.g. J. F. Cherry,J. L. Davis, A. Demitrack, E. Mantzourani,T. F. Strasser,and L. Talalay,'Archaeological landscape: a Middle Neolithic surveyin an artifact-rich

examplefromNemea,Greece',AJA92 (1988),159-76. 0 e.g.bintlinand önodgrass,boeotianExpedition.

Soils and land use potential

71

Helladic sites,however,may have been presentbut later buried by colluvium or eroded away, since most Middle and Late Helladic sitesappear to be severelyeroded on these soil units. (3) The Neogene plateau is again importantin the late archaic-early classical period, but its (relative)importancediminishesafterwards.A verylarge proportionof Bronze Age siteswere not reoccupied during the classical period, and many classical sites were not used during the hellenisticperiod. Many Early Helladic artefactsare found in places that must be considered unsuitable for agriculture today. It must thereforebe assumed that this area has seriously deterioratedas a resultof erosion. (4) With the exception of the alluvial fan, most soil unitslike the glacis date back beforethe Neolithic. The absence of Bronze Age artefactson these soil units cannot be attributedto soil characteristicsalone; perhaps climaticconditions,strategicconsiderations,or settlementtypes can explain it. (5) During the hellenistic and Roman periods the schist and glacis areas become more important.These schistsoils are mainly suitable forthe cultivationof trees,such as olive and mulberry, preferablyon terraces.

Discussion

and Conclusions

the impact of humans The Laconia studyarea has witnessed severalstagesoflandscapedevelopment. The alluvialfans in theEvrotasvalley,as wellas threecolluvialphases,mayhavebeen formedduringand after BronzeAge occupationand caused by human activities.During or shortlyafterthe Early Helladicand thelater,latearchaic-earlyclassicalexpansionofagriculture, erosionmayhaveled ofalluvialfansand colluviallevelsand thelossofsuitablesoils,especiallyin the to theformation manysoilsin the schist Neogeneplateauand thebasinfillsouthof Chrysapha.Furthermore, a area deteriorated the classical as result of as can be seenfromthemany erosion, during period soilprofiles. The riverterraces wereprobablyformedaftertheByzantine truncated period. THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SURVEY TERRITORY AS AN AGRICULTURAL AREA

The mostsuitablesoils,deep and of heavytexture,are foundon colluvialfootslopesand on Arablesoilsoccupya relatively smallpartof the surveyarea. The thebroaderwater-divides. soilson theNeogeneplateauweremoresuitablein thepast.The alluvialfansprobablycover more suitable,maturesoils. Rainfallis erraticand slight,and the cultivationof cereals in particularmusthavebeen uncertain.Agricultural productionwas unreliableand low,and far lowerthanin thecomparablearea closeto and westofSparta. SETTLEMENT

DIFFERENCES?

artefactpatternsis slightlyhamperedby erosion and sedimentation,which Interpreting remove and coverolderartefacts. The presenceof older occupationphases will respectively tendto be underestimated. The area has undergoneat leasttwodistinct phasesofagricultural The first took the Helladic and concentrated on theonce deep expansion. place during Early soils on the Neogene plateau, thoughothersoils were suitableas well. Aftera period of abandonmenta second expansiontookplace duringthe late archaic-earlyclassicalperiod; but also the schistarea and the Evrotasvalley, again the Neogene plateau was preferred, whichhad not been extensively before. It is not knownhow farclimaticvariation occupied have this may governed preference.

3

OBSERVATIONS ON THE HISTORICAL ECOLOGY OF LACONIA OliverRackham This WORKcomprisesthebotanicalstudycarriedout in Augustand September1984as part of the workof the Laconia Survey.1 Much of the surveyarea consistsof wild vegetationof some ecologicalinterest;but in orderto includea widerand more representative rangeof thebotanicalstudywas extendedto a muchlargerarea ofsome 80 by 30 plantcommunities, withadjacentpartsofArkadiaand km,coveringall ofLaconia exceptthesouth-east, together itseasternplain.(The Arkadianpartwas revisited byDr J.A. Moody and theauthorin 1985.) The wildvegetation whichis thesubjectofthisstudyformerly coveredabout halfofLaconia, buttheproportion is rapidlyincreasing.2 The Land of Laconia Laconia (ILL. 3.1) consistsof the basin of the riverEvrótas,lyingbetweenthe two great mountain ranges of Taygetos and Párnon. The plain of Sparta is the only large, continuouslycultivatedarea, about 10 by 4 km. The restof the lowlandsis of hillyand ratherrugged topography,with Pliocene conglomeratesand marls, Older Fill, andespeciallyin the north- tractsof hard limestone.There are frequentsmall plains and pocketsofcultivablesoil. The Taygetosmountainsriseveryabruptlyand reacha heightof2,407m (ILLS3.14-15).In manyplaces theyrisein twostages:a lowerrangeof cliffsrisesto a terrace-like highlandat All the such as with about 1,000m, carrying the behind them. villages Anavryti, upperslopes are hard but rocks and are abundant at the lower limestone, metamorphic higherpeaks flysch and middleelevations, to about m. Mt Parnon is more and less 1,500 up abrupt,a complex of foothills and with much most of the tangle valleys metamorphicrock,although higher In thenorththestudyarea extendsintothegreatinlandbasinofTripolis peaksare limestone. withitskarstsinkholessuchas Lake Táka. (Tripoli,formerly Tripolitsa), 1This in 1986,and takesno written chapterwas originally accountof laterchangesin the landscape.Though updated, it has not been fullyrevised to incorporatesubsequent advancesin knowledge. The photographs weretakenin 1984. Formorerecentworkin thisfield,see O. RackhamandJ. A.

Moody, The MakingoftheCretanLandscape(Manchester, 1996); A. T. Grove and O. Rackham, The Nature of Mediterranean Europe:An EcologicalHistory(New Haven, Conn., 2001).

2 The studywas conducted on similarlines to that of Boiotia in 1979-81;see O. Rackham,Observationson the historical ecologyofBoeotia',BSA 78 (1983),291-351and pis

34-8. Many of the vegetationtypesare similar,although Laconia is more complex than Boiotia. I shall also draw parallels with observations made when I took part in archaeologicalsurveysand projectsin Korinthía(Neméa:J. C. Wright, J. F. Cherry),Macedonia (Grevená:Ν. Wilkie), and Crete (Myrtos:P. M. Warren; Chaniá: J. A. Moody; Vrókastro: Β. Hayden;and theSphakiáSurvey:J. A. Moody, in Southern L. Nixon,S. Price),and in the 'Desertification Europe' projectin Crete (A. T. Grove,V. Papanastasis).I have receivedmuch help fromdirectorsand colleagueson theseprojects,especiallyΑ. Τ GroveandJ.A. Moody.

74

Chapter3

III. 3.1. Places mentionedin thetext(D. Taylor).

Historical ecology 75

Laconia is quite richin cliffsand gorges,whichare importantin the studyof vegetation becausetheycontainareas too steepforgoatsto climb.Some ofthesein Taygetos,suchas the GreatLangáda and the Gorge of Paróri,are comparableto the gorgesof Crete.There are other gorges in Parnon and a few in the interveninglowlands. A gorge (φαράγγι) is whichlacks cliffs.All Laconian gorgesare in froma ravine(ρε(ύ)μα,ré(v)ma) distinguished hardlimestone. In itspresentsettlement patterntheregionis dividedabruptlyintoa populouswesternhalf and an emptyeasternhalf.On theTaygetosside,despitethe mountainousterrain,thereis a and ruggedfertility. To thesouth smallvillageon averageevery3 km;thisis a land ofterracing characteristic of the northern farmsteads thismergesintothe hamletsand isolated,fortified Máni. In thelowlandsand on theParnonside,villagesare biggerand are spaced about 6 km difference. Althoughthe apart.This appearsto be a cultural,ratherthanan environmental, showthateveryeffort east is morearidand lesscultivablethanthewest,remainsofterracing has been made to use the land fully.When the villageswere fullyoccupied,the difference was probablynotgreat. betweeneastand westin populationpersquarekilometre Fieldwallsare common,buthedgesinfrequent. have declinedin Laconia, overthe last thirty yearsor so, to a Farmingand shepherding in is a fromthesteeper, Greece known to me. There retreat than else extent anywhere greater and morearid soils.On mostof the Parnonside littlebut olivesand fruittreesis lessfertile, one can go farwithoutseeinga ploughedfieldor terrace,or a goat.There is now cultivated; ratherlessdeclineon Taygetos.Only aroundSpartahas thecultivatedarea been maintained. the remotevillageof Vérroiain Sometimesthisgoes withdepopulation,but not necessarily; Parnonis utterlydeserted,but the more remotePolydroso(formerly Tzitzina)mysteriously Even the irrigatedAphysoudoes not have agriculture retainsan air of modestprosperity. withitspopulation. commensurate are turningintowoodland.This increase Vastareas ofland,no longergrazedor cultivated, not to ofwildvegetationis offset, anylargeextent,by forestry plantationson former though and Vlachokerasiá.3 in Ioánnis the of Theológos,Vasarás, roughland parishes Agios CLIMATE

are fewand sincestatistics fromthevegetation, The climateof Laconia can bestbe inferred main with warm wet winters It is of Mediterranean (the growing type, unsatisfactory. mostly season)and hotdrysummers. In temperature, Sparta is exactlythe same as lowlandBoiotia:Januarymean 9 °C, July mean 21 °C. Gytheiois probablya littlewarmer.Slightfrostsoccurin mostyears,but severe are confinedto highaltitudes.Spartahas occasionalsnow-daysand once had a frostof frosts which -6 °C.4In 1805therewas a frostnearMonemvasiaas late as 1 April.5Olive cultivation, to never be a more severe than that there should frost -13 °C, goes up 850 m in requires at has no is for Greece.6 The which olives,but Parnon, unusuallyhigh Tripolisplain, 700 m, be a frost hollow. remote from the and also has harder sea, winters, may being probably ι Fordetailsof similarchangesin Cretesee O. Rackham, 'The greeningof Myrtos',in S. Bottema,G. Entjes-Nieborg, and W. van Zeist (eds),Alan'sRolein theShaping oftheEastern Mediterranean (Rotterdam, Landscape 1990),341-8. 4 A. Philippson,Die griechischen Landschaften (repr.Frankfurt am Main, 1989),iii.479.

5 Leake, Travels, i. 221. 6 Olives subsidized by the European Communityhave been plantedat 1,000m, but thisdoes not countas serious cultivation.

76

Chapter3

betweenthe'wet' In rainfall, Laconia is bisectedbythegreatdivision(notedbyPhilippson)7 and the'dry'sidesofGreece.The easternhalfoftheprovince,exceptforParnon,is semi-arid, like Boiotia. The westernhalfhas muchmorelush vegetationwithcontinuousmaquis and manymoisture-demanding plants.The dividingline is oftenveryabrupt;forinstance,it can in Arkadia.Spartalieson the'wet'side; be seento bisectthelimestonemountainAgriokerasiá Aphysou,2 kmaway,on the'dry'side. There is evidentlya systemof rain-excessbeltsand rain-shadowssimilarto thatwhichI havebeen able to inferfromthemuchmorecopiousrainfallrecordsof Crete.8The Taygetos fromwhichthereresults winds,createa rain-excess, mountains, westerly abruptly intercepting a rain-shadowto the east. Several timesin late summerwe witnessedstormson Taygetos soakingSpartabut missingAphysou.Mt Parnonmakesa second,thoughlesser,rain-excess, in an outlierofnon-aridvegetation.The east coast (e.g.Monemvasia)is in a double resulting and is veryarid. rain-shadow, By comparisonwithBoiotia and Crete,the drypart of Laconia shouldhave an annual rainfalloflessthan550 mm;thewetside oughtto have at least800 mm,in places morethan 1,000mm.This is borneout by suchfiguresas I can muster.In 1894-1929 themean annual rainfallat Sparta,neartheedge ofthewetzone,was 817mm;at Gytheio,neartheedge ofthe dryzone,534 mm.9 rainfallfigures forSpartafrom1894to 1981.Because ofgaps in I haveseenofficial monthly ofthoseyears(running fromSeptemberto therecord,annualtotalsare availableforonlyfifty in half In half the total was more than 810 it was less.One yearin the and mm, years August). fourhad a rainfalloflessthan630 mm,and one yearin fourmorethan930 mm.The wettest yearwas 1920-1with1,167mm?tne driestwas 1913-14with270 mm- less thanthetotalfor somesinglemonths,ifthiscan be believed.Most oftherainfellfromOctoberto March,with a maximumin December.Rain was uncommoninJulyor August. tella storyofviolentand erraticrainfall, The statistics varyingmuchfromyearto year.This in rates of is confirmed variations the by growth plants.Wetyearshave becomelessfrequent is at of a climatic but since the region,thesefluctuations may be of recently; Sparta edge in wet and on shifts the between local dryregions, boundary merely significance, depending ratherthanon anychangesin theweatherofthePéloponnèseas a whole. SOILS

In the dryhalfof Laconia thereis littlescope forsoil-forming processes.The climateis not and calcium carbonateis drawn and oxidizing, so thathumusdoes persist any evaporative rossain materials lack Soils consist of clay. pocketsof terra up towardsthesurface.The parent in rocks. As rendzinas on softer ofhardlimestone, or ofill-differentiated fissures Boiotia,soils non-calcareous rocks.Some above even where overlie are typically calcareous(pH 7.0) they 6.1 schistsoilsgo downto pH (myobservation). In the wet half,soils are betterdeveloped,especiallyat high altitudes.There is some tendencyto formbrownearths,as in centralEurope. Soil aciditydependsmore closelyon whetheror not therockis acid. On schistsoilsin the mountains, pH is sometimesas low as Greek standards. 5.0,whichis unusuallyacid by

7 Philippson(n. 4), 415. On the climate,see Chapter 1, pp. 9-11.

8 Rackhamand Moody(n. 1). 9 FiguresafterPhilippson.

Historical ecology 77

III. 3.2. Desertofcrumblyschist,Vervena.It was notedbyPhilippsona centurybefore.

The drierthe climate,the less the vegetationdepends on soil chemistryand the more retainlittlemoisture, and Hard limestones and depthofthesoil.10 thewaterretention important Fill and rainfall. Older is more on the thedegreeto whichtheyare vegetated retentive, depends evenin a dryclimate.However,thenearestapproachto desertin mostschistsarewellvegetated facièsofflysch thestudyarea is in south-eastern Arkadia,on a schisty (ill. 3.2).The climatehere a rock that breaks is but is evidently arid, up intoa sandyscreeand, by verycrumbly aggravated water than limestone. retains even less as Philippson remarked, Modern

Plant

Communities

thereis no trace of the complexzonationof In Laconia, as in southernGreece generally, in middle altitudes which is oftenthoughtto be characteristicof low and vegetation zones.The lowlandsand uplandsare countries. Thereare onlythreealtitudinal Mediterranean ofevergreen treesand shrubs(maquis),deciduoustreesand coveredwithvariouscommunities shrubs,undershrubs (garigue),and grassesand herbs(steppe):nearlyall theplantcommunities withothers.Altitudeplayslittlepartin their describedforBoiotiaare represented here,together at between 800 and there is a rapidtransition to a beltofmountain distribution 1,200m, until, to about m. Above these and firs there is an alpinezone, conifer woods,continuing 1,800 pines on Taygetos11 butofverysmallextenton Parnon.This I shallnotdeal with. extensive 10Rackham of (n. 2); id.,'Land-useand thenativevegetation Greece',in M. Belland S. Limbrey(eds),Archaeological of Aspects Woodland (BAR int.ser.146;Oxford,1982),177-96. Ecology

11 Described by P. Quézel, 'Végétation des hautes 12 (1964), montagnesde la Grèce méridionale', Vegetatio, 289-385.

78

Chapter3

MAQUIS, GARIGUE, AND STEPPE

These are the commonestplant communitiesin Laconia, and closely resemble their in Boiotia.Maquis (λόγγος)consistsof shrubs; thatis to say,of evergreentrees counterparts reduced as and wild form.These are lentisk, olive) bybrowsingto a shrubby (such prickly-oak, of underskrubs: lowand consists long-lived usuallydeep-rooted.Garigue(φρύγανα,phrygand) of the families Cistaceae (e.g. growingwoodyplants,chiefly Leguminosae(e.g.spinybroom), cistus),and Labiatae (e.g.Jerusalemsage), oftenaromatic,whichare relativelyshort-lived, and incapable of growinginto trees.Steppe(λεβάδεια,levádeid) consistsof shallow-rooted, all and herbaceous two of or as these, three,growtogether a mosaic. grasses plants.Usually The typicalLaconian hillsidein summeris a patchworkof dark-greenshrubs,grey-green and yellowsteppe. undershrubs, As in Boiotia,thesecommunities can be describedin termsofproportion, and composition, which are to be moisture. Where determined stature, largelyindependent. Proportion appears by retentive wateris abundant(highrainfall, or northerly soil,good rootpenetration, aspect),there willbe muchmaquisand littlegarigueor steppe.OvermuchofthewethalfofLaconia,maquis an exampleis thearea ofcontinuous is continuous overwideareas,evenon limestone: maquis, severalmilesacross,to thenorthofVoutiánoi.Conversely, to thesouth-east ofAphysouthereis a veryarid tractof garigueand steppewithverylittlemaquis.For an extremeexample,the - the only schist'desert'of Vérvena(ILL.3.2) consistslargelyof bare rockwitha littlesteppe undershrubsare theverydrought-resistant hermanniae and Astragalus Anthyllis sempervirens.

- the species presentin each Composition componentof the mosaic- depends on soil and distance from the sea, and more subtlefactorssuch as mineral composition depth, which cannot as be resolved. nutrition, yet Stature Most maquis turnsintowoodlandifnot browsed;the dependson browsinghistory. surroundinggarigueis oftenreplaced by steppe. From the size and shape of the maquis ofa tractofvegetation can be inferred. bushes,therecentbrowsing history Typesofmaquis Laconian maquis consistof six co-dominant evergreentrees or shrubs.These are interspersed in a wide and continuous range of proportions,but can be reduced to seven series. Four of these are the same as fourof the six seriesof maquis in Boiotia. (1) Oak-Lentisk Series. Quercuscocci/era (prickly-oak,ancient πρίνος, modern πρινάρι or and Pistacia lentiscus Often accompanied by Phillyrea mediaand co-dominant. πουρνάρι) occasional wild olive. One of the common maquis typesof dryLaconia. Not confined(as in Boiotia) to low altitudes:near Vasaras, lentiskreaches the exceptionalaltitudeof 720 m. as sole dominant, either alone or with occasional (2) Pure Oak Series. Quercuscoccifera individualsof other shrubs. Common in dry Laconia, as in Boiotia; also occurs on dry (especiallylimestone)soils in the wet belt. latifoliais more abundant in Laconia than in Boiotia, and (3) Osk-PhillyreaSeries. Phillyrea in about one-thirdof the dry maquis is co-dominantwith Quercuscoccifera. Distinctlyless arid than (2); oftenaccompanied by small amounts of arbutus. (4) Arbutus Series. Arbutusunedoco-dominant with prickly-oakor Phillyrea;many other shrubs, some of them deciduous, present in small quantities as well (ILL. 3.3). As in Boiotia, this is the common maquis of water-retaining, chieflymetamorphicsoils, both in the wet and the drybelts. On the wet side of Laconia it occurs on limestoneas well. I regard the occurrence of arbutuson limestoneas an indicatorof non-aridity.

Historical ecology 79

Arbutus unedo and Quercus nearAphysou.Note patchesofgarigueand III. 3.3. Maquis ofco-dominant coccifera, steppein gaps.

unedo;oftenno othershrubs. (5) Erica-ArbutusSeries. Erica arbóreaco-dominantwithArbutus wet and dry belts. An outlierof schist soils or near the between Scattered on boundary in is the west of the island. a Cretan plant communitywhich extensive with Erica arbórea;usually littleor no arbutus. Fairly (6) Oak- Erica Series. Quercuscoccifera common in northernLaconia in similarsituationsto the above. Not recordedin Boiotia. andrachne co-dominant withArbutusunedoand Quercuscoccifera. (7) Andrachne Series. Arbutus

A luxuriant, well-watered typeofmaquis,rarebothin Boiotiaand Crete.Occasionalin north-eastern Laconia, just insidethe wet belt,usuallyon limestone.(Andrachneis morewidespreadas a clifftree.)

The coastalOak- Olive andJuniperus phoenicea maquisofBoiotiaand Cretewerenotrecorded in Laconia; at Gytheio,theOak-Lentiskand PureOak seriesgo rightto thesea. In Laconia, unlikeBoiotia,mostmaquis containa smallproportionof deciduousshrubs. but Technicallythismakesthem'pseudomaquis',thehigher-altitude maquisoftheBalkans,12 thereis no tendencyfordeciduousshrubsto be morefrequentat higheraltitudesin Laconia. The driermaquis,especiallyOak-Lentisk,are associatedwithwildpear [Pyrus amygdaliformis) . Pear, indeed, is the most drought-tolerantof all and hawthorn(Crataegusheldreichii) Peloponnesiantrees,and scatteredindividualsextendintotheArkadian'desert',whereeven - despitethename,itis notevergreen) fails.Maple (Acer oftengoeswith sempervirens prickly-oak it is nota mountaintreeas in Crete.The arbutusmaquisoftencontainmaple, Oak-Phillyrea; and Cotinus terebinth, Judas-tree, coggygria. 12L. Dalmatiens(Leipzig, 1911); W. B. Turrill,The Plant-life Adamovic, Die Pflanzenwelt oftheBalkanPeninsula(Oxford, 1929).

8o

Chapterj

Maquis in woodland is miniature,and patches of it oftencontainwoody climbers(e.g.

Smilaxasperd)and herbaceous plants (e.g. Brachypodium retusum). Sibljak

On the steep east-facing slopes below the castle of Mystras,the maquis componentof the is vegetation replacedby deciduoustreesand shrubs.The commonesttreesare maple and terebinth. thinly Judas-treeand wild almond are frequent,and hackberry(Ceitisorientalis) scattered. Thereis muchwildalmond.Evergreens are quiteuncommon. (chiefly prickly-oak) - exceptprobablyforthealmond- is nota consequenceofMystras This plantcommunity beinga desertedcity.It is repeatedall overtheouterscreesand talusofthelowerTaygetos,of whichMystrasis a part. A more typicalexample,behindAgios Ioannis,has terebinthcomuchmaple,occasionalCeitisand Paliurus dominantwithJudas-tree and Cotinus, Christi, spinaand sparseindividualsof the uncommonand historically importantLaconian treesOstrya ornus. The deciduoustreesformthemaquiscomponentofa mosaicin and Fraxinus carpinifolia whichthereis abundantgarigue;Jerusalemsage is dominant.Evergreensare limitedto occasionalprickly-oak and Phillyrea, and patchesοι Juniperus oxycedrus (normallya mountain treewhichseldomdescendsso low). It has very Such an assemblageofdeciduoustreesoccursneitherin Boiotianor in Crete.13 littlein common with the deciduous oakwoods to be described later. It does, however, knownby theCroatian approximate verycloselyto theBalkandeciduousshrubcommunities In thearea offormerYugoslaviait termsibljak. Its occurrencehereis somewhatofa mystery. is supposedto be the nextaltitudinalstageabove pseudomaquis.That is not so here:sibljak goes all thewayfrombottomto top oftheAgiosIoannisslope (300-750m),and at thetop is abruptly replacedbyOak-Phillyrea maquis. The sibljaksites,thoughon the wet side of Laconia, are on limestonetalus,screes,and rockswithpoor waterretention but good rootpenetration. The predominantly easterlyand a and the rule out frost-hollow south-easterly aspects, steep slopes, explanation.The high the a of and proportion garigue steppe gives vegetation decidedly arid aspect, but the occasional planes and oleanders indicatethat thereis ground-waterwhich,possibly,the deciduoustreescan reach. NeverthelessI am at a loss to explainwhythesenot especially remarkable slopesshouldnotbe coveredwithPureOak maquis. In theupperpartoftheParorigorge,sibljakis expandingintodisusedoliveterracesto form invadesand becomesco-dominant withprickly-oak, a kindofsecondarysibljak.Ostrya already in the walls. Fraxinus ornus and are and terrace present maple frequent, thereis some Spartium. is on a Clematis is an abundantwoodyclimber.This exceptionalplant community flammula soil more with a blackish limestone-scree rather sunless,NW-facing typicalof deep steep, slope, northern than of Greece. Europe Garigueand steppe

These are of severaldifferent typesof maquis. types,weaklyassociatedwiththe different areJerusalemsage,spinybroom(Calicotome Commondominantundershrubs villosa), Anthyllis associated small of and thyme(Thymus The hermanniae, capitatus). generally pockets garigue or Hypericum withthe arbutus-containing empetrifolium, maquis oftenhave Cistussalvifolius can broom the tall undershrubs Calicotome and junceum) compete (Spartium Spanish although withthelowerstatesofmaquis. 131 haveseenan examplein Korinthia;thereare a fewfragmentary patchesin Parnon.

Historical ecology 81

Steppe includes many grasses such as

Dactylis glomeratassp hispânica and Avena thistles(e.g. Scolymus annual sterilis, hispanicus),

clovers,and otherherbs. Stabilityand change

In Boiotia I argued that the mosaic of maquis,garigue,and steppewas createdby humanactivitiesout ofa previousmosaicof evergreenwoodland and steppe.The chief activities are grazing, woodcutting,and burning(eitheraccidental or deliberatethe latterin orderto improvethe pasture). If thesecease, the mosaic revertsto woodland and steppe(notnecessarilyidenticalto theoriginals). whichcan be seenhereand This reversion, therein Boiotiaand Crete,is almostuniversal in Laconia. Woodcuttingalmost ceased decadesago. In onlya fewplaces,otherthan in the Arkadianpart of the studyarea, are enoughsheepand goatsnowkeptto holdthe maquisin check.In consequence,shrubsare now growingup rapidlyinto treesalmost thestudyarea exceptforArkadia. throughout has been rapid,and has been The reversion favourable yearsin 1982and 1983. helpedby III. 3.4. A prickly-oak at AgiosKonstantinos whichputon For instance,betweenVoutianoiand Sellasia a spurtofgrowthin thefavourable and has year 1983 grewin heightby50 cm in 1982 prickly-oaks reachedthe'get-away'pointat whichitwillturnfroma and 40 cm in 1983insteadoftheusual 10-15 shrubintoa tree. cm a year,whichat once puttheirtopsout of reachofgoats(ILL.3.4). The totalarea thusturningintowoodland,in 1984,amountedto at leasta quarterof the wholeofLaconia. (On a smallerscale,maquiscan turnintodeciduousoakwoodor mountain pinewoodbyinvasion;see below.) The partplayedbyfireis as yetunclear.As in Boiotia,all maquistreesand shrubsare not killedby burning,but sproutfromthebase; manyundershrubs, are killed; notablyCalicotome, in Fires Laconia were are until the later remarkably 1980s(well grasses encouraged. infrequent under1 per centofmaquisper year),butthisstateofaffairs could nothave been expectedto last long,and indeedtherewere extensivefiresin the VoutianoiAphysouarea in 1986 and later.Experiencein Korinthiain 1985 showsthatalthoughGreek vegetation(otherthan inflammableas it looks,well-grown pinewoods)is not as exceptionally maquis nevertheless As Laconia growsup intowoodland,fuelswillaccumulateand firewillplay a burnsmerrily. greaterpartin itsecology.14 14This is happening all round the European Mediterranean: see Grove and Rackham (η. ι), ch. 13.

82

Chapter^ LOWLAND PINEWOODS

The lowlandpinesof Atticaand the northernand westernPéloponnèsedo not extendinto in the studyarea formspart of the mountain Laconia. The only native Pinushalepensis 800 between at about m, Zaraphóna)- an Agriánoi and Kallithéa (formerly pinewoods, anomalyI havenotinvestigated. DECIDUOUS OAKWOODS

In Laconia, as in Boiotia,thereare fourdeciduousoaks: Quercus ζλ Q^frainetto, brachyphylla, whose last is the Valonia Oak The and ζλ (βελανήδι,velanídi), acorn-cups macrolepls. pubescens, are and pubescens articleof commerceas a sourceof tannin.Frainetto used to be an important zone well centralEuropeanoaks,whichin theBalkansare regardedas typicalofan altitudinal are Asianoaks,hereneartheirwesternlimit. and macrolepis abovethemaquis.Brachyphylla it maybe a relicof In Boiotia,macrolepis is a non-woodlandtreeoffieldsand churchyards; The otherthreeoaksare confinedto theValleyoftheMuses,wheretheyformone cultivation. and probablyno smallwood at highelevation.In westernCrete thereis verylittlefrainetto tree of wateris the commonest (and increasing)woodland-forming pubescens^ brachyphylla in the same behaves soils of low and middle altitudes;macrolepis exactly way and retaining oaks has in The of Cretan deciduous of the island. behaviour it one part completely replaces attractedadverse commentand various attemptsto explain away what is regardedas a anomaly.15 phytosociological treein thelowlands Quercus brachyphyllaas afieldand recent-woodland

fieldand villagetree is thecommonest and fruit-trees, Quercus brachyphylla Apartfromcypresses and to be in Laconia. It growsas big as an Englishoak. Its functions firewood, shade, appear of treeshave been croppedforfirewoodby the occasionalbeam or lintel.A largeminority or pollarding.Some ofthebigpollardsare presumably shredding (croppingtheside-branches) severalcenturiesold. Examples are the manypollard oaks and oaken hedges of Kalyvia villageof Verroia;the Theológou;the innumerableshreddedtreesaroundthe near-deserted Nikólaos at and thelone giantpollard of sacred of the Kaltézes; monastery Ágios big pollards m Varvára at of thatstandsbythemountain-top (871 altitude). Anavryti chapel Agia is a veryinvasivetree.Its acornsare transported, Çhiercus bybirdspresumably brachyphylla jays havebeen seen and growin abandonedfarmland.Ifthereare parenttreescloseat hand invaderofold fields(ILL.3.5),followedbypear oak is thestrongest km),brachyphylla (withinV-2 oak. On mostcultivatedsoilsit growsfastand producesitsownacornswhenonly and coccifera aboutfifteen yearsold. It also invadesthelessaridkindsofmaquis,especiallythosewithErica when notbrowsed. arbórea, thewethalf oakwoodis growingup on and nearformercultivation throughout Brachyphylla overat A extends somewhat older old. ofLaconia. Mostofitis lessthantwenty example years in Anavryti, on formeroliveleast 1 sq kmoftheplateaubelowthe Phaneroménimonastery groveson schist,withan easterlyaspect at 600-700 m. The oaks are now up to 25 cm in Occasional relicsof old cultivation. diameter;theyare mixedwithbig olivesand chestnuts, and of nearbysibljak(Ostrya, othertreesare representatives Fraxinus) mountain Judas-tree, is abundantas an understorey. woodland {Abies).There are a fewelms in gullies.Spartium Brackenand ivyare frequent. 15W. Greuter,'Die Insel Kreta: eine geobotanische

Instituts des Geobotanischen ΕΤΗ, Skizze', Veröffentlichungen

Rubel(Zürich),55 (1975),141-97. Stiftung

Historical ecology 83

III. 3.5. Deciduousoak {Quercus land at KalyviaTheologou. brachyphylla) invadingex-cultivated

Older oakwoodsare to be foundin ravines.There is a well-established one among the in a bigNE-facing schistravinewithsteepbrokenslopes.The oaksare terracesofPikouliánika, about 12m highand 40 cm thick,and ratheruprightin habit;theytendto die in thetop and of prickly-oak and Erica understorey maybe pinchedby drought.There is a well-developed retusum withsomebracken arbórea. The rathersparsegroundvegetationis mainlyBrachypodium and Asplenium and brambleand a littleivy and Smilax.Ferns,such as Ceterach ojjicinarum are abundant rocks. Tree and adiantum-nigrum, among seedlings saplings are frequent, and cocci/era. Fraxinusgrows up into including Fraxinusornus,maple, and Quercusbrachyphylla

treesand is evidently This wood has a quitewell-developed woodlandsoil(pH 6.2) increasing. as I and a fewspecifically woodlandplantssuch Brachypodium and Digitalis ferruginea. sylvaticum which hesitateto claimit as ancientwoodland,however:it showsno signof thewoodcutting wouldsurelyhavehappenedhad itbeen longin existence.Possiblyitis a stagein a succession wherebyOak- Erica maquis turnseventuallyinto sibljak. A ravine grovein Voutianoi is buthas Spartium insteadoftree-heather somewhatsimilar, and mapleinsteadofash. These Laconianwoodsare partofa deciduous-oakinvasionto be seen in manypartsofthe Arkadia thereare whole landscapes which appear to be Péloponnèse.In south-western oakwood- theoaks come fromexistingwoods ratherthanfromfield turningintobrachyphylla trees.The brachyphylla oakwoodsof Crete are older than mostof thosein Laconia, and are with lianes and ivy). denselytangled {Smilax The ecologicalrequirements ofQuercus coincideso closelywiththoseofcultivation brachyphylla thatitwouldriskextinction at timesofhighfarming, unlessfavoured as a fieldtree.The ravine not illustrate howitmighthavesurvived suchperiods. woods,thoughprobably ancient,

84

Chapter3

- is turninginto III. 3.6. Valoniaoak ((hiercus at Passavacastle.The formersavanna- big treesscatteredin grassland macrolepis) woodlandthroughinfilling withyoungertrees.

Oakwoods withQuercusmacrolepis all overLaconia as a fieldtree.It is muchlessabundantthan is encountered Quercus macrolepis - thoughit extendsfurther intothe drybelt. and there a handful of trees here brachyphylla The treescould,as in Boiotia,be relicsof old valonia cultivation, thoughtheyare rarelyof or greatage pollarded. In Vardouniaand the northernMani, the valonia oak suddenlybecomesthe commonest treeoffieldsand woods.It outnumbers {λ brachyphylla, thoughseldomreplacingit completely. in ecologicalbehaviour, is perhaps The twooaksare almostindistinguishable thoughmacrolepis m its own when it can acorns of 2'Λ an even stronger invader; only high.Although produce verylarge,theacornsare dispersedno lesseasily. oak has been presentas a fieldtreeforseveralcenturies:thereare manybig old Macrolepis and coppicestools.A stoolover2 m in diameterwas foundnear Gytheio.Big trees pollards are sometimesfoundcloselyset as ifin an orchard,forinstanceat the castleof Passava,but to producevalonia. cultivation thereis no positiveevidenceofsystematic a less from Vardouniaand the Mani than from receded little cultivation has Although has much opportunityto formnew woodland by invading Laconia proper,(λ macrolepis For example, the arbutusmaquis or old farmland,eitherby itselfor with brachyphylla. Passava 'orchard' is turninginto a wood, withnew trees(valonia and terebinth)arising amongthe gariguebetweenthe old trees(ILL.3.6); thisprogressesslowlydespitecontinued grazingand fires.

Historical ecology 85

Macrolepisis also a tree formingestablishedwoodland, much more extensivelythan Deciduous oakwoodis relatively commonaroundtheMani border,and replaces brachyphylla. of the of on north-facing slopes southernTaygetos;the castleof Passava is a maquis many - Rothmalerreportedon for such woods. These woods are long-established good viewpoint sourcesindicatethattheyare ancient. themin 194216 and,as we shallsee,somewritten BetweenPassavaand thesea thereis a groupofsuchwoodsat low altitude,on steepnorthThe dominanttreesare macrolepis and brachyphylla facingslopes of schistand conglomerate. and maple;prickly-oak and Ceitisare rare.At the oaks.There is a littleterebinth, Judas-tree, - all the bottomof the slope thereis a littleelm. The wood has a definitecoppice structure speciesoccur as stoolsup to ι'Λ m across and thereare also signsof irregularpollarding. been Groundvegetationcomprisessparsebrambleand bracken.These woodshave evidently resourceto a degreewhichis unusualin Greece.They have a stronger managedas a definite woods. claimto be ancientwoodlandthananyofthebrachyphylla mountain oakwoods Quercus frainettoand theancient

is the typicaldeciduousoak of southernArkadia.In the south-westof the Quercus frainetto woods near Megalópoli, the railwayruns formanymiles throughmagnificent province, of hill some of this arcadian is the result and recent, valley;although landscape very clothing is invasionmentionedabove, thereare also greatwoods in whichfrainetto the Q brachyphylla dominant.We are less concernedwiththe south-easterngroup offrainetto woods, in the ArkadianpartoftheParnonrange.These extendintoLaconia onlyin one place,butthatis of in thata wood mentionedby name in a classicaldocumentis stillin veryspecial interest, existence(see below).The treeappears otherwiseto be absentfromLaconia, apart froma singlespecimenneartheGreatLangada. It is seldoma fieldor or brachyphylla. Frainetto is muchmoreofa woodlandoak thanmacrolepis in the of old oakwood at and then (as Vourvoura). only neighbourhood Althoughits villagetree, it has of invasion. Our observations weak acornis smalland easilytransported bybirds, powers indicatethatittakesmuchlongerto produceacornsthantheotheroaks(atleastfifty yearsafter In even wherea from and is not as and seed) prolific. consequence, coppicing, probablylonger muchofthemarginalinvasionis brachyphylla.17 woodis mainlyοιfrainetto, northin Greece,itis is veryrarein Creteand was discovered onlyin 1990.Further Q frainetto in and wood-pastures the of oak the woods oftenthecommonest manyspecies among coppice thatcovermanythousandsof square kilometresin the Pindos mountains.The Laconian zone (700-1,300m),in high-rainfall mountain woodsfallwithinthetopofthemaquisaltitudinal Soilsaresandy, oftenofa curiousorange areaswithvariousaspects.The geologyis alwaysschistic. with a surface humus and are acidic definite colour, layer(mor), (pH 5-6). They are veryunlike Greeklowlandsoils,and areakintotheacidbrownearthsofnorthern Europeanoakwoods. Skotitas

The wood thatI shallcall by thisclassicalname is, as we shallsee,possiblytheoldestnamed wood to haveits woodlotin Europeknownto be stillin existence.It is also theonlysurviving own god. It lies in the extremenorthof Laconia, extendingfromthe village of Karyés 16 W. Rothmaler, 'Die Waldverheit im Peloponnes', Intersyba, 3 (1943),329-42; id., 'Floristische Ergebnisseeiner botanische Reise nach dem Peloponnes',Englers Jahrbücher, 73 (1944),418-52.

17As observed by Rothmaler,'FloristischeErgebnisse'

(n. 16).

86

Chapter3

III. 3.7. Interioroftheoakwoodanciently calledSkotitas.

Aráchova)to thewestof themain Parnon range.It is a verylargewood,being3% (formerly kmfromeast to westand at least5 kmfromnorthto south.It coversratherruggedterrain, witha generalsouth-westerly aspect but continuingwithlittlechange throughtwo main and ravines and gullies. valleys many Skotitasconsistsalmostentirelyof oak (ILL. 3.7). The oaks are veryvariable,apparently of those Pubescens formsa largeminority has hybridized with(λ pubescens. because Qfrainetto in is uncommon. oaksthatcan be definitely identified, especially thevalleys,ζλbrachyphylla The wood has been regularly coppicedlikea Welshoakwood.Many of theoaks are in the formof stoolswithseveralstems.Some of the stoolsare over 1.5 m across and represent and regrowth; othershavebeen cutonlyonce.The lastregularwoodcutting centuries offelling to have takenplace between1870and 1900. Since then,single annual rings) appears (from trunkshave been cut hereand there.In the last fewyearstherehas been a moresystematic to growon and the ofthestems,leavingtheremainder downabouttwo-thirds policyofcutting are crookedand All is for as the oaks this mainly fuel, woodcutting presumably stumpsto sprout. in In a ofshredding. there is a exceed cm diameter. evenafter century seldom 30 history places are a the oaks fruit and sparingly oaklings few.Growthis growth, Despitebeingof century's die back at the as top, oaksdo whenpinchedbydrought. veryslow,and someoftheoaks Othertreesare veryfew.Especiallyat the higheraltitudes,thereare groupsof mountain thesewould be alternative and scatteredindividualfirs{Abiescephalonicd)' pines (Pinusnigrd) elevation. The firs are trees at this slowlyincreasing.Chestnutslowly woodland-forming

Historicalecology 87 in thelower groves.There is someprickly-oak spreadsintothewood fromadjacentcultivated in With these with and occasional Ostrya valleys. exceptions,Skotitas plane partsofthewood, overitsvariedtopography. uniform is surprisingly ofattenuated The wood is richin flowering maquis plants.In placesthereis an understorey Brackencoversotherareas, and Genista acanthoclada. Cistussalvifolius, and garigue,withEnca arbórea,

dominated woodlandvegetation, thereis a morespecifically noton south-facing slopes.Elsewhere

or Chamaespartium sagittale all relativelynorthernplants sylvaticum, Brachypodium by Luzulaforsten,

- occurat theloweraltitudes. - ivyand Clematis cirrhosa notcommonin Greece.Woodyclimbers As in north-western European coppice woods, much of the floraof Skotitasconsistsof plantswhichare dependenton woodlandmanagement.Thoughwoodlandspecies,thesedo not flourishin continuousshade,but flowerin profusionin the yearsof lightaftera felling. Some of these'coppicingplants'are the same speciesas behavein thisway in Britain.One in abundance,primrose richarea yieldedwild strawberry (Fragaria vesca)fruiting particularly or reichenbachiana, and the Violariviniana and elatior), and oxlip {Primulavulgaris eupatoria, Agrimonia

also behave Some specifically Mediterranean plants,suchas Cistusincanus, grassMelicauniflora. in shade of the the in thisway.The occasional junipers (Juniperus oxycedrus), languishing undisturbed wood,are probablyto be regardedas coppicingplantswhichinvadedfelledareas a century ago and havepersisted. Also as in north-western Europeanwoods,muchof the florais to be foundon roads and tracksthroughthe wood, and here too thereare many species in common,forinstance

Trifolium pratense, Clinopodium vulgäre, perforatum, Filaginellauliginosa, glomerata, Hypericum Campanula

and Tussilago farfara.Other roadsideplantsare more specificto Greekwoods, such as the also seenon Mt Parnassos. Digitalis ferruginea, foxglove, The wood is richin lichensand to a lesserextentin mosses.It maywell have a complete pallidus,Russulacf fungalfloralike thatin northernwoods: we foundLactarius mycorrhizal and Boletuscf luteus. atropurpurea,

Loranthus whichhowever On theoaksis occasionallyto be foundtheoak mistletoe, europaeus, outsidethewood. is commoneron chestnut Skotitashas no definedwood boundaries.On the north-eastit reachesthe ridgeof Mt of Karyes;it abutson grassland Parnon,whichformstheboundaryof the township(koinótis) it is slowlyadvancing,but much of the advance is of pines ratherthan and ex-cultivation; oaks. TowardsKaryesthe wood meetscultivationand abandoned terraces.On the south, withSpanishbroom.Althoughin towardsVarvitsa,itpetersoutintosteppeand ex-cultivation we did not findany evidence(e.g.terraces) now at the the wood is edges, expanding general thatithas everbeen muchsmallerthanitis now. frainettooakwoods Other

Skotitasis one of a groupof woods close togetherin northernParnon.They covermuchof the mountainsbetweenMesórrachi,Voúrvoura,and Varvitsa.The area has an unusual numberof villages- it is by far the most populous part of Parnon- and the woods are squeezed in among terraces,chestnutgroves,and pastures.There is only a small, and area ofmaquisand garigue. shrinking, These woodsare generallysimilarto Skotitas.They have a greatpreponderanceof Quercus and are withbrachyphylla roundtheedges.Theyvaryin structure pubescens), frainetto (doubtfully not alwaysdefinitely coppiced; shreddingwas sometimesnoticed.Under the treesis some and others)or bracken,or northernplants such as strawberry. garigue {Cistussalvifolius Chestnuttendsto invadetheoaks.

88

Chapters

In other The woodsare expandingat theiredgesthroughinvasion,chiefly by £λbrachyphylla. in for a revival of has made small encroachments the woods cultivation chestnut, hazel, places limitedto schist;thereis not much or apple orchards.The oakwoodsas a whole are strictly woodlandon thelimestoneand otherrocksaround,and thatis ofpineand fir. The schistmassifbetweenArvanitokerasiá, Kollines,and Kaltezes has one oakwoodat its around the of (1,119m)· ^ ls about 2'Λby ΐ'Λkmin highestpoint, chapel AgiosChristophóros extentand coversall sides of thisratherruggedmountaintop.The wood is of almostpure but at the edges.It has no definitecoppice structure, witha littlebrachyphylla Quercus frainetto, mostofthetreesappear to be of similarage, datingfrom1905-15.They are now some 14 m slopes- and partlydead in the tops. Some of the treesat the high- less on south-facing wood's edge are shredded,apparentlyforbrowsewood.Acornsare producedverysparsely. Othertreesare veryfew:pear,arbutus,youngfirs,and cherries.In mostplaces thereis an ofshadedEricaarbórea, slope.The florais replacedby brackenon theeast-facing understorey not so rich as thatof Skotitas,but includesthe same mixtureof garigue,woodland,and This wood appears to northernplants (e.g. Cistussalvifolius, vulgäre, Luzulaforsterî). Clinopodium

be in a drierlocationthanthoseofParnon. The restof the Kollines schistmassifis coveredwith£n£tf-Arbutus maquis withmuch whichsufferbadly with mountain has been of it Much nigra), (Pinus pines garigue. planted offrainetto fromdrought.There are scatteredfragments oakwood,and probablymore are hiddenamong the forestry plantationsor were destroyedto make way forthem.The oaks and are {brachyphyllafrainetto) slowlyexpanding.In the westof the massif,whichis evidently oakwood invadingold terraces,originatingfrom much wetter,thereis much brachyphylla around oaks Kaltezes. pollard histories.They are probablyancient These frainetto oakwoods evidentlyhave different withtherecentwoods of otherspeciesofoak- thoughthe woodland- theycontraststrongly all been felledat least evidenceis notquiteso strongas it is withSkotitas.Theyhaveevidently ofsystematic once withinthelasthundredyears,butmaynothavea history woodcutting. ofbrowsing; Frainetto oakwoodsat presentshowlittleeffect probablytheycontainlittlethat is edible. Deciduous oakwoodsandfire

It is veryunlikelythatdeciduous oak-treeswill burn,even in the Greek climate;any fire forfuel. or perhapsleaf-litter, amongthemmustdependon othervegetation, A smallpartof the edge of Skotitaswas burntearlyin 1985.The oaks had advancedinto Genista acanthoclada garigue,whichhad thenburntand had killedtheoaks (15 cm in diameter) forthetimebeingby downto groundlevel.The oaks had all sprouted,and weresurrounded and Galactites hispida. steppe of Stipabromoides

In theoakwoodsofsouth-western Arkadia,near Chránoi,therewas a largebutlightburn oak and is at leastpartlyon old terraces.The in 1984.Here thewood is mainlybrachyphylla and drybracken.The smalleroaks werekilledto the groundbut sprouted; fuelwas Spartium unaffected. onessproutedall thewayup thetrunk;bigoneswereapparently middle-sized accessibleto are rendered but their be killed deciduous oaks cannot sprouts byfire, Evidently A is invulnerable animals. well-established oakwood throughlack of fuel; probably browsing evenifa firecan occurat all,itwillnotbe hotenoughto harmthetrees.Firesare mostlikelyin can youngor patchyoakwoodswheretheshadeis lightand bracken,garigue,Erica,or Spartium well if with could combined accumulate fuel. and grazing, Burning,especially growvigorously offelledareas. theexpansionofoakwoodsintomaquis,and coulddelaytherecovery prevent

Historicalecology 89 MOUNTAIN CONIFERS

and These are theGreekfir,Abiescephalonica, the black mountain pine, Pinus nigrassp

grows on most of the pallasiana.A. cephalonica

higherGreek mountains;it is endemic to Greece. Populationsof P. nigraare widely scatteredoversouthernEurope;thepinesof Taygetos and Parnon are rather remote fromothers,althoughthetreeoccurson Mts Boiotia has firbut Chelmós and Kyllini.18 not pine. Neither reaches Crete. Beech, whichin northernGreece is an alternative to pine and fir,does not now reach the Péloponnèse. Firs and pines cover most of the high Taygetos,especially on the westernside, fromtheArkadianborderto the latitudeof Gytheio,and most of the higherparts of Parnon.They can occur on all aspects,but thereis a strongtendencyto favourwestfacingslopes in Taygetosand north-facing slopes in Parnon. Firs grow mainly on limestone,pines on schist,but there are exceptionsand mixtures.The woods range from1,000to 1,800m on Taygetosand from 750 to 1,600m on Parnon;youngtreesoften invade well below the lower limit of the at Mt Laganou, III. 3.8. Old blackpine {Pinusnigra) woods. Taygetos,whichgrewup in savannawithplentyofroomto spread,nowin forestand hemmedin byyoungertrees.It is Coniferwoods usuallycontainfewor no scarredbymanyfires. othertrees.In glades theremay be patches of prickly-oak(up to 1,400 m) or Juniperus On Taygetosthe pinewoodsare being colonized by youngchestnut.As already oxycedrus. at theirlowerlimitin the mentioned,the pinewoodsmergeinto a standof Pinushalepensis Kallitheaarea. Pines and firsare killedby fellingor burning(but see p. 92), but have some capacityto sproutwhenpollarded.Theygroweasilyfromseed. Mostofthemorereadilyaccessiblestands butmanagement is notintensive and maywellbe on Taygetosare used fortimberproduction, traditional. The woodsofParnonare less accessibleand appear to be under-used;pollarding ofpinesand firswas notedat Polydroso. Pinewoods

Pinesare long-lived and veryadaptable;theirvaryingsizes,shapes,and ages forma recordof of areas of even-agedtrees, thehistoryoftheirsurroundings. Usuallytheyforma patchwork On felledstumps from or colonizations. where fires, recently resulting past fellings, Taygetos, lHRothmaler, 'Floristische Ergebnisse'(η. 16).

90

Chapter3

III. 3.9. Blackpine invadingformer Taygetos. pastureat Avavryti,

fordatingtrees,suchclosedpinewoodsare ofall ages as farback as AD provideopportunities 1800.The olderof suchwoods,forinstancein shelteredvalleyswestof the GreatLangada, havepinesofmagnificent size,up to 30 m highand 80 cm in diameter. Scatteredamongthepinewoodsare occasionalindividualpineswhichare mucholder.Their spreadinghabitand massivebranchescontrastwiththenarrowcrownsand shortbranchesof thesetreesbeganlifewhenthepinewoodsdid not thewoodlandpinesaroundthem.Evidently exist;theywerenon-woodlandtreesscattered,savanna-like, amonglow vegetation.Some of divideintoup to twenty-five these,whosetrunks greatboughs,maybe pollards.Theymayhave crownsspreadingup to 24 m wide and trunksup to ΐ'Λm thick,but are no morethan 15 m to date,but high(ILL.3.8). These immensetreeshaveseldombeenfelledand henceare difficult generationof appear to be at least250 yearsold, some of themmuchmore.An intermediate pines, datingfrombetween 1730 and 1800, has a semi-spreadinghabit. These pines are describedfromaround Mt Laganou near the Great Langada; but thereare othersnear and yetothers, Anavryti perhapsnotso old,in Parnon. been expandingsincethe mid-eighteenth The pinewoodshave evidently century(ILL.3.9). is notclear,butmuchoftheirpresentterritory Whethertherewereanypinewoodspreviously can have had only scatteredtrees.Some of the land was cultivated:thereare remainsof terracesaroundMt Laganouup to 1,500m in altitude. - usuallybrackenor The vegetationunderpinewoodsis sparseand notverycharacteristic woodlandplantsare few attenuatedgarigue.Spartium goes up to about 1,350m. Specifically In flushesin ravinesthereis a widerrangeofplants,manyofthemof rotundtfolium). (e.g.Galium

Historical ecology 91

III. 3.10.Area ofyoungishblackpineskilledbya fire,at Mt Laganou,Taygetos,witha thicketofpine seedlingsspringing up in thegap.

as in themountainoakwoods:forinstanceprimrose, northern distribution coltsfoot, strawberry, and Hypericum Carexpêndula,self-heal{Prunellavulgaris),Juncus effusus, tetrapterum.

Fir-woods

These are mainlyon thinlimestonesoils,and are similarto thoseof Boiotia.The woods are and usuallysmaller;no big oftenless dense than thoseof pine. The treesare shorter-lived which ancientfirswereseen (as thereare in thePindosmountains).On thehighermountains, intorockypasturesand alpinevegetation. are usuallylimestone, thefirsthinoutirregularly Fir growsreadilyfromseed, and does not suffer fromdroughtin youthas it oftendoes in in discussingthisproblem,citesthe fir-woodof Mainalon and northernGreece. Graikiotis, Taygetosas an example of 'perfectnatural regeneration',which is attributedto a welltheseedlings.19 layerprotecting developedbryophyte Relationsbetween pineandfir

The schistsoils of pinewoodstend to be more acid (pH 5-6) than the limestonesoils of firwoods (pH > 6), but thereis a good deal of overlap.It maybe lack ofmoisturethatmakes reluctant to colonizelimestone. pine 19P. Graikiotis, 'La régénération naturelledes sapinièreshelléniques',Vegetatio, 9 (i960), 328-38.

92

Chapterj

shadeitis oftento be seengrowing Firgrowsperfectly wellon schist,and sinceitwithstands thereasonwhythisdoes be Pinewoods under mighteventually replacedbyfirwoods; pine. up fire. is nothappen undoubtedly Fires are verycommonamong Pinusnigraon Taygetosand Parnon; nearlyall the older woods have been burntat least once. The pine producesa copious, moderatelycompact leaf-litter whichis the main fuel.When ignited,thisproducesa groundfirewhichpasses underthe majorityof pines withoutkillingthem.Sometimesit flaresup into a crownfire whichkillsa treeor an area oftrees.Middle-agedand old pinesare protectedby theirthick bark (up to 10 cm thick),but this is oftencharredthroughon one side, especiallyby a subsequentfire,to killpartof the cambium.The treeis well able to survivethisinjury,and old pines oftencarry a succession of such scars, which would date the firesthat have occurredin theirlifetimes. Areasofpinelessthan35 yearsold seemseldomto be burnt,perhapsbecausetheyhavenot Pinesover70 yearsold supportfiresbutare yetaccumulatedenoughlitterto be combustible. seldomkilled.There is a vulnerableperiodbetweentheseages: it appearsthatpinesof35-70 lowerbranchesto enable the fireto climbintothe crownand years'growthretainsufficient killthetree.This is illustrated by a firewhichin about 1979burntabout 1 sq kmofpineson Mt Laganou. Most of thiswas a surfacefirewhichdid littledamage,but twolargeareas of pinesin late youthwerekilled.However,pines are veryprolificfromseed, and by 1984 the ofsaplings(ILL.3.10). intothickets burntareaswereturning Pinusnigrais moretolerantoffirethananyofitscompetitors, especiallyAbies.Everytimea fir otherwise all that would it the burns, replaceit. The onlyfirdestroys saplings pinewood treeswithinpinewoodsare eitheryoungerthanthe mostrecentfire,or are in gladesand on or in woodswhichforsomereasonhavenotburnt. rockyknobsthathaveescapedburning, is no exception. Mostoftheworld'spinesare in somewaydependenton fire,and Pinusnigra survivaldependson burningits It cannotproducesaplingsunderitsown shade; itslong-term Old pines litteris to be seen as an adaptation,nota misfortune. The combustible competitors. The treeis wellprotectedagainstits in thePindosmountainsare oftenseton firebylightning. Cones failsthelossesare replacedbyprolific butwherethatprotection ownfires, germination. old. are producedbytreesno morethantwenty years butappearsto be supersededtherebyfir.Forinstance,on the Pine can growon limestone, Neraidóvrachos by theGreatLangada thereis a mixtureofold pinesand youngfirs.Firsare moreeasilykilledbyfirethanpines,butare muchlesscombustible; althoughfiresin firwoods are known(e.g. in Boiotia),theyare rare,and replacementof the treesis slow.A possible reasonfortheprevalenceoffiron limestoneis thatthegroundis morerockyand brokenand firesdo noteasilyspread. Pine andfir versusothervegetation

Pines,and lessoftenfirs,continueto advanceintotheremaining pasturesand gariguewithin limitis steadyor perhapsslightly theiraltitudinal receding. range.The upperaltitudinal The lower limitis quite rapidly advancing, especially in Parnon. Pines and firsare stands.Two examples on a quitelargescale,varioustypesofmaquisbelowexisting colonizing, will illustrate the range.Above Anavryti(c.8oo m), pines and occasionalfirsare invadinga and pear thinlyscatteredamong decidedlyarid limestonemaquis-gariguewithprickly-oak On thenorthside ofMt Kópa nearAgrianoi(850 m), and Phlomis hermanniae fruticosa. Anthyllis and pine and firare spreadingdownhillinto lush, continuousmaquis of Arbutus,Cotinus, withsomeandrachneand maple. prickly-oak,

Historical ecology 93

In northern Parnon the boundary oakwoods is betweenconifersand frainetto - oaks on schist,pinesand firs usuallysharp on limestone.The conifersappear to be slowlyinvadingtheoakwoods. STREAMSIDES

AND RIVERINE WOODS

These are betterdevelopedthanin Boiotia; even minorand seasonal watercoursesare markedby oleanderbushesand occasional plane-trees.Where there is more definite access to ground-water,as in the ravines below Voutianoi and Vourliá (Sellasia), riverinethickets develop.These may consist of oleanderand lentiskgrowingup to 6 m high,withsome Vitexand maple, impenetrablytangledwithSmilaxand bramble.The travelleravoidsthem.Wherewaterreaches the surfacetheremaybe patchesof bulrush [Typhasp).

Elm is frequentalong lowland seasonal watercourses, especiallyon theMani border. It is a formof Ulmusminorwhich suckers stronglyand formsthickets(e.g. below the castle of Passava). It is rare in Boiotia and occasionalin lowlandCrete. alderin Europe,bythe III. 3.1i. The southernmost riverEvrotas. The Evrotashas much the best developEven in summer mentofriverine vegetation. it is a large,fast,and verycold riverby Greekstandards.It is borderedby woods of white standsof elm,and in a poplarand plane,theplanesoftenpollarded.There are intermittent to in Europe (ILL. 3.11). The understorey alders- the southernmost fewplaces well-grown thesehave thickets of the kinddescribed.In the flood-plains thesewoods is oleander-lentisk thebestsurvivalis in thegorgebetweenPáliouras longbeen encroachedupon by cultivation; and Karavás. CLIFFS AND GORGES

As in Crete,cliffsare a refugefromgrazing,browsing,and to some extentwoodcutting.20 are evidenceof what the landscape mighthave Their relictwoods and plant communities been had itnotbeen modifiedbyhumanactivities. This studyis based mainlyon threegorges.The GreatLangada is a complexgorge6'Λkm cliffs at the top. It is notverynarrow, long,mainlyin limestonebutwithsome metamorphic and muchof it is accessibleto grazing,whichat presentis probablymoresevereon the less steepslopeswithinthe gorgethan outsideit. The Parorigorgeis shorterand steeper,with huge verticalcliffsand overhangs;it is verylittlegrazed. The gorgeof Palaiomonástiroin 20Rackham and Moody (η. ι); Rackham, 'Land-use' (n. 10).

94

Chapter3

frommaquisexposedto III. 3.12.Patchofmaquisor woodlandisolatedon a hugeboulder.It is notverydifferent browsingand burning.

Chrysaphais steepand narrow,withconglomerateand limestonecliffs;it has an accessible pointat whichflocksare drivento waterin it. Plants ofholesand crevicesin verticalcliffs

withPtilostemon In the Parori gorge there is a plant communityof NW-facing cliff-faces Onosmasp., and a form of Silènecucubalus.Such rock-face Campanulaversicolor, chamaepeuce,

is similarto thatofCrete,butis poorlydevelopedin Laconia. In Cretemanyofthe vegetation are endemics,and in Laconia thereare onlya fewendemicplantsthatreplacethem; species commonon inaccessiblecliffs. theseincludeStachys relatively chrysantha, treeofverticalcliffs Andrachneis thecharacteristic Laconia, oftengrowingout throughout ofwhatlookslikesolidlimestone. Gorgewoods

The north-facing cliffsand talus of the Great Langada have a complex seriesof woods, is usuallydominant,either some ofthemrelatedto maquis and othersto sibljak.Prickly-oak by itselfor withandrachne.In less accessibleplaces or on deeper soils (oftenlowerin the gorge) it gives way to Ostrya.Terebinthand Fraxinusornusare abundant,with scattered maple. The cliffsextendwell intothe coniferzone (1,000m) but have onlya fewfirsand a and the curious Ruscusaculeatus, veryfewpines. Undershrubsinclude Coluteaarborescens, umbelliferBupleurum fruticosum.

ilex oftheLangada are thehomeoffouruncommontrees.Quercus cliffs These north-facing stream. itstypicalhabitatis thebrinkofthelowestprecipiceabove the (holm-oak)is frequent;

Historicalecology 95 cliffs Lime (Tiliarubrifolia highin growsin inaccessibleplaces on metamorphic ssppseudorubrd) One tree of in to ilex. similar is Laurel thegorge(see below). (Laurusnobilis) rare, Pyrus places (λ seenon a cliff just abovetheriver. pyrasterwas of The gorgewoodsoftheLangada are low and notverydense,partlybecause ofa history deciduous of the in all buttheleastaccessiblespots.Most trees,especially species, woodcutting are coppice stools; there are pollard limes, and occasional pollard maples and Ostrya. Regrowthis slow,probablybecause ofdrought,and althoughtherehas been no recentfelling fewtreesyetexceed10m in height. The south-facing slopesoftheGreatLangada are drierand lessprotectedagainstbrowsing. and Spartium. is dominant,eitherby itselfor withPhillyrea prickly-oak Maquis predominates; are frequentin thelowerpartof the Cercis and Ostrya ornus. The cliffs generallyhave Fraxinus and a fewgullies.In thebottomofthegorgethereis a gorge.Andrachneis confinedto cliffs ofhugepollards. ribbonofplane-woodconsisting The woodsoftheParorigorgehavea broadlysimilarrangefrommaquisto sibljak.Pricklywherethereis moremoistureor tendto be dominantin drierplaces, Ostrya oak and Phillyrea less grazing.Fraxinusornusoccurs on the drier cliffs;Quercusilexand laurel in damper, inaccessibleplaces.A featureof thisgorgeis elm,whichis frequenton smallcliffsand steep monastery slopeswithwaterseepagesnearthePhaneromeni The gorgeis woodedwithdense arbutus In thePalaiomonastiro prickly-oak. replaces gorge of often and arbutus of size, is mainlyon verticalcliffs Andrachne, great Phillyrea. maquis treesare lesscommon.There Deciduous as in the it occurs well). surrounding maquis (though is rare;one largetreeis and maple. Ostrya and a littleFraxinus is some terebinth ornus, Cercis, cliff. oftheconglomerate rootedin a fissure Deciduousoaksare veryrarein thegorgesofLaconia, as in thoseofCrete. Inferences

Althoughthere are many trees and other plants which are more or less confinedto inaccessibleplaces, these are not normallydominantin the vegetationof such places. Andrachne,whichis perhapscommoneron cliffsthan anywhereelse, turnsout, in grazed lesspalatablethanmostotherevergreens, includingprickly-oak. maquis,to be distinctly fromordinary not to be turn out often tracts of cliff-bound verydifferent vegetation Wholly it a wood of pricklyin has on the Great boulder A Langada maquis. verylargeflat-topped In inaccessible the and Colutea withLonicera oak, andrachne,and terebinth, (ill. 3.12). implexa but are ornusand some Ostrya, bottomof the Parorigorgethewoods have abundantFraxinus or Phillyrea. dominatedbyprickly-oak This suggeststhat,as faras Laconia is concerned,browsingand grazinghave not had on limestonevegetation.The gorgesdo notsupportthetheory effects radicaland irreversible the naturalvegetationof all Laconia wouldbe forests that,in theabsenceofhumanactivity, in the presentclimate,the dominatedby greattreesof palatable species.On the contrary, woodson limestonewouldonlylocallygrowbeyondthe statureoftallmaquis;and although treessensitiveto browsing,such as ilex, laurel, and Judas-tree,would doubtlessbe more abundantthan theyare now,the dominanttreesin limestonewoods would not be very fromthosein thepresentmaquis. different HEDGES

Hedges are not a commonfeatureof Laconia, but thereare a fewby villagesand rivers. composed of brambles,wild pear, and so on. Occasional bushes of They are irregularly

96

Chapterj

Paliurus,rare in othersituations,suggestthatthesemay be relictsof a timewhen hedges were a more deliberate feature of cultivated land. One or two hedges are made of deciduousoak. In thesouthoftheArkadianplainthefieldsare dividedbyregularhedgesofalmond,briar or cypress,oftenmanagedby coppicingor pollarding.Usuallytheydo {Rosaspp),hawthorn, not formcompleteenclosures,but the fieldsystemsof whichtheyformpartappear to have of Boiotia or thosearoundChaniá (Crete).The been set out in a grid,like the hedge-grids and and are hedges flimsy drought-pinched, do not appear to be old. They may have been plantedwithalmondalone. originally OLD CULTIVATED TREES Olive

The oliveis widelycultivatedin Laconia, and in 1984 it was almostthe onlyfarmlandcrop Wild olivesare thinlyscatteredthroughmanykindsofmaquis,evenin remote notdeclining. musthave gone on as theseare descendedfromcultivated is trees,cultivation likely, places;if, forcenturies. are muchrarerthanin Creteor Boiotia.At Chrysaphathereare a few Ancientolive-trees all theolivesin Laconia appearto be lessthan200 withtrunks1.8m in diameter.21 Otherwise, shouldbe is not clear,unlessan exceptionalfrost this most less than 100. and Why yearsold, shouldhavecarriedoffall theoldertrees. Chestnut

ofschistvalleysin wetparts This treeis absentfromBoiotia.In Creteit is verycharacteristic ofthewestoftheisland;it is unlikelyto be nativeand does not formwoods,but is a treeof withbeautifuland historicgiantpollardsand coppicestools. ancientcultivation, In northern Parnonthetreeis abundantaroundmostofthevillagesfromVrésthenato Ano cultivatedtreegrowingon Dolianá and westwardsto Vlachokerasia.It is an orchard-like a for different made on terraces schistsoils,often purpose.The alternative originally perhaps muchof the side of cover chestnut for naturalvegetationis deciduousoak; instance, groves Parnonoppositeto theSkotitasoakwood. In Taygetos,chestnuts are morethinlyscattered,and mostof thoseI have seen represent disusedcultivation;forinstance,thosenow embeddedin recentoakwood below Anavryti. reach1,340m in Taygetosand 1,200m in Parnon. Chestnuts In Laconia and Arkadia,chestnutis unlikelyto be native.Saplings commonlyinvade mountain pinewoods and mountain oakwoods, but full-growntrees are very rare in woodland.Possibleexceptionsare theoccasionalchestnuts, established includingbig pollards, in high valleys at the westernend of the Great Langada; these are very remote from and has generatedat least four habitation.Chestnutis probablyan ancientintroduction, near in Kastaniá namesofvillages:Kastánitsa Parnon, Cape Maléa, Kastánia in Vardoúnia, lack ofancienttrees.In all thechestnut an and Kastaniáin theMani. But thereis unexpected and has old stools, and these are not so pollards countryof Parnon, only Vourvoura as thoseofCrete. impressive

21Near Voutianoiare a fewthatexceed2 m; one (ill. 7.10)was measuredat 2.40 m (DGJS).

Historical ecology 97

Relict

Wild Trees

holm-oak betweensouthernand A striking difference middle Italy and southernGreece is that ilex(holm-oak)and Italyis a land of Quercus Ilex Greece of Quercus cocci/era (prickly-oak). is absentfromBoiotia.In Creteit is a rarity, confined mainly to the wet part of the island and there to cliffsand gorges. It appears to be verysensitiveto browsing. it rarelysurvivesin a bittenUnlikecoccifera In maquisit existsonly state. down'topiary' wherethereis enoughmoistureto enable it to growup into a tree betweensuccessive visitsoftheflocks.22 In Laconia,as we haveseen,holm-oakis a treeoflimestonegorges,usuallyon thevery in rathercool, damp places.It edge of cliffs growsnotonlyin theGreatLangada and the Parorigorge,but in inaccessibleplaces in small gorges as far south as Melissa in in limestone of cliffs Vardounia.It is frequent Parnon around Vasaras. All thesehabitats itsCretanlocalities. resemble Holm-oakis also occasionallyto be found in Europe,on thesouthernmost III. 3.13.Ancientlime-tree, in ordinarymaquis.The biggestconcentracliffin theGreatLangada. N-facing tion is in the much-brokenslopes of the Kelephínavalleyat KalyviaTheologou.Here theilexesforma zone on thelowerslopesofbig lushand ravinesand in thebottomsofsmallones.The treesare coppicestoolsamongunusually Erica-Arbutusmaquis.As in similarplacesin Crete,theyhave grownmorerapidly continuous abovethem. sincelastcutor burnt,and nowtowerconspicuously thantheircompetitors ilexappearsto be an indicatoreitherof freedomfrombrowsingor of As in Crete,Quercus soil. pluswater-retaining highrainfall LAUREL

is rarein Laconia as in Boiotia,and is a treeofdamp places in gorges.In Crete, Laurusnobilis areas,itis locallyquitecommonand entersintohedges. althoughlimitedto high-rainfall LIME

in souththe specieswhichreplaces77cordata This is probablyTilia rubrifolia ssppseudorubra, forlimepollenconsistently easternEurope.It is ofthegreatesthistoricalinterest, appearsin Cretan and Boiotianpollen diagrams,and the treewas evidentlynot uncommoneven in times.It is notnowknownin Crete;thelimesoftheGreatLangada lowlandsin pre-Neolithic in Boiotia. also on mountaincliffs, in Europe.Thereis one locality, are thesouthernmost 22Rackham,'Land-use' (n. 10).

98

Chapter^

Lime growsin twoplaces in the GreatLangada, on thecliffcalled Kotsiliésjust insidethe Messenianborderat 900 m, and at 1,000m on anothercliff1 kmto theNW.Bothare NNWrock(ILL.3.13).The withmuchshattered ofmetamorphic rock,mainlylimestone, facingcliffs are difficult fora man to reachand Kotsiliescliffseldomsees the sun. Most ofthelime-trees impossiblefora goat. Lime is verypalatable,and anyfoliagecomingwithina goat'sgraspis devoured.There are about thirty lime-trees; theyare all old and showevidenceof instantly There are several or both. or huge,ancientstools2 m across,and one of coppicing pollarding, base withboughsthatindicatethreesuccessiveheightsof thepollardshas a massivefissured ratherthanwood; thelastcuttingwas The treeswereprobablycutforleaf-fodder pollarding. the at leasttenyearsbeforethisstudytookplace. Theygrowslowlyand showsignsofdrought, in flower leavesturning freely. yellow August,althoughthey Lime is accompaniedby otherrelicttrees,mainlywithsibljakaffinities. Ostrya, maple,and and and Terebinth There is some Fraxinus ornus common associates. ilex are (λ coccifera. Quercus and were noted of laurel individuals are occasional. Pyrus pyraster. oxycedrus Single Juniperus and Ruscus. Undershrubs includeSpartium (abundant),ivy,Bupleurumfruticosum, and lichens,forinstanceIsothecium Lime is one of the richesttreesin epiphytic bryophytes cool atmosphere. These indicatea damp,unpolluted, and Lobaria relatively pulmonaria. myurum I have not seen Tilia in Parnon,althoughthe place-namePhlámbouraforan east-facing hollowin themountainsofKallitheamayreferto thetree. OSTRTA

in pollendiagrams.It was evidently treeofsibljak,is also represented This,thecharacteristic It is now unknownin Creteand reduced in and Crete. Boiotia abundant pre-Neolithic quite to one localityin Boiotia. bothto In Laconia it is commonin thenorthern Taygetos.It appearsto be moreresistant and where accessible it is browsed than and to Tilia, although severely drought browsing showsdroughtsymptoms.It sets abundant seed and, unlikemost relicttrees,easily gets fromseed;as we haveseen,itlocallyformssecondarywoodland. established is Ostrya abundantonlywithinabout 8 km westand southof Mystras.In Parnonand in southernTaygetosit is rare: singleindividualshere and thereon damp cliffsand in gorges, oftenwithilex. FRAXINUS ORNUS

whose pollen appears in This southernEuropean speciesof ash is presumablythe Fraxinus Boiotianand Cretandeposits.It is nowrarein Boiotiaand veryrarein Crete. to cliffs rareand confined itis commonin northern Ashin LaconiagoeswithOstrya: Taygetos, non-cliff sites it can on in Parnon(e.g.at Polydroso). providedit grow Althoughverypalatable, It frombrowsingat the base (e.g.by growingthroughtall prickly-oak). has some protection on some and better than resists south-facing slopes. Ostrya, grows drought apparently PALIURUS SPINA-CHRISTI

This is anothersibljakshrub,rare in Greece. In middleItaly it is common,especiallyon Roman sites,and is a traditionalhedgingplant (cf.above, 'Hedges'); it is also abundantin nativein Boiotia,and absentfromCrete.It has Croatiaand Serbia.It is rareand doubtfully no knownpollenrecord. In Laconia it is thinlyscatteredin the Evrotasvalley.In some places (e.g. near the great have been introduced.There is a springat Vivári)it is foundin hedges,and may originally

Historical ecology 99

place called Páliourasin Soustiánoiin whichPaliurusis frequentin abandoned olive-groves and nearbymaquis. PT RU S cf PT RAST ER

of fromthecommonP. amygdaltformis and centralEuropeis distinct The wildpear ofnorthern in the bottom of Greece.It is veryrarein Laconia (as in mostofitsrange).One treewas seen theGreatLangada,anotherin a dampgorgeat Polydroso(Tzitzina). ELM

reduced.Theyare rare butare nowgreatly Elmsare generally presentin Greekpollendiagrams, lessrareinLaconia,butcommonin thePindosmountains. inBoiotiaand Crete,somewhat Elms,as we have seen, are riverinetreesalong the Evrotas;theyalso occur along some as farsouthas the Mani. Some big elmswere seen on a schistcliff, seasonalwatercourses near the Phaneromenimonasterynear Anavryti.Althoughelms are with springs, probably most of themare in accessibleplaces; but grazingaround themis usually verypalatable, farmland. ofsurrounding because controlled strictly a group of microspecieswhich Most Laconian elms can be referredto Ulmusminor, and central elms of southern the smooth-leaved Europe and northwardsto comprises of whichhas large rough two kinds of the second Evrotas there are the elm, England.By leavesand belongsto anothergroup. occurrencesof Dutch Elm The Evrotaselmsat Kladás displayedone of the southernmost in It had been Disease (Ceratocystis ulmi) Europe.23 evidently presentforseveralyears; its treesare killed. suckers are as fast as is and new produced existing progress slow, ALDER

ofthenorthern This is perhapsthemostremarkable Europeantreesin Laconia. It appearsin aridpartofsouthernCrete. thepollendiagramforAgia Galini,in whatis now a particularly In the Evrotasgorgethereare about a dozen large alderson the edge of the river,among There are several planesand elms(ILL.3.n). They growto 10 m highand fruitabundantly. banks and at the water's alders on edge. gravel young This is thesouthernmost dependson a localityforalderin Europe.Its survivalpresumably in somewhat unstable its course so that youngalders large,cold,permanentriver,preferably can colonizeexposedgravel. Written

Sources

classical authors Verylittlehas come downto us fromGreekand Roman writerson theland of Laconia. We are toldrathermoreabout Arkadiaand the Péloponnèsein general,but even thisis meagre and generalizedcomparedto theevidenceforBoiotia. There are some indicationsof mostof the morewidespreadvegetationtypesnow extant. iii. 16. 2-3) and Pausanias (viii.12. 1 and elsewhere)tellus plantarum, Theophrastos(Historia 23The discolouredstreaksin the wood, which provide of the disease,were lacking;but they certainidentification werepresentin diseasedelmsin Korinthia,whichhad all the

othersymptoms oftheKladas elms.In 1990I discoveredthe diseasein Crete.

ioo Chapterj thattherewere severalspeciesof oak in Arkadia.Some of theseare recognizable:πρίνος whichmay be holm-oak(for whichis Quercus πλατύφυλλος(platyphyllos), coccifera; (prinos), and δρυς (dry whichis ζλmacrolepis; whichthe usual Greekwordis άρια); φηγός {pkêgos), s), The and Qfrainetto. whichis a generalwordforotherdeciduousoaks such as Q brachyphylla was the proverbialdiet of the Arkadians,who were called βαλανηφάγοι, acorn ofpkêgos 'acorn-eating'. Pinushalepensis, was saidto be rarein Arkadia whichis undoubtedly theπίχυς, Amongconifers iii. Arkadians werefamiliar withthe as it still is and commonaroundElis, 9. 4, 5). today(HP in Yew is said to be common Abiescephalonicá). (μίλος,milos) Ρ nigrd) and ελάτη(elatê, πεύκη(peukê, fir album xvi.20). Plinymentions the mistletoe Arkadia(HP iii. 10.2; Pliny, Natural (Viscum History, calledhyphear whichtheArkadians (ibid.93). sspabietis), buthad The σμϊλαξ(smilax) was likeprinos Two Peloponnesiantreenamesare mysterious. ofthe leavesand softwood (HP iii. 16. 2). Theophrastosgivesa longdescription non-spinous betweenprinosand 'cork-oak'(ibid. 16. 3), whichwas intermediate φελλόδρυς (phellodrys), and was used as a substitute forthe timberοιprinosin was regardedas a femaleprinos, drys, did notgrow.Pausaniasadds thatthe places,suchas aroundSpartaand in Elis,whereprinos s was used forbuoys(viii.9. 1). The genuinecork-oak,whichdoes not corkybarkofpheHodry now groweast of Italy,can hardlybe meant,forTheophrastosdiscussesit separatelyas a as namesfor Tuscan tree(HP iii. 17. 1). I regardsmilax(ifit was an oak at all) and phellodrys and ζλilex.The ancientshad the bizarrehabit of givingthe names variantsof (λ coccifera 'male' and 'female'to what were oftenminorvariantsof the same species. Theophrastos second-hand.The taxonomyofoak is probablydid notvisitArkadiabutgothis information foreasternMediterranean stillconfused;writerstoday oftenuse the name Q calliprinos variantsofcoccifera. to sibljak,nor to arbutusor There appear to be no specifically Peloponnesianreferences andrachne.Theophrastoswas familiarwithall the treesconcerned,but does not givethem localities.He calls Ostrya (ενυδρον δέ και φοφαγγώδες,HP iii. 10. 'wateryand gorge-living' in Laconia. well describe its behaviour which would 3), in Pausanias and otherauthorsto the extentof cultivatedland, The scatteredreferences have notyetbeen collatedand fullycomparedwithwhatis and woodland maquis-garigue, therenow.They do not give the impressionthatLaconia and Arkadiawere verywooded lands. Pausanias mentionsany woods thathe encounteredin termswhichimplythatthey were somewhatof a rarity:for instance, the sacred wood of Marios in south-eastern Parnon(iii. 22. 8). Sometimesthereare stilltreesin theplaces wherehe mentionsthem,as forinstanceon the Tegea-Argos road (viii. 54. 5). ProbablyPausanias, like the modern the extentofwoodland,forit tendsto growin remoteplaces; but underestimated traveller, he givesthe strongimpressionthatmostjourneys,then as now,were throughcultivated land or maquis. notin large butpresumably timber, TheophrastosmentionsArkadiaas a countryexporting The it was of 2. whether he cannot since templeaccounts good quality(HPv. 1). say quantity Strabo(viii.8. 1. 388) remarks ofDelphi recordpurchasesoftimberfrompeople at Sikyon.24 thatArkadiahad been muchdepopulatedbywarsand was famousforhorsesand asses.25 24 R. Meiggs, Treesand Timberin theAncientMediterranean

World (Oxford,1982),430-1. 25Contraryto the statementof A. Beuermann, 'Die im PeloponnesunterbesondererBerückWaldverhältnisse

10 Erdkunde, sichtigungder Entwaldungund Aufforstung', of the (1956),122-36,who both exaggeratesthe statements extentofwoodlandin antiquityand playsdownthemodern presenceoftrees.

Historical ecology ιοί

AD Two othertextsare of uncertainapplication.Hermas, the first-or second-century thus(78.4-10): hisninthParable divine,introduces The angel of repentance. . . tookme away to Arkadia,to a breast-like mountain,and sat me on the top of the in mountain,and showedme a greatplain,and roundthe plain twelvemountains,and the mountainsdiffered appearancefromone another.The firstwas blacklikesoot.The secondwas bare; it had no plants.The thirdwas The fourthhad half-dry plants,the top of theplantsgreen,but towardstherootsdry; thornyand fullof thistles. mountainhad greenplantsand was rough. partoftheplantsbecamedrywheneverthesun singedthem.The fifth The sixthmountainwas all fullofravines,somesmalland somegreat;theravineshad plants,buttheplantswere The seventhmountainhad happyplants,and all themountain but rathershrivelled-like. not too well-nourished, and everykindofcattleand birdspasturedupon thatmountain;and as muchas thecattleand the was flourishing, and every fowlsfed,moreand moretheplantsofthatmountainsprouted.The eighthmountainwas fullofsprings, kindof creatureof the Lord drankof the springsof thatmountain.The ninthmountainhad no waterat all and men.The tenthmountainhad verybig trees, was all deserted;and ithad in itbeastsand deadlyreptilesdestroying The eleventhmountainwas very and undertheshadelaysheeprestingand ruminating. and was all overshadowed, so thatone seeingthemwould adornedwithdifferent thickwithtrees,and thetreeson itwereveryfruitful, fruits, mountainwas all white. . . The twelfth wantto eat oftheirfruits. ix. 1) (ShepherdofHermas,Parable

of based on the Eclogues is a Renaissancedevelopment, The Arcadiafamiliarfromliterature the real was that this It is temptingto suppose inspiredby passage, by contrast, Vergil.26 of mountainsand their The diversity Arkadia.Hermas sayshe was himselfan Arkadian.27 wouldagreeverywellindeedwithsouthernArkadiatoday. vegetation AD biographerPhilostratosputs these words into the mouthof his The third-century subject,ApolloniosofTyana: Arkadiais fullof crops and grassyand woody,not onlythe highlandsbut also the lowlands,and needs many and shepherds,and cowboysbothforcattleand horses,and the place farmersand manygoatherds,swineherds, needsmanyoak-cutters (δρυτόμοι)who are trainedfromboyhood. (VitaApollonii,8. 7)

This also wouldfitmodernArkadiaexceptthatthereare now fewcattleor horses.However, an sage, is defendinghimselfon a chargeof sacrificing Apollonios,who was a first-century fromunemployment and that to showthatArkadiadoes notsuffer Arkadianboy,and is trying its inhabitantshave no need to earn a livelihoodby gettingthemselvessacrificed.Neither norApolloniosseemsto havebeen to Arkadia. Philostratos Conclusions

ofthe forwhattheyare worth,suggestthatthelandscapeand vegetation These textstogether, in classicaltimesfromwhattheywerejust before middlePéloponnèsewerenotverydifferent the recentagriculturaldecline. Whethertherewas any change duringthe course of the land classicalperiodtheevidencedoes notallowus to say.Kahrstedtclaimsthatthecultivated in Arkadiacontracted and thatforests and pastureincreased;28 thisis apparently based on the and Strabo texts,whichare hardlystrongenoughto bear thatinference.The Philostratos 26 P. J. Mahaffy,Ramblesand Studiesin Greece(London, 1907), 290-2.

27J. B. Lightfootandj. R. Harmer,TheApostolic Fathers (Londonand New York,1891).

28U. GesichtGriechenlands in der Kahrstedt, Das wirtschaftliche Kaiserzeit: Kleinstadt, Villa und Domäne (Dissertationes

Bernenses,1.7;Bern,1954),161.

102 Chapter j

MegalopolisSurveyappears to show a markeddeclinein numbersof sitesfromclassicalto Roman. hellenistic One certainchange since Theophrastos'stimeis the decline of yew,whichis now very I havenotseenit. rare;29 A notableomissionfromthe classicalrecordis the woods of Taygetos.Sources of good timberin Greece werefew,and such an obviousone, quite easy of access on the Messenia side,oughtto havebeen mentionedhad itbeen available.I inferthatthewoodsofTaygetosin thantheyare now. and lessmagnificent classicaltimeswereprobablylessextensive The Skotitas text

In one place we can be specificaboutthelandscapenothavingchangedsinceclassicaltimes. oaks.The name oftheplace, On thewayfromtheHermai [sc.towards Sellasia]theentireplace is fullof [deciduous] Skotitas[TheDark],did not come fromthe densityof the trees,but fromZeus surnamedSkotitas;and thereis a tenstadia.Goingbackfromhere, ofZeus Skotitason theleftoftheroad ifyouturnaside approximately sanctuary Heraklesis supposed find]thereis an imageofHeraklesand a trophy. goingon a littleand turningleftagain, [you to haveput it up afterkillingHippokoönand his sons.The thirdturningoffthedirectroad,to theright,leads to Karyai and the sanctuaryofArtemis.For Karyai is a place sacredto Artemisand theNymphs,and an imageof ArtemisKaryatisstandsin theopen . . . (Pausanias,iii. 10.6)

The topography is certain.The Hermai wereat thejunctionof Laconia, Arkadia,and what was thenthe Argolid(Paus. ii. 38. 7; iii. 1. 1). The spot is on the crestof Mt Parnonabove wereidentified byjochmusand thepriestofVresthena AgiosPétros.The Hermaithemselves in 1834. They were apparentlythreebarrowsor 'pyramids',called Phoneménoifromthe beliefthattheywerethetombsofmurderedmen.30Littlenowremainsofthebarrows,butthe The wood in 1985began directlyon the Laconia side of the barrows sitesare unmistakable. and had overrunone of them.It is verylikelythatthebottomend of thewood is about the same as in Pausanias'stime,fortheancientname ofKaryai('Nuts')has nowbeen givento the and whose name knownas Arachova,withwhichit is generallyidentified villageformerly means'nuts'in Slavonic.I am temptedto locatethesanctuaryofArtemisand theNymphsat the siteof a beautifulchapel and springat the bottomof the wood. Here are threeancient whichare amongthebiggestin Europe,withgirthsof11m. plane-trees MEDIEVAL AND LATER RECORDS

AND TRAVELLERS

Settlement and population

During theiroccupationof the whole Morea from1685 to 1715,the Venetiansattempted severalcensuses,one of whichincludesa completelistof villages(or moreprobablyof civil parishes)around1700.3I Anothercensus,witha listof villages,is due to the Frenchin 1830, afterGreekindependence.32 thesettlement pattern Exceptin theMani, whichpresenteditsownproblemsofrecording, littlein threehundredyears.The greatmajorityofmodernvillages has changedremarkably 29Rothmaler, 'Floristische Ergebnisse'(η. 16). 3° Κ. Α. Romaios,'Laconia, IV: the Ερμαι on the N.E. BSA 11(1904-5),137-8. frontier', 31Ε Sauerwein,'Das Siedlungsbild der Peloponnesum das 23 (1969), 237-44 and supplement; Jahr 1700', Erdkunde,

Πληθυσμός, 144-5,lbl~^ 231-89. Panagiotopoulos, 32J. B. G. M. Boryde Saint-Vincent, Expédition scientifique de Morée:sectiondes sciencesphysiques(Paris, 1832-6), ii. 1,p. 61.

Historical ecology 103

are recognizablein the Venetianlist.There are some desertedor unidentifiable settlements those with Turkish and some other for (especially names), changes: instance,Aphysouappears in £.1700as twotownships, Affissù-Cartali' and Afïïssù-Sardari', whichcouldmean eithertwo or two subdivisions or within the same village.But the generally villages (parishes manors) dense settlementof the wet belt and the sparse villages in the drybelt go back beyond Venetiantimes.This is remarkable,consideringthatboth censuseswere done when the Péloponnèse had recentlybeen ravaged by plague, wars, and the loss of the Muslim inhabitants oftheplains. In 1830 the highestdensityof populationin all the Péloponnèsewas in ArkadianParnon aroundAgiosPetros,a clusterofhugevillages(or townships withmorethanone village)and a densityof around50 inhabitants per sq km. This was probablyalso the case in 1700,albeit witha lowergeneraldensityof population.There were severallarge villagesin Laconian Parnon,and a generalscatterof middle-sizedvillagesthroughout Taygetos.In contrast,the drylowlandseastofmodernSpartahad onlysome5 inhabitants per sq kmin 1830. Cropsand land use

In theMiddleAges,Messeniato thewestbelongedto Venice,and something is knownofits The chief were and oil. Other corn,legumes,wine, economy. crops productswere cotton, orchardfruit, and various wild honey,'acorns', crops.33 Fromtheseventeenth centuryonwards,travellers regardedLaconia as in parta fertileand cultivated land. lists the highly Randolph(1680) productsoftheMorea as usedforshoeuppers], Olive-Oyl,Raw-Silk,Wax, Honey,Soap, Cordovan skins[finegoatskin Sheep-skins,Butter, call Valania, Cheese,Raisons,Currans,Figgs,Wines,Wheat,Barly,Rye,Oates, dry'dAcorns,(whichthe Venetians . . .) FustickWood [Cotinuscoggygria usedas a dyestiiff], and PernicokeSeed [crimson-grain; seebelow]. . ,34

He says that oranges,lemons,citrons,pomegranates,apricots,peaches, plums,cherries, and walnutsweregrownin gardens;therewerefewapples and pears (whichis cypress-trees, notso now).Of Mystrasin particularhe says: The Plain is verypleasant,fullof smallVillages,Olive,and MulberryTrees.This Place and Calamatamakemore Silkthanall theotherpartsoftheMorea.35

Leake visitedLaconia in 1805. Since Pococke'svisittherehad been two disastrouswars, although if the censuses are to be believed the total population must have increased. at leastin theplains,was evidently in decline,thoughnotso severelyas it is now. Agriculture, In south-eastern Laconia theland had fallento Muslims, who,thoughhalfstarvedand clothedin rags,have inheritedthe notion. . . thatit is the businessof the rayáh [Christian peasant]to cultivatethe land, and have, therefore,let theirestatesgo to ruin; the massacres and persecutionswhichfollowedthe insurrectionexcitedby Russia [in 1770],havingdeprivedthis cornerof the peninsulaofitsGreekinhabitants.36

33P. W. Topping, FeudalInstitutions as Revealedin theAssizesof Romania,theLaw Code of FrankishGreece(Philadelphia, 1Q48):

id., 'The post-classical documents',in MME 64-80.

34Β. Randolph, The PresentStateoftheMorea, Called Anciently

. . . fardedn, London, i68q), 17. Peloponnesus 35Ibid. 8. 36Leake, Travels,i. 221.

104 Chapterj

a NorthAmericanplant,had becomea considerablecrop. By Leake'stimemaize (kalambokki), before1770therehad Olive oil was stillthemainarticleofcommerce.Silkwas stillimportant: been an annual exportof 50,000 okes (60 tons),but in Leake's timehalfthatquantitywas producedin a goodyear.Cottonwas muchin decline. In Leake's timeTzitzina(now Polydroso)was perhapstypicalof the prosperousmountain villages. The sidesofthehillsbelowand aroundthevillageare coveredwithvinesin narrowterraces.. . . Tzitzinacontains who possessa considerablequantityof land, grownwithwheat,barley,rye,and vines;theyhave eightyfamilies, near Sparta,and manyflocks,whichare now feedingon the also some lands and a kalyvia[secondary settlement] in the plain of Elos [fardistant] winterpasturesin the low lands,particularly ; fromthe milkof theseflocksthey in thisarticle.37 makecheese,and carryon a considerabletraffic

When Chateaubriandcame to Laconia in 1806 he was veryimpressedby his firstsqualid khannear Sellasia,whoseinnkeeperreceivedhimon an upstairsdunghill.Laterhe foundan at 'Sclabochorion'(nowAmykles): oasisofcultivation We tooktheway of theplain at the footof Taygetos,following shadyand verypleasantlittlepathswhichpassed whichcame down fromthe mountain,were planted betweengardens;thesegardens,irrigatedby watercourses We saw theremanywater-melons, and sycomores. withmulberry-trees, cucumbers,and eating-grapes, fig-trees, we could have different kindsofvegetables.Fromthe beautyof the skyand almostthe same kindof cultivation, ofChambéry38 thoughtourselvesin theneighbourhood

The landscapedoes indeedstilllook likethe outerFrenchAlps aroundChambéry.The one whichis whatChateaubriandwouldhave meantby plantno longergrownis Ficussycomorus, if he identified it correctly.Aphysoustillhas an elaborate systemof irrigation sycomore, channelssharedbetweenitshouseholders. in 1888) saysthatcottonand silkwere seldomgrown;theymusthave Philippson(visiting ceased not long after.The whitemulberrytrees,however,were maintained;theyare still pollardedtodayon a one-yearcycleand theleavesare used forfeedingassesand goatsrather In 1888muchCannabis was grownin easternArkadiaas a drugplant;hashish thansilkworms. was exportedto orientalcountries.39 Maquis andgarigue

in records;theyweretoo commonplaceto be We cannotexpecttheseto be muchrepresented their uses weremainlyforpurposes(firewood, notedoftenby travellers and, althoughuseful, and thus involve so that did not and escape record. money on) goats, from and which wax, garigueflowers,appear in the medieval originatemainly Honey In 1805 the Mani and Vardouniaexported10,000 Messenia recordsand in latertravellers. okes(ΐ2!Λtons)ofhoneya year,besideslambskinbags ofsaltquails.40 A specificproductofmaquisis mentionedbyRandolphas a productoftheMorea: PernicokeSeed, whichSeed is forDyeingofScarlet.It growson a Shurb-Oak-tree [sic],risingat thestemmofthe Leaf,likea Blister,something biggerthana Pea, out of whichcomesDust (or Powder)whichbeingdryturnsto smallWorms,whichwhenquicknedtheykillwithWine.41 37Ibid. ii. 515-16. 30F. R. de Chateaubriand (ed. E. Malakis), Itinéraire de Pans à Jérusalem(Baltimore, Md., 1946), i. 124.

39A. Philippson, Der Peloponnes (Berlin, 1892), 541, 545. 40Leake, Travels,ii. 242. 41Randolph (n. 34), 17.

Historicalecology 105 This is crimson-grain, thecoccusinsect(Kermococcus whichliveson prickly-oak. There vermilio) was doubtas to whetherit was a fruitor a worm.Leake saysit was calledprinokókki and was It was boughtfrompeasantsat 15-20piastresan oke;thisworksout (in gatheredon Taygetum. - buta kilogramrepresents 1985values)at about 1,000drachmasper kilogram manyhoursof and prickly work.Laconia probablyyieldedmuchlesscrimson-grain thanBoiotia.The fiddling Bey of the Mani had a monopolyof the export;it was shippedat Marathonisi(Gytheio)for Tunisand Leghorn.At Tunisitwas usedfordyeingthefezzesthatall Turkishmenwore.42 The in coccusinsectappearsalmostto havevanished.I havetravelled muchin prickly-oak country thegathering season(Augustto October,accordingto Randolph)and haveseldomseenit. was Randolph's'FustickWood5,thewood of Connus Anothermaquisdyestuff coggygria. Firewoodcouldbe a commercialproduct.Leake saw 200 assesloaded withthe'brushwood5 thathad been importedvia PortoKágio in the Mani one Easterforthepurposeof roasting lambs.43 He describesvariouskindsofmaquis: The hillsabove Gythium and Trinisa,as well as thoseof Laconiain general,abound,in all the uncultivated parts whichare notshadedwithforest-trees, withtheholley-leaved oak shrub,fromwhichis gatheredtheprinokókki, or scarletdye,exportedfromMarathonisibythemerchants ofMistrá.The prinári,or prinusoftheancientGreeks,is of everysize, froma greatforesttreeto a low shrub:but it is onlyfromthe shrub,I believe,thatthe grainis . . . thevermilion is farfrombeingequallyplentiful in all situations.44 gathered.[Footnote']

NearVrontamás he noticedOak-Lentiskmaquis:'a barrentract,rockyand coveredwithbushes of mastic[lentisk], He remarked'scatteredtrees,chieflyof ilex5 holly-oak,and wild olive.545 betweenParnonand Sparta,whilearoundÁgios Theódoros,in the verydrysouth-eastof withmountains coveredinwildlavender.46 Laconia,he encountered terrain, garigue-only entirely Chateaubriandwas veryimpressedby the uninhabitedlandscape on the hillsbetween Laconia and Arkadia: we entereda desertwhichendsonlyin thevalleyofLaconia. The dried-upbed ofa torrent servedus as a road;we wentalong withit intoa labyrinth of low mountains,all like each other,showingeverywhere nothingbut bare peaksand slopescoveredwitha sortofdwarfgreenoak,withhollyleaves.47

The area is now muchless arid in aspect.The hillsvaryin vegetation, geologyand climate, and someofthemare moderately lush,withconspicuousarbutus,andrachne,and Cotinus. Chateaubriand continued towards the Evrotas gorge, and there found that 'the mountainsbegan to riseup and to be coveredwitha fewclumpsof trees;thevalleyswere narrowand broken;some of themremindedme, but on a verysmall scale, of the site of the Grande Chartreuseand its magnificentcover of Forests5.48 The peculiar featureof the Chartreusemountainsin France is the limestonecliffssoaring out of the forests. ProbablyChateaubriandhad in mind smallerlimestonecliffsrisingout of lush maquis and riverinewoods, as in the Evrotasgorge itselfand its tributaryravineson both sides below Vourlia(Sellasia). Boryde Saint-Vincent,who touredtheMorea in 1830and made a catalogueofitsplants,is theonlytraveller to mentionburningofmaquis: 42Leake, Travels, i. 132. « Ibid. i. 289. 44Ibid. i. 249-50. « Ibid. 1. 194.

46Ilex: Leake, Peloponnesiaca, ii. Travels, 341,supplementing 515.Lavender:ibid.i. 202. 47Chateaubriandin. 38). i. 111 48Ibid.

io6 Chapterj This arbutuswouldbecomea veryeleganttreein theMorea, iftheshepherdsdid not have thecustomof setting fireto the area whereit grows,because of the local idea thatthe ashes of burntplantsmakesthemabundant season.49 pastureforthefollowing

Saint-Vincentregardedandrachneas a rareplant:hisonlyLaconian localitywas thegorge to mentionilex: coneof the dominanttreesin of the Evrotas.He is one of the fewtravellers theMorea ... itformsthebasisofmostofthebigwoodsoftheloweror middleelevations'.50 and thoughNeumannand Partschsay the same51I can only This is a surprising statement, as that on ilex, Quercus throughotheroaks manyoccasions,has been over-recorded suppose mistaken for it.52 being Saint-Vincentsaysthatcarob, Ceratonia siliqua,grows'in all the Morea', whichis now no not This almost true. tree, certainly indigenous,is now abundantin the lowlandsof longer Cretebutrarein Laconia. The travelsofPhilippsonin 1888 givemanyparticularsofmaquisin specificplaces.Many are stillrecognizablenow.Wherenotinvadedbydeciduous ofhisdescriptions and distinctions thevegetationis eithermuchthe same todayor is now talleror denser.For oaks or conifers, example,on thewayfromVoutianoitowardsTripolis, and lack of waterbegin at once. The vegetationis wretched,partly Withthe dominanceof limestone,sterility So thearea showsa thereare cornfields. , partlylow maquis;in thelittlevalleysand depressions phrygana[garigue] and cheerless monotonous appearance.53 very

This is thearea visitedby Chateaubriand;mostofthechangesin it have evidently happened time. sincePhilippson's BetweenVlachokerasiaand KaltezesPhilippsonreports: of the rock,the vegetationis Despite the abundance of water,that is broughtabout by the impermeability it is somewhatbetterthanon thelimestone Nevertheless as tendsusuallyto be thecase on mica-schist. wretched, as longas theseare notwooded.It consistsmainlyofdryphryganaundershrubs. mountains, Onlyon thewestside whichspeciallybelongsto ofthehighestridgeeastofKaltezai is it suddenlyreplacedbya lushmaquis-vegetation, fromhereto Leondari.We have therebyleftthe dryeast westernside of Greece,and predominates the moister, halfofthePéloponnèse.54

The contrastis stillveryclear,but the dryschistcountryis not quite so barrenas in 1888; thereare wide areas of bracken,tractsof Ericaarbórea, plane-treesin valleys,and occasional after which the Kerasiá villages are and the cherries deciduous oaks, chestnuts, young has vanished beneathforestry wild of the named. plantationsof vegetation (Much apparently blackpine,whichhavenotprospered.) and travellers Earlyevidenceforsibljakis hard to come by; it is a local plantcommunity, seldomvisiteditslocalities(otherthanMystrascity,whichwouldthenhavebeen lessvegetated and than it is now). Saint-Vincentfailsto mentionOstrya, thoughhe does referto Cotinus terebinth as commonplants.

49Bory de Saint-Vincent (n. 32), i. 115. 50Ibid. i. 272. 51 C. Neumann and J. Partsch, Physikalische Geographievon Rücksichtauf das Alterthum Griechenland mitbesonderer (Breslau, 1885), 380.

52Rackham (n. 2), 327 n. 82, 337. 53Philippson (n. so), 166. 54Ibid. 165.

Historical ecology 107 Deciduousoakwoods

The fourteenth-century law-codeofFrankishGreece,theAssizesofMorea,55 containsprovisions relatingto woods. There were 'wild forests'commonto all and privateforests56 'anciently reserved5 and attachedto castles.Common-rights includedcuttingtimberand dead wood, and feedingpigs on acorns.There was an acorn harvestafter14 September.Unfortunately, laws are a notoriously it is not clear how fartheseare imported poor sourceof evidence;57 fromFranceor Germanyand howfartheycodifyactualMoreotpractice. More definiteare the medievalrecordsof Messenia,whichmentionacorns,valonia,and Valonia was a monopolyof the Byzantineemperorin the galls as articlesof commerce.58 fourteenth century.59 In the seventeenth centuryRandolphmentions'severalsortsof Oaks' and valonia.There was a large oakwood in the middle of Messenia, which may stillexist.60The ArkadiaMesseniaborderis mentionedas an area ofoakwoodsbyBrue,interpreter to thegrandvizier, in 1715;he had notmetwiththemanywhereelse in thevizier'sPeloponnesianwar.61 Theystill existand have recentlyincreased.Leake mentionsthe macrolepis oakwoodsof the northern Mani, and describesthe trade in valonia. It was a considerabletrade: Greece was said to valuedat 40 piastres(about2,000drachmasat exportsome 1,400tonsofacorn-cupsannually, ton. The the Mani had a monopolyof the exportof valonia from of 1985values)per Bey a it fetched one-third than valonia fromtherestof Greece.Much ofit Gytheio; price higher went to England.62Valonia was gatheredon the Mani border,forLeake says: 'Further a long root of Mount Taygetum westward[from stretchesto the south,called Mavrovoúní], Makriá a forestoftheveláni-oak,and or it is covered with Makryaráki[se. Ráchi', Long-ridge; is supposedto producehalfthevallonéashippedat Marathonisi'.63 I cannotidentify Makria but it at least with the area of the oakwoods Rachi, evidently agrees, macrolepis approximately, behindPassavatoday. These woodswerealso used fortimber.The inhabitants ofTzitzinacame hereas travelling as 'In Leake observes: Bardunia and the north-eastern craftsmen, partofMani, theycutplank and timberfromtheoak and poplarofMount Taygetum'.6* Saint-Vincentsaysthatvaloniawas speciallycommonbehindGytheio,butgrewalso in the Evrotasvalley.He spenta disagreeablenightin a valoniawood bytheEvrotasdelta: Some enormousValoniaswerescatteredin thisplace,withthebiggestLentisksI have everencountered. The well, wherewe had hoped to finddrinking built water,was dry;thatwhichused to fillthebasinsofa quitebig fountain ofstone,whichwe discoverednearthebed ofa torrent borderedbyOleandersand Vitex 20 feethigh,had been all muddiedbya flockwhichhadjust drunkfromit.We therefore had to giveup quenchingour thirst. Whenwe had thrownourselvesdownon our scorching beds,newmyriadsofMosquitoesbegan to tortureus. Innumerablepacks ofJackals,runningup fromall sidesin thedeep darkness,incessantly made us listento a concertofpiercingwails, ofwhichI was terrified.65

55Topping, FeudalInstitutions (n. 33).

56The word'forest'is Topping'stranslation; I do notknow theexactmeaningoftheoriginalword. 57O. Rackham, 'The countryside:historyand pseudoTheHistorian, history', 14(1987),13-17. 58Topping,'The post-classical documents'(n. 33).

59 P. Thiriet, Régestes des délibérationsdu sénat de Venise concernant la Romanie(Paris, 10,^8),1^6.

60Ibid.; Rothmaler, 'Floristische Ergebnisse'(η. ΐ6). 61 Β.

Brue, Journalde campagneque le grandvésirAli Pacha a

de la Morée(Paris, 1870). faiteen iy15pourla conquête

62The Englishleather-tanning industrywas boomingat the time: L. A. Clarkson, 'The English bark trade 22 (19,74), 1660-1830',Agricultural History Review, 136-^2. 63Leake, Travels, i. 251,cf.240. 64Ibid. ii. 516. 65Boryde Saint-Vincent(n. 32),i. 455.Jackalsstillhowlat near Sparta;theauthorsaw one notfarfromSaintnightfall Vincent'ssitesin 2001.

io8 Chapterj time.The woods, The valoniatradestillexistedin Philippson's west and northof brokenup by fieldsand olive-treesinto separate scatteredgroups,cover the hill-country ofMalevriand thesouthernpartof [Vardounia]) up towardsStephaniaand Krokeae. . . The Gytheion(thedistrict valonia-oakis notplantedin thePéloponnèse,butitswoodsare probablycarefully protectedand stabilizedin part theground,sincethevaloniayieldsa valuableexportcropalmostwithoutanylabour.66 byterracing

woodedwith In 1888,as now,thehillbetweenthe castleof Passava and the sea was 'thickly valonia-oaks'.67 oakwoodsin our studyarea,butdescribesseveralotherselsewhere Leake missedthefrainetto in the Morea. For instance,a largewood in Elis 'consistssolelyof oaks,manyof themvery This wood maystillexist.69 large,butall withverycrookedstems5.68 Skotitaswas apparentlyfirstrediscoveredby the French expedition of 1830, and is mentioned byseveralothertravellers. We noticed,likePausanias,thatthewholesouthslope of theseschistmountainsis coveredwithlittlegreenoaks; combinedwiththe colour of the rock,theygive the countrya sombreappearance whichcontrastswiththe whiteness ofthelimestonemountains.Fromthiscomes,perhaps,thename of Skotitas,althoughPausaniasgivesa forit. different etymology Boblaye(1830)7° thenorth] . . . thecountry ; beginsto be woodedaboutthreequartersofan hourbeforereaching'AghiosPetros[from and the oak-forest, properlyso called, extendsto beyondVambakouon the south. . ., as faras the villageof Vourvourato thenorth,and to theconfluenceoftheriverofVresthénawiththeŒnus to thewest.This fineforest diminishesannuallyin densityas well as beauty,in consequence of the cuttingdown of timberforbuilding purposesand forfuel. Jochmus(1834)71 on bothsidesare grownwithgnarledoaks,theremainsoftheancientoakwoodSkotitas. [At]Aráchova. . . The heights Ross (1834)7* This region,evennowcoveredwiththickoak scrub... in antiquity. . . had thename Skotitas.

Bursian(c.1835)73

Skotitasand its neighbourshave clearlynot changedmuch in extentsince the end of the Turkishperiod.As we would expectof such a denselypopulatedarea, muchuse has been but made ofthem,and at timesmuchof thiswoodlandhas been in earlystagesofregrowth; thedocumentsdo notjustifyus in regardingthepresentwoods as remnantsofa muchvaster historic wood. some Fiedlerin the 1830sreportsthat'halfan hourfromVlacho Kerasia [towards Kollines] he would is theAgiosChristophoros This presumably oak-woodlandbegins'.74 wood,although havehad to ridefastto gettherein thetime.Philippson(inhis 1959book)treatsthewood as a 66 Philippson(n. 39),530. A littlevaloniawas stillimported to England in 1984, but was said to come fromTurkey (BotanicalSocietyoftheBritishIsles). b7Ibid. 223.

68Leake, Travels, ii. 234. 69Rothmaler, 'Floristische Ergebnisse'(η. 16). 70Boblaye,Recherches, 72. 71This includesthenearbywoodsas wellas Skotitasitself. The 'confluence' does not make topographical sense

'Sellasia'). (Jochmus,

72 L. Ross, Reisen im Peloponnes,i: Der Ager Dentheliates, Theilevon Phliasia, Sikyonia, Arkadien,TheilevonArgolis,Thyreatis, Lakonikae(sic; Berlin, 1841), i. 173. 73G. Bursian, Geographie vonGriechenland (Leipzig, 1868-72),

ii. 116.

74 K. G. Fiedler, Reise durch alle Theile des Königreiches Griechenland . . . in denJahren1834 bis 1837 (Leipzig, 1840- 1).

Historicalecology 109 (He also missedthe Parnon thingof the past; evidentlyhe missedit on his 1888 travels.75 It is first noted at about the same time.76 oakwoods.) definitely byLoring The oak thatis conspicuouslyabsentfromall travellers'accountsis (λ brachyphylla. This does not mean it did not occur. It is not a verydistinctivekind of oak- it looks like the familiarfarmlandoaks of westernEurope- and it yieldsno special product,so thatif,in woodsit mightwellnotbe thoughtworthrecording. Even as addition,it formedno extensive lateas 1942Rothmalercouldobserve: In thePéloponnèsejust as widespreadas [frainetto], whereit existsas singletrees.Seldomformswoods particularly with[frainetto]. This speciesappearsto be less sensitiveto drought,and so oftenforms and is mostlyinterspersed sparsestandsat theedge ofwoodsof ζλFrainetto.7'1 Chestnut

As an anciently cultivated treethisis confirmed byplace-names:threevillagesare namedafter it in the Venetiancensus.There is a smallpuzzle, in thatseveraltravellers mentionit as a woodlandtree.Randolphincludes'wildChesnut'[sic)amongthe 'Treesin theWoods' ofthe Morea in 1680.78Leake mentions'a forestof chestnuttrees,mixedwitha fewoaks' above Kastanitsain Kynouria.79 Even Agios Petros'lies in a chestnut-wood' accordingto Ross.80 There is a similarproblemin Crete,wherethechestnut-woods referred to by writershave so I inferthattravellers farprovedelusive.Pendingfurther oftendid not knowthe discoveries, betweenorchardsand woods. difference Mountain conifers

These are littlenoticedbeforethenineteenth century. Randolphremarksthat'The Province ofArcadiais all surroundedwithMountains,mostof whichare coveredwithWoods.Yearly theyburnthe Grass and Bryersto clear the groundagainstthe Spring,and thenverygood Pasturegrowsup in itsstead.'He mentions'Pine,Firr'amongthewoodlandtrees.81 Leake knewthe coniferwoods of Taygetos:forinstance,at Mystras,Ά loftysummitof behind the castle,threeor fourmilesdistant,is clothedwitha forest immediately Taygetum, offirs'.82 He saysmuchabouttheconifers ofParnon.A mountainnearTzitzina is coveredwithfirsmixedwitha fewpines;on thesummitthereis somecultivated ground,and thetreesare burnt to preparethegroundforsowing.These woodlandsare said to have been morecultivatedin formertimes,when Tzitzinawas a muchlargervillage.83

Leake's accountsgivetheimpression thathe could distinguish fir(ελάτη)frompine,and that firwas thenmuchthecommonerofthetwo.The woodsofParnonwereprobablya littleless extensivethan theyare now.They were also more used than now,formakingplanksand torches.In thesame passageLeake mentionswildstrawberries; in his timethere illuminating werestillwolveson Parnonand wildswineon Taygetos. Saint-Vincentfailsto mentionpine and misidentifies fir.The latter'formsa regionor zone aroundthehighpeaksoftheTaygetos... It getsdestroyed there,butthereare stillsomethick forests ofit.A fewpersiston theMalevos'(inParnon).84 75Philippson(n. 4), iii.467. 76Loring,'Routes',61. 77Rothmaler, 'Floristische Ergebnisse'(n. 16). 78Randolph(n. 34), 18. 79Leake, Traveis, ii. 511.

80Ross (n. 72),174. 81Randolphin.
83Ibid. ii. CL16-17. 84Bory de Saint-Vincent (n. 32).

no Chapterj Accordingto Neumann and Partsch,'the mountainrangesof Parnon, Maenalon, and woodless,exceptthaton Taygetosat a certainheighta zone of Taygetosare almostentirely white-firs appears'.85 Philippsonin 1888 describesthe mountainwoods in more detail.At the westend of the In Anavryti, 'the micaGreatLangada therewas 'woodlandofblackpinesand a fewfirs'.86 schistis partlywooded withblackpines and firs,partlycoveredwithcorn and maize-fields. On the limestoneclifffir-woodascendsto about 1,900m'.87In a remotecirqueon the east side ofthehighestpeak ofTaygetoshe found'a splendid,stilluntouchedwildwood(Urwald) is covered Close by,on the Mani side,'the wholemountain-range of blackpinesand firs'.88 with a wood of black pines called Vasiliki,formerlyfamous,but which is now through destruction dividedinto scatteredclumpsseparatedby wide gaps'.89In general, thoughtless on themiddleTaygetos, in the higherpartsthe wood coverwas muchmoregeneral[than as faras one can judge fromthe further north], smallclumpsthatstilllie scatteredaround. Fromabout 800 to 1,900m is the zone of the coniferwoods,and whichsubordinately accompaniesthefir.Only in thehighestplaces ofthe especiallyofPinusLaricio [i.e.P. nigra], On the east side thesewoods includea partof the micawoodlandzone does thelatterpredominateexclusively. coversthemica-schist schistterrace,and ascendin scatteredgappybandsontothemainridge.Dense conifer-wood east of St Elias [Prophítis Bias,thehighest peak], also the east side of the ridgebetweenXerokampiand Kardhamyli extendedovera greatpartofthehighermountains;nowthereare . . . On theeastside thewood Vasilikiformerly which onlymiserableremainsof it at the sourceof the Kardhamylistreamand on a fewremotemountain-tops, to a sawmillthatis sitedthere.90 graduallyare sacrificed

AboveVamvakou on and aroundMt Malevós.91 On Parnon,Philippsonfound'thickfir-wood' wood ofPinus[nigra] thatis onlyrarelyaccompanied theschistwas coveredwith'an extensive on limestone'a splendid,thickwood of firscoversall the mountainsaround'.93 by firs';92 wherethereis now muchrecentpine and fir,in BetweenChrysaphaand Agrianoi,however, In scrub.94 general,Philippsonregarded'fir1888 therewas onlyprickly-oak woods,partly oftheupperaltitudesofParnon;thehighestparts mixedwiththeblackpine' as characteristic sidewerewooded. and mostofthenorth-east show thattherehave alwaysbeen pines and firswithin These accounts,takentogether, roughlytheirpresentlimitsof altitude.Despite what the travellerssay about thesebeing remnantsofonce muchlargerwoods- a claimwhichcan hardlybe based on firstshrinking - theywereundoubtedly once muchless extensivethantheyare now.Pines hand observation have increasedmorethanfirs;the increasehas probablybeen greateron Taygetosthan on limithas advancedbuttheupperhas probablyretreated Parnon;theloweraltitudinal slightly. The woods have,of course,been used fortimber,and thismay have resultedin local overthe generalchange. of thekindinferred by Philippson;but thishas not affected exploitation Much oftheincreasehas been in thelasthundredyears:thescatteredclumpsofPhilippson's time(which,on fieldevidence,may well have increasedalreadyfromscatteredsingletrees) havenowjoined up intocontinuouswoods. Further,undated, witnessesto the increase of woodland in Taygetos are the many mountainscalled Xerovouni,'Dry Mountain'.This is the usual Greekwordfora mountain 85Neumannand Partschfn.*i), 360. 86 Philippson(n. 39),207. 8?Ibid. 210. 88Ibid. 211. 89Ibid. 219.

9°Ibid. 24e». s'lbid. 158. 92Ibid.161. 93 TKÍH

TÍV7

94Ibid. 170.

Historicalecology in withouttreesor shrubs;yetsome ofthemountainsso called (e.g.at Pigádia in theMani) are nowwhollyor partlywooded. Gorges in Laconia havebeen interested in cliffs Fewtravellers or gorges.PhilippsonsaysoftheGreat Langada: The bed ofthestreamis in places surrounded bybeautifultree-growth (planes,in theupperpartalso blackpines in contrast, and firs);on thecliffs, scrubtakehold. The so-calledpath(one of onlymaquisbushesand prickly-oak theroughest, and mostslippery naturalpathsofthePéloponnèse,on whichone has in places to holdon to stoniest, themanesofthehorsesas theypicktheirwaydown,in orderto givethemsomeprotection fromslipping)goes in otherwise between highin thevalleysides. . . The heatofthesun [reflected] placesthroughtherockystream-bed, in the middleof a calm summerday and the torturing thepale cliffs thirstmake thepassage of the Langáda an ofnaturecan hardlycompensate.95 unpleasantburden,forwhichthemagnificence

The lime-trees, ilexesand Ostrya musthave existeda centuryago, but wereprobablycut so low as notto attractnotice.Philippsonwas unluckyin the road; thereare remainsof a wellconstructed butitmayhavefallenintoruinbyhistime. mule-path, Pictures

and Photographs

The manyviews of Mystrasgive some evidence of the surroundingvegetation.Prosper Baccuet's view of 1831,when the medieval citywas newly depopulated, shows sibljak alreadywell developed on Mystrashill itself,but the hills behind stilltreeless.Edward Lear's viewpointforhis sketchof the Pantánassa convent(1849) *s now obscuredby the growthof terebinthsand a Judas-tree.The Ceitisby the Perivleptos monastery,just is now a large tree.(Lear's viewpointfor recognizablewhen Lear sketchedthe monastery, this sketchis now completelyhidden in a pine plantation.)Sibljak bushes have further increasedin recentyearsand have growninto trees,as can be seen fromthe photographs in Runciman'sbook.96 The traveller Wyse(1851-2)publisheda viewof thelowerpartofthe GreatLangada. The viewpoint(about2 kmwestofthelasthouse in Trypi)can be identified exactly.The original pictureshowspatchesofmaquisand bare slopeswithsparsetrees.It appearsto be accurate; in particular, thesparsetreeshave thecharacteristic below shape,withthecrownterminated oftreesthathave been exposedto goatssincetheygrewup.97In everypart by a browse-line, oftheviewthereis now moregrowthoftreesand maquis:on theaccessibleslopes,thecliffs, and amongthecultivated fieldsofTrypiin thebackground.The changeis probablylessgreat thanin mostareas,forthereis stillsomegrazingin theGreatLangada. Pritzelin 1906 photographedthe pinewoodssomewherenear the westend of the Great Langada. I have not locatedthe viewpoint.He chose a spotwherethe woods were already ofyoungones are quitedenseand expanding;scatteredold pinesand at leasttwogenerations In Achaia he photographed visiblein thephotograph.98 oak maquisinvadedbyfir.99 95Philippson(n. 39),208. 96 All these illustrationsare in S. Runciman, Mistra:

ByzantineCapitalofthePéloponnèse (London, 1980).

97Sir Thomas Wyse,ed. W. M. Wyse,An Excursion in the

in theYear1858 (London, 1865), i. 179. Peloponnesos

98E. Pritzel,'Vegetationsbilderaus dem mittlerenund südlichen Griechenland', Englersbotanische Jahrbücher, 41 (1908), 180-214, pl. 11. 99 Ibid. pl. 10.

112 Chapter3

toArtemis Orthia. III. 3.14.ViewofTaygetosfromthekâstro at Sparta,taken£.1908.Reproducedfromthefrontispiece

The frontispiece to the excavationreportof thetempleofArtemisOrthiais a magnificent of Sparta around1908 (ILL.3.14).It givesvery of photograph Taygetostakenfromthe kástro clearevidenceofthevegetationchangesin thelasteightyyears.The coniferzone ofTaygetos was thenonlypatchesof woodlandand isolatedtrees;thesehave now increasedto forma Pasturenow remains continuousbelt,excepttowardstheupperlimitof conifers(ILL.3.15).100 Much woodland has also at the middle altitudes (900-1,200m). appearedin theregion chiefly was Phaneromeni deciduous oakwood the ofsibljakand deciduousoak; thebig monastery by little and has in then as was notthere 1908.The foreground, now, apart olive-groves, changed fromthegrowthofSpartatown. Conclusions the original pre-neolithic vegetation comesfromidentifying, recordsthemainevidenceforlandscapehistory Beforewritten counting, and datingpollengrainspreservedin peat and lake mud. No suitabledepositsare knownin in Greece. Laconia;a fewhavebeenstudiedin Boiotiaand Crete;thereare otherselsewhere The last glaciationwas a dryas well as a cold period. In the pre-Neolithicpart of the Holocene (theperiod since the last glaciation,fromabout 10,000calendaryearsBC to the 100Groveand Rackham (η. ι),fig.4.24.

Historical ecology 113

III. 3.15.SimilarviewofTaygetostakenon 27 August1984.

present)vegetationwas not much less varied than it is now, but the followinggeneralizations can be drawn. (1) Prehistoricforest(wildwood) was not continuous,but formeda mosaic with patches of steppe,and probably also savanna (scatteredtreesamong grassland). (2) Oaks were probablythe commonesttrees. (3) At least halfthe oak was deciduous the species cannot be furtherdistinguished. (4) Other maquis treesare represented:lentisk,juniper,Erica,or Arbutus. (5) Many otherdeciduous treeswere present,including: Cercis, Fraxinus; (a) sibljah.Ostrya,Carpinus, (b) semi-aquatic: elm, poplar; (c) northern:lime, alder,birch. (6) Garigue was apparentlynot part of the normal vegetationmosaic, but was restrictedto special localities.101 The modern vegetation of Laconia does much to explain the ecological relations between differentclasses of tree, and especially the behaviour of trees in category (5), which are now extinct,or nearly so, in both Crete and Boiotia. Maquis, deciduous oakwoods, sibljak, and 101 andG. Rapp,'Environmental 273-97;Rackhamand Moody(n. 1); Groveand Rackham J.Moody,O. Rackham, NW Crete',JFA23 (1996), (n. 1), ch. 10. archaeologyof prehistoric

114 Chapterj

different riverinewoods are fundamentally plant communitieswhich do not easily mix. kindsofwildwood.To some extentwe can four different from derive almost certainly They reconstructthe kinds of terrain on which each would representthe natural climax vegetation. ofLaconia probablyconsistedofthefollowing: The originalnaturalvegetation (1) Evergreen wildwood, from which maquis is derived, on hard limestone and maybe some of the drierschistsand conglomerates.There may have been several types. (2) Deciduous-oak wildwood, on much of the schist and the softerrocks which are now cultivated. (3) Deciduous wildwood of sibljak trees, also mainly on schists, probably in damper situations. (4) Riverinewoods along all the watercourses. (5) Steppe, formingpatches among the preceding vegetation types,frequentlyin eastern Laconia and rarelyin the west (supposing that the presentdifferenceof climate already existed). (6) Northerntrees,not uncommon in the lowlands but thererestrictedto speciallycool and damp localities. On the mountain vegetationthere is littledirect evidence. If, as I conjectured in Boiotia, the presentAbieswoods had once a greatervarietyof treesand shrubs,the same ought to apply to Laconia. Pine would have been less common than in recent centuries:it depends on fire,and natural sources of ignition(e.g. lightning)would probably not be frequentenough to preventit frombeing displaced by less combustibletrees. It must not be supposed that in pre-Neolithic times the vegetation was unaffected by human activities. Already in Palaeolithic times elephants - the only animal capable of breaking down a large tree had been exterminatedthroughoutEurope. Mesolithic people,

even in small numbers,could have created what would have amounted to a cultural landscapeby alteringthefireregime,muchas theAboriginesofTasmania did in a similarly combustible landscape. The presenceof northerntreesestablishesthatthe climateof Boiotia and Crete- and by inference thatofLaconia- was appreciablylessaridin thefirsthalfoftheHolocene thanitis now.This is confirmed (ratherthanon cliffs bytheirpatternofsurvival:on speciallycold cliffs in general,as theywould survivehad browsingbeen responsiblefortheirdecline),and by a speciallycold river. Most of the changesbetweenthe 'aboriginal'landscape of Greece and the presenthad records.They conformto a patternrepeatedall overat least alreadyhappenedbeforewritten the northMediterranean(but strongerin Spain and Greece than in Italy). In the early the seasonalthannow: in effect, Holocene theclimatewas wetterand probablyless strongly the third fifth to the From km southward. some limits were 500 displaced vegetation likethe to something BC therewas a gradualchange,knownas theAridization, millennium - the LittleIce Age fluctuations there have been then Since climate. Mediterranean present - butnotenoughto leavea clearmarkin thepollenrecord.102 and itspredecessors 102O. Rackham,'Ancient landscapes',in O. Murrayand S.

Price (eds), The GreekCity:FromHomer to Alexander(Oxford,

1990),85-111;Rackhamand Moody (η. ι),ch. 10; Groveand Rackham(η. ι),ch. 9.

Historicalecology 115 FACTORS CONTROLLING MODERN VEGETATION Climate

in wild plant-life betweenone part of Laconia and anothercan be Most of the differences in intensity ofland use can to climateand soil;excepton cultivated attributed land,differences influence on the Moistureappearsto be thepredominant seldombe shownto havemucheffect. - the densityof maquis,the presenceof arbutusand and composition of vegetation structure relaxes.It is and so on- and on howrapidlybushesgrowintotreeswhenbrowsing andrachne, in thelast been a small towards a less arid climate that there has to change tempting suppose fromthepoorstatistics thatare to hand. hundredyears,butthiscannotbe supported Browsing

As in mostofGreece,browsinghas had a verygreatinfluenceon thelandscape:woodshave havebeen favoured been reducedto maquis,and unpalatableplants(e.g.garigueundershrubs) overpalatablespecies(e.g. deciduoustrees).Cessationof browsingis undoubtedlythe main cause ofthechangesofrecentdecades. in Laconia ofbrowsing do notappearto havebeenquiteso overwhelming theeffects However, In Crete(whereseverebrowsing well back before human since as elsewhere. may go occupation, butno carnivores) thedifferences betweengorges thenativemammalsincludedlargeherbivores are greaterthanin Laconia. In Boiotiathemoreedibletreeshave and therestofthevegetation In Laconia palatabletreessuchas ash,elm,Cercis, exterminated. been ratherthoroughly Ostrya, arenotparticularly and andPhillyrea rare, sometimes persistin accessibleplaces. Woodcutting

fuelis commonlysupposedto have Fellingoftreesfortimberand fordomesticand industrial on the'deforestation' ofGreeceand otherMediterranean lands- on the had a greatinfluence This conversionof wildwood to maquis and then on the destructionof maquis itself.103 in it the form of a is overstated. generality, easily argument,presented(as usually is) is tree-felling notbalancedby regrowth; it willhave dependedon thelocal rate Deforestation of regrowth,on the factors(notablybrowsing)that hinder regrowth,on the densityof population,and on whetheror not therewas a fuel-usingindustry.The importanceof is emphasizedby Forbesand Kosterin theirstudyofMethanaand thesouthern woodcutting but as an export Argolid;104 thisarea has a historyof dense populationand of lime-burning and evenso itretainedmuchofitsmaquis. industry, Laconia appearsto have had onlydomesticuses fortimberand wood. In the dryregion, whereregrowth wouldhavebeen slow,populationhas been verysparsein relationto theareas of roughland.There are relatively fewlime-kilnsand no historyof any fuel-using industry Most woodland survivesin areas with a historyof servinga more than local market.105 denseto verydensepopulation,especiallynorthern Parnon. moderately 103This thesishas been restatedbyJ. D. Hughes,'How the ancientsvieweddeforestation', JFA 10 (1983),437-45; T. A. Wertime,'The furnaceversus the goat: the pyrotechnic industriesand Mediterraneandeforestationin antiquity', ibid.445-52. 104H. A. Forbesand H. A. Koster,'Fire,axe, and plow: human influence on local plant communities in the southern Argolid', Annals of theNew YorkAcademyof Sciences,

268 (1976),109-26.

105 There are nowlime-kilns sited(forno evidentreason)at Aphysou;theirfuelis grape-pipsand wood, both collected bylorryfromvariouspartsofthePéloponnèse.There is also a not insubstantial numberof small,disusedlime-kilns next in the surveyarea; it is impossibleto gauge their to rémata or output. longevity

ii6

Chapterj

in itselfto keepup can onlylocallyhavebeen sufficient In Laconia as a whole,woodcutting withthegrowthoftrees;itcan be onlya minorfactorin themakingofthemodernlandscape. However,it is verylikelythat some woods, especially mountain oakwoods, have been through beingsetaside as reservesoffuelor timber. preserved Burning

is a major influencein the mountainwoods. At middleand low altitudes, Fire undoubtedly Laconian vegetationwould formerlyhave been less combustiblethan it is now,because browsinganimalswould have eaten the fuel;but firewould probablyalwayshave been a at leastin thenon-aridregion.There is someevidenceofitsuse as a management possibility, to the methodto improvethe pasture,but thishas not attractedthe attentionof travellers if been a it had we should regularpractice. expect degree Erosion

In some regionsof Greece, such as the northernPéloponnèseand the Pindos mountains, In others,such as erosionappears to be veryactive,and gulliesdominatethe landscape.106 Boiotia and Crete, the presentlandscape is stable: visible erosion is confinedeitherto patchesof speciallyerodiblerockor to places wherebulldozingor road-makinghas eaten intotheslopes. Althoughthepresentstudydid not deal witherosionin detail,therecan be no doubtthat Laconia is a regionof the second kind,in whicherosionis not now a major factorin the and climateratherthanofthe ofgeology,tectonics, landscape.This is likelyto be a function in Crete is Where concerned, suggeststhat(as in southexperience vegetation vegetation.107 easternSpain) theplantsthatcontrolerosionare nottreesbutcrusts,a fewmillimetres thick, a was lost from that soil asserts of lichens,mosses,and otherhumbleplants.108 (Beuermann had been convertedto pastureforty limestoneslopein middleArkadiawherea fir-wood years before;buthe does notestablishthattherehad been soil in thewood whenit existed,or that thelossoftreeswas thecause ofthelossofsoil.)109 THE MAKING OF THE LACONIAN LANDSCAPE The classical landscape

The biggestchangesin the landscapeof our studyarea happenedbeforethe age of written records.By classical times,as in Boiotia, the originallyless arid climatehad changed to fromthepresentone; and theoriginalwildwoodand steppehad notverydifferent something in extentfromwhatitis now. or to roughlandnotverydifferent to cultivation, been converted Even in Mt Taygetos,woods had apparentlybeen reduced to insignificantremnants. Woodlandsurvivedelsewherein thePéloponnèse,butas isolatedwoodlotsofnotmorethana each. One of these- a classicalwood withits own name and its own fewsquare kilometres discussedabove). god stillexists(Skotitas,

106por erosion in the tectonically active northern Péloponnèse,see Groveand Rackham(η. ι),chs 14,16. 107 J. Hutchinson,Erosionand land use: the influence01 agricultureon the Epirus region of Greece', Agricultural

History Review, 17(iq6q), 8^-qo; Groveand Rackham(n. 1). 108R. Bulletin,68 (1991), 8. Alexander, BritishLichenSociety

109rieuermann (n. 25). 1 am indebtedto EberhardZangger forthisreference.

Historical ecology 117 Recentchanges Woodland is increasingin Laconia in at least six different ways: (1) Maquis shrubsturninginto trees. oaks and otherfieldtrees. (2) Invasion of cultivatedland by brachyphylla (3) Invasion of cultivatedland by sibljak. oaks. (4) Invasion of maquis by brachyphylla and macrolepis oakwood into maquis. (5) Expansion oïfrainetto (6) Expansion of mountain conifersinto maquis and mountain pasture. All these can be attributedto a decline in cultivation,or in pasturage,or in both. There have been attemptsto measure the woodland area. In TABLE3.1 I compare the figures of £.1929by P. Kontos110 withthose fromthe agriculturalstatisticsfor1981.111 However,woods in Greece do not have sharp edges, and it is a matterof opinion at what point a shrub counts as a tree.Measurementsof woodland area depend entirelyon the definitionof woodland, which is liable to shiftfromone date to another.These figurescertainlyunderestimatethe increase in woodland in Laconia, and probablyoverestimatethe increase in Arkadia. c. 79.29 sq km

Lakonia Arkadia Messinia

226 440 120

iq8i

% ofland area 6.2 10.1 4.0

sq km 249

1,188 674

% ofland area 6.9

27.2 22.5

TABLE3.1. ComparisonofKontos'sfigures Greekagricultural statistics (c.1929)fortheextentofwoodlandwiththosefromofficial for1981.

In mostofLaconia thechangesbelongto thelastforty yearsor less.In themountainsthe woodshave been increasingforlonger:in Taygetosthepinesapparently began to expandin theearlyeighteenth and have been ever century increasing, intermittently, since. The changesin Laconia are similarto, but greaterthan,thosein otherpartsof Greece;I have seenwoodlandincreasingin Macedonia,Boiotia,Crete,and Aigina,as wellas in other partsofthePéloponnèse. The intervening centuries

Had I been writingabout eitherBoiotia or Laconia in 1950, I would have said thatthe ofat least2,500years.The greatchanges landscapehad had a remarkably unchangedhistory tookplace wellback in prehistory. Wheneverwe are toldwhatthelandscapelookedlikesince classicaltimes,it is difficult to detectany difference fromthe present.I would thenhave on the inherent of and of a enlarged stability maquis patternofvegetationand land use that had survived millenniaofhumanprosperity and adversity. The changes of the last fortyyears have exploded such a theory.Wild vegetationcan We mightsupposethattherehave been respondveryquicklyto changesin humanactivity. 110 Quoted in Beuermann(n. 25). 111 EthnikiStatistiki Ypiresia[NationalStatisticalService],

Κατανομήτης εκτάσεωςτης χώρας κατά βασικές κατηγορίες χρήσεως(Athens, 1986).

ii8

Chapterj

manysuchchangesin thepast,and thatwoodshavewaxedand wanedin accordancewiththe of farmersand shepherds.This would suggesta theorythatthe landscape varyingfortunes to be appears relativelyunchangingbecause recordsare kept only at timeswhen thereis thestatethatitwas human to holddownthegrowthoftreesto approximately activity enough in 1950. We do have recordsfromafterthe Venetian This, however,would be an overstatement. war of and the Greek independence.Both of thesewerehumandisasters,causing conquest and casualties,destruction, refugeeson a scale at leastcomparablewithanythatare likelyto have happenedin earlierhistory(especiallyas one if not both of thesewars coincidedwith likethesame scale as plague).Yettheydid notresultin changesto thelandscapeon anything of the of whether the stability I resolve the still cannot thelastforty question yearsofpeace. record. lack of a continuous caused the by landscapeis realor is an illusion Some warnings

to thewell-known Laconia, likeBoiotia,is a counter-example theorythatthe originalforests of Mediterranean countrieshave been gradually and irreversiblydestroyeddown the centuries,and that much of them survivedand was destroyedas late as the nineteenth forthatwouldbe to committhe I willnotclaimthatthetheoryis therebyrefuted, century112 as is inherentin the theoryitself.But Laconia illustrates same errorof over-generalization whichmaybe ofwiderapplication. somefallaciesand weaknessesin theargument Travellersand authorstakenote ofthefellingoftrees,whichis a conspicuousand sudden event,butfailto noticethegrowthofnew trees.Boryde Saint-Vincent,forinstance,claimed whereasin facttheywere almost certainly thatthe conifersof Taygetoswere shrinking, expanding.Even Philippson,acute observerthoughhe was, recordedthe depredationsof a wereon Taygetos sawmillbutnotthelargeareas ofyoungpinesand firswhichtherecertainly as withJochmus'saccount of Skotitas,is oftendescribedin in 1888. Regularwoodcutting, ofthewood. Beuermann,in termswhicha hastyreadermaywellconfusewiththedestruction of the Péloponnèse,"3emphasizes his vehementdenunciationof the supposeddeforestation thatyoungtreesmaybe encouragedto the treesdestroyed by maraudingarmies.He forgets that would have eaten the trees!When he had eaten the armies because the goats growup travelledaroundthe Péloponnèseafterthe second worldwar,the woods had undoubtedly begunto expand,yethe writesas iftheywerestillcontracting. Scholarswho assertthatclassicalor medievalGreecewas heavilywoodedrelyon evidence fromancientauthors.But theytendto referto secondarysourcesratherthanquoting,stillless - whereit can be traced- oftendoes not say what the originaltexts.The original criticizing, thewoodland habitofexaggerating themodernwriterclaimsit says.The resultis a consistent of the past and playingdown thatof the present.The formeris judged by the standardsof Athens,thelatterbythoseofcentralEurope. In the nineteenthcenturythe population of the Péloponnèse rose, and there was morepressureon land thantherehad been; but the theorythatthisproduced undoubtedly extensiveand permanentdestructionof woodland rests,in part, on there being more numerous travellersat that time to record whatever tree-fellingwas going on. The thatwoods survivedonly to the sub-theory Péloponnèseprovidesexcellentcounter-examples 112 ofthetheoryisj. V. Amongthenumerousrestatements

Forest(London, 1981). Thirgood, Man and theMediterranean

113 Beuermann(n. 25).

Historical ecology 119

in remoteplaces wheretheywere difficult to get at. One of the biggestconcentrations of in woodland is northern Parnon Skotitas and its at least for a surviving neighbours which, was the most all of the who subscribes to time, denselypopulatedpart Péloponnèse.Anyone the view that railwaysfinishedoffthe forestsshould take the train fromArkadia into Messenia. Manyauthors,nothavingthebenefitofrecentexperience, supposethattreesonce felledor burntare gone forever.Neumannand Partsch,forinstance,enlargeon how 'extraordinarily difficult' it is to producea new generationof trees.Hence the fallacythatdeforestation is and that woods never recover lost necessarily progressive, ground. In defaultof pollen analysis,the onlyway to reconstruct landscapehistoryis to compare written accountsofdifferent dateswitheach otherand withwhatis therenow.We shouldnot accept someone else's statementthat a wood had disappeared withoutgoing to see for ourselves;our informant mayhavelookedin thewrongplace,as Leake did withSkotitas.We shouldbe on our guardagainsttheprevalenttendencyto assumethateveryearlymentionof 'trees'impliesa forest,stillless a greatforest.Pausanias says that Skotitaswentfromthe HermaitowardsKaryai;laterauthors,magnifying theirerrorsbymisquotation, have made it stretch fromAgiosPetrosnearlyall thewayto Sparta."4

114 WiththeselastparagraphscompareBintliff, Natural i. 66-83. Environment,

THE SURVEY AREA IN THE PREHISTORIC PERIODS WilliamCavanaghandjoostCrouwel1 The Neolithic

Period

the general setting - the ownershipof land, the relationship betweensocial groupsand the areas they Territory settle will have been revolutionized by the Neolithicprocess:by man's domesticationof of plantsand animalsand (as Goody in anothercontexthas expressedit) his domestication himself.The processwas underway in Greece nine thousandyears ago, but no remains datablewithinthefirstthirdof thatspan have been recoveredin the surveyarea. Indeed,at startsforthe whole of of the Neolithicperiod effectively the momentour understanding Laconia in theMiddleNeolithic2 (probablyitsmiddlephase)3withthesiteofKouphóvouno,4 2 km outsidethe catchmentof the surveyon the otherside of the riverEvrótas,and in It is difficult to believe southernLaconia withthefindsat Apidiá and evidently Alepótrypa.5 elsewherein thatLaconia was passedbyin theEarlyNeolithic,at a timewhensitesflourished the Péloponnèse(Franchthi, Lerna, Nemea,6and Corinth).Even forthe Middle Neolithic, we haveno preciseindicationoftheextentofKouphovouno;itappearsto cover unfortunately, 2-3 hectares,however,7and would thereforebe comparable in size with contemporary in Thessaly.8Surveyhas occasionallylocated Early and Middle Neolithicsites settlements fromthesurveyarea is hard and in thelightofthistheabsenceofearlysettlement elsewhere,9 theevidenceforsevereattrition to dismisssimplyas totalloss due to erosion,notwithstanding 1 The authorsare most gratefulto JeanetteForsén for information aboutAsea and theAsea ValleySurvey. 2 In this respectevidentlycomparablewiththeArkadian sites of Asea and Ayioyoryitika:E. Holmberg, The at Asea in Arcadia(Lund, 1944); W. W. Phelps, Excavations 'The Neolithic pottery sequence in southern Greece' (unpublishedPh.D. diss.,Univ.of London, 1975);J. Forsén, 'PrehistoricAsea revisited',OpusculaAtheniensia, 21 (1996), MuseumStudies, 41-72; C. W. Biegen,'Gonia', Metropolitan 3 3 It is possiblethatthe variegatedware iromÄsten and Goulás (Plytra)is EN1:PL i. 91 n. 116;PL ii. 140n. 175. 4 J. Renard, Le Site néolithique et helladiqueanciende Laconie:fouillesde O.-W. von Vacano(1Q41) Kouphovouno, (Aegaeum,4; Liège,iq8q), Q7-8. 5 Apidia was evidentlyoccupied in the MN1 period, thoughthe sherdsdecoratedin 'brownishpatternson buff' mightbetterbe compared with Nl Urfirnisthan central Greek red-on-whitewares: PL i. 86. Alepótrypa: G. in Greece Culture (Athens, Papathanassopoulos(ed.), Neolithic 1996),220 pl. 24.

6J,F. Cherry, J. L. Davis, A. Demitrack,Ε. Mantzourani, T. F. Strasser, and L. E. Talalay,Archaeologicalsurveyin an artifact-rich landscape: a Middle Neolithicexample from Nemea,Greece',AJA92 (1988),159-76. 7A map ol thesiteis givenin Kenard(n. 4), pl. 2. A dense scatterof Nl sherdscertainlycoversthe top of the mound and extendsas far as the Paroriótis;Hope Simpson and Waterhouse{PL i. 72) estimatethediameterofthesiteas 170 m (area c.2.<'ha). 8 P. Halstead suggests0.5-1.0 ha forThessalian Nl sites ('Strategiesforsurvival:an ecologicalapproachto social and economic change in the early farmingcommunitiesof Thessaly, N. Greece'; Ph.D. thesis, Cambridge, 1985), whereasJ.-P.Démoule and C. Perlésincreasetheestimateto 2-5.5 na ('The Greek Neolithic:a new review',Journalof World 7 (1993),355-416,at 370). For Treuil etai, Prehistory, MM settlements in Thessalytendto cover8-10 ha: R. Treuil, P. Darcque,J.-C. Poursat,and G. Touchais,Les Civilisations etde l'âgedu bronze(Paris, 1989), 128. égéensdu néolithique

9 Cherryetal. (n. 6); WellswithRunnels,Berbati-Limnes, esp. 65-8; Forsénetal, 'Aseavalley'.

122 Chapter4

ofsitesin thesurveyarea summarizedin theprecedingpages.Withsuchuncertainevidenceit would be prematureto attemptwide-rangingconclusions; but the contrastwith the observedin the Nemea regionsuggests of smallMiddle Neolithicsettlements configuration culturalprovince.In Laconia,perhaps, withinthebroad 'Urfirnis' distinctive regionalpatterns would have takenoverthe villagesettlements by the Middle Neolithicperiodmedium-sized land. primary Onlyat thetimeoftheLate or FinalNeolithicdoes oursurveyevidenceplaya morepositive at facevalue,thousandsofyearspassedbeforethearea part;thatis to say,takingour findings was firsteffectively settled.It has to be stressedthatthe Laconia Surveyis not uniquein this have indicatedsimilarfindings.In respect.Other surveyson the mainland10and islands11 Laconia itself, evidencein additionto thatfromthe Surveyhintsat an increasingnumberof nearAreópolis,whichmaywell cave sites.As wellas thesitesat Alepotrypa sites,in particular cave siteshavebeen reported havea supra-regional possiblyas a religiouscentre,12 significance, at In additionto theopen settlements and at Goritsá(PapagiannákouSpílaia).14 at Alepochóri13 at Geráki.15 has been Final Neolithic the and recently recognized Kouphovouno Apidia, How is thischangein settlement patternto be explained?In a broad sense,a numberof tookplace in the Late Neolithic,a scholarshave arguedthata major culturalre-alignment in of settlement the alteration not to be seen patternsbut also in moregeneral only change culturalchanges: thereare indicationsof broadeningculturalcontacts,a realignmentof Halstead and Cherry, culturalboundaries,and perhapsalso an incipientmetal industry.16 more have advanced the in other than areas specificallyeconomic Péloponnèse, though modelsforthe changes.In consideringthe Late Neolithiceconomy,Halstead has suggested whichwould thatthe Greeklandscape was subjectto gradual but extensivedeforestation, of Late Neolithic model for land suitable areas of expansion Cherry's grazing.17 open up large is morecloselyboundup withthenatureoftheAegeanislands,theirsmallsize and marginal too fragileagainstthe chance of failure.Only withthe makingearlysettlement productivity the securityof exchange and logisticlifelinescould and of denser populations backup 10See W. G. Gavanagh,'Revenonsà nos moutons:surface surveyand thePéloponnèsein theLate and Final Neolithic', ethistoire(actesde la in J. Renard (ed.), L· Péloponnèse: archéologie de Louent,12-15 mai igg8) (Rennes, 1999), rencontre internationale

See also Démoule and Perlés(n. 8), 1-35, withreferences. esp. 386-407. Ο*1tne otherhand, the Nemea Surveyarea sees a decline in FN1: Cherryet al. (η. 6), esp. 174-5. For III: Crete,cf.L. V. Watrous,'Reviewof Aegean prehistory Cretefromearliestprehistory throughthe end of the Protopalatialperiod',AJA98 (1994),695-753,at 700-1;J. Moody, O. Rackham,and G. Rapp, 'Environmental archaeologyof NW Crete',JFA23 (1996),273-97;K. Branigan, prehistoric in theZirosregion, 'Prehistoric and earlyhistoricsettlement easternCrete',BSA93 (1998),23-90,esp. 80-4.

11Melos: Island Polity,24-34. Keos: LandscapeArchaeology,

'Patternand processin theearliest 217-32;see alsoJ. Cherry, colonisationof the Mediterraneanislands',Proceedings ofthe Prehistoric 47 (1981),41-68; id., 'The firstcolonisation Society, of the Mediterraneanislands:a reviewof recentresearch', JMA 3 (1990), 145-221;J. L. Davis, 'Review of Aegean prehistoryI: the islands of the Aegean', AJA96 (1992),

699-756; A. Sampson,Η νεολιθικήπερίοδος στα

Δωδεκάνησα(Athens,1987).

12Dirós cave: N. Lambert,'Grotte d'Alépotrypa(Magne)', BCH 96 (1972),817-71; G. A. Papathanassopoulos,'Dirou cave: the excavationsof 1970-71',AAA4 (1971),12-26; id., 'Dirou cave', ibid. 149-53;id., 'Dirou cave', ibid. 289-303; id. (η. 5), 8o~4, 175-7.Diros, Katozíki,and Áno Katozíki: ibid.206. ■3 Ibid. 206. 14AA 1942,156. 15Crouwel,pers.comm. 16S. R. Diamant, 'The later village farmingstage in southernGreece' (Ph.D. diss., Univ. of Cincinnati,1974); Phelps(n. 2); C. L. Zachos, 'AyiosDhimitrios,a prehistoric in the southwestern settlement Peloponnesos:the Neolithic and Early Helladic periods' (Ph.D. diss., Univ. of Boston, andJ. 1987).On metals,see also W. W. Phelps,G. Varoufakis, E. Jones, 'Five copper axes fromGreece', BSA 74 (1979), 175-84; G. Nakou, 'The cuttingedge: a new look at early JMA8 (1995),1-32. Aegeanmetallurgy', 17P. Halstead, 'Countingsheep in Neolithicand Bronze ofthePast:Studies Age Greece',in I. Hodder etal. (eds),Pattern inHonour (Cambridge,1981),307-39,at 326-7; ofDavidClarke BSA id., 'Man and otheranimalsin laterGreekprehistory', 82 (1987),71-84,at 82.

Prehistoricperiods 123 site

pottery

Bin B116 E48 E77 e8i

128 12undiag.

L401 R429 T480 T481 U487 U489 LS 10496

14 undiag. 7 undiag. [R?] [Cl?] [Cl?] 6

chippedstone

104 70 520 38 14 13 9 5 5 37 82

groundstone

9 1

celt

Table 4. 1. Sites of Late-Final Neolithic date.

settlement Others have suggestedthata move from prosperon such small land-masses.18 to rain-fed the irrigated agriculture explains openingup of the southernGreeklandscapein thelaterNeolithic.19 In the development of thesemodelsit is possibleto recognizecommon themesof reciprocity and exchange,in whichan important part is playedby the raisingof and sheep especiallygoats.20 SETTLEMENT

(ILL.

4.1,

TABLE

4.1)

The major Neolithicsite £48(80)and its satellites,E77 (E78) and E81, have producedboth potteryand chippedstonetools. Sites B116,N363,L401,R429,T480, and 481 have yielded stoneassemblagesconsistentwitha Late or Final Neolithicdate, but eitherno potteryor simplycoarse undiagnosticsherds;Bin and probablyU487/489have stonetoolswithinthe LS 10496yieldeda lotofsherdsfroma fewpots.It is difficult rangeLN1-EH I.21The cnon-site' to be surewhetherthosesiteswithlittleor no potteryweredifferent in function and statusor have suffered even more severelyfromerosion.Densitiesof artefacts on all thesesiteswere verylow,and theirstatusas sitesofpermanentoccupationis open to dispute.Unfortunately, mereassertioncan onlymaskour ignoranceof the effects of post-depositional degradation. The varietyof artefactsrecoveredfromE48 (domestic,cooking,and storagewares; a great and polishedstonetools)indicatesa muchwiderrangeof varietyof chippedstoneartefacts activitiesthanis impliedby the morecommonnon-sitedesignations of 'chipping-floor', 'kill site',and thelike. Marked featuresof the distribution, certainlymuch distortedby fivethousandyearsof erosionand colluviation,are the concentration of siteson the fewlimestoneoutcrops,the and a preference forsituationson the topsofridges.WhileBin rarityofsiteson theschist,22 and B116maybe termeddefensive, the E48 cluster,L401,R429,T480, and T481 seem,more to be placed to command(drovers'?) routesand haveaccessto water.FindsfromE48 critically, 18 workscitedin n. 11. Cherry, 19Beyond theAcropolis, 69-71,83-5; C. Runnelsand T. van in the southernArgolid, Andel,'The evolutionof settlement Greece:an economicexplanation', Hesp.56 (1987),303-34;M. Johnson,'The Berbati-Limnesarchaeologicalsurvey:the Neolithicperiod',in WellswithRunnels,Berbati-Limnes, 37-73. ^ Diamant (η. ib); Zachos (n. ib), 151-b; r. Halstead, 'Dimini and the "DMP": faunal remains and animal

exploitationin Late Neolithic Thessaly', BSA 87 (1992), 29-59. Fora different emphasissee Cavanagh(n. 10). 21Even lesscertainare Q360,U490,U532,and R3012,with a sherdor twowhichmightbe Nl. 22On the margins,E81 and L401, whose remains are probablynotinsitu.

124 Chapter4

■ Largersite • Smallsite (Lithics) * aMonsite" (Pottery)

'

I

(

/

)

/ 0

''til

J^^s ' ' <<* k' ^/ / '''

Vv-otf»10496

j7

* f

/

1 ^

> U48e

/^

^^"Λ

'

5000

^"N.

J Metre»

III. 4.1. Neolithicsites(D. Taylor).

U4«7·^

^V^/

/

Prehistoricperiods 125

coversome 1.5 ha. Certainlythe siteis erodedand artefacts, especiallythe stonetools,have been washed downhill,but the lengthwisespread along the ridge confirmsextensive In thelightofWhitelaw'scarefulstudyofKephala and Paoura on Keos,23itwould settlement. be unwiseto takethe extentof the chippedstonetoolsalone as a guide;at E48 bothpottery and obsidianweremuchlessdenselydistributed thanon theKean sites,buttheirdistributions moreor less coincidedand it was notpossibleto distinguish different patternsof disposalor areas. Giventhe absenceofpotteryat Bin, itsdatingis evenless securethanthatof activity E48,butthesiteis similarin extent(and resemblesE48 in havinga satellite, B116). ECONOMY

SiteE48 is conspicuously setin an area ofpoor soils,todaycoveredin maquisand garigueand exploitedonlyforgrazing.Probablythesoilsweresomewhatbetterin theNeolithic,thoughit is difficult to see how any changespecificto thissite'scatchmentcould be quantified.The quernfromBin, theceltfromR429,and thecelt,polishers,and poundersfromE48 (itseems reasonableto accept theseas Neolithic)hintat agriculturalactivity. An expansionby the Neolithicpeople onto land of lowerfertility seemswidelyattestedat thistime,24 and sites similarto E48 can be cited fromelsewhere.25 In the southernArgolid,researchershave underlinedthe association of Final Neolithic and Early Helladic sites with the deep autochthonous soilsofthearea,26butthisis evenmoremarkedin theEarlyBronzeAge,and it is noteworthy thata numberof thecertainFinal Neolithicsiteslie outsidethedistribution of such soils.27Of course it is impossibleto tell,afterthe event(s),preciselywhere the soils the Nemea surveyarea strippedin later Holocene erosionmay have lain.28Interestingly, suffered a declinein theLate Neolithic,thoughheretoo Late Neolithicflintscattersoccuron An increasinguse of caves in southernGreece at thisperiodhas also prominent ridgesites.29 been notedas moresuitedto herdingthanagriculture.30 A radicalrealignment in agriculture has been proposedforthe LN1/EBAperiod,31 but the mostsober recentassessmentof the botanicalevidence32 in the EarlyBronze suggestsno morethanan increasein crop diversity of southern Greece. a so marked of Nevertheless, Age re-siting settlement,and a use of locationswhichhave seldomattractedhabitation,seemsto demandexplanationin termsof 23T. Whitelaw,'Investigationsat the Neolithic sites of Kephala and Paoura',in Landscape Archaeology, 199-216. 4 C Kenirew, lhe Emergence oj Civilisation:1 he Cycladesand the Aegean in the Third Millennium BC (London, 1972); P.

Halstead, 'Prehistoric Thessaly: the submergence of civilisation', in J. Bintliff(ed.), MycenaeanGeography (Cambridge,1977),23-9; Cherry,workscited in n. 11; A. Sampson,'Late Neolithicremainsat Tharrounia,Euboea: a modelfortheseasonaluse of settlements and caves',BSA 87 (1992),61-101;Cavanagh(n. 10). 25e.g.sitesFS 28, 31,40, 42, and 44 in theBerbati-Limnes survey(WellswithRunnels,Berbati-Limnes, 37-73);sitesS2 and S41 in theAsea valleysurvey(Forsénetal, 'Aseavalley',86 fig. 11); Plakari, near Karystos on Euboia (D. Keller, 'Final NeolithicpotteryfromPlakari,Karystos',in P. Spitaels(ed.), Studiesin SouthAttica(Ghent,1982),i. 47-67); Kephala and Paouraon Kea (J.E. Coleman,Keos,i: Kephala (Princeton, NJ, 1977); Whitelaw (n. 23)). Maritime resources might be importantat sites near the sea, though C. Gamble has caution('Surplusand self-sufficiency in theCycladic expressed subsistence economy',inJ. Davis andJ. Cherry(eds),Papersin

Cycladic Prehistory(UCLA Institute of Archaeology Monographs,14;Los Angeles,1979),129-34,at I25~7)· 20 1. van Andel, C. Runnels, and K. O. Pope, 'Five thousand years of land use and abuse in the southern Argolid',Hesp.55 (1986),103-28,at 113. 27Ibid. 114fig.7, 115fig.8. 28T. van Andel,E. Zangger,and A. Demitrack,'Land use and soil erosionin prehistoric and historicalGreece',JFA17 (toooV q*7o-ofi

29Cherryetal. (η. 6), i7Qfisr. 12. 30J. Cherry,'Pastoralismand the role of animalsin the economiesof the Aegean', in C. R. pre- and protohistoric Whittaker (ed.), PastoralEconomiesin Classical Antiquity (PCPS

theAcropolis, supp. 14; Cambridge,1988),6-34, at 23; Beyond 75-7; Sampson(n. 24); Cavanasrh(n. 10). 31Renfrew(n. 24). 32J. Hansen, 'Agriculture in the prehistoric Aegean: data versusspeculation',AJA92 (1988),39-52; Ν. Liphschitz,R. Gophna,M. Hartman,and G. Biger,'The beginningofolive in theOld World',JAS 18 (1991), (Olea Europaea) cultivation 441-54.

126 Chapter4

thesubsistence This willbe takenup below,butfirstit willbe helpfulto consider economy.33 thequestionofpopulation. POPULATION

In a recent review of the period in Thessaly,34it has been suggestedthat almost one thousandNeolithicsitesare to be foundin an area of some 400 sq km. Nothingremotely approachingthisdensityis knownfromLaconia, or indeed fromany otherregionof the Péloponnèse. We must conclude eitherthat southernGreece was much more sparsely populated, or that the archaeological evidence fromLaconia and southernGreece is subjectto some bias whichdoes not apply to the plains of centraland northernGreece. Researchershave been alertto the loss of sitesovertime;35the thickstratigraphy of multiperiod tell sites such as those of centraland northernGreece will tend to protectearly levels. If settlementin the south was predominantlyin single-period sites, a larger othersurveysin thePéloponnèsehave proportionofthemwillhave been lost.Nevertheless, establishedthatsmallEarlyand Middle Neolithicsitescan survivein certaincircumstances even withoutthe protectionof later overburden.36So surveyin the Péloponnèse has confirmedthenorth-southdivide.There was an increasein thenumberofsitesin thelater Neolithicperiod, and an expansion of settlementinto parts of the landscape whichhad previouslynot been occupied; but the inferenceof some increasein populationin the Late Neolithicperioddoes notnecessarilyfollow. Recentlythe Late-Final Neolithicperiod has been seen as one of populationgrowth;37 but the Middle Neolithic is considerably shorter(perhaps 500-1,000 years) than the Late- Final Neolithic (1,500-2,000 years). Consequently, simple site counts must be correctedto allow forthe timeoverwhichtheyoccur.In addition,Middle Neolithicsites oftenappear richin artefactsand seem to have been ratherlong-lived,in contrastwiththe and relativelyshort-lived durationof manyLate and Final Neolithic sparserepresentation sites.Finally,we mustbear in mindthe natureofthe Late and Final Neolithicfinds,and in particular'special-purposesites'and theuse ofcave sites,some ofwhich(suchas Franchthi and Alepotrypa)may have been used all the year round38while othersmay have been in the sense of the exploitationof seasonallyoccupied.39In brief,expansionof settlement, areas previouslyunoccupied, is clearlyindicatedby the evidence but need not implya significantincrease in population. Certainly, although the calculation of absolute populationdensitiesis not possible on our evidence,habitationwould seem to have been verysparse.

33Halstead, 'Man and otheranimals' (n. 17); Cherry(n. 30). 34J.-P.Démoule and K. Gallis, 'L'un des plus anciens 159 (1991), néolithiquesd'Europe', Les Dossiersd'archéologie, 8-15,at 8. 35J. Bintliil, lhe rJoeotiadurvey, in Macready and Thompson, Field Survey,196-216, at 214-15; Bintliffand Snodgrass, 'Boeotian Expedition', 137. More recently, cautionhas been expressed:Cherryetal. (n. 6), 171-5. 36Nemea valley:Cherryetal. (η. 6). Berbati-Limnes: Wells withRunnels,Berbati-Limnes, 57 (siteFS 23). 37Cherry(n. 30), 23; GreekCountryside, 343; P. Halstead, 'The north-southdivide: regionalpaths to complexityin

prehistoricGreece', in C. Mathers and S. Stoddart(eds),

Developmentand Decline in theMediterranean(Sheffield, 1994),

195-219, at 211; C. L. Zachos, 'Metallurgy', in Papathanassopoulos (n. 5), 140-3. Before the advent of surveydata the evidence,if anything, pointedto a decline: Diamant(η. 16), 363-9. 38HaisteaH 'Crmntincrsheen' (u t*7Vqq6>.

39 A. Sampson, 'Periodic and seasonal usage of two Neolithic caves in Rhodes', in S. Dietz and I. in the Dodecanese Papachristodoulou (eds), Archaeology (Copenhagen,1988),11-16.

Prehistoricperiods 127 DISCUSSION

Johnsonhas recentlysuggestedthatthe move fromthe highlyintensivehoe agricultureof Earlyand Middle NeolithicGreece to patternsof extensivefarmingwas essentiallya twophaseprocess.The firstphase,in theLate Neolithic,saw 'contrasting adaptationsto thelocal intensified The environment,involving second, in the Final (animal) husbandry5. in Helladic he associates with the Neolithic-Early period, particular developmentof plough In the of the Laconia evidence we would wish to developthismodel agriculture.40 light Survey further and draw a sharperdistinction betweenFinal Neolithicon the one hand and Early in the surveyarea the sitesoccupied and the patternsof Helladic on the other.Certainly, settlementin these two periods are entirelydifferent. Today the locations of Late-Final Neolithicsitessuchas E48 and Bin are not ideallysituatedto exploitarable (thoughthereis reasonableland not faraway),but seemwell suitedforanimalhusbandry(modernmandras now occupythe siteE48, whoseproximity to the Evrotaspermitsthe wateringof livestock, is close to Bin, whichmay also have been servedby wells).The other whilethe spring-line contemporarysites also occupy locations which have not recommendedthemselvesfor habitationsince that time; hence theyserve to confirmthe notion of ratherspecialized adaptations.41The Laconia Surveyarea does not stand alone in this respect.Both the Methanaand theNemea Valleysurveysshowa verysparserecordof occupationin theLate and FinalNeolithic,whileeffective is a featureoftheEarlyBronzeAge.42 (re-)colonization Just as strikingly, theAsea valleyin Arkadiaenjoyeda modestexpansionin theFinalNeolithicand concentrated at the siteofAsea itselfand at three then,in the EarlyBronzeAge, settlement othersettlement sites.43Consequently,althoughthe evidenceof the southernArgolidand Berbati-Limnessurveysshowsa processof gradual transformation fromFinal Neolithicto are markedand the sophistication of culture EarlyBronzeAge, elsewherethe discontinuities fromtheearlierphase. (and agriculture) duringtheEH II climaxsetsitoff,veryclearly, theLate and Final Neolithicagricultural communities of How,then,are we to characterize southernGreece?Highlyspecializedtranshumant has been ruledout: it demands pastoralism urbanmarkets and an infrastructure whichsimplydid notexistin theNeolithic.44 Nevertheless the specializedadaptationsindicatedby our sitelocationsmustfalltowardsthatend of the whereanimal husbandrywas more dominant.This in spectrumof agro-pastoralstrategies turnhas promptedthesuggestion thatparallelcommunities occupiedthePéloponnèseat this time.45 On the one hand,forthosewhichcontinuedto occupythe old Middle Neolithicsites and similarlocations,the primaryemphasiswould be on traditionalmixed farmingwith intensivecultivation of in-fields.On the other hand, there were semi-autonomous communities whichplaced greateremphasison animalhusbandryand mightuse variousless intensive forexploiting whatarabletherewas in thevicinity oftheirsites.Exchange strategies networksinvolvingmetals,obsidian, polished stone axes, stone vessels,millstones,and 40Johnson (n. iq). 41Sampson (n. 24) has arguedfora purelytranshumant occupation of the contemporarycave at Tharrounia, Euboia: 'it musthave been onlyfora fewdaysor hoursthat people stayed in the cave' (p. 95). Such a view seems extreme. 42Cherry etal. (n. 6); Roughand RockyPlace, 42.

4JWe are most gratetul to Jeanette rorsen tor this In additionto thethreesettlement information. sites(S 15-16, sitesofEH date. S23, S47-61),thereare twospecial-purpose

44Halstead, 'Counting sheep' (n. 17); 'Pastoralism or householdherding?Problemsof scale and specializationin 28 (1996), earlyGreekanimalhusbandry',World Archaeology, 20-42; id., 'Presentto past in the Pindhos: diversification and specialisationin mountaineconomies',Rivistadi studi 66 (1990),61-81;Cherry(n. 30). liguri, 45Cavanagh(n. 10).

128 Chapter4

ceramicsare also markedfeaturesof Late-Final NeolithicGreece. For theseto workon a scale acrossthe Balkansand theAegean,theywouldalso need to be effective supra-regional on the local scale, revealednot least throughregionalsurvey.Certainlyobsidianis found Perhaps,then,in widely,even at the inland sitesof the Laconia and Asea valleysurveys.46 which or less additionto distinctions of culturaltradition emphasison the mightput greater Final Neolithictransformations keyto theLate and ownershipofanimals,anotherimportant in southernGreeceinvolvedexchangebetweenthedifferent communities. The Early

Helladic

Period

the general setting The end of the Neolithicand the beginningof the EarlyBronzeAge are a darkage in the It has been questionedwhetherany (at least of the southernGreekmainland.47 prehistory in Greece has a continuousstratigraphy spanningthe published)site centraland southern or to involvethe and settlements of EH I seem to be entirelynew foundations transition,48 reoccupationof sites aftera gap. The degree to which the Péloponnèse saw a cultural fromFinal Neolithicto EarlyBronzeAge is also not clear,not least because the continuity of culturalsequencefromFinal Neolithicto EarlyHelladic is so obscure.It is symptomatic EH I ceramicphase in theArgolid,theTaliotiphase,has thisstateofaffairs thata distinctive Older been defined,and thatlargelyon the basis of surfacesurveymaterial.49 onlyrecently in theEarly whoperceiveda breakand recognizednewfeatures ofarchaeologists, generations Bronze Age, interpretedthemas introducedby invaders,50 thoughtheyand othershave intotheAegean area at this of originsof thosewho filtered tendedto stressthe multiplicity has come a tendencyto emphasize time.Withthe reactionagainstthe invasionhypothesis at theexpenseofdiscontinuities. and long-term continuities ofdevelopment51 Now, processes52 in some areas of Greece such as the Cyclades,it is plain fromthe excavationof siteslike Kephala53and Grotta54that Early Cycladic developmentsare anticipatedin the Final need not be generalto thewholeof Greece.Indeed,amongthe Neolithic.The interruption Keos surveyhas foundthesequencebrokenaftertheFinalNeolithicwith islandsthenorthern no EC I materialat all;55so that,whileKephala (and Paoura) look forwardto the ensuing was desertedat thattime.On the 'Grotta-Pelos'(EC I) culture,it appearsthattheirterritory 46 See Chapter 18; Forsén et al, Asea valley', 85-8. Note also the red-brownflint,LS ii. 156; Forsén etal., 86. 47So described by Phelps, quoted in H.-J. Weisshaar, 'Die und Berichte,xi. Keramik van Talioti', in Tiryns:Forschungen 1-34 (Mainz, 1990), 21. See J. Rutter's recent appraisal, 'Review of Aegean prehistoryII: the pre-palatial Bronze Age of the southern and central Greek mainland', AJA 97 (1993), 745-97, esp. 760-1; J. Renard, L· Péloponnèseau bronzeancien (Aegaeum 13; Liège, 1995). 40 Doubts have been cast on the integrityof the sequence et le bronzeancienégéens:les at Eutresis: R. Treuil, L· Néolithique les techniqueset les et chronologiques, problèmesstratigraphiques hommes (Paris, 1983), 68. There may be both FN1 and EH I at Tsoungiza: D. J. Pullen, 'The Early Bronze Age village on Tsoungiza hill, ancient Nemea', in P. Darcque and R. Treuil (eds), L'Habitat égéen préhistorique:actes de la table ronde internationaleorganiséepar le CentreNational de la Recherche Scientifique,l'Universitéde Paris I et l'École Française d'Athènes

(Athènes, 23-25 juin ig8y) (Paris, 1990), 331-46, at 336. 49 A. Dousougli, 'Makrovouni-Kefalari Magoula-Talioti: Bemerkungen zu den Stufen FH I und II in der Argolis', Prähistorische 62 (1987), 164-220; Weisshaar (n. 47); Zeitschrift, see J. Forsén, 'The Early Helladic period', in Wells with Runnels, Berbati-Limnes, 7^-120, at 118. 50 e.g. J. L. Caskey, 'Greece, Crete and the Aegean islands in the Early Bronze Age', CAW i. 2 (1971), 771-807; E. T. Vermeule, Greecein theBronzeAge(Chicago, 1964), 26. 51Renfrew (n. 24). 52Halstead, 'Counting sheep' (n. 17). 53Coleman in. 2O. 54 O. Hadjianastasiou, Ά Late Neolithic settlement at Grotta, Naxos', in E. B. French and K. Wardle (eds), Problems in GreekPrehistory (Bristol, 1988), 11-21. 55LandscapeArchaeology, 226.

Prehistoricperiods 129

otherhand,withinthe Péloponnèse,as pointedout above,whilesome areas saw a smooth fromLate Neolithicto EarlyBronzeAge,56reflecting development steadypopulationgrowth and continuallyevolvingeconomic factors,it will be seen below that the evidence from Laconia can be reconstructed to givea ratherdifferent picture. The EH II phase has been accepted widely as a climax period in the Aegean, with increasedcraftspecialization,complexsocial organization,elaboratearchitecture, and the a of more elaborate social The extent of urbanism this development hierarchy.57 during 'protourban5stageis disputed,58 but sitesof some considerablesize are reported:Manika (45 ha), Thebes (20 ha), Eutresis(8 ha), Tiryns(5.9 ha),59and perhapsPlatiyaliin Aitolia.60 As yet,we are notin a positionto saywhethersuchlargesettlements existedin Laconia; Dickinsonhas siteits suggestedthatPavlopetrimayhave been important,61 thoughsinceit is a multi-period size in the EarlyBronzeAge is impossibleto guess. Sites in the vicinityof the surveyarea includeKouphovouno(4 ha?), Palaiopyrgi, cthelargestprehistoric sitein the Spartanplain'62 whileGerakicould (20 ha?),and AgiosVasileios,whichlikewisecould coverseveralhectares,63 extendover4 ha and one sitesouthof Goritsa64 are however, mayreach3 ha. These figures, in theextreme, tentative and onlyprecisesurveywillrevealthesize ofthesitesand theextent ofEarlyBronzeAge artefact scatters. The end oftheEH II periodand theEH III periodare also phasesofuncertainty, and are controversial. thereis a transformation fromtheEH II cultureto a MiddleBronze Essentially, Age culturethatis sometimestermed'Minyan5.65 Caskey'smodel of a verysharpchangeat theend ofEH II, developedin thelightofhis excavationsat Lerna,has been erodedbymore recentdiscoveries,in particularat Tiryns,suggestingthe existenceof a transitional phase betweenEH II and EH III and a muchmoregradualtransformation fromone cultureto the next.66Whateverthe processand the time-scale,thereis certainlya radical realignment in settlement patterns,so thatby the Middle Bronze Age propera new orderis established throughthe Greek mainland, one which lays the foundationsfor the developmentof Mycenaeancivilization. CHRONOLOGICAL

OVERVIEW

fromtheNeolithicto the EarlyBronzeAge is not documentedwithinthe survey Continuity area. A fewsitesare chronologically uncertain,thosewhose onlydiagnosticfindsare stone 56Johnson(n. 19). He also comments(ibid.66) thatmany of the FN1 sitesin the Berbati-Limnessurveyalso have EH findsin some quantity.Note, however,the more cautious commentsofj. Forsén(η. 49), ii8. See also Greek Countryside, theAcropolis, esp. 347-9; Beyond esp. 83-93. A 'significantly EH I ceramicassemblage'has been recognizedin different the area: see D. J. Pullen in Artifact andAssemblage, 10-19 (quotationfromRutter(n. 47),761n. 60). 57 For recent reviews see D. J. Pullen, 'Social organization in Early Bronze Age Greece: a multidimensional approach' (University Microfilms International;Ph.D. diss., Indiana University,1985); M. Wiencke, 'Change in Early Helladic ΙΓ, AJA93 (1989), 495-509; S. G. Harrison,'Domestic architecturein Early Helladic II: some observations on the form of nonmonumentalhouses',BSA 90 (1995),23-40. 58See e.g. R. Hägg and D. Konsola (eds), EarlyHelladic

Architecture and Urbanization (SIMA 76; Göteborg, 1986).

59D. Konsola, 'Settlementsize and the beginningsof in Darcque and Treuil(n. 48), 463-71. urbanisation', 6oA. Delaporta, 'Platiyali-Astakos:a submergedEarly Helladic sitein Akarnania',EnaliaAnnual, 1 (1990),44-6. 61O. T. P. K. Dickinson, 'Reflectionson Bronze Age Laconia', in Φιλολάκων,109-14,at 109-10. 02PL 1. 7b.

63PLi. 81. 64 PT ; po

65 R. J. Howell, 'The origins of the Middle Helladic culture',in R. A. Crosslandand A. Birchall(eds),Bronze Age

and LinguisticProblemsin Migrationsin theAegean:Archaeological GreekPrehistory (London, 1972), 73-101. bbFor the EH II- III transition see, recently,Rutter (n. 47), 763-6, 774; J. Forsén, The Twilightof theEarly Helladics: A StudyoftheDisturbancesin East-centraland SouthernGreecetowards the End of the Early Bronze Age (SIMA Pocketbooks, 116;

Jonsered,1992).

130 Chapter4

tools.67Excavated sites in Laconia give no more certainty;it would seem occupation at Alepotrypadid not survivethe Neolithic,and at Kouphovounotheremay have been a gap followed by reoccupation. EH I potteryis known elsewhere in Laconia fromÁgios theAmyklaion,69 and perhapsElaphonisi.71 As faras can be Stephanos,68 Ágios Efstrátios,70 and the evidenceis not veryreliable,settlement in Laconia beyondthe judged, therefore, surveyarea was sparsein the EH I period.There maywellbe a hiatusin occupation;at the verybest,exiguoussettlement.In the surveyarea, it is only at the end of EH I thatthe landscape beginsto fillout (siteC126),and the main recolonizationis a featureof EH II. Likewisein therestofLaconia, EH II seemsto represent a climaxofsettlement,72 withsitesin coastallocations,a chain of hilltopsitesin the centralSparta furrow, and acropolissitesin eastern Laconia such as Geraki and Apidia. In the surveyarea it has been possible to butno diagnostically EH III pottery has recognizean earlierand a latergroupofEH II sites,73 been identified. On presentevidenceit seemstherewas realignment, indeedabandonment, of settlement at theend oftheEH II period. SETTLEMENT

(ILL.

4.2,

TABLE

4.2)

The EarlyBronzeAge distribution is considerably denserthanthatoftheprecedingphase.A markedfeatureofthespreadofsitesis theirrarityin thewesternhalfofthesurveyarea. The markedexceptionis M357Aphysou,whose finds,perhapssignificantly, were dug up in the courseof buildingworks.This may well be due to the processesof glacisformation having buriedEarlyBronzeAge sites.The main concentrations have been foundon the Neogene plateauand in the Chrysaphabasin,thougha scatterof sitesin thenorthern partshowsthat thelessfavourable schistsoilswerealso used. The majorityof sitesare small,0.1 ha or less, thoughthe effectsof erosionhave been severeand manysitesare probablyrelictsof theiroriginalextent.It would be possibleto dismisstheseas 'non-sites',but we shouldurge cautionagainsttoo readya dismissal.It is plain thattherehave been quitemarkedperiodsoferosionin different partsofGreece since the Early Bronze Age,74and these could well have destroyedsites.75Nor is occupation coveringan area of 100-1,000 sq m implausible for a single household; Harrison has establishedthatnon-monumental housesin EH II Greece rangedin size from£.40to c.8o sq m, perhapshousingup to nine people.76Material froma small farmsteadmay well have coveredonlya smallextent. A subsetof 'medium'sitesrangesfrom0.2 to 0.7 ha: P267,P285,R287,R289,N333,R428, and U500,together withthe cout-of-area' sitesU3001,U3006,and R3012.Site P284,at about

67

E78, Bill, Q36O, U487, U489, U532.

68 A. J. MacGillivray, pers.comm. »9PL 1.74-5. 70PL i. 89 n. 107(misnamed'AyiosStrategos').The 'Redslipped' ware similar to that from Palaia Kokkinia is evidentlyEH I. This sitedoes presenta prima faciecase for ofoccupation. continuity 71Site C: Waterhouseand Hope Simpson (PL ii. 146 n. 208) mentiona rimsherdwithslantingincisionswhichmight just be Taliotiware. 72See the recentdiscussionin Renard (n. 47), 80-90 and map,pl. 33,listing32 EH sites,mainlyEH II.

73W. G. Cavanagh and R. R. Laxton,'Seriationof noisy data fromthe Laconia Survey:a knowledgeengineering

approach', in J. Pavuk (ed.), Actesdu XIIe CongrèsInternational des Sciences Préhistoriqueset Protohistoriques(Bratislava, i-y

septembre iggi) (Bratislava,1993),350-66. Note thatp288 and includedin theseriationbut S431weresparsesites,originally consequentlyjudged not to be true sites,and are omitted here. 7*van Andeletal. in. 281 75Bintliff and Snodgrass,'BoeotianExpedition'. 76Harrison(n. 57).

Prehistoricperiods 131

■ Largersites • Smaller sites

y^ <^C 7 >v /^ / ι'

r

''

As^y

^^^ L

L·, J Ι

Λ

M357# yJ~^f'^

Y '

'

1 ? /

/

j'

er> J

/^I? JL,,

C126 · ' M

N333B

N191 >p

^ί284^

'

R289 "

^''

£'

·8448)' S459 * ■". * 'V R280 ' ^""*-'

R3012 R4281 <J?ft A.

'^^^y0

/

(+10170) / f /^

ΛΛ J^L/^l ^/ /^^^ r^x ίί / S^SX

Í

ν1 ■

I


^>k U50°

«U504 'i ^T U520.· · / Vu49o/

III. 4.2. Early Bronze Age sites (D. Taylor).

^~^~- Ο

132 Chapter4 site C126 P285 R287 N333 U520* U500 P262*

size (ha) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 0-3 0.05 0.2

1diagnostic pottery 31 14

16

22

69 7 2

64

26 64 6 36 45 4 26

U490 N191 Q360+ L400 U504 U300 S448+ R529* Gi54§

0.03 0.05 60.6

R280

0.01

61

S478 C128

0.02 0.01

R462* P263 M357* P267* K414 P289 C131*

0.01 0.01

35 l9 9 104 12

0.07

0.01

0.01 0.04

0.03 0.31 0.03 0.20 0.01

chippedstone

querns

X

X

14

X X

X

X X X

I

10

5

X

X X X

47

18 14

pithoi

?

1

142 14

3 63

celts

3

7 2 2 10

49

cores

X X

1

I

3 !3

X

32

* only. Sparsesitesnotseriatedbutlocatedon proximity + Siteswhosechronological positionis veryuncertain. § G154includestheerodeddepositLS 10170. Table 4.2. Main EarlyBronzeAge sitesin seriatedorder.Thereis an earliergroup(C126to G154)and a latergroup(R280to C131).

This would ι.ο ha, is the largest,perhapsa villagesiteratherthana hamletor farmstead.77 sometimes withinthesurveyarea,withtheindividualfarmsteads hierarchy suggesta two-level If we wereto seekan equivalentto P284 in the north, largerclusters.78 growingintoslightly but the site todayis, in the firstplace, quite G154may have servedas a largersettlement; eroded. was low;and ithas been severely so thatvisibility denselyovergrown, This probablyrepresentsthe lowerend of a site hierarchythatmay have threeor four tiers.79 Whetherlargersitesstill,comparablein size withManika, EH Thebes, or Tiryns,80 77Occasional findswere made of EH pottery(sitesH45, biO5,R291,N312,P405,S474)and chippedstonetools(P265, P364, n366, U501,U502, U532,U3000, A3018,A3019).The firsttwohintat EH occupationin areas wheresiteswerenot located.U501and U502 probablyrepresentstraysor a halo fromU500. U532 and A3018could representspecial activity sites,butsevereerosionmightexplaintheabsenceofpottery; theirdatesare notcertain. 78Perhapson the model proposed forMyrtos-Fournou at FournouKorifi, Korifiby T. Whitelaw,'The settlement in Myrtos,and aspectsofEarlyMinoan social organisation', O. Krzyszkowska and L. Nixon (eds),MinoanSociety (Bristol, ιΦ$)> 323-45·

79Similarto the Berbati-Limnesresultswhere,however, the Mastos site mightjust representa thirdlevel: Forsén (η. 49), ιig. Cf. the three levels proposed for the S. theAcropolis, 90-1). Note, however,a more Argolid[Beyond cautious view regardingMethana: 'The existence of a settlementhierarchyis likelybut not certain' (Roughand RockyPlace, ^1).

80 Perhapsalso Fournoiin the S. Argolid,thoughthere seemssomeuncertainty whethera clusterofsitesofdifferent periods might not form part of the area distinguished (Runnelsand van Andel(n. 19),313-14).

Prehistoricperiods 133

to be sure(see above),thoughitis not existedin Laconia beyondthesurveyarea itis impossible It has been for the that the proposed Argolid81 growthoflargesitesoccurredin a improbable. in a processofpolitical EH of at the of others which were abandoned laterstage II, expense smallsites nucleation.It is notclearthatour surveycan givea plainanswerto thissuggestion; It is also occurin thelateras wellas theearlierphasesof EH II recognizedfromthepottery. siteswereobserved(P267,P284,P285;R287, thatwhereclustersof 'medium'-sized noteworthy R428,R3012),both earlier(P285,R287)and later(P267)or 'multi-period' (P284,R428,R3012) we havesuchdifficult data thatno conclusioncan be pressed. siteswerepresent.In truth, The patternrecoveredforthe surveyarea has been observedelsewherein Laconia. On Elaphonisi,Waterhouseand Hope Simpson82recognizedsmall farmsteadsservicedby the largersitesofPavlopetriand Panagia.The densityofsiteshereis comparablewiththatin the settled.In theArgolid, schistsectionofthesurveyarea,theNeogenebeingrathermorethickly certaintypesoffindmayindicatesitesofhigherstatus,in particularstampedclayhearthsand roof-tiles.83 Neitherclass of findhas so farbeen recoveredfromLaconia, but to judge from theirdiscoveryat Akovitikaand Agios Dimitrios84theymay turnup in the future.An recentfind,reflecting theeconomicsignificance ofa site,is thediscovery ofsealings important withseal impressionsfromGeraki,85 whichparallelssitesoutsideLaconia, notablyLerna. Obsidiancoreshavebeen foundat sitesofall sizes,86 and indeedas strayfinds. Sites with special functionsare hard to distinguish.The ox figurinefromU3001 in whichcase shrineswere sited may have servedsome religiousfunction,88 (Palaiopyrgi)87 A fewsiteshave producedchippedstonetoolsand/orlittle withinthehamletsand villages.89 or no diagnostic buttheseseembestexplainedin termsoferosion.90 pottery, ECONOMY

A mixedagricultural economyis securelyattestedfortheEarlyBronzeAge,and is confirmed withinthe surveyby the discoveryof querns,celts,storagejars, and possiblyindicationsof sicklegloss.The sitesin the northare locatedabove thelimitof oliveculturetoday,and the morerobustalmondsand mulberries are todaypreferred as fieldtrees,thougholivegrovesare accessiblefairlyclose by.The Neogene soilswereprobablymoresuitedto agriculture in the In so far as we can from the Neolithic distribution a there is marked generalize past. changeof concentration: thelimestoneridgesand hillsno longerpredominate,91 and situations on waterdividesratherthanslopesare preferred. The evidencefromotherpartsof Europe generally supportsthe suggestionthat ox tractionwas used in Greece by the Early Bronze Age;92 donkeysare reportedfromLerna in EH II, buthorsesare notattesteduntilEH III.93 81Wiencke(n. ^7),4.QQ. 82PLii. 14.6-8:cf.G4Ci 18-10. 83Tiles could be used in non-monumental buildings: J. W. Shaw,'The EarlyHelladic II corridorhouse: problemsand possibilities', AJA91 (1987),59-79, at 61 n. 7; J. L. Caskey, 'The EarlyHelladic periodin the Argolid',Hesp.29 (i960), 285-303,at 289. 84Fortiles,see themap byPullenin Hägg and Konsola (n. see Zachos (n. 16),213. 58),fig.3. ForAyiosDhimitrios, 85D. Blackman,'Archaeology in Greece 1997-98',AR 44 (1997-8),1-128,at 35. 86 P267,P284,A3018. 87LS ii. 189,SF55, pl. 11 a. υοAs has been ri. lzavella-lwjen, Limares: arguedtorLithares:

An EarlyBronzeAgeSettlement inBoeotia(Los Angeles, 1985).

89Notethefivefigurines fromKouphovouno,Renard(n.δ). 90See n. 23 above. 91U500/504and U490 are limestoneknollsprojectinginto theChrysaphakarstbasin.

92 S. Piggott, The Earliest WheeledTransport: FromtheAtlantic

CoasttotheCaspianSea (London, 1983),36; D. J. Pullen,'Ox and plow in the EarlyBronzeAge Aegean',AJA96 (1992), 45-54; Wiencke(n. 57),500. 93Horses are presentat Tirynsby EH III; see A. von den Driesch and J. Boessneck, 'Die Tierreste von der mykenischen BurgTirynsbei Nauplion/Peloponnes', Tiryns, xi (1990),87-164;Rutter(n. 47),754 n. 32,766.

134 Chapter4 site P269 P284 R428 U3001 S459** U3005 R3012

size (ha) 0.10

diagnostic pottery

Ι. Ο

194 128

0-5 0.7 ο. οι

141 30 6

O.I

53

0.7

142

chippedstone 33 29 20

cores

X

querns

X X X

celts X

pithoi

X X X X X X

1

l3

Table 4.3. Possiblemulti-phase EarlyBronzeAge sites.

The surveyarea seemswellintegrated intothewiderEH II worldand, by association,into an economywhichsupporteda redistributive infrastructure and a networkoftrade.Thus the artefacts, especiallythe potteryincludingthe table wares,are comparable,and hence their makersconversant, withthoseelsewherein Greece.Obsidian directlyattestscontact.All the at the time,and the relatively of overlandtransport isolatedpositionof same,the difficulties the Neogene plateau and the Chrysapha basin, warn against over-emphasizingthe oftrade. significance POPULATION

Contemporarysettlementsin the Early Bronze Age Cyclades are argued to have been short-lived. Excavationsuggeststhaton the mainland,at least in the case of sites relatively of0.2 ha and larger,occupationlastedlonger(thoughit maybe thatour potterychronology siteswhichweresettledand resettledintermittently). is notyetrefinedenoughto distinguish Confirmationof multi-periodoccupation of sites in the surveyarea has come fromthe seriationanalysisof the pottery,94 wheresitesP284, P269, R428, U3001,U3005,and R3012 indicatethatmediumto largesiteswerequitelong-lived(TABLE 4.3). Sitesofa littlelessthan 1 ha havebeen excavatedin Greece.The EH II settlement at Lithareshas been estimatedto cover0.7 ha and was certainlyoccupiedby a numberof households;95 Agios Kosmás,a not dissimilarvillage,coveredsome 0.9 ha.96Harrison,in a carefuldiscussionof the evidence fromthe mainland, suggeststhat there may have been a change fromEH I to EH II - a warning withtheformerrathermoreopen,thelattermoredenselypacked97 settlements, againsttoo simplistica correlationbetweensize and population,even in similarperiods. to relateto EarlyBronzeAge artefactscattersis also difficult How thesesizesforsettlements associated the settlement the Melos for that On the one hand, surveyfound, example, say. withthe Pelos cemeterycoveredabout 0.4 ha,98a sitewhichon the cemeteryevidencehas On theotherhand, been thoughtofas ca settlement occupiedby a singlefamily5.99 typically has been excavated since its Fournou which discoveryby (extensive)survey, MyrtosKoryfi, estimatedat 80 X 30 m (roughly0.2 ha; excavatedarea £.50X 25 m, at least was originally 0.09 ha)100and was occupied,on a modestestimate,by 25-30 people. Kephala in the Final 94Cavanaghand Laxton(n. 73). 95Tzavella-Evjen (n. 88); S. G. Harrison, 'Settlement patternsin Early Bronze Age Greece: an approach to the study of a prehistoric society' (Ph.D. diss., Univ. of 1992),150-2. Nottingham, 9bKonsola (n. 59); G. Mylonas,AghiosKosmas:An Early inAttica(Princeton, NJ, 1959). and Cemetery HelladicSettlement

97Harrison (n. o^), esp. iqq. 98Island Polity,298.

99Ibid. 138,thoughresurveyoi the area has indicateda smallerEH siteadjacentto the cemetery(R. W. V Catling, per epist.). 100S. Hood, P. Warren,and G. Cadogan (1964),'Travelsin Crete,1962',BSA59 (1964),50-99, at 95; Whitelaw(n. 78).

Prehistoricperiods 135

Neolithicperiod has been estimatedto have occupied 0.7 ha and housed seven to ten ofpotterythoughthe obsidiancovers families,an area thatagreeswellwiththe distribution On this a ratherlargerarea.101 admittedlyfragileevidence,our best estimateis that the EH II was occupied by a scatterof hamletsor smallvillages(a pattern surveyarea during which,on the evidence of the Out-of-area'sites,continuedin the adjacent terrain)and farmsteads;verycoarsely,no more than 500 perhaps twice the numberof single-family people. Even makinggenerousallowancesforthe totalloss of sitesdue to erosion,and for thepopulationof the surveyarea musthave runto hundreds theproblemsdue to visibility, ratherthan thousands,perhaps of an order similarto its population in the eighteenth centuryAD.102

The Middle

Bronze

Age

the general setting In recentyears it has become increasinglyclear that most of the cultural differences associatedwiththe Early-Middle Bronze Age transitionin the southernand traditionally centralGreek mainlandgo back to the earlierEH II- III transition.In fact,the changes ofthematerialassemblage,as well in thearchitecture, and othercomponents manifest pottery, as in the organizationof society,are not to be viewedin termsof eventsbut as a processof regionaldifferences.103 changeovera longerperiodoftimeand withdistinct A morenuancedpictureis also emergingas regardsthe Middle BronzeAge in southern and centralGreece. It has generallybeen regardedas a periodof a lowerlevel of material wealthand social complexitythan EH II. It stillappears to be true thatformost of the in Crete,withitspalatial period'sdurationmainlandGreece 'lagged behind' developments in At the same Middle Helladic societyis the and and even time, centres, Cyclades Aigina.104 While morevariedand complexthanitsconventional now seen as considerably portrayal.105 mosthabitationsiteswere probablyon the hamletor village level, some, like Argos and Thebes, appear to have been importantcentres.Variabilityin burialpracticesis apparent fromthewidespreadtumulusand cisttombs.There is also evidence,especiallyat coastalsites, forcontactswithAigina,Crete,and otherislandsin theAegean. areas foran Towardsthe end of the Middle Helladic periodthereis evidencein different in the transitional between Middle and Late increasingpace of change,culminating phase II A in MH IIILH to as theShaftGraveera (equivalentto ceramic BronzeAge oftenreferred 101 Whitelaw(n. 23). 102See Chapter8. 103See, forrecentdiscussionand further references, esp.

Forsén (η. 66); J. Maran, Die deutschen Ausgrabungenauf der PevkakiaMagula in Thessalien,iii: Die mittlere Bronzezeit(Bonn,

1992),369-72;Rutter(n. 47),763-6,776. IO4See, interalia, Ο. T. P. Κ. Dickinson, The Originsof Civilisation (SIMA 49; Göteborg,1977),32-8; id., Mycenaean 'Parallels and contrasts in the Bronze Age of the Péloponnèse',OJA1 (1982),125-38,at 133-4. 105 See

esp. J. Maran,

Kiapha Thiti: Ergebnisse der

ii. 2 (MarburgerWinckelmann-Programm; Ausgrabungen, Marburg,1992),301-74; Rutter(n. 47), 774-85; C. Zerner,

'New perspectiveson trade in the middle and earlyLate Helladic periodson the mainland',in C. Zerner,P. Zerner,

and J. Winder (eds), Wace and Biegen: Potteryas Evidencefor Trade in theAegean Bronze Age ig^g-igßg (Proceedingsof the held at theAmericanSchool of Classical InternationalConference Studies,Athens,Dec. 2-3, ig8g) (Amsterdam, 1993), 39-56; I.

Kilian-Dirlmeier,'Reiche Gräber der mittelhelladischen Zeit', in R. Laffineurand W.-D. Niemeier (eds), Politeia:

of the5th Societyand State in theAegeanBronzeAge (Proceedings International Aegean Conference /je Rencontre EgêenneInternationale, Institut,10-13 April igg4) of Heidelberg, University Archäologisches

(Aegaeum,12;Liège,1995),i. 49-53.

136 Chapter4

The ShaftGrave era does not representa sudden clear break withthe Middle terms).106 Helladicpast.The varioustombswhichformour main bodyof evidenceindicatetheriseof who became a warriorélite.This riseis stillnotfullyunderstood, but vigorouslocal chieftains can be observednotonlyat Mycenaein thenorth-eastern Péloponnèsebutalso in otherparts of mainlandGreece,mostnotablyMesseniain the south-west. The rulingfamiliesnot only had closelinkswitheach otherbutalso withtheCycladesand particularly withCrete,whence came muchoftheirremarkable wealthand portableprestigegoods. CHRONOLOGICAL

OVERVIEW

thatis diagnostically EH III has notbeen identified in thesurveyarea or in therestof Pottery Laconia. This suggestsa hiatus in occupation afterEH II. Certainly,this part of the thattookplace in theArgolid Péloponnèsemaynothave followedthe ceramicdevelopments and centralGreece;but the preceding(EH II) and succeeding(MH) stylesare recognizable, and neithersurveynor excavationhas producedan independentEH III regionalstyleto fill thegap. Moreover,a breakor sharpdeclinein occupationis notinconsistent withthepattern observedelsewherein the Péloponnèse.107 Thus, often MH sitesin the surveyarea (M322, M349,N191and N413,Q360, R292 and R424,S434 and S478; add a couple of MH sherdsat mostofthese U514)onlythree(N191,Q360,S478)have also producedEH II finds.In contrast, site

size

B123 H45 M322 M349 N413

0.13 ?

N191 Q360 Q3009 R424 R291 R292 R457 S434 S478 U490 U514 U3006

0.07 25.00 0.60

0.05 0.07 0.40

O.OI

0.24 O.OI O.OI

0.06 O.O2 0.10? 0.02 O.6O?

soil

S2C S4D N4C

MBA sherds LHIII sherds 1

N3b

Nib

72 31 51

Nia Nib

3 34

Nia Lib Lib L2b L2a Nia L4a L4a

2

22

!3

8 5 5 2

7 4 58 2

M/LBA sherds 3 3 117 146 133 1

1

242

49 7 46 3

21

9 6 8

160

27

4 61 39 36 6 4 9

tableware

cookware

pithosetc.

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

other finds

figurine crucible, potlids

X X

figurines

X

quern?

X

X X

Table 4.4. Middleand Late BronzeAge sites.

106For a fuller see Dickinson,Origins (n. 104); bibliography id., 'The originsof Mycenaeancivilisationrevisited',in R.

au bronze Laffineur(ed.), Transition: le mondeégéendu bronzemoyen de récent de l'Université (actesde la 2e Rencontre EgéenneInternationale

Liège,18-20 avrilig88) (Aegaeum,3; Liège, 1989),131-6;M. K. Dabney and J. C. Wright,'Mortuarycustoms,palatial society and state formation in the Aegean area: a comparativestudy',in R. Hägg and G. C. Nordquist(eds),

Celebrationsof Death and Divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid

at theSwedishInstitute (Proceedings ofthe6thInternational Symposium

at Athens,11-13 June,iq88) (Skrifterutgivna av Svenska in Athen,ser.in 40,40; Stockholm,1990),45-53,at Institutet

to theMycenaeanAge 48-51; S. Dietz, The Argolidat theTransition

(Copenhagen,1991);Rutter(n. 47),774-5,785-97. 107 Compare the results of the Nemea valley, and Methanasurveys: Berbati-Limnes, Wrightetai, 'Nemea', andRocky 609, 640-1 withn. 135;Forsén(n. 49), 119-20;Rough Place,45-6. In general,see Rutter(n. 47),772-3,795.

Prehistoricperiods 137

siteshave yieldedmaterialof LH date. So the Middle BronzeAge settlement of the survey area is markedbya sharpdiscontinuity. Whileno sitescan, on presentevidence,be firmly datedto earlyMH, othershave yielded and Πto its middle later ΙΙΙ).108We note the presenceof 'fineparts(ΜΗ potterydating kantharoiand similarvesselswithroundedrims,110 incisedAdriaticwares',109 and classicDark MH II and other consistent with at sites such as the Burnished111 pottery occupation = Menelaion(Q360),M322,theN413cluster, rests,in R457,and R291( R525).This chronology on similarities withmaterialexcavatedat Agios Stephanosin the Helos plain,at particular, Nichoria in Messenia, and at Lerna and Asine in the Argolid. The sequence at Agios Stephanos also helps to date occupation at several of our sites to the time of transition betweenMH and LH or to earlyMycenaeantimes(e.g.M322,N413).112 Given the relatively smallsamplesof pottery, and the overlappingphases of mostMH the lack of stratigraphy, we hesitateto proposea finerchronology ofour sites.Once established, fabrics, however, they seem to have been relativelylong-lived,in thatmost MH sitesproduced late MH-early Mycenaeanand laterceramics(theMenelaion,M322,M349,N191,N413,R291,R457,S478). SETTLEMENT

(ILL.

4.3,

TABLE

4.4)

The distributionof Middle Bronze Age sites is far less dense than in EH II. Without exception,MH sitesare situatedin the southernpartof the surveyarea."3 (One certainand threeless diagnosticMH potsherdswere among the Iron Age findscollectedat Β123 in the area in the north.)It is not impossiblethatin the less stableschistarea AgiosKonstantinos Middle BronzeAge siteshave entirely erodedaway,thoughwe note thatsome earlier,Early BronzeAge and evenNeolithic,siteshavesurvivedtheforcesoferosionin thenorthern half. Even withinthesouthernarea thereare markeddifferences. The strongEarlyBronzeAge presenceon theNeogeneplateau(zone P) is notrepeatedin theMiddle BronzeAge (indeed, thisarea was notto be favouredagainbeforethemid-first millennium BC).Nor was muchMH materialfoundin themain Chrysaphabasin (zone U: a littlefromU514),likewisein contrast withtheprecedingepoch.It wouldbe tempting to suggestthatEarlyBronzeAge farming had exhaustedtheland in thesezones,or thatsoilshad been depletedby severeerosion.Neither suggestionseemsto bear examination,forthesezones were foundperfectly acceptablefor 108Fora few fromthe possiblyearlyMH pottery fragments Agios Stephanosand Menelaionexcavations,see Dickinson (n. 61), no withn. 7. The earliestoccupationof the Aëtos hill,whichbelongswiththeMenelaionridge,was in MH II; see H. W. Catling,'Archaeology in Greece,1980-81',AR 27 (1980-1), 1-48, at 16. IU9e.g. LÒ ii, FIG. 12.b, 11-13. 110See fSi'. τη. under tvne 2 a.

111 LSn. 18 and n. 8, 10n. 12,FIG.12.1,16-17. 112We owe much to the expertadvice of Dr C. Zerner, who has studiedtheMH pottery frombothLerna and Agios see Stephanos.For recentadvances in potterychronology, East ofthe e.g. S. Dietz, Asine,ii: ResultsoftheExcavations theMiddle Acropolis, igjo-igj4, 2: TheMiddleHelladicCemetery, Helladicand EarlyMycenaean Deposits(Skrifterutgivna av i Athen,ser.in 40,24. 2; Stockholm,1980); SvenskaInstitutet id. (n. 106); R. J. Howell,'The Middle Helladic settlement: pottery',in W. A. McDonald and N. C. Wilkie (eds), Excavationsat Nichoria in SouthwestGreece,ii: The Bronze Age

Occupation (Minneapolis, 1992), 43-204; Maran (n. 103); Maran (n. 105); G. C. Nordquist,A MiddleHelladicVillage: Asinein theArgolid(Boreas, 16; Uppsala, 1987);J. Rutter, 'PotterygroupsfromTsoungiza of the end of the Middle Bronze Age', Hesp.59 (1990), 375-458; C. Zerner,'Middle Helladic and Late Helladic I potteryfromLerna', Hydra,2 (1986), 28-74; ead., 'Middle Helladic and Late Helladic potteryfromLerna, part II: shapes', Hydra,4 (1988), 1-44; ead., 'Ceramics and ceremony:potteryand burials from Lerna in the middleand earlyLate BronzeAges', in Hägg and Nordquist (n. 106), 23-34; ead. (n. 105). For the transitional materialfromthelattersite,see alsoJ. B. Rutter and S. H. Rutter, The Transition toMycenaean:A Stratified MM II- LH IIA PotterySequencefrom Ayios Stephanos in Laconia

(Monumentaarchaeologica,4; Los Angeles,1976). 113For what follows, see also W. G. Cavanagh, 'Developmentof the Mycenaeanstatein Laconia: evidence fromthe Laconia Survey',in Laffineurand Niêmeier (n. 105),i. 81-7,at 84-5.

138 Chapter4

y^

//

^^'

Í8QQS I

f

[

/


1yv^

^7/ S U ΛΝ7

( )

ri

/

f '

Λ

Β Maj°rsite

Γ ί/

#
S / // V^y ijX

XSherdW

/ *-^X^-^J) C

^^°

' K414S^'

"^^

χΜ172 Μ322 /J'XT^

j

M349" f k

)

^^

J

0 '

'V

V

R424±M78a ''^

^ λ J/^ 108Λ24

s>^ ΧΒ3025

,'

S '

r3/' t/^^h ι

ι

;

f

''

^y

^Js ^>f£ (If (ζ^10083

X10112

>

1

Λ

I

mm

I Metres

*i 10815 UM0-iU5,4^ ^^*>^y

III. 4.3. Middleand Late BronzeAge sites(D. Taylor).

^S ν

'

Prehistoricperiods 139

cultivationin laterperiods(forexample the archaic),and the intervalof severalcenturies betweenthe abandonmentof the EH sitesand the reoccupationof the area in the Middle haveallowedthefertility oftheland to return. BronzeAge wouldcertainly of sites- is to be foundon theMenelaionridge(Q360), The main site- or conglomeration highabove theeastbankoftheEurotas.The ridgein factcomprisesfourconnectedhills:the NorthHill, the Menelaionitself(withthe remainsof the Iron Age sanctuaryof thatname), the north-southaxis of Q360 extendsover about a ProphitisIlias, and Aetós. Altogether, MH has been found all overit; thewidthis at presentnowheremore and material kilometre, thanthat. than300 m, and in placesmuchnarrower MH surfacematerial, end oftheridgeyieldedsomeEH II pottery, Whilethesouthernmost a likeMycenaean,was dispersedover verymuchlargerarea (Q360,areas Α-D, G,J-L, AA, Thus thesurveyfindsneatlyaugmentthe 1973-82excavationswhichhad revealed AC-AF).114 scrapsof MH wallson theMenelaionand NorthHill, as well as two smallkilnsfollowedby several burials on the south flankof Aetos."5 It is not clear, however,how denselythe Menelaioncomplexwas occupiedin MH (or in LH), because of the oftendensevegetation and highlevelof erosion.The questionalso remainswhetherthevariousareas of settlement as theyprobablydid in Mycenaeantimes.Excavation alreadybelongedto a singlecommunity, thattheMH Menelaionwas notunlikeMH Lerna or Asine: suggests The appearanceofthesettlement wouldhavebeen similarto thatofmodernGreekvillageswithruinssidebyside withhousesin good repairand newlyconstructed ones. Open spaceswereused forgravesor as disposalareas for rubbishand as grazinggroundfordomesticanimals."6

All the same,fromits size alone, we believethatthe Middle Helladic marksthe startof a whichwas well processby whichthe populationconcentratedwithinone large settlement, its east and west sides. With its protectedby steep dropsalong commandinglocation,the in of the Menelaion a definite interest defenceas well as in the occupation ridgesuggests Evrotasvalley. Furthernorththereare twoothersites(M349and M322)in a similarpositionon theglacis and foothillsoverlooking the Eurotasvalley,thoughnot protectedby steep drops.In both surface material of MH and laterdate, foundover an area of 0.07 and 0.05 ha the cases, have washed downfromtheoriginalsite. respectively, may No otherofthesurveysitesofMH date remotely compareswiththeMenelaionin size,but itis possibleto recognizetwolevelsofsitehierarchy belowit. (1) N413(plus associatedsites)and R291(+ R292) representsitesof 0.25-0.5 ha in extent. eroded,and hencesubjectto thelossofpotterydue to Althoughthesesiteshavebeen severely abrasionand comminution, we believethatthesettlement was originally ofthismagnitude, as is partlyconfirmed oftheland. They can be interpreted as small bythenaturalconfiguration hamletsconsisting ofa numberofhouseholds.In bothcases,liketheMenelaionitself, theyare defensible sitesprotectedby cliffs. Site N413represents theamalgamationofa series naturally ofpotteryscatters(N413,N412,N410,N411),and mayhave had theratheropen plan suggested 114 LSÛ. 402-3,ILL.24.51. 115Catling,'Menelaion', 28-9; id. (n. 108), 16 withfigs 23-5· 116 Nordquist(n. 112),29. W. D. Taylour,'Excavationsat AyiosStephanos',BSA 67 (1972),205-63, at 240, 244, has

commentedon breaks,at varioustimes,in theoccupationof thedifferent sectorsexcavatedat AgiosStephanos.

140 Chapter4

in the previous paragraph for the Menelaion. It commands the route fromSparta to Chrysapha,thoughthis is a route of only local significance,while R291 dominatesthe Loutsoremavalley.Because of theirdefensive locations,neitheris surroundedby agricultural is describedas 'largelyuncultivable5 and N4i3'sveryimmediatecatchment land,117 (LS ii. 390), though,againliketheMenelaion,thereis arableland in thevicinity. oferosionin destroying (2) The remainingsitesare smaller(0.1 ha or less;again theeffects sitesmustbe bornein mind).They are wellsitedforagriculture, and generallydo notseemto be locatedin naturallydefensiblelocations:M322,M349,N191,R457(evidently a satelliteof R291),S434(locatedalso to exploitgrazing?),and S478. The Menelaion(Q360),M349,M322,and N413forma stringspacedjust overa kilometre one fromthe other.In the Chrysaphaarea, the spacingis less regularbut the sitesare still separatedbylessthantwokilometres. Elsewherein Laconia, severaloftheEH II sitesshowno signsofMH occupation.Others, such as Amyklai,Palaiopyrgi,and Agios Vasileios(all on the chain of hillsin the Evrotas valley),and the acropolissitesof Geraki(adjoiningthe south-western slopes of the Párnon MH and the Helos have At all except plain), produced range) Agios Stephanos(in pottery. Geraki,as at the Menelaion ridge,occupationmay well have been continuousinto Late Helladictimes.118 ECONOMY

A mixedagricultural economymay be assumedforthe Middle Helladic occupationof the soilsin thesurveyarea. Sitesare quitewelllocatedforarable and limestone-derived Neogene we have soils,though suggestedthatdefenceratherthaneasy access to good land governed thechoiceoflocationfortheMenelaion(Q360),N413,and R291.Some explanationin termsof thesubsistence sector,for economyseemsdemandedbythepaucityoffindsfromthenorthern to reasonaway entirelythroughthe loss of sitesunderthe forcesof erosion. thisis difficult of the schistsoils,theirinstability Perhapsa combinationof the relativeunproductiveness the at the and, (demandingterracing?), highestelevations, dangeroffrostdamageto olivesis sufficient to explainwhythearea was avoidedin theMiddle BronzeAge. On theotherhand, in werelargelyoverlooked do notapplyto zonesΡ and U, which,similarly, suchconsiderations likethosein zones the Middle BronzeAge (or at least do not seem to have had settlements M-N and Q,-S). Access to arable was not the only factorin deciding the location of a numberof the sitesare close to good sitedon ridge-tops, settlements. Althoughfrequently watersupplies:Q360, M349,and M322to the Evrotas;N413to the Kelephína;R291-2 to the wellsin TsiliotouRéma; Ni91 near therichspringsin Kastorórema;and S434 and S478 near the copious springsin Kataphygiórema.Perhapswateringanimal stockwas particularly to theseMiddleBronzeAge villagers. important Schistslabs encounteredat N413may have servedas lids forstoragevessels.In general, vesselsare wellrepresented amongMH potteryfromthesurveyarea. The variety pithos-type of table,kitchen,and storagewaresfoundat the sitesindicatesgeneralizeddomesticactivity is indicatedbya claycrucible.119 ratherthanspecializedloci.At M413,metalworking As forthe Menelaionridge,nowadaysthereare not a lot of good soilsin the immediate some of the terraceson the ridge environs.If theMiddle BronzeAge houseswerescattered, 117 LSii, ills 24.46,24.^2. 118 See PL i and ii; GAC107ff.withmap C.

119 LS ii. 194,SF 102. Forcruciblesand otherevidencefor in MH Greece,see Nordquist(n. 112),44. metalworking

Prehistoricperiods 141

itselfcould happilyhavebeen cultivated.Otherwisetheinhabitants presumably exploitedthe Evrotasvalley,sharingtherichsoilsto the northwiththe inhabitants of siteM349and using the riverforwateringanimals(shepherdsstillbringtheirflocksfromas faras Chrysaphato waterthem).The floodlands near (classical)Limnai may also have been exploited.On the otherhand,itwouldnothavebeen convenient to haveto crosstheEvrotasin orderto exploit the area southof Sparta. It is possiblethatalreadyin the Middle BronzeAge producewas afieldas a consequenceofthesite'simportance. broughtin fromfurther The studyarea was clearlyin touchwithotherpartsofLaconia and ofthePéloponnèseat large,judgingfrompotteryfindsand theshaftgravetypeoftombfromtheMenelaionridge. fromthatin EH II withits remarkableuniformity in Still,the situationis quite different wares,types,and decoration.Insteadoftheclassic'Minyan'waresoftheArgolidand pottery central Greece, we findimitationsof their shapes and incised decoration, as at Agios Local pottery Stephanosand elsewherein Laconia.120 productionis indicatedby thetwokilns excavatedon theMenelaionridge. findsfromthesurveyarea indicatecontactswithMinoan Creteor with Some ofthepottery its colonyon Kythera.This minoanizingpotteryhas counterparts at the portsite of Agios or to earlyLH.121 Stephanos,whereitmostlydatesto theMH-LH transition POPULATION

It is veryuncertainwhethertherewas continuedhabitationfromEarlyto Middle Helladic times,thoughthe balance of evidence suggeststhatthe surveyarea- and otherparts of - wererepopulatedin theMiddleHelladic Laconia and indeedofthePéloponnèse period.We haveseen thatMH sitesare notat all numerousin our area as comparedwithEH II and are a notableexception.The usuallyof smallor mediumsize,the Menelaionridgerepresenting overallpictureis offairly lowpopulationnumbers, limitedto thesouthernpartofthearea and concentrated on theMenelaionridge,in thesmallvillagesN413and R291,and in a apparently scatterof smallersites.What evidencewe have may well suggestan increasein population duringand at theend ofthisperiod. SOCIO-POLITICAL

AND RELIGIOUS

CONSIDERATIONS

Afterthewidespreaddistribution ofEarlyHelladic sitesofmoreor lessequal status,thereis a in our studyarea in theMiddle BronzeAge. The Menelaionridgeis the notablecontraction major settlement,or cluster,as it was to be in Mycenaean times.Smaller sites at other locations,mostlynewlyfoundedin MH and also inhabitedin LH, are presumably subsidiary. WhiletheMenelaionridgeclearlyranksabove thislevel,too littleis as yetknownto attempta settlement rankingwithMH siteselsewherein Laconia, includingthosein the Evrotasvalley and to thesouthoftheMenelaion.Here,as in thesurveyarea, sitesare oftensituated opposite on hilltopsor ridgesthatcontinuedto be occupiedin theLate BronzeAge.122 Possibleevidencefora hierarchy of settlement, whichis providedin Messenia and other of Middle Bronze Greece the occurrence of burial tumuli,is absent from parts Age by Laconia. We do have a smallcemetery, a shaft including graveand fourinhumations nearby, excavatedon the Aetos hill of the Menelaion complex.Burial giftshere are confinedto a 120See Rutterand Rutter (n. 112),6-10; R. E.Jones, Greek and CypriotPottery: A Reviewof ScientificStudies(Fitch LaboratoryOccasionalPapers,1; Athens,1986),416 (withC. B. Mee).

121 Ibid. 122 FortheMH periodin Laconia, see especiallyDickinson (n. 61),109-12.ForMH sites,see PL i and ii; GAC107ff.with map C.

142 Chapter4

terracottaspindle-whorl and a minutescrap of gold- the onlypre-Mycenaeangold from Laconia- bothofwhichare associatedwiththesingleburialin theshaftgrave.Such signsof materialwealthare rare,anotherbeingthedecoratedbronzepin fromone ofthreecisttombs (Schistslabs fromM349,not farnorthof the Menelaion dug on the acropolisof Geraki.123 - cist graves.)Slightas theseindicationsare, they to have ridge,may belonged destroyed to confirm would whatwe help judge simplyfromits size: that,at least by the end of the Middle BronzeAge,theMenelaionwas developingas an important centre.It is probablyno coincidencethatthesefindscome fromtombsdatingto late Middle Helladic,whichis also a timeofincreasingevidenceforMinoan potteryconnections, at thecoastalsiteof particularly northin Laconia,includingour surveyarea. AgiosStephanosbutalso further The Late Bronze

Age

the general setting ShaftGraveera, The earlyMycenaeanperiod(MH III-LH III Ai),includingthetransitional is characterized withideas and craftsintroduced by a blendingof Middle Helladic traditions fromMinoan Crete.At the head of the variousprincipalities fromthe Aegean,particularly stooda wealthywarriorélite,whichwas also involvedin economicand religiousactivitiesas well as in the procurementand manufactureof prestigegoods. For reasons stillnot well understood,some of the centresof powerdevelopedintofull-blown palatial establishments The palaces,withor ceremonial,and a varietyof otherfunctions. combiningadministrative, statewerein turnthecontrolling centresofhighlystratified, withoutimpressive fortifications, thatthispoliticalsystemoperatedon thesame lines likesocieties.124 It is notcertain,however, in everypartoftheMycenaeanworld. oftheMycenaeanstatesofthemiddleMycenaeanperiod(LH The stability and prosperity III A2-B)in the Péloponnèseand in centralmainlandGreece began to be disturbedin the laterthirteenth centuryBC. By the end of the centurythe palatial centres,as well as many other sites, had been destroyedand/or abandoned, resultingin the break-up of the LH III B-c). As yetthereis no fullexplanationforthese Mycenaeanpalace system(transition developments:a combinationof factorsratherthan any singlecause, whetherhuman or The demiseof Mycenaeanpalace organizationwas natural,was mostlikelyresponsible.125 in othersby continuedhabitation,albeitat a lowerlevel followedin some areas by desertion, and contactsin the later Aftera fairlybriefperiod of increasedprosperity of complexity. twelfth century(LH III C Middle),the end of the BronzeAge is markedin much but not all of the mainlandand the Aegean by seriousdepopulation,a declinein materialwealth, and disruption ofcommunications. CHRONOLOGICAL

OVERVIEW

Late Helladic has been foundat variouslocations.Ten of these Potterythatis diagnostically as definite be Mycenaeansites(H45,M349,N413,Q360, R292 and R424,S434 may regarded I23H. W. Catling(n. 108), 16 (Aëtoshill);A. J. B. Wace, 'Laconia, II: topography. EarlypotteryfromGeraki',BSA 16 Nadelnder (1909-10),72-5, at 75 fig.4; I. Kilian-Dirlmeyer,

frühhelladischen bis archaischen %eit von der Peloponnes

xiii. 8; Munich,1984),no. 103, Bronzefunde, (Prähistorische pl. 4 (Geraki);see also Dickinson(η. 6ΐ), ΐΐΐ-ΐ2.

124For an importantrecentoverviewof the Myc palatial period, see C. W. Shelmerdine, A review of Aegean VI: the palatialBronzeAge of the southernand prehistory, centralGreekmainland',AJA101(1996),537-85. 125See O. T. P. K. Dickinson, The AegeanBronzeAge (n. 124),580-4. (Cambridge,1994),307-8; Shelmerdine

Prehistoricperiods 143

and S478,U490 and U514;see TABLE4.4). At certainsitesoccupied in otherperiodssome thattheywereoccupied forus to be confident was found,butinsufficient Mycenaeanpottery at thattime (K414B, 1^515,Mi72, M322,N418,R425, R3025,U520). In addition,thereare isolatedfindsofMycenaeanpottery(ls 10083,10112,10179,10493,!O7o8,10815,10824,IIIO75 sites(U3006,Q3009,R3025). 12503)and threeOut-of-area' In one case, the Menelaion ridge (Q360), excavations confirmactual continuityof at theend ofLH III B,or ratherin habitationfromMH downto a large-scalefiredestruction LH III B2-C Earlyphase,apparently followedbybriefand partialreoccupation a transitional in early LH III C.126At the other sites,known only fromsurfacematerial,the typical Mycenaeantableware usuallydates to the middleMycenaeanperiod(LH III A and III B), later.On the butnotdefinitely N410/77), rarelyearlier(a possibleLH II alabastronfragment, withtwo 'out-of-area' sites otherhand,all but threeofthesesites(H45,R424,U490),together in MH much have also Indeed, material, usually greater quantity. yielded (U3006,Q3009), certainMH potterytypeslasted into earlyMycenaeantimes,and on currentevidencewe wouldsuggestcontinuedratherthaninterrupted occupationat thesesites.Certainofour MH sitesappearto havebeen abandoned,perhapsa littlewayintoLH II. Thus theN413complex and M322producednone of the verycommonLH III ceramicssuch as kylikesand deep be dated to LH III.127R457likewise bowls,or,indeed,any sherdthatcould withcertainty LH III. producednothingdistinctively Elsewherein Laconia, severalof the MH sitesshow occupationin early(LH I- II) and while other sites seem to have been newly middle Mycenaean (LH III A-B) times,128 At one extensivelyexcavated site, Agios Stephanos in the Helos plain, established.129 habitationlasted untilearlyLH III C.I3°In her studypublishedin 1982, Demakopoulou LH III Β sites in Laconia estimatedthat only betweennine and sixteenof the fifty-two continuedto be occupiedin LH III C. The Middle and Late LH III G sitesare widelyspread, includingEpidaurosLimeraon thecoast,and Amyklaiand Pellana in the centraland upper AfterLH III C (£.1050BC) thereappears to be a hiatus in Evrotasvalleyrespectively.131 126GAC no. C 1; Catling, 'Menelaion', 24-35; (n· I0^), 16-19;id. and E. A. Catling,'"Barbarian"potteryfromthe Mycenaean settlementat the Menelaion', BSA 76 (1981), 71-82; R. Catling, 'Excavations at the Menelaion: 1985', Λακ. σπουδ. 8 (1986), 205-16, at 207-9; Ε. S. Sherratt, 'Regionalvariationsin potteryofLate HelladicIIIB', BSA 75 (1980), 175-202, at 189. For the revised dating see P. A. Mountjoy, 'The destruction of the palace at Pylos BSA92 (1997),109-37,at no-11, 123. reconsidered', 127 n4.11/1 mightbe therimof an LH III Β basin (FS 294), buttheattribution is uncertain;thealabastron^10/77 could be LH II. M322/67-8 were body sherds of Myc fabric, M322/78a jug fragment,M322 A/187a large wheelmade bowl;noneneed implyoccupationin LH III. C 37,C 39, C 58; theseall continueintoLH III. Sitesknown onlyfromsurveyand withevidenceforbothMH and LH III maywellhavebeen occupiedin theinterim period:C 7, C 12, C 18-21,C 26, C 30, C 32, C 57 (?), C 62 (?). On thesefigures, some43 percentofsitescontinuein use.

For Myc Laconia in general,see GAC,are new foundations. especially GAC 107 ff.with map C; PL i and ii; Bintliff, chs 3-4; Cartledge, SL 40-5, 60-73; NaturalEnvironment, Dickinson(n. 61), 112-14.For recentGreekexcavations,see Th. G. Spyropoulos, A. Delt.36 (1981),Chr. ι, 111-13,126-9, 130-1, and A. Delt. 37 (1982), Chr. ι, 111-12,127-30. For recentpublicationsof earlierfinds,see W. D. E. Coulson, 'Mycenaean potteryfromLaconia in the collectionof the American School of Classical Studies at Athens', in Φίλολάκων, 87-94; K. Demakopoulou, 'Some early MycenaeanvasesfromAsopos,Laconia', ibid.95-107. ■3°GACno. C 17. P. A. Mountjoy,'The LH ΠΙΑ pottery fromAyiosStephanos,Laconia', in Frenchand Wardle(n. 54), 185-91,at 186; Mountjoy(n. 126),123;Dickinson(n. 61), 114η. 33. 131For LH III C Laconia, see K. Demakopoulou, To μυκηναϊκον Ιερόν στο Άμυκλαΐον και ή ΥΕ ΠΙΓ of Athens, περίοδοςστη Λακωνία'(Ph.D. diss.,University 1982),withfig.1 (map); P. A. Cartledge,'EarlyLakedaimon: themakingofa conqueststate',in Φϋιολάκων,49-55, at 51;

c 33, c 34 (?), c 36, c 40-5, c 47-8 (?), c 49, c 59-61, c 63. in LH II (nos C 8, C 14, Includingprobablenew foundations C 35 (?),C 38, C 56), some57 per centofsites,on thebasis of

der MykenischenKommission, 17; (Veröffentlichungen Vienna,1998),92-8.

128G^CnoS

C q-4, C II, C 16-17, C 24, C 27, C 2Q, C Qc: (?)

I29GAC nos C 2, C b, C 13, C 15, C 22-3, C 25, C 28 (?), C 31,

Dickinson (n. 61), 114; B. Eder, Argolis,Lakonien,Messenien:vom Ende der mykenischen Palastzeit bis zur Einwanderungder Dorier

144 Chapter4

or 'Laconian Dark occupationin thewholeof Laconia down to £.950,whenProtogeometric to at and one or In two other sites.132 our Age' pottery begins appear Amyklai surveyarea, the 133 first IronAge findsdo notdatebefore£.700. SETTLEMENT

(ILL.

4.3,

TABLE

4.4)

The distribution ofLate Helladic sitescompareswellwiththatin theprecedingperiod,since halfofthemor morehave also producedmaterialofMiddle Helladic typesand are similarly situatedon the Neogene and limestonedepositsin the southernpart of the surveyarea.134 part,apartfromH45downbytheEvrotas.To Againthereare no certainsitesin thenorthern the sitesabove the Loutsoremavalley(R292,S434, S478) is now added R424, close to the modernroad to Chrysapha.Two more are foundedin the centralChrysaphabasin (U490 and U514;also Out-of-area5 siteU3006).The low,broad hillofU490, Panagia Ghrysaphitissa in EH a in the historicalperiod, was to become II, previouslyoccupied major settlement in ha some times.135 here 7.0 reaching Byzantine Mycenaeanoccupation appearsto havebeen scattered an area ha the few surface finds over of £.0.1 limited, (areas AM, AN, AQ, being AX). AnotherLH sitewithoutMH finds,H45 Geladári,is exceptionalin beingsituatedin the morenorthern partofthe studyarea; it lies on gentlyslopingfieldsby the Evrotasriverand commandsa routeto the north.This sitewas also firstoccupied in EH II and was to see extensiveoccupationin latertimes;Mycenaean surfacefindsare fewin number,if rather fromMH to LH we mightpointout widelydispersed.Againsttheoveralltrendofcontinuity thatthe'acropolis'N413was abandonedin theearlyMycenaeanperiodand thatthenewsites (H45,R424,U490, U514,U3006) tend to occupy shallowspursor flattishhill tops withno defensivepotential;onlyQ3009 is protectedby a steepbluffand a gully,and even thissite couldhardlybe calleddefensive. The acropoleisoftheMenelaionand R291(perhapsreduced in size- no LH pottery was recordedfromR292)continue. sparsein the surveyarea. Even whenwe are reasonably Mycenaeanmaterialis altogether sureof a site,the concentrations are usuallythin.Amongthe exceptionsto thisis the newly founded 'out-of-area'site of Melathriá (Q3009), not far south of the surveyarea. The locatedby theLaconia Surveyon fairlygentleslopesin a corridorlinkingSkoura settlement, withthe Chrysaphabasin,belongswitha groupof six chambertombsthatwas excavatedin 1966.13βThe spreadof the fairamountof surfacepotteryis sharplydefinedby thelie of the land and coversroughly0.7 ha. ConsequentlyMelathriaseemsto be at theupperend ofthe scale of sitesizes;theMenelaionapart,sitesin the surveyarea are small(0.2 ha or less),and onlythe 'out-of-area'sitesQ3009 and U3006 (0.6 ha?) could be describedas villages.The belowthat alreadyobservedfortheMH period,oftwolevelsofsettlement pattern,therefore, in LH III; the can also be distinguished of theprimarycentre(sc. 'village'and 'farmstead'), SE oftheMenelaion,thesmaller fiveand tenkilometres 'villages'Q3009and U3006lie roughly and thatthe 'village'at N413mayhavebeen suppressed, R291about5 kmNE.Note,however, On the other thatR291is reducedin size. The remainderof our siteswould be farmsteads. 132W. D. E. Coulson, 'The dark age potteryof Sparta', BSA 80 (1985), 29-84; id., 'The dark age potteryfrom Sparta,II: Vrondama',BSA 83 (1988),21-4; P. G. Calligas, 'From the Amyklaion',in Φιλολάκων, 31-48, at 40-6; Cartledge(n. 131),51-5; Eder (n. 131),99-113.. •33See Chapter5. 134 see also Cavanagh(n. 113),84-7. Forwhatfollows,

I35LS'û. 430-1,ill. 24.58.

136GACno. C 5; W. G. CavanaghandJ. H. Crouwel, inLaconia', a smallMycenaean ruralsettlement 'Melathria: in Φιλολάκων, 'Μυκηναϊκον 77-86;K. Demakopoulou, Arch. νεκροταφειονΜελαθριαςΛακωνίας', Eph.1977, 29-60 (tombs).

Prehistoricperiods 145

hand, the variousisolatedfindspotsof Mycenaean potterymay be regardedeitheras the activities of some sort,or all thatremainsof sitesthathave been totally residueofsubsidiary lostto erosion.137 As in the Middle BronzeAge, thereis one primarysettlement: the Menelaion (Q360) on cornerofour the chain ofhillsrisingsteeplyabove the Evrotasvalleyin the south-western studyarea. Mycenaean surfacematerial covered an area as large as that of MH finds (some 20-25 ha), while being much greaterin quantity(areas Α-D, F-G, J-L, Q, AB, AD- AI, AL- AM). Excavations,firstin 1909 and then in 1973-82,have broughtto light extensivebuildingremains,datingto LH II B-III Ai and LH III B2. There can be little doubt thatthe variousareas of settlement, severelydamaged by erosionas theynow are, - the resultof a processof concentrationthathad apparently formeda singlecommunity startedin MH.^8 The spacingofsitesvariessubstantially, as a lookat thedistribution map willshow(ILL.4.3). Sitesmaybe isolated(H45),whileothersare in clusters(R292and R424,U490 and U514are in LH - as in MH - is farlessdensethanin EH sitedistribution 250-300m apart).Altogether, II (thoughin thesurveyarea thereis no siteofthatperiodto matchtheMenelaionin extent); on thefaceofit,thisindicatespermanentMycenaeanhabitationon onlya smallscale.Apart fromsettlementsites,the Laconia Surveymay have located the remainsof Mycenaean chambertombsat thefootoftheMenelaionridge(Q360,area E), recallingthegroupofsuch tombsfromMelathria(Q3009). Elsewherein Laconia, severaloftheMH sites,suchas Kouphovouno,Amyklai, Palaiopyrgi, - and and AgiosVasileios- one hour'swalkapart on a seriesof hillsin the Evrotasvalley139 AgiosStephanosin the Helos plain,had alreadybeen occupiedin MH, ifnot in EH. In the showremarkablelongevity surveyarea we have seen thatquite smallsitescan, nevertheless, and medium size was no (M349,R291,S478,U514(?)), guaranteeof durability(N413).To a such histories can in Mycenaean Laconia: we be elsewhere degree unexpected paralleled MH a centre such as Geraki to have been ofsomesignificance mightexpect possible regional in LH III, butrecentfieldwork has yieldedno certainfindsofthelatterdate.140 On theother characterized a as centre of hand,Amyklai, by Bintliff, debatably, secondaryimportance,141 showsremarkable Othersitesseem to be newlyestablished, such as the complexof tenacity. low hillscomprisingancientSparta.142 In additionto settlements, plentyof LH gravesand cemeterieshave been discovered.Chief among them are the characteristicMycenaean chamberand tholostombs,whileothersappearto be local variantsofthesetypes.143 Pendingmore excavationof settlementsites and more intensivesurfaceresearch,it is difficult to establishnumbersand sizes and to detectpatternsamong the LH sitesin the different of Laconia.144 Howeverthismaybe, certaintypesoffind,likeelaborate sub-regions 137 Cf.thepatternrecently described,fortheNemea valley and thevalleysto theS ofit and Mycenae,byj. L. Davis, 'If there'sroomat thetopwhat'sat thebottom?Settlement and hierarchyin early Mycenaean Greece', BICS 35 (1988), 164-5.Here theexcavatedsiteofTsoungizais theonlyMyc settlementof any large size, while numerousfindspotsof isolatedsherds,locatedbysurvey, clusteraroundit. 130ror erosion on the Menelaion ridge, see Catling, 'Menelaion',29; R. Catling(n. 126),209. 139For walkingdistances,see Bintliff, NaturalEnvironment, 407.

140'Geraki 3', 72. Accordingly,the oft-repeatedLH III date ascribed to the enceintewall may now be seriously nnestinned. 141Bintliff, NaturalEnvironment, 407.

'^ ror aparta,see UALno. C 2. 143Dickinson, 'Parallels' (n. 104), 135; id. (n. 61), 112 to findsat Pellana, forwhichsee n. 145 below). (referring Add Th. G. Spyropoulos,A. Delt.36 (1981),Chr. 1, 126-31 and at Ansrelona). (chambertombsat SpilákianearAmyklai, 144For a division of Laconia into a dozen or so subsee Shipley,'Perioikos',214-21. regions,based on land-forms,

146 Chapter4

tomb architectureand/or burial gifts,indicatesitesof higherthan average status.Good examplesare the tombsof Pellána and Vapheio, in the upper and middle Evrotasvalley The well-known wealth,no doubtbelonged respectively.145 Vapheiotholos,withitsimpressive in EH and MH times. which had been inhabited withtheprominent hill, already Palaiopyrgi This mustsurelyhave been a large and importantsite, estimatedto cover some 20 ha. only7 km(one hour'swalk)to thesouthis AgiosVasileios,anotherlarge,multiInterestingly, hill period site.146 theLaconia Surveydid notproduceevidencefora clearincreasein thenumber Altogether, of sitesin the Mycenaeanperiod,such as has been noted by surveysin otherpartsof the wereabandonedand othersnewlyfounded. Instead,somesitesapparently Péloponnèse.147 ECONOMY

As in earlierperiods,a mixedagriculturaleconomycan be assumedforthe Late Helladic occupationof the Neogene soils in the surveyarea. Most sites,includingH45 (Geladari) further northin theEvrotasvalley,are welllocatedforarable soils.Such a mixedeconomyis attestedfortheMenelaioncomplex,itselfwithouta lotofgood soilsin itsimmediate explicitly environs:excavationshave yieldedbone refuseof domesticanimals,spinningand weaving and some remainsof lentils,olives,and grapes,as well as storagefacilitiesand implements, at thesite.)148 vessels.(The excavationshave also producedevidenceformetalworking pottery At thisperiodtheMenelaioncomplexmusthave controlleda considerabletractofcultivable land, both in the Parnon hinterlandand in the Evrotas valley below, to support its itwouldstraintheevidencefromtheLaconia Surveyto claimthat Nevertheless, population.149 in the exploitationof the landscape accompanied the rise of a palace changes significant in the Chrysaphabasin occupyan area which,in new settlements the economy.Certainly, fortranshumantshepherdsexploitingParnon. historicaltimes,servedas the kephalochóri forthepalace Moreover,we knowthatin someMycenaeanstateswool flockswereimportant But it would be merespeculationto claim thatsitessuch as U490 and U514 textileindustry. in the survey None of the newlyfoundedsettlements werefoundedto servesuch an end.150 area or nearby(Sparta, Melathria, our U3006) can plausiblybe linkedwith specialized undera palace. production as well as the Mycenaeantable-warepotteryand otherfinds The Menelaionarchitecture, fromthe surveyarea, testifiesto close connectionswithotherparts of Laconia and the in early Péloponnèseat large. There is also evidenceforcontactswithCrete,particularly have Menelaion excavations times. the Thus, yieldedimportedpotteryand a Mycenaean of dressed with reused terracotta porosblocksveryreminiscent figurine, together Minoan-type :45For Pellana (GACno. c 56 Pellanes),see PL ii. 125-7; A. Belt.371 (1982),Chr. 1, 112-13;id., Th. G. Spyropoulos, centreofprehistoric 'Pellana:theadministrative Laconia', in Cavanagh and Walker,28-38. For the Vapheio tholosand the adjacent Palaiopyrgihill (GAC no. C 4), see esp. PL i. 76-8, 80; Spyropoulos(above), 112(recentexplorationson Palaiopyrgi);I. Kilian-Dirlmeyer,'Das Kuppelgrab von Vaphio: die Beigabenausstattung in der Steinkiste. in späthelladischer zur Sozialstruktur Zeit', Untersuchungen JRGZM34 (1987),197-212. 146GACno. c 7; PL i. 80-1. 147See Cavanagh(n. 113),81-7,withtables1-2; Rutter(η. 47), 748, table ι; Shelmerdine(η. 124),õõ1"^ witntable 2;

also A.-L. Schallin,'The Late Helladic period',in Wellsand Runnels, Berbati-Limnes,123-75; Rough and RockyPlace, 52; GreekCountryside, α.^ί.

148Catling, 'Menelaion', 27-8 (animal bones, etc.), 31 (metalworkine·). 149So also Bintliff, Natural Environment, 408-9. '5° On Taygetosthe sitesat Arkines(PL ii. 128-30) and Árna (ibid.; Th. G. Spyropoulos,A. Delt.37 (1982),Chr. 1, m- 12)suggestexploitation ofthehighmountain(800 m asl), thoughWace's findof celts(PL ii. 128 and n. 105) hintsat pre-Mycoccupation.

Prehistoricperiods 147

Cretan connectionsare, of course,clearlyapparentin the burial Minoan craftsmanship.151 assemblagefromanothersitein centralLaconia: theVapheiotholos.We can evenpointto an LM III kylixstemrecoveredin thecourseofthesurvey,152 surelya case ofcoals to Newcastle. and tombfindsthroughoutLaconia- and thusincludingour survey Indeed, settlement area showthatformuchoftheLate BronzeAge theprovincewas notonlyquiteprosperous intothewiderMycenaeanworldand,byassociation,intoan economy butalso wellintegrated In thisconnection, infrastructure and a networkof trade.153 whichsupporteda redistributive referencemay be made to quarries in southernLaconia which were firstexploited in and anticorossowere in Mycenaeantimes;the finestoneslaterknownas lapisLacedaemonius demandin bothCreteand theArgolid,to whichtheywereprobablymovedbysea.154 POPULATION

overthe ofBronzeAge siteshas been totallydestroyed, thata proportion We can be confident whatproportion has thereis no reliableway of calculating and lostto archaeology; millennia, Relativefluctuations are less survived,and absolutepopulationestimatesare not possible.155 to argue,in thefairly difficult grosssense,advancedabove,thatthenumberof sitesdiscovered and theirrelativesizes are knownforthe Middle and Late BronzeAge. Even grantedthat wereratheropen in plan duringthe earlierperiod,and moredenselyoccupiedin settlements LH III, it is difficult on thisevidenceto envisagea markedrisein population.Of course,there MH sitesare morelikelyto havesurvived and to havebeen in be some biaswhereby may theory LH III covers butitis hardto imaginewhatsucha bias mightbe. Certainly, foundin thesurvey, but a shorterspan thanthelaterMiddle Helladic and earlyMycenaeanperiodsput together, in our sites the relative difference of at most of the duration time-span occupation given long wouldseemnotto undermineour conclusionthattherewas no dramaticrisein populationin the surveyarea. Thus we have seen above thathabitationat the Menelaionridgecontinued fromMH, and thesameis trueofotherlocationsin thestudyarea. We havealso uninterrupted seen thatLH sites- like those of MH - are not at all numerousand usuallyof small size. ofoccupationat sitesas smallas M349,whichmaywellhavepersistedthrough 500 Continuity is ofcourse,itneednotimplycontinuedoccupationbythesamefamily. years, striking; site'ofMelathria Some notionofthenumberofinhabitants maybe givenbythe'out-of-area a Here the sherd material covered well-defined area of about 0.6-0.7 ha. This could (Q3009). families five members havehousedat mostsomefifteen (of,say, perfamily), probablyfewerthan in small chamber-tomb associated with the six the that; settlement, tombshavebeen cemetery and a maximumpopulationfora siteofthissize. excavated.156 These suggesta minimum 151Catling, 'Menelaion', 28-9, 31-2 with figs. 7, 13; id. (n. 108), 19 with fig. 30; id., 'Minoan and "Minoan" pottery at the Menelaion, Sparta', in D. Evely, I. S. Lemos, and S. Sherratt (eds), Minotaurand Centaur:Studiesin theArchaeology of Creteand Euboea Presented toMervynPopham(BAR int. ser. 637; Oxford, 1996), 70-8; R. L. N. Barber, 'The origins of the Mycenaean palace', in Φίλολάκων, 11-23; S. Hood, 'Cretans in Laconia?', ibid. 135-Q, at 137. 152LS1ii, FIG. 13.1./0. 153See esp. Dickinson (n. 61), 112-13. For the Myc (palatial) economy, see recentlyP. Halstead, 'The Mycenaean palatial economy: making the most of the gaps in the evidence', of the CambridgePhilologicalSociety,n.s. 38 (1992), Proceedings 57-86.

•54 PL i. 105-7; υ- XI9? I21? R· A. Higgins, R. Hope Simpson, and S. E. Ellis, 'The façade of the treasury of Atreus at Mycenae', BSA 63 (1968), 331-6; P. Warren, 'Lapis lacedaemonius', in Φίλολάκων, 285-96; C. Gorgoni, I. Kokkinakis, L. Lazzarini, and M. Mariottini, 'Geochemical and pétrographie characterization of "rosso antico" and other grey-whitemarbles of Mani (Greece)', in M. Waelkens, N. Herz, and L. Moens (eds), AncientStones:Quarrying,Trade and Provenance (Leuven, IQQ2), 155-66. 155Though note the work in Messenia, where the Linear Β tablets help; see J. Bennet, 'Space through time: diachronic perspectives on the spatial organization of the Pylian state', in Laffineurand Niemeier (n. 105), ii. 587-602. 156See n. 136.

148 Chapter4

In otherpartsofLaconia, populationmaywellhave been increasingin LH, tojudge from and whatis knownoftheirsize.AfterLH III Β or earlyLH thenumberofsitesand cemeteries III C thepopulationleveldeclinedthroughout it seems,by to be followed, Laconia, eventually a periodofvirtualdepopulation. SOCIO-POLITICAL

AND RELIGIOUS

CONSIDERATIONS

ofthesurveyarea,and ofLaconia as a whole,at thebeginning The socio-political organization As forotherpartsofthePéloponnèse, thisis a oftheLate BronzeAge is notwelldocumented. ofthedistinct, Cretantimeofincreasing contactswithMinoan Creteand oftheintroduction influenced, By the LH II A period,centresof wealthand earlyMycenaeanpotterystyles.157 in theEvrotasvalley,to as Pellana and Palaiopyrgi have been established at such places power tomb architecture and/or burial from their elaborate gifts.The Vapheio tholos, judge of an with the latter testifies to the existence associated site, earlyMycenaeanwarriorélite in Messenia and theArgolid.158 knownalso fromburialselsewhere, and particularly in Anothersuchcentreofpower Laconia was situatedon theMenelaionridgein our survey not by tombsbut by a seriesof buildings,includingthe monumental area. It is represented mansionsI and II on theMenelaionhillitself, (The datingto LH II Β and III Ai respectively159 reused dressedporos blockswill have belonged to an otherwiselost structureantedating laid out, consisting of threeparallelunitsseparatedby mansionI.) Mansion I was carefully The centralunitwas ofmegarontype,itsmainhallprecededbyan anteroomand a corridors. court.There is evidenceforan upperstorey, porchwhichopened onto a (largelydestroyed) and somewallsweredecoratedwithpaintedplaster. The ambitiousbuildingprojectsofLH II B-III Ai on theMenelaionand adjacentAëtoshills findparallelsof similardate at sitessuchas Nichoriain Messeniaand Tirynsin theArgolid. of The plansofa buildingat Tirynsand ofmansionI at theMenelaionare clearlyprototypes thecentralpartsofthemuchlargerpalacesofTiryns,Mycenae,and PylosofLH III B.l6° and Thanksto the Linear Β tablets,we knowthatthesepalaces servedas administrative It is verylikelythatthe Menelaion complexand as well as culticcentres.161 redistributive as regionalcentresby the fifteenth centuryBC. The PalaiopyrgiVapheioalreadyfunctioned model and of of a house or a of few female terracotta sanctuary figurines fragments recovery to recognizean It is more difficult at the Menelaionpointto religiouspracticesas well.162 withinits catchmentin the impactof the rise of the Menelaion on subsidiarysettlements

157See Dickinson, Origins(n. 104), 90-1 (Laconia); id., Origins' (n. 106); id. (n. 61), 112 (Laconia); also Demakopoulou(n. 129)(LH I and II A Laconia). It has been suggestedthatthe LH I potterystyleactuallyoriginatedin thispartof the Péloponnèse;see Rutterand Rutter(n. 112), 63-4;Jones(n. 120),441 (withC. B. Mee). 158 I. Kilian-Dirlmeyer, 'Beobachtungen zu den von Mykenaiund zu den Schmuckbeigaben Schachtgräbern JRG^M 34 (1986),159-98;ead. mykenischer Männergräber', (n. 145). ■59 For what follows,see Catling,'Menelaion', 28-32; id. (n. 108), 16-18; id., Some Problems in Aegean Prehistory

BC (J.L. MyresMemorialLectures,14; Oxford, 0.1450-1380 Hausarchitektur 1989), 7-10; also G. Hiesel, Späthelladische (Mainz am Rhein,1990),134-5;Barber(n. 151),11-13. 160K. Kilian, 'L'architecture des résidencesmycéniennes:

origineet extensiond'une structuredu pouvoirpolitique pendantl'âge du bronzerécent',in E. Lévy (ed.), L· Système

palatial en Orient,en Grèceet à Rome (actesdu colloquede Strasbourg

ig-22juin ig8j) (Leiden,1987),203-17;id., 'The emergence ofwanax ideologyin theMycenaeanpalaces', OJA7 (1988), 291-302; Hiesel (n. 159), 133-8, 246, 249; Barber (n. 151); McDonald and Wilkie(n. 112);also Shelmerdine(n. 124), 558-9. For an overviewof the LH II B-III Ai period,see H. W. Catling,SomeProblems (n. 159). 161 See esp. Halstead(n. 153). 162 Catling, 'Menelaion', 31-2; id., Ά Late Bronze Age house- or sanctuary-modelfromthe Menelaion, Sparta', BSA 84 (1989), 171-5.The Laconia Surveycollectedone or on theMenelaion twofragments ofMyc terracotta figurines: see ridge(Q360, area A) and at Geladari (H45)respectively, LS il 189,SF56-8.

Prehistoricperiods 149

surveyarea. SitesN413and M322bothdeclineat aboutthetimemansionI is built,so thatitis to interpret the collapseof thissubsidiaryacropoliscentreand its satellite(?) as a tempting of the Menelaion's rise. Equally,giventhe close controlthatthe Mycenaean consequence to have exercised over theirimmediateterritories, centresseem the foundationof new settlements can hardlyhave takenplace withouttheircognizance. Nevertheless,central controlseemsto haveoperatedlargelythroughpre-existing settlements and centres.163 Byway Bennethas proposeda three-tier ofcomparison, ofsitesin thePylosregion:(1)large hierarchy - theMenelaionwouldstandat thetop ofsucha group;(2) ca middletierofsitesof2 ha sites or smaller'- thismightencompassR291 and the cout-of-area5 sitesQ3009 Melathriaand U3006;and (3) thebottomend,whichwouldcomprisetherestofour sites.164 The Menelaionseemsto have gone intodeclineafterLH III Ai withthe abandonmentof mansionII, therebeingno tracesofLH III A2-Bi architecture. This is preciselythetimewhen Mycenaean culturegenerallywas at its height.Laconia, too, appears to have been quite witha proliferation ofsettlement sitesand cemeteries.165 The Surveyhas collected, prosperous, at the Menelaion and othersites,fragments of potterytypesfallingwithinthe LH III A-B datableto LH III A2-Bi comesfromthecemeterybelongingwith morefirmly range.Pottery 'out-of-area' siteQ3009Melathria.166 At the Menelaion, excavationshave produced ample evidence forrenewed building in LH III B2.167 activities terraceand a largebuilding Thus,on Aëtoshillarosea monumental withpaintedplaster.Anotherbuilding(mansionIII or 'Dawkins5House'), on the Menelaion hill,clearlyhad an administrative function,to judge fromjar sealingswithmultiple-seal and of impressions fragments largestoragestirrup jars.168 It has been suggestedthatat thistimethe Menelaioncomplexwas the chiefsettlement in In thisconnection,attentionhas been drawn the centralpart of Laconia, if not beyond.169 to itsnaturally location.It commandsa wide viewhighabove the particularly well-protected Evrotasvalleyand withtheParnonmountainrangein itsback,and is therefore moresecure thantheseriesofhillsitesat Sparta,Amyklai, and in Vasileios the centreof Palaiopyrgi, Agios thevalley170 while the Menelaion was an administrative in centre However, clearly important LH III B2 as in earlierMycenaeantimes,it is notclearexactlyhow fardownintotheEvrotas valleyits authorityextended.Here the interestsof the Menelaion communitymay have clashedwiththoseofAmyklai, knownas a hillsitesanctuarybut recently called a previously centre on the basis of the LH excavation of a of III A-B palatial brieflyreported group 163See J. Bennet, 'The structureof the Linear Β administration at Knossos',AJA89 (1985),231-49;id. (n. 155). 164 Bennet(n. i^O, SQS-6. 165 See GAC 107 ff. with map C; PL ii. 170-3; Demakopoulou(n. 131),102;Dickinson(n. 61),112-13. 166 Demakopoulou(n. 136),47-^8. 167For whatfollows,see Catling,'Menelaion', 33; H. W. Catling(n. 108),16-18. 168R. M. Dawkins, 'The Mycenaean city near the Menelaion',BSA 16 (1909-10),4- 11,at 9- 11,fig.5 and pl. 3 = CMS ν suppl. i B, no. 348; BSAAR 1989-90, 25 (another sealing,fromtherecentexcavations).Cf. also the seal found in a dumpof LH III B2 date,but includingearliermaterial: Catling,'Menelaion',14; CMS ν suppl.i B, no. 339). Two of the coarse-ware stirrup jars appear to have been in or nearChania in Crete;see H. W. Catling, manufactured

J. F. Cherry,R. E.Jones, and J. T. Killen, 'The Linear Β inscribedstirrup jars and westCrete',BSA 75 (1980),49-113, at no, nos 107-8 (SM 1-2);Jones (η. ΐ2θ), 489 withtables 6.10b, nos 107-8, and 6.12. For mansion 3 ('Dawkins's House'), see also Hiesel (n. 159),131-4,249. 169Forwhatfollows, see Catling,'Menelaion',28, 34-5 (JC is mostgratefulto Dr Catlingforallowinghim to read the textofhislecture,'Wherewas MycenaeanSparta?',givenat the Mycenaean Seminar,London, 15Jan. 1992); Bintliff, NaturalEnvironment, 403-14; Cartledge,SL 65-6, 338; id. (n. 131),51; Demakopoulou(n. 131),103. 170None of these or otherLaconian sitesseems to have had fortifications in Myc times.It is onlyat theacropolissite of Geraki (GAC no. C 12) that the defenceshave- almost - been thoughtto go back to this certainlyincorrectly period;see now 'Geraki3', 72.

150 Chapter4

On presentevidence,then,it is chambertombsand buildingremainsof similardate.171 to decidewhethertherewas anysinglecentralplace in Laconia comparableto Pylos difficult in LH III Β Messenia.Otherpossiblerivalsin centralLaconia rangefromAgiosVasileiosat end. to Pellanaat itsnorthern thesouthend oftheEvrotasfurrow other thataffected Our surveyarea- and therestofLaconia- did notescapethedifficulties BC onwards. from the later thirteenth Greece as a whole and of the century Péloponnèse parts oftheMenelaioncomplexweredestroyed Excavationhas shownthatthebuildings byfirein late At three LH III B2/III G Earlyphase,and not rebuilt.172 LH III B, or ratherin a transitional a characterized are of brief there on the Menelaion locations by reoccupation, signs ridge to earlyLH III G and by the appearance of so-calledDarkMycenaeanpotteryattributed not onlyby itsnew surfacedHandmadeBurnishedor 'Barbarian'ware.This is distinguished if even it is probablylocallymade.173 butalso by itsshapesand (plastic)decoration, technology ofthiswarehavebeen recognizedin otherpartsofmainlandGreece,thefind Smallquantities contextsrangingfromLH III B2 to LH III C. So far,no convincingargumentshave been letaloneDorians.174 as evidenceforforeign thisnewpottery forregarding immigrants, presented oftheMenelaionbuildingsmusthavemarkedthebreak-upofthepolitical The destruction systemin the Laconia Surveyarea, and in those parts of the Evrotas valley that were controlledby the Menelaion complex.Accordingto excavationand surfaceresearch,the surveyarea was desertedcompletelyafterearlyLH III G, sometimein the earliertwelfth centuryBG.This indicateshow closelythe historyof Mycenaeanoccupationin the area was boundto thatofthecentreat theMenelaion.A similarpicturehas been revealedbysurveyin theregionofthepalace of Pylosin Messenia,whichwas also destroyed by fireat theLH III and the concomitant Nemea B-G transition.175 the Tsoungiza Valley survey Equally, excavations in Korinthia, as well as the Berbati-Limnes surveyin the Argolid, have - and collapse- of the largercentresof the demonstrated close linkswiththe development north-eastern Péloponnèse,and Mycenaein particular.176 In the Laconia Surveyarea, findsreappeararound700 BG,whenthe one-timesettlement site of the Menelaion sees the foundationof a shrinearound a naturaloutcrop.By being thatthereis indeeda gap in the Laponia Surveyhas demonstrated intensiveand systematic, On presentknowledge, havedone forotherpartsofmainlandGreece.177 as surveys habitation, thatsitesand potterypreciselyofthisintervening theprobability period as ofEH III have seemssmall. missedor goneunrecognized been systematically 171GAC no. c 3. Th. G. Spyropoulos,A. Belt. 36 (1981), Chr. 1, 126-9 (localitySpilakia). For LH III A-B material fromearlierexcavationsat the site,see Demakopoulou (n. 131),54, 66, 70-1;Dickinson(n. 61),113n. 31. 172Sherratt(n. 126),189,201-2;K. Kilian,'Zum Ende der mykenischenEpoche in der Argolis',JRG^M 27 (1980), 166-95; id., 'La caduta dei palazzi micenei: aspetti dei Greci(Rome, archeologici',in D. Musti (ed.), Le origini iq80, 7^-1Ie»;and see nowMountiov(η. 126). I73Η. W. Catling and Ε. Α. Catling (η. 126); Ι. Κ. Whitbread,'Pétrographieanalysisof barbarianware from theMenelaion,Sparta',in Φιλολάκων,297-306. 174jHOr recentdiscussion,seej. b. Kutter,bornecomments on interpretingthe dark-surfacedhandmade burnished potteryofthe 13thand 12thcent.BCAegean',JMA 3 (1990), 29-49; D. B. Small, 'Handmade burnished ware and Aegean economics:an argumentforindigenous prehistoric

appearance', ibid. 3-25; id., 'Can we move forward? Commentson the currentdebateoverhandmadeburnished ware'. IMA 10 (1007).22Q-w. 175 Davis etal, 'PylosΓ, 422-4,451-3. 176Wrightet al, 'Nemea', 641; Μ. Κ. Dabney, 'Craft as an economicindicatorof sitestatus productconsumption in regional studies',in R. Laffïneurand P. P. Betancourt

in the and Craftsmanship Craftswomen (eds), Τέχνη: Craftsmen, Aegean Bronze Age (Proceedingsof the 6th InternationalAegean 18-21 April igg6) Philadelphia, Temple University, Conference,

(Aegaeum,16; Liège, 1997),467-71 (Tsoungiza);Schallin(n. 173;B. Wellsand 147),in Wellsand Runnels,Berbati-Limnes, ibid.453-7,at 457. C. Runnels,'Some concludingremarks', 177 , 041; Greek 372-3; Wells Countryside, Wrightetal, JNemea and Runnels(n. 176),457; Davis etai, 'PylosΓ, 424, 451-2; Bintliff and Snodgrass,'Boeotian Expedition',139. But cf.

Roughand RockyPlace, 53-4.

5

THE SURVEY AREA FROM THE EARLY IRON AGE TO THE CLASSICAL PERIOD {c.1050-^.300bc) R. W.V.Catling1 This CHAPTER coversa periodforwhich,at least in its latterstages(£.550-360),thereis a relativeabundanceofevidencefromliterary sources,coincidingwitha timewhenSpartawas a leading politicaland militarypower in a regionmuch wider than Laconia or even the Péloponnèse.Therehas been a correspondingly largevolumeofresearchdevotedmainlyto its and social whose elucidation proves to be a continuing political, institutional, history, to historians. The contribution of challenge archaeologicalevidenceto thestudyofSpartaand from the fifth Laconia, especially centuryon, has been surprisingly slight.The reasonforthis is that remains from this are ratherscarce (in Sparta neglect partly archaeological period overlain of the hellenistic to middle largely by deposits Byzantineeras) and, witha few are features of the exceptions, inconspicuous contemporarylandscape. But much more left no cultural significantly, Sparta great legacy in the formof monumentalbuildings, and the other material arts to match thoseofitsgreatrivalAthensor otherleading sculpture, centressuchas Argos,Corinth,or Thebes. In thiscontext,the surveyhas been important in one of the few bodies of data for the studyof archaic and providing large archaeological in itsway as thepioneeringworkof Britisharchaeologists classicalLaconia, as important in thecityofSpartaat thebeginning ofthetwentieth century. This chaptersetsout to describein detailthe evidenceforsettlement, land use, and other in thesurveyarea. Beyondthat,itpointsto someofthewaysin which formsofhumanactivity thesurveydata can be understood to relatechangesin patternsofsettlement and byattempting land use to theirhistorical contextand by placingthemagainsta widerregionalbackground to in thetext).Close attention is givento evaluationofthetypes (see ILL.5.1 forplacesreferred ofsettlements and, as faras is possiblewithsurfacefinds,ofthematerialassemblages, relating 1I shouldliketo thankthe directorsof the W. G. survey, Cavanagh and J. H. Crouwel, for allowing me to participate in the original fieldworkand subsequently forthestudyand publicationofthe givingme responsibility archaic to classical pottery,as well as the writingof the presentchapter.In thelattertaskI have benefitedfromthe valuable suggestionsand criticismof the same two and of my thirdfellowauthor,D. G. J. Shipley. I have greatly appreciated their encouragement and patience in the course of its long gestation,due in large part to my own deficiencies,but made no easier by workingforthe past elevenyearsin an academic environment in whichthereis no provisionforresearchleave. My greatregretis thatmy so muchto the mother,ElizabethCatling,who contributed

illustration of the potteryin volumeII of the surveyreport, did not live to see completion of its publication. I am indebted to several scholars for providing information about theirown fieldwork and forgenerouslyallowingme to consulttheirwritingsin advance of publication:Susan Alcock,John Bintliff, Cyprian Broodbank,and Jeannette and Björn Forsén. I am also gratefulto David Hibler, Robin Osborne, Ioannis Pikoulas,and Eleni Kourinoufor readingand commentingon a finaldraftof thischapter.I am gratefulto the GoverningBody of Lincoln College, Oxford, the Craven Committee,and the Committeefor of Oxford Archaeology(Meyerstein Fund) in theUniversity forgrantsthatmade it possibleforme to take part in all sevenyearsoffieldwork and study.

152 Chapter5

L. Farr). territorial boundariesin centralLaconia (D. Miles-Williams, III. 5.1.Toponyms, mainarterialroutes,and hypothetical

Early Iron Age to classical period 153

theseto theirenvironmental The setting(landscape,soils,waterresources,and accessibility). in integrating difficulties the archaeologicalrecordwithhistoryderivedfromliteraryand sourcesinevitably mean thatthe historicalinterpretation of the surveydata is documentary if The has been to a range of advance rarely, ever,straightforward. general approach firm in alternative often without at conclusion favour ofone or the explanations, arriving any other.Whilein somerespectsunsatisfactory, suchcautionis reasonablewhereso muchremains uncertain or unknownand wherecomparative data are largelyor whollylacking. Forthesakeofconvenience, thislongperiodis dividedintofoursub-periods, which,witha fewminordifferences, culturaldivisionsused in Greek correspondcloselyto theconventional archaeologyand history:the Early Iron Age (£.1050-700BC), the early archaic period classical(£.600-450BC),and theclassical(£.450-300BC). (^.700-600BC),thelaterarchaic-early The Early

Iron Age (c. 1O5O-£.7OO bg) Ifitis no longerquiteappropriate to referto thisperiodas a DarkAge in otherpartsofGreece, thetermremainsapt to Laconia and thecentraland western In Laconia therewas Péloponnèse. desertion ofsitesoccupiedduringtheLate BronzeAge,and isolation fromtheleading widespread culturaldevelopmentsoccurringin the Aegean. In the plain of Sparta the breakwiththe oftheprimesettlement fromtheMenelaionto the Mycenaeanpastis markedby therelocation low groundaroundtheacropolisofSparta.Dependingon thechronology adoptedforLaconian it is that even at and there Protogeometric pottery, probable Sparta Amyklai mayhavebeen no substantial settlement beforethesecondhalfofthetenthcentury.2 In thisrespectthearchaeological evidenceis at oddswiththelatertraditions, whichplacedthearrivaloftheHerakleidaiand the of dual several aftertheTrojanwar.On a morepositivenote, origin Sparta's kingship generations it is worthstressing the apparentculturalhomogeneity withinLaconia fromthe earlieststage, the existence of links its scattered communities. Itscultural relations suggesting uniting laywithina WestGreekkoine, the western North-West and the Ionian islands. Greece, embracing Péloponnèse, Contactsseemto havebeenprimarily directed towardstheneighbouring of Messenia and regions southern close in in involvement these areas later maritime Arkadia,3 prefiguring Sparta's periods; linkswiththeoutsideworldwouldappearto havebeenminimal. Evidenceforcloserrelations with thewiderGreekworldis foundonlyfromthemid-eighth at a time it is when, century, generally thought, Spartabeganitsterritorial expansion beyondthebordersofLaconia.4 The surveyhas, in a negativesense,amplyconfirmed thisimageof a 'Dark Age' Laconia. There is no indicationof occupationin thisperiodwithinthesurveyarea, evenin theeighth whensignsof settlement century growthmighthave been anticipated.Not a singlesherdcan be ascribedto thisperiodofsomethreehundredand fifty that years.It is especiallynoteworthy thelargestsite(A118),consideredin latertimesto have been a perioikictown,was apparently notsettledat thisdate.The onlytraceofactivity in thesurveyregioncomesfromexcavations at thetwolargestcultsites,theMenelaion(Q360)and thesanctuary ofZeus Messapeus(N415), and is confined to theveryend oftheeighthcentury.5 The possibility thatthematerialevidence 2

Cartledge,SL 83-90; W. D. E. Coulson, 'The darkage potteryof Sparta',BSA 80 (1985),29-84, at 63-6; B, Eder,

Palastzeitbis Argolis,Lakonien,MessenienvomEnde dermykenischen zur Einwanderung der Dorier (Veröffentlichungen der

Kommission,17;Vienna,1998),99-113. Mykenischen 3 Cartledge,SL 92 ff.,112;Eder (n. 2), 100-2. 4 Cartledge,SL 102ff.The date ofthefirstMessenianwar

is reviseddown to thefirsthalfof the 7thcent,in V Parker, 'The datesoftheMessenianwars',Chiron, 21 (1991),25-47. 5 Menelaion: (H. W.) Catling,'Menelaion', 35; R. W. V fromthe Catling,Ά votivedepositofseventh-century pottery Menelaion',in Φίλολάκων,57-75.Zeus Messapeus:(H. W.) Catling, 'Messapian Zeus', 34. Subsequent studyof the has produceda fewLG sherds. pottery

154 Chapter5 forthis period has not been recognized mustbe discounted. Protogeometricand Late GeometricLaconianpotteryare normallyverydistinctive and, had theybeen present,should in identification.6 have providedno difficulties The conclusionmustbe eitherthatthe survey area was inhabitedin sucha wayas to leavefewmaterialtracesor,morelikely, thatthiswas an era ofextremesettlement with the in nucleation, populationofthe Spartaplain concentrating thearea of Spartaitselfand at Amyklai.The size ofthispopulationmusthavebeen relatively ofProtogeometric and Late Geometricpottery overthesite small,thoughthewidedistribution of Spartashouldbe a warningagainstunderestimating the numbersof itsinhabitants. Most likelythefourvillages(κώμαι)ofclassicalSpartahad theiroriginsin thisformative period.The location of the site in low-lyinggroundand the absence of defensivewalls indicatethat was notthereasonforthisconcentration ofhabitation. insecurity Withonlytheabsenceofevidenceto workon, one can butspeculateabout thesurveyarea in thisperiod.It is likelythattheforestnaturalto muchof theuplandsquicklyreestablished itselfat theend oftheLate BronzeAge: deciduousoak in theschistarea ofthenorth,maquis overtheNeogeneofthesouthand east.Agriculture was probablyrestricted to the vegetation plainofSparta,leavingthehillsas thepreserveofhuntersand herdsmen.The narrowstripof theplainon theeastsideoftheEurotaswas presumably farmedfromSparta. foundin thesurveyarea is typicalofmostpartsofGreeceuntilthe By and large,thesituation finalphase oftheEarlyIronAge. This was characterized of a few,often by thepredominance thebulkofthepopulation, locatedin widelyspaced,nucleatedsettlements, apparently containing an underpopulated come as an So it should no that area so close to twoof landscape.7 surprise theseearlynucleatedsites(Sparta and Amyklai)remaineduninhabiteduntilthe mid-eighth ofsettlement centuryFromthemiddleoftheeighthcentury divergent patterns beginto emerge in variouspartsof Greece.In manyareas therewas an expansionof settlement, apparently an increasein thenumberofnucleatedsites,beginning accompanying risingpopulation, through theprocessoffilling thevacantspacesoutsidethecatchment oftheearliestsettlements. Forthe mostpartthesewerethesitesthatwereto evolveintothecentralplacesand subordinate villages In a fewplaces,therewas a notableexpansionofdispersed ofthearchaicand classicalperiods.8 in thisperiod(suchas in theBerbativalleyin thehinterland ruralsettlement oftheArgiveplain, thereare someregionsin whichthereis no and on Melos and Thera).9At the otherextreme, with evidenceforsettlement ofanykindearlierthantheseventhor sixthcenturies.10 Continuity 6 The principal studies of Laconian EIA potteryare Coulson (n. 2), for PG; J. N. Coldstream, GreekGeometric

A Surveyof TenLocal Stylesand theirChronology (London, Pottery:

1968), 212-19, forMG-LG. See also I. Margreiter,Frühe

lakonische Keramikdergeometrischen bis archaischen £eit (10. bis 6.

v.Chr.)(Schriften aus dem Athenaion der Jahrhundert KlassischenArchäologieSalzburg,5; Waldsassen-Bayern, 1988), 19-56, fora morewide-ranging survey.Some of the fromtombsat Amyklaiis rather newlydiscoveredPG pottery less diagnostic, consisting largelyof monochromedecoration metallicsheen. I am gratefulto lackingthe characteristic Elena Zawou forshowingme someofthismaterial. 7Fora wide-ranging ofsettlement, ofregionalpatterns survey see Bintliff, esD.q-io on thelateEIA. 'Regionalsurvey', 8 See and Snodgrass,'Boeotian Expedition', e.g. Bintliff 'Patternand processin thecitylandscapes 139;J. L. Bintliff, of Boeotia fromgeometricto late Roman times', in M. Brunet (ed.), Territoires des citésgrecques:actes de la table ronde

internationale organisée par l'Ecole Françaised'Athènes(ji octobre-^

novembre iggi) (BCH suppl.34; Paris,1999),15-33,at l5~I7'i GreekCountryside, 374; Roughand RockyPlace, 57; Wright et al,

'Nemea', 616-17. 9 G. Ekroth,'The Berbati-Limnesarchaeologicalsurvey: the late geometric and archaic periods', in Wells with Runnels, Berbati-Limnes, 179-227, at 219-22. Melos: M. Wagstaffand J. F. Cherry,'Settlement and population change', in IslandPolity,136-55, at 142-4, with R. W V. Catling'sreviewin CR 98 [n.s. 34] (1984), 98-103. Thera: in 1980. author'sownfieldwork 10 F. J. CherryandJ. L. Davis, 'NorthernKeos in context', in L. G. Mendoni and A. I. Mazarakis Ainian (eds), (Proceedings of an Kea-Kythnos:Historyand Archaeology International 22-25 June igg4) Kea-Kythnos, Symposium, (Μελετήματα,27; Athens,1998),217-26,draw attentionto the absence of EIA settlementin the resultsof intensive in SE Attica,S. Euboia, and NW Keos. surveys

Early Iron Age to classical period 155

characterizesour surveyarea and perhapsLaconia in the preexisting patternof settlement in the settlement little evidence for theprofound there is where changesthattransformed general, the and of moreadvancedpartsof the north-east Attica,Boiotia, many Aegean Péloponnèse, islands.In thisway Laconia has muchin commonwiththoseareas in whichthe evolutionof was retarded.To whatextentthiswas influenced settlement by Sparta'sconquestof Messenia the for the first Messenian war,butif,as is normally thought, adopted dependson thechronology have substituted for external the warbelongsto thelastquarterof eighthcentury, expansionmay In a later the to much whichcouldbe postponed ofinternalresources, thedevelopment period. sitesin thoseextra-urban oflargecultsitesat theend oftheeighthcentury, including emergence whichhavebeenwidely thesurvey area,itis clearthatSpartawas notisolatedfromdevelopments and thestructures ofthenascentpolis.11 associatedwiththeearlystagesofstateformation The Early

Archaic

Period

(c.700-£.600 bc) The late eighthand seventhcenturiesare a crucialstagein the developmentof the Spartan are normallythoughtto havetaken state.Duringthisperioditspoliticaland socialinstitutions shape, largelyas a response to territorialexpansion in Laconia and Messenia and the acquisitionofextensivearableland workedby a subjectlabourforce(thehelots).At thesame timethe isolationthathad characterizedmostof the EarlyIron Age is brokenand Sparta Furtherterritorial expansion,especiallyto the northand emergesinto the lightof history. in southernArkadiaas well as with its into conflict north-east, neighbours broughtSparta in cultural are reflected Its wider connections developments. Althougha certain Argos. in Laconian whethermaterial manifest itself of to continues culture, manyaspects idiosyncrasy is a much greater there or architecture, Alkman), sculpture)12 literary(Tyrtaios, (pottery, mention of not to awarenessof mainstream and, perhaps,the developments, imports goods wealth of the and other artists. The increased skilled craftsmen of Spartanélite immigration of the first manifests itselfin the dedicationsmade at its sanctuariesand the construction in Messenia and the The of estates prosperity derivingfrom templebuildings.13 acquisition themperhapsengendereda rapidincreasein population. 11A. M. Snodgrass, Archaic Greece:The Age of Experiment (London, 1980), 52-65; F. de Polignac, La Naissance de la cité grecque:cultes,espaceset sociétéVIIIe-VIIe sièclesav. J.-C. (Paris, and the Originsof theGreekCity-state 1984); id., Cults, Territory,

(Chicagoand London,1995). 12On Laconian architecture, see R. A. Tomlinson,'The Menelaion and Spartan Architecture',in Φίλολάκων,

Terracottas from the 247-55; N· A. Winter, GreekArchitectural Prehistoric to theEnd oftheArchaicPeriod(Oxford, 1993), 95-109;

R. W. V. Catling,A fragmentof an archaic templemodel fromArtemisOrthia, Sparta', BSA 89 (1994), 269-75; id., 'ArchaicLakonian architecture:the evidence of a temple see C. M. Stibbe, model',BSA 90 (1995),317-24.On pottery,

LaconianMixingBowls: A Historyof theKraterLakonikos fromthe BC (Laconian Black-glazed Pottery,1; Seventh to theFifthCentury Allard Pierson Series, Scripta Minora, 2; Amsterdam, 1989); id., Laconian DrinkingVesselsand OtherOpen Shapes (Laconian

Black-glazed Pottery,2; Allard Pierson Series, Scripta OilFlasksandOther Minora,4; Amsterdam, 1994);id.,Laconian Closed 3; AllardPierson Shapes(LaconianBlack-glazedPottery, Series,ScriptaMinora,5; Amsterdam, 2000); LS ii. 88. On

sculpture, see J. Boardman, GreekSculpture:The ArchaicPeriod

(London, 1978),25-6, 76, 165; C. M. Stibbe,'Dionysos in Sparta',BA Besch.66 (1991),1-44;J. M. Sanders,'The early LakonianDioskouroireliefs',in ΦίλολΔκων,205-10;papers by Dörig, de la Genière,Palagia, Bonias, Salapata, Hibler, and Delivorriasin O. Palagia and W. D. E. Coulson (eds),

of an International Sculpture fromArcadia and Laconia: Proceedings heldat theAmericanSchoolof Classical Studiesat Athens Conference

10-14,I992) (OxbowMonographs,30; Oxford,1993). (April 13On dedication patterns,see A. M. Snodgrass, The economics of dedication at Greek sanctuaries', Attidel

e vita dei convegnointernazionale Anathema: regimedélie offerte santuari nel mediterrâneo antico, 15-18 giugno 1989 ( = Scienze delVantichità:storia, archeologia,antropologia,3-4; 1989-90),

287-94; S. Hodkinson,'Patternsof bronze dedicationsat Spartan sanctuaries,c.650-350 BC: towardsa quantified in Cavanagh database of materialand religiousinvestment', and Walker,55-63. (Hodkinson, Property, unfortunately appeared too late to be taken into considerationin the ofthischapter.) writing

156 Chapter5 The absence of EarlyIron Age sitesin the surveyarea comes as no greatsurprise,when set against the scarcityof evidence for occupation in the rest of Laconia. However,to theseventhcenturyis somethingofa shock. discoverthatthispatterncontinuedthroughout It would have been natural to suppose that Sparta's expansion outside Laconia was accompanied,if not preceded,by internalexpansionand a more extensiveexploitationof the agricultural resourcesavailablein the immediateneighbourhoodof the city.Apartfrom the twomajor sanctuariesat theMenelaion (Q360) and at Tsákona (Zeus Messapeus,N415), to in the precedingsectionand discussedin greaterdetailbelow,and one alreadyreferred straysherdfroma site near Agioi Saránda (1400), thereis nothingto suggestany change fromthe situationestablished in the previous fourcenturies.There is still no sign of occupationat theperioikictownsiteof Sellasia (A118).As alreadysuggested,an explanation lack ofsettlement forthiscontinuing expansionmaybe soughtin theconquestofMessenia. The possessionof extensivetractsof arable land of the highestquality,combinedwiththe and helotsneeded to workit, perhaps obviatedthe need forthe expansionof settlement ofthe Spartaplain. Even intothearid,marginalland to the east and north-east agriculture thanthosefoundin ifthe soilsin some partsof the surveyarea are not muchless attractive withthe fieldsof the central the Sparta plain, theycannotcomparein extentand fertility Messenian plains, where the wetterclimate of the westernPéloponnèse is yet a further advantage.What is more,therewas no local subjectlabourforceto employin the slowand arduous work of bringinginto cultivationland that had probably revertedto natural vegetationcovercenturiesbefore. Fromthe littlethatis knownof the restof Laconia, thereis nothingto suggestthatthe Withthe exceptionof findsfroma few resultsfromthe surveyarea are unrepresentative. was any morewidespreadin the seventh thereis littleevidencethatsettlement sanctuaries, centurythanit had been in the EarlyIron Age. This appliesas muchto the majorperioikic of our centresas to the restof the rurallandscape.To a largeextentit mustbe a reflection has been these small where there of of the towns, only archaeology inadequateknowledge forexample, excavation.Recentworkat Geráki(ancientGeronthrai), occasionalsystematic has produced the evidence for seventh-century occupation that was hithertolacking.14 Nevertheless,there should be no preconceivedassumptionthat this componentin the and politicalgeographyofLaconia had becomefullyestablishedby this settlement hierarchy a remarkable fact date.Makingall due allowanceforthelack ofexcavation,it is nevertheless thattownssuch as Gytheion,Asopos,EpidaurosLimera,and Boiai shouldhave yieldedno evidenceforoccupationin theseventhcentury.15 in otherpartsof Greece,including as problematic The seventhcenturyhas been identified in thelatereighthcentury16 and exists for where evidence development rapidchange regions whereeasily ofidentifying Partoftheproblemmaylie in thedifficulty seventh-century pottery are and Corinthian as Protocorinthian wares such absent; styles Subgeometric recognizable perhapssurvivedforlongerthan is generallythought,at the same timethatmonochrome in theseventhcenturyare also made more Patternsofsettlement warescame to predominate. ofthebroad term'archaic',foundin a to determineby theunfortunate difficult employment betweenthe seventhand sixth numberof surveyreports,withoutany attemptto distinguish it is clear refinement. of let alone Nevertheless, centuries, any greaterdegree chronological 14'Geraki3', 69-72.

15LS'n. 296, JJ128;310-12, MM230, NN235,NN251.

16See R. G. Osborne,Ά crisisin archaeologicalhistory? The seventhcenturyin Attica',BSA 84 (1989),297-322.

Early Iron Age to classical period 157

werenotmaintainedand thatthepace and scale ofgrowthdocumentedfortheeighthcentury a characterized a favoured this was that,outside few by instabilityand period regions, to a much more sustained betweenrivalcentres,as a sortof prelude territorial competition The pictureof divergent phase of growthfromthe sixthuntilthe end of the fourthcentury. settlement patternsthathad begun to emergeat the end of the eighthcenturycontinues throughthe seventh,but generallythereseems to have been littleradical change in the createdat thattime.In Boiotia,forexample,thereis no signofanyfurther expansion patterns whilein Atticathenumberof sitesmayactuallyhave beforethesixthcentury,17 ofsettlement contracted.18The main exceptions in what might be termed a phase of settlement On severalislands(notablyMelos and consolidationare in the Argolidand the Cyclades.19 in hamletand farmstead sitesexistedalongside Thera)a highlydispersedpatternofsettlement the urban centresthroughoutthe seventhto early sixthcenturies,thoughit should be When emphasizedthatthebasic patternhad alreadybeen establishedin theeighthcentury.20 in the the lack of settlement this broader growth survey background, continuing against placed whichmaybe typicalofmostofLaconia,becomesratherless area duringtheseventhcentury, in an at first than it sightappeared.All the same,the totalabsence of settlements surprising area of70 sq kmuntilsucha latedateis farfromnormalin thiswidercontext. The Later

Archaic

and Early

Classical

Period

(c.eOO-cAòO bc) The sixthcenturysees a radicalchangefromtheprecedingfourto fivehundredyears,setting Put briefly, it consistsin a shift a patternthatlastsin varyingdegreesto the end of antiquity. to a patternof widespreadsettlement fromnucleatedsettlement dispersionin sitesof small and medium size, rangingfromfarmsteadsto small towns (ILL. 5.2, TABLE5.1). This whosehistorical willbe consideredlater,is setout in detailin what implications phenomenon, the ofthesitesconcerned. with reference tö size,location,and function follows, particular to date and timescaleofthis some must be the of the First,however, thought given question colonization. it is the on which one mustrelyforthe of rural Inevitably pottery process answers.The near-totallack of decoratedpotteryfromthese rural sites(the finepottery almostexclusively ofthelesseasilydatedmonochrome and black-glazed wares),and consisting and worn conditionof what was recovered,precludeany degree of the veryfragmentary Not onlyis thechronology butmostofthedatingevidence refinement. chronological imprecise, If material fromthe smallsitesmaywellbelongto thephase of abandonmentor destruction. of there is a riskof fromtheearliestand intermediary is stages occupation poorlyrepresented, the date of the of rural colonization. the ofsites misled over start had However, being majority earlierin theseventhcentury, been occupiedsignificantly itis hardto believethatitwouldhave leftno trace.In spiteof the uncertainties, the generalimpression is thatthereis verylittle,if that need be earlier than the mid-sixth and much thatbelongsto itssecond century anything, 17Bintliffand Snodgrass,'BoeotianExpedition',139;R. G. in theMaking, Osborne,Greece i2oo-4jg BC(Londonand New York,1996),200. 10Osborne (n. 16),303-9; id. (n. 17),200-1. 19Continuingexpansion of townsand villages is most Countryside, 374-7.The same apparentin theS. Argolid:Greek phenomenonis foundon Keos, whereonlyin the 7thcent, was the fullcomplementof primarysettlements established: T. M. Whitelaw and J. L. Davis, 'The polis center of

Koressos',in Landscape Archaeology, 265-81,at 276-8; Cherry and Davis (n. 10),218-19.In otherpartsof the Argolid,the degreeof change seemsto have been minor:Ekroth(n. 9), andRocky Place,57-60. 213,224 (Berbati);Rough 20Melos: Wagstaffand Cherry (n. 9), 142-4, with R. conductedin Catling(n. 9); unpublishedresultsof fieldwork in 1980. 1989(seeAR 1989-90,67). Thera: author'sfieldwork This was also a phase ofnotablesiteabandonments on other Cycladicislands:Osborne(n. 17),200.

158 Chapter5

>/ BI21

/( o(b107

" .··^^

/""

y/ χ

'

K»fa L

y

S '

qA

o^T J^L

site fort> f^11*^» ■ Lar8c

fi-

· Hamlet, offarms cluster A*viüaMargefarm ° Farmstead φ Largesanctuary small 0 Shrine/ sanctuary

><SN· ^U J ' αS uaíí / Γ /·' N,H^ Μ Λ1000 ^ Γ'(ί// / DH29/ /;'/ / l^/V* / il' ' '~~s-J (f(/^? β ft J ■·.·/ ^L

' J230

XSpHllß

y^0^"300"^

^, OJ316 Γ

/

'

N312D fC* AF2HS ■ VJbo V J3Í9 Jp^Ss» p27jAÃ -**hP273 P286 DM171 M322 .·/ ' ΛΝ» ,·■■-□■ W4 ^5^

P27 ;^W

> pamm8 öÄäC

( M32sA M347 '

f J 0 1

J*

!>./

<>* /rC& N3|4 ,JT2 N985 N193

. R420.

N&â?]98/MR296 S r5

-/VW çté^îHV /fáAmn

' ,·

,

/

/

*

k- ' ''

,S521''

R275ASS22Xü*»3Zis434 8458^8459 ^sisS

U493U494

V^ir^/'/àWl

Αϋ4^49ΐΑΑ

^'t51D2

-f

í

- ι

»

5000 ==a Metres ^'^

AU490 ^Νν*^/

classicalsites(D. Taylor). III. 5.2. Late archaic-early

Early Iron Age to classical period 159 LS no.

zone

Large Sites (2)

Bin

Bi Ai

A118

villas(4) Hamlets/large P272 R281 S524 U494

Pi R3 Si Ui

size (ha)

L S

1-37 0-75 0.63 0.50

LAr-ecl LAr-Hl LAr-EGl LAr-Hl

N/L Ν Ν L/S

3 9 5 3

LAr-EGl LAr-ECl LAr-ClByz LAr LAr-Hl LAr-ClByz LAr-ECl LAr-Hl LAr-EClHI EH LAr-cl LAr/Cl LAr-LCl EH LH LAr-R LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-EClHI LAr-ECl

Ν Ν Ν Ν L/S S Ν L L/S N/L Ν Ν L L L S Ν

11

ehlarbyz LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr/Cl LAr-ClByz LAr-ECl LAr-EClHI LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-EClR LAr-ECl LAr LCI LAr-LCl LAr-Cl LAr-Cl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-Cl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl ;ci MH-LH,LAr-E LAr LCI MHLAr LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl

Ν N/S Ν L Ν Ν S Ν Ν S S Ν Ν S S S Ν L/S Ν S Ν L

S3

0.30

S527 M328

S3 M4 Ri

0.30 0.28 0.28

U499 H40

U2 H2

0.27 0.25

M347 U491

M5 Ui

T471

T4 Pi P2

0.25 0.25 0.21 0.20 0.20

S4

0.20

S437/440 U490

U3

A3014

A3

5433 J2I3 R420

Singlefarmsteads (64) N312

J224 N314 U3022 J369 N354 C114

S4 J2

N2

0.14 0.13 0.12 O.II 0.10 0.10

Ci

M2

N185 D301

N4 D2 H2

J230 R526 B103 J3i6 K235 P274 R294 S523 D96 N188

5434 C169 M322 N503 N184 N187 P262 R473 R518

0.16 0.15

M171

H29

0.20 0.18 0.18

Ri

J5 N4 U3 J6 N3

J6 R4 B2

J5 K3 Pi R2 S4 D3 N4 S4 C4 Mi N2 N4 N4 P2 R2 R2

slope(degrees)

LAr-EHl LAr-EHl

6.0

S458

P285 P271

soiltype

3-0

Villas /clusters of farmsteads (17)

R275-7

date

0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08

0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05

s

Ν Ν Ν Ν Ν Ν Ν

6 10

II 3 I I

6 3 ι I

7 5 11

5 6 9 7 2

11

8

9 2

1

14 3 10

18

9 2 2

3 8 7 8 16 11 22 14 29

l9

22 2 12

5 8 1

I

i6o Chapter5 LS no.

zone

size (ha)

S431/432 S459/460 S508 B107

S2 S3 S3 B3 G2

0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02

GI57 J22I K203 S5O9 U493

J5

K3 S3 Ui B2 P3 T4 U3

BI2I

P279 T512 U53I U3OO6 N183 P268

u4

N4 PS

Ti U3 U3 Ji Ji

T443 U3OOI U3024 J2I9 J22O K200 M194

Ki M2 M4 N5 Pi Pi

M325 N193 P273 P286 P278 R427 S442

O.OI O.OI O.OI O.OI O.OI

PS

S4 T3

O.OI O.OI

u4

U3OO3 J223 R461

O.OI

O.OI O.OI O.OI

R2

T484

O.OI

J6 R6

O.OI

< O.OI < O.OI

date

LAr-Cl EH LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-EHl LAr-LCl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr LAr LAr LAr-ECl LAr LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-Cl lar-eclhi LAr-ClR LAr-ECl ear-LAr LAr-LCl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr LAr-ECl LAr-ECl

soiltype

slope(degrees)

Ν Ν Ν L S N/S S Ν L L Ν L L S Ν Ν L L L S S S Ν Ν Ν N/L Ν Ν Ν Ν S S Ν Ν

20

8

18 19 28 15 18 3

10

5 3 !5 6

4 8 2

9 3

2 20

9 ΐ8 7 3 26 2 12 2

ι5 ι 9 9 7 6

Keytosoil types

L Ν S

limestone Neogene schist

Table 5.1. Siteswithlatearchaicto earlyclassicaloccupation,orderedin descendingsize (H45omitted).

beforethe half.On thisbasisit seemssafeto concludethattheprocessprobablybeganslightly observedfortheEarlyIronAge and and thattheabsenceof settlement middleofthecentury theseventhcentury continuedwellintothefirsthalfofthesixth.Once begun,colonizationof the surveyarea. There is thisvirginland spreadveryrapidly, thoughnot evenly,throughout of a infiltration it involved to that settlement, beginningin those progressive nothing suggest areas mosteasilyaccessiblefromthe Eurotasvalleybeforespreadingintothe remoterparts. with Withinfifty landscapemusthavebeentransformed, years,and perhapsless,an uninhabited in its natural remained that it had to cultivation. converted largely Assuming large parts in labourand manpowerand conditionup to thispoint,thischangerequireda massiveeffort need. social or economic in to some occurred pressing response presumably Froma standingstarta minimumof eightyThe numberof sitesinvolvedis impressive. sitesappear in thisperiod,as well as nine new sanctuariesor shrinesto be sevensettlement Includedin thisnumberare Sellasia, the-one site in the surveyarea consideredseparately. of Agios Konstantinos. identified as a perioikictown,and perhapsthe fortress convincingly

Early Iron Age to classical period 161

further siteswhereevidenceforarchaicBesidesthesedefinitecases, thereare seventy-two classicalactivityis found.In some cases these are clearlyhabitationsites,lackingpottery allowingcloserdating;but in manymorethe archaic-classicalpotteryformsan insignificant or laterdate. on a siteon whichthebulkofthematerialis of an earlier(prehistoric) fraction of small of and tile which were not exclude the occurrences These figures groups pottery habitationsites. consideredto represent and analysisof thisnew evidence,some cautionary Beforeproceedingto the presentation remarksare necessary.In what follows,site numbersare used forassessingthe extentof ofthesurveyarea in theperiodunderreview,and sitesize as the occupationand exploitation of the sites.The materialassemblage,of main parameterfora basic fourfold categorization notonlythe whicha samplewas collectedfromeach site,is used as thebasisfordetermining ofthesite,as wellas fordistinguishing differential levelsofaffluence. datebutalso thefunction natureofsurveydata,familiarto all In so doing,it is essentialto bear in mindtheproblematic who have been involvedin surveyin Greece. Post-depositionalprocessesmean that site to theactual are no morethanan approximation numbersand sizes,as recordedbythesurvey, in antiquity. In an area wheretherehas been extensive situation erosion,manysiteshavebeen of their largelystrippedof theirculturalremains,leavingonly small pocketsas testimony existence.The largenumberofverysmallsites(0.01-0.05ha) fromthe Laconia Surveymay indicatethatthishas been a widespreadphenomenon.Some of the smaller,short-lived sites, where were not with tiled are to have been those roofs, buildings equipped likely especially thesizesofothersitesmayhave been enlargedby the obliterated. Simultaneously, completely thoughthisappears downslopespreadofsherdand tilefromtheiroriginalplace ofdeposition, to have been less significantin the presentcontext.In addition, apart fromthose sites it mustbe assumedthatan unquantifiable numberhavebeen buriedby destroyed, completely revealedbymodernterracing colluvialdepositswithoutleavinganysurfacetraces(occasionally not to mentionthosewhichweremissedon accountof eithertheirsmall or road-building),21 In thecase ofmulti-period size or thedense,concealingvegetation. sites,especiallylargeones for it is difficult to estimate their size in anyparticular occupied manycenturies, particularly in without careful two cases the Laconia Survey(Q360 phase sampling,applied only during An assessmentof the materialassemblageis also Menelaion;U490 Panagía Chrysaphítissa). as wellas affected factors, byextraneous varyingaccordingto surfaceconditionsand visibility, theconditionof thepotteryand otherfindsthemselves. It is also easy to over-interpret small of often of to sherds of which a few are datable,in composed onlythirty fifty samples pottery, in for how site was use. as as these However, long determining long any problemsare a in the data remain vital source our acknowledged, survey developing knowledgeofchanging of and a broad time-frame. settlement of the area within The factthat exploitation patterns a are the evidence them Their value lieslargelyin they onlysurviving gives uniqueimportance. where in theircumulative inferences that be or weaker the case of any force, might stronger site from the all combined evidence of the sites, allowing gain cogency particular to be made abouttrendsin settlement and thefactorsinfluencing them. generalizations On the basis of size, the sites can be ordered in four basic groups, each perhaps to a distinctcomponentin the patternof settlement. corresponding They are dominatedin numericaltermsby the smallestsites,which may be classed as small rural habitations, as single-household or single-family farmsteads. The possibility thatnonprobablyidentifiable 21 e.g. B121 (LAr-ECl), J210 (Hl), G252 (R).

i62 Chapter5 habitationsites (such as mortuaryand industrialsites or agriculturalinstallations)are the in thisgroup(especiallyamongthe smallest)is treatedbelow in considering represented ofthe sites(pp. 187-93).This categoryis takento embraceall siteswhichfallin the function ofthetotal(74 somesixty-four size range0.01-0.14ha, comprising sites,nearlythree-quarters half of the range, in fall the bottom of sites the Within it, (fifty-two) majority per cent). ha. The than 0.01 of them are no seventeen upperparameteris somewhat larger 0.01-0.07ha; the next markedbya steepdrop-off line with to the but correlates category, dividing arbitrary lowerthan TABLE It ha in 0.10-0.18 the in thenumberof sites 5.1). is substantially (see range to where sites to define this used the upper size limitsgenerally 0.5 ha are up category, rankedas simplefarmsteads.22 commonly severalfactorsmightaccountforthisdiscrepancy. Ifourdefinition has anyvalidity, Manyof of the basis for these the classicaland hellenisticfarmhouseswhose knownsizes formpart calculationsmayhave belongedto familiesof above averagewealth,and are perhapsbetter classifiedamong the large farms considered below. It is more than likely that many farmhouseswere rathersmaller,perhaps coveringbetween50 and 125 sq m. Nor should 22Until recently,littlehas been done to establish the range of site sizes that can be correlated with Cl and in some cases thereseems to have been a farmhouses, of the classificationof rural sites. grossoversimplification of all non-urbansitesin NW Keos The uncriticaltreatment as farmsteads{Landscape 336-7) has been rightly Archaeology, criticizedby T. M. Whitelaw,'An ethnoarchaeological study of rural land-use in north-west Keos: insights and implicationsforthe studyof past Aegean landscapes',in P. ruraleset N. Doukellis and L. G. Mendoni (eds), Structures sociétésantiques: actes du colloque de Corfou(14-16 mai igg2)

(Centre de Recherches d'Histoire Ancienne, 126; Paris, 1994),163-86, at 171-4;id., 'Colonisationand competition in in the polis of Koressos:the developmentof settlement Keos fromthe archaicto late Roman periods',in northwest Mendoni and Mazarakis Ainian (n. 10), 227-57, at 230-1. siteson Melos, ofthelower-order See also, on thetreatment R. W. V. Catling(n. 9), 100,withreferenceto IslandPolity, evidence,Whitelaw 143.On thebasisofethnoarchaeological has suggesteda rangeof 0.25-0.5 ha forthe surfacescatters and theirassociatedinstallations, thatrepresentfarmhouses and 0.5-1.0 ha forexceptionallylarge or prosperoussites ('Ethnoarchaeologicalstudy',171-2; 'Colonisation',230-2). These figuresare accepted by P. E. Acheson, 'Does the and "economicexplanation"work?Settlement, agriculture, of Halieis in the late classical-early erosionin the territory hellenisticperiod',JMA 10 (1997),165-90,at 176-8 withn. 4. Known Cl farmbuildingsin Attica range in size from 0.014 to 0.1 ha: Lohmann,Atene,184 tab. 9. Most of those included in that sample are large-scale establishments, perhapsassociatedwithwealthylandownersand not likely A further to be typicalof all farmsteads. examplefromthe ofKarystosin Euboia is 0.012ha, with9 ha ofland territory associated withit (D. R. Keller and M. B. Wallace, 'The Canadian Karystia Project: two classical farmsteads', Classical Views/Echos du mondeclassique,32 (1988), 15 1-7). A

long-lived,large farmhouseon Delos, firstbuiltin the 5th cent., is slightlyless than 0.03 ha: interimreportsby M. Brunet, BCH in (1987), 644-6; 112 (1988), 787-90; 113 (1989),754-9. A Cl farmin a marginalupland locationon

Ancientfarmhouses Chios is 0.026 ha: V Lambrinoudakis, on Mount Aipos', inJ. Boardmanand C. E. Vaphopoulouat theHomereionin Chios Richardson (eds), Chios:A Conference

ig84 (Oxford,1986), 295-304, at 299-303; E. SimandoniBournia, 'Αρχαίες εγκαταστάσεις στο Αίπος3 Τημόκαστρο-Καμπούρη το Γύρισμα', 'Αρχαιογνωσία, (1982-4)5 l95~222· Four LC1-EH1 farmhouses in the of CrimeanChersonesosrangebetween0.025 an<^ territory

0.05 ha (S. J. Saprykin, AncientFarms and Land-plots on the Taurike:Researchin theHerakleianPeninsula, Khora ofKhersonesos

igj4-iggo (McGill UniversityMonographs in Classical Archaeologyand History,16; Amsterdam,1994),13,33, 37, 48), thoughmuch largersizes (0.06-0.16 ha) appear to be typical in the HI period (M. Dufková and J. Pecirka, 'Excavationsof farmsin the chora of Chersonesosin the 8 (1970),123-74,at 138if.);a fewverylarge Crimea',Eirene, farms(0.2-0.8 ha) shouldbelong to our categoryof villas. in the chora ofMetapontionin S. ExcavatedCl farmhouses Italy seem to range fromabout 0.015 to 0.03 ha: J. C. Carter, 'The decline of Magna Graecia in the age of Pyrrhos?New evidencefromthe chora', in Τ Hackens,N. D. Holloway,R. R. Holloway,and G. Moncharte(eds), The

Archaeology, Historyand Culturein Early Hellenistic Age ofPyrrhus: held at Greeceand Italy (Proceedings Conference of an International Brown University, April 8th-ioth ig88) (Publications d'histoire

de l'art et d'archéologie de l'Université Catholique de Louvain, 75: Archaeologia Transatlântica, 11; Louvain, 1992),97-145, at 109-11.These figuressuggesta range of of Allowinga multiplier 0.012-0.03ha forsmallfarmsteads. between 5 and 10 for the area over which the surface remainsassociated with such buildingshave been spread would produce a notionalrange of 0.06-0.30 ha forsmall farmsteadsites.By thiscalculationall sitesup to 0.30 ha could be treated as a single category,in which case the divisionmade above betweensitessmallerand largerthan 0.15 ha mightbe questioned. Some supportfor our low estimate of farmsteadsite size may be found in the S. Argolid,wheresmall sitesidentifiedas farmsteadsare less fromthe muchless than 0.2 ha and clearlydistinguishable numerouslargersites(Greek 544-6, tableB.2). Countryside,

Early Iron Age to classical period 163

and regionalfactorsbe ignored.Farmhousesofthesixthcentury mayhavebeen chronological and economic reasons for social their classical successors. smaller than Likewise, generally have been smaller than their Laconian farmhouses to the may counterparts region, particular houseat in Attica,wherethemajorityofknownclassicalfarmsare located.The fifth-century of a rural establishment is the known in Messenia likelyto only example Kopanaki northern a and models.23 It is be associatedwithLaconian large complexbuildingcovering515 sq m, underconsideration. and is unlikelyto be typicalof the smallfarmsteads It, too, shouldbe classified amongthelargefarms. Ratherlargerthantheprecedinggroupis a smallernumberof sitesrangingin size from 0.15 to 0.30 ha, seventeenin total (19 per cent). Provisionallythese mightbe regarded ruralhabitationsitesor large farms,forwhichwe shall adopt the eitheras higher-ranking An attemptis made below shorthandterm'villas',or as smallclustersofsimplefarmsteads. betweenVillas' and clustersof smallfarmsteadson the basis of evidencefor to distinguish differential prosperity. Clearly on a largerscale are the remainingsix sites (7 per cent) which may be listed U494 (0.50 ha), S524 (0.63 ha), R281(0.75 ha), P272(1.37ha), A118(3.0 ha), and individually: on the heightabove Bin (6.0 ha). The largestsite(Bui) is thefortress ofAgiosKonstantinos in the ordinarysense.Apartfromthe factthatits size was Sellasia,and is not a settlement mainlydeterminedby militaryneeds, it is probable thatat least part of the fortifications postdatethe archaic period. Nor is thereany easy correlationbetweenthe extentof the area and thesize ofthegarrison,whichis anywaylikelyto have variedconsiderably fortified withthe perioikic accordingto changingpoliticaland militaryconditions.A118is identified townofSellasia.If 3 ha is regardedas typicalfora smallperioikictown,as Sellasiais assumed clear thatthe remainingsites,none largerthan 1.37ha, must to have been,it is immediately be rankedbelow it. They may be classed as hamletsor small villages withpopulations probablylessthan100.24 Taken in a widercontext,thesesitesseem to fitinto a three-tier of settlement. hierarchy as the dominant centre where and social activities economic, political,religious, Sparta, wider of Laconia and Messenia were stood at the top. the concentrated, throughout region Below thiswerethe smallerperioikictownsand villages,ofwhichSellasia is an example.At a mixtureofsmalland largefarms,clusters thebottomwerethevariousruralsites,comprising of farms,and hamlets, none of which need have performedany organizational or administrative functions.Those in perioikicterritory were dependenton the secondary while the relations of the remainder were centres, presumablyconducteddirectlywiththe centralplace. The distribution of thesesitesis uneven,both in raw termsand as categorieswithinthe area. For the survey purposesof the following analysis,the surveyarea is dividedintothree sectorsof broadly similarsize, correspondingto the main geographical and geological divisions:the north(27 sq km),the west(20 sq km),and the south-east(23 sq km),each of whichis definedbelow.Since thedensestoccupationis foundin thesouth-eastern sector,our accountwillbeginthere,followedbythewestand thenorth. 23N. Kaltsas,'Ή αρχαϊκήοικίαστο Κοπανάκιτης

Μεσσηνίας',Arch. Eph.(1983)?207-37?at 208-19. 24Unfortunately, it is not possibleto estimatethe size of the site at Geladári (H45) in thisperiod. The amountsof

Ar-Cl pottery collected and its relatively restricted distribution surest thatit was not a lame site,certainlvnot a perioikicvillage. More likelyit belongs in the group of largefarmsor villas.Cf.n. 28 below.

164 Chapter5 THE SOUTH-EASTERN PERIODS

SECTOR IN THE LATER ARCHAIC AND EARLY CLASSICAL

The south-eastern sectorcomprisesthe dissectedNeogene plateau and the Chrysaphabasin and partsofitsperiphery one-third ofthesurveyarea (zonesL, N- P,R- U), together forming is all While none of the sites located four classified as hamletsand here, (23 sq km). largest two-thirds of the villas out of and small farmsteads seventeen, (twelve 70 per cent) roughly in Within this out of 60 are concentrated this district region. (thirty-eight sixty-three, per cent) uninhabited themajority ofsitesfallintofourmoreor lessdistinct each clusters, separatedby tractsofland. The firstclusteroccupiesan area of £.1.25sq kmin thenorthern corner,eitherside ofthe the lower of Koutsoviti to the east and theNeogene of the on Loutsórema, slopes upperpart one it eleven of which one (P272)is a large to its west. outlier sites, comprises plateau Including hamlet(1.37ha, itssize perhapsexaggeratedby erosion),two (P271and P285)are villas(both 0.20 ha), and the othereightare smallfarmsteads (N503,P262,P268,P273-4,P278-9,P286); thelatterare mostlyverysmall(five0.01-0.03ha, two0.05 ha, one 0.07 ha). Fourofthefive siteseastofLoutsorema,whichincludeP272and P285,are locatedat thejunctionbetweenthe arid limestoneslopes of Koutsovitiand the Neogene. Today thisarea is mostlycoveredin dense maquis,and in recenttimesit has been used forextensivegrazingof large flocksof withsmallparcelsof goats; thereare numerousdesertedand severalactivefolds(mandres), arable land confinedto the tops of spursand valleybottoms.On the Neogene the banksof cultivation to theexposures are no less aridthanthelimestoneterrain,limiting conglomerate on thewestside,where ofthefertile red clays.The situationis morefavourableto cultivation all fivesitesoccupythe morestablesoilson theleveltopsof theplateau.Here theNeogene depositsare dominatedbythered clayswhichin recenttimeshavebeen used forarablecrops and the steep-sided, and olivecultivation, withgrazinglimitedto the areas of conglomerate in this is located at theedge ofa zone the outlier and group, valleys gullies.N503, overgrown Close at extensive is the modern where of arid conglomerate terraces, activity. grazing only and of most suited to arboriculture of handto itsnorthis thesteepschistridge Chatzarórachi, in that their this area limitedvalue forarable crops. The location of the sites suggests arable withthe potentialforcombining were occupiedwithmixedagriculture, inhabitants cropswitholives,vines,and animalhusbandry. The second clusterof eightsiteslies in a heavilydissectedpart of the Neogene plateau, closeto thesouthernboundaryofthesurveyarea, and coversan area of£.0.75sq km.All eight three(N185,N314,N354)are in the (N183-5,N187-8,N193,N314,N354)are smallfarmsteads; upper size range (0.09-0.12 ha), the remainderbetween0.01 and 0.06 ha. Six of theseare situatedon the top or upper slopesof one ridge,fiveof themforminga stringof sitesthat mighthave lain close to the courseof an ancientroutebetweenthe Eurotasvalleyand the Chrysaphabasin.The twoothersites(N354,N193)occupyparallelridgesto thewestand east. All have access to theNeogene clayswhichare extensively exposedalong theupperpartsof is confinedto olivesand somecerealson thissystemofridges.Recentand moderncultivation the tops and terraced upper slopes of the ridges and spurs, but the area is otherwise dominatedby densemaquisvegetationutilizedforgrazing.Whiletheagricultural potentialis one ofthesesites(especiallyN193)to theKastoróremaspring, ofthefew limited,theproximity partofthesurveyarea, shouldbe emphasized. copiousperennialspringsin thesouth-eastern In the uppermostreachesof the Kastororema,wherethe valleyfloorwidens,its plentiful ofirrigated waterswouldhaveallowedthecultivation cropsand trees.Assumingthata spring itsexistencemayhavebeen theprincipal existedin moreor lessthesamelocationin antiquity,

Early Iron Age to classical period 165

in thisdistrict. It is verylikelythatthesurveyhas onlyrevealedpartofa to settlers attraction it is safe to presume,extendedbeyondthesurveyboundaryonto widerclusterofsiteswhich, of the Kastororema. theupperparts theridgesfringing The thirdclusterofseventeensites,coveringc.2 sq km,comprisestheareas on eithersideof the lower end of the Loutsorema.Eight occur on the lower slopes and outlyingspursof Phournáraand thehillofAgiosTheódorosto the east and northofLoutsorema,whileto its westand souththereare nine siteson the top of the plateau and the seriesof steep-sided to theChávos gorge,whichservesto draintheeastpart ridgesand valleysrunningsouth-west of the Neogene plateau and the Chrysapha basin. The area is distinguishedby the discussedin large size of the sitesand theirevidenceformaterialprosperity, comparatively twoare hamlets(R281,0.75 ha; S524,0.63 ha), six are greaterdetailbelow.Of the seventeen, villasrangingin size from0.15 to 0.30 ha (R275-7,R420,S433,S437/440,S458,S527),and the nineremainderare smallfarmsteads (R526,S431-2,S434,S422,S459-60,8508-9,S523,T443). Most of the latterfallin the middlepart of the size range (0.05-0.08 ha), withonlythree smallerthan0.05 ha. Althoughone ofthehamletsand twoofthevillasitesoccuron theeast of thoseon thewestis striking, side,the size and affluence especiallythe tightgroupofvilla siteson theleveltop of theplateau (R275-7,R420,S458,S527).This contrastis explicablein termsoftheprevailingsoilson eitherside oftheLoutsorema.The lowerslopesofPhournara forman arid limestonelandscape withsignsof limitedrecentcultivationin the formof theirprimeuse is forextensivegrazing.Three sites(S433-4,T443)lie in abandonedterracing; to theNeogeneclayslowerdown.The otherfiveoccupythese thiszone butin closeproximity threeon thehillof there is extensiverecentand moderncultivation: where morefertile soils, one of the narrow and the hamlet another on (S524)situatedjust spurs, Agios Theodoros, below the intersectionof the limestoneand Neogene, givingaccess to arable soils and ofdeep beds oftheNeogene mountaingrazing.The top oftheplateauconsistsalmostentirely at horizons of and is with thin conglomerate present mostlycoveredwitholive only clay soil conditions are also foundon theridgetops, of considerable The same age). groves(some wherethe hamletS281 and long-livedfarmsite R526 are located. Apart fromthe more to the main naturallinesof communication level,cultivablesoils,proximity extensive, along thetopoftheplateaufromNWto SE musthavebeen a further advantage. In thiscontextthegap in occupationofsome 1,100m alongthetop oftheplateau,between of the third(R420),is the southernmost siteof the firstcluster(P278)and the northernmost in no variation the or extent of the cultivableland. as there is pronounced quality surprising, be noted the between and The samephenomenon R281,wherethereis a may along P278 ridge in over about there is an abundance of land suitablefor 1,750m, though gap occupation cultivation. As in the case of the secondcluster,the existenceof a perennialspringat Agios mayprovidepartoftheanswer.Though Geórgios(S450-1),closeto theflooroftheLoutsorema, notas copiousas thatin theKastororema, itmightnevertheless be a keyfactorin favouring this area forsitelocation,especiallyforthelargervillasites.This wouldbe an evenmoreimportant factorifanimalhusbandry ofthesesites. playedan important partin theagrarianactivities cornerofthesurveyarea, comprising The fourth clusteris in thesouth-east ninesitesin the northern of the basin and the hills around its part Chrysapha includingthe large periphery, hill of Aï-Lias. Withinit may be includedfoursitesinvestigatedbeyondthe limitsof the intensively surveyedarea in the same basic geographicalunit(U3001,U3003,U3022,U3024). This area is separatedfromthe thirdclusterby the schistridge,whichrunsfromNE to SW betweenthe modernvillageof Chrysaphaand the basin drainingintothe Chavos gorge,an area almostbarrenof archaic sites.This clusteris not as concentratedas the otherthree

i66 Chapter5 groups,spreadingoverc.2 sq kmwithinthe surveyarea butprobablycoveringa muchwider area in theChrysaphabasinand itssurrounds. Casual field-walking overthesouthernpartof thebasinrevealedevidencefornumeroussitesofthisdate,especiallyon thefootslopes ofthe hillssurrounding thelevelfloorofthebasin.The sitesare generallyon a largerscale thanin theotherclusters. Amongthenineare one hamlet(U494),fourvillas(T471,U490,U491,U499) four small and farmsteads (T484,T512,U493,U531).Theirlargersize mostlikelyaccountsfor theirwiderspacing.All the sitesexaminedbeyondthe boundariesof the surveyare small threebetween0.01 and 0.03 ha, thefourth(U3024)0.11ha. The Chrysaphabasin farmsteads, consistspredominantly oftheweatheredproductsfromthesurrounding limestoneformations, buttheagricultural rossasoilsis adverselyaffected potentialofthedeep terra byitsdrynessand stoniness.Althoughnow largely abandoned, in recent times it was cultivatedalmost withcerealsand, to a lesserextent,withvines.The massofabandonedthreshingexclusively floorsand attachedstoresforstrawand chaff,the systemof mule tracks,and the extensive fieldterracingare eloquenttestimony to itsimportanceto the farmersof Chrysapha.Once again theexistenceofspringsin severalofthevalleyssouthof Chrysapha(notetheOttoman U513),appearingat thejunctionof the limestoneand schist,perhapsattracted spring-house settlement of thebasin (U493-4, U491).Anothergroupof threesites along theeast periphery (T471,T512,U499) is locatedaroundthe base ofAï-Liasat thejunctionof thelimestoneand wellsare a schist,whereit may be suspectedthatwellswereused to tap the ground-water; commonoccurrencein the contemporary landscapein areas wherethe impermeableschists A further indicationof the importanceof the Chrysapha are overlainby porousformations. basin at this date is the presence of two cult sites larger than simple rural shrines:at hill (U3001)on theeastedge ofthebasin,and at Phagiá(U3002)on a prominent Pikromygdaliá its west side. dominating be reviewed.A Outsidethesefourmainclustersis a smallnumberofsiteswhichmaybriefly occurs at thesouthedge farmstead sites of three small (R427,R473,R518;0.01-0.05ha) group of the surveyarea on a steep-sidedridge top overlookingthe north-westcorner of the Chrysaphabasin,wherethe exposed Neogene claysare suitableforcultivation.Two more smallfarmsteads groundto the east of this (R294,R461;< 0.01, 0.07) occur in the low-lying meet. Schist soils are foundin the low and the schist basement where the ridge, Neogene available around its but are periphery. ground, Neogeneclays THE WESTERN SECTOR IN THE LATER ARCHAIC AND EARLY CLASSICAL PERIODS

land on theperipheryoftheEurotasvalley,fromthe This sectoris made up ofthelow-lying north-west limitof the surveyarea to the Menelaion ridgeat the south(zones D, H-J,M, and Q,5and smallpartsofK; 20 sq km).It includestwentysites,almosta quarterofthetotal (23 per cent),mostof whichare located in the Neogene footslopesbelow the edge of the plateau facingmodernSparta. Sixteenof thesebelongto the categoryof smallfarmsteads, of Sparta will have had a markedeffecton the the otherfourbeingvillas.The proximity to find charactersand sizes of the sitesin muchof thisarea. It would have been surprising in ancient the main centre of scale so close to a hamlet or sites on population village large Laconia.25The easy availabilityof waterfromthe perennialriversEurotasand Kelephina factorinfluencing means thataccess to watersuppliesis unlikelyto have been a significant sitelocationin thisarea. 25Butnotethelater,Hl-R hamletat Myloi(M321,0.41 ha) above modernAphysou.

Early Iron Age to Classical Period 167

The stringof sitesin the low hills and spursalong the edge of the valleybetweenthe Menelaionand the confluenceof the Eurotasand the Kelephinamay be consideredas one cluster.There are sixteensitesin thisgroup,arrangedalmostin a line fromnorthto south. Neogeneclaysare the dominantsoil type,changingat the northernend to schistwherethe Kelephinaentersthe Eurotasvalley.Three sites(J213,0.16 ha; M328,0.28 ha; M347,0.25 ha) are rankedas villas,therestas smallfarmsteads J223-4,J230,J316,J369,K235,M171, (J219-21, M194,M322,M325);six oftheseare in theuppersize rangeof0.07 to 0.13 ha, theotherseven sites(J219between0.01 and 0.05 ha. The threemostnortherly 20, K235)are locatedon schist at thefootoftheslopesto thenorthand southoftheKelephina,closeto thealluvialdepositsin the valleyfloor.Close to one of these (J219)is an olive crusherwhich,if not medieval,is productionon theseslopes. probablyancientand perhapshintsat the natureof agricultural The otherthirteen occupythelowerslopesoftheNeogene,thoughin manyplacesit has been erodedto revealtheschistbasement.Thereis a tightgroupofsixsmallsites(J221, J223-4,J230, closeto themodernroad to Chrysapha,whichmay J316, J369)aroundthehillofPalaiópyrgos, This has probablyalwaysbeen a routebetween havelain close to a muchearlierpredecessor. theEurotasvalleyand theuplandplateau,and beyondto thesouthernextensionofthePárnon range, though in antiquityfollowinga ratherless direct course than at present. The in thefoothills ofsettlement and theapparentlack ofit on thelevelvalleyfloor concentration in two Sites in thisarea may lie deeplyburiedbeneath accounted for one of be ways. may alluvialand colluvialdeposits,butequallylikelythevalleyfloorwas avoidedbecauseoftherisk of the rivers,especiallyaroundthe of floodingfromthe Eurotasand Kelephina.The fringes ofthetwo,are in anycase likelyto havebeen marshyand unsuitableforhabitation. confluence The modernlandscapein thisarea is dominatedbyolivecultivation, thoughin therecentpast weremuchmorewidespread.In antiquity thisstretch ofland so closeto cerealsand vineyards and ofhighvalue,perhapsmainlydevotedto theancientcitymusthavebeen heavilycultivated oflabour-intensive suchas vegetablesand fruittrees. theproduction cropsrequiring irrigation, in mostpartsof the area is and continuous scatter The relatively observed high background a reflection of this intensive land whatever the mechanics ofitsdispersal.26 use, presumably The otherfoursitesin the westernsectoroccur in twopairs,the first(H29,H40) close to Geladári, the second (D96, D301) above the Eurotas gorge on the slopes of Vigies at the northern boundaryofthesurveyarea. Boththefirsttwolie above thevalleyfloorat thebase oftheschistslopesand spursthatrisein a massifto theeastand north-east. H40belongsto the of villas is a small farmstead Not farwestofthese (minimum 0.25 ha), H29 (0.08 ha). category twosites,in low groundin a bend oftheEurotas,is Geladári(H45).Thoughcertainly a large sitein latertimes,itsimportancein thisperiodis hard to estimate,as neitheritssize nor its function is apparentfromtheevidenceavailable.27 The twositeson thesouthand westslopes of Vigiesare both smallfarmsteads of moderatesize (0.06-0.08 ha) on schistsoils.D301 is close to the valleyfloor,withaccess to the alluvialsoils in the bend of the Eurotas.D96 is situatedon the steepermidslopesoverhanging the river.In both cases the proximity of the a as source of water and as the course of several main routes must have river, leadingnorth, been thecriticalfactorforlocatingthesesitesin an otherwise environment. unpromising 26See the discussionof off-site, scatters(pp. low-density 200-4 below). 27It was initiallyconjecturedthattherewas a perioikic settlement here,but thismustbe discountedon the basis of the survey.More likelyit was the locationof a large Hl-R

estatewitha smallerAr-Cl predecessor.Its locationin lowlyingground close to the riverwould anywayhave been foran Ar-Cl villageor smalltown.In LS ii. 357 it surprising is suggestedas thesiteofthesanctuaryofApolloPythaëusat Thornax,butthisis uncertain(p. 220 below).

i68 Chapter5 THE NORTHERN SECTOR IN THE LATER ARCHAIC AND EARLY CLASSICAL PERIODS

This sectortakesin theentirenorthern the partof the surveyarea betweenthehillsfringing Eurotasvalleyand theKelephina(zonesAC, E-G, mostofK; 27 sq km).It consistslargelyof steep,dissected,schisthillslopesdominatedto the northby the limestonemassifof Agios In spiteofbeingthelargestofthethreesectors,it containsonlytensites(11per Konstantinos. all but threeof which are located in the northernmost cent), part. At presentthe schist hillsidesare almostuniformly coveredby terracedolive groves,withdense maquis overthe uncultivatedareas and remnantsof oak forestat higheraltitudes;the limestonewithits is fitonlyforgrazing. maquisand gariguevegetation Betweenthe south-eastern and westernsectorsand the area aroundAgios Konstantinos and Sellasia in the north,thereis a large void of £.18sq km in which only threesmall farmstead sites(G157,K200,K203;0.01-0.04ha) withlate archaicto earlyclassicaloccupation wereidentified. One ofthese(K203)lies on thelowerslopesabove theflooroftheKelephina in and some valley respectshas morein commonwiththesitesalongtheedge oftheEurotas described above valley (e.g.K235,J219-20).K200 is situatedmuchhigheron the same south side of thisschistmassif.Its locationmay be explainedby the existenceof a nearbyspring, close to a laterRoman and Byzantinehamlet(K244-5).Gl57nes on me east-facing midslopes ofthismassif,witha springnearby.The existenceofa watersupplyseemsin boththesecases to havebeen a significant factorin thechoiceofsitelocation. The northernpart contains the two importantsites of Palaiogoulás (Ai18) and Agios Konstantinos(Bin). As alreadynoted,the firstof theseis mostplausiblyidentified withthe townofSellasia,knownfromancientliterary sourcesbutmostfamousforthebattlein perioikic in 222BC.28It occupiesthetopand all butthenorthslopesofa prominent itsvicinity schisthill, abovethefloorofa smallvalleyfringing theKelephinawithratherlimitedscopeforagriculture. A cemetery was perhapslocatedon the lowereast slopes(A120),as well as a smallsanctuary further down(A119), thoughneitherhas yieldedevidenceearlierthanthelateclassicalperiod.Its area is estimated at 3.0 ha, thelargesthabitation siteofthisperiodin thesurveyarea and more thandoublethesizeofthelargestoftheso-calledhamletsites,29 withthe thoughbycomparison in GreeceSellasiais extremely sizeofsmallcitysiteselsewhere small(seebelow). At Sellasia,potterythatcan be assignedto the late archaicand earlyclassicalperiodswas foundin fourofthefiveareas (Α-D butnot E) withthelargestquantityoccurringin areas Β but does notprove,thatthe sitereachedsomething (sixtypes)and C (fourtypes).It suggests, It mayalso be an indicationthatthere closeto itsmaximumsize at an earlydate in itshistory. was a deliberateact of settlementwhich broughtabout the occupation of a previously uninhabitedhillby a smallnucleatedpopulationof at mosta fewhundredpeople. There is certainly nothingto indicatea slowprocessof growthand expansionfromhamletto village, thoughexcavationwould produce a much more refinedimage than surveycan provide.30 Besidesaccessto waterin theKelephina,thesitealso has a perennialspringon theuppermost 28The sourcesare collectedin LS ii. 322. See conveniently also RE s.v. 'Sellasia'; Shipley,'"Other Lakedaimonians'", as Sellasiawas firstmade by 239-40 no. 28. Its identification W. K. Pritchett, 'The battleof Sellasia', in SAGT i (1965), 59-70,at 63-4. 29Itssizeseemsto havebeengreatly overestimated byW. K. 'The polis of Sellasia',in Studies Presented toSterling Pritchett, Dow on his 80thBirthday (Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Monographs,10;Durham,NC, 1984),251-4,at 253.

30 The only excavations to have been conducted at Palaiogoulas/Sellasia are those of Sotiriadis in 1910: G. Sotiriadis, "Ανασκαφαί εν xfj Λακωνική', PAE 1910, 277-8; id., 'Anti-Sellasia', BCH 35 (1911), 87-107, with Addendum,241-2. The resultshave neverbeen described in any detail,thoughhe claimed to have foundpotteryof date. 5th-2nd-cent.

Early Iron Age to classical period i6g

terraceofthehill.Fewtracesofancientstructures surviveapartfromprobableterracewallson theslopes.The remainsof a rubblewall aroundtheperimeter of the summit,and a dividing wall of similarconstructionacross the hilltop,may be ancient.31Unless it had a military functionconnectedto Spartan controlof one of the pointsof entryacross the northern it could have offered no morethanrefugeforthe inhabitants of the villageagainst border,32 it would not have afforded an as raiders; protection against invadingarmy, eventswereto show. Bui is the fortress some ha 6.0 on the top of Agios Konstantinos, the limestone covering massifdominatingthe horizonas one looks northfromSparta. (For a descriptionof the fortifications and theothervisibleancientremains,reference shouldbe made to thecatalogue ofsites.)33 Itsancientnameis unknown.34 On thereasonableassumption thatit servedSpartan ratherthanperioikicneeds,an a priorihypothesis mightbe thatsuch a fort,of an ostensibly defensivenature,would only have become necessaryat a time when Sparta's military supremacyand gripon the Péloponnèsewas lost.The obviousoccasionwould have been in the second quarterof the fourthcentury,followingthe defeatat Leuktrain 371 BC and to land attackfromthe Epameinondas'sinvasionsof Laconia, when Sparta's vulnerability northwas firstclearlydemonstrated. This appears to be contradicted by the archaeological evidence.Althoughimpossibleto date on architecturalgrounds,theremustbe a strong thatthe fortress and morelikelyin thelate presumption originatesat latestin the earlyfifth sixthcentury.35 in datingthe pottery, thereis Makingall due allowanceforthe difficulties for enoughto suggesta late archaicpresencein all sevenareas of thefortress, except area G whereonlytwelvesherdswerecollected.Whileclassicalwares,especiallyofthelaterfifth and fourth acrossthesite,theearliermaterialseemsto be concentrated on centuries, predominate thesummit(areaA, twelvetypes)and in areas C (fivetypes),D (fourtypes),and F (sixtypes)of the lowerenclosure.This impressionwas subsequentlyconfirmedwhen good qualitylate archaic-earlyclassicaltablewareswereobservedwheretreepitshad been dug alongtheinner faceofthenorthand north-west circuit,as wellas at otherpointsin theuppercitadel.Since it is unlikelythattherehad originallybeen a village or townsite thatby forceof changing circumstances was convertedintoa fortress, the inevitableconclusionmustbe thatit always had a military, defensivefunction.This does not necessarilyentail that the fortifications themselves originatein thisperiod,thoughtherewereperhapsoccasionsin thefirsthalfofthe fifth centuryforSparta to have occupieditselfwithfixedpointsof defenceagainsta threat fromthenorth.36 The prominent positionofAgiosKonstantinos mayalso havemade ita vital 31In LS ii. 321thecircuitwall is thoughtprobablyto be of recentdate. My own opinionis thatit is more likelyto be ancient,as remnantsof towersor bastionsare clearlyvisible in places,and so in agreementwithLoring,'Routes',59; G. Sotiriadis,'To πεδίοντης έν Σελλασία μάχης', BCH 34 (igio), 5 57^at 10; id., 'Anti-Sellasia' (n. 30), at 89-90, 93-5, 241-2;Pritchett (n. 28),64. 32In thiscontextit is noteworthy thaton twooccasionsin 405 BCAthenianembassiesweremetat Sellasia beforebeing turnedback or allowedto proceedto Sparta(Xen. Hell.ii. 2. 13, 19). It was also singledout forhard treatmentby the invadingarmyin 370/69(vi.5. 27) and, perhapsin 389, was raidedbytheAtheniangeneralChabrias(Polyaen.iii. 11.6). " LS ii. 325-8; see also Loring, 'Routes', 71-4. Commentatorsidentifiedit with Sellasia until Pritchett Pritchett recognizeditas a fortress: (n. 28), 63.

34Might it be identifiablewith the otherwiseobscure

Barnosthenes or Barbosthenes monsreferredto by Livy (xxxv. 27.

13; 30. 9)? Its distanceof 10 Roman milesΝ of Spartais not withsuchan identification. incompatible :*>5th-cent. potteryhad alreadybeen notedbyPritchett (n. 29)>251. 3()Gartledge,SL 199-222.Ioannis Pikoulasconsidersthat the northern border fortifications,of which Agios Konstantinos is one, shouldbe assignedto the 3rd cent,and more specificallythe reign of Kleomenes III (Pikoulas, 'Skiritis',145-6; Pikoulas,NMX 183-7;G· A· Pikoulas,'The desXIII Spartandefensenetworkof hellenistictimes',Akten Internationalen Kongresses für KlassischeArchäologie,Berlin ig88

(Mainz, 1990), 478). He proposes (pers. comm.) that the evidenceforearlieroccupationcould belongto a villagethat thatcarriesitsowndifficulties. precededthefort,a suggestion

170 Chapter5

As the northernborderof Spartiateterritory part of a systemof militarycommunications. assumesadded significance. its location musthavebeen in thisapproximate area, Two are The remainingfivesites(B103,B107,B121,C114,C169) are all smallfarmsteads. between the other three size aboveaverage (C114,0.09 ha; B103,0.07 ha), 0.03 and 0.05 ranging the close to foot of around the All are located ha. but one spring-line Agios Konstantinos, schistbasement.The two(B103,B121)on thenorth overliestheimpervious wherethelimestone recentand moderncultivation. basin(Vourliótikoi sideoccupya fertile Kámboi)withextensive are also in areas of lower and south-east slopesrespectively, B107and G114,on thesouth-west in on the remote G169is an outlier thisnorthern moderncultivation. area, midslopesabovethe an impassable,steep-sided gorge. Kelephinaat a pointwheretheriverpassesthrough whosesize (0.18ha) placesit Justto thenorthofthesurveyarea thereis a singlesite(A3014), fertile above the comparatively in the categoryofvillas.Its locationon the lowerfootslopes, valleyfloorof the Kelephina and also close to one of the main routesleadingnorth,may accountforitsexistence. PREFERRED SITE LOCATIONS

IN THE LATER ARCHAIC AND EARLY CLASSICAL PERIODS

thatanyone can be The factorswhichgovernedthechoiceofsiteare varied,and itis unlikely are likelyto have been influential: Some or all ofthefollowing seen as a singledeterminant. and accessto ofcultivableland and grazing,watersupply,aspect,shelter, security, availability lines of communications. Potentiallyof greatersignificancethan all thesevariablesin the are thosesocial and economicfactorsconnectedwithland ownership naturalenvironment and land use of the specificperiod whichrestrictedthe freechoice and behaviourof the all thingsbeing equal, it remainsa worthwhileexerciseto establish settlers.Nevertheless, seemto havebeen uppermostin oftheenvironment offeatures or combination whichfeatures site location. deciding ifnot all, of the sitesunderreviewwere On the reasonableassumptionthatthe majority, for with concerned preferences particularsoil typesmay be apparent. agriculture, primarily fromeach the of for the presentanalysis,itis assumedthattheland cultivated purposes Purely sitelay in the immediateenvironsof the place of habitation,thoughin realitylandholdings Withinthe surveyarea threebasic soil typespredominate.In may have been fragmented.37 sectorwithsomein thesouth-east), theseare schist(mostlyin thenorthern orderoffrequency in the red or beds of (entirely yellowclaysand conglomerate alternating Neogene,comprising in the derived soils are rossa the terra which from and south-east, (mainly limestone, south), 37It is generallyassumedthatthe standardGreeksystem of partitive inheritance (see R. Lane Fox, Aspects of inheritancein the Greekworld',in P. Cartledgeand F. D. to G. E. M. Harvey (eds), Crux:Essays in GreekHistoryPresented de Sie Croix on his yjth Birthday(Exeter and London, 1985),

208-232), fromwhich Sparta differedonly in allowing womenrightsof inheritance(Hodkinson,'Land tenure';id. 'Inheritance,marriageand demography:perspectivesupon thesuccessand declineofclassicalSparta',in A. Powell(ed.), Classical Sparta: Techniquesbehindher Success (London, 1989),

79-121), would have produced a pattern of fragmented landholdings.Such a patternis recognizedto have certain advantagesforthe survivalof subsistencefarmers:R. G. Osborne, ClassicalLandscapewithFigures:The AncientGreekCity

anditsCountryside (London,1987),37-40. This viewhas been

largelyon the basis of challengedby severalarchaeologists, survey evidence, who have found evidence that farms controlledconsolidatedblocksof land (Keller and Wallace (n. 22); Lohmann,Atene,224-9). Others have argued that in dispersedfarmsteads settlement onlymakessenseiftheir inhabitants had control of more or less consolidated landholdings(P. L. J. Halstead, 'Traditional and ancient ruraleconomyin MediterraneanEurope: plus ça change?', and JHS 107(1987),77-87,at 83-4; S. E. Alcock,J. F. Cherry, practice,and the agricultural J. L. Davis, 'Intensivesurvey, classical landscape of Greece', in I. Morris (ed.), Classical Greece:AncientHistoriesand ModernArchaeologies (Cambridge,

1994), 137-70, at 147-8; Whitelaw,'Colonisation' (n. 22), 232-3). It has also been arguedthatpropertywas probably beforetheCl period:Osborne(n. 17),61. moreconcentrated

Early Iron Age to classical period 171

withtwomajoroutcropsin thenorth).In additionthereare smallalluvialdepositsalong the coursesof the Eurotasand Kelephina.The poorlyformedschistsoilsin areas of highrelief soilsofthe fertile ofthenorthern sector)contrastwiththecomparatively (thelargeproportion Eurotas and lower found the fringing glacis and the associatedcolluvialdeposits,mostly Their water-retentive and Kelephinavalleysas wellas theenvironsof ancientSellasia (A118). givethema markedadvantageoverthe arid and ratherheavy easilyworkablecharacteristics limestonesoils,and theysupporta vigorousnaturalvegetationof maquis and oak at higher altitudes.In recentand moderntimestheyhave mainlybeen cultivatedwitholives.The Neogenedepositsare onlycultivablewherethe claysare accessible.No cultivablesoilsoccur theclays whosenaturalvegetationcomprisesonlygarigue.By contrast, on theconglomerate, soilssuitableforall crops.The limestoneis theleastattractive for water-retentive formfertile, an arid and barrenappearancewithmuchbare rockand vegetation cultivation, presenting rossaand confinedto smallpocketsofsoil. Onlytheweatheredproductsofthelimestone{terra breccia)offerscope forcultivation;thesepredominatein the Chrysaphabasin,wherethey of cultivatedwithcerealsand vines.The disadvantages have in recenttimesbeen extensively to work(stickywhen wet,friableand terrarossaare thatit tendsto be stonyand difficult crackedwhendry). Whenthesurveyarea was colonizedin thelate archaicperiodtherewas a generalbutnot sitesout absolutepreference foroccupyingsiteswithaccess to the Neogene clays.Forty-nine of eighty-seven (56 per cent)wereestablishedin suchlocations.In termsof siteclassification out of sixty-four smallfarmsteads thisfigurecomprisesthirty-seven (58 per cent),nineout of seventeenvillas (53 per cent),and threeout of the fourhamlets.This preferenceby itself in the south-eastern accountsforthe concentration of settlement sectorand the southern A in thenorth sites the Eurotas observed. number of of sites, along already particularly string cornerof the south-eastern locatedalong thejunction sector,seem to have been deliberately theirlocationmightbe seen as an oftheNeogeneand limestone.As thisis not a spring-line, maximize the for arable culture on the to scope attempt Neogene soilsin combinationwith on the limestone mountainside. The concentration ofsitesat thenorthern end ofthis grazing stretch ofterraincan be accountedforbytheproximity oftheSophrónigorgewithitscopious perennialstream,whereanimalscan be watered.Modern shepherdswithmandrasin much the same locationsas the ancientsitesconducttheirflocksdown a verysteep path to the bottomofthegorgeon a dailybasisin summer. Nineteensitesoccur on the schist,withanotherfouron the interfaceof the schistand limestone(26 per cent).Onlyfiveofthese(all smallfarmsteads) werelocatedon theschistsoils in theextensive areasofhighreliefin thenorthern sector(C114,G169,D96, G157,K200),and in mostcases the existenceof a convenient watersupplymayhave been the decisivefactor.Of the remainder, elevenoccupythe colluvialsoilsand the glacisderivedfromthe schistalong the Eurotas and lower Kelephina and around Sellasia. Consideringthe relativelylimited extentof these deposits,such soils mustbe consideredto have been equally if not more attractive thantheNeogeneclays.Moreover,theyare hometo theonlysiteoftownsize (A118), besidestwovillas(H40,J213)and eightsmallfarmsteads (B103,D301,H29,J219-20,J316,K203, K235).Two moresmallfarmsteads (T484,U3003)are locatedon the northand westedgesof the Chrysaphabasin,wherethe schistand limestoneare in closejuxtaposition.In the same area fourmoresitesoccupytheexactjunctureofthetworocks,notablyincludingone ofthe fourhamlets(U494),twovillas(T471,U499),and one smallfarmstead(R294).In all six cases, these locations may have been chosen not only to take advantage of the potential for withgrazingbut also foraccess to water.Wherespringsdo not occur, combiningcultivation

172 Chapter5

of wellsoverthe schistin can easilybe tapped by wells;the proliferation the ground-water recenttimesis clearproofofthispotential. themajorityin theChrysaphabasin. Fifteensites(17per cent)are foundon thelimestone, theprevailingschistsare replaced where of the Fouroccurat thenorthern surveyarea, edge not a of Agios Konstantinos, is the fortress of these One a of limestone. hard (Bin) cap by not it was a have hosted it settlement permanentgarrison.However, properthough may either for its immediate its survival,probablybeing supplied surroundings dependentupon fromSparta or fromnearbySellasia. The otherthreesites occur at the marginsof the limestoneterrain.Two small farmsteads(B107,B121) on the lower west side of Agios rossasoilsat thefootof on thebetterdevelopedterra liejust abovethespring-line, Konstantinos the area A the the hill. villa site outside footslopejust above the (A3014)occupies surveyed and the colluvial soils both alluvial deposits derived fromthe Kelephina valley,where a sector three In south-eastern limestoneare available. the sites, villa (S433)and two small of farmsteads (S434,T443),occupythe lowerslopes Phournara,not farabove the Neogene. Althoughtheirimmediatesurroundshave a degraded appearance, the colluvial deposits collected at the footslopehave attractedcereal cultivationin recenttimes(now entirely abandoned).The othereight,includingthreeoutsidethe surveyarea, lie in the Chrysapha basin,an area dominatedby cerealsin recenttimes.Two (U471,U490) are villa sites,therest smallfarmsteads (T512,U493,U531,U3001,U3022,U3024).Most are in the lowerpartof the basin where the colluvial deposits from the surroundinghills have formed a deep accumulationofsoil.The one smallsite(U493)on theupperedge ofthebasinis situatedclose to thejunctionwiththe schistand mightbetterbe classifiedwiththe othersitesfoundin a similarsituation. In conclusion,it can be statedthat therewere threepreferredsoils of cultivation,the colluvialdepositsofschistand limestonesoils.The formeris Neogeneclaysand therespective in the most abundant far the area, thetwolatterbeingoflimitedextent.Locations survey by of the limestoneand schist,were also favoured. at the junction normally along spring-lines, the areas of upland schist,whosedense natural to marked aversion a there was Conversely, obstacleto agricultural oak and deciduous of mayhave been a formidable vegetation maquis mountainsides limestone the bare Likewise Agios (Koutsoviti-Phournara, expansion. of for extensive unless had no and attraction, grazing Ilías, Konstantinos, Skoura) Prophítis if that few first at this terrain sites on of total absence The and any sight suggests goats. sheep but withmodernparallelsin mind farmerswere exclusively engagedin animal husbandry, as evidenceof such activities, to survive be can traces no expected virtually archaeological if not all, seem to have been flocks. their from if resided the herders Most, away especially involvementin animal with small-scale arable with farming,perhaps primarilyoccupied found the sites be this to The alongthejunction may generalization husbandry. onlyexception sector. ofthelimestoneand theNeogenein thesouth-eastern it goeswithoutsaying,is essentialforthesurvivalofanyhuman Provisionofa watersupply, and the cultivationof certaintypesof crops.38However, animals as for as well community, meansforsecuringstoresofwaterin locationswhere are various there rainfall, givenadequate naturalsources(rivers,streams,and springs)are lacking.In antiquitythiswas mostoften achievedby the collectionof rainwaterin cisternsor pithoi,or in the case oflargetownsby the piping of water for storage in urban reservoirs.Where other considerationswere 38See Island Polity,98-103.

Early Iron Age to classical period 173

or conditionsofland tenure),watermighthaveto be acquiredon paramount(suchas security a regulardailybasisfroma distantsource.Laconia's comparatively highannualrainfallis not with more on the west side than the east.39The surveyarea is evenlydistributed, precipitation therefore drierthan the lush west side of the Eurotas valley,whichlies in the shadow of accentuatedby the abundanceof perennialstreamsalong Taygetos.This contrastis further the westernedge of the plain, fedwithlarge volumesof waterfromTaygetos,and by the ofsuchstreamsin thesurveyarea and theirmuchlowervolumes. relativescarcity Exceptforthoseareas closeto theriversEurotasand Kelephina,whichprovidea perennial supplyof water,the distributionof naturalwater sources is likelyto have had a strong influenceon the distribution of ancientsites.In the precedingaccount of the settlement pattern,thejuxtapositionof sitesto watersourceshas oftenbeen observed.Apartfromthe tworivers, theonlyotherperennialstreamrunsthroughtheSophrónigorge.Its inaccessibility made it oflimitedvalue to the settlements on the Neogeneplateau,and itsimportancemay have been more forwateringflocksgrazed on the surrounding mountainsides.The other naturalsuppliesconsistof springswhosewatersnormallyforma streamfora shortdistance beforedryingup. These are foundquitewidelyin the schistareas and along the spring-line betweentheimpervious schistand the overlying limestone.Althoughthe schistuplandswere generallynot exploitedin this period, the few sites existingin this terrainwere almost invariablylocated close to perennial springs(G157,K200). Spring-linesites are more numerous.As alreadyobserved,theyoccur around the base of Agios Konstantinos(B103, B107,B121,C114)and on the peripheryof the Chrysaphabasin (U493-4). Springsin the Neogene zone occur at pointsofjunctionwiththe basementschist,but are comparatively scarce. Combinedwiththe evidentpreferenceforthe Neogene claysforcultivation,their locationsmay have had a markedimpacton the distribution of ancientsites.Competing in cultivableland and watersupplyseem to have favouredthelatter,withthelikely interests consequence that some or all of these siteswere involvedin cultivationof land at some distancefromtheresidential base. The springat AgiosGeorgiosin theLoutsoremaseemsto havebeen at thecentreof a largeclusterof siteson eitherside ofthevalley(R275-7,S431-2, S437-40,S458-9, S508-9, S523, S527),and musthave been of criticalimportanceto their survival.Likewisetheextraordinary clusterofsevensites(N183-5,N187-8,N193,N314)on the dissectedplateaualongthe southedge ofthe surveyarea shouldprobablybe associatedwith thespringin theKastororema.It is one ofa numberthatoccurin thesedeeplyincisedvalleys intothe Eurotasvalley;twomoreare foundin thevalleysbehindAphysou,which emptying sites(M322,M354).The same mightaccountforthelocationof perhapssuppliedtwooutlying anotheroutlierin an inhospitablelandscape (M503),close to the springsaround Agioi Saranda. Sitesin theChrysaphabasinmusthavereliedon wellssuchas thosewhichcurrently exist,unless therewere streamsin the watercoursesfed by the springsaround modern Chrysapha;at presentthe bulk of thiswateris piped to the villageor storedforwatering animals.The villagesiteof Sellasia (A118),as wellas beingclose to theKelephina,also had a springwithinthesite.That itwas inadequatefortheneedsofa villagepopulationis indicated by theexistenceofat leastone cisternon the south-eastside ofthehill.For theoccupantsof thefortress on AgiosKonstantinos (Bin) provisionofwaterpresentedmuchgreaterproblems, the limestone of the site.Althoughthereare springsaroundthebase ofthehill given geology whichcouldbe used in ordinarycircumstances, itwas essentialto have a securesupplywithin 39See Chapter1,p. 11.

174 Chapter5

This was providedby at leastone wellin theupperenclosure thecircuitofthefortifications. and one cisternin thelower,thoughmoredoubtlessexisted. OVERVIEW OF SETTLEMENT

IN THE LATER ARCHAIC AND EARLY CLASSICAL PERIODS

When viewedin the contextof developmentsin otherpartsof Greece, the growthin site numbers,especiallyamongthe smallercategories,thathas been documentedforthe survey area in thisperiodcan be seen as partofa widerphenomenonofsettlement expansionin the in was now that In manyintensively areas it the sixthcentury. surveyed dispersalofsettlement if the hamlets even the of and and farmsteads small majority populationin (both began, large) nucleated sites. This was the to inhabit the area continued to prelude theclimaxof large any that is so and settlement widelyattestedforthe fifth perhapspopulationgrowth, expansion, in and west(such as Achaia, the of the north and fourthcenturies,though upland regions Aitolia,Epeiros,and Macedonia) thisdid not occuruntilratherlaterin thefourthand third centuries.40 Includedin thisphenomenonare someofthoseregions(suchas south-east Attica) in thesecond where,likeour surveyarea, therehad been littleor no expansionofsettlement The evidenceseems to indicatethat,as in halfof the eighthcenturyor in the seventh.41 in thesecondhalfof thesixth numberswas concentrated Laconia, theincreasein settlement if not at its veryend. Thus in Boiotia, wheretherehad been no increasein site century, The same patternis smallsitesbeginto proliferate.42 numberssincethe late eighthcentury, Keos and perhapsin the Nemea valley,and is also attestedin colonial foundin north-west all thoseregionsthat Significantly, regionssuchas Metapontionand Krotonin SouthItaly.43 dominancein theclassicalperiod(Laconia,Attica,and Boiotia)seemto roseto supra-regional settlement haveexperiencedsignificant pattern growthat thisdate.That itwas nota uniform in areas such as the is shownby the ratherlater,fifth-century expansionof ruralsettlement of Karystosin southernEuboia.44In the southern Methana peninsula and the territory a have been more there seems to steadyincreasein the quantityof smallruralsites Argolid witha markedriseoccurringin thefifth.45 and sixth the seventh centuries, (< 0.4 ha) through from a there had been in where those areas precociousgrowthofruralsettlement Conversely, the eighthto earlysixthcenturies(theBerbativalley,Melos, and Thera) thereis a marked in thenumberofsmallsitesat thistime.46 contraction However,whiletheexpansionofrural themall in itsscale and in oursurveyarea has parallelsin otherregions,itoutstrips settlement more settlement was of rural the Elsewhere gradual,buildingto a climaxin growth intensity. in a Laconia it reached whereas and fourth thefifth centuries, peak at theverybeginningand, fromas earlyas the secondhalfofthefifth as willbe seen,was radicallydiminished century. The exceptionalnatureof the late archaicto earlyclassicalphase in our surveyarea, and perhaps in otherparts of Laconia, stronglyimpliesthatlocal pressureswere behind the explosionofruralsettlement.

40See Bintliff, 'Regionalsurvey',12-14. 41Lohmann,Atene, 121-3. 42Bintliff and Snodgrass,'BoeotianExpedition',139. 43 LandscapeArchaeology, 247-54, 328-37; Wrightet αι., 'Nemea', 610. In the latterthe broad term'archaic'is used, leavingit uncertainhow sitesshouldbe datedwithina period morethan200 yearslong.S. Italy:Carter(n. 22),106-16. 44Roughand RockyPlace,57-9; D. R. Keller and M. B. Wallace, 'The Canadian Karystia Project', Classical

Viewsl'Échos du mondeclassique,30 (1986), 155-9; nd. (η. 22);

Cherryand Davis (n. 10),21Q-20. 45Greek 548-9 withtableΒ.2. Six sitesin the7th Countryside, cent,increaseto 9 in the6th,beforenearlydoublingto 17in the5th. 46Berbati:Ekroth(n. 9), 213, 225. Melos: Wagstaffand in 1980. Cherry(n. 9), 143-4.Thera: author'sfieldwork

Early Iron Age to classical period 175

The Classical

Period

(cA50-c.300 bc) theclassicalera is definedas theperiodbetweenthe end ofthe Persianwar Conventionally in 479 and thedeathofAlexanderthe Greatin 323. While it is not our concernto question thevalidityofthischronologicaldivisionin the contextofLaconia, wherethe dates 370/69 in observingits and 338 had a much greaterimpact,thereare considerabledifficulties boundaries.At theupperend,untilmuchmoreis knownofthe sequence ofLaconian plain black-glazed wares at the end of the archaic (£.525-480 BC) and the beginningof the in distinguishing classical periods (c.480- 450 BC) therewill be considerable difficulties It is forthisreasonthata largenumberofsiteshave been betweensitesofthetwoperiods.47 dated as late archaicto earlyclassical.Thereforein the presentcontext,wherea classical phase of use is indicatedit is generallybased on culturalmaterialthoughtto be laterthan the mid-fifth century.At the lower end there are similar difficultiesin distinguishing betweenthe latestclassical and the earliesthellenisticceramics,especiallyamong survey material,and it is likelythatat least some of the latterhas been treatedas late classical. When combinedwiththe widerproblemssurroundingthe chronologyof late classical to wheretherehas been a generaldowndatingof late classicaltypes earlyhellenisticpottery, into the early third century,allowance should be made for a significantdegree of imprecisionin the datingof sites.48In thisrespectthe divisionbetweenthe two periodsis likelyto fallcloserto 300 thanto 325. In spiteofthesedifficulties it is clear thatmajor changesoccurredin the classicalperiod. These may be summarizedas being a sharp reductionin the total numberof habitation sites (ILL. 5.3, TABLE5.2) and a tendencyto increased site size, perhaps reflectingthe nucleation of the rural population, and a decisive shiftin the preferredlocations for settlement, perhapsmarkinga concomitantchange in agriculturalpracticesand priorities. habitationsitesof the late archaic period (includingthe earlyclassical), The eighty-seven almostexactlyby a half,in the 150years coveringabout 100years,are reducedto forty-six, of the classical period. The sharpestdecline is in the numberof small farmsteadsites, reducedfromsixty-four to twenty-seven; of the total havingformednearlythree-quarters Within this (74 per cent) theynow constituteless than two-thirds (57 per cent). category therealso seemsto have been an increasein site size, perhapscorresponding to a general enlargementof the survivingfarmsteadsand the evolutionof a standard architectural design forfarmhouses.Whereas in the late archaic period more than two-thirdsof the farmsteadsites(forty-four, 69 per cent)fellin the lowerhalfof the size range,< 0.07 ha, with nearlya quarter (fourteen,22 per cent) having an area of 0.01 ha or less, in the classicalperiod thisproportionhas been reduced to less than a half(eleven,44 per cent) withonly two sites (8 per cent) as small as 0.01 ha. This increase mightreflectnothing more than developmentsin the architectureof Laconian farmhouses,but could also be equated withthe demiseof the poorerfarminghouseholds.The numberof villa sitesalso sees a markedreduction,fromseventeento ten,but as a proportionof the totalnumberof sitesit remainsalmostconstantat 23 per cent(itwas 20 per centin thelate archaicperiod). Concurrentwiththe demiseof the farmsteadsis a risein the numberof hamletsfromfour to seven (16 per cent, compared with5 per cent previously).They may be individually 47These problemshavebeen discussedat LS ii. 34-5.

48 See S. I. Rotroff,HellenisticPottery: Athenianand Imported WheelmadeTable Ware and Related Material (The Athenian

Agora,29; Princeton,NJ,1997),18-36,fordiscussionof the fixedpointsin HI ceramicchronology.

176 Chapter5 LS no:

zone

size (ha)

Bi Ai

3-0

Large Sites(2)

Bin A118

villas(7) Hamlets/large

U511 U516 R281

U519 U494 H31 U491

6.0

U2 Ui

1.81

R3 U4 Ui H2 Ui

0-75 0.60

1.08

0.50 0.44 0.40

Villas/clustersof farmsteads(10) D85/95 M328 U499 H40 H34 P271 S437/440 U490 P261/264 R421

D3 M4 U2 H2 H3 P2

0.31 0.28 0.27 0.25 0.21 0.20

S4 U3 P2

0.20

R3

0.15

Single farmsteads (27) U3 U3022 U4 U520

0.20

o.i5(c.)

O.II O.II

J369

J6

0.10

M2

0.10

J2I2

J2

0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08

BIO3 h6o

B2 Hi

J3i6

J5 K3 S4 G2

0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06

M172

J231 R526 U506

J5 R4 U4

K235 S523 G159 C169

C4

K141 S431/432 U500 J22I Π47 R282

K3 S2 U4 J5 F2

R3 U2

U496 T465 U3024 J220

T3 U3 Ji M4 Ni

M325 N409

0.05 0.05

0.05 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 O.OI 0.01 O.OI

date

slope(degrees)

LAr-EHl LAr-EHl

L S

Gl-Hl Cl-R LAr-Hl Cl-Hl LAr-Hl Cl LAr-Hl

L/S L Ν L L/S S L

Cl-Hl LAr/ClByz LAr-Hl LAr-ClByz Cl Byz LAr-Cl LAr-LCl EH LH LAr-R Cl Cl

S Ν L/S S S Ν Ν L Ν N/S

22

LAr/Cl EH Cl-hl LAr/ClByz Cl-Hl Cl-HlByz Cl LAr-LCl Cl LAr-LCl Cl-Hl LAr/Cl LAr-Cl LAr/Cl Cl-Hl LAr-LCl LC1-H1LR LAr-Cl EH Cl Byz LAr-LCl Cl-Hl Cl Cl LCl-hl LAr/Cl LAr/ClhlR LAr-LCl EC1

L L Ν Ν S Ν Ν L S L N/S S

9 7

Keytosoil types

L Ν S

soiltype

limestone Neogene schist

Table 5.2. Siteswithclassicaloccupation,orderedin descendingsize.

■

Ν

S S S Ν L Ν S Ν L S L S Ν Ν

6 10

6 6

9

11

3 5 ι

3 1

6 1

5

11

5 4

II

2 1

5

10 2

7 3 J3 8 7 11

J5 l9 8 20

8 l5

25

9 8 l3 2

9 3

22

Early Iron Age to classical period Α11ίΓ)ϋtA'119

/"h60

;

V/k

^L, aH4° ^

X' X)

/$ M

y^

if

J

ξ' ^*'(

J '

I

/'· <^U//ÍX s/V V H31

_y

J<

^7/f/s!L, .-"; f^

^

Í vu? ^^

J220^·^

Ç H34./^ Cn

'

'^y ^^"^^

(1

{

AM328

•

:V^C$

W ■ ·■

DFarmstcad

* Large sanctuary 0 Shrine/small sanctuary

x Spring

C^^*^s' °

N430^^^) j/N*P264(

C {Ç^/J/f

V

f M325

# Hamlet,clusteroffarms a *vula%largefarm

/i Π

<>J215 ••••..•-^••N41^3^N409 J231 0 Q ά«*316f C?*5*

'

■ Largesite(village, fort)

(

/Κ

^- v^^^

r7^^^

[ ff

{

'

^vO^

f

U

'

«

' Vi '

8523π''

^L )R42HD I AS437


/

I

^)

·■'/--*

U499

' '

^'

· 4ΛΙ491 W· 1U500 D U496V^^ - Ο ' ' D

/ ^J '*S 0

i

'_

- -I

t

-1 ',.:,,,

I

5000

U519 r^ USOóXà^ U520
Z3 Metres

III. 5.3. Classicalsites(D. Taylor).

^'^/

177

178 Chapter3 listed:U491 (0.40 ha), H31 (0.44 ha), U494 (0.50 ha), U519 (0.60 ha), R281 (0.75 ha), U516 (1.06 ha), U511(1.81ha). withinthe survey As in the late archaicperiod,the classicalsitesare unevenlydistributed sectorremainsthe mostdenselyoccupied (twentyarea. In raw numbersthe south-eastern three sites,52 per cent) but with a pronounced shiftfromthe Neogene plateau to the Chrysaphabasinand to sitesofa largersize.All butone ofthesevenhamlets,and fiveofthe eightvilla sites,are situatedin thissector.At the same timethe westernsectorseems to withonlya slightdeclinein theoverallnumberofsites(fifteen, increasein importance, 34 per and a cent) higherproportionof farmsteadsitesthan elsewhere(ten).The northernsector but is otherwise retainsthetwolargestsitesof Sellasia and AgiosKonstantinos verysparsely inhabited(fourfarmsteads). THE SOUTH-EASTERN

SECTOR

IN THE CLASSICAL

PERIOD

sectorcontinuesto be thearea withthelargestnumber As alreadyobserved,thesouth-eastern notablechangesfromthesituationin thelatearchaicperiod. ofsites.Therewere,however, The Neogene plateau, where there had been several distinctclustersof sites in the precedingperiod, was now largelydeserted,especiallyin its northand west parts. The group of eleven sitesat the head of the Loutsoremaalmostcompletelydisappearsand is neverreoccupiedwiththe same intensity. Only two possible sitesremain. Of these,one (P261/264)was shownby bulldozingfollowingsamplingto fallwithinthe villa size range and may representthe growthof an earliersite in the same location (P262). The second (P271)has a definitelate archaic componentwithonly slightevidenceforcontinuityinto theclassicalperiod.An even moredrasticpictureofsitedesertionoccursamongthegroup offarmsteadsiteson the dissectedplateau (N183-5,N187-8,N193,N314,N354).None ofthe eightshowsany sign of survivalinto the classical period,thougha new farmstead(N186) may have been establishedin the same area at the end of the fourthcentury.Not until Byzantinetimesis a similarlevel of occupationreestablished,and then foronly a short period.There is a similarbut less dramaticreductionin the numberof sitesborderingthe centredon the springat Agios Georgios. southernend of the Loutsorema,hypothetically All the siteson the lower slopes of Phournara are deserted,leaving only the threesites closestto the springas survivorson the east side of the valleyand no new sitesto replace those abandoned. One of these is a villa (S437/440),anothera farmstead(S431-2),while the date of the third(S523)is doubtful.On the westside, everyone of the groupof seven sites noted fortheirsize and materialprosperitywas deserted.Only at the hamlet and farmsites on the ridge tops to the south (R281 and R526 respectively)does habitation continue.Two new sites appear close to R281: a farmsteadon the ridge top (R282 with R283)and a villa at thefootofthe ridge(R421)at thejunctionoftheNeogene depositsand the schist,wherewatercould easilybe extracted.Otherwisethe pictureis one of further desertion:the threesiteson the ridgesouthof R281cease occupation,as well as twoin the low-lyinggroundto theireast,withoutany new sitereplacingthem.Witha fewexceptions the majority of sites on the Neogene plateau are continuations of settlementsfirst establishedin the late archaic period (seven out of nine). The distinctclusteringof sites thatmarkedthelate archaicsettlement patternis muchdiluted,but at the same timethere is no expansion of settlementinto areas previouslyunoccupied. As such, the classical settlement patternmaybe characterizedas a muchcontractedremnantof itspredecessor. With the withdrawalof settlementfromthe Neogene plateau, the settledregionsof the

Early Iron Age to classical period 179

Eurotas valley and the Chrysapha basin became clearlydemarcatedby an intervening uninhabitedlandscape. In thezone ofschistthatoccursbetweentheNeogeneplateauand theChrysaphabasinno sitesoflate archaicdate had existed.This statecontinuedlargelyunchangedin the classical However, period,at facevalue indicatinga deliberateavoidanceofthesesoilsforagriculture. date makesan the presenceof one farmstead(T465)of late classicaland perhapshellenistic offarmsteadsitesontothe schistsoils the encroachment interesting exceptionin anticipating in thehellenistic and Romanperiods. fromthaton theplateau.Here the The situationin theChrysaphabasinwas verydifferent but is markedby the appearanceof a numberof numberof sitesremainsconstant(thirteen) implyinga substantialgrowthin the populationof thisarea. Out of the largersettlements werepermanently latearchaicsites,sixfarmsteads thirteen deserted,whileone villasite(T471) abandonedin the classicalperiod of the area seemsto have been temporarily on thefringes or evengrowthis foundat all theotherlarger and reoccupiedin thethirdcentury. Continuity thehamletU494,thevillasU490,U491,and U499(thesecond sitesand someofthefarmsteads: oftheseapparently U3022and U3024where growingfromvillato hamlet),and thefarmsteads new sitesappear:four occupationintotheclassicalperiodseemslikely.Besidesthiscontinuity, threenew hamlets(U511;U516, farmsteads (U496,U500,U506, U520) but more importantly U519).At or near threeof the fivehamletsites(U491,U511,U516)thereis mainlyhellenistic; also evidence for cult activity(see below), suggestinga small measure of communal organizationand cohesion,whilethereare veryslightindicationsof cultat two of the villa sites(U490, U499). The probable existenceof two largercult sitesat Phagia (U3002) and adds further (U3001),locatedoutsidethe area intensively surveyed, Pikromygdalia weightto with some thenotionthatin thelate archaicand classicalperiodsa relatively largepopulation ofcommunallifedevelopedin the Chrysaphabasin,thoughnot so far ofthebasic attributes ofthe as to lead to theemergenceofa centralplace. It is morethanlikelythattheinhabitants desertedsettlementson the plateau were absorbed into the new and largersites of the Chrysaphabasin and that,althoughthe patternof settlementwas greatlychanged, the sectormayhavebeen fairly stable. populationofthesouth-eastern withthisshiftofsettlement intotheChrysaphabasintheremusthavebeen a Concomitant changein theagricultural landscape.WhiletheNeogeneclaysoftheplateauwerenotentirely and abandoned, allowingforthe likelihoodthattheycontinuedto be exploitedfrommore distantresidential centres,it is clearthattheycannothave been as intensively exploitedas in thelate archaicto earlyclassicalperiods.However,all thesitesin whatmaybe consideredas moremarginallocationsat thejunctionof the limestoneand Neogene were deserted.The soilsin theChrysaphabasin,whosedryand stonycharacteristics limestone-derived havebeen noted in the previoussection,are much bettersuitedto the cultivationof cereals (mainly barley)and vinesthanto treesor vegetables,and it is reasonableto presumethatthesecrops werethemainconcernofthearea'sinhabitants. Withthe shiftin settlementtheremustalso have been a change fromdependencyon springsforthesupplyofwaterto wellsand cisterns.Whilethe springsat thenorth-east edge of the basin may have satisfiedthe waterrequirements of some sites(e.g. U494),theywere probablynotadequatefortheenlargedpopulationofthearea. Those situatedon thejunction ofthelimestoneand schist(U496,U499,U511)could havetappedthegroundwaterwithwells, and thesame methodwas perhapsemployedin thelowerpartsof thebasinwherethe schist basementunderliesthevariousweatheredproductsofthelimestone(brecciasand terra It rossd). is possibleto speculatethatcompetition forthelimitednaturalwaterresourcesoftheNeogene

i8o Chapter5 factorin its desertionand the plateau by an increasingruralpopulationwas a contributory relocationofthepopulationin theChrysaphabasin. THE WESTERN SECTOR IN THE CLASSICAL PERIOD

theeast side oftheEurotasvalleysees a lesspronounceddeclinein site As alreadyremarked, in sitesproduceevidencefordefinite or probable numbersthan thetwootherregions;fifteen in occupationin theclassicalperiod,comparedwithtwenty thelate archaicto earlyclassical. in particular, is less extreme(fromsixteento ten), The declinein the numberof farmsteads, in ofsettlement whilethenumberofvillasremainsmoreor lessconstant.The greaterstability theland is notonlyofhighqualitybutlies withintheimmediate thissectoris notsurprising; thatthe one siteclassifiedby size as a catchmentof Sparta.There are groundsforthinking smallhamlet(H31;0.44 ha) mayhavebeen a villasiteofexceptionalsize and materialwealth. SouthoftheconfluenceoftheEurotasand Kelephina(includingone sitejust to thenorth) thereare six certainsitesof thisperiod (J212,J221,J231,K235,M172,M325)and fourmore whereclassicaloccupationis suspected(J220,J316,J369,M328).Exceptforone villa(M328),all As in thepreviousperiod,theyforma moreor lesscontinuousstringalongthe are farmsteads. betweentheKelephinaand theMenelaion.A similarbutless low schistand Neogenefoothills markedclusterof foursites lies along what was probablythe line of one of the routes road) connectingSpartaand theEurotasvalley (equivalentto themodernSparta-Chrysapha oflate archaicdate, withtheNeogeneplateauand itshinterland. Amongthesmallfarmsteads were deserted. The three seven others six at mostshowevidenceforcontinuing occupation; size are all of than farmsteads established (0.08-0.10 average (J212,J231,M172) larger newly ha). At the same time,it is perhapsno coincidencethatthe two smallestsitesof thisperiod to Spartaundoubtedly (J220;M325,0.01 ha) shouldbe locatedin thisarea, whoseproximity influenced thecharacterofitssettlement. In the area to the northof the confluenceof the two riversthereare fivesites,one more fromthepreviousperiod;the thanin theprecedingperiod.Only one (H40)showscontinuity restare new.They all lie close to the riverand are forthe mostpartspaced at moreor less ofone to one and a halfkilometres. Only one oftheseis classifiedas a small regularintervals main of habitation whose farmstead period.The rest mayfallin thehellenistic (h6o), period are probablyall villas:H34(0.21ha), H40 (0.25ha), D85/95(0.31ha), and H31(0.44ha). One of sitein the same locality. of a preexisting an enlargedcontinuation theseperhapsrepresents The inhabitants of D96 (0.06 ha) on the southside of Mt Skoura,desertedin the previous period,mayhavemovedsome200 m to thelargersiteD85/95,whoseoccupationbeganin the classicalperiodand continuedperhapsuntilthesecondcenturyThese sitesoccuron or close to the schistsoils.Three of thevillasare situatedon the terracesjust above thevalleyfloor, alluvialand colluvialsoils,whilethe farmsteadstandson the withaccess to well-developed limestonecloseto thejunctionwiththeschist.This zone seemsto havebeen one ofincreasing soilsin levelgroundfor are theexistenceoffertile affluence at thistime.Amongitsattractions the of water an inexhaustible cultivation, supply, availability perennialgrazingin theriver-bed of ofSpartaas thecentralplace,and theeasyaccessibility forcattleand horses,theproximity withintheEurotasvalleyand withmoredistantplaces theprincipallinesofcommunications in and outsideLaconia. THE NORTHERN SECTOR IN THE CLASSICAL PERIOD

and relatively This partofthesurveyarea,withitsprevailingschistformations highaltitudes, dominatedin itsnorthernmost had in theprecedingperiodbeen an area ofsparsesettlement,

Early Iron Age to classical period 181

partby the two large sitesof Sellasia (A118)and Agios Konstantinos(Bin). In the classical period the numberof siteswas reduced fromten to six. The two large sitescontinuein existenceand perhapsreachtheirgreatestextentduringthelaterfifth and fourth centuries. The southernhalfof the sectorcontinuedto be largelydevoid of settlement. The three farmsteads whichhad existedin thelate archaicperiodwereall deserted.Theywerereplaced by threenew sites(F147,G159,K141),all on a smallscale (0.03-0.06 ha). G159was situated about 400 m fromone of the desertedlate archaicfarmsteads theremay (G157),suggesting have been a relocationof the residentialcentre;both siteswere occupied in the hellenistic firstoccupiedin thelate classicalperiodand period.K141had a longhistorybeingapparently survivingthroughthe hellenisticuntil late Roman times. Like one of its abandoned predecessors(K203),it is situatedat the southerntip of the schistmassif,not farfromthe settledfootslope theSpartaplain,and anticipates theincreasing of thickly fringing importance thearea in thehellenistic period.F147is situatedin theLangáda valley,in a ratherinaccessible and remotepositionwhereno settlement had existedin the previousperiod. It is an area devotedto oliveculturein recentand moderntimes. The northpartofthesectorsees a markeddropin thenumberofsites,withall but one of the small farmsteadslocated around the base of Agios Konstantinosdeserted.No new farmsteads are established.The survivor(B103)ls m tnefertile basin ofVourliotikoi Kamboi. in thearea and, likeΒ103,originatesin thelate archaic Site C169is theonlyotherfarmstead a later period.Its remotelocationhas alreadybeen noted.TogetherwithF147it prefigures in places distantfromthemainlinesofcommunications, trendforthelocationoffarmsteads sites,theymay especiallyin theschistuplands.Assumingthattheyare permanentresidential reflect an increasedpreoccupation withself-sufficiency on thepartofsomeofthepopulation. The declinein the numberof sitesin thisarea need not be translatedintoa declinein the local populationor a large-scaleabandonmentofcultivation. Increasinginsecurity throughout the fourthcenturyin the districtson the northernbordersof Laconia is likelyto have discouraged settlementaway fromthe town sites, where protectionwas affordedby fortifications and/orgarrisons.The townof Sellasia (A118)could easilyhave absorbedthe inhabitantsof these earlier sites. Nor should it be ruled out that the fortressof Agios Konstantinos(Bin) acted eitheras a place of residenceforsome farmersor as a place of in timesofdanger. forpeopleand property, refuge, As faras can be determined fromtheevidencecollectedby thesurvey, thetownof Sellasia seemsnot to have experiencedany majorgrowthin the classicalperiod.Potteryof thisdate coversmuchthesame area as thatofthelate archaicperiod,withthemajorityfoundin areas Β (eleventypes)and C (six types).If not fortuitous, the absence of any diagnosticclassical in D area is pottery noteworthy49 perhapsindicatingsome contractionof occupationat the south-west of the site. This edge may have been compensatedforby slightexpansionat its in north-east the late classicaland hellenistic edge (area E) periods,an area wherethereis no of earlier Overall the of classical sign occupation. quantity potteryis ratherlarger,but thisis as a much reflection of the duration of the perhaps longer period as any increasein the or extent of habitation. the flat hill of the would certainlyhave been density Although top suitableand largeenoughto accommodatesome sortof civiccentre,perhapsa smallagora and temple,thereare no materialsignsforthe developmentof any communalor adminin theformof a towncultor publicbuildings.However,theirabsencecan istrative functions 49Area D has evidenceforLAr-EC1 and HI occupation.

i82 Chapterj

only remainhypotheticaluntiltestedby excavation.The earliestevidenceforuse of the occursin the fourthor third cemeteryon the north-east slope (A120),the steleof Hybrion,50 the is to have existed from the site's earliestphaseofoccupation. centurythough cemetery likely It has been arguedabove thatthefortress ofAgiosKonstantinos was establishedin thelate archaicperiod,perhapsat theend ofthesixthor,lesslikely, thebeginningofthefifth century. The surfaceremainsindicatethatitsmostintensive periodofuse was in theclassicalperiod, and fourth centuries. ofthisperiodoccursin everyarea ofthe probablyin thelatefifth Pottery siteexceptforG. The majoritycomesfromareas A (seventypes),D (ninetypes),and F (five in areas Β (threetypes),C (threetypes), types),whiletheperiodis moremodestlyrepresented Ε in and (one type).Two coins one of Sikyon,found area A beforethe survey, and one of in This evidenceforincreasing Elis,foundin area G- are bothofthefourth century51 activity the classicalperiodmakesexcellentsensein termsof Sparta'schangedcircumstances in the whenitsdecliningmilitary fourthcentury, and the emergenceofrivalpowersin the strength In a muchgreatereffort on providing forthedefenceofitsterritory. Péloponnèsenecessitated thiscontextthe stringof northernborder-forts, whichbesidesAgios Konstantinosincludes thoseat Athenaionon Mt Chelmós,Leuktron(modernLeondári),and a site near modern Kollines in the Skiritis,52 musthave assumed an increasinglyimportantrole in Spartan defensive strategy, especiallyas thecityof Spartaremainedunwalleduntilthethirdcentury.53 in It remainsunclearwhetherand in whatway thefortress was developedand strengthened thisperiod.As previously remarked,thereare late archaicto earlyclassicaltracesin all but one area ofthesite,butitcannotbe shownthattheupperand lowercitadelswerebothwalled to explainthe existenceofthetwocomponents, it could be so early.As a workinghypothesis that the was a later addition to an fort around lower citadel 500 and argued original dating thatthe mostlikelyoccasion forsuch an extensionwas the timeof Sparta's deteriorating ifnotlikelihood, The possibility, situationin thesecondquarterofthefourthcentury. military in thethirdcentury, in thatthereweresubstantial modifications particularly thelocationand formof the towers,mustalso be remembered.Whateverthe case, fromthe earlyfourth century,if not before,there was probably a permanent garrison stationed at Agios whichcould communicatewiththe otherfortsin northernLaconia as well as Konstantinos in timesofheightened and could be reinforced insecurity. Sparta PREFERRED SITE LOCATIONS

IN THE CLASSICAL PERIOD

In theprecedingperiodthesoilsfavouredforcultivation wereforemost theNeogeneclaysand to a lesserextentthe colluvialsoilsderivedfromthe schistand limestone.Accessto natural and rivers)also seemsto havebeen a significant factorin site sourcesofwater(springs, streams, In theclassicalperiodthereis clearevidencefora changein preferences locationand clustering. as a in thenumberofsites.It maybe summarized whichaccompaniedthegeneralcontraction in themarkeddecreasein theabsolute oftheNeogenesoils,reflected declinein theimportance numberand proportionof siteslocated on or close to them.At the same time,the greater 50LSii. 214no. 2. 51LSii. iq6, sf 115. 52Athenaion: Loring, 'Routes', 71-4; Pikoulas, NMX 115-17,183.Leuktron:ibid. 131-5, 183-4. Kollines:Pikoulas, 'Skiritis',140-1. 5SOn the historyof Sparta'sdefences,see A. J. B. Wace, 'The citywall', BSA 12 (1905-6),284-8; id., 'Excavationsat

Sparta,1907:thecitywalls',BSA 13(1906-7),5-16),as wellas F. Bölte in RE s.v. 'Sparta', cols 1355-60; Cartledge and Spawforth,26-7, 71, 78, 94, and mostrecentlyKourinou,

Σπάρτη,57-62.

Early Iron Age to classical period 183

for thattheirattractions soilssuggests in thenumberofsiteson theschistand limestone stability enhanced. have been and not diminished were significantly may agriculture sites,roughlyone-third (32 per cent),occuron Neogene soils,to whichtwo Only fourteen theNeogeneand schistmaybe added. The declinein thenumberofsiteson morestraddling sites deserted.Thirty-six or virtually withsomeareas entirely theNeogeneplateauis dramatic, the two in archaic and of the late six have their of which to are reduced eight, period, origins of a late archaic the continuation well one new settlements may represent (P261/264,R282) (P262).A thirdnewsite(R421),on thejunctionoftheNeogeneand schist,seemsto predecessor schistsoils.Amongtheeightare a hamlet, havebeen situatedto takeadvantageofthelow-lying theEurotas of theplateaufringing On theNeogenefootslopes twovillas,and fivefarmsteads. from thirteen to six, less extreme, valley,the reductionin the numberof sites is much on the junctionof the harmonizingmore withthe overalllevel of decline.One site (J316) bothtypesofsoil.Two ofthesites(J231, M172)are new, Neogeneand schistcouldhavecultivated fromthepreviousperiod.All butone (M328)are farmsteads, theremainder beingcontinuations and mostoftheseare ofsmallsize (0.01-0.04ha). In thisarea, so closeto Sparta,it is unlikely withthedeclinein site in thearea undercultivation thattherewas anyreduction corresponding workedfromSpartaas fromsmallsitessituatedin it. It couldbe almostas effectively numbers. There is muchgreaterstability amongthe siteslocatedon the schistsoils.Here thereis a modestdeclinefromeighteento thirteensites(30 per cent,a relativeincreasefrom relatively to above (J316, R421)on thejunctionwiththeNeogene,and two 25 per cent).If thosereferred are takenintoconsideration, more(U499,U511)occurringon thejunctionwiththelimestone, in thedistribution ofthesesites Nevertheless is further reinforced. thisimpression slightshifts in theseareas as well.The schistmassifin thenorthern sector are signsofchangedpreferences sees a declinein thelow levelof occupationthathad existedin thelate archaicperiod,from tento fivesites.The desertionofall butone ofthesitesaroundthefootofAgiosKonstantinos does not necessarilyreflectthe abandonmentof cultivationin the surroundingarea. As in thelesssecureconditionsofthefourthcenturythepopulationmayhave alreadysuggested, relocated itselfat Sellasia, fromwhere this territorywas easily accessible. A growing forthe colluvialsoils at the marginsof the schistmassifis seen in the increased preference numberand size of the sitesalong the Eurotasvalleyand at the mouthof the Kelephina,a in the hellenisticperiod. Besides these,one site (h6o) on the trendwhichdevelopsfurther limestonelowerslopesof ProphitisIlias was well situatedto exploitthe colluvialschistsoils below.Finally,a singlesite(T465)appearson theschistridgeseparatingtheNeogeneplateau fromthe Chrysaphabasin, where none had previouslyexistedbut where in subsequent smallsitesbecamemorecommon. centuries in thelate Thirteensites(30 per cent)occuron the limestonesoils,comparedwithfifteen an insignificant reductionin absolutenumbersand a marked archaicperiod,representing increasein relativeterms.Of these,one is the fortofAgios Konstantinos(Bin) and another havebeen locatedto exploitthecolluvialschistsoilsalongthe (h6o) may,as alreadysuggested, Eurotas.The remainingelevenoccur on the limestonesoils in and aroundthe Chrysapha basin,and withthemshouldprobablybe includedtwosites(U499,U511)on thejunctionofthe limestoneand schist.While the rocky,limestonemountainsidesremain uninhabited,a considerablenumberof sitesare situatedwithimmediateaccess to the soils on the lower proportionofthelargersites slopesand thefloorofthebasin.Amongtheseare a significant classifiedas hamlets(U491,U494, U511,U516,U519).The increasedpopulationimpliedby thesefigureswas mostlikelyengagedin the cultivationof cerealsand vines,forwhichthe limestonesoilsare mostsuited.

184 Chapter5 In the classicalperiod the importanceof a naturalwatersupplywould appear to have become a much less significant factorin the choice of site location. The clustersof sites aroundsprings,especiallyon the Neogene plateau,disappear.Simultaneously the available naturalsourceswouldhavebeen unableto satisfy theneedsoftheincreasednumberoflarger sitesin some of themorearid areas,thoughformanysitestheriversEurotasand Kelephina musthave remainedthe primesourceof waterforhuman and agricultural purposes.This must have been the of artificial means forstoring change development accompanied by rainwater or tappingtheground-water. OVERVIEW OF SETTLEMENT

IN THE CLASSICAL PERIOD

As a phenomenonof the classicalperiod,probablyno laterthanthe secondhalfof thefifth the decline in the numberof ruralsettlements, especiallyamong the categoryof century, is something farmsteads, peculiarto our surveyarea and demandsan explanationwithina increasein thenumberofmediumand large local context.Combinedwiththeproportionate fromintensivesurveyis sites,it sets it apart frommost otherregionswhere information the fifth and fourthcenturieswitnessa widespreadincreasein available.Almosteverywhere In someofthemoremarginal in theformofisolatedfarmsteads. ruralsettlement, particularly theonlyone,whenthereis areas,thisappearsto havebeen one ofthefewperiods,sometimes For southernand centralGreece in general,the climaxof evidenceforancientsettlement.54 ruralsettlement is reachedat thistime,oftencontinuingin the earlyhellenistic periodand followedby a long period of decline in the later hellenisticand earlyRoman periods.55 For example,in the Argolidthe thereis stillconsiderableregionalvariability. Nevertheless, dramaticgrowthin sitenumbersdoes not occuruntilthefourthand thirdcenturies, though In as such from the fifth some substantial increases thisis prefigured areas, century.56 by ofrural betweentheefflorescence southernArkadiaand Messenia,thereis a clearcorrelation Likewise the sharp settlementand radical alterationsin local political circumstances.57 on Melos,one ofthefewplacesto experiencedeclineratherthan reductionin ruralsettlement growth,is best understood in the context of the eliminationof its population and its replacement by an Atheniancleruchyin 415 BC,itselfexpelledtenyearslaterin 405.58In the absenceof intensivesurveydata fromotherpartsof the region,it cannotyetbe determined whetheror not the collapse in rural settlementattestedin our area occurredthroughout Laconia. At the margins,preliminaryindications fromKythera seem to suggest that coursefrominlandLaconia, withrural on the islandfolloweda ratherdifferent settlement sitesnot occurringin numbersbeforethe classicalperiod and no indicationsof any major Likewisein theThyreatisand in thepatternofsettlement century.59 duringthefifth disruption :>4Notablyin S. Euboia, in marginalland in the territory of Karystos:Keller and Wallace (n. 44); iid. (n. 22); Cherry and Davis (n. 10), 219-20. Other examples are S. Attica (Lohmann,Atene,126-248) and upland Chios (SimandoniBournia(n. 22); Lambrinoudakis (n. 22), thoughat thelatter occupationcontinuedintoHI. 55Bintliffand Snodgrass, 'Boeotian Expedition', 139; LandscapeArchaeology, 32Q-33.

5<)Roughand RockyPlace, 62-73; A. Penttinen, 'The Berbati Limnes archaeological survey:the classical and hellenisticperiods', in Wells withRunnels,BerbatiLimnes, 229 83, at 229,271;Greek 381-94,544-5 tableB.2. Countryside,

57S. Arkadia:Pikoulas,NMX 231. Messenia:Davis etai, 'Pylos Γ, 456-7; S. E. Alcock, A. Berlin, S. Gerstel, Α. Harrison,S. Heath, N. Spencer,and D. Stone, 'The Pylos RegionalArchaeologicalProject,partIV: historicMessenia, forHesp. to lateRoman',in preparation geometric s8 Wagstaffand Cherry(n. 9), 143-4; Bintliff, 'Regional survey',10. 59C. Broodbank,'KytheraSurvey:preliminary reporton the 1998 season', BSA 94 (1999), 191-214, at 213 14; C. Broodbankand A. W. Johnston, pers.comm.

Early Iron Age to classical period 185

seemsto is fromextensivesurveyruralsettlement wherethe onlyinformation itsperiphery, in classical haveincreased the period.60 Evidence

for Site Continuity

and Discontinuity

of is markedbyextremediscontinuity in thesixthcentury established The patternofsettlement mid-sixth from the in numbers siteoccupation.Manyofthesiteswhichappeared such century lessthan100years,perhapstwoto shortduration,lastingin all probability wereofextremely at thislevel, Whilethepotterydoes not allowmuchrefinement of a family. threegenerations can be there betweenlate archaicand earlyclassicalis oftenhardto make, and thedistinction littledoubt thatthe majorityof sitesdid not survivelong afterthe mid-fifth century.This patternof abandonmentis mostextremeamong the bottomcategoryof ruralsites.Of the late archaic-earlyclassicalsitesnotedabove, nine (M194,M322,N312,P268,P278, sixty-four century, T512,U531,U3003,U3006)did notsurvivebeyondtheend ofthesixthor theearlyfifth whileanotherthirty-nine centurybeforebeing may have continuedas long as the mid-fifth out ofsixty-four, ofthetotal(forty-eight deserted.Three-quarters 75 per cent)weredesertedby out of ofcases (forty-one ifnotearlier.In thevastmajority thesecondhalfofthefifth century, there these Besides record of or had no sites these occupation. subsequent previous forty-eight) is in classical the date whose terminal sites are a further uncertain, period (13 per cent) eight someor all ofwhichmaynot have outlivedthefifth centuryOnly fivesitescan be shownto intothe continueintothefourth J221, M325,R526),noneofthemsurviving (B103,C169, century occurs for hellenistic evidence sites At three hellenistic occupation (C114,G157,J219) period. thatall but one of these afteran apparentbreakin thelaterclassicalperiod.It is noteworthy long-livedfarmsteadsare located eitherin the northpart of the surveyarea or in the low sector the east side of the Eurotasvalleyclose to Sparta.The south-eastern groundfringing most areas the and the basin, denselyoccupiedin the Chrysapha comprising Neogeneplateau totalbreak in the an almost have to seems late archaic settlement experienced explosion, sites farmstead small of (theexceptionbeingR526). occupation is less extremebut stillsevere.Of the seventeenvilla Amongthe largersitesdiscontinuity of the sixth the end is deserted one sites, centuryand six more(44 per centin total)share by withfourothersdesertedat some uncertain the same fatebeforeor soon afterthe mid-fifth, six sites thatmakeup theremainder(U490,U491, of the On three in classical the period. point of an unbroken is there sequence occupationinto the hellenisticperiod,one (U490) U499) into late antiquityand another (U491) showing signs of significant apparentlylasting is foundafteran At two (J213,T471),hellenisticresettlement in this phase. enlargement was deserted The sixth in later classical the bytheend ofthe (S437/440) period. apparentgap the two ranked as four sites the Even fourth hamlets, (P272, largest;S524)were among century desertedbythesecondhalfofthefifth However,theothertwo(R281,U494)continue century. two largesites(A118,Bin) continueintothe The to be inhabitedintothe hellenistic period. in immuneto the factorswhichcaused so muchinstability thirdcenturyand wereevidently of Geladari is true the same its Whatever otherpartsofthesettlement nature, (H45) hierarchy. ofone sortor anotherlastingintolateantiquity. withactivities Discontinuitycontinuesto be a featureof the later fifthand fourthcenturiesand the transitionto the hellenisticperiod,if not quite as dramaticas before.Among the greatly 60Phaklaris, Κυνουρία2110-29,s^tesat Marmarálona,Tarmíri,Lépida, Koutrí,and Lákkes.

i86 Chapter5 are continuations oflatearchaic-early fewerthanhalf(thirteen) reducednumberoffarmsteads, Of intothehellenistic none ofwhichsurvives classicalpredecessors, period. theotherfourteen and five more newsites,one (N409)is desertedduringthefifth Q231,R282,U496,U500, century sector.Six oftheeight all butone ofthemin thesouth-eastern U506)by theend ofthefourth, in sectors.A the west or northern are located siteswhichcontinueintothe hellenistic period a number of whichlast the noted has been of among largersites, greaterdegree longevity already the ten classical of fromthe late archaicintothe hellenistic villas,mostare period.However, the preceding from four that continued desertedby the end of the fourthcentury, including It is a had the new classical villas of one new and three sites;only longerhistory. (D85/95) period of the one with of is a hamlets that in of only greaterdegree stability found, only thecategory the hellenistic to last into a seven(H31,itself period. probably largevilla)failing is to be expected among small sites,where the establishmentand While discontinuity is likelyto havebeen governedin partby individualfamily ofruralinstallations abandonment in ourpartofLaconiawhen extreme itsoperationseemsto havebeenunusually circumstances,61 In surveyedregions. Boiotiathereseemsto have been comparedwithmostotherintensively of Likewisein northern in theoccupationofsmallsites.62 muchgreaterstability Keos, continuity The sameapplies occupationfromthelatearchaicto theend oftheclassicalperiodis normal.63 to the farmsestablishedin southernAtticafromthe late sixthcenturyuntiltheiruniversal was in Even on Melos,whereruralsettlement abandonmentearlyin the hellenistic period.64 theclassicalperiod,continuing occupation through gradualdeclinefromthelatersixthcentury was verylargelyconfinedto siteswheretherehad been an earlierGeometricand/orarchaic is foundon the Methana peninsula,especially A greaterdegreeof discontinuity presence.65 is stillgreaterthanin Laconia.66 sitelongevity amongsitesin themarginaluplands,butgenerally itsseverity In thesouthern Argoliditis foundin a moreacuteform,morecloselyapproximating therathergradualincreasein of occupationhad characterized in Laconia. Whereascontinuity morethanhalfof sitenumbers century duringthearchaicand classicalperiods,inthelaterfourth a numberofvillagesites,weresuddenlyabandonedand replacedby a massof these,including More mostofwhichdo notlastbeyondthemid-third smallto mediumfarmsteads, century.67 of in marginalland in the territory burstof ruralsettlement dramaticstillis the short-lived in fifth the later no more than century.68 years twenty-five Karystos, perhapslasting one findswhatappearsto be a general In attempting to accountforthesevaryingpatterns, and stability correlation and, on the other,the steady between,on the one hand,continuity thereis an apparentcorrelation increasein sitenumbers(as in Boiotiaand Keos). Conversely, between discontinuityand instabilityand the sudden burstsof settlementgrowththat characterizeour part of Laconia in the late archaic-earlyclassical period, the southern is The degreeof instability and Karystosin the late fifth. Argolidin thelate fourthcentury, increasedwhenmuchoftheland beingsettledis ofmarginalquality,as in thecase of further our area, partsof Methana, and Karystos.The prospectsof long-termsurvivalforlarge enhancedin regionssuchas Boiotiaand Melos,where weregreatly numbersofsmallfarmsteads was of farbetterquality.Also the economicor demographic theland availableto the settlers 61T. M. Whitelaw,'The of recentrural ethnoarchaeology settlementand land use in northwestKeos', in Landscape 403^54. Archaeology,

62BintlifFand Snodgrass,'BoeotianExpedition',139. 63Whitelaw.'Colonisation'(n. 22),22Q-30. 64Lohmann,Atene, 136-84.

65Wagstaffand Cherry(n. 9), 143-4. 66Roughand RockyPlace, 66-q, 74. 67 ClrppkCmmtrvKinp. q8t-q

QO/i

68Kellerand Wallace (n. 22; n. 44); Cherryand Davis (n. 10),219-20.

Early Iron Age to classical period 187

pressuresthatgave rise to theseburstsof site expansionare likelyto have been specificto shortduration.In thespecificcase of Laconia,wherethereis a particular periodsofrelatively betweensmallsitesizeand increasedlevelsofdiscontinuity, it roughly proportionate relationship is tempting to adduce the exceptionally smallsize of manyof the farmstead sitesas a further factor. Evenwhenallowanceis madefortheeffects oferosionon theappearanceof contributory sitesin some of the moreunstableNeogenelandscapes,comparedwithothersurveyedareas ourscan be seento containan abnormally largenumberofsmallsites(< 0.1ha). Site Classification

and Function

In theprecedingsectionstherehas been a fundamental assumptionthatthe siteswithinthe area wereplacesofpermanent settlement concernedwith survey bya ruralpopulationprimarily Whiletherecan be no doubtthatthelargestsiteshouldbe classified as a village,and agriculture. whilethoserankedas hamletsprobablyconformed to thisassumption, itcannotbe automatically assumedthatthesamewas trueofthesmallersites.As partofthedebateoverthenatureofsuch sitesin otherpartsofGreece,ithas beenarguedthatin someregionstheyfunctioned as basesfor seasonalagricultural or as storehouses forproduceand equipment, but thatthevast activities, whethercities majorityof thepopulationlivedformostof theyearin nucleatedsettlements, in distinguishing The difficulties betweensitesofthiskind (πόλεις)or villages(δήμοι,κώμαι).69 and placesofpermanent residenceon thebasisofarchaeological evidenceare considerable, and itis possiblethatnotevenexcavation couldsatisfactorily settlethematter.70 The onlyavenueopen to us forassessing thebasiccharacter ofthesesitesand someoftherangeofactivities performed at themis to analysetheevidenceofthematerialassemblages. The categoriesof materialused forthisanalysisare the following. Tile, usuallythe most abundantartefact on sitesofthisperiod,is takento indicatetheexistenceofroofedstructures, froma shedto an extensivevilla.The potterydivides thoughthesemighthavebeen anything into three basic functionalcategories: table wares associated with the serving and consumptionof food and drink,wares connected with food preparation(cookingpots, 69Osborne has been the principal and most eloquent advocateofthisview:R. G. Osborne,Demos:TheDiscovery of ClassicalAttika(Cambridge,1985),15-36; id., 'Buildingand residenceon theland in classicaland hellenistic Greece: the contribution ofepigraphy', BSA 80 (1985),119 28; id. (n. 37), 22-5, 53-74, 113-30;id., Is it a iarmr lhe definitionof agriculturalsites and settlementsin ancient Greece', in Wells, Agriculture, 21-5. The notion has attracted wide criticism:e.g. J. Roy, 'Demosthenes 55 as evidence for isolated farmsteadsin classical Attica', Liverpool Classical in classical Monthly, 13 (1988),57-60; id., 'The countryside Greekdrama,and isolatedfarmsin dramaticlandscapes',in Shipleyand Salmon,HumanLandscapes, 98-118; M. Brunei, 'Contributionà l'histoire rurale de Délos aux époques classique et hellénistique',BCH 114 (1990), 669-82; id., 'Campagnes de la Grèce antique: les dangers du prisme athénien',Topoi,2 (1992),33-51; H. Lohmann,Agriculture and countrylife in classical Attica', in Wells,Agriculture, 29-57; Lohmann,Atene,136; R. Charre,M.-T le Dinahet, and V. Yannouli, 'Vestiges antiques de Rhénée', in R. dans les Dalongeville and G. Rougemont (eds), Recherches Cyclades:résultatsdes travauxde la RCP 583 (Collection de la

Maison de l'OrientMéditerranéen, 23, sériearchéologique, 13;Lyonand Paris,1993),123-42,at 131-2; Penttinen (n. 56), 278-9; J. Forsénand B. Forsén,'The polis of Asea: a casestudyof how archaeologycan expand our knowledgeof the historyof a polis', in CPC Papers4, 163-76,at 172-4.For a generalsurveyof agricultural buildings,see S. Isager and J. E. Skydsgaard, AncientGreekAgriculture: An Introduction (London

and New York,1992),67 82. 7(1Most cogently argued by Whitelaw ('Ethnoarchaeological study'(n. 22), 168-9; 'Colonisation'(n. 22), 230), for whom the distinctionbetween residential,whether seasonalor permanent,and non-residential sites(e.g. stores, animal pens, processing facilities) is of much greater in our understanding of the mechanicsof land significance use. However, see J. F. Cherry,'Regional surveyin the Aegean:the"newwave" (and after)',in P. N. Kardulias(ed.), BeyondtheSite:RegionalStudiesin theAegeanArea (Lanham, Md.,

New York, and London, 1994), 91-112, at 96-7, on the potential contributionof archaeological science to this debate. On the basis of soil chemistry, Bintliff (n. 8), 21-2, argues thatmost small ruralsiteswere probablyplaces of permanentratherthanseasonaloccupation.

i88 Chapter^ mortars, strainers, basins),and storagevessels(primarily pithoiand transport amphoras).Among the otherartefacts,loom-weightsdeservespecial attentionas primafacieevidenceforthe manufacture ofclothand also forthepresenceofwomen.Grinding-stones, stonemortars, and otherstonetoolsare also instructive as evidenceforactivities connectedwiththeprocessing of food.The widerthe rangeof categoriesat each site,the morelikelyit is thattheyrepresent residential wheretheyare considered In tobe ofshortduration. locations, permanent particularly thecase of thepottery, thenumberof typeswithineach categoryand the absolutenumberof sherdsmayalso serveas measuresoftheintensity of activity, thoughit is recognizedthatthese ofsurfaceconditions and sitepreservation. Atthesametime, figures maybe as mucha reflection an analysisofthiskindmayrevealspecial-function sites(suchas graves,stores,and workshops) of certaincategories of artefact. A basicworking is through atypicalconcentrations assumption thatthewidestrangeofcategories and thelargestnumberofexampleswouldoccuron thelargest and longest-lived sites,whilethe reversewouldbe expectedforthe smallestand shortest-lived sites.The detailsaresetoutinTABLE as follows. 5.3,buttheresults maybe summarized Boththelargesiteshavethefullrangeoffunctional witha notablevariety oftypes categories, and absolutenumbersof storagevessels.Weavingequipmentis foundat both,somewhat in thecase ofthefortofAgiosKonstantinos. Atall butone oftheninehamletsites,a surprisingly similardiversity occurs.Combinedwiththeirsize,it leaveslittledoubtthatthesewereplacesof a permanentresidence.The exception(U516)maybe explainedby itshavingbeen primarily hellenistic site,withonlylimitedoccupationin thelateclassicalperiod.Of theothereight,four LSNo.

Size (ha)

Date

Tableware

Foodprep.

Loom-

Storage

Stonetools

Tile

weights

no. of type types sherds Villages/forts(2) Bin 6.0 Ai 18 3.0

LAr-EHl LAr EH1

Hamlets/large villas (9)

U511 P272 U516 R281 S524 U519 U494 H31 U491

1.81 1.37 1.08 0.75 0.63 0.60 0.50 0.44 0.40

Cl-Hl LAr-ecl Cl-R LAr-Hl Lar-ECl Cl-Hl LAr-Hl Cl LAr-Hl

P271

0.31 0.30 0.30 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.25 0.25 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.20

Cl-Hl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr/Cl LAr LAr-Hl LAr-Cl Lar-ECl Cl LAr-Hl LAr-cl LAr-Cl

no. of type type sherds types sherds 8

48 25

126 33

13 9

16 18

4 7

12

30 13 6 31 36 8 5

69 28 6 62 81 9 9

13

21

4 2

7 3

9

I0

4

5

4 3 5 2

5 6

5 8

5 " 6 4

2

2

7

9

4

6

17 19

21

34

Villas/clusters of farmsteads(20)

D85/95 S458 S527 M328 R275-7 U499 H40 M347 H34 T471 P285

no. of types

l7

31

19

42

2

2

35

77

25 8

40 11

5

6

4 !3

6 l7

2

2

6 7

2

2

3

7 12 2

2

4

10 10

10

15

1

1

2

1

I

2

2 2 I

2 2 I

1

2

1

no. of types

total (près./ types abs.)

2 2

1

1

3

2

3

2 1 1 2

2

2

I

I

3

3

1

I

I I

I

2

1

1

I

3 9

5 "

I

I

I

I I

2 I

2

I

2

X X

X X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X X

Early Iron Age to classical period 18 LSNo.

Size (ha)

Date

Tableware

Foodprep.

Loom-

Storage

Stonetools

Tile

weights no. of

type sherds

no. of

type sherds

no. of

types

36 173 6

9

11

3

4 3

6

3

9 6

3

3

14 8

26 11

4 6

1

1

8

12

4

5 7 4

3

3

3 9 4 4 3 6

3 I0

1

1

4

5

3 1

3 1

2

I

I

1

I

2 I

2 I

I

I

1 2

types S437/40 U490 A3014 5433 J213 P261/4 R420 R421

0.20 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.15

LAr-LCl LAr-R LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-Hl Cl LAr-ECl Cl

Single farmsteads(78) lar N312 0.14 LAr-ECl J224 0.13 LAr-ECl 0.12 N314 0.1 1 LAr/Cl U3022 Cl-hl 0.1 1 U520 0.10 LAr/Cl J369 Μ172 0.10 Cl-Hl LAr-ECl 0.10 N354 LAr-Hl C114 0.09 Cl-Hl J212 0.09 LAr-ECl M171 0.09 LAr-ECl N185 0.09 0.08 LAr-ECl D301 0.08 LAr-ECl H29 0.08 Cl J231 0.08 LAr-ECl J230 0.08 LAr-LCl R526 Cl 0.08 U506 Lar-LCl B103 0.07 h6o Cl-Hl 0.07 LAr/Cl J316 0.07 LAr-Cl K235 0.07 LAr-ECl P274 0.07 LAr EC1 R294 0.07 LAr/Cl 0.07 S523 0.06 LAr-ECl D96 0.06 Cl-Hl G159 N188 0.06 LAr-ECl 0.06 LAr EC1 5434 LAr-LCl C169 0.05 LAr M322 0.05 LAr-ECl N503 0.05 LAr EC1 N184 0.05 LAr-ECl N187 0.05 P262 LAr-ECl 0.05 LAr-ECl R473 0.05 LAr-ECl R518 0.05 LAr-Cl S431/2 0.05 LAr-ECl S459/60 0.05 LAr-ECl 5508 0.05 lar EC1 U517 0.05 Cl U500 0.05 Β107 LAr EC1 0.04 G157 LAr-EHl 0.04 LAr-LCl J221 0.04 LAr-ECl 0.04 K203 Lar-ECl 5509 0.04

23 36 4 6 4

5 6

5 6 3 7 5 6 "

2

2

2

2

1

I

2 1

2 I

2

2

8

9 4

15

45 24 37

7 4

7 4

4

12 2 11

18

9 5 3 6 5 5 3 2

22 16 2

1

5 3 8 6 5 3 2

4

types

type sherds 3

1

I

I

I

2

I

I

I

I

I

I

1

I

I

2

1

2 1

4

2

I

2 1

I

2 I

I

1

I

3

2

2 2

2

5 17

17 4 14 8

3

24

2

2

2 1

2 I

17

25

40

5 8

7 8

7 13 9 5 4

7 33 15 9 5

2

2

3

5

1

1

2

2

9 5

1

1

1

3 3 3

11

1

4

2

2

2

1

3 2

10 11

types

2

4

5 4 11

total

types

2

19 2

2

no. of

2

II

I

I

17 7

16

21

8 20

13 38

I

I

3

5

I

I

4

4

5

8

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

ο

2

20

(près./ abs.)

2 I

I

1

6 I

I

3 I

I

I

X X X X X X X X X X X

igo Chapter5 LSMo.

Size (ha)

Date

Tableware

Foodprep.

Loom-

Storage

Stonetools

Tile

weights no. of types U493 B121

F147 P279 R282 T512 U496 U531 U3006 N183 P268 T443 T465 U3001 U3024 J219 J22O K2OO M194 M325 N409 N193 P273 P286 P278 R427 S442 T484 U3OO3 J223 R461

0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 O.OI O.OI O.OI O.OI O.OI O.OI O.OI O.OI O.OI O.OI O.OI O.OI

LAr-ECl LAr-EGl Cl-Hl LAr-ECl Cl LAr Cl LAr LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr Lar-ECl LCl-hl LAr-ECl LAr-Cl lar-ehl LAr/Cl LAr-ECl ear-LAr LAr-LCl EC1 LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr LAr-ECl Lar-ECl LAr-ECl LAr LAr-ECl LAr-ECl

10 7 3

8 8 15 3 6

*3 8 10 2 3 7 13 3 3 7 13 12

3

type sherds

14

16

no. of type type sherds types sherds 1 10 2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

4

4

3

3

I

I

I

I

3

3

5 4

6 4

I

I

I

I

2 2 1

2 2 I

2

2

2

2

no. of

total

types

types

3

5

11 10 24 3 7 25 18

13 3 3 9 28 3 5 8 27 15

6

7

12

6

8

3 12

4 15

4

no. of types 6

4

2

1

5 2

2

1

1

1

1

2

I

I

1

I

2

2

I

I

7

2

1 I

2 I

3

3

I 2 3 3 8 4 19 4 6
(près./ abs.)

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

in theclassicalperiod,haveall thefunctional sites(H31,S524,11511, U519),threeofwhichoriginate stone tools. occursat twooftheremainder (R281,U494) Weavingequipment categories, including whichmight and a thirdhas stonetools(U491).The lastsite(P272)lacksboththesecategories, function belowforitand itscloseneighbour accordwellwiththespecializedpastoralist suggested (P285).In mostcases thereis a diverserangeof tablewares,cookingwares,and othertypes different as well as storagevessels.On average,twenty-nine associatedwithfoodpreparation, of this to ceramictypesoccuron sites sherdsattributable ceramictypesand fifty-three class, between variationfromsiteto site.Thereis no obviouscorrelation thoughthereis considerable thesequantities and thedurationoftheiroccupation,as is shownby thecase ofS524.This site inhabited forlessthanone hundredyears,yetitproducedthegreatest was short-lived, apparently reflects ofpottery and quantity varying types.It is perhapsmorelikelythatsuchdiversity diversity levelsofprosperity amongsitesofthisclass,thoughdue allowancemustalso be madeforvarying fromsiteto site. surfaceconditions on thetwenty villasites.Theyare at Rathergreatervariationis foundamongtheassemblages is fromthevillageand hamletsitesbythefactthatthefullrangeofcategories once differentiated sites(65 per cent). neverfoundto occur.The threemainceramicgroupsare foundon thirteen two stonetools,suggesting thata Four of theseproducedweavingequipmentand a further was carriedout at thesesitesto thatperformed at themajority of comparablerangeofactivities

Early IronAge to classicalperiod 191 thehamlets.Fiveofthesesites(D85/95,R275-7,S437/440,S458,U499)also yieldedan impressive ofceramictypes,comparableto whatoccurson therichesthamletsites.A rangeand quantity be assumedto rankwiththisgroup;itsrichassemblageis in sixth(U490)cannotautomatically of the more intensive a reflection strategy adoptedforsamplingthesite.This finding largepart of at least some of thisclassofsiteas theresidences ofwealthy tendsto supporttheinterpretation estates.R275-7is a prominent whenitsshort families locatedon theircountry example,especially tableamphoras,and The numberofcraters, durationis takenintoconsideration. cups,hydrias, morethan leaveno doubtthatthiswas something othershapesassociatedwithdiningceremony to Sparta,producedonlytable Two sites(H40,J213),bothin closeproximity a simplefarmstead. waresand threemoresites(R420,S433,T471)failedto produceanyevidenceforstorage,though The case forregarding these weavingequipmentand stonetoolswerefoundat twoofthelatter. as placesofpermanentresidenceis weaker,especiallywhen sites,thetwoformerin particular, combinedwiththe relativepovertyof the ceramictypesand theirquantities.On average sherdsattributed to types U490),seventeendifferent potterytypesand twenty-seven (excluding fromtheaverageisverywide. occuron sitesin thisclass,thoughvariation There is a clear differencebetweenthe threeprecedingclasses of settlementand the sites.On all but one (R473)thepresenceof tileindicatesthe existenceof a roofed farmstead fewhave all threeceramicgroups,let alone the full structure or structures. Comparatively occur on twenty-one out of seventy-eight sites(27 per of functional They categories. range smaller than the villas. These sitesare not a twenty-one cent), significantly proportion among between the three main sectors. the northern sector is the most distributed Although evenly in five of its eleven farmsteads this The mostlikely settled, (45 per cent)belong group. sparsely in lies their remote where for were fewerand locations, opportunities exchange explanation Elevensites access to local marketswas limited,placinggreateremphasison self-sufficiency. (43 per cent)by tablewaresand (14 per cent)are represented onlyby tablewares,thirty-two and eleven used for food (14 per cent)by tablewaresand storagevessels. preparation, types betweentheseoccurrencesand sitesize.Ten ofthesiteswithall three There is no correlation ceramicgroupsare 0.04 ha or less (threebeingamongthe smallest,0.01 ha). Some of these also havea largevarietyand numberofpotterytypes,equal to or greaterthantheaveragefor thevillas(notablyN503,P262,R526,S431-2,S509,T512,U493,U506),suggesting thataffluence and prosperity werenotconfinedto thelargersites.The concentration ofsitesofthistypein thesouth-eastern sectoris also noteworthy. On farmstead sitestheaveragenumberofceramic is the total of sherds attributed to average types 9.6, types14.On fiveofthesiteswithall three ceramicgroups,eitherweavingequipment(D96, U493) or stonetools(P279,R526,U506) are also present;bothare foundtogether on twomoresites(S509,U520)whereone oftheceramic is Their occurrence lends furtherweightto the belief that these were groups missing. residential sites.Overall,weavingequipmentis foundon eightsites(10 per cent),stonetools on nine(10 per cent).Loom-weights are notfoundon any sitesmallerthan0.04 ha, and are associated with at least two of the functionalceramicgroups:two (D96, U493), as always have all and three each have tablewaresand storagevessels(J230,M171, three, alreadynoted, or table wares and used for food preparation(K235,N188,S509). Stone tools U520) types ha occur on sites of or with a fewon sitesas smallas 0.02 ha (P279,S509, more, 0.07 mostly in With one occur association with at least two of the ceramic U3024). exception,they three as have all three,four(P274,S509,U3022, (P279,R526,U506), alreadynoted, categories; have table wares and used for food and one (U520)has tablewares U3024) types preparation, and storagevessels.The one exceptionis theunusualsiteB103,whichhas an impressive array offinewaresbutno cookingwaresor pithoi.In total,thereare thirty sites(39 per cent)where

192 Chapter5

eitherthe fullrange of ceramic categoriesor two ceramic categoriesand eitherweaving equipmentor stone tools are found.These are likelyto have been residentialsites.The elementof chancein surfaceretrieval, and the likelihoodthatcertaincategoriesof relatively value as and stonemortars)were removedin antiquity, high (such pithoi,grinding-stones, that this should be taken as a minimum suggest figureand thatsome, if not most,of the sites were of the same status. The same typeof siteassemblageshave remainingforty-seven been observedin otherintensive and haveled to a similarconclusionthatmostsitesof surveys thiskindare likelyto havehad a residential whetherpermanentor seasonal.71 function, The argumentforbelievingthatin the majorityof cases thesesitesshouldbe regardedas theirinhabitants' primeplace of residenceis strengthened by our knowledgeof thepolitical and socio-economic conditionsthatexistedin archaicand classicalLaconia. Althoughurban residencemay have been obligatoryforthe Spartanélite,who may also have been barred fromagricultural work,forthe restof the populationthe politicaland social advantagesof For the Spartanélitetherewere livingin the citywereweakerthanin manyotherregions.72 both economicand securitybenefitsin havingthe helotswho workedtheirland settledin notonlydid itallowan intensive but dispersedfarmsteads; agricultural regimeto be practised, it also reducedtheriskofrevolt.Fromthehelotpointofview,residenceon theland mayhave been compulsoryand would have affordedtheirbest chance of materialimprovement. The rest of the free,landowningpopulation, both perioikoi and inferiorSpartans,who were excludedfromtheranksofthepoliticalélite,mayhavebeen similarly motivatedto pursuethe economicadvantagesofresidenceon theland. The small numberof siteswhich apparentlyserveda different functiondeservesome attention.Only one (R456) has an assemblagewhich differsradicallyfromthe standard It consistsentirely of tile,forming a verydensescatter(up to no fragments per composition. a over ha. It is to have been servedas a 0.02 sq m) unlikely place ofresidence,and presumably storeor animalenclosure.A similardensityoftile(up to 80 per sq m) occursat P274,whereit is combinedwithscarcetablewares.However,the occurrenceof a fineset of stonegrinders seemsto be indicativeofa morecomplexfunction.73 B103,a comparativelylong-livedsite,has alreadybeen noted forits large varietyand numberof table wares and its correspondinglack of typesused forfood preparationor ofSellasiasuggests partsofthecatchment storage.Whileitslocationin one ofthemostfertile it may have been an agriculturalinstallation,used by people whose place of permanent ancientroutes residencewas in thevillage,itsproximity to theline ofone ofthehypothetical betweenSpartaand Sellasia suggestsitspurposemayhave been morespecialized.The most is thatit was a small sanctuary, obviouspossibility perhapslocated at the borderbetween minor rituals were perhaps routinelypractised.A and where Spartiateterritory Sellasia, a vase adds to this of miniature weight suggestion. fragment Sites on the east side of the Eurotas, immediatelyadjacent to ancient Sparta, might The threemostobvious(M171,M172,M194) be expectednotto havebeen residential. naturally in M notable a mixed otherwise havingsome earlyarchaicsherds,is very present picture. 194, small (0.01 ha) but has a large numberand varietyof finewares, as well as some types 71 e.g. Landscape Archaeology,337; Lohmann, Atene,45-6;

GreekCountryside, 383-5; Penttinen(n. 56), 279; D. Gill, L. Methana', Foxhall,and H. Bowden,'Classicaland hellenistic in RoughandRocky Place,62-76, at 67; Forsénand Forsén(n. 'Colonisation'(n. 22),231-2. 6g), 172;Whitelaw,

72See Osborne(n. 37),113-36,on thecontrasting of effects patterns. differing politicalconditionson residential π LS'ii. 178,no. 6 c.

Early Iron Age to classical period 193

connectedwithfoodpreparation.Here, too,theremayhave been a smallsanctuary, perhaps sitedon or close to one oftheancientroadson theeastbankoftheriver,thoughnone ofthe finewareshas obviouscultassociations.The othertwoare larger(0.09 and 0.10 ha). M171has a smallquantityand rangeoftablewaresand some storagevessels,as wellas a loom-weight, function. a residential M172has onlya smallnumberoftablewares,though perhapsindicating the hellenistic material.A similarpictureis presentedby cookingapparatusis presentamong further north(J223, threesitesslightly J230,J369).J223is tiny(< 0.01 ha) but has a moderate withitsoriginal conflicting rangeof tablewaresand typesconnectedwithfoodpreparation, Its smallsize and thevarietyofmaterialsuggestit was as a destroyed identification tile-grave. installation or rubbishpit.J230(0.08 ha), like M171,has an morelikelya smallagricultural rangeand quantityof tablewaresand storagevesselsbut also a loom-weight. impoverished is further indicatedby the ancientwall whosetop is The existenceof a builtstonestructure thatthiswas somethingmore visiblein the trackcrossingthe centreof the site,suggesting witha modestrangeand store.J369(0.10ha) is rathersimilar, thanan agricultural substantial two backfromtheriver, varietyoftablewaresand storagevessels.To thesouthand setfurther villa sites(M328,M347),one ofwhichhas the fullrangeof ceramictypesand a loom-weight, within establishments provideevenmorecompellingevidenceforthe existenceof residential fromtheriver. ofSparta,lessthanone kilometre theimmediateenvirons Evidence

for Differential

Prosperity

The two middlegroupsin the settlement patternhave, forthe sake of convenience,been labelledas 'hamlets'and 'villas'.Althoughtheseare termsderivedfromnon-Greekcultures, theyare used to describesimilaror parallelphenomena.The term'hamlet'has been adopted of householdswhose inhabitants were engagedin farming to referto smallagglomerations in little or no internal social which there was probably and hierarchyor communal Dependingon the numberof householdsincluded,theymightbe expectedto organization. rangein sizefromabout0.4 to 1.5ha; thisassumesan area of0.1 ha per household(wellabove and a populationof betweenthreeand tenhouseholds theaveragesize of smallfarmsteads), individuals).'Villa' is used to describea singlelarge farmhouseor (perhapstwelveto fifty clusterofruralinstallations, concernedwiththeagricultural ofan estate primarily exploitation but possiblyalso theplace of residenceof itswealthyowner.Their size cannotbe estimated withgreat confidence,but is suggestedto have been distinctlylargerthan the ordinary farmsteads, perhapscoveringtwoto threetimestheirarea (roughly0.15-0.30ha). It cannot, be assumedthattheselabelstrulyreflect thefunction ofall thesitesincludedin these however, factor.Although categories,especiallywheresize has been used as the only discriminant sitesize cannotbe used to distinguish betweenthetwoby itself.The largestvillas important, maywellhave been of equal or greaterextentthanthe hamlets(as alreadysuggestedin the case ofH31),whilethesmallestagglomerations ofhouseholdscouldwellbe classedamongthe villas.Withthe data availableto us, the onlyothermeans of distinguishing betweenthe two in the materialassemblageor groupsis by lookingforsignsof abnormallevelsofprosperity forlargenumbersof storagevessels,eitheror bothofwhichmight,a priori, be consideredto indicate the presence of wealthylandownersconcerned, among other things,with the accumulationof substantialagricultural surpluses.Hamlet sites,as definedabove,mightbe expectedto replicatein largerquantitiesthetypesof assemblagesfoundon smallfarmsteads. Ceramic formsassociated with symposiasticceremony,especially craters,dinoi, table as well as more elaborateshapes such as stamnoi, amphoras,and stemmedcups (kylikes),

194 Chapter5

flasks,and certainvarietiesof hydria,may plausiblybe correlatedwitha certaindegreeof To thesecategoriesmaybe added decoratedpottery, whoseraritywithintherural prosperity. elsewhere.74 Nor should it be assumed that affluencewas assemblages has been noted restricted to theselargersites.As alreadyobserved,someofthesitesclassified amongthesmall farmsteadsshow everysignof prosperity by the measureadopted above. However,forthe the mostaffluent of the suggestedindicatorsare sites,concentrations purposeof identifying ofsites. requiredratherthanthesingleexampleswhichcould,and do, occuron themajority Among the sites classifiedby size as hamlets,S524 stands out forthe quantityof its as wellas forthenumberofstoragevessels.Less conspicuous,butstill indicatorsofprosperity, are H31,R281and U491,thoughonlyon R281are storagevesselsat all numerous. impressive, All fourcould be proposedas large'villas'controlling extensiveestates.Amongtheotherfive numerous.One ofthese thereare fewsignsof affluence, thoughstoragevesselsare relatively in date,withonlya small (U516)has alreadybeen suggestedto have been mainlyhellenistic have a late classicalcomponent.Two more (U494,U519),besideslackingsignsof prosperity, categories. relatively impoverished rangeof ceramictypescoveringall threemain functional U511mayalso be classedwiththesesites,as themajorityofitsceramictypescome fromareas as shrines(A iv and D). P272also lacksclearevidenceforprosperity identified and, tentatively a ceramic it should be has modest of its size, range types; probably grouped considering large be identified as hamletsin the sensedefined withthe otherfour.These sitesmay tentatively above,occupiedbyhouseholdsofmodestwealth. One site,R275-7,standsout among those classifiedby size as villas. It has numerous indicatorsof wealth,as well as an impressivearrayof ceramic typesand more than the in the sampling reinforced averagenumberof storagevessels.This impressionwas further carriedoutbytheLaconia RuralSitesProjectin 1994,whichproduceda late seventh-century bronzedress-pin(ofa typefamiliaramongthe pins dedicatedto ArtemisOrthia)as well as cratersand tableamphoras.As none ofthepotterycan be moreexamplesofstirrup-handled thepin mustbe assumedto have been an antiqueat the datedbeforetheearlysixthcentury, all theevidencepointsto its timeofitsdeposition.Unlessthissitehad some specialfunction, a been the residence of wealthyfamily. having Sevenmoresites(D85/95,P261/264,S437/440,S458,T471,U490,U499)havea minimumof all exceptone (T471)havinga wide rangeof ceramic threeor moreindicatorsof prosperity, numbersof storage Three of them (D85/95, S437/440,U499) also have significant types. vessels.To thisnumbershouldprobablybe added P271and S527.75 They maybe classedwith villas. as R275-7 likely but have a fairrangeof types.Two of these Four siteslack clear evidenceforprosperity and mightbetterbe of the size fall at the bottom rangeof the Villa' category, (R420,R421) The fourth(P285)is A is third the farmsteads. (S433) only slightlylarger. groupedamong situatedlessthan100m NWofthehamletP272,fromwhichit is separatedby a shallowgully. Similaritiesin the characterand date of the ceramic assemblagesat P272 and P285 may oflarge as partsofone settlement indicatethatthetwoshouldperhapsbe consideredtogether hamlettype.Their locationat the footof Koutsovitiand close to the Sophronigorgemight 74LS ii. 86. 75P271was largelydestroyed in theconstruction ofthenew Sparta -Chrysapha road before the survey began. Its existencehad been noted earlier,when a rim of a stirruphandled craterwas noted among an extensivescatterof

The sherdscollectedfromS527 were unfortunately pottery. mislaidbeforetheycouldbe studiedin detail.Sitenotesrefer ofother craterand fragments to therimofa stirrup-handled largeblack-glazedvessels.

Early Iron Age to classical period 195

concernedwiththe managementof indicatethattheywere large installations alternatively flocksofsheepor goats. The othersix sitesin thisclass (A3014,H34,H40,J213,M328,M347)are moreimpoverished in theirceramicassemblages,lackingevidenceforaffluenceand havinga limitedrangeof eitherto Sparta (sitesin zones H, J, types.A commonfactoramongthemis theirproximity installations suchas thesewere thatlargeagricultural and M) or Sellasia (zone A), suggesting inhabitants are likelyto or not. The of their nottheplace of residence owners,wealthy only or absence of that worked the land. The have been the labourforce storagevessels scarcity in rather thanon the was stored or Sellasia produce Sparta mayalso indicatethatagricultural estates. is notconfinedto thelargersitesbutis foundon a As alreadystated,evidenceforaffluence sitesofall sizes.Nine,rangingin size from0.08 to 0.01 ha, havethreeor numberoffarmstead and sevenmorewithinthesame size rangehave two,as wellas moreindicatorsofprosperity, an extensiverange of types.Two (P262, R526) stand out fromthe rest. P262, with nine indicators, may be the late archaic-earlyclassicalpredecessorof the classicalvilla P261/264 site whose relativelongevitymay be a situatedonly50 m distant.R526, a well-preserved has eightindicators.On none of themdoes storageappear to further signof itsprosperity, havebeen a majorconcern.There is a similarpatternto thelargersites,wherethosecloseto be Sparta (J221,M322,M325) show no evidenceforstorage.These sitesmighttentatively as theresidencesor smallestatesoffamiliesofmiddlingor above averagewealth. identified sector. The distribution of theseaffluentsitesshowsa distinctbias to the south-eastern in the west None of the elevensitesin the northernsectorand onlysix (out of twenty-six) for These low figurescomparewithtwenty-five exhibitmarksofprosperity. (out of sixty-five) the south-east,with affluentsites occurringin everyone of its sub-zones. The greatest sitesin theentiresurveyarea, occursin concentration (tensites),includingthetwowealthiest the adjacentzones R and S, among the clusterof sitescentredaroundthe springof Agios ofthetotalnumberofsites Georgios.This is evenmoreapparentwhenexpressedas a fraction in thesezones(tenout oftwenty-one). Zones Ρ and U also have significant numbers(fourand Not surprisingly, thedissectedpartoftheNeogeneplateau(zone N) appears six,respectively). sector. to havebeen theleastprosperous partofthesouth-eastern Evidence

for Storage

As alreadynoted,thelargestquantitiesof storagevesselsoccuron the twolargestsites,A118 and Bui. Whilea correlation betweensitesize and storageappearsto be generally valid,other in determining factorsmayhavebeen significant theimportanceofthisfunction. to Proximity themaincentres,Spartaand Sellasia,has alreadybeen proposedas one suchfactor, wherethe was locatedin the centralplaces. storageof produce,perhapsforconvenienceand security, Variationsin agricultural thatsome sitesspecializedin practice,in particularthe possibility A briefsurveyof thedistribution animalhusbandry, mightalso be expectedto be influential. and frequency ofstoragevesselsmayserveto illuminate thediversity ofstoragepractices. In thenorthern locatedat Sellasia.None ofthe sector,it appearsthatstoragewas centrally sitesin its immediatecatchmentarea producedany evidenceforthisfunction.Their only occurrenceis at themoreremote,isolatedsiteson theschistmassif(C169,G159,K200,K203), noneofwhichwas necessarily dependenton Sellasia. In the westernsector,a similarbut slightlyless extremepatternoccurs. All threesites occupiedin thelate archaicand classicalperiodsin zone D (D85/95,D96, D301),northofthe

196 Chapter5 Eurotasgorgeand less easilyaccessiblefromSparta,producedevidenceforstorage.In zones H, J, and M, and in partsof K, theyoccursparselyor not at all, withoutany differentiation betweenthelargerand smallersites.Theyare presentat onlytenoutoftwenty-three sitesand in The one clear is a which rarely quantity. exception J224, largefarmstead, producedfive vessel a modest of other ceramic Two othersites storage fragments alongside array types. situated near the foot of the also have an above had (J316,M322),76 Neogene plateau,may averagestoragecapacity In the south-eastern sectorthereis a distinctconcentration of storageat the largersites, in substantial sometimes numbers.Amongthenineteenlargersites(U516beingexcluded)it is attestedon all but three,with a total of seventy-two sherdsof storagevessels.A heavy occursin zones R (thirteen), S (nineteen)and U (thirtypreponderanceof these(sixty-five) three),consideredto be theprincipalareas ofarableland. Amongthethreewithoutevidence forstorage,R420maybe notedas one ofthesmallestofthelargersites,whilethelocationof T471 at the edge of the schistridge may have a bearing on its agriculturalactivities.By thesmallfarmsteads contrast, presenta muchless consistent picture.Storagevesselsoccurat sitesofthiscategory, witha totalofonlythirty-two sherds. onlynineteenout oftheforty-five Withone exception(S459-60), morethantwo sherdsare neverfoundat any site.There is a less markedpreponderancein zones R (five),S (seven)and U (eight);zone Ρ (two)has the feweststoragesherdsin relationto the numberof sites.This imbalancein the evidencefor storageon thelargersitesand smallfarmsteads requiresan explanation.As it has previously been argued,partlyon the basis of the materialassemblages,thatthe majorityof small farmsteads wereplacesofpermanentresidence,thepresenceofstoragevesselsshouldperhaps be regardedas a furtherindicatorof affluenceand the potentialforthe productionof attachedto thesesites.Althoughstoragecapacityis agricultural surpluseson thelandholdings a vitalelementin survivalat subsistencelevel,it is likelyto have been comparatively smallscale and mayhave been accommodatedby othermeansthantherelatively expensivepithoi whichare ourprincipaltypeofevidencein thisrespect. The Rural

Economy

There can be no doubtthatthe inhabitants of the threegroupsof sitesat the bottomof the were The populationof the perioikic settlement engagedin agriculture. hierarchy primarily butthe was to the of Sellasia (A118) perhapslargeenough support existenceofspecialists, village in was acted as a of more likelyacquired Sparta.Spartaprobably supply non-agricultural goods marketforall the siteslocatedin the surveyarea, none beingmuchmorethanthreehours and othermanufactured distant.It wouldhave been therethatmetaltools,pottery, roof-tiles, occurred. itemswereobtainedand mostexchangesin agricultural ApartfromSellasia, surpluses whilenone haveservedthisfunction, thereis no sitein thesurveyarea whichcouldpotentially is close enoughto be a candidate.In this of thosebeyonditslimits(forexampleGeronthrai) area laywithinthecatchment ofSparta. senseat least,probablytheentiresurvey A distinctionshould probablybe made betweenthe economic objectivesof the small farmsteads and of the villa and hamletsites,ifit can assumedthatthereis an approximate 76DuringthesurveyM322was represented onlybyerosion materialsat the base of a steep scarp. When subsequently been revealed themainpartofthesitehad recently revisited,

on the edge of the spur-top.AmongotherLAr-ECl glazed werenoted. and domesticwares,severalpithosfragments

Early Iron Age to classical period 197

equation betweena site's size and the size of the propertyit controlled.For the former, subsistencemusthave been the primaryaim and the quantitiesof produce available for as villasand hamletsare exchangeare likelyto havebeen limited.If someofthesitesclassified centresof largerestates,ratherthanas agglomerations of small equatedwiththe residential it shouldbe expectedthattheywereconcerned, householdsengagedin subsistence farming, at leastin part,withtheaccumulationofagricultural surplusesforuse in exchange,patronage, and display.The scope forproductionforexchangewithina widereconomicsystemthan and restricted centralLaconia was naturally by thedistancefromthesea and bythedifficulty The almosttotallack ofimportsnotedin ofbulkcommodities. expenseofoverlandtransport is a clearindicatoroftheisolationofthesurvey thediscussionofthearchaic-classicalpottery77 area fromthe circulationof tradedgoods in coastal districtsof the Aegean and the wider centraland easternMediterranean. If subsistencewas the objective,cereal productionmustbe assumed to have been the principalconcernof thefarmsteadsites,withothercropsrelegatedto a minorrole in terms site of land in cultivation.This is likelyto have been an importantfactorin determining location.Unless the laborious task of terracingis undertaken,cereal culturetendsto be restricted to areas ofmoderateslope; a 10 degreeangleofslopeis regardedas theextremeat For the new settlersof the mid-sixth the steepwhicha ploughcan be operated.78 century, sided schistand limestonemassifin the northernsector can have had littleattraction. other Likewise,thedissectedNeogeneplateaumusthavebeen impracticalforarablefarming than in small,isolatedpockets.When combinedwiththe generalpovertyof the soils, it comesas no surprisethattheseareas receivedlittleattentionin thisperiod.It was onlywhen arboriculture assumedgreaterimportancewiththe developmentof a market-oriented rural in dominated that the zones of schist a assumed the by large estates, economy, place in The colonization of these zones the late fourth and third centuries agricultural landscape. indicatesthat this was primarilya hellenisticand later phenomenon.The slope angles and in TABLES recordedin thesitecatalogue79 relateonlyto thesituation 5.1-2 unfortunately ofthesitesthemselves and in somecases can be quitemisleadingabout thecharacteristics of in the immediateenvirons.Nevertheless, a to the conditions theyprovide roughguide slope the vicinityof most sites.Withinthe surveyarea, land suitableforarable cultivation(as calculatedby the quantityofland withslope anglesno greaterthan 10 degrees)is restricted in quantityand unevenlydistributed. Roughlya quarter(19 sq km out of 70 sq km,27 per in be classified this can of which more than half(10 sq km) occursin the southcent) way, easternsectorand mostoftheremainderin thewest(8 sq km);thenorthern sectorhas onlya amount small Within this framework there was (1 sq km). very clearly scope for other on activities the non-arable land.80 main Its as agricultural potentialis forarboriculture, in recent centuries on the and for the extensive of and schists, widelypractised grazing sheep goats, currentlya featureof the Neogene plateau and the limestone mountainsides. itis clearthatthemainclustersofsitescoincideto a largedegreewiththeareas Nevertheless, π LSn. 88. 78See M. Wagstaff and C. Gamble,'Island resourcesand in IslandPolity, theirlimitations', 95 105,at 101.Slope angle is also regarded as a critical factor by Whitelaw, 'Colonisation'(n. 22), 234-5. ExtensiveCl terracingin S. Atticais associatedwitholive cultivation(Lohmann,Atene, 196-219).

79LSii. 315-438. 80 See L. Foxhall, 'Feeling the earth move: cultivation techniqueson steepslopes in classicalantiquity',in Shipley and Salmon,HumanLandscapes, 44 67. On the resourcesof thenon-agricultural land, see H. A. Forbes,'The uses ofthe uncultivated landscape in modernGreece: a pointerto the value ofthewilderness in antiquity?', ibid.68 97.

198 Chapter5 of arable land, and it is naturalto assume thattheywere primarilyconcernedwithcereal and withotherarablecropssuchas pulses. cultivation sector The large numberof small farmsteadsin areas of low reliefin the south-eastern if in the was attractive to arable even that this district farmers, long term initially suggests the majorityof thesesitesfailed.While the dissectedwesternpart of the Neogene plateau was ignored,itslevel easternspine and the shallowfootslopesof Koutsoviti,incorporating some 7 sq km of arable land, were denselyoccupied,thoughthe clusteringof sitesmay,as alreadysuggested,have been dictatedby the availabilityof waterratherthan land itself. the whole of the south-eastern sectorapart from However,in spiteof its initialpopularity, utilization be as the extensive theChrysaphabasin shouldprobably regarded marginalland, brief of settlement been limitedto of whichhas historically expansionand periods rapid duration of sites located in the apparentlyequallyrapid contraction.The generallylonger in extensivearable land (£.4.5 sq km, some 3 sq km included the surveyarea) of the Chrysapha basin and its periphery,as well as its long-termhistoryof settlementand advantagesin spiteof the relativepovertyof the implythatit had significant exploitation, soils.A numberof sitesoccupyrathermore marginallocations,in particularthe clusterof late archaic-earlyclassicalfarmsteadson the ridgetops close to the Kastororemaspring, where the arable land is severelylimited in extent. Likewise, N503 (an outlier in the locationat theedge ofa conglomerate northerncluster)occupiesan unpromising landscape withverysteepslopesaround.The widespreaddesertionof sitesthatoccurredprobablyin the firsthalfof the fifth centurymay in parthave resultedfromthe hardshipsencountered in maintaininganythingmore than a precarioussubsistenceexistence,even on the eastern were perhaps ridge tops of the plateau where good soils are available. These difficulties exacerbatedbythelikelihoodthatindividuallandholdingsweresmall,as therelativedensity towardthe Chrysapha seemsto indicate.The subsequentshiftin settlement of settlement basin has already been observed in a process involvinga concentrationof agricultural fromperipheralzones to thecore. activity of some ofthelargersitesin the It maybe possibleto detectthewidereconomicinterests Threeof sectorbytheirlocations,wherecerealculturewas nottheonlypriority. south-eastern the fourlate archaic-earlyclassicalhamlets(P272,S524,U494),as well as threevillas(P285, the Neogene S433, U491),are situatedat the footof the limestonemountainsidesfringing land below the access to arable allowed basin. These the and positions Chrysapha plateau sitesand grazingforsheep and goatson the mountainslopesabove. Severalothersitesmay in a less dramaticfashion,beinglocatedon thefringesof the showa similarset ofpriorities arable and the uncultivatedland.81Three villa sites (S437/440,T471, U499) occupy the junctionbetweenthe arable and the uninhabitedridgesof schistthatseparatethe Neogene mayhavebeen a practical plateaufromtheChrysaphabasin.In thesecases,olivecultivation to animalgrazing.Two morevilla sites(P271,R420)may also be notedfortheir alternative locationson the boundarybetweenthe cultivatedlevel area and the uninhabiteddissected tractsoftheNeogeneplateau,suitableonlyas poor grazing.Althoughthesame opportunities and treecropswereavailableto a numberof formixingarableculturewithanimalhusbandry be could thesmallfarmsteads, they probably exploitedonlyon a smallscale. 81H. A. Forbes,'Pastoralismand settlement in structures ancientGreece', in Doukellisand Mendoni (n. 22), 187-96, siteswithinthe 01pastorahst at 194-b;id., lhe identification

context of estate-based agriculturein ancient Greece: versusagro-pastoralism" debate', beyondthe"transhumance BSA 90 (1995),325-38.at 336~8·

Early Iron Age to classical period 199

The widespreaddesertionof small farmsteads, and the consolidationof settlement in a reducednumberoflargersitesin the classicalperiod,presumably had a markedeffect on the sectorwas utilized.Two likelyconsequencesmaybe wayin whichtheland in thesouth-eastern noted.A numberof individualpropertieswere probablyenlargedat the expense of their in consolidatedholdings;whilethe concentration not necessarily of some of the predecessors, ruralpopulationin theincreasednumberofhamletsmusthaveresultedin theirresidenceat a greaterdistance fromthe land theyworked than in the previous period. Two further in the agricultural consequencesare likelyto have ensued.Greaterdiversification regimeis theremay probableon theenlargedestates.Withthedisappearanceofso manysmallholdings, have been greaterscope forthe managementof herdedanimalson the arable land,perhaps cattleifadequatesourcesofwaterwereavailable.Simultaneously, a lessintensive form including ofagriculture musthavebeenpractisedbythesmallholders whosesurvival livingin thehamlets, on a subsistencebasis musthave become even more riskyunlesstheirpropertieswere also forthemwas to becomedependentlabourerson thelargeestates. enlarged.The alternative A ratherdifferent agricultural regimeprobablyoperatedin the westernsector,wherethe main influencewas the proximityof the city of Sparta. This sector affordedthe best foragriculturein the surveyarea and, unlikethe south-eastern sector,had a opportunities of where site abandonment was matched use, history uninterrupted generally by new establishments. It has approximately 8 sq km of arable land, mostlylocated south of the confluenceof the Kelephinawiththe Eurotas.There are a numberof factorsin its favour water-retentive of soils,the availability apartfromthe low angle of slope,itswell-developed, Much ofit lieswithinthe water,and theease ofaccessto themainroutesofcommunication. immediatecatchmentof Sparta,fromwhereit could be directlyexploited.The low-lying areas close to the riverand the ancientcitywere probablydominatedby labour-intensive crops such as vegetablesand fruittrees,perhaps requiringirrigation.There was also the cattleand horseson thepermanentpasturesfringing the courseof potentialformaintaining the river,a featurelikelyto attractwealthylandowners.The majorityof siteslocatedby the surveyare set furtherback fromthe river,where theywere secure fromflooding.While subsistence was doubtlesstheobjectiveofthesmallfarmsteads, therewas theopportunity for themto producesurpluseswhichcould be easilyand cheaplydisposedof in the marketof Sparta,wherethe existenceof non-agricultural specialistsmusthave provideda demandfor theirgoods.Theremayalso havebeen greaterpossibilities forcombiningarablefarming with arboriculture on the lowerslopesof the schisthillsides,as well as animal husbandryon the Neogeneplateauand upperpartsoftheschistmassif.The fourvillasitesoflate archaic-early classicaldate (H40,J213,M328,M347)werewellplaced to exploitsuch opportunities. During theclassicalperiodthereare clearindicationsthatthissectorwas dominatedbylargeestates, especiallythe area northof the confluencewiththe Kelephina,wherefourout of fivesites (D85/95,H31,H40, H34) are classifiedas villasor hamlets.The 3 sq km of good arable land withinthecatchment ofthethreesitesin zone H givessomeidea oftheextensiveagricultural resourcesavailableto such estates.These werepresumably theproperty ofwealthySpartans whosemainplacesofresidencewerein thecity. As alreadynoted,thepredominantly steeplandscapesofthe northernsectorwereavoided untilthe late fourthcentury.The few exceptionsmay be accounted forby agricultural whichgave greaterprominenceto animalhusbandryand arboriculture thanarable strategies cultivation. The majority ofsitesare foundat thenorthern of the extremity surveyarea,in the smallbutfertile basinofVourliotikoi Kamboi and on some ofthebroaderterracesand spurs at thebase ofAgiosKonstantinos, as well as in the vicinityof Sellasia wherethe Kelephina

200 Chapter5

valleyopensout.These areas amountto littlemorethan1 sq kmofarableland,thoughmore lies outsidethesurveyarea to thenorthand on theotherside oftheriver,amountingin total of Sellasia. If arable to some 2.5 sq km.This was presumablythe core agricultural territory cultivationwas its primarymeans of existence,the small extentof suitableland can have signthatSellasiawas nota typical supportedonlya smallpopulation.It is perhapsa further with a role connected served but Spartandefenceofitsnorthern special perioikiccommunity land suitableforgrazingon the more extensive to much had access the site borders.However, on the schistto the south and for arboriculture and west north to the limestoneformations in to some extentbe overcome cereals could deficit that the and east,allowingthepossibility as wellas and variousfruits, pastoralproducts(wool,skins,cheese),olives,oil, by exchanging for arable and timber), productsin the goods (such as firewood,charcoal, non-agricultural if east its marketofSparta.Its arableland wouldhavebeen substantially territory augmented That this km to itseast. of theKelephinaextendedas faras theVasarásbasin,4 productive area, morethan3 sq kmin extent,was controlled by Sellasia seemspossiblein theabsenceof in future thoughthisremainsto be confirmed anyknownancientcentralplace in thevicinity, of Sellasia to itsnorthand westofferedmuchless work.Certainlythe hypothetical territory and being dominatedas it is by limestoneformations favourableconditionsforagriculture, suitableonlyforlow-gradepasture.The existenceofa single,rathersmall,late archaic-early classicalvilla (A3014)at the edge of the Kelephinavalley,only0.75 km fromthe acropolisof but thatit was could supporta certaindegreeofprosperity Sellasia,showsthatthisterritory families.Its or two than one no more small a to restricted perhaps group, very probably locationat themarginofthearableand themountaingrazingmayindicatea similardiversity as is suggestedforsiteson the Neogene plateau,thoughthe premiumon arable of interests land mayalso haveactedas a constraint againstlocatingbuildingsupon it.82 Distribution

and Interpretation

of Low-Density

Scatters

in the constituent and tileare an important ofarchaic-classical scatters The low-density pottery oftherurallandscape.Atpresentthereis no consensusin the overallpictureoftheexploitation or 'background'material.Two alternativeexplanationshave of such 'off-site' interpretation been offered:eithertheyreflectthe dispersalof potterythroughancientmanuringand the or theycorrespondto locationswhereseasonal rubbish,83 disposalofhouseholdand farmyard or to the small,non-residential, were activities agricultural performed repeatedly agricultural installations(such as pens and stores)located on the land.84However,the unsystematic does not allow us to givea of thesescattersduringthe main seasonsof fieldwork treatment the within or date accountoftheirdistribution, definitive surveyarea. The onlyreliable density, 82 The scatter of late 6th~5th cent, sherds which so associated (n. 29), 253, was erroneously impressedPritchett butis morelikelyto havebeen the byhimwithSellasiaitself, remainsofanothervillasite. "3 A. M. Snodgrass, An Archaeology oj Greece:Lhe rresentState and FutureScope of a Discipline (Berkeley, Los Angeles, and

A. M. Snodgrass,'OffLondon, 1987),113;J. L. Bintliffand site potterydistributions:a regional and interregional 29 (1988), 506-13; A. M. Anthropology, perspective',Current Snodgrass,'Surveyarchaeologyand the rurallandscape of the Greekcity',in O. Murrayand S. Price (eds), The Greek toAlexander (Oxford,1990),113-36,at 121-5; City:FromHomer

id., 'Response:the archaeologicalaspect',in Morris(n. 37), 197-200.The largequantitiesofpotteryand tilefoundin the townhousesat Halieis show associatedwith4th-cent. koprones how material of this kind could have reached the surroundingcountryside:B. A. Ault, 'Koprones and oil of townand countryand the pressesat Halieis: interaction integrationof domesticand regionaleconomies',Hesp.68 (!999)> 549"73> at 55°"9· 84 Landscape Archaeology, 46-52; Alcock et αι. (η. 37). lhe

potentialrole of non-culturalfactorsin producingthese patternsis notedin Wrightetai, 'Nemea', 607-8.

Early Iron Age to classical period 201

data comefromthelimitedworkcarriedoutin 1988,designedamongotherthingsto quantify materialin different thedensity ofbackground partsofthesurveyarea (seepp. 45-50). whichcan be relatedto theinvestigation The evidencerecordedduringthemainfieldwork, derives from of two kinds.The firstis wheresmallarchaic of low-density scatters, fmdspots and/or classical components,usuallypoorlydated, are foundto occur on sites of other is ambiguous.They may be evidenceeitherforthe periods.In thiscase, theirsignificance earliest stages of a site whose main phase of occupation occurred later, or for the of a seasonal site or agriculturalinstallationinto a permanentplace of transformation thewiderbackgroundscatter.In some cases they residence;alternatively, theymayrepresent in question. oftheartefacts and misdating mayarisefromthemisidentification The second typeconsistsof sporadic finds,sometimessingle artefactsbut more often whichitwas notthoughtappropriateto designateas sites(TABLE 5.4). slightly largerquantities, was muchless consistent, Their treatment varyingto some degreefromteam to team and, LS no.

zone

P284

P2 J5 K5 Ki R2 H2 N5 R2 M4 Mi S4 R2 M6 T4 T4 P2 E2 H3 J3 Ui J3 M5 H2 K3 U3 J5 H2 H3 K4 Ci K3 H2 H3 J2 M4 M6 N3 E3 F4 K3 R5

K204 K244/5 R422 H51 N195 R428 M326/7 M321 S475 R429 M344 T467 T470 P267 E75 H25 J43 U486/8 J44 M334 H30 K258 U497 J222 H18 K419 CIO8 K153 H26 H33 J2I4 M329 M352 N313 EOS Π43 K257 R425

size (ha) 2.00

0.89 0-79 0.69 0.61 0-59 0.47 0.45 0.42 0-33 0.41 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.31 0.28 0.27 0.27 0.24 0.21 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.12 O.II O.II 0.10 0.10 0.10

0.10 0.10 0.09 0.08

0.07 0.07 0.07

/sherds types

6/7 3/4 2/2 i/l

2/3

3/3 2/2

3/4 3/3 7/8 i/l

2/2 i/l

3/3 4/4 i/l

i/l 0/0 i/l 2/2 2/2 i/l 0/0 i/l i/l i/l 0/0 0/0 i/l

3/5 2/2 2/2 i/l i/l

2/2 2/2 0/0 2/2 i/l i/l 2/2

tile(present/ absent)

soiltype

X X X X X X

Ν Ν S S Ν S Ν Ν Ν S Ν Ν Ν S/L S Ν S S S L S Ν S S S/L S/N S S S S S S

ο

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

ο ο ο

χ

s s

Ν Ν Ν S S S Ν

202 Chapter5 LS no.

zone

J216 J225 K141 N190

J2 J5 K3 N5 F2 Gi R3 S3 U4 Bi F3 H2 J2 K4 Mi M6 M7 Ui Ui E2 E4 R2 R4 R6 T2 T3 U3 P3 R6 U3 H2 H2 H2 J3 Ji Hi Hii A2 Ci Fi Gi G2 J5 J5 J5 J5

FI33

G163 R283 S450/1 U505 B115 F137 H38 J217 K250

M357 M351 M174 U489

U3000 E76 E3O5 R528 R454 R456 T479 T468 U514 P270

R457 U3023 I110036 h10046 hioo48 J10071 J10072 hioo82 hioo83 aioii2

C10136 fioi44 gioi72 gioi79 J10229 J10234 J10236 J10241 1110299 (Í10359 (Í10367

ei037i 610382 J!O395 J10399 P10410 P10431 Π0473 S10534

Π0571 "0575 Π0590

N2

D3 D2 E2 Ei J6 J5 P2 Pi Ri S2 Ri Ri R6

size(ha) 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01

/sherds types 2/2 2/2

5/7 2/3

3/3 3/3 0/0 i/l 2/6

3/3

i/l 0/0

3/3 3/4

2/2 0/0 2/2 i/l

tile(present/ absent) X X X X X X X X

ο

X X X X X

ο

χ χ

ο

4/4

χ χ χ χ χ χ χ χ

3/3

χ χ χ

2/7 2/2 0/0 2/2

4/4 0/0 i/l

2/2 0/0 2/2 i/l 2/2

3/3 9^3 1/1

4/5 i/l

1/2 i/l i/l i/l i/l i/l

4/4 3/4 i/l

1/2 i/l i/l i/l i/l i/l i/l

9/14 i/l i/l i/l i/l i/l 2/2

ο

soiltype S S/N S Ν S S Ν Ν L L S S S

s

Ν Ν Ν L L S L Ν Ν S/N S S/L L Ν S/N L S S S

s s s s s s s s s

Ν Ν Ν Ν Ν S S

s s

Ν N/S Ν Ν Ν Ν Ν Ν Ν

Early Iron Age to classical period 203 /sherds types

LS no.

zone

1-10594 Π0595 mio6i6 mio6i8 1Ή10627 m10646 11110649 1110664

R2 R2 M3 M5 M5 M3 M5 N3

2/2 1/1 1/1 1/1 1/1 1/1

1110719 Π0809 ποδίΐ U0818 Π0822 10835 110843 Π0884 U10903 10908

N4 R2 R6 T4 R2 U2 T2 R3

i/l

10674

ruin

riin8

rung ΠΙ149 ""59 11163

Ui

p R2 R2 R2 R4 R2 U3

size (ha)

2/4 2/2 l/l l/l 1/2

3/3 l/l l/l l/l l/l l/l l/l l/l l/l

5/5 2/2

l/l 2/2

/z7
soiltype N/S N/S Ν Ν Ν Ν Ν Ν ρ Ν N/S Ν S/L Ν ρ S Ν S ρ Ν Ν Ν Ν Ν ρ

Keytosoil types

L Ν S

limestone Neogene schist

Table 54· Findspotsof archaic-classicalsherdand tile not classifiedas sites,orderedin descendingsize. (No size/tiledata in the10000+ series.) availableforfindspots

perhaps,fromseason to season. This was especiallytrueof the areas witha constant,highland along encountered levelbackgroundscatter, mainlyin zonesH, J,and M in thelow-lying the east side of the EurotasfromGeladarito the Menelaion.Whateverthe mechanicsof its to itsintensive corresponds dispersal,thedensityofmaterialin thisparticulararea presumably ofSparta,notto mentionthevillages use fromantiquity to thepresentday bytheinhabitants ofmorerecentorigin.The situationhas been further years complicatedin thepasttwenty-five or so by the dumpingalong roads and tracksof soil containingancientpottery,tile,and architecturalelementsfrombuilding sites in Sparta. However, in all the other zones, backgroundmaterial of our period was very sparse and it was normallyrecorded and to be formed.The contrasting levelsof collected,allowinga roughidea of its distribution in of the area were material different demonstrated survey by the parts amply background in tests carried out 1988. quantitative Far from ofmaterialfromthesetwotypesoffindspot is ofinterest. The spatialdistribution therebeingan evenor randomscatteracrossthesurveyarea, theytendto clusterin thesame in the same areas as them.Beforeconsidering way as the habitationsitesand, furthermore, thesein greaterdetail,some of the possibleexplanationsmaybrieflybe presented.In some scattersresultfrompost-depositional cases,it is likelythatlow-density processesand can be relatedto nearbysites.Othersmay representthe spread of culturalmaterialsthroughthe A thirdpossibility, of settlements. manuringoffieldsor thedisposalofrubbishin thevicinity in the ofparticular relevancein thedebateconcerningresidenceoutsidenucleatedsettlements

204 Chapter5

archaic,classical,and hellenistic periods,is thatthesescattersare all thatremainofthemore - sheds,small stores,animal enclosures,and so oninstallations ephemeralagricultural or froma moredistantvillageor city.Nor locatedon land cultivated fromthesmallfarmsteads can itbe excluded,in an area wheretherehas been suchintenseerosion,thatsomeare thelast a proportionof whichmusthave been vestigesof sitescomparableto the smallfarmsteads, eithertotallydestroyed or buriedundercolluvialdeposits,leavinglittleor no surfacetrace. The correspondenceof these scatterswithclustersof habitationsiteshas alreadybeen The north-eastern remarkedupon but may be exploredfurther. part of the south-eastern sector(zone P) had a relativelylarge number(eleven)of late archaic-earlyclassical sites, scattersat fivefurther locations(P267,P270,P284, whichare complementedby low-density siteson the Neogene plateau (zone Ν LS 10299,LS l0^?>1)·The group of eightshort-lived iv-v) is also matched by fivesmall scatters(N190,N195,LS 10473,LS 10664, LS 10719). Likewise,the prominentgroupof sixteenrichsitesaroundAgios Georgiosis accompanied by nine small scatters(R283,R425, S450 withS451,S475,LS 10534,LS 10571,LS 10575,LS 11149, LS 10884), with an even largernumber(nineteen)in the area to its south (R422, R428-9,R454,R456-7,T467,T470,R528,LS IO59O,LS IO594-5,LS 10809,LS IO811,LS 10822, LS 11hi, LS 11118-19,LS 11159).By comparison,the Chrysaphabasin has manyfewerlowdensityscatters,all confinedto its margins(T468, T479, U486/U488,U489, U497, U505, U514,U3023,LS 10818,LS 10843,LS IO9°3)· lowscattersis foundin thewesternsector,in thefertile The largestnumberoflow-density lyingland alongthecourseoftheEurotasbetweenGeladariand theMenelaion.Northofthe ofthe gorgeonlytwoscattersoccuron theslopesofVigies(LS 10359,LS 10367),in thevicinity habitationsitesD85 and D96. AroundGeladariand to itssouth,in zone H i-iii,thereare at mostjust southofH31(H18,H25-6,H30,H33,H35,H38,H51,LS 10036, leastthirteen scatters, of twelveoccurin zoneJ v-vi (J214, LS 10046,LS 10048,LS 10082-3).Similarconcentrations LS LS LS 10395,LS IO399)and often LS LS J222, 10241, !O236, J216-17, J225,J317, 10229, IO234? in zone M v-vii(M176,M326/M327, M344, M329,M334, M351-2,LS 10618,LS 10627,LS 10649) withthreemore(M357,LS 10616,LS 10646)in closeproximity. scattersis smallerand more diffuse, In the northernsector,the numberof low-density in to habitation sites are close several (C108,LS 10136withG114;LS 10172 juxtaposition though withG163;LS 10179withG159)or can be relatedto nearbysites(K244/k245to K200; B115to Bin). A group of sites (E55, E75-6, E305) with clear evidence forhellenisticoccupation (perhapsin proximityto a hypotheticalroad leading fromthe Eurotas to Sellasia) were perhapsfirstoccupiedin thelate fourthcentury;twosmallscatters(LS 10144,LS 10371)can be connectedeitherwiththesesitesor theexistenceoftheroad. The onlyothergroupof note are fouralong the Kelephina in its lowerstretches(K204, therouteson eitherside oftheriver.Apartfromthesethere K250,K257-8),perhapsfollowing are onlya fewisolatedscatterson theNeogeneplateau (N313,M321),the schistspurswestof Agioi Saranda (K419),and the southernpartof the schistmassif(F137,K141,K153),the three sites. latterperhapslateclassicalelementson mainlyhellenistic scattersindicatesa connectionofsome The conjunctionofhabitationsitesand low-density kindbetweenthetwo,thoughitsnaturemayhave been diverse.The generalabsenceofsuch scattersin those areas wherearchaic-classical occupationis not found(mostof the schist massifand much of the Neogene plateau) may be an indicatorthatthese areas were left in the sixthto fourthcenturies.Whethersuch scatterscan be used to largelyuncultivated delimitthe extentof ancientcultivationis much less clear and would requiremuch more detailedevidencethanwas recordedduringthesurvey.

Early Iron Age to classical period 205

Population

Estimates

Calculationsofthepopulationofthe surveyarea in the archaicand classicalperiods(TABLE Not onlyare therefundamental uncertainties as to whether 5.5) are besetwithdifficulties.85 siteswereplaces of permanentresidenceand what numbersof people may have occupied or them,but it is unlikelythatall the sitesof any one periodwere occupied simultaneously thatwe have a completerecordofall thehabitationsitesthatonce existed.Allowancemust be made for sites that have been buried, completelydestroyedby erosion or modern or missedduringthe survey;in some areas the naturalvegetationis so dense development, as to makethisa stronglikelihood.Multi-periodsites,whereit is usuallyhard to determine site size in specificphases of theirhistory, createyetfurtherdifficulties. In spite of these the exercise if remains to an worthwhile, only give problems, approximateidea of the ancientpopulation. The following calculationsare based on estimates ofsitepopulationsand takeno accountof notional of the any carryingcapacity surveyarea. They reston certainassumptions: (i) that habitationsiteswere places of permanentresidence,(ii) thattheywere all simultaneously

Sector

Farmsteads no.

pop.

Villas no.

pop.

Later Archaic-Early Classical (^550-450 BC) SE 12 180 (34%) 39 195 (37%)

Hamlets site no.

P272 R281 S524 U494

pop.

Villages site no.

Totalpop.

pop.

65 35 30 25

530 (52%)

subtotal 155 (29%) w Ν

16 8

totals

63

80 (57%) 4o(ii%) 315(31%)

Classical (c.450-300 BC) SE 12 60 (15%)

4 1 17

6

60 (43%) 15(4%) 255(25%)

90 (23%)

4

U511 U516 R281 U519 U494 U491

155 (15%)

Bin

300(85%)

140 (14%) 355 (34%)

1

300 (29%)

1,025 (100%)

90 50 35 30 25 20

400 (47%)

subtotal 250 (62%) w Ν

11

55(4i%) 20 (6%)

4

4

totals

27

135 (16%)

10

60(44%)

150 (17%)

H31

7

20 (15%)

270 (32%)

Bill

3OO (94%)

135 (16%) 320 (37%)

1

300 (35%)

855 (100%)

Table 5.5. Population estimates.

85 See e.g. Bintliffand Snodgrass, 'Boeotian Expedition', 140-5; J. L. Bintliff, 'Further considerations on the

population of ancient Boeotia', in Bintliff,RecentDevelopments, 231-52.

2o6 Chapter5

occupied by familyunits,(iii) thatthe archaeologicalrecordis more or less complete,and (iv) thatthe size rangesadopted above forthe fourcategoriesof sitesare valid. Regardless in size, the farmsteadsare treatedas the residencesof singlefamilies(five of differences people per site), the villas as the residence of wealthyfamilieswith their dependent workforceor small clustersof familyfarmsteads(fifteenpeople per site). A separate calculationis made of the populationof each of the hamlets,in whichit is assumedthat sitesof thistypewere not denselypacked; 0.1 ha is allowed foreveryresidentfamilyof five.86In estimatingthe population of Sellasia, the only village site where settlement densitiescan be reasonablyexpected to have been greater,0.05 ha is allowed foreach notionalfamilyof five(i.e. 100 people per ha). This figureis reached on the assumption thatpopulationdensityis likelyto have been lowerin a villagethana city,wherefiguresof 150-300people per ha have been proposedforthe classicalperiod. Even so, thismaywell itspopulation.Dependingon thelayoutofthesettlement and resultin our underestimating residentialunits,a muchhigherdensityof occupationis possible the size of itsconstituent in a nucleatedvillage.87 By applying these methods, the followingsestimates are produced. For the later archaic-earlyclassicalperiod,the totalpopulationis estimatedat 1,025,yieldingan average populationdensityof 14.6per sq km.This averageconcealsa wide levelofvariationbetween thethreemainsectors.As mightbe predicted,themajority(530,or 52 per cent;23 per sq km) withsmallernumbersin thewestern(140,or 14per cent;7 per sq km) occursin thesouth-east, in the and northern sectors(355,or 34 per cent; 13 per sq km).Populationwas concentrated the number of farmsteads lowerlevelsof the settlement hierarchy, largest people occupying smallernumbersin thevillas(255,or 25 per cent)and (315,or 31 per cent),withprogressively the importanceof the one village(300, or 29 per hamlets(155,or 15 per cent).Nevertheless, that is the belief the smallfarmsteads whichloom so large in most clear, cent) confirming in intensivesurveysin Greece are comparatively insignificant termsof the populationthey the and that the bulk of accommodated, population of most regionslived in nucleated The whether cities or settlements, villages.88 significanceof Sellasia would be further enhanced were a greaterdensityof population allowed (halvingthe area occupied by a notionalfamilyoffivefrom500 to 250 sq m wouldproducea populationof600). All thesame, it is not entirely misleadingto characterizethelate archaic-earlyclassicalperiodas havinga distribution ofpopulation. 'bottom-heavy5 of There is a significant shiftin the classical period towardsa ctop-heavy'distribution in the an increase abandonment of farmsteads and the population,reflecting widespread thereseems to have been an overall decline in the numberof hamlets.Simultaneously, reduced from1,025to an estimateof855 (12.2per sq km).The of the surveyarea, population is slightly reduced(400, or 47 per cent;17.6per sq of the south-eastern sector preponderance or 16 of the western while the (135, km), per cent;6.75 per sq km)and northern population 86 forthe S. Argolidwerebased on a Populationestimates different premise,whichalloweda populationof 125person Greek Countryside, 545notea. perha outsidewalledsettlements: 87See Whitelawand Davis (n. 19),279-80, fordiscussion of urban populationdensities;150 per ha is suggestedfor Koressos. In the S. Argolid, a figureof 250 per ha is calculated on the basis of excavations at Halieis {Greek Countryside, 549-51). Lower densitiesare suggestedforthe

largerArkadiancitiesinJ. Forsén,'Populationand political Arkadianpoleis',in CPC Papers ofsomesoutheastern strength 5, 35-55,at 39-41. 88The same conclusionhas emergedfrommost survey studies: e.g. LandscapeArchaeology, 553; 337-8; GreekCountryside,

Bintliff (n. 85), 237. Whitelaw,'Colonisation'(n. 22), 232-3, has recently revised upwards the proportion of the populationofKoressosresidentin thecountryside.

Early Iron Age to classical period 207

sectors(320, or 37 per cent; 11.8per sq km)remainscomparatively stable.By thistimethe in in lived hamlets or and the one of (270, 32 per cent) village(300,or 35 per majority people in with much smaller numbers farmsteads or 16 and villas(150,or 17per (135, cent), per cent) in be the of Sellasia also this grew cent).If,as might conjectured, population period(perhaps throughincreaseddensityof occupationratherthan expansionof the inhabitedarea), the wouldappearyetmoreexaggerated. trendtowardsnucleatedsettlement These figurescorrelatequite closelyin absolutenumbersand geographicaldistribution withthose derivedfromthe Venetiancensus of AD 1700.89The ten villages and hamlets identifiedin the surveyarea have a total populationof 779, divided among 217 families. More than two-thirds(523 in 134 families) were located at Chrysapha, roughly to our south-eastern sector.Slightlyless thana quarterof the total(164 in 51 corresponding families)resided in the northernsector,divided among fourvillages,while the smallest fraction(92 in 32 families)was foundin fivesmallvillagesand hamletsin thewesternsector. The populationfiguresrecordedby the ExpéditionScientifiquede Morée around 183ο,90 yielda totalofthesame order,705 amongfive thoughlessreliableand probablyincomplete, this date there was a noticeable shiftofpopulationto thenorthernsector though by villages, in a decline the south-east and cent) (40 per cent).Bothfigurescome (49 per corresponding fromperiods when populationsare thoughtto have been depressedby long periods of warfareand economic difficulties. By the last quarter of the nineteenthcentury,when and economic conditions were censuses(conducted greatlyimproved,government political in 1879,1889,and 1896)91recordedbetween2,369 and 2,673people in the area, morethan twice the estimatedancientpopulation at its peak. This was accompanied by a further declinein therelativeimportanceof the south-eastern sector(from33 to 27 per cent)and a risein thatofthewesternsector(from27 to 28 per cent). The use of the figuresobtained above forgeneratingoverallpopulation estimatesfor ancientLaconia is encumberedbyan evenwiderrangeofdifficulties, makinganycalculations based on themmoreor less redundant.Not leastare thewide diversity oflandscape,bothin termsofreliefand geology,and theexistenceofat leastone largeurbancentre(Spartaitself) whosepopulationmayhave rangedbetween40,000 and 50,000 in thelate archaicand early as wellas a numberofotherswhosepopulationmightbe expectedto have classicalperiods,92 between 500 and 1,000ifnotmore(suchas Gytheion,Geronthrai, ranged EpidaurosLimera, 89Panagiotopoulos, Πληθυσμός, 282 nos 7-13, 22; below, Chapter8, p. 405. 90J. B. G. M. Boryde Saint-Vincent,Expédition scientifique

de Morée: sectiondes sciencesphysiques (Paris, 1832-6), ii. 1:

Géographie (1834),80-2, concerningthevillagesofTheologos, Voutiani,KalyviaServianika, Aphisou,and Chrysapha. 91Publishedby the NationalStatisticalServiceof Greece and collectedin M. Chouliarakis,Γεωγραφική,διοικητική και πληθυσματική έ^ελιξις-της 'Ελλάδος 1821-igyi (Athens,1973)?9°~2 table13,ΐ37~8table14,205 table15. 92 lhe space withinthe walls 01 ISpartain the 2nd cent, perhapsincorporatedas much as 276 ha, a figurederived fromthe surveyof ancientSparta publishedas pl. 1 in BSA 13 (1906-7).The populationof LAr-Cl Sparta would easily havebeen accommodatedin sucha largearea, as seen in the followingcalculations.Assumingthatno more than 75-85 per cent of this area was available for habitation, and workingon the range of populationdensitiesproposedfor

urbansitesin Cl Greece of 150-300people per ha, produces populationestimatesof 31,000-70,500.At theirpeak in the early 5th cent, the Spartiates, including women and children,may have numberedbetween30,000 and 35,000, ofwhomroughlya fifth (6,000-7,000)are presumedto have lived at Amyklai.To the remaining24,000-28,000resident at Sparta should be added the unquantifiablenumbersof helotsand othersof non-Spartiatestatus,who are likelyto have broughtthe total population up to 40,000-50,000, yieldingdensitiesof 170-240people per ha. The factthat Sparta, notoriously among Greek cities, preserved its ancient, non-urbanized appearance into the Cl period makes it likelythat population was unevenlydistributed to the throughthe area of thecity.The partscorresponding fourvillagesofMesoa, Pitana,Kynosoura,and Limnaiwere probablyrelativelydenselyinhabited,while the remainder was dividedbetweenpublicand open spaces.See Kourinou, Σπάρτη, 89-95, 215-19,243-9.

2θ8 Chapterj

the70 sq kmcoveredby the surveyrepresents Furthermore, Akriai,Asopos,and Tainaron).93 nomós ofLakonia (3,596sq km),and lessthan land area of the modern cent of the only1.9per if and are included cent (5,074 sq km); this is probably an 1.4 per Kythera Kynouria It need be for statistical only recordedthatifthe estimatesfor purposes. inadequatesample thesurveyarea wereused as thebasisforcalculatingthepopulationoftherurallandscapeof Laconia, excludingthe largeurban units,theywould yieldfiguresof around52,500forthe sixthto earlyfifth centuries,and about 44,000 in the laterfifthand fourthcenturies.With Kynouria(1,184sclkm)and Kythera(294 sq km)included,the figureswould riseto around Inclusion of the urban unitswould involvea significant 74,000 and 62,000 respectively. between50,000 and Sparta Amyklaialone are likelyto have contributed upwardadjustment; the remaining be added for of and 60,000,to whicha notionalfigure 10,000-20,000might of Laconia (includingKynouria and large nucleated settlements.The total population Kythera)mighthave been in the region of 135,000-155,000(26-31 people per sq km), significantly largerthanthefigureof49,000recordedbytheAD 1700censusand the74,000of ofthemanpoweravailableto c. AD 1830(bothexcludingKythera).Fora completeassessment the Spartanstateup until370 BC,the populationof Messenia,not all ofwhichwas of helot status,would need to be added. Estimatesof its population are hinderedby the lack of in the absence of largeurbansites distribution.94 Nevertheless, publisheddata forsettlement lowerthanthat comparableto Spartaor Amyklaiitspopulationmusthave been significantly of Laconia. Applyingthe figuresforpopulationdensityestimatedforthe surveyarea to the ofMessinia(2,928sq km)yieldsbetween35,700and 42,750 land coveredbythemodernnomos it maybe notedthatthistalliesreasonablywellwiththe 32,600people foundin inhabitants; theAD 1700censusin moreor less the same area.95This wouldproducea veryapproximate figureofbetween175,000and 200,000forthecombinedmanpowerofLaconia and Messenia in thelatersixthand fifth centuries. The figuresrecordedby Herodotos in the contextof the Persian invasionof 480-479 providethe onlytextualbasis forarrivingat an estimateof the totalpopulationof Laconia and Messenia.There are said to have been as manyas 8,000 Spartiatesavailableformilitary service(aged 20-60),with5,000(perhapsa two-thirds levy)presentat Plataia(Hdt.vii. 234,ix. were same battle At the they accompaniedby 5,000 picked perioikichoplites(ix. 11; 10). each Spartan hoplite had seven helots in a also two-thirds Furthermore, levy). perhaps attendanceequippedwithlightarms,35,000in all (ix. 10).The perioikichopliteseach had a statusequippedwithlightarms;thesemighthavebeenperioikoi ofunspecified singleattendant of lesser rank or perhaps slaves (ix. 28). On the assumptionthatthe 8,000 Spartiatesof militaryage comprisedabout 50 per cent of the male population(about 40 per cent aged undertwenty and 10 per centoversixty),thetotalSpartiatepopulation,includingfemales,is in thecase ofthe to have been between30,000and 35,000.There is ratherlesscertainty likely matched and were about also numbered If of those 8,000 bya similar hoplitestanding perioikoi.

93In fact,as theirsmall size suggests,the populationof most perioikic towns,especially those in central and S. Laconia, may not have been large and probably rarely exceeded1,000.The smalldimensionsof thesesitescontrast withthelargersizesofsitesin N. Laconia (see below). 94 Too little is yet known from the Pylos Regional ArchaeologicalProject. The most significantresultis the absence of evidenceforwidespreadsmallruralsitesbefore

the liberationof Messenia in the 4th cent. Evidence for Ar-ECl occupation is largelyconfinedto large nucleated sites:Davis et al, 'Pylos Γ, 454-7; A. B. Harrison and N. Spencer,Afterthe palace: the early"history"of Messenia', in SandyPylos,147-62,at 160. 95Panagiotopoulos,Πληθυσμός, 249; the territories ol Garitenaand Fanariare excludedfromthiscalculation.

Early Iron Age to classical period 209

wouldhave been about 15,000.Usingthe numberoflesserrank,theirtotalmilitary strength thiswouldproducea totalperioikicpopulation samebasisofcalculationas fortheSpartiates, theproportion ofadultmalesthatwas ofabout60,000.Thereis equal uncertainty concerning representedby the 35,000 helotsat Plataia. Depending on whethertheyrepresentedthe one ofable-bodiedhelots,and assumingthatfewhelotslivedbeyondtheage ofsixty, majority mightexpectthereto have been about 60,000-80,000males,givingan approximatetotalof helots.Whencombined,thesefigures 120,000-160,000 suggestthetotalpopulationofLaconia and Messeniamighthavebeen between210,000and 255,000. The veryroughcalculationsbased on Herodotos'snumbersclearlyproduceratherhigher estimatesofthetotalpopulationthanthosebased on the estimatedpopulationdensityofthe If anyofthevariablesused surveyarea,butnotso greatas to suggestthatbothare worthless. in eitherset of calculationsis wrong,thenthereis clearlyscope forupwardor downward revisionof theseestimates.For example,as our figureforruralpopulationdensityis derived froman area largelydominatedbymarginalland,thereis clearlyscope forhigherdensitiesin areas of prime agriculturalland, especiallyin Messenia. Likewise,the populationof the perioikictownsmayhave been ratherlargerthanallowedforin our calculation.Equally,our of the perioikicand/or helot use of Herodotos'sfiguresmay have led to an overestimate in theearlyfifth of Laconia and Messenia is On this the basis, century population populations. less than and well have been somewhat have been much to 200,000 may larger. unlikely The significanceof the populationdensitiescalculatedforthe surveyarea in the later archaic-earlyclassical(14.6 per sq km) and laterclassical(12.2per sq km)periodsdepends made about thecarrying capacityoftheland and theaverage verymuchon theassumptions in context size oftheplotsofland attachedto each farm.Firstofall, it helpsto setour figures areas. with estimates made for other them intensively surveyed bycomparing A usefulbaseline is perhapsprovidedby the non-nucleatedclassical deme of Atene in south-east Attica,whosepopulationhas been estimatedat about 450, yieldinga densityof 18 In thiscase, unlikeany of the othersconsideredhere,the rural inhabitants km.96 per sq the entirepopulationof the area. Elsewherethe majorityof inhabitantsin the constituted nucleatedcentreshad to be supportedfromthe same land as was occupied by the rural Forexample,overan area ofabout 225 sq kmin thesouthernArgolid,populationis minority. estimatedto have risenfromabout 5,880 in the archaic period to 6,880 in the classical, reachinga peak of 10,855m tnesecondhalfofthefourthcentury(26-48 people per sq km).97 Throughoutthistimethe bulk of the populationlived in the two citiesof Hermione and Halieis,as well as in severallargevillageswithpopulationsthoughtto exceed 500. Leaving of theselargesettlements, the ruralpopulationdensityprobablynever aside the inhabitants exceeded10 per sq km (archaic5.2, classical6.3, late classical-earlyhellenistic 9.9). Likewise in classicalBoiotia,theruralpopulationhas been calculatedby a different routeas 33,515out ofa totalpopulationof 165,500in an area of2,580sq km,givinga densityof 13per sq km(64 per sq km includingthe urban populations).98However,considerablygreaterdensities apparentlyoccurredwithinthe area of 40 sq km coveredby the Boiotia Survey,perhapsas muchas 31.5 per sq km.99A highruralpopulationdensity(22.8 per sq km) has also been 96Lohmann, Atene,280. 97GreekCountryside, ^63 table B.7.

98Bintliff (n. 85), 236. 99This figureis reachedby assuminga populationof 560 on 112smallfarmsteadsites,and c.66o on 11largerhamlet

sitesrangingbetween1 and 3 ha. The latteris likelyto be a ratherconservative estimate:Bintliff (n. 85), 236.

210 Chapterj

calculatedin north-west Keos, wherethe smallpolisof Koressos(or Koressia)is estimatedto have had a populationof 900-1,200at itspeak in the classicalperiod(50-66 people per sq residentoutsidethecity.100 Even on km),ofwhichas manyas 410 mayhavebeen permanently thislimitedbasis,therangeofruralpopulationdensitiesin a singleperiodcan be seento have been wide,from6.3 to 22.8 in the classicalperiod;in particularly favourableniches,such as thatcoveredby theBoiotiaSurvey, wherea veryhighproportionofthetotalis cultivable, or of the of where the of rural is estimated at parts territory Metapontion, density population km km out of densities have been much The 22-44 Per scl (34.75sq 40 sq km),101 may higher. ratherlow estimates forour own area closelycorrelatewiththoseproposedforBoiotia,while the estimatedoverallpopulationdensityof 26-31 per sq km is closestto thatof the southern Argolidand low relativeto most otherregions.At the same time thereis an interesting betweenthehighdensityofthesouth-eastern sectorin thelate archaic-early correspondence classicalperiod (23 per sq km) withthe figurefornorth-west Keos, and betweenthe low forthesouthern densityofthewesternsectorin thesameperiod(7 per sq km)and thefigures Argolidin thearchaicand classicalperiods.This latterparallel,witha regionwheremostof theland appearsto havebeen cultivated bydwellersin citiesor largevillages,tendsto confirm the suspicion,and stronga priori thatthewesternsectorwas largelycultivatedby probability, peoplelivingin Sparta. The low density of population in Laconia is throwninto even sharper relief by consideration of thepopulationestimatesforAthensand Atticain the classicalperiod.102 In 432 BC, population densitymay have been as high as 125-150 per sq km, based on a of about 2,400 sq km. Even the muchreduced populationof 300,000-360,000in a territory populationof the thirdquarterof the fourthcentury,estimatedat 200,000-250,000,still levels(83-104per sq km)considerably producesdensity higherthanBoiotiaat itspeak.Athens was clearlyexceptionaland represents one extremein the parametersof populationdensity, Laconia apparently beingbelowaveragein thisrespect. on the Working assumption that 4-5 ha of land was necessary for the subsistence a of requirements familyof fivein classicalGreece,the ruralpopulationof the surveyarea clearlywould have fallenwell withinthe notional carryingcapacity of the 19 sq km of availablearableland (see above,p. 197).However,while4-5 ha ofprimearablemightsuffice fortheneedsofa family, thefigureis likelyto havebeen considerably higherin marginalareas such as ours,perhaps in the regionof 7-9 ha.103Furthermore, the evidenceadduced for affluenceat a considerablenumberof small sites is a clear indicatorthat many of the inhabitants of our area aspiredto something morethanthe bare needs of subsistence. Such farmsteadsand villasmay have controlledmore extensiveestates,perhapsin the range of 10-20 ha, analogous to the sizes estimatedfora group of prosperouslate classical-early 100The calculationsare thoseof Whitelaw,'Colonisation' (n. 22), 232 with n. 35, which give substantiallyhigher numbersfor the rural population than suggestedin the , 337-8 table17.3). originalsurveyreport{Landscape Archaeology 101 C. Carter, J. 'Metapontum: land, wealth, and Colonists andNative population',inJ.-P.Descoeudres(ed.),Greek

Populations:Proceedings of theist AustralianCongressof Classical Archaeologyheld in Honour of EmeritusProfessorA. D. Trendall

(Sydney, g-14July, ig8j) (Oxford,iQQo),405-41,at 410. 102por faç currentorthodoxview, see M. H. Hansen,

and Democracy:The NumberofAthenianCitizensin the Demography

FourthCenturyBC (Herning, 1986), 65-9; id., ThreeStudiesin

Athenian meddelelser,56; Demography (Historisk-filosofiske Copenhagen,1988),12,2^. 103Whitelaw,'Colonisation' (n. 22), 235, reportson an averageof7.4 ha forrecentfamilyfarmsin NW Keos (see his n. 55 forreferences to literature on ancientfarmplot sizes). An excavated farmhousein the marginal landscape of Karystosappears to have controlledno less than 9 ha of land: Kellerand Wallace(n. 22).

Early Iron Age to classical period 211

in the southernArgolid,and further afieldto typicalfarmsizes of the farmhouses hellenistic in the Crimea.104 in Chersonesos These fourthcenturyat Metapontion southernItalyand at on therelationship between forfarmsizesproducea verydifferent perspective higherfigures thatin ofthepopulationand thecarrying ourestimates capacityofthesurveyarea, suggesting centuriesthepopulationwas close to itsmaximumpotential.If, thelatersixthand earlyfifth forthesakeofargument, 9 ha was theaveragesize ofa familyfarm,themaximumpopulation densityforthecultivableland wouldhavebeen about55 per sq km.In thisclimaxperiod,the estimated populationof 1,025wouldcorrespondto a densityofalmost54 per squarekilometre of cultivableland. This may have been a significantfactorin the subsequentdecline of especiallyif,as willbe suggestedbelow,it was combinedwith populationlaterin thecentury, and degradationthrougherosion. in of the land the fertility depletion landin the kind leave us in no doubtthatthesmallarea ofcultivable of this calculations Finally, 1 of Sellasia more than to the which be area km)can (slightly sq territory may assigned survey to maintainitspopulation, neverhavebeen sufficient probablyno fewerthan325-350ifvillage farmsare combined.A populationofthisorderwouldhaverequiredbetween3.25 and outlying usedfortheaverage landforitsbasicneeds,dependingon thefigure and 6.5 sq kmofcultivable sizeofa farm.UnlessSellasiahad a specialstatusconnectedwithitsstrategic location,itis hard extendedwell to the east of the made above (p. 200) thatitsterritory to resistthe suggestion a further 4.5 sq kmofarablelandmainlyin theVasarasbasin. Kelephinatoincorporate Communications in the survey on the locationof ancientsettlement The influenceof linesof communication area deservesattention,especiallybecause a well-developedsystemof roads forwheeled Forthe (άμαξήλατοιοδοί) appearsto haveexistedin Laconia froman earlydate.105 transport mostpart,thesurveyarea lieswellto theeastofthemainnorth-southrouteslinkingSpartato the outsideworld (ILL. 5.4). Sparta's linkwiththe sea was most likelya continuationto whilethe routeleadingto the Megalopolis Gytheionof the road fromSparta to Amyklai,106 104Greek Countryside, 386-8 withtable 6.7. These seventeen farmsare estimatedto havebeen between5.5 and 22.5 ha in clusterof fivebetween12 and 13.5 size,withan interesting ha. At Metapontion, plots of 13 and 26 ha are in the majority, thoughnearerthe cityaverageplot sizes (4.84 ha) weremuchsmaller:see Carter(n. 101),427; id., TheChoraof (Austin, Tex., 1998), 54. At Metaponto:The Necropoleis Chersonesos, plotsof 17-26ha are thenorm,thoughthereis as to whetherthesewerefarmedby single someuncertainty families:see Saprykin(n. 22),83-4. 105Pikoulas,in a forthcoming book,will presentthe case alreadyadvocatedon severaloccasions.See G. A. Pikoulas, 'Ή Tabula Peutingeriana και ή χερσόνησος τοϋ Μαλέα', Hows,2 (1984)5175- 88; Pikoulas,'Skiritis',146-7; Pikoulas, NMX 198-227; id., 'Ή ανατολική ακτή του Μαλέα: κόλπος Μονεμβασίας',Λακ. σπουδ. g (1988),277-85; id., 'Κυθηραϊκά',Hows,13 (ΐ999)>7*~8ο. See also J. Christien, 'Les liaisons entre Sparte et son territoire malgré l'encadrement montagneux',inJ.-F.Bergier(ed.),Montagnes,

barrières ou lignesde convergence? /Berge, fleuves, forêtsdans l'histoire: HindernisseoderBegegnungsräume? Flüsse, Wälderin derGeschichte: (Travaux présentésau XVIe CongrèsInternationaldes Sciences

août 1985) (St Katharinen, 1989), 18-44; Historiques,Stuttgart,

ofArkadia',in CPC Acts6, Y. A. Pikoulas,'The road-network 248-319. Io()There were probably several means of reaching Gytheion.One routemay have followedthe Eurotasvalley to theHelos plain,fromwhereitbranchedSW.Anothermay have traversedthe plain of Sparta and reachedthe coast at Trinasosby crossingthe hillsvia modernDaphní, Krokées, and Stephaniá.See PL i. 85 n. 73; W. K. Pritchett, 'Ancient Greek roads', in SAGT in: Roads(1980), 143-96, at 178-80; id., 'Greeksectionof the Peutingertable',ibid. 197-289,at

άπότή Λακωνία', 'Τρίαμιλιάρια 252-8;G. Steinhauer,

Hows,10-12(1992-8),277-965at 295-6. Theremayalso have been a route,similarto the modernSparta-Gytheionroad, thatcrossedthe Vardouniahillsand passed close to Aigiai beforereachingGytheion:see G. D. R. Sanders and I. K. Whitbread, 'Central places and major roads in the Péloponnèse', BSA 85 (1990), 333-61, at 340. It has been withtheoutsideworld arguedthatSparta'scommunications were conductedsomewhereotherthanGytheionbeforethe in late5thcent.:C. Falkner,Ά noteon Spartaand Gytheium thefifth Historia, century', 43 (1994),495-501.

212 Chapter5

Ill 5.4. Routesin thesurveyarea (D. Taylor).

Early Iron Age to classical period 213

basin (used among other thingsfor access to northernMessenia and the north-west Péloponnèse)followeda course along the west side of the upper Eurotas and Alpheios A thirdroute,leadingto Tegea and thenorth-east valleys.107 Péloponnèse,is generally thought to havetakenthecourseoftheroad knownto nineteenth-century travellers. This followedthe mainnorthroad along thewestbank of the Eurotasto thepointwheretheriverissuesfrom thehillsnorthofSparta,just above Geladari(H45).Fromtheretheroad crossedtheriverand ascended to Sellasia (12.5 km) along one of the long spurs projectingSW fromAgios beforecontinuing northvia Karyai to the Tegean plain along the line of the Konstantinos, Part of this road musthave runwithinthenorth-west Sarandapótamos.108 edge of thesurvey no traces were recorded.109 Between the area, though unambiguous valleybottomand the base of Agios Konstantinos,thereare no sitesof archaic or classical date to suggestthat settlement was influencedby the existenceof thisroute,thoughthereare some indications thatthiswas reversedin the hellenisticand Roman periods.However,thereis evidenceto route, suggestthatthe sectionof thisroad betweenSparta and Sellasia followeda different crossingtheEurotasat thenorthern edge ofSpartaand tracinga coursesimilarto thatofthe modernSparta-Tripolis road as faras Voutiánoi,fromwhereSellasia (13km)was reachedby A route such as this musthave been skirtingthe westernside of Agios Konstantinos.110 followedby Epameinondas'sinvadingarmyin 370/69.Againthereis nothingto indicatethat it was an incentiveforsitelocation,thoughmanyof the siteson the edge of the rivervalley mighthave had easy access to it. Betweenthe base of the schistmassifand the westfootof thereare no sitesofarchaic-classicaldate along anyhypothetical course AgiosKonstantinos, thisroutemayhave taken,thougha stringofhellenistic and Roman sitesmayagain indicate thatit came laterto assumesome importance.Major routessuch as thesewere capable of carryingwheeledvehicles(wagons,carts,and so on), used by the Lakedaimonianarmyfor itsbaggage,as well as forthe movementof commercialgoods and the tithesof transporting producefromSpartanestatesin Messeniaand Laconia.111 Whilethesearterialroutesconnecting Spartawiththeoutsideworldseemnotto havebeen influential beforethehellenistic the and other period, routeslinkingthe cityto itshinterland of are to Laconia have had in for site location the likely parts greatersignificance survey area.112 They maybe examinedaccordingto the sectorsof the surveyarea theyserved.The main valleysystemsarticulatethe axes of communications, and frequently routestake their coursealong the valleybottoms.However,as a generalprinciple,routesoverareas of high relieftendto followspurand ridgecrests,avoidingtheimpenetrable in thevalleyand thickets as well as the incised side on bottoms, gully deeply gullies midslopes. 107Loring,'Routes', 36-47; W. K. Pritchett,'Pausanias' road fromSparta to the Arkadianborder',SAGT iv: Passes (1982),1-28; id., 'Pausanias' road fromMegalopolisto the Lakonian frontier',SAGT ν (1985) 69-76; Pikoulas,NMX 203-16. 108 Loring,'Routes', 52-60; W. K. Pritchett,'The road along the upper Alpheios river',SAGT ν (1985), 77-91;J. Christien,'L'invasion de la Laconie (370/69 a.C.) et les routes du nord de l'état Spartiate', in 3rd Peloponnesian ii. 325-36;Pikoulas,NMX 201-3;LS*ii. 339,352. Congress, 109The onlypossibletraceis at H47(LS ii. 357),closeto the river,wherethereis a shortstretchof limestonecobbling. is consideredto be ofOtt date in LS ii and by This,however, I. Pikoulas(pers.comm.).

110This seems to be impliedby the existenceof a road leadingΝ fromthe bridgeoverthe Eurotas,of whichtraces werenotedby the ExpéditionScientifique de Morée,as well as the existenceof the bridgeitselfat the Ν edge of the city etαι.,'Crossingthe river',296 (see n. 118). See Armstrong (route2a), 308; Steinhauer(η. ΐο6),291-2η. 40. 111 Forcefully argued by Christien(n. 105),as well as by Pikoulas,NMX 198-201. 112 The evidencefora network ofroadscapable ofcarrying wheeledvehicles,linkingSpartato theothertownsand cities ofLaconia as wellas withMessenia,is collectedin Christien (n. 105).

214

Chapter 5

COMMUNICATIONS

IN THE SOUTH-EASTERN

SECTOR

The Chrysaphabasin and Neogeneplateau,whichhave been seen as thefocusofsettlement in thisperiod,do notlie on any important linesofcommunication withmoredistantregions of Laconia, unlesstheywereused as an alternative means of reachingGeronthraiand from Laconia (see below). There is no easy way across therethe Helos plain and south-eastern Parnonat thispoint,and mostroutesare likelyto havebeen oflocal significance.113 Accessto the area is determinedby the dissectedcharacterof the plateau fringing the Eurotasvalley and bytheorientation ofthevalleysand ridges.As manyas sixroutesmayhavebeen in use in our period.Three of theseconnectthe Eurotasvalleywiththe northernend of theplateau, at moreor lessthesamepointin thevicinity ofP284.The mostimportant ofthese(7 emerging a to that the as faras followed route close of modern road km)probably Sparta-Chrysapha thefootoftheNeogenecliffs whichformthebackdropto thevalley.At thispointit probably made a steepascentto thetop oftheTsakonaspur,whichcould be followedto thetop ofthe clusterof late archaic-early ridge,emergingin subzoneΡ (i), wheretherewas an important classicalsites.This routepassed througha dense area of habitationin its lowerstretch(in subzonesJ iv-vi), and even thoughthe Tsakona spuris sparselyoccupiedcertainsitesmust have been in close proximity (N312,N409).It would also have passed close to the important of Zeus sanctuary Messapeus(N415)and anotherminorshrine(N430).114 An alternative, more northerly route(8.5 km) mighthave followedthe southside of the as far as its Kelephina valley junctionwiththe Sophronistream."5Fromhere a long and ascent is made gradual along the northside of Chatzarorachito the area of Agioi Saranda from where it (L534), perhapscontinuedalong the edge ofthe Sophronigorgeto thehead of theLoutsorema(subzonesP i-ii),givingaccessto thesitesalongthelowernorthslopesofthe Koutsovitiridge.Its hypothetical coursewould have passed close to otherwiseisolatedsites as (K250,N503),as wellas a smallshrine(K414).This routemusthavebecomemoreimportant in thearea expandedin thehellenistic settlement and Romanperiods. The secondmajorrouteis shorterand moredirect(6.5 km)fortraffic fromSparta,though barelyused at present.It crossesthe edge of theplain throughmodernAphysouand follows thevalleybehindthevillageto reachthetop oftheplateauclose to P271.116 Its coursepassed the hellenistic and Roman hamlet(M321)at the footof the Neogene scarp,wherethereare tracesoflatearchaicand classicaloccupation,and at itsupperend P268. The clustering of sitesat the northernend of theplateauand Loutsoremamaybe in part due to theexistenceoftheserouteswhosenodalpointwas thearea ofP284.Assumingthatthe routecontinued,it musthave followedthe line of the modernroad along the top of the plateau,close to R420,as faras the importantclusterof siteson the westside of the lower Loutsorema.At thispoint(2 km),in the vicinityof R275,the routemay have divided.The mostimportant leg leadingto the Chrysaphabasin probablybranchedfromthe line of the 113The route across Parnon from Prasiai to Sparta, followedby allies fromPhleious and otherPeloponnesian cities in 370/69 (Xen. Hell. vii. 2. 2), presumablypassed throughthe area. See Christien(n. 105), 26-7; ead., 'De Sparte à la côte orientaledu Péloponnèse',in M. Piérart à la (ed.), PolydipsionArgos:Argosde la fin des palais mycéniens constitution de l'état classique (Fribourg(Suisse) y-g mai ig8y)

(BCH suppl.22; Paris,1992),157-72,at 161-2. 114Armstronget ai, 'Crossingthe river',296 (route4a), 308-9.

115 This seemsto havebeen theroutefollowedbytheroad to Argos marked on the Atlas (pl. 3) of the Expédition Scientifiquede Morée, and the one taken by Leake in reaching Sparta across the S end of Mt Parnon: Leake, Travels,ii. 511-22. See J. M. Wagstaff,'Colonel Leake in Laconia', in Φιλολάκων,277-83,at 282 fig.77. 116Markedon the etal., map S of route4a in Armstrong 'Crossingtheriver',296.

Early Iron Age to classical period 215

modernroad. Instead of descendingto the valleybottomand climbingnorth-eastto gain access fromthe northernend of the basin,it is morelikelyto have continuedalong one or otherofthespursrunningSSEfromR275,descendingto theconfluenceoftheremasthatfeed into the Chavos gorge,beforeskirtingthe south side of the Aï-Lias hill and enteringthe Chrysaphabasin close to its centre(4 km).Apartfrombeing more directand avoidingan descentand reascent(5 km),sucha routewouldhavepassedcloseto a numberof unnecessary latearchaicand classicalsites(e.g.R508-9,R526,U506,U519-20). A route of lesser importanceperhaps descended fromthe plateau to the Loutsorema with (perhapscloseto thespringofAgiosGeorgios)and theredivided,one branchconnecting theother theclusterofsiteson thehillofAgioiTheódoroiand thelowerslope ofKoutsoviti, withsitesto thenorth(S431-2,S524). theEurotasvalleywiththeChrysaphabasinlie wellto thesouth The otherroutesconnecting of thoseso fardescribed.One of theserunsalong the southernboundaryof the surveyarea, followingthe crestof a long north-southspur immediatelysouthof the Menelaion ridge, perhapsall the way to the top of the plateau (11 km),close to two smalllate archaic-early and This routepassescloseto theimportant classicalsites(P278-9).117 springin theKastororema in Ν of this late archaicclassical sites subzone Close to the north a cluster of (ν). early through theroutemayhave branchedeast tojoin another wheretheremabecomesshallower, cluster, The area ofRoubaiikais thepointon a ridgeat anothernodalpointin local communications. of the main head also closeto P278-9)whereit dividesinto north-south spur plateau(its long in at thesitesofthreemodern the Eurotas threefurther valleyapproximately spurs,terminating at Platána at the area outside 12 km, 14 km,Skoúraat 16.5km). survey (Zagáno villageslying Each one ofthesespursis a viablemeansoftravelbetweentheNeogeneplateauand theEurotas havebeen longerthanthosedescribedabove.Theymight,however, thoughconsiderably valley, to the south of Sparta, especially more convenientforcommunicationswithsettlements Amyklai,than any of the more northerlyroutes.The same area also gave access to the Chrysaphabasin(3 km)via a routedescendingto thehead oftheChavosgorgefromthewest, thereafter joining the main routearound the southside of Aï-Lias. In thisconnectionthe ofsitesaroundRoubaiikamaybe significant concentration (e.g.R281-3,R427,R518). sitesin the Chrysaphabasinwerealso in a positionto communicate As alreadysuggested, withareasto thesouth.The mainrouteleavesthebasinat itssouthern end,crossesthesaddleof km and to the modern of from descends U490).A muchmore village Kephalás(5 Asphakórachi, extension ofthebasinand descendsa valleyto themodern routefollowsthesouth-east difficult routeleavesthebasinat itsnorth-east villageofGoritsá(7 km).A third,longerbutlessdifficult and later sitesare situated, and passesto the where several late archaic-classical corner, (U493-4) south-eastoverthe narrowsaddle betweenRáchi Skala to the northand Koukouriato the south.It thendescendsfrommodernKalloni (formerly Pérpeni)intothewide and productive of the either at Goritsa(10.5km)or further eastin the Charakórema, valley eventually emerging it east-westvalleyleadingto modernAgioiAnárgyroi would have (10.5km).Hereabouts, joined themainroutefromtheEurotasvalleyto Geronthrai and theHelos plain,whichis assumedto This hypothetical haverunbetweenSkouraand AgioiAnargyroi. routemighthavepassedclose Alsoworthy ofnoteare to U3006,a smalllatearchaic-earlyclassicalsitein theCharakókambos. a thetracesofan old road ofindeterminate visible for short distance on the lower north date, sideofthevalleythatleadsnorth-east fromGoritsa(U4006). 117 Ibid. 296,309; LS'û. 389, 395.

2i6

Chapter j

COMMUNICATIONS

IN THE WESTERN

SECTOR

and in an ofthisarea presentedfewobstaclesto communication, The physicalcharacteristics oftracks area so closeto themainurbancentrethereis likelyto havebeen a complexnetwork and pathsgivingaccess to fieldsand buildingson the east side of the river.Most likelythey radiatedfromSparta,or fromthe pointsat whichthe rivercould be crossedby bridgeor forded.There is now conclusive evidence that the bridge over the Eurotas, to which Xenophonrefersin his accountoftheinvasionof370/69(Hell.vi. 5. 27),shouldbe identified witha classicalpredecessorof the bridgeof Nikodemosat the northof the city(close to the oftheroad thiswas probablythestarting-point As alreadysuggested, modernroad bridge).118 similarto have been Its course thatled northto Sellasia,Karyai,and eventually may Tegea. thatof the modernSparta-Tripolisroad, passingclose to the sanctuaryof Apollo Pythaëus (Πυθαεύς) at Thornax before crossing the Kelephina between modern Kladás and Kokkinórachi. BeyondtheKelephinaitbegan itsascentoftheschistmassifin thedirectionof Sellasia. The road to the Menelaion,describedby Pausanias(iii. 19. 7), musthave branched land fringing thelow-lying southfromthemain road leadingnorthto Sellasia and traversed made itsascentto thesanctuaryby a pathsimilar theEurotas(ourzone M), and presumably to thatwhichnow leads fromthe churchof Zoodóchos Pigí. Severalothersanctuarieswere locatedalongthisroad (see below).Its continuation southwards, pastthenarrowsbetweenthe land Menelaionand thebed of the Eurotas,wouldhave givenaccess to thefineagricultural betweenthemodernvillagesofZagano and Skoura,fromwheretheremayhavebeen a route east to Geronthraiand thence to southernKynouriaand south-easternLaconia.119The forthe a convenient meansof communication existenceof theserouteswould have afforded numeroussitesstrungoutbetweentheMenelaionridgeand theKelephinavalley,thougheven travelbetweenthe and the easy terrainwould have facilitated withoutthemtheirproximity linear of thesesitesmay the almost Nevertheless, arrangement cityand thisinnerterritory. of two main roads,both suggestthattheywere situatedto take advantageof the existence wheeledvehicles. capableofcarrying The onlypartof thewesternsectornot servedby a major routewas the productivestrip oftheEurotasand Kelephinaand thecrossingoftheEurotasnorthof betweentheconfluence otherthanthe Geladari(H45).Here again thereare fewnaturalobstaclesto communication wouldhavebeen bya route riversthemselves. The mosteconomicalmeansofcommunication branchingfromthe main Sellasia roadjust described.This would have avoidedthe marshy land whichprobablyexistedin the low-lyinggroundclose to the confluenceof the rivers. Abovethispointitwouldhavefollowedthecourseoftheriveras faras thegorgenorthofthe Kopána bridge (H46). Such a routewould have servedall the sites occupyingthe lower which,thoughfewin number,are again arrangedin a moreor lesslinearpattern. footslopes, The possibility thatit,too,was a routeofprimaryimportanceshouldnotbe discounted.The 118E. Kourinou-Pikoula, 'Μνάμα γεροντείας', Hows, 10-12 (1992-8), 259-76, at 266-76; Kourinou, Σπάρτη, 78-84; Steinhauer(η. ΐο6),290-4. Steinhauerlocatesthe Cl bridgeto theS ofNikodemos'sbridge,butseemsto place too muchweighton the religiouspurposeof thisroad (linking Sparta to the Menelaion) and to underestimateeconomic The newevidencevindicatesthe and military considerations. argumentsof G. Dickins, 'Excavations at Sparta, 1906: BSA 12(1905-6),431-9,at 437-9; conclusions', topographical C. M. Stibbe,'Beobachtungenzur Topographiedes antiken

Sparta', BA Besch.64 (1989), 61-99, at 97-8; id., 'Between Babykaand Knakion: threeaddenda', ΒΑ Besch.69 (1994), 63-102, at 66-7. Wace's theory('Excavations'(n. 53), 6-9), followed by Bölte (RE s.v. 'Sparta', col. 1370) and by etai, 'Crossingthe river',298-300, 304-5, that Armstrong thisbridgeshouldbe locatedat the Ε or SE of the citymust nowbe rejected. 119 This was presumably the route followed by Epameinondas'sarmyin 370/69(Xen. Hell.vi. 5. 30).

Early Iron Age to classical period 217

fewsitesnorthofthenarrowsat theKopana bridgemusthavebeen relatively isolated,though outlinedabove would have been affordedby a track access to the lines of communications running alongtheeastsideoftheriver. COMMUNICATIONS

IN THE NORTHERN

SECTOR

As alreadyindicated,a majorarterialrouteleadingfromtheEurotasvalleyto Sellasiapassed edge of the surveyarea or followinga line throughthissector,eitheralong the north-west as a means of similarto thatof the modernSparta-Tripolisroad. Apartfromfunctioning withmoredistantplaces in north-eastern Laconia (suchas Karyai and Oios, communication or Oion), southernArkadia,and the Thyreatis,this routewas also locally importantin as well ofAgiosKonstantinos, allowingrapidreinforcement connecting Spartato thefortress as itsprovisioning, and to the villageof Sellasia. Whicheverthe courseof the road, neither in thelongsectionsbetweentheEurotasvalleyand Agios settlement appearsto haveattracted all the sites located at the base of the latter(B103,B107,B121,C114) Konstantinos. However, withSparta and werewellpositionedto takeadvantageof its existenceforcommunications extensionbeyondSellasia,thisroutewouldalso havepassedcloseto Sellasia.In itsnorthward A3014,liketheothersa sitedependenton Sellasia. in thewestern WhereasSpartais assumedto havebeen thefocalpointforcommunications as well as the of Sellasia must havehad and south-eastern southern the sectors, north, portion a similarif less emphaticrole in the northernpart of the surveyregion.Unfortunately, its ofthesurveyarea prevents locationat thenorthextremity us frominvestigating thenetwork of local communications withsitesin thewest,north,and east partsofitsterritory. Sufficeit to east of the say thattheremusthave been a routeconnectingthe villagewithits territory far as as theVasarasbasinfourkilometres to itseast. Kelephina,perhapsextending An alternativecourse forthe more easterlyof the two suggestedroutesfromSparta to Sellasiamighthavebeen to ascendtheTheológosridgeand followitsuppercontoursas faras thesaddleconnecting it to thehillofAgiosKonstantinos, thereafter itseasternfootto skirting reach Sellasia (13 km). Such a routewould have followeda similarcourse to thatof the modernroad passingfromKladas to Ágios Ioánnis Theológos and Kalyvia Theológou, A smalllate archaic-early reachingthemainhighwayat thenorthfootofAgiosKonstantinos. classicalsite(K200)lies closeto thishypothetical routein itssouthernsection,as do a number oflaterhellenistic, Roman,and medievalsites.Whetheror not it servedas themain road to routethattraversed thislargearea. Sellasia,theremaystillhavebeen a subsidiary In the southernpart of the northernsector,communicationsmusthave been directed towardsSparta.The main naturalroutefollowsthe Kelephinavalley,whichin the east-west stretchbelow itsjunctionwiththe Sophronistreamcan be followedon eitherbank with moderateease. The fewtracesof settlement and otherhumanactivitiesin thissectorin our periodare situatedclose to thisroute.BetweenSellasia and the Sophronijunction,thevalley narrowsand communications are renderedmuchmore difficult, the sectionbetweenAgios Nikólaos(G182)and the southernend of the Sellasia valley(a stretchof some 3-4 km)being forthemostpartimpassable. The majorityof sitesin the northernsectorwere accessibleby one or otherof the routes describedso far,but a smallnumberare foundin remotelocations,at a distancefromthe naturallinesof communication. Two (G157,G159),situatedon the middleslopesof the steep schistmassifabove the Kelephina,had the optionof usingthe Kelephinavalleyor a route along the Theologosridge.A third(C169),on a remotespurof the same massif,could have had accessto thesameroutealongtheTheologosridgebya branchtrack.

2i8 Chapter5 The preceding surveytends to suggest that communicationswere in many cases an factorin site location,especiallyat nodes in the networkof routesconnecting influential the various parts of the survey area. However, their importance may easily be especiallyas thereare numeroussites,includingsome rankedas hamlets overemphasized, remotelocationswithoutimmediateaccess to any ofthemain routes. or villas,in relatively Three such sitesin the northernsectorhave been noted above, but in the south-eastern sectorthe clustersof sitesalong the footof the Koutsovitiridge and those on the hill of Agioi Theodoroi were also well offthe beaten track.Nevertheless,the communications networkmay help to account forsome of the clustersof sites,as well as some of the less notableon theNeogene plateau,whereaccess easilyexplainedgaps. These are particularly to watersupplieshas also been suggestedas a criticalfactor.The gaps of more than 1 km betweenP279and R420 and ofnearly2 kmbetweenP278and R281,bothin areas otherwise eminentlysuitableforagriculture,demand some explanation.The fact that these gaps withotherroutesare not easilymade is surely coincidewithareas whereinterconnections not accidental. When this is combined with the clusteringof sites at nodal points (for examplearoundP284,Ágios Nektários,and Roubaiika),a strongcase can be made forthe relative importance of connectibilityin site location. Such a preference is easily comprehensibleif the inhabitantsof these sites were engaged in workingfragmented landholdings,where the accessibilityof a farmwithinthe agriculturallandscape might have been a significantfactor.The same conditionsmightalso account forthe general preferenceforridge-toplocationsover midslopeor valleybottomsthroughoutthe area of theNeogeneplateau. The Religious

Landscape:

Sanctuaries

withinthesurveyarea in thisperiodcomesfromtwo The earliestevidenceforhumanactivity excavatedcult sites,namelythe Menelaion (Q360), concernedwiththe cult of Helen and Menelaos, and the sanctuaryof Zeus Messapeus at Tsakona (N415).At both the earliest evidenceforcultdatesto thelate eighthcenturyBC,perhapsno earlierthan£.700.(Fordetails ofcultsites,see TABLE 5.6.) a small the earliesttemplewas probablyerected£.600BC,comprising At theMenelaion120 withdiskakroteria. roofedwithLaconian tilesand embellished cella ofporosashlarmasonry, Priorto thisthereis no evidencefora permanentstructure, thoughthereare richdepositsof The originaltempleprobablycontinuedto standafter votivesspanningthe seventhcentury. ofthevictoryoverthePersiansin 479,ofa surrounding theaddition,perhapsin theaftermath and in some facedwithblue limestone, ofmassiveblocksofconglomerate, terraceconstructed tiled to the from frieze.121 fashiondecoratedwitha marbletriglyph roof,there Apart repairs

120For the earlierexcavations,see A. B. Wace, M. S. J. Thompson, and J. P. Droop, 'The Menelaion', BSA 15 (1908-9),108-57.For summariesofmorerecentworkat the see (H. W.) Catling,'Menelaion',35-42; R. W. V sanctuary, Catling,'Excavationsat theMenelaion: 1985',Λακ. σπονδ. 9 (1986),205-16. 121The of Simonides'elegy recentlypublishedfragments on the Persian wars suggestthat the Spartans may have role to Menelaos,togetherwiththe an important attributed

Dioskouroi, in the victoryat Plataia. See P. J. Parsons, 'Simonides:elegies',in E. W. Handley,H. G. Ioannidou,P.J. Parsons, and J. E. G. Whitehorne(eds), The Oxyrhynchus Papyri,lix (Graeco-Roman Memoirs, 79; London, 1992), on p. 35. It 4-50, no. 3965,fr.2, lines8-10,withcommentary of Menelaos accompaniedthe is evenpossiblethatan effigy Spartanarmy,in thesame way as theDioskouroiare known Stateat War,iii: TheGreek to have done: see W. K. Pritchett, Los Angeles,and London,1979),14-17· Religion (Berkeley,

Early Iron Age to classical period 219 siteno.

zone

size

LargeSpartansanctuaries Q360 N415

Qi Ni

0.40 0.12

Smallruralshrines(Spartiateterritory) 0.22 J6 J367 J215 M194

J2 M2

0.02 0.01

Smallruralshrines(non-Spartiate territory?) U4 Ui Αι

0.20 0.16 0.11

N430 K414

N2

0.07

K4

A3018 P260

A3 Pi Ri

0.03 0.01

U3002 U492 A119

R296 U3001

U3

Siteswithvotiveobjects U511 U516 S524 P261/264 S437/440 U490 J224 R427 J230 B103 K235 M325

o.oi
U2 Ui

1.81 1.08

Si P2

0.67 0.20

S4

0.20

U3

0.20

J5 R2

0.13 0.10

J6 B2

0.08

K3 M4

0.07 0.07 0.01

cult

votives

date

LG-H1 LG-H1, LR

all types all types

Helen,Menelaos Zeus Messapeus

LAr-cl ar Cl hl R ear-LAr

P/Mv P/I Ρ

ρ ρ

LAr-Cl LAr-ECl lcl-Hl Cl-hl lar LAr-Cl LAr-ECl LAr LAr-EGl

I Tc Tc Tc Mv/Tc Mv Mv P/Mv P/Mv/S/I

ρ ρ

lar-Gl-Hl Cl-Hl-R LAr-ECl EC1-LC1 LAr-LCl LAr-R LAr-ECl LAr-ECl LAr-EGl LAr-LCl LAr-Cl LAr-LCl

Ρ Tc Tc Mv Mv Tc/L Mv/Lw Mv Tc P/Mv Tc Tc

ρ ρ ρ ρ

? ? ? ?

? ?

Zeus/Hermes?

?

? ? ?

ρ ρ p ρ

ofvotive Keytotypes I inscription L lamp Lw lead wreath /figurine vase Mv miniature Ρ (e.g.aryballoi,stemmedcups,lakainas) pottery S stonesculpture terracotta Tc /plaque figurine Table 5.6. Cult sites,orderedin descendingsize.

Waterforuse in untilitsdestruction £.200BC.122 seemto havebeen no subsequentalterations the ritualof the sanctuarywas providedby a cistern.Based on the quantityand qualityof votives,thecultreacheditspeak in thefirsthalfofthesixthcentury, thoughthereis plentiful and hellenistic the classical evidenceforcontinuousactivity early periodsuntilits throughout abandonment.There was no later revival.Apart frommasses of cheap votives(pottery, therewerealso morevaluablededications lead wreaths,and figurines), numerousminiatures, ofbronzevessels(mostlyphialai)and dressornaments, weaponsin bronzeand iron,armour, 122The sanctuarymay have sustainedseriousdamage in thefighting aroundtheMenelaionduringPhilipV's invasion

ofLaconia in 218 (Cartledgeand Spawforth, 63).

220 Chapter5

and theirrelativerarity, and some smallsculpturein local marbleand bronze.Nevertheless theabsenceofthemuchricherarrayofvotivesfoundin theurbansanctuariesof Spartaand mayindicatethattheMenelaionrankedbelowtheseleadingcults. Amyklai, the historyof the sanctuaryof Zeus As a consequenceof its poor stateof preservation, in certainrespects it is in traced such cannot be detail,though clearthatitdiffers Messapeus123 fromtheMenelaion.The templecompriseda longnarrowbuildingwithinternalcolonnade, roofed in rubblemasonryand havingin all likelihooda mudbricksuperstructure, constructed in the normalLaconian fashion.The remainsof antefixesand disc akroteriasuggestit was In spiteof the modified,in the firsthalfof the sixthcentury. built,or at least substantially and varied votive a rich for there is evidence intenseerosion assemblage.Apart surprisingly of the late sixthand fifthcenturies,the most frompotteryand miniatures, predominantly Of thesethemajority notablefeatureis thevastquantityofhandmadeterracotta figurines.124 some there are also but are grotesqueithyphallic females, evidently pregnant,as well figures, was the and animal as quadrupeds.Theystrongly fertility principalconcern implythathuman indicates thatsome and athletic ofthecult.However,theoccurrenceofweaponry equipment for. The cult were also catered of the more conventionalSpartaninterests appears to have suffereda much earlierdecline than the Menelaion, withonlyverylimitedevidencefor survivalafterthe mid-fourth century.It, too, seems to have been abandoned duringthe AD. centuries hellenistic period,onlyto experiencea laterevivalin thethirdand fourth and maintainedbytheSpartanstateand so In all likelihoodboththesecultswereinstituted ofthevillagesof Spartaand Amyklai.This is theconcernoftheinhabitants wereprincipally made all themorelikelyby thefactthatbothweresituatedin areas where,as has been seen, beforethe sixthcenturyBC. Both occupysimilar thereis no evidenceforhumansettlement viewsand themselves extensive sites with on widelyvisible.They hilltop conspicuous positions, are also in areas whereeven at a laterdate thereare fewothertracesof humanoccupation, suggestingthattheywere deliberatelyplaced at the marginsof the settledand cultivated landscape.Althoughthe explanationmustlie partlyin the natureof theparticularcults(the MenelaionbeingassociatedwiththeallegedtombofMenelaos and Helen, and no doubtthe it conformsto a widerphenomenonof extratracesof the extensiveMycenaeansettlement), in other urbansanctuaries regionsofGreece.125 recognized many A thirdmajor statesanctuary,thatof Apollo Pythaëusat Thornax, should be situated Its early withinthe surveyarea to the northof Sparta at the edge of the Eurotasvalley.126 was obtained in cult statue the colossal used the that the tradition are gold origins impliedby have been made regardingits fromKroisos,before546 BG(Hdt. i. 69). Varioussuggestions a low hillat Pavléïka(north on with some remains it connected writers location. Early precise river to the and close of modernKokkinorachi, Tsouni, Kelephina),whileothers formerly it has been Most of north-east have placed it in thelow-lying recently, Sparta.127 groundjust at Geladari site with the Laconia of the members identified large Survey by tentatively to mention not must be of cult indicative of evidence the lack acknowledged, though (H45),128 earlierthanthehellenistic thescantyevidenceforactivity period. I23(H. W.) Catling,'MessapianZeus'. ^4 bee (Jhapter19;groupedundernos 59-09. ^5 de rohgnac,JSaissance (n. 11),23-92; id., Médiation,

the evolutionof rural and sovereignty: competition, in geometric sanctuaries Greece',in S. E. Alcockand R. G. Osborne (eds), PlacingtheGods: Sanctuariesand SacredSpace

in AncientGreece(Oxford, 1994), 3-18; id., Cults(n. 11),

21-88.

126See Bölte'sfulldiscussionin RE s.v.'Thornax'. I27Pavleïka: Boblaye, Recherches, 74-5; Boite, RE s.v. 'Thornax'.NEofSparta:PL i. 82. 128 etal, 'Crossingtheriver',310;LS'û. 357. Armstrong

Early Iron Age to classical period 221

withtheirevidentstateinvolvement, musthave lain These threeextra-urban sanctuaries, its outer what at withinSpartiateterritory forming maybe termeda thoughperhaps fringes, formed the area have Othersanctuaries outside survey sacredcordon.129 may partofthesame between cordon (see below). As such, theymay help to definethe boundaries territory belongingto Spartaand thatbelongingto perioikiccommunities. whilebeingthe mostconspicuousand long-livedcultsites,are not The largesanctuaries, the onlyevidenceforreligiousactivityin the surveyarea. The villagesof Sparta and their immediateenvironsare well known,fromexcavationand the ancientsources,to have been of small cults,the majorityhavingtheirfloruitin the archaicand home to a proliferation beforethe antiquarianrevivalof the Roman classicalperiodsand decliningin thehellenistic of AD.I3°Pausanias(iii.19.7-8, 20. 1)refersto sanctuaries period,especiallythesecondcentury Asklepios,Ares,and Polydeukeson or close to the road to Therapne and the Menelaion,131 identified locatedin zone M butnoneofthemcertainly bytheSurvey.M194,close presumably to the river,has alreadybeen notedforits small size and unusualquantityof earlyto late The presenceof miniaturevotivesand archaicfinewares,perhapsindicativeof cultactivity. at it should be as one oftheanonymous, lesser-order sherds identified J367 suggests aryballos of Sparta.The associatedassemblageoflate archaicdate cultsitesin theimmediatevicinity to the showsthatit was short-lived, perhapsin use forless thanfifty years.SiteJ215,slightly north,mayalso have been ofthesame type,thoughof classicalratherthanarchaicdate and or earlythirdcentury. probablyas lateas thefourth Cult sitesalso figurein areas outsidewhatcan certainlybe definedas Spartiateterritory, thoughthe statusof theirinhabitantsforthe mostpart remainsambiguous.On the lower north-eastslopes of Sellasia (A118),the one certainperioikicvillage or town site, some terracottafigurines suggestedthe existenceofa sanctuary(A119),thoughit cannotbe ruled out thatthisis an extensionof the cemeteryslightlyuphill(A120);in any case no material earlierthan the thirdcenturywas found.Nothingwas foundto suggestthe existenceof a sanctuarywithinthe main area of the site. This uncertaintyleaves open the important question concerningthe extentto which a small perioikictown such as Sellasia, in the immediateambit of Sparta, maintaineda civic existenceof its own. If it lacked its own communalcults,the naturalassumptionwould be thatitsinhabitantsparticipatedin some In thisrespect,and perhapsotherstoo, way in the cultssituatedin and around Sparta.132 Sellasia should not be regarded as typical of perioikic towns and villages throughout Laconia. Its proximity, small size, and strategiclocation may have enforcedupon it a ratherdifferent relationshipwithSparta than was enjoyedby the largerand more distant townsofLaconia.

129P. A. Gartledge,'City and chora in Sparta: archaicto in Cavanaghand Walker,39-47,at 43-4. hellenistic', 130See S. E. Alcock,'Mindingthe gap in hellenisticand Roman Greece',in Alcockand Osborne(n. 125),247-61,on thewidervalidityofthispatternin thecontextofruralcults. 131See LS ii. 382. The Phoibaion, which contained a templeof the Dioskouroi,and the sanctuaryof Poseidon Gaiaochos are said by Paus. iii. 20. 2 to have been not far fromTherapnai,but it is clear fromXen. Hell. vi. 5. 30-1 thatthesewereW of the riverbetweenSparta and Amyklai. See Bolte in RE s.v. 'Phoibaion', and most recently Kourinou,Σπάρτη, 199-210.

132There is no compellingreasonforthe cult of Artemis Selasia referred to by Hesychios(s.v.Σελασία)to have been located at Sellasia. The Ar relief with a dedicatory inscriptionto the Dioskouroi listed by Kolbe among the inscriptionsof Sellasia (IG ν. ι. 919) was foundat Vourliá from (modern Sellasia) and is most likelya pierreerrante Sparta or its immediate neighbourhood. See R. Parker, 'Spartanreligion',in Powell(n. 37), 142-72,at 145-6,on the evidenceforperioikicinvolvement in Spartancults.

222 Chapter5

On theperiphery oftheChrysaphabasintherewas at leastone and probablytwocultsites thatcan be classed above the level of small ruralsanctuaries.Unfortunately, one fallsjust in outsidethearea ofintensive and could be a more survey only investigated cursoryfashion, whilethe locationof the second is not securelyfixed.The firstoccupiesthe top of Phagia viewsin every (U3002),one ofthemostconspicuoushilltopsin centralLaconia,withextensive as a sanctuaryis based partlyon itscommanding direction. Itsidentification location,butalso of a fragment of a largearchaicinscribedstele.133 thisthereare on the discovery from Apart of late of tile and some archaicclassical There is nothing pottery early type. quantities glazed to indicatethatitsurvivedafterthisperiod. in the nineteenth of a second sanctuaryis based on the discovery, The identification and in of four of the so-called Laconian the area of hero-reliefs early twentiethcenturies, (U3001).With Chrysapha,whichmayoriginatefromone and the same siteat Pikromygdalia one of these were found an archaic inscriptionreferringto Hermes, a plaque with a dedicationto Zeus, a miniaturepot, and numeroussherdsof black-glazedand large coarse but its Stibbe in a recentstudyclaimsto have relocatedthe site of theirdiscovery, pots.134 precise positionis not given and it mustlie outside the area coveredby intensivefieldThere mustalso be seriousdoubtsconcerningtheantiquityofthecairnsofstones walking.135 in one ofwhichthemostfamoushero-relief was found;massivestone-piles derivedfromfield on clearanceare a commonfeaturein thelandscapeoftheChrysaphabasin.136 Nevertheless, the assumptionthattheyhad a commonoriginalfindplace,the occurrenceof fourof these reliefsmustimplythata sanctuaryof some importanceexistedsomewherein thearea. Some whichspan thethird idea oftheminimumperiodofitsuse is givenby thereliefsthemselves, century.137 quarterofthesixthto thesecondhalfofthefifth In thecase ofthelargesanctuaries, thesurfaceremainsin theformofvotivesand tracesof The identification leave no doubtabouttheirreligiousfunction. monumental usually buildings can be more cult sites,whichperhapsoftenlacked any builtstructures, of the lesser-order where difficult.138 Not onlydoes thenatureofthecultalwaysremainobscurebut sometimes, as a cultplace is open to question.Usuallyit thequantityofmaterialis small,itsidentification votivepots,terracotta is based on thepresenceofdiagnosticartefact types,ofwhichminiature fine wares have the strongestcult and abnormal clusters of small and plaques, figurines thatsome or all of thesehad otherthanpurelyreligious associations,thoughthe possibility There is no uniformpatternin the surfaceremainsor uses is freelyadmitted(see below).139 and locationof thesesmallcultsites.There is considerablevariationin the quantity, density, to thedurationoftheiruse. They withoutanyclearcorrelation extentofthematerialscatters, are also found in a varietyof locations, some in close juxtaposition to contemporary habitationsitesor at a shortdistanceaway,othersoccupyingmarginallocationsat thefringes w LSn. 214no. 1. 134 H. Dressel and A. Milchhoefer, 'Die antiken Kunstwerkeaus Sparta und Umgebung', AM 2 (1877), 293-474,at 303-7. 135 ötibbe,Dionysos (n. 12),5-9. 136It is possible that these stone-heaps originate in antiquityand are a relicof the workrequiredto make the land cultivable.A similarphenomenonhas been notedin a (n. 22),295. marginaluplandarea in Chios: Lambrinoudakis 137 David Hibler(pers.comm.)considersAthensNM 1417, datedlate 5th-cent. byStibbe,to be no earlierthan4th-cent. and quitepossiblystilllater.

138Sanctuariesof thistypehave receivedlittleattention: see Alcock(n. 130)fora usefuldiscussion,whichfocuseson smallsanctuariesofa laterdate. 139Elsewherediscretescattersof finewares have been as evidenceforruralburials:A. M. Snodgrass, interpreted M.-Th. 'Ruralburialin theworldofcities',in S. Marchegay,

etpouvoir:idéologies, le Dinahet, and J.-F. Salles (eds), Nécropoles Actesdu colloque'Théoriesde la nécropole pratiqueset interprétations. antique' (Lyon 21-25 janvier iggj) (Travaux de la Maison de

l'OrientMéditerranéen, 27; Paris,1998),37-42.

Early Iron Age to classical period 223

of or welloutsidethe settledand cultivatedlandscape.Some are foundon prominent hilltop sites,othersin muchlessconspicuousplaces.Theirperiodofuse can be shownin manycases coterminouswiththe siteswhose inhabitantswere mostlikely to have been approximately theirdevotees.Probablyforthis reason most are short-lived,like so many of the rural habitationsites. It U492 seemsto be an exampleof a smallcult siteconnectedto one nearbysettlement. ofclassicaltype.140 It is closeto U491,a figurines producedpartofa plaque and twoterracotta siteon theedge ofthe Chrysaphabasinwhichgrewfromvilla size in thelate archaicperiod into a small hamletin the classical and early hellenisticperiods. R296 is perhaps to be associatedwiththe clusterof late archaic-earlyclassicalsiteson the Neogene plateau at the southernedge of the surveyarea, close to a route linkingthe Eurotas valley and the in Chrysaphabasinand thecopiousKastororemaspringin thevalleybelow.It was apparently use fora shorttimein thelatearchaicperiodand consistedofa verysmallbutdensescatterof finepotteryand a fewminiaturepots coveringan area ofless than 10 sq m. Small drinkingof varioustypes,were the mostcommonceramic vessels,especiallystemmedcups (kylikes) form.Wherecultsitesas smallas thisare concerneditis morethanlikelythatsome,ifnotthe of thoseof similarsize thatonce existedhave been destroyedor buried,or have majority, byfield-walking. simplypassedundetected A numberofsmallcultsitesoccupymarginallocations.Three suchsites(K414,N430,P260) occurin a stripof desolateland along the southernside of the Sophronigorge.P260,oflate archaic-earlyclassicaldate,was markedby thepresenceof miniaturepots,and the absence oftilesuggestedthattherewas no cultbuilding.It is close to a clusterof contemporary sites at thehead oftheLoutsorema(P262,P272-4,P285-6).At N430thereare terracottafigurines Its locationon a seriesofnarrowconglomerate ofclassicaltype.141 ledgeson thesteepedge of a spur,in one of the areas least fitfor cultivation,also draws attention.The closest contemporarysites are N409 and P264. K414, probablyof late archaic date, has only a miniatureand a terracottafigurine.It is in a area of schist,otherwisedevoid of sitesof archaicor classicaldate,highabove thejunctionof the Sophronigorgewiththe Kelephina. Althoughall threeare in marginallocations,it is possiblethat,like R296, theylay close to ancientrouteswhichclimbedfromtheEurotasand Kelephinavalleysto thenorthern end of theplateau,one probablyrunningclose to thesanctuaryofZeus Messapeus(N415),theother perhaps ascendingthe northernflankof Chatzarorachi(zones Κ iv and L) and passing betweenN430 and N503.Apartfromthesethreesmall sanctuaries,anotherin a marginal location(A3018)is indicatedby thepresenceof a miniaturearyballos.It occupiedone ofthe two prominentpeaks (the Tourles)above the Kelephina valley,north-west of Sellasia, and in somewayassociatedwiththatvillageor thesmallruralsettlements was presumably which existedin itsperiphery. The occasional discoveryof miniaturesand terracottason sites consideredto have a habitationfunction primarily maysuggestone oftwothings:eitherthattheseobjectshad nonor that cults could be locatedwithinsmallhabitationsites.The mostplausible religioususes, alternative to a religiouspurposeis thattheywere used in mortuaryritual,whetherburied withthedead or placed as offerings at thegrave.However,untilmoreis knownofarchaicand in classicalmortuary Laconia thereis no basis fordecidingwhetheror not thisis a practice In case the numbers are low,implyingthat,if cultactivityis to be likelyexplanation. every 140 LS'n. 192-4nos 80, 86, 98.

141 LS'n. 192nos 75, 79.

224 Chapter5

understood,it was on a small scale. Singleminiaturepots occur at fivesites(B103,142 J224, P261/264,R427,S437/440),singleterracottaanimal figurinesat two (M325,U524), single femalefigurines at one (U516).The terracotta plaques at two(J230,K235),and twoterracotta in thesurvey of a classical the one found of intensive lamp, only sampling U490producedpart of with As be the area, and a figurine. might expected, possible cult majority objects six the eleven sitesare than size. of associationsare foundon sitesoflarger average Although the smallest fiveare in theuppersize range(0.07-0.13ha), onlyone beingamong farmsteads, (0.01 ha). Three are classifiedamongthe villa sites,the othertwo as hamlets.There is also sites.Althoughfourare short-lived, someweighting towardslonger-lived occupiedonlyin the late archaic to earlyclassical period, the remainderseem to have been occupied fortwo the hundredyearsor more;foursurvivedfromlate archaicto late classical,one throughout classical period, and anotherfromclassical into hellenisticand Roman, while U490 was apparentlyoccupied fromthe late archaicperiod to medievaltimeswithouta break.The same phenomenonof cult activitylocated withina habitationsite also occursat the large hamletsite U511,occupied formuch of the classical and hellenisticperiods.Althoughno ofsmallfinewares(in werefound,twodenseconcentrations miniatures or terracotta figurines areasA ii and D) are bestexplainedas votivedeposits. The characteristicsof the religiouslandscape may be brieflysummarized.The most conspicuouscultplaces,in termsof size,monumentalbuildings,the volumeof votives,and thatSpartancultsdominatedthelandscape all occurin Spartiateterritory, suggesting longevity, There is no in muchthe same way as Sparta dominatedLaconia politicallyand militarily. evidenceto suggestthatSellasiahad a majorcultplace ofitsown as a focusforcivicidentity. are generallysmall-scaleand all shortSanctuariesoutsidewhatmustbe Spartiateterritory of theseareas neverdeveloped,or werepreventedfrom thatthe inhabitants lived,suggesting whichis sucha markedfeatureof The discontinuity a senseofcommunalidentity. developing, the habitationsitesis equallynotableamong the cult sites.The two largercult sitesin the poorly Chrysapha basin, Phagia (U3002) and Pikromygdalia(U3001),are unfortunately understood.Both could have servedas a focusforthe scatteredpopulationof the area, but neitherseemsto havelastedmuchlaterthanthemid-fifth Instead,thereligiouslifeof century. theruralpopulationmayhavebeen conductedlocallybyindividualfamiliesor smallgroupsof families,eitherwithinthe boundariesof the siteor at places close by.For thesefragmented communities, Spartanfestivalsand sanctuariesmay have providedthe main occasionsand and theirreligiousconcernswerelargely in communalcultactivity, locationsforparticipation oftheSpartaplain. withthoseoftheinhabitants identified Summary and Discussion Beforegoing on to discussthe data recoveredby the surveyforthe archaic and classical of historicaleventsand the social and economicconditions periodswithinthe framework in the analysismaybe summarized. principalresultsoftheforegoing existing Laconia, can be detectedin thesurvey Aftertheend oftheLate BronzeAge,no traceof settlement area beforethe sixthcenturyBC, thoughcult activitybegan at the Menelaion and the Althoughsomesites sanctuaryofZeus Messapeusno laterthantheend oftheeighthcentury. themiddleof around occur the half of the sixth in first the century, majority perhapsoriginate 142 The possibility thatthiswas a cultsitehas been suggestedabove on thebasisofitsabnormalassemblageoffinewares.

Early Iron Age to classical period 225

the centuryor later, in what appears to have been a relativelyrapid phase of rural colonization.Four basic categorieshave been identifiedamong the sites of thisperiod, ofsitesweresmall,lessthan dominatednumerically byitssmallestelements.The vastmajority farmsteads. is 0.15 ha, and have been characterizedas single-household Althoughcertainty in manyifnotmostcases thesurfaceassemblagesharmonizewithwhatmightbe impossible, predictedat sitesof permanentresidence.A smallernumberof largersitesoccur,variously identified as Villas', small clustersof farmsteads, 'hamlets',and one village.Differentiation betweenthemis principallyby size, thoughindicationsof wealth may be importantfor betweenvillasand otherlargesites.The one villagesiteis identified as ancient distinguishing Sellasia,whoseoriginsseemno moreancientthanthemassofsmallersettlements. Apartfrom thesehabitationsites,the importantfortress of Agios Konstantinosnear Sellasia also came intouse,at theend ofthesixthor earlyin thefifth century. The distribution ofthesesiteswithinthesurveyarea is uneven,withmarkedconcentrations in thesouth-eastern sector(theNeogeneplateauand Chrysaphabasin)and thewesternsector (themarginsoftheEurotasvalley);thenorthernsectorwas muchless denselysettled,except forthe areas around Sellasia and Agios Konstantinos.Several factorsseem to have been influentialin governingsite location. Fundamentalwas the availabilityof good soils for withclear preferences forthe Neogene clays of the plateau and the southern cultivation, of the Eurotas the valley, developedschistsoilsalong itsnorthernmargins,and the margins terrarossaof the Chrysaphabasin. The limestoneand schisthillsand mountainsideswere almostcompletelydevoid of settlement, and theymay have largelypreservedtheirnatural cover mixture of forest and oak at higherelevations)throughout this (a vegetation maquis The notable a is small number of sites located on the of only period. exception junction the and of the for limestone,perhaps takingadvantage Neogene potential combiningarable cultivation withmountaingrazing.Sourcesof waterseem to have been influential in areas withouta perennialriveror streamin close proximity. in of sites the Clustering vicinityof in is notable several areas of the and the perennialsprings Neogene plateau fringesof the basin. access to local lines of whether the main river communication, Easy Chrysapha along in or on the areas of a was further consideration. Nodal valleys ridgetops highrelief, pointsin the communications networkseem to have been especiallyfavouredand, on the Neogene reinforced thepatternofclustering aroundwatersources.There can be plateauin particular, no doubtthattheinhabitants ofthesesitesweremainlyengagedin agriculture, witha strong likelihoodthatcerealcultivation was theirprimeconcern.Thereis no evidenceforoil or wine in theformofcrushingand pressinggear,whereasequipmentforgrinding cereals production is sometimesfound.A roughestimateof 1,025people is calculatedforthe populationof the withthe spreadof settlement is the appearanceof a numberof surveyarea. Contemporary small ruralshrines,frequently on what may be assumedto have been the marginsof the cultivated landscape. Aroundthemiddleofthefifth a radical century, perhapsin thesecondhalfofthecentury, occurred. This involved the desertion of in sites the three bottom change permanent many the and a in increase the number of farmsteads, categories,especiallyamong corresponding 'villas'and 'hamlets'.Althoughthetimescaleis ratheruncertain, theindicationsare thatthese occurredwithina shortperiod. Certainpartsof the surveyarea were worse developments affected thanothers,notablytheNeogeneplateauwheresome areas wereonlyreoccupied,if otherareas seemto havegainedin thenumberand size ever,at a muchlaterdate.Conversely, of sites,in particularthe Chrysaphabasin and the marginsof the Eurotasvalley.Late in the the firstsignsof any seriousinterestin the period,in the secondhalfof the fourthcentury,

226 Chapter5

schistuplandsofthenorthern sectoroccur,an interest thatwas to growin thehellenistic and laterperiodsand stillprevailstoday.There are slightindicationsthatthe villageof Sellasia in thisrespect.There also grewin thisperiod,thoughthesurveydata are notveryinformative is also an impression ofgreateractivity at thefortress ofAgiosKonstantinos, especiallyin the in the occupationof sites; fourthcentury. Overallthereis a markeddegreeof discontinuity whenit occurs,is morefrequent on thelargersites.In a fewcases,we maysuspect continuity, thata newsitecloseto thelocationofa desertedearlierone reflects theshiftin residenceofa thereseems to have been a changed household.Accompanyingthese shiftsin settlement, forthecolluvialsoilsalong the Eurotas valleyand the terra rossaofthe Chrysapha preference Water to at the of the seem have exercisedless basin, expense Neogene clays. supplies influenceon site locationthan in the precedingperiod,as does access to naturallines of communication.In spiteof the increasein largersites,the populationof the surveyarea to the probablydeclined;our calculationsproducea roughestimateof 855. Corresponding in in thereis a reduction thenumberofruralshrinesand a similarpattern decline settlement of discontinuity. By the end of the fourthcenturytherealso seemsto have been a declineat the major statesanctuaries, as measuredby evidenceforbuildingactivityand the quantities and qualityofthevotivesrecoveredin excavation. THE RURAL ECONOMY

and thesanctuaries, thereis nothingto suggestthat WiththeexceptionofAgiosKonstantinos any of the sitesof thesetwo periodswere involvedin any otherformof productionthan Unlessthequarriesin theEurotasgorge(E49)wereopened thisearly,thereis no agriculture. or manufacturing evidenceforspecialistsitesinvolvedwithextractive processes.The scope of exchangealso seemsto havebeen confinedwithina narrowgeographicalcontext.Small-scale in anysectorofthesurvey exchangesno doubtoccurredbetweenneighboursand inhabitants area, but Sparta musthave been the focusof commercialactivity, beingboth the centreof in centreforthe the wider and the and life social, region presumed religious political, of manufactured and large population, includingnot goods.143 Sparta's production exchange and a number of the affluent class but substantial (craftsmen non-agriculturalists ruling only artisansamongothers),musthave createda demandforstapleproductsand luxuries.These needs seem to have been largelysatisfiedlocallythroughsimpletransactionsbetweenthe peripheryand the central place, and did not provide the stimulusfor any substantial in externalexchangenetworks. There is nothingto indicatea flowofgoods into involvement thisalmostclosed economic systemfromregionsbeyondLaconia and Messenia, though Sparta probablyservedmuch of inland Laconia as the marketforthe limitedquantityof and itemsthatcould notbe foundlocally.Even in Spartaitselfimports importedcommodities in peripheralareas suchas thatcovered non-existent are notablyscarce,and theyare virtually in reflect isolation must the This economic Sparta'sinlandlocation,remote part survey. by fromthe main lines of maritimetrade,but it also resultsfromLaconia's capacityforselfin mostessentialsand raw materials:agricultural produce,metalores (iron,silver sufficiency and lead, perhapscopper),buildingstone,timber,and pottingclay,as well as subservient labour.It suggeststhatsurplusproductionby the wealthywas deployedlargelyin a local ofservicesand foruse in competitive context,perhapsfortheprocurement display.However, in the Mediterranean of Laconian pottery, the widespreaddistribution exportedthroughout 143 In thisrespectI disagreewiththosewholocatethebulkofartisanalproductionin partsofLaconia otherthanSparta.

Early Iron Age to classical period 227

the sixthcentury, includingwhatmay be Laconian transport amphoras,showsthat,even if therewas littledemandforimportsin inlandLaconia, the opportunities forenrichment by in elaborate more networks were not exchange participating completely ignored.144 Spartawas not isolatedin otherrespects,havingclose relationswithplaces such as Samos and certainly Kyrene,strongconnectionswith the two main panhellenic sanctuariesat Olympia and Delphi,and personalrelationsin mostregionsofthePéloponnèseand centralGreeceas well as moredistantplaces.145 was the main preoccupationof the rural If,as has been arguedabove, arable cultivation sites,greatand small,thepotentialscope foranimalhusbandryshouldnotbe neglected.The scale and formsof stockmanagementpractisedin Greece,bothin historicaland prehistoric The generaltendencyhas periods,have been the subjectof considerablerecentattention.146 been to play down the scale of animal herdingand to reduce the scope for extensive of the classicalpolis. The restraints on large-scalestock pastoralismwithinthe framework smallterritories, managementapplywithparticularforceto statescontrolling comparatively whereanimal husbandrywas probablylargelyconfinedwithina mixedfarmingregimein was alwayson arable crops.At the same timethepotentialimportanceof whichthepriority animalhusbandryhas been recognized,bothfortheanimalproductsthatcould be deployed in marketexchange,especiallyby thewealthy, and in providinga formof 'storedcapital'.In as themain constraints on stockmanagement Laconia, twofactorsthathave been identified - thedominantinterests elsewhere ofarablefarmersoverherders,and a shortageoflabourrestrictions, applyin a muchless acute form.Territorial occasioningconflictbetweenarable and a shortageofadequate grazingthroughout farmers and herdsmen, theyearare relatively Vast tracts of land with little other than as extensive insignificant. agriculturalpotential exist outside the main zones of arable cultivation. The areas occur in the pasture largest Parnonand Taygetosmountainranges,stretching fromthe northernbordersof Laconia to the Maléa and Máni peninsulas.Both summerand wintergrazingare availablewithinthe range of altitudes,allowingseasonal movementsof flockswithminimalencroachmenton 144On thedistribution ofLaconianpotterysee M. Nafissi, 'Distributionand trade', in Stibbe, MixingBowls (n. 12), studisullastoriae la societàdi 68-88; id., La nascitadelkosmos: Sparta(Naples, 1991),236-53. On widerissuesof Laconian artisticproduction,see S. Hodkinson, 'Lakonian artistic productionand the problem of Spartan austerity',in N. Fisherand H. van Wees (eds),Archaic Greece: NewApproaches and New Evidence(London, 1998), 93-117; for a rather different approach,see R. Förtsch,'Spartan art: its many different deaths',in Cavanaghand Walker,48-54. 143òamos: r. A. L-artledge,öparta and bamos: a special relationship',CQ n.s. 32 (1982),243-59; Nafissi,Nascita(n. 144),255-76; C. M. Stibbe,'LakonischeKeramikaus dem Heraion von Samos', AM 112 (1997), 25-142, at 31-47. in the Spartan Cyrene: I. Malkin, Myth and Territory Mediterranean (Cambridge, 1994), 143-91. Olympia: C. andOracles:The Transformation and Morgan,Athletes ofOlympia BC (Cambridge, 1990), 99 103. Delphiin theEighthCentury Delphi: ibid. 168-71.Personalconnections:P. A. Cartledge, andtheCrisisofSparta(Londonand Baltimore,1987), Agesilaos and theGreekCity 243-5; G. Herman, RitualisedFriendship (Cambridge,1987),167-75,appendixA; S. Hodkinson,'The developmentof Spartan society and institutionsin the

archaicperiod',in L. G. Mitchelland P.J. Rhodes (eds),The Greece Development ofthePolisinArchaic (Londonand New York, 1997),83-102,at 93; L. G. Mitchell,Greeks Bearing Gifts:The PublicUseofPrivate in theGreekWorld, Relationships 435-323BC (Cambridge,1QQ7), ^1-6^. '4<)Amongthe mostimportant contributions are Halstead (n. 37); id., 'Pastoralismor householdherding?Problemsof scale and specializationin earlyGreek animal husbandry', World 28.1 (1996),20-42;J. Ε Cherry,'Pastoralism Archaeology, and the role of animals in the pre- and proto-historic economiesof the Aegean', in C. R. Whittaker (ed.), Pastoral Economies in ClassicalAntiquity (PC PS supp. 14; Cambridge, 1988),6 34; S. Hodkinson,Animalhusbandryin the Greek polis', ibid. 35 74; id., 'Politics as a determinant of thecase ofsouthernGreece,ca. 800-300 BC',in pastoralism: R. Maggi, R. Nisbet,and G. Barker(eds), Archeologia della. 2 vols ( =· Rivistadi studiliguri, méridionale, pastorizia neWEuropa 56 7; Bordighera,1990 1), 139-63; Forbes,'Pastoralism'(n. 81); id., 'Identification'(n. 81); see also Osborne (n. 37), 47-52. The more conventionalview is expressedin J. E. Skydsgaard, 'Transhumance in ancient Greece', in Whittaker (above),75-86.

228 Chapter5

oflargeflockscouldpresumably arableland. Second,thelabourrequiredforthemanagement the havebeen suppliedbythehelots,without adversely affecting labouravailableforthefarming roleforthe as havingan important to advocate This is not and tree ofarable pastoralism crops. arable Most of form of transhumance. existence let alone the any majorityof landowners, of farm-based than small numbers more to farmerswereprobablyunable manage animals, goodsforexchange.Rather,itis to draw meetingmainlyhouseholdneedsratherthanproviding labourat theirdisposal,to withthenecessary to thescopethatexistedforthewealthy, attention of fortheidentification criteria exploitlargeareasofmarginalgrazingland.Untilarchaeological associated pastoralsites(forexample,diagnostictypesin the ceramicassemblagespecifically it willbe hardto are established, suchas milkingand cheesemaking) withpastoralproduction in theruraleconomy.147 ofanimalhusbandry makean accurateassessment However,somesites to havehad, at leastin part,a pastoralrole (P272,P273,P274,P285)havealreadybeen suggested at theedges on thebasisoftheirlocationand byanalogywithcontemporary practice.Positioned ofthearableterrainand mountainpasture,theymayhaveserved,at leastforpartoftheyear,as basesforlargeflocksrangedon theopen mountainsides. Todaythesame area supportsseveral largeflocksof morethana hundredgoats,foldedin mandrasin preciselythe same physical situationas theirancientpredecessors. Althoughcurrentpracticemaynotbe a good guideto in instance. this hard to resist it is behaviour, particular past OF THE SURVEYAREA THE INHABITANTS ofthe surveyarea are and changein the settlement Whilethebasic patternsofdevelopment is besetwithdifficulties. ofLaconianhistory clearenough,relatingthemto our understanding Foremostamong these are the uncertaintiessurroundingsome of the most fundamental and thesequenceofeventsin mostof especiallyin thechronology aspectsofLaconianhistory, ofthesurveydata mustalso theperiodbeforethePersianwars.The chronological imprecision be acknowledged,makingit difficult,if not impossible,to relate changingpatternsof attestedeventsor episodes,suchas thegreatearthquakeof behaviourto historically settlement helot rebellion. BG and the subsequent 465 us withtheextentofourignoranceabout Broachingthemostbasic questionofall confronts ofarchaicand classicalLaconia. Who were mattersin thefunctioning someoftheelementary the people thatoccupiedtheseruralsitesin the sixthto fourthcenturies?The answermust involvea degree of diversity,correspondingto the fact that the surveycovers an area of a known extendingfromthe immediateperipheryof ancientSparta into the territory are likely inhabitants who the certain be we can At its two extremes town. reasonably perioikic to have been. A Spartiatepresenceof some sort,whetherin personor in the formof helotworkedfarmsand estates,seemsinevitablein mostof thewesternsector,especiallythatpart of the small southof the confluenceof the Eurotasand Kelephina.Likewise,the inhabitants to be ofSellasiaare reasonablytakento be itsdependantsand therefore sitesin theperiphery a area and of the total a small involve two zones these survey However, part only perioikoi. in the the of The character of sites. number small remainder, particular large comparatively numberof sitesin the south-eastern sector,is muchless clear.For theseonlytwo plausible of smallfarmsteads exist.EithertheywereunderSpartiatecontrol,consisting interpretations 147Cherry(n. 70), 100-1; Forbes,'Identification'(n. 81), 333-4. A 4th-cent. pastoral site has tentativelybeen identifiedin an upland part of Chios on the basis of the

structural remains,and thesame area has producedevidence forthe existenceof farmsengaged in arable and pastoral Lambrinoudakis activities: (n. 22),296-9.

Early Iron Age to classical period 229

or one and largerestatesworkedbyhelotlabour,or,at leastin part,theybelongedtoperioikoi in known to have existed at for whom residence the of the inferior Sparta, citywas groups If not the conventional view is we can exclude these sites followed, presumably necessary. to from the those closest the homes of Sparta itself) among Spartanélite, (exceptperhaps whosepoliticaland social dutiesrequiredthem,whetherby law or practice,to livein one of the fourvillagescomprisingancientSparta or at Amyklai.The possibilitythatthesesites accommodatedrefugeesfromoutsideLaconia can also be discarded.AlthoughSparta is it controlled, all werewithin knownto have resettled refugeepopulationswithintheterritory in none was settlements and let alone so close to itself.148 It seems nucleated Laconia, Sparta an in In inconceivablethatsuch eventwouldhave leftno echo the historicalrecord. viewof theseuncertainties, our approachwillbe to presentthearguments foreach alternative and to thequestionon thebasisofpreconceivedideas. resist,as faras possible,prejudging THE EXTENT OF SPARTAN TERRITORY

Anyattemptto answerthe questionposed above requiressome knowledgeof the extentof as distinct fromthatoftheperioikoi, as wellas conditionsofland tenureand Spartanterritory, restraints on land ownershipthatmighthavepreventedone or othergroupfrominvolvement in thesettlement ofthisarea. For some or mostSpartiates,at least a portionof theirlivelihoodmusthave been derived fromestatesin Laconia, presumablyin Spartan territory, as well as fromtheirextensive How extensivewas thisterritory? Its boundaries,if such existed, possessionsin Messenia.149 are mosteasilydelimitedbyreference to theneighbouring To thenorth,its perioikictowns.150 limitsmusthavebeen definedby theterritories belongingto thetownsofPellanaon thewest sideoftheEurotasand Sellasiaon theeast.Pellanahas evidenceforEarlyIronAge and later bordersfroman early date. occupation,and musthave definedSparta's north-western Sellasia,on theotherhand,appearsto have been occupiedno earlierthanthewave ofrural colonizationin thesixthcentury, and cannothaveconstituted a limitation to Spartanterritory untilthistime.The clearestindicationthatit servedas sucha boundaryin theclassicalperiod comesfromthe end of the fifth when embassiesfromAthensare not permittedto century, Sellasia without the proceedbeyond ephors'approval(Xen. Hell.ii. 2. 13, 19). The northern borderperhapsran roughlyeast-westbetweenthehillofAgiosKonstantinos and themodern of on the of at a the head of ravine Vordonia, village footslope Taygetos deep (EllinitsaRéma) whichfeedsinto the Eurotas.North-eastand east of Sparta,thereare no knownperioikic townsor villageson the westside of the Parnonwatershed.Geronthraiis the best-attested a perioikictownin thisdirection,situatedwell to the south-eastof Sparta and controlling that cannot have conflicted much with in interests. the It, too, originates territory Spartiate in the and prosperouscommunity EarlyIron Age and appears to have been a flourishing In the same generalarea was the small village (κώμη) of archaic and classicalperiods.151 withremainsfoundat AgiosAthanásios,Nerotrívi.152 The area Selinous,perhapsidentifiable 148Earlyresettlement of refugeesfromArgiveAsine and of Nauplia in Messenia:Cartledge,SL 126,140.Resettlement in theThyreatisin 431:ibid.245. Aiginetanrefugees 149It is not clear whetherSpartansotherthan the kings ownedpropertyin perioikicterritories or iftheseterritories were rigidlydefined: see Shipley,'Perioikos', 217, 222; Shipley,'"OtherLakedaimonians'",204-5.

150See the discussionby Bölte in RE s.v. 'Sparta', cols 1321-40;also Shipley,'Perioikos',217. 151 'Geraki1' to 'Geraki6'. 152 A.J. B. Wace and F. W. Hasluck,'East-central Laconia', BSA 15(1908-9),158-76,at 164-5;LSÜ--286, FF98.

230 Chapter5

west of Sparta is dominatedby the Taygetosmassif,an area devoid of knownperioikic in the plain of withcertainty To the south,no perioikictowncan be identified settlements. Pharis and settlements at were nucleated that there It is doubtful Bryseaiin the Sparta. historicalera,whatevertheirstatushad been in theLate BronzeAge. Their reputeseemsto be based more on theirmentionin the Homeric poems than on any historicalreality. Between Sparta and Gytheion,Krokeai and Aigiai are the only potentialcandidatesas perioikicvillages.Krokeai was located close to the modernvillage of Krokées (formerly The same applies to Aigiai, Levétsova),but littleis knownof its originsor earlyhistory.153 to indicate in its but thereis enoughevidencefroma ruralsanctuary presumedterritory indicates evidence far as it the So goes, occupationin the archaic and classicalperiods.154 was probablyrestrictedto the northbut could potentiallyhave that Spartiateterritory extendedunhinderedovera largearea to theeast and south.On thisbasis,thearea covered belongingto Sellasia in the north,all by the surveymight,withthe exceptionof territory have been underitscontrol. within An approximate calculationofthearea ofland availableforagricultural exploitation theselimits(excludingforthemomentthesurvey'ssouth-eastern sector)can be made,which terrainand areas ofhighrelief.The plainofSpartaitself, excludesmountainous includingthe excellent Itslow reliefaffords smallarea on theeastsideoftheriver,coversabout 120sq km.155 foot of the the of water with abundant for arable cultivation, along supplies opportunities it from into the streams in and the Eurotas as well as draining perennial range Taygetos far as the as west side of the on the north of The area Eurotas, hypothetical Sparta Taygetos. rising boundarywithPellana,comprisesabout 40 sq kmofbroken,heavilydissectedfoothills and Such land is best suitedto treecropsand viticulture, to the base of the mountainsides. on the east km land occurs of similar A further cultivation. for arable 50 sq requiresterracing sideoftheEurotasbetweenthemodernvillageofSkouraand theapproximate boundarywith east of Poros incised the Geronthrai Rema, thoughnot Anargyroi), Agioi just (perhaps deeply South of the plain,the Vardouniahillscomprise all thisneed have been Spartiateterritory. verymixed terrain,containingpocketsof open arable land (such as around the modern villagesofPotamiáand Daphni) but dominatedby heavilydissectedareas ofmoderaterelief. 80 sq km. These This area, lyingto the northand westof modernKrokees,adds a further half consistsoffirstless than which of of total a notional estimates km, slightly 270 sq produce ofthesurvey sector km if the south-eastern to increase This would land. arable 305 sq grade area also belongedto Sparta. of Sparta,because of its The Sparta plain may reasonablybe takenas the core territory and itsagriculturalqualities.The plain was sharedwithAmyklai,itselfa relativeproximity situatedin it. The constituent partofthepolisof Sparta and the onlyotherlargesettlement rest of the territorydescribed above must,for the most part, have been of marginal to cultivate,and less productive.The value,beingless accessible,moredifficult agricultural underlined to be seems of this core by the location of a numberof territory significance This categoryof sanctuary,brieflydiscussed extra-urbansanctuariesaround its edges.156 ™ LS''. 295,JJ120. 154LS ii. 296,JJ124. whichlastedfrom For the sanctuary, cent,to theLR period,see Bonias,Αιγιές. themid-7th 155This figureis based on the 1 : 50,000 map series produced by the Hellenic Army Geographical Service Gytheionsheets). (Spárti,Goritsá,Xerokámbion,

156The same phenomenonhas separatelybeen notedby Cartledge(n. 129),43-4.

Early Iron Age to classical period 231

above,whoseoriginsin the earlystagesofstateformationare well established,has in other in thedemarcationofthe cultivatedland, ifnot the Greekstatesbeen seen to be significant territorialboundaries, of a polis.151Typically they are located at the margins of the cultivatedland and the mountainousterrain,close to the borderswith a neighbouring state.The evidenceforthe Spartansanctuariesis ofveryunevenqualitybut suggestiveall thesame. Somewhereat thenorthedge oftheplain,on the east side ofthe river,was the sanctuary ofApollo Pythaèusat Thornax.158 As alreadyseen,it existedat leastfromthemiddleofthe its and sixthcenturybut origins the detailsof its historyare unknown.That sanctuariesof Apollo Pythaëusperhaps had particularlystrongassociationswithborder zones lends it In the same area, but set further added significance.159 back on the north-west edge of the Neogene plateau,is the sanctuaryof Zeus Messapeus,whose originscan be tracedto the second halfof the eighthcentury.Here, too, the cult titlemay correspondto its marginal betweenone territory and another.100 The peculiarcharacterof the position,intermediate votive assemblage may also suggestan initiatoryfunction,typicalof such extra-urban sanctuaries.161 Continuingsouthon the east side of the plain, on an isolatedridgeof the Neogeneplateauis theMenelaion,the sanctuaryof Helen and Menelaos,wherecultis also firstattestedin thelate eighthcentury. The same area, ancientTherapne,is also associated withthe Dioskouroi,thoughit is unclear if therewas a specificsanctuarydedicated to them.162On the west side of the plain, the Eleusinion at Kalyvia Sochás is situated below the footof Taygetos.Here, too, cult is firstattestedin the latereighth immediately Not farnorth,perhapsat Agios Ioánnis Ríganas and knownonlyfromliterary century.163 sources,therewas a sanctuaryof Dionysos at Bryseai.104 Nothingis knownof its early Isolated finds of votives of archaic and classical date at Anógeia, 3 km south of history. are indicative of in another cult the area.165 It is less clearwhetherthe Sochas, Kalyvia place architectural remainsat Arkasádes,in the plain 1.5 km north-eastof Xirokámbi,are in situ or representspolia broughtfromone ofthe othersanctuariesin the area.166At Anthochóri, in the south-west cornerof the plain, thereseemsto have been anothersanctuaryof Zeus 157de Polignac,Naissance (η. 11),23-92; Cults(η. 11),21-88. Whilecommanding generalacceptance,thepitfallsin a rigid applicationof de Polignac'stheoryare clear: see e.g. C. M. Antonaccio,'Placingthe past: the BronzeAge in the cultic ofearlyGreece',in Alcockand Osborne(n. 125), topography 79-104;C. Morgan,'The evolutionof a sacral "landscape": Isthmia,Perachora and the early Corinthianstate', ibid. 105-42; I. Malkin, 'Territorialdominationand the Greek and sanctuary',in P. Hellströmand B. Alroth(eds),Religion Power in the Ancient Greek World: Proceedingsof the Uppsala

Symposium iggj (Boreas,24; Uppsala, 1996),75-81. 150See above,nn. 27, 127,and p. 220. 159de rohgnac,Cults(n. 11),54-5. bee also r. rrontera,II tronodi Apollo in Amicle: appuntiper la topografiae la storiareligiosadi Spartaarcaica',AnnalideliaFacoltàdi Lßttere e FilosofiadelVUniversità di Perugia,18 (1980-1), 217-30, at 220-6, who suggeststhatthe statuesof Apollo Pythaëusat Thornaxand ofApolloat AmyklaimarkedtheΝ and S limits ofSparta'soriginalterritory. 160The originalsuggestion(R. W. V Catlingand D. G. J. inscribed Shipley,'Messapian Zeus: an earlysixth-century cup fromLakonia', BSA 84 (1989), 187-200,at 196-7) that

thetitleMessapeuswas somehowderivedfromtheregionof Messapia in SE Italy has been criticized by L. Dubois, Bulletin épigraphique, 1991,no. 297; he drawsattentionto the oftoponyms withtherootΜεσ(σ)απ-/Μεταπ-in frequency thePéloponnèseand in Laconia in particular. 161 de Polignac,Cults(n. 11),41-5,60-81. 102This associationis most clearlyarticulatedby Pindar (Pyth.xi. 61-4; Nem.χ. 55-7; Isthm.i. 30-1) but may already be currentin Alkman(fr.19 Calame, commentary fr.c). The assertionin Steph. Byz. (s.v. Θεράπναι) that therewas a sanctuaryoftheDioskouroiat Therapnaimaybe based on a carelessreadingofPaus. iii. 20. 2. 103C. M. Stibbe, Das Lleusmionam Fussedes Taygetosin Lakonien',BA Besch.68 (1993),71-105,at 88. On thenature of this cult see R. Parker,'Demeter, Dionysus and the Spartan pantheon',in R. Hägg, Ν. Marinatos,and G. C. Nordquist (eds), Early GreekCult Practice:Proceedings of the^th International at theSwedishInstituteat Athens(26- 2g Symposium

June, 1086)Stockholm,1988),00-103. 164Stibbe(n. 163),83-4; LS ii. 290,GG339. l6$LSii. 291,00118. 166LS ii. 293,GG104.

232 Chapter3

Messapeus.167 Early Iron Age activityat the site is alleged, but it is unclearwhetherthis shouldbe associatedwiththe cult,forwhichthereis certainevidenceonlyfromthe sixth closeto theancientroadbetweenSpartaand the It is lessclearwhetherthesanctuary century. as the identifiable Achilleion,shouldbe classifiedin the same Megalopolisbasin,perhaps m 600 north of the north-east it is situated gate of the hellenistic only category.168 Although west bank of the Eurotas.It, too,has hills the it is to the foot of the close fringing steep city, I do notincludethegreatsanctuary fromthelate eighthcentury.109 evidenceforcultactivity ofApollo and Hyakinthos at Agia Kyriakínear Amyklaiin thislist,thoughit is regardedby it must If it had any territorial some as Sparta'sgreatterritorial significance, sanctuary.170 and the social associated festival the and its be that political represented surely sanctuary betweenthevillagesofSparta unionforged, at an unknowndatebeforethemid-sixth century, a criticalstagein theevolutionoftheSpartanstate.171 and Amyklai, Whiletheextra-urban sanctuariesshouldprobablynotbe takento marktheboundariesof cultivatedlandscape, theymaywelldemarcatethe extentof theintensively Spartanterritory, Their tendsto corroborate established. distribution were first at leastas itwas at thetimethey in the later the that thenegativeevidencedrawnfrom survey eighth,seventh,and earlysixth theplain. The areas lying activities within theiragricultural centuriesthe Spartansrestricted beyondtheselimitswere perhaps regardedas wilderness,the preserveof pastoralistsand acute along thewesternedge of the plain,wherethe is particularly hunters.The distinction is immediate. mountainsides betweencultivated transition landscapeand precipitous DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION

In the absence of surveydata, thereis verylittleevidenceto indicatehow the population on the ground.In practical was distributed of thiscore territory involvedin the cultivation terms,much of the northernpart of the plain could have been workedfromSparta itself, withoutthe need forrural settlement.Likewise,the southernpart lay well withinthe ofAmyklai.However,it seemsmuchmorelikelythatthehelots,who are presumed catchment to havefarmedtheplain,residedon theland ratherthanin Spartaand Amyklai, perhapsin a This seemsto be impliedby thearchaeological and hamlets.172 mixtureofisolatedfarmsteads evidence,suchas itis,as wellas bya fewpassagesin Xenophon.Severalsiteswhichappearto ratherthan sanctuarieshave been identifiedat Tserámio,perhapsat Agios be settlements the at Unfortunately, Georgios, Agios Vasileiosand nearby,and probablyat Anthochori.173 the even of for the is evidence establishing purposes generallyinadequate published 167LS ii. 293, GG108;Bölte in RE s.v. 'Messapeai'. See Catlingand Shipley(n. 160), 195-6, fora discussionof the problems in correlatingthe archaeological and literary thattherewere two sanctuariesof evidence.The possibility Zeus Messapeus in the plain of Sparta, one at Anthochori and one much closer to Sparta (correspondingto that to byPaus. iii. 20. 3), cannotbe discarded. referred 168G. Dickins,'Excavationsat Sparta, 1907: a sanctuary on theMegalopolisroad',BSA 13(1906-7),169-73. 169P. Pelagatti and C. M. Stibbe, 'Una forma poco conosciutadi vaso lacónico:il cratèrea campana', Bollettino wi(iq88), 13-2^,at 1^-16,figs3-4. d'arte, 170 de Polignac,Cuits(n. 11),44-5, 64-8; Cartledge(n. 129), 44. There seem to me to be severalobjectionsto thisview. Cult activityat the Amyklaion,if not continuousfromthe LBA as increasingly believed,is probablyno laterthan the

of Spartaitselfin the 10thcent.,so thatit cannot settlement be treatedin the same termsas thosesanctuarieswherecult is firstattestedin the later 8th cent. Morgan (n. 157)has showna similarsequence at the sanctuaryof Poseidon at Isthmiain relationto theemergenceoftheCorinthianstate. It is also misleading to suggestthat the Amyklaionwas situated at the margins of the agriculturalland. If not absolutelycentral,it is neverthelessfirmlylocated in the midstofthecultivated landscape. 171This dimensionis acknowledgedby de Polignac,Cults (n. 11),67; Cartledere (n. 12a),46. 172See J. Ducat, Les Hilotes(BCH suppl. 20; Paris,1990), 62-4. 173LS 11.289-93; respectively, nos GG85,GG337,GG101, GG266,GG108.

Early Iron Age to classical period 233

ofthesesites,let alone theirsize. Only at Anthochori are thereclear approximate chronology indications ofoccupationbeforethesixthcentury, and it is possiblethata villageexistedhere, in the furthest cornerof the Sparta plain. Otherwisenone of thesesitesseemsto be larger than a hamlet or cluster of farmsteads,and some single-farmsteadsites may also be represented.There is no unambiguousreferencein the literarysources to any named settlementin the Sparta plain occupied in the historicalperiod, apart fromSparta and Amyklai.As alreadysuggested,Pharisand Bryseaiseem to have been no more thanplacenamesin thisera,whiletheothertoponyms (suchas Alesiai)can all be understoodas referring to districts ratherthansettlements.174 This pictureis reinforced byXenophon'saccountofthe invasionofLaconia in thewinterof370/69,in whichhe refersto theplundering ofhousesfull ofgoodsalongtheeastbankoftheEurotasand to similardepredations againsthousesin the area ofAmyklai(Xen. Hell.vi. 5. 27,30). Whilethereis somedegreeofcertainty in the aboutthegeneralcharacteristics ofsettlement in orderto have Spartaplain,evidencefordatingthespreadofruralsitesis lacking.Naturally, a well-founded ofeventsin thesurveyarea we need to knowmuchmoreabout understanding in theplainmoreor thesituationin Sparta'scoreterritory. Was thespreadofruralsettlement withthe emergenceof the extra-urbancults at the end of the eighth less contemporary as in otherpartsof Greece,or was it partof the same processthatled to the rapid century, colonizationof theNeogeneplateauand Chrysaphabasin,or perhapsunrelatedto eitherof thesedevelopments? The smallfragment of the plain investigated by the surveyon the east side of the Eurotasmay providea clue to the answer.There is nothingto indicatethatthe appearanceof ruralsitesin the stripof land betweenthe Menelaionand Geladarioccurred thathas been anyearlieror laterthanin otherpartsofthe surveyarea. The onlydistinction observedbetweensitesin thisarea and elsewhereis qualitative, in the comparativeevidence forthestorageofproduce,itselflikelyto have a directcorrelation withdistancefrom,or ease ofaccessto,Sparta.The apparentcontemporaneity in bothareas, ofthespreadofsettlement one ofwhich(thewesternsectorborderingtheEurotas)musthavebeen underdirectSpartan to supporttheconclusionthatthesurvey's southcontrol,couldbe used as a further argument easternsectorshouldalso be assignedto Spartiateterritory. If thisis right,the regionto its south and east, approximatelyas far as Agioi Anargyroi,should also be incorporated. about 35 sq kmofland withsomepotentialforcultivation, Togetherthetwoareas contribute mostofitdissectedand withmoderaterelief, butincludingsome9 sq kmofflatter land in the and basin the Charakokambos between Kalloni Chrysapha valley (formerly Perpeni)and Goritsa. THE MID-SIXTH-CENTURY

EXPANSION

of Sellasia, all the land in the Proceedingon the assumptionthat,apart fromthe territory area was under several further survey Spartancontrol, questionshave to be addressed.How do we accountforthisrelatively suddenspreadofsettlement in themid-sixth and by century, whatmeanswas it accomplished? The answermaybe ofa specificor a moregeneralnature, relatingeitherto theparticularhistoryof Sparta and Laconia or to widerdemographicand socio-economicdevelopments. In spiteof itslandlockedposition,Spartawas activefroman in date the establishment of colonies and aggressivein the pursuitof territorial early 174The same is trueof named areas borderingthe plain, such as Therapnai.The place referred to by thisname did

notcorrespondto a settlement or evena settledlandscape,as haveclearlyproved. yearsofarchaeologicalinvestigation

234 Chapter5

expansionwhenoccasion demanded.The conquestof Messenia in the latereighthcentury was the mostsignificant act of territorial but was probablyaccompaniedby enlargement, in in settlements and Messenia itself There are also indications Spartan Triphylia (Thouria).175 that Sparta asserted control over some southern parts of Arkadia, especially in the Megalopolisbasin,perhapsjoiningtheseto itsMessenianpossessions.The conqueredland in Messeniawas exploitedthroughcoercionof the nativepopulationas an agricultural labour force,obligedto giveup a largeportionoftheirproduceto theirSpartanmasters.176 Although some of its coloniesmay have servedto bolsterSpartan interests, otherswere apparently conceivedas a means of resolvinginternaltensions.If the traditionshave any historical thiswas certainly thecase withTaras and earlierwiththesettlement ofThera,as well validity, as laterwithDorieus'scolonizingactivities. It is also clear thatthe conquestofMesseniadid not satisfySparta'sappetiteforterritorial The long-drawn-out and ultimately enlargement. unsuccessful warwithTegea in thefirsthalfofthesixthcenturyclearlyaimedto repeatin the Tegean plain what had earlierbeen done in Messenia: to apportionthe land among the The Spartansand to exploitthe conqueredlocal populationas an agrarianlabour force.177 an territorial with prizeofsuccesswouldhavebeen substantial, enlargingSpartan possessions area ofarableplainsomewhatlargerthantheirown Spartanplain.In theevent,failurein this led the Spartansto developa new strategy based on cooperativealliancesrather enterprise thanconquest,fromwhichtheso-calledPeloponnesianleaguedeveloped.Althoughthedetails ofthiswar withTegea escape us, in particulartheidentity ofthosewho wereto benefitfrom the divisionof the newlyconqueredterritory, it is tempting to associatethisfailurewiththe in of settlement Laconia so attested itself, expansion eloquently bythesurvey. If we assumethatthe appetiteforexpansionwas fedby need ratherthangreed,thisneed would have remainedafterSparta had settledits differences withTegea. How such a need have arisen can be the division of land in Messeniahad not might only conjectured.Maybe been of equal benefitto all. Perhaps populationgrowth,combinedwiththe progressive diminutionof landholdingsthroughpartitiveinheritance,contributedto the gradual of a substantialnumberof Spartiates.More important thaneitherof these, impoverishment in Laconia in be the of and economic however, may signs increasingprosperity development thefirsthalfofthesixthcentury. The clearestindicationsare foundin thesanctuaries, where, besidesthe evidenceforstateactivityin the formof new templebuildings,thereis evidence forincreasingcompetitive displayin thevotiveassemblages.It is also theperiodin whichthe of Laconian thatthe wealthierLaconians, export potteryabroad reachesa peak, suggesting whetherSpartansorperioikoi^ weretakingtheopportunity ofengagingin commercialactivities fortheirown enrichment. Productionforsubsistence purposesmay no longerhave sufficed, to on the increase the outputfromtheirfarmsiftheywereto placingpressure poorerSpartans in once this environment. Whateverthe circumstances, competitive participate increasingly a land to the north had solution to this theoptionofterritorial failed, hypothetical expansion intoareaswhichhad previously been regardedas of crisismayhavebeen to extendcultivation to intensify productionbylocating marginalvalue,or,ifthesewerealreadyundercultivation, itfroma distantbase. farmson theland ratherthanexploiting

■75 Malkin(n. 145),86-9. 176Ducat (n. 172),56-64; S. Hodkinson,'Sharecropping and Sparta's economic exploitation of the helots', in Φιλολήκων,123-34.

■77 Gartledge,SL 136-9.

Early Iron Age to classical period 235 A SPARTAN ENTERPRISE?

or If thiswas a Spartanenterprise, it is hardto envisageit occurringwithouttheinvolvement sanctionof the state.It may even be temptingto associateit withthe numinousfigureof Chilon,activein thefirsthalfofthesixthcenturyand laternumberedamongtheSevenWise in thehistory ofSpartaninstitutions and societyis farfrom Men. The basisforhisimportance in thelatter,midcontroversial the classical and was Nevertheless, clear, period.178 apparently in a the of his career to critical belongs phase developmentof those sixth-century part were seen to differentiate and practicesthat,in thefifth institutions Spartafrommost century, recentstudiesthathave tendedto producean image of otherGreekstates,notwithstanding The principalrole of classicalSpartanot so abnormalin a numberof important respects.179 the land amongthebeneficiaries, the statewouldhave been in apportioning especiallyif,as in resolvinga land was an important constituent one mightexpect,itsequitabledistribution crisis.If thismarginalland had previouslybeen in use, perhaps forextensivegrazingby on behalfofthe wealthierSpartans,it mayalso havebeen necessaryforthestateto intervene newsettlers. Colonizationofthisland cannothave been a simpleor straightforward matter, especiallyif sincetheend oftheLate BronzeAge. In thefirst ithad remainedlargelyuncultivated place it and the deployment of considerablemanpower,in the wouldhave requireda massiveeffort, not to clearanceof the naturalvegetationand the preparationof the land forcultivation, of the farmbuildings.These are not likelyto have been tasksthat mentionthe construction helotsmustbe assumedto have bornethebrunt themselves; Spartanswouldhaveperformed of the work.They mustalso be presumed(on this hypotheticalscenario) to have had a theland once cultivation was established, and to have formedthe rolein farming continuing inhabitants of the and hamlets encountered As farmsteads, villas, by the survey. majorityof about archaicand classicalSparta has alreadybeen stated,therevisionofpreviousorthodoxy has notgone so faras to suggestthatSpartiatesresidedanywhere butin thevillagesofSparta and thetownofAmyklai, drawingtheirsustenancefromthefarmsworkedforthembyhelots. Even so, thepossibility remainsthattheirwivesand daughters, as wellas men overtheage of sixtywho were no longer required for militaryservice,were not subject to the same constraints on theirplace ofresidence.But,returning to theassumption thatforthemostpart helotswereinvolvedon thesesites,one mustaskfromwheresucha bodyofhelotswas drawn, when therewas no preexisting residentpopulationto coerce.Was therea surplusof helot labour thatcould be redeployedfromfarmsin the plain of Sparta,or even fromdomestic rolesin Spartanhouseholdsin the city?The numbersmusthave been considerable, running into manyhundredsif not thousands,assuming,as seems reasonable,thatthisprocessof colonizationwas notconfinedto thesouth-eastern sectorofthesurveyarea butwas repeated 178See Naflssi,Nascita (n. 144), 124-38. 179Even L. Thommen, Lakedaimonion Politeia:die Entstehung

derspartanischen (Historia Einzelschriften,103; Verfassung Stuttgart, 1996),forwhomthegreathelotrevoltof465 is the criticalwatershedin Sparta's constitutionaldevelopment, sees this as an importantphase. Conventional views of alteredby contributions Spartahave been mostsignificantly on Spartan systems of land tenure and inheritance (Hodkinson,'Land tenure';id. (n. 37)) and on the education and upbringing ofitsyouth(N. M. Kennell,TheGymnasium of Virtue:Educationand Culturein AncientSparta;Chapel Hill, NC,

and London, 1995). They have been changed to a lesser

degreeby severalrecentreappraisalsof the conditionof the helots(R. J. A. Talbert,'The role of the helotsin the class 38 (1989),22-40; Ducat (n. 172); struggleat Sparta',Historia, M. Whitby,'Two shadows:imagesof Spartansand Helots', in A. Powell and S. Hodkinson(eds), The ShadowofSparta (London and New York,1994),87-126),thoughthisremains controversial:see e.g. P. A. Cartledge,'Richard Talbert's revisionof the Spartan-helotstruggle:a reply',Historia, 40 (1991),379 81. Note also the new view of the Great Rhetra in H. van Wees,'Tyrtaeus'Eunomia:nothingto do withthe Great Rhetra',in S. Hodkinsonand A. Powell(eds),Sparta: NewPerspectives (London,1999),1-41.

236 Chapter5

themarginalland borderingtheplain ofSpartato itsnorth,east,and south.The throughout no readyanswer,but it would surelyhave been a further has area in whichstate problem intervention was necessary. There are otherdifficulties withthisreconstruction. In thefirstplace,a muchmoreregular of site in and less variation site size than is foundin the south-eastern distribution, pattern be as the correlates to an episodeof land distribution sector,might predicted archaeological new settlers under the of the state.The clustering and variablesize ofthesites among auspices of correspondmuchbetterwitha processof colonizationinvolvingthe gradualinfiltration settlerswithoutthe participation of any centralizedorganization.While Spartanscannotbe excluded frominvolvementin such an apparentlyuncontrolledprocess,it is unlikelyto thestate'sresponsein theresolution ofa specificland crisis. represent Second,althoughthe conclusionreachedabove,thatmostsiteswereplaces ofpermanent residence,accordswell withtheirhavingbeen farmsteadsinhabitedby helots,how other featuresofthesitescan be accommodatedwiththisinterpretation dependson theviewtaken ofwhatmaybe termedthehelotcondition.180 If Spartanoppressionofthehelotsis thoughtto have extendedto theireconomiccircumstances, theprima and an facieevidenceforprosperity affluent foundon manysitesbecomeshardto equatewitha helotpresence.Assuming lifestyle thatthisevidencehas been correctly thenaturalconclusionmustbe thattheseare interpreted, nothelot,or solelyhelot,farms.Alternatively, thesurveyevidencemaybe used to substantiate theidea thatsomehelotswereable to aspireto,and achieve,a considerabledegreeofmaterial of theirSpartanmastersor the wealthier prosperity, allowingthemto emulatethe lifestyle and in the processmakingthemarchaeologically fromtheseother perioikoi indistinguishable social groups.Such an idea may be renderedmoreplausibleby assumingthatthe helotsof Laconia enjoyedratherless harsh conditionsthan those in Messenia, a distinctionwhose has recently been emphasized.181 importance A thirdpotentialproblemconcernsthe threatto internalsecuritythatmighthave been posed by havinghelotssettledin hamlets(estimatedto have had populationsof between and sixty-five and villas.Its seriousness twenty-five people)as wellas in farmsteads dependson in thesecondhalfofthesixthcenturywas already whetherit isjudged thatSpartanthinking governedby a perceivedhelotthreat,and on whatactionthe Spartansmighthave takento counterthe danger.Had theyfeltsuch a threat,it is fairto assume thattheywould have intervened to ensurethatthe distribution of the helotpopulationin the countryside did not itselfcontribute to theirinsecurity. Withthisin mind,it mighthave been predictedthatthe ofnucleatedhelotsettlements, evenas Spartanswouldhave activelypreventedtheformation smallas these,bytheimposition ofa dispersedsettlement Were this their concerns so, regime. thehelotrevoltof465,when,in theopinion couldonlyhaveincreasedin theperiodfollowing ofmanyscholars,Spartanparanoia about thehelotswas at itsheightand is thekeyfactorin theirbehaviourand decision-making. However,it was preciselyin thisperiod, understanding in hamlet-sized soon after465, thattheruralpopulationincreasingly came to be concentrated 180This is the subject of fundamentaldisagreement between two basic positions. Gartledge (SL 160-77; id., the common Agesilaos (n. 145),170-7;id. (n. 179))represents view that Spartan institutionsand actions were largely geared to managing the helot threat. A much less antagonisticrelationship,at least between the Laconian helots and the Spartan élite, has been propounded by Talbert(n. 179),Ducat (n. 172),155-73,and Whitby(n. 179).

S. Hodkinson,'Servileand freedependantsof the classical Spartan "Oikos"', in M. Moggi and G. Cordiano (eds),

Schiavie dipendenti neWambito deW'oikos'e delia 'família':atti del XII Colloquio GIREA, Pontignano(Siena) ig-20 novembre 1995

(Studie testidi storiaantica,8; Pisa, 1997),45-71,at 46-53, also argues for the existence of close personal ties with certaingroupsofhelots. 101 Ducat (n. 172),13-18.

Early Iron Age to classical period 237

Such a predictionalso runscounterto the archaeologicalevidence,suchas it is, settlements. fromMessenia,whereSparta had well-founded fearsof helotunrestand a greaterneed to assertcontrol.In theperiodof Spartandomination,tracesofsettlement are generallysparse to a fewlarge nucleatedsites,much largerthan our hamlets;the spread of and restricted small farmsteads was a phenomenon associated with the recovery of Messenian independenceafter370. Assumingthese sites to have been the homes of the Messenian helots,the conclusionmustbe that,if the Spartansreallydid seek to assertcontrolin this respect,it was imposedthrougha systemof nucleatedsettlement, perhapsbacked up by a military presenceat keypoints,one ofwhosepurposeswouldhave been to discouragehelot desertion.Returningto our surveyarea, the Messenianmodel could be used to arguethat the settlement patternof the later sixthto earlyfifthcenturiesreflectslittleconcernfor controlover the distributionof the helot population. But, equally, the trend towards nucleationobservedin the classicalperiod could be correlatedwitha heightenedsense of insecurityin relations between the Spartans and Laconian helots. Alternatively,the of the Laconian helotpopulationwas of littleconcernto the Spartans,either distribution because it was not regardedas a significant factorin the overallsystemof controlor,more because it to interestingly, corresponds generallymorerelaxedrelationsand a 'laissez-faire5 settlement Taken withtheindicationsofmaterialwell-beingoutlinedabove,it could regime. be arguedthatthe data fromthe surveyprovidestrongsupportforthe idea that,in normal relationsbetweenSpartans and helotswere based on cooperationto the circumstances, mutualbenefitof both sides,withoutdenyingthe socio-politicalgulfdividingthem.In this view,the regimeof systematic oppressionacceptedby manymodernscholarsmay be seen moreas a figment of the ignoranceand hostility of the non-Spartansourcesfromwhomso much of the conventionalpictureof Sparta is derived.In practicalterms,such a regime wouldin nearlyall respectshavebeen counter-productive. The sanctuariesin the south-eastern sector,forwhichthereis no compellingevidencefor stateinvolvement, of a less present problem.The smallruralsanctuariescould have been the concernofanysocialgroup,includingthehelots,who,in spiteoftheirotherdisabilities, were not barredfromreligiousactivities.However,theyare unlikelyto have been responsiblefor the more costlydedicationsof sculptureand stoneinscriptions at the largersanctuariesof and These could have been the work of Phagia Pikromygdalia. Spartan landowners,who be to have local not least because theireconomicinterests cults, might expected patronized wereso closelytiedto theproductivity ofthearea. A PERIOIKIC

ENTERPRISE?

If the Spartans were not the main participantsin this act of internal colonization or theperioikoi mustbe consideredas theprincipalalternative. Several intensification, agricultural factorsat firstsightseemto rulethemout of consideration. as no First, alreadyseen, named is known to have existed to the east of perioikiccommunity Sparta. Indeed, none seemsto have been located closer than Pellana and Sellasia in the north,Geronthraiand perhaps Selinousto thesouth-east, and possiblyKrokeaiand Aigiaito thesouth.None oftheseis likely to haveassertedcontrolovertheNeogeneplateauand Chrysaphabasin.Nor are theylikelyto have been the sourceofthe surpluspopulation.Anylocal populationgrowthcould probably havebeen absorbedby expansionintomarginalland in theirown territories. That beingthe where would settlers have come from? in the absence of a case, Furthermore, any perioikic town would have in been the anomalous situation of neighbouring they apparently lackingany affiliation to a politicalor religiouscommunity.

238 Chapter3

On the otherhand, thereare a numberof waysin whichtheperioikoi would make better sense of the archaeologicaldata. First,theythemselveswould have providedthe labour withouthavingrecourseto helots.Second,the necessaryfortakingthisland intocultivation, of affluence is evidencefordiffering of exactlywhatmightbe expectedamongsettlers degrees thiskind.Nor would the existenceof hamletscontainingsmallnucleatedpopulationshave constituted themselves mayto a largedegreehaveidentified anythreatto Sparta.The perioikoi withSpartanvalues,and wereprobablyregardedas a sourceofsupportin themaintenanceof Spartan preeminenceand power, providingfromthe fifthcenturyan ever-increasing in The apparentlack of centralauthority proportionof Lakedaimonianmilitarystrength.102 the organizationof the colonizingprocessmay also makebettersenseifperioikoi ratherthan Spartans were the principal participants.The cult sites accord perfectlywell with this There are no groundsforthinking thatcostlyvotiveswerebeyondthe means of hypothesis. thewealthier Cultsassociatedwithknownperioikictowns(suchas Akriai,Aigiai,Las, perioikoi. and Tyros),103 both in the developmentof sanctuarybuildingsand in theirdedicatory assemblages, reveal the same competitivepressuresthat have been noted in Spartan sanctuaries. SELLASIA

In addressingtheproblemoftheoriginofthesehypothetical thesituationof Sellasia perioikoi, ifwe assumethatit is correctly identified as is relevantand deservesfurther consideration, in a case that served interests. and that it was not some way special specific Spartan perioikic thatwerelaterclassedas perioikictownswereprobablyformedat an Manyofthesettlements later thanthe EarlyIron Age settlement of Sparta itselfin the tenth no date, early perhaps in the mid-sixthcentury, at Sellasia the earliest occurs However, occupation century. Until evidence forearlier with the of rural settlement. contemporary large-scalespread it natural to associatethefoundation of is revealed future work at the seems site, by occupation to Spartais also noteworthy, thistownwiththewaveofruralcolonization.Sellasia'sproximity theclosestperioikictownto Sparta, thedistancebetweenbeingonly12km.Pellana,otherwise ofthemid-sixth is 17kmdistantin a directline.It showsthatin theparticularcircumstances a the establishment of new the were to perioikiccommunity prepared accept century Spartans of closeat hand,and suggeststhattheymightalso havebeen willingto toleratethesettlement km not Distance was basin even the probably a beingonly9 away. perioikoi closer, Chrysapha not live. in where could and could factor perioikoi determining verysignificant it is fairto speculateabout the originsof the new Takingthisargumenta step further, in thesouth-eastern settlers at Sellasia,as theywereperhapsthesame as thoseofthesettlers is thatSellasia was formedin an act of synoecismfromthe scattered sector.One possibility on eitherside of theupper populationwhichmayalreadyhave inhabitedthe ruggeddistrict have left few Their archaeological traces if theywere presence may Kelephina valley. in activities hunters,wood(forexampleas pastoralists, engaged non-agricultural primarily froma surplus a settlement formed this was new and cutters, charcoal-burners). Alternatively, 182On the see Cartledge, SL 178-93; Shipley, perioikoi 'Perioikos' and "'Other Lakedaimonians'"; J. M. Hall, 'Sparta, Lakedaimon and the nature of perioikic 5, 73-89. dependency',in CPC Papers 183 Aigiai:Bonias,Αιγιές.Akriai:interimreportsbyJ. de la Genière, 'Κοκκινιά', Α. Deli. 43 (1988), Chr. 113-15; 44

(1989), Chr. 99-100; 45 (ΐ99°)> Chr. 107. Las: P. E.

καιιστορική Tò Γνθεών:αρχαιολογική Giannakopoulos, απότιςπροϊστορικές εποχέςμέχριτου Μεγάλου αποψις Κωνσταντίνου (Athens,2ig87),52~4· Tyros:Phaklaris, Κυνουρία2ΐ73~~8.

Early Iron Age to classical period 239

population elsewhere,conceivablyanotherperioikictown but more likelySparta itself. Whateverthe case, it is impossibleto believethatthisoccurredwithoutthe sanctionof the and even morelikelythatit was the resultof deliberatepolicy.It may Spartangovernment, to createa smallnew settlement on its northernboundaryto have suitedSpartaninterests withtheregionsto thenorth.AmongtheseweretheSkiritis and the buffer serveas a defensive a term referred to as the this is not around area Karyatis,though Karyai (conveniently in with and over which the attested ancientsources),areas contested Tegea Spartansmayhave The inhabitants ofthesesparselysettledregions,whomayat exercisedratherloosercontrol.184 morecloselywithArkadiathanwithLaconia, wereperhaps themselves timeshave identified some regardedas less reliablethanSparta'sotherperioikicpartners.Perhapsunsurprisingly, but ofthemwerequickto defectunderthepressureofinvadingarmiesin thefourthcentury, Sellasia also commanded theremay have been an earlierhistoryof separatisttendencies.105 Arkadiaand theThyreatis. This frontier theprincipalrouteconnecting Spartawithsouth-east afterthefoundationof Sellasia,by theconstruction ofthe was further reinforced, apparently on AgiosKonstantinos, fortress leavingno doubtthatthisarea was consideredvitalto Spartan forthesestrategicconcernswas shownall too clearlyin the defensiveinterests. Justification early fourthcentury,revealing that the mountainous northernregions were not an insurmountable obstacleto an invadingforce.The firstknownincidentoccurredprobablyin ofSellasia,thoughthis 389,whentheAtheniangeneralChabriasallegedlyraidedtheterritory episode is in manyrespectshard to credit(Polyainos,iii. 11. 6).l8GWiththe firstfull-scale invasionof 370/69,Sellasia was quicklytakenand plunderedonce the enemyarmieshad crossedthe Skiritisand Karyatis,and was onlyrecovered£.365withSyracusanhelp (Xen. Hell. vi. 5. 27, vii. 4. 12).187 This route became the main avenue of attackin subsequent invasionsofLaconia. As to thecompositionofthe settlers, twopossibilities maybe suggested.Spartanfailureto annex the Tegean plain fordistribution themselves has alreadybeen suggestedas a among in the vicinityof criticaleventlikelyto have a bearingon the expansionof ruralsettlement if the aim had been to land for Some ofthesemay Sparta,especially provide needySpartans. in newsettlements havebeen inducedto participate closerto home.If suchpeople came from the élitegroupof homoioi, theirloss ofprivilegedstatuswould have been partlycompensated forby the allocation of land. The foundationof Sellasia would have had the combined to the solutionof a land crisisand providingforthe securityof purpose of contributing north-east frontier. Colonizationof the south-eastern sectorcould have occurred Sparta's withinthesame context,providingeconomicsecurity to impoverished Spartans.If theywere not Spartanspreparedto exchangeeconomicsurvivalfora reductionin theirpoliticaland social status,thentheywereperhapscomposedofperioikoi residentin Sparta or membersof 184The Skiritaienjoyedtheprivilegeofforming a separate unitwithintheSpartanarmy. 5 Note theArgiveproxenydecreeforGnosstasofOinous dated c.470(SEG xiii. 239). If Oinous is correctly locatedin N. Laconia, it demonstratesclose relationswith Argos, Sparta'sgreatenemyin thePéloponnèse.The 460s werealso a period of tension between Sparta and Tegea, which probablyharbouredan ambitionto recovertheseregions: see Cartledge,SL 205,214-16. lKbI he date is that suggested by Kirchner,RE s.v. 'Chabrias',col. 2018. The mostobviousdiscrepancyin the account is the 200 stades (c.32 km) given as the distance

betweenSparta and Sellasia. It is hard to comprehendhow such a raid could have occurredat a timewhen Sparta's thatsuch militarysupremacywas stillintact,and surprising an eventotherwise passedunrecordedin thesources. 187In the intervalit mustbe assumedthatSellasia was in enemyhands,thoughit is odd thatSpartawas able to attack and captureKaryai,well to the Ν of Sellasia, severalyears beforeitwas in a positionto recoverSellasiaitself(Xen. Hell. vii. 1. 28). It is also curiousthatallies fromSyracusewere involved in both events, suggestingthe possibilitythat Xenophonhas separatedincidentsfroma singlecampaign.

240 Chapter5

Fromthebeginningof one or moreoftheinferior groupssomehowexcludedfromtheélite.188 in thereis likelyto havebeen a growingbodyofnon-agricultural thesixthcentury, specialists needs that of material the for made a who increasingrange livingby providing Sparta Spartans could not supplyfromtheirown estates.Their main role would have been as and artisans(potters,metalworkers, craftsmen armourers,masons,and builders)as well as either have acted as tradersand entrepreneurs, Others the like. and musicians,doctors, may in theirownrightor on behalfofwealthySpartiates.A mixtureofpeopleprobablycarriedout residentforeigners, thesefunctions: slaves,and skilledhelots,potentially anyonewho perioikoi, was not a fullSpartiate.They would have been dependenton beingable to exchangegoods and servicesforthe necessitiesof lifeor to purchasethemin the marketof Sparta,in the a certaindegreeofsurplusproductionamonglandowners.Assumingthat processstimulating successivegenerations resident and notmigrantcraftsmen, thesewere mayhaveproducedan was not a practicable and skills crafts of the for whom practice family increasingnumber became attractive. with of combined rights landownership optionand forwhomresettlement their numbers. from in have been Sellasiamay,at least part, among populated THE NORTHERN BORDERLANDS

thesurveyarea can be more ofSellasiaand thespreadofruralsitesthroughout The settlement in fullyunderstoodin the widercontextof developments Kynouriaand northernLaconia, and Aigytis. Belbinatis(orBelminatis), theancientregionsofSkiritis, Althoughparts specifically been theobjectofintensive ofArkadianAsea have oftheMegalopolisbasin and theterritory theresultshaveyetto be published.189 However,studiesofKynouriaand thesouthern survey, ofextensive ofMegalopolishavebeen published,based on a combination partoftheterritory While thereare methodologicalproblemsin casual finds,and excavationreports.190 survey, theirresultsare nevertheless and extensivesurvey, illuminating comparingdata fromintensive in thevalidity ofourowndata. and do muchto increaseconfidence of in theareas whichin thefourthcenturycame to formthesouthernterritory Settlement Megalopolis followsmuch the same course as in our own surveyarea. Incontrovertible indicationsof settlementbeforethe sixthcenturyare lacking;the only likelyGeometric materialoccursat Asea, whichwas neverunderSpartancontrol,and at Oresthasion,which The mainfeatureis theexpansion perhapsonlycame intoSpartanhandsin thesixthcentury. in smalltownsor villagesas well as at hamletand fromthe mid-sixth of settlement century, thediffering villa-sizedsites.The absenceofsmallfarmsteads surveymethodology, mayreflect in theupperlevels sites means of efficient a is extensive that locating relatively survey showing of the settlementhierarchybut generally fails to detect sites smaller than 0.25 ha. to a patternofgreaternucleationin a borderarea. The majority it corresponds Alternatively, 188It to posittheexistencein the6th maybe anachronistic cent,of statusgroupsforwhichthereis no evidencebefore the5thcent.One mayalso wonderaboutthecompositionof the Lakedaimoniansenvisagedas settlersof the Thracian Chersonesein 398 (Xen. Hell.iii. 2. 8). The factthatthiswas conceivableat a timewhenSpartiatenumberswerein steep declinesupposesthatat mosttimestherewere men whose were so reducedforthisto be an attractive circumstances (n. 145), 211,356 withXen. prospect.Cartledge (Agesilaos Hell. iv. 8. 5) believes that a Lakedaimonian colony was indeedestablished.I am gratefulto StephenHodkinsonfor to thispassageofXen. drawingmyattention

189Megalopolisbasin:J. Roy,J. A. Lloyd,and E. J. Owens, 'Megalopolisunderthe Roman empire',in S. E. C. Walker in theRoman and A. Cameron (eds), The GreekRenaissance Empire(BICS suppl. 55; London, 1989), 146-50; iid., 'Two sites in the Megalopolis basin: suggested locations for Haemoniae and Cromnus',in Φίλολάκων,185-94, with Asea: Forsénand Forsén(n. 69). further bibliography. 190Kynouria: Phaklaris, Κυνουρία2. S. Megalopolis: Pikoulas,NMX.

Early Iron Age to classical period 241

of sitesin thisarea are plausiblyidentified as thoseof northernLaconianperioikoi, who were igi in mostlydetachedfromSpartancontrolafterthe invasionof Laconia 370/69. These sites in controlling werestrategically one of the main linesof communication between important the Eurotasvalleyas faras Mt Chelmoswhereit branched Spartaand the north,following intonorthernMessenia,the Megalopolisbasin,and the Asea valley.This strategicaspectis to south-east, reinforced bytheappearanceofa seriesoffortsalignedroughlyfromnorth-west uncertainties leaveitfarfromclearwhethertheyare to be interpreted as thoughchronological part of a unifieddefensivestrategyinstigatedat a particulartime,or were createdin an evolvingnetworkof borderdefences.These fortsare alwaysassociatedwitha neighbouring townor village,and are locatedto controlthemainarterialroutes.Some ofthesmalltownsor villageswhichemergedin the sixthcenturymaybe noted:Leuktron,close to the important fortwherethereare slightindicationsforuse in thelate archaic-earlyclassical homonymous phase,withanothersmallvillageand severallargefarmsofthe same periodin itsvicinity;192 thetownof Haimoniai,probablyabsorbedin nearbyMegalopolisin the mid-fourth century, witha hamletand largefarmof the same periodnearby;193 Malea, desertedfromthe midfourth withfoursitesofmuchthesame Kromnos,desertedafterthefourthcentury, century;194 in a its small and a hamlet.195 The recordedsizesofthelarger vicinity, including period village sites,fromc.io ha forKromnosto £.25-30ha forHaimoniai,are compatiblewithsmallcities and notableforbeingso muchlargerthana sitesuchas Palaiogoulas-Sellasia (3 ha). In other of the nucleation does not occur before the hellenistic for parts region period, examplein the In and Belbinatis. the it is in that the classical latter, Aigytis suggested periodperioikicBelbina a a number of small sites.196 It is not clear ifthe comprised dispersedcommunity occupying associatedfortofAthenaion,on thetop ofMt Chelmos,had a defensive rolein thisperiod.197 its existenceas a fort Archaeologicalevidenceis lacking,and thereare no sourcesattesting beforethethirdcentury. the effort made to retrieve the Belbinatis after370 suggests However, thatitsstrategic value was wellrecognizedand thatit mayalreadyhave been partofa wider defensive network.198 The situationin the Skiritisis muchless certainbut seemsnot to contradictthe picture constructed forthe areas to itswest.A fortified siteat Chartzenikos seemsto have been first establishedin the late archaicperiod,but is principallyassociatedwithSpartan defensive strategyof the thirdcentury.1"It, too, is associatedwitha nearbyvillage and sanctuary, notoccupiedbeforethefourthcentury, as wellas tracesof a main route,perhaps apparently with Oios is known oftheoriginsofthistown,locatedclose linkingSparta (or Oion). Nothing to Sparta'sborderwithTegea and apparentlythe onlynucleatedsettlement in the Skiritis.200 Furthereast in the Karyatis,at Análipsi,almostcertainlyto be identified withKaryai, the ofsettlement remainsfarfromclear,in spiteofitsbeingone ofthefewperioikicsites history 191Pikoulas, NMX 229-36; Shipley,'Territory'. 192Pikoulas, NMX 131-5 no. 92 (Leondári-Leuktron), 135-6 no. 93 (Agios Taxiárchis, 1.5 ha), 159-60 no. 117 (Mestiánika, 0.25 ha), 160 no. 118 (Katavóthra, 0.35 ha). 193Pikoulas, NMX 90-3 no. 45 (Perivólia-Haimoniai, 1.75 ha), 89 no. 42 (Kokkaliára, 0.7 ha), 96 no. 50 (Raches, 0.25 ha). Roy et ai, 'Two sites' (n. 189), 185-90, refer to a much more extensive site at Haimoniai of predominantly LAr-Cl date; according to Forsén and Forsén (n. 69), 167 n. 11, it is between 25 and 30 ha. 194Pikoulas, NMX 129-31 no. 91 (Voutsarás-Malea, c.15 ha).

195Pikoulas, NMX 161-6 (Paradeisia-Kromnos, c.io ha), 156 no. in (Tsoukalá Gortsiá, 1.5 ha), 167 no. 123 (Etiá, 0.06 ha), 167-8 no. 124 (Ágios Geórgios, 0.5 ha), 172-3 no. 131 (Ghirádes-Gatheai). On Kromnos see also Roy et al, 'Two sites' in. 180").iQO-3. 196Pikoulas, NMX 117-18 no. 71, 121-2 no. 78, 122-3. 197Loring, 'Routes', 71-4: Pikoulas, NMX 11^-17 no. 70. 198Cartledffeand Spawforth,86-8. 199Pikoulas, 'Skiritis', 139-42. 200Ibid. 135-7.

242 Chapter5

Geometricoccupation is alleged, but its to be thoroughlyinvestigatedby excavation.201 whenthere culturalaffinities are notclear.Fromthenuntilthesecondhalfofthefifth century, townsite,thereis no recordedevidenceforoccupation. is abundantevidencefora flourishing A slightlydifferentpicture emerges fromthe similar extensivesurveyconducted in its settlement historyshowsa greaterdegreeof Kynouria.As it is a largelycoastal district, in from an date the as well as occupation early Early Iron Age. Rather than continuity, it is moreimportant hereto detectthe concentrate on the earliestindicationsof settlement, a processthatwas notfinalizeduntil intoSpartanterritory, earliestsignsofitsincorporation the Battle of the Champions in £.545. The general impression from the available archaeologicalmaterialis thattheSpartanshad assertedcontroloverKynouria,includingthe Priorto thisdate,evidenceforLaconian aroundthebeginningofthesixthcentury. Thyreatis, associatedwiththe connectionsis veryscarce,all the indicationsbeingthatit was culturally The mostimportant sitein Kynouriawas north-east Péloponnèse,in particulartheArgolid.202 Prasiai, whose membershipof the Kalaurian amphictyonyindicates that it was an old settlement. The firstsignsofLaconian influenceoccurin thefirsthalfofthe sixthcentury203 Althoughthe site of Tyros has so far not produced evidence foroccupation beforethe no laterthanthemidhellenistic period,theassociatedsanctuaryofApollo Tyritasoriginates occur£.600,whenthefirst seventhcentury; theearliestsignsofLaconianinfluence templewas The findsfromthe Sintza cave,presumablyassociated are abundant.204 built,and thereafter with withcult,are moreambiguous,especiallyas theyare allegedto showculturalaffinities Laconia fromas early as the tenthor ninthcentury.205 Apart froma single Laconian sherd,thereare groundsfordoubtingthisassertionand forredatingthe Protogeometric One of the most importantsitesin the earliestLaconian materialto the sixthcentury.206 wherethere as Thyreaitself), not this is to be identified at Ellinikó or was (whether Thyreatis are veryslightindicationsof a Laconian presenceno later than the mid-sixthcentury.207 Furtherinland, in the upland plain of Xerokámbi,thereis evidence of a similarkind, combinedwiththe emergenceof numeroussmallsitesin the late archaicand especiallythe classicalperiods.208 consolidationof the evidencefromtheseregionspointsto a progressive Placed together, most sixth in areas from the control its border notablymarkedby the early century, Spartan A numberof nucleated settlements. in devoid of areas of previously expansion occupation this at did this these are raised particular Why happen developments. by questionsinevitably In bothcases,it is time,and whatwas theoriginofthepopulationthatsettledthesedistricts? 201Ibid. to theexcavations 137-9withn. 40, forreferences by K. A. Romaios;see LS ii. 284, DD45,and G. A. Pikoulas, 'Λακωνικά',Hows,10-12 (1992-8),559-65, at 561-3. This identification nowseemsto be generally agreed;Christien(n. expressedin ead. and 105),at 37,rejectstheviewspreviously Th. Spyropoulos,'Eua et la Thyréatide: topographie et histoire',BCH 109 (1985),455-66, at 463 η. 62; Christien(η. io8); ead., 'Promenades en Laconie', Dialoguesd'histoire ancienne, 15(1989),79-105,at 81-6. The area withinthewalls mayhave been as muchas 6 ha: see K. Kalogeropoulos,Die

kenischenGrabfundevonAnalipsis (südöstlichesArkadien) frühmy

Gesellschaft zu Athen,175; (Bibliothekder Archäologischen Athens,1998),1 and pis 2-3. 202The same generalconclusionsare reachedbyChristien (n. 113),166-7.

2O3 Phaklaris,Κυνουρία2134nos 2-3. 204Ibid. 173-8,esp. 176-7 on the pottery. Winter(n. 12), in her earlygroup, terracottas 138,places the architectural c.620-580. 205Phaklaris.Κυνουρία2i^q-6q. 206Christien (n. 113),166,arrivesat thesameconclusion. 207Phaklaris,Κυνουρία2 78-90, esp. 83 nos 3-4. The walledarea is small,c.3.5ha: see Y. C. Goester,'The plainof 1 (1993),39-112,at 55-7. There is as Astros:a survey',Pharos, yetno traceofpre-Cloccupationat Nisi AgiouAndréa,the otherlargesitein theThyreatis(c.4.9ha): ibid.84-6. 208Phaklaris, Κυνουρία2 no 20; of particularnote is a Laconian reliefpithos(p. 116). ofa 6th-cent. fragment

Early Iron Age to classical period 243

controlofterritory whichwas disputedwithothercities.In likelythatSpartawas establishing was Argosand thearea had probablybeen settledsinceat thecase ofKynouria,itsadversary In thenorthern borderdistricts, theconsolidationof settlement leasttheeighthcentury. may mostplausiblybe explainedas a deliberateSpartanpolicyconceivedto assertfullauthority fromTegea, whichitselfmay have been overthe region,perhapsin the face of competition in the sixthcentury. the confines of its to originalterritory Although seeking expandbeyond this area both beforeand afterthe conquest nominal control over doubtless exercised Sparta of Messenia,thiswas not reinforced by anypermanentpresencein the formofvillagesand was towns.Whatpopulationthere mayhave been widelydispersed,perhapslivingin sucha way as to leave littlepermanenttrace.Sparta'sclashwithTegea in the firsthalfof the sixth expansionon thepartofSparta. century mayhavebeen morethana simplewar ofaggressive notonlyin theSkiritis overdisputedborderterritory It mayequallyhavearisenfromconflicts ofMegalopolisin and Karyatisbutalso in theMegalopolisbasinwhere,beforethefoundation to 368, therewas nothingto checktheexpansionofeitherstate.This in turndirectsattention relateto the Tegean war?Was it the the chainof events.How does thisphase of settlement cause of the war,so antecedingSpartan attemptsto annex the Tegeatis,or was itjust an Or, as has alreadybeen suggested,was it the adjunctto a generalexpansionnorthwards? means of resolvingthe problemof land hungerwhich the polisfaced afterthe policy of annexationhad failed?As faras it goes,thearchaeologicalevidence,ifcorrectly dated,points ofthewar. to theexpansionofsettlement beinga phenomenonthatoccurredin theaftermath The originof the settlersin the northernborderlandscan onlybe conjectured.Existing inhabitants, livingin a highlydispersedform,wereperhapscompelledto settlein villagesand smalltownsand to adopt arable cultivationas theirprimemeans of subsistence.However, thatemerged,and it shouldperhaps theymayhave been too fewto populatethe settlements be assumedthattherewere othersourcesof populationthatcould be deployedin thisway. and itsinhabitants werelaterincorporatedintothepolisof The factthatthe entireterritory a with a deliberate Arkadian wouldseemto precludethepossibility identity, Megalopolis, city that Laconian or even Spartan settlerswere involved.Whatevertheirorigin,a further of the perioikic consequence,ifnot one of the objectives,may have been the augmentation of class. The establishment these settlements was presumably accompaniedby an hoplite of conventional arable farming, the numbers of households intensification therebyincreasing of moderatewealthwhichcould affordhopliteequipmentand spare the timeformilitary Whileit is uncertainhow important a roletheperioikoi tookin the trainingand campaigning. in in the sixth were an vital constituent the century, they Spartanarmy increasingly military manpoweravailableto Spartain theclassicalperiod.209 SPARTA AND PERIOIKIC

LACONIA

On a much broader level, this investigationdemonstratesthat the historyof perioikic in different communities partsof Laconia and Messenia may have been farfromuniform. Whilemanyofthosein southernand centralLaconia wereperhapsearlysettlements (tenthto like the of the northern towns and eighthcenturies), Spartaitself, majority perioikic villages ofterritorial controlas to theneed belongto a muchlaterstage,due as muchto consolidation to expandintomarginalterrainin orderto resolveproblemsof land hunger.They mayalso in experiencing a morepermanentSpartanpresencethanin southernLaconia, havediffered 209Cartledge, Agesilaos(n. 145), 177-8.

244 Chapter5

in the formof garrisonsas well as the militarytraffic and consignments of producefrom theregion. Messeniausingtheroadsthattraverse While the identityof the settlersin these various regionscannot be determinedwith the causes forrural expansion are much clearer.Growingpopulationand the certainty, in increasingpressuresof competitive display,combinedwithfailureto annex new territory theplain of Tegea, createdan urgentneed forthe intensification of land use in theplain of the marginalland previouslynot consideredworth Sparta itselfand, more importantly, be added the extrademandsforfoodstuffs To these and other cultivating. may by craftsmen in in resident Whoever the settlers were the non-agriculturalists Sparta. origin, archaeological evidenceseemsto favourtheidea thatin theirnewsetting theytookon thestatusofperioikoi. One potentially seriousdifficulty, sectorof alreadynoted,in theidea thatthesouth-eastern the surveyarea was perioikicdeservesfurther examination.The settlement of Sellasia tooka conventionalform,with a nucleated site controllinga territorycontaininga scatterof In the south-eastern farmsteads. sector,by contrast,therewas no centralplace to whichthe smaller sites were subordinate,and this remained the case throughoutantiquity.The in scale to supporta weretoo restricted explanationcannotbe thatthebasinand itsperiphery village-sizedcentralplace. Not onlyare therevillages,like Sellasia itself,controllingeven but in earlierand laterperiodscentralplaces smallerareas of land suitableforagriculture, haveexistedin theChrysaphabasin:thebasinwas dominatedin theEarlyBronzeAge bytwo large sites (U500 and U3001, both 0.70 ha) and in more recent times by the village of Chrysapha(population523 in AD 1700,839 in AD 1879)and itsByzantinepredecessorin the valleybottom(U490). In thiscontextit is worthnotingthe close correlationbetweenthe distribution of areas of primearable land, oftenquite small,and the locationof manysmall perioikicvillagesin Laconia (suchas Pellana,Krokeai,and Aigiai;see ILL.5.5). IftheNeogene thisanomalywould be plateau and Chrysaphabasin were in factpart of Spartanterritory, easilyexplicable.In spiteof the modestdistance,Spartawouldhave servedall the necessary and exchangefunctions), ofa centralplace forthisregion(administrative, functions religious, whose helot inhabitantsmightanywayhave had restrictedneeds and occasions forsuch in theabsenceofa centralplace theywouldapparently contact.Wereitsinhabitants perioikoi, havelackedanyaffiliation witha civiccommunity. and thatis to regardthisan exampleof a community There is, however,one alternative, a nucleated centre, composed of a looselyconnectedseriesof hamlets,villas,and lacking it is in as has been suggestedin thecase ofperioikicBelbina.Rathersurprisingly, farmsteads, Atticathat the existenceof such dispersedcommunitieshas been shownto be a reality. in smallto Intensivesurveyof the smalldeme ofAtenehas revealeda patternof settlement In a to third centuries.210 such from the late sixth farmsteads, community, early large occupied the firstpriorityof its memberswould presumablyhave been agriculturalproduction, was not of townlife.Wheresecurity the social,cultural,and otherattractions subordinating an issue and all decisionsof importancewere reservedfora politicalélitelivingin Sparta, local officialactivitywas probablyconfinedto the resolutionof disputesover land use, mayhave grazing,and accessto water.Local cults,suchas thoseat Phagiaand Pikromygdalia, Whatever could not be ties its a focus the loose communal for binding population. provided obtainedin local exchangeswas easilyaccessiblein themarketin Sparta,whichbyvirtueofits ofa centralplace. Bearingin couldhaveperformed manyofthestandardfunctions proximity 210 Lohmann, Atene,esp. 126-36.

Early Iron Age to classical period 245

L. Farr). arableland,and pasturein centralLaconia (D. Miles-Williams, III. 5.5.Areasofprimearableland,secondary(marginal)

246 Chapter5

mindthe Spartans'own undevelopedurban organization,in whichthe constituent villages stillformedrecognizableunits in the fifthcentury,and theirpreferencefordispersing settlementas a means of political subordinationand control(seen most vividlyin the of Mantineia£.385),the existenceof non-nucleatedcommunities treatment shouldoccasion lesssurprisein Laconia thananywhere else. Even iftheexistenceofsucha non-nucleated is notaccepted,it is attractive to community see in theclustersofsitesin thesouth-eastern sectorsomesortofdispersedvillagesor hamlets, notunlikesomeofthesmallermodernvillagesin Laconia. These mayhave compriseda mix ofvillasand farmsteads, each surroundedby largevegetablegardensand orchardsrequiring intensivecultivation, and separatedfromeach otherby up to 100 m. The reasonsforsuch agglomerationmay have been confinedto practicalmatters,such as access to waterand but it cannotbe ruledout thattheyhad some further communalidentity, communications, and eventhattheywereidentified byplace-names. A further about Sellasiais itssmallsize,estimatedbythesurveyat no more pointofinterest than 3 ha. Justhow small thisis becomes clear when it is comparedwiththe size of sites classifiedas smallcitieselsewherein Greece. For thesea figureof between10 and 20 ha is Sellasiaseemsbyno meansto be atypicalwithinthe fairly typical.Butevenmoreinterestingly, narrowerLaconiancontext.Althoughreliabledata forestimating sitesizesare largelylacking, so wherespecificperiodsare concerned,thereis enoughto suggestthatSellasiawas entirely not abnormallysmall.The mostaccurateinformation available is forGeronthrai(modern to have been one of the more Geraki),generallythought important perioikictowns.Here the walled area enclosedonly£.3.84ha, and testexcavationhas so farfailedto demonstrate the existence of extramuralhabitation.211 for the site have may Allowing public spaces, Akriai(modernKokkiniá)appearsto have accommodatedno morethan400-600 inhabitants. been somewhatlarger(£.7-8ha), thoughthe basis forthisestimateis less satisfactory.212 The walled areas of Epidauros Limera and nearbyZarax, both £.3.6ha, are likewiseof small dimensions.213 The headlandon whichstoodancientTeuthroneis no largerthan4.5 ha, and the townitselfmayhave been smaller.214 Smallerstillis the littlefortified with siteidentified Marios (c.0.66 ha), no biggerthan a rathersmallhamletin our own classification.215 While thereis littleevidenceforitssize,theimportanceofGytheionbeforethelatefifth centuryhas also been questioned.216 Some ofthesitesin theKaryatisand Thyreatisdiscussedabove seem to be on a similarscale (Analipsi,probablyancientKaryai,is no morethanc.6 ha; Elliniko, possiblyThyrea,£.3.5ha; Nisi Agiou Andréa £.4.9ha). The onlyarea in whichnucleated to have been largerwas in the territory laterabsorbed perioikicsettlements appear regularly the sites identified with as three Haimoniai,Malea, and byMegalopolis,where, alreadynoted, Kromnosrangebetween10and 25 ha. These figures, assumingtheyare roughlyaccurate,promptsome discussion.The degreeof by comparingits estimatedwalled Sparta'sphysicaldominationof Laconia is demonstrated area in thehellenistic ha with thetinysizesofmostperioikic period,£.275 excludingAmyklai, how difficult it was forindividualtownsto resist other towns,among thingsrevealingjust At first this raw that mostperioikictownswere control. comparisonsuggests Spartan sight 211 'Gerakiq'; 'Geraki4'. 212de la Genière(η. ΐ8^), 114. 213EpidaurosLimera: A. J. B. Wace and F. W. Hasluck, 'South-easternLaconia', BSA 14 (1907-8), 161-82, at 180. Zarax: iid. (n. 152),169.

2I4PLii. no. ^PLn. 136.

216Falkner (η. ΐο6).

Early Iron Age to classical period 247

and, perhaps, that theirimportancein the Lakedaimonian state has been insignificant overstatedin recent studies. Certainly,if a large majorityof the population of these is thoughtto have inhabitedthenucleatedcentralplace, as seemsto have been communities the case in mostGreekstates,it is hard not to concludethatindividually theywere of little a about thesefiguresmay be used to support different hypothesis Alternatively, importance. theway in whichthe perioikiclandscapewas settled.It is possibleto imaginea scenarioin local affairs, whichthenucleatedcentrewas theplace ofresidenceoftheélitewho controlled as wellas thelocationofthemaincommunalcultsand a marketforlocal exchange,butthata large proportion,if not the majority,of the populationlived in dispersedfarmsteadsand It has alreadybeen suggestedthattheremighthave hamletsclose to theland theycultivated. öf urbanlifein archaicand classicalLaconia thanin been feweradvantagesand attractions trueofinlandareas where,untilthehellenistic mostotherGreekstates.This was particularly forexternalexchangewere was not a major concernand the opportunities period,security severelylimited,not to mentionthe political dimensionin which all decisions affecting externalrelationsand war weremade in Sparta. This would onlyhave been exacerbatedif favouredby the formof government local affairswere in the hands of a narrowoligarchy, If towns was no more than of its allies. the 400-600, many perioikic population Spartaamong restricted musthavebeen severely lifeofthesecommunities theinstitutional bythesmallpool at ofadultmaleseligibleforoffice, perhapsno morethan100-150beingovertheage ofthirty should cause us size and small their small one time. Indeed, possible populations physical any as cities(πόλεις)rather to questionwhetherit is appropriateto classifythesecommunities smallcitieselsewherein Greece,includingparts thanvillages(κώμαι).As alreadyremarked, Nucleatedsitessmaller of the Péloponnèse,typically rangein size from8 to 25 ha in size.217 than8 ha are generallyclassifiedas villages,thoughamongthemare a fewknownto have In Boiotia, 10 ha has been suggestedas a at certainperiods.218 maintainedcityinstitutions nominalthresholdforviable citystatus,much the same as has been suggestedin other areas.219 Thus, in termsof size the perioikicsitesare bettercomparedwithvillagessuch as Mases (5 ha) and Eileoi (2-3 ha) in the southernArgolid,the smaller of the two large In this nucleatedsites(6.15ha) on Methana,and the smallerdependenttownsof Boiotia.220 dedicationat Delphi made contextitis worthnotingthatin threetexts,one oftheman official are referred to as villages(κώμαι),a termwhichmay in 275,different perioikiccommunities The significantly have been directlyrelatedto theirsize ratherthan theirpoliticalstatus.221 in to be connected withtheir sites northern Laconia is size of the likely perioikic larger from wherethe presenceof fortresses locationon the bordersof Lakedaimonianterritory, that was a factor. The as the sixth as centurysuggests security always significant perhaps early 217A fewexamples of carefullystudiedsmall citieswill suffice.Koressos (N. Keos), max. c.18 ha: Whitelaw and Davis (n. 19), 278. Kythnos,max. 28.5 ha: A. I. Mazarakis Ainian,'The KythnosSurveyProject:a preliminary report', in Mendoni and MazarakisAinian (n. 10), 363-78, at 367, Meios,C.15ha:J. F. Cherryand B. A. Sparkes,A noteon the topographyof the ancient settlementof Melos', in Island andRocky Place,65. Polity, 53-7,at 56. Methana,c.8 ha: Rough Asea, max. c.13ha: Forsénand Forsén(n. 6g), 166-7.Halieis, 18 ha, and Hermione, £.22.5ha: GreekCountryside, 550-2. 85), 245 fig.3. In Boiotia,several Hyettos,c.22ha: Bintliff(n. of the small townsdependent on Thespiai (Eutresisand Askra)lie withinthisrange(ibid.244-5 ^§s 2~3)·

218Each of the two smallest'cities'in Boiotia, Siphai and Chorsiai,coveredno morethan2-4 ha, thoughformuchof theirhistorytheywere politicallydependenton Thespiai. Bintliffin. 85), 231. 219Ibid. 233-5. See also Forsénand Forsén(n. 69), 167. 22OQreefc Countryside, 554-5 table Β.2; Roughand RockyPlace,

59 table5.2, 63 table6.1,siteMS 67; BintlifT(n. 85), 234-5. 221M. H. Hansen, 'Korne: a studyin how the Greeks thatwerenotpoleis',in designatedand classifiedsettlements CPC Papers '"OtherLakedaimonians'", 2, 45-81,at 74; Shipley, !95-6.

248 Chapter5

in thesedistricts has been remarked, apparentscarcityof isolatedsmallfarmsteads thoughit reflect more than the extensive in used their may nothing surveymethodology study.But ifit is real, it providesan interesting contrastto the patternof widelydispersedsettlement that seemsto haveprevailedat leastin centralLaconia.222 The expansionof ruralsettlement was probablynot entirelysuccessfulin resolvingthe economicdifficulties some late in facing Spartans.This is perhapsindicatedby the attempts, the sixthcentury, to establisha colonyunderthe leadershipof Dorieus, firstat Kinypsin at Eryxin westernSicily(Hdt. v. 42-8).223Both metwithfailure.It Libya and subsequently indicatesthattherewere substantialnumbers,includingSpartiates,readyto riskall in the fainthope ofachievinggreaterprosperity overseas.Whiletherewas probablya readypool of suchmen at mosttimes,whetherthroughdesperationor appetiteforglory,thewillingness of Spartiatesto giveup theirprivilegedexistenceat home makesbettersense if it was in fact undersomesortofthreat. THE CHANGES OF THE CLASSICAL PERIOD

As has been seen, the originalpatternof settlementdid not last forlong, thoughonce colonizedthe south-eastern and northernsectorshave apparentlyneversincebeen deserted. Providingan explanationforthe changesthatoccurredduringthe classicalperiodis beset withthesame kindofdifficulties thathave alreadybeen encountered in thisdiscussion, being and secondon knowingwho the inhabitants were.Before dependentfirston the chronology consideringexplanationsspecificto the mid- and later fifthcentury,some more general suggestions maybe made. The main shiftin the settlementpatternhas been seen to have affectedthe Neogene plateau,thesettingforlarge-scaledesertionand apparentrelocationto theChrysaphabasin. In theothersectors,thechangeis notso dramaticand it is possiblethatthedesertionofsites and theappearanceofnew ones can be explainedbyindividualfamilycircumstances relating to normallife-cycles, the availabilityof labour,and the transfer and divisionof properties throughthe systemof inheritance. First we need to ask if there are any particular characteristics oftheNeogeneplateauwhichmightaccountforitsdesertion.Land failuremay have been the mostseriouscontributory factorin the reshapingof the settlement pattern. the it thattheplateauhas neverbeforeor sincebeen as is Taking longperspective, noteworthy shortperiod £.550-450BC, raisingthe possibility thatits denselysettledas in the relatively It is also an of was overestimated at that time. area supportive capacity seriously highrelief, subjectto severeerosionif the naturalvegetationis removedand the soilsare inadequately conservedbyterracing.224 One effect ofagricultural expansionwouldhavebeen to exposethe soils to erosion.Over much of the plateau,thereis onlya comparatively thinlayerof soil in the sterile banks of and it is these areas that erosion covering mayhavebeen conglomerate, mostdestructive. Even iferosionwas notserious,thefertility ofsuchmarginalsoilsmaysoon havebeen depleted.The areas mostvulnerableto soildepletionand erosionare thedissected westernpartoftheplateau,thenorth-western part(nowdominatedbylow-gradegrazingover These coincidecloselywiththeareaswhere and the lower of Koutsoviti. conglomerate), slopes desertionwas mostsevere.The fewremnantsof settlement occurwherereliefis low and the 222It is to be hoped that much more detail about the settlement patternin N. Laconia willemergeonce theresults oftheMegalopolisSurveyare published.

223Malkin(n. 14*),1Q2-218. 224See Foxhall(n. 80).

Early Iron Age to classical period 249

soilsare deep. It is probablyno coincidencethatthesewerealso areas wherelatersettlement was concentrated. The principalweaknessin thishypothesis is thatsome ofthebestevidence forprosperityis foundon sites on the plateau, suggestingthat the land was capable of Moreover,these same siteswere desertedalmostwithout supportingan affluentlifestyle. massofothers. exception,alongwiththeundifferentiated Amongthe historicaleventsand longertermsocio-economicprocesseswhichmighthave to thisredistribution in the fifth contributed of settlement century, changingpatternsofland The tendencytowardsthe concentration of ownershipmay have been the mostsignificant. wealth,primarilyin the formof land, in the hands of an ever-smaller minorityhas been convincingly presentedas one ofthemainreasonsforthedeclinein Spartiatenumbersin the fifth and fourthcenturies.225 The effects thismighthave had on patternsof settlement may have depended to a large degree on how the land owned by individual Spartiateswas distributed across the landscape,but, unless the trendwas followedin perioikicareas, its effects shouldhavebeen restricted to Sparta'sown territory. Wherelargeestateswerecreated fromthe consolidationof adjacent landholdings,the expectedresultmighthave been the This mayalso have emergenceofa villaor enlargedfarmat theexpenseofsmallfarmsteads. been accompanied by less intensiveformsof cultivation,with arable crops perhaps concentratedin areas of low relief,and marginalland exploited for extensivepasture, and treecrops.If,on the otherhand,the land belongingto theserichSpartiates viticulture, consistedofwidelyscattered, smallto mediumlandholdings, thesettlement patternmayhave beenlargelyunaffected. As arguedabove,the onlypartofthe surveyarea whichhas to be Spartiateis thewestern sector.Can any trace of such a processbe detectedthere?The area immediatelyeast of withtheKelephina,continuesto be dominatedby smallsites, Sparta,southoftheconfluence some perhapsinstallations on propertyfarmedfromSparta. Northof the confluence,the one site picturechanges.Here villaspredominatealmostto thetotalexclusionoffarmsteads; have been rich. this was at not the of (H31)may exceptionally However, clearly expense a mass ofpre-classical between the and the Eurotas the farmsteads; Kelephina gorge numberofsites increasedfromtwo(a villaand a farmstead) in late archaic-early classicaltimesto fourin the classicalperiod(threevillas,one farmstead). In thisarea, at least,theappearanceofvillasmay have markedan intensification of land use ratherthan the opposite. In theirpursuitof landownersin thisarea mayhave establishedlargeresidenceson land alreadyin enrichment, theirpossession, withtheaim ofincreasing workforce productionbyhousingtheiragricultural as closeto theirestatesas possible.If thesouth-eastern sectoris includedin Spartiateterritory, the formationof large estatestheremighthelp to account forthe fundamentalshiftin settlement fromthe plateau to the Chrysaphabasin. The emergenceof largersites,of villa and hamlet size, in the Chrysapha basin seems to have gone hand in hand with the and villason theplateau.If some or all of these disappearanceofthemajorityoffarmsteads are identifiedas large or very large farms controllingestates, rather than as small agglomerationsof farmsteads,the realignmentof settlementmay be seen to reflectthe 225Hodkinson,'Land tenure';id. (n. 37);id. 'Modellingthe Spartan crisis: computer simulation of the impact of inheritance systems upon the distributionof landed property',BulletinoftheJohnRylandsLibrary,74.3 (1992), 25-38; id., 'Warfare,wealth, and the crisis of Spartiate in the society',inJ. Rich and G. Shipley(eds), WarandSociety

GreekWorld(Leicester-NottinghamStudies in Ancient Society, 4; London and New York, 1993), 146-76; id., 'Spartansocietyin thefourthcentury:crisisand continuity', in P. Carlier (ed.), Le IVe siècle av. J.-C: approches historiographiques (Nancyand Paris,1996),85-101.

250 Chapter3

prioritiesof wealthylandowners.Withtheirlikelypreferenceforless intensiveagricultural regimes,it is possiblethatcultivationof the marginallands of the plateau was no longer justifiableby the low yieldsthatcould be expected,and thatthe plateauwas largelyturned overto pastoraluse and perhaps,in the morefavourableareas, to vinesand olives.Arable on the deepersoilsin the basin and itsperiphery, cropswouldthenhave been concentrated where returns,though unlikelyto have been large, were probably more predictable. eventhebasinmayhavebeen seen as ofmarginalvalue to thewealthyminority, Nevertheless, whoseinterests wouldsurelyhavefocusedon theprimeagricultural land in theplainofSparta and perhapsMessenia. Insteadof tryingto forcethe surveyresultsto fithypotheses based on textualevidence,it may be more productiveto apply the archaeologicalevidencedirectlyto the problemof Whilethepolarizationbetweenrichand poor maypartlybe explained Spartanoliganthrôpia. by the Spartan systemof inheritance,is it not possible that the catastrophicdecline in Spartiatenumbersin the fifthcenturyshouldsomehowbe seen as the consequenceof the failureof so manysiteswhichhad been firstestablishedin the sixthcentury?It is certainly thatthe period of maximumruralexpansionshouldbe more or less coterminous striking withSparta'semergenceas the dominantpowerin the Péloponnèse,whichmay in turnbe linkedto the growthof Spartancitizennumbers.However,if thishypothetical increasein numbers was based on the of it have been doomed to failif land, Spartiate provision may mostor all ofitwas in marginalareas,whiletheprimearableland in theplainsremainedin the hands of a wealthyélite.In thiscase the reductionin Spartannumberswhichunderlay the crisisof the fourthcenturymay be directlycorrelatedwiththe progressive desertionof sites fromthe mid-fifth The of that class which had century. impoverishment perhaps underpinnedthepreeminenceof Sparta sincethe secondhalfofthe sixthcenturywas itself, in theabsenceofattempts at socio-political thecause ofSparta'srapiddeclinein the reform, laterclassicalperiod. As previously the chronological of the archaeologicaldata makesit remarked, imprecision difficult to correlatechangesin the settlement with pattern specificeventssuch as the great All of that can be said is that such a correlation cannot be excluded on earthquake 465. alone. there are reasons for thinkingthat the However, chronological grounds good had little on the overall of settlement earthquake impact development patterns,however destructiveit may have been.226Unless it was responsibleforthe annihilationof entire households,thenaturalresponseto sucha disasterwouldhave been to repairthedamage or rebuildnearbyand, all thingsbeing equal, continueas before.In some cases it mighthave providedtheoccasionfortherelocationof a sitewithinitscatchmentarea, suchas has been suggestedin severalinstances(e.g.D96 to D85/95,P262to P261/264).But itcannotadequately explaina situationwheresitesof all typeson the Neogene plateau were desertedin great whileat themajorityofsitesin theneighbouring seems numbers, Chrysaphabasincontinuity to havebeen therule. A further eventthatmightbe predictedto have had a radicaleffect on settlement and land use in Laconia was thelossin 370/69ofmuchofMessenia,and withit theestatesfromwhich theSpartansare thoughtto havedrawnso muchoftheirwealth,as wellas thehelotswho had workedthe land on theirbehalf.The naturalexpectationmightbe thatthe Spartanswould havebeen forcedto compensateforthislossbymorefullyexploiting theresourcesavailableto 226See Hodkinson effects oftheearthquake. (n. 37),103-5,on tnepossibledemographicand socio-economic

Early Iron Age to classical period 251

themin Laconia. The mainobstacleto doingthiswas no doubttheshortageoflabour.In this landownersmayinsteadhavebeen compelled situation wealthySpartan,and maybeperioikic, the to adapt theirfarmingregimesfor productionof cropsand othergoods witha reduced in inputof labour that could be used externaltrade,forexample oil, wine, and animal of thisloss are hard to detectamong the surveyevidence.The produce.In fact,the effects seemsto have occurredwellbeforethisdate and in response mainchangein ruralsettlement whichmaywellbe relatedis the evidencefor to different factors.However,one development encroachment of settlement onto the schistmassifin the northernsector. thefirstsubstantial On thebasis of thesurveyevidence,thishas been dated to the end of thefourthand/orthe Beforethisdate onlya fewsitesoccurin thisvast area. Unliketherapid earlythirdcentury. colonizationof the south-easternsectorin the sixthcentury,thisprocessmay have been to and Roman periods.It is tempting gradualand mayhavecontinuedthroughthehellenistic soon after370/69,beginningwiththelowerslopesofthemassif suggestthatit was instigated thatwere accessiblefromvillas and farmsin the Eurotas and lower Kelephina valleys.If modernand recentagricultural usage is any guide,it is likelythattheirprimeconcernwas and theproductionofoil. witholivecultivation The same yearalso usheredin an era of insecurity. FollowingSparta'sdefeatat Leuktrain in the winter of was invaded Laconia 370/69 by the Boiotiansand theirallies under 371, event is known from This latter Xenophon to have adverselyaffectedthe Epameinondas. northernand westernsectorsof the surveyarea. Sellasia was burntand plundered,as were houseson the east bank of the EurotasbetweenThornax and Sparta (Xen. Hell. vi. 5. 27). Some ofthesitesin thewesternsectoron whichthereis no evidenceforhellenistic occupation Three ofthevillasbetweentheKopana bridgeand mayhavebeen victimsofthisdevastation. the confluencewiththe Kelephina (H31,H34, H40) are possiblecandidates;it is especially temptingto equate the large,rich site H31 withone of those houses fullof goods whose destruction is mentionedbyXenophon.More remotesites,suchas D85/95on thelowerslopes in ofMt Skoura,mayhave escapedthisfate.Amongthe sitesto the southof the confluence, at the hands of the invading the low groundfacingSparta,manyare likelyto have suffered armyas it marchedto the southof Sparta along the east bank of the Eurotas.It mightbe betweentheclassicaland thatthefewsitesin thewesternsectorwherecontinuity conjectured should be attributed to theperiodafter370/69. is attested hellenistic (h6o,J212,M172) periods in thisway,the longif sites can be accounted for the desertion of individual even However, and it is unlikelyto have been a termeffectsof the invasionshouldnot be overestimated effects ofinsecurity werepresumably in thehistory ofruralsettlement. watershed Anylingering remainedin enemyhandsuntil£.365, mostdeeplyfeltin thearea ofSellasia,whichapparently Untilthelaterthirdand earlysecond whenit was recoveredby SpartawithSyracusanaid.227 a to deterruralsettlement, otherthan invasions were not of recurrent threat centuries, enough in the mostvulnerableareas. Most parts of the surveyarea were remoteenough to have factor. ofinvaders,so thatsecurity escapedtheattentions probablyneverbecame a significant are theonlylikelyexception, wherein theaftermath ofplundering and Sellasiaand itsterritory was it a sense of have continued to be felt. Not insecurity may only occupation heightened theloss oftheSkiritis situatedon one ofthetwoinvasionroutesfromthenorth,butfollowing 227There mustbe a strongcase forthinking thatit was in factrecoveredin the same campaign,also carriedout with ofKaryaiand Syracusanassistance,thatsaw thedestruction

the exemplary punishmentof its inhabitants who had defectedto theenemyin 370/69:Xen. Hell.vii. 1. 28 (see n. 187above).

252 Chapter5

in 338 Sellasia became an outposton the northernborderof Spartan-controlled territory. factorin the desertionof ruralsitesin the These conditionswere perhaps a contributory vicinityof Sellasia in the classical period. Their inhabitantscould probably be easily couldperhapsbe provided accommodatedin thevillageofSellasia,whereadequateprotection whichhad existedin some of The fortress all but an AgiosKonstantinos, invadingarmy. against fromthenorth,now a threat to counter formsincethelatesixthor earlyfifth century perceived that a littlesurprising musthavebeen a vitalelementin thedefenceofLaconia. It is therefore thisfortneverreceivesa mentionin the sources,unlikeseveralotherfortsalongthenorthern The lackofunambiguous borders,and so itsancientnameremainsunknown.228 archaeological in fourth is probablyno morethana the or evidenceforitsenlargement strengthening century natureofthesurveyevidence.Fixeddefences,suchas Agios oftheratherunrefined reflection in defending Laconia frominvading effective seemnotto havebeen particularly Konstantinos, armies.If thiswas theirpurpose,ratherthanto provideprotection againstsmall-scaleraiding, in origin,especiallyiftheir was misconceived we maysuspectthatSpartandefensive strategy oftheirnorthern frontier. was inadequatefortheeffective garrisoning military strength THE SURVEY AREA IN CONTEXT

Until comparablesets of publisheddata fromotherintensivesurveysin Laconia become thathave been of the patternsof settlement to assessthe significance available,it is difficult in our own surveyarea in theperiod1050-300BC in thewidercontextofLaconia established underSpartancontrol.The fundamental and the territories questionis whetherthe results fromthe studyarea are to be regardedas typicalof the restof Laconia, or are in some way the Whatevertheanswer,itwillhelpto clarify peculiarto it and to areas ofsimilarcharacter. in the surveyarea was governedby developments extentto whichtheevolutionofsettlement of Resultsfromcoastaldistricts specificto Spartaor byfactorsofwiderregionalsignificance. Laconia shouldalso revealhow strongan influencetheratherisolated,inlandlocationofthe history. surveyarea exercisedon itssettlement As has been seen above,evidencefromextensivesurvey(forexample,in southernArkadia and Kynouria)can be usefullydeployed,and some preliminaryresultsare available for intensivesurveysin southernArkadia, westernMessenia, and Kythera. The principal drawbackis that,in relationto Laconia, all theseare peripheralareas,mostofwhichdid not so thatprocessesoperatingin Laconia might fallunderSpartancontroluntilthesixthcentury, be expectedto have had a weakerimpact.In spiteoftheseproblems,an attemptat assessing to of our resultsremainsa worthwhile thewiderapplicability exercise,as long it is restricted evolutioncomprising(i) a highlynucleatedphase the broad tripartite schemeof settlement oftheSpartaplainwellintothesixthcentury, resettlement (ii)a lastingfromthetenth-century a and one in few numerous of sudden settlement hamlets, farmsteads, village, dispersion phase and (iii) an equally century, lastinga rathershorttimefromthe mid-sixthto the mid-fifth concentrated dispersal,withtheruralpopulationincreasingly abruptreductionin settlement the to the end of in hamletsand one village,fromthelaterfifth period. century For the firstphase, the theorythat a nucleatedpatternof settlementwas widespread Laconia, includingcoastal areas,findssome supportin the negativeevidence.2