fortifications situated along the ridge of Mt. Oneion, which forms the south ern boundary of the Isthmus. These Late Classical-Early Hellenistic walls,.

150 KB – 30 Pages

PAGE – 1 ============
HESPERIA 75 (2006) Pages 327~356 FORTIFICATIONS OF MOUNT ONEION, CORINTHIA ABSTRACT Recent investigations on the Isthmus of Corinth by the Eastern Korinthia Archaeological Survey (EKAS) have revealed a series of relatively humble fortifications situated along the ridge of Mt. Oneion, which forms the south ern boundary of the Isthmus. These Late Classical-Early Hellenistic walls, along with a nearby series of later Venetian fortifications, were designed to block access to the south through several low passes. Controlling the passage of northern armies through the Isthmus to the P?loponn?se was clearly a long-term strategic concern for diverse regional powers. The Isthmus of Corinth is one of the most strategically important regions in the eastern Mediterranean.1 It lies at the junction of the main north-south roads between central Greece and the P?loponn?se and the sea routes be tween the eastern and the western Mediterranean. The Corinthians, with their imposing citadel of Acrocorinth, traditionally controlled the Isthmus, which runs from the city’s western port of Lechaion to its eastern port at Kenchreai (Fig. 1). At numerous times, however, a foreign power such as Rome or Venice has sought to dominate this strategically significant corridor. The Isthmus is both a relatively fertile, flat agricultural area and the natural point of defense for the P?loponn?se against any attack from the north.2 Only 7 km wide at its narrowest point, the Isthmus is cut today by the Corinth Canal and was crossed in antiquity by the Diolkos road. It is 1. We would especially like to thank Daniel Pullen, codirector, and Thomas Tartaron, field director, of the Eastern Korinthia Archaeological Survey (EKAS). The 37th Ephoreia of Classical and Prehistoric Antiquities and the 4th Ephoreia of Byzantine and Post-Byzantine Antiquities provided cooperation and encouragement at every step of this project. We would also like to thank Ronald Stroud, James Wiseman, and Merle Langdon for advice and for reading earlier drafts of the article. Thanks are also due to the anonymous Hesperia referees, who helped us avoid many errors and infelicities. Holly Cook prepared the pottery drawings, and Karen Soteriou prepared the plans of the Maritsa Vene tian fortifications. Finally, special thanks are due to the many members of EKAS who trudged up and down the steep paths of Oneion in hot and sometimes dangerous situations, often carrying heavy equipment. This article is primarily the fruit of their labor. 2. Wiseman 1978, pp. 17-21,52 56, 81-82; Isthmia V, pp. 7-10; Fowden 1995. ? The American School of Classical Studies at Athens

PAGE – 2 ============
WILLIAM R. CARAHER AND TIMOTHY E. GREGORY GuffofCorfnth N A Ancfofit Corinth Yirfe???Gont? Voukiana Xytotortn i Saronlc Gulf vym Figure 1. The Isthmus of Corinth, with sites mentioned in the text. W. R. Caraher one of a handful of natural places critical to the defense of Greece, along with the eastern pass ofThermopylai and the western passes of Kithairon Parnes between Boiotia and the Attic-Megarid region.3 Although these three areas have natural features that have made them easily defensible, all of them required complex systems of fortification to prevent the passage of an enemy. Here we seek to shed new light on the southernmost fortifica tions of the Isthmus corridor. At the southern boundary of the Isthmian plain, the abrupt heights of Mt. Oneion provide a natural defensive line from Kenchreai to Acrocorinth (Figs. 1, 2). For an enemy approaching Mt. Oneion from the north, the sheer cliffs and steep slopes present a formidable barrier. To gain access to lands south of the mountain, it is possible to pass the Oneion barrier in a number of ways (Fig. 3). The easiest method is to go around it, either to the east or the west. The principal routes of both ancient and modern times skirt Mt. Oneion to the west, following the course of the Xeropotamos (Leukon) River or traversing the valleys of the Longopotamos (Rachiani) and Nemea (Koutsomadiotikos) rivers farther to the west.4 The difficulty with these routes in the past was that they ran directly within the view of the powerful fortifications of Acrocorinth, often prompting an invading army to seek an alternative course. To the east a route ran along the coast of the Saronic Gulf near the port of Kenchreai, just west of the modern coastal highway to Epidauros.5 The disadvantage of this route was that it passed close to the fortifications of Kenchreai, and beyond these the road narrows between the sea to the east and the mass of Mt. Oneion to the west.6 Here a small force could easily block an invader’s progress to the south. An invader with control of 3. Fowden 1995, p. 550. 4. For the Xeropotamos, see Wise man 1978, pp. 81, 88-90; Salmon 1983, p. 36. For the Nemea and Longopota mos rivers, see Pritchett 1969, pp. 77 79; Wiseman 1978, pp. 81,108-110; Salmon 1983, pp. 36-37; Bynum 1995, pp. 40-45; Pikoulas 1995, pp. 31-35; Lolos 1998, pp. 129-132; Marchand 2002, pp. 40-72. 5. Stroud 1971a, p. 127. For the identification of wheel ruts presumably belonging to this road along a stretch of exposed bedrock on the beach north of Loutro Elenis, see Kenchreai I, p. 2; Salmon 1983, p. 37. 6. Pseudo-Skylax 54; Kenchreai I, pp. 6-12.

PAGE – 3 ============
Figure 2. Mt. Oneion, looking south from the Isthmus. The Maritsa pass is just right of center. Photo T. E. Gregory FORTIFICATIONS OF MOUNT ONEION, CORINTHIA 329 the sea would have found it easier to circumvent the defenses along the Saronic Gulf.7 When an invading army found the natural routes around the ends of Mt. Oneion blocked, it might attempt to cross the mountain directly. It is possible to do so through one of several north-south passes, including the Stanotopi and Maritsa passes, which are the particular focus of this article. To attempt either of these passes, located in the eastern part of the Oneion range, an attacking army must have had serious reasons to bypass the easier routes skirting its eastern and western ends. Not only are the mountain routes arduous, but they would place the attackers in a position well east of Corinth and outside the main routes to the Argolid. The most compelling reason for using these passes would have been that forces at tempting to block the Isthmia corridor typically arrayed themselves at the eastern and western ends of the mountain, defending the easy passages and maintaining close contact with the resources and fortifications of Corinth and Kenchreai. An attempt to pass through the center of the mountain ridge, therefore, may have seemed preferable to meeting concentrated defenses on the Saronic coast or in the Xeropotamos valley. There were other reasons for an invader to seek access to the area immediately south of Mt. Oneion and east of the traditional routes to the Argolid. Textual and archaeological evidence from the Classical period at tests to the existence of an unfortified community at Solygeia in the rolling hills immediately south of Oneion (Fig. I).8 Archaeological finds have been reported near the town of Almyri and on the hills of Brielthi and Vigla. Moreover, in the course of geological work conducted by EKAS, scatters of ancient material in the fields to the west of the modern village of Rhyto were observed, indicating that the hills south of Solygeia, reached today by a road heading south from Galataki, may have had significant settlement in antiquity as well.9 The presence of these apparently unfortified settlements within easy reach of the coast may have tempted an enemy either to forage 7. E.g., Diodoros (19.54.3) recorded that in 316 Kassander avoided a con frontation with the troops of Polyper chon, who held the Isthmus at that time, by transporting his men from Megara to Epidauros by sea; see Stroud 1971a, p. 142. 8. For Solygeia, see Thuc. 4.42-45; Corinth 1.1, pp. 97-99; Stroud 1971b; 1994, pp. 269-280; Wiseman 1978, pp. 56-58. See Lorandou-Papantou niou 1999 for N. M. Verdelis’s excava tions in 1957-1958; for finds elsewhere, see Stroud 1971b, p. 238; Wiseman 1978, p. 58. 9. Tartaron et al., forthcoming.

PAGE – 4 ============
330 WILLIAM R. CARAHER AND TIMOTHY E. GREGORY Gulf of Corinth Lechaion 0 1.000 2.000 3,000 4,000 N Corinth Ancient Corinth > Isthmia B Examilia U Dkeriza Feige r Kenchreai Saronic Gulf Figure 3. Routes south through the Isthmus: (A) the coastal route blocked during the Classical period by the long walls linking Corinth to its port of Lechaion; (B) the tradi tional route south following the Xeropotamos River; (C) the eastern coastal road passing to the east of Stanotopi; (D) the Stanotopi pass; (E) the Maritsa pass. W. R. Caraher in their vicinity or to carry out destructive raids on vulnerable centers of rural agricultural production. In addition, once an army crossed the mountain’s eastern end and moved south, it had bypassed the defenses of Acrocorinth and gained ac cess to a complex network of roads leading toward the population centers of the southwest Corinthia, such as Tenea, Kleonai, and Phlius, as well as the Sanctuary of Zeus at Nemea. Thereafter, an army could link up with routes into the Argolid or move toward the west through the uplands of the northeastern P?loponn?se to descend into Sikyonia, Arkadia, and Achaia.10 It also would have been possible for an invading army without substantial naval power to proceed south into the Epidauria, although there is little evidence for this actually occurring.11 Furthermore, east-west routes passing immediately to the south of Mt. Oneion would have given an army relatively easy access to the city walls of Corinth in the vicinity of the southeast gate, allowing the invaders to attack Corinth from an unex pected direction.12 In this article, we discuss the archaeological evidence from the Stano topi and Maritsa passes of Mt. Oneion and the attempts made to fortify them in at least two distinct periods. The Stanotopi pass runs just to the 10. Polyb. 4.13.1-6. The roads of the southwest Corinthia and the passes into the Argolid have been well studied: Stroud 1971a, p. 128; Bynum 1995, pp. 14-27; Pikoulas 1995, pp. 285-288; Lolos 1998, pp. 182-190. Walbank (1957, p. 461) proposed that the Aito lians may have followed a route from Sikyon to the eastern part of the Isth mus, avoiding Acrocorinth after the Battle of Kaphyai in 220 b.c. 11. Diod. Sic. 15.69.1; Dixon 2000, p. 94. 12. This is the route taken by Dodwell (1819, pp. 196-197). For the gate, see Corinth III.2, pp. 47-54.

PAGE – 5 ============
FORTIFICATIONS OF MOUNT ONEION, CORINTHIA 331 west of the port of Kenchreai, and by traversing it, an enemy could skirt the eastern defenses of the Isthmus and descend into the plain to the south. Stroud has already discussed this passage in some detail.13 The Maritsa pass is some 2 km farther west, between Kenchreai and the modern vil lage of Xylokeriza, in an area locally called Maritsa or Trypeio Lithari. Scholars generally have not recognized this more difficult and remote pass; nevertheless, the remains of substantial fortifications designed to defend it suggest that it was perceived as a viable route south during the ancient and early modern periods.14 MAJOR LINES OF DEFENSE IN THE EASTERN CORINTHIA Stroud observed that there have always been two lines of defense running through the Corinthia: a freestanding trans-Isthmian wall and the series of fortifications along Mt. Oneion.15 The idea of a trans-Isthmian wall has long commanded the larger share of scholarly attention. Researchers have identified and seriously discussed no less than four trans-Isthmian fortifications, all of which were designed to take advantage of the series of upturned marine terraces extending northwest-southeast through the Isthmian plain.16 Broneer sought to identify and trace a Mycenaean wall that ran from the beach south of the canal near the modern settlement of Isthmia to the neighborhood of the Sanctuary of Poseidon and presumably beyond.17 Wiseman reported fortifications along the Ayios Dimitrios ridge (Fig. 3), arguing that pottery, loomweights, and the masonry itself might identify this wall with the fortifications constructed during the Persian Wars and mentioned in books 8 and 9 of Herodotos.18 He also documented more thoroughly a wall of Hellenistic date that followed a similar line on the Ayios Dimitrios ridge.19 Excavations on this ridge uncovered substantial remains of towers and what appear to have been barracks.20 While there was no evidence of the Classical wall beyond the top of the ridge, Wise man was able to trace the Hellenistic wall as it turned to the northwest and ultimately to the north toward the modern city of Corinth. The final trans-Isthmian fortification, and certainly the most impres sive today, is the Hexamilion, constructed in the early years of the 5th cen tury A.D. and rebuilt on many occasions afterward. Its remains are still well preserved in many places, and they can be traced from the Saronic Gulf to the Corinthian Gulf.21 This formidable fortification, despite periods of disrepair, served to block access to the P?loponn?se for over 1,000 years. In fact, the last attempt to fortify the lower line of the Hexamilion was during the second period (1686-1715) of Venetian occupation of the P?loponn?se, although the Venetian senate was evidently unable to provide the funds necessary for its proper repair and defense.22 The second line of defense serving to fortify the Isthmia corridor was farther south and took advantage of the Oneion range as a natural barrier against north-south movement.23 The fortifications along this line left the plain of the Isthmus undefended and could not protect against an army that moved west to enter the P?loponn?se through any of the north-south 13. Stroud 1971a. 14. This pass is not to be confused with the western pass noted by Stroud (1971a, pp. 129,137). 15. Stroud 1971a, p. 127. 16. Isthmia V, pp. 4-6. 17. Broneer 1966; see also Kardara 1971; Wiseman 1978, p. 60. 18. Hdt. 8.71, 9.7.1; Wiseman 1978, p. 60; see also Isthmia V, p. 5. 19. Wiseman 1963; 1978, pp. 59 63. See aislo Lawrence 1979, p. 169; Isthmia V, p. 5, n. 35. 20. Wiseman 1963, pp. 255-256. 21. Isthmia V 22. Isthmia V, pp. 150-151; Malte zou 1978. There was even talk of refor tifying the Hexamilion at the time of the Greek War of Independence in the early 19th century. 23. Stroud 1971a. Wiseman (1978, p. 59, p. 77, n. 91) lists eight instances in which Oneion was fortified between 369 and 146 b.c.

PAGE – 6 ============
332 WILLIAM R. CARAHER AND TIMOTHY E. GREGORY I t . – . . . ?JT7 I N o aoo 400 ero aoo i,ooom?>m? . # a*?*. 1 ^ ISaron/c Figure 4. The eastern part of the Oneion ridge, with passes and forti fications. Contour interval 20 m. W. R. Caraher river valleys. The Oneion fortifications were also less spectacular than the freestanding walls of the lower plain, and they were apparently erected and manned under less dramatic circumstances. They are associated with the Stanotopi and Maritsa passes (Fig. 4). The Stanotopi pass runs between the principal mass of Mt. Oneion and its easternmost prominence, a hill called Stanotopi. This pass crosses the mountain at a comparatively low elevation, ca. 200 m. The main routes ascend the mountain from the flat land near Kenchreai and descend close to the modern town of Loutro Elenis. The best paths follow two converging ravines that cut into the north face of the mountain. These ravines begin ca. 150 m to the east of the entrance to a modern quarry (which at present consumes the eastern extent of the mountain) and 40 m to the south of the southern fence of a modern Greek army base. One route ascends the western side of the eastern ravine and the other, probably easier, passage runs just to the east. These paths provide access to the top of the Oneion ridge, which is under 250 m in elevation at this point, and from there an army could descend by numerous routes to the south. The Maritsa pass runs across the center of the mountain ridge, ascend ing ca. 2.4 km west of Kenchreai and 2 km east of the village of Xylokeriza. The best modern path approaches a deep ravine from the east, crossing a broad alluvial fan. Ascent from the west would have involved a much steeper climb. The path from the east ascends sharply toward the east side of the ravine before crossing to the west side of a broad saddle that passes across the mountain at an elevation of slightly over 320 m. On the southern side of the saddle the path breaks to the east, crossing the saddle again, and descends south along the spines of any number of alluvial fans toward Galataki and ancient Solygeia.

PAGE – 8 ============
334 WILLIAM R. CARAHER AND TIMOTHY E. GREGORY contrast to the other structures mentioned above, this wall was built with two faces of unworked stones filled with rubble and measured ca. 2.50 m in thickness. Although there were few traces of a wall along the south, Stroud reasonably proposed that this north wall continued around the whole of the summit of Stanotopi, with the tower approximately at its center and a possible gate along the wall’s south side. Stroud thought it likely that this larger enclosure was an expansion of the upper enclosure, although he admitted that the chronology could have been reversed.28 West of this substantial complex, Stroud noted two long walls designed to guard the two lowest routes across the Oneion ridge, located west of Stanotopi and east of the hill designated 427 in his figure l.29 These walls lie along the crest of the ridge between the two heights and run roughly east-west. The eastern wall was preserved for ca. 245 m, the western for ca. 255 m. Built of rubble, in a style similar to that of the larger enclosure, the walls were 2.40-2.50 m thick. Although this area is overgrown with dense vegetation and has been disturbed by the bulldozing of a forest road, one can nevertheless trace short fragments of the walls (Figs. 4,5). CLASSICAL-HELLENISTIC FORTIFICATIONS AT MARITSA The second fortress on Oneion, above the Maritsa pass, is also datable to the Late Classical-Early Hellenistic period. It has three parts: a fortress, or enceinte, and two independent shield walls, all apparently constructed at the same time (Fig. 6). The fortress encloses the highest point on the eastern part of the mountain and consists of a large enclosure with two major spur walls. The shield walls, one to the northeast and the other to the west, served as additional defenses for the main enclosure. The Maritsa and Stanotopi fortifications are similar in organization, suggesting comparable functions and dates of construction. The Maritsa fortress has a commanding view of the central Isthmia corridor to the north and the ravine-dissected hill country to the south around modern Galataki and ancient Solygeia. The Gulf of Corinth and the Saronic Gulf are clearly visible to the north, although part of the ancient harbor of Kenchreai is obscured by the eastern heights of the mountain. The Saronic Gulf may be seen to the south and east, along with the coast from Loutro Elenis to the village of Almyri and the site on the suggestively named hill of Vigla (meaning lookout post or watch), which has evidence for occupation from prehistory to the Byzantine period.30 Immediately to the east, the hill of Stanotopi with its tower is visible as well. The modern villages of Examilia and Xylokeriza, along with much of Acrocorinth, fall within the fortification’s view to the west. While it seems likely from the arrangement of shield walls that the fortress served to secure the heights of Oneion against an enemy from the north, it also would have controlled the southern approach to the pass. In fact, anyone beginning an ascent of Mt. Oneion from the south in the general vicinity of the Maritsa pass would quickly fall out of the view from Stanotopi, but never from the view of the fortified heights of 28. Stroud 1971a, p. 137. 29. Stroud 1971a, p. 128. 30. Wiseman 1978, p. 58.

PAGE – 9 ============
Figure 6. Classical-Hellenistic forti fications above the Maritsa pass. Contour interval 20 m. W. R. Caraher FORTIFICATIONS OF MOUNT ONEION, CORINTHIA 335 Maritsa. It is possible that Maritsas favorable position obviated the need for a watchtower such as the one found on Stanotopi and elsewhere in the Corinthia.31 The Oneion ridge dominates the Isthmia/Examilia basin, and if the fortification walls stood higher in antiquity, which they almost assuredly did, they would have been visible from the Isthmus. From the south the fortress also would have been visually impressive. Main Enclosure The walls of the main enclosure are largely preserved. They surround a rocky, mostly treeless peak covering an area of over 5,000 m2. The peak rises gently to the east toward Stroud’s hill 427; today a Hellenic Army Geographical Service geodetic marker with an elevation of 423.99 m stands just inside the enclosure wall at its easternmost point (Fig. 6). The enclosure has a maximum length east-west of 110 m and a maximum width, roughly north-south, of 72 m. The course of the enclosure wall is visible for almost the entire circuit. The walls are constructed of roughly cut stones laid in two faces with a rubble fill (Fig. 7), the same construction that Stroud noted at Stanotopi. There is no evidence for the use of mortar or rectangular blocks. In a num ber of places both faces of the wall are visible; it measures 1.80-2.00 m in thickness. At its greatest height the wall is preserved to just over 1 m, and it is possible that the stone walls did not stand much higher. Along the course of the wall are numerous large fragments of Lakonian and Corinthian tiles (discussed below), and these may indicate that the upper part of the wall was constructed of mudbrick with a covering of tiles to protect it.32 The main enclosure is an irregular polygon, with its walls taking ad vantage of the local topography as much as possible. The north and east 31. Watchtowers are not uncommon on elevated locations in the Corinthia; there are examples at Kefalari (Wise man 1978, pp. 118-119, figs. 166-168) and along the Epidaurian border (Dixon 2000, pp. 51-93). 32. Pritchett (1974, pp. 133-146) has proposed that some low stone walls may have served as anchors for wooden palisades. The preponderance of tiles, however, suggests that these low walls were socles for upper walls made of mudbrick.

PAGE – 10 ============
336 WILLIAM R. CARAHER AND TIMOTHY E. GREGORY ?SMm^? Figure 7. Typical section of the main enclosure wall of the Maritsa fortifi cations. Photo T. E. Gregory sides are the least accessible, as they lie at the top of steep cliffs. The west wall is built along a slight ridge of bedrock. The easiest way to travel from the pass to the main enclosure is to ascend the gradual western slope, but no evidence for a gate exists along the west wall. The only other approach would be from the south, albeit over much steeper terrain. In the middle of its course, the south wall protrudes slightly to the south to take advantage of a local increase in slope.33 In general, however, the gentler slope of the south face of the mountain suggests that access to the main enclosure was gained from that direction, which agrees with our understanding that defensive forces would have sought primarily to hold the Isthmus against invaders from the north. It seems reasonable to imagine that the fortifications at both Maritsa and Stanotopi, standing guard over the northern approach to the P?loponn?se and the southern reaches of Corinthian territory, were designed to be resupplied from the south. Western Shield Wall The western shield wall runs north-south along a ridge ca. 200 m west of the main enclosure. It extends 220 m from a bedrock outcropping at its northern terminus to an abrupt drop at the south. It is similar in con struction to the walls of the main enclosure, with a rubble fill and a rough facing without mortar. The western shield wall was thicker, however, reaching nearly 3 m in some places. As with the walls of the main enclosure and those at Stanotopi, Lakonian and Corinthian tiles were occasionally 33. Just to the east of this southward diversion is the only, very meager, evi dence for a gate. At this point the wall seems to stop abruptly, and several uncut stones possibly laid in courses may represent the eastern side of a gate. There is no evidence for a western side of a gate, however, and the route to this part of the southern wall would be quite steep. The presence of a major spur wall projecting from the southwest corner of the enclosure’s circuit suggests that the protection of this southern flank was a priority, and this might also imply the presence of a gate in the south wall. Stroud (1971a, pp. 134, 137) noted that the fortifications at Stanotopi are most easily approached from the south side as well, and the only evidence for a possible gate was on the southern flank of the north wall.

PAGE – 11 ============
FORTIFICATIONS OF MOUNT ONEION, CORINTHIA 337 found along its course. In places the western shield wall stands to a height of 1.20 m. To the west of the wall, the ground falls away steeply toward the north-south ravine that forms the Maritsa pass through the mountain. The area immediately to the east of the wall is more or less level, and scattered concentrations of broken pottery are visible there. Farther to the east, the rocky ground, now heavily wooded, rises to the west wall of the main en closure. The western shield wall does not connect directly with the main enclosure. The steep northern and southern faces of the mountain would have made it difficult, if not impossible, for an army to ascend to the area between the western shield wall and the main enclosure. It is important to note that this shield wall does not block the pass itself. It is situated to overlook the Maritsa pass, and can be seen today from the southern end of the pass below. Moreover, it stands at a place that is already difficult to access from the pass; although the 1:5,000 maps indicate a modern path running from the pass to the wall, this would be useful only for shepherds or resin collectors. The western shield wall was therefore probably intended to discourage a direct assault on the main enclosure from the pass and to protect a stretch of level high ground from which the pass itself could be controlled. It would have provided a barrier behind which guards could hide. Depending on the precise course of the ancient route through the pass, the wall was between 200 and 300 m distant, placing it at the margin of the effective range of ancient projectiles.34 The pottery on the level ground immediately to the east of the wall may reflect the use of this level area for troop quarters. Northern Shield Wall The northern shield wall runs for a distance of 300 m along the top of the northern slope of the mountain. It is of the same construction as the western shield wall, but it is on average only 2.50 m thick. The eastern part of the wall runs for 80 m almost north-south along a rocky spur projecting from the face of Mt. Oneion. It then turns sharply to the southwest for 80 m before turning west, following the contours, for nearly 130 m. Its western end seems to be in the rocky and wooded northern face of Oneion, 40 m to the north of the northeastern wall of the main enclosure. The most distinctive feature of this wall is an abrupt, right-angle turn some 100 m from its eastern end. To the south of this sharp turn, there is a natural depression in the exposed bedrock that may have provided a level place for a tower. There are, however, no exceptional concentra tions of pottery or additional tumble that might indicate more intensive activity here than elsewhere along the wall. Nevertheless, there is no topographical reason for the well-defined right-angle turn in the wall, and it is possible that the natural depression in the bedrock was used as a foundation for a tower of some sort, perhaps constructed of mudbrick or even wood. Pottery was visible on the surface between the northern shield wall and the east wall of the main enclosure. Although tiles of various kinds were 34. Mcleod (1965) notes that the range of archers rarely exceeded 200 m, and Echols (1949-1950) suggests a similar range for the ancient sling; see also Baitinger 2001, pp. 31-32.

150 KB – 30 Pages