Εμφανίζονται 100 (επί συνόλου 242) τίτλοι με αναζήτηση: Αρχαιολογικοί χώροι στην ευρύτερη περιοχή: "ΠΕΛΟΠΟΝΝΗΣΟΣ Περιφέρεια ΕΛΛΑΔΑ" .
ΑΡΚΑΔΙΑ (Αρχαία περιοχή) ΠΕΛΟΠΟΝΝΗΣΟΣ
ΑΣΚΛΗΠΙΕΙΟ ΕΠΙΔΑΥΡΟΥ (Αρχαίο ιερό) ΑΡΓΟΛΙΔΑ
Site: Epidauros
Type: Stoa
Summary: Two part stoa; forming part of northwest boundary of the
central Sanctuary of Asklepios, north of the Temple of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 400 B.C. - 350 B.C.
Period: Late Classical
Plan:
Two part stoa. Earlier eastern section was a two-aisled stoa opening south with
Ionic inner and outer colonnades. The later, western extension was two-storied;
the lower level reached by an outside staircase to a court on its southern side.
The extended stoa had 29 Ionic columns on the southern face and 13 inner columns.
Octagonal pillars in the lower level. The lower floor of the western extension
was enclosed by a wall with doors and decorated with Doric pilasters. A stone
balustrade filled the openings between the Ionic columns of the upper level. There
were probably wooden dividers between the inner columns of both stoas.
History:
Also known as the Enkoimeterion, the stoa was used as a dormitory for those awaiting
Asklepios' advice. The later two-storied western extension was probably Roman.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 4 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Temple
Summary: Rectangular building; attached to the north side of the
Roman House, to the east outside the Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 350 B.C.
Period: Late Classical
Plan:
On the west a pronaos of 4 Doric columns in antis (3 openings) led to an open
court.
History:
Previously identified as a Roman temple to the Egyptian Asklepios and Apollo (mentioned
by Pausanias), this sanctuary is now believed to have been dedicated to the Dioskouroi
(the twins Castor and Pollux).
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 2 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Summary: Two rectangular buildings; on the southern side of the
Sanctuary of Asklepios, southeast of the Tholos.
Date: ca. 480 B.C. - 338 B.C.
Period: Classical
Plan:
Two small, adjoining rectangular buildings. The western building a single room.
The larger, eastern building divided into a large inner room and a smaller entrance.
A connecting structure of 3 parallel walls formed 2 small square areas.
History:
The buildings have not been positively identified, but may have served as storage
or residences. A later Roman wall was built over the structures.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Baths
Summary: Rectangular buildings; east of the Abaton (Dormitory) and
north of the Temple of Asklepios, in the central Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 500 B.C. - 400 B.C.
Period: Archaic/Classical
Plan:
Two simple, rectangular buildings; the western one divided into 2 parts.
History:
Possibly the 1st baths in the sanctuary, the baths may have had religious and
curative uses. The water came from the sacred well of Asklepios southwest of the
Baths. A later Roman wall was built over the remains.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Fountainhouse Summary: Small prostyle building; on the eastern
edge of the Sanctuary of Asklepios, between the Northeast Stoa and the Anakeion.
Date: ca. 250 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
Small rectangular tetrastyle prostyle building opening south with a gathering
basin on its northern side and draw basin on the southern side.
History:
Rebuilt in the 2nd century A.D.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Fountainhouse
Summary: Fountainhouse with a circular niche; west of the Roman
cistern, in the Sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas.
Date: Unknown
Plan:
Rectangular room on north, opening north, with 3 rooms leading off. On the southern
side were a nearly circular room, perhaps with a fountain, and a nearly rectangular
room. On the east a small rectangular room.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Baths
Summary: Rectangular building; south of the central Sanctuary of
Asklepios and of the Gymnasium.
Date: ca. 300 B.C. - 280 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
Many rooms with bathtubs and basins.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Gymnasium
Summary: Courtyard surrounded by stoas and rooms; south of the central
Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 280 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
In the center was a square peristyle court with 16 columns to a side. Behind the
northern side of the peristyle was an interior colonnade of 20 columns, and beyond
this a long, narrow hall, an ephebeum or exercise room, with a small rectangular
exedra (probably a shrine) in its rear wall. Behind the southern side of the peristyle
was a wall with doors leading into a long room (probably a dining room) with a
central colonnade and 2 rooms at each end. Behind the eastern and western walls
of the peristyle were various rooms, the largest on each side having a central
colonnade with the one on the east probably serving as a dining hall. An enormous,
later propylon on the northern side was the main entrance, with 2 smaller entrances
on the eastern side.
History:
Dinsmoor refers to this building as the Palaestra. In Roman times an Odeion was
built over the ruins of the Gymnasium.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 4 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Guest House Summary: Large square building with courts; northwest
of the Theater, about midway between the Theater and the central Sanctuary of
Asklepios.
Date: ca. 320 B.C. - 300 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
Four square peristyle courts with 10 Doric columns to a side. The two-storied
Doric peristyles formed portico entrances to the surrounding 160 rooms. Around
each courtyard ran a channel for water.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 28 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Stoa
Summary: Group of narrow buildings forming the northeast corner
of the Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 325 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
A narrow court surrounded by colonnades and rooms on all but the eastern side.
History:
Coulton tentatively identifies this as the Stoa of Kotys. His reconstruction includes
a two-aisled portico, Doric outer colonnade and Ionic inner colonnade, on the
south and west sides. Colonnade on the north side may have been of wood. The area
immediately south of this complex is lined with dedications.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Odeion Summary: Small, roofed theater; built on the ruins
of the Gymnasium, south of the central Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: Unknown
Period: Roman
Plan:
Walled, roofed theater with cavea facing west and a two-storied stage building.
Mosaic paved orchestra less than a complete semi-circle.
History:
Built on the ruins of the earlier Gymnasium, the northeast corner of the Odeion
and the northwest corner of its stage were the same as those corners on the peristyle
court from the earlier building.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 3 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Temple
Summary: Square building with court; in the Sanctuary of Asklepios,
southeast of the Temple of Asklepios.
Date: Unknown
Plan:
Rooms around a court. Extant various interior walls from later uses.
History:
Originally this area may have been sacred to Apollo, whose altar stands to the
west. Later, when the area was sacred to Asklepios, the open area was surrounded
on 3 sides by rooms, perhaps serving as dormitories. Many dedications surround
the building, and it forms a boundary to the open air sanctuary to Asklepios that
occupies the southeastern corner of the Sanctuary of Asklepios. Parts of the building
were rebuilt and in use during the Roman period.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Palaestra
Summary: Large rectangular building; just outside the southern perimeter
of the central Sanctuary of Asklepios, east of the Temple of Artemis.
Date: Unknown
Plan:
Small porch entrance on western side led through a short passage to a rectangular
room with 4 pillars and 4 half-columns dividing the area into 3 aisles. There
was a narrow hall with 4 columns on the north side and many smaller rooms around
the other sides. A 2nd passage and entrance opened on the south.
History:
Misidentified as the Stoa of Kotys. Kavvadias considered this building a palaestra
with an open court, constructed in Classical times. Roux suggests that the building
was built by Antoninus and used by a religious group. Roux believes that the central
court had an opaion roof, and a circular bath area at the south side of the building.
The stone tables and benches on the north side of the central room were brought
from elsewhere.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Palaestra
Summary: Complex of buildings; southwest of the central Sanctuary
of Asklepios, north of the stadium.
Date: Unknown
Plan:
Large courtyard with colonnade facing south toward the stadium and entered by
a passage on that side. Various other rooms. An entrance also on the north side.
History:
Function uncertain, may have housed athletes or been a palaestra.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Gate
Summary: Gate building; located on the northwest, outside the central
Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 350 B.C.
Period: Late Classical
Plan:
Hexastyle, prostyle Ionic colonnades at north and south ends of the rectangular
platform. Between the walls on the eastern and western sides was a 4 x 5 inner
colonnade of Corinthian columns. The Propylon was approached on both ends by ramps.
History:
Before the 4th century A.D. the Sanctuary of Asklepios was not enclosed by a peribolos
wall, thereafter the Sacred Way passed through this Propylon which marked the
entrance to the sanctuary.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 22 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: House
Summary: House; adjoined the Anakeion, just outside the east wall
of the central Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: Unknown
Period: Roman
Plan:
Colonnaded larger courtyard with a well and surrounded by rooms. Smaller courtyard
to the east surrounded by rooms. North wall shared with Anakeion.
History:
May have been a priests' house or a place for important guests to stay.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Fountainhouse Summary: Narrow rectangular building; on the
eastern edge of the Sanctuary of Asklepios, between the Northeast Stoa and the
Anakeion, west of the Doric Fountainhouse.
Date: Unknown
Plan:
Narrow building entered from the west by a courtyard leading to a vaulted chamber
has a draw basin at its eastern wall. Storage cistern in rear wall.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: House
Summary: Building with a courtyard; south and east of the Stoa of
Apollo Maleatas, in the Sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas.
Date: Unknown
Period: Roman
Plan:
Complex of several rooms, most of them nearly rectangular.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Cistern
Summary: Large oblong cistern; located southwest of the Priests'
House, in the Sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas.
Date: Unknown
Period: Roman
Plan:
Rectangular shape.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Stadium
Summary: Rectangular area; southwest of the Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 480 B.C. - 338 B.C.
Period: Classical
Plan:
Rectangular area with starting line on the west and finishing line on the east
surrounded by water channel with settling basins. Stone seats on the north and
south sides.
History:
Earth banks were built up to supplement the slopes of a natural ravine, and to
create the original seating. The stone seats and staircases were added during
Hellenistic and Roman times. A paved platform on southern slope could have been
for victors or to seat honored guests, with a possible judges' bench opposite
the finishing line. A Hellenistic vaulted passageway under seats led to a possible
Palaestra to the north. Small stone pillars marked the stadium into 6 equal parts
and Hellenistic lane markers were later added to the finishing and starting lines.
Contests held in the stadium included: running events, broad jumping, discus,
javelin, wrestling, boxing and pankration (a type of wrestling in which striking
was allowed). Performances may have been held here before the Theater was built.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Stoa
Summary: Stoa; on the north side of the Sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas.
Date: ca. 280 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
One-aisled stoa with colonnade of Doric attached half-columns facing south. Stone
screens in the intercolumniations. Massive back wall was a retaining wall.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 2 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Temple
Summary: Small prostyle temple; east of the central Sanctuary of
Asklepios, west of the Sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas.
Date: ca. 320 B.C. - 280 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
Ionic prostyle temple with pseudo-peripteral cella, 4 x 7 columns. All but 6 outer
columns were attached to the cella walls. A ramp on the east led over 4 steps
to a tetrastyle prostyle porch of 6 columns and the cella. The interior of the
cella was lined with Corinthian columns which nearly touched the walls.
History:
An excavated statue of Aphrodite with a sword (attributed to Polykleitos the Younger,
2nd century B.C.) may have stood near this temple.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Temple
Summary: Temple; southwest of the Stoa of Apollo Maleatas, in the
Sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas.
Date: ca. 350 B.C.
Period: Late Classical
Plan:
Small cella opening east onto a pronaos, distyle in antis. Adyton at the west
end of the cella and a ramp on the east.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 2 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Temple
Summary: Prostyle temple; southeast of the Temple Asklepios on the
edge of the Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 330 B.C. - 300 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
A cella opening east onto a hexastyle prostyle pronaos of Doric columns. Ten Corinthian
columns lined the cella interior on 3 sides. A ramp and paved area on the east
connected the temple to an altar.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Temple
Summary: Peripteral temple; northeast of the Tholos, in the Sanctuary
of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 380 B.C. - 375 B.C.
Period: Late Classical
Plan:
Small Doric peripteral temple, 6 x 11 columns, with a cella opening east onto
a pronaos, distyle in antis. Inside the cella was a colonnade of unknown order
with 4 columns at the rear and 7 along the sides. A ramp on the east led into
the pronaos. A paved area led east from the ramp to the Altar of Asklepios. The
altar south of this building is an Altar of Apollo.
History:
Alternative reconstructions of this building show no interior colonnade. It was
dedicated to Asklepios and designed by the architect Theodotos. The temple displaced
an earlier Temple of Asklepios farther southeast in the sanctuary.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Temple
Summary: Prostyle temple; southwest of the Propylon, between the
Propylon and the central Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 320 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
A cella opening east onto a tetrastyle prostyle pronaos. Inner colonnade of Corinthian
columns on 3 walls. Ramp on east led up to the pronaos over a three-stepped platform.
History:
Alternative reconstructions show the pronaos distyle in antis.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Theater
Summary: Theater; located southeast of the Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 350 B.C. - 300 B.C.
Period: Late Clas./Hell.
Plan:
Cavea, orchestra and skene. A round orchestra defined by a low curb with an altar
stone in the center. A paved depression between the orchestra and the cavea was
a used as an ambulatory. The cavea of 55 rows of seats was divided vertically
by 13 staircases reached through the doors at either end of the scene building.
The diazoma divided the cavea into 21 upper, steeper rows of seats and 34 lower
rows. The lowest row of seats had back supports and was reserved for honored guests.
The scene building, which may have been added later in the Hellenistic period,
was two-storied. On its southeastern side, facing the cavea, was a one-storied
stage. The stage rested on 14 pillars with engaged Ionic half-columns. Between
all but the 2 central pillars were painted wooden panels used as a back drop during
performances. There were slightly projecting wings and a ramp at each end of the
stage. At the far end of each ramp, and almost perpendicular to it, were gateways,
each with 2 doors, one leading through the parodos to the orchestra and one leading
to the ramp. The lower story of the scene had 10 pillars along its northwestern
front and four along its central axis. At either end were two square rooms. The
upper story also had two square rooms at each end, but no central pillars.
History:
Designed by Polykleitos the Younger, in the 4th century B.C., the seats were wide
enough to allow those sitting in the upper rows to rest their feet on the lower
seats without touching the persons below. Originally seating 6,210, the expansion
of 21 rows above the diazoma allowed the theater to accommodate about 14,000.
The best preserved theater in Greece, with unparalleled acoustics. Modern performances
are held here.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Tholos
Summary: Circular building; southwest of the Temple of Asklepios,
in the central Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 360 B.C. - 320 B.C.
Period: Late Classical
Plan:
Circular building with outer colonnade of 26 Doric columns and inner colonnade
of 14 Corinthian columns. Leading to the east entrance, which had windows at either
side, was a ramp over the three-stepped platform. Beneath the floor of the Tholos
was a labyrinth reached by a hole in the center of the floor.
History:
Also known as the Thymele, the activities of the cult of the Hero Asklepios took
place here, and the labyrinth below may have housed sacred snakes. Pausanias wrote
that Polykleitos the Younger was the architect. The building had elaborately carved
architectural elements and fine paving of black and white limestone. Dinsmoor
states that the paving was marble.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Reservoir
Summary: Rectangular structure; west of the Temple of Themis, outside
the central Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: Unknown
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΗΡΑΙΟΝ (Αρχαίο ιερό) ΛΟΥΤΡΑΚΙ ΠΕΡΑΧΩΡΑΣ
Site: Perachora
Type: Temple
Summary: Narrow rectangular temple; in the harbor area, northeast
of the West Court, west of the Triglyph Altar of Hera Akraia and the Geometric
Temple of Hera Akraia.
Date: ca. 550 B.C.
Period: Archaic
Plan:
Long narrow cella opening west with walls on the north and south.
History:
A more complete reconstruction, not illustrated here, suggests that the cella
opened onto a pronaos, with 2 Doric columns distyle in antis. On the interior,
Doric colonnades on the 2 low walls and a cross wall in front of the cult statue
at the western end.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Perachora
Type: Peribolos Wall
Summary: Walled group of buildings; east of the harbor and the Hestiatorion.
Date: ca. 750 B.C.
Period: Geometric
Plan:
Rectangular enclosure, with a temple and hearth on south east corner. A sacred
pool outside the enclosure.
History:
Named from inscriptions found within the sanctuary. There is some debate if this
was a separate sanctuary from that of Hera Akraia. Inscriptions dedicating spits
were found here and other features indicate this may have been a dining facility.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 2 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Perachora
Type: Temple
Summary: Geometric temple; near the harbor, at the north end of
the Triglyph Altar of Hera Akraia.
Date: ca. 820 B.C.
Period: Geometric
Plan:
Hairpin-shaped temple opening east.
History:
Probably in use until ca. 725 B.C. A later, 6th century B.C. Temple of Hera Akraia
was constructed farther west on approximately the same axis as the Geometric temple.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Perachora
Type: Altar
Summary: Altar with a colonnade; in the harbor area, west of the
L-shaped stoa near the harbor, and abutting the Geometric Temple of Hera Akraia.
Date: ca. 550 B.C.
Period: Archaic
Plan:
Rectangular altar surrounded by 8 Ionic columns.
History:
The altar is named for the triglyphs and metopes which decorated its sides. The
Ionic columns possibly supported a canopy. The altar is contemporary with the
6th century B.C. Temple of Hera Akraia, but the colonnade was probably added ca.
400 B.C.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Perachora
Type: Stoa
Summary: L-shaped stoa; northeast of the harbor, just east of the
Triglyph Altar of Hera Akraia in the Sanctuary of Hera.
Date: ca. 325 B.C. - 300 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
Two-storied, one-aisled stoa opening to the south and west. Doric, lower colonnade
of 10 columns, and an Ionic upper colonnade of attached half columns.
History:
The upper story of Ionic columns is the earliest known use of Ionic order over
the Doric order in a stoa.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Perachora
Type: Court
Summary: Open area with colonnade; on the west side of the harbor.
Date: ca. 540 B.C.
Period: Archaic
Plan:
Irregular shape enclosed by a wall opening east. A bench ran along the west, south
and southeast sides, with pillars for roofing on the west and southern sides.
History:
Ca. 540 B.C., the earliest wall cuttings probably defined the extent of the Sanctuary
of Hera Akraia. The west wall and a wooden colonnade were added ca. 450 B.C. The
ca. 450 B.C. West Court is described above in the Plan description. It was probably
destroyed by Mummius in 146 B.C. In the 2nd century A.D. a Roman house was built
on the same location.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 4 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Perachora
Type: Cistern
Summary: Circular structure; northeast of the harbor area, between
the Sanctuary of Hera Limenia and the upper plains.
Date: ca. 450 B.C.
Period: Classical
Plan:
Circular foundation with small cutting near the center.
History:
Waterproof plaster indicates that this may have been a cistern. The floor slopes
toward the center cutting which may have been a drain. There are no signs of internal
supports and it may have been unroofed.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 2 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Perachora
Type: Dining facility
Summary: Three-roomed building; east of the harbor, west of the
Sanctuary of Hera Limenia, just south of the Double-apsidal Cistern.
Date: ca. 300 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
Nearly square, three-roomed building opening north. On the south, 2 square rooms
each equipped with 11 dining couches and 7 tables, opening on their north sides
onto a narrow vestibule.
History:
Excavation indicates that there was an earlier building on the same location.
The Double-apsidal Cistern was contemporary and probably built as part of the
Hestiatorion.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Perachora
Type: Cistern
Summary: Oval water tank; east of the harbor, west of the Sanctuary
of Hera Limenia, just north of the Hestiatorion.
Date: ca. 420 B.C.
Period: Classical
Plan:
Long cistern with apses at either end having 10 piers. Steps on the west. On the
east a separate apsidal settling tank with a circular basin, fed by a large channel
or drain.
History:
The stone slab drain which fed the cistern drew rain water from the Sanctuary
of Hera Limenia, and begins at the site of a sacred pool in the sanctuary. The
steps at the western end of the cistern indicate that water was drawn there to
serve the needs of the Hestiatorion. The Double-apsidal Cistern was contemporary
with, and probably built as a feature of the Hestiatorion.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 2 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Perachora
Type: Fountainhouse
Summary: Columned fountainhouse with long narrow storage chambers;
on the upper plains of the Perachora peninsula, northeast of the harbor.
Date: ca. 325 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
Ionic Hexastyle prostyle fountainhouse opening west. Three rectangular draw basins
on the east divided by a wall from the narrow storage chambers extending east.
History:
The site was in use from the 7th century B.C. onwards, but the fountainhouse dates
from the end of the 4th century B.C., when much of the Sanctuary of Hera was rebuilt.
The storage chambers received water from a channel at the southeastern corner.
Water then flowed into the south chamber and on to the draw basins and the center
and northern chambers.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 3 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΚΟΡΙΝΘΟΣ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΠΕΛΟΠΟΝΝΗΣΟΣ
Site: Corinth
Type: Temple
Summary: Peripteral temple; in the Sanctuary of Apollo.
Date: ca. 540 B.C.
Period: Archaic
Plan:
Doric peripteral temple, 6 x 15 columns. Double cella, one opening west, one
opening east, with no door adjoining the 2 rooms. Each cella had 2 rows of columns
and a pronaos which was distyle in antis. A total of 38 columns.
History:
This temple replaces an earlier temple, ca. 625 B.C., on the same location.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 9 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΜΥΚΗΝΕΣ (Μυκηναϊκό ανάκτορο) ΑΡΓΟΛΙΔΑ
Site: Mycenae
Type: Palace
Summary: The palace at Mycenae is on the summit of the citadel hill
Date: 1250 B.C. - 1200 B.C.
Period: Late Bronze Age
Plan:
Built in different levels on the uneven ground, the main elements of the complex
were the megaron with central hearth and anteroom and the central court. Two entrances
led to the central court: the propylon and west passage at NW, and the Grand Staircase
to the S. A long corridor separated the official room from the private apartments
and bath located to the N, at the highest position on the summit. The House of
Columns or Little Palace and artists' quarters to the E may have been a part of
the palace complex. Other corridors, guard rooms and store rooms have also been
identified.
History:
Large scale levelling and terracing for the palace destroyed remains of an earlier,
smaller palace. Construction in later Hellenistic times and erosion destroyed
much of the palace, especially the private rooms and the area to SE.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 6 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Mycenae
Type: Gate
Summary: Postern Gate at Mycenae is located in the N wall ca. 250
m. E of the Lion Gate.
Date: 1250 B.C. - 1200 B.C.
Period: Late Bronze Age
Plan:
A narrow gate for double wooden doors built with an enceinte or narrow passage
before it and massive flanking walls. Same strategic construction as the Lion
Gate, but on smaller scale.
History:
Constructed at same time as Lion Gate, Northeastern Extension and other enlargements
to the citadel at ca. 1250 BC.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 2 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Mycenae
Type: Sanctuary
Summary: The Cult Center at Mycenae is a complex S of Grave Circle
A and between the Great Ramp and the E citadel circuit wall
Date: 1250 B.C. - 1200 B.C.
Period: Late Bronze Age
Plan:
A maze-like complex of structures that may, on the basis of layout and character
of artifacts, be grouped into 4 zones: E group including "Tsountas' House" and
Shrine with altar, N group with large open area, Central group including Room
with the Idols, and W group including Room with the Fresco. Perhaps an indication
of different cult deities. Also indications of temple industries in ivory and
other materials.
History:
The area, as Grave Circle A, was originally outside the citadel walls and the
basic layout of the buildings date to just after the enlargement of the fortress
walls at ca. 1250 B.C. There may have been earlier cult activity in the area before
the citadel walls enclosed it.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Mycenae
Type: Fortification
Summary: Citadel walls of Mycenae protected the palace, administration
buildings and some habitations.
Date: 1350 B.C. - 1200 B.C.
Period: Late Bronze Age
Plan:
A roughly triangular fortress around a low hill (280 m. above sea level) with
1 main gate, a postern gate and 1 or 2 sally ports. A paved ramp-road winds from
the main gate, past Grave Circle A, past buildings of lower citadel, and up to
the palace.
History:
3 stages of construction: 1) ca. 1350 BC, walls enclosed highest portion of hill;
2) ca. 1250 BC, area enlarged to S and W, enclosing Grave Circle A. Lion Gage
and postern gate added: 3) ca. 1200 BC, NE Extension encloses access to water
reservoir. SE section of citadel lost to later natural erosion.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Mycenae
Type: Fortification
Summary: Northeastern Extension is a small enlargement to the Mycenae
citadel walls at the NE.
Date: 1250 B.C. - 1200 B.C.
Period: Late Bronze Age
Plan:
Walls, 7 m. thick., enclose an area added to the circuit walls to provide access
to an underground water reservoir and a sally port. A second opening in the wall
gave access to a watch platform along the SE side of the citadel extension or
served as a S sally port.
History:
A major element in the strengthening of the citadel defenses at cat 1250 - 1200
BC.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Mycenae
Type: Tomb
Summary: Grave Circle A is inside the citadel walls at Mycenae,
S of the Lion Gate.
Date: 1550 B.C. - 1500 B.C.
Period: Middle Bronze Age
Plan:
A circular area enclosed by a low wall with a wide entrance facing the Lion Gate.
In circle were 10 grave stelai carved in low relief and 6 shaft graves containing
19 bodies.
History:
Originally outside the citadel walls, Grave Circle A seems to have been established
as a heroon and was enclosed within the enlargement of the fortress at ca. 1250
BC.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 9 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Mycenae
Type: Tomb
Summary: One of 9 tholos tombs located outside the walls at Mycenae
Date: 1300 B.C. - 1250 B.C.
Period: Late Bronze Age
Plan:
Subterranean circular chamber with a corbelled dome (hence also called "beehive
tombs"), small adjacent rock-cut chamber and level dromos or access way leading
to the side of the hill.
History:
Largest and best preserved of the 9 tholos tombs at Mycenae. Believed to be one
of the latest built. In Pausanias' time thought to have served originally as a
treasury.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 19 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Mycenae
Type: Gate
Summary: The Lion Gate is main entrance to citadel of Mycenae, located
in NW wall of the fortress.
Date: 1250 B.C. - 1200 B.C.
Period: Late Bronze Age
Plan:
A gateway for double wooden doors set into the thick fortification walls. Approach
to the gate is up a ramp and through an enceinte or confining passage. A second
passage and guardroom are located inside the gate. From here the ramp-road circled
through the lower citadel up to the palace.
History:
The monumental gateway was erected when the citadel walls were enlarged and strengthened
ca. 1250 BC.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 8 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΑΛΙΕΙΣ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΚΡΑΝΙΔΙ
Region: Argolid
Periods: Archaic, Classical
Type: Fortified city
Summary: City of southern Argolid with Hippodamian city grid.
Physical Description:
Halieis is located on the E shore of a naturally sheltered,
S-facing bay at the S tip of the Argive peninsula. Originally (in the 8th-7th
century B.C.) the acropolis and the small settlement at the shore had independent
fortification walls. Probably in the 5th century B.C. the town expanded to the
E and S up the slopes of the low acropolis hill, and the later city walls enclosed
those of the acropolis. In the Classical period the city had at least 4 gates
and the walls also enclosed a small fortified military harbor. The streets, houses
and workshops of the expanded city were organized on the Hippodamos grid system
and there was a separate industrial quarter SE and uphill from the town's center.
A Sanctuary of Apollo (now under water) is located ca 500 m NE of the town and
contains a temple, altar and stadium.
Description:
The earliest evidence for occupation at the site dates
to the Proto-Geometric period: by the 7th century B.C. there was a small fortified
settlement on the shore. Early in the 5th century B.C., refugees from Tiryns settled
at Halieis and the town expanded in size. During the Classical period Halieis
was a pawn in the endless Athens-Sparta conflict and suffered attacks from one
side and then the other. The site was abandoned near the end of the 4th century
B.C., although there was some minor reoccupation in the late Roman period.
Exploration:
Excavations in 1962 and 1965-1968 by the University of
Pennsylvania directed by M. Jameson and in 1970-1974 by Indiana University directed
by W. Rudolph.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 11 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΑΡΓΟΣ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΑΡΓΟΛΙΔΑ
Region: Argolid
Periods: Early Bronze Age, Middle Bronze Age, Late Bronze Age, Dark
Age, Geometric, Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic, Roman, Byzantine, Modern
Type: Fortified city
Summary: One of the major Mycenaean and ancient city-states of the
Peloponnese.
Physical Description:
Argos lies ca. 7 km inland, near the center of the 200
square km Argive plain, and between the bases of the Aspis and Larissa hills and
the Kharadros river. The W half of the modern town of Argos covers the ancient
city and excavations have been limited to small areas and rescue work. Features
that have been excavated or investigated include the theater, agora, sanctuary
of Apollo and Athena, the Roman odeion and baths, and sections of the Classical
circuit wall.
Description:
Traditionally Argos was claimed as one of the oldest cities
of ancient Greece, and the birthplace of Perseus, the son of Danae and Zeus. Some
Neolithic remains have been found in the area, but the best evidence for early
occupation is the Early to Middle Helladic settlement on the summit of Aspis.
By Mycenaean times the center of settlement had moved to the higher Larissa hill
to the W (where the Frankish castle now stands). Although Argos was a major Mycenaean
center and its citizens figure prominently in the Homeric epics, the city was
over-shadowed by nearby Mycenae. After the fall of the Mycenaean Empire Argos
seems to have had the predominant role in the Peloponnese until the 6th century
B.C. when it begins a long struggle with Sparta. Throughout the Classical period
Argos allied itself with Corinth or Athens against Sparta. In 229 B.C. Argos joined
the Achaean League and after 146 B.C. it became part of the Roman province of
Achaea. Substantial Roman building activity indicates prosperity in the 1st to
5th centuries A.D. Argos was capital of King Pheidon and home of sculptors Ageladas
and Polykleitos.
Exploration:
In 1892, I. Kophiniotis partially excavated the theater;
between 1902 and 1930 W. Vollgraff carried out several excavations on behalf of
the French School. French School excavations have continued under the direction
of G. Daux and P. Courbin since 1952.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 61 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΑΣΚΛΗΠΙΕΙΟ ΕΠΙΔΑΥΡΟΥ (Αρχαίο ιερό) ΑΡΓΟΛΙΔΑ
Region: Argolid
Periods: Dark Age, Geometric, Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic, Roman
Type: Sanctuary
Summary: Sanctuary of Apollo and Asklepios and an Asklepieion or
healing center.
Physical Description:
On the E coast of the Argolid, the health spa and religious
center at Epidauros maintained a bath, hotels and dwellings for the priest-physicians
as well as a tholos building, temples, stoas, gymnasium, palaestra, stadium and
a theater. The theater is one of the best preserved ancient structures in Greece
and is now used for modern presentations of ancient Greek drama. The Asklepieia
(athletic and dramatic festival) was held every 4 years. Epidauros is claimed
as the birthplace of Asklepios and it was the most celebrated center of his cult.
Description:
Traditionally the region of Epidauros is said to have first
been inhabited by the Carians. There existed, in Archaic or earlier times, a cult
of Malos in the region, but the establishment of a sanctuary to Apollo and Asklepios
is not older than the 6th century B.C. It appears that the sanctuary was first
dedicated to Apollo and that only in the 5th century B.C. did Apollo's son Asklepios
gain prominence. At the end of the 5th century B.C. and throughout the 4th century
the Asklepieion grew in fame and influence. Every 4 years (9 days after the Isthmian
Games) the Panhellenic Asklepieia Games were held. At ca. 380 B.C. poetry and
music contests were added to the competition. During the 4th century the cult
of Asklepios spread throughout the Greek world. Epidauros was claimed as the birthplace
of Asklepios and more than 200 new Asklepieia were built (most notably at Athens,
Kos, and Pergamon). Also at this time the previously unadorned sanctuary at Epidauros
was filled with votive offerings and monuments. Fame and prosperity continued
throughout the Hellenistic period. In 87 B.C. the sanctuary at Epidauros was looted
by Sulla and in 67 B.C. it was plundered by pirates. In the 2nd century A.D. the
sanctuary enjoyed a new upsurge under the Romans and the worship of new gods from
the East was introduced into the sanctuary. In 395 A.D. the Goths raided the sanctuary.
Although the cults of the ancient gods died out under Christianity, the sanctuary
at Epidauros was known as late as the mid 5th century A.D. as a Christian healing
center.
Exploration:
Excavations: P. Kavvadias and V. Stais of the Greek Archaeological
Society began in 1881, the French School of Archaeology for a short time just
after W.W. II, and J. Papadimitriou in 1948-51.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 34 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΗΡΑΙΟΝ (Αρχαίο ιερό) ΛΟΥΤΡΑΚΙ ΠΕΡΑΧΩΡΑΣ
Region: Corinthia
Periods: Geometric, Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic
Type: Sanctuary
Summary: Sanctuary of Hera.
Physical Description:
Located on a large promontory at E end of Corinthian Gulf,
N of the Isthmus and opposite ancient Corinth, near the fortified town of Peraion.
Two sacred precincts existed: Hera Limenia above the harbor with an 8th century
B.C. temple and Hera Akraia by the harbor with a 6th century B.C. temple. House
remains, cisterns, an agora and stoa were part of the settlement around the sanctuaries.
There may have been an oracle at the sanctuaries.
Description:
Perhaps due to the scarcity of fresh water, there was no
settlement and only occasional habitation on the Perachora promontory prior to
the Geometric period when the territory (originally belonging to Megara) came
under Corinthian control. It was strategically important that Corinth control
the Perachora because it could serve an enemy as a strong base near the Isthmus
and Corinth and because it provided an ideal observation point for ship movement
in the whole W part of the Corinthian Gulf. The 1st temple and precinct of Hera
Akraia was established by the Corinthians on the W tip of the promontory early
in the Geometric period. There is strong indication that Argos also played a role
in the foundation of this new Heraion. In the later Geometric period (2nd half
of the 8th century B.C.), a 2nd temple and precinct, the so-called Hera Limenia,
was built ca. 200 m E and up the valley from the 1st precinct. The 2nd enclosure
may have been a separate sanctuary dedicated to Hera Limenia, or it may have been
an extension or annex to the precinct of Hera Akraia. In the latter case the 2nd
(8th century) temple may have replaced the original temple at the shore or it
may have been a treasury or structure to house the ever accumulating votive offerings
of Hera rather than an actual temple. The original sacred precinct of Hera Akraia
is in a confined space hemmed in by sea and cliffs and a large number of offerings
and votive gifts were brought into the sanctuary during the 8th century B.C. An
annex to the popular sanctuary of Hera Akraia appears more logical than the construction
of a new and competitive sanctuary of Hera. After the establishment of the Hera
Limenia precinct the original shore side precinct of Hera Akraia was renovated
and a new temple of Hera built in the 6th century B.C. From the 8th century through
the Classical period, votive gifts and offerings continue to enrich both precincts.
In the 8th and 7th centuries B.C. Corinth became more independent from Argos and
began to send out colonists and traders to the W. The Hera sanctuary was the last
point of Corinthian territory that colonists would pass and the first point that
returning merchants would reach and this undoubtedly accounted for many offerings
to secure or give thanks for safe voyages and enterprises. The Classical period
brought another phase of building activity at the sanctuary. The area of the Hera
Akraia precinct was remodeled and a stoa and agora were added. The approach to
the Hera Limenia precinct and part of that temenos were also remodeled. There
had been habitations and fortifications built in the neighborhood of the sanctuary
as early as the original Geometric period foundations and additional buildings
of this nature appear in the Classical period. The Heraion was still important
and active in the Hellenistic period and new buildings and cisterns appear in
the neighborhood. The sanctuary, however, had been completely abandoned after
the Roman sack of 146 B.C. and Roman houses were built over its ruins.
Exploration:
Excavations: 1930-33, H. Payne, British School of Archaeology.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 22 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΗΡΑΙΟΝ (Αρχαίο ιερό) ΑΡΓΟΣ - ΜΥΚΗΝΕΣ
Region: Argolid
Periods: Geometric, Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic, Roman
Type: Sanctuary
Summary: The main sanctuary to Hera in the Argive territory.
Physical Description:
The Heraion is located approximately equidistant from Argos
and Mycenae, in an area referred to by Pausanias as Prosymna. The sanctuary occupies
3 artificial terraces below Mt. Euboea and has a commanding view of the Argive
plain. The upper terrace, supported by a retaining wall of possible late Geometric
date, is a level paved area occupied by the Old Temple and an altar. The later,
middle terrace supports the New Temple, where a chryselephantine statue of Hera
by Polykleitos was housed. Other structures located on this terrace included one
of the earliest examples of a building with a peristyle court, which may have
served as a banquet hall. On the lowest terrace is a stoa and an Archaic step-like
retaining wall. To the W are Roman baths and palaestra.
Description:
Although tradition states that Agamemnon was elected at
the Heraion to lead the Trojan expedition, the earliest finds at the cult area
date to the Geometric period. The sanctuary grew and expended during the Archaic
and Classical period and most of the remains (with the exception of the Roman
baths and palaestra) date to the 7th through 5th centuries B.C. The sanctuary
continued in importance through the Roman period.
Exploration:
Discovered 1831 by T. Gordon. Minor excavations: Gordon
(1836), Rangabe and Bursian (1854), Schliemann (1874), Stamatakis (1878) and Caskey
and Amandry 1949. Major excavations: American School of Classical Studies; C.
Waldstein 1892-1895, C. Blegen 1925-1928.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 77 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΙΣΘΜΙΑ (Αρχαίο ιερό) ΛΟΥΤΡΑΚΙ ΠΕΡΑΧΩΡΑΣ
Region: Corinthia
Periods: Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic, Roman
Type: Sanctuary
Summary: One of the four major Panhellenic sanctuaries and site
of the Isthmian Games, 2nd only to the Olympian Games in fame.
Physical Description:
Located on the SE side of the Isthmus of Corinth, ca. 13
km E of ancient Corinth, the Sanctuary of Poseidon occupies a high point with
a clear view to the Corinthian and Saronic Gulfs. The main features of the sanctuary
are the temple and altar of Poseidon and the stoas of the main temenos. Beyond
the walls of the temenos are the stadium, theater, Roman Palaimonion shrine, and
Roman baths. Associated with the sanctuary are cave shrines N of the theater and
the Sacred Grove 400 m SW of the temenos.
Description:
Traditionally the sanctuary and games of honor of Poseidon
were established by the Corinthian King Sisyphos or the Athenian Hero Theseus.
The games were reportedly reorganized as a Panhellenic festival during the 49th
Olympiad (582-578 B.C.) and held every 2nd spring thereafter. Control of the games
was held by Corinth except for the period 146-44 B.C. when Corinth lay in ruins
and Sikyon managed the games. The Archaic temenos wall had a N and E propylon
and enclosed a temple and altar. Outside the wall was a large 20 m deep well and
a 16 lane stadium with a length of 192 m. In the Classical period the temenos
was enlarged and stoas added. The original temple, destroyed by fire, was replaced
by a temple that stood (with repairs in 390 B.C.) through the Roman period. The
deep well outside the wall became a refuge pit and a new, shorter (181 m) stadium
was constructed. The Classical stadium was replaced in the Hellenistic period
by a stadium located ca. 250 m SE of the temenos and at ca. 400 B.C. a theater
was built ca. 30 m NE of the temenos. The theater was renovated twice in the Hellenistic
period and twice in the Roman period. In the Roman period the temenos was again
extended and new stoas built. The Palaimonion cult precinct was attached to the
S side of the main temenos over the traditional burial place of Palaimon (associated
with the Corinthian foundation legend for the sanctuary). The sanctuary remained
active during the Roman period, until it was sacked by the Goths in A.D. 395 At
the beginning of the 6th century A.D. the structures in the sanctuary were pulled
down for material to build the nearby fortress and Isthmia wall of Justinian.
Exploration:
In 1883 P. Monceaus of the French School investigated the
site. It was re-studied and some test trenches dug in 1933 by R. Jenkins and A.
Megaw. 1952-1961 excavations by University of Chicago directed by O. Broneer,
who located the site of the sanctuary and excavated the temenos of Poseidon, the
stadium, theater and shrine of Palaimon (including the earlier temple and stadium).
1967-1972 excavations by University of California directed by P. Clement, chiefly
of the Isthmian fortifications and burials of the sixth and fifth centuries BC.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 35 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΚΟΡΙΝΘΟΣ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΠΕΛΟΠΟΝΝΗΣΟΣ
Region: Corinthia
Periods: Neolithic, Early Bronze Age, Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic,
Roman, Byzantine
Type: Fortified city
Summary: Corinth was the capital of a major Greek city-state in
the Archaic and Classical periods; a meeting place of the Hellenic League in the
Hellenistic period and the capital of the Roman province of Achaea.
Physical Description:
Ancient Corinth is strategically located 10 km SW of the
Isthmus of Corinth and 3 km inland from its port of Lechaion, on the gulf of Corinth.
The harbor town of Kenchreai, 10 km to the E, provided the city with access to
the Saronic gulf. Corinth controlled the N-S land traffic over the Isthmus and
maintained the Diolkos, a stone paved portage for ships crossing the Isthmus.
Corinth was linked to Lechaion in the 5th century B.C. by parallel Long Walls
(cf. Athens and Piraeus) which enclosed a large area of urban and agricultural
land as well as numerous sanctuaries. To the S, walls extended from Corinth and
ascended to the natural strong hold on the heights of Acrocorinth. The large fortress
on Acrocorinth, with its triple line of fortifications and supply of spring water
was almost impregnable and a key (throughout history) to the control of the Peloponnese.
Within the fortifications of Corinth itself (an area over twice the size of Classical
Athens) religious, civic, commercial and domestic buildings as well as a large
number of markets, factories and taverns crowded around the centrally placed Temple
of Apollo. Most of the remains visible today date to the rebuilding and embellishment
of the city during the Roman period.
Description:
The name Korinthos is pre-Greek and the site was occupied
from the Early Neolithic through the Early Bronze Age. There is little evidence
for settlement in the Middle and Late Bronze Ages, however, when the region of
the Corinthia is overshadowed by the neighboring Argolid. Traditionally, Corinth
was founded by the Dorians. During the 7th and 6th centuries B.C. it became a
leading mercantile and colonizing power. Pottery and bronzes manufactured in Archaic
Corinth were traded as far as Spain, Egypt and the Black Sea. After the Persian
Wars, the rise of Athens weakened Corinth's overseas contacts and power and Corinth
is frequently aligned with Sparta against Athens during the Classical period.
The defeat of the Greek forces at Chaironeia (338 B.C.) resulted in a Macedonian
garrison being placed at Corinth and the city became the meeting place for the
Macedonian controlled Hellenic League. Corinth flourished under Macedonian rule,
but revolted in 224 B.C. to join the renewed Achaean League. In 146 B.C. the League
was defeated by Rome and Corinth was completely destroyed by the Roman general
Mummius. The city remained virtually abandoned until Julius Caesar established
a colony of veterans on the site in 44 B.C. It became the capital of the Roman
province of Achaia in 27 B.C. Extensive rebuilding in the 1st century A.D. included
the addition of a forum, large public baths, and an amphitheater. Under Roman
patronage Corinth soon reclaimed and exceeded its earlier reputation as the Greek
city most noted for luxury, vice, and decadence. Corinth suffered and survived
barbarian destruction in the 3rd and 4th centuries and disastrous earthquakes
in the 6th century A.D. Its steady decline in prosperity was finally completed
by the sack of the city by the Crusaders in the 12th century.
Exploration:
Earliest excavation in 1886 by W. Dorpfeld. A. Skias excavated
in 1892 and 1906. From 1896 to the present, excavations by the American School.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 99 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΛΕΡΝΑ (Προϊστορικός οικισμός) ΑΡΓΟΛΙΔΑ
Region: Argolid
Periods: Neolithic, Early Bronze Age, Middle Bronze Age
Type: Settlement
Summary: Archaeologically important Early Bronze Age settlement.
Physical Description:
Lerna is one of the largest (ca. 180 sq. m.) prehistoric
mounds in S Greece and probably owed its importance to its position on the narrow
strip of land between sea and mountains that formed the route from the Argolid
to the S Peloponnese. It is located in the marshy area on the Gulf of Argos (10
km S of Argos). Early Bronze Age Lerna had substantial fortification walls and
a palace or administrative center in a central building referred to as the "House
of Tiles." This was a large two-story building with terracotta rooftiles and several
storage rooms where clay sealings were found. In Classical times the area was
claimed as home of the Nereids, place where Herakles slew the Hydra and location
of the entrance to Hades (through the Aleyonean Lake).
Description:
After a long period of Neolithic occupation (Lerna I and
II) the site seems to have been deserted for a time before it was levelled off
and reoccupied in the Early Helladic II period (Lerna III). The new settlement
had a double ring of defense walls with gates and towers and a number of substantial
buildings within. The largest building has been named the House of Tiles because
of the unusual early occurrence of terracotta roofing tiles associated with the
building. The walls of the large building are nearly 1 m thick and stairs indicate
an upper story. The building was perhaps still under construction when the whole
settlement was destroyed by fire. In the Early Helladic III period (Lerna IV),
the inhabitants (who supposedly destroyed the earlier settlement) covered the
site of the House of Tiles with a low tumulus surrounded by a ring of stones,
as though to mark off a sacred area. In the Early Helladic III period Lerna was
an open settlement of smaller buildings, some of them having an apsidal megaron
floor plan. Bothroi, or "rubbish pits" were an unusual characteristic of this
settlement. The Early Helladic III levels at Lerna produced, in addition to the
typical pottery of that period, a few examples of a pottery type known as "Minyan"
ware, which was sometimes wheel-made and is a common feature of the Middle Helladic
period. The clearly defined Middle Helladic level at Lerna (Lerna V) follows without
a break. The settlement at Lerna continues to exist throughout the Middle Helladic
period, but does not continue into the Late Helladic or Mycenaean period. At the
end of the Middle Helladic period, 2 rectangular shaft graves were cut into the
tumulus of the House of Tiles, indicating that the meaning of that monument had
been forgotten.
Exploration:
Excavations: 1952-58, J. Caskey, American School of Classical
Studies.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 2 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΜΑΝΤΙΝΕΙΑ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΑΡΚΑΔΙΑ
Region: Arcadia
Periods: Geometric, Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic, Roman
Type: Fortified city
Summary: A rival of Tegea as the most important Arkadian city.
Physical Description:
Located ca. 12 km NE of modern Tripolis on the upland plain,
Mantinea occupied the area of 5 smaller villages that had synoicized at an uncertain
date (cf. Tegea). The oldest section of the city was centered on the Gortsouli
(ancient Ptolis) hill. In the 4th century B.C. the city was rebuilt and new city
walls, ca. 4 km in length, were built with over 100 towers and 9 or 10 gates.
The course of the river Ophis was altered to provide additional defense. The city
walls are among the best fortifications of Classical Greece and may have been
designed by the same Thebian engineer who planned the walls of Messene. The city
had a Temple of Hera and a colonnaded agora with a theater at its W end.
Description:
Already mentioned in Homer's Iliad, Mantinea of the Classical
period was a synoicism of 5 smaller villages. It was one of the most important
of Arkadian cities and a rival of Tegea. Mantinea was allied with Sparta until
the Peloponnesian War when it sided with Athens. In 385 B.C. Sparta destroyed
Mantinea and dispersed the inhabitants. In 371 B.C. the city was rebuilt with
new fortification walls and repopulated. In 370 B.C. Lykomedes of Mantinea instigated
the foundation of the Arkadian League, but in 364 the city left the league to
form a new alliance with Sparta. In 222 B.C. the city revolted against Macedonian
control and suffered destruction by Antigonos Doson, who then rebuilt the city
and renamed it Antigoneia, a name that it retained until the 2nd century A.D.
Exploration:
Excavations by the French School directed by G. Fougeres
and V. Berard in 1887-1889.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 8 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΜΕΓΑΛΟΠΟΛΙΣ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΑΡΚΑΔΙΑ
Region: Arcadia
Periods: Classical, Hellenistic, Roman
Type: Fortified city
Summary: One of the largest cities in the Peloponnese.
Physical Description:
One of the largest cities in the Peloponnese, Megalopolis
is located on a large plain and is bisected by the Helisson river. The city was
protected by ca. 9 km of city walls and occupied by the inhabitants of ca. 40
abandoned Arcadian villages. On the N bank the civic center of the city included
the agora, stoas, the Philippian Stoa, Sanctuary of Zeus Soter, and other civic
buildings. The S bank section of the city was the center of the Arcadian League
and the location of the Thersileion (the league's council house). The theater
in the S sector was the largest in Greece with ca. 20,000 seats.
Description:
Megalopolis was founded ca. 370 B.C. by Epaminondas of
Thebes as the capital of the Arcadian League and as a buffer city to help contain
the Spartans. During the 4th century B.C. Megalopolis politically favored Macedonia
and suffered a number of Spartan attacks. In the 3rd century the city joined the
Achaean League. In 223 B.C. the Spartans (under Cleomenes III) succeeded in taking
and destroying Megalopolis. The city was rebuilt and enjoyed some prosperity,
but never regained political power, and by the 2nd century A.D. it was a minor
town much in ruin. It was finally abandoned at the end of the Roman period.
Exploration:
Excavations in 1890-93 directed by W. Loring and others
for the British School. M. Kavallieratos excavated in 1901 and in 1962-63 cleaning
and minor excavations conducted by E. Stikas and C. Christou.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 13 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΜΕΣΣΗΝΗ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΙΘΩΜΗ
Region: Messenia
Periods: Classical, Hellenistic, Roman
Type: Fortified city
Summary: One of the best fortified of ancient Greek cities.
Physical Description:
Located in the highlands of Messenia on the SW slopes of Mt.
Ithome, Messene was among the best fortified of ancient Greek cities. Mt. Ithome
was mentioned by Homer and its summit served as a religious center and refuge
for the Messenians at least since the Archaic period. From the acropolis almost
all of the state of Messenia is visible. The 4th century B.C. fortification walls
of Messene (still well preserved) totaled a length of ca. 9 km and enclosed the
acropolis as well as large tracts of agricultural land that could serve as a place
of refuge for inhabitants from the countryside. A Sanctuary of Asklepios, theater,
stadium and other public buildings were also enclosed within the fortifications.
The circuit walls (ca. 2.5 m thick and 4.5 m high) included at least 4 well-designed
city gates and over 30 towers.
Description:
The city of Messene was founded as the new capital in 369 B.C.
after the liberation of Messenia from Spartan rule, and the city walls are reported
to have been completed in just 85 days. Messene joined and abandoned a number
of leagues and alliances during the Hellenistic period and was besieged in 220,
214, 202, and 182 B.C. The city was never politically powerful, but remained prosperous
and continued to be inhabited at least into the 5th century A.D.
Exploration:
Minor excavations by T. Sophoulis in 1895; G. Oikonomos in
1909 and 1925. A. Orlandos has excavated from 1957-1964 and since 1969.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 26 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΜΥΚΗΝΕΣ (Μυκηναϊκό ανάκτορο) ΑΡΓΟΛΙΔΑ
Region: Argolid
Periods: Neolithic, Early Bronze Age, Middle Bronze Age, Late Bronze
Age, Geometric, Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic
Type: Fortified city
Summary: Center of the Mycenaean Empire and traditional palace of
Agamemnon.
Physical Description:
Located ca. half-way between Corinth and Argos and controlling
the natural pass from the Isthmus to the Peloponnese, Mycenae was a citadel palace
that included extensive fortifications, granaries, guardrooms, shrines and a few
private dwellings situated around the palace complex. The palace consisted of
a central megaron meeting hall, throne room and courtyard with adjacent private
quarters, storerooms, guard stations and administrative rooms. Outside the Lion
Gate and massive walls of the citadel are found the private houses, workshops,
public works and other features of the dispersed settlement and the tholos tombs
of the ruling clans.
Description:
Mycenae, on a naturally defensible hill with a commanding
view and plentiful nearby fresh water, was first occupied in the Neolithic period.
Habitation continued throughout the Early and Middle Helladic periods and the
first palace complex was probably built at the beginning of the Late Helladic
period. In the Late Helladic IIIA period the fortifications probably followed
the natural boundary of the hilltop. In Late Helladic IIIB the circuit was enlarged
to the S and W, and toward the end of Late Helladic IIIB an E extension to the
citadel was added with a sally port and access to an underground water supply.
It was at this time that the great Lion Gate was also constructed. The citadel
and palace of Mycenae were destroyed at the end of the Late Helladic IIIB, although
some occupation continued at the site during the Late Helladic IIIC period. In
the Geometric period only a few small houses occupied the summit of the hill.
In the Archaic period a temple was built on the summit. During the Persian Wars
Mycenae sent a small force to fight at Thermopylae and Plataea. In 468 B.C. Argos
destroyed the acropolis at Mycenae and the city later came under direct Argive
control. As a deme of Argos the acropolis was rebuilt and fortification walls
were built around the lower town. The site continued to be inhabited until the
end of the 3rd century A.D.
Exploration:
Lord Elgin explored the Treasury of Atreus in 1802 and
Lord Sligo took the columns from it to London in 1910. Excavations: 1874-76, H.
Schliemann; 1876-77, P. Stamatakis; 1884-1902, C. Tsountas; 1920-23, 1939, and
1950-57, A. Wace, British School of Archaeology; 1950s to present, J. Papadimitriou,
G. Mylonas, D. Theocharis, N. Verdelis, A. Orlandos, E. Stikas, A. Keramopoullos,
S. Marinatos, and S. Iakovidis of the Greek Archaeological Society and the Greek
Archaeological Service and E. French and W. Taylour of the British School of Archaeology.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 54 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΠΥΛΟΣ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΜΕΣΣΗΝΙΑ
Region: Messenia
Periods: Middle Bronze Age, Late Bronze Age
Type: Settlement
Summary: Mycenaean palace complex and traditional home of Nestor.
Physical Description:
Located near Navarino Bay and modern Pylos (close to village
of Khora) on the hill of Epano Englianos. The site compares in size and richness
with the palace of Mycenae and is believed to be the home of Nestor, the second
most powerful Mycenaean king. The palace consisted of two-storeyed buildings arranged
in three main blocks: the main building with a megaron hall (containing the throne),
propylon, archives (with hundreds of clay tablets preserved), magazines and private
chambers. The SW and NE blocks contained workshops, storerooms and private chambers.
The palace was apparently unfortified. Tholos tombs and a lower town are associated
with the palace.
Description:
The site was occupied at least as early as the Middle Bronze
Age. The Mycenaean palace (which seems to have replaced an earlier fortified palace)
was built near the end of the Late Bronze Age (LH IIIB, ca. 1300 B.C.) and shortly
thereafter the site was destroyed and abandoned. Pylos is the best preserved of
all the Mycenaean palaces and is especially important for the hundreds of Linear
B clay tablets found (accidentally preserved through baking in the fire that destroyed
the palace) at the site.
Exploration:
Site was explored in 1939. Excavations: 1952- C. Blegen
and Kourouniotis.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 26 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΣΠΑΡΤΗ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΛΑΚΩΝΙΑ
Region: Laconia
Periods: Dark Age, Geometric, Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic, Roman
Type: Unfortified city
Summary: One of the major Classical city-states of ancient Greece.
Physical Description:
Located ca. 50 km inland on the wide and fertile plain
of the Eurotas valley, Sparta is almost completely surrounded by major mountain
ranges. In contrast to other ancient Greek cities, Sparta was not a compact fortified
city-state center with monumental civic and religious buildings. It was a loose
collection of smaller villages spaced over a large rural area and 6 low hills
(cf. Thuc. 1.10.2). The highest of these knolls (ca. 25 m) served as the acropolis
and location for the Temple of Athena Chalkioikos. In the Hellenistic period a
theater, stoa and agora were built near the acropolis, but the Temple of Athena
and the earlier remains at the Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia on the W bank of the
Eurotas are almost the only archaeological remains from Archaic and Classical
Sparta. The location and the militaristic character of early Sparta made city
walls unnecessary, but as Spartan power weakened construction of fortification
walls began (in 307 B.C.). The 10 km long circuit wall was completed in 184 B.C.
Description:
The location of Homeric Sparta is uncertain, and historical
Sparta was traditionally a Dorian foundation of the 10th century B.C. By the 7th
century B.C. Sparta had conquered all of Laconia and Messenia and by the 6th century
all of the central and SW Peloponnese was under direct Spartan control. In the
5th century B.C. Sparta had control of the Peloponnesian League and in 405 B.C.
defeated Athens. The reversal of Spartan power, however, began with their defeat
by Thebes in 371 B.C. In 369 B.C. Messenia was liberated and by 195 B.C. Sparta
had lost all of its political dependencies. Under the Romans, Sparta enjoyed a
degree of prosperity, in part, because of Roman admiration of the Spartan tradition
of discipline. The Romans revived the ancient initiation rites for Spartan youths
at the Sanctuary of Artemis, but in a debased touristic manner in which the Spartan
youths were flogged in an amphitheater constructed around the altar of Artemis.
Sparta survived the Herulian invasions of 267 A.D., but was devastated by the
Goths in 395 A.D. and finally abandoned.
Exploration:
Early excavations by C. Waldstein of the American School in
1892-1893. Excavations by the British School in 1906-1910, 1924-1928 and 1949.
Beginning in 1957 C. Christou has carried out excavations and rescue operations
in the area of the modern city for the Greek Service.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 27 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΤΕΓΕΑ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΑΡΚΑΔΙΑ
Region: Arcadia
Periods: Geometric, Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic, Roman, Byzantine
Type: Fortified city
Summary: One of the oldest and most powerful cities of Arkadia.
Physical Description:
Ancient Tegea, ca 10 km SE of modern Tripolis, extended
over a large area on an upland plain that had previously been occupied by 9 smaller
villages. It had a city wall from ca. 370 B.C. and, in addition to the agora,
theater, stadium and other civic buildings, it was the location of a Sanctuary
of Demeter and Kore where many Geometric and Archaic votives have been excavated.
The main sanctuary of ancient Tegea, however, was the Temple of Athena Alea, reputed
in ancient times as one of the most important religious centers in Greece. The
sanctuary originated in the Geometric period and served throughout antiquity as
a famous place of asylum for fugitives and exiles, including a number of former
kings of Sparta. The Archaic Temple of Athena was replaced by a new temple in
the 4th century B.C. and in the 5th century A.D. a Christian church was built
in its cella.
Description:
Tegea, one of the oldest cities of Arkadia, was first recorded
in the Homeric Catalogue of Ships. In the Archaic period the 9 villages of Tegea
joined in a synoicism to form one large city (cf. Mantinea and Sparta). After
a long period of struggle, Tegea was forced into the role of a vassal state by
Sparta at ca. 560 B.C. It remained under Spartan control until it joined the Arkadian
League and fought against Sparta in 362 B.C. At ca. 370 B.C. Tegea constructed
its first city walls. During the 3rd century, however, Tegea suffered 3 defeats
by the Spartans. In 222 B.C. Tegea was forced into the Achaean League and it continued
to lose political power during the Hellenistic period. The city retained its prosperity
and commercial importance, however, and flourished well into the Roman period.
At ca. A.D. 395 Tegea was destroyed by the Goths, but was rebuilt under the name
Nikli, and became one of the most important Byzantine cities in the Peloponnese.
Exploration:
G. Fougeres and V. Berard excavated in 1888-1889 for the
French School. The Temple of Alea Athena was investigated by A. Milchhofer in
1879 and by W. Dorpfeld in 1882: it was excavated by G. Mendel and C. Dugas of
the French School between 1900 and 1910. K. Dimakopoulou excavated at the site
in 1964-1965. The current excavations (1990-) are conducted by the Norwegian Institute
at Athens, under the direction of E. Oestby.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 58 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ΑΣΕΑ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΒΑΛΤΕΤΣΙ
Asea in Arcadia
Asea is located in the heart of the Peloponnese. The Asea valley was
inhabited, first in the Middle/Upper Paleolithic period (ca. 40.000 B.P) by people
making their living from hunting and fishing. During most of the Neolithic period
and the Bronze Age there were several villages in the valley, of which the most
important one was located on the Asea Paleokastro hill. After a couple of dark
centuries, an urban settlement developed on and around the Paleokastro with the
hill as its akropolis. Just to the north of the akropolis a cultplace was located,
which especially during Classical times attracted visitors from near and afar
in order to make their offerings. This and much more has been learnt through the
Asea Valley Survey undertaken between 1994-1996 and directed by Jeannette Forsen
from Goteborg University. As a direct spinoff from the survey the Late Archaic
temple located on top of the mountain Ayios Elias in Asea was excavated in 1997.
During a four week long campaign Swedish, Finnish and Norwegian scholars found
evidence of a nearly unbroken chain of cult practice from the Late Bronze Age
to Hellenistic times. Sporadic finds of a younger date were also made. The city
walls on and below the Asea Paleokastro were documented in the year 2000. The
preliminary results of this work show that only the spurwalls are of Hellenistic
date, whereas other walls on top of the akropolis are of Classical date.
Jeanette Forsen
This text is cited Jun 2005 from The Swedish Institute at Athens URL below
ΑΣΙΝΗ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΑΡΓΟΛΙΔΑ
Asine in the Argolid
In the ship's catalogue in the Iliad, Homer informs us who sent ships
to the Trojan War. In connection with the Argolid he notes that Asine, situated
at the head of the bay, sent six ships. This Asine has been identified with modern
day Kastraki near the village of Tolo. The Swedish Crown Prince Gustaf Adolf came
here in 1920 on a private tour of Greece. One of the reasons for his choice of
country was his interest in archaeology. He had already participated in archaeological
excavations in Sweden and believed that Sweden should join in investigating ancient
Greece. He was the initiator of the Asine excavations, Sweden's first excavation
on a large scale in the country.
For nearly two decades, until the outbreak of the Second World War,
Swedish archaeologists worked extensively in the Argolid and always under the
direction of Axel W. Persson. He was Swedish archaeology in Greece. As he was
not a field archaeologist but a philologist the Asine Committee appointed Otto
Frodin, an experienced field archaeologist to direct the fieldwork together with
Persson. When the publication appeared in 1938 (Results of the Swedish excavation
at Asine 1922 - 1930) in Stockholm it reflected the main interest of the two directors
as well as the focus of archaeological research at the time: prehistory. Extensive
investigations were carried out on the acropolis and in the so-called Lower Town
or the northern slopes of the rock.
Further, on the Barbouna Hill two cemeteries were partly investigated:
a Late Bronze Age one (c. 1600 -1100 BC) on the eastern slopes and a Late Geometric
one (8th century BC) on the south slopes.
Methodologically the excavations were very advanced. Much of the soil
was sieved in order not to miss small objects and all material was considered
important enough to keep. A large sherd collection is now kept in the Asine Collection
at the University of Uppsala as a result of an exchange of materials done in the
1930's between the Swedish Asine Committee and the Greek government. From several
Swedish museums prehistoric flint tools and weapons were given to Greece.
In 1970 investigations at Asine were resumed by the Swedish Institute
at Athens under the direction of Carl-Gustaf Styrenius, its director at the time.
The brothers Karmaniola who owned land east of the acropolis wished to build a
camping-place and test trenches by the local archaeological authorities indicated
extensive ancient remains. A year later Robin Hagg joined the project and the
southern slopes of the Barbouna Hill were included in the investigations. The
Karmaniola area was excavated from 1970 - 1974 and is today mostly published (in
the Acta of the institute); Hagg did his last field season in 1989. The results
of the work on Barbouna are partly published in a periodical of Uppsala University:
Boreas.
In 1985 Berit Wells investigated the Late Geometric walls on the northern
slopes of the Barbouna Hill ('Early Greek building sacrifices' in Early Greek
cult practice, eds. R. Hagg, N. Marinatos and G.C. Nordquist, Stockholm 1988)
and in 1990 the previously unexcavated corner north of the Hellenistic bastion
(A. Penttinen, 'Excavations on the acropolis of Asine in 1990', Opuscula Atheniensia,
1966). At present no fieldwork is being carried out at Asine.
At all times Asine was a site of strategic importance. This is today
reflected in the Hellenistic fortifications built by the Macedonians (probably
by Demetrios Poliorketes) c. 300 BC and in the trenches and guard towers built
by the Italian army during the occupation of Greece in the Second World War.
There is more or less continuous habitation at Asine from the Neolithic
period onwards. The place flourished through the Bronze Age and continued doing
so also after the destruction of the Mycenaean citadels and into the early Iron
Age. Not until c. 700, when Argos destroyed Asine, do we see a decline in settlement
but not a discontinuance as was proposed in the old publication. People continued
living here and c. 300 BC there was a re-colonization, when the above-mentioned
fortifications were built.
About the later history we catch only glimpses. In the Late Roman
period (c. 400 - 500 BC) at least one bath was erected; in 1686 Morosini landed
on the eve of the capture of Nauplion; and after the War of Independence Cretan
fishermen attacked and destroyed a still Ottoman village (according to tradition)
on the island of Romvi. They settled on the shore opposite and founded the village
of Tolo.
Berit Wells, ed.
This text is cited Jun 2005 from The Swedish Institute at Athens URL below
Οι ανασκαφές στην Ακρόπολη της Αρχαίας Ασίνης στο Καστράκι
και στη νεκρόπολη στη Μπαρμπούνα, άρχισαν την Ανοιξη του 1922 και τελείωσαν το
1930, από τους Σουηδούς αρχαιολόγους Axel Persson και Otto Frodin με τη συνεχή
επίβλεψη του τότε διαδόχου του θρόνου της Σουηδίας,
Γουσταύου. Ερευνήθηκαν τα τείχη, ο εσωτερικός χώρος της Ακρόπολης. Ανακαλύφθηκαν
θεμέλια κτιρίων και αγγεία διαφόρων εποχών, με αφετηρία την πρωτοελλαδική εποχή,
2.800π.Χ, μέχρι και σε υστερότερα κτίρια ελληνιστικής και ρωμαϊκής εποχής.
Στη βάση του λόφου Μπαρμπούνα ανακαλύφθηκαν τάφοι μυκηναϊκής εποχής,
γνωστοί με την ονομασία “οι τάφοι των Σουηδών” και λίγο πιο ψηλά τάφοι
γεωμετρικής εποχής. Ανοίχτηκαν 25 τάφοι εκ των οποίων 9 θαλαμοειδείς και βρέθηκαν
σημαντικότατα κτερίσματα. Μεταξύ των άλλων στο Καστράκι
βρέθηκε ένα πήλινο προσωπείο που του δόθηκε η ονομασία “Ο βασιλιάς της Ασίνης”,
το οποίο βρίσκεται στο Μουσείο
του Ναυπλίου.
Στις ανασκαφές δούλεψαν και κάτοικοι της περιοχής, οι οποίοι ακόμα
διατηρούν ευχάριστες αναμνήσεις από τη μοναδική αυτή εμπειρία.
Το κείμενο παρατίθεται το Μάρτιο 2004 από τουριστικό φυλλάδιο
του Δήμου Ασίνης.
ΔΩΡΙΟΝ (Προϊστορικός οικισμός) ΤΡΙΦΥΛΙΑ
Malthi/The Swedish Messenia expedition
Malthi is the name of the northern spur of the mountain range of Ramovouni
in northern Messenia. The village of Vasiliko is situated some kms northeast of
Malthi. In 1926 Natan Valmin came to the region and was shown two tholos tombs
which he excavated the same year. Later on a third tholos was identified, but
it was destroyed before there was time to excavate it. The tholos tombs are situated
just west of the Malthi acropolis, by the small village of Malthi (former Bodia).
Tholos I was robbed and contained a mixture of Mycenaean pottery sherds and later
material. The diametre of the circular chamber was 6.85 m and the height was 5.80
m. Tholos II was partly collapsed at the time of excavation and this tomb had
also been robbed. Both tombs were obviously cut out from the cliff (according
to Hope Simpson & Dickinson, A gazetteer of Aegean civilization in the Bronze
Age, Vol I: The mainland and islands, 1979, 174) and were not built directly on
flat ground as Valmin states. The next year Valmin excavated two more tholoi:
one west of Kopanaki and another between Vasiliko and Bouga-Kallirrhoi. The results
are published in Bulletin de la Societe Royale des Lettres de Lund 1926-1927,
190 ff.
The same year, 1927, the excavation of the settlement on top of the
acropolis started. Excavations continued in 1929, 1933 and 1934. During these
years the entire settlement, which is encircled by a wall, was uncovered. The
area within the wall measures 140 x 80 m. Valmin stated that the earliest habitation
was Neolithic. This he called Dorion I. Dorion II was larger och would, according
to Valmin, belong to the Early Bronze Age. The wall around the settlement was
erected during Dorion IV in the Middle Bronze Age. This habitation continued down
into Mycenaean times.
Valmin describes how Dorion IV was divided into three separate parts:
the central area where the architecture seemed to be more of a monumental character
and where there were workshops in the northern part, the area which runs along
the interior of the wall, and the empty areas where there was no habitation.
A number of 47 graves were excavated in the settlement within the walls. They were situated beneath and between the buildings. They are either simple pitgraves or cist graves, the sides of which consisted of stone slabs or were built by smaller stones. Single burials were most common, although some of the graves held two individuals and some held several. Two of the graves held no human bones. Nine of the burials were adults and the rest were children. Valmin searched in vain for chamber tombs in the region during all the excavation campaigns.
It is now believed that the earliest habitation at Malthi cannot be
dated earlier than the Middle Bronze Age. The pottery which Valmin called coarse
'Adriatic Ware' and which he found throughout the layers in the habitation beginning
in the so-called Neolithic settlement, has proved to be typical for the local
Middle Bronze Age in Messenia ((R.J. Howell i W.A. McDonald, 'Excavations at Nichoria:
1972-1973', Hesperia 44, 1975, 111). The encircling wall is now dated to the Late
Helladic period (P. Darque, L?architecture domestique mycenienne. These du III°
cycle, Paris 1980, 32f.).
A building or part of a settlement dating to the Late Bronze Age was
excavated in 1936 in the same area, where the two tholoi were excavated in 1926.
In 1929 Valmin travelled around Messenia and some of his observations
are recorded in Etudes topographiques sur la Messenie ancienne, 1930. After his
travels Valmin saw reason to return and conduct excavations at two archaeological
sites which he had found being of special interest. One of the sites was a temple
to the rivergod Pamisos in Hagios Floros, ca 5 km east of Messene. The finds from
this excavation indicate that this cult place had been in use from Archic down
to Roman times. The other site was Koroni in southeastern Messenia (the colony
of the inhabitants from Asine in the Argolid). Just north of the town Valmin excavated
a Roman mosaic in a room supposed to have been a larger complex: a villa or a
gymnasium. Dionysos is the central motif of the mosaic.
Many of the finds from the various excavations conducted by Valmin
and his colleagues were restored and put on display in the local museum of Vasiliki.
This museum is now closed. The finds from his excavation are now in the Kalamata
Museum.
The following excavations under the direction of Valmin are published
in The Swedish Messenia Expedition, 1938:
The two tholos tombs of Malthi (Bodia).
The settlement of Malthi including the tombs.
The temple of Pamisos at Hagios Floros.
The Roman mosaic at Hagia Triada close to Koroni.
Ann-Louise Schallin, ed.
This text is cited Jun 2005 from The Swedish Institute at Athens URL below
ΙΣΘΜΙΑ (Αρχαίο ιερό) ΛΟΥΤΡΑΚΙ ΠΕΡΑΧΩΡΑΣ
ΚΟΡΙΝΘΟΣ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΠΕΛΟΠΟΝΝΗΣΟΣ
Αμερικανική Σχολή Κλασικών Σπουδών στην Αθήνα.
ΜΙΔΕΑ (Μυκηναϊκή ακρόπολη) ΑΡΓΟΛΙΔΑ
Dendra and Midea in the Argolid
The neighbouring villages Dendra and Midea are situated in the northern
Argolid, c. six km east of the town of Argos. At Dendra there are remains of habitation
from the Early Neolithic and from the Early Helladic periods. There are also tombs
dated to various Bronze Age periods. The village of Midea is situated c. two km
to the east of Dendra. South of the village is the 270 m high mountain of Midea
where German archaeologists already in 1907 made some investigations. It has been
assumed that the habitation on the acropolis of Midea and the necropolis at Dendra
were connected because of the short distance between the sites, i.e. the inhabitants
of Midea may have used Dendra as a burial place.
Axel W. Persson initiated the Swedish field work in the area with
the excavation of a Mycenaean (LH IIIA) tholos tomb at Dendra in 1926. It was
noted that there were also chamber tombs of the same date. A Mycenaean necropolis
had been identified. Many of the chamber tombs were excavated in the following
years and the present ephoros in Nauplion at that time, N. Bertos, participated
in this work.
Already during his first excavation season, Persson had concluded
that Midea was a fortified Mycenaean citadel. In 1939 the line of the wall was
recorded, some cleaning was done in the East Gate area and some excavations were
conducted on the higher plateau as well as on the lower terraces. Persson?s results
were published in two volumes: The Royal Tombs at Dendra near Midea (1931) and
New Tombs at Dendra (1942). Persson had probably intended to continue the excavations,
but all field activities ceased because of the start of the second world war.
Instead, it was Paul Astrom who continued the Swedish archaeological commitment
at Dendra and Midea, and it was at this time, in 1960, that the field work became
a joint Greek-Swedish project. Astrom and N. Verdelis, ephor at Nauplion, made
an important and unique discovery in the excavation of 'The Cuirass Tomb', namely
a bronze cuirass, which is in the Nauplion Museum. In 1963 Verdelis and Astrom
made a small excavation on the citadel of Midea. These activities are published
in The Cuirass Tomb and other Finds at Dendra (1977) and (1983).
Twenty years passed before Midea once more became the focus of field
archaeological interest. In 1983 a joint Greek-Swedish excavation project was
initiated under the direction of Katie Demakopoulou and Paul Astrom. Work has
been concentrated on the area within the citadel wall and more specifically to
the two gate areas. The higher plateau has mostly been left untouched, probably
because this is the most eroded part of the citadel area. Since 2000 the Swedish
side of the project is directed by Ann-Louise Schallin.
The wide citadel wall on the slope of Midea is clearly visible from
far away in the Argolid plain. The wall is dated to c. 1200 B.C. According to
Persson, a Mycenaean megaron was situated on the higher plateau of the citadel.
In 1939 cutting marks in the bedrock were noted here and a preliminary sketch
plan of the layout of the 'palace' was published. These observations are hard
to verify today, because of the erosion of the bedrock and the dense vegetation
covering the plateau where the cliff is not visible. The excavations which were
begun in 1983 have been concentrated to the East and the West Gate respectively.
The soil is packed thickly against the citadel wall and it has been noted that
walls dating to approximately the same period as the citadel wall were built against
and parallel with it. There is a lot of material in the thick layers of soil and
in the upper layers the material is very mixed as it represents material eroded
from higher levels. The material mostly consists of pottery sherds and covers
a wide chronological range. The earliest pottery is dated to the Middle and Final
Neolithic periods; all the main periods of the Bronze Age are represented; some
limited activity can be noted in the Archaic, as well as in the Classical and
possibly the Hellenistic periods. In Late Roman and in Early Byzantine times,
there is also evidence of habitation.
Except for the investigations along the citadel wall, excavations
have also been undertaken on the lower terraces within the eastern citadel area.
Under the direction of Gisela Walberg an impressive, rectangular building was
excavated (LH IIIB and LH IIIC). Parts of the results from this work has been
published in The Excavations on the Lower Terraces 1985-1991 (1998). In the various
excavations on Midea it has been noted that a severe destruction occurred c. 1200
B.C., i.e. shortly after the erection of the citadel wall. The destruction is
characterized by ashy, grey soil, mixed with bits and pieces of charcoal and other
burnt organic material. We do not know the cause behind the destruction, but it
may have been the result of an earthquake or conflagration caused by enemies invading
Midea.
In the future the Swedish part of the Midea project will continue
to investigate the east side of the citadel area and especially the areas of the
East Gate and east of the East Gate. One of the goals is to find architectural
evidence for the early prehistoric habitation. We also want to explore the activity
on Midea in historic times.
Ann-Louise Schallin, ed.
This text is cited Jun 2005 from The Swedish Institute at Athens URL below
ΜΥΚΗΝΕΣ (Μυκηναϊκό ανάκτορο) ΑΡΓΟΛΙΔΑ
ΠΡΟΣΥΜΝΑ (Αρχαιολογικός χώρος) ΜΥΚΗΝΕΣ
Berbati in the Argolid
In 1934 Axel W. Persson initiated his archaeological investigations
in the Berbati Valley east of Mycenae. In the ensuing years he worked in the valley
together with among others: Ake Akerstrom, Gosta Saflund and Erik J. Holmberg.
Each of them had his own excavation: Saflund the south slope of the Mastos Hill
and the Western Necropolis, Holmberg a chamber tomb to the east and Akerstrom
the Potter?s Quarter. Akerstrom continued working in that area after the War.
The investigations in the 1930?s were concentrated in the western
part of the valley, where Orestes from Mycenae, who had worked with Persson at
Dendra, had pointed out the most promising site: that on the eastern slope of
the Mastos Hill (i.e. the Potter?s Quarter). In 1935 Persson excavated the tholos
tomb, which contained one burial. The Palace style and other pottery associated
with it date the tomb to the LH II period or c. 1400 BC. Pottery of Late Geometric
(late 8th century BC) and Late Roman date attest the fact that the tholos tomb
was reused in later periods. The tholos tomb was published by Barbro Santillo
Frizell in Opuscula Atheniensia 15, 1984. The chamber tombs were published much
later by Saflund (1965) and Holmberg (1983).
The most interesting excavations were the ones on the Mastos Hill,
where Saflund and Akerstrom investigated each his settlement area: Saflund the
Early Helladic (c. 2600-2000 BC) one on the south slope and Akerstrom the Late
Helladic (c. 1600-1200 BC) on the east slope. Saflund published his results (together
with the chamber tombs in the Western Necropolis) in 1965 in the Stockholm University
Studies, while Akerstrom resumed work at the Mastos in 1953 and finished fieldwork
in 1959. He published the pictorial pottery in the institute series in 1987. The
large amounts of pottery that remain are now under study by Mats Johnson (Neolithic),
Jeannette Forsen (Early Helladic), Michael Lindblom (Middle Helladic), Ann-Louise
Schallin (Mycenaean) and Jenni Hjohlman (Medieval).
The most spectacular structure in the Potter?s Quarter is the kiln,
which Akerstrom dated stratigraphically to the transition LH II/LH IIIA1 or c.
1400 BC. He found a dump south of the kiln with pottery supporting the date. Production
continued at the site and dumped material east of the kiln testifies to hundreds
of years of pottery making. Akerstrom maintained that Berbati was the production
center of the spectacular pictorial vases found on Cyprus and in the Levant. Not
everybody has accepted his theory but most scholars now seem to agree that the
northeast Peloponnese was the origin of these prestigious vessels. Analyses of
the fabrics have shown that the clays are consistent with the clays in the general
Berbati/Mycenae area. Schallin?s research into the Berbati production aims at
studying the relationship of shape and decoration in the local Mycenaean repertoir
employing statistical methods.
In the late 1980?s Berit Wells initiated fieldwork on a large scale.
A surface survey of the valley and of the mountainous area to the east around
Limnes was carried out. The scope of the survey was to study the interaction of
man and environment through time, from the Middle Palaeolithic 50,000 years ago
until the 18th century AD. The publication, which appeared in 1996 in the institute
series, changed the hitherto accepted view of the Berbati valley as an archaeological
entity. The previous Bronze Age finds now could be put into a historical framework.
Before the survey we knew nothing, or next to nothing, about the Neolithic (5th-4th
mill. BC), the Early Hellenistic (3rd century BC) and the Late Roman (4-6th century
AD) periods in the valley. Now we know that it flourished during those times.
Regional and diachronic studies became almost the rule in Greece during the last
two decades of the last century, but The Berbati-Limnes Survey is one of the few
that has been completely published so far.
From 1994 onwards several sites documented during the survey were
investigated or underwent further documentation. These sites were included in
a larger research project (the Berbati Valley Project) to investigate the agrarian
economy of the valley. In 1994 the Late Geometric/Archaic cult place defined in
the survey and associated with the tholos tomb was excavated. Gunnel Ekroth is
studying the assemblage and published a preliminary report on the material in
the Opuscula Atheniensia 21 for 1996. The same season a study of the Late Roman
bath was carried out, also reported on in the same Opuscula. Kai Holmgren did
a CAD model of the extant structure within the framework of a project designed
jointly by the departments of Archaeology at Lund University: Swedish Prehistory,
Medieval Archaeology and Classical Archaeology and the Swedish Institute at Athens.
From 1995 onwards the project focused entirely on the agrarian economy
of the valley. Although several targets had been chosen for excavation, only one
at Pyrgouthi or the Hellenistic Tower could be realized. It turned out to represent
a spectrum of chronological phases contrary to what the survey had shown: from
the early Iron Age to the 6th century AD.
Penttinen (diss. 2001) redefines the Berbati Valley as a typical border
region, which sometimes is dominated by Corinth, sometimes by Argos. Most of the
material comes from disturbed contexts, which, however, reflects migrant animal
husbandry rather than sedentary agriculture thus defining a border zone. The most
spectacular finds at Pyrgouthi date from the 6th century AD (Hjohlman diss. 2002).
A farmstead with its press-house was destroyed in a conflagration. Whatever was
in the press-house at the time was buried under the debris, presenting a frozen
moment in the history of the site. Large storage jars, which could be mended,
wine presses and agricultural tools were found.
Kilns datable to the 5th century BC were found also at Pyrgouthi.
At present we have a substantial amount of evidence of ceramic production in the
valley with all in all four production sites: the previously well-known Early
Mycenaean kiln from the Mastos Hill, the 5th century Pyrgouthi kilns, a Late Roman
kiln found by our Greek colleagues west of the Roman bath, and the waste from
a kiln built for the production of roof tiles after the German destruction of
the village of Berbati in 1943. Obviously the manufacture of ceramics was a by-product
of the agrarian economy during several periods of the history of the valley. Berit
Wells together with Ian Whitbread and Matthew Ponting of the Fitch Laboratory
at the British School at Athens are doing a comprehensive study of the Berbati
clay beds and ceramics through time. Undoubtedly ceramic production was an added
asset for people living in the valley.
See Arto Penttinen, Berbati between Argos and Corinth (diss. University
of Stockholm, Department of Classical Archaeology and Ancient History), 2001 and
Jenni Hjohlman, Farming the land in Late Antiquity. The case of Berbati in the
northeastern Peloponnese (diss. Stockholm University, Department of Classical
Archaeology and Ancient History), 2002.
These dissertations together with a number of specialist reports on
botanical and faunal remains etc will be published in the institute series in
early 2005.
The Berbati Valley Project was brought to conclusion in 1999 with
an intensive survey of the Mastos Hill, which had been excluded from our permit
for the 1988-1990 survey. The aim of the 1999 survey was to test new methods of
field sampling and digital processing of data. Terrace by terrace all artifacts
were collected and analyzed in the field. Small samples were collected for further
study in the laboratory. The artifact database was related to a digitized model
of the hill creating distribution maps to illustrate artifact density on each
terrace and thus activity on each terrace period by period. In this way we have
gathered new information on the history of the hill. So far our knowledge of the
medieval period was very scant. It is now obvious from the distribution map below
that a small medieval habitation must be sought on the top of the Mastos Hill.
The investigations in the Berbati Valley during the 1980?s and 1990?s
have not produced artifacts comparable to the old excavations at Asine and Dendra.
The objectives have been different. The importance of the investigations for Swedish
Classical Archaeology lies in the fact that new methods have been tested and young
scholars have been entrusted with the publication of material, sometimes for their
dissertations, which has ensured quick publication. Therefore Berbati also became
a training ground for a whole new generation of archaeologists. In this respect
it can be compared only to Asine in the 1920?s and Acquarossa in Italy in the
1960?s and 1970?s.
Arto Penttinen, ed.
This text is cited Jun 2005 from The Swedish Institute at Athens URL below
Report on the investigations carried out at the Mastos, Berbati, in 1999
The 1999 investigations at the Mastos hill in the western part of
the Berbati Valley (Prosimni) had two objectives: a) to carry out a surface survey
of the entire hill in order to learn how it was utilized in different periods
and b) to create a computerized 3D map which would visualize human activity in
relation to the landscape and such modern human activity as harrowing and grazing.
All artifacts lying on the surface were classified in the field and entered into
the computer together with information on landscape type and land use A small
sample of material was brought to the museum, where it will be studied in detail
in the summer of the year 2000.
The excavations on the southern and eastern slopes of the Mastos in
the 1930s and 1950s showed that habitation on the hill goes back to Middle Neolithic
times and that there is continued activity until the Late Helladic IIIB period.
Coins found in 1953 assert activities in the historical period as late as the
12th century AD but the excavators correctly saw Mastos primarily as a prehistoric
site. Although this year's investigations corroborate this general picture we
now have a more complete grasp of human utilization of the slopes through the
period and can further modify the picture for the historical periods.
In the Neolithic period activity was almost exclusively documented on the southern and eastern slopes, although it should be noted that the top terrace of the hill yielded a number of sherds. Whether these originated there or were brought there through manuring or similar activities cannot be ascertained at this point.
From the old excavations we know that there was an important Early
Helladic settlement with preserved architecture in the south and that this continued
towards the east into the southwestern part of the Potter's Quarter. Our survey
now has registered a considerable density of EH material not only on all the terraces
in the south but also on the terraces in the east and southeast.
In the Middle Helladic period, if we are to judge by the numbers of
sherds studied, activity at the Mastos increases. Although we see particularly
dense concentrations on some of the terraces in the south and southeast, it is
obvious that all slopes were utilized. Much of the transitional MH/LH pottery
is notoriously difficult to define and this is especially true of survey material.
Therefore some caution should be applied when studying the distribution maps of
MH and LH I-II.
Even with great caution applied it is quite evident from the map that
Late Helladic I-II was a major phase at the Mastos. Now, this is of course may
come as no surprise considering the production connected with the LH I-II kiln
excavated in the 1930s. However, activity is not restricted to the kiln area but
is very much in evidence in the west, a fact that heralds a major extension of
habitation or other activities in LH III.
Studying every single sherd on the surface at the Mastos is, as everybody understands who has walked the area, very time consuming. For this reason we did not manage to survey all the fields neither in the south nor in the east. The carpet of material stretches some 20-30 meters south of the lowest terrace of the hill and in the east the fields below the road all the way to the rema would yield masses of material, predominately Late Mycenaean to judge from walking over the fields.
Late Helladic III by far yielded the most sherds. Now, sherd counts
can be vastly misleading, as Mycenaean pottery easily breaks into tiny fragments
during cultivation or even walking over the surface. EH and MH pottery is preserved
in large fragments on the same surface. However, in the case of the Mastos we
can still safely conclude that activity in LH III superceded that in any other
period as the numbers are overwhelming, which can be observed on the distribution
map.
In the Archaic to Hellenistic and Roman periods there is scattered
evidence of human activity. For the earlier periods most of the artifacts are
tiles and there is evidence that especially Corinthian tiles were reused in later
walls. Thus they could well have been brought from a wider area around the Mastos.
There is clearly a Late Roman presence but the nature of it is, as is the case
also with the Archaic to Hellenistic, impossible to discern.
The distribution of Medieval sherds (see design inside URL below)
shows an interesting pattern. The main concentrations are on the top terrace of
the Mastos and on the rather steep slopes immediately below. We interpret this
as activity mainly on the top terrace and from there material has spilled over
on the slopes. On the northern side this terrace still preserves a substantial
fortification wall, clearly built in Byzantine times but utilizing a prehistoric
wall as its foundation. Here lay a fort which ties in very nicely with the finds
of Late Byzantine coins referred to at the beginning of this report.
Arto Penttinen, ed.
This text is cited Jun 2005 from The Swedish Institute at Athens URL below
ΠΥΛΟΣ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΜΕΣΣΗΝΙΑ
Το Ανάκτορο του Νέστορα, υιού του Νηλέα, ανακαλύφθηκε και ερευνήθηκε το 1939 απο τον Κωνσταντίνο Κουρουνιώτη και ανασκάφηκε από τον Αμερικανό Κάρλ Μπλέγκεν (Karl Blegen) και βρίσκεται στη θέση Εγκλιανός, 4 χλμ. νότια από το δήμο της Χώρας. Είναι έργο του 13ου π.Χ αιώνα και κτίστηκε από τη δυναστεία των Νηλείδων. Αποτελείται από πέντε κύρια κτίρια που καταλαμβάνουν αρκετά μεγάλη έκταση, ώστε να είναι σε μέγεθος και διαρρύθμιση συγκρίσιμο μόνο με τα ανάκτορα των Μυκηνών και της Τίρυνθας. Σε δυο μικρά δωμάτια του κεντρικού κτιρίου έχουν βρεθεί 1250 τεμάχια πινακίδων με επιγραφές στη γραμμική Β, παλαιότερο είδος ελληνικής γραφής που αποκρυπτογράφησε ο αρχιτέκτονας Μ. Βέντρις (Michael Ventris), ενώ στις αίθουσες του κυλικείου και στις αποθήκες έχουν βρεθεί κύπελλα και άλλα σκεύη.
Σε απόσταση 80 μ. βόρεια του ανακτόρου έχει βρεθεί θαυμάσιος θολωτός τάφος που αποδίδεται στο Νέστορα και το διάδοχό του Θρασυμήδη. Το Ανάκτορο καταστράφηκε από πυρκαϊά στο τέλος της κεραμικής του ρυθμού ΙΙΙβ(1200 π.Χ περίπου), την ίδια εποχή που κάηκαν και τ’ ανάκτορα των Μυκηνών και της Τίρυνθας από άγνωστη αιτία. Την ίδια εποχή, 1120 π.Χ περίπου, με την αποδυνάμωση των ισχυρών βασιλείων της περιοχής πραγματοποιείται και η κάθοδος των Δωριέων στη Μεσσηνία. Ο εκτεταμένος χώρος του λόφου του Εγκλιανού που καταλαμβάνει το κτιριακό συγκρότημα των ανακτόρων του Νέστορα, μαζί με το βασιλικό θολωτό τάφο, έχει διαμορφωθεί και καθημερινά δέχεται την επίσκεψη πολλών τουριστών.
Το κείμενο παρατίθεται τον Φεβρουάριο 2003 από την ακόλουθη ιστοσελίδα, με φωτογραφία, της Νομαρχιακής Επιτροπής Τουριστικής Προβολής Μεσσηνίας
ΑΣΚΛΗΠΙΕΙΟ ΕΠΙΔΑΥΡΟΥ (Αρχαίο ιερό) ΑΡΓΟΛΙΔΑ
'Ενας από τους πλέον σημαντικούς και ωραιότερους αρχαιολογικούς χώρους της Ελλάδας. Σε μια καταπράσινη πεδιάδα, περιτριγυρισμένη από φιλικά βουνά, χώρος παγκόσμιας ακτινοβολίας και πολιτιστικής ανάτασης, το Αρχαίο θέατρο, στην πλαγιά του Κυνόρτιου όρους, το θαύμα της Επιδαύρου κτισμένο από τον αρχιτέκτονα και γλύπτη του Αργους, Πολύκλειτο τον νεώτερο. Κτίσθηκε σε δύο διακεκριμμένες οικοδομικές φάσεις. Στα τέλη του 4ου π.Χ. η πρώτη, και στα μέσα του 2ου π.Χ. αι. η δεύτερη, αποκρυστάλλωσαν με τον πλέον θαυμαστό τρόπο, την χαρακτηριστική τριμερή διάρθρωση του Ελληνιστικου θεάτρου στην Επίδαυρο, Κοίλο- Ορχήστρα- Σκηνή. Η μεγαλύτερη ακτίνα χάραξης του κοίλου φτάνει τα 58μ., ενώ η διάμετρος της ορχήστρας είναι περίπου 20μ. Τα δύο διαζώματά του, χωρίζονται σε 13 κλίμακες και 12 κερκίδες το κάτω, και σε 23 κλίμακες καί 22 κερκίδες το άνω.
Το θέατρο, αποτελώντας την τελειότερη μορφή της αρχιτεκτονικής εμπειρίας της αρχαιότητας στην δομή του θεατρικού χώρου, εντυπωσιάζει με την ομορφιά και την συμμετρία του.
Είναι χωρητικότητας 15.000 θεατών περίπου. Η συστηματική του ανασκαφή ξεκίνησε το 1881 από τόν αρχαιολόγο Παναγιώτη Καββαδία. Το θέατρο που, με την περίφημη ακουστική του να μη χάνει ποτέ την μάχη με τον χρόνο, αποτελεί σημαντικό πόλο έλξης μεγάλου αριθμού επισκεπτών απ' όλο τον κόσμο. Εδώ κάθε καλοκαίρι, πραγματοποιείται τι φεστιβάλ της Επιδαύρου, με τις περιφημες παραστάσεις αρχαίου δράματος και κωμωδίας.
Το κείμενο παρατίθεται τον Ιανουάριο 2003 από την ακόλουθη ιστοσελίδα, με φωτογραφίες, του Δήμου Επιδαύρου
H
ανέγερση του Θεάτρου
Στα πλαίσια του συνολικού κτιριακού εξοπλισμού του τεμένους ανεγέρθη
περί τα τέλη του 4ου αιώνα π.X. και το Θέατρο. Παρά τα όσα, λανθασμένα, αναφέρει
ο Παυσανίας περί του διάσημου γλύπτη Πολύκλειτου, ο αρχιτέκτων του Θεάτρου παραμένει
άγνωστος. Σήμερα, λόγω της διαφύλαξής του υπό του εδάφους, το οποίο το κάλυψε
στην Αρχαιότητα, το κοίλο του είναι το καλύτερα διατηρημένο οικοδόμημα στο Aσκληπιείο.
Από την Aρχαιότητα ήδη, το Θέατρο της Eπιδαύρου είχε μεγάλη φήμη λόγω της ομορφιάς
και της συμμετρίας του.
Aρχικά το Θέατρο σχεδιάστηκε για να ανταποκρίνεται στις σκηνικές
απαιτήσεις του κλασικού δράματος, όπως αυτό είχε διαμορφωθεί από τους τραγικούς
του 5ου αιώνα π.Χ. στην Αθήνα. Πιθανότατα κτίστηκε σε δύο φάσεις, που όμως ακολουθούν
ένα αρχικό σχέδιο. H τελευταία φάση χρονολογείται στα ύστερα ελληνιστικά χρόνια.
Ολο το κτίσμα είναι φτιαγμένο με δύο είδη λίθων: ερυθρόγκριζο ασβεστόλιθο για
το κοίλο και πωρόλιθο για τους αναλημματικούς τοίχους και τη σκηνή. H άριστη ακουστική
του οφείλεται στη γεωμετρία του σχήματός του.
H
περιγραφή του Θεάτρου
H ορχήστρα του Θεάτρου έχει σχήμα τέλειου κύκλου, με διάμετρο περί
τα 19,5 μέτρα. Στο γεωμετρικό της κέντρο υπήρχε κυκλική πέτρινη βάση επί της οποίας
βρισκόταν η Θυμέλη, ένας βωμός του Διονύσου. H ορχήστρα ήταν ο χώρος δράσης του
χορού κατά τη διάρκεια των παραστάσεων.
Συμμετρικά τοποθετημένα, μέσα στην ορχήστρα εντάσσονται τα τρία γεωμετρικά
κέντρα για τη χάραξη των καμπύλων κερκίδων των εδωλίων έτσι ώστε να σχηματίζουν
ένα αμβλυγώνιο τρίγωνο με την αμβλεία γωνία του στραμμένη προς τις κερκίδες. Mε
κέντρο την κορυφή αυτής της αμβλείας γωνίας, χαράσσονται τα εδώλια των οκτώ κεντρικών
κερκίδων, ενώ με κέντρο κάθε μια από τις δύο οξείες γωνίες του τριγώνου, χαράσσονται
οι δύο εκατέρωθεν αντιδιαμετρικές, ακρινές κερκίδες. H χρήση των συγκεκριμένων
τριών κέντρων, αντί ενός, επιτρέπει την καλύτερη ορατότητα χωρίς να διαταράσσει
την αίσθηση της γεωμετρίας του σχεδίου. Οι σειρές των εδωλίων φαίνονται ως μέρη
κανονικών, ομόκεντρων κύκλων και όχι ως μέρη ελλείψεων. Kαθώς οι κερκίδες του
ανώτερου μέρους του Θεάτρου αναπτύσσονται ως προέκταση αυτών του κατώτερου, έχουν
κατά συνέπεια τα ίδια γεωμετρικά κέντρα χάραξης. Οπως στα περισσότερα ελληνικά
θέατρα η κατώτερη σειρά των εδωλίων είχε μορφή θρόνων, προοριζόμενων για ιερείς,
επίσημους, αξιωματούχους κλπ. Tο σύνολο των βρόχινων υδάτων, που μαζεύονταν στο
κοίλο και αναπόφευκτα κατέληγαν στην ορχήστρα, αποστραγγίζονταν μέσα από ένα ζεύγος
αγωγών που ξεκινούσε από τα δύο άκρα του διαδρόμου, ανάμεσα στην ορχήστρα και
στην πρώτη σειρά των εδωλίων. Tα νερά αυτά μέσω υπογείων αγωγών, που ανασκάφθηκαν
και λειτουργούν μέχρι σήμερα, κατευθύνονταν προς το προσκείμενο ρέμα, βόρεια της
πλατείας, πίσω από τη σκηνή του Θεάτρου.
Το κοίλο έχει μία κλίση της τάξης των 26 μοιρών. Δύο ζεύγη ισχυρών
αναλημματικών τοίχων διαμορφώνουν τα άκρα των κερκίδων προς το μέρος της σκηνής.
Στις δύο άκρες του Θεάτρου, στην κορυφή των αναλημματικών τοίχων, υπήρχαν δύο
πύργοι άγνωστης χρήσης. Mεταξύ των αναλημματικών τοίχων και της σκηνής διαμορφώνονται
δύο περάσματα, οι πάροδοι, μέσα από τις οποίες περνούσαν οι θεατές του κάτω διαζώματος,
αλλά έκανε την είσοδό του και ο χορός κατά την διάρκεια της παράστασης. Στο στενότερο
σημείο των παρόδων υψώνονταν δύο μεγαλοπρεπείς, ιωνικού ρυθμού, πέτρινοι πυλώνες,
οι οποίοι συνέδεαν αρχιτεκτονικά τα αναλήμματα του κοίλου με τη σκηνή. O κάθε
πυλώνας είχε δύο ανοίγματα, από τα οποία το εσωτερικό οδηγούσε κατευθείαν στην
ορχήστρα, το δε εξωτερικό, μέσω ενός κεκλιμένου επιπέδου, στην σκηνή. Kιγκλιδώματα
εφαρμοσμένα στα ανοίγματα απέκλειαν το χώρο του Θεάτρου όταν αυτό δε λειτουργούσε.
Στην τελική φάση της ιστορίας του Θεάτρου το κτίριο της σκηνής ήταν
μία διώροφη κατασκευή μ' ένα μονώροφο εξώστη προς το μέρος του κοίλου. Περιλάμβανε
τα ακόλουθα μέρη:
1. Tο Προσκήνιον. Aυτό ήταν ένας μονώροφος εξώστης ύψους 3,5 μέτρων στραμμένος
προς την ορχήστρα. H όψη του ήταν διαμορφωμένη με μία κομψή κιονοστοιχία ιωνικού
ρυθμού, στα άκρα της οποίας προεξείχε ένα ζεύγος πτερύγων με μορφή μικρού θυρώματος.
2. Tο Θεολογείον. Πρόκειται για το επίπεδο δώμα του προσκηνίου, επί του
οποίου οι υποκριτές απήγγελαν το λόγο τους κατά την διάρκεια της παράστασης. H
είσοδος στο θεολογείον γινόταν από κεκλιμένα επίπεδα από τις δύο εξωτερικές θύρες
των πυλώνων.
3. Πίσω από το θεολογείον και το προσκήνιον βρισκόταν η διώροφη Σκηνή.
Tο ισόγειό της, που λεγόταν σκηνή, είχε εσωτερικά τέσσερις πεσσούς που έφεραν
το υπερκείμενο επισκήνιο. H όψη του επισκηνίου προς το κοίλο ήταν μάλλον ανοιχτή,
με τέσσερις πεσσούς, μεταξύ των οποίων κρέμονταν πάνινοι πίνακες επιζωγραφισμένοι
με παραστάσεις σχετικές με το έργο που παιζόταν. H στέγη του επισκηνίου ήταν δίρριχτη.
H
νεότερη ιστορία του Θεάτρου
Tο Θέατρο ανασκάφτηκε από την εν Aθήναις Aρχαιολογική Eταιρεία κατά
τη μεγάλη ανασκαφή του τεμένους, στα τέλη του προηγούμενου αιώνα. Tο κοίλο, που
φαίνεται ότι είχε καλυφθεί αρκετά νωρίς από κατολίσθηση ή είχε βαθμιαία θαφτεί
από προσχώσεις, αποκαλύφθηκε σε πολύ καλή κατάσταση. Aντίθετα, το κτίριο της σκηνής,
που εξείχε επάνω από το έδαφος, φαίνεται ότι είχε τη μοίρα των υπολοίπων κτισμάτων
του Aσκληπιείου, των οποίων το οικοδομικό υλικό λεηλατήθηκε κατά το Μεσαίωνα.
Ωστόσο, σε συνδυασμό με τα θεμέλια, τα λίγα θραύσματα αρχιτεκτονικών μελών, που
διασώθηκαν από τα κτίρια της σκηνής, ήταν αρκετά για να επιτρέψουν την γραφική
της αποκατάσταση (αναπαράσταση). Πέρα από την γενική αναφορά του ανασκαφέα Παναγή
Kαββαδία στην συνοπτική του δημοσίευση για τις ανασκαφές του Aσκληπιείου, το Θέατρο
μελετήθηκε αναλυτικά από τους Αρμιν φον Γκέρκαν και τον Bόλφγκανγκ Mίλερ-Bίνερ
του Γερμανικού Aρχαιολογικού Iνστιτούτου. Tα αποτελέσματα της μελέτης τους δημοσιεύτηκαν
το 1961. (Das Theater von Epidauros, W. Kohlhammer Verlag, Stuttgart).
H σημερινή μορφή του Θεάτρου είναι αποτέλεσμα αναστηλώσεων, που αποκατέστησαν
πλήρως τους δύο πυλώνες και τους αναλημματικούς τοίχους των παρόδων. Aπό τις αρχές
της δεκαετίας του '90 γίνονται από το YΠΠO πρόσθετες εργασίες συντήρησης του κοίλου
και των πυλώνων, ενώ έχει γίνει σοβαρή προσπάθεια να προστατευτεί το μνημείο από
την φθορά, με έλεγχο και περιορισμό της πρόσβασης των επισκεπτών και της χρήσης
του μνημείου κατά τις παραστάσεις. Aπό τις αρχές της δεκαετίας του '50 διοργανώνεται
στο Θέατρο της Eπιδαύρου Φεστιβάλ Παραστάσεων Aρχαίου Δράματος υπό την αιγίδα
του Eλληνικού Oργανισμού Tουρισμού.
Πρόσφατα, το Θέατρο και ολόκληρος ο αρχαιολογικός χώρος εγγράφησαν
στον Kατάλογο Mνημείων Παγκόσμιας Πολιτιστικής Kληρονομιάς της UNESCO.
Το κείμενο παρατίθεται τον Ιανουάριο 2003 από την ακόλουθη ιστοσελίδα, με φωτογραφίες, του Ιδρυματος Μείζονος Ελληνισμού
Theatrum. As the Greek drama sprang from the choral dances round the altar
of Dionysus, so the architectural form of the Greek theatre was developed from
the circular dancing-place, the orchestra. At first there was no chorus distinct
from the general body of worshippers, all of whom were free to join in the dance.
As soon as a regular Chorus was instituted, it became necessary to reserve a
circular space of ground for it. A ring of stones sufficed to mark off this
circle. The altar of Dionysus was placed at its centre. The spectators stood
around it, and watched the dance. So long as the dramatic element was limited
to a dialogue between the Chorus and one actor, that person could stand on a
raised place in the middle of the Chorus, and address himself to various points
of the circle in turn. But when Aeschylus added a second actor, it became necessary
that the actors should play towards some one side. It was no longer possible
that the spectators should form a complete circle. They were now arranged in
a semicircle, or something like it. But the whole circle of the dancing-place
was still, as of old, kept clear for the Chorus. The actors stood facing the
spectators, not within the circle of the dancing-place, but on the further side
of it. Behind them was the tent or booth (skene) in which they dressed. It was
an easy improvement to conceal this tent from the spectators by a wooden screen,
which could represent the front of a house, or such other background as suited
the play. This screen was the proskenion--that which masked the skene. In the
matured theatre the term was retained, though its primitive sense may have been
forgotten. The proscenium was the background visible to the audience, whether
this was a temporary wooden structure, or, as in later times, a permanent wall.
Then skene came to denote that part of the theatre which belonged to the actors,
as distinguished from orchestra, the place of the Chorus. Thus the kommos, a
lyric dialogue between Chorus and actor, is defined by Aristotle as threnos
chorou kai apo skenes (Poet. 12): and he uses the phrase epi skenes where we
should say, on the stage (ib. 24).
The oldest theatre of which we have any knowledge is the Dionysiac
theatre at Athens. It has generally been supposed that a permanent stone theatre
existed in the Lenaion, or precinct of Dionysus, from the early years of the
5th cent. B.C. This belief rested on a passage in Suidas (s. v. Pratinas). He
states that in the 70th Olympiad (500-496 B.C.) Pratinas was exhibiting tragedy,
in competition with Choerilus and Aeschylus, when the wooden benches (ikria)
on which the spectators were standing happened to fall; and, in consequence
of this (ek touton), a theatre was built. But the history of the Dionysiac theatre
has been placed in a new light by the recent researches of the German Archaeological
Institute at Athens. The excavations, begun in 1886, have yielded the following
results, according to Dr. W. Dorpfeld:
(1) In the 5th cent. B.C., and down to about 330 B.C., the precinct contained
no permanent building for scenic purposes. There were in it two temples of Dionysus
(Fig. 1, D, E, see inside URL below), both to the south of the present theatre.
The older of these (D), which was the more northerly, dated from a time before
Peisistratus. Close to it, on the N.E., was a circular orchestra, about 78 feet
in diameter, of which traces have been found under the buildings erected by
Lycurgus. This orchestra was then the only permanent provision for drama. All
scenery, therefore, was temporary; and the spectators sat on wooden benches.
It is observed that Andocides, in the speech on the Mysteries (399 B.C.), speaks
of the conspirators whom he observed within the precinct of Dionysus as apo
tou odeiou katabainontas eis ten orchestran, not eis to theatron ( § 38): and
the latter word, when used by Aristophanes, always means the spectators.
(2) The first permanent building for drama in the Lenaion was that completed
by Lycurgus, about 330 B.C. It consisted of a stone wall with two small wings,
like towers, projecting from it on right and left (A, A); the length of the
wall between them was about 65 ft. 7 in. The temporary decorations (of wood,
with linen hangings) were erected in front of this wall, and supported by the
wings. Behind the wall was an oblong room, extending somewhat beyond the wings,
and serving for the use of the actors. A portico (C, C), opening on the precinct
of Dionysus, ran along the south side of it. The new orchestra was to the north
of this building. Dr. Dorpfeld supposes that it formed, like, the older one,
a complete circle, and that there was no raised stage; the actors stood on the
same level with the Chorus. Rows of stone seats for the spectators were now
constructed. After the time of Lycurgus no change, except of detail, took place
in the auditorium.
(3) At some later date, which cannot be fixed, a permanent stone proscenium
(B), adorned with columns, and about 10 or 12 ft. high, was built in front of
the wall with projecting wings which Lycurgus had erected. As the wings no longer
served a practical purpose (in supporting the temporary scenery), they were
annexed to the new proscenium, a part being cut off the front of each, so as
to bring them more nearly into line with it.
(4) An architrave-inscription found in the theatre shows that it was modified
and embellished in the reign of Claudius, by whom Nero seems to be meant. It
was probably at this time that the orchestra received its present pavement of
Pentelic and Hymettos marble; the significance of the diamond-shaped figure
traced in the centre is uncertain. To this period also is referred the erection
of a raised stage, supported in front by a sculptured wall.
(5) The latest recorded changes in the Dionysiac theatre are associated with
the name of a certain Phaedrus, and took place probably in the 3rd cent. To
these belong the existing front wall of the stage, adorned with sculpture of
an earlier period; also the balustrade which now separates the auditorium from
the orchestra, and the partial covering of the orchestra-canal with marble flags.
It is maintained by Dr. Dorpfeld that, not only in the Dionysiac
theatre, but in all theatres of the Greek type, the actors stood on the same
level with the Chorus; a stage raised above the orchestra was a Roman invention;
and where such a stage occurs in a theatre of Greek origin, it is a later addition,
made under Roman influence. The Roman raised stage, he thinks, was developed,
when a Chorus was no longer used, by depressing the level of the circular orchestra
in that part of it--the part furthest from the actors--where the Chorus formerly
stood. This startling theory is based chiefly on the nature of the proscenium
as it appears in the remains of some Greek theatres. The theatre of
Epidaurus (Fig. 2, see inside URL below), built about the middle of
the 4th century B.C., is the best-preserved example of the Greek type;
excavations have lately been made in it by the Greek Archaeological Society
(1883).
The orchestra forms a complete circle, defined by a ring of flat
stones. Beyond this circle, on the side furthest from the audience, are remains
of a wall, about 12 ft. high, adorned with Ionic half-columns, and flanked by
slightly projecting wings; there was one door in it, at the middle point. This
wall must have been either the background of the scene, or the front of a raised
stage. It is argued that it must have been the background, because (a) 12 ft.
would be too great a height for a stage; (b) the width of the stage--about 8
ft.--would have been too small; (c) there is no trace of steps leading from
the top of the wall to the orchestra. A similar wall occurs in the theatre at
Oropus, and is identified as the proskenion by an inscription which it bears.
The theatre in the Peiraeus affords another example.
On the other hand, several considerations tell in favour of the
received view, that Greek actors, at every period, had a raised stage.
(1) The statements of the architect Vitruvius, who wrote about 20 A.D., is decisive,
so far as the Roman period is concerned. He states that the Greek theatre had
a raised stage, about 10 or 12 ft. high, but narrower than the Roman; the Greeks,
he says, called logeion. Vitruvius uses the-word proscaenium to describe this
stage; and the same use of the term occurs in other writers, both Roman and
Greek. Dr. Dorpfeld is therefore reduced to assuming that Vitruvius has made
a mistake, confusing the background of the scene in a Greek theatre with the
front of a raised stage. But it is absurd to suppose that Vitruvius should have
made such a blunder about the Greek theatres of his own day; and that, having
accurately described a raised stage which did not exist, he should also have
invented a name for it, logeion.
(2) The theatre at Megalopolis in Arcadia has been excavated by members of the
British School at Athens (see an account by Mr. W. Loring in the Report of the
School for 1890). The date of the theatre may be placed in the second half of
the 4th century B.C. Here there is a raised stage, of which the height was originally
about 6 ft., and the width about 18 ft. A flight, of steps, extending from end
to end of it, led down to the orchestra. That it was a stage, and not a background,
is proved (a) by these steps, (b) by the fact, that access was given to it by
three doors in the wall behind it. There is no reason to doubt that this stage
is of the same date as the auditorium. A later Roman stage has been found in
front of it. By this example, then, the existence of a raised, stage in a Greek
theatre of the 4th century B.C. is placed beyond doubt.
(3) With regard to the 5th century B.C., it was not to be expected that any
remains of a raised stage should be found; temporary wooden structures would
leave no trace. The Greek plays do not supply any literary evidence which can
be deemed conclusive. There are some passages which indicate that the place
where the actors stood was accessible to the Chorus (e. g. Soph. Oed. Col. 836
ff.); -as would be the case, if we supposed a stage with steps leading up to
it, as at Megalopolis. Among the passages which seem to imply a raised stage,
we may notice Ar. Vesp. 1514, where Philocleon says, atar katabateon g' ep'
autous. This may, indeed, be rendered, I must enter the lists against them;
but it also implies some change of position, more marked than such as would
consist in moving merely from one spot in the orchestra to another, and would
be most naturally explained by a descent into the orchestra from the stage.
Some vases of Lower Italy, referable to the period 300-100 B.C., depict scenes
from the Old Attic Comedy acted on a raised logeion. Plato (Symp. p. 194 A)
speaks of the tragic poet Agathon as anabainontos epi okribanta meta ton hupokriton.
This probably refers, not to a performance in the theatre, but to the proagon.
Still, it shows that the idea of placing actors on a raised platform was familiar
to Athenians of the 5th century B.C. Even in the days before Thespis, when one
member of the Chorus held a dialogue with the rest, he was mounted, we are told,
on a kind of table (eleos: Pollux, iv. 123). A recent writer suggests that the
source of this story may have been a Comedy in which the beginnings of Tragedy
were burlesqued (Hiller, Rhein. Museum). If this were so, it would only show
that some sort of raised stage was conceived as necessary for even the most
primitive form of drama.
Lastly, there is a strong a priori objection to the theory that
actors and Chorus stood on the same level. The Chorus were usually drawn up
in ranks facing the actors. With his cothurnus and mask, a tragic actor would
still not overtop the Chorus by more than a head. Hence, a view of the actors
would have almost been wholly denied to spectators whose seats were in the middle
part of the lowest row. But those were the seats assigned to the most distinguished
persons. This argument cannot be met by saying, as Dr. Dorpfeld does, that the
Chorus was usually divided into hemichoria (leaving the actors visible between
the two groups). Such an arrangement was not usual, but very exceptional. It
may be allowed that, when the stage came to be as high as 12 ft., permanent
means of communication between stage and orchestra cannot have existed, though
temporary wooden steps might be employed at need. But before stages of that
height came into use, such communication had ceased to be requisite, since the
Chorus had no longer an active part in drama.
Vitruvius gives the ground-plan of a Greek theatre as follows. Describe a circle
for the orchestra, and in it inscribe three squares. One side of one of these
squares will represent the front line of the stage (A B). A parallel tangent
to the circle will be the back wall of the stage (C D). The stage (pulpitum,
logeion) must be not less than 10, or more than 12 feet high. Next, parallel
with A B, draw a diameter of the circle, E F. It will be seen in the diagram
that at E and F the semicircle is so continued as to make a horse-shoe, ending
at G H. The curves which thus continue it are segments of circles described
from E and F as respective centres, with E F as radius. This is known as the
construction from three centres, viz., E, F, and the centre of the orchestra.
The auditorium is shut in by lines which bisect the right angles at I and K.
The space between G H and C D is a raised stage.
The 4th century B.C. was the period at which stone theatres became
usual in Greece. We may now proceed to consider their characteristics more in
detail.
The orchestra.
It has been seen that, even in the matured theatre, the dancing-place
was still a complete circle, as in the old days of the cyclic choruses. Its
central point was sometimes marked, either by a small pit (as at the Peiraeus),
or by a stone (as at Epidaurus). Such marks probably indicate the spot on which
the altar of Dionysus was to be placed. The word thumele, a place of sacrifice,
means in classical poetry either a shrine, or, more specifically, an altar.
Lexicographers and scholiasts often mention a thumele in connexion with the
theatre; but they do not agree as to what it was, nor do they furnish any certain
clue. The most probable conclusion is that the thumele was the altar of Dionysus,
in the centre of the orchestra. Another view is that the name thumele was transferred
from the altar to a platform in the orchestra on which the altar was placed,
and that this platform was the station of the Chorus,--connected by steps with
the lower level of the orchestra (konistra) and with the higher level of the
stage (logeion). It is true that the use of thumele to denote a kind of stage
was current in later times, when thymelici, music-hall artists, were distinguished
from actors proper (Isidore, Orig. xviii. 47). But this use arose under Roman
influences, and cannot be assumed for the Greece of the 5th or 4th century B.C.
A channel, to carry off rain-water, often surrounded the orchestra, being bridged
by stones at the points from which the stairways led up to the seats.
The Auditorium.
In default of a special term like cavea, this is sometimes called
theatron: though that word, when it does not mean the whole building, more often
denotes the spectators (as we speak of the house ). In the older Greek theatres
the public entered by the side-passages (parodoi) between the proscenium and
the orchestra,--the same which the Chorus used. Sometimes, indeed, we find an
alternative mode of access, viz. by a path traversing high ground, and leading
directly to one of the upper tiers: this was the case at Athens, but it was
exceptional. A crowd entering by the parodoi would find the pressure greatest
at the mouths of the semicircular passage between the orchestra and the lowest
row of seats,--before the spectators had distributed themselves to the several
parts of the house. This fact helps to explain a peculiarity of construction.
The lowest row of seats is not, as a rule, completely concentric with the orchestra,
but is usually so contrived as to leave a wider space at the points just mentioned.
A further advantage of this arrangement was that it afforded a better view to
those who sat at each end of the semicircle.
Flights of steps ascending from the orchestra to the highest tier
of seats divided the auditorium into wedge-like segments. The Greek word for
such a segment was kerkis, which properly meant radius; the Latin term was cuneus.
A further division into upper and lower zones was effected by passages called
diazomata, girdles (praecinctiones), which ran completely round the semicircle.
At Epidaurus there is only one diazoma, which is not half-way between the lowest
and highest tier, but nearer to the latter; and, while the lower zone (between
the diazoma and the orchestra) is divided into only twelve kerkides, the upper
contains twenty-two. At Athens only one diazoma can now be traced, but there
may have been another: the number of kerkides is thirteen. The word diazoma
can denote, not only the passage itself, but the zone which it marks off: thus
the eleventh row in the upper zone is expressed by to hendekaton tou deuterou
diazomatos bathron. zone is also used in that sense. Above the highest tier,
another open passage ran round the house. The term ikria properly denoted the
wooden benches on which, in the earlier times, the spectators sat (cf. Ar. Ach.
24 f.: ostiountai . . . peri protou xulou). When stone seats were introduced,--which
at Athens does not appear to have occurred before the time of Lycurgus (c. 330
B.C.),--such seats were founded, where it was possible, on the natural rock
of the slope. At Athens, as at Megalopolis, artificial substructions were required
in several parts, and this must almost everywhere have been the case, more or
less. The material used for the seats varied much. Sometimes it is marble, as
at Iassus in Caria and Perga in Pamphylia; at Athens and in the Peiraeus, it
is (for the ordinary seats) a white limestone, finely wrought; while the smaller
provincial theatres were often content with coarser stone and workmanship. The
tiers of seats were called bathra or anabathmoi. At Athens the space allotted
to one person was indicated merely by a line engraved on the stone (as at Sparta
by a groove): it is described as hedra, topos, chora, chorion, or simply thea
(thean agorazein, katalambanein).
The privilege of proedria in the theatre was given chiefly to four
classes of persons: (1) certain priests and priestesses, among whom the priest
of Dionysus was foremost: (2) certain magistrates: (3) foreigners who were honoured
in an official character, as presbeis or theoroi: (4) citizens or foreigners
who were honoured in their personal capacity, as benefactors of the state. For
such persons special seats were provided, like armchairs, called thronoi or
kathedrai. At Athens these chairs, made of Pentelic marble, occupy the whole
of the lowest row, while others are placed in different parts of the house,
though in no case higher up than the twenty-fourth row; those assigned to priests
or officials bear their titles; thus the central chair of the semicircle is
inscribed, "Iereos Dionysou Eleuthereos". According, to one recent
view, the chairs in the lowest row date from the time of Lycurgus; it has more
generally been supposed that all these chairs are of the Roman age,--as all
the present inscriptions certainly are. At Epidaurus several rows of seats with
backs and arms were assigned to those who enjoyed proedria. Elaborate ornament
was often applied to such chairs,--the feet being shaped like lion's claws,--the
front or back carved with mythical subjects in relief, etc.
The acoustic properties of a Greek theatre would be naturally good,
since the actors had a high wall behind them and a rising slope in front. Vitruvius,
indeed, says that artificial aid was sought from brazen vessels, which the Greeks
call echeia, so placed in the auditorium as to reverberate the voices of the
actors. He even speaks of these resonators as being nicely adapted to the required
musical pitch (ii. 1, 9). The theatre at Aizani in Cilicia has a series of niches
above the diazoma: and similar niches exist elsewhere. According to one view,
these niches held the echeia, while another connects them merely with the substructions
of seats. The statement of Vitruvius leaves no doubt that echeia were used,
at least sometimes, in the theatres of his own day: but it remains uncertain
whether such a device was employed by the Greeks of an earlier time.
The outer wall enclosing the auditorium ordinarily followed the
curve of the semicircle, unless the nature of the ground caused some deviation.
At Athens the auditorium was partly bounded on the N. by the steep rock of the
Acropolis, while the rest of its boundary was formed by strong walls of conglomerate.
Where the external appearance of these walls became important, viz. in the S.
and S.W. portions, they were cased with finely-wrought limestone. The general
outline at Athens was that of a large segment of a circle, described from a
centre considerably N. of the point which served as centre of the orchestra:
for a small distance at the S.W. corner the curve passed into a straight line.
Examples also occur in which the walls enclosing the auditorium were rectangular,
as at Cnidus, and in the smaller theatre at Pompeii. The walls flanking the
seats at each end of the semicircle were either carried in a single sloping
line from the topmost tier to the orchestra, or built in a series of steps corresponding
with the tiers. In the best Greek period such walls were not exactly parallel
with the line of the proscenium, but started inwards a little, towards the centre
of the orchestra. This was the case at Athens and at Epidaurus.
Scenic Decoration.
The testimonies on this subject are of two classes.
(1) Notices in writers chiefly belonging to the Roman age, especially lexicographers
and scholiasts. Among these the most important is the grammarian Julius Pollux
(flor. 170 A.D.), in his Onomasticon, book iv., sections 128-132 (peri hupokriton
skeues). As has lately been shown by Rohde, the source principally used by Pollux
was a work by Juba, a writer of the later Alexandrian age, entitled Theatrike
historia, in at least seventeen books; while Juba, in his turn, had sources
going back to Aristophanes of Byzantium (200 B.C.), but not further. The besetting
fault of Pollux, in abridging from this ample material, seems to have been an
omission to distinguish between the normal and the occasional resources of the
stage.
(2) The second kind of evidence is that derived from the Greek dramatic texts
themselves. This source, scanty as it is, is the principal one on which we have
to rely in regard to the practice of the 5th and 4th centuries B.C. Not long
ago it was the custom to treat the notices. in Pollux and the other late authorities
as if they could be applied without reserve to the great age of Athenian Tragedy
and Comedy. A more critical study has shown the. need of greater caution in
this respect. It is not difficult to suppose that, when dramatic poetry had;
culminated, the art of scenic decoration may still have been very rude, while
it is probable that much of the apparatus described by late writers had its
origin under the Diadochi or the Empire. The history of our own stage could
show a similar, course, from the triumphs of poetry to those of mechanism.
In the extant plays of Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, and Aristophanes,
the action most often takes place in front of a house, with a practicable door;
sometimes in front of a temple, a cottage, a tent, a cave, or a rock. Painted
linen hangings, erected on a wooden frame, would have sufficed for such a background.
Aristotle, in sketching the growth of Tragedy, says that Aeschylus added the
second actor, and made the dialogue predominate over the choral part, while
Sophocles introduced the third, actor and the use of scenen-painting (skenographia).
Now, this last fact must have stood out clearly in Athenian tradition, which
Aristotle had every means of knowing, when he thus coupled it with the other
novelty as an invention distinctive of Sophocles. It is usually assumed, even
by recent writers, that Aristotle is here irreconcilable with Vitruvius, who
ascribes the introduction of scene-painting to Aeschylus. Such an assumption
is not, we think, necessary. The words of Vitruvius (vii. praef. 11) are: primum
Agatharchus Athenis, Aeschylo docente tragoediam, scaenam fecit et de ea commentarium
reliquit: and he then goes on to say how the stimulus given by Agatharchus.
led Democritus and Anaxagoras to develop principles of perspective. The phrase,
while Aeschylus was exhibiting tragedy, merely describes Aeschylus as contemporary
with the innovation. Sophocles first exhibited in 468 B.C., twelve years before,
the death, of Aeschylus. Aristotle and Vitruvius are reconciled if we suppose
that Sophocles introduced skenographia the early days of his career; a fact
which will also help us to understand why that improvement was peculiarly associated
with this name. Even before Agatharchus had made a beginning of artistic skenographia,
some ruder kind of drawing may have been used. Thus in the Persae of Aeschylus
(472 B.C.) the palace was probably indicated. In the Ion of Euripides (circ.
421 B.C.), where the scene is laid at Delphi, the Chorus of Athenian maidens
point with admiration to the sculptures which adorn the front of the temple.
We may suppose that some, representation of these, though not perhaps a very
elaborate one, appeared on the proscenium.
With regard to massive decoration, as distinguished from a painted
background, the objects required by the texts are simple, such as altars, statues
of gods or, heroes, rocks, and seats. But the texts further prove that certain
mechanical appliances were available at need.
(1) The ekkuklema was a small movable stage on wheels, which could be rolled
forward through the door in the proscenium. There was room on it for three or
four persons, and it was low enough to allow of an actor stepping off it with
ease. The most frequent use of the ekkuklema was when the corpse of a person
slain within the house was to be shown to the audience,--sometimes with the
murderer standing beside it. The moment at which the ekkuklema was pushed forward
is often, though not always, marked in the text by a reference to the opening
of the door.
Examples are:--in Aesch. Ag., Clytaemnestra is thus shown standing by the corpses
of Agamemnon and Cassandra; in Cho., Orestes with the corpses of Aegisth us
and Clytaemnestra: in Soph. El., Orestes and Pylades with the corpse of Clytaemnestra;
in Ant., the corpse of Eurydice: in Eur. Here. Furens, Heracles with the corpses
of his wife and children; in Hippol., the corpse of Phaedra.
But this was not the only case in which the appliance was used:
it could also be employed for any tableau in the interior of a house. Thus in
Aesch. Eum. the Pythia speaks. the prologue in front of the temple, and then
the ekkuklema is used to show Orestes at the omphalos within. Similarly in Soph.
Ai., when Tecmessa opens the tent, this machine serves to display Ajax prostrate
amid the slaughtered cattle. As appears from some passages, the ekkuklema could
be pushed far enough forward to admit of an actor entering, or making his exit,
at the door behind it. It should be noted that the use of the ekkuklema is not
merely an inference from later writers and from hints in Tragedy, but is proved
by the two parodies in Aristophanes, where Euripides and Agathon are wheeled
out, and are then once more withdrawn fiom view (Ach. 408 ff., ekkuklethet'
. . . ekkuklesomai: Thesm. 265,eskuklesato). The exact nature of the exostra
is uncertain, but it was evidently akin to the ekkuklema, differing from it,
possibly, only in the mode of propulsion.
(2) Machinery for showing persons in the air was required by the appearances
of the gods, and in some other cases, -as when Medea is, seen above the palace
in the chariot given to her by the Sun (Eur. Med. 1319), or when Trygaeus soars
aloft on his beetle (Aristoph. Pax, 80). Two different contrivances seem to
have been used: both were, of course, concealed by the proscenium. One was an
apparatus worked by a wheel (trochos) and ropes. (aiorai), and called aiorema,
-which was used when the person was to be seen gradually rising into the air,
or descending from above. As Trygaeus rises into the air, he begs the operator
to be carefult: o mechanopoie, proseche ton noun hos emhe (Aristoph. Pax, 174).
So in fragment 3 of the Daedalus the machinist is thus directed, ho mechanopoios,
hopote boulei ton trochon i elan anekas, lege, chaire, phengos heliou. The other
device was a sort of platform, projecting from the wings at the back of the
proscenium, close to its upper edge. This was the so-called theologeion, used
when the apparition of a god or hero was to be sudden, as it is in Soph. Phil.,
and in Eur. I. T., Helen., Suppl. The kremathra in which Socrates is suspended
(Aristoph. Nub. 218) is a burlesque of the tragic appliances.
(3) Akin to the theologeion must have been the contrivance used when a person
is to appear on the roof of a palace (as the watcher in Aesch. Ag.: Antigone
and the paedagogus in Eur. Phoen., etc.). A wooden platform, high up behind
the proscenium, would have sufficed: according to Pollux, it was called a distegia.
These seem to be the only forms of decoration or mechanism which
can certainly be inferred from the texts of the tragedians and of Aristophanes.
They are all compatible with a temporary wooden structure, and with a comparatively
simple phase of scenic art. When, in the course of the 4th century B.C., permanent
stone theatres became usual in Greek lands, the general character of scenic
decoration was perhaps not at first affected thereby. Behind the proscenium
there was now a permanent wall, forming the front of the building assigned to
the actors. But the proscenium itself probably continued, for a time, to be
temporary,--a wooden structure, with painted hangings. In the Dionysiac theatre,
as Lycurgus left it, two small tower-like wings project from each end of the
permanent back wall. These, it is conjectured, were designed to facilitate the
erection of the wooden proscenium.
It may have been at this period that periaktoi were first introduced.
These were triangular wooden prisms, revolving on a pivot (whence the name),
with scenery painted on each of their three faces. One periaktos was placed
at the left wing, and another at the right. They took the place of modern side-scenes,
and also served to indicate changes of scene, according to a regular conventional
method. The periaktos on the spectator's right hand represented the locality
in which the action was taking place. The periaktos on his left hand represented
a region outside of that locality. If, for instance, the scene of the play was
laid at Delphi, the Tight-hand periaktos would illustrate that place, while
the other might represent the road leading to Athens. The same rule governed
entrances and exits: a Delphian would come on from the right, a stranger from
the left. If the scene was to be changed from one spot near Delphi to another
in the same vicinity, the lefthand periaktos would be turned so as to present
a new face, but the right-hand one would be left unaltered. If the scene was
shifted from Delphi to Athens, both periaktoi would be turned. The first case
was technically a change of topos: the second, of chora.
There are only two Greek plays in which it is necessary to assume
a chance of scene. In the Eumenides the action is transferred from Delphi to
Athens: in the Ajax, from the front of the hero's tent to a lonely place on
the sea-shore. It is probable that, in the first of these examples, the change
was merely symbolised, by substituting the bretas of Athena for a statue of
Apollo; while the building painted on the background was identified, first with
the Delphian temple, and then with the Erechtheum. In the second example, if
the background was a landscape, nothing was required, but to remove the hangings
which represented the tent. The use of periaktoi in the 5th century B.C. cannot
be proved from the dramatic literature. On the other hand, they would have been
found peculiarly convenient when the old wooden proscenia, with painted hangings,
were replaced by stone proscenia adorned with sculpture. At Epidaurus there
is such a proscenium, with Ionic half-columns, which is probably of a later
date than the rest of the building; and the small wings which slightly project
from it at each end may have served, according to a probable conjecture, for
the reception of periaktoi. In the Dionysiac theatre a permanent proscenium
was similarly introduced, after the time of Lycurgus. The projecting towers
of his scene-building (noticed above) then became wings of the new structure,
like those at Epidaurus. There is no evidence that, in addition to revolving
scenery, the Greek theatre had scenes which could be shifted on grooves; though
the Roman stage, as Servius tells us, had both (scaena versilis--scaena ductilis:
on Georg. iii. 24).
Entrances for the actors.
Pollux speaks of three doors in the proscenium, the central one
being called thura basileios, because the chief persons of the play used it.
Vitruvius confirms this statement. Ruins of the Hellenistic or Roman age show
sometimes three doors, sometimes five. In the latter case, the two extreme doors
may have opened, not on the stage, but on spaces at either side of it (paraskenia),
used by actors waiting for their turns, or by officials. In the theatre at Megalopolis
(4th cent. B.C.) there were three entrances to the stage. Only one entrance
is traceable in the remains at Epidaurus, Zea, and Oropus respectively. It is
on a level with the orchestra; hence those who disbelieve in a raised stage
regard it as the entrance for the actors. But it may have passed beneath a raised
stage, serving to give the employes of the theatre a direct access to the orchestra.
How many doors there may have been in the painted hangings of the old wooden
proscenia, we cannot tell. The 5th century texts show that, besides the door
or doors in the proscenium, there were also entrances for the actors from the
sides, right and left.
Pollux says that when ghosts appeared on the scene they came up
either by anapiesmata (our trap-doors ), or by the charonioi klimakes. It has
generally been supposed that these klimakes led from the orchestra to the stage.
This is the case at Megalopolis, where the steps extend along the whole front
of the logeion. Another theory is that they connected the stage with a passage
beneath it, invisible to the spectators.
No curtain was used in the Greek theatre. When a play opened with
a group in position (such as the suppliants in the Oed. Tyr.), the actors must
have simply walked on to the scene, and assumed that position. When one play
followed another, and the background had to be changed, that change took place
before the eyes of the spectators. In such matters we cannot judge the feelings
of Athenians, assembled at the Dionysia, by the requirements of modern playgoers.
At Athens dramatic idealism went hand in hand with scenic simplicity.
The Administration of the Theatre.
A Greek theatre was the property of the state, and the performances
in it were acts of public worship, under state control. At Athens, in the 5th
and 4th centuries B.C., drama accompanied two Dionysiac festivals,--the Lenaea,
in January, and the Great Dionysia, in March. (We are not here concerned with
the Rural Dionysia, in December,--at which, during this period, no new pieces
seem to have been acted.) At each festival, both Tragedy and Comedy were produced;
but the Lenaea was peculiarly associated with Comedy, and the Great Dionysia
with Tragedy. There was a period, indeed, of some fifty years, dating from the
first institution of the Great Dionysia (circ. 478 B.C.), during which Comedy
alone appears to have been produced at the Lenaea. The cost of the
performances at each festival was defrayed from three sources.
(1) The theatre was let by the state to a lessee, who received the money paid
for admission, and in return undertook certain charges. One of these, as appears
from an extant document, was the maintenance of the building in good repair.
Hence the classical name for the lessee, architekton (Dem. de Cor. 28): later
writers call him theatrones (Theophrastus), or theatropoles (Pollux). He was
also bound to provide a certain number of free seats (as for the persons entitled
to proedria): but for these he was probably reimbursed by the Treasury. The
provision of scenery, and of costume for the actors (excepting the choreutae),
appears also to have devolved upon the lessee. He was certainly charged with
the custody of the scenery and of all the theatrical dresses and properties.
He also paid the cashiers, the persons who showed spectators to their places,
and all other employes of the theatre.
(2) The second source of contribution was the choregia. For each festival the
Archon Eponymus appointed as many choregi as there were competing poets; at
the Great Dionysia the number was usually three for Tragedy and three for Comedy.
The choregi were chosen from men nominated by the ten Attic tribes in rotation.
The duty of the choregus was to furnish one chorus of fifteen persons for Tragedy,
or of twenty-four for Comedy. He provided a suitable place for their training
(choregeion), and maintained them till the festival was over. If the poet did
not train them himself, the choregus had to find a chorodidaskalos. He had also
to supply the flute-player (auletes) who preceded the Chorus on entering or
quitting the orchestra, and played the occasional music. He purchased the costumes,
masks, etc., for the Chorus. But his task was not finished when the Chorus was
trained and equipped. He had also to supply any mute persons (kopha prosopa)
that might be required for the piece.
(3) The third contributor was the state. When a poet had applied to the Archon
for a Chorus, and his application had been granted, the Archon next assigned
to him three actors, who were paid by the state. It did not rest with the poet
to decide which of these three should be protagonistes, etc.: he received them
from the state already classified according to merit, as actors of first, second,
and third parts. This classification rested ultimately on special agones in
which actors were directly tried against each other, and which were distinct
from the performances at the festivals. If a poet ever required a fourth actor
(probably a very rare case), he could only go to the choregus, who might make
an extra grant (parachoregema). The state also paid the marshals (rhabdouchoi)
who kept order in the theatre, and who were stationed in the orchestra. Lastly,
a certain honorarium (distinct from the festival-prizes) was paid by the Treasury
to each of the competing poets, according to the order in which they were placed
by the judges.
The character of the dramatic contests as solemnities conducted
by the state was strongly marked in the forms of procedure. A few days. before
the Great Dionysia, the ceremony called the proagon ( prelude ) was held in
the old Odeion near the Enneacrunos. The competing poets, with their respective
choregi, were then formally presented to the public; the actors and choruses
were also present, in festal, but not in scenic, attire; and the titles of the
plays to be produced at the approaching festival were officially announced.
When the first day of the Great Dionysia arrived, the dramatic contests were
preceded by the transaction of some public business in the theatre. It was then
that crowns of honour were awarded for public services, and that the orphans
of Athenians slain in war were presented to the citizens. In due course a public
herald summoned the first on the list of competing poets. He entered the orchestra,
attended by his choregus and chorus) and poured a libation at the thymele to
Dionysus. His procession then withdrew; the orchestra was once more empty (until
the Chorus should make its dramatic entrance); and the play began. One prize
for Tragedy and one for Comedy were awarded by ten judges, taken by lot from
a large number of persons whom the senate (with the choregi) had chosen from
the tribes. At the close of the contests, five judges (taken from the ten by
a second ballot) announced the awards. The successful poets were then crowned,
before the audience, by the archon. Shortly after the festival, a public meeting,
for business connected with it, was held in the theatre. Any complaints of misconduct
which might have arisen were then heard; and officials who had distinguished
themselves received public commendation.
The Audience.
According to a recent estimate, the Dionysiac theatre was once
capable of seating about 27,500 persons. It must be remembered that all the
upper tiers have been destroyed, and that the ancient capacity was enormously
greater than it would appear from the seats which still exist. Plato was using
round numbers when he spoke of more than 30,000 Greeks as present in the Dionysiac
theatre at the tragic contests (Symp. 175 E), but it is quite conceivable that
the number was sometimes nearer to 30,000 than to 20,000. The vast theatre at
Megalopolis could hold, according to one modern computation, no fewer than 44,000
persons. Such numbers become intelligible when we consider that the Greek drama
was essentially a popular festival, in which the entire civic body was invited
to take part. Even young boys were present, both at Comedy and at Tragedy. Women
were certainly present at Tragedy; and a fragment of Alexis shows that, in the
4th cent. B.C., they were admitted to the performances of Comedy also. This,
however, was the Middle Comedy -very different, in some respects, from the Old
Comedy of Aristophanes. It would be a natural inference from the seclusion in
which Athenian women lived that they were not admitted to the Old Comedy. But
against this a priori argument may be set another,--viz. that, at the Dionysia,
Tragedy and Comedy were merely different sides of one agon: those who could
participate in one were entitled to share in the other. A line drawn on grounds
of decorum would dissever elements which, in the Dionysiac idea, were inseparable.
There is no conclusive literary evidence. But one passage in Aristophanes (Pax
964 ff.) cannot be naturally explained except on the supposition that women
were present. Another passage in the same play (Pax 50 ff.) speaks, it is true,
of males only: but that is, obviously, because the speaker, a slave, is describing
his despotes to actual, or future, despotai. At Athens the metoikoi were admitted
to the theatre. (Their exclusion fiom the Lenaea is not proved by Aristoph.
Ach. 507 f., even if v. 508 be sound.) Foreigners were also admitted, whether
officials or private persons.
In the earliest days of Athenian drama, admission was doubtless
free of charge; payment may have been introduced after the expulsion of the
Peisistratidae, when the city began to find the cost too heavy. In the 5th and
4th centuries B.C. the price of admission for one day was two obols, or not
quite 4d. Pericles introduced the system by which the state paid two obols to
each citizen for each day of the Dionysiac festivals, in order that he might
attend the theatre. This theorikon was partly defrayed from the tribute of the
allies, and probably began about 454 B.C. It was distributed by the demarchs
in the several demes; and, though it was first devised in the interests of the
poor, the only condition of obtaining it seems to have been inscription on the
lexiarchikon grammateion of the deme. The number of persons receiving the theorikon
in 431 B.C. has been computed at 18,000. In its later and wider form (as extended
to non-dramatic festivals) the theorikon became an abuse: in its original form
it was substantially a state-grant in aid of education. All seats were of the
same class, except those reserved for persons who had the right of proedria,
and who paid nothing. (Cf. Dem. de Cor. 28.) The places of payment were probably
in the parodoi leading to the orchestra. Specimens of ordinary Greek theatre--tickets
are extant. These are small leaden coins, bearing on one side some emblem of
the theatre, such as a Dionysus with a tripod, or an actor's mask; and on the
obverse, the name of an Attic tribe, or a numeral... Another kind of theatre-ticket
also occurs. This is a small round mark of bone or ivory, bearing on one side
some artistic device (such as the head of a deity), and on the other a number
(never higher than 15), in both Greek and Roman figures. These were tickets,
of the Imperial age, for persons who had proedria. The numbers probably indicate
divisions of the house.. How far such division was carried is uncertain. It
is a probable conjecture that at Athens a certain portion of the house (perhaps
a whole segment, kerkis) was allotted to each of the Attic phulai. This is confirmed
by the occurrence of tribal names on the leaden tickets noticed above; also
by the fact that the choregia was organised on a basis of tribes; and, lastly,
by the analogy of Roman colonies in which certain cunei of the theatre were
assigned to certain curiae. The members of the senate sat together in a definite
part of the Dionysiac theatre (to bouleutikon, Aristoph. Av. 794). For youths
between the ages of 18 and 21, a space was similarly reserved (to ephebikon).
The performances began in the morning, and lasted till evening;
but it is attested by the comic poet Pherecrates -who gained his first prize
in 438 B.C.- that the spectators had usually taken the morning meal (ariston)
before they came (Athen. x. 464 e). In the next century, however, we hear of
performances beginning at daybreak (Aeschin. in Ctes.76). The older Athenian
custom was for all the spectators to wear wreaths (as at a sacrifice); but this
had perhaps gone out before 350 B.C. As the whole day was spent in the theatre,
the visitors brought light refreshments (tragemata) with them. Choregi sometimes
courted popularity by a distribution of cakes and wine: and Aristophanes has
pilloried those rival poets who employed slaves to throw nuts about the house.
An Athenian audience was closely attentive,--detecting the slightest fault of
speech,--and highly demonstrative. Loud clapping of hands, and shouts of applause,
expressed their delight; disapproval found vent in stamping with the feet, hissing,
and hooting (klozein). Never, probably, has the ordeal for an actor been more
severe than it was at Athens. Persons of note who entered the house were recognised
with frank favour, or the reverse. Indeed, the whole demeanour of Athenians
at the Dionysia appears to have been marked by a certain sense of domestic ease,
as if all the holiday-makers were members of one family.
From the latter part of the 4th century B.C. onwards, it became
usual to produce drama, not merely at the Dionysia, but on any occasion of special
rejoicing; a result partly due to the personal taste of Alexander the Great
for theatrical shows of every kind. Hence the theatres gradually lost that sacred
character which had been theirs so long as they were set apart for the worship
of Dionysus. A further consequence was that they began to be used for various
entertainments which had nothing to do with drama, such as the exhibitions of
conjurers or acrobats, and, in the Roman age. gladiatorial shows, or combats
with wild beasts. Even in the 5th century B.C., indeed, cockfighting had been
held on one day of the year in the Dionysiac theatre, -a custom which legend
connected with an omen seen by Themistocles in the Persian wars: but this -unlike
the later innovations- was consistent with the religio loci, since the cult
of Asclepius had points of contact with that of Dionysus. Thus the proagon of
the Dionysia (noticed above) was held on the day, and near the place, of the
sacrifice to Asclepius.
Mention has been made of the meetings for public business held in
the Dionysiac theatre just before and after the Great Dionysia. In the latter
part of the 5th century we hear of [p. 820] the citizens convening the ecclesia
in the theatre at Munychia, and in the Dionysiac theatre itself, when, under
the Four Hundred, the Pnyx was not available (Thuc. viii. 93 f.). By 250 B.C.
it had become usual to hold ordinary meetings of the ecclesia in the Dionysiac
theatre; though the elections of magistrates (archairesiai) continued to be
held on the Pnyx. From the 5th century B.C. the theatre had been the regular
place for the bestowal of public honours, such as crowns. In later times a theatre
was often also the scene of an exemplary punishment. One of the earliest instances
is the execution of Hippo in the theatre at Messana, of which place he had been
tyrant (circ. 338 B.C.; Plut. Timol. 34). Sepulchral inscriptions, of the Roman
age -sometimes commemorating Christians- have been found both in the Dionysiac
theatre and in the Odeum of Herodes Atticus; whence it has been conjectured
that, in late times, burials occasionally took place within those precincts.
As statues of Themistocles and Miltiades stood in the Dionysiac theatre, so,
at every period of Greek antiquity, such places were adorned with monuments
of statesmen and soldiers, no less than of poets, musicians, and actors. This
was in accord with the true idea of the Greek theatre, which was not merely
the home of an art, but also a centre of civic reunion.
THE ROMAN THEATRE.
Rome possessed no theatre of stone till 55 B.C. Just a century earlier
such an edifice had been in progress, when P. Cornelius Scipio Nasica procured
a decree of the senate for its destruction (Liv. Epit. 48). The spirit of the
Roman veto on permanent theatres was one which refused to regard the drama except
as a passing frivolity. Wooden theatres were erected, and pulled down when the
occasion was over. But before the middle of the 1st century B.C. these temporary
structures had already begun to show a high elaboration. The building put up
by the aedile M. Aemilius Scaurus in 58 B.C. contained 80,000 seats; the proscenium
was adorned with pillars of marble and statues of bronze; and the whole work
seems to have possessed every element of grandeur except permanence. The old
interdict had already lost its meaning; and three years later Pompeius was allowed
to erect, near the Campus Martins, the first theatre of stone. The model is
said to have been the theatre of Mitylene, and the number of seats 40,000. The
theatre of Marcellus, built by Augustus, and named after his nephew, was also
of stone, and could hold 20,500 persons. A third such building, with a capacity
of 11,510, was completed in 13 B.C. by L. Cornelius Balbus. These are the trina
theatra of Suetonius (Aug. 45). Meanwhile many provincial towns in Italy and
elsewhere had long possessed stone theatres, built or altered under Roman influence.
The Roman type of theatre is simply the Greek type modified in certain
particulars. The ground-plan is thus described by Vitruvius (see image inside
URL below). In a circle, of the same diameter which the orchestra is to have,
inscribe three equilateral triangles. Take one side of any triangle, and let
this be the back wall of the stage, scaenae frons (A B). A diameter of the circle,
drawn parallel with A B, will represent the line dividing the stage from the
orchestra (C D). The seats for the spectators are arranged round the orchestra
in semicircles concentric with it. The five points above the line C D, where
the angles touch the circumference, are the points from which five flights of
steps lead up to the seats, dividing them into six cunei. Above the first zone,
or semicircular passage (praecinctio), the seats are divided into twelve cunei
by eleven stairways. Just above the points C and D, access is given to the orchestra
by two vaulted passages which pass under the upper rows of seats (E, F). The
platform of the stage is prolonged right and left, so that its total length
(G H) is equal to twice the diameter of the orchestra. In the back wall of the
stage there are to be three doors, the positions of which are marked by the
points I, K, L. Thus the distinctive features of the Roman theatre are these
two:
(1) The orchestra is not, as in the Greek theatre, a circle (or the greater
part of it), but only a semicircle. The diameter of the orchestra is now the
front line of a raised stage. Consequently the auditorium, also, forms only
a half-circle. The primary cause of this change was that the old Dionysiac chorus
had disappeared; the orchestra, therefore, had no longer a dramatic use.
(2) In the Greek theatre the auditorium and the scene-buildings were not architecturally
linked. The parodoi were open passages between them. In the Roman theatre the
side-walls of the scene-building were carried forward till they met the side-walls
of the auditorium. By this organic union of the two main parts the whole theatre
was made a single compact building.
These two main differences explain the other points in which the
Roman theatre varied from its Greek original. Thus:
(i.) Having closed the openings afforded by the parodoi, the Romans needed some
other access to their semicircular orchestra. Here the arch served them. By
cutting off a few seats in the lower rows at the angles right and left of the
stage, they obtained height enough for vaulted passages, which ran under the
auditorium into the orchestra.
(ii.) The solid unity of the Roman theatres lent itself to the Roman taste for
decoration of a monumental character. The permanent Greek proscenia, though
usually adorned with columns, had been simple. But the richest embellishments
of architecture and sculpture were lavished on the Roman proscenia, in which
two or more stories were usually distinguished by carefully harmonised modes
of treatment.
(iii.) A similar magnificence was shown in the external facades. Greek theatres
had usually been erected on natural slopes. A Roman theatre was more often built
on level ground. The auditorium rested on massive substructions, of which the
walls were connected by arches. From the open spaces thus afforded, numerous
wide staircases ascended, beneath the auditorium, to the several rows of seats.
Corridors, opening on these staircases, ran along the inner side of the semicircular
wall which enclosed the auditorium. The exterior of this wall was adorned with
columns, having arcades between them, and rising in three or more successive
stories, divided by architrave and cornice. Thus, while the architectural significance
of a Greek theatre depended wholly on the interior, a Roman theatre had also
the external aspect of a stately public building.
With regard to the internal arrangements of the Roman theatre, the
following points claim notice.
(1) The raised stage (pulpitum, logeion) is in some instances on a level with
the lowest row of seats behind the orchestra, as at Aizani in Cilicia and Aspendus
in Pamphylia. Sometimes, again, the stage is rather higher, but the (originally)
lowest tow of seats has been abolished, leaving the stage still level with those
seats which are actually lowest: this is the case at Pergamnum and Assus. In
a third class of examples, the stage is higher than the lowest row of seats,--as
it is at Orange. The Roman stage in the Dionysiac theatre at Athens is of this
class.
(2) Awnings were spread over the theatre to protect the spectators from sun
or rain.: These were usually called vela: the term velaria occurs only in Juv.
iv. 122. Pliny, who describes them as carbasina vela (made of linen), says that
they were introduced by Q. Catulus, in 78 B.C. (xix. 23). They were supported
by masts (mali), fixed to the outer walls of the theatre by massive rings or
sockets, which can still be seen at Orange or Pompeii. Between the masts were
cross-beams (trabes), for greater convenience in unfurling the vela. Such awnings
were of various colours, as yellow, red, darkblue (Lucr. iv. 75 ff., where see
Munro).
(3) Until the play began, the stage was concealed by a curtain; which was then
lowered. The place into which it sank, just inside of the front line of the
stage, can be seen in the larger theatre at Pompeii. At the end of the piece
the curtain was drawn up. Hence, where we say, the curtain rises, the Romans
said, aulaeum mittitur or subducitur: the curtain is up, aulaeum premitur: the
curtain falls, aulaeum tollitur. The word siparium (from the rt. of sipharos,
top-sail, supparum) meant a folding screen. Apuleius (150 A.D.) describes a
kind of, ballet as beginning when the curtain had been lowered, and the screens
folded up (sipariis complicitis, Met. 10, p. 232; cp. ib. 1, p. 7). If these
screens were within the curtain, the reason for using them along with it may
have been to heighten the effect of a tableau by disclosing it gradually. In
the later parts of the piece, they may have served to conceal sceneshifting.
Another use is also possible. Theatres of the Macedonian and Roman period sometimes
had two stages, the higher being used by the regular actors, the lower by mimes
or dancers; and the latter may have been concealed by the siparium, as the other
by the aulaeum.,The word siparium is regularly associated with comedy or mimes.
(Seneca, de tranq. An. c. 11, 8; Juv. Sat. 8, 186.)
(4) Allocation of seats. The orchestra was reserved for senators. As a special
mark of distinction, foreigners (usually ambassadors) were occasionally admitted
to it (see Tac. Ann. xiii. 54). The rest of the auditorium was called cavea.
The Lex Roscia, proposed by the tribune L. Roscius Otho in 67 B.C., provided
that the fourteen rows of seats in the cavea nearest to the orchestra should
be reserved for the equites--excluding any who should have become bankrupt (Cic.
Phil. ii. 44). Owing to the large number of equites who had been ruined by the
civil wars, Augustus decreed that the privilege given by the Lex Roscia should
be enjoyed by any eques who had at any time possessed, or whose father had possessed,
the amount of the equester census, viz. 400,000 sesterces (Suet. Aug. 40). This
is probably the Lex Julia Theatralis meant by Pliny (xxxiii. 8). Augustus farther
assigned special portions of the cavea to (1) women; (2) praetextati, i.e. boys
who had not yet assumed the toga virilis, and their paedagogi; (3) soldiers;
(4) married men belonging to the plebs. This was a premium on marriage, like
others provided in the Lex Julia et Papia Poppaea. In some provincial theatres
the town-councillors (decuriones) had seats of honour (bisellia) on the rows
next the orchestra. Corresponding to the royal box in a modern theatre was the
tribunal, immediately over the stage on the spectator's left. This was occupied
by the emperor, or by the president of the performance. A corresponding responding
tribunal on the left side was assigned to the Vestals, among whom the empress
sat. Thus, from the Augustan age onwards, the contrast between a Greek and Roman
theatre was extended to the arrangements for the audience. Instead of the simple
Greek distinction between those who had or had not proedria, the Roman auditorium
exhibited an elaborate classification by sex, age, profession, and rank.
Odeum.
The term oideion, denoting a species of theatre appropriated to
musical performances, occurs first in a fragment of the comic poet Cratinus
(circ. 450 B.C.), with reference to the Odeum of Pericles (Thraittai, fr. 1);
but it may have been in use from a much earlier time. The oldest recorded example
is the Skias at Sparta, which is said to have been round, and to have been named
from the resemblance of its top to a sunshade (skias or skiadeion: Etym. Magn.).
It was said to have been built by the architect Theodorus of Samos (circ. 600
B.C.). On its walls the Spartans hung up the cithara of the famous musician,
Timotheus of Rhodes (circ. 400 B.C.),--not as an honour, but as a stigma, because
he had marred the ancient simplicity of the instrument by increasing the number
of its strings. In the latter part of the 2nd century A.D. the Skias was still
used as a place for public assemblies (Paus. iii. 12, 10). No traces of it remain.
The circular brick building of which ruins still exist near the Eurotas seems
to have been originally an Odeum, modified perhaps, with a view to other than
musical performances, in the Roman age of Sparta.
Athens possessed three oideia:
(1) The oldest of these stood near the fountain Enneacrunus by the Ilissus.
Its origin is uncertain, but has been conjecturally referred to Peisistratus,
or even to Solon. The most probable inference from the notices concerning it
is that it was a semicircular building, arranged on the general plan of a Greek
theatre, but with a roof. It was in this Odeum that the proagon was held before
the Great Dionysia, as described above. This, too, is the Odeum to which Aristophanes
refers as being used for a law-court (Vesp. 1109); the scholiast on that passage
identifies the place with the scene of the proagon. The same building must be
understood when we read of the Odeum as a rendezvous or a lodging for troops
(Xen. Hellen. ii. 4, 9, 24), and as place for the distribution of corn (Dem.
c. Phorm. 37: [Dem.] in Neaer. 52). It appears to have been restored, or built
anew, by Lycurgus (circ. 330 B.C.); for the words of Hypereides (fr. 32, oikodomese
de to theatron, to oideion) cannot well refer to the Periclean building,--then
little more than a century old.
(2) The Odeum of Pericles stood a little S.E. of the Acropolis and N.E. of the
Dionysiac theatre: modern houses cover its probable site. Plutarch preserves
a tradition that the shape of the building was intended to recall the tent of
Xerxes (Per. 13). The fact that the top rose to a peak--like that of the Spartan
Skias, as we may suppose--apparently prompted the joke of Cratinus, when he
described Pericles, the Zeus with peaked head (schinokephalos), as toideion
epi tou kraniou echon (Thraitt. 1). These notices at least prove that the form
was round, and such as to suggest a tent. In the conception of Pericles, the
new Odeum, like the new temple of Athena, was associated with the Great Panathenaea.
As the final act of the festival was celebrated in the Parthenon, so the Odeum
was the place for the performances with which the festival began,--contests
of flute-players, singers, and rhapsodes. The Odeum of Pericles was completed
about 444 B.C. It was burnt down in 86 B.C. by Aristion, the tyrant of Athens,
when he fled before Sulla to the Acropolis. The restoration of the building
by Ariobarzanes II. (Philopator), king of Cappadocia, about 60 B.C., is the
last recorded incident in its history. It is remarkable that Pausanias speaks
as if, at the time of his visit (circ. 155 A.D.), the old Odeum by the Ilissus
was the principal building of its kind in Athens (i. 14,1). He refers to the
Odeum of Pericles merely as a structure (kataskeuasma) said to have been built
in imitation of the tent of Xerxes, and does not even name its founder (i. 20,4).
(3) The third Odeum at Athens was built by the eminent rhetorician Herodes Atticus,
in memory of his second wife, Appia Annia Regilla, who died before 161 A.D.
It had not been commenced when Pausanias described Athens; but he mentions it
in speaking of the Odeum at Patrae, which was, he says, second only to that
of Herodes (vii. 20,6). The Odeum of Herodes stood on the south slope of the
Acropolis, W. of the Dionysiac theatre. Considerable remains still exist. It
was not a round building, but a theatre of the ordinary Roman type, with a roof
superadded. Hence Philostratus describes it as to epi Rhegillei theatron (Vit.
Soph. ii. 1, 5, cf. 8), and Suidas (s. v. Herodes) as theatron huporophion,--the
Latin theatrum tectum. It was distinguished by the great splendour of the internal
decoration. The ceiling was of cedar,--with probably an open space for light
in the middle. The seats in the cavea were cased with marble, and divided into
an upper and lower zone by a diazoma. The floor of the orchestra was inlaid
with marble mosaic-work. The proscenium, which had three doors, was decorated
with columnar arcades, in four successive storeys, and with statuary. A similar
mode of decoration, though less elaborate, was applied to the external facade.
Behind the proscenium spacious accommodation was provided for the performers.
Philostratus mentions a smaller theatre in the Cerameicus at Athens, called,
after its founder, the Agrippeion, which seems to have been used for rhetorical
declamations rather than for music or drama (Vit. Soph. ii. 5, 3 and 8, 2).
The building of Pericles and that of Herodes Atticus illustrate
the twofold relation of the ancient Odeum to the ancient theatre. (1) The circular
Odeum, such as that of Pericles, was the place for music or recitation, as the
Greek theatre for drama or chorus. From an artistic point of view, it was the
supplement of the Greek theatre. (2) The semicircular Odeum, such as that of
Herodes, was merely a roofed Roman theatre; and, as such, it was used not only
for music, but for other entertainments also, such as mimes, or even regular
drama. In the Roman period the first type continued to exist along with the
second. Trajan built a round Odeum at Rome (Paus. v. 12, 4, theatron mhega kukloteres),
called oideion by Dio Cassius (lxix. 4). In many instances where an Odeum is
mentioned, the type to which it belonged remains uncertain.
In conclusion, it may be useful to enumerate some of the more important
Greek and Roman theatres of which remains exist. The following list is mainly
based on that given by Dr. A. Kawerau in Baumeister's Denkmaler. A fuller enumeration,
with references to the topographical and archaeological literature in each case,
will be found in Dr. A. Muller's Lehrbuch der griechischen Buhnenalterthumer
(1886).
I. Greece Proper.
Attica.
1. The Dionysiac theatre at Athens. Excavated in 1886 by the German Archaeological
Institute.
2. Theatre at Zea in the Peiraeus. Excavated in 1880 and 1885 by the Greek Archaeological
Society. The orchestra was surrounded by a canal, like that in the Dionysiac
theatre.
3. Theatre at Oropus. Excavated in 1886 by the Greek Archaeological Society.
The proscenium, with one door, remains.
4. Theatre at Thoricus. Excavated in 1886 by the American School. Remarkable
for the irregular curve of the orchestra, which recedes more than anywhere else
from the form of a semicircle, and approaches that of a semiellipse.
Epeirus.
1. Theatre at Dramyssus. The cavea well preserved. It had two diazomata.
2. Theatre at Elatria (now Rhiniassa). A great part of the cavea remains.
Sicyonia.
Theatre at Sicyon. Excavations begun in 1887 by the American School.
Argolis.
1. Theatre at Epidaurus. Excavated in 1883 by the Greek Archaeological Society.
The best-preserved and finest example of a Greek theatre of the classical age.
It was built about 350 B.C. by the younger Polycleitus (Paus. ii. 27, 5).
2. Theatre at Argos. The central part of the cavea was hewn from the rock; sixty-seven
rows of seats remain, separated by two diazomata. The two ends of the cavea
were formed by substructions of rude masonry.
Arcadia.
1. Theatre at Mantineia. Notable as an exception to the rule that Greek theatres
were built on natural slopes. Here the cavea rested on an artificial mound supported
by polygonal walls.
2. Theatre at Megalopolis. The largest known to Pausanias (ii. 27, 5). The site
was a natural slope, but recourse was had also to an artificial embankment at
each horn of the auditorium. Excavations begun here in 1889 by members of the
British School at Athens have disclosed the stage and the lowest portion of
the seats.
II, Islands of the Aegean Sea
The older theatre at Delos is that in which the segment of a circle formed by
the curve of the cavea most largely exceeds a semicircle. The Cretan theatres
at Gortyna, Hierapytna, and Lyctus are among those which have the niches intended,
as some have supposed, for echeia (see above).
III. Asia Minor
Among the theatres of the later Greek or Hellenistic age, those at the following
places show a peculiarity in the curve of the cavea like that noted above at
Delos: Side (Pamphylia), Myra (Lycia), Telmissus (do.), Iassus (Caria), Aizani
(Cilicia). The last-named theatre affords another example of the niches mentioned
above. Other interesting theatres of the same period are those of Pergamum (excavated
in 1885 by the German Expedition) and Assus (excavated in 1883, for the American
Archaeol. Institute, by Mr. J. P. Clarke). The Roman theatre at Aspendus (Pamphylia)
is the best-preserved ancient theatre in existence. The proscenium has five
doors.
IV. Italy
1. The two theatres at Pompeii. The larger shows a peculiarity in the four lowest
rows of seats, which are separated from those above, and appear to have been
the places of honour. The stage is also of interest. The smaller theatre was
roofed.
2. Theatre at Falerii. One of the best preserved. It was finished in 43 B.C.
V. Sicily
Theatres at Syracuse, Acrae, Catana, Tauromenion, Tyndaris, and Segesta. The
general characteristic of the Sicilian theatres is that they were founded in
Greek times and afterwards modified, or reconstructed, under Roman influences.
VI. France.
The Roman theatre at Orange (Arausio) is well preserved. The reconstruction
of it by A. Caristie (Monuments antiques a Orange, Paris, 1856) conveys a probably
just idea of its original beauty. In one respect it forms an exception to the
ordinary Roman rule; for use was made of a natural slope to support the cavea.
This text is from: A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (1890) (eds. William Smith, LLD, William Wayte, G. E. Marindin). Cited June 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΓΥΘΕΙΟ (Πόλη) ΛΑΚΩΝΙΑ
In the Northern part of Gythio, near the entrance of the city there
is the theatre, which is the most important edifice of the Roman Age. (It was
renovated during those times). The auditorium , which is divided in four parts
is well preserved. You can also see the foundations of the first stage wall dated
back to the early AD years.
South -east of the theatre there was an ancient agora. Above the theatre,
on the top of the 50m hill the Acropolis was situated. Today the remains of its
walls are distinguishable. Here there were the temple of Athena and the Gates
of Castorides as well as an aqueduct the ruins of which are still preserved.
This text is cited Apr 2003 from the Laconian Professionals URL below, which contains images.
ΕΠΙΔΑΥΡΟΣ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΑΡΓΟΛΙΔΑ
Στην Ακρόπολη της αρχαίας πόλης της Επιδαύρου και στην Ν.Δ. πλαγιά της, ιδρύθηκε σε παλαιότερη του Ασκληπιείου περίοδο, το μικρό θέατρο, για τις δημόσιες ανάγκες έκφρασης της εποχής, κυρίως όμως γιά τα δρώμενα της Διονυσιακής λατρείας, γι' αυτό και ήταν αφιερωμένο στον θεό Διόνυσο. Από τις αφιερωματικές επιγραφές, προκύπτει ότι η κατασκευή του θεάτρου, πραγματοποιήθηκε τον 4ο π.Χ. αι., από χορηγίες εξεχόντων αρχόντων και επιλέκτων προσώπων της τοπικής κοινωνίας, εκείνης της εποχής. Το κοίλο του θεάτρου, στην σημερινή του μορφή, περιλαμβάνει 9 κερκίδες με 18 σειρές εδωλίων στην κάθε μία. Στην αρχική του κατασκευή είχε χωρητικότητα 5.000 θεατών. Χαρακτηριστικό του θεάτρου είναι οι επιγραφές, που αποτελούν ένα πραγματικό - ζωντανό μουσείο. Για τον λόγο αυτό αποκαλείται και "λαλούν θέατρο".
Μετά από 23 αιώνες σιωπής, το 1971 άρχισε η ανασκαφή του. Κάθε Ιούλιο, εδώ στο μικρό θέατρο, πραγματοποιούνται σημαντικές μουσικές εκδηλώσεις από το Υπουργείο Ανάπτυξης, το οποίο τις εντάσσει στο πρόγραμμα των θερινών πολιτιστικών δραστηριοτήτων του Ε.Ο.Τ., που με την σειρά του, από το 1998 έχει αναθέσει την οργάνωση παραγωγής & εκτέλεσης των προγραμμάτων του "Μουσικού Ιουλίου", στον οργανισμό Μεγάρου Μουσικής Αθηνών.
Το κείμενο παρατίθεται τον Ιανουάριο 2003 από την ακόλουθη ιστοσελίδα, με φωτογραφία, του Δήμου Επιδαύρου
ΚΟΡΙΝΘΟΣ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΠΕΛΟΠΟΝΝΗΣΟΣ
ΜΑΝΤΙΝΕΙΑ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΑΡΚΑΔΙΑ
Το θέατρο της Μαντίνειας καταλαμβάνει το δυτικό πέρας της Αγοράς. Επειδή έγινε σε κάμπο, το κοίλο εξοικονομήθηκε σε τεχνητή επίχωση, και το χώμα συγκρατήθηκε με ημικυκλικό τοίχο, με μεγάλες πολυγωνικές πέτρες. Σκάλες οδηγούσαν στο διάζωμα και τις υψηλότερες κερκίδες. Διατηρήθηκαν ελάχιστες σειρές εδωλίων και 7 κλίμακες μεταξύ των κερκίδων. Το θέατρο χρονολογείται στα τέλη του 4ου αι. π.Χ.
Κείμενο: Εφόρου Αρχαιοτήτων Dr. Θεόδωρου Γ. Σπυρόπουλου.
Το απόσπασμα παρατίθεται τον Μάρτιο 2003 από την ακόλουθη ιστοσελίδα, με φωτογραφία, του Δήμου Τριπόλεως
ΜΕΓΑΛΟΠΟΛΙΣ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΑΡΚΑΔΙΑ
Το θέατρο της Μεγαλόπολης έγινε σε ψυσικό ύψωμα, αλλά με τεχνητή επιχωμάτωση της ανατολικής πλευράς του για τη στήριξη εδωλίων. Πιθανότατα είχε δύο διαζώματα στο κοίλο, με είκοσι σειρές καθισμάτων και δεκαεπτά σειρές στο ανώτερο τμήμα του (Επιθέατρο), που ανεβάζουν τη χωρητικότητά του σε 18 με 20.000 θεατές. Η διάμετρος του κοίλου υπολογίζεταισε 145 μ. περίπου. Ήταν το μεγαλοπρεπέστερο θέατρο της αρχαίας Ελλάδας.
Κείμενο: Εφόρου Αρχαιοτήτων Dr. Θεόδωρου Γ. Σπυρόπουλου.
Το απόσπασμα παρατίθεται τον Μάρτιο 2003 από την ακόλουθη ιστοσελίδα, με φωτογραφία, του Δήμου Τριπόλεως
ΟΡΧΟΜΕΝΟΣ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΛΕΒΙΔΙ
Το θέατρο του Ορχομενού χτίστηκε σε φυσικό λόφο με εξαιρετική θέα προς τα δύο Ορχομένια πεδία, ιδιαιτέρως προς το κάμπο της Κανδήλας. Σώθηκε το ανάλημμα της σκηνής και η κυκλική ορχήστρα, με θρόνους στην πρώτη σειρά (Προεδρία) και λίθινο κυλινδρικό βάθρο στα κράσπεδα της ορχήστρας. Ανάμεσα στα κτιστά εδώλια, υπάρχουν κλίμακες που οδηγούσαν στις ανώτερες σειρές του κοίλου. Η κατασκευή του θεάτρου ανάγεται στους πρώϊμους ελληνιστικούς χρόνους.
Κείμενο: Εφόρου Αρχαιοτήτων Dr. Θεόδωρου Γ. Σπυρόπουλου.
Το απόσπασμα παρατίθεται τον Μάρτιο 2003 από την ακόλουθη ιστοσελίδα, με φωτογραφία, του Δήμου Τριπόλεως
ΣΠΑΡΤΗ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΛΑΚΩΝΙΑ
Tο Αρχαίο Θέατρο βρίσκεται στη Νότια πλαγιά της Ακρόπολης της Σπάρτης.
Κατασκευάστηκε στα Υστερα Ελληνιστικά χρόνια (1ος αι. π.Χ.), πιθανόν στη θέση
κάποιου παλαιότερου ξύλινου. Πρόκειται για ένα τεράστιο δημόσιο οικοδόμημα, που
στηρίζεται σε δύο υψηλούς αναλημματικούς τοίχους. Με βάση το διαθέσιμο χώρο του
κοίλου έχει υπολογιστεί ότι φιλοξενούσε 16.000 θεατές σε κάθε παράσταση.
Το κοίλο και η σκηνή ήταν κατασκευασμένα από λευκό μάρμαρο, ενώ οι
άκρες των αναλημματικών τοίχων ήταν από απλό ασβεστόλιθο που εντάσσεται καλύτερα
στο περιβάλλον. Στο πάνω μέρος του κοίλου υπήρχε περιμετρική στοά, για να καταφεύγουν
οι θεατές σε περίπτωση ξαφνικής βροχής. Υπήρχαν 48 σειρές καθισμάτων, μοιρασμένες
σε κερκίδες (9 κάτω και 18 στο πάνω διάζωμα). Η είσοδος του ήταν στην Ανατολική
πάροδο, όπου υπάρχει ακόμα η μεγαλοπρεπή σκάλα που οδηγούσε στο διάζωμα. Οι θεατές
μπορούσαν να προσπελάζουν το θέατρο και από την κορυφή του Λόφου της Ακρόπολης,
από το Ιερό της Αθηνάς Χαλκιοίκου.
Η σκηνή άλλαξε μορφή πολλές φορές, στην αρχή πρέπει να ήταν ξύλινη,
διότι στη Δυτική πάροδο υπήρχε τουβλόκτιστη σκηνοθήκη όπου φυλασσόταν ολόκληρη
ή σε κομμάτια το χειμώνα. Τον 2o αιώνα μ.Χ., πιθανόν μετά από την καταστροφή των
ξύλων, κατασκευάστηκε μια μεγάλη λίθινη τριώροφη σκηνή, που σε ύψος έφθανε πάνω
από το μέσον του κοίλου, και ήταν διακοσμημένη με κίονες και αγάλματα από λευκά
και χρωματιστά μάρμαρα. Εξαιτίας του ύψους της η σκηνή αυτή λειτουργούσε ως αντηχείο,
ενισχύοντας την ακουστική του θεάτρου. Αργότερα προστέθηκε και το λογείον, δηλαδή
ο χώρος όπου έπαιζαν οι ηθοποιοί. Η παλαιά σκηνοθήκη που αχρηστεύτηκε, μετατράπηκε
σε Νυμφαίο, μια μακρόστενη διακοσμημένη δεξαμενή νερού με πίδακες και λεκάνες.
Σήμερα το θέατρο, που δεν σώζεται πια σε καλή κατάσταση, καλύπτεται από επιχώσεις
αιώνων. Εχει ανασκαφεί πολύ μικρό μέρος του. Μόνο η ορχήστρα και η σκηνή, ενώ
από το Κoίλo έχουν αποκαλυφθεί μικρά μόνο τμήματα. Ολοι αναμένουμε τη συνέχιση
της ανασκαφικής έρευνας και προσδοκούμε τη μερική, τουλάχιστον αναστήλωσή του.
Το κείμενο παρατίθεται τον Απρίλιο 2003 από την ακόλουθη ιστοσελίδα, με φωτογραφίες, του Συλλόγου Λακώνων Επιστημόνων
ΤΕΓΕΑ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΑΡΚΑΔΙΑ
Το αρχαίο θέατρο της Τεγέας, επειδή έγινε επίσης σε επίπεδο χώρο, σχηματίστηκε από υψηλή επίχωση χώματος, που περιβαλλόταν από ισχυρό ανάλημμα. Το πρώτο θέατρο, που χτίστηκε στον 4ο αι. Π.Χ. είχε ευθύγραμμες σειρές εδωλίων. Το νεώτερο θέατρο, που έγινε με χορηγία του Αντιόχου του Επιφανούς, το 174 Π.Χ. και συνεχίστηκε στα αυτοκρατορικά χρόνια, έφερε ισχυρό ημικυκλικό ανάλημμα, πάνω στο οποίο κτίστηκε η εκκλησία της Επισκοπής. Οι σκάλες του κοίλου, και η ΝΑ γωνία της σκηνής, ανήκουν επίσης στη νεώτερη φάση της κατασκευής του θεάτρου.
Κείμενο: Εφόρου Αρχαιοτήτων Dr. Θεόδωρου Γ. Σπυρόπουλου.
Το απόσπασμα παρατίθεται τον Μάρτιο 2003 από την ακόλουθη ιστοσελίδα του Δήμου Τριπόλεως
ΑΓΙΟΣ ΣΩΣΤΗΣ (Οικισμός) ΤΕΓΕΑ
Στο ύψωμα όπου σήμερα είναι χτισμένο το χωριό Αγιος Σώστης, κοντά
στoν αρχαιολογικό χώρο της Παλαιάς Επισκοπής
Τεγέας, τοποθετείται από αρκετούς
ερευνητές η ακρόπολη της αρχαίας
Τεγέας. Στην κορυφή του λόφου έχουν ανασκαφεί από τον Κ. Ρωμαίο λείψανα του
ιερού της Δήμητρος και της Κόρης. Εχουν αποκαλυφθεί ο περίβολος του ιερού, καθώς
και ένα χάσμα ημικυκλικού σχήματος και βάθους δύο μέτρων, το οποίο εικάζεται ότι
ήταν ο χώρος λατρείας του ιερού. Η θέση του ιερoύ είναι στην πλατεία του χωριού.
Το κείμενο παρατίθεται τον Μάρτιο 2003 από την ακόλουθη ιστοσελίδα του ARCADIA website, του Πανεπιστημίου Πατρών
Λάβετε το καθημερινό newsletter με τα πιο σημαντικά νέα της τουριστικής βιομηχανίας.
Εγγραφείτε τώρα!
