Corinth: late Roman horizons

Corinth: late Roman horizons

Kathleen Warner Slane


This article reviews the investigation of Late Roman Corinth, including the recent excavations in the Panayia field. A series of four assemblages that range in date from the fifth through the seventh century, presenting approximately 50 similar objects from each and establishing relative sequences for some hitherto undated classes, is outlined. The sequences for lamps, fine wares, amphoras, cooking pots, and plain wares can be clearly established at Corinth. It is more difficult to tie together the independent chronologies of each class to assess the absolute dates for the four horizons, but the conclusions require major revisions to the monumental history of the Late Roman city.


Several large gaps exist in our knowledge of Late Roman (LR) Corinth. These lacunae appear to be related to constraints imposed by the acceptance of historical inference over archaeological data and by the assumption that the geographical extent of the LR city is related to the area of excavations. (1) Unjustified confidence in the historical record encouraged most previous scholars to tie LR material culture to catastrophes, such as earthquakes and postulated sacks due to barbarian invasions. (2) Their historical conclusions for events of the late fourth and late sixth centuries were apparently confirmed by the numismatic record, which showed a marked reduction of coin losses in the first half of the fifth century and at the end of the sixth. A more critical examination of the recorded events, a better understanding of the dynamics of minting and of the significance of coins in a given context, and much more developed knowledge of the chronologies of fine-ware pottery now indicate that the history of Corinth was less episodic than previously thought and that several associations between earthquakes or barbarian sacks and deposits were premature. (3)

Although much of the central area of the archaeological site had been excavated in the 1920s and 1930s, extensive areas of the LR city were excavated under more controlled conditions from the late 1950s through the 1970s (Fig. 1). Henry Robinson excavated along the south and west sides of the forum, near the Baths of Aphrodite, and on Temple Hill. (4) Excavations by James Wiseman for the University of Texas in the area south and west of the Asklepieion produced quantities of LR material including burials, an important deposit of votive lamps, and massive but incompletely understood architectural features. (5) Demetrios Pallas began a program of systematic exploration of LR Corinth by resuming excavations at the Kraneion basilica and by uncovering the Lechaion basilica; material from one of his smaller projects at the Baths of Aphrodite comprises most of assemblage 3, presented here. (6) In the same general period the Kodratos basilica, the Skoutela basilica, a fountain near Lechaion, and a LR building south of the South Stoa were also excavated by Greek teams. (7) The published preliminary reports of these excavations present little detailed chronology, because the fieldwork was largely completed before the appearance of John Hayes’s Late Roman Pottery (henceforth LRP) in 1972. This resource proved useful in Charles Williams’s later investigations of sixth-century buildings and tombs in Forum Southwest and in Jane Biers’s study of the Great Baths on the Lechaion Road. (8) Williams’s excavations east of the Theater produced the contexts incorporated into this article as assemblages 1 and 2, and his excavations in the forum produced material that contributed to assemblages 3 and 4. Finally, in 1999, a remote sensing survey of some peripheral areas was begun; areas south and west of the Asklepieion, south and southwest of the amphitheater, and south of the Panayia field had been investigated by 2003. (9) This project has further defined the LR city beyond the area of the central excavations.


In 1996 work was undertaken in the Panayia field about 100 m southeast of the forum, where quantities of material of the second through eighth century have been excavated (Fig. 2). Among the buildings uncovered is a large urban domus–with mosaic and marble floors, pools, wall painting, and small-scale sculpture–that was erected after ca. 260 and destroyed after ca. 360; unfortunately, the floors had been kept scrupulously clean and the quantity of contemporary pottery recovered is tiny. In one of the structures built over the domus a sequence of floors with associated cooking pots provided the first indication that reassessment of Corinth’s LR pottery was required: the pottery and coins in the upper levels all appeared to be late fourth century in date, but on the lowest floor was found a mid-fifth-century coin. (10) The revised chronology for cooking pots suggested by this sequence is confirmed by material from east of the Theater (assemblage 1 below). Such fifth-century levels in the Panayia field were largely disturbed by the construction of a small, well-appointed bath and a long building of uncertain function in the mid-sixth century. (11) Use of the bath for its original purpose stopped at the beginning of the seventh century, although occupation continued, perhaps for some decades. A large, dumped fill of seventh-century pottery (assemblage 4 below) was found in a pit at the west end of the long building. Both the bath and the long building were finally dismantled in the late eighth or early ninth century. (12)



Up to the early fourth century the chronology of Corinthian lamps and of cooking wares and plain wares is based on deposits in which they were associated with datable fine wares and amphoras, as well as with coins. These deposits had usually been dumped at a single moment in time (frequently following a destruction by earthquake) and the chronological range of their contents is therefore clearly limited. The Tiberian floor deposit, the cellar fill, and the Tetrarchic pit in the Peribolos of Apollo are examples of such deposits. (13) Unfortunately, for the three centuries after the time of Constantine no such deposits can be identified in the LR city. In this article we have used other types of deposits from recent excavations east of the Theater and in the Panayia field to establish a series of four assemblages that may be tested as chronological horizons at Corinth and elsewhere in Greece. By selecting 45 to 50 objects from several unrelated contexts in which the same types occur, we can begin to establish the relative sequences for some hitherto undated classes. The relative sequences for fine wares, lamps, amphoras, cooking pots, and plain wares can be clearly established, and general trends have become apparent. It is more difficult to tie together the independent chronologies of each type and class, which are frequently long-lived, in order to assess the absolute dates for the four horizons. Our preliminary assessment is that these assemblages define horizons of the first half of the fifth century, the second half of the fifth century to 500 or later, the end of the sixth century, and the middle of the seventh century.

For each assemblage we present a brief description of the context or contexts from which the material has been drawn. It is followed by a list of associated coins, and by a numbered list of lamps, fine wares, amphoras, cooking pots, and plain wares that make up the assemblage. We should emphasize that this is a summary list of well-known or locally abundant types rather than a fully descriptive catalogue; our goal has been to stress the typological sequences. Description is limited to a descriptive name or type, diameter or height if it is measurable, (14) a fabric description if the ware is unusual, and parallels from well-dated contexts. (15) Assemblage 1: First Half of the Fifth Century

When the retaining walls of the terrace on the east side of East Theater Street were dismantled sometime around 460, a deep fill was dumped over the street itself. The robbing trenches were partly filled by the same dumped debris; eventually their sides collapsed, filling the trenches with the earlier debris within the terrace. Because there had been no activities in the area since the beginning of the fourth century, however, it is relatively easy to separate sherds that survive from the earlier phase from those contemporary with the stone robbing. The finds reported below (see Figs. 3, 4) come primarily from the deep dump over the street (lots 88-60, 88-67, and 88-68; also 88-58?), supplemented by larger, more complete pieces from the robbing trenches and from well 1982-1. (16) In assigning types to this horizon, we have assumed that any which begin in the fourth century and are not found in the earlier destruction debris of ca. 310 are part of the fifth-century horizon. The only form that appears in the early-fourth-century contexts and continues into the sixth century or later is the local folded rim bowl. It is worth noting that no Attic glazed lamps are found in the early-fourth-century contexts east of the Theater, (17) and those in the mid-fifth-century contexts are part of the late material (and their types confirm it; see below).



Eight coins and a jeton were found in the dump over East Theater Street. (18)

88-130 jeton, counter of E. L. S. Lauer (1762-1833) (Williams and Zervos 1989, no. 97)

88-133 Maximian Hercules (295/6), mint of Heraclea (Williams and Zervos 1989, no. 47)

88-134 Honorius or Theodosius II, mint uncertain (Williams and Zervos 1989, no. 67)

88-136 Theodosius II or Valentinian III (425-450), mint of Cyzicus (Williams and Zervos 1989, no. 65)

88-141 Marcian (450-457), mint uncertain (Williams and Zervos 1989, no. 66)

88-135, 88-137, 88-138, 88-140 four minimi (of which three are Williams and Zervos 1989, no. 67) (19)

Four coins come from the robbing trenches.

84-145 Corinth, Pegasos/trident (400-146 B.C.) (Williams and Zervos 1985, no. 10)

84-146 Constantius II (348-361), mint uncertain (Williams and Zervos 1985, no. 106)

84-147 Theodosius I or II (379-395 or 402-450), mint uncertain (Williams and Zervos 1985, no. 123)

88-142 Arcadius (388-395), mint of Cyzicus (Williams and Zervos 1989, no. 61)

The presence of the jeton and a fragment of a modern plate in lot 88-68 show that the removal of modern surface levels above it was not quite complete. The other coins suggest a date of deposit sometime after 425.


1-1 L-1982-34 Fig. 4

Attic glazed lamp with twisting rosette on disk and plain rim with six incuse circles; on base, A within a circle (Williams and Zervos 1983, no. 73, p. 26 [found with the whole amphoras in well 1982-1]). W. 0.078 m. The A-workshop may have operated only into the early fifth century; see Kerameikos XVI, pp. 74-75.

1-2 Lot 88-63:8 Fig. 4

Attic post-glazing lamp with plain disk and vine pattern on rim. Although the discus is missing, it is clear that it was continuous with the rim, marked off only by the outline of the vine. Cf. Agora VII, no. 2603, p. 184, pl. 41 (first half of fifth century); Karivieri 1996, nos. 122, 123, p. 198, pl. 10 (mid- and second half of fifth century); and Kerameikos XVI, nos. 4599, 4600, p. 286, pl. 78 (late first quarter and middle of fifth century).

The dumped fill over the street (lot 88-67) had two Attic glazed lamp handles and two Attic post-glazing handles and a sherd; the latest lamps in lots 88-60 and 88-68 were of the early fourth century. In addition to lamp 1-2, the robbing trenches also had one glazed Attic lamp (lot 84-42), three Attic post-glazing handles (lots 83-33, 84-42), and a single fragment of a LR Corinthian lamp (lot 84-42). The latter is the only one found on the slope east of the Theater, although such fragments are common in the LR levels to the north; it therefore seems that they were not yet being manufactured in the first half of the fifth century.

Fine Wares


1-3 C-1988-27 Fig. 3

Rim, Hayes form 64 (from lot 88-58). D. 0.326 m. Gritty, relatively coarse fabric, thick slip on interior and splashed over lip, with turning marks visible on interior and exterior. Cf. LRP, no. 64.4, p. 111, fig. 18; Reynolds 1995, fig. 5.

1-4 C-1984-222 Fig. 3

Rim, Hayes form 50B/64 (from lot 84-42). D. 0.206 m.

1-5 C-1988-116 Fig. 3

Rim, LRP, no. 50.61. D. 0.246 m. Fine fabric, thick slip on interior and over rim. Cf. Reynolds 1995, p. 145 (where this late variant of form 50 is dated 400-450), figs. 7, 8.

1-6 C-1988-26 Fig. 3

Rim, Hayes form 69 variant (from lot 88-58). D. 0.508 m. Fine fabric but thick-walled, very thin slip overall.

1-7 C-1988-115 Fig. 3

Rim, Hayes form 76. D. 0.360 m. Badly burned; similar to 1-6?

1-8 C-1984-221 Fig. 4

Style D stamped plate floor with row of cocks between thin grooves (from lot 84-42).


1-9 C-1988-28 Fig. 3

Rim, Hayes form 2B. D. 0.118 m.

1-10 C-1988-114 Fig. 3

Rim, Hayes form 2C. D. 0.285 m.

1-11 C-1983-125 Fig. 3

Rim, LRP, no. 3.32 (from lot 83-33; same form in lot 88-67). D. 0.160 m. Unusually fine, gritty orange fabric with thin, matte slip.

LR Attic

1-12 Lot 88-60:1 Fig. 3

Plate rim, probably an imitation of AfRS form 83/84. Est. D. 0.31 m.


1-13 C-1988-113 Fig. 3

CypRS rim, LRP, no. 2.1, p. 373, fig. 80 (middle). D. 0.250 m.

1-14 C-1988-117 Fig. 4

Local or unidentified red slip moldmade signature: [—]DHO[—] or [—] [DELTA]HC[—]

The following other forms appear in the deep fill: AfRS forms 50B, 59B, 67, 68, 82, fourth-century grill stamp no. 69; LRC forms 1, 1A, small 3, 4 (all from lot 88-67 with the fifth-century AfRS). From the robbing trenches: lot 84-41:1, an unidentified AfRS rim; C-1988-110, Candarlf Hayes form 5 (lot 88-61); C-1988-112, AfRS style C stamp 13n and a fringed hexagon; Macedonian t.s. grise.


1-15 Lot 84-42:3 [C-1982-126] Fig. 3

Rim, very late Niederbieber 77 (Keay XII) (Williams and Zervos 1983, no. 70, p. 26). H. 0.434, D. 0.046 m.

1-16 Lot 88-63:1 Fig. 3

Rim as Riley 1979, no. D298. Est. D. 0.085 m. Gritty, light reddish brown fabric (5YR 6/4) with abundant tiny rounded sand and mineral grains, occasional larger angular black and red, and one large hematite(?). Probably Keay XXVY. Keay 1984, pp. 189 and 198, fig. 85, a late-fourth- to mid-fifth-century Tunisian form.

1-17 Lot 88-67:5 Fig. 3

Rim, possibly African (LR Amphora 8a?). Micaceous reddish yellow fabric (5YR 7/6) with moderate small voids and angular white grains in equal amounts; surface fired very pale brown.

1-18 Lot 88-68:6 Fig. 3

Toe, MR Amphora 12 (Algerian?); separate plug seals cylindrical toe. Light reddish yellow fabric (5YR 7.5/6) with sparse to moderate large, subangular red and dark pebbles (many missing) and abundant tiny, round, light-colored grits; traces of very pale brown slip (10YR 8/3) on exterior.

1-19 Lot 88-68:7 Fig. 3

Amphora top, related to Keay XXIII/Almagro 51C (Portuguese) but the handles are circular in section. (Three examples.) Reddish yellow fabric (7.5YR 6/ 6) with a moderate amount of tiny grits: irregular yellow, rounded white, and gray in equal numbers, a few black splinters and one shell; surface badly encrusted inside and out.

1-20 C-1982-157 Fig. 4

Portuguese, Keay XIX. D. 0.093 m. Abundant, poorly sorted reddish brown and black inclusions in a reddish yellow fabric (7.5YR 7/4) with a lighter surface.

1-21 Lot 88-68:8b

Handle, Spanish? Bright red fabric with white slip.

1-22 Lot 84-41:1 [C-1982-124] Fig. 4

Sicilian? amphora, Keay LII, as Agora V, no. M 234 (Williams and Zervos 1983, no. 68, p. 25, pl. 10). H. 0.496, D. 0.093 m. Micaceous reddish yellow to light brown fabric (5YR 7/5; 7.5YR 6/4 inside) with very pale brown wash on exterior and dripped on interior; a moderate amount of angular gray grains and round dark red/black grit. Cf. Kenchreai IV, no. RC 12, p. 114, pl. 26; Aupert 1980, no. 328a, p. 442, fig. 46.

1-23 C-1982-128 Fig. 3

LR Amphora 2 (Williams and Zervos 1983, no. 72, p. 26, pl. 10). P.H. 0.385, D. 0.102, max. D. 0.431 m. Normal, fine, red southern Argolid fabric with large lime inclusions; surface fired reddish yellow. Cf. Kenchreai IV, no. RC 14, pp. 114 -115, pl. 26.

1-24 C-1982-251 Fig. 4

Carrot-shaped amphora with peg toe. P.H. 0.430 m. Fabric probably Palestinian, by comparison with baggy Palestinian amphoras. 2-24 and 4-21 may be related. Cf. Arthur and Orem 1998, p. 201 and fig. 7:3.

1-25 C-1982-127 Fig. 3

Unidentified amphora with outward-thickened band at rim (Williams and Zervos 1983, no. 69, p. 25). H. 0.478, D. 0.072 m (toe and handle fragments). Micaceous brown fabric (7.5YR 5/2) fired reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) over whole surface; sparse to moderate amount of tiny rounded white and dark inclusions and few large elongated orange grains.

1-26 C-1982-158 Fig. 4

Regional amphora with thickened rim with deep groove on upper surface; linear grooving on body. H. 0.513, D. 0.076 m. Light reddish brown fabric (5YR 6/5) fired redder on inner half of section; abundant angular and subrounded inclusions in two sizes. Cf. 2-30.

1-27 C-1982-250 Fig. 3

C.c.f. amphora as Agora V, no. M 325. H. 0.452, D. 0.058 m. One of three examples found with the nearly identical piece C-1982-125 (Williams and Zervos 1983, no. 67, p. 25, pl. 10). Cf. Corinth XVIII.2, no. 259, p. 117, fig. 29. See also 3-25.

Other types present in the dump are Niederbieber 77; a micaceous water jar (m.w.j.) toe as Agora V, no. M 373; LR Amphora 1 handle; LR Amphora 2 rims; Palestinian handle; rim of Keay XXVB (lot 88-68:8a, Tunisian); Afr. II/Ostia III form III (Tunisian, mid-third to fifth century); Gaza amphora rim (lot 88-60); red-slipped fragments like Corinth XVII, no. 127, p. 80, pl. 33. From the robbing trenches, we could add two handles and body fragments of Gaza amphoras (lots 84-10, 84-41); a rim as Riley 1979, no. D384 (lot 84-42:4); a handle of a small Palestinian amphora with vertical wall (lot 84-41; cf. 2-23a, 3-21); another Palestinian handle lot 83-33); an unidentified amphora handle (lot 84-10:5); one sherd possibly from a Samos cistern amphora in lot 84-41. (20)

Cooking Wares

LR micaceous Aegean ware (21)

1-28 Lot 84-42:1 Fig. 3

Casserole with inset groove on top of rim (three examples). D. 0.214 m. Cf. 2-35 and Gregory 1986, fig. 12:10.

1-29 C-1982-149 Fig. 3

Bowl with thick horizontal rim and ribbon handles (lot 88-63:4 and a second example). D. 0.180 m. Cf. Reynolds 1995, fig. 119:614.W6.1.

1-30 Lot 84-42:2 Fig. 3

Probable stewpot with everted rim (from robbing trenches, but probably early). D. 0.200 m.

1-31 Lot 88-63:3 Fig. 3

Probable stewpot with everted rim (from robbing trenches, but probably early). D. 0.178 m.

Other imports

1-32 C-1988-96 Fig. 3

Palestinian casserole. D. 0.278 m. Cf. Johnson 1988, casserole type 1 with carinated side, nos. 630-634, pp. 200-201, fig. 7.43.

1-33 Lot 88-68:2 Fig. 3

Rim, casserole. Probably also Palestinian, although the fabric more closely resembles the Palestinian carrot-shaped amphoras than 1-32.

1-34 C-1988-121a, b Fig. 3

Casserole without handles (five rims). D. 0.193 m. Orange cooking fabric with very large white grits.

1-35 Lot 88-68:3 Fig. 3

Baggy stewpot with squared rim. Same fabric as 1-34.


1-36 Lot 88-68:9 Fig. 3

Stewpot with everted rim and slight collar at neck (four rims). D. 0.172 m. Cf. Corinth XVIII.2, no. 186, p. 85, fig. 21, and 2-38.

1-37 Lot 88-67:2 Fig. 3

Stewpot with short neck, broad groove on top of ledge rim (four rims and one handle). D. 0.160 m.

From the robbing trenches: LR micaceous Aegean fabric bowl like 1-29 (lot 84-10:2) and a casserole base; casserole rims as 1-28 (lot 83-33); an unidentified imported handle (lot 84-10:1). A funnel rim in C.c.f. (C-1988-118) and a late local casserole (C-1988-119) are assigned to the period before the early fourth century.

Plain Wares

1-38 C-1988-97a, b Fig. 3

Bowl with piecrust decoration, dimples on upper wall. D. 0.230 m. Fine reddish yellow fabric (5YR 6/6) with sparse rounded inclusions and sparkling bits.


1-39 [C-74-76] Fig. 3

Lekane with hooked, grooved rim (seven rims).

1-40 Lot 88-68:1

Lekane with hooked rim (six rims). Profile like 1-39 but without grooves.

1-41 Lot 88-68:4 [C-2000-24] Fig. 4

Wheel-ridged krater with outturned rim (and pedestal foot). D. 0.270 m. Gray surfaces, red core. Cf. the profile of 1-42.

1-42 Lot 84-10:3 Fig. 3

Pedestal krater with heavy everted rim (four rims). Cf. 1-41.

1-43 Lot 88-67:1

Micaceous basin rim. D. 0.20 m.

1-44-45 Lot 88-67:6 and lot 88-67:3 Fig. 3

Basin or lekane rims. D. 0.28 m.

1-46 Lot 88-68:5 Fig. 4

Stamnos shoulder with white-painted waves and bands; lower attachment of vertical (not loop) handle at upper edge. Angular wheel ridging from mid-shoulder as far as preserved.(22) Fabric identical to that of 1-41; shoulder has reddish brown core, belly wall is fired gray throughout.

1-47 Lot 88-67:4

Folded rim bowls of which only this one has a heavy rim. Cf. 2-43.

Other C.c.f. shapes include bowls like C-1984-139 (Williams and Zervos 1985, no. 17, pl. 10), but these are probably early fourth century (five rims, three bases).

Assemblage 2: Second Half of the Fifth Century to 500 or Later

A later horizon is defined by a dumped fill excavated east of the Theater in 1981 (lot 81-19) (see Figs. 5-7). (23) It filled the robbing trench of a major east-west wall that extended from the east side of East Theater Street and formed the north side of a shop as it was rebuilt in the fifth century. Williams recorded 115 kg of pottery in the main fill; there were 3,400 sherds after mending, including many restored vessels. A northward extension at the west end of this trench is also included here because it had pottery of the same date (lot 81-49). As is commonly the case, none of the coins was datable later than the fourth or early fifth century and the AfRS may also be residual, but the forms of the lamps and of the LRC show that the fill should be dated later than the mid-fifth century, probably as late as the early sixth century.



81-52 Constantius II (355-361), mint of Siscia (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 56)

81-53 Constantius II or Julian, mint uncertain (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 68a)

81-182 Late Roman

81-183 Late Roman

81-117 and 81-318 illegible fragments


2-1 L-1981-17 Fig. 7

Attic post-glazing lamp with cross monogram on disk and four filling holes (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 81, p. 142, pl. 45).

2-2 L-1981-16 Fig. 7

Attic post-glazing lamp with plain disk and multiple filling holes (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 82, p. 143, pl. 45). Signed [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] within an almond-shaped double groove; cf. the glazed lamp Agora VII, no. 938, p. 129. For the top, cf. either Agora VII, no. 2699 (circular disk) or 2710 (tear-shaped disk), pp. 187-188, pl. 42.

2-3 L-1981-4 Fig. 7

LR Corinthian, imitation of a Corinthian lamp with retouched wreath and panels (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 79, p. 142, pl. 45); base has an incised cross within a single circular groove and indistinct circles in each quadrant.

2-4 L-1981-18 Fig. 7

LR Corinthian, imitation of an Attic lamp with gladiators and two filling holes (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 80, p. 142, pl. 45). For the discus, cf. the LR Corinthian lamps Corinth IV.2, nos. 1192, 1193, fig. 179; Agora VII, no. 320, pl. 9.

2-5 L-1981-3 Fig. 7

LR Corinthian, imitating an Attic post-glazing lamp with cross in a square disk and multiple filling holes (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 83, p. 143, pl. 45); base is defined by almond-shaped double grooves that frame an incised branch.

Remaining with the context pottery are four type XXVII and five late type XXVII lamps, which must date no later than the early fourth century; one Attic glazed handle; six Attic post-glazing; three unidentified post-glazing; four LR Corinthian plus two possible LR Corinthian (including one base imitating a North African lamp, which is contemporary with the pottery but not illustrated).

Fine Wares


2-6 C-1981-16 Fig. 5

Dish, Hayes form 61B/87A (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 61, p. 135, fig. 2, stamps pl. 45). D. 0.351 m.

2-7 Lot 81-19:32 Fig. 5

Rim, Hayes form 61B. D. 0.455 m.

LRC (24)

2-8 C-1981-240 Fig. 5

Rim, Antioch 944p. D. 0.278 m. Cf. also Sarachane, 27.2, fig. 37 (late fifth century).

2-9 Lot 81-19:21 Fig. 5

Rouletted rim, Hayes form 3B. D. 0.216 m.

2-10 C-1981-4a, b

Hayes form 3C (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 62, pl. 44). D. 0.320 m. Half-preserved dish (multiple fragments).

2-11 C-1981-22 Fig. 5

Hayes form 3C (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 64, p. 137, not illustrated). D. 0.280 m. Dish with nearly complete profile (multiple fragments).

2-12 C-1981-7 Fig. 7

Plate floor with kantharos stamps, Hayes no. 59 (multiple fragments). D. foot 0.118 m.

Boiotian RS (25)

2-13 Lot 81-19:34 Fig. 5

Bowl rim. D. 0.168 m. Cf. C-1989-11 (Williams and Zervos 1990, no. 5, p. 339, pl. 61) and 3-16; see also Gregory 1986, fig. 12:3 (Askra ware?).

Imitation AfRS

2-14 Lot 81-19:33 Fig. 5

Rim imitating AfRS Hayes form 82 or 87 or CypRS form 2. D. 0.370 m.

LR Attic

2-15 C-1981-136 Fig. 5

Stamped plate, imitating AfRS forms 61-64 (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 66, p. 137, stamps pl. 45).

2-16 Lot 81-19:35 Fig. 7

Partly glazed, wheel-ridged jug with gouged decoration on wall. Cf. Agora V, nos. M 320 or M 357 and M 361, pp. 114, 117, pls. 31, 33, 42, of the early and late sixth century.

The following other fine wares are also recorded but are probably residual in this robbing trench: AfRS forms 14/17 (lot 81-19:22), 32/58, 50, 59, 53, 61? (stamp no. 36), 62, 67?, 68; LRC forms 1, 3C (Williams and Zervos 1982, fig. 2: D. 0.278 m), 3/4, stamp no. 8e (which could belong to the second half of the fifth century, contemporary with assemblage 2); LR Attic rims as Agora V, nos. M 289 and L 61 (imitations of AfRS forms 59 and 61), and as Agora V, no. M 290.


2-17 C-1981-5 Fig. 5

White, micaceous, cylindrical amphora with red dipinti under both handles and at base of neck on both sides; regular wheel ridging begins about 0.08 m below edge of shoulder (Slane 2000, p. 304, fig. 6:b). D. 0.068 m. Micaceous, very pale brown fabric (10YR 8/3) fired light reddish yellow (5 YR 7-8/6) on the interior; moderate to abundant, fine, well-sorted, white, gray and red/black(26) inclusions and sparse larger white grits. Cf. Kenchreai IV, some or all of no. RC 22, pl. 27; Arthur 1998, pp. 170-171, fig. 9:1;(27) Bowden, Hodges, and Lako 2002, p. 221, fig. 21:13 (from Butrint).

2-18 C-1981-18 Fig. 5

Amphora with widely spaced grooves on shoulder, probably like Agora V, no. M 327, p. 115, pl. 32. D. 0.073 m. Red fabric (2.5YR 5/8) fired light red on surface; moderate, fine, highly sorted, white, gray, red, and black inclusions and sparse large white grits; highly micaceous in break parallel to wall but little visible on wet-smoothed surface. The form of the top is reminiscent of LR Amphora 2, but the fabric, the widely spaced grooves on the shoulder, and the narrow body distinguish it. An example of this type was found in a repair of the Roman wall at Salona (Cambi 1989, fig. 37) and another in the courtyard of the Palace of Galerius in Thessaloniki (Petsas 1968, pl. 343:d [right], where it is called Byzantine).

2-19 C-1981-139 Fig. 5

LR Amphora 1 rim. Also lot 81-19:1-6, a rim and five handles, all single fragments.

2-20-22 Lot 81-19:7-9 Fig. 5 (2-22 only)

Loop handles and angular shoulder of Palestinian baggy amphoras. Medium hard, reddish yellow fabric (5YR 6/8) with large pinkish gray or very pale brown (7.5-10YR 7-8/2) flash outside, granular break; common, small to medium, gray to orange, glassy, subrounded to rounded, platy to tabular inclusions.

2-23 Lot 81-19:10 Fig. 5

Fractional Palestinian amphoras with collar rim, wheel-ridged shoulder, and vertical wall. D. 0.070 m. Medium hard, light red (2.5YR 6-7/8) fabric with reddish yellow (7.5YR 7/6) flashes outside, granular break; common, small to medium, glassy, orange, subrounded to rounded inclusions; tabular to spherical and rare large subrounded, spherical, milky white inclusions. For the complete shape, see Williams, MacIntosh, and Fisher 1974, no. 50, p. 32, pl. 8, with characteristic vertically painted design; cf. also 3-21, 4-20.

2-23a ([C-1981-191], Fig. 5) shows the rim.

2-24 Lot 81-19:11 Fig. 5

Palestinian carrot-amphora rim; see also 1-24, 4-21. D. 0.119 m. Medium hard, light red to reddish yellow fabric (2.5-5YR 6/8) with hackly to granular break; common to abundant, small to medium rounded, spherical, glassy, pale brown sand, rare medium angular, tabular white inclusions. Cf. Bass and van Doorninck 1982, no. P80, p. 186, figs. 8.20, 8.22; Agora V, no. M 334, p. 115, pl. 33; Arthur and Orem 1998, fig. 7:3; Maioli and Stoppioni 1989, fig. 8; Reynolds 2000, pp. 390-391, 395, fig. 8:46; Hayes 2003, no. 234, p. 489, fig. 27 (deposit 11, not closely dated).

2-25-26 C-1981-8 and C-1981-19 Fig. 5

Gaza amphoras (Williams and Zervos 1982, nos. 73, 74, p. 140, fig. 3, pl. 44 [nos. 73 and 74 are interchanged in fig. 3]). P.H. 0.752 (2-25); D. 0.107 (2-25), 0.109 m (2-26). Normal brown fabric with sand. These pieces are listed in Majcherek 1995 as examples of his form 3, dated late fifth to late sixth century.

2-27-28 C-1981-141 and C-1981-142 Fig. 7

Double-handled neck and closed toe of m.w.j. (from lot 81-49) (Williams and Zervos 1982, nos. 75, 76, p. 140, not illustrated). Cf. Kenchreai IV, nos. RC 41a, b, p. 124, pl. 35 (mislabeled RC 40a, b).

2-29 Lot 81-19:36a Fig. 5

Amphora with triangular rim. Hard red fabric (2.5YR 4/8) with moderate, tiny rounded sand and dark grains, sparse subangular white bits and shell, occasional large lime and weathered feldspar(?); surface wet-slipped and fired streaky weak red to light reddish brown (2.5YR 4/2-6/3).

2-30 C-1981-138 Fig. 5

Table amphora with groove on top of rim. D. 0.073 m. Unusual red fabric (2.5YR 5/8) with light brown (7.5YR 6/4) and pinkish gray core (7.5YR 6/2). Cf. 1-26 for the shape, 1-25 for the fabric.

2-31 C-1981-12 Fig. 5

C.c.f. amphora (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 78, p. 141, fig. 3). H. 0.398, D. 0.059 m. See 1-27.

2-32 C-1981-64 Fig. 5

Top of an amphora similar to 2-31, in coarse fabric (rather than C.c.f.): moderately gritty yellowish red fabric (5 YR 5/6) with a reddish gray core (5YR 5/2); poorly sorted, subrounded to angular red, gray, and white inclusions, many irregularly shaped voids.

2-33 C-1981-15 Fig. 5

Gritty C.c.f. variant of LR Amphora 2 with plain body and flat base with central button (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 77, p. 141, fig. 3). H. 0.460, D. 0.087 m.

Also LR Amphora 2 as lot 81-49:6; another top as 1-19; red-slipped fragments as Corinth XVII, no. 127, p. 80, pl. 33; late m.w.j. fabric 1 rim as Agora V, no. M 373, pl. 41; late m.w.j. fabric 2 sherds; one handle as lot 82-107?; rim as lot 82-111:10; bodies of LR Amphora 7.

Cooking Wares

LR micaceous Aegean ware

2-34 Lot 81-19:37 Fig. 6

Rim like lot 82-111:2. D. 0.130 m.

2-35 Lot 81-19:38 Fig. 6

Casserole rim like 1-28. D. 0.160 m.

2-36 Lot 81-19:28 Fig. 6

Rim (two examples). D. 0.110 m. Also two rims as lot 82-111:3.


2-37 Lot 81-19:39 Fig. 6

Casserole rim. Same fabric as 1-32, but not blackened on exterior.


2-38 Lot 81-19:27 Fig. 6

Globular stewpot with everted rim and tapering collar at neck. D. 0.150 m. Cf. 1-36, which has a more upright neck.

2-39 Lot 81-19:25 Fig. 6

Globular stewpot with everted rim, broadly concave on top (three examples). D. 0.125 m. 2-39a, b (lot 81-19:29, 30, Fig. 6) are variants. D. 0.146 m.

2-40 Lot 81-19:23 Fig. 6

Globular stewpot with flat everted rim (five examples). D. 0.140 m.

2-40a (lot 81-19:31, Fig. 6) is smaller and baggy. D. 0.128 m.

2-40b (C-1981-140; Corinth XVIII.2, pl. 18). (28) Also lot 81-19:24, 26.

2-41 C-1981-242 Fig. 6

Local casserole with thick drooping rim, no handles. D. 0.234-0.240 m.

The following are probably residual in this context: a rim similar to 2-38 with a narrow groove on top; six wide rims otherwise similar to 2-40b; rims as 1-44; also imported white-gritted cooking-pot rims like 1-35. Shapes like 3-30 are still missing from this lot.

Plain Wares

2-42 Lot 81-19:19 Fig. 6

C.c.f. folded rim bowl. D. 0.134 m. (29)

2-43 C-1981-67 Fig. 6

C.c.f. folded rim bowl, heavy. D. 0.160 m. Cf. 1-47.

44 C-1981-13 Fig. 6

Basin with hammerhead rim (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 67, p. 138, fig. 2). D. 0.390 m. At least three more examples (lot 81-19:14-16) with diameters ca. 0.34-0.35 m.

2-45 C-1981-20 Fig. 6

Basin with hammerhead rim (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 68, p. 138, fig. 2 [misnumbered 66]). D. 0.205 m.

2-46 C-1981-124 Fig. 6

C.c.f. cylindrical basin with knob rim and horizontal handles; about threequarters preserved (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 71, p. 138, pl. 44).

2-47 [C-69-243] Fig. 7

C.c.f. lid with solid knob and straight wall (two examples). Cf. 3-33.

2-48 [C-69-244] Fig. 7

C.c.f. bell lid with hollow knob (two examples). See also 3-33, 4-30.

2-49 C-1981-6 Fig. 6

Pitcher with overhanging rim (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 70, p. 138, not illustrated). D. 0.102 m. Edge of molded foot preserved.

Assemblage 3: End of the Sixth Century

The third horizon is supplied by the finds from an underground chamber (cistern 1956-1) near the Baths of Aphrodite, excavated by Pallas, who inventoried 35 partly restored vessels and six lamps, as well as some marble fragments (see Figs. 8-10). (30) John Hayes has published several fine-ware dishes and the LR unguentaria from this cistern;(31) we add the lamps, amphoras, cooking pots, and plain wares that form part of the same deposit. The deposit is dated by a coin of Justin II (577/8), and there are numerous parallels to the Argos bath deposit, dated ca. 585 (Aupert 1980; we suggest a later date below, n. 108). We have supplemented the lamps and cooking pots with a few from the lower level of a pit excavated in Forum Southwest (lot 73-88) to demonstrate the distinction from its upper levels, which are reported with the mid-seventh-century material in assemblage 4.



* 56-2 Justin II (577/8)


3-1 *L-4057 Fig. 10

LR Corinthian lamp, imitating a North African lamp with unornamented Maltese cross on elongated disk and palm branches on rim; traces of circles in each of the two lower quadrants below the arms of the cross. W. 0.076 m. Cf. Corinth IV.2, nos. 1456-1458, pl. XXII; Bovon 1966, no. 647, pl. 17; Aupert 1980, nos. 41, 42, 53-56 (signature), pp. 410-412, figs. 22-24.

3-2 L-73-23 Fig. 10

LR Corinthian lamp, imitating a North African lamp with cross on elongated disk and palm branches on rim. P.L. 0.094, H. 0.036, Th. 0.003-0.006 m. The forked end of a cross, the same mark as on the very similar 3-1, is preserved on the base.

3-3 *L-4058 Fig. 10

LR Corinthian lamp, imitating a North African lamp with jeweled TATA pattern on rim; faint traces of bird(?) relief on elongated disk. W. 0.082 m. Cf. Isthmia III, no. 3149, p. 81, pls. 10, 35, which is slightly smaller but the same series; Aupert 1980, no. 10, p. 407, fig. 14.

3-4 *L-4059 Fig. 10

LR lamp of Corinthian type, imitating a North African lamp with peacock on disk and palm branches on rim. P.W. 0.050, Th. 0.006 m. Very fine reddish yellow fabric (7.5YR 7/5) with occasional white grit and slitlike voids, minute sparkling inclusions; light reddish brown to gray wash over top only (2.5YR 6/4, 5YR 3/1).

3-5 *L-4060 Fig. 10

LR lamp, imitating an imitation of a North African lamp with cross on disk and palm branches on rim; perhaps an over-fired Corinthian fabric. W. 0.070, H. 0.033, Th. 0.004 m. Similar to 3-1 except the disk is keyhole-shaped, the handle is conical and outside the rim pattern, and the fabric is very poor.

3-6 L-4061a, b Fig. 10 (a only)

LR Corinthian lamp, imitating a circular lamp with jeweled rectangular stamp repeated on shoulder between rows of dots; edge of disk. P.L. 0.075, Th. 0.006 m. Hard-fired, fine, light reddish brown fabric with a moderate amount of tiny white inclusions. Cf. Bovon 1966, nos. 665, 666, p. 93, pl. 18, which demonstrate that the mostly missing disk had a jeweled cross (or letters, according to Bovon); Kenchreai V, no. 457, p. 86, pls. 20, 24.

3-7 L-4062 [L-1982-21] Fig. 10

Square cross, originally attached above the handle of a LR lamp. Such crosshandles are not very common in the Corinthia: L-4170, noted in Isthmia III, no. 3144; L-4816; Kenchreai V, no. 455, pl. 20. The lamp shape is Corinth IV.2, no. 1512, pl. XXIII; Aupert 1980, no. 9, p. 407, fig. 12 (which has a jeweled rather than a plain cross).

Fine Wares


3-8 C-56-15 Fig. 8

LRP, no. 99C.23, p. 153, fig. 28. D. 0.187 m. Also two bases (in lot 73-88). 3-28

3-9 C-56-26 Fig. 8

LRP, no. 105.3, p. 167, fig. 31. D. 0.325 m. Cross graffito on underside of wall.

3-10 Lot 73-88:5 Fig. 8

Plate, Hayes form 105 with chamfer well outside line of foot. D. 0.354 m.

3-11 C-56-27

Hayes form 105/106, foot with chamfer. The estimated diameter of the foot, 0.20 m, should indicate that this is a large example, which would normally be dated to the mid-seventh century. Either this deposit is later than we have proposed or size is not the chronological criterion Hayes has suggested.

3-12 C-56-28

Hayes form 103 foot with two grooves on floor, slipped on interior only. LRC

3-13 C-56-14

LRP, no. 10.6, p. 343, fig. 71. D. 0.280 m; complete.

3-14 C-56-30 Fig. 8

LRP, no. 10.4, p. 343, fig. 71. Est. D. 0.275 m.

3-15 C-56-32 Fig. 8

Fragment, Hayes form 10A.

Boiotian RS

3-16 C-56-33 Fig. 8

Bowl with outturned rim; two burnished lines preserved on exterior wall. Cf. 2-13; see also Corinth XVII, no. 122, p. 79, pl. 32, which has similar burnishing (“paring”) on the exterior but is a slightly coarser ware.


3-17 *C-56-10 Fig. 8

One-handled mug, partly slipped. D. 0.089 m.

3-18 C-56-23 Fig. 8

Pitcher base, apparently not slipped but similar to the preceding. Broad burnished bands on exterior.

Also an AfRS 91 or 92 with feather rouletting and a grooved base rather than a foot (C-56-29); although the fabric is somewhat coarse, it should still be a fifth-century form. LRC stamp (Hayes no. 69), a double-ribbed Greek cross of the mid-fifth century (C-56-31).


3-19 C-56-22 Fig. 8

Palestinian baggy amphora top (white). D. 0.088 m. Medium hard, fired in layers very pale brown to white at edges (10YR 8/2 to 2.5Y 8/2) and at core (10YR 7/4), smooth to laminar break; sparse, large, glassy, colorless to orange, subrounded to angular, spherical inclusions and occasional very large, milky white, rounded spherical inclusions. Cf. Riley 1981, p. 104, fig. 8:72.

3-20 C-56-25 Fig. 8

Palestinian baggy amphora bottom (white). Medium hard, fired in layers reddish yellow (5YR 7/4) at core, pale yellow to light gray (5Y 7/2 to 8/2) inside and pale yellow (5Y 8/2) outside, hackly to laminar break; common, medium large, glassy, orange and white, rounded, spherical to platy inclusions and occasional large to very large, milky white, rounded spherical inclusions.

3-21 *C-56-11 Fig. 8

Small Palestinian amphora with vertical wall. D. 0.060 m. Medium hard, very pale brown fabric (5YR 7/6) with hackly to conchoidal break, reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) flashes outside; abundant, medium, white to orange, glassy, subrounded to rounded, tabular to spherical inclusions. Cf. 2-23, 2-23a, 4-20. Four dipinti between handles:



(c) Minuscule dipinto on neck: [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

(d) Minuscule letters under handle are too fragmentary to read.

3-22 C-56-34 Fig. 8

LR Amphora 2 top. Medium coarse southern Argolid fabric: light red fabric (2.5YR 6/6) fired light gray (10YR 7/2) on exterior, with a smooth to conchoidal break; a few, medium to very large, rounded to angular, spherical, creamy yellow lime bits have spalled; rare medium to very large, angular platy gold mica visible on surfaces; rare, medium to large, spherical rounded, hollow white inclusions.

3-23 C-56-35 Fig. 8

Gray-brown C.c.f. imitation of LR Amphora 2 with narrow ovoid body. D. 0.055 m. Cf. 3-24, 4-14 (which is slightly larger). Also two substantial rims, a handle, and several bodies in lot 73-88.

3-24 Lot 73-88:4 Fig. 8

C.c.f. imitation of LR Amphora 2, with narrow ovoid body. P.H. 0.310, D. 0.070 m. Hjohlman 2002, no. 29, pp. 17, 145, is similar.

3-25 *C-56-7 Fig. 10

C.c.f. amphora with flat base. Cf. 1-27.

3-26 *C-56-8 Fig. 8

Gray-black C.c.f. amphora top, perhaps derived from another local buff table amphora such as Corinth XVIII.2, nos. 248, 249, pp. 115-116, fig. 28. Perhaps cf. 4-15.

3-27 Lot 73-88:2 Fig. 8

C.c.f. top of fruit amphora with vertical handles attached to neck and top of shoulder; combing on lower shoulder. D. 0.17 m. C-1982-17 (Williams and Zervos 1983, no. 80, p. 30, pl. 11), used in a building that was destroyed in the first half of the seventh century, has similar handles, grooves on the neck, and combing on the shoulder, as does IP-2135 (on display in the Isthmia Museum), but both of these are southern Argolid fabric. Cf. also 4-16 and a second, uninventoried example in lot 73-88, both with horizontal handles.

3-28 C-56-13 Fig. 10

Sarachane type 22 amphora, complete. Cf. 4-22. Cf. also Opait 1996, p. 66 (English translation p. 213), pl. 17:1-3, citing examples from Romania in the early seventh century and from Constantinople and Berenice later.

3-29 Lot 73-88:1 Fig. 8

Unidentified amphora top. D. 0.085 m.

Cooking Wares


3-30 C-73-239 Fig. 8

Small globular stewpot with half-round rim, concave on interior; button on bottom. D. 0.108 m. See 4-27. Cf. Aupert 1980, no. 286, p. 433, fig. 43, which seems to have a straighter lower body.

3-31 Lot 73-88:3 Fig. 8

Globular stewpot with undercut, half-round rim, strongly everted. D. 0.168 m. Nineteen examples with a slightly less everted rim were published by Aupert (1980, nos. 269-285b, p. 433, fig. 43).

3-32 *C-56-12 Fig. 8

Globular stewpot with spout, triangular rim. D. 0.161-0.167 m.

3-33 C-56-19 Fig. 8

Local lid with hollow knob. See also 2-47, 2-48.

Plain Wares

3-34-39 *C-56-1 to *C-56-6 Fig. 10 (3-34 only)

LR unguentaria, of which four are more or less complete, and three have stamps. Published in Hayes 1971. (32)

3-40 C-1978-226 Fig. 9

Pitcher with flat base, cylindrical body with inset neck, and pinched spout. D. 0.074 m. Top only; C-1978-227, the full body of a second pitcher, was found with it. Medium hard, coarse, reddish yellow fabric (7.5YR 7/6 to 6/6), interior and core reddish yellow (5YR 6/6); sparse tiny sparkling inclusions; sparse medium to large white rounded grits (spherical lime and some hollow); sparse very large angular white and orange inclusions. For the whole shape, see Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 30, p. 127, pl. 40 (C-1981-132), which is probably earlier, and C-31-58, which is probably later. See also Aupert 1980, no. 229a, p. 428, fig. 40 (which has a circular top).

3-41 *C-56-9 Fig. 9

C.c.f. pitcher with pinched spout. D. 0.055 m. Burnished pattern on body.

3-42 C-56-17 Fig. 9

C.c.f. pitcher with tapering neck, swelling mouth, and pinched spout; top only. D. 0.057 m.

3-43 C-56-20 [CP-25] Fig. 9

C.c.f. pitcher with half-round rim and button base. H. 0.258, D. 0.080 m. Also one rim and two fragments preserving the rim to shoulder (in lot 73-88). Cf. Aupert 1980, nos. 221-223, p. 428, fig. 40.

3-44 C-56-36

Jug with swelling mouth. Cf. 4-34.

3-45 C-56-18 Fig. 9

C.c.f. globular bin with knob rim. C-56-21 is a second example.

3-46 C-73-240 Fig. 9

C.c.f. globular bin with knob rim; complete. D. 0.332 m.

3-47 C-56-24

Small pitcher lid, complete. D. 0.058-0.063 m. Fabric like LR Amphora 2 with rare, large, platy gold mica visible at surface and rare, large to very large, creamy yellow spherical lime inclusions where the surface has spalled.

Assemblage 4: Middle or Third Quarter of the Seventh Century

A pit in the Panayia field, west of the long sixth-century building (see Fig. 2), yielded a large quantity of mendable pottery including a wide variety of amphoras (see Figs. 11-13). The net weight of lots 96-44 and 97-57 after mending was 161 kg, numbering 4,200 fragments. A single coin found in this pit, an issue of Tiberius II (580/1), provides a terminus post quem for the contents. The assemblage can be placed in a phase succeeding assemblage 3 because there are parallels among all classes of pottery except lamps and cooking pots with the large Sarachane deposit now dated 655-670 by Hayes. (33) The pottery also closely resembles that found in the latest east of Theater destruction levels in 1982, which included a coin of Phocas (605/6), examples of LRC Hayes form 10C, and Asia Minor lamps probably datable within the seventh century. (34) Supplementary fine and plain wares of this period come from the upper level of a pit excavated at the west end of the forum in 1973 (lot 73-87), which contained a rim of AfRS Hayes form 107 (4-5) and a Glazed White Ware I bowl (4-1) also with parallels in Sarachane, deposit 30. It is notable that no LRC was found in the Panayia pit and that, in contrast to the 16 nearly complete Palestinian baggy amphoras and two fruit amphoras, the AfRS is very fragmentary. For this reason it is possible that the coarse wares in this pit are later than the datable fine wares and should be placed at an unspecified time after the middle of the seventh century. This horizon represents the latest use of the fabric of the Roman city of Corinth that is now recognizable.



96-155 Tiberius II (580/1)


The latest fragment is the handle of a LR Corinthian lamp imitating a North African type with jeweled rim and jeweled cross on the disk; combining elements seen on 3-1, 3-3, and 3-5, it is apparently earlier than all three, and we regard it as residual here. There were also fragments of earlier unglazed Corinthian and Attic lamps of the second to fourth centuries.

Fine Wares

Glazed White Ware I

4-1 C-73-238 Fig. 11

Bowl fragment. D. 0.257 m. Cf. Sarachane, 30.16, fig. 38.


4-2 C-1997-41 Fig. 11

Plate rim, Hayes form 104C. D. 0.390 m. Cf. Sarachane, 30.46, fig. 40.

4-3 C-1997-42 Fig. 11

Plate rim, Hayes form 105.6 (LRP, p. 167, fig. 31). D. 0.370 m.

4-4 C-1997-47a, b Fig. 11

Plate rim fragments, Hayes form 105.7-9 (LRP, p. 167, figs. 31, 32). D. 0.530 m. Most of this vessel was found in an earlier pit (lot 96-44).

4-5 C-73-423 Fig. 11

Bowl rim, Hayes form 107. D. 0.275 m. Cf. Sarachane, 30.50, fig. 40.

4-6 Lot 97-57:17 Fig. 11

Bowl rim, Hayes form 109 with spiral burnishing on the interior; very small fragment. Est. D. 0.290 m. Cf. Sarachane, 30.41-43, fig. 40.

Other fine wares

4-7 Lot 97-57:22 Fig. 11

Spouted jug. Fine grayish buff fabric (burned). D. 0.092 m.

Perhaps also late are a rim and handle of a spouted jug with a splash of paint (cf. Ballance et al. 1989, nos. 208, 209, p. 105, pl. 23; Ricci 1998, pp. 375-377, fig. 15:1-4, from the Crypta Balbi deposit), but surely residual in lot 97-57 are a fragmentary bowl Hayes form 99 (C-1997-43); two rims of LRC form 3; and an unidentified LRC base. Lot 73-87 has miscellaneous small fragments of AfRS of unidentifiable forms, but no LRC.


4-8 C-1997-52 Fig. 13

LR Amphora 1, nearly complete. D. 0.104 m. Sarachane type 5. Another seventh-century example is Hayes 2003, no. 264, p. 492, fig. 25 (deposit 12, midseventh century). Four dipinti on shoulder, (c) under handle:


(b) [- – -]C.



Dipinto (c) seems to be a date, 573; (d) is likely a capacity mark, ending in an illegible numeral.

4-9 Lot 97-57:20 Fig. 13

LR Amphora 2, complete profile except top of rim; small central button marks rounded bottom. P.H. 0.519 m. Southern Argolid fabric: light red (2.5YR 6/6) with occasional gold mica and large lime inclusions. At least 11 total examples in lot 97-57.

4-10 Lot 97-57:21 Fig. 13

LR Amphora 2. Medium hard, reddish yellow fabric (5YR 6/6) fired lighter (7.5YR 6/6) at surface, smooth to hackly break; sparse medium to very large flecks of gold mica and occasional milky white and creamy yellow inclusions.

4-11 C-1997-57

LR Amphora 2. Fine southern Argolid fabric. Dipinto on shoulder between handles: [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

4-12 C-1997-67 Fig. 13

LR Amphora 2. Fine or medium southern Argolid fabric. Fragmentary dipinto on shoulder: [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

4-13 C-1997-48a, b Fig. 11 (a only)

C.c.f. imitation of LR Amphora 2 with flat base. D. 0.07 m.

4-14 C-1997-49a, b Fig. 11

C.c.f. imitation of LR Amphora 2 with flat base. D. 0.075 m. Cf. 3-23.

4-15 C-1997-50 Fig. 11

Small, white-gritted table amphora with flat base with central button. H. 0.362, D. 0.055 m. Perhaps cf. 3-26.

4-16 C-1997-56 Fig. 13

C.c.f. (gritty) fruit amphora with horizontal Corinthian-style handles, plain body, and button toe; about four-fifths complete. H. 0.803, D. 0.275 m. See 3-27.

4-17 C-1997-66 Fig. 11

Fractional, white-gritted fruit amphora with vertical handles. D. (restored) 0.11 m.

4-18-19 C-1997-45 and lot 97-57:12 Fig. 11 (4-19 only)

Baggy Palestinian amphora, three-quarters complete. Also lot 96-44; at least eight nearly complete examples including 4-19. H. 0.400, D. 0.097 m (4-18); D. 0.010 m (4-19). Cf. Hayes 2003, nos. 269, 270, p. 494, fig. 25.

4-20 C-1997-61 Fig. 13

Small Palestinian amphora with vertical wall; three-quarters complete. D. 0.070 m. Cf. 2-23, 2-23a, 3-21.

4-21 C-1997-46a-d Fig. 11

Palestinian carrot amphora with flat base. H. (restored) 0.398, D. 0.080 m. Soft to medium hard, reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) fabric with granular break, pink (7.5YR 7/4) interior; common to abundant, small to medium rounded, spherical, glassy, colorless sand; rare medium angular, tabular white and occasional rounded spherical gray inclusions. Cf. Bass and van Doorninck 1982, no. P80, p. 186, figs. 8.20 and 8.22; Agora V, no. M 334, p. 115, pl. 33. See 1-24, 2-24.

4-22 Lot 97-57:19a, b Fig. 11 (b), Fig. 13 (a)

Sarachane type 22, mouth and nonjoining body. D. 0.046 m. Very fine, reddish yellow fabric (5YR 6/6), fired yellow (10YR 7/6) on exterior; occasional sparkling gold and silver flecks and occasional tiny, red and black inclusions. See Sarachane, deposit 30.195-196, p. 104, fig. 49; Agora V, no. M 372, pp. 118-119, pl. 34; also 3-28.

4-23 C-1997-51 Fig. 11

Unidentified amphora with offset rim and flat base; three-quarters preserved. H. 0.369, D. 0.110 m. At least three more examples in lot 97-57.

4-24 C-1997-38a, b Fig. 11

Amphora with flat base, dumpy ovoid body, and broad neck ending in plain lip. H. 0.330, D. 0.099 m. Canted groove marks false ring-foot. Body has very thick wall. Fine, highly micaceous, reddish brown fabric (5YR-7.5YR 6-7/4) with rare black and red grits; exterior surface wet-smoothed. Post-coctum graffito between handles: [dagger] vac. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

4-25 Lot 97-57:23 Fig. 11

One-handled jug with slightly tapering wheel-ridged neck, triangular rim, and strap handle; groove on shoulder at level of handle attachment and double wave pattern incised above it. Est. D. 0.092 m. Fine, highly micaceous, reddish brown fabric. For the complete form, see Williams and Zervos 1983, no. 82, p. 32, pl. 11 (C-1982-39, with newly joined rim).

4-26 C-1997-44a, b Fig. 11

Forerunner of Early Byzantine Corinthian amphora; about one-third preserved. D. 0.068 m. Cf. Aupert 1980, no. 326a, p. 440, fig. 46.

Also one toe and three bodies of small spatheia. Clearly residual in this deposit are the fragments of m.w.j.; Niederbieber 77; a rim and handle like 2-17; a neck of a LR Amphora 7; and a Gaza rim (lot 97-57:7 + 8).

Cooking Wares

All now apparently C.c.f., the same fabric as most local plain wares.

4-27 Lot 97-57:11 Fig. 12

Small globular stewpot with everted, half-round rim. D. 0.125 m. Spirally burnished lines outside. Cf. 3-30.

4-28 C-1997-53 Fig. 12

Globular stewpot with spout, triangular rim. D. 0.213 m.

4-29 C-1997-55 Fig. 12

Coal scuttle or dipper with flat base and solid handle; heavily burned on interior. D. 0.150 m.

4-30 C-1997-54 Fig. 12

Tall lid with thickened, everted rim. H. 0.073, est. D. 0.170 m. Cf. 3-33.

4-31 Lot 97-57:16 Fig. 12

Lower, flatter lid than 4-30. H. 0.057, est. D. 0.219 m.

Two rims as 2-37, two rims as 2-35, and two rims as Sanders 1999, no. 17 are residual.

Plain Wares


4-32 Lot 97-57:10 Figs. 12, 13

Late unguentarium. Est. D. 0.023 m. Micaceous reddish brown fabric apparently identical to late m.w.j. Cf. C-33-1521, a complete example from Asklepieion reservoir IV.

4-33 Lot 97-57:5 Fig. 12

Rim and handle of trefoil-mouth pitcher. Est. D. 0.07 m. Southern Argolid fabric(?) with tiny gold mica. See Aupert 1980, nos. 232, 233, p. 429, fig. 41.

4-34 Lot 97-57:6 Fig. 12

Pitcher with flaring rim and sloping grooved handle; red paint on shoulder. D. 0.059 m. Reddish yellow fabric (5YR 6/6) with rare sparkling and occasional white inclusions; lighter on outside. Cf. 3-44.

4-35 Lot 97-57:9 Fig. 12

Small lid with pierced knob. D. 0.088-0.090 m. Fine southern Argolid fabric: reddish yellow (7.5YR 7/4) fired pink on exterior (close to 7.5YR 8/3); sparse, tiny, sparkling and occasional large lime inclusions.


All now apparently C.c.f. except the last.

4-36 Lot 97-57:4 Fig. 12

Bowl. Est. D. 0.144 m.

4-37 C-73-237 Fig. 12

Spouted pitcher. P.H. 0.157, max. D. 0.135 m.

4-38 Lot 97-57:13 Fig. 12

C.c.f. pitcher with flattened half-round rim. D. 0.102 m. Two examples.

4-39 Lot 97-57:14 Fig. 12

C.c.f. pitcher or amphora with offset rim. D. 0.118 m.

4-40 Lot 97-57:15 Fig. 12

Deep gritty bin with square rim. Est. D. 0.16 m. The resemblance to dolia from the late-seventh-century Crypta Balbi deposit in Rome (Ricci 1998, fig. 15:9, 10) is striking, but the fabric is different.

Twelve rims and several bases as 3-46 (lot 97-57:2, 3) and two rims of pitchers like 3-43 are probably residual.


Not only the fine wares, but also the lamps, the cooking pots, and the plain wares presented here form reliable sequences; some of the amphora forms also exhibit steady change, although others cannot yet be subdivided. The combination of forms in use in a particular stratum defines each assemblage, and the relative sequence of the four horizons presented here is secure. The horizons have been dated primarily on the basis of imported fine wares, supplemented by the lamps. Although the number of such pieces in any given group may seem too limited to place as much weight on their dates as we appear to do, our experience in describing several hundred LR strata leaves us confident that the associations are consistent. Our major conclusion is that pottery is more reliable than coins in distinguishing the fifth from the fourth century and the seventh from the sixth. Our intention is to illustrate that, when fine wares are absent, lamps, cooking pots, and plain wares can be used to establish where one is in the sequence.

Broneer’s publication of the Corinth lamps assigned some examples of his types XXVIII and XXIX and all of types XXXI and XXXII to the fourth to sixth centuries, without subdividing the period.(35) Further study has shown that “type XXVIII” was simply a catchall for lamps that were not types XXVII or XXXI and included lamps manufactured in both Corinth and Athens. (36) “Type XXXI” included African imports and imitations from several different sources, including Corinth; Garnett’s study of the thousands of stratified lamps in the Fountain of the Lamps allowed her to suggest some subdivisions of type XXXI. (37) The more precise dating of contemporary fine wares made possible by the publication of LRP now allows refinement of the lamp chronology as well. For instance, it is obvious that imitations of AfRS type II lamps cannot be earlier than their prototypes, which are now dated after 425, some even after 525: they do not begin as early as the fourth century. (38) All the LR Corinthian lamps with a channel to the nozzle are in this category. (39) Broneer’s typology should be completely abandoned in favor of a subdivision based on provenience and prototypes. The following groups are distinguishable in the horizons published here: (40)

Attic glazed lamps (1-1) (formerly Broneer type XXVIII)

Attic post-glazing lamps (1-2, 2-1, 2-2) (formerly type XXVIII)

LR Corinthian imitations of Corinthian unglazed lamps (2-3) (formerly type XXXI)

LR Corinthian imitations of Attic glazed (41) and post-glazing lamps (2-4, 2-5) (formerly type XXXI)

LR Corinthian imitations of North African lamps (3-1 to 3-3) (formerly type XXXI)

LR Corinthian imitations of circular lamps (3-6) (formerly type XXXII)

AfRS lamps (formerly type XXXI) imported imitations of AfRS and circular lamps (in a single fabric, always unslipped, formerly in types XXXI and XXXII) (42) other imitations of AfRS lamps

Asia Minor lamps (formerly part of type XXIX) (43)

Lamps provide the clearest illustration of the difference among the assemblages. Attic glazed and post-glazing lamps (1-1, 1-2) are found in approximately equal numbers in assemblage 1, and LR Corinthian lamps are lacking. Karivieri’s suggestion that glazing continued on Attic lamps into the fifth century seems to be confirmed. (44) Unfortunately the robbing trenches east of the Theater do not preserve any disks or signatures on the glazed fragments, and the only signature from well 1982-1 is A (1-1). In assemblage 2 the glazed lamps are definitely rare and residual, however; Attic post-glazing lamps and LR Corinthian lamps (see below) are the main types. If the fine wares in assemblage 2 are a guide to the date of the lamps, this combination is typical of the second half of the fifth century; parallels for the two Attic post-glazing lamps (2-1, 2-2) occur together in deposit Q 17:4 in the Athenian Agora, which Karivieri dates to ca. 500. (45) The problem that was not resolved by Karivieri’s study and cannot be answered yet is not so much when the lamp-makers stopped glazing their lamps (clearly at some time in the fifth rather than in the fourth century) as when the first post-glazing (unglazed) lamps were produced. (46)

It now seems that the Corinthian lamp industry was in total abeyance in the first half of the fifth century. Only a single fragment of a LR Corinthian lamp, from a contaminated unit, was found on the slope east of the Theater (although they are common in the LR levels to the north) and should be classed with the late intrusions. In assemblage 2, however, LR Corinthian products outnumber the Attic post-glazing lamps with plain and Christian disks. The three LR Corinthian lamps in assemblage 2 belong to three of the common series identified by Garnett: imitations of a gladiatorial lamp (2-4), (47) of a lamp with plain disk and paneled rim with wreath (2-3), and of an Attic post-glazing lamp with cross in square disk (2-5). All are based on Attic or Corinthian rather than North African prototypes. Five of the six LR Corinthian lamps from assemblage 3 (3-1 to 3-5), however, are imitations of the North African type with style E(ii) cross on the disk and palm branches on rim, the latest variation of type II that is dated 525-550. Garnett had already observed that such lamps were “larger, cruder, and sloppier than most of the other lamps of North African type made in Corinth,” and concluded that they represent a late, local variant.(48) Two of these lamps are of the standard LR Corinthian hard red fabric (3-1, 3-3), but two others introduce fabrics that may no longer be strictly Corinthian (3-4, 3-5). The copy of a circular lamp (3-6) in the normal LR Corinthian fabric is a welcome fixed point for these heretofore undated lamps. It is thus clear that there were changes in fashion even among these LR mechanical copies: not only were new models imitated but also old ones were dropped. Careful attention to such variations shows great promise for dating.

All of the clay lamps in assemblage 4 are residual. (49) The possibility that glass lamps or candles displaced them remains to be explored.

AfRS and LRC are the dominant fine wares in the fifth to seventh centuries, and the occurrence of some other RS wares may be very limited. Assemblage 1 marks the earliest appearance of LRC at Corinth: Hayes forms 1 and 1A, 2B and C, 3.32, and 4 (or 3/4) appear in small quantities with coins of the second quarter and middle of the fifth century and with fifth-century AfRS. Although the amount of AfRS is sharply reduced from what it had been in the fourth century, it is still two or three times as common as LRC. Forms 50B, 50.61, 59B, 64, 67-69, 76, and 82 (as well as an unidentified form) are found in the east of Theater robbing trenches along with stamps of styles A(iii) and D; contemporary with these should be forms 53B and 62 (which are residual in the assemblage 2 deposit). The variety of late descendants of form 50 in assemblage 1 (50B, 50.61, and 64) strongly suggests that they continue well into the fifth century. The presence of form 82 seems to prove that some AfRS still reached Corinth after 440, but forms 80/81 and 91A-B are very rare on this site; it appears that importation of AfRS was drastically reduced after the Vandal conquest of Carthage. (50) The combination of AfRS and LRC forms found in the robbing trenches and dump east of the Theater strongly supports a date ca. 450 or 460 for assemblage 1.

The amount of AfRS remains meager in assemblage 2. The well-preserved AfRS dish 2-6, whose transitional form (Hayes 61B/87A) suggests a date 420-475, might be dated before 430/440 because it is stamped in style A(iii). (51) LRC, and in particular form 3B-C (2-9 to 2-11), was the fine ware of choice in assemblage 2.

LR Attic plates imitating AfRS forms 59 and 61, as well as 83/84, and a few jugs with gouged decoration appear in both assemblages 1 and 2, in somewhat smaller quantities than LRC, but not later.(52) Most deposits also contain single examples of other fine wares: for instance, a very rare occurrence of Cypriot RS, 1-13 (imitating AfRS form 84), and an unidentified RS signature, 1-14. Making its first appearance in assemblage 2 is a distinctive RS bowl with outturned lip (2-13) from a Boiotian source that continued to supply Corinth throughout the sixth century; (53) the earliest example bears a distinctive stamped cross, and the rims are also easily recognizable. As far as we can see at present, there are no Corinthian fine wares, including imitations of AfRS or LRC, in the fourth to sixth centuries.

AfRS and LRC are both present in considerable amounts in assemblage 3 in the later sixth century. The AfRS sequence begins again with forms 99, 103/104, and 105 (3-8 to 3-12) (form 91 is quite rare here), characteristic of the Byzantine (post-533) exports from Carthage. It is accompanied by LRC form 10A.(54) Assemblage 4 is marked by the presence of the latest fine wares in the Corinthian sequence: AfRS form 105 and lesser quantities of forms 104C, 107, 109, and LRC form 10C are typical seventh-century types, (55) and there are occasional examples of Constantinopolitan Glazed White Ware I, which probably take us past the middle of the century. The few other fine wares in these assemblages are from nearby sources. The Boiotian RS bowls with outturned rim (3-16) continue to ca. 600. The latest pieces belonging to the tradition of Roman red-slipped wares are a series of red-washed mugs (3-17) in a fine, micaceous fabric that appears in assemblage 3; the wash on some of these pieces is very fugitive and easily overlooked.

Because we lack deposits of narrow date in the LR period, estimating the life spans of amphora types of the fifth to seventh centuries is still at a preliminary stage. The problem is compounded because only the widely recognized eastern Mediterranean amphora types have distinctive fabrics; most other types are identifiable only by their rims or a single diagnostic feature. Furthermore, in this period most of the amphoras here are made in several grades of Corinthian cooking fabric (C.c.f.) that differ strikingly from the best-known eastern or western Mediterranean imports and are clearly local or regional imitations of widely exported types.

Assemblage 1 is marked by types as diverse as those that had characterized the second century: some continue fourth-century series, others mark the beginning of LR series, and others appear only briefly; no single type is better represented than others. Of the fourth-century types, Niederbieber 77 and micaceous water jars (now with two handles rather than one) continue into the fifth century, and some Tunisian amphoras may also belong to this rather than to earlier periods. (56) The main LR series from the far eastern end of the Mediterranean are present in small numbers (Syrian LR Amphora 1, baggy Palestinian amphoras, as well as three other distinctive Palestinian forms including Gaza amphoras), and the Aegean type, LR Amphora 2, in greater quantity (and variety). (57) Forms that make a brief appearance in assemblage 1 are two distinctive Portuguese types (1-19, Almagro 51C/Keay XXIII; 1-20, Keay XIX) and a Sicilian (or Calabrian) table amphora (Keay LII, in at least three fabrics, e.g., 1-22). (58) Small table amphoras, one in Corinthian cooking fabric (1-27) that continues the earlier buff series Agora V, no. G 197, and another with a distinctive grooved rim (1-26), are a prominent element from now on. Amphoras like 1-27 are only found as far away as Athens, and it is tempting to suggest that such small containers were used for local rather than long-distance transport. On the other hand, there is no question that the Keay LII amphoras, which are of similar size, were brought from Italy, a warning that not all transport(ed) amphoras were of large capacity in this period. (59)

All the whole amphoras that we had identified in well 1982-1 are still present in assemblage 2, and it is likely that they continued to be imported throughout the fifth century. The primary eastern LR amphora types identified in the west (Syrian LR Amphora 1, Aegean LR Amphora 2, two-handled micaceous water jars, baggy Palestinian amphoras, and Gaza amphoras) first occur in quantity at Corinth in assemblage 2, continuing in assemblage 3. (60) Appearing alongside these eastern types is another, a white micaceous amphora with distinctive dipinti first identified in assemblage 2 (2-17); its possible toe (there are no complete examples) suggests a connection with the earlier (and much larger) Agora V, no. M 273, common on Danubian sites. Palestinian amphoras and LR Amphora 2 are the only types that certainly continue in assemblage 4, joined by a new thin white amphora, Sarachane type 22, known also at Benghazi and in Romania (3-28, 4-22), by two small amphoras in fine, highly micaceous fabrics that suggest an Asia Minor source (4-24, 4-25), and by the earliest examples of the Corinthian amphoras typical of the ninth to tenth centuries (e.g., 4-26).

In addition to Gaza amphoras, there are three other Palestinian amphora types present in these assemblages, all apparently from southern Palestine: (61) the baggy jar that is widely recognized across the Mediterranean (handle listed in assemblage 1; 2-20 to 2-23, 3-19, 3-20, 4-18, 4-19), a small cylindrical vessel with a similar top and white painted sides that must be a fractional variant of the baggy jars (fragment listed in assemblage 1; 2-23a, 3-21, 4-20), and a carrot-shaped amphora probably imported from Akko (1-24 and listed fragments, 2-24, 4-21). (62) It is likely that all three types are found throughout the eastern Mediterranean as far as Italy. All three appear in assemblages 2 and 3. The first two are sometimes found in assemblage 1 and the baggy amphoras and carrot amphoras, if not all three types, continue in assemblage 4 (the latest example of the carrot amphora may be one-handled and has a flat base). The latest baggy amphoras in assemblage 4 display a greenish white fabric, which had not appeared in the earlier assemblages; whether it indicates a change in firing or a different provenience is not known.

A study of LR Amphora 2 is badly needed because the name has been applied indiscriminately to amphoras of varying sizes, shapes, and fabrics. (63) Recent studies have suggested production from kilns in the southern Argolid, on Kos, and on Chios. (64) At Corinth imported jars of this shape display a single fabric that ranges from medium coarse to quite fine: the biscuit is light red to reddish yellow (2.5YR-5YR 6/6), fired, respectively, light gray (10YR 7/2) or reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6) on the exterior, with a smooth to conchoidal break; the finer pieces appear most micaceous, but all pieces display sparse to moderate, angular platy gold mica on both interior and exterior surfaces and sparse to moderate, medium to very large, subrounded creamy yellow lime bits that have spalled; worn rock fragments and shell are also visible in the coarsest pieces. (65) The Corinth storerooms reveal a few examples similar to 1-23 (H. 0.75-0.80 m) with knob or peg toe, which is presumably what is found in the west, (66) but the vast majority are fractionals about 0.45-0.50 m tall (like 3-22 and the examples in assemblage 4). (67) Clearly, considerably more caution needs to be used in identifying this type, both in the Aegean and in the west. The problem is further complicated by our identification of a “fruit amphora,” which may be thought of as a LR Amphora 2 body with a wide vertical neck instead of the tapering neck and cup mouth of LR Amphora 2. The earliest examples of the “fruit amphora” (it is characteristic of assemblages 3 and 4) are found in the second half of the fifth century, when they have the same fabric as LR Amphora 2, and their handles and body sherds are indistinguishable from that type; this form continues throughout the sixth century (3-27). (68)

Imitations of LR Amphora 2 in C.c.f. appear by the sixth century, and show further regionalization of shapes. 2-33 seems to be an early example that shares the base of later plain wares. A distinctive small variant with ovoid body and flat base is characteristic of assemblages 3 and 4 (3-23, 3-24, 4-13, 4-14) and is also found at Berbati in the Argolid. (69) Moreover, the seventh-century “fruit amphoras” are found exclusively in the gritty Corinthian cooking fabric; by this time they have horizontal handles on the shoulder (4-16) and a smooth wall. (70)

It is the variety of imported cooking pots in assemblages 1 and 2 that distinguishes fifth-century horizons from those of the fourth century. As much as one-third of the cooking ware may be a distinctive micaceous brown fabric with a gray surface, with equally distinctive rim profiles and ribbing, here named LR micaceous Aegean cooking ware. (71) The two typical forms, common in both assemblages, are a shallow bowl with inturned, grooved rim and a carinated casserole with an upward roll on the outer edge of the rim. A few related rims in assemblage 1 may be contemporary or residual. Palestinian casseroles (and perhaps other shapes) with their lids are found regularly but in small numbers. It is interesting that these casseroles also begin to appear at such western sites as Marseilles in the first half of the fifth century; (72)presumably they travel with the Palestinian amphoras. A third imported ware, which may be limited to assemblage 1, is an orange/brown cooking fabric with large angular white grits. The forms are a casserole similar to the Corinthian type but with a much heavier rim, square in section, sometimes grooved on the outer face; lids; and a single example of a baggy stewpot. The resemblance to local cooking shapes and a lack of parallels initially suggested that this white gritty ware was “local,” but Hayes has now identified parallels at Nicopolis (pers. comm. 2003) and there are possible parallels at Benalua (Alicante, Spain) and Benghazi. (73)

The Corinthian cooking pots in assemblages 1 and 2 are close developments from types already established by the middle of the fourth century. 1-36, a stewpot with short neck and an everted rim with a rounded upper surface, was also the latest form identified in the Sanctuary of Demeter. The other C.c.f. stewpots characteristic of assemblage 1 are distinguished by a broad groove on the upper surface of the rim (1-37). The latest versions of both forms are found in assemblage 2, where they may be residual (2-38, 2-39 to 2-39b). A new form that suddenly dominates assemblage 2 is a globular stewpot with flat, everted rim and two vertical handles (2-40 to 2-40b); the lower handle attachment is finished in a concave curve that soon distinguishes all LR Corinthian cooking pots. This stewpot is then replaced by the stewpot with triangular, undercut rim that characterizes the late-sixth- and seventh-century assemblages at Corinth, as well as at Argos and Berbati. (74) It develops from a thinly potted, rather elegant rim in the mid-sixth century to a thicker but still undercut rim at the beginning of the seventh century. (75) Spouted cooking pots with a triangular but scarcely undercut rim, as 3-32, represent a very common late-sixth-century variant. By the mid-seventh century, examples with triangular rim as 4-28 still exist, but, here, alongside cooking pots with an everted, half-round rim, as 4-27, that appear to be the latest in our sequence.

There are three main lid shapes, two in C.c.f. and one in plain ware. One C.c.f. lid is a low conical form that had been around since the first century and must have been used on stewpots and casseroles, whether they were imported or not. The second C.c.f. lid is a domed lid (“bell lid”), the rims of which are easily mistaken for basins because of the thickened lip and vertical wall; (76) the hollow knobs, which may be decorated with a cross in the late sixth century, are distinctive.(77) Such rims were introduced in assemblage 2 and continue in assemblage 4; they are also known at Argos. (78) Finally, there is a plain-ware series of small lids with a twisted knob that are of an appropriate size for the local table amphoras. They appear in assemblages 3 and 4 but had counterparts in the second to fourth centuries, and may therefore have a longer life. Unlike the earlier pieces, which were string-cut, the later small lids are hollow.

Basins and lekanides are a major part of the LR Corinthian assemblages. They seem to have evolved from forms already in use by the early fourth century, although their fabric is now regularly C.c.f. rather than the former buff fabric (sometimes with large white grits, apparently southern Argolid fabric). (79) The progression can best be seen in the treatment of the rims. For instance, simple outturned rims, such as those on the deep, wheel-ridged basins of the early fourth century, (80) were folded under to produce the knob rims characteristic of the sixth century (like 2-46, the direct descendant, or 3-45 and 3-46, a new globular bin form). Similarly, there appears to be a linear development from the broad everted rim with concave top of early-fourth-century shallow wheel-ridged basins (81) to the slightly smaller lekanides with hooked, and sometimes grooved, rim like 1-39 and 1-40; basically the rim was simply pressed downward against the wall, forming a rounded carination or shoulder. (82) Further simplification (which completely eliminated vestiges of the original lip) led to the development of the late basin with hammerhead rim in assemblage 2. The early form (2-44, 2-45) had a flaring body with an inwardly thickened, inturned rim offset by a marked carination outside. In the mid-sixth century the rim was more exaggeratedly thickened, triangular, or sometimes square in section; it was both more steeply inturned and more sharply carinated, while the walls tended to become vertical. In assemblages 3 and 4 the wall was convex and vertical and had either a rounded, outwardly rolled rim offset by a carination (3-45) or one so rolled that it completely covered the carination, which remains clearly visible, however, in the section.83 It is striking that none of these forms was found in Argos.


The contents and date of each assemblage can now be summarized briefly. The first appearance of LRC and of a number of imported, apparently also eastern, cooking wares and the sudden introduction of new western amphora types differentiate assemblage 1 from earlier, fourth-century contexts; lamps and local cooking pots are developments from those prevalent in the fourth century. The date provided by AfRS and confirmed by coins is the first half of the fifth century. It thus seems that the late appearance of LRC on western sites (second half of the fifth century, forms 3B and 3C) offers better evidence for the beginning of the ware than Hayes’s original suggestion that pieces were found before 400 in the Athenian Agora, and LRC should not be dated earlier than the first or second quarter of the fifth century. (84) The western amphoras suggest that Corinth’s ties with Italy (east or west coast?) resurge in the middle of the century, and it is tempting to suggest that the Vandal conquest of Carthage diverted routes northward. At any rate, assemblage 2 exhibits the same range of imported wares that one would find on a western site, with the exception that the Palestinian and Aegean amphoras show a greater variety of shapes. The AfRS is little if any later than in assemblage 1, but the horizon is distinguished by new lamp types, new forms of LRC, and new types of local cooking pots. A date is difficult to estimate, but the second half or the last quarter of the fifth century, probably into the early years of the sixth century, is likely.

Although contexts of the early and late sixth century, like assemblages 2 and 3, are common and frequently large at Corinth, pottery of the middle of the sixth century is missing from the sequence presented here, because it is not well represented either east of the Theater or in the Panayia field (see below). The gap emphasizes the differences between the two horizons. Several important changes in assemblage 3 mark a departure from the earlier assemblage 2: the lamps are now all imitations of African types, new forms of both AfRS and LRC appear, Attic lamps and fine ware disappear, the range of imported amphora types appears largely reduced to Palestinian and LR Amphora 2 with its local variants, and a new form of stewpot with a triangular undercut rim is introduced. These changes mark an increasing regionalism of trading contacts, a trend that continues in the seventh century. For assemblage 4 the fine wares provide a date in the second or even third quarter of the seventh century, and some of the new amphora forms also have seventh-century parallels. A new and expanding repertoire of jug and pitcher forms characterizes this period.

Increasing regionalism in the later sixth and seventh centuries is a pattern that has been widely recognized in the Mediterranean. It is also part of a long-term trend that is clearly attested in local pottery fabrics: the gritty Corinthian cooking fabric, which in earlier centuries was used primarily for cooking pots and pitchers, was eventually used throughout the region for the manufacture of the broad range of plain wares and local amphoras, as well. The following vessels have the same fabric as earlier cooking pots and several series of pitchers and other plain wares: C-1981-65 and C-1981-138 (as 1-26); 1-27 and 2-32 (imitations of Agora V, no. G 197, as Corinth XVIII.2, no. 259); 3-23 and 4-14 (imitations of LR Amphora 2); 3-26 (imitation of Corinth XVIII.2, no. 248). (85) The distribution of these forms suggests that they originated somewhere in the eastern Corinthia or coastal Argolid. The phenomenon is paralleled by the change from the buff fabric of second- and third-century Corinthian lamps to the hard red fabric of the LR Corinthian products. By the sixth century the buff marl clays, which had characterized Corinthian pottery since the Archaic period, had been abandoned and did not reappear until the eleventh century. Judith Perlzweig long ago commented on the occurrence of a similar situation in Athens after the Herulian invasion. (86) In Corinth, the phenomenon is ongoing from the first century and seems to accelerate in the fifth. Are the production methods or firing temperatures (hence fuels) different for the two clays? Or do plain ware and local cooking-pot production represent a different, more dispersed, distribution of workshops? Perhaps the increasing use of glass and bronze for utility vessels encouraged a taste for lighter, less easily scratched pottery as well.

In the light of the pottery sequences presented here, the topography of the city toward the end of the LR period and the published history of several Corinthian monuments requires revision. For instance, Roebuck published as late fourth through mid-sixth century the graves in the Lerna court and the Sanctuary of Asklepios, which consist of tile graves for adults interspersed with infant burials in Gaza amphoras. (87) Although fragments of Gaza amphoras are present in assemblage 1, they only become common in assemblage 2, remaining one of the most frequent types through most of the sixth century. (88) Further, all but one of the lamps scattered liberally around the graves are LR Corinthian imitations of Attic lamps and of North African lamps with cross monograms, also paralleled in assemblages 2 and 3. Roebuck also associated a mass of more than 100 bodies in the back of a rock-cut reservoir (IV) below the Asklepieion with the great plague of 542 because of some coins found among them. (89) Rereading the associated coins, however, Zervos now identifies the latest as an issue of Justin II (565-578) rather than of Anastasius (491-518). The lekythoi in reservoir IV have close parallels with those in graves in the Lechaion basilica (see below) and in grave 33 on the Hill of Zeus (a cist grave to the west of the Asklepieion), and should be dated ca. 600.90 Moreover, similar grave furnishings are commonplace in a large number of tombs in the adjoining Lerna Hollow cemetery, dated by the excavator late fifth to mid-sixth century. (91) The use of the Asklepieion cemetery thus apparently dates to the late fifth and sixth centuries, and reservoir IV has no relation with the plague of 542.

The terminus post quem for the construction of the great basilica at Lechaion is the reign of Marcian (450-457), and for its completion, the reign of Justin I (518-527). Pallas suggested that it was destroyed by the earthquakes of 551/2. (92) A reconsideration of the illustrated ceramics from the site, however, suggests different dates both for the destruction and for the construction. Vessels used in the performance of the burial liturgy were found in two of three brick-built graves, one belonging to a presbyter, placed outside and immediately south of the apse. They belong to the period represented by assemblage 3, ca. 600, and the graves stratigraphically predate the destruction of the basilica. (93) We may reject, therefore, the suggestion that the basilica was destroyed in the middle of the sixth century. Moreover, the basilica is built on an unstable sandbar; if the building was substantially complete by 525, it is surprising that it did not suffer major damage in the earthquake of that year that Procopius specifically says destroyed Corinth. (94) It is likely that the basilica was not constructed before ca. 525. (95)

The monumental center of the city was refurbished at the end of the fourth and in the early fifth century: the West Shops were restored, structures were built over the Peribolos of Apollo, the Central Shops were replaced by a long shallow stairway linking the upper and lower areas, and Peirene was completely remodeled. (96) In the mid-fifth century changes were also made to the South Stoa when a long terrace wall replaced the old front walls of the shops97 and a small bath building incorporated three of the former stoa shops. (98) A large fifth-century house complex, which included a rectangular dining room with an apse to accommodate a stibadium and semicircular table and a large space with mosaic floors, was built over the South Basilica, and the Southeast Building was rebuilt. (99) Assemblages 1 and 2 attest widespread robbing activity east of the Theater in the same period, and there was renewed construction east of the Theater plaza. During the fifth and early sixth centuries, the forum and area east of the Theater remained very much a central part of the city. In contrast, the seventh-century horizon represented by assemblage 4 appears in isolated pits in the Panayia field, the west end of the forum, and a complex beside the Theater. Starting no earlier than the late sixth or early seventh century, graves began to encroach on the west and south limits of the forum. (100) Given the law prohibiting burials within cities, which was republished by Justinian, we view this encroachment as evidence that the forum and the area east of the Theater were excluded from the LR enceinte. If so, the LR fortification wall was almost certainly Justinianic. (101)

A small portion of one tower and a section of the wall excavated in 1930 are clearly visible on the east side of the village. Recent remote sensing survey has confirmed that the long linear feature marked by a clear change in the slope of the ground represents the line of the wall to the north and south of the 1930 excavation (Fig. 1). (102) Rather than running more or less due north and forming a reentrant along the terrace as Gregory postulated, the wall turns northwest to the edge of the plateau. (103) From here it appears to have followed the upper terrace westward toward the forum, rather than the lower terrace as Gregory supposed. Had the wall run due north from this point on the upper terrace, the area enclosed would have been overlooked by a salient of the terrace to the east, creating a point of great vulnerability. A section of a substantial cement-and-spolia wall preserving a square tower and standing to a height of about 4 m retained this terrace; it was noted ca. 200 m to the east of the village plateia in 1985. (104) Wiseman’s suggestion that this “Epistyle Wall” formed part of the LR fortification wall was followed by Gregory. This hypothesis may be rejected because that wall lacks a concrete core and does not continue to the east. Indeed, no westward extension of the wall has been found in the forum excavations or on Temple Hill, and extensive remote sensing survey in the area south and west of the Asklepieion could not confirm Gregory’s reconstruction of the wall’s line to the west of the village. (105) The survey did, however, reveal the line of the wall to the south of the Panayia field. This suggests that the west side of the LR enciente lay to the east of the forum and that the fortified area of the LR city would have occupied only about 40 hectares. The late burials within the forum were therefore outside the city.

The four assemblages presented here establish horizons of the first half of the fifth century to ca. 460, the late fifth century to ca. 500 or 510, the late sixth century to ca. 600, and the mid-seventh century as we now understand them at Corinth. (106) In the fifth century, when the forum was substantially remodeled, the city still participated in Mediterranean-wide trade as fully as it had in the past, and the coast of Asia Minor and Athens were important regional contacts. From the late sixth century the site occupied a much smaller area, and a different picture emerges. Aside from a few African fine wares, western imports have disappeared. Commodities from the Holy Land (and the northern Levant?) still reach Corinth, and there seem to be new imports from southern Asia Minor. No so-called Slavic wares were present, and they may have a very localized distribution at Corinth. Attic fine wares and lamps (luxury goods?) have disappeared from the regional scene, replaced by central Greek and Peloponnesian products. Analogous regional common wares are known from Isthmia, Kenchreai, Diporto (Makronisos), (107) Nemea, Berbati, and Argos, (108) and their distribution almost certainly extends throughout the northeast Peloponnese, making seventh-century sites now easily identifiable. Apparently they are not represented in assemblages in the Athenian Agora or at Sparta. Corinth remained an important site through the seventh century; although the amount of material is smaller, its range and variety indicate the city’s continuing prime role as metropolis of Greece.

(1.) This report draws on the excavations east of the Theater that were conducted by Charles K. Williams II in the 1980s, on earlier excavations by Williams in the forum and the Lechaion Road, and on excavations by Guy D. R. Sanders in the Panayia field in 1997 and 1998 for assemblages 1, 2, and 4. We happily acknowledge our debt to Charles Williams, not only for allowing us access to this material but also for many years of mentoring us both. We also thank the 6th Ephorate of Byzantine Antiquities for permission to use the material from Demetrios Pallas’s excavations in the Baths of Aphrodite, published here as assemblage 3. Orestes Zervos, numismatist of the Corinth Excavations, kindly reexamined the coins, and Benjamin Millis provided readings of the graffiti preserved on vessels in assemblages 3 and 4. The pottery profiles are largely the work of Karen Sotiriou, although a few in assemblage 4 were drawn by Sanders; James Herbst, architect of the excavations, was responsible for the scanning and layout of the profiles and for the plans. All photographs were taken by Lenio Bartzioti and Ino Ioannidou. The authors also wish to thank Jodi Magness and Paul Reynolds for discussion of the Palestinian amphora types. The initial work for this article was carried out while Slane held a Research Leave from the University of Missouri-Columbia, and the first draft was written while she held a Solow Art and Architecture Foundation fellowship in the summer of 2001. She wishes to thank both institutions for their support, and also the staff of the Corinth Excavations, both past and current, without whose continuing interest and help the project could not have been completed.

(2.) See Finley 1932 for a history of Corinth that has been generally accepted by scholars, including as recently as Ivison 1996 and Avramea 1997. The invasions cited are those of the Heruli in A.D. 267, the Ostrogoths in A.D. 395, and the Slavs in the 580s. The earthquakes receiving the greatest scholarly attention are those of A.D. 365, 375, and 552. Although the sources that document the last of these nowhere mention Corinth, it is credited with widespread devastation in the region. The effects of the fourth-century earthquakes have recently been questioned by Rothaus (2000, pp. 16-21); those of the sixth-century earthquake, by Sanders (1999, pp. 474-475).

(3.) For instance, the Herulian destruction of the South Stoa proposed in Corinth I.4, pp. 143-144, 151, should now be discounted, because the material within the crucial deposits proves to be late fourth rather than late third century; see Corinth XVIII.2, pp. 4-5 with n. 8; p. 309, n. 27.

(4.) South and west of the forum (Agora southwest) and Baths of Aphrodite: Robinson and Weinberg 1960, p. 231; Robinson 1962, pp. 99- 100, 109-111, 122-124, 132. Temple Hill: Robinson 1976a, pp. 221-223; 1976b, pp. 256-259.

(5.) Final publication of the stratigraphy and context material is still pending, but three preliminary reports (Wiseman 1967, 1969, 1972) and three full reports on aspects of the finds (Wesolowsky 1973; Garnett 1975; Dengate 1981) have been published in Hesperia.

(6.) At the time of excavation in 1956 Pallas incorporated his finds into the American School’s inventory and storerooms at Corinth, and the inventory book was housed in the excavations’ archives.

(7.) Pallas and E. G. Stikas published detailed annual reports in ArchDelt. For the Kraneion basilica, see Pallas 1972, 1974, 1978, 1980; for the Lechaion basilica, Pallas 1959, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965a, 1965b, 1967, 1970; the Kodratos basilica, Stikas 1964, 1965, 1966; the Skoutela basilica, Pallas 1956, 1957, 1960; the fountain at Lechaion, Philadelpheus 1921 and Stikas 1962. For the location of the LR building south of the South Stoa, see Sanders 1999, p. 441, fig. 1 (at A); and for Corinthian basilicas and monuments in general, see Pallas 1963, 1966, 1980, 1981, and Reallexikon zur byzantinischen Kunst IV, pp. 746-811, s.v. Korinth (D. I. Pallas).

(8.) Forum Southwest: Williams, MacIntosh, and Fisher 1974, pp. 9-10; Williams and Fisher 1975, pp. 1-2, 14-17; Williams 1978, pp. 25-28. Great Baths: Corinth XVII.

(9.) The remote sensing project is being conducted by Guy Sanders and by Michael Boyd of the Fitch Laboratory of the British School at Athens. Results have been briefly reported in Blackman 2002, pp. 19-20; Whitley 2003, p. 20; and Sanders 2004, pp. 176-179.

(10.) Sanders 1999, p. 458.

(11.) Excavation under the cement floor of the entrance hall of the bath indicated its sixth-century construction; see Sanders 1999, pp. 458-460. A robbing trench for a large north-south wall contained pottery of the second half of the fifth to early sixth century. Constructed over the fill of the robbing trench was a building, represented by a corner defined by two walls, that was demolished in its turn before the bath was built; its foundations were covered by successive construction layers of the bath. A full architectural phase exists, therefore, between the robbing operation and the construction of the bath.

(12.) A deep layer of broken-up cement derived from the demolition of the two structures yielded two almost complete and several fragmentary cooking vessels and fragments of table amphoras. These do not belong either to known seventh- or late-ninth-century types but rather appear to be transitional forms and probably date to the eighth or early ninth century. An Abbasid coin of the second half of the eighth or first quarter of the ninth century (95-377) was found in a demolition context in the bath’s frigidarium. See also Sanders 1999, pp. 460-463.

(13.) Wright 1980; Slane 1986, 1994, respectively.

(14.) In the summary list, “D.” is the diameter of the rim, measured on the resting surface; on small fragments precise measurement is not possible beyond two decimal points. Items in brackets–e.g., [C-1982-126]–are complete pieces from other contexts selected for illustration in preference to the more fragmentary specimens in the groups from which our material is primarily drawn.

(15.) We take for granted the definitions of African Red Slip (AfRS, here all fabric D from northern Tunisia), Late Roman C (LRC), Cypriot Red Slip (CypRS), the best-known imported amphora types (see further n. 57 below), and the fabrics of Corinthian and Attic lamps. Other frequently occurring fabrics are defined at the appropriate points in our list; see in particular LR micaceous Aegean cooking ware (n. 21), Boiotian RS (n. 25), and the Palestinian amphoras in assemblage 2. Many of the cooking and plain wares described here are of “Corinthian cooking fabric” (C.c.f.). This fabric displays a considerable range of color, from pink to red to gray, but has a consistent variety and quantity of inclusions. Coarser examples are medium hard with a hackly break. They are often red (10R-2.5YR 5/6) and may have sharp firing-layers ranging from pink (7.5YR 6/4) or reddish yellow (5YR 5-6/6) at both surfaces or exterior only to light reddish brown and reddish brown (5YR 5-6/3) at the core and/or interior surface. Some cooking pots have been burned gray (5YR 5/1) and reddish brown (5-7.5YR 5/3) on the exterior surface. These coarser vessels have a few large to very large, angular (freshly crushed?), opaque lustrous white, spherical and tabular calcite(?); sparse, medium spherical, rounded, milky white and gray quartz; and occasional medium, tabular, subrounded, orange red grits; there may be occasional fine, laminar pores parallel with surfaces. Finer pieces are medium hard, red (10R-2.5YR 5/6) with a smooth to conchoidal break and display a few small, spherical, rounded, hollow yellow (lime?) inclusions; sparse medium, milky white inclusions; and tiny, round pores. This is the local fabric used for cooking pots, wheelmade lamps, and several series of pitchers in the first to fourth centuries, and it replaces the Corinthian buff fabric for many plainware types in the LR period. Slane (Wright 1980, pp. 169-170) originally described the fabric as Corinthian, and Sanders (1999, p. 464, fabrics F and G) considered it a local fabric made from a mixture of clays found on the shoulder of Acrocorinth. Recently, George Viele identified some of the white inclusions as potassium feldspar, which originates in a volcanic environment, and suggested that Methana may be the closest potential source.

(16.) Lots 88-61 and 88-63 are from the robbing trench over the west wall of Building 7; lots 84-10, 84-41, and 84-42 are from the same robbing trench west of Building 5; and lot 83-33 is from the robbing trench of the terrace wall that formed the north side of Building 5. Lamp 1-1 and the whole amphoras 1-15, 1-22, 1-23, and 1-25 (published in Williams and Zervos 1983, nos. 73, 70, 68, 72, and 69, respectively) are from the bottom of well 1982-1, as are the amphoras 1-20, 1-24, 1-26, and 1-27. Williams’s preliminary suggestion that this well should be dated ca. A.D. 395 must be modified. Parallels for all these whole amphoras are found in the east of Theater fill and robbing trenches published here and in mid-fifth-century contexts elsewhere. The dumped fill higher up in the well can be dated in the later sixth century.

(17.) The latest lamps in the early fourth century destruction debris are Attic unglazed lamps, Corinthian glazed type XXVII lamps, and Corinthian imitations of Attic unglazed lamps, providing a precise parallel to the Peribolos of Apollo deposit of ca. 310; see Slane 1994.

(18.) For assemblages 1 and 2, we cite the coin specimens as they were published in Williams and Zervos 1982, 1985, and 1989, except where Zervos emended the readings in 2002. 88-134 Honorius or Theodosius II, mint uncertain (Williams and Zervos 1989, no. 67) 88-136 Theodosius II or Valentinian III (425-450), mint of Cyzicus (Williams and Zervos 1989, no. 65) 88-141 Marcian (450-457), mint uncertain (Williams and Zervos 1989, no. 66) 88-135, 88-137, 88-138, 88-140 four minimi (of which three are Williams and Zervos 1989, no. 67)19 Four coins come from the robbing trenches. 84-145 Corinth, Pegasos/trident (400-146 b.c.) (Williams and Zervos 1985, no. 10) 84-146 Constantius II (348-361), mint uncertain (Williams and Zervos 1985, no. 106) 84-147 Theodosius I or II (379-395 or 402-450), mint uncertain (Williams and Zervos 1985, no. 123) 88-142 Arcadius (388-395), mint of Cyzicus (Williams and Zervos 1989, no. 61) The presence of the jeton and a fragment of a modern plate in lot 88-68 show that the removal of modern surface levels above it was not quite complete. The other coins suggest a date of deposit sometime after 425. Lamps 1-1 L-1982-34 Fig. 4 Attic glazed lamp with twisting rosette on disk and plain rim with six incuse circles; on base, A within a circle (Williams and Zervos 1983, no. 73, p. 26 [found with the whole amphoras in well 1982-1]). W. 0.078 m. The A-workshop may have operated only into the early fifth century; see Kerameikos XVI, pp. 74-75. 1-2 Lot 88-63:8 Fig. 4

(19.) Zervos notes that 88-140 is probably an issue of Leo I (457-474) or Zeno (474-491).

(20.) Note also a MR Amphora 18 handle (possibly a predecessor of LR Amphora 2?) (lot 84-10:4) and late Spanish garum jar rims as Ostia III, fig. 656, which Slane classes with the early-fourth-century finds.

(21.) The fabric is soft, reddish brown (5YR 4/4) to yellowish red (5YR 5/6) at the core and gray to dark gray (5YR 5/1 to 4/1) at the extreme edges. Most examples have a smooth conchoidal break, but some have a granular break. There are sparse, fine to small angular, sparkling calcite or mica inclusions; sparse, larger, rounded, spherical, black grits; and occasional, rounded, spherical, medium milky white inclusions. This is Sanders 1999, p. 463, fabric C.

(22.) We have considered and discarded the possibility that this is the body of a gray Beisan amphora (Sarachane type 7A) because the painted decoration is horizontal and confined to the shoulder, because of the location of the ridging, and because the fabric is indistinguishable with a hand lens from that of 1-41.

(23.) The trench was described, and a preliminary catalogue published, by Williams in Williams and Zervos 1982, pp. 135-143, fig. 2, pls. 44-46. The conclusions reported here incorporate a quantified reevaluation of the pottery, carried out by Slane in 1998.

(24.) C-1981-17, LRC form 3B (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 65, p. 137, fig. 2), and C-1981-21, LRC form 3C (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 63, p. 137, fig. 2), reported as coming from this fill, come from the stratum above it and have been omitted here, although they are probably contemporary with assemblage 2.

(25.) The ware is fine, medium hard, reddish yellow (5YR 6/4 to 6/8 to 7/6) with a smooth, slightly conchoidal break; sparse, fine, platy, sparkling inclusions and sparse, rounded, small to medium, spherical, milky white grit. Some examples also contain occasional, small, spherical, subrounded yellow inclusions. Sanders (1999, p.463, fabrics D and E) had described the fabric as probably Attic,” but this suggestion has now been superseded by finds from Askra in Boiotia (see n. 53 below).

(26.) All black where fired very pale brown; red and black where fired reddish yellow.

(27.) We have been unable to substantiate that the dipinti refer to Icaria (by Samos?), as suggested by Adamsheck (Kenchreai IV) and Arthur (1998).

(28.) No examples of this rim or type were catalogued from the Sanctuary of Demeter; this piece simply illustrated the body form of LR stewpots in general.

(29.) C-1981-67 (Williams and Zervos 1982, no. 69, p. 138, fig. 2) comes from the next level above the robbing-trench fill (lot 81-18).

(30.) Neither the field notebook nor the context pottery is in the Corinth Museum. From the page numbers and dates recorded in the findbook, it appears that the fill may have had an upper part with nearly complete vessels and a lower part with more fragmentary pottery; an asterisk indicates the finds from the “upper level” in the list below.

(31.) LRP, AfRS nos. 99.23 (3-8), 105.3 (3-9), and LRC nos. 10.4 (3-14), 10.6 (3-13); Hayes 1971, pls. 36, 37.

(32.) It seems very likely that the amphora toes identified as LR Koan in Arthur 1998, p. 166, fig. 6:3, 4, are pieces of this kind, identified as “amphoriskos” in the original publication.

(33.) Sarachane, deposit 30, pp. 100-105, figs. 38-49.

(34.) This is the material reported in Williams and Zervos 1983, pp. 29-32 (nos. 76-86), as coming from a series of pits buried beneath tile falls in two separate parts of the area. Restudy of the pottery and stratigraphy in 1998 led to the recognition of a large building, built in the middle of the fifth century and destroyed in the seventh, that was buried by its collapsed roof.

(35.) Corinth IV.2, pp. 102-121, pls. XII-XXIII, XXIX; followed without change in Isthmia III, pp. 72-82, pls. 32-37.

(36.) Agora VII, pp. 8-9; Corinth XVIII.2, pp. 7, 17-23.

(37.) Garnett 1975, based on an M.A. thesis presented to the University of Texas at Austin in 1970; it is therefore pre-LRP. We have modified Garnett’s classification only slightly, to reflect a different understanding of the earlier prototypes from which type XXXI lamps were drawn.

(38.) Hayes (LRP, pp. 313-314) suggested a date of ca. 425/430-ca. 550 for type II, and in particular a date in the second quarter of the sixth century for those bearing large jeweled crosses of style E(ii). The beginning date has been confirmed by excavations along the Theodosian wall at Carthage.

(39.) AfRS lamps of Hayes types I and II are found here (LRP, p. 311, citing Corinth IV.2, nos. 1451-2 and 1453-4, respectively), but only type II was imitated at Corinth. Note that Corinth IV.2, no. 1454, is not glazed and belongs to the category of imported “unslipped imitations of North African and circular lamps” with nos. 1501-1505.

(40.) Rather than introducing a new numbered typology for the lamps found at Corinth, we continue to group them under descriptive names in anticipation that some of our subdivisions will be further revised.

(41.) Garnett’s (1975) first category, “copies of Broneer type 27 Corinthian and Attic lamps,” lumped together all prototypes from Corinthian unglazed lamps of the second through third centuries with those from Attic glazed lamps of the fourth century, and she has been followed by, e.g., Oikonomou 1988). With care, this category can and should be divided, particularly in view of the fact that three centuries separate the earliest prototypes from their imitations. As Garnett pointed out, most of the figure types (Eros with torch and thyrsos, centaur attacking, horseman riding left) and rims in this category also exist in Attic glazed lamps; it is also certain that the vine-and-ray rims copy the Attic rather than the Corinthian form (cf. Garnett 1975, n. 44). They could all be classed as copies of Attic glazed lamps, i.e., from fourth-century rather than second-century prototypes. Exceptions which prove that some earlier Corinthian lamps were copied are the gladiatorial scene (Garnett no. 1 and 2-4) and the raised tendrilrim lamps signed “Preimou” (Garnett no. 4, for which cf. Corinth IV.2, no. 566, pl. XI). The gladiatorial disks derive from a single scene, although the rims differ and must have been changed by the LR lampmakers. The scene is known in an unglazed Corinthian example showing a retiarius in loin cloth, left, with short sword and trident (Corinth IV.2, no. 633, rather than nos. 630-632 as Garnett had it; the helmeted figure on the right approaches his opponent as on nos. 630-632); there is a third-century Attic lamp with a similarly crouching, fully armed gladiator (Karivieri 1996, fig. 20), but the costume suggests that it is not the prototype for the LR Corinthian lamps. It is also possible that the LR Corinthian lamps with ovolo on the rim and rays on the disk (Garnett nos. 2, 3) derive directly from Corinthian lamps, because this kind is relatively rare in Athens.

(42.) Corinth IV.2, no. 1454, and perhaps no. 1455 (p. 285, pl. XXII) and nos. 1501-1505 (p. 290, pl. XXIII); Corinth XVII, nos. 141 (p. 83, pl. 35) and 143 (pp. 83-84, pl. 35).

(43.) Corinth XVII, no. 146, p. 84, pl. 35; Williams and Zervos 1983, no. 86, p. 31.

(44.) Karivieri 1996, passim, and see n. 46 below. The evidence from chamber tombs along the modern aqueduct to New Corinth and from the LR buildings east of the Theater also tends to confirm Karivieri’s suggestion that glazing continued into the second quarter of the fifth century; the Attic glazed lamps in these contexts are usually smaller and often more elongated than the Attic glazed lamps of the fourth century, and their slips are very thin and easily overlooked.

(45.) Karivieri 1996, p. 286 (deposit); no. 87, p. 188, pl. 46 (but with three rather than four filling holes), and no. 113, p. 194, pl. 46, respectively.

(46.) Karivieri (1996) illustrated a deposit sequence (pls. 30-44) that spans the whole production of Attic glazed lamps; it is F 16:2, G 5:2, D 12:1, H 7:5, I 11:1, M 18:3, (F 15:3), H-I 7:1 (although “dumped burnt layers” may not constitute a unit), E 2:1, D 6:1. The upper levels of F 16:2 held four glazed lamps with 10 pre-glazing lamps and a coin of Gratian (375-383), which could imply that glazing began later in the fourth century than we have previously thought. Deposits D 12:1, H 7:5, and I 11:1 contained only glazed lamps. Only one out of five lamps from the two burials that constitute M 18:3 and five out of 48 in H-I 7:1 are post-glazing. Finally, glazed lamps are absent from the last two deposits (E 2:1 and D 6:1), and all lamps are post-glazing pieces or imports. This sequence shows that there were periods when only glazed lamps and when only post-glazing lamps were available, and a period when the two were in use together. The fact that glazed and post-glazing lamps do not share such technical details as multiple filling holes and almond-shaped grooves on the base (both limited to post-glazing lamps) also shows that there was a time when they were not made simultaneously (contra Karivieri 1996, pp. 52-53).

(47.) Garnett 1975, no. 1, p. 189, pl. 43; see n. 41 above.

(48.) Garnett 1975, p. 196.

(49.) The single LR Corinthian lamp fragment from the Panayia pit, having a jeweled cross and jeweled rim, is therefore residual in the deposit.

(50.) Hayes originally dated forms 82-84 between 430 and 500; Reynolds (1995, p. 17) basically maintains this dating, struggling with the question of whether any of them commenced before the Vandal invasion in 429. Nor have any of the Carthage types identified in the British excavations yet been identified at Corinth, confirming that those forms had a more regional distribution; LRP Suppl., p. 516; Fulford and Peacock 1984.

(51.) LRP Suppl., p. 517; Reynolds 1995, pp. 148-151, 17-27. Hayes suggested that the style was characteristic of Carthage production that ended with the Vandal conquest in 439.

(52.) This circumstance parallels the importing of Attic lamps, which also seems to have stopped at the beginning of the sixth century.

(53.) The form is common in the Boiotia survey material, and wasters were found at Askra, north of Thespiai (Vroom 2003, pp. 137-139). According to Hayes and Vroom, the form is found in the Athenian Agora as well as at Corinth.

(54.) Reynolds 1995, pp. 30-31. Pallas’s cistern, the basis of our assemblage 3, along with the presence of these forms in pre-destruction levels at Antioch, was the basis of Hayes’s dating of AfRS forms 99C and 105A and LRC form 10A to ca. 600.

(55.) In the west AfRS forms 104C and 107 are considered residual after 600/625 (i.e., they would belong to assemblage 3), and form 105 is thought to disappear by 625/650. But the evidence is still meager. Since only the last of the three was present in Pallas’s cistern, we regard all of them as potentially contemporary seventh-century forms at Corinth.

(56.) These Tunisian amphoras appear elsewhere as early as the third century but have not been identified at Corinth before the fifth century.

(57.) The terminology LR Amphora 1-6 derives from Riley’s work at Carthage (e.g., Riley 1981, fig. 10) and Benghazi (Riley 1979), although nos. 3-6 apply to different shapes. We have found it useful to employ the first two but have abandoned the others in favor of more readily memorable descriptive names. Hence Riley’s Benghazi LR Amphora 4 is our Gaza amphora, and LR Amphora 5 is our baggy Palestinian (note that there are at least two other Palestinian shapes in this report). The Nile Valley LR Amphora 7 is rare at Corinth and does not appear in this report. LR Amphora 3, on the other hand, is common here; but it continues without break a series which began in the Augustan period, the Ephesian micaceous water jar, and shows a continuous typological development into the late sixth or seventh century. Since the change to a double handle and a slightly heavier fabric are the only features that distinguish LR Amphora 3 from its predecessors (the toes evolve gradually), it is impractical to use the term on Greek sites.

(58.) The Portuguese types are relatively poorly dated (late third to fifth century) and probably carried fish sauce. They occur in Rome in the first quarter of the fifth century, but not later (Reynolds 1995, pp. 61-62, 83). We thank Paul Reynolds for identifying these vessels. In Greece the south Italian Keay LII amphora has also been found in Athens (Agora V, nos. M 234 and M 302, pp. 106, 112, pls. 28, 31, perhaps also L 31, p. 77, pl. 16) and in Argos; for a discussion of the type, see most recently Pacetti 1998. Note that vessels like M 234 and L 31 contained honey, which on the latter vessel is identified as Hymettan (Agora XXI, nos. He 36, He 29, pp. 79-80, pls. 45, 46).

(59.) On this point see Panella 1989, p. 156, where she argues similarly that small, footed amphoras dominate local and regional Italian markets from the second century.

(60.) Majcherek (1995, p. 168 with n. 48) identified 2-25 and 2-26 as belonging to his form 3, widely exported around the Mediterranean and typical of the sixth century; we thank J. Magness for this reference.

(61.) Unless 1-46 is an example, which is unlikely, the baggy gray Beisan amphora typical of northern Palestine (Sarachane type 7A) does not occur in these groups and is rare or missing at Corinth.

(62.) For the carrot-shaped amphora, cf. Agora V, no. M 334, pl. 33, and Bass and van Doorninck 1982, no. P80, fig. 8.20; note that our amphoras do not match the profile of Sarachane type 15, which Hayes compared to M 334, or of Crypta Balbi 1, which Sagui compared to it. The carrotshaped form has also been identified at Qaswaret site D-50 in northern Sinai by Arthur and Orem (1998, p. 201, fig. 7:3; reference from J. Magness), although we cannot agree with the parallels given there, either. Reynolds (2000, p. 390) attributes the carrot-shaped type to Akko (following Edna Stern) and points out at least three kiln sites to its north, including Horvath ‘Uza, where this type was produced (Reynolds 2005). See also Arthur 1998, pp. 159-161, figs. 2:2-4, 3, for the distribution of this shape in Italy. The details of the handles, shoulder, and toe of this type match LR Amphora 7 from the Nile Valley and we wonder whether it is an imitation of that type. Enough examples of the Nile Valley LR Amphora 7 have been identified at Corinth to be certain that the fabric is quite different. The fabric of these carrot-shaped amphoras is indistinguishable from that of the baggy and fractional Palestinians.

(63.) None of the amphoras in these assemblages at Corinth shows either the outturned lip, the grooving produced by a single point, or grooving starting below the lower handle attachments, which are the characteristics of this form in the seventh-century debris at Emporio (Ballance et al. 1989, nos. 236-240, pp. 106-109, figs. 36, 38, pls. 25, 26).

(64.) Vroom (2003, p. 143) mentions Chios and Kardamaina on Kos, as well as the Kounoupi kilns near Porto Cheli. Arthur (1998) attributes a different form to Kos, and states (pp. 168-169) that LR Amphora 2 was made on Chios and at Porto Cheli (sc. Kounoupi) while other “Greek” globular amphoras, such as those from Yassy Ada, were made elsewhere, including at Halieis. But the fabric he describes is that of the Kounoupi kilns (our southern Argolid fabric). The southern Argolid fabric differs markedly from Hellenistic Chian or Koan amphora fabrics, for which see Whitbread 1995.

(65.) First identified by Rudolph (1979). This is the fabric from the kiln at site B-19 opposite Kounoupi Island, identified in the Corinth storerooms at various times by W. Rudolph, T. Gregory, M. L. Z. Munn, and C. K. Williams II (see Munn 1985; Megaw and Jones 1983; Runnels and van Andel 1987). The variations we observe suggest that there were numerous such production sites in the Argolid. Other (primarily fifth-century?) vessels in this fabric at Corinth are “fruit amphoras,” some basins, one-handled pitchers, and lids; all except the last display the characteristic combed decoration on the shoulder.

(66.) Keay 1984, form LXV, pp. 352-357, figs. 165, 166. Note also IP 2138 (Broneer 1959, no. 16, p. 336, pl. 72:b), H. 0.65 m; IPR 67-30 (Isthmia V, p. 74, n. 36b, pl. 19:d), p.H. 0.575 m; and the largest example known to us (Alpozen, Ozda., and Berkaya 1995, p. 111), H. 0.83 m and a pointed toe.

(67.) E.g., Corinth XVII, nos. 128, 129, p. 80, fig. 6, pl. 34 (H. 0.46 and 0.49 m, respectively); others are as small as 0.40 m in height; all have a button toe. Aupert 1980, no. 325a, p. 440, fig. 46, which we calculate to be ca. 0.65 m in height, is closer to our larger examples.

(68.) Broneer 1959, no. 15, p. 336, pl. 72:a, from Tower 7 of the fortress.

(69.) Hjohlman 2002, no. 29 (a different fabric?), pp. 17, 145.

(70.) Hjohlman 2002, nos. 33-37, pp. 17, 147-149, all with horizontal handles, which she identifies as the most common amphora type in her tower complex; Miller 1983, p. 87, pl. 26:f. The large diameter of such rims means that care must be taken not to confuse them with basins in the same range of fabrics.

(71.) See Slane 2000. The earliest publication was from Italy (Albarella, Ceglia, and Roberts 1992, pp. 180-184, figs. 11, 12), and production there cannot be completely ruled out. But the coast of Asia Minor south of Pergamon, somewhere in the region of LRC production, so that the two traveled together (as had the earlier Candarly ware and corrugated cooking pots), seems more likely.

(72.) Reynolds 1995, p. 90, figs. 124, 125.

(73.) Reynolds 1995, p. 102, figs. 129, 130.

(74.) Aupert 1980, nos. 269-285b, pp. 433-444, fig. 43; Hjohlman 2002, nos. 40-42, 161, 162, 177, 246-249, 265-268, 279.

(75.) Sanders 1999, nos. 18, 19, p. 470, figs. 13, 14.

(76.) But no such basin rim exists.

(77.) Cf. Sanders 1999, nos. 20-24, pp. 470-473, figs. 15, 16.

(78.) Aupert 1980, no. 311 and perhaps also nos. 307-310, p. 436, fig. 44.

(79.) This change parallels that observed in the fabrics of LR Amphora 2 and it seems very probable that the basins were made in the same workshops as the amphoras. Such associations reinforce our impression of growing regionalism, derived from the drastically reduced amount of imported pottery in late-sixth-century contexts.

(80.) E.g., Slane 1994, no. 58, p. 146, pl. 34.

(81.) E.g., Slane 1994, no. 59, p. 146, fig. 12.

(82.) The rim of what seems to be the last form of the pedestal krater, 1-41 and C-2000-24, is similarly related to the earlier second- to fourth-century rims, but if Slane 1994, nos. 48, 49 (p. 142, fig. 10) are examples of the former, the development would have taken place in the fourth rather than the mid-fifth century.

(83.) See, e.g., Sanders 1999, nos. 15, 16, p. 469, fig. 11; Hjohlman 2002, nos. 145, 217.

(84.) Hayes and Reynolds (pers. comm., citing Beirut); Reynolds 1995, pp. 34-36.

(85.) In addition to the fabric, such vessels also share a typical flat (or occasionally folded and molded) base with a central button and a characteristic way of fashioning and attaching the handles.

(86.) Agora VII, p. 9.

(87.) Corinth XIV, pp. 162-165, pls. 66:2, 67:4; the lamps found around these graves are shown in pl. 67:1 and the lekythoi in pl. 67:5, 6. See Sanders 2004, pp. 180-184.

(88.) No Gaza amphoras were inventoried with assemblage 3. They are common in a sequence of mid-fifth-to early-sixth-century deposits in the Panayia field between the long building and the bath; for infant burials abutting the mid-sixth-century long building; and in later sixth-century contexts in the same area. See also the lots associated with the construction, use, and abandonment of the mid-sixth-century bath, Sanders 1999, pp. 458-462.

(89.) Cf. Shear 1931, pp. 428-436, for multiple interments and accompanying lamps in a chamber tomb near Cheliotomylos, dated, at the time, before the sack of Alaric in 395. The primary interment of multiple individuals in a single tomb and of 50-100 individuals in a chamber tomb is well attested in Corinth at least as early as the fifth century.

(90.) Grave 33 contained a pitcher like 3-17 (C-33-1527), a complete bowl like 3-16 (C-33-1526), and a trefoil-mouth pitcher like 3-40 (C-33-1522). The ampulla C-33-1521 from reservoir IV is most comparable to 4-32.

(91.) Wiseman 1969.

(92.) For the dates of construction and destruction, see Pallas 1966, pp. 159, 166-167; 1967, pp. 158, 161. For the earthquakes, see Procop. Goth. 8.16-25; Finley 1932, p. 478. These earthquakes affected Achaia, Boiotia, and the region of the Alkionidon and Malaic gulfs, destroying “countless towns and eight cities,” among which Procopius enumerates Chaironeia and Koroneia, both in western Boiotia, Patras and Naupaktos at the west end of the Corinthian Gulf, and Echinus and Scarphea on the Malaic Gulf. Seismologists now doubt that such distant events can have had any effect in Corinth (see Ambraseys and Jackson 1990; Ambraseys 1994).

(93.) Pallas (1961, pp. 173-174) reports the discovery of the graves. The northernmost of the three built tombs was covered with limestone slabs and fragments of the basilica’s discarded chancel screen. Painted on the walls in red are crosses with AW pendants. The tomb contained CP-2285, a red-slipped pitcher (with [dagger]TOMA PR incised on the shoulder) like 3-17 from assemblage 3, the Pallas cistern deposit. It also contained three lekythoi and a mug, for which see Pallas 1961, pl. 72:b. The southern tomb, also covered with superfluous marble fragments derived from the basilica, contained three lekythoi and two mugs, all of which remain unpublished. A room annexed to the south transept of the church contained amphoras, cooking pots, and many lamps; see Pallas 1961, pp. 172-173, pl. 72:a. Such lamps are copies of Hayes AfRS type IIB and should date no earlier than 525, but they are earlier than the lamps in assemblage 3, which all have a herringbone pattern on the shoulder. Pallas (1965b, pl. 120) illustrates pottery presumably from the domestic structures south of the basilica. This includes a cylindrical basin similar to 2-46; a basin as Sanders 1999, no. 15, which is a sixth-century precursor of 3-46; and the fine wares LRP, AfRS no. 99.7, p. 153, fig. 28, and LRC no. 6.1, p. 341, fig. 70. LRP, AfRS nos. 87.3, 104.11 and 23, pp. 135, 161-163, figs. 24, 30, and LRC no. 5.3, p. 339, fig. 70, were found during the 1960 season.

(94.) Aed. 4.2.23: “He [Justinian] also rendered secure all the cities of Greece, … renewing their circuit walls in every case. For they had fallen into ruin long before, at Corinth because of terrible earthquakes which had visited the city” (trans. H. B. Dewing and G. Downey, Cambridge, Mass., 1941). Anecdota 18.41-44: “And earthquakes destroyed … Corinth…. And afterwards came the plague as well, … which carried off about one-half of the surviving population” (trans. H. B. Dewing, Cambridge, Mass., 1935).

(95.) A current project of rebagging and labeling Pallas’s excavation pottery has so far revealed no parallels for assemblage 2. The material accords, instead, with assemblages 3 and 4 and with the slightly earlier stewpots from the Panayia field (Sanders 1999, no. 18, p. 470, fig. 13). See Sanders 2004, pp. 184-185.

(96.) West Shops: Williams and Zervos 1990, pp. 336-339. Peribolos of Apollo: Corinth XVI, pp. 21-22. Central Staircase: Corinth XVI, pp. 12-14; Corinth I.3, p. 117, pl. 57:1. On the basis of a rereading of the excavation notebooks and a consideration of the architecture itself, Betsey Robinson has proposed downdating the monumental reconstruction of Peirene once identified as Hadrianic to the late fourth or even the early fifth century; Robinson 2000; 2001, pp. 102-148.

(97.) Visible in Corinth I.4, pls. 32:1 (reusing the columns drums from the colonnade), 41, 42:1 (turning on either side of the Kenchreai road), 45:1; Corinth XVI, pl. 15:2.

(98.) See now Biers 2003; the bath occupies Shops XXV to XXVII. Broneer (Corinth I.4, pp. 143-144, 151) ascribed the destruction of Room H immediately east of the bath to the Heruli in 267. He dated the construction of the bath, of which the foundations were dug into the deep layer of fill covering the marble floor in Room H, to about 300. A reexamination of the pottery in the destruction debris reveals the critical layers to be no earlier than the fifth century (Corinth XVIII.2, pp. 4-5; Biers 2003, p. 309, n. 27). The foundations of the bath were dug from a level 1.5 m above the marble floor into layers containing LRC form 1 and sherds of LR micaceous Aegean cooking ware as 1-28.

(99.) Broneer 1935, fig. 1; Corinth I.5, pls. 46:3 and 53; Corinth XVI, pl. 13:2, plans VI, VII (grids 9-11:N). Weinberg suggested in Corinth I.5 (pp. 77, 113, 122) that the South Basilica may have been damaged by the earthquake of 375, repaired by Valentinian II, and finally destroyed by the Visigoths in 395. Ivison (1996, p. 111) offers fifth-century parallels for the mosaics in the house. Southeast Building: Corinth XVI, pp. 11-12; Corinth I.5, p. 31, pl. 17:4 (this LR Corinthian imitation of an Attic post-glazing lamp suggests a late-fifth- or early-sixth-century date for the tile floor).

(100.) Contra Ivison (1996, pp. 104- 112), who dates the burials too early. Evidence from the Asklepieion and Lechaion basilica and from graves with Syracuse- and Corinth-type buckles provides a development of grave types. Tiles and Gaza amphoras are typical burial covers in the late fifth to sixth centuries, brick-built and rock-cut coffins are used in the later sixth and seventh centuries, and the large vaulted tombs with spolia in the forum may be eighth century.

(101.) Carpenter (in Corinth III.2, pp. 127-129) dated the late wall to the fourth century, and Gregory (1979, esp. pp. 268-270, 279-280), reconstructing its course, proposed a date in the first two decades of the fifth century. Both argued that the latest coins in the strata into which the foundations of the wall were cut and lamps and coins in a “destruction fill” against the wall were of this date, but the dates we report for assemblages 1 and 2 call this interpretation into question. Sections of the strata immediately against the wall were sketched in the notebook, and the elevations of significant finds were noted and indicated on a sketched top plan. In a sketch of a test trench about 70 m northeast of the tower, the robbed-out fortification wall, an alluviated ditch, and a robbed-out proteichisma wall were shown, but the reported finds did not reflect these phases of the wall’s history.

(102). See n. 9, above, for reports of the survey.

(103.) This diagonal line has been confirmed by a test trench excavated in 2000 by the 6th Ephorate of Byzantine Antiquities to the west of the amphitheater. The trench uncovered the concrete core and exterior face of the wall, flanked to the northeast by a dense mass of graves.

(104). Sanders 2002, pp. 648-649.

(105). Wiseman 1967, pp. 410-412; 1969, pp. 87, 92; 1972, p. 7; Gregory 1979, p. 276.

(106.) The regional picture that emerges supports and enlarges Abadie-Reynal 1989.

(107.) Gregory 1986. The site is apparently limited to the fifth and sixth centuries and the published pottery is best paralleled in assemblages 1 and 2.

(108.) Assemblages 3 and 4 present two striking differences from the late Argos assemblage published by Aupert (1980): the forms of the basins are different, and there is a large amount of glass present in the Argos assemblage. In light of the dating of our assemblages, we consider the Argos assemblage to be rather later than ca. 585, the date assigned by Aupert; cf. Avramea 1997, p. 85, and Vroom 2003, p. 53. But we cannot support a date as late as the late seventh/early eighth century, suggested in Curta 2005, p. 123, n. 87.


Abadie-Reynal, C. 1989. “Ceramique et commerce dans le bassin egeen du I[V.sup.e] au VI[I.sup.e] siecle,” in Hommes et richesses dans l’empire byzantin I: I[V.sup.e]-VI[I.sup.e] siecle (Realites byzantines 1), Paris, pp. 143-159.

Agora = The Athenian Agora: Results of Excavations Conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton V = H. S. Robinson, Pottery of the Roman Period: Chronology, 1959. VII = J. Perlzweig, Lamps of the Roman Period, First to Seventh Century after Christ, 1961. XXI = M. Lang, Graffiti and Dipinti, 1976.

Albarella, U., V. Ceglia, and P. Roberts. 1992. “San Giovanni degli Schiavoni (Molise): An Early-Fifth-Century A.D. Deposit of Pottery and Animal Bones from Central Adriatic Italy,” PBSR 61, pp. 157-225.

Alpozen, T. O., A. H. Ozda., and B. Berkaya. 1995. Commercial Amphoras of the Bodrum Museum of Underwater Archaeology: Maritime Trade of the Mediterranean in Ancient Times, Bodrum.

Ambraseys, N. N. 1994. “Material for the Investigation of the Seismicity of Central Greece,” in Materials of the CEC Project “Review of Historical Seismicity in Europe” 2, ed. P. Albini and A. Moroni, Milan, pp. 1-10 ( RHISE/ii_1amb/ii_1amb.html).

Ambraseys, N. N., and J. Jackson. 1990. “Seismicity and Associated Strain of Central Greece between 1890 and 1988,” Geophysical Journal International 101, pp. 663-708.

Amphores romaines = Amphores romaines et histoire economique: Dix ans de recherche. Actes du colloque de Sienne, 22-24 mai, 1986 (CEFR 114), Rome 1989.

Antioch = F. O. Waage, ed., Antiochon-the-Orontes IV.1: Ceramics and Islamic Coins, Princeton 1948.

Arthur, P. 1998. “Eastern Mediterranean Amphorae between 500 and 700: A View from Italy,” in Sagui 1998, pp. 157-184.

Arthur, P., and E. D. Orem. 1998. “The North Sinai Survey and the Evidence of Transport Amphorae for Roman and Byzantine Trading Patterns,” JRA 11, pp. 193-212.

Aupert, P. 1980. “Objets de la vie quotidienne a Argos en 585 ap. J.-C.,” in Etudes argiennes (BCH Suppl. 6), pp. 395-457.

Avramea, A. 1997. Le Peloponnese du VIe au VIIIe siecle: Changements et persistances (Byzantina Sorbonensia 15), Paris.

Ballance, M., J. Boardman, S. Corbett, and S. Hood. 1989. Excavations in Chios, 1952-1955: Byzantine Emporio (BSA Suppl. 20), London.

Bass, G. F., and F. H. van Doorninck Jr. 1982. Yassi Ada I: A Seventh-Century Byzantine Shipwreck, College Station.

Biers, J. 2003. “Lavari est vivere: Baths in Roman Corinth,” in Corinth XX, pp. 303-319.

Blackman, D. 2002. “Archaeology in Greece, 2001-2002,” AR 48, pp. 1-115.

Bovon, A. 1966. Lampes d’Argos (Etudes peloponnesiennes 5), Paris.

Bowden, W., R. Hodges, and K. Lako. 2002. “Roman and Late-Antique Butrint: Excavations and Survey 2000-2001,” JRA 15, pp. 199-229.

Broneer, O. 1935. “Excavations in Corinth, 1934,” AJA 39, pp. 53-75.

–. 1959. “Excavations at Isthmia: Fourth Campaign, 1957-1958,” Hesperia 28, pp. 298-343.

Cambi, N. 1989. “Anfore romane in Dalmazia,” in Amphores romaines, pp. 311-337.

Corinth = Corinth: Results of Excavations Conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens

I.3 = R. L. Scranton, Monuments in the Lower Agora and North of the Archaic Temple, Princeton 1951.

I.4 = O. Broneer, The South Stoa and Its Roman Successors, Princeton 1954.

I.5 = S. S. Weinberg, The Southeast Building, the Twin Basilicas, the Mosaic House, Princeton 1960.

III.2 = R. Carpenter and A. Bon, The Defenses of Acrocorinth and the Lower Town, Cambridge, Mass., 1936.

IV.2 = O. Broneer, Terracotta Lamps, Cambridge, Mass., 1930.

XIV = C. Roebuck, The Asklepieion and Lerna, Princeton 1951.

XVI = R. L. Scranton, Mediaeval Architecture in the Central Area of Corinth, Princeton 1957.

XVII = J. C. Biers, The Great Bath on the Lechaion Road, Princeton 1985.

XVIII.2 = K. W. Slane, The Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore: The Roman Pottery and Lamps, Princeton 1990.

XX = Corinth, the Centenary: 1896-1996, ed. C. K. Williams II and N. Bookidis, Princeton 2003.

Curta, F. 2005. “Female Dress and ‘Slavic’ Bow Fibulae in Greece,” Hesperia 74, pp. 101-146.

Dengate, J. A. 1981. “Coin Hoards from the Gymnasium Area at Corinth,” Hesperia 50, pp. 147-188.

Finley, J. H. 1932. “Corinth in the Middle Ages,” Speculum 7, pp. 477-499.

Fulford, M. G., and D. P. S. Peacock. 1984. The Avenue du President Habib Bourguiba, Salammbo: The Pottery and Other Ceramic Objects from the Site (Excavations at Carthage: The British Mission I.2), Sheffield.

Garnett, K. S. 1975. “Late Roman Corinthian Lamps from the Fountain of the Lamps,” Hesperia 44, pp. 173-206.

Gregory, T. E. 1979. “The Late Roman Wall at Corinth,” Hesperia 48, pp. 264-280.

–. 1986. “Diporto: A Byzantine Maritime Settlement in the Gulf of Corinth,” [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1984), pp. 287-304.

Hayes, J. W. 1971. “A New Type of Early Christian Ampulla,” BSA 66, pp. 243-248.

–. 2003. “Hellenistic and Roman Pottery Deposits from the ‘Saranda Kolones’ Castle Site at Paphos,” BSA 98, pp. 447-516.

Hjohlman, J. 2002. “Farming the Land in Late Antiquity: The Case of Berbati in the Northeastern Peloponnese” (diss. Stockholm Univ.).

Isthmia = Isthmia: Results of Excavations Conducted under the Auspices of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton

III = O. Broneer, Terracotta Lamps, 1977.

V = T. E. Gregory, The Hexamilion and the Fortress, 1993.

Ivison, E. 1996. “Burials and Urbanism in Late Antique and Early Byzantine Corinth,” in Towns in Transition: Urban Evolution in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, ed. N. Christie and S. T. Loseby, Aldershot, pp. 99-125.

Johnson, B. L. 1988. “The Pottery,” in Excavations at Jalame: Site of a Glass Factory in Late Roman Palestine, ed. G. D. Weinberg, Columbia, Mo., pp. 137-226.

Karivieri, A. 1996. The Athenian Lamp Industry in Late Antiquity (Papers and Monographs of the Finnish Institute at Athens 5), Helsinki.

Keay, S. J. 1984. Late Roman Amphorae in the Western Mediterranean: A Typology and Economic Study, the Catalan Evidence (BAR-IS 196), Oxford.

Kenchreai IV = B. Adamsheck, The Pottery, Leiden 1979.

Kenchreai V = H. Williams, The Lamps, Leiden 1981.

Kerameikos XVI = B. Bottger, Die kaiserzeitlichen Lampen vom Kerameikos, Munich 2002.

LRP = J. W. Hayes, Late Roman Pottery, London 1972.

LRP Suppl. = J. W. Hayes, Supplement to Late Roman Pottery, London 1980.

Maioli, M. G., and M. Stoppioni. 1989. “Classe, podere Chiavichetta: Anfore di importazione,” in Amphores romaines, pp. 572-573.

Majcherek, G. 1995. “Gazan Amphorae: Typology Reconsidered,” in Hellenistic and Roman Pottery in the Eastern Mediterranean: Advances in Scientific Studies. Acts of the II Nieborow Pottery Workshop, Nieborow, 18-20 December 1993, ed. H. Meyza and J. Mlynarczyk, Warsaw, pp. 163-178.

Megaw, A. H. S., and R. E. Jones. 1983. “Byzantine and Allied Pottery: A Contribution by Chemical Analysis to Problems of Origin and Distribution,” BSA 78, pp. 235-263.

Miller, Stella G. 1983. “Excavations at Nemea, 1982,” Hesperia 52, pp. 70-95.

Munn, M. L. Z. 1985. “A Late Roman Kiln Site,” AJA 89, pp. 342-343 (abstract).

Oikonomou, A. 1988. “Lampes paleochretiennes d’Argos,” BCH 112, pp. 481-502.

Opait, A. 1996. Aspecte ale vietii economice din provincia Scythia (secolele IV-VI p. Ch.) (Institutul roman de tracologie. Bibliotheca thracologica 16), Bucharest.

Ostia III = A. Caradini and C. Panella, eds., Le Terme del Nuotatore (StMisc 21), Rome 1973.

Pacetti, F. 1998. “La questione delle Keay LII nell’ambito della produzione anforica in Italia,” in Sagui 1998, pp. 185-208.

Pallas, D. I. 1956. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt (1953), pp. 175-183.

–. 1957. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt (1954), pp. 210-218.

–. 1959. “Scoperte archeologiche in Grecia negli anni 1956-1958,” RACrist 35, pp. 187-233.

–. 1960. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1955), pp. 193-200.

–. 1961. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt (1956), pp. 164-178.

–. 1962. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt (1957), pp. 95-104.

–. 1963. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1959-1960),” ArchDelt 17, BA1 (1961-1962), pp. 69-78.

–. 1964. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt (1961), pp. 137-154.

–. 1965a. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt (1958), pp. 119-134.

–. 1965b. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt (1959), pp. 126-140.

–. 1966. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt (1960), pp. 144-170.

–. 1967. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt (1965), pp. 137-166.

–. 1970. “Uber der Datierung eines Kapitells der Basilika von Lechaion (Korinth),” ByzZeit 63, pp. 69-75.

–. 1972. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt (1970), pp. 98-117.

–. 1974. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt (1972), pp. 205-250.

–. 1978. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt AA (1976), pp. 163-195.

–. 1980. “[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt (1977), pp. 162-183.

–. 1981. “Corinthe et Nikopolis pendant le bas moyen-age,” FelRav 118 (1979), pp. 93-142.

Panella, C. 1989. “Le anfore italiche del II secolo d.C.,” in Amphores romaines, pp. 139-178.

Petsas, F. 1968. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ArchDelt 21, B’2 (1966), pp. 334-339.

Philadelpheus, A. 1921. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ArchDelt 4 (1918), pp. 125-135.

Reynolds, P. 1995. Trade in the Western Mediterranean, A.D. 400-700: The Ceramic Evidence (BAR-IS 604), Oxford.

–. 2000. “The Beirut Amphora Type, 1st Century b.c.-7th Century A.D.: An Outline of Its Formal Development and Some Preliminary Observations of Regional Economic Trends,” Rei Cretariae Romanae Fautorum Acta 36, pp. 387-395.

–. 2005. “Levantine Amphorae from Cilicia to Gaza: A Typology and Analysis of Regional Production Trends from the 1st to 6th Centuries,” in Late Roman Coarse Wares, Cooking Wares, and Amphorae in the Mediterranean: Archaeology and Archaeometry (LRCW I) (BARIS 1340), ed. J. Ma. Gurt i Esparraguera, J. Buxeda i Garrigos, and M. A. Cau Ontiveros, Oxford, pp. 563-612.

Ricci, M. 1998. “La ceramica comune dal contesto di VII secolo della Crypta Balbi,” in Sagui 1998, pp. 351-382.

Riley, J. A. 1979. “The Coarse Pottery from Berenice,” in Excavations at Sidi Khrebish, Benghazi (Berenice) II (LibAnt Suppl. 5), ed. J. A. Lloyd, Tripoli, pp. 91-467.

–. 1981. “The Pottery from Cisterns 1977.1, 1977.2, and 1977.3,” in Excavations at Carthage, 1977, Conducted by the University of Michigan VI, ed. J. H. Humphrey, Ann Arbor, pp. 85-124.

Robinson, B. A. 2000. “The Fountain of Peirene at Corinth: A Fresh Look at the Triconch Court,” AJA 104, p. 326 (abstract).

–. 2001. “Fountains and the Culture of Water at Roman Corinth” (diss. Univ. of Pennsylvania).

Robinson, H. S. 1962. “Excavations at Corinth, 1960,” Hesperia 31, pp. 95-133.

–. 1976a. “Excavations at Corinth: Temple Hill, 1968-1972,” Hesperia 45, pp. 203-239.

–. 1976b. “Temple Hill, Corinth,” Neue Forschungen in griechischen Heiligtumern, ed. U. Jantzen, Tubingen, pp. 239-260.

Robinson, H. S., and S. S. Weinberg. 1960. “Excavations at Corinth, 1959,” Hesperia 29, pp. 225-253.

Rothaus, R. M. 2000. Corinth, the First City of Greece: An Urban History of Late Antique Cult and Religion, Leiden.

Rudolph, W. 1979. “Excavations at Porto Cheli and Vicinity. Preliminary Report V: The Early Byzantine Remains,” Hesperia 48, pp. 294-324.

Runnels, C. N., and T. H. van Andel. 1987. “The Evolution of Settlement in the Southern Argolid, Greece: An Economic Explanation,” Hesperia 56, pp. 303-334.

Sagui, L., ed. 1998. Ceramica in Italia: VI-VII secolo. Atti del Convegno in onore di John W. Hayes, Roma, 11-13 maggio 1995, Florence.

Sanders, G. D. R. 1999. “A Late Roman Bath at Corinth: Excavations in the Panayia Field, 1995-1996,” Hesperia 68, pp. 441-480.

–. 2002. “Corinth,” in The Economic History of Byzantium from the Seventh through the Fifteenth Century (Dumbarton Oaks Studies 39), ed. A. E. Laiou, Washington, D.C., pp. 647-654.

–. 2004. “Problems in Interpreting Urban and Rural Settlement in Southern Greece, A.D. 365-700,” in Landscapes of Change: Rural Evolutions in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, ed. N. Christie, Aldershot, pp. 163-193.

Sarachane = J. W. Hayes, Excavations at Sarachane in Istanbul II: The Pottery, Princeton 1992.

Shear, T. L. 1931. “The Excavation of Roman Chamber Tombs at Corinth in 1931,” AJA 35, pp. 424- 441.

Slane, K. W. 1986. “Two Deposits from the Early Roman Cellar Building, Corinth,” Hesperia 55, pp. 271-318.

–. 1994. “Tetrarchic Recovery in Corinth: Pottery, Lamps, and Other Finds from the Peribolos of Apollo,” Hesperia 63, pp. 127- 168.

–. 2000. “East-West Trade in Fine Wares and Commodities: The View from Corinth,” Rei Cretariae Romanae Fautorum Acta 36, pp. 299-312.

Stikas, E. G. 1962. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt (1957), pp. 89-94.

–. 1964. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt (1961), pp. 129-136.

–. 1965. “La basilique cemeteriale recemment decouverte a Corinthe,” in Atti del VI Congresso internazionale di archeologia cristiana, Ravenna, 23-30 settembre 1962 (Studi di antichita cristiana 26), Rome, pp. 471-479.

–. 1966. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Prakt (1962), pp. 51-56.

Vroom, J. 2003. After Antiquity: Ceramics and Society in the Aegean from the 7th to the 20th Century A.C. A Case Study from Boeotia, Central Greece (Archaeological Studies Leiden University 10), Leiden.

Wesolowsky, A. B. 1973. “The Skeletons of Lerna Hollow,” Hesperia 42, pp. 340-351.

Whitbread, I. K. 1995. Greek Transport Amphorae: A Petrological and Archaeological Study (Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper 4), Athens.

Whitley, J. 2003. “Archaeology in Greece, 2002-2003,” AR 49, pp. 1-88.

Williams, C. K., II. 1978. “Corinth, 1977: Forum Southwest,” Hesperia 47, pp. 1-39.

Williams, C. K., II, and J. E. Fisher. 1975. “Corinth, 1974: Forum Southwest,” Hesperia 44, pp. 1-50.

Williams, C. K., II, J. MacIntosh, and J. E. Fisher. 1974. “Excavation at Corinth, 1973,” Hesperia 43, pp. 1-76.

Williams, C. K., II, and O. H. Zervos. 1982. “Corinth, 1981: East of the Theater,” Hesperia 51, pp. 115-163.

–. 1983. “Corinth, 1982: East of the Theater,” Hesperia 52, pp. 1-47.

–. 1985. “Corinth, 1984: East of the Theater,” Hesperia 54, pp. 55-96.

–. 1989. “Corinth, 1988: East of the Theater,” Hesperia 58, pp. 1-50.

–. 1990. “Excavations at Corinth, 1989: The Temenos of Temple E,” Hesperia 59, pp. 325-369.

Wiseman, J. 1967. “Excavations at Corinth, the Gymnasium Area, 1966,” Hesperia 36, pp. 402-428.

–. 1969. “Excavations in Corinth, the Gymnasium Area, 1967-1968,” Hesperia 38, pp. 64-106.

–. 1972. “The Gymnasium Area at Corinth, 1969-1970,” Hesperia 41, pp. 1-42.

Wright, K. S. 1980. “A Tiberian Pottery Deposit from Corinth,” Hesperia 49, pp. 135-177.

Kathleen Warner Slane





Guy D. R. Sanders




106-76 ATHENS


COPYRIGHT 2005 The American School of Classical Studies at Athens (ASCSA)

COPYRIGHT 2006 Gale Group