A Landscape of Conflict? Rural Fortifications in the Argolid (400–146 BC)

Description

A Landscape of Conflict? Rural Fortifications in the Argolid (400–146 BC) is the first systematic study of Late Classical and Hellenistic rural fortifications in the territories of ancient Argos and the city-states of the Argolic Akte (northeastern Peloponnese). Based on one of the largest regional corpora of Greek fortified sites to date, the volume investigates the function of rural fortifications by placing them in the context of their surrounding landscape. This approach – combining ‘traditional’ methods of ancient history and landscape archaeology with GIS-based data analyses – helps to readdress the long-standing tension between ‘military-strategic’ and ‘non-military’ research agendas in Greek fortification studies, and highlights that Classical and Hellenistic rural fortifications are neither a priori fortified farmsteads nor parts of military-strategic networks of territorial defence. Instead, rural fortifications emerge in this monograph as multifunctional and multifaceted sites, which open a new window into different forms of ‘formal’ and ‘informal’ conflict in the ancient countryside and bear witness to a remarkable degree of local motivation and agency. The study thus demonstrates how ancient fortifications can provide an unexpected and so far much underappreciated opportunity for writing local or regional Greek histories – political and military as well as social and economic – from archaeological sources. Cover Title Page Copyright page List of Figures Figure 1.1 The landscape of the northeastern Peloponnese. Figure 2.1 Watersheds in the northwestern Argolid and sedimentary deposits on the Argive plain (deposits after Fouache 1999: 170, fig. 49). Figure 2.2 The Argolic and the Saronic Gulf: drainage basins and areas most susceptible to coastline changes. Figure 2.3 Evidence for ancient land use in the Argolid (after Table 2). Figure 3.1 The geographical distribution of fortified sites in the Argolid (by type). Figure 3.2 The geographical distribution of towers in the Argolid (by size and shape). Figure 3.3 The geographical distribution of fortified settlements in the Argolid (by size). Figure 4.1 Kastraki (35): satellite image and sketch plan (Google Earth 2013). Figure 4.2 The gates of Mantineia (Maher 2017: 223, fig. C8.7). Figure 4.3 Plaka Leonidiou (63): satellite image and sketch plan (Google Earth 2013). Figure 4.4 Sportiza (74): satellite image and sketch plan (Google Earth 2013). Figure 4.5 The Southeast Tower at Asini (14): plan (Adam 1982: 57, fig. 24). Figures 4.6–7 Argos’ (12) hexagonal towers on the Aspis (above) and on the Larissa-Aspis wall (below) (Adam 1982: 58, fig. 26). Figure 4.8 The possible hexagonal tower at Achladokampos (1) (Google Earth 2012). Figure 4.9 The northwest side of the possible hexagonal tower at Achladokampos (1) from the north. Figure 4.10 Drystone masonry on the north side of Agio Lias (2). Figure 4.11 Roughly hewn coursed polygonal masonry at Agios Sostis (5) Figure 4.12 Roughly hewn uncoursed polygonal masonry at Tyros (83). Figure 4.13 Carefully fitted ashlar masonry at Asini (14) Figure 4.14 Carefully fitted coursed trapezoidal masonry at Elliniko Astrous (21). Figure 4.15 Carefully fitted uncoursed trapezoidal masonry at Ano Phanari (10). Figure 4.16 Carefully fitted coursed polygonal masonry at Iria (31). Figure 4.17 Carefully fitted uncoursed polygonal masonry at Palaia Epidavros 1 (54) Figure 4.18 The distribution of masonry by type of joint (number of samples). Figure 4.19 The distribution of roughly hewn masonry by shape of blocks (number of samples). Figure 4.20 The distribution of fitted masonry by shape of blocks (number of samples). Figure 4.21 Uncoursed roughly hewn polygonal masonry at Plaka Leonidiou (63). Figure 4.22 The distribution of drystone masonry by type of site (number of samples, excluding drystone circuits). Figure 4.23 The distribution of roughly hewn masonry by type of site (number of samples). Figure 4.24 The distribution of carefully fitted masonry by type of site (number of samples). Figure 4.25 The distribution of coursed polygonal masonry by type of site (number of samples). Figure 5.1 The territory of Kleonai (after Marchand 2002b). Figure 5.2 The territory of Hermion and the shared territory of Hermion and Epidauros (2nd century BC). Figure 5.3 The territory Epidauros (3rd and 2nd century BC). Figure 5.4 The fortifications on the Akte by city-state (400–146 BC). Figure 5.5 Argive komai and dependent settlements (400–146 BC). Figure 5.6 The fortifications in the territory of Argos. Figure 6.1 The tower of Agios Sostis (5) from the south. Figure 6.2 The view from the tower of Agios Sostis (5) to the north. Figure 6.3 Surviving wheel-ruts and ancient bridges in the Argolid (after Φάκλαρης 1990; Πίκουλας 1995; Tausend 2006 and Πίκουλας 2012). Figure 6.4 Least cost paths between Argos and Mantineia calculated with the ArcGIS Path Distance tool, the so-called ‘Tobler’s Hiking Formula’ (after Tripcevich 2009 and White 2015) and the relative effort required to walk on different slopes (after Minet Figure 6.5 The least cost paths between urban centres, compared to the surviving wheel-ruts and ancient bridges. Figure 6.6 The least cost paths between urban centres and fortified settlements, compared to the least cost paths between urban centres and the surviving wheel-ruts and ancient bridges. Figure 6.7 The least cost paths between fortified settlements, compared to the least cost paths between urban centres, the least cost paths between urban centres and fortified settlements and the surviving wheel-ruts and ancient bridges. Figure 6.8 The least cost paths, compared to the 4th-century BC and Hellenistic fortifications in the region. Figure 6.9 The results of the cumulative pathway analysis, compared to the distribution of 4th-century BC and Hellenistic fortifications. Paths marked in blue denote routes with a low overlap between different paths, paths marked in red denote routes with Figure 6.10 The freestanding rectangular tower with chamfered corners at Kephalovryso (40). Figure 6.11 The view from the possible tower at Kondyli (98). Figure 6.12 The view from the drystone circuit at Vigliza (85). Figure 6.13 The view from the tower at Tourkovrysi (78). Figure 6.14 The view from the tower of Agios Sostis (5) to the south. Figure 6.15 The binary viewshed of the fortified settlement of Achladokampos (1). Figure 6.16 The classified viewshed of the fortified settlement of Achladokampos (1). Figure 6.17 Site intervisibility in the territories of Halieis and Hermion. Figure 6.18 Site intervisibility in the territory of Troizen. Figure 6.19 Site intervisibility in the territory of Epidauros. Figure 6.20 The view from Ano Phanari (10), with Palaia Epidavros and the Korinthia (left), Salamis and Attica (centre) and Aigina (right). Figure 6.21 The view from Skala 1 (104) to the west, south and east, with Stavropodio (75) (left), the Benteni valley (centre) and the Argolic Gulf (right). The plain of Iria is just visible through the trees on the right edge of the picture. Figure 6.22 Site intervisibility in the territory of Argos. Figure 6.23 Intervisible ‘site clusters’ in the territory of Argos. Figure 6.24 ‘Cluster 3’: intervisible Argive fortifications in the plain of Prosymna. Figure 6.25 The view from Agio Lias (2) to the east, with the plain of Prosymna (left) and the Argive plain (right). Figure 6.26 ‘Cluster 5 and 6’: intervisible Argive fortifications around Achladokampos (1) and south of the Zavitsa mountains. Figure 6.27 The view from Tourniki: Gaidourovouni (79) to the east along the Xerias valley. Figure 6.28 ‘Cluster 2’: intervisible fortifications in the territory of Kleonai. Figure 6.29 The area visible from fortifications in Argos’ hypothetical signalling network (400–146 BC). Figure 6.30 Argos (12), satellite-image (Google Earth 2018) with the remains of the city walls (aft Figure 6.31 Ermioni (24): plan (Frickenhaus – Müller 1911: pl. 1). Figure 6.32 Palaia Epidavros 1 (54): satellite-image with sketch plan (Google Earth 2018). Figure 6.33 Porto Cheli (64): plan (McAllister 2005:, fig. 18). Figure 6.34 Troizina (80): satellite-image with sketch plan (Google Earth 2018, after Welter 1941: pl. 2). Figure 6.35 Argos, Larissa (12): the west wall of the outer circuit from the west. Figure 6.36 Argos, Larissa (12): the outer circuit. Satellite-image with sketch plan (Google Earth 2018, after Πιτέρος 2013: 346, fig. 2). Figure 6.37 Argos, Aspis (12): plan (Philippa-Touchais – Touchais 2006: 717, fig. 16). Figure 6.38 a Galatas: Megali Magoula (25): the view to the west and north towards Troizina (80). Figure 6.38 b Galatas: Megali Magoula (25): the view to the north and east towards Limanaki 1 (48) and Limanaki 2 (99), the straits of Poros, the island of Poros and the straits between Poros and Galatas. Figure 6.38 c Phourkaria (61): the view to the southeast, south and southwest towards the island of Hydra. Figure 6.39 Walking distances, cost boundaries and fortifications (400–300 BC). Figure 6.40 Walking distances, cost boundaries and fortifications (300–235 BC). Figure 6.41 Walking distances, cost boundaries and fortifications (235–146 BC). Figure 6.42 Benteni Kiapha (16): the southwest wall from the southeast. Figure 6.43 Kazarma (39): satellite-image with sketch plan (Google Earth 2013). Figures 6.44 a–b The masonry at Kastraki (35) (top) and Kazarma (39) (bottom). Figures 6.45 a–b The cross section of the south tower at Kastraki (35) (top) and tower II at Kazarma (39) (bottom). Figure 6.46 Andritsa: Goulas (9): the cistern. Figure 6.47 Agios Adrianos (3): the cistern from the south. Figure 6.48 Kazarma (39): the cistern from the east. Figure 7.1 Walking distances in southern Attica. Figure 7.2 Possible places of refuge: walking distances and cost boundaries. Figure 7.3 Possible places of refuge: walking distances, cost boundaries, agricultural installations and the probable maximum altitude for olive cultivation (500 mamsl). Figure 7.4 Possible places of refuge: walking distances, cost boundaries, agricultural installations and modern agricultural areas. Figure 7.5 The surface pottery assemblage from the drystone circuit at Vigliza (85) by functional category (after Penttinen 1996b: 268–70). Figure 7.6 Crossbar cuttings at Elliniko: Kephalari (23) (outer door). Figure 7.7 Crossbar cuttings at Kampia (32). Figure 7.8 Cuttings for a double crossbar at Agios Adrianos (3). Figure 7.9 Areas above an altitude of 500 mamsl (with fortifications by type). Figure 7.10 Areas with a slope above 10° (with fortifications by type). Figures 7.11 a–c Ancient press beds at Andritsa: Goulas (9) (a), Ierakas (28) (b) and Mykinai (51) (c). Figures 7.12 a–d Ancient press weights at Asini (14) (a), Elliniko Astrous (21) (b), Mykinai (51) (c), and Troizina (80) (d). Figures 7.13 a–d Ancient olive mills at Amygdalitsa (7) (a), Iliopoulaiika (30) (b), Pyrgouli (71) (c) and Malantrenion (101) (d). Figure 7.14 The distribution of ancient agricultural installations at fortifications in the Argolid. Figure 7.15 The distribution of portable finds (connected to specific agricultural or industrial activities) at fortifications in the Argolid. Figure 7.16 The pottery assemblages from Agios Sostis (5) and Prosymna: Pyrgouthi (69) by functional category (after Cloke 2016: 901 and Penttinen 2005: 23–89). Figure 7.17 The pottery assemblages from two unfortified rural sites from the NVAP by functional category (after Cloke 2016: 682–87, 799–818). List of Tables Table 2.1 Sediment deposits on the Argive plain (after Fouache and Gaki-Papanastassiou 1997; Fouache 1999). Table 2.2 a Land use in the ancient Argolid: olives. Table 2.2 b Land use in the ancient Argolid: cereals. Table 2.2 c Land use in the ancient Argolid: vines. Table 2.2 d Land use in the ancient Argolid: legumes. Table 2.2 e Land use in the ancient Argolid: tree crops. Table 2.2 f Land use in the ancient Argolid: pastoralism. Table 2.2 g Land use in the ancient Argolid: wood. Table 2.2 h Land use in the ancient Argolid: hunting. Table 2.2 i Land use in the ancient Argolid: beekeeping. Table 2.2 j Land use in the ancient Argolid: salt panning. Table 2.2 k Land use in the ancient Argolid: fishing. Table 3.1 Towers and possible towers in the Argolid. Table 3.2 Fortified settlements and possible fortified settlements in the Argolid. Bibliographic references to individual finds at these sites can be found in the catalogue. Table 3.3 Forts and possible forts in the Argolid. Table 3.4 Drystone circuits in the Argolid. Table 4.1 The width and stock length of stone-throwing palintones. Table 4.2 The width and stock length of arrow-shooting euthyones, reconstructed from washers at Ephyra and the Mahdia shipwreck. Table 4.3 The outer dimensions of the hexagonal towers (in meters). Table 4.4 a The hypothetical inner dimensions of the hexagonal towers: battlements (width 0.4–0.8, all measurements in meters). Table 4.4 b The hypothetical inner dimensions of the hexagonal towers: mudbrick walls (width 1.35–2.15; Miletus: 1.35–1.8; Samos: 1.35; all measurements in meters). Table 4.4 c The hypothetical inner dimensions of the hexagonal towers: stone walls (width 0.4–1.42, Samos: 0.75–1.35, all measurements in meters). Table 4.5 a The hypothetical stock length of catapults at the hexagonal towers (battlements; all measurements in meters). Table 4.5 b The hypothetical stock length of catapults at the hexagonal towers (mudbrick walls; all measurements in meters). Table 4.5 c The hypothetical stock length of catapults at the hexagonal towers (stone walls; all measurements in meters). Table 6.1 Site clusters in the territory of Epidauros. Table 6.2 Site clusters in the territory of Argos. Table 6.3 Average monthly run-off from a tiled roof (10m2) in the Argolid. Table 6.4 Average monthly run-off from a stone surface (10m2) in the Argolid. Table 6.5 Estimated storage volume for a catchment area of 81m2 (tiled), a garrison of 16 men and a water consumption of 5 litres per day per person. Table 6.6 Estimated storage volume for a catchment area of 77m2 (stone), a garrison of 16 men and a water consumption of 5 litres per day per person. Table 6.7 Estimated storage volume for a catchment area of 230 m2 (stone), a garrison of 16 men and a water consumption of 15 litres per day per person. Table 6.8 Estimated storage volume for a catchment area of 195 m2 (stone), a garrison of 40 men and a water consumption of 5 litres per day per person. Acknowledgements Note to the Reader On the transliteration of Greek toponyms, personal names and pottery terms On sites names and catalogue numbers The descriptive catalogue Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 Approaching a landscape of conflict 1.2 Fortification studies: a brief history of scholarship 1.3 Defining the Argolid 1.4 Studying fortifications in the Argolid: an outline Chapter 2: The Landscape of the Ancient Argolid 2.1 Setting the scene 2.2 Landscape changes: from tectonics to vegetation 2.3 Land use: agriculture, pastoralism and ‘marginal’ resources 2.4 The scene is set: the landscape of the Late Classical and Hellenistic Argolid Chapter 3: A Typology of Ancient Fortifications 3.1 Ancient terminologies and modern typologies 3.2 Fortified settlements, forts, towers and drystone circuits 3.3 Safety in numbers: the distribution of fortifications in the Argolid Chapter 4: Dating Ancient Fortifications in the Argolid 4.1 Dating ancient fortifications: a persistent problem 4.2 Securing a date: dating by stratified and surface finds 4.3 Building a chronology: dating by architectural features 4.4 Polygonal problems: dating by masonry technique 4.5 Dating ancient fortifications: discussion and conclusions Chapter 5: A Regional Study of Fortifications in the Argolid 5.1 The political geography of the Argolid (400–146 BC) 5.2 Settlement patterns in the Argolid (400–146 BC) Chapter 6: Rural Fortifications as Territorial Defences 6.1 Movement: fortifications and roads 6.1.1 Tracing ancient movement: the archaeological record 6.1.2 Tracing ancient movement: A least cost path analysis 6.1.3 Least cost paths and ancient fortifications in the Argolid 6.2 Visibility: fortifications as watch-posts and signal-stations 6.2.1 Studying visibility: methods and practice 6.2.2 Site visibility and intervisibility on the Akte 6.2.4 Evaluating the ‘visual networks’ 6.3 Territories: fortifications and defensive strategies 6.3.1 Late Classical and Hellenistic strategies of territorial defence 6.3.2 Fortifications as ‘deterrents’ and the role of city walls 6.3.3 ‘Dynamic’ defences: the role of rural fortifications 6.3.4 Conclusions: fortifications as strategic military sites Chapter 7: Rural Fortifications as Local Defences 7.1 Conflict: fortifications as places of refuge 7.2 Cultivation: fortifications and agriculture 7.2.1 Fortified architecture: between practicality and defensibility 7.2.2 Location: rural fortifications in context 7.2.3 Agricultural installations: rural fortifications as processing sites 7.2.4 Portable finds: everyday activities at rural fortifications 7.3 ‘Agricultural’ fortifications: economy and agency Chapter 8: Conclusions Bibliography A. General bibliography B. Editions of ancient authors C. Fragments D. Inscriptions E. Papyri F. Electronic resources Catalogue A. Fortifications in the Argolid B. Possible fortifications in the Argolid C. Fortifications and possible fortifications in the Argolid: location unknown D. Fortifications and possible fortifications in the Argolid: now destroyed E. Structures inconclusively or erroneously identified as ancient fortifications in the Argolid Appendix Index of Sources Literary sources Epigraphic sources Papyri General Index