Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 72

The Eastern Korinthia Archaeological Survey: Integrated Methods for a Dynamic Landscape Author(s): Thomas F. Tartaron, Timothy E.

Gregory, Daniel J. Pullen, Jay S. Noller, Richard M. Rothaus, Joseph L. Rife, Lita Tzortzopoulou-Gregory, Robert Schon, William R. Caraher, David K. Pettegrew, Dimitri Nakassis Source: Hesperia, Vol. 75, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 2006), pp. 453-523 Published by: American School of Classical Studies at Athens Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25068001 . Accessed: 24/01/2011 08:30
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ascsa. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American School of Classical Studies at Athens is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Hesperia.


HESPERIA 75 (2006)
Pages 453S23




Integrated Dynamic Methods Landscape for a

From 1997 to 2003, the Eastern Korinthia Archaeological Survey (EKAS) a 350-km2 region east of the ancient city of Corinth, focusing investigated on the northern Corinthian plain. EKAS developed an interdis primarily that emphasizes novel applications of geological sci ciplinary methodology

ence, computer-based systems, and strategies for fieldwork and knowledge and collaboration among experts. In this article, the research philosophies methods are presented and their application illustrated with results from the survey. The historical development of one settlement, Kromna in the north ern Corinthian plain, is examined in detail to demonstrate the interpretive potential of data collected by these methods.

Corinth was one of the great cities of the ancient world, in large measure because of its location near strategic crossroads to the east.1 The Isthmus of Corinth provided overland passage from southern to central Greece, and linked the Corinthian Gulf, leading to Italy and the west, with the and the Levant to Saronic Gulf, giving access to the Aegean Sea, Anatolia, east (Fig. 1). The site of ancient Corinth has been excavated for more the Much Studies at Athens.2 School of Classical than 100 years by the American in the and topographic work has been undertaken archaeological including excavations
in 2000

city's eastern hinterland,

1. The Eastern Korinthia Archaeo and Frederick and

at the Panhellenic

his co based


Tartaron, authors, on the tems




logical Survey (EKAS) began with two

seasons of environmental work in 1997

2003 by Gregory andDaniel Pullen. The project operated from 1999 to 2003
under Ministry a permit granted by the Hellenic to the American of Culture


and 1998, directed by JayNoller,

under Institute by the Hellenic permits granted and Mineral of Geology

Geographic (GIS) database.

the drawings Information For

Exploration (IGME). In 1999 EKAS was codirected byTimothy Gregory

? The American School of Classical

School of Classical Studies atAthens. All of the photographs reproduced here

are from the project at Athens archives. Thomas


tion of helpful suggestions financial support from several see below, sources, Acknowledgments. 2. Corinth XX, with references.

Sys the recogni and gener







'V? ^S^ ^^^v\ {/ r-^f i^yy f.. Acrocormth ?0/

-^ "on??*
Rachi Boska

Examilia ?

v Oil)


Athikiaj fi






o^. Vrk ^iX

0 10 Km S

at Isthmia,3 the Saronic port at Kenchreai,4 and the two major as well as extensive studies of the prehistoric sites of Korakou and Gonia,5 as it relates to historical sources.6 A few unsystematic built environment of Poseidon
reconnaissance surveys were also undertaken, the most thorough being

Figure thia, text



of the


Corin in the


sites mentioned

James Wiseman's

in the 1960s.7 survey of the entire Corinthia walking Between 1997 and 2003, the Eastern Korinthia Archaeological Survey (EKAS) investigated a 350-km2 region east of the ancient city of Corinth; of the project and preliminary findings are the underlying methodology detailed below. For two decades prior to the survey, Timothy Gregory and other EKAS thia, focused and Frankish archaeologists on the Corin a large body of work produced on the Roman, Byzantine, particularly but not exclusively and historical this extensive archaeological periods.8 With 7. Wiseman 1963,1978; Biegen 1920,1921,1930; Sakellariou and Faraklas 1971; Hope Simpson 1981,
pp. 33-35. graphic For studies similar kinds of topo of the neighboring Sikyon, and Kleonai, see Lolos 2002, and Bynum 1995, respectively.

3. Isthmia II;Gebhard 1993; Greg ory 1993b; Hemans 1994; Isthmia VIII.
4. Kenchreai I.

8. Gregory 1985a, 1985b, 1990, 1993a, 1993b, 1994; Isthmia V; Kar

dulias, Rife 1994. Gregory, and Sawmiller 1995; Kardulias, and Dann 1997; Gregory, and Yerkes 1999; also Dann

5. Biegen 1921,1930; Rutter 1974.

Renewed Greek rently excavations Archaeological under way. at Gonia Service by the are cur

around regions the southwestern 1998


6. Doukellis

1994; Romano 1993.

and forthcoming,











Early Neolithic Middle Neolithic Late Neolithic Final Neolithic Early Bronze Age Middle Bronze Age Late Bronze Age (Mycenaean)
Submycenaean Protogeometric Geometric 1065-1000 1000-800 800-700

6500-5800 5800-5300 5300-4500 4500-3100 3100-2000 2000-1680 1680-1065


Archaic 480-323 Classical Hellenistic 323-31

Early Late Roman Roman


31 b.c.-a.d. 250-700


Early Medieval (Byzantine) Late Medieval (Byzantine)

Ottoman/Venetian Modern *Dates are in approximate calendar

700-1200 1200-1537
1537-1827 1827-present years.


sequence, we have been able to firmly affix our study to a chronological framework covering more than 8,000 years, from the establishment of Early Neolithic re to the present (Table 1). Nevertheless, communities previous search has offered only limited understanding of the territory inwhich these sites were found, including the locations of habitation and nonhabitation sites, road networks, and patterns of resource distribution and exploitation.9

has thus been both a natural outgrowth of ongoing research and a means to address these gaps in survey using modern specific knowledge, methods unavailable to previous investigators. EKAS The
offers a

eastern Corinthia,
unique opportunity

or the territory
to investigate the

lying east of ancient Corinth,

changing relationships among

urban, "sub-urban," and rural entities from prehistory to the present. Prior to EKAS's work, a number of settlements, industrial and exploitative areas, and other sites were already known outside Corinth's urban zone in the eastern Corinthia. The area was heavily traveled in antiquity, providing access to land and sea connections at the heart Corinth life-sustaining of mainland was a major Greece. The fertile coastal source of for Corinth and, just as agricultural for a time provided high-quality architectural building stone important, that was employed not just at Corinth and Isthmia, but was also exported at the sanctuaries of for temple construction Epidauros and Delphi.10 The quarries

plain commodities

of the eastern Corinthia


10.Tod 1985, pp. 200-205; Wise man 1978, p. 68; Burford 1969. 11.Hayward 1996,2003.
12. E.g., Gregory 1993b; Isthmia


can still be seen today at Examilia

and Kenchreai,



VIII; Kardulias 1999; Rothaus 2000.

long-term human interplay of local, regional,


reflects the history of the eastern Corinthia and supraregional interactions.12 A principal

456 aim of EKAS has been





to explore the way these relationships developed and changed spatial and temporal scales. In the prehistoric and the eastern Corinthia was not dominated by Corinth protohistoric periods, tend to emphasize the Corinthia itself, and the questions surrounding at diverse the entire northeastern P?loponn?se. Why were regional contrasts within Korakou and Gonia seemingly not abandoned during theMiddle Helladic and Zygouries? Why was there apparently period, in contrast toTsoungiza noMycenaean center in the Corinthia? It seemed likely that intensive palace survey might clarify these and other poorly documented patterns, such as an apparent to dispersed settlement at the end of change from nucleated theMycenaean period.13 The sub-urban and rural eastern Corinthia becomes less distinct ar chaeologically once Corinth came to dominate the region, and our questions center more on agency in the hinterland. Was the trajectory of Corinth s eastern hinterland inextricably tied to that of the Corinthian state? Or were residents in the hinterland region and with been the changing its hinterland in historical data would contextualize able to pursue independent relations within the outside world? Thus, a primary focus of EKAS relationship between the urban center at Corinth times. More known the has and

we broadly, hoped that the survey sites through the discovery and study of new sites and off-site material, reveal intraregional variability in human the diverse coastal, lowland, and upland landscapes of the activity upon over time, and illuminate the interactions of the eastern Corinthia people of the eastern Corinthia with other parts of the Aegean area and beyond.

Numerous research components were included under the EKAS umbrella (Table 2). They are described briefly here as an introduction to the detailed treatments of methods and results below. EKAS created a precise terminol to define specific methodological ogy concepts, giving rise to a number of terms and acronyms are terms and associated acronyms (Table 3). These the discussion that follows.

used throughout


Component Years


Geomorphological survey Geographic Information System

Systematic archaeological survey

1997-2001 1997-2002 1999-2002


Intensive (off-site) mode survey

Extensive mode survey

Experimental Modern Coasts Mortuary

(on-site) mode survey

survey 1999,2001 1999-2002 survey 2000-2002 survey


and harbors survey





13. Rutter


pp. 80-81.








Term DU Discovery Unit Discovery Unit


Meaning Basic Unit Basic survey survey unit unit of intensive discovery discovery mode mode survey


Extensive GU Geomorphic


Localized ML Mortuary

Cultural LOCA


survey the influence of landscape formed under of a specific geological a discrete a subset of the MU, of time. Normally cultural process during period concerns the formation the GU of the archaeological record. explicitly scatter or feature Term for "site" or anomalous Individual piece Term for burial or funerary feature, a class of LOCA designated by the mortuary

of extensive


survey MU Morphostratigraphic Unit Geomorphic or littoral entity processes of distinct of variable surface form, shaped by tectonic, alluvial, colluvial,


and frequency

SIA Special Interest Area

Term for concentrations of LOCAs that form interpretable foci of human activity



was fundamental to nearly every aspect of our work. At Geomorphology a basic level, we defined the survey universe as geomorpho archaeological the notion that artifacts behave as sediments. logical space, emphasizing Their movements are found are they strongly influenced by postdepositional (cultural and natural) that are processes best studied using geomorphological in advance of the techniques. Well and the condition inwhich soils, sediments, faults, survey, teams of geologists mapped archaeological and other features at scales ranging from coarse (drainage basins) to fine information formed a basis for the units). This (localized geomorphic context of the eastern Corinthia, and supplied long-term environmental such as coastline change, availability of fresh derived characteristics many of archaeological water, distribution of arable soils, and stability/instability were intimately involved in the daily survey landscapes. Geomorphologists survey units were placed by teams of archaeologists to respect geomorphic boundaries, and geomorphol interns accompanied survey teams to provide guidance and observations ogy on fine-scale processes record. affecting the surface archaeological effort: archaeological and geomorphologists

Geographic Geographic

Information Information


(GIS) are now a regular feature of Systems archaeological projects,14 but until recently GIS had been used in survey archaeology mainly to analyze retroactively data that had already been col lected.15 Before the survey commenced, we developed amultifunctional GIS that has been integrated into every phase of our research.16 Topographic (contours, landforms), environmental

14. Wescott
Levy et al. 2001.

and Brandon 2000;

15.Gillings2000,p.l09. 16.Our GIS is based on the ESRI software suite, including Arc VIEW,
ArcINFO, and more recently, ArcGIS.

(vegetation), geomorphological (geology, hydrology, tectonics), and cultural (sites, burials, roads, land use) data sets were created and continuously updated during the course of the satellite imagery, and topographic, geological, project. Aerial photographs, and geomorphological maps served as the principal data sets for locating through sur teams navigated and and geological survey. Archaeological mapped aerial photographs and topographic maps vey units using georeferenced and georeferencing the environmental and cultural data obtained

The GIS database was designed and generated by Richard Rothaus and his
students at St. Cloud State University.






on which locational and contextual information was by the GIS, and FileMaker databases, using Access Pro, printed (Fig. 2). Relational were developed for the environmental and archaeological data, and these were linked to paper field forms and to the GIS. generated the end of each field day, survey teams digitized their archaeological and geomorphic units into the GIS, and entered all data generated by survey, artifact processing, and geomorphic analysis in the appropriate database. At These linked in the GIS to the spatial information, making to generate detailed reports and a images on daily basis. Once in the GIS, this information was used to analyze and interpret incorporated across the survey area. patterns of artifact distributions it possible GIS was also used to develop spatial probability models for settlement patterns in targeted periods of the past, notably for the coasts and harbors survey (see below). databases were

Figure 2. Discovery Units mapped

before survey near and the prehistoric on site of Gonia superimposed

an aerial photograph, with UTM

coordinates and notable features





intensive (off survey operated in three modes: Systematic archaeological site) mode, extensive mode, and LOCA (on-site) mode, reflecting different scales of investigation of a culturally and physically diverse landscape. The in intensive survey discovery phase of the survey was performed mainly tracts called Discovery Units In these units, walkers at 10-m in (DUs). tervals inspected 2-m swaths of the surface, counting artifacts and picking up a representative sample according to the "chronotype" collection system teams followed behind to (explained below). Artifact processing perform in-field analysis of the finds. Extensive mode survey included nonsystem atic advance scouting and systematic, nonintensive investigation of areas







falling outside the intensive survey transects. The small size of the extensive survey teams (typically two or three people) allowed them to range widely over the survey area. LOCA (on-site) mode survey involved intensive field of anomalous concentrations encountered during the discovery investigation x 10 m were means of a phase of survey.Many investigated by grid of 10 we a flexible the sampling squares, but adopted approach to accommodate and activities of each diverse nature of the anomalies. The specific methods of these survey modes are described in detail below, with several examples.

Experimental EKAS were designed

Survey and carried out a series of experiments to reflexively evalu and to calibrate results against survey conditions. Methods

of bias

sources for their efficacy, with shortcomings exposed and the results could then be fed back into the process as identified; to field procedures. In calibrating the results, we sought to adjustments

ate procedures evaluated

identify the effects of variability in local field conditions, making it possible to adjust quantitative and qualitative results, and providing a meaningful basis for comparison aims, and among projects with disparate methods, local conditions.17

Modern EKAS


aimed to extend equal treatment to the Modern period, defined as extending from the formation of the modern Greek state in 1827 until the present. Survey archaeologists have shown interest in modern Greece to the extent that it serves the purposes of but the ethnoarchaeology,18

term 17. The "experimental survey" may also refer to the use of excavated to evaluate the results of plow material zone experiments and surveys: Clark

investigation of this chronological period is a relatively new a without tradition.19 In order to augment phenomenon methodological the typical emphasis on "traditional" and recently abandoned settlements, seasonal structures,20 and agricultural and industrial land use,21 EKAS the Modern integrated period into standard data collection practices archaeological in part by the regular survey teams.22 Modern features were implemented recorded on survey forms and modern artifacts were counted and gathered; this information was then incorporated into the project s GIS and data bases. For these purposes, theModern cally defined phases: Recent Modern (1960-present), was divided into two histori period and Present Modern (1827-1960) the postwar transition from a largely

and Schofield 1991. 18. E.g., Chang 1984,1992,1997; Sutton 1988,1994; Whitelaw 1991; Forbes 1997;Murray and Kardulias 2000.
19. Diacopoulos, Given, and Seretis

2003; Diacopoulos 2004. 20. Vroom 1993,1996,1998; 2000; Lee 2001.



the latter reflecting agrarian society to an affluent, modern, urban one. A ceramic typology for Recent Modern was established on the basis of stratified samples from the Corinth typology This and efforts are under way Excavations,23 for Present Modern. to provide

a similar

Seretis 2003. and Diacopoulos 22. Diacopoulos 2004, pp. 186-190. 23. of Guy Sanders, Courtesy director of the Corinth Excavations,

gation well as oral information State Archive inNew

an investi archaeological approach has been complemented by of the relevant written records?both historical and archival?as from Corinth For example, the Greek is expected to yield important information land use, and modernization in the eastern local inhabitants.

who kindly provided access to stratified

modern in Ancient from pottery Corinth. the Panayia site

24. Courtesy

of Adam


director of the State Archive inNew

Corinth, and EKAS collaborator.

about patterns of subsistence, in theModern Corinthia period.24 The modern survey also considered the human aspect of the present cultural landscape, including contemporary indigenous perceptions of heritage, history, and national identity, and the







on the cultural threat and impact of modern landscape.25 development issues were explored with local residents, aswell aswith representa in local and tives of the Greek Archaeological Service and administrators


to sub sites (LOCAs), ranging from cemeteries have been fully investigated. The example of Lakka settlements, Skoutara, a recently abandoned agricultural settlement (Fig. 1), shows how period were integrated.26 The archaeological investigations of theModern exploration of the settlement and its surroundings aimed at clarifying the Fourteen modern relationship between in the Modern and their surrounding in a polje among steep hills Nestled period. Skoutara consists of a number of scattered domestic isolated rural establishments

landscapes and ravines, Lakka structures, a recently refurbished church, agricultural features including pine forests. The threshing floors and terraced fields, and resin-producing included geomorphological by EKAS investigation analysis, intensive the survey, an architectural survey of the standing buildings, pedestrian search for archival


and the collection

of oral information Skoutara

from con


the basis of archaeological evidence alone, Lakka forms to the conceptually and static interpretation rigid nucleated agricultural hamlet or village. But information former residents


of an isolated, obtained from

a challenges this interpretation, revealing instead highly and flexible rural settlement and landscape. We conclude that dynamic of scattered seasonal farm Lakka Skoutara was neither a concentration houses, nor an isolated village or hamlet. Rather, for most of the 19th and in between, a semipermanent settlement 20th centuries itwas something linked with the characterized by lengthy periods of habitation intimately to the outside world inland town of Sophiko, and connected through harbor road networks and exchange networks facilitated through the town of Korphos.27 The study of Lakka Skoutara holds broad im approaches to Greek rural plications for conceptual and methodological settlement in the past, reinforcing current views that emphasize dynamism extensive a false over static impression categories that give rural village.28 and of an eternal, unchanging


Coasts The



research survey was constituted as an independent to address the difficulties of identify endeavor under the EKAS umbrella ing prehistoric and early historical harbor sites in the Corinthia. A harbor coasts and harbors

in a broader probability model for the types location model, embedded of settings favored by prehistoric inhabitants, succeeded in guiding us to some cases associated settlements, several potential harbors and in including These a a fortified Early Bronze Age settlement and Mycenaean results have been published in detail elsewhere.29
25. For the discussion of such issues,



26. Diacopoulos 2004, pp. 194-198.

27. Caraher and Diacopoulos 2004.

29. Tartaron, 2003; Pullen, Rothaus

see, e.g., Fotiadis 1998.

1993; Hamilakis

Rothaus, et al. 2003; 2006.

and Pullen Tartaron,

28. Sutton 1994,2000.

and Noller









The mortuary survey was constituted in recognition that proper documenta tion of the mortuary landscape required specialized skills and data collection beyond that carried out by survey teams. This study sought to document in and interpret the physical remains of burial as indices of variability The mortuary land use, and sociocultural settlement, identity. landscape and processes, including may illuminate or reflect historical contingencies the dynamic and medieval aHellenic The interaction between Corinth and its hinterland in ancient of times and the evolution in modern times. of settlement and the emergence

identity systematic incorporation of the mortuary survey into the research inMediterranean is unprecedented of EKAS strategy and field methods in conjunction with the extensive and landscape archaeology. Working intensive

survey teams, the mortuary survey team examined both previ known and newly discovered sites and recorded the essential material ously of mortuary behavior.30 Each site was then dated by associ components ated finds or formal was evaluated, burial typology, comparable evidence for Corinthian and locational data were entered into the EKAS GIS. The

mortuary menting

survey also served an important conservational purpose by docu numerous sites of ancient or Byzantine date that were endangered

or construction. by looting, vandalism, dumping, agriculture, has been an abundant This study revealed that the eastern Corinthia and complex mortuary landscape throughout history.31 Survey directed by 47 discrete burial areas, representing well over Joseph Rife documented 1,000 single burial events dating from the Geometric through theMiddle or Late Byzantine are situated near areas of dense settlement periods. Most and coastal or inland routes of traffic on the Isthmus. The survey of modern as part of the broader cemeteries, directed by Lita Tzortzopoulou-Gregory modern survey (see above), recorded 10 sites containing 837 graves. These which have been in use since the late 19th or early 20th century, are sites, located throughout the survey region.




In 2002, a geophysical and soil resistance methods survey using magnetic at several locations of interest identified during surface conducted

were mixed, but at one location, Perdikaria (see survey.32 The results and soil resistance anomalies outline the Fig. 16, below), strong magnetic in two principal orientations plans of several large buildings indicating a 30 x 15 m distinct chronological phases, including complex measuring with
30. Cf., table 17. e.g., O'Shea Pearson 1984, pp. 39 pp. 5

41, table 3.2; Carr 1995, pp. 129-132,

III; Parker 1999,

of internal rooms (Fig. 3). These architectural well to a dense scatter of artifacts and architectural respond Roman-Late Medieval date. At another concentration

a number

features cor fragments of

31. Dickey 1992; Isthmia IX, forth

coming. 32. Sarris 33. Kvamme 2003. 2003.

near a location, Kesimia (Fig. 16, below), two anomalies of Classical material may represent kilns. The geophysical to evaluate the of a new survey allowed us simultaneously capabilities of geophysical instruments for landscape-scale generation questions,33 and to test the reliability of our surface patterns. At the Kesimia location,






6 nT/m

-11 nT/m

16 nT/m













3. Processed


of geo

physical results from Perdikaria (above), with interpreted outlines of

0.00u _ 0.00 5.00 10.00 v 15.0?T 20.00 structures 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 50.00 55.00 Courtesy A. and other features (below). S arris


of architectural blocks learned that a substantial surface concentration subsurface foundations?at least and fragments has no corresponding not where we them to be. This result is a useful reminder of the expected by which such material remains have

processes complex transformational been moved around the landscape.








A persistent concern in regional archaeology is the continuing inability of data to support increasingly sophisticated social questions. Because survey not allow survey permits in Greece archaeological typically do regional data sets to be strengthened through complementary excavation, coring, or studies (see below), survey archaeologists have found long-term replication is to improve the practices by which data are collected and into a project's "archaeological knowledge incorporated EKAS focused on data collection first through a series of "qual system."34 that the most effective response the free and timely flow ity control" practices, and second by emphasizing at every stage of the research. In of information among project members this section we describe fundamental principles that guided our collection and treatment of data.

Research Modern


survey projects tend to be regional in scope and heavily multidis as van Andel has noted, research ciplinary, yet, Tjeerd agendas and inter actions of experts from various disciplines are often poorly coordinated.35 across seem to constitute close coordination Although disciplines would a common-sense that ought to be universal in multidisciplinary approach as natural scientists and pottery projects, experts such specialists continue to be marginalized in survey design and fieldwork.36 These experts often serve as consultants excluded from guiding the fieldwork, independent in our view, from the contexts of and most detrimentally archaeological close collaboration discovery. EKAS tackled this problem by emphasizing

he uses 1997, where an to describe the term more narrowly interactive in environment computer 34. McGlade which archaeologists can define GIS and and

of experts from all participating disciplines, beginning with the planning of the project, and continuing and organization through all preliminary the archaeological and subsequent data recording, analysis, studies, survey, and interpretation. The fieldwork aspect of this philosophy entailed in-field collaboration in the acquisition of primary data. For example, archaeologists participated in geological and geomorphological in seasons prior to the com mapping mencement of the surface survey, and geomorphology interns were attached to archaeological survey teams on a daily basis. The geoarchaeological to true program of EKAS exemplifies our commitment interdisciplinary an to van Andel's call for research, explicit response daily communication and "intensive planning exchange stage through scientists.37 In the field, specialists in artifacts of many periods geological formed processing teams, which followed the survey teams to examine the finds in their contexts of discovery. Survey team leaders were assisted in by in-field consultation with experts in geomorphology, decision-making and other disciplines. The result was enhanced communication archaeology, and deeper understanding of the data across disciplines. Other examples of this collaborative approach are described in relevant sections below. of information, ideas, and procedures from the to final and publication" between archaeologists

explore problems through other technical tools. New approaches including advocated


to landscape archaeology, to those but not limited in postmodern and Knapp archaeologies 1999), are in Aegean

(e.g., Ashmore rather poorly

survey expect that fuller integration of these perspectives in survey research design will Aegean in the be an important development on these future. For initial thoughts see Terrenato 2004. prospects,

developed archaeology. We

35. van Andel 1994. 36. van Andel 1994, p. 28; Alcock
2000, also p. 265. 37. van Andel the "contextual 1994, p. 28; see of Karl


Butzer (1978,1982).

464 This





an interesting parallel in the "reflexive archaeol philosophy finds at the new excavations at Catalh?y?k.38 Ian Hodder and his ogy" practiced to the trenches to observe the recovery of colleagues brought specialists material "at the trowels by excavators primary context.39 edge" to counteract the usual practice of removal and subsequent analysis by others with no experience of the

In a similar way, the participation of specialists (both in EKAS field teams created a and nonarchaeological) archaeological "rich interactive matrix"40 between surveyors and specialists, who shared the experience enlightening of contexts consultation. of discovery and opportunities for mutually

Sampling, EKAS





is situated

in theMediterranean

"siteless"), intensive survey,41 in clear distinction the survey universe in a systematic way, or which investigation of "sites," however defined, in the landscape. The nonsite, intensive

tradition of systematic, nonsite (or to surveys that do not walk to the exclusion approach focus on the discovery and of other material

to landscape-based rather than site-based derscores ontological problems with the concept of site.43 EKAS employed a stratified an attempt to extract data that would be sampling scheme in representative We first divided 350-km2 area. possible of the characteristics of the entire study or zones. the survey universe into environmental strata, A first stratum consisted of six major drainage systems encompassing the each drainage, further stratification survey area (Fig. 4).Within local environmental and ecological variability. Set in this broader environmental EKAS background, sought to selected parts of the area between the ancient city of Corinth investigate identified as as

a commitment implies a distinction that un survey,42

and the Saronic Gulf, in part to explore how ecological diversity may have affected life over the past 8,000 years. Long transects, made up of small, survey units, were walked across a selection of the strata we contiguous defined (Fig. 4). These transects were intended to be representative of the and cultural diversity of the survey area, but their locations the limitations imposed by our annual permits. Each season, we were denied access to portions of the requested sur of which areas would be excised. vey area, and we had no foreknowledge extent of intensive survey was limited primarily to the The geographical environmental also reflected Corinthian plain (the Examilia and Isthmia basins), with quite areas small approved for survey in other basins (Fig. 4). Total coverage in units amounted to 3.85 km2, rather than a projected 12 km2, in large survey part because bureaucratic delays in issuing permits reduced our total field northern time for archaeological survey over four seasons to nine of the planned 16 weeks (Table 4). This modest coverage was augmented by extensive 38.Hodder 1997,2000b. 39. Hodder 2000a, pp. 5-6; Farid 2000; Berggren andHodder 2003,
pp. 426-428. 40. Doonan 41. For early 2002, p. 787. see

Thomas 1975; Foley 1981; Dunnell

1983. In the and Dancey Aegean and Snodgrass see, e.g., Bintliff area, 1985,

et al. 2002; Cavanagh 42. Bintliff, Kuna, 2000, p. 1. 43. As also discussed Cherry, Davis,



and Venclov?

1988; Wright
Davis, approaches,

et al. 1990; Cherry,

1991; Wells

and Mantzourani


in, e.g., Gallant and Mantzourani

and Runnels 1996; Davis et al. 1997;

1991, pp. 21-22; andDunnell








Corinthian Gulf^
Ayios Kosmas/Kyras Vrysi Gonia/Yiriza ^

-KEnchr&ti -AyiaParaskevi Kromna Xylokeriza V&ia



M " "?

10 Kilometers

Lakka Skoutara^g


Figure ing the

4. Eastern six basins

Corinthia, that define and as the survey

show the area

of archaeological as well interest, archaeological

environmental locations transects of

us to examine survey in nonsystematic (scouting) mode, which permitted a further 20 km2 or more within the zones designated under our permits. in survey units was particularly restricted during the first season, Coverage when our permit was interpreted to mean that objects could not be moved, us to use a cumbersome system of flagging artifacts for inspec compelling tion. In subsequent seasons we were not permitted to remove artifacts from our survey units, was to collect artifacts from many although it acceptable we would have to make "sites." Although preferred targeted collections from off-site units, the material we retrieved under a liberal designation of sites is preserved for future examination by specialists. we drew up ini our While sample did not much resemble the plan the losses were to an extent offset by the project's other components tially, framework (Table 2), several of which operated in a broader geographic without formed and which schedules, together for the natural and cultural history of the illuminating full study area. To cite two examples, the geomorphological component and the coasts and harbors survey operated throughout the study area an context the same restrictions on field

sites encountered outside under geological permits. Certain archaeological the Examilia and Isthmia basins during this work were later approved for archaeological investigation. An unexpectedly positive lections was found response to the restriction on nonsite col teams in the creation of in-field artifact-processing







1999 Discovery Units 256 0 0.97 2000 600 20 1.87 2001 392 62 0.79

Total 1336 82 3.85

2002 88 0 0.22

Extensive Discovery Units

Coverage (km2)

that examined became

the finds

a fundamental

enforced endipitously on the surface reasons: the negative impact archaeological crisis of storage space in Greek museums.44 The

of discovery. In-field processing component of our integrative philosophy, and ser our inclination to limit artifact collections for other record and the

in their contexts

issues that engender conflict between the goals of survey archae are and those of the Greek archaeological establishment ologists complex,45 and beyond the scope of this article. Certainly, we do not pretend that our survey, or that unencumbered by these optimal for restrictions we would have done everything the same way. Yet the important point about the EKAS research model is that the presence of experts from in the field afforded unusual flexibility, enabling all relevant disciplines conditions were us to undertake demanded. These circumstances the necessary redesigns as unpredictable adversities tested, and ultimately validated, the flexibil into research design, staffing, and logistical capability. In the climate of survey archaeology in Greece, adaptability

ity we built currently uncertain

is essential.

The The



as Geomorphological


preserve pervasive evidence of landscapes of the eastern Corinthia natural (e.g., alluvial, colluvial, tectonic) and anthropogenic (e.g., plowing, bulldozing, removal of soils) processes that disturb soils and sediments, and consequently to recognize surfaces and deposits they may contain. Failure and control for this complex transformational history before of the surface result in specious interpretations survey may the ancient

performing record. A central foundation

innovation of EKAS was the explicit geomorphological for defining and analyzing survey space. a Prior to archaeological reconnaissance, survey geomorphological of landforms and soils that influenced the selection of survey provided maps units, the way such units were treated in the field, and the interpretation of archaeological phological survey universe was first divided into geomor spaces, at different scales; the most relevant of these are the data. The as major landforms shaped by tectonic, alluvial, colluvial, by their distinct surface forms. MUs
2004. record In-field Gregory and processing, driven by heritage ing issues rather than permit restrictions, is more world, 45. common notably in other Australia: parts of the et 44.

Morphostratigraphic Unit (MU) and theGeomorphic Unit (GU).The

MUs are defined or littoral processes, and identified associated with alluvial processes might


include terrace deposits, fans, flood insets. The boundaries between MUs and floodplain channels, commonly or aspect. The GUs are individual pieces of occur at breaks in slope, angle,

al. 1998, p. 4; Pardoe 2003.

See, e.g., Kardulias 1994a;

Cullen 2001, p. 14; Cherry 2003,

pp. 155-159.







map Figure 5. Geomorphological ping: Discovery Units (light lines) within numbered Geomorphic Units (heavy lines)

Eastern Korinthia Archaeological Survey ? 400 Meters

or large, that have formed under the influence of landscape, however small a alluvial or colluvial) or cultural (e.g., bulldozing) single geological (e.g., process during a discrete period of time. The boundaries of the GUs take
into account the effects of such processes on artifact movement and loca

tion. The GU
they can be

is generally Units

a smaller unit within

the larger MU,



the basis for the placement of our archaeo our survey was logical Discovery Units (DUs). The inviolable principle of the GU, archaeologists that DUs must not cross GU boundaries. Within were free to define as many DUs as they deemed necessary, primarily ac as visibility and ground cording to uniform conditions of discovery, such Geomorphic formed were mean (Fig. 5). For this reason, survey units generally small, the size being ca. 0.3 ha and the median 0.21 ha. The DUs were placed in the and archaeologists. The GU/DU field by teams of geomorphologists system us to recognize formation processes at a very fine scale, and to use permitted to better understand that knowledge the integrity of the artifact distribu cover tions that we This encountered. from the surface material approach units.46 One traditional subunits) As a result, the inferences that we have drawn foundation. have an explicit geomorphological differs from standard techniques of defining survey is the long transect (with or without on the regard for topography, landscape without to avoid judgmental placement history, designed method

superimposed terrain, or depositional and to provide a statistically valid sample. Another method defines "tracts" or the land according to units of modern land use (e.g., an agricultural field in terms of topography lying between two roads), ostensibly homogeneous or
46. Mattingly 2000, p. 7, table 2.1.

two methods ignore ground visibility. Yet survey spaces defined by these the fine-scale depositional history of sediments, and in our experience tend






yiii W?i?????^



* -i?fv':.*?' ?.;??; *,

to mix geomorphic
and other processes.



by bulldozing,



Figure topped,

6. Rachi


a flat terrace, with

relic marine

second innovation was the attachment of a trained geomorphol intern to each survey team.47 On a daily basis, the geomorphologist ogy the team to perform fine-scale mapping and to consult with accompanied A the team on geomorphological the survey units. With processes within of this collaboration, we avoided creating units comprising a mixed contexts, preserving basis for interpretation of the meaningful a better understanding of surface survey results. Archaeologists developed and geologists became more sensitive to archaeological problems dynamics, and cultural material. the benefit field geomorphologists' as two brief sions, examples will Rachi Boska, an uplifted marine The contributions were vital on many occa show. During survey at discovery-phase terrace overlooking the northern Corin

Mt. Oneion

in the distance, looking

thian plain (Fig. 6), we observed that recent deep plowing for a new vineyard had exposed copious remains of amultiperiod site, including segments of a Classical or Hellenistic fortification wall and a dense scatter of artifacts to Roman times. To investigate the indicating repeated use from Neolithic x m col a site, designated LOCA 9001, we superimposed grid of 90 10 10 lection squares over the vineyard (Fig. 7). Before the collection began, the geomorphology team identified a subtle disturbance archaeologists' notice: the deliberate movement (along with the artifacts it contained) from the northern that had escaped of some of the plowed the soil

to the southern

half of the vineyard, presumably to level an east-west-trending gully. This detected on the basis of subtle properties of color and texture disturbance, in the dumped sediments, was significant because it involved the removal of artifact-rich soil from one part of the vineyard to another with far lower it is virtually certain that our artifact density. Without this intervention, would have produced a false impression of the extent of the investigation scatter by the amount of material inmany southern grossly overestimating excluded those squares from our grid collection, and later

has now also been practice the Troodos by adopted Archaeological and Environmental Survey Project: 47. This Given 2004, p. 18.

grid squares.We







Figure 7. Plan of the gridded col lection of LOCA 9001 at Rachi Boska, showing the location of the gully into which soil and artifacts
were imported from the northern

gridded area.Artifact density figures (sherds/m2) are indicated on each of the DUs.

Figure 8. View of a limestone cairn atVayia with vertical rills formed by

water erosion (rillenkarren), the long-term development in situ erosiona! features showing of such



that low artifact densities the modification.

in DUs


the affected


site, the Saronic coastal site of Vayia, geomorphological a framework analysis provided pivotal evidence leading to chronological for limestone cairns and other architecture.48 In this case, geomorpholo features, known as karren, as well as gists examined karstic dissolution recognized (Fig. 8). They in the progressive development of these features, suggesting framework with two broad phases in antiquity. chronological these observations with archaeological survey and site map Combining we were able to demonstrate a clear association between the older ping, differences a relative other formational features on the limestone

justified At another

48. Described Pullen, and Noller

in detail 2006.

in Tartaron,






(EH) II artifacts, the only material phase architecture and Early Helladic recovered from the interior of the cairns and sharing with the stone certain features such as calcium carbonate accretions. As a re geomorphological sult of this interdisciplinary effort, we recognized a fortified EH II coastal a a settlement overlooking superb harbor, and developed geoarchaeologi in cal method for studying architecture that may have broad applications karstic regions worldwide.

The eastern Corinthia


is environmentally diverse, and thus may be in a variety of ways for analysis. One approach is to suggest partitioned zones make up the EKAS that three notional geographic survey area: a lowland corridor that links ancient the northern Corinthian plain, with the Corinthian south of the Isthmus; upland hills and mountains (Fig. 1). These zones zone and the Isthmus; the Saronic Gulf and the trans-Oneion the zone, comprising Gulf


and the basins south of the Oneion ridge reflect the experience of traversing a landscape of one ascends from the northern in which diversity plain topographical or around the liminal Oneion in rugged range and continues through terrain either inland toward the Argolid or coastward toward the Saronic a potentially humanized approach is useful in that it presents of the landscape, and also because restrictions placed on our

Gulf. This

perception permit limited most definable from

of our work to the northern Corinthian plain, readily this phenomenonological point of view. Yet the basis of our initial definition of a 350-km2 survey zone was the geomorphologi a are transported that sediments, cal perspective by including artifacts, series of drainages that crosscut and are crosscut by the geographic zones limitations placed on the pedestrian (Fig. 4). In spite of the geographical we were able to work throughout the survey, perform paleoenvironmental
350-km2 area.

northern P?loponn?se cial and interglacial

has been shaped mainly by regional uplift of the and by sea-level fluctuations caused by Tertiary gla at the is positioned sequences.49 Because Greece southern edge of the Eurasian tectonic plate, with the African plate be ing subducted below, the country is seismically active and the historical The

eastern Corinthia

record of frequent and often devastating earthquakes reaches back almost three millennia and continues to the present.50 Three main structural fault normal faults domains affect the eastern Corinthia: W-WNW-trending bounding the Corinthian Gulf; NNW-trending ern and NWand NE-trending P?loponn?se; terminus of the Hellenic Volcanic Arc. Tectonic normal faults of the east structures of the western

activity along these faults is one of the most rapid and significant agents of landscape change in the Corinthia. The regional record of uplift and subsidence is complex and vari able, and local sequences may be the most significant factors in topography and coastline configuration. The faults also play a key role in determining sources the supply of fresh water through the distribution of groundwater accessible through wells and issuing at the surface as springs (Fig. 9).

49. Freyberg 1973; Hayward 1999, 2003.

50. Ambraseys and Jackson 1990;

Stiros 2001.







p'-**^'\ ?. i Fi v ' , i.^^^m






-tiK Figure Isthmia 9. faults Major and Examilia the traversing basins. Note fault 'P


.;;!:iSlW-Sl ?In. EfaiiMTJS^miMi

the convergence lines at Kromna.

of two major

The surface geology of the eastern Corinthia is dominated by carbon ate rock, generally white to grayish Pliocene-Pleistocene marine marls, Pleistocene and limestones that are sandstones, capped by conglomerates, and other clay units (Fig. 10).51 The properties of the limestones, including stratification, solubility, and mineralogy, produce springs and strongly influence the formation of soils, particularly the red interbedded with marls
51. eral Institute of Geology and Min

Exploration 52. Yassoglou,

1972,1975. Kosmas, and

(iron-oxide stained) terra rossa,52 but because of regional topography and colluvial and alluvial processes are also major contributors.53 In ad relief, dition, the complex depositional history of these sediments, particularly as affected by tectonic occurrences activity, has resulted in highly variable of red, white, and greenish-white suitable for potting.54 clays as a is characterized Today, the eastern Corinthia fragmented Medi terranean forest with a xeric moisture numerous regime.55 On the basis of studies, a consensus has emerged that the climate paleoenvironmental of Greece?that is, temperature, rainfall, and seasonality?has remained

Moustakas 1997;Atalay 1997. 53. Yaalon 1997; van Andel 1998;

Bruno 2003. Perlman, and Asaro 54. Farnsworth,

Whitbread 1977;
55. Yaalon Adams and Faure

pp. 1998, 159-162; p. 636.









Kenchreai Saronic Gulf

I A Recent Deposits E??3 Recent EluvialDeposits

I* 71 Hi H Pleistocene Tyrrhenian Red, Clayey Marine Sand

and Near Shore Deposits Deposits

10. Figure Geological the northern Corinthian T. F. Tartaron, p. 17, fig. 2.1 features plain. 2003, of


I Pliocene Marls

Bffl Mesozoic Limestone

E23 Ophiolite
relatively constant for the last 5,000 years. By that time, theMediterranean climatic regime of hot, dry summers and cool, wet winters was established. recent glacio- and hydro-isostatically corrected sea-level curves Similarly, sea level was attained some 6,000 years ago, and has suggest that modern on average increased a few meters at most since that time.56 Yet it is also that variability at smaller geographical and temporal scales frequently becomes significant in cultural processes. Frequent co-seismic uplift and subsidence events in the Corinthia have altered the relationship between shore and sea, drowning coasts or thrusting them upward inways that greatly exceed the modest changes accommodated by general eustatic recognized or isostatic sea-level models.57 The same maybe said of climatic variability: annual or decadal anomalies in climate may induce drought, flooding, and other perturbations with devastating effects for archaeological consequences patterning.58 on humans and significant

after Hayward

56. Lambeck


Wells 57. Noller et al. 1997;

pp. 173-176. 58. See, e.g., Bawden


and Reycraft and

the Corinthia has been of considerable interest to geologists Although for its tectonic history and long-term structural development,59 much less is

2000; Chew 2001.

59. Freyberg 1973; Vita-Finzi

King 1985; Keraudren and Sorel 1987.







in areas that would be most relevant to about local geomorphology local faults, hydrology and groundwater sources, and activity: soils, karst topography. EKAS studied the environmental of the eastern history known human Corinthia of ways. Each of the six natural drainage systems, streams, subsidiary streams, and the surrounding land comprising major forms that provide sediment load and transport cultural material, was consid a ered as the coarsest-grained entity in nested hierarchy of geomorphological of Holocene each basin, finer-grained units were mapped to document the of soil landscape evolution, including investigations coastline change, vegetational tectonics, succession, mineralogy, in a number

units. Within

history erosion, raw materials The

sourcing, and dating of deposits and landforms. was based on analysis of satellite imagery geomorphic mapping and aerial photography, with extensive field checking by teams of ge Surface deposits and landforms were mapped ologists and archaeologists. onto 1:5,000 topographic into digital elevation sheets and incorporated for the use of field teams. Field verification transects the physical consisted of numerous in each drainage system, inwhich landscape, examined geomorphic geomorphologists surfaces and surfi


north-south described

cial deposits exposed in natural outcrops such as stream banks and coastal soil profiles of exposures in wells, landfill pits, and bluffs, and completed new house excavations. These or soil-sediment-slope-landscape profiles, catenas,*? involve geomorphic mapping of modern stratigraphy, measurement and classification, sediment and soil and long-term rates of soil erosion, investi

and geochronological control for these processes. Localized sequences of tectonic uplift and subsidence were gated by extensive field examination. With topographic maps, active and potentially identified These diverse and mapped studies the aid of Landsat active major the survey area.

imagery and fault domains were

possesses unusually and dynamic landscapes, shaped continuously by natural forces of tectonism, erosion, and sedimentation during the Holocene?the period of a human presence in the Corinthia. But time inwhich we can demonstrate

throughout show that the eastern Corinthia

the long history of intensive human activity has also transformed eastern Corinthian of the landscape landscapes. In addition to varied modifications wrought settlements and agro-pastoral land use, intensive by permanent and the dense population left behind a thick residue of durable exploitation particularly


ceramics, in surface and subsurface deposits. In many surface scatters form multiperiod and locations, overlapping palimpsests often the "continuous carpets" of material from many periods that have been noted also in Boeotia.61 of our methodological attention was directed to finding effective out these transformational of sorting processes and their respective to variability in the surface record. A close integration of contributions Much


60. Birkeland 1984, pp. 238-254. 61. Bintliff and Snodgrass 1988,
p. 506.

and archaeology allowed us to evaluate landscape stability geomorphology and assess the integrity of surface artifact scatters by mapping processes, of artifacts, at a very fine scale. Archaeological including the movement survey units were plotted using this information, and the survey effort fo cused on ways to record as faithfully of the surface remains. as possible the content and variability






The main


was to investi activity of EKAS systematically archaeological a of landscapes within the survey universe. As noted above, gate sample intensive discovery mode, extensive the survey operated in three modes: discovery mode, and site investigation mode.



unit of the discovery The Discovery Unit (DU) was the methodological of the survey. In the discovery phase, our main objectives were (1) to phase detect broad patterns of the presence and absence of human activity; (2) to remains and advance preliminary (3) to characterize where possible hypotheses the chronology and functional characteristics of the material remains; (4) to collect environmental information as a contextual framework for the evaluate the varying of archaeological material; and (5) to identify anomalous concentrations It was not the purpose material that may warrant further consideration. to analyze at a very fine scale the re of discovery-phase investigation mains within were the DU, but rather to collect basic data over a broad swath "anomalous" concentrations of material remains of the landscape. When a second of more detailed and precise analysis was phase perceived, often initiated. relied in part on relatively standard pro Crew members were survey in the Mediterranean. at a uniform 10-m spacing and equipped with two tally counters arrayed ("clickers"; normally one each for pottery and tile/brick),62 a compass, and a plastic resealable bags. Each walker observed the ground surface in 2-m investigation cedures for intensive The of the DU swath only, ameter to the right and ameter to the left, resulting in an ef fective 20% sample of each survey unit. All observed artifacts larger than a thumbnail were counted. Artifact counts were generated and recorded by so we were able to obtain sub-DU data about the individual fieldwalkers, to counting artifacts, walk quantities of broad artifact types. In addition ers collected certain far the most abundant surface objects. Potsherds, by artifact type, were picked up in accordance with the chronotype system, in which objects that are "unique" to an individual fieldwalker in each DU are gathered (see below). Other ceramic materials, mainly rooftiles and bricks, were collected according to chronotype principles, but lithics and other were collected in their entirety. At the conclusion of nonceramic objects were placed together in labeled artifact walking the unit, all collected objects a bags according to material type. Finally, the team filled out three-page DU form detailing field conditions and the results of the investigation.63 Extensive Discovery Units (EDU) provided some degree of coverage areas that could not be examined using intensive methods, and targeted for certain interesting or problematic locations that otherwise would not be examined. Such areas might fall outside the transects earmarked for DU access for a large were sampling, often because they particularly difficult of in a way and fully laden team. Some EDUs were walked systematically similar to DUs, using forms to record most or all of the same information density of material its significance; concerning

62. tile were

In rare cases when not the dominant used not

and pottery artifact to count other

were types, clickers materials. Artifacts with clickers were

counted being counted by hand.

63. The EKAS forms are available

from the first author by request.







as in DUs, but covering ground at much greater walker intervals. Other extensive investigations were unsystematic, taking the form of thin "probes" sent into unknown territory to gather information in advance of the inten sive survey effort. Yet all extensive units were defined in geomorphological terms, encountered were processed using the chronotype Extensive survey teams were small, typically composed of a team system. an assistant, and a The small size allowed the leader, geomorphologist. team to maximize its most crucial asset, mobility. and artifacts

The The



chronotype system performs two related but distinct roles, serving both as a framework for classification of artifacts and as a standard for field collec

tion. It is designed to simplify and improve the quality of the identification of pottery in the field, while facilitating our ability to analyze these data. In this dual role, the chronotype system has now been used successfully in five regional surveys: the Sydney Cyprus Survey Project (SCSP), the Australian Paliochora-Kythera Archaeological Survey (APKAS), EKAS, and Environmental theTroodos Archaeological Survey Project (TAESP), and the Pyla-Koutsopetria Archaeological Project (PKAP).64 Chronotype The as a System for Classification

structure for clas system provides a flexible, hierarchical chronotype on the a form or date, ability of any analyst to assign sifying artifacts based however precise or imprecise, to a given object.65 The hierarchical nature of the chronotype system is expressed in a structure consisting of seven basic classes?pottery, stone/lithics, metal, glass, terracotta (nonpottery), are then divided into subclasses. shell/bone, and other?that Pottery, for seven subclasses: coarse ware, medium coarse ware, example, is divided into fine ware, semifine ware, kitchen/cooking ware, lamp, and pithos. These are further divided, subdivisions potentially ad infinitum. Each chronotype of a unique set of the following characteristics: period (chronol a ogy); place in the hierarchy of class and subclasses (e.g., given chronotype cannot be both coarse ware and fine ware); and presumed function. If the of a given artifact do not fit all the characteristics characteristics of an a new existing chronotype, chronotype must be created. The place of a particular object in the hierarchy at any given moment consists

a by the ability to assign it date or form. The date may be a decade or less) or very broad very specific (within (e.g., "ancient," "Early Each level of the hierarchy represents a specific chronological Modern"). or formal resolution, so that all artifacts a residing at given level possess the resolution inherent to that level. The structure of the chronotype system is determined
64. The was Given PKAP: Nakassis, the term the et al. 2002; Caraher Boutin et al. 2005; et al. 2004; Caraher, collection sentative comm.). 65. Given for the et al. 1999, p. 24; Meyer is known as


system Given

designed and used first by the Sydney

Cyprus Survey Project: et al.

strategy collection"

"repre pers.

(M. Given,

and Pettegrew


1999, pp. 24-25; Meyer 2003; Meyer andGregory 2003. For APKAS and EKAS: Gregory 2004; TAESP:

pp. 11-13. For SCSP andTAESP,

is reserved "chronotype" while system of classification,

2003; Gregory 2004.






is infinitely expandable, however, so that an expert may move an object to or for that matter create new higher level of resolution in the hierarchy, to accommodate the expert's knowledge. New chronotypes chronotypes were often created teams in the field. the processing by a on standard is based, whenever Further, the chronotype possible, in different period specializa of artifacts used by ceramicists definitions tions. The system is thus flexible and not based on definitions of "wares" that may be appropriate for one period but not for others. In some cases an individual most scholars call a "ware," but in chronotype may be what on others it may be defined by decoration (e.g., types of transfer prints the same "ware," types of combing on Late Roman amphoras) or some other characteristic that has chronological significance. The system easily so that a scholar should be able to identifications, it does not matter for search the pottery using different definitions?thus, if an amphora is identified by Dressel type, Bernice type,Williams analysis accommodates multiple and Peacock number, or any other system; the database recognizes these identities. Finally, because the system encourages the creation of chrono or types that accommodate ambiguous (e.g., currently undatable material "ancient historical," "prehistoric," and "ceramic age" are EKAS chrono on ceramic analysts to shoehorn objects into dubious types), the pressure

functional, or fabric categories is reduced, and problematic chronological, on broad, hierarchical scales of probability material can be differentiated classified or simply consigned to oblivion.66 rather than wrongly The chronotype for a kind of Roman red-slipped pottery is illustrated in Figure 11. In this well-developed the hierarchy includes chronotype, class (pottery); subclass (fine ware); subdivision (Roman fine ware); type (Roman red slip); subtype (African Red Slip); form (Form 50); and sub form (Form 50B). Chronotype As as a Method for Field Collection

amethod for collecting artifacts in the field, the chronotype addresses the problem of obtaining a systematic sample of artifacts by generating information about both the quantity and variety of the artifacts encountered in a given physical space (DU, EDU, or portion of LOCA). The "clicker" count provides a very rough indication of raw and relative densities of or functional various classes of artifacts, but does not allow chronological such as pottery, tile, lithics, and differentiation beyond gross categories so on. The system offers a compromise between the impos chronotype

sible goal of recording all artifacts and the unacceptable option of gaining a given space. an view of the material residing in impressionistic only is the principle that fieldwalkers pick up The essence of this compromise they encounter, with the important exceptions of those that we mean that the artifact ones already collected. By "duplicate" duplicate is the same in terms of (1) material (color, thickness, coarseness, etc.); (2) or (slip, glaze, etc.). For instance, each body part; and (3) decoration shape all artifacts fieldwalker one example of identical coarse, red body sherds, picks up only but if different parts (formal elements) of the same fabric or vessel type are as well. Thus, since by convention one of each is encountered, picked up

66. Hayes 2000, pp. 105-106.







Form 46

Form 47

Form 48

Figure developed of Roman


Example chronotype

of a well for a variety fine ware. 2004, p. 22,

Form 49

Form 50A

T. F. Tartaron, fig. 2.4

red-slipped after Gregory

Form 50

Form 50B


(rim, handle, neck/shoulder, identify five different vessel components a body, base), single fieldwalker may theoretically collect up to five pieces from the same kind of vessel (or even the same vessel). This measurement is not, of course, precise, but it does provide
comparison across the survey area.



that allows



of the chronotype

about quantity and variety. Diagnostic the pickup of "diagnostic" artifacts, a category that in ceramics typically includes all rims, bases, handles, and necks or shoulders, as well as all or decorated sherds?the painted principle being that the collection involves original form or classificatory type of the whole vessel can be reconstructed from the diagnostic features of these sherds. Yet such collections are inef
fective measures of variety since entire classes of artifacts, i.e., coarse or

alternative methods?diagnostic tiveness in generating information

may be compared with two widely used collection and total collection?for effec

parts preserved),



(which may

have no corresponding
and as a





not collected.


since diagnostic




unlimited numbers





expense of others?they of ceramic types. "Total" collection, in their

of specific kinds of highly recognizable types at the are at measuring relative quantities notably poor inwhich surveyors pick up all artifacts they observe of naturally yields the most accurate measures

survey swaths, an cost in terms of time quantity and variety,67 but often at unacceptable on and burden and storage systems. Under conditions of low processing artifact density, total collection may be viable or even essential, but in the eastern Corinthia, it is not a feasible option. an because present Chronotype appealing compromise an accurate and reliable measure of variety in a they generate given unit, while offering a coarse yet systematic estimation of relative quantities of generally artifact-rich collections artifact types. Because the chronotype system promotes the collection of all ceramic forms and fabrics, the variety it captures should be as compre the massive amount of largely hensive as that of a total collection, without redundant material. The system generates ratios of artifact quantity by that are far coarser than those obtained by total type (i.e., chronotype) not as precise they should nevertheless be accurate,68 collection, yet while and they are entirely consistent with our requirement for assembling basic swath of the landscape. Of course, chronotype collections do not solve all problems associated with in-field sampling of artifacts. The downside to any artifact sampling artifacts sometimes devolves strategy is that the burden of recognizing upon inexpert surveyors, who, it might be argued, lack the experience to one type of artifact recognize the fine physical attributes distinguishing from another. The chronotype system is designed so that even inexperienced can data over a broad


effectively select representative samples, and the pottery with teams in the field report that it is rare that two specialists working distinct pottery types are so similar in all characteristics that they cannot be

distinguished by fieldwalkers with minimal chronotype experience. None the chronotype EKAS adopted a cautious policy in implementing theless, there fieldwalkers were instructed to pick up an artifact whenever system: was doubt as to whether that artifact was a duplicate sample of a chrono type already collected in their swath. In practice, the EKAS finds database confirms producing the resolution that fieldwalkers some redundant overcollected chronotypes of our ceramic analysts rather than undercollected data, for their swaths and "outcollecting" in assigning sherds to any specific

chronological period. counted 146,599 arti Over the course of three seasons, fieldwalkers facts in DUs.69 Most of the artifacts counted were pottery (74.5%) and
is not a

67. Even



69. This from the


includes of standard include



tool, since geomorphological perfect and human factors always place on the fullness record time, ymous survey 68. detected and with space. Meyer and Gregory 2003.



survey and does not


of the archaeological moment at a in single is not synon total collection total coverage of a given

tal, extensive, sampled


experimen and other units

in nonstandard

accounting ence between numbers section

thus ways, for the quantitative differ this analysis and the for all units processing in the below.

reported on artifact








Dates Period
Ceramic Ancient Post-prehistoric Ancient historic Late Roman age 6700 6700 1050 1050 a.d. b.c.-a.d. b.c.-a.d. b.c.-a.d. b.c.-a.d. 250-a.d. 2000 700 2000 700 700


Time Span Number of (Years) Artifacts

8,700 7,400 3,050 1,750 450 5,695 7,748 5.0 1,923 9,563 4.5 1,707

Percentage Analyzed
14.9 20.2





tile (24.4%) fragments, with lithics (0.4%) and other types of artifacts (e.g., marble revetment, glass, metal) together comprising less than 1%.Of the counted artifacts, 38,337 (26.2% of the artifacts seen) were collected using the chronotype system and subsequently analyzed by the processing team.70 What does this body of data suggest about the implementation of the chronotype system as awhole? On the one hand, our data support the observation made time and of pottery encountered again that the vast majority by Mediterranean to chronological survey projects is not especially diagnostic period.71 The five periods represented most frequently (Table 5) include 69.5% of all one of these Roman?can analyzed artifacts, and only periods?Late be considered narrow or precise. Moreover, the 15 chronotypes listed in Table 6 are a tiny minority of the nearly 600 chronotypes noted in three of survey, and yet constitute a remarkable proportion of the overall years pottery counted and processed in the field (23,480 of the total number of recorded; 61.2% of all chronotyped artifacts). These figures sug that our fieldwalkers did not miss the significant quantities of poorly gest coarse wares, kitchen wares, and tile diagnostic medium fragments that littered the surface of their survey units. artifacts indicates that fieldwalk specific piece of evidence, moreover, overcollected artifacts on the basis of perceived differences in generally the physical attributes of the artifacts. In principle, the maximum number of specimens of a single chronotype that any walker should collect in a ers swath is five, representing the five different parts of the vessel (see discus sion above). In practice, the average ratio of chronotype sherds to each walker swath should be much lower, since rim, base, and neck/shoulder are not found as as body that fragments frequently fragments.72 Given body fragments frequently constitute the great majority (often 70%-99%) of the most abundant chronotypes, we should expect a chronotype:walker 70. The figure of 38,337 is based
chronotype and excludes procedures such types of collection, samples. on standard collection other as grab rare

A more

to walker

2000, pp. 53-57.

ratio of average chronotype on the basis of is calculated was that chronotype units that did not

72. The


one coarse piece of "Medium ancient" was produced from a ratio of two walker swaths, giving 1785,

units where discovered.


71. E.g., Haggis andMook

pp. 265-267; Annis,


yield examples of the chronotype do

not factor into As chronotype. the average ratio for that one in DU example,

van Dommelen,

ratio for a chrono average type is simply the average of the ratio of in all units chronotype:walkers was found. where that chronotype 0.50. The

and van de Velde 1995, pp. 143-148;







Medium ancient Medium Medium ancient Tile, coarse ware coarse ware, historic historic ancient ware, historic ancient ancient ancient ancient historic historic historic ceramic ancient age historic coarse ware, Period ancient Count

Chronotyped Artifacts (%)


5,360 4,909 3,785 1,830 1,236 1,149 830 829 719 702 568 406 401 385 371 23,480

12.8 9.9


4.8 3.2 3.0 2.1

Amphora, Kitchen Tile,

ancient ancient



Kitchen ware, ancient

post-prehistoric ancient historic

2.1 1.9

Spirally Grooved ware ware Late Roman ceramic and age Roman 1.8 1.5 1.1 1.0

Wheel-Ridged ware Kitchen Pithos, blue Tile, orange core Lakonian ware


post-prehistoric Late Roman

1.0 1.0 61.2

Combed Total

no more

ratio to be, on average, below 1,where each fieldwalker on average collects than one specimen (usually a body sherd) of a chronotype per swath. In reality, what we find is that the average ratio exceeds a value of 1 in eight of the 15 most abundant chronotypes found in DUs (Table 7). result indicates that fieldwalkers collected sherds on the basis of attributes


that did not prove to be typologically significant during physical ceramic analysis. By contrast, the three lowest ratios inTable 7 belong to the Roman chronotypes Roman/Late (Combed ware, Spirally Grooved ware, andWheel-Ridged ware), the most diagnostic of these 15 chronotypes, readily defined by their characteristic surface treatments. The average ratio of chronotype sherds towalker in units where these chronotypes are found ismuch lower (0.44 to 0.47), suggesting in part that fieldwalkers felt more confident in not picking up additional specimens of the same chronotype after they had already collected examples. This would seem to indicate that in the implementation of the chronotype system, the inherent fieldwalker bias favors overcollecting coarse, poorly diagnostic body sherds (e.g., the medium coarse wares) rather than more obviously diagnostic artifacts (e.g., Combed ware). it is impossible to quantify the absolute effectiveness of imple the chronotype system in the field, these data suggest that we menting can be confident that our fieldwalkers collected more artifact data than was necessary for the resolution of our analysis. And while a certain amount of redundant data were collected, the implementation of the chronotype While










Neck / Shoulder 16 (0.3%) 24 (0.5%) 11 (0.3%) Rim 239 (4.5%) 232 (4.7%) 267 (7.1%) 9 (0.5%) 48 (3.9%) 223 (19.4%) 113 (13.6%) 4

Ratio Total CTto of Walker*

Vessel Portion Chronotype Medium ancient Medium coarse ware coarse ware,

Body 4,594 (85.7%) 4,248 (86.5%) 2,988 (78.9%) 1,821 (99.5%) 688 (55.7%) 738 (64.2%) 717 (86.4%) 825 (99.5%) 483



(1.5%) 89 (1.8%) 73 (1.9%)

430 (8.0%) 316 (6.4%) 446 (11.8%)

5,360 4,909 3,785 1,830 1,236 1,149 830 829 719 702



Medium ancient Tile,

coarse ware historic historic




Amphora, historic Kitchen


50 (4.0%) 12 (1.0%)

418 (33.8%) 173 (15.1%)

32 (2.6%) 3 (0.3%)






Lakonian, historic



Kitchen ancient Spirally ware, historic Grooved


19 (2.6%)

86 (12.0%) 1 (0.1%) 2 (0.4%) 58 (14.3%) 2 (0.5%)

3 (0.4%) 1 (0.1%) 2 (0.4%) 13 (3.2%) 6 (1.5%)

(0.5%) 128 (17.8%)


(67.2%) 700 (99.7%) 560 (98.6%) 280


Wheel-Ridged ware


1 (0.2%) 4 (1.0%) 9 (2.2%)

3 (0.5%) 51 (12.6%) 37 (9.2%) 11 (2.9%)

568 406 401 385 371




Pithos, blue Tile,

orange core Lakonian


(69.0%) 347 (86.5%) 374 (97.1%) 371






*Figure represents the average ratio of chronotype count to walker count per DU.

system also seriously reduced the amount of artifact processing in the field, since little more than a quarter (26.2%) of all artifacts counted for these the corpus units were analyzed. The system thus permitted us to minimize of artifacts to record while map a and representatively Systematizing The EKAS Case of the us to enabling systematically simultaneously artifactual landscape. complex from Roman Chronotype "Explosion" Data:

Periods Late

also generated evidence that the chronotype system can reveal mean ingful patterns of relative ubiquity among artifact types.We may explore this by examining the apparent expansion of activity across Mediterranean landscapes in Late Roman times.73 have frequently interpreted the abundance archaeologists as an indication of a final across Greek pottery landscapes

73. For grew,

a fuller discussion,

see Pette


Landscape of Late Roman






corre phase of economic prosperity for the province of Achaia, perhaps to intensification of agriculture, or even sponding population growth, there has been recent discussion about the imperial policy.74 Although of particular periods in survey data,75 there has representation been little effort to analyze the degree to which the differential visibility and identification of Late Roman pottery might exaggerate this period relative on the lead to amisimpression of settlement ground and, by consequence, "explosion" in the countryside. The EKAS data for the Late Roman period support the general pat tern of a very busy Late Roman countryside (Fig. 12) but also provide into the material that create the Late Roman "spike" insight ingredients in the eastern Corinthia. tied to the Late Roman ments the one hand, material that can be securely period is ubiquitous: Late Roman ceramic frag On

are found in nearly half of all survey units (43.2%, compared, for example, to 14.5% for the Early Roman period). Furthermore, Late Roman pottery constitutes almost 4.5% of all pottery analyzed, making Late Roman the best-represented period in EKAS. By stark contrast, the material from periods immediately preceding and following the Late Roman



less than a percent

of the total number

of analyzed

As indicated inTable 6, two of the 15 most abundant chronotypes in the eastern Corinthia?Spirally Grooved ware and Combed ware?belong to the Late Roman period, and form a substantial part (2.8%) of the over two analyzed from intensive survey units. These of the 1,707 total pieces also constitute the majority (62.8%) chronotypes of Late Roman pottery, even though some 30 other chronotypes dating to all number of artifacts the Late Roman The period were recorded. (83.0%) of Late Roman wares analyzed by EKAS great majority coarse wares and wares (9.7%) and represent amphora fragments, with fine kitchen wares (5.6%) following meagerly behind. To offer one immediate contrast, the Early Roman period ismore evenly divided between medium coarse wares and amphoras (36.2%), fine wares (38.0%), and kitchen wares utilitarian vessel fragments are much (24.9%). In the eastern Corinthia, more are fine-ware important signatures of the Late Roman period than The point is even more significant when we consider that the fragments. great majority (83.5%) of cases of Late Roman medium coarse and amphora are body source of this enormous chronotypes fragments. The obvious of Late Roman body sherds are those two predominant chrono corpus Grooved and Combed wares?that are 74. BintlifFand Snodgrass 1988;
Bintliff 1991, reviews pp. 1987, 126-127; van Andel For see Raut and Runnels recent pp. and discussion, 113-117.

man 2000; Shipley 2002, pp. 329-331;

Kosso 2003; Caraher, 2006, Nakassis, and Pettegrew pp. 21-26; Pettegrew, term "Late Roman" The as the period between a.D.; early 7th centuries corresponds and Snodgrass and a

forthcoming. is often defined the 3rd/4th

as types?Spirally easily identified Late Roman by their characteristic surface treatment. Again, by contrast, the Early Roman period, usually recognized through fine-ware rims (found far less frequently than coarse-ware body sherds), may be a more typical ceramic period in terms of its visibility in archaeological survey. Taking these factors, eastern Corinthia is more into account "explosion" in the described as an "upturn," and even this aptly need not indicate increased habitation.76 the Late Roman settlement visible and identifiable artifact types occur system just as they do using more tradi


for EKAS, "Late Roman" to the dates a.d. 250-700. 75. Bintliff, 1999, with Howard,



continued 2002. For discussion further

13 (2000), and
in BintlifT critique, et al. see Davis

76. Pettegrew, forthcoming; and Pettegrew her, Nakassis, pp. 21-26. Cara 2006,

designation Our results show that highly frequently using the chronotype







Late Roman Artifact Quanjtittes



'Eft. 16-29
30-55 Survey ("'"'"-"'1 units

Figure quantities

12. Late in DUs



in the northern



methods. The limit of five pieces per type per walker per unit had little effect, given the rarity of attaining maximum collec survey tions of any chronotype. But the example of Late Roman pottery also points to a fundamental problem inMediterranean survey that the chronotype does not solve: our general inability to date coarse-fabric sherds. Until we are better able to identify coarse wares of other and periods, comparisons are assemblage likely to be problematic. Without targeted studies of all fabric types correlated with data from stratigraphie excavations,77 there is little hope can be that differential visibility and invisibility of archaeological periods adequately addressed. It isworth noting that the emphasis of the chronotype system on capturing the full variety of forms and fabrics will facilitate this endeavor in away that diagnostic and grab collections cannot. inferences based on the coarse-ware-dominated Late Roman

tional collection

77. See Haggis andMook

an excellent to prehistoric

1993 for

of this strategy application coarse fabrics on Crete.






// f*r" / /

/illllll \r* Mlw J??

';v>-' ?T

$00 $ /

.y ...<~>><=r7 -.^ ^

6/26/02 AZD


Figure 13. Examples of artifacts recorded in the field


Processing the volume a of material collection removed from the land

In an effort to minimize scape, EKAS

strategy. This strategy was pursued low-impact our concerns about the of collecting prompted by repercussions large but also by permit restrictions about removing off-site material. samples, The processing team, staffed by artifact experts and illustrators, was the extension of the low-impact collection strategy, charged methodological with the responsibility for identifying, and recording, photographing, teams. data in the field drawing objects picked up by survey Processing avoided time-consuming and poorly rationalized eliminated collections, the need for extensive storage facilities, and provided a unique opportunity for dialogue between artifact experts and those responsible for identifying and collecting appropriate material. teams operated The processing in close concert with field teams

behind the survey team, survey. Following engaged in discovery-phase team entered a survey unit once it was finished. the processing Bagged artifacts were described, and selected artifacts were measured, drawn, and a camera photographed using digital or standard (Fig. 13). In many cases teams simply recorded as much basic information as could the processing be discerned about an artifact, in accordance with the chronotype clas sification system. Toothbrushes and dental picks were often used to clean artifacts, and selected objects were also washed as deemed necessary. Along teams work forms with records kept by the survey teams, the processing about chronology and function. artifacts could not be retained from the DUs for permanent Although a the processing collections, system generated thoroughly documented archive of information consisting of drawings, photographs, and detailed descriptions, which is augmented by substantial artifact collections that we were permitted to make from LOCAs teams (see below). The processing the basis for inferences







recorded 48,558 of the 158,802 objects counted in the field by all methods (30.6%); of the objects recorded, 1,919 (4.0%) were retained for permanent storage.78 This material will be available for inspection by experts, who will also have access to the finds database for analytical purposes. Furthermore, because most of the artifacts were left in the field, selected DUs may be revisited to evaluate and expand semblages found in them. information about the archaeological as





In the course of walking

DUs, survey teams frequently encountered surface scatters of archaeological material or recognizable architectural features that were insufficiently documented survey alone. As by discovery-mode

earlier, the traditional concept of the "site" has become increasingly terms. The concept has been problematic in theoretical and methodological noted the equation of site with habitation and critiqued,79 discrediting the status of artifact scatters as behavioral entities that can be questioning "discovered" and interpreted in archaeologically meaningful ways. Surface forcefully do not universally resist interpretation, for standing architec phenomena tural remains, caves, and graves are potentially well-bounded, functionally are often detected interpretable loci that during surveys. But surface artifact scatters must be seen asmodern phenomena affected by complex, long-term that have obscured processes postdepositional in possibly unknowable ways. patterning The or obliterated behavioral

is to untangle the complex in challenge for survey archaeologists teractions of geological and cultural structuring that result in these scatters,80 and to interpret them in the context of the overall landscape rather than from a stricdy site-based perspective. Several innovative approaches have recently been developed, including long-term replication studies,81 geophysical remote sensing,82 phosphate analysis,83 and controlled collections followed by limited, targeted excavations.84 A recent approach in Lakonia combined gridded

surface collection, limited coring to a depth of 20 cm, geophysical survey and chemical analysis for mineral magnetic (resistivity and magnetometry), properties and levels of key elements at 20 small, dense rural scatters.85 Because our permit prohibited all manner of subsurface testing, EKAS focused on careful investigation of the geomorphological processes acting upon localized parcels of land on which anomalous artifact densities were found. Using this information, field teams were better able to identify scat ters with sufficient integrity to warrant further investigation. Geophysical prospection


a applied to small selection of LOCAs

other features.86

to test for subsurface

78. The figures include and in and

between discrepancy those reported above arises because recovered

these (see

80. Schiffer 1972,1987; Taylor 2000.

81. Ammerman 1985,1995.

pp. 478-479)

the former in LOCAs

1996. 84. Shott 1995; Dunnell and Simek 1995.

85. Cavanagh, Jones, and Sarris


survey. nonsystematic 79. See esp. Dunnell 1992.

82. Weymouth andHuggins 1985; Kvamme 2003; Sarris and Jones 2000.
83. Cavanagh, Jones, and Sarris

86. Sarris

and James 2000.







have generally retreated from terminology that makes Archaeologists associations between artifact scatters and traditional functional transparent classes of sites, giving rise to such concepts as the "place of special inter of POSIs, forming interpretable est" (POSI).87 Areas with concentrations of human activity, have often been termed "special interest landscapes the term "localized cultural anomaly" (LOCA). of this term explain the concept: (1) localized, thus having some or a scatter or feature may be spatial integrity, clustering, by which or the from the material distinguished landscape around it; (2) cultural, or modification, thus a product of human manufacture and not (as far as we can tell the result of natural causes; through geomorphological study) and (3) anomaly, thus standing out qualitatively or quantitatively from the or a LOCA of landscape. Typically, the designation surrounding material relied first on the detection of a higher density of one or more classes of The elements or of pottery, obsidian bladelets) (e.g., Classical black-slipped associated objects, relative to densities of the same mate chronologically artifacts rials in adjacent units on the landscape; and second, on the identification of definable edges to the artifact scatter. The designation of a LOCA was viewed as an invitation to further study in the hope of extracting useful behavioral information from it. LOCAs walkers, In-field were designated by team leaders in consultation with field team members, and other experts. processing a crucial role in these decisions, as did our areas" (SIAs).88 We have preferred

geomorphologists, consultation played

use of GIS, which allowed for the display of large amounts of data, such as artifact densities, in a clear and understandable format. Many LOCAs, not nearly all, were subjected to further, more intensive methods though of field adopted a flexible approach to investigating investigation. We them, in recognition of their diversity in material, size, complexity, and terrain conditions. In many cases, a grid composed of 10 x 10 m squares


over the entire LOCA. These squares became superimposed sampling units within the LOCA, allowing us to gain fine spatial control over the re locations of artifacts and features. For some LOCAs, samples were in others only a selection of corded and collected from all squares, while the squares, artifact collections the sample squares was investigated. Within from total collection to chronotype collections of the entire square ranged or of a 5-m2 team followed sampling circle therein. The field processing out a chronotype analysis of the artifacts. Each team to carry the LOCA was and geomorphological investigation by photography supplemented as and with topographic mapping or geophysical prospection description, to collect artifacts from many LOCAs for needed. We received permission curation and study in the laboratory.
et al. 1997, formulations, reluctant (Caraher, 2006, remain archaeologists to part with the site concept and Pettegrew Nakassis,

p. 401, n. 27; and p. 24; Given 34-35. Noncultural 2003, pp. Meyer have also been phenomena desig nated POSIs, e.g., geomorphological 87. Davis Given et al. 1999, or botanical comm.). Note POSIs that (M. Given, in spite pers. of such new

pp. 7-9,14).

88. Given andMeyer 2003, pp. 35








Chronotype An Experiment





9002, a large, dense artifact scatter, was encountered in 1999 on the a sample col gently sloping south side of Rachi Boska (Fig. 6). In 2000 lection was made there from a grid of 40 10 x 10 m squares superimposed over an area 80 m (N-S) x 200 m (E-W). Because this was one of the first LOCAs we designated, we employed four different sampling techniques LOCA in 10 "experimental" squares in an effort to establish an optimal sampling strategy for similar dense scatters. In each experimental square, we collected the following samples: (1) chronotypes from a 5-m2 circle within the grid square (a 5% sample); (2) the remaining artifacts from the circle; (3) chrono types from the rest of the square; and (4) the remaining artifacts from the these samples, we could form four distinct collections: (1) the chronotype collection of the circle (sample 1); (2) the complete collection of the circle (samples 1 and 2 combined); (3) the chronotype collection of the square (samples 1 and 3); and (4) the complete collection of the square square.With to clarify two parameters of LOCA sampling: first, by from circles with samples from entire squares, we would comparing samples a 5-m2 circle would be see if the smaller sufficiently sample provided by of the artifact types on the surface. Second, by comparing the representative total artifact collection with the chronotype collection, we could measure of the chronotype system in delivering a representative of the artifacts in the LOCA. The results of the experiment are quite sample 1 (the chronotypes from the circles) consisted of informative. Collection 77 chronotypes, or 34% of a total 229 chronotypes from the squares. Collec the effectiveness tion 2, the entire circle, contained 111 chronotypes (48%), and Collection 3, collection of the square, 208 chronotypes the chronotype (91%). By any to capture an reasonable standard, the sampling circles failed uniformly the 10 x 10 m squares, acceptable proportion of total chronotypes within to total or chronotype collection. On the other hand, whether subjected in chronotype collections of entire squares, 91% of all chronotypes were

(samples 1-4). We sought

In view of the substantial amount of time saved, the chronotype col lection from squares appears to be a reasonable compromise between time spent and information obtained. These data also indicate that loss of infor mation not from using the chronotype system rather than total collection, but instead from examining a small areal sample of the dense surface concentration. Thus, we are confident that chronotype collections produced accurate and precise accountings of the range of materials present stemmed at the artifact concentrations Multiple Landscape we designated as LOCAs. on LOCAs


to In recognition of the inescapable element of subjectivity attached in the field, EKAS developed alternative means of LOCAs designating in-field analyzing and interpreting artifact density data, complementing LOCAs GIS with cultural anomalies may analysis.We revealed only through the application of illustrate this approach using a simple example drawn

488 from intensive





site of Kromna in survey in and around the large Classical in detail below). northern Corinthian the plain (analyzed in the field by team leaders was a relatively The designation of LOCAs conservative and intuitive process (Fig. 14:a).Mapped against a background of raw artifact densities, we see that most, but not all, areas of high or rela were declared LOCAs, but so also were some tively high artifact density areas of were apparently driven relatively low density. In-field decisions more anomalous occurrences of architecture or particular types of arti by independent of density of great importance. This perspective must have been influenced also by a sense of uncertainty about cultural entities extracting coherent, meaningful from relatively continuous carpets of material, characterized by palimpsests of residue from many periods of the past. were Although high artifact densities normally recog exceptionally nized in the field, particular densities take on archaeological significance a only in the context of the survey universe as whole, something rarely whose daily frame of reference is limited to perceived by archaeologists a the small percentage of the total survey area. Consequently, and even cultural nature of many localized concentrations of once the densities?that artifacts emerged only is, the number of artifacts relatively anomalous facts than by density alone?in and function that are variables other words, attributes were such as chronology deemed to be

per area walked, or per total unit area?were analyzed and compared against awide range of environmental, and archaeological variables and cultural, constants. For example, the GIS-generated maps of "density LOCAs," de fined as units where artifact density exceeded a certain threshold established either arbitrarily (e.g., the top 15% or 20% of units) or statistically by a Jenks (K-means) equation that grouped units according to "natural breaks" in the data. Raw density figures produce both more and different LOCA units than the in-field set when a threshold of the top 20% (quintile) of all units in raw artifact density is applied (Fig. 14:b). the GIS and our survey databases allowed us to analyze the Moreover, environmental data (such as ground visibility, ground cover, and surface collected from each unit, against which we could better clast composition) evaluate artifact densities. artifact densities

For example, we were able to identify units with per surface visibility. In many instances where exceptional was poor, team leaders did not recognize anomalous concentrations visibility the density data were adjusted for ground vis of cultural material. When ibility, however, certain units with low visibility but relatively high density met the threshold requirements of these lie on the pe (Fig. 14:c). Many of raw density "hot spots," suggesting more continuous high-density riphery scatters, where intervening areas of low artifact density are the product of discovery conditions and not the actual intensity of human activity. Similar land use, that compared artifact density to ground cover, modern analyses to our attention numerous units whose and background disturbance brought


or even low densities may have been produced by the limitations rather than the quantities of material actually of surface survey methods on the surface. Furthermore, LOCAs among by identifying high-density we avoided units with comparable environmental conditions, simplistic "corrections" for visibility and other environmental conditions, which tend







to assume amore
and environmental

fixed relationship



in artifact density

us to chronotype system allowed identify units with anomalously to chronology, function, and spe diverse artifact assemblages with respect cific artifact types. Since we could observe, for example, that the higher The more a unit s artifact diverse the artifact as density, the chronologically tended to be, we could suppose that exceptionally diverse units semblage with lower-than-average densities might reflect anomalous, but essentially concentrations of artifacts. In this way, we might identify units "invisible," in which conditions mask culturally significant adverse environmental
artifact concentrations.

of placing seemingly in their local context, and often allowing us to group units together as revealed these phenomena by transforming potential "density SIAs." We a series of our unit-based density data, essentially complex polygons with values, to a raster grid where each cell of a particular density-per-meter standard dimension density of the unit x was as a value the mean artifact (e.g., 5 5 m) assigned was into which it fell. Then, a neighborhood analysis the density value for each cell was recalculated by compar to those for all cells within a circle of 20-m radius around

to analyze the survey universe. terning the artifact density of a particular immediate vicinity, with the effect We also used GIS across

surface trends This unit with

in artifact density pat involved comparing procedure the densities present in its isolated LOCAs

performed: ing its value


(Fig.l4:d,e). The effect of this analysis is first to smooth small spikes or dips in artifact densities created by such factors as very localized areas of poor vis or small units that exist at the margins of statistical error inherent ibility and mapping methods. establishes Second, this method areas based on the distribution and nature of cultural fixed, quantifiable material rather than arbitrarily defined modern features or local toponyms patterns of the past. This is not to say that local features, geological characteristics, or modern land-use patterns could not be established as factors influencing the distribution of artifacts, but we can use GIS to rather that integrate these aspects with the archaeological data to create a landscape that blends expected cultural and environmental influences with the recorded distribution of cultural material upon the The use of fluctuating densities across broader zones defined by landscape. geomorphology, the patterning specific
landscapes or

in our collection

that may have little to do with

or blind "cells" of topographic entities, equal size89 permits to be discussed with reference not to of cultural material ("sites"), but rather to particular kinds of

spots on the landscape

of density data, combined with EKAS's methods Such manipulations of defining and collecting data from survey space, suggest ways to overcome some of the obstacles, such as variable surfaces visibility, to characterizing in archaeologically meaningful LOCAs ways. Although density-derived as more in the field, they may be viewed objective than those designated on human measurements and carry the same bur rely similarly imperfect den of demonstrating appears that humans significance with respect to the past. Intuitively, it are sometimes more effective at judging the cultural

89.Thomas 1975; Foley 1981; Ebert 1992. 90. Binford 1982; Schlanger 1992.






Raw Artifact Density

Figure 14 (above and opposite). Alternative approaches to the designation of LOCAs in the Kromna area: (a) in-field LOCAs (in yellow) designated by team leaders during survey, plotted against artifact density; (b) LOCAs (in red) derived from top 20% of DUs in artifact density; (c) LOCAs (in red) derived from top 20% in artifact density adjusted for visibility; (d) grayscale plot showing
projected trends in artifact density over the surface, using K-means equation to derive natural breaks

in data and not adjusted for visibility; (e) grayscale plot as in (d),with superimposed designated as LOCAs by all other methods combined

survey units







Eft jjJagl?LJBM^^^BBBi




^^S^^^&H b

0 150300

jSH^^B&H c

0 150300 A






significance of artifact scatters, while often the obstacles to detection of artifacts, and the ambiguity of fragmentary material upon recovery, combine to limit human judgment and necessitate the kinds of subsequent analyses our ongoing analysis is that each likely outcome of reveals different but useful information; therefore, knowledge technique about the past is maximized by the application of multiple perspectives. use of GIS for Certainly, however, the evaluating surface scatters in terms described above. A of density is effective in highlighting ments should be profitable. locations where revisits and reassess


All surface surveys would benefit by having an experimental reconnais component operating in tandem with the main archaeological sance. EKAS conducted a series of experiments in 1999 and 2001 with regional-scale two specific aims:

the effects of field conditions (1) to measure upon for purposes of calibration, standardization of archaeological procedures and development; and (2) to reflexively test the efficacy of our practice, one methods. With regard to field performance, might ask: How well do we recognize cultural material when half the surface is covered with veg etation, or when the color of red-fabric potsherds and terra rossa-stained limestone gravel is essentially the same? How does the pace of fieldwalking a pace twice as fast decrease affect identification? Will recognition by half? These questions are important ones as they influence the archaeological document EKAS most ditions which that a survey produces. assembled a team to address these and other questions. The (Table 8) investigated the effects of field con experiments in artifact recovery through a series of seeding experiments


upon a team of researchers planted potsherds, which had been previously and described, along a 50-m tract and plotted their posi photographed tions.91 Two kinds of potential survey conditions were tested. In the first sets of artifacts were placed in a tract with optimal experiment, equivalent not obscured), in another with visibility (100%, i.e., with the ground surface and in two others with average visibility (50%-70%). poor visibility (20%), focused on the extent to which ground cover such as This experiment weeds and grain stubble hinders artifact recovery. In a second experiment, a tract with disturbance92 was tested against a tract high background in order to measure differ in which there were few visual distractions, ences in artifact recognition under these two conditions. The analysis took confusion into account vegetation cover, artifact type and appearance, and background as rate of artifact recovery. The determina they affected the rates over a broad

91. A full presentation of the experiments in the

and 1999

analysis season

may be found in Schon 2002. 92. Background disturbance differs

from vegetation the surface clastic in that it refers not to visibility and other matter preventing from material being in the visible, soil of the confuse but to as such (com

itself, soil

tion of recovery a better provide

range of conditions was expected to not sense of the total range and quantity of material, only in the inspected portions of survey units, but also in the uninspected experiments back into everyday of more robust data for analysis

rock, or to conditions pact, loose), which or distract attention A

the viewer


good example above: the confusion stained similar limestone

away from artifacts. is that mentioned caused by red that has a color

By feeding the results of the seeding we contributed to the practice, acquisition

gravel to the red fabric

of sherds.







Experiment Visibility (seeding



and artifact experiments)



the effects

of various




the recovery

of artifacts

Efficacy of Geomorphic Unit

Efficacy of processing artifacts in


the use

of GUs

to define





of person-hours


artifact Compare

patterning the chronotype





and unwashed


the field Field identifications

Measure in terms

long-term of the

effects identification

of low-impact and


strategy of artifact


large artifact and




the preservation

of cultural Efficacy collection Assessment chronotype of using the chronotype as a Test whether

heritage artifact collection according types densities, extrapolated to chronotype principles generates

strategy of artifact densities (for

representative Develop from methods samples


of artifact

and aggregate



and algorithms for artifact adjusted calculating over a wide of field conditions range

Field Pass







Visibility (%) 60 Time of day Sherds recovered 50 Sherd recovery rate (%) 50.0 Seconds 910 Sherds/minute

111222-333444 123123123123 50 50 15:23 15:40 15:58 16 33 53.3 880 1.09 61.1 810 2.44

10 16:16 52 52.0 819 3.81

10 16:23 6 20.0 330 1.09

10 16:39 12 22.2 566 1.27

100 15:29 90 90.0 875 6.17

100 15:45 25 83.3 630 2.38

100 15:58 42 77.8 710 3.55

70 15:22 75 75.0 809 5.56

70 15:38 21 70.0 396 3.18

70 15:47 39 72.2 467 5.01


and to amore

refined interpretation of artifact patterning in our standard team used the units. In 1999 and 2001, the experimental survey seeding results to create a standard for surface visibility rankings with the aid of tion with

descriptions, photographic images, and in-field collabora team leaders and fieldwalkers. Team leaders were charged with effective visibility as a percentage of potential visibility (in incre rating ments of 10 from 0% to 100%, where 0% represents total to impediment surface visibility, and 100% represents no surface or ambient impediments visibility). The continuity of key personnel in the team leader positions ensured consistency in these observations. To serve as a further, independent to check, two "visibility" photographs were taken for each DU: one overview of the unit, and one detail of a representative surface. These photographs be used retroactively to assess the visibility rankings, which are cru may cial since the relationship between surface visibility and artifact recovery forms one basis for GIS analyses (described above) and ultimately for our interpretations of the survey data. seeding experiments generated a large dataset of records of artifact recovery by individual walkers in a variety of field conditions (Table 9). The full dataset shows that artifact recovery and relative visibility have a linear an one relationship, although not equivalent (Fig. 15). In other words, while increases consistently as visibility improves from 40% to 80%, that recovery The

detailed written






79.50% 66.60%

= -0.072X + 0.9453 R2 = 0.9991









Visibility Score
increase is not twofold.93 A series of recovery curves, correlated with spe might be used to apply quantitative corrections Figure 15. Graph showing the rela tionship between ground visibility
and rates of artifact from recovery, recovery projected experiments artifact

cific discovery conditions, to normalize visibility for all units. When visibility and artifact collection data are combined, formulas to extrapolate to adjusted artifact counts, and derived statistics such as total artifact densities, are within reach.94 such experimental Without data, there is no basis for explaining or attempting although consideration we to control in artifact recovery, for the sources of variability that myriad other factors must be taken into acknowledge

as well,95 some of which were also addressed by the experi teams and are currently undergoing mental analysis (Table 8). Although data may be informative principally for the eastern these experimental an excellent comparative dataset for surveys in the Corinthia, they offer and beyond.96 Similar experiments, Mediterranean adapted to local field and methodological conditions interests, would be relatively simple to devise and implement.


The densest and most area occurred fied byWiseman in the Corinthia discussed diverse concentration of cultural material in the survey an area plain in previously identi town of Kromna. A place by this name

in the northern Corinthian as the Classical ismentioned

in a passage that was later by Callimachus commentators (Callim. Sos. 12 [frag. 384 Byzantine ad Lye. 576). In 1960, Wiseman discovered a fragment of a Pfeiffer]; Tz. stone funerary monument of the late 4th or early 3rd century b.c., inscribed tower b.c. fortification of Kromna" and reused in a 3rd-century "Agathon byMiddle (SEGXX?1 219).97 The findspot was at the north edge of a dense artifact a con scatter east of the modern village of Examilia. Wiseman posited in literature and the inscription, nection between the Kromna mentioned and the extensive that this site was probably scatter, suggesting on the Isthmus."98 there "the largest inland Classical settlement Although artifact

93. Schon 2002, pp. 149-157, chart 5.5;Meyer and Schon 2003. 94.Meyer and Gregory 2003. 95. Wandsnider and Camilli 1992; Given 2004. 96. See Schon 2002 for complete
data. 97. Wiseman 98. Wiseman 1963, 1978, p. 257, p. 66. fig. 4.









Gonia Quarries Isthmia Road (Wiseman Road 3)

16. The Figure in the northern

environs Corinthian

of Kromna plain

are now alternative readings of the literary testimony,99 this area of the crossroads was clearly an important node of habitation and land use east of Corinth. EKAS investigated Kromna and its environs in four survey zones with the local names Kromna, Kesimia, Boulberi, and Perdikaria (Fig. 16). The integrative approach adopted by EKAS found itsmost effective expression at Kromna, because so many of the project?intensive major components and survey and processing, LOCA mortuary analysis, geomorphology, modern the complex survey, and GIS?were important for understanding behind the cultural patterns. The survey produced a variety of new history kinds of information about the area, and also documented, in broader of this principal site at the terms, the growth and cyclical development Isthmian features local informants our varied crossroads. Alongside conducted by the modern interviews with explorations, team led us to notable survey

99. See SEG L 339; and Shipley

2000, where the author pp. 371-372, as the Agathon identifies inscription to a man from the polis of referring in Arcadia. See also Caraher,


and Pettegrew Nakassis, 2006, pp. 14, 36, n. 2; and Pettegrew 2006, pp. 250 of the literary testi 262, for a rereading for a Corinthian "Kromna," mony men which argues that the Kromna tioned by Callimachus refers not to a town per se, but to a Corinthian place on the Isthmus sacred to or mythologi with Poseidon, cally associated perhaps Kenchreai.

and shed particular light on how the archaeological record has been transformed in recent years. The discussion that follows highlights different ways of understanding the long-term history of Kromna from a landscape perspective.

496 Kromna's Kromna Physical Setting





is situated on the lowland corridor known

as the northern Corin

thian plain, comprising Gulf and the fertile plain behind it.The plain has been shaped mainly by geologically recent deposits (see Fig. 10, above). Behind the beach sands and gravels on the shores of the Corinthian Gulf, the plain is formed by recent sedi rivers such as the Xerias and Solomos (or by swift-flowing to the coast the ancient Leukon), which flow perpendicular Xeropotamos, in narrow channels cut in response to regional uplift.100 Behind the alluvial ments brought are eluvial loam and sandy loam derived from the deposits weathering or of Pliocene red clayey sand marls, and fossiliferous Tyrrhenian sandy feature on the northern representing near-shore deposits. A prominent Corinthian plain is a series of fossil marine approximately parallel represent old beach fronts that have been to the shore of the Corinthian terraces arrayed in several arcs Gulf. These terraces

the coastal front on the Corinthian

subsequently uplifted and then to faulting and erosion.101 Through tectonic activity they have subjected been tilted backward, so that the forward (roughly north-facing) edges as cliff faces, while the trailing edges to the rise prominently slope gently rather, plain behind. The terraces have not survived intact in the Holocene; erosion and the cutting of streams and gullies have left remnants of the rising above the plain (Fig. 10). is important for several reasons. This unique geological configuration Because these relic terraces afford expansive views and defensive possibili ties, they have been favored locations for human settlement from the earliest terrace at Rachi occupation of the eastern Corinthia. One such prominent Boska (LOCA 9001; Fig. 6), occupied repeatedly over many millennia, settlement at Kromna was overlooks Kromna from the south. Long-term runs east to west by a branch of the Corinth fault that directly the ancient site (Fig. 9); along the fault numerous wells and at through least one large spring hint at the permanent supply of water necessary to the terraces run longitudinally sustain a settlement of some size.Moreover, supported and the routes of communication structuring and delimiting deduced from the known sites and this area. Wiseman transport through the territory s geological structure that at least eight major roads must have crossed the central Isthmus. In antiquity, as today, two roads converge, one east to west, from Kenchreai
as Kromna.102

arcs as isolated eminences

and one from Isthmia,

at or very near the area identified

plain is today almost entirely culti Finally, the northern Corinthian the mix of crops varying as a function of market forces and other vated, trees are factors affecting local farmers' decisions.103 Olive particularly in the survey area, present in more than half of all survey units, followed by grain, vineyards, citrus, and almonds; apricots and vegetables occur in lesser amounts. As might be expected, this entire area was used for agricultural purposes in antiquity, as indicated by scattered fragments common of artifactual material equipment.

100. Hayward 101. Pirazolli


such as groundstones, millstones, and ancient evidence attests modern

and agricultural to the fertility of

2003, pp. 16-17. et al. 1994; Dia et al. p. 64.

102. Wiseman 1978,

103. Shutes 1997.







Tracking Siteless

Kromna Survey






the survey data are in an early stage of analysis, the broad Although at outlines of a settlement history of the Greek and Roman community Kromna permit of land use and cyclical patterns of growth and decline from ca. 700 b.c. to a.D. 700. At present, given the fragmentary condi the chronological resolution of these patterns tion of surface materials, the reconstruction is somewhat Corinth coarse, but they appear to mirror itself, and probably reflect an intimate the changing relationship fortunes between of city are discernible. The artifacts and features we encountered

and hinterland. a was already major founder of By the late 8th century b.c., Corinth colonies to the west along the shores of the Corinthian Gulf, on the north western Greek coast facing Italy, and on Sicily. These colonies facilitated Corinth's dominated commercial for finished Architectural goods, the western markets interests, providing raw materials aswell as markets notably oil, wine, and the fine painted pottery that

for more than a century (ca. 725-575 b.c.). bronze work, and stone were other major Corin terracottas, thian exports. Under the tyrants Kypselos and Periander (ca. 655-586 b.c.), reached a zenith in prosperity and power. In addition to sending Corinth out colonies, these rulers built temples and other monumental works, and oversaw amajor of Corinth s primary harbors. Shortly there development Isthmian athletic games were organized after, ca. 582 b.c., the Panhellenic at the Sanctuary of Poseidon on the Isthmus. At Kromna, the Archaic period (ca. 700-480 b.c.) was seemingly a time of growth, at first gradual and then probably rapid (Fig. 17:a, b). The is small, number of artifacts that can be classified with certainty asArchaic



seven DUs Archaic

Although crossroads

more than three such objects (Fig. 17:a). producing has been found in limited amounts near the pottery

the principal scatter of Archaic material lies imme site in an area extending almost a kilometer diately south of the Classical to southeast. This dispersed, low-density northwest spread demonstrates the utility of a siteless approach, since the density of Archaic material iswell

at Kromna,

below what might be expected of a former settlement, and surely would not be recognized as such by any site-based method. The recording of artifact the use of the chronotype system, and subsequent density distributions, GIS and database queries together revealed a consistent, analysis using us a nascent settlement ancestral to low-density pattern that suggests to town.104 the later Classical A sharp increase inDUs producing significant numbers of artifacts that can be to "Ajrchaic^Classical" (ca. 700-323 b.c.) assigned with less precision in reflects the rapid physical and economic expansion of Corinth probably an the Late Archaic and Classical periods (Fig. 17:b). It is likely that agri cultural (and perhaps industrial) community of some size and significance in the Late Archaic or Early Classical period. first emerged at Kromna The DU data suggest this, in coarse terms: not only does the number of DUs producing more than three objects increase sharply, but there is a

104. Caraher, grew 2006, pp.

Nakassis, 14-21.

and Pette







IN 0 A Figure 17 (above and opposite).

Chronological Kromna. DUs objects period development with more attribution of than three to a






1200 M

of certain are shaded.








IN 0 A 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 M

5o0 shift to the crossroads at the limestone





geographical Isthmia met

area where

roads from Kenchreai


veloping residential from extensive cemeteries

quarries (Fig. 16), indicative perhaps of a de "core" of the growing community. Piecemeal discoveries

in the quarry area at the western edge of the site include graves containing 7th- and 6th-century pottery, indicating that this coalescence was under way already in the later Archaic period.105 Corinth s

prosperity continued through the first half of the Classical B. Salmon argues that even the Peloponnesian War (431-404 b.c.) period. J. affected the inhabitants of the Corinthia only marginally, mainly indirectly means of commerce that furnished by closing off the harbors and other so much wealth.106 This relative security evaporated in the first quarter of the 4th century b.c., as the Corinthia became the theater for near-constant among the Greek city-states. For more than a decade surround the Corinthian War (395-387 b.c.), the Spartans and their allies laid ing waste countryside, burning crops, stealing regularly to the Corinthian warfare can livestock, and driving residents from their homes. Kromna hardly have escaped the devastation, and may have been abandoned for years at a time as the inhabitants sought safety behind the walls of Corinth. Rachi Boska, overlooking Kromna from the south, was fortified at around this movements time and may have housed a small garrison monitoring into and around the plain. There was relief after Thebes at Leuktra sounding victory riod when the Macedonian united Greece ended Spartan hegemony with a re in 371 b.c.; and later, in the Hellenistic pe and their successors kings Philip, Alexander,

under a single rule, Corinth was able to recover some of its former prosperity. In the early 3rd century b.c., a major trans-Isthmian area that must have transformed wall was constructed the through the local topography and landscape. the town of Kromna protected have It is telling that the wall appears to have and we might wonder how that would

a visitor traversing the plain from Isthmia.107 Inscrip impressed tions concerning a substantial export business in Corinthian architectural stone date to this period of the 4th and 3rd centuries; plausibly, some and we can of this stone was acquired from the quarries at Kromna, therefore infer a continued relationship between the settlement and the Later Hellenistic at Corinth was interrupted in 146 b.c., occupation under Mummius destroyed the city. At that time, the and Kromna may have persisted suffered a general depopulation,



the Romans


if at all. Yet there is growing than a tiny rural settlement, evidence that Corinth was never entirely abandoned,108 and the results of such as EKAS portray a similar picture for smaller satellite communities as little more
the one at Kromna.

Lawrence 1964,

1939, pp. 265-266;

pp. 94-101; Wiseman

1978, p. 66. The EKAS archaeological

and mortuary surveys and cemeteries graves some of which discovered around other Kromna, below.

data furnish echoes of this turbulent history: the Classical Hellenistic period is represented in fewer DUs than the Archaic-Classical, and none of these DUs had more than three artifacts datable with certainty assume that Kromna sur period (Fig. 17:c, d).We may the gravestone of Agathon vived into the Early Hellenistic period, given evidence of substantial activity in of that date, as well as circumstantial to the Hellenistic

The DU

are discussed

106. Salmon 1984, pp. 175-177. 107. Wiseman 1963; 1978, pp. 62

108. See Gebhard and Dickie 2003,

with and references against to other arguments community. for an interim







iT^lj? <v*j?g:
* -#

Figure 18. Olive press of Hellenistic or Roman date (LOCA 9132) on the
surface at Kromna

the quarries and on the trans-Isthmian wall. The weak material signature a of the Late Hellenistic period at Kromna may reflect period of abandon ment, although this need not entail an entirely bleak picture. It is possible that the installation of an olive press (Fig. 18), capable of pressing olives from ca. 10 ha of groves per year, may date to that period,109 continued agricultural use of the plain despite the destruction

suggesting of the city was

rose to renewed as the first of the Roman province of Achaia. The sparse prominence city in DUs of definitively ceramic material representation Early Roman 19: a) contrasts sharply with the expansive spread of Late Roman times (Fig. so often the picture of Roman Greece an abandoned Roman settlement that reported by regional surveys: Early came back to life in the later Roman reason to period.110 But there is ample (Fig. 19:c), appearing to confirm be skeptical of this simplistic notion. Recent work by David Romano has revealed evidence for Caesarian and Flavian centuriation of the northern as Corinthian plain, enveloping Kromna.111 In addition, argued above, this contrast is the greater diagnosticity of ceramics of the latter exaggerated by a siteless survey method that records the distribution period.112 Here again, can reveal the biases of artifacts systematically responsible for perceived in settlement patterns. Even taking these biases into account, there appear to be real changes in the locations of activities in however, the Roman period. Evidence for Early Imperial activity is focused on area southwest of the Classical Greek town, while the occurring in only differences slight amounts in the immediate vicinity of the quarries. Only in the later Roman period did activity shift once again to the north into the quarry area of Kromna proper, accompanied by a survey-wide pattern of extensive, ca. A.D. 400. use of the dispersed landscape after

may say much refounded as a Roman


the same about the Early Roman colony in 44 b.c., and gradually

era. Corinth

109. James 111. Romano 112. See


HO. Alcock 1993; Kosso 2003.

2005,2006. above, the discussion

pp. 481-483, tion of Late

collec of the chronotype Roman fabrics. pottery




Early Roman

1000 1200M

Figure 19 (above and opposite). Chronological development of Kromna from the Early Roman through the Late Roman era.DUs with more than three objects of cer tain attribution to a period are shaded.














1200 M

Another Kromna A complementary approach to reading broader patterns from the siteless in the area, which represent places of exception data is to focus on LOCAs or features on the land. Several of these LOCAs ally high artifact density and 9007) were surveyed more intensively through (9001,9003,9005,9006, as such and functional gridded collections; they offer greater chronological resolution than is possible to obtain from the DU data (Table 10; Fig. 20).113 resulting outlines of the settlement history of Kromna appear similar to those described above, but in greater detail and with more clarity; there are also some real differences that confirm the place of LOCA analysis in the picture of land use inferred from the siteless data. complementing The Geometric b.c.) emerges as it did not in the period (800-700 View: LOCA Analysis and Locating



113. Tables artifacts confidence.

10 and

11 contain

that could Other

be dated with artifacts

only some

of "hidden landscapes" that might only data, raising the possibility be discovered search.114 A nearly complete by careful, high-resolution was found in an otherwise Geometric teacup empty grave at Mortuary 9005 and 9007 provide evidence the Geometric and Archaic periods. While it is there that we may see LOCA 9003 has little of the earliest material, in later Archaic the geographical of settlement times, a trend expansion that continues through the Classical period. LOCA (ML) 10, and artifacts for a small settlement between in LOCAs

a be assigned chronology be useful for this analysis historical"). 114. We have See Meyer collected the

could only too coarse to (e.g., "ancient

and Gregory 2003. to data with which

address esis,

and will

hidden-landscape hypoth do so at a later time.

is perhaps most striking about the data from these LOCAs What as is that there is virtually nothing that can be characterized definitively or Hellenistic Roman. Itwould be tempting to interpret this pattern Early








Period Geometric Geometric-Archaic Archaic Archaic-Classical Archaic-Hellenistic Classical Classical-Hellenistic

Approximate Dates
800-700 b.c.

9003 0 1 7 16 13 11 16 0


9006 0 0 0 1 1 4 2 1 0 0 5

9007 15 13 24 54 10 40 21 0 0 27 23

800-480 700-480 700-323 700-31 480-323 480-31 323-31

31 B.C.-A.D. 31 B.C.-A.D. 250 700

9 4 88 62 22 17 0 0 24

Early Roman Late Roman 9005 consists Roman

of two areas, 9005a and 9005b.


as an abandonment in Late Hellenistic times and a gradual repopulation of the countryside after Corinth s reestablishment, which, as noted above, would conform to a remarkably consistent decrease in rural site numbers in the Late Hellenistic and Early Roman epochs reported by surveys in islands.115 But because the intensive, siteless survey Greece and the Aegean detected levels of activity, in the form of modest artifact and graves, we see clearly the limits of counts, agricultural installations, a small a site-based approach and perceive instead the shifting focus of town low to moderate

agricultural community away from the center of the former Classical s nadir. during the time of Corinth Functional information

nates the range of activities the period between ca. 650 and 146 b.c., it is and its vicinity. Considering to use the ceramic finds (by far the most ubiquitous and most easily possible dated) to gain a first impression of the spatial arrangement and character of Kromna during prosperous times (Table 11). LOCAs 9003, 9005, and of fine and semifine painted table ware, 9007 yielded high percentages a pointing to generally high level of prosperity among the inhabitants of those locations. Further, the eight sherds from vessels likely to have had a votive function at LOCA 9007 span the Archaic and Classical periods, an suggesting the existence nearby of enduring discovered miniature votive bowls, Wiseman sanctuary or shrine. In 1960, a terracotta female figurine a Kore), and a terracotta altar, suggesting to him the proximity (probably 9003.116 Yet the finds from these of a sanctuary, possibly close to LOCA also imply a working LOCAs community engaged in agriculture, indus try, and trade. Ceramics are common at LOCAs categories Hellenistic of a domestic 9005 or commercial/industrial function and 9007, and many other sherds of these that cannot be closely dated must belong also to the Archaic settlement. An interesting contrast in the two assemblages maybe

extracted from the gridded collections illumi and the spatial patterns of land use at Kromna

at 9007, while at 9005 there significant: cooking pottery iswell represented a is particular abundance of storage and transport vessels. LOCA 9005, the Kenchreai road reaching Kromna from the southeast, may have facing

115. Alcock 1989a; 1989b; 1994,


116. Wiseman
1978, p. 66.

1963, p. 272, pi. 70;







Figure 20. LOCAs, MLs,

features at Kromna

and other been a focus of warehousing The assemblage at LOCA aswine or oil. transshipping products such more domestic. 9007, by contrast, looks at which no gridded col Other feature and artifact-scatter LOCAs, lections were made, fill out the general picture, so that it is possible to areas at Kromna and its begin to map out land-use patterns and functional or

9126, just east of LOCA 9007, is similar surroundings (Fig. 20). LOCA in artifact composition, but the sample ismore consistent with a domestic function while lacking a votive content. It is likely that LOCA 9126 should 9005 and be attached to the central residential core that includes LOCAs western and northwestern edges of the dense quarries abut the Archaic-Hellenistic scatter, and the lack of a strong signature from that era at Boulberi, across the quarries to the northwest, suggests that the the residential center, formed one boundary to the town. Within quarries 9007. The the olive press mentioned of aworking agricultural
as Early Roman.117

above (LOCA community,



the impression this feature may be as late


117. James


Some part of the quarry area adjacent to the settlement was utilized for ritual activity, evident in two dining areas that for convenience we call the rooms (LOCAs 9130 and 9131, respectively). "upper" and "lower" dining











Functional Category Table ware: fine, semifine 42 votive vessel: fine,miniature 0 Figurine: terracotta 0


9005 91 5 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 31 0 25 0 2 0 9 0 14

9007 9006 82 8 10 6 34 2 15 1 0 11 4 0

0 10 Ritual basin (perirrhanterion) Storage: pithos 3 Utilitarian: coarse,medium coarse 5 Transport: amphora 2 0 Cooking/kitchen 110 Loomweight Lamp 2 Rooftile, painted 0 Rooftile, slipped 7 In the Greek

as arenas for these dining areas served commonly world, to certain kinds of ritual. It is possible that these communal meals attached rooms had ritual connections with a nearby sanctuary, similar to dining those associated with ritual dining at the Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore at Corinth in the 6th-5th centuries b.c.118 Although far from complete, rooms are comparable in size and apparently similar in plan these dining to those at the Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore.119 Two fragments of ce

on the surface within ramic perirrhanteria?ritual washing basins?found the perimeter of the upper dining room reinforce the impression of ritual, of votive material from rather than domestic, activity. The concentration LOCA 9007 is a broad chronological may be related. Archaic-Classical believed delimited is less than 200 m from the dining rooms, and although there fit, we can only guess at this point that the two cemeteries the boundaries ofML and other mortuary features may help to listed three cemeteries that he of the settlement, which must roughly 9,16, and 37 (Fig. 20).120 A number of

further fix the towns boundaries. Wiseman to the locations

correspond other cemeteries and surface finds of fragmentary stone burial sarcophagi are known in the vicinity of Kromna,121 but it has proven difficult to recon struct their exact locations and this effort is ongoing. It is clear, however,

that large cemeteries were associated spatially with the roads and quar and Classical periods. ML ries in the Archaic 10, a cemetery of broadly road at the Classical date, overlooks the probable line of the Kenchreai southeastern limit of LOCA probably location in a quarry adjacent 9007. The convergence LOCA suggests that together limits of the residential The of Late Archaic-Late 16 is an unfinished sarcophagus date resting at itsmanufacturing to the Isthmia road, at the northern limit of 9005. ML Classical 118. Bookidis 1993; 2003, pp. 255

eastern boundary obvious breaks in density, but ML numerous Archaic-Late at a possible resident, hints

contexts of quarries, roads, and mortuary these features defined the physical and symbolic core on the northern, southern, and western sides. or ismore problematic, lacking definitive features 37, an area 200 m east of LOCA 9007 Classical sarcophagi were reported by a local boundary. More likely, the eastern boundary

119. Bookidis 1993, pp. 46-48,

figs. 3.1-3.3, table 3.1.


120. Wiseman 1963, p. 271. 121.Morgan 1939, pp. 265-266;

Lawrence 1978, 1964, p. 66, nn. pp. 94-101; 117-119. Wiseman








more fluid, the natural direction for growth but susceptible to or contraction in response to the expansion political and economic fortunes of the eastern Corinthia. always Outside the main residential zone lie several concentrated artifact scatters that have a domestic to the functional character and maybe hypothetically assigned of "farmstead."122 LOCAs 9154 and 9163 in

category have strong signatures in the Archaic-Hellenistic particular periods. LOCA 9163 typifies their artifact assemblages: 18 fragments of fine to semifine table ware, 2 millstones, were Other 11 rooftiles, 7 pithoi, 1 transport amphora, 2 loomweights, and 1 lamp. Such farmsteads surrounding the main settlement

arable soil. placed to take advantage of the well-watered similar sites, LOCAs and 9221, produced 9161, 9164, potentially too few objects of certain Archaic-Hellenistic date for functional attributes presumably to be inferred. may, therefore, propose several functional areas at Kromna: a resi core ("town"), an area at the a focus of adjacent industrial quarries, ritual activity at the transition between residential and industrial zones, We


a series of mortuary locations that may have demarcated the transition between residential and nonresidential space, two major carriage roads con a fortified position necting Corinth with the eastern coast of the Corinthia, (garrison?) overlooking Kromna from the south, and several farmsteads in the fertile agricultural land on the plain. LOCA 9003, several hundred meters to the east of the settlement, remains something of a puzzle. There, cut architectural stone, an unusual number of sherds from large quantities of sanctuar fine vessels, many of which are characteristic of Archaic-Classical all point toward ies, and the discovery of two fragments of perirrhanteria the presence of a sanctuary. This function appears to be corroborated by a terracotta altar and a Wisemans discovery, somewhere nearby, of partial Kore figurine. Yet a geophysical up no indication of monumental survey covering this area in 2002 turned foundations.123 This LOCA may be a

sanctuary and settlement that grew up along the road outside the confines of the main settlement at a time of expansion and prosperity in the eastern Corinthia, but we remain ignorant of its form and extent. These various features were certainly not all in existence or use at any we believe that given time, but they give a good impression of activity areas and land use several centuries of prosperity, when Kromna s during fortunes seemingly coincided with those of Corinth itself. The preliminary patterns invite many questions that will only be fully addressed by contin ued analysis of the data, which will refine, if not substantially revise, the
reconstruction offered here.

Interpreting Kromna The





archaeological and environmental a distinctive position in the Corinthia

122. But see Pettegrew 2001 on this

category. problematic 123. Sarris 2003.

an auspicious landscapes, where of abundant agricultural exploitation ation and manipulation

were asserted.

suggests that Kromna held because of a unique convergence of location was augmented by the intensive


and lithic resources, and by the cre of social landscapes by which power and identity

5o8 Kromna The as Crossroads





best explains its existence and its apparent prosper on well-watered, fertile soil at the cross ity.As noted above, the town sat roads of the major land routes through the eastern Corinthia (Fig. 16).124

location of Kromna


of these roads connected Corinth, via Kromna, with the Isthmus, giv access to the wealth and the rich Sanctuary ing generated by the Diolkos were held every two years. Another of Poseidon, where Panhellenic games road began at the Saronic port of Kenchreai and ran northwest to meet the road from Isthmia at Kromna, before heading west to Corinth. Wiseman

ran north from Kromna toward Lechaion and suggested that another route the Corinthian Gulf. Kromna must have been a busy place, with a constant movement of goods and people between Corinth?a popular destination famous for commerce as an important efforts to maintain The Agricultural node and pleasurable diversions?and the coasts. Kromna, was central to Corinth s in a connective landscape, firm control over its eastern territory. Landscape

A variety of evidence discussed above indicates that agriculture was a fun damental activity of the inhabitants of Kromna. The soils in the adjacent are deep and fertile, supplied with water from streams, springs, and plain and with sediment from local streams and hills (Rachi Boska, Ayios wells, Dimitrios). sediments team shows that mapping by the geomorphology transported into the plain by alluvial and colluvial processes have been transformed by the formation of deep soils, of which a thick horizon Bt is visible in plowed fields and miscellaneous The impressive cuttings today. Fine-scale variable but exposed to tens of meters in one Bt horizon, a deep cutting for municipal landfill, indicates the considerable time depth of formation and the essential stability of the landscape over that interval. The water supply too was ample: faults running through the plain offer access to groundwater, and springs issue at exposed interfaces between soft, and the underlying porous limestones and conglomerates impermeable thickness of the marls and clays.125 At the very heart of Kromna, a huge fig tree growing from a chasm beneath a small rise at the southern edge of LOCA 9007


saw 11 wells, the location of just such a spring. In 1960, Wiseman two cisterns, and a basin of poros slabs.126 Fewer wells are visible today, but local farmers have described vividly the water resources encountered in the course of digging. EKAS further discovered several features related to agriculture, described above: an olive press (LOCA 9132), millstone (LOCA 9134), and two or more artifact scatters that are provisionally as farmsteads (LOCAs 9154,9163). The northern Corinthian interpreted of which Kromna was a part, was a rich agricultural land for the plain, urban polis, as it still is today.

The The

Industrial settlement

Landscape of Kromna was

one of the adjacent to largest of Corinth's which extended along a low ridge for almost 3 quarries, km from the modern village of Examilia to Kromna and beyond. Cuttings famed limestone along this ridge show the tremendous volume of material removed from

124. Wiseman 125. For Corinth,


the natural

p. 64. water



see Landon

2003. 1978, p. 66.

126. Wiseman







cut blocks were identified in 66 of the 470 the quarries over time. Ancient DUs (14%) in the Kromna, Kesimia, Boulberi, and Perdikaria zones; the is just over 21%. In addition to cut blocks, an figure for Kromna/Kesimia unfinished and columns can still be seen in the quarries, at sarcophagus were manufactured on site. Wiseman testing to the range of products that as the 1960s, more unfinished as saw far objects in the quarries recently con most of which have since disappeared.127 Contemporary inscriptions firm that Corinthian centuries limestone was b.c. for construction in the 4th and 3rd used extensively at the sanctuaries of Asklepios at Epidauros and closer at hand we may infer a substantial

at Delphi,128 and Apollo at the Sanctuary of Poseidon at Isthmia, demand for stone at Corinth, the quarries at Kromna provided and elsewhere. It is not known whether some or all of the Corinthian stone for these major projects, but an ongo and p?trographie ing geochemical that it will be possible to match *
129 origin.

study by Chris Hayward offers the hope the architectural stone to the quarry of

quarries must also have supplied stone for buildings, monuments, and sanctuaries at Kromna and its vicinity. One of the greatest uses of stone locally was for the construction of a trans-Isthmian fortification wall The in response to the threat of the Persian invasion in 480 B.c.130This wall an was later rebuilt, probably in 279 b.c., to forestall anticipated Gallic resources is invasion.131 The value of Kromnas agricultural and industrial illustrated by the fact that they were protected behind these walls, while at Isthmia was not. Today, the line of the the Sanctuary of Poseidon can still be followed as it passes to the north of wall Classical-Hellenistic Kromna, providing a useful measure of the limit of Kromnian territory in turbulent times.132 A pair of wheel ruts (LOCA 9133) worn into bedrock were connected with Wisemans Road 3 possibly shows that the quarries as it we may associ passed Kromnas northern edge (Fig. 20). Logically ate these ruts with an access road for moving quarry stone to amain road for shipment, but it is not possible to date them, except to note that their depth (6-15 cm) and gauge (1.27-1.33 m) fall within known ranges for
Roman vehicles.133

It is likely that work in the quarries was mainly undertaken by the inhabitants of Kromna, who were

a seasonal occupation at other times engaged in agro-pastoralism. Journeymen may have been employed at times of great demand for stone, and soldiers drafted for the hasty work of throwing up defensive walls. By the Roman period, slaves may have comprised a sub stantial component of the workforce.134 At Kesimia, the detection by geophysical among or industrial-scale shop a concentration of Classical activities, although survey of two probable kilns surface pottery hints at other work their date cannot be confirmed



127. Wiseman
1978, p. 66.

1963, pp. 271-272;

131. Paus. 1963,


see also Wiseman

pp. 267-269.

128. Burford 1966,1969; Wiseman 1978, p. 68. 129. Hayward 2003, pp. 33-40.
130. Hdt. 8.71.

132. Wiseman
pi. 68:a.

1963, pp. 256-258,

133. Pritchett 1980, pp. 167-181.

134. Hayward 2003, p. 39.











monuments residential

In classical antiquity, itwas common to bury the dead and set up funerary along roads outside the confines of cities. As proposed above, these cemeteries may help to fix the approximate boundaries of Kromna s core in through time. Pausanias, traveling through the Corinthia the 2nd century a.D., noted the existence of memorial monuments the along road between Kenchreai and Corinth, but regrettably he did not describe survived around Kromna them.135 Until recently, many such monuments as ruins, and extensive cemeteries tombs of Archaic and freestanding Roman times existed on the margins of the town, as revealed by through excavations of the last century and surface discoveries made byWiseman,


of EKAS, and others. Monumental funerary structures served multiple purposes. A constant stream of merchants, pilgrims, soldiers and sailors, athletes and spectators, slaves, and local residents provided an audience for the social journeymen,

For elite families, encoded in these highly visible monuments. messages the monuments served to proclaim their status and to facilitate social re state undoubtedly in Corinthian used society. The Corinthian production monuments of various types to advance explicit historical claims to the ter and resources between the city and the coast, echoing the territorial ritory role played by tombs and funerary monuments around the world.136 Such held considerable and persons Sacred propaganda value, celebrating of the Corinthian past. the glorious

monuments exploits The

Landscape in the ancient

remains at certain

or temples

there is no explicit mention

at Kromna, the surface

sources of sanctuaries
locations are sug

gestive Wiseman

of sacred contexts. The

s discovery of terracotta farther east, leaves little doubt

shrines or sanctuaries existed in the

votive pottery at LOCA 9007, along with of comparable ceramics and an altar and a figurine that during Archaic-Classical
core of the settlement residential

9130 and beyond. The two, roughly contemporary, dining and 9131) were associated with ritual and possibly a neighboring sanctuary: the architectural evidence and the presence of perirrhanteria?particularly common components of ritual at Corinthian sanctuaries?are strong in dications of sacred contexts. Fragments of perirrhanteria were also found at LOCA in addition to one of the highest concentrations 9003, where, of cut-stone blocks in the survey area, the finds include abundant sherds of, though not exclusive to, and Classical periods.137 Wisemans sanctuary offerings of the Archaic and Kore existed there. discoveries may indicate that a cult of Demeter from fine-ware vessels not be surprising as shrines dedicated to the pair have across the Isthmus, from Acrocorinth in the west to the been identified Rachi settlement and the Isthmian sanctuary in the east.138 The development of a sacred landscape, first detectable in the Archaic Such a cult would period, of sur probably reflects the physical and symbolic consolidation at Isthmia, by rounding territories, including the Sanctuary of Poseidon the expanding city of Corinth.139 There is no evidence for earlier shrines at
135. Paus. 2.2.4.

areas (LOCAs

that are characteristic

136. E.g., Saxe 1970; Goldstein Wise 1995; Buikstra and Charles 1980; 1999.
137. M. K. Risser (pers. tojanovic comm.). 2002. 138. Anderson-S

139. Gebhard 1993.







Kromna, although these would have been small, open-air shrines lacking durable architecture and thus not easily recognized from surface remains. a Kromna More of Geometric likely, the inhabitants regional joined to the community of cult at the Early Iron Age shrine at Isthmia, prior in the early 7th cen of the first known sanctuary at Corinth establishment the evidence indicates that for centuries, tury b.c. The archaeological Isthmian roadside sanctuary served as ameeting place for widely dispersed groups from the Isthmus and beyond, fostering what Catherine has called a "regional framework of community identity."140 Morgan



we may we discover and the activities we Although place the materials infer at Kromna in convenient categories, such as "industrial" or "sacred," or attempt to locate physical boundaries or liminal places, such dichotomies more than the reflect our own intellectual preconceptions may reality in which ancient Kromnians existed. The alternatively not exist, and in fact the integrative approach of EKAS leads us to alter native points of view by breaking down such divisions. An example is the to show that neat boundaries data we have gathered can be read in space and in daily life did

of the "sacred" with industrial, memorial, and connective interp?n?tration was ritual landscapes. At Kromna, practiced at sanctuaries and dining rooms situated in residential areas and among the quarries. Dedicatory inscriptions are known from quarries in the classical Greek world, such as the dedication to Dionysos inscribed on a face of cut limestone bedrock in the quarries just northwest of Kenchreai.141 The sacred and memorial were there is awide functional overlap closely linked?indeed, landscapes in the artifacts from sacred and funerary contexts in early times, as is known from the 6th-4th-century West Cemetery at Isthmia at the and the Sanctuary of Poseidon this is distinctly not the case later in Ro (though man or Byzantine times, when the functional overlap is between domestic and funerary assemblages).142 These shared forms indicate a conflation of deposits some aspects of the acts of and commemoration. worship of a connective landscape held importance for Greek Similarly, aspects religion?a typical example being the status of crossroads as both magi
140. Morgan p. 146. 1994, p. 115.

141. SEGX1 50;Mitsos


the haunt of and healing, and dangerous, cal, associated with protection and the restless dead. The Greek gods Hermes witches and Hecate were were often set particularly associated with crossroads, where their images The clear evidence for ritual dining rooms and shrines very near the up. crossing of the Isthmia and Kenchreai roads may reflect a strong emotional association with supernatural forces at such places. the present analysis raises many questions about agency Furthermore, in the relationship of this important site with the urban center at Corinth. were

142. Clement andThorne 1974; Dickey 1992; Gebhard andHemans

1992, Risser passim; 1998, passim; M. K. (pers. comm.). 143. For ideas of agency and theo see ries of and "structuration," practice 2000. point becomes irrelevant, a

Bourdieu 1977; Giddens 1979,1981;

Dobres 144. This


however, if Shipley (2000, pp. 371-372)

that Agathon from Arcadian Kromna in the Corinthia. is correct was who foreigner was buried

the relationships activity, and linking Kromna, quarrying it possible Is Corinth? that Kromna developed strategies independent for economic prosperity, security, and ritual activity?143 Might Kromna eastern Corinthia

at certain times have pursued separate relations with other entities in the and beyond? It is perhaps significant that Agathon was not as a Corinthian, memorialized but as a Kromnian.144 Yet we cannot






Figure 21. View from Kromna

to Acrocorinth, southwest: west looking Kromna figuratively

and almost literally in the shadow of Corinth say that the land and quarry owners at Kromna were not in fact wealthy urban dwellers from Corinth.145 If they were, it will be difficult to sepa
rate the interests of astu and chora. On an even more fundamental level, a

close examination has led Pettegrew

"town" at all?rather,

of the literary, epigraphic, and archaeological evidence to suggest that Kromna was not really awell-bounded
it functioned as a crossroads emporium as part of

zone of in Corinth's eastern spatially continuous exploitation analysis of survey contexts and artifact collections territory.146 Ongoing from the broader survey area may enable us to better place Kromna in its Corinthian We context (Fig. 21). are also left with questions regarding the nature of change and area. For instance, should the northward of the chronological development shift in the Classical of the residential

an ex-urban


in terms of the period be understood "core" of a growing community associated development with quarrying activity? Or does the shift indicate the formation of directly a town at the crossroads at Isthmia and befitting the material developments the harbor at Kenchreai? area in the midst

Or is it the cultic and mortuary significance of the of an ancient quarry that is the greatest factor affecting the of settlement? How are we to read the paucity of Early Roman migration material and the apparent shift in settlement to the southwest? And what is the reason for the rehabitation of the quarry area in late antiquity? It is in the margins of uncertainty, at this early analytical stage, that such questions arise and alternative interpretations take shape. It is clear, however, that Kromna was significant because so many aspects of the Corinthian ethos found expression in this single place. It was central to Corinthian and in the practical and symbolic construction life, both geographically as a prosperous and of Corinth situated polis. An integrative historically enabled us to extract remarkably detailed information on methodology Kromnas beyond the piecemeal setting and its human history, offering interpretive potential well or that ofWisemans impressive but nonsystematic investigation,
145. Osborne 1991. 146. Pettegrew 2006, pp. 248-327. 1987, pp. 13-26;

information supplied by chance finds. In an article assessing a century of investigations into the Bronze Age of the Corinthia, New Problems," tellingly subtitled "Old Approaches,







Jeremy Rutter


an infusion of new field research

in the form of

surveys and excavations, to avoid a scholarship made stag problem-oriented nant by continued reliance on the reanalysis of old excavation material.147 This need for new archaeological approaches to address more finely focused questions extends to all periods of the Corinthian past.148 The preliminary examination of Kromna by EKAS, one of many such historical inquiries of a process of reconstituting and merely the beginning past landscapes in the eastern Corinthia, suggests some of the fruits of the application of new methods and perspectives.

Dense human occupation of the eastern Corinthia for more than 8,000 years, with an active tectonic, sedimentary, and erosional landscape, data from the surface presents serious challenges to eliciting meaningful combined record. The density of material across the landscape is variable, in some an "unbroken areas characterized carpet" of overlapping, by superimposed of material from multiple periods of the past, and elsewhere palimpsests or discrete, scatters. A further by sparse material single-period is the frenetic pace of modernization in the countryside, complication characterized by extensive bulldozing and the proliferation of new settle typified ments. The coastal Corinthia appearing everywhere rail situation will only worsen with the recent completion of a high-speed line connecting Athens and Corinth; this could effectively make much of the Isthmus a bedroom community for Athens, about 45 minutes away the cultural heritage of the eastern by train. The urgency of preserving Corinthia for the survey, even under less than ideal provides justification conditions. formulated we do not advocate a as those specific set of "best practices," such for the European POPULUS Manual of Best Prac Project's tice,149we believe that many of the principles and practices guiding EKAS are a widely relevant. Our integrative approach provides unifying philosophy While is especially at risk, with villas and hotels to attract tourists and Athenian weekenders. The

of interdisciplinary collaboration focused on the critical moment of primary data collection, and enhances the effectiveness of the discovery process by attaching to it experts in geomorphology, archaeology, GIS, and other dis us to an effective survey in ciplines. This flexible model allowed accomplish over which we had little control. limitations spite of unanticipated A fundamental emphasis on fine-scale geomorphological analysis our research design, guided sampling schemes, field procedures, analysis, and interpretation. It is our view that this level of involvement of geo 147. Rutter 2003.
148. For of survey Bronze Age is ponn?se example, data to issues the application the affecting P?lo and

morphology recourse to

should be standard among archaeological programs such as long-term complementary

surveys. Without replication studies

of the northeastern explored in Cherry

Davis 2001; Rutter 2003;Wright 2004. 149. Barker andMattingly 2000.

to calibrate survey results, our work geomorphological an even greater role in the success of the survey, and it is clear that played on the EKAS model is practi analysis of survey space geomorphological cable on a regional scale.

or test excavations

514 The combination






the chronotype of geomorphology, system, and our allowed us to answer the question recently posed by Eliza procedure are we counting for?150 She suggests that it may be beth Fentress: What of little value to count or weigh off-site material, because gross numbers or are uninformative if we have no information about relative weights of specific artifact classes, or ifwe cannot decipher the site-for ubiquity distributions. By carefully defining in which to survey, and by using the chronotype space geomorphological a representative approach to acquire sample of artifacts, both qualitatively is able to make more confident use of off-site and quantitatively, EKAS processes data to assess the potential for reconstructing past cultural patterns. The on the parameters conducted of artifact recovery EKAS experiments further refine the quantitative and qualitative information acquired from off-site More locations. broadly, our methods and results demonstrate the continued value and relevance of intensive, siteless survey, in the face of considerable and, to an extent, justified criticism.151 Taking only the example of Kromna, careful of the intensive survey data revealed activity during the Geometric, analysis that create off-site


Late Hellenistic, and Early Roman periods that surely would have been invisible using a site-based or nonintensive method. We were able to detect in fun spatially continuous patterns of low-density material that modify at such damental ways our understanding of Kromnas long-term history times as the interim between Corinth's destruction and refoundation. We believe future directions seek to establish chaeologists tary material. that the low-impact collection policy of EKAS anticipates in survey archaeology, as budgets tighten, host countries

closer controls on territorially extensive fieldwork, and ar ponder the utility of large collections of redundant, fragmen

focus attention on the responsibility These developments to help preserve cultural heritage, particularly in of survey archaeologists countries that suffer from rampant modernization and looting. The case studies presented above indicate that chronotype collections yield samples that are representative of ubiquity, type, and date, while dramatically reduc ing the number of artifacts retained. such as the geomorphological approach to Specific EKAS methods, as a collection or classification survey space and the chronotype strategy, to suit local conditions and research may be attractive in a form modified can be augmented where fieldwork permissions objectives. These methods are more liberal. But the broader goal of are usefully producing data that across and areas of the world is crucial, and in the ab regions comparable be presented sence of a standard of data collection practice, it is essential that methods in explicit detail.152 A central aim of this article has been to
150. Fentress 2000.

so that the inferences that are our methods generated from explain clearly them may be evaluated by others. was As an archaeological tool set, the EKAS methodology designed, and archaeological above all, to harmonize environmental, geographic, at all stages of the research endeavor, and to enable firmly information of the archaeological record to be drawn. The interpretations grounded the vast archive of information data generated by EKAS will complement to a from prior excavations, surveys, and chance discoveries, contributing more nuanced of the Corinthian fuller and past. understanding

151. Blanton 2001; Osborne 1996; Alcock and Cherry 2004a. 152.Tartaron 2003, p. 26; Alcock
vides Internet and Cherry 2004b. The pro a for commu vehicle promising even the most and voluminous nicating detailed accounts and dataseis: Gates,

Alcock, and Cherry 2004.







We acknowledge gratefully the cooperation of the 37th Ephoreia of Prehis toric and Classical Antiquities (represented by Panayiota Kasimi) and the and Post-Byzantine 25th Ephoreia of Byzantine Antiquities (represented following the Institute Foundation Ohio EKAS was supported by grants from the Skarmoutsou). to which we extend our sincerest appreciation: organizations,

by Konstantina

for Aegean Prehistory, the National Geographic Society, the for Exploration and Research on Cultural Origins, and the at Isthmia. State University Excavations

In addition, individual members received support from university and other external funds. Tartaron was supported by grants from Yale Griswold University, including the A. Whitney Faculty Research Grant, the Yale Center S. Niarchos for International Research and Area Grant; Faculty on Studies summer grant program. Pullen by the Council Archaeological received support from Florida State University through the Committee on Program En Faculty Research Support and the Arts and Humanities hancement Grant. Noller was funded in part by an Oregon State University General Research Fund grant, and also by aNational Science Foundation and Lisa Wells. Rothaus received funds from grant awarded to Noller St. Cloud State University for equipment, supplies, and GIS development. Rife received funding from the Classics Department of Cornell University. received an Alexander S. Onassis Public Benefit Tzortzopoulou-Gregory and a School of Archaeology Research Grant from Fellowship work was supported in part by the Christopher LaTrobe University. Schon s Fund at Bryn Mawr College and by a grant from the Foundation. Whiting Foundation a of Education funding from United States Department Fund for the Improvement of Secondary Education Research Grant, aswell as the sources: a of History following Ohio State University Department an Office of International Affairs Sum Summer Research Fellowship, mer Dissertation Research Grant, a Graduate School-Alumni Research Caraher received and a Department of History Isthmia Fellowship. Pettegrew was sources: the Ruth several Ohio State University supported by Higgins in the Department Award for Summer Research of History; the College of Humanities G. Michael Fund; and by an Riley International Academic Office of International Education Dissertation Research Grant. Nakassis Award, received travel support from the Classics Department inAegean Scripts and Prehistory at the University also thank enthusiastically all of the crew members of Texas and from the Program atAustin. We Studies Grant, and the Stavros was funding for students provided

and other participants,

who will be listed individually elsewhere. we are Finally, grateful toMichael Given, P. Nick Kardulias, and Apos t?los Sarris, as well as Tracey Cullen, Carol Stein, and three anonymous reviewers, for their insightful critiques and suggestions during Hesperia the editorial process.






Adams, J., and H. the Last Faure. 1998. "Prelim

World inaryVegetation Maps of the

since Glacial Maximum:

Contemporary Mass. Atalay, 1.1997.



"Red Mediterranean

An Aid toArchaeological Under

Alcock, 24, pp. 623-647. standing,"/^ S. E. 1989a. "Archaeology Roman Expansion Imperialism: and and

Soils in Some Karstic Regions of

Catena Mountains, Turkey," 28, pp. 247-260. 2000. and D. Mattingly. Barker, G, "General Editors' Introduction," Taurus in Francovich and Patterson 2000, iii-ix. G, and R. M. Reycraft. Disaster

theGreek City,"JMA2,
-. 1989b. in the Greek pp. 5-34. 1993. scapes of 1994. "Roman

pp. 87-135.


Landscape,"//?^ Graecia

pp. Bawden, 2000. the



The Land




Cambridge. up the Helle in nistic World: and Society," Survey and Classical Greece: Ancient Histories "Breaking Modern ed. I.Morris, Archaeologies, 171-190. pp. Cambridge, 2000. "Extracting Meaning from Ploughsoil Con Assemblages: in Francovich Remarks,"



Human Response Archaeology of of Anthropol (Maxwell Museum

ogy Anthropological Papers 7),

Albuquerque. and ?., Berggren, "Social Practice, Problems AmerAnt I. Hodder. Method, 2003. and Some


Archaeology," 68, pp. 421-434. 1, pp. 5-31. Greece: from Obser the

of Field

2000, pp. 265-266. 2004a. S. E., and J. F. Cherry. Alcock, in Alcock and "Introduction,"

cluding and Patterson

Binford, L. R. 1982. "TheArchaeology

of Place," JAnthArch in Central and Theories

Bintliff, J. 1991. "The Roman Coun

tryside vations

Cherry 2004b, pp. 1-9.

-, eds. 2004b. vey: Comparative theMediterranean Ambraseys, 1990. Strain N. N., "Seismicity of Central Side-by-Side Sur in Surveys Regional World, Oxford. and J. A.Jackson. and Associated Greece between

Boeotia Survey (1978-1987)," in

Roman Landscapes: Archaeological in theMediterranean Region, Survey and J. Lloyd, London, ed. G. Barker pp. 122-132.

1890 and 1988," Geophysical Journal

International Ammerman, A. 101, pp. 663-708. J. 1985. "Plow-Zone

P. Howard, Bintliff, J., E. Farinetti, K. Sarri, and K. Sbonias. 2002. "Classical historic Rural Farms, Hidden Pre and Greek and an

JFA Experiments inCalabria, Italy,"

-. 12, pp. 33-40. of 1995. "The Dynamics Land Use and the Acconia Modern


Landscapes, A Response


15, pp. 259-265.

Survey; JMA 8, pp. 77-92.

Anderson-S Cult tojanovic, V. 2002. of Demeter and Kore of Corinth," "The at the

and A. Snod J., P. Howard, 1999. "The Hidden Land grass. of Prehistoric Greece,"/AW scape 12, pp. 139-168.



sian Sanctuaries

in Peloponne and Cults. Proceedings at Athens,

Ninth International Symposium of the

at the Swedish Institute

and N. Venclov?. J.,M. Kuna, in The 2000. "Editorial Overview," in Future Survey of Surface Artefact and ed. J. Bintliff, M. Kuna, Europe, N. Venclov?, Sheffield, pp. 1-2. J., and A. Snodgrass. 1985.

11-13 June 1994, {SkrAth4?, 48),

ed. R. H?gg, Stockholm, P. van Dommelen, Annis, M., P. van de Velde. ment 1995. pp. 75-83. and "Rural Settie


"The Cambridge/Bradford Boeo tian Expedition: The First Four

Years,"//*/12, -. 1988. butions: pp. 123-191. "Off-Site Pottery Distri A Regional and Interre CurrAnthr 29,

and Socio-political in Sardinia," BABesch


tion:The Riu Mannu

ect 133-152. Ashmore, 1999'. W., and A.

Survey Proj
70, pp. eds.

gional Perspective," pp. 506-513. Birkeland, P.W. 1984. Oxford.

B. Knapp, of Landscape:

Soils and Geo










R. E. 2001.




Myopia," Antiquity 75, pp. 627-629.

in Pre 1920. "Corinth C. W. Biegen, historic Times," AJA 24, pp. 1-13. -. 1921. Korakou, Settlement -. 1930. pp. 55-86. a Prehistoric Boston. 3, near Corinth, "Gonia," MMS

Project: First Preliminary Report (2003-2004 Seasons)," RDAC 2005,

pp. 245-268. and R., D. Nakassis, Caraher, W. D. K. 2006. "Siteless Pettegrew. Data Collection vey and Intensive in an Artifact-Rich Case rinthia, Carr, C. Studies from Environment: the Eastern Co

of in Urbanism Mycenae," in the Bronze (Shef Aegean Age in field Studies Archaeol Aegean Sheffield, ogy 4), ed. K. Branigan, lands pp. 141-159. J. F., J. L. Davis, eds. 1991. and E. Man



Bookidis, N. 1993. "RitualDining at

Corinth," in Greek Sanctuaries: New and ed. N. Marinatos Approaches, R. H?gg, London, pp. 45-61. 2003. "The Sanctuaries Corinth," 259. Bourdieu, P. 1977. Outline of a Theory in Corinth XX,

Landscape as History: Archaeology Long-Term Keos in the Islands Northern Cycladic (Monumenta Los Angeles. archaeologica 16),


Greece,"/M/f 1995. "Mortuary

19, pp. 7-43. Practices:

Their Social, Philosophical

of Religious, Physical Circumstantial, Determinants," Method and Journal of and Theory 2, R. W. V.

Chew, S. C. 2001. World Ecological

Accumulation, Degradation: ization, and Deforestation, ad. 2000, Walnut Creek. Clark, Urban 3000 b.c.?


pp. 247

Anthropological pp. 105-200. Cavanagh, W.,

of Practice, Cambridge. I. Banks, Boutin, A., A. B. Knapp, 2004. M. Given, and M. Horowitz. "Settlement and Cemetery to the Roman in and

J. Crouwel,

Catling, andG. Shipley. 2002.

The Laconia and Change 1: Survey Continuity in a Greek Rural Land and Interpretation

1991. R. H., and A. J. Schofield. and Calibration: "By Experiment to Archae An Integrated Approach in Inter of the Ploughsoil," ology Scatters: Contribu preting Artefact tions to Ploughsoil Archaeology, ed. A. J. Schofield, Oxford, pp. 93 105. P. A., "From and M. M. theWest Thorne. at

around Katydhata Village: From

Prehistory C. 2003. Era,"

scape. Methodology

(BSA Suppl. 26), London.

of Cavanagh, 1996. and A. Sarris. W., R.Jones, and Geo "The Phosphate in The Laconia Surveys," physical 2: Continuity and in Survey Change a Greek Rural Archaeo Landscape.

RDAC 2004, pp. 335-351.

Bruno, "Isotopic Record

Clement, 1974.

Paleoclimatic Change in Soils of the

Eastern Korinthia, and D. Greece" (M.S. 1999. thesis, Oregon Buikstra, J. E., State Univ.). K. Charles. Ceme Land Ameri the Ancestors: and Sacred North

Corinth XX =C. K.Williams

N. Bookidis, eds. Corinth,



Cemetery 43, pp. 401-411.

II and
the Cen

Data (BSA Suppl. 27), ed. logical

W. Cavanagh, J. Crouwel, R. W. V.

"Centering teries, Mounds,

tenary: 1896-1996
Princeton Cullen,T in 2003. 2001.


Cading, andG. Shipley, London,

pp. 235-261.

scapes of the Ancient can Midcontinent," A. "Notes

"Introduction: of Aegean

in Ashmore

and Knapp 1999, pp. 201-228.

Burford, 1966. Building on the Epi -. daurian Inscriptions,"

Chang, C. 1984. "TheArchaeology of Herding Sites inGreece,"MASCA]

3:2, pp. 44-48. 1992. "Archaeological Land

and Visions Aegean


Prehistory," A Review

(AJASuppl. 1), ed.T. Cullen, Bos

ton, pp. 1-18. Dann, M. A., and R. W. "Use of Geographic Frankish Settlements Yerkes. Information 1994.

BSA 61, pp. 254-339.

-. The Greek Temple Build ers at Social and Eco Epidauros:A 1969.

of scapes: The Ethnoarchaeology in the Grevena Pastoral Land Use Region of Northern Greece," in

Systems for the Spatial Analysis of

in the Korin 1994b, thia, Greece," pp. 289-311. Davis, J. L. 2004. in Kardulias

nomic Study ofBuilding in theAskle

pian Early Butzer, during Sanctuary Third Centuries K. 1978. the Fourth and b.c., Liverpool. an Inte "Toward in

and Land Space, Time, Archaeological ed. J. Rossignol and L. Wand scapes, -. snider, New 1997. York, pp. 65-90. "Greek Sheep, Albanian

"Are the Landscapes in Alcock



Archaeology: -. 1982. Ecology, Bynum, M.

Approach A Personal View," asHuman

Shepherds: Hidden Economies

the European Community," dulias and Shutes 1997, pp. 141. 123


of Greek Prehistory Hidden? A

Comparative Approach,"

in Kar

JAS 5, pp. 191-193.

Archaeology Cambridge. R. 1995. "Studies

and Cherry 2004b, pp. 22-35.

Davis, J. L., S. E. Alcock, J. Bennet, Y. G. Lolos, and C. W. Shelmer

in the

Cherry, J. F. 2003. "Archaeology beyond the Site: Regional Survey and Its
Future," in Theory and Practice in Mediterranean Old Archaeology: World and New World Perspectives Seminars (Cotsen Advanced 1), ed. J. K. Papadopoulos Los Angeles, 159. 2001. J. F, and J. L. Davis. Cherry, "'Under the Sceptre of Agamem non: The View from the Hinter and R. M. pp. 137 Dia,

dine. 1997. "The Pylos Regional

Archaeological Overview and Survey," Hesperia 494. A., A. Cohen, Part I: Project, the Archaeological 66, pp. 391 R. O'Nions, 230Th and

of the Southern Co Topography rinthia" of California, (diss. Univ.

Caraher, 2004. W. R., "Less and L. Diacopoulos. than a Village: Patterns in the Land Korin 2004). J. S. Nol 2005. "The

of Rural



J.Jackson. 1997. "Rates of Uplift

Investigated through Dating

scape of the Southeastern thia" (paper, San Francisco Caraher, W. R., R. S.Moore, ler, and D. K. Pettegrew.

in theGulf of Corinth (Greece)," Chemical Geology 138, pp. 171







L. 2004. "The Archaeol Diacopoulos, in Mediter Greece," ogy of Modern ranean Archaeological Landscapes: Current Issues, ed. E. Athanassopou los and L. Wandsnider, Philadel phia, pp. 183-198. L., M. 2003. Given, and Ar




"A 'Waste' of




Landscape and

Exploitation in Lowland Greek

Agriculture," M. 1993. in Kardulias

Shutes 1997, pp. 187-215.

Fotiadis, "Regions of the Local Imagination: and Archaeologists, the Archaeological Greece," Archaeology 1:2, eds.

Diacopoulos, K. Seretis.


chaeology, Oral History, and Field

Survey," pp. 23-24. Dickey, K. in Given and Knapp 2003,

People, Record Journal pp.

in Fieldwork,

of European 151-168. R., and H.



Burial b.c." (diss. and

Francovich, 2000.



ca. 1100-550



Bryn Mawr College).

Dobres, Technology a Practice Agency: Outlining Framework Oxford. for Archaeology, 0.2002. Rev. of Hodder Doonan, Social M.-A. 2000.

PloughsoilAssemblages (The Archae

ology of Mediterranean Landscapes des

5), Oxford.
B. von. 1973. Freyberg, Isthmus von Korinth Geologie (Erlanger

2000b, mAmerAnt 67, pp. 787-788.

Doukellis, P. N. 1994. "Le territoire de in de Corinthe," et soci?t?s antiques. Actes du 14-16 colloque de Corfou, mai 1992, ed. P. N. Doukellis and la colonie romaine Structures rurales L. G. Mendoni, Dunnell, Site," R. C. in 1992. Paris, pp. 359-390. "The Notion

geologische Abhandlungen
Erlanger. T. W. Gallant, Noise tribution


1986. "Background and Site Definition: A Con to Survey Methodology,"

JFA 13, pp. 403-418.

Gates, and J. F. J. E., S. E. Alcock, 2004. "Internet Resources Cherry. for Mediterranean Regional Survey

logical and L. Wandsnider, pp. 21-41. R. C, Dunnell,

and Archaeo Space, Time, ed. J. Rossignol Landscapes, New York,

Projects: A Preliminary Listing," inAlcock and Cherry 2004b,

pp. 243-251.

and W.

S. Dancey. Strat

Gebhard, E. R. 1993. "The Evolution

of a Pan-Hellenic Archaeology Isthmia," Sanctuary: towards History in Greek Sanctuaries: From at New

1983. "The Siteless Survey:A Re

gional egy," Method Scale Data inAdvances and New Theory York, Collection in Archaeological 6, ed. M. B.

pp. 267-287. R. C, 1995. and J. F. Simek. Dunnell, "Artifact Size and Plowzone Pro Schiffer, 22, pp. 305-319. cesses,"//^ Ebert, J. 1.1992. Distributional ology, Albuquerque. S. 2000. "The Excavation

ed. N. Marinatos and Approaches, R. H?gg, 154-177. London, pp. E. R., and M. W. Dickie. Gebhard, 2003. ca. 200 "The View to 44 b.c.," from the Isthmus, XX, in Corinth


pp. 261-278. E. R., Gebhard, 1992.

and F. P. Hemans. of Chicago 1989:1," Exca Hesperia



at Catalh?y?k," inHodder 2000b,

pp. 19-35. M., 1977. I. Perlman, "Corinth and and Corfu: -. Farnsworth, F. Asaro.

"University at Isthmia, vations

61, pp. 1-77. 1998. "University at Isthmia, Excavations Hesperia Giddens, Social A. 67, pp. 1-63. 1979. Central

of Chicago 1989: II," in

A Neutron Activation Study of Their Pottery,"AJA 81, pp. 455

468. Fentress, E. 2000. For?" 2000, "What Are We and


Counting Patterson Foley, R.

in Francovich

Theory, London. -. 1981. A Contemporary Critique Historical London. Materialism, of


pp. 44-52. "Off-Site Archaeol

Gillings, M. 2000. "TheUtility of the GIS Approach in the Collection,

the Management, of Surface Future and 157 Europe, 120. Storage, Survey Data," and Analysis in The Survey Kuna, in and

ogy: An Alternative Approach for

the Short-Sited," Past: Studies in Pattern inHonour G of David of Isaac, pp.


ed. I. Hodder,

of Surface Artefact ed. J. Bintliff, M.

N. Hammond, 183.


N. Venclov?, Sheffield, pp. 105











and Ma


nuring: CanWe Compare Sherd Density Figures?" inAlcock and

Cherry Given, M., 2004b, pp. 13-21. A. 2002. and Project, B. V. Kassianidou, and J. Noller.

and Practical Survey in for Low-Impact Survey Proposals aMediterranean inMedi Context," terranean Current Landscapes: Archaeological Issues, ed. E. Athanassopou los and L. Wandsnider, Philadel 15-36. 1993. A

P. Fanning, S., D. Witter, Holdaway, T. Doel R. Musgrave, G. Cochrane, man, S. Greenwood, 1998. J. Reeves. D. Pigdon, "New Approaches Park, New A and

toOpen Site Spatial Archaeology

in Sturt National Wales, Australia," South in rchaeology 33, pp. 1-19. R. 1981. Mycenaean Hope Simpson, Park Ridge. Greece, Oceania Institute of Geology and Mineral

Knapp, "Troodos

Archaeological Environmental Survey Levant and A.

Cyprus: Report on the 2001

Season," Given, M., 34, pp. 25-38. B. Knapp, eds. to

phia, pp. D. C, and M. S.Mook. Haggis, "The Kavousi Coarse Wares:

Bronze Age Chronology for Survey

in the Mirabello Area, East Crete,"

2003. The Sydney Cyprus Survey

Project: Social Approaches Regional (Monumenta Survey 21), Los Angeles. archaeologica Given, M., A. B. Knapp, N. Meyer, T. E. Gregory, V. Kassianidou, N. Urwin, L. Wells, and J. Noller, Archaeological

AJA 97, pp. 265-293.

Hamilakis, Y. 1998. "Comments Given, and -. toM. Responses the Eteocypriots: chaeology and Inventing Ar Imperialist of

Exploration (IGME). 1972.

Korinthos 1975. Sheet, Athens. Athens. Sofikon Sheet, - Isthmia: Excavations the by under the Aus University of Chicago the American School of Classi pices of cal Studies at Athens, Princeton II = O. Broneer, and Topography 1973. Architecture, V = T. E. Gregory, The Hexamil ion and the Fortress, 1993. = C. VIII The Late Morgan, and Iron Bronze Age Settlement Early 1999. Age Sanctuary,


the Manipulation

H. Wright.
prus Survey plinary Change odos,

1999. "The Sydney Cy

Project: An Interdisci of Long-Term Central Tro

Ethnic Identity' (JMA 11.1, June 1998): Archaeology and the Politics of Identity inCyprus,"/M/tf 11,
pp. 107-111. W. 2000. "The Current State J. Hayes, inMedi of Roman Ceramic Studies terranean Studies, or Handling in Francovich Pot

Investigation in the North

26, pp. 20-39. Cyprus,"//*/ 2003. and N. Meyer. Given, M., "Map and Fieldwalking Procedures," ping

inGiven and Knapp 2003, pp. 30-36. Goldstein, L. G. 1980.Mississippian

Mortuary Two Cemeteries Valley, Practices: A Case in the Lower Study of Illinois

pp. 105-109. C. L. 1996. "High-Resolu Hayward, tion Provenience Determination of Construction Stone: A Prelimi

tery from Surveys," and Patterson 2000,

IX = J. L. Rife, The Roman

nary Study of Corinthian Oolitic

Limestone Quarries at Examilia," for Geoarchaeology 1999. 11, pp. 215-234. Evidence "Geological

Graves Byzantine Remains, forthcoming. "An Olive James, S. 2005. lation (poster, Kardulias, inModern Politics, from the Eastern 2005). 1994a. Boston P. N.


and Human






T. E. 1985a. "An Early Byzan Gregory, near at Akra tine Complex Sophia Corinth," 54, pp. 411-428. Hesperia 1985b. "Cities and Social Evo and Byzantine in South East Europe," European Per Social Evolution: Archaeological ed. J. Bintliff, Bradford, spectives, pp. 267-276. Archaeologi in cal Survey and Its Place Byzan Studies tine Studies," Byzantine -. 1990. "Intensive lution in Roman



the Pre-8th-Century Topography in Isthmia of the Central Plateau," VIII, -. The pp. 3-14. 2003. "Geology of a Basic of Corinth: Resource,"

Bureaucracy, in Kardulias and Science," the Site: Beyond in the Aegean Area,


1994b, pp. 373-387.

-, ed. 1994b. Regional Lanham. Studies

Study in Corinth XX,


pp. 15-42. F. P. 1994. "Greek Architec from

-. 1999. the Aegean


13:2, pp. 155-175. 1993a. "The Byzantine Dark in the Roman Bath Age Occupation at Isthmia," pp. 149-160. ed. 1993b. The Corinthia in in Gregory 1993b,

the Sanctuary at Isthmia," in Proceed of Poseidon on International ings of the Conference Greek Architectural Terracottas the of tural Terracottas Classical December Suppl. 27), 1.1997. and Hellenistic 12-15,1991 Periods,

in Levels "Multiple Bronze Age World

in World-Systems System," Theory in Practice: Production, Leadership, and Exchange, pp. ed. P. N. 179-201. Kardulias, Lanham,

(Hesperia ed. N. A. Winter,

Princeton, Hodder, Fluid, Reflexive "From Kleonai to an Agios -.

pp. 61-83.


theRoman Period {JRASuppl. 8),

Ann -. Vasilios: Ancient Arbor. 1994.

"Always Momentary, a and Flexible': Towards Excavation Methodology," a Reflexive

P. N.,T. E. Gregory, and Kardulias, a M. A. Dann. 1997. "Re-creating Frankish 50:3, Town,"Archaeology pp. 54-58. Kardulias, P. N.,T. E. 1995. J. Sawmiller. Gregory, "Bronze and Age

Antiquity 71, pp. 691-700.

2000a. "Developing

Journey through in Structures Landscape," Actes du rurales et soci?t?s antiques. de mai 1992, 14-16 colloque Corfou, ed. P. N. Doukellis and L. G.

and Late Antique Exploitation of an Islet in the Saronic Gulf,

Kardulias, Greece,"//^22,pp.3-21. P. N., and M. eds. T. Shutes, Studies on the

2000b, -,

inArchaeology," inHodder

pp. 3-18. Towards ed. 2000b.

Mendoni, Paris, pp. 351-358. -. 2004. "Less is Better: The

Method in Archaeology: The Example at Catalh?y?k (British Institute of

Archaeology at Ankara, Monograph

of Lanham. Fringe, European I = R. L. Scranton, Kenchreai Shaw, and W. Ibrahim,

1997. Aegean Strategies: Culture and Environment

W. J.

Quality of Ceramic Evidence from

28), Cambridge.










Investigations and Indiana


of I: University and Architecture, Leiden

Results of Corinth: the University by


Visible Remains and a Study of the

and Epigraphic Literary of California, (diss. Univ. Mattingly, lection, D. 2000. "Methods Sources" Berkeley). of Col

Keraudren, B., and D. Sorel. 1987. (Greece): "The Terraces of Corinth

tion," 2000,

Recording, in Francovich pp. 5-15.

and Quantifica and Patterson

A Detailed Record of Eustatic Sea

Level Variations during the Last

McGlade, J. 1997. "GIS and Integrated

Archaeological Knowledge Sys tems," in Archaeological Applications

Marine Geology 77, 500,000 Years,"

Kosso, pp. 99-107. C. 2003. Policy The Archaeology in Late Roman of Greece


ofGIS. Proceedings ofColloquium II, UlSPPXIIIth Congress,Forli, Italy, September1996 (Sydney University
Archaeological CD-ROM), M. Mee, in North, Methods ed. I.Johnson 2000. The Series and 5,

(BAR-IS 1126), Oxford.

Kvamme, Surveys AmerAnt Lambeck, K. L. 2003. as "Geophysical Landscape Archaeology," 68, pp. 435-457. 1995. "Late Pleistocene Sea-Level Change


Sydney. and P.James. and Site Function: C, Sites

"Soils Laconia

and Holocene Greece A


and Southern

Turkey: Isostatic, Geo 122,

and Land

in Project," Landscape Use in Greece Postglacial 3), ed. P. Halstead

Separation and Tectonic Journal 1996. Shore-Line

of Eustatic, Contributions," International

(Sheffield Studies inAegean

Archaeology 162-175. N. 2003.

physical -.

and C. Frederick, Sheffield,

pp. Meyer, and "Pottery Strategy in Given and Knapp Chronotypes," 2003, pp. 14-16. N., andT. E. Gregory. 2003.

pp. 1022-1044.
"Sea-Level Evolution: and Change A General

Framework ofModelling
Application to Aegean

and Its



Upper Palaeolithic Time," Antiquity

Landon, 70, pp. 588-611. M. E. 2003. a Broader "Beyond Peirene: of Corin View

"Pottery Collection, Pottery Analy in Given sis, and GIS Mapping,"

and Knapp 2003, pp. 48-52.

Meyer, N., and R. Schon. Data," 2003. in Given and "Experimental


thian Water Supply," in Corinth XX,

pp. 43-62. P. 1964. Lawrence, from "Five Grave Hesperia Groups 33,

the Corinthia,"

Knapp 2003, pp. 52-56. Mille?, M. 2000. "Dating, Quantifying, andUtilizing Pottery Assemblages
from Surface and Patterson Mitsos, ?ia?, M. 1936. in Francovich Survey," 2000, pp. 53-59. "ErciYpccip?? d; ApKa Kai KopwGia?,"

pp. 89-107. E. 2001. Lee, W. Archaeological and Change in aModern

"Pylos Regional Part IV: Project, the Human Greek Landscape inMes Village


ArchEph 1936, pp. 136-146.

of a C. 1994. "The Evolution Morgan, Pera Sacral Landscape': Isthmia, chora, and the Early Corinthian State," in the Gods: Sanctuar Placing inAncient ies and Sacred Greece, Space ed. S. E. Alcock and R. Osborne, pp. C. H, 105-142. II. 1939. "Excavations at

70, pp. 49-98. senia," Hesperia M. Wag T E., J. D. Anderson, Levy, goner, N. Smith, A. Muniz, R. B. Adams. 2001. "Digital 2001: GIS-Based chaeology vation SAA Recording and Ar Exca

Archaeological pp. 23-29.

in Jordan," The Record 1:3,

Oxford, Morgan,

Lolos, G. J. 1998. "Studies in the Topography of Sikyonia (Greece)"

(diss. Univ. -. of California, Land and History Berkeley). ofSikyon: a of Suppl. Kleo Forthcoming. The Archaeology Greek City-State 39), Princeton. Marchand, J. 2002.

Corinth, 1938,"4/^43,

pp. 255-267.

2000. P., and P. N. Kardulias. Murray, as Past: An Ethnoar "The Present

chaeological Study ofModern Sites in the Pikrodhafni Valley," in Sutton

Noller, pp. 141-168. E. Reinhardt, J., L. Wells, 1997. "Subsidence R. Rothaus. 2000, the Harbor Gulf, Greece, at Kenchreai, during and of

(Hesperia "Well-built

nai:A History of the Peloponnesian City Based on a Survey of the


the Earth







a.d. 400 and a.d. 1928," quakes of Eos 78, p. 636. R. 1987. Classical Osborne, Landscape

ning Religion

in Roman

Corinth," Corinth:

in Urban Inter

ed. J. Rossignol New Schon, York, R. 2002.

and L. Wandsnider,

in Roman

pp. 91-112. "Seeding the Land Contributions

with Figures: TheAncient Greek City

and Its Countryside, -. 1991. "Pride Sense London. and Prejudice, Exchange -.

disciplinaryApproaches (Harvard Theological Studies 53), ed.D. N.

Cam and S. J. Friesen, Mass., pp. 25-59. bridge, in 2006. "Roman Surveyors Schowalter Corinth," Rothaus, First History PAPS R. M. City of 150, pp. 62-85. 2000. Corinth, the Urban Cult and

scape: Experimental

to Regional SurveyMethodology" (diss. BrynMawr College).

Seretis, K., and L. Diacopoulos. 2003.

and Subsistence:

and Society in theGreek City,"

in City World, Hadrill, -. in the Ancient Country ed. J. Rich and A. Wallace and London, 1996. pp. 119-145. "Survey and Greek Soci

Greece: An of Late Antique

Mitsero Village," inGiven "SIA 5: and Knapp 2003, pp. 109-118. Shipley, G. 2000. "The Extent of Spar
tan Territory in the Late Classical

AJA 100, pp. 165-169. ety," O'Shea, J. 1984.Mortuary Variability:

An Archaeological New York. C. 2003. Investigation, "The Menindee Archaeology," 57, pp. 42-53. The Archaeol

Religion (Religions in theGraeco RomanWorld 139), Leiden.

Rothaus, taron, R. M., E. Reinhardt, 2003. T. Tar "A Geo for Under of the Korinthia," the Ae -. and J. Noller.

andHellenistic Periods," BSA 95,

pp. 337-390. 2002. Hellenistic Cavanagh in the Survey Area in and Roman Periods," et al. 2002, pp. 257-337. "The on Cultivated Case Study,"


archaeological Approach Prehistoric Usage standing Coastline inMETRON: of the Eastern Measuring

Shott,M. J. 1995. "Reliability of Ar

Records chaeological Surfaces: A Michigan


A Regional

Australian Parker Pearson,

Archaeology 1999. M.

Death and Burial, College ogy of

Station. D. K. 2001. Pettegrew, Classical Farmstead: Formation Settlement "Chasing the

gean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 24), and R. Laffineur, ed. K. Foster Li?ge, Rutter, pp. 37-47. J. B. 1974. "The Late Helladic in the Corinthia"

JFA 22, pp. 475-490. Shutes,M. T. 1997. "WorkingThings

Out: On Examining the Relation Prac ships between Agricultural in Ancient tice and Social Rules Greece," 2001. in Kardulias

the Assessing of Rural and Signature in Greek Landscape

IIIB and IIIC Periods at Korakou

and Gonia Univ. -. thia Old (diss. the Corin b.c.: of Pennsylvania). 2003. "Corinth in the Second Approaches, M.

Korinthos, S. C.

and Shutes 1997, pp. 237-257.

and Stiros, "The a.d. 365 Crete

-. 2006. "Corinth

14, pp. 189-209.

on the Isth

Millennium New Problems,"

mus: Studies of the End of an

Ancient Landscape" (diss. Ohio "The Busy Roman Cor Source Settlement Anal Pat State Univ.). -. Forthcoming. of Late Countryside inth: Ceramic ysis, Data, and Regional

Earthquake and Possible Seismic Clustering during the Fourth to

Sixth Centuries a.d. in the Eastern of His Mediterranean: torical A Review

in Corinth XX, pp. 75-83.

Sakellariou, 1971. V, and N. Faraklas. (Ancient Corinth-Cleonai

Greek Cities 3),Athens.

Corinth: Salmon, J. B. 1984. Wealthy A the City to 338 b.c., History of Oxford. Sarris, A. 2003. Technical Report at

and Archaeological Data," Structural Journal of Geology 23, pp. 545-562. S. B. 1988. "What Is a Village Sutton, in a Nation of Journal Migrants?" Modern Greek Studies 6, pp. 187 of 215. -. 1994. Settlement "Settlement Perceptions: Patterns, Rethink

terns," Hesperia. P. A., S. C. Pirazolli,

Stiros, M. Arnold, F. Laborel-Deguen, and Laborel, J. 1994. S. Papageorgiou. "Episodic Shorelines sula, Corinth W. K. in the Perachora Area, 1980. Greece," Studies Penin Tectono

Survey Geophysical Prospection and Perdikaria Kromna-Kesimia as Part Eastern of the Korinthia

Uplift Deduced fromHolocene

Archaeological Survey (EKAS-2002),

Sarris, A., Rethymnon. and R. E.Jones. 2000. "Geo -,

ing theGreek Village," inKardulias

pp. 313-335. ed. 2000. Contingent side: Settlement, Economy, 1994b, Use 1700, Tartaron, in the Southern Stanford. T. E 2003. "The Archaeo Argolid Country and Land since

physics 229, pp. 201-209.

Pritchett, inAncient

GreekTopography,Part III:Roads (University of California Publications inClassical Studies 22), Berkeley.

Rautman, tryside J. L. M. 2000. of Late "The Busy Coun Roman Cyprus," and

physical and Related Techniques Applied toArchaeological Survey

in the Mediterranean: JMA13, Saxe, A. A. of Mortuary A Review," pp. 3-75. 1970. "Social Dimensions Practices" (diss. Univ.

logical Survey: Sampling Strategies

and Field Methods," Archaeology ed. J. Wiseman Princeton, of the Tartaron, Noller. T in Southern in Landscape Epirus,

RDAC 2000, pp. 317-331.

Rife, 1999. "Death, Ritual,

Schiffer, 1972. "Archaeological and Systemic Context," AmerAnt37, pp. 156-165. -. 1987. Formation Processes Context Record, M. B.

Greece 1 (Hesperia Suppl. 32),

and K. Zachos, pp. 23-45. F., D. J. Pullen, 2006.uRillenkarren

Memory inGreek Society during the Early andMiddle Roman Empire" (diss.Univ. ofMichigan).
Romano, D. G. 1993. "Post-146 b.c.

Land Use inCorinth, and Planning

of the Roman Colony "Urban of 44 b.c.," and Rural Plan

Albuquerque. Archaeological 1992. S. H. Schlanger, "Recognizing in Anasazi Persistent Places Settle ment and Systems," Archaeological in Space, Time,

and J. S. at Vayia:

Geomorphology and aNew Class of Early Bronze Age Fortified

Settlement in Southern Greece,"

inGregory 1993b, pp. 9-30.

-. 2005.


Antiquity 80, pp. 145-160.







T. F, R. M.



Pullen. 2003. DJ. "Searching for Prehistoric Harbors Aegean

Transactions Philosophical of the Royal London 314, pp. 379-407. Society of of Velou Vroom, J. 1993. "The Kastro

for Ceramic XX, Whitelaw,T. pp. 1-13.

Production," 1991.

in Corinth

"The Ethnoarchae Rural Settlement Keos,"

with GIS, Geomorphology,

Archaeology," pp. 27-36. Athena Review

3:4, -.

kovio (Kallion):A Note on Surface

Finds," Pharos 1996. 1, pp. and Archaeol "Coffee Ware Pharos 4, Wise, 113-138.

ology of Recent and Land Use in Cherry, K. Davis,

in Northern

and Mantzourani

"Cultural Depositional J. 2000. Taylor, Processes and Post-depositional in Francovich and Pat Problems," terson Terrenato, 2000, N. pp. 2004. 16-26. "Sample Size Mat -.

on a ogy: A Note K?tahya Find in Boeotia, Greece," pp. 6-19. 1998.

ters!The Paradox of Global Trends

and Local Surveys," 1975. in Alcock and

Archae "Early Modern in Central Greece: The Con ology trast of Artefact-Rich and Sherdless

pp. 403-454. 1995. "La ocupaci?n Chin chorro en Villa del Mar, Ilo, Peru," Gaceta Andina 24, Arqueol?gica pp. 135-149. 1991, mian J. R. 1963. "A Trans-Isth Fortification Wall: Notes


Sites; JMA11, pp. 131-164.

Wandsnider, 1992. L., and E. L. Camilli. of Surface "The Character

Cherry 2004b, pp. 36-48.

Thomas, D. H. "Non-Site

on Hellenistic Military Operations

in the Corinthia," 32, Hesperia pp. 24S-275. 1978. The Land of the Ancient

Sampling inArchaeology: Up the Creek without a Site?" in Sampling

in Archaeology, Tucson, Tod, M. N. ed. J. W. Mueller, pp. 61-81. In 1985. Greek Historical

and Its Deposits Archaeological on Influence Survey Accuracy,"y/24 19, pp. 169-188. Wells, B., and C. Runnels, eds. 1996. The Berbati-Limnes


Corinthians (SIMA 50), G?teborg.

J. C. 2004. Wright, tlement Patterns Age nesos," Set "Comparative the Bronze during Pelopon and Cherry 2004b,


scriptions (originally published as two

volumes, van Andel, T. Greek Historical Inscriptions

Survey, 1988-1990
Jonsered. L. E. 2001. Wells, iments Sediments ed. J. K. in Coastal

(SkrAth4?, 44),
Sed in

in the Northeastern in Alcock

I [1946] and II [1948]), Chicago.

1994. and Archaeological A Personal View," "Geo-archaeology Science? in Kardulias

"Archaeological Environments,"




J.C, J. F Cherry, J. L. Davis,

S. B. Sutton, Jr. 1990. and "The Nemea

in Context, Archaeological R. Farrand, Stein and W. and R. J. Brandon, London. and R. Huggins. Surveying inArchae Sites," ed. G. New Rapp Haven, Jr. and eds.

E. Mantzourani, R. F. Sutton

1994b, pp. 25-44. -. 1998. "Paleosols,

Salt Lake City, pp. 149-182.

Red Sedi Wescott, B.,

Valley Archaeological Project: A

Preliminary pp. 579-659. Yaalon, D. ranean 1997. Report," "Soils What Hesperia 59,

ments, and the Old Stone Age in

Greece," 390. van Andel, T., and C. Runnels. A Rural 1987. Greek Geoarchaeology 13, pp. 361?

2000. PracticalApplications ofGIS

for Archaeologists, Weymouth, 1985. W., J.

in the Mediter Makes Them


Region: Catena Different?" N.,

the Acropolis: Beyond Past, Stanford. Vita-Finzi, 1985. C, "The and G

Archaeological ological Geology, and J. A. Gifford, pp. 191-235.

Yassoglou, stakas. Origin,

28, pp. 157-169. and N. Mou C. Kosmas, "The Red Use, Soils, Their and Man 28,


C. P. King. Geomor Seismicity,


and Structural Evolution phology, of Greece," of the Corinth Area

Whitbread, inth: The

I. K. 2003. Study

"Clays of Cor of a Basic Resource

in Greece," agement pp. 261-278.


University department logan philadelphia,

R Tartaron
of of hall 20i pennsylvania 0652o Pennsylvania classical studies

Florida department tallahassee,

State of University classics 32306



Timothy E. Gregory
department 106 230 dulles west

department 3017 life agricultural sciences oregon


crop and building 97331 and soil science


of hall 17th ohio avenue 432io history



jay.noller@oregonstate.edu gregory.4@osu.edu









Rothaus State
sponsored and avenue minnesota faculty south 563oi

William R. Caraher
programs, development University department merrifield grand forks, of of hall, north North history room dakota 20?b 58202 Dakota

St. Cloud
office research, 72o st. 4th cloud, of





Pettegrew College
of 3051 AVENUE PENNSYLVANIA 17027 history

Joseph L. Rife
Macalester classics 1600 st. grand paul, College department avenue minnesota 55105

department P.O. ONE BOX






Tzortzopoulou-Gregory University
of drive archaeology

Dimitri Nakassis
Trinity department one san trinity antonio, University of place texas 78212 classical studies

La Trobe
department kingsbury

bundoora,melbourne victoria australia 3086



Robert Schon
department founders 106 central hall street massachusetts 02481

of classical studies